Gospel of Sri Ramakrishna Lecture 111 on 07-May-2024

Full Transcript (Not Corrected)

We have been studying the chapter dealing with the visit to Vidya Sagar and here we get the most marvellous discussions that we get practically at the heart of every Upanishad, especially Mandukya Upanishad and also Katha Upanishad, some Upanishads. Though every Upanishad teaches only one truth about Brahman, but there is vast difference how they deal with the subject. So for example, the definition of Brahman is not very clear in the Isavasya Upanishad, but if we take the same thing in the Brahma Upanishad that we are talking about, there is a greater detail about it. Now, whatever comes out of the mouth of any realised soul, it cannot be anything but Upanishad. Why is it so? Because, just imagine, I will give you a simile, a river or 5-6 rivers from different directions. They have all different colours, different tastes and we can clearly see these differences. There is a place, it is called Karnaprayag in North India, where Ganges and Yamuna rivers meet together. And what is the beauty? For quite some distance, after they mix with the sea, we can clearly see how these two rivers, sorry, there is no ocean there, but they join together, Ganga and Yamuna. And you can see for a long distance, Yamuna is a little bit bluish and Ganga is slightly whitish. Side by side, running until they coalesce and merge together. Now, let us extend this metaphor. So, so many, 4-5 rivers come and mix at different points in the ocean and once they mix with the ocean, so they, as the Upanishad beautifully describes, having given up names and forms, they become one with the ocean. And then afterwards, we cannot even say that Ganga tastes saltish, Yamuna also tastes saltish. That is a very wrong expression. There is no Ganga, there is no Yamuna, both of them are nothing but pure water only. This we have to apply a person whose whole personality, as Ramakrishna put it, becomes merged in Paramatma, God. After that, there is no coming back at all. So, there is no personality. But some people, some bodies and minds, they again, as if somebody is staying there, somebody is operating there, as if the Jivatma, individual soul, as before. But no, not as before. It is completely, it is only the Paramatma. There is no individuality. But that Paramatma, a realised soul called Jivanmukta, he has to work through that particular body and mind. A lot of us become confused when we are thinking about a Jivanmukta. So, the body will not change, mind will totally change, but not the body. And certain impressions related to the body also will not change. Simple example, Sri Ramakrishna sometimes felt like eating the curry cooked when he was a young boy. His mother used to cook for him and that taste lingered in whom? Let us not say in the mind of the Jivanmukta. Let us say in the body. The body remembers that taste. So, he used to request, Ma, please cook for me once in a while. So, is he under the limitations of Samskaras like us? Absolutely no. That is called Leela. If he did not get it, he would not worry. When he is in Samadhi, he would not remember. All these tastes, etc., are meant only as I like to make. The food easily does not want to go inside our bodies. But the spices act like pistons and they push the body. This is a very tasty sweet. So, that taste pushes that sweet inside. Tasty preparation. Tasty dish. But a Jivanmukta is not affected. Whether he gets it or not, it does not really matter. But what I am trying to say is that sometimes there is a likelihood. We can judge these people. Oh, he is a Jivanmukta. Okay. But he has a special attachment to some kind of taste. No. Nothing will be there. He is none other than Brahman. He sees everything as Brahman. But he behaves as if he is like anybody else. So, as if he comes down to this world so that he can inspire confidence of all of us in him. So that we can heed his teachings, his instructions and move forward. That is the beauty of it. So, can we describe? Let me give another example. So, many of the rivers, they merge at some point in the ocean or sea. And then by the law of gravitation, especially on full moon, new moon day, the water is forced. That is, the ocean water is forced through the same channel nearly 100 miles or sometimes even more than 100 miles. Now, that is what, as soon as the ocean water enters and starts pushing back, we do not start calling it ocean water. We still call it Ganga. This is called ebb tide, low tide, high tide, etc., etc. And it is great fun. But how much power it exhibits, it almost overflows the land, floods it. So, what I am trying to tell you, we still prefer to call it Ganga, Yamuna, etc., nearer to the ocean. But at the same time, we have to keep in mind that old Ganga, Yamuna are dead. Only the new being has come. But since we do not recognize God out of infinite compassion, He tries to teach. And every teaching, there are two. I classify teachings into two parts. One, that which we can understand and we can refer. For example, a person who is temperamental, short tempered, very angry, very moody, unreliable, at what time he will be moody, that is a great defect. Not only for Brahma