What is the deep significance of Kasi Yatra in TB weddings

[KRN]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) WhatsApp Email Share Link

Dear Mr KRN :

Thank you once again for taking time to provide a detailed reply.

Somethings do not make sense to me.

Query 1. If Vairagyam sets in one should go on Sannyasam? What does go on Sannyasam mean? I cant imagine someone overcoming desires is told to immediately wear orange robe and roam around the world. For what purpose? If Sannyasam is a state of mind they dont need to do anything.

Reply : You need to see this topic in context. The reference 'yadahareva virajet tadahareva pravrajet' occurs in a Sannyasa Upanishad, and is a direct response to a query on Sannyasam in the text. You can refer the links I provided in my discussion with TBT ji.

Sannyasam can be external or internal. One can continue to live in as a Sannyasi while performing worldly duties, but mentally giving up all desires and attachment to results. But this can be very difficult to many. Without some amount of external Sannyasam, one is often deluded into thinking that one doesn't have desires.

However, when it comes to Kasi Yatra (where we started with), the idea is external Sannyasa, which is about giving up the home as well as all related attachments, and starting on the Sannyasa path. For details on Sannyasa path, kindly refer the Sannyasa upanishads (which are in a group of their own) and the passage in Brihadaranyaka Up 4.4.22 that I have quoted from earlier.


Query 2. If dharma shatras (per reference provided by Renuka Madam) or upanishads say as a rule one must do Sharaddham that does not lead to any clarity as to why one should do them. I have a hard time accepting Sankaracharya actually talked about son doing Shraddha karmam to prevent Pithrus from obstruction. These are all beliefs as you said and I have a hard time accepting Sankaracharya writing Bhashya on beliefs. Is there a reference where the Acharya wrote the way you have described?

Reply : Dharmasastras as Smriti, can be accepted and followed when they elaborate on a point that is cursorily adressed to by the Upanishads.

As I mentioned earlier, the Acharya while commenting on one of the passages in the Brih Up, clearly mentions this "son doing Shraddha karmam to prevent Pithrus from obstruction". I have no doubt about it, as while reading it, I found it interesting since that Upanishadic passage is one of the earliest references to the pithru karma. You may refer the Bhashyam to Brih Up for further details, especially at the place where it treats with various Vidyas. At present I don't have the Bhashyam with me now. So for now, it's upto you to take my word on it or not

One can take these as beliefs, but for most Hindus, Sankaracharya is a revered authority. That too,someone who distinguishedly fought the mimamsakas throughout his life! Despite that, if a person of his stature supports the performance of pithru karma, with substantiating reasons, that should satisfy most practising Hindus, I feel.

Query 3. There are harmful beliefs and harmless beliefs. If someone believe there is a heaven or hell that is a harmless belief. But if they believe that someone not believing their God is an infedel and can be killed that is a harmful belief. Believing that there is curse of Pitrus is a harmful beliefs. So I am against it.

Reply: To kill someone (infidel) not agreeing with your pet beliefs, is a harmful belief. But here the injunction is to do certain (pithru) karma, which does not have elements harmful to others. It has many beneficial elements, like feeding the learned people, which is worth encouraging. I am not going into the various positive aspects in the Shraadha karma, now. (Of course, in practice, some negative features could have crept over centuries.) But I don't agree with the idea that Shraadham is a harmful belief. And it is supported by authorities (of all sects) in Hinduism.

 

[zebra16]

Reply : As I mentioned earlier, the Acharya while commenting on one of the passages in the Brih Up, clearly mentions this "son doing Shraddha karmam to prevent Pithrus from obstruction". I have no doubt about it, as while reading it, I found in that Upanishadic passage one of the earliest references to the pithru karma. As for Acharya's commentary, you may refer the Bhashyam to Brih Up for further details, especially at the place where it treats with various Vidyas. At present I don't have the Bhashyam with me now. So it's upto you to take my word on this or not

One can take these as beliefs, but for most Hindus, Sankaracharya is a revered authority. Moreover, one who distinguishedly fought the mimamsakas throughout his life. Despite that, if a person of his stature supports the performance of Shraddha karma, with substantiating reasons, that should satisfy most practising Hindus, I feel.

