3.1 In the Samvat year 1877, on the evening of Ãso vad 7 [14th October, 1820], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting facing north on a decorated bedstead on the veranda outside the north-facing rooms of Vastã Khãchar’s darbãr in Kãriyãni. He was wearing a white khes and had tied a white feto around His head. He had also covered Himself with a white chãdar. A sabhã of paramhans, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him.
3.2 Then, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “This Shuk Muni is a very great sãdhu. From the day he began staying with me, his enthusiasm has been ever increasing; in fact, it has never diminished. Therefore, he is like Muktãnand Swãmi.”
3.3 Shreeji Mahãrãj then continued, “The affection that people develop for each other is due to gun, and the hatred they experience for each other is due to avgun. However, those gun and avgun cannot be established from a person’s external behaviour. A person outwardly may walk like a cat, fixing his eyes on the floor as he walks, but on the inside, he may have intense kãm. On seeing him behave in this way, a person who is not wise would think, ‘He is a very great sãdhu’. On the other hand, someone else may walk with wandering eyes. On seeing him, a person who is not wise would think, ‘He is a fake sãdhu’. However, inwardly he may be extremely free of kãm. Therefore, a person cannot be judged by his external, physical behaviour. He can only be judged after staying with him. By staying with him, his activities can be observed – the way he talks, the way he walks, the way he eats, the way he drinks, the way he sleeps, the way he awakens, and the way he sits.
3.4 “Also, gun and avgun are more apparent during the period of youth, but they are not so obvious during childhood or during old age. Someone may be spoiled as a child, but as a youth he becomes honourable. Conversely, someone may be good in his childhood, but becomes spoiled during his youth. A person who is determined in that he feels, ‘It is not good that I am having these improper thoughts’, and who makes an effort to eradicate those thoughts, and who remains determined until they have been eradicated, progresses in satsang in his youth. On the other hand, a person who is careless instead of being alert, will not progress. So, an honourable person can be recognised from his childhood.”
3.5 Having said this, Shreeji Mahãrãj talked at length about His fondness for tyãg in His childhood. He then continued, “A person who is honourable does not like the company of immature children from his childhood; he does not have an appetite for tasty food; and he continuously restrains his body. Just look, when I was a child, I had the same thoughts as Kãrtik Swãmi, and I felt, ‘I want to eliminate all the parts of my mother – her flesh and blood – from my body’. So, after many spiritual activities, I malnourished my body so much that if something pierced my body, water would come out, but never blood. In this way, a person who is honourable can be known from his childhood.”
3.6 Then, Bhajanãnand Swãmi asked, “Mahãrãj, is it better to maintain this thought in the mind, or is it better to expose the body to tap?”
3.7 To that, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “The faults due to the body should be known, and the faults due to the mind should be known. Of these, which are the faults of the body? Well, repeated erections and itching of the genitals, excessive movement, rapid movement of the eyes, smelling many types of fragrances quickly, walking twenty or twenty-five miles quickly, embracing someone with such force that his bones break, ejaculating semen during dreams, and so on – all these are faults of the body, not the mind. Even if these faults of the body are greatly reduced, lustful desires, as well as desires for eating, drinking, walking, touching, smelling, hearing, and tasting, may remain. These should be known as the faults of the mind. So, the faults of the body and mind should be distinguished in this way.
3.8 “Then, the faults of the body should be removed by imposing bodily restraints. Then, once the body is weakened, the remaining faults of the mind should be eradicated by thinking, ‘I am the ãtmã, separate from desires. In fact, I am completely blissful’. A person who practices these two methods – bodily restraint and thinking of the ãtmã – is a great sãdhu. If a person has only bodily restraint, but does not think of the ãtmã, then it is not appropriate. Conversely, if a person only thinks of the ãtmã, but does not restrain his body, then that is also not appropriate. Therefore, a person who has both is the best. Moreover, if these two methods – self-discipline and thinking – are necessary for even grahastha satsangis to practice, then a tyãgi should definitely practice them.”
3.9 Then, Nishkulãnand Swãmi asked, “Mahãrãj, can a person remain like that through thinking or through vairãgya?”
3.10 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “A person remains like that due to the company of a great sãdhu. Furthermore, a person who is unable to do so even with the company of a great sãdhu is a great sinner.”
3.11 Saying that, Shreeji Mahãrãj continued, “If a tyãgi desires to indulge in the worldly pleasures which are appropriate only for a grahastha, then he is as good as an animal eating dry grass. This is because even though he is never going to acquire those objects, he still has a desire for them. It seems that he has not understood that fact properly; and as the saying goes, what is the point in asking the name of a village that a person is not going to visit? If he does have a craving for those objects that he has given up, will it be possible for him to obtain them during this lifetime? He can attain them only if he falls from satsang, but not while remaining in satsang. Therefore, a person who maintains a desire for those pleasures, while remaining in satsang, is a fool. This is because whoever remains in satsang is required to follow the dharma of a satsangi. For example, if a woman sets out to become a sati but turns back upon seeing the fire, would her relatives allow her to turn back? They would force her to burn on her husband’s funeral pyre. Also, if a brãhman lady becomes a widow but continues to dress like a married woman, will her relatives allow it? Certainly they would not. Therefore, a person who maintains indecent svabhãvs while remaining in satsang has not understood this talk. If he had understood it, such indecent svabhãvs would not remain.”
3.12 Saying this, Shreeji Mahãrãj bid “Jay Swãminãrãyan” to everyone and departed to go to sleep.
End of Vachanãmrut Kãriyãni || 3 || 99 ||