Table of Contents

October 2020 - Dadavani - English

EDITORIAL

Let Us Recognize the Extensive Forms of the Ego

One’s Own Kashay Are Indeed One’s Own Enemies

The Basis of Kashay

The Form of the Ahamkaar

The Beginning and Expansion of Aham and Ahamkaar

The Definition of Ahamkaar, Maan, and Abhimaan

The Difference Between the Ahamkaari and the Maani

The Public Display of Maan Is Abhimaan

Ahamkaar and Abhimaan

Swamaan and Abhimaan

Abhimaani: Mithyabhimaani

That Is Considered Mithyabhimaan

Abhimaan, Swaprashansa, and Garvaras

Maan Has a Vast Spectrum

The Disease of Being Intoxicated With Pride

The Thermometer to Measure Maan

Nirmaani: Nirahamkaari: Nirmohi

The Ego of Being Nispruhi

The Ego Has Veiled the Light of the Self

The Effects of the Discharging Ego After Gnan

Dehabhimaan Has Become Nonexistent

The Ego Dissolves Through Shuddha Upayog

After the Ego Dissolves, There Is the Realization of the Self

The One Who Recognizes the Ego Attains Salvation

www.dadabhagwan.org

October 2020 - Dadavani - English

Let Us Recognize the Extensive Forms of the Ego

EDITORIAL

Who are our enemies in this world? Kashay (anger, pride, deceit, and greed)! The inner enemies of anger, pride, deceit, greed, attachment, and abhorrence are indeed the cause for all pain and wandering from life after life. And whose support do these kashay have? It is of the ego. To believe oneself to be what he is not is ego (ahamkaar) and it is indeed because of this that the world perpetuates. Fundamentally, there is the ego and the kashay that arise from that; the root cause of all of these is the ignorance of the Self.

Now, how can one become free from this ego? Just as the one who is bound cannot become free on his own, only someone who is free can free him. Similarly, the One whose ego and my-ness have become completely destroyed, through the grace of such a Gnani Purush, through the spiritual powers of the Gnan Vidhi (the original scientific experiment for Self-realization which can be attained within two hours) on the Akram path (step-less path to Self-realization), one can permanently become free from the living ego within two hours; and we have all experienced this. Now what remains is the discharging ego. After attaining Gnan,as one recognizes this ego, as one understands that the ego is wrong, as it is Seen as separate [from the Self], it gradually dissolves. In the current edition, in order to recognize the ego, its detailed form has been explained.

Absolutely revered Gnani Purush Dadashri [popularly referred to as Dada Bhagwan] has explained the subtle meaning of words that are used as synonyms, such as aham (‘I am’), ahamkaar (ego), maan (pride), abhimaan (excessive pride due to material possessions), swamaan (pride that is confined to one’s personal qualities), garva (the ego of doership and subtle pride in that), and so on. The prevalence of I is aham, and to display that prevalence of I is ahamkaar; for example, to express ‘I am Chandubhai,’ ‘I am her husband,’ ‘I am his father.’ When there is ownership in ahamkaar, it is maan, it is ego with rich materials. To demonstrate maan, such as, “This is my bungalow, this is my car,” that is abhimaan. Swamaan is maan that is confined to one’s own qualities. Garva means to believe ‘I am the doer,’ when in fact one is not the doer and to believe, ‘I did such a great job.’ In addition to these, the explanation of ghamand (an arrogant boaster), ghemraaji (an arrogant and condescending person), tumaakhi (superciliousness), tundmijaaji (a hot-tempered, arrogant person) and so on has been given here in simple terms with examples.

On the Akram path, the One who knows his own ego is indeed free from the ego. Just as one who looks at a bonfire is separate from it, similarly, the One who keeps the ego separate and recognizes it will attain salvation! The way through which the ego increases, it decreases by turning back along the same way. However much pure applied awareness as the Self(shuddha upayog) there is, the ego dissolves to that extent. After attaining Gnan, the fundamental ego has gone, but its effects remain. When all the effects of the ego go away, absolute Knowledge (keval Gnan)happens. The ardent prayer is that after attaining Gnan, this edition will act as the first step for mahatmas to progress as the Self (Purusharth)by recognizing the form of the discharging ego and clearing it!

~ Jai Sat Chit Anand

(Pg.4)

Let Us Recognize the Extensive Forms of the Ego

One’s Own Kashay Are Indeed One’s Own Enemies

There is no other enemy on the outside at all [in this world]. One’s own kashay (anger, pride, deceit and greed) are indeed one’s own enemies, and those kashay are indeed what are ‘killing’ a person. No one on the outside is ‘killing’ him. Truly speaking, our kashay are the culprits.

Questioner: What is kashay?

Dadashri: That which hurts the self is all kashay. Kashay means that which keeps hurting the [relative] self within, that which causes internal turmoil and restlessness (ajampo). Attachment, abhorrence, anger, pride, deceit, and greed are all things that give pain. That itself is referred to as kashay.

Anger, pride, deceit and greed do not let people be at peace for even a moment. There is constant writhing in agony! Have you ever seen such a thing? Does a fish not writhe in agony? Just as a fish writhes in agony when it is pulled out of the water, similarly, these humans writhe in agony without being pulled outside! They writhe in agony even when they are at home, they writhe in agony even when they go to the office; they writhe in agony all day long! Now, if this writhing in agony is remedied, then how much bliss would remain! Just look, ‘our’ writhing in agony has been remedied, so just look at the talks that have come forth! Constant writhing in agony will remain for the entire world. Even though this person gets a nice meal to eat, the writhing in agony within does not stop. Tell me, isn’t it a wonder how people are able to live!

The Basis of Kashay

Questioner: What is the basis of kashay?

Dadashri: It is on the basis of ignorance of the Self (agnanta). Ignorance of the Self is itself the basement of all of this. When ignorance of the Selfleaves, everything gets resolved. Ignorance of the Self leaves when ‘we’ give you the understanding [about the Self]. When ignorance of the Selfleaves,the kashay begin to shed away, and thus attachment and abhorrence begin to shed away. Subsequently, the prakruti (non-Self complex) begins to dissolve.

(Pg.5)

As long as there is ahamkaar (ego; egoism) of ‘I am the one, I am the one,’ anger, pride, deceit, greed, not a single one, can be defeated.

The interference is only of the ego. This world has perpetuated only because of the ego. Anger, pride, deceit, and greed are under the prevailing presence of the ego. If the ego is not there, then anger, pride, deceit, and greed that are there, are [really] not there. This is because their support is the ego, and the ego itself is supported by something else. Its root cause is ignorance of the Self. But ignorance of the Self certainly exists, it has spread throughout the world. So, what is the basis of anger, pride, deceit, and greed? It is the ego! What is the basis of the world? It is the ego! If the ego is removed, then anger, pride, deceit, and greed do not do anything. They all become lifeless.

The Form of the Ahamkaar

Questioner: What is the true definition of ahamkaar?

Dadashri: The world has not understood the true definition of ahamkaar. It is not in accordance with the way people have understood it. Everyone understands it in their own language. Everyone’s language is different, isn’t it? But that will not work with respect to God’s language. One actually has to take a test there, that [their own understanding] will be of no use there.

What is ahamkaar? It is to claim to be something one is not. One does not know who he really is and he claims to be what he is not, that is referred to as ahamkaar. Who has this? Who does this state apply to? It applies to everyone. Everyone is considered to be ahamkaari (with ego; with ahamkaar). Ahamkaar means it is not on the basis of any eternal element (vastu). What prevails in one’s belief? He believes to be what he is not. ‘I’ am not ‘Chandubhai’ [the reader should substitute his or her name here], but one believes ‘I am Chandubhai’; that itself is ego!

‘I am Chandubhai’ is ahamkaar. This is not the only ahamkaar. I will disclose the various forms of ahamkaar. One will say, “I am the father of this girl,” that is the second ahamkaar. “I am the husband of this woman,” that is the third ahamkaar, “I am this many years old,” that is the fourth ahamkaar,“I am fat,” that is the fifth ahamkaar, “I am dark complexioned,” that is the sixth ahamkaar, “I am his grandfather,” that is the seventh ahamkaar, and “I am his maternal uncle (mama),” that is the eighth ahamkaar. “I am his paternal aunt’s husband(fua)”; how many such forms of ahamkaar are there?! So, aaropit bhaav (false attribution of the belief ‘I am Chandubhai’) is known as ahamkaar and the original [natural] intent (bhaav) is known as nirahamkaar (egoless). When one says, “I am poor,” what is that considered?

Questioner: Ahamkaar.

