Loyã-10 Remaining Uninfatuated 1 On the morning of Mãgshar sudi 8, Samvat 1877 [13 December 1820], Shriji Mahãrãj was sitting on a large, decorated cot in Surã Khãchar’s darbãr in Loyã. He was wearing a white dagli made of chhint and a white survãl. He had also tied a white feto around his head. At that time, an assembly of munis as well as devotees from various places had gathered before him. 2 Thereupon Nityãnand Swãmi said, “In this world, there are some men who have such affection for women and other objects that if they were to be separated, they would not be able to live. There are others who also have affection for women and other objects, but it is not as intense. Hence, if they were to be separated, they would survive. Thus, there are two types of people. Now, if the former affectionate person who involves himself in worldly life with affection were to meet God, he would become attached to God in the same way; i.e., if he were to be separated from God, he would not be able to survive. Moreover, if the latter person with less intense affection for worldly life were to meet God, he would have less intense affection for God as well. Granted this, is the difference between these two types of people due to karmas, or is it eternal?” 3 Hearing this, Shriji Mahãrãj replied, “Those differences are not inherently present in the jiva; instead, they arise as a result of karmas. How does this happen? Well, when a jiva performs a karma, the force of its vruttis can be of three levels: mild, intermediate and intense. The force with which the vruttis attach themselves to the object determines the effect of the karma upon the jiva. As a result, three levels of affection arise due to these karmas.” 4 Again, Nityãnand Swãmi asked, “Granted that fact, do the three levels in the force of the vruttis occur as a result of the gunas, or is there some other reason?” 5 Shriji Mahãrãj replied, “The three types of differences are not due to the gunas; rather, when only the indriyas indulge in an object, then a mild force results. When the indriyas indulge in an object along with the mind, an intermediate level of force develops. When all three – the indriyas, the mind and the jiva – combine and indulge in an object, then the vruttis develop an intense force. Even if that intense force affects only the eyes, the other indriyas would follow, and the force would affect them as well. In this way, whichever indriya is primarily affected by the intense force, the other indriyas follow. Moreover, that intense force affects all three types of people, rãjasik, sãttvik and tãmasik. In fact, such intense force is present in each of the indriyas; thus, affection for objects arises correspondingly.” 6 Then Nityãnand Swãmi asked, “Why does he not develop affection for God with such an intense force?” 7 Shriji Mahãrãj said, “Good and bad behaviour is determined by the factors of place, time, action, meditation, scriptures, initiation, mantra and company. So, if one attains favourable places, times, company, etc., then one develops affection for God quickly. But if one encounters unfavourable places, times, etc., then one would develop affection for objects other than God.” 8 Thereafter, Chaitanyãnand Swãmi asked, “What should one do in adverse times?” 9 Shriji Mahãrãj replied, “Whenever and wherever times are adverse, one should abandon that place for another location; that is, one should not stay where the factor of time is adverse. In fact, time, in the form of Satya-yug, Tretã-yug, Dwãpar-yug and Kali-yug, exists both externally and internally. So, when Kali-yug is prevalent within one’s heart, one should not visualise the form of God within one’s heart; instead, it should be seen externally, before one’s eyes.” 10 Then Muktãnand Swãmi asked, “How can one distinguish whether a mild, an intermediate or an intense force prevails within someone’s heart?” 11 Shriji Mahãrãj replied, “When the force is mild, one would harbour the same feelings on seeing a young girl, a young woman or an old woman. Why? Because only the vruttis of the indriyas have become involved. Consequently, a mild force has developed. When the mind unites with the indriyas and they see the three types of women, then no base thoughts arise towards the young girl or the old woman; but base thoughts certainly do arise towards the young woman, and disturbance is experienced. This should be known to be an intermediate-level force. But, when both the mind and the jiva combine with the indriyas and look at the three types of women, then base thoughts arise towards all three types of women, and disturbance is experienced. In fact, one would experience such base thoughts even on seeing one’s own mother or sister. This should be known as an intense force.” 