1.1 In the Samvat year 1877, on Shrãvan vad 5 [28th August, 1820], Swãmi Shree Sahajãnandji Mahãrãj was sitting on the veranda outside the north-facing rooms of Jeevã Khãchar’s darbãr in Sãrangpur. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 1.2 Then, Muktãnand Swãmi asked a question: “The shlok ‘jitam jagat ken mano hee yen’ explains that a person who has conquered the mind has conquered the whole world. But, how can a person know whether the mind has been conquered?” 1.3 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “When the indriyas withdraw from the panch-vishays (shabda, sparsh, rup, ras, and gandh) and no desire to indulge in those vishays remains, then all the indriyas are said to be conquered. Also, when the indriyas do not come into contact with the vishays, the mind also does not come into contact with the indriyas, and its vrutti remains within the heart. In this way, a person who has rejected the panch-vishays with absolute determination should be known as having conquered his mind. But, if a person does have some love for the vishays, then even if he has conquered his mind, it should not be known as having been conquered.” 1.4 Again, Muktãnand Swãmi asked, “Can the vishays be defeated by vairãgya, or are they defeated by love for Bhagvãn?” 1.5 Shreeji Mahãrãj explained, “One way to defeat the vishays is ãtmã-nishthã, and the other is the realisation of Bhagvãn coupled with the knowledge of His greatness. Specifically, ãtmã-nishthã should be of the following type: ‘I am chaitanya, while the body is jad; I am pure, whereas the body is impure; I am imperishable, while the body is perishable; I am the embodiment of bliss, whereas the body is the embodiment of misery’. In this way, when a person realises the ãtmã to be totally distinct from the body in every way, he will never consider himself to be the body nor will he have love for the vishays. That is how the vishays are restrained through knowledge of the ãtmã. 1.6 “Also, a person should think of the greatness of Bhagvãn in the following way: ‘I am the ãtmã, while pratyaksha Bhagvãn, whom I have attained, is Paramãtmã. I have attained Shree Purushottam Bhagvãn in person, the very Purushottam Bhagvãn who is the lord of Golok, Vaikunth, Shvet-Dvip, and Brahmpur, as well as the master of Brahmã and the other devs, who themselves are the lords of countless millions of brahmãnds. That Paramãtmã forever resides in my ãtmã. I would discard all of my pleasures for the vishays of countless millions of brahmãnds, just for one second of darshan of that Bhagvãn. Moreover, if a person were to gather together all the pleasures of the vishays of countless millions of brahmãnds, even then it would not equal even one millionth of a fraction of the bliss which is present in just one pore of Bhagvãn. In fact, in the Moksh-Dharma, it is said that the loks of the other devs are like Narak, compared to the Akshardhãm of Bhagvãn. It is that very Bhagvãn whom I have attained in His pratyaksha svarup. So how can I possibly discard Him and wish for the pleasures of the vishays, which are like the pits of Narak? The pleasures of the vishays are nothing but the embodiment of misery’. So, the vishays can be restrained by realising Bhagvãn’s greatness in this way. 1.7 “The vairãgya generated by knowledge of ãtmã and Paramãtmã is such that it eradicates desires of the pleasures of all vishays. A person who has rejected the pleasures of the vishays by developing an understanding in this way, never again develops love for the vishays. Only such a person’s mind can be said to be conquered. 1.8 “Without this understanding, it may appear that a person has love, but when he encounters an appealing vishay, he abandons Bhagvãn and develops love for that object. Or, if he develops love for his son or wife, or he suffers an illness, or the pleasures of the vishays disappear, then his love for Bhagvãn decreases, and he becomes confused. Just as a dog’s puppy appears cute when it is young, the bhakti of such a person initially appears to be good, but ultimately it does not remain appealing.”

2.1 In the Samvat year 1877, on Shrãvan vad 6 [29th August, 1820], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting facing north, on a decorated bedstead which had been placed on the veranda outside the north-facing rooms of Jeevã Khãchar’s darbãr in Sãrangpur. He was wearing a white khes and had tied a white pãgh around His head. He had also covered Himself with a white pachhedi. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 2.2 Then, addressing the munis, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “Please begin a question-answer discussion amongst yourselves.” 2.3 Svayamprakãshãnand Swãmi then asked, “How can a bhakta of Bhagvãn develop intense love for the murti of Bhagvãn?” 2.4 The munis then attempted to answer the question amongst themselves, but were unable to give a precise answer. 2.5 So, Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “Love can develop due to beauty, due to lust, due to greed, due to some selfish motives, or due to the other person’s qualities. Of these, love which stems from beauty lasts only until a person sees the disfigurement caused by leprosy in the other person’s body, or until the person develops leukoderma. After that, the love which once existed would dissolve. In the same way, love stemming from greed, lust, and selfishness also eventually dissolves. However, love developed due to the other person’s qualities, ultimately survives.” 2.6 Then, Somlã Khãchar asked Shreeji Mahãrãj, “Which qualities are these? Are they external ones, or internal ones?” 2.7 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “How is it possible to develop love due to external qualities? To be more precise, it is love stemming from the qualities of the person’s speech, thoughts, and deeds, which does not dissolve. Now, are you asking only about a bhakta developing love for Bhagvãn? Or, are you also asking about Bhagvãn developing love for the bhakta?” 2.8 Svayamprakãshãnand Swãmi clarified, “We are asking about both.” 2.9 Shreeji Mahãrãj then began to explain by saying, “A person should not hurt any living being with his speech. Also, during a question-answer discussion where principles are being debated with Bhagvãn and a senior sãdhu, those who are junior should give in to those who are senior. Also, in a sabhã, he should not ask questions that may embarrass a sãdhu who is senior to himself. Instead, he should purposely accept defeat before Bhagvãn and a senior sãdhu, regardless of whether it seems appropriate or inappropriate. Of these, he would not doubt an appropriate ãgnã. But, even if it seems inappropriate and leads to doubts, he should not refuse to abide by it, at least at that time. He should certainly agree and say, ‘Mahãrãj, I will do just as you say’. If that ãgnã is such that he cannot accept it, and if it is the wish of Bhagvãn and a senior sãdhu to hear his plea, then he should fold his hands before them and say with bhakti, ‘Mahãrãj, the ãgnã which you gave me is fine, but I have certain doubts about it’. In this way, he should speak modestly. However, if it is not really the wish of Bhagvãn to hear his plea, then he should say to a senior sãdhu or a bhakta who is close to Him, ‘Although Bhagvãn has given such an ãgnã, I simply cannot accept it’. Then, the senior sãdhu would find a compromise regarding that ãgnã. However, regardless of whether the ãgnã seems appropriate or inappropriate, he should not immediately refuse to abide by it. He should use politeness to delay the following of the ãgnã given by those who are senior, but when initially told, he should not immediately refuse. This is how a person should behave regarding the qualities of speech. As a result, Bhagvãn and the senior sãdhu develop love for that bhakta, and the bhakta also develops strong love towards Bhagvãn. 2.10 “Next, how should a person behave physically? Well, if his body seems to be hyperactive, he should weaken it by engaging in bhajan or by keeping the chãndrãyan vrat. Then, on noticing this, it is well and good if Bhagvãn or a senior sãdhu takes care of his body. However, he should knowingly take care of his own body. Also, he should physically serve Bhagvãn and His bhaktas. When Bhagvãn or a great sãdhu notices a person behaving in this way physically, they develop love for him, and that bhakta also develops love for Bhagvãn. 2.11 “Now, I shall describe the way in which a person should behave regarding the qualities of the mind. When a bhakta does darshan of Bhagvãn, he should do so with a focused mind and concentrated vision. Instead, when a person, or a dog, or some other animals, or a bird, disturbs him while he is performing darshan of Bhagvãn, then his vrutti is broken from Bhagvãn’s darshan. He begins to glance here and there, up and down, and also see them at the same time. Bhagvãn and the senior sãdhus are not at all pleased upon seeing a person with such wandering vision. 2.12 “When such a bhakta does perform darshan, how does he do it? Well, he does it just as any ordinary person does. A person who has such an ordinary vision, should be known to be like a squirrel that squeaks and raises its tail at the same time. He performs darshan of Bhagvãn and notices other objects at the same time. When he begins to perform darshan in such an ordinary way, he does not remain as devout as he previously was, and he declines day by day. Therefore, while performing darshan of Bhagvãn a person should not look from side to side. 2.13 “The novelty and divinity experienced in a person’s heart at the time of the first darshan of Bhagvãn, should remain exactly the same. Moreover, he should look at the murti with a fixed gaze, and then closing his eyes, he should internalise that murti, exactly as it, is in his heart. For example, in Dharmapur, Kushalkunvar-Bãi did my darshan, and at the same time, closed her eyes and internalised the murti in her heart. Similarly, a person should perform darshan with an attentive mind and a fixed gaze, but he should not perform darshan as other ordinary people do. If, along with the darshan of Bhagvãn, he also looks at the other people, or cats, or dogs, then when he has a dream, he sees not only Bhagvãn, but also those other objects. That is why a person should perform darshan of Bhagvãn with a fixed gaze, and not with a wandering gaze. 2.14 “A person who performs darshan of Bhagvãn while keeping his sight under control, will feel that darshan to be continually new. In addition, he would also feel any ãgnã that Bhagvãn may have given, to be new. On the other hand, a person who performs darshan superficially, with a ordinary vision, would feel Bhagvãn’s darshan and ãgnã to be ordinary. Although he may perform darshan every day, for such a person it is as if he has not performed darshan at all. When such a person engages in bhajan, his mind would not remain stable. Specifically, when he attempts to concentrate on Bhagvãn while his thinking is dispersed, other objects he may have seen would spontaneously come into his mind, along with Bhagvãn. Therefore, a person should perform darshan only of Bhagvãn. The mind of this person remains only on Bhagvãn during bhajan and smaran. His thinking does not become dispersed. Instead, it becomes concentrated. 2.15 “Furthermore, I am able to determine when a person is performing darshan with wandering eyes. A great sãdhu whose own sight and mind are kept under control also realises, ‘This person is performing darshan in a superficial way’. A person who performs darshan in such an ordinary way, then begins to decline from satsang day by day. 2.16 “For example, a man who is overcome by kãm fixes his gaze on a beautiful woman with a focused mind. At that time, if some animal or bird were to pass by or make a noise, he would not notice it. In the same way, a person should attach himself to Bhagvãn with a similarly focused gaze, but he should not perform darshan in an ordinary way.” 2.17 Then, Nirvikãrãnand Swãmi raised a doubt, “Mahãrãj, we have to travel and speak to people all over the country. As a result, our mind does not remain concentrated.” 2.18 In reply, Shreeji Mahãrãj questioned, “I have given an ãgnã for you to speak to people, but when have I ever given an ãgnã for you to ignore the darshan of this murti and perform darshan of other things?” 2.19 Having said this, Mahãrãj continued, “The same divinity that a person feels when he has darshan of the murti of Bhagvãn for the first time, can be retained if he keeps his mind and gaze fixed on Bhagvãn. So, when he behaves in this way, in accordance with the qualities of the mind mentioned previously, then the love that Bhagvãn has for that bhakta remains renewed. Moreover, the love which that bhakta has towards Bhagvãn also constantly remains renewed. 2.20 “Also, both the eyes and ears should especially be kept under control. This is because worldly talks are prevalent everywhere. If a person is attracted towards them through the vrutti of the ears, and he listens to them, then all of those worldly words would be recalled when he attempts to engage himself in bhajan. Furthermore, anything seen by a person who has a wandering gaze, is also recalled during bhajan. That is why both of these indriyas should be kept strictly under control. However, while performing darshan of Bhagvãn’s murti, if the vrutti of person’s eyes and ears leaves the murti aside and is attracted towards other things, he should lecture them, by saying, ‘O fools! What are you going to achieve by looking at svarups other than Bhagvãn, and by listening to words other than the talks of Bhagvãn? As of yet, you have not attained siddh-dashã where you can instantly receive whatever you wish. This is because you are still in the process of attaining siddh-dashã. As a result, you are not going to be able to obtain those vishays that you desire. So, why are you pointlessly grasping for them and leaving Bhagvãn aside? Moreover, even if you were to attain some insignificant vishay, then due to the sin incurred as a result, there will be no end to the beatings you will receive in Yampuri’. In this way, a person should tell off his eyes and ears. 2.21 “A person should also tell them, ‘When you become stabilised in the murti of Bhagvãn, you will attain siddh-dashã in this very life. As a result, you will be able to naturally hear any talks occurring in any brahmãnd. If you desire to have a charming svarup like that of Brahmã, Vishnu, or Shiv, then you will be able to attain such a svarup. Or, if you wish, you will become a bhakta like Lakshmi or Rãdhikã. Moreover, while worshipping Bhagvãn, if you do not attain siddh-dashã in this very life, you will attain siddh-dashã after death when you become a mukta. However, without attaining siddh-dashã, even if you constantly look at some beautiful object until you die, you will still not be able to attain that beauty; and even if you listen to worldly talks until you die, you will still not attain anything. Instead, your mind will become extremely polluted by it’. In this way, a person should advise his eyes and ears, and keep them fixed only on the murti of Bhagvãn. A person, who behaves in this way, increasingly develops love for the murti of Bhagvãn day by day. As a result, Bhagvãn’s love and the great sãdhu’s love for that bhakta, also increases day by day.”

