Bhagavad Gita

History, religion and culture
vgvindan
Posts: 1430
Joined: 13 Aug 2006, 10:51

Post by vgvindan »

kj,
In to-day's context, it is very difficult to define what is one's duty. Even in the environment as existed when kRSNa propounded gIta, He has not elaborated the subject - He simply says -

tasmAcchAstraM pramANaM tE kAryAkArya vyavasthitau |
jnAtvA SAstra vidhAnOktaM karma kartumihArhasi || XVI.24 ||

"So let the Sastra be thy authority in ascertaining what ought to be done and what ought not to be done. Having known what is said in the ordinance of the Sastra, thou shouldst act here."

IMHO, kRSNa answers that question in an indirect manner in the following verse -

yadRcchA lAbha santushTO dvandvAtItO vimatsaraH |
samaH siddhAvasiddhau ca kRtvApi na nibadhyatE || IV.22 ||

"Content with what comes to him without effort, unaffected by the pairs of opposites, free from envy, even-minded in success and failure, though acting, he is not bound."

Regarding saMnyAsa, kRSNa is very specific -

kAmyAnAM karmaNAM nyAsaM saMnyAsaM kavayO viduH || XVIII.2 ||

"Renunciation of kAmyAa actions, the sages understand as saMnyAsa." (Translations by Swami Swarupananda)

"running away from one set of duties to another" - as you have put it, is IMHO, not saMnAyasa, but escapism.
Last edited by vgvindan on 18 Apr 2008, 17:24, edited 1 time in total.

cmlover
Posts: 11498
Joined: 02 Feb 2010, 22:36

Post by cmlover »

I have already defined 'DUTY' in the Sankara context.
'Duty' means 'what one is enjoined by the vedas and dharma shastras (in the context of shankara) that ought to be done'. In other words Duty is a well defined subset of vedic-sactioned activities
I also called ND all activities which are beyound the purview of sanctioned vedic activities. By ~D I meant 'not doing' or defaulting sanctioned Dutied.
Both ND and ~D get added to the Karma balance sheet. As long as the Karma balance sheet is not cleared one is not entitled to L (liberation). In fact the immutable divine law is
Karma (our action verb 'Do')-->karmaphala (R(result))...(0)
In fact Sankara argues that
IFF (DYD) then L or R...(5)
In fact we can only assert
IFF (DYD) then L
since ~DYD does add to the karma balance sheet which does produce R.
In fact R is produced all the time from all actions DYD, ~DYD or ND.
Again
ATR-->D*(death)-->B(birth)-->ATR..(3*) is an infinite loop.
and
NATR-->R-->0(Null)-->L
(but DYD is implied herein and is a must for L)
Hence I said
NATR-->DYD-->R-->L
Inherently DYD may be with ATR or with NATR. While the latter leads to L and the former leads to the infinite loop.
VGV has indeed clarified these points.

KJ asks
Who decides what is once duty ? Which all shastras to consider ? Since we play different roles,will duties clash with each other ? When somebody takes sanyasa, is he running away from one set of duties to another ?
VGV has answered it fully. Let me just say that Duty is prescribed in the Vedas and Dharma Sastras which resolve issues if there is a conflict. VGV aptly says
"running away from one set of duties to another" - as you have put it, is IMHO, not saMnAyasa, but escapism.

vgvindan
Posts: 1430
Joined: 13 Aug 2006, 10:51

Post by vgvindan »

As long as the Karma balance sheet is not cleared one is not entitled to L (liberation). In fact the immutable divine law is Karma (our action verb 'Do')-->karmaphala (R(result))...(0)
Annamayya in his kriti 'antaryAmi' aptly says -

kOrina kOrkulu kOyani kaTlu tIravu nIvavi tencaka
bArapu baggAlu pApa puNyamulu nErupula bOnIvu nIvu vaddanaka

General Meaning is -

"All the desires and sancita karma - the unreaped bundles - these will not be over unless You cut those. Sins and merits, skills - these will not go away by themselves unless You say 'no' to them".

manvantara
Posts: 64
Joined: 04 Apr 2008, 01:10

Post by manvantara »

Interesting thread. As a child, I have had some exposure to the Gita (I studied at a Chinmaya Vidyalaya) and with the years, my view has been changing.
Currently, my question, though, is: What do we personally know, for sure? In the Gita, the Lord says this, the Lord says that, but.....who am I? What is the purpose of this life? What does this body/mind combination (that has a name) know?
It is alright to quote from the various chapters, but what does it mean, internally, to each person?

Increasingly, I get the feeling that this body-mind is an automaton; that this body-mind is NOT the doer; has no control over desires/responses.

I wish I could really "feel" some of what is said in the Gita, but to me, it all appears intellectual - nothing that I can "see" (for want of a better word) for myself.

vasanthakokilam
Posts: 10956
Joined: 03 Feb 2010, 00:01

Post by vasanthakokilam »

CML, Here is a formal representation of what you stated including the infinite loop. No new content hopefully.

Code: Select all

START := LIFETIME

LIFETIME := BIRTH   ACTION_CONSEQUENCE_PAIR

ACTION_CONSEQUENCE_PAIR :=  ( LIBERATING_ACTION     LIBERATING_CONSEQUENCE ) | ( NON_LIBERATING_ACTION    REBIRTH_CONSEQUENCE )

LIBERATING_ACTION := DYD & NATR 
NON_LIBERATING_ACTION := DYD & ATR

LIBERATING_CONSEQUENCE := DEATH LIBERATION
LIBERATION := END

REBIRTH_CONSEQUENCE := DEATH LIFETIME
The last rule sets up the infinite loop and the two before gets one out of the loop.

If you agree that this formalism captures what you wrote, I have a question of fairly deep significance. I will follow up with that once I hear back.