Jnana, but even for Brahma Jnana also. I hope you understand what I am talking about. Brahma Jnana is about the supreme truth, supreme reality. Brahma Jnana is about the worldly truth, Anatma Jnana. So, such a person whose mind is unsteady, fickle, moody, ever-changing, of course, the question of his knowing Brahman is far away. But even to get the truth about this world, that also is not possible. So, whether it is secular or spiritual, knowledge requires tremendous amount of control. And we can clearly see, when we study the lives of great people, great scientists, great kings, great musicians, great writers, great poets, and all those who create symphonies, etc., a tremendous spiritual element is there. They may not overtly exhibit spiritual qualities. So, how difficult it is even to express what I just now termed as Brahma Jnana, Anatma Jnana, knowledge of the non-self. And let us not discount that Brahma Jnana is not useful. In fact, only a person who is fit to get Brahma Jnana, Anatma Jnana, alone will be able to hone his skills, her skills, and take it as a pole, as in pole vault, and then able to cross. A person, Swami Ashokanandaji used to tell, it is one of the marvellous teachings, a failure in worldly life is a much greater failure in spiritual life. So now, in this chapter, Sriram Krishna is expounding a marvellous thing, and he is also illustrating it with some stories, and these stories are pointers. So, before I go further, what I want you to remember, or all of us to remember, every spiritual truth is like a pointer. In fact, any type of knowledge is a pointer only. What do I mean? Supposing you have eaten some fruit, exotic fruit, which very few people in this world have tasted, and somebody who did not taste that fruit wants to know what type of taste it is. How much percentage of your knowledge can you convey to that person? Even 1%? There is a law. So, knowledge can be passed on to the other person, through the known to the unknown. I repeat, through the known to the unknown. Here is a person who does not know what I have eaten, but this person has eaten something similar, a mango fruit he has eaten, and when this person eats the mango fruit, he has definite knowledge of experience. First comes experience, then comes knowledge, and this person knows that particular mango fruit. He may not know about any other mango fruit, only that particular variety. So, you have eaten, this fruit looks like that. Of course, the description of the physical properties is not very important, but the experience in the form of taste, so you enjoyed it. And this is something like that. Is it sweet? Yes, very sweet. Is it very flavourful? Very flavourful. And like that, through what is known, the unknown is only pointed out. Remember, it is only pointing out. So, the other person has to use his guesswork and then go through it. Then comes a time, if he is lucky, or you might give him the same thing when you get it, and then the other person knows what it is exactly. There is a beautiful saying in Hindi, a little bit in a lighter vein, but it is sufficient to convey what I am talking about. What does a monkey know? The taste of ginger. Anyway, why am I giving this background? Because, really speaking, no object can be accurately described. Experience is the only means. But one can point. So, these pointers are what we call spiritual teaching. And in the case of Brahman, even that pointer is not possible. But pointer in the sense, you go this way and you will reach. So, any description, any meditation is only for this purpose. So, here, Sri Ramakrishna, we will return to this. Last time, the talk was about Brahman. And Sri Ramakrishna said, in short, that nobody has become successful in describing Brahman because Brahman alone has remained unpolluted. It did not become uchishta. Uchishta means somebody had eaten something and left out the rest of the thing and nobody would like to touch it. And there is a Hindu saying that if you have eaten some food and then even if a dog comes or some birds come, really speaking, you should not give. But that is one point of view. Another point of view is there is plenty of food. Dogs do not mind. And they are also as hungry or more hungry than us. Birds also are also hungry. Or they can become thirsty. So, if you can provide fresh food, fine. Otherwise, give whatever is you can spare. So, we can only point out. Sri Ramakrishna said and Vidyasagar, he reacted, Oh, today I have heard something very new. This is a remarkable statement because Vidyasagar was not only a student of secular science, but he read what is called logic. He read Vedanta. He has written books also. And especially, he was very specialized in grammar. And he was one of the most, what is called, innovative type of teachers. He started teaching in Bengali how to learn English language in a unique method. Same thing he did with regard to Sanskrit. Vidyasagar's Sanskrit Vyakarana, it is called Vyakarana Kaumudi, is enormously popular. He had adopted a particular style so that the students can learn quite easily. Previously, the pundits did not have that. They stuck to what is called orthodox methods of teaching. But Vidyasagar had led a new