|| Shri Hari ||
Gita's Yoga of Detachment
Swami Ramsukhdas
|| Shri Hari ||
Gita's Yoga of Detachment
tvameva mata cha pita tvameva
tvameva bandhuscha sakha tvameva |
tvameva vidyaa dravinam tvameva
tvameva sarvam mama devadeva ||
Swami Ramsukhdas
|| Shri Hari ||
Gita's Yoga of Detachment
Gita's Yoga of Detachment
"Yog" has various meanings. Grammatically speaking, the word "Yog" has three primary applications -
1) "Yujir Yoge" relation - i.e. Eternal relationship with God
2) "Yuj Samaadhou" - In a state of "Samadhi" (deep absorption in meditative state)
3) "Yuj samyamne" - a state of self restraint i.e influence of capability and competence.
In this way, there is all three, relationship, meditative trance and capability, in the word "Yog". Although in Gita, the above mentioned word "Yoga" can mean either of the three, it has mainly been used to mean eternal relationship (eternal union) with God.
Tam vidhyad dukhsamyogaviyogam yogasangitam | (Gita 6/23)
The separation from the assumed union with pain (travails of worldly life) is called Yoga.
All the relations in this world, they are all-in-all going to separate, all the union in this world will become dis-union. That which appears as union right now, it was not there at one time, and later on as well it will not be there. Only in the middle it appears as union. In this the union is impermanent and the separation is eternal. The separation with the world is constant, and union with God is constant. Therefore there is only separation with the world and there is union with God and union with God itself is disunion with the world. Whether we accept or not , whether we believe or not, whether we give attention to it or not, our relationship with God is Eternal. Why are we not able to experience this eternal relationship?
The reason we are unable to experience the eternal relationship, is because we have developed attachment to that thing whose separation is constant and without fail. We know the body, the wealth, the family, the honor-respect, the dishonor-disrespect etc will not remain, rather it will go away; we know that its separation is a certainty, then too by mistake we have created a fondness for these things, in other words, we have developed attachment to these things and have created an eternal relationship with them. If we develop detachment towards these things then we will realize our eternal relationship with Paramatma (God).
No one has ever been separated from Paramatma, nor will they ever be, it is impossible for that to happen. Therefore the Yoga of Detachment means - that at present there is only separation (no union) with those things with which we were never united, and in the future too there never will be any union with those things. There is no possibility of any union with those things, therefore, become disconnected from that, let there be objectivity from that world and let one realize the eternal union (relationship) with Paramatma.
When attachment is wiped out, the eternal disconnection (non-existence) of the world and connection (existence) of Paramatma will be realized.
It has been said in the Gita -
Naasato vidhyate bhaavo, naabhaavo vidhyate satah |
(Gita 2/16)
"The unreal has no existence and the real never ceases to be, the truth about both has been perceived by the seers of truth." Gita (2/16),
The point is that the non-existence of the unreal things is constant and the existence of the real thing is constant. Even though right now it appears as if there is union with the world, but in the end it will lead to disunion. Though it appears that there is disunion with Paramatma, there is eternal union only. Let that union that we have assumed with the perishable continue on - this desire itself is the main obstacle in eternal union.
If we think about our life, there was a time when we used to call ourselves a child, but we were automatically disassociated from that childhood. We did not make an effort to disconnect. No one can say that on such and such date we left our childhood. Just as childhood naturally and on its own disconnected from us, similarly youth and old age will also naturally and automatically disconnect from us. Likewise, all places, time, things, individual, states, situations, circumstances, incidents etc, are separating and disconnecting from us every moment, without our intervention. However, due to attachment we feel there is a connection and union with them.
We consider them our own, those whose separation is without any doubt. We want to take pleasure from those things. Our mind gets absorbed in those things, we want to keep them with us at all times. We develop fondness for them, our mind gets attracted and gravitates towards them - this is called "aasakti" i.e. attachment and infatuation. When this very same infatuation and attachment is for God, then it is called "love and devotion" (prem). On having attachment, the world appears to be eternal and permanent and on having love for God, God appears as eternal and permanent. Nowadays people have given the name of attachment to the world as "love", this is a very grave mistake. Love is always for the imperishable, not for the perishable.
