Reconciliation of Scriptural Injuctions

[kisalipa]

Sage Vashishtha says that it is better to be far from a worldly atmosphere to get detachment from it. You may think that this is contradictory to the above statement regarding human psychology. But on sharp analysis, the seeming contradiction is cleared. The statement of Sage Vashishtha does not apply to the stage of leaving the family permanently. His statement should be applied to a temporary period of meditation on God in the case of a householder. The householder gets real detachment from the family, being close to the family. Now he wants to concentrate on God for some time. For this purpose, he should leave the house and go to a lonely place and meditate upon God for some time. He cannot meditate upon God in the atmosphere of the house. Therefore, one should leave the house for a short period to concentrate on God in a lonely atmosphere as said in the Gita (Vivikta Desha Sevi...). But if one leaves the house permanently and goes to a forest for meditation upon God, every thing fails. The concept of leaving the family forever brings tremendous attraction to the family in the mind, leading to the failure of the meditation upon God. Therefore, the statement of Vashishtha in Yoga Vashishtha should be taken in the sense of a short exit from the house and not a permanent exit. The statement in the Veda (Yadahareva Virajet Tadahareva Pravrajet), which says that you should leave the house whenever you are detached from the family, can be similarly be applied to leaving the house for a short period. The spiritual aspirant can control the mind and attain detachment from the family only gradually by such constant practice (Abhyasenatu...—Gita). Once the attachment to God becomes complete, the detachment from the family becomes natural and spontaneous and there need not be any effort for such detachment. After such detachment, one may stay in the house but he is still is not attached to the family internally, like King Janaka. For such a fully detached soul, even leaving the house for a divine program of propagating the spiritual knowledge will not pose any difficulty as in the case of Buddha and Shankara. Once the internal detachment is complete, the external detachment is not at all a problem and even if one does not get externally detached (does not leave the home), he is still a completely detached soul.

There is no difference between King Janaka and Shankara or Buddha because in all these cases the internal detachment is complete. However, certain people, who only claim to have internal detachment like Janaka and do not get externally detached, can misinterpret this concept. Such cheating of the public is of no use because it is deceiving one’s own soul. One can never fool God. When the person is totally absorbed in God, even the surrounding atmosphere of the family cannot disturb him in anyway as in the case of Janaka. Such a person, on the order of God, may even leave the family like Shankara and Buddha for the sake of the propagation of spiritual knowledge and devotion in the world. Such an exit from family life is designed in the divine program and cannot be taken as a step in the spiritual effort (sadhana) of a human being. Shankara and Buddha were human incarnations of God (Siddhas) and they are not to be compared with ordinary spiritual aspirants (sadhakas). If the spiritual aspirant becomes Janaka by gradual practice as said above, such a state is equal to the state of Buddha or Shankara, provided the attainment of that state is real with reference to his inner consciousness. Leaving the house for the propagation of knowledge and devotion should be done only on the command of God as stated by Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa.

[peteyzen]

Sorry but I disagree, In the gita krishna makes it clear that we have to fulfill our obligations. If one has chosen to have a family and children, then one must carry out that obligation. To do otherwise is to incur very unskillfull karma. Also, it is more than possible to create the attachment for god whilst within the family, in fact I would say it is the best way. Overcoming the irritations of family life is a brilliamt way to hone ourselves, to develop patience, to strengthen our duty and love. The ultimate spiritual knowledge is uncovered whilst living a spiritual life and meditating and remembering the divine within the family circumstance.

[Vinayaka]

I see this as that vague area in some sampradayas where the two paths ... that of renunciate, and that of householder, get mixed up. If teachings were extremely clear on the distinction, we wouldn't have this half way stuff. Either become a monk or nun, or don't. Then there is less confusion.

Both can get closer to God, both can perform dharma. But the paths are distinct.

Just my two bits.

[kisalipa]

Peteyzen,

Please go through the below explanation (very carefully with patience) to understand the basic background of the above Post.

============First hand saint and second hand saint and family=============
Of course, the external atmosphere with its physical sense (family) has its own importance especially in the case of ordinary human beings who cannot resist the influence of the external atmosphere while remaining in it. Only exceptional cases like Janaka and Gopikas can remain pure even in the opposite external atmosphere. In Yoga Vasishtha the sage Vasishtha says that in the case of ordinary human beings, it is better to leave the external atmosphere because one cannot resist the entry of its influence. Therefore, Buddha and Shankara left their houses to preach this point to the ordinary human beings. Both of them personally can remain unaffected even by staying in the families like Janaka. Veda also preaches the ordinary human beings that if one is detached from the world, he should leave the family and go for the association with saints (yadaharevavirajet….). Similarly, the rebirth of a second hand saint who starts the line of the first hand saint, in physical sense, has its own importance in the case of ordinary human beings. Even in the case of a first hand saint, the memory of the family cannot be completely destroyed and it may drag him back at any time. Hanuman proved this by acting as if His mother in the case of Yayati attracts him.


When a second hand saint takes a real rebirth and becomes first hand saint from the beginning, he has forgotten all the family bonds of the previous birth and since he is a first hand saint in this birth at least the strongest bonds with wife and children do not exist even though the weak paternal bonds exist which can be conquered easily. The third strongest bond with money also perishes in the absence of wife and children because the earning of money is for them only. This facility exists in the physical sense and it is good for an ordinary human being. It is the general rule that a soul has no human rebirth. But in the case of a soul if the omnipotent God feels that the human rebirth can help the soul in its spiritual effort, God has the special power to grant the human rebirth. Gita mentions such human rebirth sanctioned by God (yogabhrashtobhijayate…). Let us take the case of a second hand saint who is leading the life of first hand saint after full realization. But the existing wife and children may attract him because he is not an exceptional case like Buddha.

