Dissatisfaction in Modern Society

In today’s world, self-satisfaction is difficult to understand, what to speak of achieve.[1]

There are many social constructs in modern society, like democracy, socialism, capitalism, humanitarianism, and materialistic science, that increase complexity, spiritual chaos, and anxiety.

For example, in a democracy, people are expected to understand and have opinions on local, national, and international affairs. We are taught that the people are the government, at least in large part. That breeds anxiety and dissatisfaction.[2]

To illustrate, prior to about 250 years ago in European society[3] or 100 years ago in the colonized countries, the burden lay on the crown. Thus, the expression “uneasy lies the head that wears a crown.”[4] Today, that unease is transferred upon the head of every citizen.

Families are also more complex and burdensome. Previously, in families around the world, cultural traditions dictated that the parents or grandparents were the ultimate authorities. Children contributed to the family as soon as they were able; they followed the orders of their parents. But today’s pampered children are a costly burden.

Also burdensome is the continual struggle to increase individual and family comforts. In pursuit of comfort, the nuclear family has become a selfish, complex, independent unit. Women abandon traditional roles to share the burdens. Many lazy, irresponsible men abandon the family, thus escaping their obligation.[5] All these family conditions cause disturbance, anxiety, and dissatisfaction.

Offspring are not expected to contribute much to the family throughout their lives. They are basically trained to be selfish and seek enjoyment. In uneducated families, that enjoyment is immediate. In more cultured families, the children are taught how to discipline themselves for long-term enjoyment.[6] But in nearly all cases, the theme is selfishness.[7]

It is not possible for a materially selfish person to be truly satisfied. Whatever happiness one achieves through comforts is ephemeral. One can rise to a high level of enjoyment like Hiraṇyakaśipu, but it will eventually end.[8]

The predominant theme of modern society is complexity for material aims, not simplicity for the sake of higher enjoyment.

Śrīla Prabhupāda taught us to satisfy life’s basic needs, like eating, sheltering, etc., using simple methods, taking care not to add complexity. That results in genuine satisfaction and time to offer greater, more focused service to the Supreme.[9]

Another symptom of dissatisfaction is constant fighting over perceived injustice and inequality.

For example, modern society, especially in America, has become extremely litigious. Among people, businesses, communities, churches, and governments, there is a constant stream of lawsuits. In previous ages, there were indeed lawsuits. We find provisions for lawsuits in many ancient texts.

However, Nārada states that when people truly followed dharma, there were no lawsuits.[10] That implies that as people become more selfish and entrapped in material pursuits, they no longer follow true dharma. They may manufacture a dharma that conforms to their insatiable desires; however, it is not truly dharma.[11] And the result is dissatisfaction, more disagreements, and more lawsuits.

In contrast to disagreements and lawsuits, people were traditionally more accepting of their lot in life. When people suffered at the hands of other people, nature, or the government, they accepted it as their lot, their fate, or life’s test.[12]

“Whatever condition Kṛṣṇa has given me, that is all right.”[13]

Traditional Society

In traditional societies, people accepted the authorities of family, community, kingdom, and religion. They understood indebtedness to the higher authorities and self-sacrifice for a higher goal, especially a spiritual one.

The Mahābhārata states that a man should be sacrificed for a family, a family for a village, a village for a kingdom, and the earth for the soul.[14] Although this statement indicates a dire situation wherein one might have to sacrifice a life or the lives of many, the theme is nevertheless sacrifice for a higher cause, even a material one. But due to selfishness, modern people try to avoid such sacrifice.

It is true that the government has a responsibility to take care of its communities that in turn must take care of families; however, over the course of time, people have become less interested in serving the greater good and more interested in receiving service from their authorities.

Especially in the wealthy countries, people are spoiled, entitled, and dissatisfied.

The varṇāśrama system is the opposite. The citizens are taught to be satisfied with their varṇa, their role in society. And the varṇas cooperate to serve the whole society, which in turn serves the Supreme. The analogy is that feeding the stomach nourishes the body. And food goes into the mouth, represented by the brāhmaṇas.[15]

Śrīla Prabhupāda explained: “Because it is a society of śūdras everywhere [modern society], there is confusion. No brain. Simply śocati: ‘want, want, want, want, want.’[16] And in brahminical culture, you will find that even if one is a very poor brāhmaṇa with no source of income, even without eating regularly, he is happy. He is happy due to his knowledge. He will satisfy himself. If he does not get his food, he will think that ‘This day Kṛṣṇa desired that I should not have my food. Oh, it is Kṛṣṇa’s pleasure. It is Kṛṣṇa’s mercy.’”[17]

The point here is that the varṇa system is the natural way to achieve social satisfaction.

