• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

sarvarambha-parityagi: Renouncer of all initiatives

Aupmanyav

Be your own guru
The yogi whose mind is fixed on Me verily attains the highest perfection of transcendental happiness. He is beyond the mode of passion, he realizes his qualitative identity with the Supreme, and thus he is freed from all reactions to past deeds. ch ..6 v ..27
Unfortunately, that is an example of Prabhupada's wrong translation which becomes apparent when you go through the synonyms (I underline the incorrect portion):

"Prasānta-manasam hy enam, yoginam sukham uttamam,
upaiti sānta-rajasam, brahma-bhūtam akalmaṣam."

SYNONYMS
praśānta — peaceful, fixed on the lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa; manasam — whose mind; hi — certainly; enam — this; yoginam — yogī; sukham — happiness; uttamam — the highest; upaiti — attains; śānta-rajasam — his passion pacified; brahma-bhūtam — liberation by identification with the Absolute; akalmaṣam — freed from all past sinful reactions.

TRANSLATION
The yogī whose mind is fixed on Me verily attains the highest perfection of transcendental happiness. He is beyond the mode of passion, he realizes his qualitative identity with the Supreme, and thus he is freed from all reactions to past deeds.

The correct translation would be something like this:
The yogi whose mind is peaceful verily attains the the highest happiness of yogis, his passions are pacified, becoming sinless he attains Brahamanhood.

Of course, I understand the reason why Prabhupada translated it in this way. According to his sect, a person cannot be peaceful unless he fixes his mind on the lotus feet of Sri Krishna.
 

Satyamavejayanti

Well-Known Member
=atanu;3702289]I agree.

However, there is another very popular teaching that approximately says "Do the allotted duty without desiring personal fruit" or "Do the allotted duty offering the fruits to Me." That I feel suits more to what you are stating.

To me, in the cited text, the 'sarva Arambha parityagi" is a bit difficult. It is more than just "anapeksah sucir daksa". This is also probably not so well known compared to the well known dictum of "renounce the fruit". This is not only renouncing the fruit, but IMO, renouncing the very ownership of an initiative/task.

True, i think there is a vary simple message to this, that we are bound by Karma, where in order to renounce the end product, it becomes imperative to renounce (non-attachments is better word i think) the karma from beginning to end, even the initiative of a karma should be in the spirit of "world order" (as per Shri Krishna) rather then any personal gain or motive. I think this and most part of the Gita is about selfless actions (yagna) or what the modern world will call "Charity".

We all begin our work with some sankalpa or other saying or thinking "I will do this and that will be the result....". Isn't it? How difficult it is to begin (Arambha) a work by being a renouncer of the beginning itself (parityagi)?

It is vary difficult indeed, and i think one of our best guides is the Gita on how to achieve this Yogi state.

OHM TATH SATH
 

ratikala

Istha gosthi
namaskaram aupmanyav ji :namaste

Unfortunately, that is an example of Prabhupada's wrong translation which becomes apparent when you go through the synonyms (I underline the incorrect portion):

unfortunately this highlights the problem which plagues Hinudism DIR .....

when people look at anothers translation and say it is ''wrong'' , .......
according to you Shraddha is not faith it is only respect ....but when I suggest that it is more than respect I am not saying you are wrong I am saying there is more depth of meaning ....here I belive srila prabhupada is not translating Prasānta wrongly he correctly gives peacefull '', followed by ''fixed on the lotus feet of sri krsna'' , this he says qualifying the translation , ...as the previous verses discuss the yogi's performance of meditation...

in the previous verses Krsna ia saying that the yogi should concentrate the mind upon the self ...this self which Krsna refers to is the trancendant self ......later on he translates 'yogi' as ''one who is in touch with the the supreme self'' ....and translates sri Krsnas words as ...A true yogi observes me in all beings , ....

so here we are talking about perfecting states of absorbtion . prabhupada simply qualifies what the absorbtion is in ... that it is in the supreme self ...the supreme in the heart of all beings , ...whether one sees that supreme as visnu , brahman or what ever ones tradition dictates , realy it dosent matter to me what name we give , what matters is that we do not identify that 'atmanam' with the the material body .
peacefull whos mind ...certainly this yogi...atains the higest happiness ...his passion passified ...attaining ...liberation by identification with the absolute ....and thus is freed from all past sinfull reactions .

