Asserted Topics:
The questions asked by six different Sadguru santo.
Key Points:
- The primary means to attain God is through ananya sharanagati (exclusive refuge).
Explanation:
(1) Maharaj said, “Today, I wish to ask questions to some of the senior santo.” He then posed a question to Anandanand Swami: “Sometimes, a person with limited intelligence is able to see their own faults and the virtues of others, whereas a person with sharp intelligence may fail to recognize their own faults and only notice the faults of others. What is the reason for this?”
When Swami could not provide a satisfactory answer, Maharaj explained: “In this or a previous life, such a person must have committed an offense against a great devotee of God. As a result of that sin, his buddhi (intellect) has been corrupted. Therefore, even though he possesses sharp intelligence, he focuses on the faults of Hari-bhakto (devotees of God) and fails to see his own.”
A person with reasoning abilities (uhapoh) might excel in worldly matters, but the fruitfulness of intellect in worldly pursuits is different from the fruitfulness in the path of spiritual well-being. More analytical power, logic, or subtle insight may certainly yield results in worldly matters, but in the path of spiritual welfare, the blessings of others serve as the best fertilizer for intellect. Above all, the rajipo (please/happiness) of a true devotee of God is the most potent factor for spiritual progress. Even if someone has limited intelligence, if they have the rajipo of God and His devotees, they gain insights into the paths of moksha (liberation) that elude even the sharpest intellects. This vision is unlocked only through the grace of a devotee, otherwise, it remains closed. Like a blind person, such an individual cannot perceive the nearby opportunities and possibilities on the path of liberation without the vision that comes from the rajipo of a devotee of God.
(2) Maharaj then asked Nityanand Swami a question: “Is there only one way to attain God, or are there many ways? If you say that God can be attained through four means — dharma (moral integrity), bhakti (devotion), gnan (knowledge), and vairagya (non-attachment) — then, how can the belief that salvation can only be attained through taking refuge in God alone be upheld?”
Swami tried to explain, but when his answer was not satisfying, Maharaj Himself clarified: “Salvation is attained solely through taking refuge in God. The four means — dharma, gnan, vairagya, and bhakti — are simply methods to please God. Ultimately, it is refuge in God that leads to the attainment of His divine abode and divine possessions. Dharma, gnan, and other practices serve only to win God’s favor.”
What is the true means to attain God? How do we attain God? The answer is simple: we attain God through God Himself. All other methods fall short in leading us to Him. A cry or prayer that arises from the heart of a soul in desperate need of God, saying, “You alone are my goal and my means,” represents the essence of ananya sharanagati (exclusive refuge). Taking God Himself as the means to attain God is the very essence of sharanagati (refuge). As the scriptures state, one must recognize their own helplessness (akinchana) and understand that there is no desire to go anywhere other than God. This is what is called sharanagati. Such sharanagati is the true means to attain liberation. Sharanagati requires being without alternative means (upayantra-rahit) and without any protector other than God (ananya gatitva). Only then can it be called sharanagati. Compared to other methods, the uniqueness of sharanagati is highlighted in the scriptures as follows…
(1) Ārteṣv āśu-phala – If one takes refuge in God with intense vairagya (non-attachment) and deep dispassion towards the world, it yields immediate results. Other means do not provide such swift outcomes.
(2) Tadanya-viṣaye – Even if one approaches God with only moderate vairagya, rather than intense, at the end of one’s life, the result is immediate attainment of Paramatma (Supreme God). Other practices, such as bhakti and similar methods, do not possess such intense power.
(3) Vahnyāder anapekṣaṇāt – Unlike Vaidik karma (Vedic rituals) such as agnihotra, or the need for specific rules and procedures, sharanagati (exclusive refuge) does not depend on these. In contrast, the four practices (dharma, gnan, bhakti, vairagya) often require specific formalities. This is what makes sharanagati superior. Therefore, it is a path that is applicable to all human beings, just like the universal truth of speaking honestly.
(4) Yāvadātma-niyatva-pāratantrya-uchitā – The jivatma (individual soul) is eternally dependent on Paramatma. Only sharanagati aligns with this inherent dependence. Other methods do not fit as seamlessly into this truth of dependence. This is why sharanagati is superior to all other practices.
(5) Apihita sva-upāya-bhāvā – One must understand that in sharanagati, there is no concept of using one’s own effort as a means (upaya) to attain God. Even when performing sharanagati, one must not think that it is the means to attain God. This is because the essence of sharanagati is to rely solely on God as the ultimate means. Therefore, sharanagati itself cannot be considered a means.
