Asserted Topics:
Which qualities in a Sant are permanent and which are transient, and Atmavichar.
Main Points:
- Swadharma, Atmanishtha, and firm faith in Bhagwan’s Swaroop are qualities that remain permanent in a Sant.
- By distinguishing oneself from the elements of Maya, one should observe with a detached view and strengthen one’s sense of being the Atman.
Commentary:
Nirvikaranand Swami asked, “Which qualities in a Sant are permanent and which are transient?” This question is somewhat complex and can be contemplated from various perspectives. Each perspective will be meaningful to some extent and not considered futile since the concept of a Sant has been explored in multiple ways in scriptures and among people. For instance, there are discussions on the thirty attributes of a Sant, fifty attributes (Harililamrut), sixty-four attributes (Satsangi Jeevan), and the qualities described in Bhaktachintamani, Kapil Gita, Ramayana, and other sacred texts. These attributes are often demonstrated by Sants in their communities. Yet, the spiritual aspirant’s mind remains unsatisfied. The personality of a Sant, akin to divine personality, is profound and challenging to measure, though not impossible.
Addressing the question in the Vachanamrut, it becomes evident that at a minimum, certain qualities are essential to maintain the integrity of sainthood. Which qualities are these? If one single quality encompasses all sainthood, then other qualities become redundant. However, if multiple qualities combine to form the extraordinary nature of sainthood, defining a singular personality becomes challenging. We will discuss these points comprehensively and also reflect on the question posed in the Vachanamrut.
Now, let us consider each attribute that provides an extraordinary introduction to sainthood (i.e., how to recognize a Sant? Let us contemplate this):
- Wearing saffron cloths is an indicator of a Sant?
- No. If we believe this, many complications arise. Someone like Ambarish, who did not wear saffron cloths, would not be considered a Sant, while deceitful individuals like Kalnemi or Ravan, dressed as ascetics, might be mistakenly considered Sants. Therefore, attire cannot determine sainthood.
- Can someone be considered a Sant or a greater Sant based on the number of followers?
- True Sants certainly attract many followers, but a large following alone does not confirm their authenticity or greatness. Today, even film actors garner immense popularity by appealing to people’s weaknesses. Many even consider them life ideals, but they cannot be called Sants. Utilizing societal weaknesses for business gains can increase influence but does not lead to spiritual welfare. The path to welfare involves guiding others away from weaknesses, not encouraging them.
- Can creating miracles be a sign of sainthood?
- This requires careful thought. Miracles don’t occur without some form of spiritual practice. Still, whether miracles should be considered indicative of sainthood remains questionable. Miracles can be produced through impure practices or malevolent arts, so their occurrence does not necessarily indicate sainthood. Nonetheless, not all miracles are of the same nature, and some are indeed linked to divine influence. However, miracles alone are not definitive indicators of sainthood.
- Can possessing virtues define a Sant?
- This too requires careful consideration. It can certainly be said that a Sant must possess virtues. However, there are rare instances where, despite the presence of virtues, sainthood may not be present in an individual. This is because virtues are often found in worldly people, non-believers, or even in those with demonic qualities. For example, Karna was generous, Jarasandh upheld Brahminical traditions, Shukracharya was knowledgeable in ethics, and Ashwatthama had attained the level of Brahman, yet none of them are considered Sants. This is because, although they possessed virtues or the power to perform miracles, what truly defines sainthood is the purpose for which those virtues are used, whose favor they serve, and whom they benefit. If those same virtues had been used in the service of Bhagwan or His devotee, they would indeed have been markers of true sainthood.
- Is being free from vices a unique mark of sainthood?
- Even in this case, it can be said that being free from vices is indeed necessary for a Sant. However, in the Vachanamrut, Maharaj mentions that although flaws may sometimes be observed in Narad, Parashar, Vashishth, and others, their benevolent nature is not diminished. Despite their flaws, they are still regarded as Sants in the scriptures. Their shortcomings are acknowledged, but their inner intent was to please Bhagwan, and since their intention was good, they quickly corrected their flaws and returned to the right path. Therefore, despite their imperfections, they are still considered Sants.
