question

[Guest guest]

Hi.

This is a question I also sent to the Advaita-L list. I would be grateful if

members of this list could help me out.

 

I am presently reading the book "Nagarjuna, The philosophy of the middle

way" by David Kalupahana. He makes some contentious statements about Vedanta

and other Astika philosophies, which I would like to be clarified. I do

think the question is

relevant to the list since Kalupahana seems to be misrepresenting the

"opponent's" case and I would like to be clarified on that.

 

1. On page 9, when discussing the context in which the Buddha came up with

his philosophy, Kalupahana says that in general there were two schools of

philosophy in India, the substantialists who claimed existence of Atman,and

the nihilists, mainly materialists who presented non-existence. In this

context, he says:

 

*********

At a very early stage, they (the brahminical philosophers) asserted that

this self (aatman) was created by a god or gods who determined that it

belongs to one or the other of the four social classes:

priestly(braahmaNa)...servant(shuudra). Thus each individual's status was

predetermined and unchangeable. It was this particular idea of creation

that elicited the most vehement criticism both from the Materialists as well

as the Buddha."

*********

 

For this statement he gives the references, Rg-veda x.90; also

Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 1.4.11-13.

 

This seems to be a misinterpretation since the Brihadaranyaka upanishad

talks about the creation of the brahmin *class*, *not* of aatmans. Is the

Rig Vedic reference that of the purusha suktam? Even there, there is no talk

of aatmans being created according to varNa, only the creation of the

varNas, right?

 

Is there any aastika school of philosophy which s to the views

ascribed by Kalupahana, especially during the time of the Buddha?

 

 

2. On page 37, Kalupahana says when discussing Nagarjuna's

Muulamadhyamakaarikaa, Chapter III:

"However, in verse 2, Nagarjuna criticizes a particular definition of

"seeing" (darshana) and that definition involves "the perception of itself"

(svaatmaanam darshanam). This undoubtedly is the Indian version of the

Cartesian "cogito" which led to the belief in a permanent and eternal self

during the period of the Upanishds (ref.1) and continued to flourish in the

speculations of the later Indian philosophical schools

(ref.2)."

 

For reference 1, Kalupahana gives Brihadaranyaka Upanishad 1.4.11-14 and for

ref.2, Swami Satprakashananda, "Methods of Knowledge, according to Advaita

Vedanta".

 

Though he may be right about Advaita Vedanta and "cogito", Is he right in

claiming that the particular verses of the Br.Up. do really talk about the

"cogito"? Is that the way Sankaracharya interprets it in his commentary?

 

Hoping to receive clarifications from members.

Thanks,

Ganesh.

 

____________

FREE Personalized Email at Mail.com

Sign up at http://www.mail.com?sr=mc.mk.mcm.tag001

[Guest guest]

An interesting question from one of our A/S level students who is

manning (or woman-ing!!) a website for youngsters. I would like the

opinion from list members.

 

jay....

 

-

<Devia.Ravji

<vivekananda

Thursday, December 07, 2000 01:48

Question

 

> Is fate fixed!!!

>

> Some people say that some events in your life are fixed & the rest is make

> up as you go along.

>

> The fixed bits are Janam (birth), Parents, Lagan & Maran (marriage and

death).

>

> Your opinion would be duly welcomed by our website.

>

> Thanks

==================

Reply:

 

This question: Is there free will? -- has bothered philosophers for a long

time.

The more elaborate question:

Is Hindu belief: That birth, death and marriage are predestined, true?

 

 

I am going to throw this question open to our list.

Let us see how the list reacts.

 

regards

Vivekananda Centre

[Guest guest]

>An interesting question from one of our A/S level students who is

>manning (or woman-ing!!) a website for youngsters. I would like the

>opinion from list members.

>

>jay....

>

>-

><Devia.Ravji

><vivekananda

>Thursday, December 07, 2000 01:48

>Question

>

>

>> Is fate fixed!!!

>>

>> Some people say that some events in your life are fixed & the rest is make

>> up as you go along.

>>

>> The fixed bits are Janam (birth), Parents, Lagan & Maran (marriage and

>death).

>>

>> Your opinion would be duly welcomed by our website.

>>

>> Thanks

>==================

>Reply:

>

>This question: Is there free will? -- has bothered philosophers for a long

>time.

>The more elaborate question:

>Is Hindu belief: That birth, death and marriage are predestined, true?

>

>

>I am going to throw this question open to our list.

>Let us see how the list reacts.

>

>regards

>Vivekananda Centre

>

 

What you have at any moment is fate- what you do with what you have

at that moment is your self-effort or purushaartha. The future fate

is nothing but past fate modified by your present action. Hence you

essentially can control your future fate in spite of your past fate

(prarabda).

Hence destiny is not some thing trusted on you by someone but by your

own past actions.

 

Birth is predestined by the prarabda - marriage etc is not random

incidents but - the blue print has been dictated by ones own past

actions and attachments - past includes past lives. One falls in

love strangely to a strange person for reasons unknown or logically

cannot be explained - this is because of the powerful pull by the

prarabda. One can overcome prarabda by self-determination and

self-control that is purushaartha. To the degree that one has master

himself - his mental control is again due to training in the past

and the present. Prarabda or destiny is like a river flowing at some

speed. If you are just a log, you will drift along with the flow.

If you keep a motor to the log, you can control the speed and go

along with the flow at a faster rate or even go against the current

but slower. You can even the change the current flow by redirecting

the river. But if the currents are too rapid - it takes a monumental

task to overcome that and go against the current. In that case it is

better to go along the flow but slowly manipulate that you gain some

control of taking advantage of the flow to your benefit. That is

Viveka. Hence, is marriage fixed? Since Hindu marriage lasts life

long (in principle), since it provides environment to exhaust ones

Vaasana-s, Lord has to make sure you have the right environment that

is conducive to your vaasana-s. Hence your partner has to be

appropriate. Hence it is believed that the marriage are made in

heaven - one is married for the past seven lives. If you change your

fate and try to realize God in this life, you can leave that fate to

someone else!

 

Hari Om!

