Gita Satsangh: Chapter 8, Verses 1 to 4

[Guest guest]

Chapter 8: Verses 1-4

(For additional commentaries, refer to the URL sites referenced at

the bottom of the text)

 

arjuna uvaacha.

ki.n tad brahma kimadhyaatma.n kiM karma purushhottama .

adhibhuuta.n cha kiM proktamadhidaiva.n kimuchyate .. 8\.1..

 

Arjuna said:

O supreme person, what is that Brahman? What is that which exists in

the individual plane? What is action? And what is that which is said

to exist in the physical plane? What is that which is said to be

existing in the divine plane?

 

adhiyaGYaH katha.n ko.atra dehe.asminmadhusuudana .

prayaaNakaale cha katha.n GYeyo.asi niyataatmabhiH .. 8\.2..

 

O Madhusudana, how, and who, is the entity existing in the sacrifice

here in this body? And at the time of death, how are You to be known

by people of concentrated minds? In order to settle these questions

seriatim-

 

shriibhagavaanuvaacha .

aksharaM brahma parama.n svabhaavo.adhyaatmamuchyate .

bhuutabhaavodbhavakaro visargaH karmasa.nGYitaH .. 8\.3..

 

The Blessed Lord said:

The Immutable is the supreme Brahman; self-hood is said to the entity

present in the individual plane. By action is meant the offerings

which bring about the origin of the existence of things. aksharam

means that which does not perish (na ksharati), the supreme Self.

This agrees with the Upanisadic text, 'Under the mighty rule of this

Immutable, O Gargi...' (Br. 3.8.9). And (the letter) Om is not

accepted here [as the meaning of aksara (lit. letter)], because of

its being mentioned (as a letter) later on in, 'The single letter Om,

which is Brahman' (13). Besides, the adjective 'supreme' is more

appropriate with regard to the absolute, immutable Brahman. By

svabhaava, self-hood, is meant the existence of that very supreme

Brahman in every body as the indwelling Self. svabhaavaH ucyate, self-

hood is said to be, is referred to by the word; adhyaatmam, the

entity which, as the indwelling Self, exists in the body (aatmaa) by

making it its habitat (adhikR^itya), and which in the ultimate

analysis is the supreme Brahman. visargaH, the offerings, the giving

away to gods of things like porridge [Caru: An oblations of rice,

barley and pulse boiled-together to be offered to gods.], cake, etc.;

bhuta-bhaava-udbhava-karaH, which bring about the origin of the

existence of things; is karma-sa.nj~nitaH, meant by action. This

sacrifice consisting in pouring of oblations is called action. The

existence (bhaava) of (moving and non-moving) things (bhuuta) is

bhuuta-bhaava. The coming into being (udbhava) of that (existence) is

bhuuta-bhaava-udbhavaH. That which causes (karoti) this is bhuuta-

bhaava-udbhava-karaH, i.e. the originator of existing things. It is

needed from this source that all beings, moving and non-moving,

originate through the successive processes of rainfall etc. (see 3.14-

15).

 

adhibhuutaM ksharo bhaavaH purushhashchaadhidaivatam.h .

adhiyaGYo.ahamevaatra dehe dehabhR^itaa.n vara .. 8\.4..

 

That which exists in the physical plane is the mutable entity, and

what exists in the divine plane is the Person. O best among the

embodied beings, I Myself am the entity that exists in the sacrifice

in this body. adhibhuutam, that which exists in the physical plane,

i.e. that which exists by comprising all creatures;-what is it?-it

consists of the ksaraH bhaavaH, mutable entity. ksharaH is that which

is mutable, which is destructible; bhaavaH means anything whatsoever

that has orgination. This is the meaning. purushhaH means the Person,

derived in the sense of he by whom all things are pervaded; or, he

who lies in every heart. He is Hiranyagarbha, who resides in the Sun

and sustains the organs of all creatures. He is adhi-daivatam, the

entity existing in the divine plane. deha-bhR^itam.n-vara, O best

among the embodied beings; adhiyaj~naH, the entity existing in

sacrifices, is the Deity, called Vishnu, presiding over all

sacrifices-which agrees with the Vedic text, 'Sacrifice is indeed

Vishnu' (Tai, Sam. 1.7.4). aham eva, I Myself, who am that very

Vishnu; am adhiyaj~naH, the entity existing in the sacrifice; which

is going on atra dehe, in this body. Since a sacrifice is performed

with body, therefore it is closely associated with the body. In this

sense it is said to be going on in the body. [to be cotd.

 

For Gita Dhyana Shlokas/Mantras and Mahatmya

 

/message/advaitin/6987

 

Adi Shankara's commentary, translated by Swami Gambhirananda, at URL:

advaitinGita/Shankara1/gmbCH6.htm

 

 

Swami Chinmayananda's commentary at URL:

advaitinGita/Chinmaya/COMM6.HTM

[Guest guest]

advaitin, "ramvchandran" <rchandran@c...> wrote:

> Chapter 8: Verses 1-4

> Arjuna said:

> O supreme person, what is that Brahman? What is that which exists

> in the individual plane? What is action? And what is that which is

> said to exist in the physical plane? What is that which is said to

> be existing in the divine plane?

 

Pranaam,

 

I am taking the liberty of posting one of the first queries on the

Gita, abovementioned verses.

 

Would these not be the right translations ?

 

Adhyaatma : Our inner Self

 

Aadhibhuuta : Above all elements

 

Aadhidaiva : Above all Gods

 

I dont understand what is meant by your translation of Individual

Plane, Physical plane and Divine plane?? Arjuna is asking Krishna to

explain the Brahman, Ultimate Reality; what is Aadhyaatma, Self; what

is Aadhibhuuta, perishable matter, the elements; and Aadhidaiva or

the Consciousness in each of us. Is that right? In the first 2 verses

Arjuna does not mention anything about Sacrifice, etc.?

 

I find the translation and the explanation a little complicated.....

 

Even in Verse 3 there is nothing mentioned/talked about Sacrifice,

etc. Where is this all mentioned, can you pls tell me, especially

about the "porridge", etc.

 

My apologies if I have missed out on something.

 

IMHO the crux of the whole dialogue is that the Self illuminates

itself by itself.

 

Regards,

 

kamal

[Guest guest]

advaitin, "ramvchandran" <rchandran@c...> wrote:

> Chapter 8: Verses 1-4

 

Namaste,

 

For those who would like to savor (even though second-hand in

translation!) the commentary of Jnaneshvara [circa 1271-1293 A.D.], I

shall post the corresonding commentary (Jnaneshvari) after each of

Ramji's postings.

