GADHADA II-1: THE CAUSE OF INFATUATION
On Jyeshtha sudi Punam, Samvat 1877 [15 June 1821], Swāmi Shri Sahajānandji Mahārāj was sitting on the veranda outside the west-facing rooms in front of the mandirof Shri Vāsudevnārāyan in Dādā Khāchar's darbār in Gadhadā. He was wearing a whitekhes and had covered Himself with a white cotton cloth. He had also tied a white pāgharound His head and was wearing a garland of white flowers. At that time, some of theparamhansas were singing devotional songs to the accompaniment of a jhānjh andmrudang, while munis as well as devotees from various places had gathered before Him in an assembly.
Shriji Mahārāj then said to the paramhansas who were singing devotional songs, "Please stop singing for the time being and conduct a question-answer session."
Thereupon Muktānand Swāmi bowed to Shriji Mahārāj with folded hands and asked, "Mahārāj, what is the nature of infatuation? Also, by what means can infatuation be eliminated?"
After thinking for a short while, Shriji Mahārāj replied, "It seems that a feeling of delusion which often appears in the mind is the very nature of infatuation. When infatuation intensifies in a person's heart, the delusion in his mind also intensifies. Thereafter, he loses all sense of discrimination of what should be done and what should not be done.
"In fact, just today, I was thinking about the reason behind such infatuation developing. Last night, I awoke in the middle of the night and slept facing north. Upon seeing theDhruv Star, the following thought arose: 'This is the northern Dhruv, but the scriptures also mention a southern Dhruv. Where could that be?' Thereafter, I looked for the southern Dhruv and I saw it as well. Just as there is a pulley for drawing water from a well, I saw a similar large pulley between the two Dhruv stars. The tips of the two supports of the wheel were touching the Dhruv stars, just as wooden pillars are held up by iron rods hammered between them. Also, just as a rope is wound around a rope-wheel which is studded with brass ornaments, similarly, I saw the positions of all of the stars, the deities, the nine planets, etc., arranged around that rope-wheel. I also saw the sun and the moon rise and set from the same direction. Then looking within, I saw that all things that are in the brahmānd - Dhruv, etc. - are also all in the body. I saw thekshetragna that resides in the body. I also saw Purushottam Bhagwān, who resides within that kshetragna. On seeing that God, My vrutti became deeply engrossed in His form - so much so that returning out of samādhi seemed impossible. But then, a devotee came near and prayed to Me. It was only out of compassion that I was able to return into this body.
"Then, the following thought arose in My mind: 'I was able to return from samādhi due to compassion, but what could be the reason for others coming out of samādhi?' It seemed to Me that they come out of samādhi because attachment for some vishays still remains.
"Therefore, the panchvishays are the cause of infatuation. Moreover, there are three grades of those vishays - superior, average and inferior. Of these, if a person who has obtained superior vishays encounters someone who obstructs him from them, then that person becomes angry on the latter. From that anger, infatuation develops.
"Generally, the ears have a constant relationship with sounds. The skin has a constant relationship with touch. In this way, the five gnān-indriyas are related to the vishays. Therefore, if a person who has casually seen an object wishes to break his vrutti from that object and keep it focused on the form of God instead, then no effort is required; hisvrutti would become detached quite easily from the vishays and remain on the form of God. On the other hand, if a person has seen an extremely charming object - such as a woman - and his vrutti has become fixed on that, then even if he attempts to keep hisvrutti on God's form, it will not stay there. Nor will his chitt remain steady. Thus, as long as the chitt is attracted by alluring vishays, infatuation cannot be eradicated. Moreover, if the Sant or one's guru or one's Ishtadev - God - should criticise a vishay towards which one's chitt has been lured, one would become upset with them and even malign them; one would not be able to accept their words. Such an experience in one's heart should be known as infatuation. Moreover, God has said in the Gitā:
Dhyāyato vishayān-punsaha sangas-teshoopajāyate | Sangāt-sanjāyate kāmaha kāmāt-krodho'bhijāyate ||
Krodhād-bhavati sammohaha sammohāt-smruti-vibhramaha |
Smruti-bhranshād-buddhi-nāsho buddhi-nāshat-pranashyati ||1
These words spoken by Shri Krishna Bhagwān are universal principles. When the chittis attracted to vishays such as sounds, touch, etc., no matter how intelligent one may be, one's buddhi becomes unstable and one becomes like an animal. Thus, infatuation is generated due to attachment to the vishays.
"Now, a person who wishes to detach his chitt from those vishays should firstly consolidate his knowledge of the ātmā; i.e., 'I am the ātmā, not this body.' Secondly, he should thoroughly understand the nature of how the cosmos is created, sustained and destroyed. Thirdly, he should thoroughly understand the greatness of God. He should think, 'The panchvishays have been created by God; thus, there must be much more bliss in God than there is in them. How is that? Well, sounds contain only pleasures related to sounds; the pleasures of the other four types of vishays cannot be found in sounds. In the same way, only the pleasures of touch, and no other vishays can be found in touch. Similarly, only the pleasures of sight exist in sights. The same applies for tastes and smells in that only their own respective pleasures exist, but the pleasures of all of the panchvishays cannot be experienced in just one vishay.
"On the other hand, in God, all pleasures exist simultaneously. Thus, even if a devotee does only darshan, he still feels totally fulfilled. Similarly, touch and other types of contact with God also make His devotees feel totally fulfilled. Moreover, whereas the worldly pleasures related to vishays are all perishable, the bliss related to God is everlasting. Such thoughts of the greatness of God should be consolidated. So, attachment to the vishays is eradicated through these three types of thoughts.
"When attachment to the vishays is eradicated, a person no longer makes distinctions between pleasant and unpleasant vishays - an ugly woman appears the same as a beautiful woman. In the same manner, he sees everything - animals, wood, dung, stones and gold - to be the same; he is not infatuated on seeing a pleasant object. This is how he views the panchvishays; no distinctions between pleasantness and unpleasantness remain in his mind. One who behaves like this is known to be free of infatuation. Shri Krishna Bhagwān has also mentioned this in the Gitā: 'Sama-loshtāshma-kānchanaha...2'. A person with such characteristics has realised God perfectly. Only he is called a staunch devotee. Only he should be known to have an inclination like that of a woman who observes the vow of fidelity, and only he should be known to possess gnān. Also, God becomes pleased only upon him. Such a devotee is extremely dear to God; that is why God has said in the Gitā:
Priyo hi gnānino'tyartham-aham sa cha mama priyaha ||3
So, only such devotees of God who have an inclination like that of a woman who observes the vow of fidelity are extremely dear to God. Moreover, it is not as if such an inclination is only acquired by one who is clever; rather, it is acquired by all those who have an intense yearning - just like in the world, naïve wives may be faithful, while shrewd wives may be unfaithful. Thus, whether one is shrewd or naïve is of no significance. Rather, it is those who have an intense yearning for liberation that keep such an inclination and offer bhakti to God.
"However, the state in which one views pleasant and unpleasant vishays as equal in such a manner and becomes free of infatuation cannot be attained in just one day. Such an achievement cannot be accomplished so hastily; only one who attempts to do so gradually and earnestly accomplishes it. Take, for example, a stone placed on the edge of a well. Due to the constant drawing of water with a rope, after a long period of time the rope causes a groove to form in the stone, despite the rope being soft. On the other hand, even if an iron chain were to be used to draw the water, such a groove would not form immediately. Therefore, those who wish to strive for liberation should eradicate attachment to the vishays. They should not become frustrated or upset. This is also mentioned in the Gitā:
Aneka-janma-sansiddhas-tatoh yāti parām gatim ||4
"Thus, one should think, 'I will eradicate as much attachment to the vishays as is possible in this life, and if in the process, some attachment still remains, then it can be eradicated in a future life. Moreover, since I am a devotee of God, I do not desire to enter the cycle of births and deaths.' In this way, a devotee should keep courage and persevere to gradually uproot infatuation.
"As long as pleasant and unpleasant vishays do not appear to be equal, a devotee of God is said to be in the process of God-realisation. When they do appear to be equal, that devotee should be known to have attained God-realisation. When one relinquishes one's attachment to vishays and attains God-realisation, one should be known to have become fulfilled. This is the very essence of all of the scriptures, i.e., the Vedas, theShāstras, the Purāns, the Itihās, etc. Furthermore, this discourse which I have delivered before you is the fundamental principle of all of the scriptures. Thus, all devotees should firmly imbibe it in their lives."
GADHADA II-2: A SMALL STREAMLET OF WATER
On Shrāvan sudi 3, Samvat 1878 [1 August 1821], Swāmi Shri Sahajānandji Mahārāj was sitting on a small, silken, embroidered cloth in front of the mandir of Shri Vāsudevnārāyan in Dādā Khāchar's darbār in Gadhadā. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. At that time, some munis were singing devotional songs to the accompaniment of a jhānjh and mrudang, while other munis as well as devotees from various places had gathered before Him in an assembly.
Thereupon Shriji Mahārāj said, "Please stop singing as I wish to speak to you." So saying, Shriji Mahārāj began, "One who wishes to attain ultimate liberation and aspires to become a sādhu like Nārad and the Sanakādik should think, 'In this body resides thejiva, and the indriyas and antahkaran have attached themselves to that jiva. They have also attached themselves externally to the panchvishays. However, due to ignorance, the jiva believes those indriyas and the antahkaran to be its own form, whereas in actual fact, it is distinct from them. The vishays are also distinct from the antahkaran, but because of constant association with them, they appear to have become one with the antahkaran.
