[Advaita-l] Fwd: On some verses of the BhagavadgItA
vmurthy36 at gmail.com
Thu Mar 13 04:58:58 CDT 2014
In the Saura Purana there is Sloka 61 in 40th chapter saying Madhva is
Prachchanna Charvaka - Prachchanno Asau Mahaadushtash Chaarvaako Madhu
Samjnakaha. If they are saying Advaitis are like materialists demons they
themselves are also materialists. In Vaayu Stuti also they are saying *lAvaNyA
pUrNakA.ntA kuchabharasulabhAshleshhasammodasA.ndrAH *full breasted damsels
will embrace them when they go to Vaikuntha and give pleasure. The
Charvakas also are saying embraces of women are very pleasing. In the
Mahabharata Tatparya Nirnaya also Madhva has said Kaama is more important
than Dharma and Artha. He is making Vayu Putra Bheema to say this.
Bheema's saying is more important than other Pandavas.
On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 11:32 PM, V Subrahmanian
<v.subrahmanian at gmail.com>wrote:
> Here is a post that is taken up in parts for a response. My responses are
> in blue fonts.
> Some comments on Swami Sivananda's (SS) translation, which HS
> Manjunath quoted (without mentioning the source) --
> > But this clearly strikes against what Lord Krishna says in Chapter 4
> > 11, where he clearly states that whatever path people travel, all paths
> > to HIM alone.
> > Ye yathaa maam prapadyante taamstathaiva bhajaamyaham;
> > Mama vartmaanuvartante manushyaah paartha sarvashah.
> > In whatever way men approach Me, even so do I reward them; My path do men
> > tread in all ways, O Arjuna!
> 'yathA', 'tathA' are correlative pronouns (demonstrative proforms)
> mean 'in which manner', 'in that manner'. For example, the well known
> idiom - yathA rAjA tathA prajA - means 'the way Raja is, so are the
> Thus, the correct translation is - In whichever manner men worship Me,
> I reward them accordingly. 'Accordingly' is the equivalent of 'tathA'.
> SS' translation is wrong because it ignores tathaiva. tathaiva means
> 'in that manner only'. But SS has (probably) misread it as 'tathApi'
> (even so), despite Shankara's bhaashya on this verse being
> grammatically right. Therefore, SS' translation: In whatever way men
> approach me, even so I will reward them - is wrong.
> Quite on the contrary, the Lord is saying that the reward is according
> to the method of worship. Therefore, it does not, in anyway, support
> HS Manjunath's imagination that all souls will be rewarded mokSha
> irrespective of their approach.
> The expression 'even so' was used as early as in 1897 by Sri AllADi
> Mahadeva Sastri in his translation of the Bhagavadgita with the commentary
> of Sri Shankaracharya. It is this translation that has been used by Swami
> Shivananda. This translation is used in yet another book by a Swami of the
> Ramakrishna Order, though in part, but with the expression 'even so.' The
> modern meaning / usage of that expression could be seen as under:
> Definition of *EVEN SO*
> *:* in spite of that *:*
> Examples of *EVEN SO*
> 1. <I know you claim not to care about the breakup; *even so*, you keep
> talking about it.>
> First Known Use of *EVEN SO*
> Related to *EVEN SO*
> Synonyms however <http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/however>,
> howbeit <http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/howbeit>,
> nonetheless <http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/nonetheless>,
> notwithstanding <http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/notwithstanding
> still <http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/still>, still and
> though <http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/though>,
> yet <http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/yet>
> Related Wordsafter all <
> anyhow <http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/anyhow>,
> per contra <http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/per+contra>
> more <http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/even+so#related-to-more>
> However, in an old 'Concise Oxford Dictionary' first edition 1911, with me,
> there is an entry for the word 'even' with a remark as 'archaic' as:
> //neither more nor less than, just, simply, as *e*. (quite) *so*,
> (emphasizing identity) that is as *God*, *e*. *our own God*. //
> The scanned page containing the above is attached herewith. Thus, the
> usage by SS does not deviate from the correct meaning of the verse: The
> Lord responds to the devotee in the *same proportion* to the devotee's
> approach; neither more nor less.