"Prasānta-manasam hy enam, yoginam sukham uttamam,
upaiti sānta-rajasam, brahma-bhūtam akalmaṣam."

SYNONYMS
praśānta — peaceful, fixed on the lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa; manasam — whose mind; hi — certainly; enam — this; yoginam — yogī; sukham — happiness; uttamam — the highest; upaiti — attains; śānta-rajasam — his passion pacified; brahma-bhūtam — liberation by identification with the Absolute; akalmaṣam — freed from all past sinful reactions.

TRANSLATION
The yogī whose mind is fixed on Me verily attains the highest perfection of transcendental happiness. He is beyond the mode of passion, he realizes his qualitative identity with the Supreme, and thus he is freed from all reactions to past deeds.
so why ''fixed on me ''... because the lord is situated in the heart ....and the yogi life is dedicated to the atainment of the supreme , not simply sitting in peacefullness .
The correct translation would be something like this:
The yogi whose mind is peaceful verily attains the the highest happiness of yogis, his passions are pacified, becoming sinless he attains Brahamanhood.
exactly ...so what is the higest happiness of yogis ??? the atainment of self knowledge , knowledge of the higer self . he gita is a treatise on the complete science of the absolute , and the yogi is one who strives to unite the individual soul with the supreme soul , the only difference lay in the advaitins veiw that the yogi merges with the supreme and the vaisnava many of whoom hold minutely varing veiws as to the possibiliy of ones 'inconceivable oneness and difference '.

Of course, I understand the reason why Prabhupada translated it in this way. According to his sect, a person cannot be peaceful unless he fixes his mind on the lotus feet of Sri Krishna.

with all due respects if you understand , ...you would not say that he is ''wrong''..many acarya's use different methods of discription when talking off such a supreme science , none is ''wrong''each has a purpose for speaking as they do ....
 

Poeticus

| abhyAvartin |
Many Hindus seem to forget that without
Prabhupada and Iskcon, Hinduism in the
West wouldn't be as recognized as it is
today.​
 

Vinayaka

devotee
Premium Member
Many Hindus seem to forget that without
Prabhupada and Iskcon, Hinduism in the
West wouldn't be as recognized as it is
today.​

Indeed. Somebody had to do it, and they did a remarkable job. Many other leaders hid out, put Hinduism to the side, or disguised it, and taught stuff they perceived would be more well received, hence the confusion that exists today with the syncretic mixes. At least we all knew who ISKCONites were. I admired them all to no end. :)
 

Aupmanyav

Be your own guru
in the previous verses Krsna ia saying that the yogi should concentrate the mind upon the self .. this self which Krsna refers to is the trancendant self .. later on he translates 'yogi' as ''one who is in touch with the the supreme self'' .. and translates sri Krsnas words as ...A true yogi observes me in all beings , .. prabhupada simply qualifies what the absorbtion is in
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.
 
Last edited:

Aupmanyav

Be your own guru
Many Hindus seem to forget that without Prabhupada and Iskcon, Hinduism in the West wouldn't be as recognized as it is today.
Poeticus. Differing in opinion is not disrespect. Calling a spade a spade is not disrespect. Kindly find me one sentence in which I have denigrated Prabhupada, Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, or Achintya Bbedabheda Advaita. I have always maintained, sometimes even under great pressure, that it is a valid Hindu philosophy, Chaitanya was one of the six great Acharyas of Hinduism (that includes Madhvacharya though I completely differ with his views), and Prabhupada was a valid Acharya of the Achintya Bhedabheda Advaita philosophy.
 