I would really like to join in the discussions and add a few points and to offer counterpoints on a few others. But as you are giving scholarly views supplemented by quotes etc. it behoves me to offer text passages/translations thereof. But as I am too hard pressed for time, I would just like to mention the following and would like to go to provision of proof etc. when challenged.

1. Inspite of advocating "gyAna mArgA" vigorously, Adi Sankara never advocated giving up of rituals etc. for gruhastAs. In fact he insisted upon gradual vairAgya in that you first give up the fruits of karmA and take what life gives as "Iswara prasAda" and once a gruhastA attains pari-pakvam the ritual doing will fall off by itself.

2. In various places in his BhAshyam, he has written "agnihOtram ityAdi" which can only mean rituals like agnihOtram etc. When one performs agnihOtram it goes without saying that one should also do sandhyA-vandanam which is a pre-requisite for doing any agni kAryam and other dEva-pitru kAryam.

3. His fight/argument with meemAmsakAs was only with reference to relegating upaniSads as mere artha-vAdA and that there is no Iswara (per meemAmsakAs). He has concurred with their intepretations on various other elements.

4. For Adi SankarA, vEdAs as pramANam for para-loukikA is given. For example in brihad-Aranyaka upaniSad BhAshyam, he gives true BhAshyam of the upaniSad unflinchingly regarding consumption of tender-bull meat etc. by the couple to get a good santAnam though it would appear to be heresy even during his times.

5. Another instance would be when questioned whether a personality such as vEda vyAsA could have existed, he replied that if the scriptures say such a personality graced the earth, it MUST be true. (I think this appears in brahma-sUtra BhAshyam).

 

[thebigthinkg]

Query 1. If Vairagyam sets in one should go on Sannyasam? What does go on Sannyasam mean? I cant imagine someone overcoming desires is told to immediately wear orange robe and roam around the world. For what purpose? If Sannyasam is a state of mind they dont need to do anything.

Reply : You need to see this topic in context. The reference 'yadahareva virajet tadahareva pravrajet' occurs in a Sannyasa Upanishad, and is a direct response to a query on Sannyasam in the text. You can refer the links I provided in my discussion with TBT ji.

Sir,

The Jabala Upanishad says, "The day one has virajet, that day one can start into wandering". This wandering stage is sannyasa.

In fact the Upanishad talks of pravrajet, which means simply wandering, roaming etc. It specifies the stage of Asrama as the wandering stage of a person. Because that's what is saMnyAsa is all about. nyAsa is depositing, delivering, giving it up. saMnyAsa means totally giving up. Giving ourselves out totally is saMnyAsa.

A saMnyAsin is supposed to give up not only the branches and leaves, but also the roots. That person is supposed to wander, roam around as much as possible. The person can settle in a kutil too in old age when unable to move. In Sankara's words that person has to live 'Jeevan maatra artha cestha', living barely to sustain life.

Now this is a tough requirement. Hence a 'Vani' moves into saMnyAsa as the Vanaprastha stages prepares the body and mind of that person for that saMnyAsa stage. This is the rule.

Jabala Upanishad provides an exception. What if in case a person has lost all energy (or becomes Vi-rajas whatever that meaning is). This can happen for physical or mental reasons. In that case of Vi-rajas also one can move into this wandering stage.

Remember it does not say vairAgya or virAga, but virajate.

Vi-rajas and Vi-raga (from which Vairagyam is derived) are different from each other. Vi-rajas is lack of rajo guna or lack of energy (if rajas is energy).

Vi-rAga is lack/losing all color. This losing of color is like losing of all passion/desire etc etc.. Essentially VairAgyam is all about becoming colorless, becoming devoid of any passion. This is a definite attribute required for saMnyAsa, no doubt. But that VairAgyam is not what is talked about in Jabala upanishad.

Getting into saMnyAsa, pravraja, which is giving up our roots, is not a joke. It requires a lot of physical and mental preparation. If a boy says I am going to saMnyAsa in every tambrahm marriage and after seeing a girl he changes his mind, that means tambrahms are ridiculing saMnyAsa or not understanding what it really means. This is an age-old tradition and I think our ancestors would not ridicule saMnyAsa.

