Continued from above…

Later on after Krishna grew up, Krishna killed this king and released his biological parents from prison. He was not raised by these parents but he felt the obligation to get them released. When he did this, then his biological mother asked him to please return the other six male children, who were killed by the King and who were born before Krishna. These infants were all dead and gone, and still Devaki remained attached to them, so much so that when Krishna asked if there was anything he could do she said something to the effect that she was still attached to the infants and wanted them to be again in her arms as living infants again.

As the story goes Krishna miraculously brought back those babies. Devaki nursed them for a while before they again went back to other dimensions where they were living.

This story gives even men, some idea about the strength of motherly affection, where Krishna’s biological mother felt attachment to infants long after they were deceased from this world.

======================================

Narendra from LinkedIn:

Michael -- first I thank you for answering our questions. Second I want to write something about Ekadasi Vrat. It is a really a strange Vrat in itself. If performed as written in scriptures, it gives a big benefits. This is my opinion and thought. I perform this Vrat and try to do as mentioned in scriptures but I am not able to do everything. I follow Bhakti Yoga and therefore worship Lord Krishna in the night of ekadasi. First I get physical benefits which I don't care too much. Second, I think, my intelligence and self control is gone up quite a bit. This is mental benefits. Third I enter into Sattvic state on Ekadasi. This helps me quite a bit to understand Bhakti Yoga, our scriptures in the right way, and gives me a great pleasure and happiness. This is big benefit for me. My stress level remains low even in bad times. Peace resides in my mind. Ekadasi once in 14 days changes me for 2 days (Ekadasi and Dwadasi). My behavior changes towards sweetness. I have a great faith on Ekadasi.

Lord Krishna says that everything "Vrat or karma or meditation or Yagna etc." makes a dent in our behavior (Tamsic, Rajsic, or Sattvic) and knowledge. Then our changed nature gives us hell or haven. I believe, it is not the karma but human nature decides -- what one should get "suffering or blessing". Karma is one of the major cause of our behavioral changes. What you wrote -- is perfectly correct. Many times, scriptures describe stuff based on perfect conditions. People are not able to perform Vrat in the right way at right place at right time. For example, people should have perfect faith in Vrat. Very Difficult. Faith comes over time. A person performing not so perfect Vrat is also quite useful. A lightly taken Vrat have very light effects.

MiBeloved's Response:

I am in full agreement with what you wrote in the second response. This is because you explain the partial compliance of the devotee.

Thanks very much!

MiBeloved 6 years ago

MiBeloved wrote:

Once I knew this woman who had one daughter. The father was an irresponsible drunk. She then had another daughter by a responsible man. After that delivery she swore that she would never again get pregnant because of the pain of the labor.

Soon after she got a tubal operation which blocked her fallopian tubes. But then some years after she used to complain about it, saying that it should never have been done because she felt the need to have more children.

Caroline wrote LinkedIn:

this has been bugging me since I read it.

Nobody asked to have her tubes tied except the woman herself. How can she then complain about it as though it was something that had been done TO her. This is total denial of responsibility and making the self out to be a victim. This is the sort of behaviour that makes it so difficult for women who know their own minds and do want the operation to get it. I know some women like that, though I was never one myself.

MiBeloved’s Response:

Being a male, I can only be speaking of this from the outside. Therefore my opinion may be unfair. It is noteworthy however that you as a female are puzzled with this behavior of making a decision, executing it, and then feeling as though one was a victim due to the execution of the desire.

I think what is happening here is that we are taking the premise seriously that an individual can make decisions without being under an influence, and we are saying that even then, the individual should carry all responsibility for the action.

This functions under the premise that freewill occurs only with mature consideration.

Actually there is no one single human being who can exhibit total free will. It is just not possible. Secondly there is no such thing as not being under an influence. We may agree to accept responsibility even though we were under an influence(s) but that still does not mean in fact that we are ever influence-free.

There is no way, that coming into existence as a human being after a universe has progressed for 13 million years, that one cannot be under influences. That is not possible. And yet for us to run a decent humanity, we have to accept responsibilities even when it is downright obvious that we are not the cause of what happens to or about us.

If a child makes a decision to take an operation to cut his right hand off because once that right hand was burnt and it hurt him terribly, then if later as an adult he regrets it, should we say to him, that he should just man up because he made that decision of his own free will?

I think you would agree that he did not have sufficient maturity at the time to really make a so called free-will decision.

A woman may decide for a permanent infertility action at a time when she could not really understand how such a decision would impact her future life. And then rightly so she may regret it later on, when her nature begins to demand of her a pregnancy.

The more important observation I made however is that a decision before full sexual mature is made by the individual without being aware of what they will become at full maturity. In other words In the caterpillar stage the butterfly may make decisions which do not take into account what it will need and how it will feel once it passed through the pupa stage and then finds itself as a creature with wings.

Whose fault is this? Well I feel it is the fault of Mother Nature, because she failed to inform the caterpillar that it would develop wings. Unfortunately arresting Mother Nature and putting her before a court is not possible. She is the one agency which is immune from prosecution.

Most people are not born with an understanding of their future needs. Hence they cannot make informed decision (free will decisions if you like) early on and unless they are guided by others who have the insight or by social restrictions which prevent them from disenfranchising themselves in the future, they may make decision which they will regret later.

