Posted on: 25 Aug 2019
This is the first part of the two-part discourse given by Swami to several devotees who visited Him on the auspicious occasion of Krishnāṣṭami. This part (Part I) is meant for all devotees, while the Part-II is highly technical and is meant for scholars. Among the devotees who visited Swami, was Dr. J. Prasad, Professor of Sanskrit at the Central University, Hyderabad, who specializes in logic or Tarka Śāstra. Also present, were Kum. Meenakshi, Shri Kishore Ram, Shri Hrushikesh, Kum. Purnima and others. The devotees posed several questions to Swami, which He answered in detail.
Miracles are shown to some great blessed devotees for inspiring them for God’s work. What about others, who are also willing to do God’s work?
Swami replied: O Learned and Devoted Servants of God! A doctor adopts different treatment methods to cure different patients depending on the specific needs of each patient. He might give oral tablets to a patient who can digest the medicine. He might give an injection to another patient who has a weak digestive system, so that the medicine directly enters his bloodstream. The reason for second patient’s poor digestion might be that he had already been given oral antibiotics, which caused hyperacidity. The first patient should not misunderstand the doctor of being partial to the second patient since the injection given to the second patient will cure his disease faster. The treatment method depends on various aspects of the patient’s condition. God is also called the doctor for curing the disease of worldly fascination (Bhavaroga Vaidya). The patient cannot be the judge of which treatment is to be adopted by the doctor. The doctor alone is the best judge of which treatment should be given to which patient.
Jesus told the doubting Thomas that those who believed in God without witnessing any miracles are far more blessed than those who believe in God after witnessing the miraculous power of God. After crucifixion, Jesus reappeared before His disciples and Thomas doubted the Jesus who stood before him. Jesus showed him the wounds on His hands caused by the nails during the crucifixion and told him the above statement.
Miracles are meant for the devotees who are in the lowest state of theism as well as for atheists. Devotees believe in God. But they feel uncomfortable in believing that a specific human being is God. Actually, the same God, in whom they believe, has come as that Human Incarnation. These devotees are in a mixed state of belief and doubt. They require the Human Incarnation of God to exhibit a miracle before believing in Him. Miraculous powers are certainly used by God to help real devotees overcome their worldly problems, if He has the hope that they will progress spiritually after getting relief from their worldly stress. But this hope should come from the side of God and not from the side of devotee. God alone knows the past, present and future of any soul (Tānyahaṃ veda sarvāṇi…—Gita). But there is one objection to miracles. Even a demon can perform a miracle because he might have obtained that power from God through long and severe penance. Even certain devilish people get some miraculous powers by worshiping ghosts. Hence, performing miracles cannot be the sole identity-mark of a Human Incarnation. Moreover, miracles can lead devotees on the wrong path. The miracles increase their selfishness and fascination towards the world because many miracles are done by the Incarnation in response to devotees’ ardent prayers to solve their worldly problems. Devotees, thus, use the Incarnation’s miraculous powers for solving their worldly problems, which increases their selfishness and attachment to the world. When one problem is solved, a hundred other problems flare up. It is just like the fire, which is not quenched by pouring ghee (clarified butter) in it, but instead flares up even more. So, miracles have harmful side-effects. The unique identity-mark of the Incarnation is true and excellent spiritual knowledge (Prajñānam Brahma—Veda, Jānītvātmaiva—Gita). No one other than the Human Incarnation of God possesses it. Besides, it does not have harmful side-effects like miracles. Apart from identifying the Human Incarnation, the true and excellent spiritual knowledge has beneficial side-effects. It leads to the spiritual progress of the devotees. It gives the right direction to devotees, decreasing their selfishness and fascination for worldly bonds. It also simultaneously increases their attraction towards God.
Krishna showed the miracle of the cosmic vision to Arjuna because Arjuna was in doubt whether Krishna was actually God. Arjuna clearly expressed his doubt to Krishna in the Gita (Kathametat vijānīyām—Gita). Arjuna, by himself, was highly devoted to Krishna. He was the reborn sage Nara and Krishna was the reborn sage Narāyaṇa, who was a Human Incarnation of God. But Arjuna doubted the divinity of Krishna in that birth because he was playing the role of an ordinary human devotee, who believes in God, but disbelieves in the human form of God due to the repulsion between common media. Hence, we have to say that the level of Arjuna’s devotion in the Gita was very low. When the patient is in such a low state, injecting him with the medicine of the biggest miracle such as the cosmic vision becomes inevitable.