That body, family, state, incident, situation etc. with which we have assumed a relation, that relationship was not there in the beginning, it will not be there later on, and in present times also it is constantly moving towards separation. In this constant state of separation, there is never ever any intermission, never any sections, never any vacation, never any rest. Even on this happening, the perception is that there is union with it, this is the main attachment. This attachment itself is binding.
"Kaaranam gunasangosya sadasadhyonijanmasu ||
(Gita 13/21)
Attachment to the modes of nature becomes the cause of birth in good and evil bodies. (Gita 13/21)
The point is that the affinity with modes of nature, the attachment and fondness for them, is the main bondage, and it is the one that causes separation from God. (Paramatma) It is only due to this attachment that we find pleasure and pain, favorable and unfavorable both as separate and distinct. When the attachment is wiped out, both become one and the same; because neither favorable will last, nor the unfavorable will last. When pleasure comes we feel good, and when it goes we feel bad and when pain comes we feel bad and when it goes we feel good. Therefore there is no difference in the two. There is a "shloka" that states -
Shatrurdahati sanyoge viyoge mitramapyaho |
Ubhayordukhadaayitve ko bhedh shatumitrayoh ||
An enemy gives sorrow on meeting and a friend gives sorrow on departing; both are the kind that will give sorrow and unhappiness; therefore what is the difference between the two? It is only attachment that is the root cause of the differences between the two, and it is that alone that leads to bondage. On becoming detached one immediately and effortlessly realizes the eternal relation with God, and on establishing an affinity with God, attachment is wiped out. Both Karmayog and Jnanayog destroy attachment and when attachment is wiped out, relationship with God is established. Bhaktiyog establishes a relationship with God, and on establishing relationship with God, worldly attachments are wiped out.
Therefore Lord has given two explanations for "Yoga" -
"dukhasanyogaviyogam yogasangitam" (Gita 6/23)
and
"Samatvam yog ucchyate" (Gita 2/48).
The point is, the separation from the world is itself called "Yog" (Union) and Eternal Union with Paramatma (God) is also called ‘Yog’. The separation from the world is perpetual and constant and union with God is perpetual and constant. That which remains perpetual and constant, that itself is called "equanimity". That equanimity is the form of God -
"Nirdosham hi samam brahm" (Gita 5/19).
When there is dis-association from the world, then one experiences union with Paramatma, and when one experiences the union with God, disassociation from the world takes place.
There are two things in front of us - permanent and temporary. When we think deeply we are the same now as we were in childhood; however, that body has not remained, that place has not remained, that time has not remained, those associations have not remained, that condition has not remained, that situation or circumstance has not remained, those sentiments have not remained. Disassociation with all of these has taken place. Just as the flow of Gangaji is constant and perpetual, similarly this world is flowing constantly and perpetually. It does not remain still even for a moment. It is perpetually and constantly moving and flowing in the direction of the non-existent (perishing).
As old as we are, that many years have gone by. Taking a look at this body, we think that we are living. This is absolutely false! The truth is that we are dying. We say that we are now fifty years old, then as such, from our age, fifty years have gone away. Now one doesn't know how many years are remaining, but we have definitely died fifty years - there is no doubt about this. When birthdays come, we celebrate most joyfully, that we have turned fifty ! But in fact we have not turned fifty. We have died that many years. The point is we are constantly and perpetually separating from this world and this body. If we experience this separation, then we will experience the eternal union with God.
One example that has been given is that when a boy or a girl are born in a family, then the feeling that remains in your mind is that the boy will stay whereas the girl will go away. Knowing this, the attachment for the boy is far more than for the girl. Knowing full well and resolving in your mind that the girl will someday get married and leave the house, therefore, from the very beginning, your attachment towards her is less. Similarly, this body, things, money-possessions, respect-honor, recognition-esteem etc all in all are only like your daughter, that will not remain with you. The entire world is constantly separating from you and this process of separating never stops. In the end, there will be separation from the world. There is no doubt whatsoever about this. Even if you get a life-span as long as Brahmaji, then too, the association with the world will not last. Even then, due to the attraction and attachment to the world, the relationship with the world appears to be stable. Wiping away this attachment is the main aim of human life and in that is success of human birth; because such discrimination (vivek) is not possible in any other form of birth.