 

However, if the readers find this distracting, please let me

know when to stop, and some can choose the option of reading it at

the URL. The original in Marathi (Devanagari/Sanskrit script is also

online, but the transliteration and font are not quite satisfactory.

 

http://www.dnyaneshwari.com/ [in Devanagari script]

 

http://www.bvbpune.org/chap08.html [English translation by Shri Yardi]

 

Arjuna said:

 

 

What is that Brahman, what is the self? What is Acton, O supreme

Person? What is called Adhibhuta? What is said to be Adhidavata?

Then Arjuna said, I am now listening carefully. Kindly explain to me

what I have asked you. Tell me what is Brahman, what is named karma,

and what is called Adhyatma? What is Abhibhuta, what is Adhidaivata?

Tell me clearly so that I can understand them.

 

 

Who and how is the Adhiyajna here in this body, O slayer of Madhu?

and how at the time of death are you to be known by the self-

possessed?

 

O lord, what is the Adhiyajna in this body, which does not come

within the reach of inference? And tell me, O Krishna, how are you to

be known at the time of departure with a restrained mind (1-5)? Look,

if a lucky person sleeps in a mansion built of philosopher's stones,

then even if he blurts something in sleep, it does not become futile.

No sooner had Arjuna uttered these words, the lord said, "Listen well

to this reply to your question,"

 

(Shri Jnanadeva says) Arjuna is the calf of the wish - yielding cow,

and over him was the shade of wish-bearing trees. It is, therefore

not surprising that his desires came to be fulfilled. Even he whom

Lord Krishna kills in wrath, attains to the experience of the

Supreme. Then how can one whom he favors with instruction not attain

it? When a person becomes one with the lord, he becomes the self; and

then the miraculous powers attend upon him in the yard of his desires

(6-10). Arjuna had this unlimited love for Lord Krishna and so his

desires always bore fruit. For this reason, the lord, anticipating

his intent, served him a dish in the form of a reply. When the infant

turns to the breast, the mother knows that it is hungry. Does the

infant then tell her in words to suckle it? Therefore, it does not

surprise me, if the gracious teacher has such affection for his

disciple. Now listen to what the lord said.

 

The blessed lord said:

 

 

The imperishable is the supreme Brahman; its essential nature is the

self, and that which cause the existence of beings in known as action.

 

Then the supreme lord said, "The supreme self is that which dwells in

this hollow body, but does not ever ooze out (11-15). It is not void,

although it is so subtle that one can strain it in the fabric of

akasha, and though it is so very fine and thin, it does not trickle

down from the cloak of the world even though thoroughly shaken. And

even after the assumption of form, it does not know the vicissitudes

of life and does not perish with the disappearance of the form. It

continues to exist in its own eternal state; and this inherent nature

of Brahman is known as Adhyatma.

 

Then just as all of a sudden, simultaneously only knows not how,

clusters of clouds of different hues appear in the sky (16-20), so

from that pure formless Brahman different entities such as mahat

emerge and the universe takes shape. On the heath of formless

Brahman, the seed of the primal will, 'let tem be many,' takes root

and spread out different primordial eggs. If you look carefully,

every primordial egg is full of such seeds, by which countless

creatures come into being and fade away. Then different parts of

these primordial eggs go on briskly conceiving the will to become

many, giving rise to a flood of creations. But in all this creation

abides the supreme Brahman without a second, and the manifold

creation, which we see, is like a mirage (21-25). One does not know

how these similarities and distinctions have come about. If it is

said that this world has come into existence without a cause, we see

that there are thousands of species, which have come into existence.

One cannot place any limit to the number of creatures and things. But

if you try to discover the origin, you know that it is Brahman. One

does not see the author of this creation nor any rational basis for

it; but the creative activity is going on all the same. All that we

see is name and form without an apparent originator. The activity

that arises from this is known as karma.

 

 

The perishable existence is Adhibhuta; the self is the Adhidaivata. I

am myself the Adhiyajna in this body, O best among men.

 

Now I shall explain what is known as Adhibhutta. As the cloud appears

and vanishes (26-30), so there is an apparent worldly existence,

which does not exist in reality; it has come into being through the

combination of five elements. It comes into being from their

combination, but its name and form etc. vanishes with the separation

of the elements. This material existence is known as Adhibhuta. The

embodied self is the Adhidaivata who enjoys whatever the prakriti

produces. He is the witness of intelligence, the lord of the senses

and is the resting-place of desire after death, as the tree is the

resting-place of birds after sunset. He is none else that the supreme

self, but being asleep in his egoism, he experiences joy and sorrow

from his activities as in a dream (31-35). What is commonly known as

Jiva, the embodied self, is the Adhidaivata, the presiding deity over

the five elements.

 

Know yea, O Arjuna that I am the Adhiyajna in this body, who wipes

out the identification of the self with the body. Indeed, I am also

the Adhibhuta and the Adhidaivata, but when pure gold is mixed with

an alloy, does it become impure? Even then the pure gold does not get

soiled or become blended with the alloy, but so long as it remains

mixed, it has to be considered as an alloy, not pure gold. But, when

the Adhibhuta and Adhidaivata are covered by the veil of ignorance,

they are regarded as different from me (36-40). The moment this veil

of ignorance is removed, the difference vanishes; and they become one

with me; but were they really different from me? If a crystal is

placed on a bunch of hair, it appears to the eye as split in two.

When, however, the hair is removed, the crack in the crystal

disappears. Does this mean that the two pieces have been soldered

now? The crystal was whole, but appeared to be cracked because it had

come into contact with the hair; when the hair was removed, it looked

without a crack as before. Similarly, when the ego-sense vanishes,

the oneness of the Adhibhuta etc. Which is already there is restored.

That with which is already there is restored. That with which they

become one is myself, the Adhiyajna (41-45). Having this in view, I

had told you that all sacrifices are produced by actions. I have

disclosed to you the treasure of bliss, which is freedom from

actions, where all the souls take rest.

 

First the aspirant should kindle the fire of senses, and then in its

flames he should offer the oblation of ingredients of sense-objects.

Then clearing the ground and sitting in the form of the diamond

posture, he should form the altar of mulabandha under the canopy of

his body. Then he should offer in the sacrificial pit the ingredients

of senses by reciting the mantras of yoga (46-50). Thereafter by

performing the sacrificial rite wit the restraint of smokeless fire

of knowledge. When he sacrifices his all in the fire of knowledge, he

merges in the knowable, which remains in its true form. This knowable

is the Adhiyajna, so said lord Krishna and this immediately appealed

to intelligent Arjuna. Knowing this, Lord Krishna said, "O Partha,

you listen well." Hearing these words, Arjuna was very much

gratified. Look, only the mother or the Guru knows how to feel joy at

the satisfaction of her child or his disciple (51-55). Then the

sattvic emotions crowded in the mind of lord Krishna even before

Arjuna, but controlling them somehow through his intellect, he began

a speech, tender and witty, which was like fragrance of ripe

happiness or the surge of cool nectar. He said, "O Arjuna, the prince

of listeners, listen. Then that (knowledge) which destroys Maya is

itself dissolved.

