sanyAsa in shankara vedAnta

[Guest guest]

praNAms

Hare Krishna

 

Sorry for the very belated mail...was bit busy coz. of pitru paksha &

navarAtri :-))

 

I am happy to note that advaita stalwarts like Sri Sastri prabhuji, Sri

Sadananda prabhuji, Sri Subbu prabhuji, Sri Sunder prabhuji have already

expressed their opinion on the subject issue. I dont have much to say on

this subject...But, let me make an attempt as I promised this earlier :-))

 

 

I've changed the subject line to present my perspective on the subject

matter. It appears that in the on going discussion some of the

prabhuji(s) having the notion that saNyAsa means some sort of mendicant

life of a certain order of monks which recommends wearing ochre clothing

(kAshAya vastra), holding danda, kamandala, tonsuring head and living on

alms etc. I am afraid, by over emphasizing on these external appearances

of a saNyAsi we are forgetting the very significance of the vedAntic

concept of saNyAsa. Ofcourse, shruti also endorses the above 'style' of

living of saNyAsis. For example in mundaka (1-2-11) it is said that

those who devote themselves to taps and shraddha in the forest with self

control and wisdom and living on alms (bhaikshyacharyaM charantaH) and

unblemised by desire, they go through the solar door (sUrya dvAreNa can

also be called as 'devayAna' mArga) )to where the immortal purusha (amruta

purusha) of undecaying nature dwells.

 

This type of saNyAsa is for those who renounced the house-holder's order

as directed by the smruti texts and this style of living and final

destination is more or less common to both vAnaprasthi-s and 'official'

saNyAsi-s :-)). But point to be noted here is this type of smArtha

saNyAsa is quite different from the 'paramahamsa saNyAsa' or paramArtha

saNyAsa enjoined elsewhere in the upanishad. For example bruhadAraNyaka

(3-5-1) : 'Knowing this Atman, brAhmaNa-s transcend longing for offspring,

wealth and worlds and live on alms'. Shankara's bhAshya on this maNtra is

quite interesting. Here he says : for there may be reasonably a

pArivrAjya (i.e. going away from home, a saNyAsa), 'other than that which

belongs to the knowing person, and is of the nature of transcending all

desires. To elaborate this point, shankara continue to clarify who is

paramahamsa saNyAsi : " The pArivrAjya which is of the nature of

transcending the desires (eshaNa-s) is ancillary to the knowledge of

Atman, for it is of the nature of renunciation of the desire opposed to

the knowledge of brahman, and desire is only in the sphere of avidyA " . It

is clear from this bhAshya vAkya that shankara talking about paramahaMsa

pArivrAjya-s who have, by the aid of knowledge, transcends the avidyA

kruta 'eshaNa-s'. And shankara concludes in this same bhAshya : OTHER

THAN THIS, there is a pArivrAjya in the form of an Ashrama (an order of

life), 'a' means to the attainment of brahmalOka and other fruits of

action. It is in connection with this saNyAsa that wearing yajnOpaveeta

etc. are enjoined and that the linga ( the uniform, like wearing a saffron

cloth, carrying shishya vrunda, kamandala (a water pot) and other items

pertaining to this particular order) is enjoined " .

 

It is quite evident from the above that a paramahamsa sanyAsi does not

have to live under a 'formal' saNyAsa flag and might not 'necessarily'

have characteristic marks of a particular Ashrama. Shankara in all his

bhAshya works quite explicitly explains what is paramArtha saNyAsa or

sarvakarma saNyAsa. Following are few examples :

 

(a) saNyAsena samyagdarshanena tatpUrvakena vA sarvakarma saNyAsena

(shankara in geeta bhAshya 18-49)..Here it is said that saNyAsa is nothing

but 'samyagdarshana'.