path so that it would be easy for people to learn. So, he started how to learn English through Bengali language. And that book became extraordinarily popular. And one of the interesting news about this book is there was a devotee of Sri Ramakrishna and Sri Ramakrishna once asked him, why are you coming to see me? And frankly, he said, I hope to obtain money from you, riches from you. Sri Ramakrishna said, bring some jalebi and then I will make you rich. This devotee brought. Sri Ramakrishna ate. From that time onwards, this person started to really prosper. And slowly he acquired a printing press. And one of the books he published was this book written by Eswar Chandra Vidyasagar, Learn English Through Bengali. And it became a classic book. And I don't know how much profit Vidyasagar got, but definitely this Upadhyaya and he became quite rich. Like that, he started publishing books, etc. Now the point is, he did enormous social service. It is because of his untiring efforts that the blighted life of child widows, in fact, his own son had married a widow, child widow, 16 years old. He himself has indicated, I would like to marry. Of course, the father gladly gave his blessings, etc. And how many millions of women must have been blessed consciously or unconsciously because they were able to remarry all because of one of the people who brought that law is Eswar Chandra Vidyasagar. So our point is, he is a great Vedanti. He has studied Upanishads, Vedas, some parts of the Vedas, etc. And he knows perhaps even better than Ramakrishna that is not experientially but intellectually. And he is remarking, Oh, today I learned something. That is a remarkable statement coming from the Eswar Chandra Vidyasagar. And what Brahman is cannot be described. This is the background. A devotee is asking, Didn't Shukadeva attain ultimate knowledge? Some say that Shukadeva only saw and touched the ocean of Brahman but didn't dive deep into it. That's why he could return and impart spiritual instruction. According to others, he returned after attaining the knowledge of Brahman in order to teach. He had to narrate the Bhagavata to Parikshit and also teach people in various ways. So, God did not merge His eye altogether. His eye of knowledge was retained. Now, there is something very interesting in the statement of Sri Ramakrishna. Here, unless we study with concentration, even this question doesn't arise within our minds. So, Sri Ramakrishna was asked a question, Sir, what about people like Shankaracharya, Shukadeva, Narada, etc.? So, didn't they attain ultimate knowledge? And then Sri Ramakrishna gives two views. What is the first view? The first view is that he touched the ocean of Brahman but did not dive deep into it. That means what? He had only secondary experience or partial or limited experience of Brahman. Because, what is the argument? That once this Ganga river merges in the ocean, the Ganga river completely disappears. Thereafter, there is no Ganga river at all. Therefore, what comes out is only if at all it comes out. That is the crux of the question. How does this individual soul which becomes merged in Paramatma, how does it come back? So, is it complete experience or is it a partial experience? Of course, we are discussing intellectually. It is never possible. Whatever we talk about, that is only the limit of our sharpness of our mind, our intellect. The truth can never be found out. The only way to find out the truth is we have to merge ourselves and then if we come out, we know what is the truth. But here, interesting, this is a beautiful study. So, he did not dive deep into it. He just touched it. So, touched means he did not drink the water. But he returned after attaining. That means after becoming merged completely in Brahman in order to teach man. Now, here also we have to understand did he come out? The question of he, she, this particular individual doesn't arise at all. It is only ocean. That is why there is a beautiful conversation in the Gospel of Shri Ram Krishna. Once, Shri Ram Krishna was talking with M. Shri Ram Krishna himself puts a question to M. Do I have any egotism? I. And M says, No, sir. You have absolutely no egotism. But you kept a little bit of I in order to enjoy the divine bliss. Very deep question. Immediately, the axe had fallen on M's head. Shri Ram Krishna said, No, I did not keep it. The Divine Mother has kept. Because once we merge, once the river merges in the ocean, it is up to the ocean. And we are not talking about ordinary water. But even if we are talking about ordinary water or about everything, there are two ways of looking at it. The Brahma Drishti or the Brahma Drishti. According to Vedanta, all the Pancha Bhutas and Samudra or Ocean represents the Jala, that is Apaha, one of the Pancha Bhutas. And all the Pancha Bhutas are Pancha Devatas. That is why they are called Panchayatana Puja. So these Pancha Devatas, because of whom we are and who maintain us all the time and without whom we cannot sustain, even exist, and unto whom we return ultimately and this is a beautiful process described. The earth part, the Bhumi part, so that merges in its source. So the earth is the Karya, effect. And every effect