#47268 - 09/17/03 08:23 PM
Janma Karma cha me divyam (4:9)
|
member
Registered: 02/12/00
Posts: 310
|
Janma Karma cha me divyam (4:9)
janma karma ca me divyam evam yo vetti tattvatah
tyaktva deham punarjanma naiti mam eti so’rjuna
I appear to be a person
Like any one else
My actions are also simple
Like any one else
But, both my appearance and actions
Have another dimension
Only few can see
The dimensions of divine appearance
And that of my divine acts
And he who can see from the divine angles
Gets liberated and merges into me (Parmatma) ||4:9||
Krishna is talking a different language here. He is suddenly on a different platform and is talking from a level where he really is. Soon after telling Arjun when and how he takes birth in the previous shlokas, he now is talking about how he is divya (divine) and how he is so exceptional (alokik).
What is so exceptional about Krishna? How is he so different from Arjun? To understand this let us approach it from a different angle. I have discussed previously about how netwok of ego is maya and how it can be understood by understanding cyberspace. Let us recap the story. You are born and have a name. You then go to school and call it your school. Soon there is your home, your school, your family and so on. All this is your sansar (world). You value this ‘your samsar’ so much. One day your time comes. You die and there goes your whole collection that you used to call yours. You are born again and the whole cycle starts again.
Now let us see what happens in cyberspace. You go to your computer and switch it on. You then sign on to your service provider and go on the internet. You check your email and surf the net. You then log off from the net and go to sleep. While you are away from your computer, the internet is still running as before.
The infrastructure is still there. You can come and use the internet any time. Even if Bill Gates has to send an email, he will need to use the same infrastructure. When you live your life in this world, you use the infrastructure that is there. When you die, your world might have disappeared, but the infrastructure continues to be there. It is very similar to your being away from the computer. Krishna has to use the same infrastructure as Arjun, you and me.
Krishna takes birth in special circumstances as described by him in 4:7-4:8. He has to then use the same infrastructure as you and me. We can see part of this infrastructure. What we can see is what we call our world. Krishna can see more than what we can see. He can see how this infrastructure affects the whole process of life after life. Who takes birth where is dependent on how healthy is this infrastructure. If the infrastructure is crumbly and is supportive for birth of Duryodhana, kansa, Dushashana etc then it has to be rectified. It is not an accident that Hitler, Musolini and Stalin type of people are born around same times. There is something wrong with the infrastructure.
We are born without our knowledge and we do not have any influence on how healthy the infrastructure is. Krishna takes birth with his full involvement. He comes here to correct the malfunctions in the infrastructure. The mayaspace has to be clean and uncontaminated. The cyberspace has to be virus free, and then only smoothe surfing is possible. Similarly, mayaspace has to be in a healthy state.
Krishna truly is exceptional in that regard. We all should try to work towards making the world a little better place before we die. That will help not only the people who are born but will help the whole process of who is likely to take birth. That is what Krishna means when he says that he comes for sustaining of the Dharma, which I have called the value system of this mayaspace.
The second part of this verse is quite interesting. How can knowing this fact about Krishna be liberating? The answer is in the process. Krishna is not talking about knowing it as a theoretical knowledge. Just remembering this fact like a parrot will not do. It has to sink in. It has to be a deeper understanding. We have to go through a process and by the time the process brings us to this understanding about Krishna, liberation would have happened. We shall explore this part in our next column and continue our discussion on Gita.
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#47271 - 10/15/03 04:23 PM
Re: Janma Karma cha me divyam (4:9)
[Re: ekrishna]
|
initiate
Registered: 04/20/03
Posts: 119
|
Quote:
Dear K:
Thanks for your post. I see that you do agree that there is a difference in knowing someone as we do and knowing Krishna.
I'm not sure what you mean by this. My point is simply that the phrase "merging into Krishna" has no basis in the original Sanskrit which you quoted, and as such, it has no place in any accurate translation of the same.
Quote:
I do not see much difference in attaining Krishna or saying merging into Krishna. What does attain mean? Some people have explained it by saying, "boond samamna sammond mein." That comes close to saying that the drop merges in to the oean.
Because Lord says "he attains Me," it does not logically follow that "merger" is the result of such attainment. There is no need to add such a meaning to what Krishna says, when the intent is to elucidate what exactly Krishna has said. If it is your belief that some merger occurs, then that is one thing. But Krishna's words should not be changed as if He were saying what you wanted Him to say; they should be translated accurately, without undue interpretation.
Interpretation is only required when the literal meaning of a statement leads one to an unacceptable meaning. For example, the phrase "his house on the Ganga" requires interpretation, since houses are not built on rivers; we understand that it actually refers to a house on the bank of the Ganga.
Krishna's statements in bhagavad-giitaa were spoken before an assembly of warriors, not sages accustomed to highly cerebral discourse full of hidden messages. Like the other scriptures in the puraana/itihaasa category, the giitaa was intended to enlighten even those individuals who did not have the qualification to study shruti. Consequently, we can understand that the style of speaking will generally be clear and straightforward, as it usually is in the Bhagavad-giitaa. Trying to assume that it will be highly allegorical, indirect, or unclear, will lead one to incorrect, illogical, and out of context meanings, all in the name of "interpretation."