 

(b) saNyAsastu pAramArthikaH (geeta bhAshya 5-6) The context here is,

without observing karma yOga it is very difficult to get paramArtha

saNyAsa. For further details we can refer bhAshya in the 5th chapter 8th

& 9th verses...Here shankara explains paramArtha saNyAsi as

'paramArthadarshee'. Here shankara clarifies that this paramArthadarshi

have the adhikAra of 'sarvakarma saNyAsa'. (sarvakAryakAryakaraNa

cheshtAsu karmasu akarma eva pashyataH samyagdarshinaH). Here sarvakarma

saNyAsa does not mean popularly known saNyAsa, shankara clarifies here

though from the vyAvahArik point we could see the 'indriya cheshta', it is

sublated (bAdhita) by the real jnAna and hence whatever appears as 'karma'

to us (loukika-s) it is 'akarma' only for the jnAni. In geeta (5-19)

shankara says : idaM tu sarvakarmasaNyAsavishayaM prastutaM and continues

in geeta (6-2) : yaM sarvakarma tat phalatyAgalakshaNam paramArtha

saNyAsaM iti prAhuH...again it is clear here that both paramArtha saNyAsa

and sarvakArma saNyAsa are one and the same and paramArtha saNyAsa is

nothing but paramArthadarshi.

 

© aksharOpAsakAnAM (meditation on the immutable) nivrutta sarvaishaNAnAM

(who have renounced all desires) saNyAsinAM paramAthajnAna nishTAnAM

(steadfast in the knowledge) dharmajAtaM prakrAntaM upasaMharati (geeta

bhAshya introduction to 12th chapter 20th verse)...Here also shankara

implied that paramArtha jnAnanishTe is nothing but paramArtha saNyAsa.

 

 

It is clear from the above references that according to shankara saNyAsa

in the real sense is nothing but samyagjnAna (the right knowledge). Here

the right knowledge itself, has been labelled as 'saNyAsa' par excellence

(paramArtha saNyAsa. One can also refer here shankara's commentary on

18th chapter 49th verse for further details. Now the question is what

would be the state of mind of this paramArtha saNyAsi?? geetachArya

himself clarifies this and says : possessing a mind unattached to

everything, self controlled, void of all desires, he attains the

accomplishment of perfect actionlessness through saNyAsa. As said above,

here shankara in his commentary explains that saNyAsa is EITHER right

knowledge OR the renunciation of all actions through that knowledge. And

what exactly is this 'internal renunciation' of all actions?? again, Lord

himself explains this in 5-13 : having mentally renounced all actions the

self controlled embodied one rests happy in the fortress of nine doors,

himself doing nothing and engaging no one else in any action. Can we say

this declaration of geetAchArya pertains ONLY to people who are in suffron

clothes?? NOWAY, the knower of that truth would think that he is doing

nothing while he sees, hears touches, smells etc. he would always bear in

mind that ONLY the senses function on their objects. (geeta 5 - 8 & 9

verses) irrespective of his Ashrama. And this jnAni's jnAna consists in

relation to action in such a way that : he sees inaction in action, and

action in inaction, he is the wisest of all men, he has a poised mind and

he alone has done all that had to be done (geeta 4-18). Shankara in his

bhAshya explains thus : the wise one sees action in inaction, and inaction

in action, seeing that all thought of action, means of action etc. are in

the field of avidyA alone, since engagement in action or desisting from it

both depend on the doing agent (kartru), and never affect the Reality of

Atman.

 

Now the important question is, is this state of mind, is this samyag jnAna

is restricted to ONLY people in a saNyAsa Ashrama?? The people who wear

ochre cloth, running Ashrams and parading with n' no. of disciples

(shishyakOti) are the ONLY custodians of this Atma jnAna?? If someone

says 'yes' to this question than it is really strange and regrettable that

they have completely misconstrued the very ideal of saNyAsa 'as taught' by

our shankara bhagavatpAda. Here point to be noted that for paramArtha

jnAni, paramahamsa parivrAjakatva can come naturally without any effort of

his own!! But this does not mean jnAni should invariably take formal

saNyAsa & follow the Ashrama rules religiously!! As said earlier, even

after jnAna, he may continue to be in his respective Ashrama or may opt

for vidvat saNyAsa like yAjnAvalkya or he may became atyAshrami like

vAchaknavi or samvarta. So, there cannot be any hardbound rule for that

jnAni to insist on the formal saNyAsa.