must have a cause, its origin. And what is the origin of earth? Waters, Apaha. This earth merges in waters. What is the origin of waters? Agnihi. So they merge in fire. What is the origin of Agni? Vayu. And they merge in the Vayu. And what is the origin of Vayu? Akasha. So air merges in space. Akasha. The very usage of the word space is very limiting actually. So we should be careful about it. But anyway, this Akasha is the Karya. Where from did it come? It came only from the Atman. Atman, Brahman, Paramatma is all same. So originally everything is Brahman. So this is how the whole world universe is Brahman. Every individual is Brahman. And all what we call technically Adhyatmika, Adhibhautika and Adhidaivika. The individual self, the external physical self and the presiding deity. This triangle is none other than manifestation of Ishwara who is called Saguna Brahma, personal God. And the personal merges in the impersonal. What is the conclusion? Sarvam Kalvidam Brahma. Because we always have to keep in mind what is called inviolable law. That whatever is the effect will have the same nature as the cause. And so we say after death even our own, our body mind is consisting of five bhutas, five elements. Only physical five elements and subtle five elements called Tanmatras. So each Tanmatra in this body, so physical Tanmatras, pancha bhutas, they merge in their part and then again it is recycled. We create through our karma etc. So the question of non-existence doesn't arise at all. Anyway coming back, that these are speculations, it doesn't matter. It is God's will that a realiser of, after realising Brahman, after knowing I am Brahman, if the body and mind are still alive and there must be some individual element which must guide that body and mind, preside over the body mind and that person's personality is called Jeevan Mukta, living free. And that person only works through that mind and body and as I mentioned, always keep in mind the body will not change. Suddenly the Ram Krishna who merged in Brahman comes back into that body. It doesn't become even one second younger. It will be the same. But you also have to understand that supposing Ram Krishna entered into Brahman at 6 o'clock in the evening and he became conscious at 6 o'clock next morning, so he will not be having that old body. He will be identified only with the new body. That identification is no identification at all. This is what Ram Krishna wants to teach us that Jeevan Mukta is never ever identified with anything but seems as though he is a child, as though he is a madcap, as though he is an inert person, as though he is a ghoul, as though he is a pundit, as though he is like a small child, innocent. He can assume and in fact he assumes how many roles? Not five. Infinite. If he is a man, he will be a man. If he is a woman, he will be a woman. Even for us to say it is he, we are only talking from the standpoint of that Jeevan Mukta's body and in the presence of great scholars, he will be the greatest scholar albeit with the real experience. So it depends upon what company he is keeping. With children, he will be absolutely like a child. Wonderful. So these are the two questions and we only have to take on faith what Ram Krishna says but the important point is they have complete knowledge of Brahman but God in some bodies and minds keeps that knowledge. So for example, Shankaracharya had kept the knowledge of the ego of knowledge. In Narada, God kept the ego of devotion, bhakti, etc. And earlier also we have seen Ram Krishna gave an example. A man had two sons. Both of them were sent for learning this Brahma Vidya and they came back after several years and father wanted to know because father himself was a knower of Brahman. He wanted to know how much the children have progressed. So he asked the elder one and the elder one started reciting, quoting from various books and father went on saying right, right, good, good and when he put the same question to the youngest son and then he simply bent his head down and did not open his mouth and the father understood. This boy had experienced, really had no Brahman because he doesn't want to deal with what is called limit Brahman. One of the greatest teachings of Sri Ram Krishna is we should never put a limit to God. You should not put a limit. So each of these well-known religions are trying to put a limit. God should look like this and God should be called only by this name and God should be worshipped only in this particular form etc. So I sometimes feel to make a little bit of fun supposing a man fashions the image of Shiva and Vishnu out of butter. In winter season, you know it will remain like that. So worship. But the moment summer season comes both of them become melted down and become butter only. Now who is Shiva and who is Vishnu? If you ask me, my answer would be you give both of them to me. Let me taste and I will give my judgment who tastes better whether it is Amul butter or some other person's butter. So Sri Ram Krishna is illustrating in the form of his two children and there is a corresponding Upanishadic story in chapter 6. This is called story of Shweta Ketu. I will give very brief. So how do we know? How do