Deshikotya -- the teacher's word

[Guest guest]

On 28 Dec, Shri Rajkumar wrote:

 

"If one has faith in his Guru, that Guru's word itself forms the

shruti-pramANa for him, whether the Guru is traditional or

non-traditional."

 

In this regard, Shri Atmananda referred to a quotation from Shri

Shankara:

 

jIvo nAham deshikoktyA shivoham

 

This could be translated as:

 

I am no jiva, not this seeming

life of personality.

By the word of my teacher, I

am Shiva -- who is truth itself.

 

So it seems that Shri Shankara himself may have considered the living

teacher to be the primary representation of tradition, giving life and

meaning to the objective sounds and words of outwardly transmitted

texts.

 

Would someone know exactly where this quotation comes from, in Shri

Shankara's works? And how it is traditionally interpreted? The full

quotation is appended below (with the exact spelling seeming a little

uncertain).

 

Ananda

 

--------------------

 

rajv ajnyAnAd bhAti-rajjau yathA hih

svAtmAjnyAnAd Atmano jIva-bhAvah

dIpenaitad bhrAnti-nAshe sa rajjur

jjIvo nAham deshikoktyA shivoham

[Guest guest]

Namaste Anandaji.

 

I have also read the following verse quoted by you. However, I am

not sure where and, at present, without sufficient means to locate

it. Let us await Sunderji's return from holidays unless some other

Member can throw light.

 

rajv ajnyAnAd bhAti-rajjau yathA hih

svAtmAjnyAnAd Atmano jIva-bhAvah

dIpenaitad bhrAnti-nAshe sa rajjur

jjIvo nAham deshikoktyA shivoham

 

With my rudimentary knowledge of Sanskrit, I see that what is

attempted here is a comparison of the superimposition of snake on the

rope on the one hand with the superimposition of jIva-bhava on Atman

on the other. Like a lamp revealing the truth of the rope (removal

of the delusion of snake), the light of True Knowledge reveals that

the jIvA is verily Shiva. But what baffles me is the word 'rajjau'

in the first line. Does that word imply a snake or is it a mistyping

for some other phonetically similar word meaning snake.

 

Secondly, Sankara seems to have deliberately used the word dEshika

for guru. In good old days, teachers used to travel a lot and were

thorough with the terrain of the country. By dEshika here, Sankara

brilliantly implies a preceptor who is thorougly familiar with the

entire vEdanta terrain to be able to ensure that his disciples are

not waylaid into wrong conclusions.

 

PraNAms.

 

Madathil Nair

[Guest guest]

"Madathil Rajendran Nair" <madathilnair>

rajv ajnyAnAd bhAti-rajjau yathA hih

svAtmAjnyAnAd Atmano jIva-bhAvah

dIpenaitad bhrAnti-nAshe sa rajjur

jjIvo nAham deshikoktyA shivoham

 

With my rudimentary knowledge of Sanskrit, I see that what is

attempted here is a comparison of the superimposition of snake on the

rope on the one hand with the superimposition of jIva-bhava on Atman

on the other. Like a lamp revealing the truth of the rope (removal

of the delusion of snake), the light of True Knowledge reveals that

the jIvA is verily Shiva. But what baffles me is the word 'rajjau'

in the first line. Does that word imply a snake or is it a mistyping

for some other phonetically similar word meaning snake.

----------

 

Namaste Nairji,

rajjuh means rope.

Going by the word meaning, the verse is not about the lamp revealing the

truth of the rope. It is about the lamp destroying (nAshe) the bhrAnti

(confusion, error) about the rope (rajjuh).

 

Hari Om

[Guest guest]

advaitin, Ananda Wood <awood@v...> wrote:

>

>

> Would someone know exactly where this quotation comes from, in Shri

> Shankara's works? And how it is traditionally interpreted? The full

> quotation is appended below (with the exact spelling seeming a

little

> uncertain).

>

> Ananda

>

> --------------------

>

> rajv ajnyAnAd bhAti-rajjau yathA ahih

> svAtmAjnyAnAd Atmano jIva-bhAvah

> dIpenaitad bhrAnti-nAshe sa rajjur

> jjIvo nAham deshikoktyA shivoham

 

Namaste.

Yes, I have also heard my father using this quotation. But I am not

able to place it now. But here is one from 'Shata-shlokI' of

Shankara which uses the idea 'deshikoktyA shivoham':

 

rajjv-ajnAnAd-bhujangaH tadupari sahasA bhAti mandAndhakAre

svAtma-jnAnAt-tathAsau bhRsham-asukham-abhUd-Atmano jIva-bhAvaH /

AptoktyA ahibhramAnte sa ca khalu viditA rajju-rekA tathAhaM

kUTastho naiva jIvo nija-guru-vacasA sAkshhi-bhUtas-shivohaM //94//

 

Tr.: Owing to the non-recognition of the rope in twilight, over it

appears a snake all at once. In the same way, by reason of non-

realisation of one's own self, the extremely unhappy condition of

the individual soul appeared on the self. Again, when the illusion

of the snake is dispelled by the words of a trustworthy friend,

there is only the rope. So too by the declaration of my own Master,

I am not the individual soul but the Immutable Self that is the

Witness. I am Shiva (the supreme Bliss).

