Devi Mandir Co-Founder Translates Sacred Texts

By a Staff Reporter

from India-West

NAPA, Calif. – New English translations by Devi Mandir co-founder Swami Satyananda Saraswati of the Bhagavad Gita and the Sundara Kanda portion of the Ramayana will be out soon. The Swami has also translated into English a text on Kali puja, according to a spokeswoman of the temple here.

While there are scores of translations of these texts available, Swami Satyananda believes that his translation is unique in that he has drawn upon his multi-cultural experiences "to personalize each individual’s search through the eyes of (the) scripture(s)."

The scriptures, the Swami said, are like a mirror in that one can see what kind of character he or she is while reading about the various characters that appear in the scriptures.

"Are you a scheming, conniving, selfish individual like Kaikeyi? Are you filled with clarity, purity and devotion like Kaushalya? Or maybe you are manifesting divine characteristics and giving solace to everyone like Rama,” he is quoted as saying in an interview with temple spokeswoman J. Victor, noting that the scriptures are a mirror to look into one’s soul.

Acknowledging that there are many translations of the Bhagavad Gita out already, the Swami said that he decided to translate the sacred text because Devi Mandir co-founder Shree Maa wanted a translation that did not merely place the book in a historical context but in a way that would be useful to a seeker on the path of sadhana.

Our translation deals with the battle each one of us faces every moment while we live in these human bodies," he is quoted as saying.

The three translations contain the original texts in Sanskrit and Bengali, as well as the English transliterations.

Shree Maa: A Saint Comes to Chicago

By Sharon Steffensen

from YOGAChicago; September – October 1998; Vol. 5, No. 5

Chicago was blessed when Shree Maa came to visit early this summer. Originally from Digboi, India, in the Arunachala Range of the Himalaya Mountains, she has lived in California since 1984 but has begun to travel in the U.S. only since last year. She is a poet, an artist, an excellent singer, and healer. She feeds the hungry, clothes the naked, and heals the sick as part of her worship, as a demonstration of her love for God.

Shree Maa teaches that every home is an ashram, a place of worship, that all actions can be service to God and expressions of devotion, and that life itself is worship. Following is a story about Shree Maa’s life with an accompanying message from Maa.

She knew from her birth that she was divine. Her first recollection was the sound of the voice of Ramakrishna, the 19th century Bengali mystic whom she considers to be her guru, saying, “Oh, you came again. Much more needs to be done in this Age of Darkness. You’ve got to show what divine life means, what is spiritual practice, and what is sacrifice.” With that instruction, she began her life’s work.

Shree Maa’s birth was predicted by Swami Bhuvananda Saraswati, a great saint and religious leader from the northeast corner of India where her family lived. She never cried. Her parents never knew when to feed her or change her diapers. At the age of three she began practicing the Sun Salutation, reciting mantras and making offerings.

When she was seven, Shree Maa began to wander into the forests to visit sadhus, seekers who had renounced the material world in pursuit of a spiritual life. By the time she was nine, she knew every tree in the forest and spent most of her free time in meditation.

Shree Maa was loved by all who knew her and was popular with both faculty and fellow students. In her community she became involved with social service organizations, organizing fund-raisers and festivals for worship or celebration.

Throughout her high school and college years, Shree Maa became more and more introspective until her family became concerned that she was spending too much time in meditation. When their pressure became too great, Shree Maa made plans to run away. After writing a note and packing a few belongings, she reached for the door and looked up at a picture of Jesus that hung over the door. Looking into his eyes, she heard a voice deep within her saying, “I am with you always. You don’t need to run away to find me.”

Shree Maa returned to her shrine room and sat in solitude. She looked at the picture of Ramakrishna blessing her from her altar, and suddenly she heard his voice: “You must finish your college education. I have much work that must be done by you, and to accomplish that, you must be educated.”

After college, Shree Maa spent years wandering in the Himalayas, impervious to fear of the pythons, bobcats and Bengal tigers that roamed the area. She had few possessions other than the simple clothing she wore, and sometimes went for days at a time without food. Her body weight reduced to little more than 60 pounds. People who saw her in deep communion with God for hours and days at a time called her the Goddess of the Mountain, the Goddess of the River, or simply Shree Maa, the Respected Holy Mother.