P.S. There are two more enumeration rules which are not used above, but I am just putting them below for completeness.
ACTION := ( LIBERATING_ACTION | NONLIBERATING_ACTION ) (
CONSEQUENCE := LIBERATING_CONSEQUENCE | REBIRTH_CONSEQUENCE

cmlover
Posts: 11498
Joined: 02 Feb 2010, 22:36

Post by cmlover »

VK
You have succintly summarized (BG 2.47). Strictly this pathway should lead one to Liberation according to Lord. But then he later says (BG 18.66)
sarvadharmAN parityajya mAmEkam sharaNaM vraja|
ahaM tvAM sarvapApEbhyO mOkShayiShyAmi mA sucaH ||

(abandoning all duties come unto Me alone for shelter; sorrow not, I will liberate thee from all sins.)
This introduces a new variable Bhakti (taking shelter in the Lord). Thus
If (B) then L
This pathway bypasses DYD NATR and hence is totally in conflict. I would love to hear what VGV has to say here.
By the by should we discuss it now or work still with BG 2.47 ?

vasanthakokilam
Posts: 10956
Joined: 03 Feb 2010, 00:01

Post by vasanthakokilam »

CML, Let us stay with BG 2.47 for now.

I have a question of some significance.

If my rule based system is allowed run multiple life times, here is how the machine's trace is:

START->BIRTH DYD&ATR DEATH BIRTH DYD&ATR DEATH BIRTH DYD&NATR DEATH LIBERATION->END

One thing that is not clear to me is this. It looks to be recursive loop. In recursion, one has to unwind through all the previous invocations to reach the top of the stack and then the machine stops. But here that does not seem to be the case. We just escape out and the whole recursion stack is wiped out clean.

I wonder if Shankara addresses this in any fashion.

Or, Is there any other school of Indian philosophy that requires you to "unwind" the stack to reach back to the real START level and that truly repesents liberation.

There is a reason for my asking this ( with some significance for me, Kurt Godel and Alan Turing and all ) but I do not want to rush to it yet.

cmlover
Posts: 11498
Joined: 02 Feb 2010, 22:36

Post by cmlover »

VK
Sankara is very pithy in his comment on this verse. He does not even quote from vedas or upanishads. As such he simply interprets the verse in words. Ramanuja also almost does that.
DYD&NATR instantly terminates the loop whereas going through the loop the karma baggage does accumulate during each cycle and is cumulated. You need to have a Karma variable whcih is adjusted during each cycle that is missing in your formulation!

vasanthakokilam
Posts: 10956
Joined: 03 Feb 2010, 00:01

Post by vasanthakokilam »

what is the karma adjustment formula? And how does it figure in exiting the loop? If you tell me that I will code it into the formalism.

cmlover
Posts: 11498
Joined: 02 Feb 2010, 22:36

Post by cmlover »

Code: Select all

Karma =k
While Karma /=0 Do
Birth
If (DYD) karma = karma +x
Else karma = karma +x1
If (ND) Karma =Karma +y
If (DYD&NATR) karma =0
Death
Loop
Liberation
End
Explanation
The initial value k is assigned at the time of creation (sarga) by the Lord. The variables x,x1,y take values depending on Birth and the activity levels.

Now you may try to fix this...

vasanthakokilam
Posts: 10956
Joined: 03 Feb 2010, 00:01

Post by vasanthakokilam »

your code is understandable, cml. One question. The karma counter is not decremented except for it going to 0. Is there anything there that decrements the karma counter so that there is another way for it to go to zero, gradually?

cmlover
Posts: 11498
Joined: 02 Feb 2010, 22:36

Post by cmlover »

We should add
LifetimeExperience = karma + z
Where z maybe negative accounting for the 'enjoyment (plusses and minuses) of karmaphala during each lifetime.
It iis theoretically possible to make Karma =0 through anubhOga. Further our philosophy also decrees 'stay at svarga and naraka for specified periods to pay back the karmaphala. The birth is the consequence of the residual karma. The account is maintained by 'citragupta' the divine accountant. In fact it is today (19-04-2008) which is the citrapourNami day on which prayers (bribes :) )are rendered to citragupta beseeching him to be lenient in our accounts :)

vasanthakokilam
Posts: 10956
Joined: 03 Feb 2010, 00:01

Post by vasanthakokilam »

OK. See if this modification to the code is consistent with what Vedas/BG/Shankara/Others say. I prefer RECURSION since it more directly maps to what we are trying to depict.

Code: Select all

COMMENT: Launch LIFETIME with an initial Karma. When it eventually returns after possibly multiple LIFETIMES,
 the next step is LIBERATION

LIFETIME( initialKarma )
LIBERATION

LIFETIME( karma )
   if ( karma equals 0 ) return;
   Birth;
   for all activities
        If (DYD) 
            if (ATR) karma = karma + x1
            if (NATR) karma = karma - x2
       else 
            karma = karma + y
   endfor
   Death
   CHITHRAGUPTHA_ADJUSTMENT_IF_ANY(karma)   COMMENT: ;)
   LIFETIME( karma )
END LIFETIME
The above code is different from previous versions on one significant point. Each activity in one LIFETIME gets positive or negative credit for karma depending on DYD&ATR or DYD&NATR. Previously DYD&NATR was not broken down at individual activity level. I hope this is still consistent with Indian philosophy.

vgvindan
Posts: 1430
Joined: 13 Aug 2006, 10:51

Post by vgvindan »

This pathway bypasses DYD NATR and hence is totally in conflict. I would love to hear what VGV has to say here.
In my school days, there used to be marking system for Mathematics - 110 out of 100. I do not know whether such a practice is still in existence. I was not very good in Maths and I never reached even 100. But I was told that if a student can write all the possible methods of solving a sum, he used to get more than the marks allotted.

