sarvarambha-parityagi: Renouncer of all initiatives

[Jaskaran Singh]

One can apply them in day-2-day life.

Suppose anyone has said or done something that hurts you. You start to think negative of s/he. But if you accept s/he's nature 'as it is' meaning s/he is like this only, s/he is not going ot change nad I cannot change anyone, God accepts s/he with her negative and positive qualities, so why I shouldn't accept s/he?

So accept s/he. To add to it, you can forgive and forget. But this does not mean that you will have to maintain contact or relation with him/her. Just avoid being negative and turn your face towards God. Do not take in mind whatever s/he does. BUT, at the same time, Since we are living in samsAra (society), hence we will have to take precautionary steps like avoid s/he, keep distance from such people. If they are tricking you, be alert and prepared. Let them take first step, then we can counter. But we still know that scorpion always bites and biting is his nature, so do not get surprised or get angry, in short do not loose your mental balance either by being negative or upset or being too much attracted (in opposite case, if you have rAga).

This is what I mean accept 'as it is'. Ofcourse you can talk from sarvAtma bhAva. I am more interested in applying it in my daily life and this is the way I apply it.

2. Accept none.

This directly means vairAGYA. Even your body is not your own. Like I gave e.g. of a lady with an affair will do all work honestly but her mind will always be longing for her lover.

Two things

1. No interest in work - no attachment, but work gets done
2. Longing for lover (ISvara)

So 'accepting as it is' and accepting 'one' would mean to accept each one with +ve and -ve qualities and do not think about their behaviour, do not take their behaviour on your mind. Be indifferent. This does not mean heart of stone. or being insensitive. Our heart and hence sentiments are surrendered and dedicated to ISvara, yes *first* ISvara has to be there, so that you can renounce world (for him).

accepting none means non-accachment

So,

accept all - no dveSa
accept none - no rAga

both from vyavahAraika plane, in a way that one can apply in practical life.

Moksha has to be THE goal. Thats that I said in my first reply.

If I have not understood your query properly, I humbly request you to please come down to a lower plane and talk in 'plain, simple english' without much sanskrit words or with their translations.

Hari OM

praNAm,
Thanks for clearing that up, although I'm not sure I explained my statement well enough. If the acceptance in the first statement ("accepting all") relates to the condition of being, whereas the acceptance in the second statement ("accepting none") relates to possesion or desire, then isn't the former a subset of the latter and the type of "acceptance" mentioned in both statements different? If you 'accept" nothing or are completely dispassionate (as you said, in a state of vairAgyam), then doesn't that entail that you do not desire or care to change another beings characteristics?

 

[Amrut]

praNAm,
Thanks for clearing that up, although I'm not sure I explained my statement well enough. If the acceptance in the first statement ("accepting all") relates to the condition of being, whereas the acceptance in the second statement ("accepting none") relates to possesion or desire, then isn't the former a subset of the latter and the type of "acceptance" mentioned in both statements different? If you 'accept" nothing or are completely dispassionate (as you said, in a state of vairAgyam), then doesn't that entail that you do not desire or care to change another beings characteristics?

praNAms,

What you say is right. When there is no expectation from others, then you do not need to accept anyone in a sense of attachment. The association with others is issue based, my heart longs only for ISvara.

But in real life, we are attached to something or someone. Both environment (spiritual & geographical) and people influence us. So it is but natural to have rAga and dveSa. Hence the first step is not to let anything inside us. Accepting people's *all* qualities means to neutralize mind. Later statement accepting one' is more subtle, and as you have pointed out former is subset of later. If later (accepting none), which implies being neutral (not negative) is developed within, then first not needed.

So, accepting all --> making extrovert mind introvert by making it calm.
accepting none --> introvert mind surrenders to ISvara, chants his name. ISvara establishes mind in heart.

As I have said, due to our extrovert nature, first one has to accept a person 'as it is'. That makes one neutral and peaceful. Mind calms down. Senses returns to their golaka sthAna i.e. they are pulled back) and mind doe not think much.

This is not the end. Move one step further. There is no need to reject or select anything. This behavior is a sing of neutral, calm and less-demanding, purified mind. Once introvert, there is no need to think of anyone after the issue / incident is over. Just let go and mind will turn inwards immediately. This is followed by surrender to ISvara, chanting his name.

To repeat (sorry for repetition)

From ISvara --> jiva bhAva --> ego / mind / buddhi --> body --> senses --> external objects

our journey, return to source

withdraw senses from external objects --> introvert mind turns towards ISvara --> jiva bhAva (mind and ego) surrendered to ISvara --> jIva merges in ISvara (toal surrendr, unconditional surrender nad love)

(lets keep various siddhanta-s aside)

everything internal and external objects are due to buddhi attached to body. Remove buddhi then within AtmA, there is no internal and external. withbody, there is no external and internal. It is buddhi that makes it look internal and external w.r.t or say relative to physical body

Is it clear? I am not good at expressing myself.

Hari OM

 

[Aupmanyav]

Is it clear? I am not good at expressing myself.

Hari OM

Apply buddhi.

Hari OM.

 

[Andy Mohan]

I understand that very well and I have mentioned the reason in the last part of my post. But then the translation becomes sectarian. For example, Kalidas will find peace only at the feet of Kali, NYK will find peace only at the feet of Shiva Ardhanarishwara, and Aupmanyav will find peace only on a merging with Brahman. Same goes with the word 'Atman', Aupmanyav does not translate it into a 'soul', he translates into the temporary and illusory physical self. Another word is 'Supreme', Aupmanyav does not translate it into the 'Supreme God' or 'Supreme Soul', he translates it into what constitutes all things in the universe, the ultimate substrate of the universe, Brahman. It is a technical question. I know that it does not make a difference to a Bhakta. Qualification by Prabhupada makes it sectarian.