In this way, regardless of whose company one keeps and what scriptures one listens to, if the conviction in the form of Bhagwan that has been established does not waver in any way, such an unwavering conviction in Bhagwan is what we call 'tadatmyapanu'. Dinanath Bhatt had such an understanding of Maharaj and conviction in Maharaj's divinity, but when he associated with Nirvikalpanand, his mind was swayed. So, that is not 'tadatmyapanu'. If he had attained 'tadatmyapanu' with Maharaj, that is why Maharaj said that 'tadatmyapanu' is in the form of understanding. What was damaged was his understanding. His nirvikalp nirvikalp Without alternatives or doubts. Used to describe faith or Tap to open in glossary → His understanding was damaged, meaning the opinion he had formed about Maharaj did not remain. The opinion he had formed of Maharaj, that Maharaj is like this, that understanding did not remain. And that was damaged. Because it was damaged, he says it should not be damaged under any circumstance, regardless of the association. And no matter what one's inner enemies are—inner enemies are nothing but demands. What are inner enemies? If there is greed, what is the meaning of greed? Of wealth. He demands wealth. If he has taste, what is the meaning of taste? Of eating well. A strong demand to eat well arises, and it cannot be curbed. It cannot be curbed. So, if some such demand arises before Maharaj and cannot be curbed, then this understanding does not remain easily. When does it remain? Maharaj showed only one way for that. When a demand arises and is not fulfilled, if he perceives his own flaw and not Maharaj's, then the conviction does not disintegrate. He feels, 'This is my mistake; it is not Maharaj's mistake that He is not fulfilling it.' It is not Maharaj's mistake. If Dinanath Bhatt had felt so in his mind—what Dinanath Bhatt felt was that it was Maharaj's mistake. Some demand of his was not fulfilled; he had a demand that Maharaj should do something for his family, permanently mentioning their name in the Shikshapatri and doing something for their livelihood. And Maharaj did not fulfill it. Maharaj did not fulfill his demand. So, what was Nirvikalpanand's demand? 'Keep Muktanand Swami in the second gear and put me in the first gear.' Maharaj would not fulfill that under any circumstance. Instead, He put him in the last gear. Therefore, the understanding of Maharaj did not remain. If at that time he had realized in his mind, 'Well, Maharaj put me in the last gear because of my own shortcoming; my qualification might not be sufficient, so He put me in the last gear.' And if Dinanath Bhatt had perceived his own flaw in his mind, thinking, 'Well, Mayaram Bhatt's capability is greater than mine and his mahima is greater,' then even if inner enemies pervaded within him, his regard for Maharaj would not decrease. Disintegration would not occur; the conviction would not disintegrate. That is why Maharaj has said so in one place in the Vachanamrut. What did He say? That he does experience confusion—it is a Vachanamrut of the last chapter. He does experience confusion, but is there any difference in that confusion or not? It is probably in this 35th Vachanamrut. Maharaj had spoken of the Vachanamrut of the six attributes, the six attributes of a sadhu. It is in the subsequent part of that very Vachanamrut. That confusion does occur, but is there any difference or distinction in the confusion? Is there a difference or not? So Maharaj said that confusion does occur. Whenever, Maharaj says, one's own Then again, Shukmuni asked, 'One may be confused, but is there any difference in that?' Is it like that? Then Shukmuni asked a question to Shriji Maharaj, "O Maharaj! One in whose heart there is firm refuge in Bhagwan and Bhagwan's devotee, which refuge, no matter what calamity befalls and whether the body experiences happiness or misery, So here, Maharaj has taken conviction and refuge because it is a series. Even after conviction, refuge must be established. Refuge is the final stage. Once conviction is established, refuge follows. Knowledge, meditation, vision, refuge, devotion, refuge—all these are in its series. Until that happens, all the preceding steps are considered weak. So Maharaj said this in that context. What did He say? Read. One in whose heart there is firm refuge in Bhagwan and Bhagwan's devotee, which refuge, no matter what calamity befalls and despite the body's happiness or misery, honor or insult, adversity of place and time, etc., does not waver—how can it be known that he has such refuge? And what is the opinion of his mind and the conduct of his body? Please tell." Then Shriji Maharaj said, "When nature twists—Maharaj has written so. When nature twists, the jiva experiences confusion. Then Shriji Maharaj said, "The devotee who attributes greatness only to Bhagwan and does not consider any object greater than Bhagwan, and considers everything other than Bhagwan as insignificant, and when Bhagwan and the Sadhu twist his nature and do not let him act according to his nature, and make him behave contrary to his nature, if he does not get confused and does not feel distressed when his nature is twisted, and letting go of his nature, however stubborn it may be, behaves simply as Bhagwan and the Sadhu instruct—one who has such understanding in these two ways, even if a calamity of any kind befalls, his refuge in Bhagwan will not waver." Then Shukmuni asked again, "One may be confused, because when nature is twisted, the jiva experiences confusion, This is a dialogue of infinite sants. They too were exhausted by nature. Both aspects are present. We should perceive it with divinity, that they are saying this for our instruction. And not all infinite sants were like that. So, they too were affected by nature. Thus, they too were exhausted by the twisting of nature. That is why it is written that when nature twists, the jiva does experience confusion. And at that time, at what moment did Maharaj and all those sants have this dialogue, saying that confusion occurs then? When nature twists, the jiva does experience confusion. Then Shukmuni asked again, "One may be confused, because when nature is twisted, the jiva experiences confusion, but is there any difference in that confusion or not?" Then Shriji Maharaj said, "When nature is twisted and one is confused, if he perceives only his own When nature is twisted, experiencing confusion is a cause-and-effect relationship. If nature exists and is twisted, confusion is bound to occur. No matter who it is, one cannot make it otherwise. But Maharaj has found a way out of it. When nature is twisted, is there any difference in that, is there any difference in the confusion or not? Or is the confusion of only one kind? Then Shriji Maharaj said, "When nature is twisted and one is confused, if he perceives only his own flaw, but does not perceive any flaw in Bhagwan and the Sadhu, he is good. And one who does not perceive his own flaw but perceives flaws in Bhagwan and the Sadhu, he cannot be trusted. And one who is like that, his refuge also has no stability." His refuge has no stability; his refuge disintegrates. And the other's refuge does not disintegrate. That is why Maharaj said so, otherwise all this would not align. These words would not fit, as He said in the 14th Vachanamrut that even if lust pervades, anger pervades, still his conviction does not waver. This, which we discussed yesterday, such conviction in the form of Bhagwan, even if lust pervades, anger pervades, association changes, this happens, that happens, still his conviction does not waver. So, if association changes—indeed, association is said to be more dangerous than lust, anger, etc., in this. Looking at the history of 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 → So, the meaning of 'tadatmyapanu'? Just true understanding or firm understanding, or conviction along with understanding? Refuge along with understanding. Refuge along with understanding. Refuge. Refuge along with understanding. Then, all aspects of conviction are included in it. Without conviction, refuge cannot exist. Without conviction, refuge cannot be established. There is refuge along with such understanding. In that, the meaning of disintegration itself is that he runs away from refuge. Maharaj said Dinanath Bhatt did have refuge in Bhagwan, but when he met Nirvikalpanandji, he ran away. Amba Sheth did have refuge in Bhagwan, but when he perceived a flaw in Maharaj, he ran away. So, true disintegration occurs in refuge. He leaves that refuge and goes elsewhere. In this way, regardless of whose company one keeps and what scriptures one listens to, if the conviction in the form of Bhagwan that has been established does not waver in any way, such an unwavering conviction in Bhagwan is what we call 'tadatmyapanu'. Conviction means first of all, Maharaj says, understanding. The meaning of conviction is understanding. After understanding, conviction. After conviction, refuge. So, that entire group must be considered. In that, not just understanding alone—haven't we said about understanding, 'I know him'? But by knowing, if one does not enter into the other, 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