Let us take the case of Rādhā. She was in the highest state of devotion since she had sacrificed all her worldly bonds for the sake Krishna. Suppose, the same Rādhā blames Krishna by saying “You have shown such a big miracle to the great deserving Arjuna. You never showed such a miracle to me. Perhaps, I am undeserving”. How can we understand this situation? We will be forced to conclude that even though Rādhā is in the highest state of devotion, the poor Rādhā is affected by the divine māyā of Krishna. That is why she is speaking like this due to meaningless jealousy towards Arjuna!
The devotees who have not seen Krishna’s miracle of the cosmic vision, can ask Arjuna about his experience of the miracle. They can believe that the miracle really happened because Arjuna is a truthful fellow-devotee. Gaining knowledge in this manner from close well-wishers is considered to be an authority of knowledge (śabda pramāṇam). Is it necessary that you should see everything with your own eyes and only then believe? Suppose your father has travelled to Mumbai city and he tells you all the interesting things about the city, do you not believe him? Do you say to him “I will not believe you unless I see everything with my eyes”. Do you not have even the least faith in your own father? If you cannot believe him, you are just like the mad atheist!
The true spiritual knowledge is indeed far far greater than miraculous powers. Several devotees were greatly attracted to the satsaṅga of Shri Paramahamsa. One day, He was crossing the river Ganges by boat for which he paid just two rupees to the boatman. At the same time, a saint, who had acquired miraculous powers from God, crossed the river by walking over the water. After both had crossed the river, the saint proudly told Paramahamsa that he had spent thirty years to attain that miraculous power. Shri Paramahamsa calmly replied that the value of the saint’s thirty-year penance was just two rupees! In contrast with this saint, Śaṅkara, due to His excellent spiritual knowledge, became famous as the World Preacher (Jagadguru) in thirty-two years!
Jesus said that one should not test the omniscient and omnipotent God by asking Him to show a miracle as a proof of His divinity. The poor fellow who asks God to prove Himself through miracles, is ignorant. He is an innocent and emotional person, who does not know that miracles are not the real proof of the divinity of God because even demons and evil people who are experts at black magic, can perform miracles. One should test the spiritual knowledge of the preacher to identify whether or not he is God. Shirdi Sai said that you should not test the preacher by asking questions whose answers are well-known to you. Instead, you should ask your genuine doubts in the spiritual knowledge after offering your salutations to the preacher, in full surrender, and after doing some sacrificial service to the preacher.
You cannot rely only on miracles for the identification of God since they can also be experienced elsewhere from undivine persons. This is called ativyāpti. Ativyāpti is the defect or error in knowing something because the cause or the indicator (hetu) is also found in some other unintended result (sādhya). For example: Horns are taken as the cause of the identification of a cow (result). But horns are also present in a buffalo. Similarly, if miracles are taken as the cause of the identification of divinity (result), the same cause also exists in the case of a demon, which is another result. In fact, even though Rāma did not perform any miracle, the sages recognized Rāma as God. This is an example of avyāpti. Avyāpti is the error in knowing something when the stated cause or indicator is not found in the anticipated result. Miracles, which were assumed to be the cause of the identification of God, were not found in Rāma, even though He was an Incarnation of God. Another example of avyāpti is as follows: Saying that a white-colored skin is the identifying characteristic (cause) of a cow (result) is an avyāpti. This is because, we know that there are cows with red and black colours also. The white color is not necessary for the animal to be a cow.
For accurate identification or authoritative knowledge (pramāṇam), one must carefully analyze and ensure that the identification is free from the errors of both ‘avyāpti’ and ‘ativyāpti’. In the case of miracles as an indicator of divinity, ativyāpti occurs because divinity can be absent, even though miracles are exhibited. Similarly, avyāpti also occurs because divinity can exist, even though no miracle is exhibited. The correct indicator (cause) for identifying the Indian cow is the prominent loosely-hanging skin below the throat, called the dewlap. A prominent dewlap is found in all Indian cows without exception and so, there is no defect of avyāpti. Also, no other animal has such a prominent dewlap like the Indian cow. So, there is no defect of ativyāpti. Thus, the Indian cow (gotvam jātiḥ) can be faultlessly identified by the presence of a prominent dewlap.
