GADHADA III-1: THE INCLINATIONS OF GNĀN AND AFFECTION
On Vaishākh vadi 11, Samvat 1882 [1 June 1826], Swāmi Shri Sahajānandji Mahārāj was sitting on a cushion with a cylindrical pillow that had been placed upon a beautifully coloured, decorated cot. The cot rested on the high veranda outside the west-facing rooms in the courtyard of the mandir of Shri Vāsudevnārāyan in Dādā Khāchar's darbārin Gadhadā. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. Beautiful tassels of mogrāflowers decorated the large, white pāgh that was tied around His head. Also, a garland of mogrā flowers hung around His neck, and a string of flowers decorated His wrists. At that time, an assembly of munis as well as devotees from various places had gathered before Him.
Then Shriji Mahārāj asked the paramhansas, "What is the understanding of a devotee who, despite facing adverse circumstances, experiences no setbacks in his bhaktitowards God?"
The paramhansas replied according to their understanding, but they were unable to provide a satisfactory reply.
Thereupon Shriji Mahārāj said, "One who worships God needs, firstly, firm vairāgya; and secondly, the virtue of ātmā-realisation. If vairāgya is lacking, then when one obtains desired objects, one will also develop love for those objects in the same way that one has love for God. If the virtue of ātmā-realisation is lacking, then when the body experiences pain or pleasure, that devotee's vruttis become disturbed. Then, he develops love for anything one considers pleasurable and an aversion for anything he considers to be full of misery. In this way, his mind becomes polluted. Therefore, a devotee of God needs extremely firm realisation of the ātmā as well as extremely firmvairāgya.
"Why? Because, by vairāgya, all worldly forms except for God's form are negated; and through ātmā-realisation, worldly pleasures and miseries are negated. A person who does not have the virtues of ātmā-realisation and vairāgya, even though he has attainednirvikalp samādhi, experiences happiness and peace only while he remains in samādhi. But when he comes out of samādhi, then, like Nārāyandās, on seeing pleasurable objects, he becomes attracted to them."
Thereafter Shriji Mahārāj said, "A devotee of God either has an inclination of gnān or an inclination of affection towards God. Of these, one who has the inclination of gnānunderstands the profound greatness of God, and one with an inclination of affection for God cannot stay without God even for a moment. Jhinābhāi, Devrām and Prabhāshankar, for example, have an inclination of gnān. Such devotees who understand the greatness of God should be known as having an inclination of gnān. A devotee who has affection for God like the gopis of Vraj should be known as having an inclination of affection.
"Of these, one who has the inclination of gnān realises God as being antaryāmi and believes, 'God does not make judgements based on what He hears from others. Instead, God recognises a devotee's inclination and speaks to him accordingly, but He does not act based on others' advice.' Conversely, one who believes, 'God rebukes me based on someone else's words, even though I am not at fault,' has no gnān of God.
"Even in worldly life we notice that a person who has selfish motives of gaining something from another will never see the other person's faults. Why? Because his affection is based on self-interest. Similarly, if a person has self-interest in mind that God will free him from the fear of births and deaths, then he will never perceive faults in God. But one who attributes faults in God by thinking, 'God changes His stand based on the prompting of others,' has neither the inclination of gnān nor the inclination of affection."
Having said this, Shriji Mahārāj said to the senior paramhansas, "Please reveal which of these two is your inclination."
Then Shriji Mahārāj continued, "A person who has an inclination of affection will do for his loved one even that which is not fit to be done. For example, in the world, thieves have affection for their wives and children. Yet, when they go to steal, they kill other people and pass on the money to their own family. In reality that thief is quite merciless, but since he has affection for his own family, he is not merciless towards them. Similarly, one who has affection for God and His devotees can never become angry on or jealous of God or His devotees, and in no way does he attribute faults to them. One who has such affection can be said to have the inclination of affection. One with neither the inclination of gnān nor the inclination of affection is said to be confused."
Having delivered this discourse, Shriji Mahārāj returned to His residence.
On the evening of that same day, Shriji Mahārāj was seated on a cushion with a cylindrical pillow placed on a decorated cot on the veranda outside the east-facing rooms of Dādā Khāchar's darbār. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. He had also worn a garland of mogrā flowers around His neck. At that time, some sādhus were singing devotional songs to the accompaniment of a dukad and sarodā, while munis as well as devotees from various places had gathered before Him in an assembly.
When the sādhus had finished singing, Shriji Mahārāj addressed the assembly: "TheShikshāpatri which I have written should be read daily by all of My followers - renunciantsādhus and brahmachāris, as well as all male and female householders. Those who do not know how to read should listen to it daily; and those who do not have the facility to listen to it should worship it daily. I have stated this in the Shikshāpatri itself. One should observe a fast on the day one fails to do any of the three. This is My command."
Thereupon everyone resolved to observe this command of Shriji Mahārāj by saying, "O Mahārāj, we will do as You have said."
Hearing this, Shriji Mahārāj became extremely pleased. He embraced all of the sādhusand brahmachāris and imprinted His holy footprints on the chests of all of the satsangis
GADHADA III-2: THE ATTAINMENT OF ALL PURUSHĀRTHS; INCARNATE GOD IN THE FORM OF THE GURU
On the evening of Jyeshtha sudi 6, Samvat 1882 [11 June 1826], Swāmi Shri Sahajānandji Mahārāj was sitting on a low, wooden seat in the courtyard 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 black-bordered, white pāgh around His head. Tassels of mogrā flowers had been inserted in that pāgh. At that time, an assembly of munis as well as devotees from various places had gathered before Him.
Then Shriji Mahārāj posed a question: "One sees that the world is perishable and that the chaitanya separates from the body and leaves it; yet, the predominance of the world does not diminish from one's heart. Despite thoroughly believing God to be an ocean of bliss, one's mind still does not focus on God. Also, satsang does not become predominant in one's heart, and one cannot eradicate love for wealth, women and other pleasures of the world. What can be the reason for this?"
Thereupon Muktānand Swāmi replied, "The person lacks vairāgya; as a result, he cannot eradicate the predominance of the world from his heart, nor can he develop love for God."
Shriji Mahārāj then clarified, "It is true that there is a deficiency in vairāgya, but it appears to Me that the inclination which forms as one practises satsang, remains as it is forever; i.e., a different inclination does not develop. By practising satsang, that inclination may be nourished, but the inclination itself remains unchanged. Whenever a person's inclination is being formed, his mind becomes disturbed in the process of formation. Just as the mind of an extremely lustful person is disoriented by lust, and the mind of an extremely angry person is disoriented by anger, and the mind of an extremely greedy person is disoriented by greed, similarly, a person's mind becomes disoriented in the process of developing his inclination. Then, during that disturbance, whichever inclination develops is the inclination that remains. Therefore, one who is wise should realise one's own inclination. Because when one is disturbed by the influence of lust, anger, etc., if one contemplates upon one's own inclination, the influence of lust, anger, etc., is lessened.
"In addition, just as a householder feels repentant if he experiences lustful thoughts on seeing his attractive mother, sister or daughter, similarly, one should feel repentant when objects other than satsang become predominant in one's heart. If one does not feel similarly remorseful on entertaining thoughts for indecent objects, then satsangdoes not remain predominant in one's heart.
"In fact, the fruit of all spiritual endeavours is satsang. In the 11th canto of the Shrimad Bhāgwat, Shri Krishna Bhagwān says to Uddhav, 'I am not as pleased by ashtāng-yoga, thoughts of sānkhya, scriptural study, austerities, renunciation, yoga, sacrifices, observances, etc., as I am pleased by satsang.' In fact, it appears to Me that allsanskārs one has gathered from previous lives have been attained through association with the Satpurush. Even today, those who obtain sanskārs do so through association with the Satpurush. One who has attained the association of such a Satpurush, but is still unable to understand matters as they really are should be known to have an extremely dull intellect.
"As for Me, I consider this assembly of satsangis to be far greater than the assemblies in Shwetdwip, Golok, Vaikunth and Badrikāshram; and I see all of these devotees as being extremely luminous. Indeed, I swear by this assembly of sādhus that there is not even the slightest untruth in this matter. Why do I have to swear in this manner? Because not everyone understands such divinity, nor can they see it; that is why I have to swear.
"Thus, even after attaining this satsang - which is rare for even Brahmā and others - affection for objects other than God still remains because the person has not developed as firm a conviction for the manifest form of God as he has for the non-manifest form of God. That is why the Shrutis state: 'If a person develops conviction in the guru - who is the manifest form of God - in the same way that he has conviction in the non-manifest deities, then, as a result, he attains all of the arthas1 which are described as attainable.' In fact, when he attains the company of such a Sant, he has, while still alive, attained He who was to be attained after death. That is to say, he has attained that which is called the highest state of enlightenment, or liberation, while being alive.
"What I have just explained to you may appear to be simple, but in reality, it is extremely subtle. One who is currently behaving in this manner will understand that this is extremely subtle; but others will not even be able understand it. That is how subtle it is."
After delivering this discourse, Shriji Mahārāj bid 'Jai Sachchidānand' to everyone and then returned to His residence.
GADHADA III-3: COMPASSION AND AFFECTION
On Āshādh vadi 1, Samvat 1883 [20 July 1826], Swāmi Shri Sahajānandji Mahārāj was at His residence in Dādā Khāchar's darbār in Gadhadā. On that day, Harji Thakkar invited Shriji Mahārāj to sanctify his house. There, he had Shriji Mahārāj sit on a cushion with a cylindrical pillow on a decorated cot on the veranda outside the east-facing rooms. He then performed puja of Shriji Mahārāj with sandalwood paste mixed with saffron and other auspicious offerings. In this way Shriji Mahārāj sat facing east and was dressed entirely in white clothes. Garlands of mogrā flowers adorned His neck, strings of flowers adorned both arms, and tassels of flowers beautifully decorated Hispāgh. At that time, an assembly of munis as well as devotees from various places had gathered before Him.
Thereupon Shriji Mahārāj asked the entire sādhu-mandal, "Compassion and affection reside instinctively in the heart of a devotee of God. Of the two, the nature of affection is like honey; i.e., it sticks everywhere. The nature of compassion is that one feels compassion towards everything. When Bharatji felt compassion for a deer, he had to take birth from the womb of a deer in his next life. Moreover, one who is compassionate undoubtedly develops affection towards those for whom one has compassion.
"There are two methods for eradicating compassion and affection: ātmā-realisation andvairāgya. Of these, ātmā-realisation is such that nothing else can penetrate it. The nature of vairāgya is that it shows all objects to be perishable. Therefore, through ātmā-realisation and vairāgya, compassion and affection are destroyed. In addition, the influences of the sthul, sukshma and kāran bodies, as well as all other influences are destroyed, and then, only brahmasattā remains. But thereafter, does a devotee harbour compassion and affection for God and His devotees? Or does he not? That is the question."
Muktānand Swāmi, Shuk Muni, Nityānand Swāmi and other paramhansas answered according to the extent of their understanding, however, none could give a satisfactory reply to Shriji Mahārāj's question.
So Shriji Mahārāj said, "Here, allow Me to answer. The answer is that by gnān andvairāgya, the chaitanya is freed from the māyik influences of the three bodiesEN-6, thethree statesEN-7 and the three gunas. It is then characterised by pure existence, and not even the slightest trace of māyik influence remains. Consider, for example, the analogy of an oil lamp's flame. Only when a wick-holder, some oil and a wick unite can the flame of an oil lamp be seen and recognised. But, when the combination of these three components is broken, the flame can no longer be seen by anyone, nor can it be recognised by anyone. Only when those components are combined is it seen and recognised. Similarly, when all māyik influences are overcome by gnān and vairāgya, the jivātmā remains as pure brahmasattā.
"Now, the jivātmā is imperceptible to the mind and speech, and it is not perceivable by any of the indriyas either. However, if, with time, it attains the knowledge of God by associating with a pure sampradāy, and it fully understands the greatness of God and His devotees, then it is freed from all māyik influences. Thereby, that jivātmā also becomes brahmarup. Nevertheless, compassion and affection for God and His devotees do still remain forever. To carry the analogy of the oil lamp further, when the combination of its components is broken, its flame remains within the air, where it cannot be perceived by any of the indriyas. However, the fragrance or foul smell that had pervaded that flame is not destroyed. In actuality, the air is even more aloof than the flame, yet it becomes pervaded by fragrant or foul smells. Likewise, by gnān andvairāgya, the jivātmā is freed from māyik influences, but the impression of satsang is not lost. Even though it becomes brahmarup - like Nārad, the Sanakādik and Shukji - it behaves with intense compassion and affection for God and His devotees. The following verses illustrates this:
Parinishthito'pi nairgunya uttama-shloka-leelayā | Gruheeta-chetā rajarshe ākhyānam yad-adheetavān ||1
Harer-gunākshipta-matir-bhagavān bādarāyanihi |
Adhyagān-mahad-ākhyānam nityam vishnu-jana-priyaha ||2 Brahma-bhootaha prasannātmā na shochati na kānkshati |
Samaha sarveshu bhooteshu mad-bhaktim labhate parām ||5
"In this manner, many verses promote the view that devotees of God who, by gnān andvairāgya, have shed māyik influences and have become brahmarup, still have compassion and affection for God and His devotees. On the other hand, one who is not a devotee of God, and who, by ātmā-realisation and vairāgya alone, has overcomemāyik influences and behaves as the ātmā has been influenced during the process of God-realisation by the evil influence of those who have only ātmā-realisation and are devoid of upāsanā of God. Consequently, he does not develop compassion and affection for devotees of God. Just as a foul smell lingers in the air and in fire, similarly, the impressions of evil company, which cannot be overcome by any means, linger within him.
"For example, Ashwatthāmā was brahmarup, but he was influenced by evil company. Therefore, he did not develop compassion or affection for Shri Krishna Bhagwān or his devotees, the Pāndavs. Similarly, the impressions of evil company do not disappear in a person who has only knowledge of the ātmā, even though he becomes brahmarup; nor does he develop compassion and affection for God and His devotees. Conversely, for a devotee of God, even though māyik influences are overcome, intense compassion and affection for God and His devotees increase. But in no way are compassion and affection ever lost; they always remain."
After delivering this discourse, Shriji Mahārāj bid 'Jai Sachchidānand' to everyone and then returned to His residence.
GADHADA III-4: BĀDHITĀNUVRUTTI
On Shrāvan sudi 3, Samvat 1883 [6 August 1826], Swāmi Shri Sahajānandji Mahārāj was sitting facing north on a cushion with a cylindrical pillow that had been placed on the veranda outside the medi of His residence 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, "Even though a devotee of God may possess gnān andvairāgya, and even if by the force of a thought process the devotee has overcome affection for worldly objects that cause him bondage, until he attains nirvikalp samādhi,bādhitānuvrutti still lingers within. Due to this, he doubts, 'Maybe attachment for my mother, father, wife, children, wealth, relatives, body or property still remains!' He remains fearful in this manner. For example, a brave warrior, even though he has killed all of his enemies, still occasionally becomes frightened by even those dead enemies; in fact, even if he sees them in his dreams, he becomes frightened. Similarly, due tobādhitānuvrutti, even a devotee possessing gnān is afraid of the bondage of worldly objects that he has negated as false from within and from which he has severed all affection. Or, if, at some time, he remembers the money he possessed, or his wife or other objects, he becomes fearful in his mind and thinks, 'What if they cause bondage?' In this manner, the recalling of objects that have been falsified from within is calledbādhitānuvrutti.
"Bādhitānuvrutti is overcome when nirvikalp samādhi is attained. Then, that person becomes oblivious of eating and drinking, day and night, pain and pleasure. But thereafter, when he withdraws from nirvikalp samādhi and enters savikalp samādhi,bādhitānuvrutti still lingers. As a result of the influence of that bādhitānuvrutti, when that devotee contracts a fever or is at the moment of death, he sometimes recalls other objects besides God. At that time, he may babble meaninglessly; he may even say words like, 'O mother! O father!' Hearing this, a person who does not understand the nature of bādhitānuvrutti, will perceive faults in that devotee by thinking, 'He was called a devotee of God; yet why does he speak like this at the time of death?' Such faults are attributed without knowing the nature of bādhitānuvrutti.
"In this world, many sinful people die with full consciousness. Also, a soldier or a Rajputwho has injured his body may die while being fully conscious. That being so, will a non-believer who dies with full consciousness still attain liberation, despite being a nonbeliever? Of course not; he will certainly be consigned to narak. Conversely, regardless of whether a devotee of God dies in a disturbed state due to the influence ofbādhitānuvrutti or while engaged in the chanting of God's name, that devotee still reaches the holy feet of God."
On the evening of that same day, Shriji Mahārāj was sitting on the veranda outside themedi of His residence. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. At that time, an assembly of sādhus as well as devotees from various places had gathered before Him.
Shriji Mahārāj then asked the senior paramhansas, "Please describe how the jiva, which resides within the body, is present in one location, and how it pervades the entire body."
The paramhansas answered according to their understanding, but none were able to satisfactorily answer Shriji Mahārāj's question.
Thereupon Shriji Mahārāj said, "In the body, just as food is transformed into semen, similarly, in the heart, there is a transformation of the five mahābhuts1 into a disc of flesh, within which the jiva resides. The jiva clings to this disc of flesh like a torch made of rags that is set alight after being immersed in oil. Also, just as fire pervades an iron nail, similarly, the jiva actually resides in the disc of flesh, and by consciousness pervades the entire body. Therefore, regardless of where pain is felt in the body, it is thejiva itself that feels the pain; so, in fact, the jiva cannot be said to be separate from the pleasures and pains of the body.
"However, some may argue, 'The jiva is luminous, whereas the disc of flesh and the body have no light. So how can they be said to have combined?' The answer to this is that just as without the combination of oil, a wick-holder and a wick, a flame cannot remain aloft in space on its own, similarly, without associating with the disc of flesh - which is a transformation of the five mahābhuts - the jiva cannot remain alone. Just as fire - which is distinct from the container, the oil and the wick - cannot be destroyed by breaking just the container, in the same way, the jiva, even though it pervades the disc of flesh and the body, does not die with the death of the body. Although the jiva does experience pleasure and pain along with the body, it is not perishable like the body. So, the jiva is indestructible and luminous, and it also pervades the body.
"Furthermore, if an oil lamp is placed at one location in a mandir, its flame predominantly pervades the wick, and secondarily, it also pervades the entire building. In the same manner, the jivātmā also predominantly resides in and pervades the disc of flesh that is a product of the five mahābhuts; and secondarily, it resides in and pervades the entire body. This is how the jiva resides within the body. Moreover, God resides within the jiva as a witness."
GADHADA III-5: BHAKTI COUPLED WITH THE KNOWLEDGE OF GOD'S GREATNESS
On Bhādarvā sudi 11, Samvat 1883 [12 September 1826], Shriji Mahārāj was sitting on a cushion with a cylindrical pillow on the veranda outside the west-facing rooms of Dādā Khāchar's darbār in Gadhadā. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. He was also wearing a garland of mogrā flowers around His neck. Tassels of mogrā flowers decorated His pāgh, and strings of mogrā flowers adorned His wrists. At that time, an assembly of the muni-mandal as well as devotees from various places had gathered before Him.
Then Shriji Mahārāj said, "Someone please ask a question."
Thereupon Muktānand Swāmi asked, "Mahārāj, of the various types of bhakti offered to God, which type of bhakti does not encounter any obstacles, and which type does encounter obstacles?"
In reply, Shriji Mahārāj said, "In the third canto of the Shrimad Bhāgwat, within the Kapil Gitā, Mother Devhuti says to Kapilji,
Yan-nāmadheya-shravanānukeertanad-yat-prahvanād-yat-smaranād-api kvachit | Shvādo'pi sadyaha savanāya kalpate katham punas-te bhagavan-nu darshanāt ||1Aho bata shvapacho'to gareeyān yaj-jihvāgre vartate nāma tubhyam |
Tepus-tapas-te juhuvuhu sasnur-āryā brahmā-noochur-nāma grunanti ye te ||2
The greatness of God is described in these two verses. Also, Kapilji describes his own greatness to Mother Devhuti by saying:
Mad-bhayād-vāti vāto'yam sooryas-tapati mad-bhayāt | Varshateendro dahatyagnir-mrutyush-charati mad-bhayāt ||3
One who has bhakti for God coupled with such knowledge of His greatness encounters no obstacles in any form. On the other hand, one who offers bhakti without realising the greatness of God, perceiving worldly attributes in Him, does encounter obstacles."
Muktānand Swāmi then asked, "By what means can such bhakti coupled with the knowledge of God's greatness be developed?"
