|
Post by kirtaniya on Jan 29, 2022 14:25:56 GMT -6
Nitai das ji, thank you for the comforting words and words of inspiration.
I would like to point out that for personal faith, determination and diligence, it can be helpful to know that liberation is never personal. This is the hidden meaning of chanting together.
It is customary to understand that some impressions come into our personal inner world, which in this inner world do not have obvious reasons. Therefore, there is an idea of what is "inside" and what is "outside".
It is against this division that the method of nonduality is directed. How does separation happen (in a provocative way, for those who think they understand, it can be formulated: who separates)?
Studying this question, I can see that the personal mind is simply a form of attachment. Not much different from a child's affection for a toy when he grabs it and says: "my car!"
|
|
|
Post by meeno8 on Jan 30, 2022 9:52:09 GMT -6
"No. I am sitting here nearly breaking my arm as I try to pat myself on the back. " No point in beating yourself up too much, Dr. Kermit... At any rate, leave the patting on your back up to us. I think you have well earned that over the years.
|
|
|
Post by meeno8 on Jan 30, 2022 9:57:21 GMT -6
Or should we call you Dr. Cookie Monster? Hey, try to go easy on those anise pizzelles, Pastry Chef Delmonico. Yeah, I know it's hard. I can attest to that from first-hand experience. Se la vie, alas.
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Jan 30, 2022 17:04:06 GMT -6
Or should we call you Dr. Cookie Monster? Hey, try to go easy on those anise pizzelles, Pastry Chef Delmonico. Yeah, I know it's hard. I can attest to that from first-hand experience. Se la vie, alas. Oops! Thanks for reminding me, bro. I totally forgot about those pizzelles I promised you and Carol (mostly Carol, I think). I will get right on it. Chef Boy-ard Delmonico at your service.
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Feb 26, 2022 10:32:20 GMT -6
Greetings Everyone, Wow! There has been a lot going on while I was away. First of all, thanks to Jagannath Misra Das for sharing his fine work, especially on the Oriya side of the CV tradition. It is great to fill in the gaps in our understanding of the tradition. Thanks also to Kirtaniya and Avadhutadas for thoughtful and thought-provoking posts. With all of the new materials recently posted it is going to take a while to read through and digest all of them. But don't let that stop anyone. Keep posting and keep discussing, please. We have much yet to explore. I was away for a weekend visiting my daughter, Jahnavi, and so was not able to check in much. In addition, I continue to work on my various projects which I worry about not being able to finish. Mahakala (Great Destructive Time) scares even Brahma (as we read in Sanatana Goswami's Brhad-bhagavatamrta this week). I should not fear it so much, though, I think. My hope is to return to the company of bhaktas in my next birth and perhaps pick up where I left off. Actually, maybe next time I will be smarter and know Sanskrit and Bengali better. The thought of returning to these lovely texts and to the Mahamantra in future births is very appealing to me. I think I can look Death in face and giggle. "Let's go bro!" Anyway, I still would like to finish as much as I can before Yama's dogs appear. I finished the fourth chapter of Skandha One of the Bhagavata and started chapter five. I will post more of that text when is has passed my dear wife's inspection. Sri Jiva's Sarva-samvadini on the first four sandarbhas is also making some headway. I am also doing Baladeva's comm. as well as Radhamohan Gosvami's comm. on the Tattva-sandarbha. Thinking about also adding Gaurakisora Gosvamin's comm. It depends on how much he repeats the points made by his predecessors. No need for an echo (at this time, at any rate: maybe later when my memory is gone and I only respond to present stimuli.). Sadly the Ujjvala-nilamani trans. has fallen by the wayside at present. I am thinking about changing the way I present it. I have done so much work on it that I hate to even think about not completing it. By the way, none of this is for the benefit of anyone else. I am a selfish bastard and only want to quench my own thirst for cognitive and emotional bliss. If anyone else benefits from my work, it is purely accidental.