- Is adherence to Panchvartman (five vows) a mark of a Sant?
- Maharaj says that a Haribhakt (devotee) may appear to be better than everyone else, but if they have once spoken a harsh word, they will never forget it as long as they live. If they have been wronged, no matter how much they have served the Sant, they will harbor enmity a hundred thousand times more and never feel satisfied (Vach.G.L.14). Also, in Vach. Loya 06, it is said that if one follows the vows with hypocrisy, they may seem more attractive in their observance than those who follow them sincerely, only then does the deceitful intent succeed. If they act just like the others, their inner intent is not fulfilled. Therefore, observing the vows can often become centered on deceit or ego, and may not be inspired by true sainthood. Thus, it also requires scrutiny.
- Can someone practicing spiritual disciplines or achieving spiritual attainments be considered a Sant?
- Therefore, this assumption can sometimes be deceptive. A Sant should indeed engage in spiritual practices; without them, sainthood cannot be achieved. However, looking at it the other way around, wherever there is spiritual practice, it does not necessarily mean that sainthood is present. Just as spiritual practices are necessary to attain sainthood, they are also performed to increase wickedness. The scriptures mention that Hiranyakashipu, Ravan, Bhasmasur, and others performed even more severe austerities than Sants. Yet, the scriptures do not count them among Sants. They are considered purely wicked.
Additionally, there are other well-known attributes mentioned. These attributes, when taken together and accurately, somewhat fall short of fully defining sainthood. However, the scriptures and great personalities have shown these attributes as essential for sainthood, making them significant and not meaningless.
The above discussion should be viewed from a theistic perspective, with a positive and investigative approach, not with atheism. We must approach it with faith, not blind faith. The arguments and doubts raised here are to examine and contemplate their purity, not to uproot them from the heart. Such thoughts should be used to uproot blind faith, not the roots of faith. Readers and thinkers should keep this in mind, as these thoughts will be useful for their own salvation. Scriptures can be interpreted in any direction through reasoning, but the path to salvation is not easily twisted. Only by contemplating impartially towards God will the path become successful.
Ultimately, how do we recognize a Sant? The solution is that just as a river flows between its two banks, sainthood flows between two key aspects. One is the person’s good intention, which is the intent focused on leading souls to the path of salvation, and the other is the complete set of attributes.
The intent behind any action or virtue—whether it is aimed at leading souls to the path of salvation (Kalyankari Ashay) or driven by a harmful intention—is what becomes most decisive in determining sainthood. This is why Sadguru Nishkulanand Swami, when describing the characteristics of a Sant and a non-Sant in the Chosathpadi, says:
“જેમ ચીલ ચડે અસમાને રે; નજર તેની નીચી છે,
દેખી મારણને મન માને રે; અન્ય જેવા આંખ્ય મીંચી છે.
એવા લક્ષણવાળા લાખો રે દીઠા મેં દૃગે ભરિયા;
કહે નિષ્કુળાનંદ શું ભાખું રે ઓળખો તેની જોઈ ક્રિયા….”
“Like a kite flying in the sky, its eyes are fixed down below,
It spots the prey and targets it, while its eyes ignore everything else around.
I’ve seen thousands with such traits through my own eyes;
Says Nishkulanand, how can I describe? Recognize them by their actions….”
Here, we are not just talking about weak actions or minor vices, but even in the presence of virtues and righteous deeds, it is the person’s inner intent that determines sainthood or non-sainthood. Maharaj has referred to this as Ishak, intention, opinion, preference, etc.
The second point is about the set of attributes described in the scriptures. The sixty-four, fifty, thirty, six, and other attributes mentioned for a Sant are essential in life. Intention alone, without these attributes, remains insignificant and ineffective. Until it is supported by actions or virtues, it cannot be fulfilled. Therefore, these attributes are also necessary. On the other hand, if the attributes are merely demonstrated outwardly but the intention is weak, those qualities or actions will lead to non-sainthood. Often, it happens that any virtue from the set of attributes can support a malevolent intent. That means one can use the guise of virtue to conceal a malicious intention. When this happens, those virtues or righteous actions cannot be components of sainthood. Instead, they place the individual in the category of non-sainthood. Not only that, but malevolent intent hidden under the guise of virtue can be more dangerous than overt misconduct. In the case of good intention, this does not happen. Even in the absence of virtues, good intention remains insignificant but does not turn the individual into a wicked person. This much is the specialty of good intention over the set of attributes. Good intention should encourage virtues. Only then will there be harmony, and together they will lead to the flourishing of sainthood.
