Asserted Topics:
The nurturing of sakar nischay (form-based conviction) in Bhagwan and the characteristics of gnan (knowledge), vairagya (non-attachment), and bhakti (devotion).
Key Points:
- Before delving deeply into scriptures, one must first develop a firm nischay in the sakar form of Paramatma (God) through the guidance of a Sadguru.
- Among gnan, vairagya, and bhakti, it is bhakti that is the most divine and effective for connecting with Bhagwan.
Explanation:
In the first part of this Vachanamrut, Maharaj explains the importance of nurturing the “seed” that leads to liberation, likening it to the care one must provide to an embryo. Just as an embryo has no defined form initially but, when properly nurtured, grows into a complete and beautiful child, similarly, if one desires the fruit of atma-kalyan (spiritual liberation) — the fruit of serving Bhagwan in His divine form — it is essential to nurture this seed correctly. Maharaj emphasizes that this nurturing must be done as described, to achieve the fruit of serving Bhagwan in His divine form as explained in the phrase, “tatra brahmatmana Krishnaseva muktishcha gamyatam”.
Maharaj continues by stating that those who lack bhakti in their hearts will interpret even the Shrimad Bhagwat as describing Bhagwan as formless. For example:
जन्माद्यस्य यतोऽन्वयादितरश्चार्थेष्वभिज्ञः स्वराट्….।
Janmādy asya yato ‘nvayād itarataś cārtheṣv abhijñaḥ svarāṭ
(Bhagavatam 1-1-1)
अत्र सर्गो विसर्गश्च स्थानं पोषणमूतयः।
Atra sargo visargaś ca sthānaṁ poṣaṇam ūtayaḥ
(Bhagavatam 2-10-1)
These verses, while singing the glory of Bhagwan, do not explicitly describe His form. The text remains silent on this matter. Maharaj explains that the processes described in such verses — the creation of the universe and other activities — cannot be accomplished without the involvement of a murtiman (form-possessing) Paramatma. However, despite acknowledging Bhagwan as the creator, the scriptures do not provide explicit descriptions of His form, leaving it implied. Consequently, Maharaj says, those without bhakti might conclude that Bhagwan is formless based on such texts.
Thus, the Shrimad Bhagwat does not conclusively decide whether Bhagwan is with form or without form. Bhakti inspires belief, but the text itself does not make a definitive statement. Therefore, Maharaj emphasizes that if one has not first gained a firm sakar nischay of Paramatma through a Sadguru, one may conclude that God is formless, even from the study of the Bhagwat.
In truth, Paramatma is not formless, and Bhagwat does not intend to convey such a notion. Although it is a bhakti-shastra (scripture of devotion), its language is highly symbolic and requires careful interpretation. This is why scholars of the Bhagwat often describe it as written in “the language of samadhi” — deeply symbolic and not always straightforward. The verses of the Bhagwat often contain hidden meanings (adhyahar), which can lead to varying interpretations depending on whether one leans towards a form-based or formless view of God. The text itself halts after implying these meanings, leaving the conclusion open-ended. Therefore, Maharaj advises that one should enter the study of the Bhagwat with a firm sakar nischay in Paramatma to strengthen one’s conviction in sakar and bhakti, otherwise one risks strengthening a formless belief instead.
Throughout the Bhagwat, there are descriptions of both anvay and vyatirek forms of Bhagwan. Descriptions of the anvay form often lead to the idea of formlessness, whereas descriptions of the vyatirek form — because they refer to specific locations, shapes, and other physical aspects — affirm Bhagwan’s definite form.
Liberation for the jiva (soul) is attained only by seeking refuge in the vyatirek (transcendent) form of Bhagwan, not the anvay form. The anvay form of Paramatma present within the creation is not capable of helping the jiva alleviate its suffering. Whenever help is provided, it is done by Bhagwan first assuming a vyatirek form or through another medium; without becoming vyatirek, He cannot assist the jiva. Likewise, He cannot grant liberation. Though Bhagwan may govern the universe through His anvay form, liberation is only possible when He assumes a vyatirek form, a form with a definite image. Therefore, whenever difficulties have arisen on Earth or for the deities, they have prayed to the Antaryami (indwelling God), requesting Him to take an avatar and destroy their obstacles. Bhagwan has responded by incarnating and removing their troubles. If liberation could be achieved through the anvay form, then everyone should be liberated, as all rely on it. However, that is not the case. No one would even need to pray. Prayers, devotion, and praises are offered to the vyatirek form alone, and the scriptures describe the fruits of doing so.
Thus, taking refuge in the vyatirek form of Paramatma, the sakar (form-possessing) Bhagwan, is like the embryo being nurtured in the womb. Only through proper nurturing and care can the fruit of a child be obtained. Similarly, though Bhagwan’s sakar form may not be immediately visible, it can be realized and perceived. Therefore, if one desires liberation, one must first develop such a firm nischay (conviction) and aspire for liberation only through sakar Paramatma. One must continually nurture this conviction, ensuring that it does not falter. Just as Agni (fire) exists anvay-like in all wood, but took on a form to assist Arjuna, Bhagwan also assumes a sakar form to help and liberate the jiva. Therefore, by believing in Bhagwan’s sakar form and seeking refuge in Him with devotion, one attains the fruit of Akshardham.
Then, Achintyanand Swami asked a question: “Among gnan, vairagya, and bhakti, which is the main cause for developing love for Bhagwan? In other words, among the three, which one has more divine influence in leading to love for Bhagwan?”