Dadashri: Then, “I am sick,” that is known as ahamkaar, “I am well,” that is known as ahamkaar, “I am a doctor,” that is known as ahamkaar. Then he will say, “I am a Shah [a common Indian surname, which was historically used as a byword for someone who was honest

(Pg.6)

and good].” Oh! Are you a Shah who has never stolen before! What is a Shah like? The one who not only never cheats in the accounting books, but never does any kind of stealing at all, he is a Shah! This is all egoism, ahamkaar. This is not a characteristic of the Self. This entire world, in fact, exists on the basis of the ahamkaar. How long does it exist like this? It exists as long as the realization of ‘who am I’ has not happened.

The Beginning and Expansion of Aham and Ahamkaar

Questioner: What is referred to as aham (‘I am’) and ahamkaar (ego), are they the same thing or are they different?

Dadashri: They are different. The words themselves are different, aren’t they!

Questioner: What is the difference between them?

Dadashri: If someone says, “I am the Self (aham Atma),” then there is no problem, but what if someone says, “I am the egoistic self (ahamkaar atma)”?What would happen? There is no problem with ‘I am’ (aham); there is a problem with ahamkaar. ‘I am’ is not ego. In ‘I am the absolute Self’ (Aham Brahmasmi), ‘I am’ is certainly used, isn’t it! This is because ‘I am’ should certainly be there, but for what? There should be ‘I am’ for one’s Real form (swaroop). Why should there be ‘I am’ for what one is not? ‘I am’, is not poison; the ego is poison. Aham means I (hu).

Questioner: We used to believe that aham (‘I am’) was itself the ahamkaar (ego; egoism).

Dadashri: No, there is actually a great difference between ahamkaar and aham.

Questioner: Is there a difference even between the two? What is the difference between the two; please could you explain this in detail?

Dadashri: The prevalence of I (hupanu) is aham, and the showing off of that prevalence of I [‘I am Chandu’] is ahamkaar. ‘I am the President,’ that is not considered ahamkaar. It is simply our people who say, “He is an egoistic (ahamkaari) person,” but actually, he is considered to be a pride-filled (maani) person. Ahamkaar is actually where no worldly things are actually connected to one, rather one (pote) just believes ‘I am’ where he does not actually exist; that falls under the category of ahamkaar. It does not extend to other things. And the moment it extends to other things, it becomes pride (maan)! When it shows off, ‘I am the President,’ and all that, then we can understand that he is full of pride.

Questioner: What is categorized under showing off?

Dadashri: It is to speak excessively about the prevalence of I. The I already exists, the aham already exists in belief, but to show it off by boisterously saying, “This is right and this is wrong,” that is called ahamkaar. But there is nothing else within it; there is no sense of ownership in anything. Once a sense of ownership arises, it means that maan (pride) has arisen.

(Pg.7)

It is not maan alone; then as the sense of ownership gradually increases, it becomes abhimaan (excessive pride due to material possessions). When it is confined to the body, he is considered to be full of maan, whereas, ‘This apartment is mine, this is mine,’ that [which includes my-ness] is abhimaan. Hence, from ahamkaar to maan to abhimaan; all kinds of various phases tend to arise.

Ahamkaar is not considered to be the same as what people understand it to be. What people refer to as ahamkaar is actually maan. Ahamkaar exists in belief; it is not in conduct (gnan). When it comes into conduct, it is called maan. Where one is not a doer, there he believes, ‘I am the one who is doing it’; that is known as ahamkaar.

Questioner: Now, explain that with an example.

Dadashri: When we say, “I came downstairs,” now in coming down from upstairs, One (pote) himself did not come down at all, it is in fact this body that came down. It is the body that came down, but one believes, ‘I came.’ Such a belief is considered to be ahamkaar, and then when he verbalizes by saying, “I came,” that is called maan. Whereas people consider verbalizing “I came” to be ahamkaar.

Ahamkaar means that one does not do anything, yet he asserts, “I am the doer.” That is aaropit bhaav (the falsely planted view that ‘I am doing’), that is referred to as ahamkaar. To refer to a relative thing as ‘I am’, that itself is ahamkaar. Ahamkaar is the fundamental thing and from that, maan (pride), abhimaan (excessive pride due to material possessions), garva (the ego of doership and subtle pride in that), ghemraaji (arrogant and condescending), [intoxicated pride (mada), jealousy (matsar)]; all sorts of words have arisen. All those different words are used at different times. It is worth understanding the gross meaning of all these words. That is why the Gnanis have given different names.

The Definition of Ahamkaar, Maan, and Abhimaan

Questioner: What is the difference between ahamkaar, maan, and abhimaan?

Dadashri: The extensive form of ahamkaar is referred to as maan. And if it is with my-ness (mamata), then it is referred to as abhimaan. When there is any, even the slightest my-ness… When one says, “This is my car,” what is the reason for making a display of this to people? It is abhimaan. If he has good-looking children, then he will say, “Look, let me show you my four children.” So that is my-ness and abhimaan! So where there is abhimaan, one keeps showing off such things to us.

What kind of a thing is abhimaan? There is aaropit bhaav in it, meaning there is certainly ahamkaar, but when one shows off [by saying], “I have four bungalows, I have two cars,” it is referred to as abhimaan.

To claim to do that which one is not doing, that is ahamkaar.And maan is an extended form of ahamkaar, that which has proliferated.

(Pg.8)

Questioner: So then abhimaan must be born out of maan, mustn’t it?

Dadashri: No. When is abhimaan born? It is when there is my-ness (mamata) that abhimaan is born.

The ahamkaar is a different state and abhimaan is a different state. These people of ours do not actually have any awareness (bhaan) at all, they truly have no awareness, they keep making unfounded statements! They say whatever comes to mind, “This is a person with abhimaan, this is a person with ahamkaar.” In fact, every human being is with ahamkaar. It is not the case that there would be any person without ahamkaar. The Gnani (One who has realized the Self and is able to do the same for others) alone does not have ahamkaar, and the followers of the Gnani also do not have ahamkaar. Otherwise, everyone else has ahamkaar. So after attaining this Gnan (Knowledge of the Self), ignorance of the Self (agnan) leaves, so the ahamkaar has departed. So, if One is the pure Soul, then there is no ahamkaar, whereas if one is Chandubhai, then there is ahamkaar.

Ahamkaar means to claim to be what one is not; the offense is limited only to that. There is no other offense of ahamkaar.

Now what is maan? It is when one wears nice clothes and rolls up his sleeves so that people can see the expensive watch he is wearing. Then when someone asks, “How are you, chief?” At that time, we can clearly see his pride (maan). This is because he is wearing expensive accessories; that is considered maan.

The Difference Between the Ahamkaari and the Maani

Questioner: What is the difference between an ahamkaari (a person with ego) and a maani (a person with pride)?

Dadashri: The ahamkaari does not have any fear of an insult, whereas the maani has fear of an insult. The maani continues to have fear of an insult. Whereas the ahamkaari does not have fear of an insult. It is if one has pride (maan) that he will be affected by an insult (apmaan), won’t he! But what about where there is no pride at all?

If a laborer passing by and you ask him, “Hey, what’s your name?” Then he will reply, “Lalvo.” Now, he does not call himself Lallubhai, so you know that he is only ahamkaari. [‘Lalvo’ is a nickname for Lallu and ‘bhai’ is used as a formality and a form of respect, like ‘Mr.’] If you ask a person, “What’s your name?” And he replies, “Lallubhai,” then you will know that he is also maani.

And if another person is passing by and you ask, “Who are you?” And he replies, “I am Lallubhai, the lawyer. Did you not recognize me?” Then he is also considered to be abhimaani.

So these are all characteristics of it!

There is ahamkaar, then when it is associated with my-ness, abhimaan has arisen. Any type of my-ness, any kind whatsoever! That is to say, when it is with any type of my-ness, it is considered abhimaan. When it is ego alone, without my-ness, then it is called ahamkaar.

(Pg.9)

The Public Display of Maan Is Abhimaan

What is considered abhimaan? If a person has possessions, then he tells others about them; that is considered abhimaan. As a matter of fact, each person tells others [about their possessions]. Not a single person can refrain from telling others [about their possessions]. So when is it considered abhimaan? The ego (ahamkaar) is certainly there, but suppose on your way to a shop, a person tells you, “Wait.” [You say,] “Dear fellow, why is it that you want me to wait? I am in a hurry!” To which he responds, “This is my house. These four buildings; these two buildings and those two buildings are mine.” All of that is considered abhimaan. [You say,] “Dear fellow, I need to be on my way right now, why are you chitchatting? Why are you bothering me unnecessarily?” But he is displaying his abhimaan. Even if you don’t ask, he still shows off how good it is! What is the reason behind that? He has abhimaan. It is a different matter if you had asked him and he tells you. And if he tells you without being asked, that is abhimaan! When he is hankering to tell someone, that is abhimaan.

