shrI Shankara charitam: exposition by KAnchi ParamAchArya

[saidevo]

******************************
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]

**************************************************
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]

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]

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]

****************************************
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]

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]

******************************
'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]

****************************************
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]

******************************
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]

**************************************************
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.

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