Posted on: 03 Feb 2016
Shri Anil Asked:
1. Some people practice remedies suggested by some astrologers, which are highly illogical like, pouring milk in flowing river, throwing silver coins in running water etc. Whether such remedies are scripture based? Kindly enlighten us.
Shri Swami Replied: All these practices are based on the foolish and ridiculous psychologies of some cracks only and are not at all based on the divine scripture, which is the word of God. For such reason only, we have to adopt the scientific analysis based on deep logic everywhere to reject the dirt from the mixed golden powder. God has created food and wealth to support the lives of human beings. This is the facility created by the divine Father for the sake of His beloved children. Remember that all the living beings with developed awareness like birds and animals are also the children of God only. It is again madness to think that birds and animals are created as the food for human beings. Will any father ask one child to eat the other child? Plants are also living beings but without awareness. Life is the respiratory system (pranamayakosha) that is meant for preparation of food in plants and for oxidation of food in living beings with awareness. Food (annamayakosha) and respiratory system (pranamayakosha) are absolutely inert without awareness. Hence, using plants for food is not sin at all. The awareness starts from the development of mind (manomayakosha), progresses through intelligence (vignanamayakosha) and ends in bliss (anandamayakosha). All these five constitute the development of awareness from inert items. The first two parts are purely inert and the rest three parts are purely awareness. Awareness is neither matter (nervous system) nor energy (nervous energy) but it is a specific work form of nervous energy and the specific nature is due to the specific nervous system only in which the inert energy specifically functions. Awareness is only an activity, which means knowing like other activities as walking, talking etc. This activity is done by the specific machine called nervous system and specific form of inert energy functioning in the nervous system, called as nervous energy. Such awareness depending upon matter and energy is only an evolved item in the course of evolution of human being from the purely inert five elements (akashat… purushah- Veda). Such awareness is always very much limited (alpajna) that developed from inert phase (ajna). The awareness of God is totally different, which is omniscient (sarvajna). Such extraordinary and super natural awareness is a special activity, which does not depend on matter and energy and hence existed even before the creation of energy and matter. This special awareness is not only independent from energy and matter, but also is not a specific work form of energy. It is only a specific work and is not a specific form of inert energy since inert energy did not exist before the creation. Such special awareness was the activity (no entertainment) of unimaginable God before the creation of matter and energy. The limited awareness not only depends on energy and matter but also is a specific work form of inert energy. Work without energy is impossible in the scientific logic of creation. But, in the case of the activity done by unimaginable God, it is the specific work but not a form of inert energy. This makes the super natural awareness as the unimaginable activity of the unimaginable God before creation. Therefore, even in the absence of energy and matter, work is possible in the case of God by which God knows everything including Himself. The result of the unimaginable work is also unimaginable, which is the knowledge of everything and Himself. Such super natural awareness also cannot be called as God because it is only the unimaginable activity done by the unimaginable God. We do not mind even if you call such super natural awareness as God since we cannot distinguish two unimaginables. But such unimaginable awareness is totally different from the imaginable awareness, which is a product evolved during the evolution depending upon energy and matter and also is a specific work from of energy only. Just by the common word namely 'awareness', you should not be misled to think that this limited awareness is the unimaginable awareness. Though, the topic is little bit deviated from the main line, it is once again confirmed that any living being with awareness including the human being is not at all God. Of course, God may enter some specific human being to make it as the human incarnation, which can be treated as God.
Even a trace of food should not be wasted in any way except to satisfy the hunger of a living being with awareness (Annam Na pari chakshita – Veda). All these ignorant activities referred by you are totally against to the word of God. Burning the food in fire, throwing the food in water are serious sins since not only the wastage of food is done but also the environmental pollution results especially in the case of burning the food in fire. Even the thrown food may develop virus causing the pollution of environment that harms the humanity. Some people argue that throwing food in water may help some living beings with awareness like fish etc., If you want to give food to fish (of course, not with the aim to kill and eat it), create an environment to give the food to the fish avoiding the wastage of food. You can collect the fish in a water tank and give food to it for as many days as you wish and then leave it in the river etc., again. Some people leave food during eating and argue that the food thrown outside will help hungry dogs etc. It is meaningless argument. You supply the food to hungry dogs etc. If you throw the food outside, supporting your action as charity, it is not justified. The reason is that such thrown food may also be eaten by bacteria and worms that develop various diseases in the society. The food may get rotten and also may develop bacteria, worms, virus, etc., which harm good people also leading to great sin. Throwing coins into river is also a foolish activity. Some people argue that such coins will introduce metallic traces into water, which become minerals to help the health of plants and human beings. This is very far-fetched and long stretched bad logic. The water gets minerals from the soil itself on which it flows and God has made already such scientific arrangements in the nature. A coin is produced after long hard work from metals extracted from the corresponding ores through tedious process of metallurgy. If you want to supply minerals to water, bring the ore and throw it in water. Even that is not necessary because the water of river collects the minerals from the soil itself. You should preserve the ore to extract metals and prepare coins. Instead of throwing the coin into the river, give that coin to a poor hungry man. But, be sure that the coin (money) is not misused by the beggar. It is better to purchase some food using that coin and give it to the beggar asking him to eat it before you because there are some beggars, who sell the food and misuse the money got from it. It is very good that you have raised some important practical aspects to open the eyes of ignorant people following blind traditions, which have no sanction from the real scripture.
2. Swami You repeatedly mentioned in Your divine knowledge that when one stop sinning further, all the his/her past sins will be smashed. Whether this offer by God cover the Prarabhdas also which are given in birth itself. For instant, one born with ambuted leg, so that he will regain full leg after repentance? [The related original question from the internet: If God answers prayers, why do people pray for things like cancer to be healed but not lost limbs? Couldn't he do both?]
Shri Swami Replied: A good question indeed. Prarabdha is the punishment implemented while the soul is taking birth in this world. Shankara says that Prarabdha cannot be smashed because it is like an arrow that already left the bow, which cannot be taken back. This is said by Shankara in His commentary on a verse in the Gita in which it is mentioned that the non-repetition of sin smashes all the past sins. The word 'all' exists in the verse as 'Sarva' (Jnanaagnih Sarva Karmaani…). The doubt comes about the word 'all' (Sarva) mentioned in the original verse. According to the original verse, all the sins should be smashed and Prarabdha is not mentioned as an exception. Moreover, if God cannot smash Prarabdha, His Omnipotence will be doubted. Now, a correlation between both these contradictions should be evolved.
The correlation is: God is omnipotent and can smash even Prarabdha. There are several miracles done by human incarnations by which a cripple (unable to walk) started walking. The latest human incarnation Shri. Bhagavan Satya Sai Baba did such miracle in the recent times only. Hence, the basic concept is that God is omnipotent. This can never be challenged by anybody. In such case, why Shankara wrote the above point in His commentary even deviating from the meaning of the word ('all') used in the verse? The statement of Shankara is related to 99% cases in which Prarabdha is not smashed. The reason is that in 99% cases, the realization is not 100%. When the action is not done, you should immediately find out its related cause. If you have stored Rupees 99 in a box, you will find 99 rupees only on the final day of count and not 100 rupees. It means, you have not added 1 rupee in the box on the day of final counting. Whatever you sow, you will reap the same. You are always questioning “Why this does not happen?” The answer is that it did not happen because of the existence of some related reason for it. When the realization is 99%, the fruit is also 99%. There are so many angles in the decision of God. If the leg is rectified, such fellow may gain his original nature and do the sins. In order to avoid such bad effect, God might have continued that. You are seeing the action of God, Who has a vision extending up to 1000 miles ahead while you have vision up to 10 feet only. How can you measure the omniscient God with your limited knowledge? As the Divine Father, He has more love on His unfortunate son and as a brother you have lesser love only. Not only your love, but also your vision is less. The first and foremost step in the spiritual knowledge is that we should know that God as a Father has highest love on our unfortunate brothers and sisters on whom our love is very less compared to His love. If you realize this one concept, all these questions will be thrown away like the birds flying from the tree by firing one bullet from gun!
Common Spiritual Knowledge Same Except Superficial Religious Practices
3. Your knowledge says that the ‘same spiritual knowledge’ is contained in all the religions. Some people may not get fully convinced since they may see lot of apparent differences in the practices of religious activities. Kindly please elaborate on ‘Same spiritual knowledge’ part.
Shri Swami Replied: I have attempted on this point to bring out the common spiritual knowledge existing in all the religions almost in all My messages whenever even the least opportunity appeared. I never leave any opportunity to correlate the religions. In fact, the common spiritual knowledge is exactly one and the same except the superficial religious practices. I often spoke that the common spiritual knowledge is like the same syllabus of a subject taught for the same standard in every state of our country in different languages. Languages differ but not the meaning of the same statement uttered in any language. You are fan of your mother tongue. Therefore, you appreciate the topic 'Quantum Mechanics' taught in your language only. You don't like the language of some neighbor state. You don't like the same Quantum Mechanics taught in that language because you are allergic to that language. The love and reluctance are related to the language only and not to the contents of the topic taught in both the languages. The topic is one and the same and the difference is only in the external communicating languages. You can refer to the topic “Conversation Between Swami and a Christian Father”, which forcibly proves the unity in the religions. The exposure of the common spiritual knowledge can be efficiently done by the strong logic as seen in the above mentioned topic. You can collect the points from various messages since this topic is given highest importance to establish universal peace and love between any two human beings in the world.
4. Referring to the statement that suffering is due to the past sins, a person asked the following:
“What is the use of punishing or praising somebody for something he has no idea about? Is it not the case when you see the current life as result of some previous lives on earth? The worse side is that if you suffer others will see it as the result of your doings in previous lives and they may even feel reluctant to help you. I strongly feel this is the attitude behind the caste system and reluctance in accepting the lower caste people.”
Shri Swami Replied: The various points in your question are situated very very far from each other indicating that you take the morning breakfast in Malaysia, lunch in London and dinner in Dubai! You are connecting the ignorance of some unknown item and punishment of sin finally ending in caste system. Ignorance cannot be supported as an excuse. Is it unknown but knowable? Or unknown as unknowable? If it is knowable unknown, it is your fault only in not trying to know it. If it is unknowable unknown, such item also appears to you through knowable-known medium. If a person kills another person and says that he has no idea about the murder to be a sin, what will be the colour of the face of the judge to comment on it! Generally, in every corner of the administration, it is an accepted policy that if one is openly punished for a sin, others will fear for it and get disciplined. Every head of the institution feels this in taking action against a crime. Not only the punishment of the sinner, but also the discipline in others makes two birds shot by one bullet. If the indisciplined fellow is punished secretly, you will not only loose the advantage of bringing discipline in others, but also the sinner will not be insulted to do the sin again and the criminal also continues to extend the indiscipline only. The insult of the sinner in the public will help him in controlling the repetition of the sin to some extent atleast. By this, both the sinner and others are benefited. If the sin and punishment are hidden as secret, neither the sinner will be reformed nor others get benefited to have fear for the sin.
Actually, the situation here is totally different because the human beings are not simply the employees and God is not the employer. What all I said above applies to general situations of administration in a college, an office, etc., where the Principal and the Manager do not have personal relationships with the students and the employees respectively. But, in this main concept, God is the Divine Father and all the human beings are His beloved children. What all you disliked in your questions is actually not implemented by the God due to His personal eternal relationship with the human beings. The sin is not punished openly in the public here. The punishments of all the sins are given in the upper world (hell) secretly without the knowledge of the public here. Even in the hell, one does not identify the other. In the heaven (upper world), Abhimanyu could not identify his father, Arjuna! Therefore, the punishments in the hell are noticed neither by the public here nor by any other departed soul in the hell. This is done by God due to His excess love for His children to keep up their dignity as children of God. This world is meant for actions only (Karma Loka) and not the enjoyment of fruits (Bhoga Loka). But, the father has the responsibility to correct the children and develop discipline. This aspect is more important than the blind love on the children. Certainly, a son punished by father in public will ask his father “Why do you insult me like this in the public and don't you consider me as your beloved son?” From the angle of ignorant son, all the above questions are justified. But the father is not equally ignorant and is expected atleast to be more wise. His main aim is the welfare of the children and not the blind love alone. An ordinary father may have blind love, but the Divine Father certainly loves His children, but His love is not blind. He has maintained the secrecy of punishment in the first stage to see whether the son gets rectified. If the rectification is not achieved, the second stage of insulting him in the public may also be adopted for the welfare of the child. In this world, no sin is punished openly. Only, certain cases of sins of very serious nature (Atyutkata Paapa) are punished immediately. All the human beings in any age are ignorant and are only children in the eyes of God. A child doing serious mischief is immediately slapped by the father in the house. Except such serious sins, all the routine sins are punished in the upper world only maintaining perfect secrecy. Getting help from others by keeping the punishment as secret is not a big point. If there is realization, the omnipotent God will do such help to such extent, which cannot be done by anybody.
All Professions Equally Respectable & There is No High or Low
Caste System is a part of the divine administration only as said in the Gita (Chaaturvarnyam mayaa…). But, such caste system decides the caste of any human being not by its birth, but, by its qualities and subsequently expressed deeds, which is also said in the Gita (Guna karma vibhaagashah). Suppose I say that all the teachers belong to one community or caste and all the military officers belong to a different community or caste, do you have any objection for such caste system? You require this caste system to get some specific work. A teacher gives knowledge to the child. A teacher is needed for educating your son. For this purpose, you have to identify the teacher separately from other professional communities. You need the knowledge of the caste system for such purpose. Hence, you should not hate the caste system from the point of purpose oriented search. All the professions are equally respectable and in this angle, there is no high caste or low caste. A person having good qualities belongs to respectable high caste and the person having bad qualities belongs to worst low caste. From the angle of respect and disrespect, there are only two castes i.e., good and bad. Rama belongs to high caste and Ravana belongs to low caste based on their qualities and deeds. Hence, the qualities and deeds decide whether one belongs to the high caste or low caste. The other type of caste system is classification of human beings based on the address of their corresponding forefathers. Suppose an young man residing in the army colony becomes a teacher and is staying with his parents in the army colony only. To give his address, you have to say that such teacher belongs to the army colony and not to the teachers colony based on his present profession. Such address of the forefathers is given by the caste system based on birth. We can respect or disrespect the past forefathers also based on their good and bad qualities exhibited in the past time. For the sake of respect, the qualities and deeds decide the caste system i.e., whether somebody has good qualities and deeds or bad qualities and deeds. For the sake of professional identity required for a specific purpose of work, the caste system based on qualities (professional talents) and deeds (professions) is required and here respect is equal for all professions. For the sake of finding the address of the forefathers, the classification based on birth is required. These three types of caste systems can exist simultaneously without contradicting each other. For the sake of respect, you have to say low or high caste based on good and bad qualities supported by good and bad deeds of an individual only. The respect cannot be judged by the caste system based on birth. A good man born in low caste should not be disrespected like Prahlada born in demons. A bad man born in high caste should not be respected like Duryodhana born in the great Bharata dynasty. A good man born in high caste like Rama must be naturally respected and a bad man born in low caste like Taataka (or her sons Maaricha and Subaahu) born in demons' family should be always disrespected. In view of these concepts of caste system, you should not express any prejudice against high caste or low caste without justified reason.
Respecting or disrespecting a person by birth is not our real ancient tradition of sages since Ravana was never respected and Prahlada was never disrespected. If some selfish and mischievous egoistic scoundrels have created ignorant violations of the truth, you should not go on pointing that past always and criticize the followers of the present rectified system. Today, as per the constitution of this country or any country in this world, no respect or disrespect is done based on the birth, which is done based on good and bad qualities and deeds. If some violations occurred in the middle past, you should not go on pointing out that past always and scold the present rectified people also. One lamb is drinking water from the stream falling from the top of a small hill. A tiger is also drinking water from the same stream standing on the top of the hill. Now, the tiger wants to kill the lamb and likes to show some reason for its attack. The tiger blamed the lamb that the water to be drunk by the tiger is polluted by the lamb. The poor lamb told that the blame is irrational because the tiger standing above is actually polluting the water which is to be drunk by the lamb on the floor. Then, the tiger said that the grandfather of the lamb stood on the top of hill and the grandfather of the tiger stood on the floor, exactly two generations back and for that, the present lamb should be punished and thus attacked the lamb by jumping down! We agree that our middle aged forefathers created egoistic and foolish traditions like respect of caste by birth etc., and we should not be punished for the middle past of our forefathers. Certainly, we should be punished if we support them and extend the same blind traditions now also and constitutions provide such punishments. At the same time, you should not criticize the ancient past sages for their true traditions, which are adopted now by the constitution in any country. You should not become that tiger to kill the lamb for the fault of its grandfather! Remove jealousy and hatred in your heart towards your brothers and sisters. Things were good in the ancient time and things are good now.
You must forget the middle past and maintain the unity of humanity with heart filled with knowledge and love. The sin was not decided by the birth in the low caste in ancient time and the same is not decided now also. The sin is always decided by the bad qualities and deeds of the sinner. Rama was not a Brahmin and Krishna belonged to the backward caste called Yadavas. Can you show any one hour time in the long stream of time of millions of generations, in our country, in which Rama and Krishna were disrespected? Similarly, can you show any one hour time in this long span of time in which Ravana was respected? You want to get some undue advantage by digging the middle past and by throwing false allegations on the present rectified system. We respect you based on your qualities and deeds irrespective of your birth in any caste. One is decided as a sinner by his bad qualities and bad deeds only and not by birth in high caste like Ravana. One is decided as even God and is worshiped by even all the high castes based on his divine qualities and good deeds irrespective of his birth in low caste like Rama and Krishna. At the same time, we submit our apology to you for the middle age atrocities of our foolish forefathers in that span of time since they were simply reciting the Veda blindly without analyzing the knowledge in it and hence mistakes resulted due to ignorance. Let us live together as one caste of humanity loving each other like brothers and sisters. At the same time, we should differentiate the two sub-castes in the caste of humanity, which are based on good and bad qualities and deeds, based on which only the respect and disrespect must be given. Let us also recognize the four sub-castes based on the professional qualities (talents) and professional deeds for the sake of some specific purpose required by us and all these four sub-castes must be equally respected since every profession is equally respectable. Let us also accept the caste system by birth if our purpose is to know the past address of the human being regarding its forefathers and in this angle, there is no question of respect or disrespect to such human being based on its forefathers, even though we can respect or disrespect its forefathers based on good or bad qualities and deeds exhibited by them in the past.
The final concept is that every individual should be independently analyzed about his/her personal and inherent qualities resulting in deeds subsequently. Mere quality without practical expression as deed is not a great sin or good deed. For quality also, a negligible reward or punishment exists (Mithyaachaarah… Gita). The real caste system should be decided purely based on the inherent qualities and correspondingly expressed deeds only and respect or disrespect should be based on such real caste system only. Of course, the past middle age forefathers behaved blindly without examining the credentials of every individual irrespective of the caste by birth. Of course, there is a reason justified to some extent for this also, which is that generally a child born in a caste imbibes the qualities and deeds from the running atmosphere in its residence. Hence, an individual born in demons must be a demon only. This is acceptable as a general case, but, analysis of each individual is a must since you may conclude that Prahlada in that time also might have been concluded as a demon by such blind concept, which closes the eyes to analyze every individual. In the ancient time of sages, analysis of every individual was done independently so that ancient Prahlada was concluded of good high caste only and not of bad low caste. Our middle age ancestors maintained such examples selected by analysis of individual passed on from ancient times, but, did not apply the analysis in their time and due to this mistake, they might have concluded Prahlada in their time as demon only. Today, we are doing individual analysis as per the constitution and are not missing a modern Prahlada. Neither we missed the ancient Prahlada nor the modern Prahlada. We might have missed a middle age Prahlada in the past middle age due to mistake of our middle age ancestors. Ravana is also a similar example as a reverse case. But, at any time (ancient, middle and now), Taataka is always bad like Ravana. We should be careful about the modern Taataka pleading that she should be also treated as of good caste since there was a slip in the middle age in the case of Prahlada and Ravana. This is taking undue advantage based on twisted logic. We will say to modern Taataka that we agree our mistake in the middle past, but, regarding her case, the decision is to be done based on the present analysis of her good or bad qualities and deeds.
Even in the past middle age, a few sages like Shankara existed giving highest importance to the knowledge of the Veda and not to its blind recitation. On this point, Shankara argued with Mandana Mishra and established the path of knowledge of the Veda. Let us examine His reaction to the caste system. One day, in the street of the Benares city, He was walking along with His disciples after taking bath in holy Ganges. An untouchable fellow in fully drunken state came in the opposite direction. Shankara told him, “Oh! Untouchable! Move away (Re! Chandaala! Apasara)”. Then, the untouchable questioned “whether the body made of the same five elements as your body should move away or the soul made of pure awareness (nervous energy) existing in the same state in your body also should move away?” Shankara fell on the feet of untouchable praising Him as His preacher. This is the incident that happened.
The misinterpreted version of this incident is like this: Shankara showed blindly the difference between low and high castes by birth on seeing the untouchable. On hearing the knowledge emitted by the untouchable, Shankara realized His mistake and fell on the feet of the untouchable.
Our correct interpretation based on sharp analysis of this same incident is like this: the Veda does not mention the 5th caste called untouchables. The extremely bad people from all the four castes were socially boycotted by all the four castes with a view that such a step will bring reformation in them as in the case of a student suspended from the school for his extreme indiscipline. Generally, due to the general expectation that a child in any caste imbibes the qualities and deeds of that caste existing in the surrounding atmosphere, this is true, but, you have to analyze every individual independently for the possessed qualities and deeds in spite of such general assumption since suddenly there may be an exception. Based on this ancient policy, sages respected Shabari born in untouchable caste by birth. Therefore, the conclusion of high or low caste is purely based on the nature of the individual and not on the caste by birth. Of course, based on the general assumption, our past middle age forefathers did mistakes neglecting the individual analysis. But, our Shankara was ancient sage, though born in the past middle age. His caste system was based on the individual analysis only and not on the caste by birth. In fact, He does not know that the fellow coming opposite to Him was born in the caste of untouchables. Shankara treated that fellow as untouchable based on the expressed bad quality and deed i.e., drunken state. How can you blame Shankara following the caste system by birth, when the birth of that fellow was not known to Shankara in advance? Shankara asked that fellow to move away based on the expressed quality and deed only.
Shankara Used ‘Untouchable’ Based on Its Meaning but Not by Birth
Opponent: How Shankara addressed Him as untouchable in the absence of the knowledge of the birth of that fellow? This means that Shankara must have known him previously born in the caste of untouchables. This is a very strong non-bailable legal case from which Shankara cannot escape as per the constitution. You cannot defend Shankara and He must be like other ignorant past middle age Brahmins.
Shri Swami: Your allegation against Shankara cannot stand at all in any Honorable Court. The reason is that, that fellow appeared in the city for the first time. His parents were sages (Brahmins) only since that fellow was Lord Dattatreya Himself, who appeared in the form of that fellow for the first time. Shankara was also Lord Shiva and knows that that fellow was Lord Dattatreya, a Brahmin like Himself. But, Shankara did not support that fellow for being Brahmin and scolded Him based on His exhibited bad quality and bad deed. This shows that caste by birth as untouchable or Brahmin was not considered at all. The word 'untouchable' indicating low caste was used by Shankara based on the exhibited bad quality and deed of drunken state. You may feel that the word 'untouchable' is very serious touching the emotional side of a caste. But, Shankara used this word based on its meaning and not on the caste by birth about which one may become emotional. If you see the meaning based on quality and deed, there is no emotion here since it is perfectly true. You should not touch a drunken person because if you touch him, he will beat you. Calling drunken person as untouchable is perfectly true! Absence of knowledge of the birth of that fellow proves that Shankara did not follow the caste by birth. He uttered the name of the low caste just based on the exhibited bad quality and bad deed irrespective of the birth. Even if that fellow was not Dattatreya and was an ordinary Brahmin by birth, Shankara must have used the same word indicating the low caste based on low qualities and low deeds. Remember that Shankara wrote commentary on the Gita in which the Lord said that His caste system (tasya kartaaramapi maam) was simply based on qualities and deeds only (Guna Karma…) and not otherwise like birth and profession. The Lord Himself belongs to the highest caste based on qualities and deeds even though born in a low caste (Yadavaas).
Opponent: If there is no mistake on the part of Shankara, why did He fall on the feet of that fellow? Shankara realized His mistake and submitted apology by falling on His feet. In such case, why do you support Shankara when the defendant Himself accepted the crime and submitted apology?
Shri Swami: Shankara fell on the feet of untouchable not for the sake of apology to rectify the mistake done by Him in insulting the untouchable by using that word. The reason is that the statements rendered by that fellow did not reveal his caste by birth. Even now (while falling on the feet), Shankara does not know his caste by birth. In the absence of such knowledge, how can you argue that Shankara repented for His mistake done to that fellow knowing that fellow was untouchable by birth? The basis of the case is lost because the ignorance of the caste by birth of that fellow was not at all removed by that fellow through his reply-statement. The statement only indicates that since all bodies are made of five elements and since every soul is pure awareness, the caste system should not be followed by birth, which implies that it should be followed by qualities and deeds only. The insult shown by Shankara to that fellow was in accordance with this knowledge because Shankara insulted Him only based on the qualities and deeds and not based on His unknown birth. Since that fellow preached this excellent knowledge, Shankara treated him as Guru and fell on his feet in appreciation of his knowledge and not to submit apology for His no mistake. In fact, Shankara also neglected the drunken state and respected the knowledge because one should take the knowledge from the preacher irrespective of his personal qualities and deeds. The knowledge given by Krishna as the Gita is to be respected and analysis of His personal qualities and deeds (stealing butter etc.,) should not be done in that context, the meaning of which is beyond your capacity of analysis. When you learn Chemistry from a teacher, you should confine to the subject and respect the teacher for his talent in the teaching. Why should you bother about the smoking of that teacher? You are not related in any way to that. The teacher will face the illness of smoking. The teacher may also be Shirdi Sai Baba, Who was also smoking and He, the God, may be testing you by exhibiting external misleading illusion (Maya). This totally different point was indicated in the respect shown by Shankara to the untouchable due to drunken state.
Atman & Body Same in All Human Beings But Jiva is Different
Opponent: The knowledge taught by that fellow is that in all the human beings, the external body and inner soul are exactly made of same constituents, which means that all human beings are one and the same. In such case, where is the difference that can be the basis for the classification through caste system? Hence, the caste system should not exist in any way since even all types of professions done by human beings also have equal dignity without difference.
Shri Swami: Does this mean that a good fellow and a bad fellow are not different? If so, why do you put a bad fellow for the crimes done in the jail and award the good fellows in the society? You are finding fault with the present constitution and also government for doing such administration! You are finding fault with the courts and jails! Certainly, the inner soul made of pure awareness and the external body made of five elements are exactly similar. Not only soul (Atman) and body (Deha) exist, but also, a third category called Jiva exists, who is a bundle of qualities. These qualities differ from one human being to the other human being and so the deeds, subsequent expressions of qualities. In this way, the difference exists forming the basis of classification of caste of good and caste of bad. Except this caste system, the other two caste systems are not to be cared. The other two caste systems are: 1) Based on talents (qualities) and professions (deeds), which should also not be cared since talents and professions have equal dignity (of course, total difference should not vanish since you have to differentiate a teacher from soldier) and 2) Based on the birth in which the basis is the above mentioned soul and body only, which is false since soul and body are similar in all human beings. Please note that talents (qualities) and professions (deeds) are different from good & bad qualities and their deeds. Both talents and good – bad qualities are qualities only. Similarly, both professional deeds and good – bad deeds are deeds only. But, the sub-classification in each category (qualities or deeds) should not be confused for each other. The result is that only the caste system based on good – bad qualities and their deeds exists, which alone is created by God. The other two caste systems to be ignored are not created by God, but are created by the human beings. Hence, God says in the Gita, in the verse “Chaaturvarnyam…” that He is the creator of the caste system and also not the creator of the caste system. Castes based on good – bad are created by God and castes based on birth, talents and jobs are created by humanity.
Opponent: The Gita says that there are only two sub-divisions in the nature called Para Prakruti (inner soul) and Apara Prakruti (external body). The Prakruti is exactly similar in all the human beings and hence no caste system should exist on any basis.
Shri Swami: The caste system based on good – bad qualities and their deeds has to be accepted, which is divine as created by the Lord and also presently constitutional. As mentioned, the qualities in the name Jiva as the third category, differentiates the human beings. If you see Para and Apara sub-divisions of Prakruti, Para is one single item, the soul. But, Apara has 8 sub-divisions, which are the five inert elements along with mind, intelligence and ego. The first five elements are inert forming the body. The next three items (mind, intelligence and ego) are the modes or functions of awareness. Mind functions in creating variations on an issue. Intelligence does the discussion and finally the right decision. Ego is the basic maintenance of the feeling 'I' and not to be mistaken as pride here. These three modes of awareness form the basis of good – bad qualities resulting in their practical deeds.
Opponent: In such case, the Apara should confine to the five inert elements and these three modes of awareness should come under Para, the non-inert category. The classification of the Gita as Para and Apara is confusing since the Apara is not only inert (five elements) but also non-inert (three modes). Moreover, you cannot differentiate human beings based on these three modes of awareness. The reason is, in every human being, the functions of these three modes are one and the same. In every human being, mind varying on the subject, intelligence deciding the issue and ego maintaining the basic 'I' are exactly similar. Hence, your classification based on these three modes also cannot stand bringing the human beings exactly similar to each other under one umbrella.
Shri Swami: You are confused again. No doubt, qualities mean the general functions of these three (mind, intelligence and ego) only. Hence, difference based on the qualities also is not possible as you said. But, the difference comes in the final stage based on the direction of the quality decided by the intelligence. The direction in one side is good and in the opposite side is bad. Now the difference appears between a good quality and a bad quality. If this difference is also not there, there should be no difference between heaven and hell there and between jail and award here. Therefore, based on this difference, good caste and bad caste appear and we differentiate the good caste of Rama from bad caste of Ravana. Remember that Rama is a non-Brahmin and Ravana is a Brahmin by birth. Hence, our caste system is not based on birth. Even though we differentiate a teacher and a soldier based on talents and professions, since we respect both with equal dignity, it is only classification with respect to just talents and jobs only and has nothing to do with award (good) and insult (bad).
Opponent: Atman is pure awareness, existing in common in all human beings as Para. The group of five elements (a sub-division of Apara) also exists as common item in all the human beings. The second sub-division of Apara (mind, intelligence and ego) along with their general functions (qualities) also exists in common in all the human beings. Therefore, homogeneity exists in all the human beings as far as the Prakruti is concerned. The heterogeneity comes only in the direction of the quality. In such case, how the Lord said that the difference is in qualities (Guna Karma…)? He should have said that the difference is in the directions of qualities.
Shri Swami: The Lord said that mind, intelligence and ego are common in all. The names of these three faculties of awareness include their general functions, which are called as qualities by us as above. It is better to call these qualities common in all by the word 'general qualities'. We can call the directions of these qualities differing in all as 'specific qualities'. Since, the names of these three faculties include general qualities, there is no need of a separate word 'quality' for the general quality once again. The general quality has no separate place (word) since it is a part of the meaning of the name like mind etc. Now, the separate word 'Guna' (quality) should represent only the specific quality or direction of the quality. The specific qualities differ and hence the classification is justified based on the difference in qualities (Gunas) as said by the Lord.
Opponent: You said that pure awareness or Para is Atman or soul. But in the Gita, Para is said to be the individual soul (Jiva) and not mentioned as Atman. The verse in the Gita clearly says that Para is Jiva and not Atman (Jiva Bhutaam…).
Shri Swami: You are exactly correct. The Para stands for the individual soul (Jiva) and not for soul in general (Atman) since the word Jiva is mentioned and not Atman in the verse of the Gita. If the pure awareness without the modes of awareness is called as the individual soul, what is the meaning of the separate word Atman? The meaning of Atman can neither be pure awareness (Jiva) nor the three modes of pure awareness (Manas, Buddhi and Ahamkara). The word Atman cannot draw any of these meanings because these meanings have already their own fixed words. If you analyze the pure awareness, it is the effect of the cause called as inert energy. Hence, the awareness as effect (Kaaryam) like golden ornament differs from the same awareness as its cause (Kaaranam) like gold block. Both ornament and block of gold can be also treated as one and the same on one side and on the other side both differ from each other. Atman means this causal inert energy and Jiva means the productive awareness. Thus, there is unity and difference between Atman and Jiva. On the side of cause, it is inert energy and on the side of effect, it is non-inert awareness. Therefore, we can use both these words in the same sense and also in different senses as per the context. Atman as inert energy is said in the Gita by the words 'Sthaanu' and 'Achala'. Both these words indicate the causal side of Jiva. Jiva is pure awareness since in the bundle of qualities (Jiva), the common pure awareness exists. We can call a bundle of different golden jewels as gold. Hence, Jiva represents the pure awareness and also the bundle of different qualities (different modes of awareness).
Opponent: If Jiva is the common pure awareness existing in all and Atman is the common inert energy existing in all, in such case also, the difference between human beings cannot be achieved.
Shri Swami: It is correct if you take Jiva as pure awareness only. One Jiva differs from other Jiva as proposed by Madhva in view of the different qualities varying from one bundle to the other bundle (Nichochchabhaavam gataah). In one bundle, golden rings, golden chains and golden bangles are present. In the second bundle golden ear rings, golden bracelets and golden necklaces exist. The difference between the ornaments is not only in a bundle but also between ornaments of two bundles. Similarly, not only the difference in qualities (thoughts) exists within Jiva, but also between the thoughts of two Jivas. This means that the word Jiva stands for not only the common pure awareness including the common three faculties of awareness, but also stands for the difference in specific qualities called as Gunas due to the difference in the decisions of intelligence having opposite directions and also many directions resulting in the space between the two opposite directions. By this, we get not only good and bad qualities but also different average qualities.
Even though, Para stands for the common pure awareness, on further analysis, it draws the three modes of awareness from the Apara category. The basic reason is that the pure awareness and these three modes are non-inert. In such case, Apara is left over with the inert five elements only. Now, after this, such new classification is based on inert and non-inert categories only. Then, Apara stands for inert and Para stands for non-inert. But, in the Gita, the classification of Para and Apara is not based on this inert and non-inert natures. Apara includes both inert and non-inert natures of several items and Para stands for one item, which is also non-inert that excelled all the items in a category called the world. The basis of this classification in the Gita is based on the isolation of the greatest item from the other items of lesser importance. Para is called greatest (Brahman in the sense greatest not God) in the category of created items. It is just like telling the difference between the king and his kingdom. The king is non-inert. The kingdom contains inert properties and non-inert public also like the king. Thus, a major part of Jiva (pure awareness and its three modes including general functions or general qualities) is common in all and a minor part (specific qualities or different directions of general qualities) differs from one human being to the other. Based on this difference, good caste and bad caste result. Nobody can bring oneness in good and bad and bring total homogeneity in the human beings, which is against to the present constitution also that recommends courts and jails.
However, you can bring Para and Apara as non-inert and inert items also with an assumption. The king is non-inert. The public in the kingdom is also non-inert, but, being fully controlled by the king can be assumed as inert. Similarly, the Para (Jiva) has full freedom under the control of which only even the three modes function and can be assumed as inert. Now, you can say that Para is non-inert and Apara is inert. The Veda says that the body is car (Chariot), senses are wheels (horses), mind is steering wheel (ropes controlling horses), intelligence is driver and Jiva is the owner. The ego or Ahamkara can be treated as the registration certificate related to the owner. The car and driver are under the final control of the owner. Even the driver is controlled by the owner and runs the car in a specific direction as per the desire of the owner only though the steering is in his hands only. This shows the full freedom of the owner (Jiva or Para), by which we can treat Jiva fully non-inert with full freedom. Even though the driver is non-inert like the owner, since the driver is controlled by the owner, we can assume the driver also as inert.
Opponent: The Lord in the Gita says that you should find total homogeneity between a Brahmin and an untouchable (Brahmane… Shvapaakecha). The word 'Sama' in this verse means oneness or total homogeneity only. This is against your above argument.
Shri Swami: If a good person and a bad person are exactly equal without any difference, why the same Gita says that good should be protected and bad should be punished (Paritraanaaya…)? If oneness in all aspects exists in the entire humanity, why these two different (opposite) words like protection (good) and destruction (bad) are used? The oneness (Sama) used in the verse stands for the major part of Jiva in all the living beings without referring to differing minor part. In the verse, the oneness between a Brahmin and untouchable is mentioned along with oneness between cow, elephant and a dog (Gavi hasthini Shunichaiva) also. If you recommend the oneness between the two human beings, why do you not recommend the oneness between the above three animals including the two human beings? First of all, you are showing the difference between human beings and animals. You are allowing the human beings to move in your house with equal status. Are you allowing the animals and human beings also to move in your house with equal status? Hence, the oneness to be seen is in the major part of the living beings with awareness (pure awareness and three modes of awareness including their general functions). The difference in the minor part (specific qualities in opposite directions called good and bad) is also equally important, which is the basis of classification of caste system done by the Lord Himself. If you say that golden ring and golden chain are one and the same gold, it means that both are similar in view of the major item, which is gold. It does not mean that the shapes of ring and chain, which are minor quantity, must be also one and the same.
Conclusion: This topic is dealt in depth and in all angles since the caste system is said to be the main defect of Hinduism and critics of other religions not only mock Hinduism, but also encourage the conversion of religion from Hinduism. Especially, the lower castes by birth are attracted by other religions pointed out at their insult in Hindu religion. All this confusion arose due to lack of deep analysis of caste system in Hinduism without understanding the policy of our ancient sages, which is to respect good caste and insult the bad caste without referring to birth or profession. The good person born in the low caste like Shabari is worshiped and a bad person like Ravana born in the high caste is always abused. These two examples are very famous in the holy epic (Ramayana) of Hinduism. When the actual policy of Hinduism is so clearly established through such famous examples, how can you say that Hinduism has a different policy? Of course, we agree that some ignorant fools of the past middle age have committed mistakes based on their lack of knowledge of the scripture, being involved in its blind recitation. Due to this, some Shabaris and some Ravanaas might have escaped. Hence, the criticism from some followers of other religions based on this past middle age may also be justified. But, such criticism is also not justified in view of the real tradition of Hinduism evolved from the learned ancient sages. Hence, some followers of other religions are taking the undue advantage of the wrong side of Hinduism without touching its correct side and this is exploited through conversion of religion for the sake of improving their majority in the world in view of political purpose. Such exploiters of other religions are as bad as our middle age forefathers. Every religion has correct and wrong side due to such bad followers. Krishna, Jesus, etc., the authors of scriptures are also human beings like these bad followers, but, how much difference exists! Bright diamond and black charcoal are made of same carbon particles but, have opposite difference in their colours. The diamonds form the correct side and the charcoals form the wrong side of every religion. Hence, every religion should take the correct side of the other religion and stop the conversion of religion. Actually, the conversion of religion is meaningless in the spiritual angle (though not in political angle) because the bright spiritual knowledge is one and the same in all the religions at the level of scriptures. These ignorant activities are only at the level of these few bad followers of the religions. Every religion should maintain perfect unity within the specific religion and especially Hinduism should develop unity recognizing the correct side of caste system represented by ancient sages. After achieving this intra-religious unity, the inter-religious unity can also be achieved by recognizing the one and the same spiritual knowledge existing in the scriptures of all the religions in the world.