Humility. After showing the modifications of the first field, he still describes the functions of the field. But they are the attributes of the limiting adjuncts that serve as means to self-knowledge. These attributes, like desire and others, are also functions of the field. This is in the form of negation. Those are in the form of modifications. All those modifications are undesirable modifications. And desirable modifications. Modifications are of two types. Those were all undesirable modifications. These are also modifications, they are modifications of knowledge. But they are all called desirable modifications. If absence of pride comes, all these attributes, some are in the form of negation, but service to the teacher. The feeling of serving. Purity, that again is in the form of negation. [blank] Humility is being free from disrespect towards superior people. Being free from disrespect. Humility. Humility and pride, what is the difference between the two? This person is very humble. And this person is free from pride. What is the difference between the two? [blank] What? A person free from pride may sometimes lack humility, but just because there is humility, it does not mean he has become free from pride. It got confused. Say something. Say it again. One who is humble, it is not necessary that he is free from pride. And one who is free from pride may sometimes be humble and sometimes may not be. That happens rarely. One who is humble is not necessarily free from pride. What is humility? It is external behavior. To say yes, yes. Then do nothing. So that is called showing humility. Folding hands, bowing down, prostrating, saying yes, yes. Yes Swamiji, yes Swamiji. Making the 'yes' a bit louder. [blank] So that is called humility. That does not mean he has become free from pride. In this, what is the definition of being free from pride... of absence of pride... not of pride, right? What definition of humility was given? Being free from disrespect towards superior people. Disrespect means internal dislike. Dislike, contempt. But towards whom? Superior people. Superior to oneself, add that much. If someone is superior to oneself, to accept them is a very difficult task. No one accepts easily. Especially if the one we are competing with is superior to us, then? Usually, we feel jealous only of those who are superior to us. Where do we feel jealous? We feel jealous of someone who is superior to us. We don't feel jealous of those who are lower, with them we feel pleased that 'I am higher than him'. If they are superior, we feel jealous. Humility is being free from disrespect towards superior people. Who should be called free from pride? First of all, to accept someone as superior is very difficult. That he is superior to us, and then to show humility before him, that is called being free from pride. What if they do that everywhere? What? He is called a fool. A fool. Someone might have such a nature, that they show humility everywhere. Humility and being free from pride often become similar in certain places, they come into one form, and sometimes the form changes. One who, in all places, is free from pride... bows down to everyone, rolls at everyone's feet, as soon as he sees a foot, he rolls. Then? [blank] Then should he be called free from pride or not? Why? He does it under the influence of his nature. Nature. And he has no thought. Being free from pride must come in the mentality. Not just in the physical. Its major role is in the mental... in the mentality. Still, lust and others have a role in the physical. But being free from pride is only in the mentality. Or is it in the physical? Maharaj said in the Vachanamrut that pride should be shed and one should remain with devotion. So he should keep bowing physically. Did he say only that he should keep bowing physically? He did not say only that he should keep bowing physically. That is also necessary. Along with the mentality, bowing physically is also necessary. But to control that, he tries. Pride... suppose he thinks in his mind 'I have no pride and I shouldn't have it', but if he does not bow physically, then? So that is also necessary. It's not that the physical is not necessary. But the role of the mental... of the mentality is greater. If there is pride... Maharaj said, right, pride should be shed and one should remain with devotion. If there is pride and then he keeps bowing physically, then? No, one has to think of the greatness. First, it was said earlier that one has to think of his greatness in this way. Thinking of the greatness, if it is not shed in