Theoretical devotion Vs Practical devotion to God, the right meaning of selfless service to God

[dattaswami]

Theoretical devotion Vs Practical devotion to God, the right meaning of selfless service to God

 

Knowledge, devotion and service are the three subsequent steps in the spiritual effort. But devotion and service can be considered as one step only, which is the love to God. Devotion generally means only theoretical devotion, which is related to words and mind. But the devotion confined to words and mind only without action is unreal and is considered to be the attitude of a prostitute who shows love only through feelings (mind) and words. Similarly, the theoretical devotion aspiring for some fruit from God is the devotion of prostitute (Veshya Bhakti). But the same theoretical devotion without aspiration for any fruit from God is good and without the theoretical devotion, service (Practical devotion) cannot be born. Even the practical devotion with aspiration for fruit from God is like the devotion of a merchant (Vyshya Bhakti).

 

Therefore, either in the theoretical devotion or practical devotion, the absence of aspiration for any fruit in return is very very important. The devotion both theoretical and practical with desire is Sakama Bhakti and Sakama Karma (Kamya Karma) respectively. The same theoretical and practical devotion without any desire is Nishkama Bhakti and Niskhkama Karma Yoga respectively.

 

The service or practical devotion consists of action or work and hence it is called as Karma. If the Karma is without desire it is called as Karma Yoga and with desire is called as Kamya Karma. The word Yoga here means the association with human form of God and Karma Yoga means the work or service done to that human form of God.

 

In both cases of Kamya Karma and Karma Yoga, if the practical devotion exists, it means the existence of theoretical devotion in the mind. Without seed (theoretical devotion) the plant (service) cannot be born. But without the plant, the seed can exist. You can get fruit from the plant only but not from the seed. Therefore, there is no fruit for mere theoretical devotion without its subsequent expression of service whether it is done with aspiration for fruit or not. If the seed is unable to develop into plant, such seed is a false or useless seed for a farmer.

 

We are seeing now the problems of the farmers with false and useless seeds, which do not grow into plants and give fruits. Hence, the theoretical devotion without desire for fruit is good but useless since no fruit can be achieved. You may say that since you are not interested in the fruit, you are satisfied with such fruit less theoretical devotion only. Such argument is only a misinterpretation of the truth to hide your selfishness. The aspiration for the fruit means the aspiration for the fruit that has come out on the plant. You must take a good seed and grow it into a plant, which should give a good fruit, and now in this stage if you are not aspiring for the fruit, then only it is Nishkama Karma Yoga. Hence, you must do the service without aspiration for the fruit that has appeared for your service.

 

You should not avoid the service saying that you are not interested in the fruit of the service and hence you are not interested in the service itself. Hence, Gita is stressing on the Karma or work and also on the absence of aspiration for the fruit. Both are equally important and one without the other is useless. Veda is also stressing on the work (Kurvanneveha….), sacrifice of the fruit of work (Tyaktena….) and the minimum enjoyment essential for the maintenance of your body and family (Bhunjedhah…).

 

You can have the corresponding quotations in Gita also (Kurukarma….., Phalam Tyaktva….., Sareera Yatrapicha te……). All these three aspects are the components of the total Yoga. People have misunderstood this total Yoga and have become lazy by leaving work or service, which is essential for God and self also on the pretext that they are detached from the fruit of work. It is like not cultivating the field and not sowing the seeds in the field stating that you are not interested in the crop (fruit). This is not sacrifice of fruit because the fruit is not seen at all.

 

This is not the sacrifice for the aspiration of the fruit because when the fruit is absent, where is the point of aspiration for the fruit? If the fruit exists before your eyes and if you sacrifice the aspiration for the fruit, then only it is the sacrifice of aspiration for fruit. Then, if your sacrifice of aspiration for fruit is real, it should be proved by actual sacrifice of fruit. Hence Gita mentions the sacrifice of fruit as the real proof for the sacrifice of aspiration for the fruit (Phalam Tyaktva…., Sarva Karma Phala tyagi….).

 

People have misinterpreted this concept in two ways. One way is to sacrifice the work itself and becoming lazy under the Hippocratic sanyasa. The other way is to sacrifice the aspiration for the fruit without the actual sacrifice of the fruit saying that Gita means only the sacrifice of aspiration for the fruit without sacrificing the actual fruit. If that is so how Gita mentions the actual sacrifice of fruit? (Phalam Tyaktva…). Veda also mentions the sacrifice of fruit (Dhanena Tyagena..). The misinterpretation is only to cheat one’s own self because by such cunning misinterpretation, nothing happens in the right way and something certainly happens in the wrong way, which is going to hell for such misinterpretation that misleads other souls also.

 

At the Lotus Feet of His Holiness Sri Dattaswami

 

Anil Antony

 

www.universal-spirituality.org

Universal Spirituality for World Peace

antonyanil@universal-spirituality.org