karma yoga and the sense of doership - a correction

[Guest guest]

Namaste all

 

The shloka referred to is 5-11, not 5-13.

 

Incidentally this error is one example, if example be needed, to prove

that actions performed with attachment will not be efficiently done!

 

praNAms to all advaitins.

profvk

[Guest guest]

Namaste Profvkji, Shyamji, Rishiji , Sastriji and others::

 

Your supplementary observations are quite useful and right at the

target. One of the question that arises is " How to be a non-doer? "

The subject matter under discussion is rather complex due to the fact

that we don't directly observe a " non-doer. " We can easily recognize

any doer but it is almost impossible for us to find a non-doer.

Variables such as " non-doer, " " quality of life, " " morale " ,

and " noble " etc., are called " latent " variables. To resolve this

problem, we have look for many observable variables that are

attributable to the latent variable. For example, the quality of

one's life may be measured using the indicators such as how the

person leads the life which include – characteristics of the living

conditions, family, friends, environmental conditions, food habits,

etc. In the same way to be a `non-doer,' the seeker should be willing

to forgo ego and attachment. The level of non-egoism and detachment

from BMI will determine the level of non-doership.

 

I believe that the above additional facts supports the implied

relationship between non-doership and detachment. At the same time, I

agree with the contentions put forward by Shyamji, Rishiji, and

Sastriji.

At the vyAvahArika level, we can find all sorts of distinctions and

divisions with names and forms of notions such as – Karma Yogi,

Bhakti Yogi, Jnana Yogi, Non-doer, Non-egoistic, Non-doer, Perfect

Yogi, etc. At the Paramarthika level all these notions get dissolved

within the Brahman!

 

With my warmest regards,

 

Ram Chandran

 

advaitin , " V. Krishnamurthy " <profvk

wrote:

>

> Namaste all.

>

> Shastri-ji and Shyam-ji have explained it. My praNAms to them. I

> agree, but my supplementary observation is that the thought that

I

> am the doer is to be declared as wrong from the beginning of the

> spiritual ascent. Because, `ahamkAra vimUDhAtma karta'haM iti

> manyate' (3 -27). So from the beginning, either the thought has to

be

> either it is Iswara that does it or it is the PrakRti that does it.

[Guest guest]

Namaste,

 

Another point I would like to add is that the vyAvahAra

(empirical) level is for the aj~nAnI only. The j~nAnI 'acts' with the

full awareness at all times of it being 'prAtibhAsika'(mithyA) level

only.

 

 

Regards,

 

Sunder

 

 

advaitin , " Ram Chandran " <ramvchandran

wrote:

>

>

> Namaste Profvkji, Shyamji, Rishiji , Sastriji and others::

>

> Your supplementary observations are quite useful and right at the

> target. One of the question that arises is " How to be a non-doer? "

> The subject matter under discussion is rather complex due to the

fact

> that we don't directly observe a " non-doer. "