"In fact, the desire to indulge in the vishays actually arises because of the indriyas, not because of the antahkaran. For example, extreme heat or cold first comes into contact with the outer indriyas, and then enters the body via those indriyas. In other words, it is not generated from within; it is generated outside and then enters within. In the same manner, desires for the panchvishays are not initially generated in the antahkaran; rather, the indriyas first come into contact with the vishays externally, and then thosevishays enter the antahkaran. To give another example, when a boil develops externally on the skin, it can be soothed only by applying medication externally, not by merely hearing talks. Also, one's hunger and thirst can only be relieved by eating and drinking, but not by merely talking about food and water. Similarly, the disease in the form of thepanchvishays can only be cured when medication is applied externally.
"The method of applying that medication is as follows: When one's skin touches avishay like, for example, women and other objects, that object 'enters' the antahkaranvia the skin. Then, via the antahkaran, it 'enters' the jiva. The vishay was not initially generated from within the jiva or from the antahkaran. In fact, all vishays which currently spring forth from the antahkaran have definitely 'entered' from outside through theindriyas, albeit in a previous life. Thus, the medicine for eradicating attachment to thevishays is as follows: One should abstain from touching objects like women and other alluring objects via the skin. Also, one should not look at their beauty via the eyes, nor talk about them using the tongue. One should not listen to them or about them via the ears. Nor should one smell their fragrance through the nose. If, through the fiveindriyas, one firmly abstains from the vishays in this manner, then the 'flow' of thevishays cannot enter within from outside. For example, a well can be cleaned only when the small streamlets of water that flow into the well are clogged from their entrance with cloth rags. In the same way, by keeping control over the external indriyas, the externalvishays cannot enter the antahkaran.
"Again, a stomach illness can only be cured when medicine enters the stomach. In the same manner, the vishays that have already accumulated in the antahkaran by way of the indriyas should be eradicated by thinking of oneself as the ātmā. One should think, 'I am the ātmā, and the indriyas and the antahkaran have absolutely no relation with me.' With such resolute thinking, by beholding God's form in that chaitanya and through the bliss of one's ātmā, one should remain fulfilled. Take, for example, a well that is completely full of water. The water in the well will prevent the flow of new water from entering the well. However, if the well is emptied by drawing water from it, then new water from outside will enter it. Similarly, through the bliss of one's ātmā, one should remain fulfilled within. Externally, one should obstruct the 'inflow' of the vishays through the indriyas. This is the only definite method for overcoming lust, anger, etc. Except for this, though, they cannot be overcome by fasting alone. So please imbibe this thought firmly in your lives."
GADHADA II-3: THE PATH OF AMOROUSNESS AND THE KNOWLEDGE OF THE ĀTMĀ
On Shrāvan sudi 4, Samvat 1878 [2 August 1821], Swāmi Shri Sahajānandji Mahārāj was sitting on a small, silken, embroidered cloth in front of the mandir of Shri Vāsudevnārāyan in Dādā Khāchar's darbār in Gadhadā. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. At that time, some paramhansas were singing devotional songs to the accompaniment of a jhānjh and mrudang, while other paramhansas as well as devotees from various places had gathered before Him in an assembly.
Then, with a gesture of His eyes, Shriji Mahārāj silenced the audience and said, "Those of you who are senior paramhansas, please come to the front as I wish to speak to you."
So saying, Shriji Mahārāj continued, "For those who worship God, there are two paths that lead to eminence, and there are also two paths that lead to downfall, all of which I shall now explain. One path is to offer bhakti to God via the path of amorousness, and the other path is knowledge of the ātmā. Both can lead to eminence, but both can also lead to downfall. Of these, thousands have fallen from the amorous path, with only a few attaining God. Although even the great āchāryas have encouraged the offering ofbhakti via the amorous path, many have been ruined by it, and only a few have benefited.
"The reason for this is that when God is described in an amorous manner, Rādhikāji and Lakshmiji, along with their companions, are also described together with God. When women are described, obviously their physical features are also described. How, then, can the mind of the person who is describing them possibly remain undisturbed? In fact, the nature of the indriyas is such that they only develop affection for thosevishays that are seductive. No woman in all of the realms possesses beauty that can match the beauty of Rādhikāji or Lakshmiji, nor is there anyone who has such a sweet voice as theirs; even the fragrance emanating from their bodies is unrivalled. Thus, upon seeing or hearing about such beauty, how can a person possibly not become infatuated? It is inevitable. Even if a person's mind is only slightly disturbed, he still falls from the path of liberation. Therefore, all of this proves to be a great obstacle for those who worship God via the amorous path.
"Now, 'brahma-gnān1' can also give rise to the following incorrect understanding:Brahma itself assumes the form of Prakruti-Purush. Then that Brahma itself assumes the forms of Brahmā, Vishnu and Shiv. Thereafter, Brahma assumes the mobile and immobile forms of creation. Subsequently, Brahma also becomes the jivas residing in those mobile and immobile forms of creation. By misunderstanding 'brahma-gnān1' in such a manner, that individual then believes his own jiva to be God, thus causing a breach in upāsanā. As a result, he also falls from the path of God. So, in the path of 'brahma-gnān1', such a breach in upāsanā is a major obstacle. Why? Because the very God who is to be understood as the cause and master of everything has been insulted. Therefore, one with such understanding should also be known to have fallen from the path of liberation.
"Now, while these two paths do lead to liberation, the obstacles along the way are also extremely grave. So, what should one who desires liberation do? Please answer this question."
Shriji Mahārāj then said, "The answer to the question is as follows: One's mind does not become infatuated on seeing one's own mother, sister or daughter, even if they are very beautiful. Moreover, even though one may talk with them, or even touch them, the mind is not even slightly infatuated. In the same manner, if one were to consider all female devotees of God as one's own mother, sister or daughter, then infatuation would not arise in any way at all. Then, by worshipping God via the amorous path, one would attain liberation.
"However, when a person does not have such understanding, and harbours lustful thoughts on seeing some great female devotee of God, the person's character becomes gravely blemished. Furthermore, whereas the blemish arising from lustfully looking at other women is eradicated by having the darshan of a devotee of God, no means of eradicating the blemish arising from lustfully looking at a devotee of God is mentioned anywhere in the scriptures. The same applies for females who look at a male devotee of God and harbour lustful thoughts; they too can never be redeemed of that sin. Thus the verse:
Anya-kshetre krutam pāpam teerth-kshetre vinashyati | Teertha-kshetre krutam pāpam, vajra-lepo bhavishyati ||2
The verse means: 'Sins committed elsewhere can be removed by going to God or a devotee of God. If, however, one commits a sin before God or His devotee, then it is like committing a sin at a place of pilgrimage; it becomes irredeemable, as if etched in iron.' Thus, whosoever wishes to worship God via the path of amorousness should, as I have explained, keep his mind pure.
"Now, on the path of 'brahma-gnān1', one should understand in the following manner:Brahma is not subject to change and is indivisible. Thus, it does not undergo change, nor can it be divided. When that Brahma is equated with all forms, it is because thatBrahma is the cause of all - Prakruti-Purush, etc. It is their supporter and pervades all through its antaryāmi powers. Furthermore, that which is the cause, the supporter and the pervader cannot be distinct from its effect. It is in reference to this context that the scriptures equate that Brahma with all forms. However, one should not believe that thatBrahma itself undergoes change and assumes the forms of all mobile and immobile beings. Transcending that Brahma is Parabrahma, Purushottam Nārāyan, who is distinct from Brahma, and is the cause, the supporter and the inspirer of Brahma. With such understanding, one should develop oneness with one's jivātmā and with thatBrahma, and worship Parabrahma while maintaining a master-servant relationship with Him. With such understanding, 'brahma-gnān1' also becomes an unobstructed path to attaining the highest state of enlightenment."
GADHADA II-4: CONSTANT CONTEMPLATION IS ACHIEVED THROUGH REALISING THE GREATNESS OF GOD AND SHRADDHĀ: A TORN WAISTCLOTH AND A GOURD
On Shrāvan sudi 5, Samvat 1878 [3 August 1821], Swāmi Shri Sahajānandji Mahārāj was sitting on the veranda outside the west-facing medi in Dādā Khāchar's darbār in Gadhadā. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. At that time, some paramhansaswere singing devotional songs in the Malār raga to the accompaniment of a dukad,sarodā, and satār, while other paramhansas as well as devotees from various places had gathered before Him in an assembly.
Then Shriji Mahārāj said, "Please stop the singing and let us now talk about God."
Thereupon Shriji Mahārāj asked, "Suppose a person who observes dharma as prescribed in the scriptures and also offers bhakti to God is faced with such adverse circumstances that if he tries to maintain bhakti, he is forced to lapse in his observance of dharma, and if he tries to maintain his observance of dharma, then he is forced to forsake bhakti. In such a case, which should he maintain, and which should he forsake?"
Brahmānand Swāmi replied, "If God is pleased by upholding bhakti, then bhakti should be upheld; and if He is pleased by upholding dharma, then dharma should be upheld."
Hearing this, Shriji Mahārāj countered, "For those who have found the incarnate form of God, it is of course appropriate for them to do only that which pleases God. But what should one do when God is not incarnate?"
Muktānand Swāmi attempted to answer, but he was unable to do so satisfactorily.
Shriji Mahārāj then said, "If one faces adverse circumstances when God is not incarnate and there is no one else left to turn to, then if one constantly contemplates only upon God, one will not fall from the path of God."
Thereafter, Shriji Mahārāj asked another question, "One who thoroughly realises the greatness of God feels, 'No matter how many sins one may have committed, if one merely utters the name of God even once, all of one's sins will be burnt to ashes.' However, what understanding should one who realises God's greatness in this manner cultivate so that he never falters from the observance of dharma?"
Again, Muktānand Swāmi attempted to answer but was unable to do so satisfactorily.
