Quest # 1: Why to believe the Vedas to be authoritative and of Divine origin and
true?

Answer: "The book in which God is described as He is viz., Holy, Omniscient,
Pure in nature, character and attributes, Just, Merciful, etc., and in which
nothing is said that is opposed to the laws of nature, reason, the evidence of
direct cognisance, etc., the teaching of the highly learned altruistic teachers
of humanity (A’ptas), and the intuition of pure souls, and in which the laws,
nature, and properties of matter and the soul are propounded as they are to be
inferred from the order of nature as fixed by God, is the book of Divine
revelation. Now The Vedas alone fulfil all the above conditions, hence they are
the revealed books.” [Light Of Truth----VII]

Man is finite in knowledge of his surroundings where he stays and does mistakes
hence cannot be perfect, because he is infinitesimal unity, whilst God is
infinite, All-pervading, Omniscient, so His knowledge ---The Vedas are the only
ATHOROTATIVE AND TRUSTED by all. The Vedas being Divine in origin, are free from
error and axiomatic (Swatah-Pramana), in other words the Vedas are their own
authority, whilst other books, dependent upon the Vedas for their authority.

"As the parents are kind to their children and wish for their welfare, so has
the Supreme Spirit, out of kindness to all men, revealed. The Vedas by whose
study men are freed from ignorance and error, and may attain the light of true
knowledge and thereby enjoy extreme happiness as well as advance knowledge and
promote their welfare" [S.P. VII]

Since time immemorial, till the Great War of Mahabharata the scholars treated
The Vedas as the repository of all true knowledge and interpreted them
accordingly. If The Vedas had not possessed science the various scientific
developments would not have taken place.

Great sage Vyasa, the author of the Vedanta Darshana unequivocally accepted this
idea. Shri Shankaracharya comments in his Sutra "Shastrayonitvat (1-1-3)"

Vedas are the scriptures of all true-knowledge. He attributes them with the
adjectives "Saravidyo-pvrinhita" and "Sarvajnakalpa"

The great sage of modern era “Maharishi Dayanand Saraswati” confidently declared
in his book "Rigvedaadi-Bhaashyabhumika" ‘in which he collected some very
conspicuous facts of science “The Vedas are the scripture of all true
knowledge, is such a gift to mankind on his part that he deserves the gratitude
of posterity.”

Quest # 2: The Vedas are the creation of God. Any proof?

Answer: There are many proofs in the Vedas that show that the Vedas are the
books of Divine revelation.

The Yajurveda (31-3) explains that Agni = Rigveda (glorification), Vayu =
Yajurveda (communion), Aaditya = Samaveda (emancipation) and Angira =
Atharvaveda = sacred word i.e. God's word.

· “Tasmaad Yajyaat Sarvahuta RrichahSaamaani jagyire” (Rigveda 10-90-9)
i.e. “God has created the Rig, Yajur, Sama and Atharva Vedas”.

· “Brahma Padavaayam BraahmanemaAdheepatihi” (Atharvaveda 12-5-4) Which
mean, “God is knower and revealer of the Vedas”.

The Yajur Veda (31-7) says: "The Rigveda, the Yajurveda, the Samaveda and
the Atharvaveda were produced by the Supreme and perfect Being, Parabrahman, who
possesses the attributes of self-existence, consciousness and bliss, who is
Omnipotent and universally adored. The meaning is that the four Vedas were
revealed by God alone."

· The Atharvaveda (10-23-4-10) says--- "Who is that Great Being who
revealed the Rig Veda, the Yajur Veda, the Sama Veda and the Atharva Veda? He is
the Supreme Spirit who created the universe and sustains it."

· The Yajur Veda (XL-8) says--- "The Great Ruler of the universe, who is
self-existent, All-pervading, Holy, Eternal and Formless, has been eternally
instructing His subjects --the immortal souls --in all kinds of knowledge for
their good through the Veda."

[For further information inquisitive readers should refer and study
--Atharvaveda 12 Th. Khanda, 5 Th. Sukta and mantra # 1 to 73]

(Atharvaveda 19-5-13, 12-5-4, 10-7-14) (Yajurveda 2/21, 23/61, 23/62, 31/7), the
all-sustaining God is the author of the Vedas.

Quest # 3: How many Vedas are there three or four?

Answer: There are four Vedas, which contain the knowledge of three subjects,
i.e. Knowledge, action and communion. [Glorification--communion--emancipation]

The books called the Rigveda, the Yajur Veda, the Sama Veda and the Atharva
Veda---mantras Samhitas only and no other.

One who believes that there are three Vedas is completely wrong and should

rectify him self. The Vedas are four in number.

Quest # 4: Why there are only four Vedas?

Answer: God has given us a beautiful body hence it is our duty to protect it.
What is the use of this precious body if there is no knowledge. Human race is
the best because only in this race one gets a proper knowledge of the soul,
Prakriti and God, and this he acquires only from the Vedas.

Knowledge, deeds, communion and emancipation (science) are the four subjects of
the Vedas and are complete when combined, otherwise there is no use of studying
only one subject or the other.

God has revealed His true knowledge to men only because man has intellect to
grasp the proper knowledge from the Rig-Veda and after getting that proper
knowledge he should act accordingly, which is taught in the Yajur-Veda. There is
a possibility that man may become egoistic after getting knowledge and
performing good deeds, so God has given him the Sama- Veda for balancing him
i.e. communion with God. When man has developed himself with knowledge, virtuous
deeds and communion with the Supreme Being, he becomes happy in his life, but
still wanders in search for something more. Lastly God provides the Atharva-Veda
in which man gets the knowledge of true science i.e. the science of the soul and
the Supreme Soul (God). The bliss of God is possible through the Atharva Veda.
Hence all the four Vedas are essential to acquire the correct and complete
knowledge of the matter (Prakriti), the soul and God with which he is free from
all sorrows and pains, when he renounces the worldly
attraction and temptation, and gets the Bliss of God.

When a man acquires the knowledge of the four Vedas
(Knowledge--deeds--communion--science), he is qualified enough to proceed to his

life's goal i.e. to get the bliss of God.

The four Vedas are the four pillars of success in a man's life, hence the four
Vedas are essential. "WHAT IS MAN'S CAPACITY AND CAPABILITY TO ACQUIRE THE TRUE
KNOWLEDGE FOR HIS EMANCIPATION, GOD HAS REVEALED THE TRUE KNOWLEDGE COMPLETE AND
CORRECT IN THE VEDAS NO LESS, NO MORE."

There are mantra revelated by knowledge in the Rigveda. The Yajur Veda mantras
are revelated by actions i.e. what is right and what is wrong, and what to do
and what is prohibited by virtue. In the Sama Veda most mantras are about
communion with God. Lastly in the Atharva Veda there are root mantras of science
on different subjects along with mantras related to medical science.

THE GREAT SAGE MAHARISHI SWAMI DAYANAND SARASVATI HAS SAID IN THE TEN
COMMANDMENTS OF ARYA SAMAJ " THE VEDAS ARE THE SCRIPTURES OF TRUE KNOWLEDGE AND
IT IS THE PREMIER DUTY OF ALL ARYANS TO RECITE AND TEACH THE VEDAS.

God is Omniscient and only He is the true friend of the soul, because the soul
has limited power and knowledge. God is the greatest teacher and guide who
revealed His knowledge in the beginning of the world after human life had been
created, for the betterment of mankind.

"As parents are kind to their children and wish for their welfare, so does the
Supreme Spirit, out of kindness to all mankind revealed the Vedas by whose study
men are freed from ignorance and error, and may attain the light of true
knowledge and thereby enjoy extreme happiness as well as advance knowledge and
promote their welfare" [S.P. VII]

"The Vedas are the true knowledge of God. In the beginning after human being had
been created, the Supreme Spirit made the Vedas known to Brahma through Agni,
etc., i.e., Brahma learnt the four Vedas from Agni, Vayu, Aaditya and Angira

(Manu Smriti 1-23)."

Quest # 5: If infinite God's full knowledge is in the Vedas, then knowledge of
God will become finite?

Answer: Whatever knowledge, the soul required for its salvation, God has
revealed the same in the Vedas. To get more knowledge than required is of no
use. God is Omniscient. He knows better about the soul's capacity for acquiring
knowledge.

GOD is infinite by nature, His essence, powers, attributes are all infinite, so
is His knowledge. The soul is an infinitesimal unity hence, remains, finite in
knowledge, though pure in nature. He acquires the knowledge according to its

capacity. God has given him correct and complete knowledge; no less no more

"A’rsha Granthas" or Religious books?

Answer: There exists the four Vedas, i.e. the Rigveda, the Yajur Veda, the Sama
Veda and the Atharva Veda.

(1) In the Rig-Veda there are 10 Mandalas (Volumes), 85 Anuvakas (Sections),
1028 Suktas and 10589 Mantras (verses)

(2) In the Yajur Veda there are 40 Adhyaaya (Chapters) in which contains 1975
Mantras.

(3) In the Sama Veda there are 1875 Mantras. And

(4) In the Atharva Veda three are 10 Mandalas (Volumes), 20 Khandas (Sections)
and 5977 Mantras.

The total mantras in the four Vedas are 10589 + 1975 + 1875 + 5977 = 20,416 i.e.
Twenty thousand four hundred and sixteen mantras.

Readers will be surprised to know that the total letters of the four Vedas is
864000, which is God's creation and are eternal. The Vedas are the religious
books for all mankind.

There are four UpVedas+ or Sub-Veda (Here the word ‘Veda’ stands for education),
under which comes six Vedangas (Limbs)*, six Upangas (sub-limbs)**, i.e. six
school of thought propounded by seers and sages, four Brahmans*** and --the
Vedas alone are held to be Divine in origin, the rest were made by R'shis--seers
of the Veda and nature. There are ten Upanishads.

[They are four in number: --(i) the Ayurveda or the medical scriptures; (ii) the
Arthaveda or the technological sciences; (iii) the Dhanurveda or the science of
archery; devastating weapon and missiles and diplomacy; and (iv) the
Gandharvaveda or the science of music.]

{* They are six in number: --(I) Shiksha [Phonetics science of morals and
duties]; (ii) Kalpa [geometry]; (iii) Vyakarana [Grammar]; (iv) Chhanda [metrics
i.e. Philology]; (v) Nirukta [etymology] and (vi) Jyotisha [astronomy and
astrology].}

{** They are six in number: --Purva Mimansa, Vaisheshika, Nyaaya, Yoga, Sankhya

and

Vedanta these are also commonly called the six schools of Indian philosophy.
They have profound respect for the four Vedas. These philosophical system show
that human mind soared to highest peak of the imagination. Usually most people
believe Vedanta means ending portion of the Veda, which is wrong. The real
meaning of "Vedanta" is so called "the theory of the Vedas." Here ‘Anta’ stands
for the theory and not for the end.}

[*** They are four in number: -- Aitreya, Shatapatha, Sama and Gopatha.]

[++ There are also ten Upanishads e.g. I'sh, Kena, Katha, Prashna, Munduka,
Muanduka, Aitreya, Taitreya, Chhandogya and Vrihadaranyka. Upanishads, which
deal with the spiritual science as well as physical science in some cases, are
the offshoots of the careful examination of the Vedic verses.]

Whatever is enjoined by the Vedas, are right, whilst whatever is condemned by
them we believe to be wrong. Among the Shruties, manu Smriti alone is

authoritative, the interporated verses being excepted.

Quest # 7: What does "Shakha" (division of the Vedas) mean and how many Shakhas
are there in the Vedas?

Answer: According to the great sage Gemini, writer of Meemansa Shastra (1-130),
the teaching pattern it is called "Shakha". Branch, part or division etc. are
not the correct meaning of Shakha but these Shakhas are the pattern of teaching
--the way of teaching, --the style of teaching of the Vedas.

It is written in the Mahabhashya-Karika (Ashtadhyayi 4-1-63) that Charan is
meant for Gotra, here Charan means --the style of teaching. In short the
branches of The Vedas means the style / pattern of teaching and they are not
division or tree-like branches.

According to the Mahabhashya, it is written that there are 1131 branches of the
Vedas. In the Sarvanukrammi its number is 1130, in the Chakraviyuh its number is
only 116. Swami Dayanand Saraswati has quoted the number of the branches of The
Vedas as 1127, in his immortal book "Light of Truth".

First it was the great sage named "Shakal" who had taught the style of teaching
of The Vedas. Shakal is very ancient. By way of Mandalas--Anuvakas--Suktas,
Shakal has popularized his brand what is known as that "the teaching of Shakal".
It is said that all other patterns of teaching (Shakhas) are come in existence
after Shakal. Where there are Mandalas, Anuvakas, Sukta, they are known as
Shakal’s literature.

om shanti shanti shanti 

K:  Is this entire world a form of God? 

V:  No. This world is the manifestation of matter called Prakrithi, God is formless. 

K: Many big Scholars, learned men are found stating that “this world is made out of God. From God ether has appeared, and from ether, the air, and from the air, the fire, and from the fire, the water, and from the water the earth and from the earth food and other animals have been formed” 

V: This statement is okay if God is accepted as the efficient cause of Creation and not as its material cause. It is totally wrong if God is understood as the material cause of the world.  God is the Creator but he is the not the base material of the world. There are three reasons for Creation. There are three things which are beginingless [Anadi] and the Anadis are three in number. They are God, Soul, and Prakrithi. God is the efficient cause, Prakrithi is the material cause [base material requiring for creation] and the factors like Time, direction are other ordinary causes. The creator is responsible for creation. The thing which is given a shape is the material cause. For ex, there is a goldsmith who prepares ornaments. The goldsmith here is the efficient cause and the gold metal is the material cause. If God were to be the material cause and ether is from Him then it should be noted that when sound is not the attribute of God then how sound would have appeared in the Sky? “Karana Gunapoorvaka Gunodhristah” The attribute of a material is reflected in its function. The attributes of gold is reflected in the ornaments. When Sound is not the attribute of God then Sound would not have appeared in the ether or sky. Nothing emerges out of Nothing. Hence it is clear that the Sky [Akash] has not been created out of God. Similarly, the air [gaseous substance] did not emerge out of Sky. Because how Sound which is the attribute of Akash could emerge out of Air [vayu]?  Fire [Agni] did also not emerge out Akash i.e. Air.  This is because the Air which has grasp as its essential ingredient could not give rise to Fire [Agni] whose attribute is the Form. In a similar manner, coldness which is the attribute of Water [Jal] also did not emerge out of Fire [Agni].  Water also did not give rise to Earth [Prithvi]. This is because smell which is the attribute of the Earth [Prithvi] is not found in water. The meaning of Upanishad verse quoted by you does not mean that God is the material cause nor it means one substance after another started emerging. Thasmadya Athasmadana Akash Sambhootah, meaning the unmanifested, omnipresent all powerful force [God] created the Sky or ether. All other elements were created by God with the help of Prakrithi.  

