10 Feb 2025
Smt. Chhanda asked:
1a. Is worldly knowledge only Rajasic and Tamasic?
[Recently in reply to Prof. Prasad’s question, You told that Sattvam is characterized by knowledge and such knowledge is also spiritual knowledge. Based on this, can we say the following:
Does it mean that all worldly knowledge is Rajasik and Tamasik only and there is no Sattvik worldly knowledge?]
Swami replied:- You are exactly correct.
b. An atheist cannot have any Sattvic quality?
Swami replied:- An atheist cannot have inherent Sattvic quality because he is always with ego (Rajas) that he is the final master of the creation. The atheist is always with ignorance about God (Tamas) because he is always not accepting the existence of God since he fears to lose his imaginary position of ultimate master.
2. What is the lesson to be learnt from the following incident?
[When Ramkrishna Paramahamsa asked His disciple Shri Girish Ghosh to do smaranam and mananam as much as possible. The disciple replied it’s not possible for him. Then Paramahamsa asked him to do only twice, once in the morning and once before going to bed. That too he could not accept. Then Ramakrishna asked him to give Him the authority i.e. He will do on his behalf (“Tabe tumi amay bakalma dao” is the exact wording). Girish Ghosh very happily accepted this. But later on, he realized and felt tremendous pressure because of this. By this act of Shri Ramakrishna, what lesson can we take?]
Swami replied:- This means that devotion (love) to God is not like a ritualistic work that can be done by some other person on behalf of a devotee. Nobody says to his friend to love his girlfriend on behalf of him since he is going on a vacation for some time!
3. Were the Vanaras knowing that the Lord would come in human form and were waiting to serve Him?
[Swami, I will request You to answer the same question once again on Gopikas and Hanuman in one side and other monkeys participating in the side of Lord Rama on the other side. My mind being very limited, is not able to understand it properly. I will write the basis for my doubt on asking the same question again and again. Gopikas, being the ordinary souls (though they were sages), selected Lord Krishna above all by identifying Him as the God in human form. They could leave everything intentionally for the sake of God leaving all worldly options. There is every chance of making mistake being ordinary souls. Still, they did not fear and voted for Lord God only. But in case of the monkeys, they were the soldiers in the side of king Sugreeva even though they were angels. So, they had no other option other than fighting for Lord Rama being the soldiers of King Sugreeva, who had promised to help Lord Rama in the war against Ravana. They are forced to participate in the war. Any soldier has to fight for his king and he may lose his life in the war, which is very natural for him. And one more point also is there. Being angels, they will not make any mistake unlike Gopikas. Were they knowing that Lord in human form will come like Hanuman (in the role of course) and they were waiting to serve Him? I have no intention to denigrate their sacrifice at all but from the view point of service and sacrifice, are they really equal to either Gopikas or Hanuman? Please take this pain again to explain.]
Swami replied:- Even though monkeys had to fight on the side of their king, their individual sincerity in the work of God Rama was excellent. We are seeing even today that an employee is very very sincere in his/her job work whereas some other employee is not at all serious in the job work even to the minimum extent. Hence, the individual devotion of each monkey is to be evaluated. Monkeys were angels whereas Gopikas were sages. Sages are always greater than angels in the purity of devotion to God. Hanuman is God Himself acting in the role of a devotee to guide the devotees in the creation. All these examples are gold-medalists. The human devotee can learn the care in the devotion from any example. We are in the level of learning alphabets and we can learn these alphabets from the teacher of any level i.e., whether the teacher is a school teacher or a college lecturer or the university professor.
4. What are the different contexts of Aavarana, Vikshepa, Mala and Vaasana, Samskaara, Guna?
[Swami, this is also a repeated question. Even though You have replied to my recent question on the contexts of Aavarana, Mala, Vikshepa and Vaasana, Samskaara, Guna, still I did not get my answer. I would like to request You again to please explain on these two different contexts? At Your divine lotus feet always, Chhanda]
Swami replied:- The strength of worldly fascination due to ignorance increases as we go forward in the list of i) Aavarana, Vikshepa and Mala, ii) Vaasana, Samskaara and Guna. The first triad indicates ignorance whereas the second triad indicates worldly fascination. Ignorance is the basis of worldly fascination. Spiritual knowledge is the basis of fascination to God. Ignorance means the lack of knowledge of God. Knowledge of the world promotes ignorance. Even if knowledge of the world exists, there is no danger if fascination to the world is absent. Fascination to God promotes spiritual knowledge.
★ ★ ★ ★ ★