Asserted Topics:
Understanding God with or without the 24 elements of Maya.
Key Points:
- There is no division of body and soul in the form of God.
- What appears in God’s form is divine, and one should not doubt it.
Explanation:
In this Vachanamrut, Maharaj asked the munis a question: Some devotees believe that God’s form includes the 24 elements of Maya, while others believe that God’s form is purely spiritual (chaitanyamay) and free from these elements. Among these two types of devotees, whose understanding is correct, and whose is not? Muktanand Swami then replied that the understanding of those who think God is composed of the 24 elements is incorrect, and the understanding of those who believe God is free from these elements and is purely chaitanyamay is correct.
In response, Maharaj raised an objection, saying that according to Sankhya or the sections in scriptures like the Mahabharata that deal with Sankhya philosophy, from the perspective of the knower (Kshetragna) and the field (Kshetra), the 24 elements of Maya are the Kshetra. The jeevs and Ishwars are the knowers (Kshetragna). Including the jeevs and Ishwars, these 24 elements are dependent on Paramatma, who is the ultimate knower (Kshetragna), or the soul of the body. Just as our body is the Kshetra and our soul is the Kshetragna, the existence of the body is impossible without the soul. This is because the soul is the support (aadhaar), and the body is supported (aadheya). Thus, the relationship between the knower and the field is one of dependence; the existence of the supported is impossible without the support, and the term ‘support’ is meaningless without something to support. Therefore, it is impossible to separate Paramatma, the knower, from the jeevs, Ishwars, or the elements of Maya. This means that God’s form includes these elements.
Furthermore, just as space (Akash) is unaffected by the transformations of the other elements, the form of Purushottam Narayan is similarly unaffected by the transformations of the Kshetra. Thus, there is no harm in saying that God’s form includes these elements, and what is the benefit in saying that it is free from them? On the contrary, the scriptures state that if God accepts these elements, He elevates them to the status of Brahman—making them like Himself. However, there is no scripture that says that when God’s form is free from these elements and is only chaitanyamay, it possesses any special power or sanctity. So what is the distinction?
From the present question and the following questions, Maharaj hints at a principle: Is there a relationship of body and soul within God’s form?
Some devotees and acharyas believe that God’s form contains the body-soul relationship, meaning that just as the jeev has a body composed of the 24 elements and a soul separate from it, God too is composed of body and soul, with the body consisting of the 24 elements, and His soul being the pure chaitanya.
Acharyas like Ramanujacharya also make this body-soul distinction in God. “Satyam, Jnanam, Anantam” is considered His primary form, and the Antaryami (inner controller) is regarded as God’s essential form. At the same time, the terms like Narākṛti (human form), Puruṣavidhah (male form), Ojāsvat (radiance), and Sondarya (beauty) describe His external form. This presents a separation between body and soul. However, Maharaj does not hold this view.
Throughout the Vachanamrut, Maharaj refers to the form of God as the final, complete form—whether called swaroop or roop, He does not describe anything beyond the form. When He speaks of swaroop, He means the form, and when He speaks of the body, He means the same. Whether He refers to it as deh (body) or dehi (soul), it is all the same for God. Unlike the jeev, there is no possibility of separating body and soul in God, even though it might be possible in the jeev.
In Vach.G.F.1, Maharaj says, “To keep one’s mind constantly engaged in God’s form is not only the most difficult practice but also the highest achievement. The murti (form) of God is like the chintamani (wish-fulfilling gem).” Here, the word swaroop is used synonymously with murti, and there is no division made between them.
Similarly, in Vach.G.F.15, the terms murti and swaroop are used interchangeably.
In Vach.G.F.32, Maharaj uses “a garland of the swaroop of God” and “a garland of the murti of God” to refer to the same concept. Thus, in Maharaj’s view, there is no conceptual separation between murti and swaroop.
In the Vachanamrut, wherever Maharaj has used the term swaroop (form), it has always been in the context of God’s murti (form). Moreover, there is no instance in the Vachanamrut where it is stated that there is a swaroop and something separate from it.