 

 

 

Regards,

 

Sunder

[Guest guest]

Namaste Sri Kamal:

 

First these are not my translations and I was reposting the verses

and commentary compiled by Sunderji. Neverthless, what is posted here

is quite authentic and different authors explain these verses with

greater details than offered here. I strongly recommend you to read

the discussions on verses 29 and 30 of chapter 7 and they are

available in the list archives. Pujyaswamiji Dayananda Saraswathi of

Arsha Vidya Gurukulam offers many pages of commentary on the Sanskrit

terms, Karma, Adhyaatma, etc., and his commentary is also available

in the archive.

 

Your translation is correct and simple but for our complicated life,

we need a complicated explanation so that our life can become simple!

Arjuna during is Gurukul time period has learnt all these terms

thoroughly and the reason that he posing these questions illustrate

that he is not satisfied with what he already know! In mathematics,

when someone asks the question, 'what is infinity?,' a simple answer

is "infinity is the biggest number and no other number is bigger than

this." But this answer is incomplete and when the professor explains

infinity, the explanation becomes complicated.

 

It is important to note that Arjuna's questions are 'open-ended,' and

no answer will ever be complete! Arjuna really wants to understand

the 'Royal secret' of human existence and liberation. Hopefully, by

the time we complete chapter 12, we may get a more complete (but

certainly more complicated) understanding of "the existence and

functionality of Ishwara." Chapters 6 to 12 describe 'tat' and I am

not surprised that you found the explanations offered to verses 1-4

appear complicated.

 

warmest regards,

 

Ram Chandran

 

advaitin, "kamal_kothari_india" <

>

> Would these not be the right translations ?

> Adhyaatma : Our inner Self

> .......

> I dont understand what is meant by your translation of Individual

> Plane, Physical plane and Divine plane?? Arjuna is asking Krishna

> to explain the Brahman,

>

> I find the translation and the explanation a little complicated.....

>

[Guest guest]

More Thoughts on the discussion of these verses:

 

The entire Gita describes the Mahavakyya, tat tvam asi with elaborate

details. The first six chapters focus on Tvam (Atman), chapters 7 to

12 explains tat (Brahman) and the last six chapters validates the

Truth, tat= tvam. The first four verses of this chapter explores the

nature of Ishwara or the Lord. Arjuna poses several open-end

questions to the Lord and wants to enhance his understanding.

 

The questions on spirituality are always open end questions and no

answer will ever dissolve all our doubts. Truth seekers will never

stop ask questions until they get enlightened. We spiritually grow at

every instant and the same questions resurface again because we are

not satisfied with earlier answers with the change in the environment

and time. Arjuna had systematic education and had basic understanding

of the terms, Brahma, Karma, Adhyatma, Adhibhuta, Adhidaiva,

Adhiyajna and others. But at this time, he is seeking a more enhanced

understandings of these terms from the Lord to get rid of

his `avidya.'

 

The word Brahma denotes various entities such as the Vedas, the

Creator, the absolute Divinity, Prakrti (Primordial matter) and Om

etc. The object of Arjunas question is to know the referenced entity

in the present context. Similarly, the word Adhyatma signifies the

body, the senses, mind, intellect, the individual soul, the Oversoul

and many more such entities. Arjuna seeks to know by this verse the

exact reference for Adhyatma.

 

Whether Karma denotes activity in general or noble pursuits such as

the performance of sacrifices, charity and so on. Or does it signify

threefold actions? Or does it denote the act of creation of this

universe by God? Arjunas intention is to have this point elucidated.

 

Similarly, does the word Adhibhuta mean the five gross elements, or

the whole order of living beings, the entire range of objective

reality or any other substance? Arjunas query: What is called

Adhibhuta? is intended to clear up this doubt.

 

Finally, Arjuna wants to know whether the term Adhidaiva means a

particular deity presiding over some material phenomenon, or destiny,

or Hiranyagarbha (the Creator), the individual soul, or any other

entity.

 

Addressing the Lord as Purusottama in verse 1, Arjuna intends to

convey that He is the best of all persons, omniscient, omnipotent,

the controller and support of all. He thereby suggests that no one

else in the world can answer his queries as satisfactorily and

correctly as the Lord can do.

 

 

The object of Arjunas query in verse 2 is to know whether the term

Adhiyajna denotes any particular deity, or God, who is the inner

witness, or any other being. He further wants to know as to how that

Adhiyajna resides in the bodies of the various living beings, and why

it is called by that name.

 

Essentially, Arjuna now seeks to know how to fix our mind on God

before realizing Him at the moment of death. Is it by means of breath-

control, or Japa, or remembrance, or meditation, or Samadhi?

Ideally, we should start from verses 29 and 30 of chapter 7 and

continue our understanding using the attempted elaboration in verses

1 to 4 of this chapter.

[Guest guest]

advaitin, "ramvchandran" <rchandran@c...> wrote:

> Namaste Sri Kamal:

>

> First these are not my translations and I was reposting the verses

> and commentary compiled by Sunderji. Neverthless, what is posted

here

> is quite authentic and different authors explain these verses with

> greater details than offered here. I strongly recommend you to

read

> the discussions on verses 29 and 30 of chapter 7 and they are

> available in the list archives.

 

Namaste,

 

The compilation is from Sw. Gambhirananda's translation of

Shankara-bhashya! It is an extra-ordinary feat for anyone to

translate into a language where the words/idioms are so 'alien'!

