Examining the extent of options available to us when our
mind rebels against the standards meant to purify us.

by Caitanya Carana Dasa

How does one know if one is being tricked by one’s mind into doing something wrong, or into giving up the right thing just because it is difficult? What if we are practicing spirituality and facing difficulties or dissatisfaction from all fronts due to the pressure we feel? Is it necessary to lower one’s standards of spiritual practice?

Is it needed to give some space to the mind at times? 

The key principle is that our mind is our mind, and it is we who must work with our mind. No one else can do that for us. If we consider our mind to be like our child, then it is we who must parent our child-like mind. We can certainly learn from each other. What one parent has used for their child is not something that can be simply replicated for another child by another parent. So, essentially, what’s important to recognize is that while the principles of parenting may be universal, where the goal is to discipline the child without crushing the spirit of the child through discipline, we must enable that spirit to flourish by providing it constructive expression, and by preventing its stronger expression.

The specifics of how that is to be done will vary from person to person. So, the mind-as-an-enemy metaphor is limited because the mind is not an enemy that we can destroy, since the mind is a functional tool necessary for us to act in the world. The mind is something we will have to be with for the rest of our lives, maybe many lifetimes, until we are liberated from material existence.

Another way to understand the mind is to consider it like the body. The body needs to be taken care of, and each body is different. Some bodies may be far more sensitive to cold than others, and people with such a body will need to be far more cautious when going out in cold weather.

Pandering to the body, or compromising on standards, when delaying or canceling going out because it is too cold or insisting on having sufficiently warm clothes before they go out, is simply doing what is required for them to function sustainably with their body. No doubt, the body can become an excuse for such a person to get out of things they don’t like to do and refuse to face the cold even when it is bearable for them.

Those who use their body to trick others will end up getting tricked by the body. Those who use their body as an excuse to cheat others and not do their responsibilities to others will end up being cheated by the body of the opportunities that could help them grow and reach their full potential.

Now, if we compare the mind to the body, then both are distinct levels of identity for us and both are different from us. Because the mind is subtler and it’s inside us, it is far easier to identify with it and to get lost in that identification.

As a radical reminder to prevent such identification with the mind, quite often we are exhorted to treat the mind like an enemy. Treating it like an enemy is different from considering it to be like any other enemy that needs to be eliminated.

In the Gita, it is said that when a charioteer is guiding a horse, they keep a tight leash on the horse, but there are times when they give a release on the leash so that the horse doesn’t get suffocated. The horse needs to be disciplined so that it does the master’s bidding, but we don’t want the horse to be dead in body or, for that matter, even in spirit.

With this background, each person needs to take responsibility to decide what boundaries they are going to live within and what bonds they are going to prioritize.

The directive in the Bhagavad-gita (6.35) about managing the mind through abhyasa can be phrased as “bonds and boundaries.” We want to bond with our higher interests, and ultimately, our highest interest, which is Krishna. And we want to set boundaries for our lower drives. 

Bonds and boundaries are principles for parenting, and for that matter, for any form of discipline. Some people flourish with narrow boundaries, and some with slightly broader boundaries. Ultimately, it’s an individual responsibility in life to manage one’s mind according to what works for oneself. Sometimes, what is meant to be a bond can feel like a boundary. The thing that is meant to connect us with our higher purpose, the highest reality of life, Krishna, can itself seem to be such a demanding discipline that our mind wants to resist it and reject it if possible. That is what happens with chanting, for example. The same could apply with rules of sensual discipline. 

What is meant to be a boundary can get equated with our bond. That means we consider our capacity to restrain our senses as the definer of the seriousness of our devotion. But our devotion is defined primarily by our attraction to Krishna and our dedication to Krishna, not by our capacity to give up other things. Yes, renunciation of certain things is definitely a symptom of the seriousness of our devotion, but the specific capacity to renounce a particular thing may well be determined by factors beyond our control, such as one’s past karma. For example, fasting on sacred days can be a sign of devotion, but an inability to fast due to one’s physiological condition does not mean that one’s devotion is not earnest. 

So, the reason for discussing this interchangeability of bonds and boundaries is to highlight that we need to be clear about what role is being performed by what and what standards we are thinking of compromising. These words—standards and compromise—tend to raise a lot of red flags, and even alarmism, in many serious spiritual practitioners. So instead of compromise, adjustment or accommodation or harmonization with our particular nature or situation may be better words. Instead of standards, we could use the words bonds and boundaries.