> > The Divine and Demoniacal nature relates to creatures in THIS WORLD. Lord
> > does not say that these qualities are permanently attached to souls.
> > qualities are only manifest attributes of the BEINGS IN THIS WORLD.
> Looks like Manjunath stopped reading Gita at 16th chapter 6th verse.
> It is understandable. After all, the next few verses detail how
> advaitins hold the world as not-real.
> The Bh.GitA verses of the 16th chapter that is alleged to refer to
> Advaitins are:
> प्रवृत्तिं च निवृत्तिं च जना न विदुरासुराः।
> न शौचं नापि चाचारो न सत्यं तेषु विद्यते।।16.7।।
> English translation by Swami Gambhirananda
> 16.7 Neither do the demoniacal persons under-stand what is to be done and
> what is not to be done; nor does purity, or even good conduct or
> truthfulness exist in them.
> असत्यमप्रतिष्ठं ते जगदाहुरनीश्वरम्।
> अपरस्परसम्भूतं किमन्यत्कामहैतुकम्।।16.8।।
> 16.8 They say that the world is unreal, it has no basis, it is without a
> God. It is born of mutual union brought about by passion! What other (cause
> can there be)?
> This verse is of special interest to the adversary of Advaita to hold that
> the Lord considers the Advaitin as asura. The reason is: 'Advaitins hold
> the world to be unreal.' However, here is the shAnkara bhAShya in part
> for the 16.7 and the present verse: न शौचं नापि च आचारः न सत्यं तेषु
> विद्यते; अशौचाः अनाचाराः मायाविनः अनृतवादिनो हि आसुराः।।किं च -- [Nor only
> do they not know what is to be done and what is not to be done, na, nor;
> does shaucam, purity; na api, or even; AcArah, good conduct; or satyam,
> truthfulness; vidyate, exist; tesu, in them. The demons are verily bereft
> of purity and good conduct; they are deceitful and given to speaking
> असत्यं यथा वयम् अनृतप्रायाः तथा इदं जगत् सर्वम् असत्यम्, अप्रतिष्ठं च न
> अस्य धर्माधर्मौ प्रतिष्ठा अतः अप्रतिष्ठं च, इति ते आसुराः जनाः जगत् आहुः,
> अनीश्वरम् न च धर्माधर्मसव्यपेक्षकः अस्य शासिता ईश्वरः विद्यते इति अतः
> अनीश्वरं जगत् आहुः। किं च, अपरस्परसंभूतं कामप्रयुक्तयोः स्त्रीपुरुषयोः
> अन्योन्यसंयोगात् जगत् सर्वं संभूतम्। किमन्यत् कामहैतुकं कामहेतुकमेव
> कामहैतुकम्। किमन्यत् जगतः कारणम्? न किञ्चित् अदृष्टं धर्माधर्मादि
> कारणान्तरं विद्यते जगतः 'काम एव प्राणिनां कारणम्' इति लोकायतिकदृष्टिः
> इयम्। [16.8
> Te, they, the demoniacal persons; ahuh, say; that the jagat, world; is
> asatyam, unreal - as we ourselves are prone to falsehood, so is this whole
> world unreal [see an episode about Duryodhana and YudhiShThira below]*;
> apratistham, it has no basis, it does not have righteousness and
> unrighteousness as its basis; it is anisvaram, without a God-nor is there a
> God who rules this (world) according to rigtheousness and unrighteousness
> (of beings). Hence they say that the world is godless. Moreover, it is
> aparaspara-sambhutam, born of mutual union. The whole world is born of the
> union of the male and female impelled by passion. (That union is)
> kama-haitukam, brought about by passion. Kama-haitukam and kama-hetukam are
> the same. Kim anyat, what other (cause can there be)? There exists to other
> unseen cause such as righteousness, unrigtheousness, etc. Certainly, the
> passion of living beings is the cause of the world. This is the view of the
> materialists. ।।16.8।।
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list