It can certainly be said that a sadhu must have virtues.
Many times, even if a person has virtues, they may not have saintliness, and such rare characters or incidents occur.
Because virtues are often found in wicked people, in those who are averse,
All the characteristics of saintliness are virtues.
The 32 characteristics, the 39 characteristics, the 30 characteristics, all are virtues, and based on them, they are called sadhus.
Those virtues must be present; if there are no virtues at all, it won't happen.
Virtues are often good and praiseworthy even in wicked people, in those who are averse, or in demons.
Karna was a great donor, Jarasandha was a Brahmin, Shukracharya had political wisdom, and was a knower of Sanjivani Vidya, and Ashwatthama had reached the level of Brahman.
was.
Yet he is not a sadhu.
How much is Shukracharya's honesty considered?
He taught Sanjivani Vidya to Kach, the son of Brihaspati.
It's a complete secret.
Today, he gave away the secret of the demons.
To Kach.
Kach was the son of Brihaspati, wasn't he? The son of Brihaspati.
And the gods, all of them, sent him, explaining, 'You go.'
And he learns Sanjivani Vidya.
And he went.
And he said, 'I am Kach, I am the son of Brihaspati, I have come to you to study knowledge.'
How much is his honesty considered?
Such honesty is not found in gods.
Not even in good people.
How much is his honesty?
That you have come to study knowledge.
So I don't sell knowledge, you learn.
He taught him knowledge.
All these are called virtues.
But King Bali was giving those three steps to Vishnu, so he wouldn't.
I won't let that happen.
The worms sat in the pipe, but he wouldn't let them.
Karna was a great donor, Jarasandha was a Brahmin, Shukracharya had political wisdom, and was a knower of Sanjivani Vidya, and Ashwatthama had reached the level of Brahman.
Yet he will not be called a sadhu.
Because even if he has virtues or the power to create miracles, for whom does he use them?
That is, for whom is saintliness proven then?
His saintliness
When is it proven? Even with virtues, saintliness is proven.
When he demonstrates its use, then his saintliness is proven.
Premanand Swami, Nityanand Swami, Gopalanand Swami, all these Nishkulanand Swami, they had detachment, but they did not become sadhus merely by detachment, merely by detachment.
Even though they had such detachment, when they dedicated their lives to God, their saintliness shone brightly.
Even if he has virtues or the power to create miracles, for whom does he use them?
That is, for whose benefit or in whose favor he does it, depends on that.
Shukracharya's qualities are also said to be like that, aren't they?
All of them have the power to create miracles, they can bring the dead back to life.
The history of Kach is a very miraculous history.
His disciples had attachment and aversion towards him, so they killed him.
And cut him into pieces and threw him in the jungle.
So from there, he brought Kach back to life with Sanjivani Vidya.
All these demons thought, 'This guru's mind has gone astray, so what should we do now? We will have to find a solution for him.'
Then, after cutting Kach into pieces, burning him, and making his ashes, they made Shukracharya drink them.
Mixed in alcohol.
Hey, mixed it in alcohol and made him drink it.
So he saw that he had called him, and he spoke from within him.
What do I do now?
Now, if he takes him out, he himself will die.
So even if he was there, he took him out.
He said, 'Come, I will teach you knowledge, and then you will come out by tearing my stomach, so I will die, and then you will bring me back to life.'
[laughter]
Look how much that is called.
There is no end to virtues.
There is no end to virtues and no end to skills.
But to use as much as one has for God, that is called the core point of saintliness.
The more he uses, the more core.
And if he doesn't use it, he's a dry, empty vessel.
Even if he has virtues or the power to create miracles, for whom does he use them?
That is, the saintliness depends on whose favor or for whose benefit he does it.
If those same virtues are used in favor of God or a devotee, then they truly become the identity of saintliness.
Fifth.
Even beyond that, to be free from vice, to be innocent, is an extraordinary sign of saintliness.
So there too, it can be said that freedom from vice must necessarily be present in saintliness.
Ignorance is not innocent.
Ignorance is not innocent.
To be innocent.
So, he says that I have no vices, so I became a sadhu.
Not in Maharaj's view.
I have no vices and I don't do anything bad.
So it's good that you don't do bad things.
But a sadhu demands effort.
You don't do bad things.
But you don't do good, so you don't make any effort.
This is when effort is 100%, then it comes into saintliness.
The less percentage there is, the less saintliness comes.
Freedom from vice must necessarily be present in a sadhu.
Yet, in the Vachanamrut, Maharaj says that even though Narad, Parashar, Vashishtha, etc., sometimes show faults, their beneficence has not gone away.
That is, even then, they are considered sadhu purushas in the scriptures.
Why?
Why?
For God
He had made an effort.
Not only that, he had made full effort.
While making efforts for God, sometimes a fault would also come into him.
So he woke up and made an effort to please God, for God.
So that fault became like a blemish on his whole life, but it didn't spoil it; his saintliness didn't diminish.
Yes.
Maharaj says that even though Narad, Parashar, Vashishtha, etc., sometimes show faults, their beneficence has not gone away.
That is, even then, they are considered sadhu purushas in the scriptures.
Their flaws are certainly counted, but their inner intention was to please God, and it was good.
Therefore, quickly that flaw
He was not damaged.
He got caught in the fault, but he maintained that intention.
And they got up again and clung to it, so they are called sadhus.
The inner intention was to please God, and it was good.
Therefore, he quickly removed that flaw and came back to his path.
Therefore, despite that, they are considered sadhu purushas.
Sixth.
Bow