I will explain Br Up 4.4.22 in another comment for sure.

-TBT

 

[KRN]

I would really like to join in the discussions and add a few points and to offer counterpoints on a few others. But as you are giving scholarly views supplemented by quotes etc. it behoves me to offer text passages/translations thereof. But as I am too hard pressed for time, I would just like to mention the following and would like to go to provision of proof etc. when challenged.

Sir,
I fully agree with all the points you have given. Regarding pt (5), Acharya goes further to quote from the Mahabharata, that Veda Vyasa was in an earlier birth a Rishi by name Apantara Tamas. By elsewhere quoting from the Anusasana and Santhi Parvas of the Mahabharata, he has showed his reverence to secondary scriptures like Mahabharata too.

 

[KRN]

Sir,

The Jabala Upanishad says, "The day one has virajet, that day one can start into wandering". This wandering stage is sannyasa.

In fact the Upanishad talks of pravrajet, which means simply wandering, roaming etc. It specifies the stage of Asrama as the wandering stage of a person. Because that's what is saMnyAsa is all about. nyAsa is depositing, delivering, giving it up. saMnyAsa means totally giving up. Giving ourselves out totally is saMnyAsa.

Sir,

Pravrajya is not simply wandering, roaming etc. If that were the case, every jobless person who wanders as a vagabond, could be referred to as someone who has entered pArivrajyam.

If, Sannyasam is a "wandering, roaming" Asrama to be followed only by an old person whose energy is all spent in the 3 Asramas, then why should one wander about and follow the tough Sannyasa rules at all? When one is devoid of any energy, perhaps in old age, it seems mindless self-cruelty to me

pArivrajyam has a much bigger meaning!

pArivrajyam is the pursuit of immortality. The giving up of attachments to the world is incidental, consequent to the realisation that they are all eshanas - for putra, vitta or loka - and immortality can never be achieved through these - and that they serve only to distract one's mind and time and energy from the goal - which is solely immortality - and which can be achieved only through the realisation of the Atman.

That attaining immortality is the goal of all human life, is the common message of all Upanishads. The upanishads do not insist on one spending his time and energy on various asramas. Since the asramas relate to the worldly matters like children, pleasures etc.

But if someone wants to spend time in Asramas, enjoying it's good and the bad, they are supported, since performing nishkama karma helps in mental purification. Also, if one has desires, then only by indulging in them, can their worthlessness be realized by many.

But the primary focus of the Sruti is always the attainment of Atmajnanam. And if some smart individual has attained renunciation (Virajet - detachment, disgust for the world) as per Brih Up 3.5.1 and 4.4.22 and wants to give up so as to devote his entire time and energy on Atmajnanam, then that is what the Upanishads want and appreciate. That is why, such individuals are reverently called Vidvaamsah. This attaining of a mental state where the focus is solely on the Atman (Baalyena thishtaset as the Upanishads say) is pArivrajyam, and not mere wandering about with unfulfilled desires and weakness of mind/body.

See how Brih Up 4.4.23 explains pArivrajyam

Therefore he who enters pArivrajyam is self controlled, calm, withdrawn into himself, enduring and concentrated, and sees the Self in his own self (body); he sees all as the Self. Evil does not overtake him, but he transcends all evil. Evil does not trouble him, (but) he consumes all evil. He becomes sinless, taintless, free from doubts, and becomes Brahmana.

 

[KRN]

A saMnyAsin is supposed to give up not only the branches and leaves, but also the roots. That person is supposed to wander, roam around as much as possible. The person can settle in a kutil too in old age when unable to move. In Sankara's words that person has to live 'Jeevan maatra artha cestha', living barely to sustain life.

Now this is a tough requirement. Hence a 'Vani' moves into saMnyAsa as the Vanaprastha stages prepares the body and mind of that person for that saMnyAsa stage. This is the rule.

If the purpose of human life were to spend a person's old age in self-punishment, and an unfulfilled and dissatisfied death at the end, then as a slow buildup to that goal, the above suggestion could be considered.

Jabala Upanishad provides an exception. What if in case a person has lost all energy (or becomes Vi-rajas whatever that meaning is). This can happen for physical or mental reasons. In that case of Vi-rajas also one can move into this wandering stage.

