Asserted Topics:
Among a renunciate with desires and a householder without desires, which of the two attains a higher state after death?
Key Points:
- Being free from desires (Nirvasanikta) is the cause of attaining a higher state after death.
- Remaining detached (Nirvasanik) amidst wealth, power, and prosperity is the true essence of Nirvasanikta.
Explanation:
In this Vachanamrut, Maharaj poses a question to the Paramhansas: one person is a renunciate with intense desires for sense pleasures, and the other is a householder without any desires. Both outwardly follow the practices of their respective Vartman (sacred vows). Maharaj asks what kind of state each will attain after death.
Maharaj has previously asked similar questions about the comparison between a renunciate and a householder in Vach.G.F.14 and Vach.G.F.29. In all three instances, the core question remains the same, but it is asked from different perspectives, leading to varied answers.
In Vach.G.F.14, the question was about which of the two is superior. Here, the question is about what happens after death, and in Vach.G.F.29, the focus is on whose desires (Vasna) diminish more.
Often, such questions arise regarding which Ashram (stage of life) is superior—Tyagashram (life of renunciation) or Grihasthashram (householder life). In Hindu society, renunciation (Tyag) has always been revered, but not necessarily detachment (Nirvasanikta). Maharaj, however, advocates for Nirvasanikta, not merely for Tyagashram. Therefore, even though Maharaj ultimately leans toward Nirvasanikta, it doesn’t mean He doesn’t value Tyagashram. In fact, He highly regards it, possibly even more than Grihasthashram. If He didn’t consider Tyagashram superior, why would He choose to become a renunciate Himself? Hence, it’s clear that while Maharaj holds Tyagashram in high regard, He values Nirvasanik living even more.
In response to Maharaj’s question, Gopalanand Swami explains that upon leaving the body, the renunciate will, because of his intense desires for sense pleasures, either be reborn as a wealthy householder in this Mrutyulok (mortal world) or become a god in Devlok (the realm of the gods), where he can indulge his desires. After satisfying these desires, he will repent, become Nirvasanik, and only then attain God’s divine abode. On the other hand, the householder, being Nirvasanik, will directly reach God’s divine abode after death and serve at the lotus feet of God.
From this, it becomes evident that the determining factor for one’s higher or lower state after death is not their Ashram. If that were the case, a renunciate would always attain a higher state regardless of his desires, and a Nirvasanik householder would be in a lower state. But this is not true. There is no direct correlation between one’s Ashram and their post-death state as there is with Nirvasanikta. Nirvasanikta governs the journey after death, not the Ashram. The Ashram serves more as an organizational structure for this life. In Tyagashram, one doesn’t have to labor for food, clothing, or shelter, which allows them to direct all their efforts toward Moksha (liberation). If they desire to please Maharaj, they can do so more easily. But if there’s no intense desire for liberation or strong attachment to a true Sadhu, then Tyagashram can become corrupt.
In Grihasthashram, efforts toward acquiring wealth are mandatory, and one is compelled to fulfill obligations toward inactive members of society, whether they desire to or not. A great deal of their effort is expended in these tasks. Only when a householder is aware of this reality can true detachment (Vairagya) and Nirvasanikta arise. Being submerged in worldly attachments rarely brings about Nirvasanikta.
Later, Muktanand Swami asks, “Maharaj, what is the remedy for a renunciate to eliminate such intense desires?” Maharaj replies, “A renunciate can remove these desires by developing a habit of serving God and His Santo, just as Uka Khachar has developed a habit of serving the Santo. If one cannot live even for a moment without serving God and His Santo, then all the intense desires for sense pleasures in his heart will be destroyed.”
In Vach.G.F.29, the same question is asked: whose desires diminish more? Maharaj explains that a householder’s desires diminish more. The characteristic of Grihasthashram is such that, as discussed earlier, worldly desires naturally subside. In Grihasthashram, the majority of efforts are expended for others, even if one does not wish to. Whether one views it as a duty, as a consequence of their desires, or as the burdens of worldly life, very little effort is left for oneself. This leads to both worldly life and liberation becoming attainable. Such is the situation of a householder.
For the one who truly understands, intense desires naturally diminish when they realize, “I’ve labored all my life, but in the end, I gained nothing.” Thus, Grihasthashram (the householder life), even amidst indulgences, fosters non-attachment (Nirvasanikta), and this is precisely the purpose of Grihasthashram as stated in the scriptures, not to indulge in sense pleasures.
On the other hand, the desires of a renunciate do not diminish simply due to the structure of their Ashram. If a renunciate carries desires and enters this Ashram, those desires may actually strengthen. The reason for this is that a renunciate does not have to labor for pleasures; they receive them freely. If they develop a taste for these freely given pleasures and their mind becomes attached, their desires do not decrease. A householder, however, has to pay the full worldly cost to fulfill their desires and is additionally admonished by the scriptures and the renunciates for such indulgence. Therefore, there is a greater likelihood of their desires diminishing.
For the renunciate, the situation is the opposite. They do not need to pay a price for their indulgence—pleasures come freely—and the householders bow down to them, saying, “Oh, by using and consuming our offerings, you have blessed us!” So, how can a renunciate’s desires diminish? In fact, if not already present, such desires may even increase. Still, Maharaj, in His immense compassion, has not left renunciates in a hopeless state.
Just as a householder’s desires diminish due to the nature of their Ashram, Tyagashram (the renunciate life) also has a distinct advantage that can cause a renunciate’s desires to diminish quickly—if they follow Maharaj’s prescribed remedy. This remedy is more feasible in Tyagashram than in Grihasthashram. Maharaj explains that if a renunciate develops the habit of serving Nirvasanik Santo (detached saints) and cannot live even a moment without serving God and His Santo, then their intense desires will soon be destroyed. Moreover, Maharaj emphasizes that the attachment to such service should be so strong that they cannot live without it, even for a moment. Desires in a renunciate thus diminish much faster than they would in a householder.
Later, Swayamprakashanand Swami asked, “What is the means by which one can greatly please God?” To this, Maharaj replied, “By remaining humble and dependent upon the saints, one pleases God immensely. Even when wealth, power, and prosperity are present, if one remains humble, submissive, and dependent, God is extremely pleased.”
Essentially, God is pleased when someone remains humble and full of earnest supplication before His saints and devotees. Here, Maharaj explains that one should maintain the same humility even after attaining great prosperity or a high status. For instance, if a renunciate initially lives in poverty and serves the saints with humility, that same attitude should remain even when they attain the wealth and glory of God’s grandeur. If, after attaining such prosperity, they continue to serve the saints humbly as they did when they were poor, God is greatly pleased. The ability to remain humble and submissive despite having wealth and power is the true earnestness that leads to ultimate well-being, and this pleases Maharaj greatly.
The poverty and humility seen in the early stages of life are often circumstantial and not necessarily a reflection of one’s devotional feelings. Circumstances may force a person to behave humbly. We cannot be certain that they act this way out of heartfelt devotion. However, when they maintain the same humility and submissiveness even in the presence of wealth and prosperity, it is a genuine result of their devotion. Circumstances could easily have caused them to act otherwise, yet they suppress those influences and act from the sincerity of their heart. This is true devotion, and it is this attitude that pleases Shriji Maharaj immensely.