K:  If God were to take the help of Prakrithi [primordial matter] then He is deemed to be subservient to Prakrithi, for He cannot create without the aid of Prakrithi. 

V: God does not take shelter under Prakrithi. But he converts the Prakrithi in the form of World. He does not take the help of any other agency in his job and converts the Prakrithi into a functioning world. Prakrithi is not the instrument. The God’s activity is reflected on it.  This could be explained as under. “Ram slaps on Bheem.  Ram is the principal doer and his activity falls on Bheem.  Is it wise thing to say that Ram is subservient to Bheem for his slapping? Perhaps it is correct to say that slapping would not have come off without Bheem. Similarly, God could not have created the world without Prakrithi” could be your way of explaining things.  But dear sister!  Prakrithi is also beginning less {Anadi] like God and hence to argue that “without Prakrithi” God is helpless is only a wild conjecture. By transforming the primordial matter called Prakrithi into a world the power of God becomes manifested and there is no question of his subservience to Prakrithi.  God grants life to soul mates and he could grant life to soul mates because they are souls already. Is it then wise thing to say that God is subservient to souls in granting life? Please remember the saying “Karanabhavatkaryabhava Nasatah Sadutpattih” meaning, there is no effect without a cause; something will not emerge out of nothing. 

K:  I have heard that before Creation there was no other material other than God and He created the world as He willed it. 

V: Good! Why God created this world? Is it for him or for others? If for himself then it amounts to that God was in need of Creation? He, who is in need of something cannot be called as POORNA i.e Total or complete. The very fact that he was in need of something is indicative of his incompleteness. On the other hand if it said that He created for Souls then it should be accepted that along with God souls also were present. It is wrong then to conclude that God alone was present before creation. 

K:  He created to show off his Leela 

V: To whom the Leela was shown? 

K: He shows the Leela to himself. 

V: Why He shows the Leela to himself? 

K: For his happiness 

V: Was there no happiness in God before enacting a Creation?  Was he destitute of Happiness or Bliss? If he had the happiness then, what the blessed thing that He got after showing off the Leela. In case, he got no happiness then the Leela is a fruitless exercise. Those elements or attributes which are susceptible to growth and decay are neither Anadi [beginning less] not Anantha [endless] When the attributes are not Anadi, how then with these transient attributes he could be called as God who is beginning less or endless?  How then with these odd qualities he is entitled to be called Pooorna and free from all oddities?  

           Leaving this issue aside and even granting that God created this world for the sake of his Leela and He got happiness derived out of it, I ask you one question. Let us assume that a hunter for his pleasure, hunts animals, kills, and maims them. He also derives a sort of sadistic delight in this sport. Then do you consider him as merciful? 

K: Why this question sister? 

V:  You will soon understand. Tell me whether there is a pain and death in the world? 

K:  Yes.  Who say it is not there? It is very much Present. 

V: If God had not created this world for his Leela, had this pain and death remained? 

K:  When there are no roots how could there be plants or fruits?  

V: And the God created this world with pains and deaths for his pleasure! He became delighted with the sufferings and mourning! Then, what is the difference between the hunter who hunts for pleasure and God who finds pleasure in the pain and death? 

K:  I understand that showing Leela is his nature. 

V:  If you think this way, then you must hold the qualities of   passion, hatred, pain, death, suffering, injustice, theft. Violence, debauchery, etc being seen in the world becoming attributable to the nature of God’s Leela. This is because; all these are present in Leela called Creation. Further, there remains no value for good and bad, Justice and injustice, Virtue and misbehavior etc, for they all become the part of God’s nature. In that event, Vedas, virtuous behavior, dos and don’ts, etc would be rendered useless. There will be a no noble ideology for the man to accomplish. There will be no ideals to work and die for, since God has shown all these qualities for the sake of his own pleasure.  

K: Okay sister. Then with what purpose God created this world as per your ideology? 

V: For the sake of the well-being of Souls God has created this world. He is merciful and just. His qualities of Justice and mercy get reflected in the Creation of the world.  He has no self-interest in doing this. Doing Justice and being merciful is his nature. 

K  If God had created this world for the well-being of Souls, then why pleasures and sorrows, merits and sins are present here? 

V: The pleasures and sorrows, merits and sins are the result of Karma of Souls of their own. The soul because of his ignorance undergoes sufferings in the world. Otherwise there is no sin in the creation. Because of their finite knowledge, souls commit sin and as a consequence undergo suffering. They take births in many lives [Yonis] as per God’s justice. God does not cause suffering to anybody. The reason for sorrow is ignorance and not knowing the truth. 

K:  Has not God created Souls? 

V: Souls are unborn. They are Anadi. 

K: How God has mastered over Prakrithi and Souls when He has not created them? 

V: This is a very entertaining question indeed!   This is like asking a school teacher [controlling students] on the ground that how could you control the students when they are not born to you? When Prakrithi is insensate and the soul is finite in knowledge it is natural therefore that omniscient God to lord over them. As students are under the control of teacher for their own welfare, the souls are the control of God for their own benefit. The souls with the help of God’s given Vedas achieve their spiritual and physical excellence. 

                Further, there is no question of exercising authority. God, Prakrithi and Soul are all Anadi i.e. beginning less. Because of God’s all-superiority and all-seniority He has a hold over Soul and Prakrithi since time immemorial. The God’s authority is also Anadi, i.e. beginning less. 

K: What is the objection if it were to be accepted that the soul is the creation of God? 

V: If this is accepted, then the souls are not free to do their Karma. Secondly, God becomes accountable for their good and bad deeds. Souls cannot be treated as partaking in an evil deed, for the reason that God himself has created the souls and the God has invested them with the fitness to do both good and bad deeds. Hence God did the good and bad deed! Hence what is wrong in the soul? If God had not given the freedom to do bad things at the time of the creation of Souls how evil could have been done by the soul?  Hence, it could be said that God did not create the soul and the latter is Anadi and enjoys freedom of action. But he is subservient to God in enjoying the fruits of Karma decided by God. 

K: Some people assert that Soul is the part of God [Brahma]  

V:  Being a part and the feeling of being a part could occur only in objects with a form that are temporary. God and Soul are both Anadis. 

K: Some say, Souls are made of Brahma the God, and finally Souls get merged with the Brahma. 

V: If this is the case, then the Soul cannot be treated as Anadi and eternal. This is not like “effect” getting merged with the “cause”, like the way the pot [effect] is getting merged with the mud [cause].  The Soul is not the effect of Brahma.  He [Soul] is independent and eternal. When being eternal how could he loose his identity and gets merged with the other? 

K: Factually speaking, the soul is Brahma itself. Because of ignorance the soul thinks separate. 

V: This establishes the fact that Brahma also has ignorance. When Brahma resigning to be soul because of ignorance from whom else the soul can get Knowledge?  He cannot get it from Brahma for the reason that Brahma is overtaken by ignorance. 

K:  Is the Soul not thru Brahma? And finally does not soul become Brahma? 

V: What becomes is not Brahma. Brahma is an inexpressible independent entity. Similarly the Soul is not made. Both are eternal principles. 

K: Some people say that this world is a myth and Brahma is alone real. They say the world is full of Maya which is not susceptible for explanation for the reason, that the Maya does not remain constant at all times. It can neither be said as “Sat” [eternal] nor “Asat’ [non-eternal] 

V: The world is neither “Sat” nor “Asat” It is always changing. You must ask how the Maya is said to be inexpressible. The fact of the matter is while the functions or expressions of Prakrithi or Maya are changing the Prakrithi is eternal.  

K: Could there be any thing other than Brahma? 

K:  If other things were not to be present how could Brahma reign as Big? If small things were not there how big things could be found?  Could sweet be there without bitterness being present? Secondly  

Brahma means to pervade. When there remains nothing to be pervaded how could he be said to have pervaded and called Brahma? 

K: Good Sister! We close the discussion here.  Only in the event of accepting three separate entities, God, Soul and Prakrithi [primordial matter] all problems get solved. No other arguments can explain satisfactorily about Creation related issues. You have explained many subtle principles all these days and solved all my doubts. You have answered satisfactorily in spite of my many searching questions. How did you obtain this quality of critical examination and Knowledge? 

V:  Look my dear sister!  For many years I remained a seeker of knowledge. In the beginning of Creation the all merciful God revealed the knowledge of four Vedas in the hearts of Rishis for the benefit of mankind. I wanted to study them in detail. Hence, I joined Aryasamaj which has the noble intention of spreading the knowledge of Vedas. I studied the Vedas and also pro-Vedic teaching contained in Upanishads and also started listening to learned lectures on the subject.  Further, I started detailed study of the classics” Light on Truth” and “Introduction to Vedas” written by the great reformer, Patriot, humanist Maharshi Dayanand Saraswathi. I have also read many other books on the subject. Because of my study and association with the scholarly persons, I have obtained the knowledge of analyzing, examining the issues threadbare. I have also gathered now enough courage to follow the truth and to oppose superstitions like Idol-worship etc. But you have been reading novels and religious literature written by Unvedic, people and hence you have not obtained the correct knowledge on serious subjects like God, worship, bondage, liberation etc. You have been denied the knowledge of all-embracing Vedas and have become a victim of ideologies which divide men on the ground of gender, color etc. In the circumstances, why you get denied the knowledge of Vedas which are veritable nectar? 
                     Since, Aryasamaj has prohibited, Idol-worship, caste discrimination, pilgrimages, unnecessary religious rituals, including expensive marriages, some traditional people may describe Aryasamajists as atheists. But don’t to be deterred. If Aryasamajists who are striving every of their nerve for the study and propagation of Vedas could be branded as atheists, then who are theists? Please don’t entertain any doubts and keep away from useless titillating books and novels. Study carefully, the life ennobling books and biographies of great men and you too will be blessed with the knowledge of truth. With the sham knowledge driven away, life becomes meaningful.

K:   Should we conduct Shraddah or not? 

 V. Yes. We must do conduct Shraddah. We must serve living parents, grand   parents, teachers, scholars, faithfully and well. This alone constitutes real Shraddah. 

K. Shraddah is done for the deceased parents. Does Shraddah is done ever or anywhere for the living?

V. First think over the meaning attached to the term Pitru (deceased parents). Pitru means protector. The Pitru who is living alone is capable of protecting the other. Only the living can guide their children. Rich with experience, they could part with their worldly knowledge for the benefit of children. Only the living parents could protect their issues completely. Once dead the Pitru ceases to be the Pitru for the reason that it is neither a soul nor a body.  When the soul when integrated with the body, the resultant being could be a Pitru. Once this soul –body union is broken could there be a Pitru? If on the other hand, if a soul is treated as Pitru then the soul ceases to be eternal or deathless. In that case the issue of soul   being senior to one or to another requires to be settled. Further, we may have to visualize a situation where one soul is born after another. In case you do not agree with this situation then there arises no relation between the soul and Pitru. When such relation does not subsist to whom Shraddah is to be done? Now, everybody agrees that the soul is deathless and hence there could be no age difference either being elder or lower to somebody. Then what is left out is the Body?. This also cannot be called as Pitru. Firstly, when the Body with the soul left is called as corpse. If the body were to be Pitru then the person who manages to bury or cremate the corpse will be blamed of committing a sin. It is no good deed to burn or cremate a Pitru!  The fact however is, people consider it as an act of nobility to dispose off the dead body either thru burial or cremation.

As a matter of fact, the biological bond that exists among human beings is relevant and stands confined to this physical world only. Once dead, he or she is nobody. Human beings are born in this world to enjoy the fruits of their Karma. Once born, their mutual relationships begin to occur. If the relationships in the form of mother, father, sister, brother, were to remain intact for ever (i.e. even after their expiry) possibility of marriages between those who were a son, mother, sister, brother in their earlier births becomes a possibility. This is unthinkable for the reason the Soul has nothing to do with the relationships like mother, father etc. Relationships keep taking place only when the body is in union with the soul. Therefore Shraddah could be only for those who are alive.

K: 15 days are earmarked in a year for Shraddah purpose. At one time Shraddah is done for one Pitru and for other at another time. Pitrus visit on Shraddah day. It is said that Pitru s visit with their subtle bodies. They partake food with the Brahmins. If for any reason they cannot come, the food is given to Brahmins so that it reaches them.

V:  Pitru is not the name of Atman (soul).  Pitru, as already made clear represents the merger entity of body and soul and it is false nay height of indiscretion to say that Pitrus arrive with their subtle bodies to receive the food. Let us for the sake for argument, accept the view that Pitrus would arrive in their subtle bodies. In that case how would they eat without their gross bodies?  Is it possible that they take food with the Brahmins? If they were to take foods along with the Brahmins will they take food first?  If Brahmins were to take first will it not Pitrus be eating the left over food? If they (Brahmins and Pitrus) were to eat together then both of them are sharing the same food and leftovers. This is condemnable from the hygienic point of view. If Pitrus were to take food first then why feed the Brahmins at all? Why 15 days only is earmarked in a year? Don’t they feel hungry for the rest of the year? Does the food given in the 15days is enough and completely satisfies them for a whole year? Is it ever possible? If considered possible then show a person who is fed for 15 days only and remaining alive for the rest of year? Even among these 15 days the relatives fix only a day. If feeding Brahmins could reach the Pitrus how is it the stomachs of Brahmins are full? If everything were to reach the Pitrus then the Brahmins must be feeling hungry all the time even after their food. How can they feel satiated when the food has reached the Pitrus?  Where the Pitrus to whom the Shraddah food is sought to be given reside? Are they healthy or sick? If sick, what is the use of heavy sweets? They require light food and bitter medicine when sick. In fact they become more sickely with heavy food. We should enquire them about this. When nobody knows where the soul resides or where the soul has entered after death, what is the use of giving heavy foods for them thru Brahmins?  If they had taken birth as lions or tigers then will Pitrus be satisfied with these sweet dishes?  If the Pitru were to arrive from some other yoni (body) then that body should die. Please think over. Supposing a person by the virtue of good and noble deeds had attained Salvation what use is there with these mortal foods? On the hand if the Pitru had been born as a gutter/ dirt worm because of Karma what use is there with these sweet foods? Each specie is having its own taste and preferences. Human food is not pleasing to all animals.

