1.1 In the Samvat year 1877, on Kãrtik vad 10 [30th November, 1820], Swãmi Shree Sahajãnandji Mahãrãj was sitting on a decorated bedstead in the residential hall of the paramhans in Surã Khãchar’s darbãr in Loyã. He was wearing a white, cotton-padded survãl and a white dagli made of chhint. He had also tied a white feto around His head. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him.
1.2 Then, Shreeji Mahãrãj asked the munis, “What does ‘Shankar’ mean?”
1.3 The munis replied, “That which gives bliss is called Shankar.”
1.4 Hearing this answer, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “Last night, an hour or two before sunrise, Shivji granted me his darshan in a dream. He was seated on the big, powerful Nandishvar. His body was of a large build, and he had thick, matted hair; he appeared to be approximately forty years of age. Along with Shivji was Pãrvati, who was wearing all white clothes. Shivji, like a great sãdhu, appeared tranquil, and he showed great love towards me. However, I did not feel love for him. This is because I believe, ‘Shiv is a dev that is full of tamo-gun, whereas I worship Shree Krishna-Nãrãyan who is the incarnation of tranquillity’. Therefore, I do not have much love for devs like Brahmã, Shiv, and Indra, who have rajo-gun and tamo-gun. Moreover, I have much hatred towards anger; I do not like angry men or angry devs. Nonetheless, why do I respect Shivji? I do so because he is a tyãgi, a yogi, and a great bhakta of Bhagvãn.
1.5 “What is anger like? Well, it is like a rabid dog. If the saliva of a rabid dog touches a man or an animal, then they suffer and die, just like the constantly barking rabid dog. Similarly, a person infected by saliva in the form of anger, suffers like a rabid dog, and falls from the path of a sãdhu.
1.6 “Furthermore, just like a butcher, an Arab, a cruel soldier, a tiger, a leopard, and a black snake frighten everyone and kill some, similarly, anger frightens all and takes the life of some. If such anger arises in a sãdhu, it appears very unsuitable; after all, a sãdhu should be calm. But, if anger were to arise, that sãdhu would appear cruel to others. At that time, the sãdhu’s appearance would change since anger itself is ugly. Therefore, anger makes a person appear ugly.”
1.7 Then, Shuk Muni asked, “Mahãrãj, if a slight trace of anger arises but is then suppressed, is such anger disruptive, or not?”
1.8 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “If a snake were to appear in this sabhã at this moment, then even if it does not bite anyone, everyone would still have to rise and scatter; there would be panic in everyone’s heart. Furthermore, if a tiger were to come and roar at the outskirts of the village, then even if it does not harm anyone, all would feel terror within, and no one would come out of their homes. Similarly, even if a trace of anger were to arise, it would still be a source of extreme misery.”
1.9 Then, Nãnã Nirmanãnand Swãmi asked, “By what means can kãm be totally uprooted?”
1.10 To this, Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “Kãm is uprooted if a person has extremely firmly realised himself to be the ãtmã; and he firmly follows the panch-vartmãn, including the vow of the eight types of brahm-chãrya; and he thoroughly understands the greatness of Bhagvãn. However, even after the roots of kãm have been eradicated, a person should not deviate from brahm-chãrya and other niyams in any ways. However, the method for totally uprooting even the most vicious form of kãm is to fully understand the greatness of Bhagvãn.”
1.11 Then, Bhajanãnand Swãmi asked, “Mahãrãj, what are the characteristics of the three levels of vairãgya – kanishth, madhyam, and uttam?”
1.12 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “A person with the kanishth vairãgya is pure while strictly following the niyams related to the tyãg of women as described in the Dharma-Shãstras. But, if he were to see a women’s body, then his would get attached to that body, and he would not remain stable. Such a person can be considered to be a person with the kanishth vairãgya.
1.13 “If a person with a madhyam vairãgya were to see a naked women, no disturbance would arise in his mind, just as he would not be disturbed by seeing naked animals. Moreover, his mind would not become attached to that woman. Such a person can be considered to be a person with the madhyam vairãgya.
1.14 “Now, if a person with the uttam vairãgya were to come across women and other worldly objects, even in solitude, he would not be tempted. Such a person can be considered to be a person with the uttam vairãgya.”
1.15 Then, Bhajanãnand Swãmi asked again, “What are the characteristics for the three levels of Bhagvãn’s gnãn – kanishth, madhyam, and uttam?”
1.16 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “A person with the kanishth gnãn initially develops the nishchay in Bhagvãn upon seeing His powers. However, when such powers are not seen in Him, or when nothing unpleasant happens to an evil person who slanders Bhagvãn, then his nishchay would not remain. Such a person can be described to be a person with the kanishth gnãn.
1.17 “If a person with a madhyam gnãn were to see pure and impure human actions of Bhagvãn, he would be deceived by them, and his nishchay in Bhagvãn would not remain. Such a person can be described to be a person with the madhyam gnãn.
1.18 “A person with the uttam gnãn, would not be deceived even after seeing any type of pure or impure actions performed by Bhagvãn, and his nishchay would not diminish. Moreover, even if the person who initially convinced him of Bhagvãn were to say, ‘He is not Bhagvãn’, he would feel, ‘This person must be mad’. Such a person can be described to be a person with the uttam gnãn.
