Was Arjuna an Atma Jnani?

[Guest guest]

H.N. Sreenivasa murthy

Pranams to you all.

Dear Participants in the above subject,

It is impossible to certify or judge whether so and so is an Atma Jnani because Atma Jnani cannot be objectified. Sri Shankara says that realisation is svasAkshikaM. Hence will it not be more fruitful if one engages himself in knowing or judging whether he has established in theSelf instead of evaluating others like Arjuna etc.? Upanishad advises us " anya vAcO vimuMcatha".

With warm and respectful regards,

Sreenivasa Murthy

 

 

Here’s a new way to find what you're looking for - Answers

[Guest guest]

sreenivasa murthy <narayana145 (AT) (DOT) co.in> wrote: H.N. Sreenivasa murthy

Pranams to you all.

Dear Participants in the above subject,

It is impossible to certify or judge whether so and so is an Atma Jnani because Atma Jnani cannot be objectified. Sri Shankara says that realisation is svasAkshikaM. Hence will it not be more fruitful if one engages himself in knowing or judging whether he has established in theSelf instead of evaluating others like Arjuna etc.? Upanishad advises us " anya vAcO vimuMcatha".

 

From

Sankarraman

Dear Sri Murthy,

Though what you say is true, you must appreciate that Sri Subramanium, the originator of this topic, has only raised this question from the findings of the scriptures, and has not presumed to judge anybody. Your reading too much into a simple academic issue, is not fair. All of us know that the Self cannot be objectified. Sometimes we talk from the relative stand point. One cannot be always in the rarefied atmosphere of the self.

with respectful regards,

Sankarraman

 

 

 

 

 

Groups are talking. We´re listening. Check out the handy changes to .

[Guest guest]

advaitin, "Sunder Hattangadi" <sunderh

wrote:

> Namaste,

>

> There is no contradiction! In Gita 10:18, Arjuna says:

>

> vistareNaatmano yogaM vibhuuti.n cha janaardana .

> bhuuyaH kathaya tR^iptirhi shR^iNvato naasti me.amR^itam.h .. 10\-

> 18..

>

> "Relate to me again in detail, O Janardana! of Thy power and

> manifestation; for I am not satiated with hearing Thy nectar-like

> speech."

>

> The true devotee never gets satiated with the Infinity of

the

> Spirit. The statement that the teaching having slipped his mind can

> only be an 'excuse' to continue the insatiability!

>

>

 

Namaste,

Thanks for the reply. Is it possible to recount from the

Mahabharatha the context in which the Anugita was taught? Again, why

was Arjuna included in the SwargaarohaNam at the end of the period of

the Pandavas? In the case of known Jnanis like Vidura and perhaps

Bhishma, no such 'going to some loka' is mentioned. What about

Uddhava? He too received the exalted teaching from the Lord. In his

case there is no mention of his going to some loka.

 

In the Gita 11th chapter verses 45 and 46 we have:

 

adr^ShTapUrvam.....

bhayena cha pravyathitam mano me |

tadeva me darshaya deva rUpam....

kirITinam....

tenaiva rUpeNa chaturbhujena...

 

....my mind is confounded with fear. Show me that form, O God, have

mercy....I wish to see Thee as before.

 

And seeing Arjuna afraid, the Lord withdrew the Universal Form.

 

While i do not want to preempt an answer, i would like to express

some hint. Did the Acharya consider the Gita purely as a Moksha

shastra and commented on it accordingly? For, in the other

Upanishads like the Kathopanishad, we have the disciple being shown

as having become enlightened after the teaching was given. The Gita

also contains this expression. Perhaps that is the reason,

recognised by the Acharya to be such, that he commented in the way he

has done it. We cannot say that he was unaware of the Mahabharatha.

He has quoted, even in the Gita bhashya, from the Mahabharatha. Let

us see if some answer transpires that can account for all these loose

ends.

 

On another note, it is not wrong to try to find out whether Arjuna

was indeed an Atma jnani. The question came up only in the face of

facts that do not to the Gita-view. One should not

conclude that one is an Atma nishtha, only to discover later that one

travels to some loka in the end.

 

Pranams,

subbu

[Guest guest]

While many commentators to the above Gita verse have said that Arjuna

did become free from samsara, the commentary by Sri Abhinavagupta

says for the verse 73: By the words `Destroyed is delusion?' what has

come about is Arjuna's resolve to fight. This is not the onset of

Brahman-knowledge in him. By indicating thus, he gives occasion for

the future teaching of the Anugita.'