one day by thinking of the greatness, and it is not something that will be shed in one day, even then, one should start the physical as well. So it happens from both sides, then there is no problem. That does not mean that even if there is pride, doing this is keeping the pride, not like that. First think of the greatness, by thinking of the greatness, perhaps if pride is not shed in one day, even then, shed pride and remain with devotion, even then start this as well. Start the physical as well. What did we have? Humility and being free from pride. Humility and being free from pride. Humility can be shown even to an inferior person. And even if one is not free from pride, there can still be humility, that can happen. Humility is a kind of etiquette. Etiquette, meaning it is maintained. By that etiquette, it cannot be said that being free from pride has happened, that he has become free from pride. Being free from pride happens by thinking with the mind, then one becomes free from pride. Suppose being free from pride... in this, a very nice definition was given. Being free from disrespect towards superior people. No disrespect towards the superior. He does not keep disrespect towards the superior. He doesn't keep it towards others either, but towards the superior, he definitely does not keep it. But suppose they are weak, their... someone has a weakness and they are nurturing that weakness, then what should be done there? Keep disrespect. If he does not keep disrespect, then it's fine. But there is no need to be very humble there. And if he is humble even there, then there is some problem in that. King Dasharatha was submissive even to Kaikeyi, so it means, even though King Dasharatha was the father of Lord Rama, still there is a problem in that. There is some problem in that. If one becomes submissive to weakness, that is not called being free from pride. If one bows down to weakness, that is not called being free from pride. Being free from pride should remain as a virtue. It should remain as a virtue till the end. It is not at all as you say. Those of saintly nature, and those of saintly nature, they usually that is called simplicity, not being free from pride. And in simplicity also it is said, right? With whom should one be simple? Simplicity everywhere is a vice. That does not remain a virtue. One should be simple only with the superior. If you are simple with the weak, they will only dump their weakness on you. What good are they going to give you? If one is simple with weak people, King Yudhishthira was simple. With whom? With Shakuni. So what did he do? And King Yudhishthira was not that simple with Krishna Krishna 1) An avatãr of Bhagvãn. He incarnated in the svarup of a cowherd. This is considered to be a greater avatãr than the others, as Shree Krishna possessed all of the powers of Bhagvãn, whereas other avatãrs possessed less power. Shree Krishna conveyed the message of love and humanity to the world. Also, He recited the epic poem, the Bhagvad Geetã, to Arjun in which He stated: ‘Whenever dharma declines and adharma increases, I shall incarnate myself as a human to save the holy, to destroy the sin of the sinner, and to establish dharma. I come into being from yug to yug’. 2) In the Vachanãmrut, Shreeji Mahãrãj also uses the name “Shree Krishna” to describe Bhagvãn Purushottam Nãrãyan. Tap to open in glossary → As much as he was with Shakuni. King Yudhishthira is considered a very good character, right. Shakuni said you have to come to gamble, so he went. Shri Krishna Krishna 1) An avatãr of Bhagvãn. He incarnated in the svarup of a cowherd. This is considered to be a greater avatãr than the others, as Shree Krishna possessed all of the powers of Bhagvãn, whereas other avatãrs possessed less power. Shree Krishna conveyed the message of love and humanity to the world. Also, He recited the epic poem, the Bhagvad Geetã, to Arjun in which He stated: ‘Whenever dharma declines and adharma increases, I shall incarnate myself as a human to save the holy, to destroy the sin of the sinner, and to establish dharma. I come into being from yug to yug’. 2) In the Vachanãmrut, Shreeji Mahãrãj also uses the name “Shree Krishna” to describe Bhagvãn Purushottam Nãrãyan. Tap to open in glossary → So he got the fruit of both, right. Did Yudhishthira think Shakuni's greatness is more than Krishna Krishna 1) An avatãr of Bhagvãn. He incarnated in the svarup of a cowherd. This is considered to be a greater avatãr than the others, as Shree Krishna possessed all of the powers of Bhagvãn, whereas other avatãrs possessed less power. Shree Krishna conveyed the message of love and humanity to the world. Also, He recited the epic poem, the Bhagvad Geetã, to Arjun in which He stated: ‘Whenever dharma declines and adharma increases, I shall incarnate myself as a human to save the holy, to destroy the sin of the sinner, and to establish dharma. I come into being from yug to yug’. 