|
|
|
Post by avadhutadas on Feb 26, 2022 11:03:46 GMT -6
Jai Nitai, Nitai das. Good to hear from you. I named my daughter Jahnavi too. 😊
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Feb 27, 2022 10:40:58 GMT -6
Jai Nitai, Nitai das. Good to hear from you. I named my daughter Jahnavi too. 😊 Congrats! Excellent choice. It is a beautiful name for a girl and connects her with a beautiful saint, a powerful woman. I must admit that it was my wife who loved the name the moment she heard it when we were discussing names for our gestating baby. We did not know whether it was to be a boy or girl. When she was born we only had a girl's name chosen. No boy's name had been chosen. Ma Jahnavi blessed us with a lovely girl who is, much like her namesake, trying to make the world a better, more compassionate place. Of course, the alternative name for Ma Jahnavi is Jahnava, but I find this less pleasing to the ear. For me, I imagine myself as an Ajamila on my death bed calling out to my daughter.
|
|
|
Post by avadhutadas on Feb 27, 2022 16:50:04 GMT -6
My wife isn't really interested in CV. I told her I wanted our child to have a devotee type name. I think she was a bit nervous. When I said "Jahnavi" she got teary eyed. Of course pregnancy hormones can do that to a person haha. I feel the same about myself and Ajamila as well.
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Mar 3, 2022 12:47:52 GMT -6
Thanks to Jagannath Misra Dasji for posting all these wonderful pieces from his translations.
Please keep us posted, Jagannath Misra Dasji, on your publications as they occur. Are you self-publishing or have you found a publisher? Not that it really matters. Self-publishing is as good as having a publisher, these days, with the modern printing technology. The only difference is in the advertising which good publishers will do for you.
Anyway, you are doing a valuable service for those of us who don't know Oriya and who are unaware of the major works of CV written and read by Orissan followers of Mahaprabhu. It is a terra incognita for me and, I am sure, for many of the others here as well.
जय राधे !
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Mar 3, 2022 13:12:21 GMT -6
My wife isn't really interested in CV. I told her I wanted our child to have a devotee type name. I think she was a bit nervous. When I said "Jahnavi" she got teary eyed. Of course pregnancy hormones can do that to a person haha. I feel the same about myself and Ajamila as well. My wife is not interested in CV much, either. She thinks it is beautiful, but does not want to become a bhakta. She is still recovering from Catholicism and leans towards non-dualism. But I love her and she encourages me in my translation work.
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Mar 5, 2022 12:40:49 GMT -6
I should add to my last post in this thread, about my wife's leaning towards non-dualism, that we all need to lean more towards non-dualism. It is an undeniable element of our tradition and yet we focus on the dualism of the tradition often to the exclusion of the non-dual. This is a major flaw in modern CV and one probably exacerbated by what I still believe to be a faux connection with the Madhva tradition. Even Madhva, though, accepts non-dualism. Here is what he teaches: According to Madhva there are two orders of reality: 1. svatantra, independent reality, which consists of Brahman alone and 2. paratantra, dependent reality. (Internet Encyclopeida of Philosophy) If the second order of reality is fully dependent, which means it cannot exist without the independent reality, this is not real duality. This is simply non-duality. Real duality would be two independent orders of reality. Thus, non-dualism is true and real and is the foundation of our philosophy, the very presupposition that makes a kind of limited dualism possible. It is easy to forget it and allow ourselves to be distracted by our apparently real dualism. Yet on some level we all know how dependent we are. Were it not for our non-dualism we would not be able to communicate or connect with any other beings including Krsna. Bhakti at its most fundamental level is the recognition of our shared participation in Krsna and with each other. One of the meanings of bhaj, the root of the word bhakti, is to participate or take part in something. We could think of it as the result of the realization that we are not independent, that is dual, but rather share in the reality of Krsna and Radhika. We are not independent of them. We share in their existence, we participate in their existence. That is to say we are non-dual with them and they also manifest in us to a minute, but very real degree. We should never forget this and this is why I think it is important to study the works of the great exponents of Advaita. It is the foundation on top of which the beautiful structure of divine love built by Mahaprabhu rests. Without that foundation that palatial building collapses.