So, replying to His own question, Shriji Mahārāj said, "A person who thoroughly realises God's greatness can still observe dharma if he cultivates the following understanding: 'I want to constantly contemplate upon God and become an ekāntik bhakta. But if myvrutti is drawn towards vicious natures such as lust, anger, avarice, etc., then that will be a hindrance in my contemplation of God.' Realising this, he remains extremely wary of treading the wrong path. As a result, he would never do anything related to adharma. If a person has such an understanding, then even though he thoroughly realises the greatness of God, he would never falter in his observance of dharma.
"Indeed, it is not a small feat to be able to contemplate upon God constantly. Because if one were to leave this body while contemplating upon God, one would attain an extremely elevated state."
Thereafter, Brahmānand Swāmi asked, "We do realise this, yet we still cannot constantly contemplate upon God. What is the reason for this?"
Shriji Mahārāj explained, "First of all, to be able to constantly contemplate upon God, one needs such shraddhā. If one does not have such shraddhā, it implies that there is a corresponding deficiency in realising God's greatness. When there is a deficiency in realising God's greatness, it suggests that there is also a corresponding deficiency in one's conviction of God. So, if one realises the greatness of God and has shraddhā as well, then one will be able to constantly contemplate upon God.
"Furthermore, God's greatness should be realised as follows: God, who transcendsPrakruti-Purush, is the very same when He enters them; that is to say, He still retains His divine powers. Even after He enters the entities evolved from Prakruti-Purush, i.e., the brahmānd, He retains the very same powers; but, in no way do traces of māyāaffect God's form. For example, consider the difference between gold and other metals. When they are buried together in the ground, after a long period of time, the metals other than the gold will decompose into the dirt surrounding them. In comparison, the longer the gold stays in the ground, the more valuable it becomes; i.e., it does not decompose in any way. Similarly, God, deities such as Brahmā and others, or othermunis are not all the same. This is because when they come into the contact of dirt in the form of the vishays, then all except God become engrossed in those vishays, regardless of how great they may be. Moreover, although God seems to be like a human, there is no worldly object capable of affecting Him. Regardless of how alluring avishay may be, He is never enticed by it. Such is the transcendental greatness of God. If one realises such greatness, one would be able to constantly contemplate upon God.
"However, as long as a devotee is attracted to vishays, he has not realised God's transcendental greatness at all. For example, Shri Krishna Bhagwān said to Uddhavji, 'O Uddhav! You are not even slightly lesser than me.' Why was this so? Because Uddhavji had realised God's transcendental greatness and thus was not allured by thepanchvishays.
"For one who realises the greatness of God, to rule a kingdom or to have to beg for food are both equivalent. He also feels the same towards a young girl, a 16-year-old girl, and an 80-year-old woman. In fact, he views all of the attractive and repulsive objects in this world as being equal; he does not get enticed by an alluring object as a moth does by a lamp. In fact, he is not tempted by any object whatsoever except for God; he is only attracted to the form of God. A devotee who behaves in this manner never becomes bound by vishays, regardless of how enticing they may be.
"However, if a person has not understood this key principle, then it would be very difficult for him to detach his mind from even a torn waistcloth or a gourd. Thus, without realising God's greatness in this way, even if a person endeavours in a million other ways, he will still not be able to constantly contemplate upon the form of God. Conversely, only one who realises the greatness of God is able to constantly contemplate upon Him."
GADHADA II-5: FIDELITY AND COURAGE
On Shrāvan sudi 7, Samvat 1878 [5 August 1821], Swāmi Shri Sahajānandji Mahārāj was sitting on a small, silken, embroidered cloth which had been placed on the platform in front of the mandir of Shri Vāsudevnārāyan in Dādā Khāchar's darbār in Gadhadā. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. At that time, some munis were singing devotional songs to the accompaniment of a tāl and mrudang, while other munis as well as devotees from various places had gathered before Him in an assembly.
Then with a gesture of His eyes, Shriji Mahārāj stopped the devotional songs and said, "Everyone please listen; I wish to speak. A devotee of God should firstly maintain fidelity, and secondly, courage. For example, consider a woman who observes the vow of fidelity. Even if her husband is old, sick, poor or ugly, the mind of that faithful wife would never sway upon seeing the virtues of another man. Even if a beggar's wife, who observes such a vow, were to see a great king, her mind would not waver. In a similar manner, a devotee of God should observe the vow of fidelity with God.
"Furthermore, if someone were to speak ill of one's husband, then one should not remain timid and become subdued. Rather, one should reply very boldly. In this manner, a devotee of God should not become suppressed by evil people; he should be courageous.
"However, it is generally said that a sādhu should view everyone equally. But this is not the principle of the scriptures. Because Nārad, the Sanakādik, Dhruv, Prahlād, etc., have taken the side of only God and His devotees; they have never taken the side of non-believers. One who does side with a nonbeliever will himself, either in this life or in the next, definitely become a non-believer as well. Therefore, a devotee of God should certainly side with God's devotees and forsake the side of non-believers. Please imbibe this discourse of Mine extremely firmly."
GADHADA II-6: A DRAFT; THE NATURE OF THE CHITT
On Shrāvan sudi 8, Samvat 1878 [6 August 1821], Swāmi Shri Sahajānandji Mahārāj was sitting on a square platform in front of the mandir of Shri Vāsudevnārāyan in Dādā Khāchar's darbār in Gadhadā. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. At that time, some of the paramhansas were singing devotional songs to the accompaniment of a tāland mrudang, while other paramhansas as well as devotees from various places had gathered before Him in an assembly.
Then Shriji Mahārāj said, "Please stop the singing and let us now talk about God."
Thereupon, all of the munis sat with their hands folded. Shriji Mahārāj then continued, "In this world, there are many people who are like infidels. They believe, 'Water from the Gangā and other water seems the same; shāligrāms and other stones seem the same;tulsi and other trees seem the same; a Brāhmin and a Shudra seem equal; food which is the prasād of God and other food seems the same; to fast on the day of Ekādashiand to go hungry on any other day seems the same; and a sādhu and a non-sādhu also seem the same. Despite this being so, why have those so-called great men made distinctions in the form of moral do's and don'ts in the scriptures?' This is what people with evil minds profess. That is why I put this question to all of you sādhus: Are those distinctions in the form of moral do's and don'ts prescribed in the scriptures by great men valid, or are they concocted? May the junior paramhansas answer this question."
The junior paramhansas replied, "The distinctions in the form of moral do's and don'ts are indeed valid. If this were not so, how could there be a distinction as to who deserves to attain swarg and who deserves to attain narak?"
Hearing this, Shriji Mahārāj commented, "They are young, but they understand well." Shriji Mahārāj then elaborated upon the answer Himself. He said, "Whatever the great men of the past have prescribed in the scriptures is valid. Take the example of a wealthy businessman. If he writes a draft to pay some other merchant, then although it seems that the piece of paper is not worth even a single rupee, it is indeed money. Only when one cashes the draft the businessman had signed does one subsequently receive a large sum of money from that very same draft. Similarly, although at the time there may not seem to be any benefit in observing the moral do's and don'ts, one who does observe dharma by the command of a great Purush ultimately attains liberation - just as one receives cash from drafts.
"Moreover, a person who does not trust a draft signed by a wealthy businessman should be known to be a fool - because he does not realise the wealth of that businessman. Similarly, one who does not trust the words of greats such as Nārad, the Sanakādik, Vyās, Vālmiki, etc., should be known as a nāstik and a grave sinner.
"Furthermore, one who has such a nāstik attitude believes, 'What is the difference between God's murti and other stones? All stones are one and the same. What is the difference between a married woman and an unmarried woman? All women are equal. What is the difference between one's wife, mother or sister? After all, they all look alike. In fact, even all of the avatārs of God such as Rām, Krishna, etc., look like humans. Surely, then, the concept of them being greater or lesser has been concocted by man'simagination. But what can we do? Because we have to live with such people, we have to agree with whatever they say. Nevertheless, the moral do's and don'ts prescribed by the scriptures are definitely nonsense.' This is the understanding that sinners such as the nāstiks have in their minds. If one hears such words from someone, then the listener should be known as a sinner and a nāstik; and realising him to be an outcast, one should by no means keep his company."
Shriji Mahārāj then began another topic. He said, "The chitt of all people is like honey, or like water saturated with gor, sugar or sākar. If, for example, a fly or an ant were to fall into that honey or water saturated with gor, sugar or sākar, it would become stuck in it. Even if a person were to touch the honey or saturated water, it would stick to the person's finger as well. The nature of the chitt is similar to this; it sticks to whatever object it recalls. In fact, the chitt even attaches itself to things that are utterly insignificant, such as stones, or rubbish, or dog excrement - things in which there is not even the slightest pleasure. If it recalls such useless things, it will then also contemplate upon them. Such is its sticky nature.
"Furthermore, just as the reflection of a great sādhu will be seen in a large, glass mirror if he stands before it, the reflection of a dog, a donkey or a vile person will also be seen if they stand before it. Similarly, the chitt is extremely pure; it can visualise whichever object it recalls, regardless of whether it is appealing or not. Therefore, a spiritual aspirant should not think, 'Objects such as women and other alluring vishays sprout in my chitt because I do not possess vairāgya.' In actual fact, objects sprout naturally even in the chitt of one who does possess vairāgya. Thus, vairāgya or the lack of it is not the reason behind this. Instead, the nature of the chitt is such that whatever it recalls, be it good or bad, it contemplates upon. When it contemplates upon an object, it appears just as it would appear in a mirror. That is why one should realise, 'I am distinct from thechitt. I am the ātmā, the observer of the chitt.' Realising this, one should not become frustrated by the pure or impure thoughts arising in the chitt. Instead, one should realise oneself to be distinct from one's chitt, engage in the worship of God and always remain joyful."
GADHADA II-7: A POOR MAN
On the night of Shrāvan sudi 11, Samvat 1878 [9 August 1821], Swāmi Shri Sahajānandji Mahārāj was sitting in front of the mandir of Shri Vāsudevnārāyan in Dādā Khāchar's darbār in Gadhadā. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. At that time, an assembly of paramhansas as well as devotees from various places had gathered before Him.
