PDA

View Full Version : shrI Shankara charitam: exposition by KAnchi ParamAchArya



saidevo
07 February 2010, 12:52 AM
Disclaimer for my Translated Materials

These selective English translations done by me from the Tamil book Deivatthin Kural (7 volumes), compiled from the upanyAsams--lectures, of KAnchi ParamAchArya by his mahAbhakta shrI RA.GaNapati and published by the VAnati Padhippakam, Chennai, are posted here with the sole intention of carrying the divine messages of the AchAryALs of the Shankara MaThams established by Sri Adi Shankara BhagavadpAda, so that we the members and readers of this Forum can understand and practice the directions contained in the messages.

As a translator, I have no commercial interests or financial considerations in spreading the messages of our Gurus, and have no claims of copyright for the translations.

I have duly quoted the source of these translations, and I hereby acknowledge the credits to the publications, authors, devotees and any other people concerned.

If anyone involved with these publications has any reservations on the implicit consents and permissions assumed in these translations for the spiritual benefit of Hindus and the mankind, the same may be brought to the notice of the Forum Administrator, for necessary changes or removal of the material presented.

'saidevo', as translator of the materials presented.

*** *** ***

An amazing accomplishment of KAnchi ParamAchArya's upanyAsams--lecturers, is his elaborate teaching of the tough, difficult and lofty philosophy of the Vedas and UpaniShads of SanAtana Dharma, in a way that the common man can understand and be inspired by it, and at the same time, enlightening and motivating those who have a deeper knowledge. With his sama-dRShTi--impartial outlook, ParamAchArya reconciles all the sectoral siddhAnta of our religion, explains the nature of the final goal of ultimate liberation of our Vedas and UpaniShads, and indicates to what extent the different siddhAnta define the path towards its accomplisthment.

ParamAchArya's upanyAsam on the life and works of shrI Adi Shankara BhagavadpAda, explaining the background and all the relevant circumstances that necessitated the advent of the avatAra of God DakShiNamUrti in human form, runs to over 800 pages in printed form, under the section titled 'shrI Shankara Charitam' in volume 5 of the book 'Deivatthin Kural'. Those who not possess the printed volumes, can read it online at the Website of KAnchi Shankara MaTham at http://www.kamakoti.org/tamil/ . Details of an English translation of the seven volumes of the book brought out by 'Sri Kanchi Mahaswami Peetarohana Shatabdi Mahotsav Trust' are published their Website at http://www.srikanchimahaswami100.org/books.htm .

My attempt at this English translation of 'shrI Shankara Charitam' is meant mainly to express my lifelong gratitude towards our Jagadgurus of Shankara MaThams, besides my desire to share the drops of blissful experiences obtained from reading it. Although I know that I can do only selective translation, I pray to BhagavAn and the Gurus to give me their anugraham for strength and efficacy to be able to do it completely, and to the satisfaction of its readers who have read/not read the original.

saidevo
07 February 2010, 12:53 AM
******************************
pravRtti--nivRtti
******************************
Two thousand, two thousand and five hundred years ago, the condition of our desham--country, had extremely deteriorated.

Since anAdi kAlam--eternity, the vedokta--Vedas-sanctioned, path has been prevailing in our desham. Its name is SanAtana Dharma. Since it arose in anusaraNam--conformity with, the Vedas, it can also be called the vaidika matam--Vedic Religion. Only bahu kAlam--several millennia, later, did the people of anya desham--foreign countries, gave it the name Hindu Matam, and we are using only the name they gave it. It is not even mentioned in the books that are the basis of our matam--religion, that the name for it is SanAtana Dharma or vaidika matam. Since there were no other religions and only this single matam was prevailing from eternity, there was no avashyam--necessity, to give it a name. Later, those who came from the western countries, since they had to pass the Sindhu nadI first in our BhArata desham, making Indus of the (name) Sindhu, they gave the name India to the BhArata desham that had its territory therefrom, and started calling its matam--religion, that came prAchInam--from ancient times, Hinduism, and all of us who follow it Hindus, and these names have prevailed.

In this SanAtana Dharma systematized by the Vedas, two mArgas--paths: the pravRtti mArga, and the nivRtti mArga.

• To conduct life in this lokam--world, well and in accordance with Dharma, the pravRtti mArga.

• To let go the worldly life, and on completing it (at death), to come in aikyam--unity, with ParamAtmA and get liberated from the janana-maraNam--birth and death, the nivRtti mArga.

• To live in accordance with Dharma, that is, to conduct the household life as per Vedic regulations so as to bring good to oneself and good to the jana samUham--community, and do the karmAnuShTAnams--prescribed duties, in anusaraNam--conformity, with the varNAshrama vyavastas--bounds of the occupational class system, is the pravRtti mArga.

• In this mArga, we obtain puNyam--good karma, to the extent we do our karmAnuShTAna well, and due to that puNya phala--fruits of good karma, obtain vAsam--residence, in the inba lokam--pleasure world, of svargam--heaven.

• But then that pleasure is not shAshvatam--perpetual. As we go on experiencing the pleasure, our puNya balance would become lesser and lesser. After it is exhausted, 'punarapi jananam'--back again to birth, as it is said, to be born again on this earth.

• Still, as we lived according to the Veda Dharma (in the pUrva janmam--earlier birth), this would be a good birth that obtains good facilities. If the life is led without failing in Dharma in this life too, again the svaga bhogam--heavenly enjoyment. But then as said (earlier), this bhogam--enjoyment, is not shAshvatam--eternal.

• That it is not shAshvatam is on one side. With that, even while enjoying it, this pleasure will not be one that gives us pUrNa tRpti--complete satisfaction. "Nothing further is required! Has not this state been obtained in nirantaram--perpetually? There is nothing to move away from this, even slightly. There is no further need for us."--Only when one can become such, only then, the tRpta pUrNAnandam.

However much santoSham--happiness, is there in these two, bhUlokam--world of earth, and svargam--heaven, it cannot give such fulfilment of Anandam--bliss. One cannot be in these lokas--worlds, without the various kinds of bhayam--fear, duHkham--sorrow, and the izhupaRigaL--unsettling condition, of kAma-krodhAdi--desire, anger, etc. To obtain these pleasures, one should be making incessant efforts too. That is, one should keep on struggling.

• Not only that. Will these pleasures satisfy what we are in our inner depths? Never. Except that somehow there will be a pleasant experience to the eye, ear, mouth, and other sparshAdi--tactile senses, to the manas--mind, even to the buddhi--intellect, there won't be even some slight sukhAnubhavam--comfortable experience, in these (pleasures) to the AtmA, which is resident beyond all these, and beyond our antaHkaraNa--inner organs too.

Even to us while experiencing the pleasures, from time to time when some dIrgha yojana--deep thought, comes up, it would seem, "What is this? Without obtaining any fulfilment for that something that sits inside us as sArabhUtam--excellent thing, we continue to seek at the outer level something that is asthiram--impermanent, as saukhyam--comfort, inbam--pleasure, do whatever (to have them) and seem to get satisfied with them?"


• That which gives complete inner satisfaction is only the nivRtti mArgam. Only the man who gives up karmas--labour and activity, gives up the jana samUham--community, becomes sannyAsi--ascetic, and remains sadA-sarva-kAlam--at all times, in Atma-chitana--thinking about the AtmA, doing dhyAnam--meditation, would get into the state of complete fulfilment that lets him know and experience that the AtmA is nothing but Brahmam.

Only that state which is called samAdhi and sAkShAtkAram--Self-Realization, is one that remains shAsvatam--permanent, once it is obtained. Even in normal conversation, we say, "it was brahmAnandam!", about an experience of happiness that is known to us. In vAstavam--truth, however, that 'brahmAnandam' would be known only the man who has got siddhi--personal success, in the nivRtti mArgam!

• It is not the feeling of bliss that someone experiences about something else as Brahmam. The bliss that he is the brahmam is the brahmAnandam. This one (who has got siddhi in the nivRtti mArgam) himself becomes that Anandam that is called brahmam. Only there, there is no bhayam--fear, no duHkham--sorrow, and the unsettling condition of kAmam--desire, and krodham--anger; and no incessant efforts are required.

• One should work hard before he gets the siddhi. I said struggle, and it would perforce be a great one. But once that lakShyam--target, is reached, there is no sliding down from it.

What is said as

தில்லை வெளியிலே கலந்து விட்டாலவர்
திரும்பியும் வருவாரோ?

tillai veLiyilE kala~ndu viTTAlavar
tirumbiyum varuvArO?
--SubrahmaNya BhArati

"Once they merge with the space of Thillai (Chidambaram), will they ever return?"

is only this. And what Brahma SUtram has ended, with two times instead of one, as

अनावृत्तिः शब्दाद् अनावृत्तिः शब्दाद् ॥४.४.२३॥

anAvRuttiH shabdAd anAvRuttiH shabdAd ||4.4.23||

"No return (for those liberated souls) on account of the scriptural statement (to that effect)."--svAmi ShivAnanda

only says this. The brahmasUtrakAra--author of BS, says, "This is not what I have said; it is in the shruti--Vedas." 'shabdAd' means 'from the shruti which is the shabda pramANam'.

The ChAndogya upaniShad which is the shruti shiras--crest of Vedas, also ends saying it twice in this way.

Therefore, the nitya pErinbam--permanent Heavenly Bliss, is obtained only by the nivRtti mArgam. All that is obtained in pravRtti (mArgam) is only the chiRtRinbam--earthly pleasures, which is nashvara--perishable.

******************************

saidevo
08 February 2010, 09:44 AM
******************************
Two paths, for two kinds of people
******************************
Still, in the drama that IshvAra enacts as lokam, prajAs--world and people, if it is said, "Become a sannyAsi--ascetic; go to the jungle and hold your nose (to control breathing); in addition, do the vichAraNam--inquiry, of AtmA and get soaked in it", most people are not such, as to listen to it. The tApam--burning desire, of getting to know that the reason for everything is the vastu--reality, brahmam, and then getting to know, that which is brahmam is the individual AtmA, does not arise in most people.

• The name for this tApam is mumukShutvam. The desire to get liberated is mumukShutvam. One who has that desire is the mumukShu. What I spoke about as nivRtti mArgam so far is only what is generally called the jnAna mArgam. Only the mumukShus are the adhikArins--authorized people, who has the yogyatA--fitness/ability, to traverse that path. In the population, they would be very less in number.

• The other people would always be indulging in some kAryam--task. Without external upakaraNas--instruments, and other people, there will be no kAryam. Keeping all these things and doing something or other is the svabhAvam--natural disposition, of the majority of people. About these people who are attached to their karma--action, BhagavAn has spoken of as "karma sangis"--"attached to action", (see note 01) in the GItA.

As to why these people are always at karma--action, they have verious kinds of desires; if they need to get them fulfilled, they also need to do something, toiling and tricking other people? If we sit silently, would the vastu--article, we are desirous of getting, fall in our hands on its own accord?

Except that we need to just sit silently to reach the AtmA that always remains with us as svayam chittam--Self-shining, without the need of its being obtained from outside, for any other thing that we need, we have to indulge in some action.

The very fact of saying it this way means that with every action we move further and further outward from the AtmA. (The term) 'pra-vRtti' itself means only that: "to keep going outward".

The opposite term for this is 'ni-vRtti'. What is the opposite of going outward? Is it not to return the place of habitation? 'To return' is 'ni-vRtti'; to return to the AtmA.

'To be indulging in action' for pravRtti and 'to have a full stop to action and stay silent' for nivRtti are (the derived) meanings that are in vogue.

If the majority of people would be of the nature of going outward in action, can they be compelled saying, "No, you shouldn't be going outward; simply sit quietly and do Atma vichAram--Self inquiry."? Even if it is done, when on their own accord they don't have that desire, the desire called mumukShutvam--the only desire of reaching the satya vastu after all the worldly desires are gone,--what fruits will be there?

sari--Alright, should they be left as they are? If that be the case, everyone for his durAshas--bad desires/vain expectations, would be cheating, and spoiling the life of others and thus the whole world would be disrupted? For Ishvara, this lokam--world, instead of being a rasavata nATakam--drama filled with Rasas (see note 02), would become an alangkOla kUththu--revelry of disorderliness? What can be done therefore?

• It is for this purpose that the Veda has planned as the prvRtti mArgam, the karma mArgam which prescribes actions that are dharma-mayam--filled with dharma, for one who goes in pravRtti, in accordance with his propensity; and

• as nivRtti mArgam, the jnAna mArgam for one who gives up all action and wants to restrain and shrink himself in the actionless AtmA.

What is the meaning if it is said that the Veda has planned? The meaning is only that Ishvara, who is himself veda mantra svarUpam--the form of Veda mantras, planned it through the Rishis.

Both these kinds of prajAs--children, have only originated from Him? It's his duty to plan a good marga--path, for them? If the majority of people are karma sangis--attached to action, only he has made them to be as such!

saidevo
08 February 2010, 09:47 AM
Where it is said as

yataH pravRuttirbhUtAnAM yena sarvamidaM tatam

in the GItA (see note 03), it is advised in spaShTam--for clear perception, that by whom all these are in vyApakam--pervaded, from that same Ishvara, the pravRtti has arisen for the jIvas. Making it more spaShTam in his bhAShyam--commentary, AchAryAL has stated that Ishvara, sitting as antaryAmin--inner regulator, inside a jIva, makes him indulge in pravRtti.

• Initially, in the adhyAyas--chapters, that start with the 'karma yogam' (in the GItA), Bhagavan was saying that the reason for the people to be karma sangis (that is, being interested in pravRtti), was only prakRti--Nature. And prakRti is only mAyA.

• Right, if it is mAyA, does it do anything on its own accord? Only Ishvara remains as one who has even that mAyA, as its yajamAna--patron. One UpaniShad says, "Know that prakRti is only mAyA. Know that the owner of that mAyA, mAyA's yajamAnan, is Mahesvara." (see note 04). BhagavAn also has said in GItA (7.14), "mama mAyA duratyayA"--"my mAyA which is impassable".

Thus it is known that only Ishvara, to have his mAyA-lIlA staged, has made the karma sangis who go outward in pravRtti, as such. If all the jIvas go in nivRtti what will happen? They would get aikyam--merged, in Ishvara's nirguNa brahma svarUpam, breaking out the mAyA. Then how can He be in santoSham--happiness, enacting his drama of prapancha lIlA?

• We see in the BhAgavatam, that as the SanakAdis (Rishis starting with Sanaka) who appeared first in the sRShTi--Creation, had gone in nivRtti, then BrahmA created as PrajApatis, ten Rishis starting with MarIchi, in order that they would beget a number of children and fill up the bhUmi--earth.

Therefore, it is known that the divya saMkalpam--Divine Will, itself is that the entire lokam--world, as jnAnis should not leave the world, making his drama stage empty and ruined.

Still, for that can he let all those who act in the drama act as they please without any discipline or order?

In order that it does not happen, Ishvara has revealed the pravRtti mArgam through the Vedas, thinking with parama kRupa--supreme compassion,

"Although these people go in pravRtti, with the small amount of svAtantrayam--freedome of the will, I have given them for my own amusement, I should not let them do it all haphazardly as they like, making the overall social life disorderly. I should not also let them as individual prajas--children, overly commit mistakes and get stuck in pApam--sin.

"Without being a drama, all of it should not go as brahmam; the drama should not be all confusion too; should not let them suffer in pApam with overly commitment of mistakes. Although it is certain that there would be no nityAnandam--eternal happiness, by karma--action, I should not let the people get immersed in afflictions even without the temporary bhoga bhoyAdi Anandam--happiness of enjoyments, obtained by doing that karma as puNya karma--meritorious acts. Individual life or samUha--societal life, whatever, I should give them a path where there is discipline, love, beauty, paraspara sahAyam--mutual assistance,--(path of) dharma to put it all in a single word."

• He gave a path where everyone would go on doing satkaryAs--good acts, in accordance with the status Ishvara has made them born in, geting shreyas--excellence, for them in this world, and making the world kShemam--prosperous, and obtain santoSham--happiness, in the svargAdi puNya lokas--heavely worlds of merit. The bhAgam--part, of this in the Vedas is named Karma KANDam. All the yajna karmAnuShTAnas--sacrficial and other rites, restraints and rigours, are those that are comprised in this.

• He gave a path as nivRtti mArgam for mokSha siddhi, in that same Vedas, through the UpaniShads that form the concluding part. It has the name JnAna KANDam. There will be much of tattvopadesham--teaching of realities, therein.

MokSham is different, Svargam is different. Only MokSham is the sthAnam--position, that gives nirantara--permanent, liberation from samsAram--worldly life. Svargam depends on the amount of puNyam, and lasts only until the time it is spent. It is a lokam--world, that only gives various kinds of indriya inbam--sensual pleasures.

**********

saidevo
08 February 2010, 09:49 AM
Notes:
01. Bhagavad GItA 3.26

न बुद्धिभेदं जनयेदज्ञानां कर्मसङिनाम् ।
जोषयेत्सर्वकर्माणि विद्वान्युक्तः समाचरन् ॥३.२६॥

na buddhibhedaM janayedaj~jAnAM karmasa~ginAm |
joShayetsarvakarmANi vidvAnyuktaH samAcharan ||3.26||

From Shankara's GItA BhAShya, translated by Swami Gambhirananda:

3.26 The enlightened man should not create disturbance in the beliefs of the ignorant, who are attached to work. Working, while himself remaining deligent [Some translate yuktah as, 'in the right manner'. S. takes it in the sense of Yoga yuktah, merged in yoga.-Tr.], he should make them do [Another reading is yojayet, meaning the same as josayet.-Tr.] all the duties.

02. rasas

The nava rasas--nine kinds of feelings/sentiments/moods that might prevail, e.g., in a stage dance like the bharata nATyam, are: shRungAraM--love, hAsyam--laughter, raudram--fury, kAruNyam--compassion, bIbhatsaM--disguest, bhayAnakam--horror/terror, vIram--heroic mood, adbhutaM--wonder. To these eight rasas, Abhinavagupta added shAntam--peace/tranquility, making it nine in all.

Two rasas were later added to the list: vAtsalya--parental love, bhakti--spiritual devotion. For more details, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rasa_(aesthetics)

03. Bhagavad GItA 18.46

यतः प्रवृत्तिर्भूतानां येन सर्वमिदं ततम् ।
स्वकर्मणा तमभ्यर्च्य सिद्धिं विन्दति मानवः ॥१८.४६॥

yataH pravRuttirbhUtAnAM yena sarvamidaM tatam |
svakarmaNA tamabhyarchya siddhiM vindati mAnavaH ||18.46||

18.46 A human being achieves success by adoring through his own duties Him from whom is the origin of creatures, and by whom is all this pervaded.
--shankara bhAShya, GambhIrAnanda

04. shvetAshvatara upaniShad 4.10

मायां तु प्रकृतिं विद्यान्मायिनं तु महेश्वरम् ।
तस्यवयवभूतैस्तु व्याप्तं सर्वमिदं जगत् ॥४.१०॥

mAyAM tu prakRutiM vidyAnmAyinaM tu maheshvaram |
tasyavayavabhUtaistu vyAptaM sarvamidaM jagat ||4.10||

IV-10: Know then that Nature is Maya, and that the great God is the Lord of Maya. The whole world is filled with beings who form His parts.
--Tyagisananda

saidevo
10 February 2010, 11:14 AM
******************************
Two kinds of fruits of the karma mArgam
******************************
A big visheSham--speciality/distinction, of the karma mArgam that Ishvara has planned for us through the Vedas is that:

I said (earlier) that very often we have a yojana--deep thought, "What is this we are doing without any rest or stop! It only seems to us that by this activity, something inside us remains without getting filled up, and it's as if we experience only a superficial alpa sukham--trivial pleasure, that is quickly exhausted?" Although such a thought arises, our habitual vAsana--impression, immediately pushes it down, without letting it grow into some good virakti--freedom from attachment, and vairAgyam--dislike/non-attachment. We are happy, falling again and again in the same pool of mud--as 'pazhaiya kuruDi'(see note 01) and feeling good about it.

If any death or a great loss comes by, only for that duration, we who always indulge in kAryam--action, perhaps because we can't do anything with this, would remain as if we have some vairAgyam. They say prasava vairAgyam--perseverence in labour, shmashAna vairAgyam--perseverence at the cremation ground. But even that gets carried away like writing on the water surface. In this way, little by little if we go on experiencing hardships, by that experience some pakvam--ripeness/maturity, would arise in us.

Even in that stage, it is such that we can't give up our karma-action. AtmA--brahmam--jnAnam thus doing dhyAna-vichArAdi--meditation and inquiry, sitting in ekAntam--solitude,--that yogyatA--fitness/ability, would not have arisen in us. Still, the thought 'would be better if that yogyatA arises someday' would have been created in the foothills (of mind).

Although the pravRtti of the mind (I use the word in the meaning 'the propensity of mind') is only in kAryams--actions, and it is not possible to let it go and do jnAna vichAram, the wish 'better if I can give up actions, better if the yogyatA for jnAna vichAram arises' would be created. People who are in this way, won't be in large number among the karma sangis--attached to action. Still, as more than the number of those who go in tIvram--ardently, as mumukShus in nivRtti, for many people, at least this thought will exist in the basis.

In uddesham--purpose, of the pravRtti mArgam, given by Ishavara through the Vedas, the anuShTAnam of the same Karma KANDam, for such people also, by doing a great upakAram--help, serves as a great upAyam--means, which gives them the yogyatA for reaching the nivRtti mArgam, at least in some future time. ParamAtmA has arranged it that way.

What he has done is that, if these shAstrokta karmas--scriptural prescriptions of acts, which are Dharma, are done, he has made them give two kinds of phalas--fruits. For the two kinds of people who do the karmas in uddesham of two kinds of lakShyas--aims, he has arranged two kinds of phalas, in order that the lakShyam of each kind is accomplished.

• One kind, those who do not think beyond the pleasures of the bhUlokam--earth, and svarga lokam--heaven. If these people do as they please for the pleasures they seek, they cause kaShTam--difficulty/trouble, to the lokam--world, as well as seek pApam--sin, for them, and become useless without even getting the nashvara--perishable, pleasures they desire; and because of this, Ishvara has given them shAstroktam--scripturally, the karma kANDam, (which is) karma mArgam expressing his concern thus:

"appA--my dear! It is only possible for you to be sadA--always, doing some kArya--work. Only I have created you in such a manner. I have given you some svAtantrayam--freedome of the will, too. I have done all this just for me to witness my sport. But then (using your freedom of will), don't make me witness a veRik kUththu--(Tamil)revelry of obsession, and think, 'My sRShTi--Creation, has become so worse!' By doing things as you please, don't make it problematic for you, troublesome for the people, and painful for me! Only the Karma KANDam is the way (for you) to avoid it becoming this worse. I have given you karmas--prescriptions for action, therein, in order to really give you the bhUloka-svargaloka saukhyams--comforts, which you like. Since your svabhAvam--natural disposition, is in action, give up doing it as you please, and start doing it thus (the karmas prescribed in the shAstras).

"In doing karmAnuShTAna in this way, there would certainly be kaShTams--difficulties/problems, shrama--toil/exertion, and tyAgams--sacrifices. But then the difficulties that would arise later when you do things as you please would be far greater than these? There, even if it would be comfortable during the small period of time of your action, the effects that follow the actions would be parama kaShTam--extremely problematic, for a long time later. Whereas here, (every act done in veda shAstra anuShTAnam and svadharma paripAlanam) although it is shramam--of exertion, during the small period of time when it is done, with many niyamas--restraints, and dravya tyAgas--giving away wealth, its fruit is such that it gives santoSham--happiness, bahu kAlam--for a long time, isn't it? Therefore, make a decision, 'Let me correct myself, and do my actions (as per karma mArgam) with obedience to Ishvara'."

Thus has Ishvara prescribed the karma mArgam through the Vedas. This is for one kind of people. People who think it is enough to live a happy life without bothering about AtmAnubhavam, IshvarAnubhavam-- experience of Self and God.

saidevo
10 February 2010, 11:15 AM
I spoke about another kind. Same kind as that which can't do Atma vichAram or go melting in Ishvara. Still, these are people who have the thought, 'Why all these kAryas, turning round and round like the bull of an oilpress? After all, what are the pleasures obtained by this? They don't give an inner fulfilment! I should get it (somehow)!'

For these people too, Ishvara has given the same svadharmAnuShTAnas of the Karma KANDam as the margam--path. Still, (there is) a difference. As described above, people who are satisfied with the bhUloka-svarga loka santoShams, go in the karma mArgam, only with the uddesham--purpose, of santoSha prApti--reaching happiness. Ishvara himself has prescribed this fruit for that mArgam.

But then didn't I speak about another kind who think 'This fruit is not for us. We have no desire in such Anandas that are nashvara--perishable. Still, we don't have the chitta pakvam--mental ripeness, but then our svabhAvam is only in doing some kAryam', for them too Ishvara has prescribed that the same shAstroka karma mArgam gives them the chitta pakvam. The same karmAnuShTanam that gives one or two santoShams and ends with that if it is done with desire for fruits, if a person goes doing it thinking, 'This is IshvarAjnA--God's orders. The AjnA that he has given through the Vedas. We do anuShTAnam of it only obeying it for that. We don't need any of the santoSha phalas acquired by it', that will give them the chitta shuddhi--mental purification.

Without any desire for the fruits of own gains and happiness, that is, as niShkAma--desireless/disinterested/unselfish, 'It's the way BhagavAn has assigned for the lokam to be in the rightful order. kArya kramam--methods of actions. Let us do it as such only because it is karma mArgam', if someone starts doing karmas in this way,--without considerations of selfishness, without letting the dirt of desires touch them, obeying BhagavAn's orders, 'only for his prIti--gladness/satisfaction, I do it: paramameshvara prItyartham', thus according to svadharma, if a person voluntarily starts doing ALL the karmas prescribed for him,--all the doShas--blemishes, in his chittam will gradually wear away and disppear.

After obtaining such chitta shuddi, he can give up karma--action. The svabhAvam of being always busy in action will subside. Little by little, as dhyAnam, vichAram--thus later on he can go in the nivRtti mArgam.

For the karma mArgam, thus two kinds of fruits. One is the bhUloka-svargaloka santoSha phala--fruit, obtained directly by karma. Another is the phala of chitta shuddi, obtained in due course, by giving up the fruit in IshvarArpaNam--consigning to God, and doing karma only because it is his AjnA. The chitta shuddhi does not end there. It is that which creates the yogyatA--fitness/ability, to do pravesham--secure an entrace, in the path of nivRtti mArgam which is also the jnAya yogam.

Although I said two kinds of fruits, in vAstavam--reality, if it is karma phala, it is only in the tatkAla--temporary, santoShams that karma--action, directly gives in the bhUloka-svarga lokas. Even if it is thought that this fruit is not required, because he can't keep away from karma--action, because it gives him a discipline by doing svadharmas according to their vidhi--rules, and because by this he can help the rightful order of the samUham--society, when one does karma and he gets chitta shuddhi, that chitta shuddhi did not arise as the fruit directly from those kAryas--actions.