The Lord is a great Maths teacher. He has set up not one, two or three, but any number of ways to solve the sum of life. And, it has been proved that each one of the path is as valid as the other.

cmlover
Posts: 11498
Joined: 02 Feb 2010, 22:36

Post by cmlover »

vk
If (DYD & NATR) Karma=0
Exit
In otherwords if you did your prescribed duties and were not attached to the fruits of your present and past karmas, all your karma balance sheet is wiped out and you get liberation on death. That is not reflected in your coding.

VGV
I agree the Lord has indeed provided multiple pathways to liberation and he has left the free choice for us! In fact he has the prerogative to accord liberation without giving any explanations as he did to the residents of Ayodhya who perished along with Rama in the Sarayu River!

vgvindan
Posts: 1430
Joined: 13 Aug 2006, 10:51

Post by vgvindan »

Currently, my question, though, is: What do we personally know, for sure?
manvantara,
The only entity that no one - not even the worst, rather, best atheist - can deny is 'I am'. The search is to find who this 'I am'.

I totally agree with you that all our approach is intellectual only and not apprehension - what you term as 'see'. The thief is there - we can feel him - but he is such an elusive thief that very few had succeeded in apprehending him. Vivekananda says, we must - we are destined to - apprehend him one day. A tamil saint sings 'sikkenap piDittEn iniyengezhundaruLavadE'. - "I have caught hold of you fast, whereto can you go?" Let us continue the pursuit.

vgvindan
Posts: 1430
Joined: 13 Aug 2006, 10:51

Post by vgvindan »

if (NATR) karma = karma - x2
I think here we make as assumption that every NATR reduces our stock of karma; IMHO it is not so, it simply does not add to the karma stock. At any point of time, we have the option to resume ATR or intermix ATR and NATR.
Therefore, if we totally desist from ATR (NATR), the karma stock would, still not be reduced to zero.

There is a verse in BG IV.19. -
jnAnAgnidagdha karmANaM tamAhuH paNDitaM budhAH ||

"...whose actions are burnt by the fire of knowledge, him, the sages call wise".

Which, in effect means, while every NATR does not decrease the karma counter, it increases another counter called 'knowledge'. When knowledge (counter) reaches a point of no-return, or outweighs the karma stock, the karma stock - rather stack, is wiped out in one go. However, there is a possibility that 'knowledge' and 'karma' could co-exist when 'knowledge' is not strong enough to wipe out the stock of karma.
Last edited by vgvindan on 20 Apr 2008, 13:05, edited 1 time in total.

vgvindan
Posts: 1430
Joined: 13 Aug 2006, 10:51

Post by vgvindan »

I may add a clarification to my previous post.

In Hindu philosophy, there is a simile of 'fried seeds'. A seed, when it finds a suitable environment, will sprout forth. But once we fry the seed, it loses the ability to germinate. Knowledge (jnAna) is said to play the role of frying the seed called karma. The outcome of actions whether with ATR or NATR are bound to be similar (excepting the quality, of course) but the karma performed with NATR is like a fried seed and loses its germinating capacity.
Last edited by vgvindan on 20 Apr 2008, 20:55, edited 1 time in total.

vasanthakokilam
Posts: 10956
Joined: 03 Feb 2010, 00:01

Post by vasanthakokilam »

vk
If (DYD & NATR) Karma=0
Exit
In otherwords if you did your prescribed duties and were not attached to the fruits of your present and past karmas, all your karma balance sheet is wiped out and you get liberation on death. That is not reflected in your coding.
CML, it is intended to be there ( any coding bugs notwithstanding ).

If you look at the inner loop

for all activities
If (DYD)
if (ATR) karma = karma + x1
if (NATR) karma = karma - x2
else
karma = karma + y
endfor

"if (NATR) karma = karma - x2" should be equivalent to what you wrote. This has the same effect of "if ( DYD & NATR ) karma=0; exit" but achieved differenly.

But there are some essential differences. We can change the code in any way we want, but here are some questions about Indian Philosophy whose answers act as requirements for this code. Here they are.

1. In a life time, there are a whole bunch of activities that a person performs. Some are in the DUTY set and some are outiside of it. In the DUTY set, should one perform ALL of it with NATR for exit? That is what you are implying but I want to make that is correct. If someone performs some of the DUTY set with NATR and some with ATR, do they still get any credit towards liberation? My code above incorporates the latter and I am not sure if that is strictly according to Indian Philosophy or not. So please clarify.

2. VGV in his last two posts had introduced some new concepts which needed to be folded into the code. Not a difficult coding exercise but I have a few questions.
VGV, like karma, is knowledge also transfered from LIFETIME to LIFETIME? or knowledge has just an effect of reducing ( frying ) the karma counter in one LIFETIME. Here I mean both: Frying the potency of the total karma and the actual magnitude of the karma. Your last post I think talks about the concept of knowledge reducing the potency ( frying ) of karma.

Does DYD & NATR produce that KNOWLEDGE?
What else can produce that KNOWLEDGE?
KNOWLEDGE as an antidote for karma. Is there any guidance of this antidote relationship?

Second, are we still talking about Karma counter going to 0 as the necessary and sufficient condition for exit?

cmlover
Posts: 11498
Joined: 02 Feb 2010, 22:36

Post by cmlover »

VK
I see your point
If someone performs some of the DUTY set with NATR and some with ATR, do they still get any credit towards liberation.
I guess not. Whatever is done ATR will add to karma and one will not be eligible for L until Karma counter is zero. I assume TOTAL NATR is necessary to wipe out karma within ones lifetime (equivalent to frying the bIja in VGV's colourful discussion of Sankara/Patanjali/...) However by divine grace (as VGV argues) anything can be done. And again Knowledge being a counterbalance is also part of Sankara philosophy but we are mixing up too much at present. Get the main program setup and then add the other subroutines later. It is indeed exciting to look at Indian Philosophy in an objective algorithmic fashion! CONGRATS VK!
is knowledge also transfered from LIFETIME to LIFETIME?
Yes! It is part of the 'vaasana' jIvAtma carries along. But do you want to discuss this now?
Does DYD & NATR produce that KNOWLEDGE?
No. They have no connection. Knowledge has to be acquired (vEdAnta vicAra). It also comes through divine grace (but again based on vaasana)
KNOWLEDGE as an antidote for karma. Is there any guidance of this antidote relationship?
These are independant pathways. However
Knowledge -->NATR
is possible, but not the otherway around. In fact NATR itself is part of Knowledge.