Poeticus

| abhyAvartin |
Poeticus. Differing in opinion is not disrespect. Calling a spade a spade is not disrespect. Kindly find me one sentence in which I have denigrated Prabhupada, Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, or Achintya Bbedabheda Advaita. I have always maintained, sometimes even under great pressure, that it is a valid Hindu philosophy, Chaitanya was one of the six great Acharyas of Hinduism (that includes Madhvacharya though I completely differ with his views), and Prabhupada was a valid Acharya of the Achintya Bhedabheda Advaita philosophy.

Kindly find me an occurrence in any of my posts
wherein I state that you have denigrated the founder
of Iskcon.​
 

Ravi500

Active Member
Unfortunately, that is an example of Prabhupada's wrong translation which becomes apparent when you go through the synonyms (I underline the incorrect portion):

"Prasānta-manasam hy enam, yoginam sukham uttamam,
upaiti sānta-rajasam, brahma-bhūtam akalmaṣam."

SYNONYMS
praśānta — peaceful, fixed on the lotus feet of Kṛṣṇa; manasam — whose mind; hi — certainly; enam — this; yoginam — yogī; sukham — happiness; uttamam — the highest; upaiti — attains; śānta-rajasam — his passion pacified; brahma-bhūtam — liberation by identification with the Absolute; akalmaṣam — freed from all past sinful reactions.

TRANSLATION
The yogī whose mind is fixed on Me verily attains the highest perfection of transcendental happiness. He is beyond the mode of passion, he realizes his qualitative identity with the Supreme, and thus he is freed from all reactions to past deeds.

The correct translation would be something like this:
The yogi whose mind is peaceful verily attains the the highest happiness of yogis, his passions are pacified, becoming sinless he attains Brahamanhood.

Of course, I understand the reason why Prabhupada translated it in this way. According to his sect, a person cannot be peaceful unless he fixes his mind on the lotus feet of Sri Krishna.


After reading this, I was reminded of a beautiful story of Krishna and Radha.

Radha was feeding Lord Krishna bananas, peeling the fruit off its skin and offering the fruit in Krishna's mouth. However, due to Radha's deep state of bliss and intoxication by divine love, she forgot what she was doing, and started throwing away the fruit and offering the skin in Krishna's mouth. Krishna , however continued eating the banana skins with great relish, with a mischievous smile. :)

Thus when Prabhupada or other bhaktas perhaps blissfully mistranslate Krishna's teachings to give more emphasis on Bhakti, which is in line with Krishna's teachings and emphasis on Bhakti, I am sure Krishna will be generous with such errors. Maybe he might even encourage it and gives more suggestions.

However I don't think Krishna will be generous with the misinterpretations of his teachings by atheists for atheist-materialistic purposes. ;)
 
Last edited:

Amrut

Aum - Advaita
Namaste Atanu ji,

Thank you for reminding me of this beautiful verses.

As I understand, what makes difference is the initiative to start a new work and not the work itself.

Initiative means to think of something, to create or conceive a new idea --> mind becomes active.

Since it is you who is creating, it means the karma done is sakAma.

If things are done spontaneously without planning, then it is ok, but creative thinking like a web designer does nor an engineer designing a new mechanical part for a machine, etc all require our imagination and creativity.

Hence this type of karma becomes kAmya karma. Skilful in action would mean

1. do karma with SAxI bhAva
2. do karma for ISvara.

I am more tilted towards SAxi bhAva. Here there is no creativity. You just do the work. Sri vidyAraNya svAmI in PanchadaSI (dhyAnadIpa prakaraNa) and Sri Ramakrishna both give an example of a women who does all the work in house sincerely, but her mind is always longing for her lover.

In case of surrendering work to ISvara, some say think that all thoughts like creativity also comes from ISvara. The problem begins (from advaita POV).

karma is jaDa, what makes one attached to the fruits is the ichchA, ASA, hetu, etc. When one is in SAxI bhAva, then one is witness. an observer cannot act. Both cannot be done at a time. Advaita begins with renunciation of actions, atleast mental. Hence creating new work is not advised. It is like hitting your axe on your own leg.