Look! Is it a wise thing to post a letter without writing the address of an addressee? Does the letter have any chance of reaching the concerned? Never. Unaware of where the Pitrus reside, does feeding of the Brahmins with food reach the Pitrus? This is superstition plain and simple.  If food could reach somebody by feeding the other then what is the need of taking food while on tour? It is enough that a Brahmin is fed at home and the hunger of the person on tour is satisfied!  Could you call this as a wise thing?

Sister! If the Pitru had attained Bliss or Salvation by the virtue of good knowledge backed by good deeds then there is no need whatsoever for conducting Shraddah for him. Even when he takes a rebirth there is no necessity for Shraddah. Even when he had no Salvation and not taken rebirth and remains suspended no Shraddah is needed here. If he had died as a sinner, doing Shraddah for him will not absolve of his sins and he does not get Sadgati or improved status. On the other hand if he had died after doing good deeds he would not be condemned to a lower status or Durgati for want of Shraddah. A Shraddah is immaterial here. Each Soul is destined to get the fruits of his Karma and therefore doing Shraddah for the deceased parents is sheer waste of time, labour, money and above all, it is a self-deception.

K:  Sister! You have logically established that there is no need to do Shraddah and what is given to one does not reach the other. O.K. Kindly clarify the matter litter further. A debt-ridden father is survived by his son. The son pays off the debt. Now tell me, whether by this act of his son the soul of the deceased became free from the guilt of debt? The father no longer remained a debtor now since the debts have been cleared by his son. If the son thereby could liberate the soul of his father from the guilt of being died a debtor similarly will not the feast given to the Brahmins has the effect of creating happiness to his father associated with a feast?

V:  What is to be borne in mind here is that, the fruits of Karma of the father is not shared by his son and so also the vice versa. The sanskars of good and bad work done by the person leaves impression on his subtle body. These sanskars alone are the determining factors of his Prarabhdha containing the elements of happiness and sorrow. The prarabdha cannot be wiped off without undergoing the experience. It is true, from the point of mundane world that the son has cleared the debts of his father. But how the son could wipe off the sanskars of debt taken and not repaying thereby which had been imprinted on the soul of a debtor (father). The son of course could settle the worldly loan account of his father but could he settle the loan accounts relating to the subtle body of his father? Further by treating that the repayment of loans will have the effect of wiping out the debt related guilt belonging to the soul of the other, a natural question that arises here is,  supposing  there is a father who had made property thru rightful means, did lot of philanthropy when alive and bequeathed  property to his son.  Now visualize a situation where his son has squandered away that property and leaves a highly sinful life. He could lead such immoral life because of the property left behind by his father. Now tell me since the son could lead a sinful life on the strength of the money left behind by his father  will the son’s sins would reach the soul of the deceased father?  No will be the answer.  If the sins of the son could not affect the soul of deceased father how the sanskars of the loanee father are wiped out by the act of repayment of loans by his son?  The reason why the son had repaid the loan is he is the beneficiary of that loan. When the son could inherit the property associated with the loans taken by his father who else other than son should repay it?  The receiver of the benefit (son here) should repay. This is the rule of human society. However this rule is not observed in many countries. There are no joint families in these countries. They take care of their children until the latter acquire the strength to live independently. Once the children become strong to be independent enough, they are separated and relations between them become nominal.  Here nobody is indebted to the other. No question of payment/non-payment of Loan arises here. The loanee is alone accountable for the loan taken by him. That the son is an inheritor of the property is the underlying reason why the son should repay the amount borrowed by his father. If there were to be no such rule then there is no reason why the son should repay the amount borrowed by his father. This is only social law, and has no bearing on the spiritual world. Hence to say that the son wipes out the adverse sanskars imprinted on the soul of father has no meaning whatsoever and it is a myth. Who is indebted to whom and in what manner is a thing that rests in realm of knowledge of God. He alone arranges a system where mutual debts accounts are wiped off. In the realm of Creation a thing which is an end to one becomes the means to the other. However it is certain that the fruit of Karma of one person is not shared by the other.

Look!  A story goes on Shraddah day. Karna who was donating gold while being in this world got only gold in Heaven.  But that did not satisfy his hunger for food and therefore he took 15 days leave from Heaven and came back to the earth and feasted Brahmins. It is only there afterwards he started getting food in Heaven. This story which is popular is 100% false and opposed to law of creation and yet has a message that he reaps what he sows. Since Karna donated food he got the same in Heaven. If the system of Shraddah were to be true then the relatives of Karna should have arranged food for him in Heaven via by throwing a feast to Brahmins in this world!

K:  If food is not got by the Pitrus so be it. However what is wrong in providing food in name of parents? At least some Daan (donation) is made under this pretext. At least some merit (punya) is achieved in their memory.

V: It is totally wrong! The ancient wholesome Vedic practices get ruined here. Do you want to know why? Pitru Yagna is one of duties to be performed everyday.  Five yagnas i.e. Pitru yagna (honoring the living parents) Devayagna Brahmayagna (worship of God) Balivyshwadeva Yagna (helping the poor and needy) and AthithiYagna (honoring the guests) are to be done to the best of ones capacity. This is a Vedic command. Instead of doing these Vedic yagnas and setting apart of 15days in a year and calling it as ancestral fortnight (Pitru Paksha), does it not defame the daily duties? Further, even when done on the day of death of Pitrus on every year all the said faults continue to persist as such.

Even if you examine from the angle of Varnshsrama (Four-fold Varna system) system the Shraddah for the dead makes no meaning.  When the son remains in Brahmachaya order the father would be in Grihastashrama (householder). When the son gets into become householder the father would be in Vanaprasthanashrama. When the son gets into Vanaprasthanashrama the father would be in Sanyashrama.  At the time of death of father son would be in Sanyasashrama. Now think over how a sanyasi could do Shraddah for the departed Pitrus?  He would have become a Sanyasi after giving up all the worldly desires/aspirations. Family bonds are not sync with a Sanyasi. On becoming a Sanyasi, he is a neither a father nor to son to anybody. Then whither Shraddah here?  Further, a sanyasi is always on the move and he is called parivrajak preaching good things. His whereabouts is not known to his son or to others when he dies. The question whether Shraddah was not possible when the father had died while the son was still a householder and not had become either a vanaprasthi or Sanyasi is also irrelevant, since the conduct of Shraddah is itself untenable and unvedic.

          Now, about the issues of Daan( Charity) or indulgence in philanthropy. Arranging or offering food for the fully deserving in memory of deceased parents and making donations or Daan is not bad by itself. But please note that doing so under a pretext will not yield good results! This is so because, honest intentions are not involved here and therefore no good imprint is left on the doer soul.  Only such deeds are considered meritorious which are done prompted by honest thinking, matched by saying and action. Otherwise no merit is earned here. Any work for that matter should be done with sense of dispassion, and honesty. The thought that feeding Brahmins would satisfy the deceased parents is a wrong notion. Further to say that feasting anyway is meritorious also does not point out to honesty.    Making donations recklessly to the undeserved would only promote the number of lazy and indolent men. This does no good to society. If feasting and making donations were considered absolutely necessary then why make it only on Shraddah days? And further why to Brahmins only? Should we not help poor, hungry, sick, and blind of whatever might be their caste? Similar to the way we celebrate the festivals of birth anniversaries of great men like Ram and Krishna, if we could celebrate the birth events of the departed Pitrus in token of offering our respects then Shraddah indeed could be accepted. Otherwise it is mere a sham.                                                             
 

   K:  Sister! You have analyzed the issue well. Thanks. Now I would like to ask what the advantage of doing Yagna is.  Why people pour Ghee and materials in Fire?

Why should we perform Yagna was the question that was raised yesterday. Yes there are many advantages in doing Yagna. This is not a just a process where ghee and materials are poured into the fire wastefully. The ghee and materials that are offered to fire enables the air to be purified. Since the air is rendered pure the possibility of getting diseases is avoided. 

K:  How Yagna could purify the air? 

V: The Yagna materials (called samagri) are made of four kinds of vegetable substances which are disinfectant, odiferous, sweet, and nourishing in nature. When Yagna is performed with the odiferous materials of the nature referred to, the disease causing germs get destroyed. This is called air purification. This also likely to cause rains and further improves the quality of food crops and medicinal plants. As a consequence, happiness is caused to all living beings. 

K. In my view, it is more beneficial to consume nourishing foods which builds up the ability of body to resist diseases. Why burn such nourishing food items and cause waste? Where is the possibility of rain being got from Yagna? 

V:  It is not my case that we should not eat healthy and nourishing foods. By all means we should take them in good quantity and at the same time perform Yagna also to the best of ones capacity. As we try to strengthen the body with the food we eat, so also it is equally necessary that we should seek to strengthen and purify the quality of air. He is a sinner who does not purify the environment. He who pollutes the air should necessarily undo the same by the Yagna process. Please think over. Whatever that comes out of the body in the form of excretions be it from nose, ears, skin (sweat) and other organs are waste products which are unclean and polluting. Whereas what is taken in the form of Vegetables, Water, fruits, grains etc are all wholesome and clean. Similar is the case of the air we inhale.  However what is exhaled is impure air. It is a well-known fact that air is vital to human and animal life and whereas we can survive without food and water for a few days, we cannot survive without air even for a few minutes. Once we realize the air is a vital factor to our lives it is therefore very important to see that it is kept pure. When the air gets polluted epidemics break out and the life is threatened. Hence there cannot be a better method for effecting air purification than conducting Yagna which is also called as Havan or Homa. 

             Further your query as to why should we burn and thereby destroy them i.e. ghee and other items, makes no sense. No matter is ever destroyed and only the form of the material undergoes change. When the water is heated evaporation takes place and only a fool would think that water is destroyed. Whereas an intelligent man understands that water is evaporated and has mingled with the air. Similarly the things that are burnt inside the Yagna kund do not get destroyed but after undergoing change they reach the air in a subtler form engaging in the act of purifying the air. They also further help the water vapors present in the air to get converted into a mass of clouds, in the same manner a heavy quantity of milk getting is converted by a   dash of curds. The ghee which is unaffected by the brightest of bright sunrays helps in thickening the water vapors into clouds which bring us rains. If Yagnas are conducted regularly as per rules rains could occur to our convenience. In the past, Yagnas were being conducted strictly as per rules and therefore rains were copious. There were neither famines nor diseases as being rampant today.

K: Is it not enough that we keep odiferous and disinfectants at home? Is not the air getting purified from them? Is that the air is rendered pure only from burning? What specialty is there in burning the materials? 

V: Definitely we must keep odiferous things and disinfectants at home, besides doing Yagna. The strength of materials multiplies hundredfold by doing Yagna. For proof of this statement, consider this. A person can eat chilies and withstands its pungency. But the same person cannot withstand the strong acrid smell that is emanated when a piece of chilly that is put inside the fire. He starts coughing very badly and this soon becomes a nuisance to neighbors. People start cursing the fellow responsible for burning the chilli. However if the same person performs Yagna, the neighbors start praising him for the wonderful pleasing smell being spread all around. Now you would have understood the power of materials burnt in fire. There cannot be nobler act than doing Yagna which is also called act of philanthropy done in silence. The Yagna purifies the home air where done and also the air of surrounding area. People may not will to accept the help or donation. But through Yagna a donation is received from another and this is so because the subtler gases travels to all neighborhood houses and kills the germs and this constitutes receipt of help and therefore the statement that Yagna is a silent act of philanthropy is fully justified. 

K: The Sun kills the germs and removes the bad odor. Then where is the need for Yagna? Why man should intervene in things being done without his participation? 

V: The celestial bodies like the sun and the moon are doing their functions without human help is true. Then why man is striving to get electricity, gas, illuminating objects etc.? Trees, plants are growing on their own and why man is striving to grow food? God has created an inbuilt system in body which could defend itself against sickness. The heart pumps and distributes the blood. Lungs purify the blood. The intestines absorb the food, create the energy and arranges for the disposal of wastes. All these activities are done methodically and involuntarily. This being the case, why man is using medicines? Why he follows food discipline when fallen ill? In fact, it is this Laws of Creation that is prompting the man to work to its advantage, the object being the welfare of human being itself. The Laws of Creation inspire the man to remove the dirt and purify air, similar to the way the sun does his job. Yagna is thus demonstrative token act which supplements and supports Nature’s purifying job. 

        Secondly, although the God’s machinery is operating in its own way to maintain the purity of environment, there are some primary duties cast on the part of man to be performed in this context. Can we allow garbage to be accumulated waiting to be disposed off by rains and winds? Should we allow stench to be got removed or contained by the sunrays? Then why we should have Municipal bodies? There could be number of similar questions. The moral of the story is however is that, the Man should remove the dirt that he creates. Yagna is thus an action form of such thinking.

 K: Well.  Why mantras should be recited while performing Yagna? 

V: The Yagna details are all described in Mantras. They are recited while performing Yagna and by doing so the Mantras are remembered and Vedas stand protected thereby. By repeatedly reciting the Mantras we develop faith in them. With the faith firmly rooted in, the corresponding action becomes stronger. With the action becoming stronger, the good sanskars of such Karma leaves a strong imprint on the soul. This enables him to realize the goal of life. 

K: Thank you sister. Let us close the discussion on this. Now tell me the significance of wearing Yagnopavitha? Why people wear across their shoulders? While some wear three threaded Yagnopavitha and  some other wear six threaded one. What is the secret of it? 