3.1 In the Samvat year 1877, on the evening of Shrãvan vad 7 [30th August, 1820], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting on a decorated bedstead on the veranda outside the rooms of Jeevã Khãchar’s darbãr in Sãrangpur. He was wearing a white khes and had tied a white pãgh around His head. He had also covered Himself with a black-bordered khes. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 3.2 Svayamprakãshãnand Swãmi then asked Shreeji Mahãrãj a question: “Mahãrãj, suppose there is a bhakta who physically performs pujã of pratyaksha Bhagvãn with various types pujã items. Also, suppose there is another bhakta who performs mãnsi pujã of Bhagvãn using various imaginary items. Of the two, which bhakta is better?” 3.3 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “If a person lovingly performs pujã of Bhagvãn, with hair-raising sentiments and an emotion-filled voice, then regardless of whether he performs physical pujã or mãnsi pujã, both are superior. On the other hand, if he performs pujã mechanically – without feeling love or excitement, and without showing emotion in his voice – then regardless of whether he performs physical pujã of Bhagvãn or mãnsi pujã of Bhagvãn, both are inferior.” 3.4 Then, Somlã Khãchar asked, “By what characteristics can a person recognise a bhakta who becomes overwhelmed with love while performing physical pujã or mãnsi pujã of Bhagvãn?” 3.5 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “Such a person has intense shraddhã in performing the pujã of Bhagvãn and serving Him, in listening to kathãs and talks related to Bhagvãn, and in singing kirtans. He also understands the profound greatness of Bhagvãn. With each passing day, both of these two aspects remain renewed, but never diminish. For example, Muktãnand Swãmi’s shraddhã and understanding of Bhagvãn’s greatness are exactly the same today and just as new as they were when I first saw him in Lojpur. They have not diminished in any way whatsoever. In the same way, such a bhakta should be recognised by these two characteristics. 3.6 “All the Yãdavs who stayed with Shree Krishna Bhagvãn, did not have such shraddhã or understanding of Bhagvãn’s greatness. They served Him just like they would serve other kings. Therefore, they did not achieve fame and are not even regarded as bhaktas. On the other hand, Uddhavji served Shree Krishna Bhagvãn with shraddhã and an understanding of His greatness, and therefore he has been described as a great bhakta of Bhagvãn and has been extremely renowned in the shãstras and in the world.” 3.7 Then, Nirvikãrãnand Swãmi asked, “Mahãrãj, what are shravan, manan, nididhyãs, and sãkshãtkãr?” 3.8 Shreeji Mahãrãj explained, “To listen to a talk through the ears, is known as shravan. Then, after hearing the talk, to mentally think over the talk, and to discard parts of the talk which are not needed and to retain the parts of the talk which are useful, is known as manan. Then, after having mentally retained the talk with nishchay, the practice of continuously recalling the talk day and night is known as nididhyãs. Finally, when that talk is recalled exactly as it was, with absolute clarity and sincerity, it is known as sãkshãtkãr. 3.9 “If a person engages in shravan, manan, and nididhyãs about the svarup of the ãtmã, then he will attain sãkshãtkãr of the ãtmã. Furthermore, if a person engages in shravan, manan, and nididhyãs of Bhagvãn, then he will attain sãkshãtkãr of Bhagvãn. Sãkshãtkãr cannot be attained by doing shravan alone, without practicing both manan and nididhyãs. 3.10 “If a person does not practice manan and nididhyãs following the darshan of Bhagvãn’s murti, then even if he performs darshan for thousands of years, he will not attain sãkshãtkãr of that murti. This is because this kind of darshan is like having done only shravan. On the other hand, if a person has had darshan of Bhagvãn’s entire body, and has then done manan and nididhyãs of all the parts of His body, then he will be able to easily recall those parts even today. Conversely, a person who has performed only darshan of Bhagvãn’s body would be unable to recall it, even if he attempted to recall it. 3.11 “Also, there are some bhaktas who say, ‘We sit in meditation and try very hard to recall Mahãrãj’s murti, yet we cannot visualise even a single part. Then, how can we possibly envision the whole murti?’ The reason for this is the same as above – they merely perform darshan of the murti, without doing manan and nididhyãs. So, how can it be visualised? After all, if a person has merely seen even a worldly object with his eyes, or merely listened to it with his ears, and it is not later mentally recalled, it will be forgotten. Then, how can he expect to remember the murti of Bhagvãn, which is divya and not worldly, without doing manan and nididhyãs? 3.12 “Therefore, if a person continuously engages in manan and nididhyãs after performing darshan of Bhagvãn and listening to His talks, then he will attain sãkshãtkãr of them. Otherwise, even if he performs darshan and shravan for the rest of his life, he will still not attain sãkshãtkãr.”

4.1 In the Samvat year 1877, on Shrãvan vad 8 [31st August, 1820], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting facing north on a decorated bedstead on the veranda outside the rooms of Jeevã Khãchar’s darbãr in Sãrangpur. He was wearing a white khes, and had tied a white pãgh around His head. He had covered Himself with a white pachhedi. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 4.2 Svayamprakãshãnand Swãmi then asked a question: “Mahãrãj, how should a person clearly understand the distinction between the ãtmã and non-ãtmã, which will never cause him to mistake ãtmã and non-ãtmã to be one?” 4.3 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “That which is understood clearly is beneficial – whether it is understood by one verse, or by two verses, or by five verses, or by a hundred verses, or even by a thousand verses. So, once a person has developed such a clear understanding, no misconception remains about the ãtmã and non-ãtmã being one. Furthermore, only such clear understanding leads to happiness, whereas a foolish understanding does not lead to happiness. Therefore, a person should clearly understand, ‘I am the ãtmã, and not a single one of my characteristics can be found in the body. Also, not one of the characteristics of the body – which is jad, full of misery, and perishable – can be found in me, since I am chaitanya’. After making such a distinction and becoming totally free of worldly desires, a person should believe himself to be chaitanya and then think of Purushottam Bhagvãn. Distinguishing between that which is jad and that which is chaitanya in this way should be known as true wisdom. 4.4 “However, a person who believes himself to be the ãtmã for a while, but then believes himself to be the body for a while and fantasises about women, should be known as a fool. He will not experience happiness in his heart. For example, there may be some delicious food which is comparable to amrut , but if just a small amount of poison were to be mixed with it, then that food would never give a person pleasure, but would in fact lead to misery. In the same way, a person may think of that ãtmã all day, but if he believes himself to be the body and fantasises about women, even for just a moment, then all of his thoughts are useless. Therefore, a person should think only of the ãtmã, so he can become totally free of worldly desires. 4.5 “Now, someone may doubt: ‘What will become of me if I do not become totally free of worldly desires and happen to die in that imperfect state?’ Well, a bhakta of Bhagvãn should never think like that. Instead, he should realise, ‘If anything dies, it is this body. But as I am that ãtmã, which does not age and is immortal, I will never die’. Having developed such an understanding, he should maintain courage, keep a firm mind, and discard all desires other than those of Bhagvãn. 4.6 “Then, in the process of eradicating worldly desires in this way, if a few desires do remain, he will attain the Naraks described in the Moksh-Dharma. Specifically, if a bhakta of Bhagvãn retains any desires for the world, then he attains the loks of Indra and other devs. After migrating to those loks, he experiences the pleasures of apsãrãs, heavenly vehicles, palaces decorated with jewels, and other luxuries – which are like Narak, in comparison to the dhãm of Bhagvãn. However, a bhakta of Bhagvãn does not go to Yampuri, like a vimukh, nor does he re-enter the cycle of births and deaths. 4.7 “Therefore, even if a bhakta of Bhagvãn has worldly desires, if nothing else, he will become a dev. Then, having become a dev, he will become a human again. As a human, after offering bhakti to Bhagvãn and becoming free of worldly desires, he will ultimately attain the dhãm of Bhagvãn. But, he will not have to suffer from the miseries of Narak or the cycle of births and deaths, like the vimukh. Bearing this in mind, a bhakta of Bhagvãn should not become discouraged on seeing the force of worldly desires. Instead, he should joyfully continue to worship Bhagvãn, continue in his attempts to eradicate his desires, and maintain absolute faith in the words of Bhagvãn and His sant.”

