The fruit of 'punya' will definitely come to one whether he/she desires it or not. Whether he enjoys it (mentally) or not is a different question. One's response to the fruit of 'punya' is a different matter altogether. It is the same with 'pãpa'. The fruit of 'punya' and 'pãpa' does not spare even a Jnãni. All bodily afflictions ('sariira avasthai') definitely occur to the Jnãni as well. Nothing affects the Jnãni is the 'siddhãnta'. But, 'pãpa' or 'punya' does not spare even the great Jnãni. This is the reason that some Jnãnis are popular while some Jnãnis remain totally unknown. 'Yashas' (popularity) is due to 'punya'; 'Kirti' (fame) is due to 'punya'. Through certain 'punya', 'kirti' (fame) is earned; through certain 'punya', 'ishwarya' (wealth) is earned. Some Jnãnis become Matãdipathi (head of Mutts) - Rãghavendra Swami, Periya Periyava became Mutt heads. This is because they have earned such 'punyas'. So, they moved about in palanquin and enjoyed the paraphernalia that a Rãja possesses. Thus, 'punya' and 'pãpa' does not spare even the Jnãni.

We need not think about earning 'punya' or 'pãpa'. You may ask, 'Well! Shãstras ask you to perform 'punya' earning acts like dãna/dharma!' But, Shãstras speak of 'adhikãri beda' (difference in the [attitude of] persons). For whom are these Vedãnta Grantas? They offer advise only to the 'mumukshus' (spiritual aspirants). Who is a 'mumukshu'? One who aspires for Moksha. This matter concerns only the one who has sacrificed his all ('sarva sanga parityãga') and totally submitted himself to spiritual ('adhyãtmika') life. One should not question 'The Vedas advocate performance of 'dãna', dharma. Then are the words of the Vedas mere bluff?' What the Vedas speak is indeed true. There is no contradiction in this matter. But, there is 'adhikãri beda' in this. You are unable to do Vedãnta vichãra; you have no 'lakshya' (aim) to attain Brahma sãkshãtkãra. Therefore, as far as worldly affairs ('loka vishaya') are concerned, do good work. If you do 'dãna' along the lines of dharma then you will earn 'punya'. Through 'punya' you will secure birth in a good family ('kula'). Through this you may attain Liberation in that janma. This is the opinion of the Vedas.

The Vedas has been divided into Karma, Upãsana and Jnãna. The Vedas are not four. The Vedas is only one. 'Vedas' is only the general term - Sãma Veda, Yajur Veda. What is the Vedas? All put together is called the Vedas. Just as the Vedas has been divided into Karma, Upãsna and Jnãna kãnda, it has also been divided into Sãma Veda, Yajur Veda, Rig Veda and Atharvana Veda. It is the main Veda that has been divided thus. It does not mean that each of these was born separately.

Yajur Veda contains all yãga-yagnyas. It contains nothing else. It speaks on the way to perform Vãjpaeyam, Aswameda yãga, Rãja suyam, Soma yaga, etc.

Rig Veda contains all types of prayers. Sri Suktam, Purusha suktam that we chant - are all from the Rig Veda. It contains prayers for a good wife, wealth, multi-storied house, etc. It prays, 'Na chora bhayam, na mrithyu bhayam, na chatru bhayam, na sarpa bhayam' (There should not be fear of thief, death, enemy, serpent). Rig Veda contains such innumerable worldly prayers. The prayers in Rig Veda are very amazing. 'Mrigasanjivini' is a 'kila bhãga' mantra in Rig Veda. 'Kila bhãga' means - for example, Mahãbhãrata contains many slokas in which certain slokas stand apart. These slokas will be said to be part of Bhãrata as also apart from it. It carries some meaning if read along with Bhãrata slokas. Such slokas are called 'kila bhãga'. Rig Veda contains 'kila bhãga' mantras. It is said that one who does japa of Mrigasanjiivini mantra, which is a 'kila bhãga' of Rig Veda, is cured of even diseases like cancer. But, one should do it in accordance with the laid down rules ]('prayogas'). When we eat 'panchagavyam' (mixture of cow dung, cow urine, ghee, milk and curd) as medicine we consume it as a simple mixture. There is a Mantra for mixing the 'Panchagavyam' for consumption with the potency of the Mantra ('Mantra poorva'). Similarly, certain 'prayogas' (usages) have been underlined for Mrigasanjivini. Ãcharya has written a lot on these in 'Prapancha Sãrathi'. There are mantras to make the dumb speak. Thus, Rig Veda consists of lots of prayers.

Yajur Veda advocates the way to conduct different yãgas. What does Rig Veda do? It gives the prayers to be offered to different devatas. We give 'ãhooti' (offerings) and the devata appears. Rig Veda contains prayers.

