Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 15 of 15

Thread: Favourite Gita verse

  1. #11
    Join Date
    November 2010
    Location
    Amreeka
    Age
    28
    Posts
    92
    Rep Power
    0

    Re: Favourite Gita verse

    Quote Originally Posted by yajvan View Post
    naiṣkarmyaṣiddhi= the perfection of non-doing.
    At the opposite end of the spectrum is that of not authoring any action. That is, doing nothing perfectly. This condition (avasthā) within this verse is called out as asaktabuddhiḥ. This is asakta+buddhiḥ :

    • asakta = free from all ties, independent
    • buddhiḥ = intellect in general but also power of forming and retaining conceptions and general notions , intelligence , reason , intellect , mind ,discernment , judgement.

    This is one totally free of all imaginations of what is and what is not. There is no place for vāsanāḥ (past impressions1) to sprout.
    Hence where then is karmāḥ ( plural form shown here) forming?
    Sriman Yajvan,

    I beg to respectfully differ with you. It certainly is true that various places in the sastras encourage devotees to maintain a balanced outlook on life. To borrow an example from Shaivism, Lord Shiva embodies the attributes of both a sannyasin and a grihasthu, while still finding the time to look after his devotees. He does not concentrate all of his energies on any one activity by itself.

    However, Vaishnava scriptures seem to acknowledge that perfection of action is at least theoretically possible. The avatar who appears in your avatar, Sri Rama, was known for performing extraordinary feats, such as defeating the ogress Taraka and the powerful Asuric king Ravana. The purpose of his incarnation was to take birth as an ordinary human being (or at least, as ordinary as was possible for princes in ancient North India) and show humanity the path of righteousness. In doing so, he accomplished things that much more powerful kings could not do.

    How does one explain this apparent contradiction? If you would like, we can create a separate thread for this topic.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    September 2006
    Age
    65
    Posts
    7,664
    Rep Power
    384

    Re: Favourite Gita verse

    hariḥ oṁ
    ~
    ~~~~~
    namasté


    Quote Originally Posted by TTCUSM View Post

    • I beg to respectfully differ with you. It certainly is true that various places in the sastras encourage devotees to maintain a balanced outlook on life.
    • However, Vaishnava scriptures seem to acknowledge that perfection of action is at least theoretically possible.
    • How does one explain this apparent contradiction? If you would like, we can create a separate thread for this topic.
    Thank you for your note...let me see if I can sort out a few things on the position I have offered the reader.

    The points suggested are relevant to the knowledge found in the śrīmad bhāgavad gītā . How so? This ~perfect~ non doing is skill in action.
    Chapt 2, 48th śloka, kṛṣṇa-ji informs us , yogasthaḥ kuru karmānī- established (or steadfast) in yoga (union) perform actions (karma)

    Now the question, who then are doing all these actions ? I still see the wise acting, I am acting too , you are acting. Who then is doing this? Let's go to chapter 3 , the 27th and 29th verse:
    in every case actions are performed by the 3 guna-s of prakṛti1 (nature). He whose mind is deluded by the sense of 'I' and 'mine' holds 'I am the doer'||


    Now the question becomes what is action and what is inaction? Kṛṣṇaḥ -jī says in the 16th verse of chapter 4, 'even the wise are bewildered here'
    . First it is important to note that chapter four's theme is action and inaction. Specifically the 18th śloka : He who sees action in inaction and inaction in action is wise amongst men.
    • sees action in inaction = one grounded in Being (silence) while the senses act within the field of the senses. That is, action does not overshadow or dominate, as this person is grounded in Being (silence of the Self).
    • inaction in action = this person also sees Being (silence) everywhere - within the field of life and all that occurs within the universe.


    The śloka goes on to say: He that is united has accomplished all action. This is quite a profound statement that many pass by. If we know what the goal of all actions are then we are brought to the door steps of what this śloka means.

