What is the meaning of the statement that even if one possesses dharma dharma 1) Universal law or principle that 'sustains' or 'upholds' the entire world. Righteousness, morality, religion, Tap to open in glossary → Since Maharaj said this, what does it imply? Why does that happen? Why is it that despite having so many good qualities, one does not correct subordinates? What need did he have for this? Maharaj has forbidden you, saying that if he does not correct, then one should not keep his company. So, that is a kind of flaw. What is the cause of that flaw? From what has it originated? Then how can there be good qualities if there is body-consciousness? They may be good, body-consciousness is fine, everyone has body-consciousness. So, it happens like that. Firstly, he does not have Maharaj's grand vision. Apart from oneself, to others... Maharaj's vision is indeed there; vision and mission are currently available from books. If someone speaks well, they claim, 'This is my vision,' and adopt it. But, the greatest selfishness is, 'My interests should not be harmed.' So, behind that lies ego or pride. Why do they not correct subordinates? What if my interests are harmed? Then, whether they benefit or not does not matter, but let my position remain intact. So, it seems he has fear. What else could it be? Otherwise, there is no other issue in correcting or stopping. He himself is good, that is what it means. Even if he is good, if he does not correct the weak, what does that mean? So, it means that he himself is weak, but he does not appear weak. Thus, his weakness is this: that if my interests are harmed, then it becomes difficult. So, it is with him; his survival is based on being called good. This is such a vast jungle, Maharaj, one could get lost in this jungle. Maharaj has forbidden it; he said that one should stop and correct. In stopping and correcting, discretion is certainly necessary. Maharaj said that if one has five types of discretion, then five sadhus will stay with him, otherwise they will not. But on the other hand, Maharaj also said that a sincere seeker likes to be corrected. So completely... Gunatitanand Swami has written in his talks, 'I do not stop or correct anyone.' If someone says this, he says, 'Fine.' I let everyone have their way. But I stop them in certain matters. In what? If Maharaj's command is being violated, then I do not listen to anyone in that matter. So, that is called discretion. Where to stop and where not to stop. Where to correct and where not to correct. But it is fine. Satsang Satsang 1) True company. The practice of associating with Bhagvãn’s sant, other satsangis, the ãtmã, and the sacred shãstras, and also observing vartmãns and niyams. 2) Also refers to the sampradãy, which is the presence of good company. Tap to open in glossary → Discretion in keeping the company of sadhus. What is the meaning of the statement that even if one possesses dharma dharma 1) Universal law or principle that 'sustains' or 'upholds' the entire world. Righteousness, morality, religion, Tap to open in glossary → Shastriji Maharaj used to say, 'If I do not correct you,' then? I would be guilty before God. My role is this: that you develop love for God. It does not matter if you do not develop love for me. In correcting, this is the very question, isn't it? If one is an elder, and he does not correct the younger ones, if he corrects the younger ones, then what is the action and reaction? His love for him breaks. If corrected, love for him decreases, it certainly decreases. So, his love for him breaks. He does not mind if it breaks with God. The purpose of correcting is only when it is not happening with God. He does not mind if it breaks with God. It should not break with me. So, this concept of his, what do you call it? It is somewhat dangerous, so Maharaj says not to keep his company. It is very good. One should think deeply about this, why Maharaj said such a thing? Eh? It is very subtle. His concept is such that no one's love for me should break; it does not matter if it breaks with God. Even if God's command is being violated, or if the redemption of his soul is being ruined, then he does not mind. But his love for me must not break. Because he must join my army. Since this is his concept, Maharaj says not to keep his company. That is the meaning. What is the original question? Is that your question, eh? Even if they speak with courage, it is so. Keeping the company of such sadhus, meaning even if they speak with courage, one should not keep whose company? It is about not keeping, not keeping. Do not keep. It is like that. Is that the question? Yes. What kind of sadhu, even if he speaks with courage, should be abandoned? Meaning, he does not correct. Maharaj's answer is the same. If he does not correct oneself, then... the next question. What kind of sadhu's company should be kept and whose should not? Its answer: even if he himself observes the vows very well and has pure conviction, and we live near him, and he does not correct us, but pampers us and shields us... Observes the vows very well and, also has conviction. Also has conviction in God. Has both. Still, he does not correct us. Why does he not correct? The meaning of correcting is that if some mistake is being made, a mistake on the path of liberation, or if love for God is decreasing, then he corrects him. Why? The conviction is such, what does conviction mean? Your conviction means developing affection for God, becoming His own, establishing a sense of belonging, establishing selfhood. What if someone ruins what is yours? Would anyone tolerate it? So, he has not developed a sense of belonging to God; he has developed a sense of belonging to his own creation. Of one's own... we have this institution, so if someone ruins the institution, then we become cold. And if they ruin his liberation, we do not mind. Or even if they ruin Maharaj's tradition, we do not mind. So, what does that mean? Our creation must not be harmed; it