Questioner: Is it because of abhimaan that one says, “Mine is more superior and his is inferior”?

Dadashri: Yes, abhimaan means ‘This is superior and this is inferior.’ One gives proof of that; ‘This is my property, that is my property, this is my car.’So based on this, he is trying to say, “[Mine is] superior and [his is] inferior.” However, he does not say superior or inferior directly. Abhimaan means one has more things than are necessary and he makes a show of it; that is abhimaan. He believes in his mind, ‘How happy I am!’ He tries to make others feel inferior, this is known as abhimaan.

So, with abhimaan, one shows everything off; he shows this off and that off. Oh, he will even show off his expensive eyeglasses. He will say, “Did you see my glasses?” Hey, what do I want with your glasses that you keep showing them to me! But he keeps saying such things to feed his abhimaan. Oh, even if he has bought an expensive set of trousers, he keeps showing them off. If he has bought some costly shoes, even then he will keep showing them off; that is abhimaan!

Abhimaan means to display pride everywhere, wherever one can. Even if his brother’s house is small, he still shows off, “This is my brother’s house, this is my uncle’s house, that is my house.” He shows off as though it is big; over there, abhimaan prevails within. To show off one’s possessions to impress othersis known as abhimaan. Why does he show off? It is for maan. Moreover, he has gone beyond maan, he does not straighten out even with abhimaan. Then nature sorts him out by giving him beatings. So, one may have two to four cars, but one should not have any egoabout it. One should not display abhimaan over it. When one expresses abhimaan, it is the beginning of the departure [of those things]. One should maintain humility. The more extra worldly comforts one has available, one should maintain humility.

(Pg.10)

Moreover, one will say, “I have four sons, this son of mine is a chartered accountant,” and so on. That is all abhimaan. When one says, “I am fair complexioned, I am fat,” all of that is considered abhimaan. If all these other people are dark complexioned and one himself is fair complexioned, then he has the abhimaan of being fair. Do people have deep pride (mada) of their [own] looks or not?

Questioner: They do.

Dadashri: If one’s wife is very beautiful, then he would havepride that, ‘No one’s wife is like my wife.’ Does that happen or not?

Questioner: It happens.

Dadashri: Now, this beauty is not going to last. It does not take long for this beauty to become ugly. What would happen to that beauty if she ever ends up getting smallpox? Would the beauty last if she ends up getting smallpox? No matter how good looking she is? Is any of this authority in our hands? So, one should not express ahamkaar over this. ‘There is no one who is better looking than me’; that falls under abhimaan. So when someone says, “I am fair complexioned,” that is not ahamkaar. These people do not understand ahamkaar at all. Whereas a person with abhimaan is readily recognized.

Questioner: Abhimaan is clearly visible when a group picture is taken.

Dadashri: Yes. Oh, the photographer himself will even understand that this person has abhimaan. But upon seeing ‘us’, the photographer immediately starts clicking away. He realizes, ‘He [Dadashri] appears to be completely without abhimaan.’ Whereas a person with abhimaan would immediately stiffen up at that time. Hey, why did you stiffen up? Whereas ‘we’ have the state of spontaneity and naturalness.

Questioner: Abhimaan is just like ahamkaar, isn’t it?

Dadashri: No, ahamkaar is better. Ahamkaar can actually be removed, whereas abhimaan creates tremendous misery. What is the role of nature? The role of nature is to bring down abhimaan. As abhimaan increases, one is bound to be brought down. He gets knocked down from up above! There is no problem with ahamkaar.

Ahamkaar and Abhimaan

What must be the difference between abhimaan and ahamkaar? ‘I am Chandubhai’ is ahamkaar. To claim ‘I am’ where you are not, that is called ahamkaar. And to show off, “These are my bungalows, these are my cars,” is abhimaan! Then why don’t you show off your greying hair? “Look, my hair is greying, look!” But nowadays people dye their hair black! They dye it! So, ahamkaar has arisen out of the lack of understanding, whereas abhimaan has arisen with understanding. When one takes garavas (indulges in the pleasure that arises from doership) [by saying], “Take a look at this, look at my estate, look at this, look at that,” then we would realize that abhimaan is rising for that person.

Now, if someone here were to sing

(Pg.11)

a spiritual song and everyone were to become pleased, then he would sing two or three more spiritual songs. That is also abhimaan!

Have you understood what abhimaan is?It is to believe the paudgalik (that which fills and empties, arises and gets destroyed, all that is the non-Self) ‘weight’ to be your own ‘weight’. To believe ‘I am important’and to believe all the things of the non-Self complex that are of ‘weight’ to be of one’s own ‘weight’, such as gold jewelry, a watch, a house, and all such things, that is abhimaan! One believes the ‘weight’ of his bungalow to be his own ‘weight’. Our people actually say, “Look at my bungalow, look at this and look at that; how amazing my bungalow is!” If they speak that way, then someone might say that the ahamkaar is speaking. Someone may say, “He has ahamkaar.” No, he is considered to have abhimaan. He does have these possessions, but upon making claims, to show off one’s own self, to indulge in the pleasure that arises from doership (garvaras), that is referred to as abhimaan. In abhimaan, that pleasure derived tends to be very sweet. The moment one says, “These are my bungalows,” the ‘taste’ of sweetness (meethash) immediately prevails within. So then it becomes a persistent habit for him, like Havmor ice cream.

Other people do have the right to have pride (maan), such as, ‘I own this flat, I own a car.’ They do have the right to have pride. However, they have no reason to keep abhimaan. And who can have abhimaan? The one who owns five to ten large houses can express abhimaan. If he has such amenities, if he has an estate in a small village or some other such thing, he expresses abhimaan. What is the point of being puffed up with pride when all you have is an apartment that is worth five to twenty-five hundred thousand rupees? No matter what rules and regulations the government imposes, if it does not otherwise affect a person’s wealth, if such a person expresses abhimaan on occasion, then that is acceptable.

Questioner: ‘Puffed up with pride’ means that a person has more abhimaan; that’s what ‘puffed up with pride’ means, right?

Dadashri: Those with abhimaan are different and those who are ‘puffed up with pride’ are different! The one who is ‘puffed up with pride’ does not have any property at all. Even if he has nothing that’s worth displaying abhimaan over, he still has a lot of pride, his head is puffed up with pride.

Questioner: Dada, why must they have used this terminology?

Dadashri: The person speaks in such a way that it burns. He speaks in such a way that it gives you a migraine, it gives you a headache!

Now have you understood what abhimaan is? And did you understand the point about ahamkaar?

Where one has not done anything, he says, “I did it,” that is ahamkaar. To express ahamkaar by puffing up one’s chest is maan (pride), and then to go around telling people, “I did that myself,” that is referred to as abhimaan.

(Pg.12)

Questioner: When one has saiyam (anger-pride-deceit-greed that are within control), then abhimaan arises along with saiyam, doesn’t it!

Dadashri: Where there is abhimaan,there is no saiyam. The abhimaani is blind and where there is saiyam, there should not only be no abhimaan, but there should be no ahamkaar either.

Maan and Swamaan

Questioner: What is the difference between maan and swamaan?

Dadashri: Maan means ego with rich materials. Whereas swamaan means to have pride that is confined to one’s own qualities! It is pride confined to one’s qualities that are fixed, such as, ‘I am a graduate.’ So, it is pride that is confined only to being a graduate. That is one’s own swamaan, he asks to be recognized for what he has achieved. He is not asking for anything beyond that. When that swamaan is violated, he feels, ‘I am a graduate yet why are they saying this?’ So it is confined to being a graduate. And he has the qualifications for it, so he should not be instigated. No one’s swamaan should be violated.

And what is maan? Forget whether he has a degree or any quality, forget about the qualities, but he has an expensive watch, he has glasses with a gold frame, he is wearing a nice long coat; that is all maan!

Questioner: Is there a difference between hurting one’s ego and hurting one’s swamaan?

Dadashri: There is a great deal of difference! When one’s swamaan is hurt, he will bind vengeance.

Questioner: And if one’s ego is hurt, then would he not bind vengeance?

