The Ashtavakra Gita

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " sam_t_7 " <sam_t_7> wrote:

><<snip>>

 

But then, after I

> got off this board I somehow clicked onto a website with a Gita

> called the Ashtavakra gita. Now, I'm not heavily into reading

> things that are rife with mythology and stuff but my eyes were

glued

> to it so I did read. Well, this Gita totally acknowledges my

> laziness as enlightened and transcendent so I'm now totally at

peace

> in this justification. It's like the guy who wrote that Gita eons

> ago was actually me or something……. I mean I could have been

reading

> my own journal (if I actually wrote one) I had no idea that lack of

> desire (which to others appears to translate as lazyness) was so

> blessed, holy and transcendent. You may get a kick out of it

> yourself.

>

> Excerpts for your viewing pleasure:

>

> ~~~~~~~~

> Ashtavakara:

> The inner freedom of having nothing is hard to achieve, even with

> just a loin-cloth, but I live as I please abandoning both

> renunciation and acquisition. 13.1

>

> Sometimes one experiences distress because of one's body, sometimes

> because of one's tongue, and sometimes because of one's mind.

> Abandoning all of these in the goal of being human I live as I

> please. 13.2

> Recognizing that in reality no action is ever committed, I live as

I

> please, just attending what presents itself to be done. 13.3

>

> Mystics who identify themselves with bodies are insistent on

> fulfilling and avoiding certain actions, but I live as I please

> abandoning attachment and rejection. 13.4

>

> No benefit or loss comes to me by standing, walking or lying down,

> so consequently I live as I please whether standing, walking or

> sleeping. 13.5

>

> I lose nothing by sleeping and gain nothing by effort, so

> consequently I live as I please, abandoning loss and success. 13.6

>

> Continuously Observing the drawbacks of such things as pleasant

> objects, I live as I please, abandoning the pleasant and

unpleasant.

> 13.7

> While a person of pure intelligence may achieve the goal by the

most

> casual of instructions, another may seek knowledge all one's life

> and still remain bewildered. 15.1

>

> Liberation is indifference to the objects of the senses. Bondage is

> love of the senses. This is knowledge. Now do as you please. 15.2

>

> This awareness of the truth makes an eloquent, clever and energetic

> person dumb, stupid and lazy, so it is avoided by those whose aim

is

> enjoyment or praise. 15.3

>

> You are not the body, nor is the body yours, nor are you the doer

of

> actions nor the reaper of their consequences. You are eternally

pure

> consciousness, the witness, in need of nothing - so live happily.

> 15.4

>

>

> The body invested with the senses stands still and comes and goes.

> You yourself neither come nor go, so why bother about them? 15.9

>

> Let the body last to the end of the Age, or let it come to an end

> right now. What have you, who consist of pure consciousness, gained

> or lost? 15.10

>

> Let the world-wave rise or subside according to its own nature in

> you, the great ocean. It is no gain or loss to you. 15.11

>

> My dearest, you consist of pure consciousness, and the world is not

> separate from you. So who is to accept or reject it, and how, and

> why? 15.12

>

> How can there be either birth, karma or responsibility in that one

> unchanging, peaceful, unblemished and infinite consciousness which

> is you? 15.13>>

 

Thanks, sam_t_7, I had almost forgotten just how GREAT the Ashtavakra

Gita truly is. The best translation, BTW, is that of Thomas Byrom.

 

R. Balsekar has written a book about the Ashtavakra Gita too, but I

understand that for some reason, his version is not exactly flying

off the bookstore shelves.

 

Seriously, Thomas Byrom's translation is completely beautiful.

 

Mr. lazE_2

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " misterenlightenment "

<misterenlightenment> wrote:

 

> R. Balsekar has written a book about the Ashtavakra Gita too, but I

> understand that for some reason, his version is not exactly flying

> off the bookstore shelves.

>

>

> Mr. lazE_2

 

sam: I think Balsekar landed/focused on the part that says, " now do

as you please " and " now be happy " and that kinda swung him into the

senses. Then he forgot to read on about the part that says " let go

of the senses for it's the cause of bondage. " Not really able to wrap

himself around being able to accomplish the 2 at one time is

apparently a common road hazard on the path to guru hood. But, that's

a page 2 topic <book may yet be forthcoming if it can make me some

quick bucks. I hear there's a book sales gap caused by Balsekar that

needs filling.>

 

Ya, I read thomas Byrom's version, which is very airy,fairy and

poetic. I like it, although in his attempt to make it poetically

frilly he leaves out some of the concepts or glosses over them and so

some of the major points get missed, or not hit with as strong of an

impact. I read it after reading the other version so that was the

comparison this book reviewer came up with.

Sam I am.

[Guest guest]

Nisargadatta , " sam_t_7 " <sam_t_7> wrote:

><<sni>>

 

> Ya, I read thomas Byrom's version, which is very airy,fairy and

> poetic. I like it, although in his attempt to make it poetically

> frilly he leaves out some of the concepts or glosses over them and

so

> some of the major points get missed, or not hit with as strong of an

> impact. I read it after reading the other version so that was the

> comparison this book reviewer came up with.

> Sam I am.>>

 

I looked around last night for Thomas Byrom's version, but I couldn't

find it, so I'll have to re-read it before I can see whether I agree

with you or not.

 

I'm heading out to Amazon.com shortly to order it and perhaps a few

more different translations for comparison.

 

I may have missed it in your other posting, but which version did you

read?

 

As far as R. Balsekar goes, I think it's a hoot that they are

advertising Balsekar's books right on the Niz or GR homepage (I forget

which one and I'm too lazy to toggle back to see).

 

If anybody is ordering a lot of Ramesh books these days, I don't think

it's anyone on this list, although I have been wrong before, that's

for shit sure.

 

Eman