Gita Satsangh Chapter 13: The Field and the Knower of the Field

[Guest guest]

Namaste dear all:

 

We will be starting the continuation of Gita Satsangh on January 1.

The Satsangh presentations will be quite similar to my presentations

of Gita Satsangh of chapter 12:

 

The transliteration of the Sanskrit verses will be followed by

English translation of the entire verse by Swami Gambirananda

(Sankara Bhasya). This will be followed by an English translation of

the Sanskrit words and phrases. Along with this, the excellent

commentary by Swami Chinmayanda will be provided. Every week, I will

present two to three verses (depending on their relevance and

appropriateness) using this format. If and when necessary, I will

also provide a more detailed commentary by Swami Dayananda Saraswati

to bring the Vedantic Insights of Gita. Since this list focuses on

Sankara's Advaita Philosophy, I will not be presenting commentaries

and translation of verses due to Ramanujacharya or Madhvarcharya.

 

Members who want to share those translation can post such translation

and commentaries without analyzing the merits/demerits of the views

expressed by the Acharyas. All these Acharysa – Sankaracharya,

Ramanujacharya and Madhwacharya are philosophical giants with great

number of followers and believers. They have presented what they

truly believed and we are not qualified to judge the validity and

correctness of those interpretations. For those of us in this list,

Sankara Bhasya is more appealing and conducive to what we believe

in. It will be very beneficial for all those who follow the Satsangh

to get a copy of Holy Gita by Swami Chinmayananda which can be

purchased from Chinmaya Mission Publication or from Amazon.com.

Chinmaya Mission also publishes booklets by chapter of Bhagavad Gita

with Sanskrit verses, transliteration, meanings by verses followed by

commentary. They are sold at very nominal prices. (Holy Gita is

$15.00 and Gita booklets of 18 chapters complete set for $20.00).

Swamiji's entire Book is also available for reading or downloading

at: http://www.journeytothetruth.com/index.htm. The ebook is in pdf

format and it contains the Sanskrit verses, transliteration,

translation, meaning and commentary.

 

The blessed Lord tells us that the knowledge of the Field and the

Knower of the Field is the true knowledge. This highest and the best

knowledge grants us divine wisdom and spiritual illumination that

lead to divine beatitude. This body is the Field. The Immortal Soul

(yourself), dwelling in the body is the Knower of the Field. Verily,

it is the Supreme Being who has projected Himself and assumed the

form of this Knower of the Field within this body. This self is none

other than That. Thus, Lord Krishna explains the mystery of the

individual soul dwelling within this mortal body. This knowledge

constitutes the main subject matter of all the scriptures and the

highest philosophical works.

 

The tradition looks upon the entire Gita as having its subject matter

in the Upanishad mahavakya - " tat tvam asi, you are that. " This

statement contains Vedanta in nutshell. The jiva who wants to be

enlightened is equated to Isvara in this statement tat tvam asi.

In the first six chapters, the Gita sastra unfolds the meaning of

tva. The first chapter reveals Arjuna's sadness. The jiva, is always

sad, sometimes acutely and other times chronically. Arjuna no longer

wants to resort to any mode of escape but wants to address the

problem. Thus, in the second chapter we saw Arjuna discovering in

Krishna a teacher and seeking a solution, placing himself at the

Lord's feet as a disciple. And Lord Krishna accepted and began

teaching him, not simply advising him. Thus the teaching began.

Knowledge of the real meaning of the word tvam was unfolded as the

one who is unborn, not subject to destruction, eternal and not

subject to change. The one, who cannot harm nor be harmed and who is

neither subject nor object. Neither the weapon can cut nor the fire

can burn that person.

 

Though they are one, there is a seeming contradiction between the

jiva and Isvara. Isvara is omniscient and the cause of everything

whereas the jiva is of limited knowledge and bound by the various

laws, and so on. In order to equate jiva and Isvara, one has to

understand what is meant by the word `tvam' and Bhagavan unfolds the

real meaning in chapters 1 to 6.

In the second chapter Lord Krishna presents the means (Karmayoga)

that will aid in gaining this knowledge. Then Arjuna expressed a

doubt in the third chapter about whether he should adopt a life of

renunciation (sannyasa), or continue with karmayoga both of which are

for the jiva .