|
|
|
Post by kirtaniya on Mar 8, 2022 10:53:31 GMT -6
I should add to my last post in this thread, about my wife's leaning towards non-dualism, that we all need to lean more towards non-dualism. It is an undeniable element of our tradition and yet we focus on the dualism of the tradition often to the exclusion of the non-dual. This is a major flaw in modern CV and one probably exacerbated by what I still believe to be a faux connection with the Madhva tradition. Even Madhva, though, accepts non-dualism. Here is what he teaches: According to Madhva there are two orders of reality: 1. svatantra, independent reality, which consists of Brahman alone and 2. paratantra, dependent reality. (Internet Encyclopeida of Philosophy) If the second order of reality is fully dependent, which means it cannot exist without the independent reality, this is not real duality. This is simply non-duality. Real duality would be two independent orders of reality. Thus, non-dualism is true and real and is the foundation of our philosophy, the very presupposition that makes a kind of limited dualism possible. It is easy to forget it and allow ourselves to be distracted by our apparently real dualism. Yet on some level we all know how dependent we are. Were it not for our non-dualism we would not be able to communicate or connect with any other beings including Krsna. Bhakti at its most fundamental level is the recognition of our shared participation in Krsna and with each other. One of the meanings of bhaj, the root of the word bhakti, is to participate or take part in something. We could think of it as the result of the realization that we are not independent, that is dual, but rather share in the reality of Krsna and Radhika. We are not independent of them. We share in their existence, we participate in their existence. That is to say we are non-dual with them and they also manifest in us to a minute, but very real degree. We should never forget this and this is why I think it is important to study the works of the great exponents of Advaita. It is the foundation on top of which the beautiful structure of divine love built by Mahaprabhu rests. Without that foundation that palatial building collapses. Nitaidas ji, The non-duality is often imagined as something abstract, as quintessence of concept. As if in a state of disbelief that one can bite off a mango himself. It is like some legendary heros tell us about mango and we even cannot tell do they taste this mango or not. They accept mangoes, the concept of mango, that’s all what we can admit for ourselves. Why not to see it directly? There is the direct method of kirtana - external and internal, making it one. This self sufficient method does not depend on additives for the doubting mind at all. Never the supplements for the doubtful mind can be a foundation of the direct vision of the absolute truth. And the non-duality is not the absolute because it is a phenomena. You can see it in its appearance and disappearance. Recognizing this object, you can recognize it in detail, in nuances. It is rather imprudent to believe that our philosophy takes jnana from Advaita philosophy and enriches it with something of its own. In the definition of bhakti in BRS - jnana karmadi anavrtam - precisely this very jnana of Advaita is being rejected (along with the mechanical ritual - here "karma"). Knowledge and action of uttama-bhakti is free from such kind of ignorance. There is a state of uncertainty we can see. What is uncertainty? This is the consciousness of emptiness. Clear, unambiguous, distinct consciousness of this very clarity and only it. You directly see the chain of conditioning, you can consider it in the same way as you see these very letters, you can see from what points they are formed. You don't have to imagine, you don't have to guess, you don't have to chose some opinion. And this state of emptiness is with dissatisfaction. What is this dissatisfaction? It is a desire for certainty, any, not some certain. The thirst for certainty, the