She experienced such deep samadhi, for prolonged periods, that she radiated an aura of illumination. When she returned to the awakened state, often there would be many people from nearby villages who had heard of the meditating yogini in the forest and left their homes and jobs in nearby villages to sit with her.

Stories told by the villagers made Shree Maa famous and her capacity as a spiritual messenger grew. Soon there was a continual stream of politicians, government workers, businessmen, farmers, villagers, and housewives flocking to see her wherever she went.

When she expressed a desire to travel throughout India, her disciples and devotees from the railway colony provided her with a first class railway pass to cover all her expenses. On one of those journeys, she visited The Ramakrishna Mission in Calcutta, where she stayed in the former house of Shree Sarada Maa, Ramakrishna’s wife. There is a striking physical resemblance between the two women, and even their voices are the same. Devotees would gather outside the house to receive Shree Maa’s blessings. In the evenings she would share spiritual inspiration and stories. Often she would sing. Most of the time, however, she would sit with her eyes closed, totally absorbed in her love for God, and others would join her in meditation.

In 1980, she met Swami Satyananda Saraswati, an American who had been living in India for 20 years. They traveled together with Maa’s devotees throughout India, and in 1983, when she received an instruction from Ramakrishna to go to the U.S., Swamiji came with her. They established a temple in Martinez, California, and lived a simple life dedicated to daily worship.

As word spread of Shree Maa’s presence, thousands came to seek her blessings. In 1992, a new home, Devi Mandir, was found for the temple in Napa Valley, California, open to the public on Sundays. When she received instruction again from Ramakrishna to step out from her seclusion and begin sharing her love and wisdom in person throughout the world, she began a tour, which included Chicago this past summer.

Chicago was blessed to have her.

~~OM~~

Links to blogs on Chandi Sadhana in 2008

• Devyah Kavacham
• Argala Stotram
• Kilakam
• Vedoktam Ratri Suktam and Devi Suktam
• Siddha Kunjika Stotram
• Navarna Viddhi
• Chapter 1

~~OM~~

• Shree Maa: Mother of all our Hearts!
• Shree Maa's Greeting from India: March 12, 2008
• Shree Maa's greeting from India: March 13, 2008
• Shree Maa's greeting from India: March 14, 2008
• Photos: March 14-16, 2008
• More Photos
• A Song to Sarada Devi: March 19, 2008
• March 20, 2008
• Holi Festival in Delhi
• Train to Banaras
• Banaras by day and night: March 27-29, 2008
• Shree Maa and Swamiji at Annapurna Temple in Banaras
• 48 hours in Banaras
• Trilochan's Music
• God is a Mystery
• A devotee's story
• "Don’t Get angry: Talk to me"
• Be Simple, God is your own
• Swamiji and the Farmers
• Swamiji and Shoes

~~OM~~

• Bara Maa shares stories about Shree Maa: 1
• Bara Maa shares stories about Shree Maa: 2
• Bara Maa shares stories about Shree Maa: 3
• Bara Maa shares stories about Shree Maa: 4
• Questions and answers with Bara Maa

~~OM~~

• Relationships: 1
• Relationships: 2
• Relationships: 3
• Relationships: 4
• Relationships: 5
• Relationships: 6
• Relationships: 7

~~OM~~

Is the Guru-Disciple relationship cultivated based on disciple doing the sadhana prescribed by the Guru? Can someone do another sadhana that they feel drawn to and consider you as their Guru?

Yes. A guru is an example of a quality or attitude we want to practice and perfect in our lives. That will be our sadhana. It does not need to be the sadhana of the Guru. In most cases it is not. It is the attitude of the Guru. It may be the attitude of discipline. It may be the attitude of compassion or love or any other bhava which the Guru exemplifies. It may be the way She cooks or writes or maybe we can't explain it.

What are the kinds of questions that a student can ask a Guru to know if the teacher is the right Guru for them?