Shriji Mahārāj replied, "Bhakti coupled with the knowledge of God's greatness arises in one's heart by serving and profoundly associating with eminent sādhus like Shukji and the Sanakādik."
Thereafter Shuk Muni asked, "One devotee of God is such that his faith in God is perfect, and disturbances such as lust, anger, avarice, infatuation, etc., do not arise in his heart. A second devotee is such that his faith in God is perfect, but swabhāvs such as lust, anger, avarice, infatuation, etc., do cause a disturbance within. When these two types of devotees leave their bodies, do they attain the same level of bliss in the abode of God, or do they attain different levels of bliss?"
Shriji Mahārāj replied, "If a devotee of God whose faith is perfect and who is not disturbed by lust, anger, avarice, etc., desires anything other than the manifest form of Shri Krishna Bhagwān, then, even if he is a great renunciant and has firm vairāgya and intense ātmā-realisation, he will attain a lower level of bliss. As for the other devotee, even though he also has perfect faith in God, when lust, anger, avarice, infatuation, etc., cause disturbances within, he feels remorse within his heart. But, except for the manifest form of Shri Krishna Bhagwān, he wishes for no other object. Then, even if he has only a slight amount of ātmā-realisation and vairāgya, such a devotee still attains profound bliss in the abode of God after leaving his body.
"Why is this? Because the former devotee superficially appears to be a renunciant and free of other desires. But since he inwardly desires to attain ātmā-realisation and other things, he is called a 'sakām devotee'. In the higher realms, he will certainly attain less bliss. Conversely, the second devotee superficially appears to be a 'sakām devotee', but inwardly, that devotee wishes for nothing except the form of God. If a desire for pleasures other than the form of God arises, he feels intense remorse in his mind. Therefore, he is called a 'nishkām devotee'. When such a devotee leaves his body, he attains profound bliss, becomes an attendant of God, and develops intense love for the form of Shri Krishna Bhagwān."
GADHADA III-6: THE FRIENDSHIP BETWEEN THE MIND AND THE JIVA
On Bhādarvā vadi 5, Samvat 1883 [21 September 1826], Swāmi Shri Sahajānandji Mahārāj was sitting in His residence 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 looked compassionately at all of the devotees and said, "If a devotee of God engages in delivering spiritual discourses, singing devotional songs, listening to talks of God, and the rest of the nine types of bhakti with jealousy towards other devotees, then God is not very pleased by that bhakti. But if, having discarded jealousy, one offers bhakti only for one's own liberation and not to display to other people, then God is pleased by that bhakti. Therefore, one who wants to please God should not offer bhakti to please other people or out of jealousy for someone, but should do so only for one's own liberation.
"If, while offering bhakti to God, one commits a mistake, one should not blame someone else for that fault. Indeed, it is the very nature of all people that when they are at fault, they claim, 'I made a mistake because someone else misled me; but I am not really at fault.' One who says this, though, is an utter fool. After all, others may say, 'Go and jump into a well!' Then, by such words, should one really jump into a well? Of course not. Therefore, the fault lies only in the person who does the wrong, but he blames others nonetheless.
"Similarly, to blame the indriyas and antahkaran is the foolishness of the jiva. Because in reality, the jiva and the mind are close mutual friends. Their friendship is like the friendship between milk and water. When milk and water are mixed and heated on a fire, water settles below the milk and itself burns, but it does not allow the milk to burn. To save the water, the milk overflows and extinguishes the fire. Such is their friendship. The jiva and the mind have a similarly close friendship. So, the mind never entertains thoughts of things that the jiva does not like. Only when the jiva likes something does the mind attempt to persuade the jiva. How does it attempt to persuade it? Well, when the jiva is meditating on God, the mind suggests, 'You should also meditate on some female devotee of God.' The mind then makes the jiva contemplate on all of her features. Then, it forms indecent thoughts about her just as it forms indecent thoughts about other women.
"But, if the devotee's jiva is extremely pure, he will not accept the arguments of the mind, and he will, instead, feel intense remorse. Thereafter, the mind will never entertain such thoughts again. Conversely, if his jiva is polluted and sinful, it will accept the arguments of the mind. Then, by making the devotee repeatedly entertain indecent thoughts, the mind will make him fall from the path of liberation. For this reason, a sincere aspirant develops intense hatred for talks of adharma - which are contrary to the path of liberation - regardless of whether they are suggested by his own mind or by some other person. Then, his own mind or the other person will not reappear in an attempt to persuade him.
"Furthermore, because the mind is a friend of the jiva, it will never entertain thoughts which the jiva does not like. So, when indecent thoughts are formed in the mind, if thejiva becomes extremely furious with it, such thoughts will never arise in the mind again. Thus, when indecent thoughts repeatedly arise in the mind, the devotee should understand it to be the fault of his own jiva, not the fault of his mind alone.
"If a person offers bhakti to God with this understanding, the evil influence of some non-believer or his own mind will not be able to affect him even slightly. Thereby, he will be able to worship God without any obstacles."
GADHADA III-7: AN IRON NAIL
On Bhādarvā vadi 6, Samvat 1883 [22 September 1826], Swāmi Shri Sahajānandji Mahārāj was sitting on a cushion with a cylindrical pillow at His residence in Dādā Khāchar's darbār in Gadhadā. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. He was wearing garlands of mogrā flowers around His neck, and tassels of mogrā flowers also decorated His pāgh. At that time, an assembly of munis as well as devotees from various places had gathered before Him.
Thereupon Shriji Mahārāj said to all of the devotees, "I shall now tell you My innermost principle. For a person who desires his own liberation, nothing in this world is more blissful than God and His Sant. Therefore, just as a person is profoundly attached to his own body, he should be similarly attached to God and His Sant. One should also remain absolutely loyal to the Bhakta of God. But in no way should one abandon one's loyalty to God and His Bhakta, even if while keeping that loyalty one's reputation increases or decreases, or one is honoured or insulted, or one lives or dies. In addition, one should not allow an aversion to develop towards them. Furthermore, one should not have as much affection towards one's body or bodily relations as one has towards theBhakta of God. For a devotee who behaves in this manner, even extremely powerful enemies such lust, anger, etc., are unable to defeat him."
Continuing, Shriji Mahārāj then said, "God, who possesses a definite form, is always present in His abode, Brahmapur. Devotees of God, who also possess a form, remain in His service in that abode. Therefore, one who has taken firm refuge in the manifest form of God should not harbour the following fear in one's mind: 'What if I become a ghost or an evil spirit, or attain the realm of Indra or the realm of Brahmā after I die?' One should not harbour such doubts in one's mind. After all, a devotee of God who possesses the understanding mentioned earlier definitely attains the abode of God; God does not leave him astray anywhere in between.
"Moreover, that devotee should firmly keep his mind at the holy feet of God. Just as an iron nail that is firmly affixed to an iron surface can never be separated, similarly, one's mind should be fixed firmly at the holy feet of God. When the devotee has kept his mind at the holy feet of God in this manner, he does not have to die to attain the abode of God - he has attained it while still alive."
Having delivered this discourse, Shriji Mahārāj bid 'Jai Sachchidānand' to everyone and then instructed the assembly to disperse.
GADHADA III-8: REMAINING ETERNALLY HAPPY
On Bhādarvā vadi 9, Samvat 1883 [25 September 1826], Swāmi Shri Sahajānandji Mahārāj was sitting on a cushion with a cylindrical pillow that had been placed on a large, decorated cot on the veranda outside the west-facing rooms of Dādā Khāchar'sdarbār in Gadhadā. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. Garlands of mogrāflowers adorned His neck, and tassels of mogrā flowers decorated His pāgh. At that time, an assembly of munis as well as devotees from various places had gathered before Him.
Thereupon Shriji Mahārāj asked the munis, "How can a devotee of God remain eternally happy?" The senior sādhus replied according to their understanding, but then Shriji Mahārāj Himself said, "The answer is that a devotee of God who, firstly, has firm vairāgya; who, secondly, has extremely firm swadharma; who has gained control over all of his indriyas by these two means; who has intense love for God and His Bhakta; who has a close friendship with God and His Bhakta; who never becomes indifferent towards God and His Bhakta; and who is pleased only by the company of God and HisBhakta, but does not like the company of a non-believer - remains eternally happy in this realm and beyond.
"A person who has not controlled his indriyas by vairāgya and swadharma remains miserable, despite staying in the company of God and His Bhakta. Why? Because he who has not gained control over his indriyas does not experience happiness anywhere. Even while engaged in bhakti towards God, when the indriyas are drawn towards thevishays, that devotee experiences extreme misery in his heart. Thus, only one who gains control over one's indriyas remains eternally happy. Furthermore, only one who has gained control over one's indriyas should be known to have vairāgya and dharma. One who has not controlled one's indriyas should not be known to possess vairāgyaand dharma. Therefore, since a person who has vairāgya and dharma has restraint over all of his indriyas, he is eternally happy."
Then Muktānand Swāmi asked, "Mahārāj, for a devotee of God, what is one of the greatest obstacle in his bhakti towards God?"
Shriji Mahārāj replied, "For a devotee of God, the greatest obstacles are that he does not realise his own drawbacks, his mind becomes aloof from God and His Bhakta, and he develops indifference towards the Bhakta of God. These are the greatest obstacles for a devotee."
GADHADA III-9: THE GATEWAY IN THE FORM OF AWARENESS
On Āso sudi 11, Samvat 1883 [11 October 1826], Swāmi Shri Sahajānandji Mahārāj was sitting on the veranda outside the west-facing rooms of Dādā Khāchar's darbār in Gadhadā. He was dressed entirely in white clothes and was adorned with garlands and strings of flowers. Also, tassels of flowers were dangling from His pāgh. At that time, an assembly of munis as well as devotees from various places had gathered before Him.
Thereupon Shriji Mahārāj said to all of the devotees, "I shall now describe to all of you male and female devotees the elevated state and understanding of My seniorparamhansas as it truly is. After listening to this discourse, I request all of you to narrate how you behave and to reveal your state."
Saying this, Shriji Mahārāj began, "The senior sādhus in My muni-mandal behave in such a manner that the awareness within their hearts is the gateway to the abode of God. It is at this gateway where all of the sādhus remain standing. Consider the following analogy: A king's guards, while standing at the entrance of the king's palace, do not allow any thieves or robbers to come near the king. They courageously believe, 'If anyone comes near the king to cause problems, we will cut them to pieces, but in no way will we let them reach the king.' With such courage, they wait, armed with shields and swords. Similarly, all of these sādhus are standing at the gateway of the abode of God in the form of awareness. Inside that gateway of awareness - in Akshardhām - dwells God, of whom they do darshan. There, they do not allow wealth, women, or any other worldly object to enter and infiltrate that form of God in their heart. If any worldly object does forcefully attempt to enter the heart, they destroy that object, but in no way do they allow it to enter the location in their heart where they have secured God. In this manner, they constantly remain alert like a brave warrior. But they do not move from their position - regardless of whether they encounter progress or regress, happiness or misery, praises or insults, or countless other types of difficulties.
"However, someone may doubt, 'If they do not move from their position, then how do they perform their bodily activities such as eating, drinking, etc.?' I shall explain this using the following example: Consider a woman who goes to a well to draw water. There, she places her feet on the edge of the well. On the one hand, she stays cautious of this, lest she falls into the well. However, her vrutti is also fixed upon drawing water from the well. As another example, a man who has mounted a horse is aware of his feet in the horse's stirrups and is also aware of the reins in his hand. While riding, he is also mindful of the trees, ditches, and stones that come along the path. In the same way, all of these sādhus, while introspecting, remain in the service of God and also perform their bodily activities - but they are not deflected from their state."
Shriji Mahārāj thus revealed the state of the senior sādhus and then said, "All of you should also introspect and constantly remain in the service of God. Moreover, you should not allow objects other than God to become dearer to you than Him. All should be extremely cautious of this.
"After all, if a king's guard is careless while guarding the king, thieves and robbers would reach the king, and the guard's service would be rendered meaningless. Similarly, if a devotee develops love for objects other than God, then money, women and other objects also enter his heart - wherein lies the awareness of God. Due to this, his bhakti is rendered meaningless.
"Therefore, one who wishes to keep one's bhakti free from obstacles and to attain the holy feet of God, should remain constantly vigilant at the gateway of the abode of God in the form of awareness, and should not allow any objects except God to enter therein."
In this way, Shriji Mahārāj spoke words of enlightenment for all of His devotees.
GADHADA III-10: VRUNDĀVAN AND KĀSHI
On Āso vadi 12, Samvat 1883 [28 October 1826], Swāmi Shri Sahajānandji Mahārāj was sitting on the veranda outside the east-facing rooms of Dādā Khāchar's darbār in Gadhadā. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. At that time, an assembly of sādhusas well as satsangi devotees from various places had gathered before Him.
In that assembly, a scholarly Brāhmin of the Mādhvi Sampradāy came to Shriji Mahārāj. Shriji Mahārāj asked him, "In the scriptures of your sampradāy, Vrundāvan is called the abode of God. It is also said, 'Even at the time of final dissolution, Vrundāvan is not destroyed.' The followers of Shiv also claim, 'At the time of final dissolution, Kāshi is not destroyed.' But I do not understand these statements. Why? Because during final dissolution, pruthvi and the other four bhuts are completely destroyed, so how can Vrundāvan and Kāshi possibly remain? If they do remain, how are they supported? Such serious doubts arise."
Having said this, Shriji Mahārāj asked for the Shrimad Bhāgwat scripture to be brought and read aloud the narration of the four types of dissolution1 from the 11th and 12thcantos.
Thereafter Shriji Mahārāj said, "Looking from the viewpoint of the Shrimad Bhāgwat and the Gitā, during final dissolution, nothing remains of anything that has evolved fromPrakruti-Purush. So, if in final dissolution Vrundāvan does remain intact, then please quote a verse from the scriptures of Vyāsji or a verse from the Vedas to prove it. Why these two? Because there is no greater āchārya than Vyāsji. Others who have becomeāchāryas and have established their sampradāys, have accepted the scriptures written by Vyāsji as authoritative. Therefore, the words of Vyāsji, the foremost āchārya, are more authoritative than the words of all of the other āchāryas. So, using the words of Vyāsji and the verses of the Vedas, substantiate the statement, 'Vrundāvan is not destroyed in final dissolution' - only then will My doubt be cleared.
"Moreover, whoever has become an āchārya has established his beliefs based on references from the words of the Padma Purān. Mostly, they have established these beliefs by inserting concocted verses into the Padma Purān. As a result, no one besides their own followers believes them. Therefore, I will be convinced if you cite the words of the popular Shrimad Bhāgwat Purān. Why? Because Vyāsji has composed the Shrimad Bhāgwat after taking the very essence of all of the Vedas, Purāns and the Itihāsscriptures. Thus, there is no Purān as perfectly authoritative as the Shrimad Bhāgwat. Also, the whole of the Mahābhārat is not as authoritative as the Bhagwad Gitā. Therefore, cite the words of such powerful scriptures to convince Me."
Hearing these words of Shriji Mahārāj, the Brāhmin said, "Mahārāj, the question you have raised is logical. There is no one on this earth capable of answering your question. In my mind, I have formed a firm belief in You; i.e., 'You are the Āchārya of all āchāryas, the lord of all ishwars.' Therefore, please have compassion on me and explain to me Your principle."
Shriji Mahārāj then said, "From the Vedas, the Purāns, the Itihās and the Smrutis, I have formed the principle that jiva, māyā, ishwar, Brahma and Parabrahma are all eternal. Consider it as follows: Māyā represents the soil; the jivas represent the seeds in the soil; and ishwar, the rain. By the will of God, an ishwar - in the form of Purush - unites with māyā2. Subsequently, just as the seeds in the soil sprout by the association of rainwater, similarly, the jivas, which are eternal, arise from within māyā; but new jivasare not created. Therefore, just as ishwar is eternal, māyā is also eternal. The jivasresiding in māyā are also eternal, and they are not components of God; they are alwaysjivas.
"When a jiva seeks the refuge of God, it overcomes God's māyā, becomes brahmaruplike Nārad and the Sanakādik, attains the abode of God, and becomes His attendant. This is My principle."
Hearing these words of Shriji Mahārāj, the Brāhmin renounced his Vaishnav beliefs, accepted Shriji Mahārāj's refuge, and was initiated into the Uddhav Sampradāy.
GADHADA III-11: UNDERSTANDING LIKE THAT OF SITĀJI
On Āshādh sudi 3, Samvat 1884 [27 June 1827], Swāmi Shri Sahajānandji Mahārāj was sitting on a large, decorated cot on the veranda outside the east-facing rooms of 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, "I wish to ask the following question: Is there one means to overcome both the indriyas and the mind? Or is the means to overcome the indriyasdifferent from the means to overcome the mind? That is the question."
The senior paramhansas answered according to their understanding, but Shriji Mahārāj's question was not answered in a satisfactory manner.
So Shriji Mahārāj said Himself, "The answer is that the indriyas are overcome by the four means of vairāgya, swadharma, austerities and niyams. The mind is overcome by the nine types of bhakti coupled with the knowledge of God's greatness."
Muktānand Swāmi then asked, "How can the type of bliss that a devotee of God enjoys in nirvikalp samādhi be enjoyed even without samādhi?"
Shriji Mahārāj replied, "If the devotee has profound attachment and deep love for God and His Bhakta, just like the attachment and love that he has for his own body, then the type of bliss that prevails in nirvikalp samādhi will continue to remain forever, even without that samādhi. That is the only answer."
Thereafter Shriji Mahārāj asked the paramhansas, "What type of understanding must a devotee have, whereby he will in no way recede from the path of liberation regardless of the adverse circumstances he may encounter, and whereby he develops such staunchness that he will not be affected by any obstacles whatsoever?"
The senior sādhus answered according to their understanding, but Shriji Mahārāj's question was not answered satisfactorily.
So Shriji Mahārāj said, "The answer to this is as follows: If a person is profoundly attached to God and His Bhakta, just as he is attached to his body, then he will not be affected by any obstacles. In fact, regardless of the extent of adverse circumstances he may encounter, he will not turn away from God and His Bhakta."
Then Shriji Mahārāj addressed the paramhansas again. He said, "When Jānkiji was exiled to the forest by Rāmchandraji, she began to lament. Lakshmanji was very sorrowful at that time as well. But then Sitāji explained to Lakshmanji, 'I am not crying because of my own grief; I am crying for the grief of Rāmchandraji. Because Raghunāthji is extremely compassionate, and since he has exiled me to the forest out of fear of public accusation, he must be thinking, "I have sent Sitā to the forest without any fault of her own." Knowing this and being compassionate, he must be experiencing severe grief in his mind. So please tell Rāmchandraji, "Sitā is not distressed; she will go to Vālmiki Rishi's hermitage and happily engage in your worship there. So do not feel any remorse on account of Sitā's distress."' Sitaji sent this message with Lakshmanji, but in no way did she perceive faults in Rāmchandraji.
"Now, one devotee is such that he does not perceive faults in God and His Bhakta1, but his vairāgya and dharma are somewhat moderate. On the other hand, another devotee has intense vairāgya and dharma, but does not have an understanding like that of Sitā. Of these two types of devotees, which type should one lovingly keep the company of?"
Chaitanyānand Swāmi replied, "One should only keep the company - with intense love - of one who has an understanding like Jānkiji, even though that person's dharma andvairāgya may be moderate. One should not keep the company of one who, despite having intense vairāgya and dharma, perceives faults in God and His Bhakta."
Hearing this, Shriji Mahārāj said, "The answer is correct."
GADHADA III-12: A MAGICAL TECHNIQUE
On Āshādh vadi 8, Samvat 1884 [16 July 1827], Swāmi Shri Sahajānandji Mahārāj was sitting in the balcony of the medi of His residence in Dādā Khāchar's darbār in Gadhadā. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. At that time, an assembly of munisas well as devotees from various places had gathered before Him.
Then, for the benefit of His devotees, Shriji Mahārāj said, "One who desires one's own liberation should not harbour any form of vanity - such as, 'I have been born in an upper-class family,' or 'I am wealthy,' or 'I am handsome,' or 'I am a scholar.' One should not keep any of these types of beliefs. In fact, even with a meek satsangi, one should behave as a servant of servants.