12 Then Brahmãnand Swãmi asked, “Suppose a person notices the distinction between the three types of women, and notices their beauty and ugliness, yet he does not experience any base thoughts – which type of force is that?” 13 Shriji Mahãrãj said, “Having realized an object to be the cause of intense misery and having contemplated upon that fact, one attributes grave drawbacks to that object. The contemplation of those drawbacks in the mind then leads to those drawbacks being acknowledged by the jiva. The witness,74 who transcends the jiva, also affirms those drawbacks, and so an extremely firm conviction in those drawbacks is developed. Thus, when the vruttis of the indriyas enter the object, the mind and jiva also go along with the vruttis; but since the jiva’s deep conviction of the drawbacks in the object pierces the mind and indriyas, even though the object is seen and fully recognized, still an intense aversion arises for it. For example, if a snake’s venom is dropped in a bowl of sweet milk, and one sees the venom being added, then even though the milk appears exactly as before, an intense aversion for it prevails in one’s heart. Why is that? Because one has realized, ‘If I drink the milk, I will die.’ Similarly, such a person has realized, ‘This beautiful woman is an obstacle on the path of liberation; and she is the cause of extreme misery in this realm and in the higher realms. In fact, I have attained the company of women countless times in past lives in various life forms, and if I do not worship God, I will attain the company of countless more females. Thus, this attainment is not rare. However, the company of God and his Sant is extremely rare, and this woman is a major obstacle in the attainment of that.’ A person who has realized this and has intensely realized the flaws in the object will never be infatuated on seeing a woman, regardless of how beautiful she may be. 14 “Furthermore, there is another way to remain uninfatuated: Janak the Videhi, who was a great king and a devotee of God, stayed in his kingdom and, due to his firmness in gnãn, remained uninfatuated even while indulging in enticing vishays. Similarly, a devotee with gnãn like Janak, harbours the thought, ‘I am the ãtmã – pure, chetan, unchanging, the embodiment of bliss, and imperishable. Vishays like women and other things, however, are full of misery; they are vain, perishable, and jad.’ With this thought, he believes only his own self, the ãtmã, as being the embodiment of bliss. Also, he believes, ‘The pleasure and pleasantness which are apparent in the vishays – i.e., sounds, touch, etc. – are only experienced due to the ãtmã. But, when the ãtmã leaves the body, that which was once pleasurable becomes miserable.’ He contemplates upon his ãtmã in this manner. 15 “Also, he contemplates upon Paramãtmã, who transcends the ãtmã, as follows: ‘I have attained this gnãn of the pure ãtmã, which transcends mãyã, by the grace of the Sant. That Sant is a devotee of God. Moreover, that God is the ãtmã of even Brahman, who is the ãtmã of all. He is the ãtmã of Akshar and is also the ãtmã of the countless millions of muktas. I am the brahmarup servant of that Parabrahman Purushottam Nãrãyan.’ 16 “Further, he understands the greatness of God by realizing ‘léÂÌØ °ß Ìð Ù ØØéÚU‹Ì×Ù‹ÌÌØæ ˆß×çÂ...H ’75. Such verses have greatly expounded the greatness of God. When a person who has such gnãn of his own self and of God attains a vishay, regardless of how appealing it may be, his mind would not be even slightly affected by it. He does indulge in the essential vishays, i.e., sounds, touch, etc., but he does not become dependent upon them; rather, he indulges in them independently, of his own accord. Just as a spider spreads its own web and then, when necessary, it independently retracts it, in the same way, such a devotee possessing gnãn engages the vruttis of his indriyas in the vishays and retracts them of his own accord. Such a person, even if he is amongst people, feels as if he is in the forest; and though he may be in the forest, he experiences more happiness there than one does from ruling a kingdom. 17 “Such a devotee may reside in a kingdom, thousands of people may be under his command and he may be wealthy. But he himself does not feel, ‘I have become very great.’ Furthermore, if the kingdom is destroyed and he begs for food from house to house with an earthen begging-bowl, he does not feel, ‘Now I have become poor.’ This is because he remains absolutely carefree in his own bliss, and he knows the greatness of his own self and that of God. Thus, he views gold, dirt, iron and stones as equal; he also feels equanimity in honour and insult. Since his vision has become broad, and he knows all worldly objects to be vain, no objects are capable of binding such a person with gnãn. For example, when a man who was initially poor receives a kingdom, his vision becomes broad. At first he may have been selling bundles of wood or doing various other insignificant jobs, but he forgets them all and he begins to do important tasks related to his kingdom. Similarly, to such a person with such an understanding becomes happy. 18 “Also, if a person has faith, i.e., he believes, ‘Whatever such a great Sant and God say is the truth; there is no doubt in it,’ and with such a belief, he does as God and his Sant instruct him to do, then such a person remains happy. So, these two types of people are happy, and apart from them, others are not happy. Thus the verse: Øà¿ ×êÉU¸Ì×æð Üæð·ð¤ Øà¿ ÕéhðÑ ÂÚU¢ »ÌÑÐ ÌæßéÖõ âé¹×ðÏðÌð ç€Üà؈؋ÌçÚUÌæð ÁÙÑH76 Also, in the Bhagvad Gitã, it is said: çßáØæ çßçÙßÌü‹Ìð çÙÚUæãUæÚUSØ ÎðçãUÙÑÐ ÚUâßÁZ ÚUâæðùŒØSØ ÂÚU¢ ÎëcÅU÷ßæ çÙßÌüÌðH77 So, all objects, except God, become vain to a person whose vision becomes divine in this way. Moreover, the meaning of these two verses is the same.” 19 Then Muktãnand Swãmi requested Shriji Mahãrãj, “Mahãrãj, now please ask the question you were going to ask.” 20 So Shriji Mahãrãj asked, “Is there only misery in mãyã, or is there also some happiness in it? That is the question.” 21 Muktãnand Swãmi replied, “Mãyã causes only misery.” 22 Thereupon, Shriji Mahãrãj said, “Of the three gunas – sattvagun, rajogun and tamogun – which arise from mãyã, sattvagun is said to give happiness. Furthermore, in the Shrimad Bhãgvat it is said, ‘ âžß¢ ØÎ÷ÕýræÎàæüÙ×÷Ð’78 and that the products of sattvagun are gnãn, vairãgya, wisdom, tranquillity, self-restraint, etc. How is mãyã in this form a cause of misery? Furthermore, it is stated in the 11th canto: çßlæçßlð ×× ÌÙê çßhØéhß àæÚUèçÚU‡ææ×÷Ð Õ‹Ï×æðÿæ·¤ÚUè ¥ælð ×æØØæ ×ð çßçÙí×ÌðH79 So, how is mãyã in the form of knowledge which leads to liberation a cause of misery?” 23 Hearing this question, Muktãnand Swãmi and all of the other paramhansas said, “Mahãrãj, we are unable to answer, so please have mercy and give the answer yourself.” 24 Hearing this, Shriji Mahãrãj said, “To a sinful person, the form of Yamarãjã appears frightful and terrible, with large teeth and a large, frightening mouth; he appears black like soot, huge like a mountain and horrific like death. In this way, his form appears dreadful. But to a virtuous person, the form of Yamarãjã appears very pleasant, like Vishnu. Similarly, to those who are non-believers, mãyã causes attachment and intense misery, while to a devotee of God, that same mãyã is the cause of intense happiness. Also, the entities that have evolved out of mãyã – the indriyas and the antahkaran, and their presiding deities – all support the bhakti of God. Therefore, for a devotee of God, mãyã is not a cause of misery; it is a source of great happiness.” 25 Then Muktãnand Swãmi asked, “If mãyã is a cause of happiness, why is it that when a devotee of God visualises the form of God and engages in worship, mãyã, in the form of the antahkaran, causes misery by generating many disturbing thoughts?” 26 Shriji Mahãrãj replied, “Mãyã, in the form of the antahkaran, does not cause misery to a person who thoroughly understands the greatness of God and has an absolutely firm refuge of God; but it does cause misery to a person who does not have such a refuge. For example, a kusangi would attempt to dislodge only an irresolute satsangi, but no one would dare to dislodge a staunch satsangi. In fact, no one would be able to speak ill of Satsang in his presence. Similarly, mãyã, in the form of the antahkaran, would never entertain a desire to daunt a person who has a firm refuge in God. Rather, it would help his bhakti to flourish. However, mãyã does deflect a perso1n who has a slight deficiency in his refuge in God and does cause him misery. Then, when that person develops a complete refuge in God, mãyã is not able to disturb him or cause him pain. Therefore, the answer is that if a person has such complete faith in God, mãyã is not capable of causing him misery.” 74. Here ‘witness’ refers to God. 75. Dyupataya eva te na yayur-antam-anantatayã tvamapi…H Even the masters of the higher realms [i.e. deities such as Brahmã] cannot fathom your greatness – because it is endless. [In fact,] neither can you yourself [fathom your own greatness]. Indeed, in your each and every hair countless brahmãnds accompanied with their barriers fly simultaneously at immense speed – like mere specks of dust flying in the air. Even the Shrutis describing you as ‘neti neti’ [i.e. indescribable and unfathomable] ultimately perish in you [i.e. fail to extol your complete glory]. - Shrimad Bhãgvat: 10.87.41 76. Yash-cha moodhatamo loke yash-cha buddhehe param gatahaÐ Tãvubhau sukham-edhete klishyatyantarito janahaH In this world, there are two types of people who experience [the] bliss [of God] – those who are utterly ignorant [and have blind faith in God] and those who are perfectly enlightened [and have realized God]. Those who are in between, though, are troubled. - Shrimad Bhãgvat: 3.7.17 77. Vishayã vinivartante nirãhãrasya dehinahaÐ Rasa-varjam raso’pyasya param drushtvã nivartateH The sense objects recede for a person who abstains from indulging in them. However, the longing for them does not subside. The longing subsides [only] when his vision reaches [i.e. he realizes] the transcendental [i.e. God]. - Bhagvad Gitã: 2.59 78. Sattvam yad-brahma-darshanam Sattvagun leads to the vision [i.e. realization] of Brahman [i.e. God]. - Shrimad Bhãgvat: 1.2.24 79. Vidyãvidye mama tanoo viddhyuddhava shareerinãmÐ Bandha-mokshakari ãdye mãyayã me vinirmiteH O Uddhava! Realize my two forms – both of which have been created from my mãyã: the primordial [brahma]vidyã and avidyã, which liberate and bind people [respectively]. - Shrimad Bhãgvat: 11.11.3
Posted on: Sat, 20 Jul 2013 10:26:40 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015