1.19 “Of these, the person with the kanishth gnãn becomes siddh after countless lives; the person with a madhyam gnãn becomes siddh after two or three lives; and the person with the uttam gnãn becomes siddh in the same life.” Shreeji Mahãrãj replied in this way.
1.20 Then, Motã Shivãnand Swãmi asked, “Despite having complete nishchay in Bhagvãn, why does a person not feel fulfilled within?”
1.21 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “A person whose antah-karans burns due to enemies, such as of kãm, krodh, lobh, svãd, sneh, and mãn, would not believe himself to be fulfilled – even if he does have nishchay in Bhagvãn.”
1.22 Then, Nityãnand Swãmi asked, “What is the method for overcoming these enemies?”
1.23 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “The enemies are overcome only if a person remains alert to harshly punish them. Just as Dharma-Rãj remains ready, day and night, to beat sinners with a stick, similarly, if the indriyas behave immorally, then the indriyas should be punished; and if the antah-karans behave immorally, then the antah-karans should be punished. The indriyas should be punished by imposing upon them the kruchhra chãndrãyan and other vrats, and the antah-karans should be punished through a thought process. As a result, those enemies, like kãm and krodh, would be defeated. Then, by having nishchay in Bhagvãn, a person would feel himself to be completely fulfilled.”
1.24 Then, Muktãnand Swãmi asked, “Who can be said to have developed complete satsang?”
1.25 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “First of all, such a person has extremely firmly realised himself to be the ãtmã. Also, he believes his ãtmã to be absolutely detached from the body, the indriyas, and the antah-karans; he does not believe the actions of the body and indriyas to be his own. Despite this, he does not permit even a slight lapse in following the panch-vartmãn. Moreover, even though he himself behaves as brahm-svarup, he does not abandon his feeling of servitude towards Purushottam Bhagvãn; he faithfully worships Bhagvãn while maintaining a master-servant relationship with Him. Furthermore, he realises the pratyaksha murti of Bhagvãn to be absolutely unaffected, like ãkãsh.
1.26 “That ãkãsh is interwoven with and pervades the other four bhuts; and the actions of the other four bhuts occur within ãkãsh. Similarly, despite performing pure and impure actions, the pratyaksha Shree Krishna-Nãrãyan remains unaffected, just like ãkãsh. Also, such a person realises the countless powers of this Bhagvãn as follows: ‘This Bhagvãn appears to be human for the kalyãn of the jeevs. But, in fact, He is the creator, preserver, and destroyer of countless brahmãnds. He is the lord of Golok, Vaikunth, Shvet-Dvip, Brahmpur, and other dhãms. He is also the lord of all the countless akshar-rup muktas’. With this understanding of Bhagvãn’s greatness, he devoutly engages in various forms of bhakti, and in listening to the talks of Bhagvãn. He also serves Bhagvãn’s bhaktas. When a person behaves in this way, his satsang can be said to be complete.”
1.27 Nãnã Shivãnand Swãmi then asked, “At times, a person understands the greatness of a bhakta of Bhagvãn extremely well, but at other times, he does not understand it so well. What is the reason for this?”
1.28 Then, Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “A sant follows the path of dharma. When he sees a person treading the path of adharma, he lectures that person. As a result, a person who identifies himself with the body will not know how to accept the advice positively and, in return, will perceive avgun in the sant, and will have hatred towards the sant. Therefore, a person understands the greatness of a sant as long as he is not lectured by him. Even when that person is given beneficial advice that may pain him, he perceives avgun in the sant, and does not retain that understanding of the sant’s greatness.
1.29 “A person who perceives avgun in a sant, is unable to become pure by any form of prãyshchit. In fact, release from the sins, such as lust, is possible, but release from the sin of insulting a sant is not possible. For example, if a person contracts tuberculosis, no medicine would be able to cure the disease; he would definitely die. Similarly, a person who perceives avgun in a sant should be known as having tuberculosis; he will certainly fall from satsang sometime in the future. Furthermore, even if a person’s hands, feet, nose, eyes, fingers, and other body parts are severed, he still cannot be described as dead. However, when the head is severed from the body, he is described as dead. Similarly, a person who perceives avgun in a bhakta of Bhagvãn, has had his head severed. If he lapses in following other vartmãn, then his limbs can be said to be severed – he will still live. That is, he will survive in satsang. But, a person who has perceived avgun in a sant will certainly, at some time, fall from satsang. He should be known to have had his head severed.”
1.30 Then, Bhagvadãnand Swãmi asked, “If a person has perceived avgun in a bhakta, is there any method to apologise for it, or not?”
1.31 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “There is a solution, but it is extremely difficult; a person who has intense shraddhã can do it. When avgun are perceived in a sant, a person should think, ‘I have committed a great sin by perceiving avgun in a brahm-svarup bhakta of Bhagvãn’. From such thoughts, he will feel intense regret in his heart. As a result of such regret, while eating, he will be unable to distinguish between tasty and tasteless food, and at night he will be unable to sleep. As long as the avgun of the sant is not removed from the person’s heart, he will continue to experience extreme guilt, just like a fish will suffer without water.
1.32 “On the other hand, when he intensely perceives gun in that sant, then if that sant has been hurt in any way, he would please him with absolute humbleness. If this type of thought remains in a person’s heart, then even if he has perceived avgun in that sant, they would still be overcome, and he would not fall from satsang. Apart from that, there is no other solution; this is the only solution.”
End of Vachanãmrut Loyã || 1 || 109 ||