Dadashri: No, not at all. There is no problem with the ego. But these wealthy people do not have ego at all, do they! It is always only the people who are poor who have ego. If you tell a person, “Come along you, useless fellow,” even then he remains unaffected, that is known as ego. Nevertheless, it is not limited to just that; the ego may or may not be affected. The ego may even be affected. The person may even be censured at that time and yet he may even be unaffected. However, wealthy people do not have the ego alone.

Questioner: Then what do wealthy people have?

Dadashri: Wealthy people have maan, abhimaan, swamaan; they have a variety of things. They have everything along with the ego. Whereas people who are poor do not have anything along with the ego, the poor things.

Questioner: If a person has done something good, then he will take abhimaan of that, and what if he exerts abhimaan to humiliate someone?

Dadashri: All of that does not fall under abhimaan.

Questioner: So then what is the difference between the two?

Dadashri: Maan and abhimaan are with rich materials!

(Pg.13)

Questioner: So are maan and abhimaan connected to material wealth?

Dadashri: Yes, nothing else.

Swamaan and Abhimaan

Questioner: What is the difference between swamaan and abhimaan?

Dadashri: What kind of pride is swamaan? It is the kind of pride in which ‘no one should instigate me even slightly’ and ‘no one should disturb my steadiness.’ A person only keeps swamaan to the point that no one instigates him. Whereas for a person with abhimaan, what he says is, “The property of my bungalow starts from here and it goes all the way up to there. And you haven’t even seen the backside of it.” Then, because he wants to show off all the jewelry he bought for his daughter, he shows it to you. He shows to you because it feeds his abhimaan. Then if he has some land, he shows that off, “These two hundred acres of land are mine.” And a person with abhimaan will keep looking in the mirror all day long to see how good looking he is! And when people talk about their ancestors, that they were like this and like that and were of a noble lineage, all of those people have abhimaan. They are not considered to be with swamaan.

A swamaani is involved in the worldly exchange of give and take. Swamaan means to respect others and to be respected in return, that is considered swamaan. So, in the dealings of worldly life, swamaan is a form of worldly interaction. One must make do with things to the point that no one’s swamaan is violated. Albeit, we have attained this path to liberation, so there is no talk of swamaan for us. However, in the dealings of worldly life, one should be mindful of maintaining swamaan, otherwise he would be considered naffat (thick-skinned rudeness). One should certainly be self-respecting, shouldn’t he! Even for those without Self-realization (agnani), there should definitely be this much. This much of a boundary is needed, isn’t it! Would it be acceptable to cross the boundary? Swamaan means to protect oneself so he does not get insulted.

Swamaan is the greatest thing; it is the limit of the positive qualities within the state of ignorance of the Self! ‘We’ have actually praised swamaan a lot, in the sense that it is the limit of positive qualities within the state of ignorance of the Self! There certainly would be positive qualities within the state of ignorance of the Self, wouldn’t there? This is the limit of that!

Questioner: Is swamaan pardonable or not?

Dadashri: If one has taken this Gnan, then swamaan is pardonable. Otherwise, swamaan should certainly be maintained.One should maintain swamaan even within the state of ignorance of the Self, shouldn’t he! If a person does not have swamaan, then he would become crass and impertinent. Once he becomes impertinent to the level of insensitivity (naffat), he crosses the boundary.

Questioner: But is there a certain amount of ‘I am’ (aham) in swamaan?

(Pg.14)

Dadashri: Let it be; there is ‘I am’ for sure. But at least he will not become crassly insolent. One remains within the boundary because of swamaan, he never crosses the boundary. So, even in the state of ignorance of the Self, swamaan is necessary.

Questioner: Now, everyone has his own swamaan. So we should maintain our own swamaan, shouldn’t we?

Dadashri: Now that You have attained this Gnan, why should You keep swamaan? Now there is no swamaan.

Questioner: But under certain circumstances, if something happens, we should maintain our swamaan, shouldn’t we?

Dadashri: But You have nothing to do with swamaan. Maan and swamaan are all gone. The fact is, the one for whom the ‘swa’ (the self) has not changed, he should maintain swamaan. Now, for you the ‘swa’has changed [to Swa, the Self]! Would there be swamaan for the One for whom the ‘swa’ has changed? Did you not understand this?

Questioner: But one should maintain swamaan in a way that is ‘dramatic’ [as though acting in a drama with constant awareness as the Self]?

Dadashri: That will certainly remain. Whatever remains is correct. Otherwise, there is no need to maintain swamaan. Why would you want to start up a new business!

Swamaan means ‘I am Chandubhai’ and to protect your own pride. But that is as long as you are Chandubhai. And now that You are the pure Soul, what is the need for such a discussion? After attaining this Gnan, You have become the Self. Then where is the place for swamaan? Swamaan means maan of the belief ‘I am the body.’ But You have become the Self, so it’s not as though swamaan remains! However, swamaan remains in the part that is discharging (nikaali). We are not concerned with that which is discharging, are we!

Abhimaani: Mithyabhimaani

Questioner: What is the difference between abhimaan and mithyabhimaan?

Dadashri: Abhimaan is when one owns many houses and he shows them off; that is considered abhimaan. Whereas for the one who has mithyabhimaan, the fellow may not even have food to eat, yet he goes around telling people, “We have all this prosperity…” and he goes around making such baseless statements. Have you not seen such people? Even our people say, “He has mithyabhimaan.” Mithya means there is nothing at all, yet he expresses abhimaan, he blows hot air. Whereas for a person with abhimaan, people know about him, [they’ll say,] “No, he does have property, he is doing abhimaan over that. He is worthy of doing abhimaan,but he should not do abhimaan. He should not boast.” A person with abhimaan means people give him a disproportionate amount of respect with certainty. This is because he is wealthy, isn’t he! But when he brags, we get put off and think, ‘Why did you have to say it for yourself? You should listen while we express our admiration.’

(Pg.15)

That Is Considered Mithyabhimaan

Questioner: Please give an example of mithyabhimaan!

Dadashri: What is mithyabhimaan? It is when a person does not own a house, yet he says, “I have lot of property.”

There was one [man, with the last name of] Patel, who was sitting in a train. He was from the same village as ‘us’ [the village of Bhadran]. There was some other man with him from another village, he was a nice man. That man asked, “Sir, where are you going?” To which the first man [the Patel] responded, “I am going to Bhadran.” Then the man asked, “How many days will you stay there?” To which the Patel answered, “I am only going to stay there for ten to twelve days. But it will take me two days just to clean the house.” The man replied, “It only takes one to two hours to clean a house.” The Patel told him, “It takes two to four hours just to sweep the lower floor. Then there’s the second floor, the third floor. Each of these need to be swept. Then the bathrooms need to be cleaned, other things need to be washed. There must be about one hundred to one hundred and fifty quilts; these too, will need to be washed.” He kept bragging in this way. And the other man just kept listening. This is how he [the Patel] kept painting the picture! One hundred and fifty quilts (!)

Later, his wife came and told me, “Just look at what he was saying.” So what did her husband then tell me? [He told me,] “I was telling that man all this and she ruined my reputation over there. She told him that we have nothing of the sort, do not believe it. I was trying to build a reputation, I was trying to build up my reputation, and she goes and destroys it.” Hey, how was this going to build his reputation? Whose reputation was going to increase? What nonsense is this! This is mithyabhimaan. To live on rent and tell tall tales!

Oh, people even wear clothes that have been rented, don’t they? [They say,] “We have two bungalows and a big farm. There is a garden in there too.” His coat is well ironed, but it is rented. Your coat may be at the drycleaner’s, and the drycleaner rents it out to this man. So then you end up wearing a coat that someone else has worn. So just look at this world! Moreover, you brag that you do not wear clothes someone else has worn. This is how the world runs! I have seen everything. You will even recognize it, ‘That man was walking around wearing [my] coat.’ You would even have the thought, ‘This coat is like just mine. It has a stain over here; even the stain is in the same place.’ But what can you say to that man? This is how this world is.

Abhimaan, Swaprashansa, and Garvaras

Questioner: Is there a difference between abhimaan and garva (the ego of doership and subtle pride in that)?

Dadashri: If abhimaan and garva were placed on a weighing scale, then how much would they weigh? What would happen if we were to place garva on one side of the weighing scale and abhimaan on the other side? Would they weigh the same? Abhimaan would weigh a quarter

(Pg.16)

of a pound and garva would weigh forty pounds.

Questioner: Please explain how that is so.

Dadashri: The truth is, people do not understand abhimaan, they do not understand garva. Garva is not abhimaan. Abhimaan is a different word, garva is different, and ahamkaar is also different.

Questioner: So does garva mean I-ness (hupad)?