In 1907, British historian Sidney Low observed: “There is no doubt that it [varṇa] is the main cause of the fundamental stability and contentment by which Indian society has been braced up for centuries against the shocks of politics and the cataclysms of Nature. It provides every man with his place, his career, his occupation, his circle of friends.

“It makes him at the outset a member of a corporate body, it protects him through life from the canker of social jealousy and unfulfilled aspirations; it ensures him companionship and a sense of community with others in like ease with himself. The caste organization is to the Hindu his club, his trade union, his benefit society, his philanthropic society. There are no workhouses[18] in India and none are as yet needed.”[19]

Satisfaction in Daiva-varṇāśrama

Currently, it is up to the individual to seek satisfaction in meditation, chanting, prayer, or another means, which many people do. However, it is extremely difficult or nearly impossible to achieve family and social satisfaction in modern global culture.

Social satisfaction in the daiva-varṇāśrama system is achieved through living simply and accepting one’s place in society. Even if one meditates or chants for a couple of hours in the day, without satisfaction on a societal level, life often becomes turbulent, spiritually chaotic, and insufferable.

Some declare that everyone must chant or meditate on a societal level, and peace will be achieved. That may be true; however, there is no historical evidence that such a utopian society has ever existed aside from in the Satya-yuga. Thus, it is an unproven theory, meaning there is no proof that enough people can be induced to chant to establish the promised peace and satisfaction.[20]

But daiva-varṇāśrama society has existed, and it still exists in many places, although in fractured forms. The varṇāśrama society does not depend on everyone to be a brāhmaṇa. It is an elevated culture without the need for everyone to vibrate together in unison. Instead, it is a culture in which the people work for a higher cause. Certainly, no society in this age can achieve perfect satisfaction. However, when comparing modern society with traditional daiva-varṇāśrama, and not just theoretical daiva-varṇāśrama, one finds a markedly higher level of satisfaction.

Unlike a theoretical society in which the people all chant or meditate, the practical or observable superiority of varṇāśrama culture is proof of a society that offers greater social satisfaction.

Researchers conduct surveys to determine which countries are happiest. Their criteria are based on wealth, health, education, etc.[21] But in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, the happiness and satisfaction indices are different. To achieve a higher level of satisfaction and avoid suffering, one must become detached from material happiness and distress that come and go. Such detachment is extremely difficult to understand for those with material goals.

However, Kṛṣṇa details the methodology for such detachment in His Gītā.

Kṛṣṇa’s Method to Achieve Satisfaction

In the third chapter of His Gītā, Kṛṣṇa does not specifically mention varṇa; however, the chapter is mostly about work (karma) or occupation,[22] and varṇa also means one’s occupation. So, when Kṛṣṇa uses the word karma, one can think karma/varṇa.

Near the middle of the chapter, just when Kṛṣṇa is discussing karma and yajña, he mentions self-satisfaction. Thus, we get the idea that satisfaction is related to karma/varṇa and yajña.

Taking a step back to give an overview, the theme of the chapter is work, detachment from the fruits of work, and yajña, which directs those fruits toward Viṣṇu and away from the deadly enemy lust.[23] In that way, offering the fruits—the money—establishes our link with Viṣṇu instead of nourishing our lust.

Here is a more detailed explanation:

Kṛṣṇa starts by explaining work. It is unavoidable and constant. He then states that working in a way that controls the mind and senses is the best.

This is important to note, because, after discussing the methodology of work, detachment, and yajña, He ends the chapter with control of the mind and senses, thus wrapping up His discussion by referencing the original premise.

Essentially, the control of mind and senses is accomplished through yajña to Viṣṇu in the varṇāśrama society.[24]

Kṛṣṇa reviews the traditional Vedic system of yajña, which is at the heart of varṇāśrama culture.[25] He describes a cycle of yajña, rain, and food. He emphasizes that one who breaks the cycle and enjoys the food and other necessities without offering them in yajña is a thief.[26]

Going beyond food, Kṛṣṇa then explains the transcendental nature of yajña: Work comes from the Vedas, which come from the Supreme, who pervades yajña. Thus, through yajña to Viṣṇu one links to Viṣṇu.

