|
||
|
| ||
|
Sri Hari
GURUJI SRI MURALIDHARA SWAMIGAL MISSION |
||
 | ||
|
SWAMIGAL SPEAKS |
MISSION |
NÃMA BHIKSHA KENDRA |
VEDA PATASHALA |
PUBLICATIONS/PERIODICALS |
|
||
|
|
||
|
| ||
|
Sri Hari
GURUJI SRI MURALIDHARA SWAMIGAL MISSION |
||
| ||
|
SWAMIGAL SPEAKS |
MISSION |
NÃMA BHIKSHA KENDRA |
VEDA PATASHALA |
PUBLICATIONS/PERIODICALS |
|
||
|
Premika Bhavanam
4th September, 2001 Devi Kãlotram - Day 9 Page 1 Page 2
Sri Sri Swamiji has been rendering 'Upanyãs' (discourses) in Tamizh. This is being brought to you here. There may appear to be variations in the 'tense' of the language. This is due to the fact that great effort has been taken to maintain the original style of the 'Upanyãs'. Therefore, we request you to keep this in mind while reading the translated 'words' of Sri Sri Swamiji.
"One who has the real feeling, 'Lord! I have attained this janma. I should somehow cross this janma; should not attain another janma' is the real 'mumukshu'. Such a person will exert effort to attain Jnãna." -- Sri Sri Swamiji Sri Sri Swamiji,
'Shruti, Smriti, Purãnãnãm, Ãlayam Karunãlayam
"HARE RÃMA HARE RÃMA RÃMA RÃMA HARE HARE " The question, "Who is the one who attains 'Ãtmasãkshãtkãra' (Self-Realization)?" arises only in one who has not understood Advaita. Those who advocate dvaita philosophy argue in the following way, 'Let us say that a boat is sailing on a smooth flowing river. Cool breeze is blowing. The plants and trees on the banks are filled with colorful, fragrant flowers. The full-moon is resplendent with all its splendor. The melody of a flute fills the ears. Will a person on the boat desire to enjoy this or reach his place of destination? In dvaita (the 'enjoyer'- the subject and the 'enjoyed' - the object), one is able to enjoy these. What joy would be found in advaita state?' But, this is not the right argument, for, unless we know the joy that is to be earned we cannot judge which is greater, the present state or the other state. There is no doubt that this ('Dvaita') is enjoyable. But, without any knowledge about the other state one cannot arrive at a conclusion regarding the greatness in joy - in duality or in Oneness. Only when one has experienced both states can he realize which 'ãnanda' is greater. But, in advaita state a person is unable to enjoy anything else. This is because there is no 'Dwaita Prapancha' (no world apart). Whatever is being enjoyed in the world is only a 'brãnti' (delusion) of the 'manas'. This also is only a manifestation of the Ãtma Chaitanya. Yogis know the behavior ('chestai') of the 'manas' - of others' as well as their own. What do they do? They watch the state of one whose 'manas' is in a high state of joy. At this stage, it has subsided in the place of origin. When the 'manas' subsides, a great happiness is experienced. When the joys of the 'indriyas' (senses) are experienced, the 'manas' rests in the place of origin. This is the reason that we experience happiness. This can be found when we enjoy music. When our whole concentration is in music, while singing or playing an instrument, the 'manas' is in the place of origin. This creates happiness in us. In the same way, when we see the beauty of nature, the 'manas' gets one-pointed by itself. Only when the 'manas' gets one-pointed is happiness experienced. Ramana explains wonderfully as to when the 'manas' experiences joy - 'Thanakku priyammana porul kai kooduvadãlum, priyamillãda porulukku nãsam erpaduvadãlum' that is, when one secures the object of desire and when the object of aversion gets destroyed!' - When some problem arises for a person whom we dislike we feel happy! At such times the 'manas' rests in the place of origin. This is the behavior ('chestai') of the 'manas'. Thus, when we undergo any happiness, it is only 'Ãtmãnanda'. But, this is only a minute percentage of the great 'Ãtmãnanda'. The ratio of this 'Ãtmãnanda' differs. There is no contradiction in the fact that the full joy of 'Ãtmãnanda' is found only in 'poornãnanda' (completeness). Therefore, sailing in a boat enjoying the music of a flute is no doubt enjoyable but is not the right parallel to be drawn for 'Ãtmãnanda'. Similarly, another example is also given. A bee drinks honey. Which is greater joy? - 'Being a bee and drinking the honey or the bee falling into and getting drowned in honey? This again is not the right argument. Honey is 'jada' (insentient). When the bee falls into the honey, it dies. Then, how can it enjoy the honey?