Sadananda

 

 

 

--

K. Sadananda

Code 6323

Naval Research Laboratory

Washington D.C. 20375

Voice (202)767-2117

Fax:(202)767-2623

[Guest guest]

Namaste,

 

Please visit :

 

http://www.escribe.com/religion/advaita/m5867.html

> The Riddle of Fate and Free-Will Solved:

> > >(A dialogue between His Holiness Shri Chandrashekhara Bharati

> > >Mahaswami and a Disciple): [His Holiness was the Sringeri

> > Mathadhipati 1912-1954.]

 

It may provide some answers.

 

Regards,

 

s.

 

 

 

advaitin , "Vivekananda Centre" <vivekananda@b...>

wrote:

> An interesting question from one of our A/S level students who is

> manning (or woman-ing!!) a website for youngsters. I would like the

> opinion from list members.

>

> jay....

>

> -

> <Devia.Ravji@C...>

> <vivekananda@b...>

> Thursday, December 07, 2000 01:48

> Question

>

>

> > Is fate fixed!!!

> >

> > Some people say that some events in your life are fixed & the

rest is make

> > up as you go along.

> >

> > The fixed bits are Janam (birth), Parents, Lagan & Maran

(marriage and

> death).

> >

> > Your opinion would be duly welcomed by our website.

> >

> > Thanks

> ==================

> Reply:

>

> This question: Is there free will? -- has bothered philosophers

for a long

> time.

> The more elaborate question:

> Is Hindu belief: That birth, death and marriage are predestined,

true?

>

>

> I am going to throw this question open to our list.

> Let us see how the list reacts.

>

> regards

> Vivekananda Centre

[Guest guest]

Namaste.

Shree Sadanada's explanation was wonderful.

I would like to put in my little thoughts too.

 

Fate and some specific events are pre-destined to the extent one has

Vasanas(Karma). Think about it this way - the things that you would

do tomorrow etc., is mostly known today. If I were a pilot today, for

example, the tasks I would do tomorrow pertain to flying airplanes

and I would mostly be involved with other pilots. I would not stop

flying and go full-time fishing suddenly[swadharma/Paradharma].

 

This continuity maintenance is through the mind and the whole of the

tendencies of mind may be summed up as Karma, if we may say.

 

Hence Karma determines what is already determined by our own minds.

 

A group of people also may have collective Karma as well and they

will stick together.

 

However, all said and done, this is not be too important after all.

 

Sri Shankara declared thus:

Atma-Bodah [6] Samsarah SwapnaTulyo Hi

The world, filled with attachments and aversions, and the rest, is

like a dream; it appears to be real as long as one is ignorant,but

becomes unreal when one is awake.

 

Atma-Bodah [7] - The world appears to be real as long as the non-dual

Brahman, which is the basis of all, is not known. It is like the

illusion of silver in an oyster-shell.

 

Within a dream, all the positive and negative intensities are real as

long as dream exists. Once woken up, we laugh it all away. Waking up

from Samsara, which is like a dream, is thru the Advaitic realization

of Brahman !

 

With Love,

Raghava

> >

> >This question: Is there free will? -- has bothered philosophers

for a long

> >time.

> >The more elaborate question:

> >Is Hindu belief: That birth, death and marriage are predestined,

true?

> >

> >

> >I am going to throw this question open to our list.

> >Let us see how the list reacts.

> >

> >regards

> >Vivekananda Centre

> >

[Guest guest]

On Thu, 7 Dec 2000, K. Sadananda wrote:

> What you have at any moment is fate- what you do with what you have

> at that moment is your self-effort or purushaartha. The future fate

> is nothing but past fate modified by your present action. Hence you

> essentially can control your future fate in spite of your past fate

> (prarabda).

> Hence destiny is not some thing trusted on you by someone but by your

> own past actions.

>

> Birth is predestined by the prarabda - marriage etc is not random

> incidents but - the blue print has been dictated by ones own past

> actions and attachments - past includes past lives. One falls in

> love strangely to a strange person for reasons unknown or logically

> cannot be explained - this is because of the powerful pull by the

> prarabda. One can overcome prarabda by self-determination and

> self-control that is purushaartha. To the degree that one has master

> himself - his mental control is again due to training in the past

> and the present. Prarabda or destiny is like a river flowing at some

> speed. If you are just a log, you will drift along with the flow.

> If you keep a motor to the log, you can control the speed and go

> along with the flow at a faster rate or even go against the current

> but slower. You can even the change the current flow by redirecting

> the river. But if the currents are too rapid - it takes a monumental

> task to overcome that and go against the current. In that case it is

> better to go along the flow but slowly manipulate that you gain some

> control of taking advantage of the flow to your benefit. That is

> Viveka. Hence, is marriage fixed? Since Hindu marriage lasts life

> long (in principle), since it provides environment to exhaust ones

> Vaasana-s, Lord has to make sure you have the right environment that

> is conducive to your vaasana-s. Hence your partner has to be

> appropriate. Hence it is believed that the marriage are made in

> heaven - one is married for the past seven lives. If you change your

> fate and try to realize God in this life, you can leave that fate to

> someone else!

>

> Hari Om!

> Sadananda

>

>

>

 

 

Dear shri Sadananda garu,

 

namaskarams. It is indeed a blessing to see your views on this topic.

We have discussed this many times before. While I very much admire

your clinical presentation on many matters advaitic and learn much

from your postings and teachings, I must respectfully differ from

your interpretation on this matter.

 

You said above "... What you have at any moment is fate- what you

do with what you have at that moment is your self-effort or

purushaartha...."

 

If what shaped up till now is my prArabdha, then the immediate step

I take, the immediate thought I get is a result of my prArabdha.

At any particular moment in time then, the prArabdha dictates a human's

thought or action. That is, there is nothing else beyond my prArabdha.

My prArabdha shapes my action and my thought which is a precursor to

any of my action. That is, a human has no puruShArtha, as we understand

that word, no independent decisive action apart from what is dictated

by prArabdha. The only puruShArtha a human has is bhakti (as was

pointed out by someone on this List sometime ago), i.e., surrendering

him/herself to Ishwara, the personal God. Even that is also due to

Ishwara's grace.

 

What I said above can also be put this way:

 

What you are calling puruShArtha, I am saying it is not puruShArtha,

but is a divine gift or divine grace. There is no credit the human

can take for it. Ishwara, the karmaphalapradA, dictates that particular

action or thought to come to this human X.

 

What I said above does not contradict bhagavatpAda shri shankara's

sayings in the early part of VivekacUDAmaNi, where the human effort

is stressed (for Self-realization). It is significant, I think, that

shri shankara does not call it puruShArtha in any of His writings.