V: Yagnopavitha is called the thread of oath (Pratigna sutra) or a thread where a person binds himself to follow a set discipline. Ideally speaking Yagnopavitha should have only three threads. These threads are joined at a knot called Brahmagranthi. The three threads stand for or represent three debts/obligations which require to be discharged. They are (1) debt that we owe towards god called DevaRin (2) debt towards parents (Pitru Rin) and (3) debt towards teachers (Acharya Rin). These debts are to be discharged faithfully. By debt towards god is meant, gratitude to God for having been born human. This is repaid by engaging oneself in praise, prayer and communion (Ishwara stutiprathanopasana) regularly. The person who does not do prayer called Sandhya, and Fire sacrifice called Havan cannot be said to be free from Dev Rin. It is not that God is going to be benefited from Sandhya-Havan. But on the contrary these activities do lot of good to the soul. By Sandhya the soul is elevated and with the Havan the body-soul both gets strengthened. He, who does not remember the agency that rendered the help, is not fit to be trusted. Hence the first thread shows the path to be free from the debt that we owe to God. 

                The second thread commits the wearer to serve the parents in order to be from the debt he owes to them. The third thread commits him to repay the debt he owes to his Acharya. In the other words, the Acharya who has imparted his knowledge and instrumental in showing the pious path should be served always faithfully. In addition, the three threads commit a person on other subtler points too. For ex, Knowledge, Action and Worship are the three paths by which a person could realize God. Hence, the wearer of Yagnopavitha resolves himself for realization of God thru these means. Further he resolves to overcome the three Stages of consciousness (Jagruth, Swapna, and Sushuptha) and aims to establish contact with God in the ultimate Conscious stage called Turiya. 

               Further, the wearer of Yagnopavitha also resolves to avail the best of Tri-attributes called Gunas( Satva, Rajas, and Tamas)so as to establish relationship with the Ultimate goal of Life i.e. God.  He resolves to treat the young, the equal, and the old appropriate to their status. In other words, the old is given respect, the equal is shown love and the young is showered with kindness. There are many more issues over which the Yagnopavitha wearer resolves to perform the ordained duties. 

K: What you say that Yagnopavitha consists of three threads is found to be false as I have seen hundreds of people wearing Six threaded Yagnopavitha. Further, it is possible to remember all the above oaths even without Yagnopavitha. Then why bind the man with the threads?   

V: That you have seen people wearing six threaded Yagnopavitha is of course true. However it ought to have been with three threads only. In ancient times women were also wearing Yagnopavitha.  But with the passage of time the selfish male dominated society snatched away the rights of women associated in this regard and also study of Vedas. They started to wear that part of Yagnopavitha that belonged to women. But thanks to Maharshi Dayananda Saraswathi, women have got back their rights with the result many Arya men and women have again started wearing Yagnopavitha. No Arya male ever wears six threaded Yagnopavitha. Yes, it is only those men who are opposed to enlightenment and welfare of women that wear the six threads. 

Next, about the question as to why need the thread to be worn unnecessarily when the associated oaths could be remembered as well. This point may be likened to a case of policeman being instructed of his duties but the uniform not given.  What good of uniform and badge?  If policeman were not to wear Uniform and badge then what makes him different from the ordinary public? How to recognize a policeman then? How would the people submit to his authority? Hence it is important that he remembers his duties and equally important is that he wears his Uniform and Badge. The same analogy is applicable to Yagnopavitha as well. It is important to remember the duties and wear the Yagnopavitha also which is a hall mark of twice-born (enlightened Arya).   

K:  O.K.  Why people raise it to their ears? 

V:  This is done only during the time they attend to the nature call. As long Yagnopavitha rests on the ear it would remind him to wash his hands/ face after done with. Once this is over, it is brought down. This way the Janeu becomes a reminder tool for cleansing. 

K: Is it very necessary that it should be raised to ears? 

V: Not very necessary.  No harm done when raised to ears either. But the need to remain clean would be reminding.  Another thing to be noted here is, if the janeu is too long the chances of getting polluted by the touch of urine and faeces are always there. Hence it is necessary to raise it ears from this point of view. 

K:  Well, why people leave tuft of hair on the crown of their heads?  Why it is tied while doing prayer (Sandhya)? 

V: The very word Shikha also called tuft in English points out that it remains at the top of body. The place where tuft is grown is called Brahmarandhra. Scholars call this place as treasure cave (Guptha kosha). In yoga parlance it is called as “Sathya”. That is the reason why we get a reference “Satyam punaatu punah shirasi”. The first thing that is done before commencing Sandhya is to knot the tuft while reciting the Gayathri Mantra. This is similar to the practice in marriage where the bride’s one end of Sari (pallu) is tied to the end of groom’s dress to indicate that the former has come over within the latter hold. The tying of knot is reflective of soul being tied in with that of God. Frankly speaking the tuft is a sign of Dharma 

K: Why Hindus alone keep tufts? Why not others? Please reply its usefulness in brief. 

V:  I have already told that this is a sign of Aryan Dharma. Shikha (tuft) means to keep on top. Since Vedic Dharma is godly it is a sublime religion indeed!  Hence people keep it as a sign of Dharma. How others whose religion is not Vedic could keep this tuft? Only those who belong to elevated Dharma alone could keep elevated symbols.

K:  Do bodies like ghosts and spirits exist?  Number of stories is told on ghosts and spirits.  Talismans, threads are tied in an attempt to ward off evils. Mantras are muttered to drive away the spirits. There are exorcists claiming similar action. Is it correct?

V:  Really speaking, ghosts and spirits do not exist. What people say on the subject are just imaginary stories. Time has three dimensions, present, past, and future. Bhoot means past i.e., what is elapsed.   A deceased does not exist anymore. He is counted to as belonging to the past (Bhoota). Therefore, Bhoot refers to the person who is dead and gone. There is nothing called pretha (spirit). A dead person is called as pretha ( pra+ ita) which would also mean as one who has already gone away. In other words Bhoot and pretha refer to that person who was there earlier but not now because he is dead. People who say that they have seen these ethereal bodies, normally also claim that they could be seen in night only. How? All phony things occur only in night. Whether these men claiming to have seen such unearthly bodies possess catty eyes or whether these airy bodies are made of radium type substance that could be seen only in dark is for anybody to guess. All the big and minute things in the world could be seen either with our naked eyes or thru specially made lenses. If Bhoots and Pretas were to be some sort of human bodies definitely they would have been visible or not visible at all. Fact however is, it is generally said to be seen by a person who normally suffers from deliriums or convulsions or whose mind is heavily influenced by stories of Bhoots and Pretas. Otherwise men who are sound, in body and mind do not claim for having seen them. As per principles of psychology when the man’s mind is subjected to certain bad influences (psychological trauma) he would be visualizing pictures of some weird objects and scenes.  What is to be seriously pondered over here is that when a man is dead his body gets merged in the five elements of nature. And the soul takes a new body as per law of Karma. Then where is the question of Bhoot or pretha? Wherefrom it can originate?

             If it is said that Bhoot or prêt refers to the subtle body then it should be clarified that the soul cannot discharge any bodily functions without the medium of gross physical body.  If, talisman, black threads, mumbo-jumbo, exorcism were capable of warding off diseases, then the ward of the men indulging in such spurious practices should never succumb to any disease? Is it so? Their children also die and so also they vanish one day. If mantras or mumbo-jumbo could cure men from diseases then where is the necessicity for Doctors and Hospitals? Funnily, the cat will be out of the bag when a person who is said to be possessed of spirit is confronted with a difficult problem. Person desirous of examining them should ask for a Veda Mantra from a person possessing such spirits in case he is a Hindu or he must be asked to recite versions of Koran in case he is a Muslim. If done, these tricksters stand thoroughly exposed. Further these fraudulent men employ some smart tricks here to fool the credulous. So when the common man is unable to understand these phenomenons they tend to think that they (men of spirits) are capable of controlling the spirits. Frankly speaking there are no spirits, but these thoughts keep nagging the weak and the doubting thamases. The truth however is, every person shall reap what he sows and there is no escape from this law.  . The just God is present everywhere and his law that person is rewarded or punished as per his previous karma or sanskars stands unchanged.

 Do planets influence men and cause pleasures and pains?

K. Good! There may not be objects like spirits. But pleasures and pains are definitely caused by planets. We have to undergo the punishments inflicted by these nine planets. Astrology can never go wrong. Astrology is so perfect that it can predict the cosmic phenomenon like lunar eclipse and solar eclipse well before hand.

V. pains and pleasures are not due to planetary influences. They occur because of the outcome of ones deeds. The planets that are present would give neither pain nor pleasures to anybody. Planets do influence the earth each in its own way. The changes like happiness or sorrow that occur are dependent on the strength of the objects.  For ex, Sun is a star. Its light is found everywhere. Utilizing the sunlight a plant is growing tall with roots firmly embedded in the soil.  At another place there is tree which lies after being cut. The sun falls equally on the growing tree as well as on the tree that is cut. But it is only the uncut tree that is growing big and the severed tree is withering away fast due to sunlight. Whereas the sun is falling equally on both why the uncut tree is flourishing well and other is getting dried up? The same sun falls equally on iceberg and stone.  The stone becomes harder because of sunlight but the iceberg melts. A healthy eyed man enjoys the beauty of Nature made more enchanting by the shades of light whereas the man with the diseased eye shuns the sight of sun and feels unhappy. Now tell me whether this difference was caused by Sun? Did he do any mischief here?  What was the fault of Sun?  The changes, the pleasures or pains occur because of the strength of the object. Now look!  There are two parts present in Astrology.  That part which is based on mathematical calculations is called Astronomy could be called as scientific. The other which is predictive in nature and dependent on speculations on planetary movements is a pure myth. The lunar and solar eclipses are related to Astronomy. Therefore they can be predicted well in advance i.e. before months and years. The Sun, the Moon have been at work as per physical laws and the Astronomy is accordingly written. Astronomers have the knowledge of the movement of planets and they could therefore accurately predict when the eclipses could take place. Where there is certainty in the movements of the objects its influence could be known at once by mathematical calculations. There is definiteness in the movements in a clock. Any boy who is conversant with the reading of the clock could say with certainty when 12 Noon occurs. When both the needles are getting together at 12.during the day he would instantly say that it is 12 Noon.  This is possible because there is an accurate movement in a clock. Truly speaking, Astronomy is mathematics based science.  Astrology is a predictive mumbo-jumbo and Astronomy has been associated with this by default.

K: is it right to eat meat by human being?

                    V:  No. It is not right.

                     K:  why?

                      V:   Meat cannot be obtained without causing pain to the animals. It is not human to give pain to anybody due to selfishness.

                    K: If this is the logic, then nobody should eat fruits, vegetables either, for plants also have a life. When plants have life, don’t they undergo pain when plucked and eaten?

                  V: you first asked whether eating flesh was proper.  I said it was not proper. Whether trees and plants have life is not the issue here. If you were to say that there would be flesh where there is life, then substantiate what is the flesh that cannot be eaten in green leaves and fruits? Vegetables have juices, but no flesh or blood. People don’t say eat mango’s flesh, apple’s flesh etc. Instead they say take mango juice, apple juice etc. you may take juice from whatever be the source, be it sugarcane or sweet lime. There is nothing wrong in it. Wrong lies in taking the flesh and blood. Pain and sorrow is always accompanied whenever the flesh and blood is drawn. Whereas no pain is accompanied to juices when drawn.  When the milk is drawn from the cow, it feels no pain. On the other hand if milk is not drawn when the udders are full the cow cries for relief. The situation is different however when the flesh and blood are taken out from the animals. It writhes in pain when such things are done.

V: Is not the pulp or kernel in fruits and greeny leaves and vegetables flesh?

K:  If the kernel or pulps of fruits are flesh indeed, then we could as well say that the sweet jamoons and Rasagollas are also flesh for it has also juice in them. But who says as such? Blood is there where flesh is there. Can there be a flesh without blood? There is a juice in trees and plants but no blood.  Wherefrom the blood can come? The human body consists of seven essential elements called Dhatus. (They are Rasa, raktha, mamsa, medhus, majje, and asthi as per Ayurveda text)  Among these Rasa comes first, which is converted to blood subsequently. When our food is eaten it is converted to Rasa. From Rasa it becomes Raktha or blood. The blood becomes flesh which is third stage in process of assimilation.  Nature has designed that Rasa be converted to flesh and therefore by eating flesh it is again converted to Rasa and then again to flesh. This is against the rules of nature.

K: If that is the case, there may not be any wrong in eating eggs for eggs do not contain flesh. Probably they contain only juice.

V: eggs are brought out when the ovum and sperm meet. From out of these bodies animals with flesh and blood are born. Is it right and human to destroy the living body in its nascent stage? That too for selfish reasons?

K:  Except very few majority of the world are meat eaters (Non-Vegetarians). From, this it becomes clear that it is after all not bad to eat meat. Nature has designed man to be non-vegetarian.

V: there is no logic in what you say. Does the majority is always right? For ex, truthful and honest people are always less in number and is it right then that we also should be untruthful and dishonest so as to be one with majority? Sinners outnumber pious men. Then is it proper to brand sinners as good?  Grass is found in plenty in the world and relatively fruit-bearing trees are less in number and sandal trees are still less in number. Primary schoolers are more than the highschoolers and the number of Graduates are even less and post-graduates are very small in number as compared to the number of graduates. Since the P.Gs are in minority could we call them bad and inconsequential? It does not take much time for the evil to spread. However conscious efforts are needed to spread the goodness. Clothes get tainted with dirt easily without efforts. But efforts are required to remove the dirt. God has not made man to be meat-eater. It is the man who has cultivated this habit. Is Opium fit to be consumed? No. But we find large number of people becoming slave to opium.  Further it is clear by the way human teeth are formed and lengthy intestines built that human being are designed to be vegetarian and not vice versa.

K:  what is the proof to say that man is not a meat-eater?

