My jignyaasaa is probably leading me more & more towards apparent contradictions between stated manuals of "paddhatis" & those of revealed texts.
Just take these two :
(1) सर्व धर्मान् परित्यज्य मामेकं शरणं व्रज
(2) मानसं वाचिकं पापं कर्मणा समुपार्जिथम् श्री राम स्मरणेन एव व्यपोहति न शंशयः
The first is Lord Krishna's final words of succor to Arjun when the Lord finds the latter still in confusion after over 700 verses & even the vishwa roopa darshan etc. He could have said this right at the beginning, without going thru elaborate treatise on evolution.
Which makes it clear that "release from bondage" is not so simple. "All is Krishna's marzi" kind of mindset is to be preceded by an understanding of the various processes, following them with utmost trust that "deliverance" is assured, even while surrendering unconditionally.
Take the other : This is a samkalpam part right at the beginning of every "Maha Samkalpam" in Upakarma, or a ritual bath in the Ganges etc. If one trusts this - and I have no reason not to believe that this indeed was the intention of the seers when these were prescribed -- to follow this up with naming every conceivable papa vimochanam part in the same samkalpam, appears to me as highly illogical if not totally "negating" the former part.
(After tying up Hanuman with a Brahma Astram he is tied up with an ordinary rope and the effect of the former is negated is a common enough story related to us in childhood.)
Ideally, if instead, after an elaborate samkalpam followed by a ritual of say a certain number of dips in the Ganga, this "Rama smaranam" part is finally introduced, as if to say -- like Krishna to Arjun -- "Arre bhaiya just surrender unto me", it would make for a far better means to understand the path of evolution from mere belief to faith to ultimate surrender in total Trust.
Do I make sense?.......
Love
Ekalavya alias Vichu
Just take these two :
(1) सर्व धर्मान् परित्यज्य मामेकं शरणं व्रज
(2) मानसं वाचिकं पापं कर्मणा समुपार्जिथम् श्री राम स्मरणेन एव व्यपोहति न शंशयः
The first is Lord Krishna's final words of succor to Arjun when the Lord finds the latter still in confusion after over 700 verses & even the vishwa roopa darshan etc. He could have said this right at the beginning, without going thru elaborate treatise on evolution.
Which makes it clear that "release from bondage" is not so simple. "All is Krishna's marzi" kind of mindset is to be preceded by an understanding of the various processes, following them with utmost trust that "deliverance" is assured, even while surrendering unconditionally.
Take the other : This is a samkalpam part right at the beginning of every "Maha Samkalpam" in Upakarma, or a ritual bath in the Ganges etc. If one trusts this - and I have no reason not to believe that this indeed was the intention of the seers when these were prescribed -- to follow this up with naming every conceivable papa vimochanam part in the same samkalpam, appears to me as highly illogical if not totally "negating" the former part.
(After tying up Hanuman with a Brahma Astram he is tied up with an ordinary rope and the effect of the former is negated is a common enough story related to us in childhood.)
Ideally, if instead, after an elaborate samkalpam followed by a ritual of say a certain number of dips in the Ganga, this "Rama smaranam" part is finally introduced, as if to say -- like Krishna to Arjun -- "Arre bhaiya just surrender unto me", it would make for a far better means to understand the path of evolution from mere belief to faith to ultimate surrender in total Trust.
Do I make sense?.......
Love
Ekalavya alias Vichu
In one of Her readings Ambaal said, "Yevan therinjaacchu (or thelinjaacchu?) enru cholraano avan therunjukkalaiinnu therinjukko". While this might mean that in the spiritual space of complete clarity there is no urge to proclaim that, we may wish to draw a limited wisdom from this that we are safe after all from that illusion as long as we keep running into one contradiction or the other. So let us indulge in the contradictions that have presently sprung up before us.
ReplyDeleteThe Bhagavatgeetha is an exposition (upadesham) of the Ultimate Truth by the Ultimate Guru who is the Lord Himself to the the ultimate shishya symbolised by Arjuna. Arjuna therefore is an uttamaadhikaari who is confronted with contradictions at the highest levels of his contemplation into dharmam and adharmamam and ultimate Truth. The Lord may have exclaimed about his "confusion" in a manner of shaking him up into purposeful action but knew that Arjun was ready to receive the highest knowledge. Arjun's already refined understandings of dharmam and adharmam and the Truth beyond these had necessarily to be reinforced before reminding him of the final step of giving up even all this so called understanding, in total surrender. Here was an Uttamaadhikaari to be goaded into action, totally surrendering however the false sense of doership behind those actions. Who else but the Lord could reconcile to Arjun's complete satisfaction, the fundamental contradiction between the inevitability and illusion of purposeful action. From the quality of the contradictions that we face, it appears we are getting ready too for His Grace to enlighten us. Meanwhile we should perhaps guard against letting doubts masquerade for their own sake as earnest enquiry.
Contd..... Gulpa
Upaakarma is an annual ritual designed for the adhamaadhikaaris among us who skip the minimum daily sandhyaavandanam and go on to do everything that leads the soul to its downfall. It becomes necessary to delineate all such acts that cause harm to the soul's welfare so that each of us has some chance to reflect somewhere and do something about it. A guy thoroughly unqualified for performing any rites has to pass thru a minimum purificatory process before he may be considered to have qualified even to perform the upaakarma and hence he must invoke Shri Rama for that before he even starts the ritual. Our external environment today is so completely bereft of aachaaram that even those of us who may consider ourselves reasonably qualified may want to remember Sri Rama to feel clean enough to do the upaakarma. I therefore do not see a contradiction in the order of the mantraas here.
ReplyDeleteYes, if the Rishis were in a mood that you get into often, they could have added, "Madia" at the end of that preliminary sankalpam.
There is in Shri Gnyaanaananda Bharati's book, Sanaatana Dharma, a chapter titled Elements of Experience- Progress only in stages, which is bang on the " contradiction" between the "paddhatis" and the "revealed texts". I will type it out and mail it to you one of these days.
Gulpa
Beautiful. Just a limited point, after saying that rama naama will wash away all sins, there is no need to repeat 100 different varieties of sins later..... "madaya" would have been an excellent addition as suggested.
ReplyDeleteVichu
As I reflect further, Adi Shankara has used this very word " Moodamathe" in Bhaja Govindam.... My "madaya" is derived from this? I am flattered & humbled both at the same time......
ReplyDeleteVichu