 

praNAms

Hare Krishna

 

Infact I had the same doubt in my mind sometime back & I got the

confirmation from my guruji that arjuna's declaration i.e. nashtO mOha,

smutir labhdhvA at the end of gIta does not have anything to do with that

of paramArtha brahma jnAna....nashtO mOha pertains to his totally uncalled,

untimely affection towards his relations on the battle field & *smutir

labhdvA* pertains to his *kula dharma* as a kshatriya...After listening

krishna's words arjuna's doubt vanished with regard to the battle which he

was due to fight, and his duty was clear to him. But this does not anyway

mean that arjuna has the ultimate paramArtha jnAna & his all ajnAna

removed, nor it is said so anywhere in the Gita.

 

Yes, it is a matter of fact that, arjuna, even after hearing upadEsha from

svayaM bhagavAn himself, could not realize the tattva in its entirety &

onceagain, succumbed to ahankAra mamakAra which forced him to ask bhagavan

for the second round of upadEsha. Normally it wont happen like that if at

all arjuna's knowledge on battle field was *Atma/brahma jnAna*!!! His

arrogance & egocentric nature were quite evident when he fought with

babruvAhana (arjuna-chitrAngada's son), tAmradhvaja & haMsadhvaja during

ashvamEdha digvijaya yAtra conducted by his elder brother, yudhishTira at

the post kurukshEtra war era.

 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

[Guest guest]

advaitin, bhaskar.yr wrote:

>

>

> While many commentators to the above Gita verse have said that

Arjuna

> did become free from samsara, the commentary by Sri Abhinavagupta

> says for the verse 73: By the words `Destroyed is delusion?' what

has

> come about is Arjuna's resolve to fight. This is not the onset of

> Brahman-knowledge in him. By indicating thus, he gives occasion for

> the future teaching of the Anugita.'

>

> praNAms

> Hare Krishna

>

> Infact I had the same doubt in my mind sometime back & I got the

> confirmation from my guruji that arjuna's declaration i.e. nashtO

mOha,

> smutir labhdhvA at the end of gIta does not have anything to do

with that

> of paramArtha brahma jnAna....nashtO mOha pertains to his totally

uncalled,

> untimely affection towards his relations on the battle field &

*smutir

> labhdvA* pertains to his *kula dharma* as a kshatriya...After

listening

> krishna's words arjuna's doubt vanished with regard to the battle

which he

> was due to fight, and his duty was clear to him. But this does not

anyway

> mean that arjuna has the ultimate paramArtha jnAna & his all ajnAna

> removed, nor it is said so anywhere in the Gita.

>

 

Namaste,

 

Shankara's vcommentary on Gita 18:73, is unambiguous as to

Arjuna's realizing the Ultimate. There is no need to be disturbed by

other commentators' interpretations. Arjuna has said even as early

as 11:1, that his delusion is gone.

 

As regards Anu-Gita, literal interpretation can be risky.

When Krishna responds to Arjuna's request to repeat the Gita

upadesha, Krishna says he could not repeat it because he was then in

a 'high state of Yoga'. Does this mean that He had come 'down' to a

lower state ? Certainly not.

 

 

Regards,

 

Sunder

[Guest guest]

advaitin, "Sunder Hattangadi" <sunderh

wrote:

> Namaste,

>

> Shankara's vcommentary on Gita 18:73, is unambiguous as to

> Arjuna's realizing the Ultimate. There is no need to be disturbed by

> other commentators' interpretations. Arjuna has said even as early

> as 11:1, that his delusion is gone.

 

 

Namaste,

 

Thanks for the reply. While discussing this question with friend

yesterday, he drew my attention to a fact in the entire Gita: One can

clearly discern two kinds of teaching that came from the Lord: one

addressed to Arjuna in particular and the other not being so, being

of a general nature. When thinking about this two-fold aspect of the

entire Gita teaching, what came to the forefront were certain

specific teachings addressed to Arjuna, for example:

 

Karmaneyeva adhikaaraH te, kuru karmaiva tasmaat tvam, chittva enam

samshayam yogam aatishtha, utthishtha, karma kartum iha arhasi, etc.

 

All these, in effect mean: To Arjuna, in particular, the upadesha of

Bhagavan is Karma Yoga. He specifically says this by separating him

out as one who is not fit for Jnana Yoga and as such the course of

action for him is karma yoga. The Lord has made it clear in the

generality of the teaching that he who has not walked the path of

karma yoga is not fit as yet to take up Jnana Yoga and the commentary

has made it clear amply in all such places.