It is human effort, yes, but it is not the human's effort. Also,

AvadhUtagIta early verse about importance of Ishwara's grace in

advaitavAsanA.

 

As always, I would be grateful for your comments.

 

 

Regards

Gummuluru Murthy

-

[Guest guest]

>

>You said above "... What you have at any moment is fate- what you

>do with what you have at that moment is your self-effort or

>purushaartha...."

 

Murthy gaaru -

 

I should first acknowledge that the above quotation is not mine but

by Pujya Gurudev Swami Chinmayanandaji.

 

>If what shaped up till now is my prArabdha, then the immediate step

>I take, the immediate thought I get is a result of my prArabdha.

>At any particular moment in time then, the prArabdha dictates a human's

>thought or action. That is, there is nothing else beyond my prArabdha.

 

I think you are jumping one step here. Thinking may be the result

based on my past memory. But there is will involved in terms what

direction I would like to think of all the possibilities that are

presented at any moment - hence kartum shakyam, akartum shakyam and

anyathaa kartum shakyam - these are the three choices I have. As a

human I am always at cross roads and I have to make a choice.

Animals do not have that choice. We have not only the will to act

and the creative power of Lord trickled through - hence the saying

man is created in the image of the Lord. - Although thinking is

dictated by the past actions, we have a choice to override several of

the possible directions that memory has provided based on our value

system and culture and education. While the we are prisoners of

our past in terms of the environment we are have, the next

environment is the present environment modified by the present action

where we can chose how to act within our capabilities. That I do not

have a choice of action is the only an outcry of an individual who

want a specific result that is seeking and pushing in that direction

- but that is his choice.

 

Once one has realized then the choice of the action is not at an

individual level since that individual is dissolved and the choice is

at the Iswara level since the realization is I am Iswara - Hence the

statement - maya adhyakshena prakR^itiH suuyate sa charaacharam comes

into picture.

 

If everything is praarabda then there is no question of

self-realization - It will happen when it is due since I have no

control on anything. We have to begin to ask why there is disparity

in praarabda-s. If that disparity in praarabda is in our control

that means at some time or other the purushaartha played a part - if

the disparities is due to Lord then Lord cannot be Lord anymore since

he is partial to some and not others. Please read the - dhyaayato

vishayaan .. slokas - which clearly imply the human will and role in

doing down the hill or - sat sanghatwe nissangatvam .. where the role

is going up the hill.

 

In the final analysis - as long as there is a notion of doership then

choice of doing rests on the individual. When the ego and the

associated doership is surrendered, the choice of doing is left to

that who has now identified with totality.

 

Hari Om!

Sadananda

 

 

 

 

>My prArabdha shapes my action and my thought which is a precursor to

>any of my action. That is, a human has no puruShArtha, as we understand

>that word, no independent decisive action apart from what is dictated

>by prArabdha. The only puruShArtha a human has is bhakti (as was

>pointed out by someone on this List sometime ago), i.e., surrendering

>him/herself to Ishwara, the personal God. Even that is also due to

>Ishwara's grace.

>

>What I said above can also be put this way:

>

>What you are calling puruShArtha, I am saying it is not puruShArtha,

>but is a divine gift or divine grace. There is no credit the human

>can take for it. Ishwara, the karmaphalapradA, dictates that particular

>action or thought to come to this human X.

 

This statement is absolutely true only when one has realized as

explained above. Till then it is also a notion, helpful for one to

surrender ones ego - that is it is for sadhana.

 

 

>

>What I said above does not contradict bhagavatpAda shri shankara's

>sayings in the early part of VivekacUDAmaNi, where the human effort

>is stressed (for Self-realization). It is significant, I think, that

>shri shankara does not call it puruShArtha in any of His writings.

>It is human effort, yes, but it is not the human's effort. Also,

>AvadhUtagIta early verse about importance of Ishwara's grace in

>advaitavAsanA.

 

Avadhuuta Geeta is not yoga shaastra. It talks about from the point

of absolute -

"aham dhyaata param dhyeyam akhanDam khaDate katham?! - There is no

meditator and meditated, how can one divide that which is

indivisible? - At that there is no purushaartha nor praaradha not the

divine will not divinity either! One indivisible reality. It is geeta

that is stripped out (avadhuuta) of all duality.

 

 

>As always, I would be grateful for your comments.

>

>

>Regards

>Gummuluru Murthy

>-

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

>Discussion of Sankara's Advaita Vedanta Philosophy of nonseparablity

>of Atman and Brahman.

>Advaitin List Archives available at: http://www.eScribe.com/culture/advaitin/

>For Temporary stoppage of your Email, send a blank email to

><advaitin-nomail >

>To resume normal delivery of Email, send a blank email to

><advaitin-normal >

>To receive email digest (one per day) send a blank email to

><advaitin-digest >

>To to advaitin list, send a blank email to

><advaitin->

 

--

K. Sadananda

Code 6323

Naval Research Laboratory

Washington D.C. 20375

Voice (202)767-2117

Fax:(202)767-2623

[Guest guest]

fate or free-will?

 

this is among a class of philosophical questions born and bred by

and through the separative ego-Mind trembling in the fear of the

unknown. and little does it know that, in fact, it is immersed

in a realm a notch above even that: the Unknowable Itself!

 

which is why such questions never did and never will produce any

definitively satisfactory answers. (it's to our distinct advantage

that they don't, either!)

 

sages differ. sastras differ. ramana has on one occasion blatantly

proclaimed: "yes, everything is predetermined," and went on to say--

which he's alluded to on a number of occasions--that the free will of

man has to do at best [and *exclusively*] with his identifying or not

with what is in truth his allotted role [or predetermined actions]

ordained by isvara. herein lies the matter of the sthithaprajna of

the jnani, where the consideration emerges whether moksha itself is

constituted by not via the freedom *of* but rather the freedom *from*

choice! (derivation herein of the idea of 'choiceless awareness.')

on other occasions--and more frequently--he would employ his notorious

[and dreaded!] brahmastram: [paraphrased] "find out who's asking

whether one has free will or not, that's the main thing." (his divine

weapon was dreaded because the questioners were frustrated by it, as

it would leave them dissatisfied with not having their particular

concerns addressed. yet little did they know in fact that such

concerns are in fact derived from a single archetypal pattern of

anxiety created and sustained by the bewildered ego-Mind, that wants

everything reduced to a graspable/manageable understanding. which in

fact would--if something like it could be even remotely had!!--strip

Being down to a bland and anemic lifelessness that would wreak havoc

on the soul to an extent unimaginable! AND THIS IS THE POINT BEING

MISSED BY SO MANY STEEPED IN SPECULATIVE-PHILOSOPHICAL PURSUIT!)