    Purpose of actions
    The goal or purpose of all actions is to bring one to fulfillment. The *highest*3 fulfillment is none other then Self-recognition, that of fully blossomed consciousness that has unfolded into the unity of Being. Then one can say all has been accomplished. Any further actions performed is now on the level of natural law (dharma) and in accordance with all the laws of nature. One then is an exponent of Reality, here on earth.

    All actions are relinquished to the tri-gunas as they have been all along ! The person fulfilled is established in Being/pure awareness, the Supreme , there is nothing more for him/her to do ( code for 'thinking' they are the actual doer) as no authorship is attested.

    One last view

    Let me leave the reader with the last part that corroborates (supports) the view above. Let’s look to the śrīmad bhāgavad gītā chapter 5. Kṛṣṇaḥ -jī’s words provide guidance:
    naiva kiñcitkaromīti yukto manyeta tattvavit|
    paśyañchṛṇvanspṛśañjighrannaśnaṅgacchansvapanśvasan||8

    pralapanvisṛjangṛhṇannunmiṣannimiṣannapi|
    Indriyāṇīndriyārtheṣu vartanta iti dhārayan||9


    I will use my teacher’s translation of the verses offered:
    (the) one who is in union (yuktaḥ) with the divine and who knows the truth (tattvavit) will maintain1 , ‘I do not act at all’ ;
    · in seeing (paśyan),
    · hearing (śṛṇvan),
    · touching (spṛśan),
    · smelling (jighran),
    · eating (aśnan),
    · walking moving (gacchan),
    · sleeping (svapan),
    · breathing (śvasan),
    · speaking (pralapan),
    · letting go (visṛjan),
    · seizing (gṛhṇan),
    · even opening the eyes and closing the eyes (unmiṣan & nimiṣan).
    he holds simply that the senses (indriyāṇi) are occupied (vartante) or act among the objects (artheṣu) of sense indriya-s. ||8-9


    इतिशिवं
    iti śivaṁ


    1. prakṛti - nature , character , constitution ; 'making or placing before or at first'; the original or natural form or condition of prakṛti = pra+ kṛti
    • kṛti the act of doing , making , performing , manufacturing , composing
    • pra - rooted (√) in pṝ or prā = filling , fulfilling - as it it rooted in pṝ is defined as 'to grant abundantly'

    2. maintain – the term in the śloka says manyeta , or manya which means 'thinking one's self to be , passing for , appearing as'. My teacher nets it out as ‘maintains’. This , I think is brilliant. Why so? Because ‘thinking’ comes and goes. ‘Maintains’ implies permanency and that is the relevance that occurs with union or yuktaḥ ( shown as yukto in line 1).
    3. Note the structure of *highest* fulfillment is thus: knowledge -> action -> achievement -> fulfillment; Hence the *highest* fulfillment is predicated in knowledge; some say pure knowledge which is code for Being, pure awareness, etc.

    Last edited by yajvan; 29 April 2017 at 04:01 PM. Reason: added *highest*
    यतस्त्वं शिवसमोऽसि
    yatastvaṁ śivasamo'si
    because you are identical with śiva

    _

  3. #13
    Join Date
    October 2012
    Location
    Bhaarath
    Age
    44
    Posts
    1,100
    Rep Power
    1488

    Re: Favourite Gita verse

    Namaste Yajvan

    I do not act at all
    This is a very dangerous interpretation if not described correctly. I am not making this comment to above quote alone but to the entire post.

    Before contemplating on whether the 'I' in me act or not, should not we define the word 'act'?

    Secondly, actions do happen whether I commit it or not. Then. what is the causation of that act.

    Thirdly, after we define 'act', should be not categories into good act and evil act?

    Finally, if causation of 'act' is 'Maya' (illusion, ie I am conditioned to believe that there is an action happening while there is none) then I have the following question:

    Can a Suspect standing inside trial room say to Judge, I did not act. It is all the Maya that did. Precisely the suspect is saying crime did not happen.

