Guest guest Posted July 29, 2001 Report Share Posted July 29, 2001 Pranams to the learned public who use this media for discussion on Vedantha . I am a new member . I would like to include my query for the discussion . Swamy in 12th chapter prescribes three ways to bring B,M,I together and pave way for SAdhanA. (Verses 9,10,11) 1. Train yourself through abhyAsA .2. If you are not able to do abhyAsA , perform the activities for My sake . 3. If you are not able to perform for My sake , forego the result ( pala ) of your activities . And in the next verse Swamy says karma pala thyAga is the best way .. I wish to consider a person who is a simpleton . He performs the duty regularly . He accepts the result as such it happens . He does this in" What ever I am distined to get I will get " mood . He is not an analyst or a seeker. Since Swamy's Guidance have universal application , I wish to know the position of the person above mentioned in comparison with the sAdhakA . With PranAm , Srimathy Narayanan , Singapore Y! Pages - Search or browse for business listings. http://yp..sg/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 30, 2001 Report Share Posted July 30, 2001 Namaste Srimathi Narayanan: Bhagwan Sri Krishna in Chapter 12, verse #12 summarizes the essence of the verses 9 to 11 beautifully: s'reyo hi jnaanam abhyaasaaj jnaanaad dhyaanam vis'isyate dhyaanaat karmaphalatyaagas tyaagaac chaantir anantaram Better indeed is knowledge than the practice (of concentration); better than knowledge is meditation; better than meditation is the renunciation of the fruit of action; on renunciation follows immediately peace. (Dr. Radhakrishnan's translation) This sequence is a good illustration of the excellent tactics employed by the great teacher, Lord Krishna to educate Arjuna (the seeker - saadhakaa) the importance of action with the renuciation of its fruits. The renunciation of the fruit of action does not imply that there will be no results for any action; it emphasizes that the Kartha (actor) is the agent of the Lord and he/she accepts the results with equanimity. The entire Gita was addressed to the saadhakaa's point of view only and when the saadhaka practices literally by the words of the Lord, he/she becomes the Yogi. Lord Krishna calls such a yogi as the Stithaprajna (person with the steady mind). The entire Gita emphasizes the importance of Sadhanaa (practice) instead of mere intellectual understanding. This is the subtle message! warmest regards, Ram Chandran Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 30, 2001 Report Share Posted July 30, 2001 On Mon, 30 Jul 2001, [iso-8859-1] Srimathy Narayanan wrote: > [...] > . I wish to consider a person who is a simpleton . He performs the duty > regularly . He accepts the result as such it happens . He does this in" What > ever I am distined to get I will get " mood . He is not an analyst or a seeker. > Since Swamy's Guidance have universal application , I wish to know the position > of the person above mentioned in comparison with the sAdhakA . > With PranAm , > Srimathy Narayanan , > Singapore > namaste srimathy narayanan-ji, and welcome to the List. The matter which you raised was under discussion in a tangential way a few weeks ago. I am of the opinion that, yes, a person doing things for their own sake without any apeksha is a yogi. *Intellectual* knowledge that I am brahman is really an extra information. With our discussions and intricate search for Atman and jIvA and how jIvA is different or not different from Atman, what is the end-product? We only strive to be able to do our work without any phalApeksha (desire to the fruit of action), because for us, continuously the ego continues to raise its ugly head. And we want to eradicate that ego. If a person is already doing that (doing things in stride without phalApeksha), then what difference does it make to that entity whether brahman is jIvA, or whether he/she is brahman or not. You describe this person as a simpleton. Is that not a worldly assessment putting up our worldly standards of judgement? HastAmalaka, jaDabharata, although may be called simpleton by our standards, are brahmajnAni-s. However, having said the above, I must say there is a considerable contrary opinion held by members of the List that aham brahmAsmi, I am brahman, that knowledge is (essential for) moksha. I am sure they articulate that view in a clearer way. What this amounts to is essentially this, one of the following two: (i) you are essentially an ajnAni and until you have that knowledge, aham brahmAsmi, you would not attain moksha. or (ii) you are essentially a jnAni. Only if you are covered by layers of avidyA, then only you need that knowledge aham brahmAsmi. I will explain my understanding of BG12.9, 10, 11 after I have a chance to look at them this evening. Regards Gummuluru Murthy --- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 30, 2001 Report Share Posted July 30, 2001 advaitin, Srimathy Narayanan <srimathynarayanan> wrote: > Pranams to the learned public who use this media for discussion on Vedantha . I > am a new member . I would like to include my query for the discussion . > Swamy in 12th chapter prescribes three ways to bring B,M,I together and pave > way for SAdhanA. (Verses 9,10,11) 1. Train yourself through abhyAsA .2. If you > are not able to do abhyAsA , perform the activities for My sake . 