Can we say that the unimaginable nature is the correct inherent characteristic by which we can unmistakably identify God? If you say so, the question comes as to how the visible-imaginable Krishna could exhibit God’s unimaginable nature. This objection can be resolved by saying that the unimaginable God merged with Krishna and showed the unimaginable nature. Krishna, the visible-imaginable human being-component in the Incarnation, did not exhibit the unimaginable nature. If the unimaginable nature were inherent in all human beings who are visible and imaginable, all human beings would have exhibited it. But it is not so. In the case of Krishna, we say that the unimaginable God merged with Krishna with perfect homogeneity. So, there is perfect monism between the unimaginable God and Krishna. Some may argue that since the unimaginable God is capable of even separating from the selected human being, a perfect monism cannot be accepted. Our response to this argument is that whether to have perfect monism with the selected human being or not, completely depends on the will of God. In some Human Incarnations like Krishna and some Energtic Incarnations like Datta, the monism is perfect and the unimaginable God never separates from the medium in which He has merged. In other Human or Energetic Incarnations, the merging of God with the medium might have perfect monism as far as the limits of our understanding are concerned. But beyond the limits of our imagination, some dualism may exist between God and those media. Since that dualism is beyond our imagination, from our point of view, the monism between God and the medium is perfect in the case of all Incarnations. If God never separates from the medium in a certain Incarnation, there is certainly perfect monism. But even if God separates from the medium in a particular Incarnation, there is still monism from our point of view since that dualism is beyond the limits of our imagination. This should be our conclusion about the analysis of a Human Incarnation. The Incarnation cannot even be said to be like a eutectic alloy of two metals. The eutectic alloy, after all, remains only as a homogenous mixture of two components at the molecular level. It never becomes a single item with perfect monism. Depending on the will of God, a Human Incarnation may be like a mixture (eutectic alloy) or like a single item with perfect monism.
Miracles can sometimes even bring blame to God. Krishna gave life to the son of sage Sāndipani whereas He did not give life to His own nephew, Abhimanyu, who got killed in the war. Subhadrā misunderstood her brother Krishna and blamed Him for not bringing her son, Abhimanyu, back to life, even though Krishna was capable of doing so. Krishna told her that the original unimaginable God present in Him in a merged state, was not willing to do that miracle. He said that He was only a puppet in the hands of the absolute unimaginable God. The actual hidden reason for not bringing Abhimanyu back to life was that Abhimanyu was an incarnation of a demon. So, in His mind, Krishna was actually very happy about the death of Abhimanyu. The omniscient God has a million angles to analyze in a situation, before deciding to perform a miracle or not. We can analyze any situation only from two or three angles, at the maximum. We can never understand the final decision of God and we often misunderstand Him.
You have said that one should approach a doctor for the treatment of one’s illness because medical science is also given to humanity by God alone. God alone has created all medicines. Hence, according to You, taking the medicines prescribed by a doctor is not undivine. Can You please explain this elaborately?
Swami replied: Scripture says that science is given to humanity by God alone (Vijñānametat sarvaṃ Janārdanāt—Viṣṇu Sahasranāma Stotram). The Veda also says that God caused medicinal plants to grow from the earth (Pṛthivyā oṣadhayaḥ). What is undivine in this? I have come across some hypocritical devotees saying that they are not taking any medicine for their headache since God will cure them. By such behavior, these hypocrites want to distinguish themselves from ordinary people so that the public will treat them as someone special and respect them. This is not true devotion. It is a cheap method of drawing the innocent public’s attention towards them! Scripture says that your sin will trouble you in the form of illness and that to cure it, you should first use medicine, then worship the planets and finally worship God. (Pūrvajanma kṛtaṃ pāpaṃ, vyādhirūpeṇa bādhate, Tat śāntiḥ auṣadhaiḥ dānaiḥ, Japahoma surārcanaiḥ). These three are sequential steps that one should follow to cure illnesses.
The first step is taking some medicine from a doctor. You must have faith in that doctor in order for the medicine to work properly. So, while taking the medicine, the devoted patient says that the doctor is God and that the medicine is the holy water of the Ganges (Śarīre jarjarībhūte, vyādhigrasta kalebare, auṣadhaṃ jāhnavītoyam, Vaidyo Nārāyaṇo Hariḥ). Such a devotee has so much real love and faith in God that God will charge that doctor so that he will give the correct medicine to the devotee. The medicine too, will work effectively by the will of God. Is all this not a part of devotion to God?