In such cases they are the victims of innocence or immaturity.

But in a way you are right, because there is a saying that who should be blamed when the tongue bites the teeth?

Who should be punished then?

Should we hold a trial and blame the cruel teeth?

Should we confront the tongue for being between the teeth of its own freewill?

It is a dilemma.

Tommy skipped school and subsequently he did not get a diploma. The result of that was that he could not get a decent job. So who is to blame? Should Tommy not be held accountable for his school absence?

Does that depend on Tommy’s maturity at the time of making the decision?

======================================

Statement of Caroline on Linked In:

I'm impressed with your answer, it is an accurate description of the human condition, the paradox between free will and as you say, influence. We feel as though we have choice, a lot of the time, but we are constantly under the influence of various things, family, society, the time we live in, belief systems, not to mention the internal spiritual influences that may be unique to each individual.

I just read something a couple of hours ago about this. Our parents and previous generations had much fewer choices than we have today, those of us in developed countries, at least. They took pretty much what was put in front of them. So in that way, they were a lot less free than we have come to perceive ourselves to be, but this may only be a perception on our parts.

I think a good way of putting it would be to say that we choose what we are compelled to choose. I chose to become a Moonie in 1971, but in another sense I was compelled, not by another person, or outer circumstances, but by an inner imperative of soul. I had to do it, I felt compelled to do it based on everything I believed to be right at that time.

And then there is grace, which I think is what Narendra is saying in a different way. Grace is sort of outside the equation, whatever choices we have chosen or been compelled by influences to make, however 'good' or 'bad' those choices may have been I feel, based on experience, that once you stop being a victim in your own mind, once you open yourself consciously to God, or Great Spirit, or whatever you want to call it, that it brings you to a whole other level of cause and effect. I think you explained that very well when you described how someone like Obama was able to make it to the White House.

I have experienced this grace first hand many times. For instance when I left the Moonies in 1985, from an external viewpoint my life looked like a train wreck, but internally I was buoyed up by an internal feeling of love and rightness that I can only call grace. And the key to accessing that grace is to take responsibility for your decisions, whether you made them under influences or you made them from free will. Once you start taking responsibility it is a whole new ballgame. That is what I have experienced.

Carlos Palacios 6 years ago

MiBeloved wrote:

"After this then I decided that okay, I will raise children and also do my yoga mission as best as I could."

Carlos Palacios reply:

If you ever decide to write a commentary on the Bible, you should include the above statement for Matthew 22:15-12.

This is where Jesus says, "Give Caesar (material nature) what is Caesar's (ancestral duties/family responsibilities/job/dues/taxes) and give God what is God's (Spiritual Practice/Krishna/ Sadana/Yoga/Magic etc)."

I guess you discovered at that point in your life that you had to strike a balance between material nature and Krishna.  So you decided to pay your dues to both masters who were exerting their influence on you.  And in so doing you caused Jesus to bite his tongue because in Matthew 6:24 he said that "No one can serve two masters."

You proved him wrong! LOL

MiBeloved 6 years ago

That is why we have to study Karma Yoga from God, from Krishna, because by ourselves we cannot do both the social life and the effective spiritual disciplines.

It is very confusing but if you study Karma Yoga, you can take lessons from Krishna and then you can serve the two masters.

This really means service to Krishna on one hand and serving the social obligations on the other hand under the direction of Krishna.

This is reduced to only servicing Krishna, because then service to relatives and to society is done under Krishna's thumb.

Arjuna in Bhagavad Gita is the example of this.

At first after Krishna explained buddhi yoga in chapter two, Arjuna said to Krishna that he could not follow a dual path of serving society and also maintaining the spiritual perspective within. Arjuna asked for one thing and said that Krishna should offer one or the other.

But Krishna said to Arjuna that he has to do both things, maintain spiritual perspective and render social service but that Arjuna should render the social service as supervised by Krishna.

Since you can’t serve two masters and you must complete both services, then you have to agree to take supervision from God as you render the services, and then you are in fact only serving one master.

But if you take directions from your social associates to render services to family and society, and then you run to God for advice on spiritual discipline, there will be a problem.

Take advice from God for both matters and then only one master is involved.

Make a detailed and lifelong study of Bhagavad Gita to learn the methods of Krishna’s karma yoga teachings.

unlimitedsun 6 years ago

Thank you Carlos for that question.

The answer provides most definite clarification,

It’s like a final nail in that coffin!

Sharone 6 years ago

It is a fact that one cannot serve two masters. By serving God foremost, both masters would ideally be served. But just as an Ekadasi fast done without the purity required, or with improper motivations, will not yield the full benefits, any action that one takes with ulterior motives will have a karmic result. There are many people who think they are serving God but forget that higher calling and get karmically entangled again. There are all sorts of karmic consequences of not being of "one mind."  A woman who either aborts a child or who decides to give it up for adoption might regret their decision later on, but can find some fulfillment in assisting children in other ways.  Unfortunately, for your mother, the clock ran out and she didn't get a chance to fully pursue an alternate means of assisting children; thus the dissatisfaction after death of the body.