There are various intensities that we are searching for in our relationships. The Guru is someone we want to allow inside, we trust to allow ourselves to be completely vulnerable, whose example is one that we respect and want to emulate.

Can you please let me know how the ideal disciple-Guru relationship should be?

A love affair.

How does a student know when a certain teacher is the Guru for him/her?

How do you know when you have fallen in love?

You just know...

How do you, or how did your Guru, evaluate progress by aspirants?

By the type of sadhana they are performing, the questions they ask, and by the glow in their faces.

Is attachment to the Guru beneficial/not beneficial for one's spiritual growth.

Necessary. Totally desirable. How can we become a shishya, a perfect reflection of the Guru, without attachment? The shishya says, "I love you so much I want to become like you!" That is a very positive attachment.

Why do so many Gurus insist on loyalty and either state explicitly or implicitly that without this you cannot progress on the spiritual path.

Loyalty makes a consistent discipline. It allows us to experience unselfish love. It allows us to surrender in the face of obstacles.

What does the Guru's protection mean? Does it mean that the Guru saves us from each and every calamity that can befall us or does the Guru show us by example how to deal/face that calamity?

I like your second alternative better, but I will like to offer another.

The Guru gives a new inspiration to pursue new directions, new goals for our lives. When we engage in the new pursuits, the old attachments no longer have the same relevance as they did when they were the sole focus of our lives. Therefore, it is no longer regarded as a calamity when we don't achieve our frivolous desires.

Can a Guru take the karma of a disciple?

It depends how karma is offered. If we complain that I don't want this, then the Guru probably won't want it either. If we are so overjoyed that we want to share it, the Guru will probably be present to share with us.

How do we develop devotion to the Guru?

Watch and hear Swamiji's answer by clicking on this icon: .

~~OM~~

How do partners from different faith traditions reconcile them?

Partners from different faith traditions must share the understanding that their ideals, their love, and their partnership is so much more enduring than religious tradition. Then they both can participate in each other's tradition without feeling like outsiders.

Again, it is a privilege to be able to discriminate between spirituality and religious ceremony. Utilizing that blessed discrimination, both partners can participate in all ceremonies regardless of "tradition" and never feel imposed upon.

How do they (partners from different traditions) raise their children with regards to tradition?

They would raise their children as spiritual beings who respect every tradition. The children could learn about all traditions and live spiritual lives irrespective of specific faith tradition.

When two faith traditions directly contradict each other in a relationship, how do the partners decide what is the "right" path to follow?

This takes us back to our original discussion about common goals. Ramakrishna said it so definitively: As many as there are individuals, so many are the paths to God.

If partners define their goals prior into entering into partnerships, then they already know the "right" path to pursue to their attainment. They have created their own brand of religion: the religion of their partnership.

What is the best course of action when someone you love and are in a relationship with does something violent towards you? My choice was to cut off all communication and get away from this person though it is painful. Why does someone do violence to someone they love? What is the spiritual reason for this? I appreciate your writings.

People lash out in violence because they feel they no other way of being acknowledged. There is no way to justify their violent action, but the reality is that if we could reach out to the person who wants to be heard and cover them with love and understanding, we could probably abate all the violent tendencies before they manifest.

The reason it takes place with people who are beloved is that there is so much attachment to that relationship, so much longing to be received, understood, accepted, and where else could one go to vent their frustrations except in a loving, trusting relationship.

The real joy and challenge is to be able to diffuse violent
explosions before they occur by stopping the conflict from spinning out of control. Just stop and consider our goals. What are we trying to get from the circumstance? And then go ahead and negotiate the outcome to its logical conclusion.

My spouse and I are considering breaking up and I am wanting to approach the issue from as spiritual a perspective as possible. I would like to do whatever is best for everyone and am wondering if God ever wants spiritual aspirants to stay "out in the world" even if they have no sex drive? Would one have to stay in relationship to just to fulfill karma even if they want to know God?