Sãma Veda offers the prayers contained in Rig Veda in a musical way. We chant a sloka. But, this sloka can also be chanted musically. Thus, Rig and Sãma are almost similar. Sãma offers whatever is contained in Rig in a musical form. This is because Bhagavãn loves music. Rig itself is a metre. Sãma Veda offers the same in a musical form.

Thus, the Vedas contain Karma, Upãsana and Jnãna. In temples we find Garuda (the divine bird that carries Lord Vishnu) 'vãhana'(vehicle). What does this 'Garuda vãhana' represent? Its two wings represent Karma and Upãsana. On this is seated Bhagavãn, verily 'Jnãna swaroopa' (the Form of Knowledge). Garuda is verily 'Veda Swaroopa' (the Form of the Vedas)! This is the 'tãtparya' (philosophy). One 'paksha' (part) is karma, the other 'paksha' is upãsana and seated between the two is Bhagavãn, verily Jnãna swaroopa. This is Garuda 'tattvãrta' (philosophical attribute).

In the same way, Parameshwara sits on Rishaba (the divine animal of Lord Siva) 'vãhana'. The Rishaba's four legs represent 'dharma', 'artha', 'kãma' and 'Moksha' on which sits Parameshwara, verily Jnãna swaroopa. These are the 'tatvãrta' for each 'vãhana' (vehicle).

Thus, the Vedas are categorized into Karma, Upãsana and Jnãna. Jnãna is Vedãnta. Upanishads is found to contain Vedãnta. The Vedas is only one. The part speaking of yãga, etc. forms Yajur Veda, prayers form Rig and the musical aspect forms Sãma.

Atharvana Veda is for protection. Suppose we have to run a Veda Pãtasala. This is dharma 'rakshana' (protection). For this one needs human power, money, articles, etc. Are all these enough? No! Lots of hurdles are faced while carrying on such activities. So, one has to protect oneself against these hurdles. We plough the field, apply manure, sow the seeds and once the plants sprout up we protect it by removing the weeds. The unwanted weeds have to be removed so that the wanted plants grow well. In Gita, Bhagavãn says, 'Paritrãnãya Sadhunãm' followed not by 'Dharmasamsthãpanãrthãya' but 'Vinãshãya dushkritãm'. Bhagavãn, while speaking of taking Avãtar in every Yuga, speaks of protecting the Sãdhus and does not follow it up with the words 'establishment of Dharma' but with the words, 'destruction of the wicked'. To protect the Sadhus and to destroy the wicked!

When is it possible to protect the Sãdhus? Only on the 'nigraha' (destruction) of the wicked. The Government has to provide us proper security if we have to live peacefully. There is law and order only when the Government provides proper security. Only then can we lead a fearless life.

Rig Veda offers prayers, Sãma Veda gives the same in a musical way, Yajur Veda speaks of yãgas, but Atharavana Veda totally contains Mantras to destroy the wicked. It is to protect oneself from the wicked.

The powerless is destroyed in the world. Let us say that a pack of dogs come rushing to the dirty food leaves thrown into the dustbin. If you watch this pack you will find that amongst these is one that is the strongest. It barks and all the weak ones move away. This strong one eats all the food. Thus, from birds to animals to human beings, it is only the strong that survives. It is the survival of the fittest. The powerless is fooled. The same is found in forest life, too. Big, powerful animals like the lion, tiger, and elephant survive. Even amongst these only the fittest survives. The leopard that is enjoying its hunt runs away when a lion appears on the scene. Only the fittest survives in the world.

Some are powerful by nature. You must earn strength in some way. One who wishes to earn physical strength eats suitable food. For the Brahmin his strength lies in 'tapas'. You cannot live without power. Someone is smart enough to use his physical strength. The king has military power. So, if you do not have physical strength then what should you do? Earn 'tapo bala'. You can survive in the world only if you are strong. 'Tapas' is the strength of a Brahmin. This is the reason that, in days gone by, every Brahmin was a great 'tapasvi'. In every home you could find this.

Why and how did our ancestors command respect everywhere? It was due to their regular chanting of the Gãyatri. We find this even in Rama-Krishnãdi avatãras. What was reason for Rama's successful execution of all His work? This was the result of His Gãyatri japa. In Krishna-avatãra, why did Krishna command respect ('Jagat Poojya') in all the three worlds? Gãyatri Japa! How was Sage Agastya able to drink up the ocean? It was only due to the 'phala' of Gãyatri! How was Sage Viswãmitra able to create a heaven for Trisangu? The 'phala' of Gãyatri.

Therefore, we can survive only if we are strong in some aspect. Become strong.

Veda Mantras are the real power. So, Atharvana Veda hits the wicked through Mantras. When hit with an 'astra' (weapon), you hit back with an 'astra'. When hit physically, you hit back physically. But, when attacked by a Mantra, Atharvana Veda hits back with Mantra.