 

Here is the original Bhashya:

 

aksharaM na ksharati iti aksharaM paramaatmaa, 'etasya vaa aksharasya

prashaasane gaargi' iti shruteH |

 

oMkaarasya cha 'omityekaaksharaM brahma' iti pareNa visheshhaNaat

agrahaNam.h |

 

paramam iti cha niratishaye brahmaNi akshare upapannataraM

visheshhaNam.h|

 

tasyaiva parasya brahmaNaH pratidehaM pratyagaatmabhaavaH

svabhaavaH , svo bhaavaH adhyaatmam uchyate |

 

aatmaanaM deham adhikR^itya pratyagaatmatayaa pravR^ittaM

paramaarthabrahmaavasaanaM vastu svabhaavaH adhyaatmam uchyate

adhyaatmashabdena abhidhiiyate |

 

bhuutabhaava udbhavakaraH bhuutaanaaM bhaavaH bhuutabhaavaH tasya

udbhavaH bhuutabhaavodbhavaH taM karoti iti bhuutabhaavodbhavakaraH,

bhuutavastu utpattikaraH ityi arthaH |

 

visargaH visarjanaM devatoddeshena charupuroDaashaadeH dravyasya

parityaagaH |

 

sa eshha visargalakshaNo yaj~naH karmasa.nj~nitaH | karmashabdita iti

etat.h |

 

etasmaat hi biijabhuutaat vR^ishhTyadikrameNa sthaavaraja~Ngamaani

bhuutaani udbhavanti |

 

adhibhuutaM praaNijaatam adhikR^itya bhavati iti | ko.asau |

 

ksharaH ksharati it ksharaH vinaashii bhaavaH yatki~nchit janimat

vastu iti arthaH |

 

purushhaH puurNam anena sarvam iti puri shayanaat vaa purushhaH

aadityaantargato hiraNyagarbhaH sarvapraaNikaraNaanaaM anugraahakaH

saH adhidaivatam.h |

 

adhiyaj~naH sarvayaj~naabhimaaninii vishhNvaakhyaa devataa 'yaj~no

vai vishhNuH' iti shruteH |

 

sa hi vishhNuH ahameva atra asmin dehe yo yaj~naH tasya aham

adhiyaj~naH yaj~no hi dehanirvartyatvena dehasamavaayii iti

dehaadhikaraNo bhavati dehabhR^itaaM vara ||

 

So, it would be preferable to skip over difficult portions on the

initial reading, and seek different translations in more modern

idiom. When the sanskrit idiom and words and sound sink in, it will

definitely send a joyous thrill in any reader!

 

 

Regards,

 

Sunder

[Guest guest]

advaitin, "ramvchandran" <rchandran@c...> wrote:

> More Thoughts on the discussion of these verses:

>

> The entire Gita describes the Mahavakyya, tat tvam asi with Arjuna

poses several open-end.......

 

Pranaam Sri Ram,

 

Thank you....

> The word Brahma denotes various entities such as the Vedas, the

> Creator, the absolute Divinity, Prakrti (Primordial matter) and Om

> etc. The object of Arjunas question is to know the referenced

entity

> in the present context.

 

Exactly.....so in the present context the entity referred to would

mean the Supreme Reality ? Similarly, the words Adhyatma, Karma

Adhibhutaand and Adhidaiva have also to be taken in the present

context only, isn't it?

 

But your 2 posts elaborating the meaning have helped a lot. You are

absolutely right when you say that the higher you go, the subtler the

topic and the more complicated the explanation.....I suppose at my

level of development I need to stick to the basic explanations.

 

Best reagrds,

 

Kamal

[Guest guest]

Namaste,

 

Another handy reference to keep is the (late) Swami Krishnananda's

[Divine Life Society] commentary:

 

http://www.swami-krishnananda.org/gita/gita_13.html

 

[The site map for all his writings online is at :

 

http://www.swami-krishnananda.org/sitemap.html ]

 

 

Regards,

 

Sunder

 

 

 

 

advaitin, "kamal_kothari_india"

<kamal_kothari_india> wrote:

> advaitin, "ramvchandran" <rchandran@c...> wrote:

> > More Thoughts on the discussion of these verses:

[Guest guest]

Namaste all,

Although Sri Bhagavan's answer does not come in this

section it may be appropriate to pick up now on

Arjuna's last question in the second shloka and the

two words prayANakAle (at the time of death/departure)

and niyatAtmabhis (by those whose selves are

controlled).

The first few months of this year were spent in the

company of two friends, both dying, whom I had known

for many years. One was a monk who had served the

dyslexic children and adults throughout his life in

the monastery. He found prayer and ritual an

interruption to his work. For him it was very much

'his work' and he could never see how it was the work

that was controlling him utterly. As a consequence, as

the body decayed, the manas was still rushing about

trying to organise and arrange and manipulate. To be

with him was not restful and only those whom he

thought he could control were allowed to visit him as

time went by. There was never any rest for him as he

was dying as he had lived, attached to action,

criticising those who displeased him and so, even up

to the day he died, events around him did not go

smoothly.

In contrast was another friend who was a highly

talented artist and architect. He was a devout

Catholic who had discovered...been discovered

by....meditation over the last 15 years. We had worked

together on a number of projects related to his

religious life but the true extent of his achievements

were never discussed. It was only after his death

that we learned just how prolific his service to

society had been. It was clear that his work was an

offering. As he approached the time of departure it

was a joy to be with him and evrything fell into

place. It so happened that his spiritual guide just

happened to make one of his rare visits to England and

spent a day with him; as he was about to die his

priest just happened to be passing and called in by

chance; so he was able to administer the last rites in

accordance with my friend's faith. In this case

there was no doubt; Self shone through that man as he

gave up his claim to action and body. Indeed for the

last two weeks of his life his face had that magical

quality of being both feminine and masculine in its

repose.

 

I mention these here because of the word 'control' in

Arjuna's question. The monk always sought to be 'in

control' but I hope that behind the apparent

difficulties of his dying he could see that this was

not the truth; it could not have been clearer to those

of us watching. For the other man, he had long ago

offered up control to that which he would say was 'God

within my true Self.'

 

Verse two therefore has this relevance to me at this

time,

 

Peace

 

 

Ken Knight

 

 

 

 

Health - Feel better, live better

http://health.

[Guest guest]

advaitin, ken knight <hilken_98@Y...> wrote:

> Arjuna's last question in the second shloka and the

> two words prayANakAle (at the time of death/departure)

 

Pranaam,

 

IMHO the word Prayaanakaale in this context means not death of the

physical body but 'death' of the ego, 'death' of the causal and

subtle bodies just before time of Realisation when the Self reveals

Itself by Itself.

 

Regards,

 

Kamal

[Guest guest]

--- kamal_kothari_india

<kamal_kothari_india wrote:

>

> IMHO the word Prayaanakaale in this context means

> not death of the

> physical body but 'death' of the ego, 'death' of the

> causal and

> subtle bodies just before time of Realisation when

> the Self reveals

> Itself by Itself.

 

Namaste,

 

many thanks for picking this up. This is why I was

using an added translation of 'time of departure' for

clearly that which is not born cannot die.

My main point in relating the departure of my friends

was to illustrate the certainty of which Sri Bhagavan

speaks in answer to Arjuna's question. Remembering

also that Arjuna was a kshatriya and therefore he must

have questioned the processes involved in death before

he got to the battlefield of kurukshetra, we need to

consider in practice what this means for ourselves.

