Shri Datta Swami

Posted on: 24 Apr 2022


Divine Satsanga on 22-04-2022

Note: This article is meant for intellectuals only

Satsanga with Swami on 22-04-2022 attended by Shri Phani, Smt. Bhagya and Srivatsa Datta. Following are the remarks of Swami during the Satsanga.

1. The Veda says that the Lord appeared in different forms with the help of His various types of the unimaginable power called Maayaa (Indro māyābhiḥ pururūpa īyate). Here, in all types of the unimaginable power, the unimaginable nature is common and all types are different forms of the same unimaginable power. For example, ‘Aṇimā’ is to become very small and ‘Garimā’ is to become very big. Both are essentially unimaginable power only. Hence, the word unimaginable power used as singular or used as plural has no contradiction. The unimaginable God (Parabrahman) present in Lord Datta is using this unimaginable power in creating the world. Here, the unimaginable power or Māyā is not different at all from the unimaginable God or the possessor of the unimaginable power. Even in the imaginable domain, you differentiate between sun and sunlight, by capturing the sunlight as power of a battery and thus, you may separate the power from the possessor of the power or sun in this case. You cannot do the same with unimaginable power and unimaginable God because both are unimaginables. Any number of unimaginables result as one unimaginable item only. Based on this, we cannot have a third item called Māyā as instrument because Māyā and Parabrahman are one and the same, both being unimaginable. When one cuts a tree with an axe, the instrument (axe) is external. But when we say that one broke a stick with his strength, the strength cannot be an external instrument like an axe. The instrument need not always be a separate external item like an axe. The subject itself can also act as the instrument as in the case of one breaking a stick with his strength.

When God created this world, He was not having the help of any second thing except His unimaginable power, which is Himself only. It is said that God is not only the intellectual cause like pot-maker but also the material cause like mud (abhinna nimittopādāna kāraṇaṃ Brahma). Hence, there are two items only, which are the omnipotent God and the created product called world. In this case, you have to take the example of a magician creating objects through magic without taking the help of any second thing or second person. Between these two items, one is Parabrahman or the absolute reality and the second is the world, which is relative reality. The world can’t be the absolute reality because in such a case, God cannot do miracles in the world since one absolute reality cannot perform miracles (like creation of something from nothing, controlling it and making it disappear etc.) in another absolute reality. A pot cannot do any miracle with a cloth. A daydreamer (absolute reality) can do a miracle in his imaginary world (relative reality). Therefore, Māyā talked as instrument of God must be one with God. Māyā cannot stand on the side of the world, which is also wonderful because before the wonder of God, wonder of the world is insignificant. World is a known wonder whereas God is an unknown wonder.

Shankara told that God is unimaginable (mauna vyakhyā prakaṭita Parabrahma…). He also told that Māyā is unimaginable (turīyā kā'pi tvaṃ duradhigama nissīma mahimā…). He addressed both God and Māyā by the common word Turīya indicating that both are alternative words or names for the same one unimaginable item.

Shankara wanted to call the imaginable relative awareness or soul as the unimaginable God for the sake of reforming atheists. For this purpose, He was forced to call the imaginable relative awareness or soul as God and there was no other way. Immediately the question will come that where is the unimaginable power of God with the soul. For this sake, Shankara filtered the unimaginable power from the soul and assigned it with God, who is also imaginable relative awareness only. Such separation of unimaginable nature from awareness is a twist to construct a trick for the sake of reformation of atheists only. In fact, the unimaginable power or Māyā and the unimaginable possessor of Māyā called Parabrahman are one and the same since both are unimaginable. Knowingly this, Shankara did this trick to uplift atheists. Since Shankara separated Māyā from soul (in fact, Māyā is never with the soul since Māyā is God Himself), He always attached Māyā to the side of the world only and made Māyā as a relative reality. Since relative reality does not exist by itself, He found the opportunity to use this to say that Māyā does not exist by itself (yā mā sā māyā). All this was a stunt of Shankara in order to bring atheists to the path of theism.