"Furthermore, even though he may be called a satsangi, a person who has perceived faults in God or His Bhakta should be known to be like a rabid dog. Just as one who is touched by the saliva of a rabid dog also becomes rabid, similarly, if one listens to the talks of or keeps affection for one who has perceived faults in God or His Bhakta, then both the person who keeps the affection as well as the listener become like a non-believer. Then, just as tuberculosis is never cured by any medicine, similarly, the demonic attitude of one who has perceived faults in God or His Bhakta is never eradicated from the perceiver's heart. On the other hand, one may have killed countless Brāhmins; or one may have killed countless children; or one may have killed countless women; or one may have killed countless cows; or one may even have associated many times with the wife of one's guru - nevertheless, at some time or other, one can be freed from these sins. In fact, the scriptures even describe the methods to do so. But as for perceiving faults in God or His Bhakta, no scripture describes methods to be released from such a sin. Indeed, if one consumes poison, or falls into the ocean, or falls from a mountain, or is eaten by a demon, then one has to die only once. But one who maligns God or His Bhakta has to continuously die and be reborn for countless millions of years.
"Also, in the worst case, a disease leads to the death of the body; or if an enemy is encountered, at most he destroys the body - but the jiva is not destroyed. However, by maligning God or His Bhakta, the jiva is also destroyed. Someone may ask though, 'How can the jiva be destroyed?' Well, for example, just as a eunuch cannot be called aman or a woman - he can only be called a eunuch, similarly, the jiva of a person who maligns God or His Bhakta also becomes impotent; i.e., it is never able to endeavour for its own liberation. Therefore, his jiva should be known as having been destroyed. Knowing this, one should never malign God or His Bhakta.
"In addition, one should not harbour deep affection for one's bodily relations, even if they happen to be satsangis. For example, if a snake's venom falls into some sweetened milk, then whoever drinks it will die. In the same way, even if one's bodily relations are devotees of God, they are still mixed with venom in the form of relationships. Therefore, a person who has affection for them will definitely forfeit his liberation. Knowing this, one who wishes for one's own liberation should not maintain affection for one's bodily relations. In this way, after becoming aloof from worldly life and harbouring love for the holy feet of God, one should continue to engage in the worship of God.
"One who retains within one's heart the discourse that I have just delivered will never encounter obstacles on the path of liberation. In fact, this discourse is like a magical technique."
Shriji Mahārāj thus concluded the discourse with these words.
GADHADA III-13: MAINTAINING EKĀNTIK DHARMA AMIDST ADVERSE CIRCUMSTANCES
On Āshādh vadi 9, Samvat 1884 [17 July 1827], Swāmi Shri Sahajānandji Mahārāj was sitting on the veranda outside the east-facing rooms of Dādā Khāchar's darbār in Gadhadā. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. Garlands of mogrā flowers hung around His neck, and tassels decorated His pāgh. At that time, some munis were singing devotional songs to the accompaniment of a dukad and sarodā, while othermunis as well as devotees from various places had gathered before Him in an assembly.
Thereupon Shriji Mahārāj said, "Please stop singing devotional songs, and let us talk about God." So saying, Shriji Mahārāj asked a question to the muni-mandal: "A jiva's body is contingent upon the karmas performed in past lives. That is why it is not always so stable. For example, at times, a person remains healthy, and at other times, he becomes ill; sometimes he functions independently, whereas sometimes, he becomes dependent - whereby he may or may not be able to stay where he chooses; at times, he may be able to stay in the fellowship of devotees, but at some other time, he may even be separated from them and be forced to live alone. All of this is due to the influence ofkarma or kāl. In such circumstances, a person's resolve in observing niyams becomes unsteady.
"Further, if a sovereign like the British detains one somewhere; or if one's mind andindriyas - which are also like the British rulers - keep one under their control, then it is uncertain whether one will stay in the mandal of sādhus or observe the disciplines ofSatsang. Having said this, though, the scriptures have specifically stated: 'If one perfectly possesses all four of the attributes of dharma, gnān, vairāgya and bhakti, then one can be called an ekāntik bhakta, and such a person attains final liberation.' However, it seems unlikely that the physical conditions will remain stable under the influence of kāl and karma. Therefore, how can a devotee of God maintain his ekāntikstate? That is the question."
Thereupon, Gopālānand Swāmi, Chaitanyānand Swāmi, Nityānand Swāmi, Muktānand Swāmi, Brahmānand Swāmi, Shuk Muni, and other senior sādhus answered according to whatever they felt was correct but were unable to answer the question satisfactorily.
Shriji Mahārāj then said in reply, "Please listen as I reveal to you the way in which My faith in God remains firm." He then began, "Regardless of how much pain or pleasure comes My way, and regardless of whether wealth or poverty comes My way, in those circumstances, first I realise the immense greatness of God. It is this realisation that allows Me, on seeing the riches and royal opulence of the great kings of this world, to not associate even the slightest amount of significance to them in My heart. Indeed, I believe that for Me, there is nothing greater than God; and so My mind is firmly attached to His holy feet. In fact, My love for God is so firm that even kāl, karma and māyā are incapable of destroying that love. Even if My own mind attempts to destroy that love for God, it cannot be destroyed. In fact, My resolve is such that regardless of the extent of happiness or misery that may happen to come My way, that love is not destroyed.
"Also, the natural inclination of My mind is such that I do not at all prefer to live in cities, in mansions or in royal palaces. On the contrary, I very much prefer to stay where there are forests, mountains, rivers, trees, or in some secluded place. I feel that it would be nice to sit alone in some secluded place and meditate upon God. This is what I prefer at all times. In fact, before I had had the darshan of Rāmānand Swāmi, I had already decided with Muktānand Swāmi, 'After you arrange for Me to have the darshan of Rāmānand Swāmi, the two of us will retire to the forest and constantly engage ourselves in the meditation of God, and never shall we return to stay amongst people.' Such was the resolution of My mind then; even now, I feel exactly the same.
"In addition, the profound affection that I have for God and His devotees is so strong that even kāl, karma and māyā are incapable of eradicating that affection. In fact, even if My own mind attempted to eradicate it, it would definitely not be eradicated from My heart. Such is the intense love I have for God and His devotees.
"Many times I have become disheartened and felt like leaving this Satsang, but I have remained here on seeing the fellowship of devotees; I could in no way abandon them and leave. In fact, I would be unable to stay where I do not find such devotees of God, even if someone were to try by a million means to keep Me there. Regardless of how well one may serve Me, I simply cannot get along with one who is not a devotee of God. In this way, I have attached My mind with profound love to God and His devotees; and other than that God, I have no liking for anything else. If that is so, why should love for God not remain? Indeed, when I am engaged in spiritual discourses, devotional songs, etc., related to God, I experience such ecstasy that I feel as if I shall become mad due to it. In fact, whatever composure remains is solely for the benefit of the devotees; but in My mind, that very same ecstasy always remains; although outwardly, I behave in accordance with the etiquette of society.
"It is that very God who is the sole controller of this body. If He wishes, He may oblige the body with an honourable ride on an elephant; or if He wishes, He may have it thrown in prison; or if He so wishes, He may even place some serious illness in the body. Despite this, one should never pray before God in the following manner: 'Mahārāj! Please relieve me of my misery.' Why? Because we want this body to behave in accordance with the wishes of God; after all, God's wish is our wish. We do not want our preferences to differ from the preferences of God even in the slightest way. Moreover, since we have offered our body, mind and wealth to God, then now, only the will of God is our prārabdha; besides that, there is no other prārabdha for us. Therefore, regardless of whatever pain or pleasure we may encounter by the wish of God, we should not become disturbed in any way; we should be pleased with whatever pleases God.
"Thus, God Himself protects the dharma, gnān, vairāgya and bhakti of a devotee who has such intense love for God. Occasionally, though, due to the prevalence of adverse circumstances, it may outwardly appear that such a devotee is transgressing dharma,gnān, etc., but inwardly, there is no transgression at all."
In this manner, by citing His own example, Shriji Mahārāj described the understanding of an extremely staunch devotee of God, and how he should develop firm love for God.
GADHADA III-14: THE KĀYASTH'S INDISCRETION; A DONKEY
On Āshādh vadi 11, Samvat 1884 [19 July 1827], Swāmi Shri Sahajānandji Mahārāj was sitting on the veranda outside the east-facing rooms of Dādā Khāchar's darbār in Gadhadā. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. Tassels of flowers were dangling from the pāgh upon His head, and garlands of flowers hung around His neck. At that time, while some munis were singing devotional songs, paramhansas as well as devotees from various places had gathered before Him in an assembly.
Then Shriji Mahārāj said, "Please stop the singing and begin a question-answer session."
Thereupon Muktānand Swāmi asked with folded hands, "Mahārāj, there is nothing more essential than God; yet why does an individual not develop deep affection for Him? That is the question."
Shriji Mahārāj replied, "He has no discretion. If he did have discretion, he would think, 'I have accepted the vow of brahmacharya, yet the desire to enjoy the pleasures of women still has not disappeared from my heart. That is very improper as I have invariably enjoyed the pleasures of women when I have taken birth in the 8.4 million life formsEN-3 - and those pleasures have always been much greater than those experienced in a human birth.' Because when this jiva was born as a goat, it must have single-handedly indulged in the pleasures of a thousand she-goats. When it took birth as a horse, or a bull, or a buffalo, or a king monkey, or indeed any other animal, it must have encountered countless young, beautiful females of its own species. This was not due to prārabdha, nor was it due to God's grace - it was only natural. Moreover, if one does not worship God, one will obtain countless females in whichever life form one is born in. This would not be due to the service or puja of some deity, or to the chanting of some mantra; because the opportunity of enjoying women and other pleasures is but natural. In fact, several times this jiva has become a deity, where it has enjoyed the pleasures of Devlok; many times it has become an emperor of the world and enjoyed countless pleasures on this earth. Despite this, though, the jiva's craving to enjoy women and other objects has still not diminished. On the contrary, a person feels that the pleasures of women and other objects are extremely rare and, realising their immense pleasure, develops affection for them. That affection is such that it can in no way be eradicated, however much one tries. It is because of this sin that the jiva is unable to develop deep affection for God.
"In fact, I have personally seen with My own eyes how the jiva harbours such impure, worldly desires. When I was young, I used to go to a mandir of Shiv in Ayodhyā and sleep there. There, a Kāyasth came daily to offer puja to Shiv. After offering puja to Shiv, he would pray before Shiv and ask for the following boon: 'O Mahārāj! O Shivji! Never grant me a human birth again. Because in this human birth, I have taken so many aphrodisiacs, yet I have been unable to fully enjoy the pleasures of women to my satisfaction. Therefore, O Shivji! Please grant me the body of a donkey for many lives to come so that I can fully enjoy the pleasures of females without shame or restrictions.' He asked for this boon from Shivji daily. So, because of this sin of harbouring worldly desires, the jiva does not develop affection for God in any way."
Muktānand Swāmi then asked further, "Mahārāj, one with such extreme indiscretion does not develop affection for God. But what about someone who believes that God is the ocean of all bliss, and that all objects other than God are certainly full of only misery? Despite knowing this, why does he not develop affection for God?"
Shriji Mahārāj explained, "In either a past life or in this present life, that person has been influenced by extremely unfavourable places, times, company and actions. Due to this, he has performed very intense, sinful karmas that, in turn, have left impressions on his mind. Therefore, despite being able to discriminate between good and bad, he is unable to shun the bad and develop deep affection for God. Moreover, just as the influence of unfavourable places, times, actions and company causes the impressions of sinfulkarmas to influence the mind, similarly, the influence of extremely favourable places, favourable times, favourable actions and favourable company causes one to perform very intense, pure karmas, the influence of which will destroy the very intense, sinfulkarmas. Only then does one develop deep affection for God. That is the answer to the question."
Thereafter Ayodhyāprasādji asked, "Suppose, on the one hand, there is one who is very intelligent, whose insight into the scriptures is also exceptional. On the other hand, there is one who is not so intelligent and who has a limited understanding of the scriptures. Nevertheless, the one who is very intelligent falls from the Satsang fellowship, whereas the one who is not intelligent remains firm in Satsang. What is the reason for this?"
Shriji Mahārāj answered, "There are two types of people in this world: godly and demonic. Of these, those who are demonic will fall from Satsang, despite being exceptionally intelligent; whereas those who are godly will never fall from Satsang, even though they may not be intelligent. For example, if one sows a seed of chilli or the seed of a neem tree or the seed of a shingadiyo vachhnāg plant, and one waters them daily with sweet water, the chillies will still turn out to be pungent; the neem tree, bitter; and the shingadiyo vachhnāg plant, poisonous. Why? Because the very seeds themselves are such. On the other hand, if one sows sugarcane, the juice of the sugarcane will still be sweet despite treating it with compost from the leaves of a neem tree and watering it with bitter water. In the same manner, godly people will always adhere to the path of God, and demonic people will always turn away from the path of God."
Then Shuk Muni asked, "How can one distinguish between a godly person and a demonic person?"
Shriji Mahārāj replied, "In a godly person, vicious natures such as lust, anger, avarice, etc., are due to the influence of unfavourable circumstances. Under the influence of favourable circumstances, however, they are destroyed within a short time. But in a demonic person, vicious natures such as lust, anger, avarice, etc., are never destroyed. If someone were to speak some harsh words to a demonic person even once, he would not forget them for as long as he lives. Then, if that demonic person were to become asatsangi, he would initially appear to be better than all of the other devotees. But, he would be like the following: Silt that has gathered in the region of Bhāl - where there was previously sea - has made the soil fertile. As long as the silt remains, sweet water can be obtained by digging below; but if one were to dig much deeper, then extremely saline water would emerge. In the same way, even if a demonic person has become a devotee of God, the moment his wishes are not fulfilled and he is even slightly disturbed, then compared to the service of the sādhus he had previously performed, he would malign them thousands of times more. Even then, his mind would not be content."
Muktānand Swāmi thereupon asked, "Mahārāj, You said that a demonic person who becomes a devotee will remain in Satsang so long as his wishes are fulfilled; and if they are not fulfilled, he falls from Satsang. But what if he happens to die before falling fromSatsang? Will he remain demonic, or will he become godly?"
Shriji Mahārāj replied, "As long as that demonic person is good when he encounters death, he will become godly and, offering bhakti to God, will attain the highest state of enlightenment."
Then Nrusinhānand Swāmi asked, "Of the nine types of bhakti, which is the best?"
Shriji Mahārāj replied, "Of the nine types of bhakti, whichever type aids one in developing firm attachment to God is the best type of bhakti for that particular person."
Thereafter Gopālānand Swāmi asked, "During one's childhood or during one's youth, what type of company should be sought?"
Shriji Mahārāj answered, "Both should affectionately keep the company of a person who is senior in age; is firm in dharma, gnān and vairāgya; and has deep affection for God."
Then Nājā Jogiyā asked, "Which is the best of the three: one whose mind is attached to God out of anger, one whose mind is attached to God out of fear or one whose mind is attached to God out of love?"
Shriji Mahārāj said, "One whose mind is attached to God out of love is the best."
Thereupon Shivānand Swāmi asked, "How can a devotee of God who does not possess discretion of what is good and bad as described by Shriji Mahārāj, and who also lacks vairāgya, cultivate such discretion and also cultivate vairāgya towards all objects other than God?"
Shriji Mahārāj replied, "If one develops firm affection for God from the initial stages, then due to that affection, discretion and vairāgya will automatically develop. Now, consider the following: When one is attracted to an object, it is called affection or desire. Then, if someone were to obstruct the gaining of any object for which one has affection, one would become angry on that person. This applies not only to humans; even animals express such anger. For example, a buffalo that is attached to a female buffalo out of lust will kill another buffalo that approaches the female; this behaviour is widely observed in all types of animals. In the same way, one with deep affection for God immediately becomes angry on any object that acts as an obstruction in that affection, and he immediately shuns that object. Therefore, one who has deep affection for God automatically develops vairāgya as well as discretion."
Again, Shivānand Swāmi asked, "Suppose there are two types of people, both of whom are intelligent. Of these, one possesses faith, in that he totally accepts whatever God says; whereas the other accepts only those words of God that he feels are appropriate. Of the two, who is better?"
Shriji Mahārāj replied, "Only the one who possesses faith is better. Rāmchandraji has said in the Rāmāyan, 'I protect one who has firm faith in me - just as a mother protects her child.' Therefore, only the one with faith is better."
Then Ātmānand Swāmi asked, "In one's mind, one is resolute in behaving according to the wishes of God for the rest of one's life. Still, one feels, 'What can one do for God and His Sant to earn their trust?'"
Shriji Mahārāj explained, "A person earns the trust of God and His Sant when, firstly, even if he falls severely ill and is not cared for very well during that illness, he still does not bear an aversion towards anyone, nor does he feel disheartened. Secondly, even if he is harshly insulted by God and His Sant without any fault of his own, he still does not bear an aversion towards anyone. Thirdly, if there were to be the slightest infringement in his observance of the niyams of this Satsang, he would feel extremely repentant and would immediately perform atonement. Also, even if he were to entertain an evil thought in his mind, he would feel just as repentant and distressed as someone who had happened to physically infringe the observance of religious vows. One with such characteristics earns the complete trust of God and His Sant; i.e., they feel of him, 'This person will never fall back from Satsang.'"
Thereupon Bhagwadānand Swāmi asked, "How can others recognise a devotee who continuously understands the greatness of God and His Bhakta in his mind?"
Shriji Mahārāj answered, "One who continuously understands the greatness of God and His Bhakta in his mind serves them sincerely and lovingly. He physically bows and touches the feet of all of the sādhus. If a sādhu were to fall ill, he would massage his head and feet and also take care of his dietary needs. If he were to receive some object that he liked, he would first offer it to the sādhus before using it for himself. One who behaves in this manner by thought, word and deed should be known to have fully understood within one's heart the greatness of God and His Sant."
Thereafter Shriji Mahārāj asked the sādhus a question: "A person may possess intensedharma, gnān, vairāgya and bhakti; yet sometimes, there may be some relaxation in his observance of dharma; there may be some attachment despite having vairāgya; there may be some slackening in his bhakti; and attachment to his body may still remain despite having gnān. What can be the reason for this?"
Gopālānand Swāmi and Brahmānand Swāmi replied, "If there appears to be a flaw in a person who possesses intense dharma, gnān, vairāgya and bhakti - a person who can be thought of as being as powerful as God Himself - it remains purely out of compassion; it is not a flaw as such. In fact, when such a great person behaves with 'bāhyadrashti'1, he transforms many jivas to the ranks of Jadbharat and Shukji. Therefore, such an extremely great person behaves in a worldly manner purely out of compassion for the jivas."
Hearing their reply, Shriji Mahārāj said, "That is precisely the correct answer to the question."
GADHADA III-15: APPLYING BANDAGES TO WOUNDS
On Āshādh vadi 13, Samvat 1884 [21 July 1827], Swāmi Shri Sahajānandji Mahārāj was sitting in the balcony of the medi of His residence in Dādā Khāchar's darbār in Gadhadā. He was dressed entirely in white clothes and was also wearing garlands ofmogrā flowers around His neck. At that time, an assembly of munis as well as devotees from various places had gathered before Him.
Then Shriji Mahārāj said to Muktānand Swāmi, "Today, I had a long talk with thedevotees who cook for Me1."
Thereupon Muktānand Swāmi asked, "Mahārāj, what did You talk about?"
Shriji Mahārāj then said, "The talk was that when a devotee of God sits to perform themānsi pujā of God or sits to meditate upon God, he remembers the times in the past when his jiva had succumbed to the panchvishays due to the influence of unfavourable circumstances or the influence of lust, anger, avarice, etc. For example, a warrior who returns injured from the battlefield rests on a cot because of his wounds; however, until his wounds are not dressed with bandages, the pain of the wounds does not cease, nor is he able to sleep. Only when bandages are applied to his wounds is he relieved of his pain, and only then is he able to sleep. In the same way, the jiva has been 'wounded' by the panchvishays due to the influence of unfavourable places, times, company and actions. Whichever of the nine types of bhakti relieves the pain of these 'wounds' caused by the vishays and makes one oblivious of the vishays themselves, should be thought of as the application of a bandage to the 'wounds'. Also, that particular type ofbhakti should be known to be one's inclination in worshipping God.
"Then, abiding by that particular inclination, one should engage in mānsi pujā or the mental chanting of God's name. In fact, whatever one may do, one should do so within one's own particular inclination. One will benefit tremendously as a result of this.
"However, just as a wounded warrior experiences no peace until his wounds are bandaged, similarly, if one fails to recognise one's own particular inclination, one will not experience any happiness at all during worship, and the pain due to the 'wounds' inflicted by the vishays will not be relieved. Therefore, after recognising which of the nine types of bhakti causes his mind to be fixed on God and prevents him from indulging in any thoughts other than those of God, that devotee should realise, 'This is my particular inclination.' Thereafter, he should keep that type of bhakti predominant. This method is a universal principle."