First you must ask yourselves what is the object of your partnership, what is your common goal? When you know where you are trying to go, it becomes a lot more easy to understand how you are going to get there, and with whom you want to travel. Sex need not be a distraction from spirituality. But there is much more to your relationship than sex. Quite possibly in these circumstances it might be good to spend some time in solitude and make a plan for the next steps in your life.

Spiritual life means to give more than we get. How do we translate this so that we do not allow ourselves to be exploited in the name of giving. Can you please share your thoughts Swamiji?

To be sadhus we must be efficient. Efficiency demands that we budget our time, resources, etc. To be a spiritual giver means to give the best that we can as is appropriate according to time, place, circumstance, etc.

How can you build a life partnership with someone who tends to have an understanding that there is 'one' way to God, who doesn't hold Sri Ramakrishna's wisdom that there are as many paths to God as there are individuals?

The first question we must ask is Why we would want to struggle with a dogmatic approach to life? Are we talking about a relationship of pure love and total acceptance which seeks to support each other mutually and reciprocally in achieving our common interests? Or are we thinking more in terms of an overwhelming physical attraction, which has given rise to infatuation.

A dogmatic approach to life will most probably manifest not only in regards to religion, but also in terms of having one's own way even in relatively insignificant decisions. That does not portend to a mutual and reciprocal give and take and sharing relationship. First, I would look towards common values and common goals before seeking any commitments for a longer or permanent relationship.

Is it possible to build an 'inclusive' spirit of how to know God with someone who has little belief or interest in understanding other ways?

Probably not. We can only teach people who are inspired to learn. There must be a recognition of some kind of lack or paucity for people to want to change. Until they do not want to change, it is impossible to believe that they would become interested in other ways of looking at life.

How might you navigate goal-setting discussions in this regard? Can you actually build a successful relationship with someone who tends to not hold valid or wish to honor the sacred in your own spiritual wisdom and path?

I believe that if someone is not interested in honoring the sacred in your life, it cannot become a successful relationship. I cannot see any commonality in your goals or life processes. What is there to negotiate?

What if 'dogmatic' is just one of the ways in another person - much as hard-headedness is in mine? And what if I also see a heart for mutual and reciprocal give and take and sharing? If I sit in pure love and total acceptance, does not this make all of this infinitely okay?

Again, what do we want to do together, what is our aspiration? What could we do together to make a real contribution to creation, to make this world a better place because of our having been here, working together?

Can we do that if one of us is dogmatic? How can we pursue our objective together unless our relationship is mutual and reciprocal?

If both of your hearts were actually aspiring towards pure love, acceptance and mutual support, there would never be an occasion to depict a partner as dogmatic. It may be very romantic to adore your partner as the fulfillment of all your dreams, but it will be sufficiently difficult to negotiate future incompatibilities if you do not at least show a desire to compromise from the beginning.

I see people around me that are very selfish and those who give so much that they are drained. Can you please advise us on how to keep the right balance?

Watch and hear Swamiji's answer by clicking on this icon: .

~~OM~~

How do a couple know they are right to have kids? What makes a good parent?

Unfortunately, too few people ask this question before they begin families, and I appreciate your asking it in advance. It is time to begin talking about the possibility of having children when a relationship is not just secure and stable but also has so much love that that love calls to be manifested in a greater commitment of sharing. When we feel so full to overflowing that we want to share our abundance, that is the time to begin the discussion of we might go about doing that through having children.

A good parent would be an individual who has tremendous patience, knows their goals in life, and wants to sacrifice one way of life for another, in order to demonstrate the sincerity of his or her devotion. A good parent is simultaneously both a good teacher and a good student, and will rejoice in sharing the learning experience of family growth.

Oftentimes, after the initial 'honeymoon period,' the initial spark that creates a relationship dies. While not wanting to separate, people begin to lose interest in each other. How can a person regain interest in their partner?

