When my teacher, Rahujan, came to Sydney Australia, in 1973, I was going through the pain and disillusionment from my first broken marriage.....

I was living alone in a two-bedroom flat at the time. A friend asked me if I could offer free lodging to someone she had invited to visit Australia sometime before. Now her situation had changed and she had no means of accommodating him.

I reluctantly agreed to offer the spare bedroom. "But", I said, "I don't want to be involved"....

Nothing could be further from the truth! When I met him - a thin, undernourished, softly spoken distinctively Indian-looking little fellow, I could not help but attend to him and do things for him as if propelled by a force beyond my reasoning and my personal inclinations.

Although he had a good mastery of the English language, his pronunciation was so totally "Indian" that I had great difficulty in understanding him. But I soon got used to his accent and was eventually able to transcribe just about word from speeches he gave both at my place and in other public venues.

I cooked for him, washed his clothes and cleaned his room. But most of all I used to bombard him with questions about this teaching that he was bringing to the West.... this "divine-love devotion" as he called it.

I had never heard the term "guru" or "Veda" before. However, listening to this man speak with the utmost authority and docile simplicity, I came to understand that there is a "divine government" operating. Certain divine laws and divine perceptions which Man needs to know and come to terms with if he is to bring about an end to his struggle for happiness and emotional suffering.

At the time I met Swami Ji, I was searching for any knowledge, any consoling hope of understanding what was happening in my life. Amongst other things, I was attending a local group involved in the teachings of G. I. Gurdjieff. I had heard of the different levels of Man, consciousness, ignorance ("sleep", in Gurdjieff terms), and many other concepts. Ordinary man was at levels 1, 2, and 3. If you met a man who was at level 4 you were lucky because he would be the gateway into the fourth dimension, the medium between ordinary man and enlightenment...

Man No 6 was very rare and he would not be walking among ordinary people... So you can imagine my incredulity and at the same time the awe which I must have felt when, in a letter of introduction that Swami Ji showed me, he was being referred to as a Rasik Saint from India who had been "pushed" by an urge to come out of isolation and teach Divine Love Devotion to people of the West!!

This sounded nothing short of Man No7! I had heard that there are a few men who have attained the "divine body" and are fully realised. But it was not something that happened everyday, let alone have such a man show up at your doorstep!

I looked and looked at that word "Saint" for a long time. Then I actually stupidly pointed it out to this meagre man in front of me and I said: "This letter says you are a Saint!" He did not change in any manner of expression, posture, or tone of voice. He just said: "It is tradition... in India, that's all...."

Had I actually met someone who "had crystallised the divine body" I remember thinking, bringing to mind the teachings of Gurdjieff. A man who had crystallised the divine body in himself would be of the order of no less than Jesus Christ!!

I discarded from my mind any such expectations. We walked into my flat and after I offered him some refreshment - he had just arrived from India - I began my tirade of questions. My friend Denise had already left and I was on my own with this little man from Vrindaban India under my roof, prepared to answer any question that I would put to him....

At around 11:30 pm just as he was going to answer my umpteenth question he appeared to pass out. He became very still, but he did not actually fall over. His eyes were shut and he was REMing. I did not know what to do. I got frightened. Will I call emergency? Phone a doctor? Wait until he comes to? I would gently call out his name (so disrespectful, as I found out later, to call a man of this kind by his first name by someone like me!) but he either would not answer or could not hear me...

I decided to call Denise on the phone. She said not to worry. "Swami Ji often goes into divine trance...."

After quite sometime, the exhausted traveller came to and I prepared his bed to rest in. Nothing was said about anything.....

Swami-Ji's very first talk (that's how he wanted to be addressed "Swami-Ji") was titled "The Aim Of Life". It was as if he had come for the specific purpose of telling us "this is what you have to do if you want to be happy. These are the laws, this is the path, this is why you are here and this is who God is...." There was nothing left out. It sounded too simple to be practical. Where was the "struggle" that I had heard about to become self-realised and "working on oneself" until perfection is attained?

I had many long sessions with him into the long hours of the night - questions and answers that were never recorded unfortunately. This short book is not meant to go into that, nor to recount the conversations we would have during trips we took around Sydney for the sake of some leisure and entertainment. The way he saw nature and the activities of all living things including people struggling for survival, going to work, try to enjoy life, etc, was quite different from the way we see them.

To him the entire natural milieu; the natural phenomena such as the rain, the elements; animate and inanimate things had a place in the manifest world. "With material eyes you see material things; with spiritual eyes you see spiritual things" he often said. "You have to develop spiritual vision"....

