daivayoga, chance, karma & fate

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~
Namasté

This post asks questions about the following:

daiva दैव - destiny , fate , chance, divine power or will
daivayoga दैवयोग - the juncture of fate, fortune, or chance ; and/or the dispensation of fate ( this is also written daivayogaḥ)
yadṛcchā यदृच्छा -spontaneity, accident, chance or even self-will ; some may say yadṛcchayā which means by accident or unexpectedly.
saṁśaya संशय - uncertaintyChance, destiny, providence, divine intervention, saṃcita¹ karma and prārabhdha¹ karma ; the present selection of an action and its results either immediate or in the future. All these points of reference and influence are found in this life.

How does one know where the fruit of an action comes from? Is the result based upon the current effort expended, or is it the fruit ( result ) of a past action? Is it by chance or ~luck~ ? How does one sort this out?


Even Kṛṣṇa informs us in Bhāgavad gītā ( chapter 4, 17th śloka) - Unfathomable is the course of action. The word He uses is gahana गहन which means impenetrable , inexplicable , hard to understand (deep , dense , thick , impervious). IMO this unfathomable includes the complexity of where an action may stem from i.e.

ādhyāmika आध्यामिक - relating to self or soul.
ādhibhautika आधिभौतिक - belonging or relating to created beings or the surroundings of beings ~society~ .
ādhidaivika आधिदैविक - relating or preceeding from gods or spirits; (from adhideva) , relating to or proceeding from gods or from spirits ; proceeding from the influence of the atmosphere or graha (planets) , proceeding from divine or supernatural agenciesAdd to this a POV from the Yoga Vāsiṣṭa¹ . It talks of kākatālīya¹ on many occasions. That kākatālīya is the story of the crow and the palm tree. It goes like this:
A crow alights (lands) on the top of a coconut palm tree. Upon its touch-down at the top, at that very moment, a ripe coconut detaches from its branch and falls to the ground. Two mutually exclusive events ( ~unrelated~) occur. An observer views this event in the same space and time and sees a relationship, yet in truth there was none. That is both events were independent of each other.

We go through life and perform an action - sometimes that action brings great results, other times failure, grief, or little results. What then is occurring? Kākatālīya ? Chance? We as humans look for the connection, the inter-dependence of actions and sometimes they just may not be there.
What part of past karma ( if at all) is coming to bear? How does one think of this in their daily life?

Any opinions or views on this matter?

praṇām

words

saṃcita संचित (some write this saṇcita) - piled together , heaped up , gathered , collected , accumulated ; In this application, it means the sum total of all past actions ; also note the following word: saṃcit संचित् to agree together , be unanimous
prārabhdha प्रारब्ध commenced , begun , undertaken; one who has commenced or begun. Use here, in this application , it is that karma coming to fruition now
Vāsiṣṭa ( also written vāśiṣṭha) means owning or belonging to the sage vasiṣṭha
kākatālīya काकतालीय is kāka ( a crow) + tālī ( a tree) +ya (joining) : after the manner of the crow and the palm-fruit

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~
Namasté



daiva दैव - destiny , fate , chance, divine power or will
daivayoga दैवयोग - the juncture of fate, fortune, or chance ; and/or the dispensation of fate ( this is also written daivayogaḥ)
yadṛcchā यदृच्छा -spontaneity, accident, chance or even self-will ; some may say yadṛcchayā which means by accident or unexpectedly.
saṁśaya संशय - uncertaintyChance, destiny, providence, divine intervention, saṃcita¹ karma and prārabhdha¹ karma ; the present selection of an action and its results either immediate or in the future. All these points of reference and influence are found in this life.






A man last year walked into an auto dealership to look at a car to buy. While standing next to a car he was viewing a jet engine that fell off a plane ( overhead) crashed through the roof and killed him upon impact.
A friend in New york ( Sept 11th, 2001) is not allowed to board a plane that would take her back to California. She is mad and upset with the Airline. That same plane crashes into the Towers in New York City.Examples of daivayoga दैवयोग - the juncture of fate, fortune, or chance -or- prārabhdha¹ karma ? Or are they one and the same?



praṇām

[amra]

I read a story once about a man who worked as a museum curator. He had many exhibitions in his museum, some lasted a few hours others days others months and years. He always had many exhibitions ongoing at the same time. Some of these exhibitions were forced upon the curator from outside agencies and due to his weak will he capitulated and ran the exhibitions. Some of the exhibitions he ran because it was his nature to prefer these exhibits. Now this curator became depressed and unhappy because these people from outside were forcing him to run these exhibits, that he had no wish to run to compensate he became slightly deluded and thought that he had actually originated these external exhibits and thought he liked them. Instead of managing this external exhibits and the people behind them, he prefered to go into a sort of deluded sleep.