 

Shankara's clarification on this point in geeta bhAshya (commentary on

2-10 & introduction to the geeta verse 2-11) is worth noting. Here

bhAshyakAra says, jnAni can perform his pUrvAshrama duties 'even' after

the dawn of jnAna just for the sake of lOka saMgraha like janaka &

bhagavAn krishna etc. but we should not read much into because jnAni

transcends the very notion of kartru, karma & kriya.

 

And in geeta bhAshya 4-19 shankara says : yastu prArabdha karmA san

uttarakAlaM utpannAtma samyagdarshanA syAt, saH sarvakarmaNi prayOjanaM

apashyan sa sAdhanaM karma parityajatyeva, saH kutaschit nimittAt " " karma

parityAga asaMbhave " " sati karmaNi phale cha saNga rahitayA svaprayOjana

abhAvAt lOkasaMgrahArthaM pUrvapat karmaNi pravruttOpi naiva kiMchit

karOti jnAnAgnidagdha karmatvAt tadeeyaM karma akarma eva saMpadyate " "

shankara says here, he who engaged in action due to the influence of

prArabhdha, later on become saMyag darshi (self-knowledge) and he surely

renounces all karmas since he does not find any purpose in it. But for

some reason, if this renouncement of actions is impossible (karma

parityAga asaMbhave) he still continues to engage himself in action for

the sake of lOka saMgraha but without any attachment to those actions and

their results.

 

Here shankara could see the possibility of ' karma parityAga asaMbhavata'

in some cases of jnAni...there might be plenty of reason for this,

 

(a) if this jnAni is a King & due to his sarva karma saNyAsa his own

people may suffer because of lack of proper leadership

(b) if his own responsibility is not completed

© if he is physically not fit enough to practice the rigors of saNyAsa

Ashrama

(d) if there is dependents like aged parents

(e) if there is no concurrence from the better half:-)) ( this is my

excuse for not taking saNyAsa :-)) atleast I've someone to blame for my

dodging:-))

 

(I am just maintaing vyAvahArik status of the jnAni to cite the above

examples...kindly dont argue 'for the jnAni where is the question

responsibility, relation etc.:-))

 

So, above circumstance may not allow a jnAni to take formal saNyAsa & in

these cases, a jnAni may continue to be their in gruhasthAshrama and can

do 'regular' karma without any notion of katrutva bhAva. So, saNyAsa is

NOT the must even after jnAna coz. his jnAna would burn away all his

actions...(jnAnAgi dagdha karmaNaH)...shankara further clarifies this in

geeta bhAshya 5-19 by saying : pravruttena chet lOkasaMgrahArthaM

nivruttena chet jeevana mAtrArthaM taM, jnAnAgni dagdhakarmANaM.

 

And finally, in chAndOgya (2-23-1 concluding sentence) bhAshya, which

myself & sri Sastri prabhuji quoted earlier clearly gives a 'clean chit'

to gruhasthAshrama jnAni to whom pArivrAjyaM is 'artha siddhaM'. Though

shankara himself states in this very bhAshya that this is not to show the

importance of any Ashrama and its respective phala, it is worth to note

that shankara declaration that by default a gruhasta jnAni would get the

status of pArivrAjyaM.

 

With this we can conclude that paramArtha jnana is NOT AT ALL a sole

property of A FORMAL SANYAASI....And contextually there are several

meaning to the word 'saNyAsa' in shankara's bhAshyAmruta.

 

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!

bhaskar

 

PS : In the next mail, I shall try to clarify how a karma yOgi can be a

saNyAsi & what exactly the result of karmaphala tyAga rUpa saNyAsa and

what is smArtha saNyAsa and vividishA or mumukshu saNyAsa. I think with

these topics, we can cover the whole concept of saNyAsa in shankara

bhAshya.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Pranams Bhaskar-ji

Thank you for your note - my comments are as follows.