Mentally to consider things as belonging to us is attachment (sense of mine-ness). Considering things as ours in relating with the world, is not attachment (sense of mine-ness). Externally that sense of mine-ness is only for the purpose of serving. Relationships that are assumed only for the purpose of serving one another are not binding. Only those relationships that are assumed for selfish interests are binding.
Our relationship with the world cannot last and our relationship with God can never be wiped out. However, due to attachment for the perishable, we are not aware of our relationship with the world. On having attachment to the perishable, one constantly sees towards relationship of perishable and only the perishable.
Question - How to wipe out attachment to the perishable?
Answer - A very simple straight-forward solution to this is, whoever we have an attachment to, serve those and in return do not desire anything from them neither desire respect, honor, service, hospitability, favors etc. from them. Do not desire anything at all. Serve those whom you have a sense of mine-ness with. Utilize those things that you have a feeling of mine-ness with for serving others. If you have a sense of mine-ness with the body, then work with the body to serve others. The more that the sentiments and feelings are to see to other's happiness, that much our relationship with things will be severed.
When the months of "Adhikmaas" arrive, the sisters and mothers collect places, glasses, bowls, cups, umbrella, clothes and various other things. Of these some bowls may be collected by a child, then the mother says, O' this is to be given, it is not ours. Even though purchased from money earned by us and kept in our house, yet it is not regarded as ours and we do not use it. Similarly, all these things are for serving, they are not for sense enjoyment. If we become determinate on this, then the attachment towards those things will be wiped out.
The human body is not for sense enjoyments at all -
"yahin tana kar phal bhishaya na bhaayi" (Manas 7/44/1).
This body is only for giving happiness to others, it is only for serving others. If we become immersed in serving others, if we become fond of seeing to the welfare of all beings, then attachment will go away -
"Te praapnuvanti maameva sarva bhootahite rataah." (Gita 12/4) `
Those who are engrossed in the welfare of all beings also come to me." (Gita 12/4)
There is a principle, that which is in the beginning and the end, is also there in the middle (present), and that which is not there in the beginning and in the end, is not there in the present, as well. If at present we are 80-90 years old, then prior to the ninety years, there was no body, house, family, wealth, that belonged to us and after 90 or so years it will not remain ours. Therefore at present as well, it is not ours. These all are constantly separating from us. But our relationship with God was there previously, later on will also remain so and it is there at present as well. The point is that being an "ansh" (ray of consciousness) of God, there is eternal union with God. For taking pleasure, we establish a relationship with the perishable the name of this is "aasakti" (attachment).
We do not have to take happiness, rather we only have to give happiness. If we become immersed only in giving happiness to others, seeing to other's welfare, serving others, then our attachment will go away. But the mistake we make is that, we give happiness to others, only for gaining pleasure and happiness from them. Just as a business-man buys goods to sell for profit, similarly we get into a relationship with others to gain pleasure, and we break off relationship with them also for our own happiness. Thus, we are only holding on to our happiness as the central motive. Tthis is "aasakti" attachment.
We must not indulge in perishable pleasures, rather we only want imperishable happiness. That imperishable joy (bliss) is ever attained. Just as there is both day and night on earth, but there is neither night nor is there the kind of day that goes alongside with the night in the Sun. Rather there is radiance and brightness at all times, Similarly in this world there is both pleasure and pain, but in God there is neither pleasure nor pain, rather there is only eternal joy (bliss) -
Ram sacchidanand dinesa |
Nahin tahum moha nisaa lavalesaa
(Manas 1/116/3)
One is not to give up things, rather hoping, desiring and enjoyment of pleasure from them, are to be renounced. If we give up the body, then we will die; thus we need to renounce the desire for pleasure from this body. In the same way, we need to renounce the wanting of pleasures from things and individuals. Just as in the winter days when you use blanket, it is not to gain pleasure from it, rather it is to be protected from the cold. But when you think that you should have a certain type of blanket, certain type of comforter - this is "aasakti" attachment. However, if the blanket is exclusive or ordinary, whether it is a thick comforter or an ordinary one, we only want to get protection from the cold. This is not an attachment, rather it is a necessity. Both attachment and necessity are different. There is attachment "aasakti" and desire for the world and there is dearness and a essential need "avashyaktaa" for God. Necessities "avashyaktaa" are the kind that can be fulfilled and "kaamna" desires are the kind that can come to an end. That which is going to come to an end, what is the issue, or impediment in giving it up?