Here is the relevant part to this post of my story that I heard from someone. The curator had a manager who was very compassionate to all his staff. Now to all the curators exhibits that were his own, this manager arranged and organised with scientific precision where each item must be and for how long it must be in a specific place. When the curator put up a certain piece of furniture or an old painting the manager would decide for how long they would be there and also who could come and see them The manager who was connected with absolutely everyone, even arranged for only well-to-do people who had an affinity with the piece displayed by the curator to come and see the pieces. Thus the curators own exhibits were ruled by order and attracted like influences, due to the influence of the most benevolent manager.

On the other hand the exhibitions that were enforced from outside were subject to many problems. First of all, because the curator did not put his heart into these exhibits many things used to fall and break. The exhibits were unpredictable. The Manager did not interfere with these exhibits he let them run how they wanted. These exhibits attracted all types of riff-raff. Drunks drug addicts and various other unpredictable people. Some people just come in to see the exhibits because they wanted to get out the cold. All in all people saw these exhibits not because they had an affinity to these exhibits but due to some chance coincidence.

Another important point of this marvellous story is that the exhibits that were forced on the curator from outside, were very short in duration whereas the exhibits that were essential to him, they lasted for a long time. The sad part of this story is that the exhibits that were essential to the curator the ones he liked, were in the centre of the museum, surrounded by the other exhibits that the external forces had forced on him. People who wanted to see the CUrators real exhibits had to pass through all his fake ones. And the tragedy is that people or influences that were meant to reach his true exhibits were sometimes deflected away by the false ones.

This story has a happy ending, the Curator was sent on a 'training course' by his manager. He was made known of this by the managers personal assistant who is based in the centre of the museum. This course was run by several of the managers close aquantances. They taught the curator ways in which to manage the external influences, the organisation of the museum, and the 'people' who walked through the museum. After this 'training' the curator kept the external influences under control and allowed the people who wanted to see his real exhibits to be exposed to them.

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~
Namasté


I read a story once about a man who worked as a museum curator.

An excellent post amra, thank you.

praṇām

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

Namasté

If we look back to the original question on this post, it is asking


How does one know where the fruit of an action comes from? Is the result based upon the current effort expended, or is it the fruit ( result ) of a past action? Is it by chance or ~luck~ ? How does one sort this out?

Here is another POV one can consider. From where does my question come from? From the Bhāgavad gītā . Kṛṣṇa says the following in the Bhāgavad gītā (chapter 2, 47th śloka)
karmaṇi evādhikāras te
mā phalesu kadācana
mā karma-phala-hetur bhūr
mā te saṅgo'stv akarmaṇi
This says, you certainly (eva) have ādhikāra¹ (claim , right , privilege, control) of your (te or ti) karmaṇi¹ (of your actions) , but never or not (mā) of its fruits (phalesu) .
The remaining words say in general live not for the fruits of action, nor attach yourself to inaction.

This says you control the selection of your actions, but you do not control the potency or the result on how this action may turn out ( strong, weak, successful, meager, unsuccessful, etc). That is the
crux of my question overall from the 1st posting.

Lets assume there are a few areas of influence to the result of an action. I offered 6 or 7 ( I am sure there can be more):

The Components
Chance, destiny, providence, divine intervention, saṃcita¹ karma (the aggregate of all karma up to that point) , prārabhdha¹ karma (actions
coming to fruition in this life), kriyāmana karma ( seeds of actions that are currently being placed i.e. net new actions).

For simplicity lets remove one component - saṃcita¹ karma (the aggregate of all karma up to that point). Why ? IMO this is who you
are as of today, the sum total of all your past choices that make you, well ...you. If we take out saṃcita karma , then we have 6 components.

Now, again to add some clarity ( I hope) lets keep it simple ; for this discussion lets assume the following:

Each reason for the result (phala or fruit) of an action is mutually exclusive . That means a result is caused by one component and one component only i.e. say chance and nothing else.
Each component have equal probabilities - that is, there are 6 componentsand each carry a probability of 16.6% of being the core reason for an end results potency (16.6% X 6 = 100%).Lets also define the potencies

Power: strong, middling (meager) and weak (weak also means no apparent result);
Quality: the result can be Favorable ( positive) and Unfavorable (negative) or Neutral neither favorable or unfavorable.
So one can have a strong positive result ( Winning the lottery for $1 million) ; Weak yet positive result ( wins a portion
of the lottery for $1 dollar). Like that, the variation can change for each result.Now can look at the number of permutations¹ & combinations that are possible.

