Posted on: 16 May 2024
O Learned and Devoted Servants of God,
1. Suppose God in human form takes My suffering onto Him, shall I not be concerned and worried about it?
[A question by Smt. Chhanda]
Swami replied:- God in human form has the same medium of the human being. The individual soul is common. In the case of God, the individual soul is sustaining an infinite ocean of bliss. This is called as Paraa Prakruti, which sustains everything. This individual soul grasps and sustains all the information and is called cittam or cit. Cit is in the context of grasping the information and cittam is in the context of sustaining the information. Mind, intelligence and basic ego are the functional faculties of cit or awareness. When suffering is taken, the mind undergoes the pain of suffering and this is called as the process of suffering. Mind, intelligence and basic ego along with the five physical elements constitute the eight components of Aparaa Prakruti, which is the external phase. Cit or Paraa Prakruti or the individual soul is the internal phase. When the human form of God takes the suffering of His real devotees, the process of suffering takes place in the mind, which is the external phase only.
The internal phase is infinite bliss and the effect of suffering of mind cannot touch the internal phase. Hence, we say that God is enjoying the suffering. Suffering belongs to the external phase and enjoyment belongs to the internal phase. When happiness takes place in the mind or external phase, its effect can touch the internal phase called bliss. Since bliss and happiness are qualitatively one and the same, there is no negative effect of happiness on the bliss. Happiness, which is quantitatively infinite and continuing without any break is called bliss. Therefore, we can conveniently say that God is enjoying the happiness. In this way, God enjoys both suffering and happiness equally at the inner level. The mental suffering is essential to satisfy the deity of justice because unless suffering is experienced by the soul, the deity of justice is not satisfied. To satisfy the deity of justice, God also experiences the process of suffering in the external mental plane.
If you take the case of an ordinary human being, the internal individual soul or cit is highly polluted with worldly qualities and hence, it is an infinite ocean of misery and confusion. The suffering undergone in the external mental plane will easily penetrate into the individual soul. Similarly, happiness also enters the individual soul. Both worldly happiness and worldly misery are the materials of worldly thoughts, which contaminate the pure awareness or individual soul. Hence, the ordinary human being experiences both misery and happiness in the external as well as the internal planes.
Yoga is said to be the internal enjoyment of the external happiness and the external suffering of mental plane (Samsatvaṃ yoga ucyate - Gita). Hence, this type of equal internal enjoyment is possible only to mediated God (Saguna Brahman). In the case of Nirguna Brahman or unimaginable God or Parabrahman, it is not at all attached by worldly affairs and it is the infinite ocean of bliss. Parabrahman enters the first energetic incarnation (God Datta) and hence, enters every energetic and human incarnation through God Datta. Therefore, equal enjoyment of misery and happiness is possible only to the incarnation of God. A devotee may also attain this state by the grace of God. However, this does not mean that such a devotee became God because the soul is not the creator, maintainer and destroyer of the world like God.
In the Veda, the happiness of the king of this entire earth is taken as the maximum limit of the intensity of the human being at climax level (Sa eko mānuṣa ānandaḥ). When you multiply this happiness by several hundreds, the infinite ocean of the bliss of the mediated God results. This infinite ocean of bliss is the state of Parabrahman, who enters every incarnation (mediated God), be it energetic or human. Hence, the above concept is very much possible in the case of the human incarnation. But, bliss is also a quality of awareness only and cannot be the inherent characteristic of Parabrahman so that Parabrahman can become imaginable. Parabrahman is constantly associated with this bliss so that we easily mistake that bliss is the inherent characteristic of Parabrahman. Even awareness is the result of the omnipotency of Parabrahman and cannot be His inherent characteristic. Hence, Parabrahman always remains unimaginable. The Veda places this bliss (Aanandamaya kosha) as the topmost item of creation, which is higher than all other four component items (Annamaya kosha or food, Praanamaya kosha or inert energy linked to respiration, Manomaya kosha or mind and Vijnaanamaya kosha or intelligence) of a human being. This means that the ultimate aim of the human being is only excessive and continuous happiness called bliss.
People call God as sat (true existence), cit (awareness) and aananda (bliss). Awareness and bliss are associated characteristics, but still, since both are constantly associated, they can be treated as if they are inherent characteristics. The true existence (sat) is the real inherent characteristic of God. Hence, scholars call God more precisely as sat only (tat sat, which means that God is true existence only and the rest nature of God is unimaginable). Please understand all the above explanation slowly and patiently to perfectly assimilate the background concept. Now, tell Me — Is there any meaning if you suffer since God in human form is suffering by transferring your fruit of sin? Jesus also suffered during crucifixion in this way only. Even that suffering was the fruits of sins of His real devotees only. God will never suffer the fruits of sins of all humanity. In such a case, human beings will continue to do sins, thinking that God will suffer for their sins one day or the other. If God had already suffered all the sins in the form of Jesus, the future sins of the future generations will miss that opportunity and also God will be blamed as having partiality. God will never be foolishly partial in such a way because God is not the foolish father blindly fascinated towards His children (souls). Some priests have created this concept that Jesus suffered for the sins of the entire humanity so that conversion of people into their religion becomes easily facilitated! Emmanuel means God, who came to save His real devotees only and not to save the entire humanity.
Hence, you need not suffer when God suffers your fruit of sin because it is His pleasure to do so. You have not aspired for such transfer of sin. Don’t displease God by suffering for His suffering of your sin. Instead of suffering, you develop more and more true love (practical devotion instead of theoretical devotion through suffering mentally) to God so that you will reach the climax fruit, which is higher than the highest abode of God. You have shown your true love on God by practical sacrifice at the climax level. God is pleased with you and is responding practically by suffering the fruit of your sin. God said in the Gita that He will respond in the same phase in which you approached Him (Ye yathā mām… - Gita). He is very much pleased to follow this policy. Why should you displease Him by opposing His policy? Instead of practical devotion (or Karma Yoga, which is service and sacrifice of fruit of work), had you shown theoretical devotion and theoretical knowledge (Bhakti Yoga and Jnaana Yoga) to God, God also would have responded in the same theoretical phase without practically transferring the fruit of your sin onto Him.
This means that had you sung devotional songs on God with tears, God also would have sung songs with tears for your practical suffering. This is the most important concept in spiritual knowledge and every devotee must think about practical devotion as far as possible if such devotee has finished understanding all the concepts of true spiritual knowledge. Since this point is missing, God is always silent to respond to the devotees. This shall not be treated as business devotion because when you sacrificed practically, you never aspired for any practical fruit in return. This point proves that your devotion is not business devotion. It looks like business devotion, but it is not business devotion because you did not aspire for any practical fruit in return while doing the practical sacrifice. Such true love impressed God and He is spontaneously responding to you based on His own desire in free atmosphere in which there is no compulsion of business. In this way, you have to separate true devotion from business devotion because both devotions have a very narrow margin of separation so that you shall not mistake one for the other.
The above said policy of God (Ye yathā mām… - Gita) is justified on deep analysis and shall not be mistaken as business devotion proposed by God Himself. This is a very very subtle concept that can be very very easily misunderstood. Your name starts with the letter ‘c’ that represents the velocity of light (E=mc2) and you are a deep scholar in physics also, which deals with various fast travelling forms of energy. I studied Chemistry that deals with static and stable matter. Therefore, don’t be fast in your questions and patiently hear My stable answers.
Conclusion:-
i) Every devotee shall worship God with theoretical (Asambhuuti upaasana) as well as practical devotion (sambhuuti upaasana). Spiritual knowledge and theoretical devotion come under theoretical phase (Jnaana Yoga and Bhakti Yoga). Service and sacrifice to God come under practical phase (Karma Yoga). Practical devotion is the proof of theoretical devotion. Hence, a devotee shall do practical devotion as far as possible, at least depending on the extent of capacity and extent of real devotion.
ii) Due to selfishness-based greediness, practical devotion is avoided by souls and their theoretical devotion is false. Due to this reason only, God keeps silent.
iii) Even if the practical devotion is shown, it is purely based on some practical benefit in return from God. Hence, not only should practical devotion be done, but also it must be pure without any aspiration in return from God. Therefore, both theoretical and practical devotion must be done without any aspiration in return from God. Then only, God is pleased completely.
iv) God said that He will give practical fruits for theoretical devotion supported by practical devotion. He also told that He will give theoretical fruits to mere theoretical devotion. This shall not be misunderstood as the business devotion intended by God. Since there was no aspiration in return in the case of the devotee and God also gives fruit in a free atmosphere (without being compelled by the aspiration in return), this devotion is true devotion. The reason for the above saying (Ye yathā mām… - Gita) of God is only the justice of God to practically reward practical devotees and is not business.
v) In practical sacrifice, the magnitude of the sacrificed item is not important, but its share in the total possessed wealth is important. This means that a beggar donating one coin is doing 100% sacrifice whereas a rich donating hundred coins is doing very little sacrifice. Hence, there is no business in this true love to God. Business is neither on the side of the devotee nor on the side of God!
2. Does the verse in the Gita also mean the quantitative balance between practical sacrifice and the practical fruit given by God?
[Ms. Thrylokya asked:- In continuation of the answer given by You to Smt. Chanda, I like to ask the following question as an extension:- For the sake of justice, God told that theoretical fruits are for theoretical devotion and practical fruits are for the practical devotion. In view of the same justice, does this verse also mean the quantitative balance in practical sacrifice and the practical fruit given by God (In ethical business, there is exchange of an item and money quantitatively balanced and this is justified)? This means that if the practical sacrifice is 10 kg, the practical fruit also will be 10 kg and not 10mg?]
Swami replied:- Draupadi sacrificed a piece of cloth to God Krishna for bandage when His finger was cut. In this example, the practical sacrifice is 10 mg only whereas the practical fruit (God Krishna gave infinite number of sarees to Draupadi when Kauravas attempted to make her nude in the court) given by God is 1 crore kg. Here, there is no quantitative balance. If there is quantitative balance, it would become business devotion. Here, the important point is that when Draupadi did practical sacrifice of the piece of cloth weighing 10 mg, she did not expect any fruit in return weighing even 0.00000000000000000000001mg. This creates a free atmosphere for God so that He may give anything in return (1.0 crore kg) or may not give anything in return (0 mg). There is no business contract between the devotee and God. Draupadi gave that much needed for bandage and God Krishna gave that much needed to protect her. The exchange is simply need based, which is the exchange of true love between them. Moreover, God Krishna told this verse to such devotees, who are based on selfish-greediness, doing only theoretical devotion without even a trace of practical devotion. Even if a trace of practical devotion is done based on the maximum limit of capacity of the devotee without any aspiration in return, God may give a mountain of practical fruit. This can be seen in the case of Sudaamaa, who got infinite wealth for sacrificing a very little parched rice brought on loan.