Are we ready to discuss 'Knowledge' which means we are finished with BG 2.47.

vgvindan
Posts: 1430
Joined: 13 Aug 2006, 10:51

Post by vgvindan »

vk,
The questions posed by you have deep philosophical significance. I shall try to answer them to the best of my 'knowledge' and ability.

There is a fine couplet in the kaThOpanishad -

SrEyaSca prEyaSca manushyamEtastau samparItya vivinakti dhIraH |
SrEyO hi dhIrO(a)bhi prEyasO vRNItE prEyO mandO yOgakshEmAdvRNItE || I.ii.2 ||

"The preferable and the pleasurable approach man. The man of intelligence, having considered them, separates the two. The intelligent one selects the electable in preference to the delectable; the non-intelligent one selects the delectable for the sake of growth and protection (of the body etc.)
(Translation by Swami Gambhirananda)

ATR is natural even to lower beings; animals also do have knowledge.
NATR is applicable to humans only - thanks to discrimination.
As has been brought out in the couplet quoted above - choosing the electable is the true 'knowledge' - being conducive to one's true welfare).
To cut short, 'discrimination combined with will-power' is the 'knowledge' for our purposes.

As per Hindu philosophy, knowledge, like karma, is transferred from lifetime to lifetime in the form of impressions both at superficial and sub-conscious levels. (The behavioural variation between conjoined twins is an example).

Frying the seed of karma is applicable only to 'that' particular karma performed with NATR.
Regarding potency of knowledge to decimate the total karma, in addition to the gIta verse IV.19 quoted earlier - please refer to IV.37 also -

yathaidhAmsi samiddhO(a)gnirbhasmasAtkurutE(a)rjuna ||
jnAnAgniH sarva karmANi bhasmasAtkurutE tathA ||

"As the blazing fire reduces wood into ashes, so, O Arjuna, does the fire of knowledge reduces all karma to ashes (Excepting of course prArabdha, or karma which, after causing the present body, has begun to bear fruits.) (Translation and notes by Swami Swarupananda)

DYD & NATR buttresses knowledge - because knowledge is essential for choosing NATR itself.
What else can produce knowledge? - a very difficult question to answer; let me ponder.
Knowledge as an anti-dote for karma - a nice way of putting.
Needs more deliberation to answer your queries.

PS: I just saw post of CML. I am yet to study it. I shall respond later.
Last edited by vgvindan on 20 Apr 2008, 23:52, edited 1 time in total.

vasanthakokilam
Posts: 10956
Joined: 03 Feb 2010, 00:01

Post by vasanthakokilam »

CML, I understand we are bringing in "knowledge" and so we may be moving away from BG 2.47. And you wanted the code to be set up strictly in the "karma' realm. I am attempting that below.

I am incorporating your statement "I assume TOTAL NATR is necessary to wipe out karma within ones lifetime". . Let me present the new version of "strictly karma" code first. We can modify it with "knowledge related provisions".

Here it is.

Code: Select all

COMMENT: Launch LIFETIME with an initial Karma. When it eventually returns after possibly multiple LIFETIMES,
 the next step is LIBERATION

LIFETIME( initialKarma )
LIBERATION

LIFETIME( karma )
   if ( karma equals 0 ) return;
   Birth;
   KarmaToBeWipedOut = TRUE;
   for all activities
        If (DYD) 
            if (ATR) karma = karma + D1; karmaTobeWipedOut = FALSE;
            if (NATR)  karma = karma + D2; 
       else 
            karma = karma + ND1; karmaTobeWipedOut = FALSE
   endfor
   Death
   if karmaTobeWipedOut is TRUE
      karma = 0;
   LIFETIME( karma )
END LIFETIME
This version implements the stipulation that ALL duty activiteis are to be performed with NATR to wipe out karma.


BTW, that stipulation in this pure karma based path is one tall order to satisfy, isn't it? Even a single slip makes you try again in another life time. That sounds harsh ;) Also, from what age, does this apply? Because you can not expect a child to act with NATR. But those are subject to commentary I suppose.

cmlover
Posts: 11498
Joined: 02 Feb 2010, 22:36

Post by cmlover »

VK
Looking Good! Let us not hurry. This is the 'Karma' module. There will be several other modules. Each should be logically consistent but cannot be 'complete' (Godel's ghost).
This one is not complete yet. VGV has the tendency to overshoot!
I have tried #43 to start on the axioms and definitions. They are incomplete. We need to define NATR.
This version implements the stipulation that ALL duty activiteis are to be performed with NATR to wipe out karma.
Note that NATR is time dependant. In fact 'time' is a hidden variable. If a person is ATR during the first part of his life and NATR during the latter part he is still entitled to L. That is the basis of Hindu varNAshrama dharma. That is the reason for positing 'sanyasa' at the latter part of life!The 'kAma' part of the ashrama is devoted to upabhOga and one is not required to renounce that part. But when the enjoyment peaks the ATR grows. It becomes very difficult to practise NATR at that point. That is when NATR is to be practised by renouncing everything and nullifying the karmaphala. Nowhere in Gita Lord asks one to seek sanyasa to start with. In fact he emphasizes karma which is bound to produce results willy-nilly. But that is the time to cultivate NATR gradually (since it is time-dependant) and ultimately Total NATR leading to liberation!

vasanthakokilam
Posts: 10956
Joined: 03 Feb 2010, 00:01

Post by vasanthakokilam »

CML, that complicates the code ;) but not by much. I will wait till I get the requirements worked out cleanly.

Your clarification also answers my question: "From what age does this stipulation apply".

Can we reasonably interpret this 'Total NATR' as 'Just before death, for a certain period of time uninterrupted DYD & NATR'?

Here are some examples:

(DYD & ATR ) ( DYD & ATR ) (DYD & NATR ) (DYD & ATR )............. (DYD & NATR) (DYD & ATR) DEATH -- NO GOOD

(DYD & ATR ) ( DYD & ATR ) (DYD & NATR ) (DYD & ATR )............. (DYD & NATR) (DYD & NATR) DEATH -- GOOD

Then of course, the question remains, how many or how long uninterrupted ( DYD & NATR ) sequence is needed for L? Is even one such action good enough?

vasanthakokilam
Posts: 10956
Joined: 03 Feb 2010, 00:01

Post by vasanthakokilam »

I have my power point slides ( three slides ) ready that link my favorite theoreticians Kurt Godel and Alan Turing and our favorite philosopher Shankara. I realized that it is more in the knowledge realm, and so I will wait to present that till we get to 'knowledge'.

cacm
Posts: 2212
Joined: 08 Apr 2010, 00:07

Post by cacm »

Dear V,
I am most interested getting copies of what is in your slides if they are available for circulation. I am quite familiar with Kurt Godel's work- tho' I am not an expert in that area- & Alan Touring- I have worked more than 50 years professionally in "Global Optimization" esp. using artificial intelligence techniques like simulated annealing, Metropolis algrithm etc- Reg Sankara I am familiar with Adi Sankara. my email is vkv43034@yahoo.com

cmlover
Posts: 11498
Joined: 02 Feb 2010, 22:36

Post by cmlover »

VK
(DYD & ATR ) ( DYD & ATR ) (DYD & NATR ) (DYD & ATR )............. (DYD & NATR) (DYD & ATR) DEATH -- NO GOOD

(DYD & ATR ) ( DYD & ATR ) (DYD & NATR ) (DYD & ATR )............. (DYD & NATR) (DYD & NATR) DEATH -- GOOD
The first one is OK. The second is 'NO GOOD'. NATR comes out of conviction. It is 'not' like the party-switching by politicians. Again NATR when you have nothing to lose is a cop-out. Everytime we perform a ritual we end up saying
sarvam tat sat brhamArpaNaM
This is meaningless repetition of words since we are not renouncing anything. In fact it is said at the culmination of a kAmya karma where we have the expectation for Results.

As VGV has stated, ATR is natural for humans along with animals. Whereas NATR requires discriminating knowledge. It is difficult to say when NATR sets in. But once the conviction is in firmly one is enroute to Liberation.

Note that NATR--> L is available to every individual. The problem is to define L convincingly since it has to be taken on faith (especially Hinduism). Even those who believe may opt for ATR so that they may accumulate plusses through 'Good' behaviour whose rewards may be reaped in future births since Karma and Reincarnation are cornerstones of Hindu Faith.

vasanthakokilam
Posts: 10956
Joined: 03 Feb 2010, 00:01

Post by vasanthakokilam »

I decided to finish my document on Godel, Turing and Shankara and share it with all of you for your comments. It is still a work in progress and there is no guarantee that I have captured the nuances of Indian Philosophy correctly. I myself feel that this is orthogonal ( and rather at a meta level ) to what we are discussing here in detail.

Here is the document titled: Godel-Turing-Shankara.pdf

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/6372521/Godel-T ... ankara.pdf

This morning I had 0 slides, and then I had three slides with pictures which then expanded to 40 slides. The content has been simmering in my mind for a while.

I am looking forward to your comments. If it is going to cause a disruption to what we are discussing now, we can definitely wait to discuss my document until the current discussion comes to a logical resting point.
Last edited by vasanthakokilam on 22 Apr 2008, 01:02, edited 1 time in total.

vgvindan
Posts: 1430
Joined: 13 Aug 2006, 10:51

Post by vgvindan »

While writing my previous post, I was tempted to write about NATR without any reference to knowledge - much like a military training where the drill and other activities become instinctive.

My general observation is that the moment you remove the uniform, the sense of discipline and drill seems to take a back seat - (I was, by profession, a soldier for 33 years). Very few understand the purpose of discipline and drill and try to adapt it in their private lives.

Take the example of Arjuna - such a wonderful disciple of Dronacharya. It required a Krishna to instill in him the Karma as a drill. But his doubts persisted till the end and ultimately Lord had to declare 'sarva dharmAn parityaja mAmEkaM SaraNam vraja'.

Arjuna was only an apparent reason for propounding gItA, yet, it doesn't escape one's attention that NATR is not something which a man would, without any initiation choose. However, once having chosen and a determination sets in, further application of knowledge may or may not be very essential. In such a cases, the very determination takes the person across - the following verse of gitA substantiates this -

sattvAnurUpA sarvasya SraddhA bhavati bhArata ||
SraddhAmayO(a)yaM purushO yO yaccraddhaH sa Eva saH || XVII.3 ||

"The SraddhA of each is according to his natural disposition, ... The man consists of his SraddhA; he verily is what his SraddhA is" (natural disposition - the specific tendencies of saMskAra) (Translation and notes by Swami Swarupananda).

In computer language, people call it 'bootstrap loading'. Some such initiation is required for NATR.
Re your question whether ATR and NATR can be mixed. As CML has rightly pointed out, in the initial stages till the inertial laws remain operative, ATR is bound to be mixed with NATR. However, a time has to come when NATR becomes the natural disposition of the individual, otherwise karma will continue to operate.

In short, NATR, totally devoid of 'knowledge', IMHO, is a very tall order, yet not impossible.

vgvindan
Posts: 1430
Joined: 13 Aug 2006, 10:51

Post by vgvindan »

[quote]In this formalism, Brahman is needed only to “hold the mirrorâ€
Last edited by vgvindan on 21 Apr 2008, 10:31, edited 1 time in total.

cmlover
Posts: 11498
Joined: 02 Feb 2010, 22:36

Post by cmlover »

Vk

Just went through your ppt. I am simply STUNned. A very nice integration of ideas. This is the sort of integrating approach that is needed to make Indian Philosophy appealing to the present generation. Now I have to study your material carefully and digest the concepts since my comprehension of Computer Science is minimal. Strangely your discussion brought back to my mind the 'Fixed Point Theorm' and philosophical discussions claiming that God is the Fixed Point for all mapping systems. Let us leave it for yet another discussion! Maybe we should finish off BG 2.47 first..

Byt the by here is a digression on the Barber's paradox
In my village there is a barber who has taken the vow that the barber will not shave anybody who shaved himself. Paradoxically the Barber has a baby smooth face. Nothing biologically/medically wrong with that person. How?
:)

vasanthakokilam
Posts: 10956
Joined: 03 Feb 2010, 00:01

Post by vasanthakokilam »

Female barber? ;)

cmlover
Posts: 11498
Joined: 02 Feb 2010, 22:36

Post by cmlover »

Yes ! or Child labour :)

vgvindan
Posts: 1430
Joined: 13 Aug 2006, 10:51

Post by vgvindan »

I came across this article and I wanted to share with you. Sorry for the digression.
In the beginning there was neither existence nor non existence. Nothing was
there. Suddenly Brahma and Vishnu sprang forth from Nowhere, and were wondering
who they were, and from where did they come from, what they should do, and
whether they should create the world, and if so, who should do it. Then they
were astonished to see an infinite linga of light arise from the Nowhere. So
they decided to find its origin and end in order to prove their own greatness.

Today, like the two gods, scholars want to do the same thing. They want to
'measure' god, find the ends, figure out and map the entire route, leave no
mystery behind, no stone unturned. Isn't this what all philosophers do - try and
'measure' God? We are the 'gods' searching for causes and reasons for creation,
and just how exactly dissolution is going to take place, all in minute detail,
step by step, frame by frame detail, with footnotes thrown in.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/akandabar ... sage/27701

vasanthakokilam
Posts: 10956
Joined: 03 Feb 2010, 00:01

Post by vasanthakokilam »

We should all feel good to be in the company of Vishnu and Brahma ;) (j/k)

One thing I find interesting about the first paragraph is the story includes two 'gods' and not 'one'. To distinguish between subjective and objective experience, you need minimally two people. Otherwise, there is no way to check if you are delusional or not. Of course, the other person can be delusional in exactly the same way but that is a different but related matter.

cmlover
Posts: 11498
Joined: 02 Feb 2010, 22:36

Post by cmlover »

Nice intro to shaiva siddhanta. The pashu/pati/paasham system is yet another self-contained (complete (by implication)) sytem of Indian Philosophy. Therein the karma balance sheet gets wiped clean by the compassionate deity (Siva). Hence liberation is assured for everybody. While shankara's approach is more markaTa vaada this is more allied to maarjaara vaada.
Personally I would prefer to be an indolent maarjaaram than be an inquisitive markaTaM :)

vgvindan
Posts: 1430
Joined: 13 Aug 2006, 10:51

Post by vgvindan »

I would prefer to be an indolent maarjaaram than be an inquisitive markaTaM
Someone who feels 'markaTa' is better - http://mindbloggermax.blogspot.com/2007 ... river.html

vgvindan
Posts: 1430
Joined: 13 Aug 2006, 10:51

Post by vgvindan »

cml,
IMHO, it is very difficult to practise mArjara nyAya - it requires a state of mind, which places implicit faith in the promise of 'yOga kshEmaM vahAmyahaM' and which doesn't care wherefrom the next meal is going to come from. IIRC, there are a few such incidents -

In the life of Adi Sankaracharya, when kApAlika wanted to behead the AcArya, he submitted himself totally and the Lord (nRsiMha), through the medium of padma pAda, manifests to save him.

Similary, jaDa bharata submitted himself for beheading by a kApAlika - and the Mother saves his life. - http://luthar.com/2007/01/05/the-story- ... hnamurthy/

AnjanEya, while leaping over the Ocean, promises surasA - the nAga mAtA - that he will become food for her after his task of finding Sita is over.

Such a state of mind, for all external appearances, may look 'indolent', but, IMHO, it is the highest form of prapatti.
Last edited by vgvindan on 23 Apr 2008, 21:56, edited 1 time in total.

cmlover
Posts: 11498
Joined: 02 Feb 2010, 22:36

Post by cmlover »

No doubt prapatti is tough. But it is easier than karma yoga or gnaana yoya. The lord after investigating all aspects recommends this route (BG 18.66). Thyagaraja is a living current example who attained nirvaNa just singing all the way . (How nice!). When the robbers appeared Rama took it on himself to defend him!
It is the convition that is difficult. Our intellect simply denies that it is possible. Hence Patanjali ultimately advises that eventually we have to 'kill' the intellect (vignaana) to accept 'brahmam' implicitly.(which Godel proved objectively!) All the gymnastics of haTha yoga are ultimately to control the 'mind' though aimed through physical control. In that respect 'naada yoga' is a pleasant and easy way of attaining that control as we are endeavouring through this Forum! Aren't we all kitten lulled into serenity through the divine melody of CM forgetting our daily markaTa behaviour of gossip and contention !

VK RAMAN
Posts: 5009
Joined: 03 Feb 2010, 00:29

Post by VK RAMAN »

Well said cml.

“Na aham vasami vaikunte na yogi hrudayeravau
madhbaktha: yathra gayanthi thathra thishtami Narada "

Music
Posts: 149
Joined: 21 Jul 2006, 20:25

Post by Music »

“Na aham vasami vaikunte na yogi hrudayeravau
madhbaktha: yathra gayanthi thathra thishtami Narada "
Is this from the Gita?
Last edited by Music on 24 Apr 2008, 21:01, edited 1 time in total.

Ramnath Iyer
Posts: 72
Joined: 19 Nov 2007, 13:33

Post by Ramnath Iyer »

Can somebody help me with the correct words for the gita sloka 'Parithranaya' along with a gist meaning as well as word-by-word meaning ?

thanks for the help.

PUNARVASU
Posts: 2498
Joined: 06 Feb 2010, 05:42

Post by PUNARVASU »

parithrANAya sAdhUnam, vinashAya cha dushkrtAm
dharmasamsthApanArthAya sambhavAmi yugE yugE.
Meaning:
SambhavAmi yugE yugE-I will take birth in every yuga
parithrANAya sadhUnAm-for protecting the righteous people
vinAshAya cha dushkrtAm-and for destroying the evil
dharmasamsthApanArthAya-(and) for establishing righteousness.

Hope this will suffice.Thanks.

krishnanrasika
Posts: 20
Joined: 01 Mar 2008, 15:37

Post by krishnanrasika »

Hari Om. For the above verse (Chapter 4.8), below is gist of Pujya Swami Dayananda Saraswati's discourse.

---------------------------------------
Meaning : For the protection of those who are commited to dharma, for the destruction (correction) of those who follow adharma, and for the establishment of dharma, I come into being in every age.

Why does an avatar come? It is not to enjoy punya-papa because these do not apply to an avatar. Nor does an avatar come to suffer the life of a samsari. An avatar comes for a three-fold purpose only. First, to protect the people who are commited to a life of dharma (paritranaya sadhunam). If they are protected, then dharma is protected. This protection is carried out in many ways, one of which is by the avatar chastising those who do things that are not in keeping with dharma (vinasaya dushkritam). Vinasaya can also mean destruction, but here the destruction is more in terms of correcting by chastising, disciplining, etc. This then is the second reason for the avatar to come. In either case, the real task of an avatar is to re-establish the dharma (dharma-samsthapana-arthaya). This is the third but real reason for the advent of an avatar.
---------------------------------------
I read the previous discussions in this thread and would only suggest one word of caution - An important text like the Bhagavad Gita (classified as the Prasthana Trayam - others being the Upanishads and Brahma Sutras) requires a systematic study under the guidance of a Teacher, without which we may not understand the full purport (and could also end up in wrong understanding!). Hence, Bhagavad Gita is given the status of an Upanishad (and called Gitopanishad) since it is in the fom of a dialogue and it has to be studied by sitting near a Guru.

Well, the common question is - Where do I find a Guru? Where do I find the time to do systematic study? Our Sastras say that if our intention is strong and if we are ready (there is always a preparedness requried to assimilate knowledge), we will find a Teacher.

Pranams
Krishnan
Last edited by krishnanrasika on 02 May 2008, 13:05, edited 1 time in total.

vgvindan
Posts: 1430
Joined: 13 Aug 2006, 10:51

Post by vgvindan »

Krishnanrasika,
There is an episode in the life of Narendra - later Vivekananda. One night Narendra saw Ramakrishna Paramahamsa walking towards Panchavati side where there was the quarters of Mother Sarada Devi. Narendra developed doubt that his Master was clandestinely visiting the Mother at the night time. He (Narendra) followed Master only to find Master in meditation under the Tree at Panchavati.
Next Morning, Master, asked Narendra whether his doubt had been clarified. Narendra felt ashamed that he doubted Master. Master responded to Narendra that as the Guru would not accept anyone and everyone as disciple, without testing, so also, no one should accept anyone as his Guru without proper verification.

Kabir says 'Gobind aur guru mere sAmne khaDa; kisko pahle karun praNaM? guruko, kyonki gurune hi Gobind ko dikhAyA' - Govind and Guru are standing before me; whom should I salute first? of course the Guru, because it is he who showed me Govind.

Guru is not a magician who produces Vibhuti and Watches shaking one's hands. Such charlatans are found in every nook and corner. There are any number of gurus who ask for a lakhs of rupees for Sri Vidya Mantropadesa. These are not Gurus.

Ramakrishna Paramahamsa would say that a true guru is like a cobra - the disciple-frog utters only three croaks before being swalled by the 'cobra'. On the other hand, if a water snake catches a frog, it is an agony both for the snake and the frog - neither it can swallow it or it can leave it.

Instead of waiting for Guru, one should make self effort to develop himself; when the fruit is ripe enough, the parrot will surely come to peck - it must come - Parikshit is an example - the 'Parrot' did indeed come.

Therefore, it is not very correct to say that the prasthana traya should be read under the guidance of a Guru only. If one is truly inclined to develop himself, it is possible even without a human guru - Ramakrishna Paramahamsa says 'Saccidananda is the true Guru'.

The traditional view that Upanishadic texts should be learnt under the guidance of guru is applicable only for those periods when there was no universal education. In this age of knowledge explosion, even a book could be a guru - if one is indeed willing and sincere. Misunderstanding could arise even when taught by a guru.
Last edited by vgvindan on 02 May 2008, 18:58, edited 1 time in total.

cmlover
Posts: 11498
Joined: 02 Feb 2010, 22:36

Post by cmlover »

VGV
In those days without any audio recorders, the correct intonation of the upanishads could only be taught by a guru. Further the prasthana tryam should be studied only after the dIkSha (initiation) and only the Guru can give the dIkSha!

krishnanrasika
Posts: 20
Joined: 01 Mar 2008, 15:37

Post by krishnanrasika »

Hari Om.
Fully agree that one should not follow a Guru blindly. Also, self-effort is involved in getting a Guru and this is part of the preparedness. However, the need of a live Guru/Teacher cannot be excluded just because there are so many fake Gurus floating to make a quick buck. (Just because there are fake doctors drinking the blood of innocent patients, do we exclude the need of a specialist when we are seriously ill? Would we choose to do self-study for a University degree or strive for admission in the most reputed institution?).

History will give us examples of many Mahatmas who are jnanis and attained liberation without a live Guru. Sri Ramana Maharshi is another oft-quoted example - my inference from those Mahatmas are
a) Exceptions cannot be the rule
b) Do we know what preparation they went thru and how many Gurus they had in their previous lives ?

Books/Cds etc. will give us plenty of information (or even misinformation). But we need the dialogue with a Teacher to turn that information into knowledge. There are plenty of books on self-medication, but when our life is at stake would we refer the books and try self-medication or approach a qualified dosctor (after due verification of their expertise)? My humble submission is that the study of Bhagavad Gita should be considered with equal or more seriousness as compared to attending to an illness of our body.

Another important aspect while learning under a Guru is 'Shradha'. There is no real english equivalent for this word, but the nearest is 'open-mindedness', the attitude required while learning is 'I could be wrong, there may be something new for me to learn'... Again referring to the Bhagavad Gita, it is called 'Sri Krishna Arjuna SAMVADA'. A Samvada is a dialogue where there is an intetion of learning and mutual benefit as opposed to proving the other party wrong or to establish that one knows better than the Teacher.

Tad-vijnanartham sa gurum evabhigacchet, samit-pani srotriyam brahma-nistham.
[To understand these things properly, one must humbly approach, with firewood in hand (dry firewood represents our mind which is dry of ego and will catch the fire of knowledge even with a small spark), a spiritual master who is learned in the Vedas and firmly devoted to the Absolute Truth" (Mundaka Upanisad).]

Lord Krishna did not start the teaching to Arjuna as a soon as Arjuna started talking about his problems and his decision to run away from the battle field, Krishna started the teaching only after Arjuna requested him to accept him as his student (Ch2.7 ...sishyasteham shaadi maam tvam prapannam..).

My submission is that there is a whole lot to be understood in Ch.1 and initial verses of Ch.2 (even in the Gita dhyana shlokas) before jumping to a discussion on verse Ch.2.47.

I may be wrong in my views and if so, I stand to be corrected.

Pranams
Krishnan

vgvindan
Posts: 1430
Joined: 13 Aug 2006, 10:51

Post by vgvindan »

cml,
My concern is not with regard to intonation - it is vAchyArtha and lakshyArtha.
If I go by the stipulation that I need dIksha, I would not be entitled to write in these posts.
I humbly beg to differ with you.

vasanthakokilam
Posts: 10956
Joined: 03 Feb 2010, 00:01

Post by vasanthakokilam »

One problem I see with the Guru-Disciple way of imparting knowledge is that the disciple usually becomes 'slavish' to the ideas of the Guru. That is why there are 'schools of thought' that are established by Gurus even in interpreting the same holy book. The disciple instead of learning from the Guru in an intellectually honest way, for whatever socialogical and psychological reasons, accepts the Guru's interpretation.

I do not devalue the significance of the teacher at all. Far from it. What will be ideal is if the Guru is confident enough that he/she allows the disciple to question the interpretation and debate it. If the Guru convinces the disciple through such mechanisms that his interpretation and meaning makes sense, that would be the ideal way to teach. I am not sure how many such supremely self confident Gurus exist. If they regurgitate what has been taught to him by his guru, then he may not be accomodative to that kind of a Guru-Disciple relationship.

vgvindan
Posts: 1430
Joined: 13 Aug 2006, 10:51

Post by vgvindan »

Tad-vijnanartham sa gurum evabhigacchet, samit-pani srotriyam brahma-nistham.
[To understand these things properly, one must humbly approach, with firewood in hand (dry firewood represents our mind which is dry of ego and will catch the fire of knowledge even with a small spark), a spiritual master who is learned in the Vedas and firmly devoted to the Absolute Truth" (Mundaka Upanisad).]
krishnanrasika,
We are not living in the age of Manduka Upanishad - otherwise, we would not be discussing such issues in open forums.

I fully subscribe to the view of VK that the intention is 'not to devalue the significance of the guru'. But, pray tell how many brahma-nishThas are here - and of them, who would be willing to agree to questioning about their own competence by prospective disciple? If you know one, please let me know by private mail, so that I can approach him. It is not a ridicule - sincerely.

Kindly refer to BG - Arjuna questions Krishna at every step. Ultimately the Lord condescends 'yathA icchasi tathA kuru'. That is the spirit of true guru, unless the disciple makes a prapatti. Kindly also refer to the comments of Annie Besant on the episode of vastrAparaharaNa -
“The Gopis were Rishis, and the Lord Supreme as a babe is teaching them a lesson. But there is more than that. There is a profound occult lesson behind the story. When the Soul is approaching the Supreme Lord at one great stage of initiation, it has to pass through a great ordeal. Stripped of everything on which it has hitherto relied, stripped of everything that is not its inner self, deprived of all external aid, of all external protection, of all external covering, the soul itself, in its own inherent life, must stand naked and alone, with nothing to rely on save the life of the Self within it. If it flinches before the ordeal, if it clings to anything to which it has hitherto looked for help, if in the supreme hour, it cries out for friend or help, or even the Guru himself, the soul fails in that ordeal. Naked and alone it must go forth, with absolutely none to aid it save the divinity within itself. And it is that nakedness of the soul as it approaches the supreme goal, that is told of in that story.â€
Last edited by vgvindan on 02 May 2008, 21:51, edited 1 time in total.

Post Reply