Celibate Saint or Married Person?

O Learned and Devoted Servants of God,

[Dr. Nikhil told ‘My spiritual classmates did not become householders but I became the householder. All of them are lucky to have salvation.’]

Swami replied: ‘Only you are going to get the salvation because you became the householder.’ Nikhil was astonished and asked for clarification.

Swami continued: The psychology of the people is to get attraction towards the things, which are far and to get detached from the things, which are very close. Infact, this is the general psychology of souls and even angels are not exceptional as said in the Veda ‘Paroksha Priya ivahi devah pratyaksha dvishah…’, which means that even angels like any item, which is far and dislike any item present before the eyes. This is the reason for God keeping us in close association with worldly atmosphere and to keep Himself far from us. Whatever God does is always meaningful and we criticize God without understanding Him in depth. You should always be closely associated with the items from which you want detachment. You should always keep yourself far from the items on which you like to maintain your attraction. When the item existing away from you becomes closely associated, your attraction towards it starts diminishing. This is the reason for the repulsion towards the contemporary human incarnation, which exists before your eyes. Similarly, the reason for attraction to past human incarnations and the energetic incarnations of God related to the upper world is that these forms are not before your eyes.

One day, Radha came to Dwaraka from Brindavanam and Rukmini gave her hot milk. Rukmini also was taking the same hot milk every day but, on that day, Krishna became red due to heat. On enquiry, Krishna told that since He is in the heart of Radha, His body became red due to the hot milk taken by Radha. Then, Rukmini asked the Lord for not seeing the same effect every day since she was also taking the same hot milk. The Lord told that since He is in the heart of Radha only, the effect was seen. Rukmini asked the reason for the difference between her and Radha. The Lord told that since Rukmini is staying very close to Him, her devotion was not as strong as that of Radha, who was staying in Brindavanam far from Him. This story shows that close association always leads to the negligence.

Two devotees were traveling to the city of Varanasi to worship the Lord Shiva. One of them was attracted by a prostitute and stopped in her house before reaching Varanasi. The other person went to Varanasi and worshipped Shiva for the rest of the life. Both died on the day of Shivaratri. The person in Varanasi was always having mental attraction to the prostitute. The person who is with prostitute is always having mental attraction to Lord Shiva. Finally, the messengers of Yama took the person who died in Varanasi to hell, whereas the messengers of Lord Shiva took the person who died in the prostitute’s house. All these incidents prove that the mental attraction is always on the item, which is far from you and the detachment comes from the item, which is before your eyes.

When Narada asked about the address of a real Brahmachari, Brahma told that Krishna is the real Brahmachari. Krishna is having sixteen thousand wives! You can imagine the intensity of detachment that is resulting in His case from the family life and this is the reason for His over attachment to God or Brahman. Brahmachari means the person who is intensively attached to God. The intensive attachment of Krishna to God is clear through the excellent Gita that came out from His mouth. Ofcourse, here you should take Krishna in the role of an ordinary human being to take this message. Similarly, Vashishtha married Arundhati and got hundred sons through her. But he claimed himself to be the real Brahmachari and the river Ganges gave way to Arundhati when she uttered that her husband, a real Brahmachari asked for the way. This again shows that the opposite atmosphere around you creates real detachment from it. If you leave it and go far, your attraction on it will become more and more.

Sage Vashishtha says that it is better to be far from worldly atmosphere to get detachment from it. You may think that this contradicts the above statement regarding human psychology. But it is not so as it is clear on sharp analysis. The statement of sage Vashishtha does not apply to the stage of leaving the family permanently. His statement should apply to a temporary period of meditation on God in the case of a householder. The householder gets real detachment from the family being close to the family. Now, he wants to concentrate on God for sometime. For this purpose, he should leave the house and go to a lonely place and meditate upon God for sometime. He can meditate upon God in the atmosphere of the house. Therefore, one should leave the house for a short period to concentrate on God in a lonely atmosphere as said in the Gita (Vivikta Sevi…). But if one leaves the house permanently and goes to a forest for meditation upon God, everything fails. The concept of leaving the family forever brings tremendous attraction on the family in the mind, leading to failure of meditation upon God. Therefore, the statement of Vashishtha in Yoga Vashishtha should be taken for a short exit from the house and not in the case of permanent exit. The statement in the Veda (Yadahareva Virajet Tadahareva Pravrajet…), which says that you should leave the house whenever you are detached from the family, can be applied for leaving the house for a short period also. The spiritual aspirant can control the mind and attain detachment from the family slowly by such constant practice only (Abhyasenatu… Gita). Once the attachment on God becomes complete, the detachment from the family becomes natural and spontaneous and there need not be any effort for such detachment. After such detachment, one may stay in the house but still he is not attached internally to the family like king Janaka. For such a fully detached soul, even leaving the house for a divine program of propagating the spiritual knowledge will not have any difficulty as in the case of Buddha and Shankara. Once the internal detachment is complete, the external detachment is not at all a problem and even if one is not having the external detachment, still he is completely detached soul only. There is no difference between Janaka and Shankara or Buddha because, in all these cases, the internal detachment is complete. However, certain people who claim the internal detachment like Janaka without the external detachment can misinterpret this concept. Such cheating the public is of no use because it is deceiving his own soul since one cannot fool the God.