5.1 In the Samvat year 1877, on Shrãvan vad 9 [1st September, 1820], Swãmi Shree Sahajãnandji Mahãrãj was sitting on a decorated bedstead on the veranda outside the north-facing rooms of Jeevã Khãchar’s darbãr in Sãrangpur. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 5.2 Then, Muktãnand Swãmi asked a question: “Which method of eradicating worldly desires is so powerful that it alone incorporates all other methods?” 5.3 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “The worldly desires of a person will be eradicated, if he has the following four characteristics in his heart: shraddhã, faith in the words of Bhagvãn and His bhaktas, love for Bhagvãn, and the knowledge of the greatness of Bhagvãn’s svarup. Of these, if the knowledge of Bhagvãn’s greatness is extremely powerful and the other three – shraddhã, faith, and love – are weak, they will also become extremely powerful. On the other hand, although a person may appear to have intense bhakti, if it is not coupled with the knowledge of Bhagvãn’s greatness, it will ultimately be destroyed. For example, a ten-year-old girl who has contracted tuberculosis will certainly die before she matures into a young woman. Similarly, a person whose bhakti lacks the knowledge of Bhagvãn’s greatness will find that his bhakti will be destroyed before it matures. 5.4 “Furthermore, if a person has bhakti for Bhagvãn in his heart coupled with the knowledge of Bhagvãn’s greatness, then even though he does not possess any other kalyãn-kãri qualities, they will still develop in his heart. Conversely, if a person does not have bhakti in his heart coupled with the knowledge of Bhagvãn’s greatness, then even though he possesses kalyãn-kãri qualities, such as tranquillity and self-restraint, they are as good as being absent because they will ultimately be destroyed. 5.5 “Therefore, even if a person has only bhakti coupled with the knowledge of Bhagvãn’s greatness, his worldly desires will still be eradicated, and all the kalyãn-kãri qualities will develop and reside within his heart. Bhakti of Bhagvãn coupled with the knowledge of His greatness is the greatest and most reliable method to eradicate a person’s worldly desires.” 5.6 Then, Svayamprakãshãnand Swãmi asked, “What is the anvay nature of the jeev, and what is its vyatirek nature? What is the anvay nature of ishvar, and what is its vyatirek nature? How should Purushottam Bhagvãn be known in His anvay form, and how should He be known in His vyatirek form?” 5.7 Shreeji Mahãrãj explained, “When the jeev is said to experience births and deaths, that should be known as the jeev’s anvay form. When the jeev is said to be achhedhya, abhedhya, and avinãshi, that should be known as the jeev’s vyatirek form. 5.8 “When ishvar behaves as one with its three bodies of virãt, sutrãtmã, and avyãkrut, that should be known as the anvay form of ishvar. When ishvar is described as sachidãnand, and as greater than its body (the brahmãnd), that should be known as the vyatirek form of ishvar. 5.9 “The anvay form of Akshar is the inspirer of Prakruti-Purush and all the devs, such as Surya, and Chandra. The form in which there is not even a trace of the influence of Prakruti-Purush, and in which only Purushottam Bhagvãn resides, should be known as the vyatirek form of Akshar. 5.10 “The anvay form of Purushottam is that which resides in the hearts of both bound jeevs and released jeevs as their witness. However, He remains untouched by such states of bondage and release. In the same way, He also resides in the hearts of ishvars and Akshar as their witness, but He remains unaffected by their influence. The form that is greater than jeev, ishvar, and Akshar should be known as the vyatirek form of Purushottam. These are the anvay-vyatirek natures of the various entities.” 5.11 Again, Muktãnand Swãmi asked, “Does the importance of Bhagvãn’s darshan, the importance of chanting His holy name, and the importance of the touch of Bhagvãn, apply only to the bhaktas of Bhagvãn, or does it also apply to all beings?” 5.12 Shreeji Mahãrãj answered, “The modes of darshan are certainly different, so please listen as I explain them to you. When a person does darshan of Bhagvãn with his eyes coupled with his mind, then that darshan could not be forgotten, even if he tired to forget it. In the same way, if the skin is coupled with the mind when he touches Bhagvãn, then that touch will also not be forgotten. For example, the Shreemad Bhãgvat narrates the words spoken by the gopis to Bhagvãn: ‘O Bhagvãn! Since the day we touched your feet, all the pleasures of the world, apart from you, have seemed like poison to us’. Similarly, when all the gnãn-indriyas are coupled with the mind and are then engaged in darshan, listening, and touching, the experiences are never forgotten. 5.13 “To give another example, an ignorant person who indulges in the vishays when the five gnãn-indriyas are coupled with his mind, can never forget them, even if he wants to forget them. Similarly, only that darshan of Bhagvãn, and listening to the talks of Bhagvãn, which have been done with the mind engaged, should be known as darshan and listening. 5.14 “On the other hand, a person may do darshan, but it is as good as not having done darshan at all. This is because at the time he was doing darshan, his mind was wandering elsewhere. As a result, he will certainly forget that darshan within a day, or maybe within five days, or maybe within fifty days, or maybe within six months, or maybe after one year, or after five years; eventually, it will not remain. 5.15 “Therefore, only a person who engages the five gnãn-indriyas (eyes, ears, nose, tongue, skin) coupled with the mind, in the darshan and touch of Bhagvãn with intense love and the understanding of His greatness, attains the fruits of that darshan and touch. Others, who have the darshan and touch of Bhagvãn, attain only the seeds. However, the real importance applies only to those who engage in the darshan and touch, coupled with the mind.”

6.1 In the Samvat year 1877, on Shrãvan vad 10 [2nd September, 1820], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting on a decorated bedstead on the veranda outside the north-facing rooms of Jeevã Khãchar’s darbãr in Sãrangpur. 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, Nityãnand Swãmi asked, “How do the mental states remain within each of the other mental states?” 6.3 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “The ‘state’ is where the jeevãtmã dwells, when it indulges in the vishays. There are three types of mental states: jãgrat, svapna, and sushupti. 6.4 “Of these, the jãgrat state is the result of the sustenance state of Virãt-Purush. It is full of sattva-gun and is located in the region of the eyes. In that jãgrat state, the jeevãtmã is known as vishva. Moreover, with the consciousness of its sthul body, via the ten indriyas and the four antah-karans, the jeevãtmã appropriately and carefully indulges in the pleasures of the external vishays according to its past karmas. This is known as the jãgrat state, in which sattva-gun is predominant. 6.5 “Within the jãgrat state, if the jeevãtmã indulges in the pleasures of the external vishays inappropriately due to some misconception, then that is known as the svapna state within the jãgrat state. In the jãgrat state, if the jeevãtmã indulges in the pleasures of the external vishays irresponsibly, due to grief or fatigue, then that is known as sushupti within the jãgrat state. 6.6 “The svapna state is the result of the creation state of Hiranyagarbh. It is full of rajo-gun and is located in the region of the throat. In that svapna state, the jeevãtmã is known as taijas. With the consciousness of its sukshma body, via the indriyas and antah-karans, the jeevãtmã indulges in pleasurable and miserable vishays, which are temporary, according to its past karmas. This is known as the svapna state, in which rajo-gun in predominant. 6.7 “Within the svapna state, if the jeevãtmã knowingly indulges in the pleasures of the temporary vishays carefully and with awareness, exactly as it does during the jãgrat state, then that is known as the jãgrat state within the svapna state. However, if in that svapna state the jeevãtmã, due to sluggishness, does not recognise those temporary vishays which it experiences, then that is known as the sushupti state within the svapna state. 6.8 “The sushupti state is the result of the destruction state of ishvar. It is full of tamo-gun and is located in the region of the heart. When the jeev is in that sushupti state, the vruttis of the indriyas and the antah-karan, the desires for the pleasures of the vishays, and its sense of knower-ship and doer-ship, all become merged in the kãran body. When the jeevãtmã, which has the consciousness of its kãran body, and is known as prãgna, remains fully absorbed in the bliss of sagun brahm in the form of Pradhãn-Purush, it is known as the sushupti state, in which tamo-gun is predominant. 6.9 “Within the sushupti state, if a sense of doer-ship develops due to the impressions of a person’s karmas, then that is known as the svapna state within the sushupti state. Then, opposing realisation of that sense of doer-ship – which disrupts the bliss of sushupti on account of the agony of the pain experienced during jãgrat and svapna – is known as the jãgrat state within the sushupti state. 6.10 “In this way, the other two states reside within each individual state. Also, that which gives knowledge of these distinctions between the states to the jeevãtmã, and who gives the jeev the rewards of its karmas accordingly within those states, is known as turyapad, as the antaryãmi, as the drashtã, as Brahm, and also as Parbrahm.” 6.11 Again, Nityãnand Swãmi asked, “How should a person understand the four types of speech – ‘parã’, ‘pashyanti’, ‘madhyamã’, and ‘vaikhari’?” 6.12 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “That is a vast, as well as an extremely subtle subject, but in the eleventh skandh of the Shreemad Bhãgvat, Shree Krishna Bhagvãn explains it to Uddhavji. Please listen as I explain it in brief. 6.13 “At the time of the first creation, after entering the thousand-petalled lotus which lies on the head of Virãt-Purush, Purushottam Bhagvãn produced the ancient divine sound – like the sound of Akshar-Brahm. Then, via the sushumnã path, that divine sound pervaded the navel of Virãt-Purush. Then, along with mahã-prãn, it rose upwards, and caused Virãt-Purush’s lotus-navel – which was previously facing downwards – to face upwards. In this way, the divine sound produced in the navel of Virãt-Purush is known as the ‘parã’ speech. For the purpose of creating the Veds, Bhagvãn Himself has inspired that ‘parã’ speech. Therefore, it is like a seed. That ‘parã’ speech is like a stream of light, and is the cause of the ‘ardhamãtrã’. 6.14 “From there, the ‘parã’ speech reached the hruday-ãkãsh of Virãt-Purush, where it was known by the name of ‘pashyanti’. From there it reached the region of the throat and became known by the name of ‘madhyamã’. From there, it reached the mouth of Virãt-Purush and received the name of ‘vaikhari’. It then became the form of pranav by becoming the three sounds of ‘A’, ‘U’, and ‘M’. It then became the fifty-two syllables, and took the form the four Veds. In this way, a person should understand the four types of speech in Virãt-Purush – ‘parã’, ‘pashyanti’, ‘madhyamã’, and ‘vaikhari’. 6.15 “Now, I shall describe these four types of speech which also dwell within the body of the jeev, so please listen. That same Purushottam Bhagvãn resides in the jeev as antaryãmi. He is independent, yet interwoven with the three mental states of the jeev. That same Bhagvãn assumes an avatãr on this earth for the kalyãn of the jeevs. At that time, those jeevs describe the svarup of that Bhagvãn as well as His dhãms, qualities, and divine powers. They describe His divya charitras, make a distinction between ãtmã and non-ãtmã, and also individually explain the differences between jeev, ishvar, mãyã, Brahm, and Parbrahm. Such speech is known as ‘parã’. Speech that gives a complete explanation of mãyik worldly entities and vishays is known as ‘vaikhari’. Speech that gives an incomplete explanation, and creates confusion of mãyik worldly entities and vishays, is known as ‘madhyamã’. Finally, speech which blindly describes those mãyik worldly entities and vishays as being the same, and which cannot be understood, is known as ‘pashyãnti’. 6.16 “In this way, the details of the four types of speech can be known in the jãgrat state of the jeev. The details of those four types of speech in the svapna and sushupti states can only be known by a person who has mastered samãdhi – it cannot be known by others.”