V:  observe the structure of human body. I have already told you regarding the human teeth. The human’s teeth and nails are not similar to carnivorous animals. Man hacks- the meat and cooks it with ghee and spices so as to suit his taste and teeth. Whereas the teeth and nails of carnivorous animals are structured to tear the meat. Its tongue is suited to eat the raw meat. But the human tongue is not equipped for that. Carnivorous animals do not perspire. But the human being perspires.  Carnivorous animals drink the water licking. But man drinks the water by gulping. The eyes of carnivorous animals are round in shape whereas it is oval in case of man. During intercourse the carnivorous male and female are fastened but it is no so in respect of human species. The length of intestines in carnivorous animals is short. However it is lengthy in case of man as more time and length is required for digestion of vegetarian food.  There are many other reasons thru which it can be proved that man is conditioned to be vegetarian.

K:  the logic is ok.  But tell me whether trees would not experience pain?

V:  sister!  I do not say that the trees do not have life. There may be countless number of jeev called souls inhabiting in a tree but they do not possess the medium of mind to experience the joys and sorrows. There may not be differences in the character of souls. But due to his action (Karma) the souls are classified as abhimani jeev and anushayi jeev. The abhimani jeev possess the body and remains mobile.  The abhimani jeev has a body of its own and remains proud of it.  This body experiences pain when put to violence. Hence it is violence to kill them for consumption and therefore wrong. On the other hand anushayi jeev has no body and mind. It remains in deep slumber called sushupthavastha. It has neither pain nor joy. Trees may be their resting places, but possesses no body.

                        Further, trees grow as per the chemical process pre-designed by god. The twigs and branches that are cut start growing again. The flowers wither away but bloom again. Fruits keep on appearing again and again.  Twigs when planted start growing and become trees. All this affirm the point that the trees do not undergo pain. But this is not so in the case of animals. If you cut any part of the body of animals it will not reappear. Moreover, it causes pain too. If you are illogical and argue that shedding of wool from sheep or goat causes pain to it is not correct either because while shedding the hair the animal does not undergo pain similar to the man who does not complain of pain when his hairs and extra grown nails are cut and removed. These are again regenerated. What resides in static vegetable kingdom is Anushayee jeev and as already made clear there is no blemish of violence involved in consuming vegetables, fruits and grains etc.

K:  O.K. Let the issue of violence be away. Some people opine that meat eaters are brave and enormous strength lies in meat.

V:  meat eaters could be anything but heroic. They are cruel and bloodthirsty. Heroism is different from that of cruelty.  You may say that there are thousands of meat eating men who are famous for their heroism in history. But let me make clear that their heroism has nothing to do with meat neither then nor now. The quality of being heroic is attributable to the factors like education and environment. If meat could be the factor for generation of heroism then the majority of people in the world ought to have been heroic. But are they? In India, Hindus, Christians, and Muslims take meat. But no community is as quarrelsome, intolerant and violent as Muslims are. This is because Muslims unlike other communities lack good education and environment. He is alone could be called a Hero who without being selfish and remaining firm fights ceaselessly for the sake of society and country risking his own life. He is the real hero who never backs out from the chosen path. Can the acts of looting, vandalizing, stabbing, attacking stealthily, and abducting of women, be ever considered as heroic? Are the men who indulge in such despicable deeds can be considered as heroes? No, never. They are only knaves and scoundrels or even worse.

K:  It is told that meat provides strength. Lions, wolves and other carnivorous animals are quite strong. They take only meat. A lion could kill an elephant. This goes to show that meat has strength.

V:  Are not animals that do not take meat powerful?  Do bulls, horses posses less power? The power in the world is measured in terms of Horse Power only. A lion gets rattled when confronted with a wild pig. It is so strong. A pig can drink water when positioned between two lions. But the reverse is not possible. Lion is not stronger than the elephant. All wild animals become scared when an enraged elephant roams the forest. However the lion takes control of an elephant through its sharp teeth and paws and not because of its strength. Now visualize a situation. There is a man who is bodily strong and other a man weak.  If the weak man were to possess knife, pistol or any other weapon he could easily overpower the strong man and even could kill him. This is because he posses the strength of arms. In case an elephant were to possess sharp teeth, paws and with no small eye, then it would have never allowed other animals to survive. Herbivorous animals although strong and powerful become helpless in the absence of sharp arms.

                 Now what to talk of power?  Meat does have not an iota of power inherent in metals like gold, silver, copper, iron etc. Many plants and vegetables possess enough power even in their minute quantity as compared to meat.

K:  people depend upon meat where no grains are grown. It is told that meat is the staple food for those who inhabit in places like Iceland, Antarctica etc. Meat is their natural food.

V:  They are not human beings whose natural food is meat. They may be different species although structurally they may appear as human. Their nails and teeth may be in such a way as to tear the meat apart. How can they be carnivorous if they are humans similar to us?  There is an animal called snow deer inhabiting in that area which thrives strongly on the algae and mushrooms formed in the stony crevices. People may kill them for their food. If an innocent animal could become strong eating mushrooms and algae man also could become strong surviving on such food which is vegetarian. The fact however, is that they have addicted to taking to meat and have become slave to their palate. God has not endowed us with sharp nails and teeth suited to meat consumption. These people are habituated to take meat. Any material could be obtained where man can lay hands on. If he cannot grow food, it could be obtained from outside. If he could not procure food even from outside then the place is not worth living. To be frank, all arguments given in favour of meat consumption are all meaningless and shallow.

K: there is a question of survival economics involved here. Where food is scarce fish is available in plenty. Poor people depend upon fish and other meat products. If the meat is not available their life is ruined.

V: wherever you look at the world, the main question is staple food and not meat. Other types of food are supportive and used to enhance the aroma and tickle the taste buds of man. The staple food like wheat and rice is consumed predominantly as they are the principle source of body energy. This is the substantive question and continues to be so in the world.

K: Good! What is seriously wrong with the meat-eating then?

V:  A meat-eater cannot be a devotee of God. Because with the tama sic food the meat is, his thoughts also become tama sic and never satvic. Any number of real devotees of God that lived in the world did not take meat and gave it up subsequently if they had been consuming it earlier. They understood the path of divine light lying inside. God’s devotees cannot be found among the meat-eaters. Those who claim that they are so while keeping with meat eating are bogus men. They possess sinful qualities. Only those who are vegetarians could invoke god. Hence   meat is to be abandoned always.

V:  How the attributes of Mercy and Justice could remain together with God was your yesterday’s question. Frankly speaking, both Mercy and Justice are always remain together, the difference being whereas Mercy is from the side of God; Justice is dispensed as per the Karma of men. For ex, a farmer sows the seed in a farm. But the God instead gives him hundreds of grains in return. This is God’s mercy. About Justice it is as per the well-known adage “he reaps what he sows”. When he sows the groundnut seed he reaps the groundnut crops only, and not wheat. This is his justice. There is a father with four sons. The father gives Rs 1000/- each to his sons. This is the mercy being shown by the father on his sons. If one son snatches the portion of another son forcibly then the father punishes the erring son. This is his justice. The father gives money from his side. Hence he is merciful; punishing the erring son and restoring the rights to the entitled is the Justice of the father. A king punishes a robber. This is his Justice. By giving death sentence to the robber he protects the weak and affected. This is His mercy. If the king lets off the robber it is His “injustice”. Really speaking the meaning of both Justice and Mercy is one and the same. Where is Justice without Mercy? The unjust is selfish and never kind. God is while being Just is also Merciful. He has created the world for living beings. This is His total Mercy. He dispenses fruits according to their Karma to everybody and this is His Justice.

K: Does God becomes aware whenever a wicked deed is performed or not? If yes, why it is not stalled immediately?

V: God tries to stall everybody from doing wicked deeds instantly. The proof for this is, while about to do an  evil, the feelings of guilt, shame, crop up in the mind of the doer at the same time, whereas while doing a good deed the feelings of delight, enthusiasm springs in his mind instantly. All these things happen from the side of God. This is called the inner voice. Why human beings? Even in animals the feelings of doubt and shame crop up. When a piece of bread is thrown at a dog it eats at the same place with its tail wagging. The same dog when it steals a piece of bread it neither wags the tails not eats at an open place. It eats stealthily. Why? It knows that this is a food gained by stealing. Hence it is clear that God prevents the living beings from committing a crime. Yes. This much is certain. God does not snatch away the liberty of doing an action from any body. The Soul is beginning less and is free to do any action and this being the case how can He take away the independence of human beings? If he takes away the liberty, the Souls do not remain as Souls as such or there a longing to improve from their side. For ex, when examination is going on, the teacher would be watching the boys against copying. So many boys would be writing wrong answers and the teacher is observing them. He does not prevent boys from writing wrong answers but allows them. He is not coming in the way of their independence. If the teacher on the other hand were to dictate the correct answers to all, how could there be an improvement from the boys? What is the point then in teaching and conducting examinations to them? In that event, the students do not remain as students but become a piece of lifeless dolls. It is the duty of the teacher to teach them well. To study well and write correct answers is the duty of boys. In a similar manner it is the duty of God to provide the nature of Good and bad deeds through Vedas. It is not His job to get good or bad things done. The living beings do their Karma according to their freedom. They get happiness if they were to do good things inspired by Knowledge and suffer if they do vice versa. Apart from the knowledge given thru Vedas, God by remaining within their hearts would be prompting living beings not to do evil things.  Of course, it is up to their freedom and power to heed to this advice or not. This is called the God’s attempt to prevent the occurrence of Evil deeds. Prevention does not mean taking away the freedom. In case, God was to take away the freedom of action, the imitative and Enthusiasm for doing a Work or not gets lost and the living beings become reduced to just dolls in the hands of God. And God becomes accountable for everything.

K: Good! Why God does not provide the benefit [Award or Punishment] immediately?

V: How can award or punishment be given instantly? Let us think for a while. God has given a reward for the good work done by a person immediately. The duration of happiness consequent of this reward could be also visualized to last for one year. Now in the very next day he does some wicked things and that that the duration of punishment for this deed is to last for a year. Now think about this. Now the man has got a reward and consequently he should not put to any suffering for a period of a year. But if punished immediately for his bad deeds for a period of a year then the earlier order of God that he should enjoy happiness for a period of one year is defeated. Since the human being possess the work freedom, he would  keep on doing either good or  bad deeds and if God were to provide instant reward for the deeds done then the system of God  awarding  punishments or happiness and their unhindered enjoyment or suffering  overlap each other   and His own inimitable law suffers.

K: Do the lakhs of lives in the world are born of their Karma?

V: There are two types of lives in the world. One is called Bhogayoni and other is called Ubhaya yoni. They have got this birth because of their Karma.

K: What is meant by Bhogayoni and Ubhayayoni?

V: Those lives that enjoy happiness or sorrows but do not indulge in any action for their future are called Bhogayoni. For ex, animals and birds. Man is an Ubhayayoni. He enjoys both pain and pleasures as per predetermined Karma and also does both good and bad things for future.

K: Why man is considered as Ubhayayoni?

V: Animals and Birds have passion or concern for eating only. They don’t have the passion to produce things. They are here to enjoy as decided by God’s system. They don’t earn anything. These animals eat, wheat, grains, but they are incapable of producing them for the reason they lack thinking faculty. But the man because of thinking strength produces the crops by utilizing the animals. Because of his thinking power only he is described as Ubhayayoni. He is capable of enjoying the goods and controls all animals by his thinking power. A shepherd has thousands of sheep. A cowherd has thousands of cattle.  Man gets acrobatics done even by lions in circus. Why animals? Because of this thinking strength he manipulates fire, air, water, sky, earth to his advantage. God did not give man feathers to fly but he has got aero plane built for the purpose. God did not provide him with bodies of fish, crocodile, turtle, etc, to remain in water but he has got ships, built for the purpose. God did not give him the distant penetrating sight of an eagle but has found out Microscope, Telescope etc, to overcome the difficulty. What is the secret of this? It is because of his thinking ability. Hence he is Ubhayayoni.  He enjoys the reward of his karma of his previous births and also does action for future also

K: Does all lives get their births as per their Karma? Does not man become animal or bird in his next birth?        

V:  Yes. The types of lives [Yonis] are got by their own Karma. Souls keep on moving from one lives [Yonis] or the other. The Karma done in human life are linked to merit or sin [Punya or Pap] I have already told that human being possesses the thinking ability and when he misuses this faculty he commits a sin requiring to travel in all types of lives[Yonis}. God gives birth in many lives [Yonis] according to his own Karma for his improvement. The effect of his good and bad deeds leave imprint on his subtle body. It is this Sanskars that merit him births in several types of lives [Yonis].

K: When human birth is got?

V: When the Sanskars of noble deeds outweigh the Sanskars of sin he gets a human birth. When the Sanskars of selfless life become super strong he gets a liberation i.e. Moksha. In other words, man becomes free from the worries of mundane life and enjoys Bliss.

K: How can the soul of an elephant get into the size of an ant? Because the bigger the animal the bigger the size of the soul. This could be possible. Is it not?

V: There is no big or small in Souls. All Souls are of similar type. There are big or small things in the size of bodies. For ex, in a big machine there are many parts. One part cuts, the other part separates, yet another prints and each part does its own job. But the machine provides equal power to each part. But since the machine is big it has many parts with diverse functions. Those animals which have manlike lips drink milk. A bird with its peaks gulps the milk. There is no disparity in souls. The difference is found only in bodies. 

K: Does birth takes place according to Karma? If that is the case, where was Karma before birth? While there cannot be Karma without a body and when was there was no soul with body, how Karma could be done then? Then how he gets caught in the bondage of births?

V: The birth takes place because of ignorance and the bodies are got according to Karma. A boy gets admitted to a school because he is ignorant. Further standards depend upon his Karma or fitness. Similarly, the man gets entry into a School called this world i.e. his first appearance with a body, due to his finite knowledge and taking births in so many lives are due to Karma. Secondly, this is not the first time that he got a birth but has obtained body countless times before and still happening. The Soul has many Sanskars.  One may ask what the Sanskars were obtaining at the time of beginning of Creation. At the beginning of Creation Sanskars pertaining to previous Creation was already there. The Creation is flowing like a river which has no beginning or end. Creation and dissolution of the world keeps on occurring like day and night. It keeps on rotating like a Wheel.

K: Some people assert that evolution has taken place from smaller animals to man.  They say that Man is the ultimate evolution in Creation.