we determine that this is the truth? There are what is called in Vedanta six characteristics. That is, it must be something which is never known before. Purvata. And the beginning and the end must be the same. Like any good writer he starts with saying I am going to teach you and this is my subject matter. And in the end he summarizes and said this is the subject matter I tried to expound to the best of my ability. So this beginning and end must not contradict each other. And then Abhyasa. Many times repetition must be there. About the same truth. Why repetition? Because for people like us the repetition is necessary until it becomes us. In fact any knowledge if we have knowledge we become that knowledge. Our whole personality has become identified with that knowledge and we act and react according to that knowledge. Simple example. These are very beautiful psychological truth. Suppose I have eaten a sweet and then it is a very good experience. Now I know I have knowledge and I have become this sweet. How does it affect me? Next time if this experience is a pleasant experience and that is the true knowledge. True knowledge is not how much sugar is there how much flavor is given etc. But true knowledge is always judgmental value. Did it give me 10% happiness? Or did it give me 11% happiness? This is the only way of judgment. So the other sweet gave me only 9% happiness. And this has given me 11% happiness. So I desire it. This is what I mean. Once we have this knowledge we become that knowledge and our whole orientation will be according to this knowledge that was very present I want it. And if on some occasion two sweets one gives me 9% joy another gives me 11% joy. If both are present my first preference will be to go for the higher joy. Because this is an invariable law. So long as we have not experienced higher type of joy our mind only runs after whatever we know to be the highest. But once we experience something higher our longing will be even if we do not get it our longing will always be only for the higher type of joy. So that is how knowledge completely modifies our behavior. And if I think this person is good and that knowledge makes us how we act and react. That changing, moulding our behavior is totally dependent upon our experience. And we do not stop with mere experience. We always depend upon the judgmental value. Why do we love our parents? Because they give us great joy either in the form of nourishment or in the form of protection in the form of value. Every child runs to the mother because in the opinion of the mother the child is the most valuable. So other mothers may not value the child. That is why the child does not cherish anybody, does not run anywhere else. It runs only to that even parents. If the father shows less affection and the mother shows better affection, more affection and the child always runs only towards the mother. In fact, in our normal day-to-day experience, nobody can replace our mother. And this is what Sri Ramakrishna and other spiritual teachers teach us. Do not call upon God even as a father. That is why the religions which prefer to call upon God as father they have got what is called patriarchal views. That society always has wars. Look at Christianity. Look at Judaism. Look at Islam. All the three, they discount the motherliness of God. Only a few mystics are there but for most of them it is only the father. Father in heaven, etc. Or God or Allah. Whatever it is. Therefore, a father requires power. The exhibition of power is more important. But those religions which are accustomed to worship God as mother, matriarchal feeling, so they are less likely to fight, etc. But one thing is there, jealousy will be very common on those who think about God. Devotees quarrel with devotees and one school of philosophy fights with the other school of philosophy, etc. Anyway, this is very important. That is why I am expounding all these things. So, what is the place of the schools of philosophy in what we are talking about accepting God and worshipping God, contemplating upon God as father or mother, you may raise that question. Because Dwaitins, that is dualists including qualified non-dualists that is Visishta Dwaitins. Dwaitins and Visishta Dwaitins, both of them, they become devotees. And both of them accept God as father. Even though they accept God as father, it is not the idea of the Semitic religions have about God as father. Here it is, Asesha Kalyana Guna Sagaraha, an ocean of infinite auspicious quality. That is Narayana protecting Prahlada as an example. So, more than a mother, Narayana is only there. But in all the dualistic religions, you find something extraordinary. You will never get a single idea of God. If there is Narayana, there is Sridevi, Lakshmi. If there is Brahma, there is Saraswati. And if there is Shiva, and there is Parvati. So, this beautiful combination of both the genders, the feminine, the masculine, but not in the sense of bodily differentiation, in the sense of Guna, Guna Visesha. So, an ocean of forgiveness, unlimited patience, and equality is the special qualities of the mother. Whereas, justice, etc., protection, power, strictness, all these things belong to the