_____________

It appears that in the on going discussion some of the

prabhuji(s) having the notion that saNyAsa means some sort of mendicant

life of a certain order of monks which recommends wearing ochre clothing

(kAshAya vastra), holding danda, kamandala, tonsuring head and living on

alms etc. I am afraid, by over emphasizing on these external appearances

of a saNyAsi we are forgetting the very significance of the vedAntic

concept of saNyAsa.

****

My response

For the record, I have never emphasized on these externalities nor do I, or

anyone including Shankara, consider them crucial. Examples like Bhagwan Ramana

and Ramakrishna Paramahamsa will suffice to demonstrate that ochre robes and

that whole list of paraphrenalia you talk about is not critical for

sarvakarmasannyasa - in fact absence of any indicatory marks or belongings is

what characterizes vidwat sannyasa even according to the Shruti - so your

erection of a strawman that you continue to beat down throughout your post is

quite unnecessary and uncalled for. Forget about the saffron robes you keep

referencing in a patronizing manner - in the Mandukya karika, as well as his

bhashya, Shankara clarifies that such a vidwat sannyasi " should merely depend on

strips of cloth coverings and food that come to him by chance for the

maintenance of the body "

______________________

But point to be noted here is this type of smArtha saNyAsa is quite different

from the 'paramahamsa saNyAsa' or paramArtha saNyAsa enjoined elsewhere in the

upanishad. For example bruhadAraNyaka (3-5-1) : 'Knowing this Atman, brAhmaNa-s

transcend longing for offspring, wealth and worlds

and live on alms'. Shankara's bhAshya on this maNtra is quite interesting. Here

he says : for there may be reasonably a pArivrAjya (i.e. going away from home, a

saNyAsa), 'other than that which belongs to the knowing person, and is of the

nature of transcending all desires. To elaborate this point, shankara continue

to clarify who is paramahamsa saNyAsi : " The pArivrAjya which is of the nature

of transcending the desires (eshaNa-s) is ancillary to the knowledge of Atman,

for it is of the nature of renunciation of the desire opposed to the knowledge

of brahman, and desire is only in the sphere of avidyA " . It is clear from this

bhAshya vAkya that shankara talking about paramahaMsa pArivrAjya-s who have, by

the aid of knowledge, transcends the avidyA kruta 'eshaNa-s'. And shankara

concludes in this same bhAshya : OTHER THAN THIS, there is a pArivrAjya in the

form of an Ashrama (an order of life), 'a' means to the attainment of brahmalOka

and other fruits

of action. It is in connection with this saNyAsa that wearing yajnOpaveeta etc.

are enjoined and that the linga ( the uniform, like wearing a saffron cloth,

carrying shishya vrunda, kamandala (a water pot) and other items pertaining to

this particular order) is enjoined " .

****

My response:

Bhaskar-ji Shankara in the commentary here says - " Therefore the knowers of

Brahman renounce rites AND their accessories such as the holy thread(!) embrace

the life of a MONK known as Paramahamsa and LEAD A MENDICANTS LIFE LIVE UPON

BEGGING - giving up the insignia of a monk's life prescribed by Smrtis which are

their MEANS OF LIVELIHOOD - for those who merely have recourse to that life. "

What Shankara is saying is that a vidwat sannyasa has to be FURTHER GIVE UP even

the minimal accessories that a formal ashrami sannyasi is allowed, and has to

resort to living upon begging. Your conclusion of trying to read novel meanings

into the term sannyasa is thus totally misfounded. There are vanaprastha

ashramis who live in the forest as also tapasvis who adopt sannyasa ashrama but

are not Self-knowers - Shankara is differentiating this while defining a vidwat

sannyasi. The Shruti itself makes the context clear.

_______________________

You write:

It is quite evident from the above that a paramahamsa sanyAsi does not

have to live under a 'formal' saNyAsa flag and might not 'necessarily'

have characteristic marks of a particular Ashrama.

