48. नित्यसन्तुष्टमानसः Nitya-santuṣṭa-mānasaḥ

One whose heart was ever absolutely contented

Santuṣṭi means contentment or satiation. It may seem as if contentment is born of desiring, attaining and enjoying more and more objects. However, the Śāstra explains the true position as follows: “Never does desire subside through the enjoyment of desired objects. Instead, it only grows more and more as does fire because of clarified butter.”¹²⁹

Now this may seem to be contradictory to people’s experience in general. After all, when one attains the objects of one’s desire, one does experience joy and satisfaction. Bhagavatpāda explains the mechanism in detail as follows: “The Ātman is changeless and is of the nature of Supreme Bliss. The non-Self, Māyā, is just the opposite – ever agitated and of the nature of sorrow. The mind, the limiting adjunct of the Ātman, takes on the steadiness and bliss of the Ātman or the agitation and misery of Māyā, depending on the circumstances. When the mind is seized by desire for an object, it gets agitated and the agitation gives rise to misery. When the desired object is attained, the mind becomes calm and steady and the bliss of the Ātman is experienced. The happiness that comes from sense objects in this manner, continues only as long as the mind remains calm and steady, that is until the mind is again agitated by the next desire.”¹³⁰ Clearly, the mind can be maintained in a state of steady contentment only if divorced from sense objects and turned inwards.

This nāma says that His Holiness was one whose manas, mind, was nitya, always, not just tuṣṭa, contented, but saṁ-tuṣṭa, completely contented. Complete contentment is marked by satiation with whatever is got. The completeness of His Holiness’s contentment stemmed from the fact that it was undecaying and steady, unconditioned as it was by desire.

Śrī Sadāśiva Brahmendra contrasts the bliss of true contentment with the joys had from worldly objects: “On account of the excellence of sattva, unsurpassed internal joy arises for the contented yogin. Pleasure stemming from sense objects becomes unfavorable like poison. It is said, ‘The unequaled grandeur of enjoyment seems like poison for those tranquil ones who have attained the satiation of drinking the nectar of contentment.’”¹³¹ His Holiness was a yogīśvara nonpareil, ever of absolutely contented mind.

❧

Even as a child, Sri Srinivasa Sastry was contented with whatever He got and never craved for anything. While He was a brahmacārin studying at Sringeri, Jagadguru Śrī Candraṣekhara Bhāratī Mahāsvāmin used to ask the brahmacārins, in general, questions such as, “Was the food satisfactory today? Was it tasty? Was it excessively salty or pungent?” The boys used to enthusiastically express their views on the food eaten by them. Sri Srinivasa Sastry, however, remained silent on these occasions.

One day, the Jagadguru asked Him, “While all the others readily comment on their food when I ask these questions, why is it that you remain silent?” He replied, “All that we get is Your Holiness’s prasāda. As such, it is always tasty.”

❧

Justice Somnath Iyer (who retired as the Chief Justice of Karnataka and had been the Governor of the State for some time) once asked His Holiness, “Your Holiness can have all the comforts in the Maṭha. Instead of experiencing any comforts, Your Holiness strains Yourself so much every day, from early in the morning to late at night. What does Your Holiness get out of this?”

His Holiness smiled at him and said, “Suppose you are offered a choice between plain jaggery and badam halwa (a sweetmeat made of almonds), which one would you choose?” Somnath Iyer said, “Where is the doubt here? I would choose badam halwa.” “Likewise,” responded His Holiness,

136 49. Niṣkalaṅka-sucāritraḥ “those who have tasted the bliss of the Supreme will not seek mundane comforts.”

❧

The following was reported by Sri S. G. Narasimhaiyya, who was His Holiness’s Private Secretary for a period of time.

“I asked His Holiness, ‘In the photos published in the Maṭha’s almanac and other publications, Your Holiness is just dressed as a saṁnyāsin. Should we not publish, instead, photographs of Your Holiness in all splendour, fully decked with ornaments symbolic of the position of the pontiff of this great pīṭha?’

“He said, ‘This is my preferred way of being. Intrinsically, I do not want any of the pomp and grandeur that the pīṭha is associated with, though they may be required on specific occasions as per the age-old tradition of the pīṭha. By my Guru’s grace, I am firmly convinced about this. If I were to have complete liberty, I would go away this very instant and, in solitude, immerse and lose myself in the contemplation of the Supreme.’”

❧