    I have another question, probably require a separate thread. ie, Can Srimad Bhagavad Gita be practiced in totality by a person living within the framework of worldly life?



    Quote Originally Posted by yajvan View Post
    hariḥ oṁ
    ~
    ~~~~~
    namasté



    Thank you for your note...let me see if I can sort out a few things on the position I have offered the reader.

    The points suggested are relevant to the knowledge found in the śrīmad bhāgavad gītā . How so? This ~perfect~ non doing is skill in action.
    Chapt 2, 48th śloka, kṛṣṇa-ji informs us , yogasthaḥ kuru karmānī- established (or steadfast) in yoga (union) perform actions (karma)

    Now the question, who then are doing all these actions ? I still see the wise acting, I am acting too , you are acting. Who then is doing this? Let's go to chapter 3 , the 27th and 29th verse:
    in every case actions are performed by the 3 guna-s of prakṛti1 (nature). He whose mind is deluded by the sense of 'I' and 'mine' holds 'I am the doer'||


    Now the question becomes what is action and what is inaction? Kṛṣṇaḥ -jī says in the 16th verse of chapter 4, 'even the wise are bewildered here'
    . First it is important to note that chapter four's theme is action and inaction. Specifically the 18th śloka : He who sees action in inaction and inaction in action is wise amongst men.
    • sees action in inaction = one grounded in Being (silence) while the senses act within the field of the senses. That is, action does not overshadow or dominate, as this person is grounded in Being (silence of the Self).
    • inaction in action = this person also sees Being (silence) everywhere - within the field of life and all that occurs within the universe.


    The śloka goes on to say: He that is united has accomplished all action. This is quite a profound statement that many pass by. If we know what the goal of all actions are then we are brought to the door steps of what this śloka means.

    Purpose of actions
    The goal or purpose of all actions is to bring one to fulfillment. This fulfillment is none other then Self-recognition, that of fully blossomed consciousness that has unfolded into the unity of Being. Then one can say all has been accomplished. Any further actions performed is now on the level of natural law (dharma) and in accordance with all the laws of nature. One then is an exponent of Reality, here on earth.

    All actions are relinquished to the tri-gunas as they have been all along ! The person fulfilled is established in Being/pure awareness, the Supreme , there is nothing more for him/her to do ( code for 'thinking' they are the actual doer) as no authorship is attested.

    One last view

    Let me leave the reader with the last part that corroborates (supports) the view above. Let’s look to the śrīmad bhāgavad gītā chapter 5. Kṛṣṇaḥ -jī’s words provide guidance:
    naiva kiñcitkaromīti yukto manyeta tattvavit|
    paśyañchṛṇvanspṛśañjighrannaśnaṅgacchansvapanśvasan||8

    pralapanvisṛjangṛhṇannunmiṣannimiṣannapi|
    Indriyāṇīndriyārtheṣu vartanta iti dhārayan||9


    I will use my teacher’s translation of the verses offered:
    (the) one who is in union (yuktaḥ) with the divine and who knows the truth (tattvavit) will maintain1 , ‘I do not act at all’ ;
    · in seeing (paśyan),
    · hearing (śṛṇvan),
    · touching (spṛśan),
    · smelling (jighran),
    · eating (aśnan),
    · walking moving (gacchan),
    · sleeping (svapan),
    · breathing (śvasan),
    · speaking (pralapan),
    · letting go (visṛjan),
    · seizing (gṛhṇan),
    · even opening the eyes and closing the eyes (unmiṣan & nimiṣan).
    he holds simply that the senses (indriyāṇi) are occupied (vartante) or act among the objects (artheṣu) of sense indriya-s. ||8-9


    इतिशिवं
    iti śivaṁ


    1. prakṛti - nature , character , constitution ; 'making or placing before or at first'; the original or natural form or condition of prakṛti = pra+ kṛti
    • kṛti the act of doing , making , performing , manufacturing , composing
    • pra - rooted (√) in pṝ or prā = filling , fulfilling - as it it rooted in pṝ is defined as 'to grant abundantly'

    2. maintain – the term in the śloka says manyeta , or manya which means 'thinking one's self to be , passing for , appearing as'. My teacher nets it out as ‘maintains’. This , I think is brilliant. Why so? Because ‘thinking’ comes and goes. ‘Maintains’ implies permanency and that is the relevance that occurs with union or yuktaḥ ( shown as yukto in line 1).
    Anirudh...