****

My response:

Yes - because Shankara here is asking him to even renounce those insignia and

the paraphrenalia you alluded to earlier! He is asked to wear strips of bark for

clothing and live on the barest minimum of food.

____________________

Shankara in all his

bhAshya works quite explicitly explains what is paramArtha saNyAsa or

sarvakarma saNyAsa. Following are few examples :

 

(a) saNyAsena samyagdarshanena tatpUrvakena vA sarvakarma saNyAsena

(shankara in geeta bhAshya 18-49)..Here it is said that saNyAsa is nothing

but 'samyagdarshana' .

****

My response:

Precisely my point Bhaskar-ji. In Shankara's lexicon samyag darshana is possible

ONLY for sannyasis - to the extent that the two become synonymous. And what type

of sannyasa he has in mind he makes it amply clear at numerous points in his

bhashya. He clarifies it here itself when he says " samyag darshana tat purvakam

va sarvakarmasannyasena " leading to giving up of ALL activities which is vidwat

sannyasa.

______________________________

(b) saNyAsastu pAramArthikaH (geeta bhAshya 5-6) The context here is,

without observing karma yOga it is very difficult to get paramArtha

saNyAsa.

****

My response:

This is because karmayoga is a preparatory step for attaining chittashuddhi.

Without passing high school you cannot do your PhD. And after acquisition of

chittashuddhi from karmayoga alone does one in stages acquire knowledge and only

then will it even be possible to embrace sarvakarmasannyasa.

_____________________

For further details we can refer bhAshya in the 5th chapter 8th

& 9th verses...Here shankara explains paramArtha saNyAsi as

'paramArthadarshee' . Here shankara clarifies that this paramArthadarshi

have the adhikAra of 'sarvakarma saNyAsa'. (sarvakAryakAryakar aNa

cheshtAsu karmasu akarma eva pashyataH samyagdarshinaH) .

***

My response:

Bhaskar-ji do you see what Shankara is saying here - What Shankara is saying

here is " Only the right seer, the paramarthadarshee BECOMES FIT TO RNOUNCE ALL

WORKS " he gives an example here and says the no one after seeing the absence of

water in a mirage will drink water - in other words once one is a Knower then

ANY FORM OF KARMA should immediately cease.

____________________

Here sarvakarma  saNyAsa does not mean popularly known saNyAsa, shankara

clarifies here  though from the vyAvahArik point we could see the 'indriya

cheshta', it is  sublated (bAdhita) by the real jnAna and hence whatever

appears as 'karma'  to us (loukika-s) it is 'akarma' only for the jnAni.

***

My response:

Let us see what Shankara is saying here " And hence - because of this Jnana - he

becomes " fit to renounce all works "

i.e. he acquires the necessary qualification for vidwat sanyasa. By no stretch

of imagination does this mean the term " sannyasi " means someone who has not

physically renounced all actions!

_________________________

In geeta (5-19) shankara says : idaM tu sarvakarmasaNyAsavi shayaM prastutaM and

continues  in geeta (6-2) : yaM sarvakarma tat phalatyAgalakshaNam paramArtha

saNyAsaM iti prAhuH...again it is clear here that both paramArtha saNyAsa and

sarvakArma saNyAsa are one and the same and paramArtha saNyAsa is nothing but

paramArthadarshi.

***

My response:

Please read the next sentence in the bhashya for 6.2 Bhaskar-ji....yaM

sarvakarma tat phalatyAgalakshaNam paramArtha saNyAsaM iti prAhuH...karmayogasya

pravrttilakshanasya tadvipareetena nivrrtilakshanena..etc. " On the basis of what

common characteristic are identified the two OPPOSED STATES - karmayoga and REAL

renunciation? " ..

 

As an example you have a beggar playing the role of a King - and one can ask

what is the common characteristic of this beggar and the Kinig? They both are

wearing a crown! One cannot take this to mean a beggar and King are the same.

