Video 97

The Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna read by Swami Atmajnanananda (05/27/22)

[Music] your words are like nectar bringing life to squirt souls they are praised by poets and removal sin they are auspicious to hear wonderful and exalted those who spread these words throughout the world are truly giving souls welcome everyone to our class on the gospel of srama krishna we're on chapter 15 this is the last visit to keshav but this chapter uh includes other things so this was it began on wednesday november 28 1883 and after going to kesho srama krishna went to joigopalsen's house which is not far from there so the section that we're on is actually in uh in their house and some other devotees are there and we stopped on page 327. so srama krishna is talking to one of the neighbors whenever tucker went to somebody's house all the neighbors would come and uh there was a network of his devotees depending upon where he went if it was a uh brahmo house then the brahmos would would come if it was about rambos house or something then ward would go out to all of the nearby liberties and they would all try to come sometimes it would just be curiosity people so this is just a neighbor we don't know who his name was what his name was or anything so srama krishna has been talking to him about discrimination so i'll start we we read this last time but i'll start with this master discrimination is the reasoning by which one knows that god alone is real and all else is unreal now this is always the big issue what do we mean by real and what do we mean by unreal and taqwa he'll give all different types of explanations here he says real means eternal and unreal means impermanent so they'll they'll be all different definitions and uh well there'll be schools of vedanta that for them unreal really means unreal that when they say like a dream literally like a dream that it will evaporate when we wake up there'll be different schools he refers to all of them at different times and we know and this is the most important thing to remember that for takur these are not final positions or final truths these are all different spiritual attitudes that are helpful to some people more helpful to some than others and the only final truth is experience so this we always have to keep this in mind otherwise it's very very confusing why he'll say sometimes this world is unreal like a dream other times uh that once we realize god it's real and all different types of things so we have to always remember that that when he says it's become very very commonplace for us to assume that this refers to all the different religions that he practiced that all different religions are past leading to the same goal but it equally applies to all different philosophical positions and this is how he can he can accept the not final truth but efficacy of the dualistic position and qualified non-dualistic position and also the the adwaitic position as being able to lead one who suited to that particular path along that path to have final realization and then the path is left behind so this that's never the goal the path is we shouldn't confuse the position that we take in the beginning with what we understand at the end because sometimes it's quite different for for the path of devotion we can start out as completely duelist that we feel completely separate from god we worship god then we feel some sense of union some sense of oneness even and on the path of discrimination this uh richard marga uh we can start out with this idea that this world is completely unreal and end up with this idea that it's nothing but god manifestation of so uh this there'll be a long discussion about this but just for us to keep in mind that real means eternal unreal means impermanent this was the most common way that ashram krishna explained unreal assat almost always he would say almost always sometimes of us do this also has another interesting significance to it that when we say that something has was too something has the substance to it we can mean it uh in a literal philosophical sense or we can make it in the sense of it has some value to it so someone is a person of substance is it one person to the person of substance another person is not but they both have the same substance within them it doesn't mean a metaphysical substance it means the quality of character so we'll we'll see all of these different subtle ways of understanding sat and assat real and unreal so he says real means eternal and unreal means impermanent he who has acquired discrimination knows that god is the only substance and all else is non-existent now this is the one when we have these conversations this is the one time when we can't rely on the english translation very much say suppose in the bengali he says assat we want to say non-existent do we want to say unreal do we want to say transitory so because uh very rarely will surround the christian to take that position that it's non-existent how can we say this world is non-existent generally that's more his attitude with the awakening of this spirit of discrimination a man wants to know god on the contrary if a man loves the unreal such things as creature comforts name fame and wealth now so now the unreal they're not non-existent things so he's not using it in that sense we can love the unreal that means transitory things such as creature comfort's name fame and wealth then he doesn't want to know god who is of the very nature of reality through discrimination between the real and the unreal one seeks to know god then listen to a song come let us go for a walk or mine to cali the wish fulfilling tree and there beneath it gather the four fruits