Shloka 3

Let the mind every dawn dwell and ponder on Ram |
Further let the first word that emanates be Ram ||
Let this great upright behavior never abandon |
Blessed be he among all humans, this person || 3 ||

When considering what exactly one needs to do when starting on the path of devotion, this shlōk is worth mulling over.
Superficially, Samartha is telling us a very practical and mechanical solution. In fact, being able to provide instruction that is accessible to anyone, that can be easily implemented in daily life, and when practiced faithfully is incrementally helpful towards progress, is a specialty of Samartha.

Samartha's instruction to us is to think of Ram as the first thing every morning. With this order, it is as though he is waking up a sleeping person. He is simultaneously indicating what to do when one awakes, and what it means to be awake. The word dawn signifies a specific time. The period of dawn consists of 2-3 hours before sunrise. Normally, the period between 4:30 am to 6-6:30 am may be considered as dawn. Waking up within this period is considered excellent for well-being and for meditation. A person who goes to bed at night between 9:30-10:00 pm can awake easily at this time, having slept for 6-7 hours. In Ayurveda, this is defined as the period of Vāta. Waking up during this time ideal from a point of personal hygiene. After brushing one's teeth and using the toilet, the body feels clean, light and energetic. This state is ideal for meditation. The environs are quiet, pleasant and healthful. The intellect is sharp and the mind is eager. Any meditation at this time is always beneficial to the body, mind and intellect. As far as possible sit erect and crosslegged on a deerskin or woollen mat, or even on one's own firm bed. One should face east or north. The hands should be placed in an Ardhānjalī (half-joined), on top of each other in front below the belly-button, or alternatively in the Dnyānamudrā (knowledge pose), on top of each knee. Next, chant the name of your chosen deity in your mind.

The repeating of the name should be done in a voice preceding the Vaikharī, i.e. in Madhyamā, Pashyanti or in Parā such as have been described by the philosophers. Being able to utter the name in the Parā is very difficult for the common person. This has perhaps been, or must have been achieved only by the exceptional individual. Only when concentration is absolute and has reached the level of complete absorption, when the intellect is stilled, and when the turbulence in the mind is quelled and all desires are eliminated, thats when the Parā voice can become actionable. This is not possible without long periods of constancy, purity of body & mind and ardent effort. At least in the initial stages it is preferable to not venture that way. After mentally repeating the name, and prior to other daily activities, one should also vocally chant the name. In our ancient tradition, it was customary to recite several different stotras (hymns) or sing bhupāļįs (devotional songs). This culture was prevalent up until the last generation in our society. Even vaudeville composers have composed bhupāļįs in the past.
This practice is almost absent in the present young generation. Instead, under the guide of intellectualism, questions such as 'What is the point of this?', 'What for?', 'Why bother?' have created the conditions to further degrade the many good aspects of culture that still survive. Old traditions have been dismantled, but nothing new and good has been established in its place. As a result a kind of vacuum has been left behind and despair is rising.

How many of these new fashionable ideas that invade the new generation proven to be useful in their own right? But the space for asking such questions has been eroded. In our tradition it is said, "Despite skepticism in the afterworld, the inauspicious is to be rejected by people. If it doesn't exist, what harm can arise, and if it does, then the doubters will perish". This is rather salient from a practical point of view. Does God exist or not? Should one waste time in uttering His name? What benefit does it bring? Even if these questions are not resolved, what great loss if one spends 10-15 minutes every morning in quiet contemplation? Even if my limited intelligence convinces me indeed that God doesn't exist, then the 10-15 minutes may be wasted. We know well how much time gets wasted daily. But if great, thoughtful personalties such as Dnyāneshwar, Tukārām and Rāmdās, tell us with full conviction that God exists, and if I cannot set aside 10-15 minutes every day for my own spiritual benefit, then doesn't it imply that I am bringing about my own destruction? We must therefore conclude that daily reflection will only bring benefit and has no real downsides. This is to err on the safe side.

Somewhat related to this, but in a different way, let me relate my own experience. During the summers, when I lived in Lonavala, I would commute from Lonavala to Pune every day for work. The morning train would leave at 10-10:30 am and would reach Pune between 11:30-12 noon. I would work at the University and return in the evening. I would eat lunch before leaving in the morning. Our dear Dada would always ensure that I carried a light lunch with me. I would say, "This is an everyday route for me. It ends in one hour and 30 minutes. I eat before leaving - so why pack an additional lunch?" Dada would reply, "Is the additional burden going to be so large that you will need to hire a porter? It is our tradition to carry a meal with you when you travel. If this has scriptural support or not, you go ahead and determine that." He would remind me to carry a lunch every day. One day something went wrong with the train and it stopped somewhere along the way. We were stuck for 4-5 hours; you might imagine the plight of those that didn't have anything with them. Abiding by the rule of carrying a lunch allowed me and a young fellow traveller child to complete the journey in comfort. Even if the time spent in meditating feels wasteful, it is likely to benefit in this sort of way.

The kind of lifestyle we lead today comes with numerous stresses affecting the body, mind and intellect. These rising stresses have led to a large increase in more or less severe diseases such as indigestion, constipation, acidity, insomnia, blood pressure, diabetes and heart disease. The time spent in quiet meditation in the morning is also likely to be beneficial in alleviating these stress-related diseases. Even if this meditation is done in a purely mechanical manner, it is likely to have some effect. Of course, if it is done with faith and mindfulness, then it will inevitably lead to "the greatest possible result". If in addition to just spending some time chanting the name of your deity for a few minutes in the morning, if one continues to reflect and recide the name as much as possible throughout the day, then it is possible to be able to chant the name in the Madhyamā and Pashyantī voices as well. One must constantly reflect in private, but when in company as well. For this alone, the shløk, "When coming and going, standing and sitting, and working" asks us to, "Let go of all bashfulness and meditate on God".