  4. #14
    Join Date
    September 2006
    Age
    65
    Posts
    7,664
    Rep Power
    384

    Re: Favourite Gita verse

    hariḥ oṁ
    ~
    ~~~~~
    namasté


    Quote Originally Posted by Anirudh View Post
    This is a very dangerous interpretation if not described correctly. I am not making this comment to above quote alone but to the entire post.

    Before contemplating on whether the 'I' in me act or not, should not we define the word 'act'?

    Secondly, actions do happen whether I commit it or not. Then. what is the causation of that act.

    Thirdly, after we define 'act', should be not categories into good act and evil act?

    Finally, if causation of 'act' is 'Maya' (illusion, ie I am conditioned to believe that there is an action happening while there is none) then I have the following question:

    Can a Suspect standing inside trial room say to Judge, I did not act. It is all the Maya that did. Precisely the suspect is saying crime did not happen.

    I have another question, probably require a separate thread. ie, Can Srimad Bhagavad Gita be practiced in totality by a person living within the framework of worldly life?

    First and foremost, I cannot get past answering your question without fully addressing the first point of your response.
    This is a very dangerous interpretation of ‘I do not act at all’
    This is not a interpretation or an improvisation but a translation of what kṛṣṇaḥ -jī says in the 5th chapter, 8th verse of the śrīmad bhāgavad gītā . It is imperative that one is mindful that this verse offers the position and experience of a knower (vit) of That (tattva) i.e. the Supreme, the yuktaḥ ( shown in the verse below as yukto) and what he/she maintains- manyeta i.e. his/her experience.

    If you do not look at the terms of kṛṣṇaḥ -jī, then we ( I ) cannot go one step further:
    naiva kiñcitkaromīti yukto manyeta tattvavit|
    paśyañchṛṇvanspṛśañjighrannaśnaṅgacchansvapanśvasan||8

    naiva kiñcitkaromīti = “I do not act at all” , some (like svāmī lakṣman-jū ) prefer to translate this as ‘I don’t do anything’, others say ‘ I do nothing indeed’

    "I (mi) do not indeed (naiva) act, make produce, cause (kara) anything (kiñcid) close quote " iti

    naiva = na+eva
    • na = not + eva = indeed , truly , really

    kiñcit = kiñcid1 = anything\nothing ( the final 'd' is converted to 't' by the rules of saṁdhi, then inserted into the sentence)
    karomīti = kara + mi + iti

    • kara = the act of doing; doing , making , causing , producing
    • mi = the first person, singular voice = ‘I’ ( this is a suffix for verbs and who is doing an action)
    • iti = “_“ quotation ; also used as ‘thus’ and is properly used here in “ I do not act at all ”

    I will answer one more question on this to bring out the knowledge:
    Can a Suspect standing inside trial room say to Judge, I did not act. It is all the Maya that did. Precisely the suspect is saying crime did not happen.

    There are a few positions one can offer, the first answered by kṛṣṇaḥ -jī :
    idaṁ te nātapaskāya nābhaktāya kadācana |
    na cāśuśrūṣave vācyaṁ na ca māṁ yobhyasūyati ||
    18.67

    This says in general, that one should not share ( be spoken vācyaṁ) this most sublime knowledge ( of the śrīmad bhāgavad gītā) to one who has not undergone tapas (nātapaskāya) nor one that is not devoted (nābhaktāya), nor one indignant (abhyasūya) towards Me.

    You see, the question you have posited is interesting & and has merit, and is clever, but resides in the mundane world... of people swarming, thinking they are the the body, mind, ego. We are talking of things that are most noble and pure.

