Kapila referred by Sri Krishna in the Bhagavad Gita

[Guest guest]

Dear Advaitins,

 

There is mention of Kapila Maharshi in the Bhagavad Gita:

 

Of all trees I am the banyan tree, and of the sages among the demigods

I am Narada. Of the Gandharvas I am Citraratha, and among perfected

beings I am the sage Kapila. (Bhagavad Gita 10.26)

 

Is Krishna referring to Sage Kapila who is the founder of the Samkhya

philosophy? or Kapila who comes in the bhagavatam who has given the

famous kapilopadesha? If krishna is refering to the former one, why

krishna is calling him 'perfected being' in spite of his prorogation

of dualistic philosophy ? I am not very sure about the kapilopadesha

of Bhagavatam whether it is non-dual or dualistic in approach.

 

Can anybody help me to clarify this issue?

 

Yours in Sri Ramakrishna,

 

Br. Vinayaka

[Guest guest]

Vinayaka <vinayaka_ns > wrote: Dear Advaitins,

 

There is mention of Kapila Maharshi in the Bhagavad Gita:

 

Of all trees I am the banyan tree, and of the sages among the demigods

I am Narada. Of the Gandharvas I am Citraratha, and among perfected

beings I am the sage Kapila. (Bhagavad Gita 10.26)

 

Is Krishna referring to Sage Kapila who is the founder of the Samkhya

philosophy? or Kapila who comes in the bhagavatam who has given the

famous kapilopadesha? If krishna is refering to the former one, why

krishna is calling him 'perfected being' in spite of his prorogation

of dualistic philosophy ? I am not very sure about the kapilopadesha

of Bhagavatam whether it is non-dual or dualistic in approach.

 

Can anybody help me to clarify this issue?

 

 

Please refer to the book of Tapasyanandaji on this. I am surprised that you should not have taken note of this.

with regards

Sankarraman

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Access over 1 million songs - Music Unlimited.

[Guest guest]

advaitin, Ganesan Sankarraman <shnkaran wrote:

 

> Please refer to the book of Tapasyanandaji on this. I am surprised

that you should not have taken note of this.

> with regards

> Sankarraman

 

Dear Sir,

 

Surprisingly there is no notes given to this particular verse in his

translation of Gita. I have studied up to 10th chapter, but there

seems no mention of the explanation for this topic (If my memory

doesn't fail, which happens too often :-))

 

Are you asking me to refer his translation of Srimad BhAgavatam?

 

Yours in Sri Ramakrishna,

 

Br. Vinayaka

[Guest guest]

Vinayaka <vinayaka_ns > wrote: advaitin, Ganesan Sankarraman <shnkaran wrote:

 

>

 

Dear Sir,

 

Surprisingly there is no notes given to this particular verse in his

translation of Gita. I have studied up to 10th chapter, but there

seems no mention of the explanation for this topic (If my memory

doesn't fail, which happens too often :-))

 

Are you asking me to refer his translation of Srimad BhAgavatam?

 

 

Dear Vinayaka,

I am not referring to Bhaghavatam or Bhaghavat Gita translated by the late revered Tapasyanandaji, but to the small work containing the teachings of Kapiala, wherein he chooses not to identify the teachings of Kapaila Muni as one of Nireeswara Vada. I hope I have not erred. If I have please excuse me for the error. Recently, I saw a number of brahmacharis of Ramakrishnasram in Ramanashram, all of them being very young. By chance had you been there? There is a work called Ramanaparavidyopanishad, containing the teachings of Ramana Bhaghvan by one Lakshmana Sarma, who has commented on some of the basic writings of Bhaghavan with the pseudonym, 'Who.' It is a marvelous work, which will set at rest all your doubts on Advaita, rather render them meaningless in the light of the highest teachings of Bhaghavan, taking you directly to the Self, without the paraphernalia of technical terminologies and logic. It is available online in the website of David

Godman. The profound teachings can be understood by even a layman, even better understood.

with regards and love

Sankarraman

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Get your own web address.

Have a HUGE year through Small Business.

[Guest guest]

advaitin, Ganesan Sankarraman <shnkaran wrote:

>

>

>

> Vinayaka <vinayaka_ns wrote:

advaitin, Ganesan Sankarraman <shnkaran@> wrote:

 

 

 

> Dear Vinayaka,

> I am not referring to Bhaghavatam or

Bhaghavat Gita translated by the late revered Tapasyanandaji, but to

the small work containing the teachings of Kapiala, wherein he chooses

not to identify the teachings of Kapaila Muni as one of Nireeswara

Vada. I hope I have not erred. If I have please excuse me for the

error. Recently, I saw a number of brahmacharis of Ramakrishnasram in

Ramanashram, all of them being very young. By chance had you been

there? There is a work called Ramanaparavidyopanishad, containing the

teachings of Ramana Bhaghvan by one Lakshmana Sarma, who has commented

on some of the basic writings of Bhaghavan with the pseudonym, 'Who.'

It is a marvelous work, which will set at rest all your doubts on

Advaita, rather render them meaningless in the light of the highest

teachings of Bhaghavan, taking you directly to the Self, without the

paraphernalia of technical terminologies and logic. It is available

online in the website of David

> Godman. The profound teachings can be understood by even a layman,

even better understood.

> with regards and love

> Sankarraman

 

Dear Sir,

 

Thanks for the information. Yes, most of the authors do not agree that

he was the same person who propounded sankhya philosophy. In the

translation by Swami Satchidanendra Saraswati,he has written a note

that even if we take him to be propounder of Sankya there is no

problem but he restricts it to the perfected one, who understands

nature, its components and working only. This is even told by

Shankaracharya that they are the masters as far as nature and its

understanding is concerned.

 

This question doesn't have any meaning as far as self-knowledge is

concerned. But I am making earnest and sincere attempt to understand

the prasthanatraya and i don't want to leave out even minute details

as far as possible.

 

I haven't visited Ramanashram. I have an aversion for traveling and

think its a sheer waste of money and time. I feel better to sit with

talks with ramana maharshi and gazing at his picture than visiting

ramanashram :-)

 

Finally, thanks for your info. on george's book availability in the

personal book shop.I did not know that it is part of the Sacred books

of the east series translated and edited by Prof. Max. Mullar. Deluxe

version is lying in our library itself, which is used hardly by

anybody. I shall try to buy it once mother lakshmi bestows her grace :-)

 

Yours in Sri Ramakrishna,

 

Br. Vinayaka

[Guest guest]

I understand your dislike for travels. So is the case with me. But Tiruvannamalai is a very mystic and occult place, having attracted many jnanis. It is not merely a place of worship. Recent propaganda by some cinema actors is attracting terrible crowd there which is unfortunate. I have not been attracted by any place in the world except Tiruvannamalai

 

 

 

with respectful regards

Sankarraman

 

 

 

Don't pick lemons.

See all the new 2007 cars at Autos.