Thereupon Muktānand Swāmi asked Shriji Mahārāj, "A devotee of God resolves in his mind, 'I do not want to retain a single swabhāv which may hinder me in worshipping God,' and yet, such inappropriate swabhāvs do remain. What is the reason for this?"
Shriji Mahārāj replied, "If a person has a deficiency of vairāgya, then even if he has theshraddhā to eradicate his swabhāvs, still they will not be eradicated. For example, a poor man may wish for lots of sumptuous food and lavish clothes, but how can he acquire them? Similarly, one who lacks vairāgya may wish in his heart to acquire the virtues of a sādhu, but it is very difficult for him to do so."
Muktānand Swāmi then asked, "If a person does not possess vairāgya, what means should he adopt to eradicate those vicious natures?"
Shriji Mahārāj replied, "If a person lacks vairāgya, but intensely serves a great Sant, and obediently perseveres in his observance of the injunctions of God, then God will look upon him with an eye of compassion, and feel, 'This poor fellow lacks vairāgya, and lust, anger, etc., are harassing him very much. So now, may all those vicious natures be eradicated.' As a result, they will be eradicated immediately. In comparison, if he were to endeavour in other ways, those swabhāvs may be eradicated, but after a great deal of time and effort - either in this life or in later lives. If such vicious natures are eradicated instantly, then it should be known that they have been eradicated by the grace of God."
GADHADA II-8: EKĀDASHI; 'GNĀN-YAGNA'; 'ANTARDRASHTI'
In the early morning of Shrāvan sudi 12, Samvat 1878 [10 August 1821], Swāmi Shri Sahajānandji Mahārāj was sitting on a small, silken, embroidered cloth in front of themandir of Shri Vāsudevnārāyan in Dādā Khāchar's darbār in Gadhadā. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. At that time, some paramhansas were singing devotional songs to the accompaniment of a tāl and mrudang, while other paramhansas as well as devotees from various places had gathered before Him in an assembly.
Then, addressing the sādhus, Shriji Mahārāj said, "One should observe the Ekādashifast because of the following story: Once, God was sleeping with his ten indriyas and mind - the eleventh indriya - drawn inwards. At that time, Mur Dānav, the son of Nādijangh, came to do battle with God. But then, a young woman was created from the divine light of God's eleven indriyas. Seeing her, Mur Dānav proposed to her, 'Please marry me.' The young woman replied, 'I have taken a vow that I will only marry the person who defeats me in a duel.' Thus, a duel between Mur Dānav and the young woman ensued, in which the young woman severed Mur Dānav's head with a sword. God was pleased with her and said, 'Ask for a boon.' The young woman requested, 'On my day of observance, no one should eat grains. Furthermore, since I was born from the divine light of your eleven indriyas, my name is Ekādashi. Since I am an ascetic, on my day of observance, no one should indulge in any of the vishays related to the elevenindriyas, which includes the mind.' Hearing Ekādashi's wish, God granted her that boon. This is the story as it is narrated in the Purāns.
"The Dharma-shāstras also state: 'The Ekādashi fast should be observed. On that day, one should not allow impure thoughts of lust, anger, avarice, etc., to arise in the mind. Nor should one physically engage in any immoral activities.' This is what the scriptures prescribe. In accordance with those scriptures, I also say that on the day of Ekādashi, one should not merely fast, but one should also forsake the 'food' of the eleven indriyas. Only then can the Ekādashi observance be considered true; without that, it should be known as mere fasting.
"Just as the prāns have their diet in the form of food, similarly, the ears have a diet of sounds, the eyes have a diet of sights, the tongue has a diet of tastes, the nose has a diet of smells and the mind has a diet comprising of thoughts and desires. In this way, the eleven indriyas have their respective diets. To forego these is called observing the fast of Ekādashi. However, to allow the eleven indriyas to roam freely along the path of immorality and indulge in their respective 'foods' is not truly Ekādashi according to the scriptures. Therefore, when observing the fast of Ekādashi, the eleven indriyas should not be allowed their respective diets. Since such an observance arrives once every fifteen days, one should definitely make a point of observing it. In return, God will become pleased upon one. Without this, however, merely fasting does not please Him.
"The residents of Shwetdwip, who are called niranna-muktas, are continuously observing this fast, and never do they allow it to be broken. That is precisely why they are called 'niranna' - food-less - muktas. We too should have such aspirations as, 'I want to become like those niranna-muktas in Shwetdwip'; one should not lose heart in this respect. Only if one keeps courage and observes the fast of Ekādashi in the way I mentioned earlier, listens to and engages in the discourses of God and devotional songs and also stays awake at night, is the fast considered to have been observed properly. This is the very definition of the Ekādashi observance as mentioned in the scriptures."
Thereafter, Shriji Mahārāj again said, "When Brahmā carried out the very first creation, he told all of the people, 'You should all perform sacrifices. Through them you will attain all of the purushārths, and the process of creation will also flourish. Therefore, be sure to perform these sacrifices.' Brahmā then demonstrated the many different types of sacrifices along with their rituals as described in the Vedas. To those who had adopted the path of pravrutti, Brahmā demonstrated the rājasik and tāmasik sacrifices of thepravrutti path. To those who had adopted the path of nivrutti, he demonstrated sāttviksacrifices. These sacrifices have also been described by Shri Krishna Bhagwān in theBhagwad Gitā. Since we have adopted the path of nivrutti, we should perform sāttviksacrifices, not rājasik or tāmasik sacrifices in which animals are slaughtered.
"One can perform a sāttvik sacrifice by withdrawing the ten indriyas and the mind - the eleventh indriya - from whichever vishays they have become attached to and then offering them into the brahma-agni. Such a sacrifice is called a 'yoga-yagna'. By continuously making such offerings, Parabrahma Shri Purushottam manifests Himself within the brahmaswarup self of the person who performs such a 'yoga-yagna', just as God grants darshan to the performer of a traditional sacrifice. In fact, this is the fruit of the 'yoga-yagna'.
"Furthermore, when a devotee of God engages in 'antardrashti', it is called a 'gnān-yagna'. Someone may ask, 'What is antardrashti?' The answer is: To direct one's vruttitowards either the internal or the external form of God is itself 'antardrashti1'. Without doing this, even if one is sitting and seemingly engaged in 'antardrashti', it is still 'bāhyadrashti2'. Therefore, physical God-related activities, such as having the darshanof God, performing His puja or engaging in discourses, devotional songs, etc., of God, are all, in fact, forms of 'antardrashti'. All of these are aspects of a 'gnān-yagna'. In addition, to behold that form of God within one's heart, to perform its puja, to bow before it, etc., is also 'antardrashti', and they are also aspects of a 'gnān-yagna'. For this reason, then, all satsangis are continuously performing such a 'gnān-yagna'. However, it is by the wish of God that some attain samādhi and others do not. Nevertheless, sometimes, it could also be that the devotee himself has some sort of deficiency.
"Then there are those foolish people who say, 'Do not sing devotional songs which describe the gopis, sing only nirgun devotional songs.' Those same fools claim that one who roams around naked is nirgun. But if one could become nirgun by merely walking around naked then even dogs, donkeys and other animals would be called nirgun. That is the understanding of fools.
"In comparison, a devotee possessing gnān realises, 'Only God is nirgun, and all those who have some relation to God are followers of the nirgun path. Furthermore, any spiritual discourse or devotional song associated with God is also considered nirgun. Others, which are not associated with God, possess māyik gunas and should thus be considered to be sagun. So, if a person has not been graced with the attainment of God, then even if he walks around naked, he cannot be called nirgun; whereas even if a householder has been graced with the attainment of God, he can still be called nirgun - as can a renunciant.' Therefore, the path to attaining God is itself the nirgun path, and all God-related activities are thus also nirgun.
"As for a person who has come into contact with God, there is no limit to his good fortune. But such a relationship with God is not the result of merits from one life alone. That is why Shri Krishna Bhagwān has stated in the Bhagwad Gitā:
Aneka-janma-sansiddhas-tato yāti parām gatim |3
The meaning of this verse is: 'One becomes realised and attains the highest state of enlightenment after the pious deeds of many lives have accumulated.' What is this highest state of enlightenment? Well, the attainment of the manifest form of God is itself the highest state of enlightenment.
"Again, Shri Krishna Bhagwān has said:
Mamaivānsho jeevaloke jeeva-bhootaha sanātanaha | Manah-shashthāneendriyāni prakrutisthāni karshati ||4
This verse means: 'In this world, those jivas who are 'anshas5' of God withdraw their mind and five gnān-indriyas away from the panchvishays and keep them suppressed. On the other hand, those who are not 'anshas' of God are drawn by their indriyas and are taken where the indriyas wish to go.' Because we are not led astray by our indriyas, we should realise ourselves to be 'anshas' of God. Realising this, we should remain elated, should engage in the worship of God and should offer all of the vruttis of ourindriyas to God. We should continuously perform a 'gnān-yagna' in this manner.
"Without performing such sacrifices, there is no way in which liberation can be attained. The four Vedas, the Sānkhya scriptures, the Yoga scriptures, the Dharma-shāstras, the 18 Purāns, the Mahābhārat, the Rāmāyan, the Nārad Panchrātra, in fact, all scriptures share the principle that liberation cannot be attained without performing sacrifices.