The honeymoon period is generally easy and fun. The Gita says that those events that begin by being easy and fun but later become difficult and full of pain, are 'tamasik,' or 'born in darkness.' In contrast, those events which begin with effort and ultimately become easy and fun, are 'sattvik,' and hold the quality we should strive for in all actions in our lives. Rather than asking how to revive the fun, the real question should be, 'Did we do our homework on what this relationship is about before entering into it?" Through such self-probing and resulting analysis, we should strive to avoid relationships which are all 'honeymoon' and no substance.

How do we cope with pain in relationships? How do we emotionally manage ourselves during rough patches?

Emotional pain is a consequence of attachment. If we want to continue the relationship, then the obvious requirement will be to surrender the attachment. Accepting our partner's behavior is another opportunity to demonstrate the sincerity of our love and eliminate pain.

Does having doubts about a relationship mean it's not meant to be? In other words, is it okay to have doubts sometimes?

Certainly we all have doubts from time to time. At those times we want to reinforce the positive aspects of our partnership, reaffirm our goals, and surrender our negativities.
Essentially, we have to do the accounting, so to speak, and if the relationship is right, the outcome should be the understanding that our togetherness is more empowering than our being separate.

Is the saying that, "if there's a will, there's a way" really true? What do we do to rallying flagging wills? How do we motivate ourselves to keep trying?

Generally, it is true that sufficiently motivated people will find a means to accomplish the desired results. However, sometimes we keep on running and come smack into the brick wall in the midst of our path. Sometimes we need to take at least break, realign our plans, reconsider our methods, make sure they are in conformity to our values, and replenish our energy and resources. Then, after refreshing and reminding ourselves what we're after, we can determine if this endeavor becomes a back-burner project, or if it remains an important priority.

Can something that starts out enjoyable, and then becomes hard (i.e., tamasic) be transformed into something sattvic?

Yes. When we understand that the goal of a relationship is not just selfish enjoyment but also an opportunity to unite in spirit, we can transform our purpose in said relationship to make our activities an expression of our love for God. That becomes sattvic karma.

Motivation and its source are the key determinants of the quality of actions. As most of our functions have mixed motives, our actions are often of mixed character. What may begin with selfish consideration, may ultimately become a manifestation of divinity.

Are all things that are enjoyable from the start tamasic?

Not necessarily. If we engage in an activity for selfish reasons, that activity will be tamasic. But if we control our selfishness and act from divine inspiration, enjoying it all the while, our actions are not tamasic.

How can we bring the sattvic into what might be a tamasic relationship?

First we must consider if a relationship is tamasic, is it worth pursuing? Should we actually put out the effort to bring sattva into such a relationship? Or should we think just to abandon such a relationship which will not (by definition) take us to where we want to go?

If there is a possibility of the relationship being appropriate for our future growth, then we must move back to our goal setting and define what is our common aspiration and where can we most effectively work together. Basically, we need to decide what will be the most efficient means of getting back on target, so to speak.

How do we begin to reveal our more spiritual sides to partners who were not necessarily reared in a religious tradition? (This question deals with self-consciousness, not the accepting nature of the other partner; assume the other partner is accepting if somewhat an atheist)

We will want to distinguish between our spiritual sides and our religious traditions. Being spiritual means to be a giver. It is not necessary that spirituality is connected with religion. If we are really loving and generous and kind, we are spiritual, whether or not we choose to celebrate God in any particular language or religious structure.

What is the importance of monogamy?

Monogamy is important because it saves us from unnecessary conflict. When we engage in multiple relationships, we are torn with regards as to how to divide our attention. With such internal conflict, every external commitment comes into question, for, if we cannot fully trust ourselves, whom can we trust?

How do we reconcile tales of ancient, righteous Hindu kings, such as Dasarath, and sages, who had more than one wife, with the value of monogamy today?

While it may have been a custom in many cultures to practice polygamy, societal structure was different in those situations. The economies of those eras made marriage more of a financial and social relationship, rather than an emotional bond between two people.

Furthermore, the involved parties of those relationships understood themselves to be part of an extended family and did not expect more. Today, most partnerships look at themselves at forming the basis of a nuclear family and expect all that goes along with that role, emotionally and practically; such a situation becomes difficult in a polygamous marriage.