    The suspect in court

    • First , if in fact this ~suspect~ was the yuktaḥ ( the knower of That), then nothing need be said by him. All is taken care of. He cares little of the result, the judge nor his decision. He would only be there by the will of the Supreme; all is well.
    • If the ~suspect~ is the brute he would have little to argue as he would not have the where-with-all to take this argument and position to its conclusion. The judge dealing in worldly matters would also not comprehend this position. Of this I have no doubt. The brute cares of only of 'me'ness , of individuality, gains, pleasure, and avoiding pain. Who could think that he ( the brute) would answer honestly, let alone be able to offer a salient argument on this theme?


    Herein is the pickle
    Most to many do not 'get' this knowledge of 'I do act at all' because they still reside within the framework of individuality2. They still think: I am the body, I am happy ( mind), I am sad (mind), I am blind ( the organ of perception). They still think they reside in the framework of this body/mind/ego complex. They have been in this condition so long that they believe it is really who they are and not an expression of what they are. They have confused what they do ( I am a mother, father, baker, landlord, manager, student) for who they are. This is the blunder that brings birth-after-birth. Then they are considered the paśujana ( worldly, of differentiated consciousness).


    इतिशिवं
    iti śivaṁ

    1. kiñcit - this comes from kiṁcid.
    • By the rules of saṁdhi the 'ṁ' can be optionally converted to ñ, of which vyasa-ji chose to do. Now you have kiñcid. When this term is placed back into the sentence, the next sound is karomīti , a hard ‘k’ sound, and therefore we are required to change the ‘d’ to a ‘t’ and we end with kiñcit.
    • Now the crux of this kiṁcid means ‘little’, ‘something’ . Within this sentence it is saying naiva = na+eva not even + a little (kiṁcid), not even something is done; Hence this translates to 'nothing' in English.

    2. framework of individuality
    • Why can’t I just experience this Self why does it seem so elusive ? The answer is this, the unconditioned (SELF) cannot be known by the conditioned or puryaṣṭaka, the 8 parts/components. The 8 are the tanmātra-s, buddhi, ahaṁkāra, and manas. The field of the tanmātra-s sometimes called out as tanmātragocaraḥ is made-up of 5 + 3 more i.e. buddhi, ahaṁkāra , and manas which = 8 , or puryaṣṭaka, the 8 parts/components. This city of 8 is part of the human condition, that becomes conditioned.
      • words used in point 2:
      • tanmātra-s tanmātra-s – considered śabda ( sound), sparśa (touch), rūpa (form) , rasa ( taste) & gandha (smell); these senses influence and ‘condition’ the human
      • buddhi – intellect ; the power of forming and retaining conceptions and general notions , intelligence , reasoning abilities
      • ahaṁkāra – ego that is connected with objectivity
      • manas – mind in its widest sense; many see this organ as ‘thought production’
    Last edited by yajvan; 29 April 2017 at 07:22 PM.
    यतस्त्वं शिवसमोऽसि
    yatastvaṁ śivasamo'si
    because you are identical with śiva

    _

  5. #15
    Join Date
    October 2012
    Location
    Bhaarath
    Age
    44
    Posts
    1,100
    Rep Power
    1488

    Re: Favourite Gita verse

    Namaste Yajvan,

    Thanks for devoting your time to answer my question. I will create a separate thread based on the information provided as a part of 'Pickle'.

    I was listening to lectures based on S.B.Gita commentary made by Sri Vaishnava Achaarya(s) (Gita Bashya by Sri Raamanujaarya, Taatparya Chandrika by Sri Swami Desikan and translations of Gitaartha Sangraha by Sri Yamunaacharya). I am not able to provide the translation of Sri Swami Desikan as it is in regional vernacular.