A child is born, then whether he will grow up or not, whether he will study or not, whether he has wealth and possession or not, there can be doubts about all of these, but whether he will die or not in this there is no doubt. He will definitely die. If we do not take this point which is a sure thing and accept it, then what else will we accept? By accepting that which is without any doubt, one will not have to suffer. Therefore the thing whose separation is a certainty, accept its separation at present itself. That which will definitely separate, why to wish pleasure and happiness from it ? If we wish pleasure and happiness from it, then when there is separation from it, you will have to cry and when you separate from it, then too you will have to cry. If from the very beginning we give up desire for pleasures then you will not have to cry.
When a girl gets married, while leaving to go to her new home (husband and in-laws house), she cries. She is very sad to leave her parents and separate from them. But as she begins to stay in her new home, in due time she blends in so well with the new family that she even forgets her parent's home. When she becomes a grand-mother and a great grand-mother and when her grand-children and great grand-children's wives are rebellious, then she says that an outsider has come and ruined this household! She does not remember in the least bit that she herself was an outsider at one time. This is called "aasakti" (attachment). She has regarded this house as her own, that I am from here, I am a mother and this is my son, I am a grand-mother and these are my grand-sons etc. These are all mine. There is a certain kind of relish (pleasure) in this. This relish is the kind that leads to enormous amount of suffering, This relish will not remain forever, but it will leave behind deep pain and suffering. The bird will fly away, but will leave behind an egg! The relationship that was established out of attachment for one's own pleasure and happiness will not remain forever. It will surely go away. If a relationship is established for giving happiness then there will be happiness forever. If people who are dedicated to serving go to any major program or event, only with the motive of serving, then on leaving, they are not sad and do not cry, because they have gone there with the objective of giving happiness to others, not for taking pleasures. However, when there is hope of getting happiness from others in the family, then while parting from them, one has to cry.
If someone's son dies then it is very sad, but really speaking the suffering is not due to the death of the son, rather it is due to the sense of mine-ness with him. Daily whoever dies, it is a son that has died; because the person who has died, is someone or the other's son. But when you regard one as "my son" now there is suffering from his death. Therefore in this world it is the sense of mine-ness which is the cause of suffering. If the relationship is established only for the purpose of serving, then there will not be so much suffering. Therefore may all the relating in the family be only one of serving, only of giving happiness, only of giving them rest and relaxation. By doing so, the attachment "aasakti" will be wiped out.
If a twenty-five year old son dies, then one feels very sad. But that very same son if between the age of 19 and 20 becomes very sick, and the doctors say that there is no possibility of this boy living very long, and while suffering for several years dies at the age of twenty five, then one does not feel so sad. The point is hope of happiness, desire for happiness and enjoyment in pleasure is the main cause of suffering. If there is no hope, desire and enjoyment in pleasures, then there can never be any sorrow or suffering. All-in-all, suffering is dependent on hope, desire and enjoyment in pleasures.
He who gives with the aim of taking, is as such only taking, not giving. He who gives a rupee, having the sentiments "ek guna daan, sahastraguna punya" (of getting thousand fold merits), then his relationship is with thousand rupees! He who gives pleasure to a woman, takes care of the children, arranges children's marriage, and does all things with the intention of getting pleasure in return, will end up suffering. He who does not engage in any relation for gaining pleasure, lives very happily in this world. He lives joyfully, and dies joyfully. But he who engages in a relationship with the objective of gaining something, undergoes suffering even while alive, and also suffers while dying. If the other person is low or higher stature, or if he is of the same stature, one has to give happiness to all. On doing so, our relationship will become pure, we will attain peace. Without wanting, our respect and honor will increase. Therefore the way to renounce attachment is - to serve all, give happiness to all. If we get into a relationship with anyone, then it is for giving happiness and pleasure to them, for seeing what is beneficial to them, for their benediction, for their upliftment, for their respect and honor, for giving them rest and relaxation. We do not want to affiliate with anyone for taking. By doing so, attachment will be wiped out.