"It is also My command that all paramhansas and all satsangis should continue performing a 'gnān-yagna'. While performing a 'gnān-yagna' in this manner, one ultimately has a divine vision of Parabrahma within one's own self, which is Brahma. This is the fruit of the 'gnān-yagna'. The climax of the 'gnān-yagna' ritual is when one becomes like a niranna-mukta of Shwetdwip. As long as one has not attained that state, one should realise that much is left to be accomplished. In fact, one should harbour a strong desire to become like a niranna-mukta. In the process, one should not lose faith, and one should not consider oneself to be unfulfilled. Since one has been graced with the attainment of God, one should consider oneself to be absolutely fulfilled, and one should diligently continue performing the 'gnān-yagna'."
GADHADA II-9: CONVICTION OF GOD; REALISING GOD TO BE LIKE OTHER AVATĀRS IS BLASPHEMY
On Shrāvan sudi 14, Samvat 1878 [12 August 1821], Swāmi Shri Sahajānandji Mahārāj was sitting on a small, silken, embroidered cloth in front of the mandir of Shri Vāsudevnārāyan in Dādā Khāchar's darbār in Gadhadā. Ānandānand Swāmi had just performed His puja. Shriji Mahārāj was wearing a red survāl and dagli made fromkinkhāb. He had tied a golden-bordered, orange reto around His head and had also tied a brocaded shelu around His waist. On His shoulder was a sky-blue coloured reto, and tied around His wrist were several rākhdis. At that time, an assembly of munis as well as devotees from various places had gathered before Him.
Thereupon Muktānand Swāmi suggested, "Let us sing devotional songs."
Shriji Mahārāj said, "Let us talk about God." He then continued, "The path of gnānshould be understood in such a way that one does not malign the form of God in any way. In fact, one should not worry if at sometime or other one has transgressed God's commands; but one should never malign the form of God. If one does disobey God's commands, then one can still be freed from that sin by praying to God; however, there are no means of release for one who has maligned the form of God. Therefore, one who is wise should certainly abide by God's commands to the best of one's ability. However, one should also intensely maintain the strength of conviction in God's form; i.e., 'I have attained the very form of God who reigns supreme, who forever possesses a divine form, and who is the 'avatāri' - the cause of all of the avatārs.' If a person realises this, then even if he may have left the Satsang fellowship, his love for God's form will not diminish. In fact, even though he is out of Satsang at present, ultimately, when he leaves his body, he will go to God's Akshardhām and stay near God.
"On the other hand, a person may be in the Satsang fellowship at present, and he may even be abiding by the commands prescribed in the scriptures, but if his conviction of God is not firm, then when he leaves his body, he will either go to the realm of Brahmāor to the realm of some other deity; but he will not go to the abode of PurushottamBhagwān. Therefore, one should realise the manifest God that one has attained to forever possess a divine form and to be the 'avatāri', the cause of all of the avatārs. If, however, one does not realise this, and instead realises God to be formless or like the other avatārs, then that is regarded as committing blasphemy against God.
"Now consider the following: Arjun's spiritual strength was based on his conviction of God, whereas Yudhishthir's source of strength was his faith in the words of the scriptures. Then, when the Mahābhārat war was fought, Shri Krishna Bhagwān said to Arjun,
Sarva-dharmān-parityajya mām-ekam sharanam vraja | Aham tvā sarva-pāpebhyo mokshayishyāmi mā shuchaha ||1
The meaning of this verse is, 'O Arjun! Abandon all of the various types of dharma and surrender only unto me. I shall deliver you from all sins, so do not lament.' By keeping faith in these words, Arjun never became disheartened, despite committing countless misdeeds during the war. He maintained firm faith in God. Conversely, Yudhishthir had not committed any sins whatsoever, and yet, because he had faith in the words of the scriptures, he felt, 'I shall never attain liberation.' Even when all of the rishis, Vyāsji and even Shri Krishna Bhagwān himself attempted to explain to him, still he did not forsake his remorse. Only when Shri Krishna Bhagwān took him to Bhishma and had him listen to Bhishma's discourse on the true meaning of the words of the scriptures did he develop some faith. Nevertheless, he did not become totally free of doubt like Arjun. Thus, one who is intelligent should intensely maintain spiritual strength based on the conviction of God.
"Even the slightest strength based on this conviction will protect one from great dangers. Shri Krishna Bhagwān has also said,
Svalpam-apyasya dharmasya trāyate mahato bhayāt ||2
This verse means, 'If one has the slightest strength based on the conviction of God, it will protect one from great calamities.' For example, when Arjun fought in theMahābhārat war, he encountered many, many types of grave dangers in the form ofadharma. Yet, he was spared from those dangers because of his conviction of God. Therefore, only he can be called an ekāntik bhakta whose strength is based on the conviction of God more than anything else; and only he can be called a staunchsatsangi. The Shrimad Bhāgwat also mentions this predominantly; i.e., 'If one strays from the dharma proclaimed in the Shrutis and Smrutis, one should not worry. However, one should never abandon the refuge of God.'
"Then some may feel, 'If we propound such talks, dharma will become irrelevant.' But this principle is not intended to make dharma irrelevant. Rather its purpose is as follows: Places, times, actions, company, mantras, scriptures, preachings and deities can be of two types - pure and impure. Of these, if one were to encounter the impure, and if as a result some difficulties were to arise, then if one has the firm conviction of God, one would never fall from the path of liberation. Conversely, if there is a deficiency in one's conviction of God, then whenever one falters from dharma, one would feel, 'I am destined to fall into narak.' Therefore, only one whose strength is based on the conviction of God is a staunch satsangi. Without this, one is merely appreciative ofSatsang. Even the scriptures mention that only one who firmly maintains the conviction of God is called an ekāntik bhakta."
Then Shriji Mahārāj said, "If Nārad, the Sanakādik, and deities such as Brahmā and others were to hear the discourses being presently delivered in Satsang, they would say, 'We have never heard such talks before, and we shall never hear them again.' These discourses can be described as 'Na bhooto na bhavishyati3'. Although these talks are extremely subtle, even a person of average intelligence can understand them. It is as if these talks are personified. Therefore, there is no limit to the merits of one who, at this present time, has a conviction of Satsang. Realising this, those who aresatsangis should consider themselves to be totally fulfilled. Moreover, a person who has profound love for God, regardless of whether he understands this discourse, has nothing left to do. If, on the other hand, one does not have such profound love for God, then one should definitely realise the greatness of God. Thus, one who is wise should contemplate upon this discourse, understand it, and then take extremely firm refuge in God. This principle alone is the very essence of all essences."
GADHADA II-10: SAFEGUARDING THE FOETUS IN THE FORM OF FAITH IN GOD
On Shrāvan vadi 3, Samvat 1878 [16 August 1821], Swāmi Shri Sahajānandji Mahārāj arrived at Lakshmivādi on horseback1 from Dādā Khāchar's darbār in Gadhadā. There, He sat facing north on the square platform under the mango tree. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. At that time, an assembly of paramhansas as well as devotees from various places had gathered before Him.
Thereupon Shriji Mahārāj said, "The Shrimad Bhāgwat proclaims that Brahmapossesses a form. However, if those who read it do not have bhakti for God, they will understand God to be formless, even from reading the Shrimad Bhāgwat. Also, from the second canto, which describes the characteristics of the refuge of God, those who are lacking in bhakti will again understand God to be formless. In reality, though, God is not formless. Why? Because it is through God that everything mobile and immobile is created. Now, if God were formless, then how could He create something that possesses a form? For example, ākāsh is formless. Therefore, pots and other forms that can be created from pruthvi cannot be created from that ākāsh. In the same manner, since Brahmā and the rest of creation possess a form, God, their creator, also definitely possesses a form.
"Moreover, the Shrimad Bhāgwat states: 'The supporter of adhyātma, adhibhut andadhidev is God.' Now I shall explain how, so please listen carefully. Adhyātma, theindriyas of Virāt-Purush; adhibhut, his five mahābhuts; and adhidev, the presiding deities of the indriyas of Virāt-Purush, all entered Virāt. Despite this, Virāt was unable to rise. Only when Vāsudev Bhagwān assumed the form of Purush and entered Virāt-Purush, did Virāt-Purush rise. That God thus acts with oneness2 with the adhyātma,adhibhut and adhidev of Virāt-Purush. In reality, however, He is distinct from Virāt, and only this form of God is said to be worthy of seeking refuge.
"For example, fire in the form of light is formless, while Agni himself possesses a definite form. Moreover, when Agni suffered from indigestion3, he came to Krishna and Arjun in his personified form. Then, when he went to burn the Khāndav forest of Indra, that same Agni assumed the form of flames and spread throughout the whole forest. In the same way, Purushottam Bhagwān pervades all through His antaryāmi powers, which are brahmarup. Yet, possessing a definite form, He is also distinct from all.Brahma4 itself is a ray of the light of Purushottam Bhagwān, while God Himself always possesses a form. Therefore, a person who aspires to attain liberation should realise God to possess a definite form and should maintain His firm refuge.
"Moreover, he should speak in such a manner so as not to break someone's refuge of God. For example, just as a woman who carries a foetus in her womb attains a child, one who carries a foetus in the form of faith in God, attains God's Akshardhām. Therefore, one should practise such methods whereby that foetus is never endangered. One should also talk to others in such a way that that foetus in the form of faith in God does not miscarry."
Thereafter, Shriji Mahārāj returned to Dādā Khāchar's darbār from Lakshmivādi. There, He sat on a large, decorated cot on the veranda outside the east-facing rooms. At that time, an assembly of paramhansas as well as devotees from various places had gathered before Him.
Then Shriji Mahārāj summoned the junior paramhansas and initiated a discussion amongst them. Achintyānand Swāmi then asked a question: "Of the three - gnān,vairāgya and bhakti - which one plays a more significant role in fostering affection for God?"
No one was able to answer that question. So Shriji Mahārāj said, "Here, I shall answer that question, and I shall also describe the characteristics of gnān, vairāgya and bhaktiin turn.
