Lessons from Swamis

The Dec 2020 Special Issue of The Vedanta Kesari was on the topic ‘Lessons from Swamis’. New content on this topic is being serialised this year.

Swami Madhuryananda

Nalini joined the Order at Baranagore Ashrama in 1934. He received mantra-diksha from Swami Shivanandaji and sannyasa from Swami Virajanandaji in 1944. He also served in Belur Math and Vrindavan centre. A qualified homeopath he treated patients and helped in relief works. Though he lost eyesight in later years, he managed his life independently. He attained mahasamadhi on 26 June 1983.

Eating amriti was his last desire

Madhuryanandaji stayed in Vrindavan for over twenty years in a room next to Saradeshanandaji. He was a homeopathic doctor. For the last ten years of his life, he was virtually blind. As long as both of them lived in the old ashrama, Saradeshanandaji would regularly sit beside him and read aloud the scriptures. In this connection, I remember one touching incident. Madhuryanandaji had a special liking for food. He would every now and then forget that he had eaten and would feel hungry the next hour. One day the swami in-charge of the kitchen went to his room and jokingly said, “Maharaj, what do you want to eat? Tell me, I’ll feed you to your heart’s content.” Madhuryanandaji replied, “I want to eat amriti.”* It was the month of June and amritiwas not available anywhere in Vrindavan because the sweet is prepared during October-November. The kitchen in-charge then said, “Maharaj, it is not time for amriti. Will you have any other sweets?” Madhuryanandaji was unyielding. He said, “No! I will have amritionly. Nothing else!” We all felt very sorry that we could not fulfill Maharaj’s wish. But what happened the next day surprised us all. The secretary swami of Vrindavan returned from Delhi with two bucketsful of amritis!! We were all taken aback. How was it possible? What had happened was that there was a feast in the memory of Swami Budhananda at our New Delhi ashrama. Those two buckets of amriti came from there. These amritiswere served to Madhuryanandaji. He ate two at lunch and then rested on his bed in the afternoon. In the evening his attendant noticed that Maharaj was lying unresponsive. I immediately went and saw that it was all over. What a tranquil death and how strange! Sri Ramakrishna removed even the last fragment of his child’s desire in a miraculous way!

We can hardly judge anybody from outside. Saradeshanandaji used to say, “Madhuryananda is staying in Vrindavan for so many years but I have never heard him complaining about anybody!”

Note: * Amriti also known as Jaangiri is an orange-coloured Indian sweet made of black gram.

— Swami Shuklatmananda

Srimat Swami Tapasyananda Ji (1904 – 1991) was one of the Vice-Presidents of the Ramakrishna Order. His deeply convincing answers to devotees’ questions raised in spiritual retreats and in personal letters have been published in book form as

Spiritual Quest: Questions & Answers.

Pariprasna is a selection from this book.

Pariprasna

QUESTION: How does a vision differ from a dream or a day-dream?

MAHARAJ: Visions and dreams are as north and south poles. Dreams and day-dreams are the products of one’s own mind and their quality, content and consequences are entirely based on the mind of the individual. But a true vision is a projection of the Cosmic Mind, the indwelling Divine, into the experiencing Jiva. Its form may be shaped by concepts and symbolic thoughts of the experiencing mind, but its content and significance transcend the individual, just as the world we experience in our ordinary consciousness transcends our individual minds. That even the true vision is experienced only by the experiencing mind, does not detract from its truth value. Because, if the right type of receiver, with which the true vision is experienced, is obtained by other minds, they also can experience it. Our ordinary receiver is our Antahkarana (inner organ), consisting of the mind and intellect. But this receiver can be improved or transformed. When we observe different species of beings, we see how the range of direct knowledge varies vastly from species to species with the development and refinement of the receiving apparatus. An insensitive particle of matter, when it becomes a living cell, becomes vaguely sensitive to an environment. As the cell evolves into a more and more complex organism, this vague sensitiveness develops into sense perceptions of varying nature along with the diversification of sense faculties. When the higher mind and, with it, the rational, ethical and aesthetic faculties develop, wonderful forms of apprehension come into being, which are as removed from rudimentary sense perception as rudimentary perception is from the pure insentiency of inorganic matter. It will thus be seen that, even from the study of evolution as known to science with the improvement of the receiving mechanism of organisms, there is observed a remarkable growth in the content and quality of the apprehensions that become possible with reference to the same environment.