Jabala Up clearly mentions such weak or suffering persons separately - I have quoted that yesterday. Please refer my messages posted yesterday.

Viraja is a word used in other Upanishads too, like in Brih Up. There again, it is used in the sense of 'absence of impurity/ desires'.

If the Asramadharma were the rule and the subsequent lines were the exception, the Upanishadic passage would have clearly specified that. I have given a few translations of the work that agree with my perspective that all three options are available. Can you give any references to translations of the work, classical or modern, that interpret the passage the way you state?

 

[KRN]

Remember it does not say vairAgya or virAga, but virajate.

Vi-rajas and Vi-raga (from which Vairagyam is derived) are different from each other. Vi-rajas is lack of rajo guna or lack of energy (if rajas is energy).

Vi-rAga is lack/losing all color. This losing of color is like losing of all passion/desire etc etc..

Vi-rajas - Free from dust, free from passion, free from menstrual excretion (Sanskrit - English Dictionary by V.S Apte published by MLBD)

The meaning is exactly as I have given, ie the giving up of desires/passion. And that is why I connected this with the eshana-Tyagam of the Upanishads, wherever it deals with parivrajyam.

Also pls see Brih Up 4.4.23 where the word Vi-rajas is used in the same sense.

Your interpretation of virajas as "lack of energy", is not supported due to several counts, as I explained yesterday and today.

Also please see how Jab. Up further explains this giving up of passion/desires in detail, at the end.

यथा जातरूपधरो निर्ग्रन्थो निष्परिग्रहस्तत्तद्ब्रह्ममार्गे
सम्यक्सम्पन्नः शुद्धमानसः प्राणसन्धारणार्थं
यथोक्तकाले विमुक्तो भैक्षमाचरन्नुदरपात्रेण
लाभालाभयोः समो भूत्वा
शून्यागारदेवगृहतृणकूटवल्मीकवृक्षमूलकुलालशालाग्
निहोत्रगृहनदीपुलिनगिरिकुहरकन्दरकोटरनिर्झरस्थण्डिलेषु
तेष्वनिकेतवास्य प्रयत्नो निर्ममः
शुक्लध्यानपरायणोऽध्यात्मनिष्ठोऽशुभकर्म-
निर्मूलनपरः संन्यासेन देहत्यागं करोति स परमहंसो
नाम परमहंसो नामेति ॥ ६॥

One cannot attain this Samatvam (for labhalabhayoh etc), Nishparigraha, nirgrantha etc without giving up desires/passion. As Gita also explains in detail.

Nowhere does the word Viraja indicate 'lack of energy'.

 

[KRN]

Getting into saMnyAsa, pravraja, which is giving up our roots, is not a joke. It requires a lot of physical and mental preparation. If a boy says I am going to saMnyAsa in every tambrahm marriage and after seeing a girl he changes his mind, that means tambrahms are ridiculing saMnyAsa or not understanding what it really means. This is an age-old tradition and I think our ancestors would not ridicule saMnyAsa.

Sannyasam is not the giving up of our roots! It is the getting back to our roots, which is the Atman. Undoubtedly, Sannyasa is not an easy thing. It is kshurasya dhara nishitaa duratyayaa. But the preparation goes back to several births in the past. Certain fortunate individuals there might be, endowed with detachment, right from birth. For such people, Upanishads like Jabala Up and Brih Up advise the giving up of the Asramas whenever they seem superfluous or when they serve only to distract a person from the goal.

Considering that Jabala Up suggests Asramadharma as only one among three options leading to Sannyasa, and considering that Sannyasa, as the path which will help one to center his focus solely on Atmajnanam which confers immortality, which is the ultimate goal of all, and considering that entering into Garhasthyam would be a major decision in one's life, which could potentially delay his Sannyasam by many many years, it is but reasonable that a choice is clearly put before a boy on whether he wants to take to Sannyasam immediately. So I see the practice of Kasi yatra as an excellent reminder to everyone.

In the course of time, like every achaaram, this one too has turned into a farce. But that's not the fault of our well meaning ancestors

 

[thebigthinkg]

Sir,

Pravrajya is not simply wandering, roaming etc. If that were the case, every jobless person who wanders as a vagabond, could be referred to as someone who has entered pArivrajyam.

