1.1 In the Samvat year 1877, on Bhãdarvã sud 12 [19th September, 1820], a decorated, canopied bedstead that had been brought by Jãdavji Bhakta from Surat, had been placed on the veranda outside the north-facing rooms of Vastã Khãchar’s darbãr in Kãriyãni. A mattress with a white, silken cover had been placed upon the bedstead. A large, white, cylindrical pillow and red, silken knee-cushions had been placed on the mattress. Also, frills of gold fabric were dangling on all four sides of the bedstead. Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting facing north on this beautifully decorated bedstead. He was wearing a white khes with a black border, and had tied a white feto with a gold border around His head. Also, He had covered Himself with a shelu with a gold border. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. They were all staring at the charming appearance of Shreeji Mahãrãj, just as chakors stare at the moon with fixed eyes. 1.2 Then, Shreeji Mahãrãj said to the paramhans, “Please begin a question-answer discussion amongst yourselves.” 1.3 Bhudharãnand Swãmi then asked, “Does nishchay in Bhagvãn arise in the antah-karans or in the jeev?” 1.4 Shivãnand Swãmi attempted to answer the question, but was unable to do so satisfactorily. 1.5 So Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “The jeev knows through the buddhi, which is the cause of all knowledge, and is greater than all. That buddhi resides in the man, in the chitt, in the ahankãr, in the ears, in the eyes, in the nose, in the tongue, in the mouth, in the skin, in the arms, in the legs, in the genitals, and in the anus. It resides in the body in this way, pervading it from head to toe. The jeev resides within this buddhi. However, the jeev is not felt, only the buddhi is felt. 1.6 “The following example will illustrate this: When the flames of a fire rise and fall, they do so because of the wind. The rise and fall of the flames are apparent, but the wind is not apparent. Also, when dung is placed in fire, the dung begins to burn. Then, when it is placed where there is no wind, smoke begins to rise. At that time, the rising smoke is apparent, but the wind within is not apparent. Also, the clouds that move in the sky are seen to do so because of the wind, but the wind that resides within them is not apparent. In this way, flames, smoke, and the clouds represent the buddhi, and the wind represents the jeev. 1.7 “What is that jeev like? Well, the jeev is the knower of the beliefs formed by the buddhi, and it also knows Brahmã, who is the cause of the beliefs in the buddhi. The jeev knows the thoughts of the man, and also knows Chandra, who is the cause of those thoughts in the man. The jeev knows the remembrance in the chitt, and also knows Vãsudev, the cause of the thinking in the chitt. It knows the ‘I-ness’ of the ahankãr, and also knows Rudra, the cause of that ‘I-ness’. In this way, the jeev perceives the four antah-karans, the ten indriyas, and the vishays, and their presiding devs, who allow a person to discriminate among those vishays. The jeev does all of this simultaneously. 1.8 “That jeev appears to be in one place; it appears to be as fine as the tip of a spear; and it appears to be extremely subtle. It appears this ways because it is associated with the buddhi. But, when that jeev is known as the illuminator of the body, the indriyas, the antah-karans, the vishays, and their presiding devs, it appears to be extremely vast, and it appears to be pervasive. That is when the jeev is not associated with the buddhi. 1.9 “That jeev is not known by the indriyas, but is known by assumption. For example, on seeing a sword weighing two hundred kilograms, a person can infer, ‘The carrier of this sword must be extremely strong’. Similarly, the jeev inspires the body, indriyas, the antah-karans, the vishays, and their presiding devs, simultaneously; therefore it must be very powerful. This is how the jeev can be known by assumption.” Shreeji Mahãrãj answered the question in this way. 1.10 Nityãnand Swãmi then asked, “Mahãrãj, what is the answer to the original question in what you have just said?” 1.11 Shreeji Mahãrãj clarified, “Well, the answer is that when the belief of Bhagvãn has developed in the buddhi, a person should realise that the belief has also developed within the jeev. How does that happen? Well, the belief initially develops in the indriyas, then in the ahankãr, then in the chitt, then in the man, then in the buddhi, and then finally, it develops in the jeev.” This was Shreeji Mahãrãj’s reply. 1.12 Again, Nityãnand Swãmi asked, “Mahãrãj, how can a person know when there is belief of Bhagvãn in the indriyas? How can a person know when there is belief of Bhagvãn in the antah-karans? How can a person know when there is belief of Bhagvãn within the jeev?” 1.13 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “The belief of Bhagvãn which is in the indriyas should be known as follows: Of all the objects in this world which are seen, heard, smelt, or touched, some are pleasant and some are unpleasant; some give pleasure and some give misery; some are liked and some are disliked; some are appropriate and some are inappropriate. If no doubts arise even when all these characteristics are apparent in Bhagvãn, that should be known to be the belief of Bhagvãn in the indriyas. 1.14 “Furthermore, of the various effects of the three gun (sattva-gun, rajo-gun, and tamo-gun), the effect of tamo-gun is laziness and sleep; the effect of rajo-gun is lust and anger; and the effect of sattva-gun is tranquillity and self-discipline. If no doubts arise even when all these are noticed in Bhagvãn, then that should be known as the belief of Bhagvãn in the antah-karans. 1.15 “Due to nirvikalp samãdhi, Rushabh-Dev Bhagvãn wandered crazily, keeping a stone in his mouth. Although his body burned in a forest fire, he remained totally unaware of it. So, if no doubts arise even when such a gunãtit state is apparent in Bhagvãn, then that should be known as belief of Bhagvãn in the jeev. 1.16 “For example, ships that travel in the sea carry an iron anchor with them. When thrown into the sea, if that anchor is immediately retracted before it reaches the seabed, then not much effort is required; it comes out of the sea immediately. However, if it is allowed to reach the seabed before it is retracted, then it comes out only after great effort. But, if it is allowed to descend gradually, and it settles and lodges itself into the seabed, then it cannot be pulled up by any means; it cannot be retracted. Similarly, when a person develops the belief of Bhagvãn in the jeev, that belief cannot be dislodged in any way whatsoever.” Shreeji Mahãrãj spoke at length in this way, but only a small section has been mentioned here. 1.17 Then, Chaitanyãnand Swãmi asked, “Mahãrãj, Bhagvãn is greater than the mind and speech, and He is gunãtit. So, how can the mãyik indriyas and antah-karans perceive Him?” 1.18 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “When the jeev – the knower of the body, indriyas, and antah-karans – becomes merged during the sushupti state, its indriyas and antah-karans also become merged in that sushupti state. At the time, Bhagvãn inspires that jeev. When the jeev enters the svapna state from the sushupti state, the dream-related locations, pleasures, vishays, and the jeev are all inspired by Bhagvãn. He inspires them during the jãgrat state as well. In this way, Bhagvãn inspires the jeev both when it is conscious of the body, and when it is not. Also, from Pradhãn, maha-tattva was formed; from maha-tattva, the three types of ahankãr were formed; from that ahankãr, the indriyas, devs, five mahã-bhuts, and five tan-mãtras were formed; all these are also inspired by Bhagvãn. Virãt, who is composed of all these tattvas combined, is also inspired by Bhagvãn. When all of these merge into Mãyã, Bhagvãn inspires that Mãyã as well. 1.19 “That Bhagvãn also inspires both jeev and ishvar when they identify themselves with their bodies. He inspires both jeev and ishvar even when they reside in the sushupti state, and are merged by Pradhãn and are without any identify or form. He inspires Kãl, which causes Mãyã and other entities to assume an identity and form, and also causes them to abandon their identity and form. So, how can that Bhagvãn be known by the indriyas and antah-karans? Is that your question?” 