26. SAṀNYĀSIN

D: Should actions be renounced?

A: Unnecessary actions should not be done. In spiritual life, one should not try to discard all actions right at the beginning, but should dedicate them to Īśvara. It may be noted that actions themselves will leave one as one’s mind gets purer and purer. Just as cleaning-nut powder settles down at the bottom along with the impurities in water, all actions dissociate themselves from an advanced person on their own. That is the period best suited for one to take up saṁnyāsa.

D: Should saṁnyāsa be taken up before or after the attainment of jñāna?

A: The saṁnyāsa taken up after the attainment of jñāna is called vidvat-saṁnyāsa while that taken before knowledge is termed vividiṣā-saṁnyāsa. The former is superior to the latter.

D: What state of mind qualifies one for saṁnyāsa?

A: After properly analysing the world, one concludes that one will not get any lasting happiness from it, and leads a spiritual life. Subsequently, when one becomes unconcerned about actions and their renunciation, then indeed one is truly fit for saṁnyāsa. One should have attained equipoise prior to taking up saṁnyāsa.

D: Can one take up saṁnyāsa even at a young age?

A: Yes, provided one has intense vairāgya.

(Let him take to saṁnyāsa on the very day that he attains intense vairāgya.)

D: Are there any regulations for a saṁnyāsin?

A: There are regulations for those who have taken saṁnyāsa but have not attained jñāna. However, there are no obligatory norms for saṁnyāsin-s who have attained the Supreme.

D: If a saṁnyāsin does not get food for some days, should he make efforts to get food or should he keep quiet thinking, “I will not try to get it even if my spiritual life is affected.”

A: The saṁnyāsin who has realised the Truth need not worry about food or death. However, if an unenlightened saṁnyāsin feels that his spiritual practices will be compromised, he may, if he wishes, make some more effort for bhikṣā.

D: Does not the word cāturmāsya mean four months? But nowadays, saṁnyāsin-s remain in a place only for two months. Has this been permitted in the śāstra-s?

A: Yes.

D: Do saṁnyāsin-s need to observe ahiṁsā as a mahāvrata?

A: Yes. Saṁnyāsin-s must practise ahiṁsā at all times. For them, it is a mahāvrata.

D: Is it the duty of saṁnyāsin-s to induce others to get jñāna?

A: There is no rule that a saṁnyāsin must guide others towards realisation. There is nothing wrong if he lives on his own. However, by training disciples, he becomes a Guru.

D: Is there any rule to the effect that all those who have attained jñāna should, without exception, take up formal saṁnyāsa?

A: No. If Īśvara feels that it would be better if they remain in the midst of the world, He will keep them in an āśrama other than saṁnyāsa. However, I do not mean by this that a householder’s life is better.

D: Will a man who has attained jñāna care for saṁnyāsa? Why should one lead a saṁnyāsin’s life after jñāna dawns?

A: It is not that he puts in great effort and takes up saṁnyāsa. Actions wither away from him of their own accord. Thus, he becomes a vidvat-saṁnyāsin to remain as an undisturbed jīvanmukta.

★ ★ ★ ★

❑ Incidents from Acharyal's Life

Forbearance and ahiṁsā are vital characteristics of a saṁnyāsin. The following incident shows that Acharyal had imbibed these virtues even as a young boy.

Even in His childhood, Sri Srinivasa Sastry (Acharyal’s name before His saṁnyāsa) was ever uncomplaining. One day, His friends decided to test the limits of His forbearance. Fetching a stick, they began to beat Him with it. He bore their unprovoked onslaught without a murmur. When the boys stopped, aghast at how far they had gone in testing Him, He won their hearts with kind words. He also told them the following story:

A Buddhist monk was unjustly tortured by a monarch. The king finally softened and, feeling ashamed, begged the monk’s pardon. As an act of atonement, he catered to the subsequent needs of the monk. Thus, merely by forbearance, the monk was able to humble the emperor. Sri Srinivasa Sastry’s friends hung their heads in shame on hearing the tale.

★ ★ ★ ★

On many an occasion Paramacharyal (Jagadguru Sri Chandrasekhara Bharati Mahaswamigal) had spoken to Sri Srinivasa Sastry about the futility of leading a worldly life. This had kindled some queries in the mind of Sri Srinivasa Sastry, who posed them to Vaidyanatha Sastry. These were:

1. I have heard that the eldest son in the family must compulsorily get married. Is it so?

2. Our Guru embraced monasticism after becoming highly erudite. Is it obligatory that one acquire deep knowledge of the scriptures prior to renouncing the world?

3. I have heard that when one is born, immediately a set of debts accrues to one. Some of these are repaid by serving one’s parents, some by worshipping the deva-s and yet others by begetting progeny. Is this indeed the state of affairs?

4. Is one permitted to enter another āśrama, only after dwelling for long as a brahmacārin in the hermitage of the Guru?

5. Can a young boy like Me take up saṁnyāsa if he desires to? Parents may not grant permission. Can saṁnyāsa be taken up without their approval?

During the course of one of His talks with the students, Paramacharyal, of His own accord, proceeded to give a detailed exposition. He said that marriage is compulsory only for a person who wants to enjoy sensual pleasures. It is not obligatory on one who has strong dispassion to lead a householder’s life. Further, there is no injunction in the Veda-s that a dispassionate one should get married. The Veda-s indicate remedies for the removal of desires and never exhort the gratification of longings or procreation. Just as fond parents would only try to save their child from falling into fire and would not induce it to tumble into it, so too do the Veda-s indicate the means for people to abstain from bad ways and to proceed in the holy path. In fact, the moment one becomes extremely dispassionate, one can renounce and become an ascetic. Thus, a man can become an ascetic regardless of whether he is a celibate or a householder or a forest-dweller.

Paramacharyal went on to explain the futility of begetting a child. He strengthened His explanations by various citations and firmly drove home His points. For instance, He said that only rarely one happens to get a son who is endowed with all good qualities. Even on such a son being born, if the lad were to be shortlived or diseased or were to later have no children, the parents would have to put up with mental suffering. If a young child were to suffer on account of diseases or planetary influences, the grief of the parents would know no end. If the child were to grow up a little but were to be stupid, then too the parents would be far from happy. Further, if after upanayana, the boy were not to become learned or, if learned, he were to refuse to get married, then also the parents would suffer agony.

Paramacharyal explained that śrāddha (a rite performed for the deceased parents) is an obligatory duty that purifies the performer. He emphasised that the manes do not sustain themselves exclusively on the piṇḍa (ball of cooked rice) that is offered during the śrāddha ceremony. He went on to add that the stories found in texts like the Mahābhārata about the necessity of offspring are not meant for advanced spiritual aspirants who have strong dispassion. All the queries raised earlier by Sri Srinivasa Sastry were thus categorically answered by Paramacharyal; neither He nor Vaidyanatha Sastry had mentioned them to Paramacharyal.

★ ★ ★ ★

Acharyal once narrated the following information to a disciple:

Two days before taking saṁnyāsa, I had thought, “Dreams are not under My control. Mistakes committed in them do not result in sin. Nevertheless, My renunciation should be so sincere and firm that after being initiated into saṁnyāsa, I should not see Myself in any dream as clad in white as I am now. I love chanting the Gāyatrī-mantra. Yet, as Gāyatrī-japa is disallowed for paramahaṁsa-saṁnyāsin-s, I should not engage in it even in My dreams from the day after tomorrow.” By God’s grace, till today, this has come to pass.

★ ★ ★ ★

❑ Experiences of Devotees

Once during one of Acharyal’s visits to Delhi, I was desirous of making a special wooden cot for Him to sleep on, as the weather was extremely chill. Later, I found that His Holiness did not lie on it but on the floor. Anxious, I submitted, “I have arranged for the cot exclusively for Your Holiness’ use. It is brand new and no one has used it so far. I will be very happy if Your Holiness uses it.” Acharyal smiled and said, “Yes, I will.” Later, I was surprised to find that He used it only to keep His articles on that and to occasionally sit on that, but not for sleeping. He continued to sleep on the floor unmindful of the testing weather condition. [Dr. H.C.Visvesvaraya]

★ ★ ★ ★

❑ Parables of Acharyal

Acharyal once narrated a humorous tale concerning pseudo-saṁnyāsin-s.

A saṁnyāsin was not observing any regulations with regard to food and spiritual practices. A householder approached him and asked, “You do not seem to be observing any regulations whatsoever. You eat as you wish, spend your time loitering and do acts that are unbecoming of a saṁnyāsin. Is it proper for you to be like this?” The saṁnyāsin replied, “Everything is Brahman. The body and the mind perform actions whereas I am the pure, conscious Ātman which is unstained. As such, it matters little to me what the body and the mind do. Indeed everything is Brahman.”

The householder queried, “Will you come to my house for bhikṣā?” “Yes”, replied the saṁnyāsin, “I have no objections. To me, who revels in the Ātman, nothing matters. I shall come.” That afternoon, the saṁnyāsin went to the householder’s place and sat down to have a meal. However, his host did not offer him even a drop of water. As minutes passed, he became restless. His host deliberately ignored his uneasiness. Finally, unable to withstand the delay any longer, he shouted, “What do you mean by keeping me waiting? I am quite hungry. Serve me fast.”

The householder came up to him and said, “I fail to realise how hunger and thirst could arise in you who are totally immersed in the bliss of the Ātman. You are all-pervasive, for, such is the nature of the Ātman. I am unable to offer you water, for, being omnipresent, you already pervade it from within and without.” The saṁnyāsin got up saying, “Do not speak like that. I am unable to bear my hunger.” He then left in search of food.

This saṁnyāsin lacked self-control and dispassion. Hence, he did not adhere to the rules meant for unenlightened mendicants. He misused Advaita philosophy merely to explain away his misconduct. His unrestrained behaviour fetched him much sin; his Advaitic declarations offered him no protection from demerits.

Nowadays many take up saṁnyāsa but without anyone to initiate them into it. For their saṁnyāsa, about ten rupees are sufficient. They just go to a shop and say, “Give me a cloth which is ochre-coloured.” Unlike normal saṁnyāsin-s whose clothing is drab, they want theirs to be resplendent. So, they specify, “Give me a cloth which is ochre-coloured and resplendent.” They wear it and wander about as saṁnyāsin-s!

★ ★ ★ ★