Dadashri: No, I-ness is considered to be ahamkaar. ‘I am Chandubhai’ is considered to be ahamkaar. At times, you may not even have abhimaan, you may not even have garva. To believe to be what you are notis calledI-ness. Those who miss out on the state of the Self (Swapad) are in I-ness. But what is garva? Garvaras (indulgence in the pleasure that arises from doership) is actually very sticky. The ras (intensity of derived pleasure) of abhimaan is docile in comparison, it is a quarter of a pound! Whereas in garvaras, itis forty pounds!

Questioner: Please explain garvaras with an example.

Dadashri: In abhimaan,one does not have the sense of ‘I am the doer of all of this.’ Whereas with garvaras,one believes ‘I am the doer.’ So, by becoming the doer in one [activity], he in turn believes he is the doer of the entire universe. So garvaras extends very far and wide. Does anyone express garva? Oh! There is garva with respect to everything. The awareness of ‘I am doing this,’ that is all considered garva.

It was when the awareness of ‘I am doing’ went away for Krupaludev (Self-realized Gnani Purush who lived between 1867-1901. He is also known as Shrimad Rajchandra) that he attained the right belief of ‘I am pure Soul’ (samkit). At that time, he stated, ‘The ego of doership in the unfolding karma ceased! (Matyo udaya karma no garva re.) The entire world is in garva in the karma that is unfolding. There is no exception to that. This is because as long as one does not attain the Self, he is verily elsewhere [in the non-Self], and as long as he is elsewhere, garva is bound to be present.

Why did egoism arise? It is because of ignorance. Ignorance of what? There is ignorance about who is doing all of this. So, what did Narsinh Mehta [a renowned Gujarati poet and saint] say?

‘Hu karu, hu karu ej agnanta,

Shakat no bhaar jem shwaan taane,

Shrushti mandaan chhe sarva eni pere,

Jogi jogeshwara kok jaane!’

‘I am doing, I am doing, that itself is ignorance,

Just as a dog believes ‘I am pulling the cart’ [which the bullocks are pulling],

The foundation of the universe is that everything carries forth on its own,

This is Known by the rare yogi or the fully enlightened One!’

Is what Narsinh Mehta is saying wrong? Many people claim, “I did this, I studied the scriptures, I did penance, I did chanting.” Which of these is true?

(Pg.17)

So how would a person progress when [he believes,] ‘I am doing it, I am doing it’? And what is garva? One claims, “I did it,” when in fact he is not the doer; that is referred to as garva. He is not the doer; it happens.Instead, what do people say?

Questioner: I did it.

Dadashri: That is called garva.

Questioner: It is said that garva of even Gnan arises.

Dadashri: We can accept the garva of Gnan because it is the garva of something good. However, this is garva even of ignorance.

Questioner: And garva is also used in a positive way, ‘This is something worth taking garva [pride] for.’

Dadashri: There it is used in a positive way, but the fundamental garva in the world is over here [in doership]. People have taken it to denote something good.

Questioner: And if someone has done something good, then he’ll even tell others, he’ll go and tell ten others, “I did this, I did this.” If such a thing ends up being spoken, then what should be done?

Dadashri: Yes, but garvaras will arise only if he tells others, isn’t it! Garvaras is that which arises upon telling others, that is when garvaras arises. That is when one gets enjoyment. And if some other person is asleep, then he will even wake him up after a while and tell him; that is when he’ll leave him alone!

Questioner: Whatis difference between swaprashansa and garvaras?

Dadashri: Swaprashansa is when someone says, “You are very sensible. You are a very worthy person. It is hard to find a person like you!” That is swaprashansa! When someone says such things, he forgets everything else. He will even do everything that person asks of him all day long.

And garvaras means to express, “I did such a great job! I did it so well!” For whatever task he does, to derive pleasure (ras) from ‘I did it so well,’ that is garvaras!

What is the reason behind the habit of ‘tasting’ [deriving the pleasure of] garvaras? There is ahamkaar behind it; there is the egoism of ‘I am something.’

Garva means to believe ‘I am the doer’ when in fact one is not the doer. At that moment, pleasure is derived, garvaras arises within. It tastes very sweet, so he gets enjoyment out of it, claiming, “I did it!”

Questioner: And even the surrounding environment is such that people latch on to the instrumental doer (nimit) by giving further respect, they give flowers, they give letters of praise, stating, “You are indeed the one who did it!”

Dadashri: Yes, they latch on by saying, “You are indeed the one who did it; you are indeed the one who did it!”

He takes garva when he does something nice for someone else. He even takes garva when he does something bad.

(Pg.18)

For example, he takes garva of, “I have killed the most powerful of them all.” “I have made many people wealthy,” “I have made many people rich.” He takes garva of that. That is not considered swamaan, that is not considered abhimaan.

In a case where it is hard to find good paan (mouth freshener made from betel nut leaf) and someone manages to find some, then he will keep singing about it, “It couldn’t be found anywhere else!” That is garvaras. He will say, “It is because of me that we managed to get some. Otherwise, we wouldn’t have gotten any.” He indulges in the garvaras, he enjoys it very much.

Questioner: It is definitely wrong to take garva, isn’t it?

Dadashri: Worldly life persists because of garva. The seed of worldly life is garva indeed, it is not the ego.

Questioner: In what way is garva a seed?

Dadashri: There is no taste to the ego. So, the ego is bland. Whereas this garvaras is tasty, it is very tasty! Maan and abhimaan are also tasty, but not as much as garva. There is nothing that is as tasty as garva.

So you are not really the doer. The doer is some other entity altogether. Here, you make the false attribution (aarop), you make the false attribution that ‘I am doing this.’ The garvaras from that gets sampled. Moreover, that garvaras tastes very sweet and karma gets bound because of that. When garvaras is tasted, when the false attribution is made, karma gets bound.

Maan Has a Vast Spectrum

These words related to maan, they range across a broad spectrum, there is a vast spectrum.

Questioner: Tundmijaaji, ghamand, are they considered [part of that]?

Dadashri: Yes, there is actually a variety of words. People actually understand garva and garavata (wallowing in worldly pleasures)in their own terms, don’t they! These people are such that they will refer to abhimaan as garva.What can be considered as ahamkaar, what can be considered as abhimaan, what can be considered as maan, what can be considered as garva,what can be considered as one who is tumaakhi?

Questioner: Who can be considered as having khumari (extra pride with ‘my-ness’)?

Dadashri: The one who has khumari; there are many different types of abhimaan, aren’t there! Then what other word is there? Ghamand! In ghamand, a person has no substance, yet he’ll claim, “Oh, I can defeat even the lawyer’s father.” So you will realize that he has ghamand. There are all kinds of people, there is all kinds of stock of karma! Then they’ll say [a person is] machharayelo (someone who stings like a mosquito), they’ll even say, “This person has a lot of ghemraaji.” There are differences in all of these, that is why they have been given different names. The person who stings like a mosquito is definitely comparable to a mosquito. When he ‘bites’, it stings.

(Pg.19)

Questioner: But all of these things, such as abhimaan, ghamand, they manifest after a person reaches a certain age, don’t they? A child does not have much of this.

Dadashri: A child does not have these at all. As the intellect increases, all of this mischief increases.

Questioner: What is the definition of tundmijaaji?

Dadashri: Tundmijaaj! The person does not have an iota of understanding, he does not have a hint of money, yet he has endless arrogance (mijaaj). If he cannot find anyone to marry him, even then he has endless arrogance! Hey, why are you being so arrogant when you can’t even find anyone to get married to? So he is considered tundmijaaji.

Then there is the one who is with tumaakhi (supercilious). Some seventy-five to a hundred years ago, the collectors, police officers, D.S.P. [District Superintendent of Police], all of these people had tumaakhi; they would maintain so much tumaakhi as if they were God. And they would beat up prominent businessmen. They used to lash prominent businessmen with whips. What tumaakhi! ‘We’ had a contracting business, so ‘we’ would have to meet with all the officers, so I had seen those with tumaakhi over there. In a train, a person could not sit in front of a collector in the first class coach. Actually, they were with integrity. They would not deviate from the code of conduct. But then they had endless tumaakhi. What tumaakhi! They would contemptuously shoo people away. An executive engineer who used to come to ‘our’ business would create a chaotic situation and he would do as he pleased because he had the power.

