Seventeenth Century Revelations - Nijanand · Seventeenth Century Revelations ... divine Tāratam...

Seventeenth Century Revelations

Copyright – Do not Copy of 111 Author: K C Vyas

Seventeenth Century

Revelations

A Research Project on

Shri Pran-Nathji’s Divine Wisdom

(Tārtam Vani)

Author

K. C. Vyas, Delhi, India



TABLE OF CONTENTS

Preface ................................................................................................. 4 Chapter 1 ............................................................................................... Parātma-Yoga 7

1.1 ................................................................... Mankind: Three Categories 10

1.2 ..................................................................Successive Upward Link-ups 16

1.3 ................................................ The Wake-up Call For Brahman-srishties 20

1.4 ................................................................. Inter-Loka Spiritual Linkages 22

1.5 ............................................................. Samashty-Vyashty Relationship 25

1.6 ........................................................................... Lokās And Upa-Lokās 31

1.7 ....................................................................................... Four Pralayas 34

1.8 ......................................................................... Prophecies Of Our Age 37

1.8.1 ............................................................................................... Bible: Hints of Spiritual Link-ups 46

1.8.2 ............................................................................................... Period of Jaagani 49

Chapter 2 Our Unique Vārāha Kalpa ................................................ 52

2.1 ................................................................... Durations of Yugas, Kalpas 53 2.2 ................................................... Yogāvasishtha: Vaivasvat Manwantara 56 2.3 ...................................................... Parama-pada, ‘Nishkalanka’ Parātmā 59 2.4 ............................................................... Views of Other Texts/Tāratam 62 2.5 .............................................................................. Ambiguity on Ātmā 70 2.6 ........................................................................... Adhyātma Rāmāyana 72 2.7 ............................................................... Bhāgawatam versus Tāratam 78 2.8 ............................................................................................... Hamsas 83 2.9 ..............................................................................‘Varna’ of scriptures 86 2.10 ....................................................... Rāsa-leelā in Yoga-Māyā’s creation 88 2.11 ................................................................. Anātmā, Ātmā and Parātmā 94 2.12 ................................................................................. Parātma-nishthā 98 2.13 ..................................................................... Change-over to New Age 101 2.14 .............................................................................................. Efficacy 103 2.15 ...................................................................... More Biblical References 106 2.16 .................................................................... New Age: Evolving Clarity 108



Chapter 3 ?? .................................................................................... 109 Chapter 4 ?? ...................................................................................... ??



Preface

Hindu scriptures say that reality behind Sanskrit term ‘Brahm’ or ‘God’, and its relationship with human soul, a Jeeva, is difficult to grasp. Further, realizing that relationship is far more difficult, say scriptures, even when it should be the sole objective of a Jeeva and then to accomplish the legendary ‘liberation’. It relates to getting

liberated from ‘bondage’ of having to experience the misery of repeated reincarnations in world. They also say that life-after-life efforts in right direction under guidance of a self-realized Sat-guru, is essential for the purpose. Only this much became clear with the help of my need-based perusals of translations/commentaries of

scriptures in Hindi, as I was not a student of Sanskrit or Philosophy. But belonging to a religious Hindu family, I was encouraged to grasp their intents and follow their guidance. On following that advice, I found my interest in scriptures growing. Later, I connected with Theosophical Society, the books based on ‘psychical’ research,

‘readings’ given by Edgar Cayce, etc. But all that accumulated knowledge also left a certain frustration owing to the varying viewpoints, use of different terminologies, etc in scriptures, concerning particularly to the

highest level of reality. At best, some imperishable, ‘Akshara’ level was merely pointed at, not elucidated, whereas the human beings only have a capacity to experience only the perishable or ‘Kshara’ realm (Loka) they dwell in. The 15th chapter of Gitā further complicates the matter by tersely, yet explicitly announcing in a total of five verses, a still higher level reality called ‘Purushottama’! That seemed to be the ‘Brahm’. Now, which of

the two higher levels above Kshara is an aspirant supposed to realize to secure liberation and escape the clutches of a power of God called ‘Maya’ that governs our Kshara world: Akshara or Purushottama, the Aksharateeta? Again, scriptures talk of 7-8 types of ‘Mokshas’ or ‘Muktis’, the ‘liberation’! It

all seemed to be too confusing. Gitā also asserts in last two of those five verses: Aspirants should know so very comprehensively the Purushottama principle as not to leave any room for doubt about it;

only then they would have done all that they are required to do. That did sound mysterious; would it secure the highest ‘type’ of lieration? When other scriptures were searched, it was found they seldom alluded to ‘Purushottama’; and even when it was done, the term was just not elucidated. But it was

not so surprising as even ‘Akshara’ level was declared to be ‘beyond any description’! That perhaps, understandably, left the scholars to speculate, by and large, only on what the reality of Akshara Purusha was – completely leaving Purushottama out of the purview of their enquiry!

The message of Gitā has not quite been appreciated: The reality of God is not of a uniform consistency; rather, it exists at three major planes of three Purushas and three Lokas. But it says, all those Lokas are governed by Purushottama, implying that other two Purushas – ‘Akshara’ and ‘Kshara’ Purushas – either do not have any role to play; or at most they do

so in a subordinate capacity to that of Purushottama even when governing their own Lokas. Then Bhāgawatam talks of 14 Lokas, all perishable at the time of Prākr it Pralaya,



taking place after 36000 Kalpas, Naimittik Pralayas that follow them, when only three out

of them perish and get re-created! It was confusing at first, but it did clarify that all of those 14 were really the sub-divisions of a larger Kshara Loka, that in turn was only one of the three Lokas of Gita. On following pages such sub-divisions of any Loka are denoted as Upa-Lokas in order to avoid

confusion. Whenever a mention is found of three Lokas, collectively denoted as ‘Trailoki’, there will still remain a doubt: whether these perish after every Kalpa; or two out of them are

imperishable and only one is perishable as given in Gita. Such doubts do not somehow bother the scholars who contribute to commonly read religious literature! A doubt still remained unresolved: Is God ‘formless’, or is also present in some ‘form’; or say, is He an impersonal, formless reality of enormous spread, or one perhaps also existent in some

‘personal’ form? It is the same as asking, using my terminology (Sanskrit terms): whether He is only a ‘Samashty’ principle or also is present in a ‘Vyashty’ (personal) form, and again in only one or all the three realms? If latter is the case, then how can Samashty-Vyashty relationship be defined? Is it the same as God taking an Avatara?

It seemed, it was only on realizing some ‘Vyashty’ form of God that one could have His experience – uniquely different from all others – that is amenable to being compared with that of someone else. Without such a possibility, how can people say that both have realized the same (level of) reality. Surely, no one can describe a formless reality. Is it why

scriptures said that reality of eternal God (at one or both of the higher two levels above Kshara) is ‘beyond any description’? But they did describe a ‘four-limbed’ form of Vishnu, in a human form otherwise, symbolically representing Samashty Kshara Purusha! Do the two higher Purushas too have similar, distinctive ‘forms’? Many such issues were left

unresolved by scriptures. That left me unsure of what to make of them. I was in such an uncertain, even frustrated frame of mind in mid 1995 when I heard about Tāratam Vāni (TV). I started reading, one by one, several of its books as published with

commentaries by Prānanāth Mission, New Delhi. I was drawn to, and also surprised, by them. It did need good bit of collating with nuances of scriptures before inferring that those were the latest Revelations of God, deserving a place on similar high pedestal as scriptures are placed on. TV surely complemented and supplemented them in its own style in several

vernaculars as prevalent in 17th century India! It explains not only the esoteric imports of, but also the need on part of Vedavyas to compose, the text of Bhāgawatam! TV unveils its contemporary relevance, not only to Hindus but the world at large. Several of its scattered statements were pieced together and collated with the ancient scriptures to perceive an

outline of His grand plan to reward the spiritual aspirants in an unprecedented manner, right in our times! I hope that perception has been properly conveyed here. In a total of 18758 verses,

Tāratam Vāni extensively talks about three Purushas, their respective Lokas, unheard of spiritual destinations of persons of Brahm-srishty cadre, their liberation, etc – though hardly ever alluding to Gitā, perhaps the most well known Hindu text! But it does often collate itself with Bhāgawatam to reveal the spiritual significance to present day



aspirants of outwardly quite frivolous accounts of the Brij- and Raasa-leelas enacted in His

boyhood days by Shri Krishna, with grown up cowherd women, over 5000 years ago! Why would Shri Krishna of Gita, the Purushottama (God personified) have behaved in such a frivolous manner? Again, why did revered sage Vedavyas at all record such episodes in Bhāgawatam, a text that was composed especially for guiding the highly

evolved persons, termed as ‘Parama-hamsas’ who were expected to reincarnate in the worsening times of Kaliyuga? Such doubts would certainly arise to reasoning minds of even Hindus, leave alone to those

of other faiths. Without any knowledge of their spiritual imports, as were brought to light by Tāratam Vāni only in 17th century, those episodes were trivialized by fun loving Hindu masses in their folk literature (even mocked at by missionaries of other faiths). Indeed, over the centuries, scholars did develop some rationale behind them, but it lacked the

spiritual insights now opened up by TV. It has come to rescue of spiritual aspirants/scholars, by revealing the truths as had hitherto remained undisclosed to mankind (it was preplanned this way by God, says TV)! A look at the topics of discussion on Contents sheet of the research thesis would show how most of my doubts got resolved based on inputs from the divine Tāratam Vāni.

I say with all humility that I often found myself unequal to such a task but several ‘Bhrigu Samhita’ readings I was fortunate to get – from Shri Kedarnath Prabhakar, D Lit, Saharanpur, India–not only encouraged but even motivated me to grasp the divinity of

Tāratam Vāni, particularly in light of ancient scriptures. This does seem to be in tune with rationalistic temper of our times. It certainly would call for scriptural testimonies. I hope this research thesis reaches the scholars of religion who are curious about how and when a certain dawn of spiritual age would take place in world, as is

predicted in scriptures of almost all the faiths. They can be expected to have read something or the other about Hindu philosophy, particularly about Vaishnava school of thought that lays great emphasis on Bhāgawatam. I hope they would peruse the testimonies and favor me with their esteemed feedback.

I acknowledge the patient, whole-hearted support of my family members all these years, several friends, Smt Vimla Mehta of Prananath Mission and Shri Narendra Patel and friends at Lord Prananath Divine Center (LPDC, Macon, USA), who encouraged me to complete my thesis and offered to post it on

their web-site. I also thank Neeta and Rama K. Vyas for arranging a very fruitful meeting with LPDC in July this year. K. C. Vyas,

Warm regards,



Chapter 1 Parātma-Yoga

The term ‘Parātmayoga’ may never be found in scriptures. It was in fact ‘coined’

for ease of expressing the crux of a unique ‘concept’ that is implied alright, but not

made explicit in certain seventeenth century Revelations called ‘Tāratam Vāni’ or

just ‘Tāratam’. It amounts to saying that God had gracefully established from time

to time certain metaphysical ‘Inter-Loka spiritual linkages’ in case of some entities

dwelling in three different realms or Lokas, so that they also eventually experience

the other two Lokas! No Hindu scripture this author had connected with had hinted

at such a concept; the same evolved while collating Tāratam Vāni with ancient

scriptures. Only later did it occur that a grace termed “Brahm-yoga” in Gitā/5/21,

conferred on an imperishable Ātmā, may also be termed as ‘Parātmā-yoga’ from

the stand-point of a highly evolved, yet a perishable Jeeva that Tāratam terms a

‘Brahm-srishty’, earlier spiritually linked by God with a ‘Brahm-yogayukta-Ātmā’.

Only these Brahm-srishties are entitled as per Tāratam to eventually experience

the bliss of union with God and get liberated from misery of being in a ‘bondage’ to

repeatedly reincarnate in our Kshara Loka (the perishable realm). Gitā speaks of

three Purushas of vast, cosmic spread and of three Lokas. The scriptures do talk of

Kshara Loka and its 14 Upa-Lokas (discussed later) that Jeevas inhabit, but do not

say explicitly that other two Lokas also serve as habitats for their own ‘embodied

entities’. Tāratam asserts that often, consistently. It denotes the embodied entities

residing in different Lokas (comparable to layers of His consciousness, the realms

of God) as: the Jeevas of Kshara (perishable) Loka; Ātmās of imperishable Akshara

Loka; and Parātmās of Aksharāteeta Loka (imperishable, yet superior to Akshara

Loka). When Tāratam Vāni was collated with scriptures it appeared that a Brahm-

srishty category Jeeva would surely have in past been spiritually linked up with an

imperishable dweller of Akshara Loka – ‘Brahm-yogayukta-Ātmā’ of Gitā/5/21 –

that was in turn linked up with a ‘Parātmā’, the dweller of Aksharāteeta Loka!

It is further contended that Gitā presents the same grace but from view-point of an

eternal ‘Ātmā’, when it says that Brahm-yoga enables such an Ātmā to have an

experience of ‘un-ending bliss’ (‘Akshaya sukha’) of (union with) Brahm. The

scriptures seldom employ the term ‘Parātmā’; and even then it is not elucidated at

all. It was therefore not explained by the scholarly commentators. A rare statement

of Bhāgawatam was fortunately located (taken up for discussion later) that almost

equated ‘Parātma-nishthā’ – getting established in Parātmā – with ‘Brahm-nishthā’

(getting established in Brahm). It is only Tāratam Vāni that clearly reveals that the

Parātmās happen to be the most divine embodied entities (all females), eternally

residing in Aksharāteeta Loka in a uniquely blissful, conjugal relationship with their

Lord, the Aksharāteeta Purusha (Purushottama of Gitā). Bhāgawatam’s statement

was enough to convey that terms Brahm and Aksharāteeta Loka related to same

level of His reality; and that it would not be inappropriate to term the ‘Brahm-yoga’

of Gitā as ‘Parātma-yoga’ from the view-point of a Brahm-srishty!



Gitā omits mentioning that even a perishable Jeeva of the Brahm-srishty category,

earlier linked up spiritually with Brahm-yogayukta-Ātmā is entitled to experience

the bliss of the latter, even a part of it. Relevance of Brahm-yoga to the Jeevas of

Kshara Loka has therefore remained unexplained in Gitā and its commentories.

Why was that grace announced in our world if it was so irrelevant to all Jeevas?

When attention got drawn to Gitā/11/47, it occurred that its ‘Ātmā-yoga’ needs to

be considered as a grace of God that was showered on spiritually evolved Arjuna,

the recipient of the discourse of Gitā. He was earlier praised in Gitā/10/37 to be His

Vibhooti! Yet, with what purpose he might have been so graced is neither revealed

in Gitā, nor speculated by scholarly commentators. It was not easy for the auther

therefore to associate Ātma-yoga conferred on a Jeeva with Brahm-yoga that was

conferred on an imperishable Ātmā that was earlier linked with that Jeeva.

It needed collating Tāratam with scriptures to discern that Brahm-yoga is really a

higher order grace that must be a subsequent one conferred on a deserving Ātmā

earlier linked up with a Jeeva (as a result of Ātma-yoga)! It was argued that when

that Ātmā got ‘connected to, or associated with’ – conceptualized here as having

been ‘spiritually linked up with’ – the Brahm level of His reality (during Brahm-

yoga), the Jeeva with whom that Ātmā was earlier linked up also would get

likewise linked up with Brahm. Spiritual link-up has been conceptualized like an

electrical connection of Kshara Loka’s Jeeva established with an Ātmā of Akshara

Loka during the course of Ātma-yoga, and that connection later getting extended

from its Ātmā to a Parātmā located in Brahm or Aksharāteeta Loka! That seemed to

explain the Tāratam’s unambiguous and oft repeated statement that both, the

Ātmā and Brahm-srishty category Jeeva shall eventually experience the bliss of

union with Brahm, though of varying magnitudes (say, intensities)!

That resulted in hypothesizing that grace of ‘Ātmā-yoga’ conferred on a deserving

Jeeva – Tāratam can be seen to have termed such a Jeeva as belonging to its

‘Ishwarsrishty’ category – is really a harbinger of a possible higher order grace of

Brahm-yoga that could be conferred in future on same Ātmā linked with that

Ishwarsrishty. This latter grace – Gitā’s Brahm-yoga conferred on that Ātmā

(connected with an Ishwar-srishty), is here envisaged as ‘Parātma-yoga’ (“Para-

Ātmayoga”), referring to Jeeva earlier conferred with Ātmā-yoga. Such a Jeeva

then becomes a Jeeva of ‘Brahm-srishty’ of Tāratam! It terms the countless Jeevas

that had not deserved to be graced with even Ātmāyoga as belonging to

‘Jeevasrishty’ category. In this manner Tāratam categorizes the entire mankind into

its three ‘srishties’. In an ascending order of their spiritual superiority, these can be

arranged as follows: the ‘Jeevasrishty’, the ‘Ishwarsrishty’ and the ‘Brahm-srishty’.

This categorization is a bit different from the ancient ‘Caste’ system of Hindus.

As explained later, the higher two ‘srishties’ can be considered to have evolved

out of the base category of Jeevasrishty – with said two graces of God mentioned

above, the highest being Brahm-yoga! This correlation of Tāratam with Gitā is valid

only if one accepts that Brahm-yoga is conferred only on ‘eternal’ Ātmās, the

dwellers in Akshara (inperishable) Loka – as only they (and not Jeevas) can



experience ‘un-ending’ bliss (“akshaya sukha”)! On the other hand a Jeeva (‘self’

of an entity dwelling in Kshara Loka) is perishable; hence the ‘Ātmā’ referred to in

Gitā/5/21 has to be the subjective ‘self’ of some imperishable entity dwelling in an

imperishable Loka (and not Kshara Loka)! It cneeds to be clarified that that every

Jeeva is not linked with an Ātmā (this point will be discussed later at some length).

While Tāratam clarifies many points of scriptures, it is not entirely straight-forward in

its own narrations. Some truths are discussed with utmost clarity, even repeated a

few times while discussing several issues – for example, that Ātmās and Parātmās

are located in two different Lokas altogether and Jeevas in Kshara Loka. But when

talking of role of an Ātmā whose spirit is located between those of a Parātmā and

a Brahm-srishty in an Inter-Loka spiritual link-up, its intent could be grasped only

after identifying and piecing together many hints scattered in thousands of its

Verses. It simply discloses (repeatedly) that the spirits of three ‘srishties’ eventually

have three different spiritual destinations. How can it be explained when they all

are essentially the embodied Jeevas of Kshara Loka regulated by the same power

of God called Kāla-Māyā (Māyā of scriptures)? It simply says, abilities and deeds

of three srishties to grasp spiritual truths are of differing orders.

But how does that give the higher two srishties higher spiritual destinations that lie

beyond Kshara Loka? Their ‘upward’ spiritual linkages are not mentioned explicitly.

Tāratam only says that Brahm-srishties somehow possess their spiritual roots in

Parātmās located in Aksharāteeta Loka; and Ishwarsrishties are likewise rooted in

Ātmās located in Akshara Loka. It further implies vaguely that the spiritual roots of

Brahm-srishty category Jeevas pass through Ātmās of Akshara realm! That is why a

Brahm-srishty experiences itself in its spiritual journey first as an Ātmā and then as a

Parātmā! That was the main basis of hypothesizing that a Brahm-srishty was graced

with both the said graces of Gitā: first the Ātma-yoga, and next with Brahm-yoga

(conferred on their Ātmās); and that Ishwarsrishties were graced with only Ātmā-

yoga! Jeevas whose ‘upward links’ extend only upto Akshara Loka (Ishwarsrishties)

can be said to possess the capability to eventually experience themselves as

those Ātmās. They naturally possess a potential of experiencing the Akshara Loka.

The experience of Akshara Loka by an Ishwarsrishty is really ‘through’ the spirit of

its linked up Ātmā that has been awakened. The experiences of Akshara and

Aksharāteeta Lokas by Brahm-srishty are through its respectively linked up Ātmā

and Parātmā! Tāratam clearly says that a Brahm-srishty will first experience itself

‘as an Ātmā’ and then ‘as a Parātmā’. On subjectively identifying itself with Ātmā, a

Brahm-srishty (and also the Parātmā, as will be explained later) would feel itself to

be that Ātmā existing in, and experiencing, the Akshara realm! When its Ātmā later

subjectively identifies with the linked up, but now awakened, Parātmā: both, the

Brahm-srishty and that Ātmā experience the bliss of Aksharāteeta realm through

their linked Parātmā. Tāratam also discloses that intensity of bliss then experienced

by Ātmā (Gitā’s Brahm-yogayukta-Ātmā) is higher than that by the Brahm-srishty.



Further, Tāratam clearly says that the Ātmā, being eternal, willexperience its share

of bliss eternally, but only ‘after’ the period of ‘Jāgani’ (explained later) in our

Kshara Loka is over; while the Brahm-srishty would experience its portion of bliss

‘before’ the said period is over! Thereafter the Brahm-srishty would simply cease to

exist in this world! It can then be said to have got liberated for ever from the

legendary ‘bondage’ of having to exist in Kshara Loka. From all such statements of

Tāratam, and others of scriptures, the role of the spiritual linkages and that of Ātmās

could be worked out, as is being summarized now. The Ishwarsrishties and Brahm-

srishties, both, can experience the Akshara level of reality alike, as these srishties

are contended to have been graced with Ātmā-yoga. Still, as only Brahm-srishties,

had been graced also with Parātmayoga, they are in possession of a potential to

experience the Aksharāteeta Loka too! Countless Jeevas of the ‘Jeeva-srishty’

category do not have their spiritual linkages extending upto any higher Loka.

1.1 Mankind: Three Categories

The Jeevasrishties shall never experience any of the two higher Lokas, Tāratam

says unambiguously. Their spirits can of course climb upto highest point in the

Kshara Loka, but go not beyond it upto Akshara realm. Tāratam is thus seen

dividing the entire mankind into three categories, its three ‘srishties’. Arranged in

ascending order of superiority these are: Jeevasrishty, Ishwarsrishty and Brahm-

srishty. Tāratam even reveals the total number of Jeevas of each of the two higher

categories: 24000 Ishwarsrishties and 12000 Brahm-srishties! These numbers are not

going to increase or decrease with passage of time in our Kshara Loka. It seems

that duration of our perishable Kshara Brahmānda (Loka) that has so far elapsed

could evolve only Jeevas of these many higher ‘srishties’ from the innumerable

ones of ‘Jeevasrishty’ category; and no more! The measure of evolution of human

beings, in other words, is their ability to experience imperishable two realms of God

that are located beyond our perishable Kshara Loka.

Only a total of 36000 (24000+12000) Jeevas out of innumerable ones of our vast

Brahmānda (Kshara Loka) can eventually experience themselves as Ātmās, by

attaining Ātmic consciousness in their ‘Turiya’ states. Tāratam thus seemed to

suggest that only 36000 Jeevas must have previously been blessed with the grace

of Ātmayoga by God. Only these many were found deserving to be blessed with

Ātma-yoga, say considered fit enough to be shown glimpses of what lies beyond

the perishable realm of God (our Kshara Brahmānda). Innumerable others can

never attain ‘Turiya’ state of consciousness required to have a glimpse of Akshara

realm as they can attain only the three lower yogic states of consciousness (also

sometimes called ‘Buddhi-vrittis’). But Aksharāteeta realm can be experienced

only by 12000 Brahm-srishties in a state of consciousness ranked even higher than

Turiya; it is termed by Yogavāsishtha as ‘Turyateeta’! Intriguingly, higher ‘srishties’

shall reach their highest spiritual destinations during a very narrow time-span!!

Tāratam Vāni lays considerable emphasis on role played by ancient scriptures in

spiritually evolving mankind in past; and also explains its own role in evolving them



further. It needs to be grasped in context of ancient scriptures: both, their concepts

and the prophecies. But its Revelations have remained by will of God out of sight

even most Indians! Keeping this in mind an attempt is made on these pages to

provide to readers an overall perspective of Tāratam, how it correlates with the

ancient Hindu scriptures (and a little with Bible) and what is its contemporary

relevance to entire mankind. Such correlations as could be located are presented

here. It would be found that certain clarifications pertaining to rather uncommon

terms of Tāratam have been repeated often. It was done in order to spare the

readers of cross checking with their explanations given on earlier pages.

A view has been propounded here that two higher ‘srishties’ would have been

evolved by God over extremely long periods by showering graces over them of

course commensurate to their efforts. That is this author’s personal opinion; Tāratam

does not state this categorically. But it is his experience Tāratam reveals its fuller

imports only when grasped in backdrop of scriptures. That is why corroborations of

scriptures are provided below from texts like Yogavāsishtha, Upanishadas, Gitā,

Adhyātma Rāmāyana, Bhāgawatam, etc. It seems that these and scriptures also of

other faiths had enabled mankind to evolve spiritually in past eras, in several

societies, cultural backgrounds, etc. Those past-life Samskāras, impressions of

scriptural grasp developed then by the two higher srishties, would surely provide

them certain intuitive grasp in subsequent lives (if born in other faiths) when they

see Tāratam revealing imports of scriptures of their ealier faiths. It considers itself,

and also other scriptures, as Revelations of same God. That suggests God would

have revealed the spiritual truths (perhaps relating to different levels of reality) as

were relevant to spiritual needs of different cultures, at different times.

Gitā’s term ‘yogayukta’ points at ‘having established a metaphysical link-up of

sorts’ among any two or more of the following: a Jeeva, Ātmā and Parātmā. The

term ‘Yoga’ is used in scriptures to point at both: the ‘path’ that needs to be

treaded by way of ‘Sādhanā’ (efforts in specified direction) by a yogi, and also the

desired spiritual ‘destination’, the ‘Sadhya’, experience of highest level of God or

Brahm. The term ‘yoga’ also points in common parlance at an act of summing up

two or more numbers, or even the resulting ‘sum’! In this background, Gitā’s ‘Ātma-

yoga’ and ‘Brahm-yoga’ seemed to point at graces of God that link up the spirits of

two or more entities, located in their own Lokas, with intention of later opening up a

way for deserving yogis to reach spiritual destination they desire and deserve too.

In case of said two yogas such higher destinations seem to have been indicated in

Gitā by prefixing them to the term ‘yoga’: ‘Brahm’, is the Aksharāteeta realm; and

‘Ātmā’, the Akshara realm.

Gitā/5/21 and 24 say clearly that a ‘Brahm-yogayukta-Ātmā’ can experience

eternal bliss, “akshaya sukha”, and secure “Brahm-nirvana”. Gitā/6/21 says that a

yogi then becomes entitled to receive ‘utmost’ (‘Atyantik’) happiness (‘sukha’), the

“sukham Ātyantikam”! It seems the term ‘Ātyantik’ was used in a duel sense: that

of ‘utmost’; and also to drop a hint pointing at a type of “Pralaya’, one of the four



‘types’ of annihilation of the Kshara creation (as stated in Bhāgawatam, explained

later in this chapter) resulting in ‘Brahm-nirvana’, the legendary ‘liberation’!

“Ātyantik Pralaya” occurs only to rare yogis and not to countless other Jeevas

who continue to be under the ‘bondage’ to per force experience severe bouts of

pain and misery His power, Māyā, inflicts on all Jeevas of Kshara Loka! It is the

highest spiritual reward for a yogi who succeds in efforts to experience the highest

level of reality, the Brahm. On receiving it, such a yogi then earns the right to get

‘lierated’ from the said ‘bondage’. Tāratam says, such liberation would happen to

only the 12000 Brahm-srishties (and their linked Ātmās too) when their linked up

Parātmās collectively awaken to their Aksharāteeta existence – when the planned

period of Jagani is over in our world (by 29th century)! It further states: On attaining

Parātmic consciousness (one by one), every Brahm-srishty would identify itself with

its respective Parātmā,

Each of the 12000 Parātmās is a glorious adolescent female enjoying a blissful

conjugal relationship with the Purushottama in Aksharāteeta Loka! Tāratam vividly

reveals why all Parātmās are presently experiencing in their respective ‘delusions’

(of their own asking!) that they bodily exist – in our Kshara world – in the names and

forms of such-and-such Brahm-srishties (though they are completely oblivious of

this). Every Parātmā would happen to shed her delusion (one by one) – in a time-

frame pre-decided by God that is estimated to end in 29th century AD! Then pre-

delusion bliss would return to them (after their ‘momentary’ delusions)! Not only

that, certain portions thereof would for ever flow down over her spiritual linkage

with a respective Brahm-yogayukta-Ātmā!

It was seen that several statements of both, ancient Hindu scriptures and Tāratam

corroborate each another, but it does not happen always. They even complement

and supplement each other. Yet collating them, as found by this author, led to a

satisfactorily reasoned out understanding of esoteric intents of both! Tāratam states

explicitly: That is bound to happen as the source of both is really the same God! It

was while verifying this claim that an outline could be dsicerned of the concept of

‘Inter-Loka spiritual linkages’ that seemed implied in both of them, but not quite

made explicit. It is contended that it serves as a tool to grasp the intents of both.

Gitā does not mention different ‘states of consciousness’ in which a yogi becomes

capable of experiencing higher realms of God. But it does seem to talk, besides

other yogas, of one called ‘Bhakti-yoga’ that can eventually lead one blessed with

it to eventually experience Him and His realms lying beyond the Kshara Loka

which their spirits are ‘naturally’ endowed with capabilities to experience. The term

‘Bhakti’ can be viewed looked as opposite of ‘Vibhakti’, pointing at having got

‘separated’ from God or the realm where He eternally remains present (opposite of

yoga). Two negatives amount to a positive, so the term Bhakti can be viewed as

‘A-vibhakti’, the opposite of getting separated – or a grace that leads to re-union.

Delusion is envisaged as eventually providing subjective identification of one, say

the first entity with the second one, each inhabiting its own Loka. Before the link up,



each of the two was equipped to experience only its own Loka. But after the linkup

the first entity becomes oblivious of its own Loka and starts receiving inputs of live

experiences of the second entity who is alive to (aware of) of its own Loka. The first

entity thus happens to start subjectively indentifying itself with second one,

experiencing the latter’s Loka. It can be said to be the ‘delusion’ of first entity, the

consequence of that spiritual link up! It is the consequence of a dual impact: first

entity’s spirit (focus of consciousness) getting somehow separated from its own

Loka, and accessing second one’s experiences (without even being aware of this

fact), subjectively identifying with second one. It is like a dreamer identifying

himself with experiences of some person existing in a dreamt-up world.

It is contended here that as consequences of the said two yogas of Gitā: an Ātmā

of Akshara Loka gets spiritually linked up with a Jeeva conferred with Ātmā-yoga;

and likewise, a Parātmā existing in Aksharāteeta Loka (Brahm level) gets linked up

with that very Ātmā. That accounts for delusion (‘Vibhrama’) of Parātmā and Ātmā

who then feel verily as if they respectively are the (upward linked) Brahm-srishty. In

this example, the Parātmā and Ātmā suffer from ‘Vibhakti, say separation from their

respective habitats (Aksharāteeta and Akshara Lokas). This also sows the seeds in

Brahm-srishty, and linked up Ātmā of potentials to eventually experience the far off

Aksharāteeta Loka by identifying with their linked up Parātmā. But it happens only

after the linked up Ātmā and Parātmā sequentially shed delusions to ‘awaken’ to

their real identities! What was A-vibhakti for two higher entities becomes Bhakti for

lowest one; it is awarded with a potential to eventually experience the higher two

Lokas. Likewise, higher entities get enabled to experience the Loka of lowest entity.

That explains how Bhakti-yoga can enable a Bhakta of Kshara loka to experience

a higher realm. Tāratam says: for a Brahm-srishty’s consciousness to first rise from

Kshara to Akshara level, it is essential to first possess the divine knowledge (Jnana

in Sanskrit and ‘Ilm’ in Urdu). But for it and its linked up Ātmā to rise up further – from

Akshara to Aksharāteeta level, Tāratam says, love for God of adequate intensity

the ‘Ishq’ (an Urdu term), perhaps the Para- or Prema-bhakti of Hindu scriptures, is

essential. Tāratam thus settles a controvercy of religious discussions: which one of

the two is the easier or superior path; either that of Jnana or Bhakti? It asserts that

both are essential, but in different laps of a very long spiritual journey of a Brahm-

srishty (a Bhakta) graced by God with upward spiritual link terminating in a

Parātmā. Only then the scriptural bliss of experience of Purushottama (located in

Aksharāteeta Loka) can be had by a Kshara Jeeva. Bhakti does not simply point at

being ‘emotional’ or simply ‘devoted to’ God; it really amounts to a grace of God

of ‘spiritually linking up’ a Jeeva with entities located in higher levels. Vibhuti-yoga

and Buddhi-yoga need to be grasped in backdrop of concept of spiritual link-up.

The accent on emotion (love, devotion) as in Bhakti, and that on intellect in Jnana:

both are necessary, but that on Jnana has to come first; that on Bhakti follows later.

That is why Tāratam terms itself as ‘Be-shaq Ilm’, a body of divine knowledge, the

Jnana (Ilm) that can ‘remove all the doubts or queries (‘shaq’ in Urdu)’ of a seeker,

an aspirant of Brahm-srishty status. It says God first blesses a Brahm-srishty with ‘Ilm’



(Jnana) and only later with ‘Ishq’. This agrees well with Shri Krishna’s comments on

Buddhi-yoga of Gitā/10/10, the importance of ‘Jnana-yajna’ and ‘Swadhyaya’ (the

study of scriptures to grasp their intents) in Gitā/4/23-42. The Yogasutras of the sage

Patanjali (/2/44) too say the same if ‘swadhyaya’ is reckoned as ‘refelecting upon

Revealations of God inked in scriptures and also those He might have thought it fit

to manifest subsequently, like Tāratam Vāni (and even some later material He may

decide to reveal during the said period of Jāgani).

Scriptures seem to have referred to the said love as ‘Prema-bhakti’: that love and

devotion which leads to a union with Him! The term ‘Bhakti’ is also used in a wider

sense: one that enables the devotees (perhaps of Jeevasrishty category) to reach

upto highest place in Kshara Loka (Vaikuntha); and even upto Akshara level (for

those of Ishwarsrishty category). It is reasonable to expect that these two srishties

would also need (like Brahm-srishties do) the Jnana, say the knowledge relating to

their eventual spiritual destinations. ‘Bhakti’ of Gitā needs to be taken in context of

Tāratam in a broader sense of ‘A-vibhakti’ that goes on to undo an earlier

separation, the Vibhakti (delusion) of a higher entity owing to its ‘down-ward’ link-

up with, and experience of being the lower order entity. When the delusion is shed

in due time, an opportunity is provided to lower entity to peep into the higher realm

– through subjective identification with the higher entity – without having to bodily

move out of the lower Loka wherein God had placed it! That explains His grace.

As for Jeevas of Kshara Loka, they were placed by God in that realm; hence their

faculties and inclinations were ‘naturally’ tuned to only experience it – pleasures,

pain, name and fame, victories or defeats over their opponents, etc – but right in

this world. At best they may get attracted to a place in Vaikuntha, in the vicinity of

Kshara Purusha, the Master of Kshara Loka. But as per Tāratam a limited number of

them (two higher srishties) had in past got attracted to higher spiritual destinations

(Lokas) due to exhortations of scriptures. They were given the capabilities to

remotely with those spiritual link-ups to eventually to experience the higher realms,

but only after grasping the truths relating to higher Purushas and Lokas.

Tāratam gives us to understand that the truths of Aksharāteeta level had hardly

been revealed by God in past; but when the time was ripe for it, He manifested the

Tāratam Vāni in seventeenth century India. It implies that Brahm-srishties needed

some more spiritual maturity to be able to grasp those truths; when it happened He

reincarnated few of such highly evolved Brahm-srishties. He not only created the

conditions for one of them, the Sat-guru (Shri Devachandra ji) to turn his focus on

Him via Bhāgawatam, but even used him to lead others of his kind back to Him! He

later disclosed via the next Brahm-srishty, Mahāmati Prānanāth, details of a divine

plan including the time-span within which the 12000 Brahm-srishties would receive

their spiritual rewards that were only waiting to be picked up by them. But for it to

happen, they would first have to be thoroughly clear, by studying Tāratam about

their own relationship with Him, the deluded Parātmās and how they would receive

their own rewards, but only after awakening respective Parātmās from delusion.



Gitā/15/19-20 pointedly says that comprehensive truths about (Samashty, cosmic)

Purushottama principle need to be grasped first; only then such wise ones can be

said to have done what is expected of them (“Krita-kritya”)! It is not categorically

said that only then He would take the responsibility of safely leading them on such

a path as would lead directly to Himself. Again it is neither specified that this offer is

meant only for those whose Ātmās were first graced with Brahm-yoga that must be

fulfilled by them. It only says that so much knowledge of Purushottama needs to be

gathered as would make them “Asammoodha” (ones whose ignorance has been

shed altogether) before He grants them an audience. But Tāratam Vāni states that

explicitly by terming itself as a “Beshaq Ilm”, such knowledge as would remove all

their doubts. Gitā specifies that rider only ambiguously while Tāratam puts it bluntly

that its “Beshaq Ilm” needs to be grasped thoroughly before Brahm-srishties could

hope to experience a blissful union with Purushottama, their spiritual reward!

It can be seen from commentaries that the Verses of Gitā/15/15-20 are construed

by Hindus as almost equating the cosmic Purushottama principle with Shri Krishna,

as a person bodily present in the world who happened to declare – quite tersely

though – that He was the Purushottama! Yet this understanding is both correct and

incorrect based on ‘AnuGitā Parva’ of Mahabharata, a text that also contains Gitā.

It is recorded there that Shri Krishna could not repeat the discourse of Gitā later as

He was ‘yogayukta’ with Brahm (Aksharāteeta reality) during the period that he

gave it on earlier occasion! It means Purushottama and Shri Krishna can not be

equated for ever; the former alone can really decide on when, how and through

whom to reveal Himself in world! No one, however great, can disclose such truths

independent of Him!

Tāratam was manifested after thousands of years of Gitā and Bhāgawatam. Both,

composed by Vedavyās, did not allude to Aksharāteeta Loka (Brahm) or its

inhabitants, excepting once in Bhāgawatam – that Parātma-nishthā is almost the

same as Brahm-nishthā. On the other hand Tāratam alludes hundreds of times to

Parātmās, their eternal blissful existence in Aksharāteeta Loka, and importantly,

their presently experiencing (remotely) our Kshara Loka through 12000 Brahm-

srishties, etc! Such truths need to be correlated with scriptures to fully grasp the

perspectives of both these sources. As for Brahm-srishties present in ealier times,

during the times of (and in close proximity of) Shri Krishna: they had remained

completely unaware of their own lofty status as also that of Shri Krishna!

On correlating Gitā/15/19-20 (also /10/3) with Tāratam, it became clear that He

must have taken the required steps to metaphysically grace some deserving ones

with His yogas, instilling within them higher capabilities than rest of the mankind to

later grasp the intents of Tāratam and to benefit therefrom. He also augmented

those ancient and rather inadequate revelations via Tāratam Vāni to reward those

who grasped the truths of His Purushottama principle and thereby creating a

potential within them whereby they may not only realize (experience) it but even

announce its existence to the world!



The Brahm-srishties will experience the bliss of union (of lesser intensity than their

Ātmās) with Purushottama for a limited period, as stated earlier. Even then, it will far

exceed what any other Jeeva bodily existing in the Kshara Loka can ever hope to

experience. It obviously would be a reward for every Brahm-srishty’s efforts of the

past and present, an unshakable faith in His scriptures and untiring efforts to grasp

the spiritual truths relating to His Purushottama principle, etc, leading to awakening

of their linked up deluded Paratmas. Tāratam says clearly that such a reward shall

accrue to a Brahm-srishty when it awakens the Parātmā linked with it in past

around the time when Shri Krishna had appeared in the world. After enjoying the

bliss of union with Purushottama during the period of Jagani, every Brahm-srishty it

would disappear from Kshara Loka fully ‘liberated’ from its karmic bondage!