The superiority of prapatti (surrender) over bhakti (devotion) is explained by the scriptures as follows:
- Bhakti requires the involvement of all three varnas (social classes), meaning that those in lower castes may not be able to touch or worship deities in certain ways. However, prapatti can be performed by everyone.
- Bhakti is more difficult and complex than prapatti, which is comparatively simpler.
- Bhakti must be practiced continuously until the end of life, whereas prapatti is accomplished with a single act of surrender.
- Bhakti yields results gradually, while prapatti gives immediate results.
- In bhakti, the seeker must strive to attain the desired result on their own, but prapatti is already complete and does not require additional effort.
- Bhakti is often hindered by obstacles, but prapatti faces no such impediments.
- Bhakti is not considered a true means to attain the fruit (Paramatma), whereas prapatti is recognized as a direct means to the ultimate goal.
- Bhakti is contrary to the soul’s inherent nature of dependence (paratantrya), whereas prapatti aligns perfectly with the soul’s dependent nature.
(3) Then Maharaj asked Brahmanand Swami, “Is the jiva (soul) in the body with form or without form?” Swami replied that the jiva has form. Maharaj expressed a doubt: “If the jiva has form, then during the creation of the universe, why does God create and provide the jiva with buddhi (intelligence), senses, mind, and prana (life-force)? If the jiva were truly with form, there would be no need to create these faculties. Therefore, the true nature of the jivatma is not with form but is sattamātra (pure consciousness), and it is formless.”
Maharaj explained further: “The jiva is eternally attached to the karan sharir (causal body) composed of ignorance. Just as a magnet pulls and attaches iron to itself, the jiva clings to the sthul (gross) and sukshma (subtle) bodies, which are products of maya. Due to this ignorance, the jiva identifies itself with the physical body, but in reality, it is not the body.”
Brahmanand Swami then asked, “When the jiva attains the divine abode of God, what form does it take?” Maharaj responded, “When the jiva reaches God’s divine abode, it sheds its attachment to the three dehas (bodies)—the sthul, sukshma, and karan bodies. At that time, by God’s will, the soul assumes a body made of chaitanya (consciousness), in alignment with the divine nature of Paramatma’s prakruti (God’s divine creation). This body, which Maharaj refers to as the brahmamay deh (divine body) in Vach.G.F.1, is acquired, and with that divine body, the soul remains engaged in the service of Maharaj.”
(4) Then Maharaj asked Gopalanand Swami, “When one attains the ashtanga yog (eightfold yoga) or atmadarshan (self-realization), this is achieved through the grace of God and His devotees. However, after attaining these two states, why does one’s focus on God and His devotees diminish, and why does the individual become more engrossed in these two accomplishments? What is the reason for this?” Swami replied, “Once a person attains success in yog and atmadarshan, they develop a sense of pride, and this leads to their focus on God and His devotees becoming secondary.”
Maharaj raised a doubt, “When someone achieves these two states, they become brahmarup (one with Brahm). In Brahm, pride cannot exist, so your answer doesn’t seem satisfactory.” When Swami could not provide a satisfactory explanation, Maharaj offered the correct answer: “While it is true that such a person becomes brahmarup, finding fault with their situation is not appropriate. However, it is a fact that some deficiency remains, no matter how small it may be. The minor variations or defects that exist in such a yog-siddha or atmadarshi person can be addressed by following the tradition of the pure spiritual lineage. For instance, Shukdevji became brahmarup and attained yog-siddhi, but he never abandoned bhakti (devotion) and satsang (association with devotees). His elevated state of atmadarshan and siddhi never became an obstacle to his engaging with ordinary devotees in satsang. Therefore, it is mentioned in the Bhagwat:
हरेर्गुणाक्षिप्तमतिर्भगवान् बादरायणिः।
अध्यगान्महदाख्यानं नित्यं विष्णुजनप्रियः।।
Harer guṇākṣipta-matir bhagavān bādarāyaṇiḥ,
Adhyagān mahat ākhyānam nityaṁ viṣṇu-janaḥ priyaḥ.
(Srimad Bhagavatam 1.7.11)
This verse explains that Shukdevji immersed himself in the qualities of God and engaged in the study and narration of the Bhagavat, driven by his attraction to bhakti and satsang with the devotees of Bhagwan Vishnu. Even after reaching such a high spiritual state, his desire for bhakti and satsang remained strong.