7.1 In the Samvat year 1877, on the night of Shrãvan vad 11 [3rd September, 1820], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting on a decorated bedstead on the veranda outside the north-facing rooms of Jeevã Khãchar’s darbãr in Sãrangpur. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 7.2 In the sabhã, Shreeji Mahãrãj had requested the first skandh of the Shreemad Bhãgvat Purãn to be read. During the reading, the following statement was encountered: ‘Wherever the jagged edges of the manomay chakra are worn away, that place should be known as Naimishãranya Kshetra’. Hearing this, Muktãnand Swãmi inquired, “Mahãrãj, what exactly is the manomay chakra, and what should a person understand its jagged edges to be?” 7.3 Shreeji Mahãrãj explained, “A person should understand the mind to be the manomay chakra, and the ten indriyas to be its jagged edges. Wherever those jagged edges of the mind (the indriyas) wear away and become blunt, that place should be known as Naimishãranya Kshetra. Religious deeds (jap, tap, vrat, dhyãn, and pujã) commenced in that place flourish rapidly, day by day. Furthermore, that Naimishãranya Kshetra should be known to be wherever Bhagvãn’s ekãntik sant resides. 7.4 “When the jagged edges of the manomay chakra are worn away, no affection remains towards any of the panch-vishays. Then, even if a person sees a beautiful woman, or extremely attractive clothes, or jewellery, a strong hatred develops towards them deep within his mind. However, the vruttis of indriyas would never cling to them. 7.5 “For example, when an extremely sharp arrow pierces and lodges into its target, it cannot be removed. However, if that same arrow, with its tip removed so that only its shaft remains, were to be shot at a wall, it would rebound and fall to the ground. It would not penetrate the wall like the sharp-tipped arrow. Similarly, when the jagged edges of the manomay chakra (the indriyas) are worn away, then no matter how appealing the vishays may be, the vruttis of the indriyas would not be drawn towards them. Instead, they would rebound like the blunt arrow-shaft. When a person is able to behave in this way, the jagged edges of the manomay chakra can be said to have been worn away. 7.6 “So, a person should seek kalyãn wherever he sees such a Naimishãranya Kshetra in the form of the association of a sant, and he should remain there with an absolutely firm mind.”

8.1 In the Samvat year 1877, on Shrãvan vad 12 [4th September, 1820], Swãmi Shree Sahajãnandji Mahãrãj was sitting on a decorated bedstead on the veranda outside the north-facing rooms of Jeevã Khãchar’s darbãr in Sãrangpur. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 8.2 Chaitanyãnand Swãmi then asked, “Mahãrãj, what are the characteristics of irshyã?” 8.3 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “Irshyã develops from the mãn that a person holds within his heart. In fact, krodh, matsar, and asuyã also arise out of mãn. But the characteristic of irshyã is that a person cannot tolerate someone greater than himself being honoured. A person who has such a nature should be known to have irshyã with his heart. Moreover, a person who has extreme irshyã cannot tolerate anyone’s greatness.”

9.1 In the Samvat year 1877, on Shrãvan vad 13 [5th September, 1820], Swãmi Shree Sahajãnandji Mahãrãj walked from Sãrangpur and arrived at Kundal to please His haribhaktas. There, He was sitting facing north on a decorated bedstead on the veranda outside the west-facing rooms of Amrã Patgar’s home. He had tied a white pãgh around His head. He had covered Himself with a white pachhedi, and was wearing a white survãl and white angarkhu. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 9.2 Muktãnand Swãmi then asked, “Mahãrãj, why do the dharmas of the yugs prevail in a person’s heart?” 9.3 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “The dharmas of the yugs prevail because of the three gun. When pure sattva-gun is prevalent, Satya-Yug prevails in the heart. When rajo-gun is prevalent, Tretã-Yug prevails in the heart. When rajo-gun and tamo-gun are prevalent together, Dvãpar-Yug prevails in the heart. Finally, when tamo-gun alone is prevalent, Kali-Yug prevails in the heart. In this way, the prevalence of the yugs is due to the gun.” 9.4 Muktãnand Swãmi asked further, “What causes the activities of the gun?” 9.5 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “The cause of the activities of the gun are karmas. Specifically, the type of karmas a person has performed previously, determines the gun that will prevail. Therefore, if a person, in whom rajo-gun and tamo-gun are prevalent, attempts to perform dhyãn on Bhagvãn, he will not be able to do so. In such situations, he should make use of the strength of ãtmã-nishthã and Bhagvãn’s greatness. He should realise, ‘I am the ãtmã. Since I am gunãtit, there can be no mãyik influence within me’. Furthermore, he should realise Bhagvãn’s greatness in the following way: ‘Ajãmel was a terrible sinner and yet, because of his son, he uttered the name of “Nãrãyan”. As a result, he was freed from all his sins and attained Akshardhãm. I have attained that Bhagvãn in His pratyaksha svarup, and I chant His holy name day and night. Therefore, I am fulfilled’. Thinking in such a way, he should always remain joyful. 9.6 “However, a person in whom rajo-gun and tamo-gun are prevalent should not insist on performing dhyãn. Instead, he should engage in bhajan and smaran as much as possible. Moreover, he should physically serve Bhagvãn and His sant with shraddhã. At the same time, he should abide by his dharma and believe himself to be fulfilled.” 9.7 Again, Muktãnand Swãmi asked, “Kali-Yug prevails in the heart of a person who has accumulated many tãmasi karmas. Is there any method to eradicate those karmas, or not?” 9.8 Shreeji Mahãrãj answered, “If he has intense shraddhã and extremely firm faith in the words of Bhagvãn and His sant, then whatever type of tãmasi karmas he may have performed, they will be destroyed. The dharma of Kali-Yug will also vanish, and the dharma of Satya-Yug will prevail. Therefore, if a person practices satsang with absolute honesty, then no fault will remain in his heart, and he will become brahm-rup in this very lifetime.” 9.9 Then, Svayamprakãshãnand Swãmi asked, “What can be called sthãn?” 9.10 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “An individual’s dharma according to the four varnas and the four ãshrams should be known as sthãn. You are all tyãgis, but if you were to leave this ãshram and tread the path of grahasthas, then you would be known to have diverted from your sthãn. So, even in the most difficult circumstances, or even if I were to issue an ãgnã, you should not deviate from your dharma. Moreover, while grahasthas wish to perform my pujã by offering clothes and jewellery, you should not wish to do so. Instead, you should offer pujã by using leaves, flowers, fruits, and water, and you should experience joy by performing this pujã. It would not be appropriate for you to deviate from your dharma to perform pujã of Bhagvãn. Therefore, all of you should remain within your own dharma, and offer pujã within your capacity. This is my ãgnã, so abide by it firmly.”