There was a king. He was walking on his terrace in the evening. There were 5-7 men with him. Behind the king's palace there were a few vacant houses. Saints would sometimes come and stay at these houses. The king asked his men, there was a saint who used to come and occasionally stay here, isn't it. The men said, yes, the saint used to come, but we have not seen him come here in sometime. The king said, "yes, that saint was a great renunciate and a detached person. There was great peace in his presence. If I meet him, I would like to ask him a few things. Please try to find him." On inquiring about the saint, they found out that he had left his mortal body. Man makes a great mistake, that when someone is present they do not make use of their time, and when the person dies, they cry. The king said, "Oh! I have committed a grave mistake, I was not able to take advantage of his presence! Now if there are any disciples of his, please bring them here. I would like to meet them. The king's men, investigated and found one ascetic. They asked him, "Maharaj, do you know that saint?" They said, "Yes we know him. He was a great soul of a very high caliber." The men asked, "Were you his disciple?" They said - "No, he did not make anyone his disciple. But yes! But I have definitely lived with him." When this message reached the king, the king asked to bring this ascetic to the kingdom. The king's men went to the ascetic and told him that the king has requested him to accompany them to his kingdom. The ascetic said, "What offense have I committed?" The king previously only called those that were offenders. The king's men said, that "No Maharaj, the king is calling you for satsang (holy company), and for inquiring on spiritual truths. Please come with us.
The ascetic accompanied the king's men and on the way he picked up a small little puppy from the street gutters, hid it in his covers and walked along.
In a king's court there is great significance of seating arrangements, and who gets what seat. The seating arrangement is carefully assigned and the height of the seating shows respect and reverence. The king arranged for a blanket on the floor for the sadhu to sit on, and the king himself also sat on it along with the ascetic, so that the attention was taken away from the status symbol. The sadhu immediately on sitting down spread both his legs facing the feet towards the king. The king thought, this man is foolish and does not understand anything about being civilized! He probably has never gone into a king's court for a meeting and therefore does not know how to behave in a civilized manner.
The king asked him - Since when have to started spreading your legs like this?
The ascetic (sadhu) replied, since I withdrew my hands. When there is desire to gain something, then we spread our hands and withdraw our feet. But when there is no desire to take anything at all, then we withdraw our hands and spread out the legs. Saying so, the sadhu, sat back properly.
The king realized, that this man is not foolish, rather he is very intelligent, a renunciate, and he has come here to alert him. The king asked about the saint.
The sadhu replied, that such a great saint is a rarity.
The king asked - Did you live with him?
The sadhu said Yes I have lived with him.
King said You must have taken something from him?
Sadhu - No king, I did not take anything!
King - Then you were left empty and deprived?
Sadhu - No, one who lives with such a saint, can never be empty and deprived. I did not take, but it remained.
King - What remained?
Sadhu - When you remove musk from the box, then too the fragrance remains. When ghee (clarified butter) is removed from the container, then too the grease, the stickiness remains in the container, similarly, when staying with a saint, his fragrance, his grease (stickiness) remains.
King - What is that fragrance, that stickiness? please share with me?
Sadhu - This is about us sadhus (ascetics) and penniless ones, not about kings. What will you do on knowing such things?
King - No Maharaj ! Please definitely share with us.
The ascetic took the little puppy out from under his covers and placed it in front of the king.
The king said - I do not understand what you mean?
The sadhu said - You will not be offended I hope !
The king said - In fact, I am asking you, how can I be offended? Simply tell me the truth.
Sadhu said - King ! I do not see a difference between you and this puppy; this equanimity is itself the fragrance, that stickiness of that saint that you wish to know about. This puppy is a very ordinary thing, and you are very great - this is true, but I do not see so. You have life force in you and so does this puppy. Your breath moves and so does his. Your body is made up of five elements, and so is his. You can see, and so can the puppy. You also eat and drink and so does the puppy. What is the difference between you and him? There is something great about every being on earth. In totality, all are equal ! You are in a high position and he is not, this difference is perceived when my relationship is for wanting something. I have no selfish interest in anyone at all. Neither do I want to take something from you, nor from the dog, therefore what difference is there between the dog and you, for me? Please do not be offended. You asked me to share, therefore I have told you the truth. I do not disregard you, rather I respect you, because you are the master, the king of all your subjects.