When the person is totally absorbed in God, even the surrounding atmosphere of the family cannot disturb him in anyway as in the case of Janaka. Such person may even leave the family like Shankara and Buddha for the propagation of spiritual knowledge and devotion in the world on the order of God. Such exit is designed in the divine program and cannot be taken as a step in the spiritual effort (Sadhana) of a human being. Shankara and Buddha are human incarnations of God (Siddhas) and they are not to be compared with the spiritual aspirants (Sadhakas). If the spiritual aspirant becomes Janaka by slow practice as said above, such state is equal to the state of Buddha or Shankara, provided the attainment of such state is real with reference to his inner consciousness. Leaving the house for the propagation of knowledge and devotion should be done on the command of God only as stated by Shri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa.

You have to tackle the Maya carefully with tactful approach according to the human psychology. Otherwise, one will be insulted and thrown away by the powerful Maya. Your spiritual effort should not be against the psychology of the mind. The detachment from the family should be spontaneous without any effort. The effort means force and mind cannot be controlled by force, which is already attracted to the world. Without the complete attraction to God, if you detach mind from the worldly attraction, the mind will rebel because it needs the process of attraction as its food. If the mind is immersed in the attraction to God, it is satisfied with such divine nectar as its food. In the absence of divine nectar of devotion to God, the mind likes to eat some rubbish food and it cannot remain hungry without food. In the absence of divine nectar of devotion as the food of highest quality, some food of even low quality is needed for the mind. When you are in journey, you cannot get homely food, but you cannot also remain hungry without food. Therefore, you will be eating some nonsense during the journey to pacify your hunger. Similar is the case with mind. If you are served with homely food, you will not go for bad food even by force. Similarly, if you fully pacify mind with the devotion, the mind will not go for worldly affairs even if it is forced. The high quality food should be sufficiently supplied to pacify the hunger. Then only, your hunger is put off. Simply tasting a little food of high quality cannot pacify the hunger completely. Therefore, merely tasting the devotion of God is not sufficient to detach the mind from the worldly affairs. The devotion should be completely injected into the mind so that the hunger of the mind is completely satisfied by the quantitative aspect also. Once your mind is engaged in the devotion always, the worldly affairs cannot deviate you. This is the reason for the diversion of the mind to the world even though the mind has tasted devotion.

The devotion to God should be based on absence of aspiration for any fruit in return. This point is the life of the entire devotion. In all most all the cases, the devotion is based on the need for God’s help in the materialistic life or in getting protection from the hell after death. Such need based devotion will lead to atheism one day or other because atleast after sometime, God will keep silent towards such need based devotion. When God becomes silent and the need for God disappears, the devotion also vanishes like the useless tail in the case of human being in the process of evolution. The tail is well developed in the case of animals because it is needed to throw away the flies. But when the animal started walking on two legs and the two hands are well developed to throw away the flies, the tail slowly disappeared due to the absence of its use. A monkey walks on four legs and therefore, the tail exists with full vigor to throw away the flies. When the same monkey became the human being in the process of evolution, the hands were well developed and hence, the tail disappeared. If you see the physical form of Hanuman, it is fully human form with well-developed hands. The mouth of Hanuman can be seen even in certain human beings and therefore, it cannot prove that Hanuman is a monkey. His mouth was as good as the mouth of a handsome human being and it is deformed when He swallowed the Sun due to burning. In His case, the tail should disappear since it has no use. But in His case, the tail is very long and very strong even though its need disappeared. The tail represents the devotion without need or aspiration of fruit. The long tail represents the continuous devotion without any break even in the absence of need. The strong tail denotes the intensive devotion even in the absence of need. Thus, the very physical form of Hanuman represents His path of devotion, which is very strong and continuous even in the absence of any need. Even though there was no aspiration of any fruit, God gave Him the highest fruit by which He became God Himself.