 

Even in the sixteenth chapter, in the end, the Lord says:

Therefore, the scripture is thy authority in deciding as to what

ought to be done...Now, thou oughtest to know and perform thy duty

laid down in the scripture-law.

 

And in the 18th chapter, verses 59 and 60 the Lord says:

 

If, indulging in egotism, though thinkest 'I will not fight', vain

is this, thy resolve; nature will constrain thee. Bound as you are,

O Kaunteya, by thy own nature-born act, that which from delusion thou

likest not to do, thou shalt do, though against thy will.

 

One is compelled to conclude that the Lord taught Karma Yoga to

Arjuna. In fact in the 6th chapter He made it clear that for the one

who intends to ascend to the plane of Yoga, meditation, he starting

point is karma yoga. This will give him the required freedom from

the wayward nature of the mind, and qualify him to sit in

meditation. Once this is got, the Lord said, withdrawal from karma

is the means to attain perfection in dhyana. The Lord turned down

the pleas of Arjuna to take to renunciation. He repeatedly asked him

to fight, that is, the performance of the duty of a Kshatriya.

 

It is this background that makes one reluctant to conclude that

Arjuna became an Atma Jnani, even before carrying out the specific

instruction for him from the Lord. The wording of the last verse of

the 4th chapter is somewhat puzzling:

 

With the sword of Knowledge cut asunder your doubt and RESOLVE TO DO

YOUR DUTY.

 

How can one be instructed to do the duty after attaining

realization? He rises beyond injunctions and prohibitions then. The

commentary provides: ...get rid of the doubt that is assailing your

mind: to do my duty or to take to the path of Jnana? Then, rise up to

do your duty.

 

The commentary for the 18th ch. verse under discussion now, as you

said looks quite unambiguous to favour the conclusion that Arjuna did

become a Jnani. But the foregoing does not lend credence to such a

conclusion.

 

Let the question get resolved in due course when more insights come

to us from various sources.

 

Warm Regards,

subbu

[Guest guest]

The commentary for the 18th ch. verse under discussion now, as you

said looks quite unambiguous to favour the conclusion that Arjuna did

become a Jnani. But the foregoing does not lend credence to such a

conclusion.

 

praNAms

Hare Krishna

 

Yes, shankara in 18.73 commentary implies that Arjuna has *become* a brahma

jnAni after hearing krishna's gItOpadEsha...Thanks to Sri Sunder prabhuji

for pointing out this commentary...But his questionable attitude after the

death of his son abhimanyu, and during ashvamEdha yAga period never get

answered....Anyway let us wait for more enlightening insights...till

then...

 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

[Guest guest]

advaitin, bhaskar.yr wrote:

>

> ...But his questionable attitude after the

> death of his son abhimanyu, and during ashvamEdha yAga period never get

> answered....

 

Namaste,

 

Even jnani-s appear to behave like any other human being as

circumstances warrant (e.g. Rama's grief at Sita's abduction).

 

Arjuna, who had surrenderd himself to Krishna (Gita 2:7), who

was qualified to receive Krishna's grace in getting 'divya-hakshu' and

'vishva-rupa-darshana', who had all the 'daivi-sampat' necessary, was

like a piece of camphor ready to burst into fire of 'atma-jnana'. He

fought the war as a jnani, not as an a-jnani. He had completed all the

karma-yoga in his previous lives, but he did not remember it. To doubt

Shankara'a conclusion seems to me unjustified.

 

The dictates of karma-yoga may need either just one moment, a

whole life, or a series of lives.

 

A jnani's 'actions' should not be judged by the standards of

life an a-jnani is prescribed to follow.

 

 

Regards,

 

Sunder

[Guest guest]

> A jnani's 'actions' should not be judged by the standards of

> life an a-jnani is prescribed to follow.

 

> Regards,

>

> Sunder

 

 

So very true.

There is a very graphic and moving account of how Sage Vasishta (who

has of course the authored the greatest scripture on advaita)

reacted upon hearing about the death of his son(s). He is overcome

by immense sorrow as it were.

 

Shankara himself describes his sense of loss upon the death of his

mother.

 

At a vyavaharic level we can never judge a gunateetha by his

behavior or actions.

 

Shyam

[Guest guest]

advaitin, "Sunder Hattangadi" <sunderh

> The dictates of karma-yoga may need either just one moment, a

> whole life, or a series of lives.

>

> A jnani's 'actions' should not be judged by the standards of

> life an a-jnani is prescribed to follow.

