A human can easily gain knowledge up to the level of intellect in a direct manner. But knowledge beyond the intellect does not happen naturally in a direct manner. To gain that knowledge, one has to adopt an introspective perspective. There is no knowledge beyond the intellect. Introspective thinking, yes. Introspective thinking is required. If I am separate from this, then who am I? In introspection, two things are needed. One is to separate oneself. What kind of knowledge is that which is gained through scriptures and saints? Through scriptures and saints, it can be both introspective and extrospective. All kinds of knowledge can be gained through scriptures and saints. Introspection happens only to oneself. And only oneself can do it. No one else can make you introspect. The knowledge that someone else imparts is called extrospective. But if someone else has said something, given an instruction, and if one acts accordingly, then that becomes introspection. To know oneself, one's senses, inner self, one's nature, one's flaws, to know them, one's jiva. When flaws and nature are recognized, it means the jiva is recognized. The jiva does not literally come into one's hands. These are like physical objects, so they come into hand. The nature has become like physical objects, that's why. So that comes into hand. That means to recognize one's own nature. So that is called introspection. And to recognize other people's nature is called extrospection. Like, "he is like this, he is like that, he is like this." So that is called extrospection. Maharaj said that when there is confusion, one should take a witness. Yes. That is to take a witness to recognize one's own flaws. Is taking a witness called introspection or extrospection? If one's flaw comes to light by doing so, then it is called introspection. And if it doesn't, then it is called extrospection. One's own flaw does not come to light, does not come into hand, without introspection. If others try to point it out, if they come to point it out, one goes to scold them, goes to bite them. Is that futile? What? Is trying to point it out futile? Trying to point it out is not futile. To make them understand is their destiny. Trying comes under one's duty. Suppose if someone is elder, then it is their duty to guide the younger ones, like, "brother, if you do this, you will go to God, and if you do this, you won't." So that is not called futile. But whether it clicks for the other person or not is called their destiny. If it doesn't click for them and they feel, "I have no flaws, yet they are falsely accusing me," then that is called their destiny. Then that is not called introspection. When a clash occurs, it does not happen without a flaw. Whether it is of one person or anyone else. A clash does not happen without a flaw. So at that time, one should introspect whether "is there my flaw in this or not?" Then that is called introspection. The scriptures explain to us, or the gurus explain, so that doesn't make it introspection or extrospection. How one takes it, based on that, it is called extrospection or introspection. If one analyzes, does analysis of what is explained in the scriptures within oneself, then it is said to be introspection. And if one analyzes only in others' examples, like, "he did this, in Vachanamrut and Gita it was written like this, but Vishwamangal Swami doesn't have it at all. Vishwamangal Swami is completely mindless." Then that is called extrospection. That is not introspection. One never applied it to oneself. One never looked within oneself. So the same goes for the scriptures and the same for the guru guru A teacher. He will guide you on the path of kalyãn. Tap to open in glossary → The guru guru A teacher. He will guide you on the path of kalyãn. Tap to open in glossary → Then if one looks everywhere, like, "this is not in this Swami, and not in that one, and not in that one." Then that is called extrospection. That is not called introspection. But if it comes up in a discourse and one feels, "how much does this apply to me?" Then that is called introspection. The meaning of introspection is just that, to think within oneself. And the meaning of extrospection is just that, to look outside, look at everything outside, external vision. They look outward, not at the inner self. The self-existent Lord pierced the senses outward. That is from the Upanishads, right? What? The senses outward pierced the self-existent Lord. Senses Senses means mine Senses means the organs of perception. Senses outward means the senses are directed outward. Senses outward, directed outward, delighting in external objects, thus directed outward. 'Anch' is the root verb meaning to worship or move. That means to look at others. To feel happy by looking at others, and it's not just happiness, then jealousy also happens, like if one sees someone's prosperity, one feels jealous. If one sees someone's downfall, one feels good. So the senses, the mind, they are directed outward. Not at the inner self. They cannot see the inner self. To see the inner self, one has to adopt an introspective vision. Then they indeed see. If one adopts an introspective vision, then one sees oneself too. Maharaj says, "when did he try and not see?" If one does it with the power 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 → Then what is the power 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 → Maharaj says, "we all are sitting in the power 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 → The power 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 → What is the power 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 → If one looks with an introspective vision, one sees oneself too. And one sees God too, like that. And if one doesn't look, then it is senses directed outward. Like a mirror and a window. These are all examples, what do they say? Window and mirror. Window and mirror. Mirror and window. What did everyone learn to look through? Why in the window? Do you like a window or a mirror? What does Rishikesh Bhagat like? Does he like a window or a mirror? Likes mirror. Likes mirror, but cannot say it aloud. Window means looking at others. And mirror means looking at oneself. In a mirror, only oneself is seen, who else is seen? So introspective vision and extrospective vision, like that. Inner self, the self-existent Lord pierced the senses outward. But knowledge beyond the intellect does not happen naturally in a direct manner. Beyond intellect comes the knowledge of righteous intellect, after righteous intellect comes the knowledge of the jivatma, after the knowledge of the jivatma comes the knowledge that Paramatma is the indweller. So all of that does not happen in a direct manner. Because these are external objects, and those come under the 'I' (self). The knowledge of the 'I', the true knowledge, comes only if one introspects, "how am I?" Not as someone else says. But one should look at oneself, "how am I?" If someone is elder, and if it comes under their duty to tell the younger ones, and if they don't tell, does it cause them any harm? God does not let them gain true knowledge. God punishes them. Spiritually? Obstacles also happen, right? The obstacle is that it then becomes our headache, that is the biggest obstacle. They themselves become a headache. But God does not let them gain true knowledge in spirituality either. If one does not guide younger people on the right path, does not show them the right path, then why would God show the right path to this person? So God leads them too on a dark path. That is their punishment. That is their punishment. But knowledge beyond the intellect does not happen naturally in a direct manner. To gain that knowledge, so Shastriji Maharaj used to say, "I am telling you and freeing myself." Then it is your destiny. If there are past sins, one won't understand properly. And if there are past merits, then it will click for you, like that. It is my duty to tell, otherwise I would be a sinner in the eyes of God. Not only does one become a sinner in the eyes of God, but God also does not let them experience the bliss of God. If one doesn't tell, then God does not let them experience the bliss of God. But knowledge beyond the intellect does not happen naturally in a direct manner. To gain that knowledge, one has to adopt an introspective vision. There is no knowledge beyond the intellect, therefore it is called ignorance. Since this ignorance is the cause of all bodies and births, meaning the cycle of birth and death, it is called the causal body. Through intellect, the knowledge of objects beyond the intellect is not gained, so that itself is ignorance. 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