GADHADA III-16: THE VOW OF FIDELITY
On Āshādh vadi Amās, Samvat 1884 [23 July 1827], Swāmi Shri Sahajānandji Mahārāj was sitting on the veranda outside the east-facing rooms of Dādā Khāchar's darbār in Gadhadā. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. He was wearing garlands of mogrāflowers around His neck, and extremely beautiful tassels were dangling from His pāgh. At that time, an assembly of munis as well as devotees from various places had gathered before Him.
Thereupon Shriji Mahārāj said, "I ask a question to the entire muni-mandal and to all of the householder devotees; whoever can reply may do so. The question is as follows: It does not take very long for a devotee of God to shun the company of a person who is full of flaws. But how is it possible to shun the company of one with extremely fine virtues? After all, one naturally develops affection for a virtuous person, regardless of whether he is one's own relative or not. Moreover, affection that is formed due to the influence of those virtues cannot be eradicated, however much one tries. Therefore, how does a devotee of God prevent the development of affection for anyone other than God, regardless of how virtuous that person may be? That is the question."
The senior sādhus answered according to their understanding but were unable to satisfactorily answer Shriji Mahārāj's question.
Shriji Mahārāj then said, "Here, allow Me to answer. The answer is as follows: A wife who observes the vow of fidelity, even if her husband is poor, ugly, ill or old, is not even slightly impressed in her mind on seeing other men - even if they happen to be rich, handsome or young. If she does happen to affectionately look at or laugh with other men, then she loses her fidelity. If some guests were to come to the house of that faithful wife, she would offer them food and water. If she offers food and water to some male relative of her husband, she does so knowing him to be related to her husband, but the affection she has for all other men does not even come close to the affection she has for her husband. Nor does she see virtues in other men as she sees in her own husband. Moreover, she acts according to the wishes of her own husband. Such is the firm fidelity that a faithful wife has towards her husband.
"In the same manner, a devotee should have firm fidelity to God. Specifically, like a woman who observes the vow of fidelity, he would never develop the same affection towards even other mukta sādhus - however great they may be - as he has developed towards whichever form of God he has had the darshan of. Nor does he develop affection for other avatārs of his Ishtadev. He keeps affection only for the form that he has attained, and he acts according to His wishes only. If he does happen to respect others, it is only because of their association with his God. One who, like a faithful wife, has such faithful bhakti towards one's own Ishtadev, never develops affection on seeing others, however virtuous they may be. For example, Hanumānji is a devotee of Shri Raghunāthji. Following the avatār of Rām, there have been many other avatārs of God, but Hanumānji's bhakti has been like that of a woman who observers the vow of fidelity, as he has remained faithful to Rāmchandraji only. This is why Hanumānji's bhakti is considered to be like that of a faithful wife. The bhakti of a devotee of God who has such fidelity can be said to be like that of a faithful wife. Conversely, if a person does not have such an inclination, his bhakti can be said to be like that of a prostitute. Therefore, one should not knowingly engage in bhakti that would cause one to be disgraced. Instead, a devotee of God should thoughtfully engage in faithful bhakti - like that of a faithful wife."
GADHADA III-17: THE STORY OF BHARATJI
On Shrāvan sudi 6, Samvat 1884 [30 July 1827], Shriji Mahārāj was sitting on the veranda outside the east-facing rooms of Dādā Khāchar's darbār in Gadhadā. He was dressed entirely in white clothes and was wearing garlands of flowers around His neck. At that time, an assembly of munis as well as devotees from various places had gathered before Him.
Thereupon Shriji Mahārāj said, "There is no story in the Shrimad Bhāgwat as incredible as the story of Bharatji. Why? Because Bharatji was the son of Rushabhdev Bhagwān, and for the specific purpose of realising God, he renounced his kingdom, which encompassed the whole world, and retired to the forest. There, while engaged in the worship of God, he developed affection for a young fawn. As a result, his mind's vruttitook the form of that fawn. Subsequently, despite his greatness, Bharatji was reborn as a deer due to the sin of that attachment.
"As a matter of fact, there are countless types of sins; but for a devotee of God, of all those sins, having affection for anything except God is an extremely grave sin. Therefore, if a wise person thinks over this story of Bharatji, he becomes extremely fearful in his heart with the thought, 'What if I develop affection for anything other than God?' In this manner, he becomes extremely afraid.
"Thereafter, when Bharatji gave up the body of the deer, he was born in a Brāhminfamily. Then, out of fear of developing affection for anything other than God, he paid no attention at all to worldly affairs and deliberately behaved as a madman. He thus lived in a manner whereby he could maintain his vrutti constantly on God."
After delivering this discourse, Shriji Mahārāj left to attend the arti.
GADHADA III-18: THE DEGENERATION OF WORLDLY DESIRES
On Shrāvan vadi 10, Samvat 1884 [17 August 1827], Shriji Mahārāj was sitting on the veranda outside the east-facing rooms of Dādā Khāchar's darbār in Gadhadā. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. Garlands of flowers were hung around His neck, and tassels of flowers were dangling from His pāgh. At that time, an assembly of munis as well as devotees from various places had gathered before Him.
Thereupon Shriji Mahārāj's nephew, Raghuvirji, asked a question: "Why does the jiva's condition during the dream state not remain the same as it is during the waking state?"
Shriji Mahārāj replied, "The jiva behaves in the dream state exactly as it does in the waking state. After all, the same types of worldly desires which appear while awake spring forth in dreams as well."
Then Nirlobhānand Swāmi asked, "Mahārāj, many times objects that have never been seen or heard in the waking state spring forth in dreams. What may be the reason for this?"
Shriji Mahārāj explained, "If objects that have never been previously seen or heard appear in the dream state, it is due to ingrained desires generated by karmas performed in past lives."
Thereafter Akhandānand Swāmi asked, "Mahārāj, for a person who becomes a devotee of God, how long does the force of karmas performed in past lives persist?"
Shriji Mahārāj answered, "When that person comes into contact with the Satpurush, the ingrained desires generated by his past karmas gradually wear away as he consistently associates with him. Eventually, he reaches a stage where the desires that give rise to births and deaths no longer remain. For example, grains of rice that are three to four years old can be eaten, but if sown, would not grow. In the same manner, when the ingrained desires generated by karmas performed previously become deteriorated, they do not lead to further births and deaths.
"However, one may ask, 'How does one recognise whether those ingrained desires have degenerated, or not?' Well, consider the analogy of a duel between two men armed with shields and swords. As long as both can withstand each other, the strength of both appears to be equal. But the moment one retreats, he is said to have been defeated. Similarly, for a devotee of God, so long as thoughts related to God and those related to the vishays appear to be equal, he should realise his worldly desires to be more powerful. However, when thoughts related to God displace those related to thevishays, then he should realise that his worldly desires have degenerated."
Shriji Mahārāj then asked the paramhansas a question: "How can a devotee who no longer identifies himself with the body and who has developed an aversion for thepanchvishays be recognised as such by other devotees?"
Muktānand Swāmi replied, "Mahārāj, we are incapable of answering Your question. Please be compassionate and answer it Yourself."
So Shriji Mahārāj then said, "Whether he be a householder or a renunciant, a devotee of God who no longer believes himself to be the body and whose attachment for thepanchvishays has been eradicated, may be required to behave as if he is the body depending on God's instructions to him; he may also have to indulge in thepanchvishays if necessary. For example, a frail bull can be made to stand with the support of a stick and by people holding it by its horns and tail. But, it will remain standing only as long as someone holds it up; the moment one releases it, it will fall to the ground. Similarly, one who is free of worldly desires engages in activities only to the extent of the instructions given by God. Take, as another example, a person with a bow and arrow in hand. The bow bends as the person pulls back the string; when he releases the arrow, the bow becomes slack again. In the same way, a person free of worldly desires engages himself in activities only to the extent of God's wish, but never does he do anything which transgresses that. On the other hand, when a person with worldly desires engages in activities, he is unable to detach himself from those activities of his own accord; he is unable to do so even when God instructs him to do so. Such are the characteristics of a person free of worldly desires and a person with worldly desires."
GADHADA III-19: TWO UNDESIRABLE TRAITS OF A RENUNCIANT
On Shrāvan vadi 13, Samvat 1884 [20 August 1827], Swāmi Shri Sahajānandji Mahārāj was sitting on a cushion with a cylindrical pillow that had been placed on a large, decorated cot on the veranda outside the west-facing rooms of Dādā Khāchar's darbārin Gadhadā. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. Also, garlands of mogrā andkarnikār flowers adorned His neck. At that time, an assembly of munis as well as devotees from various places had gathered before Him.
Thereupon Shriji Mahārāj said, "A devotee who has renounced worldly life may possess two undesirable traits which do not befit him in this Satsang fellowship. The first is lust, and the second is affection for his relatives. In my eyes, one who possesses these two undesirable traits is like an animal. Of these two, I have an extreme repulsion for one who has excessive affection for one's relatives.
"For this reason, then, a person who has renounced worldly life should not keep even the slightest amount of affection for his relatives. Why? Because having affection for one's bodily relatives is a sin graver than the five grave sins. Therefore, a renunciant devotee of God should realise his own chaitanya to be distinct from both the body and the relatives of the body. He should believe, 'I am the ātmā; I have no relations at all with anyone.' In fact, the relatives of this body should be considered together with the relatives of the 8.4 million types of previous life forms. If a person does try to understand the greatness of his relatives, knowing them to be satsangis, then since there is already some affection due to the fact that they are related, he develops more affection for them than he has for God and the devotees of God. Therefore, if a person does keep affection for one's relatives - towards whom affection is but natural - knowing them to be devotees of God, then his life becomes futile.
"Moreover, it is also natural to develop affection for those who perform one's menial service, though they may not be one's relatives. So, one who is wise should not keep affection towards a person who is serving one, even if the person serving happens to be a devotee of God. For example, if a snake has released venom into a mixture of milk and sākar, the mixture also becomes poisonous. Similarly, out of his own self-interest, a person should not keep affection towards one who does his menial service, even if the person serving happens to be a devotee. Why? Because his jiva becomes attached due to that. Then, just as he thinks about God, he also begins to think about the one who serves his needs. For that person, this in itself is an obstacle in his worship of God - just as the young fawn itself became avidyā, i.e., māyā, for Bharatji. In this manner, a devotee of God should totally shun all who obstruct his worship of God, knowing them to be avidyā."
Shriji Mahārāj then concluded by adding, "The paramhansas and all of the sānkhya-yogidevotees should daily say and listen to this discourse which I have just delivered. Specifically, the senior member of a mandal should daily narrate this talk, and others should listen. If the senior person fails to do so, he should observe a fast on that day. Those who do not come to listen to that talk of God with shraddhā should also observe a fast. Please imbibe these words firmly in your lives."
GADHADA III-20: 'SWABHĀV', 'PRAKRUTI' AND 'VĀSANĀ'
On the night of Shrāvan vadi Amās, Samvat 1884 [22 August 1827], Swāmi Shri Sahajānandji Mahārāj was sitting in His residence in Dādā Khāchar's darbār in Gadhadā. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. At that time, an assembly of sādhusas well as devotees from various places had gathered before Him.
Thereupon Dinānāth Bhatt asked a question: "Mahārāj, kāl is the power of God, andkarma refers to the actions performed by the jiva. But what exactly is 'swabhāv'?"
Shriji Mahārāj explained, "The karmas that the jiva has performed during past lives have fully ripened and have become assimilated with the jiva. Just as fire 'enters' iron, similarly, those karmas have ripened and have become one with the jiva. It is thosekarmas that are known as 'swabhāv', or 'vāsanā', or 'prakruti'."
Muktānand Swāmi then asked, "Mahārāj, You call the karmas which have become assimilated with the jiva, 'swabhāv' or 'vāsanā'. But how does one eradicate 'vāsanā'?"
Shriji Mahārāj replied, "It appears that the only means to do so is by performing thebhakti of Shri Krishna Bhagwān, coupled with the realisation of one's self as the ātmā. If one offers bhakti to Shri Krishna Bhagwān without ātmā-realisation, then just as one has love for God, one will also develop love for other material objects. Therefore, bhaktiaccompanied by ātmā-realisation is the only means to eradicate 'vāsanā'. However, even one who has ātmā-realisation may be disturbed by adverse circumstances, just like an ignorant person. But such disturbances do not last long."
GADHADA III-21: A GOLDEN THREAD; DHARMA POSSESSES THE SAME EMINENCE AS BHAKTI
On Bhādarvā sudi 9, Samvat 1884 [31 August 1827], Swāmi Shri Sahajānandji Mahārāj was sitting on a cushion with a cylindrical pillow that had been placed on a large, decorated cot on the veranda outside the west-facing rooms of Dādā Khāchar's darbārin Gadhadā. He was dressed entirely in white clothes, and garlands of chameli flowers adorned His neck. At that time, an assembly of the entire muni-mandal as well as devotees from various places had gathered before Him.
Then Shriji Mahārāj requested Gopālānand Swāmi and Shuk Muni to begin a question-answer session.
Thereupon Shuk Muni asked Gopālānand Swāmi, "It is through offering bhakti to God that the jiva crosses God's māyā and attains Akshardhām. Through dharma, it attains Devlok; but once its accumulated merits are exhausted, the jiva falls from Devlok. Now, whenever there is a decline in dharma, God assumes an avatār for the purpose of re-establishing dharma, but not for the purpose of establishing bhakti. However, it appears that what can be attained through bhakti cannot be attained through dharma. Therefore, how can dharma be elevated to the status of bhakti? That is the question."
Gopālānand Swāmi began to answer that question. In whatever he said, though,dharma became a component of bhakti, but in no way could he elevate the eminence ofdharma to the status of bhakti.
On hearing this, Shriji Mahārāj laughed a great deal, and commented, "To answer that question is difficult indeed. Therefore, allow Me to answer it." He then explained, "Dharma is of two types: One is nivrutti dharma and the other is pravrutti dharma. In turn, these two types of dharma can either be related to God or not related to God. Of these two, the type of dharma that is related to God is the one that was adopted by Nārad, the Sanakādik, Shukji, Dhruv, Prahlād, Ambrish, and other devotees. It is thisdharma that is known as bhāgwat dharma or ekāntik dharma. In fact, this type ofdharma is not different from bhakti; they are both one. The type of dharma that theavatārs of God come to establish is this very same dharma. On the other hand, thedharma of one's caste and āshram alone is extremely inferior compared to bhāgwat dharma, because it is through bhāgwat dharma that the jiva crosses God's māyā and attains the abode of Purushottam. Therefore, the eminence of bhāgwat dharma andbhakti is the same, and the fruits of both are exactly the same as well. It is in this way that the greatness of bhakti and dharma are the same. In comparison, though, thedharma of one's caste and āshram on its own is extremely weak, and its fruits are also temporary."
Shriji Mahārāj then continued, "I am of the opinion that even if I try to develop affection for anyone other than God and His ekāntik bhaktas, I cannot do so. I also feel that My inclination is similar to that of Jadbharat, Shukdev, Dattātreya and Rushabhdev Bhagwān. As a result, I also prefer to stay only in forests, mountains and jungles; I do not like to stay in large towns or cities. Such is My inherent nature. Despite this, I stay in the midst of thousands of people for the sake of God and His devotees. Nevertheless, I remain just as detached here as I would if I were living in the forests. But I do not stay amidst thousands of people out of any self-interest; it is for the sake of God and His devotees that I stay in the midst of people. In fact, no matter how much pravrutti I may have to engage Myself in for the sake of the devotees of God, I still consider it to be nivrutti.
"Moreover, I do not see the flaws of a devotee of God, however much at fault he may be. I believe that even if there are some intrinsic, minor flaws in a devotee of God, one should overlook them. If those flaws are in oneself, however, then one should endeavour to eradicate them. But if that type of flaw appears in a devotee of God, one should not take note of that flaw. One should perceive flaws in a devotee only if he were to lapse in his observance of some major religious vow but not on account of some other minor flaw.
"One should also not be pleased by defeating a devotee of God in arguments. On the contrary, one should derive pleasure in deliberately losing to him. One who does engage in an argument and defeats a devotee of God is a sinner worse than one who has committed the five grave sinsEN-10.
"In addition, I do not like even the sight of one who speaks ill of a devotee of God before Me. In fact, I do not enjoy food or water offered by a person who perceives flaws in a devotee of God. If he does do so, then even if he happens to be My relative, I still develop an intense dislike for him. Why? Because in reality, we are the ātmā; so why should we keep affection for our body and the relatives of the body? We have developed affection for God and His devotees believing ourselves to be the ātmā, not out of the belief that we are the body.
"Indeed, the inner enemies of lust, anger, avarice, infatuation, matsar, arrogance, etc., will certainly distress one who is unable to behave as the ātmā. Therefore, if one offersbhakti without attaining ātmā-realisation, one's true nature is sure to be exposed in thisSatsang fellowship. Why? Because this Satsang is divine, and all these satsangis are exactly like God's attendants residing in Shwetdwip, Vaikunth and Golok. I, Myself, swear by God and the devotees of God that I realise these satsangis to be the same as the attendants of God residing in the divine, all-transcending Akshardhām.
"However, one whose gnān, vairāgya, dharma and bhakti are not extremely firm will most certainly suffer a setback. For example, a thread dipped in wax remains stiff in winter and monsoon, but when summer comes, it invariably becomes slack. In the same manner, monsoon and winter represent the period when the devotees here are happy in every way and are also honoured in Satsang. During that period, gnān,vairāgya, dharma and bhakti appear to be very intense. But with the advent of summer - the period when a devotee is insulted in Satsang or when he becomes physically distressed - his gnān, vairāgya, dharma and bhakti become limp like the thread dipped in wax. Even then, I do not forsake such a person. But he, of his own accord, becomes obliged to withdraw from Satsang. Thereafter, even if he is supposedly a satsangi, he does not experience the bliss of satsang within.
"For this reason, then, one should practise satsang with intense firmness after attaining ātmā-realisation; one should not practise satsang in such a manner that affection for one's body and one's relatives persists. To continue the analogy, a thread of gold remains the same in all six seasons1; it does not become limp even during the heat of summer. Similarly, when one's satsang is firm, regardless of the amount of misery that may befall one and however many times one is insulted in Satsang, one's mind never turns away from Satsang. Only such staunch satsangi Vaishnavs are My kith and kin; and I wish to stay in the midst of such Vaishnavs during this life and also in Shri Krishna Bhagwān's abode. Such is My resolution, and all of you should also make the same resolution.
"Why do I say this? Because as you have all become My disciples, I should tell you that which is beneficial to you. After all, a true friend is he who tells us that which is of benefit to us, even if it may appear to hurt. Please realise this as the characteristic of a true friend."
GADHADA III-22: AN INTIMATE FORM OF BHAKTI
On Bhādarvā vadi 4, Samvat 1884 [9 September 1827], Swāmi Shri Sahajānandji Mahārāj was sitting on the veranda outside the west-facing rooms of Dādā Khāchar'sdarbār in Gadhadā. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. Tassels of white flowers were hanging from His pāgh, and garlands of white flowers adorned His neck. At that time, some paramhansas were singing a Vishnupad to the accompaniment of a dukadand sarodā, while other paramhansas as well as devotees from various places had gathered before Him in an assembly. Shriji Mahārāj was sitting in that assembly in an introspective mood.
Then Shriji Mahārāj said, "The inclination of profound, loving bhakti in a devotee of God, as described in this devotional song, is the inclination of Jhinābhāi, and it was the inclination of Parvatbhāi and Mulji as well. I was reflecting within and was thinking that there must also be others in the Satsang fellowship with the same inclination. One who cultivates this inclination of profound, loving bhakti loses all attachment to thepanchvishays and is able to maintain ātmā-realisation without even having to try."
Thereupon Muktānand Swāmi asked, "Narsinh Mehtā worshipped Shri Krishna Bhagwān with a sense of intimacy, whereas many devotees of God such as Nārad and others worshipped God with a sense of servitude. Of these two types of devotees, whose bhakti should be regarded as being better?"
Shriji Mahārāj replied, "The type of bhakti offered by Narsinh Mehtā, the gopis, Nārad, and the Sanakādik is not of two types; in reality, it is of one type. After all, the body - be it male or female - is worldly and perishable; but the jivātmā, the worshipper, is neither male nor female - it is characterised by pure existence and consciousness. When it leaves its body and transmigrates to the abode of God, it assumes a form according to the wish of God. Or, depending upon the opportunity for service that arises there, that devotee assumes an appropriate form and serves God accordingly.