Necessity to ‘coin’ the term ‘Parātma-yoga’ was felt in order to briefly express that

the grace of Brahm-yoga conferred on an Ātmā of Akshara Loka can also be said

to be transferred on to a perishable Brahm-srishty that was earlier linked up with

that Ātmā. That in effect entitles the Brahm-srishty to get linked up with the same

Parātmā (located in Brahm). It is this spiritual link up with a ‘deluded’ Parātmā that

finally enables the flow of those blissful experiences – when the former awakens to

re-unite with Purushottama – to reach the Brahm-srishty over the spiritual linkage.

State of consciousness in which a Brahm-srishty identifies itself with by now an

awakened Parātmā, says Tāratam, is higher than Turiya (the ‘Turyateeta’ of

Yogāvasishtha). But how did those Parātmās happen to get deluded in the first

instance? That can be said to be a natural consequence of her having been

‘downward’ linked with a Brahm-yogayukta-Ātmā of Gitā/5/21 – and through it

with a Brahm-srishty located in Kshara world!

1.2 Successive Upward Link-ups

On one side of the spiritual linkage of a Brahm-yogayukta-Ātmā is an eternally

blissful Parātmā and on the other, a perishable Brahm-srishty. So as every Brahm-

srishty disappears from its habitat, the Kshara Loka, after experiencing a part of the

awakened Parātmā’s bliss, the latter’s upward linkage would be severed. It will

however happen after the period of Jāgani is over in our world – that is, when the

12000 Brahm-srishties would have experienced their share of bliss of union with the

Purushottama! But upward linkages of each of those 12000 Ātmās with respective

Parātmās shall remain intact, enabling them to perpetually access the bliss of their

linked up Parātmās (“akshaya sukha” as it is denoted in Gitā/5/21)! That would

happen as nothing ever is destroyed in Akshara and Aksharāteeta Lokas: their

entities, and the spiritual linkages that were established by Purushottama; so the

bliss would continue to flow over those linkages for ever. Tāratam thus enables us

to reason out when it is collated with scriptures. A few more instances of this type

as were noticed by this author would be presented on following pages. Even some

more could probabely be located if only the scholars searched for them.

Only when it dawned that Gitā had used the term ‘yoga’ to point at His grace of

‘adding up’ (say ‘linking up’) that a faint outline started emerging of the concept of



‘spiritual linkages’. But it took quite some time to realize it as Tāratam does not

quite highlight ‘grace’ aspect of God like Gitā does. But it does assert quite

emphatically that 24000 Ishwar-srishties shall succeed in raising consciousness

only upto ‘Turiya’ state and would attain only the Ātmic consciousness. The Brahm-

srishties too would do that, and later attain even the Parātmic consciousness to

experience the said bliss! Reason is this: the Ātmās of Ishwarsrishties simply do not

possess access to Parātmās. Then Tāratam also unambiguously discloses that such

Ātmās, as were linked with Brahm-srishties, after experiencing that union with

Purushottama, shall never again get hooked up to Kshara experiences!

In the light of Yogavāsishtha we can say that the Ishwarsrishties can not raise their

yogic consciousness to beyond ‘Turiya’ – literally the ‘fourth’ state of consciousness

(higher than the ‘lower’ three states) – in which Akshara Ātmā is experienced. This

text also talks of a still rarer and loftier yogic state called ‘Turyateeta’ in which the

Brahm, the Paramātmā can be experienced. Yet it does not highlight contribution

of God – by way of graces, like Gitā does – to facilitate the yogis to accomplish

what others, not so graced, can not. It also does not give out, like Tāratam does,

that the yogis can, in their higher states of consciousness, experience as if they are

verily the entities present in higher Lokas – either Ātmā or the Parātmā. Yes, only

once it was found employing the term ‘Parātmā’, but it did not explicitly associate

it (her, as per Taratam) with a realm of God that is higher than Akshara! This rare

mention of Yogavāsishtha on Parātmā will be discussed later.

Yogavāsishtha neither clarifies that there are two higher levels of His reality (the

Lokas) that serve as habitats for higher order entities, Ātmās and Parātmās; nor that

Paramātmā (Purushottama) dwells only at the highest level. But it explains well the

five states of consciousness in the context of seven of its Yoga-bhoomikas (as if the

same were the seven steps of a ladder) that the spirit of a yogi must climb in order

to reach upto the level of Brahm or Paramātmā. It refers only symbolically to said

three ‘lower’ yogic states as ‘waking’, ‘dream’ and ‘deep sleep’ in that order – the

very terms that we use to denote what every Jeeva experiences during its whole

lifetime. Most other texts too borrow the symbolic terminology, but without in least

clarifying that it is adopted for three lower states of a ‘yogi’ (not of every person)!

These scriptural snags seem to have resulted in a common perception that any of

the countless Jeevas, who experiences the three ‘lower’ states (waking, dream

and deep sleep), is naturally poised to attain the next higher ‘Turiya’ (‘fourth’) state.

That is a false perception. The Turiya state is very rare wherein imperishable Ātmā is

experienced. As per Yogāvasishtha, it can be attained only after a yogi develops

a total insensitivity towards the experiences of Kshara Loka first, in third yogic state

termed only symbolically as “sushupti’ (deep sleep)! Only then, with further efforts,

that yogi attains Turiya and even the Turyāateeta states. It calls for treamendous

(life-after-life) efforts. Such a perception enabled this auther to hypothesize that the

Ishwarsrishty and Brahm-srishty categories must have evolved out of the lowest

one of Jeevasrishties, over extremely long periods and only with graces of God!



Turiya may follow after the three lower yogic states, as contended here, but only if

one is graced with Ātma-yoga! With more efforts the same yogi may be conferred

with Parātmayoga too – to eventually succeed in attaining Turyateeta state. Text of

Yogāvasishtha presents a life-after-life perspective of human existence and says

that efforts made on the path of yoga in any life do not go waste in case yogi fails

to accomplish the goal in that life. It uses a term ‘yoga-bhrashta’ (getting de-railed

from the chosen track of yoga) for such yogis. They may accomplish that goal in

some later life in a favourable environment when past Samskaras, the impressions

of past efforts and accomplishments come to the fore. Such yogis will then seem to

move faster towards their goals as compared to others who may not have made

requisite efforts in past! Other Hindu scriptures too say the same. An explicit

reference of Gitā/6/37-47 can be cited in support of that statement.

In response to pointed query of Arjuna (Verses 37-39), Shri Krishna said that one

who is ‘yoga-bhrashta’ gets re-born in prosperous, and virtuous family, or in that of

a wise yogi, to make further progress rapidly. He categorically told Arjuna that a

yoga-bhrashta person reclaims ‘Buddhi-yoga’ (“Tatra tam buddhi-samyogam

labhate paurvadehikam”) that was earned by him in some previous life and body!

Buddhi-yoga is explained by Him in tenth chapter in the context of Vibhooti-yoga

(Gitā/10/10) and will be discussed later. Arjuna is advised that the aim of everyone

should be to strive to become such a yogi (Gitā/6/46). All that can be said here is

this: Arjuna must have been such a fortunate past life yogi (scriptures attest to this

fact), for the divine discourse of Gitā came his way even without his asking for it!

One can well see why Shri Krishna provided him (and through him to the world at

large) with a global view of human existence, different yogas, etc when Arjuna’s

dilemna at the time was: whether to fight the devastating Mahābhārata war or not!

As many scholars have expressed it, there is yet another purpose: Gitā was not

meant for Arjuna alone, that divine discourse was meant for consumption of the

evolved ones to appear later (as was also the case with Bhāgawatam). When the

scriptures were collated with Tāratam it enabled this author to hypothesize that the

Ishwarsrishties must have evolved out of those Jeevasrishties who could at best

attain only the third ‘yogic’ state – and yet were considered worthy of such a grace

of His that would enable them to attain an even a higher, the ‘Turiya’ state. The

Brahm-srishties seem to have been likewise evolved by God, out of Ishwarsrishties,

to attain a state even higher than Turiya. Tāratam does not disclose the process of

evolution of its two higher category Jeevas from those of the lowest one, but it

provides enough material to collate with Yogāvasishtha, Gitā, Bhāgawatam, etc

on higher states of consciousness that a yogi can accomplish.

A statement of Bhāgawatam was then located saying that ‘Parātma-nishthā’ is the

same as ‘Brahm-nishthā’! It made clear that Tāratam’s Aksharāteeta Loka, habitat

of the Parātmās, was the Brahm that many verses (apart from Gitā /5/21) talked of.

That provided scriptural support to hypothesis that Brahm-yoga and Parātma-yoga

are one and the same, only stated from differing reference points. , Bhāgawatam

uses the term Parātmā several times, but without elucidating it. Such instances are



cited later. It needed good amount of collating with scriptures before it could be

deduced that they must have evolved out of Jeevasrishties with successive

‘upward’ linkages with entities of higher Lokas for even Gitā did not allude to either

lower three or higher two states of consciousness, the ‘Buddhi-vrittis’ as these are

termed in Bhāgawatam.

Explanation of the concept of spiritual linkages is difficult on two counts: firstly, the

readers may not even have heard of Tāratam Vāni; and secondly, its full import

becomes clear, in opinion of this author, only when it gets collated with scriptures.

But unlike other faiths, Hinduism does not express itself in either one, or at best only

two; threr are several scriptures. Again, the commentators belong to different

philosophical schools of thought (‘Darshana Shastras’). That often results in different

interpretations of same statement. If different scriptures are to be collated, based

on their commentaries, then the difficulties become manifold. Tāratam points at

this scenario, but does not blame only the commentators; it says the scriptures too

must accept a share of that blame, owing to their lack of clarity, even glaring

‘blanks’ found in their narrations at some crucial locations! That leaves the doors

wide open for scholars to fill in the blanks as best as they can!

Above scene had required the augmentation of such scriptures via Tāratam Vāni.

It was manifested in an enigmatic manner in 17th century India in what must surely

have been the Turyāteeta states of consciousness of two personages: the Satguru,

Shri Devachandra ji (1581-1655 AD), and his chosen disciple known by his title as

Mahāmati Prānanāth (1618-94 AD). The latter’s real name was Shri MehRāj Thakur.

It is repeatedly said that Tāratam was manifested primarily to brief only the

spiritually evolved Jeevas, the Brahm-srishties, regarding highest spiritual truths as

the last leg of their spiritual journey had arrived. They had therefore to be armed

with hitherto withheld information. Tāratam repeatedly asserted that it was essential

for them to comprehensively grasp the truths relating to most superior realm of

God, the Aksharāteeta Loka, how it can be reached, etc.

Tāratam simply states that the spirits of 12000 Parātmās – without their coming over

bodily to Kshara Loka – are presently under ‘delusion’ that they are inhabiting the

Kshara Loka in form of such-and-such Brahm-srishtie! It discloses that as and when

the Parātmās would happen to shed their delusions, one by one – as a result of

efforts of respective Brahm-srishties – they will re-gain their normal capabilities to

experience Aksharāteeta Loka. Thereafter it will be the turn of Brahm-srishties to

experience the existence in that Loka through the ‘awakened’ Parātmās! But that

can happen only if and when they first succeed in comprehensively grasping the

truths relating to realm of Purushottama and His beloved Parātmās, the delusion of

the latter, how and when they would shed it, etc. These spiritual truths, then

properly grasped instill a potential in aspirants to eventually ‘realize’ them! But God

also seems to have created that bit of extra urge, and even the intellectual

capacity within every Brahm-srishty, to grasp those truths.



1.3 The Wake-up Call For Brahm-srishties

Tāratam says indirectly that even in their deluded states, the Parātmās receive the

truths relating to themselves via the spirits of linked up Brahm-srishties (carried over

to them over their spiritual linkages). These inputs generate within the Parātmās

certain subconscious forces that start opposing the deluding forces. That explains

why such inputs should be sent by Brahm-srishties as are intellectually convincing.

This can be done by grasping Tāratam Vāni and correlating it with scriptures, and

grasping the statements of blissful existence in Aksharāteeta Loka of Parātmās as

against their present miserable experiences of our Kshara Loka, etc. The Parātmās

also need to realize that it has happened as a consequence of their identification

with Brahm-srishties. These inputs on reaching even the deluded consciousness of

Parātmās inform them that they were deluded by the Purushottama in order to fulfill

a desire that had gripped them (as Tāratam puts it) in Aksharāteeta Loka to

experience what the existence in Kshara Loka was like!

As outlined in Tāratam, the Parātmās shall certainly succeed in shedding their

delusions, but only after experiencing in full measure the misery in Kshara Loka and

also when they receive the said inputs regarding their earlier blissful existence from

their respective Brahm-srishties (on grasping it). Those inputs shall serve purpose of

a sort of ‘wake-up call’ issued by God that they will receive in their deluded states!

It can be seen that God had not intended them to be deluded for ever as He is

seen promising them via Tāratam Vāni that the Brahm-srishties are equipped with

that bit of (excess) urge and capability to extract the essence of spiritual truths

relating to His higher realms; and also to collate those with hints available in

ancient scriptures. This correlation is essential to develop an overall framework of

His divine plan to reward them!

Tāratam reveals that the total duration of their delusion would really last only for a

minutest part of a moment of Aksharāteeta Loka, but when in delusion it would be

experienced as thousands of years of Kshara existence in form of such and such

Brahm-srishties. Further, the words of Tāratam that their misery of Kshara existence

is going to be shortly over is expected to generate within them a hope that will cast

its shadows in Kshara Loka within the hearts of Brahm-srishties – that this time

around their efforts to grasp those highest spiritual truths are sure to bear exotic

spiritual fruits! Thus, though all Jeevas connecting with Tāratam Vāni may make

efforts to grasp it in order to experience the bliss of Aksharāteeta Loka, only those

who were earlier spiritually linked up with those Parātmās (through Parātmā-yoga),

say possessing the status of Brahm-srishties, would really succeed.

The Brahm-srishties do possess the urge as also capability to provide such an

understanding of spiritual truths to their linked up Ātmās and Parātmās as would

cause their awakening from delusions they suffer from, due to their downward link-

ups with Brahm-srishties (identification with them). Spiritual links can be envisaged



as electric wires (or better, some wireless links) that can carry the live, moment-to-

moment experiences of Brahm-srishties, happiness or otherwise, their conceptual

grasps of spiritual truths, etc! Their upward transmission is implied quite clearly in

Tāratam. It exhorts the Brahm-srishties to grasp spiritual truths as it would assist the

Parātmās to grasp them, even in their delusion, and learn about the efforts being

made by Purushottama to awaken them. They would realize, even in their deluded

states that time had arrived when they whould (or can) shed their delusions!

In His scheme, apart from that bliss of Aksharata experiences, the Brahm-srishties

will also have the honour in Kshara Loka to corroborate many truths, as were only

hinted at in scriptures, based on their own experiences! That would bring to them

much respect in the world. Mankind would treat them as living gods! Further, they

would also be instrumental in drastically slashing down the period of evil influence

of Kaliyuga from 432000 years to around 6000 years (Tāratam mentions this figure in

an indirect manner)! But alas, Brahm-srishties are really unaware that they (and

only they) really possess the lofty spiritual and intellectual potential. Presently they

think and act like innumerable other Jeevas, adopting their practices and beliefs.

They are asked by Tāratam to search within as to who they are, why they are in this

miserable world and search for ways and means to permanently get out of it!

In a way, the situation is that God says to everyone: here you are, provided with

the scriptures and Tāratam; see if you feel motivated to study them. If those make

any sense to you, it is quite likely you belong to any of the higher two categories;

but the real ‘Litmus test’ lies in your capability to attain Atmic as also the Paratmic

consciousness! He as if says: let there be an open competition; all those motivated

to compete in the race, even in worsening times of Kaliyuga are welcome to join it;

but their aim should be to claim ‘spiritual’ rewards of highest realm – not those of

this world. To emphasize urgency in taking up this task, it says that the rewards can

be collected only during a given time-span. Tāratam exhorts all the Brahm-srishties

not to ‘miss the bus’, wishing them good luck and also saying: let the best 12000

win!

God revealed in Tāratam the scheme of rewarding them, but only when some of

the Brahm-srishties had evolved enough to digest its truths, as also to explain those

to others of their kind. It asked them to spread their understanding for sake of those

who were to make their appearance at a later date. It often says that His plan is to

reward the Brahm-srishties in a narrow time-span of 1130 years (it is given clearly in

TāratamVāni)! Based on its hints, that time span is contended to have started in the

year 1678 AD and will therefore end 1130 years later. That time-span thus works out

to be 1678-2808 AD. Then it will be the turn of 24000 Ishwar-srishties to awaken their

Ātmās in next 70 years. The overall time-span of such unprecedented events (the

period of Jāgani) thus is 1200 years starting from base year of 1678 AD,when the

Parātmā linked up with Mahāmati Prānanāth got awakened through the efforts of

his Sat-guru, Shri Devachandra ji.



We in the year 2012 are located within first one-third of the period that is hailed by

Tāratam as ‘the period of (or the day of) Jāgani’. The 17th century term ‘Jāgani’ –

seems to be a distortion of Sanskit term either ‘Jagarana’ or ‘Jagriti’ – pointing at

‘spiritual awakening to highest reality’, one-by-one, of every 12000 Brahm-srishty.

When it would take place, every Parātmā shall re-unite with her Lord Purushottama,

and her blissful experiences will then flow down to linked up Ātmā and also Brahm-

srishty. The divinity of that experience will express itself within that Brahm-srishty by

way of a surge of intense, subtlest and most divine, influential light that Tāratam

terms as ‘Noor’ (Urdu term) radiating out from it and spreading out to all the

fourteen Upa-Lokas of our Kshara Brahmānda! That subtle, but extremely potent

influence can best be described in English as ‘divine Aura of global spread’.

At that time the blessed Brahm-srishty would fully identify itself with an awakened

Parātmā, Whatever spoken by it in that (Turyateeta) state would be considered as

something communicated by none less than God through a Parātmā! That is why

the words conveyed by the two Brahm-srishties, Satguru and Mahāmati Prānanāth,

(called Tāratam Vāni) while they were connected with their respective, awakened

Parātmās are here termed as God’s “17th century Revelations”. It simply is a record

of truths passed on via two awakened Parātmās, named ‘Sundari’ and ‘Indrāwati’

of Aksharāteeta Loka through the said two personages. Those truths happened to

have manifested from time-to-time in form of a total of 18758 divine Verses in our

Kshara Loka during the period 1657-94 AD as described later.

It is however relevant to note that all the words of past eras that announced the

existence of Aksharāteeta Loka as habitat of Purushottama, Parātmās, etc (using

different terminologies) too would have carried divinity (to certain extent) in form of

divine light, the Aura. Tāratam Vāni mentions this pointedly (in respect of Prophet

Mohammed) and also describes the role of that Aura in coming times. It is stated

that it can destroy the malevolent tendancies lying within all human beings, and in

a way prepares them amenable grasp and accept higher spiritual truths. Such

statements draw a good parallel with a 5000 year old prophecy of Bhāgawatam

relating to future appearance of God in form of ‘Kalki’ and how His aura would

then spread in the world to purify the human hearts in worsening period of Kaliyuga

that had began no sooner than Shri Krishna departed from this world.

1.4 Inter-Loka Spiritual Linkages

The concept has been developed based on this author’s understanding, firstly of

the Samashty/Vyāshty relationship and secondly of a Loka and its sub-divisions

termed here as Upa-Lokas. It forms the very basis of an absolute necessity of Inter-

Loka spiritual linkages for a Vyāshty located in one Loka to remotely experience

another Loka, without having to be physically present in the latter. These linkages

are conferred by God only on deserving Jeevas of Kshara Loka. Scriptures do

exhort mankind to realize Brahm or Paramātmā and then get liberated, but can not

describe how to do it, other than getting into Turyateeta state or seeking His grace!



Gitā suggests becoming His Bhakta or being ‘yogayukta’ with Him or phrases to

that effect, meaning getting connected with Him in some way; but commentators

have not interpreted these words as ‘getting spiritually linked up with a higher level

of reality through some Vyāshty located at that level. They perhaps thought of God

as an eternal reality of uniform consistency that as if directly supported the

consciousness of all Jeevas; meaning they all had ‘direct’ accesses to Him, only

requiring His permission for audiences with Him. There was a lack of scriptural

clarity on His existence at three distinctly different levels, the Lokas (and also their

Upa-Lokas). Aksharāteeta Loka was not mentioned at all. Further, as pointed out

earlier, the term Ātmā generally pointed at, and was even accepted as the ‘self’

(eternal that too!) even of an imperishable human being. Lack of clarity on

Samashty-Vyāshty relationship at Akshara level added to confusion. In this

backdrop, the need of conceptualizing Inter-loka spiritual link-ups was felt only in

the light of revelations of Tāratam Vāni.

Such a spiritual ‘link-up’ is envisaged on these pages for (deluded) Parātmā and

Ātmā to access experiences of a Brahm-srishty in order for them to have a feel of

existing in Kshara Loka and vice versa for the latter to access their experiences (in

Turiya and Turyāteeta states) as and when the former two wake up from delusions.

It could also have been conceptualized that the linkages were installed by God for

all Jeevas (for leading them right upto Aksharāteeta level), but with metaphysical

switches inserted in those links initially in ‘OFF’ position with a proviso that the same

got turned on to ‘ON’ position when God ‘willed’ in respect of few deserving ones!

Scriptural statements could perhaps have favoured this latter alternative of spiritual

linkages installed initially with switches in OFF position for every Jeeva; but it did

not match with what Tāratam asserts: only 12000 Parātmās were deluded by

Purushottama. That restricted to only 12000 as the number of Brahm-srishties who

were linked up with Aksharāteeta level reality.

It was finally decided to conceptualize that a spiritual link-up got established with

a deserving Kshara Vyāshty as and when God desired (willed to bless someone). A

sketch (like a schematic diagram) is presented below to depict spiritual linkages,

hoping it will serve as a visual aid when grasping discussions on the subject yet to

follow. The Lokas are depicted in three lighter colour shades: of green for Kshara, of

yellow (Akshara level) and of purple (Aksharāteeta level). Vyāshties located there

are depicted as small circles of respective darker shades. Their spirits are depicted

as tiny (white) uncoloured circles located centrally in circles of darker shades. That

scheme was adopted to express relationship between the consciousness of every

Samashty Purusha and that of all the Vyshties governed (by the former). This would

explain the very need of ‘Inter-Loka’ spiritual linkages. This Samashty-Vyāshty

relationship would also be discussed later; but briefly, it is the same as what exists

between ‘Macrocosm’ and ‘Microcosm’, but with following understanding.

The Vyāshty Purushas (conscious Jeevas) are able to cognize, and connect with

only their own Loka (not any other Loka). They exist within, and are sustained by,

the consciousness of their own Samashty Purusha. It is a natural restriction imposed



by the sustaining consciousness; but it gets overcome as envisaged here when the

Purushottama, the Ishwara of all three Lokas, gracefully establishes an ‘Inter-Loka

spiritual link-up’ of a Vyāshty of one Samashty Purusha with that of other Samashty

Purusha. This enables the first Vyāshty to gain access to the experiences of another

Loka via those of the second Vyāshty located in its Loka.

Spiritual linkages are depicted in dotted vertical lines spanning all the three Lokas

in case of Brahm-srishties, and only two Lokas in case of Ishwarsrishties. The

Jeevasrishties are not at all upward linked. As and when any higher order Vyāshty

experiences a lower Loka over its linkage, it is said to be in a state of ‘delusion’; but

when it experiences a higher Loka it is said to be doing so in its higher state of

consciousness (Samādhi). For Kshara Jeevas, these higher states of consciousness

are termed either as ‘Turiya’ or ‘Turyāteeta’.



1.5 Samashty-Vyāshty Relationship

Tāratam only implies (without making explicit) the reason Purushottama was

required to establish the Inter-Loka spiritual linkages – and that too in respect of a

limited number of Vyāshties of three Lokas. It must have been done, as contended

here, to enable the Aksharāteeta Parātmās and Akshara Ātmās to experience

Kshara existence through the respective Brahm-srishties; and then for their spirits to

revert to their own Lokas. The same ‘means’ also would have enabled the Brahm-

srishties and their linked up Ātmās to experience what the blissful Aksharāteeta

existence is like during the period of Jagani. As already said, the concept of such

spiritual linkages does not contradict statements of either the scriptures or Tāratam

Vāni. Rather, when need arises, it clarifies some of their earlier, poorly understood

statements of both simply because it suggested itself while collating them. It was as

if implicit in narrations of both, like a substratum, only waiting to be dug up and

taken cognizance of.

But it first needed firming up a basic idea that all the Lokas really existed within

(and were governed by) the consciousness of their respectrive Samashty Purushas;

and that spread of consciousness of every universal, formless Samashty Purusha

defines the boundary limits of that Loka wherein embodied Vyāshties dwell. Such a

postulation on Samashty-Vyāshty relationship explains why the Vyāshties of a

particular Loka can neither physically move out of boundaries of their own Loka

nor even experience happenings in some other Loka – without the said Inter-Loka

spiritual linkages. It is an enigma that scriptures did not elucidate this relationship

(to place obstacles before the seekers?). While talking of say Akshara reality,

scriptures often used the term Ātmā in either sense, Samashty and Vyāshty; but

Tāratam termed the former as ‘Akshara’ Purusha’ and the latter as ‘Atma’! Such few

instances enabled firming up the Samashty-Vyāshty relationship, as otherwise it

was getting difficult to grasp statements of scriptures like the following few.

Take Shri Krishna’s most important declaration in Gitā: He is that third Purusha, the

Purushottama, superior to both, the Kshara and Akshara Purushas! How can that

be? He was located at the time of discourse, and indeed for all of His lifetime other

than while enacting the Raasa-leela, in Kshara Loka! Then He also announced in

Gitā/10/37 that He was a Vibhooty, one in whom the divinity of highest level had

manifested! Commentaries on Gitā have not even pointed at such contradictions.

Then, third Purusha and His realm are not even hinted at in scriptures, excepting

vague references to ‘Brahm-pur’ or ‘Brahm-dhaam’. Tāratam gives considerable

information on that highest realm, but to believe it one would naturally like to have

corroboration of scriptures. That called for collating and stretching the imagination

quite a bit to guess what was implied (but not made explicit) in both these sources.

The terms Pur (or Pura) and Purusha are related. A ‘Pur’ is a habitat, employed in

scriptures as a simile either for a vast Kshara Loka in Gitā/15/16 of the Samashty

Kshara Purusha or for a human body (in /5/13) of a Jeeva located in Kshara Loka.



In both instances, the subtle consciousness of Purusha (Samashty and Vyāshty) has

to be taken as pervading the Pur (either a Loka or a human body) and governing it

from within. In other words, a ‘Purusha’ is envisaged as residing within (occupying),

a ‘Pur’ in capacity of its Master and effectively governing it from within – like a

dreamer’s consciousness governing dream world and actions of all Vyāshties who

appear in it! Kshara Loka is also called as Kshara ‘Brahmānda’. ‘Anda’ means an

egg filled with certain fluid.

In a ‘natural’ way that fluid evolves itself into a live chick of bird. We explain it by

saying that ‘Nature’ (Prakriti, the consciousness of Kshara Purusha) brings about

that transformation. Likewise the omnipresent powers lie within whole world – to lay

down the rules governing all the natural phenomena. Extending that logic to

‘dream’, we can well say that consciousness of a dreamer governs anything

coming within the dream-world, including thoughts and actions of all Vyāshties

existing in it. The consciousness of a Samashty Kshara Purusha is likewise free to

govern Kshara Brahmānda and Vyāshties present in it; and to manifest the Purusha

as an ‘Avatāra’ in it, even as dreamer (of waking state) seemingly enters in his

dream.

The logic of dream consciousness governing the dream world is used in Tāratam

and in most scriptures like Yogavāsishtha, but in context of Kshara level reality. The

same logic seems to be applicable to two higher levels. We have three Samashty

levels of reality (Lokas) so we need to envisage three Samashty Purushas as

governing their respectve Lokas from within. Likewise, every Samashty Purusha has

to be envisaged as having the soverign power to be present in His own Loka as a

formful Vyāshty Purusha (like all other Vyāshties present therein). Shri Krishna’s

declaration in Gitā that He is not only the Purushottama – third (Samashty) Purusha

superior to other two Purushas but also the Master of all three Lokas (Trailoki) – is

quite puzzling. It is contended in light of Taratam that He, as Ishwara of three Lokas,

the Purushottama principle, is the power behind all three Purushas; and yet that

power is focussed in the ‘third’ Purusha – real seat of power behind the thrones of

Kshara and Akshara Purushas – that directly governs His Aksharāteeta Loka!

The Inter-Loka spiritual linkages are envisaged as passing from the spirit of a

Vyāshty of one Loka to that of another Loka through the Samashty consciousness

of both the Purushas concerned (likewise of three Lokas too), as Ishwara of the

three Lokas is really the ‘Purushottama principle’! Its laws and deeds are not easy

to grasp or explain based on scriptures using worldly logic. Still one has to make an

attempt, however audacious it may seem to be, to bring them within the range of

reasoning. The analogy of dreamer comes to help to grasp the statement of

Gitā/10/37 when Shri Krishna, known as Vāsudeva (son of Vāsudeva), declares

Himself to be a Vibhooty among those of ‘Vrishny’ dynasty; while He declares later

in /15/18 that He is the Purushottama! If we use dreamer’s analogy it would have

been alright if He had claimed be an Avatāra, a Vyāshty form of Samashty Kshara

Purusha (present bodily in Kshara Loka). Tāratam confirms, He was indeed born as



an Avatāra of Kshara Purusha; and only later did higher consciousness (of higher

two Purushas) entered in that Shri Krishna, and even withdrew therefrom!

Likewise, in other Vibhooties present in Kshara Loka too can the higher levels of

consciousness/experiences descend – via their upward spiritual linkages reaching

upto those levels! Thus linkages simply need to be viewed as the means that He

has gracefully provided to His ardent devotees over which (eventually) the higher

experiences can descend right within their spirits. Only the Purushottama can

perform this feat in respect of Vyāshties of all the three Lokas (as their Ishwara or

maste, as per Gitā/15/17)! That also gives rise to a question: whether the so-called

‘Vibhooties’ listed in Gitā/10 (or in Uddhava-gitā) relate to the Vyāshties of either

Akshara or Aksharāteeta Loka? Use of the term ‘Divya Ātma-vibhooty’ suggests

that it refers to someone linked with a ‘divine Ātmā’ (a Brahm-yogayukta-Ātmā), in

whom the potential was manifested through a spiritual link-up, to eventually enter

the Brahm level of His reality (Aksharāteeta Purushottama’s level).

It can be added in light of Tāratam that He would have also made the provisions

of spiritual linkages to manifest different higher levels of His reality right in the hearts

of two higher srishties during said period of Jāgani! The same had happened in

case of Shri Krishna too, as was seen after collating the discourse of Gitā with what

is given in the AnuGitā Parva of Mahabharata (these two incidents are recorded in

same text of Mahabharata). It points at connecting with and disconnecting from,

Shri Krishna’s Avatāri (Kshara) consciousness – as dictated by the Purushottama

principle, just before and perhaps immediately after the discourse of Gitā. The

same used to happen off and on with Mahāmati Prānanāth, just before and after

the divine verses of Tāratam got uttered by him! Such a happening could also

have taken place more than once during Shri Krishna’s lifetime. But this much is not

recorded even in Bhāgawatam, even after the Deva-rishi Narada had asked

Vedavyās to include all spiritual truths on divine birth and deeds of Shri Krishna by

collecting them in his yogic, Samādhi state!

Here too we find that it is the Purushottama principle that decides on how much of

spiritual information should be revealed, and by whom and when. In Bhāgawatam,

Vedavyās provided some information but not all. It was perhaps left for Tāratam

Vāni to augment it as would hopefully be borne out by discussion on the Brij- and

Raasa-leelas. It is also relevant to point out here that Tāratam does not contradict

Bhāgawatam (rather it augments). Its assertions that it constitutes a body of

information that was meant to be revealed much later – when a need would arise

for its disclosures – when adequately evolved Brahm-srishties would make

appearances in world. When that happened it took pains to provide information

relating to Aksharāteeta reality: the Purushottama in a Vyāshty form of “Shri Rāj ji”;

His Loka, its dwellers, their desire to experience the Kshara Loka, etc! It was done

to eventually cause the awakening of Parātmās in Aksharāteeta loka!

Some texts point at the highest level ambiguously, while others avoid mentioning it

at all. Again, scriptural narrations are so lengthy, as to often make commentators



miss out connecting many subtle hints they drop. The brevity of Gitā (700 Verses)

often frustrates the seekers, but it is beneficial too. It reveals in briefest possible

manner that there are three Purushas, three Lokas and also that third Purusha, the

Purushottama, is the real Master of all three Lokas! It thus makes it easy to correlate

with Tāratam Vāni on such issues. Still it did not clarify that each of the said two

higher Purushas pervades, sustains and governs His own Loka along with the

subjective selves (spirits) of all Vyāshties located therein – like it does in respect of

Kshara Purusha and Jeevas. Gitā/15/17-19 just stops short of revealing that the

consciousness of Kshara and Akshara Purushas need to be taken as subordinated

to that of the ‘cosmic’ Purushottama (not Shri Krishna who came to and left our

world).

People perceive Shri Krishna till now – and they had done so even in His own times

– as an embodied Jeeva, at best an Avatāra (of Kshara purusha)! It was mainly for

them that He had to reveal in Gitā/10/3 that He was the “Loka-maheshwara”, a

Samashty principle that governed all the Lokas and that since He was present in a

body, the ignorant ones can not grasp that fact! This verse too seems pointing at

‘three-fold’ existence of the same one reality that we call as God, Paramātmā or

Purushottama who governs any and every thing present at any place (Loka); yet

Shri Krishna could not repeat the discourse of Gitā when Arjuna requested Him to

do so after the great war of Mahabharata was over! This instance is illustrative of a

relationship of those present bodily in Kshara Loka with a threefold God-hood that

sustains His three Lokas. In case of Brahm-srishties they have a relationship that was

established by none other than Purushottama principle with the Parātmās in order

that they may experience the Vyāshty form of Akshārateeta Purusha!

Tāratam hardly ever refers directly to Gitā, like it does to Bhāgawatam, still it

indicates how three levels of God-hood worked in unison to create the three

highest Upa-Lokas at Akshara level. The Samashty-Vyāshty relationship as is

attempted here – a total dependence of consciousness of all Vyāshty Purushas

(Vyāshties) of any Loka on that of their respective Samashty Purusha – would not

be available in any scripture. It had to be arrived at after some lengthy reasoning

(difficult to explain) while collating Tāratam Vāni with scriptures. It helped to justify

the absolute need of an ‘Inter-loka spiritual link-up’ to enable a Vyāshty of one

Loka, to be connected spiritually with some other Vyāshty of a different Loka in

order to eventually experience latter’s Loka. Gitā/5/21’s ‘yogayukta’ emphasizes

this point in respect of such Ātmās as were thus linked with Brahm, the “Brahm-

yogayukta-Ātmās”, in order to get eventually established in Brahm, to have for

eternity its bliss and to secure “Brahm-nirvana”. But it offers no clarification on why

that revelation was made in Kshara Loka; or how it is relevant to its Jeevas (if at all).

To grasp narrations of Tāratam it had become essential to grasp the process how

Brahm-srishties would experience union with Purushottama ‘via’ their respective

Parātmās eternal inhabitants of Aksharāteeta Loka – or even how the latter have

subjectively identified with respective Brahm-srishties. Before Samashty-Vyāshty

relationship was understood the way outlined here, it was not possible to



conceptualize that Purushottama’s graces (mentioned in Gitā) are required to

have Inter-loka spiritual linkages established by Him in order to have experiences

of other Lokas by Brahm-srishties, Brahm-yogayukta-Ātmās and Parātmās. The

scriptures seldom employed the two terms ‘Samashty’ or ‘Vyāshty’, leave alone

used them together in any narration, to provide an opportunity to contemplate on

their relationship.

So it required considerable time to muster up the courage to articulate it and say

that Inter-Loka spiritual link-up is most essential among the Parātmās, Atmas and

Jeevas (Brahm-srishties) to remotely experience the Lokas other than their own.

The personages whose words are recorded in scriptures seem to have taken it for

granted that the readers would be able to somehow figure it out! To illustrate, let us

review a few references of Gitā: apart from the verses /15/16-18 that employ

‘Purusha’ in Samashty sense, and in /8/8, 10 and in /10/12 too; the verses /2/15 and

60 certainly imply sense of a Vyāshty! Use of the term ‘Vibhum’ in Gitā/10/12

stands out as an instance when an effort has indeed been made to clarify that the

verse points at a Samashty Purusha. Likewise, in /2/59-60 a term ‘Dehee’ (a

conscious being occuupying a ‘Deha’ (a human body) points at a Jeeva. In verse

/5/13 the ‘Deha’ is said to have nine doors (openings for eyes, ears, etc),

suggesting that it is a human body for which the term ‘Pur’ also is used (as a simile).

So ‘Dehee’ is same as a Vyāshty (Kshara) Purusha, an embodied Jeeva.

Many examples can be cited of scriptural practice (of Upanishadas particularly)

when they do not at all use the qualifying terms ‘Samashty’ or ‘Vyāshty’ (for

Purusha or his consciousness) even when it is most required to clarify their intents.

On enquirying with some scholars, they after consulting Sanskrit dictionaries

opined that the term ‘Samashty’ simply points at an aggregate (collection) of

several Vyāshties. On presenting this author’s opinion on their relationship, they

opined that it could well be possible if Samashty is composed of a subtler stuff that

is able to govern from within the Vyāshties (if it pervades them); but that called for

placing Samashty at a higher hierarchical position than its Vyāshties. Their reply

was: though this author’s opinion is not reflective of prevalent understanding of

those terms, it can not be ruled out either.

The required confidence to suggest here the perception of this author really came

only after he connected with a book “Ātma-vijnāna” of Swami Yogeshwarananda

where he places ‘Samashty Chitta’ higher than the ‘Vyāshty’ Chittas. Now, Chitta is

the very seat of human consciousness. His contribution is discussed a little later in

the context of his clarifications of many experiences (of Samādhi states in quite

recent times) and statements of the Theosophists and other reputed persons like

Edgar cayce. Anyway, this term ‘Samashty’ as is used on these pages conveys a

sense that it occupies a higher hierarchical status than its Vyāshties. Yogavāsishtha

states in /3/121/37, 42, etc that no relationship – like that between an experienced

inanimate ‘object’ and a conscious ‘subject’ (Jeeva) – is just not possible (between

two totally dissimilar things unless both exist in some unifying reality!



So there has to exist a certain unifying principle underlying both of them! That very

principle is here termed as the consciousness of Samashty Kshara Purusha. That

enables subjects, the animate Vyāshties, to experience the inanimate objects of

the world, both being located within the consciousness of Kshara Purusha! Insights

of this type collected from several sources suggested that the material cause of 1)

the conscious Vyāshties, Jeevas; 2) inanimate Kshara Loka, and 3) even the

experiences as get generated within the Vyāshties of Kshara Loka – all are made

up of a subtler stuff of consciousness of Samashty Kshara Purusha! It is surmised that

similar relationship could well be existing between the Samashty consciousnesses

of the two higher Purushas and their Vyāshties (Ātmās and Parātmās).

That logic enabled this asuther to reason out that any Vyāshty is ‘naturally’

restricted to experience only its own Samashty Purusha’s Loka! But Gitā clearly

says that (Aksharāteeta) Purushottama or Paramātmā is the Ishwara of all the three

Lokas! So Tāratam’s assertion that Aksharāteeta Purusha (the purushottama) had

arranged for 12000 Parātmās to remotely experience the existence in Kshara Loka

seemed well within His powers. He made it possible for all Parātmās, without having

to be bodily present in Kshara Loka, to experience it – by simply arranging to have

the experiences/inputs transmitted to them over the said ‘Inter-Loka’ spiritual

linkage spanning all the three Lokas. That also served interests of equal number of

Ātmās and Jeevas (Brahm-srishties) to have an experience in due time of Brahm,

the eternally blissful Aksharāteeta abode! He thus has been contended as the only

one capable of ‘supernaturally’ arranging to remove those ‘natural’ restrictions,

placed not only on the 12000 Parātmās but also on that many Ātmās and Jeevas.