2) In the Vachanãmrut, Shreeji Mahãrãj also uses the name “Shree Krishna” to describe Bhagvãn Purushottam Nãrãyan. Tap to open in glossary → Not more greatness, more simplicity. He just held onto simplicity. For him... for him Shakuni and Krishna Krishna 1) An avatãr of Bhagvãn. He incarnated in the svarup of a cowherd. This is considered to be a greater avatãr than the others, as Shree Krishna possessed all of the powers of Bhagvãn, whereas other avatãrs possessed less power. Shree Krishna conveyed the message of love and humanity to the world. Also, He recited the epic poem, the Bhagvad Geetã, to Arjun in which He stated: ‘Whenever dharma declines and adharma increases, I shall incarnate myself as a human to save the holy, to destroy the sin of the sinner, and to establish dharma. I come into being from yug to yug’. 2) In the Vachanãmrut, Shreeji Mahãrãj also uses the name “Shree Krishna” to describe Bhagvãn Purushottam Nãrãyan. Tap to open in glossary → One's simplicity... often what happens? It is self-oriented. We have to remain like this. No one should call us non-simple. He felt that way even with Shakuni. And again, from whom should one get the definition? From the scriptures. Not from Krishna Krishna 1) An avatãr of Bhagvãn. He incarnated in the svarup of a cowherd. This is considered to be a greater avatãr than the others, as Shree Krishna possessed all of the powers of Bhagvãn, whereas other avatãrs possessed less power. Shree Krishna conveyed the message of love and humanity to the world. Also, He recited the epic poem, the Bhagvad Geetã, to Arjun in which He stated: ‘Whenever dharma declines and adharma increases, I shall incarnate myself as a human to save the holy, to destroy the sin of the sinner, and to establish dharma. I come into being from yug to yug’. 2) In the Vachanãmrut, Shreeji Mahãrãj also uses the name “Shree Krishna” to describe Bhagvãn Purushottam Nãrãyan. Tap to open in glossary → If Krishna Krishna 1) An avatãr of Bhagvãn. He incarnated in the svarup of a cowherd. This is considered to be a greater avatãr than the others, as Shree Krishna possessed all of the powers of Bhagvãn, whereas other avatãrs possessed less power. Shree Krishna conveyed the message of love and humanity to the world. Also, He recited the epic poem, the Bhagvad Geetã, to Arjun in which He stated: ‘Whenever dharma declines and adharma increases, I shall incarnate myself as a human to save the holy, to destroy the sin of the sinner, and to establish dharma. I come into being from yug to yug’. 2) In the Vachanãmrut, Shreeji Mahãrãj also uses the name “Shree Krishna” to describe Bhagvãn Purushottam Nãrãyan. Tap to open in glossary → then he had no problem. Then he had no problem. Still he was called simple. No problem with that. He got proof from the scriptures, right. Then at least 25% I am simple anyway. Whether he says it or not. So King Yudhishthira could not be as simple with Shri Krishna Krishna 1) An avatãr of Bhagvãn. He incarnated in the svarup of a cowherd. This is considered to be a greater avatãr than the others, as Shree Krishna possessed all of the powers of Bhagvãn, whereas other avatãrs possessed less power. Shree Krishna conveyed the message of love and humanity to the world. Also, He recited the epic poem, the Bhagvad Geetã, to Arjun in which He stated: ‘Whenever dharma declines and adharma increases, I shall incarnate myself as a human to save the holy, to destroy the sin of the sinner, and to establish dharma. I come into being from yug to yug’. 2) In the Vachanãmrut, Shreeji Mahãrãj also uses the name “Shree Krishna” to describe Bhagvãn Purushottam Nãrãyan. Tap to open in glossary → as much as he was with Shakuni. So what should be called being free from pride? That is the question. If there are weak people and we sit there submissively, then that is not called simplicity and that is also not called being free from pride. The scriptures do not call it so. Even the scriptures do not say so. Because there is going to be no benefit in that. Otherwise, tell me, who can be called as simple as King Yudhishthira. And again, he has qualities. He is called the incarnation of Dharmaraja. He is called the incarnation of Dharmaraja. But he had decided that one