>

>

> Regards,

>

> Sunder

>

Namaste,S-ji,

 

Yes I agree, for there is always the prarabda karma built into the

body mind complex, which will continue on whether there is an ego

there or not....ONS...Tony.

[Guest guest]

advaitin, "Sunder Hattangadi" <sunderh

wrote:

>

> advaitin, bhaskar.yr@ wrote:

> >

> > ...But his questionable attitude after the

> > death of his son abhimanyu, and during ashvamEdha yAga period

never get

> > answered....

>

> Namaste,

>

> Even jnani-s appear to behave like any other human being as

> circumstances warrant (e.g. Rama's grief at Sita's abduction).

>

> Arjuna, who had surrenderd himself to Krishna (Gita 2:7), who

> was qualified to receive Krishna's grace in getting 'divya-hakshu'

and

> 'vishva-rupa-darshana', who had all the 'daivi-sampat' necessary,

was

> like a piece of camphor ready to burst into fire of 'atma-jnana'. He

> fought the war as a jnani, not as an a-jnani. He had completed all

the

> karma-yoga in his previous lives, but he did not remember it. To

doubt

> Shankara'a conclusion seems to me unjustified.

>

> The dictates of karma-yoga may need either just one moment, a

> whole life, or a series of lives.

>

> A jnani's 'actions' should not be judged by the standards of

> life an a-jnani is prescribed to follow.

>

>

> Regards,

>

> Sunder

 

Namaste,

Thank you Sir, for this wonderful response. I reproduce hereunder a

reply received from a friend of mine in this context:

 

Quote:

I have the following to say:

 

a)He is a Jnani because he himself seems to say so. After all no one

can decidedly say that an other person is a Jnani or not. (However, to

me, he is a Jnani (particularly) because Bhagavatpadal says so :-).

b)He was supremely great. He beheld the viswarupa darsana which none

except him had seen in the past nor would any one get an opportunity

to see in the future. c) He was extremely dear to the Lord.(vide 18.64

etc.)

d) His punya-visesha was so extraordinary that he met even Lord Siva

and the latter too was extremely pleased with him. .

e) The Lord often says Eg: 10.10, 10.11,18.56 - that due to His grace

a devotee achieves the goal. He has obviously graced Arjuna. That is

why Arjuna says "tvatprasadaat" .

f)When a person is taught by Bhagavan Himself, how can Jnana not dawn

on that person ?

g) A Jnani can forget the 'teaching' later on. But nothing happens to

his moksha (As a rare case, as is typical of itihasas/puranas,

Arjuna may even have had some karma left to go to heaven. But his

ajnana must have gone once he was blessed by the Lord through His

teaching.)

h) Though having become a Jnani, he had to wage the war, as a

kshatriya is not pre-eminently qualified for

sanyasa-purvaka-jnana-nishtha.Thus, for such a jananin, work is the

best course as it would propmote the welfare of the world -

lokasangraha. The Lord himself says this in 4. 15 - please read this

especially with the bhashyam.

i)For the very same in reason in (h) the advice in the last sloka of

Chapter 4 is not out of place.

(unquote)

 

Pranams,

subbu

[Guest guest]

I would like to add one more thought on sage VasiSHta from RAMAYANA. When he saw the baby Rama in the Cradle. He was so attracted to the child. A thought arose in him "How I desire/wish I had a son like this child?" but immediately he correctc himself saying that, his own thinking is not correct, dismisses saying, 'even this thought is Isvara.'

From this we learn ,that the difference between a j~nAni and Aj~nAni is, the j~nAni senses immediately and corrects himeslf.

om namo narayanaya

Lakshmi Muthuswamy

 

shyam_md <shyam_md > wrote: > A jnani's 'actions' should not be judged by the standards of

> life an a-jnani is prescribed to follow.

> Regards,

>

> Sunder

So very true.

There is a very graphic and moving account of how Sage Vasishta (who

has of course the authored the greatest scripture on advaita)

reacted upon hearing about the death of his son(s). He is overcome

by immense sorrow as it were.

Shankara himself describes his sense of loss upon the death of his

mother.

At a vyavaharic level we can never judge a gunateetha by his

behavior or actions.

Shyam

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

A jnani's 'actions' should not be judged by the standards of

life an a-jnani is prescribed to follow.