Similarly, in the second step, when you show your horoscope to an astrologer, the astrologer will be charged by God to calculate the chart correctly, make the correct prediction and suggest the correct remedies, which are capable of removing the problem. Astrological remedies involve the worship of the planets (planet-deities). The planets are only the executive powers of God and they assist God in implementing the constitution written by God in order to govern souls. The power is not different from the possessor of the power. When you worship the power, you are, in effect, worshipping its possessor of the power. If you wish to honor a poet with a garland, do you offer one garland to the poet and another separate garland for his poetic talent?
The planet is characterized by its unimaginable power, using which, it catches the sinner at correct place and at the correct time to deliver the punishment. Planets also similarly give the appropriate benefits to souls. These benefits are the good fruits of meritorious actions done by good persons. The Sanskrit word for planet is ‘graha’, which means, ‘that which catches’ (Gṛhṇāti iti grahaḥ). It means that the planet catches the soul, wherever it may be, at the exact time to deliver the good and bad fruits of the soul’s deeds. Hence, the planet is not different from God. The unimaginable power of God itself is reflected through the planet in executing the delivery of the fruits of the soul’s deeds. The planet is like the lens which refracts the light of the sun. The sun is compared to God and its light is compared to God’s unimaginable power. Astrology is called Jyotiḥ Śāstra. Jyotiḥ means light and it refers to the radiant planets. So, astrology or Jyotiḥ Śāstra is the science or knowledge of radiant planets. But spiritual knowledge, which is the knowledge of God, is the root Jyotiḥ Śāstra. This is because, God is called the Paraṃ Jyotiḥ or the ultimate Radiant One. It means that God is the original Light that illumines the nine lights or planets. So, if the problem is not solved by worshipping the planets, then as the last resort, one should worship God to get rid of the problem which is the punishment of one’s sin. This is the third step in curing your illness or solving your problems.
If God is willing to help you, you will be cured in the first stage itself. This first stage of curing the illness through medical treatment is the arrangement made by God for the benefit of all souls including atheists. The devotee who wants to establish his separate identity, rejects this first stage of medical treatment and proceeds to the next step to prove that he is a high-level devotee. A devotee arranged the speech of a scholar in his house and invited many devotees to attend the speech. At the entrance of the house, the host placed a large bucket of water so that the devotees could wash their feet before entering the house. All the devotees used that water to wash their feet before entering. When the egotistic scholar arrived, he did not use the water that others were using, to wash his feet. He waited outside, expecting the host to bring water in a separate vessel, especially for him. He did this to distinguish himself from the other devotees! Is he not an egotistic fool? All the water, no matter in which container it is brought, belongs to the host. The entire arrangement for washing the feet of devotees was made by the same host. The case of the hypocritical devotee who rejects medicine and wants God to specially use His miraculous power to cure his headache, is similar to the above egotistic scholar!
Swami replied: The basic similarity between the two is that both are based on the existence of the omnipotent God having unimaginable power. The difference is that pravṛtti is a subject developed by God, which souls must compulsorily follow, whereas nivṛtti is a subject developed by devotees, who want to establish a special personal bond with God. In nivṛtti, the worship of God must be devoid of the aspiration for any fruit in return from Him. In pravṛtti, the soul can aspire for beneficial fruits from God, provided the soul always votes for justice against injustice. Even in pravṛtti, the aspiration for the fruit is unnecessary because, for meritorious deeds done without committing any sin, God certainly grants heaven as the fruit, both here as well as hereafter.
In nivṛtti, one has to vote for God—against both justice and injustice. It means, one must choose God over one’s legitimate worldly bonds and certainly above illegitimate worldly bonds. Actually, there is no question of leaving one’s illegitimate worldly bonds for the sake of God in nivṛtti. This is because, in the previous step of pravṛtti, the illegitimate worldly bonds have already been left for the sake of legitimate worldly bonds. Pravṛtti is the first step and nivṛtti is the second step. It means that there is no nivṛtti without first following the pravṛtti. Rāvaṇa is a very great example of nivṛtti, but he always violated pravṛtti. As a result of his demonic violation of pravṛtti, he was severely punished by God. Since he had not succeeded in pravṛtti, he was not even eligible to enter nivṛtti. A corrupt female employee trying to marry the employer will be rejected by the employer. Not only will he reject her marriage proposal but he will also expel her from her job.