(to me, recording artists like dylan occasionally, lennon usually

and hendrix almost always had their finger on this very idea!)

 

other observations include the idea that if one is yet subject to

the illusion of a separative ego, then the illusion of free will

accordingly prevails. it could be said, in light of this, that the

notion of free will is indeed very real, yet within the illusion of

the ego! this is tantamount to saying that although the perception

of the mirage on the desert is very real, it nevertheless in truth

will in no way quench one's thirst.

 

in any event, such philosophical questions (others include: if

brahman is perfect, how did imperfection arise? -or- what is the

origin of desire responsible for Creation?) are among the ultimate

tricks of the mind. there can in fact be no definitive answers to

any of these questions. why not? simply because, as alluded to

above, they would violate the very foundation of the primal fact

that Life, indeed brahman Itself, is an unfathomable Mystery.

 

OM shaanthi shaanthi shaanthiH

[Guest guest]

Following interesting question came to us:

Members welcome to reply directly or via the list......jay / Vivekananda Centre

 

 

-

Shashikiran Prabhakar

ps_kiran

hindu

Wednesday, December 12, 2001 04:46

Question

 

 

""Renunciation: The central theme of the Gita is renunciation. "Work away; but

offer the fruits of your actions to God. Do not run after the objects of the

senses. Lead a detached life.""

 

when it says offer fruits of your actions to God. Can you explain how one can

actually implement this? thanks

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Hari OM,

 

--- Vivekananda Centre <vivekananda

wrote:

> Following interesting question came to us:

> ""Renunciation: The central theme of the Gita is

> renunciation. "Work away; but offer the fruits of

> your actions to God. Do not run after the objects of

> the senses. Lead a detached life.""

> when it says offer fruits of your actions to God.

> Can you explain how one can actually implement this?

 

= This is a mental process of assigning the results of

the action to God. This is recommended to help "Karma"

stop accruing to our souls due to our actions.

(which otherwise is an automatic process)

 

All experiences produce a vritti (thought)in our mind.

When we claim it as ours, we develop an attachment to

such thoughts. Accumulated vrittis tend to become as

Gunas (tendencies) which coat the mind. Mind travels

with the soul from birth to birth and is not inherited

from parents like body.

 

So if you want liberation of the soul, then only (not

otherwise) renounce the fruits (by avoiding mental

attchments or gratification from that experience)

which would otherwise coat you mind and in turn the

soul.

 

The above explanation is from a book " The soul's

journey to its destiny" by Swami Ashokananda of RK

Mutt order and published by Adavita ashrama cost Rs

32.

 

Pranams.

P.B.V.Rajan

 

 

 

Check out Shopping and Auctions for all of

your unique holiday gifts! Buy at

or bid at http://auctions.

[Guest guest]

>

>

> ""Renunciation: The central theme of the Gita is

> renunciation. "Work away; but offer the fruits of

> your actions to God. Do not run after the objects of

> the senses. Lead a detached life.""

>

> when it says offer fruits of your actions to God.

> Can you explain how one can actually implement this?

 

Namaste all,

The Gita is clear on this and chapter 2 verse 62 to

64 are our guide.

All actions have their natural 'fruits' and it is

attachment from the ego that is the problem.

The key word ...dhyaayatah....can be translated as

'brooding on' or 'dwelling in'.

For example: We are walking along and catch the smell

of some favourite food. Immediately the manas has

acknowledged the sense object a thought may arise 'I

like' or 'I want' which will produce a set of images

concluding in th purchase and eating of the food. If

the mind is allowed to dwell on that initial sense

experience then an attachment...sa~ngaat...arises and

the process to the destruction of discrimination

unfolds inevitably...buddhinaashaat.

The Lord advises us to dedicate every action to Him

and in advaita there is the practice of neti neti to

strengthen the buddhi. At the beginning and end of

every action there is a moment of rest as in the

inward and outward breath and it is at this point that

the dedication or other discipline has its place. If

the mind is confused by one set of events overlapping

so that no pasue is observed then whenever the memory

arises to stop and be still for a moment we must be

obedient to that instruction for the flow of grace

needs to be heard. In time even the practices of

dedication or neti neti are to fall away but this

happens as they become part of the natural working of

the mind.

So, one answer to the question is to cease 'dwelling'

in the thoughts that arise from the acknowledgement of

an object of sense.

I am sure that others will have more insightful help

to answer this question which will calrify the above

but I hope that it may be of some use,

 

Peace and happiness to all

Ken Knight

 

 

 

Check out Shopping and Auctions for all of

your unique holiday gifts! Buy at

or bid at http://auctions.

[Guest guest]

Namaste:

 

The central theme of Gita is the renunciation of all thoughts on the

fruits of action and instead focus on the action. In reality we do not

offer any fruits to God and it is a symbolic gesture. Even the fruits

that we offer in the temple to the God is symbolic reminder that they

are God's 'gift' to the offerer. God doesn't need any 'fruits' from us

and we are the one taking all the fruits from Him. We need to convince

ourselves that the 'fruits' of any action is His Gift and all such

gifts needs to be cherished. The central theme of Gita (described in

the above paragraph) is stated beautifully in verse 47 of Chapter 2:

 

karmany evaa'dhiharaste maaphalesu kadaacana

maa karmaphalahetur bhur maate sango'stv akarmani

 

Your right is to work only and never to the fruit thereof. Let not you

focus your attention on the fruit of action, no you divert your focus

to ‘inaction.'