But, against whom should this be used? A king has weapons. The king has the power to use this. Can one object to the king holding weapons? No! The king will never misuse his weapons. Let us say that a police holds an AK-47 gun in his hand. Can you say that the police should not hold the gun in his hand as it depicts violence? You cannot object to the police holding a gun. Why is he holding it? For protection of the innocent from the wicked.

In the same way, one cannot question, 'How can the Vedas speak of destroying someone?' Why has the Vedas said all these? Not to hit all and sundry. It is only to destroy those who create 'hãni' (problem) in carrying out dharma 'kãrya' (dhãrmic work). In those days during the performance of a Yagnya, the troublemakers would drop meat in it. We find this in Ramayana. Thãtaka was a demoness ('rãkshasi'). She dropped meat in the Yagnya of the rishis. Mãreecha was another troublemaker. Viswãmitra takes Rama and Lakshmana only for guarding the Yagnya against such troublemakers.

Such trials and tribulations do arise. How will they escape from these? So, they possess some Mantra 'bala' (Mantra power). Atharvana Veda that offers such Mantra 'bala' also warns that the misuse of these Mantras would earn grave 'pãpa'. Therefore, one should not question why Atharvana Veda contains such destructive Mantras.

Atharvana Veda contains all sorts of Mantra 'prayog' (usage of Mantras). It contains a Mantra that can bring about mental instability in a person. There is a Mantra, which can kill a person. Innumerable Mantras are found in Atharvana Veda. Nothing has been missed in Atharvana Veda. But, our ancestors' 'righteousness' is seen in the fact that this Veda has almost died out because they never thought of using it!

Yajur, Rig and Sãma Vedas have all been nurtured. But, it is not so in the case of Atharvana Veda. Why? Though the Vedas offer a way for self-protection, our ancestors did not like to use it. This is the reason that it has died out. There is only one person in the whole country who has done 'adhyayana' (learnt) of this Veda, i.e, one who has learnt it thoroughly. There are a handful of persons who have done a little 'adhyayana' of this Veda. Atharvana Veda is, therefore, meant for protection ('rakshanãrtam').

While carrying out any dharma, the 'pratikoolas' (hindrances) have to be simultaneously removed even as 'anukoolas' (supportive actions) are carried out. Only then can it be protected.

In the case of protection of 'strees' (ladies), our Dharma says, 'A lady should be under the shield of a man. This forms a protective measure for her.' But, what do the women feel? They think that they have been deprived of their freedom. Security guards are provided for a Prime Minister. These security guards follow him wherever he goes. The reason is to offer protection to him and one cannot say that the Prime Minister has been deprived of his freedom. In those days man had held himself responsible for protecting women. It was only a safety measure and was not meant to make them feel dependant on man.

Vedas speak such innumerable dharmas. One can speak forever on the Vedas.

At one point of time, only the religion of the Vedas existed in the whole world. We find that yãga-yagnyãdiis have been performed in 'yuda matha' (Jewish faith). They had carried out sacrifice of goats just as they are being done in the villages here. In our country, the king was deemed to be an 'amsa' (form) of Bhagavãn. In the same way, the 'yuda' king was deemed to be verily God. In this religion there was no separate social law other than their holy text. The rules laid down in their religious text were the law for running the affairs of the country. They crucified the Christ as he objected to this.

Jesus Christ was a perfect Brahmachãri (celibate). This was the reason that he was successful in carrying out his great work. He never lost his brahmachãrya 'shakti' at any point of time. The reason for Swami Vivekãnanda's great success in his work was also his perfect brahmachãrya. Jesus Christ had a great following and subsequently Bible came to rule the ways of the country.

Egypt was filled with our Ãrya culture. The German and the Portuguese were once filled with our Ãrya culture. Iraq is found to have had Hindu 'Sãmrãjya' (rule).

Anyone who desires to spread his faith catches hold of the king. We find this in the history of our Tamizh Nadu State. Suppose a fanatic Shaivaite or a Vaishnavite desired to spread his faith in the kingdom, he would first instill it in the king so that the whole kingdom gets converted to his faith. This is the reason that we find that under the rule of a Shaivaite King, many Perumãl temples had been converted into Siva temples. In Chidambaram, it was Govindarãja Perumãl sannidhi that was foremost ('ãdi sannidhi'). Natarãja sannidhi came later. This occurred during the rule of a king who was a Siva bhakta. In the same way, a Vaishnavite king converted all Siva temples in his kingdom into Perumãl temples. Mannãrgudi Rãjagopala temple was at first, a Siva temple. Lots of 'pramãna' (proof) for this is found in the sculptures here. This is the reason that no Ãzhwãr has sung on Mannãrgudi Rãjagopala and thus, not been included in Divya Desams.