On the contrary, in Vach. Karyani 8, Maharaj has clearly explained that God’s form is more subtle than the subtlest and more gross than the grossest—this is one of God’s divine powers. So then, what should we consider as God’s primary swaroop? Maharaj says that the murti of Maharaj in human form, measuring three-and-a-half hand spans, is the primary swaroop. Therefore, there is nothing beyond that form, nor is there anything more to understand. Maharaj has explicitly mentioned this.
In Vach. Antya 30, Maharaj says, “We like the idea that Purushottam Bhagwan’s murti always resides within a mass of divine light (tej), and this very thought captivates our mind.” In other words, the search for any element beyond this form ends here. The murti is the final form of God’s swaroop. Maharaj makes it clear in this Vachanamrut that dividing God’s murti into “roop” and “swaroop” is not in line with His understanding. Others may hold this view, but Maharaj neither agrees with nor advocates for it, as is evident from other parts of the Vachanamrut.
In response to Dinanath Bhatt’s question about whether one should meditate on God’s murti with the understanding that it includes the elements or is free from them, Maharaj answers that devotees of God do not like to engage in the senseless debate of whether God’s swaroop contains elements or not. A devotee simply knows that God is God; for him, there is no place for separation or rejection. He meditates on God’s form exactly as he perceives it. There is no room to meditate by removing the material part or element part from the form because these distinctions are obstacles in meditation. Questions like “Is it this way or that way?” or “Is this form true, or is there something beyond it?” are distractions that hinder focused meditation and prevent it from becoming steady. Thus, one should take a firm, unwavering approach, like that of a faithful wife, when meditating on God’s form. These alternatives (vikalpas) are meditation breakers, whereas the glory of Paramatma’s swaroop enhances and nourishes meditation.
Therefore, one should understand the greatness of the form on which one meditates: the murti that supports my meditation is the soul of countless universes, the foundation of everything, the ultimate sustainer, and completely free from any material transformations (vikar). The transformations of Maya and other such mutable objects do not affect Purushottam Bhagwan, who remains entirely uninfluenced. With this understanding, one should discard the thought that there is something beyond this murti or that there are parts of it to be accepted or rejected, and develop unwavering faith in the murti. Maharaj has described such a person as sthita-prajna (a person of steady wisdom). Maharaj says that one who has no hesitation about God’s form, one who has no doubts about the murti, should be considered to have reached the state of nirvikalp (free from doubt) and is to be called sthita-prajna.
Such a person, firm in their understanding of God’s form, is redeemed by God from all sins, as stated in the Gita: “sarva-dharmān-parityajya māmekaṃ śaraṇaṃ vraja | ahaṃ tvāṃ sarva-pāpebhyo mokṣa-yiṣyāmi mā śucaḥ ||” (“Abandon all other duties and surrender unto Me alone. I will deliver you from all sins. Do not grieve.”). In this world as well, it is common practice not to find fault with someone from whom one’s greatest interest is being served. Similarly, those who understand that their greatest interest is served by God, knowing that He will redeem them from all sins and grant them abhayapada (freedom from fear), will not find faults in Him. Even if there were any flaws, they would not perceive them.
For example, Shukdevji, the gopis, and Uddhavji did not entertain doubts about God’s actions, even when they might have seemed questionable. In fact, their understanding of God’s greatness deepened because they had firm faith in Shri Krishna’s murti. Maharaj emphasizes that whether one is a great scholar like Shukdevji, Uddhavji, or an uneducated person like the gopis, if one is firm in their understanding of God’s form, they will not be confused by witnessing any human-like actions or behaviors of God, nor will they harbor doubts about His divinity.
Moreover, only a devotee who has such firm faith can recognize the greatness of another devotee with similar faith. A person with this deep faith in God’s form is the only one who can truly appreciate the greatness of others with similar faith. Those who are detached from God, even if they are scholars, cannot understand this. As the gopis and Uddhavji recognized each other’s greatness, this mutual appreciation comes only to those with steadfast faith.One who has no reservations about God’s form, who sings about both His omnipotence and, at the same time, His perceived powerlessness, without any hesitation, and who praises both God’s appropriate and seemingly inappropriate actions without feeling distressed or confused—such a person is a sthita-prajna devotee of Purushottam Bhagwan. For such a person, nothing remains to be understood beyond that.