What are the gains of cultivating a vegetable garden? Only kathrikkAi sAmbAr--brinjal sAmbAr, veNDaikkAi kaRi--okra fry, ityAdi--such things, right? One person does not want this sAmbAr and kaRi; but he has agony--something like putra shokam--loss of son, loss in business. In order that it is not felt, he cultivates a vegetable garden doing some digging and grubbing so he might let the agony be forgotten. For that, if it is asked, 'what is the fruit of cultivating a vegetable garden?' can we say, 'putra shoka nivRtti'--'escape from the loss of son'?

In this manner, one who does karma without the requirement of the karma's ihAmutra phala (see note 02) does not ascribe the chitta shuddhi obtained as the karma phala. It is what he gets as Ishvara prasAdam. The chitta shuddhi is what Ishvara does anugraham--favour: 'remaining without the requirement of the direct fruits to him, because it is our AjnA and with the purpose of social order, this man does karmAnuShTAnam so well for our prIti! For such manobhAvam--mental state, let us clear the ashuddas in his chitta.'

saidevo
10 February 2010, 11:16 AM
Even what is the direct fruit is not given by karma itself. How can the karma which is but jaDa--inanimate/lifeless, give the fruit? Although it is only Ishvara who as the phala-dAdA gives it (the fruit), making a difference in it, he shows the bhUloka-svargaloka fruits that accrue to a person through external vastus--articles, as karma's direct phala, and the chitta shuddhi that arises inside, in the antaHkaraNam, for a jIva, as his prasAdam. Therefore, there is no custom to speak about chitta shuddhi as karma phala. In GItAdi shAstras too, whenever it is mentioned as karma phala or karma phala tyAgam, it is mentioned only in this meaning. Chitta shuddhi is not karma phala; it is obtained by doing tyagam--sacrifice, of the karma phala.

'There is no yogyatA to go in jnAna mArgam. With the santoShams obtained in karma too there is no complete fulfilment'--for such people, BhagavAn says, "Since you can't give up kAryas, keep doing them. But no have desire on the fruit. Doing phala tyAgam, do anuShTAnam of the karmas for my prIti alone. By that in due course the chitta shuddhi will arise. Then you can enter the jnAna mArgam." The Karma MArgam here gets elevated as Karma Yogam. (whereas) The jnAna mArgam is always only jnAna yogam.

Yoga means being united, to unite. In the adhyAtma shAstras, the ways that help a jIva to unite in parama satyam, would have been mentioned as yoga. It is not necessary that each of these (yogas) should directly get (a jIva) into the final satya lakShyam. Enough if it is like a lane that gets to the main road. This is also a yoga. That which directly unites in the lakShyam is jnAna yogam. That which gets to that main road is karma yogam. It might take several janmas--births. Still, one day it will get there.

**********

Notes:
01. pazhaiya kuruDi
This usage is from the old Tamil proverb:

பழைய குருடி, கதவைத் திறடி.

pazhaiya kuruDi, kadavaith thiRaDi.
Hey the old blind woman, open the door.

The explanation for this proverb given in the book A Classified Collection of Tamil Proverbs by Rev.Herman Jensen (an 1897 publication) is as follows:

A saint met some blind women in a certain house, and had compassion on them, and gave them their sight, for which they were very grateful. After some time he happened to visit the house again and found the women so prond and ungrateful that they would not open the door for him though he addressed them as above to remind them of their former condition and the blessing he had given them.

" The peril past the saint mocked."

This book can be downloaded at:
http://www.archive.org/download/classifiedcollec00jensiala/classifiedcollec00jensiala.pdf

02. ihAmutra phala

iha-amutra phala. iha--in this world, amutra--there above/in the other world, phala--fruit/gain. Thus, the fruits obtained in the bhUloka and svarga loka.

saidevo
11 February 2010, 10:18 AM
******************************
The decline of karma yoga in passage of time
******************************
pages 301-304

Right at the time sRShTi--Creation, arose, thinking, "In my sRShTi, there should be jIvas with countless manobhAvam--mental attitudes, and this prapancham--universe, should be a nATaka vinodam--dramatic amusement, for me. For this purpose, there should be some svAtantrayam--freedome of the will, for the jIvas. But then the vinodam should not become viparItam--inverted/perverse", BhagavAn revealed through the Vedas the two paths, pravRtti and nivRtti mArgams.

In ancient times, during the pUrva yugas--bygone Yugas, people took up the mArgam that was destined for them and obtained shreyas--excellence. Some people went in nivRtti; and the others engaged themselves in pravRtti. One important thing about it was that: without allowing their jIva svAtantrayam run as they pleased, the people of the pUrva yugas, all of them, were of the thought to do things only for Ishvara prIti, in obedience to Ishvara. So, their desires did not go branching off, crossing the limit. What happened by this was that, although they did karmas for bhogya phalas until a certain time (in life), thereafter their attachment in those saukhyas--comforts, diminishing, they thought about redeeming their AtmA. But they had realized that they did not have the yogyatA for jnAna niShTa--meditation. Therefore, doing phalatyAgam that would take them there, they were doing anuShTAnam of the karma mArgam as karma yogam itself. The pravRtti dharma in those ancient days was shining in a lofty state as the very karma yogam itself. Progressing in this yogam, after excellent chitta shuddhi arose, obtaining sannyAsam and going in nivRtti, people were getting the mokSham.

Since in the Dharma ShAstras nivRtti has been prescribed as vAnaprastham, and sannyAsam after the gRuhasthAshramam, as a general way of life, it is known that everyone was doing it in their life in such a manner. It is known that although up to a certain age they did karmas in kAmyam--having desires, and enjoyed the bhogas--pleasures, therafter reducing their attachments, they started it (their living) as nishkAmya yoga. KAlidAsa in his 'RaghuvaMsham' has spoken about the SUrya VaMsha RAjas only in this way. Although in their yauvanam--youth, they were such as to have attachment in the viShaya sukham--objective/sensual pleasures, they dropped their sharIram--body, on their antimam--death, only after becoming yogis (see note 01).

Even in those days, there might have been some people who could not make yoga of their karma. But then they would also have known 'although it is not possible for us, only that is the way to nitya-shreyas--permanent excellence', adoring and doing namaskAram--prostrations, to the karma yogis and jnAna yogis. They did not seek to do sthApana--uphold/establish, that only their karma mArgam (where there is no yoga) was the highest.

Later, as years rolled by, desires began to swell in the people. Thereby, doing karma in desire of their gains, for phala only, increased. Obtaining chitta shuddhi doing phala tyAgam, and then going in nivRtti--this was steadily declining. Those who did karma this way (for phala only) had written it down as a great siddhAnta: "Only this is right. Only this is the parama puruShArtha sAdhana. The sannyAsa mArgam that gave up karma is very wrong." Repudiating Ishvara, Atma sAkShAtkAram and such things, they developed the siddhAnta, "vedokta karma gives phala on its own. There is no phala-dAdA as Ishvara. No AtmAnanda mokSham without any kAryam--action. Let us go to svargam--heaven, doing the karmas prescribed in the Vedas only for their phala. Even if there is a mokSha above the svargam, how can it be said that it will be obtained by mere jnAna vichAram without any action? What we need to do until the end is only karma. If that mokSha could come thereby, let it come."

The UpaniShads which are the ending parts of the Vedas, speak about nivRtti jnAnam and sAkShatkAram--Self realization. They are called the uttara bhAgam--rear part, of the Vedas. Repudiating that which is called the jnAna kANDam, and accepting only the karma kANDam described in the pUrva bhAgam--front part, of the Vedas, the siddhAnta thus developed, has the names 'pUrva mImAMsA' and 'karma mImAMsA'. 'mImAMsa' means 'investing into good things'.

The siddhAnta developed on the basis of the jnAna kANDam which is the uttara bhAgam has the name 'uttara mImAMsA'. Still, the custom is to refer to it as 'VedAnta'. Since it is the shAstra--scripture, relating to the UpaniShads that occur at the anta--end, of each veda shAkhA==branch of Veda, the name 'VedAnta' arose for it. And the custom arose to refer to the 'pUrva mImAMsA' as (just) 'mImAMsA'. Let this subject be on one side.

**********

Notes:
01. RaghuvaMsham

शशवे अभ्यस्थ विद्यानाम् यौवने विषय एणिनाम् ।

वार्थके मुनि वृत्तीनाम् योगेन अन्ते तनु त्यजताम् ॥१.८॥


shashave abhyastha vidyAnAm yauvane viShaya eNinAm |
vArthake muni vRuttInAm yogena ante tanu tyajatAm ||1.8||

About those who in their adolescence are masterly in studies; in adulthood predisposed for material pleasures; in old-age gravitating towards saintlike activities, and at end-time yoking their minds with the Absolute and ultimately evicting their souls from their bodies to attain mokSham.

saidevo
12 February 2010, 08:03 AM
**************************************
Upadeshas of the two MArgas
**************************************
pages 304-307

Since the days of sRShTi--Creation, sending mahApuruShas--great men, as AchAryALs--teachers, BhagavAn used to get the upadesham--instruction/teaching, of the two dharmas known as prVRtti and nivRtti done. Since nivRtti is the final mokSha siddhi, he remained as the guru for it in DakShiNAmUrti rUpam. That is Paramashiva svarUpam. One he is chiefly (the deivam--deity) for nivRtti. ViShNu too gave upadesham of nivRtti mArgam in the rUpas--forms, HaMsAvatAra, DattAtreyIya and HayagrIva. Still, in these (avatAras), he did not show that much shakti--power, as he did in his DashAvatAram.

DakShiNAmUrti, HaMsa and HayagrIva did not give jnAnopadesham doing saMchAram--wandering about, in the lokam--world. People like the SanakAdi--four Sanaka saints, and BrahmA sought them and had upadesham. DakShiNAmUrti, instead of teaching in words, would do anugraham--favour, of it as anubhavam--experience.

Now, when we pray to the Gods, many of our prayers get fulfilled. But that Deivam does not do it becoming pratyakSham--visible. They do it in sUkShmam--through subtle planes, is it not? In that way, there are people who prayed to DakShiNAmUrti and HayagrIva for jnAnam and got, are getting that anugraham in sUkShmam.

If it is shivAlayam--Shiva's temple, knowing that there as jnAna dAdA he would be present in DakShiNAmUrti rUpam, everyone including the rustic people, would for a kShaNam--moment, closing their eyes, would pray to him, although they don't know what is jnAnam. It can't be said to this extent about HayagrIva. Thus it is (the tradition), to think only about Paramashiva for the nivRtti mArgam.

Those who did saMchAram like DattAtreyIya--the SanakAdi, were also only ViShNu's aMshAvataras; they too would do saMchAram; and these people gave upadesham of nivRtti
to many people at different times. Still, they did not go teaching their shiShya jana--disciples/pupils, planning only that upadesha kAryam as their siddhAnta.

For the pravRtti dharma, ParamAtma did not need to do so much directly by himself. Since going in jnAnam as nivRtti, giving up kAryam, giving up manas--mind, is difficult for the people, in uddesham--pupose, of it, he acted to send greater number of mahAns and also give the upadesham himself. The manuShya svabhAvam--human nature, being going in action with their mind and kAryas--tasks, for the pravRtti sAdhana done using these very things, it was sufficient to teach them by their vidyAbhyAsa guru--educational teacher, according to the shrauta, smArta shAstras.

• Still, it was such in the Adi--ancient times, that only BhagavAn had to give upadesham to Vivasvan, that is SUrya, the rahasya--secret, that if these karmAnuShTAnas are done niShkAmya, it would become the yogam that could provide the chitta shuddi necessary for progressing in the nivRtti mArgam.

• SUrya in turn did upadesham to Vaivasvata Manu, the adhipati--lord/ruler, of our manvantara (see note 01), the pravRtti dharma of karma yoga (that is, one that paves the way for the nivRtti mArgam). Vaivasvata means 'son of Visvan'.

• Vaivasvata Manu in turn did upadesham to his son and the first rAjA of the SUryakula--Solar Dynasty, IkShvAku.

Thus the pravRtti dharma as karma yoga was given in upadesham through the lineage of sons for a long time and was observed as such.

• That to the Vivasvan who is SUrya he did upadesham of the karma yoga, and it reached through the lineage of sons to aneka rAjariShis--many royal sages, BhagavAn has mentioned in his GItA (beginning of the fourth chapter).

Both the yogas, karma and jnAna, are given upadesham--instructions, in the GItA. In addition, the bhakti yoga, which I have not mentioned till now, is also given upadesham.

**********

Notes:
01. manvantara

One day of BrahmA when he acts in his jAgrat--waking, state, comprises a thousand chatur yugas--four Yugas. The sRShTi--Creation, also will function during that time. When that time ends, BrahmA's night comprising another thousand chatur yugas will be born. He would sleep during that time; and the sRShTi to will shrink into him, without any fuction. This is what is called the kalpa praLayam. When the night ends and the next day of BrahmA starts, the SRShTi will be started again.

During the time of one thousand chatur yugas when sRShTi is functioning, fourteen Manus will appear and lord over the sRShTi. The ruling time of a Manu is thus known as manvantara. At the end of the time of each Manu, there will be Manvantara PraLaya. The next Manu will appear as the first prajA--citizen, and create the manuShya kulam--humanity. During the present ShvetasvarAha kalpam, we are in the manvantara of the seventh Manu who is Vaivasvata.

saidevo
14 February 2010, 09:55 AM
************************
bhakti
************************
pages 307-310

Since the flow (of my lecture) was about pravRtti and nivRtti as doing kAryas and not doing any, the karma yoga that is kAryam, and the jnAna yoga that gives up kAryas and remains in ekAntam--solitude, doing dhyAna vichAram,--only these two were mentioned and it was left at that.

Bhakti comes as kAyam--action, and ShaDanggam--rites, involved in the pUja.

It will go up to (the stage of) actionless meditation sitting in savikalpa samAdhi, without any iha-prajna--sense about the physical world, getting captivated in BhagavAn. "Even that relation of getting captivated in him is not enough, should get merged in him without any sort of separation"--thus when bhakti reaches such a uchcha--lofty, level, that same bhakti would become jnAna.

In the jana samUham--society of people, the majority will be such that they don't take to tattva research as yoga, vedAnta, mImAMsa. To all the people including these people, as alpam--small/minute, or svalpam--very small/very minute, only bhakti is the one that sets in them as svAbhAvika--natural/peculiar/spontaneous, in some way or other. There is no talk here about the nAstikas--atheists, or the mImAMsakas who set aside Ishavara prastAvam--eulogizing God, as unnecessary.

To any person in general, the thought of bhakti, "For this world to be born and going on in this way, there should be a mahAshakti--a great power, as the reason. We should be in obedience to it", would never cease to arise.

Although they are karma sangis--attached to action, generally people will not accept the mImAMsa concept that there is no necessity for a phala-dAtA as Ishvara. They would only look at him as the mahAshakta who could fulfil any of their wishes. Money, education, health, promotion whatever, although they keep doing kArya, endeavouring to get all these, they would still keep holding their bhakti towards him to the extent they know about it, with the consideration that only if his grace is there, what is wanted would be accomplished. Although people who say "This is not bhakti, only vyApAram--business," keep saying it, these people think that they are in bhakti as far as they are concerned.

Although those who know that it is the same God who grants his blessings through many devatas do parihAsam--make fun, of people who stop at doing ArAdhana--worship, to each devata for each kAmana--wish/desire, without knowing the truth, even in these (latter) people, in some corner, a real thought of bhakti to the Eka ParamAtma, is not absent altogether.

Since the kAmanas--wishes/desires, would be according to the guNas of the individuals, in the arrangement of doing upAsana--worship, to different deiva bhedas--deity distinctions, to get these (desires) fulfilled, and to set up an upAsana mArga--worship path, in accordance with their guNa, several things that are not good, also arrive in worship. Just as the karma yoga declined among the MImAMsakas, it happens that the bhakti yoga too declines to a low level. Bhagavan has spoken about this (subject) too in his GItA.

• He has spoken in the adhyAya--chapter (7), called 'jnAna vijnAna yoga' about the subjects of doing upAsana--worship, to several devatas in kAmyam--fulfilment of desires, and obtain phalas--fruits, that are nashvara--perishable; and doing upAsana of the paramAtmA who is ekam--only one, and obtain shAsvata phalas--permanent/imperishable fruits.

• Then, before closing, in the chapter (17) called 'shraddhAtraya vibhAgayoga', he describes, "People of sattva guNa satya devatas, rajo guNis yakSha-rAkShasas, and of tAmasa guNa bhUta pretas do worship to." Here, worship methods that are obscene, worship methods like the narabali--human sacrifice, that are krUra--bloddy/cruel, are also included.

I came to tell you about how bhakti--devotion, arises in different levels with different things, from the parAkAShTa--boundless, state of the nivRtti mArga, to the mahA-nIcha--very low, action of chopping at the neck and giving in sacrifice, in pravRtti.

There can only be two things as pravRtti and nivRtii in opposition to each other? Where can another come as the third? Which why the mention of only karma and jnAna, and the omission of bhakti that arises in svAbhAvikam in sakala janas--all people, and goes embracing everything from the low state of karma to the high state of jnAna.

• The jnAni who knows anubhava-pUrva--through experience, that the world is mAyA, also goes melting in bhakti: "Remaining such a ParamAtma, as atIshvara--God beyond, to mAyA, what all the things he plays (in his lIlA)!"

• There are parama bhaktas--supereme devotees, who set aside jnAnam as not at all necessary, and also set aside samsAra pravRtti in the same way, and do dhyAna--meditation, only about his mahimas--greatness/majesty/power, and experience him in sAkShAt--manifestly, in the bhAva--frame of mind, such as vAtsalyam--fatherly affection.

• There are those who stay in pravRtti and pray that only he should give them the jnAna bhikSha--alms of knowledge, and take them to nivRtti.

• Karma yogins also do bhakti upAsana--devotional worship, because, to obtain the yogyatA--fitness, which would get them into jnAna yoga, along with the chitta shuddha, the chitta aikAkriyam (singular concentration) is also required to be obtained and to hold the chittam in a single thought, only the Ishvara chintana--thinking about God, helps. In addition, doing arpaNam--submission, of the phalas of their kAryas to him, considering him as the phala-dAtA, they worship him in this way.

• Without being (karma) yogins, people like us who go in action only wishing their fruits, do something which we are thinking is bhakti, praying, "I shall break coconuts, do anga-pradakShNa--rolling over, SvAmI! Please do this, do that for me."

• There are people who even more crudely, and as bIbhadsa--loathsome, indulge in madyapAna--drinking intoxicating liquors, strI-bhoga--sexually enjoying women, and up to chopping a kaDA--(Tamil)he-goat, (in sacrifice), doing it all thinking them as (acts of) bhakti.

Whatever it is, all of it in the end has to be included in either one of pravRtti and nivRtti. Which is why it was stopped mentioning only them (leaving out bhakti).

• Still, in addtion to mentioning that the Karma KANDam of the Vedas as AdhAra--support, for pravRtti dharma, their JnAna KANDam as the AdhAra for nivRtti dharma, some people would mention as the AdhAra for the bhakti worship, an UpAsanA KANDam in the same Vedas.

• In the GItA, three yogas as karma, bhakti and jnAna are clearly mentioned. Some would also say that the first six adhyAyas--chapters comprise the karma ShaDgam, the next six chapters bakti ShaDgam, and the six chapters that follow as the concluding part as jnAna ShaDgam.

**********

saidevo
15 February 2010, 07:16 AM
****************************************
The Yogas that the GItA speaks about
****************************************
pages 311-313

Thus, in addition to mentioning the three yogas, for each subject that occurs as their parts in the eighteen adhyAyas--chapters, BhagavAn has given the very name yoga. Only the 'sAMkhya yoga' (chapter 2) and 'karma yoga' (ch.3) are the ones that directly (in that order) refer to the nivRtti mArga and pravRtii mArga. One adhyAya--chapter 12--has the name 'bhakti yoga'.

Apart from these, as 'dhyAna yoga' ('AtmasaMyama yoga', ch.6), 'rAjavidyA-rAjaguhya yoga' (ch.9), 'vibhUti yoga' (ch.10), 'puruShottama yoga' (ch.15)--in this manner, a total of eighteen yogas are given as heading in the GItA. 'Arjuna viShAda yoga' is the name of the first adhyaya. That is, even Arjuna's confusion of mind is called a yoga!

'Was it Only BhagavAn who gave these headings to the eighteen adhyAyas? He was only doing saMvAda--coonversation, with Arjuna? In the middle of it, wherefrom did the chapter heading come?' If such questions are asked, I know not how to reply. The belief that the GItA is what BhagavAn spoke is enough for us. If VyAsa who included it and wrote the (MahA)BhAratam had given the headings, it would be like BhagavAn doing it. VyAsa was also BhagavAn's avatAra, aMshAvatara--avatar in features.

Why did he mention viShAda, that is the confusion of mind, as yoga? Only because of that (the mental confusion) it occurred to him (Arjuna) to think about Atma sambandham--in relation to AtmA? That is why!

Until then with countless people without any confusion of mind, he had fought, won, and obtained the very name 'Vijaya'. Only now, in this KurukShetra, when looking at BhIShma the Grandfather, DroNa the AchArya--teacher, and the Kauravas sons of periyappA--father's elder brother, he got his mind confused, and thoughts such as 'What is to be obtained by winning these people and ruling the rAyjam--country? Compared with this, it is better to get alms and eat.' had arisen in him.

Of course, this is not the virakti--indifference to worldly objects, that arose after his manas--mind, ripened and became mature. One who until now without thinking whether it is hiMsa--violence, or ahiMsa--non-violence, fought the battle with anya manuShas--strangers, with parAkrama--heroism, today in the ajnAna attachment, pAsha bandha--ties of affection, 'O these are all our people', he has thought about it in an asaTTu virakti--stupid indifference. BhagavAn scolds him because, for one who has to do the dharma yuddha--war to establish dharma, he has become so stupid.

Still, only because such a confusion arose, he could think something apart from rAjya bhogam--royal indulgence, about nivRtti? Only because of it, it was sAdhyam--possible, for BhagavAn to teach him the sattya tattvam--principle of Reality?

Until then, except that BhagavAn could do for him only such kAryas--things, as giving SubhadrA in vivAha--marriage, to him, even being dishonest in the task, could he open his mouth towards him (Arjuna) as jnAnopadesham--teaching of jnAna? Therefore, since in some way the viShAda too dropped in the good, that (chapter) has got the name 'viShAda yoga'!

At the time he gave upadesha to Arjuna, BhagavAn went on naming all of it as 'yoga, yoga', which served as upAya--means, and anukUla--favourable, to get chitta shuddhi and obtain ekIbhAvam--feeling of oneness, with ParamAtma. If 'union' is the meaning of 'yoga', whatever helps to unite with ParamAtma are all only yogas? What is the meaning of saying, "For him it is the yogA kAlam, so he takes everything in scoop"? The meaning is that as per his jAtakam--horoscope, the grahas are joined, got united, in good sthAnas--positions, and everything turns out well for him.

Although there are thus several unions, yogas, which is the parama uttama--supremely lofty, yoga? Only to get united with ParamAtma, right? Only that is the Vedas' parama tAtparyam--ultimate aim/purpose/meaning.

********************

saidevo
17 February 2010, 09:13 AM
****************************************
Advaita, the nirantara yoga
****************************************
Underlined English terms are the ones actually used by ParmAchArya.--sd

pages 313-315

Even in uniting thus, the uttama--most elevated, status is to unite with ParamAtma in nirantaram. For 'nirantaram' we take the meaning 'that which is shAsvatam--permanent, in kAlam--time'. That too is not incorrect. 'antaram' means 'gap'. 'nirantaram' is 'one without any gap whatsoever'. Leaving no gap (interval) in time is also right only, but kAlam is one that we add here in our abhiprAyam--opinion. 'nirantaram' means only 'without any gap whatsoever'. Being filled without any gap in space is also 'nirantaram'. Thus, if don't suppy as 'time' and 'space', for 'nirantaram' the only meaning is 'without any gap whatsoever'.

When it is said 'to united with ParamAtma in nirantaram' the meaning is to unite so that there is no gap between him and the jIvAtman. To be united is only to become as One. Until becoming as One, at least some gap will continue to remain. Even if there is a small gap, it would only mean that he is there, we are here, thus (both are in) in bheda--with distinction, remaining separated. So long as it is such, there will remain the bhayam--fear, 'will this gap become larger?' Therefore, without any gap altogether, getting aikyam--unity, with him in 'nir-antaram', should become Him. Called 'jIva-brahma abheda yoga', this is what the shruti-shiras (UpaniShad which is the end of the Veda) gives as the parama uttama yoga--supremely elevated yoga.

• It is mentioned in the TaittIryopaniShad's Brahmavalli part (also known as Anandavalli), "If there is antaram, that is, even a minute gap, minute difference, the fear this union would end at some point of time, would continue to be there." (see note 01).

• One who is mumukShu, only when he remains firm in Brahmam, only then gets his abhaya pratiShTha--fearless esetablishment, it is mentioned thus before that (previous quarter of the verse). (This is) Advaitam. Advaitam is jIvAtma thus uniting with Braham without any distinction as two, and becoming that same Brahmam. (see note 01).

Only to teach this uttama yoga of jIva-brahma abheda, did BhagavAn teach his GItA. But then to him (Arjuna) who was a kShatriya--of ruler class, a karma vIra--hero of deeds, if the nivRtti mArga suitable for this is given immediately, he would not be able to absorb and follow it, so, teaching karma yoga in mukhyam--chiefly, and then teaching many other yogas, in the end he very well explained nivRtti as 'mokSha sannyAsa yoga' (chapter 18).

But then since Arjuna could come to jnAna niShta--meditation for jnAna, only after doing anuShTAnam--observance, of karma yoga, if he did sharaNAgati--surrender, dedicating all his kAryas--tasks, to him (BhagavAn) who is the phala-dhAtA, he ended with the abhaya vAk--words of protection, that he would release Arjuna from sakala pApam--all sins. He finished, stroking Arjuna with parama kAruNyam--supreme compassion, and comforting him with the words, "mA shuchaH"--"dont grieve". (see note 02).

**********

Notes:
01. TaittIrya upaniShad 2.7.1

"For, whenever the aspirant creates the slightest difference in It, he is smitten with fear."

earlier part of the same verse

"For whenever an aspirant gets fearlessly established in this un-perceivable, bodiless, inexpressible, and un-supporting Brahman, he reaches the state of fearlessness."