There are lots of 'pramãna' (proof) in the view that Chidambaram Natarãja has come from Kerala desa. The Dikshitars of Chidambaram keep 'poorva shika' (the tuft worn on the forehead). This is a Kerala tradition. Parasurãma established this Kshetra (Holy place on the west coast) and shifted some Brahmins, from what is now known as Tamizh Nadu, to this region. Here, it rains almost all through the year. It is not very easy to live under such a condition. The difference in climatic conditions was not found suitable for their living. Parasurãma, however, made them wear 'poorva shika'. Ãbasthamba rishi says, 'One should never change his 'shika' (tuft), 'pundram' (religious mark on the forehead) and 'sutram'. This is smriti 'vãkya' (the words of the Smriti). Dharma forbids a person belonging to one class of sutra taking up the performance of another sutra. Amongst these Brahmins who were shifted to the west coast by Parasurãma, some returned to Tamizh Nadu region while some stayed back. These people with 'poorva shika' are called 'sozhiyãll'. Some parts of Tamizh Nadu are filled with these Brahmins. Since Natarãja has come from Kerala, the Natarãja Dishitars keep 'poorva shika'. The words, 'Ponnambalam', 'Chitrambalam' are words from the region of Kerala. 'Ambalam' is a word from this region. The dish 'Kalli' is from this region. This dish is prepared for 'Thiruvãdirai' of Natarãja. Lots of Kerala 'sampradaya' (tradition) can be found here.

In many countries/Kingdoms one can find the change in history/culture. We speak of 'saraba murti'. There is no 'pramãna' for sarabeswarar in any of the Vedas. But, people take him as a god. It is said that this god came to cool down Nrisimha's anger. Any faith or religion is spread through the head of the kingdom. Had not Buddha caught hold of King Ashoka, Buddhism would not have spread this much. It was only because King Ashoka embraced Buddhism and sent his children out to Sri Lanka and Japan to spread this religion, that it came to be spread so widely.

Thus, great 'tapasvis' were able to bring about such transformations.

In the beginning there was only Ãrya/Vedic culture throughout the world. People living in other parts of the world also studied the Vedas. This is the reason that we find that Sanskrit has been the base language for all languages. This is found in the German and Portuguese languages. One cannot find a language that has no flavor of Sanskrit. The Dravidian languages such as Telugu, Kannada, Malayalãm, Tulu are a mixture of Sanskrit and Tamizh. Gujarãti, Marãtti, vraja bhãsha, Bengãli are found to be a mixture of Sanskrit with the 'prãkrita bhãsha'. Even the scripts ('lipi') of these languages resemble Sanskrit. Thus, it was only Sanskrit language that spread all over. How did the Sanskrit language spread thus?

How was the language born? It is said that initially there was no language and that man spoke incoherently as 'ah!' 'ooh!' Some evolution theory is put forth for the birth and development of language. But, our Vedas says that the very day that man was created by Bhagavãn, he knew to communicate in a proper language. It is not as if the human was a 'tribal' class first and had no language. Even today we find tribes. Don't they have a proper language? They do. There will always be the existence of tribes.

While speaking on 'srishti' (creation), Srimad Bhãgavatam says, Svãyambhu Manu and Shatarupa came out of Lord Brahma. Uttãnapada and Priyavrata were their sons and Akuti, Prasuti and Devahuti their daughters. They married their daughter Devahuti to Kardama who had been ordained by Lord Brahma (from whom he was born) to create progenies. Svãyambhu Manu while marrying off his child Devahuti to Kardama spoke. Uttanapada's little son Dhruva spoke to the Lord. Thus, man spoke even at the time of initial creation.

Parrots speak. Cows and buffaloes moo. Every animal and bird has a language. It may sound as some unintelligible cry of the bird or animal. But, they are indeed communicating with each other. A parrot makes different kind of sounds - one during danger, one in joy. We are unable to understand it. In Ashtapadi, Jayadeva says that the parrot said, 'kuhoo! Kuhoo!' and again in another place he describes the sound as, 'gala! gala!' The sound is different in 'viraha' (call for mating). Ãndãl also refers to the birds' cry in Tiruppãvai. Therefore, dog, cat or any other animal has a language of its own. I happened to read a book. When a crow is hurt, the cry produced by it brings all the other crows to its proximity. In this book, a man has written that having keenly watched the different tones of the crow's cry, he produced them and had the same response from the crows as would a crow's cry. Thus, each animal and bird has a language to take care of its needs.