Combinations
6 possible components + 3 power levels + 3 quality levels . For this view I will combine(6 possible components + 3 power levels) = 9 component-power levels. The 9 then canthen give a result in 3 different quality levels (favorable, unfavorable or neutral). If we look
at it this way, there are 84 possible combinations¹ or origins that can occur from one action.
Examples of combinations using this approach:

The fruit of an action is caused by Chance - that chance is powerful, and also gives a favorable result.
The fruit of an action is caused by Chance - that chance is powerful, and also gives an unfavorable result
The fruit of an action is caused by Chance - that chance is powerful, yet only gives a neutral result
This approach would then apply for Chance that is middling ( or meager) but gives a favorable, unfavorable or neutral resultWhen you add all the combinations up - we would count 84 different ways the fruit of an action may have come into being.

This IMHO is why this subject seems so interesting ( to me). It is my opinion amra, gives us a clue to the answer in his post # 3 above.

praṇām

words

ādhikāra अधिकार authority, rule , administration , jurisdiction , claim , right privilege , ownership
mā मा - nor, not , neither
te for iti इति - as you know ( this is my view only and not taken from any author).
karmaṇi कर्मणि - connected with or being in the action
phala फल - fruit, benefit, consequence , effect , result , gain or loss , reward or punishment , advantage or disadvantage.
saṃcita संचित(some write this saṇcita) - piled together , heaped up , gathered , collected , accumulated ; In this application, it meams the sum total of all past actions ; also note the following word: saṃcit संचित्to agree together , be unanimous
84 possible combinations - the math (6+3)!/ [3! x (9-3)!]
Permutations
6 possible components + 3 power levels + 3 quality levels = 479,001,600 permutations that can result (12 factorialed or 12!)
Yet this approach seems unfair. A permutation is just the different ways set of events or objects can be arranged so they are not repeated i.e. a different order.
Example: ABC can be arranged as BCA, or CAB or as BAC, etc. yet the basic ABC original letters are not new, just re-arranged.
Hence permutations are not the proper fit for this conversation.

[vcindiana]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

Namasté





Dear Yajavan:
It is interesting you like numbers and math and like to play with these. My take is God’s view has to be beyond numbers. The chance thing you describe is almost daily occurrence; most of us see both good and bad stuffs. Last month a very good friend of mine was diagnosed as having rare lung disease and she is facing a lung transplant. My young b in law was diagnosed to have brain tumor and recently died leaving a young family. My s in law in her 40s developed breast cancer and died within 2 years of the diagnosis. 10 year old very healthy boy from a ‘happy family’ that I know went to bed and did not wake up in the morning. All these people were nice people and also were religious. There are so many of these kinds of real stories affecting real people. Bad Chance? Bad fate? Bad Karma ? Also some good things do occur, like so many people survived in disasters like 9/11, tsunami, etc.. . I get exposed to so many lethal bacteria and viruses. I am still alive. Thank God!! . Good Chance? Good fate? Good karma? Etc

I found the answers in BG 2: 47 which I consider the Greatest Commandment by God written by Vyasa. Geeta‘s simplified message is to do Swadharmic Action without seeking fruit of action.
What I see is God according to Geeta taking a great risk in giving us full right/freedom to do whatever action; this could be good and bad. It is downright dangerous. But there is a purpose. The first two lines of this verse are very connected. evādhikāras te mā phalesu kadācana these are not separable. Geeta is saying Swadharma actions are to based not on fruit of action. Actions based on fruit of action are reward/result oriented and are CONDITIONAL. But Geeta says do actions with no reward meaning do actions unconditionally. What are unconditional actions? These are the actions of sacrificial in nature. These are the ones I pay due attention, I feel the responsibility, I put our mind and heart into these, and it costs me something, usually three commodities most precious to me – my time, my energy and my money. Sacrificial actions do not carry any karmic baggage. Beautiful name for the sacrificial action is LOVE.
Love does not manifest without freedom, Geeta knows that when it says “evādhikāras”. It takes the tremendous risk. Tsunami happens; people get diseases, air plane crashes, etc. If God, not giving freedom and starts controlling all these natural actions it becomes easier for me to manipulate Him. For things that happen in nature (Chance/fate) God knows them, but He purposely stays away telling us it is “unfathomable”. According to Geeta, Swadharmic actions with full of Love, Bhavana and sacrifice melt Karmas away, which is equavent to to Akarma or Inaction.
Love.........VC

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

Namasté VC,
thank you for your post , you write:




What I see is God according to Geeta taking a great risk in giving us full right/freedom to do whatever action; this could be good and bad. It is downright dangerous.

Can you help me understand what risk the Lord has? As I see it 'risk' is when you do not know the outcome of an event. What is there that the Lord does not know? Today, tomorrow or a million years from this moment (omniscience¹)? A blade of grass doe not move without His knowing.


Recall what the Bhāgavad gītā informs us in Chapter 3, 27th & 28th śloka-s. It is the guna-s acting upon and within the guna-s. This must be considered when one considers 'chance' and our actions. We choose the action and how this unfolds and the potency of the results is not our choice , yet many think it is.