 

In every situation in our life, we need to understand that our rights

are limited and consequently we do not have the right to dictate the

fruits of our action. Every action always comes along with the fruits

(results) and our action alone does not determine the fruits. We are

part of the ‘Cosmos' where the fruits are determined by all the actors

(visible, invisible, direct and indirect). The moment we divert our

attention from ‘action' to ‘pre-determination of the fruits of the

action' we likely become ‘inactive.' and consequently fail to achieve

the goal. In the modern terminology, the Lord suggests that ‘the horse

should be in front of the cart and not the cart in front.' To

understand the full implication of this verse, Mahabharat dramatizes

this verse beautifully using the hero, Arjun. Arjun diverted his

attention from fighting the war (action) to the results of the war

(death and suffering of relatives and friends). This diversion has led

him to be inactive and he tried to ‘renounce the action' instead of

‘renouncing the thoughts on the results of the war.' In the above

quoted verse, the Lord emphatically tells Arjun (Kartha) to fight the

war and leave the responsibility of all the consequences to Him (karma

Phala dhata).

 

The question "Can you explain how one can actually implement this?"

shows our doubts on the practicality of ‘Karma Yoga - Karma with the

Yagna spirit.' According to Advaita, Ignorance is responsible for our

doubts and with knowledge, we can remove the ignorance along with it

our doubts. We have to convince ourselves that the "Karma Yoga" is

adoptable in the real world in dealing with our daily life. The Lord

understood the difficulties of a Sadaka such as Arjun and explains the

term ‘renunciation' in the later chapters. I suggest that one has to

read the entire Gita in order to get full conviction to the words of

the Lord.

 

Doubts also occur with a lack of faith in what we attempt to do such

as the practice of ‘Karma Yoga.' What is faith? "Faith is to believe

what we don't say and the reward is to see what we believe" (St.

Augustine). One way to implement "Karma Yoga" is to believe in Karma

Yoga and practice it. By practice, one can cultivate the faith and

finally will be able to see. A careful reading and contemplation of

Gita, it will be possible to see that the ‘renunciation' that the Lord

refers is ‘our ego.' Our ego is responsible for us to believe that we

have the right to the fruits our action. If we renounce our ego and

surrender to the Lord, we will be able to accept the fruits as His

Prasad. In Sanskrit, Prasad means Peace and if we cultivate the

Prasad Buddhi (cultivating the attitude to accept good and bad results

without emotions) we will certainly attain PEACE.

 

Warmest regards,

 

Ram Chandran

> >

> >

> > ""Renunciation: The central theme of the Gita is

> > renunciation. "Work away; but offer the fruits of

> > your actions to God. Do not run after the objects of

> > the senses. Lead a detached life.""

> >

> > when it says offer fruits of your actions to God.

> > Can you explain how one can actually implement this?

>

[Guest guest]

Namaste,

 

The central theme of the Gita is NOT renunciation! It is

realisation of the SELF - the Immanent and the Transcendent.

Renunciation is the critical element in that process.

 

The Gita is considered as a commentary on the first two verses

of Isha upanishad. To realise that whatever exists is Divine

['braahmii sthiti'], is the pinnacle or Summum Bonum of life; but it

cannot be so realised without practising the secret of Karma. That

secret is renunciation. It is the key to the treasure, not the

treasure itself!

 

The Gita has uniquely analysed the elements of renunciation,

especially in Chapter 18. The other chapters have analysed the

concomitant accessories in its perfection.

 

At least this is how I perceive the issue.

 

Regards,

 

Sunder

 

 

 

advaitin, "ramvchandran" <rchandran@c...> wrote:

> Namaste:

>

> The central theme of Gita is the renunciation of all thoughts on the

> fruits of action and instead focus on the action. >

[Guest guest]

Namaste Sunderji:

 

Thanks for your valid point. Please also note that "renunciation of

all thoughts" implies 'Self-realization" because thoughts are the

clouds which obstruct the light of wisdom. I do agree that our

perceptions are likely to vary greatly influenced by knowledge and

faith and conviction.

 

warmest regards,

 

Ram Chandran

 

advaitin, "sunderh" <sunderh> wrote:

> Namaste,

>

> The central theme of the Gita is NOT renunciation! It is

> realisation of the SELF - the Immanent and the Transcendent.

> Renunciation is the critical element in that process.

>

>

>

> advaitin, "ramvchandran" <rchandran@c...> wrote:

> > Namaste:

> >

> > The central theme of Gita is the renunciation of all thoughts on

the

> > fruits of action and instead focus on the action. >

[Guest guest]

Namaste Ramji,

 

This is wholly in accord with Gita 6:2 & 4;

'sarva-sankalpa-sanyasi' .

 

However, in you previous message, you stated one has to focus

on action alone. This is not the interpretation of Shankara, who says:

"When a yogin, keeping the mind steadfast, feels no attachment for the

objects of the senses......, nor thinks that he has to do any

action-whether nitya [obligatory] or naimittika [obligatory and

incidental] or kamya [done with a motive] or pratishiddha [forbidden

by law]- regarding it has no use to him;.....The words 'renouncing all

thoughts' imply that all desires as well as all actions should be

renounced....."

 

 

Regards,

 

Sunder

 

 

 

 

advaitin, "ramvchandran" <rchandran@c...> wrote:

Please also note that "renunciation of

> all thoughts" implies 'Self-realization" because thoughts are the

> clouds which obstruct the light of wisdom.

>

>

> advaitin, "sunderh" <sunderh> wrote:

> > Namaste,

> >

> > The central theme of the Gita is NOT renunciation! It is

> > realisation of the SELF - the Immanent and the Transcendent.

> > Renunciation is the critical element in that process.

>

> >

> >

> >

> > advaitin, "ramvchandran" <rchandran@c...> wrote:

> > > Namaste:

> > >

> > > The central theme of Gita is the renunciation of all thoughts on

> the

> > > fruits of action and instead focus on the action. >

[Guest guest]

Namaste,

 

Shankara has devoted 4 pages before, and 1 page after, the verse

you have quoted, and I think you will find there his answer to your

objection! The Bhashya is at URL:

 

advaitinGita/Shankara1/gmbCH6.htm

 

[i had quoted excerpts from the same Bhashya for verse no. 4.]

 

There is also in the archives Swami Dayananda's [Arsha Vidya

Gurukulam] commentary on these verses.

 

If you feel that your doubt is not cleared by these, we can continue

the thread.

 

Regards,

 

Sunder

 

 

 

 

advaitin, Vinayak Lohani <vinayaklohani> wrote:

>

>

> Priya Sundar jee,

> You have written that sankara all actions should also be

renounced.But in the verse 6.1 its explicitly warned that complete

refrain from action is not yoga but only resignation of fruits of

those actions.