If one hasn't studied enough, if the living isn't pure, wholesome and holy, then it is difficult to take the Lord's name in the mind, and it is easier to voice it. It is therefore said, "Speak the text loudly with great respect". Occasionally, it is good to sing it loudly to the accompaniment of claps and Mridanga drums. Whatever is possible, one must try to do as much as one can with discipline, respect, love and devotion.

Now this was about chanting the name of God. Samartha now proceeds to tell us about how to conduct oneself in the usual way through his famous quote, "He who takes up a quantity of Vitthala should be careful of his diet". For a certainty, any religious act like chanting God's name, or ritualistic worship, if not accompanied by a steadily increasing amount of purity in though and action cannot result in a benefit. That is why, after the first two lines where he tells us to meditate upon the name of God, in the third line he asks us to engage in good conduct and to not get rid of proper behavior. Good conduct alone is great, which means it is superlative, praiseworthy, respectable and to be embraced. It must be implemented in daily living, and must never be abandoned. Now what constitutes virtuous conduct? The meaning of this phrase can be arrived at in two ways, either as the conduct displayed by virtuous people, or alternatively a conduct in which the actions are virtuous. Behavior that is founded in truth is also virtuous behavior. We must carefully understand what it means to act in truth, or to ensure that all behavior hews to truth. This is not so easy. A thinker's positive and negative qualities of the intellect occlude the true nature of things and color the perception of reality by adding to or subtracting from it to a greater or lesser extent. Notice therefore how different people relate one event in different ways. It always proves difficult to see truth exactly as it is. To truly know the truth, the intellect must be unsoiled, without prejudice, sharp and calm. A weighing scale used for measuring out firewood, even though functional, is not the right tool for weighing gold, nor is it usable to measure out important chemicals for an experiment in a laboratory. Similarly even an intellect that serves well for the dealings of daily life may prove incapable against the challenge of knowing the truth. To know the truth the intellect needs to be delicately sympathetic. In one national laboratory I saw a weighing scale that was installed on a platform whose foundation went deeper than the laboratory building. The platform was built of concrete and the scale was protected inside a niche behind a glass cabinet, so as to isolate it from even the breath of the person using the scale. An intellect that wants to know truth must be similarly unaffected. Where can we find such a subtle intellect? This kind of weighing scale is available only to saints. As such, the sense in which virtuous conduct implies conduct based in absolute truth is not usable by the likes of us. It is forfeit. For us then, virtuous behavior is the conduct of virtuous people. "Where the great ones walk, that is the way". This definition of virtuous conduct is useful to us.

We must however be alert when determining the measure of a person. If we can be a little discerning, it is possible to evaluate a person's greatness. Even though this acumen is difficult, it is not as unobtainable as that required for truth-knowing. Being elected, having wealth and respect, holding power, speaking sweetly, being a scholarly orator and having many well-educated people throng at ones lectures, these are not the kinds of qualities appropriate to determine a person's greatness. Instead, the greater the magnitude of the two qualities of selflessness and competence in a person, the greater he may be considered. One great person may be quite different than another, but both can be simultaneously great. Gokhale and Tilak were different from each other. Their rivalry is legend, but both were great. Even though they disputed each other's approach, Tilak acknowledged Gokhale's greatness. Tilak's respect for Gokhale is clearly seen in the obituary he wrote on Gokhale's passing. The situation between Ranade and Tilak or Bhandarkar and Tilak was similar. Both of them were cognizant of Tilak's eminence. The magnanimity of acknowledging the greatness of a rival is not commonplace.

From one point of view Shankarāchārya would be considered great, while from another perspective it might be Madhvāchārya. But a person might not choose either as a role model! "First you decide who is greater, then we can decide whom to follow. Until then I will continue to mimic this movie star". Such is kind of procrastination that one indulges in when adopting a righteous living, and such a condition is no good.

Keep the faith in great people and superlative personalities, and follow their instructions to the letter. Inasmuch as it is true that when evil leaves the mind it will leave the body, it is worth remembering that without making some sincere efforts to eliminate evil from the body it is not possible for the evil in the mind to subside. Traditions and conventions have arisen for this reason alone: Don't sit on the threshold. Don't sneeze on a threshold. Don't drink water standing up. Don't sleep with your feet pointing south. Perhaps none can answer why. Even science cannot always provide answers to the `why?'. Perhaps such conventions are to instill a kind of order and discipline in life, or perhaps to cause every task to be done mindfully. Today though, individual whimsy has been mistaken for freedom. ``What right do you have to peek into our private life?'' Such questions are asked with impunity. If one wishes to be celebrated for writing well, then then shouldn't he be ready to face brickbats when writing rubbish?

Samartha therefore considers a person with principled conduct as blessed indeed. Getting elected, earning fame and popularity, becoming rich, this does not imply blessedness. Behaving righteously, not coveting another's wealth, not desiring another person's woman, helping another as much as possible, not causing suffering to another in order to pursue self-interests, not encroaching on the rights of others, not speaking ill of others, keeping a pleasant attitude, these are the signs of living with integrity. He who lives this way is alone deserving of praise, and even his private life must be clean. While eminently true that in practice it is not advisable to look into anyone's private life, living a life not worthy of being seen is a debasement of life itself.