Loyã 15 · Vachanamrut · Swaminarayan Scriptures

Ãtmã-Darshan

In the Samvat year 1877, on the night of Mãgshar vad 13 [2nd January, 1821], Shreeji Mahãrãj was sitting in Surã Khãchar’s darbãr in Loyã. He was wearing a warm, red dagli and a white khes. He had tied a white feto around His head, and had tied a bokãni with another white feto. In addition to this, He had covered Himself with a chofãl and a pachhedi. A sabhã of paramhans, as well as haribhaktas from various places, had gathered before Him.

Then, Shreeji Mahãrãj said out of compassion, “The jeev pervades the entire body from head to toe through its three powers of adhyãtma, adhibhut, and adhidev. Through the indriyas, and their presiding devs, it experiences the vishays, but it cannot experience anything by being distinct from the presiding devs and the indriyas.”

Then, Nityãnand Swãmi raised a doubt: “Mahãrãj, it is said that the jeev pervades the whole body in general, but resides specifically within the heart. So, how should a person understand the fact that awareness is not present everywhere equally?”

Shreeji Mahãrãj answered, “The sun pervades each and every object equally by its rays, but its light is seen according to the object it shines upon. For example, pure sunlight is not experienced as intensely on stone or sand or in dirty water as it is on a floor made of glass or in clean water. Therefore, just as a person experiences a greater and lesser intensity in the sun’s light, in the same way, even though the jeev resides equally in the indriyas, the antah-karans, and the organs of the indriyas, a person experiences its power more intensely in the indriyas because of their purity. For example, does a person experience as much sensation in his nose and ears as he does in his eyes? Certainly not. Furthermore, the four antah-karans are even purer than the indriyas, and so the jeev’s power can be experienced there even more intensely. In comparison, it is experienced to a lesser degree in the indriyas. Nevertheless, the jeev does pervade the entire body equally.”

Then, Brahmãnand Swãmi asked, “Many see the jeev to be like a star, or like the flame of an oil lamp, or like the flash from a firecracker. How should a person understand these differences in experiences?”

Shreeji Mahãrãj explained, “Just as a person who has mastered akshi- vidyã can see the jeev and the murti of Bhagvãn within with his eyes, a person who has realised the ãtmã through the indriyas sees the ãtmã in a similar way. For example, if there was a glass-statue shaped in the svarup of a human – with all of its limbs, hair, and vessels made of glass – and if it were filled with light, then the light would be seen only according to the size and shape of the tubes within; it would not be seen everywhere. In the very same way, people describe the nature of the jeev according to however they have seen it. However, because they have not attained nirãvaran drashti, they do not see the ãtmã as it is. However, when a person who has not attained nirãvaran drashti and is one with his ãtmã, he no longer perceives the divisions of the different organs of the indriyas; instead, he realises the ãtmã as it truly is.

“Just as a person who has attained the viewpoint of ãkãsh does not perceive the other four bhuts, similarly, a person with nirãvaran drashti does not perceive differences in the jeev’s light arising from its indriyas, their organs and presiding devs, and the antah-karans; instead, he realises the jeev precisely as it is. On the other hand, a person who perceives distinctions does not realise the jeev as it is. For example, from a group of people, one person saw the tail of a cow, one person saw its mouth, one person saw its hoof, one person saw its belly, and one person saw its udder. Whichever part of the cow was seen, belonged to the cow, yet no one saw the cow completely. However, because at least one part was seen, it can be said that the cow was actually seen. In the same way, a person can be said to have had the darshan of the ãtmã to the extent to which he has seen the light of the ãtmã through his indriyas or antah-karans. However, this cannot be said to be perfect darshan of the ãtmã. Therefore, I have explained the general and the specific experiences of the jeev in this way.”

At that point, Nityãnand Swãmi questioned, “Mahãrãj, you have described the jeev as being nirãkãr. Therefore, when Bhagvãn dwells within the jeev, does He reside without a svarup, or does He possess a svarup?”

Shreeji Mahãrãj clarified, “Bhagvãn dwells as the refuge of the indriyas, the antah-karans, their presiding devs, and the jeev. For example, Shree Krishna Bhagvãn made Uddhavji explain to the gopis, ‘I am near to you by being the refuge of your indriyas, antah-karans, their presiding devs, and the jeev. Just as the very same five mahã- bhuts which reside in the brahmãnds are also within everyone’s body, similarly, I reside in Mathurã like the mahã-bhuts reside predominantly in the brahmãnds; but just like those mahã-bhuts reside subtly in the bodies of the jeevs, I also reside within all of you. The fact that I cannot be seen is to keep the vrutti of your mind confined within me; that is why I cannot be seen. Nevertheless, I reside within you, and I possess a definite murti’.”