Yet - this is where the math helps... it only allows us to try and track and understand nature a bit better. Like any tool it has its strengths and weaknesses.


praṇām


references
Omniscience HDF post if one is interested: http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=2363

[vcindiana]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

Namasté VC,
thank you for your post , you write:

Can you help me understand what risk the Lord has? As I see it 'risk' is when you do not know the outcome of an event. What is there that the Lord does not know? Today, tomorrow or a million years from this moment (omniscience¹)? A blade of grass doe not move without His knowing.



Dear Yajavan: I wish there is the word “RISK” in Geeta, perhaps it is implied in this verse (2:47) which I consider the greatest commandment to all humankind. Help me please, if you can find an equivalent word in Sanskrit or in any Indian language.
Don’t you think God has taken tremendous risk in giving the right/freedom when Geeta says “You CERTAINLY have the right “? What if He has not given the right, then all the actions will be at his commands. We all will be just puppets. We will be like robots or just some mechanical things. He can cure cancer. He can stop Tsunami. Reminds me of Santa clause, we need to be good boys and girls. We do not have to sweat, food will automatically drop on our dinner plates .We do not have to drive, and God does all the driving. etc etc ..etc... (I know Atanu will remind me that I am not a doer, let me come to that later)
Don’t you think by granting full rights to us God takes the tremendous risk that we can abuse these rights? We can get mad and even kill people. Just like Good, Evil is fully allowed. He knows Good or the bad are relative things. For Him Pain and Pleasure are just in a spectrum. He knows pain hurts, bad things hurt, good things bring happiness. But by granting full rights He cannot stop people getting hurt or killed. (But He does help the Healing) This is God’s high risk business. Downright dangerous. But He knows the purpose.
What I find amazing is that the verse continues saying ….to do the action without seeking the fruit. This means whatever the actions we need to do have to be unselfish and unconditional. Vyasa is very clever in not defining what is a good and what is a bad action. He knows this is murky. (My favorite question is How good (or bad) is good (or bad) enough?).
We can go on.................
Love...................VC

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

Namasté VC,


Don’t you think God has taken tremendous risk in giving the right/freedom when Geeta says “You CERTAINLY have the right “? What if He has not given the right, then all the actions will be at his commands.

I do not see any risk, none at all. Risk suggests there could be failure or an outcome that is not welcomed or uncalculated. Risk, negative outcomes, etc. are part of the relative field of life, the life of the 3 guna-s.

Kṛṣṇa tells us to be without that. That means not to put that behind you, but to open one's self to the full view of life.
The upaniṣads inform us that only seeing that part of life is viewing 180º of life and not a 360º view.

Once this full view is established one will find there is no faults, no risk, etc. but all things are an extention of one's SELF. So say the wise.
Where then can be the risk if there is not another? Risk takes 2 ( or more) to occur. Risk suggests that 'another' will not perform or give results or fail... yet if there is not '2' where then can this risk hide?

This is what the Bhāgavad gītā suggests one considers - nothing about risk, every thing about fullness - this is Brahman. If Brahman is the sum total of all , where is there 2? Where is there a place for risk from the Lord to occur? Risk may suggest loss, and a loss of fullness - this is impossible for Brahman- lost to whom? There is only One, and this is sattā (Being).

It is when we think there is there are more then 2, that fear, risk, loss arises. This is not my wisdom but that of the the following:

Bṛhadaraṇyaka Upaniṣad - Puruṣavidha-Brāhmaṇa, 2nd śloka.
dvitiyad vai bhayam bhavati

Any time there is a sense of 2, fear arises i.e. Fear is born of duality.

dvitiyad or dvitia द्वित- 2nd or two
bhayam or bhaya भय- fear , alarm dread apprehension
( rooted in bhī to fear for , be anxious about )
vai an emphasis and affirmation , generally placed after a word
and laying stress on it (it is usually translatable by 'indeed' ,
'truly' , 'certainly' )
bhavati or bhava भव arising or produced from , being inpraṇām

[vcindiana]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

Namasté VC,



I do not see any risk, none at all.
praṇām

Dear Yajavan: I do respect your excellent points. Thank you.

Following is only my personal observation. I see God as full 360 degree freedom and I express my own thoughts with humility and not trying to downplay others. To me this very verse implies risk. When I read this verse superficially I was asked to do an action without seeking a return or reward. How absurd is this? Where is the incentive? Is there logic into this? But Geeta says jump off the boat whether I float or drown. Isn’t it risky? Arjuna was asked to fight regardless he won or not. He was not assured a winning ticket. As per Geeta Arjuna himself was not hundred percent sure that he would defeat the enemies. Krishna tells him to just fight using his own talents, education and experience (Swadharma). This does imply to me to take Risk by Krishna.