When there is a conflict between these two, the good intention becomes more important. The sequence of attributes follows afterward. If both good intention and attributes coexist in a person, there is no deficiency. Such individuals are rare. Without the full grace of the Bhagwan and the true Sant, such a union is not achieved, and such sainthood does not manifest.
In the Vachanamrut, Maharaj also says that the three qualities that remain permanent in a Sant are firm faith in Bhagwan, Atmanishtha, and Swadharma. These qualities are primary and fundamental in purifying and aligning the intention towards the path of salvation and in encouraging and fostering virtues.
Then Muktanand Swami asked, “Even if one understands the distinct nature of the body and soul, why does one still forget this distinction and become attached to the body?” Maharaj replied, “If one has once understood the clear distinction, it is never forgotten. Even if one starts to consider oneself as the body, one cannot truly believe oneself to be the body. Similarly, once firm faith in Bhagwan is established, it does not waver; it remains continuous and unbroken.”
Then Swayamprakashanand Swami asked, “How should one contemplate the soul?” Maharaj replied, “When the Antahkaran faces the Drashta, the Jivatma, then all external objects related to the physical body are forgotten.
Considering oneself as the observer (Drashta), observing the activities of one’s own senses and Antahkaran and evaluating their benefits and drawbacks is called Pratilom Dristi (reverse vision). By doing so, the inclination towards sensory objects gradually slows down. The senses, Antahkaran, and associations all constitute the worldly society. (Maharaj refers to this in Vach.G.M.45). When the soul, with an observational attitude, evaluates the intentions behind each activity using Pratilom Dristi, their worldly intentions gradually slow down. As a result, distractions in meditation decrease, and by contemplating this way, one continuously performs self-assessment, meaning examining one’s Atmabhav (sense of self). Since this is a positive activity, it is encouraged, making meditation easier.
When efforts to slow down the inclination towards sensory objects are unsuccessful, Maharaj suggests two ways to contemplate. One way is to contemplate the objects as they are. What does it mean to contemplate objects as they are? It means considering the real and scriptural flaws described by great personalities and scriptures and learning to observe them in one’s heart. When this happens, the wrong impressions are removed.
The second way is to contemplate the observer as it is, meaning to evaluate its qualities. Learning to experience this in one’s heart ensures that only the true impressions remain, and the wrong ones are removed. Consequently, both contemplations will merge into one, making meditation easy. Therefore, as long as the stronghold of sensory impressions exists, one should not meditate but rather engage in rational contemplation. Through rational contemplation, one attains the suitability for meditation. Hence, this contemplation should continue.
Maharaj says, offering the nature of the body to the body and the nature of consciousness to consciousness means rationally considering the attributes of the body as confined to the body and removing them. Sturdiness, frailty, fever, and other bodily attributes are inherent to the body. When these arise in the body, the soul mistakenly identifies with them, which should be avoided by confining these attributes to the body alone. One should strengthen the feeling that “I am separate from the body, a devotee of the Supreme God, and I am the soul.” This feeling, when fortified, is considered to be offering these attributes to the body. Similarly, inattentiveness, madness, foolishness, craving, sorrow, and other attributes belong to the Antahkaran. These too are not inherent in the soul, which is distinct from the mind and its attributes. If one firmly understands this discrimination, it is considered offering these attributes to the Antahkaran. Knowing the qualities of the soul and contemplating them steadfastly is considered offering them to the soul. Maharaj says, such rational contemplation should not be abandoned until distractions are removed and meditation becomes comfortable. Just as a king cannot enjoy the pleasures of his kingdom until he has vanquished all his enemies, one cannot attain the bliss of meditation and the Supreme God until all distractions from the senses, Antahkaran, and the world are removed through rational contemplation.