02. Bhagavad GItA 18.66

सर्वधर्मान्परित्यज्य मामेकं शरणं व्रज ।

अहं त्वा सर्वपापेभ्यो मोक्ष्ययिष्यामि मा शुचः ॥१८.६६॥


sarvadharmAnparityajya mAmekaM sharaNaM vraja |
ahaM tvA sarvapApebhyo mokShyayiShyAmi mA shuchaH ||18.66||

18.66 Abandoning all forms of rites and duties, take refuge in Me alone. I sahll free you from all sins. (Therefore) do not grieve.
--English Translation of Sri Sankaracharya's Sanskrit Commentary--Swami Gambhirananda

******************************

saidevo
20 February 2010, 10:15 PM
************************************************************
The punaruddhAraNam--revival that KaNNan--KRShNa brought about
************************************************************
pages 315-320

The yoga that he taught to SUrya, which was later passed down in teaching in the lineage of the IkShvAku dynasty, in kAlakram--order of time/due course, crumbled, BhagavAn told Arjuna and said, "I have come only to give it a new lease of life by teaching it to you, who is my bhakta--devotee, and sakha--friend", and did his GItopadesham. On the pretext of teaching Arjuna, he taught it to the entire loka--world.

इमं विवस्वते योगं प्रोक्तवानहमव्ययम् ।
विवस्वान्मनवे प्राह मनुरिक्ष्वाकवेऽब्रवीत् ॥ ४.१ ॥

एवं परम्पराप्राप्तमिमं राजर्षयो विदुः ।
स कालेनेह महता योगो नष्टः परन्तप ॥ ४.२ ॥

स एवायं मया तेऽद्य योगः प्रोक्तः पुरातनः ।
भक्तोऽसि मे सखा चेति रहस्यं ह्येतदुत्तमम् ॥ ४.३ ॥

imaM vivasvate yogaM proktavAnahamavyayam |
vivasvAnmanave prAha manurikShvAkave&bravIt || 4.1 ||

evaM paramparAprAptamimaM rAjarShayo viduH |
sa kAleneha mahatA yogo naShTaH parantapa || 4.2 ||

sa evAyaM mayA te&dya yogaH proktaH purAtanaH |
bhakto&si me sakhA cheti rahasyaM hyetaduttamam || 4.3 ||

4.1 (The Blessed Lord said --) I imparted this imperishable Yoga to Vivasvan, Vivasvan taught this to Manu, and Manu transmitted this to Iksavaku.

4.2 The king-sages knew this (yoga) which was received thus in regular succession. That Yoga, O destroyer of foes, in now lost owing to a long lapse of time.

4.3 That ancient Yoga itself, which is this, has been taught to you by Me today, considering that you are My devotee and friend, For, this (Yoga) is a profound secret.
--shankara bhAShya, GambhIrAnanda

ParamAchArya's explanation:

"I taught this imperishable yoga to SUrya. SUryan taught Manu. Manu taught IkShvAku.

"Thus the RAjarishis who came in the vaMsha parampara--lineage of successors, had known it. O destroyer of foes (Arjuna)! In the long passage of time, that yoga became naShTa--withered, in this world.

"You are a bhakta--devotee, to me; also remain as a friend! Only that purAtana--ancient, yoga was explained to you today by me. Isn't this a uttama rahasyaM--a profound secret?"

The yoga BhagavAn refers to here is the Karma Yoga. Only that (yoga), after the RAjarishis--royal sages, did paripAlam--fostered it, bahukAlam--for a long time, had become chaitilyam--dilapidated, during KRShNa's time, so he says that he givee its upadesham again to Arjuna who belongs to the RAjakulam--royam family, and does its punaruddhAraNam--revival. It would appear so if we look at the GItA's immediate context.

But then in the beginning of the previous adhyAya--chapter,--just as he mentioned here about teaching the Karma Yoga in Adi--the beginning of time, to Surya--he has also mentioned that he taught both the JnAna Yoga and the Karma Yoga to the sannyasins called SAMkhyas and the niShkAmya karma mArgis called Yogis.

लोकेऽस्मिन् द्विविधा निष्ठा पुरा प्रोक्ता मयानघ ।
ज्ञानयोगेन साङ्ख्यानां कर्मयोगेन योगिनाम् ॥ ३.३ ॥

loke&smin dvividhA niShThA purA proktA mayAnagha |
j~jAnayogena saa~gkhyAnAM karmayogena yoginAm || 3.3 ||

3.3 The Blessed Lord said -- O unblemished one, two kinds of steadfastness in this world were spoken of by Me in the days of yore-through the Yoga of Knowledge for the men of realization; through the Yoga of Action for the yogis.
--shankara bhAShya, GambhIrAnanda

Therefore it becomes clear that to do punaruddhAraNam--revival, of not only the Karma Yoga for those in the pravRtti, but also the JnAna Yoga for those in the nivRtti, did KRShNa take avatar. When he said these two yogas, it only means 'all the yogas'! Whatever (yoga), that should only come under one of the two, pravRtti and nivRtti?

Even the RAjarishis he mentioned as the descendents of the IkShvAku vaMsham, when they taught the pravRtti dharma, polishing it as Karma Yoga, they could not have stopped abruptly there, without teaching something about the nivRtti dharma, that is JnAna Yoga where it (Karma Yoga) led to. Let their samAchAram--practice, be whatever. BhagavAn certainly did uddhAraNam--foster, of both pvavRtti and nivRtti, giving them new life. In the GItA he has gone teaching about sakala--all yogas only? Still, inasmuch as his upadesha starts at the SAMkhya Yoga meant only for the JnAnis, and ends at the MokSha SannyAsa Yoga, it is known (with certainty) that he establishes only the nivRtti dharma of getting advaita siddhi by jnAnam, as his parama lakShyam--supreme aim/object.

• If BhagavAn has praised the Karma Yoga giving it emphasis in many places to the extent of some people thinking that GItA teaches only Karma Yoga, the reason is only that the direct shiShya Arjuna, who received GItopadesham from him, was adhikArin--entitled to, only Karma Yoga.

Thus, to put in order the two mArgas pravRtti and nivRtti, and establish the jnAna moKSha as the end, and do saMsthApana--regulation of, the vaidika dharma, that the KRShNAvatara took place. In his GItAbhAShya upodghAtaH--preface, AchAryAL has thus made it clear.

Although KRShNa ParamAtma spoke in vyakta--apparently, about only the Karma Yoga that had become naShTa--withered, during his time, during that time in fact all the yogas, all the mArgas, had become impaired, it is thus known from his GItA. Although they had not damaged altogether as it happened in Kali, even in the DvApara Yuga when he took avatAra touching this (Kali) Yuga, it is known that in general there was some destruction in all the mArgas--paths.

• He chides in one place that one who poses externally as having mastered the indryAs--senses, which do the karma--actions, but internally only thinks about the earthly pleasures which are indrya viShaya--within the scope of senses, as mere mithyAchAra, that is a deceiver, hypocrite (see note 01).

This is in nivRtti. That is, this shows that even in those days there were vAi vedAntis--(Tamil) lip Vedantins, who had appeared to have gone in jnAna mArga but actually slipped from that ideal.

• Before this, in the very second adhyAya where he starts his upadesha, he has chided the MImAMsakas (see note 02).

He calls them 'veda vAdaratAs', who without taking the tattvArta--principle, that is the sAra--essence, of the Vedas, analyzing and debating those vAkyas--sentences, only grammatically, and feeling elated about it.

Only by explaining the meaning thus, the MImAMsakas do nirNaya--determine, that the very prayojana--purpose, of the Vedas is in directing the manuShya--man, in karma--actions, and not in going as a sannyAsin in jnAna vichAram, giving up the karma.

He chides these people who do karma only for fulfilment of desires as kAmAtma. He does khaNDanam of--refutes, them as the 'svargaparA', who seek only the world of revelry called Devaloka, instead of seeking the nityAnda--permanent bliss, called MokSha. As they get their bhoga--enjoyment, and aishvarya--wealth, only in this way, they do prasanggam--propaganda, of these vistAra--elaborate, rites in pramAda--madness, and vashIkara--subjugation, whereas in vAstavam--reality, those rites only push (people) into the whirl of birth (he refutes them thus).

He uses the phrase 'puShpitAM vAchaM' to indicate that like doing puShpAlangkAram--decoration with flowers, these people win, doing adornment in words. In English too, they say flowery language. He calls these people 'avipashchita'--unwise/ignorant. This shows that even Karma Yoga had become impoverished during KRShNa's time. 'Yoga that had become naShTa--withered, in later times', as BhagavAn put it.

I mentioned earlier about the wrong paths that appeared in the bhakti mArga too. I mentioned about the rajo-tamo guNa people, in rAjasam and tAmasikam, worshipping everything, up to the YakSha RAkShasas and bhUta pretas.

Only to remove the decay that had thus occurred in all the mArgas, and do punaruddhAraNam--revival, of them, did KRShNAvatAram take place.

You would be knowing what KRShNa said about his avatar, as only for dharma saMsthApana--regulation, of dharma. I began (my lecture) saying that dharma is what is classified as pravRtti dharma and nivRtti dharma. Until the pravRtti mArga was not such as to develop for nivRtti as niShkAmya yoga, KRShNa ParamAtma was not prepared to give it the name 'dharma'. Howevermuch Veda karmAnuShtAnam is done, if it is done for karma phala, there is no prayojana--use; doing sacrifice of the phala, and obtaining the chitta pakvam--mental maturity, to undertake the nivRtti mArgam for nitya saukhyam--permanent welfare, was the prayojana--purpose,--only this was his abhiprAya--opinion. He told as his abhiprAya too, only what is in the VedAnta.

That is what AchAryAL too made prakAsha--shining, polishing it well. Only if the pravRtti is made Karma Yoga, by that Karma Yoga chitta shuddhi, and after obtaining chitta shuddhi, the attachment in karma having gone, the rise of interest in jnAna vichAram and then going in nivRtti, will set in.

If the mImAMsa of doing karma throughout the Ayus--lifetime, for only phala--fruits, is accepted, then where is the nivRtti mArgam? In this way, during the days of KRShNa, chiefly for the nivRtti dharma the hAni--damage/loss occurred, and he took avatAra to do sthApana--regulation/preservation, of both.

**********

Notes:
01. mithyAchAra: GItA

कर्मेन्द्रियाणि संयम्य य आस्ते मनसा स्मरन् ।
इन्द्रियार्थान्विमूढात्मा मिथ्याचारः स उच्यते ॥ ३.६ ॥

karmendriyANi saMyamya ya Aste manasA smaran |
indriyArthAnvimUDhAtmA mithyAchAraH sa uchyate || 3.6 ||

3.6 One, who after withdrawing the organs of action, sits mentally recollecting the objects of the senses, that one, of deluded mind, is called a hypocrite.
--shankara bhAShya, GambhIrAnanda

01. vedavAdaratA: GItA

यामिमां पुष्पितां वाचं प्रवदन्त्यविपश्चितः ।
वेदवादरताः पार्थ नान्यदस्तीति वादिनः ॥ २.४२ ॥

कामात्मानः स्वर्गपरा जन्मकर्मफलप्रदाम् ।
क्रियाविशेषबहुलां भोगैश्वर्यगतिं प्रति ॥ २.४३ ॥

yAmimAM puShpitAM vAchaM pravadantyavipashchitaH |
vedavAdaratAH pArtha nAnyadastIti vAdinaH || 2.42 ||

kAmAtmAnaH svargaparA janmakarmaphalapradAm |
kriyAvisheShabahulAM bhogaishvaryagatiM prati || 2.43 ||

2.42-2.43 O son of Prtha, those undiscerning people who utter this flowery talk--which promises birth as a result of rites and duties, and is full of various special rites meant for the attainment of enjoyment and affluence--,they remain engrossed in the utterances of the Vedas and declare that nothing else exists; their minds are full of desires and they have heaven as the goal.

********************

saidevo
23 February 2010, 07:27 AM
******************************
KRShNa and Shankara
******************************
pages 320-322

What is the subject taken (for discussion)? We came to listen to the story of BhagavadpAdAL; without beginning with where and to whom he was born as the son, it started with pravRtti and nivRtti, and has now stopped at KRShNAvatAram instead of ShankarAvatAram?--it might seem so.

The avashyam--necessity, for the ShankarAvatAram arose, only after the circumstances that prevailed in the KRShNAvatAra kAlam--time of KRShNa's avatar, reached a critical stage. Only in accordance with the vAkku--(Tamil) promise/assurance, that he gave in KRShNAvataram, this man's avatAra was to happen.

• Without KRShNa, there is no AchAryAL. He was the one who spread it all over the world as 'bhaja govindam, bhaja govindam'.

• There is a belief that the very Alaya mUrti--temple deity, who was the kula deivam--family deity, in the place where Shankara was born, was only KRShNa.

• If it has ensued today that if we say 'jagadguru' it is only our AchAryAL, the one who had received that virudhu--title, before him is only KRShNa ParamAtma. There is this very stotram (that extols him) as "kRShNam vande jagadgurum" ('kRShNAShTakam' by Shankara).

• For the GItA that Jagadguru has taught, this Jagadguru has written an explanatory commentary.

Above all these things, at a time when dharma had become so much kShINa--diminished/withered, and adharma swelled gaining control, our AchAryAL's avatAra took place, and even today we listen to his charitram--life, and feel happy, one who had given the assuruance that in such a circumstance such an avatAra must necessarily arise, is only KRShNa ParamAtma. Everyone would be knowing, the vAkku he had given:

dharmasaMsthApanArthAya sambhavAmi yuge yuge || 4.8 ||--GItA

What he said before this as the previous shloka:

yadA yadA hi dharmasya glAnirbhavati bhArata |
abhyutthAnam-adharmasya tadAtmAnaM sRujAmyaham || 4.7 ||

That is, he gave that assurance to us, satyam paNNi--(Tamil) swearing with a gesture of promise: "Whenever there arises hAni--dimunition, for dharma, and a swelling rise for adharma, at those times I shall make an avatAra of myself and come."

Only to save that assurance, shrI ShankarAvatAram took place later. For all such reasons, it is only appropriate to mention that avatAra first and then talk about this avatAra.

Let the llstening to the avatAra kathA--story, be on one side. One should know what for did this avatar take place, isn't it? Which is why all that talk about pravRtti-nivRtti, and karma-jnAna-bhakti. Both the avatAras came about only to do jIrNoddhAra--repair what is ruined, of those ways. Even more than the time of KRShNa ParamAtma, at a time when these ways had gone far ruined, did AchAryAL's avatAra take place, and did punaruddhAraNam--revival, that was mahat--great/huge.

******************************

saidevo
27 February 2010, 11:58 PM
**************************************************
pUrvakAla avatAras--Avatars of Ancient Times
**************************************************
pages 322-325

Even before the KRShNAvatAra, from Matsya to RAmA, seven avatars had taken place. As the eight avatar BalarAma was KRShNa's samakAla--contemporary, I stopped with RAmA. Those avatars were not the ones, that took place to give upadesha--teaching, of pravRtti-nivRtti. Although they might have given some upadesha, it was not the mukhya--chief, goal of that AvatAra. Because in those times the circumstance was not such as to have BhagavAn himself take avatar for upadesham.

• Just as the Karma Yoga was going on well continuously through SUrya--Manu--IkShvAku and then their vaMsha--descendents, as BhagavAn said (in his GItA),

• the JnAna Yoga and Bhakti Yoga too were going on continuously in those times, in an order, through the jnAna-parampara--tradition of JnAna, and bhakti-parampara--tradition of devotion, represented by their guru-shiShya--teacher-disciple.

People in general were going in the right path.

As to why the avatars took place in those times, it was only to destroy the clans of Asuras and RAkShasas, when they came to power and tormented the people. After this saMhAra-kRtyam--act of destruction, was over, people would be going in the good path as before, in nirbhaya--fearlessly. Without any necessity of sAkShAt Ishvara himself doing upadesha by taking birth, it was going on through mahAns--sages. People according to the mental disposition of each, were going in whatever yoga (that suited them), in pravRtti or nivRtti.

In order to make the greatness of jnAnam known, although BhagavAn did give upadesha from time to time through his avatars Datta and HaMsa, it was not necessarity for him to take up his Ishvara-shakti--God's power, in visheShaM--specially, for this purpose. Only if something becomes very chaitilyam--dilapidated, was there the need to spend much shakti--strength, to lift it and make it stand upright as before? This is why they (our ancestors) distinctly classified

• the avatars required for the asura-rAkShasa saMhAram--destruction of the Asuras and RAkShasas, as BhagavAn's sAkShAt-shaktimat--with visible divine power, DashAvatAras--ten avatars;

• and the avatars he took for upadesham, such as the SanakAdiya, Nara-NArAyaNa, Kapila, Datta, VyAsa as aMshAvatAras--avatars with a share of divine power.

• There is a count of twenty-four avatars. In that will be included the DashAvatAra and these jnAnopadesha avatars; in addition, those of Dhanvantari, Mohini, etc. will also come under (this count).

What happened after RAmAvatAra and before KRShNAvatAra was that, the Asura-RAkShasas, instead of remaining as they were, excessively did Avesha--enter/take possession, of several rAjAs--kings, who were in manuShya-rUpam--human form.

• KaMsa, JarAsaMdha and the Kauravas were born in the very manuShya-jAti--human species. Still, they were of the asura-guNa--Asuric temperament.

• ParashurAma too started with the saMhAram--destruction, of a rAja-kuTumbam--royal household, going madonmatta--intoxicated with passion. But then later he went on destroying even those kings who were not such (madonmatta), and finally got defeated in the hands of RAmA--thus the story goes differently.

It was only during KRShNa's time were the Asuras committing atrocities in the form of many kings. In addition, as original Asuras, there were NarakAsura, BahAsura, and BANAsura.

In this way, some original Asuras, and Asuras in human form as kings who were in much greater number than these, during KRShNa's time were doing hAni--harm/damage to the lokam--world, and the Dharma mArgas.

But then the general public who were in far greater numbers than these (Asuras and Asuric kings) did not in general go off the dharma paths. As mentioned (a while ago), although there were people in the jana-samUham--community, who were those who did only vaRaTTu--(Tamil) meaningless/ill-advised karmas, those who followed krUra upAsana--bloddy/cruel worship, and those who did hypocrisy--pretended, as possessing jnAna without actually attaining it, more than them in large numbers were the people, who went only in the right paths.

Even then, considering that the worst might spread as disease, KRShNa ParamAtma, keeping Arjuna in focus, did upadesham of the pravRtti and nivRtti dharma, polishing them very well.

Still, it can't be said that he took avatar only for this (purpose). Having many other uddesham--purpose, only, did he take avatar as a pUrNAvatAra--complete avatar, with full Ishvara-shakti--divine power. The bhUmi--earth, suffered by the adhikrama--invasion, of the Asuras who were disguised as kings. Goddess BhUmAdevI went to BrahmA and complained. He in turn took her and the Deva-samUham--Deva community, to MahAviShNu and appealed to him. Only listening to that, MahAviShNu did KRShNAvatAra--thus it is narrated in the BhAgavatam.

To relieve the earth of its burden of the Asuras in the form of kings by destroying them, to do upadesham of good ways, and along with these two (purposes), to do and show exhaustively all that is possible as a deivam--God, and manuShya--man,--in this way only he came with pUraNa-shakti--complete power, in that avatAram.

• From stealing butter then get spanked by the cowherd women, and then doing rAsakrIDA--rasa dance/sport, with those very women;

• big acts such as the Govardhana-uddhAraNam--holding up the Govardhana hill on a finger, vishvarUpa-darshanam--giving darshan of his universal, all-pervasive form;

• small acts such going as a messenger, and driving a chariot;

• doing anugraha--divine favours, to people like the PANDavas, DraupadI, and Kuchela, so much as to make us wonder if bhakta-vAtsalyam--parental love towards devotees, can go to ways and levels;

thus he did whatever many things, in such great number. Upadesha was a mukhya kArya--chief task, in what he did, but it was not his full task. While he sported in the bhUlokam--world of earth, in the nara-veSha--guise of man, only after three-fourths of his lifetime had gone by, did he open his mouth as jnAnAchArya--teacher of knowledge, for giTopadesham--teaching of GItA.

Later, before finishing his naralIlA and returning to paramapadam--highest state, he did another upadesha to a parama-bhakta called Uddhava svAmi. It has the name 'Uddhava GItA'. For the upadesha done to Arjuna, based on the one who did upadesha, the name 'Bhagavad GItA' came into vogue. For the upadesha done as the last act in the avatar, however, the name 'Uddhava GItA' came into vogue, based on one who listened to it.

******************************

saidevo
02 March 2010, 08:35 AM
****************************************
Kali Yuga: in the beginning and later
****************************************
pages 325-327

Kali Yuga was born a short time before KRShNa took up his paramapada-ArohaNam--ascension to his highest abode. Nevertheless, without letting the world fall into the worst immediately, what BhagavAn had done, were giving a helping hand, propping up, saving and lifting (the world from falling). In a way to make the anuShTAnam of the less powerful people of the Kali Yuga possible, VedaVyAsa BhagavAn who was an aMshAvatAra,

• classified the Vedas (into four collections). By them, by their very karma-kANDa, and jnAna-kANDa vidhis--injunctions, he secured the pravRtti-nivRtti mArgas from being crushed and struck off.

• In addition, collecting in essence, the adhyAtma tattvas--principles of the Self, which across all the upaniShads remained spread, unfolded, and scattered, he gave it to the world as 'Brahma SUtra', like threading maNis--beads of gems, in a sUtra--string, and thus did visheSha upakAra--special assistance, for the jnAna mArgam--nivRtti dharma.

• For the Anmika mEmbADu--(Tamil)spiritual development, of sarvajana--all the people, he gave the eighteen purANas in anugraham--divine favour, and gave pOshAkku--(Tamil)nourishment/sustenance, to the Bhakti mArga too.

By all these (efforts), even after Kali was born, for two thousand, two thousand and five hundred years, people were mostly going in the right path.

There is a definite computation (of time) that Kali (Yuga) was born in 3102 BCE. Since in the saMkalpam--ritual vow/declaration, done in the vaidika karma--Vedic rite, pratidinam--daily,

• from which year (vayas--age) in BrahmA's Ayus--lifetime,
• which kalpa in that (age), which manvantara in that kalpa,
• which year in which Yuga of the chaturyuga--four Yuga, cycle in that manvantara,
• until which ayanam--solstice, Rtu--season, mAsam--month, pakSham--fortnight, tithi--(lunar) day in that year,

as that day is mentioned up-to-date, it is known without any scope for doubt as to when the Kali Yuga began. It was in this time (of Kali Yuga) that the lokam--world, was going to some extent in the right path only, for nearly two thousand years, that is, until 2500 years before today (see note 01).

Even then, since in BhagavAn's sport, it was constituted to give adhikAram--power to rule, to Kali PuruSha, in (the name of) Yuga Dharma, later, his cheShTa--mischievous behaviour, started increaing.

Notes:
2500 years before today

ParamAchArya has thus mentioned Shankara's avatAra kAlam--time of avatar, in the opinion that it happened 2500 years ago. Details in his exposition titled "shrI Shankara's kAla nirNayam--ascertainment of shrI Shankara's age".

******************************

saidevo
08 March 2010, 08:35 AM
**************************************************
The great danger of Kali: disguise of allurement
**************************************************
pages 327-329

As to what is the mukhya--chief great danger in this Yuga, it is that a dangererous vastu--article/subject/concept, without being visible as such, coming in the disguise as a very good one and alluring (the people). Only when the danger in something is known as danger, can we safeguard ourselves from it? And if we are dhIra--intelligent and brave, we can also have a fight with and keep it in under control?

• In the pUrva Yugas, when the Asuras appeared as apAya hetu--cause of destruction, their krUra rUpam--cruel form, and the cruel acts they did explicitly--when these were known to the people, they tried to keep away (from the Asuras). Still, when these Asuras fell on them snatching (things and lives), the people prayed to BhagavAn with the thought "we can't have a fight with these forces". BhagavAn too took avatAra and did saMhAram--annihilation of the Asuras. Just as when a thorn stings (the flesh), its removal restores immediate wholesomeness (to the affected part) thereafter, the jana samUham--community (I include the deva samUham--Devas community too), became normal and was going in the right path.

• Even in KRShNAvatAra, it was possible to differentiate the people such as KaMsa, sishupAla, JarAsaMdha, and Duryodhana as duShTas--bad, who caused danger to dharma.

It was thus in the pUrva Yugas that different duShTa groups did hiMsa--injury, and after BhagavAn took avatar and annihilated it, the lokam--world became normal. And there were mahAns--sages in great numbers, who preached the righteous path. After the duShTas were destroyed, they would start their work in nirbhayam--free from danger. There was no necessity for the BhagavatavatAra himself, either by doing upadesham to the people or showing it by living, to establish the pravRtti-nivRtti mArgas. Still, if the avatars did take place but did not do duShTa-nigraham--suppress evil, the duShTas would have completely destroyed these two mArgas. In this rIti--manner, the avatars did rakShaNam--protection, of the Veda Dharma.

In those times, the evil did not come in the disguise of good and brought the sarva janas--all the people, under their control by alluring them. The evils (on the other hand), instead of looking vazhIkaraNa--bewitching, and acting with priyam--love, remained to be known as evil in spaShTam--clear perception, and tried to bring the people under their control. Therefore, knowing it well as bad, the people could remain resolved not to submit.

In Kali (Yuga), the group of Asuras and the RAkShasa jAti do have not a separate existence. That is, as such outside the manuShya jAti--human race. Understand it, no? Only inside the brains of the manuShyas--humans, have the Asuras and RAkShasas entered! In this Yuga, the adharma shakti--evil power, instead of remaining outside in bautikam--as living beings, and attacking people, have entered their buddhi as evil chitta-vRttis--mental modifications!

******************************

saidevo
08 March 2010, 08:36 AM
******************************
Founders of new religions
******************************
pages 329-331

Many people came, inciting and stirring up this (adharma shakti in mind), to push the people deep into evil. These people also did not seem as krUra Asuras. They appeared in a way that everyone believed them as only thinking about the people's hitam--welfare, teaching them the satyam--truth, and living only to safeguard their AtmA. Some of them were also seen having good education, knowledge, debating skills, and high shIlam--moral conduct, in personal life. In vAstavam--actually, their purpose might have been good. Even in what they taught, there was no absence of some good aMshas--aspects.

• Still, when looked at in totality, what everyone of them said and taught, was in virodha--opposition to the Veda mArgam, which systematized in pUrNam--completely, the pravRtti-nivRtti dharmas for the genuine AtmAbhivRddhi--spiritual welfare, of the people.

Although their teachings looked good superficially, if one gets inside it, they were such as to do no sahAyam--help, to both the iham--this world, and param--the other world. Even though it was such, one should not speak low of the respect of those who taught this way. We need not also be in doubt of their good purpose. Some people among them would even have been such as having received a great personal anubhavam--experience.

• Still, in their teaching it to the others, they made these other people leave the Veda mArgam that was the royal path for all the iha-para kShemas--welfare, and go in lanes, holes and wild tracts. Thus, at that time, people had fallen in the dark jungle of ajnAnam--ignorance. It is described thus: "ajnAnandar-gahana-patitAn" (this verse will be explained in full later). 'gahanam' means a dense and dark forest.

Thus, many people started appearing at that time, making the common people leave the Veda Dharma.

As to who those people were, they were the ones who founded many (new) matas--religions, and siddhAntas--doctrines; or those who made the abhiprAyas--opinions, that had already sprouted just a little somewhere but had gone covered with earth, now flourish and grow into big siddhAntas, by manuring them.