Now one may praise the beggar and say " he looks Royal " - this doesnt make him a

King. That is what Shankara also clarifies here with regards to a karmayogi -

" that this concession is mentioned ONLY as a commendation or praise " stutyathah "

which is NOT to be taken literally! Not sure how you missed reading/mentioning

that part!

______________________________

© aksharOpAsakAnAM (meditation on the immutable) nivrutta sarvaishaNAnAM

(who have renounced all desires) saNyAsinAM paramAthajnAna nishTAnAM

(steadfast in the knowledge) dharmajAtaM prakrAntaM upasaMharati (geeta

bhAshya introduction to 12th chapter 20th verse)...Here also shankara

implied that paramArtha jnAnanishTe is nothing but paramArtha saNyAsa.

****

My response:

Once again for Shankara ONLY THOSE WHO HAVE EMRACED SANNYASA CAN BE STEADFAST IN

KNOWLEDGE - not the other way around (everyone who is steadfast in knowledge is

a " sannyasi " !..) as you imply. He has made this amply clear in numerous portions

- you can refer to my ongoing series for a sampling of these.

_________________________

It is clear from the above references that according to shankara saNyAsa

in the real sense is nothing but samyagjnAna (the right knowledge).

***

My response:

This I am afraid is quite simply a misrepresentation of Shankara's position.

________________________

Here the right knowledge itself, has been labelled as 'saNyAsa' par excellence

(paramArtha saNyAsa. One can also refer here shankara's commentary on 18th

chapter 49th verse for further details.

***

My response:

This is an excerpt from his bhashya in that section Bhaskar-ji.

“…..Even after removing the defects in the organs and the mind, there arises

the possibility of acceptance of gifts either for the maintenance of the body or

for righteous duties; discarding them as well, i.e. BECOMING A MENDICANT OF THE

PARAHAMSA class; nirmamah, free from the idea of possession, becoming devoid of

the idea of 'me' and 'mine' even with regard to so much as one's body and life;

and for the very same reason, santah, serene, withdrawn; the monk who is

effortless and steadfast in Knowledge, kalpate, becomes fit; brahma-bhuyaya, for

becoming Brahman… "

______________________

As said above, here shankara in his commentary explains that saNyAsa is EITHER

right knowledge OR the renunciation of all actions through that knowledge.

***

My response:

Please reconcile this statement of your with the Br Up bhashya you yourself

quote - " Knowers of Brahman renounce their homes and embrace sannyasa " and many

many such statement of Shankara. Also see further below.

________________________

Can we say this declaration of geetAchArya pertains ONLY to people who are in

suffron clothes?? NOWAY, the knower of that truth would think that he is doing

nothing while he sees, hears touches, smells etc. he would always bear in mind

that ONLY the senses function on their objects. (geeta 5 - 8 & 9 verses)

irrespective of his Ashrama.

***

My response:

Bhaskar-ji with regards to Geeta verse 5.8 and 5.9 - Shankara clarifies

" samyagdarshiinah tasya sarvakarmasannye eva adhikarah " // " the right seer is

alone FIT TO RENOUNCE ALL WORKS. " If according to your earlier position

" Sannyasa IS samyag darshanah and Samyag Darshanah is Sannyasa " this sentence

that One with samyag darshanah ALONE is FIT TO RENOUNCE becomes meaningless. I

hope the difference is quite clear to you.

_______________________

And this jnAni's jnAna consists in relation to action in such a way that : he

sees inaction in action, and

action in inaction, he is the wisest of all men, he has a poised mind and

he alone has done all that had to be done (geeta 4-18). Shankara in his

bhAshya explains thus : the wise one sees action in inaction, and inaction

in action, seeing that all thought of action, means of action etc. are in

the field of avidyA alone, since engagement in action or desisting from it

both depend on the doing agent (kartru), and never affect the Reality of

Atman.

