PART-TWO***PROF ANIL KUMAR'S SATSANG: BABA'S CONVERSATIONS WITH STUDENTS.

[Guest guest]

PART-TWO *** PROF ANIL KUMAR'S SATSANG: BABA'S CONVERSATIONS WITH STUDENTS -------------------- “Ramayana has a message to convey” Now we come to the next episode for the month of August 2002. Swami, most unusually that evening, sat in His chair after interviews. He was in a relaxed mood and, while looking at me said nicely, “Ask Me some questions.” We didn’t know what to ask or what not to ask, what type of questions He wanted, what His mood was. (Laughter) “Swami?”

“Yes! Ask some questions.” Then I thought the convenient thing to do would be to ask a question on the Ramayana -- that would be less risky. (Laughter) If I asked some questions on deep philosophy, He might say, “You selfish fellow, so many students are here. Ask questions that will be useful to them.“ If I said, “Swami, grant me an interview tomorrow” He might say, “That’s not a question. You are a selfish fellow! Fish is better than selfish.” So I thought it would be convenient and safe to ask a question on the Ramayana. I said, “Swami, there are so many epics in Hindu Vedanta. The story of Krishna is ‘Bhagavatha’. The story of Rama is ‘Ramayana’. The story of the Pandavas and the Kauravas and their battle at Kurukshetra is ‘Mahabharatha’. These three are important epics. There is so much mythology, yet these three are prominent. I have one question. “ “What is it? Ask.” “We have so many versions of the Ramayana: A great saint named Tulsidas wrote his own version

of Ramayana called ‘Ramacharitamanas’. Valmiki composed the original Ramayana. A woman by the name of Molla wrote another Ramayana -- the ‘Molla Ramayana’. There’s a gentleman named Kamban who wrote yet another Ramayana, the ‘Kamban Ramayana’. Sage Vyasa wrote still another spiritual Ramayana, the ‘Adhyatma Ramayana’. What are all these? Which one is true? (Laughter) Why so many? Why isn’t it so with the other epics? Why aren’t there a lot of Mahabharatha’s? Why are there only a lot of Ramayana’s? Isn’t it confusing? Of all the versions, which one is correct? Which one should I follow? Which one is authentic?” Then Bhagavan laughed. He was so compassionate. He said, “There are so many versions of the Ramayana because it has a message to convey on how one should behave -- at the individual level, in one’s

social conduct and ethical nature as a householder, as a brother, as a ruler, as a husband, as a friend and as an ideal man. All these aspects are dealt with very well in the Ramayana. The social, ethical, moral, individual and political roles -- all these roles are put together and rolled into one, dealt with in detail in that holy epic, the Ramayana. Each author focused on one of these aspects. Thus we have so many Ramayana’s. Some have dealt in depth with the devotional aspect. Some have dealt with the social aspect or the individual aspect. The perfected, multi-dimensional aspects of the Ramayana have been dealt with by many people on different occasions in different periods of time. Therefore, we have many versions of Ramayana.” “If you have total faith in God, you will never question His actions” Then I realised that it would be all right for me to take a risk, as His mood seemed good. Hence, He would be lenient. I took the risk and said, “Swami, if Krishna is God, how can He afford to be partial to the Pandavas? Can God be partial? The Kauravas are also His children. He should be impartial. The whole Mahabharatha shows Krishna’s total partiality toward the Pandavas. So, how can He be God? I can’t reconcile it. I know fully well that You are going to support Krishna because You are that same Krishna. But still I am not able to understand

it. Please explain.” Bhagavan said, “All your misnomers, all your misconceptions, all your misapprehensions are signs of your total, utter and complete ignorance. (Laughter) Your ignorance is responsible for this confusion, for this sorry state of affairs. Secondly, you do not have total faith in Krishna as God. If you had total faith in God, you would never question His actions. If you say Krishna was partial, and if He was partial, can He be God? It means that you have no faith in Krishna as God. So, absence of faith, lack of devotion and ignorance are responsible for such a lopsided view or wrong impression.” “Oh, I see.” Now it is

my turn to respond. “OK, Swami, but how do You justify that? How do You justify Krishna being partial to the Pandavas? That is my question. I am ignorant; I lack faith; I am sufficiently foolish -- I accept that. But what is Your answer to my question about Krishna being partial to the Pandavas? Can He do that?” Then Swami said, “All right, I’ll give you a straight answer. The Pandavas followed Krishna completely. The Pandavas followed Krishna’s command totally, fully and unconditionally and, because they followed Krishna totally, He supported them. They were completely devoted to Him. It wasn’t partial, conditional or part-time devotion. Theirs was total devotion. In times of humiliation, in times of pleasure and pain, in challenging situations and in war, they followed Krishna

totally. So Krishna supported them. How can you say He was partial?” “Oh Swami! My case is lost. (Laughter) Now I understand. God cannot be partial. He may look partial, but only because of our ignorance. So, if God is to support us, if God is to stand by us, we have got to follow His command totally. We must develop trust in Him unconditionally.” Swami said, “Had you known this earlier, you would not have asked this question!” (Laughter) Then I said, “Swami, You said Yourself that I am a man of ignorance. So naturally I asked this question. (Laughter) My question is justifiable, while Your answer made me free from ignorance. I am no longer ignorant of the facts.” (Laughter) Everyone joined in the laughter. With that, the evening session concluded. Ram ChuganiKobe, Japanrgcjp