If, Sannyasam is a "wandering, roaming" Asrama to be followed only by an old person whose energy is all spent in the 3 Asramas, then why should one wander about and follow the tough Sannyasa rules at all? When one is devoid of any energy, perhaps in old age, it seems mindless self-cruelty to me

pArivrajyam has a much bigger meaning!

pArivrajyam is the pursuit of immortality. The giving up of attachments to the world is incidental, consequent to the realisation that they are all eshanas - for putra, vitta or loka - and immortality can never be achieved through these - and that they serve only to distract one's mind and time and energy from the goal - which is solely immortality - and which can be achieved only through the realisation of the Atman.

That attaining immortality is the goal of all human life, is the common message of all Upanishads. The upanishads do not insist on one spending his time and energy on various asramas. Since the asramas relate to the worldly matters like children, pleasures etc.

But if someone wants to spend time in Asramas, enjoying it's good and the bad, they are supported, since performing nishkama karma helps in mental purification. Also, if one has desires, then only by indulging in them, can their worthlessness be realized.

But the primary focus of the Sruti is always the attainment of Atmajnanam. And if some smart individual has attained renunciation (Virajet - detachment, disgust for the world) as per Brih Up 3.5.1 and 4.4.22 and wants to give up so as to devote his entire time and energy on Atmajnanam, then that is what the Upanishads want and appreciate. That is why, such individuals are reverently called Vidvaamsah. This attaining of a mental state where the focus is solely on the Atman (Baalyena thishtaset as the Upanishads say) is the goal of pArivrajyam, and not mere wandering about with unfulfilled desires and weakness of mind/body.

See how Brih Up 4.4.23 explains pArivrajyam

Therefore he who enters pArivrajyam is self controlled, calm, withdrawn into himself, enduring and concentrated, and sees the Self in his own self (body); he sees all as the Self. Evil does not overtake him, but he transcends all evil. Evil does not trouble him, (but) he consumes all evil. He becomes sinless, taintless, free from doubts, and becomes Brahmana.

oops sir, I did not mean that pravraja is just roaming and wandering. I agree with the 'spirit' (if not the exact words used) in what you wrote above. For the Atma jnanam part the best is to learn from what Br Up really says. Will write about it.

Please look at my comment in full.

"Jabala Upanishad provides an exception. What if in case a person has lost all energy (or becomes Vi-rajas whatever that meaning is). This can happen for physical or mental reasons. In that case of Vi-rajas also one can move into this wandering stage.

Remember it does not say vairAgya or virAga, but virajate.

Vi-rajas and Vi-raga (from which Vairagyam is derived) are different from each other. Vi-rajas is lack of rajo guna or lack of energy (if rajas is energy).

Vi-rAga is lack/losing all color. This losing of color is like losing of all passion/desire etc etc.. Essentially VairAgyam is all about becoming colorless, becoming devoid of any passion. This is a definite attribute required for saMnyAsa, no doubt. But that VairAgyam is not what is talked about in Jabala upanishad.

Getting into saMnyAsa, pravraja, which is giving up our roots, is not a joke. It requires a lot of physical and mental preparation. If a boy says I am going to saMnyAsa in every tambrahm marriage and after seeing a girl he changes his mind, that means tambrahms are ridiculing saMnyAsa or not understanding what it really means. This is an age-old tradition and I think our ancestors would not ridicule saMnyAsa."

So I am echoing what you are saying. Then I am asking

"Getting into saMnyAsa, pravraja, which is giving up our roots, is not a joke. It requires a lot of physical and mental preparation. If a boy says I am going to saMnyAsa in every tambrahm marriage and after seeing a girl he changes his mind, that means tambrahms are ridiculing saMnyAsa or not understanding what it really means. This is an age-old tradition and I think our ancestors would not ridicule saMnyAsa."


-TBT

 

[KRN]

oops sir, I did not mean that pravraja is just roaming and wandering. I agree with the 'spirit' (if not the exact words used) in what you wrote above. For the Atma jnanam part the best is to learn from what Br Up really says. Will write about it.