 

We cannot play at sacrificing or offering action, it

arises from a unity of heart and mind and for the monk

his ego-attachment to a life of work 'for others',

bound him securely. Finally the departure from the

body and the dissolution of the ahaMkAra is

inevitable; it makes the appearance of coming and

going so much easier if we realise this through

embodiment and my other friend had, through grace,

maybe discovered this great secret,

 

om sri ram

 

Ken Knight

 

 

 

 

Health - Feel better, live better

http://health.

[Guest guest]

Namaste.

 

This Geetha Satsang is commendable. However, I wish we had started

it with a basic advaitic vision - an efficient, short synopsis of the

message conveyed by the great book and other upanishads that could

help a beginner find his way thorugh the maze. The verses quoted are

real quicksands which can gobble up an untrained mind and leave it

utterly confounded. The varying commentaries (just visit the Geetha

Supersite!) on these verses by erudite minds is ample proof for what

I am saying.

 

The real tricky part to my eyes is the word "visarga" for which

Sankara has chosen the meaning of sacrifical offerings. Swami

Sivanandaji has explained the mechanics of how offerings (yajnas) can

become the genesis and support of all beings (creation). It all

sounds very far-fetched to me (with all respect to these great

minds). May be I am ill-informed and cannot appreciate the vedic

significance of sacrifices. However, till I am convinced of it

throughly, I would like to go for the simple meaning of "issuing

forth, scattering, creation etc." that are found in standard Sanskrit

dictionaries. One can look up Monnier-Williams on the Net for these

meanings.

 

Arjuna asked too many questions in the first two verses. That was

only natural because he was totally confused. Those questions were

very valid for Arjuna's level of understanding then and should not be

judged or looked at by us from the point of view of a realised

person. Arjuna was simply looking for the roots and mechanics of

creation as any enquiring mind would do. The "time of departure" then

was a big problem for Arjuna (inspite of the wisdom instilled by Lord

Krishna through the 2nd Chapter!) as it is for all ordinary mortals.

He couldn't still appreciate the truth stated by Kenji: "that which

is not born cannot die". His journely towards real realization -

the "state" where one realizes that there are no more questions to

ask and no more answers to find - had only just begun.

 

Shri Harshanand has recently posted a commentary on Maanasollasa

(Post # 14120). In our present context of understanding creation and

karma, I believe, that post should impart to all enquiring minds the

basic advaitic vision needed to go thorugh Chapter 8.

 

Lastly, may I request Shri Ramji to kindly present only the verses

with his personal interpretation (as he understands them)? Others

can then add their ponts of view. This would help shorten the

posts. The URLs where other scholarly interpretations are available

are already known to most members.

 

Pranams.

 

Madathil Nair

_____________________________

 

advaitin, ken knight <hilken_98@Y...> wrote:

This is why I was

> using an added translation of 'time of departure' for

> clearly that which is not born cannot die.

[Guest guest]

advaitin, "madathilnair" <madathilnair> wrote:

 

Pranaam,

>However, I wish we had started

> it with a basic advaitic vision - an efficient, short synopsis of

the

> message conveyed by the great book and other upanishads that could

> help a beginner find his way thorugh the maze. The verses quoted

are

> real quicksands which can gobble up an untrained mind and leave it

> utterly confounded.

 

Sir, with due respect, any study and/or discussion on such subtle

topics will be difficult to understand not only to "untrained minds"

like some of us (me included) but, am sure, for veterans like you as

well. There are hundreds of interpretations of the Gita and I dont

see how you can give any "synopsis" that may be acceptable

universally. In any case the moderators did put up an explanatory

note last week which you must go through in the archives.

 

Basically on this Group we follow the teachings of Advaita as

propounded by Sankaracharya and so the discussions take place in that

spirit. From the tone of your posting it seems as if you are

irritated by the discussions.....sorry and pardon me if I am

wrong......but the idea of having an online 'satsang' is to

*initiate* a discussion. Else each one can do self-study as I am sure

many of us are doing. Maybe some on the Group need a little more

explaining than others....surely there is nothing wrong with that, is

there?

 

Generally, we must maintain dignity and calmness in all our postings.

 

Thanks and with best regards,

 

Kamal

[Guest guest]

--- madathilnair <madathilnair wrote:

>

> The real tricky part to my eyes is the word

> "visarga" for which

> Sankara has chosen the meaning of sacrifical

> offerings. However, till I am

> convinced of it

> throughly, I would like to go for the simple meaning

> of "issuing

> forth, scattering, creation etc." that are found in

> standard Sanskrit

> dictionaries.

 

Given your comment you may like Winthrop Sargeant's

translation of shloka 3:

The Blessed Lord spoke:

Brahman is the supreme imperishable;

And adhyatma is said to be the inherent nature of the

individual, which originates the being of creatures;

Action is known as the creative power ( of the

individual, which causes him to be reborn in this or

that condition of being).

 

We may need to be patient and wait for Chapter 18 to

help us...eg 18. 59-61 amongst many possibilities.

However here are some first thoughts.

Starting from where we appear to find ourselves, in a

dualistic state of good and bad, living and dying (

which was Arjuna's biggest problem at the outset of

the Gita): It is through the recognition that this

state of attachment is but a wheel of pleasure/pain

repetitions that we can be touched by a memory of

unity. This then takes us back to 7.29 when the

injunction...mAM AShritya, having taken refuge in

me...is given.

It seems that at any given moment there is a total

unity in which there is rest and there is also an

impulse contained within that unity, a thrust outwards

that is fleetingly a potential only; subject and

object are combined, as yet undifferentiated. Then we

are like a stone from a catapult; once the action has

begun it must progress to completion. It is in action

only that the individual soul exists; beyond the state

of the noun (action) is the verb 'to act' which is not

of the individual.

Is it that our question as to 'What is adhyAtma?'can

be observed now for we are always appearing to be in

action?

 

The last paragraph comes from a quick consideration of

the word 'visarga' that you had pointed to. I am

afraid that my Sanskrit is minimal but the following

may be taken up by others with more insight:

vi-sarga.

I am here using Yaska's words on prepositions(1.1-5)

Prepositions are modifications of 'becoming' and

should be inferred according 'to the occasion'.

Prepositions therefore come in pairs and Yaska gives

'vi' as the antithesis of 'sam'.

Now that is useful for 'sam' means combination...think

of English words that begin with 'com' or 'sym' or the

word 'same' itself. So 'vi' brings out the aspect of

division in its following part of the word.

 

'sarga' can mean the creation of the world as opposed

to the dissolution, pralaya. From the dhattu sR^ij for

which Panini gives the meaning 'visarga'. [so if we

try too hard to gain meaning from books we soon get

snookered.]

One of the meanings that Monier Williams gives for

'sarga' is 'a herd let loose from a stable'. I like

that for the impulse towards action that I was

describing above is held by stability, staying still

in one place, but once the decision is taken to let go

then there is a huge outward rush of energy, truly a

stampede, the compulsion into action is master.

 

So to return to the verse 3 of chapter 8:

action is known as the creative power (of the

individual which causes him to be reborn in this or

that condition of being). And just as we should pick

up the earlier posting that the 'time of departure' is

not to be limited to the death of the body, so too

this process of rebirth can be seen as both a single

event or a process that is going to take place many

times today.

This process is indeed sacrificial ....making

sacred.... and is made sacred if we remember the

injunction of Lord Krishna...mAM AShritya...or the

Upanishadic verse on sacrifices: How wonderful, How

wonderful, How wonderful, I am the food, I am the

food, I am the food, I am the food eater, I am the

food eater, I am the food eater.

Final thought and question to real Sanskritists: is

the dhattu of AShritya also sR^ij ? If so that is

interesting.

 

Sorry if this is a ramble but I feel that there is so

much in your references to visarga that maybe others

can bring it out better than in the above,

 

Om sri ram

 

Ken Knight

 

 

 

 

Health - Feel better, live better

http://health.

[Guest guest]

My dear brother Kamal,

 

That my post gave rise to such a reaction from you is very very

unfortunate. I didn't mean any offence to anybody. By "untrained

minds", I meant the beginners. I didn't mean that term to include

any particular person on this list or outside. I don't understand

why you like to join that group. I am not a verteran. However, if

you will call me one, I can only thank you.

 

Our List, as you have stated, is avowedly devoted to advaita and

Shankara. In that case, it shouldn't be difficult for us (our

knowledgeable moderators) to write a "synopsis" within that

framework. There is no need for us to look into hundreds of

interpretations that exist.

 

In a post recently, Shri Kathirasanji wrote that a basic

understanding of advaita will be really helpful if one intends to

study Bhagwan Ramana's teachings. I had that sensible suggestion in

mind when I recommended a "synopsis". As none was immediately

available, at the end of my post, I suggested Shri Harshanand's

commentary on Manasollasa as it covers almost the entire gamut of

vedanta. Besides, it has a good discussion on creation and karma too

which are issues very relevant to the Geetha verses under

discussion. I am sure any one who has read that commentary will

find our ongoing Satsang easier to understand.

 

As a Member of this List, I strongly feel that we should have

a "synopsis". There is a crying need for it. It is a lacuna that

needs to be urgently filled. There is no point directing newcomers

(This term does not include you, Kamal.)to references in our already

vast archives where they have to struggle with opposing points of

view unable to arrive at any logical conclusions. A synoptical

intrdocution is not a new idea. There are several vedanta teachers

who deliver very effective nutshell introductions before beginning

their discourses on specific works. I personally know of a very good

preceptor who insists that all those attending his discourses should

first have imbibed the introduction.

 

I am not irritated as you imagine. In fact, I am overjoyed and have

found this satsang commendable. I am participating fully with all my

enthusiasm as I have done in all earlier discussions on this forum.

 

You say: "Basically on this Group we follow the teachings of Advaita

as propounded by Sankaracharya". Am I not one among that "we"? Am I

intruding?

 

If you have any critical comments on the philosophical issues raised

by me, please join in as Kenji has done. Kindly don't read uncalled

for meanings into my words. And lastly, I have not been or, for that

matter, never been undignified in my writings. I am always calm too

as demanded of an advaitin. If our Moderators feel otherwise I am

willing to be pulled up. I have written all this only to clarify my

position.

 

Thanks and regards.

 

Madathil Nair

__________________________

advaitin, "kamal_kothari_india"

<kamal_kothari_india> wrote:

> Sir, with due respect, any study and/or discussion on such subtle

> topics will be difficult to understand not only to "untrained

minds"

> like some of us (me included) but, am sure, for veterans like you

as

> well. There are hundreds of interpretations of the Gita and I dont

> see how you can give any "synopsis" that may be acceptable

> universally. In any case the moderators did put up an explanatory

> note last week which you must go through in the archives.

>

> Basically on this Group we follow the teachings of Advaita as

> propounded by Sankaracharya and so the discussions take place in

that

> spirit. From the tone of your posting it seems as if you are

> irritated by the discussions.....sorry and pardon me if I am

> wrong......but the idea of having an online 'satsang' is to

> *initiate* a discussion. Else each one can do self-study as I am

sure

> many of us are doing. Maybe some on the Group need a little more

> explaining than others....surely there is nothing wrong with that,

is

> there?

>

> Generally, we must maintain dignity and calmness in all our

postings.

>

> Thanks and with best regards,

>

> Kamal

[Guest guest]

Namaste Kenji,

 

Your 'rambling' thoughts were really stimulating.

 

I am not a Sanskritist. And not a "real" one for that matter.

However, I don't think we can have a marriage between AShritya and

sR^ij. While the former imparts a sense of "being attached or

annexed", the latter points in the opposite direction

at "proliferation, multiplicity, and scattering". And when I

say "scattering", I am reminded of the analogy of the Sun being

reflected on disturbed waters whereby one sees so many Suns. In that

sense, the Geethakaaraka could not have chosen a better word than

visarga. The whole creation is nothing but an apparent scattering!

The Sun shines on unaffected despite!

 

Thanks for your prolific thoughts - particularly the reference to the

upanishidic verse on sacrifices. That calls for some pondering.

Perhaps, I may ultimately find out why and where I missed on

Sankara's explanation of sacrifical offerings for the word "visarga".

 

Best regards.

 

Madathil Nair

 

__________________

 

advaitin, ken knight <hilken_98@Y...> wrote:

> This process is indeed sacrificial ....making

> sacred.... and is made sacred if we remember the

> injunction of Lord Krishna...mAM AShritya...or the

> Upanishadic verse on sacrifices: How wonderful, How

> wonderful, How wonderful, I am the food, I am the

> food, I am the food, I am the food eater, I am the

> food eater, I am the food eater.

> Final thought and question to real Sanskritists: is

> the dhattu of AShritya also sR^ij ? If so that is

> interesting.

>

> Sorry if this is a ramble but I feel that there is so

> much in your references to visarga that maybe others

> can bring it out better than in the above,

[Guest guest]

First let me thank all the discussors- Ken thanks for

you illuminating post and madathilnair thanks for

keeping up the discussion and your comments and Kamal

the spirit of your comments are well taken. Let us

concentrate on our understanding than

misunderstandings. We will all be winners.

 

In the Geeta sat sangh we are in the middle of the

text with eight chaper. There is a sapta vaDa nyaaya

that swami Dayanandaji emphasizes in his talks when he

teaches - Bhagavaana Ramana's text Upadesha shaara.

One villager with his friend went to a restaurent for

the first time and asked what was available that can

fill his stomach. The waiter said the lunch time is

over and now they have only vaDa and costs one rupee.

The villager asked him to bring the vada. After eating

one he found himself not full hence asked one more and

then one more. After eating seventh one he felt he is

no more hungry. On the other hand his friend eat only

one and stopped with that. While leaving the

restaurant,his friend paid one rupee for his vaDa and

the villager also tried to pay one rupee only. The

manager said he eat seven vaDa-s and he has to pay

seven rupees. The villager protested since all he

wanted in the first place was that which fills his

stomach and it was only the seventh vaDa that filled

his stomach and he does not have to pay for the

previous six vaDa-s that the waiter brought and kept

him unnecessorily busy and occupied eating previous

six vaDa-s which did not fill his stomach. He could

have brought the seventh vaDa in the first place

itself as he did for his friend who was full with one

vaDa. He later found out the his friend had eaten six

vaDas at home before he came to the restaurant. Well

the unique qualification of the seventh vaDa is that

it follows the sixth. All this story means that since

we are in the middle of the text, for those who are

interested it is advaisable to down load previous

discussions related to the earlier chapers. These are

stored in the list files for easy access.

There is also another geeta bhaashya being posted from

the beginning by Vidya and one can follow that for

those who are interested.

 

Ken - vi+sarga - vi is also used in the meaning of

visheshheNa sarga - to point out that the creation

that is being mentioned is of special type, wherein

the upadaana kaaraNa and nimitta kaarana - the

material and instrumental causes are not different but

they are one and the same. It is a peculier creation

unlike any other creation that we are familier.

 

aashraya - has a different root - the meaning of

shelter or locus for the object of discussion.

 

The other aspects will become more clear as Sree Ram

Chandran presents the rest of the slokas.

 

Hari OM!

Sadananda

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sign up for SBC Dial - First Month Free

http://sbc.

[Guest guest]

Namaste,

 

Here are some more thoughts to ponder on!

 

visarga indeed does have the meaning of offering oblations also, the

dravya-yaj~na (ref: Vedamurti Satavalekar - Purushartha-Bodhini Tika

on Gita - in Marathi, 1976).

 

In the context of the debate with the 'pUrva-mImA.nsA' followers,

Shankara must have used this meaning deliberately [ref. to Gita 3:9-

10,14-15; also 4:24 and 9:16]

 

Gita's strictures on such followers are also reflected in the words:

pushhpitaaM vaacham, veda-vaada-rataaH, traiguNyavishhayaa vedaa

nistraiguNyo bhavaarjuna, kR^ipaNaaH phalahetavaH,

shreyaandravyamayaadyaj~naaj~naanayaj~naH, karmibhyashchaadhiko yogii,

etc.

 

Shri Satavalekar devotes two full pages to the commentary on this word

and has beautifully synthesised all the meanings into the statement

that action is what the creative impulse produces in order that the

creatures are led forward to the Supreme Spirit.

 

In essence, Gita 7:30 and 8:3-4, proclaim 'sarvaM khalvidaM brahma';

whatever exists, and whatever name one gives to it, it is the Supreme

Spirit only.

 

 

Regards,

 

Sunder

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

advaitin, "madathilnair" <madathilnair> wrote:

> Namaste Kenji,

> Perhaps, I may ultimately find out why and where I missed on

> Sankara's explanation of sacrifical offerings for the

word "visarga".

>

> Best regards.

>

> Madathil Nair

>

> __________________

>

> advaitin, ken knight <hilken_98@Y...> wrote:

>

> > This process is indeed sacrificial ....making

> > sacred.... and is made sacred if we remember the

> > injunction of Lord Krishna...mAM AShritya...or the

> > Upanishadic verse on sacrifices: How wonderful, How

> > wonderful, How wonderful, I am the food, I am the

> > food, I am the food, I am the food eater, I am the

> > food eater, I am the food eater.

[Guest guest]

Thanks. Advice well taken.

 

About visarga, yours is a wonderful new angle to look at from.

 

Grateful if you kindly tell us the source of this oornanaabhi

connotation for visarga.

 

Hari Om.

 

Madathil Nair

 

____________________

 

advaitin, kuntimaddi sadananda <kuntimaddisada>

wrote:

> Ken - vi+sarga - vi is also used in the meaning of

> visheshheNa sarga - to point out that the creation

> that is being mentioned is of special type, wherein

> the upadaana kaaraNa and nimitta kaarana - the

> material and instrumental causes are not different but

> they are one and the same. It is a peculier creation

> unlike any other creation that we are familier.

[Guest guest]

--- madathilnair <madathilnair wrote:

> Grateful if you kindly tell us the source of this

> oornanaabhi

> connotation for visarga.

 

 

 

Namaste both,

likewise I would like to thank you for opening up some

more areas of grammar for me particularly as upasargas

seem so important to understand in how they modify a

sound. I am very much a beginner in the subject of

grammar...everything else as well really...so your

help is much appreciated.

Can you please explain oornanaabhi for me as my

dictionary gives its meaning as 'spider' or the more

evocative 'having wool on the navel'. Since the

surgeons got at my body this is not a problem I have

any more but I hope that this will not prevent my

understanding...jesting asid, is this a Panini term?

 

Many thanks

 

Ken Knight

>

> ____________________

>

> advaitin, kuntimaddi sadananda

> <kuntimaddisada>

> wrote:

>

> > Ken - vi+sarga - vi is also used in the meaning of

> > visheshheNa sarga - to point out that the creation

> > that is being mentioned is of special type,

> wherein

> > the upadaana kaaraNa and nimitta kaarana - the

> > material and instrumental causes are not different

> but

> > they are one and the same. It is a peculier

> creation

> > unlike any other creation that we are familier.

>

>

>

 

 

 

 

Health - Feel better, live better

http://health.

[Guest guest]

Sanskrit has been called the language of the gods. Some key Sanskrit words

have pages full of different meanings in the hard text Monier-Williams

dictionary. The early onlooker can be dazed, where seemingly whole

conversations might be carried out with just a few of these most used words,

like bhava for instance. The glory of Sanskrit is that meaning is indeed,

relatively floating, i.e., meaning can and should change according the degree

of subtleness of spontaneous awareness.