For practical application, as human beings, we must try to apply as much as possible, until we are able to remain calm. Mind does not hanker for any sense object or for any person. Mind is peaceful. With constant practice, one can achieve success. A ball when dropped from a height does not become motionless, but bounces back upwards. But each time the bounce reduces until ball becomes still.

Skilful is not to be taken in literal sense that we refer to an art of doing a particular work.

Just my 2 cents

Hari OM
 

atanu

Member
Premium Member
Namaste Atanu ji,

Thank you for reminding me of this beautiful verses.

As I understand, what makes difference is the initiative to start a new work and not the work itself.

Initiative means to think of something, to create or conceive a new idea --> mind becomes active.

Since it is you who is creating, it means the karma done is sakAma.

If things are done spontaneously without planning, then it is ok, but creative thinking like a web designer does nor an engineer designing a new mechanical part for a machine, etc all require our imagination and creativity.

Hence this type of karma becomes kAmya karma. Skilful in action would mean

1. do karma with SAxI bhAva
2. do karma for ISvara.

I am more tilted towards SAxi bhAva. Here there is no creativity. You just do the work. Sri vidyAraNya svAmI in PanchadaSI (dhyAnadIpa prakaraNa) and Sri Ramakrishna both give an example of a women who does all the work in house sincerely, but her mind is always longing for her lover.

In case of surrendering work to ISvara, some say think that all thoughts like creativity also comes from ISvara. The problem begins (from advaita POV).

karma is jaDa, what makes one attached to the fruits is the ichchA, ASA, hetu, etc. When one is in SAxI bhAva, then one is witness. an observer cannot act. Both cannot be done at a time. Advaita begins with renunciation of actions, atleast mental. Hence creating new work is not advised. It is like hitting your axe on your own leg.

For practical application, as human beings, we must try to apply as much as possible, until we are able to remain calm. Mind does not hanker for any sense object or for any person. Mind is peaceful. With constant practice, one can achieve success. A ball when dropped from a height does not become motionless, but bounces back upwards. But each time the bounce reduces until ball becomes still.

Skilful is not to be taken in literal sense that we refer to an art of doing a particular work.

Just my 2 cents

Hari OM

I really like it. Thanks. I will like to hear more on 'action in inaction' and vice versa from you.
 

atanu

Member
Premium Member
namaskaram poeticus ji:namaste

but the important word in this thread is 'parityAgi'

The yogi whose mind is fixed on Me verily attains the highest perfection of transcendental happiness. He is beyond the mode of passion, he realizes his qualitative identity with the Supreme, and thus he is freed from all reactions to past deeds. ch ..6 v ..27

Namaste Ratikala

If in the Yogi there is notion "I am qualitatively different. I am now yoked.....", will that suit the word 'parityAgi'?

No debate. Just asking for clarity.:)
 

Amrut

Aum - Advaita
I really like it. Thanks. I will like to hear more on 'action in inaction' and vice versa from you.

Namaste,

Action in inaction and inaction in action is also explained in Astavakra Gita. I am not much reading shastras these days, so just quoting from memories.

The goal is life decides our direction and also the type and direction of sadhana. Moksha is the first thing that is needed. Later this bhAva gets strong.

niSkAma karma and akarma.

niSkama karma means that you are doing karma without any fruits or with SAkxI bhAva. Rutuine kamras like eating, sleeping, bath, etc do not hinder in meditation. What matters is our own initiation, bonds with objects and persons, which is called as jIva sruShTi. ISvara sruShTi is pruthvI, tArA, naxatra, graha, parvata, nadI (river), etc. These things and acts necessary for survival of body do not disturb. Hence we should not compare them with karma that we do to fulfill our desire like earning more and more money and keep satisfying demands, desires, etc. Earning for survival is ok and should not be taken as hindrance. What matters is our planning and if things do not work according to our plan, then we get upset and analysis starts. So repition of any karma (due to rAga) and critizing nad staying away, failure analysis (due to dveSa) gives rise to kAma, krodha, moha, etc. In all this our ego swells like balloon. It is intention or motive behind any karma that is important and not the karma itself, as karma is (comparatively) jaDa (w.r.t mind).

In short anything that strengthens jIva bhAva is to be avoided as much as possible. ISvara srushTi helps us. So we move from sakAma karma to niSkAma karma.

But still there is an observer. In akarma sthiti, you clearly know that 'I am not the doer AND ISvara is the doer'. In niSkAma karma there is still avaraNa of aGYAna. akarma does not generate any fruits.

Hence a GYAnI's actions are inactions (akarma), while aGYAnI, who's mind is not calm, keeps thinking and hence his maun is just vAcika maun, inside him, there is too much turbulence, while GYAnI's mind even while working (acting) is calm. GYAnI acts on intuitions or say, someone is controlling his acts.

It is the mental calmness that is important. vairAGYa means absence of bhOgya padArtha (in mind). maun is vacika then mAnasika and later on it is said that the true maun is the maun of vAsanA-s. When there is no desire, then there is actual maun, in Atma-sthiti.

So in meditation, while meditating on OM, initially one may chant verbally in low tone, but later it shifts to mental chanting. Here chanting is done in mind.

Where is mind?

Mind (and hence thoughts) are connected to sahasrahAra chakra, but emotions are connected to anAhata. So when one is hurt, we feel hurt in chest and not head, while too many thoughts move with great speed, it influences head.

From another angle, a way to find mind is to be aware from where thoughts are coming, exactly in that place you becomes aware and starts chanting OM and thoughts fade away.

From effort to effortless

But this is just initial state. Here there is an effort to chant. Later on, OM continues by itself, and then one becomes observer. Now, one can be aware of beginning, termination and intonation, pitch, spandan (gap between two OMs), so as to make meditation continuous (AjyadhArayA says Sri Ramana Maharshi, another word is saral chintanam)

Now, chanting shifts from mind to heart, not physical heart, but source. Some also experience it in center of chest (anAhata chakra), but it is not necessary ot have this experience.

So, from verbal to mental to auto chanting (ajapA japa) is the path.

Since, you, as an observer, do not make efforts, hence there is no fatigue and bordom, there is no stress and hence no saturation point. AS this period of effortless chanting increases, both quantity and quality of meditation increases.

Here too, by being aware of udbhava sthAna of OM (tUrIyA), OM will autometically rest in it's source. One moves beyond space and time. Time is also a concept of mind. Only you are present.

So, in meditation, we move from effort to effortless. With such practice, meditation continuous even when one is working in day time, fully concentrating in work allotted to s/he and his/her action becomes inaction. I am not able ot explain it properly, but it happens. Life is a happening, and one begins to forget (vismriti / vismruti) of day-2-day life and does not remember what he had done yesterday. He now finds it hard to think, as if I will have to make efforts to think. Until one is in this phase, life just flows, life is a happening. With repeated practice, and with the habit of being aware (acquired in meditation by the grace of gurU and ISvara), one can become sAxI.

Our journey from doer to sAxI to Atma sthiti is sakAma --> niSkAma --> akarma --> nirvikalp samAdhi --> moxa (sva-svarUpa sthiti becomes sahaj sthiti ==> jIvanamukti).

Just a personal opinion.

Another 2 cents.

Hari OM
 
Last edited:

Amrut

Aum - Advaita
in short

it is the vAsanA that triggers our actions, hence our fruits, hence our future and future births :) (our birth is to fulfill dissatisfied desires)

maun (absence) of vAsanA means ... :) - you get it.

karma and akarma

Hari OM
 

ratikala

Istha gosthi
namaskaram atanu ji :namaste

Namaste Ratikala

If in the Yogi there is notion "I am qualitatively different. I am now yoked.....", will that suit the word 'parityAgi'?

No debate. Just asking for clarity.:)

jai jai , if in the yogi there is no false sence of self then he has surrendered , ...renounced , ...given up , ...abandoned ....