 

Then the fourth chapter unfolds the real nature of sannyasa as the

giving up of action through knowledge, jnanaKarmaSanyasa. The one

who sees inaction in action and action in inaction is the one who has

discrimination, who is united (to " me " ) and has done all that is to

be done.

 

In the fifth chapter sannyasa is further unfolded showing that the

atman is not a doer or enjoyer. Even seeing, hearing, touching,

smelling, eating, going, sleeping, letting go, grasping, winking, and

so on, the knower of the self does not perform any action.

 

In the sixth chapter contemplation upon the atman is advised: " Having

made the mind alive to the self, one should not dwell upon anything

else (as separate from the self. Thus the first six chapters are

centered on the word " you " in the sentence " That you are. "

 

The whole emphasis changed dramatically even in the initial verses of

the seventh chapter where Bhagavan talks about Isvara, the meaning of

the word " that, " as the cause of the entire world, (jagat). In the

tenth chapter he talks of the glories (vibhutis) of Isvara; in the

eleventh chapter he shows the cosmic form, of the Lord (visvarup) and

in the twelfth chapter, Krishna talks about upasanas. When Isvara is

discussed, the jiva becomes a devotee. Thus the second group of six

chapters deals predominantly with Isvara.

 

The last six chapters, of the Gita, talk about the identity of the

jiva and Isvara and the means, for achieving that identity.

Accordingly, certain values and attitudes are going to be discussed

in these chapters.

 

The Thirteenth Chapter pin-points its teaching on the principles

known as Purusha and Prakriti - we may say, consciousness and matter,

or what we know as subject and object. The relationship between these

two is to be understood, and the whole of philosophical deliberation

is nothing but this study of the relation between subject and object,

seer and seen, consciousness and matter, Purusha and Prakriti. The

Purusha is the Soul of all beings, and God identifies himself with

this Soul, here in the form of the great Incarnation, Krishna. The

Knower is the Subject. The Known is the Object, or the Field. The

Kshetra is this Field of operation; the operator upon this Field is

the Kshetrajna. The Knower of the Field is God Himself. The Atman, or

the Self in all beings, which is present in all individuals, and is

the subject in you and in me and in everything, is the Universal

Subject at the same time. " I am the Knower in all fields, and not

merely in one field. " The Atman in my body is not confined to this

body only; it is the Atman uniformly present in all other bodies,

also. And, so, there is a necessity to understand the distinction

between the Knower of the Field, the Field, the nature of Knowledge,

and the Goal of Knowledge.

 

With my warmest regards,

 

Harih Om!

 

Ram Chandran

 

Note: The satsangh will begin on the New Year Day! Happy New Year!

[Guest guest]

" Ram Chandran " <ramvchandran wrote:

 

>... " I am the Knower in all fields, and not

> merely in one field. "

 

> Note: The satsangh will begin on the New Year Day! Happy New Year!

 

Dear RamJi and Dear All:

 

Funny enough (these things happen like " magic " sometimes), a few hours

ago I just finished looking at Pujya Sri Swami Dayananda's wonderful

presentation in the form of a lecture about this topic: " The Field and

the Knower of the Field " . The lecture is available in YouTube at this

address in three parts (in all almost one and a half hour) and it may be

a good prelude to the forthcoming topic of our Gita satsang on Chapter

13:

 

http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=swami%20dayananda & ie=utf-8 & oe=utf-\

8 & rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official & client=firefox-a & um=1 & sa=N & tab=wv#

 

The above link is the for the first part, other parts will be displayed

next to it.

(if the link appears broken, cut and paste)

Needless to say, it's an utmost inspiring teaching he gives here.