• Whoever they were, they were the ones who made siddhAntas, which were in virodham--opposition, to the Veda Mata--Vedic Religion, that was SanAtana Dharma--Universal/Eternal Dharma, founded by the Rishis on Ishvara PreraNa--God's directions.

Among these people, who came as the mUla-puruShas--founders of matas--religions and siddhAnta pravartaka--promotors of new doctrines, there are two classes.

• One class did not oppose the Vedas altogether, and did not say that their doctrine was made in refutation of the Vedas. Whereas in vAstavam--reality, their doctrine, unlike the Vedas classifying as pravRtti-nivRtti and then linking them as one after the other, was such as to take only one (of the two mArgas), or only a few aspects of the one (mArga) they took, and conclude it as the final.

• The other class were those who created new religions, in total and explicit refutation of the Vedas. The religions Bauddha, Jaina and ChArvAka are of this kind. Just as it was named Bauddha and Jaina, with reference to their mata-sthApakas Buddha and Jina, to speak of the ChArvAka too (using the name of its sthApaka), it should be called BArhaspatam. Since it was a matam--religion, established by BRhaspati, (it was) BArhaspatam.

******************************

saidevo
23 March 2010, 12:15 PM
**************************************************
Bauddha, ShramaNa religions and the Hindu religion
**************************************************
pages 331-335

That I now criticize the Bauddha and Jaina matas--religions in my speech might make you feel sorry. Because you would have read highly about Buddha and Jaina in our history books. It is saMdeham--doubtful, if about any other mata puruShas--religious greats, so much is spoken about with such highness in the pATha pustakas--school text books.

In what they say as GAndhIyam and the principles of progress in tatkAlam--present time, since the Bauddha, Jaina religions have given a place (in their doctrines) to ahiMsA--not-injuring,

and giving all the rights equally to sakala janas--all the people, without any varNAshrama-bheda--class distinctions,

they are given such heights (in the school text books).

And since there is himsA--injury, in yajnam--fire sacrifices, and the people are classified according to their birth and given various adhikAras--authority/eligibility, has the lesser abhiprAyam--opinion, risen towards the Hindu Matam.

But then, only with careful attention to things such as that

• for the jana samudAyam--society of people, to grow and progress properly, various types of kAryas--actions/work, need to be done, and that

• people are of different kinds in deha-rIti--bodily, and mano-rIti--mentally,

and deciding that

• the same type of dharma should not be prescribed
• the same type of anuShThAnas--observances/practices, and works should not be given

to all the people, the varNa-vibhAgam--class distinctions ('caste divisions' as referred to in practice), has been worked out in our Matam--religion,

• to facilitate everyone (of all the classes) to progress upward (spiritually). This is a social order.

In order that all the works and services required for the jana samudAyam are done in thalaimuRai-kramam--the course of generations, without any competitions or shortfall, they apportioned the kAryas--actions, in this order.

In the same way, for the individual man to have orderly progress in life,

• to facilitate his going up stage after stage in pakvam--maturity, through brahmacharyam, gArhasthyam, vAnaprastham and saMnyAsam--bachelorhood, householdership, hermitic life, and asceticism,

the Ashrama-vibhAgam--division of life stages, was done.

If lofty dharmas such as ahiMsA are prescribed as compulsive anuShThAna--observance, for sakala--everyone, it would only be that no one would be able to observe it.

• Therefore, if a class is marked as the ideal among the people, and only for that class of people it (a lofty dharma) is prescribed as a must, they would preserve it with alertness and a feeling of pride;

• and the others too will surely follow it, at least to some extent, with the thought 'we should also try out, in accordance with this ideal';

it is with this idea that the dharmas were classified.

If we look at it in pratyakSham--as visible reality, today

• only in the Bauddha deshas--Buddhist countries, even the bhikShus--Buddha sages, do take mAMsa bhojanam--meat as food.

• Even in those places, as sanyam--army, yuddham--war, in the rAjAngga-rIti--manner of the government, and murder and robbery in the tani-manuShya-rIti--manner of individual man, do aggessive incidents continue to happen.

• Even in our country, except Ashoka, those who were Bauddha, Jaina kings did not remain without indulging in wars. Still, only at the samayas--times, when they remained in a dilemma, feeling guilty that this was not suitable for their religious doctrine, were there no powerful empires and the people from anya desha--foreign countries, have invaded (our land). Later, even they (those Bauddha, Jaina kings) had to fight in wars. That is, they were constrained to go against their religion.

Thus in the religions where it was prescribed that 'all dharmas are for all people',

• there was not even a facility as in our religion which classified the dharmas, so at least one specific class could live their dharma in firmness, and, motivated by their example, the others to go in that dharma to some extent,

• it has happened that all the people are equal only in giving up their dharma and thus come into a great doSha--religious deficienty, that all of them disregarded their mata-vidhis--religious regulations.

To show that in the Vaidika Matam--religion of the Vedas, the precepts of dharmas and kAryas being classified in adhikAra bheda--eligibility differences, has given Atma-shreyas--spiritual welfare, not just to some single jAti--caste, but to sakala--everyone, it is enough to mention only one thing:

• Only in this one religion have the mahAns and jnAnis born in great numbers in sakala jAtis--all castes, in every caste (practically), and the honour from the whole world celebrating only our country as the Land of saints has come to us.

• Only in our country, as mahonnata kalAchAram--the greatest civilization, where the social life has been stable and sustained for several thousands of years,

‣ and as classified in our Religion, it was made possible for the many vargas--classes, in our samUham--society, to do their work properly, so that the entire society could progress regularly in kaTTukkOppu--(Tamil) cohesive solidarity,

‣ while all the great societal traditions such as the Babylonian civilization, Egyptian civilization, and Greek civilization, which in the Adi-kAlam--ancient times, were in their aggressive glory (koDikaTTippaRa~ndha) had all gone vanishing without a trace,

‣ if this Hindu civilization alone, in spite of receiving countless attacks from without and within, is still remaining with jIvan--life, in defiance,

to give this (civilization) thus a shakti in special, what is there in it which is not there in the other civilizations?

If this subject is done Alochanam of--considered, Ara amara--(Tamil) in leisurely settlement of thoughts, in naDunilai--(Tamil) impartiality, the kAraNam--reason, would be known as the varnAshrama vibhAgam--occupational classification, which is present only in this civilization.

That is, only this arrangement has, on the one side

• giving poShaNa--nourishment, to tani-manuSha-Atma-abhivRtti--individual man's spiritual development, has made these many mahAns--sages, to appear (in this civilization/country);

• If one class is reserved for the ideal stage, isn't it natural that a number of mahAns appear in that class, and people from other classes follow them doing prayatna--persevering efforts, and (many of them) attain a similar state?

• Although it is the people from a single class, the jnAnam, bhakti, shAntam and anbu--knowledge, devotion, tranquillity and love they attained, without stopping as the belonging to that class only, radiates throughout the samUham--society, and paves for mahAns to appear in all the classes.

and on the other side,

• only this varnAshrama-vibhAgam has secured the great jana samudAyam--population of this desham--country, as a great tradition and civilization where the jIvashakti--life force, has been sustained (throughout the ages).

**********

saidevo
26 March 2010, 09:33 AM
******************************
himsA--injury, in the yajnas
******************************
pages 335-337

If the Vedas have given the yajna karmas wherein it appears that there is the aMsha--share, of himsA--injury, to that specific varNa which is formed specially for a sAttvika--virtuous life, will it be one without any nyAya--justice/fairness?

• The ShAstram--scripture says that by yajna-bali--sacrifice in fire rituals, certain deva shaktis--divine powers, get prIti--satisfaction, and do good for the lokam--world;

• and the sacrified animal too attains satgati--a good passage.

If it is asked that this be proved, if we ask back such persons, "Why don't you prove that this is not so?", what would they do?

In a ShAstram that arose solely in uddesham--purpose, of loka-kShemam--worldly welfare, and in a ShAstram that the world celebrates as teaching the loftiest positions in tattvArtha--spiritual principles, and AtmAnubhavam--spiritual experience, will there be prescribed unnecessarily thus--to do Ahuti--oblation, in agni--fire, a prANi--animal?

If in the name of yAga--oblation, had the brAhmAnas done prANi-vadha--killing animals, in large numbers and eaten them, it is certainly a fault. Still, except that some rAjA like BimbisAra for the Adambaram--fanfare of it, would have done it employing the brAhmaNas, in any yajna there is no avashyam--necessity, for this many prAni-bali--animal-sacrifice.

In evidence that it is a fault doing slaughter of animals in large numbers, there is an upAkhyAnam--incident, in BhAgavatam. A king named PrAcIna Barhis was there. He conducted yAgas--sacrifices large numbers of pashus--goats. NArada came down to stop it and impart him the right knowledge. One who came down, what he did was that, he showed the king a scene that was to take place in the svargam--heaven. In that scene is a large group of goats. Every goat has strong horns with sharp, iron caps. Instead of being sAdhu--well-disposed, those goats are ugra--fierce, like the tiger and lion, whetting their horn-caps and getting ready to tear down at something.

"aiaiyo--an exclamation of fear, why are these animals doing thus in viparItam--perversely? What are they in mustIpu--so prepared and ready, to tear down?" asked PrAcIna Barhis.

To that NArada said, "unakkAkat-thANDA--hey for you only, are these animals waiting! These are only the goats you gave in yajna-bali--slaughtered in sacrifice, beyond any kaNakku-vazhakku--count and tradition. It is only vAstavam--real, that they have attained svarga-prApti--reaching the heaven. Even then, since your doing excessive jIva-hati--killing living beings, is a pApam--sin, they are waiting as to when you would arrive there so they could tear down your bowels." This is the BhAgavata-kathA.

What the brAhmaNas ate was just a kunRimaNi--seed of the creeper crab's eys, and that for the respect as yajna-prasAdam--divine gift of sacrifice--not to fill up their stomach (with it)*.

I came to talk about the tatkAla--current, thinking and celebrating the Bauddha and Jaina religions as higher to Hinduism, for the principles of samatvam--equality, and ahimsA--non-injury.

Note: *For more details on yajna, check this speech by ParamAchArya:
Is Sacrificial Killing Justified?
http://www.kamakoti.org/hindudharma/part5/chap23.htm

**********

saidevo
17 April 2010, 08:35 AM
**************************************************
Not for criticism of other religions, but that there should be no criticism of own religion!
**************************************************
pages 337-340

I have not at all come here to criticise those religions. No religion need to be criticised for the sake of it. If in every matam--religion, for many centuries, there have been different janakkUTTam--(Tamil) crowd of people, they should have been that way, only by seeing some niRaivu--satisfaction/gladness/fullness, in those religions?

Whatever the religion,--by teaching such things as one should not go selfish, should reduce desires, should be kind, should be truthful in conduct,--reveal something above the worldly pleasures exprienced by this body?

As mahAns--great people, in all religions, with shIlaM--good conduct, prema--love, tyAgam--sacrifice, and an own experience obtained according to their principles and their anuShTAnam--rigours, have many people arrived. And philosophers who are men of knowledge, going with dIrgham--depth, in tattva-chodanam--Self-inquiry, have been there in matams like Bauddham, MImAMsA, NyAya, and SAMkhya. In the books of NAgArjuna (a Bauddha), I have myself an interest.

But then if (following) any religion is not wrong, the question is that if only our religion can be said to be so (wrong to follow). Without going in the manner of fad--craze, as 'ours' in svaya abhimAnam--personal high opinion, even if it is viewed in nishpakShapAtam--impartially, as I showed now (above):

• More than in any other religion, only in this religion, throughout countless generations, more number of mahAns, that is, great people who obtained svAnubhUti--Self experience, by this matAnuShTanam--rigours of this religion, have appeared.

• It is known that more than any other religion, only this religion has preserved with jIvashakti--power of living, a matchless nAgarika samudAyam--civilization of people, for a very long time.

• How can we remain without saying it that only this religion of ours, without having it as a single, identical arrangement for everyone, for people of different kinds, in ways that suit them, kAryam--actions, AchAram--life discipline, and an iShTa-mUrti--personal god, have been given place to,

so an excellent path has been paved for the jIva at all levels, for obtaining the highest possible anubhavams--experiences, for that level, and then moving with saukhyam--comfort, from one level to the next higher, until the parama satyam--supremely real, state, where ultimately the jIvAtman becomes the paramAtman, is reached?

• If all the religions are to be praised that they cause to obtain something above the sAdhAraNa laukika anubhavams--ordinary worldly experiences,

even higher than what they cause to obtain, only our religion makes it possible to obtain the ultimate niRaivu--(Tamil) satisfaction, of uttomottama jIva-brahma-aikyam--most superior, soul-God-unity,

so for that fulfilment, it is only right to praise/celebrate this religion above all others?

• When there are such unique distinctions, and when the other religions seek to criticise this religion, without understanding either the great (ultimate) satisfaction of the parama-tAtparyam--supreme object (of Self-Realization), or the sampradAyas--tradition, that give a satisfaction from time to time and are located in the middle stage of the path to the ultimate,

can we just keep quiet that all religions are high but only our religion which is higher than them should remain receiving khaNDanam--criticism/opposition, from them all?

• In a religion that gives it as its final teaching that there is no difference between the JIvan and Brahman, if there is this much varNAshrama vidhyAsam--differences, without thoroughly researching the reasons for it, when the others criticise our religion as one that creates distinctions between humans, should we just keep quiet without researching the truths behind it and explaining them to the others?

• Buddha was a great man, Jina (MahAvIra) was a great man; but then even they did not refrain from criticising our Vaidika matam, thinking 'there is good in everything; let us go in samarasam--compromise/reconciliation; why should we do khaNDanam of the Vaidika matam' (right)?

If that be such, and when we know the reason very well that their criticising this religion is not correct, it is only right that we should take the efforts we can, to criticise their criticism?

• In the foreign countries where there is no right Adi-mata-siddhAntam--original religious principles, as suitable to the pakva-sthiti--maturity status, kalAchAram--culture, of the people of those countries, and as one that does upakAram--assistance/favour, for their some inner satisfaction, (the religions) Bauddham (Buddhism), Christianity and Islam are there. Let us not have any AkShepaNam--objection, to them at all.

But when we have a religion that gives a path for people in all stages and leads everyone to the level of supreme satisfaction, if those religions come here to invade us, how could it be that we should not object it?

• We are sitting here to listen to AchAryAL's story. The whole world celebrates him as a great man. Even those who have abhiprAya-bheda--difference of opinion, with him, praise him as a mahA-buddhimAn--great man of intelligence and wisdom, a tyAgin--selfless man, who worked incessantly with dedication that he had a 'mission' for the people, and in many other dinusu--(Tamil) ways.

What did such a man do as his chief work? Only that he did kaNDanam--criticism, of the other matams that prevailed during his time and made SanAtana Dharma shine again with jIvan--life? Only for that purpose did that avatAra take place? If this is the case, how can it be that I should do upanyAsam--speech, about AchAryAL without criticising the other religions in any way?

• There is nothing wrong in criticising, showing the right reasons. It would be wrong only if it is done in vitaNDA-vAdam--frivolous controversy. If we have fair and justified reasons and points, we too should seek to criticise the others. In the same way, they too should do it.

(In doing kaNDanam,) The mistake lies in one of two modes.

‣ One, to do vitaNDA, without showing correct reasons.
‣ Another, to seek to criticise with dveSham--hatred/repugnance/enmity, in our mind.

Even with those who have different abhiprAyam--opinion, without any sort of dveSham, we should criticise only the abhiprAyams, with prema--love. We should conduct ourselves with the manobhAvam--mental frame, 'It appears such to their buddhi. Let us tell them what occurs to us; and also listen to what occurs to them. Then let us both analyse and consider both the views'.

The samarasam--feelings of reconciliation, should be there ONLY in this prema--love, and NOT in the principles. If in principles we keep quiet that way (in samarasam), it would only end in the others climbing and sitting on our head and make us 'EmAnda chONagiris'--betrayed fools. The propriety is in fighting for the principles that appear satyam--true, to us.

saidevo
18 April 2010, 10:21 AM
pages 340-343

Doing AkShepaNa of--reviling, the Veda Dharmam which remains as one that includes sakala siddhAnta--all principles and doctrines, or taking only one aMsham--part, from it and maintaining that as the pUrNa dharmam--complete path, that some people of knowledge and discipline spread it as (different) siddhAntas in the Kali (Yuga) is mentioned in our shAstra-purANas as the kRtrimam--falsified action, done by the Kali PuruSha. This action is explained as what-is-not-good coming in disguise as what-is-good, alluring the people to follow the aMshas--parts, anuShTAnas--rigours, principles and lifestyle in veda-vRtta--contrary to the Vedas.

• If it be difficult to talk about people like Buddha and Jina as those who gave an alternative path with full knowledge and heart, only to prevent the people from taking the right path, let it not be spoken in that way at all. So far as they are concerned, so far as the people who attained a state similar to theirs are concerned, it need not be said that what they taught are what-is-not-good.

• For people who, like these great men, can control their senses and sit in tapas--meditation, remaining in complete ahiMsa, love, and discipline with the firm determination 'let this sharIram--body, go; I should not get up without attaining lakShya-siddhi--accomplishment of the goal',

the Vedas and the vaidika-anuShTAnas are really not necessary at all. That Veda itself has mentioned this.

"For one who has become a jnAni, a father is no more a father, a mother is no more a mother, worlds are no more worlds, the Devas no more gods, (and) the Vedas no more Vedas."

It is there in an UpaniShad, which are the shruti-shiras (crown of Vedas) (BRhadAraNyaka Upanishad, 4.3.22).

• But then even among such UpaniShads, in the ChAndogya upaniShad that gives 'tat tvam asi' as the most superior jnAna-lakShayam--goal of knowledge, in its concluding verse (8.15.1), where it is described as to who attains a sthAnam--position, in which there is no return to this world,

it is mentioned that he gets that eligibility/position, only by doing the Veda adhyayana-anuShTanas--study and practice of Vedas, according to the prescribed rule, living a family life, and by firmly holding his indriyas--senses, without any chalanam--movement, and observing ahiMsa--non-injury at all places except where it occurs in the Veda karmas.

In other words, our Matam--religion, has not prescribed the dharmas meant for a Buddha or a Jina to everyone.

• The very greatness of our Dharma lies in giving varied sets of dharma in stage after stage from the foundation level, in order that a man can in the end become a jnAni.

• What is even greater, it is mentioned in our Matam that the jnAni too should set an example by living a common spiritual life, so that he can take into his fold even the person at the fundamental level, and guide everyone by holding the hand, right from the position everyone is in situated life.

Specifically, in the GItA, BhagavAn has emphasized it well (see note 01).

• Thus in our Matam, as proper to practical life, and suitable in mano-tattva-rIti--psychological limits, when it is taught that even a jnAni should as a guide to the people set an example of their own dharma,

in direct contradiction to this,

if a man creates a siddhAnta that the jnAni's dharma should be prescribed for even the sAmAnya janas--ordinary people, however great the person is in his individual life, since by that siddhAntam people's Atma-kSeham--spiritual welfare gets ruined, so it uddesham--purpose, of this result, it is only necessary to do nirAkaraNam--repudiation, of it (that siddhAntam)?

**********

Notes:
01. Bhagavad GItA

na buddhibhedaM janayedaj~jAnAM karmasa~ginAm |
joShayetsarvakarmANi vidvAnyuktaH samAcharan ||3.26||

From Shankara's GItA BhAShya, translated by Swami Gambhirananda:

3.26 The enlightened man should not create disturbance in the beliefs of the ignorant, who are attached to work. Working, while himself remaining deligent [Some translate yuktah as, 'in the right manner'. S. takes it in the sense of Yoga yuktah, merged in yoga.-Tr.], he should make them do [Another reading is yojayet, meaning the same as josayet.-Tr.] all the duties.

*****

tasmAchchhAstraM pramANaM te kAryAkArya vyavasthitau |
GYAtvA shAstra vidhAnoktaM karma kartumihArhasi ||16.24||

From Shankara's GItA BhAShya, translated by Swami Gambhirananda:

16.24 Therefore, the scripture is your authority as regards the determination of what is to be done and what is not to be done. After understanding (your) duty as presented by scriptural injunction, you ought to perform (your duty) here.

In his lecture 'GItA's injunction' under the Section 'AchAram' in part 3 of the 'Deivatthin Kural', ParamAchArya says: "Those who seek to reform too need the GItA, but they simply go hiding such things in it. Or they go a step further and say that these are all interpolations!"--sd

saidevo
30 April 2010, 09:02 AM
pages 343-344

Since our shrI Shankara BhagavadpAdaL's avatAram was only for this purpose, it is not possible to remain without talking about the doShas--defects/deficiencies, in the other sidhAntas, that have been pointed out by him and the great people who came in the VedAnta sampradAya before and after him.

• As (I) told earlier, where the doSham is seen, it is not wrong to speak about it, and it must be spoken of. But the important thing is that even if doSham is talked about, there should be no dveSham--hatred/enmity.

Not to criticise those other matas--religions. By showing that those other matas criticising our matam is not correct, and to make people understand our mother religion as it is, we need to talk about all these things.

It is not enough to just mention some people who were the mata-sthApakas--religious founders, and siddhAnta-pravartakas--proponents of religious principles, which were in contradiction to Veda Dharmam, as the reason for the trend of this Kali Yugam, and stop at that.

• Just as there should be a seed for a thorny tree to grow, so for that seed to take root and grow, there should also be an appropriate bhUmi--ground?

Whatever siddhAnta seeds do the mata-sthApakas and prasArakas--propagandists, plant, only when the bhUmi--ground, of the state of mind of the jana-samUham--populace, does-poShaNam-of--nourish, them by feeding the bhUsAram--ground essences, they can sprout and grow well in that samUham?

Thus it transpired that people got a taste in general for the trends that were in virodham--opposition, to the Veda Dharmam, and because of it the avaidika-matas--non-Vedic religions, spread well among them. It was only this, which was mentioned as the asura-rAkShasas entering the buddhi--mind/intellect, of the people.

Kali PuruSha with much tact and skill had made a show that these religions too taught paths that were dhArmika--righteous, and those who did upadesham--teaching, of them as well as those who followed them, were both going in the path of dharma.

Even after Kali was born, because of the balam--strength/power, KRShNa ParamAtmA and VyAsAchAryAL had given, for about two thousand and five hundred years, after the vaidika-dharmAchAraNa--practice of Veda dharmam, was current, Kali PuruSha started showing his Adhikyam--superior authority, in utter rudeness, compensating for his earlier sleep during this interim period.

He started showing his kaivarisai--(Tamil) dexterity/sleight of hand, even as a person who slept for a long time suddenly wakes up thinking 'ayyO, we slept for a long time, there is so much to be done' starts doing things in rude fanfare. To give another another example, it was like breaking open a marble-sealed (goli) soda bottle that was pent up!

It is mentioned in the pustakas--books, that in that vegam--rush/dash, seventy-two matams--religions, appeared in contradiction to SanAtana Dharma. It is also mentioned that each one started in much uttaNdam--fierceness and cruelty.

All that is asaMdarbha--unreasonable/incoherent, will be born in rude fanfare. That which remains hitam--beneficial, and satyam--true, in vAstavam--reality, will be born in sAttvikam--auspiciousness, and shAntam--peace, and come up for action. Those that are not so, will only start with intemperate speech (athambikkoNDu) and rough-and-tumble (aDAviDiyAga).

It is there in the books that thus 72 religions appeared, as if to prove that Kali is adharma-yugam--an eon of adharma.

**********

saidevo
03 May 2010, 10:31 AM
****************************************
Was Kali intended for adharma?
****************************************
pages 344-349

One thing should be clarified here. Isn't it only bhagavat-saMkalpam--divine will, that in the prapancha-nATakam--drama of the universe, in every chatur-yuga--four yugas, starting in complete dharmam in the KRta yugam, and then gradually declining in the TretA yugam and DvApara yugam, it should go completely adharma in the Kali yugam? Why blame it then? Why start reforming it when Kali has been earmarked as the yuga for adharma? Such a question might arise.

Although we cannot understand bhagavat-saMkalpam, when he informs us through the shAstras that Kali is an adharma yugam, it appears that we should not take it to mean that this yugam has been decidedly willed by him, for the lokam--world to go completely ruined in adharma.

• Lokam is a nATakam for him: The nATakam he writes the story of and directs. Although it can be said that just as a dramatist, for the rasa-vaisitAya-ruchi--taste of abiding feeling (in order to make changes in the kAvya-rasas--feelings of characters in the epics, to heighten their effect), does-kalnapa-of--imagines, scenes with (their predominant feeling as) raudra--anger/fury, bIbhatsa--disguest/loathing, and bhaya--fear, he might also be doing in the Kali, his compassionate heart will not allow it all to go beyond a limit.

If it becomes completely full of raudram, bIbhatsam and bhayAnakam--terror, what could be there in it to be spoken of as rasam? There would only be virasam--nauseousness/bad taste.

• Therefore, although he does not do-sRShTi--create, in this yuga, people as that much dhArmikas--righteous, and of deiva-shakti--divine powers, as in the case of pUrva-yuga-manuShyas--people of earlier yugas,

and although he has created giving them an inner ruchi--disposition, towards adharma,

he would not end it as a kolaik-kUththu--revelry of massacre, in which they get completely immersed.

• Although he keeps watching people to go on sliding as in a sliding board game, he would send strong mahAns who would support them at the bottom and save from a complete fall that would break their bones.

• He would ensure that although on one side, on account of the nature of this yuga, adharmas go on increasing,

on the other side, giving many things that make one think of dharma and keep at least some people in the jana-samUham as dhArmikas in continuence.

Thus, although we see today, on the one side, bribery, fraud, murder and clubs for gambling and other improper actions,

on the other we see pravachanam--expositions, bhajana--worship by singing sessions, kumbAbhiShekam--sanctification of temples, (and such good things) on the increase, right?

• Even when the Kali is to end, there is not going to be any complete astamana--going down, of people who lead good, vaidika and dhArmika life.

• It is mentioned that in the kaliyantam--end of Kali, BhagavAn will take avatAra as Kalki in the TAmraparNi tIram--banks of TambraparaNi river, that is, in our Tirunelveli jillA--district, as putra--son, to a sad-brAhmaNa named ViShNuyashas. This only means that even at that time there would at least be some sad-brAhmaNas who follow the vaidika-AchAras?

• The tyranny of Kali has indeed been exaggerated in the texts such as the PurANas. It would be narrated as all dharma having gone, completely destroyed.

• It is mentiond that even before our AchAryAL's avatAram, the Devas went to KailAsa and appealed to Parameshvara that the Veda dharma had gone completely destroyed.

• And yet, if we look at it later, we get to know that AchAryAL took avatAra, in a MalayALa brAhmaNa family that was for generations following the vaidika-anuShTAnam. He did abhyAsa--study, of all the vaidika-vidyAs in yadoktam--as specified, in the gurukulam.