***

My response:

Shankara also clarifies here what a sannyasi means -jeevanmatraarthacheshtah -

he is sannyasi and his stirrings are meany ONLY TO MAINTAIN LIFE IN THE BODY.

Nothing more.

______________________

Now the important question is, is this state of mind, is this samyag jnAna

is restricted to ONLY people in a saNyAsa Ashrama?? The people who wear

ochre cloth, running Ashrams and parading with n' no. of disciples

(shishyakOti) are the ONLY custodians of this Atma jnAna?? If someone

says 'yes' to this question than it is really strange and regrettable that

they have completely misconstrued the very ideal of saNyAsa 'as taught' by

our shankara bhagavatpAda.

***

My response:

Once again it is regrettable that you are erecting more strawmen needlessly.

Shankara never talks about " running ashramas and parading with a number of

disciples " - why are you so keen on de-riding these Exalted Souls and their

ashrama - not all Paramahamsas teach or have ashramas and even if they do - they

dont need to " parade with disciples " - the latter naturally flock to them, as in

the case of the Sage of Kanchi and Bhagwan Ramana. It is unfortunate to hear

these type of comments about an institution your own paramaGuru belongs to.

*____________________

Here point to be noted that for paramArtha jnAni, paramahamsa parivrAjakatva can

come naturally without any effort of his own!! But this does not mean jnAni

should invariably take formal saNyAsa & follow the Ashrama rules religiously! !

As said earlier, even after jnAna, he may continue to be in his respective

Ashrama or may opt for vidvat saNyAsa like yAjnAvalkya or he may became

atyAshrami like vAchaknavi or samvarta. So, there cannot be any hardbound rule

for that jnAni to insist on the formal saNyAsa. Shankara's clarification on this

point in geeta bhAshya (commentary on 2-10 & introduction to the geeta verse

2-11) is worth noting. Here bhAshyakAra says, jnAni can perform his pUrvAshrama

duties 'even' after the dawn of jnAna just for the sake of lOka saMgraha like

janaka & bhagavAn krishna etc. but we should not read much into because jnAni

transcends the very notion of kartru, karma & kriya.

***

My response:

Bhaskar-ji - as a matter of fact it is in this very commentary that Shankara in

his bhashya even leaves open the possibility about men like Janaka (still

engaged in action) being self-realized - " On the other hand if it is held theey

were NOT enlightened the passage may be explained to mean that Janaka and others

like him achieved samsiddhi, purity of mind by means of actions dedicated to

God. " !

__________________

" But for some reason, if this renouncement of actions is impossible (karma

parityAga asaMbhave) he still continues to engage himself in action for

the sake of lOka saMgraha but without any attachment to those actions and

their results.

Here shankara could see the possibility of ' karma parityAga asaMbhavata'

in some cases of jnAni...there might be plenty of reason for this " (a) if this

jnAni is a King & due to his sarva karma saNyAsa his own

people may suffer because of lack of proper leadership

(b) if his own responsibility is not completed

© if he is physically not fit enough to practice the rigors of saNyAsa

Ashrama

(d) if there is dependents like aged parents

(e) if there is no concurrence from the better half:-)) ( this is my

excuse for not taking saNyAsa :-)) atleast I've someone to blame for my

dodging:-))

***

My response:

Here Shankara first of all makes it clear that what he means by sannyasa is to

give up everything save the bare minimal " stirrings necessary for the mere

maintenance of the body " and (because of the context of the verse) he allows a

concession by mentioning " for some reason " ...showing that this is an exceptional

situation - by no means can this be extended to the innumerable situations and

excuses that you allude to by extension. It is incongruous to say he is a

" Knower " of Brahman that he knows his Self to be nitya shuddha mukta Atma and

then say he feels responsible to care for aged parents and as a King( a Prime

Minister in todays' age?!) feels his people will suffer - with this type of

reasonings no person can ever take to sannyasa - it will simply be impossible to

be a grhastha and not have ANY responsibility or duty. This is repeatedly what

Shankara stresses that ONLY to a knower can there be the conviction that by

sannyasa he is not being derelict

in his duties. All these seeming " responsibilities " stem from a false belief of

an ignorant man that it is " he " and not Ishwara who is taking care of his near

and dear ones or his subjects, as the case may be. You do bring about an

excellent and very important ethical point of practicality here that permission

of a spouse is considered necessary even for a Knower to renounce and

Sureshwaracharya makes this quite explicity in his Br.Up vartika (even though

Shankara does not say so).