If this fact is remembered, we can easily understand how with the improvement of the understanding of man, he can have newer and newer vistas of experience. Improvement of understanding comes from the purification of it by ridding it of the hold of sense-objects, by practice of devotion and surrender to God through dedicated action and meditation and by training the mind to withdraw from its outgoing tendencies and get in-gathered and concentrated on itself. By the practice of purification, devotion and inward concentration, the Kundalini, is roused, and it goes up by stages to the level of the brain. When this power is confined to the three lowest centres, upto the navel, consciousness is gross and earthbound, and can capture the Cosmic Mind only at the gross sensuous level of vibration. As this power is awakened and raised to higher levels, consciousness becomes more and more subtle and intensified and becomes a receiver, capable of capturing the subtle vibrations of the Cosmic Mind. The heart, the throat, the eyebrows and the brain are spoken of as the centres representing these higher vibrations.

The experiences that are open to consciousness at these subtle levels are the genuine visions. This idea may be explained by the example of a lift. When the lift is at one level, one has access, if one wants, to all objects at the level. When the lift rises, the lower levels are shut off and a new level opens to our eyes. Applying this analogy to the elevations of consciousness through the awakening of Kundalini, we can understand how the experience of the reality changes with the change of our receiver and our plane of reference. All objects, including our sense perception are, in their ideal form, projections of the Cosmic Mind at different levels of manifestation or vibration. Consciousness, attuning itself to the vibrations, captures with its receiver such of these vibrations as are, in tune, at its level. At the purely sensuous level, only sensuous presentations appear real and only sensuous values, like those connected with food, pleasures, ambition, etc seem worth pursuing. But when consciousness gains the capacity to capture subtle vibrations, experiences that are no less valid than those of earth consciousness but immensely superior to them in respect of their value, occur to sadhakas.

They are entirely different from the experiences of dreams, day-dreams, and of minds deranged by disease or by drugs. The first two are conditions that come when the awareness of the mind shrinks and gets diffused and the experiences that occur are only projections of one’s own mind, wherein the mind itself, along with its contents, is both the seer and the seen. It is maintained by Swami Vivekananda in his Raja Yoga that the sense of objectivity and reality which even such experiences give is due to the very minute stirring of Kundalini. But they are quite normal, and have no special effect on the health of the mind. But the experiences of drug addicts and deranged minds are due to the disintegration of the nervous system and the mind. No question of their reality can therefore arise. The greater the disintegration that takes place, the more are they drawn into these bizarre experiences.

Apart from the difference in their sources, the difference in their effects is visible to any observing mind. Dreams and day-dreams do not in any way increase one’s knowledge or improve the quality of one’s mind. Abnormal experiences of the mentally defective definitely lead to degeneration of the mind and they weaken and disintegrate one’s personality. Drugs give elation and illusory experiences as a result of the distortions they produce in the nervous system. They do not in any way help the integration and enrichment of personality, nor do they establish one in any abiding conviction or sense of settlement and peace. A drug addict becomes a slave to the drug and loses all self-control. As a man, he is much the worse for his experiences and, if he goes on unchecked, he ends up as a complete wreck.

Entirely different are the effects of the real experiences that come to a sadhaka as a result of the expansion and intensification of consciousness through holy living, self-control and inward concentration. He becomes more and more poised in the subject-consciousness; though his awareness is intensified, he maintains the detachment of a witness in regard to external objects, he has mastery of the senses, he gains great powers of concentration, his will gets integrated and powerful. His convictions regarding spiritual entities become settled and unshakable, he is above fear and all passions; he is full of peace and he emanates that peace wherever he goes. It is not that all persons of spiritual development should get visions, but that genuine visions leave a positive effects of the beneficial nature described above, indicating that the sadhaka is on the right path. They are not an end in themselves. But they are entirely different in their source and effect from dreams and day-dreams of normal people and from fantasies of deranged minds and drug addicts.

(Continued from page 22...)

North Kolkata: The Leela Kshetra

Kamal Kutir

It was on the second floor of Kamal Kutir that Sri Ramakrishna was first photographed in 1879. In the photograph we see him standing in Samadhi, lightly supported by Hridayram. In

Sri Ramakrishna in Samadhi front of this building is the memorial site where Keshab and many of his family members are buried. To the right of this building, is the worship room where Brahmo members now meditate. Since 1932, a premier girls’ educational institute, the Victoria Institute, has been operating in these premises.

