In the realm of the animated world, there are two broad categories. Certain living beings are social creatures, and some others are non-social. Generally, animals of the cat group are non-social. Cats, hyenas, black tigers, leopards, panthers, jaguars, Royal Bengal tigers – they are all animals of the cat group. They are non-social animals. [[And]] animals of the dog group are to some extent social. They are dogs, wolves, and lions. And there are certain animals which do not have canine teeth. [[They are the most social animals in the world.]] They belong to the ape group and proto-ape group. [[Also]] within this category are other animals who are still to be domesticated.
Man is a living being. However, man comes within the ape group – that is, man is a social animal, [[a social being rather,]] though logicians of the past used to say that man is a rational animal.
[[You see, there is the plant world, there is the animal world, there is the human world.]] What is the difference amongst them? [[Between animals and plants,]] the difference is that animals can move whereas plants are stationary. But regarding animals, can we say animals are moving plants? No. Similarly, the fundamental difference between animals and human beings is that human beings have got dharma whereas animals are without dharma. But as we cannot say that animals are moving plants, we cannot say that man is a dharmic animal.
A human being is a social being. Social beings cannot lead a secluded life. They need friends. They also want friends. If a person is to live alone in a big town or in a village, he will become insane. His mental equilibrium will be lost because by nature he is a social being. And human philosophy also reflects this human characteristic.
When asked by a logician, a philosopher will say that this universe is a Macropsychic conation; that multiplication is the wont of creation – “one” becoming many, “mono” becoming “multi”. But those philosophers will not be able amplify the idea. And ask a person engaged in actional cult as to why the universe was created. He will say: “When movement is the order of creation, there must be spatial and personal differences, and that is why the universe was created.” If you request him to go into details he will not be able to amplify the idea either. But when you ask a devotee why the world is created, he will apply the theory that man is a social being. When man is a social being, naturally for him his Supreme Father, Parama Puruśa, is also a social being. Suppose you are fond of cheese, you will always be thinking that all the living beings of this universe are also fond of cheese. This is the psychology, that is, your philosophy will be reflected on others. This is the human characteristic. So the devotee will think in this line. Since a man is a social being, so his Creator, his Progenitor, is also a social being. He also wants to live with all and does not want to lead a secluded life.
The idea or the reply of the devotee is, “I do not know philosophy, I do not know the actional cult. My reply is, When there was nothing in the Universe, that is, when my Supreme Father, my Parama Puruśa, was alone in the universe, just try to have an idea regarding His position – how boring it was – what a monotony! He was alone in the Universe. There was no Universe even. As soon as the Universe is created, heterogeneity is also created. That heterogeneity saves Him from the pains of monotony. But there was no heterogeneity because there was no Universe even. So just to save Himself from the trouble and pains of monotony my Lord Parama Puruśa Himself divided His existence into many. “Mono” became “multi”. He was a singular entity and now He created this diversity within His mind – not “without” His mind, because outside Him there is nothing.
So man is a social being and his Parama Puruśa is also a social being. He cannot live alone. He wants to play with His children. That is why He created many. And now He is not alone. He is within the mind of each and every creation, and nobody, no mind and no soul, is alone in this world. He wants that there should be many, otherwise He would become insane, mad, because of the monotony of singularity.
Now, who is the real friend? Say there is Mr. X and Mr. Y. Did they come into this world at the same moment? No, one earlier and the other later. Will they leave this world just at the same moment? No, one earlier and the other later. Nobody is actually contemporary to others. Is it not a fact?
[[In Sanskrit there are four words for the English word “friend”.]] But you know, identity is ultravires to the spirit of nature. No two things of this world are identical to one another. They may be similar, there may be similarity, but no two things are identical to one another. Two tumblers are created by the same potter but they are not identical. And when we say “They are all synonymous expressions” – it is incorrect. The inner significance of each and every word varies. For “village” there are two Latin adjectives. One is “rural” and the other is “rustic”. “Rural” is used in a good sense and “rustic” in a bad sense. They may be similar but they are not identical. For “child” two adjectives are “childish” and “childlike”. “Childlike” is always in a good sense and “childish” always in a bad sense. No two words are identical. Neither are things.
In Sanskrit there are four words for “friend”, but they are not identical to one another. They may be similar. Those four words are bandhu, suhrd, mitram and sakhá. Bandhumeans “those within the bondage of love”. That is, when one cannot tolerate the idea of separation one is called bandhu. Now, have you got any bandhu in this world? No. Even your friend, your best friend, did not come at the same time as you, and after leaving the cremation ground there is permanent separation. He will be with you up to the cremation ground. After your cremation he will not be with you. So he is not bandhu, he is not a friend, for he can tolerate the idea of separation. So who is the real friend? Parama Puruśa. When you are in this physical framework, in this quinquelemental framework, He is with you, with your body, with your mind and with your spirit. After death, He will be with your mind, with your soul. When the body is lost, the body will become one with the earth but mind and spirit will remain. He will be with you. So He is the real friend, He is the real bandhu[[, and there cannot be any mundane friend, mundane bandhu. It is a false utterance to say that a mundane friend is the best friend. Nobody is your friend. Only Parama Puruśa is your friend, and nobody else is your friend.
The second word is suhrd. Suhrd means “with whom there is never any clash, clash of ideology”. You must see in your family there is psychological clash amongst brothers, sisters, husband and wife. So everywhere there is psychological clash.]] In that respect nobody is your friend or comrade. So many fissiparous tendencies exist in the realm of intellectuality. [[So]] can there be a suhrd [[in this world]]? No. But your ideas are always respected by or approved by Parama Puruśa. Because they are approved by Parama Puruśa, you get the scope to express your views. So He is the only suhrd. No one else in this world is your suhrd.
The fourth one is sakhá. (About the third one I will speak later.) [[The root meaning is]] “one entity in two different structures”. That is, structures vary but the entitative flow does not vary. With your friends or relatives or even amongst family members there is no such love [[– that the physical bodies,]] the physical structures, vary, but the inner self does not vary. It is not the case with anybody in this world. But it is the case with Parama Puruśa because He is within. So there are differences in entitative structure, but there is no difference in ectoplasmic structure. So Parama Puruśa is the only sakhá. Nobody else can be your sakhá.
The third one is mitram. Mitram means “colleague”. Two physicians are mitram. Two thieves, two pleaders are also mitram; that is, they have a similar duty and profession. When the duty is similar, the term “colleague” is used – the Sankrit term of which is mitram. [[You may have mitram in this world but they are colleagues and nothing else. You have seen that mitram may or may not be friends.]] Two physicians of a small village are not friends – they are at best colleagues because there is competition between them. Parama Puruśa alone is your real friend. It is your duty to strengthen the hand of your real friend, that is, of Parama Puruśa. How can you do it? Just be a moralist – move along the path of spirituality and help His ectoplasmic structure with that of yours. Be a machine in the hands of Parama Puruśa and help Him in creating a more beautiful world and a [[more]] beautiful human society.
Shrii Shrii Anandamurti
25 May 1979, Rotterdam