"But if a devotee of God develops the same attachment to wealth, women and other objects as he has towards God, then he cannot be called a staunch devotee of God. Having become a devotee of God, if one commits sins and accumulates detrimental desires in Satsang itself while offering bhakti, then those sins become ingrained in one - as if etched in iron. Moreover, a graver sin than associating with others' wives due to the influence of evil company is to look at a devotee of God lustfully while in Satsang. Therefore, one who wishes to develop deep attachment to God should not allow any type of sin to remain in his mind. Why? Because female satsangi devotees are to be viewed as one's own mother, sister or daughter. They are the extremely vile sinners in this world who look at women of their own family lustfully. So, he who looks at devotees lustfully is a vile sinner and will never be released from that sin. That is why one who wishes to become an amorous devotee should become an amorous devotee after shunning this kind of sin.
"Having said this, though, the gravest of all sins is perceiving faults in God and His devotees, because due to that fault-finding attitude, animosity is created towards them. Even if one has killed millions of cows, consumed alcohol and meat, and committed adultery with the wife of one's guru countless times, one can still be released from such sins at some time or other. But, a person who maligns God and His devotees will never be released from his sin. Then, if the maligner is a male, he will become a male demon; or if female, she will become a female demon. Then, even after countless lives, that person will never cease to be a demon and will never become a devotee of God.
"Furthermore, one who has already maligned a devotee of God and whose maligning attitude has become established will under no circumstances be able to eradicate that attitude. On the other hand, another person who is in the process of maligning, realises, 'I have committed a grave sin in maligning God and His devotees; therefore I am extremely vile, and God and His devotees are extremely great.' When one sees others' virtues and sees faults within oneself in this manner, then any sins one may have committed will be eradicated, however grave they may be.
"Indeed, no other sin displeases and pains God more than the sin of maligning His devotees. When Jay and Vijay insulted the Sanakādik in Vaikunth, God immediately rushed to the Sanakādik and told them, 'Whoever maligns sādhus like you is my enemy. Therefore, you have done well in giving a curse to Jay and Vijay. In fact, if my own hand were to harm pious Brāhmins like you, then even I would cut off my hand; so what can I say of others?' This is what Vaikunthnāth Bhagwān said to the Sanakādik. Consequently, Jay and Vijay became demons due to the sin of maligning the pious devotees of God. Others who have also maligned devotees of God have all fallen from their eminent position - a fact that is well noted in the scriptures. Therefore, one who desires one's own good should not malign the devotees of God. If one does happen to knowingly or unknowingly malign someone, then one should bow to that person's feet, pray to him, and act in a manner that pleases him."
GADHADA III-23: MĀNSI PUJĀ
On the night of Āso sudi Punam, Samvat 1885 [22 October 1828], Swāmi Shri Sahajānandji Mahārāj was sitting on a large, decorated cot that had been placed in the yard of His residence 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 Shriji Mahārāj, out of compassion, addressed all of the devotees and said, "One who is a devotee of God daily performs the mānsi pujā of God. The details of performing that mānsi pujā are as follows: One should perform that mānsi pujā in different ways, depending on the three seasons; namely summer, winter and monsoon.
"During the four months of summer, one should perform puja by first bathing God with cool, fragrant, pure water. One should then offer Him a beautiful, washed, white khes to wear, which is thin and fine. After seating God on a beautiful seat, His whole body should be smeared with fragrant sandalwood from the Malay mountains, which has been collected in a bowl after forming it into a paste. Firstly, the sandalwood paste should be smeared on His forehead and closely observed; then His hands should be smeared and closely observed; then the paste should be smeared on His chest, stomach, thighs, calves, and other parts of His body. Those parts should also be observed. Then, beautiful kumkum should be applied on His holy feet as well as on the soles of His feet, and they too should then be observed. Thereafter, garlands of fragrant flowers such as mogrā, chameli, champā, roses, etc., as well as various ornaments such as a cap, armlets, wristlets, etc., made of flowers should be offered. A fine cloth that is not too heavy and is as white as a mogrā flower should be tied around His head; and a beautiful, white cloth which is fine and light, should be wrapped around His body. Then one should embrace God - once, or twice, or according to the degree of one's love. Thereafter, one should touch God's holy feet to one's own chest and head. During that embrace, the sandalwood paste on God's body as well as parts from the garlands of flowers may stick to one's own body; and kumkum may also stick as a result of touching God's holy feet to one's own chest and head. All this should be visualised; i.e., one should feel, 'Sandalwood paste, kumkum and garlands consecrated by God have touched my body!'
"During the four months of winter, one should perform puja by first bathing God with warm water and then offering Him a white khes to wear. One should then seat God on a decorated cot with a velvet mattress that has been covered with a white bedsheet. One should offer a survāl, offer a dagli, tie a rich orange reto of golden threads around His head, tie a rich reto around His waist, and place a rich reto over His shoulders. Then one should place various ornaments made of diamonds, pearls, gold and rubies on various parts of His body and adorn Him with a pearl necklace as well. After offering these clothes and ornaments, the various parts of God's body should be closely observed. A kumkum chāndlo should also be applied to God's forehead.
"During the four months of monsoon, one should perform puja imagining that God has returned from some village, His white clothes having become completely drenched; or that He had gone to bathe with the paramhansas in a river and has returned from there drenched. After removing His wet clothes, He should be offered deep orange garments to wear; and His forehead should be smeared with yellow sandalwood paste mixed with saffron.
"During summer, one should visualise God to be sitting either in an open place or in a flower garden. During winter and monsoon, one should visualise God to be seated in a fine medi, or inside a house. In particular, when offering God something to eat, only those foods - chewable, drinkable, lickable or suckable - which one likes to eat should be visualised for offering to God. Even if God does not like such foods, when offering items to Him, one should still visualise only those items that are relished by oneself. Also, incense, oil lamps, ārti and other articles should be offered to God as appropriate.
"In this manner, a devotee who offers puja in different ways according to the three different seasons increases his love for God, and his jiva benefits tremendously. Therefore, whoever has heard this discourse should imbibe it and daily perform themānsi pujā of God in the manner described. As a matter of fact, I have never talked about this before."
Shriji Mahārāj then spoke on another topic. He said, "When God and His Bhakta are pleased on a devotee, he should feel, 'It is my great fortune that God and His Bhaktaare pleased with me.' Also, when, for the purpose of teaching a lesson, they reprimand him, he should feel, 'It is my great fortune that they reprimand me; after all, it will help in removing my flaws.' In this way, one should be pleased even if reprimanded; one should not feel any grief in one's mind, nor get upset, nor even regard oneself as being very sinful. Indeed, one should always remain pleased. This attitude is also worthy of being imbibed."
GADHADA III-24: SIXTEEN SPIRITUAL ENDEAVOURS; VAIRĀGYA DUE TO GNĀN
On Āso vadi 12, Samvat 1885 [4 November 1828], Shriji Mahārāj was sitting in themandir of Shri Gopināthji in Dādā Khāchar's darbār in Gadhadā. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. At that time, an assembly of sādhus as well as devotees from various places had gathered before Him.
Thereupon Muktānand Swāmi asked Shriji Mahārāj, "The devotees of God remain in God's service in Akshardhām. What are the spiritual endeavours needed to earn such service?"
Shriji Mahārāj replied, "Shraddhā, swadharma, vairāgya, total control over the indriyas, non-violence, brahmacharya, keeping the company of sādhus, ātmā-realisation, unflinching bhakti to God coupled with the knowledge of His greatness, contentment, sincerity, compassion, austerities, treating those devotees of God who are senior to one in terms of virtues as gurus and also maintaining deep respect for them, maintaining a feeling of friendship towards those devotees of God who are one's equals, and treating those devotees of God who are junior to one as disciples as well as acting for their benefit - through these 16 spiritual endeavours, an ekāntik bhakta of God easily earns God's service in Akshardhām."
Shuk Muni then asked, "All of our sādhus observe religious vows. But what characteristic in a sādhu would enable us to be sure that that sādhu would never deviate from his dharma even in times of adversity?"
Shriji Mahārāj answered, "He whose attention is constantly focused on all of those mandates, major or minor, given by God, and who finds it extremely difficult to infringe any mandate; and who acts neither excessively nor in a lax manner regarding those mandates, should be known as one who would not fall from his dharma despite adverse circumstances."
Shriji Mahārāj then spoke out of compassion: "For a person to eradicate one's innate nature is indeed difficult. In spite of this, if one has realised Satsang to be the fulfiller of one's self-interest, then it is not difficult to do so. For example, the members of Dādā Khāchar's family have an interest in keeping Me here, so they do not retain any nature which I do not like. In this way, one's innate nature can be eradicated due to self-interest. It can also be eradicated out of fear, albeit not totally. Why? Because one may fear a person in the person's presence, but when that person is not present, one may no longer be fearful - just as a thief abandons his corrupt nature out of fear of the king.
"Furthermore, despite the fact that I have repeatedly fired harsh words and upset one who possesses some swabhāv or another, if one is not disheartened in any way at all, then I have such love for that person that that love remains effortlessly as it is, in the waking and dream states. Regardless of whatever happens, that love does not diminish.
"Moreover, of the various virtues possessed by devotees, I shall now narrate one admirable virtue in each. Dādā Khāchar, the virtue of faith; Rājbāi, the virtue of renunciation; Jivubāi, the virtue of shraddhā; Ladubāi, the virtue of desiring to please Me; Nityānand Swāmi, the virtue of desiring to please Me; Brahmānand Swāmi, the virtue of insisting that there should be no lapse at all in observing the disciplines of Satsang; Muktānand Swāmi, the virtues of desiring to please Me and having faith in Me; Somlā Khāchar, the virtue of always behaving consistently; Chaitanyānand Swāmi, the virtue of wishing to behave in such a manner that pleases Mahārāj in some way; Swayamprakāshānand Swāmi, the virtues of faith in God and realising His greatness; Jhinābhāi Thākor, the virtue of having awareness, lest he becomes attached to any object other than God; and Motā Ātmānand Swāmi, the virtue of ensuring that none of My commands are disobeyed." In this manner, Shriji Mahārāj narrated the virtues of many senior paramhansas and other devotees.
He then continued, "The three senior ladies of this place and Gopālānand Swāmi, Brahmānand Swāmi, Muktānand Swāmi, Nityānand Swāmi, Shuk Muni, Somlā Khāchar and Dādā Khāchar - all of you presently behave very well. However, if the four factors of place, time, company and action were to become unfavourable, then there is no doubt at all that your enthusiasm would not remain as it is now. However, if a person who has a greater degree of gnān were to be caught in the vishays by chance, he would break free from that attachment. What is that gnān? It is the understanding, 'I, the jiva, am like this; the body is like this; the relations of the body are like this; the nature of Prakruti,Purush, virāt, sutrātmā and avyākrut is like this; God is like this; and the abode of God is like this,' and so on. If one has a firm conviction of this gnān in one's heart, then thevairāgya that results is true vairāgya. Apart from that, any other form of vairāgya only superficially appears to be vairāgya; in fact, there is no strength in it. For example, the flame of an oil lamp is extinguished by the wind, whereas the vadvānal fire and the fire of lightning in the clouds is not extinguished by water; in fact, despite remaining in water itself, it continues to burn. In the same manner, vairāgya without gnān does not last when it encounters the vishays. On the other hand, vairāgya produced from gnān does not diminish despite encountering the vishays; it continues to burn like the vadvānal fire.
"It is precisely for the purpose of somehow instilling this gnān in your minds that I continuously deliver discourses. Because if a discourse eventually does truly inspire you, then this gnān will become instilled in you. Conversely, if a person does not understand this and instead harbours a sense of I-ness and my-ness by believing, 'This is my caste, this is my mother, this is my father, these are my relatives,' then he should be known to be an extremely ignorant person possessing a worldly perspective."
Having said this, Shriji Mahārāj again spoke out of compassion: "What is the reason behind a spiritual aspirant attaining noble virtues? Well, one develops an aversion for the world in proportion to the attachment one has for listening to the talks and discourses related to God; moreover, vicious natures such as lust, anger, avarice, etc., are also destroyed to that extent. Conversely, if someone is lazy in listening to those talks and discourses, then one should infer that he will not imbibe noble virtues. In fact, out of the nine types of bhakti mentioned in the scriptures, the bhakti of listening to spiritual discourses is considered to be the best. Therefore, one who possesses that form of bhakti will attain all of the various forms of bhakti up to and including profound, loving bhakti." Shriji Mahārāj delivered the discourse in this manner.
At mid-afternoon on that same day, when all of the paramhansas were seated for their meals in a line on the veranda outside the north-facing rooms of Dādā Khāchar'sdarbār, Shriji Mahārāj was sitting on a large, decorated cot that had been placed under the neem tree.
Thereupon Shriji Mahārāj said to the paramhansas, "One should not understand the greatness of female devotees in excess. Why? Because under the pretext of realising their greatness, one may constantly think of them, leading to them appearing in one's dreams. So, if one does understand their greatness, one should understand it collectively, by thinking, 'All of them are devotees of God.' But, one should not attempt to understand a particular one as being greater and another one being lesser. However, if one attempts to understand their greatness to a greater or lesser degree than this, then there is a great danger in that. Similarly, female devotees should also understand the greatness of male devotees collectively. If they do not realise this, then it is also a great danger for those females."
GADHADA III-25: PLEASING SHRIJI MAHĀRĀJ; A TRUE DEVOTEE OF GOD
On Kārtik sudi 10, Samvat 1885 [16 November 1828], Swāmi Shri Sahajānandji Mahārāj was sitting on a large, decorated cot 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 spoke out of compassion: "'Bhakti, upāsanā, service,shraddhā, firmness in observing dharma, and other spiritual endeavours related to God should all be performed without harbouring desires for any other fruits.' This fact is mentioned in the sacred scriptures, and it is true; but one should certainly harbour the following desire: 'May God become pleased with me through these endeavours.' That desire should be kept. If, on the other hand, a person does not keep such a desire and acts without any specific objective, then he should be known to possess tamogun. Therefore, one should develop the virtues of bhakti, upāsanā, etc. with the desire for fruits in the form of the pleasure of God. If a person nourishes any desire other than that, he will attain only fruits such as the four types of liberation1.
"Furthermore, it is not the case that God's pleasure is bestowed only on those who offerbhakti with various articles and not upon the poor. Someone may be poor, but if he offers water, leaves, fruits and flowers to God with shraddhā, that is enough to please Him. Why? Because God is extremely great. Just as a king rewards someone who composes even a single verse in his praise with a village, similarly, God also becomes gratified instantly."
Continuing, Shriji Mahārāj said, "Who can be called a true devotee of God? If some prolonged illness were to overtake a person's body, or if he receives neither food to eat nor any clothes to wear; in fact, regardless of the extent of pain or pleasure that come his way, if he still does not regress even slightly from the worship and bhakti of God,niyams, dharma or shraddhā, but on the contrary, progresses with time - then he is called a true devotee."
Then Rājbāi had a question asked to Shriji Mahārāj, "Mahārāj, which virtues please You and which flaws displease You?"
Shriji Mahārāj replied, "The following are the flaws of speech: Specifically, if someone wishes to behave in some special way, then he should notify Me only once by saying: 'Mahārāj, if You agree, then I shall behave like this.' But he should not repeatedly ask, 'Mahārāj, why are You not telling me whether I should behave like this or behave like that?' That I do not like. Also, I do not like a person who, despite knowing Me as hisIshtadev, repeatedly cross-questions My words. Nor do I like a person who, without being asked, interrupts Me while I am speaking to someone. Regarding the performance of pious actions such as meditating on God, observance of dharma, offering bhakti, etc., I do not like a person who throws the burden of such actions on God by thinking, 'Only if God wishes are these possible.' Nor do I like a person who thinks, 'I shall do this; and I shall do that,' and thereby relies solely on his own strength and not on the strength of God. Also, I extremely dislike a person who speaks inconsistently and coarsely. Nor do I like a person who feels a sense of shame or laziness when it comes to talking of God, engaging in spiritual discourses or singing devotional songs, and yet feels no shame or laziness in performing worldly activities. Also, I do not like a person who boasts of his virtue of renunciation or bhakti, or of anything else. I do not like a person who sits behind everyone else during an assembly instead of sitting as befits his own status. Moreover, when seniors are seated in an assembly, I do not like a person who forcibly pushes them aside to take his own place at the front of the assembly.
"In addition, I am pleased with female devotees who behave chastely by covering their own bodies and who, instead of keeping a wandering gaze, keep their gaze cast downwards when they walk. Many times, instead of doing My darshan with a fixed gaze, someone may forsake that darshan and look repeatedly in the direction of an approaching man or woman, or a dog walking by, or cattle walking by or in the direction of some noise. On such a person, I feel so much disgust that I feel, 'What can I do? If I had not become a sādhu, I would beat him in some way!' But that is not possible since beating someone is extremely inappropriate for a sādhu. I also do not like a person who conceals the truth, i.e., who does not disclose to an appropriate person the disturbing thoughts that arise in his mind. These three things are extremely detrimental: egotism, anger, and being suppressed by others, i.e., not revealing what is in one's mind due to the suppression of others. Also, if devotees become disrespectful because they view each other as equals and do not maintain respect for one another, that is extremely inappropriate as well."
GADHADA III-26: THE SANT WHO SUPPRESSES HIS MIND AND INDRIYAS
On Kārtik sudi 11, Samvat 1885 [17 November 1828], Swāmi Shri Sahajānandji Mahārāj was sitting in the mandir of Shri Gopināthji in Dādā Khāchar's darbār in Gadhadā. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. At that time, an assembly ofparamhansas as well as devotees from various places had gathered before Him.
Thereupon Shriji Mahārāj said, "What are the characteristics of a Sant who is worthy of being worshipped on par with God? Well, such a Sant suppresses the actions of māyā'sgunas - the indriyas, the antahkaran, etc.; but he himself does not get suppressed by their actions. In addition to this, he only performs activities related to God; he is staunch in his observance of the five religious vows; and believing himself to be brahmarup, he worships Purushottam Bhagwān. Such a Sant should not be thought of as a human being, nor should he be thought of as a deity, because such behaviour is not possible for either humans or deities. Indeed, even though that Sant appears to be human, he is still worthy of being worshipped on par with God. Therefore, whoever desires to attain liberation should serve such a Sant. Also, females should serve females possessing such virtuous qualities."
Then Ātmānand Swāmi asked Shriji Mahārāj, "Regardless of how ordinary one may be, as long as one stays within the limits of the vows of this Satsang, one will not become bound by the panchvishays. Please narrate the characteristics of a person who cannot become bound by the panchvishays, even though he may happen to leave the Satsangfellowship due to unfavourable circumstances."
Shriji Mahārāj explained, "If a person has dharma predominant in his mind; and if he has the qualities of an āstik in that he firmly believes, 'One who performs pious or impious karmas in this realm will undoubtedly receive the respective fruits of thosekarmas in the realm beyond'; and if he, having such firm beliefs, is concerned about his own reputation by thinking, 'If I do something immoral, what will people think of me?', then he will not become bound by any object - women or others - wherever he goes. For example, Mayārām Bhatt, Mulji Brahmachāri, Nishkulānand Swāmi and those of that calibre will never falter even if they encounter women, wealth, etc.
"However, someone who is like this may, firstly, have the attributes of false ātmā-realisation in thinking, 'I am the ātmā; I am Brahma; so I am not affected by good or bad actions. I am absolutely detached from everything.' Secondly, he may falsely understand the greatness of God; i.e., he may talk a great deal about that greatness, by saying, 'The greatness of God is so profound! So what harm is there in transgressingdharma?' In such a person, these two types of flaws could become major obstacles in the observance of dharma. Therefore, it is better if he has genuine ātmā-realisation, he thoroughly understands the greatness of God, and he firmly observes - with understanding - the various types of dharma, such as the vows of non-lust, non-avarice, non-taste, non-attachment, non-egotism, etc., in order to please God. Such a person believes, 'If I observe dharma, God will be extremely pleased with me, and if I deviate from dharma in any way, then God will be extremely displeased with me.' If he has this firm conviction within, then that devotee will never falter from dharma in any way. On the other hand, if a person does not have this kind of understanding, then regardless of how much gnān he may have, or how much bhakti he may offer, he may still deviate from dharma or become bound by worldly objects. This is a fundamental truth."
Shriji Mahārāj again addressed the assembly out of compassion: "I do not like vanity. That vanity may be of one's virtues of bhakti, renunciation, or vairāgya; of one's attainment of the attributes of Brahma; of one's understanding; or of one's observance of the five religious vows. I do not like these or any other forms of vanity. Also, I do not like hypocrisy. What is hypocrisy? Well, although one may not have much faith, bhaktior dharma, to outwardly pretend to possess them to a great extent in order to look pious in front of others is hypocrisy. That, I do not like. Nor do I like any person who, while worshipping God, eliminates the distinction between himself and God. I also do not like a person who behaves liberally; i.e., after taking a vow, he adheres to it occasionally and relaxes from it occasionally. In addition, I do not like a person who, having extensively understood the profound glory of God, considers himself to be extremely insignificant and does not believe his true form to be the ātmā, which is distinct from the body.