In a single stroke His plan seems to have provided for the three different orders of

Vyāshties of all three Lokas to eventually experience His three-fold existence (in

the three different Lokas) as three Purushas located therein, as well as their Lokas!

But they all are required to put in efforts to first grasp the scriptures as augmented

by Tāratam in a school that happens to be our world (‘Bhoo’ upa-Loka of a larger

Kshara Loka); as only here such lessons can be learnt as per His scheme. That is

why all the truths were were manifested in ancient times too in our world! He also

then arranged to manifest Tāratam Vāni in our world, so that adequately evolved

Brahm-srishties would connect with it and make efforts to grasp it. As He has

intended that the linked up Parātmās must be awakened in a pre-determined

time-frame as disclosed in Tāratam, He should be relied upon to ensure that the

Brahm-srishties are provided with intellectual abilities timely – and also justify the

faith He had reposed in them!



1.6 Lokas and Upa-Lokas

It would be in fitness of things to review the very need to coin a term like ‘Upa-

Loka’ in order to denote it as one of the self-sufficient parts or sub-divisions, of a

larger Loka. This point is not made explicit in scriptures. On the contrary the same

term ‘Loka’ is also used by them for what is here called as an Upa-Loka! That

confusing practice seems to have seeped in Tāratam too! Both talk of three Lokas

at some places and of fourteen at others (Gitā talks of three Lokas only)! How

many Lokas are there: three or fourteen? Tāratam provides a clue by declaring

that consciousness of a Brahm-srishty needs to transcend experiences of all

fourteen ‘perishable’ Lokas (Upa-Lokas really) – in order to reach imperishable

Akshara Loka. This makes it clear that Tāratam’s Kshara Loka is one out of those

‘three’ larger Lokas that really happens to be a collection of fourteen Upa-Lokas!

Bhāgawatam too seems to agree with this contention, but in a round-about way,

as will hopefully become clear from the following brief discussion.

Tāratam’s Kshara, Akshara and Aksharāteeta Lokas are in all probability the

‘Prithwi’, ‘Antariksha’ and ‘Dyu’, collectively called as “Loka-trayam” by Arjuna in

Gitā/11/20 (after he was given the divine sight). His terminology would have been

dictated by that of the Vedic Verses including its ‘Shanti-pāth’. In spite of this, we

see many scholars, including the great Shankaracharya, interpreting Arjuna’s

“Lokatrayam” (and also perhaps that of Gitā/15/17) as composed of the three

(Upa-Lokas) known as ‘Bhoo’, ‘Bhuvah’ and ‘Swah’ (‘Swarga’). These three terms

are also called as ‘Vyahritis’ (used in Gayatri Mantra, for example). Such confusion

could well have occurred due to use of same three Vyahritis as symbols to

esoterically point at different things or principles! Taittiriya Upanishad/5/1-5 lists four

instances of their symbolic use: Lokas (the terms as used by Arjuna), heavenly

bodies, the different Vedas and also different Pranas that circulate within every

human body!

The esoterically revealed truths of scriptures need to be handled with certain

caution. That is why it is openly said therein (at times) that those should not be

passed on to unauthorized persons or that the same need to be learnt from the

spiritually evolved beings, the Sat-gurus. But in absence of such Satgurus a wide

scope gets left for scholarly seekers of knowledge to interpret such truths to best of

their capabilities that such interpretations have become sources of controversies;

yet it also prevent the mankind from discarding the scriptures altogether, saying

these are beyond the grasp of mankind. It may even be said that proper time had

not arrived to manifest some more truths, to augment the scriptures. That finally

happened in 17th century AD to enable at least the 12000 Brahm-srishties to

comprehensively grasp such truths and benefit therefrom. Tāratam makes it a point

to consistently use same three adjectives for Samashty Purushas and their larger

Lokas, as also three different terms for the embodied entities inhabiting them.



‘Bhoo’, ‘Bhuvah’ and ‘Swah’ are the three Upa-Lokas that perish periodically, after

a certain time known as a ‘day’ in the life-time of Brahmā (creative power behind

the Kshara Loka) – also known as a ‘Kalpa’ – during the ‘Naimittika Pralaya’ as is

mentioned in Bhāgawatam/3/11/17-39. The same three Upa-Lokas get re-created

later when it is the time for next Kalpa to commence, only after the ‘night’ of

Brahmā (of equal duration as the ‘day’) elapses! The said three Kshara Upa-lokas

are collectively termed “Bhooh-adi-trayah” (the three Lokas: Bhoo, etc) in 28th

Verse, and “Triloki” in the next verse; but in 30th verse the same three are referred

to as “Tribhuvanas”! But such terminologies could not prevent from inferring that

these three were not the Taaratam’s Lokas – the Kshara, Akshara and Aksharāteeta

– and were really the three perishable Upa-Lokas out of a total of fourteen, created

and destroyed after lesser intervals of time, i Brahmānda n every Kalpa.

All of these fourteen really are the ‘Upa-Lokas’ of Tāratam’s Kshara Loka that

together get annihilated (but after an extremely long duration) at the time of what

is termed as ‘Prakrit Pralaya’ of entire Kshara Loka (or a Kshara Brahmānda). The

verses 17-39 really relate to calculations of time-frame of entire Kshara Loka, all of

its fourteen Upa-Lokas; but the verses 28-30 pertain particularly to its three Upa-

Lokas that get annihilated in what is termed as ‘a Naimittik Pralaya’, after every

‘Kalpa’, a day in the lifetime of Brahmā. Clubbing these three Upa-Lokas as a

‘Triloki’, it is said that the three perish once a Kalpa or 36000 times in the entire life-

time of Kshara Brahmānda (Loka) that is said to last for 100 years of Brahmā (a year

of 360 days)! Scriptures also divide the fourteen Upa-Lokas in two equal parts each

of seven. The lower ones (Nos 1-7) are not relevant to our present discussion; only

those from 8th to 14th are; and these are respectively named as Bhoo (8th), Bhuvah

(9th), Swah (10th), Mahah (11th), Janah (12th) Tapah (13th) and Satya (14th). These

serial numbers are allotted by author only for sake of clarity.

Names of 10th and 11th are given in Bhāgawatam/3/11/29; and those from 12th to

14th in /3/13/25, 44. These fourteen Upa-Lokas of a larger Kshara Loka perish after

100 years of Brahmā’s life-span is over, at the time of ‘Prakrit Pralaya’, also often

called ‘Maha-pralaya’ in scriptures. It is said that from Akshara level of reality issue

countless Kshara Brahmāndas (this has been going from times immemorial and this

shall continue for ever), and all of them, after existing for said period, merge into

the Akshara reality! What Bhāgawatam in effect says is this: the four Upa-Lokas,

Nos 11 upto 14, definitely do not perish after the completion of every Kalpa

(/3/11/29); but only the three at Nos 8-10 do (and also perhaps the lower seven).

These three are said to get burnt up ‘by the fire that emanates from Sankarshana’

(“trilokyām dahyāmanāyām shaktyā Sankarshanā-agninā”). That heat, it seems, is

also felt in the adjacent Upa-Loka No 11 (the Mahah) hence the great sages

Bhrigu, etc who generally stay there leave it to move over to the next higher,

‘Janah’ Upa-Loka (No 12). These seven upper Upa-Lokas are mentioned also in the

Vedic Sandhya (prayer).

The sage Bhrigu is one of the foremost sages mentioned in the Puranas. He is also

one of the great ‘see-ers’, one who ‘saw’ and gave to the world a large number of



Vedic Verses. He is declared to be a Vibhooty among the ‘Maharshis’ in Gitā and

that among the ‘Brahmārshis’ in Uddhava-gitā of Bhāgawatam! Such great ones

are said to act as instruments of God to pass on to mankind the spiritual truths from

time to time as they remain alive for entire duration of Kshara creation. Hence they

are termed as ‘Chira-jeevi’ (those who live for ever). They are variously referred in

scriptures, based on their spiritual attainments as ‘Brahm-rishis’, ‘Brahm-Munis’,

‘Maharshis’, etc. They are the ones who are said to descend from higher levels

(Upa-Lokas or Lokas?) from time to time in various parts and cultures of the world to

impart such spiritual truths (as are then accepted by their followers as ‘faiths’). In

short, the same personage could well have been born in different countries, times

and cultures to guide their peoples in right direction – from where they were.

Their statements based on which great faiths were founded might not have been

tampered with, and the Jeevas flow with passage of time through one or the other

of these streams of faiths to make a steady spiritual growth; but when the scriptures

are mis-interpreted and people act on wrong premises, their progress would surely

retard. It is said in Tāratam that such great messangers of God shall appear in our

world during the ‘day of Jāgani’ and would get frustrated to find that the intents of

their past utterances were not grasped properly or had become controversial and

had even caused armed conflicts in the name of religion. Brahm-srishties will, this

time around, furnish more comprehensive knowledge and their words will be heard

with respect by followers of all faiths, it says. That did actually happen in times of

Mahāmati Prananāth and his disclosures of Tāratam, but only to a limited extent.

That did not leave a longer lasting impact. Even the importance of Bhāgawatam

was realized by all sages including Narada only after the great four sages

collectively known as ‘Sanaka-adi’ convincingly demonstrated its efficay.

The message of Tāratam has not yet spread even to a small part of India, but if it

truly is what it claims to be – the disclosure of God outlining His plan for mankind –

it is bound to spread in whole world during the remaining period of Jāgani, in one

way or the other. This present effort as also other activities being undertaken by the

Pranami Samaj (followers of Mahāmati Prananāth) – following a lull of almost three

centuries! – could not have taken place unless inspired by God! The Tāratam Vāni

was brought out of their temples, where it was worshipped in a book form for long –

against some stiff resistence from a part of that Samaj – and placed before society

at large. This nust have happened only as per His divine plan. The confirmation to

this effect was received from the divine “Bhrigu Samhita readings” that this author

received in the end of year 2000 and thereafter! The phenomenon of making

available to some Jeeva a ‘reading’ in form of guidance from revered sage Bhrigu

is perhaps encountered only in India.

But even all Hindus may not today have a belief in his readings. Therefore his

testimony is furnished only for those who do have belief. Sage Bhrigu confirmed

figure of 12000 (Brahm-srishties) and provided a glimpse of future events.

Bhāgawatam too provides a brief glimpses of how present Kaliyuga would end

with coming of Parama-hamsas, Kalki, etc; but in retrospect, in light of happenings



of 17th century, it seems even they would require inputs that Purushottama revealed

through Sat-guru, Shri Devachandra ji and Mahāmati Prananāth. It would hopefully

become clear from accounts furnished later on what happened with Sat-guru. It

seems Purushottama had waited patiently for his arrival to initiate the process of

Jāgani by awakening a Parātmā linked up with him to announce that there were a

total of 12000 Parātmās who were experiencing our Kshara world! The Satguru had

the honour to be the first Brahm-srishty to awaken his Parātmā by devotedly

attending to grasp the intents of Bhāgawatam for fourteen long years!

1.7 Four Pralayas

The chapter of Bhāgawatam/12/4 talks of a total of four ‘types’ of Pralayas (or the

annihilations), three out of which relate to ‘objectively’ experienced reality of our

Kshara Loka. First one, the Nitya Pralaya (discussed later) is mentioned in the

verses /12/4/35-40. The 40th Verse lists the said four Pralayas and says that it is the

power of Kāla (time) that is responsible for all of them. Two annihilations discussed

earlier were the ‘Naimittik’ and ‘Prakrit’ Pralayas, based on references from third

Skandha of Bhāgawatam. The same are also discussed in /12/4/1-30. The fourth

one, the Ātyantik’ Pralaya, was discussed earlier. It refers to a total annihilation of

one’s ‘subjective’ self (not of the ‘objective’ world that is experienced by one). It

happens to the Jeevas who get liberated from bondage of Kshara existence.

Tāratam says there are present only 12000 Jeevas of that, the Brahm-srishty,

category who would accomplish this feat – but only when their linked up Parātmās

awaken one by one from their delusions and they then have audiences with the

Purushottama!

Tāratam however does not directly refer to any of the four Pralayas, leave alone

making it explicit that only its Brahm-srishties are equipped to secure the Ātyantik

Pralaya. Even Gitā/6/21 does not directly point at ‘Ātyantik Pralaya’. The second

part of its term “sukham-ātyantikam”. The term ‘Ātyantikam’, as seen earlier, is

translated by commentators as ‘intense’ in relation to ‘sukham’ – meaning an

intense bliss of union with God. Tāratam says, maximum bliss can be experienced

only by Brahm-srishties after they awaken their Parātmās. Gitā/6/21 does not

postulate that ‘intense bliss’ would be experienced at the time of Ātyantik Pralaya

by a Jeeva. In fact even the Tāratam most often uses a Quranic term ‘Qayamat’

instead of Pralaya. Both these terms are commonly used to point at ‘annihilation’ of

objective world. Thus, both in Gitā and Tāratam, that concept of ‘Ātyantik’ Pralaya

of Bhāgawatam does not come to the forefront. Tāratam speaks highly of Quran,

but it also says that its utterances are esoteric and also asserts that those referred

as ‘Momins’ in it are really the Brahm-srishties; and only they will experience that

Qayamat (that turns out to be the ‘Ātyantik’ Pralaya of Bhāgawatam)!

Let us now consider the ‘Nitya’ Pralaya. It is said to take place every moment but

human senses can not detect the destruction and recreation of Kshara Brahmānda

– like we do not detect, while watching a ‘movie’, the frequently occurring periods

when the screen is totally dark. It may be reasonable to believe that not only the



bodies of all human beings, but even their faculties of consciousness would be

getting destroyed and re-created perpetually; hence it is called ‘Nitya’ Pralaya. In

the darkened cinema hall we merely see a large number of ‘stills’, the illuminated

images that are flashed on screen in quick succession (sixteen times a second!)

interspersed with periods when the screen is totally dark.

That creates an illusion, owing to inertia of any human eye, as if one is seeing the

continuously moving (not in jerks) several illuminated images (stills) on screen.

When synchronized sound effect is added, one perceives not only the ‘moving’ but

also ‘talking’ images. That also is what happens when one recieves the inputs,

supposedly from the sense organs, relating to what is considered as the objective

Kshara world that is evry moment destroyed and recreated with slight change.

Taking cue from this example, it would not be difficult to believe what the verses of

Bhāgawatam/12 /4/35-40 say about why we humans do not experience either the

Nitya Pralaya or even the operations of Kāla that incessantly brings about minute

changes in things of the world after every Nitya Pralaya while recreating it (their

relative positions, etc). Such statements became clear only after many references

were correlated, with other verses like /3/10/10-11 and also /3/5//23-6. The former

two relate to what Kāla (‘Time’in English) constantly modifies the nature, state and

shape of objects of created world from moment to moment as brought about by

the fast changing combinations of ‘Gunas’ of Prakriti, the ‘Samashty’ consciousness

of Kshara Purusha – on a vast scale!

Such changes take place endlessly, so far as any Kshara creation (Brahmānda)

lasts; hence the terms ‘Nitya’ (eternal) and ‘Pralaya’ (destruction) are used jointly,

even though they create a contradiction of sorts! The Verses /3/5/23-6, particularly

verses 25-26, are not easy to grasp, and yet these are very important. “Māyā” is

the power behind the ever-changing created world caused due to the “Kāla-

Vrittis”, variations or operations of Kāla as narrated in these two verses. Māyā is

described as being “sat-asat-ātmak” – indicating that it spans both: ‘sat’ and’ and

also ‘a-sat’. ‘Sat’ points at the existence for ever, the consciousness of Akshara

Purusha. Its Avyakrit Pada (one of the four Padas) is said to create the A-sat,

Kshara consciousness (governing Kshara Loka) – owing to the Kāla-vrittis (like the

projector creates an illusion of moving and talking images on account of the

succession of fast moving ‘still’ projections).

The real and eternal (Sat) alone can create what people call un-real and non-

eternal (A-sat); not vice versa. That hopefully explains why Māyā is said to be “sat-

asat-Ātmak”: one that forms a sort of bridge between Sat and A-Sat. It is significant

to note that Tāratam consistently terms the ‘Mayā’ of Indian scriptures as “Kāla-

Māyā”, the power that creates, sustains and destroys either some or all fourteen

perishable Upa-Lokas from out of Akshara reality. Māyā is said in scriptures to

consist of two powers, those of ‘Āvarana’ and ‘Vikshepana’ but they do not quite

explain how these create the illusion of world. It is suggested that same can be

explained by taking recourse to the simile of a cinematographic projector that

alternately adopts two positions in quick succession: first covering completely



(‘Āvarana’) the source of continuous, homogeneous white light (‘Avyakrit’ Pada of

Akshara) for a while; and then presenting a particular frame of a celluloid film

(Vikshepana).

A continuous stream of light keeps on passing through the frames that come in its

way in a pre-arranged sequence on a spool of celluloid film in quick succession.

That projects a stream of illuminated ‘still’ images on the screen, in quick

succession, but interspersed by periods when screen is totally dark. The role of

cinema projector compares with process of ‘Vikshepana’. Those slightly different

‘still’ photographs are contained in the spool, taken by a special movie camera. It

compares with innumerable, but slightlty different positions from one another of the

world that are created by ‘Kāla-vrittis’ under the direction of God.

Keeping in mind the simile of cinematographic projector: source of intense white,

formless light (the ‘Avyakrit Pada’ of Akshara reality) is transformed by operations

of Kāla-vrittis into projection (Vikshepana) of illusion of phenomenal Kshara Loka

containing innumerable different forms, some of which seem moving. Those minute

changes take place during the brief time interval of Nitya Pralaya (Āvarana of the

Avyakrit Pada). But what corresponds to the spool of that celluloid film that

produces the different ‘Vikshepas’? The will of Aksharāteeta Purusha as it manifests

through Akshara Purusha provides the sequence of changes in the shapes of the

inanimate objective world as well as the subjective selves of all animate beings,

the highest among them being those of the Jeevas. These sequential happenings

in Kshara Loka are envisaged as taking place in what we may termed as the

consciousness of Samashty Kshara Purusha.

The consciousness of Samashty Kshara Purusha is comparable to coloured light

rays that issue forth from projector and fall on the screen to create an impression of

moving images: the Vikshepana that holds Kshara Loka within its womb. In an

ultimate sense the happenings in Kshara Loka can be considered as resulting from

the will of Akshara and Aksharāteeta Purushas. These two Purushas act in unison to

create, sustain and even destroy innumerable Kshara Purushas (when their Lokas

are finally destroyed during Prakrit Pralayas)! Thus the happenings in every Kshara

creation can be envisaged as those dictated by Purushottama’s will (the Sat-Chit-

Ananda swaroopa of God, as would be later discussed in light of Taratam) – even

though it is usually said that innumerable Kshara Brahmāndas issue forth from

Akshara reality only to re-merge in it! His will can not be differentiated from that of

Akshara Purusha or even the innumerable Kshara Purushas. Thus all three Purushas

seem to be one in their essence and God may be said to have a three-fold

existence in His three realms.

One has to imagine that there are fourteen such projectors in operation all the

time for every Kshara Brahmānda, some for Lokas that are subject to Naimittik

Pralaya and others for those which would get destroyed only at the time of Prakrit

Pralaya. Only a Brahm-srishty would be spared the misery of experiencing Kshara

existence, but after its Ātyantik Pralaya (countless other Jeevas must however



continue to endure it)! It would then be said to get liberated from the clutches of

Māyā that produced the particular Kshara Loka in which it was located (its Jeeva-

Bhaava, the continuous flow of experiences within it as a subject (of the objective

Kshara Loka). That is why it is always said in Hindu scriptures that liberation is in

hands of God, or that everyone should seek refuge in His lotus feet for that purpose.

While the experience of bliss of union with Purushottama will be short-lived for the

Brahm-srishtites, it will be un-ending for their linked up Ātmās, ‘Brahm-yogayukta-

Ātmās’; and that is in agreement with what Gitā/5/21 says!

Tāratam talks also of ‘Moha-Jal’, certain zone of ‘nothingness’ that lies between

the Kshara and Akshara Lokas. It is said to be unable to sustain experiences of any

kind to Jeevas whose consciousness may reach that zone. As experiencers, they

will pass into non-existence. The Jeevasrishties, at best will be able to experience

only ‘Vaikuntha’, most superior Upa-Loka at Kshara level, to serve the four-limbed

Vishnu, the Kshara Purusha, in task of governing the Kshara Loka so far as it lasts. At

the time of Prakrit pralaya they will perish along with Vishnu. They had not

conceptualized the reality behind Kshara creation to be a ‘formless’ one, so they

will experience the formful Vaikuntha. As for peak attainment of Jeeva-srishties

who had conceptualized the reality as ‘formless’, and who had still desired to go

beyond Vaikuntha: Tāratam asserts that their consciousness would get emedded in

Moha-jal, the said zone of nothingness. They can not have experiences of Akshara

level reality in absence of the upward linkages.

The spirits of only the Ishwarsrishties and Brahm-srishties will succeed in that task.

Their link-ups with higher Vyāshties act like seeds (sowed in soils of higher Lokas)

that when sprouted grow into trees to bear fruits by way of experiences of higher

Lokas (to Kshara Jeevas) – besides awakening the linked up higher Vyāshties.

These latter would get re-established in their real ‘selves’ or ‘swaroopas’ from their

deluded states resulting from their past downward link-ups. We need to imagine

this tree growing downwards (scriptures too use this symbology). In light of Tāratam

we can discern God’s scheme of things: For Vyāshties of higher Lokas their down-

ward linkages serve them to experience Kshara Loka (again and again, if

required) – the only Loka where God choses to manifest full range of truths of His

reality (in bits and pieces though, and also little vaguely)! But on thoroughly

learning those truths, they get wise about the full spread of sphere of His influence,

and later revert to their real existence, and rise still higher in Akshara Loka.

1.8 Prophecies for Our Age

Our scriptures are replete with references to spiritual influences, say radiations that

emanate from some divine personages in form of subtle light or fragrance that can

influence others to turn to spirituality. Those subtle influences radiate out of them to

illuminate the inner beings of others around them, purifying their hearts, Buddhi

(only loosely translated as ‘intellect’) and enabling them to grasp such higher truths

as are being revealed or explained by them. Such purifying, say spiritually uplifting

emanations are called ‘Divya Teja’ in Hindu scriptures, translated in English as



‘Divine Aura’. The intensities of Auras are pointers to levels of spiritual attainments

or higher levels of divinity present in them. The spirits of such great ones are

blessed with capabilities, via their Auras, of uplifting others who come in contact

with them to seek spiritual guidance. Tāratam terms powerful influences emanating

in Turyateeta states of the Brahm-srishties, when experiencing Purushottama or

Paramātmā via the linked up Parātmās as “Noor”. Everyone possesses an auric

envelope, not so very powerful though – still one remains totally unaware of its

existence. The auric envelope is like an extension of one’s own spirit (self) that can

interact at spiritual level with others.

Those who become favourably affected by auras of great beings do improve their

own auras too, though they may remain unaware of the fact due to lack of psychic

vision that is required to see such auras. But it may transform into their changed

(gentle) behaviour with others, better grasp of scriptural truths, etc. Yogāvasishtha

for example even gives colour shades of auras of some revered sages, saints and

Avataras! In the paintings of such great ones the auras are depicted by way of

shining, envelopes of light surrounding their heads. The auras of such saints need to

be looked upon as His divine instruments to affect others (via them) in what is

known in Indian tradition as ‘Sat-sanga’. The company and blessings of saints,

even when they are present in our perishable (A-sat) world, are said in scriptures to

assist others in establishing their spirits in ‘Sat’, imperishable reality of God. Seeking

Satsanga of saints is considered by the wise as a very potent means of getting

spiritually evolved. It is also true that it comes one’s way only by the grace of God.

Such saints are His instruments to bless the deserving ones and are referred in

scriptures as ‘Sat-purushas’, ‘Sat-gurus’, etc. The Satsanga with them provides an

opportunity to mankind to listen to and grasp the spiritual wisdom as expressed in

their own words, or even their clarifications on truths recorded in scriptures – those

revealed by great ones of the past. While being enveloped by the aura of such a

Satguru, his words can be grasped better by the disciples than when the same are

repeated later by someone else who had heard them directly or even read (if

recorded on paper in books). This is why all scriptures recommend Satsanga, on a

‘one-to-one’ basis, as a very potent means of accomplishing spiritual upliftment

and finally the liberation. In a way, his aura fetches down in gross world the divinity

of God in order to evolve others!

As per Tāratam the most divine Aura spread through Mahāmati Prānanāth (and

earlier through his Satguru) in seventeenth century was so powerful as to perform a

Satsanga of a global spread. The same happening would take place as and when

the remaining Brahm-srishties succeed in awakening their linked up Parātmās. In it

the guru, concerned Brahm-srishty, may not be seated right beside persons whose

hearts are to be purified. Purushottama will make use of such Brahm-srishies’ hearts

as places wherein to manifest His divine influence and then spread it in the world to

cleanse the hearts of entire mankind, particularly Brahm-srishties who have not yet

been able to shed remaining part of their ignorance. This is expected to take place

irrespective of whether or not they become aware of changes taking place within



their psyches, or are even exposed to the concept of efficacy of subtle influences

that come into play during the ‘Sat-sanga’ of Indian traditions.

A world-wide happening is prophesized in Bhāgawatam’s 12th Skandha disclosing

manifestation (‘Avatarana’) of God or Purushottama called ‘Kalki’, expected to

appear in our world to end the malevolent Kaliyuga. Some other Puranas too say

the same. These texts and Tāratam too say that Kaliyuga commenced when Shri

Krishna passed away from our world more than fivethousand years ago – it could

not get a toe-hold till such time as Shri Krishna remained in our world. It is said in no

uncertain terms that as Kaliyuga advances, considerable filth, layer after layer, will

get deposited on hearts of mankind as their thoughts and deeds increasingly start

violating the tenets of Dharma and spirituality.

Only after a highest ever tide of selfish, evil and violent type starts settling down in

the hearts of a vast majority of mankind that the changeover to Satya-yuga will get

initiated in world through the spread of divine influence of God through His Avatara

called Kalki. Bhāgawatam says that the most ancient (Hindu) codes of conduct as

stipulated for different (spiritual) orders of human beings in varying age groups, the

so called ‘Varna-ashrama’ discipline shall almost Vānish as end of Kaliyuga draws

near. It prophesies that the ancient system will then be re-established by two great

yogis, the disciples of Shri Krishna called ‘Devapi’ and ‘Maru’. Their contribution is

only tersely talked of in two verses of Bhāgawatam/12/2/37-8, almost in the same

breath as it had talked in verses 18-22 of the divine acts of Kalki! But manifestation

of Kalki is referred to in other scriptures too.

It is interesting and intriguing too that in 17th and 19th centuries two different groups,

apparently not connected with each other – the disciples and followers of

Mahāmati Prānanāth, the ancesters of present day Pranami Samaj on one hand

and the early Theosophists on the other – arrived at a common conclusion! Based

on their different reasonings and also sources of information (not spelt out clearly)

they concluded that the two yogis mentioned in Bhāgawatam/12/2/37-8 were the

very two personages who had provided them with divine knowledge: respectively

the wisdom of Tāratam Vāni and Theosophy. These two groups believed that they

were guided on spiritual path by Devapi and Maru of ancient times!

The Pranami Samaj based on very clear statements of Tāratam Vāni believes that

Kaliyuga will get terminated much before its specified term specified in scriptures

of 432000 years with the seeds sown by the Sat-guru, Shri Devachandra ji and his

illustrious disciple, Mahāmati Prānanāth; and Satya-yuga would then commence.

The Theosophists on other hand had believed that the world was poised to witness

a ‘New Age’; and ground was being prepared by those personages through them

for a coming changeover around the year 2000 AD (or commencing therefrom) –

from the earlier ‘Piscean’ Age to a new ‘Aquarian’ Age! Then there are also Biblical

statements relating to God’s Day of Judgement, etc. As discussed later, all these

issues on further analysis seem to point at either the same happening or different

stages of execution of His plan leading to that changeover.



Anyway, the accumulated burden of thoughts and deeds of mankind for millennia

will be such as to require intervention of God in form of Kalki, to perform the divine

deeds and prepare for an age of spirituality and enlightenment. The deterioration

in value-system followed by mankind had been on a steep downslide, over the

thousands of years of Kaliyuga. Poor, even grossly incorrect interpretation of

scriptures and utter disregard of scriptural guidance on Dharma and spirituality

were the predominant causes of that downslide; ‘Preya’, that which is desirable,

shall take precedence over ‘Shreya’, that which is right (on path of Dharma). Some

selfish ones shall justify ‘Preya’ by either ignorantly or by deliberately turning away

from ‘Shreya’ by interpreting the scriptures to serve their own interests.

Scriptures say, it will result in conflicts within families, among social groups (castes

included) or sects of various religious faiths, etc resulting in suffering, bloodshed.

Mankind will be helpless against such a tide of happenings that really their own

past karmas had let loose. The Nature (Prakriti) too shall react against disregard

(and ignorance) of scriptural guidance by exhibiting its fury. That is when Kalki will

appear. His benevolent acts of wisdom and also valour will eliminate the wicked

ones to save the good ones to reinstate Dharma in world. His Aura shall reverse the

said downtrend and gradually prepare the mankind for accepting divine truths.

Collating with Tāratam, Bhāgawatam’s references to spread of divine Aura by Kalki

appears to be the same as that spread through the Brahm-srishties who succeed in

awakening their Parātmās. That Aura would act upon the hearts of entire mankind,

making them receptive to grasp not only the truths disclosed in ancient scriptures

but also revealed by Tāratam Vāni; or even those yet to be revealed in present

and future by the Brahm-srishties in the stressful times.

The unexplained term ‘Kalki’, seems to be an ambiguous reference to ‘descent of

the experiences of Purushottama’ – actually of Parātmās located in Aksharāteeta

Loka (awakened after shedding their delusions) – right within hearts of respective

Brahm-srishties. When such unprecedented happenings take place, all the Brahm-

srishties, one by one, would be having the most divine experiences, say audiences

with Purushottama in their Turyateeta states of consciousness (as had happened

with Mahāmati Prānanāth and his Satguru in 17th century). Collating scriptures with

Tāratam: the manifestations of Kalki would take place not only in one human being

(as per Bhāgawatam), but in a total of 12000 Brahm-srishties, one by one, during

the said period of Jāgani and that should gradually reverse the trend of past

millennia to make mankind more amenable to accept that God is very much

present somewhere, monitoring them and still continuing to either reward or punish

them, as the case may be.

The trend of either ignoring scriptures, or even considering them as unacceptable

since they frequently seem to contradict one another, shall get replaced by an

urge to properly interpret them in light of Tāratam and later revelations. Believers of

all the faiths will thank God for timely help in getting them out of the mess that they

had themselves created: firstly by arranging to eliminate wicked ones and also



revealing more spiritual truths through Brahm-srishties! That will provide to mankind

in an effective manner such spiritual truths as were missing in scriptures, in order to

intelligently grasp the facts relating to His three-fold existence and also His role as

the only savior of mankind! The 12000 Brahm-srishties will awaken their Parātmās

during period of Jāgani stretching over 1130 years after the base year of 1678 AD,

when a Parātmā called “Indrāwati” who was linked with Mahāmati Prānanāth was

awakened. This was inferred from the hints contained in Tāratam.

Earlier, a Parātmā named “Sundari or Sundarabai”, the one linked up with Satguru,

was awakened by Purushottama Himself (pleased with efforts of Satguru) in year

1618 AD, around the time of birth of Shri MehRāj Thakur. With passage of time, the

latter came to be known as Mahāmati Prānanāth after his Parātmā, “Indrāwati”,

got awakened in year 1678. Through their awakened Parātmās the two personages

delivered the wisdom of Tāratam Vāni in 17th century. As and when remaining

Brahm-srishties reincarnate during remaining period of Jāgani – and connect with

Tāratam and comprehensively grasp its intents – their linked up Parātmās shall get

awakened one by one. Then Brahm-srishties shall receive their spiritual rewards –

blissful audience with Purushottama! They would then corroborate the truths as

revealed by Tāratam; and in the opinion of this auther, they may disclose even

more truths, if and when required. During a further period of 70 years, all the 24000

Ishwar-srishties too would have received their rewards!

As mankind has hardly received such testimonies during past three centuries or

so, the bulk of them can be expected to be received by mankind in a short time-

span of next 8-9 centuries from now. That surely would be like experiencing a

deluge of divine Aura and spiritual truths, after almost a drought of thousands of

years (other than those of the scriptures) – and this, amidst most disastrous times

brought about both by man and mother Nature! The unmistakable signs of such

disasters are already noticeable. Yet, not even a tiny fraction of Indian scholars,

leave aside the masses, has heard about Tāratam Vāni – even after three centuries

– holding out a hope that the world shall not come to an end. It is therefore difficult

to speculate how the wisdom of Tāratam will spread in whole world, as it claims it

certainly would! His ways of fulfilling promises are inscruitable; we can only pray

God and keep our fingers crossed that a New, spiritual Age shall after all dawn.

We have only a few centuries, as per Tāratam, left to see Bhāgawatam’s prophecy

on end of present Kaliyuga and dawn of next Satya-yuga to be fulfilled and not

over four million years and also all inter-faith conflicts resolved satisfactorily.

Satyuga (also called Krita-yuga) shall then dawn due to incisive influence of His

divine Aura, brought down to our perishable world over the Inter-Loka spiritual

linkages that He would have established long ago – around the time when Shri

Krishna had appeared in world. Those linkages would have served their intended

purpose by end of period of Jāgani. Mankind would have been provided with all

required spiritual truths not made available to them for ages – not necessarily in a

steady manner but in bursts, as and when the Brahm-srishties would make their



appearances and succeed in awakening their Parātmās. A very long period of

steady spiritual growth of mankind (Jeeva-srishties) will thereafter commence!

People will have known what He likes or otherwise, how to worship Him (one God)

– not by giving up their reliance on scriptures of the past; but by grasping their

intents after augmenting with Tāratam (and subsequent information). Tāratam says:

all inter-faith rivalries shall vanish thereafter; however far-fetched (even impossible)

this prediction may seem in backdrop of the history of last several thousand years.

Some signs of a need to to inter-faith dialogue are observable too, if only one looks

for them – apart from a certain revival of interest in re-interpreting the scriptures.

This can be seen from quite a narrow band of popular literature originating in

materialistic West. (it is also read in other countries with considerable interest) that

seems to disagree with prevalent interpretations of Testaments as had for centuries

been within the strict domain of Church to pronounce.

It has kicked up some controvercies. The masses however seem to devour such

material. Without taking sides, it can be observed that these events seem to point

at a revival of interest in the scriptures, a reversal of earlier trend of masses mostly

turning away from them. Such material seems to suggest that certain significant

streams of beliefs were indeed prevalent around the beginning of Christian era that

did not get accounted for in scriptures now interpreted by Church. There also are

the difficulties of translating original texts written in ancient languages into different

modern languages. This problem is claimed to have resulted in several skewed

interpretations of mysterious statements and allegories of Testaments (same is the

case with scriptures of many other faiths). The said literature attempts to present

interesting facts and discussions taking two or more view-points: one based on

prevalent scriptural interpretations and the other of certain ‘rationalists’, men of

science, etc who do not seem satisfied with them.

A view of some others too is presented in the said literature who are inclined to

accept that God could well have revealed Himself in some other countries and

cultures as recorded in their scriptures, or even later till our present times. These

seekers are not uncomfortable with perusing scriptures of other faiths, if called for

to improve their understanding of spiritual truths. They advocate a ‘comparative

study’ of different scriptures to augment their own understanding of spiritual truths,

man’s relationship with God, etc. They are open to considering even the data that

came to light in recent centuries via psychical, even scientific research. All in all,

certain openness seems to be showing up to suggest that they see no harm in

collating all the information they can collect, from whatever avenues!

The Theosophists, reputed persons and psychics like Edgar Cayce (1877-1945) of

USA have talked authentically of New Age, human aura, Law of Karma, gradual

spiritual evolution of soul over several reincarntions, etc. They talked in their altered

states of consciousness about philosophical concepts they were either unaware of,

or were not so convinced about, in their waking states. These issues mainly related

to life-after-life perspective, rather than of only a single-life, of human existence



that is required to be kept in mind (as a possible alternative) in order to

accomplish the grand objective of uniting with God. Those who dwelt upon such

psychically collected data cited the Indian scriptures to show that their findings

were indeed in accordance with at least some other scriptures (if not their own).

Even some Hindus like this author who had once reconciled to a view that Indian

scriptures were not amenable to any contemporary corroboration did find these

recent happenings rather unexpected, though very much welcome. Unfortunately,

most Indians have not had an opportunity to get exposed to such published

literature that corroborates the Indian concepts. Communications from discarnate

spirits, etc too surfaced in West and researchers investigated data available from it.

But, as is always the case, some sceptics do not accept such para-normally

collected data. That could well have induced an urge within the Western psyche to

carry out a re-appraisal of their own scriptures, collating them with other scriptures,

as required – rather than simply abandoning any and every scripture by saying

those can not be reasoned out, hence are unacceptable.

Indian concepts also became subjects of discussion as a result of psychical

research. Hypnotic regression for instance was seen to yield a recall of long

forgotten memories, some of which can possibly be corroborated if relating to this

life; while others could amount to recall of subjective memories of past lives! Then

there was the contemporary literature on beliefs of Freemasons, Rosecrucians, etc.

They suggested, based on whatever their sources of information were, that esoteric

statements and allegories of scriptures made it a point to hide certain higher order

truths from those who were not fit enough to digest them or could even possibly put

them to misuse. In Indian scriptures too we often come across instances when

some great ones are depicted as having openly instructed, while giving out certain

truths, that those needed to be kept secret, or within limited circles of evolved

persons who were worthy of possessing such truths.

Were those truths, even when recorded in scriptures, deliberately left vague or

incomplete? Were future revelations expected to augment them (Tāratam Vāni for

example)? Or was mankind not evolved enough to benefit from such truths as

earlier withheld from them, as Tāratam seems to suggest? Whatever may be the

case, this made scriptures that bit difficult to rationally grasp or defend. There also

exists a possibility that if such truths were expressed in plain terms, masses or their

leaders could have found them unpalatable enough to raise a clamour to either

discard them altogether or even have portions thereof deleted when put on paper.

We see from published accounts that those who proclaimed such truths were

denounced and even persecuted. History is full of such instances. Collating

Tāratam with scriptures adds implicitly yet another angle: scriptures, though not

understood in their times, were also meant to provide certain vague testimonies to

such truths as would be revealed in future! Without that, mankind would not be

inclined to accept such later revelations.



Reverting to view-points propagated in the said Western literature, one can not but

escape feeling that interest in Comparative religion is gradually spreading from

level of scholars to rational, but open minded masses. That literature interprets the

statements of Testaments differently: for example, the prophecy of great ‘deluge’

was interpreted at a place – rather than being considered simply as a cataclysmic

deluge sweeping away the world – as flooding the world with ‘divine light and

spiritual information’ in past withheld from mankind! It is not to say that fears of

global warming and rising sea levels, etc are unfounded. But people are also considering explanations of coming ‘Apotheosis’ – a Greek term for transformation

of man into God – as the expected transformation of men to their true potential in a

spiritual age that they say has already begun!

‘Apocalypse’ was in a book explained as the ‘unveiling in future’ of great spiritual

wisdom’, to be followed by an unprecedented era of spiritual awareness. If that is

what the Testaments, etc had really meant, then Tāratam fully supports them and

even gives some reasons for mankind to (now) become the rightful recipients of its

truths! That Western literature draws quite a parallel with prophecy of Bhāgawatam

as also other Puranas that the Satya-yuga shall dawn as a result of manifestation of

Kalki, contended here to be the Purushottama principle in the world, and through it

the divine truths! Tāratam says its manifestation is the consequence of His divine

intervention to reward the Brahm-srishties and also bring about such magnificent

changes in world as would bring about changeover from present Kaliyuga to not-

so-distant Satyayuga! We will see later how such statements also draw a parallel

with Bible’s Day of His Judgement, etc in light of the ‘readings’ of Edgar Cayce.

