6th April, 1937

Talk 385.

Mr. Vankata Rao, an Andhra gentleman, in the course of conversation with Sri Bhagavan, was told:

"Until you gain jnana you cannot understand the state of a Jnani ^[?]. There is no use asking about the work of Isvara ^[?] and the rest. Some ask why Siva went naked in Daruka forest and spoiled the chastity of the rishi's wives. The puranas which record this incident have also said that Siva had previously saved the Devas ^[?] and the universe by consuming the poison halahala ^[?] at the time of churning the ocean of milk. He, who could save the world from the deadly poison and lead the sages to emancipation, had also wandered nude amongst their women. Their actions are incomprehensible to ordinary intellects. One must be a Jnani to understand a Jnani or Isvara."
D.: Should we not learn the jnani's ways and imitate them?
M.: It is no use. Vasanas are of four kinds:

(1) Pure (Suddha), (2) Impure (malina ^[?]), (3) Mixed (madhya ^[?]) and (4) Good (Sat ^[?]), according as the jnanis are the Supreme (varishta), the best (variya), better (vara), and good (vit). Their fruits are reaped in three ways: (1) of our own will (swechha), and by others' will (parechha) and involuntarily (anichha). There have been jnanis like Gautama, Vyasa, Suka and Janaka.

D.: Was Vyasa also a Jnani?
M.: Yes. Certainly.
D.: Why then did the bathing angels don clothes when he appeared before them, but not when Suka passed?

M.: That same Vyasa sent Suka to Janaka for instruction; Suka was tested by Janaka and finally he returned convinced of Vyasa's greatness.

D.: Is jnana the same as arudha?
M.: So it is.
D.: What is the relation between bhakti ^[?] and jnana?

Page 366
M.: Eternal, unbroken, natural state is jnana. Does it not imply love of Self? Is it not bhakti?

D.: Idol worship does not seem good. They worship the formless God in Islam.

M.: What is their conception of God?
D.: As Immanence, etc.
M.: Is not God even then endowed with attributes? Form is only one kind of attribute. One cannot worship God without some notions. Any bhavana ^[?] premises a God with attributes (saguna ^[?]). Moreover, where is the use of discussing the form or formlessness of God? Find out if you have a form. You can then understand God.

D.: I admit I have no form.
M.: All right. You have no form in sleep, but in the waking state you identify yourself with a form. See which is your real state. That is understood to be without form on investigation. If you know your Self to be formless by your jnana, should you not concede the same amount of jnana to God and understand Him to be formless?

D.: But there is the world for God.
M.: How does the world appear? How are we? Knowing this, you know God. You will know if He is Siva, or Vishnu or any other or all put together.

D.: Is Vaikuntha ^[?] in Paramapada, i.e., in the transcendent Self?
M.: Where is Paramapada or Vaikuntha unless in you?
D.: Vaikuntha, etc., appear involuntarily.
M.: Does this world appear voluntarily?

The questioner returned no answer.

M.: The self-evident `I', ignoring the Self, goes about seeking to know the non-Self. How absurd!

D.: This is Samkhya Yoga. Being the culmination of all kinds of other yogas, how can it be understood to start with? Is not bhakti antecedent to it?

M.: Has not Sri Krishna started the Gita with Sankhya?
D.: Yes. I understand it now.

Page 367