1.20 Everyone confirmed, “Yes, Mahãrãj, that is the question.” 1.21 Shreeji Mahãrãj continued, “The answer to that is as follows: Bhagvãn does not create and sustain the world for His own sake. In fact, it is said in the Shreemad Bhãgvat: buddhindriya-manah-prãnan janãnãm-asrujat-prabhuha matrãtham cha bhavãrtham cha hyãtmane kalpãnaya cha “This shlok means: Bhagvãn created the buddhi, indriyas, man, and prãns of all people to enable the jeevs to indulge in the vishays, to take birth, to transmigrate to other loks, and to attain kalyãn. Therefore, Bhagvãn created this universe for the sake of the kalyãn of the jeevs; Bhagvãn sustains it for the sake of the kalyãn of the jeevs; and Bhagvãn also causes its destruction for the sake of the kalyãn of the jeevs. How is that? Well, He destroys it to allow the jeevs – who are tired as a result of undergoing many births and deaths – to rest. That Bhagvãn, who acts in all ways for the benefit of the jeevs, becomes like a human out of compassion. Then, when the jeevs maintain profound association with a sant of that Bhagvãn, why should they not be able to know Him? They can certainly know Him.” 1.22 Then, Bhajanãnand Swãmi asked, “Mahãrãj, why then does the Vedic shlok claim: yato vãcho nivartante aprãpya manasã saha From where speech returns along with the mind without having attained Brahm and Bhagvãn. 1.23 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied in a pleased tone, “Well, in that case, the facts are as follows: pruthvi resides in ãkãsh, but does not become like ãkãsh; jal also resides in ãkãsh, but does not become like ãkãsh; tej also resides in ãkãsh, but does not become like ãkãsh; and vãyu also resides in ãkãsh, but does not become like ãkãsh. In the same way, the mind and speech do not attain Bhagvãn.” 1.24 Then, Nityãnand Swãmi raised a doubt: “Mahãrãj, the Shrutis and Smrutis claim: niranjanaha paramam sãmyam-upaiti He who is free from the blemishes of mãyã, attains qualities similar to those of Bhagvãn bahavo gnãna-tapasã pootã mad-bhãva-mãgataha Many who have been purified by tap in the form of gnãn have attained my qualities. 1.25 Shreeji Mahãrãj then said, “What I just mentioned is regarding the mind and the indriyas of a vimukh. However, the mind and indriyas of bhaktas of Bhagvãn do become merged with Bhagvãn. For example, at the time of destruction, pruthvi, which resides in ãkãsh, becomes one with ãkãsh; jal also becomes one with ãkãsh; tej also becomes one with ãkãsh; and vãyu also becomes one with ãkãsh. Similarly, the bodies, indriyas, antah-karans, and prãns of those who are bhaktas of Bhagvãn, due to their gnãn of Bhagvãn, become like Bhagvãn. This is because Bhagvãn’s murti itself is divya. So, the bodies, indriyas, and antah-karans of those bhaktas become like Bhagvãn’s indriyas, antah-karans, and body. That is why the bodies, indriyas, antah-karans, and prãns of those bhaktas, become divya. 1.26 “Take the following example: A bee captures a worm, stings it, and then buzzes over it. As a result, that worm – in the very same body – is transformed into a bee. Then, none of its bodily parts remain like that of a worm; it becomes exactly like a bee. Similarly, a bhakta of Bhagvãn, in that very same body, becomes divya like Bhagvãn.” 1.27 Shreeji Mahãrãj then concluded by saying, “The essence of this talk that I have given is for both a person with firmness in bhakti coupled with ãtmã-nishthã, and for a person with firmness in bhakti alone, progress is as described. However, the indriyas and antah-karans of a person with ãtmã-nishthã only do not become divya like Bhagvãn’s murti; he attains only brahm-sattã.” 1.28 Having spoken in this way, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “Now, let us stop this talk, as the sabhã has become quiet. Someone please sing some pleasing kirtans.” Saying this, He Himself began to perform dhyãn, while the sãdhus began singing kirtans.

2.1 In the Samvat year 1877, on Ãso sud 2 [9th October, 1820], Swãmi Shree Sahajãnandji Mahãrãj was sitting on the veranda outside the north-facing rooms of Vastã Khãchar’s darbãr in Kãriyãni. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. A sabhã of paramhans, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 2.2 By Shreeji Mahãrãj’s ãgnã, the junior paramhans had come to the front of the sabhã and were asking and answering questions amongst themselves. 2.3 Then, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “Allow me to ask one question.” 2.4 The junior paramhans responded by saying, “Mahãrãj, please do ask.” 2.5 Shreeji Mahãrãj then said, “One person’s intellect is such that since the day he joined satsang, he may occasionally perceive avgun in Bhagvãn and His sant, but it does not persist, and then passes away. Day by day, he may continue perceiving gun and avgun, but he never abandons satsang. This is because he is wise and realises, ‘There is no sant like this in the entire brahmãnd, and there is no other Bhagvãn besides his Mahãrãj’. As he has realised this, he remains firm in satsang. On the other hand, another person’s intellect is such that he never perceives avgun in Bhagvãn or His sant. But, even though the intellects of both bhaktas are outwardly similar, and their nishchay in Bhagvãn is also similar, one person continues perceiving avgun, while the other does not. What is the fault in the intellect of the person who keeps perceiving avgun? I put this question to Nãnã Shivãnand Swãmi.” 2.6 Nãnã Shivãnand Swãmi then attempted to answer the question, but was unable to do so adequately. 2.7 Then, Bhagvadãnand Swãmi said, “That person’s intellect is cursed.” 2.8 At that point, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “He is correct. That is the correct answer to the question. In the world, do people not say, ‘He has been cursed by someone?’ In the same way, that individual has been cursed because he may have hurt a great sant, he may have hurt a humble person, or he may not have served his parents. That is why his intellect is the way it is.” 2.9 Then, Bhagvadãnand Swãmi asked, “Mahãrãj, how can his cursed intellect be healed?” 2.10 Shreeji Mahãrãj explained, “This piece of cloth which I wear on my head and a thick cloth like a rug cannot be washed with the same amount of effort. This is because this thin cloth is cleaned immediately by washing it with only a small amount of soap. On the other hand, to wash a thick cloth, it must be soaked in water for two to four days, and then boiled over a fire. Only then, after it is washed with soap, does it become clean. Similarly, if a person whose intellect is cursed follows niyams only to the extent that everyone else does, then that avgun will not be eradicated. He should not only remain free of kãm, svãd, lobh, moh, and mãn as others. Instead, he should become more free of kãm than others; he should become more free of lobh than others; he should become more free of svãd than others; he should become more free of moh than others. Also, he should go to sleep later than others; and he should chant the name of Bhagvãn with a mãlã more often than others; and he should wake up a little earlier than others. In this way, if he follows niyams more intensely than others, his cursed intellect will be healed; otherwise it will not be healed.” 2.11 Then, Motã Shivãnand Swãmi asked Motã Yogãnand Swãmi a question: “Do karmas have a form or are they formless?” 2.12 Motã Yogãnand Swãmi replied, “I do not think I can answer that question.” 2.13 Shreeji Mahãrãj then replied, “In reality, karmas are without a form, but the good or bad fruits which result from those karmas do have a form. Those who claim that karmas have a form are nãstiks. After all, a karma is an action, and so it cannot have a form.” 2.14 Shreeji Mahãrãj talked a great deal in this way, but only a small portion has been mentioned here.

