Puruśa akartá phalasákśiibhútah bhávakendrasthitah guńayantrakashca.

Phalasákśibhútah. What is the meaning of phala in Sanskrit? Parińáma (pari – nám + ghaiṋ). Parińáma means the reactions that begin accruing after an action is complete. Pari means specific form, nám means one’s identity. [We say], what is your name? What is your identity? One meaning of phala [fruit, consequences] is parińáma. Certain actions of ours are performed consciously while others are performed unconsciously through force of habit. Of these habitual actions, some are dependent on others while some are independents. There are certain conscious actions that are often done unconsciously. For example, certain words come out from one’s mouth unconsciously. Why does this happen? Because one’s nature has been moulded thus. Certain actions are also performed consciously. However, they are not motivated by any specific purpose. If you want, you may look to the right or the left. Moreover, without being prompted by anyone or persuaded by any motive, you may look in any direction inadvertently. While sitting, a person may look in this direction or that without any specific intention.

It may so happen that a person is sitting and wants to know what So-and-So is doing, and suddenly looks in that direction. This happens; there is nothing good or bad in such actions. For instance, there was a person who was a notorious bandit. He had murdered many people. But later in his life he grew penitent and felt inspired to righteous actions. Afterwards, he became a good person, a very good person. At one place in North Bihar, the monks of Ananda Marga were singing very beautiful kiirtana. That person was formerly a bandit. When he heard that the monks were singing beautiful kiirtana, he felt drawn there, and said, Báh! Báh! Már lát́hi, már lát́hi [“Strike with a stick”]. Others thought: “What is going on? The monks are singing such beautiful kiirtana but this gentleman says, Már lát́hi, már lát́hi. ” Then the bandit explained, “Previously it was my nature that whenever I used to find anything good and exciting, I would say, ́már lát́hi,’ and now, out of force of habit, I said it again.” He did not say it consciously. It was his habit. Hearing such excellent kiirtana, other people would say, “Oh! Very good!” and other exclamations, but this man said, “Már lát́hi, már lát́hi.” Things like this happen.

Back to phala. Actions, done unknowingly and independent of others, are not included in one’s account; one is not culpable. Only those actions that have the backing of the conscious mind are included in one’s account. You are walking. You do not commit any sin if an insect is crushed under your feet while walking, because you just have walked along without any specific intention. So there is no sin and no injustice on your part. But if you step forward and crush a crawling insect under your shoes intentionally, then you have done this at the behest of the conscious mind. If that insect is not your born enemy [játashatru] – i.e., a snake, a scorpion, etc.–you are definitely guilty of the act of killing. You commit just as much a sin in killing that insect as you would commit in killing an ox or a buffalo. Compassion for living creatures is the highest dharma (jiive dayá parama dharma). This is quite true. In this case what is the meaning of jiiva [living creatures]? The creature that is not one’s born enemy is the ajátashatru. There are various born enemies of human beings, such as tigers, poisonous snakes and scorpions. There is no question of virtue or sin with regard to the killing of born enemies. If you do not kill them, they will kill you. If one does not kill them, one paves the way for suicide or self-annihilation. This is foolishness.

But those who are not your born enemies, such as, the oxen, buffaloes, and goat that live around you, if you kill them, it is an injustice; it is a hundred times more sinful. So if you are a large-hearted person and you desire that living creatures and animals not be killed, then you may try again and again to help people understand this, but you should not apply force. You can help someone to become good by making him understand, but no one becomes good through the application of force. You may persuade, you may bring them onto the path of righteousness by helping them to understand. This you can certainly do. If the sinner is engaged in sinful acts or keeps moving ahead on a sinful path, you can prevent that person from doing so by the application of force. But you cannot rectify him in this way. If you have great compassion for the world of living creatures (this is a very good quality and is indicative of tenderness of heart, it is very positive), then you can take a firm stand for the non-killing of every creature, from the Cosmic Entity to the tiniest blade of grass (ábramhastamba), from the elephant to the ant. In this way you can encourage and inspire your fellow human beings. But if you persuade and exert pressure on people by saying that only ants or only cockroaches should not be killed, then you will be guilty of one-sidedness. It means there is partiality in you. Why should you invite the criticism that you do not have as much love for the buffalo as you have for the ants and goats? This is certainly not correct.

You are responsible for the actions that you have done consciously and knowingly, induced by personal considera-tions. So the mind undergoes no distortion by actions that do not have the backing of the mind and wherein the mind remains non-attached. The mind becomes overjoyed when actions that have the support of the mind turn out to be good. But your mind becomes constricted if you come to learn later that a particular action of yours was bad. “What did I do? Why did I do? It would have been better not to have done it.” Such repentance overwhelms a person after repeated mistakes. But by then it is too late. Whenever the mind supports an action, it then remains subject to distortion by those actions. The normal state of one’s psychic flow is disturbed, be it righteous or unrighteous.