> anashritah Karmaphalam karya karma karoti yah

> sah Yogi ca sanyasi ca na niragniha ca akriyah

> Dhanyawad,

> Vinayak

> Vinayak

[Guest guest]

Namaste Sunderji:

 

Let me clarify my understanding of what I stated before. I want to

assure you that I have not intention to contradict Shankara. It seems

that my statements has unintentionally create the impression of

contradiction. As long as we live, we have to conduct our actions but

Yogis who possess the steadfast mind free themselves (liberation) from

the ill effects of actions and desires. For the perfect Yogi, the

action becomes spontaneous without creating the thoughts on the

consequences of the action. By renouncing all thoughts of

consequences, the Yogi's actions become converted into 'inaction.'

 

Let me give an example: When we try to learn to ride on the bicycle,

we have the fear about falling and getting injuries. We have doubts

whether we can ride the two wheeler bike without falling. I still

remember bike learning boyhood days. My elder brother who used to hold

the bike from behind, helping me to ride to give me the confidence

that I am protected by him all the time. After few days, he slowly

reduced his support and one day I suddenly noticed that I was riding

without him behind. Finally, I was finally convinced that I am not

likely to fall and after that time, my thoughts on 'falling from the

bike' completely disappeared. This change in attitude has transformed

the `action - riding the bike with thoughts on falling' into

`inaction- riding the bike without any thoughts on falling.'

Essentially by `renouncing the thoughts on the consequences of riding

the bike' bike riding became an enjoyable activity without fear and

doubts.

 

In other words, as long as we live, we have to perform our duties. The

yogi (sanyasi) performs his/her duties with full detachment to the

results where as the samsari due to attachment performs his/duties

with the thoughts on dual outcomes such as failure and success, good

and bad, happy and sorrow etc. When actions become spontaneous (just

as the blooming flowers, fruiting trees, etc) we can free our mind

from polluting thoughts and this is liberation and this is

self-realization. Earlier we discussed chapter 5 (True Renunciation)

where we spent quite a bit of time on verse 2.

The lord says, " The renunciation of works and their unselfish

performance both lead to the soul's salvation. But of the two, the

unselfish performance of works is better than their renunciation."

(Dr. Radhakrishnan's translation). Dr. Radhakrishnan also points out:

"The intention of Gita right through seems to be that the work to be

abandoned is selfish work which binds us to the chain of karma and not

all activity. We can not be saved by works alone but works are not

opposed to saving wisdom.

 

Finally, I want to thank you again for steering the Satsang with your

alternate explanation. Again you may or may not agree with me with

everything that I said here. It is equally likely that my perception

of Gita will likely change with greater reading, listening and

understanding. Hopefully with more participation and greater amount of

discussions we can certainly gain by clearing our doubts.

 

Warmest regards,

 

Ram Chandran

 

advaitin, "sunderh" <sunderh> wrote:

> Namaste Ramji,

>

> This is wholly in accord with Gita 6:2 & 4;

> 'sarva-sankalpa-sanyasi' .

>

> However, in you previous message, you stated one has to

 

focus

> on action alone. This is not the interpretation of Shankara, who

 

says:

> "When a yogin, keeping the mind steadfast, feels no attachment for

 

the

> objects of the senses......, nor thinks that he has to do any

> action-whether nitya [obligatory] or naimittika [obligatory and

> incidental] or kamya [done with a motive] or pratishiddha [forbidden

> by law]- regarding it has no use to him;.....The words 'renouncing

 

all

> thoughts' imply that all desires as well as all actions should be

> renounced....."

>

>

> Regards,

>

> Sunder

>

[Guest guest]

Namaste Ramji,

 

Shankara enjoyed being contradicted! So much so that he

anticipated objections, playing the role of 'puurva-pakshin'-s, so

that he could effectively counter them!

 

I think the seeming contradiction may be due to not

distinguishing at each step the word as applied to the 'aarurukshoH

muneH' or the 'yoga-aaruuDhaH'. As Shankara points out in the

introduction to the Gita chapter 6, the word yogi or sanyasi is

applied to the former 'only in a secondary sense'. For the latter, in

the absence of an ego, the actions are only 'seen' by 'others' as

'desireless actions'.

 

Thus, for a 'yogaaruuDha' the concepts of action or

renunciation are irrelevant. As you point out, the blooming of a

flower or ripening of a fruit just 'happens'.

 

Works can be opposed to 'saving wisdom' when they do not fall

in the category of 'sat-karma', another word for karma-yoga.

'sat-karmas' are those that are in accordance with 'dharma-shastras'

[shaastra-pramaaNam], and applies to the 'non-yogarudha'-s!

 

Couldn't agree with you more than in your concluding statement; as Sri

Krishna says: Gita 4:42

 

"Therefore, with the sword of wisdom cleave asunder thisw doubt of the

Self lying in the heart and born of ignorance, and resort to Yoga.

Arise, O Bharata!"

 

 

Regards,

 

Sunder

 

 

 

 

 

advaitin, "ramvchandran" <rchandran@c...> wrote:

>

> Let me clarify my understanding of what I stated before. I want to

> assure you that I have not intention to contradict Shankara. It

seems

> that my statements has unintentionally create the impression of

> contradiction.

> "The intention of Gita right through seems to be that the work to be

> abandoned is selfish work which binds us to the chain of karma and

not

> all activity. We can not be saved by works alone but works are not

> opposed to saving wisdom.

Again you may or may not agree with me with

> everything that I said here.

 

Hopefully with more participation and greater amount

of

> discussions we can certainly gain by clearing our doubts.

[Guest guest]

-

jagannath M

Monday, April 08, 2002 12:11

Question

 

 

I am Jagannath. I got the e-mail address from the website.

I request you to please answer my basic question on spirituality.

 

1). If we are all part of the God then why did we came to this world ?.

Our present state is according to our karma of last life. then I

want to KNOW is at the first time why did we came here?

Before that what is the our state ? and after getting Mukti what

will be our state?

 

 

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~response from Vivekananda Centre ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

Dear Jagannath

 

 

Very good question..... let us see what response our list can provide.

We do not promise that we will 'answer your question'.

But I am sure we will respond to your question

in a wide variety of ways.