10.1 In the Samvat year 1877, on Shrãvan vad 14 [6th September, 1820], Shreeji Mahãrãj was walking with all the sãdhus from Kundal and, along the way, they arrived at Khãmbhdã. They settled themselves under a pipal tree. The people of the village then brought a decorated bedstead for Shreeji Mahãrãj to sit upon. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. A sabhã of sãdhus, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. Some of the sãdhus were singing kirtans. 10.2 Shreeji Mahãrãj then asked the sãdhus to stop singing, and addressed the village people, “In this world there are two types of people: Those who follow the path of honesty (dharma) and those who follow the path of sin (adharma). Of these, the person who follows the path of honesty, abandons stealing, adultery, slander and all other forms of sin. Fearing Bhagvãn, such a person remains within the disciplines of dharma. As a result, everyone in the world trusts him, be it a member of his family or anyone else; and whatever he says is accepted by all as the truth. A person who follows dharma, likes the company of a true sant. 10.3 “On the other hand, a person who follows the path of sin(adharma), is engrossed in evil deeds such as stealing, adultery, eating meat, drinking alcohol, changing someone’s varna and ãshram by force, and having his own varna and ãshram changed by force. As a result, no one in the world ever trusts him. In fact, even his own relatives do not trust him. Such a sinful person never likes the company of a true sant; and if someone else were to keep the company of a sant, the sinful person would spite him too. 10.4 “Therefore, a person who aims to attain kalyãn, should not follow the path of sin (adharma). Instead, he should follow the path of honesty (dharma), and keep the company of a true sãdhu. As a result, he would certainly, without a doubt, attain kalyãn.” 10.5 Hearing this talk, many people of the village accepted the refuge of Shreeji Mahãrãj. 10.6 Shreeji Mahãrãj then returned to Sãrangpur, and sat on a decorated bedstead on the veranda outside the north-facing rooms of Jeevã Khãchar’s darbãr. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 10.7 Shreeji Mahãrãj then said, “If a person looks at the dhãms of Bhagvãn – Golok, Vaikunth, Shvet-Dvip, Brahmpur – from a physical perspective, they appear to be very far away. However, if a person looks at them from the ãtmã’s perspective, they are not even an atom’s distance away. Therefore, the understanding of a person who views from a physical perspective is false, and the understanding of a person who views from the perspective of the ãtmã is true. In reality, Bhagvãn and the dhãm of Bhagvãn are not even an atom’s distance away from a sãdhu who believes, ‘Bhagvãn is forever present in my chaitanya. Just like the jeev resides in the body, Bhagvãn resides within my jeev. My jeev is the sharir, and Bhagvãn is the shariri of my jeev’. Such a sãdhu also believes that his jeevãtmã is distinct from the three bodies – sthul, sukshma, and kãran – and that Bhagvãn forever resides within his ãtmã. Such a sant is like a mukta of Shvet-Dvip. When a person has the darshan of such a sant, he should realise, ‘I have had the darshan of Bhagvãn Himself’. A person who has such an understanding has nothing more to attain. 10.8 “If a person is unable to attain such an understanding, then he should maintain profound associations with a sant. If that sant were to daily beat him five times with a pair of shoes, he should still tolerate such insults. In no way should he abandon his association with a sant, just as an opium addict cannot abandon his addiction. Such a person should be known to be equal to the sant mentioned earlier. Also, whatever that sant attains, a person who continues to profoundly associate with such a sant, also attains.”

11.1 In the Samvat year 1877, on Shrãvan vad Amãs [7th September, 1820], Swãmi Shree Sahajãnandji Mahãrãj was sitting on a decorated bedstead on the veranda outside the north-facing rooms of Jeevã Khãchar’s darbãr in Sãrangpur. 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, Muktãnand Swãmi asked a question: “Personal effort is mentioned in the shãstras, but how much is actually achieved by personal effort, and how much is achieved by Bhagvãn’s grace?” 11.3 Shreeji Mahãrãj explained, “A person who, by the words of a sadguru and the shãstras, has attained firm vairãgya, has firm shraddhã, strictly follows the eight types of brahm-chãrya, has affection towards ahinsã, and absolutely firmly realises himself to be the ãtmã, is relieved of the burden of births and deaths which hangs over his head. Then, just like a grain of rice that has had its outer chaff removed does not grow, a mukta who has the gun just mentioned, is freed from eternal ignorance in the form of mãyã. He is therefore freed from the cycle of births and deaths, and attains the state of ãtmã-nishthã. This much can be achieved by personal effort. 11.4 “Bhagvãn’s grace is only bestowed upon a person who has these characteristics. When he attains the grace of Bhagvãn, he becomes an ekãntik bhakta. Even the Shrutis state: niranjanaha paramam sãmyam-upaiti “The meaning of this Vedic shlok is that a person who is free from the blemishes of mãyã, attains qualities similar to those of Bhagvãn. Just as Bhagvãn is never bound by any pure or impure karmas that He may perform, the mukta is also never bound by pure or impure karmas. 11.5 “Due to her love, Lakshmiji sometimes becomes absorbed in Bhagvãn’s murti, whereas on other occasions, while remaining separate from Bhagvãn, she remains in Bhagvãn’s sevã. In the same way, out of intense love, the bhakta also sometimes becomes absorbed in Bhagvãn, and at other times he is separate and remains in Bhagvãn’s sevã. Moreover, just as Bhagvãn is independent, that bhakta also becomes independent. These powers can only be attained by the grace of Bhagvãn.” 11.6 Then, Nityãnand Swãmi asked, “Bhagvãn’s grace is bestowed upon a person who has absorbed all these characteristics perfectly. But, what becomes of a person who has some deficiency in developing these characteristics?” 11.7 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “If a person has a deficiency in any of the qualities of vairãgya, brahm-chãrya, shraddhã, ahinsã, and ãtmã-nishthã, then he does not attain ãtyantik moksh, and Bhagvãn’s Akshardhãm. Instead, he attains some other dhãm of Bhagvãn. If he has even more worldly desires remaining, he attains the loks of the devs. In the Moksh-Dharma, these loks are described as being like Narak compared to the dhãm of Bhagvãn. Then, after being a dev, he returns to being a human, and from being a human he again becomes a dev. anek-janma-sansiddh-stato yãti parãm gatim A yogi who has become siddh after many lives, attains Akshardhãm. “This shlok explains that a bhakta of Bhagvãn who has worldly desires does not go to Narak, nor does he have to undergo births and deaths in the cycle of 8.4 million life-forms. Instead, he takes innumerable births as a dev and a human being. Then, only when he develops the previously described qualities of vairãgya, brahm-chãrya, shraddhã, ahinsã, and ãtmã-nishthã, does he become worthy of attaining the grace of Bhagvãn. He then becomes an ekãntik bhakta of Bhagvãn, and attains His gunãtit dhãm, Akshardhãm. 11.8 “So, whether it takes one life or innumerable lives, only when a person develops the previously described characteristics and becomes extremely free of worldly desires, does he become worthy of attaining the grace of Bhagvãn, and only then will he attain ãtyantik moksh. Without it, he will definitely not attain it.” 11.9 Then, Nrusinhãnand Swãmi asked, “Is there a method by which a person can eradicate all of his deficiencies within this very lifetime?” 11.10 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “If a person becomes extremely vigilant and determined, then all of his deficiencies can be eradicated within this very lifetime. If his deficiencies have not been eradicated while he is alive, and if he were to become free of worldly desires and develop intense love for Bhagvãn during his last moments, then even in those last moments Bhagvãn would shower His grace upon him, and he would attain the dhãm of Bhagvãn. 11.11 “Therefore, whether after one life, or after countless lives, or even in the last moments before a person dies, should a bhakta’s vruttis become intensely focused on Bhagvãn, no deficiency would remain in that bhakta.”

12.1 In the Samvat year 1877, on Bhãdarvã sud 1 [8th September, 1820], Swãmi Shree Sahajãnandji Mahãrãj was sitting on a decorated bedstead on the veranda outside the north-facing rooms of Jeevã Khãchar’s darbãr in Sãrangpur. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 12.2 Then, Nirvikãrãnand Swãmi asked a question: “Which qualities constantly remain in a sãdhu, and which qualities come and go?” 12.3 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “First, there is ãtmã-nishthã; second, there is svadharma; and third, there is nishchay in the svarup of Bhagvãn. These three qualities constantly remain in a sãdhu, whereas others may come and may go. Therefore, while other qualities come and go, these three qualities will always remain.” 12.4 Then, Muktãnand Swãmi asked, “Why is it that even after understanding the distinction between the body and the ãtmã, a person forgets that distinction, and continues to identify himself with the body?” 12.5 Shreeji Mahãrãj explained, “Once a person has clearly understood the distinction between the body and the ãtmã, it cannot be forgotten. Even if he believes, ‘I am the body’, he can no longer accept himself as the body. Also, once he has firmly established the belief of Bhagvãn, even if he tries to reject it, it cannot be rejected. Furthermore, the belief that his understanding of ‘I am an ãtmã’ has been lost, and the belief that ‘I am the body’ has begun to prevail, is simply a misconception of his mind. The belief never actually returns. Such a bhakta with perfect gnãn is conscious only of his ãtmã. Also, he believes his ãtmã to be brahm-rup, and that Purushottam Bhagvãn, who is Parbrahm, forever resides in that brahm-rup ãtmã. In addition to this, his belief of Bhagvãn remains forever steady.” 12.6 Then, Svayamprakãshãnand Swãmi asked, “How should a person think of his ãtmã?” 12.7 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “When the drashtã (the jeevãtmã) focuses on the antah-karan, it becomes unaware of the outer sthul body, and all the vishays related to it. Then, with the thought that rests between the antah-karan and the drashtã, a person should realise the nature of the man, the buddhi, the chitt, and the ahankãr. A person should then observe the various immoral thoughts within the antah-karan. Then, only when those immoral thoughts end, should a person perform dhyãn on Bhagvãn’s murti. However, as long as those immoral thoughts and desires persist, a person should keep observing them, but he should not perform dhyãn at that time. 12.8 “In addition, when the five gnãn-indriyas of the outer sthul body are drawn towards their respective vishays, a person should think in two ways: Firstly, he should think about the vishay towards which the indriyas have been drawn. Secondly, he should think about the drashtã who watches from the organ of the indriya. Then, when the first thought of the vishay and the second thought of the drashtã merge into one, his vrutti becomes completely detached from the vishays. However, if he does not think in this way and attempts to break his vrutti from the vishays forcefully, then the vrutti’s attraction towards the vishays will not be eradicated. On the other hand, if he withdraws his vrutti by applying this thought process, his vrutti will never again become attached to the vishays. Therefore, as long as the vruttis of a person’s indriyas have affection for the vishays, he should avoid performing dhyãn of Bhagvãn. Only when the vruttis of the indriyas become stable should he perform the dhyãn of Bhagvãn. 12.9 “Also, when the drashtã is active in the outer sthul body, a person should be absolutely clear in making the distinction that when he is active in the sthul body, he should never look towards the desires arising in the sukshma body; and when a person is active in the antah-karan, he should become unaware of his sthul body. Moreover, using the thought which rests between the drashtã and drashya, he should realise, ‘The drashtã and drashya are absolutely distinct’. With this understanding, a person should assign the features of the body, to the body, and the features of the drashtã, which is chaitanya, to chaitanya. Also, childhood, youth, old age, fatness, thinness, birth, and death, are all aspects of the body. Therefore, they should never be thought of as belonging to the ãtmã. On the other hand, being achhedhya, abhedhya, not aging, immortal, full of gnãn, blissful, and eternal, are all aspects of the ãtmã. They should in no way be considered to belong to the body. Instead, those characteristics should be understood to belong to the ãtmã. 12.10 “These thoughts should not be abandoned as long as desires and immoral thoughts persist in the antah-karan. Take the example of a king: As long as he is confronted by an enemy, he cannot preside on his throne in peace, nor does he indulge in any pleasures. Only when all of his enemies are conquered, does he enjoy the luxuries of his kingdom. Similarly, a bhakta of Bhagvãn should firmly keep these thoughts, as long as the enemies (his mind and indriyas) continue to trouble him. Only when all the desires of his mind and indriyas have diminished, should he perform dhyãn of Bhagvãn.”