Once you come out of your worship-room, what exists in the rest of your house and in the outside world is pravṛtti. The word karma (karma yoga) means the service done to God. Karma is confined to your worship-room and to your Satguru, who is the contemporary Human Incarnation of God. If you want Me to speak the bitter truth, your Satguru Himself is the real worship-room. If you bring the word karma outside, into the world full of ordinary souls, the word karma loses its color. Doing service without aspiring for any fruit in return, applies only in nivṛtti. In pravṛtti, you have to do service, aspiring for the fruit in return for the sake of the welfare of you and your legitimate family members. If you extend the policy of nivṛtti to pravṛtti, your clever employer will make you a scapegoat! If you refuse to take a salary for your work, and if your employer too is a follower of pravṛtti, he will preach the truth to you and insist that you take your salary. But in this Kali age, it is more likely that the employer will misuse the innocence of the employee. Similarly, the employee also pretends to be innocent only in order to get close to the employer and steal from the employer, ten times more money than his rightful salary!
In both pravṛtti and nivṛtti, you should not be constantly worried about the fruit of your work. Such worry will cause mental tension which will waste your energy. You will fail in your work and the expected fruit will not be achieved. This can be well-understood from the First Law of Thermodynamics, which states that the energy suppied to a system (Q) gets partly spent in raising the internal energy of the system (E) and only the remaining part gets converted to useful work (W). The law is expressed in the form of the following equation:
Q = E + W
Where Q is the total energy supplied to the system, E is the rise in the internal energy and W is the work done by the system.
Applying the above law to the present context, the total energy of your body-system is partly spent in worrying and mental tension, which is like the rise in internal energy and only the remaining part can be converted to useful work. The fruit obtained is proportional only to the work done. So, by avoiding the wastage of energy in unnecessary worry and tension, one can increase one’s work output.
In nivṛtti, this problem should not exist because the devotee’s attention is not on the fruit. He is not working for achieving the fruit for himself. He has already sacrificed the fruit to God. Yet, a true devotee too, experiences tension while he works to achieve the fruit for the sake of God. An example is Hanumān, who underwent a lot of tension while he was searching for Sītā for the sake of God Rāma. Even in this case of nivṛtti, the same law must be applied. One must avoid worry in order to maximize the work output and achieve the fruit. Achieving the fruit is very important. Unless one first achieves the fruit, how can one sacrifice it to anybody, including God? It was based on this law that Krishna said in the Gita that one should confine oneself to one’s work alone and not worry about the fruit (Karmaṇyevādhikāraste, mā phaleṣu kadācana). Hence, one must have the talent of distinguishing between pravṛtti and nivṛtti as well as identifying commonality between the two. Krishna says that ignorant souls cannot do this (Pravṛttim ca nivṛttim ca, janā na vidurāsurāḥ—Gita).
Purely in the context of pravṛtti, what is the best policy that one should adopt while saving and spending one’s earned money in the world?
Swami replied: There are two extreme ways regarding the expenditure of one’s earned money:
Both these above-mentioned types of people are wrong due to their extreme concepts. The golden middle path of Aristotle, lies in identifying essential needs correctly and distinguishing them from unnecessary things. People who follow this middle path spend on their essential needs and avoid spending on unnecessary things.
If extreme spendthrifts ask for your help in their old age, do not help them. If they had saved their earned money by controlling unnecessary expenditure throughout their lives, today, they would not have had to beg from others to meet their needs. Such people should be punished for their past ignorance. Money is given to you by God so that you can spend it to meet your present essential needs and save the rest for your future needs in your old age. You are expected to control unnecessary expenditure in the present. All this advice is confined to pravṛtti or worldly life.
In nivṛtti, the sacrifice of money for God’s work is said to be the only path for salvation by the Veda (Dhanena tyāgena ekena amṛtattvamānaṣuḥ). The Gita says that the sacrifice of one’s hard-earned money is the best way to get salvation. The sacrifice of money for the sake of any loved one is the practical proof of your theoretical love for the person; be that person your worldly relative or God. Theoretical love is also necessary since it is the theory that generates practice.