Risk may be a human term that I can understand. I agree there is no such thing as a God sitting there and actually weighing the risks and benefits. As a human being it is the best way I can understand just like putting gender or image to God. I see risk all the time. Believing God itself is a Risk but I think it is worth it. Life is filled with risk, when I fly or drive I take risk, no guarantee that I would be 100 percent safe. Risk is unavoidable at least in my life. Only in risk taking I become stronger, more courageous, boldly venture into exciting places I can only dream about, learn new things and Grow (Vikasa). This BG verse (2:47) deeply inspires me.
I see risk is not about duality even though it may sound that way, it is something we all take in our everyday life and some of us take lot more. Love is Risky. People have risked their lives to save some one else.

You are right that Risk is part of Gunas. I need to have these Gunas to start with. Geeta takes an immense effort to describe individual Gunas to make me understand where I am and what I am doing. I wonder what would have happened without any Gunas in this world. What is the purpose of these well defined Gunas? I know Geeta calls me to come away from all Gunas. That is the ideal, but not a reality for the simple reason that once I reach the Ideal (Moksha/End) then what do I do, where is the Growth then? How can I love some one? I do not have a clue. But I need to risk and keep climbing. I guess I am in a good company like you.

Love……………….VC

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

Namasté VC,


Following is only my personal observation. I see God as full 360 degree freedom and I express my own thoughts with humility and not trying to downplay others. To me this very verse implies risk.
I wonder what would have happened without any Gunas in this world. What is the purpose of these well defined Gunas? I know Geeta calls me to come away from all Gunas. That is the ideal, but not a reality for the simple reason that once I reach the Ideal (Moksha/End) then what do I do, where is the Growth then?

I am impressed with your thinking here, you are going deeper and wider - very enjoyable to read.

you mention

I wonder what would have happened without any Gunas in this world. This is do-able and not a fanciful idea or concept.
The 'ideal' here is something that is attainable. Yet it is not done by effort, the same way you would move a boulder, or hit a home run, or save for a home. It is done by experiencing pure awareness, the SELF. The field of the SELF is devoid of the 3 guna-s. That is why Kṛṣṇa informs us to be without them... if you are without them, then where can you be?
1. In samādhi
2. Established in samādhi ( Brahman) - some call Cosmic Consciousness
3. Established in God Consciousness

Yet these sound so high-flying and esoteric - it starts with simply experiencing the silence that is in you , in all of us. All are welcomed to the silence - no one has a monopoly on this. This , some call, the 4th, or turiya. Yet in the beginning , we need to close the eyes to begin the process. Is there other ways? Sure.

Can any one do it ? Sure. Just like getting into an elevator and pressing the 10th floor, you do not need to be a mechanical engineer to know how the motor and pulley's all work to get to the tenth floor, you just press the button and you are off. Same with experiencing the Silence, turiya. You find the capable teacher and he/she will assist you.
Just like diving into the pool (of silence) - you just take the proper angle next to the pool and you go right in. It is just knowing the right angle of diving into the pool and diving is possible - there is no need to know the physics of gravity, the geometry of the angles of incidence and refraction, all that. We find the instructor , he points to the pool, gives you a few lessons and you are off.

Like that, turiya can be experienced. It not just for the yogi, but for all who wish to expand and experience this fullness - and then one is practicing what Kṛṣṇa is telling us. very simple.

praṇām

[satay]

Namaskar Yajvan,


hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~
Like that, turiya can be experienced. It not just for the yogi, but for all who wish to expand and experience this fullness - and then one is practicing what Kṛṣṇa is telling us. very simple.

praṇām

You make it all sound so easy. :)

[atanu]

----We do not have to sweat, food will automatically drop on our dinner plates .We do not have to drive, and God does all the driving. etc etc ..etc... (I know Atanu will remind me that I am not a doer, let me come to that later)
VC

Namaste VC,

No. No. You got the whole thing wrong.

We all have to toil for satisfying our bodily needs and hungers, till we are bodies.

But Shri Krishna, as the final commandment teaches Arjuna: Know that you are not a doer (have you not read it?). I intuit that the acts of appeasing the hungers and desires of the body and mind and subsequent heavy moaning, panting, and sweating will appear similar as eating a piece of hot bread in dream and scalding the palate.

Please do not mix the concepts of our bonded mind with what Shri Krishna teaches of the free atman, which is non-doer, taintless, immortal. (I know that you are tied to waking life impressions so strongly that you do not even read what atanu writes).

Om

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

Namasté
I wrote

We go through life and perform an action - sometimes that action brings great results, other times failure, grief, or little results. What then is occurring? Kākatālīya ? Chance? We as humans look for the connection, the inter-dependence of actions and sometimes they just may not be there.
What part of past karma ( if at all) is coming to bear? How does one think of this in their daily life?