13.1 In the Samvat year 1877, on Bhãdarvã sud 2 [9th September, 1820], Swãmi Shree Sahajãnandji Mahãrãj was sitting on a decorated bedstead on the veranda outside the north-facing rooms of Jeevã Khãchar’s darbãr in Sãrangpur. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 13.2 Then, Muktãnand Swãmi asked, “Can a person who previously had nishchay in Bhagvãn, but later lost it, really be said to have had nishchay in the first place?” 13.3 Svayamprakãshãnand Swãmi replied, “If a person has developed nishchay in his jeevãtmã, he would not lose it by any means. However, if his nishchay is based on the writings in the shãstras, then when Bhagvãn performs some action that is not mentioned in the shãstras, he would lose his nishchay in Bhagvãn.” 13.4 “Hearing this, Shreeji Mahãrãj then said, “In the shãstras, there are an endless variety of talks describing Bhagvãn as being powerful as well as weak, as being the all-doer as well as a non-doer. So then, which action not mentioned in the shãstras could Bhagvãn possibly have performed, which causes a person to lose his nishchay? Please answer this question.” 13.5 The munis replied, “No action of Bhagvãn is outside the shãstras. So, what is the reason behind a person developing nishchay and then losing it?” 13.6 Shreeji Mahãrãj explained, “It is only through the shãstras that a person develops nischay. This is because the shãstras describe the characteristics of Bhagvãn as well as the characteristics of a sant. So, only nishchay developed through the shãstras remains firm. On the other hand, nishchay developed by a person’s own mind, without the help of the shãstras, eventually dissolves. 13.7 “The shãstras are also the inspiration behind the activities of dharma. The fact that an ignorant person, who has never heard the shãstras, has been able to follow the disciplines of dharma to this day, in the form of making distinctions between his mother, sister, daughter, and other women, is due to the shãstras. How is that? Well, it has been passed down through the generations after someone initially heard the talks from the shãstras. From that, it has spread throughout society through successive generations. Therefore, a person who develops nishchay in Bhagvãn and loses it afterwards has no nishchay in the words of the shãstras. Such a person is stubborn and a nãstik. 13.8 “On the other hand, if a person does have nishchay in the shãstras, he would never turn away from Bhagvãn. This is because the shãstras describe an endless variety of charitras of Bhagvãn. So, regardless of which actions Bhagvãn performs, it will never be outside of the shãstras. Therefore, only a person who has nishchay in the shãstras is able to develop unshakeable nishchay in Bhagvãn, and only such a person attains kalyãn. In addition, such a person would never deviate from dharma.”

14.1 In the Samvat year 1877, on Bhãdarvã sud 3 [10th September, 1820], Swãmi Shree Sahajãnandji Mahãrãj was sitting facing west on a decorated bedstead on the veranda outside the rooms of Jeevã Khãchar’s darbãr in Sãrangpur. He was wearing a black-bordered, white khes, and had covered Himself with a white chãdar. He had also tied a white pãgh around His head. Bunches of yellow flowers were placed above His ears, and tassels of yellows flowers had been placed upon His pãgh. In addition to this, a garland of yellow flowers was hanging from His neck down to His navel. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 14.2 Svayamprakãshãnand Swãmi then asked a question: “It is said in the Geetã that once a bhakta attains the dhãm of Bhagvãn, such as Vaikunth, he never falls back from it. But, which flaw causes some to fall back?” 14.3 Shreeji Mahãrãj asked in return, “Who has attained the dhãm of Bhagvãn and then fallen back? Give me even one example!” 14.4 Svayamprakãshãnand Swãmi replied, “First of all, there are Jay and Vijay, the pãrshads of Bhagvãn who fell from Vaikunth. Then, there are Radhikãji and Shreedãmã, who fell from Golok.” 14.5 Shreeji Mahãrãj then clarified, “Jay and Vijay did fall, but it was only because Bhagvãn wanted to illustrate the glory of a sãdhu. If a person insults a sãdhu, like the Sanakãdik, then even if he has attained a dhãm like Vaikunth, he can still fall from it. That is why they fell. In addition, Jay and Vijay did return to Bhagvãn’s dhãm, Vaikunth, in their third life. Therefore, they cannot be said to have fallen; it happened because it was Bhagvãn’s wish. In any case, a person can only be said to have fallen when he never again retains any contact with Bhagvãn. 14.6 “Also, when Rãdhikãji fell from Golok, that too was by Bhagvãn’s wish, as He Himself wished to incarnate in a human body to uplift countless jeevs and perform kalyãn-kãri actions. Therefore, if someone claims that Rãdhikãji fell, then Bhagvãn could be said to have fallen along with her. That is why she cannot be said to have fallen, because it was Bhagvãn’s wish that they both came to earth from Golok. So, in this instance, it should be recognised as being the wish of Bhagvãn only. 14.7 “Of course, if it is His wish, a mukta may incarnate in a body even from Akshardhãm. Moreover, by His will, that which is jad can become chaitanya, and that which is chaitanya can become jad. After all, Bhagvãn is extremely powerful, and whatever He wishes, occurs. Therefore, no one who has attained the dhãm of Bhagvãn falls back from it without it being Bhagvãn’s wish. However, a person who does fall, is a worldly incomplete bhakta, who falls during the course of his spiritual activities. Such a person is called ‘yog-bhrasht’. In contrast, those who have become siddh through vairãgya, ãtmã-nishthã, bhakti towards Bhagvãn, and brahm-chãrya, are equal to the muktas of Shvet-Dvip. They never fall.” 14.8 Having explained this, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “Now, I shall ask a question.” 14.9 The munis responded, “Please do ask.” 14.10 Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “In the Udyog-Parva of the Mahãbhãrat, Sanat-Sujãt Rushi says to Dhrutrãshtra, ‘He who abandons both laziness and infatuation has completely disobeyed Bhagvãn’s mãyã. In fact, laziness and infatuation are mãyã itself’. Now, we are known to be tyãgi bhaktas of Bhagvãn. If someone amongst us has laziness and infatuation, and if that person is not particularly vigilant in eradicating them by using the strength of Bhagvãn’s glory, then what type of bliss does such a bhakta experience in this body? Also, what type of bliss does he attain after he dies? That is my question.” 14.11 Svayamprakãshãnand Swãmi replied, “A person who is a bhakta of Bhagvãn need not worry too much if his laziness and infatuation are not eradicated by the deep thought of Bhagvãn’s glory.” 14.12 Shreeji Mahãrãj then questioned, “What is wrong with a bhakta of Bhagvãn who has laziness and infatuation and is vigilant in his efforts to eradicate them? What makes a person who is not so vigilant better than the person who is?” 14.13 Svayamprakãshãnand Swãmi explained, “That bhakta of Bhagvãn relies on the strength of Bhagvãn, not on the strength of his spiritual activities. That is why he is better.” 14.14 Shreeji Mahãrãj questioned further, “You are claiming that a person who is careless, despite the enemies of laziness and infatuation being prevalent in him, is superior. Well, consider the example of a pati-vratã wife. Due to the fear of her husband, and the fear of preserving her pati-vratã dharma, she remains very conscious in her mind, in case she smiles at or touches another man. Moreover, in her mind lies the following fear: ‘If I behave freely, my husband will think of me as an adulteress, and will no longer accept my sevã. This would be a breach of my pati-vratã dharma’. Bearing this in mind, she remains ever vigilant. So, you are claiming that a bhakta who keeps bhakti just like the pati-vratã wife and who is conscious in his efforts to eradicate laziness and infatuation is at fault. Furthermore, you are suggesting that a bhakta who is not concerned about eradicating laziness and infatuation, like a woman who flirts with any man she fancies, and is not concerned about preserving her fidelity, is actually superior! Is this because of a misunderstanding on your behalf, or what? 14.15 “Remember, if a person remains careless, then even if he is a bhakta of Bhagvãn, the two enemies of laziness and infatuation would not fail to hinder him. For example, when a person drinks alcohol or bhãng, then just as a vimukh becomes intoxicated, a bhakta of Bhagvãn would also become intoxicated and delirious. In the same way, just as alcohol and bhãng in the form of laziness and infatuation affect a vimukh, they affect a bhakta of Bhagvãn as well. However, the only difference between a vimukh and a bhakta of Bhagvãn is that a vimukh cannot eradicate these two enemies, whereas a bhakta can overcome them if he remains vigilant in his efforts. That is the advantage a bhakta of Bhagvãn has. Nevertheless, he is not better if he remains careless, even if he is a bhakta of Bhagvãn.” 14.16 Then, Shreeji Mahãrãj asked another question: “How many elements is the sthul body composed of, and how many elements is the sukshma body composed of? Are there equal elements in both, or does one have more or less than the other? Please describe the nature of these two bodies.” 14.17 Svayamprakãshãnand Swãmi attempted to answer the question, but was unable to do so adequately. Then, all the munis said, “Mahãrãj, please be kind enough to answer this question yourself.” 14.18 Shreeji Mahãrãj then explained, “The sthul body is composed of the five tattvas known as the five mahã-bhuts, such as pruthvi and jal. The sukshma body is composed of nineteen tattvas: the five gnãn-indriyas, the five karma-indriyas, the five prãns, and the four antah-karans. Yet, only when the sukshma body is interwoven with the sthul body, can all activities be carried out properly, but not otherwise. This is because only when the sukshma body, together with the indriyas, joins the sthul body – which includes the organs of the indriyas, such as the eyes and ears – can the vishays of those indriyas be indulged in. This is not possible by the organs of the indriyas of the sthul body alone. Therefore, the sukshma body composed of the nineteen tattvas is interwoven with the sthul body composed of the five tattvas (five mahã-bhuts). That is why the sthul body is also said to be composed of twenty-four tattvas. 14.19 “In the same way, the pleasures of the sukshma body can only be indulged in when the sukshma body behaves as one with the sthul body, which is composed of the five tattvas. That is why the sukshma body, which is composed of nineteen tattvas, is also said to be composed of twenty-four tattvas. Moreover, because the sthul body is inherent within the sukshma body, when a person associates with a woman through his sukshma body, he ejaculates semen from his sthul body. Therefore, there is unity between the sthul body and the sukshma body during the jãgrat state and the svapna state.” 14.20 Then, the munis remarked, “Mahãrãj, this suggests that the sukshma body is the same as the sthul body. So, just as there is an effect of karmas on the sthul body, is there a similar effect on the sukshma body as well? Or is there a difference?” 14.21 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “If a person has just as strong a belief that the sukshma body is ‘mine’, as he has that this sthul body is ‘mine’, then the law of karmas would apply to the sukshma body just as it does to the sthul body. Indeed, it is only to encourage the individual that the karmas of the sukshma body have been said to be insignificant. 14.22 “In comparison, neither the sthul body nor the sukshma body of a person who has no consciousness of his sthul and sukshma bodies, is affected by karmas. This is because such a person behaves only as the ãtmã. Therefore, a person who has such ãtmã-nishthã, remains unaffected by karmas related to the sthul and sukshma bodies. Nonetheless, such a person would never physically perform any impure karmas. Furthermore, he endures any joy or pain resulting from his prãrabdha. Even while experiencing them, he believes, ‘I am not the one who experiences. I am the ãtmã’. 14.23 “On the other hand, a person who is ignorant and who perceives himself with the body, is affected by all karmas related to the sthul and sukshma bodies, and therefore he experiences joy and pain according to his karmas. This is because an ignorant person, while experiencing whichever vishays he indulges in, believes the body to be his true svarup, and feels, ‘I am the one who experiences these vishays’. 14.24 “Then, in his final moments, such an ignorant person sees yamduts. He then becomes unaware of his body and enters a state of unconsciousness. The yamduts force him to leave his body and therefore separate his jeev. The jeev then receives the body of an evil spirit, in which it suffers the torments of Yampuri. In comparison, a bhakta of Bhagvãn possessing gnãn, sees Bhagvãn or His sant in his last moments. He also becomes unaware of his body and enters a state of unconsciousness. However, when that bhakta discards his body and becomes separate from it, Bhagvãn grants him a divya body like that of Bhagvãn, with which he resides in the dhãm of Bhagvãn.”