thirst for difference, the thirst for distinction. As soon as this thirsty mind is recognized (it is called avidya pratyaya sanskara), you can see the non-duality. But this clear vision of mind’s thirst can be fully satisfactory. It is not satisfactory because of inclination to metaphysics. Metaphysics is the assumption that behind the observed there is something unobservable. It's a delusion. The point is that there is a thorough attention. Attention to attention. You gotta see what goes back to a particular certainty. Just watch how confidence arises. All at once without restrictions. And then how the limitation arises, how the focus narrows down to something and how it starts to drift. Because in fact the only nature of certainty is the focus of attention. What the attention is directed - changes. Therefore, it is impossible to keep the certainty stable. Metaphysics is always based on delusions about being and non-being. Because it is lazy to study what is being and non-being. It takes it for granted. It blindly accepts: this does exist, that doesn’t exist. It is from this position that any duality is perceived, starting with discrimination consciousness (vijnana). What we call existing is firmly stuck (upadana) in the six pillars (sad ayatana), separating in contact (sparsa) these two: - perceived as real: distinguishable images (namarupa) that arise in the contact of both rupa (five pillars) and nama (mind pillar) from - perceived as imaginary: distinguishable images that arise only in the contact of the mind pillar. Clinging to the real (desires of the bodily senses) forms one becoming (bhava-existence) - in the world of the senses (kamaloka). Clinging to the imaginary (mental sense desires) forms another becoming (bhava-existence) in the world of forms (rupaloka). Clinging to contact with discrimination of non-objectivity, discrimination of non-direction, discrimination of immutability, and of non-discrimination forms yet another becoming (bhava-existence) - in the world of infinities (arupaloka). By exploring the nidana of bhava-existence, consciousness transcends birth and death. But then you have to go beyond bhava. Only when the nidana bhava is clearly discernible and explored, does the nidana upadana become just as clearly discernible. And only in the nidana upadana does clinging to “I” become clear, as a mechanism that fastens aggregates, isolates “mine”, limits the perceived lot of existence and allocates the flow of existence into a self-conscious being. This is how we are not independent of Them, and actually of anyone. This is how we share in their existence, participate in their existence. We fully share this bhava, not just to a minute degree. It is a desire for self preservation only makes us think of minuteness of Their presence in us. The svarupa of kinkari demands full grip, not partial, in order to see this desire. In some moments also we can take rest in “Brahman”. But … āruhya kṛcchreṇa paraṁ padaṁ tataḥ patanty adho ’nādṛta-yuṣmad-aṅghrayaḥ (10.2.32) … it will change as an achievement must do. With the cessation of contact, the duality of the supports (the six pillars) and their spheres also ceases, but the supports themselves remain. Therefore, after an instant birth and existence on the arupaloka, contact and immersion again occur in the ever more diverse worlds of rupaloka and kamaloka. Therefore, non-duality is not yet an absolute reality, but only an approximation to it. Therefore, the Buddha was not satisfied with the teachings of his teachers, who achieved only the highest dhyanas of arupaloka. Therefore, Sriman Mahaprabhu and his Vraja sangha were not satisfied with the teachings of Advaita Vedanta, based on the achievement of only the highest dhyanas of arupaloka. When the supports also cease, only then does sensory perception cease. Only then the emergence and cessation of supports is clear. It doesn't mean there is something soulless superior to our most dear. It means how they become dear and teach us selfless action.