Bonds are meant to provide us nourishment, and boundaries are meant to provide us protection. If instead of nourishment, a bond is causing exhaustion, and if instead of protection, a boundary is causing suffocation, then we need to figure out why that is happening. The broad principle is that we need to be nourished, and we need to be protected, just like a child needs to be fed and fenced. Feeding and fencing is another way of describing it. If the food is not nourishing the child, then the food needs to be changed. If the fence is leading to the child feeling suffocated, then that needs to be evaluated. So, we could make an inventory, a list of what bonds we are trying to develop and what boundaries we are trying to establish, and then evaluate which of the bonds give us strength and which are not giving us strength, and which bonds, if any, are requiring strength to maintain. Similarly, we could examine which boundaries we are trying to establish, which boundaries give us protection in a way that we feel protected, and which boundaries are making us feel restricted.

Which bonds, if any, are in between? Are we accepting them out of deference to convention but not necessarily feeling them?

By this method of exploration, we can progress toward more mature decisions. Maybe writing this exploration down and then sitting with it for some time, maybe even praying about it for some time, could help. Perhaps, we can take a printout of that exploration and put it in front of the Lord on the altar, leave it there for His consideration, and then later re-examine what we have written. This way, we can be more devotionally directed in our introspection.

When we have entrusted our deliberation to our Lord, we can pray for guidance and try to maximize the bond that gives us strength, so that we are in a healthy state of consciousness when we deliberate again. We will have established a clear rationale for what we want to do, so that we won’t second-guess ourselves in the future constantly. Even if we decide to stick to a standard or decide to adjust that standard—whether it be in terms of a bond or a boundary—we will have some clearly articulated reasons for it, and we will also be open to revisiting our decision if radically different information or experience comes our way.

Before deciding to let go of a bond or a boundary, it may be helpful to take time to strengthen a bond that has nourished us and to consciously put in effort for some well-defined time—say a week, a fortnight, or a month — especially if we can intensify that bond in a way that is sustainable for an overall period of time while also nourishing us. We can then see whether from that strengthened position, the vision of that difficult bond or boundary has changed.

In a war, sometimes a strategic withdrawal from a front may be required, but that shouldn’t be the first course of action. Other courses of action, such as reinforcing that front, need to be explored. However, sometimes accepting a defeat on one front may well be necessary for surviving in the bigger war and maybe scoring a bigger victory in the long run.

The test to know whether what we are doing is an excuse or a reason is ultimately twofold: sustainability and interchangeability. Sustainability means that occasional feelings of dissatisfaction will come to everyone, but prolonged feelings of exhaustion or suffocation need to be addressed. Spirituality needs to be practiced sustainably, because it is a relationship with Krishna. While intensity is important, sustainability is even more important.

Additionally, if that kind of adjustment of a bond or boundary would have been necessary in another field of our life—especially a field that is dear to us—then considering that answer can be very helpful in determining whether we are doing this just as an excuse to get away or whether it is a genuine need for us, given the kind of mind we have.

To Summarize Broadly:

1. Our mind needs to be treated like a child, not like an enemy. Each parent has to find their own way of dealing with their mind.

2. If we consider the mind to be like a tool, like a horse for a person on a ranch, then the horse needs to be disciplined, not deadened. 

3. We need to decide which bonds and boundaries we want to maintain and what adjustments might be necessary, using the principles of nourishment and protection. Bonds are meant to give us strength and nourishment, while boundaries provide protection. If they’re causing exhaustion or suffocation, we need to reevaluate them.

4. Making an inventory of our bonds and boundaries and reflecting on them in prayerful consideration can help us make more mature, devotionally directed decisions. Taking time to reinforce a positive bond before making a final decision can provide a clearer perspective on difficult choices regarding spiritual practices.

5. To know whether the adjustment we are thinking of doing is a reason or an excuse, consider the factors of inter-changeability and sustainability. Would we do the same in some other area of our life, especially one that is important for us? Will this help us make our spiritual practice more sustainable because spirituality is ultimately about our relationship with Krishna — and in a relationship, while intensity is good, sustainability is key?

Caitanya Carana Dasa is the associate-editor of Back to Godhead (US and Indian editions). To read his daily Bhagavad-gita reflections, please subscribe to Gitadaily on his website, thespiritualscientist.com.