Lastly, even looking at polygamous marriages from that era, we see what difficulties occurred as a consequence of jealousy and disruption of the family's harmony. In the case you cite above, Dasarath gave up his life, Ram and Sita went into the forest, and Kaikeyi spent a life time of repentance.

What exactly is the role of the householder as described in the scriptures?

The householder is the primary earning member of society, so he or she will be the support of the other members of society. In other words, the young and the elderly are all dependent upon the householders.

The householder is supposed to make a contribution to society. To pay off our debts to the Gods, we householders should strive to make this world a better place because of our having been here. To pay off our debts to our ancestors, we must show respect to the elderly in the way that we will want to be respected when we are old. Finally, to pay off our debt to the Gurus, we should live in accordance with their wisdom.

When one is free from debt and has satisfied the roles of the householder, only then can he or she aspire to lead a life of renunciation.

If done well--lovingly, happily, and sincerely--is there still shame in the role of the householder?

No, the householder is not to be shamed or disparaged at all. All of society is dependent upon the householders. That is why the householder's status is far superior to all of the other ashramas.

~~OM~~

Is marriage only once in a lifetime?

We must first distinguish between marriages made in Dharma and marriages made for fun.

A Dharmic marriage is not once in a lifetime alone. It is only once, period. Dharmically connected partners find a relationship based upon the ideals of perfection. Maintaining those same ideals from lifetime to lifetime, they therefore find the same partnership over and again. Ram recognized Sita immediately; Krishna understood that Radha was his soul mate. These are examples of Dharma patnis, or relationships devoted to expressing the highest Godliness.

However, a Bhog patni, a wife for enjoyment, may stay in a marriage as long as it is enjoyable. Such a relationship would be an example of an experience which begins in pleasure and ends in pain. Obviously in these cases, there will be a multitude of partners for each person, as people will continue to search for new relationships when the enjoyment is no longer present in their current one.

How do we deal with the pain of separation? What are ways partners can cope when they are not physically with each other?

If they are really partners, then they realize that they are apart in order to achieve the objectives of the partnership. That is, they are still working together across the distance, albeit separately.

Today it is so much easier to maintain communications across vast distances. Using these channels, like the internet and phone calls, partners can remind each other how much each other's sacrifice is appreciated and thereby increase the energy of inspiration.

How important is sharing the same geographic location to a partnership?

From time to time non-verbal communication is important, so geographical proximity will be important. In order to read each other's body language, feel each other's intensities, and sense the vibrations from our partner, we will want to be in geographical proximity as much as circumstances allow.

What would be your advice to young people trying out being in relationships for the first time?

First of all, think about why you want to have a relationship. Is it because everyone else does it, or is it because you have actually found a compatible spirit, who complements your attitudes and inspires you to become better? Then go back to goal setting and paint a picture of how your relationship will expand each other's capacities. Think: what can you gain from each other, and what will you enjoy to give?

How do we learn to give up our selfishness when it comes to our partner?

If we truly imagine the greatest gift that we can offer our partner, ultimately, it is be our selfishness; in other words, the best thing we can give up and let go is our self-centeredness. We must strive to remember that the most wonderful offering, or rather, sacrifice, is that of egoism and selfish attachment, and that is the demonstration of the sincerity of our love.

How do we know when we are being selfish or simply respecting ourselves?

In my opinion, most so-called "self-respect" is actually selfishness. It generally is born out of the desire to recognize ourselves when we feel we are not getting sufficient recognition from others. However, if we always demonstrate sincere respect to others, we ourselves will always be truly respected and have no need for our own "self-respect."

Can you love a person too much?

No. Love requires that we sacrifice. Hence, the next question will be, 'Can we sacrifice too much?' Again, the answer is, 'No.' All sacrifice is an offering to God.

Can you love too many people?

No. But you can have too much misplaced attachment and too many unfounded expectations and unlimited desires, which may be destined for dissatisfaction.

In marriage, when is it time to resort to divorce? If there is the desire to stay together on both ends, can all issues be worked out?