My personal association with Rahujan lasted only just under two years. Then he moved on to New Zealand and then to the US, then disappeared forever from my material sight.

I still remember him saying, at one time: "saints sometimes appear of their own free will to bless the people of this world with their knowledge and then likewise disappear..."

In just under two years of association with this man from Vrindavan, India, I came to know of a knowledge that was to totally transform the way I perceived and related with people and the world.

I was put in touch with the body of literature called Vedas, which I have been studying ever since and from which I have been obtaining ever-increasing inspiration and revelation...

In this short book you will be able to read Rahujan's own words as he spoke them to the small gatherings which took place in Sydney all those years ago....

The transcriptions from the original tapes have been edited to make complete sentences and give the talks cohesion, readability and structure. The original recordings are still in my possession, comprising two full reels of 7-inch tapes.

1. The Aim of Life

Given on the evening of December 19, 1973

These talks have been recorded on tape, then transcribed and typed, followed by scanning into a PC and edited for ease of reading, grammatical correctness and idiomatic paraphrasing. I have tried to retain, however, the general style and flavour of the talks, in an attempt to preserve the original substance and modality of the speaker.

It is a fairly obvious fact that EVERYONE feels that he should be doing something in the world. Every student, every young man, aspires to become something one day. But what he thinks, what he plans to become, it is very rare, it is found, that he becomes that. Moreover, from the beginning to the end of life, his aims and objects keep changing. As a small baby he wishes for one thing; as a child he wishes for something else; as a teenager his desires change again; as a young man he wants something altogether different. Whether in youth, or in old age, or in childhood, every person has this in common: that he has some wish. From a newborn child, to a person lying on his deathbed, every one has some desire, some wish, which he wants to fulfil. This is characteristic, and we will dwell on this for a while...

Actually, we might ask, "what is it that we really wish? What is our innermost desire?" We are looking into this question today.

If we observe a child - a small child - he simply needs to sleep comfortably, to be fed, some toys to play with, that's all. As he grows up, his desires multiply. The old desires disappear, but new ones take their place. And the multiplication of desires goes on constantly; it never comes to an end.

During our lifetime, we earn so many things, we achieve so many heights, we fall so many times; but these ups and downs do not eliminate desire. There is a change in desire, but there is no elimination of desire. Today you think of one thing, tomorrow you will think of another thing. Desire remains; it will never go. AND UNHAPPINESS IS DUE TO DESIRE. So we should think very deeply over the cause of desire, the root cause.

If we think about this with an open mind, we find we have five senses. And whatever we desire concerns these five senses, nothing else. We can think of something to see; we can think of something to hear; we can think of something to touch, to smell, to taste. We can think of nothing else.

It is not possible for us to think or imagine anything else because we have only five senses, not six. So although desires may be unlimited, they can be categorised in five classes. These five groups of desires constitute the five categories of enjoyment and disappointment we experience. Thus, every person, whether he is a child, a young man, or an old man, he will think only across these five categories; he cannot imagine anything apart from these.

Now then, aren't we getting sensory pleasure? We are!

No one is stopping us from looking at beauty. Any one, rich or poor, can LOOK at beauty. But does that satisfy him? No! Sensory enjoyment is free for every one; and every one is enjoying sensory perception to some degree. But is he satisfied? It would seem not. The difference is one of degree only, as the following example will illustrate:

Suppose one man is having a sumptuous, expensive dinner in a big hotel, while a beggar is having his meal at a park bench, simply some dry, stale bread. One would expect quite a difference in the SENSORY ENJOYMENT that the two men derive. In fact this is not so. The taste which that poor man is experiencing after 12 hours appetite - the night before he "skipped" a meal - is far greater than the pleasure which the rich man is experiencing from his delicious dinner and the company of his friends...

Where is pleasure? Think about that for a moment... If you say pleasure is in taste, in delicious things, here we find the reverse. The beggar is eating a meagre chunk of stale bread, while the other person is enjoying a multi-course banquet - still he is not enjoying his banquet while the beggar is relishing in his dry bread. So if we think about this deeply we can see that pleasure does not lie in things but must lie somewhere else...

However, every human mind suffers from one misconception; taking the beggar as an example, he thinks, "If I am getting so much satisfaction from just this piece of dry bread, how much more pleasurable it must be to have a big dinner inside a restaurant in the company of friends." In other words, everyone thinks that if we increase the sensory input, the pleasure will also increase. This "ignorance" lies in the mind of every human being.

Every one thinks, feels, and decides like this: "With my present means I am getting a certain amount of satisfaction. If I multiply my means, if I enhance my status, if I get more money, a bigger house, more recognition... I'll be much happier. But those who have these things are not happy. They are thinking about someone higher in socioeconomic status than themselves and aspire to become like them. This "thinking" never ends and life comes to an end.

So from childhood up to old age, the man thinks only this: that his present status is not giving him full satisfaction, but he will find satisfaction when he achieves such and such. But when such and such is achieved, when his dream comes true, he feels, after enjoying it for a brief moment, that he must have "more of it" or something bigger than that...

Take for example a young man whose means of locomotion is simply a motorcycle. His dream is to have a car one day - not an air-conditioned car, simply a plain, inexpensive car. Suppose he comes into some money. He buys a car. He sits in it for the first time. The pleasure he gets from sitting in his car for the first time is not there the second time! The third time is less pleasurable. After a month the car becomes as ordinary as his previous motorcycle. Now the car of his dream has to be air-conditioned. But when he gets that, it, too, will become "ordinary." So this is the way in which the average person is passing his whole life. Simply in imagination and "thinking" every one is passing his life. Every one thinks and hopes that he will get happiness and pleasure sometime in the future, while in the present, only dissatisfaction and unhappiness is experienced. Everyone's "present" is thus unfulfilled and the future is full of hopes. But the future is always the future.

It would seem that typically the average person lives in the hope of attaining pleasure, not in realising pleasure. His life is hopeful, but his present is full of distress, although this varies from person to person.

In fact what happens is this, that while the person is young and undergoing education he thinks that he will be happy when he gets married, when he is a big man, when he has a car, when he owns a big building. But when he gets these things, we find him thinking, "Oh no, my childhood was very happy, now I'm worried!"

We are forced to conclude, then, that everyone appears to think that happiness and pleasure lie either somewhere in the past or somewhere in the future, while in the present no-one is experiencing happiness or pleasure. Thus, what the person has thought in the past was wrong, as time has shown and we may safely infer that what he is thinking now will also, in time, be proved wrong.

All his decisions, thoughts, and expectations from childhood up to this age have been proved wrong; therefore it would be logical to assume that what he is thinking at present may also be wrong...

A moment's reflection will show that whatever we think about ultimately concerns one or more of our five basic senses. But still our "thinking" will, in time, be proved wrong. Therefore we can say that happiness or pleasure does not lie in sensory experience. What will satisfy us is something else, not sensual gratification, but something else. And that we have to know.

Can we "know" that? From the above argument, this would appear to be impossible. Why? The reason is a psychological one. What we imagine we have seen, or experienced, perceived, or read about at some time or another in the past, what we perceive or experience becomes our imagination. What we have never perceived before - neither heard nor seen nor read about - we cannot "think" of that. Our perception comes into our imagination, nothing else. Thus, you have never perceived real happiness; therefore you cannot think of real happiness. You have never perceived anything beyond the five senses, therefore you cannot think of anything beyond the five senses. Any person who has never perceived anything beyond this material world, cannot think of anything beyond this material world. Thus our perceptions are material; that's why all our imaginings are material, and it follows that all our decisions will be material. PERCEPTION, IMAGINATION, DECISION, all three are material, and all our "enjoyments" are material.

Thus we find that this "material" world is not giving us satisfaction. The satisfaction we desire, therefore, if it exists, must lie outside this material world. Our problem is one of perception and knowledge of that which may satisfy us.

I said above that we cannot know anything beyond this material world, since we cannot imagine, think, or perceive anything beyond matter. So is it impossible for us to be happy or to attain satisfaction? No, it is not impossible! I am saying that it is not possible to achieve happiness and fulfillment from sensory perception. I am also saying that it is possible for us to BE happy.

When we read the history of our Saints, our prophets, we find that they have declared that they have found something supreme to this material world which they have called supreme love and happiness. They have said that they have found it and they said that anyone can find it also. So if it is possible to find it, it only remains to find out HOW to go about it. The Saints and Prophets have found it, so if we follow their method we may also find it. This is the only correct way of thinking. So we have to stop our thinking and start thinking according to the views of our historical Saints. Then we will be able to know something about that which we have been longing to know for millions and billions of years.

There are so many contradictions in the religions of the world. Some say one thing; some say another thing. On this point I say that all Saints belong to the same divine Power. Divine Power is only one, not two. And all saints belong to the same divine Power. Whether he is a saint from India or from the west, or from anywhere in the world, if he is a SAINT, he will belong to the same divine Power. Therefore his theme should not differ. If we look at the religions of the world from this point of view, we find that all Saints have said that there is something called LOVE. But that "love" is also divine, not to be confused with material love. So the Saints have said that if we get divine Love we will feel pleased and contented for ever and ever; and that while ever we try to enjoy material love we will experience dissatisfaction after every enjoyment.

This is the only view. Every Saint has said, "Love God, if you wish to be happy in this world." Therefore our problem is this: What is that love of God? Are we trying to get that love? Let's consider that...

I've explained so far that material enjoyments are not actually satisfying our selves, our real selves. They simply give temporary gratification, but they do not console us. Rather, they increase our lust, our ambition, and our desire. Suppose a person "decides" to enjoy a particular "new" sensation. As soon as he enjoys that, he immediately thinks and plans again to enjoy that. The same with everything you taste, see, hear, etc. Thus it is explained that through these worldly enjoyments, worldly pleasures, worldly gratifications, your soul is not being gratified. They only give a temporary satisfaction, not in full, but in part. It means that our soul is longing for something else. And that something else can only be divine, because there exist only TWO substances: MATERIAL and DIVINE, not a third. To realise the implication of the existence of only TWO substances, consider the following analogy: Suppose you are confronted with two persons, one pious, the other impious - a good person and a bad person. You do not know, however, which of the two is "good" and which is "bad." But it may be taken for granted that one is good while the other is bad. Now if it is decided that the first is good, it must follow that the second is bad. Proof is only required for the first, not for both. Similarly, since it has been proved time and time again, that worldly enjoinments do not console our soul, it must follow that the consolance of our soul lies in the divine. The actual reason why may only be known after divine happiness is achieved. But even before that one can see that it is logically so - when it is granted that there is only material and divine.

Thus that undefinable and insatiable "longing" experienced by every human being is actually a longing for divine pleasure, not for material pleasure.

Now anyone can say, and you can say, "But I don't want divine." I can ask him: "Then what do you want?...." What does he want? He can only say, "I want sensory gratification." But the question is this: how much sensory gratification will fully satisfy this person? What is the limit? Suppose the object of desire is a beautiful object. How beautiful should the object be so that the person is fully contented? This no one can say!

The fact is that everyone is looking at the beauty of the world throughout one's life. But is there anyone who is completely satisfied from looking at such beauty? Obviously not. This implies that the desire for beauty is not being satisfied by the beauty of the world.

The beauty that will satisfy any person is not in this world. Our so-called "satisfaction" is nothing but the satisfaction of a temporary curiosity. When the curiosity is satisfied, we "wish" for something else to see. However the desire for beauty is genuine, but the object which will completely satisfy that desire is divine Beauty, not material beauty, because only divine Beauty can give permanent consolation to that part of us which is itself permanent.

Further it is to be understood that divine Beauty is not simply some mental concoction or imagination. Pleasure from divine Beauty is derived in the same way as for material beauty, namely through an object. Without an object no one can get any pleasure from any beauty, be it material or divine. From material objects we get material pleasure, which is temporary, while from divine objects we may get divine pleasure, which is permanent.

Therefore, for the case of seeing beauty, it is concluded that our inner desire is to see divine Beauty, not material beauty. So in general, the longing of our inner conscience is for divine objects, but as our mind, and therefore our thinking is material, we are attracted by, and decide to get, material objects for our satisfaction. Thus our situation is this:

The conflict is further complicated by the fact that we perceive with our mind. The mind is our only means of obtaining knowledge. The Soul has no means of perception. The implication is that the mind is constantly trying to satisfy the soul with something it neither wants nor needs, and that's why it is constantly longing for something else too see, to feel, to hear, etc.

Here is something you could try next time you are "enjoying" one of your favourite objects. Ask yourself: "Is this what I really want?" You should experience a two-sided 'reply'. On the one hand it will be quite 'clear' to you that you are getting pleasure; and on the other hand you will feel that really it falls somewhat 'short' of what your heart desires. But more often than not, however, the mind will convince you that "actually I am happy, I'm doing alright... considering", or something like that.

It would seem, then, that all material enjoyment ends up in unsatisfied pleasure, not complete consolation, but incomplete satisfaction.

What makes it almost impossible for us to get out of this trap is that there is generally an attraction between like things. So the mind is naturally attracted by material objects, being, itself, material. This attraction we have come to call "love" or "happiness" or something like that. It should be clear, however, from the above explanation, that our soul can never be satisfied by such "loves" and "pleasures" for it is divine and can only be satisfied by divine objects, not material objects.

This explains why the individual is always swinging between two decisions. Sometimes he feels that he is getting satisfaction; sometimes he is quite convinced that there is absolutely no pleasure in the world. The fact is that we do get pleasure from the world. We are not denying that! But the other fact is that we are not satisfied. Both are facts, and both feelings are experienced by everyone. But the mind cannot decide which is true and which is false.

So to know all these things, as I said before, we have to rely on the writings in our Scriptures and in our historical Saints...

So today I've explained that the aim of life is to get divine, not material. That's all, thank you.

QUESTION: There is one thing which you mentioned: it's the conflict which arises in the mind. You can see it in a way as a pull towards the material....

ANSWER: It's a two-way pull.....

Q: It's very strong.

A: Yes...

Q: Is this what you would call ignorance? This pull to the material?

A: No. Ignorance I call this: that mind is not getting the correct knowledge. Mind sticks to its decision. A person sticks to his mental decision; not to the voice of the soul. Because the voice of the soul is clearly saying that you are not getting satisfaction in the world. It means you want something else. But mind says: "No, no, I am getting pleasure! What is this something else?" So, when a person decides that: "No this is wrong, what our soul is longing for, that is right"; and how to get that. If this curiosity arises in the mind......

Q: What is the problem? The mind itself? Has it not got a natural tendency to be connected with the senses?

A: Yes, natural..

Q: You have to rise above the senses?!...

A: No, you have to get the correct knowledge.... Because every action depends upon the decision of your mind. You cannot do anything unless mind permits to do that. So when correct knowledge comes in mind, the person's actions will be correct. And the aim changes..... Now he has the aim of getting material heights; then he will aim to get Divine heights.... He will be in the world; he will be doing his service; he will live in the world; but his aim will change... And when his aim changes then he will progress towards Divine.....

Q: Can be hard work, working towards the Divine....

A: No, not hard... very easy...

Q: We make it hard... if you live in a city....

A: Yes, I am also living in the city for two years...

Q: Were you isolated for a long time?

A: In this place near Delhi, called VRINDABAN, BARSANA, where Lord Krishna was born.... so there I stayed for about twenty years...

Q: Were you alone? Completely alone?

A: Yes completely alone.

Q: There were no other human beings?

A: No, no, villagers were there! When I was living in Barsana, actually that is a small town... and on the hill-tops... places are made. So I was living there. And down the hill there were just villagers....

Q: So you communicated with the village?

A: No communication...

Q: You didn't talk to them?

A: To some sincere devotee I would sometimes talk.... because they (the villagers) were too busy in their own world, no question of taking any Divine advise from me!

Q.: What did they think of you?

A.: It's tradition! They are used to it. Simply they know just to give food to any Saint. That's all. Nothing else.

Q: Why do they do that? Out of generosity?

A: Yes, Because in Braj, since about five hundred years, I think thousands of Saints lived there. So they are accustomed to that.... They don't want to learn anything. Just if a person is in need... they give, that's all.

Q: You didn't feel that you were cut off from civilisation....

A: They are civilised villagers....

Q: You felt as if you were part of the village; not separate from the village...

A: Yes. Not separate..... Actually isolation means: suppose I am living in this room, in the city, and just I close my door, and not talk to anyone. That is isolation. No question of going very far from village or anything like that. Just to have no social connections... is isolation.

Q: They come seeking you perhaps....

A: Yes to learn something... If some one wanted to learn anything about devotion or something like that, I'd talk to them....

Q: So materially you were cut off from the village but spiritually you were part of the village.

A: Yes.

Q: You were talking about Divine beauty and material beauty. Aren't they one and the same?

A.: No. There is Divine Personality and material personality. Material personalities are uncountable. Divine Personality is only one; whom we call God. Or Godhead Personality. So that Godhead Personality is Divine Beauty.

Q: You were talking about the little boy growing up, and going from a motorcycle to a car etc.. His desires growing and growing.... without satisfaction.. How does he transpose these desires for these material things to desires for.......

A: No, we have only got desires. A person has got only desire..... and he has got senses. So his desires are following the senses. If he has got EYES he will like to SEE. He desires to see, but his mind decides to see the worldly beauty. Your inner conscience is calling you to see BEAUTY; either Divine or material. But your mind decides to see material. That is wrong. The desire to look at beauty is not wrong. But this decision that "I want to see material beauty", that is wrong. Everybody has got desires of senses - sensual desires - but mind decides that we can enjoy these worldly things..... So, when this knowledge comes that "no, I want to see Divine Beauty; I want to enjoy Divine pleasure", it's called correct knowledge. And then he proceeds towards Divine. Then all his thinking is changed, imaginations are changed; plannings are changed.... because now he is planning to get material things... after he will plan to get Divine things. Everything will remain the same: imagination, thinking, planning.... but all will change from material to Divine.

Q: This comes about from dissatisfaction with material. The soul says: I want to get real satisfaction, from Divine. He's got to have this desire... the desire has got to arise to change from the senses to the Divine. How does this direction of the desire change from the senses to the Divine?

A: If you have got eyes you will like to see! You cannot avoid! Desires can never be eliminated; it is totally impossible to eliminate them. Totally impossible. You can change your desires...

Q: But the direction is changing. From the sensual to the Divine. What changes the direction?

A: Your decision is changed. (Some one interjects: "from what you were saying before, it would appear that it is the right knowledge that changes the direction. Would that be right?)

A: YES! The right knowledge!

Q: Is the knowledge found in the Scriptures, or is it within oneself?

A: Everything is within you. But you have to reveal that. How to reveal your inner powers. Your inner Divine happiness... How to reveal that; this knowledge comes through Scripture or through a Saint. Not by your own self.... (Interjector: In other words some one has to show you. It's there. But some one has to show you. You can't do it on your own. Would that be right?)

Q: Some have done it on their own, haven't they?

A: NO! It is impossible.

Q: How about Buddha?

A: Incarnations.... they do like that.... because they are not souls! I am talking about souls. Suppose a personality descends from Divine into this material world; so He is already descended from Divine.... so there is no question of making any Guru for Him! This rule is for souls, not for incarnated Saints.... Saints are of two types: one takes incarnation; and one, first he remains as a soul - ordinary human being - and then he becomes a Saint. So for the incarnated Saints, that rule doesn't apply. They can accept a Guru, just for tradition, but there is no rule for Him to do so. But souls, they need to. So, in India, all our Jagadgurus, they were incarnated Saints. And some incarnations like Lord Buddha, and all that, they are also incarnations. So they don't need...

Q: Krishna....?

A: Krishna also! He is the main incarnation! Krishna is the main form of Godhead Personality!.... He is the origin... from which all forms come....

Q: Would he be the same, then, as Buddha?

A: No. One of Krishna's incarnations is called Buddha.... His four incarnations are very common: Buddha, Ram and one was NRSHIMHA. And the main was Lord Krishna. Krishna himself took all these forms. Because God cannot be two. God is one...

Q: I'd like to know, in your isolation, what were you doing mainly. What would your normal day be? Were you engaged in any work? How much time did you spend in contemplation.

A: It is difficult to explain.... I was not doing any 'job' or any 'study' (Interjector: You were not reading and not working....?).

A: No, no work...

Q: Were you in a state of meditation?

A: Yes something like that....

Q: Constantly or.......

A: Actually our meditation... which pertains to Divine-Love.... this is not a separate piece of work. It comes in life... while with open eyes... while sitting or lying or talking or walking.... Every moment there is meditation. Normally people think that if a person sits in a pose and closes his eyes, then he is meditating. This is not the correct idea of real meditation. Meditation means deep thinking. So, deep thinking can be any place, anywhere. So normally in that period I was just in my own Divine thoughts... something like that....

Q: How often did you see your spiritual teacher? How often did you communicate with him?

A: He was not living very far. About three or four hundred miles.

Q: How often did you see him; once a week or....

A: No, no. Few times in a year..... But normally I needed no communication. Because actually in our devotion there are no 'steps' to cross. There is a smooth way to follow. So there is no change in devotion. No change in meditation. There is no 'technique'. So there is no question of asking anything. Just like there are 'classes' in education. A person leaves one class and enters another class... (our devotion) is not like that. There is only one class... which he has to pass. Only one. One can pass in one year, in ten years, in ten lives, in a hundred lives, no question of that. We have to pass that limit; only one class..... In short, I can put it like this: that you have to grow love for God. So that when that love comes to such a limit, that you cannot live without Him, that is the ultimate limit of Devotion. If you are enjoying the world without Him, it is a faint love; if you are feeling His separation, there is love. If you are feeling more separation, more longing, then your love is increasing........