That surely justifies the need of a long 1200 year period specified in Tāratam to

clarify misconceptions regarding scriptures and also a need to spread the powerful

Aura of Aksharāteeta realm via not one but 12000 Brahm-srishties, the only ones

capable of manifesting Kalki of Bhāgawatam within their hearts! It is contended

here that only those who are graced with Parātma-yoga (the Brahm-yoga of Gitā)

are really equal to this feat! However, the prevalent interpretations of Bhāgawatam

suggest that only one personage, the Avatāra called ‘Kalki’, would accomplish

everything required to end Kaliyuga and also to usher Satya-yuga. But considering

enormity of this operation, the need of 12000 Brahm-srishties and a 1200 year-long

period, as specified in Tāratam, does not seem unreasonable. Again, it often says

that it is only a one-time occurance in entire life-span of our Kshara Brahmānda

(creation) – and not a routine changeover, one out of 36 million such changeovers

that have either already taken place in world, or shall take place during remaining

life-span of our creation!

Tāratam often praises India as a worthy land for God to manifest His Revelations;

but it also asserts that in coming times the Brahm-srishties would be born in various

lands, cultures and races. It finds flaws with Indians who, believing in life-after-life

existence tend to slacken their efforts aimed at spiritual evolution, liberation, etc in

order to first enjoy comforts provided by this life. They sure draw comfort from the

knowledge that all those aims can be fulfilled in countless lifetimes; so they may as



well defer their efforts to future life or lives, when suitable conditions arise. Instead,

those who believe in single-life human existence, says the Tāratam Vāni, may take

their scriptures more seriously and may tend to follow them right in present life! It

says: the spiritual aspirants of either tradition must comprehensively grasp the truths

given in Tāratam as also in their own scriptures and must develop a faith that the

deserving ones shall not be abandoned by Him. It collates itself with some

prophecies and hints at a precise time-span when He will proffer a helping hand to

those who have faith in manifestation of Kalki; the savior, the Messaiah; second

coming of Jesus Christ, appearance of Imam Mehdi, etc.

It asserts that those prophecies are destined to come true in the period of Jāgani.

Tāratam hints significantly that the followers of various faiths had been expecting

their respective saviors to appear later among those of their own faith; but it is not

necessary that this should happen! This is a sensitive issue and better be left at that.

The inquisitive ones are advised to check up with some books of Tāratam directly.

Yet another of its hints worth mention is: scriptures might also have disclosed future

happenings as if those were the episodes of past eras, rather than of what is likely

to happen in future! Anyway, the spiritual aspirants should hope to connect with, or

say have Satsanga with, some high personages during the remaining period of

Jāgani estimated to last till beginning of 29th century, even though during present

times in 21st century it might seem most difficult! They would receive spiritual help

they deserve, sooner or later – in this life or in next! There is an urgent need to grasp

this message, rather than harbouring negative thought like: can anything good

happen in these days?

Belief in reincarnation, in God’s justice, conviction that efforts undertaken in right

direction are never wasted – and that those shall certainly bear fruits either in this

or future life – is certainly useful. This belief seems to be now gaining ground even

in Western countries via the said Western literature. It is significant that discussions

on such beliefs are not now restricted only to the scholarly literature on religion and

philosophy. These are now spreading to masses via popular literature! But there is

nothing ‘Indian’ or ‘Hindu’ or ‘Buddhist’ about these beliefs; these are universal in

their application. From the said Western literature it seems as if these beliefs were

indeed prevalent (vaguely perhaps) in some communities prior to, and even later

than the time of Jesus Christ; however, they disappeared gradually owing to some

historical reasons. If true, it explains why it is not merely a chance but a divine plan

that is dictating those very beliefs to re-surface among those, and even other

countries, at such a critical period of Jāgani.

It is humbly felt that certain statements of Bible are quite in consonance with what

is being presented on these pages based on Tāratam (mainly collated with Hindu

scriptures). This perception arose only after the concept of Inter-loka spiritual

linkages was articulated and effort was made to express it on these pages. It is

hoped that such correlation with Bible presented in following few paragraphs

would be of some interest to those interested in Comparative Religion. Some more

such correlations would be found in subsequent chapters, as relevant to the topic



under discussion therein. ‘Good News, New Testament’, Today’s English Version of

Bible, published by The Bible Society of India, Bangalore, India (1976 edition) has

been used below for quoting en verbatim certain selected verses. Their effort of

presenting simple English translation of Bible is laudable.

1.8.1 Bible: Hints of Spiritual Link-ups

Following dialogue appearing in Gospel of John/3/1-9 seems suggestive of

spiritual link-ups and a thorough understanding of Jesus Christ concerning the

three levels of God’s reality, somewhat akin to what is revealed in Gitā and

Tāratam

“There was a Jewish leader named Nicodemus, who belonged to a party of

Pharisees [1]. One night he went to Jesus and said to him, “Rabbi, we know that

you are a teacher sent by God. No one could perform the miracles you are doing

unless God were with him [2]”. Jesus answered, “I am telling you the truth: no one

can see the Kingdom of God unless he is born again [3]”. “How can a grown man

be born again?” Nicodemus asked. “He certainly can not enter his mother’s womb

and be born a second time [4]”!

“I am telling you the truth,” replied Jesus. “No one can enter the Kingdom of God

unless he is born of water and the Spirit [5]. A person is born physically of human

parents, but he is born spiritually of the Spirit [6]. Do not be surprised because I tell

you that you must all be born again [7]. The wind blows wherever it wishes; you

hear the sound it makes, but you do not know where it comes from or where it is

going. It is like that with everyone who is born out of the Spirit [8]”. “How can this

be?” asked Nicodemus [9].

Jesus answered “You are a great teacher in Israel, and you do not know this [10]?

“I am telling you the truth: we speak of what we know and report what we have

seen, yet none of you is willing to accept our message [11]. You do not believe me

when I tell you about the things of this world; how will you ever believe me, then,

when I tell you about the thngs of heaven [12]? And no one has ever gone upto

heaven except the Son of Man, who came down from heaven [12]”.

It needs to be noted how deftly Jesus shifted the focus of attention of Nicodemus

from the miracles he performed (and how) to that on highest spiritual truths. Similar

instances are often found in Hindu scriptures too, including Gitā when the focus is

shifted from earthly truths subtly to those of higher order. It seems Nicodemus

neither had any previous knowledge of spiritual truths relating to higher levels of

reality nor had even sought them from Jesus. In all probability, what Jesus revealed

might have not been known to most others of those times. Such truths were

perhaps made available in that land for first ever time; that is why these have been

recorded in Bible! We may now turn the attention to how that ancient dialogue

supports the understanding of Tāratam Vāni and the concept of Inter-Loka Spiritual

Linkages developed based on it.



In the light provided by Tāratam, Jesus seems to be revealing that an aspirant (of

Brahm-srishty category) has to be first ‘born again’ – to identify itself with its own,

‘spiritually’ linked up, eternal Vyāshty ‘Ātmā’ – located in what he called ‘heaven’!

Only thereafter can its spirit (its Ātmā) gain entry into Aksharāteeta Loka that Jesus

termed as ‘Kingdom of God’ [verse 5]. This is apparent from his clarification in verse

6 that being ‘born again’ meams being born ‘spiritually of the Spirit’! Is it the same

as being born in heaven, say in Akshara Loka of Tāratam? It surely is not ‘being

born physically of human parents’ as said very clearly said in 6th verse? That would

rule out the possibility of being born yet again, in some other Kshara body, say in

next reincarnation (reincarnation is not articulated in both Testaments)!

Being ‘born spiritually of the Spirit’ [verses 6 and 8] seems to be the same as

‘awakening of the eternal Ātmā’ from its own delusion leading to a Brahm-srishty

(even an Ishwar-srishty for that matter) identifying itself with its ‘awakened Ātmā’.

The verse John/3/11 says that awakening had indeed happened in case of Jesus,

and that his words were based on his direct experience. The same assertion is

made in verse 13 by saying that he had (earlier?) gone to ‘heaven’ and had

returned therefrom (either in that very life, or perhaps in earlier times)! And he also

said he would return again in future times (after his crucifixion) when several

horrors would be unleashed in the world. We may also briefly review what Jesus

said in John/14 in respect of the two terms, he often employed: ‘Father’ and ‘Spirit’.

In verse 8 his disciple Philip said to him, “Lord, show us the Father; that is all we

need”. Jesus obviously could not have met with his request, so it looks as if he

admonished Philip, as seen from verses 10-17.

He said, “Do you not believe, Philip, that I am in the Father and the Father is in me?

The words that I have spoken to you”, Jesus said to his disciples, “do not come

from me. The father, who remains in me, does his own work [10]. Believe me when I

say that I am in the Father and the Father is in me. If not, believe because of the

things I do [11]. I am telling you the truth: whoever believes in me will do what I do

– yes, he will do even greater things, because I am going to the Father [12]. And I

will do whatever you ask for in my name, so that the Father’s glory will be shown

through the Son [13]. If you ask me for anything in my name, I will do it [14]. If you

love me, you will obey my commandment [15]. I will ask the Father, and he will

give you another Helper, who will stay with you for ever [16]. He is the Spirit who

reveals the truth about God. The world can not receive him, because it can not see

him or know him. But you know him, because he remains with you and is in you

[17]”.

The ‘work’ of 10th verse that Jesus alludes to is not only in respect of miracles that

he used to perform (the focus of curiosity of Nicodemus, ref John/3/2 discussed

earlier), but also of (hitherto not revealed) spiritual truths he revealed. Throughout

the verses 10-17 cited above and 18-26 cited below, he declares unequivocally

that it is the Father who really performs those works, as the ‘Father is in him and he

in Father’. He is also seen announcing [verses 12-15] that he is shortly ‘going to’



Father. This discussion took place at the time of supper, on an evening before he

was crucified. He said, those who believed in him, obeyed his ‘commandement’,

and loved him were (thereafter) slated to perform even greater works! The 16th

verse is enigmatic: he says he would ask the Father who would then give them

some other ‘Helper’ who will ‘stay with them (his obedient disciples) for ever’.

Obviously the ‘Spirit’ that reveals them ‘the truth about God’ is the ‘Helper’ that is

‘eternal’, as per verses 16-17 (a spiritually linked and awakened Vyāshty Ātmā?)!

Then in verses 18-26 he said: “When I go, you will not be left all alone; I will come

back to you [18]. In a little while the world will see me no more, but you will see

me; and because I live, you will also live [19]. When that day comes, you will know

that I am in my father and that you are in me, just as I am in you [20]. Whoever

accepts my commandments and obeys them is the one who loves me. My father

will love whoever loves me; I too will love him and reveal myself to him [21]”. “Then

Judas (not Judas Iskariot) said, “Lord, how can it be that you will reveal yourself to

us and not to the world [22]”? Jesus answered him,”Whoever loves me will obey

my teaching. My Father will love him, and my Father and I will come to him and

live with him [23]. Whoever does not love me does not obey my teaching. And the

teaching you have heard is not mine, but comes from the Father, who sent me [24].

I have told you this while I am still with you [25]. The Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom

the Father will send in my name, will teach you everything and make you

remember all that I have told you [26].

Above verses [18-21] suggest certain ‘one-ness’ of Jesus that would develop with

his ‘obedient’ disciples, by his Father on his own recommendation, and also with

Father is highly significant in context of present discussion. Jesus surely alluded to

‘one-ness’ of his eternal ‘self’ (a Vyashty Ātmā), with the ‘selves’ (Ātmās) of his

disciples, since they would all be existing within the consciousness of Samashty

Akshara Purusha. That becomes clear from what Jesus replied [25-26] to Judas’

query [22]: ‘the Helper, the Holy Spirit’ would teach Judas everything and (even)

make him remember all that Jesus had revealed while he still present among his

disciples (before crucification)! The “Holy Spirit” belongs to ‘heaven’ [John/3/13]

from where Jesus is said to have descended (seemingly the Akshara level) – and

not the ‘Kingdom of God’ a term that he seems to have used for the Aksharāteeta

level. It is the Akshara level of Holy Spirit and the individual Helpers (Vyashty

Atmas) who would be helpful in connecting the seekers (His children) with God!

Yet, Bible does not explicitly distinguish the level of ‘Holy Spirit’ (Akshara) from

‘Kingdom of God’, the Aksharāteeta. It is the same with almost all Hindu scriptures.

The latter ambiguously point at God by using several terms, few of them being Hari,

Akshara, Brahm, Para-Brahm, etc. Returning to Bible, it significantly reveals that

disciples of Jesus (seekers of God) would retain the memories of his teachings!

Why? Only to get those only recorded later in Bible (‘Gospels’)? Perhaps that was

not the only purpose of God. Those disciples must have been men of two higher

categories of Tāratam (other than of Jeeva-srishties). Why would God have given

them the opportunity to be in divine company of His son and learn such truths



directly from him, if they were not going to subsequently benefit therefrom (in later

lifetimes, whichever faith they would be born in then) during the period of Jāgani?

But they would then have to collate their scriptures with all the truths that God had

revealed including in Tāratam. It is then that the benefits of ‘Satsangas’ (divinr

company of the great ones, even of most distanat past would accrue.

For example, let us take the mysterious words of Jesus spoken to a Samaritan

woman recorded in John/4/21-24. Jesus said to her,”Believe me, woman, the time

will come when people will not worship the Father either on mountain or in

Jerusalem [21]. You Samaritans do not really know whom you worship; but we Jews

know whom we worship, because it is from the Jews that salvation comes [22]. But

the time is coming and is already here, when by the power of God’s Spirit people

will worship the Father, as he really is, offering him the true worship that he wants

[23]. God is Spirit, and only by the power of his Spirit can people worship him as he

really is [24]”.

Those words seem to have been clarified by 20th century readings Edgar Cayce

gave regarding ‘Israel’ (hence also the ‘Jews’): it does not point at a particular

geographical area inhabited by Jews (during some period of history of mankind)

and having belief in certain scriptures called Old Testaments. Rather, it relates to

those aspirants who are in search of ways and means of how to reach God (His

highest level)! Are ‘12 Tribes of Israel’ same as the 12000 Brahm-srishties of

Tāratam? It can not be ruled out. A few more statements of Bible are discussed

later along with spiritual truths contributed by the last couple of centuries. It was

possible to muster up courage to locate, cite and interpret the verses of Bible (also

others cited later) as its ‘testimonies’ due to the fact that Jesus finds very reverential

mentions in Tāratam, as one linked up with Aksharāteeta level. It is also the case

with Prophet Muhammad and Holy Quran, but in absence any knowledge of the

letter, it would be inappropriate to comment. However, several of its statements

have been collated by Tāratam with Quran and the seekers can readily refer to it.

1.8.2 Period of Jāgani

Returning to what Tāratam says, all the 12000 Parātmās shall get awakened to their

pre-delusion Aksharāteeta existence only by efforts of that many Brahm-srishties.

After their delusion is shed – lasting only for a minutest fraction of a moment as it is

experienced in Aksharāteeta Loka – they would resume their eternal existence in

their own Aksharateeta Loka! They all would then wake up from their experiences

of existence in our Brahmānda. Earlier, driven by a curiosity, they all had desired

and even insisted to know what Kshara existence was like. So they were deluded.

After their collective awakening, says Tāratam, they would have seen the might of

their Lord, how powerful their delusion was; their utter inability to shed it on their

own, etc. They would realize that their Lord had kept His word. He had forewarned

them that while in Kshara Loka, there would be no one there to put them wise on

the path that led to Him. In the end He assured them that He would render them the



required help by sending them ‘messages’ (certain key statements of ancient

scriptures and also Tāratam).

He had said, only after grasping them they would be in a position to overpower he

spell of His power called Kāla-Māyā, the Māyā of scriptures that governs Kshara

Loka! The awakened Parātmās linked with the Sat-guru and Mahāmati Prānanāth

had provided all that information via the Tāratam Vāni to enable remaining Brahm-

srishties to collate with scriptures. It would develop comprehensive understanding

of His three-fold existence, His Plan for the mankind (and partuclarly those through

whom He had planned all of them to experience the Kshara existence) relating to

how the end of present Kaliyuga would take place, etc. As that understanding

reaches their linked up Parātmās one by one, their return spiritual journies would

begin leading to their own Aksharateeta Loka.

It seems Purushottama had arranged to communicat certain spiritual truths (as

were recorded in ancient scriptures) – though rather incomplete in themselves –

that could later serve as ‘scriptural testimonies’ to some extent of those furnished in

Tāratam Vāni. That would happen when remaining Brahm-srishties would make

efforts! But Tāratam Vāni would surely not have any relevance to the needs of

countless Jeevas. They would not be able to comprehend it, even if they tried to

grasp it! That happens to be the case as they are enamoured of existence in this

perishable realm – pleasures, name and fame that can be enjoyed in it. They keep

on searching from scriptures how to propitiate the deities that operate in this realm

to assist the Kshara Purusha. Hindu scriptures do not disappoint them. They readily

provide required information. Aadditionally, they provide information on higher

levels of reality of God only ambiguously.

God’s power of Maya behind Kshara Purusha’s consciousness thus ensures that

Jeevas do not even aspire to get out of its orbit. Tāratam says, happenings in the

world during the period of Jāgani would certainly glorify the Brahm-srishties, like it

happened first with Satguru and next with Mahāmati Prānanāth. It asks Brahm-

srishties to make haste to participate in the plan that God has drawn up especially

for them, in order to enable them to experience the bliss of His experience, of such

a magnitude as had never been experienced earlier by them! It also reveals the

relatively long period of Jāgani to persuade them to be patient; their turn could

well be round the corner; for God is kind and would never ignore their pst and

present efforts! Contemporary relevance of Tāratam Vāni has to be grasped in

context of both, the gross as also spiritual happenings. Many conflicts are presently

raising their ugly heads disguised as birth-right of everyone to gain material

prosperity by whatever possible means, and also at any eventual cost to

themselves or to others.

That mentality is aided and abetted by distorted interpretations of scriptures. This

thinking and consequent mental pollution spreading fast with advancing Kaliyuga

are certainly disliked by Nature, said the sage Bhrigu in several of his divine ‘Bhrigu

Samhitā readings’ recieved by this author. Nature is reacting to this by way of



‘natural’ disasters, increasingly harsh weather patterns, etc. The Law of Karma

would unfailingly take its course: The guilty will be meted out punishments; and

virtuous ones would be saved. But the sage Bhrigu’s readings talked highly of role

to be played by Tāratam Vāni in bringing about the end of Kaliyuga! He said that

spiritual guidance would be rendered to the deserving ones who made efforts to

follow it. Such readings were particularly comforting as not much had taken place

in the direction of its spread in last three centuries. It was made available in printed

form to society, in a very small way, beginning with decade of 1980’s.



Chapter 2 Our Unique Vārāha Kalpa

Tāratam repeatedly and consistently talks of three (Samashty) Purushas and their

respective Lokas and also identifies distinctly the embodied entities (Vyashties)

dwelling in those three Lokas as Jeevas (mankind) of Kshara Loka; Ātmās of

Akshara Loka; and lastly, the Parātmās of Aksharāteeta Loka. They are the

Vyashties of different spiritual orders who dwell in, and experience their own,

respective Lokas – the way we Jeevas do our Kshara Loka. Their spirits can not

transgress the limits of their own respective habitats (to experience other Lokas) –

unless of course enabled by God to do so, as discussed earlier. Tāratam does not

state this explicitly. This was the inference drawn by this author based on its various

statements (and collating with scriptures) saying that only a few Jeevas while still

located in Kshara Loka, the limited number of Ishwar-srishties and Brahm-srishties,

would be able to eventually experience the higher located Akshara and

Aksharāteeta Lokas.

Had those 12000 Ātmās (the Brahm-yogayukta-Ātmās) been aware of their own

(Akshara) Loka at the time they were upward linked with that many Parātmās, the

latter would sure have have straight away identified themselves with those Ātmās

and commenced experiencing the Akshara Loka. But that did not happen as per

Tāratam. They instead started experiencing Kshara Loka. It is thus inferred that

those 12000 Ātmās must themselves have been, at the time of their upward link-

ups, under a delusion that they were such and such Jeevas existing in Kshara Loka.

Only that could have led those Parātmās to become recepients of experiences of

their linked Ātmās, say to identify with respective Kshara Jeevas, the Brahm-

srishties) those Ātmās were earlier linked with! Thus both, the 12000 Ātmās and that

many Parātmās started experiencing that they were such and Brahm-srishties. As

for those Parātmās, in spite of their linkages with Ātmās, they started identifying

with such and such Brahm-srishties, the moment their delusion commenced!

Tāratam does not disclose all that, but it could be inferred when grasping its few

verses that talk of an intermediate stage when the Brahm-srishties will identify

themselves with (their earlier linked up) Ātmās – before they do that (one by one)

with the respective Parātmās. It is in the second stage that the Brahm-srishties

would succeed in experiencing the Akshara Loka, and also Purushottama located

there in a Vyashty form of Shri Rāj ji! That is really the ‘parama-gati’, ultimate

spiritual destination of their spirits, while still being bodily located in Kshara Loka. It

would however happen only after the linked up Parātmā awakens. But only when

all the 12000 Parātmās awaken (one after the other), they would once again

(collectively) resume their Aksharāteeta existence.

Then the linked up Ātmās would get lodged in the highest Upa-Loka at Akshara

level and would remotely experience the Aksharāteeta Loka for ever, through their

respectively awakened Parātmās! The Kshara Brahm-srishties’ spiritual links will get

severed as they themselves will disappear from Kshara Loka without leaving any

trail! That is the ultimate liberation for any Jeeva that the Hindu scriptures talk of



(the Ātyantik Pralaya of Bhāgawatam). They do this without disclosing process of

liberation, and that it can happen only after the most deserving ones out of them

get linked with Brahm level of reality (the Parātmās located there). Purushottama

had not explicitly disclosed that plan in earlier scriptures revealed to mankind, as

per Tāratam. An effort was made to review as best as possible if and what was

given in the scriptures of His plan and when it would likely get executed during the

life-span of our Kshara Brahmānda (in which Kalpa or Manwatara).

2.1 Durations of Yugas, Kalpas

To a rational mind it would appear that present age of our creation – and its further

break-up into Kalpas, Manvantaras and Yugas – is best left for the scientists to pass

judgement on, but Hindu scriptures have made it a point to talk of such issues. They

give some fixed, yet different durations of four Yugas that cyclically occur in world,

also exhibiting different characteristic traits of human nature that predominantly

surface up in those yugas. Typically, these traits relate to: the accent on ethics and

morality, or otherwise; leanings towards spirituality or otherwise; the extent of

acceptance of scriptural guidelines, etc! The nature of time remains unchanged;

but as inspired by God the mankind does seem treading such paths as would lead

them either to peace and harmony enabling spiritual evolution; or to disregard the

tenets of Dharma leading to chaos. All this happens in accordance with Law of

Karma. God adjudges the spiritually evolved Jeevas in chaotic times, when they

are called upon to decide on whether to follow the guidelines of scriptures or not.

In absence of a previous occasion or even an interest to peruse the calculations

concerning durations of Yugas, etc the best policy for this author should have been

to steer clear of this topic. But that would have left out of the gamut of discussion a

topic of much contemporary relevance, often mentioned in Tāratam Vāni: the

drastic reduction in life-span of our present Kaliyuga from that indicated in the

scriptures; and more importantly, why! Tāratam traces causes of that curtailment to

the happenings that took place towards the very end of preceeding Dwapar Yuga,

as recorded in Bhāgawatam. Certain Jeevas would have been graced with

Parātma-yoga, by creating upward spiritual linkages of their Ātmās (with the

Parātmās)! Chapter 3/11 of Bhāgawatam outlines how to calculate durations of

Yugas, Kalpas and indeed, the entire life-span of Brahmā (of Kshara Brahmānda).

Commonly accepted figures are given below, along with an opinion of perhaps a

lone but learned individual that this author had incidentally stumbled upon.

Brahmā, who has the power of creating Kshara Brahmānda, is said to have a life-

span of 100 years. His day, (a day-and night cycle really), is called a ‘Kalpa’. It is

said to last for 1000 ‘Chaturyugis’ at a stretch. Now, every Chaturyugi composed of

a group of four cyclically appearing Yugas is said to last for 12000 ‘Divya Varshas’

as per /3/11/18 (including the periods of changeovers from one Yuga to another).

It is commonly understood that Gitā/8/17 too refers to a ‘Kalpa’ but without

disclosing precise duration of every ‘Chaturyugi’ and using a general term ‘Yuga’

in place of Chaturyugi. Duration of both, a day and night of Devas (the deities) is of



six months duration of men. Gitā/8/24 too discloses this, but discreetly. The Devas’

day-and-night cycle thus lasts for a full year having 360 day-night cycles of men.

Bhāgawatam reckons a year of 12 months, and every month of 30 days for

calculating life-times of ‘devas’ (divine, samshty beings) and also Brahmā (same

as is found in other scriptures too). Most scholars opine that a ‘Divya’ Varsha (year)

is same as one year of Devas (360 years of men) who assist the Tri-devas (Brahmā,

Vishnu and Mahesh) of our Kshara Brahmānda in governing it. Based on this

understanding they calculate durations of Yugas, Chaturyugis, the Kalpas, and

also of Brahmā’s hundred years. The Kshara Brahmānda lasts for Brahmā’s 100

years. The sole differeing view is that of Shriram Sharma, a yogi, the founder of a

welknown institution known as ‘Gayatri Pariwar’. He does not agree with a ‘Divya’

Varsha (year) being held as one year of ‘devas’ (or 360 years of men), the opinion

held by most authors.

Shriram Sharma says that a ‘Divya-abda’, a Divya Varsha is simply a year mankind

experiences on our planet (located around the equater) as it revolves around the

sun, the most glorious (‘Divya’) object; and it should not be mixed up with one year

of Devas, of their 360 days. Perhaps Devas are conceptualized as being located at

the poles experiencing a 6 months day and also a night. If his opinion is accepted,

then the figures quoted below of durations of Yugas, etc right upto the whole

lifetime of Brahmā, as are commonly accepted and worked out by most scholars,

will need to be divided by 360! Without entering into that controversy, let us for the

present move forward with commonly held views on durations of Yugas.

A ‘Chaturyugi’ composed of a cycle of four Yugas (cyclically repeated over and

over during the entire existence of our Kshara Brahmānda) is said to last 12000

‘Divyabdas’ or 4.32 million years (that is, 12000 multiplied by 360) years of men. The

four Yugas are: Sat (or Satya), Treta, Dwapar and Kali. Their unequal life-spans are

said to be in proportions of 4:3:2:1; and the smallest among them, Kaliyuga, like the

one mankind is said to be presently living in, has a life-span of 432,000 years; that

of Satya, Treta and Dwapara Yugas would respectively be of 4, 3 and 2 times that

figure. Our present Kaliyuga is said to have commenced as soon as Shri Krishna left

our perishable world for His imperishable abode (from where He had come). Now,

the Kalpa, a day of Brahmā, is said to be made up of 1000 Chaturyugis; hence it is

of 4.32 billion years duration.

The life-span of the creating power Brahmā, hence also of our Kshara creation

(Brahmānda), is said to be of 100 years duration, or composed of a total of 36000

Kalpas or 155.52 trillion years of men! As per /3/11/33, it is said to be divided in two

equal halves, each called a ‘Parardha’, or 50 years of Brahmā’s life (or 77.76 trillion

years of men). In /3/11/34-6, the first and last Kalpas of 1st Parardha of Brahmānda

are respectively termed “Shabda Brahm” or the “Brāhm Kalpa”, and “Pādma”

Kalpa. Likewise, the first Kalpa (or at least one of the early ones, referring to what is

mentioned in Māheshwar Tantram, discussed later) of 2nd Parardha that mankind is

presently passing through is termed as “Vārāha” Kalpa.



Every Kalpa, a day of Brahmā, is further sub-divided into fourteen smaller

durations, the ‘Manwantaras’, each one corresponding to period of reign of a

divine personality called a ‘Manu’, the ‘lawgiver’ in it. The humanity is said to be

located presently in 28th Kaliyuga of “Vaivasvat” Manwantara, based on

Bhāgawatam. Other Puranas too say the same, but unlike them Tāratam Vāni

asserts that some unprecedented happenings as had never before taken place in

our creation (and also shall not take place in its remaining lifetime) shall be taking

place in present Kaliyuga. It says: due to awakening of Parātmās in Aksharāteeta

Loka, and consequent spread of most divine Aura in the world through respective

Brahm-srishties, hearts of mankind will get cleansed of the malevolent influence of

Kaliyuga! That would drastically reduce its life-span from 432000 years to the time it

indicates, only few thousand years! Now, this is quite a prophecy not only relating

to earlier said 1200 years period of Jāgani, but also to remaining part of Kaliyuga!

What is so special about our Kaliyuga, Manwatara or even Vārāha Kalpa? After all

time is time: whether of one Kalpa or another. So, the happenings as predicted to

take place (even vaguely) in scriptures needed to be searched for, if pertaining to

the astounding ones as expected to take place in our times. Keeping that in mind,

effort was made to peruse scriptural prophecies for our times. In Tāratam Vāni of

17th century we find mentioned a short time-span of 1200 years wherein we are at

present located (the period of Jāgani). Bhāgawatam talked 5000 years ago of the

future appearance of Kalki at an undisclosed time towards the end of Kaliyuga of

432000 years duration! Other texts dicussed later only say factually that Brahmā of

our Brahmānda was unable to create our Vārāha Kalpa after Brahmā’s previous

night was over (in its three Upa-Lokas). But it is not articulated if that happening

was so unprecedented. It is only disclosed that a higher power called “Mānasa”

had to intervene (without mentioning its hierarchical level)!

It is not explicitly said why it happened or whether it was due to the necessity of

bringing in our world the divine ‘Mānasa-putras’ who were linked up with Ātmās

who had ‘awakened’ once, as contended here (if this had factually happened).

Are these Manasa-putras some of those who are termed as Brahm-srishties by

Tāratam? Most ancient mention (perhaps of trillions of years ago) to our Vaivsvat

Manwantara, the seventh one of Vārāha Kalpa, can be found in the text of

Yogāvasishtha in context of times upto which the great sage Vasishtha would keep

on visiting (off and on) our world for sake of disclosing the spiritual truths, like he did

to Shri Rama then (this text is discussed at some length a little later). But the

Vaivasvata Manwantara has been alluded to in two quite unkown texts – even in

scholarly circles – as the one wherein happenings, very similar to those disclosed

by Tāratam would take place!

Tāratam has said emphatically that it would stand corroborated by ancient

(welknown or otherwise) scriptures. But as can be seen from this discussion, only

those two unknown texts do that to a very good extent. Hence these are the only

two supposedly ancient texts that are cited in books authored by Pranāmi scholars

in support of that assertion of Tāratam. But Tāratam most of the time refers only to



Bhāgawatam to explain its intents. It is seen that welknown scriptures too do not

say ditto of what Tāratam does, so we can draw the support of former’s testimonies

only on some salient points made by it not on all). At the same time Tāratam does

not generally contradict scriptures (or vice versa) either on spiritual concepts or

even happenings taking place in our times. This is the context and backdrop for

carrying out a search for possible causes of the astounding happenings that

Taaratam talks of.

2.2 Yogāvasishtha: Vaivasvat Manwantara

The text of ‘Rāmāyana’ is known to be one the two great epics that Hindus revere,

‘Mahabhārata’ being the other. It was authored by the sage Vālmiki who was a

contemporary of Shri Rāma and His guru Vasishtha. All of them had lived during the

end of Tretā Yuga. That Yuga was succeeded by Dwāpar Yuga, by end of which

appeared Vedavyās followed by Shri Krishna. The sage Vālmiki is said by scholars

to have vividly painted an account of ‘ideal’ life lived by Shri Rāma, the son of king

Dasharatha. That is why Shri Rāma has been held in very high esteem for thousands

of years by Hinus as an ‘ideal’ to be emulated by the mankind. Based on the text

of Bhāgawatam (and also other texts) Shri Rāma was an earlier Avatāra of Vishnu,

who returned in the end of Dwāpar Yuga as Shri Krishna.

It needs to borne in mind that different scriptures have used the term ‘Vishnu’, at

times to point at Kshara Purusha and at others at the Akshara Purusha and even the

Purushottama – as typically seen in case of the ‘Vishnu Sahastra-nām’, regularly

recited by many spiritual aspirants. Tāratam, and several other ancient scriptures

(though a bit ambiguously) say that Vishnu is the Akshara Purusha’s ‘Sabalik’ Pada

(Mahāvishnu) that really gets into a dream-like state (as Narāyana or Vishnu) in

which He gets pointed at as the ‘Chaturbhuj’ (four-limbed) Vishnu, the Kshara

Purusha. When we talk of Vishnu’s Avatāra, particularly as Shri Rāma and Shri

Krishna we have to be careful to associate them them with lower levels of reality;

particularly that of Shri Krishna.

The massive text of Yogavāsishtha is a great spiritual discourse given by Vasishtha

to Shri Rāma when as a youth, after completing studies (still for no obvious reason),

had started showing preference to lead an ascetic life-style, in search of eternal

truths. Most people like this auther normally peruse an ‘abridged’ Hindi (or other

language) translation of Yogāvasishtha like that of Gitā Press, Gorakhapur, UP,

India. But even that runs into slightly less than 700 pages! Hence, locating a

suitable concluding remark from it (as required) proves to be quite a task; and this

discourse really is a part of still larger text of Ramāyana authored by Vālmiki,

(hence it is commonly called as ‘Vālmiki Rāmāyana’). The text of Yogavāsishtha is

often treated as if it were an independent text, though it is said to be a part of

Vālmiki Ramāyana. In the latter, Shri Rama is often projected as an ideal whose life

and deeds need to be emulated by all while facing similar difficult situations while

treading the path of Dharma (righteousness).



It is only in later texts like Adhyātma Rāmāyana composed by Vedavyās (really, a

part of larger Brahmānda Purāna) that the life and teachings of Shri Rāma are

outlined. In it He is depicted, perhaps ambiguously, as ‘Paratma’ and also as

‘Purushottama’ (discussed later). It does not elucidate both of these terms, yet it

may be useful to review imports of this text in relation to what Yogavāsishtha

reveals about ‘Paratma’ in a rare verse and tying it up with Turyāteeta state of

consciousness of a yogi – his ‘Parama-pada’, the highest spiritual goal.

Then we have yet another, an immensely popular text called Rāma-Charita-

mānas’ that was composed about 400 years ago in a dialect of Hindi, not in

ancient Sanskrit, by a scholarly saint-poet Tulasidās. Hence it is easily understable

by masses, at least of north India. It is also known simply as ‘Tulasi Rāmāyana’and

is said to have been based on ancient Sanskrit text, Adhyātma Rāmāyana (the

relevance both would become clear later). It can be found in large number of

Hindu homes, often cited in religious literature as an authoritative translation or

commentary on ancient Rāmāyana. Some of its verses are so popular and have

sunk so deep in mass psyche that they seep into day-to-day conversations to

explain any point.

That inspired this auther to tie up the time of composition of Tulasi Rāmāyana with

manifestation of Tāratam Vāni (taken up later for discussion) in the light of an

inconspicuous remark of Brahmā made for Nārada, found in ‘Mahātmya’ portion of

Adhyātma Rāmāyana, about how profound are the truths revealed in it. When

giving out the spiritual truths, the Tulasi Rāmāyana depicts symbolically, and in

similes, Shri Rāma as God or Brahm personified, and as ‘Maryādā Purushottama’

(the term is discussed later). All this is mentioned here to point out how the

ambiguities of scriptures (particularly about Atmā and Parātma) seem to have

been planned by God to gradually dimish with passage of time – right from the

most ancient times of Yogāvasishtha till the present period of Jāgani!

It had puzzled this authour for long as toā how the text of Yogāvasishtha covering

a very comprehensive account of a discourse the great sage Vasishtha had given

to Shri Rāma (over several days at a stretch) survived the onslaught of time for over

millions of years! Shri Rāma was in a dilemna then on the right spiritual path to be

followed. How could the sophisticated philosophical articulations of Vasishtha,

often cited on these pages in support of Tāratam’s assertions of higher states of

consciousness (Turiya and Turyāteeta, attainable by Jeevas only of its two higher

categories) reach us without suffering any mutilation? When was it transcribed on

paper? This issue is also discussed later in context of a divine scheme of God that

diligently preserves complete records, the ‘Ākāshic records’ of any and every

thing or event that had occurred in world even in the most ancient past, together

with accounts of Karmas. These Kārmic accounts relate to both, those that have

borne their fruits already and those yet to do so, of any Jeeva)

It is likely, the authentic accounts of that discourse were extracted from Ākāshic

Records afterwards. It is commonly believed that it had taken place by end of the



Tretā Yuga of our present Chaturyugi located in Vaivasvata Manwantara of Vārāha

Kalpa! By this belief: By the year 2012 AD, over 51 centuries of present Kaliyuga

must have passed already. Stretching further back, full Dwāpar Yuga of twice the

duration (432,000 years) of Kaliyuga too must have earlier elapsed before Treta-

yuga ended! Towards end of that Tretā-yuga the sage Vasishtha is commonly

understood have given that discourse; in short, at least 869,000, years ago! How

was it preserved without any mutilation for so long? Such a curiosity drove this

author to peruse it again in search for clues, if any, that might have been missed

out earlier. To his utter surprise, even disbelief, it turned out that it was delivered

trillions of years ago, for the first time and could have been repeated on a number

of later occasions, in several subsequent Kalpas!

The Sarga 3 of Mumuksha Prakarana says that Vasishtha had delivered his

discourse to Shri Rāma when both had been present in 72nd Tretā-yuga of ‘Brāhma’

Kalpa, an early Kalpa of ‘first’ Parardha – and not in ‘Vārāha’ Kalpa, of ‘second’

Parardha that the mankind is presently passing through! Vasishtha had also said to

Shri Rama, using his divine powers that events unfolding then – and it included the

appearances of them both – had occurred not only in past, but would also occur in

future Kalpas! Subsequently, in 14th Sarga of Poorvardha of Nirvana Prakarana, he

disclosed that in some distant past he had visited the sage Kakabhushundi, who

was a ‘Chiranjeevi’ – one having the powers to survive for aeons of time and even

retain the memories thereof (like sage Markandeya could, as would be seen later)!

He had then introduced himself to Kākabhushundi as a son of Brahmā, as perhaps

erroneously commented in the text. It seems based on other scriptures that

Vasishtha was a ‘Mānas-putra’, the son of ‘Mānasa-deva’, a higher power than the

said Brahmā of Kshara level.

Anyway, Vasishtha had then said that he resided in a certain ‘Sapta-rishi Mandala’

and was ordained to keep on visiting our world, from time to time, upto the

‘Vaivaswat’ Manwantara – that is, our present one! The ‘Sapta-rishi (literally, seven

great sages) Mandala is termed in English as ‘The Great Bear’ constellation of

seven stars of our galaxy. As per Hindu belief, the great sages dwell in those stars.

But what is so special about our Vaivasvata Manwantara? Why was Vasishtha

required to reveal from time to time the most profound spiritual truths only till then?

Were his words going to serve the purpose of ‘scriptural testimonies’ (to whatever

extent possible) to more comprehensive truths that were planned to be manifested

much later in Vaivasvata Manwantara – say, Tāratam Vāni? It is significant that just

before Vasishtha briefed Shri Rāma on said meeting with sage Kākabhushundi, he

had clarified (in 13th Sarga) about what the term ‘Yoga’ meant: It was the ‘means’

of realizing ultimate reality of Brahm or Paramātmā!

Vasishtha then disclosed: There were two means available to mankind to meet

that goal; first one relied upon acquiring divine wisdom, ‘Jnāna’, of His real ity (like

Shri Rāma was ar the time engaged in), the ‘Jnāna-mārg’; and the other one was

‘Prāna-nirodha’ – ‘Prānayama’, etc. The latter is commonly termed as ‘Yoga-mārg’,

like the one outlined in sage Patanjali’s ‘Yoga-sutras’ (this is the text most referred



to in present times). Bhāgawatam talks mostly of ‘Bhakti-mārg’, apart from the

other two. Thus we see three major ‘mārgs’, the ‘paths’ prescribed in scriptures for

the aspirants to choose from; and it is often debated in Hindu religious literature

about which one of them is easiest to follow or is even the most superior.

Vasishtha then disclosed significantly that the term ‘Yoga’, as understood by most

aspirants (and it is the case till date!) is the one outlined by Kākabhushundi, ‘Prāna-

Nirodha’. He then went on to narrate to Shri Rama what he learnt about it from

Kākabhushundi. It is recorded in Sargas 14-27 of Nirvāna Prakarana (Poorvardha).

After that, Vasishtha proceeded to inform Shri Rama in Sargas 29-42 on efficacy of

learning the spiritual truths from a Sat-guru who had himself realized them. He then

narrated his own experience as he learnt such truths from Shiva (in previous

lifetime perhaps) when he used to reside near mount Kailash, Shiva’s abode in the

Himalayan region – in Tibet now – engrossed in grasping the intents of scriptures.

Vasishtha told in no uncertain terms how he got into a Samādhi state while intently

grasping the discourse of Shiva!

Above episode demonstrates not only the importance of grasping divine truths

from a Sat-guru but also the efficacy of doing so in his vicinity (the so-called Sat-

sanga)! Both these aspects are repeatedly emphasized in scriptures and in

Tāratam too. It sure is an up-hill task to present in brief (that too in English) the

articulations of revered sage Vasishtha, particularly his philosophical concepts. The

text is also studded with many anecdotes of even further distant past and several

amazing similes (‘Drishtantas’) to drive home the points he made. Those simililes

can be found to have been used by other, later day sages as can be seen from

subsequent texts, though not that well elucidated as in Yogavāsishtha, particularly

in respect of lower three out of a total of five states of human consciousness. Most

importantly: Shri Rāma is said to have attained Samādhi while intently grasping the

discourse of Vasishtha, by the time it was about to end; and Vasishtha had to

awaken him therefrom!! This is explicitly recorded in the text. Vasishtha preached

‘Jnana-marga’ and prove its efficacy. Tāratam too says the same: Brahm-srishties

must grasp its inents thoroughly, as only then would they make any headway on

the path leading eventually to experience of Purushottama (Brahm).

2.3 Parama-pada, ‘Nishkalanka’ Parātmā

There is also available a publication of Chaukhamba Sanskrit Pratishthana, Delhi

giving the full Sanskrit text and verse-by-verse Hindi translations, having a spread

more than 1900 pages! Now, articulations of Vasishtha are highly sophisticated in

terms of logic propounded, but are tedious and hard to grasp for commoners.

Hence, it was practical to consult this unabridged version only occasionally in

order to see if terms like Parātmā, Aksharāteeta Loka, etc had at all figured in that

original Sanskrit text. This effort proved its real worth only when an invaluable verse,

34/22 was fortunately located in Nirvāna Prakarana (Poorvardha) in a discourse

that was given by Shiva to Vasishtha (recorded in Sargas 29-42). It did employ the



term ‘Parātmā’! Its huge implication was found to have been completely missed by

the commentaters, no doubt due to to lack of exposure to wisdom of Tāratam.

The verse says: in order to secure the ‘Parama-pada’ (highest spiritual attainemnt)

a yogi has to first get firmly grounded in Turiya state and then rise still high – upto

Turyāteeta state – to be one with a “Nish-kalanka Parātmā”! This highly significant

phrase points at a Parātmā who is devoid of any ‘Kalanka’, any bad name earned

due to some past (wrongful) act; say to one who has washed off that Kalanka with

some worthy deeds later on, or even after living through any sentence meted out

to her! It is perhaps the Yogāvasishtha’s way, however indirect it may be, to reveal

what Tāratam says: It was injudicious for Parātmās to have (even playfully) insisted

on experiencing how it was to exist in miserable Kshara realm, when they were

eternally (already) existing in most blissful Aksharāteeta Loka! It had invited their

delusion, shedding which on their own would turn out to be very difficult (even for

those divine entities), says Tāratam – via the inputs they would later receive during

their Kshara existence as such and such Brahm-srishties (only when they attained

the rarest of rare Turyāteeta State).

Could that be the ‘Kalanka’ that Shiva alluded to? In the backdrop of Shiva’s

discourse, later conveyed by Vasishtha to Shri Rama, and collated with Tāratam

Vāni, an ‘awakened’ Parātmā can well be said to have become ‘Nish-kalanka’!

Likewise the yogi, who is able to identify in his Turyāteeta state with an awakened

Parātmā, can be termed as one within whose hconsciousness would descend the

highest experiences of tha Nish-kalanka Parātmā. Can such a yogi then be called

a “Nish-kalanka Avatāra”, or “Nish-kalanka Budh Avatāra”? It seems so, as ‘Budh’

relates to one who has demonstrated a capability to attain higher, or the highest,

‘state of consciousness’, or say ‘Buddhi-vritti’ (as it is alternately termed), called

‘Turyāteeta’! While in it, would descend within the yogi the experiences of (his

linked up) by now ‘Nishkalanka Parātmā’ – one who has shed her delusion! Such

terms, as and when used by scriptures are not necessarily explained at all (or even

satisfactorily), particularly in context of prophecies relating to high personages.

The followers of Mahāmati Prānanāth for example claim that he was the one who

was prophesied in ancient scriptures as the would be ‘Nishkalanka Budh Avatāra’!

The term ‘Budh’, is also found in Gitā/4/19, /5/22 (immediately after the often cited

verse /5/21 talking about Brahm-yogayukta-Ātmās), and 10/8, in connection with

those awarded the Vibhooty-yoga and Buddhi-yoga. Elucidation/derivation here

of the term ‘Nishkalanka Budha Avatara’ is based on Yogavāsishtha’s verse, 34/22

of Nirvana Prakarana (Poorvardha) quoted here en verbatim: “Sthairyenakālatah

swasthā nishkalankā Parātmanā; turyāteetādi namatwādapi yāti parama-

padam”. It can not be said with certainity whether more such references exist in

Yogāvasishtha. It could well be a lone reference this auther fortunately stumbled

across relating to role played by a Parātmā (even this term is unexplained in the

text) in securing for a Yogi his highest spiritual goal, ‘Parama-pada’! Its significance

lies in the fact that it hints at a possible tie-up of the yogi with a ‘Nishkalanka

Parātmā’ – but only when in Turyāteeta state –an awakened Parātmā of Tāratam!



This is perhaps the best possible corroboration one can have of Tāratam Vāni from

a text said to be the repository of Vedāntic wisdom. It is not possible to provide the

nuances of Shiva’s discourse whose recipient was a sage like Vasishtha, who even

attained Samādhi pondering over what was being revealed to him! By way of a

backdrop of this discourse, it is given in the text that Vasishtha once saw divine

light in great profusion appearing before him and that it got converted soon into

the two forms of Shiva and his divine consort “Umā” (also known as “Gauri” or

“Pārvati”). He appropriately prostrated and worshipped them. Then began the

divine discourse as Vasishtha enquired: what was the most appropriate way of

worshipping the highest reality (‘Devārchana’)? In brief, Shiva disclosed that as that

reality was an ‘A-kritrim’ (primeval) principle, not made up of previously created

stuff, it can not be worshipped using any created stuff (‘Kritrim’), say like garlands,

incense sticks, etc!

Shiva said that the highest principle is called either as ‘Paramātmā’ or ‘Shiva’ and

is the root cause of all that gets created later, including him and his consort, as

they were present before Vasishtha then (and consciousness present within them)!

Thus, being the very source of awareness or consciousness: that principle is

‘Jnana-āswaroopa’. The ‘Jnana’, or knowledge thereof is the only offering that is

really acceptable to It; but for that to happen, the mind of a yogi has to be at

peace, unperturbed and focused on It! Shiva further said that It is one with, and

also separate from all Jeeva-ātmās (Jeevas or Jeeva-Ātmā combines?); so every

yogi – only such a Jeeva-ātmā combine – has to first get firmly established in true

conviction of his being one with a Parātmā (and how). That might well have been

the purpose behind Shiva’s appearing before Vasishtha and to inform him how a

Jeeva (a yogi) can get established first in Turiya state of consciousness – in order to

be one with an Ātmā – and next, the Turyateeta state to be one with Parātmā.

Tāratam says the same: a Brahm-srishty established first in its Ātma-swaroopa (in a

Brahm-yogayukta-Ātmā) in Turiya state alone can eventually get established in its

linked up, awakened Parātmā, an embodied Vyashty of Aksharāteeta Loka’, and

through her have an audience with Vyashty ‘form’ of Purushottama (Shri Rāj ji)! That

Vyashty form is ever present in Aksharāteeta Loka for His ‘objective’ experience!! It

needs to be kept in mind that Tāratam talks of that Loka as a ‘formful’ one. Within it

dwell those ‘formful’ Parātmās and Purushottama too. On the other hand Vasishtha,

throughout his discourse, seems to have given an impression of alluding to Brahm,

as a ‘Samashty’ principle – the cause both of ‘subjective selves’ (Jeevas) and also

objective reality that is experienced – and even to ‘Ātmā’ as Samashty Akshara

reality (as gathered from commentaries). He does not talk of Vyashty Ātmās who

might be present at that level, yet he talked about some Parātmā with whom a

yogi of this perishable world could possibly be linked with!

Sage Vasishtha did not elucidate the term Parātmā. Same was the case with other

personages whose words are recorded in Bhāgawatam, Adhyātma Ramāyāna,

Upanishadas etc. The commentaters have therefore either ignored such rare,



mysterious references to ‘Parātmā’ or even proceeded to presume that it alludes to

Paramātmā (further equated by Gitā with Purushottama) – a Samashty principle!

This was clearly observable in commentaries of the said texts (discussed later).

These texts, on few occasions, employ the term Parātmā for Shri Rāma and Shri

Krishna too – when they were bodily present in perishable world! In verses 7/25,

9/11 of Gitā, Shri Krishna reveals: He was not really a Vyashty Jeeva of Kshara

world (as many thought He was), whose consciousness was confined only to His

human form seen by them; but He really, as some Samashty principle, pervaded

all the Lokas, and governed them from within (verses /10/3 and /15/17)!

Lack of understanding of such verses of Gitā coupled with generally observed

lack of interest on part of scriptures to explain the ‘Samashty-Vyashty’ relationship

could have thwarted the urge (if any) on part of the commentaters to develop a

much needed conceptual clarity on it. That is why it became necessary for this

author to first conceptualize that relationship, based on understanding the auther

developed of scriptures and Tāratam Vāni. That led to formulating the need of an

‘Inter-Loka spiritual link-up’ of a Parātmā in Brahm (Aksharāteeta level) through an

Ātmā of Akshara Loka (both Vyashties) with a Brahm-srishty located in Kshara

Loka. It was argued that only such a link-up could provide an ‘objective’

experience of Purushottama in a Vyashty form, after a Brahm-srishty succeeded in

subjectively identifying with a Parātmā in Turyateeta state. It was reported as this

auther’s thesis in Hindi published by Prananāth Mission, New Delhi in the year 2005.

2.4 Views of Other Texts/Tāratam

The rare reference of Yogavāsishtha cited above could be located few years after

that Hindi book and it went a long way to assure that this auther had not erred in

formulating the concept that Parātmās were indeed located at Brahm level. Then

were located a few verses of Bhāgawatam that almost equated Parātma-nishthā

with Brahm-nishthā, re-confirming that point. Subsequently dawned the implication

of Mundaka Upanishada (discussed in next chapter). It conveys that Ātmā (Brahm-

yoga-yukta-Ātmā of Gita, one linked up with a Brahm-srishty), after experiencing

Brahm, would attach itself to it – like an arrow released by a strong archer from his

bow would remain pierced in the target aimed at! As per Tāratam, it would happen

only with 12000 Ātmās as they get lodged in highest Upa-Loka of Akshara Loka –

but ‘after’ the period of Jagani is over in the world; when all the 12000 Parātmās

had ‘collectively’ awakened to their Aksharāteeta existence. In short the target

aimed at by every such Ātmā would be its own (linked up) Parātmā!

In some scriptures God, the GodBrahm principle, is termed as ‘Tat’ (‘that’, any

‘object’, anything different from ‘self’), while others say: “Aham-Brahm-asmi” – ‘I’

verily am the Brahm; and such assertions outwardly seem to contradict each other.

Such a reality can not surely be ‘experienced’ if its experiencer merges his or her

‘subjective self’ with it. In order to make such claims The ‘self’ needs to experience

it ‘objectively’ – by retaining its subjective identity – at the same time remaining

united with, or attached to, the Brahm. In this backdrop, statements of Tāratam can



be interpreted as follows. ‘Samashty’ as well as ‘Vyashty’ forms of Brahm can be

experienced: as Samashty, by way of experience of blissful Aksharāteeta Loka

and as ‘Vyashty’, in form of ‘Shri Rāj ji’; but only after ‘subjectively’ identifying with a

(Vyashty) Parātmā!

Even if the subjectivity of such a yogi should remain intact, his yogic experience

would need to be of some unique, ‘formful’ object – different from that of any other

object – and not of a ‘formless’ Samashty principle. In latter case that experience

may not retain any uniqueness. An often cited scriptural statement employed by

the guru to explain the principle of Brahm to a disciple – “Tat-twam-asi” had turned

out very difficult to comprehend as ‘Tat’ means ‘that’; and ‘Twam’ as also asi’

respectively mean ‘you’ and ‘are’. So this phrase literally means “you verily are

that (Brahm)”. ‘That’ is obviously not any and every ‘thing’ normally coming with in

the range of human consciousness; it has to be something special, present at

some eternal level of reality called Brahm. In other words, for Brahm (Purushottama

principle) to be experienced ‘uniquely’, it has to present itself as a ‘formful’ object

during a yogi’s Turyateeta state of consciousness, in order to really produce any

‘unique’ experience worth a mention (capable of description) and corroborated

by someone else.

Should the very subjectivity of a yogi vanish, then nothing would remains of him

(his Jeeva-bhava, Jeeva consciousness) to proclaim before the world that he has

experienced (or it is possible others also to do so) the Paramātmā or Brahm?

Tāratam only adds: All human beings are not endowed with such capabilities; still,

even those who are, would need such testimonies during the period of Jāgani,

from time to time, to get instilled with nedded encouragement and confidence that

such a ‘highest goal’ is achievable. They would then make requisite efforts. But

Shiva had said in a few verses that ‘Parama-pada’ (obviously of an ‘experiencer’)

can not really be described; it had to be attained in one-ness with the Parātmā.

Vasishtha also significantly conveyed to Shri Rama that it would not be acquired

by study of any and every scripture, but he did not either name the scripture that

could help secure the ‘Parama-pada’, or reveal when/where it would get made

available to the mankind!

Vasishtha only said that the discourse of Shiva caused him to get into the state of

Samādhi for a ‘Muhurta’ (a measure of time)! It is anybody’s guess whether Shiva

passed a little more information to Vasishtha, when he got into his Samādhi that he

did not in turn pass on to Shri Rama verbally, as is recorded in Yogavāsishtha about

existence of Parātmās, Brahm (Aksharāteeta Loka), etc. In view of that poosibility,

it can not be said if similar truths were not eventually passed on by him to Shri

Rama when latter too attained Samādhi as the discourse of Vasishtha was about to

end (Sargas 127-8 of Nirvana Prakarana, Poorvardha)! It is certainly possible that

divine truths are passed on to a disciple by an elevated guru, even when both are

present in perishable world, after the former first gets into a higher state of

consciousness (several types of Samādhi are described in ‘Yoga-sutras’ composed

by the sage Patanjali) in the vicinity of a qualified guru.



Coming to our recent times of 20th century AD, from the accounts of Swamy

Yogeshwarananda we see that truths of operations of different components of what

we term as a human ‘soul’ – and even the technique of attaining such a state –

were learnt by him through his guru in a Samādhi state! As we will see later, when

his guru touched his forehead he instantly went into a Samādhi state that lasted for

several hours at a stretch! This much has been clearly stated by the Swamy in the

Preface of his extremely enlightening book, ‘Ātma-vijnana’ (‘Scince of Soul’). As

can be expected, he would have been quite qualified, say spiritually evolved

āenough by that time, to receive that grace of guru and learn the truths that are

not that at all elucidated in scriptures in a manner that can be grasped when in

‘waking’ state of consciousness.

Referring to that rare mention cited from Yogāvasishtha, a few more instances also

were found in other welknown texts (Bhāgawatam and Adhyātma Rāmāyana)

wherein the term ‘Parātmā’ was indeed employed, yet not explained. This situation

surely is puzzling in the context of enormous expanse of Hindu scriptures. Only a

solitary effort was found making an unsuccessful attempt at elucidating the term

‘Parātmā’ – in an effort in fact to distinguish it from the terms ‘Anātmā’ and Ātmā –

in its very first chapter entitled “Shri Rāma-hridaya” of a text called Adhyātma

Ramāyāna. It gives a discourse of Shri Rāma to his devotee, Hanuman. It sure

seems that without an exposure to Tāratam Vāni, the commentaters of this text

have failed to note that one of the several queries of Pārvati raised before Shiva

was: how can Shri Rāma (a Parātmā), bodily located in Kshara world be equated

with ‘Purushottama’, as was the contention of Shiva?

It was implicit in her query: how can a Parātmā, and also the Purushottama, exist

in our Kshara Loka? Similar query arose before this author after seeing Gitā’s verse

10/37 that Shri Krishna was Himself a Vibhooty – but the commentaters did not

express surprise: how is it possible when He was ‘Purushottama’ (ref 15th chapter),

whose divine Teja (influence or light) when manifested in any Jeeva made it His

Vibhooty! In other words how can He be both: the Purushottama and a Vibhooty

too! We also see Him addressed as “Parātmā” by few great ones in the text of

Bhāgawatam. Such doubts can be resolved if recourse is taken to the concept of

‘Inter-Loka’ spiritual linkage established with the grace of God, as propounded

here, among Vyashties dwelling in different Lokas! Shri Krishna’s inability (Anugitā

Parva) to repeat the discourse of Gitā (after the war was over) was due to the fact

that He was not then ‘yogayukta’ with Brahm then. Perhaps His linkage was not

operative as it was on the earlier occasion when delivering the discourse of Gitā.

This suggests He was right in saying that He was a Vibhooty too!

Tāratam Vāni clarifies: The higher levels of reality entered into Shri Krishna’s being

at their will and even left Him in the early part of His divine life. Same could well

have happened again: before, and sometime after, the discourse of Gitā! It can be

added that Mahāmati Prānanāth too used to often attain a highest state of

consciousness that his disciples simpistically termed as ‘Avesha’. It must have



been his Turyateeta state (articulated well in Yogavāsishtha) as only after getting in

that state could he reveal the divine truths contained in Tāratam Vāni. Once he

was out his normal self (in waking state), he used to read with interest what he had

uttered during ‘Avesha’ and transcribed by his disciples. This happened off and on,

umptying number of times, till he left the worldin 1994 AD.

While in that ‘Avesha’ or Turyateeta state, Mahāmati Prānanāth manifested the

divine truths concerning Purushottama and His beloved Parātmās, their individual

delusions of existing in Kshara Loka, how and within what period they would shed it

one by one, etc. When out of it, he regained his worldly personality to be aware of

his gross surroundings, to interact with everyone as usual. Tāratam says: during his

Turyateeta state, Mahāmati Prānanāth – rather his linked up Parātmā “Indrāwati” –

was the recipient of those truths from Purushottama that he uttered in our gross

world. Such Revelations were meant only to supplement and complement those

earlier ones as recorded in scriptures – to make them more comprehensible, rather

than negating them. Only the highest reality can decide on how, when, where,

through whom and in what sequence, its truths would be revealed in world – or

even preserved/published in it (if at all) and in what manner!

Reverting to the text of Adhyātma Ramāyāna, perhaps since Pārvati’s queries

were not adequately replied by Shiva then, she would have raised them(not in the

earlier context of Shri Rama, but in some other), as is recorded in a text called

‘Maheshwara Tantram’. But it has so far remained almost unknown among the

Indian scholarly circles. It is verifiable that the clarifications of Shiva, as recorded in

Maheshwara Tantram, are remarkably similar to those of Tāratam Vāni! Shiva also

had disclosed similar facts to Vedavyās in a discourse that was later recorded by

Vedavyās, in a text called ‘Purāna Samhitā’. Both these texts are not mentioned in

any ancient or contemporary religious literature that this author has come across.

Pranami Samaj however accepts them as genuinely ancient scriptures, and even

presents them in their recent literature as ‘scriptural testimonies’ in respect of the

Tāratam Vāni, but the readership (also of the two unknown texts) is quite limited.

Reverting again to Yogavāsishtha, it states in Sarga 127-8 of Poorvardha of Nirvana

Prakarana that after Vasishtha had about completed his discourse, Shri Rama too

attained Samādhi! He ceased interacting with Vasishtha and had to be awakened

therefrom by Vasishtha with effort! This incident was narrated by the sage Vālmiki

(Sarga 128) to his disciple, Bharadwāj! Such episodes suggest: Not only is it

possible to gather truths of a particular higher level of reality in an appropriate

‘type’ of Samadhi; but reverse is true too! The comprehensive grasp of those higher

level truths could lead to its realization, either immediately or eventually (with the

grace of God), when the aspirant is evolved enough. Was that why – if those two

unknown texts happen to be genuine – were not allowed to reach in His scheme of

things even to scholarly aspirants till right time had arrived to awaken Parātmās?

In Sarga 29 of Nirvāna Prakarana (Uttarardha), on being repeatedly asked by Shri

Rama, the revered sage Vasishtha was finally seen to have, reluctantly, disclosed



that he was ‘Brahm-swaroopa’, ‘Jnana-swaroopa’ Paramātmā Himself! Possibly, he

could have got established in Parama-pada earlier but, as dictated by God, it was

beyond the power of his speech then for him to reveal any more truths (like Shri

Krishna was unable to repeat the discourse of Gita later, ref discussion on Anugita

Parva). God had perhaps chosen to communicate only such truths through

Vasishtha as were planned by Him to be revealed at that time! But Vasishtha,

perhaps to evade a query of Shri Rāma on who he really was (his spiritual status in

relation to Brahm), is seen to have replied that words giving out such truths in the

(Kshara) world get contaminated, by ‘Kalanka’, disrepute of sorts!

He was finally persuaded by Shri Rama to ignore such faults (Kalanka) of speech

to satisfy his curiosity! Vasishtha then significantly said: One established in Parama-

pada becomes like a corpse (relative to the world); one does not then interact

with others! This is similar to what Tāratam exclaims in a couple of its verses that

express an astonishment of Mahāmati Prānanāth himself. The verses say: “It really

is a wonder of all wonders to see his own ‘headless’ corpse (in Kshara world)

uttering truths relating to a far off place where his ‘head’ must have been hurled

away to (the Aksharāteeta Loka), seen by the eyes (located on that head)! It

would have been termed a wonder had it happened even once (with him); but it

keeps on happening time and again”! Vasishtha advised (Sargas 29-30) that it is

essential to develop a capability to turn away from all worldly objects to get free

from their lure, and consequent bondage (Avidya) to per force experience the

pleasure, but mostly the pain. This state is not unlike that of a dead person.

He also said elsewhere in that text that only when a Jeeva-Ātmā acquires the

requisite amount of disenchantment, even abhorance for worldly existences that a

path to liberation opens up. He said, Avidya is removed only after one searches for

great ones (Rishis, Munis, highly evolved Jeevas) and cultivates their company (the

so-called Satsnga of Hindu scriptures). Half of Avidya, he remarked, would then

disappear straight away; a quarter of it would vanish when one grasps the intents

of scriptures in light of their teachings; and, as for the remaining quarter, one must

make requisite efforts! All this is not easy, however. The Satsanga too comes one’s

way only when fervently desired and also deserved. When those three conditions

are met, said Vasishtha, Avidya wiould certainly vanish, the as per Sargas 11-12 of

Nirvana Prakarana (Uttarardha)!

Vasishtha defined a Muni thus: one who has Jnana (knowledge) of Paramātmā

and also that of the world (Kshara Loka), perhaps implying that he cares for, even

worries for, rest of the suffering mankind and supplies deserving ones the required

information about God and His ways. It implies that Muni possesses the capability

to get established in higher level of reality to gather the spiritual truths of that level,

and of how to reach there; and later disseminates intelligently that knowledge to

others. Great ones like several Avatāras of Vishnu, Shiva, etc are often depicted in

scriptures as bearing a certain responsibility in God’s scheme of things to shoulder

a burden of saving the mankind, particularly His devotees, from those who are evil

– those who become powerful in times of darkness and ignorance in the world.



Hence, the Avatāras of Vishnu, Shiva along with sages like Vasishtha, Bhrigu,

Vedavyās, Deva-rishi Nārada, etc keep on coming to world from time to time to

spread spiritual truths in order to illuminate the hearts of mankind, as those get

forgottan gradually, with passage of time. They, using divine powers they possess,

foresee the events of future times and even take certain anticipatory steps. A good

example of such a step in respect of our times relates to need, as was once felt by

Vedavyās, the great-grandson of Vasishtha to compose yet another text known as

Bhāgawatam. But this time around it was done, especially by keeping in mind the

needs of ‘Hamsas’ and ‘Parama-hamsas’ who were expected to appear during

worsening times of our Kaliyuga! He was also inspired by the Deva-rishi Nārada to

undertake that task and was advised to especially narrate the truths of divine birth

and deeds of Shri Krishna! That is why Bhāgawatam has first narrated the deeds of

several earlier Avatāras of Vishnu (including himself!) and thereafter given, rather

extensively, those relating to Shri Krishna.

Interstingly, it was seen from first chapter of the said ‘Purāna Samhitā’ that

Vedavyās was not himself satisfied with his own understanding of the highest level

of reality (Brahm): whether there at all existed any level higher even than Akshara!

That explains why all compositions of Vedavyās – a total of eighteen Puranas

(including Bhāgawatam), Mahabhārata, Brahm-sutras, etc – have tended to be

slightly vague on this particular point. Those words are often interpreted by the

commentaters to suggest that Akshara, level of reality higher than the Kshara, is

the highest. Purāna Samhitā is perhaps the lone text – unfortunately unknown in the

scholarly circles – making it a point to dwell on the said dissatisfaction on part of

none other than the great Vedavyās – concerning that highest level, and how he

then went about to enquire into this metaphysical issue. It discloses that verses of

Vedas had bodily appeared before him (obviously in his higher, meditative state of

consciosusness) to provide good bit of additional information!

Yet all the queries of Vedavyās could not be replied by the verses of Vedas. But

they were kind enough to reveal to him that Shiva was the only one who could

enlighten him further. After one year of meditation Shiva is said to have appeared

and given to Vedavyās a discourse that is contained in Purāna Samhitā that he

composed later. It is not disclosed when exactly he did that, but it seems from its

first chapter that it was done sometime after he had composed all the eighteen

Puranas, including Bhāgawatam (and that happened after Kaliyuga had set in).

Shiva disclosed that ‘Aksharāteeta’ (‘Brahm’) was really that ‘highest realm’

wherein eternally dwell the divine Parātmās and also Purushottama in Vyashty

forms, etc. Both, this text and Māheshwara Tantram, furnish almost the same

information as was much later and even more clearly supplied by God to the world

in form of Tāratam Vāni, in 17th century India.

As for these two unknown texts: only scholars can after thoroughly studying them

pass a judgement if these are genuinely ancient, divine in their roots, etc – like

they consider other welknown scriptures to be. If these really are, then these could



possibly have been transcribed some time before the 17th century AD, but later

than the compositions of Vedavyās (his welknown texts). Their manuscripts are

generally understood to have somehow found their way to Mahāmati Prānanāth

and his disciples. They perhaps remained in their custody for three centuries, till

their publication in later part of 20th century.

It is worth noting that these unknown texts are quite vocal in announcing that they

contain highly confidential information which should not be disclosed to world at

large. But some other texts, Tantric texts for example, do that also, to more or less

extents, in order to avoid their falling in the wrong hands, getting misinterpreted, or

even misused. Anyway, that could have been the reason why they might not have

percolated even among the scholarly circles like other welknown texts. Purana

Samhita even discloses a few broad regions of India where 11000 (out of a total of

12000) evolved ones (not alluded as Parama-hamsas’ or ‘Brahm-srishties’) – would

reincarnate in future! But it is not given in it if those 11000 would, after evolving

adequately, in earlier stages of evolution, would reincarnate later in other parts of

the world too. As for remaining 1000, it can only be guessed that they would

reincarnate in other parts of world to reveal either similar truths or certain others,

and also in backdrops of cultural/religious beliefs prevailing there.

After all, spiritual surge has to take place in whole world as revealed by Tāratam,

particularly during the period of Jāgani (surely not restricted to India)! As was said

here in the first chapter, as also would be in this as also in next chapter: some

spectacular happenings have occurred in several fields during the last couple of

centuries or so – particularly in Western countries, but leaving their imprints in whole

world – at an unexpectedly fast pace. Take for example, the fields of science and

technology, psychical research, as also the changing attitudes of people towards

taking cognizance of their implications – rather than relying only on prevailing

interpretations only of their respective scriptures (even an accent on Comparative

Religion). All this had occurred, significantly, during the period of Jāgani, that too

concurrent with a quite noticeable trend of people turning away from scriptures!

Certain rationalistic temper seems to be prevailing in present times, perhaps

brought about by a leaning towards science, calling for either some visible proof or

an attitude to reason out, or coordinate with, all the available data.

Returning to earlier discussion, as for Avatāras, they have carried the burden of

generally guiding humanity, from time to time, on path of Dharma and spirituality.

They are known to perform the deeds of valour, fighting the evil ones when their

influence grows to such levels as can not be countered by the good and righteous

ones. Some Avatāras like that of Vedavyās simply reveal such spiritual truths, on

grasping which hearts of people get enlightened; such weeds of ignorance as if

get removed as were allowing evil tendancies to raise their ugly heads. He spoke

of two great Avatāras of Vishnu: Shri Rāma and later, Shri Krishna, both of whom, by

and large considered by Hindus to be the very personification of God in our world.

Besides them, he also talked of a last Avatāra, the “Kalki”, who is expected to

appear in present Kaliyuga to end it and herald next Satya-yuga.



While the former two are discussed below, the Kalki would come up for discussion

a little later. Summarizing above part of discussion on Yogavāsishtha, revered sage

Vashishtha only casually told Kakabhushundi in quite inconspicuous a manner

(and then to Shri Rāma) that he would often keep coming to world, but only till

‘Vaivasvata Manvantara’ (passing presently). It must have been a very distant

future then! He neither disclosed why he would do so only till then, nor alluded to

concept of Avatāras, particularly that of Kalki. He only tersely introduced the term

‘Nishkalanka Parātmā’ and even connected it up with a yogi’s Turyāteeta state of

consciousness and ‘Parama-pada’, the highest spiritual attainment of a yogi! It

clearly matches with what Tāratam says: In each Brahm-srishty’s state of

consciousness that is higher even than Turiya, he or she would awaken its linked up

Parātmā to her real, eternal Aksharāteeta existence. As she re-unites with her Lord,

the Purushottama (Brahm) principle present there in a Vyashty form, experience of

that blissful reunion would flow down within her linked up Brahm-srishty too!

The descent of experiences of such an ‘awakened’ Parātmā, right within the heart

(consciousness) of its linked up Brahm-srishty, is contended on these pages to be

what Bhāgawatam terms as ‘manifestation of Kalki’, though not so elucidated by it!

It nowhere relates “Avatāra of Kalki” with manifestation of Purushottama principle –

even within the Parama-hamsas for whom this text was especially composed by

Vedvyās. On a rare occasion the text was found to have vaguely associated the

term ‘Parātmā’ with ‘Brahm’ in a discourse commonly called ‘Uddhava-gitā that

Shri krishna gave to Uddhava only days before he departed for His eternal abode.

We neither find Tāratam Vāni supported by scriptures in an ‘end-to-end’ manner;

nor does it seem contradicted by any of the concepts thrown up by the latter. It

only seems that those concepts were beyond the reach of commentaters. But it

was not their fault in a way; the augmenting wisdom of Tāratam was not available

to them. God had planned to reveal it much later, to initiate the period of Jāgani!

It would also be pertinent at this stage to review how the miserlyness or ambiguity

of information supplied by text of Adhyātma Ramāyana had prevented it from

removing doubts on three terms: the ‘Anātmā’, ‘Ātmā’ and ‘Parātmā’. Three

attempts were made by Shri Rama, as narrated by Shiva to explain those terms to

Parvati, his divine consort. This text starts with quite pertinent queries of Parvati

raised with Shiva on spiritual status of Shri Rama whom Shiva had considered to be

at par with Purushottama. He had asserted that by worshipping Shri Rama, Jeevas

could attain liberation. Parvati had wondered: How Shri Rama – once ignorant on

truths (like most other Jeevas are) about Ātmā, Brahm, etc, and one who needed

to be enlightened on these issues by someone else (his guru, the sage Vasishtha) –

can be equated by Shiva with Purushottama (Brahm)? Only Purushottama (God)

could be the cause of liberating other Jeevas, Parvati thought.

In reply to Parvati, Shiva is seen to have narrated complete biography of Shri

Rama in the text of Adhyātma Ramāyana. It contains three important philosophical

discourses that Shri Rama gave. The first one given to hanuman appears right at



the outset in first chapter called ‘Rama-hridaya’. Chronologically it occupies a

mid-position between the other two that Shri Rama gave to Lakshmana; the last

one being known as ‘Rama Gitā’ – only half of which could be grasped by Parvati,

as Brahmā had mentioned to Nārada. To be fair, the doubts of Parvati were such as

would have arisen in any rational minded spiritual seeker.

Whether the clarifications of Shiva were adequate or not can best be judged by

perusing the commentaries on this text published by Gitā Press, Gorakhpur wherein

‘Parātmā’ has sometimes been interpreted as Ātmā and at other times as

Paramātmā! As per Tāratam, Parātmā is neither of the two; it acts as an instrument

for Ātmā to experience the Paramātmā! Unlike ‘Parātmā’, the term ‘Ātmā’ can be

seen to have been employed by scriptures on umptying number of occasions. Still,

in this author’s opinion, one needs to determine evry time whether it is employed at

any particular place in the sense of an eternal Samashty or Vyashty; or, in case of

the latter, whether it points at either the ‘self’ of a perishable or imperishable

embodied entity. Following discussion will hopefully bring out the point and help

grasp the import of remaing two terms, Anātmā and Parātmā.

2.5 Ambiguity on Ātmā

In general, sriptures are ambiguous about Ātmā; at times with quite perplexing

variations. Taittiriya Upanishada in its Brahm-valli for example talks of five Koshas

(bodies) that every human being possesses, all identical in size and shape but

interspersed with one another, and having differeing orders of subtlety of the stuffs

these are made up of. The grossest one is ‘Annamaya Kosha’ (made up of food,

‘Anna’) that is visible to our eyes. Other four remain ever invisible to our normal

eyesight. Almost our contemporary, Swamy Yogeshwarananda (referred earlier),

‘saw’ them with his divine sight and described how four subtler organs that every

human being possesses, collectively termed as ‘Antahkarana’ by scriptures, are

located in said four invisible Koshas, and also function in unison. That‘Antahkarana’

is commonly termed as the ‘soul’ of a human being. But the Taittiriya Upanishada

terms every one of those four subtle Koshas as ‘Ātmā’ of the (immediately) grosser

one that it pervades, and is thus in a position to govern it (the latter) from within!

Thus, one sees a hierarchy of four Ātmās, the subtler Koshas or ‘selves’ – presided

over by the subtlest one called ‘Anandamaya’ Kosha – all acting in a well co-

ordinated manner to create an impression of being a single ‘conscious self’ that

experiences, and interacts with, the outside world via the gross human body! That

hierarchical ‘self’ is variously called by a common man as ‘soul’, ‘Jeeva’ and also

‘Ātmā’ – seemingly the ‘experiencer’ of the world around, performer of deeds.

Those four Koshas also find mention in the Mundaka Upanishada/2/2/7 when

conveying in some vague manner (in verses 1-11) that Brahm can be experienced

through a ‘Parātmā’, in its ‘Anandamāya Kosha’, within a portrion of subtle space

near ‘heart’ area of gross human body. Yogeshwarananda’s observations confirm

part of that statement (without referring to any Parātmā though) as ‘Chitta’, the seat

of human consciousness is located in ‘Anandamaya Kosha’ located in an area



corresponding to that of heart in the gross body! It is there that God is experienced,

he says. But Yogeshwarananda does not talk of three levels of Godhood.

Tāratam says, highest extent of bliss (‘Ananda’) of union with the Aksharāteeta

Purushottama (located in His own Loka!) can be experienced right in the heart of a

Brahm-srishty without the need to physically visit that Loka. Then in Mundaka

Upanishada we find that Samashty Brahm principle is termed as ‘Ātmā’ of all Lokas,

and naturally their Vyashties too, but without explicitly mentioning any order of

superiority among the three as Tāratam reveals! Obviously, such a Brahm can only

be the ‘Param-ātmā’ (superior even to Ātmā, also termed as Akshara Purusha), the

Aksharateeta Purushottama, Ishwara of all three Lokas, as per Gita. Yet another

variation is seen in Adhyātma Ramāyana in the three discourses of Shri Rama,

wherein we find a new term (not used that often in most other scriptures) – the

‘Anātmā’ – explained in relation to both, the ‘Ātmā’ and ‘Parātmā’! In Bhāgawatam

too we find these three terms used (a rather rare instance), in a seemingly casual

way in praise of “Shrutadeva” for Shri Krishna!

Above two instances draw a parallel with Tāratam when critically examined (it is

done later). Shri Rama seems to convey in Adhyātma Ramāyāna that Anātmā is

an insentient (say an image in mirror or what we see in dream?) human form

composed of gross and subtle bodies that attracts the consciousness of principle

of ‘Ātmā’ to manifest within it! In other words, the ‘real’ conscious principle of Ātmā

somehow gets entangled with an inherently insentient or ‘unreal’ Anātmā. But it is

not explained well how these two terms stand in relation to another commonly

used term, the ‘Jeeva’. In another discourse, the contents of human consciousness

or ‘chida-abhasa’ (it may perhaps be simply termed as ‘Jeeva-bhava’) is said to

have been manifested by ‘Paramātmā’ (God). It is implied that it inherently has a

potential to return back to its roots, the Paramātmā – but without specifying any

reasonable metaphysical process that enables the return journey.

Above references have been provided to highlight the extent of confusion

concerning even ‘Ātmā’! These seem inevitable as scriptures by and large talk of

‘Ātmā’ in backdrop of only a ‘two-fold’ classification of reality: the ‘Kshara’ and

that lying beyond it, the ‘Akshara’. So, when ‘Ātmā’ itself is not clearly stipulated as

being eternal, or Akshara (either in Samashty or Vyashty sense), how can one

conceptualize anything lying beyond it, either ‘para-Ātmā (a Vyashty Parātmā) or

even a Samashty ‘Paramātmā’? Mandukya Upanishada (perhaps shortest of all) is

composed of only 12 verses! In it, Ātmā is termed as an ‘Ishwara’ (a Samashty

therefore), an ultimate cause of all human beings, who can experience the former

only in their ‘fourth’ state of consciousness – one transcending ‘waking’, ‘dream’

and ‘deep sleep’ states! Then one is led to believe that Ātmā is like a four legged

reality (the Akshara Purusha?). Yet its last verse seems to suggest as if that ‘Ātmā’

(obviously a Vyashty Jeeva) on attaining its fourth state of consciousness gets

entitled to experience its own (Vyashty) Ātmā (Parātmā?) that is eternal!