"All people have a tendency such that on seeing an enticing object, their affection for any object that is not as enticing will naturally diminish. Thus, before the bliss of God'sAkshardhām, these worldly pleasures seem artificial; permanent bliss can only be found in the abode of God. Therefore, if while listening to talks about God, the bliss related to God is realised, then everything that has evolved from māyā will appear worthless. For example, a man with a copper coin in his hand will lose affection for it when someone offers him a gold coin in exchange. In the same way, when one realises the bliss related to God, one develops vairāgya towards all worldly pleasures, and one develops love only for the form of God. That is the form of vairāgya.
"Now I shall describe the form of gnān. There are two sets of scriptures that explain gnān: One set is the Sānkhya scriptures, and the other set is the Yoga scriptures.
"Of these, the doctrine of the Sānkhya scriptures is as follows: Ākāsh pervades pruthvi,jal, tej and vāyu, and there is not even a single anu that is devoid of ākāsh; still the shortcomings of pruthvi, jal, etc., do not affect ākāsh at all. In the same manner asākāsh, no māyik flaw can affect Purushottam Bhagwān. This fact is mentioned in theKrishnatāpni Upanishad as follows: When Durvāsā Rishi came to Vrundāvan, Shri Krishna Bhagwān told the gopis, 'Durvāsā Rishi is hungry; so all of you take dishes of food and go to him.'
"Shri Krishna Bhagwān replied, 'Tell Yamunāji that if Shri Krishna is forever abrahmachāri, then please make way for us.'
"Laughing, the gopis went to the banks of the Yamunā and said this. Immediately, Yamunāji gave way. The gopis fed the rishi, and he in turn ate all of the food. Then thegopis asked him, 'How shall we return home, as the Yamunā flows along the way?'
"The rishi then asked them, 'How did you get here?'
"The gopis then explained, 'Shri Krishna had told us that if he has been a brahmachārisince childhood, then ask Yamunāji to give way. Thus, Yamunāji gave way, and we have come to you.'
"Hearing this, the rishi said, 'Now tell Yamunāji that if Durvāsā is continuously fasting, then please give way to us.'
"Again, laughing, the gopis said this. Immediately, Yamunāji gave way. On seeing these two incidents, the gopis were totally dumbfounded.
"Therefore, God is unaffected in the same manner as ākāsh, and despite being the doer of all actions, God still remains a non-doer. Although He is associated with all, He remains absolutely aloof. In this way, the Sānkhya scriptures describe God as being unaffected. To understand this is gnān according to the Sānkhya doctrine.
"Now I shall explain the doctrine of the Yoga scriptures, so please listen. The doctrine ofYoga is that whoever wishes to meditate on God should first stabilise his vision. To stabilise the vision, it should first be fixed upon the form of God or some other object. Then, while staring at the same object, the vision becomes steady, and with it, theantahkaran also becomes steady. When the antahkaran becomes steady, God's form should be beheld in the heart. This would not be strenuous for the yogi who attempts to behold the form; in fact, he can behold it quite easily. However, if, from the beginning, a person does not stabilise his antahkaran through practice, then when he does meditate on God, many other types of disturbing thoughts arise and obstruct his path.
"Thus the principle of the Yoga scriptures is as follows: 'The vrutti should first be stabilised through practice before it is attached to God.' Realising this is gnān according to the Yoga scriptures. Therefore, to consolidate one's understanding through the doctrines of those two scriptures is known as gnān.
"Now the method of practising bhakti is as follows: When the ocean was churned, Lakshmiji emerged from the ocean. After taking a marriage garland in her hand, Lakshmiji thought, 'Who is suitable for marriage? I shall marry him.' Then, wherever she looked and examined, whoever was handsome lacked virtues, and whoever possessed virtues lacked beauty. In this way, she noticed great shortcomings in many. She then saw all of the deities and all of the demons as possessing such shortcomings as well. Finally, seeing that it was only God who was complete with all virtues, without any faults at all and the source of all bliss, Lakshmiji developed profound bhakti towards God. With intense love, she placed the marriage garland around God's neck and married God. Therefore, to realise such redemptive virtues in God and to seek His firm refuge is known as bhakti."
Hearing this, Muktānand Swāmi asked Shriji Mahārāj, "Mahārāj, I have not yet quite understood which of the three of gnān, vairāgya or bhakti has the greater power in fostering affection for God."
Then Shriji Mahārāj replied, "Bhakti has a lot of power; and while gnān and vairāgyaalso have such power, it is not as much as that of bhakti. However, true bhakti is extremely rare. The characteristics of those who possess bhakti are as follows: When God assumes a form like a human for the sake of the liberation of the jivas and travels on this earth, many of God's actions are divine and many appear to be māyik. When God assumed the avatār of Krishna, He gave darshan to Devki and Vasudev in a four-armed form. He also lifted Mount Govardhan. He cleansed the Yamunā's waters of poison by removing Kāliyānāg. He subdued the infatuation of Brahmā and gavedarshan to Akrurji in the waters of the Yamunā. He also dispelled the strife of all of the Yādavs by killing the wrestlers, an elephant, as well as wicked persons like Kansa. Similarly, in the avatār of Rām, He broke the bow and also dispelled the strife of the deities by killing wicked persons such as Rāvan. These and other such exploits are known as the divine actions of God.
"However, when Sitā was abducted, Raghunāthji appeared to have become insane due to constant crying. In the avatār of Krishna, he fled from Kālyavan, was defeated by Jarāsandh, and also had to relinquish his kingdom in Mathurā to go and settle on an island in the sea. These and other such actions of God appear to be human-like. Even a sinner would perceive divinity in the divine actions of God; a true devotee of God, however, would perceive divinity even when God performs human-like actions. In theGitā, God has said,
Janma karma cha me divyam-evem yo vetti tattvataha | Tyaktvā deham punar-janma naiti mām-eti so'rjuna ||5
This verse means: 'O Arjun! My birth and my actions are divine. He who realises them as divine will not take another birth when he leaves his body; rather, he will attain me.' So whenever God performs divine actions, they appear divine to both a devotee and to one who is not a devotee. However, when God performs human-like actions, a true devotee still perceives divinity in them, but by no means does he perceive flaws in such actions of God. Having such understanding is known as having bhakti towards God. In fact, only such devotees earn the fruits mentioned in the above verse.
"The gopis were devotees of God, and they never, in any way, perceived flaws in God. On the other hand, merely on listening to the talks about the gopis, King Parikshit perceived a flaw in God. Shukji then explained those flaws to be false by illustrating the powers of God. Therefore, bhakti in which one perceives all of the actions and incidents of God as being divine, as the gopis did, and never perceives a flaw by understanding them to be human-like, is very rare. In fact, it is not achieved by merely doing good deeds for one or two lives. Rather, only when the pure sanskārs of many lives accumulate, does bhakti like that of the gopis develop. In fact, such bhakti is itself the highest state of enlightenment. It is this type of bhakti that is greater than gnān andvairāgya. If a person has such bhakti in his heart, what would be lacking in his love for God? Nothing would be lacking."
GADHADA II-11: ALL KARMAS BECOMING A FORM OF BHAKTI
On Shrāvan vadi 5, Samvat 1878 [18 August 1821], Swāmi Shri Sahajānandji Mahārāj was sitting on a large, decorated cot under the neem tree in front of the mandir of Shri Vāsudevnārāyan in Dādā Khāchar's darbār in Gadhadā. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. At that time, an assembly of munis as well as devotees from various places had gathered before Him.
Thereupon Shriji Mahārāj said, "After listening to all of the scriptures, some people believe that they only deal with dharma, arth and kām. Thinking thus, they themselves also perform pious karmas such as sacrifices, observances, etc., only for the attainmentdharma, arth and kām. As a result, they enjoy the fruits of such karmas in Devlok,Brahmalok or Mrutyulok. Then, they return to the cycle of births and deaths. Therefore, the pious karmas that a person performs while harbouring a desire for dharma, arth andkām, all become sāttvik, rājasik and tāmasik; and the fruits of those karmas are enjoyed while staying in the realms of swarg, Mrutyulok and pātāl. However, they do not attain the gunātit abode of God. As long as one does not attain liberation, the miseries of births, deaths and narak do not subside.
"So, if one abandons the desire for the fruits related to dharma, arth and kām, and if one performs pious karmas only to please God, then those pious karmas become a form ofbhakti and aid in the attainment of liberation. Thus the verses:
Āmayo yena bhootānām jāyate yash-cha suvrat | Tad-eva hyāmayam dravyam na punāti chikitsitam ||
Evam nrunām kriyā-yogāhā sarva sansruti-hetavaha |
Ta evātma-vināshāya kalpante kalpitāhā pare ||1
The essence of this verse is as I have described earlier.
"However, this fact is actually very intricate, and if it is not fully understood, then on seeing a devotee of God behaving in the same way as all ignorant people do, one would perceive flaws in him. As a result, the person who perceives the flaws would be consigned to narak.
"But in fact, there is a vast difference between the activities of a devotee of God and the activities of a nonbeliever. How? Well, all activities of a non-believer are for pampering his indriyas, whereas all activities of a devotee of God are solely for serving God and His devotee. As a result, the devotee's activities are a form of bhakti.
"Moreover, bhakti is like gnān in the sense that both are a form of non-karma. Hence, all of a devotee's activities are in a form of karmas that do not cause attachment. Thus the verse in the Bhagwad Gitā:
Karmanyakarma yaha pashyed-akarmani cha karma yaha | Sa buddhimān-manushyeshu sa yuktaha krutsna-karma-krut ||2
The meaning of this verse is as follows: If a person sees non-karma, i.e., gnān, in thekarmas performed by the devotees of God for the purpose of pleasing God; and he sees a non-believer who has adopted the path of nivrutti as drowned in karmas, then such a person is said to possess gnān and is the most intelligent amongst all people; he is a yogi; he is worthy to attain liberation and is 'krutsna-karma-krut' - i.e., he has performed all karmas.