 

Advaita itself is a system which prevents one from reaching the domains

preached by advaita, so long as meaning is not allowed to 'float'. Sanskrit

is tailor made to float the meaning of any expression, to spontaneously move

one around in the worlds of varying degrees of subtlety. So long as we

insist on firmly staying within the rigid intellectual rules set up by

advaita, then we fail to reach the domains suggested by advaita; we simply

remain super-expert talkers about advaita.

 

The idea of ritual brings such ideas to a head. For most ardent

intellectually devised dogma, the idea of ritual falls short of any kind of

real reality; that is, it is a fiction. And most of the time it is.

Senseless motions and maneuverings over fire and sandal paste and rice and

all sorts of theatrics. Ritual is dead. We often say, 'in god we trust',

but the idea is dead, a repetition of harangue heard since birth.

 

Yet ritual is very much alive, for those who are alive. Those who are

already alive 'see' and understand and feel the great subtleties beneath; the

subtleties existing at many levels of continuing subtlety, until finally,

eventually, one simply pops into turiya, back and forth, up and down, through

the many fine gradations expressed by the fluid floating mechanics of

Sanskrit.

 

Rather than to take up yet another, and another, and another possible

interpretation of the Gita Sanskrit, perhaps it would be more constructive to

consider the mechanics of operation of the 'many mansions' available to our

experience. It is hardly of use to hear recorded text messages of the great

avatars of the past as compared to how we, each of us personally, recognize

and experience such changing states of subtlety. Indeed, I ask the learned

ones here, what is it that makes certain ritual apparently work, at least

some of the time, while other ritual never works, and perhaps some few

precious rituals may always work? What is it that gives the reality to

ritual and how and why does it work? How is the one who does not recognize

the potent glory of certain rituals to become aware of it? To what degree is

the whole topic of ritual within or outside the domain fenced off by

'advaita'?

 

jai guru dev,

 

Edmond

[Guest guest]

Namaste Kenji,

 

I am really sorry for this. Oornanaabhi is spider as you have

rightly found out. Creation is likened to a spider making its web

where both the instrumental and material causes are the same, i.e.

the spider itself, as the wool for the web comes from the insect's

body. It is a classic analogy where both the causes co-exist.

 

In my present circumstances, I am not able to locate and quote the

exact upanishadic reference for this analogy. I am sure our life-

saver in such situations, SunderHji, will fly in and help.

 

I am not a grammarian. Although I have a great liking or affinity

for that language (It may be the remnant of some fortunate samskara

in a previous birth.), my knowledge of Sanskrit is just rudimentary.

Judging your background, experience and hard work, I am sure, Kenji,

you have seen many folds more of Panini than me.

 

Best regards.

 

Madathil Nair

 

______________

 

advaitin, ken knight <hilken_98@Y...> wrote:

>

> Can you please explain oornanaabhi for me as my

> dictionary gives its meaning as 'spider' or the more

> evocative 'having wool on the navel'.

[Guest guest]

--- madathilnair <madathilnair wrote:

> Thanks. Advice well taken.

>

> About visarga, yours is a wonderful new angle to

> look at from.

>

> Grateful if you kindly tell us the source of this

> oornanaabhi

> connotation for visarga.

>

 

I think the sloka with reference uurnanaabhi is from

Mundaka Up. I donot have the reference at office, I

have to check it at home. Yes Sunder will be able to

give us.

Hari OM

Sadananda

 

> Hari Om.

>

> Madathil Nair

>

>

 

 

 

Sign up for SBC Dial - First Month Free

http://sbc.

[Guest guest]

Namaste,

 

uurNanaabhi :

 

Brihadaranyaka upan. 2:1:20

 

Mundaka 1:7

 

Shvetashvatara 6:10 [some editions have tantunaabhai]

 

Maitri 6:22

 

Brahma 11

 

Kshurika 9

 

 

Regards,

 

Sunder

 

 

 

advaitin, kuntimaddi sadananda <kuntimaddisada>

wrote:

>

> --- madathilnair <madathilnair> wrote:

> I think the sloka with reference uurnanaabhi is from

> Mundaka Up.

[Guest guest]

Namaste,

 

The Spectrum of Karma:

 

Gita states many incisive insights about karma ('action') and j~naana

(wisdom): e.g.

 

sarva.n karmaakhilaM paartha GYaane parisamaapyate .. 4\.33..

(all actions are comprehended in wisdom).

 

GYaanaagnidagdhakarmaaNa.n tamaahuH paNDitaM budhaaH .. 4\.19..

(whose actions are consumed in the fire of knowledge, the wise ones

call a sage).

 

Advaita as a method of realising the Absolute (Advaita) Spirit

[saankhya maarga] does not fence off the karma maarga, but prepares

the latter to be fulfilled:

 

yatsaaN^khyaiH praapyate sthaanaM tadyogairapi gamyate .

ekaM saaN^khya.n cha yoga.n cha yaH pashyati sa pashyati .. 5\.5..

 

One truly sees who sees the same destination whether reached by the

path of knowledge or of yoga.

 

Many terms have been used in the context of karma, and a schema may

be of some use to get an overview:

____________________

akarma

 

taamasika ugrakarma

dushhkR^ita karma

vikarma

ashaastravihitam,

 

nishhiddha

=================================================================

moghakarma

dharma

yoga

kaamya karma

raajasika

niyata karma

[shaastra pramaaNa]

svabhaavaja-/sahaja-/sva- karma

===================================================================

puNya karma

saatvika

sukR^ita nishhkaama karma bhakti

 

 

====================================================================

naishhkarmya

triguNaatiita

j~naana/paraa bhakti

 

j~naanottara karma (lokasa.ngrahaartham)

====================================================================

1.I do not have to engage in action.

2.I engage in action to satisfy my needs, regardless how it affects

others.

3.I engage in action without regard for scriptural

injunctions.

 

4.I engage in action as a duty prescribed by scriptures.

5.I engage in action for the welfare of others, as an

ideal.

6.I engage in action to purify my mind.

 

7.I engage in action as a worship of the indwelling God/Supreme Spirit

8.I act as an instrument of the Spirit.

9.I engage in action as the Spirit moves me.

 

10.I see my own reflection in all action.

11.I My-Self am all action or inaction.

=====================================================================

 

Gita has synthesized karma-phala-tyaaga and sa.nnyaasa as an ideal.

The elevation and broadening of karma through yaj~na (and daana, and

tapa) and yoga and worship to reach that ideal is the unique

contribution of Gita.

 

 

Regards,

 

Sunder

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

advaitin, edmeasure@a... wrote:

To what degree is

> the whole topic of ritual within or outside the domain fenced off

by

> 'advaita'?