'parityAgi' (renouncer);.....if I am not wrong is also 'one who has left'

so it is one who has left false sence of self behind , ..

I would not want to start a debate between one who regards the true self to be quantitively , qualitively different from God and one who does not , what is important is that the false sence of self is renounced .
 

zenzero

Its only a Label
Friend atanu,

He who is the same in honour and dishonour and the same to friends and foes, and who has given up all initiative of action, he is said to have risen above the modes.

Thank you for that stanza being brought out to this illiterate. frubals!

Personally being in such practise only find the following: who is the same in honour and dishonour and the same to friends and foes, initiative of action gets lost by its own accord though have no idea if it makes one to rise or fall above or below as all levels are having the same mode and so friends and foes are at the same level.

Love & rgds
 

Amrut

Aum - Advaita
Friend atanu,



Thank you for that stanza being brought out to this illiterate. frubals!

Personally being in such practise only find the following: who is the same in honour and dishonour and the same to friends and foes, initiative of action gets lost by its own accord though have no idea if it makes one to rise or fall above or below as all levels are having the same mode and so friends and foes are at the same level.

Love & rgds

Namaste,

It is said that to embrace all or to have this world as family (vAsudeva kutumba), one has to renounce our own family (from mind).

Until we are attached to our family, there will be bias and hence we will give priority to our family members, close relatives, friends and loved ones.

If we become neutral and do not get attached to our relatives, then

we will accept all 'as it is ' and
accept none

accept all 'as it is' with positive and negative qualities, so that neutralizes dveSa
accept none (this neutralizes rAga)

do not value things or person too much to make you mOhAnda (blinded by attachment) that you cannot see the truth.

100 % application of all these words is not there, but we can sure try to apply them as much as possible.

what we talk of univesal or say unconditional love comes when we are not attached with any one, then our heart is purified and love for God blossoms in us. If this happens then we are on a spiritual journey.

Hari OM
 

zenzero

Its only a Label
Friend Amrut,

It is said that to embrace all or to have this world as family (vAsudeva kutumba), one has to renounce our own family (from mind).
Yes true and the other is also true that once we realise that we do not have to do anything but to be aware of the mind and its doing we realise that there is actually nothing as mind it is simply a space where thoughts dwell and these thoughts are nothing but attachments and just when we become conscious/aware/alert of any thought the same instant the thought like darkness recedes when light or consciousness is brought in.
Any effort even to drive thoughts is where the problem lies and most are unable to grasp that where the mind is free of thoughts as all is lost in the effort itself.

Until we are attached to our family, there will be bias and hence we will give priority to our family members, close relatives, friends and loved ones.
When one understands the mind and what it is as above then one understands that attachment and detachment are just the absence of the other and consciousness is what lies in both like the spot in the yin and yang. The point where it is neither this or that neither attachment nor detachment is understood/realised then its all simply ONE be they the self or the parents, relatives, neighbours etc.
The rest of what you mention are expansion of the above.
The balance to be maintained.

Love & rgds
 

Jaskaran Singh

Divosūnupriyaḥ
accept all 'as it is' with positive and negative qualities, so that neutralizes dveSa
accept none (this neutralizes rAga)
At a svAbhAvika level, that form of "acceptance" you are using as the rAganimmitam is different from that in your former statement. If I understand you correctly, the former statement relates to sAmatva, whereas the latter relates to aparigraha, right?
 
Last edited:

Amrut

Aum - Advaita
Dear friend Zenzero

Well said. I agree :)



At a svAbhAvika level, that form of "acceptance" you are using as the rAganimmitam is different from that in your former statement. If I understand you correctly, the former statement relates to sAmatva, whereas the latter relates to aparigraha, right?

Dear Jaskaran,

Thanks for contemplating on my words

1. accept all 'as it is' with positive and negative qualities, so that neutralizes dveSa
2. accept none (this neutralizes rAga)

both are said from vyavahArika plane. aprigraha (dispassion)

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
 
Top