15.1 In the Samvat year 1877, on Bhãdarvã sud 4 [11th September, 1820], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting on a decorated bedstead on the veranda outside the rooms of Jeevã Khãchar’s darbãr in Sãrangpur. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 15.2 Then, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “I shall ask a question. There are two types of bhaktas of Bhagvãn: A person has such deep love for Bhagvãn that he cannot bear even a second without His darshan. His love is very obviously noticeable. Another bhakta of Bhagvãn possesses knowledge of the ãtmã as well as total vairãgya. He also has love for Bhagvãn, but his love does not appear to be like the love of the first bhakta. Furthermore, although the first bhakta’s bhakti is extremely appealing, he possesses neither knowledge of the ãtmã and vairãgya, but his bhakti is not as appealing as the first bhakta’s. Of these two bhaktas, whose bhakti is superior, and whose bhakti is inferior? That is the question.” 15.3 To this, Svayamprakãshãnand Swãmi replied, “He who has intense love for Bhagvãn is better, even if he does not have knowledge of the ãtmã and vairãgya.” 15.4 Shreeji Mahãrãj then questioned, “With what understanding do you say that he who does not have knowledge of the ãtmã and vairãgya is better? Such a person believes himself to be the body, and so whenever he comes upon any of the panch-vishays that comfort his body, he will develop affection for them. As a result, his love for Bhagvãn will diminish. So why do you consider him to be superior?” 15.5 Svayamprakãshãnand Swãmi clarified, “I do not consider the person who develops affection for the vishays to be a bhakta who loves Bhagvãn. Instead, I consider the person who is like the gopis to be such a bhakta.” 15.6 Then, Shreeji Mahãrãj explained, “The gopis were not so naïve. They were so wise that their wisdom could go beyond the understanding of those who do possess knowledge of the ãtmã and vairãgya. They also spoke as expressively as those who are educated in diplomacy. In addition, they knew Bhagvãn precisely as He should be known. Even Uddhavji, the wisest of the Yãdavs and Bhagvãn’s adviser, became overwhelmed when he realised the gopis’ understanding. That same Uddhavji later said, ‘Bhagvãn has shown great mercy to me by sending me to impart gnãn to the gopis’. He had actually gone to preach to the gopis, but upon hearing their words, he himself absorbed in the preaching of the gopis. 15.7 “Though you may say that the gopis were not very intelligent, there were three distinctions amongst them: mugdhã, madhyã, and praudhã. 15.8 “Of these, the characteristics of the mugdhã gopis are as follows: They would often lecture Bhagvãn and say, ‘We have gone out of our way doing things for you, yet you do not take even the slightest notice of us’. Furthermore, if they were teased further, they would be upset with Bhagvãn, and speak such harsh words that a person would feel they will soon fall from the path of Bhagvãn. The gopis who are described in this way in the shãstras, should be known as mugdhã gopis. 15.9 “Those who are madhyã gopis, would never become angry with Bhagvãn and would never speak such harsh words. However, by using their shrewdness, they would use cunning methods to conceal their selfishness from others and do whatever they please while also doing whatever pleases Bhagvãn. Therefore, they would not do only that which pleases Bhagvãn. Furthermore, even if they have to do something that pleases only Bhagvãn, they would definitely use a cunning method to do whatever pleases themselves as well. The gopis, who are described in this way in the shãstras, should be known as madhyã gopis. 15.10 “In comparison, praudhã gopis would do only that which pleases Bhagvãn. In no way would they use any cunning methods to satisfy their selfishness. Their only wish would be to please Bhagvãn. Therefore, they remain happy with whatever pleases Bhagvãn. Also, they would never become angry at, or jealous of the other gopis who are equal to them. They would also abandon vicious natures, such as mãn and matsar, and remain alert in the sevã of Bhagvãn. They would never do anything by thought, word, or deed that would displease Bhagvãn. The gopis who are described in this way in the shãstras, should be known as praudhã gopis. In this way, there are three distinctions amongst the gopis. 15.11 “Overall, the gopis had extreme wisdom in their understanding, and therefore their love cannot be said to be without understanding. Also, they had thoroughly understood the greatness of Bhagvãn. Due to the power of that understanding of Bhagvãn’s greatness, the qualities of ãtmã-nishthã and vairãgya naturally flourished in their hearts. Therefore, it was due to the power of understanding Bhagvãn’s greatness that countless kalyãn-kãri qualities, such as ãtmã-nishthã and vairãgya, were fully developed in the gopis. 15.12 “The characteristics of such a bhakta are as follows: He wishes for only those panch-vishays (shabda, sparsh, rup, ras, and gandh) which are related to Bhagvãn, but not for those which are related to anything else. Then, through those vishays, he develops intense love for Bhagvãn. The love is so intense that even though he does not possess the qualities of ãtmã-nishthã and vairãgya, he still does not have any other desire in his heart, except the desire for Bhagvãn. 15.13 “Consider the following example: When it has not rained, the seeds of any types of grass cannot be seen anywhere on the earth. But, when it does rain, so much grass grows that even the earth cannot be seen. Similarly, when a person who does not possess the qualities of ãtmã-nishthã and vairãgya meets with kusang, though he may seem to have no desire for vishays other than Bhagvãn, he will begin to have desires for those objects. Furthermore, his mind will become corrupted, and he will not remember Bhagvãn in his heart. Instead, he will constantly crave for the vishays. As a result, that bhakta who loves Bhagvãn, but does not possess the qualities of ãtmã-nishthã and vairãgya, will feel, ‘I do not have even the slightest love for Bhagvãn’. Therefore, a bhakta who has love for Bhagvãn, but does not possess the qualities of ãtmã-nishthã and vairãgya, is extremely inferior. 15.14 “In comparison, a bhakta whose love for Bhagvãn seems ordinary, but who has the qualities of ãtmã-nishthã and vairãgya, feels, ‘The murti of Bhagvãn is forever present within my jeevãtmã’. Because of this ãtmã-nishthã, he may not seem outwardly enthusiastic for the darshan and touch of Bhagvãn’s murti. In fact, he may appear to be very quiet. However, the roots of his love are very deep. Moreover, his love is not the type that would diminish due to the influence of kusang. Therefore, this bhakta is superior, and is ekãntik.”

16.1 In the Samvat year 1877, on Bhãdarvã sud 5 [12th September, 1820], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting on a decorated bedstead on the veranda outside Jeevã Khãchar’s darbãr in Sãrangpur. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 16.2 Paramãnand Swãmi then asked a question: “It is said in the Shreemad Bhãgvat, ‘While residing in Badrikãshram, Nar-Nãrãyan Rushi is performing tap for the sake of the kalyãn and happiness of all the people in Bharat-Khand’. So, why is it that everyone does not walk a path of kalyãn?” 16.3 Shreeji Mahãrãj explained, “The answer lies in the fifth skandh of the Shreemad Bhãgvat. It is said, ‘Bhagvãn is performing tap, but he does so only for the sake of his bhaktas, not for those who are not bhaktas of Bhagvãn’. 16.4 “Nar-Nãrãyan Bhagvãn, who is dressed in the clothes of a tapasvi, performs harsh tap out of extreme compassion, and for the benefit of those people who realise the rarity of attaining a human body in this Bharat-Khand, and therefore attain the refuge of Bhagvãn and offer bhakti to Him. While performing tap, and gifted with qualities, like dharma, gnãn, vairãgya, upsham, divine powers, that are constantly present in Him to a great extent, he dwells in Badrikãshram until the destruction of the universe. Therefore, even if His bhaktas who live in Bharat-Khand may possess the qualities, such as dharma and gnãn, to a lesser degree, they flourish greatly in just a short span of time due to the power of Bhagvãn’s great tap. Then, by the will of Bhagvãn, these bhaktas receive the darshan of the pratyaksha murti of Shree Krishna Bhagvãn amidst the divine light of Akshar-Brahm that is in their hearts. In this way, due to Bhagvãn’s tap, bhaktas attain kalyãn without any difficulties. However, those who are not bhaktas of Bhagvãn do not attain kalyãn. This is the answer to your question.”

17.1 In the Samvat year 1877, on the evening of Bhãdarvã sud 6 [13th September, 1820], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting facing north on a decorated bedstead on the veranda outside the rooms of Jeevã Khãchar’s darbãr in Sãrangpur. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 17.2 Then Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “As the vision of a person who worships Bhagvãn becomes increasingly weak, he realises the unlimited nature of Bhagvãn, and he increasingly realises the greatness of Bhagvãn. When that bhakta identifies himself with the body, he sees Bhagvãn as the witness of his jãgrat, svapna, and sushupti states. Later, when he realises himself as beyond the jãgrat, svapna, and sushupti states, he realises Bhagvãn as beyond them too. Then, as his vision becomes increasingly weak, he realises Bhagvãn as being far beyond himself and understands the greatness of Bhagvãn even more. Then, as his vrutti attaches itself more and more to Bhagvãn with love, his upãsanã of Bhagvãn becomes even more firmly established. 17.3 “For example, ants, birds, men, cattle, horses, elephants, large crocodiles, and fish, all drink water from the ocean and become healthy, but the ocean’s level is not even slightly reduced. Therefore, the greater the capacity of the creature, the more it understands the vastness of the ocean. 17.4 “Here is another example: A mosquito, a sparrow, a kite, a hawk, an analpakshi, and Garud all fly in the sky, yet to all of them the sky is limitless. However, the greater the strength of their wings, the more they understand the vastness of the sky and their own inferiority. 17.5 “Similarly, a bhakta whose upãsanã is like that of Marichi and other prajãpatis, can be compared to the mosquito. A bhakta, whose upãsanã is higher, like that of devs such as Brahmã, can be compared to the sparrow. A bhakta, whose upãsanã is higher still, like that of devs such as Virãt-Purush, can be compared to a kite. A bhakta, whose upãsanã is higher still, like that of Pradhãn-Purush, can be compared to a hawk. A bhakta, whose upãsanã is still higher, like that of pure Prakruti and Purush, can be compared to an analpakshi. A bhakta, whose upãsanã is even higher, like that of an Akshar mukta in Akshardhãm, is like Garud. As the powers of these bhaktas increase, they recognise the greatness of Bhagvãn more and more. Moreover, as their own powers increase, their master-servant relationship with Bhagvãn is also strengthened. 17.6 “Also, when the person engaged in worship and identified himself with the jeev, the jeev possessed the luminosity of a firefly. As he continued worshipping Bhagvãn, the eight barriers (jad prakruti) were gradually overcome, and he became increasingly luminous – first like an oil lamp, then like a torch, then like the flames of a fire, then like the flames of a forest fire, then like lightning, then like the moon, then like the sun, then like the fire of destruction, and finally, he became as radiant as the light of Akshar-Brahm. 17.7 “In this way, the luminosity, powers, and bliss of such a bhakta constantly increase. In the example, the sequence from firefly to Akshar-Brahm refers to the difference among the level of muktas. As a person reaches a higher spiritual state, Bhagvãn’s greatness is realised to a greater extent, and he attains a higher mukta level.” 17.8 Shreeji Mahãrãj then bid “Jay Sachidãnand” to everyone and stood up. Then, holding a branch of the tamarind tree, He stood facing east and said, “From here, the full moon appears like a small plate. But, as a person approaches it, it appears to get increasingly large. Then, when he comes extremely close to it, it becomes so vast that he is unable to see its limits. Similarly, as obstacles (mãyã) are overcome and a person increasingly attains the proximity of Bhagvãn, he realises the unlimited greatness of Bhagvãn. As a result, his sense of servitude towards Bhagvãn is increasingly strengthened.”

18.1 In the Samvat year 1877, on Bhãdarvã sud 8 [15th September, 1820], Swãmi Shree Sahajãnandji Mahãrãj was sitting facing north on the veranda outside the north-facing rooms of Jeevã Khãchar’s darbãr in Sãrangpur. 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. 18.2 Shreeji Mahãrãj then said, “If a person with shraddhã comes across the company of a true sant and develops shraddhã in the words of that sant, then all the kalyãn-kãri qualities of svadharma, vairãgya, gnãn, bhakti, and wisdom, would develop in his heart, and the vicious natures, such as kãm, and krodh, would be burnt away. On the other hand, if he encounters kusang and develops shraddhã in their words, then the qualities such as vairãgya and wisdom would be destroyed. 18.3 “It is like the analogy of saline land. No matter how much rain falls upon it, no grass, or anything else, can grow upon it. However, if a flood were to sweep across the same land, then all the salt would be washed away. As a result, where there was once salt, there would now be silt. If the seeds of banyan, pipal, or other trees were to fall into that silt, they would grow into large trees. Similarly, if a person, who has the previously mentioned qualities of svadharma, vairãgya, gnãn, bhakti, and wisdom, firmly rooted in his heart, and who has not even the slightest desire for the pleasures of this world, were to meet with kusang, then waters (kusang) would sweep across his heart and leave behind silt (worldly talks). Then, the seeds of vicious natures, such as kam, krodh, lobh, moh, mad, and matsar, which are dormant in the silt, would grow into large trees. Therefore, a bhakta of Bhagvãn should never keep kusang.” 18.4 Then, Shreeji Mahãrãj continued, “If a person has some svabhãvs and he thoughtfully attempts to eradicate them by associating with a sant, then they can be destroyed. However, a person’s vicious svabhãvs will not eradicate if he foolishly applies any other methods. When such a fool becomes depressed, he either sleeps, cries, takes out his frustrations on someone else, or he may even do upvãs. He will use any of these four methods to try to overcome his depression. If he becomes severely depressed, he may even resort to committing suicide. These are the way in which a fool attempts to overcome depression. However, such methods neither reduce the pain, nor do they eradicate a person’s svabhãvs. On the other hand, if a person were to attempt to eradicate them with understanding, then both the distress and the svabhãv would be eradicated. Therefore, only those who have understanding become happy.” 18.5 Then, Shreeji Mahãrãj continued with another example and said, “Large flames of a fire are extinguished when water is poured over it, whereas even a slight flash of lightning can never be extinguished, even though it is in the midst of dense rain clouds. Similarly, regardless of how much vairãgya a person may have, or how much love for Bhagvãn he may have, if he does not have understanding, then like the flames of the fire, all of his qualities will be lost due to water (kusang). In comparison, a person who has the understanding of vairãgya and love is like the fire of lightning. It may be slight, but it is never destroyed.” 18.6 “Then, Nirvikãrãnand Swãmi asked, “Mahãrãj, if a person has a vicious svabhãvs, like kãm and krodh, can they be eradicated, or not?” 18.7 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “Just as a merchant keeps an account of all his transactions, if a person keeps an account of his svabhãvs from the very day he entered satsang, then they can be eradicated. He should think, ‘When I was not in satsang, I had these vicious svabhãvs. But, ever since I have entered satsang, they have diminished’. Then, every year, he should check to see if he has progressed or if there is still some deficiency remaining. However, a fool does not keep an account like the merchant does. Therefore, any svabhãvs, which a person may have, can be eradicated if he continuously examines himself while doing satsang.” 18.8 Muktãnand Swãmi then asked, “If a person keeps kusang then it is obvious that he will develop vicious svabhãvs. But, why is it that such vicious svabhãvs arise even after a person associates with a sant?” 18.9 Shreeji Mahãrãj explained, “During his childhood, a person does not face enemies, such as kãm, krodh, and lobh. Also, at that age, he also tends to have more love for Bhagvãn. However, when he enters youth, the enemies increase along with the belief that he is the body. During that period, if he keeps the company of a sãdhu, who does not have vicious natures and the belief that he is the body, then he will cross the ocean of youth. However, if the youth does not do this, the enemies will defeat him, and he will consequently turn vile. 18.10 “However, if an older person is spoilt while doing satsang, it is because whichever avgun he perceives in a great sant, all return to dwell in his own heart. Conversely, if he perceives the gun of a great sant and thinks, ‘Any svabhãvs the great sant exhibits is only for the sake of the kalyãn of jeevs. In fact, He is flawless; but my identification of flaws in him is due to my own personal foolishness’, and he also asks for forgiveness for his mistakes, then his deficiencies will diminish. 18.11 Mahãnubhavãnand Swãmi then asked, “Can rãjasi, tãmasi, and sãttvik svabhãvs be eradicated by doing satsang?” 18.12 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “All svabhãvs can be eradicated if a person tries to eradicate them.” 18.13 Mahãnubhavãnand Swãmi asked further, “If that is the case, then despite the fact that Durvãsã and others have become muktas, why do they still remain tãmasi?” 18.14 Shreeji Mahãrãj explained, “The qualities, like tamo-gun, which are seen in Durvãsã and others, are only present because they choose to keep them. They feel, ‘If someone is misbehaving, tamo-gun is actually very necessary in order to lecture him. That is why we keep it’. Therefore, they purposely retain these qualities. Nevertheless, when a svabhãv is prevalent in a person, he should have hatred towards it. He should think, ‘I am a bhakta of Bhagvãn, and such a vicious svabhãv does not suit me’. In this way, by the grace of Bhagvãn, a person’s svabhãvs can be eradicated if he regards them as flaws and strives to discard them.” End of Shree Sãrangpur Prakaran ||