does not matter if God's creation is harmed. So, he lacks in conviction itself; his conviction, Maharaj's conviction... What did you say? What you are saying? If he does it, it is fine, and if he does not, it is fine. That is the case if they are strangers, but this is not about strangers. Suppose, whatever they do in the market, we do not mind. But if they enter our house and do it, do we not immediately stand up with a stick? That is correct, they have not become anyone's own. In this, it is about not correcting those whom one has accepted as one's own. That is the meaning. Even though Maharaj has not described the situation in detail here, that it is like this or like that, but it means that whoever has become one's own, And, that person may be fine, but still, the followers do not correct him. So, what is the problem in that? So, he should maintain that much discretion, it is excusable for the good of that soul. But if they never remember those things, and have no focus towards it. If correcting causes a break, then he should find a remedy for it, so that it does not break and correcting can begin. In short, but on the other hand, if he is going towards prohibition, then to turn him back, is his responsibility. And if he does not fulfill that responsibility, then one should not keep his company. If he does not fulfill that responsibility, then his satsang satsang 1) True company. The practice of associating with Bhagvãn’s sant, other satsangis, the ãtmã, and the sacred shãstras, and also observing vartmãns and niyams. 2) Also refers to the sampradãy, which is the presence of good company. Tap to open in glossary → satsang satsang 1) True company. The practice of associating with Bhagvãn’s sant, other satsangis, the ãtmã, and the sacred shãstras, and also observing vartmãns and niyams. 2) Also refers to the sampradãy, which is the presence of good company. Tap to open in glossary → It is to lead us towards God, isn't it? If you think deeply, Maharaj has asked very subtle questions. One has to think deeply. One has to think in a practical context, why does this not happen? What Maharaj has forbidden, what has been prohibited, what is the problem in that? He is indeed correct in his own way, he has conviction and, observes the vows as well. He is correct in his own way, and yet Maharaj did not consider him correct. He rejected him from being considered correct. Eh? There is a lack of conviction. It cannot be called a lack of vows; it is called a lack of conviction. The affection he should have for God, and the concern he should have for God's work, that is not happening; he is concerned about his own work. What is the meaning of the statement that even if one possesses dharma dharma 1) Universal law or principle that 'sustains' or 'upholds' the entire world. Righteousness, morality, religion, Tap to open in glossary → he has become his own and remained so, that is the meaning of a sincere seeker, he has become his own and remained so. Still, to him, he does not correct in weak matters. And for weak matters, it means he encourages them. Remaining silent means encouragement has been given to the weak matter. He does not say anything. Even if he does not encourage him, saying, 'You did very well by stealing and bringing it,' there is no need to say that. He turns a deaf ear to it, he stole and brought it, let it be. So, it is considered that he got encouragement, silent encouragement. '...if they do not correct a sincere seeker, do not speak the truth even if it is bitter, and instead pamper and shield them, then even if they are considered great in worldly affairs, one should not keep their company.' 'And those who constantly correct, speak on the nature of the sincere seeker, and do not flatter, even if they are not great in worldly affairs, one should keep their company.' Swami was very vigilant in this matter. Constantly, even if there is nothing, he would find something to correct. If they come near. If they do not come near at all, then it is a different matter. Even if there is nothing, still, he would have extracted some point from somewhere. He corrects him. Anyone like that, we might not have seen many Sadgurus, but there are such people. Narayan Bhagat used to say, such people have existed. When living in a temple where many Sadgurus reside, each would shield their own disciples. Each shields their own disciples. Then, even if they do wrong, they shield them. They do not try to correct them. They try to increase their numbers. If another one like that is also found, then it is fine. And, only Swami was such, who would not shield anyone. After that Swami passed away, that quality died within us too. Now, who can say anything to whom? No one can say anything to the insiders. Now, what excuse do we make? The current era is such, they have all come from touch screens, they cannot be shown this. They have come from touch screens, they cannot be shown. Let them do as they are doing. Such an excuse is currently the excuse of the era. The excuse of the era is so powerful, that whatever is there keeps going, carts after carts keep going. In this era, even instead of carts, trucks after trucks pass by, so then in this era... The excuse of the era. Behind not correcting here, some weakness lies in his heart, or some selfishness other than pleasing God remains. Therefore, he cannot speak the truth of true benefit to his followers in harsh words. Giving harsh advice to extremely close people is a complete test for oneself. There is a risk to oneself. Either his weakness is not being removed, or the other person breaks away and leaves. If he himself has some weakness, then he cannot speak to anyone in harsh words. In this, Maharaj said that there is no weakness in him. He has both conviction and vows. And still he does not correct, then it means that he has that selfishness, 'What if he leaves me and goes somewhere else?' He might go somewhere else where they are lenient. And, that is not acceptable