Austerities, Conditioning and Liberation

[Guest guest]

Namaste,

 

I am cc'ing this reply to without revealing your

identity, as the discussion may be relevant/useful to some other people. Hope

you won't mind.

 

* * *

 

Background for others:

 

This young man is an advaitin and interested in self-knowledge. He is highly

attached to Aadi Shankara. He highly regards those learning and chanting Vedas.

He also highly regards those who renounce material world, live simple lives in

simple settings and take up austere lifestyles. He has a negative opinion on

tantra and, to some extent, on rituals that are not " Vedic " in his view.

 

He mentioned to me once that knowledge taught by someone not following

" austerities " is useless. He thought that austerities are vital to getting

self-knowledge. His idea of austerity is living a simple life in simple settings

with maximum isolation from the material world.

 

I argued: " usually austerities are performed by those getting self-knowledge,

but austerities are neither necessary nor sufficient to get self-knowledge. A

self-realized person may be living a seemingly opulent or even debased

lifestyle, but his mind may be detached. For example, Girish was highly regarded

by Ramakrishna and Vivekananda, but he associated with drunkards and prostitutes

and ended up transforming many people who had no hope otherwise. Janaka lived as

a king in the middle of opulence, but was as detached as any rishi. Thus, what

kind of austerities one seems to follow externally may or may not have a bearing

on one's knowledge and level of spiritual evolution. Whether and what

austerities one follows externally is not the main factor, but one's mental

state is what matters. How attached one is to one's actions and their fruits

decides how free one is and that decides how complete one's knowledge is. If one

has a rina with some drunkards and nature takes one to a club to give something

to a few drunkards, a liberated man may even go to a club and interact with

them. The issue is not *what* one does, but with what mental attitude one does

it and how much attachment one has to the results. I am not saying that you

should do such things, but realize that some realized people may do it. Do not

dismiss people based on external factors. Follow your path, but have respect for

all paths. "

 

He was taken aback and protested that I have been too influenced by " tantra " . He

sent a few quotes from Srimad Bhagavad Gita to support his view on austerities

(see below). I will now reply to his mail quoted below.

 

* * *

 

Sri Krishna said in 18.4 quoted below that sacrifice, giving and austerity are

not to be given up ever. They never become an obstacle to self-realization.

Though some philosophers said all actions should be rejected as they bind one,

Krishna made it very clear that some actions should never be given up and they

do not bind one when performing without an attachment to the fruits of the

actions.

 

Anyone who is not yet liberated obviously has several pending kaarmik debts.

Until they are paid off, Nature will not let that person become free. So one

needs to somehow pay those debts back, without incurring newer debts. Thus, the

idea of some philosophers that you need to give up all action is illogical. If

you give up all action, you can never pay off pending debts. No wonder Krishna

says some actions should never be given up. Even Vasishtha teaches at the

beginning of Yoga Vaasishtham that action and knowledge are the two wings with

which the bird of soul flies off and becomes liberated.

 

But your idea of acceptable actions seems to be to sit in a small hut in a

secluded place and do external austerities. That can help one control the mind

and not incur new kaarmik debts, but how does it help one pay off previous

kaarmik debts? Through austerity, one can pay off some kinds of karmik debts,

but some firm karmaik debts require one to interact with others. So, interacting

with others and giving things back to others are needed to pay off all debts and

become free.

 

After all, Sri Krishna included sacrifice and giving, in addition to

austerities, when listing the actions that must never be given up! One should

sacrifice one's interests and give to others. One should do that without

worrying about the end result of the action.

 

* * *

 

Now, the question is who to give and what to give. What is the " obligatory

action " referred below?

 

That can change from one person to another. Swadharma, or the right thing to do

for an individual, is decided for each individual based on previous mental

conditioning and previous kaarmik debts. One of the goals of sadhana is find

one's swadharma and discharge it. One will never fully and clearly know one's

correct dharma. As one discharges some of one's responsibilities, as one's ego

becomes less, as one's attachment to the fruits of one's actions becomes less,

one becomes purer. As one becomes purer, one's understanding of swadharma

becomes clearer.

 

One person's dharma may be kill his gurus, brothers etc (Arjuna). One person's

dharma may be to live in a palace and rule a big kingdom (Janaka). One person's

dharma may be to spend time with drunkards and prostitutes and slowly teach them

about god in a way they can understand (Girish). One person's dharma may be to

roam the whole country or the world, debate with others and establish knowledge

of Adwaita (Aadi Shankara and Vivekananda). There is no absolute right or wrong.