3.1 In the Samvat year 1877, on the evening of Ãso vad 7 [14th October, 1820], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting facing north on a decorated bedstead on the veranda outside the north-facing rooms of Vastã Khãchar’s darbãr in Kãriyãni. He was wearing a white khes and had tied a white feto around His head. He had also covered Himself with a white chãdar. A sabhã of paramhans, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 3.2 Then, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “This Shuk Muni is a very great sãdhu. From the day he began staying with me, his enthusiasm has been ever increasing; in fact, it has never diminished. Therefore, he is like Muktãnand Swãmi.” 3.3 Shreeji Mahãrãj then continued, “The affection that people develop for each other is due to gun, and the hatred they experience for each other is due to avgun. However, those gun and avgun cannot be established from a person’s external behaviour. A person outwardly may walk like a cat, fixing his eyes on the floor as he walks, but on the inside, he may have intense kãm. On seeing him behave in this way, a person who is not wise would think, ‘He is a very great sãdhu’. On the other hand, someone else may walk with wandering eyes. On seeing him, a person who is not wise would think, ‘He is a fake sãdhu’. However, inwardly he may be extremely free of kãm. Therefore, a person cannot be judged by his external, physical behaviour. He can only be judged after staying with him. By staying with him, his activities can be observed – the way he talks, the way he walks, the way he eats, the way he drinks, the way he sleeps, the way he awakens, and the way he sits. 3.4 “Also, gun and avgun are more apparent during the period of youth, but they are not so obvious during childhood or during old age. Someone may be spoiled as a child, but as a youth he becomes honourable. Conversely, someone may be good in his childhood, but becomes spoiled during his youth. A person who is determined in that he feels, ‘It is not good that I am having these improper thoughts’, and who makes an effort to eradicate those thoughts, and who remains determined until they have been eradicated, progresses in satsang in his youth. On the other hand, a person who is careless instead of being alert, will not progress. So, an honourable person can be recognised from his childhood.” 3.5 Having said this, Shreeji Mahãrãj talked at length about His fondness for tyãg in His childhood. He then continued, “A person who is honourable does not like the company of immature children from his childhood; he does not have an appetite for tasty food; and he continuously restrains his body. Just look, when I was a child, I had the same thoughts as Kãrtik Swãmi, and I felt, ‘I want to eliminate all the parts of my mother – her flesh and blood – from my body’. So, after many spiritual activities, I malnourished my body so much that if something pierced my body, water would come out, but never blood. In this way, a person who is honourable can be known from his childhood.” 3.6 Then, Bhajanãnand Swãmi asked, “Mahãrãj, is it better to maintain this thought in the mind, or is it better to expose the body to tap?” 3.7 To that, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “The faults due to the body should be known, and the faults due to the mind should be known. Of these, which are the faults of the body? Well, repeated erections and itching of the genitals, excessive movement, rapid movement of the eyes, smelling many types of fragrances quickly, walking twenty or twenty-five miles quickly, embracing someone with such force that his bones break, ejaculating semen during dreams, and so on – all these are faults of the body, not the mind. Even if these faults of the body are greatly reduced, lustful desires, as well as desires for eating, drinking, walking, touching, smelling, hearing, and tasting, may remain. These should be known as the faults of the mind. So, the faults of the body and mind should be distinguished in this way. 3.8 “Then, the faults of the body should be removed by imposing bodily restraints. Then, once the body is weakened, the remaining faults of the mind should be eradicated by thinking, ‘I am the ãtmã, separate from desires. In fact, I am completely blissful’. A person who practices these two methods – bodily restraint and thinking of the ãtmã – is a great sãdhu. If a person has only bodily restraint, but does not think of the ãtmã, then it is not appropriate. Conversely, if a person only thinks of the ãtmã, but does not restrain his body, then that is also not appropriate. Therefore, a person who has both is the best. Moreover, if these two methods – self-discipline and thinking – are necessary for even grahastha satsangis to practice, then a tyãgi should definitely practice them.” 3.9 Then, Nishkulãnand Swãmi asked, “Mahãrãj, can a person remain like that through thinking or through vairãgya?” 3.10 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “A person remains like that due to the company of a great sãdhu. Furthermore, a person who is unable to do so even with the company of a great sãdhu is a great sinner.” 3.11 Saying that, Shreeji Mahãrãj continued, “If a tyãgi desires to indulge in the worldly pleasures which are appropriate only for a grahastha, then he is as good as an animal eating dry grass. This is because even though he is never going to acquire those objects, he still has a desire for them. It seems that he has not understood that fact properly; and as the saying goes, what is the point in asking the name of a village that a person is not going to visit? If he does have a craving for those objects that he has given up, will it be possible for him to obtain them during this lifetime? He can attain them only if he falls from satsang, but not while remaining in satsang. Therefore, a person who maintains a desire for those pleasures, while remaining in satsang, is a fool. This is because whoever remains in satsang is required to follow the dharma of a satsangi. For example, if a woman sets out to become a sati but turns back upon seeing the fire, would her relatives allow her to turn back? They would force her to burn on her husband’s funeral pyre. Also, if a brãhman lady becomes a widow but continues to dress like a married woman, will her relatives allow it? Certainly they would not. Therefore, a person who maintains indecent svabhãvs while remaining in satsang has not understood this talk. If he had understood it, such indecent svabhãvs would not remain.” 3.12 Saying this, Shreeji Mahãrãj bid “Jay Swãminãrãyan” to everyone and departed to go to sleep.

4.1 In the Samvat year 1877, four-and-a-half hours after sunrise on Ãso vad 8 [15th October, 1820], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting on the veranda outside the north-facing rooms of Vastã Khãchar’s darbãr in Kãriyãni. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. A sabhã of paramhans, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 4.2 Then, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “Please begin a question-answer discussion amongst yourselves.” 4.3 Gopalãnand Swami asked Bhajanãnand Swami, “In this body, how much awareness is of the jeev, and how much awareness is of the witness (Bhagvãn)?” 4.4 Bhajanãnand Swami attempted to answer the question, but was unable to do so. 4.5 Shreeji Mahãrãj then replied, “The buddhi pervades this body from head to toe. As a result, it is simultaneously aware of the activities of all the indriyas. The jeev resides within that buddhi by pervading it. Therefore, the awareness of the buddhi is due to the awareness of the jeev. Similarly, since the witness resides within the jeev, the awareness of the jeev is due to the awareness of the witness.” 4.6 Nityãnand Swami then asked Shreeji Mahãrãj, “Mahãrãj, the witness does reside within the jeev. But, realising that a witness must possess a form, the question is how can that which possesses a form also be all-pervading?” 4.7 Hearing this, Shreeji Mahãrãj explained, “That which possesses a form can also be all-pervading. For example, Agni-Dev possesses a definite svarup when residing in his lok, but through his powers, he is latent within wood. Similarly, Bhagvãn possesses a definite form in His Akshardhãm, but through His antaryãmi powers, He pervades the jeevs and functions as if He possesses a form. Therefore, even that antaryãmi form should be considered to possess a form.”