‘We’ had witnessed such tumaakhi. Now it makes me laugh when I look at these collectors. In the past, they would display such tumaakhi, as if God had arrived. Whereas today, if a collector goes out wearing slippers and you accidentally step on his toes, he will say, “Please, please.” If such a thing were to have happened in the past, then they would have lashed that person with a whip. And that too, they would have lashed him at the station itself. Whereas today, they say, “Please, please.” Look, they have straightened up after taking many beatings! All their tumaakhi has subsided, hasn’t it! If there was a prominent collector on the train, even then one could not say anything! And if there was a governor, even then one could not say anything. But look, they have straightened up after taking many beatings! And now they will say, “Yes, it will do.” What will they say even to their wives? “Yes, yes, it will do, it will do.” Before, they would never say, “It will do,” and what about now?

In fact, just look, they have mellowed considerably! And these days, even if people criticize prominent people, there are no repercussions. See how they’ve mellowed! Have they straightened up or not?! They have straightened up, and with further beatings, they will straighten up even more.

Questioner: Then moving on, what

(Pg.20)

is a ghemraaji person like? Does ghemraaji mean ghamand?

Dadashri: No. Ghamand is different and ghemraaji is different. These people are very shrewd. Up to a certain point, a person is ghamand and if he goes beyond that point, then he is ghemraaji. If there is a change in the intensity, then they will immediately differentiate between the two. These people are actually very shrewd.

Ghemraaji is someone who can’t travel even three miles because of his physical health, and yet he will say, “I can travel all over the world.” People needlessly walk around with ghemraaji. [People will say,] “He just walks around with ghemraaji in his head.” People say this, don’t they? So they maintain ghemraaji. Then people will even say, they’ll even ruin his reputation, saying, “He is needlessly maintaining ghemraaji, just look!” Would people let him off the hook? They do not let him off the hook if he maintains ghamand, they do not let him go if he maintains ghemraaji. They do not let him off the hook no matter what he maintains, they comment on it. They will say, “He maintains ghamand,” “He expresses abhimaan, he is pride-filled.” People actually comment on everything.

What is a ghemraaji? He keeps snubbing other people. [He will say,] “You go home.” He keeps snubbing everyone. [If you tell him,] “Hey, chill out! Just let me sit.” But then he will say, “Move away from here.” So he doesn’t even consider other people to be in alignment with his standards. He considers everyone to be like animals. Even humans are considered to be like animals. Now tell me, that is the ghemraaji! From which language do you think this word has originated? Is it a Persian word?

Questioner: This is colloquial(tadapadi), of the Charotari language [dialect of Gujarati spoken in the Charotar district in the state of Gujarat].

Dadashri: Yes, it is the Charotari language! People will say, “He is very ghemraaji. He has nothing to show, yet he is very ghemraaji.” And the word ghemraaji exists in Gujarati, doesn’t it! Now where has this word come from? I am looking for its root cause, but I cannot find anything! I can find the root cause of abhimaan and all of that.

Questioner: So these words are not as simple as they seem, there is a deep, hidden meaning in them.

Dadashri: Yes, these words are full of meaning. One should not define them superficially. The absolute meaning lies within. But it is when so many layers [of ignorance] are lifted that the absolute meaning can be realized.

Questioner: You had said, “[I had] A lot of ego.” So through this, all the phases of the ego came into experience, didn’t they?

Dadashri: Yes, experience them from all sides! I also saw the ‘perspective view’ of it too. I can recognize what the ego looks like from the ‘perspective’ [view].

(Pg.21)

The Disease of Being Intoxicated With Pride

What kind of ego do people express? Suppose a person passing by walks in a straightforward manner, he walks naturally in an orderly fashion. And when he passes by again, at that time we feel, ‘Why does it seem as though there has been some kind of a change in him?’ His face appears different to us. When he passes by again, he appears to be filled with an air of arrogance (rof). So we know that there has been some change, there has been an effect on him of some kind.

So we say to him, “Come in, come in and have some tea.” We offer him tea to inquire [after the change in his attitude], not because of his air of arrogance. Whereas he believes we are offering him tea because of his air of arrogance. We give him tea and some snacks and then ask him, “Where did you go?” To which he replies, “I went and got the five thousand rupees I had to collect.”

He’s got five thousand rupees in his pocket, so the intoxication has arisen! He becomes unmatt (intoxicated with pride; haughty). This disease has infiltrated, the disease of unmatt! So the ‘eggplant’ becomes ‘tight’! Otherwise, the ‘eggplant’ becomes ‘limp’.

Now tell me, if five thousand rupees makes a person ‘tight’, if a person becomes unmatt, for ‘us’, God Himself has yielded to ‘us’, God Himself has yielded to the Gnani Purush! So tell me, how ‘tight’ must ‘we’ be? But even then, there is no unmatt in the slightest. That too is a wonder, isn’t it! If five thousand rupees makes a person this ‘tight’, then how ‘tight’ must be the One to whom the Lord of the three worlds has yielded! But no, that is precisely where there is true humbleness. ‘We’ are actually like a small child.

The Thermometer to Measure Maan

Questioner: There is also maan that is without any material possessions, isn’t there? These monks and ascetics do not have any material possessions; nevertheless, they have tremendous maan. What kind of maan is that?

Dadashri: They have maan about knowing the scriptures. This is also a type of asset, isn’t it! ‘I know all the scriptures,’ that is also considered an asset, isn’t it! All of these things are also considered to be material possessions. That is all considered to be maan.

Questioner: And there are also cases in which a person doesn’t know anything, yet he has a lot of maan.

Dadashri: Yes, that does happen. This is because he believes that! If anyone gives a person respect (maan)and he does not accept it, if he does not accept it in his mind, then he does not become disturbed. So he thinks, ‘Now there is no maan left in me.’ This is because when people give him respect, it does not affect him very much, he does not accept it from within. And he behaves in such a way that those people do not feel offended. So he simply believes on his own that the ‘mercury’ is not rising for me, so there is no maan left. Otherwise, the ‘mercury’

(Pg.22)

would certainly rise, wouldn’t it! When people give him respect and he accepts it, then the ‘mercury’ certainly rose, didn’t it!

Now, if he does not accept it, then the ‘mercury’ does not rise. But then I asked, “There is no maan left in you, is there? Now check using a ‘thermometer’, to see whether a fever has arisen.” He replied, “What thermometer is that?” I told him, “Say fifteen to twenty relatives of yours are sitting here and someone tells you, ‘You have no sense at all.’ Then that affects you, doesn’t it! Hey, where did it all go? You didn’t have any maan, did you?” There is no pride (maan) like that of an insult (apmaan). All other forms of pride have no significance, but there is no pride like an insult. The one who cannot endure an insult is the biggest maani (one who has pride). A person can tolerate the respect people give him, but he cannot tolerate an insult, that is the greatest pride of all. He is considered to be a big maani.

Nirmaani: Nirahamkaari: Nirmohi

These days, there are manymonks who move about claiming to be nirmaani (one who maintains the belief and ego that ‘I do not have a desire for respect and recognition’). That will not do. Have you ever seen a nirmaani person? A nirmaani person can be considered nirahamkaari (egoless), can he not?

Questioner: Yes, egoless.

Dadashri: Be careful, do not ever say that (!) A person who is nirmaani has the ego (ahamkaar) of being nirmaani, they have the ego of ‘I am nirmaani.’ Whereas people who have pride have the egoof being a person with pride (maani). The ego of a person with pride is better, but in which lifetime will one get rid of his ego of being nirmaani? The ego of being nirmaani is a subtle ego; upon entering into it, it never leaves. One will say, “I am nirmaani, I am nirmaani.” He has become nirmaani. There is a subtle ego behind that. Instead, this gross [ego] is better, because people will tell you, “Hey, you have this much power, is that why you are walking around with an inflated chest?” Would people say that or not? Whereas in the other case, there is no one to tell him off at all! So then it [his ego] continues to grow day by day. So then I have to directly tell them, “Understand this, otherwise you will wind up astray. You will have to become egoless. The state of being nirmaani will not do.”You understood what nirmaani means, didn’t you?

When ‘we’ give you Gnan, You become egoless. However, nirmaani is a big ego. That impediment (lafru) is very big, mind you! This impediment of pride is better. It is a docile impediment. Someone will even say [to a person filled with pride], “Hey, why are you walking around with your chest puffed up?” Would people say this or not? Hey, tell that person, “Even I don’t walk around with my chest puffed up while I am working, so why are you walking around with your chest puffed up?” But no one will say anything to a nirmaani person, would they! There is no pride. The state of nirmaani is a subtle ego. What does this mean? It means the external ‘horns’ have

(Pg.23)

been cut off, but the internal ‘horns’ remain. As a matter of fact, neither external nor internal ‘horns’ are acceptable! Internal ‘horns’ create an internal ‘sting’. And there is nothing that stings him externally. Everyone cleans it for him. His house helpers take out the bedbugs and mosquitoes for him. So then nothing stings him externally. But how will the inner ‘stinging’ leave you alone? The inner stinging is an intense ‘sting’. Have you ever experienced inner ‘stinging’?