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Mar 10, 2022 13:22:17 GMT -6
Nitaidas ji, The non-duality is often imagined as something abstract, as quintessence of concept. As if in a state of disbelief that one can bite off a mango himself. It is like some legendary heros tell us about mango and we even cannot tell do they taste this mango or not. They accept mangoes, the concept of mango, that’s all what we can admit for ourselves. Why not to see it directly? There is the direct method of kirtana - external and internal, making it one. This self sufficient method does not depend on additives for the doubting mind at all. Never the supplements for the doubtful mind can be a foundation of the direct vision of the absolute truth. And the non-duality is not the absolute because it is a phenomena. You can see it in its appearance and disappearance. Recognizing this object, you can recognize it in detail, in nuances. It is rather imprudent to believe that our philosophy takes jnana from Advaita philosophy and enriches it with something of its own. In the definition of bhakti in BRS - jnana karmadi anavrtam - precisely this very jnana of Advaita is being rejected (along with the mechanical ritual - here "karma"). Knowledge and action of uttama-bhakti is free from such kind of ignorance. There is a state of uncertainty we can see. What is uncertainty? This is the consciousness of emptiness. Clear, unambiguous, distinct consciousness of this very clarity and only it. You directly see the chain of conditioning, you can consider it in the same way as you see these very letters, you can see from what points they are formed. You don't have to imagine, you don't have to guess, you don't have to chose some opinion. And this state of emptiness is with dissatisfaction. What is this dissatisfaction? It is a desire for certainty, any, not some certain. The thirst for certainty, the thirst for difference, the thirst for distinction. As soon as this thirsty mind is recognized (it is called avidya pratyaya sanskara), you can see the non-duality. But this clear vision of mind’s thirst can be fully satisfactory. It is not satisfactory because of inclination to metaphysics. Metaphysics is the assumption that behind the observed there is something unobservable. It's a delusion. The point is that there is a thorough attention. Attention to attention. You gotta see what goes back to a particular certainty. Just watch how confidence arises. All at once without restrictions. And then how the limitation arises, how the focus narrows down to something and how it starts to drift. Because in fact the only nature of certainty is the focus of attention. What the attention is directed - changes. Therefore, it is impossible to keep the certainty stable. Metaphysics is always based on delusions about being and non-being. Because it is lazy to study what is being and non-being. It takes it for granted. It blindly accepts: this does exist, that doesn’t exist. It is from this position that any duality is perceived, starting with discrimination consciousness (vijnana). What we call existing is firmly stuck (upadana) in the six pillars (sad ayatana), separating in contact (sparsa) these two: - perceived as real: distinguishable images (namarupa) that arise in the contact of both rupa (five pillars) and nama (mind pillar) from - perceived as imaginary: distinguishable images that arise only in the contact of the mind pillar. Clinging to the real (desires of the bodily senses) forms one becoming (bhava-existence) - in the world of the senses (kamaloka). Clinging to the imaginary (mental sense desires) forms another becoming (bhava-existence) in the world of forms (rupaloka). Clinging to contact with discrimination of non-objectivity, discrimination of non-direction, discrimination of immutability, and of non-discrimination forms yet another becoming (bhava-existence) - in the world of infinities (arupaloka). By exploring the nidana of bhava-existence, consciousness transcends birth and death. But then you have to go beyond bhava. Only when the nidana bhava is clearly discernible and explored, does the nidana upadana become just as clearly discernible. And only in the nidana upadana does clinging to “I” become clear, as a mechanism that fastens aggregates, isolates “mine”, limits the perceived lot of existence and allocates the flow of existence into a self-conscious being. This is how we are not independent of Them, and actually of anyone. This is how we share in their existence, participate in their existence. We fully share this bhava, not just to a minute degree. It is a desire for self preservation only makes us think of minuteness of Their presence in us. The svarupa of kinkari demands full grip, not partial, in order to see this desire. In some moments also we can take rest in “Brahman”. But … āruhya kṛcchreṇa paraṁ padaṁ tataḥ patanty adho ’nādṛta-yuṣmad-aṅghrayaḥ (10.2.32) … it will change as an achievement must do. With the cessation of contact, the duality of the supports (the six pillars) and their spheres also ceases, but the supports themselves