"Now I shall describe the type of person I do like. Such a person thoroughly understands the greatness of God. He understands his ātmā - which is vyatirek from the body - to be brahmarup. He firmly observes dharma and also staunchly engages in thebhakti of God. Despite having such virtues, if there is some devotee in the Satsangfellowship who does not understand anything yet has faith in God, then the former would consider the latter to be great and himself to be insignificant in comparison to that devotee. When speaking, such a person never reveals even the slightest pride of his wisdom. I am extremely pleased with a person who behaves in this manner."
Having delivered this discourse, Shriji Mahārāj returned to His residence.
GADHADA III-27: NOT KEEPING ANY OBSTINACY
On Kārtik sudi Punam, Samvat 1885 [21 November 1828], Swāmi Shri Sahajānandji Mahārāj was sitting in the mandir of Shri Gopināthji in Dādā Khāchar's darbār in Gadhadā. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. At that time, an assembly ofparamhansas as well as devotees from various places had gathered before Him.
Thereupon Shriji Mahārāj said, "The pleasures associated with sights, sounds, smells, tastes and touch are all found to co-exist in one place - the blissful and divine form ofPurushottam Bhagwān. When we have the darshan of that form of God, we can enjoy the bliss of that beauty, as well as the bliss of the other four types of vishays, i.e., sounds, touch, etc. That gratification occurs simultaneously. With worldly vishays, however, when one indulges in one vishay, one receives the gratification of only thatvishay, but not of the others. Thus the pleasures of worldly vishays are found separately. Moreover, those pleasures are futile, perishable and ultimately the cause of extreme misery. But in God, one enjoys the bliss of all of the vishays simultaneously. That bliss is extremely divine; it is eternal and imperishable. Therefore, a spiritual aspirant should develop vairāgya towards the worldly vishays and become totally attached to the divine and blissful form of God."
Shriji Mahārāj then continued, "If a devotee has an intense yearning to engage in thebhakti of God and to associate with the Sant, then regardless of any swabhāv that he may possess, he eradicates it and behaves according to the Sant's will and command. Even if that swabhāv is such that it has become bound to the chaitanya, one who has an intense desire to do satsang will eradicate it." With that, He narrated His own story: "Initially, My nature was like that of a renunciant, but because I had an intense yearning for the darshan of Shri Rāmānand Swāmi, I lived according to Muktānand Swāmi's instructions, not according to My personal preferences."
Thereafter Shriji Mahārāj said, "The details of the kind of obstinacy a devotee should and should not keep are as follows: One type of obstinacy is observing the vows of non-lust and other such vows; the other type of obstinacy is behaving with the feeling that one will be able to sleep only if one's place is here and not if it is elsewhere. The latter and other innumerable forms of obstinacy that are the result of trivial swabhāvs should not be considered the same as the former type of obstinacy. The obstinacy of observing religious vows is as essential as one's own life; it is extremely beneficial. That type of obstinacy should be kept with an understanding of its importance. But if the latter type of obstinacy, which is due to swabhāvs, is formed, it should be thought of as worthless; and if the Sant asks one to abandon it, it should be abandoned. The former type of obstinacy, however, should not be abandoned.
"To consider these two forms of obstinacy as equivalent is foolishness. For example, if a child has almonds in his fist, and if someone attempts to make him give them up, he will not. Furthermore, if he has a fist full of rupees or a fist full of gold coins, and if someone attempts to make him give them up, he will not give them up. Thus, it can be said that the child considers the almonds, the rupees and the gold coins to be of equal value. Therefore, the child can be considered to be ignorant.
"If someone has almonds in his hand, and a thief comes and threatens the person, saying, 'Put them down, or I will cut off your head with this sword,' then one who is wise will give them away, but one who is foolish will not. Similarly, between the two types of obstinacy, one should realise which is significant and which is insignificant. If someone does not understand this and considers both to be equivalent, then he should be known to have a swabhāv of obstinacy and to be arrogant. If such a person does observe religious vows because of that obstinacy, and if he remains in the Satsang fellowship in this manner till the end, then it is all well and good; but one cannot have complete faith in him. Why? Because if he is offended by some remarks, or if his self-importance is not maintained, then he will not remain as he is. On the other hand, one who offers bhaktito God and observes religious vows with obstinacy is called a rājarshi. Even greater, one who offers bhakti to God while observing religious vows with the intention of pleasing God is called a brahmarshi and a sādhu. There is a similar difference in the fruits of the two as well."
Continuing, Shriji Mahārāj explained, "Egotism, jealousy and anger - these three vicious natures are much more detrimental than even lust. Why? Because the Sant may have compassion on a lustful person, but he will not have compassion on an egotistical person. In addition, jealousy and anger are evolved from egotism. Therefore, egotism is a major vice. Furthermore, one does not fall from Satsang due to lust as one does due to egotism. For example, there are many householder devotees in our Satsang - and they continue to remain in Satsang. So, I always have an intense aversion for these three: egotism, jealousy and anger. You will find this verified in My spoken words which have been written down. Also, if you reflect upon them, then you will realise this to be true as well. Therefore, one should eradicate egotism by realising the greatness of God."
Again, Shriji Mahārāj said, "What is the conviction of God? Well, consider how it is in worldly life. Since childhood, one has the conviction of one's parents, caste, sub-caste,āshram, gender, as well as the conviction that this is an animal, this is a man, this is water, this is fire, this is the earth, this is the wind, this is the sky, and so on. All this is due to the scriptures. Even if one has not heard the scriptures, one has been convinced by principles prevalent in society - which themselves were derived from the scriptures. Similarly, the attributes of the Sant - being free of lust, avarice, egotism, taste, attachment, etc. - are also described in the scriptures. The Sant who possesses these attributes has a direct relationship with God. Therefore, one should develop the conviction of God based on his words. In fact, to have firm faith in the words of the Santis itself the conviction of God."
Thereafter Nāth Bhakta of Vadodarā asked Shriji Mahārāj a question: "Do the relatives of a devotee of God who has firm faith in God attain liberation due to their relationship with that devotee?"
Shriji Mahārāj replied, "If the relatives or ancestors of the devotee of God have affection for him, then yes, they will attain liberation; otherwise, they will not. In fact, even if one who is not related to that devotee has affection for him, then he will also benefit. Why? Because at the time of one's death, one may remember that devotee whose vrutti is constantly fixed on God. Thus, by remembering that devotee, one attains liberation."
Shriji Mahārāj then said, "I talk about the nature of the ātmā and about the nature of God; yet, by merely talking about them one does not experience their bliss as it really is. Their true bliss can only be experienced in samādhi, or after one leaves the body; but it cannot be experienced by merely talking about it. For example, the pleasure of looking at an attractive object can only be enjoyed by the eyes. If someone were to praise that pleasure with his mouth by saying, 'I saw a very beautiful object,' then the pleasure experienced by the mouth is not the same as that experienced by the eyes. Similarly, one may attempt to praise with words the pleasure of sounds heard by the ears, fragrances smelt by the nose, sensations felt by the skin, and flavours tasted by the tongue, by saying, 'It was an extremely pleasant smell; it had a delicious taste; it felt very good; it sounded nice' - but one does not experience pleasure through words as one experiences the respective pleasures through the respective indriyas. Similarly, the bliss and the happiness of God which one experiences, as well as the bliss and the happiness of the ātmā which one experiences through samādhi or after leaving the body cannot be experienced by merely talking about them. However, if one doesshravan, manan and nididhyās on these two topics, then one attains realisation. Then, after attaining realisation, one enjoys the same experience and bliss as one does from these two in samādhi. Therefore, after listening to talks concerning these two, one should do manan and nididhyās on those talks."
GADHADA III-28: FALLING FROM THE PATH OF GOD
On Kārtik vadi 1, Samvat 1885 [22 November 1828], Swāmi Shri Sahajānandji Mahārāj was sitting in the mandir of Shri Gopināthji 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 Shriji Mahārāj said, "There are two ways in which a person falls from thebhakti of God: One is by listening to shushka-Vedānta scriptures, whereby he may consider the form of Shri Krishna Bhagwān and other forms of God to be false - just as he considers all other forms to be false. Such a shushka-Vedānti should be considered to be extremely ignorant. The other way of falling is by believing, 'If I worship God, then I will enjoy women, food, drink and other pleasures of the panchvishays in Golok andVaikunth.' Then, due to the desires of those pleasures, he forgets even God. The fool, with his distorted mind, believes, 'If that enjoyment was not true, then God would not associate with women like Rādhā, Lakshmi, etc., in that abode. So that pleasure is also true.' But he does not realise God to be absolutely self-fulfilled and content within His own ātmā. In actual fact, such activities of God are for the purpose of giving bliss to His own devotees. Therefore, one should engage in bhakti together with gnān and vairāgya.
"One who has understood the greatness of God realises that only God is all-blissful, whereas the pleasures derived from the panchvishays have only a slight fraction of the bliss of God; thus he would never become attached to any object. The Moksh-dharmaalso mentions: 'Compared to the bliss of the abode of God, the pleasures of the other realms are like narak.' This is the understanding that a devotee of God should have. If he does not have this understanding, he will fall away from God in the two aforementioned ways."
Thereupon Surā Khāchar asked Shriji Mahārāj, "Even after resolutely forming the conviction of God and the Sant as they truly are, what is the reason for someone suffering a setback?"
Shriji Mahārāj replied, "There was some deficiency in that person's conviction from the moment that he first established it. What was that deficiency? Well, if someone wishes to indulge in savoury food due to a desire for tasting delicious food, and if God or theSant denounce it, then he will suffer a setback. Or, if disturbing thoughts of lust still remain, and they speak against it; or if avarice remains, and if they have him renounce his avarice by telling him, 'Give away your wealth, property, land and farm to someone,' then he will be unable to follow this command. Consequently, he suffers a setback. Or if a person has egotism and the Sant denounces it and insults him, then he suffers a setback due to that as well. Therefore, a person suffers a setback due to the faults that still remain in him, even though he has the conviction of God. But if one eradicates one's faults at the outset - when one establishes one's conviction - then one will not suffer a setback. At present, if those who possess these faults thoughtfully introspect, they will be able to realise, 'I am weak in this aspect. So if I am asked to follow such a command, I will fall back from Satsang.' In this way, they can understand themselves comprehensively."
Thereafter, Shriji Mahārāj asked Brahmānand Swāmi, Shuk Muni and Surā Khāchar a question: "What flaw do you possess which would have you suffer a setback?"
The three of them answered, "Mahārāj, we have the flaw of egotism. As a result, if asādhu of equal status insults us, we become somewhat disturbed."
Hearing this, Shriji Mahārāj commented, "Then I ask that if one has realised God with the knowledge of His greatness as mentioned in 'Dyupataya eva te na yayur-antam anantatayā... ||1' then how can one keep egotism, jealousy or anger towards a sādhu of such a God? If one still does, then there is a flaw in one's understanding. For example, if one understands the authority of the Governor sahib - that he is the king of the whole world and that he is extremely powerful - then even if one of his pauper-like servants were to come, even a great king would obey his orders and act according to however he is told. Why? Because the king has understood, 'He is the servant of the powerful Governor sahib.' After all, egotism does not persist before one who is more powerful than oneself. Similarly, if one has understood God to be the master of all divine powers and wealth, then how can one retain egotism before a sādhu?"
Brahmānand Swāmi agreed, "Mahārāj, what you are saying is correct. If a person has realised God and the knowledge of His greatness, then he will never develop egotism, jealousy or anger towards a sādhu."
Shriji Mahārāj continued, "Just look, Uddhavji was so great and so intelligent! Yet, because he had understood the greatness of God, he asked to be reborn as a vine so that he could be touched by the dust from the feet of the gopis who were so attached to God. Thus it is stated:
Āsām-aho charana-renu-jushām-aham syām vrundāvane kimapi gulmalataushadheenām | Ya dustyajam svajanam-āryapatham cha hitvā bhejur-mukunda-padaveem shrutibhir-vimrugyām ||2 Aho bhāgyam-aho bhāgyam nanda-gopa-vrajaukasām |
Yan-mitram paramānandam purnam brahma sanātanam ||3
Because he had understood the greatness of God, even Brahmā spoke in this manner. Therefore, if a person realises the greatness of God and a sādhu in this way, egotism, jealousy and anger can no longer persist. Moreover, he would behave as a servant of servants before them; and no matter however much they insult him, he would never think of leaving their company and going away. Also, he would never feel in his mind, 'How long should I tolerate this? I will just stay at home and engage in worship there.' Thus, if one understands God's greatness in such a manner, egotism is eradicated."
Then Shriji Mahārāj explained, "If a devotee of God were placed on a shuli due to somekarma of his, and if at that time I were standing next to him, the devotee would still not think, 'It would be good if God would free me from the pain of this shuli.' In this manner, he is not concerned about his own physical comforts. Instead, he bears the hardships that befall him. As a result, God becomes extremely pleased with such a devotee who is free of all expectations."
Shriji Mahārāj then said, "I shall now tell you who attains the bliss related to God. First, consider the following analogy: Water is the very life of a fish. As long as it remains in water, it is able to move, swim and perform all its activities; but the moment it leaves the water, it loses its liveliness and dies. Similarly, if a person believes the panchvishays to be his lifeline and believes them to be a source of happiness, then when he is separated from them, he becomes almost like a dead person. Such a person can never attain the bliss of God. In fact, only a person who does not believe the panchvishays to be his lifeline experiences God's bliss; only he is able to indulge in it; and only he attains it."
GADHADA III-29: TWO TWENTY-YEAR-OLD DEVOTEES OF GOD
On the night of Posh sudi 2, Samvat 1885 [7 January 1829], Shriji Mahārāj was sitting on a large, decorated cot that had been placed on the platform in front of the medi in Dādā Khāchar's darbār in Gadhadā. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. At that time, an assembly of sādhus as well as devotees from various places had gathered before Him.
Thereupon Shriji Mahārāj asked Shuk Muni a question: "Suppose there are twosatsangis. Both are twenty years of age, and both possess the virtues of faith, affectionate bhakti, vairāgya and dharma to an equal extent. But due to his prārabdha, one of them married, whereas the other did not find anyone and so remained asānkhya-yogi. He also had a desire to marry, but he could not find someone. Since neither of them had intense vairāgya from the beginning, both have an acute desire for indulging in the vishays. The question, then, is whose acute desire will be calmed, the householder's or the sānkhya-yogi's? When replying, keep in mind that the Vedas state, 'Only one who has intense vairāgya should renounce from the stage of thebrahmacharya āshram; whereas one whose vairāgya is feeble should become a householder for the purpose of diminishing his intense desire to indulge in the vishays. Only then should he accept the vānprasth āshram, and thereafter the sannyās āshram.' Therefore, answer carefully."
Shuk Muni attempted to answer the question but was unable to do so satisfactorily.
Answering the question Himself, Shriji Mahārāj said, "The householder is good, and the other who is a sānkhya-yogi is bad. Why? Because he lacks intense vairāgya. As a result, he does not realise that the vishays are vain and false. Also, for the same reason, he has no firmness in his conviction of his self being ātmā. For this reason, if he happens to leave the Satsang fellowship and encounter vishays, he will become attached to them; if he does not come across vishays, however, he will be obliged to come back into Satsang. On the other hand, the householder will progress even if he has the darshan of a sādhu once every six months. Therefore, it is not appropriate for one who is deficient in vairāgya to renounce; it is only appropriate for someone who has intense vairāgya. If someone who is deficient in vairāgya does renounce, then his renunciation will not endure throughout his life. After one year, two years, or after even ten years, difficulties will definitely arise in his renunciation."
Thereupon Shuk Muni raised a doubt. He questioned, "Mahārāj, if the one whosevairāgya is weak listens to the greatness of God from a sādhu and ponders over it in his mind, then will he not develop intense vairāgya? In fact, only very few people - due to their prārabdha - have intense vairāgya from the beginning. Generally, though, we see that a person develops vairāgya even though he did not possess it initially. How can this be accounted for?"
Shriji Mahārāj explained, "The answer to that is that one can never develop intensevairāgya merely by contemplating by oneself, or by any other means for that matter. However, if, in the same way that one has affection for God, one develops deep affection for the great Sant who possesses the four qualities of dharma, gnān, vairāgyaand bhakti, then all of the actions one performs - seeing, listening, talking, etc. - will be performed according to the wishes of that great Sant whom one has attained, i.e., one will not do anything which is against the Sant's wish. In one's mind, one constantly fears behaving contrary to the wishes of that Sant; one feels, 'If I do not behave according to his wish, then he will not maintain affection for me.' That is why such a person will constantly behave according to the Sant's wishes. Therefore, if someone has developed such attachment for the Sant, then even if he does not have vairāgya, his renunciation will endure till the end.
"Just see in our Satsang fellowship, since all of the males, females and paramhansasare attached to Me, all the other females observe religious vows to the same extent as the two or three senior women. Why? Because in their mind, they realise, 'If we do not remain alert and observe the religious vows, the love which Mahārāj has for us will not remain, and He will become displeased.' The paramhansas also behave in the same manner. In fact, it is the same for all of the other satsangis, brahmachāris and pārshads. All of the male and female devotees living far and wide are also alert in observing the religious vows; they too feel, 'If we do not behave properly, Mahārāj will become displeased.' Thus, all of them staunchly observe dharma out of affection for Me, even though they may possess vairāgya to a greater or lesser degree.
"However, when I recently fell ill in Panchālā, if something serious had happened to Me, then everyone's firmness would not have remained as it is now. At such a time, one who has intense vairāgya can remain within dharma; or one who has affectionately attached one's jiva to a person who has intense vairāgya can remain within dharma; or one who keeps contact with Satsang and, realising God to be antaryāmi, behaves according to the niyams that have been prescribed for him can remain within dharma. Except for these, others cannot remain within dharma. Thus, what I have just explained is the only answer to the question I had asked."
GADHADA III-30: CONSTANT AWARENESS OF FIVE THOUGHTS
On Posh sudi Punam, Samvat 1885 [19 January 1829], Swāmi Shri Sahajānandji Mahārāj was sitting in the mandir of Shri Gopināthji in Dādā Khāchar's darbār in Gadhadā. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. At that time, an assembly of munisas well as devotees from various places had gathered before Him.
Thereupon Shriji Mahārāj said, "Two beliefs which I like, and by which My mind becomes pacified, are as follows: First, I like one who is firmly convinced that there is a mass of divine light which is chaitanya, and that the form of Shri Purushottam Bhagwān forever resides at the centre of that mass of light; and with that belief, he worships and offers bhakti to that God. On the other hand, I do not like one who believes in and worships only the chaitanya divine light; nor do I like one who does not believe God to forever possess a form; nor do I like one who does not worship God. Secondly, I like one who endeavours in austerities, yoga, vairāgya, developing an aversion towards thepanchvishays, etc., in order to please God - without any form of pretentiousness. Seeing such a person, My mind becomes pleased, and I feel, 'He should be congratulated for behaving in that manner.'
"In addition, I have constant awareness of these five thoughts: First, I am certainly going to die and leave this body; it is imminent. In fact, I firmly feel, 'I am going to die at this second, at this very moment.' Such awareness remains in times of happiness and distress, pleasure and displeasure, in fact, amidst all activities. That is the type ofvairāgya I possess. The second thought is the constant awareness that even though death is certain, this much work has already been accomplished, and this much work is left, which I would like to complete. The third is the thought of whether or not desires for the panchvishays have been eradicated from My mind. In fact, I feel, 'If they have been eradicated, then why does activity regarding that vishay still occur? What if maybe they have not been eradicated?' In this manner, I am constantly suspicious of the mind. The fourth is the concern of whether or not Muktānand Swāmi and the other senior sādhusand senior devotees have eradicated their desires for the panchvishays. In fact, I am constantly aware of looking into everyone's hearts to observe, 'This person's worldly desires have been removed, but this person's have not.' Finally, the fifth thought is that if I become dejected, then who knows where I would run away to! In fact, I would probably leave My body. Therefore, I believe I should not become dejected. Why? Because it is good that by My association all of these men, women and paramhansashappily sit to engage in the bhakti of God. Seeing them engaged in such bhakti, I become extremely pleased in My mind. In fact, I feel, 'Everyone must die someday, but to perform bhakti in this manner is the only great benefit of living.' I am constantly aware of this."
In this manner, Shriji Mahārāj cited His own behaviour as an example for the enlightenment of His devotees, while in actual fact, He Himself is the manifest form of Shri Purushottam Nārāyan.
