| Listen to Prabhaata-rashmih Audio |
Harih Om Tat Sat. Jai Guru. Jai Guru.
Yesterday, I think last evening, in answer to an enquiry from ‘X’, I was explaining and emphasizing the interactional sādhanā. I found that 'X' was very much deeply pensive about it. I asked her why. Then she was saying, “You have given us deeksha and along with the deeksha as the crucial point, we also are given some anusandhāna. Now during the interactions, are we to do this anusandhāna? Or are we to do the interactional sādhanā?" In short, this was her conflict.
Now, what I don’t understand is, why this conflict at all! When you are given a sādhanā, you go on doing the sādhanā. That does not mean, I should not discuss the subject of interactional sādhanā. What is the purpose of doing sādhanā? The purpose of doing sādhanā is to realize the self. And this realization has to be continuous. When it is continuous, interactions will never be a conflict or a vexation. If your interactions are not a conflict, or it does not produce any agitation or vexation, where is the question of any sādhanā further? Your interactions become a flow, it becomes an overflow of the realization that you have.
Even if you meditate four hours in a day, and during the four hours you are absorbed, when you wake up and you are interacting, if the interactional phase brings agitation, suffering, doubt and other things, then is your sādhanā complete or incomplete? If it is incomplete, what is it that you want to do further? Stop all interactions and again meditate? First of all, is it possible?
कार्यते ह्यवशः कर्म सर्वः प्रकृतिजैर्गुणैः ।।
kāryate hy-avaśaḥ karma sarvaḥ prakṛti-jair-guṇaiḥ ||
Nobody will be able to remain inactive, non-active, even for a moment. So, if you claim that "I am going to meditate and only remain absorbed", it will be a pseodo-claim. Is there anybody who can sleep continuously throughout the day and night? Suppose somebody says, “I am going to sleep. I will only be sleeping.” Suppose he goes on sleeping and no food is taken, no nourishment is provided, will there be an individual surviving there for sleep? Suppose one spiritually remains absorbed for ten years, I don’t know whether there has been anyone who went on remaining absorbed spiritually, once he got into it and for the rest of his life he was absorbed, I don’t think there has been anyone. Even if there is one, a question arises: “Is that the desirable state or something else?”
What is this anusandhāna that you have been given? It is constantly telling you that 'You are the self', 'You are the self', 'You are the self', 'You are the self'. Once you have the feeling that ‘I am the self’, will there be any interactional problem or conflict then? So, to have conflict means your anusandhāna doesn’t work. You have to make the anusandhāna true. For that, either by virtue of anusandhāna alone you sublimate your interactions, or you try to sublimate the interactions with some additional thoughts and introspection.
Throughout the Bhagavad Gita, you will find sthitaprajnata is described and sthitadhi also is explained. And throughout the Bhagavad Gita except when he refers to meditation and absorption, all the descriptions are about interactional sublimation, enrichment, uniformity, evenness.
ईक्षते योगयुक्तात्मा सर्वत्र समदर्शनः ।।
īkṣate yoga-yuktātmā sarvatra sama-darśanaḥ ||
तस्याहं न प्रणश्यामि स च मे न प्रणश्यति ।।
tasyāhaṁ na praṇaśyāmi sa ca me na praṇaśyati ||
What are these verses?
vāsudevaḥ sarvam-iti sa mahātmā su-durlabhaḥ ||
If by your anusandhāna and adherence to it, reflecting upon it, practicing it, your mind expands and becomes pure, there is nothing like that. But what we find is that it seldom happens. None of you is perhaps so much either devotional or zealous or none of you has that much of ananya-bhāva and Guru bhakti, so that the sādhanā that your Guru has given you alone is sufficient. This is what I told my Gurudev, “You have given me deeksha. I will do only that deeksha sādhanā. I will not read books.” He said, “Very good.” So here was one who refused to read books and held on to his sādhanā. In all probability, it was that steadfastness and exclusiveness in the sādhanā that I could read books, understand them, incorporate them without any effort. Why don’t you understand this?
I would like you to personally tell me whether you feel that you are a disciple and to which extent. Are you exclusive in that? What importance are you giving to the Brahmavidya deeksha that you have got? Do you rely upon it? Does it work? If it works, then why are you still feeling that there should be Prabhāta Rashmih, there should be satsang, books should be read, explained etc.? I never asked my Gurudev for an explanation of anything. I never sought repeated satsang with him. I did not have them also. I only did my sādhanā.
Even if you ask me now, if there is a sādhanā element in me, it is the same sādhanā which I was doing 62 or 61 years back. The same sādhanā is still functional in me. This sādhanā is so compulsive, so interrogative, so investigative, so confirming, re-confirming, re-assertive, it will assert in such a manner that no interactional impacts will be allowed to unsettle you. Because the sādhanā tells you that: "I am the self. I am not supposed to be agitated." So the feeling that "I am un-agitatable" overwhelms all kinds of impacts from the world. So, I would like all of you to think about this point.
Where is the conflict between anusandhāna and interactional sublimation? Interactional sublimation is the manifestation of your anusandhāna. But we are discussing it as a subject so that, that will also become part of your sādhanā and reinforce your anusandhāna.
dhyānenātmani paśyanti kecid-ātmānam-ātmanā |
Dhyāna itself is a full means.
Sankhya yoga means introspection, vicāra itself is another means.
Sublimating the mind while doing karma which constantly brings alternate results, ishtam, anishtam and miśram (favorable, unfavorable and a combination of the two), always trying to sublimate them is karma yoga; that also is an independent path. But I am yet to find somebody who takes to any one of them exclusively. Many people will say: “I am a Karma yogi.” They are not Karma-yogins, they are karmins, not yogins. If they are yogins, they will find karma is only a means and the effect is in their mind in the form of yoga. But they are emphasizing karma. A karma yogi will always say, "The karma brings threefold results. My constant job is to assimilate these threefold results to such an extent that I don’t look to them, they don’t look to me." He will have only reference to the mind and not karma. Because karma will repeatedly bring forward ishta, anishta and miśra phalas. If he is a karma yogin, these phalas (results) are constantly afloat in his mind. If he is able to remain afloat, unaffected by them, will he refer to this unaffectation and floating of the mind or will he refer to the karma? You tell me?
I was telling you about Vishnu Sahasranama Vishva Yajna Mahotsava. That was only a shell. So far as I am concerned, it was an extensive expression of my own mind where I was constantly floating on the mind, on the mind, on the mind, on the mind. All of you would have said that it is Vishnu Sahasranama Vishva Yajna Mahotsava. That is only a name given to the shirt I am wearing. But I have never become the shirt. Will you understand this?
My dear children, you lack introspection. Your faith has to be reassessed. Your deeksha and its influence has to be re-evaluated. If you are doing anusandhāna, the anusandhāna will find its expression in your interactions and you will never allow the interactions to affect you adversely. What makes you think that "I am affected."? Only your anusandhāna makes you think that "I am unaffected". You should not be affected, (but) you get affected. So, the affectation becomes a problem, only in the light of what you are doing and what you want to achieve. I don’t know whether the idea is clear to you.
Harih Om Tat Sat. Jai Guru.