    Ramanuja's Commentary One who has realised the nature of the atma or soul knows the true nature of reality. Such a person reflects that through the senses of perception such as eyes and ears, the senses of action such as the voice, the pranas or life breaths, the physical body functions with all its corresponding objects; but factually I am separate as an individual consciousness from all these activities and virtually do not do any of these actions.
    The conception of doership is derived from contact with the senses
    which a living entity is coerced to accept from time immemorial due to past actions in past lives.

    But this doership is not an essential attribute of the atma and thus it is not necessary to accept. So I shall not accept it as being my essential nature. Thus does one situated in atma tattva or soul realisation reflect.
    I understand the view you have presented (assuming it as based Sri Shankraachya) and the one that is given above does not contradict.

    The question that arise here is if Sriman Naaraayan/Sri Krishna (in otherwords the Aatma or Paramaatma or whatever the word that will sufficely substitute) do not perform actions why Sriman Naaraayan wanted Sri Arjuna to perform his duty.

    Sri Arjuna might have had his own reason not to do that activity which resulted into the birth of Srimad B.G, let us not analyze that at the moment. What matter is why Sri Krishna instructed Sri Arjuna do an 'act', while he himself says do not perform any act?. I am just guessing my wording in the question is correct.

    Now, I hope you will understand why I had said it as dangerous interpretation in my first post.

    idaṁ te nātapaskāya nābhaktāya kadācana |
    na cāśuśrūṣave vācyaṁ na ca māṁ yobhyasūyati ||
    18.67
    What I gather is, we intentionally or unintentionally create a disconnect from the beginner by not giving the correct information, due to which either the message is lost or not trusted.

    Sri Arjuna might have been a great warrior as he had attained great boons by performing rigorous sciptural practises, even then he had his moment of despair. No one alive at this very moment is immune to that desparity. If then, why Sri Arjuna was given the lessons of Srimad B.G? I sincerely hope my question will not be considered as a mischeivous attempt to derail as you have taken time to answer my first question. Thanks again for your time and effort.

    Pranaam.

    Quote Originally Posted by yajvan View Post
    hariḥ oṁ
    ~
    ~~~~~
    namasté





    First and foremost, I cannot get past answering your question without fully addressing the first point of your response.


    This is not a interpretation or an improvisation but a translation of what kṛṣṇaḥ -jī says in the 5th chapter, 8th verse of the śrīmad bhāgavad gītā . It is imperative that one is mindful that this verse offers the position and experience of a knower (vit) of That (tattva) i.e. the Supreme, the yuktaḥ ( shown in the verse below as yukto) and what he/she maintains- manyeta i.e. his/her experience.

    If you do not look at the terms of kṛṣṇaḥ -jī, then we ( I ) cannot go one step further:
    naiva kiñcitkaromīti yukto manyeta tattvavit|
    paśyañchṛṇvanspṛśañjighrannaśnaṅgacchansvapanśvasan||8

    naiva kiñcitkaromīti = “I do not act at all” , some (like svāmī lakṣman-jū ) prefer to translate this as ‘I don’t do anything’, others say ‘ I do nothing indeed’

    "I (mi) do not indeed (naiva) act, make produce, cause (kara) anything (kiñcid) close quote " iti

    naiva = na+eva
    • na = not + eva = indeed , truly , really

    kiñcit = kiñcid1 = anything\nothing ( the final 'd' is converted to 't' by the rules of saṁdhi, then inserted into the sentence)
    karomīti = kara + mi + iti

    • kara = the act of doing; doing , making , causing , producing
    • mi = the first person, singular voice = ‘I’ ( this is a suffix for verbs and who is doing an action)
    • iti = “_“ quotation ; also used as ‘thus’ and is properly used here in “ I do not act at all ”

    I will answer one more question on this to bring out the knowledge:

    There are a few positions one can offer, the first answered by kṛṣṇaḥ -jī :
    idaṁ te nātapaskāya nābhaktāya kadācana |
    na cāśuśrūṣave vācyaṁ na ca māṁ yobhyasūyati ||
    18.67

    This says in general, that one should not share ( be spoken vācyaṁ) this most sublime knowledge ( of the śrīmad bhāgavad gītā) to one who has not undergone tapas (nātapaskāya) nor one that is not devoted (nābhaktāya), nor one indignant (abhyasūya) towards Me.

