Hermit's viewpoint

This may seem like my arrogance is up for mouthing words! In my limited understanding of bits of readings from Brahma sutra bhashya, Upadesha sahasri, yoga sutras and other works advaitic, its sheer foolishness to claim to have understood even an iota of Adi Shankara and still continue to yearn for money/matter.

There isn't any better qualification to be a student than to have renounced the lower in search for the higher. The search, in itself, doesn't exist per se, but as long as it is not *known* that there is nothing to know but *being*-- till such knowledge dawns-- it is a search and will remain so. Even a brahmajnaani like Shankara said that karma and jnaana cannot go hand-in-hand. It was Ramana Maharshi who asserted "Be as you are", but there have been very few, rather hardly any, like Ramana who have merged with the absolute in a matter of spontaneity! There is no saying whether or not they've spent many prior lives as seekers to be blessed so (in order to bless others)!

For us mortals, thirsty of nectar droplets of eternal bliss, there is a long list of things lined up to be done. The shortest path is to renounce the ownership of anything, physically and mentally. Blessed are those who can do so mentally while not amounting to any additions to physical attachment. For others, physically being in association with things that bind, will never lead to mental renunciation. It is said that one must have purity of thought, words and deeds. Factually, words being subtler than deeds, and thoughts being subtler than words, it is a graduation from purifying actions through purifying words to purifying thoughts. Truly fortunate are those who have pure thoughts, thereby burning the words and actions in such pureness!

athaato brahma jijnaasaa...

om tat sat

2 comments:

Vasant G. Hebbar said...

Shankara's views on Karma and Jnana margas would need greater understanding.

Advaitavedanti said...

It may well be so, but I know you're talking of my understanding that jnAna and karma don't go hand-in-hand. It is what Shankara said and there are no two ways about it, although you and I would like it that way. :)

Once again, its a traditional view and I subscribe to it. No one understands Shankara better than the saMpradAya. Neither you nor I have saMskAras for it and we both know it well! ;)