Hearing this, Nityãnand Swãmi questioned further, “Mahãrãj, does Bhagvãn, who resides as the refuge of the indriyas, antah-karans, their presiding devs, and the jeev, reside in the svarup of Purush, Akshar, or as Purushottam Himself?”

Shreeji Mahãrãj replied, “The light of the jeev, Purush, Akshar, and Purushottam is very similar in terms of luminosity. So much so, that no one is capable of distinguishing between their light. However, they are absolutely distinct from each other, but no one is capable of seeing these distinctions. Only a person who receives a divine body composed of divine light by the grace of Bhagvãn realises, ‘This is my own self, this is Purush, this is Akshar, and this is Purushottam – who is distinct from all’. In this way, a person can see them separately, and their light distinctly. However, no one else is capable of distinguishing between them. Therefore, Bhagvãn may reside in whichever svarup He chooses, but it is He Himself who resides within the jeev – no one else.”

Then, Shreeji Mahãrãj continued, “There are three sets of shãstras which are eternal and which describe only the svarup of Shree Krishna Bhagvãn. They are Yog, Sãnkhya, and Vedãnt (the Upanishads). I shall now explain the principles of each, so please listen.

“Those belonging to the Sãnkhya philosophy propose the existence of twenty-four tattvas and believe that Bhagvãn is greater than them; that is, Bhagvãn is the twenty-fifth tattva. However, they do not accept jeev and ishvar as being distinct from the twenty-four tattvas. Their reasoning is that the tattvas cannot be sustained without the jeev; so the jeev is imagined only as a form of the tattvas because of its close co-existence with them. As a result, they do not consider the jeev to be distinct. Also, just as they regard the jeev as a form of the tattvas, they regard the ishvars as a form of the twenty-four tattvas. In this way, they imagine both jeev and ishvar among the twenty-four tattvas, and therefore count them together with the twenty-four tattvas; they do not consider them as being distinct from the tattvas. This, along with believing Bhagvãn to be the twenty-fifth tattva, is the philosophy of Sãnkhya.

“Despite this, a person should not conclude that there is no jeev at all, because the proposers of Sãnkhya have prescribed the six spiritual activities (shat-sampatti – sham, dam, uparati, titikshã, samãdhãn, and shraddhã) as well as shravan, manan, and nididhyãs, for the jeev. By behaving in this way, the jeev attains a thought that eventually leads to the realisation of its distinction from the tattvas. Then, a person engages in the worship of Bhagvãn, realising himself to be brahm-rup. This is the Sãnkhya philosophy. It is also mentioned in the Moksh-Dharma, where Nãradji explains to Shukdevji: tyaja dharmam-adharma cha ubhe satyanrute tyaja ubhe satyanrute tyaktvã yena tyajasi tat-tyaja “The meaning of this shlok is that when a mumukshu prepares to think about his ãtmã, he should abandon all thoughts of dharma and adharma, satya and asatya, which disturb him. In fact, he should also abandon the thought by which he abandons these other thoughts. In this way, he should behave as brahm-rup. However, the shlok does not suggest that a person should physically abandon the niyams in the form of dharma. This is the correct interpretation of the shlok.

“Next, proposers of the Yog philosophy promote the twenty-four tattvas distinctly from the jeev and ishvar, whom they regard as the twenty-fifth tattva, and Bhagvãn as the twenty-sixth. With the power of discrimination they distinguish the twenty-fifth tattva (jeev) from the other tattvas, and after firmly resolving that to be their form, they gather the vruttis of the twenty-four tattvas and forcefully attach them to the twenty-sixth tattva (Bhagvãn); they do not allow them to be drawn towards the vishays. They believe, ‘If my vruttis abandon Bhagvãn and wander elsewhere, I will have to pass through the cycle of births and deaths’. Therefore, they forcibly keep the vruttis of their indriyas and antah-karans on Bhagvãn.

“In comparison, the proposers of Sãnkhya believe, ‘I have no indriyas or antah-karans, so where shall the vruttis go?’ Therefore, they consider themselves to be brahm-rup and remain fearless. Those belonging to the Yog philosophy remain constantly fearful. For example, if a person had to carry a pot filled to the brim with oil up some stairs without spilling any oil at all, and if two swordsmen with drawn swords were on both sides trying to frighten him, that person would be extremely afraid. Followers of Yog remain just as afraid of the vishays and strive to keep their vrutti fixed on Bhagvãn. This is the philosophy of Yog.

“Vedãnt (the Upanishads) explains only Bhagvãn, who is the ultimate cause of all, as being the truth; they claim all else to be false. Just as when a person attains the viewpoint of ãkãsh, he does not perceive the other tattvas, in the same way, a person who sees only brahm, perceives nothing else. That is the philosophy of Vedãnt.” || End of Vachanãmrut Loyã || 15 || 123 ||