    You see, the question you have posited is interesting & and has merit, and is clever, but resides in the mundane world... of people swarming, thinking they are the the body, mind, ego. We are talking of things that are most noble and pure.

    The suspect in court

    • First , if in fact this ~suspect~ was the yuktaḥ ( the knower of That), then nothing need be said by him. All is taken care of. He cares little of the result, the judge nor his decision. He would only be there by the will of the Supreme; all is well.
    • If the ~suspect~ is the brute he would have little to argue as he would not have the where-with-all to take this argument and position to its conclusion. The judge dealing in worldly matters would also not comprehend this position. Of this I have no doubt. The brute cares of only of 'me'ness , of individuality, gains, pleasure, and avoiding pain. Who could think that he ( the brute) would answer honestly, let alone be able to offer a salient argument on this theme?


    Herein is the pickle
    Most to many do not 'get' this knowledge of 'I do act at all' because they still reside within the framework of individuality2. They still think: I am the body, I am happy ( mind), I am sad (mind), I am blind ( the organ of perception). They still think they reside in the framework of this body/mind/ego complex. They have been in this condition so long that they believe it is really who they are and not an expression of what they are. They have confused what they do ( I am a mother, father, baker, landlord, manager, student) for who they are. This is the blunder that brings birth-after-birth. Then they are considered the paśujana ( worldly, of differentiated consciousness).


    इतिशिवं
    iti śivaṁ

    1. kiñcit - this comes from kiṁcid.
    • By the rules of saṁdhi the 'ṁ' can be optionally converted to ñ, of which vyasa-ji chose to do. Now you have kiñcid. When this term is placed back into the sentence, the next sound is karomīti , a hard ‘k’ sound, and therefore we are required to change the ‘d’ to a ‘t’ and we end with kiñcit.
    • Now the crux of this kiṁcid means ‘little’, ‘something’ . Within this sentence it is saying naiva = na+eva not even + a little (kiṁcid), not even something is done; Hence this translates to 'nothing' in English.

    2. framework of individuality
    • Why can’t I just experience this Self why does it seem so elusive ? The answer is this, the unconditioned (SELF) cannot be known by the conditioned or puryaṣṭaka, the 8 parts/components. The 8 are the tanmātra-s, buddhi, ahaṁkāra, and manas. The field of the tanmātra-s sometimes called out as tanmātragocaraḥ is made-up of 5 + 3 more i.e. buddhi, ahaṁkāra , and manas which = 8 , or puryaṣṭaka, the 8 parts/components. This city of 8 is part of the human condition, that becomes conditioned.
      • words used in point 2:
      • tanmātra-s tanmātra-s – considered śabda ( sound), sparśa (touch), rūpa (form) , rasa ( taste) & gandha (smell); these senses influence and ‘condition’ the human
      • buddhi – intellect ; the power of forming and retaining conceptions and general notions , intelligence , reasoning abilities
      • ahaṁkāra – ego that is connected with objectivity
      • manas – mind in its widest sense; many see this organ as ‘thought production’

    Last edited by Anirudh; 29 April 2017 at 09:00 PM.
    Anirudh...

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. 745 verse of Bhagavad Gita
    By markandeya 108 dasa in forum Bhagavad Gita
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 17 June 2015, 05:54 AM
  2. Bhagavad Gita Verse 8 Chapter 9
    By markandeya 108 dasa in forum Bhagavad Gita
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 13 December 2014, 02:48 PM
  3. The Last Gita Verse
    By bakkam in forum Bhagavad Gita
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06 February 2012, 10:31 AM
  4. Gita Chapter 2 Verse 7
    By c.smith in forum Bhagavad Gita
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 13 March 2008, 11:46 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •