Asserted Topics:
Are Vidhi–Nishedh (the do’s and don’ts) true or false? And the nature of the mind.
Key Points:
- The distinctions between Vidhi–Nishedh are true.
- One must inevitably reap the fruits of both good and bad deeds.
- Do not be discouraged by the whims of the mind; recognize yourself as distinct from it.
Explanation:
In this Vachanamrut, Shreeji Maharaj first asked the junior Santo about the perspective of some people in the world who, like barbarians, claim there is no difference between the water of the holy Gangas and any other water, that the sacred Shaligram (a stone form of Bhagwan Vishnu) is the same as any other stone, and that the Tulsi (a sacred plant) is just like any other plant. Similarly, they argue that there is no distinction between a Brahmin and a Shudra, no difference between food offered to Thakorji (God) as prasadi and any other food, no importance to fasting on Ekadashi, and no difference between a Sant and a non-Sant. Such people, driven by evil motives, question why great sages have established these distinctions in the scriptures. So, I ask you all, are the distinctions between Vidhi (the do’s) and Nishedh (the don’ts), as prescribed by the great sages in the scriptures, true or imaginary? I want the junior Santo to answer this question.
The essence of the question is whether following Vidhi–Nishedh leads to success or not. Does good conduct yield positive results, either in this life or after death, and does misconduct lead to punishment? Or are these merely concocted ideas put forth by the scriptures? You, who are dependent on me, what is your genuine belief in this matter?
Is the water of the holy Gangas truly purifying, and does the water of the sewer defile?
Does the worship of the Shaligram truly reach Bhagwan Vishnu?
Is food offered as prasadi before Bhagwan capable of destroying past sins, while food cooked for oneself increases sin—do you believe this personally?
Do you believe that fasting on Ekadashi yields immense merit both in this world and the next?
Do you accept that holding reverence for a Sant leads to the welfare of the soul, while attachment to a non-Sant results in downfall and misfortune?
Is the practice of following Vidhi (the do’s) as stated in the scriptures beneficial, and does violating Nishedh (the don’ts) inevitably lead to punishment, or are these just imaginary ideas concocted by idle minds?
What is your personal belief on this matter? Atheists claim otherwise.
Then, the junior Santo responded, “Maharaj, the distinction between Vidhi–Nishedh is true and valid; it leads to success and yields the appropriate results, whether good or bad. If this were not true, how could one explain the concepts of heaven and hell?” Shreeji Maharaj was pleased and said, “Yes, their understanding is correct. If the creation of this universe did not account for one’s past deeds of merit and sin, and if Bhagwan had created the universe at random, without considering such factors, then Bhagwan would be seen as partial, for why should one person be happy and another suffer? The fault would lie with Bhagwan. Thus, this creation is truly varied, not uniform, and the differences arise from the past deeds—both good and bad—of each soul, as determined by Vidhi–Nishedh.”
One cannot escape the consequences of poor conduct in this universe, no matter how much time may pass—this is the rule, whether we accept it or not. If we accept it, we can avoid future suffering; if we don’t, we must be ready to endure the consequences. Therefore, Maharaj says, what the great sages have declared in the scriptures is indeed the truth.
Shreeji Maharaj then provided an analogy: just as a wealthy person might give someone a hundee (a draft), or in modern terms, a cheque or a bank draft, on paper, it may appear that there is no money, but the money is real. When the cheque is cashed, it results in a large sum of money. Similarly, in worldly matters, people easily believe in this process, but when it comes to the hundee (draft) of the afterlife, they lack faith. Maharaj explains that when one follows the do’s and don’ts (Vidhi–Nishedh) as commanded by great Purush (spiritual figures), there may not seem to be any immediate significance in performing the do’s and don’ts, but in the end, following their commands will bring about one’s ultimate welfare. A person who doesn’t trust in the cheque given by a reliable wealthy person would be considered foolish. Similarly, one who doesn’t trust in the commands of great Purush like Narad, Sanak, Vyas, Valmik, and others, but instead trusts in the words of petty materialists and atheists, must be considered an atheist and a great sinner. One should treat such a person as a Chandal (outcaste) and avoid any association with them.
Then the Santo asked a question (as recorded in Sudhasindhu), “Maharaj, how is it that unwanted objects or thoughts, which we don’t even like, enter our minds and hearts? When and how do they enter?”
Maharaj responded, The chitt (mind or consciousness) of a human is like honey or thick syrup made of jaggery or sugar. Just as flies, ants, or insects that come into contact with such syrup get stuck, similarly, if a person touches the syrup, it sticks to their fingers. The nature of the chitt is the same: whatever object it remembers, it clings to it.
There are two types of objects: dependent and independent. For example, if we say ‘Devadatt is a son,’ the mind naturally asks, ‘Whose son?’ But if we simply say ‘Devadatt is a person,’ the curiosity ends there. Similarly, jnan-vritti (the tendency of knowledge) is subject-related. Bhagwan has created it in such a way. There cannot be any knowledge or cognition without an object to be known. The chitt forms the shape of the object, then that object enters and presents itself to the jivatma (individual soul). The jivatma perceives the object presented in the chitt as a subject. Thus, Maharaj explains that the nature of the chitt is to stick to things. The chitt is knowledge-based; therefore, it grasps the forms of objects, takes them inside, and presents them to the soul. It does not discriminate between good and bad or between what is pleasing and what is not. First, it simply takes the shape of the object, and only afterward does it determine whether it is liked or disliked. Hence, Maharaj says, Paramatma has designed the nature of the chitt in such a way. Its nature is to cling to things. Whether the object is pleasing or displeasing to the soul, once it is remembered, the chitt must take its shape. This is unavoidable. Therefore, Maharaj says, the chitt is as clear as a mirror. Whatever comes before it—whether auspicious or inauspicious—its image is captured. The process is the same for all objects, though the outcomes may differ. Thus, Maharaj says, do not become disheartened by the bad impressions (ghat) formed in the chitt, for it is simply the nature of the chitt to cling to whatever is remembered.Therefore, one should consider oneself, the atma, as distinct from the chitt, which is merely a functioning mechanism of consciousness. One should not associate the self with the chitt, and to prevent the chitt from forming negative impressions, it should be attached to Bhagwan. Take steps to ensure that bad impressions don’t arise, but do not become disheartened and think, ‘I lack detachment, which is why these thoughts arise.’ Maharaj says that even those with strong detachment (vairagya) can have thoughts arise in their chitt. So, do not assume that weak impressions in the chitt are solely due to a lack of detachment; rather, recognize that this is simply the nature of the chitt. Instead of being disheartened and confused, understand that the chitt behaves in this way, and take measures to clear it while continuing to worship Bhagwan joyfully.