"Therefore, if in any way a person perceives a flaw in a devotee of God who, by God's command, performs karmas for the purpose of pleasing God, then adharma and its retinue will enter and reside in the perceiver's heart."
GADHADA II-12: THE ART OF RULING
On Shrāvan vadi 6, Samvat 1878 [19 August 1821], Swāmi Shri Sahajānandji Mahārāj was sitting in front of the mandir of Shri Vāsudevnārāyan on the veranda outside the west-facing rooms of Dādā Khāchar's darbār in Gadhadā. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. At that time, an assembly of paramhansas as well as devotees from various places had gathered before Him.
Thereupon Shriji Mahārāj said, "I wish to talk to you, so please listen. In the discourse I am about to deliver, I shall describe only one spiritual endeavour for attaining liberation, but it is so powerful that all other spiritual endeavours are incorporated within it. It is as follows:
"The jiva, which resides in the body, feels, 'Lust, anger and other vicious natures are attached to my jiva.' In this manner, depending on which of the vicious natures, i.e., lust, anger, avarice, etc., is predominant in a person, he believes his jiva to be full of that nature due to his association with it. But, in fact, not a single one of these vicious natures lies within the jiva; the jiva has merely believed itself to possess them out of its own foolishness.
"Hence, he who wishes to attain the highest state of enlightenment should make an effort, but he should not relax or lose courage. Also, he should think, 'Just as the fourantahkarans, the ten indriyas, and the five prāns reside in this body, similarly, I am thejivātmā, and I also reside in this body. However, I am greater than all of them, and I am their controller.' But he should not think, 'I am insignificant, whereas the antahkaransand indriyas are strong.' For example, if a king were to possess little or no intelligence, then even the members of his own family would not obey his orders. When the people in the village hear about this, no one in the village would obey his orders. Further, when the people throughout the kingdom hear about this, no one in the kingdom would obey his orders. As a result, the king would become depressed and powerless. He would sit idly and would not attempt to enforce his rule over anyone.
"In this analogy, the king symbolises the jiva, the members of the household symbolise the antahkaran, and the people of the village and kingdom symbolise the indriyas. So, if the jiva becomes discouraged and relaxes its authority, then when it wishes to exercise its sovereignty over the antahkaran and orient it towards God, the antahkaran will not follow. Also, if it wishes to control the indriyas, even the indriyas will not comply. Then, even though the jiva is the king of the kingdom in the form of this body, it becomes helpless like a beggar. When a king becomes discouraged, his subjects who live in his kingdom assume power and do not allow him to exercise his authority at all. Likewise, in the kingdom of the jiva, symbolised by this body, lust, anger and other vicious natures - who are not the king - assume the kingship. Then, they do not allow the jiva to exercise control.
"Thus, he who aspires to attain liberation should never harbour such timidity and should employ whatever measures are necessary to force the indriyas and antahkaran to accept his authority - like a king who studies books about the art of ruling and then exercises authority over his kingdom, but is not subdued by his subjects. However, if the king did not know the art of ruling, the people would not obey his orders; rather, they would begin to beat him. Then, his country would become desolate, or he himself would behave miserably because no one would obey his rule. In this manner, not knowing the art of ruling results in two unfortunate consequences. Similarly, if the jiva were to attempt to rule the kingdom in the form of the body without understanding the art of ruling, then it would never become happy."
Thereafter, Muktānand Swāmi asked Shriji Mahārāj, "How should one who aspires to attain liberation learn the art of ruling?"
Shriji Mahārāj replied, "The art of ruling should be learnt in the following way: First of all, one should thoroughly realise the greatness of God. Then, one should conquer one's mind by meditating on God's form. One should conquer one's ears by listening to discourses related to God, but one should not allow worldly talks to be heard by the ears. In the same manner, the skin should only be allowed to touch God and the devotees of God. The eyes should only be allowed to do darshan of God and His followers. The tongue should forever sing the praises of God and taste only the prasādof God. The nose should only be allowed to smell the fragrance of flowers and other objects that have been consecrated by God. None of the indriyas should be allowed to follow the unrighteous path. When a person behaves in this manner, no one can overthrow his authority in the kingdom in the form of his body.
"Only one who endeavours in this way and totally discards timidity is said to be walking on the path of liberation. This is an extremely great method for overcoming one'sswabhāvs. If this method of personal endeavour is practised vigilantly, then all spiritual endeavours for attaining liberation are incorporated within this one endeavour. Hence, personal endeavour itself is the greatest of all spiritual endeavours for attaining liberation."
GADHADA II-13: DIVINE LIGHT
On Shrāvan vadi Amās, Samvat 1878 [27 August 1821], Swāmi Shri Sahajānandji Mahārāj was sitting on a small, silken, embroidered cloth on the veranda outside themandir of Shri Vāsudevnārāyan in Dādā Khāchar's darbār in Gadhadā. He was wearing a white khes and had covered Himself with a white cotton cloth. He had also tied a white pāgh around His head. At that time, an assembly of munis as well as devotees from various places had gathered before Him.
Raising both arms in the air, Shriji Mahārāj signalled the assembly to settle down and listen. Turning to the sādhus who were humbly praying before Him with folded hands, Shriji Mahārāj said, "O paramhansas! All of the seniors, along with those who are wise, please come to the front. Please listen very attentively to what I am about to say. What I am about to say to you, I say not out of any pretence, or out of any self-conceit, or to spread My own greatness. Rather, it is because I feel that amongst all of you sādhusand devotees, if someone can understand My message, it will tremendously benefit that person; that is My purpose in narrating it. Moreover, this discourse is based on what I have seen and realised through My own experience. In fact, it is also in agreement with the scriptures. Although I feel that it is not appropriate to discuss this in public, I shall tell you nonetheless.
"I remain naturally in a state in which even if I wished to engross my mind in the most charming sounds, the most charming touch, the most charming smells, the most charming tastes and the most charming sights of this world, I could not do so; I remain absolutely dejected towards them. In fact, all of the attractive vishays and the repulsivevishays are the same to Me. Also, a king and a beggar are the same to Me. Further, to rule all the realms and to beg for food carrying a broken begging bowl are the same to Me. Even sitting with honour on an elephant and walking on foot are the same to Me. Whether someone honours Me with sandalwood paste, flowers, fine clothes and ornaments, or throws dirt on Me - all are the same to Me. Whether someone praises Me or insults Me - both are the same to Me. Gold, silver, diamonds and refuse are all the same to Me. Moreover, I look upon all devotees of God as being equal; i.e., I do not differentiate one as being superior and another as being inferior.
"I have intense vairāgya in My antahkaran, yet I am not burdened by it. I do not feel burdened like a person who carries a heavy rock on his head or ties a purse full of money and gold coins around his waist. My strict observance of swadharma does not burden Me, nor does the realisation that I am Brahma burden Me. When I superficially praise some object or criticise another, I do so purposefully. Whenever I forcefully engage My indriya's vruttis towards objects, they remain there very reluctantly; as soon as I relax that force, they withdraw immediately. It is like throwing a stone into the air - it goes as high as it can depending on the force of the throw, but ultimately it falls back to earth. Or consider a weak bull - it can stand only as long as a man forcefully supports it. But as soon as he withdraws the support, it slumps onto the ground. Further, imagine a very strong man who is able to crack a betel nut between his teeth. But, after sucking ten or twenty very sour lemons, he would have great difficulty chewing even roastedchanā. In this manner, it is only when I forcefully engage My vruttis in the vishays that they remain engaged in them.
"So what is the cause of My behaving like this? Well, it is because My indriyas vruttisconstantly remain inverted towards My hrudayākāsh. In that hrudayākāsh, I see extremely luminous divine light. Just as during the monsoon season, clouds cover the entire sky, similarly, only that light pervades My heart.
"Amidst that divine light I see the extremely luminous form of God. The form is dark, but due to the intensity of the light, it appears to be rather fair, not dark. The form has two arms and two legs, not four, eight or a thousand arms; and its appearance is very captivating. The form is very serene; it has a human form; and it appears young like a teenager. Sometimes the form in the divine light is seen standing, sometimes sitting, and at other times, it is seen walking around. It is surrounded on all four sides by groups of muktas, who are seated facing Him, and who are engrossed in looking at that form of God with a fixed gaze. I see that form in its incarnate form before Me at this very moment. I saw it before I came into this Satsang fellowship; I could see it when I was in My mother's womb; in fact, I could see it even before I entered my mother's womb. Moreover, I am speaking to you while sitting there. In fact, I do not see this village of Gadhadā or even this veranda - I also see all of you sitting there as well.
"Whosoever realises this form will, like Me, never be drawn towards the pleasures of thevishays. In fact, you also see this form of God, but you do not comprehend it fully. However, when you come to comprehend this fact, you will not encounter any difficulty in subduing the desires for the panchvishays and swabhāvs such as lust, anger, etc.; they will be subdued easily.
"That uniform divine light is referred to as the ātmā, or Brahma or Akshardhām. The form of God within that light is called the essence of the ātmā, Parabrahma orPurushottam. It is that same God who, for the liberation of countless jivas, manifests on this earth in different yugs in the form of Rām, Krishna, etc. In this realm, He appears to be like a human being, but He is not; He is the lord of Akshardhām. Shri Krishna Bhagwān has said in the Gitā,
Na tad-bhāsayate sooryo na shashānko na pāvakaha | Yad-gatvā na nivartante tad-dhāma paramam mama ||1
Therefore, even though Shri Krishna Bhagwān appeared to be like a human, He still transcends Akshar and is divine.
