3.1 In the Samvat year 1877, on Fãgan sud 8 [11th March, 1821], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting on a decorated bedstead in Jhinã-Bhãi’s darbãr in Panchãlã. He was wearing a white khes and had covered Himself with a white pachhedi. He had also tied a white feto around His head. A sabhã of paramhans, as well as a sabhã of haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him.
3.2 Then, Shreeji Mahãrãj said to the paramhans, “Please begin a question-answer discussion.”
3.3 Then, Muni Bãvã asked Brahmãnand Swãmi, “We have attained this satsang, as well as the association of Bhagvãn. All other flaws have been eradicated, and we also have enthusiasm to do satsang. Despite this, why do mãn and irshyã still remain?”
3.4 Brahmãnand Swãmi then began to supply an answer, but was unable to do so satisfactorily.
3.5 Then, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “Such a person lacks intelligence. This is because a person who is intelligent realises all of his gun and avgun, as well as the gun and avgun of others. On the other hand, a person who is not intelligent only acknowledges his own gun, but fails to realise his avgun; he feels himself to be as distinguished as the Sanakãdik, and he views other renowned people to be inferior to himself. However, a person who is intelligent realises his own avgun, and thinks ‘I possess many avgun. Then, maintaining an intense hatred towards those avgun, he eradicates them. Also, if a sãdhu were to speak to him about eradicating those avgun, he would accept that advice as beneficial. As a result, avgun, such as mãn and irshyã, will not remain in him.
3.6 “On the other hand, someone may appear to be very intelligent, but if he does not recognise his own flaws, then his intelligence should be known to be merely worldly. Outwardly, that intelligence appears to be very sharp, but he cannot be called intelligent. Actually, he should be known to be an utter fool, and his intelligence is useless for attaining his own moksh. In comparison, someone else may possess only a little intelligence, but if he attempts to eradicate his avgun after recognising them, then even his limited intelligence is useful in attaining moksh. In fact, only he can be called intelligent. Therefore, a person who never perceives his own avgun and perceives only his own gun should be known as a fool; and a person who acknowledges his own avgun should be known to be intelligent.”
3.7 Then, Shreeji Mahãrãj instructed, “Now, please sing kirtans.” The paramhans then commenced singing ‘Sakhi Ãj Mohan Deethã Re, Sheriye Ãvta Re…’.”
3.8 Following this, Shreeji Mahãrãj spoke again, “Now, please stop the singing. The kirtans that you have just sung are full of love. While you were singing, I thought about the nature of love, and realised that love is a great quality; and to worship Bhagvãn with love is admirable. After deep thought, I realised, ‘Love itself is the mãyã of Bhagvãn’. This is because if two women are casually talking to each other, looking at each other, or casually touching each other, then that is a different type of love. Or, if two men are talking to each other, looking at each other, or casually touching each other, then that is also a different type of love. However, if a man is looking at a woman, embracing her, listening to her talks, and enjoying her fragrance, then the love and mental attraction he develops for her is a type of love that does not develop between two men. Also, if a woman is looking at a man and embracing him, then the love she develops for him through his association, with her mind being totally attracted towards him, is a type of love that does not develop between two women. Therefore, that which is the cause of the continuance of the world, and the cause of bondage and the cycle of births and deaths, is the mãyã of Bhagvãn, which takes the form of love.
3.9 “Then, I thought, ‘Shabda, sparsh, rup, ras, and gandh are the panch-vishays. After having regarded everything else as perishable, if those vishays are directed only towards Bhagvãn, realising Him to be the only source of ultimate bliss, then that is fine – that is not mãyã’. But, then I thought that even that is not appropriate. After all, if a person perceives shabda, sparsh, rup, ras, and gandh, to be better in other objects compared to those that are in Bhagvãn, he will abandon Bhagvãn and will develop love for other objects. For example, Shree Krishna Bhagvãn’s 16,100 wives, who were apsãrãs in past lives, had asked for the following vardãn from Brahmã: ‘O Mahãrãj! We have experienced the touch of devs, demons, and humans, but we have not experienced the touch of Bhagvãn as our husband. Therefore, please grace us so that He becomes our husband’. So, Brahmã replied, ‘Perform tap and Bhagvãn will become your husband’. So, they performed intense tap, after which Ashtãvakra Rushi and Nãrad Muni both became pleased and granted the following vardãn: ‘Bhagvãn will become your husband’. In this way, by performing many tap in other lives, they attained Shree Krishna Bhagvãn. However, on perceiving more beauty in Sãmb than in Bhagvãn, they became infatuated by Sãmb. Therefore, it is not appropriate for a person whose mind is not steady to develop love for Bhagvãn through the pleasures of the vishays of the five indriyas. However, if a person’s mind does remain steady, without having any doubts, then it is appropriate.
3.10 “Moreover, a person who is intelligent should develop love for Bhagvãn in the following way: A person should realise his jeev as being distinct from the twenty-four tattvas. Then, after uprooting the vruttis of the five indriyas that are firmly embedded in the jeev, and while remaining as the jeev alone (without vruttis of the indriyas) he should remain nirgun and develop as much love for Bhagvãn as possible.
3.11 “What do I mean by nirgun? Well, the ten indriyas are the products of rajo-gun; the antah-karans and their presiding devs are the products of sattva-gun; and the five bhuts and the panch-vishays are the products of tamo-gun. A person who believes himself to be distinct from the products of those three gun and from the three gun themselves, and remains as the jeev alone, is known as nirgun. So, he should become nirgun in this way and develop love of Bhagvãn. Therefore, it is said:
3.12 “Those who possess gnãn after having realised the nature of the kshetra and the kshetragna attain ãtmã-nishthã and develop love for Bhagvãn. What is the kshetra? Well, the three bodies (sthul, sukshma, and kãran) and the three mental states (jãgrat, svapna, and sushupti), are the kshetra. Such a person realises the kshetra to be distinct from his own ãtmã, and he feels, ‘Those can never be any part of me; I am the knower; I am extremely pure, formless, genderless, and chetan, while the kshetra is extremely impure, jad, and perishable’. Understanding this firmly, a person who develops vairãgya towards everything else, and offers bhakti to Bhagvãn while following svadharma, is known to possess ekãntik bhakti and gnãn. A bhakta possessing this gnãn is superior to all. In fact, Bhagvãn has said:
3.13 “Realising this, a person should uproot the indriyas, the antah-karans, and the vishays from the jeev, and develop love for Bhagvãn – only that is appropriate. As long as a person has not uprooted them, he should extract work from them in the form of the darshan or touch of Bhagvãn. Moreover, they should not be regarded as supporters; instead, they should be regarded as enemies. In fact, a person should never feel gratitude towards them by thinking, ‘They are beneficial to me in offering bhakti to Bhagvãn’. He should not feel that the eyes enable a person to listen to the kathã of Bhagvãn; the skin enables a person to experience the touch of Bhagvãn; the nose enables a person to experience the fragrance of Bhagvãn’s mãlã and tulsi; the mouth enables a person to engage in kathãs and sing kirtans in praise of Bhagvãn; and the tongue enables a person to experience the taste of Bhagvãn’s prasãd. A person should not understand them to be helpful in performing bhakti of Bhagvãn. They should not be given gratitude, nor should they be trusted. Instead, they should be regarded only as enemies. This is because what if in the process of experiencing happiness through the darshan or touch of Bhagvãn, they lure a person to believe that there is pleasure in the darshan or touch of women and other objects? That would be very damaging. Therefore, those enemies (the five indriyas) should be confined, and work in the form of bhakti to Bhagvãn should be extracted from them. For example, a king who has captured his enemy keeps him chained and extracts work from him; never does the king free him or trust him. If he were to free him or trust him, then the enemy would definitely kill the king. In the same way, if a person trusts his enemies (the indriyas), and frees them and does not keep them confined, they will definitely make him fall from the path of Bhagvãn. Therefore, they should never be trusted.
3.14 “Also, just as the British arrest a criminal and keep him standing in a witness box to question him, without freeing him or trusting him, in the same way, the indriyas and the antah-karans should be kept in a witness box and in chains (the niyams of the panch-vartmãn), and then they should be made to offer bhakti to Bhagvãn. However, they should not be given any gratitude; they should be looked upon only as enemies. If the indriyas and the antah-karans are regarded as supporters, given gratitude, and seen to be useful in bhakti, then in the process of experiencing the happiness of the darshan or touch of Bhagvãn, they will lure a person to believe that there is some pleasure in women and other objects. As a result, all efforts he has made will become useless. For example, if one spark of fire were to fall on a large pile of gunpowder, then that gunpowder would be completely reduced to ashes. In this way, the stability of a person’s indriyas is not certain.
3.15 “Therefore, it is only appropriate that a person develops love for Bhagvãn while behaving as the ãtmã. That is my principle, and a person who develops love for Bhagvãn in this way is dear to me. Moreover, he should think, ‘The beauty of Bhagvãn cannot be found anywhere else; the touch of Bhagvãn cannot be found anywhere else; the bliss experienced from hearing Bhagvãn cannot be found anywhere else; and the tastes related to Bhagvãn cannot be found anywhere else’. In this way, a person should tempt the indriyas and the antah-karans, and divert them away from other vishays. This understanding is appropriate.”
3.16 Then, Svayamprakãshãnand Swãmi said, “Mahãrãj, in which place should a person stay and develop all these thoughts?”
3.17 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “A person should think: ‘I am not the sthul body, the sukshma body, or the kãran body; I do not have the jãgrat, svapna, or sushupti states; I am not the five gnãn-indriyas, the five karma-indriyas, the four antah-karans or their presiding devs; in fact, I am distinct from all these. I am chaitanya; I am a bhakta of Bhagvãn’. If the indriyas and antah-karans misbehave in some way, they should be disciplined in the following way: ‘Do you wish to see the beauty only of Bhagvãn, or do you also wish to see the beauty of others? Do you wish to listen to sounds related only to Bhagvãn and experience smells related to Him, or do you also wish to listen to other sounds and experience other smells? If you do crave after the vishays leaving Bhagvãn aside, then what is there between you and me? Who are you and who am I? I will have absolutely nothing to do with you. Whatever you do, you will have to bear the consequences’.
3.18 “Lecturing the indriyas and antah-karans in this way, a person should pray to Bhagvãn: ‘O Mahãrãj! O Swãmi! You intensely love your bhaktas! You are an ocean of mercy! The fault lies with the indriyas and antah-karans. I am distinct from them. In fact, they are my enemies. So, please protect me from their influence’. A person should constantly offer prayers in this way; and understanding his own kshetragna to be composed of chaitanya, he should offer love and bhakti to Bhagvãn.”
End of Vachanãmrut Panchãlã || 3 || 129 ||