So, what is Ātmā: Samashty or a Vyashty; Kshara or Akshara? In light of use of the

term by Tāratam Vāni to point at an imperishable Vyashty, that last verse of

Mandukya Upanishada seems to ambiguously suggest that a perishable Jeeva

can experience in ‘fourth’ state of consciousness its being a Vyashty Ātmā and

thereafter (in some still higher state) it becomes entitled to experience the latter’s

Ātmā, the Parātmā! In that light, an Anātmā of Adhyātma Rāmāyana could well be

a hierarchy of the interspersed ‘Koshas’ (bodies every human being possesses)

that are really insentient (not having attributes of life, perception, mind, etc). Such

attributes of ‘sentience’ as if get implanted within that hierarchy (that we term as

‘soul’ or a Jeeva) through the ‘chida-ābhāsa’ God induces in it! In other words, an

illusion is created within that insentient hierarchy of semblance of ‘sentiece’! That is

the best that could be extracted from Adhyātma Rāmāyana of how the perishable

‘Jeeva consciousness (Jeeva-bhava)’ is created by the ‘Chid-ābhāsa’.

2.6 Adhyātma Rāmāyana

The importance of this text lies in the fact that in it we find employed at several

places the term “Parātmā”, by several great personages of ancient times, while

addressing, or alluding to, Shri Rāma. It is composed of 7 Kandas, containing about

4200 verses in 64 Sargas. It is said to be a part of larger ‘Brahmānda Purana’, one of

the eighteen Puranas composed by Vedavyās. The title itself suggests that it

concerns more with issues related with ‘Adhyātma’ (spiritual issues, those relating

to Ātmā), but given out in context of Rāmāyana, the divine life led by Shri Rāma. In

its Māhātmya (a sort of introduction highlighting the great importance of main text

to follow), the Brahmā (creator of our Kshara Brahmānda) is seen responding to a

query of Nārada on the dispensation for mankind in the malevolent Kaliyuga. He

asked: As Kaliyuga advances, it would turn away hearts of men from the ‘punya

karmas’ (good deeds); so how and when would they re-start performing such

deeds as would lead them to higher Lokas (“Para-Loka-gati”)?

Nārada did not quite specify higher Loka or Lokas he had in mind: whether the two

Lokas superior to ‘Kshara’, or its higher three Upa-Lokas inncluding Swarga. Brahmā

replied: mankind would ignorantly miss the real import of scriptures and indulge in

uncalled for debates and conflicts; and further, this trend would finally reverse only

after they come to learn about the truths relating to the “swaroopa” of Shri Rama,

say the level of consciousness present in Him (Aksharateeta?) as had once been

revealed by Shiva to his consort Pārvati. He then narrated to Nārada the discourse

of Shiva, in short the full text of Adhyātma Ramāyāna! It reveals that Pārvati had

enquired: why did Shiva consider Bhakti (devotion) of, or towards, Shri Rama to be

at par with same as that of Purushottama – in order to secure a sort of entry in a

boat allowing safe travel for Jeevas to cross the vast ocean of Kshara existence?

She meant: why Shri Rāma’s grace is essential for one in order to get ‘liberated’?

Pārvati said, she was well aware of the fact that Shri Rāma was ignorant once and

needed to learn from someone else (Vasishtha) about his Ātma-swaroopa –

implying that if Shri Rāma was really the Purushottama, He should not have been



ignorent about such an issue! Her brief queries are contained in verses 7-15 of first

chapter called ‘Rama Hridaya’. Shiva simply replied: such curiosities are only

natural to arise in one who is a Parātmā! She is thus told that she too (like Shiva)

was a Parātmā! Throughout the discourse Shiva is seen giving the biography of Shri

Rāma, narrating a few instances when some great sages like Vishwāmitra, Nārada

and Ahilyā (a devotee) had addressed Him as ‘Parātmā’ or ‘Paramātmā’; without

really (in this auther’s opinion) addressing all her queries, point-by-point. He also

narrated three important discourses given by Shri Rāma. In fourth Sarga, Aranya-

kānda, we find a discourse that Shri Rāma gave to his younger brother Lakshman,

during their fourteen-year stay together in ‘Vanavāsa’ (to stay in forests) from

Ayodhyā, the capital of His father Dasharatha’s kingdom.

Dasharatha was obliged to order that ‘Vanavāsa’ in line with a promise he had

given in past to Shri Rama’s step-mother, Kaikeyi. The chapter of ‘Rama-hridaya’

contains the queries of Parvati to Shiva and also a very brief discourse given by Shri

Rama to Hanuman (discussed earlier) that took place when both brothers and Sitā

had returned to Ayodhyā. Next discourse, known as ‘Rāma-Gitā’ was given to

Lakshman after Shri Rāma’s wife Sitā, pregnant at the time, was asked to leave

Ayodhyā and she had taken refuge in the hermitage of sage Vālmiki, and in due

time delivered twin sons, Luv and Kush. By the way, the great yogi ‘Maru’ (one of

the two alluded to in prophecy of Bhāgawatam often discussed on these pages)

was a descendant of Kush, the son of Shri Rama, who belonged to ‘Ikshwaku’

dynasty.

Brahmā had confided to Nārada In respect of the discourse of Rāma-Gitā that

even Pārvati could grasp only half of it; while he could grasp only a quarter of what

Shiva had revealed! All the three discourses were studied to see if those answered

all queries of Pārvati. It seemed they did not; that is perhaps, why in this auther’s

humble opinion, she must have raised them again at some undisclosed time (and

occasion), refer earlier discussion on the almost unknown text called ‘Māheshwara

Tantram’. In it we find that Shiva did answer similar queries to the ones that Parvati

had raised in Adhyātma Rāmāyana. He furnished information in it as is similar to

what Tāratam Vāni has revealed regarding the three levels of reality, Parātmās,

their delusion etc!

Adhyātma Rāmāyana, however ambiguous it may seem, does seem to be an

attempt to inform the readers of existence of three – rather than only two distinct

levels of reality (the practice of most other texts). It also seems implying that both,

the terms Parātmā or Purushottama (Paramātmā), by which Shri Rāma had been

addressed also by great sages, really pointed at one and the same level of reality

that it is higher than where the ‘Ātmā’ and ‘Ānātmā’ are located! Only that much

could be gathered from the very brief and even ambiguously worded discourse

called ‘Rama-hridaya’ (in nine verses of first Sarga of Baala-kanda/1/44-52) given

to Hanumān. We see in it an attempt to differentiate the imports of three terms

‘Anātmā’, ‘Ātmā’ and ‘Parātmā’ by employing a simile of three seemingly different

componants of in fact only one and only one continuum, the Ākāsha.



Now, the Sanskrit term Ākāsha denotes not only a void, an empty space that holds

within it all the gross created objects of the gross world, but it also is the first one,

the primary Samashty principle (out of a total of five) that by transforming itself

turns into remaining four. The remaining principles are called ‘Vayu’ (air), ‘Agni’

(fire), ‘Jala’ (water) and Prithwi (land or earth). Whole of the perishable creation is

said to be composed of innumerable permutations and combinations of these five

principles (‘Maha-bhootas’). Such Ākāsha is termed by Shri Rama as the ‘Mahā-

Ākāsha’ in a simile to point at three seemingly Samashty levels of rea lity (rather

than Vyashty, but without quite making it explicit). He also points at two more

discernible levels of this continuum of ‘Mahā-Ākāsha’ (Parātmā?); the second one,

a part of it pervading some body of water (lake) as ‘Jala-avachchhinna-Ākāsha’

(Ātmā?); and third (caused by both of the said two) as the ‘images’ (earlier alluded

‘Chidābhasa’) of what lies outside of (or above) the lake!

It is implied that it is the underlying continuum of Mahā-Ākāsha that is really

responsible in making it possible for the water body (lake) to capture the images of

clouds, etc – as both what lies within the lake (water) and outside of ā it (couds,

etc) are only its transformations. The Mahā-Ākāsha does not in the process get

divided into two or more altogether different components on account of its

transformations. Shri Rama then straight away draws parallels between those levels

of Ākāsha with three divisions of Samashty consciousness “Chiti” – seemingly of the

Brahm or the Purushottama (perhaps to correspond with Samashty Aksharāteeta,

Akshara and Kshara levels) but it seems to have been done (in context of that

discourse) in order to point at the distinctions among Vyashties of Parātmā, Ātmā

and Anātma (that carries a false notion of being a Jeeva due to Chida-ābhāsa, as

discussed earlier).

It was possible to infer that only in light of some understanding of Tāratam. Shri

Rāma did not say anything of this sort clearly (as conveyed by Shiva to Parvaati).

Perhaps it was just not possible (and even intended) to convey that only in nine

verses! The commentaries do not present such interpretations. In fact throughout

this text one (at least this auther) did not get an impression that explicit replies, to

queries raised by Parvati right at the outset, were furnished. There are two more

discourses, a little more in length than the one just discussed; and one finds several

gaping blanks left in them too, both again given by Shri Rāma (to Lakshman). The

commentaters were (perhaps per force) called upon to fill in those gaps. One thing

is significant: Shri Rama did not say He was the “Purushottama”, as Shiva had

contended. But, as we will see later, he did once say He was a Parātmā!

In light of Tāratam a doubt arises: how could Shri Rama have either been a

Parātmā or Purushottama when He was bodily present in perishable Loka? Was He

only ‘spiritually connected’ with the highest Loka through a Parātmā? Again, can

we also conclude that it was a scriptural norm to term anyone of Kshara world,

who was thought to have been graced with ‘Parātma-yoga’ (as presented here),

either as Parātmā, or even Paramātmā (Purushottama)? Well, Shri Krishna did



declare in Gitā that He was the Purushottama (Vasishtha too had to reveal it on

insistence of Shri Rāma, that he was brahm, as seen earlier)! But in Anugitā Parva

He said He was only ‘yoga-yukta’ with Brahm when delivering the discourse of

Gitā; while Gitā itself says at some other place that (only) an eternal Ātmā can be

Brahm-yogayukta (spiritually linked with Brahm)!

Who is the one worshipped by Hindus as the most perfect Avatāra (one in whom

maximum extent of divinity had manifested): A Vibhooty; most perfect Avatāra of

Samashty Kshara Purusha; the Akshara Purusha (the imperishable Samashty Atma);

or Samashty Purushottama (Brahm) principle beamed in His human form? Anugitā

Parva says He was ‘yogayukta’ with Brahm when delivering the discourse of Gitā,

but not thereafter, hence he could not repeat the discourse of Gita on a later

occasion. It seems Shri Krishna only ‘uttered’ such words as the higher level eternal

reality that He was at the time connected with ‘revealed’ through Him! Those words

had got recorded in the scriptures! Now, though both, Shri Rāma (who appeared

earlier) and Shri Krishna are held in highest esteem by Hindus, and worshipped as

God personified, but the scriptures also say, they both were the Avatāras of same

Vishnu, as manifested in the world at different points of time. Some of them reveal

that Shri Krishna was the most ‘perfect’ Avatāra.

Perhaps Shri Krishna was the most perfected Avatāra over a long period of time –

like we human beings evolve with passage of time, over several reincarnations.

This speculation lends credence as to why Shri Rāma hesitated to declare being

the Purushottama. Perhaps He may have been just on verge of being that – with

the spiritual guidance of revered sage Vasishtha and the ideal life that He led. Is

that why He is called ‘Maryādā’ (difficult to say, either on the verge of ‘becoming’,

or one who ‘became’) Purushottama? By the time same Avatāra appeared again

as Shri Krishna, He might perhaps have been fully ‘perfected’! That is perhaps why

Shri Krishna is also called “Shodash (16) Kalā (phase) Sampoorna” Avatāra of

Vishnu: One who has peaked to the 16th phase (commencing from its darkest one,

finally to the ‘full moon’ phase on 16th day). This Upanishadic simile would be taken

up for discussion in 3rd chapter. Tāratam repeatedly gives out how the higher levels

of reality entered into Shri Krishna – and even left Him – in first eleven years and two

months of His divine lifetime (discussed later)!

Whatever is recorded in scriptures may be factual alright, but how can we say that

their factual revelations, particularly concerning the greatest personages were

comprehensive, or in a chronological order? But all scriptural statements were

accepted by later day scholars by simply saying, the same can never be wrong.

Either that, or they did not venture to verify if all clarifications sought by its seekers

(Parvati for example) had really been answered by those whose replies are

respectfully recorded in scriptures (by Shiva for example). We can not presume

that all of their its earlier material was so comprehensive as not to leave any need

of their having to be augmented at some later time. Tāratam repeatedly states that

seekers of truths of Brahm-srishty category were rather frustrated with scriptures, as

they had not satisfactorily answered all of of their queries. So, for long had been in



in search of satisfactory clarifications. Even the occurrence of ‘sakshatkara’ of –

‘realization’ of (or coming face to face with) – the ‘Ātmā’, (the ‘Ātmā-sakshātkara’)

and that of ‘Brahm’ (the ‘Brahm-sakshātkara’) are at times treated in religious

literature as being almost at par.

Yet a few references did obliquely convey that the realization of Ātmā is a pre-

requisite for that of Brahm-sakshātkara’, hence both spiritual milestones are not

really at par (of same level); and Tāratam confirm this perception. But this much is

not clearly and properly given out in religious literature. Prevailing understanding

could have survived for so long owing to a scriptural practice of pointing at only

the imperishable, causative ‘Akshara’ level of reality, on which subsist countless

perishable Kshara Brahmandas. That reality has been termed in scriptures as

‘Brahm’, ‘Para-Brahm’, ‘Parama-Brahm’, etc – again without adequate elucidation

– leading the seekers to believe that all those terms point at same, the ‘Akshara’

reality. Based on what could be extracted from Tāratam, the term ‘Brahm’ points at

‘Aksharateeta’ level and the ‘Para-Brahm’ perhaps at ‘Akshara’.

In Adhyātma Ramāyāna we do not find Shiva explaining ‘Purushottama swaroopa’

as Brahmā had claimed he had done (in its Māhatmya portion) with such a clarity

as would lead the seekers to ‘Parā-Loka-gati’ (spiritual journies to higher Lokas). In

first discourse to Lakshman (verses 19-55 of 4th Sarga of Aranya-kanda) Shri Rama

announced that Paramātmā needs to be experienced by a Jeeva in order to get

rid of its false identification with an Anātmā. The latter is an ‘unreal’ creation of the

two components of Māyā, the ‘Vikshepa’ and ‘Āvarana’, said Shri Rāma. Māyā, the

power of Paramātmā, is said to create both: the external world and also the said

unreal feeling, due to Chid-ābhāsa (Jeeva-bhaava) getting implanted in every

Anātmā, that it exists in the (unreal) world (verses 20-30). Then in verse 31 it is said

that the Jeeva and Paramātmā are really one, in a way of the same essence, but

they only appear to be different n account of devious machinations of Māyā!

In verses 35-7 Shri Rama terms Himself as “Sarvātmā”, Ātmā of every Vyashty (of

only the Jeevas of this unreal world, or also of Vyshties of other two Lokas?) and

advises that everyone needs to remove ignorance with the help of scriptures and

know all about Ātmā and it really being one with Him. Shri Rama said that would

lead to a merger of Jeeva-Ātmā’s consciousness with Paramātmā (verses 43-5).

Then Shri Rama calls Himself ‘Parātmā’ and in verses 45-7 even says – for those who

get attached to Him with Bhakti – that they sure will see the Ātmā manifested

before them! It is also interesting to note that Shiva is not seen intervening after this

discourse to tell Parvati that those were the words of Shri Rāma that had led him to

believe that worship of Shri Rama was at par with that of Purushottama. In context

of Tāratam Vāni and even other texts, who is Shri Rama then: SarvĀtmā, Parātmā or

the Paramātmā?

Let us now see what Shri Rama additionally says in Ram-Gitā, verses 6-62 of the 5th

Sarga of Uttara-kanda. He advised that one must get to know about Ātmā from a

Sat-guru as only that can provide liberation from the bondage of Kshara existence;



the performance of karmas can not really provide the liberation (those would only

provide commensurate fruits, in this very Kshara Loka)! In verses 17-18 we find Him

asserting that Ātmā should rid of identification with a human body – an Anātmā

(bondage of karmas seemingly performed through it) – and (or in order to) have a

direct experience that it is in fact one with a ‘Parātmā’! Only then the Ātmā shall

get rid itself of ‘Moola (original) Avidya’ (Ātma-vibhrama, the delusion, of Ātmā or

of Parātmā?) of being one with Paramātmā (verse 43). But ambiguities in verses of

Adhyātma Rāmāyāna (and also in other scriptures), as presented on these pages,

occurred only in the light of Tāratam. The cited portions of Adhyātma Ramāyāna

were interpreted differently by learned commentaters of Geeta Press, Gorakhpur.

Then we also have verses 28-31 that assert: a Jeeva is really one with Paraāmtmā

but this fact can not be realized unless the false identification with gross, subtle and

causal bodies (Anātmā) is given up. This assertion really seems to suggest that

every Jeeva can be one with a Parātmā. The verses 32-40 then say that the Ātmā is

required to transcend beyond three lower ‘Buddhi-Vrittis’ (states of consciousness),

to get re-established in its own swaroopa. Bhāgawatam says it can be done by

only a Jeeva in its Turiya state. Tāratam Vāni says this can be done only by its two

higher srishties. This discussion clearly points at scriptural ambiguity regarding the

term Ātmā – which gets further compounded with Taittiriya Upanishada that uses

the term Ātmā for even a subtle Kosha (body)! To summarize, the text of Adhyātmā

Ramāyāna, at best, is a half-hearted effort to respond to pointed queries of Parvati

(an opportunity allowed to slip through). Shiva also did not clarify to Parvati that the

discourse of Vasishtha had resulted in Shri Rama getting into a Samādhi state, in

which higher spiritual potentials/knowledge could have descended in Him.

Even when specific queries on spiritual issues were raised with Shiva, he simply

resorted to narrating the biography of Shri Rama including either what He gave out

in His three discourses, or the contentions of other sages on His spiritual status, thus

clearly avoiding any philosophical articulations in support of his contentions. How

then would later day readers be expected to get wise on subject of Purushottama

swaroopa when even an aspirant of Pārvati’s spiritual caliber was not fully satisfied

(as per Brahmā!)! That could have prompted Pārvati to raise similar queries again

with Shiva, but without referring to the earlier occasion; and she was then given a

fuller response in Māshwara Tantram (but not known to scholarly circles)! It may be

relevant to mention here that Shiva too had doubts like Vedavyās once had (refer

discussion on Purana Samhita).

Shiva too resorted to Samādhi in order to obtain required clarifications from beings

of still higher spiritual level than him and he got it finally from Sadashiva, Shiva told

Pārvati, as given in Māheshwara Tantram. That would perhaps have happened

after he had given his earlier discourse (Adhyātma Rāmāyana) to Pārvati. But this

time around Shiva’s clarifications revolved around the personality of Shri Krishna

and His beloved Gopis (rather than Shri Rāma)! When Vedavyās enquired, Shiva

gave similar information to him, but it can not be known whether it happened

before or after Pārvati received it. The ways of God, as the revealer of all spiritual



truths (Gitā/15/15), are strange indeed: we sometimes do not have requisite

queries raised, hence no answers provided; while on other occasions answers (like

in case of Tāratam) are provided but without being told (often) of the queries!

On still other occasions, like in the Adhyātma Ramāyana, we have queries that

are reasonably clear, but no clear answers provided! On yet another occasion we

find Shri Krishna even volunteering, before the Mahabharata war, to furnish some

very confidential information in Gitā, without Arjuna having asked for it! Again, we

also find in scriptures that a query is raised by a seeker in certain context at some

stage of any discussion and the same is answered not immediately, but at times

much later, after many chapters of the text; without tracing the context of it to that

earlier query! The reader is fed with some more information in the meanwhile, and

that surely shifts reader’s focus away from the original query.

2.7 Bhāgawatam versus Tāratam

As is welknown, this text of 18000 verses was especially composed by Vedavyās,

addressing itself to needs of great devotees of God of caliber of Parama-hamsas,

hence it is reckoned also among scholars as ‘Parama-hamsa Samhitā’. The title of

that text is ‘Shrimad-Bhāgawata-Mahāpurana’, but is commonly called Bhāgawat

Purāna, Bhāgawatam, simply Bhāgawat. It is one out of the 18 Puranas Vedvyās is

known to have composed (not counting Purana Samhitā). Before he composed it,

he was rather dissatisfied with his earlier efforts. Only after intuitively knowing it, the

Deva-rishi Nārada met him and advised him to compose yet another text, this time

keeping in mind only the needs of highly evolved, the Parama-hamsas; to provide

them such truths as would help them experience God and to secure liberation from

clutches of Māyā, particularly during the fast detreriorating times of Kaliyuga. As it

is, the sage Vedavyās too had arrived at the same conclusion after reflecting on

his own dissatisfaction (Bhāgawatam1//4/25-33).

Narada suggested that Vedavyās should in his next composition include all

accounts of divine birth and deeds of Shri Krishna by accessing them in his

Samādhi state. We can also call it as accessing required information from ‘Ākāshic

Records’ or ‘Book of God’s Remembrances’, as the welknown Ameriacn, Edgar

Cayce (1877-1945), termed it. On collating Cayce’s information (‘readings’) with

an earlier referred book, ‘Ātmā Vijnāna’ (Science of Soul) written by Swami

Yogeshwarananda, those ‘Records’ seemed to be the same as ‘Samashty Chitta’

(of Kshara Purusha) where he said all the records of even most ancient karmas are

stored in His scheme of things! “Samādhi anusmar” (recall those accounts in your

Samādhi state) is what Deva-rishi Nārada asked Vedavyās to do, adding that he

was “Amogha-drik” (/1/5/13) – meaning capable to unerringly locate any and

every such past information. Not that Vedavyās was unaware of his capabilities; as

he would have used them umptying number of occasions in past, to gather all

informations required for composing earlier compositions including the great epic

of Mahabharata.



Anyway, Vedavyās is said to have promptly attended to that task. That is how the

text of Bhāgawatam got composed. Some say it is difficult to grasp it as it employs

‘Samādhi-bhāshā’ (the esotericism used when narrating such information as is

collected in Samādhi?). It is held in highest esteem among scholarly aspirants,

particularly those of Vaishnavite traditions. It is composed of 12 Skandhas. The 10 th

Skandha is massive, composed of a total of 90 chapters; and Tāratam reveals the

hidden, spiritual imports of many events narrated in it. Those imports seem to have

been purposely suppressed or omitted altogether, since the right time had not then

arrived to make them public. Following discussion will hopefully bring it out that

Bhāgawatam (and even other scriptures) need to be reviewed in the context of

Tāratam to grasp the scheme of God devised over 5000 years ago to enable 12000

most evolved spiritual aspirants, Parama-hamsas of Bhāgawatam, to claim their

highest spiritual rewards during the period of Jāgani.

The chapters 1-5 of 10th Skandha narrate the happenings just before and after Shri

Krishna’s birth in a prison cell of cruel king Kamsa in Mathura. The just-born divine

infant Shri Krishna to Devaki was placed in basket and surreptiously carried over to

his friend Nand’s house by Vasudeva, His father, in middle of a stormy, rainy night.

Nand stayed in Gokul situated just across the river Yamuna in Brij area. Vasudeva

then placed Him by the side of his friend’s wife Yashoda (asleep then), who had

just delivered a daughter in her quite a ripe age. Now, Vasudeva carried that just

delivered female child back to prison cell in Mathura. Nand, Yashoda, or anyone

else of their household remained oblivious of all these mysterious happenings. On

the next morning they thought that Yashoda had given birth to a male child, on the

previous night (namely, Shri Krishna)! Bak in Mathura, news went to the cruel king

Kamsa that Devaki had given birth to a female child. He went to the prison and

killed that child, like he had earlier killed all six elder brothers of Shri Krishna born in

the prison cell. Only the seventh one, Balarām, just elder to Shri Krishna was saved

with the divine intervention of God.

Balarām was miraculously transplanted by the will of God (as a foetus) from womb

of Devaki, in prison then, to that of Rohini, another wife of Vasudeva, who was

earlier secretly arranged to be sent to the house of Nand (otherwise she too would

have been imprisoned by the cruel king Kamsa). Now, carrying away the just born

Shri Krishna to Gokul was done by Vasudeva in a mysterious trance-like state that

was induced in him when Devaki, his wife present in the prison cell (along with

him) was about to deliver Shri Krishna. In a divine experience that Vāsudeva had,

he was asked to follow certain instructions, which he did in that trance-like state:

he carried Shri Krishna to Gokul and left Him Yashoda’s side; and carried away the

daughter whom she had just given birth in her house! Vasudeva did exactly as he

was instructed and even devaki, his wife did not miraculously did not come to

know of the switch-over.

The unsuspecting couple, Nand and Yashoda, thus raised Shri Krishna for over 11

years as their own son – till He remained in Brij. Then He left those foster parents to



leave for Mathura at the call of evil king Kamsa, never to return to them (all other

scriptures too say the same), even after killing Kamsa. He then got His real parents

Vāsudeva and Devaki freed from the prison cell. Both, Shri Krishna and Balarām

were raised in the household of Nand in Brij, before they left for Mathura. All divine

deeds performed during this over 11-year period stay in Brij area by Shri Krishna

are commonly termed as His “Brij-leela” (or ‘Baal-leela’) and narrated in chapters

/10/6-28. Leaving out the miracles He performed, we may now see the divine truths

as are only partly recorded in Bhāgawatam, and further augmented by Tāratam!

Descent of Higher Level Consciousness

Now, ‘Hamsa’ literally means a white swan. Bhāgawatam/11/12/23 vaguely uses

this term to point at a ‘purified’, an evolved Jeeva who aspires for higher spiritual

gains while existing in world – rather than aiming for worldly objectives as done by

those who are metaphorically pointed as ‘vultures’. In popular perception a Hamsa

is associated with a holy lake, the place of pilgrimage for Hindus till date, called

‘Manasarovar’, located by mount Kailash (now in Tibet, adjoining Indian border),

considered the abode of Shiva. It is also given in Bhāgawatam/11/17/10-11 that

right in the beginning of our Vārāha Kalpa, the entire mankind belonged only to

one ‘Varna’ (spiritual order of human beings) called ‘Hamsa’ (divine ones of

‘Manasa-srishty’ cadre, like the four legendary ‘Kumāras’ who are collectively

known as ‘Sanaka-adi’ in scriptures). Shri Krishna once said: “At that time all men

were “Kritakritya” (ones who had accomplished all what they had wanted to),

hence it was also called “Krita-yuga” – a term often used by the commentataers

as a synonym, perhaps erroneously for (every) ‘Satya-yuga’. They all worshipped

Shri Krishna as a ‘Hamsa’, as is recorded in Bhāgawatam.

It appears that the classic Hindu categorization of ‘Varna-vyavastha’ of ascribing

‘Varna’ to anyone was in ancient times based on the spiritual evolution that one

had attained by then. One’s Varna (one of the meanings of this word is ‘colour’)

was supposed to point at spiritual potential that existed within him or her for

climbing still higher on spiritual ladder (in that life), say enabling even higher levels

of divine consciousness to flow in or manifest within one’s spirit. It was believed that

the previously accomplished level of evolution gave a typical hue (colour) to a

Jeeva’s subtlest body, the causal body, which became visible in its ‘aura’, the sutle

vibrational environment surrounding every person. This is a very difficult concept to

grasp. Some useful references (though these are not quite prominently cited in

commonly read religious literature) from the text of Mahabhārata would be

provided later with a hope that those intersested in this topic would connect them

with other such references to develop the theme further.

With passage of long periods of time, the said system seems to have degenerated

into the so-called ‘caste system’ of Hindus as it is practised today, one based

mainly on heredity. Tāratam seems to subtly carry forward that idea to its logical

conclusion without directly referring to ancient concept of Varna-vyavasthā.

Hence the connection between the two systems does not come to the fore. It



divides the mankind into three broad categories by stipulating the highest spiritual

destinations that their spirits (‘srishties’) would ‘eventually climb upto’ (their

‘parama-gatis’) by the end of our very special Kaliyuga. It really amounts to

stipulating that three different levels of God’s reality exist from where the ‘descent’

of consciousness (operating at those levels) could eventually flow down

respectively into spirits of each of the three categories even when located in

Kshara bodies. Further, It is the descent of Aksharāteeta level consciousness into

spirits of Brahm-srishties that will primarily cause the end the malificence of present

Kaliyuga before its appointed time.

It was not earlier intended to discuss the precise intents of development of original

‘Varna-vyavastha’ system. These are difficult to locate from the vast expanse of

Hindu scriptures, and even more difficult to grasp and explain as the same are

often vaguely worded. Moreover, good amount of controvercy surrounds this

topic. But it became essential to do so in context of a significant prophecy of

Bhāgawatam/12/2/37-38 disclosing that around the end of present Kaliyuga that

ancient system would get ‘restored’ with efforts of two ancient yogis known as

“Devapi” and “Maru” who are mentioned in it quite a few times. As prophesied,

they would make an appearance towards the end of Kaliyuga to re-establish the

ancient Varna-vyavastha and herald forthcoming Satya-yuga! It draws a parallel

with what happened with the Sat-guru and his worthy disciple, Mahāmati

Prānanāth as chronicled in Beetak (biographical material pertaining to them both)

composed by a close disciple of Mahāmati Prānanāth named “Shri Laldas”.

Shri Laldas hinted in his Beetak – and the entire Pranami Samaj firmly believes in

his words – that Bagawatam’s prophecy made before the king Parikshit by sage

Shukadeva thousands of years ago regarding yogis Devapi and Maru really relates

to their spiritual mantors (Satguru Shri DevachandRāji and Mahāmati Prānanāth),

who had provided them the wisdom of Tāratam! This belief is further supported by

what Bhāgawatam says in the same chapter about God’s manifestation in form of

“Kalki” (verses 16 onwards upto 37-38 that talk of Devapi and Maru too) and the

divine Aura that He would spread in the world. Going by words of Bhāgawatam (of

manifestation of Kalki in a single individual) some of them feel Satguru was that

Kalki while others say it was Mahāmati Prānanāth. But Tāratam Vāni says that

divine Aura would be spread by each and every of the 12000 Brahm-srishties as

and when it awakens its Parātmā and that Kaliyuga would be brought to an end by

the Aura spread by all of them!

That led to the quest: Whether the manifestation of Kalki will take place only in one

highly evolved individual, son of a Brahmin named Vishnuyasha, as is given in

Bhāgawatam, or it had already taken place first time in the Satguru, and next in

Mahāmati Prānanāth; and will thereafter take place in every Brahm-srishty till end

of the period of Jāgani? After weighing in several statements of Tāratam this auther

was led to conclude that manifestation of Kalki (Purushottama principle) would

take place in all Brahm-srishties. The two prophecies concerning Devapi and Maru

as also the manifestation of Kalki (and His divine deeds) are interlinked, although



the scholarly commentaries of Bhāgawatam have not mentioned such a link-up

(obviously in absence of exposure to Tāratam). To spot that ‘link-up’ it was

essential to grasp the imports of following scriptural terms/concepts: ‘Varna’; the

system of ‘Varna-vyavasthā’ and how it can support the unprecedented future

happenings mentioned by Tāratam; the ‘Manasa-deva’ who alone (intriguingly)

could create our Vārāha Kalpa; ‘Manasa-putras’ (only loosely translated in English

as ‘sons of God’), etc.

The narrations of Bhāgawatam/12/2 (and also of other scriptures) make it appear

as if ‘change-over’ to next Satya-yuga will be of a ‘routine’ type – like the ones that

would have taken place millions of times in our Kshara creation in the past, and

would take place in future, till it perishes. In other words, scriptures do not suggest

any ‘astounding’ changeover that mankind is presently undergoing. Certain

understanding of scriptures emerged only when few seemingly unrelated

statements or notions thrown up by them were culled out and linked together in a

particular manner. Attention was drawn to a fact mentioned in all scriptures that an

intervention of a certain principle called “Manas” was essential to begin present

Vārāha Kalpa, after the period of perevious night of Brahmā was over. Then it

occurred that creating our world in Vārāha Kalpa can surely be considered as a

‘direct intervention’ of Aksharāteeta level, say by way of ‘preparatory steps’ to

enable in Vaivasvata Manwantara the Parātmās to experience it! Was that

intervention alluded as intervention of that unelucidated “Manas” principle?

Those ‘preparatory steps’ would have catered for enabling the carefully selected

evolved persons’ link ups to awakened Ātmās of Akshara Loka to appear in world

in beginning of Vārāha Kalpa so that their links (spiritual roots) could be extended

even to Aksharāteeta Loka – at some appropriate time in Vaivasvat Manwantara.

In earlier Kalpas it was not the case and Brahmā of Kshara Loka backed by lower

two Pādas of Akshara Purusha (Sabalik and Avyākrit) could create the beings of

Jeeva-srishty category and even perhaps to connect some of them upwards with

Vyashties of Akshara Loka. Possibility of establishing the further upward spiritual

links of some of them (more evolved) Ātmās, located in two higher Padas of

Akshara Purusha with Parātmās – at some later time in Vaivasvata Manwantara –

would sure have needed those ‘preparatory steps’ right at the time of bringing into

existence the world of Vārāha Kalpa. That surely would call for direct intervention

of sorts from Aksharāteeta level and higher two Pādas of Akshara level wherein at

least the highest two Upa-Lokas of the larger Akshara Loka are located.

It was not hoped that an end-to-end corroboration of Tāratam would emerge

when collated with scriptures; still some more corroboration was indeed expected

than what actually emerged; and some of it did, but only after passage of some

more time. It also then occurred that such a hope was based on an inapropriate

premise that Tāratam had intended to summarize what all had been revealed by

scriptures (at least some important ones). Its intention would simply have been to

augment the latter, say to complement and supplement them! It was unjustified

therefore to really expect an end-to-end corroboration from Hindu scriptures; or



even from those of other faiths (even an effort was not made in that direction due

to lach of enough knowledge).

One may however like to ensure that it did not contradict the scriptures, at least

on higher levels of reality and be content to see that both complement and

supplement each other. That should be considered as adequate basis to conclude

that they both had originated from the same God, who had revealed the various

levels of His reality in different times and cultures to cater to demands of time and

the evolution that had already taken place or was planned by God to take place

subsequently! In that backdrop some scriptural statements are presented below to

show how Tāratam augments at least the Hindu scriptures. It also explains few

intriguing statements of Bible or at least draws parallels with them (as done in

chapter 1) in context of concept of Inter-Loka spiritual linkages.

Returning to Bhāgawatam, the discussion to follow would hopefully clarify some its

intriguing points such as: Who are the Parama-hamsas or what extraordinary

spiritual capabities are said to be present only in them? Why Bhāgawatam’s

accounts of Shri Krishna and Gopies, the uneducated cowherd women of Brij

region of India, called Brij- and Raasa-leelas, were given so much prominence

when outwardly those do not at all appear to be acts of any ‘spiritual’ type? Or

why Raasa-leela was enacted only in a special creation of ‘Yoga-māyā’ – and not

in that Brij area of our Kshara world? Bhāgawatam alludes to ‘Yoga-māyā’ only

once in the five chapters describing enactment of Raasa-leela (‘Raasa-pancha-

adhyayi’) by Gopies! It does not at all elucidate, unlike Tāratam that does it

repeatedly that Yoga-māyā was a superior power of God to the scriptural Māyā

(Kāla-māyā of Tāratam), the power behind countless perishable Brahmāndas

(creations). In a little over 11 years at the end of previous Dwāpar Yuga, those

Gopies were present with Shri Krishna to enact the so called ‘Brij-leela’.

What was the purpose of God in making them frivolously enact the ‘Rāsa-leela’ in

a glorious creation of Yoga-Māyā? What was so special about those uncultured

cowherd women, and how would their seemingly frivolous acts recorded in it

would be relevant to ‘spiritual’ needs of ‘Parama-hamsas’, especially for whom the

text of Bhāgawatam was composed by Vedavyās? Keeping those queries in mind,

we may now review the perceptions of some enlighetened personages recorded

in it concerning the Rāsa-leela, Yoga-Māyā, our Vārāha Kalpa and why it is often

said that the grace of Shri Krishna’s lotus feet is essential for spiritual advancement,

etc? What was His spiritual status after all?

2.8 Hamsas

The sage Shukadeva said in Bhāgawatam/10/77/32: those who secure a refuge in

His lotus feet get rewarded with “Ātma-vidya” (concepts of eternal Ātmā, how to

get connected to it, later realize it, etc) and eventually (for their spirits) the

“Parama sat-gati”, highest destination in ‘Sat’ (Akshara realm of His realaity)! Then

in /10/87/20-1 it is asserted: those of ‘Hamsa’ order or their progeny (“Hamsa-



kula”) are fervently devoted to Him. They aspire for, and succeed in taking refuge

in His lotus feet (it also means giving up an obsessive mind-set that a Jeeva is the

real performer of all deeds and consequently has the right to receive their fruits). In

verse /2/4/13 we also see Shukadeva spelling out the divinity and influence of Shri

Krishna, by saying at the outset of his discourse of Bhāgawatam to Parikshit: The

‘Parama-hamsas’ (superior even to Hamsas) bow before Purushottama’s lotus feet

(surrender their ‘selves’ to Him) to fulfill their aspirations (of experiencing Him)! That

seems to vaguely distinguish their spiritual outreaches from those of Hamsas.

Following discussion too would hopefully highlight that outreach of Hamsas is upto

Akshara level. Uddhava enquired about what He had disclosed to ‘Sanaka-adi’

(four legendary ‘Mānasa-putras’) on the ultimate limit of Yoga (accomplishment).

Shukadeva told the king Parikshit what he had disclosed. Shri Krishna had said

(Bhāgawatam/11/13): ‘Sanaka-adi’ once went to Brahmā, the creator of our world,

with a query on how, if at all, is it possible for consciousness of Jeevas – who

always operate through, and interact with created objects of the world, through

sense- and motor-organs – to turn away from them (their lures), and get liberated

from that bondage? As Brahmā could not reply to that query, he meditated and He

(Shri Krishna) appeared before them in form of a “Hamsa” (literally, a ‘swan’, but

here it points at a higher order entity) to enlighten them! In nutshell, what He

disclosed later (when Uddhava enquired about it) was this: the natural flow of

consciousness can indeed be turned away from world , but only in a fourth

(‘Turiya’) state of consciousness after giving up the desires of Kshara world that

crop up in their lower three states of consciousness (/11/13/29).

Since in Turiya state one can only reach Ātmic consciousness, say realize only the

Ātma-swaroopa, Shri Krishna seems to have revealed only how to realize Akshara

level reality. He also informed Uddhava that His clarifications had removed all the

doubts of Sanaka-adi. In /11/14/3-5 it is said: that discourse (the “Veda-sanjnita”)

He gave to Brahmā on that occasion had got destroyed in previous (Naimittik)

Pralaya, so it was again given to Brahmā in beginning of present (Vārāha) Kalpa,

and it was passed on by Brahmā to Manu, who in turn passed it on to seven

“Brahm-rishies” (they are also perhaps alluded to in scriptures as ‘Prajāpaties’), the

sage Bhrigu and six others – belonging to ‘Manasa-srishty’ order. When expressed

using the terminology of Tāratam, all the personages referred to here would surely

have been of at least of ‘Ishwarsrishty’ category. Anyway, they are said to have

further passed on that information to all ‘Siddhas’, ‘Gandharvas’, ‘Vidyadharas’,

etc (personages of higher spiritual status than ordinary Jeevas)!

In certain places the scriptures seem to vaguely point out that Hamsas really are

(or once were) those termed as ‘Manasa-putras’, the sons (putras) of ‘Mānasa-

deva’. But commentaters often project them as ‘mental’ (‘Mānasa’) sons of the

‘Brahmā’, the power that creates our Kshara creation. Are not we human beings

too destroyed and re-created every moment by Brahmā – one of trinity (Brahmā,

Vishnu and Mahesha) of Kshara Purusha – also his mental creations, akin to those

everyone creates in a dream (refer that simile of cinematographic projections)?



How are we different then from those of Mānasa-srishty? The answer could well be

that we all – including those of Mānasa-srishty order – live in Vārāha Kalpa that

could be created (also sustained) by a certain ‘behind the scene’ support of a

higher order reality (Brahmā did not need that support when creating previous

Kalpas.