 

Yours in Bhagavan,

Mouna

[Guest guest]

"Ram Chandran" <ramvchandran wrote:> "tat tvam asi, you are that." This > statement contains Vedanta in nutshell. The jiva who wants to be > enlightened is equated to Isvara in this statement tat tvam asi.> Though they are one, there is a seeming contradiction between the > jiva and Isvara. Isvara is omniscient and the cause of everything > whereas the jiva is of limited knowledge and bound by the various > laws, and so on..> > The last six chapters, of the Gita, talk about the identity of the > jiva and Isvara and the means, for achieving that identity. > Accordingly, certain values and attitudes are going to be discussed > in these chapters.Dear RamJi, Pranams and Happy New Year to start.I have a question in relation to the above statements. As you may have guessed by now, I'm just a beginner not only in advaita but in terms of Gita knowledge, so I want to have things right from the start if possible.I always understood that the basic advaitic equation is that Atman is equal to Brahman. Brahman, through Maya takes different forms according to the instrumentor adjunct or limitation. At the individual level, Jiva-Atman and at the total level Param-Atman. If you take out the "Jiva" and the Param" you getalways Atman. Jivatman when through a body, the waker (vishva); through a mind, the dreamer (taijasa); through the cosmic, total level, Ishvara or the sleeper (prajna).According to this perpsective, Jiva can never be equated to Ishvara, since they are only "costumes" wear by Brahman (please note the poetic language here) through Maya, or our vyavaharic point of view if you wish. What they "share" is their intrinsic nature, their essencial I-dentity. Otherwise would be like saying that a wave is equal to the ocean, and the ocean a wave, which doesn't make much sense, since both are forms of water.Could you comment on this apparent contradiction in terms (Jiva's identity with Ishwara)?Could you mark the difference in your statements about when to say Ishvara and when to refer to Brahman? Maybe that's what you meant all along, but in that case what don't we name things as they are meant to be named?Since I'm not well versed in the Gita, I might be missing the point completely here also (I always leave that possibility open)Thanks in advance,I renew my Pranams,I renew my Best Wishes for a Happy New year!Your in Bhagavan,Mouna

[Guest guest]

--- On Wed, 12/31/08, Mouna <maunna wrote:

 

 

Mouna - I am sure Shree Ram Chandran will be addressing your question - but in

brief - the equation is only at the substantive level- where the claim is aham

brahmaasmi - not aham Iswarosmi - brahman is the substantive of jiiva-jagat and

Iswara. That is why realized person can still have BMI and Iswara can have his

BMI while the realized person recognizing oneness at substantive level and

differentiating at the superficial level - like scientist recognizing oneness of

all materials at fundamental particle level while discriminating food vs

garbage.

Hari Om!

Sadananda

[Guest guest]

kuntimaddi sadananda <kuntimaddisada wrote:>> Mouna - I am sure Shree Ram Chandran will be addressing your question - but in brief - the equation is only at the substantive level- where the claim is aham brahmaasmi - not aham Iswarosmi - brahman is the substantive of jiiva-jagat and Iswara. That is why realized person can still have BMI and Iswara can have his BMI while the realized person recognizing oneness at substantive level and differentiating at the superficial level - like scientist recognizing oneness of all materials at fundamental particle level while discriminating food vs garbage. Dear Teacher, Sri SadajiFrom the point of view you just gave I deducted what I was asking originally. The question is not whether I am equal to Ishwara (the jiva can never be equal to Ishwara otherwise "it" will be also Omniscient, All-Knowing and Eternal, sharing the same attributes (correct use of the word attributes in this case) of Ishwara.The only attribute I can see of the Jiva is it's Ignorance.So then, the question is whether my essential nature (not attributes) is the same as Ishwara's. Vedanta says, yes, You are That Essence.Am I wrong thinking this way?***Dear Teacher, Sri ShyamJiI am digesting your posting of your blog yet. But I have a question relating to your recent post. The Knower of the Field is Ishwara, I couldn't agree more because we are still in duality, there's a field, there's a knower. He is the Knower at the samashti level, He has no ignorance, He is Brahman through my limited eyes... He is All WITH attributes. i can't be Him, but "I" (Tat) include him and me, in a relationless relation.Is this thinking wrong?Yours in Bhagavan,Mouna

[Guest guest]

--- On Wed, 12/31/08, Mouna <maunna wrote:

 

 

 

From the point of view you just gave I deducted what I was asking originally.

The question is not whether I am equal to Ishwara (the jiva can never be equal

to Ishwara otherwise " it " will be also Omniscient, All-Knowing and Eternal,

sharing the same attributes (correct use of the word attributes in this case) of

Ishwara.The only attribute I can see of the Jiva is it's Ignorance.