Questioner: I have seen it; I have experienced it.

Dadashri: So one will have to become egoless, the state of being nirmaani will not do.

Questioner: Dada, then there is another word that’s similar: nirmohi.

Dadashri: Nirmohi is not a full word. Nirmohi does not mean that one is completely without illusory attachment (moha). We cannot use the word nirmohi for a person who is completely free of illusory attachment. The One for whom illusory attachment has been destroyed is not considered nirmohi. Therefore, nirmohi is not a state in which illusory attachment has been destroyed. We can only use the word anaasakt (beyond all attraction), not nirmohi. Up to what point is the word nirmohi applicable? A person who has pushed away illusory attachment using the ego (ahamkaar) is referred to as nirmohi. A person who has pushed away pride using the ego is referred to as nirmaani. So the ego itself is still present, but he has reduced everything else. If someone hurls abuse at him, he will say, “What is it to me?” But his ego remains as it is. The ego of being in the state of nirmohi remains, the ego of being in the state of nirmaani remains. That ego will eventually have to be removed, won’t it?

The Gnani dissolves the ego of a person with maan. However, the ego of nirmaani cannot be dissolved even by God, that is how subtle the ego is. If such a subtle ego arises within you, you are doomed. So, ask someone before you do anything along these lines.

The Ego of Being Nispruhi

All these ascetics are nispruha (without any inclination towards any material thing of this world), they have no desire (spruha) at all. [They say,] “What do we care? We do not want anything.” When someone brings milk for him, that person thinks, ‘Bapji (respectful term used to address the ascetic) will be pleased. He will be helpful to me some day. My son does not have a son.’ And then what does the ascetic say? “We do not want anything, get away from here. Why did you come here?” He even hurls abuse at him. However, our people are intensely greedy and so their [the ascetics’] work gets done. And it is the law of scientific circumstantial evidence(vyavasthit). In any way, shape, or form, people bring them food and drink, even if they hurl abuse at them. So they at least survive! It is the law of scientific circumstantial evidence; it does not fail to provide them with food. Oh, people will even go as far as to say, “The ascetic’s

(Pg.24)

mind is like that, but give him [food].” They deliver the food even while taking on abuses. Now, when one says, “We do not want anything,” even that is indeed considered a desire. That is also an ego of a kind, of being nispruha!

Those who have become nispruha go around saying, “What is it to me, what is it to me.” They end up wandering life after life and make everyone else wander life after life. And what is the Gnani Purush like? He has spruha (desire) only towards your Self, and is nispruha towards all your external, worldly matters. He does not want any worldly thing and His only desire is how others can attain salvation. Yes, he does not have complete nispruha. So, ‘we’, the Gnani Purush, are nispruha-saspruha (without any inclination towards any material thing of this world and with inclination only towards the Self). What does this mean? Even this side of the ‘shore’ is not ‘ours’ and this other side of the ‘shore’ is also not ‘ours’. ‘We’ have no inclination towards your non-Self complex and have inclinationtowards your Self. So, even if you were to hurl an abuse at ‘us’, ‘we’ would maintain spruha for You. What is the reason for that? ‘We’ have inclination towards your Self. If a person does something wrong, insults ‘us’, even then ‘we’ maintain protection for that person, the poor thing. Did you understand?

The Ego Has Veiled the Light of the Self

Questioner: Is the ego (ahamkaar) the main reason that all our energies get veiled?

Dadashri: It is indeed because of the ego that all the energies have gotten squandered, isn’t it! It [the ego] is always blind. Now, we make divisions of the ego, we make divisions as to which subject is there ego for? For this person, there is more ego when it comes to greed, for this other person, there is more ego when it comes to pride; there are various such egos. So, it is indeed the ego that hinders a person, do you feel that?

Questioner: Is it simply because of the ego that there are collisions?

Dadashri: The entire problem is because of the ego. Now, this person says, “Dada, you think too much.” I reply, “No, that ego has become nonexistent (shunya) for ‘us’!” In the future, these intellectuals will say the same thing that you are trying to say. This is because how could such a thing happen! Hey, nothing had to be done for this. It is necessary to make the ego nonexistent. Otherwise, how would I be able to do so much? [The One who has] Deliberated about the entire universe; how would a person be able to think to such an extensive extent?

Questioner: Wouldn’t a person actually become more puzzled, Dada?

Dadashri: On the contrary, he would become more puzzled. This illumination of Self, it is of use to you. And in the middle, there is egoism. Depending on the design of the egoism, the illumination comes through that design. The design of the egoism may be like this for some, it may be like that for others. It may be different for others, so such a design comes through [the illumination]. But what

(Pg.25)

happens if the egoism has been destroyed? The light will go straight through, directly, won’t it!

The Effects of the Discharging Ego After Gnan

After attaining Gnan, You have no ego (ahamkaar) at all. This is because what can be referred to as ego? To decide ‘I am Chandubhai’ is called ego! And You have doubt towards the knowledge that ‘I am Chandubhai.’ ‘I am not Chandubhai’ and ‘I am the pure Soul,’ so now You do not have ego at all.

Questioner: By ego, do you mean ‘I am Chandubhai’; is it only that part you are referring to?

Dadashri: Yes, that itself is considered ego.

Questioner: The part of the ego is gone, but does our abhimaan still remain?

Dadashri: Yes, there is no problem with abhimaan. That abhimaan is something that is getting discharged. You do not have ego left at all, do you! There is no problem with abhimaan. Maan and abhimaan are things that will get discharged. Then beyond this, there is garva (the ego of doership and subtle pride in that) and all other baggage that remains! The fundamental ego has gone, but the effects of the ego that were there, these still remain, don’t they! The fundamental root cause has gone. But the upper branches and everything else still remain, that will eventually dry up.

Questioner: So is abhimaan simply the result of the old ego?

Dadashri: Yes. Abhimaan is a result of the ego. That result remains, and the root cause has gone. The ego has gone! And when all the effects of the ego go away, keval Gnan (absolute Knowledge) happens.

Questioner: But abhimaan is a result of the ego, so when abhimaan goes away, keval Gnan ends up happening, right?

Dadashri: No. In terms of result, abhimaan is not the only one. There are many other effects of the ego. When all of these depart, keval Gnan happens!

Questioner: So what are the [other] effects of the ego?

Dadashri: There are many kinds of effects.

Questioner: What should we do so that our abhimaan does not cause any difficulty to anyone, it does not hurt anyone, and instead it makes them happy?

Dadashri: All you have to do is to maintain this intent, you don’t need to do anything else. You should maintain the intent, ‘May no one be hurt by my abhimaan and may they feel happy.’ Then if someone does get hurt, then you should do pratikraman (apology coupled with repentance) and move on. What else can you do? Should you get hung up on that point all night long? This is not something that you should get hung up on. Even if you want to get hung up on it, that is not something you can do, so what should you do?

(Pg.26)

Nevertheless, you should proceed in a way that does not hurt anyone.

Questioner: On that account, the entire worldly life is indeed a result of the ego. The result of ‘I am Chandubhai’ is all of worldly life, isn’t it?

Dadashri: But now, that ego has gone for You after attaining this Gnan. If the ego still remained, then it would continue to create results, wouldn’t it! After this Gnan, new results do not arise, do they! And the old results continue to leave. Only the old ones will leave. So, the problem is solved. The ‘tank’ does not refill. One person’s ‘tank’ may be fifty gallons, another’s may be twenty-five hundred thousand gallons. When the ‘tank’ is bigger, it takes longer [to empty out]. So what does it matter for the one whose ‘tank’ is emptying?

Questioner: But as the ‘tank’ is emptying, someone might get swept away as it happens in a flood, there may be a collision with someone, and a blow may be dealt to someone.

Dadashri: Yes, but dealing a blow to someone is all a result [of the ego], isn’t it! What do You have to do with that? However, you should do pratikraman if someone is hurt.

Dehabhimaan Has Become Nonexistent

It is actually ‘we’ who should express abhimaan that ‘we’ are the superior of the entire universe. Nevertheless, ‘we’ have less [abhimaan] than even a small child. ‘We’ do not have any ego at all! If ‘we’ had ego, then ‘we’ would not have attained all of this! The One who has no ownership of the body can become the owner of the entire universe. The One who has no ownership of the body, mind, or speech becomes the owner of the universe!