It bears repeating that the heart of varṇāśrama society is yajña and it has been that way since varṇāśrama was created. That means the heart of daiva-varṇāśrama in this age is saṅkīrtana-yajña.

Kṛṣṇa warns us that one who does not follow the natural cycle lives in vain. In simple terms, that cycle is working, getting results like money or harvest, and offering the excess above necessities to Viṣṇu.[27] In Vedic times, the offerings were placed in the fire. In this age, they are offered in the fire of saṅkīrtana-yajña.

In other words, work in a varṇa produces money or harvest, which is placed in the fire of saṅkīrtana. The money is used to glorify and celebrate Kṛṣṇa, and the harvest is used for prasādam.

Returning to yajña. A fundamental purpose of yajña in varṇāśrama society is to facilitate detachment from material life. It functions like this: After working, we get some excess above what we need for our bare necessities. That excess we can spend on either comforts or yajña.

If we spend it on yajña, we have less to spend on comforts. Simple.

In modern complex society, that is difficult to do. But in simple varṇāśrama society, it is much easier. And lest someone object that it is too difficult, Mahāprabhu offered us the living example of Kholāvecā Śrīdhara, who was extremely poor, yet he sacrificed 50% of his income.[28]

And Mahāprabhu embraced him. Imagine Śrīdhara’s satisfaction when that happened. Of course, most are not on the level of Śrīdhara Prabhu, but just as we follow the example of Śrīla Prabhupāda and the ācāryas, we may try to follow Śrīdhara’s lead.

As Śrīla Prabhupāda mentioned, the varṇāśrama system is designed to satisfy Viṣṇu through yajña and thus achieve detachment through offering the results of work to Him.[29]

It is a practical process. Again, when we offer our money to Kṛṣṇa, we have less to spend on extras or comforts.[30] Those comforts are kāma, which does not just mean sex. It means all the things we work for that are beyond our necessities.[31] Kṛṣṇa supplies our necessities and more. That extra amount should be used to achieve liberation through yajña.[32]

Toward the end of the chapter, Kṛṣṇa explains that kāma rests on the mind and intelligence (buddhi).[33] That kāma is the source of our dissatisfaction.[34] Through the process of yajña and sense control,[35] one destroys the kāma that lives on our buddhi like a parasite.[36]

In that way, a society organized into varṇas and āśramas to perform yajña for Viṣṇu (saṅkīrtana-yajña) results in social satisfaction.[37]

It is therefore incumbent on devotees to advertise daiva-varṇāśrama as the only way to achieve social satisfaction, meaning the cessation of the incessant harassment from a society hell-bent on comfort, entertainment, and a materialistic quality of life.

In the modern materialistic world, people decry faith in religion. However, daiva-varṇāśrama does not yield to such attacks. To paraphrase Śrī Kṛṣṇa, one can directly observe how daiva-varṇāśrama-dharma awards great happiness and satisfaction.[38]

The daiva-varṇāśrama system is practical and observable. It uses the methodology or technique explained above to achieve satisfaction.

And Kṛṣṇa says that one does not have to begin the technique with devotion to Him.

He says, “If you are unable to sacrifice to Me, then at least give up all the results of your work and try to be self-situated or self-controlled.”[39] That means one should sacrifice one’s money for a higher purpose and simultaneously control the senses. Such detachment and sense control will eventually lead to bhakti.

He explains that by karma-phala-tyāgaḥ, giving up the results of work, one achieves peace or satisfaction.[40]

Therefore, the daiva-varṇāśrama society, depending on how expansive and well-organized, may accommodate a great variety of people who are working toward liberation and social satisfaction in a way that anyone can see and any innocent person can join.

[1] The Google dictionary defines satisfaction as the pleasure from fulfilling one’s desires or needs. In the śāstra, one should not seek to be satisfied (santoṣa) by fulfilling one’s desires; instead, by accepting what one’s receives. (SB 3.28.2) Also, SB 7.15.20: “Desires, hunger, thirst, and anger have an end, but greed is never satisfied.” [In modern society, desires and needs have morphed into greed.]

[2] “Anxieties of Democracy,” Social Science Research Council, ssrc.org.

[3] Including America, Australia, etc.

[4] Henry IV, part 2, Shakespeare.

[5] These are the adharmic, irresponsible progeny described in BG 1.40.