 

 

praNAms

Hare Krishna

 

Very much true prabhuji...ajnAni-s like me can not dictate the terms about

jnani's attitude & lifestyle...how can we, with a conditioned mind set,

adjudge who is jnAni & who is not & how jnAni should behave & should not

etc.!!! but if you look back, even the history does not grant *jnAni-hood*

to arjuna despite the fact that he has been initiated by bhagavan

himself...In mahAbhArata we do see, jnAni-hood has been ascribed to

vidhura, dharmavyAdha, bhIshma, shuka muni etc. etc. but nowhere (as far as

I know) it is mentioned that arjuna comes under that category....On most of

the occassions, (even after gItOpadEsha) arjuna was at the receiving end &

its been narrated how arjuna with sheer arrogance refused to take the help

of krishna bhagavan while fighting the battle with babruvAhana (ref. vide

Jaimini bhArata)...And again, at the end, in the *svagArOhaNa* episode too,

despite being a jnAni, he could not even reach this celestial abode whereas

*yudhishtira* with a dog (!!??) made it very easily....So,there is no

historical support to prove arjuna's ultimate realisation...But our

bhagavadpAda has compassionately granted him that noble stature...So, it is

like supreme court verdict for us & hence, no more discussion :-))

 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

[Guest guest]

Note from List Moderators: We value your enthusiasm to convey everything that you read, see and heard on every subject matter of discussion. Please note that your posting will be more beneficial to the list and members if you take time to reduce the volume and instead focus only on the substance. Once Winston Churchil made the following statement:- "To speak an important message crisp and clear within 5 minutes I need an hour's preparation; but to speak for an hour the same message I can do it immediately!" His statement is profound and all of us in this list can benefit from his subtle message. The moderators are fully aware that members value and cherish posts that focus on the subject matter of a discussion. They often get frustrated when they see long messages with verses from scriptures both relevant and irrelevant. We the posters should use our discriminating intellect (Vivekam) to keep and post only the most relevan! To answer Bhaskar Prabhuji, will it be fruitful to quote the entire Bhagavad Gita? Ofcourse, not! In conclusion, the moderators do appreciate your frequent participation in the list discussions and they want to insist you to pay greater attention to the discussion topic while posting.

-----

 

Bhaskar prabhuji writes

 

(But our > bhagavadpAda has compassionately granted him that noble

stature...So, it is like supreme court verdict for us & hence, no

more discussion :-))

 

Prabuji, may i please recall this verse from Srimad bhagvad gita ,

chapter 10, verse 37

 

VIBHUTI YOGA

 

vrsninam vasudevo 'smi

pandavanam dhananjayah

muninam apy aham vyasah

kavinam usana kavih (cxh 10, verse 37)

 

 

 

Of the descendants of Vrsni I am Vasudeva, and of the Pandavas I am

Arjuna!. Of the sages I am Vyasa, and among great thinkers I am

Usana.

 

 

prabhuji , there were five pandavas to choose from ! Then was then

was the dana veera Karnan, the hero also ! but while elaborating on

His divine glories, lord Krishna chose to honor 'arjuna' as his

alter ego ! why ?

 

was it because Arjuna was the most valiant of all ?

 

was it because arjuna was a great archer ?

 

was it because Arjuna was krishna's childhood friend ?

 

no, prabhuji!

 

Lord krishna chose Arjuna only BECAUSE arjuna was the best among men

and Lord krishna only identifies with the best ! nothing less will

do for someone to be equated with the Bhagwan Krishna !

 

IN THIS SAME VERSE , SRI KRISHNA chooses to honor Vyasa who is well

versed in vedic knowledge . WAS NOT VYASA AN INCARNATION OF lord

krishna ? AND lORD kRISHNA ALSO HONORS USANA , THE GREATEST AMONG

ALL KAVIS .

 

in the same chapter 10 , verse 11 of srimad Bhagvat gita reads

 

tesam evanukampartham

aham ajnana-jam tamah

nasayamy atma-bhavastho

jnana-dipena bhasvata

 

Out of compassion for them, I,

Abiding in their hearts, destroy

The darkness born of ignorance

By the shining lamp of knowledge

 

It is obvious from the above verse that out of extreme compassion

Sri KRISHNA HAS GIVEN JNANA DIKSHA to ARJUNA !

 

 

IN ANOTHER VERSE IN THE SRIMAD BHAGVAT GITA , SRI KRISHNA SAYS

 

 

yas tv atma-ratir eva syad

atma-trptas ca manavah

atmany eva ca santustas

tasya karyam na vidyate (3:17)

 

 

He who is content in the Self,

Who is satisfied in the Self,

Who is pleased only in the self:

For him there is no need to act. (3:17)

 

THIS VERSE CAN BE INTERPRETED IN MANY WAYS - AS THE BEST EXAMPLE OF

KARMA YOGA ! it can also be interpreted to emphasize

the 'sharanagati tattwa' underlying dedicating all fruits of action

to the lotus feet of the lord!