Questioner: But some people say that abhimaan is often witnessed in the Gnani Purush. How can that be?

Dadashri: Where there is abhimaan, there is no Gnan, and where there is Gnan, there is no abhimaan.

Questioner: Does that mean that Gnan and abhimaan cannot coexist?

Dadashri: Gnan and abhimaan can never coexist. There is either abhimaan or Gnan! Nevertheless, if you were to slap me twice and abhimaan were to arise in me, then that is ignorance (agnan) and you would clearly see, ‘He is not a Gnani.’

Yes, up to the point I had not attained Gnan, the belief that ‘I am the doer and I am this body’ (dehabhimaan)had not left. On the contrary, it started off as 25% and increased to 125%. When I was born, it was at 25%, and as I grew up, it increased to 125%. It kept biting away when it was only 25%, so would it not have kept biting away when it increased to 125%?Now,abhimaan is that which keeps causing aggravation, and ahamkaar is that which keeps burning internally. If there is only internal burning, then it is referred to as ahamkaar, whereas abhimaan keeps biting away.

So, ‘we’ did not have ahamkaar, ‘we’ ended up developing abhimaan. Oh,

(Pg.27)

‘we’ had also become tundmijaaji. And oh, some even used to say that I had lot of ghemraaji. This is because even when ‘we’ did not have Gnan, ‘we’ had accumulated such a high quality of karmic stock from the past life, so I did feel, ‘I have something.’ I did know that and consequently, some ghemraaji of that remained.

So, all of this is in my awareness, as to where there should be ego, where there should be abhimaan, where there should be all of that. Nowadays, you cannot find a single person with ego only; there is always some degree of perversion [of the ego], the person would have definitely progressed to the stage of abhimaan.

An ahamkaari person is considered natural and spontaneous (sahajik). It is a natural ego, and an ahamkaari person cannot be found in the current era of the time cycle! From where would one find a person with [unperverted] ego? These days, there are people with abhimaan. What is the ego? [The belief] ‘I am Chandubhai’ is itself ego. However, that is a natural and spontaneous thing. The offense is not his in that. And what is abhimaan? When someone keeps showing off, ‘This factory is ours, this hospital is also ours,’ then you should realize who is doing the talking? It is his abhimaan that is talking.

Questioner: But what you had said, that your dehabhimaan had increased from 25% to 125%. And then how did it go down to zero?

Dadashri: All of a sudden! I did not actually do anything in that. This is but natural; it happened naturally. That is why I tell people that this is not something to imitate. It is natural; so what are you going to do? Now come to me, I will show you the way. I have found the path. But if you try to follow the path that I had taken, then you will get a thrashing. This is because I could not bear it when it went from 25% to 125%. Only I know how I managed to get through those days!

Questioner: There is a saying, ‘Initially, the dehabhimaan was 25%. As he became learned, it became 100%, and upon becoming a guru, it increased to 4,000%.’ Now the only thing of importance is how to come down to 0%.

Dadashri: Now after attaining this Gnan, in which direction is Your Purusharth (progress as the Self) happening? It is going towards zero. What was the case before? It [the ego] would double in that [wrong] direction. Now it is headed towards zero. So it does not make any sense to look for solutions here. Everything is actually moving along systematically right now. It is headed towards zero, and it is bound to happen!

The Ego Dissolves Through Shuddha Upayog

Questioner: The form of the ego (ahamkaar) that currently exists within me, which ‘button’ of Purusharth is there in order to bring it down to zero?

Dadashri: It is only shuddha upayog (pure applied awareness as the Self). However much shuddha upayog there is,

(Pg.28)

the ego will dissolve to that extent. And after this Gnan is given, what is the condition of the egoism? The answer is if it is a very cold day today and a person who makes and sells ice has a lot of ice in store, then he will think, ‘When will it be sold? Where should I store it?’ So, he gives a very heavy discount, then a merchant will say, “I will stock up on ice.” Now, he stocks up on ice, no matter how many bags are piled up, will it increase or decrease? How does it decrease? How does it decrease at night? It continuously keeps melting. So, after this Gnan is given, the ego certainly continues to dissolve. Some people may even tie bags around it, they keep adding sawdust to it. Hey, don’t do that.

After the Ego Dissolves, There Is the Realization of the Self

Questioner: This ‘I’ (hu) that is there, is it the prakruti (non-Self complex) or is it the Self?

Dadashri: ‘I’? The word ‘I’ is a different thing. However, ‘I’ has been misused. If ‘I’ is used for the pure Soul, for the Self, then there is no objection to it. And if it is used elsewhere, if it is used with aaropit bhaav (false attribution with the belief ‘I am Chandubhai’), then it is referred to as ahamkaar.

So this ‘I am’ was being used in the wrong place. There certainly is existence [of the ‘I’]. The developing I (pote) knows that ‘I am’, but because there was no awareness of what ‘I am’ he kept on saying “I am Chandubhai,” “I am a doctor,” “I am a collector,” “I am his brother-in-law.” All this turned out to be wrong. Now, ‘I am pure Soul’ turned out to be correct.

There was the process of going in the wrong direction, so now this is referred to as the process of going in the right direction. As long as One does not become the pure Soul in exactness, however much he had gone in the wrong direction, he will have to come back in the right direction. However many times he had said, “I am Chandubhai, I am Chandubhai,” he will have to say, “I am pure Soul, I am pure Soul,” that many times, then he will move ahead.

Questioner: So, it is indeed the ego that is speaking, isn’t it? The very one that had been going in the wrong direction is the very one that now...

Dadashri: The ‘I’; the ‘I’ [the awakened Self; jagrat Atma] is saying this, the ego is not saying it. The ego remains separate. The ego does not say that. The ‘I’; the ‘I’ is indeed One’s own real form as the Self(Swaroop). Now, the original Self Itself will not say this, however, this action has now turned towards It. When we say the words ‘pure Soul,’ even that pure Soul is Itself not a word, this action has now turned towards It. As Your faith (shraddha) changes, as Your belief changes, the veil over the Self (avaran) gradually gets destroyed. This is something which destroys the veils. But the existence of the ‘I’, is indeed the awareness that, ‘I am pure Soul’. A change has occurred in the awareness. If it were the ego, then it would not be of any use at all. It is a different thing altogether.

(Pg.29)

This has nothing to do with the ego. In fact, it is only after the ego has dissolved that One attains the awareness of His own real form as the Self. This is all considered to belong to the interim state.

The One Who Recognizes the Ego Attains Salvation

If one recognizes the ego (ahamkaar), then it can make him God. The ego is such that it can make one God. And that ego does everything. It has arisen from that. The ego is not wrong. If the ego of the Gnanis goes in the right direction, it takes them to the final stage and it will take them all the way to the status of being a God. As the ego gradually becomes pure, it goes from being impure (ashuddha) to inauspicious (ashubha), from inauspicious to auspicious (shubha), from auspicious to pure (shuddha), but the ego is exactly the same.

Questioner: You had once stated, “If one recognizes the ego, then it is such that it can make him God.” So do we have to recognize the ego?

Dadashri: If one recognizes the ego then it is more than enough, isn’t it! No one can recognize the ego, can they!

Questioner: I did not understand that. What does it mean to recognize the ego?

Dadashri: To recognize the ego means to recognize the entire pudgal (non-Self complex). If one really recognizes the one who is saying, “I,” if One has recognized the entire pudgal,then One has indeed become God!

Questioner: That ‘I’, meaning the entire pudgal is to be recognized, is that so?

Dadashri: The ‘I’ precisely means the entire pudgal. The ‘I’ does not refer to anything else. The driver knows how the wheels will turn if he turns the steering of an eighty-foot-long bus a certain way! So he believes the eighty-foot bus to be his entire form. And if it is a thirty-foot bus, then he will believe [his form to be] thirty feet. If it is a five-foot car, then he will believe [his form to be] five feet.

Questioner: So it means that the ego takes on that form?

Dadashri: His ego functions by expanding everywhere, it is for this reason that he is saved from colliding. Yes, it functions as the entire form. Therefore, this entire pudgal is of the ego only. The One who recognizes this ego attains salvation! Everyone does express egoism, but they don’t recognize it, do they!

Questioner: In this, what is the ego and who is the One who recognizes it?

Dadashri: The One who recognizes it is precisely God.

Questioner: Now, the ego has been said to be in the form of the pudgal, and moreover, that same ego becomes God too?

Dadashri: As that ego continues to become more and more purified, when it becomes the [absolutely] purified ego, at that time, this God and ‘it’ both become one. The purified ego is itself the pure Soul.

~ Jai Sat Chit Anand