"Whoever meditates on the human form of that God sees the luminous, divine form seated in Akshardhām. Such a person who meditates in this manner, traverses māyāand attains the highest state of enlightenment. So, even though God assumes a human body, He is still divine, and the place where He resides is also nirgun. His clothes, jewellery, vehicles, attendants, food, drinks, etc. - in fact, any other objects which become associated with Him - are all nirgun. One who realises God's form in this manner does not harbour any affection for the panchvishays, just like I do not. He becomes independent.
"It is this Purushottam, who transcends Akshar, who is the cause of all avatārs. Allavatārs emanate from Purushottam, and they merge back into Purushottam. When God, after assuming a human form, leaves this earth to return to His abode, sometimes, like a human being, His physical body remains on earth - like when Rukmini took Shri Krishna's body into her lap and was engulfed along with it in the fire. Likewise, Rushabhdev's body was burnt in a raging forest fire. In other instances, His bones and flesh become divine and, leaving no remains behind, He returns to His abode. When He manifests, He may sometimes be born of a woman, or He may sometimes appear from wherever He wishes. In this manner, God's method of birth and death are not necessarily in accordance with the ways of this world. When you thoroughly realise God as such, you will encounter no obstacles on the path to liberation. Without such firm understanding of the nature of God, though, one will never be able to overcome one's weaknesses, regardless of the amount of renunciation one maintains or the number of fasts one performs.
"Then you may say, 'We have firm understanding of that God just as You have described. Why, then, do our prāns and indriyas not become engrossed in God?' Well, one should understand that as being God's wish. In reality, such a person has nothing left to accomplish; he is fulfilled and has reached the culmination of all spiritual endeavours. If one has such a firm belief in God, then even if a slight flaw remains in the observance of the vows of non-egotism, non-avarice, non-lust, non-taste or non-attachment, there is still nothing to worry about. However, if any deficiency remains in understanding God, then one's flaw will never be eradicated. Therefore, one should attempt to understand this principle by any means within this lifetime.
"If one has completely understood the essence of this discourse, then regardless of whether one is reborn in a base or elevated life form due to one's prārabdha karmas, still, like Vrutrāsur, one will not forget this gnān. Also, when Bharatji was reborn as a deer, he retained gnān from his previous life. Such is the profound greatness of thisgnān. In fact, it is even narrated continuously in the assemblies of sages such as Nārad, the Sanakādik, and Brahmā and other deities.
"However, such discourses regarding the nature of God cannot be understood by oneself even from the scriptures. Even though these facts may be in the scriptures, it is only when the Sstpurush manifests on this earth, and one hears them being narrated by him, that one understands them. They cannot, however, be understood by one's intellect alone, even from the scriptures.
"One who has such a complete realisation of God, and who is also able to see the past, present and future, still does not harbour the slightest self-conceit regarding this fact. He would not grant anyone a boon, nor would he curse anyone; sometimes, though, he may well grant a boon or give a curse. At times, he remains fearless, and at other times, he may even become frightened. Despite that, he would never allow emotions such as elation or depression to infiltrate his mind. One who has such an unflinching refuge of God would never knowingly perform a bad deed. However, if due to adverse circumstances an improper deed is performed, a person with such a refuge would still not fall from the path of liberation. Hence, there is no other obstacle-free path like that of having the firm refuge of God.
"One who has realised this fact harbours only pure intentions. Just see, I have absolutely no selfish expectations from My paramhansas and satsangis. The only reason I may call someone, rebuke someone or send someone away is that if by any means one realises this fact, it will be very beneficial to them. So, all of you should firmly imbibe this discourse.
"Realise that the form amidst the divine light is this Mahārāj visible before you. If you cannot do that, then at least realise, 'Mahārāj sees the form which is amidst thataksharrup light.' Even if you can understand this much, you will be able to maintain affection for Me. As a result, you will attain ultimate liberation. Keep this principle constantly new and fresh in your minds; never forget it out of complacency. Remember it tomorrow just as it is today. Keep it vivid in your minds and remember it daily until the end of your lives. Whenever you talk about God, be sure to implant the seeds of this principle. This is My command. Moreover, this principle is so vital that you should remember it daily for the rest of your lives; in fact, even after you leave this body and attain a divine form, you should recall it. Indeed, this principle which I have revealed before you is the very essence of all of the scriptures, and it is My own firm experience; I have talked to you having seen it with My very own eyes. In fact, I swear by all of youparamhansas that I have seen these facts with My own eyes."
In this manner, Shriji Mahārāj described His true identity, though indirectly, asPurushottam. Upon hearing this revelation, the sādhus and devotees accepted the fact that the form described amidst the divine light is, in fact, Shriji Mahārāj Himself.
GADHADA II-14: NIRVIKALP SAMĀDHI
On Bhādarvā sudi 1, Samvat 1878 [28 August 1821], Swāmi Shri Sahajānandji Mahārāj was sitting on the veranda outside the north-facing rooms near the mandir of Shri Vāsudevnārāyan in Dādā Khāchar's darbār in Gadhadā. He was wearing a white khesand had covered Himself with a white cotton cloth. Around His head He had tied a whitefeto in which a chhoglu of red karnikār flowers had been inserted. A beautiful, kumkumchāndlo also adorned His forehead. At that time, an assembly of munis as well as devotees from various places had gathered before Him.
Thereupon Muktānand Swāmi asked, "When a sādhu attains oneness with the form of God, does he attain it through samādhi, or can he also attain it through some other method?"
Shriji Mahārāj replied, "Once a person has known that this is a neem tree, he never harbours the doubt in his mind, 'Is this a neem tree, or not?' Similarly, if one has total realisation of God's form as I described yesterday, and if one no longer harbours any doubts about it, and if one's mind in no way causes one's conviction of God to waver regardless of the type of company one may encounter or the type of scriptures one may hear, then such absolute conviction is what I call oneness.
"Such oneness is attained through profound association with an Ekāntik Bhakta of God, but not by samādhi alone. In fact, such oneness is itself nirvikalp samādhi. Moreover, the sādhu who has such nirvikalp samādhi is also called nirgun Brahma. Regardless of whether he follows the path of nivrutti or the path of pravrutti, the sādhu who has such an unshakeable conviction is still nirgun. For example, Nārad and the Sanakādik all followed the path of nivrutti, whereas the Saptarshi, King Janak and others, all followed the path of pravrutti. However, due to their conviction of God, they should all be known to be nirgun.
"However, those who follow the path of nivrutti but do not have the conviction of God should be known to be sagun due to their māyik gunas. Furthermore, one should realise, 'This person appears to be a staunch renunciant, but because he does not have the conviction of God, he is ignorant and will definitely go to narak.'
"On the other hand, a person who has such a conviction of God will not attain an ill fate - even if some small deficiency remains in him. In fact, ultimately, he will definitely attain the nirgun state. But a person without such a conviction of God - even if he is a sincere renunciant and is vigilantly striving to eradicate lust, anger, avarice, etc. - will not be able to eradicate those vicious natures by his efforts alone. Ultimately, he will become evil and go to narak.
"Therefore, whoever realises such gnān of God, even if he has only a feeble intellect, should still be regarded as possessing much intellect. On the other hand, if he has not realised such gnān of God, then even if he has much intellect, he should still be known as having no intellect."
GADHADA II-15: KEEPING ENMITY TOWARDS ONE'S SWABHĀVS
On Bhādarvā sudi 2, Samvat 1878 [29 August 1821], Swāmi Shri Sahajānandji Mahārāj was sitting on a small, silken, embroidered cloth which had been placed on the veranda outside the mandir of Shri Vāsudevnārāyan in Dādā Khāchar's darbār in Gadhadā. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. At that time, an assembly of munis as well as devotees from various places had gathered before Him.
Thereupon Shriji Mahārāj asked all of the paramhansas a question: "There is a single thought which, if applied, can destroy any swabhāv, regardless of how formidable it may be. Without that thought the swabhāv cannot be eradicated even if one were to apply a thousand other thoughts. What is that thought? Please answer according to your understanding."
The paramhansas replied according to their understanding but none were able to give a complete explanation.
Shriji Mahārāj then said, "Here, I shall explain. If one has an enemy, and if that enemy were to ruin whatever work one is doing, or if he were to swear at one's mother or sister, then one would bear an intense aversion for him and would employ any means whatsoever to harm him. If not that, one would at least be extremely happy if someone else were to harm him. In the very same way, if the inner enemies of lust, anger, etc., hinder a person while he is striving to attain liberation, he would harbour the same sort of enmity towards them as well; moreover, that enmity would never diminish. Whoever applies such a thought can eradicate all swabhāvs with that thought alone.
"Now, if a sādhu were to criticise and insult those internal enemies of lust, anger, etc., then a person who has the aforementioned thought would not develop an aversion towards that sādhu. On the contrary, he would be grateful to the sādhu and would feel, 'This sādhu is helping me conquer my enemy, and thus he is an extremely great benefactor.' A person who has attained such a thought can destroy all of his inner enemies. Thereafter, no vicious swabhāvs will be able to remain in his heart. Without this thought, though, the enemies in the form of the swabhāvs can never be overpowered, regardless of whichever types of other thoughts one may apply. Therefore, keeping enmity towards one's swabhāvs is the greatest thought of all."
Thereafter, Shriji Mahārāj asked, "By which characteristics can one recognise a person who would never deflect from the four attributes of dharma, vairāgya, gnān of the ātmā, and bhakti of God coupled with knowledge of His greatness?"
All of the sādhus attempted to answer the question according to their understanding, but no one was able to give a precise answer.
So Shriji Mahārāj explained, "If, from childhood, a person has such a nature that he would never be suppressed by anyone's personality, nor could anyone mock someone or jest in his presence, nor could anyone make even a mild sarcasm at him, then such a person would never deflect from dharma, vairāgya, gnān and the bhakti of God. Even though his personality may make him appear arrogant, because of his zeal to attain liberation, he will not leave the Satsang fellowship under any circumstances."
No comments:
Post a Comment