 

jay Vivekananda Centre London

 

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

Namaste:

 

During one of Swami Chinmayananda's Vedantic discourses, a devotee

from the audiencce asked a similar question on the origin of 'Karma or

equivalantly, vasana.' Swamiji smiled at the person and said, "it is

a very good question and let me provide you the answer and please come

and see me at the end of the discourse." The devotee was very pleased

and went to see the swamiji after the discourse. Swamiji provided him

a pen and a paper and asked him to write the question in bold letters.

Swamiji further asked the devotee to fold the paper carefully and put

it in his pocket. The devotee obeyed swamiji and said, now let me hear

the answer.

 

Swamiji had even bigger smiles and now elaborated, "Look, my friend,

keep that paper safely and take that along with you when meet the God

and hand it over to Him; He will provide the answer!"

 

In conclusion, there can be no intellectually appealing (and logically

consistent) answer to this question. This question has no begining and

will never end (anAti). This is one of the favorite question of those

who have serious doubts about "Advaita."

 

warmest regards,

 

Ram Chandran

 

 

advaitin, "Vivekananda Centre" <vivekananda@b...> wrote:

>

> I am Jagannath. I got the e-mail address from the website.

> I request you to please answer my basic question on spirituality.

>

> 1). If we are all part of the God then why did we came to this

world ?.

> Our present state is according to our karma of last life. then

I

> want to KNOW is at the first time why did we came here?

> Before that what is the our state ? and after getting Mukti

what

> will be our state?

>

[Guest guest]

Shree Jagannath,

 

Here is my answer to your question based on my

understanding.

 

Your question involves some contraditions. "If we are

part of God then whey did we come into this world?" -

already assumes that you accept the notion that we are

part of God. God is the one who has no origin, if he

has - then we run into another question- whey did he

come into this world. Secondly, if we are part of God

and we came later to God as your question implies,

then he was incomplete without us as parts before we

came into this world. Which again puts limit to God

and God is no more God. If God is beginningless then

so are we. That is how Krishna starts his discourse in

Second Ch. of Geeta - There was never a time I was not

there nor you nor these kings in front of you and

there will never be a time when they will be absent,

etc.-

 

Not that I am evading the answer - but the question

itself need to be examined before validating the

answer. When one say before and later - these are

concepts of time. But time itslef was not there to

start with to talk about before and after. Hence the

question of when did my first karma stared is invalid

question since Vedanta prescribes to the correct

undersatnding - creation-sustanence and annihilation -

sR^ishhTi, sthiti and laya are not linear but cyclic -

in a cycle we cannot talk ahout a beginning - is it

not? Hence when and how and beginnings are all

answered as - anaadi - beginningless. That is one

reason the question is invalid.

 

Second reason is - your are asking a question and

expecting an intellectual answer to satify you. But

the very intellect that is asking the qustion and

another intellect that is providing the answer both

are in the realm of thoughts and thoughts are in the

realm of time- since time is gap between two

sequential thoughts. That which is beyond time is

beyond the intellect and one cannot provide an

intellecutal answer to your intellectual quesion - one

can provide it but that answer has no more relavence

since it is beyond time or anaadi and any answer is

invalid. Hence Vedanata is outright truthful - it

categorily says that there is no answer to your

question since it is inexplainable - anirvachaniiyam.

 

One way to look at it is when house on fire and you

are caught up in the fire, there is no point in

inquiring at that time - how did the fire start. What

was the beginning etc. One can ask all these

questions once we get out of the house safely - but in

this case once we get out of the house there is no

more quesions becuase one finds that there is no house

nor fire to ask.

 

Another example is like asking when did Gold become

ring and bangle etc. If you ask that question to Gold

- It will only answer - I never became ring or bangle

- I was gold and I am gold and I shall be gold. I am

by myself -What you call ring, bangle etc are all my

glories - pasyam me yogamaisvaram - look at my glory

says Krishna.

 

Crteation is beginning less. Hence one cannot say how

and why -One can come up with theories but those are

only to satisfy an intellect to some degree. Honest

answer is - there is no beginning and the question is

invalid from absolute point just as the quetion of

when gold became a ring? -

 

 

 

Hari Om!

Sadananda

 

 

 

 

 

--- Vivekananda Centre <vivekananda

wrote:

> -

> jagannath M

> Monday, April 08, 2002 12:11

> Question

>

>

> I am Jagannath. I got the e-mail address from the

> website.

> I request you to please answer my basic question

> on spirituality.

>

> 1). If we are all part of the God then why did we

> came to this world ?.

> Our present state is according to our karma of

> last life. then I

> want to KNOW is at the first time why did we

> came here?

> Before that what is the our state ? and after

> getting Mukti what

> will be our state?

>

>

>

> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~response from Vivekananda Centre

> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

>

> Dear Jagannath

>

>

> Very good question..... let us see what response

> our list can provide.

> We do not promise that we will 'answer your

> question'.

> But I am sure we will respond to your question

> in a wide variety of ways.

>

> jay Vivekananda Centre London

>

>

>

>

> [Non-text portions of this message have been

> removed]

>

>

 

 

 

 

Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax

http://taxes./

[Guest guest]

DEAR JAGANNATH, OUT OF IGNORANCE[ZERO] WE FORGOT OUR REAL SELF, THIS IS

TERMED MAYA[THAT WHICH IS NOT] MAYA GAVE BIRTH TO THE WORLD OF FORMS AND

NAMES...THIS IS LIKE SAYING A BARREN WOMAN GAVE BIRTH TO A SON.......EACH OF

US IN OUR IGNORANCE OF REALITY IS THAT BARREN WOMANS SON, OUT OF OUR MINDS

WE KEEP CREATING MORE AND MORE IGNORANCE BY CHASING AFTER HAPPENESS IN A

WORLD WHICH HAS NO REAL TRUE EXISTENCE. AS TRUTH WE HAVE NEVER COME OR GONE

ANYWHERE, NEVER TAKEN A BIRTH OR EVER DIE, IT IS ALL LIKE A DREAM WE HAVE IN

THE NIGHT AND DREAM WE ARE A GREAT KING, WHEN WE AWAKE IN THE MORNING WE

KNOW CLEARLY THAT WE WERE NOT THE GREAT KING OF LAST NIGHTS DREAM.....IT WAS

ALL THE MINDS IMAGINATION, SAME WAY WE ARE DREAMING THAT WE HAVE BEEN BORN

AND WILL DIE AND THAT MY NAME IS SUCH AND I AM THIS FORM, THIS IS THE SLEEP

AND DREAM OF MAYA AND IS NOT ARE REAL SELF..