The Veda says, ‘Avidyaya mrutyum Tritva Vidyaya Amrutamashnute’, which means that one can cross the Maya with the help of Maya only and can catch God only with the help of true knowledge. This means that you can capture God by truth and sincerity only. But you cannot win the world by the same truth and sincerity. The world is full of falsehood or Maya. To reach God, you have to cross this world by false means only. Therefore, you have to learn both Maya and true knowledge to be used for the world and God respectively. If you reverse, you will neither cross Maya nor attain God. When your aim is God, the false means used to cross the worldly bonds are not at all false. Anything in the direction of God is not at all false. Anything in the direction of the world is not at all true. Ends justify means. A lie told by Krishna to kill Drona became justice. Even truth against the will of God becomes injustice. Shankara wanted to leave His mother for the divine service. He told several times the true spiritual knowledge to His mother. But the mother finally wants Him to stay with her only. Shankara cheated her by telling a lie that a crocodile caught His leg under water and forced her to accept samnyasa as His last wish. He did not cheat her to allow Him to marry an unacceptable girl. In that case it will be a sin. For the sake of God only, He cheated His mother, which is a right way only. Similarly, Buddha left His family in the midnight. Saibaba told that the verse in the Gita ‘Upadekshyanti te jnanam…’ (which means that the preacher will preach knowledge) should be also reversed by introducing Ajnanam in the place of Jnanam, which means that the preacher shall also preach about ignorance or Maya to cross the Maya. Unless you cross the river, you cannot reach the village on the other bank. The guide who gives the details of the village present on the other bank of the river must also teach you the swimming to cross the river. Krishna knows stealing the butter and dancing with Gopikas to attract them to get detachment from the worldly bonds and at the same time, He is the excellent expert in spiritual knowledge as seen through the Gita. When the preacher gives knowledge of God only, the soul cannot cross Maya with the help of that knowledge. Such a preacher is a human Guru who gives only theoretical knowledge without the practical knowledge that is required in the world-laboratory. Only Sadguru can give both theoretical and practical knowledge. He represents not only the scripture but also the world (Vishwam Vishnuh...). Science is the knowledge of the world (Vijnanam) and is unaware of God and hence, science can be also treated as ignorance (avidya). Though science cannot speak about God, it can disprove the awareness as non-God item of creation. The Advaita philosopher, who does not know this ignorance (Science) mistakes awareness as God. Therefore, the knowledge of unimaginable God can be established only on knowing the science intensively, which can prove all the non-God items as non-God items only. To cross the Maya of awareness, one requires the help of ignorance (science) only and not the mere knowledge of God from the scripture.

You must know the nature of intelligence and the nature of the mind also to control the mind. Though intelligence is higher faculty, it cannot control the mind by passing on the orders as decisions. The mind yields to the decision of intelligence immediately but slowly the mind proposes alternative (Vikalpa) and controls the intelligence by diverting it into the alternative way. The mind is like the tactful wife who yields to the decision of the husband on the spot but slowly diverts him to her will in course of time through sweet proposals. To capture such mind, you must learn the same talent of the mind. Krishna transformed Satyabhama slowly by not behaving like her husband but behaving like a wife to her. You can cut the diamond by another diamond only and you can remove the thorn by another thorn only. To teach this spiritual concept of intelligence and mind, God created the man and woman with such different natures representing the intelligence and mind respectively. When this concept is understood, both man and woman should take the concept equally and get the spiritual benefit. There is no difference between the man and woman in their three bodies. The gross body is made of five elements, the inner subtle body is made of three qualities and the innermost causal body is made of pure awareness in both the cases. The compositions of the proportions of the three qualities vary in both the cases to suit the above concept. Thus, the firm intelligence and the inconsistent mind are represented by the man and woman respectively and here both are equal as actors but for their difference in the external assigned roles. One actor need not criticize the other actor for external role. Thus, the man need not criticize the inconsistent nature of the woman, which is only a role given by God. The man should also learn the submissiveness of the woman, which is also an external role and which is necessary for attaining the grace of God.

The Veda says that the five parts (Koshas) starting from gross body made of food (Annam) are Brahman. If you take these five parts in the case of an ordinary human being, the word Brahman stands for the greatest item in a category. The Sanskrit dictionary (Amara Kosha) allows such alternative meaning, which is derived from its root word. The Gita also gives the example for such alternative usage and Brahman is used to mean the Veda, which is the greatest among the scriptures (Brahmaakshara...). If you take the word Brahman in the sense of God, then the case of human being will be the case of human incarnation, in which case, every part becomes God just like the live wire is treated as current in every part internally and externally (Antarbahischa… Veda). You cannot take the case of ordinary human being and the sense of God for the word Brahman together and say that every human being is God. Even in that way, you cannot say that the awareness alone is God because even the gross body is said to be God in the Veda in the context of Pancha Koshas. Advaita, which restricts only the pure awareness (soul) or causal body as God cannot fit itself even in such line of misinterpretation.

★ ★ ★ ★ ★