male, what is called male gender. We have to understand that. So, this is very important for us that we are fortunate to be able to contemplate God in both the aspects. In every aspect, we don't make a difference. And that is why wars really do not end in bloodshed. But it is only, most often, it is only wars, what is called war of words. That's all. Coming back to our subject, there is this beautiful story. In the Chandogya Upanishad, Chapter 6, there was a man of God realization. He had only one son. His name was Shweta Ketu. And Shweta Ketu came of age, and still he did not show any inclination to go to Gurukula. And that means, the father did not see any sign of eagerness to acquire knowledge. So, one day he called and said, Shweta Ketu, in our family, nobody is born who is of an ignorant person. So, a beautiful word is noochya, that is, unlearned person. Not the modern pundits or what is called professors. Not like that. That is, no heirs of God. So, it is right that you should not be an exception to this family orientation. So, you please go to the Gurukula. And obediently, the boy went. Twelve years he lived there. Then he came back full of pride because he was the son of his father. Oh, he was very extraordinarily intelligent. Intellectually he understood many things. Not that he did not study. That is the story I am going to slightly expound just now. So, he came back. And the first perception of the father who was a Nohara Brahman is, this boy, his head is full of egotism because probably he was the best student in his Guru. Guru must have certified also without indicating anything. And that went to the head of this Shweta Ketu. And then he was not showing it, but overtly, but his behaviour is showing. And the father observed it. And immediately he said, Shweta Ketu, your head seems to be swollen. Did you master that knowledge by knowing which the unheard becomes heard, the unknown becomes known, the unthinkable becomes experienceable, etc. And the question took the boy by surprise. He was shocked. What? I thought I had mastered everything. But there is still something. Then you see, he should have become humble because that is the true characteristic of knowledge. Vidya Dadhati Vinayam. But no. He had become more arrogant. He said, Sir, I think my teacher did not know. My Guru did not know. That is why he did not teach me. Surely, if he had known, he would have taught me. We don't know what happened after this conversation. Father must have disciplined the boy because the Upanishad only tells what comes. Very interesting observation. We have to understand what we call, you know. It is not what a person says, but it is what he means in between what he says. So the father must have understood. He must have disciplined him. He must have pointed out the defect and the boy became humble because he was really an intelligent boy. Somehow a temporary obstacle had come. Just like the obstacle had come to Nachiketa's father. Nachiketa's father was overcome by Brahma Gnanam. Even though his ambition was to conquer the whole world. That means to get all joy available in the whole world. But then he was carried away, probably by a Samskara. And after some time, that Samskara came to be known by him. He cognized it. He diagnosed it. He took the remedies. He became pure. And then he understood. I am talking one thing. I am doing something. So it is not that Nachiketa's father remained ignorant. It is an evolution of human mind. Higher and higher experience gives better and better knowledge and brings us closer and closer to God. So who was Nachiketa? That immature mind which was called Vajashravasa now became known as Nachiketa. I thought I knew everything. But now I know I do not know. So I want to know. Nachiketa. I want to know. Acquire true knowledge. So what is to be done? So he goes in this story. I am just mentioning because every story has a deeper significance than what superficially it presents to us. So in this Kathopanishad then the Vajashravasa must have contemplated, found out his own problem and he must have disciplined himself and he had become pure, Adhikari. And then what does an Adhikari do? I do not want anything in this world. I want that by which I become everything. Like it comes in the Mundaka Upanishad. Eka Karana Gnanena Sarva Karya Gnanam Bhavati. By knowing the cause of everything we have the knowledge of everything. So this Nachiketa's father called Vajashravasa he must have become purified. So as the story goes that this man he was giving giving away useless type of thing. But now really he wanted to give. But for that purpose contemplation had to be done. So his son as it were that is the discriminating part of Vajashravasa's mind can be called as Nachiketa. He wanted to know why am I not attaining the goal even though I am doing everything. Because if there is anything, any ingredient is missing, the end product will not be complete at all. So that much intelligence he understood. Then he said I am still clinging I must give up everything. That giving up everything is called death. That is completely just as a dead man has to give up everything so this person then he goes to Yamadharma Raja. Who is Yamadharma