3. If you > are not able to perform for My sake , forego the result ( pala ) of your > activities . And in the next verse Swamy says karma pala thyAga is the best way > . I wish to consider a person who is a simpleton . He performs the duty > regularly . He accepts the result as such it happens . He does this in" What > ever I am distined to get I will get " mood . Dear Srimathy Narayanan, This is a wonderful query indeed with a wonderful answer by Shree Ram. Let me add that such a sAdhakA's position (as that of yours) of acceptance is not of a passive nature and that it is a potent and active position. (S)he performs duty regularly offering to the Lord beforehand. The very performing of a task with utmost joy is its own end. What happens subsequently is of no value and no concern. Imagine a young mother playing with her little child. The joyous play itself is the end and means. The mother has no thought as to what happens later on as a result of the play subsequently. As the Gita and several saints say, this approach itself will lead to Self-knowledge, but it is not important :-) Perhaps we may look up on examples in our epics. I recall two householders who had better Self-knowledge than the sage Vishvamitra. One was Dharmavyada and the other was a lady, I forgot the name. Namaste Raghava Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 4, 2001 Report Share Posted August 4, 2001 Dear Murthy garu, Well summarized. The point (ii) is the crux of the matter. That knowledge can come from some previous life and no one (sometimes including the individual) will ever understand or accept it in that special simple individual, unless there is a resonance. -- Vis --------------- - "Gummuluru Murthy" <gmurthy <advaitin> Monday, July 30, 2001 12:22 PM Re: Position of a person who accepts the outcome > > On Mon, 30 Jul 2001, [iso-8859-1] Srimathy Narayanan wrote: > > > [...] > > . I wish to consider a person who is a simpleton . He performs the duty > > regularly . He accepts the result as such it happens . He does this in" What > > ever I am distined to get I will get " mood . He is not an analyst or a seeker. > > Since Swamy's Guidance have universal application , I wish to know the position > > of the person above mentioned in comparison with the sAdhakA . > > With PranAm , > > Srimathy Narayanan , > > Singapore > > namaste srimathy narayanan-ji, > > and welcome to the List. > > The matter which you raised was under discussion in a tangential > way a few weeks ago. > .....We only strive to be able to do our work > without any phalApeksha (desire to the fruit of action), > because for us, continuously the ego continues to raise its > ugly head. And we want to eradicate that ego. If a person is > already doing that (doing things in stride without phalApeksha), > then what difference does it make to that entity whether brahman > is jIvA, or whether he/she is brahman or not. > > However, having said the above, I must say there is a considerable > contrary opinion held by members of the List that aham brahmAsmi, > I am brahman, that knowledge is (essential for) moksha. I am sure > they articulate that view in a clearer way. > > What this amounts to is essentially this, one of the following two: > > (i) you are essentially an ajnAni and until you have that knowledge, > aham brahmAsmi, you would not attain moksha. > or > (ii) you are essentially a jnAni. Only if you are covered by layers > of avidyA, then only you need that knowledge aham brahmAsmi. > > I will explain my understanding of BG12.9, 10, 11 after I have a > chance to look at them this evening. > > Regards > Gummuluru Murthy > --- > > > Discussion of Shankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy of nonseparablity of Atman and Brahman. > Advaitin List Archives available at: http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/ > To Post a message send an email to : advaitin > Messages Archived at: advaitin/messages > > > > Your use of is subject to > > 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.