Asserted Topics:
What is the reason for developing deep or mild attachment toward Paramatma (Supreme God)?
Main Points:
- When only the Indriya (senses) are engaged in a Vishay (object of sensory pleasure), the intensity of attachment remains mild, and accordingly, mild affection develops.
- When the Indriya and Man (mind) combine, the intensity increases to a moderate level, leading to moderate affection.
- When the Indriya, Man, and Jeev (soul) all engage, the affection becomes intense.
- If the faults of worldly objects are deeply ingrained in the Jeev, even when the Indriya and Man function together, and an object appears distinctly, affection will not develop for it.
Commentary:
In this Vachanamrut, Nityanand Swami asked a question: In this world, why do some people become so attached to objects like women, etc., that they feel they would die if separated from them, while others have a more ordinary level of attachment? If these two types of Jeev (souls) were to encounter Bhagwan (God), those with intense attachment to worldly objects would develop the same intense attachment for God, and separation from God would feel unbearable, potentially leading to the end of their life. On the other hand, those with mild attachment to worldly objects would only develop mild attachment to God. Is the distinction between these two types of people due to their actions in this life, or does it stem from actions performed in previous births?
In response, Shreeji Maharaj answered that this distinction is not eternal but is created through one’s actions. When a person acts, the intensity of their urge to act can be classified into three levels: mild, moderate, and intense. Depending on the level of intensity with which the Jeev acts, the affection for the object also corresponds to that intensity. Thus, when someone has such a strong attachment that separation from women or other objects leads to their death, it indicates that the Jeev was driven by intense force. Similarly, if they turn toward Bhagwan with the same intense force, they will develop an equally intense affection for God.
This is indeed true, but it should not be interpreted that, in order to develop deep attachment for Bhagwan, one must first have deep attachment for women or other worldly objects. One does not need to learn how to cry over the separation from a woman or practice dying due to that separation. If the distinction between souls were eternal, then only those who were deeply attached to the world would develop deep attachment to Bhagwan. However, Maharaj clarifies that this is not the case. It is entirely possible that a person with no attachment to worldly objects could turn to God, and this lack of attachment to the world does not mean that they are incapable of developing affection for Bhagwan.
In general, the way a person’s Indriya (senses) and Antahkaran (internal faculties) function with intensity in worldly matters is the same way they function in relation to Bhagwan (God). There is no change in this, nor does one need to first practice in the worldly sphere. If one engages in the path of God with intense force, even if there is no attachment in the world, one can develop intense affection for God. If this were not true, then Mumukshus (seekers of liberation) who have intense Vairagya (detachment) from the world, upon renouncing it and turning toward God, would remain intensely detached even from God, and would not be able to connect deeply with Him. However, there are examples of such people in the past who, despite having intense detachment from the world, developed intense affection for God. For instance, Sadguru Nishkulanand Swami, who had extreme Vairagya toward worldly objects, had the same profound affection for Maharaj as the Gopis had for Krishna. This is referenced by Sadguru Gunatitanand Swami.
Then, Nityanand Swami asked, “Is the intensity of the urge in these three categories due to the Gun (attributes), or is there another reason?”
Maharaj responded that this intensity does not arise due to the Gun. This is because, at times, even a Tamasi (one dominated by ignorance) person can develop such intensity, as can those with Rajasi (passion) and Sattviki (goodness) dispositions. Therefore, the Gun are not the cause, since there is no fixed rule governing this.
Maharaj explained that the real cause is Karma (actions), and the driving factors in Karma are the Indriya, Antahkaran, and Jeev, which all contribute to the act in varying degrees. When only the Indriya act but the Man (mind) and Antahkaran are not engaged, the intensity of the urge remains mild, and the affection is similarly mild. When the Indriya engage along with the Man, but the Jeev is not involved, the intensity is moderate. When the Indriya, Man, and Jeev all engage together in a matter, the urge becomes extremely intense, and one develops deep attachment to the object. Maharaj stated that when one sense experiences high intensity, the other senses follow suit and assist in increasing that intensity, causing the Jeev to enter deeply into attachment.
A doubt may arise: is there any reason why sometimes only the Indriya function, while other times the Indriya, Man (mind), and Jeev all function together? What causes this distinction, where in some people only the Indriya are engaged, but the Jeev does not participate?
The resolution to this is that the intensity with which a person’s Indriya, Man, and Jeev are involved, whether in relation to Bhagwan or worldly objects, depends on how intense their desire (or hunger) is for that particular object. The desire for Bhagwan refers to the intense longing to attain Him and the bliss associated with Him, while the desire for the world refers to the deep-seated cravings for worldly objects. When a person has an extremely intense need to attain Bhagwan, their Indriya, Man, and Jeev all act with full intensity toward Him. This hunger is what propels the Jeev to act with force. To create this intensity in the Atma, there must first be a deep hunger or longing. Engaging with auspicious Desh (place), Kal (time), etc., repeatedly contemplating on these in the Antahkaran, favorable sensory conditions, the excellence of the object of focus, and the bliss derived from it—these are all factors that increase the intensity toward Bhagwan.
In response to Nityanand Swami’s question about why the Jeev does not develop intense attachment toward Bhagwan, Maharaj explained that the association with inauspicious Desh and Kal destroys one’s intensity toward Bhagwan and increases attachment to the world. Thus, if one renounces inauspiciousness and associates with auspicious Desh and Kal, one’s affection for Bhagwan will grow with great intensity. Then, Chaitanyanand Swami asked, “What should one do if the time is unfavorable?” Maharaj answered that in such a situation, one should flee from there. If the inauspiciousness of Desh, Kal, Sang (association), etc., prevails, then one must somehow find a way to stay away from it; only by doing so can one avoid its negative effects. Even if one stays with determination, the effect of such negativity will inevitably occur.
Muktanand Swami then asked how one could discern whether the intensity of desire is mild, moderate, or intense. Maharaj gave the example of the sense of sight to explain the intensity of worldly attachment. When the intensity is mild, a person can see three types of women without developing any evil thoughts. However, when the Man joins the Indriya, and the intensity is moderate, seeing a young woman will disturb the mind. When the Jeev also joins, the intensity becomes high, and evil thoughts arise even upon seeing any of the three types of women, or even when seeing one’s own mother or sister, disturbing the mind. In essence, if one can experience even the highest form of sensory pleasure without being disturbed, that is considered mild intensity. If disturbances arise with the highest but not the moderate or lowest forms of pleasure, the intensity is moderate. If one’s mind is disturbed even by unfavorable or lowly objects, then it should be understood that the intensity is high.
When Brahmanand Swami asked, “If one sees the three types of women and finds them either beautiful or ugly, but does not feel any disturbance, what intensity should that be considered?”
Maharaj replied, “If one has thoroughly understood that a certain object causes extreme suffering and has meditated on this fact, and the essence of that understanding has deeply settled in the Jeev, then even when the object is seen, the deeply ingrained realization of its faults immediately resurfaces. As a result, even if one sees a woman or similar objects, there is no Bhogbuddhi (the inclination to indulge), but rather a strong inclination toward renunciation develops. It is akin to seeing a pot of milk mixed with sugar, but if one knows that a serpent has dropped its venom into it, then all desire to consume it vanishes, and instead, a strong sense of disgust arises. The reason why attachment arises toward a Vishay is because Bhogbuddhi arises from within. However, in this case, the object is clearly perceived, but because of the awareness of its faults, the desire to indulge is entirely destroyed, and even upon seeing it, there is no mental disturbance. Thus, one remains free of attachment.”
Maharaj continued, “Another perspective is that of a devotee like King Janak. Through his deep Gnan (knowledge) — specifically, the knowledge of his own Atma and the greatness of Paramatma — and the understanding that he is a servant of such a great Paramatma, his vision becomes extremely broad. With such an expansive outlook, the pleasures of this world seem insignificant, and he perceives only degradation in them. As a result, the desire to indulge is extinguished, and no disturbances arise, allowing him to remain free of attachment.”
Maharaj further explained that when one has unwavering faith in the words of Bhagwan and His Sant, they can also remain in this state of complete detachment, and the pull of the Vishay does not affect them.
Then Maharaj asked the Santo whether Maya is solely a source of misery or if there is some happiness in it as well. In response, Muktanand Swami said that Maya is only a source of misery. Maharaj then raised a point of doubt, saying, “Among the three Gun (qualities) that arise from Maya, Sattvagun is considered to be a source of happiness. In the Bhagwat, it is said, ‘Sattvam yad brahmadarshanam’ (Bhag. 1.2.24), meaning that Sattvagun leads to the realization of Brahm. The qualities associated with Sattvagun are Gnan (knowledge), Vairagya (detachment), discretion, and tranquility. How then can Maya, which is associated with Sattvagun, be solely a source of misery?” Moreover, in the 11th canto of the Bhagwat, it is said:
‘Vidyāvidye mama tanu viddhyuddhava! śarīriṇām |
baṃdhamokṣakarī ādyey māyayā me vinirmitā ||’ (Bhagwat 11.11.3)
This means that both knowledge (Vidya), which leads to liberation, and ignorance (Avidya), which causes bondage, are forms of my Maya. How then can Maya, which leads to liberation in the form of Vidya, be considered a source of misery?” The Santo were unable to provide an answer to this.
Maharaj then explained, “Just as the appearance of Yamaraj (the god of death) is frightening and dreadful to a sinful Jeev and appears to be a source of great misery, yet the same form of Yamaraj appears extremely pleasing, like Vishnu, to a virtuous soul, similarly, Maya is extremely binding and full of misery for those who are turned away from Bhagwan. But for the devotees of Bhagwan who genuinely seek to worship Him, the same Maya becomes a source of great happiness. The Indriya, Antahkaran, and all faculties of the body strengthen their devotion toward Bhagwan, and thus Maya is not a source of misery but of happiness for them.”
Muktanand Swami then asked, “If Maya is a source of happiness, then why does the Antahkaran cause distress through constant doubt and uncertainty when a devotee engages in meditation?” Maharaj replied, “If a Satsangi is immature in their faith, then a corrupt person may try to mislead them. However, if a Satsangi is firm in their faith, no one can tempt or dissuade them from the Satsang. No one will even dare to speak ill of the Satsang in front of them. Similarly, when a devotee has thoroughly understood the greatness of Bhagwan and has taken firm refuge in Him, Maya does not cause them misery, nor does the Antahkaran in the form of Maya tempt them. However, for those whose refuge in Bhagwan is not firm, Maya causes misery and attempts to mislead them. But for those with firm refuge, Maya ultimately nourishes their devotion. Therefore, once the Jeev takes mature refuge in Bhagwan, Maya will neither be able to mislead nor trouble them.”