Raja? Lord of death. What is the Lord of death? He who doesn't know what is death. He who conquers death. That is to say by knowing I am deathless. Such a person is called a Yamadharma Raja. Yama Raja. So I give you to death means what? That means you take to Sanyasa give up everything and be in quest of it. But you need a Guru. At that point of time, at that stage of development, the person is completely ready for the knowledge of Brahman. Then humbly he has to approach a teacher and that is how he had gone to Yamadharma Raja. Not that this is what exactly Jesus Christ also indicates unless a man is dead and is reborn he cannot enter into the kingdom of heaven. It has nothing to do with physical death. That is you die to your clinging to old ideas stubborn, useless, negative, incomplete ideas. Then how do we know? How does the teacher know? We are ready because he tests. Every Upanishad gives us that idea directly or indirectly. Sometimes the teacher says you go and live observe 32 years of Brahmacharya. That is as we get in the Chandogya itself to Prajapati sent both Indra as well as Virochana 32 years. Then he gave some knowledge and one person he thought I have attained the knowledge of Atman that is the Asura. Asura means one who is a worldly person terribly attached to only body. But Indra again he came back. He was a thoughtful person, discriminating person and he diagnosed his own problem. So thrice and then again three times Prajapati sends him 32, 32 and then 5 years. So total 101 years what purpose? To become fit, to receive that knowledge and then through the analysis of the waking, dream dreamless and Turiya exactly like Mandokya Upanishad, the Prajapati teaches the knowledge. Marvellous stories. So this Naciketa had to be tested. How to be tested? So a teacher, Yamadharma Raja as if gives I will give you three bones. I am shortening the symbolism of this story. So what is the first bone? For unenlightened person worldly persons, worldly happiness. Not fleeting worldly happiness but real worldly happiness very less of suffering and mostly happy and that comes only by leading a dharmic life. That was the bone given by Yamadharma Raja to Naciketa in the form of your father will be absolutely joyful when you go back. That means even after enlightenment your father is terribly worried about you. That means physically in the waking state you will be the happiest person. That is the symbolism. And when you are happy the whole world will be also happy. When you are pure you see everything as pure only. This is one of the essential teachings of Sri Ramakrishna. Yatha trishti hi tatha trishti hi. As you look at then the world appears exactly in the same way. Then there are people, thinking people and they are not happy with this. What happens after death etc. They are given that faith there is life, there is other world and life after death for them how to attain because that joy is far superior, incomparably superior. So you have to do certain contemplations called Naciketa Agni and Yamadharma Raja gives that bone from now onwards. This Agni Vidya goes by your name called Naciketa Agni. But what is your third bone? And then Naciketa says earthly wise I was very happy, heavenly wise I also experienced and I know what it is and it is not different from earthly type of happiness, coming and going, temporary happiness and everything temporary is temporary only, it comes to an end. I want permanent happiness. For that Brahma Vidya is necessary. So teach me about Brahma Vidya and especially I know you are capable of teaching. So this indirect cognition of a Brahma Jnani is one of the greatest good fortunes and it requires great purity, not Pandit's mentality, intellectual capability but tremendous amount of purity and Naciketa had because he firmly rejected all the pralobhanas, all the temptations and then the real crux of the Katha Upanishad is that thou art that you are that Atman the rest is beautiful what is called analogies, metaphors the teaching is given. And so why did I refer to all this? Ghashreta Ketu must have become like Naciketa and his own father had started giving him this particular. This is what I wanted to convey in our next class we will analyze this beautiful story. Why do we want to analyze? Because Sri Ramakrishna's words have deep significance and I am doing what Swami Vivekananda had indicated for every devotee of Sri Ramakrishna once he commanded his disciple Saracandra Chakravarthy that you study the life of Sri Ramakrishna in the light of the Vedas and you study the Vedas in the light of Sri Ramakrishna's life and teachings then you will understand Vedas better and you understand Sri Ramakrishna also in the right way and that is why I am trying to mix from one to the other whenever I get the opportunity I am going. So do not worry why is the Swami getting stuck only at this paragraph and this way the gospel will never be complete. You don't worry about completion so you try to be complete person. That is most important. Om Jananem Sharadam Devem Ramakrishnam Jagad Gurum Pada Padme Dayo Saritva Pranamami Mohal Moho May the Ramakrishna Holy Mother and Swami Vivekananda bless us all with bhakti Jai Ramakrishna