2. God Shiva wrote a poem on the prayer of a priest, who wanted to get some gift for poetry in the court of a king. In that poem, Lord Shiva wrote that the hair of a lady has natural scent. Natkīra, the chief scholar of the court found fault with this saying that the hair of a lady cannot have natural scent unless scented oil is applied. God Shiva appeared showing third eye and told that the hair of Goddess Parvati has natural scent. Natkīra told that it is impossible for human ladies. God Shiva does not have any contact with human ladies except Goddess Parvati. Had it been God Narayana, He would know this fact due to His contact with Gopikas. Natkīra was having lot of ego of scholastic knowledge and told that the concept is wrong even if God Shiva shows several eyes around the head! This is very strong ego, which was suppressed by the curse of Shiva. He fell on the feet of God Shiva and was blessed again. Here the point is that Natkīra should not have been so rigid with God. God can change any concept just by His will. Moreover, the topic belongs to pravrutti or world, which is a relative reality depending on the moods of God. The same God Shiva as Shankara argued with Mandana Mishra for several days and Shankara did not mind even if Mandana Mishra blamed Shankara in the arguments. This is the subject of nivrutti, which has the highest value. In Pravrutti or worldly life, we have to follow God and like His liking (justice), disliking His dislike (injustice). In Nivrutti or spiritual life, you can break justice also for the sake of God even though God is opposing it! This is the difference between Natkīra of Pravrutti and Mandana Mishra of Nivrutti.

3. God is beyond space and time. When He showed the entire world in His small mouth in which even Yashoda and Krishna in this scene were seen! This proves that God is beyond space. Similarly, when He was teaching the Gita to Arjuna, He preached the Gita (18 chapters) in 18 hours. The same time was just 18 seconds for the entire army. This shows that God is beyond time. In total, this means that God is beyond four-dimensional space-time model, which is simply controlled by God as relative reality. Two different spaces were created simultaneously in the mouth and two different times were created simultaneously in the war field proving that space and time are not absolutely real, but relatively real like the rest of the creation.

4. Miracles are essential as fundamentals and dangerous in the further spiritual path. In the beginning, the unimaginable events called miracles are very much needed for an atheist to accept the existence of unimaginable God. Since miracles are perceived by all types of people, atheists also must agree to the existence of miracles. On seeing the smoke just like the fire is inferred, on seeing miracles (unimaginable events), the existence of the unimaginable God, who is the source of miracles has to be accepted by anybody since none can give a logical explanation of miracles. In this way, for the establishment of the existence of the unimaginable God (so that one can fear for the punishments given by God in unimaginable ways), miracles are very very essential in the beginning. But for theists, miracles are not necessary. They should worry about the path by which they can please God and miracles have nothing to do with this. If theists are also interested in miracles, their faith in God is not real. Even theists on the correct path are getting interested in miracles because using the miraculous powers of God, personal worldly problems can be solved. This interest in miracles will increase to get more number of worldly problems to be solved. Simultaneously, this will increase  worldly interest and selfishness. In pleasing God, selfishness spoils the real love towards God. In real love, there is no notion of business and selfishness will introduce the notion of business. This will make devotees fall down to very very low levels in the eyes of God. Hence, miracles are very very dangerous to theists.

5. If you are unable to identify the divinity of the contemporary human incarnation, you can use it at least as a guide in your spiritual path. At least, you will be benefitted by getting the correct direction in your spiritual path. In fact, no human incarnation by itself tells that it is God or the goal. It is the result of your research to find out Him as the contemporary human incarnation of God. The clue for finding out Him as God is the excellent unimaginable quality of knowledge that He preaches to you. If your consciousness is completely satisfied with the excellent unimaginable knowledge that clears all your doubts, it is the clue in identifying the incarnation. Don’t confirm the incarnation by miracles because miracles are performed by even demons. Moreover, miracles mislead you from the right spiritual path. The inner consciousness, which is in touch with God is always the best authority in identifying God through knowledge. It is only the true knowledge that you need from God because knowledge alone gives the right direction in not only the spiritual path but also in the worldly path and the same is said by the divine poet Kaalidaasa ‘satāṃ hi sandeha padeṣu vastuṣu, pramāṇa mantaḥkaraṇa pravṛttayaḥ’.