So then, the question is whether my essential nature (not attributes) is the

same as Ishwara's. Vedanta says, yes, You are That Essence.

Am I wrong thinking this way?

 

Mounaji PraNAms

 

All objects are attributive only - sans attributes what is there is existence

and existence is established by knowledge - Therefore the essence of you without

any attributive -kshetram - is I AM - whatever you add next to I AM is only

attributive. Iswara also has to say I AM - if you remove all the Iswara's

attributes - tat tvam asi - using bhaagatyaaga lakshNa that Ram mentioned is

essentially removing all the attributes and equating the essence. Then only the

equation tat tvam asi is fulfilled.

 

Hari Om!

Sadananda

 

.

[Guest guest]

Namaste Mounaji:

 

First, we do need to recognize that currently we are about to begin

and discuss chapter 13 to learn and recognize the full intent of the

tat-tvam-asi equation. The organization of Gita is similar to

doctoral program and the specialization is Vedanta and the student is

required to complete the course work consisting of all 18 chapters.

After completing the course work the student has to use that

knowledge and takes the guidance from his advisor (Guru) to go beyond

what he or she has learnt in the class room. During the course work

and during research work, the student will be experiencing all sorts

of contradiction and in consistencies. The student slowly learnt to

dissolve those doubts and develop a thesis by articulating his (her)

findings to convince the committee of experts. If you believe that

you are still a beginning student of Vedanta, then you do need to

wait until we complete all the 18 chapters of Gita Satsangh. Here is

a brief paragraph of my explanation to what is being stated in my

introduction.

 

Once we realize that 'I am brahman', there will be no jiva and there

will be no Isvara either. When we know that everything is brahman, we

must also know that there is nothing other than the brahman. Of

course, the jiva cannot dismiss Isvara as unreal because both are

equally real from the vyavaharika standpoint of the unenlightened.

But surely, once there is enlightenment, Brahman alone is the only

ever existing reality!

 

This statement from Gandhiji is quite useful for all of us who try to

interpret any scripture or the words of the sages - " At times, I used

to think that there are inconsistencies in Bhagavad Gita, later,after

contemplation, I was able to recognize that Gita is always right! The

apparent inconsistencies were only due to my ignorance and

misunderstanding of what Gita actually states!! "

 

In the book, " The message of Gita, " Gandhiji further emphasize the

importance of faith and devotion while reading the words of sages: A

prayerful study and experience are essential for a correct

interpretation of the scriptures. Those who would interpret the

scriptures must have the spiritual discipline. They must practice the

yamas and niyamas - the eternal guides of conduct. A superficial

practice there of is useless. Those who are lacking in bhakti,

lacking in faith, are ill-equipped to interpret the scriptures. The

learned may draw an elaborately learned interpretation out of them,

but that will not be the true interpretation. Only the experienced

will arrive at the true interpretation of the scriptures. A humble

student will simply say: " It is the limitation of my own intellect

that I cannot resolve this inconsistency. I might be able to do so in

the time to come. " That is how he/she will plead with himself and

with others.

 

With my warmest regards,

 

Ram Chandran

 

Note: You seem to be like the college student with better

perspectives of the subject matter feeling uncomfortable while

sitting in the middles school class room. We certainly do not want to

have the paramarthika perspective of Vedanta while understanding the

Vyvaharika reality of life!

 

advaitin , " Mouna " <maunna wrote:

>

> " Ram Chandran " <ramvchandran@> wrote:

>

> > " tat tvam asi, you are that. " This

> > statement contains Vedanta in nutshell. The jiva who wants to be

> > enlightened is equated to Isvara in this statement tat tvam asi.