The point is that when we want to take something from the world, then we see someone who is wealthy and someone who is poor. But when we want nothing from the person, whether it is the wealthy or the poor person, what difference does it make?
There was a sadhu, whose daily routine was to beg for alms and eat his meals. While taking alms (bhiksha) from the village there was much crowd on the way. To avoid being touched by people, he used to sit right where he received the bhiksha and eat. One day after eating, he was cleaning his bowl when a rich man said, let me wash your bowl for you. The sadhu said that I do not wish you to wash it for me. The man said, I will have my servant wash it. The sadhu said, in my eyes there is no difference between you and your servant. Whether you clean or your servant cleans what is the difference? The difference is when I consider you as great and your servant as ordinary. In my eyes, you both are respectful. The servant is a servant, in your eyes, but he is not my servant, is he ? Am I paying him or what? My relationship is the same with you and your servant. The difference is when I have something to take, when I have a relationship out of attachment and aversion.
The point is by giving up the desire to take something from the world, attachment will go away. Therefore only have a relationship with the world for giving, for making others happy, this is a very simple straight-forward means of getting rid of attachment. We have to give happiness to all, wife, son, mother, father, brother, brother-in-law etc. We have to see to everyone's well-being, and we have to take nothing from anyone. There was no sense of mine-ness at first with these people, nor will it be so in the end. Only in the middle we have regarded them as our own. But that too is constantly coming to an end. The responsibility of leaving this attachment is on us; because, it is we who have held on to the attraction, the attachment. Neither God nor anyone else has done this to us. It is also not the fruit of one's karma, rather it is the fruit of our foolishness. It is our duty to give up our foolishness.
Due to attachment to worldly pleasures and hoarding, realization of God and realization of eternal bliss is not taking place. Therefore, we are to renounce attachment and attain God's divine love, as essentially we are a part of God (a ray of His consciousness); thus our attraction should be towards God (Paramatma) alone, and the body's towards the world. On considering relationship with the one body, we will establish a relationship with the entire world. Just as a man establishes a husband-wife relationship with one woman, then he ends up having umpteen relations - mother and father in-law, brother and sister in-law and many others. And on severing relationship with the one, relationship with the entire world is severed. The point is, due to desire to take, relationship is established with the entire world and on giving up desire to take, relationship with the entire world is severed. On severing relationship with the world, eternal relationship (eternal union) with God is established. This is yoga of detachment.
Question - Will we not get attached to those whom we serve?
Answer - No it will not happen. One man sitting near a roadside water fountain (water faucet), is providing everyone with water. He comes in contact with many people. Many come, drink water and leave, but the man who is providing the water does not get attached to them, because besides feeding water there is no other relationship at all. Attachment is only due to having a relationship based on wanting to take something.
People praise the man who donates and distributes fifty blankets in the winter months, but a business man who sells thousands of blankets is not glorified. Even though the blankets sold by the businessman are used in protecting against the cold, then too he does not get the virtuous merits; because he has only given the blanket to earn money. To give with the objective of taking is as such not giving, rather it is taking only. Thus attachment is that in which one gives with the objective of taking, or taking is with the intent of taking, i.e. the taking is predominant. Therefore taking should be with the objective of giving and giving should be with the objective of giving. Just as a Brahmin takes from a family that invites him to perform the last rites of a deceased person, but he takes only for the benefit of the family. Thus he is taking only for giving.
First the aim is determined, then actions follow suit. Our aim should be to renounce attachment. We have to "take" something only with the aim of renouncing attachment and we have to "give" also only to renounce attachment. Let there be no expectation from any one. If wife makes "roti" then eat it, but you should not expect that she should make "rotis" daily. This expectation is the cause of much suffering. -
"Aasha hi param dukham, nairaashyam param sukham"
(Srimad Bhagwat 11/8/44)
We have to serve others according to our capacity. However much of time, knowledge, abilities, and things we have, we have to serve only with those. We are not responsible for anything more than that, and others don't even expect anything more from us. There is property tax on our property and income tax on our income. If we do not have property, then what property tax is expected from us? If there is no income then where is the question of income tax?