ETERNALY WE ARE ALWAYS WITH OUT STATE, HE IS STATELESS...ALL STATES COME AND

GO ON HE...LIKE A MOVIE SCREEN THAT MANY PICTURES AND SCENES COME ON BUT

WHEN THE MOVIE IS OVER THE SCREEN REMAINS CLEAR WITHOUT ANY TAINT OF ANY

PICTURE OR SCENE REMAINING THAT SCREEN IS LIKE ARE REAL TRUE SELF WE ARE

NEVER EFFECTED BY ANYTHING THAT APPEARS.

SINCE WE ARE ALWAYS THE SAME BEFORE AND AFTER IS ALL MEANINGLESS FROM THE

POINT OF VIEW OF A REALIZED ONE...

 

PEACE AND JOY......JAYA

 

 

---

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).

Version: 6.0.344 / Virus Database: 191 - Release 2/04/2002

[Guest guest]

Namaste.

 

I am afraid I should point out the following:

 

1. From the advaitic angle, your question is wrong. A wrong

question cannot be answered. Trying to answer will only confound you

more.

 

2. To an advaitin, there is nothing but God - nothing else (This

includes himself!) So, the question of God having a part and that

part going somewhere else does not arise.

 

3. The thought of birth, death, rebirth, this world, that world,

karma, karmaphala etc. - is due to not understanding (2) above.

 

4. Understanding (2) involves systematic study. All the same, it is

simple too. Please pray without any let up and look for a guru. In

the meantime, endeavour to read books on advaita from the very

beginning. Start with an open mind. If you won't misunderstand me,

don't think that you already know something and, therefore, can begin

just anywhere. You will definitely be blessed and all your doubts

will be cleared.

 

5. Lastly, according to advaita, you are already liberated. Only

that you don't realise that. Understanding (2) is knowing that you

are free.

 

Madathil Nair

____________________

 

advaitin, "Vivekananda Centre" <vivekananda@b...> wrote:

> -

> jagannath M

> Monday, April 08, 2002 12:11

> Question

>

>

> I am Jagannath. I got the e-mail address from the website.

> I request you to please answer my basic question on spirituality.

>

> 1). If we are all part of the God then why did we came to this

world ?.

> Our present state is according to our karma of last life.

then I

> want to KNOW is at the first time why did we came here?

> Before that what is the our state ? and after getting Mukti

what

> will be our state?

>

>

[Guest guest]

-

"kuntimaddi sadananda" <kuntimaddisada

<advaitin>; <vivekananda

Tuesday, April 16, 2002 11:52

Re: Re: Question

> Shree Jagannath,

>

> Here is my answer to your question based on my

> understanding.

>

> Your question involves some contraditions. "If we are

> part of God then whey did we come into this world?" -

<snip>.....

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

 

Dear Sadanandji

 

Technically this cannot be an answer - at best it can be called a

response. You are falling in the trap of answering a question

which you have qualified as invalid.

 

Spiritual dialogue is great fun..... but we have to make sure

it does not degenerate into mere mental gymnastics.

It has to be tangible - it has to be experienced first hand.

Mere mental acceptance has very limited milage.

 

What do the list members think?

 

jay : )

Vivekananda Centre London

[Guest guest]

Respected JAYA,

 

If we are already Brahman (TRUTH) and if this world is MAYA or an

Illusion then why should we study veda-vedanta and do sadhana or

tapasya? where is the need to do Yoga or Karma or Dharma?

 

As all those Sadhana marga are all product of the world are they all

illusion or False?

 

Kindly explain to me.

 

Bowing with reverence

Suresh

 

 

advaitin, "JAYA" <jaya@b...> wrote:

> DEAR JAGANNATH, OUT OF IGNORANCE[ZERO] WE FORGOT OUR REAL SELF,

THIS IS

> TERMED MAYA[THAT WHICH IS NOT] MAYA GAVE BIRTH TO THE WORLD OF

FORMS AND

> NAMES...THIS IS LIKE SAYING A BARREN WOMAN GAVE BIRTH TO A

SON.......EACH OF

> US IN OUR IGNORANCE OF REALITY IS THAT BARREN WOMANS SON, OUT OF

OUR MINDS

> WE KEEP CREATING MORE AND MORE IGNORANCE BY CHASING AFTER HAPPENESS

IN A

> WORLD WHICH HAS NO REAL TRUE EXISTENCE. AS TRUTH WE HAVE NEVER COME

OR GONE

> ANYWHERE, NEVER TAKEN A BIRTH OR EVER DIE, IT IS ALL LIKE A DREAM

WE HAVE IN

> THE NIGHT AND DREAM WE ARE A GREAT KING, WHEN WE AWAKE IN THE

MORNING WE

> KNOW CLEARLY THAT WE WERE NOT THE GREAT KING OF LAST NIGHTS

DREAM.....IT WAS

> ALL THE MINDS IMAGINATION, SAME WAY WE ARE DREAMING THAT WE HAVE

BEEN BORN

> AND WILL DIE AND THAT MY NAME IS SUCH AND I AM THIS FORM, THIS IS

THE SLEEP

> AND DREAM OF MAYA AND IS NOT ARE REAL SELF..

> ETERNALY WE ARE ALWAYS WITH OUT STATE, HE IS STATELESS...ALL STATES

COME AND

> GO ON HE...LIKE A MOVIE SCREEN THAT MANY PICTURES AND SCENES COME

ON BUT

> WHEN THE MOVIE IS OVER THE SCREEN REMAINS CLEAR WITHOUT ANY TAINT

OF ANY

> PICTURE OR SCENE REMAINING THAT SCREEN IS LIKE ARE REAL TRUE SELF

WE ARE

> NEVER EFFECTED BY ANYTHING THAT APPEARS.

> SINCE WE ARE ALWAYS THE SAME BEFORE AND AFTER IS ALL MEANINGLESS

FROM THE

> POINT OF VIEW OF A REALIZED ONE...

>

> PEACE AND JOY......JAYA

>

>

> ---

> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.

> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).

> Version: 6.0.344 / Virus Database: 191 - Release 2/04/2002