Therefore, 'Poornãnanda' is only within you. That is only 'Chitswaroopa'.
Innumerable examples can be cited. It may come close to describing the 'Ãtmãnanda' but, it is very difficult to describe the highest 'vasthu' (object) in totality. Advaita can be understood only if grasped properly. Doubts will not arise only if you understand advaita properly. Who attains 'Ãtmasãkshãtkãra' (Self-Realization)? Who attains 'Ãtmãnanda' (the Bliss of the Self)? Who is enjoying this 'Ãtmasãkshãtkãra'? - If these queries arise in one's mind it only goes to show that he has not understood advaita. How can there exist another object of experience? If this object is 'jada' (insentient), how can it be experienced? It cannot be! If it were Chaitanya, then it would amount to the presence of two Chaitanya. If there were two Chaitanya then one should contain more 'ãnanda' and the other less of it. If both have equal 'ãnanda' then one need not attain the other but remain in his own 'ãnanda'. If one Chaitanya has more 'ãnanda' and another less of it, then there is existence of two - one who experiences and the other that is being 'experienced'. But, here the one who experiences is Chaitanya and all the things being experienced are 'jada'. Therefore, two cannot exist. The existence of a second is only a 'brãnti' (illusion). Brahman desired to create the world. Upanishad says, 'So kãmayata bahusyãm prajãyeya', that is, there arose a desire in Brahman to create this universe. So it took a 'roopa' in order to create this universe. This is called the 'saguna' (God with form). This 'saguna' is no different from Brahman in any aspect. It has no 'prãkrita sambhanda' (relation with 'prakriti' or Mãya) connection. It remains 'aprãkrita' (beyond Mãya). It can be said as 'Krishna'. Ãchãraya, in Prabodha Sudhãkaram, speaks of Krishna as 'Jagat srishti karta' (creator of the Universe). This 'saguna' began to create the world. Visishtãdvaitiis repeatedly question, 'With what did Bhagavãn create this world?' There must have been something with which creation must have been done. Is that not so? A potter needs mud to make a pot. Potter is the 'karta' (creator). Making the pot is the act. Mud is the item used to make the pot. Now, Bhagavãn must have used some object to create this world. These people refer to this object as 'prakriti'. They say that Bhagavãn created this world with 'prakriti'. If Bhagavãn had carried out his work of creation with 'prakriti', the question arises, 'Did this 'prakriti' exist even before Bhagavãn? Or is it of the same Age?' If the 'prakriti' is of the same Age/period as Bhagavãn then the philosophy ('tattva') that 'there was only One, there is only One and there will always be only One' will get defeated. Upanishads say, 'sa ekah!' There always IS only One! Therefore, there are no two. Well! How is this 'prakriti'? It has come out of Bhagavãn. Srimad Bhãgavatam speaks of the spider weaving its web. The spider uses the thread from within it and weaves the web. If it has not been woven properly, the spider swallows it back. The spider does not undergo any physical change due to the thread being brought out of its body nor when swallowed back. The spider does not thin down when the thread is brought out to weave the web nor does it fatten up when it is swallowed back. There is absolutely no change in the spider. In the same manner, Bhagavãn let out this 'prapancha' only from His own Self. He holds it within Himself as He runs the 'prapancha' and finally draws it unto Himself. Therefore, when we look at it in the 'riiti' (angle) 'Sarvam Brahmamayam' (all is verily Brahman), the whole 'prapancha' is verily Bhagavãn. 'Drishti' (perception) has to be transformed into 'Jnãnamaya' (knowledge). Here, questions such as, 'who experiences? who attains?' should not arise. If it does, it only goes to show that you have not comprehended Advaita. What is deep within? - Beyond this physical 'sariira' (body), the 'pancha kosa' (five sheaths) and all sorts of 'karanas'? Only Chaitanya. It is only the Chaitanya that is spread ('vyabithhu') all over the Jagat. It cannot even be said as 'spread all over'. IT ONLY IS! If it is deemed as spread all over, then there has to be a space where something remains spread. Therefore, IT ONLY IS! Only IT can know ITSELF. It is verily 'ãnandamaya'. It comprehends ITSELF and enjoys ITSELF. Therefore, it is not the 'Ãtma' that goes out when a person dies. The 'Ãtma' neither leaves nor comes. It is only the 'sukshma sariira' (the subtle