Sir, the pursuit of immortality thru Atma jnanam is the message of ALL Upanishads. And not Asramadharma. That is my point.

So I am echoing what you are saying. Then I am asking

"Getting into saMnyAsa, pravraja, which is giving up our roots, is not a joke. It requires a lot of physical and mental preparation. If a boy says I am going to saMnyAsa in every tambrahm marriage and after seeing a girl he changes his mind, that means tambrahms are ridiculing saMnyAsa or not understanding what it really means. This is an age-old tradition and I think our ancestors would not ridicule saMnyAsa."

I have already replied in detail to your message, including the above part, in posts (56), (57) and (58)

 

[thebigthinkg]

Vi-rajas - Free from dust, free from passion, free from menstrual excretion (Sanskrit - English Dictionary by V.S Apte published by MLBD)

The meaning is exactly as I have given, ie the giving up of desires/passion. And that is why I connected this with the eshana-Tyagam of the Upanishads, wherever it deals with parivrajyam.

Also pls see Brih Up 4.4.23 where the word Vi-rajas is used in the same sense.

Your interpretation of virajas as "lack of energy", is not supported due to several counts, as I explained yesterday and today.

Also please see how Jab. Up further explains this giving up of passion/desires in detail, at the end.

यथा जातरूपधरो निर्ग्रन्थो निष्परिग्रहस्तत्तद्ब्रह्ममार्गे
सम्यक्सम्पन्नः शुद्धमानसः प्राणसन्धारणार्थं
यथोक्तकाले विमुक्तो भैक्षमाचरन्नुदरपात्रेण
लाभालाभयोः समो भूत्वा
शून्यागारदेवगृहतृणकूटवल्मीकवृक्षमूलकुलालशालाग्
निहोत्रगृहनदीपुलिनगिरिकुहरकन्दरकोटरनिर्झरस्थण्डिलेषु
तेष्वनिकेतवास्य प्रयत्नो निर्ममः
शुक्लध्यानपरायणोऽध्यात्मनिष्ठोऽशुभकर्म-
निर्मूलनपरः संन्यासेन देहत्यागं करोति स परमहंसो
नाम परमहंसो नामेति ॥ ६॥

One cannot attain this Samatvam (for labhalabhayoh etc), Nishparigraha, nirgrantha etc without giving up desires/passion. As Gita also explains in detail.

Nowhere does the word Viraja indicate 'lack of energy'.

Yes, I acknowledged very much that vi-raja could also be free of raja guna. I wrote rajas could be energy or manifestations of excess energy (which is raja guna like anger, passion lust). I said would take vi-rajas simply as energy here and not the guna because saMnyAsa requires more than being free of rajas.

Actually Br Up says something totally opposite to the concept that you are propounding that saMnyAsa is about AtmajnAnam. That's why I want to write about 4.4.22 and 4.4.23 in very detail, probably in a separate post.

Just to clarify on how virajas is used in 4.4.23

In Br Up 4.4.23, Yajnavalkya tells Janaka that a person who knows the Atma, a 'brAhmana' (a knowledgeable person), whose actions become sinless, whose mahima neither grows big nor small because of actions. In that context, that brAhmana (is not neccessarily a saMnyAsa)
becomes "vipāpo virajo'vicikitso brāhmaṇo bhavati".

There are three ills we have. Ill of action (pApa), ill of mind (rajas guna) and ill of body (needs cikitSa).

A learned who knows the Atman is free of ills of action, ills of mind and free of needing any physical treatment.

vipApa is free of sinful actions.
viraja is free of raja guna (free of passion, anger and other aspects of raja guna)
vicikitsa is free of medical treatment (medicines).

In this case I attribute Vi-raja to free of raja guna (excess energy causing anger, passion, lust etc), because here the brAhmana is becoming free of ills of mind (action comes before and body comes after wards).

The ill of mind is the raja guna that causes energy imbalance or excess energy in terms of anger, passion, lust etc which could end up performing sinful actions.

-TBT

 

[KRN]

Yes, I acknowledged very much that vi-raja could also be free of raja guna. I wrote rajas could be energy or manifestations of excess energy (which is raja guna like anger, passion lust). I said would take vi-rajas simply as energy here and not the guna because saMnyAsa requires more than being free of rajas.