There has to be something special with not only the ‘created’ Jeevas, at least

some of them, but also with being of the Brahmā in our Vārāha Kalpa! The text of

Mahabharata (as discussed in next chapter) seems to suggest that the term

‘Mānasa-putras’ applies to either ‘Hamsas’ or ‘divine Brahmanas’ (references cited

later) – with ‘awakened’ Ātmās. It seems possible that some others like them could

have appeared in this Kalpa and in due course of time acquired the status of

‘Parama-hamsas’ with His further graces of Parātma-yogas – to extend their links of

further upwards, upto Parātmās. If this logic is right, then the term ‘Mānasa-putra’,

those of ‘Mānasa-srishty’ order, could well be the evolved Ishwar-srishties who

were ripe enough to get elevated as Brahm-srishties. It can be envisaged thus: All

human beings (all of three ‘srishties of Tārtam’) are indeed created by Brahmā.

But they can have reaches upto highest level of Kshara Loka; and at best upto the

lower two Pādas of Akshara level with graces of Ātma-yoga. But for even a few of

the latter category to be further connected upwards, with Brahm, the Bramā of that

Kshara creation must himself have support of still higher order reality, the so called

Mānasa-deva.Most scriptures, other perhaps than Gitā, neither talk of more than

one higher level of reality above Kshara, nor even the existence at those levels of

formful habitats (like our psrishable world serves the purpose for embodied Jeevas)

whether higher order Vyashties could be dwelling. The term ‘Mānasa’ of scriptures,

or Mānasa-deva’ (as commentators often call It) is perhaps a vague name given

by scriptures like ‘Hari’ or ‘Shri hari’ that seems to point at both, the Akshara and

Aksharāteeta Purushas put together. As such ‘Manasa-srishty’ order of beings or

those called as ‘Manasa-putras’ could well have been such of Ishwar-srishties

order who were evolved enough to be elevated to Brahm-srishty category. They

perhaps were the higher, “Divya Vibhooties’ of Gitā and Bhāgawatam.

They are the ones who would receive rewards of their efforts (undertaken in past

eras) during the period of Jāgani in ‘Vaivasvat Manwantara’ of Vārāha Kalpa that

could be brought into existence only with intervention from such a level (Mānasa-

deva) that was higher than what Kshara level Brahmā normally has! If one takes

into account the testimony of sage Markandeya recorded in text of Mahābhārata

(discussed later) one may well wonder if Shri Krishna is the one who is referred to as

Mānasa-deva! Shri Krishna is also alluded to as “Bhagawan Hari” by Shukadeva (in

Bhāgawatam/11/17/8) while answering to the queries of Parikshit raised in

/11/17/1-7. He said that is Uddhava had enquired the same with Shri Krishna: what

was the information He had given to Brahmā and Sanaka-adi (/11/17/1-7) when

He had appeared before them in form of a Hamsa in the beginning of present

(Vārāha) Kalpa?



In the remaining verses of chapter, Bhāgawatam /11/17, and even in subsequent

chapters, Shri Krishna disclosed to Uddhava: it was He who had formulated ancient

‘Varna-āshrama system’ and even went on to explain what the codes of conduct

were for the four ‘Varnas’. It is in line with what Shri Krishna had disclosed to Arjuna

in Gitā/10/2-3: He as the “Loka-Maheshwara” is the root cause of all devas and

even of all the great sages (that is why even they do not know fully about Him)!

Then in Gitā/10/6-8 He disclosed that He had made even the seven Maharshis

(perhaps the same as those Bhāgawatam terms as ‘Brahm-rishies’), capable of

even creating mankind (‘Prajā-paties’)! Those higher order capabilities are said to

have been transmitted to them by His ‘Vibhooty-yoga’ (ref Gitā/10/6-7). He further

said: even those who solve such mysteries themselves become His Vibhooties!

Those Vibhooties are often seen preaching in world the system of ‘Varna-āshrama’

through their discourses from time to time, as recorded in scriptures, so that others

may, by following their guidance, live in peace and happiness, apart from making

spiritual progress.

Intersetingly, it is said in Bhāgawatam /11/17/11 that He (‘Pranava’) was present in

that ancient Krita-yuga (perhaps in beginning of Vārāha Kalpa) like a mighty bull

(a mataphore) standing firmly on all four feet (‘pādas’ of Akshara Purusha’?) in

support of that creation, hence all those who followed the ascetic practices in

those times had in effect verily worshipped Him as a “Hamsa” in line with their

understanding of Vedas! In /11/13/18-9 is again cited the earlier referred discourse

of Shri Krishna to Brahmā and Sanakādi whose intellect was obsessed with need to

perform Karmas (as means to fulfill any objective). That is why they would have

enquired: who really was He (20th verse)? He intriguingly told them that they were

not any differant from Him; as such their query was really irrelevant! He said, He

was the experience, experiencer and also the experienced. He disclosed one can

discard the said obsession (present in three lower states of consciousness) only by

securing next higher, the ‘Turiya’ state! Then in /11/24/2 He further disclosed to

Uddhava: In that Krit-yuga everyone (or most?) could discriminate between what

was right and wrong (perhaps the tenets of system of ‘Varna-vyavastha’).

We thus see Bhāgawatam generally speaking highly of Hamsas and Parama-

hamsas, but without revealing how they attained that high status or if they were

metaphysically helped by God (via spiritual link-ups). In Bhāgawatam/11/12/22-24

Shri Krishna is seen clarifying to Uddhava the difference between an ordinary

Jeeva and Hamsa. He implies: Hamsa is one established (or desirous of being so?)

in (an eternal) Ātmā, while Jeevas are like vultures (content with eating dead

animals: a simile for those content with experiencing objects of perishable world?).

In next chapter He told Uddhava what ‘Sanakādi’ normally advise the spiritual

aspirants: the “Buddhi-vritty” (state of consciousness) needs to be withdrawn from

Kshara world and turned on to Him in ‘Turiya’ state. It suggests, they too must have

been in Turiya state when they appeared along with Brahmā before Shri Krishna.

Yogāvasishtha says, in Turiya state a yogi (of ‘Hamsa’ order) is able to experience

eternal ‘Ātmā’; yet for experience of Paramātmā he (one of ‘Parama-hamsa

order’) has to attain Turyateeta state.



2.9 ‘Varna’ of scriptures

It seems Hamsa and Parama-hamsa are the titles given to human beings present in

our Kshara world, who possess ‘potentials’ of experiencing respectively Akshara

and Aksharāteeta levels of reality (spiritual link-ups with Ātmās and Parātmās). It

further seems “Brahmāna” was a term employed by scriptures to point vaguely at

those like Brahm-rishies, who either knew all about Brahm already, or those who

had received suitable graces of God so that they would eventually experience

any one out of the two levels of eternal Brahm (Akshara or Aksharāteeta). But this

much could be inferred only after locating some rare scriptural references to some

Jeevas who had already secured, or could secure, “Hamsatva” or “Brāhmanatva”.

Mahabhārata (references cited later) says for Devāpi – one of the two yogis

prophesied in Bhāgawatam/12/2/37-38 – that he had attained ‘Brahmānatva’ after

he renounced the throne of Hastinapur and took to forests and ascetic practices,

meditation, etc!

Devāpi was otherwise of ‘Kshatriya’ Varna by birth (being born in a royal family),

considered just a step lower in spiritual hierarchy of ‘Brahmān Varna’ (it seems to

have degenerated into what is termed now as ‘caste system’ of Hindus). The other

two ‘Varnas’ (in descending order) are ‘Vaishya’ and ‘Shoodra’. Mahābhārata

seems ambiguously suggesting that Devāpi might have attained such a spiritual

milestone as would entitle him to be re-designated as ‘Brāhmana’ – same as

saying that he had acquired ‘Brahmānatva’! One more reference was located in it

purporting to say that ‘Hamsatva’ can also be ‘acquired’! Thus it is indeed possible

for someone to acquire both, ‘Hamsatva’ or ‘Brahmānatva’ in any lifetime with

requisite practices as laid down in ancient Varna-āshram system. Mahābhārata

seems to have pointed at this fact in context of ‘Varna’ system as was followed in

those times, and one that is followed in India till date!

“Jesus Who Became the Christ” is a parallal to Mahābhārata’s phraseology, cited

here based on the ‘readings’ given by a welknown, psychically gifted American

called Edgar Cayce (1875-1945). His psychical ‘readings’ are often cited on these

pages owing to his wonderful corroborations he was able to provide for (only in an

enigmatic, hypnotic state) for several concepts common to Hinduism, Jainism,

Buddhism, Sikhism, etc (all originating in India) – apart also from the truths revealed

by Jesus Christ as recorded in Bible! Those Indian concepts related to reincarnation

phenomenon, the Law of Karma, life-after-life human existence in which one can

spiritually evolve, etc. Cayce often used for Jesus Christ the phrase “Jesus who

became the Christ”! In context of present discussion, did Jesus similarly ‘ascend’ to

next higher step on spiritual ladder termed by Edgar Cayce as becoming ‘Christ’,

say attaining “Christhood’? We need to remember that Jesus is also referred to in

Bible as ‘son of God’!

The phenomenon that worked itself out through Edgar Cayce, a devout Christian,

is viewed by this author as representing the rather amazing things that have either



happened, or will happen in future, during the period of Jāgani. Today some

Christians even doubt if there could have existed in our world a divine personage

called as Jesus Christ. He seemed to be too good to be true! For them, Edgar

Cayce not only provided adequate testimony of his having existed in world, but he

even explained hidden imports of several of his enigmatic statements as recorded

in Bible. Jesus frequently talked in parables.

Unfortunately, this contemporary corroboration by Edgar Cayce of ancient Indian

concepts has not quite been appreciated by even Indian philosophical circles

and communicated to wider Indian masses. The phenomenon that worked out

through Cayce, and likewise through the Theosophists, seems to have given the

Western world a first-hand exposure to such concepts via their own personalities!

There is nothing Indian about them; these are univerasal in their application,

whether people are really aware of them or not! Anyway, people usually take it for

granted that “Jesus” and “Christ” are the two different names of same person (like

name and a middle name or a surname). But from Edgar Cayce’s readings it looks

as if it was some spiritual accomplishment – say, acquiring “Christ-ness or Christ-

hood”, say experiencing a higher, “Christ” consciousness!

Had ‘Christ’ been a Sanskrit term employed in a reverential sense, the Indian

scriptures could well have said that Jesus had attained “Christ-atva” (similar to

“Hamsa-tva” and “Brāhmana-tva”)! It is noteworthy that one does come across in

recent English literature a few terms like ‘Christ-consciousness’ or ‘Krishna-

consciousness’ for certain higher or highest level of consciousness that someone

can attune to with proper efforts. There exists a worldwide Hindu, Vaishnavite

organization called “International Society for Krishna Consciousness (abrieviation:

‘ISKCON’)! Referring to earlier discussion on ‘Manasa-srishty’, this author wonders

whether (in view of an obviously high spiritual stature of Jesus) the ‘Manasa-putra’

of Indian scriptures is really comparable to Bible’s “Son of God”.

What has been quoted on these pages of Bible is taken from the English version, a

pocket size book (“Good News, New Testament”) published by The Bible Society of

India, Bangalore. It does not quite say how that ‘Son of God’ differs from ‘son of

man’, but the latter does appear to correspond with ‘Maithuny-srishty’ of Hindu

scriptures, those of human parentage. Yet the Gospel of John presents Jesus as the

eternal Word of God, who “became a human being and lived among us”! So Jesus

seems somehow connected with spiritual level of ‘eternality’ – perhaps the Biblical

way of narrating spiritual link-up with an eternal Akshara level of reality (Ātmā) of

Hindu scriptures. Does the term ‘Word’ refer to Akshara Purusha (the level of His

reality); and ‘God’ or ‘Kingdom of God’ similarly to Aksharāteeta Purusha or

Aksharāteeta Loka of Tāratam (Puroshattama principle of Gitā)?

We can see what John/1/1-5 says regarding the Word of Life: “Before the world

was created, the Word already existed; he was with God and he was the same as

God. From the very beginning the Word was with God. Through him God made all

things; not one thing in all creation was made without him. The Word was the



source of life, and this life brought light to mankind. The light shines in the darkness

and the darkness has never put it out”. The verses of John/1/10-13 are equally

revealing: “The Word was in the world, and though God made the world through

him, yet the world did not recognize him. He came to his own country, but his own

people did not receive him. Some, however, did receive him and believe in him;

so he gave the right to become God’s children. They did not become God’s

children by natural means, that is, by being born as the children of a human father;

God himself was their father”. Bible thus indicates that ‘God’s children” became as

such by the grace of God. Their spiritual attainments would naturally be higher.

Tāratam Vāni said the same unambiguously in 17th century. Only Ishwar-srishties

have capabilities to experience themselves as Ātmās of Akshara Loka in their

Turiya states while the Brahm-srishties can likewise identify themselves also with

Parātmās of still higher, the Aksharāteeta Loka (Bible’s ‘Kingdom of God’?).

Collated this way, this bit of discussion surely raises a speculation: is securing the

‘Hamsatva’ (of Mahabharata, discussed later) the same as being awarded with the

Ātma-yoga and likewise the ‘Parama-hamsatva’, same as being further rewarded

with ‘Parātma-yoga’ (Brahm-yoga of Gitā)? Latter part of speculation was also

suggested in Bhāgawatam/11/23/58-62 when Shri Krishna almost equated

‘Parātma-nishthā’ with ‘Brahm-nishthā’. Clarifications on Hamsas seem to have

been made available in Bhāgawatam and also in other Hindu scriptures only in bits

and pieces, scattered all over; not concisely in one place.

2.10 Rāsa-leelā in Yoga-Māyā’s creation

Acts of Shri Krishna and Gopies are narrated in five chapters, Bhāgawatam/10/29-

33 (called ‘Rāsa-pancha-adhyayi’) and commonly called ‘Rāsa-leelā”. Tāratam

fully corroboratesthe the accounts of Rāsa-leela and of just previously enacted

‘Brij-leelā’ too. Both also find mentions in several other Hindu texts. But Tāratam also

reveals what those scriptures have not disclosed: the spiritual significance of those

ancient happenings; and more importantly, the relevance of Rāsa-leelā enacted

in Yoga-Māyā’s creation, particularly to Brahm-srishties, and its role in making

available to them their spiritual rewards during the period of Jāgani! Fortunately,

with the availability of abundant, cheap religious texts (like those of organizations

like Geetā Press, Gorakhpur), Television, etc the Hindu society at large is learning

more about Bhāgawatam. Other organizations like ISKCON have translated

Bhāgawatam in English for worldwide consumption. But it makes the accounts of

those two ‘leelas’ – particularly if taken at their face value – amenable to criticism

not only from those of other faiths but also from rational minded Hindus.

Tāratam Vāni and real-life accounts of the Sat-guru Shri Devachandraji’s spiritual

awakening as available from the Beetak literature explain well that the effort of

composing Bhāgawatam as undertaken by sage Vedavyās in ancient times fully

served its intended purpose by initiating the process of Jāgani in year 1618 AD.

Satguru was the first Parama-hamsa (Brahm-srishty) whose linked-up Parātmā got

awakened then and it happened after a fourteen year-long dedicated study of



Bhāgawatam! Herein lies the relevance of Bhāgawatam to spiritual needs of later

day Parama-hamsas prophesied to appear later in Kaliyuga. Yet the spiritual intent

of that text can not be grasped fully without taking recourse to Tāratam Vāni. In

fact both these texts complement each other and visualize the scheme of

Purushottama that called for spirits of those Gopies to be elevated to a glorious

creation of Yogamāyā in what may well be termed a ‘penultimate’ stage (in those

ancient times) – in order that they may rise to Aksharāteeta Loka on their own

during the period of Jāgani!

The same Gopies when reborn during subsequent lifetimes – thinking they were

ordinary Jeevas were really the Parama-hamsas (Brahm-srishties) but unaware of

that fact. They were expected in His scheme as revealed by Tāratam to be those

who would connect with their own accounts of Rāsa-leela and then dwell deeply

on spiritual imports of those esoteric accounts! That was what precisely happened

with the Satguru as per Beetak literature. Bhāgawatam, however, hides that

scheme of Purushottama, only revealing that it was meant to enlighten Parama-

hamsas who would make appearance in worsening period of Kaliyuga! As for

‘Yoga-māyā’, it employs the term only once, in /10/29/1, vaguely linking it up with

the place where Rāsa-leelā was enacted on a ‘full-moon night’. It gives all the

impression to suggest that it was enacted in same Kshara creation (ours of Kāla-

māyā) wherein the ‘Brij-leelā’ had been enacted, before the onset of that night.

It was really the night of ‘Brahmā’ – “Brahm-ratra” as mentioned in a lone verse,

/10/33/39, towards the end of those five chapoters – without dropping a hint that

the three Upa-Lokas (including ‘Bhoo’, that where our world is located) would

surely have been annihilated owing to the ‘Naimittik’ Pralaya (when it is the night of

Brahmā)! It seems both the references (/10/29/1 and /10/33/39) have not been

collated with each other by commentaters. Otherwise they would surely have

realized that Brij area of India located in world would have been destroyed when

Rāsa-leelā was getting enacted. This author had indeed come across a rare

statement in some scripture sugasting that ‘Naimittik’ Pralaya may take place

(even when full duration of a day of Brahmā has not elapsed) in order to serve any

divine purpose (‘Nimitta’) of God. But it was unfortunately misplaced, and could

not be re-located later for citing here.

Anyway, Tāratam does seem to suggest that there indeed was a divine purpose

that was going to be served much later. It says it was a rarest of rare occasions

when Purushottama’s beloved Parātmās (their spirits really) were required to be

shown what was it like to exist in Kshara Loka (during the Brij-leela period of 11

years and 52 days), later in Yoga-māyā’s creation, and again to next Kshara

creation – before returning to Aksharāteeta Loka. He did it by making them identify

with spirits of those Gopies of Brij! Brij area is still one of the most important places

of pilgrimage for all Hindus. They believe it is the same land where Shri Krishna had

enacted Brij-leelā, and later even the Rāsa-leelā on the bank of river Yamuna!

Tāratam says, Kshara world along with its Brij area where Brij-leelā was enacted



was destroyed when spirits of Gopies along with Shri Krishna experienced glorious

creation of Yoga-māyā, where Rāsa-leelā got enacted!

Bhāgawatam does not at all explain what divine purpose was served by Shri

Krishna and Gopies when they performed those seemingly frivolous acts (in light of

Indian traditions of chastity, etc) on that night of Rāsa-leelā. This much can also be

gathered when persusing Rāsa-leelā accounts (in those five chapters). It depicts

that king Parikshit did express a surprise before the sage Shukadeva (/10/33/27-29)

regarding why Shri Krishna, his ideal had performed those frivolous acts with grown

up and married Gopies, who had their children back home; and what good would

it serve when the populace hears of those! It is seen that rather than giving any well

reasoned answer, the sage simply said in verse 40 that all those who either recite,

or even listen with devotion to Rāsa-leelā performed by Him would certainly be

spiritually benefited! He said they would even secure ‘Parā-Bhakti’ of His lotus feet.

He added: They would even shed their own desires for (or attitudes towards sex?),

etc. But how would it happen is just not elucidated, even hinted at.

Aspirants capable of reflecting rationally on what is recorded in Bhāgawatam are

bound to be dissatisfied with such casual approach. Just because Shri Krishna, the

ideal of so many, one who is equated with God, had acted that way in ancient

past, do those frivolities deserve to be reverently recited and heard, to be

emulated by them, sung in the folklore? How would the evolved Parama-hamsas –

get benefited by such scriptural guidance? Then on reflecting over the whole issue

in light of Tāratam, it seemed as if it had really intended that aspirants should

remain perplexed, even dissatisfied with narrations of Rāsa-leelā! It could well

have been a part of His plan that they keep on reflecting from time time about why

Vedavyās should have included that episode at all in the Bhāgawatam, especially

composed for Parama-hamsas. They had to otherwise have faith in that text; yet to

keep on returning to it, to check up if they had missed any important clue.

Bhāgawatam seems to have admirably succeeded in that endeavour. Well, for

thousands of years the spiritual aspirants of India tried their best to arrive at their

own versions of spiritual intents behind its esotericity (if at all). This much can be

seen from their voluminous contributions to religious literature of subsequent times.

But it can now be seen in the light of Tāratam that unless such human efforts are

supplemented by further revelations of God, their fuller imports can not be grasped

by beneficieries, the Parama-hamsas. That is why God is seen to have manifested

further dose of Revelations in seventeenth century India when some of those

Parama-hamsas having deep faith in Bhāgawatam (and still unable to decipher its

intents), those of Vaishnavite traditions, had been reborn in India. But before turning

to Tārtam, let us also see if Bhāgwatam had furnished any more information on the

power of Yoga-māyā, apart from those five chapters describing the Rāsa-leelā.

Bhāgawatam indirectly speaks of mysterious Yoga-māyā after 50 chapters (in

/10/85/34-55)! Bāli, a devotee of Shri Krishna since ancient times, said to Shri

Krishna that even greatest yogis (“yogeshwaras”) were not aware of it; how would



he then know? Saying that, he raised His lotus feet to his head and fervently

requested that he be blessed with devotion and love for them. It happened when

Shri Krishna went to ‘Sutal’ Upa-Loka at Kshara level, employing His power of

‘Yoga-Māyā’, on an almost impossible mission (verses 39-46) and while there, He

met Bali, who was overwhelmed with that gracious gesture. Bāli then addressed

Him as “Brahm”, and “Paramātmā” (as if manifested in a human form)! How wise

Bali was can be seen only when his request is collated with what Nārada had said

to Shri Krishna in /10/69/37-8: Even the great sages were unaware of mystery of His

Yoga-māyā, yet he was so fortunate to have known it with grace of His ‘lotus feet’!

We also need to dwell on verse /10/69/18, when Nārada said to Shri Krishna: “Only

the grace of your feet can liberate a devotee”. So, the wise Bāli had sought such a

grace from Him!

We can find several hundreds of occasions in Bhāgawatam and other scriptures

when devotees are depicted seeking the grace of His lotus feet. There are about 8-

10 connotations in which terms ‘Moksha’ or ‘Mukti’ (liberation) are used, so there

always could be present some extent of confusion: Refuge in lotus feet of which of

Gitā’s three Purushas? In context of Tāratam’s clarification on Yoga-māyā: It is

clear that Parama-hamsas of Bhāgawatam need to seek refuge in lotus feet of Shri

Krishna, in whom Purushottama principle was present when Rāsa-leelā was

enacted by Him. Tāratam says emphatically, and even repeatedly: Aksharāteeta

Purusha in a Vyashty form of ‘Shri Rāj ji’ had asked all Parātmās in Aksharāteeta

Loka – just before deluding them – to hold on to His feet (their memory).

Brahm-srishties would be most fortunate Jeevas in the world who would find

themselves before those feet present in Aksharāteeta Loka, but only when their

respective Parātmās shed their delusions and get awakened! Shukadeva too says

something similar in /10/77/32: Those who take refuge in His lotus feet get

rewarded with “Ātma-vidyā” (the concept of eternal Ātmā and how to get

established in it, etc) that can eventually make available the “Parama Sat-gati”. In

light of Tāratam it seems to refer to highest destination that the Brahm-yogayukta-

Ātmās of Gitā will reach in Sat (Akshara) level (the ‘Parama-pada’ for a yogi of

Yogāvasishtha) – and finally get lodged there in highest Upa-Loka of Akshara

Loka! These Ātmās were linked with Aksharāteeta Parātmās on one side and on

the other with Brahm-srishties. In context of Parama-hamsas bodily located in the

world, scriptures ambiguously ask them (the most evolved devotees) to seek

refuge in those lotus feet. But how to proceed, where are those feet located?

The wise devotees therefore seek refuge in feet of Shri Krishna or other great ones

of order of Brahm-rishis in order to secure those feet located at Brahm level

(Aksharāteeta). Purushattama’s feet are sure to be located deep within memories

of the deluded Parātmās, or due to their spiritual linkages within the hearts Brahm-

srishties (those alluded to in scriptures as ‘Brahm-rishis’, etc). As seen earlier,

Shukadeva right at the outset of his discourse to Parikshit, in /2/4/13, said that

Parama-hamsas bow before the feet of Shri Krishna in order to have their

aspirations fulfilled! In /10/87//20-21 it is asserted that those Jeevas of ‘Hamsa



caliber’ (Parama-hamsas are superior even among them) or their progeny or

disciples (“Hamsa-kula”) are fervently devoted to Him, and that they do in the end

succeed in securing refuge in His feet.

While Tāratam presents Aksharāteeta perspective of the Parātmās, Bhāgawatam

as also other Hindu scriptures present the perspective of Parama-hamsas located

in our Kshara world. Let us see what was the contention of Uddhava in /10/47/62:

Even ‘yogeshwaras’ (yogis of highest order, those who become His instruments to

confer the graces on others) need to contemplate on ‘Rāsa-leelā’ enacted by Shri

Krishna during which He had placed His lotus feet on the bossoms (in hearts, say

consciousness) of His beloved Gopies who participated in it! This reference seems

to show how inter-linked the several statements cited on earlier pages are: those

relating to His power called Yoga-māyā and its glorious creation (rather than that

created by Kāla-māyā) where Rāsa-leelā was enacted; need on part of spiritual

aspirants to seek refuge in His lotus feet, etc!

Coming now to 11th Skandha, it has 31 chapters. It contains a divine discourse that

Shri Krishna gave to His devotee, Uddhava (chapters 6-29), termed commonly as

‘Uddhava-Gitā’. It contains over 1000 verses – about one-and-half times those in

Gitā. This discourse is equally respected in scholarly circles like Gitā is. It was

delivered by Shri Krishna during the last few days that He passed in our perishable

world prior to departing for His imperishable abode. While the first five chapters of

11th Skandha trace the Yādava dynasty in which Shri Krishna was born, etc and the

curse that it had received from some great sages of ancient past, the last two (30-

31) describe how that curse worked itself out in the last few days that Shri Krishna

passed in our world. With this prelude we may now proceed to examine some

divine truths contained in two Skandhas (10 and 11) as relevant to our discussion.

Let us take up a question that Uddhava asked in Bhāgawatam/11/16/1-5 in the

Uddhava-Gitā portion. Uddhava asked: “You actually are Param Brahm, the

controller of creation from within, and are still present before me! Only the great

ones, the ‘Brāhmanas’, knew that you can be worshipped in your Vibhooties too;

so please tell me which were those ‘bhāvas[, ‘forms’ (the Vibhooties by names?) in

which great sages of ancient past, the “Parama-rishis”, had worshipped you and

succeeded in receiving your graces? O, ‘Mahā-vibhooty’ (great Vibhooty)! Please

tell me about all Vibhooties in whom you reside. I would like to pay respects at

their feet, as those are the holiest places of pilgrimage for mankind. Even the

ground they walk on (or they had walked on in past) becomes place of pilgrimage

for the humanity”!

Shri Krishna replied by saying that Arjuna had once raised similar query before the

beginning of Mahābhārata war (in discourse of Gitā). He disclosed to Uddhava the

names of a few of those Vibhooties. He by the way revealed that the sage Bhrigu,

who often finds a mention on these pages (in context of his divine ‘Bhrigu Samhitā

readings’), was a Vibhooty among the ‘Brahm-rishies’ (Gitā says he was a Vibhooty

among the ‘Maha-rishis’, great rishis)! While Gitā does not give clues on the



understanding of Arjuna, Uddhava was perhaps better aware of purposes served in

world by such Vibhooties. But before proceeding with Uddhava-gitā it would be

relevant to first review a very significant dialogue between Him and Shrutadeva, on

whom Shri Krishna once paid (10th Skandha of Bhāgawatam).

The said two dialogues are being cited here to show how scantily Bhāgawatam

talks about existence of Parātmās, or their roles in His scheme of things. It points at

why this text did not succeed in awakening Parātmās linked with ear lier Parama-

hamsas. The first one to succeed in that task was the Satguru, Shri Devachandraji –

although with some direct intervention by Purushottama – still via his great devotion

to Bhāgawatam! This much is made quite expliciit in both, Tāratam itself and the

Beetak literature. But this fact need not belittle the huge efforts made by him in past

in search for truth about God, how to realize Him, etc. He later turned to the

Vaishnavite traditions of worship, and gradually experiencing fascination for Shri

Krishna’s deeds as narrated in Bhāgawatam, but particularly the ‘Rāsa-leelā’.

2.11 Anātmā, Ātmā and Parātmā

The unexpected visit of Shri Krishna accompanied by several great sages really

overwhelmed a learned Brahmin devotee named Shrutadeva. He humbly played

the part of a host. We find he was well aware that the feet of such great ones

convert the ground they walk on to future places of pilgrimage for those who may

appear later – a perception that prevails among followers of various faiths too.

Anyway, Shrutadeva touched Shri Krishna’s feet and expressed gratitude for His

graceful visit. How Shri Krishna responded is recorded in verses 10/86/51-57. He

said that main purpose of “Brahm-rishis” and “Brāhmanas” accompanying Him

then was to bless him. He also added significantly that the devotees (those who

aspired to experience Brahm) are advised to ‘worship’ such great ones as He (the

consciousness of that Brahm level) was always present within them! He in effect

said that He (Samashty Purushottama principle), as and when pleased, choses to

blesses other aspirants through such Brahm-rishies!

Here it is announced that He, Brahm, is ever present in their hearts, say chooses to

remain mysteriously connected with the great ones; implying that He uses them as

His outposts, channels through which to bless the deserving ones like Shrutadeva!

The Brahm-rishis then become His distribution centres of His graces in Kshara world,

to extend His benevolent influence to deserving ones (even as and when He is not

available in person to do so). It is also relevant to see what Shrutadeva had earlier

said, refer verses 44-47 while praising Shri Krishna: “It is not that you are with me for

the first time; you, in fact, are ‘Parama-purusha’ (Purushottama) who has entered

the entire creation including selves of all Jeevas with your power of Māyā – like a

dreamer makes an entry in his own dream! Still you prefer to manifest only in

‘Amala’ Ātmās (the purified ones), those who have got sanctified by worshipping

you and reflecting on you. But for others, in spite of your being ever present within

them, you remain ever hidden from them”! These are highly significant words.



The term ‘purified’ or ‘A-mala’ for a Vyashty Ātmā of the 46th verse seems to point

at the state of an imperishable Ātmā when it has shed the ‘mala’ (the deposited

dirt of bondage of previously held desires and memories of previous) of Kshara

experiences, or even some left-over propensities to get hooked up to them again.

That dirt as if gets attached, deposited on an imperishable Ātmā during the time it

remains under a delusion (the so-called Ātmā-vibhrama) into believing that it is

leading Kshara existence, operating through its linked up Jeeva’s gross and subtle

Kshara bodies. It is as if that delusion causes that ‘mala’ – like an ‘infection’ – of its

linked up Jeeva to get attached to that deluded Ātmā! As such, when it gets cured

of that infection, it becomes ‘A-mala’ (purified, sanctified). Tāratam says in respect

of a Brahm-srishty: First its has to experience its imperishable Ātmā (after it has got

cured of its infection, say become ‘A-mala’; and only then its linked up Parātmā

could get awakened to have an experience of being seated at the lotus feet of

Purushottama!

Shrutadeva might well have been vaguely aware of the concept relating to Inter-

loka spiritual linkages; so he seems to have expressed it in the way he would have

known it. It is significant that He addressed Shri Krishna in 48th verse as “Parātmā”

(one beyond Ātmā)! Did he do that in the sense of Paramātmā (in a Samashty

sense as was translated in commentary) that can only be experienced via a

Parātmā? When 47th verse is fully accounted for, it seems Shrutadeva could well

have used the term ‘Parātmā’ based on his understanding of spiritual truths, in

broadly the same sense as that provided by Tāratam (instead of Paramātmā).

What he might have intended to communicate in 47th verse is this: after a Jeeva

who has first realized its Ātmā (“Adhyātma-vid”), can it hope to get qualified to

realize its being a Parātmā (the one ever united with Paramātmā)!

Was Shrutadeva aware of the fact that only those devotees who had realized their

imperishable Ātmās were really entitled to be first further upward linked with some

Parātmās in order to later experience Paramātmā, Purushottama or Brahm? It

seems so, since he also said that one who did not realize eternal Ātmā (who has

not become A-mala) and thought one’s ‘Ātmā’ (self) was the same as that of any

other person (Jeeva) – experiencing the world through “Anātmā” (conglomerate

of gross and subtle bodies) in repeated life-and-death cycles – will remain for ever

ignorant of (its) true Ātma–swaroopa (“swa-Ātma-vibhakta-mrityave”)!

The 47th verse is seen using three terms ‘Anātmā’, ‘Ātmā’ and ‘Parātmā’ – perhaps

in the same connotations as were used in discourse of ‘Rāma-hridaya’ by Shri

Rāma in the text of Adhyātmā Ramāyāna (discussed earlier) – again without any

attempt to explain them! These terms seem respectively associated with sentient

Vyashties of three different Lokas provided it is accepted that term ‘Ātmā’ refers

basically to an eternal Vyashty of Akshara Loka (the so called ‘Sat’ level of His

reality). Differently put, ‘Ātmā’ needs to be associated strictly with a characteristic

feature of ‘imperishability’ (eternality) that is present at Sat or Akshara level (and

not that at Kshara level).



In light of above discussion, the term ‘Anātmā’ (it can well be spelt ‘Un-Ātmā’)

should get associated with ‘perishbility’, the characteristic feature of Kshara level

(His realm) and its seemingly sentient beings, the ‘Jeevas’ that operate in this Loka

through some conglomerate of gross and subtle perishable bodies present there.

In other words, Kshara ‘Jeeva’ of Tāratam – though not quite the same as ‘Anātmā’

mentioned in Adhyātma Ramāyāna as also this reference of Bhāgawatam – seems

to point at a seemingly sentient Vyashty (an entity) that experiences and interacts

with Kshara Loka through an insentient Anātmā. This term ‘Anātmā’ is not found that

often in scriptures, and even when found, it is not explicitly equated with a ‘Jeeva’

(of Tāratam) in most commentaries. On the contrary, the term ‘Ātmā’ is more often

used as a synonym for a Kshara Jeeva, the experience of Kshara world.

This practice has seeped so deep in society that we find a common man often

saying (while talking of death and rebirth) that an ‘Ātmā’ leaves its previous gross

body on death and re-enters another body after certain time-interval that varies

from person to person, in the meanwhile remaining in some subtle body. It is then

claimed that such ‘Ātmā’ is really eternal, not subject to death like the gross body

is. This practice improperly substitutes the term ‘Ātmā’ for ‘apparent self’ (Jeeva of

Tāratam) that perishes at the time of Prakrit Pralaya, the ultimate destruction of

whole Kshara Brahmānda, after Brahmā’s life-time of (his) 100 years has expired.

Before it, that ‘Ātmā’ is perhaps erroneously said to lead ‘embodied’ existence in

world through a conglomerate of subtle bodies, the ‘Panch Koshas’ (five ‘bodies’ of

every human being) as said in Taittiriya Upanishada.

As per ‘Adhyātma Rāmāyana and the reference of Bhāgawatam under

discussion, the ‘Anātmā’ needs to be considered as one existing in the Kshara

Loka for extremely long period as compared to human life-span; but not eternally.

Tāratam Vāni consistently employs the term Ātmā for an imperishable and still a

deluded Akshara Loka’s Vyashty, identifying itself with a perishable Jeeva

(operating through a perishable Anātmā) under the spell of its delusion. The ‘Ātmā’

of said 47th verse seems to point at such an eternal Ātmā – the Brahm-yogayukta-

Ātmā – that is linked up with Vyashties located at two extremities of its linkage –

Anātmā and Parātmā! The fact that should not be lost sight of is this: everything

located in Kshara Loka – both the conglomerate of bodies (Anātmā) as well as

consciousness that operates through it – is really perishable too; and that includes

the Samashty Kshara Purusha, the trinity of ‘Tridevas’ of a Kshara creation: Brahmā,

Vishnu and Mahesh. But in common parlance and also in Tāratam only the Vishnu

is termed as Kshara Purusha, since he is said to sustain the phenomenal Kshara

world that is repeatedly destroyed and re-created by Mahesh and Brahmā

respectively (refer the earlier discussion on ‘Nitya’ Pralaya).

Was Shrutadeva possibly aware of the fact that only if Kshara consciousness of

any Jeeva, experiencing the world through a particular Anātmā, got linked up with

that of some Akshara Vyashy, an Ātmā (say it had struck roots in that Vyashty) did

that Jeeva stand a chance of subjectively identifying itself with Ātmā? Perhaps so,

as he further seems to imply that vaguely: only after that (link-up) happens, can



the eternal Ātmā (later on) gets awakened to its Akshara existence and that Jeeva

then get a chance of learning about a Parātmā (or how else can we explain his

understanding of getting connected to her)! Shri Krishna’s assertion to Shrutadeva –

that His ‘swaroopa’ is really the same as that of ‘Brahm-rishies’ then present with

Him – seems to suggest that all of them, even when bodily present in Kshara world,

were actually rooted in Brahm level like Him.

Tāratam informs us that roughly at that stage in His divine life (when Shri Krishna

must have met with Shrutadeva), He had possessed only Kshara Purusha’s

consciousness continuously residing within Him. Even Bhāgawatam further on, in its

54th verse says that His swaroopa then was that of ‘Chaturbhuja, the four-limbed

Vishnu, the Kshara Purusha! Was the consciousness of those Brahm-rishies too was

likewise rooted only in Kshara level then? No, firstly they were not ordinary rishis

(sages), but were the so called ‘Brahm-rishies’, suggetsing that they were in some

way connected right upto the Brahm level of reality, hence capable of blessing

other devotees (as declared to Shrutadeva by Shri Krishna), as and when required,

owing to possessing their upward linkages with Brahm level.

Tāratam says Shri Krishna was connected to different higher levels of reality during

different stages of His divine lifetime (in our Kshara world). When born to Devaki in

the prison cell of Mathura, He was an Avatāra of Kshara Purusha, but imediately

thereafter entered within Him the consciousness of Akshara Purusha! Thus, the one

who was placed in a basket by His father Vasudeva in prison cell in Mathura and

carried over to Gokul (in Brij, on opposite side of river Yamuna) was not merely an

Avatāra of Vishnu, but the one who had residing within Him the consciousness of

mighty Akshara Purusha. Tāratam emphasizes this point explicitly, leaving no doubt

in readers’ mind. It further says: only after He was placed by side of Yashoda, did

enter in Him the Aksharāteeta level consciousness!

For first 11 years and 52 days He lived in Brij: His being was beamed with full-blown

consciousness of Aksharāteeta Purusha. Same was the case even when He

enacted the Rāsa-leelā with His beloved gopies, the illiterate cowherd women of

Brij in a glorious creation of Yoga-māyā. After the Rāsa-leelā was over, and he

returned to the next Kshara creation (our present world), Tāratam says He was left

with only Akshara level consciousness for 11 more days He passed in Brij and

Mathura. Thereafter, right upto the time He left our world for His divine abode, He

had present within Him only that base level Kshara consciousness (of Avatāra of

Kshara Purusha, the Vishnu) that He was born with! At least on one occasion, based

on Anugitā Parva of Mahābhārata, Shri Krishna must have been re-connected with

Brahm for a while delivering the discourse of Gitā. That perhaps is the way of

Mahābhārata, via both Gitā and Anugitā Parva, to point out that Shri Krishna had

remained connected with – and also later disconnected from Brahm level.

Returning to what Shrutadeva expressed: Was he aware of existence of Parātmās

at the Brahm level of God’s reality? Without clarifying it Bhāgawatam states that he

was asked by Shri Krishna to worship the Brahm-rishies in order to be recipient of



His blessings (He said the same in discourse of Gitā, but discreetly in context of

manifesting His divinity within the Vibhooties)! Vedavyās who composed the text of

Bhāgawatam would surely have intended to advise its primary beneficiaries, the

Parama-hamsas (Brahm-srishties of Tāratam) via the cited dialogue between Shri

Krishna and Shrutadeva alluding to all the three terms (Anātmā, Ātmā and the

Parātmā) that they should investigate the connection, if any, that may exist among

them (particularly in Vyashty sense).