Thought itself is the language. Otherwise, how can a thought rise up? If there is no thought it means that there is no language. We may not speak but thoughts are continuously rising up. Is that not so? We are expressing our thoughts in some language. Even at the time of creation Bhagavãn had given a language. What is the language that Bhagavãn had given? Sanskrit, of course! This is because the language of Bhagavãn is Sanskrit. 'Apourushyamãna' (beyond-human) Vedas is in the Sanskrit language. The Vedas is the breath of Bhagavãn. This is the reason that it is in Sanskrit language. The Vedas has come out of Bhagavãn. The sound in space ('akãsh') is in Sanskrit.

What is the meaning of the term 'Sanskrit? 'Samskãra' means clean. There are forty 'samskãrãs' laid down for man. 'Sanskrit' is that, which needs no cleansing. This language does not need any correction. It is said that Sanskrit is best suited for the computer. This is because it has a root, i.e one can trace the origin of the words in this language. This is not so in other languages. In Tamizh we say 'Thãmarai' (Lotus). If we try to find the reason for the birth of this word, it is not known. But, in Sanskrit it is not so. The word 'Pankajam' (Lotus) means one that has come from mud/clay.

Varnãshrama dharma did not exist only in this Bhãrata desa. Which religion existed all over the world in ancient times? It was only Varnãshrama dharma. Ãryan culture was found all over. This 'Bhãratiya samskãra' (Indian culture) existed wherever man knew to speak and other living beings existed. 'Bhãrata varsha' was so large. This was destroyed later.

Even in the recent past our culture was destroyed to a large extent due to the entry and rule of the British. We got our independence in 1947. It is now 54 years since we got our freedom and we find that our ancient tradition has almost been uprooted by the rule of the British. In the same way Varnãshrama dharma that existed all over the world was shaken up and uprooted with the birth and spread of other faiths. We find that the spread of Buddhist culture shook up the ancient 'vaidika' dharma. This happened here, in Bhãrata bhoomi - in this karma bhoomi, in spite of the existence of innumerable tattva Jnãniis and tattvas. Then, what to speak of other lands?

The caste division existed not only in India but also in other parts of the world. 'Agni hotrams', 'oupãsanas' had been conducted all over the world. Then why is it said that Bhãrata bhoomi is the only karma bhoomi and that one should not go abroad? This has been decided on the basis of the lines on which this Yuga is moving. In sutra bhãshya, Ãcharya says that three things should be avoided in Kali Yuga. Meat consumption in 'shrãrdham' (rites conducted for the dead ancestors). In Ãryan tradition, Brahmins who participated in the shrãrddha ceremony were served meat. Today we use 'urad dãl' ('ullundu') in the place of meat. This is akin to eating meat. This is the reason that a Sanyãsi should never eat 'ullundu'. In earlier Age, a child was begotten through the brother. But, this has been forbidden in Kali Yuga. The third that is forbidden in Kali Yuga is human sacrifice ('nara bali') in 'Yãga', which was in vogue in earlier Age. This is found in the life of Viswãmitra.

Likewise, the Shãstras say that after a time Sanyãsa should not be taken in Kali Yuga. One Smriti says that Sanyãsa should not be taken at all in Kali Yuga. Another Smriti says, 'As long as the deer lives, the Ganga flows on this land and the sound of the Vedas is heard, one can take Sanyãsa in Kali Yuga.' Therefore, even in this Kali Yuga, one cannot assure that it is the same dharma that would apply throughout the Yuga. What is applicable in one part of the Yuga need not apply to the latter part of the Yuga. It may change. It is also said that one should not go to a place where a 'foreign' religion has been established. This is said for the one reason that it might affect you.

Thus, once upon a time only this religion existed all over the world.

One should not foolishly question why the Vedas speak in a particular manner. Now, the Vedas speak on the glory of 'vastra dãna' (donating clothes) for almost 16 pages. The Vedas speak on the glory of 'anna dãna' (offering food in charity) and 'teerta yãtra' (bathing in Holy Rivers). But, here, we are dealing with a Vedãnta granta. The Vedãnta granta deals with 'mumukshus' only, whose 'tãtparya' (end-goal) is Moksha. There is no place here for those with worldly desires ('kãmiis') and for the householders ('samsãriis'). Their dharma is different. They have to perform dharmas to the level of their capability. Through this, they may be raised to a better condition, earn ''punyas', obtain another janma and due to these 'punyas', get a Guru. Even Ãdi Sankara says that it is only through many crores of 'punyas' that the association of a Mahãpurusha is attained. But, here when you are asked to shirk from doing 'dãna' or dharma it only means that those moments should also be used for doing only Vedãnta vichãra. What has been advocated to a Sanyãsi? Do not perform puja. A Sanyãsi should not touch 'agni' (fire). Why? What would happen if a Sanyãsi touched 'agni'? Nothing! Then why has this rule been laid for a Sanyãsi? If the Sanyãsi begins to cook his food, his time is wasted on this. Even during those moments he should be doing 'pranava' japa. Do you understand? This is the reason that he is exempted even from doing puja. 'Keep doing 'pranava' japa'. One has to lessen his work. Only then will the 'manas' turn inward. If you get involved in work, the 'manas' will not turn inward. It is only for this reason that a Sanyãsi is advised against all such work.

What should a 'mumukshu' (spiritual aspirant) do? There is no need of 'dãna' or dharma for a mumukshu. Keep doing Vedãnta vichãra.

'evubãyathinãle vãyuvir 'chalanam iv vullam kattu padumo' - the (spiritual) path that you are following to control the mind verily bestows the 'phala' of a dip in the holy river, of having done 'dãna' and 'tapas'. It is the only way to Mukti (Liberation); it is verily the 'guna' (virtue), 'swa-dharma' (one's prescribed duty).

You are a 'mumukshu' and are doing Brahma vichãra. It is absolutely easy. What does it mean by 'easy'? You have to drop all external activities. You need not do any external work. Ãchãrya says in one of His 'bhãshyas' (commentaries), 'Even to lift a fruit you have to move your hand. But, to know the 'Ãtma swaroopa' even this act is not required.' Bhagavatpãdãl says that even this small act ('kriyai') is not needed for this. Thus, this is so very easy!

Next, Bhagavãn says, 'Chittam siridasaiya samsãram' - There is a delusion ('brãnti') for the people of the world towards 'ãsrama' dharma (the four stages of religious life of a Brahmin - 'Brahmachãri' (student of the Vedas), 'Grahasta' (householder), 'Vãnaprasta' (retirement to the forest) and 'Sanyãsa' (ascetic life). But, in practice, are these 'ãsrama' dharmas being lived true to their demands? We see some in the sanyãsa-ãsrama slipping from their dharma. We find that some sanyãsis have even got married! One may question this -'Is it right for a Sanyãsi to get married?' But, it can also be seen from a different angle - this is better than slipping even while being in this 'ãsrama'. But, this is not at all surprising.

In Kali Yuga, when the 'varnãsrama dharma' - Brahmin, Kshatriya, Vysya and Sudra have been unsettled, why should one speak ill of a Sanyãsi alone? Is a brahmachãri being a real celibate? Do you know who is called a brahamchãri? Only one who does Veda adhyayana. In today's world do we find the brahmachãri wearing tuft on his head? Does he hold a 'danda'? Is he doing 'samitã dãna'? Has he done the required Veda adhyayana? Rules have been laid down even with regard to the style of wearing the 'vastra' (clothing). It has to be worn above his knees. He cannot use the 'top vastra'. He cannot speak to a woman. He should not touch even his sisters and mother. He should not lay down next to them. He should not use 'lãhiri vastu' (things that would excite the senses). He should eat only 'Bhiksha anna' (food procured through begging). Is a brahmachãri in his dharma in this world? Is the 'grahasta' (householder) in 'grahastrasrama' dharma? You do not get to find a 'vãnaprasta' in Kali Yuga. Just the way varnãsrama dharma has been spoilt, other 'ãsramãs' have also been spoilt.

We call the one who is not married as Brahmachãri. One who is married as the 'grahasta' (householder) and the one who has left home due to some tiff with the family members as a 'vãnaprasta'!  It has come to be so in these times, from our point of view ('riiti')! One who remains unmarried is not a Brahmachãri. Only one who does Veda adhyayana and follows the dharma that has been prescribed for him is a Brahmachãri. 'Grahasta' is one who carries on 'agni-hotra', 'owpãsana'. 'Grahastãsrama' is only for the 'samrakshana' (fostering) of Sãdhus. When a Mahãn visits a town/village it is the duty of the 'Grahasta' to invite Him home and offer hospitality. 'Grahastãsrama' is meant only for this. He should not be indifferent to the visiting Mahãn. Why has he entered into 'grahastãsrama'? It is only for performing dharma. In Ramayana, Vãlmiki says that even in solitude, Rama and Sita used to speak of dharma. They were always doing dharma vichãra. 'Grahastãsrama' is meant only for this.

When all these dharmas have been disturbed how will Sanyãsa dharma be? Even it exists only in name. Sanyãsãsrama is meant only for Brahmins. When Arjuna desires this, Bhagavãn says that he cannot take up Sanyãsa. Bhagavãn says, 'Your dharma is to fight. Only if you fight can you go to Moksha.'

Wearing the ochre robe or ochre coloured 'kurta' without a 'danda' or a 'kamandala' does not bring you into this classification (of a Sanyãsi). Shaving your head and hanging a cloth bag on your shoulder does not make an ascetic of you. There are many 'Sanyãsiis' who are drawing pension from banks! They desire to take up Sanyãsa but are not keen on giving up their pension! There are many like this. Why take up this 'ãsrama' if you cannot keep up the dharma pertaining to it? You need not. By doing this you only earn sins.