[6] Bhagavad-gītā 18.36-38, three kinds of happiness.

[7] For example, The Selfish Society: How We All Forgot to Love One Another and Made Money Instead, Sue Gerhardt.

[8] BG 9.21 kṣīṇe puṇye martya-lokaṁ viśanti. “When one’s merits are exhausted, one returns to the world of suffering.”

[9] For example, conversation with Minister Dixon, April 23, 1976.

[10] “Asahāya, Commentary on Nārada-smṛti,” Principles of Hindu Law, The Commentaries, Jogendra Chunder Ghose, Vol II, 1917.

[11] SB 6.1.34-39 lecture, Dec 19, 1970: Dharmāṁ tu sākṣād bhagavat-praṇītam [SB 6.3.19]. Dharma is enacted by the Supreme. Man-made dharma is not dharma. It is called dharma-viparyaya, the opposite of dharma, or kaitava-dharma, cheating dharma. [summarized]

[12] I am not suggesting here that devotees or people in general should tolerate every injustice. If someone commits murder, he should be punished severely. I am pointing out a general theme that applies especially to civil disputes.

[13] SB 1.5.36 lecture, Aug 17, 1974: “’Whatever condition Kṛṣṇa has given me, that is all right.’ Tat te anukampām: ‘It is by His grace I have got this position.’ Morning Walk, Apr 14, 1976: Although you may not like it, misery comes. Similarly, happy conditions come according to your destiny. Why waste time with this? You cannot change it. Formerly any man was satisfied in any position. [summarized] Moreover, in the Bible, St. Paul and others discouraged lawsuits. For example, Corinthians 6.7: “To have lawsuits at all with one another is already a defeat for you. Why not rather suffer wrong? Why not rather be defrauded?”

[14] Mahābhārata Sabha Parva, Chapter 55: Vidura to Dhṛtarāṣṭra: tyajet kulārthe puruṣaṁ grāmasyārthe kulaṁ tyajet | grāmaṁ janapadasyārthe ātmārthe pṛthivīṁ tyajet

[15] SB 11.5.2 and “Yajña, Sacrifice to the Supreme,” Back to Godhead, May 20, 1956.

[16] Śocati can be translated as grieving, lamenting, or in this case, covetous whining.

[17] Conversation, Sept 21, 1973.

[18] Workhouses were operated by the British government as places for people who are destitute. They received board and lodging in return for work.

[19] Vision of India, Sidney Low, 1907, pp. 862-263 quoted in History of Dharma-śāstra by Kane, vol II, part 1. [One may argue that this quote does not represent Ṭhākura Bhaktivinoda’s criticism of modern varṇāśrama. However, the Ṭhākura’s issue with asuric-varṇāśrama is that the brāhmaṇas, who should be devotees of Brahman, take advantage of the system for their material ends. They are not proper teachers and representatives of Brahman or Para-brahman. The Ṭhākura did not disapprove of a varṇa system that “provides every man with his place,” meaning that a man is provided with a social structure that offers him satisfaction with his place in society. Sidney Low was not making a spiritual critique. His material analysis was that the varṇa system offered equal or better provisions for the common people than the British system. That was an extraordinary endorsement considering the European attitude of superiority at the time.]

[20] The exception to this statement is that in the Satya-yuga, there was one social class called haṁsa and the people followed dharma perfectly. (SB 11.17.10) Also, it is said that in the 17^th century, King Virhamvir ordered the citizens to chant and adhere to other Vaiṣṇava practices. But they did not maintain those disciplines for long. In other words, there are not enough haṁsa-like people for a perfect dharma society, and it cannot be achieved by force.

[21] “World Happiness Report: What makes some countries happier than others?” The Christian Science Monitor, Husna Haq, csmonitor.com.

[22] The definition of karma is work. It means working in one’s job, occupation, or profession. In this chapter, Kṛṣṇa uses it in that simple way. Here, it does not mean a good or bad reaction to that work.

[23] Restated with some Sanskrit: “Work (karma), detachment from the fruits of work (karma-phala), and yajña, which redirects karma-phala away from kāma and thus purifying the mind and senses.” Note that the final verses of the third chapter refer back to the opening verses, 1- 7, bringing in a conclusion or resolution to the beginning of the chapter. Arjuna’s opening question was the relationship between intelligence (buddhi) and work (karma). The chapter leads to an understanding of how those two are linked. The last few verses conclude and refer back to the beginning.