remain. Therefore, after an instant birth and existence on the arupaloka, contact and immersion again occur in the ever more diverse worlds of rupaloka and kamaloka. Therefore, non-duality is not yet an absolute reality, but only an approximation to it. Therefore, the Buddha was not satisfied with the teachings of his teachers, who achieved only the highest dhyanas of arupaloka. Therefore, Sriman Mahaprabhu and his Vraja sangha were not satisfied with the teachings of Advaita Vedanta, based on the achievement of only the highest dhyanas of arupaloka. When the supports also cease, only then does sensory perception cease. Only then the emergence and cessation of supports is clear. It doesn't mean there is something soulless superior to our most dear. It means how they become dear and teach us selfless action. Thanks, Kirtaniyaji, for this analysis combining Buddhist and Vaisnava teachings with respect to the relationship of the non-dual knowledge to the dualism, not of the empiric world, but of the transcendent world. I have long believed that there is an intimate connection between Buddhism and Vaisnavism. They are more than sisters of the same mother (Indian mystical culture and history). They are twins, one of which emerged from the womb earlier than the other and thus had a head-start that the slightly younger sister drew on and benefited from as they grew up together, certainly deeply influencing each other, but mostly from the side of the slightly older sister. The Bhagavad-gita, for instance, is in large part a Hindu response to Buddhism, the critique of inaction, for instance, being aimed at Buddhist and Jaina retirement from the world and cessation of action (rites and other acts). Retirement from the world was not initially a Hindu thing until relatively late. It is only grudgingly accepted in the earliest surviving independent law text of Apastamba (~300 BCE). Though he describes the state of the wandering ascetic and that of the forest hermit, he regards them as inferior to household life, in which rites are to be performed with the presence/help of the wife. They were, at his period, relatively new practices that contradicted the accepted Vedic life style of marriage and production of sons (A. 2.23-24). Many things have been drawn from Buddhism in to Vaisnavism and so it is appropriate to join them together in elucidating their vision of the ultimate and the methods of its approach. I will say more about this in later posts. For now let me say that your post, serendipitously, reminded me of a verse from the Bhagavata (1.5.12) that I will struggling with just yesterday: naiṣkarmyamapyacyutabhāvavarjitaṃ\\ na śobhate jñānamalaṃ nirañjanam |\\ kutaḥ punaḥ śaśvadabhadramīśvare\\ na cārpitaṃ karma yadapyakāraṇam ||12||
My translation at present: Even inactivity does not shine that is without love for Acyuta; away with knowledge that is untainted; more so for action which is always inauspicious, even though performed without cause, and not offered to the Lord. (12) Here untainted knowledge is knowledge of Brahman which is regarded as inadequate because in contains no love for Acyuta. It thus does not "shine," is not beautiful. So too are inactivity which refers to the renunciation of the world as a monk or sannyasi. And then action itself is rejected too. So inactivity, activity and delimited knowledge, the kind promoted by Advaita Vedanta, all for being empty of love for Acyuta. When Rupa says karma-jJAna-anAvRtam, he is surely referring to this kind of empty knowledge of Brahman. Bhakti itself is regarded as a kind of knowledge, as I argued before (cit-hlAdinI-zakti-sArayor samavetaH: the inseparable union of the essential cores of the awareness and pleasure powers). The knowledge rejected by Rupa is this jJAna-niraJjana mentioned in this Bhagavata verse, the knowledge unconnected with hlAdinI, love for Acyuta. The rest of your post I more or less agree with and have gained valuable insights from. Thanks! On other influences of Buddhism on CV, I will write more later. রাধে রাধে !
|
|
|
Post by kirtaniya on Mar 11, 2022 10:39:42 GMT -6
Nitaidas ji,
Your meditation is ever fresh and delicious. It's great that you put the Gita in a historical context. Among Buddhists there are endless holy wars between sharp and blunt ends. These disputes about what is closer, what is further, what is older, what is faster - come from assumptions and delusions.
Some teachers are more qualified than others. Each person can be a teacher for another person if he has mastered something that this other person needs. This is the beauty of knowledge - its practicality. When I know exactly what you need and give it to you, this is love. When you know exactly what I need and give it to me, this is love. Bhakti is basically dadati pratigrhnati guhyam.
If you have something to protect, then what you protect has not yet become anatman, anitya and dukkha, that's it. Real jewels cannot be slandered, distorted, perverted, or discredited. They are inaccessible to any attacks. But they cannot be preserved, saved, held, defended or justified.