V: This is wrong. If that is so, when man is present the other animals should have become extinct. Whereas man and other animals, birds etc, are also there. How can it be said, that Man also has evolved as other animals went on evolving?  How a seed could remain intact after it is sprouted and grown as tree? Can the flower buds remain as such after flowering? Another important thing to be noted is, there is general knowledge found to be even in animals other than man. But Special knowledge is to be found only in man.

How this Special knowledge is found in man? This is due to his power of thinking. This thinking power is not found available in other animals. If this thinking power was present in other animals then man would have found it, not possible to boss over them.  A common principle to be noted here is that, “Nothing emerges out of nothing”. In case, man is evolved out of other animals, then the thinking power should have been present in other animals too. But this is not seen. The theory of evolution says that man is evolved out of monkey. If this is the case, then a just born baby would not have been drowned if thrown into water. If man is evolved out of monkey then all the powers of monkey should have been found invested in man. But this is not the position. Hence, it is clear that man, animals, birds etc have been formed as per the just system of God.

Is  Idol worship justified?

             K: When God is formless how to meditate on Him? 

V:  Meditation is of two kinds. One is about worldly things and living beings and other one is about God who is beyond senses and All-controlling. We meditate about worldly things when we see them or get parted from them. For ex, I saw a woman in Calcutta. We became friendly. Next, I saw her in Bombay after five years. Immediately I remember her as the woman I met at Calcutta. Secondly, when we part ourselves. For ex, my friend left for tour. Frequently, I would remember where she could be now? When we are together the question of meditation does not arise. Because how could we meditate when she is already before me? But when she parted she is remembered. These are all about worldly things. But the meditation about God is different. To meditate means is to keep mind away from materials and subjects. In other words, zeroing on Soul whose strength is spread over mind and senses. So long the mind and senses are preoccupied with worldly things the soul cannot meditate on God. It is necessary therefore before undertaking meditation that the mind and senses are not allowed by habit to be drawn towards materials and subjects. Meditation is also called as Dhyana, is the seventh step in Yoga. First, yama Niyama Asana, pranayama, pratyahara, Dharana, are to be tackled first. Then the man becomes qualified for undertaking Dhyana. As per rules, meditation is mastered after the six steps are overcome.  When there is a distance of seven steps before mastering Dhyana how is it that it could be achieved through Idols first?

K:  The mind is fickle. How it can stay on the formless? Idols are required for staying of mind. Mind cannot become steady without a formless object?

V: You are innocent. Mind could stay put only in formless. It cannot become steady in form. This is because, the object with which  a  form is made of elements of  sound, form, touch and liquid etc, Hence mind becomes unsteady after getting stuck in these things. If mind could become steady because of form then the entire world which is having a form and logically the minds of all should have become steady. But this is not the case. The more the minds getting entangled in worldly objects the more unsteady the mind becomes. If you examine still more carefully, mind does not become steady at all. The moment the mind becomes still, death follows. Frankly speaking, mind getting inwards from outside transactions could be stated as the steadiness of mind. So long man lives, his mind would be always in momentum.

K: Are you of the opinion that people who meditate thru Idols are under illusion? Through Idols the unsteadiness of mind is kept away. Hence people worship idols of Ram, Krishna, etc.

V:  I have already told that meditation of God is not possible thru Idols. Dhyana means mind being away from subjects. All Idols have all the five subjects in a disorganized way. Looking at them roughly, they have FORMS. Fruits, flowers, milk etc are offered to them and hence there is a juice present. Fruits have scent or smell. Blowing of Bells or conches has an element of sound. The Idols are made of five elements, like, sound, smell, touch, form, and liquid. Then how the Idols can keep away the unsteadiness of mind? People, who worship Krishna’s idol for steadiness of mind, should Ponder over the fact, that it was Krishna who was present in full life before Arjuna and still the mind of Arjuna was wavering. He tells Krishna,

                         Chanchalam  manah krshna  pramadhi balavadrudam|

                          tasyaham nigrahm manye vayoriva sudhushkam||   [Geetha]      

 Meaning:  The mind is fickle, agitated and strong. I find it is as difficult as to control the air.

                        Krishna replies.

                                        Asamshayam  mahabaho  mano durvigraham chalam|

                                        Abhyasena  tu kaunteya  vairagyena cha gruhyate||   

Meaning: Arjuna! It is not doubted that the mind is very fickle and obdurate. But it is controlled by regular practice and detachment.

           Given the fact   that when Arjuna was seeing Krishna day in and day out and in spite of his mind was still restless, how the imaginary images of Krishna could instill steadiness of mind?

K: Then should we not worship Idols at all?

V: We should do Idol worship [Murthy puja] i.e. the inanimate Idols should be worshipped in the manner deserving for an inanimate matter. Similarly, the live i.e. Conscious entities should also be worshipped in a manner befitting for living beings.

K: I did not catch your point. How worshiping of the inanimate [Jada] should be done as deserving to a Jada matter and Conscious [Chetan] beings in appropriate manner as deserving to Chetan entities? 

V:  The term Pooja [worship] has many meaning as per its root verb and also in common parlance. For, ex, the meaning of the term Pooja is to do honor whereas with reference to a jada matter it means to use the inanimate matter judiciously or wisely and to safeguard it from destruction.  Now think over the meaning attached to worship of a Jada matter. It means to keep them in order, to safeguard them, to ensure that they are not broken and do not get soiled. This is the intended meaning here. Bowing before all things, offering fruits and flowers is not thought of here. When it is said that a noble man is to be worshipped the intention here is that he should be honored with food and gifts and does not mean flinging of fruits, flowers, water etc at him. Further in the context of fraudulent, the worship of him conveys the meaning that he should be thrashed soundly and not otherwise. So here in one context, Pooja means altruism and in other context punishment.  Likewise in respect of jada matter i.e. Idol-worship what is intended here is that these Idols are to be kept safely and offering of light, prostrating before them is not at all the desired intention. This is because that these Idols being inanimate cannot grasp the reverence of a doer nor in a position to receive what is offered to them in the form of flowers and sweets. Conscious beings in the form Father, mother, teacher, Sanyasi, advisor, and scores of men similar to them should be done Pooja i.e.  They are to be honored with fruits, flowers, food etc. In other words Pooja here is to be understood as doing an honor or respect.

K: God is said to be everywhere. He is also found to be in Idols. In that case why Idols should not be worshipped? What is worshipped is not stone. The all pervading God is worshipped therein,.

V: It is true that since god is found to be everywhere he is found to be in Idols also. But it is not necessary that He should be worshipped everywhere and in all things. It is the soul that offers Pooja and the object being to meet with God. Meeting between the two is possible only where they could have a chance to meet. God is no doubt is in Idols. But the soul which desires meet with God is not there in Idols. Then how could there be a Meet? Yes. God and Soul are both present in the hearts of every human being. Meet between these two could take place here only i.e. hearts. Hence the man who wants to meet God is required ensure that Pooja is done in his heart after controlling the mind and senses. Now look!  Can we drink water everywhere presuming that God is there in water? God is present in Lions and Snakes. Is it okay to go nearby them? Hence it is clear ignorance and superstition to believe that God is in Idols and hence He should be worshipped there. God is in poison. Then should we eat it? No. Only such things that are eatable are to eaten. Idol worshippers think that they are doing Pooja to the all pervading God in Idols. But frankly speaking, there can be no Pooja of the all pervading God in Idols. You may ask how?  God is present also in those Pooja items that are placed on Idols. For ex, sky [void] is present in a pot. It is present in brick also.  Could he hit the Void by throwing the brick at the pot? Since the void is pervading everywhere the brick cannot hit the void rather the pot gets broken. Not the Void. Because the void is present both in the pot and brick. Similar is the case of Pooja things that are placed on the Idol. These Pooja items are deposited over Idols and not on God for the reason God is pervading in Pooja items also.

V: It is not necessary that we need to put fruits and flowers on God. But looking at Idols reverentially we become aware of the grace and glory of all pervading God.

K:  This is talk in the extreme. How could we get the knowledge of all pervading God, his grace and glory? Just think. There is an oil in til seed. But what is seen? Is it til or oil? Apparently only the til seed is seen. You don’t see the oil in it even when seen with utmost reverence. When the oil is seen?  Only when the til seed is grinded the oil is seen. Similarly what is seen in Idol are the bare Idol only and not the all pervading God. Only when you cut the bond with Idol and start searching God in the heart then only God is perceived. Now about the knowledge of glory of God while looking at Idols. How the glory of God is seen in the man made Idols? In fact the greatness of man who has carved the lovely Idols will alone be seen when looking at Idols. If you want to see the grace and glory of God observe the entire Creation with a rational attitude. You will observe the beauty and greatness even in small things.  What mark of God’s greatness is there in the man made inanimate Idols?

K: Sister! We get the results as we believe. Even you don’t agree that Idols are not God you can get the results by thinking God in them. Secondly, before we ascend to the heights, we cannot do it so instantly and we require steps. I consider Murthy Pooja as the first stepping stone for the realization of God. Hence, if anybody were to make the imaginary pieces of God and worship them there is no fault in it

V: You should know that faith does not alter the truth of an object. If somebody due to ignorance thinks or believes that lime water is milk can he churn butter out of it? Will the stomach gets it’s full by visualizing a stone as a Roti? If by mere thinking could get the desired things then the people would not have been found to be so sorrowful. We would not have witnessed the people laboring hard to get things they desire. A belief becomes a belief only when it stands on Truth. Otherwise it is a non-belief. Supposing if a person were to consume laxative pills believing them as medicinal

Tablets can he not get the purging? Hence it is sheer ignorance to say that we can get the results by mere believing contrary to the hard facts.

  Look!  The priests of Somnath temple had a belief that the inanimate Idol was a veritable lord Mahadev himself. Hence, when Mohamed Gazni came in aggression the priests were sitting idle. They started advising the people, to do Somnath Jap and there was no need to fight as the Lord himself would vanquish the enemy forces. What terrible consequences followed because of this belief and trust are well known to the students of history. Why Somnath temple? Other temples also were destroyed and the Idols broken and tons of money was looted and taken away all because of this belief and trust. Still people did not get rid of their superstitions. The irony is,  People believed in  powers of  the Idols which were incapable of doing anything but  reposed no faith in  the Conscious entities[ people] who were capable of achieving anything. What a shame? This is the main reason for the downfall of our country and community. Now you would have understood how sorrowful the outcome of belief borne out of ignorance is. Your statement that Murthy pooja as the stepping stone for realization of God is totally erroneous. Yes. Worship of Conscious bodies could of course be treated as the stepping stone of God’s realization in a limited manner but the same cannot be accepted in the context of worship of inanimate Idols. The inanimate objects could be pavements for climbing Himalayas but how they could be stepping stone in God’s realization when they [pavements] are void of any knowledge? The alphabets A, B, C, D are the basic steps to learn English. But if anyone believes this as basic steps for learning Hindi or Sanskrit how could he learn these languages? Hence he could climb to the target thru things which is considered as its steps. The steps for God’s realization are selfless service, Satsang, the eight paths of Yoga [Yama, Niyama, Asana, pranayama, pratyahara, Dharana, Dhyana, and Samadhi]. Only the regular practice of these steps faithfully can ensure the God’s realization.

                    You asked me what are the faults involved in worshipping the imaginary Idols of God. The faults are many. They are as under.

1. Man deceives himself by assuming certain real things in imaginary or artificial objects. Even Animals, Birds, insects know that artificial things cannot accomplish the functions of the   Real. Throw a mouse made of mud or rubber before a cat. The cat never pounces upon the artificially made mouse. A bee never stops on a flower made of paper. Similarly the animals never aspire on artificial things. But a man who claims to be very intelligent creature among all animals longs to obtain the maximum of good things out of artificial things. Can there be a bigger paradox than this?

2. Man imagines his requirements are also due to this imaginary man made Idols. Since man needs food he also feels that God also requires food and therefore presents eatables. He dresses them as he himself dresses. He bathes the god as he takes bath. He puts God to sleep and awakens him. He puts on ornaments on God as he tries to put on himself.  When man is of the belief that God also is in need of formers requirements then what sort of upliftment that could be expected of this God? When God is himself is the subject of many requirements how he could fulfill the requirements of others? Can the blind lead the blind? No, Never.

3. God is one. But the Idols are many. Each group bound by their own tradition has carved out gods as per their belief. Consequently, there are inter-group clashes destroying national unity. There are other hundreds of faults.

K: Then is it your opinion that we should neither carve out Idols nor worship them? When we see the peaceful, serene and detached Idols of great men we get peace; further they make impact on us.

V: It is not my opinion that we should not carve out Idols at all. Yes we should make Idols that is what I say. By keeping the photos of great men or making their Idols, we can perpetuate their memories. However it does not mean that these replicas should be worshipped like Conscious beings or they should be prayed for grant of favors treating them as either Gods or Gods representatives. How can these grant favors as done by Conscious beings or God? Can a father who is dead shower as much love as he did while being alive to his son? Is the body of the father which fed his son so lovingly while being alive is of any use after death? What difference is there between carved out Idols and the dead body?  The Idols do not putrefy whereas the dead body starts putrefying soon after death. This is all the difference and in respect of others matters there is no difference. Pooja means proper use. If goods are not put to use properly then they get ruined causing harm to the man. How you may ask?  Listen! There is a devotee of river Ganga.He worships it day in and day out. He offers flowers and Sweets to the River. He sings praises of Ganga always. But he does not know how to swim. One day he gets into the deep river. Will not he get drowned? However great devotee of the river he might be, since he does not know swimming he is sure to get drowned. Then there is other person who does not treat Ganga as mother. He has killed somebody. His clothes have become bloody. He jumps into the river and Swims across the river. How this happened? The reason is simple. He knows how to make use of the river. The first one was doing a wrong Pooja. Hence the river drowned him and saved the other. There would be a section of worshippers of Ganga. Taking bath in the river, offering flowers etc is treated as worship. Every year they shell out hundreds of rupees to Railways. They also get killed in stampede.

                        Then there is other section of Ganga worshippers. They make canals. Through irrigation they produce abundant crops, and produce power in the form of Electricity. They never did take bath in the river. They got Ganga in their taps at home. Since they knew the correct usage of the river [a Jada matter] how could they keep idle? Any number of examples could be given about the unconscious matter [jada] similar to Ganga. Now about the impact on seeing some Idols. Good or bad influence is not got by seeing the Idols. It is so because of the inherent Sanskars. A Hindu goes to a Ram or Krishna temple. He automatically bows before the Idols. This is because he would have imbibed the history of these personages and also learnt the way they vanquished evil persons like Ravan and Kans. These sanskars could be either through Books or by being heard. But before the same Hindu if you place a statue of Confucius of China, he does not get influenced, nor does it induce any faith in him, the reason being he does not know anything about Confucius. Hence he does not bow before this statue. A Muslim does not bow before any Hindu deities. Why? Because that Muslim has no Sanskars. On the other hand he finds an awful looking Muslim in a photo more pleasing for the reason that Sanskars that the Muslim appearing in that photo is looked as “momin” [Help to Islam] is strongly embedded in his mind. Hence, it is the Sanskars that makes an impact on

Mind while seeing some Idols. If Idols were to make impact it should have done it so to all the viewers of Idols and got peace. But this does not happen.

V: Don’t they show Maps in Schools? They disclose the knowledge of the entire world thru the medium of small Maps. Likewise, the small Idol could disclose the knowledge of God? Is it not?

V: Dear Sister! The Map is made of the world which has a shape. Hence we get knowledge of rivers, mountains, sea, cities, Railways etc. God is omnipresent and formless. Hence it is not possible to make an Idol of Him. Hence the Knowledge of God is not obtained.

K:  Syllables and sound are formless. But we make a sign of it and students are taught. If we don’t design the shape of syllables and sound how could else the students learn knowledge?

V: Syllables and sound are not seen by the eyes. But they are heard of course. The eyes choose the subject matter of its concern in order to make the subject known to ears. But how could it receive as its subject matter as it’s when the relevant subject matter is not theirs? This is understood by experience only. It is also not correct to say only when imaginary sign is accompanied by sound, Education could be imparted. If this were to be correct, we would not have seen learned blind men at all. They would not have seen how A, B, C, D alphabets looked like. However we see many blind men well versed in English, Hindi, etc. Secondly the imaginary signs are known as Varna [Letters]. Not syallables.What is written is letter. It has a form. That which is spelt is syllable and this is formless.

          It is also not correct that thru the signs [which have a form] one could get the knowledge of formless. This is because the formless sound is first spelt and then sign is written and told to recognize the sound with a particular sign. If your logic is accepted then it amounts to driving the knowledge of formless God first and then asking the student to recognize God in a particular   form! When the knowledge of formless God is obtained already then why worships the Idols? Is not the God realization an object of worship? When God is realized why worship without a reason?

K: Good! Time is formless. But people get their jobs done thru the Clock.

V: Clock is not the form of time. Just as we become aware of the time with the movement of Sun, similar work is done through a Clock. The entire functioning of Clock is dependent on Sun.

K: How to meditate on Formless? When an Idol is present before, we keep on meditating. Now we sit for meditation of Formless and closed the eyes. Nothing is before us. Then how the mind can remain steady?

V: There are two types of world; one is spiritual and another physical. The Soul is related to the spiritual. Physical is related to elements like Earth, water, Fire etc. Let us remember that God related subjects are spiritual in nature. Where is the scope of spiritual thinking when your mind keeps roaming here and there while doing Meditation? What are remembered are physical things only? Spiritual meditation could take place when the thinking of worldly objects having form is set aside and the Soul is thought of being pervaded by God. There is no bar of space and time between God and Soul. What is far away is Knowledge. Once the obstacle of Knowledge gets removed God is beginning to be felt. It stays put when the minds desires. The mind stops on those things that are practiced. All works in the world is successfully got through practice only.  We would have seen women carrying many water filled pots over their heads negotiating the uneven roads taking care to see that a not a drop of water is spilled over. Many boys and girls carefully walk on the wired thread while doing acrobatics. In circus, dogs and cats even fire bullets. This is all due to practice only. Many weaklings take cold bath in the biting winter but which is dreaded by musclemen. Like wise those who are habituated of thinking God and by practicing the Yama and Niyama they keep meditating on God for hours together near rivers and mountains. Those who have attained Samadhi keep meditating for days together. Do they meditate on any Idols? Not at all. If you think bit deeply, the mind does not rest on Idols at all. The minds keep wandering on the eyes, nose, and limbs of the Idols. When the Idols are not present, the transactions are drawn towards the Soul.

          Sister! Kindly remember. Even if the mind were to rest on Idols, it rests on Idols only and not on God. Really speaking, God is formless and omnipresent. Hence close your eyes and start meditating on the meaning of OM with a feeling” that God is present everywhere and I am present in Him and He is also present in me” Keep repeating OM. Recite Gayathri Mantra or any other Vedic mantra and think deeply of its meaning.  See how the mind is not brought to control.

K: If we buy sweets from sweet meat shop for a Rupee and eaten, it causes happiness. The Sweet is having a form. The taste we derive is formless. If we were to ask the vendor to provide one rupee taste how could he give that formless taste? This goes to show it is only through the material representation we could get the God’s Bliss.

V: That which is the taste of a matter is enjoyed when it is eaten. If Khova is eaten we get the taste of Khova. If a Laddu is eaten then we get the taste of Laddu only. There is a link of subject and its effect between Khova and its taste, and the link between them is not that of be pervaded and pervade. Khova is a subject and taste is its effect. However, the Idol and God are two different subjects. You know Khova through its taste. When God is not the quality of Idol how could God is felt thru the Idol? Further only when Khova is eaten then only its taste is derived. How a person could derive the taste of khova when it is artificially made of mud? Not possible. Similarly, only when god is experienced the God’s Bliss is obtained. Instead, if material representation is made of metal and mud in place of God how then the God’s bliss is obtained?

K: A currency Note with a King’s photo thereon is more comfortable for circulation. In a similar manner Murthy Pooja is also more comfortable.

V: First of all a King is a person with a body. Hence his photo can find a place in a currency Note. Whereas God is formless and his Photo cannot be made. Further, the Notes printed under the king’s authority are legal and can be easily being traded upon. Whosoever prints Notes against King’s authority could be jailed. Hence the proper and correct usage of forms and objects made by God is more rewarding. Making photos and stating that they are the material representation of God amounts to flouting the order of God which attempts to land the doer in darkness for several births.

K: We have heard in Mahabharata that Ekalavya learnt Archery by making the Idol of Dronacharya?

V:  There was a person Dronacharya and his photo was possible. What Ekalavya did was to make the prototype of the master. He did not worship it in place of God. Secondly, the prototype did not teach him archery. If that is the case why he should have practiced? He learnt the entire Archery thru his efforts and practice. Dronacharya was completely unaware of this development. When he came to know about his prototype he gave punishment.  If photos or prototype were capable of imparting education then Vedas could be learnt by just putting up of the photo of Vedavyas. One should be able to get riches by just putting up the photo of Kubera. Do we learn anything other than inertness from the lifeless objects? A butler from his association with an Englishman learns to talk in English. A labour learns to make sweet dishes by working with a Sweet maker. By sitting near fire, the heat is felt. We get the quality of things that we are associated with. By associating with inert, lifeless idols people also got inertness and lost vitality. They were beaten. Temples were destroyed. Country was thrown to slavery and poverty. Because of this inertness the qualities of self-confidence and Action were lost.

K: Good! We have discussed the matter enough. Now tell me whether God is just and merciful? If yes, how both attributes could remain together? If mercy is shown justice gets affected. If Justice is shown then the mercy is lost.

V: Let us discuss this tomorrow.

K:  Sister! Please reply to yesterday’s question.

V:  Why to remain devoted to God? And why should we praise and pray Him was your yesterday’s question.
             Well.  All things in the world aspire to get drawn towards its Primary source or centre of Power. This is applicable equally to both Conscious [chetan] and non-conscious or inert [Jada] bodies. Fire moves up and up for the reason that the Sun is the primary source of heat or Fire. Now consider another example. Throw a mud ball towards the Sky and however high it is thrown up ultimately it lands on the earth because Earth is the prime source of mud. Water gets evaporated from sea, because of Sun and the water so evaporated becomes a cloud. It starts raining and the water enters the rivers which ultimately join the sea, because sea is the prime source of water. So is the case of other materials also. Every material has its prime source.
         Ocean is the Prime centre of water
         Sun is the treasure house/ source of Fire
         Sky is the Prime centre of Wind
         Earth is the source of soil 

Similarly Knowledge also has its prime source in the world. That is God. All the knowledge that man has acquired has been got from God. If a man could acquire the knowledge by himself without others assistance there was no necessity for schools, colleges, universities etc. Teachers were also found then not necessary. But this is not the case. Parents teach their children to talk and make them aware of so many things that surround them. They teach their children, how to eat, drink, dress etc. Behavior, etiquettes, inter-personal relationships etc are also taught. When these children enter schools they learn many other things. Here it should be also noted that what the teachers teach is also not theirs but what they would have learnt while at home, Schools and colleges before becoming teachers.

Here a question arises. When the knowledge the men acquire is thru others who taught the human beings or the primary man at the time of Creation when there were no people before them? The answer is they got the knowledge from God only. Then how the Knowledge was given? How he taught them since He had no body?
 

Here it may be clarified, that there exists a difference between revealing the knowledge and imparting them.  Teaching is done through sound and knowledge is revealed in heart. Since God is all pervading He is present in the human beings created at the time of Creation. Accordingly, God reveals the Knowledge in the souls of chosen Rishis Viz, Agni, Vayu, Aditya and Angira. These Rishis in turn teach the knowledge for others through the medium of Sound. Then starts the mechanism of teaching, i.e. reading and hear them reading, reciting etc.

If God had not given the knowledge, the tradition of transmission of knowledge would not have come off. It is therefore clear that whatever knowledge that man has acquired is thru the process of transmission only and whatever enlightenment he has obtained has become possible thru god given intelligence and by observing the nature of world created by god. Man can enhance the boundaries of knowledge but so long he is not administered knowledge he cannot obtain himself. In the beginning of Creation God has revealed the knowledge in the hearts and minds of Rishis in seed form. Subsequent growth of knowledge in expanded form [Tree form] is rendered possible thru the efforts of Rishis   and intelligent men. This is the rule from time immemorial and the same will continue in future also. When all things in the world are aspiring to get drawn to its prime source and still at it, why the soul with finite knowledge would not wish to move towards God who is the repository and source of infinite knowledge? This is because his evolution is not at all possible sans God. Conscious bodies evolve with conscious bodies and unconscious [inert] bodies with inert bodies.

The welfare of conscious soul is not possible by any inert things in the world. It is true however, that by intelligently utilizing the inert matters the well being of body is definitely ensured. The soul however, bound as it is by limited knowledge [i.e. remaining Alpagna] seeks improvement in the worldly things but fails.  Hence he remains restless. Ignorance is the reason for unhappiness in the world. If soul were to understand the true nature of materials obtaining in the world, he will not experience unhappiness or sorrow. The soul becomes enmeshed in sorrow and shackles so long it keeps equating untruth to truth, ignorance to knowledge and conscious to inanimate. God who is the source of knowledge is the real source of happiness. Removed from God happiness does not lie in worldly things. If happiness could be found in worldly things then the entire world should have looked happy and cheerful. But the actual position is different. Every conscious being in the world seeks happiness, because it is not with him.  Why he should seek happiness if he already had?  He becomes  liberated with worldly sorrows and bondages and attains eternal happiness called Bliss[Ananda] in the end when while remaining devoted  keeps on doing praise[ Stuti] prayer[ Prarthana]and communion[ Upaasana]

K: It is wrong to say that there is no pleasure or happiness in the worldly things. If there were to be no happiness in them, then why they should be much sought after by men? If money were not to bring happiness why people would have struggled to accumulate it? If food were not cause happiness why they would have consumed it? Why wear clothes if they were not to cause happiness? Why construct Homes if they were not to bring in pleasure and happiness?  All this indicate that there is happiness in worldly things. Hence, people desire to have them and do not want to give them up. He finds happiness in their acquisition and feels unhappy at its loss. Then how to believe that happiness is not found in material things?

V:  Sister! What you find happiness in worldly objects is not real happiness but illusion of it. Happiness is in the minds of men. When a man makes use of things he feels comforted and comes to believe that happiness is obtained from them only. But frankly speaking, happiness is not obtained from a particular thing. He feels happy so because of mind’s concentration. When a dog bites a dry bone, its gums starts bleeding and the dog [unaware of the fact that dry bone cannot have a blood] keeps on sucking the blood oozing from its own gums! Similarly where is the happiness in the worldly things outside? Happiness lies inside. This is known. If money were to spell happiness, then no rich man would have been unhappy. But the extent of worries that the rich man has is not there with the poor man. A rich man down with diseases could buy medicines but not health. That rich man   could employ teachers, workers, buy books but can he earn knowledge? No. He can earn knowledge and wisdom only thru hard intensified study. Likewise he may buy food but cannot buy hunger.

There are millionaires in the world who are unable to digest even one meal a day. Now tell me whether there is happiness inherent in money. If food were to bring happiness the quantum of happiness one derives by eating four chapattis should be four times by eating 16 chapattis. This is because happiness should be proportionate to the quantum of food eaten. But does this happen? By eating more than that satisfies his hunger he becomes sick requiring medication. Dry, tasteless food tastes like nectar when one is hungry, whereas, nectar tastes bitter when not hungry. Similar is the position about clothes. If clothes were to cause comfort, the same cloths that are comfortable  in winter should continue to be so in summer also and vice versa. If causing comfort were to be the nature of clothes then it should cause comfort in all seasons. Why warm clothes are not suited in summer and winter clothes are not suited for winter?

The nature and character of a thing should remain constant under all circumstances. For ex, to burn a thing is the nature of Fire. This nature will not undergo change. Sweetness is the quality of sugar. Eat sugar at any time. You taste sweet only. Likewise, if causing happiness is the nature of worldly things, then people would not have sought happiness even after their possession. They should be feeling happy every second. Now be clear!  Will the problem of a person running high temperature could be overcome by putting him on a soft, silky bed? Never. Hence I tell you, that happiness does not lie in the worldly things. God is the source of Happiness and that is obtained by being nearer to Him.

