29 Jan 2017
Shri Balaji asked: Respected Swamiji, Kindly clarify the following questions which came up during discussions with my friends Shri. Shriram, Shri. Chandan and Shri. Sohan:
1) Today, many religious conservatives agree that the different religions are messages from the same God. But they add a point saying that "Other religions were messages relevant only to a particular time, region, and section of people. At that time and place, people were at a lower level spiritually and God revealed only the knowledge which they could digest. But our religion was revealed to people of a high spiritual level and God has revealed the highest knowledge only in our religion". How to respond to above conservative argument which once again leads to a conflict due to one section of people claiming their religion to be great and mocking at other religions as inferior?
Swami replied: Every religion has various levels of knowledge corresponding to different levels of devotees. In every language of every country, the education system varies from LKG to PG level. Of course, metaphysics was deeply developed in India compared to other countries. All these levels are related to theoretical level. Practical level is far higher than the theoretical level of devotion. The achievement of practical level depends upon the psychological setup of the devotee. The practical devotion is always generated from the theoretical spiritual knowledge only. As per this concept, Indians should have been the highest practical devotees. But, it is not so. Therefore, the practical level of devotion depends upon the level of the psychological attitude of the devotee and not mere religion. We can say that in India intelligence was very much and hence doubts are many in various angles. Answering all such doubts developed the height of the spiritual knowledge. The seed may be good and the rain may be well, but, the fertility of the soil is also important, which is the setup of psychological pattern acquired from previous births (samskara). One devotee told Me that India is great because God incarnated here many a time. I told him not to be unnecessarily proud because a teacher visits a class of dull students only several times to revise the subject. We should not unnecessarily create splits between religions by praising your own religion and your own country. The ego will bring down the value of spiritual knowledge. It is always better to analyze yourself and rise to the higher level, whatever may be your religion or country. A gem is a gem in any religion and a stone is a stone in any religion. A PG student is always greater than LKG student irrespective of language, religion and country.
2) In one of Your discourses, You have mentioned Hinduism and non-Hindu (Mlechha dharma) as the 2 religions which used to exist before. What is the relationship of Hinduism and non-Hindu religions with Sanatana Dharma? Is it right to say that initially, Sanatana Dharma was the only religion throughout the world which was revealed by God to mankind? Are all religions of the world today only partial views of the Sanatana dharma and finding the Universal Spirituality among the religions would lead us to Sanatana Dharma?
Swami replied: Sanatana Dharma means the spiritual knowledge of ancient sages. The sages were always for peace of the world. Hence, Sanatana Dharma comes under universal spirituality only. Creating any split between religions or believers of God is not Sanatana Dharma at all. Later on, the middle age scholars developed the splits due to their ignorance and hence, they were not in the line of ancient sages of Sanatana Dharma. Correlation is always the attitude of ancient sage. Condemning others point is always the behaviour of egoistic middle age scholar.
3) Is the varnashrama dharma revealed by Lord Krishna applicable to both Hindu and non-Hindu religions? Some traditionalists say that non-Hindus should not read the Vedas or perform yagnas, and yagnas are not to be performed in non-Hindu (Mlechcha) regions. Please comment on this line of view.
Swami replied: The Gita clearly says that the caste system (varna) is always based on the qualities and deeds (guna karma) and not on the birth. This is universal rule. Similarly, the state of spiritual progress (ashrama) is also based on the qualities and deeds of a devotee only and not on the external dress or external place like house or forest. Yajna is only the sacrifice of fruit of work (karma phala tyaga) in the form of food during the spiritual debates. The food is prepared by cooking, which is a work (karma samnyasa). You have to take every concept with universal outlook because there is only one God, the Creator, and the whole universe is His creation only.
4) Shri Shriram asked "Kama is listed as one of the Purusharthas. At what point does its pursuit become sinful?
How can a layperson like me draw a boundary to determine limits of indulgence for a Kamya activity?
I would appreciate if Sri Swami can provide practical examples".
Swami replied: The word kama is used in two senses:- 1) General desire and 2) sex. When kama is taken as purushartha, it stands for sex. Illegal sex with any female, other than wife, is condemned by God. Sex with any intensity confined to wife or husband is not a sin as per the Gita. The word ‘kamya’ indicates general desire and not mere sex. Any worship done, be it theoretical or practical, with a selfish desire brings you to very low level before God. Any sacrifice or service done to God without aspiration for any fruit in return takes you up in the spiritual ladder.
5) Some atheist may say that he is paying a lot of tax to the government which can be taken as social service. Further he is not doing major sins like violence, corruption, infidelity etc. Rest of his efforts and money go in luxuries for himself and his family. Can he claim that he is successful in Pravrutti? Sincerely, Balaji
Swami replied: Certainly, the person referred by you is in high level provided that the Government is also doing social service on perfect lines. If the Government is not perfect, he should find other ways to see that the tax paid by him reaches the really deserving people. Luxuries are not good even otherwise. It is conclusion of scientific analysis that luxuries spoil the health. He can save the wealth by avoiding luxuries and use it in the service of God, which includes the service to poor in the name of God. Social service without the background of the concept of God will certainly collapse or gets twisted on someday or other.
★ ★ ★ ★ ★