_______________________

And finally, in chAndOgya (2-23-1 concluding sentence) bhAshya, which

myself & sri Sastri prabhuji quoted earlier clearly gives a 'clean chit'

to gruhasthAshrama jnAni to whom pArivrAjyaM is 'artha siddhaM'. Though

shankara himself states in this very bhAshya that this is not to show the

importance of any Ashrama and its respective phala, it is worth to note

that shankara declaration that by default a gruhasta jnAni would get the

status of pArivrAjyaM.

***

My response:

Shankara nowhere declares that a grhasta jnani would get the " status of a

parivrajyam " - he emphasizes that a grhasta who achieves Self-knowledge has to

resort to parivrajyam i.e. renounce his home. In fact in the very section you

quote there is a counterobjection - can it not be said that knowledge in

association wit the virtuous conduct of a mendicant becomes the cause of

Immortality?

To which the Opponent replies - No, because these virtues are indistinguishable

from the virtues prescribed for the stages of life. Or, even if it is held that

virtues in association with knowledge become the cause of knowledge, then, this

can equally be the case with regard to virtues of all the stages of life. The

Upanishads declare that Moksha is a result of knowledge. Therefore whoever among

the persons following the virtues prescribed for their own stage of life remains

established in Brahman he attains Moksha.

 

{Note here the opponent clearly implies that establishment in Brahman is

possible for all ashramas - i.e. there is no need for sannyasa - what is

required is jnana AND a life of virtues or mental purity and freedom to remain

in whatever stage of life one is in. See how Shankara vehemently demolishes this

seemingly " logical " argument by showing that there is NO SUCH THING as a

HOUSEHOLDER established in BRAHMAN)

 

Reply: Shankara: NO, because knowledge required for performance of rites and

duties and the knowledge needed for the realization of Brahman are OPPOSED to

each other.........because the conviction arising from Knowledge and ignorance

are OPPOSED to each other. This being so, whoever has got rid of the conviction

about differences based on which the injunction about rites and duties come into

effect, HE DESISTS from all kinds of rites and duties BECAUSE all causes for

this cease to exist as a result of the conviction of the Oneness arising from

the vedic texts....and he who has ceased from all rites and duties is spoken of

as one established in Brahman and HE MUST BE A MONK because it is IMPOSSIBLE 

for ANYONE ELSE to be so. FOT THE OTHER has not got his conviction about

differences removed. because of his seeing hearing thinking and knowing

differences he believes " I shall get this by doing this. " In the case of such a

man who is engaged thus there CANNOT BE ANY ESTABLISHMENT IN Brahman for he is

possessed of the ideas arising from his attachment to false transformations

which have speech alone as their basis.

______________________

With this we can conclude that paramArtha jnana is NOT AT ALL a sole

property of A FORMAL SANYAASI.... And contextually there are several

meaning to the word 'saNyAsa' in shankara's bhAshyAmruta.

 

***

My response:

Bhaskar-ji it is one thing to conclude that even though one respects Shankara,

one can have one's own intellectual honesty and disagree with, or not consider

very important, the Acharya's stated positions on each and everything as

Sadananda-ji alluded to - it is quite another thing to try to find ways to read

into his bhashyas a message that seems to suit one's line of thinking - a

tremendous degree of objectivity is called for and one needs to examine this

dispassionately, and with the help of one's Guru, comprehensively.

 

Humble pranams

Hari OM

Shri Gurubhyoh namah

Shyam

 

--- On Tue, 9/29/09, Bhaskar YR <bhaskar.yr wrote: