Evening Darshan, September 8, 1970
(Light of Kirpal, chapter 2)
Q: We are recording everything. Do You mind?
Master: No, something substantive, that should be recorded. Not everything . . . How did you pass your day today? Very busy in doing?
Q: Well, we did some shopping and now we’ll do no more of that. We got it out of the way. We finished.
M: That’s all right. So from tomorrow you’ll be regular in your meditation.
Q: Yes, Sir.
M: Tomorrow morning you can go there [the room for meditation], sit down at 7:30. I’ll come there when I’ve finished here at nine. Up to nine you will have sufficient time for meditation. That I often do also. Have you any subject now for discussion?
Q: A thing I have hoped for some time is that we could ask You a question such as they asked Jesus, “Lord, if we should pray, how should we pray?” And then He presented the Lord’s Prayer. If we asked You that question, what would you say?
M: I have great regard for Jesus. Jesus was Jesus. He said, “I am a son of man; of course, God is working through me.” That’s all right. He gave an answer that was quite appropriate according to the level of us more worldly people who think and pray, “God give us this day our daily bread.” But there are different levels of prayer. I’ve discussed that point in the book Prayer. There have been such-like people who pray, “Oh, God, we want nothing more than this: we want one mare to ride on, a house to live in, so much to eat and so much to drink, and this and that thing. This is not taxing. If You cannot afford it, we cannot pray.” Some address God like that. This is the ABC; it’s from the level of man. That’s all right.
Ultimately they pray, “Thy kingdom come on earth.” We worldly people need everything. In my book you’ll find this point brought out very clearly. Perhaps the average man wants not less than two hundred dollars a month; “This is really what I want. If You cannot give it, I cannot pray,” he says. That’s from the angle of a worldly man. But ultimately as you progress on the way you’ll surrender everything. The tithe system has been with us from time immemorial. So first you’ll give one tenth, then you’ll give more, then more, then everything to Him. In the beginning our Master used to give tithe of His income to the Master who would use it for the good of the people. Then when He progressed, He gave all of His income to the Master’s Feet and He (Baba Jaimal Singh) would send income for the use of Sawan Singh’s family. This is the ultimate.
But from the level of the worldly man, that prayer is good. Other Masters and Saints have also given out prayers like that. So that prayer befits worldly men like us.
Q: Like us?
M: Like us. I am a worldly man, you see. I cannot be cast out from the man body; I’m a man too, like you. That is a man, you see. That God Power is making the best use of it. When the rider is good he has two feet strongly in the stirrups — that pays, benefits us. He is safe. So a worldly man needs everything; but as we progress we surrender everything to Him. Ultimately we say, “If You give, that’s all right; . . . if You don’t give, even that makes no difference; even then we are satisfied.” That’s the ultimate — full surrender. You’ll find that given out very clearly in the book Prayer. I’ve got a copy from America.
Q: We start by asking things from God, but the real prayer is when we surrender everything to God.
M: Yes. “If You give or not, that’s all right.”
Let me give you an example. I don’t say it fits the situation in the West but it does in the East.
A newly married woman goes to her husband; at first, she says, “Well, I want this, I want that.” It’s but natural. Then she thinks, “He loves me.” When a wife knows that her husband loves her, she will think, “I want this. If he gives it to me, all right; if not, all right.” She does not sulk, “You must give me this and that thing, otherwise I can’t go on.” The lowest form of prayer is, as I told you, “I want this, I want that, otherwise I cannot pray. I cannot live.” To ask: “Give us our daily bread” — this is normal.
The time comes when the wife sees: “My husband loves me even in rags and torn clothes. He sees my condition and he does not buy me new clothes, but I must be loved by him; if these torn rags appeal to him, all right. The only thing is, I must be loved by him.” This is the ultimate goal. “If he wants to see me in this state and he’s pleased with that; if he knows, he sees and does not give me anything, it means I’m pleasing to him in that manner. My whole job is to win his pleasure, is it not?” So this is the ultimate. There are stages.
Q: The ultimate evidently has been reached in the East, but in the West we have a complicating factor: advertising. The wife perhaps listens to television or radio and finds out that she really should have this desire and that desire, and . . .
M: That’s in the beginning. That’s quite elementary. As a son of man, you see, everybody wants something. But when a woman comes in contact with somebody who has chosen her as a companion for life, for weal or woe, then she should win his pleasure. Even if she wants something and he cannot give, she will be satisfied. In the time of Father Abraham, the slaves were bought. He bought a slave, brought him home, and asked him, “Where will you sit?” — “I’m bought; wherever you will make me sit.” . . . “What will you eat?” — “There is no question of my desire; I am bought — whatever you will feed me.” Father Abraham sighed. “Oh God, he is a good servant of yours. I am not.” So this is the ultimate.
Q: We have a new factor in the West that enters in, called women’s liberation, in which they don’t believe in accommodating themselves to the husband the way that You’ve discussed.
M: Strictly speaking, husbands and wives should have equal rights. But they must be one soul in two bodies. Otherwise there’s no good family life. God has united them as a matter of reactions of the past. Now I’m speaking very strictly according to principles. You don’t mind that? According to principle when a man takes a wife and they want to leave each other, then even if the wife remarries or the husband remarries, they are both adulterers. These are the words of Moses. We fall short of these Commandments. And there’s real happiness only when one is attached to one person throughout life. In India this has been proverbial. In the West there are divorce courts. Every day if some trouble arises. “All right, I’ll go (for a divorce),” the wife or husband says. So where’s the peace? No peace. After six years just see them. One son has been born here, another is born there. Who claims them? Very difficult situation, I would say.
India has been proverbial for family stability, but this disease has now also crept in here too. Divorced people think they are advanced. To my mind, they have degraded themselves by this level of thinking. So there is actually no permanent peace, union, or integration. You follow me? We also have divorce courts in India now — not many, but still they have been started; it is the nation’s loss.
In the West you’ll find that trouble arises every day. There are very few who are sincere to each other. God has united you as a reaction of the past, so let God disunite. Both of you should go together as equals; both united together, not as slave — I don’t mean that — but as equals, both united.
Marriage means taking a companion in life
who will be with us in weal or woe
in our earthly sojourn,
and we should help each other to meet God.
One duty may be of begetting children.
But if divorce comes, they say: “This is my son; you can keep that son.” All this trouble is going on. First a son is living with his father; two years later he is living with his mother. Excuse me if I say, there is no sincerity.
Divorce is one of the main causes of trouble in the West. It has crept into India too, I’m sorry to say. The Mohammedans also allow it, with some restrictions. A man wanting a divorce gives notice for three months, then reconsiders for six months — that’s the rule. Then after one year or so if he and his wife cannot be reconciled, they are divorced. At the time of divorce the man pays something. You see? This is what Mohammedanism has got. In Hinduism that has not been the custom. You may approve of divorce, but I say evil has crept in here, too.
If a man considers he has to, he will adjust. In my letters, you’ll find the advice, “Try to adjust, please.” And many couples, after having applied for divorce, have returned to each other. Now they’re living a good life.
When once you think that you both have to carry on, you’ll adjust. Otherwise one will go this way and one that way, and there will be no peaceful home. So I always tell them, “Be polite to your wife, be truthful, be loving, adjust, control yourself.” And to the wife, “If your husband hates you, you must be sincere.” I’ve found in many cases they’ve come back to a normal life. So everyday, try to adjust.
As it is, a young man gets married. After two years he divorces; he takes another wife, and the wife takes a husband. After two more years he gets another divorce. Every time he has to remarry he has to take the role of a young man again; he’s never out of the sensual life. I’m pointing this out from the spiritual point of view.
So these are very strict orders I am giving you; if those who are divorced remarry, both are adulterers. You see you cannot stamp out good or evil altogether, but we have to take such a recourse in which there is more good as compared with evil. Married couples should say, “You and I have to carry on somehow; we haven’t adjusted yet. We will try to adjust.” But if one partner threatens divorce, then the other will retaliate. That’s not the way; there will be no peace with all these frivolous thoughts haunting your brain. I’m just explaining from the practical point of view, that’s all.
Once I had a very long correspondence on this subject. There are some genuine cases too, but they are very few, very few, not like what goes on now. Now everybody with a little excuse can say, “I am going to divorce you.” How can you love two men at a time or two wives at a time? After all, there are some obligations.
I’m not talking deep philosophy, only common sense. There’s more peace that way. I now find those who have come in contact with me through correspondence are changed. Those who had already taken recourse to divorce, that was too late, but those who were intending to divorce, they have changed their minds. Now they have comparatively peaceful lives. To give you an example: if you have one bangle, maybe of iron or gold, that won’t make any noise. But if there are two or three, they will always be jingling. One heart attached to so many places — where’s the rest? Sometimes driven that way, sometimes driven this way.
So this is very important, a very grave question to consider. I’m sorry this evil has crept into India too. Even now it affects, I think, ten percent of all marriages. You see, once a custom starts, it continues. It will take time, but what they have started will spoil the whole thing. In the case of family planning, India has the highest birthrate now.
Q: In India one sees billboards everywhere advertising family planning. Do you approve of it?
M: Truly speaking, I don’t; they should maintain celibacy, chastity. This is a very valuable thing. They spoil it. I am not in favor of family planning. I tell you honestly. The point is, to conserve that power helps you physically, intellectually, and spiritually. We fall down every moment. I have put one column in the diary for chastity of thought, word, and deed. In these points, I’ve made it clear what I think…
All right, tomorrow morning you may meditate at seven thirty over there. If you call me, I will come about nine or nine thirty. Then in the evening we’ll have a heart-to-heart talk. Now if you don’t mind, I’ll attend to them. [So many Indian initiates are waiting to see their Beloved Master.] Good night to you all.