K: If happiness were to be within, and real joy does not rest with the worldly things, then why a person derives happiness in eating sweets? Why he does not derive happiness by eating Mud? There is joy in eating Rotis but not sand. Sugar tastes but not grass. What is the reason for this?

V:  The feeling of happiness which we derive in eating sugar candy etc is because of the character of the latter and this does not constitute real happiness. The sweetness is felt when this is concentrated in mind. Then only he experiences joy in it. If sugar candy were to cause happiness then it should cause same happiness during fever also whereas sugar tastes bitter during fever. Similar is the case of chillies. Persons not habituated to taking chillies find it as poison. So is the case of other worldly things. Now about person not finding happiness in eating mud. If mind is concentrated in it then eating mud also becomes enjoyable.

We might have seen some women eating mud balls. Some animals eat sand stones also. Leave this matter aside. We find people taking liquor which is awfully smelling, astringent and bitter. Opium is highly bitter but some people consume it. People find happiness in these things. Does joy lie in these things? No. Man derives happiness in these things as long as his mind gets concentrated in them. A question may arise as to how the mind gets concentrated in an object. When a man becomes used to a thing he starts concentrating therein albeit temporarily is the answer. Because of habit, the inherent culture or the sanskars of that object leaves a strong impression on the mind. The sanskars of a particular thing instigates a person to use them often and often.

Similar is the case of beautiful scenario. Man in order to see his mind gets relaxed goes to forests, Sea, Parks, mountains etc. But when he is entangled in a criminal case he does not derive joy in these places of interest. Strikingly good places appear to be drab, worthless places for him for the reason his mind is restless resulting in lack of concentration. A person goes to a music concert, Film show etc to enjoy. But if he finds his son being sick he does enjoy the show even though present. This is because the sickness of son has disturbed him. At times when our mind is busy roaming elsewhere, we are unaware of taste of food being eaten. Hence it is clear that happiness rests with when accompanied by concentrated mind and not in objects.

K: First you said that God is a prime source of all Happiness and now you are telling that happiness lie in concentrated mind. Why this dichotomy?

V: Only in the concentrated mind the blissful God is felt. The ignorant finds that happiness lie in the external things. This is not dichotomy. What is important to be known here is, because of habit man obtains   transient concentration in worldly things. Hence transient happiness is obtained. We may ultimately realize God if we start concentrating mind in comprehensive form in worship. This is the ultimate aim of life. Precisely for this reason, praise [Stuti] prayer [Prathana] and communion [Upaasana] is necessary, the object being let mind gets concentrated and thereby derive more and more happiness.

K: What is the proof that the more the mind is concentrated, the more happiness is derived?

V: I give a proof based on state of being while in wakeful {Jagrit] state and in deep slumber [Sushupthi] state. During wakeful position man’s transactions [vrithis] are spread over towards worldly things. Hence concentration is not attained. The mind rushes to one object or the other. But in sleep condition his mind’s activities are in concentrated, restful mode, and he feels happy after a good sleep. Getting up in the morning he says that he is happy because he got a good sleep overnight. The happiness he got in sleep was due to the mind’s concentration. The soul is relieved off the connection with worldly objects and rapprochement is done with God. The soul is attached either to worldly things or with God. The more he is attached to worldly things the more sorrow he experiences. The more he cultivates relationship with God he derives more happiness.

This becomes clearer from the example. A person is in jail. He is ailing. He is pained at the loss of his wife and children. He is having lot of other worries.  He is disturbed but till when? These things drag him to restlessness as long he is in wakeful state.  Once he manages to get sleep all the troubles disappear and he enjoys the same amount of happiness that a king enjoys. Even animals enjoy happiness in sleep. This is because that in Sleep his mind’s transactions are not scattered over, but remain concentrated. Control of mind’s transactions is called “YOGA” i.e. communion with God. When an intelligent communion is established with God thru Stuti, Prarthana, and Upaasana it is said that there is spiritual elevation. This spiritual upliftment reaches its zenith thru Samadhi where Soul becomes immersed with God. This is the ultimate aim of life.

K:  Which is called Stuthi, Prathana and Upaasana?

 V:  Praising the God with full devotion and faith is called Stuthi. Seeking God’s help for the removal of his foibles or weaknesses from those Godly qualities is called Prarthana. Keeping away from the worldly things that involves his pride in self called Ahankar and strongly invoking a feeling that he is nearer to God is called Upaasana.

K: You believe that God has no Form. But large number of people in the world thinks otherwise and offer prayer to the Form. What is wrong in understanding that God has a Form or having a Body?

V: You will get answer to this question tomorrow.

K: Sister! Give reply to yesterday’s question

V: Your yesterday’s question was how God could protect the world when he was devoid of body for the reason that there could be no activity without body being present. But  I say that  your understanding of the matter is wrong. Conscious being can do functions any where it resides. It can give momentum. Where it is not there, then only the requirement of body is needed. For ex, now I have lifted this book. From which?

V: If hands were not to be there would it be possible to lift the books?

V: Good! The hands have lifted the book. Now tell me which lifted the hands?

V: Look! I am shaking my entire body. From which the body is being shaken?

V: You were just telling that no activity was possible without Body. Now how the body got its activity without a Body? The answer to this question is wherever the conscious entity and its strength is present there remains no necessity for the agency like the body. The Soul that resides inside the body gives mobility for the entire body, and for those things that reside outside the mobility is given thru the body. This is because He [Soul] is not found outside. God resides both inside and outside and he is omnipresent. Hence He does not require a body. Since he is present in the entire universe he gives momentum for the entire universe.

K: I see, Pot makers, Cooks etc, who are having a Form, alone could create objects having Form. Then how formless God could create this world having a Form?

V: Creators who have a visible Form could create things that are external to their bodies. They cannot create things within their bodies. For the creation of things that are external to their bodies the help of limbs like hands and legs are necessary. However these are not necessary for creation of things that are inside. There are no materials which are external to god. He pervades all. He is omnipresent. Hence no body is necessary for Him to create. A cook prepares food that is outside his body. Supposing if he prepares the food inside his body then who would eat the food? In such case why hands and legs are needed? The blood, bone, and marrow are formed inside the body without the help of hands and legs. Now think over. Sense organs create and watch external things. In case they were to watch what goes inside the body the life becomes miserable. How things will be if one were to smell inside body things, were to watch the flesh, blood, stools etc present inside the body? It is awful experience indeed! It is god’s grace that we see things that are external to the body.

K: Does the Creator pervade the created? Clock maker makes the clock. Clock is different from that of clock maker. The sweet maker makes the sweet. The sweet and sweet maker is different from each other. It is a universal principle that the maker is different from what is made. How it is possible that the God creates all and pervades all? Secondly it is not understood how things are created without the aid of hands and legs.

V:  The clock makers, sweet maker, are all creative men with finite abilities further bound by the limitation of space and time. They are together with the object created to the extent of action involved for creation. If they were not to be there the corresponding action would not have taken place. When we say that clock-maker made the watch it would mean that he assembled the machine parts. A clock-maker makes the watch but does not create it. The machine parts maker is with the clock when the machine parts are being assembled. If he was not present, the machine parts would not have joined together to become a clock. Similarly the machine maker is present with machine parts with action. If that was not the case the machine parts would not have been made. Similarly, the people who made steel [out of iron ore] used to make machine parts were with the steel and this would not have come off had they not been with steel. This goes to prove that behind making a clock many hands of creation are involved. The Creator is present with the every corresponding action. Similar is the case of Goldsmith, and others. They are the creators of their action. Many hands are involved before making a final product.

                        So it is clear that while making an object, apart from the maker, the help of many people are involved. Then only an object could be created. Why this is so? This is so because man has limited knowledge and limited abilities and he could create things with the coordinated efforts of others. Those Creators are with the created by their action. When they could associate with gross objects as such, why god is not present in the subtlest of the subtle, grossest of the gross Creation? Think for yourself. Creation does not mean just Sun, Moon, Stars, Mountains, Tress, Rivers, Human beings, Animals, Birds etc, There are many things which are endless subtle and beyond imagination. The Creation includes or a combination of all these things.

                                        Creation is made by an intelligent combination of atoms. Five gross elements, five principles of subtle entities called Panchatanmatras [speech, touch, vision, taste, and smell] five great elements called Panch-Mahabhootas [ether, air, water, fire and earth] are all created out of these atoms. The creation is made of out of these things. If the assembler of atoms is not with them how they can take shapes? There is no machinery in the world which can hold atoms together and bring out things out of them. The elements which are indivisible are called Atoms. God is immanent in all the atoms. Hence is able to form the grossest and subtlest things in the world. The atoms are the subtlest things in insensate [Jada] matters and God is more subtle than them. Hence he could pervade them. If this was not the case, he had to seek the help of outside agency similar to man taking the help of others for creating things. Hence it is clear that everyone is present to the extent of action involved for creation. Now the question how could things be created without hands and legs? Granting that these parts are necessary, a question that arises here as to who could have created these limbs? Here it should be understood, Hands and legs are the product of creation. When hands and legs could be created without the help of the latter is it not then possible for other parts of Creation to be had without the assistance of hands and legs? Are the hands and legs of a child in mother’s view being formed with any hands or legs? Seeds grow into plants and trees. And are they so made with hands and legs? It should be made clear here, that hands and legs could manufacture things that are related it. Is it possible to create mosquitoes and other minute creatures out of legs and hands? The circumference of the Earth where human beings reside is about 25000miles. There are planets like Mars, Uranus and stars like Sun in the Universe which are million times bigger than the Earth. Is it possible to create these objects with hands and legs? Only the omnipresent and omnipotent God has created these bodies in a purposeful manner.

K: Sister! Some how you initiate new subjects for discussion.  Where is the Rule being observed here? Are the things created as per Rule? Where is the method here? We see tall mountains, deep valleys, on the one side! And on the other side there exist dense forests, deserts, bushes, shrubs etc. Where is the method/order here? Like wise the world is formed haphazardly. Normally a system is followed. When a man builds a house, he provides for a living room, well, lavatory etc so as to make it hospitable. An agriculturist builds an agricultural farm, provides for a farm house, canals, varieties of plants and trees etc in a methodical manner. A shopkeeper arranges goods in order in the shop. So a Rule or method is followed by man, whereas I find Creation to be reckless and bizarre. As per my assessment no Rule or method is found to be in Creation.

V: It is utter foolish to say that no Rule or method is found in Creation. Why Sun should rise in East and set in west? Why not the other way round? Is there no Rule here? Even the best made human watch shows slight variation in being either fast or slow. But do you find a variation by a second in the movement of Sun and the Moon? How perfect are their movements? Based on the movements of Sun and Moon the eclipses occurring at a distant future could be predicted accurately. Similar is the state of things in respect of other cosmic bodies also. Now tell me why mango seed is obtained from Mango tree only. Why we cannot get oranges from Mango tree? Why man is born a baby, grows into adult and gets old. Why not he gets old first, youth later and baby there afterwards? Why see with eyes only and not heard from them? Why nose smells only but cannot taste? Are these not indicative of the presence of Rule here?

                     Mountains are found to be somewhere and so the rivers. Oceans, bushes, Forests are found to be at some other place. And to say that there is no Rule in creation because of this diversity is reflective of your ignorance. With what petty yardstick you are measuring the Creation? Normally people find fault in things they do not understand. This is universal phenomenon. This sort of reasoning could be likened to an ant which started climbing the body of man and telling that the head is like a forest, eyebrows as thorny fences, nose as a hillock with nostrils as tunnels, moustaches to bushy forests, etc and felt that man indeed should be awful creature. The ant bound by its limited intelligence assumes that body has been formed haphazardly.

           Supposing, for the convenience of ant, if the eyes, face, nose and other parts are removed and body is made flat then the ant might feel that the body had been constructed in orderly fashion. Now my point is body shaped to the requirement of an ant could satisfy the whims and fancies of an ant and it might even say that the human body was in order. But the body shaped to the ant’s requirement could ever remain human? Will the aesthetic intelligent transaction between the organs of perception and action occur there? Not at all. Take another example. An Engineer constructs a machine having hundreds of parts inside it. The shape and size of each part might be round, curved, square, big or small. The parts are made to the requirement of the machine. An ignorant person not aware of the importance of machine might think that the parts are too big or curved and he may even say that the parts have been assembled haphazardly. It is natural for an ignorant to think this way. But the machine maker knows well and he has assembled the parts as ought to have been done for the machine to work satisfactorily. If the machinery parts had been made either round or straight only the Machine would not have worked at all.

                 Similar is the position of Creation effected by God. The machinery called Creation has many parts. It has mountains, rivers, ocean, valleys, forests etc, etc. The Creation has a purpose and an object, i.e. welfare of human beings. For the ignorant, the parts of Creation appear as uncouth, useless and lacking in order, the reason being they are unaware of purpose of Creation. The usefulness of parts of Creation i.e., oceans, rivers, mountains etc is not understood. The examples of shopkeeper, agriculturist, etc that were given are too small and could be understood easily, whereas the laws of Creation are too subtle and complex to be understood. Just think over of the Brain thru which man makes laws. Even this brain is made by god who has formulated innumerable laws of Creation. If no laws were to be there who would have believed God? The existence of immutable laws provides the proof of existence of God.

K: O.K. God has made the Creation. Who has created the God?

V: Created matter is the effect. It [created matter] requires a material cause [base material] and the Maker is called Efficient cause. God is not a created-matter. He is Eternal and has No origin. Hence, the question, as to who created God does not therefore arise. Who could be creator for who is self-created? If the Creator were to have a creator then he cannot be called a Creator. He becomes a Cause then. He is alone a Creator who is self-independent. The matter- created, cannot be termed as Creator. The human bodies deemed as Creators are not Creators in the real sense. They are instruments or agencies that bring about Creation. The Soul is the Creator.  

K: O.K. Granting, that Creator has no Creator as such, then please tell me as to why should we accept the God? Why should we praise [stuthi] pray [prarthana] and communion [Upaasana] Him? How is He related to our lives?