 

Now read verse 37 of chapter 11 of srimad bhagvat gita

 

tasmat tvam uttistha yaso labhasva

jitva satrun bhunksva rajyam samrddham

mayaivaite nihatah purvam eva

nimitta-matram bhava savya-sacin

 

 

 

Therefore get up and prepare to fight. After conquering your enemies

you will enjoy a flourishing kingdom. They are already put to death

by My arrangement, and you, O Savyasaci, can be but an instrument in

the fight.

 

 

Read how sri Krishna addresses Arjuna as only an 'instrument' used

by Him TO DEFAET THE EVIL KAURAVAS!

 

IN THE NEXT VERSE 38 OF THE SAME CHAPTER OF THE SRIMAD BHAGVAT

GITA , GITACHARYA SAYS

 

dronam ca bhismam ca jayadratham ca

karnam tathanyan api yodha-viran

maya hatams tvam jahi ma vyathistha

yudhyasva jetasi rane sapatnan

 

 

The Blessed Lord said: All the great warriors--Drona, Bhisma,

Jayadratha, Karna--are already destroyed. Simply fight, and you will

vanquish your enemies.

 

 

so from the above passages , it is clear that Liord Krishna had a

higher purpose in mind when he became the charioteer of Arjuna ! Of

all the pandavas, Arjuna had the 'adhikaratvam' to be Krishna's

disciple ! and Lord KRISHNA CHOSE ARJUNA and imparted to him the

great science of atma vidya as Arjuna was the most qualified !

Arjuna was also blessed with the 'divya chakshu' ( divine eye of

knowledge) so he can understand the cosmic manifestation of the

lord!

 

on another note , there is a difference between Krishna avatara and

Rama avatra ! Krishna avatara was a poorna avatara - Lord Krishna

knew his past and other births . Wheras in Rama avatattara , lord

Rama did not know he is an incarnation wheras sage vasishta and all

knew Sri RAMA'S GREATNESS! tHAT IS WHY SRI rAMA JUST BEHAVED LIKE AN

ORDINARY MAN - prone to all normal emotions etc . WHERAS sRI KRISHNA

EXHIBITED ALL HIS SIDDHIS ETC , SRI rAMA NEVER DID ! THEREFORE , sRI

KRISHNA is considered to be a complete manifestation of God, not a

partial expression of the power and the glory of God.

 

IN CONCLUSION i LIKE TO RECALL THIS VERSE FROM SRIMAD BHAGVAT GITA

 

yatra yogesvarah krsno

yatra partho dhanur-dharah

tatra srir vijayo bhutir

dhruva nitir matir mama (CHAPTER 18 VERSE 78_)

 

 

 

Wherever there is Krsna, the master of all mystics, and wherever

there is Arjuna, the supreme archer, there will also certainly be

opulence, victory, extraordinary power, and morality. That is my

opinion.

 

 

VANDE Vasudevam!

[Guest guest]

he was after all looking at Lord Rama's face Itself and that too as

a Newborn!! Can there be a more beautiful vision??

thank you for sharing that.

Shyam

 

advaitin, Lakshmi Muthuswamy <lakmuthu

wrote:

>

> I would like to add one more thought on sage VasiSHta from

RAMAYANA. When he saw the baby Rama in the Cradle. He was so

attracted to the child. A thought arose in him "How I desire/wish I

had a son like this child?" but immediately he correctc himself

saying that, his own thinking is not correct, dismisses

saying, 'even this thought is Isvara.'

>

> From this we learn ,that the difference between a j~nAni and

Aj~nAni is, the j~nAni senses immediately and corrects himeslf.

>

> om namo narayanaya

> Lakshmi Muthuswamy

>

> shyam_md <shyam_md

wrote: > A

jnani's 'actions' should not be judged by the standards of

> > life an a-jnani is prescribed to follow.

>

> > Regards,

> >

> > Sunder

>

> So very true.

> There is a very graphic and moving account of how Sage Vasishta

(who

> has of course the authored the greatest scripture on advaita)

> reacted upon hearing about the death of his son(s). He is

overcome

> by immense sorrow as it were.

>

> Shankara himself describes his sense of loss upon the death of

his

> mother.

>

> At a vyavaharic level we can never judge a gunateetha by his

> behavior or actions.

>

> Shyam

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>