To answer this, Maharaj said: “All three means have the capacity to lead to love for Bhagwan, but when comparing the three, which one is superior? Let me explain the distinct nature of vairagya, gnan, and bhakti. First, listen to the nature of vairagya.”
The nature of vairagya is that it is primarily based on vivek (discrimination). The inherent nature of all jivas is that when they perceive a superior object, their affection for an inferior object diminishes. When they see greater happiness in one thing, their mind withdraws from the lesser pleasure, and thus, vairagya arises. Similarly, the happiness of Bhagwan’s Akshardham is incomparably greater than the happiness of maya (the material world), which is like a mere imitation in comparison. Therefore, when one repeatedly listens to talks about Bhagwan, and comes to recognize the bliss of Bhagwan, they develop vairagya toward the pleasures of maya and begin to love Bhagwan, who is the true source and center of all bliss. In this way, through vairagya, one is drawn to the bliss of Bhagwan, and through the discrimination between true and false happiness, one develops love for Bhagwan.
Now, let me explain the nature of gnan. The essence of gnan is rooted in understanding the true nature of reality. The knowledge of atma-tattva (the soul) and Paramatma-tattva (the supreme God) reveals that both are untainted, extremely pure, and completely unaffected by the world. Nothing can compare to their purity. One who can live with this awareness can also remain pure and unattached. Seeing Bhagwan’s greatness in this way causes love to arise for Him. Maharaj says that there are two scriptures that explain gnan: Sankhya and Yog. By mentioning Sankhya, Maharaj includes Vedanta in this explanation as well.
Maharaj narrated the episode of Durvasa’s visit to Vrindavan to explain how Bhagwan is as unattached as the sky, a karta (doer) yet akarta (non-doer), and beyond human and divine comprehension. Bhagwan’s unimaginable and completely detached nature was demonstrated through the incident with the gopis and His practice of urdhvareta (celibacy). The same detachment was affirmed by Yamunaji, who showed how Durvasa, though having consumed a full meal, remained ever-fasting, illustrating that he was always in a state of fasting. Yamunaji thus provided evidence of this extraordinary yogic power, demonstrating that both of these great beings were entirely detached and untainted. People may fall into delusion, but divine proofs confirm that both exhibited immense detachment and purity, leaving no room for doubt. Seeing such astonishing strength fosters a firm reliance on the opposite, or vyatirek, form of Bhagwan.
Next, Maharaj explained the knowledge from the Yog-shastra. The first step in this path is to still the mind and intellect, after which one must focus on the form of Paramatma. As one attains steadiness, immense strength follows, and by progressively deepening one’s focus on Bhagwan, one achieves the perfection of samadhi. This leads to a special love for Paramatma. Thus, attachment to Bhagwan that arises from the perspective of knowledge is formed through gnan.
Now, let us describe the nature of bhakti. In bhakti, the focus is on personality. The divine personality of Bhagwan is incomparable to that of any deity, human, siddha, or liberated soul. Maharaj narrated the episode of the churning of the ocean, during which Lakshmiji emerged. Many approached her with the desire to marry her, but upon observing them, Lakshmiji saw that those with beauty lacked virtues, and those with virtues lacked beauty. She saw great individuals tarnished by defects. Finally, seeing Bhagwan—who possessed a perfectly complete personality, free from faults, full of virtues, and the source of all happiness—Lakshmiji lovingly placed the varmala (marriage garland) around His neck. This process of recognizing and appreciating the supreme virtues of Bhagwan is bhakti, and it leads to love for Him.
Then Muktanand Swami asked, “Maharaj, it is still unclear which of the three—gnan, vairagya, or bhakti—has the greatest divine influence?”
Maharaj responded, “There is indeed more divine power in bhakti. Gnan and vairagya also connect one to Bhagwan, but the vision and divine power found in bhakti are not present to the same extent in gnan and vairagya. How can one determine whether this divine influence is greater or lesser?”
Maharaj explained, “When Bhagwan takes on a human form for the benefit of souls, He performs both divine and worldly acts. Even sinful souls recognize His divinity in His divine actions, and they experience no doubt. However, when He engages in worldly-like actions, those who are weak in faith or not fully connected to Bhagwan begin to doubt Him, perceiving Him as an ordinary human. In such situations, neither vivek (discrimination) nor tattva-drishti (true understanding) remains intact, and even those with gnan or vairagya may become confused. At this point, only true bhakti can guide one. A true devotee, however, never falters.”
Maharaj continued, “For example, the gopis had such devotion that they never saw any faults in Bhagwan. On the other hand, when King Parikshit merely heard about the gopis, he immediately found fault with Bhagwan. It was only after Shukdevji revealed Bhagwan’s divine powers that King Parikshit was convinced of the error in his judgment.Here, all three—vairagya in King Parikshit due to his nearness to death, gnan in Shukdevji, and bhakti in the gopis—are present, but the greatest divine power is found in bhakti. The gopis saw divinity in all of Bhagwan’s actions, even those that appeared worldly, and they never considered Him to be ordinary. Such bhakti is exceedingly rare. When one sees divinity in Bhagwan’s worldly actions, only then can it truly be called bhakti. This kind of bhakti does not arise from the meritorious deeds of just one or two lifetimes—it is the result of countless lifetimes of virtuous impressions. Only after accumulating such auspicious sanskaras does a devotee develop the kind of bhakti that the gopis had. And such bhakti is itself the highest spiritual goal. Once a person has such bhakti, nothing else remains to be achieved.