Theravada is gorgeous, Zen is miraculous, Vajrayana is charming, Dzogchen is touching. But at the same time, Theravada is boring, Zen is vulgar, Vajrayana is vicious, Dzogchen is arrogant. Thousands of epithets can be given, and they will refer only to the state of the judging mind.
All opinions arise from attachments. If some opinions are good, then some opinions are bad. If all opinions come and go, and all attachments can be let go where they arise, then opinions are superfluous. The one who knows for sure does not think. He who does not know is forced to think, seek, try.
In a sense, any world is empirical, otherwise how would we know it and how would we be in it? Therefore, there is the concept of yoga-maya (as a kind of maya as such). There are gross senses, because they are habitual (common sense), and there are subtle senses with subtliest nuances when the habit is overcome.
I was talking about non-duality, which is endowed with some subtle distinguishable features. These are the four arupa dhyanas. They still contain some information (important that this information is not about them, but they are these distinguishing signs, information). Nirvana is the cessation of all information. Therefore, nirvana is identical to sansara. No information means no difference.
Therefore, due to the absence of information in it, due to the fact that nirvana is recognized by indirect signs - nirvana is neither non-dual nor dual. This is not a conditioned phenomenon, but it is not complete insight. Technically, attachment to void is called hinayana. It is on 180° of Zen Circle. Nirvana is the starting point for overcoming habitual views. And rupa-dhyana (not arupa) in its finest is identical to Dharmakaya.
|
|
|
Post by Nitaidas on Mar 18, 2022 12:32:34 GMT -6
Greetings Everyone,
জয় রাধে !
Just checking in. Sorry for my absence from the site. I have been busy with my translation and publishing projects. Plus, I was little under the weather for a day or two. It happens when we change seasons sometimes. I am feeling fine now. The section of the Bhagavata I am working on now is the 5th Chapter of Skandha One. It is the chapter in which Narada castigates Vyasa for not praising Krsna enough in his previous works. It is a difficult chapter with longer verses that have a more complex structure. Thus it slows me down some, but it is great. Sridharasvamin has longer comments on the verses of this chapter. Srinathacakravartin only comments on a few verses.
Here is an example:
atho mahābhāga bhavānamoghadṛk\\ śuciśravāḥ satyarato dhṛtavrataḥ |\\ urukramasyākhilabandhamuktaye\\ samādhinānusmara tadviceṣṭitam ||13|
Now, o hugely fortunate one,\\ you are unerring in vision,\\ of pure fame, pleased by the truth,\\ a keeper of vows. For freedom\\ from all bondage, recollect, through\\ meditative concentration,\\ Urukrama's various deeds. (13)
Sridhara:
He says, “so, since knowledge, clever speech, and expertise in action that are empty of {\it bhakti} are worthless, therefore describe the career of Hari.” “Now” means for this reason. “Unerring in vision” means one whose visual understanding is accurate, whose fame is pure, who is engaged in the truth, and who holds to his vows. You thus have such great qualities. Therefore, with concentration, single-pointed focus of the mind, on the various deeds, sports, of the Great Strider (Kṛṣṇa), for the sake of liberation from all bonds, o Ocean of Great Fortune [Vyāsa], you remember them [his deeds] and describe them. This is the meaning. And this [latter] is another statement. Thus the use of the middle person construction ({\it tvam}, you) is not inappropriate.\footnote{Śrīdhara's point here is that in the first sentence of this verse the pronoun used for Vyāsa is {\it bhavān}, the formal pronoun or {\it prathama-puruṣa} (first person) construction. Since that first statement praising Vyāsa is a separate sentence from the second statement recommending that he meditate on and describe the deeds of Urukrama, the use in the second of the less formal pronoun {\it tvam} or {\it madhyama-puruṣa} is not incorrect.} (13)
Don't mind the typesetting codes.
|
|