[Advaita-l] Dharma is for a body (was Re: : Sankhya and Yoga can give Moksha?)
sjayana at yahoo.com
Fri Jun 15 13:37:13 CDT 2012
Dharma or moral action is to be performed by means of a body. For example, dAna or charity is a dharma. It doesn't matter how much one "thinks" or "wants" or "yearns" to give money to a deserving person if one doesn't PHYSICALLY pick up the money and give it away, there is no dharma being done. Similarly, for Vedic rituals - it is imperative that they are diligently followed by an actual application of effort using the body, or they don't count.
("The road to hell is paved with good intentions")
Dharma is also specific to the particular body that exists at the present. If one is a king in one's body at present, one must perform a king's duties -- it doesn't matter if one was a dog or a lion in a previous body. The past body is irrelevant in the performance of dharma by the present body.
"Mano-nigraha is a parama-dharma" according to Swami Vidyaranya in the Jivan-mukti Viveka, and it is well-known that mano-nigraha is Yoga (e.g. Gita 6.35-36). Of course, it is always good to feel compassion while giving charity and it is commended -- but it must again be emphasized that the action of giving charity must be physically performed by the body.
So far as the karta is concerned - it is NOT the AtmA (Gita 3.27), for the GYAnI who knows the Self engages in no work (Gita 3.17).
From: Sudhakar Kabra <sudhakarkabra at yahoo.com>
To: S Jayanarayanan <sjayana at yahoo.com>; A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2012 7:11 PM
Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Dharma is for a body (was Re: : Sankhya and Yoga can give Moksha?)
--- On Fri, 6/15/12, S Jayanarayanan <sjayana at yahoo.com> wrote:
>From: S Jayanarayanan <sjayana at yahoo.com>
>Subject: [Advaita-l] Dhar is for a body (was Re: : Sankhya and Yoga can give Moksha?)
>To: "advaita" <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
>Date: Friday, June 15, 2012, 12:27 AM
>>Dharma is moral action for a body.(Yoga is a "Higher Dharma" for the mind, but that's a different matter).
>Dharma being an act, there has to be a karta. The phala of dharma accrues to the karta as per the bhavana it is being done and the proper procedure prescribed in the scriptures. Incidentally yoga is not a higher dharma of mind..
>The result of a finite act will always be finite. >Then how is it that Dharma, which is moral or ethical action enjoined on the body, actually helps with Self-realization?
>Dharma helps to attain chitta shuddhi, which is required for the shuddha jnana to arise. >H.H. Chandrasekhara Bharati MahaswamigaL says (I think in His biography, am quoting the gist from memory here) that the Shastras enjoin action for which the results cannot be seen. One therefore performs the action with the belief that the result may be achieved in another life (different from the present one). This raises the conviction that the Self is NOT the (present) body! >In other words, by performing the rituals that are enjoined by the Vedas, one automatically obtains the conviction that the Self and the body are different!
>Even after getting the conviction that the self and the body is different, the result is still incomplete. The ultimate proclamation of the vedanta is "you are that" - and that is achieved by jnana through realization only.
>Sudhakar kabra ________________________________ From: sriram <srirudra at vsnl.com>To: S Jayanarayanan <sjayana at yahoo.com>; A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> Sent: Thursday, June 14, 2012 4:32 AMSubject: Re: [Advaita-l] : Sankhya and Yoga can give Moksha? Dear Sri S.JayanarayananIf one behaves according to the dharma of their body will it not mean that there is identification of athma as a dhehi ?I think better it is if said that dharma of their ashram.R.Krishnamoorthy.----- Original Message ----- From: "S Jayanarayanan" <sjayana at yahoo.com>To: "advaita" <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>Sent: Wednesday, June 13, 2012 10:10 PMSubject: Re: [Advaita-l] : Sankhya and Yoga can give Moksha?Bhaskar YR bhaskar.yr at in.abb.com wrote:>> Just as Rama showed an apparent ignorance of his real nature, so too did Sankara show an apparent ignorance of his real nature.>> Sankara was playing the role of a king and gave his
disciples an opportunity to show their devotion to their Guru,>> in the same way as Brahma received an opportunity to show his devotion to Vishnu.> rAmO vigrahavAn dharmaH, I dont think like shankara in DV, rAma too engaged himself in sva-varNAshrama nishiddha activities.Dharma is specific for a given body. "Sankara" in the body of the king behaved perfectly according to the dharma of a king or ruler.> IMHO, justification like this can be given on each & every questionable activity of the person whom we believe he is jnAni or our Acharya, is it not??Not so. Just as Sankara in his original body behaved perfectly according to the rules of dharma of a Sannyasi, so too we would expect all Acharyas (and indeed everyone) according to the dharma of their body.> Since we are the ardent follower of bhagavatpAda, he is our paramAchArya we some how have to defend his activities as accounted in> dig-vijaya (DV). But an outsider, an objective reader would not let
his readings swayed by the subjective attachment to the personality in question.I cannot speak for subjective views of arbitrary people.> For that matter, the author of DV doesnot provide this type of justification for shankara-s 'sva-varNAshramaviruddha activities'. Instead, shankara here defends his stand (withregard to his parakAya pravesha) on various other grounds. And theauthor does not give even a hint for us to believe that shankara here givingan opportunity to his disciples to prove their guru bhAkti. OTOH,he emphasizes, shankara in king's body, completely lost himself and wasenjoying 'nirargaLa brahmAnanda' from the sexual relations with antaHpurastree-s!! He also says, shishya-s of shankara had to sing 8 different songsto wake him up...And even after realizing his true svarUpa shankara inDV does not say anything about apparent & temporary forgetfulness ofhis real nature for the sake of his shishya-s. If shankara's forgetfulnessis for the
noble cause, I wish the author of DV could have said it somewhere.Again, that is not unlike the Valmiki Ramayana where Brahma had to "remind" Rama of his real nature being Vishnu. Valmiki Ramayana also does not say Rama's ignorance is apparent.> Anyway, I heard this type of story evenin vishnu's varAha avatAra also. In this case nArada had taken thetrouble to take vishNu out of varAha, which was enjoying happily with wife& kids in the gutter :-))>> In fact, Sankara even says in the Dig-Vijayam, "I am equal to Maha-Vishnu".> Yes, our bhagavatpAda, despite all theseDV exaggerations, is brahma, vishNu, maheshvara svarUpa for us. Hencethe chanting gururbrahma, gururvishNu gurudevO maheshwaraH..> Kindly pardon me prabhuji, this is my lastpost on this subject, whatever reply you give to this is final.Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!bhaskar_______________________________________________Archives:
http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaitaTo unsubscribe or change your options:http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-lFor assistance, contact:listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org _______________________________________________Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaitaTo unsubscribe or change your options:http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-lFor assistance, contact:listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list