Question - Is there a sin in being attached to satsang (holy associations) etc.?
Answer - No; Satsang is not an attachment, rather it is love. It is not desires, rather it is an essential need. However, wishing that the divine songs (bhajans) instruments are great, the background music is excellent, the lecture is very touchy, that the audience break into tears or there is uncontrollable laughter - this is attachment on the part of the listener. May others think I am a good speaker, may they respect and honor me - this is attachment of the speaker. If there is interest in satsang for attaining liberation, enlightenment, love of God, then as such, it is an essential need (hunger) and there is nothing wrong with that.
Satsang is for getting rid of that attachment. Just as a thorn is used for removing another thorn, similarly, attachment (attraction) to satsang, removes the attachment for the world.
Sangah sarvaatmana tyaajyah sa chetyaaktum na shakyate |
Sa sadbhih sah kartavyah sataam sango hi bhejasham ||
(Maarkanya. 37/23)
Attachment should be entirely wiped out. However, if it cannot be given up, then one must associate with holy men, because good association is the medicine to wipe out that attachment.
Question - What is the difference between desires (kaamna) and essential needs (avashyaktaa)?
Answer - Essential needs are for the imperishable and desires are for the perishable. Just as, when there is a big pot hole on the road then the cars that go over the bumpy road, strain and bend. But if the pot hole is filled with some stones, dirt, sand etc, then the car is able to go over it without straining and bending. Similarly when the body is hungry, then satisfying the hunger is an essential need. Whether you eat greens and roti or sweet-dish and puri, whatever satisfies the hunger. But to only want certain things, certain sweets, certain snacks, certain condiments, - this is desire (kaamna). Essential needs are satisfied, but desires are not. No one's desires have been satisfied, they will never be satisfied and they cannot be satisfied.
Question - Sometimes to teach someone, we have to take help (service) from others, is this good?
Answer - To take help (service) in order to teach children etc., is in fact doing service. It appears as an act of taking, but as such it is not taking, rather, it is teaching a lesson.
Question - All the bodies are perishable and impermanent, then why are we to serve them?
Answer - By serving the perishable and impermanent, the attraction and attachment to the perishable is renounced. And when the attraction and attachment is renounced, the imperishable is attained. In reality, service is not only of the perishable body, rather it is of the indweller (shariri, the one having the body). In relationships, the inert things only reach as far as the inert body, not the sentient; but the one who takes help, assuming himself as the body, for him, service is of the sentient.
"Jimi abibeki purush sareerahi"
(Manas, Ayodhyaa. 142/1)
The point is, when the body is assumed as ours, then that which reaches the body, reaches us.
A devotee considers everyone to be an appearance of God and serves accordingly -
"Svakarmanaa tamabhyarchya"
(Gita 18/46),
"mein sewak sacharaachar roop swami bhagawant"
(Manas, Kishkindhaakaand 4).
On feeling a sense of oneness with God, one attains equanimity in the world -
Tulasi mamataa Ram so, samataa sab sansaar |
Raag na rosh na dosh dukh das bhay bhav paar ||
(Dohaavali 94)
On attaining equanimity in the world, attraction (attachment) for it goes away. This is Yoga of Detachment.
Narayana ! Narayana !! Narayana !!!
From book in Hindi "Jit Dekhu Tit Tu" By Swami Ramsukhdasji
--------------------------------------
Narayana ! Narayana ! Narayana !
From book ‘Jit Dekhu Tit Tu’ in Hindi by Swami Ramsukhdasji
FOR MESSAGE IN HINDI PLEASE VISIT at
http://www.satcharcha.blogspot.com/
25TH - 30th October, 2011 GITA KA ANAASAKTI YOG
WEBSITES:
ENGLISH: www.swamiramsukhdasji.net
HINDI: www.swamiramsukhdasji.org
http://www.shriswamiramsukhdasjimaharaj.com/
http://www.sadhaksanjivani.com/
HINDI BLOG:
ENGLISH BLOG:
http://www.bolharibol.blogspot.com/
FACEBOOK: https://www.facebook.com/swamiramsukhdasji
GROUPS
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/sadhaka/info
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/sadhak_insight
OTHER
Contact:
sadhak@swamiramsukhdasji.net