I was thinking... Lets say a person does something that was not life supporting (adharma¹), perhaps bad, an injustice such as killing another. This karmic seed has been planted.

Now this person is really sorry , repentful in heart and mind. This too is another action , karma that takes place. What effect ( if any) does the sorry and repentful play? does it make the initial action's results less severe? does it mitigate the issue?

It seems to be a thing with humans that when a transgression occurs, saying you are sorry is the right thing to do. Yet what does it accomplish? What 'baggage' is dropped by this action?

Any thoughts on this ?

praṇām

words
adharma अधर्म - unrighteousness , injustice , irreligion , wickedness

[vcindiana]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

Namasté
I wrote

I was thinking... Lets say a person does something that was not life supporting (adharma¹), perhaps bad, an injustice such as killing another. This karmic seed has been planted.

Now this person is really sorry , repentful in heart and mind. This too is another action , karma that takes place. What effect ( if any) does the sorry and repentful play? does it make the initial action's results less severe? does it mitigate the issue?

It seems to be a thing with humans that when a transgression occurs, saying you are sorry is the right thing to do. Yet what does it accomplish? What 'baggage' is dropped by this action?

Any thoughts on this ?



Dear Yajavan: I am sure you know the answer.

For me BG CH 9 verses 30 and 31 answer this dilemma. Even if a man of the vilest conduct worships me with exclusive devotion, he should be considered a saint/righteous for he has rightly resolved. Next it goes on to say …….Swiftly/speedily he becomes virtuous and secures lasting peace. My devotee never falls.
My observations: All stand equal before God. A saint or a chandala is equal to Him. But the person who is devoted and open minded will see the God revealing. All sins are due to Avidya, when a person does a wrong thing, he has done it so because he did not know it was wrong. ( JC just before dying asks God to forgive his killers as these people did not what they were doing.) When he sincerely comes to know his mistakes and open his heart to God, God accepts him speedily without any probationary period! Wow, this is something a human being cannot do. This is the extent of ? Irrational and unconditional Love of God. Love is a powerful destroyer of Karmas.

Love………………VC

[vcindiana]

Namaste VC,

No. No. You got the whole thing wrong.

We all have to toil for satisfying our bodily needs and hungers, till we are bodies.......................


Please do not mix the concepts of our bonded mind with what Shri Krishna teaches of the free atman, which is non-doer, taintless, immortal. (I know that you are tied to waking life impressions so strongly that you do not even read what atanu writes).

Om

Dear Atanu: I am new to BG.


Doership as I understand carries Karma. Actions for Non Karma yogi and karma yogi are same. The difference is, one goes for fruit of action and other not. The actions performed by KarmaYogi is not binding, no condition attached. Action without any condition has to be sacrificial. This is Love. Actions performed with full feeling or “Bhavane” becomes so lighter I feel as though I am not doing the action. Soon I will drift into beautiful nondoership. Most of us have experienced, when there is so much stress or dead line to meet etc we feel the action very burdensome. It becomes a lot lighter when I do not have these restrictions or when I am not worried about my performance. I interpret BG Ch 2:69 as “Karma Yogi sleeps to the Fruit of action! “. (Nondoership)

One other way I understand about Nondoership is the sense of gratitude/reverence to wards our God.( A higher authority) I know I do the work but I thank God for the knowledge, skill, talents, insight, strength, inspiration etc God has given me to do the right thing. I do this by not claiming my doership.
Love…………..VC

[atanu]

Dear Atanu: I am new to BG.


This is Love. Actions performed with full feeling or “Bhavane” becomes so lighter I feel as though I am not doing the action. Love…………..VC

Namaste VC,

I agree that possibly none of us here is a Jnani to the extent of being a non-doer. We all feel pressure of work (me most). But I will repeat that it is neither true nor a question of mere feeling. That the Atman is not the doer is brahmasatyam, as below:


Chapter 18 Gita



14. The body, the doer, the various senses, the different functions of various sorts, and the presiding Deity, also, the fifth,



15. Whatever action a man performs by his body, speech and mind, whether right or the reverse, these five are its causes.



16. Now, such being the case, he who, owing to untrained understanding, looks upon his Self, which is isolated, as the agent, he of perverted intelligence, sees not.



17. He who is ever free from the egoistic notion, whose intelligence is not tainted by (good or evil), though he slays these people, he slayeth not, nor is he bound (by the action).

This indeed is the simplest truth, yet the hardest to believe. On realisation of this, all vain glory of all accomplishments/money/beauty/power will vanish into thin air -- so, it does not find a place in most christian/dvaita bound mind.

This simple truth is not welcome at all for immature minds. And Shri Krishna also warns that immature minds should not be disturbed. But you are already into Gita, so you are well prepared to absorb this in time.

