General question on the Gita

[atanu]

hi atanu,
I didnt say we need to know the akshara sat!i only stated that,there are SAT and ASAT.

Namaste amith,

Probably. But I wished to point out:

Svet. U.

IV-8: Of what avail are the scriptures (vedas) to him who does not know that indestructible, highest Ethereal Being, in whom the gods and the Vedas reside ? Only those who know That are satisfied.

IV-9: The Lord of Maya projects the Vedas, sacrifices, spiritual practices, past and future, religious observances, all that the Vedas declare, and the whole world including ourselves. The other, again, is bound by Maya in this.
--------------------

There is value in above two verses. The goal is to know the akshara. If scriptures do not bring this point unto activation, then the job remains unfinished. Of what avail is arguments over which one gets blood pressure and shouts down other fellow passengers, if not for Self knowing, eventually? If not for attaining Parama Shanti?

Om Namah Shivaya

[amith vikram]

Namaste amith,

You indeed know much. I have only one point. The way you apply "i am vishnu. but the only flaw is that,'I' am not vishnu.amith-ahankaar=vishnu", the same may apply to our (everyones) perception of vishnu (or shiva).

I hope, I am clear.

Om Namah Shivaya

namaste atanu,
i wish to say this again:
"shivaaya vishnu rupaya,shiva rupaya vishnave.
shivashcha hridayam vishnuhu,vishnoshcha hridayam shivaha.
yeta shivamayo vishnuhu,evam vishnumaya shivaha.
yetaantaram na pashyaami,tathame svastirayushi"

let me be clear first.
they say the one matter,brahman is unborn.
but vishnu was definitely born.so vishnu is not brahman.but the vedas say that vishnu is unborn.the problem here is,to know vishnu.to know vishnu as the unborn.to know vishnu not only in the pitaambara or one holding divya astras or one who is married to lakshmi.to know vishnu as all pervading like he demonstrated in his vaamana avatar.

virat vishnu cant be percieved.only for the sake of upasana should a man think of vishnu with gyan that he is without form.brahma sutra suggests to apply the formless,boundless "nature" to imbibe during dhyana and drop everything which has form.
in that case shiv shankar can also be imbibed in dhyana.why, one can say a man next door is god if he has nothing to do with fruits of this world or the other.
i dont know why you persist on shiva every time i quote vishnu;like i ever said vishnu is greater than shiva.i dont adore anyone who says 'i am great,i am the lord'.i dont care if he is the lord of 3 worlds or brahman himself.well in that case,vishnu is not brahman.like yama says in kena.up. whatever men worship on earth is not brahman.

[amith vikram]

Namaste amith,

Probably. But I wished to point out:

Svet. U.

IV-8: Of what avail are the scriptures (vedas) to him who does not know that indestructible, highest Ethereal Being, in whom the gods and the Vedas reside ? Only those who know That are satisfied.

IV-9: The Lord of Maya projects the Vedas, sacrifices, spiritual practices, past and future, religious observances, all that the Vedas declare, and the whole world including ourselves. The other, again, is bound by Maya in this.
--------------------

There is value in above two verses. The goal is to know the akshara. If scriptures do not bring this point unto activation, then the job remains unfinished. Of what avail is arguments over which one gets blood pressure and shouts down other fellow passengers, if not for Self knowing, eventually? If not for attaining Parama Shanti?

Om Namah Shivaya

namaste atanu,
my view is this:
i can never know about the sat.i can only merge with sat.
like you pointed out 'the goal is to know the akshara',
i assume we started our journey for the sake of that.
bri.up quotes: 'one who does not know brahman knows it.
one who knows brahman never knows it'

[amith vikram]

Namaste vikram,

That 'Sat cannot be known' is itself a knowledge which must be known

Om Namah Shivaya

yeah thats exactly what i was trying to say.

[atanu]

namaste atanu,
i wish to say this again:
"shivaaya vishnu rupaya,shiva rupaya vishnave.
shivashcha hridayam vishnuhu,vishnoshcha hridayam shivaha.
yeta shivamayo vishnuhu,evam vishnumaya shivaha.
yetaantaram na pashyaami,tathame svastirayushi"

------in that case shiv shankar can also be imbibed in dhyana.why, one can say a man next door is god if he has nothing to do with fruits of this world or the other.
i dont know why you persist on shiva every time i quote vishnu;like i ever said vishnu is greater than shiva.i dont adore anyone who says 'i am great,i am the lord'.i dont care if he is the lord of 3 worlds or brahman himself.well in that case,vishnu is not brahman.like yama says in kena.up. whatever men worship on earth is not brahman.

Namaste Amith,

If my writing has conveyed the impression as highlighted in blue fonts, I am at fault. I have experienced beyond doubt: "shivaaya vishnu rupaya, shiva rupaya vishnave -----. I fully agree with you.

My point was only to stress the knowledge of imperishable Pragnya Ghana, which is us. When it is Ghana (unparted) it is like tranquil water. But when the Pragnya is no more Ghana (broken by thoughts), the scriptures are comprehended as per superposition of thoughts. In this regard, i cited a verse which i find of great importamce, namely:

IV-8: Of what avail are the scriptures (vedas) to him who does not know that indestructible, highest Ethereal Being, in whom the gods and the Vedas reside ? Only those who know That are satisfied.

Else

IV-9: The Lord of Maya projects the Vedas, sacrifices, spiritual practices, past and future, religious observances, all that the Vedas declare, and the whole world including ourselves. The other, again, is bound by Maya in this.
----------------------

All this was not only to agree to your initial point (cited below) but to take it forward a bit more.

For someone who starts a spiritual journey,or who reads the gita for the first time or who has no knowledge of the ONE AND ONLY ONE matter,most of the chapters in the gita will be useless.I am stating this based on my own experience.

The goal is Parama Shanti (at least for me) and that is available only after knowing the nature of the indestructible, highest Ethereal Being.

Like the Upanishad says "There is no satisfaction in the limited----"

It is a corollary thereof that the highest indestructible cannot be known by remaining a second to it, since that is the very nature of the Universe and all beings -- from brahmA down to a blade of grass.

Regards

Om Namah Shivaya

[devotee]

It is a corollary thereof that the highest indestructible cannot be known by remaining a second to it, since that is the very nature of the Universe and all beings -- from brahmA down to a blade of grass. [/COLOR]
[/COLOR]

Excellent Atanu ! It cannot be said in a better way in so few words !!

OM

[Ganeshprasad]

Pranam Atanu and all

It is a corollary thereof that the highest indestructible cannot be known by remaining a second to it, since that is the very nature of the Universe and all beings -- from brahmA down to a blade of grass.

Regards

Om Namah Shivaya

a lot has been said in relation to original question, there definitely is a lot to learn from this chapter for that there is no doubt. As to what we learn would depend on what colour glasses we are wearing and see the world (in this case the Vishvarup) in that light.

Some of the question that arises, in my mind, from what had been said thus far,
did he have darsan of the lord as an individual separate from him or merged in unity?

Arjun is definitely seeing the Vishvarup, he being afraid, he is bewildered, he is offering prayers and having conversation with the lord.

No where in this chapter Arjun has suggested that he is merged, as a matter of fact he sees multitude of Devas and demons offering prayers.

To whom would he seek the pardon if he was merged as one?

Therefore, O adorable Lord, I seek Your grace by bowing down and prostrating my body before You. Bear with me as a father to his son, as a friend to a friend, and as a husband to his wife, O Lord. (11.44)

Then the Lord confirms in verse 54 bhaktya alone would be eligible to see him in those form, which led Arjun to ask in chapter 12

arjuna uvaca
evam satata-yukta ye
bhaktas tvam paryupasate
ye capy aksaram avyaktam
tesam ke yoga-vittamah
Arjuna said: Those ever-steadfast devotees (or Bhaktas) who thus worship You (as the manifest or personal God), and those who worship the eternal unmanifest (the formless or impersonal) Brahman (by developing Jnana), which of these has the best knowledge of yoga? (12.01)

Jai Shree Krishna

[amith vikram]

Namaste Amith,

If my writing has conveyed the impression as highlighted in blue fonts, I am at fault. I have experienced beyond doubt: "shivaaya vishnu rupaya, shiva rupaya vishnave -----. I fully agree with you.

My point was only to stress the knowledge of imperishable Pragnya Ghana, which is us. When it is Ghana (unparted) it is like tranquil water. But when the Pragnya is no more Ghana (broken by thoughts), the scriptures are comprehended as per superposition of thoughts. In this regard, i cited a verse which i find of great importamce, namely:

IV-8: Of what avail are the scriptures (vedas) to him who does not know that indestructible, highest Ethereal Being, in whom the gods and the Vedas reside ? Only those who know That are satisfied.

Else

IV-9: The Lord of Maya projects the Vedas, sacrifices, spiritual practices, past and future, religious observances, all that the Vedas declare, and the whole world including ourselves. The other, again, is bound by Maya in this.
----------------------

All this was not only to agree to your initial point (cited below) but to take it forward a bit more.



The goal is Parama Shanti (at least for me) and that is available only after knowing the nature of the indestructible, highest Ethereal Being.

Like the Upanishad says "There is no satisfaction in the limited----"

It is a corollary thereof that the highest indestructible cannot be known by remaining a second to it, since that is the very nature of the Universe and all beings -- from brahmA down to a blade of grass.

Regards

Om Namah Shivaya

thats true,the goal is parama shanti.actually,i was trying to tell the same thing.but like you said,moving a bit forward,you have explained suffeciently.thanks.

[atanu]

Pranam Atanu and all

a lot has been said in relation to original question, there definitely is a lot to learn from this chapter for that there is no doubt. As to what we learn would depend on what colour glasses we are wearing and see the world (in this case the Vishvarup) in that light.

Some of the question that arises, in my mind, from what had been said thus far,
did he have darsan of the lord as an individual separate from him or merged in unity?

Arjun is definitely seeing the Vishvarup, he being afraid, he is bewildered, he is offering prayers and having conversation with the lord.

No where in this chapter Arjun has suggested that he is merged, as a matter of fact he sees multitude of Devas and demons offering prayers.

To whom would he seek the pardon if he was merged as one?

Therefore, O adorable Lord, I seek Your grace by bowing down and prostrating my body before You. Bear with me as a father to his son, as a friend to a friend, and as a husband to his wife, O Lord. (11.44)

Then the Lord confirms in verse 54 bhaktya alone would be eligible to see him in those form, which led Arjun to ask in chapter 12

arjuna uvaca
evam satata-yukta ye
bhaktas tvam paryupasate
ye capy aksaram avyaktam
tesam ke yoga-vittamah
Arjuna said: Those ever-steadfast devotees (or Bhaktas) who thus worship You (as the manifest or personal God), and those who worship the eternal unmanifest (the formless or impersonal) Brahman (by developing Jnana), which of these has the best knowledge of yoga? (12.01)

Jai Shree Krishna

Pranam Ganeshprasadji,

BG 12. 2. Those who, fixing their minds on Me, worship Me, ever steadfast and endowed with supreme faith, these are the best in Yoga in My opinion.
BG 12.5. Greater is their trouble whose minds are set on the Unmanifested; for the goal—the Unmanifested—is very difficult for the embodied to reach.

There is no doubt of this. Isha Upanishad also has the same teaching. There are steps in yoga. My Guru teaches that sadhaka should never apply advaita to Ishwara or Guru, till "I am this body" sense is not erased. Most of us, I believe, do take a mantra or a deity for dhyana. Brahma Sutra states that this is for developing concentration.

Section II

Topic-7: Vaisvanara
24. Vaisvanara (the Cosmic Person) is the supreme Lord, for though the (two) words (Self and Vaisvanara) denote many things, they are used specifically.
25. The form referred to in the Smriti is an indicatory mark (that Vaisvanara means the supreme Lord). Hence Vaisvanara is God.
26. If it be objected that Vaisvanara is not the supreme Self because of the word used as well as other factors, and because of residence inside, then we say: not so, because the instruction is to conceive of Brahman as such, because the specification is inapplicable to others and because they mention Him even as a person (Purusha).
27. For these very reasons (Vaisvanara is) neither the deity nor the element.
28. According to Jaimini, there is no contradiction even in case of direct meditation.
29. According to Asmarathya, it is from the point of view of manifestation (that God is referred to as spatially limited).
30. According to Badari (God is spoken of as spatially limited) on account of being meditated on.
31. According to Jaimini, the spatial limitation is (justifiable) because of the meditation based on superimposition; for this is shown (in another text).
32. And they (the followers of the Jabala branch) remember (ie., read of) this One (ie., God) in this place (ie., in between the head and the chin).

Yet again Shri Krishna does teach that the light of the lights (which surely holds no form) must be known. And Brahma Sutra says:

Section III

Topic-6: Worship with and without Symbols
15. Badarayana says that the superhuman being leads to Brahman only those who do not use symbols (in their meditation), since this twofold division involves no contradiction and one becomes what one resolves to be.
16. And the Upanishad reveals a speciality about the results (of meditations with symbols).

Regards

Om Namah Shivaya

[atanu]

Topic-6: Worship with and without Symbols
15. Badarayana says that the superhuman being leads to Brahman only those who do not use symbols (in their meditation), since this twofold division involves no contradiction and one becomes what one resolves to be.
16. And the Upanishad reveals a speciality about the results (of meditations with symbols).

For a change I cite the purport of Shri Ramanuja:

------ In the case of those, on the other hand, who rely on the symbols (in which they meditatively contemplate Brahman), beginning with name and terminating with prâna. ('He who meditates on name as Brahman,' Kh. Up. VII, 1 ff.), the meditation is not proved by texts of the two kinds previously mentioned to lead to Brahman; it rather is contaminated by an element not of the nature of intelligence, and hence--according to the principle that the result of a meditation is the same in nature as the meditation itself--the soul of the inferior devotee practising such meditation does not proceed by the path of light and does not reach Brahman.--That this distinction is declared by Scripture itself, ------

Om