27.1 In the Samvat year 1885, on Kãrtik sud Punam [21st November 1828], Swãmi Shree Sahajãnandji Mahãrãj was sitting in the mandir of Shree Gopinãthji in Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. A sabhã of paramhans, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him.
27.2 Then, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “The pleasures associated with shabda, sparsh, rup, ras, and gandh, are all found to exist together in one place – in the blissful and divya murti of Purushottam Bhagvãn. When we have the darshan of that murti of Bhagvãn, we can enjoy the bliss of that beauty, as well as the bliss of the other four types of vishays, all at the same time. However, with worldly vishays, when a person indulges in one vishay, he receives the pleasure of only that vishay, but not of the others. Therefore, the pleasures of worldly vishays are found separately. Moreover, those pleasures are useless, perishable, and the cause of extreme misery. However, in Bhagvãn, a person enjoys the bliss of all the vishays at the same time. That bliss is extremely divya; it is eternal and imperishable. Therefore, a mumukshu should develop vairãgya towards the worldly vishays and become totally attached to the divya and blissful murti of Bhagvãn.”
27.3 Shreeji Mahãrãj then continued, “If a bhakta has an intense desire to engage in the bhakti of Bhagvãn and to associate with His sant, then regardless of any svabhãv that he may possess, he eradicates it and behaves according to the sant’s wishes. Even if that svabhãv is such that it has become bound to the chaitanya, a person 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 tyãgi, but because I had an intense desire for the darshan of Rãmãnand Swãmi, I lived according to Muktãnand Swãmi’s instructions, and not according to my personal preferences.”
27.4 Then, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “The details of the kind of determination a bhakta should and should not keep are as follows: The first type of determination is observing the vows, such as nishkãmi and nirlobhi; the second type of determination is behaving with the feeling that he will be able to sleep only if his place is here and not if it is elsewhere. The second type and other innumerable forms of determination that are the result of insignificant svabhãvs should not be considered the same as the first type of determination. The determination of observing vartmãns is an essential as a person’s own life; it is extremely beneficial. That type of determination should be kept with an understanding of its importance. But, if the second type of determination is formed, which is due to svabhãvs, it should be thought of as worthless; and if a sant asks a person to abandon it, then it should be abandoned. However, the first type of determination should not be abandoned.
27.5 “To consider these two forms of determination 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. Therefore, it can be said that the child considers the almonds, and rupees, and the gold coins to be of equal value. Therefore, the child can be considered to be ignorant.
27.6 “If someone has almonds in his hand, and a thief comes and threatens him by saying, ‘Put them down, or I will cut off your head with this sword’, then a person who is wise will give them away, but a person who is foolish will not. Similarly, between the two types of determination, a person 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 svabhãv of stubbornness and arrogance. If such a person does observe the vartmãns due to that determination, and if he remains in satsang in this way till the end, then it is all well and good; but a person cannot have complete faith in him. This is 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, a person who offers bhakti to Bhagvãn and observes vartmãns with determination is called a rãjarshi; and a person who offers bhakti to Bhagvãn while observing vartmãns with the intention of pleasing Bhagvãn is called a brahmarshi and a sãdhu. There is a similar difference in the rewards of the two as well.”
27.7 Continuing, Shreeji Mahãrãj explained, “The flaws of mãn, irshyã, and krodh are much more harmful than even kãm. This is because a sant may have compassion on a person with kãm, but he will not have compassion on person with mãn. In addition, irshyã and krodh evolve from mãn. Therefore, mãn is a major flaw. Furthermore, a person does not fall from satsang due to kãm as he does due to mãn. For example, there are many grahastha bhaktas in our satsang, and they continue to remain in satsang. So, I always have an intense dislike for mãn, irshyã, and krodh. 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, a person should eradicate mãn by realising the greatness of Bhagvãn.”
27.8 Again, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “What is nishchay in Bhagvãn? Well, consider how it is in worldly life. Since childhood, a person has the belief of his parents, varna, and ãshram, and gender, as well as the belief 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 shãstras. Even if a person has not heard the shãstras, he has been convinced by principles prevalent in society, which themselves were derived from the shãstras. Similarly, the characteristics of a sant, who is free of vicious natures like kãm, lobh, mãn, svãd, and moh, are also described in the shãstras. A sant who possesses these characteristics has direct relationship with Bhagvãn. Therefore, a person should develop nishchay in Bhagvãn based on His words. In fact, to have firm faith in the words of the sant is itself nishchay in Bhagvãn.”
27.9 Then, Nãth Bhakta of Vadodarã asked Shreeji Mahãrãj a question: “Do the relatives of a bhakta of Bhagvãn, who has firm nishchay in Bhagvãn, attain kalyãn due to their relationship with that bhakta?”
27.10 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “If the relatives or ancestors of a bhakta of Bhagvãn have affection for him, then yes, they will attain kalyãn; otherwise, they will not. In fact, even if a person who is not related to that bhakta has affection for him, then he will also benefit. This is because at the time of death, a person may remember that bhakta whose vrutti is constantly fixed on Bhagvãn. Therefore, by remembering that bhakta, he attains kalyãn.”
27.11 Shreeji Mahãrãj then said, “I talk about the nature of the ãtmã and about the nature of Bhagvãn. However, by merely talking about them a person does not experience their bliss as it really is. Their true bliss can only be experienced in samãdhi, or after a person leaves his 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, a person 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’. However, he does not experience pleasure through words as he experiences pleasure through the indriyas.
27.12 Similarly, the bliss and the happiness of Bhagvãn that he experiences, as well as the bliss and the happiness of the ãtmã that he experiences through samãdhi or after leaving the body, cannot be experienced by merely talking about them. However, if a person performs shravan, manan, and nididhyãs on these two topics, then he attains sãkshãtkãr. Then, after attaining sãkshãtkãr, he enjoys the same experience and bliss as he does from these two in samãdhi. Therefore, after listening to talks concerning these two, a person should perform manan and nididhyãs on those talks.”
End of Vachanãmrut Gadhadã || 27 || 261 ||