5.1 In the Samvat year 1877, on Ãso vad 14 [4th November, 1820], Swãmi Shree Sahajãnandji Mahãrãj was sitting on a bedstead with a canopy on the veranda outside the north-facing rooms of Vastã Khãchar’s darbãr in Kãriyãni. 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, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “I wish to ask a question.” 5.3 The munis responded by saying, “Mahãrãj, please do ask.” 5.4 Then, Shreeji Mahãrãj asked, “Bhagvãn assumes an avatãr on earth to grant kalyãn to the jeevs. But, is He not capable of granting kalyãn while remaining in His dhãm, without assuming an avatãr? After all, Bhagvãn can grant kalyãn in any way He wishes. Then, what is the purpose of Him assuming an avatãr on earth? Furthermore, if Bhagvãn can only grant kalyãn when He assumes an avatãr, and He is incapable of granting kalyãn in any other way, it would suggest that this is a weakness of Bhagvãn. But in reality, Bhagvãn is capable of granting kalyãn to the jeevs by assuming an avatãr, and He is also capable of granting kalyãn to the jeevs without assuming an avatãr. Then, what is the purpose of Bhagvãn assuming an avatãr on earth? That is the question.” 5.5 The senior sãdhus answered according to their own understanding, but were unable to answer Shreeji Mahãrãj’s question adequately. As Shreeji Mahãrãj raised doubts to their answers, their answers were all disproved. The munis then folded their hands and requested, “Mahãrãj, only you are capable of answering this question.” 5.6 Shreeji Mahãrãj then explained, “Bhagvãn assumes an avatãr for only one reason: Having surrendered Himself to the bhakti of those bhaktas who have intense love for Him, Bhagvãn assumes whichever svarup the bhaktas wish for in order to grant them bliss. He then fulfils all the desires of His bhaktas. Since the bhaktas have a physical body, Bhagvãn also assumes a physical body, and showers love upon those bhaktas. In addition to this, He suppresses His powers and behaves with the bhaktas as a son, or as a close companion, or as a friend, or as a relative. Because of this, the bhakta may not maintain much courtesy with Bhagvãn. Nonetheless, Bhagvãn showers His love upon the bhakta in whichever way He desires. 5.7 “Therefore, the only reason Bhagvãn assumes an avatãr is to fulfil the desires of His beloved bhaktas. Along with this, He grants kalyãn to innumerable other jeevs and also establishes dharma. Now, if there is any doubt in what I have just said, please speak.” 5.8 The munis replied, “Mahãrãj, your reply is most appropriate.”

6.1 In the Samvat year 1877, on Ãso vad Amãs [5th November, 1820], the day of Divãli, a row of oil lamps had been arranged around a stage which had been assembled in front of the north-facing rooms of Vastã Khãchar’s darbãr in Kãriyãni. Swãmi Shree Sahajãnandji Mahãrãj was sitting on a decorated, canopied bedstead that had been placed on that stage. He was wearing a red survãl made of kinkhãb with golden embroidery. He was also wearing a black, kinkhãb dagli with the words ‘Nar-Nãrãyan-Swãminãrãyan’ imprinted upon it. Around His head He had tied an orange pãgh with a border of golden threads. He had also tied a sky-blue coloured feto tightly around his waist, and garlands of yellow flowers were hanging around His neck. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 6.2 A female bhakta from the port of Deev had come on that occasion. She requested Shreeji Mahãrãj to allow her to perform His pujã. Accepting her request, Shreeji Mahãrãj came down from His seat, approached the bhakta, and accepted her pujã. Then, after accepting the clothes, a yellow umbrella, and a pair of wooden chãkhadis offered by her, He returned to His seat. 6.3 Then, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “For so many years bhaktas have been offering clothes and thousands of rupees worth of jewellery to me, but I have never gone of my own accord to receive them as I just did. Also, I have never become as pleased by wearing the clothes and jewellery offered by others as I have just now. I have become extremely pleased upon this bhakta today.” 6.4 The munis commented, “That bhakta truly does have love.” In the meantime, Dinã-Nãth Bhatt arrived, bowed at the feet of Shreeji Mahãrãj, and then sat down. Shreeji Mahãrãj then gave all the richly embroidered clothes to him. 6.5 Muktãnand Swãmi then asked, “Mahãrãj, by which gun is Bhagvãn pleased upon a bhakta?” 6.6 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “Bhagvãn is pleased with a bhakta who becomes free of kãm, krodh, lobh, kapat, mãn, irshyã, and matsar, and then offers bhakti to Bhagvãn. But, amongst all of those, matsar is the root of all avgun. That is why in the Shreemad Bhãgvat, Shree Vyãsji has noted that only the sãdhu who is without matsar is worthy to possess bhãgvat-dharma. As a result, matsar is fainter than all the other avgun. Also, it is extremely difficult to eradicate matsar.” 6.7 Then, Brahmãnand Swãmi asked, “What is the method for eradicating matsar?” 6.8 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “A person who is a sãdhu, and treads the path of a sãdhu, will be able to eradicate matsar. However, if a person does not desire to tread the path of a sãdhu, the matsar within him will never be eradicated.” 6.9 Again, Muktãnand Swãmi asked, “What causes matsar?” 6.10 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “There are three causes of matsar: women, wealth, and delicious food. But, for a person who does not have any of these three, mãn is the cause of matsar. Moreover, for a person who possesses matsar, the fact that I have given these clothes to Dinã-Nãth Bhatt, must have led to matsar. Such a person would never think, ‘The person who brought such richly embroidered clothes and offered them to Mahãrãj should be commended. Mahãrãj should also be commended since He immediately gave them away to a brãhman’. Such a thought would never arise in the heart of a person who possesses matsar. Even if someone else gives something and someone else receives it, a person who possesses matsar burns with envy unnecessarily.” 6.11 “As for me, not even the slightest bit of kãm, krodh, lobh, mãn, matsar, or irshyã, enters my heart. Also, in my heart, I experience a strong hatred for the panch-vishays (shabda, sparsh, rup, ras, and gandh). In fact, I do not have even the slightest interest in any one of the panch-vishays. 6.12 “Whenever I accept food or clothes, I do so on seeing the bhakti of the bhaktas; I never accept them for own physical pleasure. All of my actions, like eating, drinking, and wearing clothes, are for the sake of all the sãdhus and satsangis. If I have the feeling that it is for my own sake and not for their sake, then I would immediately discard it. 6.13 “The only reason I keep this physical body is for the sake of the satsangis; besides that, there is no other reason. Bhaktas such as Mulji Brahm-Chãri and Somlã Khãchar, who have been staying close to me for so many years, know my nature and realise, ‘Besides the bhaktas of Bhagvãn, Mahãrãj does not have love for anything else. In fact, Mahãrãj is not affected by anything, just like ãkãsh’. In this way, those who constantly stay near me know my nature. I have sacrificed my body for the sake of those who are bhaktas of Bhagvãn by word, thought, and deed. Therefore, in all ways, I am attached to whoever is a bhakta of Bhagvãn. To me, the wealth of the fourteen loks, without the bhaktas of Bhagvãn, seems as worthless as a blade of grass. 6.14 “In addition, even those who are bhaktas of Bhagvãn and have firm love only for Bhagvãn, will not find pleasure in the enticing vishays. Although they may sustain the body with ordinary vishays, they immediately become miserable by attractive vishays. Therefore, only such a person can be considered to be a completely perfect bhakta of Bhagvãn.”

7.1 In the Samvat year 1877, on the night of Kãrtik sud 1 [6th November, 1820], a row of oil lamps had been arranged around a stage in front of the north-facing rooms of Vastã Khãchar’s darbãr in Kãriyãni. Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting on a bedstead that had been placed on the stage. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. A sabhã of paramhans, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 7.2 Then, Kãshidãs of the village of Bochãsan asked Shreeji Mahãrãj a question: “Mahãrãj, tyãgis follow the path of nivrutti; therefore, they are able to keep their vrutti constantly on Bhagvãn. However, grahasthas follow the path of pravrutti; so, they are plagued with countless worldly problems. What understanding must a grahastha maintain in order to fix his vrutti constantly on Bhagvãn?” 7.3 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “The grahastha should believe, ‘Just as I had parents, wives, and children during my past lives in the cycle of 8.4 million life-forms, I have the same in this life as well. In fact, there must be many mothers, sisters, and daughters from many past lives wandering around, and yet, just as I do not have any sense of ‘my-ness’ for them, similarly, I should not keep any sense of ‘my-ness’ for the relations of this body either’. Thinking in this way, if he diverts his affection from everything else, maintains firm affection only towards Bhagvãn, and keeps the company of a sãdhu, then even a grahastha’s vrutti can remain constantly fixed on Bhagvãn, just like the vrutti of a tyãgi.” 7.4 Hearing these words of Shreeji Mahãrãj, all the grahasthas present in the sabhã folded their hands and asked, “Mahãrãj, what will become of the grahastha who is unable to behave in that way?” 7.5 Shreeji Mahãrãj answered, “I spoke in reference to a person who, having eradicated all desires for all objects except Bhagvãn, keeps his vrutti constantly on Bhagvãn. But, someone who is not so strong should abide by the dharma of satsang. He should also rely on the strength of Bhagvãn and His sant, whose refuge he has taken, by believing, ‘Bhagvãn is adham-udhãran and patit-pãvan, and I have attained Him in person’.’’ After hearing these words from Shreeji Mahãrãj, the bhaktas became extremely pleased. 7.6 Shreeji Mahãrãj then asked the sant, “What causes vairãgya to arise?” 7.7 The sãdhus replied according to their understanding, but Shreeji Mahãrãj’s question could not be answered adequately. So they said, “Mahãrãj, you will have to answer that question.” 7.8 Shreeji Mahãrãj explained, “Upon hearing the words of the shãstras and sat-purush, developing a fascination that does not diminish once developed, is the only cause for vairãgya; there is no other cause. Whoever is fascinated in this way, will develop vairãgya, regardless of whether he is tãmasi, rãjasi, or sãttvik. On the other hand, if a person does not have such an fascination, he will not develop vairãgya. Also, if someone’s fascination diminishes after a few days, then the vairãgya that develops can cause tremendous harm. How? Well, when he does have the fascination, he renounces and leaves his home. Then, after he becomes a sãdhu, the fascination that he had previously developed, subsides; but the house he left behind would be in ruins. Then, like the dog of a washer-man, who is fed neither at home nor at the river, he falls from both paths. On the other hand, those who have firm vairãgya, attain Akshardhãm.” 7.9 Then, Shreeji Mahãrãj asked another question to the paramhans, in an extremely pleased mood: “What is ãtyantik kalyãn? Also, how does a person who has attained ãtyantik kalyãn and siddh-dashã, feel in all of his activities?” 7.10 The munis answered according to their understanding, but Shreeji Mahãrãj’s question was not answered adequately. So, all the munis folded their hands and said to Shreeji Mahãrãj, “Mahãrãj, you will have to answer that question.” 7.11 Shreeji Mahãrãj then said, “During the destruction of the brahmãnd, the twenty-four tattvas, which have evolved from Prakruti, are absorbed into Prakruti. Then, Prakruti-Purush also disappear in the divine light of Akshar-Brahm, after which only the concentrated light, which is sachidãnand, remains. The divya murti of Purushottam Bhagvãn Vãsudev is constantly present in that divine light. Through that divya murti, He Himself becomes visible to everyone, and incarnates on earth in human form for the purpose of granting kalyãn to the jeevs. But, the jeevs on earth who are ignorant fools, claim that Bhagvãn has mãyik qualities within Him. In reality, he does not have any mãyik qualities within Him; He is forever gunãtit and has a divya murti. Moreover, it is that very same Bhagvãn, who has a murti and is divya, which the Vedãnt shãstras propound as being nirgun, achhedhya, abhedhya, and pervading everywhere. He has been described as being nirgun, in order to dismiss the mãyik view from the mind of the jeev. That Bhagvãn remains the same during the time of creation, sustenance, and destruction of the universe; He does not undergo any changes like worldly objects do, and He always maintains a divya svarup. Having such a firm belief of pratyaksha Purushottam, is called ãtyantik kalyãn. 7.12 “A person who has attained siddh-dashã through such belief, experiences the following: Wherever he casts his eyes – among all the sthãvar and jangam forms – he sees the murti of Bhagvãn as if it is before his eyes, the same murti that constantly remains in Akshardhãm even after the destruction of the body, the brahmãnd and Prakruti-Purush. Other than that murti, he does not perceive even an atom. These are the characteristics of a person who has attained siddh-dashã.”

8.1 In the Samvat year 1877, on Kãrtik sud 4 [9th November, 1820], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting on a decorated bedstead on the veranda outside the north-facing rooms of Vastã Khãchar’s darbãr in Kãriyãni. He was dressed entirely in white clothes. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 8.2 Then, Muktãnand Swãmi asked a question: “Mahãrãj, the Veds, the shãstras, the Purãns, and the historical shãstras, have described the sagun svarup of Bhagvãn and have also described His nirgun svarup. So, how should a person understand the nirgun svarup, and how should he understand the sagun svarup of Shree Purushottam? Also, how much does a bhakta of Bhagvãn benefit by understanding the nirgun svarup of that Bhagvãn, and how much does he benefit by understanding the sagun svarup of that Bhagvãn?” 8.3 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “The nirgun svarup of Bhagvãn is much subtler than that which is subtle. It is the ãtmã of all the tattvas, such as pruthvi and jal; it is the ãtmã of Pradhãn-Purush, which are higher than those tattvas; and it is the ãtmã of pure Purush and Prakruti which are themselves higher than Pradhãn-Purush; it is the ãtmã of even Akshar who is higher than them. All these make up the sharir of Bhagvãn. Just as the jeev is subtler, purer, and of greater luminosity than the body, in the same way, compared to all the other entities, Bhagvãn is much more subtle, pure, unaffected, and luminous. For example, ãkãsh pervades the four bhuts (pruthvi, jal, tej vãyu). Moreover, it remains unaffected by those four bhuts, and the influences of those four bhuts do not affect ãkãsh. In fact, despite dwelling in those four bhuts, ãkãsh remains absolutely unaffected. In the same way, Purushottam Bhagvãn dwells in all as their ãtmã. Despite this, He is absolutely unchanged and untainted, and He maintains His own unique characteristics; no one is capable of becoming like Him. 8.4 “For example, even though ãkãsh dwells within the four bhuts, the four bhuts are incapable of becoming unaffected and untainted like ãkãsh. Similarly, Purushottam Bhagvãn is the ãtmã of all, yet no one up to and including Akshar is capable of becoming as powerful as Purushottam Bhagvãn. In this way, being extremely subtle, extremely unaffected, extremely pure, extremely untainted, extremely luminous, and possessing tremendous, divine powers is the nirgun aspect of the murti of that Bhagvãn. In another example, if Mount Girnãr were to be placed next to Mount Lokã-Lok it would appear extremely small. In the same way, before the vastness of Purushottam Bhagvãn, countless millions of brahmãnds, which are encircled by the eight barriers (jad prakruti), appear extremely small, like mere atoms. Those brahmãnds do not become smaller, but before the vastness of Bhagvãn they appear smaller. In this way, the extreme vastness of the murti of Bhagvãn is the sagun aspect of Bhagvãn. 8.5 “Then, someone may doubt, ‘In His nirgun svarup, Bhagvãn is subtler than the extremely subtle, and in His sagun svarup, He is more vast than the extremely vast. Then, what is the nature of the original svarup of Bhagvãn, who assumes both of these svarups?’ 8.6 “Then, answer to that is that the pratyaksha svarup of Bhagvãn visible in a human svarup is the eternal and original svarup of Bhagvãn. His nirgun and sagun aspects are the special, divine powers of that svarup. For example, Shree Krishna Bhagvãn and Arjun sat in a chariot and went to retrieve the son of the brãhman. After crossing Mount Lokã-Lok, they reached the darkness of Mãyã. Shree Krishna pierced that Mãyã using his sudarshan chakra. Then, reaching the light of Brahm, which is beyond that Mãyã, he retrieved the son of the brãhman from Bhumã-Purush who resides there. In that situation, the chariot and horses were mãyik and physical, but through contact with Shree Krishna Bhagvãn, they became extremely subtle and chaitanya; so, they reached the nirgun Akshardhãm of Bhagvãn. In this way, to impart subtlety to physical objects is the nirgun aspect of Shree Krishna Bhagvãn’s murti. 8.7 “Furthermore, that same Shree Krishna Bhagvãn showed the whole brahmãnd, including the eight barriers (jad prakruti) which encircle it, in his own mouth to his mother, Yashodãji. To Arjun, he also revealed the Vishvarup form in his own svarup. At the time, with the exception of Arjun, everyone saw the svarup of Bhagvãn as being five-and-a-half feet in height. Also, when Bhagvãn assumed the avatãr of Vãman, he initially gave darshan in the form of a dwarf. However, after he had made Bali give up as much land as could be covered in three footsteps, he increased the size of his own svarup to such an extent that one footstep alone covered the seven Pãtãls, with his own body covering the entire sky. With his second footstep, he covered the seven Svargs and pierced the outer shell of the brahmãnd. Bali Rãjã saw this vast svarup of Bhagvãn, but others only saw the dwarf svarup of Bhagvãn. 8.8 “In this way, Bhagvãn’s vastness, which is even more vast than the extremely vast, is the sagun aspect of Bhagvãn’s murti. For example, the sky is cloudless during the winter and summer, but when monsoon arrives, it becomes overcast with innumerable clusters of clouds. With time, these clouds form in the sky and later disperse again. In the same way, by His own will, Bhagvãn reveals His divine powers from Himself in their nirgun and sagun aspects, and also withdraws them back within Himself. That Bhagvãn appears to be like a human, but no one is able to understand the limits of His greatness. If a bhakta realises the nirgun and sagun aspects in Bhagvãn’s svarup in this way, then Kãl, karma, and Mãyã would be incapable of binding him, and throughout the day he would continuously experience wonder in his heart.”

9.1 In the Samvat year 1877, on Kãrtik sud 5 [10th November, 1820], Swãmi Shree Sahajãnandji Mahãrãj was sitting on a decorated bedstead on the veranda outside the north-facing rooms of Vastã Khãchar’s darbãr in Kãriyãni. 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 asked a question to Nityãnand Swãmi and Brahmãnand Swãmi: “Suppose there is someone who is so unkind and stubborn, that once he develops a grudge for someone, he never abandons that grudge. Instead, he continues to remain stubborn like a buffalo. Can such a person be called a sãdhu or not?” 9.3 Both replied, “A person who is like that cannot be called a sãdhu.” 9.4 Then, Muktãnand Swãmi asked a question: “Mahãrãj, there may be a bhakta of Bhagvãn who perceives avgun in some other bhakta, and due to that, he develops hatred for that bhakta. How can he eradicate the perception of that avgun?” 9.5 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “A person who has the bhakti of Bhagvãn in his heart and realises the greatness of Bhagvãn, would never perceive avgun in a bhakta of Bhagvãn, and he would never develop an unkind stubbornness towards a bhakta of Bhagvãn. For example, Uddhavji had understood the greatness of Bhagvãn, and therefore asked for a vardãn: ‘May I be reborn as any of the vines, or blades of grass, or shrubs in Vrundãvan in order to have the privilege of being touched by the dust of the feet of the gopis’. Also, Shree Krishna Bhagvãn told Baldevji that the trees, birds, and deer in Vrundãvan are extremely fortunate. Even Brahmã asked for a vardãn from Shree Krishna Bhagvãn: ‘O Bhagvãn! May I be so highly blessed to be able to serve your holy feet as your dãs, either in this life, or in the life of an animal or bird’. 9.6 “Therefore, a person who understands the greatness of a bhakta of Bhagvãn in this way will never develop a grudge due to a person’s avgun. Moreover, a person who understands such greatness never takes into account even minor avgun that are present in a bhakta of the pratyaksha svarup his own ishta-dev. In fact, a person who realises the greatness of Bhagvãn looks upon even animals, trees, and shrubs, which have come into contact with Bhagvãn, as equivalent to devs. If that is so, what can be said of those people who are engaged in the bhakti of Bhagvãn, abiding by the vartmãn, and chanting the name of Bhagvãn? He would certainly look upon them as equivalent to devs and would not think unkindly of them. 9.7 “Therefore, a person who understands the greatness of Bhagvãn does not develop hatred towards bhaktas of Bhagvãn. On the other hand, a person who does not understand such greatness does develop hatred towards them. Therefore, a person who does not realise the greatness of Bhagvãn and His bhakta should be known as being half-fallen, even if he is a satsangi. Only a person who understands the greatness of Bhagvãn and the bhaktas of Bhagvãn should be known to be a perfect satsangi.”

10.1 In the Samvat year 1877, on the night of Kãrtik sud 10 [15th November, 1820], Swãmi Shree Sahajãnandji Mahãrãj was sitting in one of the east-facing rooms of Vastã Khãchar’s darbãr in Kãriyãni. A sabhã of ten or twelve senior sãdhus and five or six haribhaktas were sitting before Him. Shreeji Mahãrãj seemed to have a fever, and so he was warming Himself in front of a coal stove that had been placed before Him. 10.2 Then, Shreeji Mahãrãj told Muktãnand Swãmi, “Please check my pulse. It seems as if there is a slight illness in my body.” 10.3 Then, after checking His pulse, Muktãnand Swãmi said, “Mahãrãj! It seems to be a serious illness.” Saying this, he continued, “Mahãrãj, it seems that the times are tough for the satsangis right now. After all, Mahãrãj, you are as vital to the satsangis as their lives, and any illness in your body is the very meaning of a difficult period for all satsangis.” 10.4 Hearing this, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “In order to please Bhagvãn, Nãradji performed severe tap by enduring cold and heat, hunger and thirst, for many yugs; and due to this, he was able to please Bhagvãn. In the same way, a person who is wise deliberately performs tap by restraining his body and indriyas. Therefore, a sãdhu who is wise should also behave so as to deliberately induce suffering to his body and indriyas. If that is so, why should he wish to relieve whatever suffering comes his way due to Bhagvãn’s wish? 10.5 “Moreover, a tyãgi sãdhu should firmly maintain the following wish in his mind: ‘I do not desire the pleasures of the panch-vishays found in Dev-Lok, Brahm-Lok, Vaikunth, and other loks. In this very body, or by going to Badrikãshram and Shvet-Dvip after I die, I wish to please Bhagvãn by performing tap. Furthermore, even if it takes one life or two lives or a thousand lives, I wish to please Bhagvãn only by performing tap’. 10.6 “Furthermore, the jeev’s kalyãn is attained only by the following understanding: ‘Everything happens by the will of Shree Krishna-Nãrãyan, not by Kãl, karma, or Mãyã’. In this way, understanding that only Bhagvãn is the all-doer, is the best cause of kalyãn. Performing tap, however, earns Bhagvãn’s pleasure. Yet even while performing tap, a person should keep such feelings as Rãdhikãji and Lakshmiji keep for Bhagvãn when offering loving bhakti. If a person still understands only Bhagvãn to be the all-doer, then even if he does not perform tap, his jeev overcomes the misery of births and deaths. But, without performing tap, Bhagvãn’s pleasure is not bestowed upon that jeev. 10.7 “There is no sinner worse than the person who does not realise Bhagvãn to be the all-doer. In fact, he should be known to be a sinner worse than a person who has killed a cow, killed a brãhman, associated with the wife of his own guru, or criticised a sadguru who is a knower of brahm. This is because he believes Kãl, karma, and Mãyã, to be the cause of everything; not Bhagvãn. In fact, a person should not even stand in the shadow of such persons who are nãstik outcasts, nor should he listen to their talks, even unknowingly. 10.8 “Furthermore, by the grace of Bhagvãn, those who are bhaktas of Bhagvãn may become like Brahmã, Shiv, Shukji, or Nãrad; they may even become like Prakruti-Purush; or they may become like brahm or Akshar. However, no one is capable of becoming like Shree Purushottam-Nãrãyan. Therefore, just like a vile person is shunned, a person should immediately shun the company of those persons and those shãstras that disprove the upãsanã of Bhagvãn and break his master-servant relationship with Bhagvãn.” 10.9 Then, Muktãnand Swãmi asked, “Mahãrãj, a bhakta who serves Bhagvãn by offering beautiful clothes, jewellery, and various types of food, also desires to please Bhagvãn. Yet, you are saying that a person can only please Bhagvãn through tap. Then, what is inappropriate about pleasing Bhagvãn through such offerings, without restoring to tap?” 10.10 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “If the person who is offering bhakti to Bhagvãn with such lavish objects does so without any desires, solely for the purpose of earning Bhagvãn’s pleasure, then it is all right. On the other hand, if he is tempted by those objects, viewing them to be Bhagvãn’s prasãd, and leaving Bhagvãn aside, if he develops affection for those objects, then by indulging in the vishays, he will become engrossed in them and corrupted by them – that is what is inappropriate. Therefore, a tyãgi should realise Bhagvãn to be the all-doer and strive to please Bhagvãn only by performing tap. He should also worship Bhagvãn by offering loving bhakti in the same way as Rãdhikãji and Lakshmiji. That is my principle.” 10.11 Then, Brahmãnand Swãmi asked, “Mahãrãj, please tell us how we can benefit in this lok and in the lok we attain after death?” 10.12 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “The principle that I have just explained is itself the only means to attain supreme bliss, in this lok and in other loks.” 10.13 Then, Gopalãnand Swãmi asked, “Mahãrãj, in a person’s mind, he may have great enthusiasm to develop the qualities of tyãg and perform tap. But, if some obstacle is encountered in the process, what should he do?” 10.14 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “A person who has great dedication in any activity would never be held back, even if he were to face thousands of obstacles. That should be known to be true dedication. Just see, it has been twenty-one years since I first met Rãmãnand Swãmi. During this period, I have come across countless bhaktas who have been offering countless varieties of clothes, jewellery, food, and drink. Despite this, my mind has never been tempted by any of those objects. This is because I have dedication only for tyãg. 10.15 “Furthermore, in this world there are so many widows who, following the death of their husbands, continue to grieve. On the other hand, there are also many women who renounce their wedded husbands and engage themselves in worshipping Bhagvãn. Similarly, there are so many foolish men who mourn the loss of their own wives and continues to have desires for other women. However, there are so many men with vairãgya, who renounce their own wedded wives and engage themselves in worshipping Bhagvãn. In this way, each and every person has a different type of dedication. 10.16 “But, my dedication and principle is just this: A person should strive to please Bhagvãn by performing tap. Also, realising Bhagvãn to be the all-doer, he should offer bhakti to Him while maintaining a master-servant relationship, and he should not allow the upãsanã of that Bhagvãn to be violated in any way. All of you should accept these words of mine as the most supreme principle.”

11.1 In the Samvat year 1877, on the night of Kãrtik sud 11 [16th November, 1820], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting on the veranda outside the east-facing rooms of Vastã Khãchar’s darbãr in Kãriyãni. He was wearing a white khes and a white dagli made of chhint. He had also tied a white pãgh around His head, and was wearing garlands of yellow and red guldãvadi flowers. Tassels of yellow flowers were also dangling from His pãgh. In addition to this, two barbers who were holding torches, were standing before Him on either side. A sabhã of munis, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 11.2 Then, Sachidãnand Swãmi asked Shreeji Mahãrãj, “What are the characteristics of a person who has love of Bhagvãn?” 11.3 Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “A person who has love for his beloved Bhagvãn, will never disobey the wishes of his beloved. That is that characteristic of love. To take an example, the gopis had love for Shree Krishna Bhagvãn. So, when Shree Krishna Bhagvãn prepared to leave for Mathurã, all of them together decided, ‘We will disobey the norms of family traditions and society, and we will keep Bhagvãn here by force’. However, at the time of Shree Krishna Bhagvãn’s departure, they looked into his eyes and realised that it was not his wish to stay. As a result, all of them remained far away, because in their hearts, they feared, ‘If we do not act according to Bhagvãn’s wishes, His love for us will subside’. Thinking in this way, none of them were able to utter a word. 11.4 “Then, after Bhagvãn went to Mathurã, even though Shree Krishna was only five miles away, the gopis never disobeyed his wishes by going for his darshan. They realised, ‘If we do go to Mathurã against Bhagvãn’s wish, then the love that Bhagvãn has for us will diminish’. 11.5 “Therefore, the characteristic of love is exactly this: A person who has true love for someone acts according to that person’s wishes. If he realises his beloved to be pleased by his staying nearby, then he stays nearby. On the other hand, if he realises his beloved to be pleased by his staying away, then he stays away; but in no way does he behave contrary to his beloved’s wish. That is the characteristic of love. So, since the gopis had true love for Bhagvãn, they did not go for Bhagvãn’s darshan without his ãgnã. Only when Bhagvãn sent for them in Kurukshetra did they have darshan of Bhagvãn, but in no way did they disobey Bhagvãn’s ãgnã. Therefore, a person who has love for Bhagvãn would never disobey Bhagvãn’s ãgnã. He would only act according to Bhagvãn’s wishes. That is the characteristic of love.” 11.6 Then, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “Now let me ask a question.” 11.7 The munis responded, “Mahãrãj, please do ask.” 11.8 Shreeji Mahãrãj then said, “Except for those panch-vishays which are related to Bhagvãn, a bhakta of Bhagvãn treats all other vishays as worthless. Therefore, he associates only with Bhagvãn. Now, suppose Bhagvãn were to issue the following ãgnã to such a bhakta: ‘Live away from me’. In that situation, if he keeps a selfish desire for Bhagvãn’s darshan, it would amount to disobeying the ãgnã; and if he does not follow the ãgnã, then the love that Bhagvãn has towards that bhakta would not remain. Therefore, just as that bhakta has abandoned the worldly vishays (shabda, sparsh, rup, ras, and gandh), does he also abandon the vishays related to Bhagvãn, or does he not? That is the question.” 11.9 Each of the munis gave an answer according to his level of intelligence, but the question was not answered satisfactorily. Then, they said to Shreeji Mahãrãj, “Mahãrãj, you will have to provide the answer.” 11.10 Then, Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “If a bhakta has deep love for Bhagvãn, treats the worldly panch-vishays that are not related to Bhagvãn as worthless, and if he is firmly attached to Bhagvãn via the panch-vishays, then wherever such a bhakta goes by Bhagvãn’s ãgnã, the murti of Bhagvãn also goes with him. Moreover, just as that bhakta cannot remain without Bhagvãn, in exactly the same way, Bhagvãn also cannot remain without the bhakta. In fact, He does not leave the heart of the bhakta even for a fraction of a second. Therefore, such a bhakta does constantly maintain contact with Bhagvãn in the panch-vishays. This is because the same panch-vishays that no one can stay without, that bhakta has considered to be worthless. Instead, he has attached himself to Bhagvãn in the panch-vishays. Therefore, that bhakta maintains a constant relationship with Bhagvãn.”

12.1 In the Samvat year 1877, on Kãrtik sud Punam [20th November, 1820], Swãmi Shree Sahajãnandji Mahãrãj was sitting on a decorated bedstead on the veranda outside the east-facing rooms of Vastã Khãchar’s darbãr in Kãriyãni. He was wearing a white khes and a white dagli made of chhint. He has also tied a white feto with a bokãni around His head. A sabhã of paramhans, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him. 12.2 Then, Shreeji Mahãrãj said, “Please begin a question-answer discussion.” 12.3 Then, the munis asked questions amongst themselves for quite some time, where the topic of the three bodies of the jeev (sthul, sukshma, and kãran) and the three bodies of ishvar (virãt, sutrãtmã and avyãkrut) arose. 12.4 Shreeji Mahãrãj then commented, “The kãran body is the mãyã of the jeev. That same kãran body evolves into the sthul and sukshma bodies. Therefore, all three bodies –sthul, sukshma, and kãran – can be said to be the mãyã of the jeev. In the same way, virãt, sutrãtmã, and avyãkrut can be said to be the mãyã of ishvar. 12.5 “The kãran body, the mãyã of the jeev, is attached so strongly to the jeev that they cannot be separated by any means whatsoever. However, if a person attains the company of a sant, realises the svarup of Bhagvãn through the words of that sant, performs dhyãn on the svarup of Bhagvãn, and takes in the words of Bhagvãn in his heart, then the kãran body attached to his jeev is burnt completely. 12.6 “For example, the shell of a tamarind seed is firmly attached to the seed. But, when the seed is roasted over a fire, the shell is burnt and then becomes detached. It can then be peeled off easily by rubbing the seed in your hands. Similarly, when the kãran body is ‘roasted’ by performing dhyãn and following the words of Bhagvãn, it becomes separated from the jeev just as easily as when a person rubs off the shell of a roasted tamarind seed. However, even if a person were to try a million other methods, he would not be able to destroy the jeev’s ignorance in the form of the kãran body.” 12.7 Then, Shreeji Mahãrãj asked a question to the munis: “During the jãgrat state, sattva-gun prevails and a person has knowledge of all objects. In spite of this, when a person hears something in the jãgrat state, it can only be strengthened if he thinks of it in the sukshma body. However rajo-gun prevails in the sukshma body; and during the state of rajo-gun, complete knowledge is not possible. However, in the sukshma body, when a person thinks about what he has heard during the jãgrat state, it becomes complete knowledge. How can this apparent contradiction be resolved?” 12.8 The munis collectively attempted to explain to the best of their understanding, but none could provide an adequate answer to Shreeji Mahãrãj’s question. Therefore, they folded their hands and said, “Mahãrãj, this question can only be answered by you.” 12.9 Shreeji Mahãrãj thereupon explained, “The answer is that the jeev, which is the kshetragna, dwells within the heart. The kshetragna enlightens the fourteen indriyas. Of these indriyas, the antah-karans dwell extremely close to the kshetragna. As a result, whatever a person hears is consolidated when he thinks about it in the antah-karans. After all, the kshetragna is more powerful than all the indriyas and the antah-karans, and so whatever it approves becomes thoroughly strengthened.” 12.10 Having heard this answer, the munis commented, “Mahãrãj, you have given a precise answer. No one besides you could have answered that question.” 12.11 Shreeji Mahãrãj then said, “Regardless of how lustful, angry, greedy, or rude a person may be, if he listens to these types of talks with faith and love, all of his vicious natures would be eradicated. For example, if a man with teeth strong enough to chew raw chick-peas were to eat many sour mangoes, he then would not be able to chew even boiled rice. In that same way, if a person, who is strongly overpowered by vicious natures were to listen to these talks with shraddhã, then that person would no longer be capable of indulging in the panch-vishays. Moreover, the mind does not become as free of desires for vishays by subjecting the body to strict vrats such as tapta-kruchhra, chãndrãyan, as it does by listening to these talks of Bhagvãn. In addition, your minds must not become stable while performing dhyãn or by turning a mãlã as perfectly as they do while you are listening to these talks. Therefore, a person should listen to the talks of Purushottam-Nãrãyan with faith and love. There is no better method to stabilise the mind and to free it of the desires for vishays.” End of Shree Kãriyãni Prakaran ||