to him. Even keeping the company of wrong people. What if he does not listen? He will not listen, firstly, since he has accepted him, he should try to convince him. Giving up and saying 'he will not listen' is not an excuse; that is entirely a weakness. Swami would never say, 'What if he does not listen?' Like that. His efforts continue, and the other's efforts also continue. The other's efforts are ongoing, and his efforts are also ongoing. Then, if he does not listen, Swami would say, 'I am not guilty.' Suppose I tell you, and then you do not listen, then before God, he is freed from this guilt. Maharaj's talk... if he breaks away, if speaking harsh words causes him to break away and go elsewhere, or if his feelings towards me break and decrease, my conviction will be lost, because of that, if we do not tell him, then before God, he is guilty. To God... he ruins God's work and improves our work, still we tolerate it. So, it means that we give more importance to ourselves than to God. Not to God. If God's work is being ruined, if he is doing God's work and ruining something of ours, and you tolerate him, then that is called your devotion. If he is ruining our work and improving God's work, then no problem. Behind not correcting here, some weakness lies in his heart, or some selfishness other than pleasing God remains. Therefore, he cannot speak the truth of true benefit to his followers in harsh words. Giving harsh advice to extremely close people is a complete test for oneself. Because those who listen to advice are not just listeners; they are those who observe life closely and know our weak links. Therefore, they are afraid to advise, or if the listener is just like him, there will be no need to fear. Otherwise, due to one's own flaws, one has to let the follower do as they please. Only then do they remain theirs, otherwise they do not. Whereas, the one who shows the path of benefit even by giving bitter advice has no other selfishness in his heart except to please God. Therefore, one should keep the company of the one who corrects and does not flatter. Then Maharaj spoke that even if a saint possesses good and great qualities like devotion and knowledge, if there is one such flaw due to which his company should not be kept, that flaw is: even if they correct. It means that the whole series... the series is going on, even if they correct. Still, one should not keep his company. Why? '...due to which his company should not be kept, that flaw is that there is much laziness. Much sleep.' He corrects others and himself does not... What if he himself does not do it? Does it have an impact on the other person? He himself sleeps until seven o'clock and then tells everyone, 'You must wake up at five o'clock,' meaning, 'Why didn't you wake up?' Sleep is too much, and he has no time left for worship, meditation, satsang satsang 1) True company. The practice of associating with Bhagvãn’s sant, other satsangis, the ãtmã, and the sacred shãstras, and also observing vartmãns and niyams. 2) Also refers to the sampradãy, which is the presence of good company. Tap to open in glossary → Both laziness and sleep. If he has qualities and he is lazy, then it does not let the qualities bear any fruit. Again, Maharaj spoke that he is clever in speaking about God and advice, if there are vices and no laziness, it brings more fruit. Even of vices. And if there are virtues and laziness, is there, then it does not let the fruit come, the fruit of virtue does not come. Vicious people do not have much laziness. Laziness is only in virtuous people, because 'we have nothing to achieve, we are lazy.' Vicious people cannot afford to be lazy, otherwise vice cannot be achieved. It is said, 'Flaws are the cause of activity.' Flaws cannot exist without activity. Even if virtue does not act, its livelihood is not lost. Those who have high-class virtues, on this basis, their livelihood continues. They were very good in the old days, weren't they? Yes. Again, Maharaj spoke that he is clever in speaking about God and advice, and speaks very well. He speaks in a way that sounds sweet to hear. Even then, in whose speech the superiority of his own dharma dharma 1) Universal law or principle that 'sustains' or 'upholds' the entire world. Righteousness, morality, religion, Tap to open in glossary → directly or indirectly. Such establishment is happening. That 'we have nothing like that, we do this much to please Maharaj.' Directly or indirectly, if its establishment is happening, reinforcement is happening, then Maharaj says his... '...even then, in whose speech the superiority of his own dharma dharma 1) Universal law or principle that 'sustains' or 'upholds' the entire world. Righteousness, morality, religion, Tap to open in glossary → If they show their own superiority, and their own... if they do not show others' weakness, then? Still, it should not be heard. They show their own superiority. Regarding others' weakness, Maharaj said that we develop a dislike for them. If we develop a dislike for good people, then it ruins our redemption. But if they do not show others' weakness and show their own superiority, then? Eh? Still, do not keep. And if they do not show their own superiority and show only others' weakness, still do not keep. Both points are there from the two. Because through that speech, the glory of God is not going to be established in our hearts. But through that speech, only the image of that great person will be established in the hearts of the listeners, therefore it should not be heard. In whose speech there is extreme sweetness... AI translation of the Gujarati transcript above, produced in the same pass that transcribed the audio, one English segment per Gujarati segment. Devotional and technical terms with no precise English equivalent (kirtan, satsang, vasana, samskara, and similar) are kept as their plain transliteration rather than force-translated. Not human-proofread., AI-translated, unverified · Source details