In his case if the memory of his wife and child is removed permanently such attraction will end forever. In such case what is the solution? The only solution is the death in that life which alone can remove the memory of the family. After the death he may become the first hand saint and may not have fresh wife and fresh son. Now, he has the probability of leading a pure life of the first hand saint. In this case, the human rebirth is a must for helping him in attaining the final goal. God sanctions the human rebirth in such deserving case and you cannot bind God by any rule because He is omnipotent. Therefore, except the case of yogabrashta, every soul, which has no hope of reformation in the next human rebirth is thrown into permanent hell. The general rule is applicable to such hopeless souls only. Even if there is a ray of hope of reformation, God will sanction the human rebirth because the ultimate aim of God is only reformation of the soul. Even in the permanent hell the soul is continuously tortured for the reformation only. The word ‘permanent’ means a long time only. The torture in the hell for a long time like a long time surgery of a patient is again done for reformation only and not for any revenge. Therefore, to say that every soul has human rebirth is as wrong as saying that no soul can have human rebirth. But such rebirth in physical sense is not necessary in the case of exceptional souls like Gopikas and King Janaka. Gopikas attained Goloka, which is above the God’s abode and this shows that God has kept them on His head. This place is more than advaita in which the soul becomes God. God became the servant of Gopikas. Gopikas exhibited the higher state than the highest state through their real madness for God. In their previous births they were already the first hand saints. Radha was sage Durvasa in the previous birth. Therefore, the present birth of Gopikas is higher than the highest state of the first hand saint.

Here we said that the first hand saint becomes Brahman. The word “becomes” does not mean the real transformation of soul into Brahman. It only means the charging of the soul by Brahman so that the soul is treated as Brahman just like the live wire charged by the current is treated as current itself. Even Lord Krishna says this truth in His case (Avyaktam vyaktimaparnam… Gita) and how any other soul can expect more than this? The soul should not expect the real transformation of the soul into Brahman. Brahman cannot disappear so that the soul hereafter is the only Brahman. Transformation of anything into some other thing is always impossible. Generally, the soul after being charged by Brahman does not slip because in such highest state, ego never enters the soul. Based on this it is said that one will not slip from the state of Brahman. But if ego enters even in such highest state the slip is inevitable as in the case of Parashurama. All the public will be praising the human incarnation as the Brahman (God) but the soul that is charged by Brahman is well aware of its individuality. Sai Baba was always remembering God (Allah Malik). When Jesus told that he (individual soul) and his father (God or Brahman) are one and the same, it means that he can be treated as God and it does not mean that he is the God. This subtle difference was not understood and he was crucified. He should have told straightly that he is God if it is otherwise. Mohammed avoided this complication on this subtle aspect and revealed the actual truth that God never becomes or is actually transformed into the human soul. Assuming that you have really replaced the original Brahman and that you have become the original Brahman, you can never be recognized by any one since you become the original unimaginable Brahman. You will be recognized by yourself only as said in Veda “Brahmavit Brahmaiva” which means that the knower of Brahman is Brahman only. The silence of Buddha indicates this original status of God. The original God needs a convenient medium to express Himself to the public and such convenient medium is only the human form because the main program of human incarnation is to guide people in the spiritual path by giving true clarifications of the scriptures. Selfish people have misinterpreted the scriptures so that they can achieve the real fruit through false means as in the case of the materialistic cases in the court. The advocate tries to misinterpret the constitution so that his client escapes the punishment and gets the benefit. This psychology has entered the spiritual field because the soul is a bundle of feelings acquired in the world. You may misinterpret the legal scripture and fool the judge to get the benefit through false ways. But how can you fool the omniscient God and get the benefit through such misinterpretation of His spiritual scripture? God comes in human form to remove such false interpretations and clarify the truth. The spiritual knowledge (Brahma Vidya) is the most complicated subject and even little clarification is almost impossible in it. When you do not understand any concept, it is generally said that it is not Brahma Vidya, which cannot be understood. But God expressed through human form called as Satguru can give the best and complete clarification in this most complicated subject. Such clarification is specific to God only and hence such specific special knowledge (Prajnanam) is the best and constantly associated identity card of God (Prajnanam Brahma…. Veda). The miracles are transferable items and cannot be the real identity card of God since miracles are also exhibited by demons. No individual soul can give such best clarification as God and hence the prajnanam is the non-transferable item. Miracles may or may not be exhibited by God because miracles always divert the soul from the spiritual path. But God in human form always exhibits this specific special spiritual knowledge because that is very much needed for the souls to have the real guidance in the spiritual path. Krishna, Buddha, Jesus, Mohammed, Mahaveera etc., who are the human incarnations, were always spiritual preachers giving clarifications in the spiritual knowledge, whether miracles were exhibited or not. A demon always exhibits miracles to expose his false superiority and wants fame from the public. But God in human form exhibits a miracle rarely if He feels that it will help the spiritual path of the soul. But generally the miracles are violations of the natural administration set up by God Himself and God does not want to contradict His own administration. Miracles solve the problems by violating the cycle of deeds and such solutions bring more attachment to the world in the case of souls and this is harming their spiritual progress. Therefore, prajnanam is the only identity card of God in human form, which is constantly exhibited.