GADHADA III-31: A METHOD OF MEDITATION USING THE EXAMPLE OF A SHADOW
On the evening of Mahā sudi 4, Samvat 1885 [7 February 1829], Shriji Mahārāj was sitting on a large, decorated cot on the veranda outside the west-facing rooms of Dādā Khāchar's darbār in Gadhadā. He had tied a white feto around His head and was wearing a white khes. He had also covered Himself with a red-bordered, white, British cloth. At that time, some of the paramhansas were singing devotional songs to the accompaniment of musical instruments, while other paramhansas as well as devotees from various places had gathered before Him in an assembly.
After the paramhansas sang the devotional song 'Hari mere hāralaki lakari...1', Shriji Mahārāj requested, "Please sing 'Jamunāke teera thādo...2'." The paramhansas then began singing that devotional song. In the meantime, Shriji Mahārāj sat contemplating.
Then He interrupted, "Please stop singing, and allow Me to talk to you." Continuing, He said, "What I am about to reveal to you is not much, but it can be very beneficial for those who practise meditation. In fact, I have never revealed this matter before." Then closing His gentle eyes, He began thinking, and thereafter said, "There is a mass of divine light that is like countless millions of moons, suns and flames of fire. That mass of light appears to be like an ocean. The form of Purushottam Bhagwān resides within that luminous, brahmarup abode of God, and He Himself assumes an avatār from that form.
"What is that God like? Well, He transcends both the perishable and the imperishable; He is the cause of all causes; and countless millions of aksharrup muktas worship His holy feet. Out of compassion, that very same God is manifest and present before your eyes in an incarnated form for the purpose of granting ultimate liberation to jivas. Therefore, there is a great similarity between the form residing in the abode of God and this incarnate form of Shri Krishna.
"The vision of a person who meditates on this human form of Shri Krishna develops extreme vairāgya for all charming sights other than God and remains engrossed only in the charm of God. Then, he does not notice even the slightest difference between the manifest form of God and the form in His abode. The appearance and age of that form, and the appearance and age of this form will appear similar. In addition, the height and build of that form will appear to be exactly the same as that of this form; not even the slightest difference can be discerned between that form and this form. Indeed, there appears to be a total oneness between them. In this manner, there is not even the slightest difference between that form and this form. In fact, both are one.
"When one meditates on that manifest form outwardly, in front of the eyes, there is not the slightest difference between that form and this form. But, if the meditator looks at that same form inwardly, within his eyes, then that same form does not appear to be the same as before. In this case, it becomes the same size as the pupil of the eye. Thereafter, when the meditator introspects, and meditates and looks inward at the point of his throat and below, he does not see that same form as the two forms he saw before. He sees that same form as being extremely large, extremely tall, extremely fat, and extremely frightening. For example, the shadow of a man formed by the sun at noon would be almost the same length as the man's body. But when that same sun sets, the shadow becomes very elongated - it does not remain the same length as theman's body. Similarly, the form of God also becomes as large as mentioned previously. Then when the person sees that form within the buddhi, which resides in the heart, and within his own jiva within the buddhi, he sees the form as being the size of a thumb. It appears to have two arms or four arms, but he does not see it in the three ways that he saw before. Then, inwardly, the meditator sees the form to transcend his jiva and sees it in the midst of a mass of divine light which is like that of countless millions of suns, moons and flames of fire. Also, he sees that form to be just like the form that he saw before his eyes; he does not discern even the slightest difference between the two.
"Thus, the same form that is in Akshardhām - which is gunātit - is manifest. There is no difference between the two. Just as the form in the abode is gunātit, the human form is also gunātit. The difference which was noticed earlier was, in fact, due to the gunas of the different locations within the body; i.e., in the eyes there is sattvagun; in the throat there is rajogun; even the jiva, which resides within the buddhi, is full of gunas."
After delivering this discourse, Shriji Mahārāj said, "Please continue singing the devotional song which you were singing earlier."
In this manner, Shriji Mahārāj revealed Himself as Purushottam using the non-manifest form of God as an example.
GADHADA III-32: COMMITTING SINS UNDER THE PRETEXT OF KNOWING GOD'S GREATNESS
On Mahā sudi 5, Samvat 1885 [8 February 1829], Swāmi Shri Sahajānandji Mahārāj was sitting on a large, decorated cot 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, the singer-paramhansas were singing devotional songs related to the spring season, while other munis as well as devotees from various places had gathered before Him in an assembly.
Thereupon Shriji Mahārāj asked Muktānand Swāmi and the other sādhus, "Please explain the meaning of the verse 'Vishayā vinivartante nirāhārasya dehinaha... ||1'."
Shriji Mahārāj then added, "With reference to that verse, I have formed the conviction that one who is in his youth should reduce his diet and should eat and behave moderately. After all, when one's diet is reduced, physical strength also diminishes. Only then can the indriyas be overcome; otherwise, they cannot. Having done that, if a person enthusiastically engages his mind in the nine types of bhakti of God, and himself lovingly engages in bhakti, then he will remain in the Satsang fellowship till the end. But if he does not behave in this manner, he will surely succumb to his indriyas and, sooner or later, he will fall from Satsang. Even one who has mastered samādhi, like Govardhan, is afraid of this; so what can be said for others?
"However, one's diet cannot be controlled by merely observing several fasts consecutively. That only leads to one's desires and diet increasing, because when one breaks a fast, one tends to eat twice as much. But if a person begins to reduce his diet gradually, it can be controlled. For example, even though the clouds cause rain to fall in tiny drops, water still collects in a large quantity. Similarly, one should control one's diet gradually. Consequently, one's indriyas will also be controlled. Then, if one lovingly engages in bhakti, one will remain in Satsang till the end. This is a fact."
Shriji Mahārāj then said, "How does a true devotee of God understand God's greatness? Well, he believes, 'God, who possesses a definite form, forever resides in His luminous Akshardhām. He is the cause and controller of everything, the antaryāmiwithin all and the supreme master of countless millions of brahmānds. Moreover, His form is divine, blissful, and free from the gunas of māyā.' Understanding the manifest God in this way, he believes that with the exception of God, all other worldly objects are absolutely vain and perishable. In addition, he has love only for God, and he engages in the nine types of bhakti. He also believes, 'Kāl, māyā, Brahmā, Shiv, Surya, Chandra, etc., are powerful, yet even they act according to the commands of that extremely great God.' Understanding this, he always behaves within the disciplines of dharmaestablished by God in order to please Him; never does he transgress those disciplines.
"On the other hand, a person who has a corrupted mind believes, 'Such a great God is the uplifter of the wretched and the redeemer of sinners. So why worry about slightly breaching the disciplines of dharma? After all, God is capable of granting liberation.' In this manner, he does not hesitate in committing sins under the pretext of knowing God's greatness. Such a person should be considered wicked and sinful. Such a person, even though he may superficially appear to be a devotee, should not be considered a devotee, and one should not remain in his company. Only a person who has the understanding described previously should be considered to be a devotee, and only his company should be kept."
GADHADA III-33: NOT ALLOWING THE MIND TO BECOME AFFECTED BY FOUR THINGS
On Fāgun sudi 11, Samvat 1885 [16 March 1829], Swāmi Shri Sahajānandji Mahārāj was sitting in the mandir of Shri Gopināthji 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.
Then, addressing all of the paramhansas, Shriji Mahārāj said, "In the Satsangfellowship, there are only a few devotees whose mind would not be affected by wealth, property, women, children, etc., and who would not develop faith in those who fulfill the desires related to those things. In fact, there cannot be many devotees who are like this." Saying this, Shriji Mahārāj continued, "This Muktānand Swāmi and Gopalanand Swāmi are like that, because in no way would they become impressed by anyone, no matter how great he may be - even if he were to show miracles.
"What are the characteristics of a person who will not be influenced by anyone? Well, such a person believes, 'I am the ātmā, which is distinct from the body; I am luminous and characterised by pure existence. Moreover, the manifest form of God constantly resides within my self. Except for the form of God, all worldly forms are asatya and full of countless flaws.' A person who has such vairāgya and who thoroughly understands the greatness of God will never harbour any kind of doubts in his mind. But having said that, that understanding is very difficult to cultivate. Because even though these twosādhus are so great, if they were to receive an abundance of honour, or if heaps of rupees and gold coins were to be placed before them, or if they were to encounter attractive women, then even though they are renunciants, they would not be able to maintain their integrity. In fact, if they do encounter those objects, then it is doubtful whether they would remain on par with even the lowest of our renunciants. Why? Because the very association of those objects is such. For example, see how pious all of us sitting here are. However, if we were to drink bottles of liquor, we would not remain so composed. Similarly, the association of those objects certainly has an effect on a person. Therefore, only if one does not associate with those objects can one be saved from them. In fact, even before one encounters them, one should be cautious, lest one encounters them. Moreover, it is a well-known fact of the scriptures that only God is unaffected by their association. That is why it has been stated: 'Rushim nārāyanam-rute... ||1' as well as '...Ye'nye svataha parihrutād-api bibhyati sma ||2'."
Thereafter Shriji Mahārāj said, "Who can be called an ekāntik bhakta of Vāsudev Bhagwān? Well, one who possesses the qualities of swadharma, gnān, vairāgya, and unparalleled bhakti towards Vāsudev Bhagwān coupled with knowledge of his greatness can be called an ekāntik bhakta.
"Furthermore, regarding such a person's ultimate fate, it is said that he 'enters' Vāsudev Bhagwān. But what is meant by 'entering'? Well, that devotee has affection for the divine form of Vāsudev Bhagwān, who dwells within a mass of divine light. Due to that affection, he has constant awareness of the form of Vāsudev Bhagwān in his mind, and he behaves as if he is infatuated by that form. Remaining in that state, he also engages in the service of Vāsudev Bhagwān outwardly. For example, even though Lakshmiji remains in the heart of Vāsudev Bhagwān symbolically and through her profound love, she also outwardly serves him in the form of a female. The 'entering' of an ekāntik bhakta into Vāsudev Bhagwān should be understood in a similar manner.
"Even at present, the attachment a devotee has for the ten types of bhakti - engaging in discourses related to God, singing devotional songs, chanting His holy name, etc. - as well as the attachment he has for swadharma, vairāgya, ātmā-realisation, keeping the company of the Sant and realising the greatness of God is such that he can in no way do without them. For example, one who is addicted to opium cannot live without it. Even though that opium is extremely bitter, a person who is addicted to it cannot live without it. Or, if a person is addicted to alcohol, then even though his throat burns whenever he drinks alcohol, he cannot live without it. Even if someone were to offer him many rupees he would not accept them, because his addiction is more dear to him. Why? Because that vice has become ingrained in his jiva. Similarly, if a person was addicted to thebhakti of God and other such activities, then even if he remains under the influence of any type of bad company, he would not be able to live without engaging in those devotional activities. Moreover, his mind would not be pleased in engaging in any other activities. Such a devotee of God whose jiva has become engrossed in God's bhaktiand other such activities, and who is extremely eager to perform only those activities, can also be said to have 'entered' Vāsudev Bhagwān.
"So what are the characteristics of such a devotee of God? Well, except for the service of God, if he does not wish for even the four types of liberation3, how can he desire anything else? Such a person should be known as an ekāntik bhakta because he has no desire for anything. A person who is not like this, at times, enjoys engaging in thebhakti of God; but if he encounters evil company, he will forget bhakti and begin to behave immorally. Such a person should be known to be a fake devotee and a person who believes his self to be the body. He is not a true devotee and cannot be trusted."
Then Shriji Mahārāj continued, "If a devotee of God is vulnerable to women, wealth,swabhāvs and the belief that one is the body, then even if he is engaged in the bhakti of God, his bhakti cannot be trusted; he will surely encounter hindrances in it. Why? Because if at some time he happens to come across women or wealth, then there will be no stability in his bhakti, and he will become engrossed in them. Also, if a person believes his self to be the body, then when he suffers due to some illness, or if he is unable to obtain food and clothing, or if a command to observe a difficult religious vow is given, then again, his bhakti will be disturbed. In fact, he will become frustrated and will not be able to think; he will begin to behave immorally. Also, if he has a certainswabhāv, and if the Sant reprimands him instead of allowing him to behave according to his swabhāv, i.e., makes him behave contrary to it, then also he will become disturbed. Then, if he cannot remain in the company of the Sant, how will he be able to maintainbhakti? Therefore, he who wishes to develop resolute bhakti should not be vulnerable in these four aspects. If there is a flaw in these four, it should be slowly eradicated with understanding. Only then can one perform unflinching bhakti of Vāsudev Bhagwān. What I have just said is absolutely true; there is no doubt in it whatsoever."
GADHADA III-34: MAINTAINING DESIRES ONLY FOR GOD
On Chaitra sudi 3, Samvat 1885 [6 April 1829], Swāmi Shri Sahajānandji Mahārāj was sitting in the mandir of Shri Gopināthji 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.
Then Shuk Muni asked Shriji Mahārāj, "There appear to be two means by which desires for only God, and not for any worldly object, remain. One is love for God, and the other is vairāgya coupled with gnān. These are the two means. For one who does not practise these two means firmly but who does have faith in God and the conviction of God, is there a third means by which he can maintain desires only for God and not for anything else?"
Thereupon Shriji Mahārāj said in reply, "That is a good question because it is true that only by those two means do desires only for God, and not for anything else, remain. If a person does not practise those two means, then his desires for objects other than God will not be eradicated. As a result, he remains unhappy in life. But since he has faith in God, God will grant him liberation after death nonetheless.
"However, just like those two means, there is also a third means for eradicating desires for objects other than God. What is it? Well, it is to diligently observe the prescribedniyams. Just what are those niyams? Some are related to the duties of one's caste andāshram. Just as there are niyams for an ātmanivedi sādhu and a brahmachāri, similarly, even though a person is not an ātmanivedi, he should still follow the niyams of not seeing women and not listening to talks about them. In this manner, he should strictly and diligently observe the niyams related to forsaking the panchvishays. Also, he should physically serve God and His Bhakta, and he should listen to spiritual discourses related to God. In this manner, if he observes niyams in the form of engaging in the nine types of bhakti, then his mind will also begin to entertain pious thoughts. So, if a person behaves according to these two niyams, then as a result, even if he does not havevairāgya or love for God, they will develop; he will become extremely powerful; impure desires for objects will be eradicated; and only desires for God will flourish day by day."
Again, Shuk Muni asked Shriji Mahārāj, "Mahārāj, it seems anger arises when one's desire for a certain object or one's sense of my-ness for something is violated by someone. When a desire, i.e., a craving, is not satisfied, then that desire results in anger. So, it can be said that such a person has developed a swabhāv wherein anger can arise. Is it possible, though, that anger will not arise even in such situations?"
Shriji Mahārāj replied, "The great Sant - who, by God's command or by his own wish after understanding God's greatness according to the scriptures, has made a pious resolution to keep innumerable people within the disciplines of dharma and to lead them onto the path of God and is active in that respect - may express anger on a person who infringes the disciplines of dharma and follows adharma. Why? Because that person has infringed on the Sant's resolve. Therefore, if the sādhu does not express anger and does not reprimand that person in order to teach him to remain within the disciplines ofdharma, then that person will continue to infringe those disciplines and will not progress. Therefore, anger expressed for this reason is beneficial; there is nothing unsuitable about it. Why? Because thousands of people have taken the refuge of the great Santwho has resolved to take this path. So how can they possibly not be somewhat reprimanded?
"Anger will not arise, however, if one shuns the very cause of that anger. Obviously, anger will not arise, if one is travelling alone in the jungle; but how can the great Sant do that? After all, he has understood from the scriptures the great fruits involved in guiding countless people towards God by discourses - in order that they attain liberation. Similarly, he has also understood the importance of observing God's injunctions. Therefore, even though he may express anger, he still does not forsake his pious resolution.
"One who has developed attachment with the great Sant, has understood that his personal interest of attaining liberation can be realised through the Sant and believes, 'Only through this Sant will I benefit' - then even though he may have a swabhāv in the form of anger, he will never get angry on that great Sant. In fact, he will surely forsake his swabhāv. So, anger can also be eradicated in this way.
"On the other hand, he who becomes angry on a sādhu over the exchange of some worthless objects has simply not understood the greatness of the sādhu, or the true path of a sādhu. If he had understood it, then he would not become angry over such worthless objects. In fact, even if such a person is intelligent and understanding, if he does become angry on a sādhu for worthless objects, then his intellect should be considered to be like that of a king's minister - adept only in worldly affairs. He does not possess the intellect of a true sādhu."
GADHADA III-35: FORCEFULLY ALTERING ONE'S INNATE NATURE; GOD IS MALIGNED WHEN HIS BHAKTA IS MALIGNED
On Chaitra sudi 9, Samvat 1885 [12 April 1829], Swāmi Shri Sahajānandji Mahārāj was sitting in the mandir of Shri Gopināthji in Dādā Khāchar's darbār in Gadhadā. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. At that time, an assembly of sādhus as well as devotees from various places had gathered before Him.
Then Shuk Muni asked Shriji Mahārāj, "Mahārāj, how can we recognise that a person has such a firm refuge of God and His Bhakta that it will in no way falter - regardless of the extent of hardships he may have to face; regardless of any physical happiness or distress; and regardless of whether he faces honour or insult, or even adverse circumstances? Please also describe what type of thoughts such a person has in his mind, as well as how he behaves physically."
Thereupon Shriji Mahārāj said in reply, "If a devotee realises that only God is great, but he does not believe anything else to be greater than God; and if he also believes that everything except God is vain; and if he does not become disturbed or annoyed when God or the Sant attempts to forcefully alter his innate nature or when they do not allow him to behave according to his nature; and if he can forsake his nature, no matter how ingrained it may be, and follow the commands of God and the Sant in a straightforward manner - then that devotee's acceptance of the refuge of God will not falter, regardless of how adverse the circumstances may be."
Shuk Muni then queried, "Such a person must become disturbed, because when anyone's nature is forcefully altered, one naturally becomes disturbed. But the question is, are there differences in the types of disturbances that are experienced, or not?"
Shriji Mahārāj explained, "If a person is disturbed when his nature is forcefully altered, and if he then finds faults with himself rather than with God or the Sant, then he is good. However, instead of finding faults with himself, if a person perceives faults in God and the Sant, then his future is doubtful; i.e., there is no stability in such a person's refuge of God."
Again, Shuk Muni asked, "If God or the Sant have never attempted to twist one's nature, how can one realise in one's own mind, 'If they do attempt to do so at some time in the future, I will become disturbed.'? After all, how can one be sure of something that one has not experienced?"
Hearing this, Shriji Mahārāj explained, "One should reflect upon the thoughts that occur in one's mind. For example, 'In my mind, besides the thoughts of God, there are also thoughts related to the panchvishays; of these, for which objects do I have powerful desires and for which do I have strong cravings?' If a person contemplates in this manner, he can realise himself as he truly is; otherwise, he cannot. During that contemplation, he should also realise, 'I have very strong desires for this object, and I am striving to attain it. But, when the Sant attempts to have me forsake it, I will become disturbed.' In this way, he becomes clear about his own self. If his nature is stubborn, and God or the Sant do not attempt to alter it, then he will survive in the Satsangfellowship; however, if they do attempt to alter it, then he will definitely fall. Ultimately, then, he will become extremely disturbed and will fall from Satsang."
Thereafter Shriji Mahārāj said, "The scriptures claim that to malign the Sant is the gravest of all sins. What is the reason for this? Well, it is because Shri Krishna Bhagwān himself resides in the heart of that Sant. Therefore, when one maligns theSant, one maligns God as well. After all, when one maligns the Sant, God, who resides within his heart - is hurt. In such a case, the sin of maligning God is an even graver sin. Therefore, it is said that to malign the Sant is the gravest of all sins.
"Having said that though, Kansa, Shishupāl, Putnā and other demons spited God, yet God still granted them liberation like that of a devotee. Why was this? Because even though it was out of animosity, those demons did contemplate upon God. Therefore God felt, 'Those demons thought of Me and thus associated with Me, albeit out of animosity. So I should grant them liberation.' These cases should be taken as examples of God's compassion. One should also realise, 'If God granted them liberation even though they sought the refuge of God through animosity, why would God not grant liberation to a devotee who seeks His refuge by offering bhakti and who pleases Him by that bhakti? Of course, He will.'
"The intention of those who have given the scriptures is to inspire people towards thebhakti of God by showing God's abundant compassion; their intention was not to allow people to behave against God's wishes like those demons. Therefore, a person who spites God by keeping animosity towards Him and who behaves against His wishes should definitely be considered to be a demon - because that is the way of demons. However, one should behave only in a manner that will please God; one should engage in bhakti and please Him and His Bhakta. That is the way of devotees of God."
Shuk Muni then asked further, "Mahārāj, what are the characteristics of a Sant who is such that by maligning him, God residing within his heart is also maligned, and by serving him, God is served?"
Shriji Mahārāj thought for a while and then answered out of compassion: "First of all, the foremost characteristic is that he never believes God to be formless. He understands God to eternally possess a form and to be divine. In fact, no matter how many of thePurāns, Upanishads, Vedas, or other scriptures he may hear - if ever he comes across the idea of God being formless, he thinks, 'Either I have not understood the true meaning of the scriptures, or there may be some other purpose behind such words; but God indeed always possesses a form.' If he does not understand God to possess a form, then his upāsanā cannot be considered resolute. Besides, if God did not possess a form, then He could not be called the all-doer - just as ākāsh cannot be called the doer; nor could He be said to reside in one location. Thus God eternally possesses a form. In addition, He is the creator, sustainer and destroyer of countless brahmānds; He is forever present in His Akshardhām; He is the lord of all; and He is manifest here before your eyes. The aforementioned Sant always has this understanding; but this understanding of his is never shaken in any way or under any circumstances.
"Secondly, he engages himself in the ekāntik bhakti of God. Moreover, when he sees someone else engaged in spiritual discourses, singing devotional songs, chanting the holy name of God, etc., he becomes extremely pleased in his mind.
"Thirdly, when he stays amongst devotees, he does not allow any of his swabhāvs to interfere. In fact, he will forsake his swabhāvs, but he will not leave the company of the devotees of God. If the Sant happens to denounce his swabhāvs, he does not bear contempt towards the Sant. Instead, he finds faults with his own swabhāvs, but never does he become upset or even think of departing from the company of the devotees of God. In this manner, he remains within the fellowship of devotees.
"Fourthly, when he comes across any precious item such as an expensive piece of clothing, some delicious food, clean water, etc., he thinks, 'It would be nice to give this to a devotee of God.' He would give away the items to him and be happy.
"Fifth, the devotees in whose company he is staying do not feel of him, 'He has being staying with us for so many years, yet we have not been able to truly understand him; and who knows what he is really like? It is difficult to judge him.' He would not be like that. Instead, he would be such that everyone would know him outwardly and inwardly, and they would feel, 'He is definitely like this.' He would be of such a frank nature.
"Sixth, even if he is of a quiet nature, he would not like the company of kusangis; and if he does happen to come across them, he would, in fact, become infuriated. In this manner, he has a natural dislike for the company of those who are non-believers.
GADHADA III-36: THE MOST EXTRAORDINARY SPIRITUAL ENDEAVOUR FOR LIBERATION
On Vaishākh sudi 1, Samvat 1885 [4 May 1829], Swāmi Shri Sahajānandji Mahārāj rode on horseback from Dādā Khāchar's darbār in Gadhadā and arrived at Lakshmivādi. There, He sat on a platform within the grounds. 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.
Then Shriji Mahārāj asked all of the paramhansas and devotees, "What is the most extraordinary spiritual endeavour for the liberation of the jiva, which, if practised, will surely guarantee liberation and prevent all other obstacles from hindering that liberation? Also, what is the greatest obstacle in that endeavour for liberation, on account of which one would certainly fall from the path of liberation? Please answer both of these questions."
Everyone answered according to their understanding, but the question was not answered satisfactorily.
So then Shriji Mahārāj said in reply, "The most extraordinary spiritual endeavour for liberation is to understand Purushottam Bhagwān, who is seated amidst the mass of light of Brahma, as eternally having a form. Furthermore, understanding that all avatārsemanate from Him, one should accept the refuge of the manifest form of God by any means possible. One should also offer bhakti to that God while observing dharma, as well as associate with a Sant possessing such bhakti. That is the most extraordinary spiritual endeavour for liberation. One encounters no hindrances along that path.
"A major obstacle in practising that spiritual endeavour is keeping the company ofshushka-Vedāntis. Which obstacles arise when a person keeps their company? Well, initially, he develops affection for them. That affection develops due to the Vedāntis' goodwill. For example, if a person has saved someone's life by giving him some food during a famine, then that person would naturally develop affection for him. In this way, one develops affection for a person who has helped one. Similarly, those shushka-Vedāntis would point out advantages, such as, 'The ātmā does not undergo births and deaths, and it is formless. In fact, regardless of the number of sins one may commit, theātmā remains immune to those flaws.' Pointing out such advantages, they denounce the form of God. That is a major obstacle since it leads to the rejection of God's form. Therefore, one should never keep the company of shushka-Vedāntis - they are absolutely ignorant. In fact, there is no greater obstacle on the path of bhakti than this."
Thereafter, Shriji Mahārāj returned to Dādā Khāchar's darbār. There, He sat on a large, decorated cot on the veranda outside the east-facing rooms and said, "I have heard all of the scriptures and have formed a principle. I have also travelled throughout this land and seen many realised yogis." So saying, He narrated the stories of Gopāldāsji and other sādhus. He then continued by saying, "I believe that it is impossible to see theātmā and Brahma without the upāsanā and meditation of God's form. Only throughupāsanā can the ātmā and Brahma be seen; without it, they cannot be seen. In fact, wishing to see the ātmā and Brahma without upāsanā is like attempting to lick the sky with one's tongue; even if one tries for a hundred years, one will never be able to taste it as sour or salty. Similarly, the ātmā and Brahma simply cannot be seen without theupāsanā of the form of God - regardless of the efforts one may resort to. Furthermore, the scriptures' mentioning of the possibility of ātmā-realisation through nirbij1 Sānkhyaand Yoga is irrelevant - I have not seen anyone do so, nor is the claim in accordance with My experience. Therefore, the claim is false."
GADHADA III-37: OBJECTS ENJOYED PREVIOUSLY ARE REMEMBERED IN TIMES OF POVERTY
On Vaishākh sudi 3, Samvat 1885 [6 May 1829], Swāmi Shri Sahajānandji Mahārāj was sitting on a small, embroidered cloth on the veranda outside the north-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.
Then, addressing all of the sādhus and devotees, Shriji Mahārāj said, "Once a person has thoroughly attained the gnān of God, then even if the factors of place, time, action and company become adverse for him, his gnān does not diminish in the least. Take, for example, the analogy of a great king or a millionaire. If he happens to lose his status due to his prārabdha and becomes poor, and because of that if he has only cheap food to eat, such as low-quality grains, or the spinach of dodi, or kothā, or berries, or boiled pipal fruit, etc., then he would certainly eat it; but he would also recall the expensive delicacies that he formerly ordered and ate - items which no one else could even obtain. In his mind he would think, 'I used to eat all those delicacies in the past, whereas now I eat such common food.' In this manner, whenever he eats, he would recall this. However, if a person has been eating such common food from the beginning, and if he becomes even poorer, then he continues to eat the same type of food as before. So what does he have to recall? Nothing.
"Correspondingly, once a person has thoroughly known in his own mind the bliss of God and the bliss of worshipping God, then even if he can no longer remain within the fellowship and has to leave, he will endure happiness and misery according to hisprārabdha while remembering that bliss; he will not forget it. But what is there to recall for someone who has not known that bliss of God and who has not experienced it? Nothing. Such a person, in fact, is like an animal."
Continuing, Shriji Mahārāj said, "Now I shall narrate to you the gnān of the form of God. No deity, human or anything created from Prakruti, possesses a form like God. In addition, kāl devours everything except God; that is to say, kāl's powers are incapable of affecting God. This is what God is like. In fact, only God is like God; no one else can even compare to Him. Also, a devotee in the abode of God who has attained attributes similar to God also possesses a form similar to that of God. Nevertheless, that devotee is still a mukta, and God is, after all, Purushottam. Indeed, God is supreme amongst everyone and is fit to be worshipped by everyone. He is also their master. No one, however, can fathom the greatness of that God. He has a divine form, is nirgun, and is worthy of being meditated upon. In fact, that form of God is such that a person who meditates upon Him becomes nirgun himself.
"Moreover, while staying in one place - in His abode - God resides by way of His anvayform as the antaryāmi and the giver of the deserved fruits of karmas to all of the jivas in countless brahmānds. Indeed, He is the very life of all jivas; without Him, those jivas are not capable of doing anything or indulging in anything.
"In addition, that God is the master of all yogic powers. Just as a person who has attained yogic powers can obtain with his own hands any object even in Brahmalokwhile sitting here, similarly, God, using His yogic powers, performs all activities while staying in one place only. Also, for example, the fire that is latent within wood and stone is different from the wood and stone themselves. Similarly, God dwells within all jivas, but His form is different from the jivas.
"That God Himself, possessing countless divine powers, becomes like a human for the purpose of granting liberation to the jivas. If a person cultivates the gnān of that form of God in this way, then if he has offered bhakti to that God and has fully experienced the bliss of that gnān and bhakti as it really is at least once in his jiva, he will never forget it. In fact, regardless of whatever happiness or distress comes his way, he does not forget the experience of that bliss of God's form, just as the king in a state of poverty does not forget the happiness of his past.
"Why do I tell you this? Because currently, all of you are present in the Satsangfellowship; but, due to adverse circumstances or adverse prārabdha, if one no longer remains in Satsang, then if one has understood this fact, one's jiva can still attain liberation. Moreover, if one has such a conviction, one will never feel, 'I will not attain liberation.' After all, to continuously remain in Satsang is indeed extremely difficult. In fact, to physically behave as described is also rare. But if a person someday happens to leave Satsang, then even if he cannot physically behave likewise at that time, his jivawill still benefit greatly if he has understood this fact. That is why I have delivered this discourse."
GADHADA III-38: THE SĀNKHYA SCRIPTURES AND OTHERS; REMAINING FOREVER HAPPY
On Vaishākh sudi 14, Samvat 1885 [17 May 1829], Swāmi Shri Sahajānandji Mahārāj was sitting in the mandir of Shri Gopināthji 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 Shriji Mahārāj said, "Having pondered over the Sānkhya scriptures as well as other scriptures, I have formed the conviction that all forms that are the result of the entities evolved from māyā are false. Why? Because all those forms will be destroyed by kāl. Conversely, the form of God in Akshardhām and the form of the muktas - the attendants of God - are all satya, divine and extremely luminous. Also, the form of that God and those muktas is two-armed like that of a human being, and it is characterised by eternal existence, consciousness and bliss. That God, residing in Akshardhām, is served by those muktas with various types of divine articles, and He is always present there to bestow supreme bliss upon those muktas.
"It is that same supreme Purushottam Bhagwān who manifests on this earth out of compassion - for the purpose of granting liberation to the jivas. He is presently visible before everyone; He is your Ishtadev; and He accepts your service. In fact, there is absolutely no difference between the manifest form of Purushottam Bhagwān visible before you and the form of God residing in Akshardhām; i.e., both are one. Moreover, this manifest form of Purushottam Bhagwān is the controller of all, including Akshar. He is the lord of all of the ishwars and the cause of all causes. He reigns supreme, and He is the cause of all of the avatārs. Moreover, He is worthy of being worshipped single-mindedly by all of you. The many previous avatārs of this God are worthy of being bowed down to and worthy of reverence."
Shriji Mahārāj then explained, "Greed for wealth and other things, desires to associate with women, attachment of the tongue to various tastes, the belief that one is the body, affection for kusangis and attachment to one's relatives - one who possesses these six characteristics will never become happy, either in this life or even after death. Therefore, one who desires to be happy should eradicate such swabhāvs, maintain nivrutti, and not keep the company of equals. One should also attach one's jiva to theBhakta of God - the great Sant - who does not identify his self with the body, who possesses vairāgya, and who feels that he has transgressed a major injunction of God even if he has transgressed a minor injunction. One should act according to his command by thought, word and deed. Also, one should certainly avoid the vishays, and in no way should one allow them to come near by abandoning one's niyams. If one does begin to associate with the vishays, one will certainly fall. This should be accepted as a universal principle."
GADHADA III-39: VISHALYAKARANI HERBAL MEDICINE
On Āshādh vadi 10, Samvat 1886 [25 July 1829], Shriji Mahārāj was sitting on the veranda outside the east-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.
Addressing all of the paramhansas and satsangis, Shriji Mahārāj said, "What is God'smāyā? Māyā is nothing but the sense of I-ness towards the body and my-ness towards anything related to the body. These should be eradicated. Anyone who eradicates māyācan be said to have transcended māyā. In fact, it is the principle of all of the scriptures that one should eradicate māyā and develop love for God. This principle must be understood - either today or some time in the future. Great devotees such as Hanumān, Nārad, Prahlād have also asked from God, 'Protect us from māyā in the form of I-ness and my-ness, and may we develop love for You. May we also have the company of theSant who has transcended māyā and has love for You; and may we develop affection and a sense of my-ness towards him as well.' Therefore, we too should do the same and ask for the same, as well as do shravan, manan and nididhyās on this principle."
Then continuing, Shriji Mahārāj said, "A devotee of God requires the strength of two things: ātmā-realisation and the greatness of God. What is ātmā-realisation? It is to realise the ātmā as being distinct from the body. If while staying among the sādhusthere happens to be a quarrel for some reason, or if the feelings of I-ness and my-ness, or vicious natures such as egotism, anger, avarice, lust, matsar, jealousy, cravings for taste, etc., prevail, then one who does not regard oneself as the ātmā perceives flaws in the sādhus. This would be extremely detrimental for him. That is why one should realise one's true self as being the ātmā, distinct from the body.
"That ātmā is neither a Brāhmin, nor a Kshatriya, nor a Kanbi. It is no one's son and no one's father. It belongs to no caste and to no class. It is radiant like the sun and fire; but it is also full of consciousness. The flames of fire and the rays of the sun are jadbecause they do not move when touched by the finger. However, when an ant is touched by a finger, it moves and turns back. This implies that the ātmā is full of consciousness. It is said to be similar to the sun or to fire, but that is merely because its form is similar in radiance.
"The ātmā has passed through countless life forms. In fact, it is said that a person has drunk as much milk from his mothers as there is water in the ocean. In those lives, theātmā has experienced death in countless ways, yet it has not perished. It has remained as it is. So, if it did not perish in that state of ignorance when it regarded itself as the body, how shall it perish now that we have its gnān? Thus, we should realise that ātmāas our true self.
"Furthermore, how should the greatness of God be understood? Well, God is the Lord of the lords of countless brahmānds. However, the brahmānds of which He is lord are insignificant compared to Him. Therefore, it is said:
Dyupataya eva te na yayur-antam anantatayā Tvamapi yad-antarānda-nichayā nanu sāvaranāhā |1
Within each brahmānd there are Brahmā, Vishnu and Shiv, as well as the pruthvi with its seven dwips, seven oceans, Meru, and Lokālok and other mountains. Thebrahmānds also contain the 14 realms, the eight barriersEN-5, and many other things. God is the lord of countless such brahmānds. For example, one can realise the eminence of an emperor of the world, even though his villages can be counted. But the eminence of God is much greater because even those countless brahmānds are insignificant to Him. So then, of what significance can the beings of those brahmāndsbe before God? Of no significance at all; they are utterly insignificant.
"Furthermore, in those brahmānds, what are the pleasures of the panchvishays that God has given to the jivas like? Well, those pleasures seem extremely rare; so much so, that many have given their heads for them. However, the bliss of God's own form and of His abode are indeed outstanding. The pleasures of the worldly vishays are dependant on other factors and must be experienced distinctly. In comparison, God is the reservoir of all forms of bliss. Moreover, the bliss of God is imperishable and extremely divine. For this, consider the following analogy: An extremely wealthy manenjoys a great variety of food at home. Then, after finishing the meal, he throws a leftover piece of rotlo to a dog. In this case, the leftover piece of rotlo can be considered utterly inferior, and the various delicacies that the wealthy man enjoys can be considered to be full of pleasure. In the same way, God has given the countless jivas of the brahmānds the pleasures of the panchvishays. But they are inferior like the piece ofrotlo thrown to the dog, whereas the bliss of God Himself is far superior.
"Even so, God grants a great deal of happiness to the jiva during the state of deep sleep. During deep sleep, one is relieved of even severe pain, and instead, one experiences profound peace.
"Even the great such as Brahmā, Shiv, Lakshmiji, Rādhāji, Nārad, Shuk, the Sanakādik, and the nine Yogeshwars apply the dust of God's holy feet upon their heads. They put aside all of their self-importance and constantly offer bhakti to Him.
"Moreover, just look at the diverse creation created by God! What ingenuity He has used! Just see, a human is born of a human and an animal from an animal; a tree from a tree and an ant from an ant. Also, no matter how intelligent someone may be, no one is capable of replacing a destroyed part of someone's body exactly as it was before. God possesses innumerable such skills. Therefore, by realising such greatness of God and realising Him to be blissful, one develops vairāgya for all things and love for God alone.
"If one attains the gnān of one's jivātmā and the gnān of God's greatness as mentioned earlier, then even if one has somehow become attached to any sort of pleasures of thepanchvishays, one would not remain bound by them, but would, in fact, break that bondage and withdraw from them. How, then, can one who forsakes the pleasures of the panchvishays become attached? Therefore, having listened to these two types ofgnān, one should apply them within one's mind with great fervour. For example, a brave and fierce man would be extremely angered if an adversary killed his father. If the adversary harassed him further by also killing his son and brother, kidnapping his wife, passing on his mother to a Muslim, as well as stealing all his belongings, the man would become increasingly aggravated as he is harassed more and more. At all times then - while awake as well as in his dreams - he would be obsessed by only this. In the same way, only when a person is constantly obsessed by these two topics can that gnān be realised. Then, that gnān would assist him against any sort of adversity that may befall him. For example, when Hanumānji brought the vishalyakarani herbal medicine for Rāmchandra and gave it to him to drink, all of the arrows from Rāmchandraji's body fell out by themselves. Similarly, all of the 'arrows' in the form of the indriyas' desires to indulge in the vishays are removed when these two points have been imbedded in a person's mind. That is to say, the vruttis of his indriyas withdraw from the pleasures of the vishays and become rooted only in God. Only he is a satsangi, because only he who associates with his own satya ātmā and satya God can be called a satsangi.
"If a godly person were to hear the talks of these two points, they would stir his heart and pervade every pore of his body. Conversely, if a demonic person were to hear them, they would not touch his heart at all; instead, they would exit from his ears, just askhir would not remain in a dog's stomach because the dog would vomit it out. In actual fact, nothing can be said to be as delicious as khir, yet it does not remain in a dog's stomach, let alone pervade its body. On the other hand, if a man were to eat khir, it would indeed pervade every pore of his body, and it would be extremely enjoyable. Likewise, these talks do not enter into the hearts of dog-like, demonic people; rather, these talks enter and pervade totally only in the hearts of godly people."
Shriji Mahārāj then added, "Only God is like God. Many have attained qualities similar to His by worshipping Him, yet they certainly do not become like God. If they did become like God, this would suggest the existence of several Gods. As a result, the governance of the world would not remain orderly. One God would say, 'I will create the world,' while another God would say, 'I will destroy the world.' One God would say, 'I will make it rain,' while another would say, 'I will not.' One would say, 'I will instil human instincts in animals,' while another would say, 'I will instil animal instincts in humans.' A stable state would not be possible in this situation. But see how orderly everything functions in the world! There is not even the slightest irregularity. Thus, the governor of all activities and the lord of all is one God. Not only that, it seems that no one can ever challenge Him. Therefore, God is definitely one, and no one can become like Him.
"All these facts that I have revealed may be simple, but everything is included therein. However, only the wise can grasp their essence, but not others. Whosoever understands these facts and thoroughly consolidates them has accomplished everything; indeed, he has nothing more to achieve. Having listened to these discourses delivered by Me, one should keep the company of those devotees of God who have thoroughly imbibed them. This will lead to the day-by-day consolidation of those discourses."
In conclusion, Shriji Mahārāj revealed, "I deliver these discourses to you not from any imagination of My mind, nor to display any sort of aptitude. I have experienced all that I have spoken about. In fact, I speak in accordance to what I practise. Outwardly, I may have a great deal of contact with women, wealth and the panchvishays. In fact, wherever I go - Surat, Amdāvād, Vadodarā, Vartāl, etc. - thousands of people gather; they obey Me, honour Me and welcome Me with great fanfare. There I stay in luxurious places and receive rich clothes, vehicles, etc. Despite all of this, whenever I look towards My ātmā and towards the greatness of God, it all seems absolutely insignificant. I cannot become attached to any of it. In fact, I become oblivious to it all, just as one is oblivious to one's past lives. The reason I can behave in such a manner is that I have thoroughly realised the aforementioned two topics. In fact, whosoever realises them would also behave accordingly if ever he were somehow put in similar circumstances. Therefore, these two topics should be understood by all means."
No comments:
Post a Comment