But it is hard to give up the illusion of ego by any human, as even Vishnu is said to have suffered from this illusion. Vishnu being all, none of us is free from the illusion of ego ---- but we can pray to Vishnu for illumination and freedom.


Regards

Om Namah Shivaya

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

Namasté

VC writes

Actions for Non Karma yogi and karma yogi are same. The difference is, one goes for fruit of action and other not.


I continue to read the POV's offered, yet I scratch my head. The teaching of Kṛṣṇa is to go beyond the field of action and operate from there. How can you go beyond the field of action? By being established in sattā, Being, the SELF. It is not a mood of ' oh I feel I am not acting and I really do not have a goal; I am not attached to the fruits of my action '', this is mood making. This is not the teaching offered by Madhusūdana (Kṛṣṇa).

Kṛṣṇa is teaching Arjuna skill in action. Become established in yoga (union of the Divine, of the Supreme, of sattā). - yogastaḥ kuru karmāṇi ( chapter 2 , 48 śloka) is the vidhi¹ (formula or injunction) offered.
This is a completely new operating system - like going from DOS 2.0 to Unix - it’s on a whole new level in how one functions - it is not a mood, a style , or pretending.

It is good to remember - why is there a fight occurring anyway on the field of the Kuru-s? It is because Duryodhana's¹ desire to possess more and preserve the possessions he has already obtained. Kṛṣṇa is teaching how to be in one's natural state of Being where desires ( for more and more) are just not relevent, a state of balance, beyond duality.

He wishes to inform Arjuna of this skill. What is the skill? If you are established in Being, sattā, you are then beyond the 3 guna-s ( chapter 2, 45th śloka) which harbor duality, change and flux.

This condition then of Being is established in purity, independent of possessions, and possessed of the SELF , says Kṛṣṇa.
One is freed from the field of duality - this is where the turmoil resides. One is tossed about like a ship on the ocean with no
rudder - pushed from one wave to another. The guna-s have their play with you.

Why does Keśava mention 'independent of possessions' ? They no longer have their sway on the person. One is beyond possessions, there is no need to aquire.

The key word used by Kṛṣṇa is niryogakṣema. It suggests that in this state of Being one free from the nagging thoughts of gaining what one does not have or even preserving the possessions one may have at the time.

This is where one not fully established sattā may think, 'oh I will act, but not put my mind on the final result, I wish to not gain a possession ' . This is not clear thinking nor the instruction offered by Kṛṣṇa. What is the instruction? Yogastaḥ kuru karmāṇi , then all else comes automatically.

praṇām

words

vidhi विधि- a rule , formula , injunction , ordinance , statute , precept , law , direction
niryogakṣema - niryoga निर्योगa rope for tieing cows + kṣema क्षेम- giving rest, peace - The notion
is being tied (niryoga) to possessions and giving rest, peace to this ( kṣema ) .
nir = nis = without or free from + yoga is attaching or binding + kṣema ( giving rest)
Duryodhana the eldest son of Dhṛtarāṣṭra and leader of the kauravas in their war with the pāṇḍava.

[vcindiana]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

Namasté

VC writes

I continue to read the POV's offered, yet I scratch my head. ....
Kṛṣṇa is teaching Arjuna skill in action. Become established in yoga (union of the Divine, of the Supreme, of sattā). - yogastaḥ kuru karmāṇi ( chapter 2 , 48 śloka) is the vidhi¹ (formula or injunction) offered.
This is a completely new operating system - like going from DOS 2.0 to Unix - it’s on a whole new level in how one functions - it is not a mood, a style , or pretending.

...........................
praṇām


Dear Yajavan:

Please let me know whether this thread is going somewhere.

My thoughts (with humility) about BG 2: 48 (Yoga of Equanimity)
This forum is the place where we post our ideas, concepts, comments etc... These are all the actions. What is the purpose of these actions? Don’t we like to see fruits of all these writings/actions? I do not know about you, I love to see my posts are read and liked and even loved by all of you. It will be nice I get rewarded! The ego element automatically enters my brain, thanks to Krishna for gifting me with Gunas. My point is Gunas are very part of human being. Only in Gunas we like some posts and we dislike some other posts to the point every one of us have expressed at least in a subtle way our displeasures criticizing on others comments.

The word equanimity, which is beyond Gunas, does not mean to completely ignore the Gunas, good or bad, but to put all these on the table. I do not think all knowing God gave us Gunas without purpose. There is no life without Gunas. It is up to me to make the best decision without factoring emotion. I consider this is like deliberating after a due diligence. There is RISK involved, the result may not be in my favor, but it is OK. What I sense from Geeta is that all it matters is whether I carefully considered all the options, good or bad or even ugly. (This is something I do in my “right or freedom” Geeta mentions in the previous verse 2: 47.) and whether I exercised my equanimity to the best of my ability. I need to consider my own brain as a court of law and myself as the judge before I commit to an action. Yoga for me is nothing but to get trained (Sadhana) and act like loving God who is the author of equanimity.