who is righteous should remain simple, one should definitely not be cunning. Righteous people should not be cunning and they definitely shouldn't be, that is a fact. Do not be cunning, but not being cunning does not mean becoming simple either. Simplicity is to be kept in this place, similarly being free from pride also suits and is beneficial in certain places. In other places, it is not beneficial. So it is written that being free from disrespect towards superior people is humility. Why did it have to be said like that? Otherwise, it would have said free from disrespect is being free from pride. Analyze the words. Word analysis was done, right. Does it come in Tarksangraha or not? Or has it gone that way. [blank] Free from disrespect. Humility is being free from disrespect towards superior people. And to measure how much that happens, one needs a reverse perspective. Those who are superior to me, how much humility can I show before them. How much free from pride can I be before them. Even more than humble, how much free from pride can I be. So that is called humility... being free from pride. Being free from pride there is not true freedom from pride, being free from pride before him is true freedom from pride. Otherwise, the procedure of being free from pride is the same as it is. But what is there is not being free from pride. [blank] If King Yudhishthira folds hands before Shakuni, then that being free from pride has no meaning. That is meaningless freedom from pride. Not just meaningless, on the contrary, it throws him into a pit. If he had folded hands before Krishna Krishna 1) An avatãr of Bhagvãn. He incarnated in the svarup of a cowherd. This is considered to be a greater avatãr than the others, as Shree Krishna possessed all of the powers of Bhagvãn, whereas other avatãrs possessed less power. Shree Krishna conveyed the message of love and humanity to the world. Also, He recited the epic poem, the Bhagvad Geetã, to Arjun in which He stated: ‘Whenever dharma declines and adharma increases, I shall incarnate myself as a human to save the holy, to destroy the sin of the sinner, and to establish dharma. I come into being from yug to yug’. 2) In the Vachanãmrut, Shreeji Mahãrãj also uses the name “Shree Krishna” to describe Bhagvãn Purushottam Nãrãyan. Tap to open in glossary → So that is called being free from pride. Should this being free from pride be kept person-centric or virtue-centric? Because in every person there is good and bad. No, this is person-centric. This is the influence of the knower of the field. This is not about a goal or teamwork. It is the influence of the knower of the field, how being free from pride comes individually in us. What do you say? What is your question? Before whom to be free from pride, before whom not to be? Or if a person has good virtues, to be free from pride only to the extent of those virtues? Then if there is some weakness in him, then in that much again If such discrimination is maintained, then there is no problem. If such discrimination is maintained, there is no problem. But rather than looking at the particular virtues of that person, that person is divine, that person is saintly, or is unsaintly, demonic, only that is to be seen. Often they may be divine and have saintly virtues, but may not have superior virtues compared to us. Even then, be free from pride before them. What does superior mean? That he is ahead of this. Ahead of this. For example, Swamiji knows music. Right? He knows music well. But if there is saintliness in him, Then be free from pride before him. Then be free from pride before him. And if they have superior virtues compared to him, but no saintliness, then do not be so before them. So virtue... here is not the measure of virtue. It is the measure of godliness. It is the measure of saintliness. And how much divine feeling and desire for liberation is in him, that is what this is about. This is spirituality. This is the union of the field and the knower of the field. Field, field... so it is the influence of the knower of the field. Since there is the knower of the field, it has become spiritual. When it comes to the soul, it becomes spiritual. [music] AI translation of the Gujarati transcript above, produced in the same pass that transcribed the audio, one English segment per Gujarati segment. Devotional and technical terms with no precise English equivalent (kirtan, satsang, vasana, samskara, and similar) are kept as their plain transliteration rather than force-translated. Not human-proofread., AI-translated, unverified · Source details