What is right action for one person may be wrong action for another. For

example, Swami Chandrasekhara Saraswati, an undoubtedly liberated soul,

considered crossing ocean a sin based on tradition and refused to leave India's

shores. But people like Swami Vivekananda and Srila Prabhupada crossed oceans to

teach sublime knowledge in foreign lands. What each one did was right for him.

 

* * *

 

Given that one's own dharma may be *anything*, it is important to not close

one's mind to some actions. If one controls the mind's pre-occupation with

self-gratification, controls ego, if one develops the ability to do what one can

do for others without expecting anything in return, then Nature will slowly take

one towards more and more aspects of one's own dharma.

 

One who has strong preconceived notions of right and wrong and closing the mind

to some things may end up running away from one's own dharma due to the aversion

to some actions!

 

Sri Krishna clarified in verse 18.10 below that one should not dislike a

disagreeable work or be attached to an agreeable work. If one is fascinated by

living in a secluded place or doing specific external austerities (what you call

" the saatvic austerities " ) and if one finds certain things disagreeable (e.g.

going to a club, interacting with practitioners of a specific path, living in

opulent conditions) and ends up avoiding disagreeable work and picking agreeable

work, one is violating what Krishna said in 18.10.

 

If one says " I will sacrifice, but only X and Y; I will give, but only X and Y

and only to A and B; I will do austerities, but only X and Ys " , that is

reflective of one's mis-conceptions and effectively one has an attachment to the

results of actions and perhaps to the actions themselves. That is not saattwik

renunciation.

 

Sattwik renunciation as taught by Sri Krishna below is one where one feels

comfortable engaging in any acts of sacrifice, giving and self-restraint,

without any attachment to the results.

 

All interaction with other objects of the field of duality involves give and

take. Actions where one is oblivious to what one receives and focuses only on

giving to others, will free one from kaarmik debts without incurring new debts.

If one lives in a palace and mentally enjoys the comforts there, one is

" receiving " something from the external world. That will make one incur new

kaarmik debts. On the other hand, if one lives in a palace, lives in great

comforts and yet manages to keep the mind disengaged and oblivious to the

comforts, then one is not getting anything from the external world. The idea is

to stop receiving things from others and yet keep giving things to others.

Eventually all the debts will be finished off.

 

Giving up specific things because one thinks they are bad is not saattwik

renunciation. Giving up attachment to the results even as one engages in actions

and giving up likes and dislikes at the mental level is saattwik renunciation.

Sacrificing self-interests and giving things to others, while restraining the

mind from its preoccupation with self-gratificatiton and without any attachment

to the result is saattwik renunciation. Giving whatever one is in a position to

give and someone else is in a position to receive, with total oblivion to what

one receives in return, is saattwik renunciation. Notions like " I need to avoid

this action because it is disagreeable " and " I should somehow do this action

because this is agreeable " are blockages.

 

If one avoids such notions, gives more and more to others, becomes more and more

oblivious to what one receives in return and one's ego becomes less and less,

then one will become clearer and clearer regarding what one needs to do and

slowly marches on the path to self-knowledge.

 

* * *

 

Read the story of Choodala and Sikhidhwaja in Yoga Vaasishtham, which was taught

by Maharshi Vasishtha to Lord Rama to impart self-knowledge to Lord Rama. King

Sikhidhwaja leaves his kingdom, goes to a forest, lives in a hut and does

austerities for many years and yet does not realize Self. His wife Choodala

remains in the palace and yet becomes realized. She later comes to her husband

and helps him in his effort to realize Self. She talks to him about physical

austerities vs mental attitude and sinternal transformation. I suggest reading

and pondering that story.

 

* * *

 

Bottomline: Knowledge of someone following great external austerities and yet

having a lot of mental conditioning in the form of likes, dislikes, pride, sense

of doership, expectations from others etc, may still be incorrect as one is not

yet realized. It may be " mere information " as you say. On the other hand,

knowledge of someone not following any external austerities and yet having no

ego and no mental conditioning may be perfect.

 

Of course, I have nothing against austerities. They are often helpful. But,

realize that the true renunciation is at the mental level and external

austerities do not guarantee it. Combine external austerities and rituals with

constant self-examination and contemplation. There is no single path. Follow the

path you like, but somehow engineer an internal transformation. While you work

on that, it is useful to have healthy respect for various paths and various

masters, instead of looking down upon some people (e.g. those who do not follow

" saatvic austerities " ).

