Guru Nanak Chamatkar (Part 2)-Bhai Vir Singh English ... - Vidhia.com

144 GURU NANAK CHAMATKAR PART-II
Pandit: Was he a magician?
King: Mat,ric is a thing ofthis materialistic world. He was a man ofcharacter.
He had an enlightened mind. He had some life-t,riving sensation and spark as
also some 'Vision of the soul'. He had some wondrousness in him. The
wondrousness is that he had a live sensation in him and his contact gave that
live sensation to others.
Pandit: I cannot understand. It is body, mind and soul. But what is this
life-t,riving sensation or live sensation?
King: The body, mind and soul, everybody has got and God is there in
everybody. But everybody is not in ecstasy, not in blossom, not in delight, not
engrossed in the Lord, not away from desires, not attracted to the Lord, not in
exuberance of love of the Lord and not above desires and despair.
Pandit (confused and trying to change the course of discussion): Ifhe was
so good, then why did he come here from Punjab where they say, milk flows
in rivers and wheat grows like mountains? If he was away from desires, then
why did he sell his goods here and carried the money in his pockets to his
hometown?
King: There are many who keep away from wealth. They do not touch
money. They are recluses but still they live in desires and despair.
Pandit: What do you mean?
King: To have wealth or to be away from wealth outwardly is not a sure
proofof enlightenment ofsoul. Attachments and detachments are ofthe mind.
If a person is earning honestly, does not grab another persons right, who
makes an effort to earn, lives on that earning and t,rives charity, does goodness
to others, he is not too happy in gains and not sad in losses, then his attachments
are true and pure.
Ifsomeone is a recluse and has ego that he is in renouncement and if he
is short of money due to his renouncement and sulking why his desires are
not being fulfilled, then the recluse who is sulking and not contented, I will
say, his renouncement is fruitless.
Pandit: Maybe that man was not having greed for money. He might be
having some other motive. He may be wishing that if the king has faith in his
religion, then itwould be an honor. Ifhe had no desires, then why he prompted
the king towards his faith, why he did not make the poor people join in his
faith? Why was he more interested in the king?
King: You mean to say that the poor people have more of a right. The
king can go to hell. (Laughingly) Is it so, dear pandit? Well, this I have said
jokingly. But you consider the circumstances.
Page 154 www.sikhbookclub.com