Quote:
Attain to me is a language of Gyani
But such a meaning should not be assumed of Krishna until it can be proven that what Krishna has spoken is consistent with the understandings of the Gyani school you refer to. Otherwise, it is like putting the carriage before the horse.
You should translate literally first, and see if the conclusions of your school can be derived from Krishna's words. Then, if that has been established, you can go back and apply the assumptions of your school to an understanding of Krishna's words.
Quote:
while merging, surrendering, dissolving a language of Bhakta. This is not very dissimilar to shunya and Purna being explanation of same ultimate by two different angles.
I agree about the independent existence...and I have tried to explain that in what I have written.
Nowhere in bhagavad-giitaa is the "merging" or "dissolving" of the bhakta spoken of. This would contradict giitaa 2.12 in which the eternal nature of all these living entities is clearly established. It also contradicts the Upanishadic statement "nityo nityaaNaam chetanas chetanaanaam" which speaks of the eternal living entities and eternal Lord, both of whom are conscious. Furthermore, it contradicts giitaa 18.54 "brahma bhuuta prasanaatmaa" which defines the stage of attaining Brahman; in it, the living entity attains supreme devotion unto Krishna -- "mad-bhaktiM labhate paraam." The attainment of devotion presupposes a devotee and the object of devotion. By no stretch of the imagination can this be construed to refer to merger.
regards,
K
_________________________
H. Krishna Susarla M.D.
Achintya Mailing List
www.achintya.org
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
#47277 - 10/15/03 07:27 PM
Re: Janma Karma cha me divyam (4:9)
[Re: ekrishna]
|
initiate
Registered: 04/20/03
Posts: 119
|
Quote:
I'm still not clear on why you insist on believing that one's individuality is lost and that one has to merge into something. As I mentioned before, such concepts are not taught in Bhagavad-giitaa.
regards,
K
Reply:
For me it is not a belief or a concept and I do not need or want to insist. This is how I see it. Feel free to differ or contradict.
Of course, you are welcome to believe what you wish, and I do not dispute that right here. You are even welcome to privately believe that the Giitaa teaches what you want it to teach; that, too, I do not dispute.
But in a public arena such as this, those of us who study the Bhagavad-giitaa have an implicit responsibility to try to represent this sacred text accurately. It is not fair for the uninitiated to be led astray (even unintentionally) by man-made interpretations in the name of Krishna. Ordinary mortals such as you and I cannot create philosophy which can liberate anyone; this is because we are subject to certain defects: (1) having limited senses, (2) propensity to fall under illusion (maayaa), (3) tendency to cheat or be cheated, and (4) the tendency to make mistakes.
This is in contrast to the Supreme Lord, who has no such flaws. This is obviously understood from the definition of "God." So it is important to understand His words as He spoke them, without interpolating our own man-made ideas. For you and I, study of bhagavad-giitaa may be a hobby. But for others, it is a vital part of their search for liberation from the misery of this world.
To illustrate this point, let me give an example. If a child is starving and begs me for food, will it be very compassionate upon him if I draw a picture of food and give it to him? I can say, "see this is nice, I created it, it's my own design." But the child is still hungry. I have not actually helped him.
Similarly, the pure teachings of Krishna can help those who seek liberation, if they are not adulterated. If they are changed, then they are no longer His teachings.
The purpose of reading any book is to understand what it is actually saying, rather than to read one's own ideas into it. If one wants to do the latter, then why look at that book in the first place? In that case, simply write your own book and let it be judged on its own merits. Please do not take the name of "Bhagavad-giitaa" or "Krishna" as a vehicle for your own views. This sacred text must be understood as it is.
Quote:
I do differ from you that BG does not teach dissolving of ego.
Again, I do not know what you mean by "ego" in this case. Do you mean that Ego = individuality? I can say for a fact that there is no "dissolving of individuality" taught in bhagavad-giitaa. This is not a question of disagreement or interpretation. There is simply no evidence of such a concept in Bhagavad-giitaa, period.
If you feel otherwise, please quote the evidence which teaches dissolving of individuality. If it exists, then surely Krishna said it somewhere, would you not agree? I mean, it would be pretty silly to say that Krishna taught this in Giitaa when He nowhere spoke it.
Quote:
BTW, I am joining your e-group and hope to get some of your thinking from there. Nice to have interacted with you on this topic so far.
I approved your membership. Welcome. Please take some time to review the rules of posting. One of the main principles of this group is that when people write something, they must do so based on evidence (especially when it is requested). This prevents unfounded speculation from flourishing in a forum that is otherwise dedicated to discussion of the eternal truths of Sanaatana-dharma.
Please feel free to post any questions you have there. It can be a lively and very enlightening forum at times.
regards,
_________________________
H. Krishna Susarla M.D.
Achintya Mailing List
www.achintya.org
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Previous Topic
Index
