Posted on: 04 May 2011
The human incarnation remains unimaginable with respect to God in It and remains imaginable and even visible with respect to the medium. The medium and God become one only, like the current and wire, which are inseparable during the flow of current. This is monism of Shankara. Since both are separable in one time or other, both are separate but become one and the same as long as God exists in the human form. Both monism and difference exist according to Ramanuja. According to Madhva, there cannot be monism between the unimaginable God and imaginable human form. Therefore, according to Madhva, always the difference is maintained. You must understand that the debate of all these three divine preachers is only confined to God and soul in the human incarnation only and this debate does not apply to God and the ordinary soul in the world. Context is always important. If you miss the context, you will be mislead. In a function, the chief guest was president of the country. In that specific function, since the chief guest happened to be the president of the country, the chief guest was associated with lot of security. An ignorant person concluded that the chief guest in every function will be always accompanied by lot of security. In another function, the chief guest was the president of a village. The ignorant fellow thinks that the chief guest in that function also will be accompanied by lot of security. But, not even a single person of security was found. All this misunderstanding happened due to the missing of context and generalization of the concept of a specific context.
Shankara said that soul and God are one and the same. Ramanuja said that the soul is inseparable from God and hence, the monism is practically true and the difference is theoretically true. Madhva said that the soul is always different from God at anytime. All these three angles are about the soul and God existing in human incarnation only. In a human incarnation, the soul is charged by God like the wire by current and hence, both are one and the same for all practical purposes. The electrified wire gives the shock of current wherever it is touched. If both are not one and the same, the shock of the current cannot be exhibited by the electrified wire as its property. This is the view of Shankara. According to Ramanuja, in the case of human incarnation also, both soul and God are different because soul is created imaginable item, whereas, God is the unimaginable creator. Even in the case of electrified wire, the wire is a chain of metallic crystals, whereas, the electricity is the stream of electrons. Both are in different forms. In spite of this difference, they are inseparable during the time of existence of human incarnation or existence of current in the wire. During such specific period, the monism should be accepted. The creation is the quality (Visheshana) and the creator is the substratum of the quality (Visheshya). It is like fruit and its taste, which are inseparable. Ramanuja maintained both the inseparable monism and the actual difference. He stands as a bridge between Shankara and Madhva. Madhva says that even during the period of the flow of current in the wire, electricity and wire are two different forms only. In that period also, electricity is electrons and wire is crystals. Hence, the actual truth is only difference and not the monism. Madhva takes Hanuman as the best example. The behavior of Hanuman was always with respect to the soul component only. Even though God existed in the soul [Hanuman], the soul always felt itself different from God and exhibited always the obedience to God [Rama]. Parashurama was an example of contrast. The soul component in him felt that it is God and was punished. All the three views are simultaneously correct from the point of the angle of the observer.
A devotee, who worships the human incarnation as God, should always stick to the angle of monism. Even Hanuman worshipped Rama as God and never looked at the soul component. From the point of devotee, the monism is correct. But, from the point of the angle of human incarnation, the difference must be always recognized by the soul. Rama never declared or posed as God. Even in the case of Krishna, the declaration of Krishna as God during the Gita is by the God-component directly and not at all by the soul-component. Except the context of the Gita, Krishna never declared that He is God. Shankara always declared that He is God. This statement was always from His God-component only. But still, the observer always misunderstands that the soul-component is making such a statement. Shankara also supported the misunderstanding by saying that every soul is God. The situation pressed such false declaration.Such declaration was essential to convert the atheists into theists. Based on this false generalization, even if you think that the soul-component is making such false statement, it is also not wrong. It is only subsequent consequence of the essential false generalization. In His case, He is not wrong in both ways. If the God-component made such a statement, it is not wrong at all since it is absolutely true. If the soul-component makes such a statement, it is also not wrong because a false generalization that every soul is God is already made by Shankara for the sake of conversion of atheists. For the sake of initial rectification, a twist in the higher concept is not wrong. The higher concept is irrelevant at the initial moment. The twist can be removed and even the reason for the twist can be explained at a later stage in an appropriate time. Unless the immediate initial problem is solved, further development is also not possible. Even if the people do not develop further, at least the initial progress is better than the ground. One is better than zero, even if hundred is not achieved. It is better to be a theist accepting the existence of God, even though he thinks that he himself is God, than to remain as an atheist.
Baba as Shankara
The case of Baba was similar to that of Shankara. The situations and the requirements of the programs were also similar. In the time of Shankara, there were many atheists. In the time of Baba also, the development of science taken in the negative sense is too much and practically atheism only existed even though theism existed theoretically. If the people believe in the unimaginable God, they will have fear for the hell and the sins shall be minimized. Today, sins in all angles are in climax. The immediate answer for the practical proof of the existence of God is the establishment of an unimaginable event called as miracle. Shankara and Baba performed miracles even from the childhood. Shankara as a child created the pour down of some golden fruits in the house of a poor person. A few other recorded miracles performed by Shankara were:
The ego and jealousy of an atheist are always in the climax and the atheist will never accept the contemporary human incarnation. To pacify this attitude, Shankara created a twist in the concept of human incarnation that every living being having awareness is God. By this, Shankara tried to achieve the goal of Buddha also to restrict the people from killing the animals, birds, etc. since every living being is God. The present situation is also not different from that of Shankara. In the time of Shankara, atheism existed in the name of atheism only. But today, the same atheism exists in the name of theism. It is the same old wine in a new bottle. Baba also performed several miracles to give proof of unimaginable God. Baba also adopted the same philosophical trick of Shankara to pacify the ego and jealousy of the human beings. Even in His speeches, Baba admired Shankara many a times.