body) that leaves the physical body. Only in the case of a Jnãni, the 'gatãkãsa' mingles with the 'Mahãkãsa'. For the ordinary man, the 'Ãtma' remains bound in the subtle body just as it was earlier in the physical body. Do you understand? It was only because of the Chaitanya within, the physical body could see, eat, hear, talk, and run about here and there. In the same way it is only because of Its existence in the subtle body that the latter moves about. There is some experience in each loka as per its (the subtle body) 'prãrabdha'. There has to be some Chaitanya to undergo these varied experiences in each loka. Therefore, the 'Ãtma' remains bound in this physical body due to 'ajnãna' (ignorance). The one in 'sukshma sariira' (subtle body) also has 'manas'. One who has 'manas' is bereft of Jnãna. (A devotee asked, 'In 'parakãya pravesha' (entering into another body) it is only the 'sukshma sariira' (subtle body) that goes into another body. What happens to this physical body? Sri Sri Swamiji, 'This body will be in a state similar to coma as there is no 'manas'. The 'manomaya sariira' (subtle body) has left. There will not be any movement ('chestai') in this 'sariira'. But the life ('jivan') exists. In 'parakãya pravesha', when the 'manomaya sariira' leaves the physical body, it is connected to the physical body through a thin silver string from the spinal cord. This does not get cut. It remains connected to the physical body. If something happens to the physical body before the 'manomaya sariira' rejoins it, nothing can be done. Then, the subtle body will keep wandering about.') Thus, if the question 'who attains or enjoys 'Ãtmãnanda'' arises in one, it goes to show his inability to comprehend Advaita. 'Irukkinren enkalaiyodu yeinda chaitanya uru sathhi ahdãl ollirum prapancham' - This diverse world seen by you is only the manifestation ('vellipãdu') of 'Ãtma Chaitanya'. The 'mano shakti' just above the Chaitanya gives life to this 'prapancha' and creates the Mãya of reacting with the chaitanaya - we go here and there, we speak of this country and that town, we speak of day and night, yesterday, today and tomorrow, the different incidents, etc. All these are sheer delusion ('mithyai'). This place and that place are also only delusion. The Sun does not rise up or go down. But, a 'jiivatvam' (life) is given to this illusory world. Why and how? Only due to the Chaitanya within! Due to the chaitanya within, a 'brãnti' (delusion) is born that all these have chaitanya (life). We react with these and experience joy and sorrow, profit and loss, anger and fear, etc. Do you understand?
'Athduvida mãgi arivolli mãthhiramãi
How is this Jnãna? It knows Itself. Therefore, it is verily Knowledge ('arivumayam').
The Chaitanya within is pulsating ever as 'I', 'I'. Only if you are able to reach this, will it be possible for you to attain the advaita state. 'Since, the advaita state can be 'attained' only through this, it is verily the seed for Jnãna,' says Bhagavãn. All these are swaroopa lakshanas (dispositions). Earlier, it describes the advaita state - It is without a second; It exists as verily the light of Knowledge ('Jnãna oli'); there will not be any 'drishya' (visions); it shines forth as a singe 'I'. Therefore, this is the seed for Moksha. Since, it is this 'Aham!' spurana (vibration as 'I') that will lead you to Moksha, it is verily called the seed for Moksha. The 13 verses that have been dealt with so far can be classified into one group. At first, a question was put forth for learning the way to attain Moksha. What was the way shown? Devi Kãlotram is the only way and there is no alternative. He then encourages you to move in this path without any fear. In the next verse, He says that the way that is followed to control your mind is the way to attain Moksha. Once the mind is controlled and destroyed, he becomes verily the Trinity, the devas and all the rest. You cannot attain this 'ãnanda' state through any karma. There is no karma to be done after attaining this state. One who is interested in Moksha need not go on pilgrimages, teerta yãtra or do dãna and dharma. One who does Moksha sãdhana sincerely would certainly reach Moksha even if he does not desire it. No example can be given to describe this 'ãnanda' of being One. Samsãra is nothing but only a very slight movement of the 'manas'. And finally, this 'I' is the seed for attaining Moksha. He then speaks of all other sãdhanas and condemns Yoga sãdhana as not being Moksha sãdhana.