of life of your two wives dispassion and worldliness bringing along this passion only on your way to the tree and ask her son discrimination about the truth by turning the mind within oneself one acquires discrimination and through discrimination one thinks of truth now discrimination goes back again to this idea of sat and assad but kakura seems to put more emphasis on what is of value in life and what is of passing value the shreyas prayers distinction we read about in the kato punishad i feel is more important for suramar krishna than any metaphysical doctrine about what is the real status of the world real or unreal is it is it just fleeting is it like a dream generally he's talking about when the mind acquires discrimination then what is of lasting value in life what will bring the ultimate satisfaction and contentment in life as opposed to uh what will just help us pass our time that it'll just be of a very temporary value to us and and nothing that will uh be of lasting importance lasting value to us reaching that tree sorry then the mind feels the desire to go for a walk to kali the witch fulfilling tree reaching that tree that is to say going near to god you can without any effort gather four fruits namely and moksha okay these are a very ancient vedic tradition that breaks down everything into these four aims of life and four stages of life so we have the ashramas and uh the different aims of life fit in with the different stages of life so the harm that we learned at the vermicardia stage are 10 common goal with the householder stage when we're in gurihasta stage and and then when we renounce everything go into the forest the uh become one of prestins and then eventually sunny arsenal and then the goal is moksha of course the dharma has to be learned in the beginning that stays with us throughout we never give up the dharma until the very end if by dharma we mean convention then we give that up of course but otherwise and comma and artha and kama this is this is when we get a chance to to burn our fingers and to learn what this world is really about we get to fulfill some desires and also find out what things will be trouble for us and this is the time we learn our lessons in life and then when we've learned all of our lessons then we feel ready to renounce so the four stages of life go along with with all of this yes after realizing god one can also get if one so desires which are necessary for leading the worldly life now we always wonder can one realize god and then come back and live in the world if by realizing god means that nirvikalpa samati and taqwa again uh is is vague on this topic that there'll be times if he's really talking about nirvikalpa it will be pretty clear that ordinary person can't come back and then there'll be other times when he'll talk about living the world after realizing and then something like this he say after realizing god what can also get our 10 comma this is a remarkable statement we don't generally hear him talking in this way so this means that after living in the world uh realizing god if one lives in the world still is a household sinking janika still with the duties and things in the world then one can even possess wealth and have dharmic types of desires and enjoyments and won't harm him neighbor then why should one call the world maya now who is this enjoyable he said brahmo so probably the neighbor is also a problem the there's a good to know little context here because there are certain things that the brahmos didn't like uh all sorts of different things from from the very dualistic highly devotional attitudes and with the gods and goddesses especially the rather krishna episodes and things like that and some traditional ideas about guru and avatar and then some advaitic ideas they also didn't like very much that this idea that this world is unreal like a dream this world is maya we know that because of swamiji's own attitude when uh telling him that everything you see is is nothing but when burman god itself then he went out on the veranda with hazra and they were joking around oh this body is god this picture of god and everything laughing like that so that was uh probably a typical attitude of the brahmos also that they didn't like this extreme at the waiting position uh where this the world is something unreal and because they were so interested in in helping society that even swamiji also we can say he didn't like this idea of dismissing this world as as maya in the sense that we don't care about the suffering of other people they were so interested in reform and everything so this this question it's probably uh this neighbor he knows that these great pandits and these vedantists and everything they talk about maya all of the time this world is maya so he's asking that question master as long as one has not realized god one should renounce the world following the process of naiti neither now renounce the world uh this i i don't think he means that one should take monastic vowels i think what he what he's talking about here is i make a distinction between that which is eternal that which is changing so renounce the world as the be all and end all of life to give up that idea that this world is all that we have something like that and follow the process of that means that if we want to get to that which is unchanging and eternal we have to eliminate everything changeful if we want to get to the pure subject we have to eliminate everything that's the object so this is a director that anything that can be an object of perception an object of thought an object of understanding has to be separate from that which is the uh witness that which is the uh the the pure subject so this is that in 1880 it also means that anything changeful even this external world that we we don't want to identify i'm in with anything changeful at all so in the beginning beginning we do this now notice that the way he talks as long as one is not realized god so this is not a final position this is a spiritual attitude we take we haven't yet realized god but we we start out by giving up this idea that this world is everything this world is 100 real and this is the only thing of any value in this world and we follow the process of 1880 that means we start to see that there must be something unchanging which is aware of that which is changing and that will be the self so we practice this in 1880 and then he says but he who has attained god knows that it is god who has become all this so now this is the flip this is the flip the that which we renounced as as unreal as after the realization of god we see that this is nothing but the manifestation so we we renounce the waves as not being the ocean and then when we have the final realization we realize that oh there's really no difference that this is just the the surface of that that same ocean of such something like that so he who has attained god knows that it is god who has become all this now this is our salvation that we have in the upanishads emphasis is always on the other side his emphasis is always on this world being unreal doesn't use very often this really has that sense of false something erroneous that we're misperceiving something that way so his emphasis is always on that and even after god realization with his ego of knowledge one still sees this world is is kind of dream like fleeting and floating on that ocean of brahmin that that can also be there but the emphasis will be a little bit different for say the two types of vignes the those who are devotees and those who are more philosophical in nature because the edwitans they keep this eye of of knowledge that means i imberman and for the devotee they keep this eye of devotion which means i'm a servant of god childhood they've got some relationship each is equally avigni sometimes tucker emphasizes path of devotion and the path of vigna it will say for the vigyanis or the bhaktas they but they'll both say that this world is real because of the manifestation of the divine the vigyani who's at heart may also feel that but still their emphasis will be the real reality divine self within and this is just a passing show now we talked about last time that if we look at this world from the point of view of just time then whether it's real or not it's it's fleeting because we're fleeting our days are fleeting that way also this world is unreal so he who has attained god knows that it is god who has become all this then he sees that god maya living beings and the universe form one whole maya here we have to take a little bit as shakti otherwise a miami and some type of delusion some type of erroneous thinking or something so you're more this idea of shakti this this maya is uh a very curious concept it's it's our way of explaining how that one reality uh appears to become manifest as this entire universe that that power which allows that to happen is called maya and it's inscrutable we don't know how it happens uh it's really a term that we use to explain the phenomenon that we don't know the explanation for how the one becomes the many so for some this maya will be used to mean uh that there's no real the my the vermin is not undergoing any transformation or any change that some veil of ignorance falls over brahman itself although somehow it's under the control of ramanishwara at that point so that can be maya but have shakti yeah maya even for the advaitans has this idea of shakti this is power to conceal and power to to superimpose but not so much of this chit chatty not for the more dualistic uh schools it'll be a real power to create a real power to create this universe uh [Music] how that works also is it is it this power in the upanishads we see this uh projection of the elements which combine and then it's more or less like a real creation for some of the uh it dwight ends it'll be more like a dream than brahmin in dreaming all of this then there's no real evolution or anything it all just exists as a projection of the mind of the cosmic mind even that's a type of power so this is hard to eliminate this idea of shakti from vermiya even the definition of maya that we get and said like we don't decide and everything that it'll be broken down into this uh these two different types of shakti the one covers everything and the shakti and the other big shape of shakti it weak concept yeah it's a weak link it's a very weak link i gave a talk on this not too long ago that for me maya's is just putting a term on on a phenomenon that we don't understand it's not doing anything else if we look at the definition of maya it's inscrutable it can't be understood and yet it's being used to help us understand something else so it's a weak link if we if we say that see this idea at the vedanta okay the right way dante has two aspects two sides to it one is the oneness of the so-called individual soul with the supreme soul this can be experienced there's no weakness to this link this one is it's pretty solid but this idea second idea that this jagmatiya that this world is for this is is speculative and and different advertising schools will give different interpretations the for the shaktas the shaktis can also say individual soul and supreme solar one but they'll give a more realistic interpretation to this world the fact is we don't know how this world comes into existence and we we rely on a concept which we call maya which doesn't explain it but it makes it feel like we understand it a little better because we use the concept may remember i gave a few different examples that suppose a child i asked the asked his mother why is it that when uh when water gets colder and colder when it reaches at 32 degrees a fahrenheit that it turns into ice and the mother says because that's the freezing point of water so the child says oh okay now i understand what what what what have we learned nothing but we're giving a name to it how does the caterpillar turn into a butterfly metamorphosis does that tell us anything we put a term to it so now we think oh okay so that's how it happens metamorphosis of course the biologists and scientists they'll know a little bit better about it but so this maya really it's something where we can't understand how it comes into existence we can understand how it works but we can eliminate it from if we think of maya in terms of individual ignorance it has an end so we can't say it doesn't exist at all because uh it's supposed to be that power or whatever which makes this whole visible universe come into existence on some level and it can't be called uh real because it disappears with knowledge so it's like darkness darkness it's it it's a real has a real phenomenal existence to it will trip and fall i mean we really it's we can't just say there's no such thing as darkness but when we turn the light on then what happened to the darkness did it ever really exist was it ever real just absence of light so i don't know weak concept from some some point of view we can say it's a brilliant type of concept but uh it points to the fact that there's something that goes beyond our ability the rational ability to understand this universe with this human mind and sramakrishnan talks about that all of the time yes isn't it a subservient energy of secretion for those who believe in the personal god that they'll talk about it that way the there's the certain invasion of a tradition that will also rely heavily on this idea of shakti there will be different types of shakti this bahiranga shakti this they all belong to krishna krishna is a personal ishwara we can who creates this whole universe and there's an antarang that creates the individual souls that we have all different types of shakti so this this this uh which is also a type of maya this this uh uh we can't get out of this if we start out with the brahman alone israel and brahma is unchanging and everything we have to have a second concept to explain anything and yet the advaitan doesn't want to admit of anything any second thing so it's very it's difficult they're they're in a difficult position so srirami krishna he he talked about all of these things as different world views and they're all different ways of helping us some are more helpful for us and some less and so so we'll see now he's going to talk about vishishna the vedanta and his view seems to be that for most people this is an easier way to understand things and we have we have uh many scholars and monks of our order who feel that taku was more of a shifted uh i disagree with this i'll get to it a little bit because i don't think he he didn't look about upon these things that way maybe he he he felt comfortable with this philosophy but his concept of truth was completely different it was all realization for him everything without if if two people are talking about one person who and they're giving slightly different definitions and descriptions and everything is one right and one wrong for him it's the person is the truth is that person which includes everything far more than we can possibly know and we don't have to know everything about that person we just go and meet that person that'll be enough whatever appeals to us that'll be enough for us so his concept was different anyway let's let's go on with this so now he says god includes the universe and its living beings now what does the advaitan say that somehow through maya god predicts the brahman projects the universe and the same brahman seems to enter into all beings and this is giving a more realistic interpretation that god includes the universe and its living beings so somehow within now when we talk about vishishta vada which is this means that this is a doctrine that accepts that brahman alone exists brahman alone is real but has internal distinctions so this is exactly what he's saying within ben berman will find all living beings and the universe somehow contained within so this is this is an internal distinction but there's no second reality so from that point of view it's a type of adueta but it's not the real advaita because they won't admit the or they they they they don't posit the oneness of the individual soul with the supreme self for them there are many jivas yes is there many seeds inside of the one plant anyhow so let's go with this god includes the universe and it's living being suppose you have separated the shell flesh and seeds of a bell of fruit this is classic example he'll give this many times and someone asks you the weight of the fruit will you leave aside the shell and the seeds and weigh only the flesh not at all okay now what does the advice say weight is the same the the weight of the ocean if you if you take the weight of the waves and add it to the weight of the or will it be any greater weight it's all the same you can so this is this is uh uh we have our uh what is the uh our vedic hymn okay if you take this whole uh universe this visible universe out of brahmin you subtract it from that roman is unchanged the weight won't be less looking at it from a different point of view this is the way to sees this world my understanding that he won't say oh no that's a mistake that if you remove it from bromine bruhman will be a little bit less just as if you remove the seeds from the belly fruit it'll be it'll be a little bit less he's talking about it from a different point of view that's all he can accept both of these will not go away their sense is still the same right the essence of the birth and the problem even if you remove the brahman the essence is the same is it's not reduced any of this that's redone to know the real weight of the fruit you must weigh the whole of it they sell the flesh and the seeds now we can we can understand this also from an ordinary point of view about how we live in the world see taco is a practical person also that we want to live in this world and not care about people and not care about the environment they'll only care about the self within because this is all maya so we can discard it all of that so from an experiential point of view we we have to add all of it together and take all of it together it doesn't have to be again this high metaphysical understanding of things the shell may be likened to the universe so this is the external right and the seeds to living beings so for the this is ramanuja's school that and also uh or sankia philosophy that there'll be multiple jivas real real not exactly see taco will give the illustration of the sun being reflected each reflection is not a real individual jiva because if it's real then uh it'll be permanent and it'll be there and even in in the time of liberation so the example of the reflected sun will be and the dwight dwight of how the the numerous jivas are only apparent because of the one sun which is reflected in all different containers so look at the difference between that and this idea that the belgrade has lots of different seeds within it they're all real the other one is is yes the only reality is this is the sun now is tucker contradicting himself no he's just showing different different world views different ways of understanding things some will appeal the one someone will not and the philosophers argue over these things that no it has to be either one or the other you remember the very beginning when i met sir i'm a christian for the first time talk was asking about do you believe in god with former without form and said what kind of a question is that it's either one or the other it's not it's could something be white and black at the same time how can did god be both and do i and i have to choose one or the other but he can be both so because he's he's used to this this hard type of logic and tucker has taught me from a whole different point of view so the shell may be likened to the universe and the seeds to living beings while one is engaged in discrimination one says to uh to oneself that the universe and the living beings are non-self and unsubstantial now talk words actually he's taking this it's just advaita vedanta and and merging it with his advaitic sadhana they won't necessarily do this type of of discrimination but anyhow so while one is engaged in discrimination one says to oneself the universe and the living beings are non-self and unsubstantial okay so this idea of non-self when we say this universe we we have to include our own body this is the more important part that i want to include my own body and my own mind and my own senses and and my own all my thoughts and everything else that they're constantly changing and they're non-self because i'm aware of them they're the object we don't object doesn't mean a physical object a thought is an object this ego is an object an object for consciousness we are objectified when we talk about the ego we're objectifying ourselves turning ourselves into a person but the real self is the is the one who's watching the whole process so if we do this then we we we have to uh uh eliminate these as part of the subject we we this it sounds paradoxical but the dwight exciting is based on dualism it's based on starting with a dualistic position that there's the real and the unreal there's the permanent and the changing it starts out like that now they can get around it by saying that which is which is uh impermanent that which is changing is ultimately unreal we'll find out later that it never existed so there was no real duality but in the beginning we feel that way so at that time one thing's of the flesh alone is the substance and the shell and seeds is unsubstantial but after discrimination is over that means after we've had some type of realization some experience one feels that all three parts of the fruit together form a unity then one further realizes that the stuff that has produced the flesh of the fruit has also produced the shells and seeds so it all goes back to brahmin so if we think of the dream the dream that all the objects inside of the dream will understand that these all go back to that same consciousness and the individual in the dream goes back to that same consciousness but if we want to add the weight of it from that point of view once the dream breaks we're not losing anything because it was unreal so the advaitan will say that for the way the brahmin alone exists there's no more weight than that the other thing is is a superimposition which has no weight to it we're not adding anything we're not losing anything so two different points of view that's all they're not ultimately contradictory unless we want to really uh play the role of of the of the philosophers and uh who argue against each other and try to use logical points this and that otherwise they're both beautiful world of views and taco is a world of view it's a it's a blend of of these because he says everything ends in oneness and uh you you peel the onion and inside you won't find individual jivas in each one you have just that pure empty space which is the south so he likes both ideas but for most people we can't get rid of the jiva now this is another important point that his his objection to this idea that uh we're one with a roman is it not because it's not true but because this ego idea keeps coming back and this feeling of separation is there so as long as that feeling of separation is there we have to act accordingly so as long as the stick of the ego see this means that if the stick of the ego doesn't separate one side from the other discus the appearance of separation but that appearance is very very strong we can't just throw it away and pretend it doesn't exist so he's very practical he says as long as that ego is his former relationship with god and that will help us get to that point where every everything will disappear and we'll be in that state of oneness so after discrimination is over one feels that all three parts of the fruit together form a unity then one further realizes that the stuff that has produced the flesh of the fruit this is brahman has also produced the shell into the universe and see it the jeebus to know the real nature of the belfruit one must know all three then he goes on it is the process of evolution and involution now this evolution and involution uh will be more of a realistic understanding of of creation because it takes place in time this uh if if we really examine uh this uh idea and again that dwight david has different ideas about creation they're different schools i don't understand half of these things and i don't bother about them i'm not very interested in these things but this idea of evolution and involution so oh from so from somebody of the point of view there's no evolution whatsoever no evolution whatsoever of course we don't find this in the upanishads the upanishads are more realistic but if this is a dream and somebody says that uh uh even even created things who who built the these the tables and chairs huh what do you mean it's a dream i don't have to unless it's part of my dream part of the dream is that i dreamt that somebody built them they're just there and they come in all at once spontaneous instantaneous there's no evolution whatsoever at all in a dream once the dream starts but yes this universe is just but the the punishment idea is more like this that and the sanki idea which is accepted mostly evolution and involution that there is a projection and at the end of that period of of creation whatever then it gets with a drawn and gets involved there so that whatever was there well the seeds will be there for the next creation and it goes on and on endlessly and beginninglessly which of course is a bit of a contradiction but that's another philosophical problem so it is the process of evolution and involution the world after its dissolution remains involved in god now we we may say that this brahman nothing will be brahman is beyond everything so we have these other ideas that somehow ishwara or hiranyagara but they'll come up with all different ways of understanding how this this cosmic mind can still remain unmanifest at the time of dissolution when we talk about is it just at the body mind level that evolution happens but evolution is at the spirit level right or the soul level now we're just talking about material level material level the evolution of the individual spiritual evolution of the individual is independent of all of this now what that means is suppose suppose uh every life you get closer and closer to god realization but it's time for dissolution of the universe what happens to you are you stuck that that when when the next creation comes you'll continue along your spiritual path somehow you don't start over again because with your bad luck it's like uh you got your visa in the passport but your passport expired your visa is no good anymore yes you can keep the visa so you continue now all of these things have philosophical difficulties don't ask me to try to explain how these things work at all i don't i don't bother with these things but anyway this is that theory that so this evolution we're talking about now is really the projection of this universe how this universe comes into existence and at the time of pralia what happens to this universe that from the sankey point of view everything goes back to energy we have our prana akashi and everything like that so it is the process of evolution and involution the world after it's a dissolution remains involved in god and god at that time at the time of creation evolves as the world butter goes with buttermilk and buttermilk goes with butter if there's a thing called buttermilk then butter also exists and there if there is a thing called butter then buttermilk sorry if there's a thing called buttermilk then butter also exists and if there's a thing called butter then buttermilk also exists if the self exists then the non-self must also exist so yeah so what this is saying is that we can't separate this universe from roman itself it uh revolves back into berman and and comes out here like the spider that the the web the thread that'll become a web comes out of its own body and then the spider can also withdraw that same thread so we can't separate the thread from from the spider this is the universe from brumen this is this theory of projection means the phenomenal world belongs to that very reality to which the absolute belongs so we may say it's unreal that means that it's that it's fleeting that means that it's superficial it may not be the thing that can appeal to us and everything but it has some type of existence like the wave on the it's the surface of the ocean that wave uh is a wave reel not if we think i i mean can we capture a wave it's never the same shape for for more than just even a split second it's never the same shape right you ever look at waves yeah it's not like a painting it's not like a seascape the seascape you can actually paint and it'll have a certain shape a wave is never like that it's a constant motion but does that mean that it's unreal unreal from that point of view that it's just we put it we it has a temporary form rupa and we give it a name so from that point of view if we think that it's some real separate thing and and doesn't need the ocean then it's unreal then that's a false understanding of it but if we know that it's nothing but the ocean and the weight of the ocean doesn't increase if we include the wave it's all the same so that's a little different from the other illustration so phenomenal the phenomenal world belongs to that very reality to which the absolute belongs again the absolute belongs to that very reality to which the phenomenal world belongs he who is realized as god has also become the universe and its living beings and now the adroitin has a problem the brahmin can't change so they'll say maybe the shakti changes or maybe it's a parent something like that but everything has a problem philosophically if we say it can't change we can't explain everything if we say changes then it's not absolute so taco will always come back and say what can we understand with this human mind it's too much we can't possibly understand this this creation and liberty one who knows the truth knows that it is he alone who has become father and mother child and neighbor man and animal good and bad holy and unholy and so forth now this much we can understand that this divinity dwells within all beings because that same consciousness is there and that everything uh emerges from brahman one from one way or one one point of view or another somehow or other that it all can be brought back into that one reality otherwise we can't explain the existence of it we in fact from our point of view we know nothing about the reality of the external world because all through the senses that we know everything we don't touch anything we think we touch something but just some sensations are coming into the brain and giving that feeling that we're touching we don't know anything about this this external universe we don't know much about anything if we're really honest with ourselves neighbor then is there no virtue and no sin okay so this is the problem this is the problem with the uh those edwardians who uh say that there's from this absolute point of view none that nothing else matters and uh of this in in the history of india this was a little bit of a problem why this uh grey dante either remained with the sadhus and they kept distant from everybody else or it got misused and it led people to not care for making progress in the world different things like that so there's a good question that is there no virtue and no sin huh there's a lot of really if i'm not the doer i'm the witness and everything and this world is unreal and everything what about all of these other things master they both exist and do not exist so there's no from a the highest point of view that we'll see that uh these things will dissolve somehow but we don't live on that level and we can't pretend that we do from our point of view they exist and they're important and we have to know the distinction and we have to practice virtue and we have to make sure that we don't do anything yeah harmful to other people if god keeps the ego and a man see this is all we talk tucker's final point he'll always go back to that as long as we have this feeling of i that'll be the then forget about this higher stuff if we have that feeling of i this is the world that we live in we can't pretend we can't say that i have this feeling of i and at the same time that everything this world is a dream i don't have to care about anybody or anything so it's long if god keeps the ego in a man then he keeps him he keeps in him the scent of differentiation and also the sense of virtue and sin but in a rare few he completely effaces the ego and these go beyond virtue and sin good and bad now theoretically that means that these god realized souls they can do anything and get away with it they won't get any bad karma they know i'm not the doer but top was very very clear that one of the signs of a god realized soul is that they'll never do anything that will be sinful they'll never take a false step so that'll that'll be the test if somebody says yes i've realized the highest truth that no karma will stick to me i can do anything it doesn't make any difference and they go about telling lies and then they're doing all sorts of immoral things then there's a clear sign that this is just talk and they're just either they fool themselves or they're they're hypocrites tucker you know that sadhu that said he was people said his conduct was very good so takara asked him about it he said this world is unreal is is my bad contact alone real so taku said he's spit on that type of debate on the the this is just confusing these these two different points of view so in a in a rare view he completely effaces the ego and these go beyond virtues in good and bad as long as a man has not realized god he retains the sense of differentiation and the knowledge of good and bad and has to we we can't pretend that we don't know the difference you may say virtue and sin are the same to me i'm doing only as god bids me like i do as you make me do but you know in your heart of hearts that these that those are mere words we can sing shockly tomorrow day and night as long as we want that i'm the instrument and and you're the operator and we go about doing all this nonsense and it's just pure it's just ridiculous it's just this uh we're fooling ourselves and everybody else it doesn't make any sense whatsoever so if we know so let me read this again this is a very nice thing you may say virtue and sin are the same to me i'm doing doing only as god bids me but you know in your heart of hearts that those are mere words though sooner do you commit an evil deed then you feel a palpitation in your heart even after god has been realized he keeps in the mind of the devotees if he so desires the feeling of the servant ego this is how one lives in the world taco says after realization this is this is the ripe ego in that state the devotee says oh god thou art the master and i am thy servant even this he's not saying that i'm just an empty shell and whatever happens you're doing it he says no i have some feeling of separation but i do only as you want me to do not as you make me do even but this is the servant ego such a devotee enjoys only spiritual talk and spiritual deeds he does not enjoy the company of ungodly people he may see god in all but doesn't enjoy their company so you see that god keeps the sense of differentiation even in such a devotee neighbor you ask us sir to live in the world after knowing god can god really be known master yeah this taco says three different things i i i'm curious about these things i i pay attention sometimes that they live in the world after realizing god live in the world after attaining knowledge live in the world after attending devotion and we just read recently sometimes they live in the world after attaining knowledge and devotion after realizing god is too high after attaining knowledge and devotion it'll be doesn't have to be god realization but at least getting established in some higher understanding master god cannot be known by the sense organs or by this mind there's another one of his citizen teaching but he can be known by the pure mind the mind that is free from worldly desires otherwise how do we know god we have it has to be through the mind now maybe the mind is perfectly still if we're talking about nirvikalpa samadhi but even then we'll come back to that same mind when we come back down again the mind doesn't really get destroyed this idea of manonasia it doesn't mean that the mind is completely that means at that time in that state of samadhi the mind is not functioning as if it's been destroyed at that time but if it's really destroyed we can't come back into it neighbor who can know god now this is interesting what does that mean who can know god is it a rhetorical question or is it a real question who can know god who can know god takes it as a rhetorical question i think it's a real question i think this is interesting i think this this neighbor is really asking who is qualified to know god can an ordinary can a householder know god that he says who can know god and talk with his master he says right who can really know him he takes it as a rhetorical question so i is very nice i like this but as for us is enough to know as much of him as we need that means he said who can know who can understand all of god all or the ways of god tucker says that very often what need have i of a whole whale of water one jar is more than enough for me an ant went to a sugar hill did it need the entire hill a grain or two of sugar was more than enough neighbor sir we are like typhoid patients how can we be satisfied with one jar of water we feel like knowing the whole of god master that's true but there is also medicine for typhoid neighbor what is that medicine sir master the company of holy men repeating the name of god and singing his glories and unceasing prayer gives great emphasis to prayer i pray to the divine mother mother i don't seek knowledge here take thy knowledge take thy ignorance we're running after this knowledge and this this knowledge of everybody thinks that we should be able to understand how this universe comes into existence is so ridiculous if we think about it we we don't even know how a toaster works we don't know how much and to know god anyhow so the company of holy man repeating the name of god and singing his glories an unceasing prayer i pray to the divine mother mother i don't seek knowledge here take thy knowledge take thy ignorance give me only pure love for thy lotus feet i didn't ask for anything else as is the disease so must the remedy be the lord says in the gita oh arjuna take refuge in me so this shana nagati this is the final word of the gita final teaching take refuge in me i shall deliver you from all sins take shelter at his feet he will give you right understanding not knowledge of all the details right understanding what's important what's not important he will take entire responsibility for you after yeah right this is after surrender but that's the final stage yes so so this is a very high stage yes yes then you will get rid of this typhoid can one ever know god with such a mind as this can one pour four seers of milk into a one seer pot can we ever know god unless he lets us know him therefore i say take shelter in god let him do whatever he likes he is self-willed what power is there in a man okay good we just reached the end of that of that chapter so we'll start next time chapter 16 with the devotees of chinese [Music] [Music] [Music] srama krishna who is stainless of infinite nature whose heart melts in sympathy for his devotees who is an embodiment of the divine and the supreme lord and ever worthy of our worship [Music] peace peace