Swami Saradanandaji’s parental house

Retracing our steps on Keshab Chandra Sen Street we reach Amherst Street crossing. Turning left onto this road and walking southward for around 500 metres we reach the crossing of Amherst Street and Mahatma Gandhi Road (previously known as Harrison Road). At the junction to our right is the birthplace of Sarat Chandra Chakravarty, later known as Swami Saradananda. His cousin Shashi Bhushan Chakravarty, later known as Swami Ramakrishnananda, also lived in this house to pursue his education. Saradanandaji’s father had a medical shop here. Unfortunately, there is no trace of the building now. With this, we conclude our visit to the locations where Sri Ramakrishna’s disciples and admirers lived and also the places Sri Ramakrishna visited. (concluded.)

References 1) Sri Ramakrishna and His Divine Play, p.835-6 2) God Lived with Them (2016), p. 87 3) The Gospel of Ramakrishna, p. 349 4) The Gospel of Ramakrishna, p. 924 5) God Lived with Them, p. 531

Navabidhan Brahma Samaj Kamalkutir -- Keshab Chandra Sen’s house Swami Saradanandaji’s birthplace and residence was located here

Believe Not

SWAMI SATYAPRIYANANDA

Most religions of the world and sects thereunder insist on an unquestioning belief in certain doctrines, dogmas, rituals, books, temples or forms. They assert that this unquestioning belief is essential for a person to be considered a follower of that religion or sect. And because of differences in these matters, they also come to blows. However, Swami Vivekananda pointed out that all these were secondary details; the only concern of religion was with manifesting the divinity which is latent within - either by work, or worship, or psychology, or philosophy, by one or more or all of these - and becoming free.

Unquestioning belief was not Narendranath’s cup of tea; he would not believe in the Vedas which proclaimed that the creator entered into his creation. How could the creator become one with the created, he wondered and made much fun of it. This doubt was resolved by one divine touch of Sri Ramakrishna. Narendranath would also not believe in the worship of images. Indeed, how could an intelligent person worship images made out of stone, wood or metal? Narendranath would not accept something just because everyone else accepted it. He always insisted on tangible proof. Sri Ramakrishna would say, “Narendra says that God with form is a mere idol. He says further: ‘What? He (Ramakrishna) still goes to the Kali temple!’”1

There is an interesting incident mentioned in The Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna. A sub-judge, who was a member of the Brahmo Samaj, raised the question: “Sir, does God show more grace to one than to another? If so, He can be accused of the fault of partiality.” It is usual to ascribe partiality to God also because we see that while one is born with all that one could desire for, another is born utterly poor without even the basic necessities of life and with physical handicap. A second allegation against God is that he must be sadistic for he must be enjoying the discomfiture of a handicapped person. In reply to the question of the subjudge, Sri Ramakrishna explained at length, “What are you saying? Do you mean to say that the moon and a glow-worm are the same, though both give light? Iswar Vidyasagar asked me the same question. He said, ‘Is it a fact, Sir, that God gives more power to one and less to another?’ ‘God’, I said, ‘exists in every being as the All-pervading Spirit. He is in the ant as well as in me. But there are different manifestations of His Power in different beings. If all are the same, then why have we come here to see you, attracted by your renown? Have you grown a pair of horns? Oh, no! It is not that. You have compassion; you have scholarship; there is a greater degree of these virtues in you than in others. That is the reason you are so well known.’ Don’t you see that there are men who, single-handed, can defeat a hundred persons? Again, one man takes to his heels in fear of another; you see such a person too. If there are not different manifestations of power in

different beings, then why did people respect Keshab Sen so much? It is said in the Gita that if a man is respected and honoured by many, whether it be for his scholarship or his music or his oratory or anything else, then you may know for certain that he is endowed with a special divine power.” A Brahmo made the jarring comment to the sub-judge, “Why don’t you accept what he says?” To this Sri Ramakrishna sharply responded saying, “What sort of man are you? To accept words without conviction! Why, that is hypocrisy! I see you are only a counterfeit.”2

Sri Ramakrishna went to see Pandit Sasadhar Tarkachudamani on the day of the Car Festival of 1885. In the course of the conversation, he instructed the Pandit thus: “Those persons only who have got power direct from the Mother of the universe can truly become preachers of religion; the grandiloquence of other so-called preachers is in vain.” He then asked for a glass of water to drink. … As soon as Sri Ramakrishna asked for water, a person wearing tilaka, strings of beads and other emblems of religion on his body, respectfully brought a glass of water and gave it to Sri Ramakrishna. But when Sri Ramakrishna was about to drink it, he could not do so. Another man, who was beside him, saw it and threw away the water in the glass. Filling it with water again, he brought the glass to Sri Ramakrishna, who drank a little of it and bade good-bye to the Pandit for that day. Everyone thought that something had fallen into the water brought at first, and hence it was that Sri Ramakrishna did not drink it. Narendranath said that he was sitting very near Sri Ramakrishna then. He, therefore, saw clearly that there was neither a mote nor a bit of straw nor any other kind of dirt in the water; yet Sri Ramakrishna had refused to drink it. On pondering over the cause of it, Narendranath thought that the glass of water was perhaps polluted by ‘contactual impurity’. For, he had heard Sri Ramakrishna say that it was impossible for his hand to proceed to take any kind of food or drink brought by those in whom worldly-mindedness was viciously prevalent, who dishonestly earned money by cheating, robbery, or doing harm to others in any other way, and who externally assumed the guise of religion as a mere ruse for satisfying their lust and greed. He was also heard to say that he could know the nature of such persons intuitively, and that his hand would invariably contract if he touched such food unconsciously. Narendranath said that as soon as this thought arose in his mind, he made a firm resolve to ascertain the truth of the matter taking advantage of the above-mentioned incident. So Narendranath helped Sri Ramakrishna into the carriage and expressed his inability to go with him, as an urgent piece of business detained him there. As Narendranath was acquainted with the younger brother of the man with the emblems of religion on his person, he called him to a secluded place after Sri Ramakrishna had left and began to put questions to him about the character of his elder brother. Questioned thus, he hesitated at first, but afterwards said, “How can I speak of the bad character of my elder brother?” Narendranath said, “I could understand the truth from that. Later I questioned another person of that household who was acquainted with me, and came to know everything. Thus freed from doubt, I wondered how Sri Ramakrishna could know people’s minds.”3 Sri Ramakrishna affirmed that the Divine Mother poured knowledge as a gushing stream of water into his mind and that the supply of knowledge was endless.

Narendra could not accept a man, “an imperfect mortal”, as his guru. As a member of the Brahmo Samaj, he could not believe that a human intermediary was necessary between

man and God. Moreover, he openly laughed at Sri Ramakrishna’s visions as hallucinations. Sri Ramakrishna was grateful to the Divine Mother for sending him one who doubted his realisations. Often he asked Narendranath and his other disciples to test him as the moneychangers test their coins. He laughed at Narendranath’s biting criticism of his spiritual experiences and samadhi.4

Even a few days before Sri Ramakrishna’s entering mahasamadhi doubts persisted in Narendranath’s mind! Narendranath said to himself, “If in the midst of this racking physical pain he declares his Godhead, then only shall I accept him as an Incarnation of God.” He was alone by Sri Ramakrishna’s bedside. It was a passing thought, but Sri Ramakrishna merely smiled. Gathering his remaining strength, he distinctly said, “He who was Rama and Krishna is now, in this body, Ramakrishna — but not in your Vedantic sense.” Narendranath was stricken with shame for doubting the genuineness of Sri Ramakrishna.5

Narendranath’s mindset was scientific. No scientist simply believes. He may have some axioms dear to his heart. Yet he collects data, analyses them, classifies them, and then correlates his findings into a scientific truth, which he expounds as a scientific law. The only axiom that Narendranath could accept was the truth of one’s own realisations.

Among the various incarnations and prophets the world has seen, Buddha was the only incarnation who said, “I do not care to know your various theories about God. What is the use of discussing all the subtle doctrines about the soul? Do good and be good. And this will take you to freedom and to whatever truth there is.” ... He is the first great reformer the world has seen. He was the first who dared to say, “Believe not because some old manuscripts are produced, believe not because it is your national belief, because you have been made to believe it from your childhood; but reason it all out, and after you have analysed it, then, if you find that it will do good to one and all, believe it, live up to it, and help others to live up to it.”6 The scientific mind of Narendranath caught the scientific spirit in Buddha’s words.

Expounding his stand on what religion is, Narendranath said, “Religion is above reason, supernatural. Faith is not belief, it is the grasp on the Ultimate, an illumination. First hear, then reason and find out all that reason can give about the Atman; let the flood of reason flow over It, then take what remains. If nothing remains, thank God you have escaped a superstition. When you have determined that nothing can take away the Atman, that It stands every test, hold fast to this and teach it to all.”7

Here was Sri Ramakrishna who had firsthand experience of religion — who had realised the all-pervading consciousness, in the image and in the vessels used for worship, and in people even of questionable character. To him the Divine Mother was a reality. He could see the Divine Mother, talk to Her and receive guidance from Her. She spoke through Sri Ramakrishna. It is quite easy to see that the scientific temperament of Narendranath found all this difficult to digest or accept without direct personal experience. If Sri Ramakrishna could see the Divine Mother and talk to Her more intensely than he perceived and talked with Narendranath, he wanted direct proof. Narendranath got that direct proof one day!

It is hard to believe that poverty at home drove Narendranath to approach Sri Ramakrishna to plead with the Divine Mother on his behalf — the same Divine Mother whose presence in the image he had questioned; whose visions that Sri Ramakrishna had, he had dubbed as hallucination! But he did just that! Sri Ramakrishna, however, asked Narendranth

to approach the Divine Mother direct with no intermediary. Narendranath walked to the temple and stood before the image of the Divine Mother and saw there not the mere image which he thought was being worshipped but the conscious presence of the Divine Mother. It is recorded history that Narendranath could not stoop so low as to ask of Her material comforts; instead he prayed for knowledge, devotion, discrimination and dispassion. No longer could he, with his scientific spirit, question his own perception. One can never question one’s own realisations. But that meant a great struggle. No wonder, later seeing his disciple Sister Nivedita’s difficulty in totally accepting him, he observed, “Let none regret that they were difficult to convince! I fought my Master for six years with the result that I know every inch of the way! Every inch of the way!”8

It was intriguing to the Western audience, brought up in the religious tradition which required of them blind acceptance of the dogmas of their religion, when the preacher from distant India allowed them to ask any number of questions at the end of every lecture. Swami Vivekananda knew that the conclusions of Vedanta could withstand any amount of reasoning by the thinking masses. Sometimes Swami Vivekananda shared his views with a large audience. Naturally he expressed the same truth in the same lecture from different angles of vision, each angle of vision being truth. Some agreed and Swami Vivekananda said that that thought was meant for that person. Some did not agree and Swami Vivekananda said, with a smile, that that thought was not meant for that person. The

possibility of the same truth adapting to the needs of different peoples of the world required prophets to give expression as would satisfy them and hence there may be some differences between prophetic utterances. However, each prophet talked about the same God, an observation expressed by Sri Ramakrishna in the words, “all jackals howl alike.” On 7 April 1926, Swami Akhandananda, in his speech at the final session of the first Convention of the Ramakrishna Math and Ramakrishna Mission, said: “One day a man denied the idea of the existence of God before Sri Ramakrishna. And mark you what Sri Ramakrishna, who was ever so deeply absorbed in ecstatic communion with the Divine Mother, said to him in reply: ‘Well, who told you that there is a God? I would not ask you to believe in any such idea. But then, you cannot with reason deny that there is a Power working behind the universe. One may attribute any name to it, but it remains there all the same. Why not take it in that spirit and try to know more intimately what you believe in? Know this and be happy. To be sure, mere belief cannot give rest to your inner cravings. Knowledge — true knowledge of the mysteries of this phenomenal existence — alone can do that.’”9 Therefore, we are not to merely believe, for that is not religion; religion is realisation, not tall talk, however philosophical it may sound. When one has religious experience, one will not be able to doubt it in the least. If there is doubt in the mind, then it is not religious progress. Hiding under the umbrella of belief, we should not fill the mind with the thoughts of others. That will only create confusion and not help us to face the tough challenges of life. tt

References: 1) The Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna. p. 225 2) Ibid., p. 625-26 3) Sri Ramakrishna, the Great Master, pp. 685-86 4) Gospel. pp. 57-58 5) Ibid., p. 72 6) The Complete Works of Swami Vivekananda. 1: 117 7) Ibid., 7: 60 8) Ibid., 9: 399 9) God Lived with Them, p. 585