'Chakarangal nãdigal sãrpaduma devatai While speaking on Atharvana Veda, we have already warned on putting forth foolish questions like, 'Can the Vedas advocate Mantras to punish others?' Deivam (god) holds spear, lance, conch, wheel, etc. in Its hands. Can we question this? The God that protects can also punish. Protection of the innocent can be carried out only with punishment of the wicked. The Vedas speak on the basis of 'adhikãri beda' (difference in the category of persons). It is different in the case of 'mumukshus' (spiritual aspirants). If you worship the 'poorna devata' (the complete/highest God) then you need not do upãsana of demi-gods like Surya, Sani, sukra, etc. These demi-gods are within the control of the highest Deity. But, another person may be advised to circumambulate the 'navagraha' (the nine planets ruled by nine devatas). Why? This is due to the difference in the nature of this person. He may not be able to do 'poorna upãsana'. One should possess 'maha viswãsa' (absolute faith) to do 'poorna upãsana'. Since they are interested not in Moksha but in some trivial worldly matter, they are advised on these lines. In the case of mumukshus, he crosses over the ''prãrabdha'' by silently undergoing whatever is his due. In upãsana, we firmly believe that the miseries that we have to face have come about due to our 'prãrabdha' and that we must uncomplainingly endure such troubles so that we get rid of our 'prãrabdha'. We can attain Moksha only if all these 'prãrabdhas' are got rid of. So a sãdhak has the maturity to take even such adverse situations in a healthy manner as he has absolute faith in God. But a common man cannot take such things. We should not question why yoga-sãdhana is being condemned? Ãchãrya says, in Vivekachoodãmani, 'Na yogena, na karmena, na sãnkhyena'. These texts describe Jnãna marga as the path to attain the ultimate. Jnãna is spoken as the direct path towards the goal as compared to yoga or other paths (by Ãchãrya and authors of such texts). In this particular Text, towards the end, there will seem to be even a suggestion that this highest is not attained even through Bhakti. Though Ãchãrya does not openly say so, there seems to be a slight suggestion of this idea, which is taken as a supportive text by those who consider Jnãna alone to be THE path. Those in the path of karma will say that Moksha can be attained only through karma. Examples are given to support their view. We may raise objections to their ideas. They say, 'There is a master. A servant works for him. The master would have laid down certain rules and regulations regarding punctuality and execution of work. If this servant does not follow any of these rules but only keeps singing the praises of the master, only a foolish master will help such a servant. If the master is shrewd and straight forward, he will ask the servant to stop praising him and carry on with his work.' So, those who advocate the path of karma say that God himself asks one to follow the Shãstras, which has been created by Him. He has declared that following the Shãstras alone pleases Him and not unnecessary songs of praise. But what do we say? We say - 'what if the master himself who pays us, allots the duty of praising him? Should we not follow his command? What does Bhagavãn say 'na yogaih, na sãnkhyaih, na tapasa…' - Neither yoga nor sankhya nor tapas will lead one to me. Only through Bhakti can one reach me. So He has laid down such rules and regulations. He has assured to save and bless those who do bhajan (sing His praises). Now, yoga is being taken up. One must clearly understand that yoga is not a wrong way. There are certain paths which are certainly not to be treaded by us and which are to be completely avoided. For instance, Vamachara mãrga is to be condemned. Mahãns opine that this mãrga is not to be followed at all and it is 'nishiddha'(not to be done). Even tantric path is not a desirable path. Even here, there is 'vaideeka tantra' (tantra along the lines of Veda) and another (tantra), which is used as a negative force. So, one must have no doubt that the path of yoga is not condemned like the above-mentioned paths. Jnãna is a much easier way than yoga and that is what is meant here. A tapasvi is immediately recognized (as the mark of his tapas is seen externally) but a jnani is not so easily recognized. We cannot know him to be one (Jnãni). He may just walk along the road like any other person. This is because, even tapas is 'possessed' but Jnãna is one's natural state! Hence, a person practicing japa, dhyana etc. might look different and some 'viseshatva'(some kind of specialty) might be seen in him. But no such thing can be noticed in a Jnãni. He appears to be like any other person. This is so because Jnãna is the real nature of everyone. But this Jnãna is the highest. Only those who desire fame, desire possession of some special attributes to command respect from others, would get caught in such things. But one, who is really in search of truth, will seek only Jnãna. Jnãna is the highest. So now he takes up yoga. Yoga can also help reach one attain the highest, but those who follow the path of Jnãna, need not practice yoga. One who is doing Ãtma vichãra need not do yoga. Secondly, vichãra is a much easier path than yoga. 