 

Best regards,

Narasimha

 

Do a Short Homam Yourself: http://www.VedicAstrologer.org/homam

Do Pitri Tarpanas Yourself: http://www.VedicAstrologer.org/tarpana

Spirituality:

Free Jyotish lessons (MP3): http://vedicastro.home.comcast.net

Free Jyotish software (Windows): http://www.VedicAstrologer.org

Jyotish writings: JyotishWritings

Sri Jagannath Centre (SJC) website: http://www.SriJagannath.org

 

 

--- On Sun, 10/25/09, <deleted> wrote:

 

Dear PVR,

For the sake of not limiting our discussion to a mere argument, I present

the below verses from SBG-XVIII chapter. Verse 5, 6 settles the matter we

discussed. Verse 5 discusses what is to be done (for self-knowledge as the

goal) and 6 says that even those good actions should be without attachment.There

is no where it is encouraged, supported or rationalized one to engage in

Nishiddha Karma. However verse 9 can be very easily misunderstood by making one

engage in Nishiddha and saying that it is Lords wish and that it was done

without any attachment.

 

So to me knowledge (as far as self knowledge is concerned) without the

saatvic austerities is mere information, it cannot sprout. We see that a lot in

western philosophy. Based on your time kindly see atleast 4, 5,6,9 below (Swami

Sivananda's true translation of the few verses).

 

<deleted>

 

XVIII

Kaamyaanaam karmanaam nyaasam sannyaasam kavayoviduh;

Sarvakarmaphalatyaagam praahustyaagam vichakshanaah.

The Blessed Lord said:

2. The sages understand Sannyas to be the renunciation of action with

desire; the wise

declare the abandonment of the fruits of all actions as Tyaga.

 

Tyaajyam doshavadityeke karma praahurmaneeshinah;

Yajnadaanatapah karma na tyaajyamiti chaapare.

3. Some philosophers declare that all actions should be abandoned as an

evil, while others

declare that acts of gift, sacrifice and austerity should not be

relinquished.

 

Nishchayam shrinu me tatra tyaage bharatasattama;

Tyaago hi purushavyaaghra trividhah samprakeertitah.

4. Hear from Me the conclusion or the final truth about this abandonment, O

best of the

Bharatas; abandonment, verily, O best of men, has been declared to be of

three kinds!

 

Yajnadaanatapah karma na tyaajyam kaaryameva tat;

Yajno daanam tapashchaiva paavanaani maneeshinaam.

5. Acts of sacrifice, gift and austerity should not be abandoned, but should

be performed;

sacrifice, gift and also austerity are the purifiers of the wise.

 

Etaanyapi tu karmaani sangam tyaktwaa phalaani cha;

Kartavyaaneeti me paartha nishchitam matamuttamam.

6. But even these actions should be performed leaving aside attachment and

the desire for

rewards, O Arjuna! This is My certain and best conviction.

 

Niyatasya tu sannyaasah karmano nopapadyate;

Mohaattasya parityaagas taamasah parikeertitah.

7. Verily, the renunciation of obligatory action is improper; the

abandonment of the same

from delusion is declared to be Tamasic.

 

Duhkhamityeva yat karma kaayakleshabhayaat tyajet;

Sa kritwaa raajasam tyaagam naiva tyaagaphalam labhet.

8. He who abandons action on account of the fear of bodily trouble (because

it is painful), he

does not obtain the merit of renunciation by doing such Rajasic

renunciation.

 

Kaaryamityeva yatkarma niyatam kriyate’rjuna;

Sangam tyaktwaa phalam chaiva sa tyaagah saattwiko matah.

9. Whatever obligatory action is done, O Arjuna, merely because it ought to

be done,

abandoning attachment and also the desire for reward, that renunciation is

regarded as Sattwic!

 

Na dweshtyakushalam karma kushale naanushajjate;

Tyaagee sattwasamaavishto medhaavee cchinnasamshayah.

10. The man of renunciation, pervaded by purity, intelligent and with his

doubts cut

asunder, does not hate a disagreeable work nor is he attached to an

agreeable one.

 

Na hi dehabhritaa shakyam tyaktum karmaanyasheshatah;

Yastu karmaphalatyaagi sa tyaageetyabhidheeyate.

11. Verily, it is not possible for an embodied being to abandon actions

entirely; but he who

relinquishes the rewards of actions is verily called a man of renunciation.