Baba as Ramanuja and Madhva
Baba resembles Ramanuja in the development of devotion by singing sweet devotional songs with sweet voice. Baba encouraged the worship of idols like Ramanuja since the idols stand as representative models for God in the case of general mass. Baba resembled Madhva in stressing the concept of service. Unless you are trained in the service of humanity, you cannot serve God in human form. You have to eradicate your ego, selfishness and jealousy towards a co-human form through the service to humanity. Then only, you will be eligible to serve God in the human form present before your eyes. Madhva always worshipped Hanuman because Hanuman worshipped and served His contemporary human incarnation. If you have reached the stage of realization and maturity to recognize the alive human form of God, idol worship is not necessary. The idols in human form also indicate the human incarnation only. Baba told in one speech, “Idol is the finger indicating an object. With the help of the finger, you have to see the object. Once you see the object, finger is not necessary”. What a beautiful example is given to explain the concept! In preaching the knowledge, Baba resembles Shankara and Jesus. Had Baba not arrived in the present situation, the roots of atheism would have cracked the building of spiritual knowledge leading to its complete collapse. Due to the development of science, every miracle was thought to be a tale of entertainment created for the sake of children. Even the concept of God was thought to be a creation for giving confidence in the human beings who lack it. Several human incarnations of Lord Dattatreya like Shripada Vallabha, Narahsimha Saraswati, Manikya Prabhu, Akalkota Maharaj, etc. have come performing miracles along with preaching. Even in the time of Shirdi Sai Baba, the science did not develop so much and hence, lesser number of miracles were performed. But today, the development of science is very fast and hence, Baba performed the miracles on an open stage. You will find the preaching of spiritual knowledge with every human incarnation because it is the essential program and the main goal of God. Miracle may be or may not be performed as per the requirement. But preaching the spiritual knowledge is inevitable and hence, the Veda says that the spiritual knowledge is the only identifying sign of God in human form.
Master Necessary for Every Human Being
I have been ordered by Baba to propagate this spiritual knowledge and even I am surprised about the quality of the knowledge that radiated from Me. Seeing the excellent quality of the knowledge, I realized that I am not the author of this knowledge and Baba only spoke through Me. Baba spoke through Me some concepts not covered by Him in His speeches. By this, Baba wanted to see that whether I will be tempted to own this knowledge. The test of Datta is always very subtle. There is also another reason for this. Baba spoke the new concepts through Me since Datta is famous to give fame to His devotees. The credit for the acts of Datta is given to the devotee in this way. This second angle of the test of Datta is also to see whether the devotee becomes egoistic by the fame. Thus, this point is a double-edged knife on which the devotee has to walk very carefully. In this analysis, the word ‘Baba’ stands for the unimaginable God-component present in Him and the word ‘I’ stands for the imaginable soul-component. Since God is unimaginable and cannot be directly indicated, you have to take some imaginable medium for the indication of such God. Unless this sharp analysis is taken up, there will be lot of confusion in the concept. If you represent Baba or Rama and Myself or Hanuman by the soul-components only, the concept of master and servant cannot arise. If you represent Baba or Rama and Myself or Hanuman by the God-component only, then also, the concept of master and servant cannot arise. You may doubt that why Baba should be represented by God-component and Myself by the soul-component only and not the vice-versa. The situation contradicts such possibility. Baba told Me that He has selected Me for the propagation of knowledge. This situation clearly establishes that He is the master and I am His servant. Therefore, the God-component in Me and the soul-component in Baba should not be touched. Two boys or two girls are acting as Rama and Sita in a drama. As per the drama, you have to take Rama as male and Sita as female. You should not go deep into the internal basis and say that both are males or females. The male stands for the God-component and the female stands for the soul-component. If you take the soul-component in Rama and Hanuman, both are females. If you take God-component in both, both are males. But, as per the convention of drama, Rama is taken as male and Sita is taken as female.
Shirdi Sai Baba declared that Venkusa was His master. Shankara declared that Govinda Bhagvat Paadaa was His guide. You should not be confused by the names. The God-component always does anything worthy like miracle or radiates the excellent knowledge. The credit is given to soul component since the soul is His devotee. You may say that Baba never mentioned any master for Him. Since Baba declared that He is Shirdi Sai Baba, it naturally means that Venkusa was His master. Rama is the master of Hanuman. The guides for Rama were sage Vashishtha and Vishwamitra. The concept of master and servant is always projected by the soul component of the human incarnation because it is a message to the humanity. If this aspect is not projected and demonstrated, the devotees will be attacked by the cancerous disease called ego. When the human incarnation projects the concept of Its master, you have to take the point to be related to its soul-component only and not to the inner God-component. Then only, the human beings will search for the master thinking that when the human incarnation Itself has master, not to speak of a human being. I complete this discourse by saluting My master, Bhagvan Shri Satya Sai Baba.