Guest guest Posted April 3, 2000 Report Share Posted April 3, 2000 I just corrected the subject line so that readers who are browsing through subject search will not find it difficult. Regards, Madhava > > Ram Chandran [ramvchandran] > Sunday, April 02, 2000 3:16 PM > advaitin > Re: Bhagawad Gita Ch2. Verses: Verses 16 to 18 > > > > ====================================================== > Discussion on Bhagawad Gita - Chapter2 - Verses 16 to > 18 compiled from Bhagavdgita - Multimedia CD > (permission is obtained from the publisher for > conducting Gita Sang Discussion) > ======================================================= > > Verse # 19 > The separation of the astral body from the gross body > is called `death'. It is the gross body that meets > with death; there fore, in the preceding verse it was > stated that "all these bodies are perishable. "Even so > the body plus mind and intellect, through whose agency > the life of another gross body is terminated, is > called a `killer'. In this way the killer also is a > body, and not the soul. But ignorant men, attributing > the function of a body to the soul, regard the soul to > be a killer-an agent (vide III. 27); that is why they > have to reap the bitter fruit of such actions. > > Verse # 20 > > By saying, "the soul is never born Nordics," and > negating thereby the two modifications of birth and > death, the Lord negates, in effect, all the six > modifications in the soul, and then uses other > expressions also to negate the other modifications. > The six modifications are: (1) Birth, (2)Becoming, > (3) Growth, (4) Transformation,(5) Decay and (6) > Destruction. By declaring the soul as `unborn,' the > modification of birth has been negated of it. The > sentence` nor does it become only on being born' > negates the second modification of `becoming'; the > term `ancient' negates the third modification of > `growth'; the term `everlasting' negates > `transformation'; the term `eternal' negates `decay'; > and the sentence `even though the body is slain, the > soul is not', negates the last modification of` > destruction'. > > Verse # 21 > > In this verse the Lord has brought out one Spirit > existent everywhere, which the idea that he who knows > the true nature neither dies nor can be killed, and > which of the soul can never think that he can kill > again neither kills nor causes anyone to be anyone, or > cause anyone to be killed. Therefore, all these > actions of other words, when he knows that it is being > subjected to death, infliction of death body which is > killed by another body on another, or becoming the > cause of conjoined with the mind, intellect and > another's death etc, are attributed to the senses; how > can he identify himself with soul due to ignorance. In > reality, they have the body and believe that he has > killed nothing to do with the soul. Therefore, anyone, > or caused anyone to be killed? Grieving for any being > whatsoever does not for in his consciousness there > remains only stand to reason. > > Verse # 22 > > From a superficial view, the illustration may appear > to be somewhat inappropriate, and not on all fours > with the fact sought to be illustrated. For generally > one feels a sort of gratification in leaving off > worn-out clothes and adopting new ones, while the > process of casting off an old body and entering into > another entails suffering and pain. A deeper > consideration, however, will show that the > illustration is not inappropriate. For in casting off > an old body and entering into a new one, it is the > ignorant alone who suffers pain, not the wise. A child > weeps when its mother removes old clothes, soiled with > dirt, from its body, and compels it to wear new ones. > The mother remains indifferent to the weeping of the > child and in the child's own interest makes it submit > to the change of clothes. Even so God, for the good of > the Jiva, and caring little for its tears, changes its > body when it is worn-out. > In this context, the wearing-out of a body should be > construed to mean expiry of the duration of its life. > If the word `worn-out' is interpreted in the sense of > `old', it will raise a difficulty inasmuch as people > do not in every case die old. Men and women in their > youth, and even infants, are very often found to enter > the portals of death. On the termination of its > `Prarabdha' (the sum-total of Karma's bearing fruit in > one life), a being may die at any age, no matter > whether it is old age, youth or infancy; and that will > be considered the limit of its life. The wearing-out > of a body should therefore be taken to mean the > exhaustion of the force of Prarabdha, which has been > responsible for building it. Taken in this sense, the > adjective `Jirnani' (worn-out) applied to the noun > `bodies' is quite appropriate. > On the analogy of `Vasamsi' (clothes) use of the > plural form in Sarirani' (bodies) also has been made > after due thought and consideration. There may be two > reasons for the use of the plural form in this case:- > (a) There is no knowing how many bodies a particular > Jivatma has cast off up till now, how many it has > taken anew, and how many more it will continue > hereafter to cast off and adopt, till it obtains > enlightenment and consequent release from birth and > death. This is indicated by the plural form applied in > this context. > (b) Every individual soul possesses three bodies:-the > gross, subtle and causal. When the Jivatma leaves one > body and enters into another, all these three bodies > are changed. The actions of a man are responsible for > the modification of his nature or disposition. The > causal body is represented by one's individual nature > made up of Sattva, Rajas and Tamas or the principles > of harmony, motion and inertia. This is also known as > disposition or temperament. Generally speaking, it is > one's nature which determines the last thought at the > time of death, and according to that last thought or > desire the subtle body is formed. The Jivatma leaves a > worn-out body carrying the subtle and causal bodies > with it, and enters into a new gross body suited to > the subtle body. Thus it was quite reasonable to use > the plural form of the word to indicate the change > that takes place in all the three bodies gross, subtle > and causal. > In reality the soul, being immobile and non-active, > does not migrate from one