Love.................VC

[vcindiana]

Namaste VC,

I agree that possibly none of us here is a Jnani to the extent of being a non-doer. We all feel pressure of work (me most).


Dear Atanu:

Your human side is nicely reflected here, as you state you feel the pressure of work most. (Me most) I am not sure there is any one in this world who does not feel the pressure. It is interesting in spite of your higher knowledge (in Geeta) which I admire; you admit stress of life does take a toll on you. That is the mark of your humility.

Love………………. VC

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

Namasté VC,



Dear Yajavan:


The word equanimity, which is beyond Gunas, does not mean to completely ignore the Gunas, good or bad, but to put all these on the table. I do not think all knowing God gave us Gunas without purpose. There is no life without Gunas.

Let me see if I can explain the notion offered by Kṛṣṇa. His directive (vidhi) is not an intellectual concept that is to be accepted or rejected by the mind, as if one was picking a political view on an issue. It is a reality of Awareness thay gets established within ones Being - that is why He says yogastaḥ kuru karmāṇi.

you write


The word equanimity, which is beyond Gunas, does not mean to completely ignore the Gunas

I do not see 'equanimity' in this śloka. Nor do I see it in the 45th śloka. The offer and direction is to be beyond them, established in
ātmavān ( the SELF, Brahman) , per sloka 45.

VC, it is not a question of the guna's being on or off the table - it is the state of Being in which the guna-s no longer inhabit ones behavior that push and pull the mind.

This level of Being is not an intellectual concept ( I mention again) , nor a mood where one can choose ' I like this, I think I will reject that in this concept ' - it is a new Reality that dawns and the guna-s no longer have their sway over the sadhu.

This is what ( IMHO) I think you may be missing. It's not a philosophical concept to be accepted or rejected. Once one is possessed of the SELF, the guna-s do not control the person. Kṛṣṇa is telling us this is most desirable. Why? moha¹ is gone. One is free from duality ( brought by the guna-s), without anxieties ( chapter 6,18th śloka, free from cravings) , yet filled with the Supreme.

you write


There is no life without Gunas
The guna-s act within themselves - they continue. But for the person established in the SELF 'there is no action he need to do' (chapter 3, 17th śloka. What does this mean? we can address it later.

What I believe you may be missing , you are NOT the body. The body is a bundle of flesh, bones, etc. that are managed by nature (the 3 guna-s are the ambassators). Kṛṣṇa is quite clear about this... He says in Chapter 2, 12th śloka - There never was a time when I was not, nor you, nor these rulers of men. Nor will there ever be a time when all of us cease to be. VC, your body is consumed by time and goes to the wind, yet the ātman ( the SELF, Brahman) is never lost, as it was never born.

This is who you really are and it is not part of the 3 guna-s (ever).

If you miss this point, then the core value of Bhāgavad gītā is lost in words.

praṇām

words

vidhi विधि- a rule , formula , injunction , ordinance , statute , precept , law , direction
moha मोह - bewilderment , perplexity , distraction , infatuation , delusion, error

[yajvan]

hariḥ oṁ
~~~~~~

Namasté

In post #18 I wrote the following which requires a bit more information to round out the idea for your consideration:


This condition then of Being is established in purity, independent of possessions, and possessed of the SELF , says Kṛṣṇa. One is freed from the field of duality - this is where the turmoil resides. One is tossed about like a ship on the ocean with no rudder - pushed from one wave to another. The guna-s have their play with you.
Why does Keśava mention 'independent of possessions' ? They no longer have their sway on the person. One is beyond possessions, there is no need to aquire. The key word used is niryogakṣema. It suggests that in this state of Being one free from the nagging thoughts of gaining what one does not have or even preserving the possessions one may have at the time.
In the Taittirīya Upaniṣad , śikṣā vallī ( 11th anuvāyka or sub-section) says, Speak the truth (satyaṁ), practice righteousness (dharmaṁ), do not neglect your self study (svādhyāya). It continues and says, let there be no neglect of righteusness (dharmaṁ), let there be no neglect of protecting yourself (kuśalānna), let there be no neglect of prosperity (bhūti).

For the householder this suggests how one should live a balanced life while respecting (and practicing) the wisdom of Self-knowledge and higher learning.

What is my point? that of possessions. One needs these as a householder. The word used in the śloka is bhūtyai or bhūti which means well-being , thriving , prosperity , might , power , wealth , fortune. This word also means existence, being.

What is this telling us? Yes , do not forget your well-being, yet do not forget where this comes from , Being, existence. The notion (for me) is have these possessions, but do not be possessed by them. As Kṛṣṇa suggested, independent of possessions, niryogakṣema, mentioned in the quoted of post #18 above.

praṇām