sarvaaramBha-parityaagi of BG 14.25: acceleration analogy and questions

[Guest guest]

praNams Advaitins,

 

Can the elders of this group kindly explain the meaning

of the term 'sarvaaramBha-parityaagi' that Bhagavan Shri

Krishna uses in Bhagavad Gita 14.25? Here is some of

my notes. Please correct any mis-interpretations:

 

Swami Chinmayananda's commentary gives the meaning

as " one who has given up the undertakings that are

selfish " . If I begin from Shri. ProfVKji's explanation of

" Who is the Doer? " , It seems to me that Lord Krishna in

the above verse is emphasizing the same concept, namely

that the individual should move away from the notion of

doership (and hence " beginner-ship " ) " the self " . If

everything is " the Self " , what is there to do?

 

Doing away with the notion that the individual is starting

something is closely tied to the realization that all this is

mitHya at the paaramarthika level. Nothing needs to be

done at all and everything is perfect as it is!

(Isn't this is very similar to the expression used by

Siddhartha to Govinda in the last chapter of Herman Hesse's

Govinda?) Things happen according to their own rules

and according to the guNas the activities are associated with.

Even at a vyavahaarika level, if the individual is seen to be

actively starting something and taking part actively in it,

he/she is neither starting it nor taking part in it actively,

though *it may seem so*.

My question: how does this work out in practical world?

 

A " physics " interpretation: Doing something is a movement.

That " we should be moving " is a rule of karma in

vyavakaarika world. Even the Lord keeps doing

something (3-22). (Though for the different reason!)

This concept of " we doing something or moving " is also

similar the idea that everybody in steady state continues to

move, according to its natural state [very loosely, the first

law of Newton].

 

Doing something different from what one is doing (a kind of

aaramBha) needs an " acceleration " . Does aarambhaparityaagi

mean someone who inherently has no acceleration (0 acceleration)

in him/her?

 

Or, given a new situation, she adapts to it quickly, in a seamless

fashion, as if she were always doing it with perfection? Doesn't

this mean an infinite acceleration in him/or her?

 

Do these interpretations make sense physically (if you pardon

the pun)? If both of these are true, is this an example of an

antinomy which can be solved by making a mystical interpretation

(ala Shri Ranade?)

 

praNams to all Advaitins

Ramakrishna

 

PS: Swami Chinmayananda alludes to the three arguments

that Shri Adi Shankara gives in the commentary of 14.27.

Can someone kindly do an exposition on them?

[Guest guest]

Shree Ramakrishna - PraNAms

 

Here is my understanding:

 

I see the two explanations are not divergent. Just

historically, the sloka was quoted by Swami

Shivanandaji to Swami Chinmayanda just to tease him

when the later told the former that he is going down

to the planes to teach vedanta to the massess.

 

One can looks the sloka from different points:

explanations can be given. 1. To recognzie that I am

not a doer but doing is being done by the prakRit -

then the question of parityaagi - does not come at

all. Parityaagam comes only when I first assume that

I am doer - in order for me to do, the giving up. But

as a sadhana, one should give up the notion that I am

a doer, as long as the notion is still lingering in

the mind.

 

The second explanation is I am not the doer but the

Lord is doing through me. That is I am only an agent

but not the real doer - like an ambassoder working for

the country. He does not do but he has to do and

whatever he does, it belongs to the country he

represents and the country is responsible. Then

whatever I do is for the Lord and Lord is lokam - it

is for loka kalyaanam. There is no selfishness involve

in the action. There is a diplomatic immunity for all

actions.

 

3. Ultimately, Lord only does everything, hence even

the idea that I have to has to be given up. That is

jnaani. Of course Lord uses the equipments for the

benefit or loka kalyaaNam.

 

That bhakaa is very dear to Me - says the Lord. As the

karma yogi matures from just giving up the results of

the action to giving up the agency of the actions, is

involved in the sloka.

 

Actions will still go on but the quality of the

actions from selfishness to sleflessness takes place.

Hence both explanations are not divergent.

 

Hari Om!

Sadananda

 

 

 

--- Ramakrishna Upadrasta <ramakrsn

wrote:

kindly explain the

> meaning

> of the term 'sarvaaramBha-parityaagi' that Bhagavan

> Shri

> Krishna uses in Bhagavad Gita 14.25?

[Guest guest]

Sadaji :

 

What a 'delightfully' Divine post. Great explanation. i particularly

loved the following sentiments ....

 

(The second explanation is I am not the doer but the

Lord is doing through me. That is I am only an agent

but not the real doer .... <<<<<snip snip >>>>>>>>

 

Ultimately, Lord only does everything, hence even

the idea that I have to has to be given up. That is

jnaani. Of course Lord uses the equipments for the

benefit or loka kalyaaNam. )

 

SADAJI , MAY I PLEASE RECALL THE FOLLOWING VERSE FROM SRIMAD

bHAGAVAD GITA ?

 

na me parthasti kartavyam

trisu lokesu kincana

nanavaptam avaptavyam

varta eva ca karmani ( CHAPTER 3 , VERSE 22)

 

 

O son of Prtha, there is no work prescribed for Me within all the

three planetary systems. Nor am I in want of anything, nor have I

need to obtain anything--and yet I am engaged in work.

 

and my dearest advaitins ! why should LORD KRISHNA WORK AT ALL ? HE

might as well close HIS 'eyes' AND PRETEND ALL IS WELL WITH THE

UNIVERSE ! THIS IS BECAUSE OUR BELOVED YOGESHWERA IS NOT SELF -

CENTERED ! hE wants to set an example to all the jivas by assuming

the role of a true leader - leadership by example !

 

read the next sloka, please !

 

yadi hy aham na varteyam

jatu karmany atandritah

mama vartmanuvartante

manusyah partha sarvasah ( ch 3 , verse 23 )

 

 

For, if I did not engage in work, O Partha, certainly all men would

follow My path.

 

Poojya Gurudeva Chinmayananda EXPLAINS THIS VERSE THUS :

 

" A liberated soul realises himself to be nothing other than the

Spirit, upon which alone is the play of matter sustained, as the

dream is sustained upon the waker. If this God-principle, though

inactive in Itself, does not consistently serve the pluralistic

phenomenal world as its permanent substratum, the world as it is

now, cannot exist. The ocean never rises, in spite of the billows.

Yet, it is a fact that without the ocean the waves cannot rise or

dance. Similarly, if the Lord were not to keep on activity serving

the world, the cultural life of the generation would stagnate. "

 

AND let me recall this beautiful namavali of Srimati Lalithambika

from Sri Lalita Sahasaranama :

 

unmesha niminishotpanna vipanna bhuvanavali - The opening of

whose eyes results in creation and closing in destruction.

 

yes! Nairji , can you imagine what would happen If Meenakshi Devi

closes HER eyes ? The whole universe will come to an end ! So Devi

Meenakshi in all Her infinite mercy and compassion , keeps her EYES

wide open TO PROTECT US JIVAS jusrt like the mother Fish keeps her

eyes open to protect her young ones! In any case , Devi is 'saxini'

as well as the great jagat 'janini'!

 

OUT OF THE INDIVIDUAL COMES THE GENERAL GOOD - this is the

foundation of capitalism - Same principle goes for in Spirituality

as well ! If 'one' becomes a jnani by virtue of is/her Sadana, it is

his/her duty to see that other 'souls' too advance in spiritual

practice ! Otherwise why should jnanis write books , give discourses

or travel from place to place ?

 

THAT IS WHY IT IS SAID LEAD KINDLY LIGHT !

 

Advaitins ! please remember this wise adge

 

" When the effective leader is finished with his work, the people say

it happened naturally. "

 

YES! TO REALIZE ONE'S TRUE NATURE ( SWABHAVA) ONE NEEDS A LEADER TO

LEAD THE OTHERS WITH HIS /ANUBHAVA) - tHAT IS THE BEAUTY OF A HOLY

SATSANGHA!

 

love and regards

[Guest guest]

Namaste all.

 

These are some thoughts on *sarva-Arambha-parityAgI*

 

In my understanding of advaita and the Gita as interpreted by

Shankara, I think this word summarises them all.

 

Go back to IV-19:

 

Yasya sarve samArambhAH kAma-samkalpa-varjitAH /

jnAgni-dagdha-karmANaM tam AhuH paNDitam budhAH //

 

One who embarks upon actions which are devoid of desires or purposes

has his actions burnt up by the fire of jnAna and he is called the

really learned by those who know brahman. The embarking on actions

is for `loka-samgraha'. If he is already a renunciate, that is one

who has physically renounced everything, his embarking on actions are

only for journeying through this life. Recall V-11.

 

The fire of jnAna that is talked about here comes from the fact that

jnAna means *karmAdau akarmAdi darshanaM* (Ref. Shankara's

commentary: IV – 19), that is, seeing inaction in action (IV – 18).

 

This is the renunciation of all `Arambhas' talked about in XIV-25.

Shankara comments:

*deha-dhAraNa-mAtra-vyatirekeNa sarva-karma-parityAgI*, that is, one

who has renounced all actions except for residing in this body.

 

PraNAms to all advaitins.

profvk

[Guest guest]

List Moderator' Note: Members are onc again reminded not to include the entire

text of previous posters. Please follow the summary guidelines for further

assistance. Follow how it was done here.

 

Respected Sir,

 

It appears to me that the main thrust of your Question revolves round

the two key words used by you: ACCELERATION and ANALOGY (you highlighted

them in the header too).

 

Expressed differently, is the analogy of 'Laws of Motion' appropriate

and secondly is acceleration the causal phenomenon comparable to

arambha?

 

If the acceleration is internally generated, it will also implicitly

impinge on the question of 'Free Will', a highly debated issue.

 

Are you satisfied with the replies you have received so far on this

thread? Are they not from a predictable traditional viewpoint and (at

least one of them) absolutely theistic 'surrender' angle without

touching on the physical (in both senses of the pun as used by you)?

 

regards,

 

ramesam

 

 

advaitin , " Ramakrishna Upadrasta " <ramakrsn

wrote:

>

> praNams Advaitins,

>

> Can the elders of this group kindly explain the meaning

> of the term 'sarvaaramBha-parityaagi' that Bhagavan Shri

> Krishna uses in Bhagavad Gita 14.25? Here is some of

> my notes. Please correct any mis-interpretations:

>