Similarly, Maharaj emphasizes through the Vachanamrut that even if one’s spiritual status becomes very elevated, they must maintain interest in God, especially in His true devotees. This interest should never become secondary. If it does, and one’s focus is solely on their own spiritual status, Maharaj declares that it is a fault. To avoid this fault, spiritual leaders should reflect on the example of Shukdevji. After reaching an elevated state, what did he do? After attaining that state, what did he take the most interest in? What do I take interest in? Gopalanand Swami, Muktanand Swami, Nityanand Swami, Gunatitanand Swami, and Brahmanand Swami—these great figures, after attaining high spiritual positions and receiving respect from Maharaj Himself, continued to engage with the bhakto (devotees) who were at earlier stages of spiritual progress. What kind of interest did they have in this? Were they only interested in their own elevated spiritual state, or did they take an interest in satsang and bhakti? Maharaj advises us to reflect on the lives of these great figures to rectify our own shortcomings.
Often, a person may experience slight success or accomplishment on the spiritual path, and even good and sincere devotees may begin to struggle with this issue. To prevent this, Maharaj has offered this caution to the great devotees of God. Who other than Maharaj could provide such advice? Alternatively, one should sincerely pray to Maharaj with a pure heart to reveal their own faults. If our intention is genuine, Maharaj will certainly make us aware of our shortcomings.”
(5) Maharaj then asked Muktanand Swami: “Suppose a devotee fully realizes the greatness of God, but God does not perform any miracles. Meanwhile, others who use charms and mantra (incantations) display supernatural powers. Upon witnessing this, will the mind of a devotee of God waver, or will it remain steady?” Swami replied, “One who has firm conviction of God will not have love or faith in anything other than God. If a person does waver, it means they do not have true conviction of God.” Maharaj accepted this answer.
(6) Then Maharaj asked Shukmuni: “If a devotee of God has had the direct experience of God and His santo, what does he attain while alive, and what does he attain after death?” Shukmuni replied, “Maharaj, only you can provide the correct answer to this question.”
Thereupon, Shriji Maharaj said: “A devotee who has realized God and His santo spends their days and nights engrossed in narrating and singing the katha (divine stories) and kirtan (devotional songs) of God. While living, they experience the realization of their own jivatma (soul) as being beyond the three states of consciousness—jagrat (awake), swapna (dream), and sushupti (deep sleep)—and they see their atma in the form of Brahm. They develop vairagya (non-attachment) towards everything except God, abandoning irreligious practices and living a life rooted in dharma. After leaving the body, God elevates the devotee to His own level. Such a devotee becomes free from the influence of kal, karma, and maya (time, deeds, and illusion) and remains eternally engaged in the service of God. This is what they attain after leaving the body.”
Here, a question arises: We all consider ourselves devotees of God, and we believe that we have received the direct experience of Maharaj and His santo—and indeed, we should believe this—but why don’t we see the changes in our lives as described in the Vachanamrut? Let’s set aside the current scenario for a moment and consider that even during the time of Maharaj and the nand santo, there were many individuals whose lives did not exhibit the transformations mentioned in this Vachanamrut. Does this mean that they did not truly receive the direct experience of God and His santo? Additionally, after Maharaj left this world and the nand santo passed away, many great santo emerged in the history of the Sampraday whose lives did reflect all the transformations described in the Vachanamrut. So how do we define the true experience of God and His santo?
The answer lies in understanding that mere physical association or presence is not what constitutes true attainment (prapti). In the spiritual path, true recognition is what is considered real attainment. The fruits described in the Vachanamrut are only realized when this recognition occurs. If one has merely encountered God physically but has not truly recognized who Shreeji Maharaj is and what He represents, then even if they have received His presence, it cannot be considered true attainment. That is why even during the time of God’s incarnation, many individuals who were with Him did not fully benefit from His presence. In fact, Vyasji wrote, “Durbhago bat lokod’yam yad vastu nitaram api” (The world is indeed unfortunate, for it fails to recognize the true value of that which is before it). Many people during Maharaj’s time, as well as many followers, faced this issue.On the other hand, after the passing of Maharaj and the nandsanto, many great santo emerged, and even though they never physically met Maharaj, the signs of true attainment were clearly visible in their lives. This indicates that the true experience of God is based on understanding and recognizing Him as He truly is, rather than on mere physical association. When one gains true recognition of Paramatma and His santo, understanding who they are and what their greatness is, the signs of attainment described in the Vachanamrut will naturally manifest in their life. Thus, the realization of God’s greatness is the true sign of direct experience (sakshat prapti), and this is what one attains after leaving the body.