body to another; it is ever > fixed and steady. But just as when a pot is carried > from one place to another, the ether or space within > the pot also appears to be carried, even so when the > subtle body leaves a gross body and enters another, it > appears that the soul also has moved from one body to > another. Therefore, the acts of leaving one body and > entering into another are attributed to the soul in > order to explain the phenomenon of death to the > ordinary people. The word `Dehi' is indicative of the > soul identifying itself with the body; due to its > association with gross body, it appears to be leaving > one and entering into another. In this sense, it has > been said that the soul leaves a worn-out body and > enters into a new one. In this verse, two different > verbs `Grhnati' and `Samyati' have been used > respectively with reference to the two objects > `clothes' and `bodies'. The primary sense of `Grhnati' > is `to take', and that of `Samyati' is to go'. Clothes > are taken and worn, therefore the verb `Grhnati' has > been used with reference to them; and the soul appears > to leave a body and enter into another, therefore the > verb `Samyati' has been used with reference to it. > Similarly, the use of the two words `Narah' (man) and > `Dehi' (living creature) in this verse has a special > significance, inasmuch as clothes are worn and > discarded by men alone, and not by other beings, but > migration from one body to another holds good in the > case of all beings. Therefore, the word `Narah' (man) > has been used while speaking of clothes, and the word > `Dehi' (embodied being) while speaking of bodies. > > Verse # 23 > > Arjuna's grief proceeded out of the apprehension that > he would be required to kill his elders and other > relations by striking them with lethal weapons, or by > hurling destructive weapons against them; therefore, > in order to remove his grief, the Lord establishes the > immortality and formlessness of the soul by pointing > out the inability of all form; the four elements of > earth, water, fire and air to destroy it. He shows > that even when the body is cut to pieces by weapons, > the soul is not. Destructive fire-missiles may but the > body, but the soul will not be burnt, the Varunastra > (weapon of water) may be applied to dissolve the body, > but the soul will not be dissolved thereby; the weapon > of air (Vayavyastra) may dry up the body, but the soul > will not be dried up. The body is perishable and > possessed of a the soul is everlasting and formless. > Therefore, the soul can never be destroyed by the > element of earth in the form of any weapon or by the > elements of water, fire and air. > > Verse # 24 > > The present' verse has been added by the Lord to show > by argument why the soul cannot be destroyed by > weapons. It is indivisible, unmanifest, constant and > immutable; therefore weapons are altogether powerless > to destroy it. > When it is said that the soul is incapable of being > cut and burnt by fire etc, the indestructibility of > the soul is no doubt established; but these tests > equally apply to ether as well; for being the cause of > all other elements and pervading them all, it cannot > be cut by weapons, which are products of the earth, > nor can it be burnt by fire, nor dissolved by water, > nor again can it be dried by air. In order to show > that the indestructibility of the soul is totally > different from that of ether, the soul is called > eternal, omnipresent and everlasting. The intention of > this is to show that ether is not eternal, because > during the final dissolution of creation it is > dissolved; whereas the soul never ceases to be, > therefore it is eternal. Then ether is not > all-pervasive, it pervades only its own evolutes; but > the soul is all-pervasive. Again, ether has a > beginning; but the soul is without beginning. Thus by > the use of these last adjectives the difference > between the soul and ether has been clearly brought > out. > By describing the soul as `still' and `motionless', it > has been shown that both forms of motion represented > by vibration and movement from one place to another > are absent in it. Motion which takes place when the > thing is rooted to a fixed place is known as > `vibration', whereas motion in the form of change of > place is termed as its movement from one place to > another. The soul neither vibrates, nor moves from one > place to another. It is all-pervasive; there is no > place which is not filled by it. > > Verse # 25 > > The soul cannot be cognized by any of the senses, > therefore it is called `unmanifest', nor can it be > conceived by the mind, therefore it is `unthinkable'. > Again, by describing it as `immutable', the > distinction between the soul and Prakrtihas been > emphasized. The intention of this is to show that all > the senses as well as the mind are evolutes of > Prakrti; they cannot therefore apprehend Prakrti, > which is their cause. Therefore, like the soul, > Prakrti too is unmanifest and unthinkable. But Prakrti > is not immutable, it is subject to change, whereas the > soul undergoes no transformation in any circumstance. > Thus the soul is something entirely different from > Prakrti. When the soul is realized as eternal, > omnipresent, immovable, everlasting, unmanifest, > unthinkable and immutable, as described above, > grieving for it becomes quite out of place and > unreasonable. > In the above verses, describing the soul as unborn > and imperishable the Lord demonstrated that it was > unreasonable to grieve for it. In the next two verses > He shows that it is improper to grieve for it, even if > it be assumed that it is subject to birth and death:- > > > ----------------------------- > ---------- > Good friends, school spirit, hair-dos you'd like to forget. > Classmates.com has them all. And with 4.4 million alumni already > registered, there's a good chance you'll find your friends here: > http://click./1/2623/3/_/489436/_/954713486/ > ----------------------------- > ---------- > > Discussion of the True Meaning of Sankara's Advaita Vedanta > Philosophy focusing on non-duality between mind and matter. > Searchable List Archives are available at: > http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/ To from > the list, send Email to <advaitin- > > For other contact, Email to <advaitins > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.