A friend of Star of Mysore sent me a write - up about a Godman from Bidadi, on Mysore - Bangalore highway, Paramahamsa Nityananda, requesting that it be published. It was nothing but a PR exercise free of cost by a bhakta to his / her divine incarnation or from a Shishya to a Guru, depending on how a person considers Paramahamsa Nityananda.

Many years ago, I had read Brahmasutra in English where issues relating to creation, God, His motive for creation etc., were discussed among other things. Similarly in Upanishad, very similar issues are discussed in the form of mythological stories.

When I saw the questions and answers, with which our friend's article began, I also thought of Gargi of Upanishad which I have not read, but heard from my friend. It appears, a devotee had asked Paramahamsa Nityananda questions, for which answers were also given. The questions and answers were as follows:

Who is a “Rishi”?
A good old name for scientists of the inner world.
Then who is a scientist?
Modern rishis who do the same in the outer world.
Are you a scientist or a Rishi?
Both and something more.

This reminded me of Gargi I mentioned above.

Once King Janaka of Videha (Mithila) invites learned Brahmins for a philosophic congress (Brahmayajna). Gargi was a female philosopher. She had the guts and gumption (Amazon of ancient India). Modern day feminist of our ancient India). She was one of the Navaratnas of the kind I had earlier mentioned about in these columns while writing about Obama in King Janaka's court. True to her scholarship, she was of questioning type, questioning the origin of all existence, including God. At the congress, a lively conversation or a question and answer session takes place between Gargi and the greatest of all Yoga masters, Yajnavalkya, the questioner being Gargi. To cut a long story short, Yajnavalkya defines Brahman and when further asked for clarification, says "The knowers of Brahman call Him the im perishable."

Well, that is "matter." Matter can neither be created nor be destroyed says science. And finally, Gargi must be tired of asking questions and the Yoga Guru too of answering questions. Therefore, they decide that which is imperishable is Brahman, the GOD.

Now, see how the old Yajnavalkya defines this God:

"Verily, that Imperishable, O Gargi, is never seen but is the Seer; it is never heard, but is the Hearer; it is never thought of, but is the Thinker; It is never known, but is the Knower. There is no other seer but this, there is no other hearer but this, there is no other thinker but this, and there is no other knower but this. By this imperishable, O Gargi, is the unmanifested akasa pervaded."

If one asks me, what Yajnavalkya means is that God is YOU. Man. It is he who sees, who hears, who is the thinker. He is the knower. But again are you imperishable. Even when you perish, when you die, only "matter," your body, changes its form. From a living body, you become a dead body and then become dust of the earth, matter... Get it? You are imperishable. You are God! Now Gargi turns to the learned men and addresses them thus: "You had better bow down to Yajnavalkya and take your leave. No one among you has the power to get the better of him in the matter of learning or wisdom."

So also with Paramahamsa Nityananda!

The word “belief” is such a powerful weapon in the hands of our religious persons, priests, preachers and Godmen that they, and even the scriptures, use it very effectively on the gullible people. In this case, I wish, Yoga Guru had asked Gargi:
"Who is your father?"
And when Gargi told her father's name, the Guru should have asked:
"How do you know?"
And when Gargi answered saying my mother told me, the Guru should have asked: Do you believe your mother?
Gargi would have naturally said, "Yes, I do."

Then the Guru should have asked:
"If you can believe your mother, her words, why don't you believe the holy scriptures given to us by enlightened Rishis?"
And Gargi, the clever lady that she was, would have said, "Well, I had not seen the Rishis who said God created the world; but I have seen my mother." And the Guru should have said:
"But how do you believe your mother's words? She could be telling you a lie, to save her honour. And yet you believe in her words. Similarly, you have to believe the Rishis when they say God created the world."
And Gargi would have retorted, "No way. As a child, as an immature adolescent, I would believe my mother. But when I have become an adult and have doubts about my mother's words about my father, I would rather go on a quest for truth about my father rather than blindly believe my mother's words."

And this business of belief, belief without an iota of doubt in the mind of the believer, which these Godmen and priests expect from their followers for realising one's prayers, is utter nonsense. No wonder Somerset Maugham in his well-known novel “Of Human Bondage” writes about the protagonist's predicament in the matter of believing in God's power, as mentioned in the Bible saying “And he did not see how he could believe more than he did”. That's my predicament too!

In Brahmasutra by Swami Veereshwarananda, 1948 edition, a question was asked, "Why did God create the world?" This was on the assumption that God indeed created the world.
The answer was in the form of a question: "Why does a child play?"
The inference, apparently, is there is no purpose. A child plays for its own purpose. There is no other motive or goal. So the creation of the world is a child's play for God. Like a child's play or an artist's work, the world evolved itself and is still evolving.
I have always found these spiritual persons very smart in outsmarting those who ask questions relating to God, religion and spirituality.

Take for example the question posed by a devotee that whether he is God.
Paramahamsa Nityananda simply replies, "I am not here to prove I am God, I am here to prove you are God."

How smart! You are pleased to know about yourself, about you being a God, which you yourself did not know. At the same time, you are overwhelmed because Paramahamsa Nityananda has proved himself to be so self - effacing despite being a God. In fact, his answer assumes that he is God all right and he is going to prove you are also God. Happy, you.

Osho Rajneesh is an expert in this kind of rigmarole or jugglery of words. Those who have heard him or read his books will vouch for what I say here. They do come up with smart statements which will overawe the listener. Like for example, when Jaggi Vasudev, another Godman, a gift from Mysore city now headquartered in Coimbatore, was once abroad and after his talk was asked to field some questions from the audience. One gentleman got up and was mumbling a question. He was so apologetic that he sought forgiveness from the Sadhguru if his question was wrong. The Sadhguru, Jaggi Vasudev, was quite condescending and with a benign smile, running his fingers through his flowing beard, said: "Don't worry, my answer may be wrong but your question can’t be wrong. For that matter no question can ever be wrong."

There was a thunderous applause from the audience. Amen. Enough of God and Godmen for now.