1.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on the night of Mãgshar sud 4 [20th November, 1819], Shreeji Mahãrãj had come to the residential hall of the sãdhus, in Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. A sabhã of sãdhus, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 1.2 Shreeji Mahãrãj then asked, “What is the most difficult of all spiritual activities?” 1.3 The brahm-chãris, sãdhus, and grahasthas, answered according to their understanding, but no one could give a satisfactory reply. 1.4 Shreeji Mahãrãj then said, “Allow me to answer. There is no spiritual activity more difficult than to continuously engage the mind on the svarup of Bhagvãn. The shãstras state that there is no greater achievement for a person whose mind’s vrutti is constantly focused on the murti of Bhagvãn. This is because the murti of Bhagvãn is like a chintãmani. Just as a person who possesses a chintãmani attains whatever he desires, a person whose mind’s vrutti is constantly focused on the murti of Bhagvãn can instantly see, if he so wishes, the svarups of jeev, ishvar, Mãyã, and Brahm. He can also see Vaikunth, Golok, Brahm-Mahol, and other dhãms of Bhagvãn. Therefore, there is no spiritual activity more difficult, nor is there any greater achievement, than to continuously engage the mind’s vrutti on the murti of Bhagvãn.” 1.5 Then, Sheth Govardhan-Bhãi asked Shreeji Mahãrãj, “What is the nature of Bhagvãn’s mãyã?” 1.6 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “Mãyã is anything that obstructs a bhakta of Bhagvãn, while he is performing dhyãn of Bhagvãn’s murti.” 1.7 Then, Muktãnand Swãmi enquired, “When a bhakta leaves his physical body, which is composed of the five bhuts, and goes to Akshardhãm, what type of body does he attain?” 1.8 Shreeji Mahãrãj answered, “A bhakta who has sought refuge in the Dharma-Kul will attain a brahmay body by the wish of Bhagvãn. When such bhaktas leave their body and go to Akshardhãm, some go by sitting on Garud, some go by sitting on a rath, and others go by sitting on a vimãn. This is how they reach the dhãm of Bhagvãn. Those who have mastered yog-samãdhi, can actually witness these events.” 1.9 Then, Harji Thakkar asked Shreeji Mahãrãj, “Some have been practising satsang for quite some time, yet they do not have the intense love for satsang as they do for their own body and their relatives. What is the reason for this?” 1.10 Shreeji Mahãrãj explained, “Such a person has not fully realised the greatness of Bhagvãn. When a sant, by whose association the greatness of Bhagvãn can be fully realised, talks to him about his svabhãv, the person is not able to change his behaviour. Instead, he develops hatred towards the sant that has advised him. It is due to this sinful act that he does not develop intense love for satsang. After all, sins committed elsewhere, are washed away by association with a sant. But sins committed against a sant, are washed away only by the grace of the sant himself, not by any other means. The shãstras also state: anya-kshetre krutam pãpam tirth-kshetre vina-shyati tirth-kshetre krutam pãpam vajra-lepo bhavi-shyati Sins committed elsewhere are destroyed at a place of pilgrimage, but sins committed at a place of pilgrimage are as though etched in iron. 1.11 “Therefore, if a person does not have hatred towards the sant, he develops intense love for satsang.”

2.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on the night of Mãgshar sud 5 [21st November, 1819], Shreeji Mahãrãj had come to the residential hall of the sãdhus, in Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. A sabhã of sãdhus, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 2.2 Then, Mayãrãm Bhatt asked Shreeji Mahãrãj, “Mahãrãj, please describe the characteristics of the three levels of vairãgya – uttam, madhyam, and kanishth.” 2.3 Shreeji Mahãrãj then explained, “A person who has the uttam vairãgya, engages in worldly activities, either by the ãgnã of Bhagvãn, or as a result of his responsibilities; but like Janak Rãjã, he is not affected by those worldly activities. He may indulge in the most tempting of the five vishays (shabda, sparsh, rup, ras, and gandh) attained as a consequence of his responsibilities, but he does so unwillingly. Those vishays are unable to attract him, so his tyãg remains undiminished. He invariably views those vishays as flawed, and treats them like enemies. Moreover, he constantly remains in contact with sãdhus, and shãstras, and remains in the sevã of Bhagvãn. Even if he were to come across difficult desh, kãl, and sang, his understanding would not weaken. Such a person is said to possess uttam vairãgya. 2.4 “A person who has madhyam vairãgya, also indulges in the most appealing of the five vishays and remains unattached to them. However, if he were to encounter difficult desh, kãl, and sang, he would become attached to those vishays, causing his vairãgya to decline. Such a person is said to possess madhyam vairãgya. 2.5 “As for a person who has kanishth vairãgya, if he were to encounter ordinary or inferior vishays, he may indulge in them, but would not become bound by them. However, if he were to encounter and indulge in appealing vishays, he would become bound by them. Such a person is said to possess kanishth vairãgya.”

3.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on the night of Mãgshar sud 6 [22nd November, 1819], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting in Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 3.2 Shreeji Mahãrãj then said, “Even a person who can constantly see the murti of Bhagvãn in his heart, should recall the leelãs performed by Bhagvãn in His different avatãrs in different places. He should also maintain love for brahm-chãris, sãdhus and satsangis, and should always remember them. If at the time of death he forgets the murti of Bhagvãn, but remembers the leelãs performed by Him in the different places, or if he remembers satsangis, brahm-chãris or sãdhus, then he will also remember the murti of Bhagvãn. In this way, that person attains a high spiritual status and benefits greatly. That is why I perform grand Vishnu-yãgs, annually celebrate Janamãshtmi, Ekãdashi, and other festivals, and gather brahm-chãris, sãdhus and satsangis on these occasions. Even a sinner who remembers these occasions at the time of death, can attain Akshardhãm.”

4.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on Mãgshar sud 7 [23rd November, 1819], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting in Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. A sabhã of sãdhus, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 4.2 Then, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “Haribhaktas should not have jealousy amongst each other.” 4.3 Ãnandãnand Swãmi replied, “Mahãrãj, even then jealousy still remains.” 4.4 Hearing this, Shreeji Mahãrãj explained “If a person does hold jealousy within them, it should be like that of Nãradji. Once, both Nãradji and Tumbru went to Vaikunth for the darshan of Lakshmi-Nãrãyan. There, Tumbru sang before them. Both Lakshmiji and Nãrãyan were so pleased that they rewarded him with their clothes and jewellery. Seeing this Nãradji became jealous of Tumbru, and thought, ‘I shall also learn to sing like Tumbru, so I can please Bhagvãn’. 4.5 “Nãradji learned the art of singing, and sang before Bhagvãn. But Bhagvãn replied, ‘You do not know how to sing like Tumbru’. Then, Nãradji performed tap to please Shiv, and received his blessings to master the art of singing. However, when he sang again, Bhagvãn still was not pleased with his singing. So he practised his singing for seven manvantars. Despite this, Bhagvãn still was not pleased. 4.6 “Finally, Nãradji learned to sing from Tumbru himself, and then sang before Shree Krishna Bhagvãn in Dvãrikã. Only then was Shree Krishna pleased, and rewarded Nãradji with His clothes and jewellery. Nãradji then abandoned his jealousy towards Tumbru. 4.7 “Therefore, if a person is to hold jealousy within themselves, then he should perceive the gun of the person that he is jealous of. He should also abandon his own avgun. If this cannot be done, then a bhakta should at least totally abandon any form of jealousy that would result in harming another bhakta.”

5.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on Mãgshar sud 8 [24th November, 1819], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting 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. 5.2 Then, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “A person should perform dhyãn upon Shree Krishna Bhagvãn together with Rãdhikãji. If he cannot hold the murti within the heart whilst performing dhyãn, he should not lose faith and stop the dhyãn like a coward. Those who are persistent in this way will earn the immense grace and darshan of Bhagvãn. Moreover, Bhagvãn will be bound by their bhakti.”

6.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on Mãgshar sud 9, [25th November, 1819], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting in Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 6.2 Then, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “In satsang, a person who is wise, increasingly finds avgun within himself, and perceives gun in Bhagvãn and His bhakta. Moreover, when Bhagvãn and His sant utter harsh words of advice for his own benefit, he accepts them as beneficial, and is not hurt by them. Such a person steadily attains greatness in satsang. 6.3 “Conversely, a person who lacks wisdom, practices satsang and listens to talk about satsang, but continually perceives gun within himself. When Bhagvãn and His sant highlight his avgun and advise him, he misinterprets such advice due to his arrogance. He perceives avgun in the person advising him. Such a person steadily declines, and loses his reputation in satsang. Therefore, if a person abandons the pride of his own gun, and remains brave, and keeps faith in Bhagvãn and His sant, his ignorance is eradicated, and he attains greatness in satsang.”

7.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on Mãgshar sud 9 [26th November, 1819], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting in Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 7.2 Then, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “No one is able to understand the philosophical principles found in the shãstras. In fact, all are confused by them. Therefore, please listen as I explain those principles precisely as they are. 7.3 “When the jeev behaves as if united with the three bodies of sthul, sukshma, and kãran, it is known as the anvay form of the jeev. When the jeev is distinct from these three bodies and described as eternal, it is known as the vyatirek form of the jeev. 7.4 “Ishvar, when together with its three bodies of virãt, sutrãtmã, and avyãkrut, is its anvay form. When ishvar is distinct from these three bodies and is described as eternal, it is known as the vyatirek form of ishvar. 7.5 “When Akshar-Brahm pervades Mãyã and the countless millions of brahmãnds that evolve from Mãyã, it is said to be in its anvay form. When Mãyã is distinct from everything and has the attributes of sachidãnand, it is known as the vyatirek form of the Mãyã. 7.6 “When Shree Krishna Bhagvãn is the antaryãmi and the controller of Akshar-Brahm, the ishvars, the jeevs, Mãyã and the brahmãnds that evolve from Mãyã, it is said to be the anvay form of Bhagvãn. When He is distinct from all and resides amidst the light of Brahm in Golok, it is said to be the vyatirek form of Bhagvãn. 7.7 “These five entities – Purushottam Bhagvãn, Akshar-Brahm, Mãyã, ishvar, and jeev – are eternal.”

8.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on Mãgshar sud 11 [27th November, 1819], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting in Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. A sabhã of sãdhus, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 8.2 Shreeji Mahãrãj then said, “If the indriyas are engaged in the sevã of Shree Krishna Bhagvãn and His bhakta, then the antah-karans are purified and the sins, which have been attached to the jeev for eternity, are destroyed. On the other hand, if the vruttis of the indriyas are directed towards women and other vishays, then a person’s antah-karans become polluted and he falls from the path of kalyãn. 8.3 “Therefore, a person should indulge in the vishays only as prescribed in the shãstras, but should never indulge in them by disobeying the niyams that are described in the shãstras. Also, a person should keep the company of a sant and should avoid kusang. In this way, when a person avoids kusang and keeps the company of a sant, the sense of ‘I-ness’ that he has towards his body and the sense of ‘my-ness’ that he has towards his bodily relations, are destroyed. He also develops profound love for Bhagvãn, and vairãgya towards everything except Bhagvãn.” 8.4 Then, on that same day, three hours after sunrise, Swãmi Shree Sahajãnandji Mahãrãj was sitting in Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr, facing the neem tree. A sabhã of paramhans was seated underneath the neem tree. Grahastha satsangis were also seated in the sabhã. Sãnkhya-yogi and female bhaktas were also seated in the sabhã. 8.5 Shreeji Mahãrãj then said, “Paramhans. Talk about your strengths in satsang; and if there is a weakness, then do no talk about it. Only talk about the strengths. Whoever has firm nishchay in Bhagvãn, should talk about that; and whoever has great knowledge about the ãtmã, should talk about that – ‘I am not a body; I am an ãtmã’. Also, those who have the strength of one of the five qualities – nirlobhi, or nishkãmi, or nispruhi, or nisvãdi, or nirmãni – talk about your strength.” 8.6 Then, Shreeji Mahãrãj happily said, “First, I will talk about my strength. Then, you will talk about your strength.” 8.7 Then, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “By the grace of Nar-Nãrãyan, I know I am an ãtmã, I am achhedhya, I am abhedhya, and I am sachidãnand. My greatness is due to the strength of my own svarup, and upãsanã of Nar-Nãrãyan; it is not due to expensive clothes, valuable jewellery, chariots, pãlkhi, elephants, and horses. Also, my greatness is not due to all the satsangi men and kings in the world standing before me with folded hands. If they were to leave satsang and become vimukhs, and if I do not have clothes to wear or a place to live, I will not feel inferior. My upãsanã of Nar-Nãrãyan is the cause of my greatness, and it is the reason that I know ‘I am brahm’, and how I know ‘I am an ãtmã’. If I try to leave my greatness, or if other devs try to reduce my greatness, it still will not diminish. 8.8 “My upãsanã of the Nar-Nãrãyan, who is Parbrahm and Paramãtmã, is such that ‘This Bhagvãn has a sãkãr murti’. If someone speaks of their experiences, or uses shãstras to convince me that Bhagvãn is nirãkãr, I will never trust their talks. This is because, due to His grace, I can see the sãkãr svarup of Bhagvãn in front of me. 8.9 “In my heart, I understand that those who say Bhagvãn is nirãkãr, have not fully understood Him, have never had darshan of His svarup, and they do not understand the shãstras. In the shãstras, those who have written that Bhagvãn has a nirãkãr svarup, have written this to show that Bhagvãn’s svarup is not like our mãyik svarup. In Bhagvãn’s physical body, the features that can be destroyed – five bhuts, ten indriyas, four antah-karans – are not like those found in humans. It is for this reason that the shãstras have described Bhagvãn as nirãkãr. 8.10 “The indriyas that are in Bhagvãn’s body cannot be destroyed. With his eyes, he looks towards Purush, who then looks towards Mãyã. This causes millions of universes to evolve from Mãyã. In these universes, the devs evolve, and in each universe, the sthãvar and jangam objects form. This proves that Bhagvãn has eyes. 8.11 “Then, when the universe and all the sthãvar and jangam objects are destroyed, and mahã-pralay occurs, only Bhagvãn remains. The Veds then pray to Bhagvãn. Listening to these prayers, he creates the universe again. This proves that Bhagvãn has ears. 8.12 “In this way, there are fourteen indriyas, which are alokik and cannot be explained. 8.13 “Through physical svarups, such as Rãm and Krishna, Bhagvãn comes to earth for the kalyãn of the jeevs. Due to his extreme compassion, he takes a svarup that can be seen by the jeev. Bhagvãn believes that if he does not take a physical svarup that can be seen, then how will the jeev perform dhyãn, smaran, and pujã? For this reason, Bhagvãn takes a pratyaksha svarup that can be seen by all – both satsangis and kusangis. 8.14 “But, Bhagvãn is the way He is. His indriyas or body do not become mãyik just because the jeev is able to see Him. For this reason, I can never believe anyone who claims that Bhagvãn is nirãkãr. 8.15 “If all the females in the universe come to my sevã, and if all the objects in the universe are offered to me, I will not become attached to them. This is due to the strength from my upãsanã of Nar-Nãrãyan. But, even if I do become attracted to these objects, I am not attached to them. This is due to the grace of my Bhagvãn, who allows me to have firm knowledge of my own svarup. 8.16 “I do not know how to give someone a son, give money, make the dead come alive, or kill someone. But, I do know how to give kalyãn to a jeev, and take that jeev to Akshardhãm. I shall not speak anymore. If I do speak, I will end up speaking more than I should.” 8.17 Saying all this, Mahãrãj looked at all the paramhans, with cool eyes like the season of Sharad. He then said, “Now, talk about your own strengths in satsang.” 8.18 Mahãrãj then said, “You and I have the same strengths. Therefore, my strengths are a part of you. Keep firm nishchay in everything I have said today.” In this way, Mahãrãj explained his own strengths in satsang for the benefit of the bhaktas. In reality, He Himself is Purushottam Nãrãyan.

9.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on Mãgshar sud 12 [28th November, 1819], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting in Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 9.2 Then, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “Suppose a person has developed nishchay in pratyaksha Shree Krishna Bhagvãn, offers bhakti to Him, and has His darshan. But, despite this, he still does not consider himself fulfilled, and instead, feels a deficiency within his antah-karans. He thinks, ‘As long as I have not seen the radiant svarup of this very same Bhagvãn in Golok, Vaikunth, and other dhãms, I have not attained ultimate kalyãn’. Talks about Bhagvãn should not be heard from a person with such ignorance. 9.3 “If a person has firm nishchay in pratyaksha Bhagvãn, believes himself to be fulfilled merely by His darshan and desires nothing else, then Bhagvãn Himself forcefully shows him His divine powers and murtis in His dhãms. 9.4 “Therefore, a person with firm nishchay in Bhagvãn, should desire nothing, except pratyaksha Bhagvãn.”

10.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on Mãgshar sud 13 [29th November, 1819], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting 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. 10.2 Then, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “Once, when I was travelling from Venkatãdri to Setubandh Rãmeshvar, I came across a sãdhu by the name of Sevak-Rãm. He had studied Shreemad Bhãgvat and other Purãns. During his journey, he fell ill. With him, he had a thousand rupees worth of gold coins. However, as he had no one to nurse him, he began to cry. I consoled him, and said, ‘Do not worry about anything. I shall look after you’. 10.3 “On the outskirts of the village, there was a banana orchard, where there was a banyan tree that was home to a thousand ghosts. The sãdhu had become extremely ill and was unable to walk any further. I felt extreme pity for him. So I prepared a bed of banana leaves one-and-a-half feet high under the banyan tree. As the sãdhu was suffering from dysentery and was passing blood, I would wash him and attend to him. 10.4 “He would give me enough of his money to buy sugar, ghee, and grains for himself. I would bring the ingredients, cook them, and then feed him. As for myself, I would go to the village for my meals. On some days, when I did not receive any food from the village, I had to do upvãs. Despite this, that sãdhu never once said to me, ‘I have enough money. Cook for both of us so that you may dine with me’. 10.5 “After serving the sãdhu for two months in this way he began to recover. Then, as we walked towards Setubandh Rãmeshvar, he made me carry his belongings weighing about twenty kilograms, whereas he walked with only a mãlã in his hand. By then, he was healthy and capable of digesting half a kilogram of ghee, yet he still made me carry his load while he walked empty-handed. In actual fact, my nature was such that I would not keep even a handkerchief with me. But respecting him as a sãdhu, I walked carrying his belongings weighing twenty kilograms. 10.6 “Although I served that sãdhu and helped him recover, he did not offer me even a single penny worth of food. Therefore, realising him to be ungrateful, I abandoned his company. In this way, a person who does not appreciate favours done by others should be known as a krutaghni. 10.7 “In addition, if a person has committed a sin but has performed the prãyshchit for it as written in the shãstras, then whoever still considers him a sinner should himself be considered a sinner, just like a krutaghni.”

11.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on Mãgshar sud 14 [30th November, 1819], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting in Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 11.2 Then, Brahmãnand Swãmi asked, “Mahãrãj, what is the nature of vãsnã?” 11.3 Shreeji Mahãrãj explained, “A desire within the antah-karans to enjoy vishays that have been previously seen, heard, or encountered, is called vãsnã. Moreover, a desire within the antah-karans to enjoy vishays that have not previously been encountered, is also called vãsnã.” 11.4 Then, Muktãnand Swãmi asked, “Mahãrãj, who can we call an ekãntik bhakta of Bhagvãn?” 11.5 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “A person who has no vãsnã other than Bhagvãn, and who thinks himself to be brahm-rup as he offers bhakti to Bhagvãn, is known as an ekãntik bhakta.”

12.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on Mãgshar sud Punam [1st December, 1819], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting in Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. A sabhã of sãdhus, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 12.2 Shreeji Mahãrãj then said, “When a person understands the nature of the causes of the entire creation, specifically Purush, Prakruti, Kãl, and the twenty-four tattvas, including maha-tattva, then he is released from the bondage of his avidyã, and the twenty-four tattvas that evolve from avidyã.” 12.3 Then, Muktãnand Swãmi asked, “Mahãrãj, how can their nature be known?” 12.4 Shreeji Mahãrãj then said, “Their nature can be realised by knowing their characteristics. I shall now describe those characteristics. 12.5 “Purush is the controller of Prakruti, and is also distinct from her. He is indivisible, without a beginning, and without an end. He is self-luminous, omniscient, imperishable, satya, kshetragna, and the cause of all the activities that possess a form. Also, he has a divya body. 12.6 “Prakruti is composed of the three gun. She is both jad and chaitanya, eternal, nirvishesh, the kshetra of all the jeevs and all the elements, including maha-tattva. She is also the divine power of Bhagvãn. 12.7 “Mãyã is nirvishesh, and the three gun of Mãyã are normally in the state of equilibrium. That which disturbs Mãyã, is called Kãl. 12.8 “Now I shall describe the characteristics of maha-tattva and the other elements, so please listen. 12.9 “Chitt and maha-tattva should not be regarded as being different. The entire world resides in a small form within maha-tattva, which itself is unchanging, luminous, pure, peaceful, and full of pure sattva-gun. 12.10 “Ahankãr is composed of the three gun, and is the cause of the evolution of all bhuts, indriyas, antah-karans, their presiding devs, and the prãns. It is peaceful, dense, and totally ignorant. 12.11 “The man is the place where all the desires for women and other objects are generated. It is subject to random thoughts, and is the controller of all the indriyas. 12.12 “Buddhi possesses the knowledge of all the objects. The specific knowledge which all the indriyas possess, is due to the buddhi. Its natural features are sanshay, nishchay, nindrã, and smruti. 12.13 “The characteristics of the ten indriyas – the ears (shrotra), the skin (tvak), the eyes (chakshu), the tongue (rasnã), the nose (ghran), the voice (vãk), the hands (pãni), the feet (pãd), the anus (pãyu), and the genitals (upastha) – is to connect themselves in their respective vishays. 12.14 “Shabda is the indicator of all objects. Shabda is the cause of all social interactions, and reveals the nature and class of the speaker. It dwells within ãkãsh, and is also the physical element of ãkãsh, and is perceived by the ears. 12.15 “Sparsh is the physical element of vãyu. Softness, hardness, cold, heat, and perception by the skin, are the characteristics of sparsh. 12.16 “Rup reveals the appearance of all objects. It resides in all objects in a small form, and changes as objects change. It is the physical element of tej, and is perceived by the eyes. 12.17 “The characteristics of ras are sweetness, spiciness, distastefulness, bitterness, sourness, and saltiness. It is the physical element of jal, and is perceived by the tongue. 12.18 “The characteristics of gandh are fragrance and stench. It is the physical element of pruthvi, and is perceived by the nose. 12.19 “Pruthvi supports all jeevs, and in the form of a physical body, the pruthvi is their home. It separates the other four bhuts, and gives a physical form to all life-forms. 12.20 “Jal binds pruthvi and other substances, and it also softens and moistens all objects. It satisfies and sustains all life-forms, it quenches thirst, and suppresses heat. 12.21 “Tej is luminosity, the cause of the digestion of food and absorbs liquids. It eliminates cold, is the cause of drying, creates hunger and thirst, and is the cause of burning wood and ghee. 12.22 “Vãyu causes trees to shake, and it gathers leaves and other small objects. It also carries the five vishays – shabda, sparsh, rup, ras, and gandh – to their indriyas. It is the vital force of all the indriyas. 12.23 “Ãkãsh provides space for all jeevs, and is the cause of the internal and external activities of the bodies. It is also where the prãns, indriyas, and antah-karans reside. 12.24 “In this way, by knowing the characteristics of the twenty-four tattvas, Prakruti, Purush, and Kãl, a person is freed from ignorance. In addition to knowing the characteristics, a person should also know the process of their creation. 12.25 “While residing in His dhãm, Shree Krishna Bhagvãn impregnates the womb of Mãyã through Akshar-Purush, through whom countless millions of Pradhãn and Purush are produced. What are those Pradhãn-Purush pairs like? Well, they are the cause of the creation of countless millions of brahmãnds. Of these, I shall now tell you about one Pradhãn-Purush pair – the cause of the creation of one brahmãnd. 12.26 “Firstly, Purushottam Shree Krishna Bhagvãn, in the form of Purush, impregnated the womb of Pradhãn. From the Pradhãn, maha-tattva evolved. From maha-tattva, the three types of ahankãr evolved. Of these, from sãttvik-ahankãr, the man and the presiding devs of the indriyas evolved; from rãjas-ahankãr, the ten indriyas, the buddhi, and the prãns evolved; and from tãmas-ahankãr, the five bhuts and the five tanmãtras evolved. These tattvas were created in this way. 12.27 “Then, inspired by the will of Bhagvãn, each tattva with its own components, helped create the bodies of the ishvars and the jeevs. A particular ishvar’s bodies are known as virãt, sutrãtmã, and avyãkrut. A particular jeev’s bodies are known as sthul, sukshma, and kãran. 12.28 “The body of ishvar, called virãt, has a lifespan of two parãrdhs. Fourteen manvantars pass, during one of Virãt-Purush’s days, and his night is the same duration as the day. During his day, the lower ten loks of the brahmãnd remain in existence; and after his night falls, they are destroyed. This is called nimit-pralay. 12.29 “When the two parãrdhs of Virãt-Purush have passed, the body of Virãt is destroyed, along with Satya-Lok and the other loks. At that time, Pradhãn-Prakruti, Purush, and the twenty-four tattvas, including maha-tattva, are absorbed back onto Mahã-Mãyã. This is called prãkrut-pralay. 12.30 “When that Mahã-Mãyã is absorbed by the divine light of Akshar-Brahm – like the night merges into the day – it is called ãtyantik-pralay. Also, the day-to-day death of the bodies of individual devs, demons, and humans, is called nitya-pralay. 12.31 “In this way, by knowing the process of the creation, sustenance, and destruction, a person develops vairãgya towards the world, and bhakti towards Bhagvãn. Also, when all of those brahmãnds are destroyed, all other jeevs lie dormant within Mãyã, whereas the bhaktas of Bhagvãn attain the dhãm of Bhagvãn.” 12.32 Again Muktãnand Swãmi enquired, “What is the dhãm of Bhagvãn like?” 12.33 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “The dhãm of Bhagvãn is without a beginning and without an end. It is infinite, indivisible, divya and sachidãnand. I shall describe it using an analogy. 12.34 “Imagine that this whole world, with all the mountains, trees, humans, animals, and all other life-forms, is made of glass. Also, imagine that all the stars in the sky are as bright as the sun. Then, just as the glass world would glow with extreme beauty amidst this radiance, the dhãm of Bhagvãn is similarly beautiful. Bhaktas of Bhagvãn see this in samãdhi and attain that luminous dhãm after death.”

13.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on Mãgshar vad 1 [2nd December, 1819], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting on a decorated bedstead under the neem tree near the mandir of Shree Vãsudev-Nãrãyan, in Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He was wearing a red survãl and a red dagli. He had tied a golden shelu around His head, and another golden shelu was tied around His waist. Pearl necklaces hung around His neck, and tassels of pearls were dangling from His pãgh. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 13.2 Then, Nityãnand Swãmi asked, “Within each body, is there only one jeev, or many? If you say there is only one jeev, then when the branches of a banyan, a pipal, or other trees are cut and planted elsewhere, exactly the same type of trees grows there as well. Has that one jeev been dissected into two, or has another jeev entered the new tree? If you say it is the same jeev, then how has a jeev been divided? A jeev is said to be whole and indivisible.” 13.3 Hearing this, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “I shall answer the question. Purush and Prakruti are the two powers of Shree Krishna Bhagvãn. He is the cause of the creation, sustenance, and destruction of this universe. Through His two powers of Purush and Prakruti, He assumed the form of Virãt. Then, during the first brãhm-kalp, Bhagvãn gave all beings, from Brahmã to the smallest blade of grass their bodies, through His own body in the form of Virãt. 13.4 “Then, during the pãdma-kalp, Bhagvãn gave Marichi and others their respective bodies, through the form of Brahmã. Then, through Kashyap and Daksh, He gave the devs, demons, humans, animals, and all the sthãvar and jangam life-forms, their bodies. That Shree Krishna Bhagvãn, along with His powers in the form of Purush and Prakruti, resides as antaryãmi in all jeevs, and grants each jeev a body according to its past karmas. 13.5 “That jeev, in its past lives, has performed many karmas – some with sattva-gun predominating, some with rajo-gun predominating, and some with tamo-gun predominating. As a consequence of those karmas, Bhagvãn grants that jeev a body of the udbhij type, or the jarãyuj type, or the svedaj type, or the andaj type. Bhagvãn also grants the jeev the rewards of its karmas in the form of happiness and misery. 13.6 “In addition, Bhagvãn makes the body of that jeev give birth to another body, according to its own karmas. Just as Bhagvãn created various life-forms from the bodies of Kashyap and the prajãpatis, that same Bhagvãn, while residing in all jeevs as antaryãmi, creates other bodies from one body by methods appropriate to that particular body. However, the jeev, through which other bodies are created, does not itself multiply into many forms. Bhagvãn grants birth to a jeev, through the body of another jeev, according to the relation of the karmas between the two jeevs.”

14.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on Mãgshar vad 2, [3rd December, 1819], Swãmi Shree Sahajãnandji Mahãrãj was sitting on a decorated bedstead under the neem tree opposite the mandir of Shree Vãsudev-Nãrãyan, facing south, in Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He had tied a white pãgh around His head. He was also wearing a white khes, and had covered Himself with a chãdar. Also, tassels of yellow flowers decorated His pãgh. Bunches of yellow flowers had been placed above both of His ears, with roses decorating those bunches. He was wearing garlands of yellow flowers around His neck. With His right hand, He was playing with a white sevati flower. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 14.2 Shreeji Mahãrãj then asked the munis, “Suppose there are two bhaktas of Bhagvãn. One is a tyãgi, and has abandoned worldly life. Although he does not have intense vairãgya, he physically abides by the vartmãns thoroughly. However, he still has a slight desire for worldly life in his mind, but he overcomes this by a thought process. He also has firm nishchay in Bhagvãn. Such is the tyãgi. In contrast, there is another bhakta, a grahastha. He also has firm nishchay in Bhagvãn. Even though he has remained a grahastha by Bhagvãn’s ãgnã, he is disinterested in worldly life. He has the same intensity of worldly desires as the tyãgi. Of these two bhaktas of Bhagvãn, who is better?” 14.3 Muktãnand Swãmi replied, “The tyãgi bhakta is better.” 14.4 Then, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “The tyãgi abandoned worldly of his own accord, out of frustration – so how can he be better? On the other hand, the grahastha has stayed at home because of Bhagvãn’s ãgnã – so how can he be inferior?” 14.5 Muktãnand Swãmi attempted to answer Shreeji Mahãrãj’s question in many ways, but was unable to give a satisfactory response. Then, he said, “Mahãrãj, please answer the question yourself.” 14.6 Then, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “If a tyãgi who is weak-minded receives rich foods to eat, then desires for worldly life will be revived within his heart. Or, if he encounters many hardships, the desires for worldly life will be revived. Compared to such a tyãgi, a grahastha is much better, because whenever a grahastha encounters times of extreme hardship or even times of great pleasure, he is always cautious, just in case he becomes attached to these pleasures. With this awareness, he remains disinterested in worldly life. Therefore, a true tyãgi is a person who has no desires for worldly life after he has abandoned it. 14.7 “But keep in mind that a grahastha is much better than a tyãgi with worldly desires, only if he follows the dharma prescribed for grahasthas. The grahastha’s dharma is extremely difficult to follow because countless occasions of good and bad times are encountered. Despite this, a true grahastha’s mind does not waver from serving sant or from following his dharma. He also realises ‘The profound association of the sant that I have attained is like a magnificent chintãmani and a kalp-vruksh. My wealth, property, sons, and daughters, are merely like a dream. The deep association of the sant that I have attained is the only true benefit of life’. Moreover, he does not become disheartened amidst any type of hardship that may come his way. Such a grahastha is by far the better of the two. Therefore, of all things, becoming a bhakta of Bhagvãn is very difficult; and to attain the association of the bhaktas of Bhagvãn is very rare indeed.” 14.8 Having spoken in this way, Shreeji Mahãrãj then arranged for the singing of kirtans written by Muktãnand Swãmi. 14.9 Then, Muktãnand Swãmi asked, “The Shrutis state: ante yã matihi sã gatihi Whatever a person’s mental state is like at the time of his death, will also be the state of his jeev after his death. “If a person’s mind is fixed on Bhagvãn at the time of death, he will attain a pleasant fate after death. Otherwise, he will not. This is the interpretation of the Vedic shlok. If this is so, then what is the significance of the bhakti a person has performed throughout his life?” 14.10 Shreeji Mahãrãj explained, “A person who has been graced with pratyaksha Bhagvãn, never falls from the path of kalyãn, regardless of whether or not he is conscious and aware of his physical body at the time of death. He is protected by Bhagvãn. 14.11 “Conversely, a person who has turned away from Bhagvãn, does not attain kalyãn when he leaves his physical body, even if he is conscious. Instead, he is sent to Yampuri after death. There are many sinful butchers who die while still fully conscious and aware of their body. Will they attain kalyãn? Of course not. If a bhakta of Bhagvãn suffers an accidental death and does not remember Bhagvãn, he will still attain kalyãn. 14.12 “Therefore, that Vedic shlok should be interpreted as follows: ‘The outcome at the time of death is determined by the present state of mind’. Therefore, a bhakta who realises in his mind ‘My kalyãn is guaranteed’ will as a result certainly attain kalyãn after death. In comparison, a person who has not been graced with the company of a sant or the svarup of Bhagvãn, will feel in his mind ‘I am ignorant, and I will not attain kalyãn’. As a result, his state of mind will determine his fate after death. 14.13 “A person who is the dãs of Bhagvãn has nothing left to do. In fact, other jeevs attain kalyãn by his darshan, so what is surprising about him attaining kalyãn? But to develop servitude towards Bhagvãn is very difficult indeed. This is because a dãs of Bhagvãn has the following characteristics: he realises the physical body as asatya, and his own ãtmã as satya. He has no desires to indulge in objects that are intended for his master. Also, he never behaves against the wishes of his master. Such a person is called a true dãs of Bhagvãn. However, a dãs of Bhagvãn who behaves as the body, is a false bhakta.”

15.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on Mãgshar vad 3 [4th December, 1819], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting in Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 15.2 Shreeji Mahãrãj then said, “A person whose heart is filled with bhakti towards Bhagvãn, feels ‘I only want to act according to the ãgnã of Bhagvãn and His sant’. This is the spirit within his heart. Also, he never – not even by mistake – utters ‘I will only be able to follow certain ãgnã, but not others’. 15.3 “Furthermore, such a person remains determined to see the Bhagvãn’s murti in his heart. If, while performing dhyãn on that murti, it cannot be seen, he does not lose courage. Instead, he constantly maintains a new shraddhã. While trying to see that murti, disturbing thoughts may arise, and despite his best efforts, they may not be suppressed. However, these disturbing thoughts can be overcome. The murti of Bhagvãn can then be seen within the heart by understanding the immense glory of Bhagvãn and by believing himself to be completely fulfilled. Even if this process takes ten years, twenty years, twenty-five years, or even a hundred years, he still does not become discouraged. He never abandon’s his attempts at seeing the murti of Bhagvãn within his heart. After all, Shree Krishna Bhagvãn has mentioned in the Geetã: anek-janma-sansiddh-stato yãti parãm gatim A yogi who has become siddh after many lives, attains Akshardhãm. 15.4 “Therefore, a person who continues to try and see Bhagvãn in this way, is called an ekãntik bhakta.”

16.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on Mãgshar vad 4 [5th December, 1819], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting in Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. A sabhã of sãdhus, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 16.2 Then, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “A wise bhakta of Bhagvãn, who can distinguish between sat and asat, perceives the avgun within himself and thoughtfully eradicates them. He also rejects any apparent avgun he perceives in a sant or a satsangi, and perceives their gun. Moreover, he never sees avgun in Bhagvãn. In addition, he accepts as the highest truth, whatever words of advice Bhagvãn and a sant offer and does not doubt their words in any way. Therefore, when a sant tells him ‘You are distinct from the mind, body, indriyas, and prãns; you are satya; you are the knower of the body, indriyas, and prãns, which are all asatya’ he accepts this to be the truth. He then behaves as the ãtmã – distinct from them all – and never follows the instincts of his own mind. 16.3 “In addition, such a person perceives objects and kusang that may cause bondage, or raise deficiencies in the ekãntik dharma, and avoids them. He does not become bound by them. Also, he takes in thoughts that are positive, and avoids thoughts that are negative. A person, who behaves in this way, is known to possess wisdom.”