• And men like PadmapAda, who had obtained samskAram--perfection, by good vaidika-anuShTAnams, had become his shiShyas--disciples.

Therefore, it is known that Veda Dharma--why say Veda Dharma? so far as we are concerned, Dharma means only Veda Dharma--was not completely destroyed ever.

"Isn't this Kali? The Atma-balam--spiritual strength of the people is very little! With that strength can the people perform well the agnihotra karmAnuShTAnam? Or do anuShTAnam of the sannyAsa ashramam without at all causing any bhangga--break, to it?" This question arose in the yuga-Arambha--beginning of the yuga, when the Dharma ShAstras were being formulated.

• agnihotram is a ritual that comes in the karma kANDam as pravRtti mArgam; sannyAsam is one that comes in the jnAna kANDam as nivRtti mArgam. So, if these two are gone, there is no way at all for the people to rise in spirit.

For the kali-kAla-manuShyas--people of the Kali age, who are alpa-shakta--of trivial strength, is this going to be the atogati--helpless state? This question arose.

What reply, that is, judgment, did the Dharma-shAstrakAras give it?

• Let there be no confusion as for Kaliyugam and KRtayugam. Until such time as there is varNa-vibhAgam--class distinctions, to at least some extent, until the time there is at least some veda-adhyayanam--chanting Vedas, till that time the agnihotram and sannyAsam can remain, was the judgment given by them.

Isn't it known by this that although these things get dim in Kali, they would still be burning-as-muNuk-muNuk--blinking, without being extinguished completely. When it gets to the stage of extinction, a MahA-PuruSha will come, pour some oil, trim the wick, and make it jvalita--lighted, again. It would go very well for sometime as if to let us think whether KRtayugam itself has set in. After that dimming again, and trimming again--in this fashion it would be going on.

• Including the avatAra-kAlam of AchAryAL, even in this Kali, there have always been some people who were good karmAnuShTaddhas (those who do it as karma yoga, instead of its being dry mImAMsA), people with good bhakti--devotion, and jnAnis full of jnAnam. They will be there in the coming times too.

• One thing called guru-parampara--succession of gurus, has always been there in-avichchinnam--uninterruptedly, in all the mArgas. If there is no guru, there would be no adhyayanam, no sannyAsa-dIkSha--ascetic initiation; so if these have always been there, it is obtained that in the paramparA-kramam--order of succession, there have also been gurus in avichchinnam, doing abhyAsam--practice, and upadesham--teaching, of these things.

• Since AchAryAL in many places in his bhAShyams has mentioned that there is value only for the 'sampradAya vidyA' which occurs in the guru-shiShya-parampara kramam, it is obtained that this (vidyA) has been practised in (uninterrupted) succession until his time.

• Not only that he got the advaita-vidyA in upadesham from Govinda BhagavadpAda in the paramparA-kramam, until his time there have been other advaita AchAryas: KASakRtsna, DrAviDAcArya, BrahmAnandin, BhartRprapancha, BhartRhari, Brahmadatta, Saundara pANDya--these people have taught advaita even before our AchAryAL.

• Similarly in those days, Alayas--temples, where pujas were conducted according to the vaidika-Agama rituals, had also not disappeared. Although it is mentioned that in his doing kShetrAdanam--going around sacred places, three times thoughout this desham--country, AchAryAL made the ugra-paddhati--fierce texts of rites, saumyam--cool/auspicious, and changed the avaidika tAntrika pujas to conform to the regular texts, it is not mentioned that he did so in all the Alayas. There were Alayas where the worship rituals were performed in the right way.

His own parents has obtained varam--boon, for him to take avatar (in their family), only by doing bhajanam--worship, in the TiruchUr temple.

saidevo
21 May 2010, 07:31 AM
pages 349-350

Then why do the purANas scare us saying, "Gone, gone! Everything gone in the Kali! Whatever little (good) remains, even that would be gone in kAlakrama--course of time. All of it will become mRgaprAya--age of animals"? It is only to warn, rouse and caution us so we do not remain in Alasyam--idleness/sloth. Only when it is described as most dangerous, we will stir and rise from our idleness.

It is wrong to say, "As Kali is only an adharma-yuga, let us also be in adharma!"

• If the police sound the tom-tom that there is much danger of thieves in the town, what would we do? Would we throw our belongings on the street ourselves, so the thieves could take them away (without harming us) and keep quiet? Would we not take care to protect as much as we can? The purpose of the police tom-tom is only to warn in this way and let us safeguard our things to the possible extent?

• (In the same way), the shAstras sounding the tom-tom that Kali has started his rule of adharma is only for us to safeguard the dharma as much as possible and not give up what is remaining, with the thought that we can't do anything about it, and go wasted.

• Only if a man stands against the adharma-pravAham--gush of adharma, that occurs in this Yuga, can he get a-hundred-crore times of the phalas--fruits, of the dharmAnuSTAna--dharmic observances, that he might do in the other Yugas. Much of the honour is in standing against at times of opposition.

• (Laughing gently) In the other Yugas, a number of people would go and surround Ishvara; and it would not be possible for him to inquire each and everyone and do his anugraha--divine favour. In Kali (however) he would be waiting and looking out for people who might come to him. So even if we do a little yatnam--work, he would consider it worth a kOTi--crore times more, call us beside him and do his anugraha.

• Considering that just by saying "all gone, all gone", some people might tire and fall that their preventive efforts would only go nishprayojanam--useless, they have in the shAstras mentioned certain pratyeka anukUlas--specific advantages, and encouraged us.

They have mentioned that in this Kali Yuga by easily uttering/chanting the name of BhagavAn, can be obtained the anugraha phala--fruits of divine favour, that is obtainable only by

‣ doing dhyAnam--meditation, along with the shrama-sAdhya kArya--very difficult task of mano-nigraham--mental restraint, in the KRta Yuga;

‣ subjecting the sharIram--body, to kaShTam--pain/exertion, by doing yAgas--fire sacrifices/oblations, in the TretA Yuga,

‣ and by doing archanA--worship, and pUja--rituals, in vistAraNam--elaboration, in the DvApara Yuga.

In the same shAstras where they have scared us, they have also comforted us in this way. (This is the reason that) VyAsAchArya has twice confirmed, 'kali sAdhu, kali sAdhu'--"Is the Kali a yuga of asat? Only that is a yuga of sat"!

saidevo
21 May 2010, 07:33 AM
******************************
'shaMkara vijayam'
******************************
pages 350-351

We were looking at the time when that Kali had got himself entangled as an asAdhu--not honest/wicked. I told that it was mentioned in the books that 72 durmatas--evil faiths/cults, were confounding the people then. As to which the books are, the books that speak of AchAryAL's charitam--biography. They had the name 'shaMkara vijayam'. If a VIP visits a place we say that he made 'vijayam' there. 'vijayam' means 'jayam' with 'visheSham', that is, 'victory with distinction'.

• The kings going in every direction and conquering other kings is 'digvijayam'. Similarly, a sage going on a visit is mentioned as vijayam, with the meaning that he went to the place and conquered the hRdayas--hearts, of janas--people, by love.

• The charitram of mahAtmas like our AchAryAL gets the name 'vijayam' as they had accomplished a big victory called 'Atmajayam', by which the enemies called wrong thoughts could never raise heads within them throughout their life; and further (they had) conquered by love and knowledge, the minds of loka-janas--people of the world, from the paNDitas--scholars, to the pAmaras--rustics.

• Thus, many people have compiled many 'shaMkara vijayam's. In some of them has come this prastAvanam--exordium, of 72 matas--faiths/cults. In the 'aShTottarashatam' (108 names for doing archanA) on AchAryAL too, it occurs as "dvispatati matochChettre namaH"*. "One who made-nirmUla--eradicated, 72 matas" is the meaning.

Note:

द्विसप्तति मतोच्छेत्ता सर्वदिग्विजयप्रभुः ।
काषायवसनोपेतो भस्मोद्धूळितविग्रहः ॥१८॥

ॐ द्विस्पतति मतोच्छेत्त्रे नमः

dvisaptati matochChettA sarvadigvijayaprabhuH |
kAShAyavasanopeto bhasmoddhULitavigrahaH ||18||

oum dvispatati matochChettre namaH
--shrI shaMkarAchArya aShTottarashata nAmAvaliH

I bow to shrI shankara who through the advaita vedAnta uplifted many forms of religious worship by giving them a proper focus. dvisaptati is 72, mata means religion and uchChetta means uplifting. Many religious observances can be done with various goals, but if done with earnest intention of knowing the Self, these observances get a proper focus.

According to available extracts from the lost AnandagirIya shaMkaravijaya (e.g., in the commentaries on the popular mAdhavIya shaMkaravijaya) shaMkarAchArya reformed 72 different cults in the course of his travels in India.

******************************

saidevo
28 May 2010, 12:26 AM
****************************************
Seventy-two matas--faiths/cults
****************************************
pages 351-355

Even after doing so much research, of those seventy-two, the names of many are not known! Once I say this, let it not be objected to, "You see? It is our custom to build stories without being able to show AdhAram--support/evidence. Only by doing so, we have written up everything as myth and not as history."

• Although the names of all the seventy-two (faiths) are not known, it is possible to discover very well, the names of forty to forty-five of them. For many of these, there are plenty of AdhAra pustakas--supportive texts. There is also firm evidence that they were in anuShTAna--observance, at a certain time.

• Of these, since the faiths like mImAMsA, nyAya and vaisheShika are somewhat supportive of our vedAnta mata, we teach them in our pAThashAlas--vedic schools, even today.

• The talk of seventy-two faiths has been there for a long time. Therefore, since we come to know of half--even more than half--of them, we can do-anumAna--infer, that the remaining faiths should also have been there at certain times, so it is not a concocted tale.

• In his charitra--biographical, texts that can very well be spoken of as the contemporaries of AchAryAL, mentioning the names of aneka matas--several faiths, it is elaborated that he did-nirAkaraNam-of--expelled, them.

• There were shiva-matas, viShNu-matas, even 'hairaNyagarbha-mata' that related to brahmA! indra-mata, kubera-mata, and then manmata-mata, yama-mata--in this way, there were matas holding these divine personalities as muzhu mudhal deivam--complete, sole god.

• In the same way, we find in-vichitram--a strange way, in those pustakas--texts, that there were matas related to the (worship of) pitRus--ancestors, related to the bhUta-vetAla--ghosts and spirits, and worshipping guNas as gods, and kAlam--time, as god.

• Apart from these about which much details are not known, there had been some twenty to twenty-five matas whose siddhAnta--principles, is known in-pUrNam--completely.

As to what these matas are:

• apart from the vedAnta that AchAryAL established with a new jIvan--life, the remaining five of the ShaD-darshanam, namely, sAMkhya, yoga, nyAya, vaisheShika and mImAMsA;

• pAshupatam, kAlAmukham, bhAgavata-pAncharAtram (these two would always be mentioned together in the AchArya bhAShyas), thus four;

• gANapatyam, kaumAram, shaivam, shAktam, vaiShNavam, sauram--the six that were followed as avaidikam--non-vedic, in the wrong way. (Only these six that AchAryAL did-sthApana-of--established, as the ShaNmata--six sects);

• bauddha and jaina that arose, completely objecting to any veda-sambandha--vedic connections;

• the lokAyuta matam, aka chArvAkam--as open nAstikam--atheism, and complete materialism without going into any Atma-viShaya--subject of the spirit, at all (the one that I spoke of as BArhaspatam);

thus there have been some twenty to twenty-five matas; if we add everything (these and the earlier ones spoken after their deities of worship), it might add up to forty or forty-five. (Of the remaining thirty or so out of the seventy-two, even their names are not known!) For some that are known by name, the mUla-pustakas--basic scriptures, are not available.

• Whatever be the way those matas were, of those seventy-two, not a single one is in anuShTAnam in our desham--country, today!

‣ Although bauddham spread to foreign countries and became one of the largest religions of the world, it is not followed in India, the country of its birth.

‣ and although jainam is there konjam-konjam--to a little extent, it only remains as a matam that has taken up many worship rituals of the hindumatam. Many of those who bear the name 'jain' are there as having koLvinai-koDuppinai--marital relationships, with the Hindus. In the AchArya bhAshyas, jainam was not analyzed with visheSham--importance. It would be surprising if I mention that in the AchArya bhAShyas, even the bauddha-mata-kaNDana--criticism of Buddhism, won't be much. We can look at this subject later.

• Although today in our desham--country, there are many matas--sects, as shaivam and vaiShNavam, the shaiva-vaiShNava matas that AchAryAL did kaNDanam of during his time were different than what prevails as them today.

‣ The later shaiva-vaiShNava mata sthApakas--founders, might have taken only some amShas--aspects, of their counterparts that he did kaNDanam of, and became obsolete.

‣ In the vaiShNavam of rAmAnujachArya, the pAncharAtra principles that AchAryAL did kaNDanam of, are found mixed up.

‣ The siddhAnta shaivam might here and there go embracing the pAshupatam that AchAryAL criticised.

May those things be whatever, these (shaiva vaiShNava) matas are only found today in the new rUpam--form, their later mata sthApakas gave them, which is (widely) different from the form they had during the time he criticised them.

• Although there are many texts for such matas as nyAya and mImAMsA, and there are people who read them to date, there is no one to follow them as an individual mata--sect, as 'nyAya matasta', 'mImAMsa matasta' after AchAryAL (took them on for criticism).

• And although a large number of yoga margas--yoga paths, have appeared today and many people do try them, they don't separate themselves from the hindumatam and call them 'yoga matasta', right?

• If many of those seventy-two have run away with even their names being not known, only AchAryAL has driven them away! We come to know of some of them from the pustakas--texts. Some are known because they are in vazakku--practice, in deshAntaras--other countries. We also discover from the damaged statues and maNDapas--pavilions, 'Oho! Earlier such a religion was in practice.'

If a man like AchAryAL had not come, we don't have to exert ourselves this much to find those matas--faiths! It would have happened for us to go searching after only the hindumatam!

**********

saidevo
30 May 2010, 11:09 PM
******************************
AchAryAL's Ashcharya sAdhana
******************************
pages 355-356

That is, that single mUrti--personification/embodiment, has made those seventy-two matas--sects/cults, obsolete in this desham--country! That such a sAdhana--accomplishment, he has done is a suprise that grows as one ponders over it! If an ANDi--mendicant, has accomplished it using only his Atma shakti--power of Self, jnAna shakti--power of knowledge and vAda shakti--power of discussion, how can he be anyone other than an avatAra puruSha? That too the time he did vAsam--live, in the bhUlokam--earth, was for only thirty-two years!

• Of course, today it is not that all the people in this desham are those who follow him, as advaita sampradAyastas--traditionalists. There are people who belong to the sampradAyas established by rAmAnujAchArya, mAdhvAchArya, shrI kRShNa chaitanya, vallabhAcharya, shrIkaNThAcharya, and meykaNDAr. Even so, all these AchAryALs established these matas--sects, only many centuries after our AchAryAL.

• Except the advaita, all the matams (that we see) today are those that arose only after AchAryAL's time. Until then, only AchAryAL's matam had ruled, its flag fluttering, making all the earlier matas nonexistent!

• Any matam that came later could not cause a great naShTam--loss, to it. Whatever new matas came, there have always been a great number of people who followed AchAryAL as his sampradAyastas.

• Unlike AchAryAL's siddhAntam which made all the previously existing matas as nonexistent, no other siddhAnta that came later could do so. Just because rAmAnuja came, advaitam did not cease to exist. After him, because mAdhva came both advaita and vishiShtAdvaita did not cease to exist. In this way, when every new matam arose, although some people joined it, it was not the case of everyone joining it and any other matam becoming nonexistent.

• Only during AchAryAL's time, had everyone accepted his matam only. It was the same case, even after him for a few centuries. That was why a distinct honour of being a 'jadguru' and 'jagatAchAryAL' accrued for him.

• Only for him that the title 'jagadguru' remains as one that speaks of the truth in vAstavam--reality, without being a virudu--award, given in praise for the sake of upachAram--decoration!

• Just because it is termed as 'jagat', we don't have to think about the deshAntaras--other countries. Since only our desham--country, which is the karma-bhUmi--field of actions, suitable for vaidika anuShTAnam--vedic practices, is like the soul and heart of the entire jagat--world, if he is an AchAryAL for all this desham, then he is only a jagatAchAryAL.

• What we call bhArata desham--country, (today) was in pUrva kAlam--earlier times, known in more vistAram--extent, as bharata khaNDam--continent, and that there existed 56 deshas--countries, such as angam, vangam, kalingam and so on within it, resembling 56 mAhANangaL--states, today. If by going on digvijayam in all those fifty-six, and doing nirAkaraNam--driving away/expelling, of all the paramatas--other sects, did AchAryAL establish the advaita vedAnta, only that is jagadgurutvam--the quality of being a world teacher.

******************************

saidevo
30 May 2010, 11:13 PM
**************************************************
The all-inclusive vaidikam is only AchAryAL's matam!
**************************************************
pages 357-358

Whether they profess to agree or not agree with the vedas, the matas--sects, that prevailed then, the matas established later by sages like rAmAnuja and mAdva, and then the anya--foreign, matas that are followed the world over,--in all these, whatever good aMshas--features, are there, they are all only those found in the vedas.

• Because of the kAla-desha-vartamAna--movement in time and place, although the foreign AchAra-anuShTAna do not seem vaidikam--vedic, including the matas--religions, in the deshAntaras--foreign countries, if we take the spirit, it would certainly be one that has AdhAra--base/support, in the vedas.

• When I say spirit here, I do not just speak of the tattvas--principles, in the religions. I also speak about the ShaTangus--rites and rituals. Although the ShaTangus that are there in the anya-matas--foreign religions, do not seem to have any vaidika-vAsana--impressions of the vedas, the jIvan--core, of those ShaTangus that I speak as the spirit, will certainly not be one that is not found in the vedas.

• All the matas spoken of as vaidika and avaidika, knowingly or unknowingly, thus in tattvam, ShaTangu both, have formed only by taking one or two aMshams from the vedas. Just one or two aMshas, not in-pUrNam--completely.

• If we look at the vedas, many things are there as shiva-sambandha--related to shiva; there are many others that are viShNu-sambandha.

‣ The matas like vishiShtAdvaita and dvaita have left out the shiva-sambandha and taken only those that are vaiShNava.

‣ In the shivAdvaitam, shaiva siddhAntam it would be vice versa. In effect, they would be such as to leave one and grahita--grasp another, of those that are found in the vedas.

‣ The mImAMsakas took only the karma-mArgam and rejected the jnAna(-mArgam).

‣ The bauddham, took only the yama, niyama disciplines and the niShprapancha tattva from the veda dharma, but went developed them in a different dinusu--manner/fashion.

In this way, if we look at any matam--religion, it is such as to accept something from the vedas and reject something.

• It is only AchAryAL's matam that has accepted the entire vedas as such, in sampUrti--completely filled up. To put it rightly, it is not AchAryAL's matam at all, only the original veda matam. The original veda matam that AchAryAL did punaruttAraNaM--rescued and secured!

It is only the path that AchAryAL has given us that is pUrNam--complete in every respect, with karma, bhakti, jnAna, yoga, the niyama of discipline called dharma, saprapancham, niShprapapancham, and the sammata--consonance, of all the deivams unlike the shiva-viShNu bedha.

**************************************************

saidevo
14 June 2010, 10:44 PM
**************************************************
About itara matas--other Hindu sects and cults
**************************************************
pages 358-361

It is necessary to speak about the other apUrNa--incomplete, matas that he did-nirAkaraNam-of--repudiated.

• I spoke about the MImAMsAkas--followers of MImAMsa, who took only the karma KANDam (of the Vedas) for their doctrine.

‣ They did not consider that a person called Ishvara made sRShTi--Creation, of the lokam--world.

‣ They did not also agree that only he dispenses the karma-phala--effects of karma.

‣ Both saguNa Ishvara and nirguNa Brahmam were not there for them. There was neither IshvaropAsana--worship of God, nor any Atma-dhyAnam--meditation on the Self.

‣ They said only karmAnuShTAnam--performance of Vedic rituals was sufficient, and there should be nothing else as bhakti--devotion, or jnAnam--knowledge, to attain the svargam--heavens, or something above that they could not describe--the mokSham, which is the nityAnanda-padam--mark/sign of bliss.

‣ They went to the extent of saying that only they are the people who do-anusaraNa-of--follow, the Veda dharmam and that those who become sannyAsins--ascetics, giving up the karma--action of performing Vedic rituals, go in-virodha--against, the Vedas, so it is a pApam--misfortune/sin, to even sight a sannyAsin.

‣ Despite all such things, it was only these MImAMsAkas who, on par with the VedAnta, showed direct AdhAram--support/evidence, in the Vedas themselves, for their abhiprAyam and anuShTAnam--opinions and rituals, among the six darshanas which are described as Astika matas, that is vaidika matas that believe in veda-Adhara--Vedic suport.

‣ All the karmAnuShTAnas they performed were vedokta--mentioned in the Vedas. Only they brought out the meanings of the veda mantras in elaboration.

‣ NyAya, VaisheShika, SAMkhya and Yoga--they all ended with the limitation that they did not do-AkShepaNam-of--object, to veda prAmaNyam--establishment of Vedic proof. (Other than this) they could not show much AdhAra--support, in the Vedas for their siddhAntas--principles, or AcharaNas--practices.

Thus, although MImAMsA was a vaidika matam, it was a vaidika matam that was apUrNa--incomplete and mULi--(Tamil) deformed. Without understanding that even as a man goes from school to college, Veda has the arrangement of karma kANDam first and then jnAna kANDam, they tried to end it at the school level and establish that it was above all academic degrees!

**********

• In the SAMkhya matam, there will be a mention of twenty-four tattvas--first principles, starting with PrakRti--Nature as the passive power of creation, and ending with the pancha bhUtas--five elements.

‣ It is also mentioned therein that PrakRti is the pradhAnam--chief entity. Only this remains as the mUlam--root, for everything in this lokam--world, and even this lokam itself. Something like the power of Nature mentioned in these days.

‣ manas--mind, indriyas--senses, all these things are (originated) only from this PrakRti.

‣ Mixing in different vihitAchAra--ratios, the three guNas--sattvam, rajas, tamas-- which are its anga--parts, it creates the nAnAvidha prapancham--manifold universe.

‣ Still, it is only a jaDam--inanimate entity. As to what is chetana vastu--entity of consciousness, it is known as PuruSha. PuruSha is one that is self-contained, without getting mixed up with PrakRti. It won't do any kAryam--action. By only by its sAnnidhyam--presence/nearness, PrakRti does all these kAryas.

‣ That matam (SAMkhya) says that mokSha is the state of kaivalya--absolute isolation, where the jIva--individual soul, remains in solitude, after investigating and giving up all the twenty-four tattvas, and getting released from PrakRti.

‣ The PuruSha mentioned here is like the AtmA that is nirguNa, mentioned in the UpaniShads which are the jnAna kANDa (of the Vedas); and the PrakRti is like MAyA.

‣ Nevertheless, in contrary to what is mentioned in our VedAnta (which are the UpaniShads) that the same AtmA is the Brahmam spoken as the ParamAtmA; all the jIvAtmas are only this Brahmam; and all the jIvAtmas are only the veShas--disguises, this single Brahmam has taken up using MAyA, SAMkhya mentions that there are several PuruShas.

‣ When a single MAyA or PrakRti is the kAraNam--reason, for sakala jIva-jagat--all the world of beings, the AtmA or PuruSha, which is jnAyamaya--full of knowledge, and shAntamaya--full of peace, should also be singular? How can there be many (of It/Him)?

‣ As with MImAMsA, in SAMkhya too there is no Ishvara.

What is appropriate (however), is what VedAnta says:

that one which links Brahmam that is nirguNa and the jIva-jagat, is the SaguNa Brahmam known as Ishvara, who is the prabhu--lord, of MAyA;

and that it is only the NirguNa Brahmam which unites with MAyA and becoming SaguNa Brahmam, does the jIva-jagat vyApAram--performance/business.

‣ After saying that PuruSha remains with no sambandha--connection, with anything, and then saying that only by its sannidhi-visheSham the jaDa-PrakRti does all these things, has no sAram--real meaning/strength in it.

‣ Only by obtaining chitta-shuddhi--purity of mind, by niShkAmya karma--desireless action,

doing-upAsana-of--worshipping, Ishvara who is the phala-dAta--dispenser of karmic fruits,

and then doing jnAna-vichAram--inquiry of real knowledge, after having practised to stop the chittam on a single thought, can one get released from the cocoon/shell of PrakRti.

Whereas by ordaining that there is no karmAnuShTanam and no Ishvara, and instead of doing vichAram--inquiry, about the satyam--reality, to be attained, by investigating the twenty-four tattvas which are to be given up, how can the release be obtained?

‣ With just the mUla viddhyAsa--main difference, that the UpaniShads speak of the Brahmam which is chetana--sentient, as the jagad-kAraNa--cause of the world, whereas SAMkhyam speaks about the PradhAnam (PrakRti) which is achetana--insentient, as the kAraNam, AchAryAL has established that it cannot be a vaidika sampradAyam--vedic tradition.

‣ Although SAMkhyam says like VedAnta that for the tattvam--first principle, called PuruSha there is no kartRuvam--agency of action, that is, it has no kAryam--action, it also says that PuruSha has bhokRutvam--agency of enjoyment, and that only for the PuruSha's bhogam--enjoyment, the PrakRti does a thing like sRShTi--Creation; and this does not suit either the VedAnta or rationality.

‣ To enjoy the bhoga--possessions, is also a kAryam--action? The PuruSha tattvam which is without kAryam, how can it do only this kAryam?

‣ When the truth is that the AtmA which is PuruSha is neither a karta--performer, nor a bhokta--enjoyer, is what the anubhavins--Self-Realized, have discovered in their state of samAdhi,

to say that it is not a karta only but is a bhokta, is in virodham--opposition, to the pratyakSham--ocular evidence/direct perception.

**********

saidevo
18 August 2010, 08:45 AM
pages 362-363

• Yoga is a matam--religious sect, that teaches the way to control the chittam--thinking/expansion of mind, and stay detached in the samAdhi state.

‣ It teaches the yoga sAdhana of aSTAnga, one that comprises of eight limbs. It is in-anuShTAna--followed, till today and also gives results.

‣ Neverthess, except that it accepts the One as Ishvara, in other respects it has only taken the SAMkhya mata abhiprAyas--opinions. So, the shortfalls of that matam are also found in this one.

‣ Even its acceptance of Ishvara is not in the manner that only he does the vyApAram--business, of the jIva-jagat--beings and world, and dispenses the karma-phala--effects of karma.

‣ He is accepted in that matam as the ideal which is Ishvara, who is without any blemish or suffering whatsoever, so it is of-prayojana--useful, to the sAdhaka--seeker, who wants to accomplish chitta-nirodha--control of mind expansion, to anchor the chitta--expanding mind, in some lofty lakShyam--aim/target, without letting it scatter over the many.

• The NyAya and VaisheShika are only buddhi-ArAychchigaL--intellectual research.

‣ NyAya is tarka-vAda--doctrine of reasoning. If the VedAnta says that only Brahmam is the satyam--Reality, so we must dissolve by jnAnam--knowledge, the veSha--disguise, it has taken up by MAyA and become That itself (that is, Atman/Brahman itself),

these matas teach that both the jIva and the jagat are satya, and not veSha, and that unlike an eka-paramAtma--One Supreme Brahman, there are aneka--many, Atmas--souls.

‣ VaisheShika, which goes in anusaraNa-of--conformity to, NyAya, explores the visheSha guNas--specific characteristics, of each of the many, as the kAraNam--cause, for the differences in the jIva-jaDa prapancham--animate and inanimate universe. Since it explores the visheSha--specifics, it has the name VaisheShika.

‣ In this siddhAnta--doctrine, there is no striking out by jnAnam, of the jIva-bhAva--mental identity with the ego, and the jagat--world. Its principle is that the jIva-jagat are made up of aNUs--atoms, that are indestructible.

‣ It does-vistara--elaborates, how the aNUs and paramANUs--sub-atomic particles, combine in various ways and create the vastus--objects.

‣ If the SAMkhya teaches that just by researching the twenty-four tattvas--principles of creation, the jIva is liberated from them and attains mokSha--deliverance,

in VaisheShika, it is taught that by researching its principle of atomicity, and the special distinctions called padArtha, a jIva sets apart its sharIram--body, and the viShayas--sensual objects, it experiences, as just an assembly of aNUs--atoms, which are merely jAda--inert, gets to know the AtmA that is chaitanya--consciousness, and obtains liberation from the samsAra--worldly life.

‣ The doShas--deficiencies, we saw above in the SAMkhya would also apply here. By doing much buddhi-vAda--intellectual reasoning, and getting to know about the vastus--objects, how can the karma-nAsha--dissolution of karma, and mano-nAsha--destruction of mind, arise? Without these, how can there be the liberation from saMsAra--worldly life?

• Since like the SAMkhya which teaches the achetana pradhAna--insentient matter, as the jagat-kAraNam--cause of the world, the NyAya-VaisheShikas teach the achetana paramANUs as the jagat-kAraNam, AchAryAL has shown that this darshan too is opposed to the UpaniShad matam, that is the Vaidika matam, that teaches chetana Brahmam as the jagat-kAraNam.

Such are the Astika (vaidika) darshanas--Veda-based systems of philosophy.

*****

saidevo
20 August 2010, 10:53 AM
pages 363-368

• The Bauddha and Jaina matas are new avaidika matas--religions, that do not conform to the Vedas, which arose with a resolve not to accept the Veda pramANa--authority of the Vedas.

‣ adhyayanas--Vedic chanting, vaidika karmAnuShTas--Vedic sacrifices and rituals, UpaniShads, and varNAshramas--classes and stages of life,--these two religions rejected all of these as totally unnecessary.

‣ They also rejected Ishvara--personal God, and IshvaropAsana--worshipping a personal God.

‣ What was ordained as sAdhAraNa dharma--normal disciplines of life, for sakala-jana--entire populace, (namely) ahiMsa--non-violence, satyam--truth, asteya--not stealing, brahmacharya--continence, and aparigraham--non-acceptance beyond the necessaries of life--only these disciplines (of life) they taught, and yet, without having any flexibility according to the pakvam--maturity, of each person, they ordained them strictly as a must for everyone.

‣ Although in Jaina (matam), making a distinction between harsh and not so harsh niyamas, it is ordained that the BhikShus--mendicants, should have 'mahA-vratam'--great penances, and others can have 'aNu-vratam'--tiny penances, in the absence of varNAshrama vibhAgam--varNa and Ashrama classifications, even that aNu-vratam was-shrama-sAdhya--could not be accomplished by exertion, for the common anuShTAnas--observances, of the populace.

‣ Since that matam (Jaina) considered that only by giving shramam--exertion, can the karma be reduced, it has the very name shramaNa (chamaNa in Tamizh).

• Looking at siddhAnta--philosophy, as the end of the religion, in Buddha having left it saying only something (about the Truth), as if he thought, "Let us not say anything decisive; let everyone experience it and get to know it", it happened later that even that something got elaborated in many ways, and there arose in the Bauddham:

‣ VaipAshikam--followers of the unchanging reality philosophy,
‣ SautrAntikam--followers of the Buddhist sUtras,
‣ YogAchAram--followers of the 'mind only' philosophy, and
‣ MAdhyamikam--the middle way between the other two,

as many sampradAyas--traditions, as differing from each other.

‣ As two different sects opposing each other, in the name of that same religion two sects arose, as MahAyAna and HInayAna.

‣ The YogAchAram and MAdhyamikam came under the MahAyAna. The SautrAntikam and VaipAshikam came under the HInayAna.

‣ Although there appeared in each of these philosophies, experienced people who had contemplated deeply, under the many traditions that arose with contradictory principles, it all ended up in giving much scope to clash in vAda--debates, rather than in anubhavam--experience.

• When it comes to anubhavam--experience, what happened was that--did I not mention before that Buddha that said only something (of the Truth) and left the remaining (for the sAdhakas to find out in experience)?

And that was his taking only the amSham--share, that shows this lokam--world, as mAyA--illusion, in the UpaniShads, and his leaving out the fact that as AdhAram--support, for this mAyA, there is a satyam--Truth, behind.

• Therefore, the bauddha-siddhAntas--Buddhist philosophy, instead of teaching that

‣ the jIva's--soul's, lakShyam--goal, is to obtain the anubhUti--knowledge and perception, of the Brahman or Atman that remains as a satyam--Truth, characterised by nitya-shuddha-buddha--eternal and pure awareness, and sat-chit-Ananda--existence-consciousness-bliss, and become pUrNa-vastu--abiding in fullness, and only this is mokSham--liberation;

‣ came up with the teaching that getting released from the mAyA-pravAham--illusory currents, of this world that is changing restlessly without any AdhAram--support, and merging into the nothingness of the shUnya--vacuity, is the mokSham called nirvANam.

‣ How can the anubhavam--experience, obtained by doing dhyAnam--meditation, on the nishchayam--inquiry/conviction,

that there is no satya-vastu--Entity of Truth, (which is) shAshvata-vastu--Entity of Eternity, and everything is shUnyam--emptiness,

be the great state of bliss of brahmAnandam--bliss of Braman, a term known even in the spoken language of the people?

• "There is no lokam--world, no jIva--soul, no Atman, no Brahman, all that appears as happening are nothing but some kind of a bhrama--giddiness/dizziness. Since only those samAcharas--happenings, that appear and disappear then and there are going on continuously, the bhrama--dizziness, arises that there is in nijam--reality, a stream of life. Like blowing out (the flame of) a burning lamp, to blow out all these things is the mokSham of nirvANam."

Thus, in toto, Bauddham ends only in getting (a seeker) into a shUnya--emptiness.

• (On the other hand,) VedAnta speaks of the lokam--world, and jiva--soul, becoming false, when the jIvAtmA unites in aikyam--oneness, with the paramAtman who is the pUrNam--fullness, (not emptiness,) of Brahman.

‣ It also mentions that this worldly life of dvaitam--duality, that appears (as real), in the state where that aikyam--unity, has not happened, was caused to happen by Brahman itself, when it remains as Ishvara who is united with the mAyA shakti;

‣ and adds that Ishvara conducts the jagat--world, with a plan; which is why this jagat, although it becomes asatyam--untrue/false, in the end, moves on in a discipline with kAraNa-kArya-vidhis--rules of cause and effect.

• Bauddham, without accepting Ishvara and a tatkAla-satyavat--immediate/temporary reality, for the run of the world,

‣ saying on the one side that everything simply appears and disappears,

‣ and on the other accepting the principle of karma that (strictly) remains within the kAraNa-kArya-vidhi and the principle of reincarnation,

do not match in each other.

• Jaina matam also does not speak that there is One known as Brahman which is satya-vastu, and it conducts the world becoming Ishvara by uniting with mAyA.

‣ It leaves out everything without coming to a conclusion, teaching that nohting can be considered as existing or non-existing. This has the name syAdvAdam--assertion of possibility or non-possibility. That is, to leave things in antaram--(Tamil) supportless state, saying, "it could be such:", and not "it is such" with a conclusion. That is, to say "may be"! In saying 'may be', 'may not be' is also hangs on it.

• That is, to be indecisive about the satyatvam--truth, of the vastu--entity, is syAdvAdam. This may-be-may-not-be doctrine, would branch out into sapta-bhangi--seven branches. It would be like a strange puzzle to listen to! What those seven are:

‣ one is syAd-asti--it may be there;
‣ two, syAd-nAsti--it may not be there;
‣ three, syAd-asti-nAsti--it may be there, or it may also not be there;
‣ four, syAd-avaktavya--it may be that it is indescribable;
‣ five, syAd-asti-cha-avaktavya-—it may be there and it may be indescribable;
‣ six, syAd-nAsti-cha-avaktavya-—it may not be there and its not being there may be indescribable;
‣ seven, syAd-asti-cha-nAsti-cha-avaktavya—-it may remain as being there and not being there and it may be indescribable.

If one keeps on going with these assertions, to what nishchayam--certainty, can one come to?

• Although it is mentioned in Jainam that AtmA--soul, is jnAna-mayam--full of knowledge, chaitanya-mayam--full of consciousness/intelligence,

Jainam also mentions that the AtmA becomes commensurate with whatever sharIram--body, (it takes); ant-size within the body of an ant; elephant-sized within the body of the elephant; if the ant reincarnates as elephant, the AtmA that was ant-sized earlier, now becomes elephant-sized!

‣ It says that karmas become paramANUs, enter the AtmA and shrinks and binds it; and if the ties are removed, the AtmA gets released and in that state of liberation flies to the apex of AkAsha--space, and remains there in saukhyam--welfare/comfort.

‣ To remove those ties, that is, to prevent the karma-paramANUs from entering the AtmA and spoil it with ties and shrinkage, it says that the strict vratas--religious observances, ordained in the religion must be in-anuShTAnam--practised.

• The Jaina matam would lay much stress on ahiMsA--non-injury, and dAna--charity. It would show much hatred on worldly life. Although these are uttama--lofty, principles, it would be shrama--difficult/requiring exertion, for the majority of people. And thereby, they would happen to violate the regulations of their own religion.

• If it is not arranged for them, as in our religion, giving respect as gRhastha-dharma--householders' dharma, to family life,

giving a raised status as puruShArthas--aims of life, to the artha-kAma--wealth and desire,

and encouraging the majority of people to lead their life in dharma with utsAham--happiness,

there would not be any saMtoSham--satisfaction/happiness, at all for them obtained in daily practical life.

‣ With not enough pakvam--maturity, to lead an Adharsha--ideal, life, would lead to deceptively have such disguise and then go astray, and the samUham--society, itself would deteriorate.

‣ Or, instead of maturing step by step and giving up desires, and (finally) becoming a ripe fruit, seeking to give up desires out of hatred (for worldly life) would result in riping prematurely and falling.

In both Jainam and Bauddham, this danger is there.

******************************

saidevo
28 August 2010, 10:18 AM
******************************
Concept of God
******************************
pages 368-373

Amuzedly, the PUrva-mImAMsA that spoke only of vaidika karmAnuShTAnam--Vedic rituals, did not talk about Ishvara; and the Bauddha-Jaina matas which totally objected to vaidika karmAnuShTAnam did not also talk about Ishvara!

Even more amuzing is: let the vaidika karma be on one side. Don't we speak about a 'Karma Theory'? That--'Every action has a reaction. Every cause has an effect. No one can escape from this. There is an effect for every good and bad action that we indulge in. These effects must necessarily be experienced. Only for this that although maraNam--death, happens in one sharIram--body, the need arises for a jIva--soul, to take up another janma--birth, in another sharIram and experience (the effects), and thus the wheel of samsAra--worldly life, goes rotating on'--is the Karma Theory.

• The Christian and Islam religions do not speak of (the jIva) thus taking several janmas--births, for karma-phala-anubhogam--enjoyment of the fruits of karma. Still, although this principle (of karma) is not there in those religions now, it was present in the root forms of those religions; or the Karma Theory was after all present in the Hebrew religions that preceded those religions in those countries, they say.

This subject is not in-sambandham--related, to us now. There is nothing in AchAryAL's charitam--biography, related to the Christian and Islamic religions.

• But then as to why I came to speak about the Karma Theory is that all the three--MImAMsA, Bauddham, and Jainam--which are well related to AchAryAL--related in kanDana rUpam--by way of his criticising them, have accepted the Karma Theory.

• Although these three do accept the Karma Theory, their not accepting Ishvara who remains as the karma-phala-dAtA--dispenser of karmic fruits, is what is most amuzing (in them)!

• Karma is an achetana--inanimate, jaDa vastu--inert thing. How can it organize a plan and make arrangements for such and such phala--fruit/result, for such and such action, with such decisiveness/finality, and control?

‣ Still, on the one side, the MImAMsakas said, denying (the existence of) Ishvara, 'karma causes to ensue its own fruits'.

‣ And on the other side, the completely avaidika--non-Vedic, Bauddha-Jainas too, without explaining how and by whom are the karma-phala are caused, doing nirIshvara-vAdam--argument against a personal God, and saying that there would be janmAntara--future births according to karma-phala, raised a building of siddhAnta--doctrine, without an astivAram--(Tamil) foundation!

• It is said in Bauddham that only the state of shUnya--emptiness, called nirvANam is the mokSham--liberation; all these loka-vyApAram--transaction of worldly life, only seems such, as many samAchAras--(Tamil) affairs, coming together as happenings in some sort of a stream of mAyA, so all that is nothing but falsity.

‣ Thus when everything remains entirely as false, as combining and separating as whatever things they seem, how can it happen, deciding with such precision, an inescapable result as such for every karma?

‣ Without dismissing everything as 'some sort of a stream of mAyA', it only enables us to guess, that a mahA-mati--great intelligence/mind, resolves and arranges for the cause-effect happenings? Only Ishvara is that mahA-mati.

One thing must be mentioned here. An important thing.

• Since AchAryAL has also stated, "All these loka-vyApAram--transaction of worldly life, is mAyA; only Brahmam is the satyam", by this some people think that it was copied straight from Bauddham.

• These people should understand an important difference. When AchAryAL says that this lokam is mAyA, he does not say that it was some sort of a headless, tailless flow of many things coming together, as the Bauddhas say.

‣ AchAryAL has only established that an Ishvara, who has either this mAyA as his guNa--attribute, or has this mAyA-shakti--power of illusion, has created the appearence called this lokam--world, from Brahmam itself, and also conducts its affairs, and dispenses the karma-phala--fruits of karma.

‣ To put it in other words, he has said that the Brahmam which has no kAryam--action, or guNa--attribute, is NirguNa Brahman, and that the same Brahman, combining with mAyA-shakti becomes Ishvara the SaguNa Brahman, who has kAryam and guNam, and does the loka-vyApAram--transaction of worldly life.

‣ To escape from this, by attaining the NirguNam from the SaguNam, and to become aikyam--united, with it in abhedam--absence of distinction, is the lakShyam--goal, of his advaitam.

‣ For that he has organized (for us) a sAdhanA-mArgam--path of seeking, to progress in the advaita jnAna mArgam, which stipulates doing Ishvara-bhakti as a first step, since it requires the anugraham--divine favour, of mAyA-sahita-Ishvara--Ishvara conjoined with mAyA, and who is the SaguNa Brahman.

• There is another difference. If it is mAyA, it does not mean that it is totally false. AchAryAL would call that which is totally false as atyanta-asat--absolute unreality. Brahmam is that which is pUrNa satyam--absolute reality. That which is called prAtibhAsika satyaM--a temporary apperance as reality, is what is in between.

‣ That is, (this prAtibhAsika satyaM is) one that looks real in practical vyavAhAra--worldly life, but would disappear with the arrival of jnAnam.

‣ AchAryAL has only said that the mAyA-lokam--the world as it seems, is such a temporary appearance as reality called prAtibhAsika satyaM; and not as the atyanta-asat which is totally unreal.

‣ Thus the jagat--world, is not asatyam--unreality, but a tatkAla-satyam--temporary reality called mithyA.

• Thus, only when giving the jagat an intermediate reality, it becomes possible to classify (actions) as good and bad and say that Ishvara who is mAyi dispenses the phala--fruits.

‣ So it becomes possible to say that only by doing good, one can obtain chitta-shuddhi--purity of mind, through it by Ishvara anugraham, and then proceed in the nivRtti (jnAna) mArgam. What is doing good? To remain in self-control and act in dharma.

‣ In Bauddham, after saying, 'There is a mokSham which is shUnyam. Everything else is a stream of mAyA that is false', when controls such as ahiMsA--non-violence, and satyam--truth, are emphasized, it remains impossible to answer when questions are raised, such as, 'when it is said that everything is false, what for is hiMsA or ahiMsA? satyam or asatyam? why should there be dharma and self-control?'

‣ Whereas in AchAryAL's siddhAnta--doctrine, it is possible to reply (to such questions), by assigning an intermediary reality as mithyA to the mAyA-jagat, that only when a jIva--soul, acts in self-control and dharma, would Ishvara, who administers the world giving fruits according to karma, give it chitta-shuddhi and raise it to the jnAna-mArgam.

‣ As an upAyam--means, that helps this discipline of dharma, AchAryAL also accepted the vaidika-karmAnuShTAna that MImAMsA teaches.

• The very greatness of AchAryAL's matam--doctrine, lies in his approving of the karmAnuShTAnam of the MImAMsA, the mAyA doctrine of Bauddha, and the ahiMsA principle of Jaina, giving them a place at the appropriate stage!

In summary, what I came to tell you is to show that both the Bauddha and ShramaNa (Jaina), accepting the doctrine of karma alone (without an Ishvara), and ordaining as its angam--part, the disciplines of dharma, seems like raising a buiding without an astivAram--foundation.

Whether one dismisses as Bauddham does, that all this life are only the flow of falsity, or decides like Jainam does, that nothing can be said in certainty about anything, in both (these approaches) it is not possible to obtain an explanation, for the arrangement of running in continuity the samsAra-chakra--wheel of worldly life, by intertwining with such decisiveness/finality, the fruits of every karma.

In general, a matam--religion, that has no Ishvara, does not stick with the jana-samudhAyam--populace.

******************************

saidevo
09 November 2010, 12:50 AM
**************************************************
bauddha-jaina religions and the peoples' attitude
**************************************************
pages 373-378

The people are not bothered about the tattva-siddhAntas--religious philosophies. Only some great Shakti--power, has created this world and is running it; and to that Shakti known by the name SvAmi, pray for fulfilment of their kAmanas--desires/wishes;--only this is the religion of the common people.

• In addition, it is the svabhAvam--nature, of the common people to obtain a sense of fulfilment in the declaration that they belong to the path taught by that sage who turned up to earn their honour and respects and taught them a path, in the belief 'if this man says it, then it should be right'.

• The mata siddhAnta--religious philosophy, that he teaches is what is deemed as his 'path'. What it involves would not at all be known in visheSham--specifics, to the people. Nor would they ever strive to make what little they know about it, their svanta-anubhavam--personal experience, by doing-anuShThAnam-of--practising, it.

• Nevertheless, the people would continue with the attitude: 'let it be whatever, if this man--this elderly sage--teaches it, it should be right, so let us remain as his followers, and whatever little we can in what he teaches, let us try to practise'. This is also applicable to the followers of AchAryAL's matham--religion.

Let us have a look at the bauddha-jaina religions in this angle.

• Which other religion has not taught the codes of conduct prescribed in those religions, such as ahiMsA--non-injury, satyam--truth, aparigraha--non-accumulation of wealth?

‣ In the 'Manu Dharma shAstra' the section on sAdhArana dharma for sakala jana--dharma common to all people, starts only with these codes.

‣ It is not that a shAstra should prescribe it: whoever doesn't know that he should be disciplined?

‣ Still, desires catch and draw a person, preventing him from being disciplined. When they thus draw him, to do tattva-vichAra--spiritual inquiry,--either according to the VedAnta, or the bauddha-jaina, or the sAmkhyAdi-siddhAntas--philosophies of SAMkhya, etc.--in some manner researching the tattvas--spiritual principles, obtain anubhavam--experience, and by that experience control the desires, would be sAdhya--possible, for only one or two in a hundred or a thousand.

‣ The others would be such as to accept anything, only if it teaches that one should surrender to an Ishvara--personal God, who is karuNAmUrti--embodiment of compassion, pray to him, and by his grace, have the bad things removed and the good accrue.

• In the bauddha-jaina religions, there is no Ishvara at all. Whereas for the people, there is no interest in the codes prescribed in those religions at the anuShThAna--practice, level. Nor do they have the shakti--ability, to go in the path taught by the philosophy of those religons at the anubhava--experience, level.

• So what should be done to make those religions popular as mass religions? And those religions declared themselves to be common for all the (classes of) people!

‣ Saying 'declared themselves' does not dhvani--sound, that well. In vAstavam--reality, both Buddha and JIna were men who thought about a mass religion, giving all the rights and privileges to all classes of people. Teaching that the Hindu religion which has varNa-vyavasta--class bindings, was doing pakShapAtam--siding with/being favourable to, only some people, they gave sama-adhikAra--equal rights, in their religion to all the people.

‣ Still, in what they thought to give as a mass religion, if the natural religion of deity worship that has mass appeal is not included, how can it go as intended?

• If their religions spread among the people during the time of Buddha and Jina, the reason was different.

‣ If a Buddha or a Jina did a new prasAram--propaganda, saying that the Veda matam that existed till then was making a distinction among the people, and teaching, 'we would do it right and give equal elevation to everyone', then there would arise an attraction in it for the people?

‣ Questions like what principle did they teach, whether it could be understood, and whether it could be followed, would not have risen then.

‣ Further, since Buddha and JIna who taught that way, belonged to a lineage that had a status/rank, and were full of discipline, love and sacrifice in their own life, their personal magnetism did-AkarShaNa-of--attracted/drew towards, the people.

• I don't say this for only those religions; it applies to all religions.

‣ In the Hindu matam itself, as far as the common people are concerned, they have no bother for its various siddhAntas. People have always done it--going behind him--if someone with special honour, came to teach a (specific) siddhAnta--philosophy.

‣ Even in the vishayam--case, of our AchAryAL, I am not at all prepared to say that all the jana-samUham--multitude of people, followed him only after understanding the Advaita he taught.

‣ Many people would have embraced his matam, only by interest arising towards him based on that individual manuShya's--man's, guNas--good qualities, "this man is a great mahAn--sage, he would only teach the good to us", and the faith born out it. Let it remain (on one side).

After Buddha and JIna had gone, how to make the people remain interested in those religions?

• 'Saying merely discipline, discipline, evokes no interest; the philosophy also does not reach. The common people are not bothered about mata siddhAnta--religious philosophy, or sAdhAnA-mArgam--spiritual path. Only with a living God like Ishvara can they retain their interest'--when it is such, there arose a compulsion for the bauddha-jaina religions to cater to what the people liked.

‣ Therefore, they decided to provide for mUrtis--images, for worship, in some way, although they did not teach about Ishvara, which their philosophy did not give room for.

‣ What they did was--they did not of course establish an image as SvAmi (Ishvara); but then they made arrangements for worship of the mahAns--sages, they considered having attained pUrNatvam--liberated fullness, going by the philosophy of the bauddha-jaina religions, and established for those elders, all the requirements such as Alayam--temple, mUrti--image, and pUjAkrama--worship regulations.

‣ The reason they attributed for such worship was similar to the concept of Ishvara in the Yoga shAstra as an ideal. That is, by worshipping their religious elders--such as the buddhas, bodhisatvas, tIrthaMkaras--who have attained the lakShyam--goal, the people would take the states attained by these elders as the ideal, and try to follow them.

• But it is highly doubtful as to whether it happened as desired.

‣ There is no saMdeham--doubt, that once they established bigger and bigger vihAras--temples, and mUrtis--images, they would have attracted the people and made them do the worship.

‣ But then people would never have bothered themselves, thinking of the ideal of a lakShyam--goal, "we too should become like this man, a buddha, bodhisatva or an arhat".

‣ Instead, the people would only have stopped with the prayers to these (bauddha-jaina) mUrtis, that in their worldly life, 'I need this, I need that, and my afflictions should be removed', or at the loftiest, 'I should get the jnAnam, obtain the vairAgyam'.

They would not have started with 'we too should practise their ideals'. Such is the attitude of the common people.

• If it is to obtain boons in this way, then there should necessarily be an Ishvara as the karma-phala-dAta--dispenser of karmic fruits. One who gives the phala for the karma, only he can give the fruits we seek?

• In other words, although those two religions established their pUjA-mUrtis as lakShya-puruShas--goal-models, who guided the path to the lakShyam--goal, and not as the Ishvara, the karma-phala-dAta,

the people, however, worshipped those mUrtis only for their iShTa-kAmya-phala--fulfilment of personal wishes, thinking them as the aneka mUrtis--many images, of Ishvara in the Hindu religion.

• As things went on this way, later, those religious leaders had to go as far as the tasks of establishing different deities for their people for different fruits, as it existed in the Hindu religion.

‣ It even transpired that they had to take into their religion, the Hindu gods, either by changing the names, or as such.

Although uddesham--stipulation, and practice are different, if it amounts to the pretence of going according to the uddesham, but bending the regulations to be practical, is it not a great shortcoming for a religion? Is it not a kuRai--(Tamizh) flaw/deficiency, too, for those who claim to belong to that religion? It existed in this manner, during that time, 2,500 years ago.

**************************************************

saidevo
09 November 2010, 11:40 PM
**************************************************
Barefaced lokAyatam--materialism
**************************************************
pages 378-379

Apart from these religions, there existed barefaced nAstikam--atheism, in the name of chArvAkam.

In all the religions mentioned till now, samsAram--worldly life, is spoken of as a bandham--binding, and solutions are given to obtain nivRtti--escape/liberation, from it. It is not that each one of these religions did not have its own lofty principles.

• In contrary to all these religions, without saying that samsAram is a bandham and to obtain mokSham--liberation, from it is the lakShyam--goal,

the religion that said 'kaNDadhE kATchi, koNDadhE kolam'--(Tamizh) seen is THE sight, worn is THE form' was the ChArvAkam.

• 'chAru' means lovely, pleasing, and 'vAkam' is vAkyam--speech/statement. 'The statement which is pleasing to hear' is thus chAruvAkam.

‣ If it is said, "vratas--vows, are not necessary, upavAsa--fasting, is not necessary; and there is no need to get confused, contemplating the tattvas--spiritual philosophy. Just eat well, drink well and enjoy the pleasures of life", it would only be pleasing to hear, right? That is why the name, chAruvAkam.

‣ "There is nothing like sAmi--God, bhUtam--elements, or Atman--Self; are they visible to the eyes? To the eyes, this sharIram--body, is visible, this lokam--world is visible. So, take whatever you can from this world that is saukhyam--comfortable, to the body, and enjoy life. Apart from this, we don't need any matam--religion, or maNNAngkaTTi--(Tamizh) clod", is what that religion says.

• They would say that only the devaguru BRhaspati, in order to ensure that the Asuras did not turn to the ways of goodness, created such a religion and spread it among them. Therefore it had the name BArhaspatam, which I mentioned earlier.

‣ Since it ends with this lokam--world, without any talk about paralokam--future worlds of afterlife, they would generally refer to it as lokAyatam! In Tamizh, 'ulakAyatam'--what they call 'materialism'.

This religion, which was created in uddesham--consideration, of the Asuras, prevailed to a small extent in our desham--country, in this KalikAlam--Kali yuga age, among the people in whom the Asura-vRttis--evil tendencies, have entered.

**************************************************

saidevo
07 December 2010, 07:11 AM
************************************************************
Matas--sects, that agreed with the Vedas, but not with the VedAnta
************************************************************
pages 379-381

Instead of doing-AkShepaNam--objecting, to the Vedas right from the basis (like the bauddha, jaina and chArvAka sects), there were matas, which said that they agreed with the veda pramANam--testimony/authority (that is, what Vedas say is the satya-pramANa--testimony of the truth), took only one aMsham--share, from them, did siddhAnta--doctrine, that this was the entire purport, and did-kaNDanam-of--thrashed, the other aMshas.

• Generally, people of these sects will not agree to what is explained in the VedAnta as the parama-tAtparyam--ultimate purpose, of the Vedas: the jIva-brahma aikyam--unity of the individual and universal soul, and that mokSham--liberation, is nothing but having-anubhavam--experiencing, that aikyam--unity, in Atma-sAkShAtkAram--intuitive perception/realization of the Self.

• These matas, arose doing-bhanggam-of--breaking, the cohesiveness of SanAtana Dharma, that gave a method from the root to the top, as integrated, saMyukta--united, starting at the kAryas--actions, meant for those who cannot at all understand about Atman--Self, and they had spread in different degrees at that time.

• Among these (sects), were the five, which had distinction in the manner of vishaya-ArAychchi--investigation of things: SAMkhya, Yoga, NyAya, VaisheShika, and MImAMsA.

• In the Yoga (sect), along with the vishaya-ArAychchi of SAMkhya, a sAdhanA-mArgam--way of spiritual practice, too is there, as an added distinction. Still, all these sects are those that do not approach the sAra-tattvam--essential principle, of SanAtana Dharma.

• Among these five, the MImAMsA, which was reproached by KRShNa ParamAtma himself (in the GItA), was again becoming popular. The other four, namely, SAMkhya, Yoga, NyAya and VaisheShika, were only being followed by some intellectuals.

• The MImAMsA alone, which is karmAnuShTa-maya--full of rites and duties, was in anuShTAnam--practice, to a considerable extent, in the brAhmaNa-samUham--brahmins class.

• Since in that shAstra--scripture, (of MImAMsA) that speaks of karmas such as agnihotra and yajnas, there was, in addition, abundant intellectual investigation about inquiring the meaning of the Vedas, it is known that there was a good following to that sect among the brahmins.

• It is also known that in that jAti--caste, (of brahmins), there was another part that had embraced the bauddha-matam.

• Since it was a time when VedAnta, being much withered although not completely gone, was holding its breath in hands, brahmins who could not attain fulfilment in karmas--ritual actions, alone, and wanted to get involved in what they call metaphysics, those truths that are bhautika-atIta--beyond the physical, as there was scope in bauddham for abstract meditation (unadulterated, svachCha--wholesome, dhyAna-vichAram--inquiry by meditation), went in that route.

As many among the brAhmaNas who were, since AdikAlam--the beginning of times, mukhya--chief, adhikArins--authority, for the karmAnuShTAnas, abandoned it and sought bauddham, in the (works called) 'Sankara Vijayas' it is mentioned, in some atishayokti--exaggeration/hyperbolical language, that the Devas at that time went and complained to Parameshvara, that a durdashA--bad situation/misfortune, had come about, when everyone would close their ears (with hands) if they heard about the word 'yAgam'--sacrifice.

**********

saidevo
22 December 2010, 08:01 AM
****************************************
Worship methods of those days
****************************************
pages 381-384

As far as the public are concerned, did we not see that only Alaya-pUjA--worship in temples, is the matam--religion? As to how this was in those days:

• krUra-upAsana--bloody worship, in the names of kApAlikam, kAlAmukham, bhairavam had obtained a new lease of life.

• In shakti-upAsana--worship of Goddess, ApAsamAna--(Tamizh) obscene, anuShTAnAs--religious practices, in the name of vAmAchAram raised their heads.

• Such samAchAras--practices/customs, were also part of the some vaiShNava tantras.

From what I say as '(ApAsamAna) anuShTAnm', giving it a high name, you can understand how in this Yuga, the bad takes on the appearance of good!

• Even for such things as giving a bali--a victim (in a sacrifice), toddy nivedanam--offering, and strI-puruSha anubhogam--man-woman enjoyment, sticking a label as lofty principles, it had come to pass that this was a mArga--path, for Amta-shreyas--good/better state for the soul.

Since the day the manuShya jAti--human species, appeared, there would certainly have been two classes as those who were refined and those who were not. And those who lacked refinement would have done worship with bali, toddy and carnal revelry. Why say 'would have'? We see it in the case of the AdhiVasis--aboriginals, of all deshas--countries, so as to make us say 'there were'. Even today there are such people.

• Whoever it is, when it seems that there should be a shakti--power, which is the mUlam--root, for us and this lokam--world, and when it is thought to worship that shakti, it happens that the shakti is seen with such rUpam--form, as preferred, given such nivedanam--offering, as preferred, and do such other upachAras--services, as preferred. It is in this that those who lack refinement do worship in a peculiar way.

• The vEDikkai--amusing part, of this is that as with the manuShya jAti, in the deva jAtis--deva species, too, there are devatas who lack refinement. Ishvara, in his sport, makes these kind of people have bhakti--devotion, towards these kinds of devatas, and worship them in a way they both like, which is, however, disgustful to those who are refined.

• It cannot be said that such worship is wrong at that level. Still, even when we say ugra-devata--ferocious god, kShudra-devata--mean/wicked god, we call it a 'devata' and not an asura-janma--demonic birth. So, with whatever lack of refinement the worship happens to be, if there is hiMsA--injury/harm, and revelry in it which go to the extent of being described as asuratvam--demoniac, it is certainly wrong.

What happened in the time I mentioned was that shAstras--texts, were made describing the upAsana--worship, methods that lacked refinement, as Atma-shreyo mArgas--spiritual welfare paths, in order to make them appear as refined.

• Without stopping at the uncivilized people doing something within themselves, prayatnas--efforts, were made to give them a civilized appearance and attract the civilized society towards it.

Some sAdhanas--means of spiritual advancement, which seem loathsome, cruel and disgusting to us are mentioned in some tantra, yoga shAstras. Doing abhyAsam--practice, of them, some might have, in vAstavam--reality, obtained a shakti--power, or a siddhi--spiritual accomplishment. They might even get some prayojana--use, that are Atma-sambandham--related to the Self, in this way.

• But this is a mArgam--path, that resembles an activity where maraNam--death, is certain, if the karaNam--action such as a somersault, fails due to some fault.

• Just as in krUra-devatA upAsanA, where even a slight mistake is enough for the krUra-devata to kill (the performer), with these types of yoga sAdhana too, even if a slight mistake arises, there is bound to be Atma-hAni--damage to the soul, altogether.

• It would be a highly shrama-sAdhya--laborious accomplishment, to master, without any sort of vikAram--(Tamizh) perversity, arising in the manas--mind, the abhyAsas--practices, that could make the sAdhaka--practitioner, slip in a sudden fall, totally into mere indrya-sukham--sensual pleasures.

Such sAdhanas, which are like walking on the razor's edge, are not at all avashya--necessary.

To say that it is like walking on the razor's edge, makes it appear as a gaurava sAdhana--respectful practice. The UpaniShad has spoken about our very brahma vidyA sAdhana which is vedAnta--end of the Vedas, as walking on the razor's edge.*1

• So, instead of giving it a honourable mention, we can say as RAmakRShNa ParamahaMsa said: "Although one can reach the lakShyam--goal, by these ways, it would be like entering a house through the garden, scale a wall and then get in through the kakkUse--(Tamizh) lavatory, instead of entering through the frontal threshold as per the custom"!

• Although for some people, (bizarre) paths such as these were avashya--necessary--and they could get the results thereof following a sAdhana which is shrama-sAdhya for their progress, without getting their hand or leg broken, without slipping and falling in the amedhya--faeces/excrement--even then they should not make these things bahirangga--public knowledge, which are hetu--cause, for getting Atma-hAni--soul-damage, for other people to try.

• Nevertheless, in the time we are now having a glance at, since they would not have any prAbalyam--popularity by predominance, or antasthu--status, if they do anuShTAnam--practise, only for themselves, many people started for doing prasAram--propaganda, of these tantras that are Apad--dangerous, to the public.

Note:
waling on razor's edge: kaThopaniShad

उत्तिष्ठत जाग्रत प्राप्य वरान्निबोधत ।
क्षुरस्य धारा निशिता दुरत्यया दुर्गं पथस्तत्कवयो वदन्ति ॥ १.३.१४ ॥

uttiShThata jAgrata prApya varAnnibodhata |
kShurasya dhArA nishitA duratyayA durgaM pathastatkavayo vadanti || 1.3.14 ||

1.3.14: Arise, awake, and learn by approaching the excellent ones. The wise ones describe that path to be impassable as a razor's edge, which, when sharpened, is difficult to tread on.

It is remarkable that SvAmi VivekAnanda chose this mantra for his famous slogan "Arise, Awake and stop not till the goal is reached."

**********

saidevo
19 January 2011, 11:38 PM
pages 384-386

What was most vichitra--strange, in this was, although Buddha left without teaching anything about SvAmi--God, since the populace could not afford it without worshipping gods, later in that matam, keeping Buddha himself as a SvAmi in a way, we saw that they erected large vigrahas--images, for worship, in such sizes as not seen for any SvAmi in the Hindu matam, right?

• At least let that go. For whoever the person, if those vigrahas which remain in parama-shAntam--supreme peace, are seen, it would be most unlikely that the manas--mind, would not focus for at least a kShaNa-kAlam--one moment in time, and a peace would not arise within.

• But then without stopping at this, what happened on another side was that, in that matam, without considering the pakvam--maturity, and yogyatAMsham--ability, they admitted people in large crowds in the name of bhikShu-sangham. This could be due to the reason that only when there are saMnyAsins--ascetics, in large numbers, it would give prestige for a matam--religion.

• What happened as a result was that, for many who became bhikShus at that time, in an AkarShaNa--attraction, since their viveka-vAirAgya--discretion and dispassion, were not sufficient, later couldn't stand the severe rigours of saMnyAsam. There arose chalanas--temptations, that were wrong. As an outlet to satisfy them, in the gaurava--respected, name of matAnuShThAnam--religious performances, they started creating AbhAsa--obscene, tantras.

• In other words, in-vichitram--strangely, in that matam in which it was ordained that there was no need for worship, as many methods of worships as could be there, including the obscene methods, arose!

• Later, since at that time everything was taking a slide, as if should our matam lag behind them, in the Hindu matam too, many people appeared and introduced such viparIta upAsana--perverse methods of worshipping.

• When looked at in the perspective of bhakti-upAsana--devotional worship, without giving occasion to blame as krUra--bloody, or AbhAsa--obscene, there were also in prasAram--propaganda, one sampradAya--tradition, in pAshupatam as shaivam, and another bhAgavata-pAncharAtra sampradAya as vaiShNavam.

• Two sects arose as vaidika pAshupatam and avaidika pAshupatam, and worship that was saumya--auspicious, was ordained only in the vaidika pAshupatam.

• There is also an abhiprAyam--opinion, that a good mArgam--path, called kAshmIra shaivam, which goes in high philosophy, could also have been there, in a somewhat slight, Arambha-sthiti--beginning stage.

Still, even all these sects did not reflect as it was, the pUrNa--complete, final, tAtparyam--purport, of the Vedas.

• All these sects were those which did-AkShepam--objected, to some extent, the parama-tAtparyam--supreme purport, "bhakti-upAsana is only there as pUrvAnga sAdhanam--initial efforts, to obtain chitta-aikAgrayam--oneness of mind, for the advaita-jnAnam--knowledge of Non-duality; in the end, the upAsaka--worshipper, the deivam that is done-upAsana-of--god that is worshipped, and the upAsana--worship, should all merge in unity."

• Even kAshmIra shaivam went nearer and nearer to advaita only, and could not become advaita that is svachCha--clear/transparent/white. It was only opposed to that.

Thus, the anekavidha--of many kinds, bhakti-sampradAyas--devotional traditions, although they spoke of themselves as vaidika--Vedic, in vAstavam--reality, were such as to go against the advaita-lakShyam--goal of non-duality, which was the end of vaidikam--Vedas; still, they were such as to seek honour and influence for them, taking the name of the Vedic tradition that is anAdi--beginningless, and one that has been in prakAshaNam--giving light, here.

**********

saidevo
05 February 2011, 12:16 AM
************************************************************
Would be vaidika only with complete veda-sammata--agreement with Vedas
************************************************************
pages 386-389

If something is to be designated as vaidika-matam--vedic religion, it is not enough if it agrees with only certain things taught in the Vedas and develops those things. More mukhyam--important, than this is that it should not do-AkShepa--object to, anything taught in the Vedas.

If it is argued that

• there are sUktas--hymns, in the Vedas about Shiva; so the matams like the pAshupatam, which took and developed it are vaidika;

or, in the same manner,

• since there are ViShNu sUktas in the Vedas, the vaiShNava matas that have arisen out of that foundation, such as the bhAgavata pAncharAtram are vaidika;

it is not a correct vAdam--argument.

In the Vedas, Shiva and ViShNu are stuta--adored, without any distinction between them. Where each of them is referred to, that one is mentioned as the parabrahmam--brahman.

Therefore, although there is nothing wrong, that is avaidikam--unvedic, in the rise of the shaiva matas which mention Shiva as the primordial and ultimate God, or in the same manner, the vaiShNava matas which take ViShNu as primordial and ultimate,

these matas, without stopping at adoring only Shiva or ViShNu which are the iShTa-deivam--preferred deity, for them,

• if the shaiva matas say, 'ViShNu is not the primordial and ultimate god, he is only below Shiva' and

• the vaiShNava matas say, 'ViShNu alone is the primordial and ultimate god, Shiva is inferior to him',

then they only go in muraN--(Tamizh) contrary, to the Vedas. Therefore, they become avaidika.

• It would be alright if they stop at holding on to what they prefer. But if they seek to attack what they don't prefer, it amounts to attacking a portion of the Vedas. So such a matam cannot be one that is vaidika.

This is saying it somewhat in a broad outlook. Those who speak more strictly, would say

• "In the Vedas are mentioned the yajnas for all svAmis--gods. In a single yajna, there is prescription to give yajna-bhAgas--share of the vedic sacrifice, to many gods. Only he who performs all those things without any distinction is the real vaidika. (On the other hand) one who says, 'I will perform only that which relates to one god. I will not perform those related to the other gods', cannot be a vaidika.

Let him remain with atyanta-bhakti--intimate devotion, towards what is an iShTa-mUrti--preferred image, at the level of the manas--mind. When it comes to pUja, yajna and such in kAryam--religious performances, only when they are done as found in the shruti-smRti, without entertaining any deiva-bhedam--deity distinction, it would mean vaidikam."

• "One should follow only the forty saMskAras--ceremonies, given by the smRtis, in-anusaraNa-of--following, the shruti.

If a matam says that only if one does some specific saMskAram that is not found among them, one can become their follower, then that matam is simply one which is different from the veda matam.

For udAharaNam--example, among the forty saMskAras, there is nothing as having mudrA-dhAraNam--symbol-wearing, as tapta-siMha--branded marks (on the body), either the shangkha-chakra--conch-disc, or the shUla-RShabha--spear-bull. If it is said that only if one undergoes such a saMskAra, one can become a follower of a matam that is ViShNuparam--ViShNu as superior, or Shivaparam, he cannot be called a vaidika", would say the people who are strict (in their definition).

• In addition, "Whoever it is, only when there is varNAshrama-anuShThAnam--class-observance, he would be a vaidika. If one says 'For us only bhakti is mukhya--imporatant. We don't need the varNAshrama-vyavastas--class-bindings', it would be avaidikam", they would say.

It is the same for those that are matas which do tattva-chodana--philosophical inquiry, instead of being bhakti-matas.

• That is, it is not enough if they inquire into only certain tattvas, in veda-adhAram--vedic support. It should be noted as to whom at what stage are these tattvas are done-upadesham-of--taught.

• What the Vedas have prescribed in the case of those who cannot reach that stage, should not be totally discarded as 'these are not avashya--necessary.'

• On the other side, it should not be maintained that the tAtparyam--purport, of the Vedas has become pUrta--complete, with what they have selected, discarding what is taught in the Vedas for stages above that level.

• Even those who have such (philosophical) abhiprAya--opinion, should not go snipping away, 'We go teaching only as philosophy? So, there is no sambandham--relation, between us and the varNAshramam, which is the social practical samAchAram--custom'.

Only on these bases, even in the MahAbhAratam, it is done-nirNaya--determined/ascertained/settled, as to what is vaidika matam and what is avaidika matam.

saidevo
06 February 2011, 01:45 AM
pages 389-392

The long upadesham--teaching, that BhIShma pitAmaha, lying on the sharakkUDu--bed of arrows, gives Dharmaputra occurs in MahAbhArata in two parvas, as shAnti parva and anushAsana parva.

• In that teaching, the two--pAncharAtram and pAshupatam--which are bhakti-upAsana matas--devotional religious sects,

and the other two--the sAMkhyam that remains as a tattva-shAstram--philosophical scripture, and the yoga that teaches a sAdhanam--means of inquiry, in kriyA-rUpam--form of action, on the basis of the sAMkhya tattvas--

that is, these four religious sects are separated from the Vedas and mentioned as different matas.

• It is mentioned there as sAMkhyam yogaH pAnchArAtram vedAH pAshupatam tathA. That is, 'sAMkhyam, yogam, pAnchArAtram, Vedas, pAshupatam--these five matas', is how it occurs there. If the Vedas are one of the five matas, it only means that the other four are not related to the Veda matam?

• In (MahA)bhAratam itself, in another place, yoga is mentioned using the name of Patanjali, the mUla-puruSha--founder, of that matam, as 'pAtanjalam'. It is mentioned in spaShTam--with clarity, as nAnA matAni--different religious sects.

• There is one text known as shiva mahimna stotram. Done by PuShpadatta. It is a very ancient stotram--hymn. One which is very prasiddha--well known, in the vaDa-desham--North India. In that (stotram) too, in this same manner, vedam, sAMkhyam, yogam, pAshupatam, vaiShNavam are mentioned as different matas.

त्रयी सांख्यं योगः पशुपतिमतं वैष्णवमिति प्रभिन्ने प्रस्थाने

trayI sAMkhyaM yogaH pashupatimataM vaiShNavamiti prabhinne prasthAne
--shiva mahimna stotram, 7

'trayI' means the Vedas. That is one matam--religious sect. 'sAMkhyam' is another matam. 'yogam'--that too is one matam, separately. 'pashupatimatam' is the pAshupatam that refers to SivaperumAn. That is also one matam. Finally, another is 'vaiShNavam'. These are mentioned as 'prasthAnas' that are 'prabhinna'--'mArgas--paths, that are different from each other' is the meaning.

There is great value for thus being mentioned in (MahA)bhAratam and shiva mahimna stotram.

• The story of BhAratam is one that goes in consonance with the story of KRShNa-paramAtman who is ViShNu avatAram. HarivaMsham, which remains as the anubandham--supplement of BhAratam, is one that speaks elaborately about shrI KSRhNa charitram--life.

Nevertheless, when the tantra called pAnchArAtram was done-anuShThAna-of--practised, as only referring to ViShNu, in virodham--opposition, to the samarasya-bhAvam--perception of equality, of the Vedas, belittling the other deivams--gods, and in contrary to the shruti-sMRti AcharaNa--practice,

BhAratam has mentioned it as a samayam--religion, which is external to the Vedas.

• In this same manner is the mention of the pashupati matam as an external samayam to the Vedas, in the 'shiva mahimna stotram', although it arose to speak only about Shiva mahimas--greatness.

As there is a satya-pramANam--testimony of truth, for mahAkavai-vAk--words of great poets, I shall narrate one such on this subject.

• One who obtained the gauravam--honour, of paNDita-samUham--society of scholars, is shrI HarSha kavi--poet. Those who do not have pANDityam--scholarship, cannot understand his pustakas--books. He had written the NaLa-charitram--life story of King NaLa, giving it the name NaiShadham.

• DamayantI svayamvara--self-choosing groom, scene in that text. NaLan has come to the svayamvara maNDapam--pavilion. Between him and DamayantI, parapara-prema--mutual love. So, she would only garland him.

• In this scene, as enhancing the kAvyach-chuvai--(Tamizh) epic sensibility, something puzzling happens in the 'NaiShadham' as in the case of the present day mystery/suspense stories. That is, instead of one NaLa, five NaLas are seated adjacent to each other!

• Only one of them is the (real) NaLan. The other four are Agni, Yama, VaruNa and Indra, who have come in disguise, tatrUpam--in the exact form, of him. DamayantI goes astonished as to who among those five men is the nija--real, NaLan.

Only when narrating this incident, Kavi (shrI HarSha) brings in the viShayam--subject, we were looking at. He brings it in the form of an upamAnam--simile.

• He says: "Just as bhramippu--(Tamizh) amazement/confusion, arises when Advaita, which is the real Veda matam, and the other four matas sAMkhyam, yogam, pAshupatam and pAnchArAtram, which wear the same Vedic disguise, are together,

when she looked at the four Devas in NaLa-veSham--NaLa's disguise, sitting with the nija NaLa, DamayantI went bhramita--astonished in confusion, as to who was the real NaLa among these five men."

panchama kOti mAtre ... matAnAm advaita tattva iva satya tarepi loka

In this manner at that time, in our desham--country, since time anAdi--beginningless, as there was belief among the majority of the panDita-pAmara--scholarly and ordinary, that only veda-vAk--words of the Vedas, was the Ishvara vAk--God's words, which is satyam--truth,

in vAstavam--reality, several matas which had avaidika principles and (the related) kriyA-kalApa--package of acts, were such as to describe themselves as only vaidika matas and attract people. Some among these attracted the learned, as being philosophical; and some as being deiva upAsana--divine worship, attracted the public.

• Not that all the upAsana mArgas were like this. There were also upAsana, that had arisen as vaidika in vAsatavam--reality, for each svAmi--god; but these had lost their lustre.

• Only those tantras which had remained avaidika but were in vaidika disguise were largely in prasAram--propaganda.

• Another thing should be mentioned here. There were also aneka--many, tantras in prasAram which declared, "What great authority are the Vedas? More than the Vedas, only the Agamas (that is, tantras that are upAsana mArgas) are the authority. Only this is what ParamAtman himself had done upadesham--teaching, and sthApana--establishment, of."

Is not the unique honour of the Veda matam is that it was established by BhagavAn himself?
• Whereas when some people said 'Only our tantra is what BhagavAn established', and wrote and showcased the kathA-purANas for that also,

and in addition, relaxing the adhikAra-bheda--differential ranks of the Vedas, created the shaTangas--rituals, to cater to the emotional tastes of people, many went after them with the curious intention of trying them.

**********

saidevo
12 March 2011, 11:54 PM
****************************************
Revolutionary religions
****************************************
pages 392-394

Somewhere and always in the jana-samUham--public, in one corner for at least some people, the tendency--what is called 'revolutionary attitude' today--to break up everything that is old and try all things anew, won't be absent. Still, in the pUrva-kAlangaL--ancient days, people would have much hesitated to suddenly break up a tradition charged with vajram--strong core, and go for something new.

• In such a circumstance, if one or two men break away daringly, then, in-anusaraNam-of--following, those one-two revolutionists, many people will go out, just as when one or two small leaks form on the banks of a lake, that eats into (the surrounding barrier) and results in a large leak.

• In this way, at that time, when some people went out saying 'what is Veda? Only our shAstra--scripture, was created by God',

and some others, saying 'what is Veda? What is bhagavAn--God? We don't need any Vedas or bhagavAn. Only our scripture that has dispensed with the Vedas and bhagavAn is the right one', did-sthApakam-of--established, new matams--religious sects, as total revolution.

• I spoke about the bauddham, jainam and the chArvAkam that arose in this manner. Among these, there were not many takers for chArvAkam. Whatever it is, 'if there is no svAmi--God, there is nothing above deha-sukham--bodily pleasures, there is no need for matAcharaNam--religious conduct', most people can't accept it with courage. So, for this appaTTa--stark, lokAyatam--materialism, not much--only a little--support was given.

• Only for the bauddha-jaina matams much support was there. The AkarShaNam--attraction, Buddha and JIna had for taking the path of a tuRavi--ascetic, and did prasAram--propaganda, although born in rAja-kuTumbam--royal family; then in those matams many learned men appearing and giving nUlgaL--texts; and above all the great patronage from the kings those matams had--all these together gave them good growth.

• The bauddhas giving their mata-pustakas--religious texts, in prAkRta-bhAShA, the spoken language of the people, dispensing with SaMskRtam, and the shraMaNas--Jains, teaching all people in their mother tongue, setting up schools, became a reason for their popularity.

• People were not much worried about what those mata-upadeshas--religious teachings, were. Nor did they strive in visheSham--specifically, to live them in practice. Still, for the honour of having a common mata-shAstra--religious scripture, and schools (that taught them), people joined those religions.

• I already spoke about the mUrti upAsanam--image worship, that arose in those religions, so that the people were facilitated to join in greater numbers. For the populace, it is enough if they had this aspect.

• Of these two, it is known that during AchAryAL's--Shankara's, time, jainam--Jainism, was not that powerful. This is because, as said earlier, in his book, there is very little jaina-mata-khaNDanam--refutation of the Jain religion.

• Although about bauddham, there is khaNDanam here and there, even that is much less.

• Only the mImAMsA-khaNDanam is much more.

We will see the reason later.

**********

saidevo
19 March 2011, 01:20 AM
**************************************************
The inevitable circumstances for an avatar to take place
**************************************************
pages 394-396

In toto,--as the sAram--essence, for all that is discussed thus far in detail and with fanfare--as to how was the prevailing situation in the desham--country, then

• the vaidika matam which is pUrNam--complete, was very much kSheNa--weakened;

• matams that called themselves vaidika but were not so in reality, tAntrika matams that said only they were in reality born in-anusaraNa-of--following, ParamAtman's AGYa--orders, and the avaidika matams that had totally disapproved vedam-paramAtman both--all these told, there were seventy-two religions/sects.

• The durbhAgyam--misfortune, that no one born as manuShya--human, could set right the situation had arisen for our purAtana--ancient, mata nAgarikam--religion and civilization. As a great bhAgyam--fortune, in this itself, it also became necessary that only Ishara should take an avatar.

• This is where KRShNa ParamAtman arrives. Only him I referred to much in the beginning?

We now come to the link responsible for it--shrI KRShNa's connection in BhagavadpAda's avatAram.

************************************************************
avAtara tattvam--the principle of an avatar
************************************************************
pages 395-396

shrI KRShNa said that the SanAtana Dharma he gave in upadesham--teaching, in Adi--the beginning, to SUrya--Sun God, after being very well in anuShThAnam--practice, initially for many Yugas, going through the lineage of familes through their sons, later declined, and only that (SanAtana Dharma) he was now teaching Arjuna. We also had a look at the GItA shlokas that mention this. In the veil of ignorance he had created with his mAya, coming in naraveSham--human guise, shrI KRShNa had totally made Arjuna forget that He was bhagavad-avatAram!

So, when He told him thus, Arjuna asked him: "What is this KRShNa! You were born now, whereas SUrya was born in an ancient time. (Although SUrya was there in Arjuna's time too, since (KRShNa) BhagavAn said that only He taught SUrya, who in turn passed that upadesham to IkShvAku who lived countless yugas before, Arjuna says thus.) When it is this way, what is the meaning of your saying that you taught SUrya?"

अपरं भवतो जन्म परं जन्म विवस्वतः ।
कथमेतद्विजानीयां त्वमादौ प्रोक्तवानिति ॥ ४.४ ॥

aparaM bhavato janma paraM janma vivasvataH |
katham-etad-vijAnIyAM tvam-Adau proktavAn-iti || 4.4 ||

Your birth was later, Vivasvat's birth was earlier.
How am I to understand that you proclaimed to him in the beginning?

To that BhagavAn said: "Countless janmas--births, have happened for me before this birth. Not only for me, for you too. I know all about those pUrva-janma samAchAram--information about earlier births, but you do not know."

बहूनि मे व्यतीतानि जन्मानि तव चार्जुन ।
तान्यहं वेद सर्वाणि न त्वं वेत्थ परंतप ॥ ४.५ ॥

bahUni me vyatItAni janmAni tava chArjuna |
tAnyahaM veda sarvANi na tvaM vettha paraMtapa || 4.5 ||

(to continue)

saidevo
08 May 2011, 09:40 AM
pages 396-399

He did not stop by saying this. Even if he had stopped, Arjuna, who was thinking him as a manuShya--human, would not have raised a question against it.

• Thinking, 'Just as there were aneka--many, previous janmas--births, for me who is a manuShya, this KRShNan too had them. But then somehow he is remembering all those janmAntara--former lives', he would have left it at that.

• Even if he had raised a question, instead of asking, 'How and why did pUrva janmas--previous births, arise for you?', he would have only asked, 'How come you happen to remember your pUrva janma samAchAra--information?'

• For us it is not at all something that matters. He cannot fool us into thinking that he is a manuShya! So the question as to how there was jnApakam--memory, for that BhagavAn who is sarvarjna--omniscient, would not arise for us.

• But then another big question would arise for us. "Since Arjuna was a manuShya, as per his karma, he had aneka pUrva janmas and was now born as Arjuna. Whereas this man is BhagavAn. What karma could be there for him? What for, how and why does he take many janmas? Just as he is born now for his nara-lIlA--sport in human form, would he have born earlier too?"

• He knows that we would ask in such manner. Would he not know that whatever he does-upadesha-to--teaches, Arjuna, would be read by us after VyAsAchArya wrote it down in bhAratam? Only for that (purpose) did he give his upadesha? Therefore, even if Arjuna did not ask any question, expecting that we would ask, he started replying to this:

अजोऽपि सन्नव्ययात्मा भूतानामीश्वरोऽपि सन् ।
प्रकृतिं स्वामधिष्ठाय सम्भवाम्यात्ममायया ॥ ४.६ ॥

ajo&pi sannavyayAtmA bhUtAnAmIshvaro&pi san |
prakRutiM svAmadhiShThAya sambhavAmyAtmamAyayA || 4.6 ||

[4.6: Although my imperishable Self is unborn, although I am Lord of beings, relying on my own nature, I am born by the creative power of my Self.]

"It is not that I should get stuck in karma and take janma for that. I am a birthless vastu--reality, aja; not a jIva--individual soul, that suffers various kinds of changes due to the vikAra--changing nature, of manas--mind, and prakRti cheShTitam--manner of life due to movement of Nature. I am the changeless Atma-vastu--reality of the Self: avyayAtman--imperishable. I am the Ishvara--Lord, of sakala bhUta--beings: bhUtAnAm Ishvara. Although it is in this manner--api san means 'although it is in this manner'--I do-sambhava--cause my own/take birth, taking in my vasham--control, by my mAyA--power of illusion, prakRti--Nature, which is the AdhAra kAraNam--fundamental reason, for the appearance of the prapancham--universe; that is, I take janma--birth:prakRutiM svAm adhiShThAya sambhavAmi Atma mAyayA'

• Just as he makes the prapancham--universe, appear by his mAyA, he also causes his appearance as one who takes janma--birth. The jIva-jaDa-prapancham--sentient, insentient universe, are all only the appearances he has taken. There is nothing except Him. But then he plays in a way that prakRti takes control of the jIva-jagats--beings and worlds, and rules over them. Because of that (his play), these do not know that they are only He.

• Getting stuck in the sattva-rajo-tamo guNas of prakRti, the jIva goes on making karma of various kinds, and to do-anubhava-of--experience, them, goes on taking janma after janma.

• Whereas He, without thus coming under the vasham--control, of prakRti, remains as one who takes control of prakRti and rules over it, but still takes janma like us. That is called avatAram.

As to why and how He takes janmas, reply has been given here for the how. Only then he gives us the kAraNam--reason, as to why he too takes janma. That is the link for our (Shankar)AchArya charitram. He says in two shlokas that are suprasiddha--well known:

यदा यदा हि धर्मस्य ग्लानिर्भवति भारत ।
अभ्युत्थानमधर्मस्य तदात्मानं सृजाम्यहम् ॥ ४.७ ॥

परित्राणाय साधूनां विनाशाय च दुष्कृताम् ।
धर्मसंस्थापनार्थाय सम्भवामि युगे युगे ॥ ४.८ ॥

yadA yadA hi dharmasya glAnirbhavati bhArata |
abhyutthAnamadharmasya tadAtmAnaM sRujAmyaham || 4.7 ||

paritrANAya sAdhUnAM vinAshAya cha duShkRutAm |
dharmasaMsthApanArthAya sambhavAmi yuge yuge || 4.8 ||

[4.7: Whenever there is a decline in dharma, O BhArata, and a rise in adharma, then I send forth myself.
4.8: For the protection of the good, for the destruction of the evil-doers, and for the purpose of establishing the dharma, I come into being from age to age.]

• He started only with the statement that he knew all about the janmas he had already taken, which Arjuna did not know. That is, he talked about only his pUrva janmas--earlier births.

• Then, explaining how he takes janma in general, he now explains as to why and what for--not only in the pUrvam--earlier times, but at all times--he took and is going to take janma.

What does he say?

• Whenever there comes hAni--decline/deficit, in dharma: yadA yadA hi dharmasya glAnir bhavati

‣ What would happen if there is hAni for dharma? There would be abhivRddhi--growth/increase/prosperity, for adharma. He says that in: abhyutthAnam adharmasya.

‣ Thus, when dharma becomes kShINa--weakened/destroyed, and adharma rises over it, at whatever times this happens, then--tadA: at that time,

I cause my own birth: AtmAnaM sRujAmyaham.

• What would happen when dharma is in kShINa?

‣ The janas--people, who are sattva--pure and good, would be restless. The sAdhus--sages, would get caught among the duShTas--wicked, and experience kaShTa--pain and suffering.

‣ ParamAtman would think to do-rakSha--guard/protect, these sattva jana and do-shikSha--punish/discipline, the duShTas--wicked: paritrANAya sAdhUnAM vinAshAya cha duShkRutAm.

‣ BhagavAn would think to protect and nourish the sAdhus well, and destroy and do-saMhAram--kill, of the duShTas.

(to continue)

saidevo
20 May 2011, 09:34 AM
pages 399-401

(BhagavAn, in taking avatar, would think...)

• This should not end as a kAryam--work, done only for that time. It should be done, that even after that time, for a pretty long time to come, dharma stands well sthApita--established, the sAdhus--wise people, live in peace, and the duShTas--wicked, don't raise their heads.

• Of course, it is not possible to make dharma that has undergone shaithilyam--dimunition/weakness, to be prakAsha--shining, forever in the lokam--world.

• The very loka-nATakam--drama of the world, is in the opposing shaktis==forces--called pair of opposites--fighting with each other, and gaining upper and lower hands alternatively.

• Nevertheless, in the vichitra--strange, run of sRShTi--creation, as it sometimes happens, that without this (fight) being in sama-balam--equal strength, the adharma that is Asura--of wicked nature, is given the ALumai--(Tamizh) dominance, the nATaka rasam--prevailing sentiment/character of the drama, suffers and it becomes virasam--bad/unpleasant.

• It is, when it thus gets much worse, that the situation is set right by taking an avatar. But then upon my returning after thus doing shiShTa rakShaNam--protection of the disciplined and wise, and duShTa shikShaNam--punishment of the wicked, and establishing the rule of dharma, very quickly would the Asuras try to raise their head and make the head of shiShtas bow to them. That is, for the adharma-shakti, there would be efforts of an abhyutthAnam--spring back, quickly.

• So, while giving a birth to me, by myself, and going all the way there to set right things, it should be done in such a way that it does not go waste quickly. Although it is not possible to make dharma permanent for all times, I should, without letting it be a temporary measure that fizzles out soon after, establish dharma for a somewhat long time to come.

He would think to do a deep saMsthApanam--firm establishment, not just a sthApanam--ordinary establishment. Therefore, dharma saMsthApanArthAya--to establish dharma firmly.

• However firm and well it is established, it cannot be done-sthApana-of in shAsvatam--perpetually? So after a kAla-kaTTam--(Tamizh) period of time, passes, adharma will only become dominant, right?

• "Let it become dominant. Whenever it happens, I said I would be born at that time! I repeat, sambhavAmi yuge yuge--in every such saMdarbham--occasion, I take avatar."

• For the yuge yuge, one should not take literal meaning and think that he would take avatar only once in a Yuga. The meaning should be made as BhagavAn saying, "However many yugas does sRShTi--Creation, takes place, alukkAmal sallikkAmal--without getting tired or fed up, for dharma sthApanam, I would again and again take avatar."

‣ In the beginning, without mentioning any time measure of Yuga, he only said yadA yadA--at whatever times? Would he change it in his very next shloka and make it only once in a Yuga?

• So, BhagavAn only said that at whatever times does dhamra declines and adharma dominates, to save the sat--good, and destroy the asat--wicked, in the name of avatAram, he would take janma--birth.

• By his very saying, paritrANAya sAdhUnAM--for protection of the sAdhus--wise and good, it becomes clear that however much does adharma dominate, even at that time, without dharma being completely gone, sAdhus who do anuShThAnam--practice/perform, dharma, would be living, at least in small numbers.

• He said that there is no janma--birth, for him like the manuShayas--humans, who are stuck in prakRti--Nature; only for the loka rakShaNam--protection of the world, he takes janma, controlling the prakRti.

*** *** ***

saidevo
15 July 2011, 12:03 AM
pages 401-403
avatAra rahasya sUchana: pointers to the secret of taking avatar

Why did he say, "taking vasham--control, of prakRti--prakRutiM svAmadhiShThAya"?

• In another place in the same GItA, in this same meaning, he says, prakRutIM svAm avaShTabhya (9.8). What he said as adhiShThAya here, there he says as avaShTabhya. The meaning for both is only 'taking vasham--control]. Only in that manner has AchAryAL (in both the places as vashIkRutya) done-bhAShyam--commented.

• He who says about his taking janmas--births, here, there speaks about his giving janmas to other people again and again.

• He speaks (there) about doing vashIkRutyam of prakRti at the end of the pralaya kAlam--time of dissolution, and again releasing all the beings whose souls were shrunk in the kalpa pralayam, and making them born again and again.

प्रकृतीं स्वामवष्टभ्य विसृजामि पुनः पुनः ।
भूतग्राममिमं कृत्स्नमवशं प्रकृतेर्वशात् ॥ ९.८ ॥

prakRutIM svAmavaShTabhya visRujAmi punaH punaH |
bhUtagrAmamimaM kRutsnamavashaM prakRutervashAt || 9.8 ||

[On the basis of my own original nature, I emit again and again the entire multitude of beings inexorably, by the power of my original nature.\

• He could have left it here by saying, "I take, for dharma-saMsthApanm, avatAra janmas". There again, he could have left it with, "I make the beings that were shrunk in the kalpa pralayam, to take birth again and again, so they would experience their karma". Why should he say, in both places, "I do it this way, taking vasham of prakRti"?

• It is here that the avatAra rahasyam is revealed. What the sUkShma--subtle, truth about avatar is, is known. Only to convey it has he dropped a sequence of words in this manner.

Why shouldn't it be by saMkalpa mAtram--only by will?

To look at what it is, a big question as pUrvAnggam--preliminary:

• "sari--Alright, dharma diminishes in the lokam--world. ParamAtman, with parama kAruNyam--supreme compassion, thinks 'Let it not go waste in this manner. Let it live again in dharma'. Wouldn't it be enough if he does such a saMkalpam? And the bhagavat saMkalpam would be fulfilled on its own!

• "Instead, why should he, who has no janma, take a janma, he who has no nAma-rUpam--name and form, pile them upon him, arrive as an avatar, do many yatnas--efforts/exertion, like us, engage in saNDai-kiNDai--(Tamizh) battle-rattle, and in that (fight) himself take aDi-udhai--(Tamizh) blows and kicks, and and suffer?

• "In avatAram, he too suffers all the pains that we do! Not just the kaShTas--pains/difficulties, that come from outside. He who is described as the sachchidAnanda svarUpam, in his avatars, behaves likes us: gets angry, cries, and does shRnggAram--erotic acts. What for are all these?

• "Let him do dharma saMsthApanm. But then why not do it from his uchcha sthAnam--peak position, remaining in Kailash, VaikuNTham, whatever, by saMkalpa mAtram? Why take janma as an avatAram? This question arises."

It is vAstavam--true, that SvAmi--God, can do anything just by saMkalpam. But then if we do-Alochanam-of--consider, it thoroughly, if he is to do anything thus by saMkalpa mAtram, you know what he would have to do ultimately?

• It would only come to his willing against any sRuShTi--creation, and close everything! [laughing] Doing a single saMkalpam, 'let there be no sRShTi', he would happen to stay peaceful!

saidevo
04 September 2011, 10:40 AM
pages 403-406

• That he should not remain peaceful is why he has with priyam--fondness, made the sRShTi--creation? In the Adi--beginning, only he was there, as sachchidAnanda brahmam? That peace was not enough (for him) which is why (with the intention) 'to play, to revel', he has gathered mAyA on himself, made the sRShTi and produced us as asaDus--(tam)dunces?

• Even if in the (kalpa) pralaya, all the jIvas get shrivelled and concealed, and although he remains quiet for a thousand chatur-yugas letting that laya--(dissolution) stay as such, (thereafter) again as punar-sRShTi--re-creation, pulling up everything, he starts whirling the carousel round and round?

• His manas--mind, his chittam--intention, will never be known to us. Never be understood however much we contemplate on it. Although it would seem to us, 'without remaining himself as ekam-evadvitiyam--one without a second, why should he do such a thing as sRShTi', for whatever purpose he has done it, what can we do about it?

• Although parama-vedantam says 'no such sRShTi is there; everything is only kalpana--creating in mind, mAyA--illusion', that kalpana or mAyA, why should it arise in the first place?

This is why it is customary to finish it (any such discussion) in one word, as some sort of lIlA--sport/play!

• We would not know or understand SvAmi's purpose. So, although we think, 'why make this sRShTi, spoiling his peace', he is indulging in all the revelry there can be, himself always remains peaceful, in a state of prashAnta--calm and removed, as AtmArAma--rejoicing in one's self!

• Since by doing his revelry his peace does not leave him, he would never end the kUtthu--revelry and close the sRShTi! Only he with his own volition, inaugurated it, and is conducting it with all pomp and glory!

Therefore, in his plan, except for the time as pralaya, meant for dissloution and concealment, he would not at any other time, close it for whatever reason.

Let it be such. If asked why he should not do dharma saMsthApanam--regulation of dharma by saMkalpa mAtram--mere will, without taking avatar, what is the meaning of the reply that instead of doing it so, he could as well close the sRShTi?

As to what the meaning is...

• Let us suppose that when the state arises wherein adharma would destroy dharma, and SvAmi does the saMkalpam, 'let the dharma saMsthApanam occur'. Can he do saMkalpam to let this dharma saMsthApanam be shAshvatam--permanent?

• No, he can't. Because, if the entire lokam--world becomes dharma-mayam--filled with dharma, and stays as such, for what rasa-bheda--variety of different tastes, he has made the jIva sRShTi, that would no longer be there!

• If it is lIlA--sport, it would be exciting, only when it goes on getting stuck in many different emotions, with two teams remaining opposite in a tug-of-war, or two opposite teams kicking the ball here and there, falling and gathering, win and loss, disappointment and luck, anger and contentment, crying and happiness?

• If it is lIlA-nATakam--drama of sport, shouldn't there be navarasam--nine kinds of tastes, in that play? If the sarva-jana--all people, doing dharmAnuShThAnam--observance of dharma, and becoming shAntas--peaceful people, stay shAshvatam--permanent, where is the lIlA-vichitram--varied wonder of sport, in that? Where is the nATaka-rasam? It will be a bore for SvAmi!

• The very name of this world is mishra-lokam--world with diversity. That is, this is a world that he has made-uddesha-of--prescribed as a mixture of good and evil.

• After having made his sRShTi of asura-lokam with everything as evil, deva-lokam with everything as happiness, tapolokam, satya-lokam ityAdi with everything as shAnti--peace, in order that he does not get bored in them, making our world as mishra-lokam, giving the jIvas some amount of svAtantrayam--freedom of the will, to do their karma--actions, he witnesses the play.

• Therefore, if the svArasyam--naturalness, of the jIva-svAtantrayam goes away completely, and everyone becomes dharmiShTha--very virtuous/righteous, this very lokam would become mechanical in BhagavAn's view!

• It should (thus) remain as mishra-lokam. Instead, if it becomes a dharma-lokam which is amishra--unmixed, he should only close it (right)?

saidevo
07 September 2011, 12:02 AM
pages 406-408

• If everyone acts according to dharma, no new karmas would accumulate. Staying in this mAyA-loka-saMsAram--life in the world of mAyA, until their old karmas are exhausted, they would get released from this sRShTi--creation. If all the people thus attain mokSham, the sRShTi should close down, shouldn't it?

• Instead of people doing it, it would be natural if the sRShTi-kartRu--maker of the creation, who created them as well, thinks to close it? (laughing) It would only occur to him, "Who are these people to annul the sRShTi I brought up? Let me do it myself!", right?

• Thus, as the sRShTi-lIlA is necessary for him, he would not think of doing dharma saMsthApanam--regulation of dharma, in-shAshvatam--permanently. This is why the saying that instead of doing-saMkalpam--willing, that the lokam--world, go on in dharma permanently, he would as well think about closing down the sRShTi.

Alright, in that case let him not do the saMkalpam 'May there be dharma saMsthApanam in shAshvatam. Let it be so only when a very bad situation arises.' He can will it this way? Instead, why should he take avatar?

• If he does a saMkalpam in this way, he would need to repeat it as adharma gets upperhand again and again? Our very saying, 'why should he take avatar? why not do it by his will?' is out of our thought, 'why should he exert himself'. Even if he is to will it without taking avatar, he cannot stay with the peace that we think he needs.

• Since he would then be doing only a temporary saMkalpam, he would need to inspect the status of the world restlessly, will it again and again and thereby exert himself.

• It is only by not requiring the peace we think he needs, he piles upon himself the task of sRShTi, and thereby voluntarily takes up the tasks of giving us AhAram--food, making an account for the karmas of all the people, and giving them the wages? So it seems that he cannot avoid repeated saMkalpam, however much we think about reducing his workload.

Therefore he thinks that instead of doing saMkalpam as a mere thought--he is a lIlA-priyA--one who likes sports, mind you--he should disguise himself as an avatar, do the lIlA and regulate dharma (by making his presence felt).

• Everything is only (due to) his saMkalpam. But then he shows that an instrument did it in kArya-rUpam--form of action/performance.

• If on occasions adharma gets upperhand, even that is his saMkalpam. But then have we read anywhere, 'Sitting somewhere as ParamAtman, he (just) did a saMkalpam; and suddenly the lokam--world became adharmic'?

• As the asuras--evil spirits, rAkShasas--demons, duShTa rAjAs--wicked kings, people who do-prasAram--spread wrong principles as matam--religion, and many others such as thieves, killers, forgers do anekam--many things, in kArya-rUpam, adharma raises its head.

• In kali(yuga), if the manas--mind of the people seeks evil things, even that is a kAryam--task, done with the mind, although it is not a task done by the hand or leg. After the mind thought of something bad, to experience that bad thing, the hand and leg starts doing the bad thing as an external action.

• When thus everything happens in the world by karaNa-kArya--instrument and action, (not only the bad, also the good--except that he conducts everything with karaNa-kArya, although it is all his saMkalpam, he never shows it to happen saMkalpa-mAtram--due his will;--when it goes on this way),

that is, when he conducts them in such a manner, when the big rise of adharma too happens in this same manner, how could it be said that the renaissance of dharma alone take place by his saMkalpa-mAtram?

• If he does not show the karaNa-kArya for that too, it would be like doing away with an exciting aMsham--share of action, in his sport!

Therefore, when dharma diminishes, he would send mahAns--great sages, like dUtas--messengers, to do-abhivRddhi--make it rise (again). When a stage is reached that it wouldn't be effective, he would himself become a karaNa--instrument, and take avatar.

*** *** ***

saidevo
12 October 2011, 11:22 PM
Humanity and divinity in an avatAra
pages 409-412

When thus taking an avatar with the lakShyam--goal, of doing dharmottAraNaM--rescuing and securing dharma, he has kept kneaded inside, aneka viShayas--many things, that are the sAram--essence.

• In addition to doing-upadesham--teaching, dharma, he should also set an example of it in his life. The dharma that is not soaked in life, won't be useful, however elegantly it is taught.

• Only in the case of Adarsha puruShas--illustrious men, who live their own life in dharma and thereby guide the others, the thought, "Oh, how much shuddha--pure and shAnta--peaceful are these people! Living in happiness themselves, they also impart that happiness to the world! We should also try doing it this way", would arise in the people.

• To conduct such an Adarsha life and guide the people, it becomes necessary that he has to come as an avatar.

Nevertheless, can an avatAra puruSha, for the sake of being Adarsham remain at the peak, denying all the tendencies that are in the common people?

• Can he always remain at the atIta--superior level where our clashes of emotions, and any of our desires are not there for him?

• It should not be. If it is such, he will never be a guide, a model. How can a person who is always at the atIta level be a lakShya puruSha--role model, for those in other levels?

• If a sANDO--Samson/strong man, lets an elephant stand on his chest lying down, we would be happy clapping our hands and be amazed at it; but would we think about doing it ourselves? We would only say, "He can do it. How can it be possible to us?"

• If an avatAra puruSha keeps doing everything in parama dhArmikam--in supreme conformity with dharma, remaining at his top level, without any of our bhUloka vAsanas--worldly impressions, thinking that 'This man certainly does not belong to our manuShya jAti--human species. He does not have any of uncertain struggles of mind or the Asha-pAshas--desires and ties, that we have', we would do a number of namaskAras--prostrations, to him and not get the utsAham--strength of will/resolution, that we might also go in his way and try it.

Therefore, by controlling him to some extent in manuShyatvam--being human, and acting it out that he is just like us, but still when it comes to a struggle between the wrong and the right, going only in the right and avoiding the wrong, he would set an example to us that 'Only what is dharma needs to be done. Only that would give us lasting happiness and peace.'

• Although being like us in many aMshas--parts/aspects, he would set an example by passing where we usually fail.

• Only if he stays such a person, would we get the utsAham--resolution, 'we too can conduct ourselves like him--and live in dharma; and pass in the lesson given to us by the shAstra--scripture.'

(At the same time) If someone remains a sAmAnya--ordinary, all through, we will not notice what he does or whether he goes in dharma or not. Even now, here and there, there could be many people who are good, and who go in dharma, but stay anonymous. But then how this could be a motivating force to the world?

• Would Gandhi be the only person who tried being aligned to satyam--truth and act according to manas sAkShi--conscience, in samIpa-kAlam--recent times? There would have been many (like him). Still, as he was one who did his kAryas--tasks, for the entire desham--country, a path arose (known) as 'GAndhIyam' for others, and during his time, many people actually strived to go in that path.

• Therefore, when SvAmi--God, takes avatAra, although he would remain mAnuSham--belonging to mankind, on one side, he would acquire to some extent, divyAMshas--divine aspects, and deiva shaktis--divine powers, to do-AkarSha--attract, manuShyas--people towards him, so that it does not happen that it (his avatar) ends with his time, but its influence is felt in the time to come.

• He would do a kAryam--act, that is asAdhyam--impossible (for others). Remaining as a bAlaka--boy, he would do-vatam--kill rAkShasas--demons like TADaka and SubAhu (killed by shrIRAma).

• Or doing a tyAgam--forsaking something that is impossible for us--on the very day when his paTTAbhiShekam--consecration as king, was decided, if someone said, "Go to the jungle", setting out with a smiling face and the reply "AhA--alright"--he would do-AkarShaNam of the people.

• But (at the same time), without letting us ignore him as "This man is deivAMsha--of divine aspect, so what he does can't be a model to us", this man himself would, like us, let his nostrils fill with sorrow, and show us as being in a quandary, mourning (his wife SItA's loss with words such as), "O good tree, did you see her? O good husk of the tree, did you see her?"

• Thus, by remaining as deivam--divinity, and as mAnuSham--human, in turn, he would give us the stimulus to walk the path of dharma.

Of course, to the deiva-shakti--divine power, manuSha-shakti--human power is less. Men are less powerful than the Devas. But not to the extent of people thinking of themselves as alpa-shaktas--of trivial power.

• If they do-indriya nigraham--restrain senses, and lead a shuddha--pure life, the manuShyas--people, too can do kAryas--acts, with so much power.

• If they become yogeshvaras--experts of yoga, they can do-sampAdanam--acquire/earn, shakti which is like the Devas', or even greater than that.

In order to instil hope and utsAham--strength/power, to the manuShyas--human people, who are thinking much less of themselves, that they too can accomplish big tasks becoming this much shaktas--powerful,

BhagavAn--God, instead of doing dharma saMsthApanam--regulation of dharma, remaining as BhagavAn, arrives as a manuShya and does it.

**********