The most important factor for sanyãsãsrama is 'jihva' (to control your tongue). If you can control your tongue, all the 'indriyas' (senses) will automatically come under control. One who is unable to control his 'jihva' is useless for sãdhana. This is why a Sanyãsi has to beg for his food, eat without desire for taste, i.e. mix all the begged food together and eat it up. A Sanyãsi should go without food. All these rules have been laid down for a Sanyãsi. Why? It is only through the food consumed that all the 'indriyãs' (senses) rise up 'joyfully'! If you eat half or quarter stomach fill, your 'indriyas' will not work strongly. If the 'indriyas' are not strong, your 'chintana' (thought) will not run anywhere else.

When all the 'ãsramas' have become a matter for criticism, it is no surprise that this 'ãsrama' (Sanyãsi) has also become so. Since, we have great expectations from Sanyãsis we analyse and comment on their behavior. This is because it is an optional 'ãsrama'. It is not forced on you. You can take it up if you desire. 'Having taken it up voluntarily, how can you mess it up?' is the question asked. Another great surprising factor of this sanyãsãsrama is that, those who take it up do not know the dharma of this 'ãsrama'! Before taking up this 'ãsrama', no one thinks, 'what is the dharma that have been prescribed for this? Let me know this first.' Some Swamiji gives him the Sanyãsa. This is the reason that there are strict rules that Sanyãsa should be taken only from another Sanyãsi; a Guru should give sanyasãsrama. The Guru should test the candidate's quality and then bestow this 'ãsrama'. It is not so in today's world.

Bhagavãn says, 'If you desire Moksha, seek a Guru. On attaining a good Guru, learn the mãrga. Lead a pure ('pavithramãna') life. Do not let your mind go haywire. Our life should be as pure as the flower that has bloomed out and is filled with fragrance. Every moment, we should keep moving in the path to attain Bhagavãn. Then, everything in life will automatically move in line with this.

'Adanãl deemãn paramãm pirgnaiyinãl pãr' - 'Therefore, Oh! the intelligent! Turn your vision inward.'
'Chittam siridasaiya samasãram' - One whose mind moves 'even a little' is a samsãri. Are you wearing the ochre robe? This does not mean that you are dispassionate. Has one married and begotten children? This does not mean that he is a samsãri. The world would look at him in 'loka riiti' (a worldly angle). A man wearing the ochre robe is considered great; one who is not married is considered great; one who is married is considered 'ajnãni', a samsãri.

However, it appears that even the 'loka' is able to comprehend something. The world seems to understand Mahãns who are married. It is seen that some in sanyãsãsrama have not become popular. So, it has to be said that the world does understand at least a little in this aspect. When their (Mahãns') 'divya shakti' glows out, there are some who follow them without seeing their 'ãsrama' but drawn by their 'prabhãva' (glory).

Nothing affects a Mahãpurusha. It is not a matter for comprehension through 'buddhi' (intellect). There is just one point - 'chittam siridasaiya samsãram' - who is a 'samsãri' (the worldly person)? One whose mind has 'chalana' (stirs) is samsãri, i.e. one in whom even a single thought rises up. Let him belong to any category. A story runs in Andhra desa. A swamiji was doing puja daily. Everyday after the puja, the swamiji would utter, 'Emi ãyindo? Emi ãyindo? (wonder what has happened?) One day, a disciple enquired of the swamiji, 'Why do you daily utter 'emi ãyindo? emi ãyindo?'  The swamiji explained, 'When I left home to take up Sanyãsa, my wife was in family way. I am worried about her delivery!'

Rãmakrishna Paramahamsa used to narrate a story. A swamiji was doing puja. A disciple came there. While giving 'teerta' to the disciple, the swamiji asked, 'When did you come?' The disciple said, 'I came in while you were worrying over watering the plants, during your puja!' This disciple was smart enough to know the mind of the swamiji! Therefore, one whose mind has ''chalana'' is verily the samsãri. 'chalana' means even a single thought - even divine thoughts like 'when will I get Moksha'; 'I am not doing japa'. Even these are 'chalana'. You can only bifurcate it as good 'chalana' and bad 'chalana'. But, it is 'chalana' nonetheless. You should not worry about the way the world is moving.

'Chittam siridasaiya samsãram' - this is a wonderful statement. It has been said that one whose mind has 'chalana' is a samsãri. One whose mind has no 'chalana' at all - 'chittam nischalanamãi nirka mukti iduve' - he does not say one whose mind has been destroyed. He says one whose mind has become one pointed. Why then does he say 'mukti iduve' (this is verily Mukti)? This is because once the mind has attained 'ekãgra' (one-pointed) then Mukti is certain. One who has succeeded in pulling and tethering the mind that is akin to the fast blowing wind has Mukti close at hand.

In Bhakti granta, it is said that one who is always thinking of Bhagavãn has Moksha very close. One from whom tears flow incessantly and experiences horripilation on thinking of Bhagavãn has Moksha near at hand. Likewise, here in Vedãnta, for one whose mind has become one pointed Moksha is near at hand. So, 'mukti iduve'.

'Anda ekãndathai adiyum sugam aduve
andamilã addhiyantha ãnandam - endha
karumamum il apparathir katravanãm ãrdhãn
ramiththidãn nee isaippãi - pirivãm' (V.11)

Well! You have spoken on all these. But, how does it (Brahmãnanda) feel? 'anda ekãndathu adaiyum sukam aduve!' - You speak of 'Ãtmãnanda'. How is this 'ãnanda' (joy) of 'Ãtma'? Well! My child! It cannot be described. It would lose its dignity ('gourava') if it could described! Let us say that a doctor prescribes a medicine. It is not available but a substitute is obtained. If there were a substitute to any matter ('vishaya') we would try that instead of this or if the prescribed matter is not available we can always try the alternative. But, how is this ('Ãtmãnanda')? It has no substitute!

Sugar candy is sweet. It is said that it is as sweet as the sugar. If we are unable to get sugar candy we can eat sugar and experience the taste of the candy. But, 'anda ekãdanthu adaiyum sukam aduve' - you make your mind one-pointed through Brahma vichãra. The joy ('ãnanda') that you get through this is 'aduve' i.e. there is no other joy equal to this; no other joy is greater than this; it cannot be described as this or that. What does the Vedas say? It says, ' 'Neti! Neti!' ' - 'Not this! Not this!' Even the Vedas has not succeeded in describing this state. So, how is this 'Brahmãnanda'? 'aduve'! That itself is 'THE JOY'!

'Andamila addhiyantha ãnadam aduve' - This 'ãnanda' has no beginning, no end and it does not diminish. How is this? When it is said that it has no beginning, it means that it always has been. You are only not aware of it. Therefore, it has no beginning. If you ask a Jnãni, 'When did you attain Moksha?' he would reply, 'When was I without it?' This is because there is no state of 'attainment'. There is no state of 'yet unattained'! Attainment refers only to that which was not with you earlier. Suppose you had misplaced some article of yours and found it. Was this found newly? No! It was with you but was only 'thought' to be lost. It was neither lost nor found. Brahmãnanda IS EVER ('nityasiddham'). Thus, a Jnãni will not say that he found this 'ãnanda' on this day, date and time. If he says so then he is not a Jnãni. A Jnãni would only say, 'When was I without it? It always has been.'

This 'ãnãnda' has no beginning. Well! Will this 'ãnanda' suddenly leave me one day? No! There is no end to it. Will there be any variation in this, i.e. will this 'ãnanada' increase or decrease? No! How is this 'ãnanda'? 'Andamilla athiyantha ãnandam' - It has neither beginning nor end. It will neither disappear one fine day nor will there be any variation in its level over a period.

If you say, 'Please spare me from practicing 'ãtma vichãra' (Self-enquiry). This path is not suitable for me. Is there any 'karma' through which I can enjoy this? Is it possible for me to donate some crores of rupees to someone to enjoy this? Or shall I dig a pond?' the answer is a simple, 'No! This 'ãnanda' cannot be earned through any 'karma'.' Well! Even if you give up all your wealth, dig a pond or build a temple you cannot earn this 'Ãtmãnanda'. This is because this state is not reached through any 'karma' but 'Realized' through 'pragnyai' (knowledge). It is 'unnarvu poorvam' (feeling). How can the 'Conscious' be 'felt' through some 'achetana vastu' (insentient thing)? 'Karmas' are all 'achetana' (insentient). Can you produce a 'Chaitanya vastu' out of two 'achetana vastu'? Therefore, through 'achetana' work you cannot 'Realize' 'Chaitanya swaroopa'.

How can this state be 'Realized'? Only through Jnãna ('kevalam Jnãnam'). It cannot be had through any type of karma. You cannot get it either through 'agni hotra', 'oupãsana' or Veda adhyayana. You cannot earn it through digging ponds or building temples or 'dãna' or dharma. Why did he speak against performance of 'dãna'? Because this state cannot be attained through 'dãna' or dharma. Well! After 'Realization' also there is no karma to be performed! "

Next >

Page 1    Page 2

NOTE: Any discrepancy/lapse in the translated version of the Upanyãs is the sole responsibility of the person/s who translated the work from Tamizh into English.

Home • e-MM • Contact

Radhe Krishna