Most marriages that end in divorce had no plan or common goal. If a couple has a plan and common goals, then all issues can be worked out. Divorce comes about when a couple no longer has anything in common. There is just separation into 'yours' and 'mine.'

What are some goals that people with separate career dreams/causes can share together? In other words, can goals be things other than physical projects?

Absolutely. Goals are not only "physical projects," but rather, any activity that partners can plan and execute together. For example, partners can have a goal of spending quality time together on a regular basis. There are many spiritual goals that partners can share as well. 'Goal' does not only refer to one's occupation or profession. Instead, we must define our goals according to the values which the partners share, not their careers.

Can a goal/effect of a partnership be to teach us to expand our empathy, to gain a more loving view of the universe and a greater sense of our places in it?

Yes, but remember that the goals of our partnership should have some verification process. If we make all of our goals altruistic in nature, then there is no way to certify that we have attained them or not; it's entirely subject to personal opinion without outside qualifications. Hence, choose goals that have a practical application. For example, if we define a goal as wanting to be in love all the time, how can we prove that we are attaining that goal? Conversely, how can we define what happens when we forget that goal, or, in other words, show the flip side? Thus, we must define the goal in question. For example, if we define our goal as wanting to spend a specific amount of time with the beloved on a regular basis, it will be easy to determine if we did or did not accomplish our goal.

What is a way to help ourselves get over our selfishness? What are things to tell ourselves at challenging moments when our immediate instinct is to speak to our own 'needs' rather than the goals at hand?

One of the first and most primary goals for us to remember is that we are striving to be a "we", not an "I." In doing so, we should ask ourselves what is in the best interests of our communities? As individuals trying to be a "we," we must think, 'What can I give, surrender, sacrifice, for the edification of our community that would really demonstrate the sincerity of my love?'

How important is officially getting married to lifelong partnerships?

Marriage is extremely important. When partners can stand before their families, their communities, the legal system, and God, and proclaim their sankalpa to work together, it intensifies the commitment tremendously. By not solemnizing a marriage, we are leaving an errors and omissions clause in our agreement, a "fallback" point if you will, so that the "What if it doesn't work out?" issue can always be addressed with the easiest and most cowardly solution.

What does our tradition's marriage ceremony signify, and what the particular rites mean?

There are a few ingredients which are common to all the Vedic marriage ceremonies, regardless of the region of India. First and foremost amongst these common links is the circumambulation of the divine homa fire, repeated seven times. This act acknowledges the surrender to Divine Consciousness on seven levels. This means that the partnership being solemnified respects that the relationship is not only "till death do us part" but is, more importantly, a union of souls which transcends our physical bodies and continues into eternity.

A bride and groom also take seven steps together, demonstrating that their partnership embodies respect on every level of consciousness. They also worship each other as deities, indicating that they share a deep and mutual respect.

Does physical intimacy make a difference to partnerships?

It most definitely does. Physical intimacy creates a special bond of attachment and thereby indelibly impacts our objectivity in relationships. When we open ourselves to such intimacy, we allow ourselves to be extremely vulnerable. That vulnerability can be extremely comforting, particularly in its enabling us to think that we can trust another individual so completely. However, it can also become a source of great pain, if our partner is perceived as using that vulnerability for manipulation.

Physical intimacy may be appropriate once the bond of trust has been truly proved in other ways. Before that, it is a gamble.

What can having children add to a partnership? What can it detract?

Having children can add the amazing experience of seeing a replica of ourselves in real time. Almost every action we see our children perform is a re-enactment of some behavior they have witnessed. That is why it is said that Mother is the first Guru and Father the second. By in large children mimic the behaviors they experience and view. Seeing our children is a wonderful opportunity to correct our attitudes and behaviors so we can be the examples we want our children to follow.

Often parents see in their children all the aspirations that they long to achieve. Frequently we condemn our children for becoming just what we ourselves have become, for assuming all the attitudes and prejudices that we, ourselves, exhibit. If we are not content with what we have become, we could very well share that discontent with the next generation. Our children have the capacity to show us just how unfulfilled we actually are, or how close to our goal we may possibly be.