>

[Guest guest]

"Ram Chandran" <ramvchandran wrote:Dear Sri RamJi, my pranamsI definitely didn't study the Gita in deep (so far). You are right in that and I'llbe doing my best to do it. At the same time, I have to say, to avoid misunderstanding about my intentions, that I never implied that the Gita had inconsistencies. I just put two and two together from what I heard many times from the mouth of Swami Chinamayananda, Swami Paramarthananda and Sri Sadananda (my main references when it comes to Advaita Teachings refering to The Scriptures). The doubt is still there (refering to my original question), if it had been answered, my limited capacity doesn't allow me to interpret it. But with all due respect, I don't consider a valid answer to say: continue study and you will understand (although in itself it makes a lot of sense, it's just that it isn't the answer to my very specific question). Coming from you, I know it is a very sincere advice that I will try to implement right away anyway.In view of all this, I humbly request to take the last part of your post as my plead also: "It is

the limitation of my own intellect that I cannot resolve this

inconsistency. I might be able to do so in the time to come."My Pranams again,Yours in Bhagavan,Mouna

[Guest guest]

advaitin , kuntimaddi sadananda

<kuntimaddisada wrote:

>

>

> Mounaji PraNAms

>

> All objects are attributive only - sans attributes what is there

is existence and existence is established by knowledge - Therefore

the essence of you without any attributive -kshetram - is I AM -

whatever you add next to I AM is only attributive. Iswara also has to

say I AM - if you remove all the Iswara's attributes - tat tvam asi -

using bhaagatyaaga lakshNa that Ram mentioned is essentially removing

all the attributes and equating the essence. Then only the equation

tat tvam asi is fulfilled.

>

> Hari Om!

> Sadananda

>

Hari Om Shri Sadanandaji, Pranaams!

 

Can we say even initially when the king and servant seen under the

umbrella during the procession could not be differentiated

(chaitrinyAya) as well on scrutinity after removing all their

costumes (vivekacUDAmani V 243 & 244) and hence the apparent

differences between Ishvara and jIva are superimposed only and not

real at all times (V 243).

 

In Shri Guru Smriti

Br. Pranipata Chaitanya

[Guest guest]

Namaste Mounaji:

 

Happy New Year!

 

First let me admit that the limitation of my intellect could be

responsible for me not able to clear your doubts. I am of the opinion

that one of the effective ways to clear our doubts is to cultivate

faith on concepts that intellectually not appealing. A strong faith

in Isvara may become necessary to fine tune the intellect to accept

and comprehend Isvara. For Jiva to recognize Atman an important

first step is to intellectually accept Isvara with faith and

conviction. The Jiva is like the pole-vaulter who uses the pole to

jump over the barrier of intellectual limitations. The pole-vaulter

while completing the jump releases the pole over the barrier and the

pole is abandoned! Jiva also takes the help of Isvara to cross-over

the limitations of intellect.

 

Different frameworks of Vedanta, Satsanghs, Scriptures and the

teachings of sages are all essential tools for comprehending the

Brahman and to go beyond the intellectual limitations. All these

essential tools are means and at the end, they all get dissolved with

the recognition that " I am the Brahman. " Ultimately speaking, there

will be no equation such as the " tat tvam asi " and it also get

dissolved with the Brahman!

 

With my warmest regards,

 

Ram Chandran

 

 

advaitin , " Mouna " <maunna wrote:

>

> " Ram Chandran " <ramvchandran@> wrote:

>

> At the same time, I have to say, to avoid misunderstanding about my

> intentions, that I never implied that the Gita had inconsistencies.

> I just put two and two together from what I heard many times from

the

> mouth of Swami Chinamayananda, Swami Paramarthananda and Sri

Sadananda

> (my main references when it comes to Advaita Teachings refering to

The

> Scriptures).

>

[Guest guest]

advaitin , " Mouna " <maunna wrote:

> The doubt is still there (refering to my original question), if it

had

> been answered, my limited capacity doesn't allow me to interpret

it. But

> with all due respect, I don't consider a valid answer to say:

continue

> study and you will understand (although in itself it makes a lot of

> sense, it's just that it isn't the answer to my very specific

question).

> Coming from you, I know it is a very sincere advice that I will

try to

> implement right away anyway.

>

> My Pranams again,

>

> Yours in Bhagavan,

> Mouna

 

Dear Mouna-ji,

Please see the explanation of `Tat tvam asi' at

www.geocities.com/snsastri/vedamahavakya

 

and see whether this answers your doubt.

Best wishes,

S.N.Sastri

[Guest guest]

In advaitin , "snsastri" <sn.sastri wrote:> Dear Mouna-ji,> Please see the explanation of `Tat tvam asi' at> www.geocities.com/snsastri/vedamahavakya> and see whether this answers your doubt.Dear Teacher, Sri Sastriji, pranamsYour link answered my doubt, indeed.I am copying and pasting some excerpts of your website that gave me the explanation of what Sri Ramji original posting was, where my doubt originated. Thank you very much again.Yours in Bhagavan,Mouna**********(Excerpts from: www.geocities.com/snsastri/vedamahavakya)The

meaning of tat

tvam asi

 

 

V.C.- Commentary of

S'rii Jagadguru Chandras'ekhara Bhaarati on verses 243 to 251—

The

word tat stands for Brahman as

qualified by the functions of creation, sustenance and dissolution (i.e.iis'vara).

The word tvam stands for the aatmaa as qualified by the mental states of

waking, dream and deep sleep (i.e.jiiva).

These two are of mutually opposed qualities, like the glow-worm and the

sun, like the servant and the king, like the well and the ocean and like

the atom and the earth (verse 244). There can be no identity between

these two, which are the literal meanings (vaachyaartha)

of the words tat and tvam.

The identity is only between their implied meanings (lakshyaartha).

The opposition between the literal meanings is due to the upadhis, since the literal meaning of tat is Brahman with the upadhi

or limiting adjunct of maayaa and

the literal meaning of tvam is

aatmaa with the limiting adjunct of the five sheaths. When these

limiting adjuncts, which are not real, are effectively removed, there is

neither iis'vara nor jiiva. The two terms tat and

tvam (That and Thou) are to be

understood properly by their implied meanings in order to grasp the

import of the absolute identity between them. This is to be done neither

by total rejection of their literal meaning

nor by total non-rejection, but by a combination of both.

 

 

Implied

meanings are of three kinds—jahallakshaNaa,

ajahal- lakshaNaa and jahadajahallakshaNaa....jahadajahallakshaNaa-

Here a part of the literal meaning is retained and the other part

discarded. The sentence "This is that Devadatta" is interpreted by

using this lakshaNaa. The

meaning intended to be conveyed by this sentence is that Devadatta who

is seen at the present time in this place is the same as the person who

was seen earlier in another place. The literal meaning of the word

`this' is Devadatta associated with the present time and place. The

literal meaning of the word `that' is Devadatta associated with the

past time and some other place. Since this sentence purports to convey

the identity of the person seen in different places at different times,

we get this meaning by discarding the reference to the place and time

conveyed by the words `this' and `that' and retaining the

reference to Devadatta. This is also known as bhaagatyaaga-lakshaNaa.

The meaning of the sentence tat

tvam asi is obtained by using this method. Just as in the sentence

"This is Devadatta" the identity is stated by rejecting the

contradictory qualities, so also in the sentence "That thou art" the

contradictory qualities (namely, the limiting adjuncts)

are rejected. Thus it follows that the jiiva

and Brahman are in essence one when the limiting adjuncts, maayaa and the five sheaths, are rejected.

 

 

 

The above view, that jahadajahallakshaNaa is to be applied for getting the meaning of

this Mahaavaakya, is the traditional and the most widely accepted view.

But the author of Vedaanta Paribhaashaa says, after stating this view,

that according to him it is not necessary to resort to implication (lakshaNaa) at all (Chapter IV- Verbal testimony)********** The meaning of the Mahaavaakya `aham

brahma asmi'

This

Mahaavaakya is explained by Sures'vara in Naishkarmyasiddhi, 2.29

thus:--Just as in the sentence, "This post is a man", the earlier

cognition that there is a post is sublated by the subsequent cognition

that it is a man (and not a post), the cognition "I am Brahman"

removes entirely the cognition as "I". Sures'vara explains the

statement aham brahma asmi, (

I am Brahman), through what is known as baadhaayaam

saamaanaadhikaraNyam. In a sentence in Sanskrit, words which, having

the same case-endings, denote one and the same thing are said to be in samaanaadhikaraNam.

The relation between the words is called saamaanaadhikaraNyam.

This relation is of two kinds, mukhya

saamaanaadhikaraNyam and baadhaayaam

saamaanaadhikaraNyam. In the former, the objects denoted by the

words will have the same ontological status (or the same order of

reality). For example, in the sentence, the pot-space is but the great

(outer) space, the space within the pot and the great space are both

empirically real (vyaavahaarika satya). The difference between them is only due to the

upaadhi in the form of the

pot. When the upaadhi is

removed, they become one, which they really are, even earlier. But if

the words of a sentence, having the same case-endings, denote objects

which have different ontological status, and if they purport to convey

only one idea, they are in baadhaayaam

saamaanaadhikaraNyam. For example, in the statement "This post is

a man", the words "post" and "man" have different ontological

status. Since what exists is a man and not a post, "man" is

empirically real (vyaavahaarika) and

"post" is only apparently real (praatibhaasika).

Thus, just as the idea that what is seen is a post is removed when

the person hears the statement "This post is a man", the wrong

cognition of the form `I am a man', `I am happy' etc, is removed

when a person realises that he is Brahman on hearing the statement aham

brahma asmi.(End of Excerpts)***********

[Guest guest]

--- On Wed, 12/31/08, pranipatachaitanya <pranipatachaitanya wrote:

 

 

 

 

Can we say even initially when the king and servant seen under the

 

umbrella during the procession could not be differentiated

 

(chaitrinyAya) as well on scrutinity after removing all their

 

costumes (vivekacUDAmani V 243 & 244) and hence the apparent

 

differences between Ishvara and jIva are superimposed only and not

 

real at all times (V 243).

 

Pranipata Chaitanyaji - PraNAms

 

Yes there difference of any kind are never real at any time. If I know that they

are not real - the problem is already solved. There appears to be a big gulp

between saying that they are not real and firm abidance in the knowledge that

all apparent differences are not real - habitual notions come in between

understanding and transactions to keep us off-balance. Hence nidhidhyaasana is

required.

 

Hari OM!

Sadananda

[Guest guest]

advaitin , " Ram Chandran " <ramvchandran

wrote:

 

> Happy New Year!

>

 

I want to submit my deep appreciation for the postings of Sri RamJi, Sri

SadaJi, Sri ShyamJi and Sri SastrJi which helped me clear my doubts

regarding Sri Ram's statements in a precedent post.

I think I'm ready to start studying this 13th Chapter of the Gita now.

 

My pranams to All,

 

Yours in Bhagavan,

Mouna

[Guest guest]

Dear Mounaji: Pranams. Wish you the very best in 2009.

 

Please read the Who is the doer by profvkji, listed under Beach 8 in

" The Gems From The Ocean Of Hindu Thought, Vision and Practice " This

can be accessed from profvkji's site,

http://www.geocities.com/profvk/. Members of the Advaitin Group can

also access this writeup from the Files section. In my opinion, Ch 13

provides answers for your queries.

 

You may also listen to the lectures, Ksetrajna Bhashyam - Lectures 1

to 11, which are a detailed discussion on Ch 13, incorporating

Shankara's commentary. Swami Tatvavidananda is a disciple of Swami

Dayananda Saraswathi. Like, Swami Paramarthananda, he is a sthotriya

(studied under the traditional veda patasala (gurukula) sampradaya and

a vedantin. He is a great Sanskrit scholar(Ph.D- gold medallist). The

link for the lectures is:

http://www.avgsatsang.org/hhstvs.html

Regards.

Jan Nagraj

 

advaitin , " Mouna " <maunna wrote:

I think I'm ready to start studying this 13th Chapter of the Gita now.

Yours in Bhagavan,

Mouna

[Guest guest]

advaitin , " Mouna " <maunna wrote:

>

> In advaitin , " snsastri " <sn.sastri@> wrote:

>

> > Dear Mouna-ji,

> > Please see the explanation of `Tat tvam asi' at

> > www.geocities.com/snsastri/vedamahavakya

> > and see whether this answers your doubt.

>

> Dear Teacher, Sri Sastriji, pranams

>

> Your link answered my doubt, indeed.

> I am copying and pasting some excerpts of your website that gave

me the

> explanation of what Sri Ramji original posting was, where my doubt

> originated.

> Thank you very much again.

> Yours in Bhagavan,

> Mouna

>

 

 

Yes. Shastriji's explanations are very clear. Thanks for posting the

excerpts.

 

thollmelukaalkizhu