'Chakkarangal' - Most of us know what is meant by 'Chakkarangal'. There are six 'chakras' along the spinal cord. 'Nãdigal' - there are totally 72,000 'nãdis' in a human body. 'Sãr paduma devathaigal' - this refers to the devatas who are the presiding deities of the six 'charkas'. We speak of Varãha murthi, Nrisimha, Matsya, Koorma etc. The visions of these devatas can be had at their respective 'chakras'. For this reason, they are called yoga devatas. What do those who worship Ambãl do? They talk of devatas like Varãhi etc. This corresponds to the Varãha devata. There is also an Ambãl with a lion face (corresponding to the Nrisimha devata) and one with a horse face. In Dharmasthala (state of Karnataka), only Siva is worshipped. Like the Buddhist, they do not accept any other god but have pictures depicting the yoga 'chakras' and their corresponding yoga devatas (deities). The vision of these devatas can be had at the respective 'chakras'. So 'sãr paduma devadaigal' refers to these devatas whose 'sãkshãtkãra' ('Realization') can be had at each 'chakra'. 'Akkarangal' - refers to the mantras for the particular devatas, mandala murtis like Surya (sun), Chandra (moon), agni (fire) etc. But, such yoga practices should be abandoned and only the direct path of Jnãna should be adopted. This yoga is generally referred to as 'ashtãnga' yoga as it has eight limbs, namely, yama, niyama, ãsana, prãnãyãma, prathyãhãra, dhãrana, dhyãna, Samãdhi. One cannot perform yoga sãdhanas through mere knowledge of these (eight limbs). Maha Periyava used to ask for a wooden seat and draw 'yantrãs' on this plank. On certain occasions, while in meditation, Periyava used to ask for 'mana-palaga' and draw yantras on these with rice flour. He then used to worship these 'yantras' and after a few days dissolve it in water ('visarjanam'). This is a kind of worship of the yoga devatas, by doing ãvãhana (installation) in the yantra prescribed in the Sri Vidya mãrga. Ãndavan Picchai also had several such experiences, which she wrote to Periyava. Periyava tore the paper into pieces, as the world cannot understand such things. Muthuswami Dikshithar sings on Goddess Meenãkshi of Madurai. He describes her as 'Dvãdasha kshetra nilaye'. There are twelve small 'chakras' between 'bhroo madhi' (centre point between the eye-brows) and 'sahasrãra' (mid point in the head). Apart from the six 'ãdhara' (major) 'chakras', there are several small 'chakras' between two 'ãdhara chakras'. Several places on the earth are marked out to represent the different parts of the body. For instance, Kãncheepuram is the Nãbhi (navel) of the earth. Madurai is the 'bhroo madhi' (center point between the eyebrows), which consists of these twelve 'chakras'. This is why Dikshithar sings 'Dvãdasha kshetra nilaye'. When Ãndavan Picchai visits Madurai, she undergoes all these experiences. She has, in fact, written down all these in a book where she describes the greatness of Madurai. In this book, she has given an account of all the experiences that she had in Madurai. So, all the Kshetra mãhãtmyas and sthala purãnas (history of the Holy place) are absolutely true. If there is a Kshetra mãhãtmya for Kapaleeswarar temple (Mylapore, Chennai, Tamizh Nadu), then it is absolutely true. So is the case with any other Kshetra mãhãtmya like Udupi etc. As our minds are filled with mundane things and feelings like 'kãma' (desires), 'krodha' (anger), 'bhaya'(fear), jealousy etc. and due to innumerable vãsanas we are blind to such divine secrets. They remain hidden from our eyes and perception. It is most improper for us to even cherish any desire to know these secrets because we do not deserve to know these secrets. I wonder if we have the darshan of the 'Archãvatãra' (idol of the Deity) properly. We may just look at the 'Archãvatãra' casually and leave the Temple. But, Mahãns experience all these. Many examples can be cited. As I have already told, Ãndavan Picchai has had such experiences. In the case of Ammãlu Ammãl, too, such experiences can be seen. She might not have visited a particular Kshetra; nor heard its sthala purãna earlier. But, in her songs, she would give exact details of the temple, its purãna etc. This is possible because of the experience she undergoes in these places during her very visit. Once she visited Udupi. Udupi has sthala purãna. " Page 1 Page 2 NOTE: Any discrepancy/lapse in the translated version of the Upanyãs is the sole responsibility of the person/s who translated the work from Tamizh into English.
Radhe Krishna |
|||