17.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on Mãgshar vad 5 [6th December, 1819], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting in a west-facing room of Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã, while the kathã was being read. He was wearing a white khes, and had covered Himself with a chãdar. He had tied a white pãgh around His head, with a tassel of yellow flowers inserted into the pãgh, and He was wearing a garland of yellow flowers. He was in a very pleasant mood. 17.2 At that time, Shreeji Mahãrãj called for Muktãnand Swãmi, Gopãlãnand Swãmi and some other sãdhus. Addressing them, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “A small element of negative influence still remains in our satsang, which I wish to eliminate today. I want to conduct this matter in a way that includes all satsangis, paramhans, sãnkhya-yogis, and karma-yogis. 17.3 “Now, what is this negative influence in satsang? Well, it is those who speak discouragingly about satsang. That is the negative influence in satsang. What do they say? They say, ‘Who can follow Bhagvãn’s ãgnã thoroughly? Who can possibly follow the vartmãns perfectly? No one. Therefore, we should follow only as much as we can. After all, Bhagvãn is adham-udhãran, and so He will grant kalyãn to us as well’. 17.4 “They also say, ‘Attempting to see Bhagvãn’s svarup in the heart is not possible by a person’s own efforts. It is only seen by those whom Bhagvãn helps out of compassion’. With such proud words, they discourage others from practicing dharma, gnãn, vairãgya, bhakti, and other spiritual activities that please Bhagvãn. 17.5 “Therefore, from this day onwards, no one in our satsang should ever utter such discouraging words. Instead, always speak with courage. Those who do speak such words should be known as napunsak. In fact, on days when a person speaks such discouraging words, he should keep an upvãs.”

18.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on Mãgshar vad 6 [7th December 1819], three hours before sunrise, Swãmi Shree Sahajãnandji Mahãrãj was sitting on a decorated bedstead, in the courtyard in front of the veranda outside the west-facing rooms of Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. 18.2 After calling the paramhans and satsangis, Shreeji Mahãrãj sat engrossed in thought for quite some time. Then, He said, “I wish to tell all of you something, so please listen.” He then said, “In my mind I feel that I should not talk about this matter. However, I have the understanding that you are all mine, so I shall tell you. The matter is such that only a person who understands it and acts exactly according to it, will become a mukta. Otherwise, even by listening to or studying and understanding the meanings of the four Veds, six shãstras, eighteen Purãns, and the Mahãbhãrat and other historical shãstras, a person cannot become a mukta. I shall now talk about the matter, so please listen. 18.3 “Regardless of the attractive objects which may appear before me, if there is no desire for them in my mind, I am not worried. Also, my nature is such that even if the slightest desire of an object were to arise within me, I only feel at ease after shunning it. 18.4 “For this reason, I thought about what actually causes disturbances within the hearts of Bhagvãn’s bhaktas. I considered the man, buddhi, chitt, and ahankãr as possible causes. However, the antah-karans are not the cause of these disturbances. The only fault of the antah-karans is the satisfaction that it has, due to either the power of its nishchay in Bhagvãn or the strength derived from knowledge of the ãtmã. Due to this satisfaction, it feels, ‘I have found Bhagvãn, and so I have nothing left to do’. 18.5 “Actually, the greater fault lies with the five gnãn-indriyas, which I shall now elaborate in detail. Of the many varieties of foods that a person eats, each has differing tastes and differing natural qualities. When he eats that food, the natural qualities of the food pervade and affect the antah-karans as well as the entire body. For example, even a bhakta of Bhagvãn, after drinking bhãng, loses awareness of his vartmãns and the worship of Bhagvãn, due to the stimulation caused by that bhãng. Similarly, the natural qualities of the countless types of food are of a countless variety, like bhãng. So much so, that they seem endless. 18.6 “In the same way, a person also hears a countless variety of sounds with his ears. Those sounds also have a countless variety of natural qualities. Consequently, the qualities of whatever sounds he listens to, pervade and affect his antah-karans. For example, there may be an armed and violent person, an adulterous person, a prostitute, or a person who disobeys the rules of the Veds and society. Listening to the talks of such vicious persons is like drinking bhãng or alcohol – such talks pollute the antah-karans of the listener and make him forget the worship of Bhagvãn and His vartmãns. 18.7 “Similarly, there are countless varieties of touch sensations. They too have countless varieties of natural qualities. The touch of a sinful person also has an effect like that of bhãng and alcohol. Therefore, even if a bhakta touched such a person, that bhakta will lose all of his gun. 18.8 “There are also countless varieties of things to see. They too have countless varieties of natural qualities. If a person looks at an immoral person, the effect is just as damaging as drinking bhãng or alcohol. Therefore, looking at an immoral person definitely pollutes his mind and causes harm. 18.9 “In the same way, there are countless varieties of smells, with countless varieties of natural qualities. If a person smells the fragrance of a flower or some sandalwood paste from the hands of a sinful person, it pollutes his mind in the same way as drinking bhãng. 18.10 “Conversely, just as the mind is polluted by association with an immoral person, association of Bhagvãn or His sant purifies the mind. Even if the mind is polluted, it is purified by listening to the words of Bhagvãn and His sant. The mind is similarly purified by their touch. However, if a person is unable to touch such a great sant due to the restrictions of his vartmãns, then merely touching the dust of his holy feet to his head makes him pure. Likewise, a person is purified by the darshan of a great sant. However, he should have darshan while respecting his vartmãns. A person is also purified by eating prasãd, but the prasãd should be taken in accordance with the niyams of his varna and ãshram as set by Bhagvãn. If a person is unable to take prasãd, he should offer sãkar and take that as prasãd. In the same way, smelling the fragrance of the flowers and sandalwood paste offered to the great sant also purifies the mind. 18.11 “On the other hand, if a person indulges in the five vishays thoughtlessly, without distinguishing good from bad, then even if he is great as Nãrad and the Sanakãdik, his mind will surely become polluted. What is so surprising about the mind of a person who believes himself to be the body becoming polluted? Therefore, if he gives freedom to the five indriyas without understanding the difference between suitable and unsuitable, his antah-karans will become polluted. On the other hand, if a person indulges only in pure vishays through the five indriyas, then his antah-karans become pure. If the antah-karans become pure, he will be able to constantly remember Bhagvãn. 18.12 “However, if the objects of indulgence of even just one of the five indriyas are impure, the antah-karans will also become impure. Therefore, the sole cause of any disturbance experienced by a bhakta of Bhagvãn during worship is the vishays of the five indriyas, not the antah-karan. 18.13 “Another factor that determines the nature of a person’s antah-karans is the type of company he keeps. If he sits in a sabhã of materialistic people in a lavish seven-storey mansion decorated with beautiful mirrors and comfortable seats, and if those materialistic people are seated wearing various types of jewellery and fine clothes, and they are exchanging alcohol amongst themselves, with prostitutes performing vulgar dances to the accompaniment of various musical instruments – then the person’s antah-karans will unquestionably be harmfully affected. On the other hand, if a person sits in a sabhã where a paramhans is seated on a torn mattress in a grass hut and talks of Bhagvãn, dharma, gnãn, vairãgya and bhakti are in progress – then the person’s antah-karans will surely be favourably affected. 18.14 “Therefore, if a person thoughtfully examines the influence of satsang and kusang on the antah-karans, their effects can be realised. However, a fool cannot realise this. Indeed, this fact will not be understood by those who behave irresponsibly like animals. In comparison, a person who has even a little wisdom and has sought at least some refuge in Bhagvãn will immediately understand. Therefore, all paramhans, sãnkhya-yogis and karma-yogis should not associate with evil people. 18.15 “Regardless of how evil a person may be before joining the satsang, he should be accepted into satsang after he takes the appropriate niyams. However, if after joining the satsang, that person retains his evil nature, he or she should be removed from satsang. If he or she is not removed, then great harm will result. For example, if a person’s finger is bitten by a snake, or if it develops gangrene, and if the affected part is not immediately removed, the results would be damaging. Similarly, if a person is recognised as evil, you should immediately shun him. 18.16 “In conclusion, remain wise enough to accept these words of mine. If you do so, I shall consider it to be equivalent to you having served me in every way. I will also bless all of you and be extremely pleased with you. This is because you will have justified my efforts. Moreover, all of us will stay together in the dhãm of Bhagvãn. However, if you do not behave in this way, we will be greatly distanced. Consequently, you will reborn as a ghost or a demon, and you will have to suffer. Of course, the fruits of whatever bhakti you may have previously offered to Bhagvãn will be rewarded eventually, but only after great misery. Even then, you will become a mukta and go to Akshardhãm only by behaving as I have described. 18.17 “Furthermore, if anyone attempts to imitate me, he will definitely suffer. This is because Nar-Nãrãyan resides within my heart. Moreover, I am an eternal mukta. I have not become a mukta through the preaching of others. I exercise complete control over my man, buddhi, chitt, and ahankãr. In fact, I seize my antah-karans just as a lion clutches a goat, whereas others cannot even see their antah-karans. Therefore, imitating me, and believing that a person can remain pure even amidst attractive pleasures is just not possible, even for the likes of Nãrad and the Sanakãdik. So what can be said of others? 18.18 “A countless number have become muktas, and countless more will become muktas. Amongst them, none have been able to indulge in pleasures of the senses and yet remain uninfluenced by them; none will be able to do so in the future; nor is there anyone like that presently. Even a person who has made an effort for countless millions of years is incapable of remaining uninfluenced amidst temptations. Therefore, if you behave as I have described, you will benefit.” 18.19 Continuing, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “When I lovingly call someone near, it is for the benefit of their jeev. When I look at someone lovingly, or eat the tasty meals they have prepared, or sit on a decorated bedstead, or accept clothes, jewellery, garlands of flowers, and other offerings – it is all for the good of their jeev, but not for the sake of my personal enjoyment. In fact, I vow on Rãmãnand Swãmi that I do not accept those objects for my personal pleasure. Therefore, realising this, none of you should imitate me. 18.20 “Also, keep the activities of your five indriyas extremely pure. Please accept this ãgnã of mine without fail. This fact is simple in that it is comprehensible to all; so all of you will immediately understand it. Moreover, if you extensively announce it throughout satsang, I shall be very pleased indeed.” 18.21 Having delivered this talk, Shreeji Mahãrãj bid “Jay Sachidãnand” to all and returned to His residence.

19.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on the evening of Posh sud 1 [18th December, 1819], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting 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. 19.2 Then, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “In this satsang, those bhaktas who seek their own ãtyantik kalyãn cannot fulfil that aim by ãtmã-nishthã alone; nor can they fulfil that aim by lovingly offering the nine types of bhakti alone; nor can they fulfil that aim by vairãgya alone; nor can they fulfil that aim by svadharma alone. Therefore, all four qualties – ãtmã-nishthã, bhakti, vairãgya, and svadharma – should be perfected since all are dependent upon each other. Now, please listen as I describe how these four qualities are interdependent. 19.3 “If a person has ãtmã-nishthã, but does not have love towards Bhagvãn, then he does not attain the compassion of Bhagvãn, which can only be attained by love. Such compassion results in the achievement of the desirable and great divine power of not being overpowered by the gun of Mãyã. On the other hand, if a person does have love for Bhagvãn, but has not attained ãtmã-nishthã, then due to the belief that he is the body, that love cannot be perfected. Also, a person may have both ãtmã-nishthã and love for Bhagvãn, but if he lacks firm vairãgya, then the desires for worldly five vishays will prevent the perfection of ãtmã-nishthã and love for Bhagvãn. 19.4 “Then again, a person may have vairãgya, but if he lacks ãtmã-nishthã and love for Bhagvãn, he does not experience the profound bliss associated with the svarup of Bhagvãn. Also, a person may have svadharma, but if love for Bhagvãn, ãtmã-nishthã and vairãgya are absent, then he will not be able to rise above Bhur-Lok, Bhuvar-Lok, and all the other loks up to Brahmã’s Svarg-Lok. That is to say, he will not be able to rise above the brahmãnds and attain Bhagvãn’s Akshardhãm, which is greater than the darkness of Mãyã. On the other hand, a person may have the three qualities of ãtmã-nishthã, love for Bhagvãn, and vairãgya; but if svadharma is lacking, the three cannot be perfected. 19.5 “In this way, ãtmã-nishthã and other three qualities are dependent upon each other. A bhakta, who has extremely firmly established these four qualities within himself through the profound association with Bhagvãn’s ekãntik bhaktas, has completed all spiritual activities. Only he should be known as an ekãntik bhakta. Therefore, a bhakta having any deficiency in these four qualities should overcome that deficiency by serving and profoundly associating with the ekãntik bhakta of Bhagvãn.”

20.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on Posh sud 2 [19th December, 1819], Shreeji Mahãrãj was seated on a decorated bedstead on the veranda outside the east-facing rooms of Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He had tied a white pãgh around His head, and a tassel of yellow flowers had been placed in the pãgh. A garland of yellow flowers had been placed around His neck, and bunches of white and yellow flowers had been placed above His ears. He had also covered Himself with a white chofãl and was wearing a khes with a black border. The kathã was being read. A sabhã of paramhans, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 20.2 Then, Swãmi Shree Sahajãnandji Mahãrãj said, “Please listen, I wish to ask all of you a question.” 20.3 Hearing this, all the haribhaktas said with folded hands, “Please do ask.” 20.4 Shreeji Mahãrãj then asked, “Who is the most ignorant of all ignorant people?” 20.5 Everyone pondered over the question, but no one was able to reply. So, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “Here, I shall answer myself.” 20.6 Hearing this, everyone was pleased and said, “Mahãrãj, only you will be able to give a precise answer, so please explain.” 20.7 Shreeji Mahãrãj then began, “The jeev, which resides within the body, observes both the attractive and the unattractive. It witnesses childhood, youth, and old age, as well as a countless number of other things. However, the observer (jeev) fails to observe its own svarup. The jeev looks at objects externally, but it does not look at its own svarup. Therefore, it is the most ignorant of the ignorant. 20.8 “Furthermore, just as the jeev indulges in a countless variety of sights with the eyes, it similarly indulges in and knows the pleasures of the other vishays with the ears, skin, tongue, and nose. However, it does not indulge in the bliss of its own svarup and nor does it know its own nature. For this reason, it is the most ignorant of the ignorant, the most senseless of the senseless, the most foolish of fools, and the vilest of the vile.” 20.9 At that point, Shuk Muni raised a doubt. He asked, “Is it truly in a person’s own hands to see his own svarup? If it is, why does the jeev remain ignorant?” 20.10 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “For a person who has attained satsang, darshan of his jeevãtmã lies in his own hands. In fact, when has he attempted to see his own svarup and failed to see it? Having become dependent on and made helpless by mãyã, that jeev draws within, and enters the svapna and sushupti states, but never does it draw within of its own accord to see its own svarup. On the other hand, a person who thinks about the greatness of Bhagvãn and draws within himself sees his own svarup as extremely pure and luminous. In the midst of the luminance, he beholds the murti of Purushottam Bhagvãn, and experiences bliss in the way of Nãrad and the Sanakãdik. Therefore, all deficiencies in a bhakta are due to his own laziness.”

21.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on the evening of Posh sud 3 [19th December, 1819], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting on a decorated bedstead on the veranda outside the east-facing rooms of Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He was wearing a khes with a black border, and had covered Himself with a white cotton cloth. He had also tied a white pãgh around His head. A sabhã of sãdhus, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. Some of the sãdhus were singing kirtans to the accompaniment of a jhãnjh and pakhvãj. 21.2 Shreeji Mahãrãj quietened the sabhã and said, “Please listen, I wish to tell you something.” Having said this, He sat in deep thought with His eyes closed for quite some time. 21.3 Then, He said, “A haribhakta, who in his mind desires to intensely please Bhagvãn, can do so by the following means: unshakeable determination in abiding by the dharma of his varna and ãshram; firm ãtmã-nishthã; dislike for all objects except Bhagvãn; and bhakti which is without any desires for rewards, and which is accompanied with an understanding of Bhagvãn’s greatness. Bhagvãn is extremely pleased by these four spiritual activities. These spiritual activities are collectively known as ekãntik dharma. At present, there are many bhaktas in our satsang, who possess ekãntik dharma. 21.4 “A bhakta of Bhagvãn should think of the murti of Bhagvãn while eating, drinking, bathing, washing, walking, sitting, and all other activities. He should particularly think of Bhagvãn and continuously think of His murti when there is no mental disturbance within. However, when there is some internal disturbance due to random thoughts, he should realise his own self to be distinct from the body, the indriyas, the antah-karans, and the vishays, and their presiding devs. Only when those disturbing thoughts diminish, should he think of the murti of Bhagvãn. 21.5 “The body should not be believed to be a person’s true self, nor should a person’s bodily relations be regarded as his true relations. This is because the jeev has previously taken birth in each of the 8.4 million life-forms. In fact, the jeev has taken birth in the wombs of all females in this world; it has also taken birth numerous times in the wombs of all the dogs, cats, monkeys, and other types of life-forms in the cycle of 8.4 million life-forms. Also, of all the different types of females in this world, which has it not previously made its wife? All have been its wife at one time or another. Similarly, with numerous female bodies, that jeev has also made all the different forms of males, its husband. 21.6 “Therefore, just as a person does not believe the relations of those previous 8.4 million life-forms to be his true relations, and just as he does not believe the bodies of those 8.4 million to be his true relations, and just as he does not believe the bodies of those 8.4 million life-forms to be his true body, in the same way, a person should not believe this present body to be his true self, nor should he believe the relations of this body to be his true relations. 21.7 “Therefore, a person should offer bhakti to Bhagvãn day by day, and should also constantly keep the company of a sãdhu, while regarding all possessions and all objects as asatya, while having realised himself to be distinct from the body, indriyas, and antah-karans, and while following his own dharma. 21.8 “A person who does not have this understanding – who identifies himself with the body, and who has an ordinary attitude – should be thought of as an animal, even if he is presently in satsang. Yet, in this satsang, even animals attain kalyãn by the intense grace of Bhagvãn. So, what is so special about humans attaining kalyãn? However, such a person cannot be called a true ekãntik bhakta of Bhagvãn. Only a person possessing the understanding previously described can be called an ekãntik bhakta. After such an ekãntik bhakta leaves his body and becomes free of all influences of mãyã, he attains Akshardhãm via the archimãrg. 21.9 “Akshar has two forms. One, which is formless and pure chaitanya, is known as Chidãkãsh or Brahm-Mahol. In its other form, Akshar remains in the sevã of Purushottam-Nãrãyan. A bhakta who has reached Akshardhãm attains qualities similar to those of Akshar, and forever remains in the sevã of Bhagvãn. Furthermore, Shree Krishna Purushottam-Nãrãyan is forever seated in that Akshardhãm. The countless millions of muktas, who have attained Akshardhãm, behave as the dãs of Bhagvãn. Purushottam-Nãrãyan Himself is the master of them all, and the master of the kings of all the countless millions of brahmãnds. 21.10 “Keeping this in mind, all of our satsangis should develop the following singular belief: ‘We also wish to sit beside the akshar-rup muktas, and we wish to go to Akshardhãm, and forever remain in the sevã of Bhagvãn. We have no desire for the temporary and mãyik worldly pleasures, and nor do we wish to be tempted by them in any way’. Keeping such a firm belief, a person should offer ekãntik bhakti to Bhagvãn. 21.11 “By thoroughly understanding the greatness of Bhagvãn, a person should eradicate his desires for women, wealth, and all objects other than Bhagvãn. If desires for objects other than Bhagvãn are to remain, then if on the path to Akshardhãm he is tempted by these objects, he will abandon Bhagvãn and be lured by those objects instead. This would prove to be a major disaster. Therefore, a person should worship Bhagvãn after overcoming desires for all objects.”

22.1 In the Samvat year 1876, at noon on Posh sud 4 [20th December, 1819], Shreeji Mahãrãj was seated on a decorated bedstead on the veranda outside the east-facing rooms of Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. A tassel of flowers had been inserted in His pãgh, and bunches of flowers had been placed above both of His ears. He was also wearing a garland of guldãvadi flowers around His neck. A sabhã of paramhans, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. The paramhans were singing kirtans. 22.2 Shreeji Mahãrãj then said, “Please listen. I wish to tell you something.” 22.3 Hearing this, the paramhans stopped singing and prepared themselves to listen. 22.4 Shreeji Mahãrãj continued, “If a person does not remember Bhagvãn while singing kirtans to the accompaniment of a mrudang, a sãrangi, a sarodã, and other musical instruments, then that singing is as good as not having sung at all. There are many people in the world who sing and play instruments without remembering Bhagvãn, but they do not attain peace of mind. Therefore, whichever activity a person performs – whether it is singing kirtans, reciting Bhagvãn’s name, or singing the Nãrãyan dhun, – he should only perform that activity while remembering the murti of Bhagvãn. 22.5 “If a person specifically attempts to engage himself in bhajan, he may only be able to focus his vrutti on Bhagvãn. However, after completing those acts of bhajan if he does not keep vrutti in Bhagvãn while performing daily duties, his vrutti will not be steady on the murti of Bhagvãn even if he attempts to engage in bhajan again. Therefore, a person should practice maintaining his vrutti on the svarup of Bhagvãn while walking, eating, and drinking – in fact, during all activities. If he does this, his vrutti becomes fixed on Bhagvãn when he engages in bhajan as well. Moreover, when his vrutti begins to remain on Bhagvãn, it remains so even during other work. If a person is stupid and ignorant, then he will not be able to keep vrutti in Bhagvãn, even when he does bhajan. Therefore, a bhakta of Bhagvãn should carefully practice maintaining his vrutti on the murti of Bhagvãn.” 22.6 Having said this, Shreeji Mahãrãj requested, “Now please sing kirtans.”

23.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on Posh sud 5 [21st December, 1819], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting on a decorated bedstead on the veranda outside the east-facing rooms of Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He had tied a white feto around His head and was wearing a white angarkhu and white survãl. He had also tied a deep orange shelu around His waist. A sabhã of paramhans, as well as satsangis from various places, had gathered before Him. 23.2 Out of compassion, Shreeji Mahãrãj then began to speak to the paramhans, “The Vãsudev Mahãtmya shãstra is extremely dear to me, as it describes all the methods of how bhaktas of Bhagvãn should worship Him.” 23.3 Shreeji Mahãrãj then continued, “There are two types of bhaktas of Bhagvãn: One bhakta has complete nishchay in Bhagvãn, yet worships Bhagvãn identifying himself with the body. The other, believes his own svarup to be chaitanya, and beyond the influence of the three mental states (jãgrat, svapna, sushupti) and the three bodies (sthul, sukshma, and kãran). This bhakta worships Bhagvãn while seeing Bhagvãn’s murti within his own svarup. As a result, he sees his own svarup, which is beyond the three mental states and the three bodies, as being extremely full of divine light. Within that light, he sees the murti of Bhagvãn, just as it is in its pratyaksha svarup, as being extremely luminous. Such is the sthiti of this bhakta. 23.4 “As long as a person has not attained this sthiti, he is subject to obstacles, even if he is a bhakta of Bhagvãn. For example, Shivji did not have this sthiti and was therefore enticed by the beauty of Mohini. Brahmã also did not have this sthiti, and therefore became attracted to the svarup of Sarasvati. Nãradji also did not have such sthiti, and consequently had a desire to marry. Others like Indra and Chandra, who were not behaving with this sthiti, also had their reputations blemished due to their mistakes. 23.5 “Furthermore, if a person has not developed this sthiti, he will identify worldly characteristics even in Bhagvãn, even if he himself is a bhakta of Bhagvãn. Parikshit Rãjã was not such a bhakta who had this sthiti, and so he raised doubts about the divinity of Shree Krishna Bhagvãn after hearing of the rãs-leelã. On the other hand, because Shukji was such an elevated bhakta, he had no doubts whatsoever. Such a bhakta firmly realises ‘If no flaws can affect me or bind me in any way, how can there possibly be any mãyik flaws in Bhagvãn, by whose worship I have become like this?’ A bhakta with this sthiti firmly realises this. 23.6 “When such a bhakta of Bhagvãn focuses his vrutti on the svarup of Bhagvãn, that vrutti is divided into two. Of these, one vrutti focuses on the svarup of Bhagvãn, while the other focuses within the worshipper himself. The vrutti that is fixed on Bhagvãn’s svarup is applied lovingly, whereas the vrutti that is fixed on the worshipper himself is full of thoughts. This vrutti that is full of thoughts neutralises all other thoughts and desires – except those of worshipping Bhagvãn – that may arise in the worshipper himself. In this way, the vrutti of such a bhakta constantly remains on Bhagvãn. 23.7 “A person who at times worships Bhagvãn with a concentrated mind, and at other times indulges in worldly thoughts, does not develop this sthiti. For example, consider a pot that is filled with water and emptied somewhere. If another pot of water is subsequently emptied at the same place on the following day or the day after that, a pool of water will not collect there. This is because the water poured on the first day dried up on that very day, and water poured after also dries up on that same day. On the other hand, if a trickle of water were to flow continuously, a large pool of water will soon be formed. Therefore, while eating, drinking, walking, and engaging in any activity whatsoever – whether it is pure or impure – in fact, at all times, a person should constantly keep his vrutti of Bhagvãn. While maintaining his vrutti constantly on Bhagvãn in this way, he attains strong sthiti.”

24.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on the evening of Posh sud 6 [22nd December, 1819], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting on a decorated bedstead on the veranda outside the east-facing rooms of Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He had tied a white feto around His head, and was wearing a white khes. Also, He had put on a warm, red dagli and had covered Himself with a white chofãl. A sabhã of paramhans, as well as satsangis from various places, had gathered before Him. 24.2 Then, Shreeji Mahãrãj said to the paramhans, “I shall explain how sthiti can be attained by gnãn. What is this gnãn like? Well, it is greater than Prakruti and Purush. When sthiti is attained by this gnãn, Prakruti-Purush and their actions do not come into view. This is known as gnãn-pralay. A person, who has attained this sthiti, sees only pure chaitanya, within which only the murti of Bhagvãn resides, with no other forms remaining. At times, a person cannot even see the murti of Bhagvãn within that divine light; only the light is seen. At other times however, both the divine light and the murti of Bhagvãn are seen. This is known as sthiti attained by gnãn. Such sthiti is attained by constantly maintaining the vrutti on the visible murti of Bhagvãn.” 24.3 Continuing, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “The extent to which a person has understood the greatness of Bhagvãn determines the intensity of both the divine light experienced in the heart, and the divine sounds of prãnav that are heard. Furthermore, the extent of a person’s nishchay and understanding of the greatness of Bhagvãn determines the extent to which vicious thoughts are diminished. Therefore, when a person develops absolute nishchay in Bhagvãn and thoroughly understands His greatness, all of his vicious thoughts are eliminated. 24.4 “For example, if a person has sucked a slice of lemon, his teeth become a little sensitive, but he is still able to chew soft chickpeas. However, if he has sucked a whole lemon, he is unable to chew chickpeas, and will even have difficulty chewing mung beans. If he has sucked many lemons, he would be unable to chew cooked rice. In the same way, when a person has developed ‘sourness’ (nishchay) in Bhagvãn and an understanding of His greatness, his gums as the four antah-karans and the ten indriyas, become sensitised. In that state, with its gums as the man, the jeev is unable to chew chickpeas (thoughts for the vishays). With its gums as the chitt, the jeev becomes incapable of thinking of the vishays. With its gums as the buddhi, the jeev becomes incapable of developing a determination for the vishays. With its gums as the ahankãr, the jeev becomes incapable of developing any form of consciousness related to the vishays. Similarly, the jeev, with its gums as five gnãn-indriyas and five karma-indriyas, becomes incapable of chewing chickpeas (vishays). 24.5 “However, the indriyas and the antah-karans of a person who does not have absolute nishchay in Bhagvãn and who has not fully realised the greatness of Bhagvãn, do not withdraw completely from their vishays.” 24.6 Shreeji Mahãrãj then explained, “The svarup of Bhagvãn is greater than Mãyã and its gun, and is free of all types of flaws; but, it is for the sake of the kalyãn of jeevs that He appears to be like a human. In fact, Bhagvãn does not have any of the flaws that foolish people assign to Him. However, the intellect of the person who describes Bhagvãn with such flaws will never be freed of those flaws that he assigns to Bhagvãn. Specifically, a person who believes Bhagvãn to be full of kãm will himself become intensely full of kãm; a person who believes Bhagvãn to be full of krodh will himself become intensely full of krodh; a person who believes Bhagvãn to be full of lobh will himself become intensely full of lobh; and a person who believes Bhagvãn to be full of irshyã will himself become intensively full of irshyã. In fact, whatever types of flaws a person assigns to Bhagvãn will ultimately cause misery to the person himself – just as a fistful of sand thrown at the sun falls back into the eyes of the thrower. 24.7 “On the other hand, if a person understands Bhagvãn to be absolutely flawless, then regardless of his own svabhãvs, he himself becomes absolutely flawless as well.” 24.8 Then, Brahmãnand Swãmi asked, “Suppose there is a person whose indriyas are not drawn towards any of the vishays, nor do vicious thoughts arise in his antah-karans. He also has absolute nishchay in Bhagvãn. Despite this, a feeling of dissatisfaction remains, and he feels hopeless within. What can be the reason for this?” 24.9 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “That is a major deficiency in the bhakta. Despite the fact that his mind has become stable and that he has firm nishchay in Bhagvãn, he still fails to experience intense happiness in his heart. In particular, he does not feel, ‘I am extremely fortunate and completely fulfilled, whereas others in the world are constantly being troubled by kãm, krodh, lobh, moh, mad, matsar, ãshã, trushnã. They are subject to the three types of sufferings day and night. As for me, Purushottam Bhagvãn has compassionately revealed His own svarup to me. He has also freed me from kãm, krodh, and all the other vicious natures. He has also placed me in the company of sãdhus similar to Nãrad and the Sanakãdik. Indeed, I am very fortunate’. 24.10 “Failing to think in this way and failing to remain extremely delighted throughout the day is a major deficiency. In fact, such a bhakta can be compared to a child who has been given a chintãmani in its hand, but derives no happiness from it as the child does not realise the chintãmani’s value. Similarly, the major flaw in that bhakta is that despite having attained Purushottam Bhagvãn, he does not feel constant delight within by realising, ‘I am completely fulfilled’. 24.11 “Moreover, when a fault is noticed in a haribhakta, a person should think, ‘His svabhãv is such that it is not suitable in satsang; nevertheless, he has attained satsang. Regardless of what he is like, he has still remained in satsang. Then, surely his sanskãrs from past lives or from this very life must be extremely favourable for him to have attained this satsang’. With this understanding, he should highly appreciate even such a person’s gun.” 24.12 After this talk, Shreeji Mahãrãj bid “Jay Sachidãnand” to everyone and returned to His residence.

25.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on the morning of Posh sud 7 [23rd December, 1819], Shreeji Mahãrãj arrived at the residence of the paramhans in Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He was wearing a white khes and had covered Himself with a white chofãl. He had also tied a white feto around His head. He was sitting facing east on the western veranda. A sabhã of paramhans, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 25.2 Out of compassion, Shreeji Mahãrãj then said, “A bhakta of Bhagvãn, who follows only svadharma, does not feel completely fulfilled within his heart. That feeling of fulfilment can only be attained by ãtmã-nishthã and the knowledge of Bhagvãn’s greatness. Moreover, absence of these two qualities, determines the extent of the deficiency in this experience of fulfilment. Therefore, a bhakta of Bhagvãn should firmly develop these two qualities. 25.3 “The deficiency remaining in these two factors also determines the extent of the difficulty experienced during samãdhi. Recently, I granted samãdhi to a haribhakta in which she saw intense divine light. Seeing the light, she began to scream, and she shouted, ‘I’m burning!’ Therefore, even those who experience samãdhi, require knowledge of the ãtmã. If a person does not realise his own svarup to be the ãtmã, and instead believes his svarup to be the body, the deficiency will remain. 25.4 “I explained to that bhakta, ‘Your svarup is the ãtmã, not the body. You are not this Lãdkibai of the Bhãt sub-caste; instead, your svarup is the ãtmã, which is achhedhya and abhedhya’. I then placed her into samãdhi again and told her, ‘Go to the four-petalled kamal at the site of Ganpati, and look at your svarup there’. 25.5 “When a person in samãdhi enters the site of Ganpati, that person hears divine sounds and sees divine light. When he enters the higher place of Brahmã, he hears louder sounds and sees brighter light. When he enters the still higher place of Vishnu, he hears even louder sounds and sees even brighter light. In this way, as he enters higher and higher locations, he hears increasingly louder sounds and sees increasingly brighter light. As a result of the intense divine light seen in samãdhi, and the loud thunderous sounds that occur, even the most strong-minded become fearful. 25.6 “For example, despite being a bhakta of Bhagvãn and despite being extremely brave, Arjun was incapable of beholding Bhagvãn’s Vishvarup form. He therefore pleaded, ‘O Mahãrãj! I am incapable of beholding this svarup of yours. Please grant me darshan of your former svarup’. Similarly, in samãdhi, when thundering noises like those of an entire brahmãnd exploding are heard, and masses of intense light like overflowing oceans are seen, even the brave lose their patience. Therefore, a person should understand his own svarup to be distinct from the body. 25.7 “Samãdhi experienced in this way is achieved in two ways. One is by controlling the prãns through prãnãyam, whereby the chitt is also controlled. The other is by controlling the chitt, whereby the prãns are also controlled. When is control over the chitt achieved? It is achieved when a person’s vruttis are detached from everything else and focused only on Bhagvãn. However, these vruttis can be focused on Bhagvãn only when desires for everything else are overcome and only a singular desire for the svarup of Bhagvãn remains. Then, those vruttis will not be deflected from Bhagvãn’s svarup by any means whatsoever. For example, if twenty pails of water were drawn from a water-well, and the flow of water from each pail flowed in separate directions, then there would be little force in each flow. However, if the flows of all twenty pails of water are combined, then the resultant flow would become extremely powerful – like that of a river – and would not be able to be diverted by any means whatsoever. Similarly, when a person’s vruttis have become free of worldly desires, his chitt focuses only on Bhagvãn’s svarup. 25.8 “Conversely, when a person has desires in his chitt for the pleasures of the world, his vrutti is widely dispersed among thousands of different types of sounds heard via the ear; the vrutti of the skin is dispersed among thousands of different types of touch sensations that are felt; the vrutti of the eyes is dispersed among thousands of different types of things that are seen; the vrutti of the tongue is dispersed among thousands of different types of tastes; the vrutti of the nose is dispersed among countless types of smells. In the same way, the vruttis of his karma-indriyas are dispersed among their respective vishays in thousands of different ways. In this way, via the ten indriyas, his antah-karans are dispersed in thousands of different ways. Only when his chitt thinks about Bhagvãn, and his man generates thoughts of Bhagvãn, and his buddhi establishes the nishchay in the svarup of Bhagvãn, and his ahankãr thinks ‘I am the ãtmã, and a bhakta of Bhagvãn’, can his desire for Bhagvãn be known to have become singular. 25.9 “Alternatively, the control of the chitt by controlling the prãns is achieved by ashtãng-yog, which comprises of eight stages: yam, niyam, ãsan, prãnãyam, pratyãhãr, dhãran, dhyãn, and samãdhi. This ashtãng-yog is the method, and its gift is the nirvikalp samãdhi of Bhagvãn. When this nirvikalp samãdhi is achieved, the chitt is controlled by controlling the prãns. On the other hand, if the chitt focuses on Bhagvãn after becoming free of worldly desires, then the prãns are controlled by control of the chitt. 25.10 “Therefore, just as the chitt is controlled by mastering ashtãng-yog, similarly, the chitt can also be controlled by focusing on the svarup of Bhagvãn. A bhakta whose chitt’s vrutti becomes focused on the svarup of Bhagvãn, masters ashtãng–yog without even attempting to master it. Therefore, the spiritual activities of ãtmã–nishthã and the knowledge of Bhagvãn’s greatness that I have just described should be firmly practiced. 25.11 “Furthermore, a person’s vartmãn dharma – which are Bhagvãn’s ãgnã – should certainly be followed. For example, the dharma of a brãhman is to bathe, lead a pure life, and never drink even water from a shudra’s house. Similarly, a satsangi should never falter in following Bhagvãn’s ãgnã. This is because Bhagvãn will be pleased with him if he behaves accordingly. 25.12 “Moreover, a person should very firmly maintain both the knowledge of Bhagvãn’s greatness as well as the knowledge of the ãtmã coupled with vairãgya. He should also feel fulfilled by realising, ‘Now I have no deficiencies remaining’. With this understanding, he should constantly offer bhakti to Bhagvãn. Having said this, he should not get carried away in the joy of this understanding, and nor should he feel unfulfilled. If he does feel unfulfilled, then the blessings that have been showered upon him by Bhagvãn can be considered as not having germinated – like a seed sown in saline soil. Conversely, if he gets carried away and begins to behave disobediently, then that is like having thrown a seed into a fire, which burns it. Therefore, if a person understands as I have explained, then no form of deficiency will remain.” 25.13 After saying this, Shreeji Mahãrãj returned to His seat.