According to the laws of nature, another type of karmabhoga [experience of requitals] must be undergone in order to restore the mind to its normal state. If the original action is righteous, then one must undergo the good consequences of such righteous action, and if the original action is unrighteous, one has to reap the adverse consequences of such an action.

Ná bhuktaḿ kśiiyate karma kalpakot́i shataerapi
Avasyameva bhoktavyaḿ krtaḿ karma shubháshubham.
Jávannakśiiyate karma shubhaiṋcá shubhamevaca
Tábanna jáyate mokśo nrńám kalpashataerapi.
Yatha louhamayae páshae páshae svarńamayaerapi
Tathábaddho bhavejjivo karmáviscá shubhae shubhae.

[Unless one undergoes the requital of one’s mental reactive momenta – good requitals for good actions, bad requitals for bad actions – one cannot attain liberation. Whether an action is good or bad, the reaction must be experienced. Unless one’s good or bad saḿskáras (mental requitals momenta) become completely exhausted, one cannot attain mokśa (non-qualified liberation) even in crores of kalpas (aeons). Just as chains, whether of iron or gold, are still chains, so people bound by saḿskáras, whether good or bad, are nevertheless bound.]

There is no escape even if one performs a good action. One has to return again and again to this earth in order to reap the auspicious consequences of such actions. The idea that the disembodied mind experiences the auspicious consequences of its good actions is indeed a fantasy. This fantasy world is called heaven. It means that if one has performed a good action, then one will reap the consequences of that auspicious action after death. But the mind can experience its good consequences, if and only if, it has a body. One experiences joy and agony, pleasure and pain only if one has a brain, nerve cells and nerve fibres. If there is no physical body, how can there be any experience? So the thought of experiencing that pleasure in heaven is nothing but sheer fantasy. There is no logic behind it. That is why, in Ánanda Sútram, it is said, Na svargo na rasátala [“There is neither heaven nor hell”].

Where is the question of pleasure and pain in the absence of the physical body! So the fantasy of heaven is completely erroneous. Yes, one has to come to this world again in order to experience pleasure and pain. You have to come to the world again so that the saḿskáras of the past attain fruition. It is correct, because one has to perform actions in order to restore the mind to its normal state from the distortions (vikrti) caused by previous actions. What does a wise person do then? When the five Pandavas were in exile, they were spending their days in great suffering, even though Yudhisthira, as the king, had performed great acts of charity. What great suffering they endured during their exile in the forest! Then, Draopadii caustically remarked to Yudhisthira, “Very well, very well.”

Sahasra sahasra Bráhmań kańaka pátre bhuiṋje,
Ámi kari paricaryá sevá hetu dvije.
Dvijere suvarńapátra dáo ájiṋá mátre,
Ekhan vaner phal bhuiṋja vanapatre.

[Thousands of Brahmans you once fed on golden plates,
I attended them and served them;
You offered them golden plates at your slightest bidding,
Now you eat wild fruits on forest leaves.]

So what did Yudhisthira say then? “I do not expect anything in return whenever I do anything good. I desire no result. I want to offer the good results of my good actions to the Lord, and I should reap the bad consequences of my bad actions. I will not give those to the Lord. I should not come to this world to reap the consequences of good actions that are done through me. Whenever I do anything, I offer it to the Lord – ‘O Lord, take the consequences of this auspicious action.’ I also say, ‘Let me have for myself the inauspicious consequences of my inauspicious actions.’”

Karmakari yei jan phalákauṋkśii hay
Vańiker mata sei váńijya karay.
Phalalobhe karmakare lubdha bali táre
Lobhe punah punah paŕe naraka dustare.
Ámi yáhá karma kari phalákauṋkśii nai
Samarpańa kari sarva Ishvarer t́háinn.

[Those who solicit the fruits of their actions are no better than merchants. He or she who acts for gain is called a greedy person and acting under the influence of greed; they are carried to the darkest hell. I do not act for any fruit; rather I surrender all my actions unto Brahma – the Supreme.]

This is indeed the path of a pure, saintly and truthful person. This is the secret behind escaping from the good consequences of a good action. One may say that it is nice to undergo the good consequences of one’s righteous actions. “I shall lie in a golden bed and stretch my legs on a silver cot and someone shall come and offer me hot delicious cakes (málpoá). I will only have the trouble of chewing and swallowing them. I will only have to take this little trouble.” But this is not the way things are. There is no real good gained by this.

While experiencing the good consequences of one’s righteous actions one may commit three or four wrong acts. Thus one has to then come again to reap the consequences of such unrighteous acts. One has to transcend the cycle of actions and reactions. One must desist from wrong actions. “I will restrain myself from unrighteous actions. I shall not do anything unjust, come what may. I shall fight against evil. I shall fold my hands before a righteous person.” This is the lifestyle of a righteous person. “I shall be vociferous against injustice and shall remain humble before a righteous individual. I shall commit no evil. I shall do as much good as possible, and while doing so, I shall tell Parama Puruśa at every step that I desire no reward and want nothing auspicious, in return for my good deeds. Let these be Yours.”

Phalasákśiibhútah. The mind is the doer of all actions, good or bad. They are not done by the átmá. The átmá [unit consciousness] is not involved in any action. But the fact is that the mind remains attached to the átmá, it remains integrally, inseparably related to the átmá. Therefore, the distortions in the mind caused by sinful acts leave their impression on the átmá. But the unit consciousness remains as unaffected as before though the distortions leave their imprints on the surface. Gold remains as it is. When gold is coated with enamel then the impurity remains on the surface, but when that enamel is removed, the gold is found intact. Indeed, the gold has not become impure though the enamelling leaves its imprint. So in the case of a sinner, the distorted mind remains along with the átmá. That átmá can be considered as the sinful-self (pápátmá). The self is addressed in different manners as the evil-self, virtuous-self, noble-self and sinful-self (durátmá, puńyátmá, mahátmá, pápátmá), but the self is neither sinful, noble, evil, nor anything else. Some time ago in India, a particular person who was a mixture of virtues and vices – of course, every one has both virtues and vices – used to be adored as “Mahátmá” [“Noble Soul”]. All átmás are the same. No átmá is noble and no átmá is abominable. These are only flattery and mere sycophancy. Some people use this means to further their own interests. You should be aware of such people. You know, excessive admiration is a sign of deception.

So átmá is neither noble nor ignoble . Átmá is átmá. If the sinful mind (the distortions which the mind has undergone due to sinful acts) is associated with the unit consciousness, or in other words, if the mind which has provided the impetus for a sinful act, remains associated with the átmá, it is called pápopahata caitanya or pápopahata átmá [consciousness or soul apparently assailed by sin]. Similarly, when the mind is engaged in righteous actions it undoubtedly imbibes positive saḿskáras [reactive momenta] and undergoes positive distortions. It is called puńyopahata caitanya or puńyopahata átmá [consciousness or soul apparently affected by virtue]. Terms such as puńyátmá [virtuous self] and pápátmá [sinful self] are not proper because the átmá as such is immune to vice and virtue. Since a virtuous mind or a sinful mind gets associated with the átmá, it is called phalasákśiibhútah, for it remains as the witness. The átmá remains as the witness of the phenomena of action and reaction.

Dvá suparńá sayujá shákháyá samánaḿ brkśaḿ pariśasvajáte;
Tayorańyah pippalaḿ svádvattya nashnanna nyoabhicákshiiti.

[Two birds of golden plumage are perched together in a tree. One of them tastes the sweet fruits; the other simply witnesses without tasting.]

There are two entities in one body. There are two birds, as it were. One bird, i.e., the átmá, witnesses and does not eat the fruit [as the other bird does]. It witnesses; it remains poised on the same tree. Here tree refers to the physical body. Suparńá means “beautiful wing” or “golden wing”. Sayujá sakháyá means “intimate companions”.

I said yesterday that everything is being recorded. Nothing is hidden from view. There is no way to conceal anything. Someone once told me during personal contact, “I do a great deal of charity and noble deeds.” “You have done very good things,” I told him, “Really very good. You have done charity and alleviated the suffering of others. How can I tell you how happy I am to hear this? But there is one thing that troubles me. You have stolen your friend’s radio.” Then, he burst into tears. Such is the nature of human beings. One remembers one’s good actions and says, “I have done this, I have done that,” but forgets the wrong actions one has committed. They do not realize that both good and bad actions are being tape-recorded (just as Rámánanda is taping what I say).

Phalasákśiibhútah. Átmá remains the exclusive witness. It sees everything, understands everything and enforces necessary discipline from time to time. The very act of witnessing is its action. It does not do anything by itself. It is the non-doer. The kartá [headman] in a marriage ceremony or at a festival remains seated in a chair. He witnesses and observes everything. Regarding Parama Puruśa it is said that He is Paramacakśuśmána, i.e., the Supreme Witnessing Entity. Often it is said that when So-and-So says something hurtful to another person, Parama Puruśa may or may not take notice. I do not say that He takes notice nor do I say that He does not take notice. But when So-and-So expresses his grievance before Him, then, of course, He is aware. So His witnessing faculty is of supreme importance. How so? Sákśiibhútah, the witness-ship is explicit in Him. His duty is only to know. There is no way to do anything in secret, no matter how intelligent one may be. Hence Phalasákśiibhutah.