[24] BG 3.9, Viṣṇu Purāṇa 3.8.8. Mind and sense control is also achieved through bhakti, whose limbs are yajñas. (BG 3.13 purport).

[25] The Puruṣasukta section of the Ṛg Veda (10.90) begins with a primordial yajña during which the four varṇas proceed from the body of the virāṭ-puruṣa. See also, SB 11.5.2-3.

[26] BG 3.12.

[27] Either one follows karma (work)—karma-phala (fruits of work)—yajña, or one follows karma—karma-phala—kāma (comforts). The latter is a life of sin, lived in vain. This is a simplified form of the cycle described by Kṛṣṇa and the great commentators. According to Śrī Madhvācārya, “The Supreme Lord is eternally established in the cycle of yajña. The cycle was established by Lord Brahmā at creation. Whoever does not perpetuate the cycle, which is beneficial to all beings in the universe, is sinful. His actions run counter to the sustenance of all life, and he will be cast into hell. (SB 5.26.18).” Another point is that there are at least two definitions of karma-phala. One is the money or harvest one receives from working. That is the definition I am referring to here. The other meaning is the material body or situation one receives as the result of one’s actions. That is karma-phala or karma-bandha (the bondage of karma). The way to avoid karma-bandha is to use karma-phala in yajña to Viṣṇu. (BG 3.9) Doing so is called karma-phala-tyāga (renunciation of the fruits of karma).

[28] SB 1.2.6 lecture, Feb 23, 1972, and SB 1.2.12-14 lecture, March 26, 1967.

[29] BG 3.9 purport.

[30] Much of what I’ve written in this article is for gṛhasthas. For example, yajña for brahmacārīs does not involve money. For them, it is generally study of the Bhagavad-gītā, Śrīmad Bhāgavatam, and Caitanya-caritāmṛta. Brahmacārīs know that; however, many gṛhasthas seem to be in a fog regarding the sacrifice of money.

[31] Technically, kāma means attachment of the senses to the sense objects. BG 2.62 dhyāyato viṣayān puṁsaḥ. Thus, the ultimate objective is niṣkāma-karma or work without desire. That means one can no longer work for oneself or one’s family, but for Kṛṣṇa alone, anya-abhilāṣitā-śūnyam, devoid of desire. That is uttama-bhakti, which we are not discussing here.

[32] BG 3.10. Yajña to Viṣṇu or Kṛṣṇa is synonymous with karma-yoga or karma-miśra-bhakti. The ultimate goal is niṣkāma-karma or work without desire (kāma). And the varṇāśrama system is the process to achieve that high goal of niṣkāma-karma. But it is not easy to achieve niṣkāma-karma or niṣkiñcana. In a conversation, Feb 14, 1977, Prabhupāda explained: “He [Caitanya Mahāprabhu] rejected everything material. Niṣkiñcana. But we are not going to be niṣkiñcana. We are not rejecting the whole society. Our duty is that we shall arrange the external affairs all so nicely [by implementing daiva-varṇāśrama] that one day they will come to the spiritual platform [niṣkiñcana or niṣkāma-karma] very easily; we are paving the way.” [summarized]

[33] BG 3.40.

[34] SB 8.19.25. hetur asantoṣo ’rtha-kāmayoḥ. “The cause of dissatisfaction is kāma, lust, for artha, money.”

[35] BG 3.30-31, 3.41.

[36] Here buddhi means the intelligence to discriminate between material and spiritual or between attraction to the sense objects and Kṛṣṇa. It is intelligence in the sense of the power of discrimination. It is the intelligence to use the fruits for yajña instead of lust.

[37] SB 3.6.33 purport: “[The organization of society into varṇas and āśramas] will make the entire society perfect in regard to the order of its social construction. A disordered [non-varṇāśrama] society cannot satisfy either the members of the society or the Lord.”

[38] BG 9.2. With some Sanskrit, “One can directly observe (pratyakṣa) how this daiva-varṇāśrama-dharma (dharmya) awards great happiness and satisfaction (su-sukham).”

[39] BG 12.11. With some Sanskrit, “If you cannot work for Me (mat-karma), then give up all the results of your work (sarva-karma-phala-tyāga) and try to be self-situated or self-controlled (yata-ātma-vān).”

[40] BG 12.12. karma-phala-tyāgas tyāgāc chāntir. “By giving up the fruits of work one attains peace (satisfaction).”