16.1 In the Samvat year 1877, after the sandhyã ãrti on Mãgshar vad 14 [3rd January, 1821], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting on a decorated bedstead in Surã Khãchar’s darbãr in Loyã. He was wearing a white khes and a warm, red dagli. He has also tied a white feto around His head, and had tied a bokãni with another white feto. A sabhã of paramhans, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him.
16.2 Then, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “May the paramhans please engage in a question-answer discussion.”
16.3 Then, Mahãrãj Himself asked a question: “What are the characteristics of a person whose worldly desires have not become blunt, whose worldly desires have become blunt, and whose worldly desires have been completely uprooted?”
16.4 Muktãnand Swãmi began to answer the question, but could not reply adequately.
16.5 So, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “The vruttis of the indriyas of a person whose worldly desires have not become blunt, cling to the vishays. In fact, they cannot be dislodged even by a thought process. In comparison, the vruttis of a person whose worldly desires have become blunt do not enter the vishays immediately. If the vruttis were to enter the vishays, and he attempts to withdraw them, they would withdraw instantly; they would not remain attached to the vishays. However, a person whose worldly desires have become completely uprooted is unaware of the vishays during the jãgrat state, just as he is during the sushupti state. He would regard all pleasant and unpleasant vishays as equal and would behave as a person who is gunãtit.”
16.6 Then, Gopãlãnand Swãmi asked, “A person’s worldly desires may have become blunt, but what is the reason for them not being removed from their roots?”
16.7 Shreeji Mahãrãj explained, “The answer is that if a person has perfectly absorbed the following four qualities, then his worldly desires will become uprooted: gnãn in the form of knowledge of that ãtmã; vairãgya in the form of detachment from all things that have evolved out of Prakruti; dharma in the form of brahm-chãrya; and bhakti coupled with the knowledge of Bhagvãn’s greatness. Any deficiency in these four qualities leads to a deficiency in uprooting a person’s worldly desires.”
16.8 Having given the reply, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “Now, allow me to ask a question. Countless spiritual activities have been prescribed for a mumukshu to perform in order to attain Bhagvãn. Out of all of them, by which one powerful activity can all flaws be eradicated and all gun be acquired?”
16.9 The paramhans could not answer the question.
16.10 So, Shreeji Mahãrãj revealed, “If a person has bhakti coupled with the knowledge of Bhagvãn’s countless powers as described by Kapil-Dev to Devhuti, then all of his flaws would be eradicated:
mad-bhayãd-vãti vãto-yam suryas-tapati mad-bhayãt
It is by fear of me that Vãyu (wind) blows, Surya (sun) shines, Indra (clouds) rains, Agni (fire) burns, and Yam (death) devours the living
“Moreover, even if a person does not possess gnãn, vairãgya, and dharma, he still attains them. Therefore, this spiritual activity is the best of all.”
16.11 Then, Shreeji Mahãrãj asked another question: “A person with kapat, who is also clever, cunningly conceals his kapat. Please explain how such a person’s kapat can be recognised?”
16.12 Brahmãnand Swãmi answered, “Such a person can be recognised by the fact that he keeps the company of someone who is an enemy of satsang and who speaks unkindly of Bhagvãn and His sant. Such a person cannot be known by any other means.”
16.13 Shreeji Mahãrãj accepted the answer, but questioned further, “Yes, but how can such a person be recognised if he does not keep the company of such people?”
16.14 Brahmãnand Swãmi then added, “His kapat would be exposed in times of difficult circumstances.”
16.15 Shreeji Mahãrãj confirmed, “That is the correct answer to the question.”
16.16 Then, Shreeji Mahãrãj asked another question: “Which single avgun transforms all of a person’s gun to avgun?”
16.17 Shreepãt Devãnand Swãmi replied, “If someone criticises a bhakta of Bhagvãn, then all of his gun become as good as avgun.”
16.18 Shreeji Mahãrãj clarified, “That is true, but I had another answer in mind. A person may well be endowed with each and every gun, but if he believes Bhagvãn to be nirãkãr, then that is a great flaw. So much so, that because of this avgun, all of his gun become avgun.”
16.19 Then, Shreeji Mahãrãj asked, “Why does a person perceive avgun in a sãdhu?”
16.20 The paramhans attempted to answer the question, but were unable to give a precise answer.
16.21 So, Shreeji Mahãrãj answered the question Himself: “A person with mãn perceives avgun in a sãdhu. This is because it is the very nature of someone who has mãn, that if someone praises him, even though that person may have a hundred avgun, he would overlook them and would instead greatly highlight a single gun. Conversely, if a person does not praise him, then even though that person may have a hundred gun, he would overlook all of them and highlight an utterly insignificant avgun. Consequently, he would initially spite the person mentally, then verbally, and ultimately physically as well. Therefore, mãn is a great flaw. However, do not think that only the wise have mãn and the naïve do not. In actual fact, the naïve have more mãn than the wise.”
16.22 Then, Muktãnand Swãmi asked, “Mahãrãj, how can mãn be eradicated?”
16.23 Shreeji Mahãrãj explained, “A person who thoroughly realises the greatness of Bhagvãn does not have mãn. Look at Uddhavji, and how wise he was! He was skilled in the Niti-Shãstra, and had physical characteristics like that of a king. However, as he had understood the greatness of Bhagvãn, he put aside his mãn upon seeing the love of the gopis for Bhagvãn, and prayed, ‘May I become a tree, a vine, a blade grass, or maybe a shrub – anything that has been touched by the dust from the feet of the gopis’.
16.24 “Tulsidãs has also said:
tulsee jyake mukhanse bhoole nikase rãm
tãke pag kee paheniyãm mere tan kee chãm
“This means that even if someone utters the name of Bhagvãn unintentionally, a person who realises Bhagvãn’s greatness would make shoes from his own skin and offer them to that person. If that is so, would he have any mãn before a bhakta of Bhagvãn who constantly engages himself in worship and in chanting the name of Bhagvãn, who bows down to Bhagvãn, and who realises the greatness of Bhagvãn? Certainly not. Therefore, mãn is eradicated when a person realises the greatness of Bhagvãn, but without understanding the greatness of Bhagvãn, mãn simply cannot be eradicated. Therefore, whoever wishes to eradicate mãn should realise the greatness of Bhagvãn and His sant.”
End of Vachanãmrut Loyã || 16 || 124 ||