People convert to another religion because they cannot tolerate the defects and blind traditions in their own religion. These defects that have existed in their religion for a very long time make it very difficult to follow the religion. So, they prefer to convert to another religion that does not have such defects.
Swami replied: You see many uneven edges and surfaces on the hill that is close to you. But the hill that is far away seems to be smooth and even. The reality is that you will see a lot of unevenness on the surface of every hill, if you get close enough to it. In every religion, you always find three types of concepts:
Every religion has excellent Human Incarnations of God, very good followers of the Human Incarnations and bad people who twist the original concepts. Hence, all religions are one and the same in their composition, as stated above. In this Kali age, the proportion of good and bad followers everywhere is also a constant 10:90. If you only consider the concepts of the Human Incarnations and the supporting concepts of good followers in all religions, you will find that all religions have high uniformity. After all, all religions believe in the existence of the omniscient and omnipotent God, who punishes sinners even if they mange to escape the law of the land. This much commonality in the concepts preached by different religions is sufficient to establish a peaceful society all over the world. As far as this common concept is concerned, there need not be any contradiction between world religions. This commonality is the basis for establishing Universal Spirituality and Universal Religion. Therefore, there is no need whatsoever for converting to another religion. You can follow your own religion till the end of your life to get the grace of the same unimaginable God. It is this same God who is worshipped in various specific forms in the various world religions. Let us accept the defects in our own religion with full frankness and full courage. Let us try to rectify our mistakes with all boldness. Let us not try to bury our defects and become a bad example for other religions. Let us stand as an example for every religion by openly admitting our blind traditions and making sincere efforts to rectify those blind traditions.
When we follow our religion and its ancient culture, it does not mean that we blindly support our blind traditions, even if they are proved wrong by impartial logical analysis. Previously, one religion might have been the straight path to God and another religion might have been a curved path to reach the same God. The reason for this is the specific psychologies of the different sets of people living in two different regions. In olden days, people in each region had a uniform psychology. So, one religion was given to one set of people living in a certain region, while a different religion was given to another set of people living in another region as per their different psychologies. But today, all types of people exist in every region. Hence, every religion has both good and bad followers. God is the common goal for all religions. Different religions are placed around the same common center, God. In whichever religion the followers stand, there is one straight path to the common goal at the center (God) for the good people. Similarly, there is also a curved path to the same center for the bad people in each religion. The curved path is superimposed on the straight path. The good people of every religion travel along the straight path towards the center and the bad people of every religion travel along the superimposed curved path.
Hence, you cannot say that one religion is the short and straight path to reach God whereas other religion is a long and curved path to Him. You cannot use such logic to support conversions. In every religion, at the topmost level of God, there is not even a trace of any defect. For example, in Hinduism, God has said in the Gita that a person’s caste is based on the person’s qualities and deeds, and not on the family in which the person was born. God Rāma refused to grant salvation to the sages after their death, even though they too, like Rāma, belonged to the upper castes. In fact, Rāma even killed Rāvaṇa, who was born in the caste of sages due to his wicked deeds. When sages praised Rāma as God, He did not accept it. Instead, He denied it saying that He was only a human being, called Rāma, the son of Daśaratha (Atmānaṃ mānuṣaṃ...). The same Rāma granted salvation to the old lady, Śabarī, who belong to a scheduled caste, even while she was alive! The sages aspired for some fruit in return for their worship to Rāma, whereas, Śabarī did not aspire for any fruit in return. She lovingly served Rāma by offering Him wild fruits, which she tasted to ensure that they were sweet! Do you find any consideration of caste by God in Hinduism?
Prajnaanam Brahma Jnaaniitvaatmaiva Kathametat vijaaniiyaam Radha Maaya Maya shabda pramaanam saadhya ativyaapti Rama Pramaanam saafnaa gotvam jaatih Vijnaanametat sarvam Janaardanaat Pruthivyaa Oshadhayah Puurvajanma krutam paapam vyaadhiruupena baadhate Tatshaantih aushadhaih daanaih Japahoma suraarchanaih Shariire jarjariibhute vyaadhigrasta kalebare aushadham jaahanaviitoyam Vaidyo Naaraayano Harih Gruhnaati iti grahah Pravrutti Nivrutti Karmanyevaadhikaaraste maa phaleshu kadaachana Pravruttim cha Nivruttim cha Janaana viduraasuraah Dhanena tyaagena ekena amrutattvamaanashuh Atmaanam maanusham