26.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on the afternoon of Posh sud 11 [27th December, 1819], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting on a decorated bedstead on the veranda outside the east-facing rooms of Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He had tied a white pãgh around His head. He was wearing a white khes and had covered Himself with a white chofãl. Two large guldãvadi flowers had been placed upon His ears, and a tassel of flowers had been inserted in His pãgh. A sabhã of paramhans, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. Some of the paramhans were singing kirtans to the accompaniment of a pakhvãj. 26.2 Shreeji Mahãrãj then said, “Please stop singing, and listen as I sing a kirtan in the form of talks.” 26.3 The paramhans said, “Very well, Mahãrãj. Please do.” 26.4 Shreeji Mahãrãj then said, “If a person is attracted only by Bhagvãn’s svarup while singing rasik kirtans, then that is fine. But, being attracted to anything other than Bhagvãn’s svarup signifies a major deficiency. This is because just as that bhakta develops affection for and is attracted by sounds related to Bhagvãn, he also develops affection for and is attracted by worldly songs, musical instruments, and talks related to women. Such a bhakta should be known to lack wisdom. Therefore, a person who is attracted equally by the words of Bhagvãn and His sant, and by worldly speech, should abandon such foolishness. Having abandoned such foolishness, he should experience happiness through sounds and speech related only to Bhagvãn. Such a person is a true rasik bhakta. 26.5 “Furthermore, just as that rasik bhakta wishes for sounds related only to Bhagvãn, he desires only the touch of Bhagvãn. When he realises that other types of touch are like touching a black cobra or a blazing fire, he is a true rasik bhakta. Similarly, if a person experiences extreme bliss on seeing Bhagvãn, and realises everything else to be like a pile of filth or a dead dog, then he is true rasik bhakta. Similarly, if a person experiences extreme bliss after tasting the prasãd of Bhagvãn, and not from enjoying other various types of tastes, then he is a true rasik bhakta. 26.6 “Furthermore, such a bhakta experiences profound bliss on smelling tulsi, garlands of flowers, and many varieties of small fragrant items like perfume and sandalwood that have been offered to Bhagvãn. He is not pleased on smelling the perfume, sandalwood, or garlands of flowers worn by people. In this way, a person who has intense love for panch-vishays related to Bhagvãn and an intense dislike for worldly panch-vishays is a true rasik bhakta. 26.7 “On the other hand, a person who becomes a rasik bhakta, but still derives the same pleasure from other types of shabda, sparsh, rup, ras, and gandh as he does from Bhagvãn–related vishays, is a false rasik bhakta. This is because he experiences the same type of joy from vishays as he does from Bhagvãn. Therefore, such affection and mode of worship should be abandoned. This is because it is not Bhagvãn who is at fault – it is the rasik bhakta’s attitude that is at fault, as he has believed Bhagvãn to be exactly like other objects. As a result, his bhakti and affection are flawed. 26.8 “Now, just as I have described caution in indulging in the five types of vishays for the sthul body in the jãgrat state, similarly, subtle vishays exist for the sukshma body in the svapna state. A bhakta may experience happiness from shabda, sparsh, rup, ras, and gandh related to Bhagvãn on seeing the svarup of Bhagvãn in his dream, but if he also derives exactly the same pleasure on seeing other vishays in his dream, then that bhakta’s affection is false. On the other hand, if a person in his dream experiences happiness only by association with Bhagvãn and feels a dislike for other vishays as if they were vomited food, then he can be said to be a true rasik bhakta. However, if he does not have a dislike for the other vishays, then although the svarup of Bhagvãn seen in his dream is true, that bhakta’s understanding is flawed. This is because he has equal love for Bhagvãn and for other vishays. Therefore, true understanding is to remain attracted only towards the svarup of Bhagvãn, and not towards other vishays. 26.9 “In this way, when only thoughts of Bhagvãn remain while thinking, the mind becomes completely void, with the exception of the murti of Bhagvãn, and that bhakta does not identify the body or the brahmãnd at all. Then, while seeing the murti of Bhagvãn within that void, divine light is generated, and the murti of Bhagvãn is seen within that light. So, love towards only the svarup of Bhagvãn in this way, is called pati-vratã bhakti.” 26.10 In conclusion, Shreeji Mahãrãj added, “When you sing rasik kirtans, I also close my eyes and think about just this. These thoughts of mine may be simple, but nothing is able to persist in those thoughts except Bhagvãn. In fact, my thoughts are so powerful that if any vishay were to come in the way of the rasik love that I have for Bhagvãn’s svarup, its head would be cut off. Just as you prepare a kirtan to sing, I prepared this kirtan in the form of a talk, which I have shared with you all today.” 26.11 In this way, using Himself as an example, Shreeji Mahãrãj delivered these talks for the benefit of His bhaktas.

27.1 In the Samvat year 1876, before sunrise on Posh sud 12 [28th December, 1819], Shreeji Mahãrãj arrived at the residential hall of the paramhans in Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. There, He sat on a platform facing west. He had tied a white feto around His head, and he was wearing a khes. He had also covered Himself with a white chofãl. A sabhã of paramhans had gathered before Him. 27.2 After a few minutes of deep thought, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “Everyone wishes to worship Bhagvãn, but their understanding differs. Bhagvãn fully resides in the heart of a person who possesses the following understanding: ‘The earth remains stable and trembles; the stars remain steady in the sky; the rains fall; the sun rises and sets; the moon appears and disappears, and it waxes and wanes; the vast oceans remain constrained within their boundaries; a drop of liquid develops into a human possessing hands, feet, a nose, ears, and the rest of the ten indriyas; the clouds, through which lightning strikes, float unsupported in the sky – these and a countless variety of the other wonders are only due to the Bhagvãn that I have attained’. With this understanding, he has the belief that no one except the pratyaksha svarup of Bhagvãn is the cause of these wonders. He realises, ‘The countless wonders which have occurred in the past, those which are currently taking place, and those which will occur in the future, are all only due to the pratyaksha svarup of Bhagvãn that I have attained’. 27.3 “Moreover, he also understands that ‘Even if someone were to throw dust on me, or were to humiliate me in any way, or were to seat me on a donkey after cutting off my nose and ears, or even if someone were to honour me by seating me on an elephant – all these situations would be equal for me’. Such a bhakta views a beautiful young woman with equality, he treats a heap of gold and a pile of stones with equality, and he also possesses countless glorious qualities, such as gnãn, bhakti, and vairãgya. Bhagvãn eternally resides in the heart of such a bhakta. 27.4 “Consequently, by the grace of Bhagvãn, that bhakta attains countless types of power, and gives kalyãn to countless beings. Despite these powers, he tolerates the praises and insults of other people. This itself is also a great achievement, because to tolerate insults, despite being so powerful, is not easy for others to achieve. Therefore, a person who tolerates in this way should be considered to be extremely great. 27.5 “The powers of such a person are such that Bhagvãn sees through his eyes, which empowers the eyes of all the beings in the brahmãnd; and since it is Bhagvãn who walks through his legs, he is also capable of giving the strength to walk to the legs of all the beings in the brahmãnd. Therefore, since it is Bhagvãn who resides in all the indriyas of such a sant, that sant us able to give power to the indriyas of all the life-forms in the brahmãnd. Therefore, such a sant sustains the world. His greatness lies in the fact that he tolerates the insults delivered even by insignificant people. Only those who are forgiving in this way should be considered to be extremely great. 27.6 “On the other hand, those who threaten and frighten those who are more humble than themselves, and believe ‘I have become great’, are not truly great. In fact, those people in this world who frighten others by showing extraordinary powers, should not be considered to be bhaktas of Bhagvãn. Instead, they are jeevs lost in mãyã, and are only suitable for Yampuri. Their greatness is limited to the worldly life. For example, in society, a person with one horse is considered to be greater than someone with no horses at all, whereas a person with five horses is considered to be greater than someone with only one horse. In this way, the wealthier a person is, the greater he is considered to be in society. However, such a person is not great in worshipping Bhagvãn.” 27.7 Continuing, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “A grahastha or sãdhu who believes, ‘This woman is very beautiful; these clothes are extremely fashionable; this medi is very nice; and this utensil is very lovely’, has little knowledge. Then, you may ask, ‘Will such people attain kalyãn or not?’ Well, in this satsang, even the wretched attain kalyãn. However, the people described never develop the qualities of a sãdhu, or the glorious qualities of the sant previously described. This is because they have not become suitable for such nobility.” 27.8 After delivering these talks, Shreeji Mahãrãj bid “Jay Sachidãnand” to all, and returned to His residence in Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr.

28.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on Posh sud 14 [30th December, 1819], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting on a decorated bedstead on the veranda outside the room in line with the room of Shree Vãsudev-Nãrãyan, in Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. At that time, the sãdhus had sat down to eat in His presence. 28.2 Shreeji Mahãrãj then said, “When a satsangi is likely to fall from satsang, vicious desires steadily flourish within him. At first, he begins to perceive avgun in all satsangis day by day. In his heart, he feels, ‘All of these satsangis lack understanding; only I have true understanding’. In this way, he considers himself to be superior to all. Such a person remains constantly uneasy, day and night. He cannot sit peacefully anywhere during the day; nor can he sleep at night. Moreover, his anger never subsides. In fact, he constantly smoulders like a half-burnt log. A person who behaves in this way should be known to be on the verge of falling out of satsang. No matter how many days he spends in satsang, he will never experience peace in his heart. Therefore, he will fall from satsang. 28.3 “Conversely, when a person is likely to advance in satsang, pure desires steadily flourish within him. Day by day, he perceives only gun in all satsangis; he views all bhaktas as superior to himself and considers himself to be insignificant. Moreover, he experiences the bliss of satsang in his heart twenty-four hours a day. Such characteristics indicate that pure desires have flourished. In fact, the more such a person practices satsang, the more he benefits. Eventually, he attains extreme greatness.” 28.4 Having delivered this talk, Shreeji Mahãrãj bid “Jay Sachidãnand” to all and returned to His seat.

29.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on the evening of Posh sud Punam [31st December, 1819], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting on a decorated bedstead on the veranda outside the west-facing rooms of Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He was wearing a white khes and had covered Himself with a white chofãl. He had also tied a white pãgh around His head. He was wearing garlands of white flowers, and a tassel of white flowers was hanging from His pãgh. A sabhã of sãdhus, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 29.2 Shreeji Mahãrãj then said, “Please ask a question.” 29.3 Then, Gopãlãnand Swãmi asked, “How can the force of bhakti coupled with dharma, gnãn, and vairãgya be intensified?” 29.4 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “There are four means to accomplish this: The first is a pure desh, the second is a pleasant kãl, the third is spiritual kriyã, and the fourth is the sang of a sat-purush. Of these, the influence of desh, kãl, and sang are more powerful than kriyã. This is because, if a desh is pure, and kãl is pure, and a person also keeps the sang of sant like yourself, then kriyã will naturally be pure as well. Conversely, if a desh is impure – like the region of Sindh, if the kãl is impure, and if a person also keeps the sang of prostitutes and perverted people, or of those who consume alcohol and meat, then kriyã will certainly be impure as well. Therefore, a person should stay where there is a pure desh, and should abandon a place where the kãl has become unpleasant. A person should keep the sang of a bhakta of Bhagvãn, as well as the sang of a sant who abides by the panch-vartmãn. As a result, a haribhakta’s bhakti for Bhagvãn gains tremendous energy. This is the answer to your question.” 29.5 Then, Muktãnand Swãmi asked, “Mahãrãj, initially a haribhakta may be very impure at heart, but he later becomes extremely pure. Is this due to his previous sanskãrs, the grace of Bhagvãn, or the bhakta’s personal efforts?” 29.6 Shreeji Mahãrãj explained, “The good or bad that occurs due to person’s previous sanskãrs is apparent to everyone in the world. For instance, the cause of Bharatji becoming attached to a deer can be understood to be due to prãrabdha. Or, if a poor person were to receive a large kingdom, then everyone would come to know of it. That should be known as prãrabdha.” 29.7 Then, narrating His own story, Shreeji Mahãrãj continued, “Considering the spiritual activities I have performed, it is unimaginable that my body has survived such strictness, yet even in those circumstances it did survive. That can be considered to be due to prãrabdha. What were those circumstances? Well, while staying in Purushottam-Puri, I spent many months surviving merely on air. On one occasion, I allowed my body to be carried away by a river that was four to five miles wide. During the winter, summer, and monsoon, I stayed without shelter, wearing only a loincloth. I also used to wander in the jungle amongst wild animals such as tigers, elephants, and wildebeests. I travelled in many frightful conditions, yet my body did not perish. In these situations, a person should consider prãrabdha to be responsible. 29.8 “Now, consider the son of the brãhman named Sãndipani whose son was saved from Narak, and when five-year-old Dhruvji prayed to Bhagvãn, the meanings of the Veds and other shãstras were spontaneously revealed to him. In these situations – as well as when a person’s mind is purified by the wish of Bhagvãn or by His grace, or by the grace of His ekãntik sãdhu who has been pleased by a person’s extremely pure sentiments – the influence of Bhagvãn’s grace should be considered to be responsible. 29.9 “If a person keeps the sang of a devout sãdhu and becomes virtuous through his own thoughts, then that is known as purush-prayatna.” 29.10 Having said this, Shreeji Mahãrãj bid “Jay Sachidãnand” to the sabhã and returned to His seat laughing.

30.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on the evening of Posh vad 1 [1st January, 1820], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting on a decorated bedstead on the veranda outside the room facing north, in line with the mandir of Shree Vãsudev-Nãrãyan, in Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He was wearing a white khes and had covered Himself with a white chãdar. He had also tied a white feto around His head, with tassels of white flowers hanging from it. He was wearing a garland of white flowers, bunches of white flowers were placed above His ears. He was also wearing berkhã of white flowers around His wrists. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. Some of the munis were singing kirtans. 30.2 Shreeji Mahãrãj then requested, “Please begin a question-answer discussion.” 30.3 Dinã-Nãth Bhatt then asked, “At times, thousands of thoughts arise, yet they do not leave a lasting impression in the mind. At other times, only an irrelevant thought arises, yet it leaves a strong impression in the mind. What is the reason for this? Also, by what means can a bhakta eliminate such disturbing thoughts?” 30.4 Shreeji Mahãrãj answered, “The reason is the influence of the gun. Thoughts occurring when tamo-gun is predominant, induce a state similar to that of sushupti. Therefore, those thoughts do not leave a lasting impression in the mind. When sattva-gun prevails, a person experiences a state of awareness. Therefore, any disturbing thoughts that occur at that time, are dispelled by thinking. Therefore, those thoughts do not leave a lasting impression either. However, thoughts that arise when rajo-gun is prevalent, leave a lasting impression in the mind. Therefore, the reason some thoughts do leave a lasting impression in the mind and others do not, is due to the prevalence of the different gun. 30.5 “If an intelligent person reflects on this matter and examines his thoughts whenever they arise, he will be able to recognise which gun is predominant in him at that particular time. However, subtle thoughts that arise repeatedly from moment to moment cannot be grasped by anyone. At the most, someone intelligent like yourself may be able to distinguish two, three, or four of the more superficial thoughts that arise during the course of a day. 30.6 “So, if a person examines the predominant gun under whose influence his thoughts arise, and thinks about the spiritual talks which takes place in satsang, then the power of satsang is such that any disturbing thoughts, which arise under the influence of the gun, are dispelled. Then, becoming free from all doubts, he is able to continuously concentrate on the svarup of Bhagvãn. 30.7 “Without satsang, even if a person carries out millions of spiritual activities, disturbing thoughts and the influence of rajo-gun and the other gun will not be eradicated. Therefore, if someone sincerely practices satsang and reflects upon the talks relating to Bhagvãn, then his vile thoughts will be eradicated. In this way, the influence of satsang is extremely powerful. In fact, no other spiritual activity can compare with satsang. Therefore, a person who wishes to rid the mind of thoughts related to rajo-gun, should sincerely practice satsang by thought, word, and deed. As a result, disturbing thoughts will be eradicated due to the power of satsang.”

31.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on the evening of Posh vad 2 [2nd January, 1820], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting on a mattress with a large, cylindrical pillow that had been placed on the east-facing veranda outside His residence in Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. 31.2 At that time, Yogãnand Muni asked, “Mahãrãj, suppose there are two bhaktas of Bhagvãn. One bhakta follows nivrutti and does not hurt anyone verbally. The other, is constantly serving Bhagvãn and His bhaktas, by offering food, clothes, and flowers. However, in doing so, he may occasionally hurt someone verbally. Of these two bhaktas, who is better?” 31.3 Shreeji Mahãrãj did not answer the question. Instead, He called for Muktãnand Swãmi and Brahmãnand Swãmi. He had them listen to the question, and then requested, “Please answer this question.” 31.4 Both Muktãnand Swãmi and Brahmãnand Swãmi then answered. “The bhakta who may verbally hurt someone, but serves Bhagvãn and His sant, is better. The bhakta who follows nivrutti and does not hurt anyone, and is therefore unable to serve Bhagvãn and His sant, should therefore be known to be feeble. The bhakta who serves others can be described as having bhakti. Therefore, the bhakta with bhakti is the better of the two.” 31.5 Shreeji Mahãrãj confirmed, “The answer you have given is correct.” He then added, “It is a major weakness if a person notices a small avgun in someone who possesses this bhakti and completely abides by Bhagvãn’s ãgnã, and then develops hatred for him. A person who perceives avgun in this way may also perceive avgun in Bhagvãn, who has assumed a human form for the purpose of granting kalyãn to the jeevs. He may also perceive avgun in the profoundly great bhaktas of Bhagvãn. 31.6 “Moreover, just because such a person alleges such faults in Bhagvãn or His sant, does that mean the avatãrs of Bhagvãn or sant are incapable of granting kalyãn? They are indeed capable of granting kalyãn. However, a person whose intellect is distorted, always negatively misinterprets things. For example, Shishupãl always said, ‘The Pãndavs are from a different cast. They are immoral because all five of them have the same wife. Krishna is also a scoundrel, because from the moment He was born, He first killed a woman, then He killed a crane, and then He killed a calf. He is known as Madhusudan not because He killed a demon named Madhu, but because he destroyed honeycombs. Just because those Pãndavs worship Him, does that make Him Bhagvãn?’ In this way, Shishupãl, with his demonic intellect, identified avgun in Bhagvãn and His bhaktas. However, the bhaktas of Bhagvãn did not do so in any way. Therefore, a person who perceives avgun should be known to have a demonic intellect.” 31.7 Hearing this, Yogãnand Muni said, “Mahãrãj, we do not perceive avgun in the great bhaktas of Bhagvãn, but we do perceive avgun in ordinary bhaktas.” 31.8 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “A bhakta’s greatness or smallness is not measured the way you seem to understand it. Greatness is due to a person’s nishchay in the pratyaksha svarup of Bhagvãn and by following His ãgnãs. However great a person may be in worldly matters, if he lacks these two characteristics, then he is still ordinary. 31.9 “The greatness which I have just described is present today in all the bhaktas in our satsang. This is because all the bhaktas here realise, ‘We have found pratyaksha Purushottam Bhagvãn, who is greater than even Akshar. Therefore, we are completely happy’. Realising this, they offer bhakti to pratyaksha Bhagvãn, while following His ãgnãs. Therefore, on seeing some irrelevant personal abnormality in such a bhakta, a person should not perceive avgun in him. If a person does have a habit of doing so, then his intellect becomes demonic.”

32.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on the morning of Posh vad 3 [3rd January, 1820], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting on a decorated bedstead on the veranda outside the west-facing rooms of Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He was wearing a white khes and had tied a white pãgh around his head. He had also covered Himself with a white chãdar, and His forehead had been smeared with sandalwood paste. He was wearing a garland of white flowers, and a tassel of white flowers was hanging from His pãgh. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. Some of the munis were singing kirtans. 32.2 Shreeji Mahãrãj then said, “Please listen, I have a question to ask.” 32.3 The munis and haribhaktas replied, “Mahãrãj, please ask.” 32.4 After thinking for quite some time, Shree Mahãrãj said, “In this world, a materialistic individual who is attached to the five vishays, cannot survive without indulging in them. Moreover, just as that vimukh indulges in the five vishays, a bhakta of Bhagvãn also indulges in five vishays. So, how are the two different? In what way? Well, the materialistic person enjoys worldly vishays without Bhagvãn. However, for a bhakta of Bhagvãn, listening to kathãs of Bhagvãn is the only vishay for his ears; touching the charanãvind of Bhagvãn or touching the holy dust from the holy feet of a sant is the only vishay for his skin; having darshan of Bhagvãn or His sant is the only vishay for his eyes; taking the prasãd of Bhagvãn and singing His praises are the only vishays for his tongue; and scents of flowers and other objects which have been offered to Bhagvãn is the only vishay for his nose. In this way, there is a difference between the vishays that a vimukh indulges in and those that a bhakta indulges in. 32.5 “Furthermore, just as a bhakta cannot stay without indulging in the vishays, even eternally liberated muktas, such as Nãrad and the Sanakãdik, cannot stay without indulging in them. Although they remain in samãdhi for long periods of time, after emerging from samãdhi, they also indulge in vishays in the form kathãs, kirtans, and talks of Bhagvãn. 32.6 “For example, birds leave their nests to gather food, but after gathering their food, they always return to their nests at night to rest. They never forget their own nests and return to another bird’s nest. Similarly, after feeding on kathãs, kirtans, and talks of Bhagvãn, bhaktas of Bhagvãn also return to their own nest (Bhagvãn’s svarup) to rest. Also, animals, birds, and in fact, all creatures, return to their own homes to rest after feeding. People also travel far and wide for their work, but only when they return to their own home do they rest peacefully. 32.7 “Now, based on the analogies that I have just narrated, I ask all the haribhaktas a question: Just as a vimukh is attached to the five vishays and is unable to live without them for even a single moment, have you becoming firmly attached to the vishays in the form of the kathãs, kirtans, and talks of Bhagvãn, or not? I also ask another question: Just as a bird returns to its nest after feeding, do all of you also return to rest in your nest (Bhagvãn), after feeding on kathãs, kirtans, and talks of Bhagvãn? Or, do you rest elsewhere? 32.8 “Additionally, domesticated cattle return to their post in the evening after grazing on the outskirts of the village, whereas stray cattle do not return to their post. A stray cow, after grazing in someone’s field, sits wherever it wishes. There, someone may beat it, or it may even be attacked by a tiger. Now, do you return to your post like the domesticated cattle, or do you sit down to rest anywhere after grazing in someone else’s field like the stray cattle? Those who are senior amongst you, think about your answer to these questions.” 32.9 Then, all the munis and bhaktas replied individually, “Mahãrãj, we have indeed become attached to kathãs, kirtans, and talks related to Bhagvãn. Except for the nest and post (Bhagvãn’s murti), we do not stay anywhere else.” Hearing their reply, Shreeji Mahãrãj became extremely pleased. 32.10 On that same day, towards the end of the afternoon, Shreeji Mahãrãj was seated on a large decorated bedstead under the neem tree in the centre of Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr, facing the mandir of Shree Vãsudev-Nãrãyan. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. Some of the munis were singing kirtans. 32.11 Shreeji Mahãrãj then requested, “Now, please begin a question-answer discussion.” 32.12 Dinã-Nãth Bhatt and Brahmãnand Swãmi asked, “At times, a bhakta of Bhagvãn is able to blissfully engage in bhajan and smaran of Bhagvãn, and is able to concentrate on His murti. At other times, he is disturbed within and is unable to experience the bliss of bhajan and smaran. What is the reason for this?” 32.13 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “He has not learned the technique of visualising the murti of Bhagvãn.” 32.14 Hearing this, Muktãnand Swãmi asked, “What is that technique?” 32.15 Shreeji Mahãrãj explained, “The technique is as follows: Different gun enter the antah-karans at different times. When sattva-gun prevails, the antah-karans are pure, and a person can pleasantly engage in bhajan and smaran of Bhagvãn’s murti. When rajo-gun prevails, the antah-karans become polluted and many disturbing thoughts arise, making it difficult to engage in bhajan and smaran. When tamo-gun prevails, no thoughts arise in the antah-karans at all. Therefore, a person engaged in bhajan should learn to recognise the prevailing gun and should perform dhyãn upon the murti of Bhagvãn whenever sattva-gun prevails. When tamo-gun prevails, no thoughts arise at all, and a person experiences a feeling of emptiness. A person should not attempt to perform dhyãn upon Bhagvãn in such conditions. When rajo-gun prevails, many disturbing thoughts arise. Therefore, a person should not attempt to perform dhyãn upon Bhagvãn at that time either. On such occasions, a person should think, ‘I am distinct from these thoughts, and I am an ãtmã. In fact, I am the knower of these thoughts. Furthermore, Purushottam Bhagvãn is forever present within me as antaryãmi’. Only when the force of rajo-gun decreases should a person perform dhyãn upon the murti of Bhagvãn. 32.16 “However, a person should not become unhappy on noticing the many thoughts which arise when rajo-gun prevails. After all, the antah-karans are like a small child, or a monkey, or a dog, or like a person who plays with a child. The nature of the antah-karans are such that it remains restless for no reason whatsoever. Therefore, a person who wishes to perform dhyãn upon Bhagvãn should not become disheartened on seeing the disturbing thoughts that arise in the antah-karans. Moreover, the thoughts arising in the antah-karans should be regarded as being distinct from himself. Therefore, a person should engage in the bhajan of Bhagvãn, while believing the ãtmã to be distinct from himself.”

33.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on the evening of Posh vad 5 [5th January, 1820], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting facing east on a decorated bedstead on the veranda outside the room next to the mandir of Shree Vãsudev-Nãrãyan in Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He was wearing a white khes and had covered Himself with a white chãdar. He had also tied a reto, with deep orange ends, around His head. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 33.2 Muktãnand Swãmi then asked, “The shãstras have described countless spiritual activities that please Bhagvãn. Amongst them all, which one is so powerful that it alone earns as much bliss of Bhagvãn, as is earned by performing all spiritual activities combined? Please reveal it to us.” 33.3 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “Please listen as I tell you the one spiritual activity by which Bhagvãn can be pleased.” He then continued, “Accepting the firm refuge of Bhagvãn is the single, greatest activity amongst all spiritual activities for pleasing Bhagvãn. However, that refuge must be extremely firm and without any flaws. 33.4 “There are three types of refuge. One way of having the refuge of Bhagvãn is with blind faith. If a person has intense blind faith, then even if someone such as Brahmã were to attempt to deflect him from his refuge, he would not be deflected. 33.5 “The second type is firm refuge of Bhagvãn that is created out of love. Whoever has intense love for Bhagvãn, cannot even forcibly be attracted to any object other than Bhagvãn. This is known as firm refuge produced out of intense love. 33.6 “The third type is refuge with understanding. A person who has great intelligence understands the sagun-nirgun and anvay-vyatirek aspects of Bhagvãn. He understands entities that have been created by Bhagvãn’s Mãyã, as well as the ways Bhagvãn takes avatãrs on earth. He also understands how, at the time of creation of the universe, Bhagvãn behaves as Akshar, how Bhagvãn behaves as Prakruti-Purush, how Bhagvãn behaves as Virãt-Purush, how Bhagvãn behaves as Brahmã and other prajãpatis. He also understands how Bhagvãn works through those like Nãrad and the Sanakãdik, for the purpose of granting kalyãn to the jeevs. He understands all these methods. 33.7 “Moreover, he realises that Purushottam Bhagvãn is greater than everything and is absolutely unaffected. He who has such an understanding is said to have a firm refuge of Bhagvãn using his intelligence. If someone tries to discourage him, or even if he tries to discourage himself, such refuge never fades away. Also, regardless of whether Bhagvãn – assuming a human svarup – displays His divine power or acts powerless, such a person’s intellect would not hold any doubts.” 33.8 Then, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “If you allow me, I wish to ask a question.” 33.9 Muktãnand Swãmi replied, “Mahãrãj, please do ask.” 33.10 Shreeji Mahãrãj then asked, “Of the three characteristics I have just described to you, which is your strength? Although a combination of all three is found in all bhaktas of Bhagvãn, the characteristic that is strongest, is said to be the strength they posses. So, of the three – blind faith, love, and understanding – which is your strength?” 33.11 Muktãnand Swãmi and Brahmãnand Swãmi both replied, “Our characteristic is of understanding.” 33.12 Then, the other sãdhus also stated their own strengths.

34.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on the morning of Posh vad 11 [11th January, 1820], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting facing south on a decorated bedstead on the veranda outside the west-facing rooms of Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He was wearing a white khes and had covered Himself with a white chofãl. He had also tied a white pãgh around His head, and was wearing garlands of flowers. Tassels of flowers and silken threads were hanging from His pãgh, and bunches of flowers had been placed above both of His ears. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. Some of the munis were singing kirtans to the accompaniment of musical instruments. 34.2 Then, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “Please stop the kirtans, and begin a question-answer discussion.” 34.3 Then, Brahmãnand Swãmi asked, “Bhagvãn is the cause of all bliss, and He is greater than everything, yet the jeev’s vrutti does not become attached to Him. Instead, its vrutti becomes attached to worldly objects that are worthless and perishable. What is the reason for this?” 34.4 Muktãnand Swãmi attempted to give an answer, but was unable to do so adequately. 34.5 So Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “Please listen as I answer that question. Since the day Bhagvãn created this world, He has set it in motion in such a way that he will not have to make an effort again. In fact, He has devised it in such a way that procreation occurs automatically. Men naturally develop affection for women, women naturally develop affection for men, and both naturally develop affection for their children. That is Bhagvãn’s mãyã in the form of affection. 34.6 “The vrutti of a person who is not swept away by the flow of that mãyã, remains focused on the svarup of Bhagvãn. So, a bhakta of Bhagvãn develops vairãgya by maintaining a dislike for worldly objects. Furthermore, knowing Bhagvãn to be absolutely blissful, he keeps his vrutti focused on Bhagvãn. However, if a person does not develop vairãgya towards worldly objects and becomes distanced from the svarup of Bhagvãn, then even great muktas, such as Shiv, Brahmã, and Nãrad, would be swept away by those worldly objects. For this reason, if a person abandons Bhagvãn and keeps the company of worldly objects, then his vrutti will most certainly become attached to those worldly objects. Therefore, a bhakta of Bhagvãn should not keep affection for anything other than Bhagvãn.” 34.7 Shreeji Mahãrãj then said, “Now, it is Muktãnand Swãmi’s turn to ask a question, so please ask.” 34.8 Muktãnand Swãmi then asked, “It is extremely difficult for a person to attain Bhagvãn. Moreover, there is no greater benefit and no greater bliss than attaining Bhagvãn. Then, why do people abandon such immense bliss and struggle painfully for worthless objects? That is the question.” 34.9 Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “Here, I shall answer that. A person suffers when he ignores the ãgnã of Bhagvãn and beings to stray away from them. On the other hand, if he acts according to those ãgnã, he will experience the true bliss of Bhagvãn. So, a person suffers only to the extent that he disobeys the ãgnã of Bhagvãn. Therefore, tyãgis should live according to the ãgnã that have been prescribed for tyãgi, and grahasthas should live according to the ãgnã that have been prescribed for grahasthas. 34.10 “A person suffers to the extent that he lapses in following these ãgnã. Only when a tyãgi follows the eight types of tyãg of women, is his vow of brahm-chãrya considered complete. He suffers to the extent that he deviates from this. Brahm-chãrya has also been prescribed for grahasthas. For them, brahm-chãrya constitutes shunning all women except their wives, abstinence from sexual relations with his wife on days of religious occasions, and engaging in sexual relations only during appropriate times. Whoever deviates from these and other niyams that have been prescribed for tyãgis and grahasthas, will suffer accordingly. 34.11 “Therefore, the happiness and misery experienced by a vimukh is determined by his own karmas. As for a bhakta of Bhagvãn, whatever misery he suffers is due to the negligence in following Bhagvãn’s ãgnã for the sake of worthless objects. Whatever happiness he does experience, is a result of following the ãgnã of Bhagvãn.”

35.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on Posh vad 12 [12th January, 1820], Swãmi Shree Sahajãnandji Mahãrãj was sitting facing east on a decorated bedstead under the neem tree in front of the mandir of Shree Vãsudev-Nãrãyan in Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 35.2 Addressing the munis, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “Either you ask me a question, or I shall ask you a question.” 35.3 The munis said, “Mahãrãj, please ask.” 35.4 Shreeji Mahãrãj then said, “Suppose there is a person who does not falter when it comes to protecting his own kalyãn, despite having little intelligence. On the other hand, there is another person who is very intelligent – to the extent that he can point out mistakes even in great men. But, he does not walk on the path of kalyãn. What is the reason for this?” 35.5 The munis attempted to answer, but as Shreeji Mahãrãj raised doubts, they were unable to provide a precise answer. 35.6 Shreeji Mahãrãj then said, “Allow me to answer. Such a person may be highly intelligent, but his intelligence is polluted. As a result, he is unable to walk on the path of kalyãn. For example, suppose there is some sweet, tasty buffalo-milk. If a snake’s venom were to fall in it, then that milk and sugar would become poisonous. Whoever drinks it, would die. Similarly, such a person may be highly intelligent, but he has identified avgun in a great sant or Bhagvãn. The avgun that has entered his mind is equivalent to the snake’s venom. So, how can he possibly walk on the path of kalyãn? In fact, even if someone were to listen to his talks, the listener’s mind would also fall back from satsang. 35.7 “A person possessing such a polluted intelligence in this way, perceives avgun in Bhagvãn and His bhaktas, wherever he takes birth. On the other hand, a person who does not have a polluted intelligence, but has little intelligence, does not falter in protecting his kalyãn.” 35.8 Muktãnand Swãmi then asked, “Mahãrãj, can a person with such a polluted intellect ever turn towards Bhagvãn?” 35.9 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “No, he never turns towards Bhagvãn.” 35.10 Muktãnand Swãmi asked, “Mahãrãj, please tell us how we can avoid developing such a demonic intellect.” 35.11 Shreeji Mahãrãj explained, “If a person does not keep the following four svabhãvs with Bhagvãn and His sant, then his intellect will never become demonic: krodh, mãn, irshyã, kapat. If he keeps even one of these four, then his intellect will become demonic, just like Jay and Vijay. Despite being wise, their intellect became demonic, because they showed mãn towards the Sanakãdik. As a result, they both fell from Vaikunth. 35.12 “Furthermore, when a person’s intellect becomes demonic, even the gun of Bhagvãn and His bhakta appear as faults to him. Wherever such a person takes birth, he becomes an attendant of Shiv or the king of demons, and does bhajan of Bhagvãn with hatred.”

36.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on Posh vad 13 [13th January, 1820], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting on a decorated bedstead on the platform under the neem tree in front of the mandir of Shree Vãsudev-Nãrãyan in Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He was dressed entirely in white clothes, with garlands of white and yellow flowers adorning His neck. Bunches of white flowers were placed on both of His ears, and a tassel of yellow flowers was hanging from His pãgh. A chhoglu made from red karnikãr flowers had also been placed in His pãgh. Also, He was playing with a ball of white flowers with His right hand. To the joy of His bhaktas, He was sitting in a charming fashion. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 36.2 Shreeji Mahãrãj then said, “How should a person view a person who has abandoned worldly life and accepted the clothing of a tyãgi, yet still has affection for useless objects? He should be viewed to be like a poor person beside a wealthy person. Suppose there is a poor person who has no clothes to wear and feeds himself by scavenging for scraps of food from piles of waste, not only does he consider himself to be a sinner, but other wealthy people also consider him to be a sinner. They presume, ‘He must have committed many sins, which is why he has no food or clothes’. 36.3 “Similarly, after becoming a tyãgi, a person who collects nice clothes and other pleasant objects with a strong craving for them, but does not have affection for dharma, gnãn, vairãgya, and bhakti, is considered by the great ekãntik sant to be a sinner just like the poor person. As he is a sinner, he does not have love for dharma, gnãn, vairãgya, and bhakti. Instead, he has affection for objects other than Bhagvãn. 36.4 “However, for a true tyãgi both dirt and gold are equal. Also, a tyãgi never makes distinctions by thinking, ‘This object is pleasant, and this object is unpleasant’. He never has such an understanding. Instead, he has love only towards Bhagvãn. Only such a person is a true tyãgi.”

37.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on Posh vad 14 [14th January, 1820], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting facing west on a decorated bedstead under the neem tree in front of the mandir of Shree Vãsudev-Nãrãyan in Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He was wearing a white pãgh, from which hung a tassel of yellow flowers. Bunches of white flowers had also been placed upon both of His ears, and a garland of yellow and white flowers adorned His neck. He had covered Himself with a white chãdar, and was wearing a white khes. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 37.2 Then, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “A person who lacks understanding cannot abandon his feelings of affection for his birthplace even though he has abandoned the world.” So saying, He showed everyone the scar on His thigh where He had been injured by the broken branch of a tree during His childhood. Shreeji Mahãrãj then continued, “Whenever I see this scar, I remember the tree and the lake. Therefore, it is extremely difficult to forget your birthplace and relatives. I would like those amongst you, who do not remember your birthplace and relations, to confess. For those of you, who do not speak up out of shame, take oath on the name of Nar-Nãrãyan.” 37.3 Then, all the munis revealed what was true for them. 37.4 After listening to them, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “If a person believes himself to be the ãtmã, where is the birthplace of that ãtmã? Who are the relatives of that ãtmã? Of what gender is that ãtmã? Moreover, if you wish to maintain relationships with your relatives, then you should also maintain relationships with all the relatives that you have had throughout your previous lives in the cycle of 8.4 million life-forms. Furthermore, if a person wishes for the kalyãn of his relatives, then he should wish the same for all. However, just as upon beginning this human life the parents of the previous 8.4 million life-forms have all been forgotten due to ignorance, similarly the parents of this human body should be forgotten through knowledge. 37.5 “As for me, I have no affection towards any of my relatives. Moreover, a person may be serving me, but if there is no bhakti for Bhagvãn in his heart, I cannot develop a liking for him – even if I try. Even if he is as virtuous as Nãradji, if he lacks bhakti for Bhagvãn, I do not like him. 37.6 “On the other hand, there is a person who has bhakti for Bhagvãn in his heart. He understands that the way in which pratyaksha Bhagvãn resides on this earth, and the way in which the bhakta of Bhagvãn remains in the vicinity of Bhagvãn, is exactly how they remain when ãtyantik-pralay occurs. He also understands that Bhagvãn and His bhakta is eternally sãkãr, but never does he understand them to be nirãkãr, regardless of any Vedãnt shãstra he may hear. Furthermore, he realises that no one besides Bhagvãn sustains the world, and he also realises that without Bhagvãn, even a dry leaf cannot be stirred. 37.7 “A person with such firm belief that Bhagvãn is sãkãr, even an ordinary person, is still dear to me. Kãl, karma, and Mãyã are unable to use their power over him. In fact, Bhagvãn Himself instructs any punishment that he is to receive, but no one else has any authority over him. On the other hand, I have no respect for a person without such a belief, even if he happens to have the qualities of tyãg and vairãgya. However, a person with firm belief in Bhagvãn in his heart never loses his belief that Bhagvãn is sãkãr, nor does he ever understand Bhagvãn to be nirãkãr like a mass of light, regardless of how many shãstras he may hear or the company he may keep. A sant with such a belief is so highly respected by me that even I place the dust on his holy feet on my head. In my mind, I am afraid of harming him, and I also long to have his darshan. 37.8 “A person without this belief attempts to attain kalyãn using the strength of his own spiritual activities, but he does not strive for it by relying on the grace of Bhagvãn. Such a senseless person is as foolish as someone wishing to cross the ocean without the aid of a ship, by his own efforts. Conversely, a person who wishes for kalyãn through the grace of Bhagvãn is wise, like a person who wishes to cross the ocean with the help of a ship. 37.9 “After leaving their body, all those with such knowledge of Bhagvãn’s svarup attain a murti of chaitanya in the home of Bhagvãn and forever remain in His sevã in His presence. But if a person has attempted to attain kalyãn without having such a belief, then he will go to dwell in the loks of other devs. 37.10 “In fact, the darshan of such a true bhakta of Bhagvãn is equivalent to the darshan of Bhagvãn Himself. He is so great that his darshan alone can redeem countless wretched jeevs.” 37.11 Having delivered these talks, Shreeji Mahãrãj requested, “Now please sing a kirtan.”

38.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on the evening of Mahã sud 1 [16th January, 1820], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting on a small mattress which had been placed on the veranda outside the stables in Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He was wearing a white khes and had tied a white, red-bordered feto around His head. He was also wearing a richly embroidered angarkhu and had covered Himself with a white chofãl. A sabhã of sãdhus, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 38.2 After glancing at all the haribhaktas, Shreeji Mahãrãj thought for some time and then said, “Please listen, as I have something to say.” 38.3 He then continued, “From the time a satsangi enters the satsang, he should examine his mind by thinking ‘In the first year, my mind was like this, then it was like this. Previously, I had this much desire for Bhagvãn and this much desire for the world’. In this way, he should repeatedly reflect on his yearly total of desires and always attempt to gradually, yet constantly eradicate all worldly desires that remain in the mind. However, if he does not assess himself constantly, and allows those desires to accumulate, then they will never be overcome. Consider the analogy of opening an account with a merchant: If a person settles the debts regularly on a monthly basis, then it will not be difficult to repay the debt. But, if he waits until the end of the year to repay the debt, it will be extremely difficult to settle the account. Likewise, a person should assess himself constantly. 38.4 “In reality, the mind is saturated with desires for the world. In the way that sesame seeds are permeated with scent by padding them between alternating layers of flowers, the mind should be saturated with flowers in the form of the constant remembrance of Bhagvãn’s charitra, together with an understanding of His greatness. These charitras and thoughts of Bhagvãn should be entangled within the mind. As one thought subsides, another should be visualised. In this way, the mind should not be left idle.” Saying this, Shreeji Mahãrãj narrated a story of a ghost.” 38.5 He then continued, “Even if a person begins to recall the charitras, talks, and darshan of Bhagvãn of just one day, there would be no end to them. If that is so, then there would certainly be no end to them for someone who has passed ten to fifteen years in satsang. 38.6 “These charitras should be recalled in the following way: ‘In this way, Mahãrãj and the paramhans held sabhã in this village; in this way, pujã was offered to Mahãrãj; in this way, talks were done’. Those charitras of Bhagvãn should be recalled over and over again. Moreover, for a person who does not have much understanding, this is certainly the best method for them. In fact, there is no other method like it. 38.7 “Then, you may say, ‘We wish to take very little food and wish to keep many fasts’. But, I do not emphasise those methods. A person should abide by those methods as best as he can in accordance with his given niyams. But, what I have just described to you is what should truly be done.” 38.8 Then, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “I believe that the mind should be free of worldly desires. No matter how much pravrutti a person may do physically, if his mind is pure, then he cannot be seriously harmed – even though outwardly, in society, a person engaged in pravrutti appears to be dishonourable. On the other hand, if a person’s mind is full of worldly desires and he superficially behaves as if he is practicing nivrutti, then he may appear respectable in society, but his jeev will suffer severely. This is because at the time of death, it is those thoughts that are in a person’s mind that spring forth, just like the child of a deer sprang forth in Bharatji’s mind during his last moments. As a result, he became a deer in his next life, even though he had originally given up a kingdom and Rushabh-Dev Bhagvãn was his father. Therefore, to remain mentally free of worldly desires is my belief. By keeping fasts, the mind does become weak along with the body; but, when the body becomes strong again, the mind also becomes strong. Therefore, mental tyãg is required along with physical tyãg. In fact, a person whose mind holds thoughts of Bhagvãn but not thoughts relating to the world should be considered important in our satsang. Conversely, those who do not do this are inferior. 38.9 “Furthermore, a grahastha should engage in worldly activities physically, but mentally he should also remain free of worldly desires, just like the tyãgi, and should think of Bhagvãn. Also, he should engage in social activities according to the ãgnã of Bhagvãn. Moreover, if mental tyãg is not genuine, then what about Janak Rãjã, whose mind was like that of a great yogi master, despite ruling a kingdom? Therefore, only tyãg which is developed mentally, is appropriate.” 38.10 Shreeji Mahãrãj then explained, “If impure thoughts arise in a person’s mind, he should reveal them. But, as the saying goes, ‘Only a dog will lick a dog’s face’, or ‘When a snake is a guest to another snake, the host-snake will have nothing to offer, so the guest-snake lick’s the host-snake’s face’, or when a married woman goes to a widow, the widow says, ‘Come, lady. May you also become like me’. Similarly, to reveal impure thoughts to someone who also experiences impure thoughts is like the examples mentioned. 38.11 “Then, to whom should a person reveal his impure thoughts? Well, he should reveal them to a person who is so strong-willed, that no impure thoughts relating to the world arise in his mind. However, there may be many who do not experience such thoughts. So, out of those, a person should reveal his impure thoughts to a person who criticises those thoughts after listening to them and who continues to criticise them in all of his activities – while eating, drinking, sitting, standing – until they are eradicated from his mind. Moreover, that person should have the same determination to eradicate others’ impure thoughts as he has to remove his own. A person should reveal his impure thoughts to such a person. But, if the person to whom he reveals his impure thoughts does not give advice in this way and is himself careless, then what can someone gain from him? Therefore, after revealing impure thoughts in this way and eradicating them, a person should continuously hold thoughts only of Bhagvãn and become free from all desires for the pleasures of the world.” 38.12 Then, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “What are the characteristics of keeping a fast on a day of Ekãdashi? Well, the ten indriyas and the mind, the eleventh, should be withdrawn from their respective vishays and attached to Bhagvãn. That is considered as having kept an Ekãdashi fast. In fact, bhaktas of Bhagvãn should engage in this continuously. In comparison, if a person whose mind is not free from worldly desires in this way physically engages in vrat and tap, he does not benefit very much. Therefore, following his own dharma and understanding Bhagvãn’s greatness, a bhakta of Bhagvãn should maintain a constant effort to free his mind of worldly desires.” 38.13 Shreeji Mahãrãj then explained, “A true tyãgi is a person whose mind never thinks about a desire for objects that he has already given up. Just as a person has no desire for faeces once they have been excreted, in the same way, no desire arises for rejected objects. Nãradji narrated to Shukji: tyaja dharmama-dharma cha The essence of the shlok is: ‘A person should abandon all objects except the ãtmã; he should behave only as the ãtmã and worship Bhagvãn’. Such a person can be called a perfect tyãgi. Furthermore, grahastha haribhaktas should behave like Janak Rãjã, who said, ‘Although my city of Mithilã is burning, nothing of mine is burning’, as stated in the following shlok: mithilãyãm pradeep-tãyam na me dahyati kinchana A grahastha haribhakta with this type of understanding, even though he may possess a house, is a true haribhakta. A person who is not such a tyãgi or grahastha is called a false bhakta, whereas a person who behaves as described above should be known as an ekãntik bhakta.” 38.14 Then, Motã Ãtmãnand Swãmi asked Shreeji Mahãrãj, “What are the characteristics of the jeevãtmã, which is distinct from the body, the indriyas, the antah-karans, and their presiding devs?” 38.15 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “I shall answer that question in brief. The jeev is the speaker that explains the nature of the body and the indriyas, and explains their natures separately to the listener. That speaker is the knower of everything, and is distinct from all the above – that is called the jeev. Also, the listener, which understands the forms of the body and the indriyas as being distinct, which knows them, and which is distinct from them all, is also known as the jeev itself. This is the method of understanding the nature of the jeev.” Shreeji Mahãrãj spoke in this way.

39.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on Mahã sud 3 [18th January, 1820], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting on a decorated bedstead on the platform under the neem tree in front of the mandir of Shree Vãsudev-Nãrãyan in Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He was wearing a white khes and had covered Himself with a white chãdar. He had tied a white pãgh around His head, from which tassels of yellow flowers were dangling. Bunches of white and yellow flowers had been placed above His ears, and He was wearing garlands of yellow flowers around His neck. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 39.2 Shreeji Mahãrãj then asked a question to a vedãnti brãhman who was sitting in the sabhã, “You claim that only Brahm exists. Furthermore, you say that with the exception of that Brahm, jeevs, ishvars, Mãyã, the world, the Veds, six-shãstras, and the Purãns, are all false. I can neither understand this concept of yours, nor can I accept it. Therefore, please answer what I ask you, and do so by citing only the Veds, the six-shãstras, the Purãns, the Smrutis, or other historical shãstras. However, if you reply quoting the words of some inauthentic shãstra, then I will not accept your answer. But, since I have absolute faith in the words of Vyãsji, I will be able to accept your answer if you reply quoting his words.” 39.3 The vedãnti then attempted to reply using various arguments, but as Shreeji Mahãrãj had raised doubts, the question remained unanswered. 39.4 Then, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “Please listen as I answer that question myself. There are two different states of those who have become muktas by worshipping Bhagvãn. For example, a person standing on top of Mount Meru clearly sees everything in the vicinity of Meru – the other mountains, trees, as well as the ground that supports the mountains and the trees. Similarly, those enlightened muktas who have attained savikalp samãdhi, see jeevs, ishvars, Mãyã, and their supporter (Brahm), as being separate from each other. A person standing on top of Mount Lokã-Lok, sees everything in the vicinity of Mount Lokã-Lok, but sees the other mountains and trees, as being one with the ground. He does not see them as being separate. Similarly, those great muktas who have attained nirvikalp samãdhi see jeevs, ishvars, and Mãyã as Brahm, but they do not see them as separate entities. 39.5 “In this way, there are two differing states of muktas, and it is due to their differing states that everything is viewed as being either satya or asatya. The words of those who have attained the savikalp state are noted in the Veds, the six-shãstras, and the Purãns, and they describe all of those entities as being satya. However, the words of those who have attained the nirvikalp state describe all of those entities as asatya. In reality, they are not asatya. They are only described as being asatya because they cannot be seen due to the influence of the nirvikalp state. 39.6 “For example, there is no night for a person sitting in the chariot of Surya. But, for those on earth, there is both day and night. Similarly, from the viewpoint of a person who has attained the nirvikalp state, all the things do not exist, whereas according to others, they do exist. So, if a person interprets ‘Brahm’ in this way, then there will never be any irregularities in the statements of the shãstras. But, if a person does not, then irregularities will arise. Furthermore, if a person – without having understood these inconsistencies and without having attained that nirvikalp state, relying solely on words learned from the shãstras – promotes the existence of Brahm alone, claiming that the guru, the shishya, jeevs, ishvars, Mãyã, the world, the Veds, the Purãns, and the shãstras, are all imaginary, then he is extremely foolish. Ultimately, such a person will be sent to Narak.” 39.7 Having answered the question, Shreeji Mahãrãj ended by asking the brãhman, “Now, if you have any doubts in what I have just said, please say so.” 39.8 Then, the vedãnti brãhman replied, “O Mahãrãj, O Prabhu, O Swãmi! You are Bhagvãn, and you have incarnated for the kalyãn of the entire world. The explanation you have given is of course precise. There is no room for any doubt.” So saying, he became extremely pleased, and after abandoning his misconceptions, he became an ãshrit of Shreeji Mahãrãj.

40.1 In the Samvat year 1876, in the early hours of Mahã sud 4 [19th January, 1820], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting on a decorated bedstead under the neem tree in front of the mandir of Shree Vãsudev-Nãrãyan in Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He was wearing a white khes and had covered Himself with a white chãdar. He had tied a white pãgh around His head, with a tassel of yellow flowers hanging from it. He was wearing a garland of yellow flowers around His neck. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 40.2 Muktãnand Swãmi then asked Shreeji Mahãrãj, “What is savikalp samãdhi, and what is nirvikalp samãdhi?” 40.3 Shreeji Mahãrãj answered, “If a person who has sthiti in the svarup of Bhagvãn does not have any impure desires, but does have some pure desires. For example, ‘I wish to become like Nãrad, the Sanakãdik and Shukji’, or ‘I wish to go to the ãshram of Nar-Nãrãyan and stay with the munis there to perform tap’, or ‘I wish to go to Shvet-Dvip and become like a mukta of Shvet-Dvip by performing tap’ – then such a person is said to be in savikalp samãdhi. On the other hand, a person who does not have such thoughts, has attained the characteristics of Akshar-Brahm, and remains engaged only in the murti of Bhagvãn, is said to be in nirvikalp samãdhi.” 40.4 Then, Muktãnand Swãmi asked again, “Mahãrãj, what is the difference between bhakti and upãsanã?” 40.5 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied: shravanam kirtanam vishnoha smaranam pãd-sevanam archanam vandanam dãsyam sakhyam ãtma-nivedanam Nine ways of offering bhakti to Bhagvãn: shravan, kirtan, smaran , pãd sevan, archan, vandan, dãsya, sakhya, ãtma-nivedan. “To worship Bhagvãn in these nine ways is known as bhakti. 40.6 “Upãsanã can be defined as having a firm belief that Bhagvãn’s svarup is sãkãr. Even if a person becomes brahm-rup, that belief never disappears. Moreover, even if he happens to listen to shãstras proposing the view that Bhagvãn is nirãkãr, he would still understand Bhagvãn to always be sãkãr. Regardless of what is mentioned in the shãstras, he would only promote Bhagvãn’s svarup as sãkãr, never allowing his own upãsanã to be disproved. A person who has such a firm understanding is considered to possess upãsanã.”

41.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on the evening of Mahã sud 5 [20th January, 1820], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting on a decorated bedstead on the platform under the neem tree near the mandir of Shree Vãsudev-Nãrãyan in Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. He was also wearing garland of yellow flowers. Bunches of yellow flowers had been placed above His ears, and tassels of yellow flowers were dangling from His pãgh. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 41.2 Then, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “Please engage in a question-answer discussion.” 41.3 Nrusinhãnand Swãmi then said, ekoham bahu shyãm prajãyeya “Many pandits and vedãntis in the world interpret this Vedic shlok to mean: ‘The one Bhagvãn present at the time of destruction, Himself takes the form of all jeevs and ishvars by His own will’. But this belief can only be accepted by someone who is a fool. We have accepted your refuge, so this belief does not make sense in our minds. Our understanding is that Bhagvãn is achyut, and that he does not divide and assume the svarups of various jeevs and ishvars. Therefore, we can only fully understand the meaning of this shlok if you explain it to us.” 41.4 Shreeji Mahãrãj then explained, “The meaning of that Vedic shlok is not as they interpret it to be. In fact, it has a different meaning altogether. In the Ved-Stuti, it is stated: svakruta-vichitra-yonishu vishan-niva hetutayã taratam-tash-cha-kãstyanala-vatsva krutãnu-krutihi This means: ‘Purushottam Bhagvãn creates and enters the various types of life-forms as their cause, He is antaryãmi, and He inspires them to a greater or lesser degree’. 41.5 “More specifically, at the time of creation, Purushottam Bhagvãn, who is greater than even Akshar, looks towards Akshar. As a result, Purush incarnates from Akshar. After entering Akshar, Purushottam enters Purush, and in the form of Purush, inspires Prakruti. In this way, as Purushottam successively entered the various entities, the activities of creation took place. Then, Pradhãn-Purush were produced from Prakruti-Purush. From Pradhãn-Purush, maha-tattva was produced. From maha-tattva, the three types of ahankãr were produced. From ahankãr, the bhuts, the vishays, the indriyas, the antah-karans, and their presiding devs were produced. From those, Virãt-Purush was produced, and from the lotus extending from his naval, Brahmã was produced. From that Brahmã, Marichi and other prajãpatis were produced. From them, Indra and other devs, the demons, and all the sthãvar and jangam creatures were produced. 41.6 “Purushottam Bhagvãn enters and dwells in all the above as their cause, and is antaryãmi. However, He does not reside in Prakruti-Purush to the extent that He resides in Akshar. He does not reside in Pradhãn-Purush to the extent that He resides in Prakruti-Purush. He does not reside in maha-tattva and the rest of the twenty-four tattvas to the extent that He resides in Pradhãn-Purush. He does not reside in Virãt-Purush to the extent that He resides in the twenty-four tattvas. He does not reside in Brahmã to the extent that He resides in Virãt-Purush. He does not reside in those like Marichi to the extent that He resides in Brahmã. He does not reside in Kashyap to the extent that He resides in Marichi. He does not reside in Indra and the other devs to the extent that He resides in Kashyap. He does not reside in human beings to the extent that He resides in Indra and the other devs. He does not reside in animals and birds to the extent that He resides in human beings. In this way, Purushottam Bhagvãn resides in all – to a greater or lesser degree – as their cause, and is antaryãmi. 41.7 “For example, fire resides within wood. Large fire resides in large pieces of wood, long fire resides in a long piece of wood, and bent fire resides in a bent piece of wood. In a similar way, Purushottam Bhagvãn resides in various entities with varying degrees of power according to the task to be accomplished through that entity. 41.8 “Purushottam Bhagvãn also resides in those like Akshar and Prakruti-Purush, and is antaryãmi. However, because of the difference in the abilities of those entities, there is a difference in their power. So, there is only one Purushottam Bhagvãn, and it is He who enters all and resides in them as antaryãmi. But, He Himself does not become the jeevs and ishvars by assuming many svarups. This is how that Vedic shlok should be interpreted.”

42.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on Mahã sud 6 [21st January, 1820], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting facing west on a decorated bedstead on the platform under the neem tree in front of the mandir of Shree Vãsudev-Nãrãyan in Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He had tied a white pãgh around His head. He had also covered Himself with a white chãdar and was wearing a white khes. Bunches of yellow flowers had been placed above both of His ears. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 42.2 Seated in the sabhã, were some vedãnti brãhmans. Seeing them, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “Those who study or listen to the Vedãnt shãstras claim, ‘The vidhi and nishedh are false; Svarg and Narak, which are attained by following them, are also false; the disciples who attain them are false; and the guru is false as well. Brahm pervades everything and it alone is satya’. But, those who speak in this way, with what understanding do they propose this? 42.3 “In actual fact, the ãchãrya of all vedãntis, Shankar-Ãchãrya, had his own disciples keep a cane and a kamandalu. He also enforced, ‘A person should recite the Bhagvad Geetã and the Vishnu-Sahasranãm; a person should perform pujã of Vishnu; those who are young should bow down to those who are senior in age; and a person should beg for alms only from the house of a religious and pure brãhman’. So, because Shankar-Ãchãrya proposed the following of various vidhi and nishedh in this way, can you claim that he did not have complete gnãn? Have those who claim to have recently attained gnãn, and have falsified the following of these vidhi and nishedh, become greater than Shankar-Ãchãrya? Actually, it seems as if they are speaking out of absolute foolishness. 42.4 “In reality, those vidhi and nishedh that have been falsified in the shãstras, can be understood through the following example: If a large ship sets out to sea for a year, then neither the shoreline ahead nor the shoreline behind can be seen. In fact, even huge mountains on either shoreline cannot be seen, so how can trees or people possibly be seen? Wherever a person looks, only water can be seen; but besides water, nothing else is visible. If he looks up, the enormous waves of the ocean rising up will be seen. So even above, only water is visible. In this situation, people sitting in the ship would claim that there is only water, and nothing else exists. The principle behind this example is that a person who has attained a nirvikalp state in the form of Brahm claims, ‘There is only Brahm; besides that everything else, such as jeevs, ishvars, and Mãyã, is false’. Hearing words written in the shãstras supporting this view, a person who has not even attained that state, claims all vidhi and nishedh are false. He thinks of his wife and children, and carries out all social activities while believing them to be true. Therefore, he believes the vidhi and nishedh, which are written in the shãstras, to be false. Those who preach such gnãn in this world should be known as extremely sinful and nãstiks. 42.5 “After all, it was because of the uneasiness that such a nãstik nature may creep into people’s hearts, that Shankar-Ãchãrya composed many shloks in the praise of Vishnu, such as: bhaja govindam bhaja govindam govindam bhaja mudhamate O fool! Worship Bhagvãn...Worship Bhagvãn...Worship Bhagvãn. “He also composed several shloks praising Shivji, Ganpati, Surya, and many other devs. After hearing these shloks, all the devs appear to be satya. It was with this intention in mind that Shankar-Ãchãrya composed shloks in praise of all these devs. Despite this, scholars of today falsify them. In addition, they claim, ‘Regardless of how severe a sin a person with gnãn may commit, it would not affect him’. But, they say this out of foolishness. 42.6 “Also, consider this: From all those tyãgi paramhans, Jadbharat is the best. In fact, the story of Jadbharat has been noted in each of the Purãns and all the Vedãnt shãstras. That great Jadbharat was also the son of Rushabh-Dev Bhagvãn in his previous life. He gave up his kingdom, and went to live in the forest. There, he developed affection for a deer. Although that was merely out of compassion, this mistake caused him to be reborn as a deer. Like that deer, he attained four legs, a short tail, and small horns on his head. 42.7 “In comparison, the gopis of Vraj were attached to Shree Krishna Bhagvãn out of lust. Despite this, they were still able to overcome Bhagvãn’s mãyã, and attain the nirgun Akshardhãm of Bhagvãn after becoming gunãtit. The reason for this was that Shree Krishna Bhagvãn was Purushottam, and He was a gunãtit divya murti. So, because the gopis developed love for Him, either knowingly or unknowingly, they became gunãtit as well. However, Bharatji became a deer because he had developed affection for the deer out of compassion. Therefore, no matter how great a person may be, kusang only leads to harm. Conversely, regardless of how great a sinner a person may be, if he maintains profound association with Bhagvãn, who is satya, then that person also becomes absolutely pure and attains kalyãn. Of course, if Shree Krishna Bhagvãn was not gunãtit himself, then His bhaktas, the gopis, would not have attained the gunãtit state. But, because they did attain the gunãtit state, Shree Krishna Bhagvãn was most certainly flawless, gunãtit, and divya. 42.8 “Vedãntis also claim, ‘Everything is pervaded by Brahm’. Just as the gopis developed love for Shree Krishna Bhagvãn, all women develop love for their husbands, and all men develop love for their wives. However, they do not attain what the gopis attained. Instead, they attain gloomy Narak. Therefore, those who prescribe that vidhi and nishedh are indeed true, not false; and whoever falsifies them, will be consigned to Narak.” 42.9 Having said this, Shreeji Mahãrãj bid “Jay Sachidãnand” to everyone, and returned to His residence.

43.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on the evening of Mahã sud 7 [22nd January, 1820], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting on a decorated bedstead on the veranda outside the east-facing rooms of Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He had tied a white pãgh around His head. He had covered Himself with a white chãdar and was wearing a white khes as well. Tassels of yellow flowers were dangling from His pãgh, and garlands of yellow flowers adorned His neck. Also, bunches of yellow flowers had been placed above both of His ears. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 43.2 Looking at all the bhaktas with a compassionate gaze, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “I wish to ask a question, so please listen.” He then began, “The Shreemad Bhãgvat Purãn states, ‘Those who are bhaktas of Bhagvãn do not desire any of the four types of mukti’. Other great bhaktas of Bhagvãn also say, ‘Bhaktas of Bhagvãn do not wish for the four types of mukti’. What are the four types of mukti? The first type is to reside in the dhãm of Bhagvãn; the second type is to stay near Bhagvãn; the third type is to assume a svarup similar to Bhagvãn; and the forth type is to attain powers similar to Bhagvãn. These are the four types of mukti. A bhakta of Bhagvãn does not wish for any of these. Instead he only wishes to serve Bhagvãn. Now, my question is, ‘Why does that bhakta not wish for the four types of mukti?’ Please answer according to your ability.” 43.3 All the paramhans attempted to answer the question, but were unable to do so adequately. 43.4 Then, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “Here, I shall answer the question. A person who maintains a desire for the four types of mukti after becoming a bhakta of Bhagvãn is known as a ‘sakãm bhakta’. In contrast, a person who has no desires regarding the four types of mukti, and who only desires to serve Bhagvãn, is known as a ‘nishkãm bhakta’. In fact, the Shreemad Bhãgvat states: mat-sevaya prateetam cha sãlokyãdi chatushtayam nechhanti sevaya puranahã krutonyat-kãlaviplutam If those who are only fulfilled by serving me do not desire the four types of mukti, such as a place in my dhãm, which are attained by serving me – then why would they desire anything that is ultimately perishable? sãlokya sãrshti sãmeepya sãrupyaika-tvamapyut deeyamãnam na gruhnanti vinã mat-sevanam janãhã Even if granted a place in my dhãm, powers similar to mine, my closeness, a svarup similar to mine, or oneness with me, nishkãm bhaktas would not accept them without my sevã. 43.5 “This means that a nishkãm bhakta of Bhagvãn does not wish for the four types of mukti, if the sevã of Bhagvãn is not included. He only wishes to serve Bhagvãn. In turn, Bhagvãn keeps this nishkãm bhakta in His own sevã. Bhagvãn also insists on granting such a bhakta with His divine powers and bliss, even though the bhakta does not wish for them. Kapil-Dev Bhagvãn has also said: atho vibhutim mama mãyã-vinastã-maishvaryam-ashtãngama-nupravruttam shriyam bhagavateem va spruhayanti bhadram parasya me teshnuvate tu loke Even though my nishkãm bhaktas have no wish for the material wealth of the loks up to and including the lok of Brahmã, for the eight extraordinary powers, or for the auspicious wealth of Bhagvãn, they still enjoy all these in my dhãm. 43.6 “In the Geetã, such a nishkãm bhakta has been referred to as a bhakta with gnãn. A sakãm bhakta, on the other hand, has been referred to as materialistic. Therefore, a bhakta should not wish for anything except the sevã of Bhagvãn. After all, wishing for anything other than the sevã of Bhagvãn is considered to be a flaw. It should be overcome by extreme association with the nishkãm ekãntik bhakta of Bhagvãn.”

44.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on the morning of Mahã sud 8 [23rd January, 1820], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting facing west on a decorated bedstead on the platform under the neem tree in front of the mandir of Shree Vãsudev-Nãrãyan in Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He was wearing a white khes, and had covered Himself with a white chãdar. Also, He had tied a white feto around His head, and had tied a bokãni with one end of the feto. A garland of white flowers decorated the feto. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 44.2 Shreeji Mahãrãj then asked, “What is the characteristic of having love towards Bhagvãn?” 44.3 Brahmãnand Swãmi attempted to describe the characteristic of love, but was unable to do so adequately. 44.4 Hearing his reply, Shreeji Mahãrãj commented, “You have not even come close to describing love. You say it is remaining detached from the body and the brahmãnd, but that is not the characteristic of love. That is the characteristic of vairãgya. In actual fact, love is constantly remembering Bhagvãn’s murti. That is called love. 44.5 “A bhakta with total love for Bhagvãn, never has any thoughts other than those of Bhagvãn. The extent to which he holds desires other than those of Bhagvãn, is the extent to which he lacks in his love. If, whether knowingly or unknowingly, some thoughts other than remembering Bhagvãn’s murti were to arise in a person who has true love for Bhagvãn, it would be as distressful for him as someone throwing a handful of pebbles and sand into a delicious meal he is eating, or as painful as being branded on his forehead by a red-hot branding iron. A person who feels this way should be known to have love for Bhagvãn. So now, if all of you examine your hearts, you will realise how much love you have for Bhagvãn.” 44.6 Brahmãnand Swãmi then asked, “By what means can a person develop such intense love for Bhagvãn?” 44.7 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “Only by keeping profound association with the sat-purush can a person develop intense love for Bhagvãn.” 44.8 At this point, Somlã Khãchar questioned, “But, we are intensely engaged in such profound association, yet why does such intense love not develop?” 44.9 Shreeji Mahãrãj explained, “It is true that you engage yourselves in such profound association, but as well as associating with me, you also associate with the world. As a result, intense love for Bhagvãn does not develop.” 44.10 Then, a brãhman named Vãlo Dhruv, from Vaso, asked a question. “Mahãrãj, how can the feelings of ‘I-ness’ and ‘my-ness’ towards the body and its relations, be eradicated?” 44.11 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “The jeev has a misconception that it does not believe itself to be the jeevãtmã, and distinct from the body. Instead, it believes itself to be the body. To illustrate how the body clings to the jeevãtmã, consider a person who wears a dagli after having it sewn by a tailor. That person then begins to believe, ‘The tailor is my father, and the tailor’s wife is my mother’. Such a person would be considered a fool. In the same way, the jeevãtmã is given a dagli in the form of this body. That body is born sometimes to a brãhman couple, or sometimes to a low-caste couple, or in any of the other 8.4 million life-forms. Therefore, a person who believes the body to be his true self and believes the parents of that body to be his own parents, is called a fool. He should be considered to be like an animal. 44.12 “Moreover, out of those 8.4 million life-forms previously undertaken, there is not a single mother, sister, daughter, or wife who keeps the pati vratã vow any longer. So, how can a person who believes these relations to be his true relations, ever overcome the feelings of ‘I-ness’ and ‘my-ness’? Therefore, without such understanding, to eradicate attachment for a person’s birthplace and native land, is very difficult indeed. 44.13 “Therefore, as long as a person believes the body to be his true self, his entire understanding is totally useless. As long as he continues to hold pride in his varna and ãshram, he will never see qualities of a sãdhu. So, after discarding the feelings of ‘I-ness’ and ‘my-ness’ for the body and its relations, believing the ãtmã to be brahm-rup, and after abandoning all worldly desires, if a person worships Bhagvãn while following svadharma, he should be known as a sãdhu. No distance remains between Purushottam Bhagvãn and a person who has acquired such qualities of a sãdhu. Everything else may be possible, but to acquire such qualities of a sãdhu is extremely difficult. In fact, I am such a sãdhu, because I do not have even the slightest pride in my varna and ãshram.” 44.14 Shreeji Mahãrãj spoke in this way for the purpose of enlightening His bhakta. In reality, He Himself is Purushottam Nãrãyan.

45.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on the evening of Mahã sud 10 [24th January, 1820], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting facing south on the platform in front of the mandir of Shree Vãsudev-Nãrãyan in Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He was wearing a white khes and had covered Himself with a white chãdar. He had also tied a white pãgh around His head. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 45.2 Gopãlãnand Swãmi then asked, “Mahãrãj, many vedãntis claim that Bhagvãn is nirãkãr, and does not possess a svarup. Moreover, they quote Vedic shloks that support only that belief. On the other hand, bhaktas of Bhagvãn, such as Nãrad, Shukji, and the Sanakãdik, claim that Bhagvãn is sãkãr. Of the two, who is correct?” 45.3 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “Purushottam Bhagvãn is eternally sãkãr, and that murti is extremely luminous. The all-pervasive Brahm, which is antaryãmi and sachidãnand, is actually the divine light of Purushottam Bhagvãn, but He Himself possesses a definite murti. The Shrutis also mention, ‘Bhagvãn looked towards Mãyã’. Now, if Bhagvãn sees, does that mean that He has only a pair of eyes and nothing else? He also has hands and feet. This proves that He is sãkãr. 45.4 “Take the example of water. Its corresponding dev, Varun, is sãkãr in his own home, while water itself is described as nirãkãr. Also, the flames of a fire are described as nirãkãr, while their corresponding dev, Agni, is sãkãr in his own home. Sunlight is also described as being nirãkãr, while Surya-Dev, who resides in his home, is sãkãr. Similarly, sachidãnand Brahm is nirãkãr, while Purushottam Bhagvãn is sãkãr. Furthermore, that all-pervasive sachidãnand Brahm, is the divine light of Purushottam Bhagvãn. 45.5 “Someone may claim that the Shrutis propose that Bhagvãn is all-pervasive and perfect, and is without features like hands and feet. But, those Vedic shloks that disprove the features like hands and feet, are actually disproving the mãyik hands and feet. In reality, Bhagvãn’s murti is divya, not mãyik. 45.6 “When a mirror is placed in front of the sunlight, the reflection is just like the sunlight. In this way, the light of Purushottam Bhagvãn, which is sachidãnand Brahm and pervades everything, can also be seen as sãkãr, like Purushottam Bhagvãn, by the pure antah-karans acting like a mirror. 45.7 “In the same way, Purushottam Bhagvãn is always sãkãr. He is not nirãkãr. Those who do believe Him to be nirãkãr, just do not understand.”

46.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on the evening of Mahã sud 11 [25th January, 1820], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting facing south on the platform near the mandir of Shree Vãsudev-Nãrãyan in Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He was wearing a white khes and had covered Himself with a white chãdar. He had also tied a white pãgh around His head. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 46.2 Then, a vedãnti brãhman by the name of Maheshvar Bhatt asked Shreeji Mahãrãj, “Everything is merged during the state of samãdhi, but how does ãkãsh become merged?” 46.3 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “Please listen carefully as I explain the characteristics of ãkãsh in detail. Ãkãsh is the name given to vacant space. All objects that exist, reside only within that vacant space. Moreover, ãkãsh pervades and resides within all of those objects. In fact, there is not a single object in which there is no ãkãsh. It even exists in the smallest particle of pruthvi. If we cut that particle into millions of pieces, ãkãsh will exist within those pieces as well. 46.4 “So, when a person looks from the viewpoint of ãkãsh, the other four bhuts cannot be identified; only ãkãsh can be identified. Everything is dependent on that ãkãsh. The three types of bodies, sthul, sukshma, and kãran, stay within ãkãsh. This brahmãnd also resides within ãkãsh, along with its creator, Prakruti and Purush. But that ãkãsh also resides within Prakruti-Purush and their creations, the body and the brahmãnd. Ãkãsh resides externally as their supporter. Therefore, this ãkãsh is never merged, neither during the state of sushupti nor during samãdhi. 46.5 “Someone may argue, ‘The five bhuts have evolved from tamo-gun, so how can that ãkãsh be called the supporter of Prakruti and Purush? Also, how can it be said to pervade them all?’ Well, if Prakruti did not contain ãkãsh in the form of vacant space, then how could maha-tattva – which emerges from Prakruti in the way fruits and flowers emerge from a tree, and a calf emerges from a cow’s womb – emerge at all? Therefore, ãkãsh does reside within Prakruti. Furthermore, ahankãr also emerges from maha-tattva, so ãkãsh resides within maha-tattva as well. The three gun emerge from ahankãr, so ãkãsh resides within ahankãr as well. The five bhuts emerge from tamo-gun, so ãkãsh resides within tamo-gun as well. However, the ãkãsh that has evolved from tamo-gun is subject to change, whereas the ãkãsh that is the support of everything is not subject to change and is eternal. It is this ãkãsh that is known as Brahm and as Chidãkãsh, and is the supporter of all. Moreover, it is within this ãkãsh that Purush and Prakruti undergo the states of expansion and contraction. 46.6 “How is this so? When Purush gazes at Prakruti – just as children are born to a man and woman – with Purush as the husband and Prakruti as the wife – children in the form of maha-tattva are produced. In this way, Prakruti takes the form of the twenty-four tattvas as well as the form of the body and the brahmãnd. This is her state of expansion. Purush pervades all entities that evolve from that Prakruti, with his powers. This is his state of expansion. 46.7 “In time, when all the entities that have evolved from Prakruti are destroyed, and Prakruti appears to remain absorbed in Purush’s body, that is Prakruti’s state of contraction. When Purush reverts within his own self – at the time when all the entities that have evolved from Prakruti are destroyed – that is known as Purush’s state of contraction. For example, when a tortoise expands, all of its limbs emerge from its shell; and when it contracts, it withdraws all of its limbs back into its shell and remains totally motionless. That states of expansion and contraction of Prakruti and Purush are similar to this. 46.8 “Also, it is only Purush, and not the all-supporting Chidãkãsh, which has an anvay-vyatirek relationship with Prakruti and the entities evolved from her. After all, how can something that is all-supporting ever be vyatirek from anything? On the contrary, Purush always resides in everything. 46.9 “This brahmãnd is surrounded on all four sides by the Lokã-Lok mountains, just like a fort. Beyond the Lokã-Lok mountains is Ãlok; beyond Ãlok are the seven barriers; beyond that is nothing but darkness; beyond that darkness, there is divine light, which is known as Chidãkãsh. Above, the brahmãnd extends up to Brahm-Lok; above which are the seven barriers (jad prakruti); above which there is darkness (Mãyã); above which there is again divine light, which is known as Chidãkãsh. 46.10 “Below, brahmãnd extends down to the seventh Pãtãl; below which are the seven barriers (jad prakruti); below which there is darkness (Mãyã); below which there is again divine light, which is known as Chidãkãsh. In this way, Chidãkãsh is present on all four sides of the brahmãnd, as well as within the brahmãnd. When a person’s vision reaches the perspective of that all-supporting Chidãkãsh, it is given names like dahar-vidyã or akshi-vidyã. However, they are all called brahm-vidyã. 46.11 “That Chidãkãsh is extremely luminous and eternal. It is neither created nor destroyed. Whenever there is any mention of the creation and destruction of ãkãsh, it is with reference to the ãkãsh that has evolved from tamo-gun, and which is full of darkness. This ãkãsh can be merged, but the all-supporting Chidãkãsh is never merged. This is the answer to your question. If anyone still has any doubts please do ask.” 46.12 Then, the vedãnti brãhman and all the haribhaktas replied, “None of us have any doubts at all now.”

47.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on the morning of Mahã sud 12 [26th January, 1820], Swãmi Shree Sahajãnandji Mahãrãj was sitting on a decorated bedstead on the platform under the neem tree in front of the mandir of Shree Vãsudev-Nãrãyan in Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 47.2 Then, after snapping the fingers of His right hand, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “Everyone please listen with attention, as I have something to tell you. What I have to say is simple, but you will only be able to grasp its meaning if you listen carefully. Otherwise, you will not.” 47.3 All the haribhaktas said, “Please do tell us, Mahãrãj.” 47.4 Shreeji Mahãrãj then said, “Of Bhagvãn’s bhaktas, some have strength in dharma-nishthã, some have strength in ãtmã-nishthã, some have strength in vairãgya-nishthã, and some have strength in bhakti-nishthã. Although a person may have one strength, they also possess all the other types, but to a lesser extent. 47.5 “A bhakta, whose main strength is following bhãgvat-dharma, lovingly engages himself in performing the basic sevã of Bhagvãn and His bhaktas. He also abides by the rules, like ahinsã and brahm-chãrya, which are related to the dharma of his varna and ãshram. The bhakta also enjoys building mandirs for Bhagvãn, and working in His gardens. He enjoys offering different varieties of food to Bhagvãn, and also enjoys hand-plastering and sweeping the mandirs of Bhagvãn and the residential halls of sãdhus. In addition, he offers bhakti to Bhagvãn by listening to kathãs and singing kirtans without any form of pretence. Moreover, such a bhakta who is strong in following dharma intensely enjoys listening to and reading shãstras describing bhãgvat-dharma. 47.6 “A bhakta, whose main strength is ãtmã-nishthã, always behaves as the ãtmã, which is beyond the three bodies and the three mental states, and is described as eternal. He understands that his ishta-dev, pratyaksha Shree Krishna Paramãtmã, is beyond everything, has an extremely pure svarup, and forever possesses a divya murti. In addition, he talks about and listens to talks describing the pure nature of his own ãtmã, as well as talks about Paramãtmã. He also enjoys shãstras that contain such talks. His nature is such that he is unable to tolerate anything that obstructs him from behaving as an ãtmã. 47.7 “A bhakta, whose main strength is vairãgya-nishthã, has a persistent dislike for all worldly objects, but not towards Bhagvãn’s murti. Realising those objects to be asatya, he never remembers his home, his family, or any other object that he has given up – in the same way that he never remembers faeces once they have been excreted. Such a bhakta only keeps the company of bhaktas who are tyãgis. In addition, he offers bhakti to Bhagvãn in a way that does not conflict with his tyãg. His talks are always about tyãg, and he has a liking for shãstras that propose tyãg. Moreover, he has an extreme dislike for tasty foods, beautiful clothes, and for all worldly objects related to the five vishays that may interfere with his tyãg. 47.8 “A bhakta, whose main strength is bhakti-nishthã, has intense love only for Bhagvãn’s svarup. Apart from that svarup of Bhagvãn, he is unable to focus his mind’s vrutti towards worldly objects. Yet, he lovingly offers rich clothes and jewellery to Bhagvãn. He also enjoys listening to the human-like charitras of Bhagvãn and also greatly enjoys listening to any shãstra that describes Bhagvãn’s svarup. In addition, he only develops love towards those bhaktas who have love for Bhagvãn. Besides them, he never develops love towards even his own son or relatives. Such a bhakta is always engaged in some activity that is related to Bhagvãn. 47.9 “Now, after reflecting upon this talk, which describes the characteristics of bhaktas possessing these four strengths, all of you please reveal which of these is your strength. In actual fact, this talk is rather like a mirror, as it reveals a person’s own true strength as it is. Furthermore, those who are Bhagvãn’s bhaktas are never without a strength. However, as they may have not recognised it, they find that they cannot intensify it. As long as it is not strengthened, it will continue to fluctuate according to the talks a person hears. So, after thinking over this talk, please reveal your strengths as they are.” 47.10 All the haribhaktas then revealed their respective strengths. 47.11 Shreeji Mahãrãj then requested, “Those who have similar strengths, please stand up together.” Then, those bhaktas with similar strengths, stood up in turn, after which Shreeji Mahãrãj asked all of them to sit down again. 47.12 Nityãnand Swãmi then asked, “Do those four types of bhaktas, with their strengths, have any gun or avgun in their strengths?” 47.13 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “Yes, they do have gun and avgun. Please listen as I describe them. The extent to which bhaktas with those four strengths behave according to the characteristics I have described earlier, is their gun. The extent to which they cannot behave according to those characteristics, is their avgun.” 47.14 Finally, Muktãnand Swãmi asked, “Of the four types of bhaktas, is one superior to the others, or are they all equal?” 47.15 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “As long as each one adheres to his strength, then all four are equal. However, if a person adheres to all four strengths, then he is superior to all. When one person is strong in all four, he is known as param-bhãgvat, and only he can be called an ekãntik bhakta.”

48.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on the evening of Mahã sud 13 [27th January, 1820], Swãmi Shree Sahajãnandji Mahãrãj was sitting facing west on a decorated bedstead on the platform under the neem tree in front of the mandir of Shree Vãsudev-Nãrãyan in Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. Two oil-lamps were lit in front of Him after the sandhyã ãrti of Shree Vãsudev-Nãrãyan, and the Nãrãyan dhun had finished. 48.2 After that, Mahãrãj said “Everyone listen very carefully. I wish to speak to you.” 48.3 Then, the munis and haribhaktas said, “Mahãrãj, please tell us.” 48.4 Then, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “It is my wish, that all haribhaktas receive a murti of Nar-Nãrãyan Dev printed on paper, for you to perform pujã. This pujã is accepted by all shãstras. The Shreemad Bhãgvat states that there are eight types of murtis, including a printed murti. Therefore, pujã can be performed upon a printed murti. This is my wish. 48.5 “In the morning, all haribhaktas should bathe and then perform pujã of Nar-Nãrãyan. Then, you should do pradakshinã and sashtãng pranãm. Then, you should ask, ‘Please protect me from the influence of kusangis’.” 48.6 Shreeji Mahãrãj then elaborated, “There are four types of kusangis: the kudã-panthis, the shakti-panthis, the shushka-vedãntis, and the nãstiks. If a person associates with kudã-panthis, they will cause him to falter in his vartmãns and make him impure. If a person associates with shakti-panthis, he will be forced to consume meat and alcohol, which will deflect him from following his svadharma. If a person associates with a shushka-vedãnti, a person will fall from bhakti and upãsanã, because such people claim that the dhãm of Bhagvãn and the murti Bhagvãn are all false. Finally, if a person associates with nãstiks, they promote that only karmas are real, and deny the existence of Shree Krishna Bhagvãn, and therefore leads a person astray from the path prescribed by the eternal, sacred shãstra. 48.7 “Therefore, a person should request from Bhagvãn, ‘May I never encounter the company of these four types of people’. He should also pray, ‘Mahãrãj. Please protect me from the inner enemies of kãm, krodh, lobh, moh, ahankãr, irshyã, and the belief that I am the body. Also, forever keep me in the company of your bhaktas’. A person should daily pray to Bhagvãn in this way, and always be wary of such kusangis and inner enemies. 48.8 “All haribhaktas should not think, ‘How can the picture on the paper protect us from kusang?’ A person should never bring this thought into the mind. If all of you listen to me and perform the pujã of Nar-Nãrãyan, I can communicate with Nar-Nãrãyan, as I am a sat-purush. I will say to Nar-Nãrãyan, ‘Mahãrãj. Please remain in the murti that I have given, if the haribhaktas abide by the panch-vartmãn, and perform pujã of the murti’. 48.9 “I will keep Nar-Nãrãyan Dev by force in the murti, and tie him with a rope in the form of love. So, please keep faith that the murti on paper is truly Nar-Nãrãyan Dev. Knowing this, never leave a murti without having performed pujã. In the morning, after bathing, you should perform pujã of Bhagvãn. Then, you should attend to your daily duties. As long as you follow the panch-vartmãn, and perform pujã of Nar-Nãrãyan Dev, He will remain in this murti. This is my ãgnã, which you all should believe with firm faith.” 48.10 The haribhaktas accepted everything that was said by Shreeji Mahãrãj.

49.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on the evening of Mahã sud 14 [28th January, 1820], Swãmi Shree Sahajãnandji Mahãrãj was sitting on a decorated bedstead on the platform under the neem tree in front of the mandir of Shree Vãsudev-Nãrãyan in Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. Two small oil lamps were lit in front of Him. He was wearing a garland of yellow flowers around His neck, and strings of yellow flowers decorated both wrists. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 49.2 Shreeji Mahãrãj then said, “Please begin a question-answer discussion.” 49.3 Then, Brahmãnand Swãmi asked, “Why is it that our vrutti remains on Bhagvãn only as long as we forcibly keep it there, whereas it remains on worldly objects without the slightest effort?” 49.4 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “The vrutti of Bhagvãn’s bhakta never remains on anything except Bhagvãn. In fact, his only concern is ‘It will be very difficult for me to keep my vrutti on worldly objects’. Therefore, Bhagvãn’s bhakta finds it difficult to keep his vrutti on any worldly objects, while a worldly person finds it difficult to keep his vrutti on Bhagvãn. A person whose vrutti does not remain fixed on Bhagvãn, is not a bhakta of Bhagvãn. Nevertheless, if he attends satsang, he will gradually become a bhakta by listening to the talks of the sãdhus.” 49.5 Brahmãnand Swãmi then asked further, “By what means can a person keep his vrutti on Bhagvãn?” 49.6 Shreeji Mahãrãj explained, “The way to achieve that is antar-drashti. Antar-drashti is to constantly look towards the murti of pratyaksha Bhagvãn that a person has attained. Besides that murti, even if he sees the six chakras, or Golok, or Vaikunth, or other dhãms of Bhagvãn, it should not be considered to be antar-drashti. Therefore, to look at Bhagvãn’s murti that a person has seen within his heart, or to look at the murti of Bhagvãn visible externally, is known as antar-drashti. However, wherever a person’s vrutti strays apart from Bhagvãn’s murti, it is called bãhya-drashti.” 49.7 Shreeji Mahãrãj then told the paramhans, “Please arrange yourselves into pairs, and begin a question-answer discussion.” 49.8 Then, the paramhans carried out a question-answer discussion amongst themselves for quite some time, through which Shreeji Mahãrãj examined their intelligence.

50.1 In the Samvat year 1876, in the early hours of Mahã vad 1 [31st January, 1820], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting in front of the veranda outside Dãdã Khãchar’s medi in Gadhadã. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 50.2 Shreeji Mahãrãj then asked the munis, “A person who possesses a sharp intellect attains Brahm. Can the intellect of a person who is skilled in the managing of worldly affairs be called sharp, or not? Also, can the intellect of a person who is very skilled in interpreting the shãstras and the Purãns be called sharp, or not?” 50.3 The munis attempted to answer the question, but were unable to do so adequately. 50.4 Shreeji Mahãrãj then explained, “Some people may be extremely skilled in worldly affairs, yet they do nothing at all to safeguard their own kalyãn. Others know the precise meanings of the various shãstras, Purãns, and other historical shãstras, yet they too do nothing to safeguard their kalyãn. Therefore, they cannot be said to possess a sharp intellect. Instead, they possess a blunt intellect. On the other hand, a person who safeguards his kalyãn, even though he may possess only a limited intellect, should be considered to have a sharp intellect. So, a person who pays more attention to worldly affairs, even though he possesses a sharp intellect, should be considered to possess a blunt intellect. 50.5 “This is stated in the Bhagvad Geetã: yã nishã sarva-bhootãnãm tasyãm jãgrati sayami yasyãm jãgrati bhutãni sã nishã pashyato munehe “This shlok explains that while worshipping Bhagvãn, all worldly people behave as if their mind is covered in darkness, like the night. Therefore, they do not worship Bhagvãn. On the other hand, Bhagvãn’s bhaktas are awake in worshipping Bhagvãn. Therefore, they are constantly engaged in worshipping Bhagvãn. Furthermore, everyone’s mind is awake with respect to the five vishays – shabda, sparsh, rup, ras, and gandh – and they continuously indulge in the vishays. In contrast, the minds of the Bhagvãn’s bhaktas, are covered in darkness with regards to indulging in the vishays. Therefore, they do not indulge in them. 50.6 “Therefore, only a person who remains alert regarding his own kalyãn can be said to possess a sharp intellect. As for others, they are all mere fools.”

51.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on the night of Mahã vad 2 [1st February, 1820], Swãmi Shree Sahajãnandji Mahãrãj was sitting on a decorated bedstead on the veranda outside the west-facing rooms in front of the mandir of Shree Vãsudev-Nãrãyan in Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He was wearing a white survãl and a white angarkhu. He had also tied a white pãgh around His head. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 51.2 Then, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “Please ask a question.” 51.3 Purnãnand Swãmi then asked, “The ten indriyas are produced from rajo-gun, and the four antah-karans are produced from sattva-gun. Therefore, all the indriyas and antah-karans are mãyik. However, Bhagvãn is beyond Mãyã. So, how can a person develop nishchay in Bhagvãn through the mãyik antah-karans? Also, how can a person see Bhagvãn with his mãyik indriyas, like the eyes?” 51.4 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “Mãyik objects can be realised by mãyik means, and if a person has realised Bhagvãn through the same mãyik antah-karans and indriyas, then it implies that Bhagvãn must also be mãyik. Is that your question, or not?” 51.5 Purnãnand Swãmi and all the munis confirmed, “Yes Mahãrãj. That is our question. You have clarified it for us.” 51.6 Then, Shreeji Mahãrãj explained, “The answer to that is as follows: The surface area of the pruthvi is 500,000,000 yojans. On the pruthvi, there are various objects such as trees, mountains, pots, and clothes. That pruthvi exists within all of those objects, and it also exists distinctly on its own. So, if a person looks from the perspective of pruthvi, then it appears that pruthvi has taken the form of all of those objects, and that no object exists apart from pruthvi. However, pruthvi itself has been produced from a small portion of jal. This jal is below the pruthvi, around it, as well as above it. In fact, jal totally pervades the pruthvi. If a person looks from the perspective of jal, only jal exists, and there is no pruthvi at all. Furthermore, that jal has been produced from a small portion of tej. If a person looks from the perspective of tej, only tej exists, and there is no jal at all. This tej, has been produced from a small portion of vãyu. If a person looks from the perspective of vãyu, only vãyu exists, and there is no tej at all. This vãyu has been produced from a small portion of ãkãsh. If a person looks from the perspective of ãkãsh, the other four bhuts, the entities evolved from them (the body and the brahmãnd) are not apparent at all. It appears as if only ãkãsh exists everywhere. 51.7 “This ãkãsh has been produced from a small portion of tãmas-ahankãr. That tãmas-ahankãr, along with rãjas-ahankãr, sãttvik-ahankãr, the bhuts, the indriyas, and antah-karans, and their presiding devs, have been produced from a small portion of maha-tattva. So, if a person looks from the perspective of maha-tattva, the three types of ahankãrs, the bhuts, the indriyas, the antah-karans, and their presiding devs, do not exist – only maha-tattva exists. So, if a person looks from the perspective of maha-tattva, the three types of ahankãrs, the bhuts, the indriyas, the antah-karans, and their presiding devs, do not exist – only maha-tattva exists. That maha-tattva has been produced from a small portion of Pradhãn-Prakruti. Therefore, if a person looks from the perspective of Prakruti, maha-tattva does not exist – only Prakruti exists. However, during the period of destruction, Prakruti is absorbed into a small portion of Purush, and at the time of creation, she is produced again from a small portion of Purush. Therefore, if a person looks from the perspective of Purush, only Purush exists – there is no Prakruti. 51.8 “Countless millions of Purush are produced from a small portion of Mahã-Mãyã. So, if a person looks from the perspective of Mahã-Mãyã, only Mahã-Mãyã exists – there is no Purush. Mahã-Mãyã itself is produced from a small portion of Mahã-Purush. So, if a person looks from the perspective of Mahã-Purush, only Mahã-Purush exists – there is no Mahã-Mãyã. That Mahã-Purush, rose from a small region of Akshar – the dhãm of Purushottam Bhagvãn. Therefore, if a person looks from the perspective of Akshar, neither Mahã-Purush nor anything else exists – there is only Akshar. But, above that Akshar is Purushottam Bhagvãn, who is even greater than Akshar. That Purushottam Bhagvãn is that all-doer – responsible for the creation, sustenance, and destruction of everything – and is also the cause of all. 51.9 “Now, a cause always pervades its effect, and at the same time, also remains distinct from it. Therefore, if a person looks from the perspective of Purushottam Bhagvãn, the cause of all, then nothing else appears to exist – except Purushottam Bhagvãn. 51.10 “It is this very Bhagvãn who, out of compassion for the kalyãn of the jeevs, gives darshan in a pratyaksha svarup to all the people on this earth. At that time, if a person realises this greatness of Purushottam Bhagvãn by intense association with a sant, then all of his indriyas and antah-karans become divya, just like Purushottam Bhagvãn’s indriyas and antah-karans. Then, through those indriyas and antah-karans, he can develop nishchay in Bhagvãn. For example, a diamond can only be cut by another diamond; it can never be cut by anything else. Similarly, the nishchay in Bhagvãn can only be developed through Bhagvãn. In the same way, the darshan of Bhagvãn is also possible only through Bhagvãn, but it is not possible through the mãyik indriyas and antah-karans.” 51.11 Having delivered this talk, Shreeji Mahãrãj bid “Jay Sachidãnand” to all and returned to His residence.

52.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on Mahã vad 3 [2nd February, 1820], Shreeji Mahãrãj was having kathã read on the veranda outside Dãdã Khãchar’s medi in Gadhadã. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 52.2 During the kathã, a reference was made to the fact that a person who understands Bhagvãn’s svarup through the four sets of shãstras – Sãnkhya, Yog, Vedãnt, and Panch-Rãtra – should be known to be completely enlightened. 52.3 Hearing this, Muktãnand Swãmi asked, “Mahãrãj, please explain how a person can realise Bhagvãn through those four sets of shãstras? Also, what deficiency remains in a person who does not realise Bhagvãn in that way?” 52.4 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “The Sãnkhya shãstras propose Bhagvãn as being the twenty-fifth tattva. Also, just as the twenty-four tattvas are incapable of doing anything without Bhagvãn, jeev and ishvar are also incapable of doing anything without Bhagvãn. Therefore, jeev and ishvar are also included in the twenty-four tattvas. These twenty-four tattvas, which include jeev and ishvar, are called kshetra. Bhagvãn, the twenty-fifth tattva, is called kshetragna. 52.5 “The Yog shãstras propose Bhagvãn as being the twenty-sixth tattva, and as possessing a definite murti. They describe jeev and ishvar as the twenty-fifth tattva, and describe the twenty-four tattvas as being distinct from them. They prescribe that a person should perform dhyãn upon Bhagvãn, realising his ãtmã to be distinct from those tattvas. 52.6 “The Vedãnt shãstras describe Bhagvãn as pervading all, as being the cause of all, as the supporter of all, as nirgun, advait, and niranjan, and as the non-doer despite being the all-doer. They also describe Him as possessing only divya qualities and not any worldly qualities. 52.7 “The Panch-Rãtra shãstras describe that there is only one Bhagvãn, who is Shree Krishna Purushottam Nãrãyan. He incarnates into the four svarups of Vãsudev, Sankarshan, Aniruddha, and Pradyumna. It is also He who assumes an avatãr on this earth. A person who offers the nine types of bhakti to Him, attains kalyãn. 52.8 “These are the various descriptions of Bhagvãn as given in those four scriptures. A person who thoroughly understands them, should be known to be completely enlightened. 52.9 “However, a discrepancy would arise if a person were to try to understand Bhagvãn’s svarup using only the Sãnkhya shãstras, while leaving the other three shãstras aside. The Sãnkhya shãstras do not describe jeev and ishvar as being distinct from the twenty-four tattvas. Therefore, when the followers of Sãnkhya reject the twenty-four tattvas and believe their jeevãtmã to be distinct from them, they would understand their jeevãtmã as the twenty-fifth tattva, but not Bhagvãn. 52.10 “There is a weakness in trying to understand Bhagvãn’s svarup from the Yog shãstras alone. They believe that Bhagvãn possesses a definite murti, but the followers of Yog consider Him to have limitations. They do not understand Him to be the antaryãmi of all, and absolutely perfect. 52.11 “There is also a weakness in trying to understand Bhagvãn’s svarup from the Vedãnt shãstra alone. They believe that Bhagvãn – who is the cause of all, pervades all, and is nirgun – is nirãkãr. They do not realise that Bhagvãn’s eternal svarup possesses divya limbs, not mãyik arms and legs. 52.12 “There is also a weakness in trying to understand Bhagvãn’s svarup from the Panch-Rãtra shãstras alone. They offer bhakti to Bhagvãn, but they see Bhagvãn’s avatãrs with human traits. Also, they understand Bhagvãn to be present in only one place at any one time, and not as being the antaryãmi of all and absolutely perfect. 52.13 “These are the types of weaknesses that arise when a person does not realise Bhagvãn using a combination of all four sets of shãstras. However, if a person attempts to realise Bhagvãn using all four sets of shãstras together, then the weakness raised from the understanding of one set of shãstras, is corrected by the understanding of another. Therefore, a person who understands Bhagvãn using all four sets of shãstras, is known as being completely enlightened. 52.14 “If he ignores one set of shãstras, he is known as being three-quarters enlightened. If he ignores two sets of shãstras, he is known as being half-enlightened. If ignores three sets of scriptures, he is known as being a quarter enlightened. If he acts according to his own fictional interpretations of the shãstras while ignoring all four sets of shãstras, then even if he is a vedãnti or a person with upãsanã, he is lost. He cannot be said to have found the path of kalyãn. Therefore, such a vedãnti’s gnãn is hypocritical, and a person with such upãsanã is a hypocritical bhakta.”

53.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on Mahã vad 9 [8th February, 1820], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting facing west on a decorated bedstead on the veranda outside the west-facing rooms in front of the mandir of Shree Vãsudev-Nãrãyan in Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He was wearing a white survãl and a white angarkhu. He had tied a rich, orange shelu with a silken border around His waist. He had also tied a rich, orange reto with a silken border around His head, with tassels of flowers hanging from it. He was also wearing garlands of flowers around His neck. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 53.2 Shreeji Mahãrãj then requested, “Someone please ask a question.” 53.3 Muktãnand Swãmi then asked, “There are those in satsang who progress day by day. There are also those who seem to fall back day by day, despite being in satsang. What is the reason for this?” 53.4 Shreeji Mahãrãj explained, “A person who perceives avgun in a great sãdhu, gradually falls back in satsang. Conversely, a person who perceives gun in that sãdhu progresses, and his bhakti towards Bhagvãn flourishes. Therefore, a person should not perceive avgun in a sãdhu. Instead, should only perceive his gun. 53.5 “A person should perceive an avgun in that sãdhu only if he breaks any of the vartmãns prescribed by Bhagvãn. However, even if the sãdhu has no flaws in following his vartmãns, on seeing some small irregularity in the sãdhu’s nature, a person may feel that is improper. Therefore, they focus only on the sãdhu’s avgun, and ignore his many gun. This causes the person’s own glorious gun, like of gnãn and vairãgya, to diminish. 53.6 “Therefore, only if there is a flaw in the following of the vartmãns, should a person find avgun; he should not find avgun in a bhakta of Bhagvãn for any other reason. 53.7 “Moreover, if a person does not find flaws, his glorious gun will begin to flourish day by day.”

54.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on Mahã vad 11 [9th February, 1820], Swãmi Shree Sahajãnandji Mahãrãj was sitting on a mattress with a large, cylindrical pillow on the veranda outside the west-facing rooms in front of the mandir of Shree Vãsudev-Nãrãyan in Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He was wearing a white khes and had covered Himself with an orange reto that had a border of interlocked golden and silver threads. He had also tied a feto around His head using a sky-blue silken cloth. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 54.2 Muktãnand Swãmi then asked, “Through the discussion between Janak Rãjã and the nine Yogeshvars, the eleventh skandh of the Shreemad Bhãgvat describes the nature of a bhãgvat-dharma. How is the bhãgvat-dharma sustained? Also, how can the gateway to moksh be opened for the jeev?” 54.3 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “Bhãgvat-dharma is sustained by maintaining intense love towards an ekãntik sãdhu of Bhagvãn, who possesses the qualities of svadharma, gnãn, vairãgya, and bhakti coupled with knowledge of Bhagvãn’s greatness. Maintaining intense love towards such a sãdhu also opens the gateway to moksh for the jeev. Kapil-Dev Bhagvãn has said to Devhuti: prasanga-majaram pãsha-mãtmanaha kavayo viduhu sa eva sãdhushu kruto moksha-dvãrama-pavrutam “This means: ‘If a person maintains intense love towards an ekãntik sant of Bhagvãn just as strongly as he maintains intense love towards his own relatives, then the gateway to moksh is open for him’.” 54.4 Shuk Muni then asked, “By what characteristic can someone recognise a person who would never lapse in following his dharma, even under the most difficult circumstances?” 54.5 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “A person whose nature is such that he is strict in obeying the ãgnã of Bhagvãn, and who would never disobey any ãgnã, however minor or major, will never fall back from following dharma, irrespective of the circumstances. Therefore, determination in dharma is found only in those who strictly follow Bhagvãn’s ãgnã, and their satsang also remains strong.”

55.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on Mahã vad 11 [10th February, 1820], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting on the east-facing veranda of His own residence in Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. A sabhã of sants, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 55.2 Then, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “Please begin a question-answer discussion.” 55.3 Muktãnand Swãmi then asked, “Why is a person unable to remain determined in bhajan, smaran, and the vartmãns?” 55.4 Shreeji Mahãrãj explained, “A person’s determination does not remain steady due to the influence of unpleasant desh, kãl, kriyã, and sang. There are three levels of this determination: uttam, madhyam, and kanishth. If there are extremely unpleasant desh, kãl, kriyã, and sang, then even the uttam level determination is dissolved. Then, what can be said of the madhyam and kanishth levels of determination? 55.5 “However, if a person’s determination remains exactly the same, despite the influence of extremely unpleasant desh, kãl, kriyã, and sang, then the force of good deeds and merits previously performed by him must be extremely powerful. On the other hand, a person’s intellect may become polluted despite extremely pleasant desh, kãl, kriyã, and sang. This is because he must have committed a great sin, or must have insulted a great bhakta of Bhagvãn, either in a past life or in this life. Therefore, despite association with pleasant desh, kãl, kriyã, and sang, his mind has still become polluted. 55.6 “If a person serves a great sant attentively, his sins will be burnt and reduced to ashes. On the other hand, if a person associates with a great sinner, then his own sins increase, and any religious deeds that he may have performed, will also be destroyed. Also, a person who puts his arms around the necks of prostitutes drinking alcohol, and then blames Bhagvãn by thinking, ‘Why did Bhagvãn not keep my mind stable?’ should be known as an utter fool.”

56.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on the evening of Mahã vad 12 [11th February, 1820], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting on a decorated bedstead on the veranda outside the west-facing rooms in front of the mandir of Shree Vãsudev-Nãrãyan in Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He was wearing a white khes, and had covered Himself with an orange reto, interlaced with gold and silver threads. He had also tied a reto, with a deep orange border, around His head. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. After singing the ‘Nãrãyan’ dhun, some munis were singing kirtans to the accompaniment of a jhãnjh and mrudang. 56.2 Shreeji Mahãrãj then said, “Please conclude singing kirtans, and let us conduct a question-answer discussion for a while.” Having said this, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “Let me ask a question.” 56.3 He then began by saying, “Shree Krishna Bhagvãn mentions four types of bhaktas in the Geetã. Of these, the bhaktas with gnãn are described as being the best. However, if all four have an equal level of nishchay in Bhagvãn’s svarup, how is the bhakta with gnãn superior?” 56.4 The munis attempted to answer that question, but were unable to give a satisfactory answer. 56.5 Shreeji Mahãrãj then explained, “The bhakta possessing gnãn behaves as brahm-svarup and thoroughly realises the greatness of Bhagvãn. As a result, no desires remain in his mind except for those of Bhagvãn’s svarup. However, the other three types of bhaktas do not fully realise the greatness of Bhagvãn, despite having nishchay in Bhagvãn. This means that desires, other than those for Bhagvãn, still continue. That is why they do not come equal to those bhaktas possessing gnãn. Therefore, if any desires, other than those related to Bhagvãn, remain in a bhakta, it is a serious flaw. 56.6 “Another major flaw is when a person who has no worldly desires at all and has intense vairãgya, behaves arrogantly on account of that vairãgya. Also, he may have the intense force of knowledge of the ãtmã, or may have the force of intense bhakti towards Bhagvãn. However, if out of arrogance, he is unable to bow before humble bhaktas or is unable to address them humbly, then that is also a serious flaw in him. As a result of that flaw, his strength in satsang does not flourish. 56.7 “Consider the analogy of a stone-cutter digging a well. If the stone underneath sounds hollow when he strikes it, he predicts, ‘There will be plenty of water in this water-well’. However, if the stone sounds solid on the surface, and sparks fly when he strikes it, then the stone-cutter assumes, ‘If there is going to be any water in this water-well at all, there will be very little’. In the same way, a person who remains arrogant due to the pride of his gnãn, vairãgya, and bhakti, may be called great, but his greatness will be very limited, as he does not perceive the gun of humble bhaktas. Therefore, whoever wishes to please Bhagvãn should not become arrogant due to the pride of his gnãn, vairãgya, and bhakti, or due to any other glorious gun he may have. As a result, pratyaksha Shree Krishna Nãrãyan will become pleased, and will reside in his heart.” 56.8 Muktãnand Swãmi then asked, “Mahãrãj, by which method can a person overcome the pride which arises due to gnãn, vairãgya, bhakti, and other glorious gun?” 56.9 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “While realising the greatness of Bhagvãn’s bhaktas, if he physically bows down to them, serves them, recognises thoughts of pride when they arise in his heart, and maintains the force of thought, then pride is eradicated.” 56.10 Shreeji Mahãrãj then continued, “A bhakta’s great, loving bhakti for Bhagvãn may be so intense, that Bhagvãn does as that bhakta wishes. However, if that bhakta develops pride in his heart due to that bhakti, it presents a serious flaw on his part. Also, a bhakta may be arrogant due to his knowledge of the ãtmã or due to his vairãgya, but that arrogance only serves to strengthen his belief of being the body. Therefore, bhaktas of Bhagvãn should not hold on to any form of pride whatsoever. That is the only means to please Bhagvãn. 56.11 “Furthermore, if great bhaktas of Bhagvãn examine themselves and look inwards towards their own hearts when even a little pride arises, they would notice an expression of disgust on the murti of Bhagvãn residing within their hearts. Conversely, when they behave humbly, Bhagvãn’s murti residing within their hearts would appear to have an extremely pleased expression. Therefore, using the force of thought, a bhakta of Bhagvãn should not allow any sort of pride to arise. 56.12 “However, if pride does exist with gnãn, vairãgya, and bhakti, it is rather like impurities added to gold. If impurities are added to twenty-four carat gold, it becomes twenty-two carat. Adding more impurities renders it eighteen-carat. Adding even more impurities renders it twelve-carat gold. In the same way, as impurities (pride) mix with that bhakta’s gnãn, vairãgya, and bhakti, the purity of all three gradually decreases. Therefore, gnãn, vairãgya, and bhakti without pride, are like twenty-four carat gold. 56.13 “If a person is arrogant, the qualities of gnãn, vairãgya, and bhakti may make him appear virtuous from the surface, but he does not have any inner-strength. For example, this pruthvi, with a surface area of 500,000,000 yojans, supports the oceans, the mountains, and all forms of life, and so it appears very strong. However, because the pruthvi floats on jal like a dung-cake, jal appears to be much stronger than pruthvi. Likewise, tej appears to be much stronger than jal, and vãyu appears to be even stronger than tej. Finally, although it appears to have no strength at all, ãkãsh is the strongest of them all since it supports all the other four. Similarly, the qualities of gnãn, vairãgya, and bhakti of a bhakta who has no pride, are as powerful as ãkãsh. He may not outwardly appear to be powerful, but such a humble bhakta is superior to all. 56.14 “Moreover, just as a child never has any feelings of pride, in the same way, no matter how much praise or respect he encounters, a sãdhu should always behave without pride – just like a child.” 56.15 Muktãnand Swãmi then asked another question: “The jeev is distinct from the indriyas, antah-karans, and prãns. It is also distinct from the three mental states of jãgrat, svapna, and sushupti, and the three bodies of sthul, sukshma, and kãran. After hearing this in satsang, a firm belief of this has been developed. So why does the blissful jeevãtmã, while engaged in the bhajan and smaran of Paramãtmã, still associate with the indriyas, antah-karans, prãns, the three mental states, and the three bodies, causing it to become miserable due to the influence of disturbing thoughts?” 56.16 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “Many people become siddh, many become sarvagna, and many become devs. Therefore, they attain countless types of greatness, including Akshardhãm. All this is achieved through the force of the upãsanã of Bhagvãn, and without upãsanã nothing can be accomplished. Therefore, the distinction between ãtmã and non-ãtmã cannot be realised by merely understanding the distinction as given in the shãstras, nor can it be realised by listening to talks from senior sãdhus and deciding in the mind, ‘I shall now distinguish between ãtmã and non-ãtmã’. Instead, it is the extent of a person’s nishchay in his ishta-dev that determines how much distinction he develops between ãtmã and non-ãtmã. In fact, without using the strength of his ishta-dev, no spiritual activities can be fulfilled. 56.17 “In contrast, a person who has loving bhakti for Bhagvãn, like the gopis, has completed all spiritual activities. However, if a person does not have such love, then he should understand the greatness of Bhagvãn in the following way: ‘Bhagvãn is the master of Golok, Vaikunth, Shvet-Dvip, and Brahm-Mahol. Although He appears to be like a human for the purpose of granting happiness to His bhaktas, His murti in His dhãms like Golok and Vaikunth, radiates with the brilliance of millions and millions of suns from each part of His body. However, in Mrutyu-Lok, humans serve Him, and He becomes visible only when a small oil lamp is lit in front of Him. Nonetheless, it is He who provides light to those like the sun and the moon. That Bhagvãn is such that Radhikã, Lakshmi, and His other bhaktas constantly serve Him in His dhãms. Following the destruction of the brahmãnds, it is only this pratyaksha Bhagvãn who remains. Also, it is this same Bhagvãn who, at the time of creation, creates countless millions of brahmãnds through Prakruti and Purush’. 56.18 “Thinking of Bhagvãn’s greatness in this way, is the only method for understanding the distinctions between ãtmã and non-ãtmã. In addition, the extent of that bhakta’s nishchay in Bhagvãn, coupled with the knowledge of Bhagvãn’s greatness, also determines the amount of vairãgya that develops in that bhakta’s heart. Therefore, after abandoning the dependence on the strength of other spiritual activities, a person should rely exclusively on the strength of Bhagvãn’s upãsanã. 56.19 “Such a bhakta believes, ‘However great a sinner a person may be, if at the end of his life, he utters ‘Swãminãrãyan’, he will be redeemed of all sins and will reside in Brahm-Mahol. Then, how can there be any doubt about a bhakta, who has taken refuge in that Bhagvãn, attaining the dhãm of Bhagvãn?’ That is how he understands the greatness of Bhagvãn. Therefore, a bhakta of Bhagvãn should increase the strength of their upãsanã of Bhagvãn day by day, by practicing satsang.”

57.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on Fãgan sud 2 [15th February, 1820], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting in the residential hall of the sãdhus in Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. A sabhã of sãdhus, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 57.2 Then, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “Those of you who know how to engage in a question-answer discussion, may ask one question each.” 57.3 Muktãnand Swãmi then asked, “Mahãrãj, what is the most extraordinary means of attaining moksh?” 57.4 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “The knowledge of Bhagvãn’s svarup and the knowledge of Bhagvãn’s greatness are the two most extraordinary means to attain moksh.” 57.5 Muktãnand Swãmi then asked another question, “What is the nature of love towards Bhagvãn?” 57.6 Shreeji Mahãrãj answered, “The nature of true love is that it should not be developed by logical thinking. However, if a person develops love by logically thinking of Bhagvãn’s gun, then perceiving avgun in Bhagvãn will cause his love to be broken. Therefore, it is best to leave such love as it was originally, rather than repeatedly establishing it and then raising doubts about it. Instead, a person should develop love towards Bhagvãn with blind faith. After all, love developed by logically thinking of Bhagvãn’s gun cannot be trusted. Therefore, a person should develop the same type of love towards Bhagvãn as he has for his bodily relations. This love is known as love due to blind faith. However, having said this, love developed by realising Bhagvãn’s greatness is of a totally different nature altogether.” 57.7 Shivãnand Swãmi then asked, “Although a person has an intense yearning to stay in the satsang, why is it that some inappropriate svabhãvs are still not eradicated?” 57.8 Shreeji Mahãrãj explained, “If a person has not developed a dislike for the svabhãv that is holding him back in satsang, how can he be said to have an intense yearning for satsang? And how can he be said to have realised that svabhãv to be his enemy? For example, if a friend of yours were to kill your brother, your friendship with him would no longer remain. Instead, you would be prepared to cut off his head. This is because the relationship with a brother is closer than that with a friend. Likewise, a person may have a svabhãv that causes him to break his vartmãns and fall from satsang. Despite this, if he still does not have any feeling of hatred towards it and does not develop bitterness towards it, then he does not have total love for satsang. On the other hand, if his love for satsang is like the love he has for his brother, then he would shun that negative svabhãv immediately. After all, the jeev is extremely powerful. The mind and indriyas are all merely the kshetra, whereas the jeev is their kshetragna; the jeev can achieve whatever it attempts.”

58.1 In the Samvat year 1876, at the time of the sandhyã ãrti on Fãgan sud 5 [18th February, 1820], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting in the residential hall of the paramhans in Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 58.2 Shreeji Mahãrãj then said, “Please ask a question.” 58.3 Then, Muktãnand Swãmi asked, “Mahãrãj, when a bhakta of Bhagvãn engages in bhajan and smaran of Bhagvãn, he is disturbed by the forces of rajo-gun and tamo-gun in his heart. As a result, he is unable to experience the bliss of bhajan and smaran. So, how can a person overcome the force of rajo-gun and tamo-gun?” 58.4 Shreeji Mahãrãj explained, “The influence of the gun is due to three factors – the body, kusang, and past sanskãrs. Of these, the gun that arise due to the body are overcome by reflecting upon the ãtmã and the non-ãtmã. Gun that have arisen due to kusang are eradicated by keeping the company of a sãdhu. Should these two methods fail to eradicate the force of rajo-gun and tamo-gun, then the problem lies in the influence of some unpleasant sanskãrs of the past; they are very difficult to eradicate.” 58.5 Ãnandãnand Swãmi then asked, “How can such unpleasant sanskãrs of the past be eradicated?” 58.6 Shreeji Mahãrãj answered, “If an extremely great sant becomes pleased upon a person, then regardless of how unpleasant the person’s sanskãrs may be, they are all destroyed. Moreover, if a great sant is pleased, a beggar can become a king. No matter how unpleasant a person’s prãrabdha may be, it becomes pleasant. Also, he avoids any terrible hardships that lie ahead.” 58.7 Ãnandãnand Swãmi asked further, “How can a person please such a great sant?” 58.8 Shreeji Mahãrãj explained, “First of all, he must be honest with a great sant. He must also abandon kãm, krodh, lobh, moh, mad, matsar, ãshã, trushnã, ahankãr, and irshyã. Moreover, he should behave as a dãs of a sant, and maintain a constant effort to eradicate pride from his heart. While doing so internally, he should physically continue to bow to everyone as well. As a result, the great sant will become pleased with him.” 58.9 Mahãnubhavãnand Swãmi then asked, “Mahãrãj, while staying in satsang, how can a person eradicate all of his faults? Also, how can a person’s bhakti towards Bhagvãn continue to flourish day by day?” 58.10 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “The more a person continues to perceive the gun of the great sant, the more his bhakti begins to flourish. If he realises the truly great sant to be completely nishkãmi, then even if he has as much kãm as a dog, he will also become nishkãmi. Conversely, if he perceives the avgun of kãm in the great sant, then no matter how nishkãm he may be, he becomes full of intense kãm. In the same way, if a person views the great sant to be full of krodh or lobh, then he will also become full of krodh and lobh. Therefore, if a person understands the great sant to be absolutely free of kãm, lobh, svãd, mãn, and sneh, he will also become free of all of those evil natures and become a faithful bhakta. 58.11 “What are the characteristics of such a faithful bhakta? Well, just as he has a natural dislike for objects that cause misery, similarly he has a natural dislike for the attractive five vishays (shabda, sparsh, rup, ras, and gandh). Moreover, he has firm nishchay in Bhagvãn alone. Such a person should be known as a faithful haribhakta. 58.12 “The only way of becoming such a faithful bhakta, is by behaving as a dãs of the dãs of Bhagvãn, and by realising, ‘All these bhaktas are great, and I am inferior compared to them all’. Realising this, he behaves as a dãs of the bhaktas of Bhagvãn. All the evil natures of a person who behaves in this way are destroyed; and day by day, glorious qualities, such as gnãn, vairãgya, and bhakti, continue to flourish within him.”

59.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on Fãgan sud 14 [27th February, 1820], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting facing west on a decorated bedstead on the veranda outside the west-facing rooms in front of the mandir of Shree Vãsudev-Nãrãyan in Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He was wearing a white khes and had covered Himself with a white chãdar. He had also tied a white cloth, with a border of silken thread, around His head. His forehead had been smeared with sandalwood paste. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 59.2 Shreeji Mahãrãj then said, “Please begin a question-answer discussion.” 59.3 Muktãnand Swãmi then asked, “Mahãrãj. How can unique love towards Bhagvãn be developed?” 59.4 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “A person should have the following understanding: Firstly, the belief of Bhagvãn – ‘He who I have attained is undoubtedly Bhagvãn Himself’. He should also have the attributes of an ãstik. Furthermore, he should realise the divine powers of Bhagvãn – ‘This Bhagvãn is the master of Brahm-Mahol, Golok, Shvet-Dvip, and all other dhãms. He is the master of countless millions of brahmãnds and is the all-doer’. He should never believe Purush, Kãl, karma, Mãyã, the three gun, the twenty-four tattvas, or Brahmã and the other devs, to be the creators of this brahmãnd. Instead, he should realise only Purushottam Bhagvãn to be the creator, and the antaryãmi of all. Such an understanding, along with nishchay in pratyaksha Bhagvãn, is the only way to develop a unique love for Bhagvãn.” 59.5 Muktãnand Swãmi asked further, “Despite having realised the greatness of Bhagvãn, why does a person still not develop a unique love for Bhagvãn?” 59.6 Shreeji Mahãrãj explained, “If he has realised the greatness of Bhagvãn in this way, then he indeed does have a unique love for Bhagvãn, but he does not realise it. For example, Hanumãnji possessed immense strength, but he did not realise it until someone else revealed it to him. Also, when Baldevji abducted Pralamb-Ãsur, Baldevji possessed tremendous strength, but he himself was unaware of this fact. He only became aware of his strength when he was informed by a divine voice from the sky. In the same way that bhakta does indeed have unique love for Bhagvãn, but he is simply not aware of it.” 59.7 Muktãnand Swãmi asked further, “How can the strength of the love be realised?” 59.8 Shreeji Mahãrãj answered, “A person realises that he has a unique love for Bhagvãn, by practicing satsang and by listening to the sacred shãstras.” 59.9 Muktãnand Swãmi then asked another question. “Desh, kãl, and kriyã become either pleasant or unpleasant. Is this due to sang, or due to some other factor?” 59.10 Shreeji Mahãrãj explained, “All desh are a part of the earth, and so they are the same everywhere. Kãl is also the same everywhere. However, wherever there is an extremely powerful person, unpleasant desh, unpleasant kãl, and unpleasant kriyã, all become pleasant by his influence. Conversely, by associating with an extremely vile sinner, even pleasant desh, pleasant kãl, and pleasant kriyã, become unpleasant. Therefore, the person is the governing factor in determining whether desh, kãl, and kriyã are pleasant or unpleasant. 59.11 “If that person is extremely powerful, he will influence desh, kãl, and kriyã, according to his nature, throughout the whole world. A person of slightly less power will be able to influence only one region. A person who is even less powerful will be able to influence only one village. A person of even less power than that will be able to influence only a neighbourhood or his own household. In this way, the pleasant and unpleasant influences of desh, kãl, and kriyã are dependent upon the purity and impurity of these two types of people.”

60.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on Fãgan vad 1 [29th February, 1820], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting in the residential hall of the paramhans in Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He was wearing a white khes and had covered Himself with a white chãdar. He had also tied a white pãgh around His head, which was decorated with tassels of white flowers. Garlands of white flowers were hanging around His neck. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 60.2 Shreeji Mahãrãj then said, “Of all spiritual activities, the activity of eradicating worldly desires, is the greatest. A person can do this by bearing in mind his craving for the vishays – shabda, sparsh, rup, ras, and gandh – and by thinking, ‘Is my desire for Bhagvãn equal to my desires for the world? Is it greater? Or is it less?’ A person should examine himself in this way. For example, if a person’s ears are drawn to worldly talks just as much as they are drawn to talks related to Bhagvãn, then he should realise, ‘My desire for Bhagvãn is equal to my desire for the world’. He should examine all the other vishays in this way. 60.3 “While examining himself in this way, if a person gradually decreases his worldly desires and increases his desire for Bhagvãn, he begins to develop an understanding where he views all vishays equally. After such calmness has developed, honours and insults will appear to be the same to him. Moreover, pleasant and unpleasant types of touch will appear to be the same; attractive sights and unattractive sights will appear to be the same; a girl, a young lady and an old woman will appear to be the same; gold and rubbish will appear to be the same as well. Similarly, pleasant and unpleasant tastes and smells will also appear to be the same. When a person can instinctively behave in this way, it should be known that his worldly desires have been overcome. 60.4 “In fact, to behave above the influence of worldly desires, is the dharma of a person who is ekãntik. But, if some desires do remain, then even in a person is able to attain samãdhi and control his nãdi and prãns, those desires will draw him back out of samãdhi. Therefore, only a person who overcomes worldly desires is an ekãntik bhakta.” 60.5 Muktãnand Swãmi then asked, “What are the means to eradicate worldly desires?” 60.6 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “Firstly, a person requires firm ãtmã-nishthã. Secondly, he should realise the insignificance of the five vishays. Thirdly, he should realise the profound greatness of Bhagvãn, and think, ‘Bhagvãn is the master of all dhãms – Vaikunth, Golok, Brahm-Mahol. So, having attained that Bhagvãn, why should I have affection for the pleasures of the vishays, which are useless?’ A person should think of Bhagvãn’s greatness in this way. 60.7 “He also thinks, ‘If I become unworthy of going to the dhãm of Bhagvãn, due to some deficiency remaining while worshipping Bhagvãn, and He were to place me in Indra-Lok or Brahm-Lok, there is still a million-fold more bliss there, in comparison to this world’. With such a thought, a person should become free of all desires for the insignificant pleasures of the world. So, by realising Bhagvãn’s greatness in this way, he becomes free of worldly desires. Then, he feels, ‘I never did have any desires. It was all like some kind of illusion. In reality, I have always been free of desires’. This is what a person experiences. 60.8 “This ekãntik dharma can only be attained by following the ãgnã of a sant who is free of worldly desires, and who has love for Bhagvãn. It cannot be attained merely by reading shãstras. Even if a person were to attempt to repeat those talks exactly, having merely heard them, he would not be able to do so properly. Therefore, a person can attain ekãntik dharma only from someone who has already attained the state of ekãntik dharma.”

61.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on Fãgan vad 3 [3rd March, 1820], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting on a decorated bedstead on the platform under the neem tree in front of the mandir of Shree Vãsudev-Nãrãyan in Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He had tied a white cloth, with a border of silken thread, around His head. He was wearing a white khes, and had covered Himself with a white pachhedi. He was wearing garlands of white flowers around His neck, and tassels of white flowers were hanging from the left side of His pãgh. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 61.2 Muktãnand Swãmi then asked, “How can a person remain calm even under the influence of lust, anger, greed, and fear?” 61.3 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “A person who has firm ãtmã-nishthã and believes ‘I am not the body, but I am the ãtmã, which is distinct from the body, and is the knower of all’, never loses his calmness. On the other hand, a person without ãtmã-nishthã may try many other means, but he cannot remain calm.” 61.4 Brahmãnand Swãmi then asked, “To what extent does ãtmã-nishthã actually help a person at the time of death?” 61.5 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “When faced with the task of crossing a river, a person who knows how to swim, can easily cross it. On the other hand, a person who is unable to swim will be left standing. However, when faced with the task of crossing an ocean, both require the aid of a ship. Similarly, a river (cold and heat, hunger and thirst, honour and insult, happiness and misery) may be crossed by a person with ãtmã-nishthã. However, death is like an ocean and both a person with ãtmã-nishthã and a person without it, require the help of a ship (nishchay) in Bhagvãn. Therefore, only the firm refuge of Bhagvãn is helpful at the time of death. Ãtmã-nishthã alone is of no use whatsoever at the time of death. For this reason, a person should firmly develop nishchay in Bhagvãn.” 61.6 Muktãnand Swãmi then asked, “It is said that siddhis are shown to the bhaktas of Bhagvãn. Does this fact apply only to those whose nishchay in Bhagvãn is fickle, or also to those who have firm nishchay?” 61.7 Shreeji Mahãrãj explained, “Siddhis only appear before those whose nishchay in Bhagvãn is continuous. For others, they are very difficult to attain. In fact, those siddhis are inspired by Bhagvãn Himself to test His bhaktas – ‘Does he have more love for me or for the siddhis?’ Bhagvãn tests His bhaktas in this way. 61.8 “If the bhakta happens to be completely devoted and desires nothing except Bhagvãn, is free of worldly desires, and is an ekãntik bhakta, then Bhagvãn Himself becomes bound by that bhakta. For example, Vãmanji seized Bali Rãjã’s kingdom, which comprised of the Svarg-Lok, Mrutyu-Lok and Pãtãl, and covered all fourteen loks with His first two steps. Bali Rãjã then offered his own body for Vãmanji to place the third step. In this way, Bali Rãjã devoutly offered everything to Bhagvãn. Also, despite the fact that Bhagvãn deceived Bali Rãjã without any fault of his own, Bali still did not falter from His bhakti. On seeing such perfect bhakti for Him, Bhagvãn ultimately became bound by Bali. Although Bhagvãn bound Bali Rãjã only for a moment, in the process, Bhagvãn himself became bound by ropes (Bali’s unique bhakti). To this very day, Bhagvãn is forever standing at Bali’s gate, never out of Bali Rãjã’s sight, not even for a fraction of a second. 61.9 “Likewise, after abandoning all other worldly desires and offering everything to Bhagvãn, we should also remain as the dãs of Bhagvãn. In the process, if Bhagvãn happens to inflict more misery upon us, then Bhagvãn Himself will become bound by us. This is because He loves His bhaktas, and is an ocean of kindness. He becomes bound by anyone who offers great bhakti to Him. As a result, the mind of a bhakta who has such loving bhakti, becomes so bound to Bhagvãn, that Bhagvãn is unable to free Himself from His bhakta. 61.10 “Therefore, we should become more pleased as Bhagvãn puts us through more severe hardships, bearing in mind, ‘The more misery Bhagvãn inflicts upon me, the more bound He will become to me, so He will not be away from me for even a moment’. With such understanding, a person should become increasingly pleased as Bhagvãn imposes more and more hardships. However, he should never become disheartened in the face of misery or for the sake of bodily comforts.”

62.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on Fãgan vad 4 [4th March, 1820], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting on a decorated bedstead in the middle of the courtyard of Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He was wearing a white khes and had covered Himself with a white chãdar. On His head, He was wearing a white pãgh that was decorated with garlands and tassels of white flowers. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 62.2 Svayamprakãshãnand Swãmi then asked, “The Shreemad Bhãgvat states: satyam shaucham dayã kshanti-stayã-gaha santosh ãrjavam shamo dama-stapaha sãmyam titikshop-ratiha shrutam gnãnam virakti-raishvarya sauryam tejo balam smruti svatantryam kaushalam kãnti-dhairya-mardav-meva cha prãgala-bhyam prashnaya shilam shaha ojo balam bhagah gãmbhirya sthairya-mãstikyam kirtimãrno-naham-kruti “These thirty-nine kalyãn-kãri qualities forever dwell in the murti of Bhagvãn. How can these qualities be acquired by a sãdhu?” 62.3 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “If a sãdhu develops the perfect nishchay in Bhagvãn, then he will acquire these kalyãn-kãri qualities of Bhagvãn. What is that nishchay? Well, he realises that Bhagvãn is not like Kãl, not like karma, not like svabhãv, not like Mãyã, and not like Purush. He realises Bhagvãn to be distinct from everything, their controller, and their cause. But despite being their cause, He is beyond their influence. A person, who has developed a nishchay in pratyaksha Bhagvãn in this way, will never be deflected. Even if he hears misleading shãstras, or if he hears the talks of misleading philosophers, or even if his own antah-karans raises doubts within himself, his nishchay in Bhagvãn never weakens in any way. 62.4 “A person with such a nishchay in Bhagvãn is said to have a relationship with Bhagvãn. Moreover, he naturally acquires the qualities of whomever he has a relationship with. For example, when our eyes meet with an oil lamp, the light of that oil lamp enters our eyes, which expel the darkness around them. In the same way, a person who has developed a relationship with Bhagvãn by having a firm nishchay in Him, acquires the kalyãn-kãri qualities of Bhagvãn. As a result, just as Bhagvãn is unattached in all respects and is capable of doing as He chooses, such a bhakta also becomes extremely capable and unattached.” 62.5 Nirvikãrãnand Swãmi then asked, “Despite having the nishchay in Bhagvãn, glorious qualities are still not acquired. Instead, mãn and irshyã are increasing day by day. What can be the reason for this?” 62.6 Shreeji Mahãrãj explained, “Even if a person offers amrut, or shingadiyo vachhnãg, or dudh-pãk with sugar, or opium, in Bhagvãn’s thãl, the natural qualities in each will still remain the same. They will not change in any way. Similarly, a person who is demonic and extremely undeserving, will still not abandon his own svabhãv even if he comes into contact with Bhagvãn. Furthermore, if he happens to insult some humble bhakta of Bhagvãn, then the demonic person will suffer as a result. This is because Bhagvãn is present in everyone as antaryãmi, and He displays His divine powers whenever and however He wishes. Therefore, insulting such a bhakta is equal to insulting Bhagvãn. As a result, the offender suffers severely. For example, Hiranyakashipu was so powerful that he had conquered Svarg, Mrutyu-Lok, and Pãtãl. However, as he harassed Prahlãdji, Bhagvãn appeared from a pillar in the svarup of Nrusinh, and killed Hiranyakashipu. 62.7 “Bearing this in mind, a bhakta of Bhagvãn should strive to develop humility and should never insult anyone, as Bhagvãn also dwells in the hearts of those who are humble. Therefore, He will punish anyone who insults humble bhaktas. Realising this, a person should never hurt even the smallest of beings. However, if a person indiscriminately mistreats others out of abhimãn, then Bhagvãn, who is the destroyer of abhimãn and who pervades all as antaryãmi, is unable to tolerate this. He will appear in one form or another to thoroughly destroy the abhimãn of that person. Therefore, remaining fearful of Bhagvãn, a sãdhu should not retain even the slightest abhimãn, nor should he hurt even the smallest of beings. This is the dharma of a nirmãni sãdhu.”

63.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on Fãgan vad 7 [7th March, 1820], Swãmi Shree Sahajãnandji Mahãrãj was sitting on a decorated bedstead on the platform outside the west-facing rooms in front of the mandir of Shree Vãsudev-Nãrãyan in Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He was wearing a white khes and had covered Himself with a white chãdar. He had also tied a white cloth, with a border of silken thread, around His head. Garlands of white flowers adorned His neck, and tassels of roses had been inserted in His pãgh. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 63.2 Nrusinhãnand Swãmi then asked, “What kind of thoughts arise in a person who has a deficiency in his nishchay in Bhagvãn?” 63.3 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “A person with a deficiency in nishchay would become extremely overjoyed on seeing Bhagvãn displaying some of His powers. However, when he sees no such display of divine powers, he would become disheartened. Despite trying, if he is unable to eradicate impure thoughts from his heart, he then has a dislike towards Bhagvãn. He would feel, ‘I have bent over backwards practicing satsang for so long, yet Bhagvãn still has not eradicated my impure thoughts’. In this way, he perceives an avgun in Bhagvãn. 63.4 “Despite much effort, if he is unable to free his mind from the objects he cherishes, he then perceives that very same avgun in Bhagvãn. Specifically, he believes, ‘Just as I have vicious natures, such as kãm and krodh, Bhagvãn also has the same natures. The only difference is that Bhagvãn is regarded as being great’. A person who has such doubtful thoughts within his heart, should be known to have a deficiency in nishchay; his nishchay cannot be called perfect.” 63.5 Paramchaitanyãnand Swãmi then asked, “Mahãrãj, what are the thoughts of a person with perfect nishchay in Bhagvãn?” 63.6 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “A person with perfect nishchay feels within, ‘I have attained all there is to attain. Wherever pratyaksha Bhagvãn resides, that itself is the highest dhãm. All these sãdhus are like Nãrad and the Sanakãdik; all satsangis are like Uddhav, Akrur, Vidur, Sudãmã, and the cow-herds of Vrundãvan, and female haribhaktas are like the Gopis, Draupadi, Kuntãji, Sitã, Rukmani, Lakshmi, and Pãrvati. Now I have nothing more to achieve. I have attained Golok, Vaikunth, and Brahmpur’. A person with perfect nishchay has such thoughts and experiences extreme joy in his heart. A person who experiences such feelings should be known to have perfect nishchay.” 63.7 Shreeji Mahãrãj continued, “A person who has perfectly understood the svarup of Bhagvãn, has nothing left to realise. Please listen as I now explain the method of realising this. Hearing this, a person develops firm nishchay in Bhagvãn. 63.8 “Firstly, he should realise the greatness of Bhagvãn. To illustrate this, consider the analogy of a great king. If even his servants and maids stay in seven-storey mansions, and their gardens, horses, carriages, jewellery, and other luxuries make their houses appear as magnificent as Dev-Lok, then imagine how magnificent the darbãr and its luxuries of that king must be. Similarly, consider the loks of the devs of this brahmãnd – Brahmã and the other devs – who follow the ãgnãs of Shree Purushottam Bhagvãn. If there is no limit to those loks and their magnificence, then how can a person possibly comprehend the extent of the magnificence of Virãt-Purush, from whose navel Brahmã was produced? Furthermore, the master of countless millions of these Virãt-Purush is Purushottam Bhagvãn, whose dhãm is Akshar. Within that dhãm, countless millions of such brahmãnds float like mere atoms in each and every hair of Akshar. Such is the dhãm of Bhagvãn. In that dhãm, Purushottam Bhagvãn Himself resides eternally with a divya svarup. Moreover, countless divya objects exist in that dhãm. So, if this is the greatness of Akshar, then how can a person possibly comprehend the extent of Bhagvãn’s greatness? A person with nishchay understands Bhagvãn’s greatness in this way. 63.9 “Besides, that which is greater than another is more subtle than the other, and is also its cause. For example, jal is greater than pruthvi, is the cause of that pruthvi, and is more subtle than it as well. In turn, tej is greater than jal, vãyu is greater than tej, and ãkãsh is greater than vãyu. In the same way, Akshar, Prakruti-Purush, Pradhãn-Purush, maha-tattva, and ahankãr are all progressively greater than each other, the cause of each other and more subtle than each other. They also possess a svarup. 63.10 “In comparison, Bhagvãn’s Akshardhãm is extremely large. Countless millions of brahmãnds float like mere atoms in each of its hairs. Just as an ant moving on the body of a huge elephant appears insignificant, everything else appears insignificant before the greatness of that Akshar. For example, an ant appears large amidst small mosquitoes; a scorpion appears large amidst ants; a snake appears large amidst scorpions; a kite appears large amidst snakes; a bull appears large amidst kites; an elephant appears large amidst bulls; a mountain such as Girnãr appears large amidst elephants; and Mount Meru appears large amidst Girnãr. In turn, Mount Lokã-Lok appears extremely large amidst a mountain such as Meru. The pruthvi appears very large in comparison to Mount Lokã-Lok. In turn, jal, the cause of pruthvi, is larger than it and is more subtle than it. In the same way, tej is the cause of jal, vãyu is the cause of tej, ãkãsh is the cause of vãyu, ahankãr is the cause of ãkãsh, maha-tattva is the cause of ahankãr, Pradhãn-Purush are the cause of maha-tattva, and Mul-Prakruti and Brahm are the causes of Pradhãn-Purush. The cause of all of these is Akshar-Brahm, which is the dhãm of Purushottam Bhagvãn. 63.11 “That Akshar does not have any states of contraction or expansion; it forever remains in the same state. That Akshar also possesses a svarup, but because it is so vast, its svarup cannot be visualised. For example, the brahmãnd, which has evolved from the twenty-four tattvas, is known as Virãt-Purush. That Virãt-Purush possesses features like hands and feet, but because his murti is extremely vast, he is beyond visualisation. Brahmã walked for a hundred of his own years (one year of Brahmã is equivalent to 315,360,000 human years) on the stalk of the lotus that emerged from Virãt-Purush’s navel, but was still unable to reach its end. So, if the end of the lotus cannot be reached, how can Virãt-Purush possibly be measured? Therefore, the svarup of Virãt-Purush cannot be visualised. In the same way, despite having a definite svarup, Akshardhãm cannot be visualised. This is because countless brahmãnds float within its each and every hair. 63.12 “It is within that Akshardhãm, that Purushottam Bhagvãn Himself resides eternally. By His antaryãmi powers, He resides in His anvay svarup in Akshardhãm, in the countless millions of brahmãnds, and also in the ishvars of those brahmãnds. Also in that Akshardhãm, countless millions of muktas, who have acquired qualities similar to those of Bhagvãn, remain in Bhagvãn’s sevã. Also, divine light, equivalent to that of millions and millions of suns, radiates from each and every hair of those sevaks of Bhagvãn. Therefore, if those sevaks are so great, how can the greatness of their master, Purushottam Bhagvãn, possibly be described? 63.13 “That extremely powerful Bhagvãn, enters Akshar and assumes the svarup of Akshar. He then assumes the svarup of Mul-Prakruti-Purush, and then the svarup of Pradhãn-Purush. Then, He enters the twenty-four tattvas produced from Pradhãn, and assumes that svarup. He then enters Virãt-Purush produced from those tattvas, and assumes that svarup. He then enters Brahmã, Vishnu, and Shiv, and assumes their svarups. 63.14 “In this way, that Bhagvãn, who is extremely powerful, extremely luminous, and extremely great, contains His own spiritual powers and divine light with Himself and becomes like a human being for the kalyãn of jeevs. He assumes a svarup that allows people to have His darshan, perform His sevã, and offer worship to Him. For example, a tiny thorn that has pricked an ant’s leg cannot be removed with a spear or a pin. It can only be removed using an extremely fine needle. In the same way, Bhagvãn limits His own greatness within Himself, and assumes an extremely modest svarup. Just as Agni constrains his own light and flames to assume a human svarup, similarly, Bhagvãn also suppresses His own powers and acts as a human for the kalyãn of jeevs. However, a foolish person thinks, ‘Why does Bhagvãn not manifest any powers?’ But, he does not realise that Bhagvãn deliberately conceals His powers for the sake of the kalyãn of jeevs. After all, if He were to manifest His own greatness, then even the brahmãnd would diminish into insignificance. Then, what can be said of jeevs? 63.15 “Kãl, karma, and Mãyã are incapable of binding a person who has developed such firm nishchay, coupled with an understanding of Bhagvãn’s greatness, in his heart. Therefore, he who understands Bhagvãn perfectly in this way, has nothing left to achieve.” 63.16 Then, Nityãnand Swãmi asked, “When Bhagvãn assumes a human svarup, does He always do so sequentially in the order described, or can He also assume a human svarup directly?” 63.17 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “For Bhagvãn, the sequential order is not necessary. For example, a person who takes a dives into a pond can emerge from wherever he wishes – either at the same entry point of the dive, or at the banks, or anywhere nearby. Similarly, if He so wishes, Purushottam Bhagvãn can take a ‘dive’ in His Akshardhãm and directly assume a human svarup, or if He wishes, He can assume a human svarup following the sequential order.” 63.18 Following this explanation, Shreeji Mahãrãj continued, “I shall now briefly explain the characteristics of a person with extremely firm nishchay, so please listen attentively. Firstly, a person with perfect nishchay will do anything asked of him on the path of pravrutti, without ever backing away, even if he has intense tyãg. Moreover, he does not do it reluctantly; he does it willingly. The second characteristic is that regardless of any svabhãv he may possess, even if it cannot be eradicated by a million ways, if he senses Bhagvãn’s insistence in abandoning that svabhãv, he abandons it immediately. The third characteristic is that despite his own avgun, he is unable to live without the talks, kirtans, and the sant of Bhagvãn, even for a moment. He finds avgun only within himself and thoroughly perceives the gun of a sant. He also understands the great glory of the talks and kirtans of Bhagvãn, as well as of the sant of Bhagvãn. A person with such understanding should be known to have perfect nishchay. Furthermore, if a person with this nishchay were to disobey the vartmãns due to prãrabdha, he would still not fall from the path of kalyãn. In comparison, regardless of how great a tyãgi a person may be, without this nishchay his kalyãn is not guaranteed.” ||

64.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on Fãgan vad 9 [9th March, 1820], Swãmi Shree Sahajãnandji Mahãrãj was sitting on a decorated bedstead on the platform outside the east-facing rooms of Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He was wearing a white khes and had covered Himself with another black-bordered khes. He has also tied a white cloth with a border of silken thread around His head. Around His neck, He was wearing a new kanthi made from tulsi beads. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 64.2 Shreeji Mahãrãj then asked the munis, “The Shrutis mention that the ãtmã and Akshar are the sharir of Purushottam, who is Bhagvãn. That ãtmã and Akshar are not subject to change, and are beyond the influences of mãyã. Moreover, like Bhagvãn, the ãtmã and Akshar are greater than Mãyã. Then, how can that ãtmã and Akshar be described as the sharir of Bhagvãn? This is because the sharir of a jeev is totally different from the jeev itself and is subject to change, whereas the jeev inside the body, is not subject to change. Therefore, just as the body of the jeev and the jeev itself are totally different, similarly, there should be the same degree of difference between Purushottam, and the ãtmã and Akshar, which are the sharir of Purushottam. Please explain how they are different.” 64.3 All the munis answered according to their understanding, but no one was able to provide a precise answer. 64.4 Shreeji Mahãrãj then said, “Allow me to answer. The ãtmã and Akshar make up the sharir of Purushottam Bhagvãn, and they are pervaded, dependent, and powerless. In what way? Well, by means of His antaryãmi powers, Bhagvãn pervades the ãtmã and Akshar, whereas the ãtmã and Akshar are the ones who are pervaded. Bhagvãn is independent, whereas the ãtmã and Akshar are dependent upon Bhagvãn. Furthermore, Bhagvãn is all-powerful, whereas the ãtmã and Akshar are totally powerless before Him. In this way, Bhagvãn is the shariri of both the ãtmã and Akshar, and these two are the sharir of Bhagvãn. 64.5 “That shariri, Purushottam Bhagvãn, possesses an eternal divya murti. With His antaryãmi powers, Bhagvãn resides as the ãtmã of all the ãtmãs. These ãtmãs pervade their physical bodies, and are the drashtã of these bodies. Bhagvãn also resides in all the physical bodies, which are pervaded in relation to the ãtmãs. These physical bodies are the drashya of ãtmã. In this way, Purushottam Bhagvãn is the ãtmã of all. When referred to in the shãstras as the ãtmã of drashya, which has a svarup, Purushottam Bhagvãn is also described to have a svarup. When referred to in the shãstras as the ãtmã of the drashtã, He is described as nirãkãr. However, in reality Purushottam Bhagvãn is different from both the drashya, which has a svarup, and the ãtmã, which does not have a svarup. He eternally possesses a definite svarup, which is not an ordinary, worldly svarup. Moreover, despite possessing a definite svarup, He is the drashtã of both the drashtã and the drashya. 64.6 “Furthermore, Purushottam Bhagvãn is the inspirer of both the ãtmã and Akshar, is independent from them, and is their controller; He possesses all spiritual powers; He is greater than even Akshar, which is greater than everything. Out of compassion, that Purushottam Bhagvãn appears as a human being on this earth, for the kalyãn of jeevs. Understanding Him to eternally possess a divya svarup, a person who offers bhakti and upãsanã to Him acquires qualities similar to those of Bhagvãn, as well as countless other spiritual powers. 64.7 “After such a person’s ãtmã has attained the state of brahm, he constantly remains in the sevã of Purushottam Bhagvãn with love and great devotion. On the other hand, a person who performs dhyãn upon Bhagvãn and offers upãsanã while believing Him to be nirãkãr, is merged into brahm-sushupti. He never returns from this state, nor does he ever acquire any spiritual powers from Bhagvãn.” 64.8 Finally, Shreeji Mahãrãj added, “I have delivered this talk having experienced it directly myself. Therefore, there is not a trace of doubt about it. Moreover, these facts can be understood only from a person who firmly believes that Bhagvãn is forever divya and sãkãr. They can never be understood from others. Therefore, these facts should be thoroughly remembered by all.”

65.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on Fãgan vad 14 [13th March, 1820], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting on a mattress with a large, cylindrical pillow placed on the veranda outside His bedroom 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. 65.2 While the kathã was being read, Shreeji Mahãrãj called the senior paramhans near Him. When the kathã was completed, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “Now, all the senior sãdhus seated here will answer each other’s questions. This will reveal their level of intelligence.” 65.3 Svayamprakãshãnand Swãmi then asked Premãnand Swãmi, “How is ãkãsh created, and how is it destroyed?” 65.4 Paramãnand Swãmi attempted to answer the question, but was unable to provide a precise answer. 65.5 Shreeji Mahãrãj then said, “When a child is initially in its mother’s womb and at the time of its birth, the cavities of its heart and other indriyas are small. But, as the child grows, those cavities develop; and the ãkãsh within increase as well. However, when the child becomes old, the cavities of its indriyas decrease in size, and the ãkãsh within also decrease. Similarly, when Virãt’s body is produced, ãkãsh appears to be created in the cavity of his heart and other internal organs. Also, when Virãt’s body is destroyed, the ãkãsh within appears to be destroyed as well. This is how ãkãsh is created and destroyed. However, just as Prakruti-Purush are eternal, the ãkãsh that is the supporter of all is also eternal. It is not subject to creation and destruction. However, ãkãsh is created and destroyed through samãdhi. A person who experiences samãdhi knows its method.” 65.6 Paramãnand Swãmi then asked Svayamprakãshãnand Swãmi, “How does the sushumnã nãdi reside within the body and outside of the body?” 65.7 Svayamprakãshãnand Swãmi attempted to answer the question, but could not do adequately. 65.8 Shreeji Mahãrãj then replied, “Whatever is present in this brahmãnd, is also present within this body. The only difference is that in the body the scale is small, whereas in the brahmãnd the scale is large. In fact, the arrangement of the brahmãnd is the same as that of the body. For example, just as there are rivers in the brahmãnd, similarly there are blood vessels in the body; just as there are oceans in the brahmãnd, similarly water is present in the abdomen of the body; and just as the sun and the moon are present in the brahmãnd, similarly the idã nãdi and pingalã nãdi house the sun and moon in the body. In the same way, just as other objects are present in the brahmãnd, they are also present in the body. 65.9 “Also, the nãdis of the indriyas in this body are coupled with those of the brahmãnd. When a person acquires control over the tongue, he attains Varun-Dev; when a person acquires control over speech, he attains Agni-Dev; when a person acquires control over the skin, he attains Vãyu-Dev; when he acquires control over the genitals, he attains Prajãpati; and when a person acquires control over the hands, he attains Indra. In the same way, when a person controls the brahm-randhra – the end portion of the sushumnã nãdi located in the heart – he reaches the arrogant dev by the name of Vaishvãnar Agni, which resides in the shishumãr chakra. It is then that he sees the uninterrupted path of light from the brahm-randhra to Prakruti-Purush. That path of light is known as sushumnã. This is how the sushumnã nãdi resides in the body and in the brahmãnd.” 65.10 Paramãnand Swãmi asked Svayamprakãshãnand Swãmi another question, “Which state is destroyed first – the jãgrat state, the svapna state, or the sushupti state?” 65.11 As Svayamprakãshãnand Swãmi was unable to answer that question, Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “When a person focuses on the svarup of Bhagvãn with love in the jãgrat state, the jãgrat state is destroyed first, then the svapna state, and finally the sushupti state. When the mind thinks of and focuses on the murti of Bhagvãn in the svapna state, the svapna state is destroyed first, then the jãgrat state, and finally the sushupti state. Furthermore, when a person attains the state of upsham, while concentrating on the svarup of Bhagvãn, the sushupti state is destroyed first, then the jãgrat state, and finally the svapna state.” Shreeji Mahãrãj answered the question in this way. 65.12 Svayamprakãshãnand Swãmi then asked Paramãnand Swãmi another question, “How should a person understand the ‘ichhã-shakti’, ‘gnãn-shakti’, and ‘kriyã-shakti’ of Bhagvãn?” 65.13 Laughing, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “Even you probably do not know the answer to that question.” He then began to give the answer Himself. “When sattva-gun is predominant, the rewards of any karmas performed by a jeev are experienced in the jãgrat state. When rajo-gun is predominant, the rewards of any karmas performed are experienced in the svapna state. When tamo-gun is predominant, the rewards of any karmas performed are experienced in the sushupti state. 65.14 “When a jeev enters the state of jãgrat, it becomes inert like a slab of stone, and retains no type of consciousness, such as, ‘I am a pundit, or I am a fool; I have done this task, or I want to do this task; this is my gender, or this is my varna, or this is my ãshram; this is my name, or my appearance is like this. Am I a dev, or am I a human? Am I a child, or am I old? Am I good, or am I a sinner?’ and so on. No such consciousness is retained. When a jeev enters this state, Bhagvãn awakens it from unconsciousness through His gnãn-shakti and makes it aware of its actions. This is known as gnãn-shakti, the power of understanding. Furthermore, whatever action a jeev engages in, it does so with the support of what is known as Bhagvãn’s kriyã-shakti, the power of application. Finally, whatever object is desired by the jeev, is acquired with the help of what is known as Bhagvãn’s ichhã-shakti, the power of free will. 65.15 “Moreover, the three states of jãgrat, svapna, and sushupti experienced by a jeev are not due to the consequences of its own karmas alone. They are experienced only when Bhagvãn, the giver of the rewards of karmas, allows the jeev to do so. When a jeev, indulging in the rewards of the jãgrat state, wishes to enter the svapna state, it cannot do so independently. This is because Bhagvãn, restrains its vrutti. Similarly, if it wishes to enter the jãgrat state from the svapna, it is unable to do so; nor can it enter the sushupti state or emerge from it to enter the svapna or jãgrat sates. It is only when Bhagvãn allows it to indulge in the rewards of the karmas of the particular state that it is able to indulge in them. However, a jeev cannot indulge in the rewards of its karmas according to its own will or as a direct consequence of karmas. This is how a person should understand the gnãn-shakti, kriyã-shakti, and ichhã-shakti of Bhagvãn.” 65.16 Shreeji Mahãrãj answered the question in this way, out of compassion.

66.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on Fãgan vad Amãs [14th March, 1820], Swãmi Shree Sahajãnandji Mahãrãj was sitting on a large decorated bedstead on the platform outside the east-facing rooms of Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He was wearing a khes with a black border, and had covered Himself with a white pachhedi. 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. 66.2 Shreeji Mahãrãj then said, “The Shreemad Bhãgvat describes Vãsudev, Sankarshan, Pradyumna, and Aniruddha – four avatãrs of Bhagvãn. In some places they are described as sagun, whereas in others places they are described as nirgun. The term nirgun is used in reference to Vãsudev Bhagvãn, and the term sagun is used in reference to Sankarshan, Aniruddha, and Pradyumna. However, when described as nirgun, the minds of the listener and the reader are confused, and they draw the conclusion that Bhagvãn does not possess a svarup. However, this is their misunderstanding. 66.3 “Besides, the words of the shãstras cannot be understood in their true context by anyone except an ekãntik bhakta. These are words such as, ‘Bhagvãn is nirãkãr, luminous, nirgun, and all-pervading’. On hearing these descriptions, a fool concludes that the shãstras describe Bhagvãn as being nirãkãr. On the other hand, an ekãntik bhakta realises, ‘When the shãstras describe Bhagvãn as being nirãkãr and nirgun, they are referring to the fact that He does not possess a mãyik svarup or mãyik characteristics. In reality, His svarup is forever divya, and He possesses countless kalyãn-kãri qualities’. 66.4 “There is also a reference to Bhagvãn being an immense mass of divine light. However, if there is no murti, then there can be no light either. Therefore, that light must definitely be from that murti. For example, take the murti of Agni. When flames radiate from his murti, only the flames – not the murti of Agni – are seen. However, a wise man realises that the flames are definitely radiating from Agni’s murti. Similarly, water radiates from the murti of Varun. Although only the water – not the murti of Varun – is visible, a wise man realises that the water radiates from Varun’s murti. In the same way, the divine light, which has the intensity of millions of suns and is like brahm-sattã, is the light of the murti of Purushottam Bhagvãn. 66.5 “The shãstras also state, ‘A thorn is used to remove a thorn, and then both are discarded. Similarly, Bhagvãn assumes a physical body to relieve the earth of its burdens. Then, having relieved the earth of its burden, He discards the physical body’. Hearing such words, the foolish people are misled into the understanding that Bhagvãn is nirãkãr, and they fail to realise the murti of Bhagvãn as being divya. 66.6 “However, an ekãntik bhakta has the following understanding: ‘To fulfil Arjun’s pledge, both Shree Krishna Bhagvãn and Arjun left Dvãrikã on his chariot to fetch the Brãhman’s son. Crossing Mount Lokã-Lok, they cut through Mãyã’s veil of darkness with the Sudarshan Chakra. Driving the chariot through that darkness, they entered a mass of light. There, they collected the Brãhman’s son from Bhumã-Purush before returning. This was only because Shree Krishna Bhagvãn’s murti was divya. Due to the power of that divinity, the wooden chariot and the horses – despite being composed of the five bhuts – all became divya and beyond Mãyã, like chaitanya. Had their murtis not become divya, they would never have been able to rise above Mãyã. After all, everything that has evolved from Mãyã ultimately merges into Mãyã, and can never reach Brahm, which is beyond Mãyã’. Therefore, it was due to the powers of Bhagvãn’s murti that the mãyik objects become non-mãyik. A fool has the understanding that Bhagvãn’s murti is mãyik, whereas an ekãntik sãdhu has the understanding that Bhagvãn’s murti is greater than Akshar. He also understands that Purushottam Bhagvãn possesses a definite murti, and is the ãtmã of countless millions of brahm-rup muktas, and also of Akshardhãm. 66.7 “Therefore, regardless of which shãstras are being read, if they describe Bhagvãn as being nirgun, a person should realise that they are merely praising the glory of Bhagvãn’s murti. However, Bhagvãn always possesses a definite murti. A person who realises this is known as an ekãntik bhakta.”

67.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on Chaitra sud 7 [21st March, 1820], Swãmi Shree Sahajãnandji Mahãrãj was sitting in the residential hall of the munis in Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 67.2 Shreeji Mahãrãj then asked the munis, “There is a sat-purush who has no love at all for the pleasure of this world. He has desires only for the dhãm of Bhagvãn and the svarup of Bhagvãn. He also wishes the same for whoever associates with him. He feels, ‘As this person has associated with me, it would be of great benefit to him if his desires for this world are eradicated, and his love for Bhagvãn is developed’. Furthermore, all the efforts that are made by the sat-purush, are only for acquiring bliss after attaining the dhãm of Bhagvãn after death. He never does anything for the sake of bodily comforts. So, with what understanding can a mumukshu acquire the qualities of such a sat-purush, and what understanding causes such qualities to not be acquired? That is the question?” 67.3 Muktãnand Swãmi replied, “If a person views such a sat-purush, who has no desire for the pleasures of this world, and accepts whatever words are uttered by him, then that mumukshu will acquire the qualities of that sat-purush. A person who does not do so will not acquire those qualities.” 67.4 Shreeji Mahãrãj then said, “That answer is correct, but please listen as I explain the method of understanding by which a mumukshu can acquire the qualities of the great sat-purush. A person perceives the qualities of such a sat-purush, who has no love for anything except Bhagvãn, by believing, ‘This sant is extremely great. Despite thousands of people standing before Him with folded hands, he does not have the slightest desire for the pleasures of the world. As for me, I am extremely insignificant, and I am solely attached to worldly pleasures. I do not understand anything at all about Bhagvãn. Shame on me’. In this way, he feels guilt and perceives the gun of the great sant. He also feels guilt after realising his own avgun. While repeating in this way, vairãgya arises in his heart, and then, he acquires qualities similar to those of that sat-purush. 67.5 “Now, please listen as I describe the characteristics of a person in whose heart the qualities of the sat-purush are never acquired. Such a person believes, ‘The sat-purush is said to be great, yet he has no kind of common sense whatsoever. He does not even know how to eat and drink properly, nor does he know how to dress properly. Bhagvãn has given him abundant pleasures, yet he does not know how to enjoy them. Moreover, when he gives anything to anyone, he does so at random’. In this way, he perceives countless types of avgun in the sat-purush. Such a cruel person never acquires the qualities of a sat-purush.”

68.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on Chaitra sud 9 [23rd March, 1820], Swãmi Shree Sahajãnandji Mahãrãj was sitting on a decorated bedstead under the neem tree in front of the mandir of Shree Vãsudev-Nãrãyan in Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He was wearing a white khes and had covered Himself with a white chãdar. Around His head, He had tied a white cloth with border of silken thread. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places had gathered before Him. 68.2 Shreeji Mahãrãj then said, “Allow me to ask a question.” 68.3 The munis responded by saying, “Please do ask.” 68.4 Shreeji Mahãrãj then said, “For one month during the famine of Samvat 1869, whenever I entered samãdhi, I felt I had gone to Purushottam-Puri, where I entered and resided in the murti of Shree Jagan-Nãthji. That murti may appear to be wooden, but through its eyes I observed everything. I observed both the bhakti and the deceitful ways of the mandir’s pujãri. In the same way, those people in our satsang who have mastered samãdhi can also enter the bodies of others through samãdhi, and see and hear everything. The shãstras also mention that Shukji spoke through the body of a tree. Therefore, a great sat-purush or Bhagvãn can enter wherever they wish. 68.5 “Bhagvãn has given eight types of murtis for worship by His ãgnã – shaili (stone), dãrumayi (wood), lauhi (metal), lepyã (earth or sandalwood paste), lekhyã (engraved or drawn), saikati (sand), manimayi (gems), and manomayi (mental). Bhagvãn Himself personally enters those murtis and resides within them. A bhakta of Bhagvãn, who worships those murtis, should maintain the same respect for them as he does for pratyaksha Bhagvãn. 68.6 “In the same way, Bhagvãn also resides in the heart of a sant. Therefore, a sant should also be respected. In spite of that, a bhakta totally fails to respect him. He considers a murti to be merely a painting or to be made of stone or other materials. Furthermore, he looks upon that sant as an ordinary human being. But Bhagvãn Himself has said, ‘I forever reside in the eight types of murtis and in a sant’. Still, that bhakta behaves disrespectfully before the murtis of Bhagvãn and before a sant, not at all fearing Bhagvãn. Does such a person have nishchay in Bhagvãn, or not? That is the question.” 68.7 The paramhans replied, “As he does not realise Bhagvãn to be antaryãmi and fails to respect Him, such a bhakta does not have nishchay in Bhagvãn at all. He does not have nishchay, so his bhakti is like that of a hypocrite.” 68.8 Shreeji Mahãrãj then asked further, “Will such a bhakta attain kalyãn, or not?” 68.9 The sãdhus replied, “No, he will not attain kalyãn.” 68.10 Shreeji Mahãrãj then continued, “A person who develops such a nãstik attitude towards the murtis of Bhagvãn and a sant, will not stop there. He will also develop nãstik feelings towards the pratyaksha svarup of Bhagvãn whom he worships. He will also develop nãstik feelings towards the dhãms of Bhagvãn, such as Golok and Brahmpur. Furthermore, he will come to believe that the creation, sustenance, and destruction of this universe are due to Kãl, Mãyã, and karma, but not due to the will of Bhagvãn. In this way, he will become a firm nãstik.” 68.11 Muktãnand Swãmi then asked, “Is this nãstik attitude due to a person’s past karmas, or due to the influence of kusang?” 68.12 Shreeji Mahãrãj explained, “The sole cause of the development of such a nãstik attitude is listening to the shãstras of nãstiks and keeping the company of a person who has faith in those shãstras. Furthermore, kãm, krodh, lobh, ahankãr, mãn, and irshyã also cause a nãstik attitude to develop. A person who possesses any one of these svabhãvs, will not be able to believe the talks of even sãdhus, such as Nãrad and the Sanakãdik. 68.13 “When is such a nãstik attitude overcome? Well, when a person listens to talks of the leelãs of Bhagvãn, such as the creation, sustenance, and destruction of the universe as described in ãstik shãstras, like the Shreemad Bhãgvat, and also understands the greatness of Bhagvãn and a sant, the nãstik attitude is overcome and an ãstik attitude develops.” ||

71.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on the evening of Chaitra vad 4 [2nd April, 1820], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting with a large, cylindrical pillow on a decorated bedstead which had been placed on the platform in front of the west-facing medi in Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He was wearing a white khes and had covered Himself with a white chãdar. He had also tied a white feto around His head. A sabhã of sãdhus, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. Muktãnand Swãmi and some sãdhus were singing kirtans to the accompaniment of musical instruments. 71.2 Then, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “Please conclude the kirtans for now, and begin a question-answer discussion amongst yourselves.” 71.3 Somlã Khãchar then asked, “Bhagvãn forgives all the mistakes of His bhaktas, but which one mistake does He not forgive?” 71.4 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “Bhagvãn forgives all other mistakes, but He does not forgive the mistake of insulting a bhakta of Bhagvãn. Therefore, a person should never harm a bhakta of Bhagvãn in any way whatsoever. Furthermore, of all the mistakes made against Bhagvãn, to deny the svarup of Bhagvãn is a very serious mistake. A person should never make this mistake; and anyone who does make this mistake, commits a sin more serious than the five great sins. 71.5 “Denying the svarup of Bhagvãn is nothing more than understanding Bhagvãn, who eternally is sãkãr, to be nirãkãr. In fact, Bhagvãn who is Purushottam, forever resides with a divya svarup in His Akshardhãm, and His divine light is like that of millions of suns and moons. Countless millions of brahm-rup muktas serve the holy feet of that Bhagvãn. That Bhagvãn, also known as Parbrahm Purushottam, incarnates on earth out of compassion, for the kalyãn of the jeevs. When He incarnates, all tattvas that He accepts become brahm. The three bodies (sthul, sukshma, and kãran), the three mental states (jãgrat, svapna, and sushupti), the ten indriyas, and the five prãns, were all apparent in avatãrs such as Rãm and Krishna. Although all of them appear to be like ordinary humans, in reality they are all brahm, not mãyik. Therefore, a person should never deny the svarup of Bhagvãn.” 71.6 Mãtra Dhãdhal then asked, “What is the characteristic of jealousy?” 71.7 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “A person who is jealous of someone cannot tolerate that person benefiting in any way. He would be pleased if misery falls upon that person. That is the characteristic of jealousy.” 71.8 Then, Shreeji Mahãrãj asked the munis, “A person who has nishchay in the pratyaksha murti of Bhagvãn, worships Bhagvãn, and behaves in accordance with the niyams of satsang, will attain kalyãn. That is the way of satsang. However, what are the methods of kalyãn according to the shãstras? The meanings of the Veds are indeed very difficult to understand, so they are not narrated in kathãs. However, the Shreemad Bhãgvat Purãn and the Mahãbhãrat contain the message of the Veds, and are easier to understand. Therefore, they are widely narrated in public kathã. Please explain how a person can attain kalyãn as explained in the shãstras. Also, bear in mind that Shankar-Ãchãrya has proposed that Bhagvãn is nirãkãr, whereas Rãmãnuj-Ãchãrya and other ãchãryas have proposed that Bhagvãn is sãkãr. Therefore, please base your answer on the principles of the shãstras.” 71.9 Using references from shãstras, the munis then disproved the view that Bhagvãn is nirãkãr, and promoted the view that kalyãn is only possible by the worship of Bhagvãn with a sãkãr murti. 71.10 Shreeji Mahãrãj then commented, “I myself also accept that view, but I would like to ask you a question regarding this. Purushottam Bhagvãn is greater than the nirãkãr Akshar-Brahm and He is eternally sãkãr. If a person, who has found that Bhagvãn on this earth, still cherishes a desire to see Brahmpur, Golok, Vaikunth, Shvet-Dvip, and the other dhãms of Bhagvãn, can he be said to have nishchay in Bhagvãn, or not?” 71.11 The munis replied, “Despite having found Bhagvãn, a person who constantly feels in his mind, ‘Only when I see Akshardhãm and other dhãms, or see the light of millions and millions of suns, is my kalyãn attained,’ does not have absolute nishchay.” 71.12 Shreeji Mahãrãj argued this by asking, “What sin has he committed in having a desire to see Brahmpur, the other dhãms and the svarup of brahm, that you disqualify his nishchay?” 71.13 The munis replied, “Why should a person who believes that kalyãn is attained by the mere darshan of pratyaksha Bhagvãn have a dislike for Brahmpur, Golok, and other dhãms? After all, they do belong to Bhagvãn. Also, without Bhagvãn, he would have no desire for them.” 71.14 Shreeji Mahãrãj further questioned, “Those dhãms and the pãrshads residing in them, are chaitanya and are beyond Mãyã. So, what flaw is there in them that a person should not desire to see them? Also, what about Bhagvãn who is pratyaksha on this earth? How do you view His pãrshads, who are in fact perishable, and the houses He lives in, which can be destroyed?” 71.15 The munis replied, “We understand those houses to be like Brahmpur and the other dhãms, and we understand those pãrshads to be brahm-rup.” 71.16 Shreeji Mahãrãj then said, “Brahmpur and the pãrshads of Bhagvãn residing in Brahmpur are immortal and imperishable, whereas the houses and pãrshads of this Mrutyu-Lok are perishable. How can you possibly compare the two?” 71.17 Finally, Nityãnand Swãmi requested, “Mahãrãj, you will have to answer that question.” 71.18 Shreeji Mahãrãj explained, “When Bhagvãn incarnates for the purpose of granting kalyãn to the jeevs, He is always accompanied by His Akshardhãm, His pãrshads – who are chaitanya – and all of His divine powers. However, they are not perceived by others. Nevertheless, when a bhakta acquires an alokik vision during samãdhi, he does see divine light equivalent to countless millions of suns in the murti of Bhagvãn. Together with the murti, he also sees countless millions of muktas, and also Akshardhãm itself. Therefore, all of these do accompany Bhagvãn. Despite all of this, Bhagvãn only accepts the sevã of His own, earthly bhaktas. He stays in the houses of His bhaktas, which are made of mud, clay, and stone. He lovingly accepts whatever those bhaktas offer Him, whether it is incense, an oil lamp, food, clothes, or anything else. He does so for the purpose of elevating those earthly pãrshads to the ranks of divya pãrshads. All the objects that a bhakta offers to Bhagvãn assume a divya form in the dhãm of Bhagvãn. Moreover, that bhakta also attains a divya svarup and attains those divya objects there. In this way, Bhagvãn accepts all the offerings offered by His earthly bhaktas in order to allow them to experience everlasting bliss. Therefore, a bhakta of Bhagvãn should realise that the svarup of Bhagvãn, along with His Akshardhãm, is present on this earth, and he should also explain this fact to others.”

72.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on Chaitra vad 11 [9th April, 1820], Swãmi Shree Sahajãnandji Mahãrãj was sitting facing east on a decorated bedstead on the veranda outside the north-facing rooms near the mandir of Shree Vãsudev-Nãrãyan in Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 72.2 Then, Muktãnand Swãmi said, “Mahãrãj, yesterday you had a very nice talk with Dãdã Khãchar. All of us very much wish to hear that talk.” 72.3 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “If a bhakta of Bhagvãn has nishchay in Bhagvãn coupled with the knowledge of His greatness, and also thoroughly realises the greatness of the sãdhus and satsangis, then even if that bhakta’s karmas and kãl happen to be unpleasant, both kãl and karma combined are incapable of harming him due to the extreme force of his bhakti. On the other hand, a person lacking nishchay in Bhagvãn and His sant, does not benefit in any way, even if Bhagvãn wishes to do good for that person. 72.4 “A person who suppresses the humble, does not benefit in any way either. In fact, Bhishma-Pitã has said to Yudhishthir Rãjã in the Mahãbhãrat, ‘If you suppress the humble, you and your descendants will be burnt to ashes’. Therefore, whether he is a bhakta of Bhagvãn or not, no humble person should even slightly be pained. Moreover, if a person does hurt the humble, not only does he not benefit in any way, but he also incurs a sin equivalent to the sin of killing a brãhman. 72.5 “In the same way, the sin incurred by making false allegations against someone is also equivalent to killing a brãhman. Even if the allegations happen to be true, a person should constructively advise the person in private, but in no way should he be publicly humiliated. 72.6 “Similarly, a person who forces the five categories of women to lapse in their dharma, also incurs the sin of killing a brãhman. What are these five categories of women? First, a woman who has sought a person’s refuge; second, a person’s own wife who does not desire intimacy on days of vrat or on day of fasting; third, a woman who is a pati-vratã wife; fourth, a widow; and fifth, a women who has placed her trust in a person. If a person commits adultery with these five categories of women, he incurs the sin of killing a brãhman. Of these five categories, if a widow’s mind wavers towards immorality, she should be inspired to follow dharma.” 72.7 The munis began to sing rasik kirtans of Bhagvãn. Hearing them, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “When Bhagvãn assumes a body for the sake of the kalyãn of the jeevs, all of His actions are like those of humans. On seeing those actions, a bhakta of Bhagvãn understands them to be charitras, whereas a vimukh or a weak-minded bhakta perceives avgun. For example, when Shukji narrated the rãs-leelã, Parikshit Rãjã had a doubt, and so asked, ‘Bhagvãn had incarnated to establish the order of dharma. Then, why did he commit a breach of dharma by associating with the wives of others?’ In this way, Parikshit perceived avgun in Bhagvãn. 72.8 Shukji, on the other hand, thoughtfully began singing praises of Bhagvãn, explaining that Kãm-Dev has conquered Brahmã and other devs and brought them under his control. This has greatly inflated Kãm-Dev’s arrogance. To vanquish that arrogance, Bhagvãn challenged Kãm-Dev. Just as a powerful king gives his own weapons to his enemy prior to fighting him, Bhagvãn also gave his enemy (Kãm-Dev), the necessary ‘ammunition’ for fighting. What was that ‘ammunition’? Well, the force of Kãm-Dev is revealed in the company of women, and that force is also greater during the nights of the monsoon season. In addition, romantic gestures of women, listening to seductive words, seeing the beauty of women, and touching women, greatly increase the force of Kãm-Dev. After giving all of this as ‘ammunition’ to Kãm-Dev, Shree Krishna Bhagvãn conquered Kãm-Dev and continuously remained an urdhva-retã like a brahm-chãri. In this way, he vanquished Kãm-Dev’s arrogance. No one except Bhagvãn possesses such magnificent powers. It was after realising this immense power of Bhagvãn that Shukji celebrated the charitras of Bhagvãn. However, as Parikshit Rãjã failed to understand this, he perceived an avgun in Bhagvãn. 72.9 “However, someone may ask you, ‘Being paramhans, why do you sing such rasik kirtans?’ In that case, you should tell that person, ‘If we do not sing rasik kirtans, and instead perceive avgun in the rasik charitras of Bhagvãn, then we would also join the ranks of Parikshit Rãjã and other nãstik vimukhs. However, we do not wish to join the ranks of vimukhs. After all, Shukji, who is considered to be the guru of all paramhans, himself celebrated the rasik charitras of Bhagvãn. Therefore, we must also certainly do the same’. 72.10 “Nevertheless, when Purushottam Bhagvãn, who is greater than both the perishable and the imperishable, assumes a human svarup and travels in the brahmãnd for the kalyãn of the jeevs, His charitras are just like those of all humans. Just as humans possess mãyik svabhãvs such as kãm, krodh, lobh, moh, mad, matsar, irshyã, ãshã, trushnã, abhimãn, defeat, victory, fear, and grief, Bhagvãn also exhibits the same svabhãvs Himself. However, they are all for the kalyãn of the jeevs. So, a true bhakta celebrates the charitras of Bhagvãn and attains Akshardhãm, whereas a vimukh perceives avgun in them. 72.11 “In fact, just as Bhagvãn is the ãtmã of the perishable, He is also the ãtmã of Akshar-Brahm, who is greater than Prakruti and Purush. With His own powers, Bhagvãn supports both the perishable and the imperishable, yet He Himself is distinct from them both. Furthermore, the greatness of Bhagvãn is such that within the pore of His each and every hair, countless millions of brahmãnds appear as mere atoms. Only when that great Bhagvãn becomes like a human for the sake of the kalyãn of the jeevs, do they have an opportunity to do His sevã. If He were to remain exactly the same size as He really is, then even the ruling devs of this brahmãnd, like Brahmã, would be incapable of having His darshan and performing His sevã. Then, what can be said of mere humans? 72.12 “Consider the vadvãnal fire that dwells in the ocean. Despite consuming the waters of the ocean, it is so vast that even the water of the ocean cannot extinguish it. If we wished to light an oil lamp in our homes and that vadvãnal fire were to enter our homes, instead of enjoying the light of the oil lamp, we would all be burnt and reduced to ashes. However, if that same fire were to assume the form of an oil lamp, its light would provide joy, even though the oil lamp is the very same fire. The oil lamp is so weak that it could be easily extinguished by blowing on it or smothering it by hand. Nevertheless, only it can provide comfort to us, whereas the vadvãnal fire cannot. 72.13 “In the same way, Bhagvãn may appear to be as powerless as a human, but only through that svarup can countless jeevs attain kalyãn. The jeevs are incapable of even doing darshan of His murti, within who’s each and every hair reside countless millions of brahmãnds. This makes kalyãn impossible through that murti. Therefore, all charitras Bhagvãn performs after assuming a human murti are worthy of being celebrated. A person should not doubt, ‘Despite being Bhagvãn, why does He do this?’ In fact, to realise all of Bhagvãn’s charitras as kalyãn-kãri, is the very dharma of a bhakta. Only a person who understands this can be called a perfect bhakta of Bhagvãn.” 72.14 Kãkã-Bhãi, of the village Rojkã, then asked, “What are the characteristics of a person who merely has nishchay in Bhagvãn, without realising His greatness? Also, what are the characteristics of person who has nishchay in Bhagvãn coupled with the knowledge of His greatness?” 72.15 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “A person with only nishchay still has the doubt, ‘Although I have attained Bhagvãn, will I attain kalyãn or not?’ On the other hand, a person with nishchay coupled with the knowledge of Bhagvãn’s greatness believes, ‘From the very day I had the darshan of Bhagvãn, my kalyãn has been guaranteed. In fact, kalyãn is also assured to anyone who devoutly has my darshan or accepts my advice. Then, how can there be any doubt regarding my own kalyãn? I am indeed absolutely fulfilled. Furthermore, whichever spiritual activity I do perform, I perform solely to please Bhagvãn’. A person with such understanding should be known to have nishchay in Bhagvãn coupled with the knowledge of His greatness.” 72.16 Again, Kãkã-Bhãi asked, “What are the characteristics of the three types of bhaktas of Bhagvãn –uttam, madhyam, and kanishth?” 72.17 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “The uttam bhakta believes himself to be the ãtmã, and distinct from his body. He does not associate the qualities of the body (jad, full of misery, perishable, impure) with the ãtmã, and nor does he associate the qualities of the ãtmã (achhedhya, abhedhya, avinãshi) with the body. He sees the jeevãtmã residing in his body, as well as the Paramãtmã dwelling within his ãtmã. Not only that, he sees the ãtmãs residing in the bodies of the others as well. Despite having become so skilled, he realises Bhagvãn and His sant to be superior to ãtmã-nishthã, and does not have even the slightest pride in the fact that he has attained ãtmã-nishthã. A person with such characteristics is said to be an uttam bhakta. 72.18 “In comparison, a person who becomes jealous of bhaktas of Bhagvãn, despite having knowledge of the ãtmã and nishchay in Bhagvãn, should be considered to be madhyam bhakta. If Bhagvãn were to insult this person, he develops jealousy towards Bhagvãn, and feels, ‘Even though Bhagvãn is so great, why is He treating me this way, despite no fault of my own?’ 72.19 “Finally, a person who has nishchay in Bhagvãn but no ãtmã-nishthã, has love for Bhagvãn as well as for the affairs of this world, and experiences joy and grief in the affairs of this world, should be considered to be a kanishth bhakta.” ||

73.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on the night of Chaitra vad Amãs [12th April, 1820], Swãmi Shree Sahajãnandji Mahãrãj was sitting on the veranda outside the north-facing room of His residence in Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He was wearing a white khes and had covered Himself with a white chãdar. He had also tied a white feto around His head. At that time, four senior sãdhus, including Muktãnand Swãmi, and some fifty other haribhaktas, had gathered before Him. 73.2 Then, Gopãlãnand Swãmi asked, “What is the nature of lust?” 73.3 Shreeji Mahãrãj answered, “Semen alone is the nature of lust.” 73.4 Gopãlãnand Swãmi then raised a doubt, “Semen is one of the seven basic constituents of the body – the seven basic constituents of the body are: ras (bodily fluids), rakta (blood), mãns (muscle), med (fat), asthi (bones), majjã (marrow), and shukra (semen). Then, how can semen alone be called the nature of lust? Also, how exactly is that semen produced?” 73.5 Shreeji Mahãrãj explained, “The mind resides in the mano-vahã nãdi. Whenever a thought related to women arises in the mind, semen is churned from the body, and after collecting in the mano-vahã nãdi, it is discharged through the genitals – just as ghee surfaces from yoghurt when it is churned by a churning rod. A person whose semen is not discharged through the genitals is known as an urdhva-retã and a perfect brahm-chãri. When Shree Krishna Bhagvãn associated with the gopis during the rãs-leelã, he did not allow the discharge of semen. For this reason, he was known as an urdhva-retã brahm-chãri, and had therefore conquered lust. Therefore, semen alone is the nature of lust. A person who has conquered semen, has conquered lust.” 73.6 Gopãlãnand Swãmi asked again, “When the body is burnt after death, its seven constituents are burnt along with it. Therefore, if semen alone is the nature of lust, then by the burning of semen along with the body, lust should also be burnt. Why then, does lust arise when the jeev enters another body?” 73.7 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “Semen is retained in the sukshma body. Moreover, it is because of the sukshma body that the sthul body is produced. When a ghost, which is mainly composed of a sukshma body, enters into the sthul body of another man and associates with a woman, that woman conceives a child by that ghost. Therefore, semen is definitely retained in the sukshma body.” 73.8 Gopãlãnand Swãmi questioned further, “Shivji was an urdhva-retã, yet on seeing Mohini, semen was discharged. This implies that as long as there is semen in the body, it is sure to be discharged whenever a man associates with a woman in the jãgrat state or svapna state. So then, as long as there is semen in the body, how can a person be called a perfect brahm-chãri?” 73.9 Shreeji Mahãrãj explained, “That can be said to be a fault in Shivji’s yogic powers. A person whose semen is discharged in the jãgrat state or svapna state by the thought of a woman, cannot be called a true brahm-chãri. That is why in this whole world, Nar-Nãrãyan Rushi is the only one who has firm brahm-chãrya. Since we have accepted the refuge of that Nar-Nãrãyan Rushi, by his grace and by worshipping him, we shall also gradually become nishkãmi and perfect brahm-chãris like Him. 73.10 “Yogis try to burn the semen, which remains in the body, with great effort. However, Shree Krishna Bhagvãn maintained perfect brahm-chãrya, even in the midst of the company of women. Such powers are only present in Bhagvãn. No one else is capable of remaining uninfluenced in this way. Therefore, other yogis should make an effort to avoid thinking of women in both the jãgrat state and the svapna state.” 73.11 Shuk Muni then asked, “In Dvãrikã, Shree Krishna Bhagvãn had 16,108 wives. It is said that He had ten sons and one daughter by each wife. How should one understand this?” 73.12 Shreeji Mahãrãj clarified, “The incidents of Dvãrikã are one thing, and then incidents of Vraj are another. In Dvãrikã, Shree Krishna Bhagvãn had adopted the philosophy of Sãnkhya. A follower of the Sãnkhya philosophy believes his own self to be distinct from the mind, body, and indriyas. While performing all actions, he does not regard himself as being the doer of those actions, nor does he experience either joy or grief from those actions. That was the principle adopted by Shree Krishna Bhagvãn. Therefore, He was said to be uninfluenced. The Sãnkhya philosophy adopted by Shree Krishna Bhagvãn in Dvãrikã is the very same Sãnkhya philosophy followed by kings such as Janak, who worshipped Bhagvãn as grahasthas. In the same way, Shree Krishna Bhagvãn was also a grahastha, and was known as the king of Dvãrikã. Therefore, because He followed the Sãnkhya philosophy, he remained uninfluenced as well. 73.13 “However, in Vrundãvan Shree Krishna Bhagvãn had adopted the philosophy of Yog, by which He maintained His vow of perfect brahm-chãrya, despite associating with women. At that time, He displayed the powers of Nar-Nãrãyan Rushi within Himself. In the Shreemad Bhãgvat, Kapil-Dev explains to Devhuti, ‘No one, except Nar-Nãrãyan Rushi, is capable of overcoming my mãyã in the form of women’. However, Shree Krishna Bhagvãn conquered lust while associating with women. 73.14 “Now, consider the following incident: When Durvãsã Rushi came and Shree Krishna Bhagvãn began sending all the gopis with dishes filled with food for him, the gopis asked, ‘How shall we cross the Yamunãji River?’ 73.15 “At that time, Shree Krishna Bhagvãn said, ‘Tell Yamunãji that if Shree Krishna is forever a brahm-chãri, then make way for us’. When the gopis said this to Yamunãji, she made way for them. 73.16 “After feeding Durvãsã Rushi, all the gopis asked him, ‘Yamunãji is in our way. How shall we return home?’ 73.17 “Durvãsã Rushi then asked, ‘How did you come?’ 73.18 “The gopis explained, ‘We told Yamunãji that if Shree Krishna is forever a brahm-chãri, then make way for us. So she made way for us. But how shall we return home now?’ 73.19 “Durvãsã Rushi then said, ‘Tell Yamunãji that if Durvãsã Rushi is forever fasting, then make way for us’. When the gopis said this to Yamunãji, she made way for them. Seeing this, the gopis were extremely surprised. However, they were unable to realise the greatness of Shree Krishna Bhagvãn or Durvãsã Rushi. 73.20 “Shree Krishna Bhagvãn played with the gopis while maintaining His vow of perfect brahm-chãrya and was therefore still a brahm-chãri. Durvãsã Rushi also united his ãtmã with Shree Krishna Bhagvãn, the ãtmã of all, and although he ate all the food offered by the gopis, he was still forever fasting. This was because in reality, he had fed all the food to Bhagvãn. Therefore, the actions of the extremely great cannot be understood. 73.21 “If a person looks for followers of the Sãnkhya philosophy, he could find thousands. However, to be an urdhva-retã by way of yogic powers, is only possible for Nar-Nãrãyan. In addition, a true bhakta of Nar-Nãrãyan can also gradually develop firm brahm-chãrya by the power of his worship, but others cannot. 73.22 “Furthermore, if semen is discharged through the genitals in the jãgrat state or svapna state, a person cannot be called a brahm-chãri. Nevertheless, a person who follows the eight types of tyãg of women is walking on the path of brahm-chãrya. So with time, by the grace of Nar-Nãrãyan, he will gradually become a firm brahm-chãri. 73.23 “When I was young, I had heard that semen is also released through a person’s sweat. So in order to retain my semen, I learnt two types of jal-basti, and also kunjar-kriyã. In order to conquer lust, I learnt many yogic ãsans as well. When I slept at night, I slept in the posture of gorakh-ãsan to prevent the discharge of semen even in the svapna state. To conquer lust, I made such an effort that my body stopped sweating, and I no longer felt either the cold or the heat. Then, when I came to Rãmãnand Swãmi, he tried to make me sweat by pasting ãval leaves all over my body. Even then, my body would not sweat. Therefore, conquering lust is the most difficult of all spiritual activities. However, a person who has the firm strength of upãsanã of Bhagvãn’s svarup, has become absolutely free from desires for the five vishays, and is firm in remaining free of worldly desires, becomes free of lust by the grace of Bhagvãn.” 73.24 Nityãnand Swãmi then asked, “What is the method of becoming free of worldly desires? Is it listening to talks, or is it vairãgya?” 73.25 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “Vairãgya alone cannot last; it is eventually destroyed. Therefore, after developing knowledge of the ãtmã and complete gnãn of Bhagvãn’s svarup, a person should think, ‘I am the ãtmã and sachidãnand, whereas the body and the brahmãnd are mãyik and perishable. How can they compare to me? Moreover, my ishta-dev is Purushottam Bhagvãn, who is greater than even Akshar, and is the supporter of countless millions of brahmãnds. I have the firm refuge of that Bhagvãn’. Vairãgya developed from these thoughts, is said to be coupled with gnãn. It is this vairãgya that is never destroyed. For example, a burning flame is extinguished when water is poured over it. However, the vadvãnal fire, which rests in the ocean, cannot be extinguished even by the waters of the ocean itself. Similarly, vairãgya coupled with gnãn is like the vadvãnal fire and the fire of lightning – it cannot be extinguished. Without that gnãn, other forms of vairãgya cannot be trusted. 73.26 “My vairãgya is like that of the fire of lightning and the vadvãnal fire. This nature of mine is known by those who have stayed extremely close to me. However, those who remain far from me, are unable to realise my nature. Furthermore, this Mulji Brahm-Chãri may appear to be naïve, yet he thoroughly knows my nature, and understands, ‘Mahãrãj is as distant as ãkãsh. He has no prejudices against or in favour of anyone’. Also, because he knows my nature, he possesses qualities like those of Bhagvãn. Moreover, the antaryãmi Bhagvãn residing within all, explains to the minds of all men and women, ‘There is no fault whatsoever in this Brahm-Chari’. 73.27 “The means of acquiring such great qualities is as follows: Whoever believes a great sant to be absolutely free of flaws becomes totally flawless himself. However, if a person perceives flaws in a great sant, that person’s intellect becomes polluted, and inner enemies, like kãm and krodh, all come to dwell within his heart. As a result, the heart of that person who perceives faults in the sat-purush is greatly troubled by disturbing thoughts. Although he may practice satsang, he never stops being unhappy. 73.28 “Those who are wise, realise all my characteristics by staying close to me. They realise, ‘Mahãrãj has no affection for any object in this world that can awaken infatuation, such as wealth, women, jewellery, food, and drink. In fact, Mahãrãj remains distant from all these things. Also, when He allows someone to sit near Him or talks to him of gnãn, it is purely out of compassion for the kalyãn of the jeev’. On the other hand, those who are fools, whether they stay near or far, cannot understand my nature. 73.29 “These talks can only be understood by a person who has ãtmã-nishthã, who offers bhakti to Bhagvãn while holding His murti within the ãtmã, and who does not abandon the worship of Bhagvãn even after becoming brahm-rup. Therefore, after developing ãtmã-nishthã and understanding the greatness of Bhagvãn’s murti, no desire for any objects remains. Once worldly desires are eradicated, a person may experience pain and pleasure according to the prãrabdha of his body, but the indriyas no longer remain sharp. 73.30 “The indriyas are the jagged edges of the manomay chakra. They become blunt only by the complete understanding of brahm and Parbrahm. For example, if a person, whose teeth have become very sensitive as a result of sucking lemons, has to chew some chick-peas, he would never be able to chew them. If he was extremely hungry, he would at most swallow them, but he would be unable to chew them. Similarly, a person who has thoroughly understood the greatness of Bhagvãn and the ãtmã, feels no joy whatsoever in any of the pleasures of the vishays of any dhãm. While the prãrabdha of the body continues, he may indulge in food, drink, and other objects, but he would do so in the same way as the person with sensitised teeth, swallowing whole chick-peas. 73.31 “To eradicate worldly desires is indeed an extremely difficult task. In fact, they remain even after mastering samãdhi. After attaining samãdhi, there is no way a person can return back into his body from the svarup of brahm. If he does return, it is because of one of three reasons. Firstly, he returns to his body from samãdhi if he holds desires for worldly pleasures. Secondly, if someone is extremely powerful, he can enter into samãdhi and return to the body according to his own will. Lastly, if there is another person who is much more powerful, then that person can bring someone back into their body from samãdhi. These are the three ways of returning to the body from samãdhi. 73.32 “When samãdhi occurs, a person has the darshan of Brahm and sees the divine light of Brahm to be like that of countless millions of suns. At that time, if that person does not have much understanding, he regards the murti of pratyaksha Purushottam Bhagvãn to be inferior, and believes Brahm to be superior. This leads to committing a breach of upãsanã. That is why firm nishchay should be developed in the pratyaksha murti, because only then can all things be accomplished. I am also determined that I shall not allow any flaw whatsoever to remain in anyone who sincerely surrenders his mind to me. Therefore, I shall not allow even a little distance to remain between us.” 73.33 Then, Muktãnand Swãmi asked, “What are the characteristics of a person who has surrendered his mind, and what are the characteristics of a person who has not surrendered his mind?” 73.34 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “If a person, who has surrendered his mind to Bhagvãn, is unable to be present while the talks of Bhagvãn are going on, or for the darshan of Bhagvãn, he experiences intense regret in his heart. Whenever he listens to the talks of Bhagvãn and has the darshan of Bhagvãn, his love for Bhagvãn continually increases, but never does his mind recede from those talks and darshan. Moreover, when Bhagvãn gives an ãgnã to someone to stay far away, a person who has surrendered his mind would think to himself, ‘If that ãgnã was given to me, I would gladly go to Buranpur or Kãshi, or anywhere else for that matter’. A person, who remains happy living according to the wishes of Bhagvãn in this way, is near to me; even if he is a thousand miles away. 73.35 “On the other hand, a person who has not surrendered his mind in this way, is as good as being hundreds of thousands of miles away, even though he may be staying very close to me. In fact, I am afraid of even giving advice to a person who has not surrendered his mind to me, as I fear ‘Will he accept it positively or negatively?’ These are the characteristics of a person who has surrendered his mind and who has not surrendered his mind.”

74.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on the morning of Vaishãkh sud 11 [24th April, 1820], Swãmi Shree Sahajãnandji Mahãrãj was sitting on a decorated bedstead under the neem tree opposite the mandir of Shree Vãsudev-Nãrãyan, in Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 74.2 Then, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “The extent of a person’s vairãgya and understanding, can be measured only when he encounters vishays, or in times of hardship, but not otherwise. That being so, what can be said about situations of extreme happiness or hardship? For example, everyone must have realised the state of their own antah-karans during the minor difficulty that recently fell upon Dãdã Khãchar.” 74.3 Muktãnand Swãmi then said, “It is natural that in a person’s heart, he sides with Bhagvãn’s bhaktas, with the understanding that if satsang flourishes, many people will benefit; but if the satsang suffers a setback in any way, no one will benefit. That is why joy and grief are experienced.” 74.4 Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “Since we are the dãs of Nar-Nãrãyan, we should be pleased with whatever pleases Him. If it is the wish of Nar-Nãrãyan, then our satsang will flourish; and if He wishes to make it decrease, then it will decrease. Also, if Nar-Nãrãyan seats us on an elephant, we should be happy; and if He seats us on a donkey, then we should also remain happy. We should not have the slightest love for anything except the holy feet of Nar-Nãrãyan. If there is a person who’s mind is attached to just a minor responsibility, then what will become of him if he is given the major responsibility of taking care of the whole world? 74.5 “For this reason, our lord, Shree Nar-Nãrãyan, performs tap while sitting under a bordi tree; and He does not touch anything that gives worldly pleasures. That is why we are the dãs of our lord, Shree Nar-Nãrãyan. Just as a pati-vratã wife keeps jewellery, clothes, and food, less than her husband, we should keep less worldly pleasures than our Shree Nar-Nãrãyan. 74.6 “If a bhakta wishes great things for Bhagvãn, it is fine if he has these wishes while doing bhakti, and if he is nishkãmi. The bhakta should not wish these objects for himself. Bhagvãn is not at all interested in the enjoyment of these worldly objects for Himself, but He sees the bhakti of the bhakta, and accepts the objects given by them. 74.7 “Bhagvãn is the master of millions of universes, and the master of Brahmpur, Golok, and Vaikunth, and other dhãms, and the master of Rãdhikãji and Lakshmiji. If Bhagvãn desired worldly objects and enjoyments, why would He abandon all these things and sit under a bordi tree to perform tap? Therefore, Bhagvãn can have no desire for worldly pleasures. In comparison to other avatãrs, our Nar-Nãrãyan is a greater tyãgi, and performs tap for the kalyãn of jeevs. 74.8 “If Nar-Nãrãyan has desires for worldly objects, then why does He eat berries and sit under a tree? There are many foolish souls in the world who are owners of land. If Nar-Nãrãyan, who is Bhagvãn, wanted some wealth and worldly pleasures, then should He not keep at least a few villages for His own use? However, Bhagvãn does not want anything. Therefore, we should become a greater tyãgi than our master. 74.9 “In whatever way satsang flourishes by the wish of Bhagvãn, we should remain joyful. If it is the wish of Bhagvãn, then the whole world will become satsangis; or if He so wishes, then satsang will decline. But, under no condition, should we have grief of joy in our minds. Whatever occurs is due to the actions of Bhagvãn. So, just as a dry leaf blows in the air according to the direction of the wind, we should remain with Bhagvãn and worship him, and never let any unhappiness enter our minds.”

75.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on Vaishãkh vad 11 [8th May, 1820], Swãmi Shree Sahajãnandji Mahãrãj was sitting on a decorated bedstead under the neem tree in front of the mandir of Shree Vãsudev-Nãrãyan in Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He was wearing a garland of yellow flowers around His neck, and was dressed entirely in white clothes. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 75.2 Surã Khãchar then asked, “It is said that seventy-one generations of a family, which consists of a bhakta of Bhagvãn, attain kalyãn. But, many in that family may even be enemies of Bhagvãn and His sant. In what way do they attain kalyãn?” 75.3 Shreeji Mahãrãj answered, “Devhuti had profound love towards Kardam Rushi as her husband, yet she attained kalyãn because of her love for him. The fifty daughters of Mandhãtã Rãjã who married Saubhari Rushi, were attracted to him because of his handsome appearance. Although their love for Saubhari was born out of lust, they still all attained kalyãn like Saubhari Rushi himself. Therefore, if all the members of a family, in which there is a bhakta, believe ‘We are indeed very fortunate to have a bhakta of Bhagvãn in our family’, and keep love for the bhakta with such an understanding of his greatness, then all the members of the family will attain kalyãn. Even if the bhakta’s ancestors, who have died and have gone to Svarg, realise ‘We are indeed very fortunate to have a bhakta of Bhagvãn in our family’, and they also keep love for the bhakta, then those ancestors will attain kalyãn as well. 75.4 “However, a person who keeps hatred towards a bhakta of Bhagvãn, does not attain kalyãn. As his hatred towards the bhakta increases, his mind becomes more and more polluted. In fact, when he dies, he falls into the same pit of Narak as that entered by a person who has committed the five great sins. Therefore, all those who have love for a bhakta of Bhagvãn, regardless of whether they are family members or not, attain kalyãn.” 75.5 Then, Nãjã Bhakta asked, “Suppose there is one bhakta of Bhagvãn with firm nishchay, and another with only a little nishchay. Although outwardly they both appear to be good, how can the two be recognised?” 75.6 Shreeji Mahãrãj explained, “A person who has precise gnãn of the nature of the ãtmã, firm vairãgya, and perfect bhakti and svadharma, should be known to have perfect nishchay. Even if one of these four factors is lacking, then despite having nishchay, it is still without the knowledge of Bhagvãn’s greatness. If all four factors are totally present, then that should be known as nishchay in Bhagvãn coupled with the knowledge of His greatness.”

76.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on sud 11 of the first Jyeshth [23rd May, 1820], Swãmi Shree Sahajãnandji Mahãrãj was seated in His residence in Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. At that time, some senior sãdhus were seated before Him. 76.2 Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “There are four types of people I do not get along with, even if they happen to be bhaktas of Bhagvãn: A person with krodh, a person with irshyã, a person with kapat, and a person with abhimãn. Of these, both krodh and irshyã are dependent on abhimãn. Furthermore, I can never believe a person with kãm to be a satsangi. In fact, even if such a person happens to be in satsang, he is as good as a vimukh. 76.3 “A true satsangi is a person who has absolutely no flaws in following the panch-vartmãn, and who remains totally undisturbed until the end of his life, regardless of whatever strict commands I may impose, and force him to abandon his preferences and enforce my own. I effortlessly and naturally develop love for such a bhakta. On the other hand, I cannot develop love for a bhakta without these qualities, even if I try. This is because my nature is such that I can only develop love for a person who possesses perfect bhakti for Bhagvãn in his heart.”

77.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on vad Amãs of the second Jyeshth [10th July, 1820], Swãmi Shree Sahajãnandji Mahãrãj was sitting on a decorated bedstead on the veranda outside the west-facing rooms in front of the mandir of Shree Vãsudev-Nãrãyan in Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 77.2 In the sabhã, the munis were engaged in a question-answer discussion amongst themselves. During the discussion, a muni, out of misunderstanding, began to invalidate dharma on the basis of his nishchay in Bhagvãn. 77.3 Hearing this, Shreeji Mahãrãj commented, “A person who abandons dharma under the excuse of the gnãn of Bhagvãn, should be considered to be demonic. The svarup of Bhagvãn possesses countless kalyãn-kãri qualities, which Pruthvi has described to Dharma in the first skandh of the Shreemad Bhãgvat. Therefore, a person who has accepted the refuge of Bhagvãn acquires these kalyãn-kãri qualities. Moreover, a person who has nishchay in Bhagvãn also acquires the thirty characteristics of a sãdhu described in the eleventh skandh of the Shreemad Bhãgvat. Therefore, a person who does not possess the thirty characteristics of a sãdhu should not be considered to be a true sãdhu. 77.4 “Conversely, a person who does have nishchay in Bhagvãn definitely does acquire the kalyãn-kãri qualities of Bhagvãn within his heart. When these qualities of Bhagvãn are acquired by a sãdhu, he also acquires the thirty characteristics of a sãdhu. From today onwards, whoever abandons dharma (panch-vartmãn), and solely supports the strength of bhakti or gnãn, is a blasphemer of the guru and guru’s word. Anyone who even talks of such a lapse in dharma should be called a vimukh and told, ‘You have sided with demons, and we shall not accept it’. With such words, the talks of that sinful person should be dismissed.” 77.5 A sant then asked, “Mahãrãj, there may be an extremely faithful bhakta of Bhagvãn who suffers great pain and who babbles meaninglessly at the time of death, whereas a person who does not seem to be a true bhakta appears extremely composed at the time of his death. In fact, he dies in comfort, realising the glory of Bhagvãn, and even expressing His greatness. What is the reason behind this? Please explain why a religious person’s death appears to be unpleasant in comparison to an ordinary person’s death that appears to be pleasant?” 77.6 Shreeji Mahãrãj explained, “A person’s mind is influenced by the eight factors of desh, kãl, kriyã, sang, dhyãn, mantra, dikshã, and shãstra. If these eight factors are pure, the mind becomes pure; but, if they are impure, the mind becomes impure. 77.7 “Also, Bhagvãn’s mãyã inspires the dharmas of the four yugs to prevail in turn within a person’s heart. At the time of death, if the dharma of Satya-Yug is prevalent, then death appears very pleasant. If the dharma of either Tretã-Yug or Dvãpar-Yug is prevalent, then death appears less pleasant. However, when the dharma of Kali-Yug is prevalent, death appears extremely unpleasant. In this way, the pleasantness and unpleasantness of death is also determined by kãl. 77.8 “The three mental states – jãgrat, svapna, and sushupti – are also factors. At the time of death, if the jãgrat state is prevalent, then even a sinner would die while still completely conscious. If the svapna state is prevalent at the time of death, then a person dies mumbling without making sense, even if he is a bhakta of Bhagvãn. Furthermore, if the sushupti state is prevalent at the time of death, then regardless of whether a person is a bhakta of Bhagvãn or a vimukh, he passes away unconsciously, unable to say anything, neither good nor bad. However, if a person dies while thoroughly realising his jeevãtmã as greater than these three states and as being brahm-rup, he passes away displaying all the powers of Bhagvãn. Passing away after becoming brahm-rup and displaying such powers, is only possible for bhaktas of Bhagvãn. It is not possible for any vimukh. In this way, Kãl, as well as the three mental states, determines the pleasantness and unpleasantness present at the time of death. 77.9 “However, even if a vimukh dies speaking normally, with the jãgrat state being prevalent, that does not imply in any way that he will attain kalyãn. Regardless of whether he dies pleasantly or unpleasantly, he will go only to Narak. Conversely, regardless of whether a bhakta of Bhagvãn speaks normally, babbles without making sense, or remains silent at the time of death, he definitely attains kalyãn. There is no doubt whatsoever in this fact. All bhaktas of Bhagvãn should realise this. Although a bhakta of Bhagvãn appears to be suffering pain when passing away, he actually experiences great bliss within due to the grace of Bhagvãn. So, even if at the time of his death a bhakta passes away babbling without making sense, there should be no doubts at all regarding his kalyãn.”

78.1 In the Samvat year 1876, on Ashãdh sud 3 [13th July, 1820], Swãmi Shree Sahajãnandji Mahãrãj was sitting on the veranda outside the west-facing rooms in front of the mandir of Shree Vãsudev-Nãrãyan in Dãdã Khãchar’s darbãr in Gadhadã. He was wearing a white khes, and had covered Himself with a white chãdar. He was also wearing a white pãgh on His head and a garland of white flowers around His neck. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 78.2 Shreeji Mahãrãj then said, “All sant, please listen. I wish to ask a question.” 78.3 The sants responded, “Please ask, Mahãrãj.” 78.4 Shreeji Mahãrãj asked, “If the eight influences of desh, kãl, kriyã, sang, mantra, dhyãn, dikshã, and shãstras are pleasant, they purify a person’s mind. However, if these eight influences are unpleasant, they pollute a person’s mind. But, do the sanskãrs of the karmas performed in past lives have any influence on these eight factors?” 78.5 The munis answered, “It seems that the karmas of past lives do play a role. If a person’s past karmas are pleasant, he is born in a pleasant desh. However, if the past karmas are unpleasant, he is born in an unpleasant desh. In the same way, the other seven factors are also determined by past karmas. Therefore, past karmas appear to play a major role in all of them. The eight influences may be predominant in certain circumstances, but past karmas are predominant in all circumstances.” 78.6 Shreeji Mahãrãj then questioned, “From what principle in the shãstras do you claim that past karmas play the predominant role among all the eight influences? Please quote any reference from the shãstras. After all, only in the Jain shãstras, and not in any other, does a person find the predominance of only karmas. Other shãstras explain only the predominance of the sang of Bhagvãn and His bhaktas. Moreover, because you support the predominance of only past karmas, are you truly nãstiks superficially disguised as satsangis, or what? This is because no one except the nãstiks promote the predominance of karmas. They believe the Veds, the shãstras, the Purãns, and the Mahãbhãrat, and other historical shãstras, to be false. They only accept their own shãstras, written in the Mãgdhi dialect, as authentic. Therefore, it is only out of foolishness that they only promote past karmas. 78.7 “If the eight influences vary according to past karmas, then why has the hundred-feet-deep underground water not risen to the surface for the many religious kings who have been born in the region of Marvad? If the influence of desh was controlled by past karmas, then the water-table should rise for people who have performed good deeds, and fall for sinners. However, this is not the case, because in the region of Marvad, both sinners and religious people suffer from the problem of water being found deep underground. In reality, each desh does not lose its natural characteristics. Therefore, the eight influences do not vary according to past karmas. 78.8 “Therefore, a person who desires his own kalyãn should not uphold the predominance of karmas in the way that nãstiks do. If the eight influences are unpleasant, he should abandon them and seek only pleasant influences. 78.9 “Moreover, just as pleasant and unpleasant desh exist outside the body, a person’s body can also be a pleasant or unpleasant desh. If the desh (the body) is pleasant when the jeev resides within it, then kalyãn-kãri qualities such as nobility, contentment, compassion, and dharma, develop. However, if the desh (the body) is unpleasant when the jeev resides within it, then flaws such as kãm, krodh, lobh, moh, mad, and matsar develop instead. 78.10 “Also, pleasant and unpleasant sang should be distinguished as follows: When no distance remains between a person and the sang he keeps, this is known as true sang. Outwardly, even enemies embrace each other, yet their hearts are hundreds of thousands of miles apart. Such outward sang cannot be called sang. Only sang that is kept by thought, word, and deed, can be called sang. A person should keep such sang – by thought, word, and deed – only with Bhagvãn or His bhaktas, as it leads to the kalyãn of a person’s jeev. However, a person should never keep the sang of a sinner.” 78.11 Then, at midday, Shreeji Mahãrãj called all the young, student sãdhus and requested, “All of you student sãdhus, please ask me questions.” 78.12 Motã Shivãnand Swãmi then asked, “How can a person who has firm nishchay in Bhagvãn, be recognised?” 78.13 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “A person with firm nishchay in Bhagvãn regards all actions performed by Bhagvãn as kalyãn-kãri, whether they are good or bad. In fact, however many countless kinds of kriyã a faithful bhakta witnesses, whether Bhagvãn wins or loses or runs away, or whether He shows pleasure or grief, he says, ‘All kriyãs of Bhagvãn are for the sake of kalyãn’. If a bhakta speaks only in this way whenever he speaks, then he should be known to have absolute nishchay in Bhagvãn.” 78.14 Then, Nirmanãnand Swãmi asked, “How can a person prevent the development of a fault-finding attitude towards Bhagvãn and His sãdhus?” 78.15 Shreeji Mahãrãj answered, “If a person possesses the previously mentioned firm nishchay in Bhagvãn, then he never develops a fault-finding attitude towards Bhagvãn. Furthermore, when he thinks of the greatness of the dãs of such a great Bhagvãn, he never perceives faults in the bhaktas of Bhagvãn either.” 78.16 Then, Nirmanãnand Swãmi and Nãnã Pragnãnand Swãmi both asked, “How can a person see the murti of Bhagvãn in all the three mental states of jãgrat, svapna, and sushupti?” 78.17 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “If the pure sanskãrs from a person’s previous lives are powerful, then he can constantly see the murti of Bhagvãn in all three states. If a person, who continuously experiences fear, lust, or love for something, can see objects other than Bhagvãn constantly in all three states, then what is surprising about being able to see Bhagvãn constantly as well? He can definitely be seen.” 78.18 Nãnã Shivãnand Swãmi then asked, “How can a person with a stable foundation in satsang be recognised? That is the first question. The second question is: How can the enemies, like mãn, kãm, krodh, lobh, mad, matsar, and irshyã, be destroyed?” 78.19 Shreeji Mahãrãj explained, “A person who is absolutely loyal to satsang cannot at all tolerate someone speaking unkindly of satsang. For example, even though a person may have had a disagreement with a member of his family, he would be unable to tolerate anyone speaking unkindly of them. Therefore, just as a person is loyal to his relatives, if a person is similarly loyal to satsang, then his foundation in satsang is stable. 78.20 “The answer to the second question is as follows: If a person has such loyalty for satsang, how can he possibly hold mãn or irshyã towards sant or satsangis? Therefore, all the inner enemies, like mãn, mad, matsar, and irshyã, of a person who is loyal to satsang are destroyed. However, if a person does not have this loyalty for satsangis, and regards satsangis and kusangis as equal, then however highly he may be regarded in satsang, he is sure to become a vimukh.” 78.21 Then, Nãnã Ãtmãnand Swãmi asked, “Bhagvãn and His sant may boldly tell someone whatever needs to be said, with the belief, ‘Whether he is praised or lectured, he will not fall from satsang in any way’. How can a person earn this trust of Bhagvãn and His sant? That is one question. The second question is: How can a person win the love of all the sãdhus, just as he has won the love of the sãdhu he is presently staying with?” 78.22 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “As in the answer to Shivãnand Swãmi’s question, if a person is extremely loyal to satsang, Bhagvãn and His sant do not hesitate in lecturing him. They never lack faith in him, and they never feel, ‘If he is lectured, he will leave satsang’. Instead, they have firm faith and believe, ‘His satsang is firm, and so there is no danger in lecturing him’. 78.23 “The answer to the second question is: He may leave the person he was previously staying with because he was unable to get along with him, and subsequently go and stay with another person. Despite this, he is unable to tolerate others speaking unkindly of the person he originally stayed with. Therefore, all the sãdhus feel, ‘This person is not ungrateful. He is a very good sãdhu because he has not forgotten that he is thankful to the person from whom he has learnt even a little’. Realising this, all the sãdhus like him. On the other hand, if he speaks unkindly of the person he originally stayed with, all the sãdhus feel, ‘This person is ungrateful. In the future, if he does not get along with any of us, he will surely speak unkindly of us too’. As a result, no one likes him.” 78.24 Then, Daharãnand Swãmi asked, “Bhagvãn is greater than Akshar, mind and speech, and He is invisible to all. Then, why can everyone see Him as pratyaksha?” 78.25 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “Bhagvãn – who is beyond Akshar, mind and speech, and who is invisible – Himself, out of compassion, decides, ‘May all the enlightened and unenlightened people in Mrutyu-Lok see me’. Having decided this, Bhagvãn, who will always prevail, becomes visible to all people in Mrutyu-Lok out of compassion.” 78.26 Tyãgãnand Swãmi then asked, “How is Bhagvãn pleased?” 78.27 Shreeji Mahãrãj answered, “A person who wants to please Bhagvãn should not wish for bodily comforts. He should not even crave for the darshan of Bhagvãn. To do exactly as Bhagvãn commands, is the only way to please Bhagvãn.” 78.28 Then, Lakshmanãnand Swãmi asked, “With what understanding is a person able to feel the wonder of having attained the profound association of Bhagvãn and His sãdhus? Also, how can he feel joyful all day and night?” 78.29 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “A bhakta realises, ‘This Bhagvãn and these sãdhus all reside in Vaikunth, Golok, and Brahmpur. In fact, all of those dhãms are present wherever Bhagvãn and these sãdhus reside. Therefore, I am extremely fortunate in that I am able to stay in the presence of these sãdhus’. If he understands this, then he will experience happiness all day and night, and will sway in an ocean of bliss throughout the day.” 78.30 Paramãtmãnand Swãmi then asked, “How can a person acquire the thirty characteristics of a sãdhu described in the eleventh skandh of the Shreemad Bhãgvat?” 78.31 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “A person who regards a sant, who possesses the thirty characteristics, as a guru and as a dev, and associates with him by thought, word, and deed, acquires those thirty characteristics. In fact, all the shãstras state, ‘When a person serves a sant, he becomes like the sant’.” 78.32 Then, Shãntãnand Swãmi asked, “There is one bhakta who constantly maintains his vrutti on the svarup of Bhagvãn. There is another bhakta who engages in bhajan and smaran, and also listens to and engages in kathã and kirtans of Bhagvãn. Which bhakta of Bhagvãn is the better of the two?” 78.33 Shreeji Mahãrãj explained, “A person who experiences nirvikalp samãdhi and is not conscious of his body, is the better of the two, even if he does not engage in kathã and kirtans of Bhagvãn. Also, there may be someone who is conscious of his body and gets up from worship of his own accord to eat, drink, and perform all bodily activities, and still does not listen to or engage in the kathã and kirtans of Bhagvãn. In comparison to him, a person who does listen to kathãs and kirtans is better.” 78.34 Ãdhãrãnand Swãmi then asked, “How should we behave so that Bhagvãn and His sant become pleased?” 78.35 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “If we strictly follow the panch-vartmãn, and do not allow any sort of failure in following them, Bhagvãn and His sant will be pleased. There is not even the slightest doubt about this.” 78.36 Then, Vedãntãnand Swãmi asked, “If a person has previously behaved improperly, what can a person do to please Bhagvãn and His sant?” 78.37 Shreeji Mahãrãj answered, “Bhagvãn and His sant become displeased upon seeing impure svabhãvs within a person. When we develop a hate towards those svabhãvs, a sant also realises this. This is because whenever a person has hatred towards someone, the whole world knows. As a result of this, a sant, who himself is also an enemy of those svabhãvs, sides with us and imparts compassion upon us, showing us the way to conquer those svabhãvs by whichever means possible. 78.38 “Therefore, after developing a bitter hatred towards root svabhãvs that has led to a person’s disgrace, he should adopt a method that would totally remove it. When we behave in this way, Bhagvãn and His sant shower total compassion upon us. Whenever Bhagvãn and His sant shower their compassion, a person continues to experience extreme bliss within his heart. Also, a person’s ability to walk on the path of kalyãn increases, and the strength of his enemies, such as kãm, krodh and lobh, decreases. Therefore, Bhagvãn does help a person who keeps intense hatred towards that bitter enemy which causes distress within his heart, which is why it is necessary to have hatred for the enemies, like kãm and krodh. It is therefore very beneficial to develop hatred towards his enemies.” 78.39 Then, Bhagvadãnand Swãmi asked, “Mahãrãj, just as a person fears Bhagvãn when he is near Him, what understanding should a person have so that he fears Bhagvãn just as much when he is far from Him?” 78.40 Shreeji Mahãrãj explained, “Just as a person maintains the respect of Bhagvãn when He is near, the same respect remains when He is far if he thoroughly understands the greatness of Bhagvãn. The greatness should be understood as follows: ‘Purushottam Bhagvãn – who is greater than Akshar; by whose wish, countless millions of brahmãnds are created, and then supported by His powers; who is vyatirek, yet is present within everything as anvay, and while being anvay, is also vyatirek from everything; who dwells within each and every atom in His antaryãmi svarup just as He is in His pratyaksha svarup; without whose wish, not even a blade of grass is able to move; who is responsible for creating, sustaining, and destroying countless millions of brahmãnds; who administers pain and pleasure to the beings residing in these brahmãnds; who is the sole doer of all that happens – incarnates on this earth for the kalyãn of the jeevs. 78.41 “‘However, when that very Bhagvãn mounts a horse, it appears that the horse is carrying Him. But in reality, it is Bhagvãn who is the upholder of the horse. Furthermore, when Bhagvãn sits on the earth, it seems that the earth is supporting Bhagvãn, but in reality, it is Bhagvãn who supports the entire earth along with its sthãvar and jangam forms of life. 78.42 “‘At night, the light of the moon, an oil lamp, or a torch allows a person to have the darshan of Bhagvãn. During the day, the light of the sun allows a person to have the darshan of Bhagvãn. In reality, however, it is that Bhagvãn who provides light to the sun, the moon, and the flames of fire. These are the magnificent powers of Bhagvãn. Despite this, Bhagvãn has become like a human for the sake of the kalyãn of the jeevs, and He is giving darshan to me’. If a person understands the greatness of Bhagvãn in this way, then he can keep the same respect for Bhagvãn when he is far from Him as when he is near Him.” 78.43 Bhagvadãnand Swãmi then asked another question: “Nothing happens without Bhagvãn’s will. Everything that happens is all the work of Bhagvãn alone. So, when Bhagvãn or His bhaktas encounter difficulties, why does He not ease their distress? Why does He wish to increase their distress?” 78.44 Shreeji Mahãrãj explained, “When Bhagvãn assumes a human svarup, it is normal for Him to behave in absolutely the same way as humans do, and not reveal His alokik powers. This is how all the charitras of Bhagvãn are described in the shãstras. Therefore, a person may only have doubts when Bhagvãn exhibits new charitras. But, as long as the charitras of Bhagvãn are like those performed by the previous avatãrs, there should be no doubts in a person’s mind.” 78.45 Then, Nirmalãnand Swãmi asked, “What understanding is required to thoroughly realise the greatness of a sant of Bhagvãn?” 78.46 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “When a person thinks about the greatness of Matsya, Kurma, Varãh, Vãman, Parshurãm, Rãm, Krishna, and the countless avatãrs of Bhagvãn, and thinks, ‘Bhagvãn has freed countless jeevs through Rãm, Krishna, and other avatars, and I am extremely fortunate that I have attained the profound association of a sant of that very Bhagvãn’, he begins to thoroughly realise the greatness of the sant day by day.” 78.47 Then, Nãrãyanãnand Swãmi asked, “How is the jeev anvay with the three bodies of sthul, sukshma, and kãran, and how is it vyatirek from them?” 78.48 Shreeji Mahãrãj answered, “When the body encounters pleasures and pain, and the jeev takes on that pleasure and pain upon itself, the jeev is anvay with the three bodies. When it believes itself to be distinct from the pleasures and pain of the three bodies, then the jeev is vyatirek from them.” 78.49 Shunyãtitãnand Swãmi then asked, “When a person initially practices satsang, he has deep love for sant and satsangis. But, why does this love later decline?” 78.50 Shreeji Mahãrãj explained, “Initially, he holds very high respect for a sant. Later, when he perceives a minor avgun in the sant, he regards it as a minor avgun because of his own malicious mind. As a result, his vicious nature flourishes, and his respect for the sant declines. Then, if he thoughtfully eradicates this vicious nature, he becomes as pure as he was before. However, if he does not do so, he will ultimately become a vimukh.” 78.51 Prasãdãnand Swãmi then asked, “What is the cause of the jeev’s moksh?” 78.52 Shreeji Mahãrãj answered, “To do exactly as a sant says without having any doubts, is the only cause of the jeev’s moksh.” 78.53 Then, Trigunãtitãnand Swãmi asked, “What methods should a person adopt when faced with unpleasant desh, kãl, kriyã, and sang?” 78.54 Shreeji Mahãrãj explained, “The only way to overcome unpleasant desh, kãl, kriyã, and sang, is to escape from them by any means possible.” 78.55 Nãnã Nirvikãrãnand Swãmi then asked, “Despite having nishchay in Bhagvãn, why is a person’s vãsnã not eradicated?” 78.56 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “A person’s vãsnã is not eradicated because he has not fully realised the greatness of Bhagvãn.” 78.57 Then, Motã Yogãnand Swãmi asked, “Despite having perfect nishchay in Bhagvãn, why does a person still not develop love for Bhagvãn and the kathãs of Bhagvãn?” 78.58 Shreeji Mahãrãj explained, “It is because he has not yet realised the greatness of Bhagvãn as it is. If a person thoroughly realises the greatness of Bhagvãn, then he does not develop love for anything else besides Bhagvãn, even if he tries. In addition, he develops constant love only for Bhagvãn, His sant, and the kathãs and kirtans of Bhagvãn.” 78.59 Then, Pratoshãnand Swãmi asked, “How can a person’s bhakti towards Bhagvãn remain constant?” 78.60 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “If a person thoroughly understands the greatness of pratyaksha Shree Krishna Purushottam – who is the cause of the four avatãrs of Aniruddha, Pradyumna, Sankarshan, and Vãsudev, and who is the cause of the twenty-four avatãrs – then he remains steady in the nine types of bhakti towards Bhagvãn, like smaran and kirtan.” 78.61 After answering the questions of all the munis in this way, Shreeji Mahãrãj asked them all, “Kãm, krodh, and lobh are the three gateways to Narak. All of you please reveal if you have thoroughly conquered any of these.” 78.62 The munis then spoke about the ones they had conquered. Hearing this from the munis, Shreeji Mahãrãj became extremely pleased. After happily imprinting His holy feet on the chests of Ãtmãnand Swãmi, Yogãnand Swãmi, Bhagvadãnand Swãmi, and Shivãnand Swãmi, He added, “Just as Mahãnubhavãnand Swãmi and the others, are senior munis, these four munis should also be considered senior along with them. Therefore, do not allow anyone to insult them.” 78.63 Having advised Muktãnand Swãmi and the other senior sãdhus in this way, Shreeji Mahãrãj bid “Jay Sachidãnand” to everyone and returned to His residence for His meal.” End of Shree Gadhadã Pratham Prakaran ||