 

praNAms to all advaitins

profvk

[Guest guest]

advaitin, "Ranjeet Sankar"

<thefinalsearch> wrote:

> "Madathil Rajendran Nair" <madathilnair>

> rajv ajnyAnAd bhAti-rajjau yathA hih

> svAtmAjnyAnAd Atmano jIva-bhAvah

> dIpenaitad bhrAnti-nAshe sa rajjur

> jjIvo nAham deshikoktyA shivoham

>

> With my rudimentary knowledge of Sanskrit, .... But what baffles

me is the word 'rajjau'

> in the first line. Does that word imply a snake or is it a

mistyping

> for some other phonetically similar word meaning snake.

> ----------

>

> Namaste Nairji,

> rajjuh means rope.

> Going by the word meaning, the verse is not about the lamp

revealing the

> truth of the rope. It is about the lamp destroying (nAshe) the

bhrAnti

> (confusion, error) about the rope (rajjuh).

>

> Hari Om

 

Namaste.

 

'rajjau' is the locative case (7th case) of the root word 'rajju'.

It means 'on the rope'.

 

praNAms to all advaitins

profvk

[Guest guest]

'rajjau' is the locative case (7th case) of the root word 'rajju'.

It means 'on the rope'.

 

praNAm prabhuji

Hare Krishna

 

prabhuji, would it not be more feasible meaning, if we take *rajjau* as

*about the rope* instead of *on the rope*, since the contextual implication

of rope in this verse is *our true nature*. Pls. clarify.

 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

[Guest guest]

Namaste Ranjeetji.

 

I said "removal of delusion". Isn't that "destroying confusion"?

 

What is the delusion or confusion? Do you mean to say Sankara left

it unsaid and expected the reader to understand it as snake? If you

look at the other verse quoted by Prof. Krishnamurthyji, the delusion

is named as bhujanga (snake). Rajjau as the locative doesn't seem to

fit in there. That is why I am baffled. It could be some other word

like bhujanga or uraga or nAga.

 

To translate the verse as I understand: Just as, due to ignorance,

the rope appears as ____________, due to the ignorance of one's own

real nature, the limitations of jIva-bhavah seem to appear on the

Atman. As the lamp removes or destroys the delusion or confusion or

error of (to reveal) the rope (that it is not snake), I am not the

jIva but Shiva by the guru's words. The pramANa for that conclusion

is the words of the teacher (dEshikOkti), which is the lamp of true

knowledge that removes the svAtma-ajnAna).

 

PraNAms.

 

Madathil Nair

_______________

 

advaitin, "Ranjeet Sankar"

<thefinalsearch> wrote:

> "Madathil Rajendran Nair" <madathilnair>

> rajv ajnyAnAd bhAti-rajjau yathA hih

> svAtmAjnyAnAd Atmano jIva-bhAvah

> dIpenaitad bhrAnti-nAshe sa rajjur

> jjIvo nAham deshikoktyA shivoham

>

> With my rudimentary knowledge of Sanskrit, I see that what is

> attempted here is a comparison of the superimposition of snake on

the

> rope on the one hand with the superimposition of jIva-bhava on Atman

> on the other. Like a lamp revealing the truth of the rope (removal

> of the delusion of snake), the light of True Knowledge reveals that

> the jIvA is verily Shiva. But what baffles me is the word 'rajjau'

> in the first line. Does that word imply a snake or is it a mistyping

> for some other phonetically similar word meaning snake.

> ----------

>

> Namaste Nairji,

> rajjuh means rope.

> Going by the word meaning, the verse is not about the lamp

revealing the

> truth of the rope. It is about the lamp destroying (nAshe) the

bhrAnti

> (confusion, error) about the rope (rajjuh).

>

> Hari Om

[Guest guest]

advaitin, "Madathil Rajendran Nair"

<madathilnair> wrote:

> Namaste Ranjeetji.

>

> I said "removal of delusion". Isn't that "destroying confusion"?

>

> What is the delusion or confusion? Do you mean to say Sankara

left

> it unsaid and expected the reader to understand it as snake? If

you

> look at the other verse quoted by Prof. Krishnamurthyji, the

delusion

> is named as bhujanga (snake). Rajjau as the locative doesn't seem

to

> fit in there. That is why I am baffled. It could be some other

word

> like bhujanga or uraga or nAga.

>

> To translate the verse as I understand: Just as, due to

ignorance,

> the rope appears as ____________, due to the ignorance of one's

own

> real nature, the limitations of jIva-bhavah seem to appear on the

> Atman. As the lamp removes or destroys the delusion or confusion

or

> error of (to reveal) the rope (that it is not snake), I am not the

> jIva but Shiva by the guru's words. The pramANa for that

conclusion

> is the words of the teacher (dEshikOkti), which is the lamp of

true

> knowledge that removes the svAtma-ajnAna).

>

> PraNAms.

>

> Madathil Nair

> _______________

>

> advaitin, "Ranjeet Sankar"

> <thefinalsearch> wrote:

> > "Madathil Rajendran Nair" <madathilnair>

> > rajv ajnyAnAd bhAti-rajjau yathA hih

> > svAtmAjnyAnAd Atmano jIva-bhAvah

> > dIpenaitad bhrAnti-nAshe sa rajjur

> > jjIvo nAham deshikoktyA shivoham

> >

> > But what baffles me is the word 'rajjau'

> > in the first line. Does that word imply a snake or is it a

mistyping

> > for some other phonetically similar word meaning snake.

> > ----------

> >

> > Namaste Nairji,

> > rajjuh means rope.

> > Going by the word meaning, the verse is not about the lamp

> revealing the

> > truth of the rope. It is about the lamp destroying (nAshe) the

> bhrAnti

> > (confusion, error) about the rope (rajjuh).

> >

> > Hari Om

 

NAMASTE.

 

I didn't realise the nature of the bafflement. Now I see it, Nairji.

It is all because of the English transliteration of the first line as

 

rajv ajnyAnAd bhAti-rajjau yathA hih.

 

The correct rendering (so that the meaning comes out clear) should

be as follows:

 

rajjv-ajnAnAd bhAti rajjau yathA ahiH.

 

"ahiH" means snake. The compound yathAhih has to be broken as yathA

+ ahiH. I should have seen earlier itself that this was the problem.

 

Now let me give the full translation word by word. First I quote the

shloka:

 

rajjv-ajnyAnAd bhAti rajjau yathA'hiH

svAtmA-jnyAnAd Atmano jIva-bhAvah

dIpenaitad bhrAnti-nAshe sa rajjur-

jIvo nAham deshikoktyA shivoham

 

First the breaking into words: (padac-cheda) and their meanings

 

rajjv-ajnyAnat: by the non-recognition of the rope

bhAti : appears

rajjau : on (in) the rope

yathA : just as

ahiH : snake

svAtmA-jnyAnAt : by the non-recognition of one's Self

AtmanaH : for the Self

jIva-bhAvaH : the attitude (appearance, becoming) of jIva

dIpena : by the lamp

etat : this

bhrAnti-nAshe: on the eradication of illusion (false appearance)

saH: that (bhavati : becomes)

rajjuH: rope

jivaH the individual soul

na: (am) not

ahaM: I

deshikoktyA : by the words of the Master

shivaH ahaM : I am Shiva.

 

The final translation:

Just as by the non-recognition of the rope, snake appears on the

rope, so also by the non-recognition of one's Self, the attitude of

Jiva appears for the Self. Again just as on the eradication of the

illusion (of snake) by the lamp, it is seen as the rope, so also, by

the words of the Master, it is seen that I am not the individual

soul, but Brahman.

[Guest guest]

Namaste Prof. Krishnamurthyji.

 

Salutations! Wonderful!

 

You won't believe it - I begin my day very early chanting different

stOtrAs as I make sandwiches for my school-going daughter. It starts

with Ganesha, as is the usual practice, then the navagrahas

(particularly because of my liking for astrology) followed by Devi

and Hanumat stOtras. In the stOtra for Ganesha and the planets,

there is the word 'ahi' for Rahu, the serpent (natwAhIm kEtu-mAndIm).

What a pity I couldn't recognize this daily chanted 'ahi' in the

transliteration. I had taken the last 'hi' to mean emphasis

for 'yatA'! Mother Saraswatiji waited till this morning to appear as

you to answer my bafflement! Inscrutable are Her ways! Immense

thanks for the help.

 

PraNAms.

 

Madathil Nair

____________________

 

advaitin, "V. Krishnamurthy" <profvk>

wrote:

>

> I didn't realise the nature of the bafflement. Now I see it,

Nairji.

> It is all because of the English transliteration of the first line

as

>

> rajv ajnyAnAd bhAti-rajjau yathA hih.

>

> The correct rendering (so that the meaning comes out clear) should

> be as follows:

>

> rajjv-ajnAnAd bhAti rajjau yathA ahiH.

>

> "ahiH" means snake.

[Guest guest]

Namaste,

 

This verse occurs in Shankara's Advaita-Pancharatnam (Complete

Works - publ. Samata Books).

 

Regards,

 

Sunder

 

 

 

advaitin, "Madathil Rajendran Nair"

<madathilnair> wrote:

> Namaste Anandaji.

>

> I have also read the following verse quoted by you. However, I am

> not sure where and, at present, without sufficient means to locate

> it.

>

rajjvaj~nyAnAdbhAti rajjau yathAhiH

svAtmAj~nyAnAdAtmano jIvabhAvaH .

AptyoktyAhibhrAntinAshe sa rajju\-

rjIvo nAhaM deshikoktyA shivo.aham.h || 2 ||

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

> dIpenaitad bhrAnti-nAshe sa rajjur

> jjIvo nAham deshikoktyA shivoham