Those Parama-hamsas were the very gopies, says Tāratam, who had participated

in Rāsa-leela enacted in Yoga-māyā’s glorious creation (and earlier the Brij-leela

for 11 years and 52 days) – to be reincarnated as Brahm-srishties in future, during

the last lap of their spiritual journies. Their spirits (consciousness) were seeded with

the divinity of Purushottama’s feet (as per Bhāgawatam’s testimony seen earlier).

Referring to the last instruction of their Lord Purushottama, to His beloved Parātmās

– given in Aksharāteeta Loka, just prior to deluding them to existence in our Kshara

Loka – they surely would have carried subconscious memories of His lotus feet. It

seems those memories had created a certain ‘potential’ in the deluded Brahm-

yogayukta-Ātmās, to later experience those very feet, as and when their linked

Parātmās might happen to shed their delusions.

Not only that, even the Brahm-srishties are said to possess that potential. Only they

– and not all other great ones – carry ‘Brahm-charanas’, the feet of ‘Brahm’ (the

Purushottama) within their hearts, as is asserted in dozens of verses of Tāratam! Did

Shrutadeva have an inkling of this fact when he vaguely talked of certain link-up

among the three Vyashties – the Anātmā, Ātmā and Parātmā? Only Brahm-srishties

would ‘realize’ that potential as and when when their linked up Ātmās and

Parātmās shed their respective delusions and identify themselves with respective,

awakened Parātmās – to find themselves seated at those very feet! We intriguingly

see Gitā not alluding to Parātmās where Purushottama is located. He simply talked

of Brahm-yogayukta-Ātmās. Bhāgawatam too does not explicitly speak of any

level of reality higher than Akshara. The term Brahm or Shri Hari is surely used in

scriptures but it is not made clear whether it alludes to either or both of the Akshara

and Aksharāteeta Purushas (levels of His reality); but it vaguely talks of Parātmās!

2.12 Parātma-nishthā

Let us now review another rare mention of Parātmā in Bhāgawatam that has quite

frequently been cited on these pages. It was spotted quite fortunately towards very

end of the discourse of ‘Uddhava-Gitā’ (chapters 11/6-29) – inconspicuously

deploying an elucidated term “Parātma-nishthā”. It was found in Shri Krishna’s

narration of certain ‘reflections’ of an earlier well-to-do, but now an impoverished

Brāhmana, on how to get liberated from bondage of miserable Kshara world. He

philosophically reflected over that issue and his ‘reflections’ were cited by Shri

Krishna to make some point to Uddhava. It appears at a juncture of successive

queries raised by Uddhava and answered by Him (some of them have been cited

elsewhere on these pages).



Those ‘reflections’ led the Brāhmana to conclude (though his logic is not easy to

grasp) that “Parātma-nishthā” is what needs to be sought for by aspirants in order

to get liberated. In light of Tāratam’s use of the term ‘Parātmā”, Shri Krishna seems

to have finally declared that ‘Parātma-nishthā’ is that means to eventually attain

‘Brahm-nishthā’ (verses /11/23/58-62), say to get established in Brahm (and

thereafter get liberated)! With it He seems to have replied to a very important query

of Uddhava that appeared 7 chapters back (in the text)! In verses /11/16/1-5 he

addressed Shri Krishna as “Param-Brahm, most superior (level of) Brahm, devoid of

any beginning or end and still capable of being present within all those created,

sustained and destroyed. Uddhava said: “He was beyond all bhāvas”. Use of this

term ‘bhāva’ typifies ‘vaguenss adopted by scriptures to reveal its truths only

‘partially’, while hiding the other part. Now ‘bhava’ can assume any connotation

commencing from ‘any thought that may enter human mind’, right upto ‘various

kinds of philosophical contentions’, or even ‘experiences appearing in any higher

state of consciousness’!

Uddhava’s query perhaps was this: How should Jeevas worship such a Param-

Brahm? He pressed ahead with his point “Still, Brahmānas, ‘Paramarshis’ (greatest

sages of ancient past) are known to have succeeded in worshipping you with

‘Bhakti’ and receiving your graces that manifested your divinity within them (say

becoming your Vibhooties”)! In which ‘bhavas’ then did they worship you?” Then

bowing before His lotus feet he said that His feet were the greatest places of

pilgrimage (in hearts of devotees). Addressing Him as a “Maha-Vibhooty” (either

the greatest among all Vibhooties, or Param-Brahm, who turns other Jeevas into

Vibhooties), Uddhava wisely requested that he be informed of identities of all those

who finally became His ‘Vibhooties’ (/11/16/5). The sequence of his queries is quite

similar to that seen in the 10th chapter of Gitā when Arjuna made a similar request.

Almost the same names of Vibhooties are found revealed in Bhāgawatam.

The conceptual part of that query on the ‘bhavas’ seems to have been tersely

replied by Shri Krishna in verses /11/23/58-62 was just discussed, but without

relating it to the original query of 7 chapters back. The commentaters did not point

at this connection. The reply finally seems to have been given, but much after

listing the Vibhooties, discussing system and practices of ‘Varna-ashrama Dharma’,

types of yogas, concepts of reincarnation, law of karma, etc from chapters 16 to

22. Thereafter Shri Krishna narrated unhappy turn of events in past in the life of a

Brahmāna and his own efforts of himself reasoning out the answer, after deeply

contemplating on the ways of getting liberated. He concluded that the ancient

Maharshis (“Poorvatamair-maharshibhihi” of /11/23/58) had sought to have the

‘Parātma-nishthā’ (to get blessed with Parātmā-yoga) in order to get established in

Brahm and (eventually) to get liberated!

Was God then pleased with such ‘bhavas’ of those ancient aspirants (say graced

them with Parātma-yoga) so that they may strike roots in His Brahm level of reality,

and perhaps get entitled to be termed ‘Brahm-rishies’ of scriptures? Shri Krishna did

not reveal that. He only hinted that ‘Parātma-nishthā is either the same as Brahm-



nishthā; or that the former will eventually lead to latter state – before the liberation

can take place (/11/23/58-62)! This part of discussion seems to imply that the

concept (‘bhava’ of /11/16/1-5) of becoming Parātma-nishth was known at least

to some extrent to the great ones of ancient past, along possibly with the truth

about existence of Parātmās at Brahm level of reality. This was inferred from the

text of Yoga-vāsishtha (ref earlier discussion).

Again, could they also have likewise known, with whatever clarity (ref discussion

on Adhyātma Rmāyana and this text) that Partāma-nishthā only meant getting

connected spiritually with Parātmās located at Brahm level? Was this concept

known to some other aspirants also in order for them (like Brāhman of /11/23) to

have inwardly developed an urge to be similarly linked up with Brahm? One more

thing is not made clear: whether ‘Parātma-nishthā’ will instantaneously lead to

one’s getting ‘Brahm-nishth’ (getting established in Brahm)? Tāratam implies from

view-point of a Brahm-srishty that grace of Parātma-yoga, as defined here, would

not lead to its spirit getting instantaneously established in Brahm (via a Parātmā).

That would happen only ‘eventually’, allowing for an inevitable time-lag between

the moment when every Parātmā was deluded and that when she would shed the

delusion – oddly enough, as a consequence of the grasp of highest spiritual truths

she gathers during delusion!

From view-point of a downward linked Parātmā, it would be both: instantaneous

as also eventual: almost instantaneous when reckoned in terms of a Parātmā’s

Aksharāteeta existence (awareness of that Loka); but ‘eventual’ if considered in

terms of time as it would be experienced in delusions of existing in Kshara Loka. As

per several unambiguous statements of Tāratam, every Parātmā would have

experienced thousands of years of existence at Kshara level within the minutest

fraction of a moment as it is experienced at Aksharāteeta level. Such a scenario

exists on account of vast difference between what we term as ‘time’ – as it is

experienced in different levels of His reality.

Let us now consider view-point of a Brahm-yogayukta-Ātmā. Its spiritual potential

receives a quantum jump after getting linked with a Parātmā. Before that link-up it

had to be content with either being in a deluded state of identification with some

Kshara Jeeva; or when its earlier delusion was shed, in its original awareness of the

Akshara level. Yet it was in no way able to get rid of that propensity (altogether) of

getting repeatedly hooked up to miserable delusions of Kshara existence. The link-

up with a Parātmā as if makes it strike a spiritual root at Aksharāteeta level to instill

in it a potential to completely get rid of that ‘propensity’. In the scheme devised by

Purushottama, the Brahm-yogayukta-Ātmā would shed that ‘propensity’ altogether

– but only after its deluded existence in Kshara Loka is shed for ever after period of

‘Jāgani’ is over (after all the 12000 Parātmās collectively awaken)! Thereafter it

would experience for ever only the bliss of Aksharāteeta Loka (through its earlier

linked Parātmā) – and never again the miseries of Kshara experiences! Gitā/5/21

seems to point at this happening (after the period of Jāgani is over).



Those blissful experiences of 12000 Brahm-yogayukta-Ātmās would naturally get

made available to Samashty consciousness of Akshara Purusha in which they

would continue to exist in Akshara Loka, but in its highest Upa-Loka, says Tāratam –

even after the collective awakening of that many Parātmās is over. That would

satisfy for ever the earlier curiosity of Akshara Purusha concerning what blissful

happenings keep on taking place in Aksharāteeta realm. Tāratam categorically

states that Akshara Purusha was unable to do so in past; but now, after the period

of Jāgani is over in our Kshara Brahmānda, that curiosity or desire of of His shall

then be fulfilled for ever! The wonderful scheme of Purushottama, of establishing

the spiritual link-ups of selected 12000 Ātmās with that many Parātmās is expected

to remove the earlier handicap of Akshara Purusha! But it would happen only after

the period of Jāgani is over in our Brahmānda.

All the Parātmās would have by then satisfied their curiosities concerning what the

pain and misery of Kshara existence was like. Their Lord had warned them of such

a happening before consenting, very much grudgingly though, to let them have

that experience (by deluding them). Thereafter, says Tāratam, Parātmās would be

only too glad to resume their blissful existence in Aksharāteeta Loka. Tāratam in

fact articulates not one but two great ‘causes’ – an ardent desire on part of the

Akshara Purusha on one hand to know what keeps on happening in Aksharāteeta

Loka; and of that of all Parātmās on the other, to experience Kshara existence.

Both these causes emanated at higher two levels of reality, yet His methodology of

satisfying those curiosities/desires called for ‘an unprecedented,’ almost a ‘direct

intervention of both those levels’ in affairs of our Kshara Brahmānda. It took place

in present cycle of four Yugas (‘Cahturyugi’) of Vaivasvat Manwantara of the (our)

Vārāha Kalpa, by the end of Dwapar Yuga and it has spilt over to our Kaliyuga. It

would end only after our Kaliyuga ends and Satya-yuga of next Chaturyugi is

heralded.

2.13 Change-over to New Age

In response to queries of king Parikshit who ruled firmly with tenets of Dharma as

stipulated in scriptures, the sage Shukadeva can be seen to have given in last

(12th) Skandha of Bhāgawatam certain prophecies in respect of future happenings

relating to those who would rule India following him (starting from his descendents)!

Shukadeva said that evil forces of Kaliyuga (it had already set in during his lifetime)

will keep on gaining dominance after his death over conscience of both, the rulers

and subjects, emphasis on ethics and morality would be on downslide, etc. Now,

Parikshit had battled with such forces all his life, so his concern over how accent on

Dharma would deteriorate as Kaliyuga advances – as also the manner in which it

would get re-established finally – is quite understandable. Shukadeva provided in

chapter/12/1 even the names and accounts of some future kings, even durations

of rules of their dynasties (even number of generations), etc for thousands of years

of worsening Kaliyuga! After outlining the worsening Indian scenario in times of



Kaliyuga in verses /12/2/1-16, Shukadeva even outlined in verses 17-24 how in

some distant future the divine acts of Kalki would put to an end the Kaliyuga!

Such a changeover has per necessity got to be spectacular, as the earlier three

Yugas were related to ‘gradual’ decrease in accent on Dharma (from its best

enforcement in previous Satya-yuga) over very long periods of time. The coming

changeover on the other hand requires re-establishing the Dharma, from the

lowest level of enforcement to the highest – at a substatntially faster pace! In such

a backdrop Shukadeva (esoterically) revealed even the name of horse (verse 19)

that Kalki would ride as “Devadutta”! This ‘horse’ is contended by this auther to be

none other than Sat-guru, Shri ‘Devachandra ji’ (followers of Mahāmati Prānanāth

have not made this speculation though), as seen from their published literature. The

reason for it could be that ‘Devadutt’ is said in the text to be a ‘horse’. This example

suggests, in this auther’s opinion, what pains scriptures take to hide their mysteries,

particularly when it comes to prophecies.

Then in verses 37-38 is narrated the role of ancient yogis “Devapi” and “Maru” who

would arrive in future as directed by Vāsudeva (Shri Krishna) to re-establish the

ancient ‘Varna-ashrama’ Dharma (‘codes of conducts’ to be followed by those

belonging to four different ‘Varnas’ in various stages of their lives). Commentaters

of Bhāgawatam have not connected up the two prophecies (only 20 verses apart,

in the same chapter too!) relating to the manifestation of Kalki seated on a horse

named ‘Devadutt’ and to ancient yogi ‘Devapi’. Followers of Mahāmati Prānanāth

believe that their Sat-guru was none other than a later reincarnation of “Devapi”,

based mainly on a hint provided by a Beetak contributed by Shri Laldas, one of the

twelve very close disciples of Mahāmati Prānanāth. He hed composed the quite

voluminous Beetak almost immediately after Mahāmati Prānanāth left his body.

As per prevailing understanding of Bhāgawatam, the manifestation of Kalki would

take place only towards end of the life-span of Kaliyuga of 432000 years duration,

commencing from the time of departure of Shri Krishna from our world for His

eternal abode. As is generally known, He departed only over 5100 years ago,

leading to a common belief that said divine intervention of Kalki (and also perhaps

of two yogis Devapi and Maru) would take place only after over 426,000 years! In

this backdrop, the question that needs to be answered is this: How would those

who connect up later with Tāratam (in coming centuries) – and also having a belief

in statements of Bhāgawatam – accept that changeover period from Kaliyuga to

Satya-yuga (and also process of awakening Parama-hamsas to their highest

spiritual potential) had already begun in the 17th century and would even end 1200

years thereafter?

We first need to grasp that it was Bhāgawatam that became instrumental in

awakening a Parātmā spiritually linked with Sat-guru through whom manifested for

first time the truths relating to Aksharāteeta level. That text is projected by Tāratam

as a sort of coded message from Purushottama for the Parama-hamsas (its Brahm-

srishties), the likes of Sat-guru spiritually linked up with other Parātmās. It says all



the ancient scriptures had originated from the Purushottama and reveal truths

regarding some level of His reality or the other. Then it also says that life-span of

Kaliyuga has got drastically reduced from 432,000 years due to ferocious pace of

evil tendancies it unleashed in the hearts of mankind.

Tāratam only briefly says that was given esoterically in Bhāgawatam while giving

out vastly differeing outer limits of life-spans of Jeevas as they appear in different

Yugas. For Satya-, Tretā-, Dwāpar- and Kali-yugas respectively, these limits are

given in it as: 100,000, 10,000, 1000 and 120 years (last limit is given in some

Puranas as 100 years)! Is there any relation between these life-spans and those of

Yugas themselves? As for latter, Tāratam only says it happens due to mankind not

following the tenets of Dharma to fullest extent, as might have been done in Satya-

yuga. It was followed in reducing extents in subsequent Yugas. That may account

for such a dramatic reduction (as has perhaps been indicated esoterically in text)

in maximum life-spans of mankind in different Yugas! An unsuccessful attempt was

made to work out if any formula emrges to assess extent of reduction in life-span of

Kaliyuga as given in Bhāgwatam. Was it left only to God’s judgement to decide on

when, and in what manner to herald the coming, most glorious, spiritual age? Bible

too seems to suggest that, as would hopefully be seen from later discussion.

2.14 Efficacy

Certain esotericity seems to be present even in Bhāgawatam’s Mahatmya portion

while disclosing the time when its efficacy in fighting the maliciousness spreading

in Kaliyuga (and bringing about the changeover to next Satyayuga) would get

demonstrated in India. The legendary Sanakādi are said to have done it to

convince Nārada and several great sages who had gathered on the bank of holy

river Ganga (Ganges) at Haridwar. Narada had once visited India (verses 1/25-26

of Mahatmya) when 260 years of Kaliyuga had elapsed (verses 1/28-36 and 6/94-

6), when Hindu temples and places of pilgrimage were being destroyed/defaced

by ‘Yavanas’ (invaders of other than Hindu faith). It would have happened about

4850 years ago (5100 minus 260 years) or 2840 BC. But history of India reveals that

such incidents indeed took place, but only in last 1000-1500 years (not earlier than

500-1000 AD). That animosity against religious sentiments of Hindu faith continued

till days of Moghul rule in India ended around middle of 19th century AD (India

became independent hundred years thereafter).

We may not be able to cite reference of any religious literature saying that

Bhāgawatam’s efficacy had actually been demonstrated so very conclusively as is

stated in its Māhātmya portion. It did happen; but only in lifetime of Sat-guru in the

year 1618 AD, as has been exhaustively narrated in several Beetaks composed

around the end of 17th century by disciples of Mahāmati Prānanāth! Unfortunately,

this fact is not known today outside of the Pranami Samaj. It is not found recorded

in any religious literature of last three centuries read by the masses. Hence they are

not aware at all of this momentous happening when a Parātmā named “Sundari”,

linked up with the Satguru, was awakened – and that in turn initiated the process of



awakening of other Parātmās too! It happened after 14 years of dedicated efforts

(with great devotion towards Shri Krishna), as elucidated in Beetak literature, of the

Satguru in grasping the intents of Bhāgawatam. The Purushottama appeared

before him, obviously in his highest state of consciousness and revealed the

highest spiritual truths relating to present delusion of Parātmās, etc.

It is amazing that such a happening that stirred up thousands in Gujarat and few

other states of India should have remained practically unknown even in those

states. In retrospect we can only say God had willed it that way. The voluminous

Beetak of Shri Laldas has been traditionally recited in all Pranami temples (there

may be dozens of them in India!) in a particular month, every year, for last over 300

years! A few million persons of Pranami community can recall that episode by

heart. So, accepting that it did happen, is it then possible that said Mahatmya of

Bhāgawatam purposely misled its readers, about the time of demonstration of

efficacy of Bhāgawatam, by saying that it took place much earlier than it factually

did – though perhaps intended by the Sat-guru himself – in 1618 AD? Was it done to

keep alive the interest of all spiritual aspirants focused on efficacy of Bhāgwatam

(like all Mahatmyas do in respect of their texts) for thousands of years?

If so, then it seems to have served the purpose in case of the satguru, the Parama-

hamsa (and also partially for thousands of others who would have appeared

before him), for whom the text was especially composed! As per Tāratam, precise

time of such a stupendous happening was intentionally kept a closely guarded

secret in His divine dispensation for present times. About the mismatch in times

given by Bhāgawatam and what history gives out today: It can be explained only

by a categoric statement of Tāratam that scriptures often reveal ‘future’ events

(prophecies) as if they had already taken place in ‘past’! The religious literature

often seems to lament that precise dates of future happenings are not clearly

revealed in scriptures. Anyway the said mismatch does raise yet another

conjecture on ‘place’ (Haridwar) where efficacy of Bhāgawatam is said to have

been demonstrated some 4850 years ago by Sanakādi.

Mahamati Prānanāth is said to have convened a congregation of several religious

heads, representing different schools of philosophical thought, in the year 1678 AD

at Haridwār. Timewise, the event took place after the Parātmā, “Indrawati”, linked

with him had awakened. By that time thousands of divine verses of Tāratam had

already manifested within his consciousness with the efforts of his Sat-guru (and of

course latter’s awakened Parātmā ‘Sundari’). Thereafter, till he passed away in

year 1694 AD, about 1000 more verses (out of a total of 18758) manifested, directly

through his Parātmā, “Indrawati”. Anyway, those heads of Hindu sects had

gathered at Haridwār on an auspicious occasion of ‘Kumbh Mela’ then held in

Haridwar (It is traditionally held in rotation at different holy places) to take dips in

holy river Ganges! Mahāmati Prānanāth had then explained to them the tenets of

Tāratam Vāni. No record of even this episode is found in religious literature (other

than in the beetaks).



The wisdom of Tāratam that manifested in Mahāmati Prānanāth is said to have

emanated from two Parātmās, linked with him and also his Sat-guru. We can not

really segregate the contributions of either these two personages, or even their

Parātmās. Perhaps that is why all Beetaks have followed a practice of beginning

their narrations with the appearance of Sat-guru in world, and ending only with the

disappearance of Mahāmati Prānanāth! Their personalities can not be separated

from one another. Even verses of Bhāgawatam/12/2/37-8 have talked of the two

ancient yogis, Devāpi and Maru, almost in the same breath (and Shri Laldas has

hinted in his Beetak that those two were the same as the two personages whose

biography he was giving out).

Tāratam often says that Bhāgawatam was a message that the same God had sent

for them in ancient past. The former however states in a verse that manifestation of

Kalki would take place a person, named “Vishnuyasha”, who would ride a horse

named ‘Devadutta’ to perform such divine deeds as would finally end the

Kaliyuga. The followers of Mahāmati Prānanāth could be in a sort of fix: who out of

their two personages is that Bhgāwatam’s Avatāra of Kalki? Based on what

Tāratam says, it is propounded here that all 12000 Brahm-srishties would witness the

manifestation of Kalki (Purushottama) right within their hearts, as their linked up

Parātmās awaken one by one during the period of Jāgani to re-unite with Him, the

Ishwara of all three Lokas. Although He dwells in Aksharateeta Loka, He remotely

governs the Vyashties of Akshara and Kshara Lokas; and seems to have likewise

made arrangements to let at least some of them, have only a ‘remote’ experience

of union with Him (through their linked up Parātmās).

It is really the feat of remotely experiencing the Purushottama (manifestation of His

experiences in the hearts of Brahm-srishties) that seems to have been termed in

Bhāgawatam as ‘manifestation of Kalki’ in our world. It happened for the first time

within Sat-guru in year 1618, and later in 1678 AD within Mahāmati Prānanāth.

Quite a long, 1200 year period was provided in His scheme for those happenings to

take place with all Brahm-srishties. But its progression seems to have got slowed

down, almost ‘halted’, for over 300 years, for whatever reasons! The message of

Tāratam has not spread to even a minute part of India by year 2012, leave alone to

rest of the world. This leaves only 866 years from 2012 to demonstrate the

effectiveness of His scheme in respect of all the Brahm-srishties. Some of them are

bound to appear in other countries too. He can be relied upon to make His

prophecy concerning the period of Jāgani come true.

Again, the unprecedented nature of such happenings is not limited only to our

‘Bhoo’ Upa-Loka (our ‘world’). It has within its purview the entire Kshara Brahmānda

consisting of all 14 Upa-Lokas, particularly the highest four where the most evolved

Jeevas are said to reside (they too would appear in our world in due time). That is

perhaps why Tāratam says, most divine Aura (its ‘Noor’) shall spread to all the 14

Upa-Lokas through every Brahm-srishty, as and when its linked up Parātmā

happens to awaken. But the present world scenario may justifiably seem be quite

depressing to spiritual aspirants. A hope was indeed kindled in this auther by a



divine Bhrigu Samhita reading he received in end of 2000 AD. In present context its

contents, and also of several subsequent readings can be briely be summarized as

ollows: Time is not far away when three centuries-long slow-down in progression of

awakening remaining Parātmās would end and it would gather pace!

Those readings pointed out that the message of Tāratam is bound to spread in the

world in coming times. Its intents would then be grasped by requisitely evolved

persons and the said almost halted progression would be put back on track. That

can be said to have actually begun in a small way when the decade of 1980’s saw

gradual (printed) publications, one by one, of all 14 books of Tāratam Vāni along

with translations and commentaries. That phase was over a few years back. Still

collating with scriptures and publicizing the research finding has to gather pace.

This auther connected with Tāratam Vāni in the year 1995 and was fascinated. With

passage of time that fascination kept on increasing. It was then found that Tāratam

had itself hinted clearly at a certain slow-down (but without specifying its duration)!

But no one could have guessed it would be three long centuries long! It certainly

was comforting to know from an independent, prestigious source of Bhrigu Samhita

that the said progression would gather pace in coming decades.

It is implicit in those readings that some spiritually evolved Brahm-srishties could

have reincarnated in 20th century and that the remaining ones would keep on

doing so at regular intervals during the remaining period of Jāgani. If it did not so

happen, that period would gradually get depleted, leaving lesser and lesser time

for remaining Parātmās to awaken! Who knows what newer means would then be

adopted by God to awaken His beloved Parātmās? He might even reveal in other

parts of the world some more spiritual truths to augment more directly the

scriptures prevalent there! Such kind acts on His part would certainly be welcome

by all spiritual aspirants who are dismayed at the present religious strifes cropping

up in the name of religion! This atmosphere is not surely conducive to their seeking

inspiration from scriptures other than perhaps of their own faith. In that backdrop

an effort was made to search if Bible contained any clues on when the worsening

times (Kaliyuga) would come to an end.

2.15 More Biblical References

Jesus was seen to have revealed in clear terms some 2000 years ago that God had

planned to cut short the period of horrors. That ‘period’ seems almost pointing at

present and coming times of weapons of mass destruction, even good people

turning away from adherence to scriptures and also the increasing fury of Nature.

But what is the provocation for such a direct intervention, if mankind has deserved

all that owing to its own evil deeds? Bible says He would do that to save good

people – particularly His children (Brahm-srishties, refer earlier two discussions on

Bible) – from having to suffer those horrors, for too long. This presents yet another

viewpoint relating to His divine Plan to cut short the otherwise 432,000 year-long

Kaliyuga of Bhāgawatam as also the above discussion on its Mahatmya!



It is quite clear from Mark/13 that God had a plan to cut short the duration of

horrible times essentially for sake of those who are dear to Him. In words of Jesus

Christ (verses 19-20): “For the trouble of those days will be far worse than any the

world has ever known from the very beginning when God created the world until

the present time. Nor will there ever be anything like it again. But the Lord has

reduced the number of those days; if he had not, nobody would survive. For the

sake of his chosen people, however, he has reduced those days”. It was a part of

such plan that in order to put an end to a steep downslide in world affairs, God

would also again send His son, Jesus Christ, in world (It is understood that Holy

Quran too points at this). Tāratam refers to that statement and even ties it up with

happenings related with the Satguru!

Jesus also draws a clear line of demarcation between false prophets, those who

perform miracles to impress the masses, etc and those who who are the ‘chosen’

people of God. In verses 21-23 Jesus confides to his disciples: ”Then, if anyone says

to you, ‘Look, here is the Messaiah!’ or, ‘Look, there he is!’ – do not believe him. For

false Messiahs and false prophets will appear. They will perform miracles and

wonders in order to deceive even God’s chosen people, if possible. Be on your

guard! I have told you everything before the time comes”. In next two verses [24-

25] Jesus made a very significant prophecy: “In the days after that time of trouble,

the sun will grow dark, the moon will no longer shine, the stars will fall from heaven,

and the powers in space will be driven from their courses”. Such events have not

occurred yet, but some psychics predict such events (like sudden tipping of axis of

earth’s rotation). Three earlier verses [21-23] warn us of dangers of prophecies: How

miscreants may use them to deceive others! Is it why these are worded vaguely?

Then Jesus spoke about his own return in verses 26-27: “Then the Son of Man will

appear, coming in the clouds with great power and glory. He will send the angels

out to the four corners of the earth to gather God’s chosen people from one end of

the world to the other”. Does ‘coming in clouds’ possibly refer to his (baffling) re-

appearance among the followers of other than Testaments, even of Quran – the

scriptures of ‘Qateb’ stream, as Tāratam terms them? Tāratam seems implying as

such! When exactly such unprecedented happenings would take place? Following

words of Jesus [Mark/13/32-33] are so very relevant to topic of present discussion:

“No one knows, however, when that day or hour will come – neither the angels in

heaven, nor the Son; only the Father knows. Be on watch, be alert, for you do not

know when the time will come”.

To hint at who are dear to God, who belong to His Kingdom, what wonderful

happenings will take place in future, etc Jesus explained his parable of weeds in

Matthews/13/37-43. Jesus said, ”The man who sowed the good seed is the Son of

Man; the field is the world; the good seed is the people who belong to the

Kingdom; the weeds are the people who belong to the Evil One; and the enemy

who sowed the weeds is the Devil. The harvest is the end of the age, and the

harvest workers are angels [37-39]. Just as the weeds are gathered up and burnt in

the fire, so the same thing will happen at the end of the age: the Son of Man will



send out his angels to gather up out of his Kingdom all those who cause people to

sin and all others who do evil things, and they will throw them into the fiery furnace,

where they will cry and grind their teeth [40-42]. Then God’s people will shine like

the sun in their Father’s Kingdom. Listen, then, if you have ears [43]!”

All that is going to happen during ‘end of the age’ as Bible calls it, termed here as

‘change-over period to next Satya-yuga’! We need to correlate Bible’s statements

with what is discussed here regarding ‘Ātyantik Pralaya’ of Parama-hamsas (the

Brahm-srishties of Tāratam) when Kalki would manifest in them by end of Kaliyuga,

during the period of Jāgani. Is Bible’s ‘end of the age’ same as that of ‘Kaliyuga or

of period of Jāgani’? The 43rd verse clearly says that God’s people – Brahm-srishties

– would ‘shine like the son in their Father’s Kingdom’. Does it esoterically relate to

their being instruments of spreading in world the most divine Aura of Aksharāteeta

level? In the humble opinion of this auther, the above statements of Bible sure

corroborate those of Bhāgawatam and also Tāratam Vāni. What Jesus said to the

Jewish authorities in Jerusalem, on an occasion of some religious festival, about

the future times pertains to ‘our present times’!

The Jewish authorities were critical of Jesus healing someone on a Sabbath, refer

John/5/17-8. Jesus said “My Father is always working, and I too must work. This

saying made the Jewish authorities all the more determined to kill him; not only

had he broken the Sabbath law, but he had said that God was his own Father and

in this way had made himself equal with God”. These later verses [25-29] are

particularly relevant to topic under discussion. “I am telling you the truth: the time is

coming – the time has already come – when the dead will hear the voice of the

Son of God, and those who hear it will come to life [25]. Just as the Father is himself

the source of life, in the same way he has made his Son to be the source of life [26].

And he has given the Son the right to judge, because he is the Son of Man [27]. Do

not be surprised at this; the time is coming when all the dead will hear his voice

[28] and come out of their graves: those who have done good will rise and live,

and those who have done evil will rise and be condemned [29]”.

2.16 New Age: Evolving Clarity

The scriptures discussed earlier seem to present an evolving perspective in terms

of clarity they provide on two separate issues. First one relates to spiritual truths

pertaining to highest level of reality and how it can be realized by mankind.

Second one relates to their prophetic statements about when it could be realized

by at least some evolved human beings. As for spiritual truths, we have already

reviewed some welknown scriptures and a few more like Mahabharata and

Upanishadas would come up for discussion in next chapter. We may now attempt

a brief summary of prophecies: how vaguely or otherwise these were given out in

past, particularly regarding unprecedented nature of the change-over period to a

glorious New Age to be characterized by comprehensive understanding of His

reality. It is natural indeed for spiritual aspirants of the present to possess a curiosity:



How did the same God lead them gradually, from time to time, while executing His

divine plan to reward them.

We saw while discussing Yogāvasishtha how casually the revered sage Vasishtha

is said to have mentioned to sage Kakabhushundi that he would keep on returning

to world, time and again, but only upto the ‘Vaivasvat’ Manwantara (that we are

presently located in). The underlying purpose of his said visits would surely have

been to impart spiritual truths to mankind, in keeping with demands of times. His

very last visit could have been in Treta-yuga of our Chaturyugi. We also saw that

information he then furnished, as recorded in the text, perhaps was a replica of

what he had done in most ancient times (in beginning of first Parardha). But he did

not disclose at that ancient time that there shall not be left any need for him to

appear again to furnish similar truths. Why? Because all augmenting truths would

have been furnished (via Tārtam Vāni?) in our Manwantara – after the last time he

gave discourse in our present Chaturyugi – which could enable a comprehensive

understanding of the spiritual truths to be developed by mankind? That could well

have been the case; put it differently, it is the best that this auther can make out of

his enigmatic mention of Vaivasvata manwantara.

Vasishtha also did not reveal (ref Sarga 199 of Nirvana Prakarana, Uttarardha of

Yogāvasishtha) the purpose why many great personages, Jeevan-muktas (those

who had realized their eternal Ātmās), reside in certain holy places, as if they had

were staying in some colonies of souls who too had evolved likewise (in their subtle

bodies?). Were they awaiting their turn to reincarnate at some appropriate future

time, to further evolve and later realize the highest reality (in Turyateeta states)

either during or ahead of the period of Jāgani, to thereafter get liberated (for ever)

from clutches of Māyā? This point is not clarified. He simply gave out names of holy

places those personages choose to inhabit. One of them, the ‘Kalapa-gram’, was

mentioned much later (recorded in Bhāgawatam/12/2/37-8) by Shukadeva as the

place where the two great yogis, Devapi and Maru (discussed earlier), were

residing then – 5000 years ago (when Kaliyuga had just commenced)!

Shukadeva had also prophesied then that they would reappear in world when the

Kaliyuga would be about to end. He also said, the two yogies would re-establish,

as directed by Shri Krishna (in its true spirit), the original ‘Varna-ashram Dharma’ –

meaning the one that Shri Krishna had Himself devised (Gita confirmsthis)! Since

Shri Laldas had hinted in his Beetak that those yogis were the two personages

whose biographies he was furnishing, efforts were made to find out about their

social and spiritual status as per the Puranas, etc – apart from the original spirit

behind the ancient Varna-ashrama system. It was further prompted on learning

that two centuries later, even some Theosophists held a belief that same two yogis

were the ‘Mahatmas’ (great personages) who had inspired them to found the

Theosophical Society, by way of preparing for a spiritual New Age! Whatever could

be gathered about them and the ancient system would be found in next chapter.

A highly significant thing that Vasishtha said to Shri Rama (recorded in 97th chapter

of the same Prakarana) was this: In different parts of world were prevalent many



schools of thought and one of them related to those whom he called ‘Mlechchas’.

It is perhaps a reference to the beliefs that are based on Judio-Christian-Islamic

stream of scriptures that Tāratam terms as ‘Qateb’. He went on to described that

belief in following manner: After death the bodies of people are buried in the belief

that in due time God would either raise them and liberate, alternatively send them

to hell or heaven, depending upon their past deeds! He said there was nothing

wrong in those beliefs; they were appropriate to their cultures. What more,

Vasishtha even said that in countries, where such beliefs prevail, appear great

personages, who with their sun-like radiance (divine influence, Aura) enlighten the

hearts of people; hence their teachings too need to be followed!

The veracity of statement of Vasishtha can be easily verified by the readers by

referring to words of Bible reproduced en verbatim in earlier paragraphs.Did

Vasistha’s disclosure amount to a prophecy on what would be held as ‘beliefs’

after hundreds of thousands years among the followers of scriptures like Testaments

and Quran? Had such beliefs actually prevailed in those parts of the world, since

most ancient times of Vasishtha till date? The latter could also be true as we find a

most fundamental difference between what is propounded in the two streams of

scriptures: those of Indian origin and the ones that originated in West Asia (Qateb).

Indian scriptures talk of ‘life-after-life’ existence of human souls, while those of West

Asia (Qateb traditions) by and large speak only of ‘single life existence’ of humans.

Indian beliefs need stretching the imagination too far; while those of Qateb fall

quite wthin the range of everyone’s life-long experiences. These two streams of

beliefs could well have originated in most ancient times to be continued right upto

the times of Vasishtha in end of Treta-yuga (and till date).

We also can not rule out that it was a very remarkable prophecy of Vasistha, akin

to the one he made before Shr Rama concerning arrival in future of Shri Krishna

who would then declare Himself to be God (Purushottama). That prophecy came

true over 5100 years before present times (ref 15th chapter of Gitā). It could also

likewise have been a very remarkable prophecy pointing at beliefs that would

prevail later (based on Qateb stream of scriptures). Readers may refer to the words

of Jesus quoted en verbatim from the discourses of Jesus Christ to his disciples,

when Kaliyuga had advanced by 3100 more years. Jesus clearly talked of a New

Age hinting that changeover to it was not far off. He also prophesied that he would

return in those times. If we turn to Tāratam Vāni that got manifested in 17 th century,

we see it announces not only the beginning but also end of that changeover

period (apart from a seeming slow-down in process of changeover)!

We have discussed Gitā, Bhāgawatam, Bible and Tāratam. It is interesting to see

how their contents – in terms of both, spiritual concepts as also prophecies, have

progressively become clearer as the time of New Age drew nearer! It has to be

kept in mind that Jesus appeared when 3100 years of Kaliyuga had elapsed

already. So the statements of Bible can reasonably be taken as having attempted

to disclose some of the hitherto undisclosed plan of God, than was attempted by

Gitā or Bhāgawatam. With the same logic, Tāratam can be expected to have



disclosed a little more of His plan in respect of the said change-over that is on way

presently, during the period of Jāgani, and when it would end. After all, the same

God (Purushottama) has revealed spiritual truths in past along with His plan to

evolve some deserving ones (out of the countless human beings) in future to the

highest possible level. Taratam says that explicitly.

With such a premise, we may expect Him to resort to revealing even more truths, if

and when required, in the remaining period of Jāgani in order to push forward His

divine plan. Gitā/15/15 provides us with a basis for that hypothesis in words of Shri

Krishna. He had hinted (Gitā/15/19-20) that aspirants need to concentrate on

grasping the truths relating to Purushottama principle. But He did not reveal that

those who succeed in that effort would be able to experience a part of bliss that

Brahm-yogayukta-Ātmās, with whom they were linked, would experience. He

does not seem to have done that based on His words recorded in Bhāgawatam.

Raasa-leela was enacted in the glorious creation of Yoga-Māyā by Gopies with

Shri Krishna – again without even a hint of the spiritual upliftment that must have

been provided to them in order to later enable their spirits to experience the bliss

of Brahm, Purushottama. It was also not revealed how Parātma-nishthā of great

personages would lead to being established in Brahm (Brahm-nishthā).

All that was left to be clarified after 47 centuries through Tāratam Vāni when the

time had almost arrived, as per His planning, to end the Kaliyuga! During the time

gap between Bhāgawatam and Gitā on one side and Tāratam Vāni on the other,

He seems to have disclosed, via the words of Jesus Christ that period of horrors

would be shortened by God so that His children would not be called upon to suffer

too much. He also chose to disclose via Jesus about Kingdom of God, how to

reach there, etc. But He did that in a cultural backdrop that was far different from

that in India, where people remained under an impression that end of Kaliyuga

was still very far away; after hundreds of thousand years. Then He revealed via

Tāratam that the life-span of Kaliyuga had been slashed down drastically due to

very pace at which it had unleashed its evil influence!

Above scenario has been presented to make few points. First one is that it can

indeed be useful to collate relevant information from various scriptures in order to

develop a more comprehensive understanding about God, the Purushottama of

Gitā/15/16-20 and His plan for mankind. Secondly, Tāratam Vāni can be reckoned

as yet another scripture. Next, certain urgency needs to be attached by aspirants

(of all faiths, located in different parts of the world) in making efforts to meet their

spiritual goals. God has decided to deliver highest spiritual rewards to them in a

predetermined time-span that would end in not too distant a future. They need to

gear up to claim those rewards by acquiring all available spiritual truths, from any

source they can lay their hands on.

Seventeenth Century Revelations - Nijanand · Seventeenth Century Revelations ... divine Tāratam...

Documents

Transcript of Seventeenth Century Revelations - Nijanand · Seventeenth Century Revelations ... divine Tāratam...