OK. With the reference to the dictionary hope you are now convinced that the meaning for virajas that I gave, as devoid of passion/desires, is correct.

Actually Br Up says something totally opposite to the concept that you are propounding that saMnyAsa is about AtmajnAnam. That's why I want to write about 4.4.22 and 4.4.23 in very detail, probably in a separate post.

Sir, pArivrajyam, which is the topic of Brih Up (4.4.22) directly talks about Atmajnanam only.

 

[KRN]

Just to clarify on how virajas is used in 4.4.23

In Br Up 4.4.23, Yajnavalkya tells Janaka that a person who knows the Atma, a 'brAhmana' (a knowledgeable person), whose actions become sinless, whose mahima neither grows big nor small because of actions. In that context, that brAhmana (is not neccessarily a saMnyAsa)
becomes "vipāpo virajo'vicikitso brāhmaṇo bhavati".

The same set of Brahmanas who have realised the Atman, are meant

In (4.4.22) the Upanishad talks of Vidvan Brahmanas who have taken to pArivrAjyam after realising the Atman. See 'etameva viditva munir bhavati. etameva pravrajino lokamicchantah pravrajanti''.

And (4.4.23) which immediately follows (4.4.22) deals with these Vidvan Brahmanas. See the expression 'tam viditva' in the Rik.

There are three ills we have. Ill of action (pApa), ill of mind (rajas guna) and ill of body (needs cikitSa).
viraja is free of raja guna (free of passion, anger and other aspects of raja guna)
vicikitsa is free of medical treatment (medicines).
In this case I attribute Vi-raja to free of raja guna (excess energy causing anger, passion, lust etc), because here the brAhmana is becoming free of ills of mind (action comes before and body comes after wards).
The ill of mind is the raja guna that causes energy imbalance or excess energy in terms of anger, passion, lust etc which could end up performing sinful actions.

Sir,

The Brih Up doesn't talk about the guna theory anywhere. You are unnecessarily complicating it by introducing the rajo guna out of nowhere (and what about Sattva and Tamas then?)
And the meaning of vichikitsa is 'free of doubt'.
You cannot state that someone who has realized the Atman should be entirely free of physical diseases. Then are you implying that people like Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa and Ramana Maharshi who have have suffered from diseases till death, might not have realized the Atman?

Going back to the quote 'Yadahareva virajet tadahareva pravrajet' from Jabala Up, I have already provided a few translations matching with the interpretation I have given. Can you please provide links to any translation to the text, ancient or modern, which agrees with your interpretation?

 

[KRN]

TBT ji,

Thank you for your time in our interaction over the past few days. I hope I have been able to put forward my perspective with clarity. Due to pressing work I will not be visiting this forum for a week from now. If you require any further clarification, I will provide that when I next visit this forum.
Best
KRN

 

[thebigthinkg]

Sannyasam is not the giving up of our roots! It is the getting back to our roots, which is the Atman. Undoubtedly, Sannyasa is not an easy thing. It is kshurasya dhara nishitaa duratyayaa. But the preparation goes back to several births in the past. Certain fortunate individuals there might be, endowed with detachment, right from birth. For such people, Upanishads like Jabala Up and Brih Up advise the giving up of the Asramas whenever they seem superfluous or when they serve only to distract a person from the goal.

Considering that Jabala Up suggests Asramadharma as only one among three options leading to Sannyasa, and considering that Sannyasa, as the path which will help one to center his focus solely on Atmajnanam which confers immortality, which is the ultimate goal of all, and considering that entering into Garhasthyam would be a major decision in one's life, which could potentially delay his Sannyasam by many many years, it is but reasonable that a choice is clearly put before a boy on whether he wants to take to Sannyasam immediately. So I see the practice of Kasi yatra as an excellent reminder to everyone.

In the course of time, like every achaaram, this one too has turned into a farce. But that's not the fault of our well meaning ancestors

Yes, absolutely. For going back to our roots, one has to give up our physical roots. That's why pravraja is about wandering. So we can divide the fundamental questions here into 2 parts

1. Does kAsi yAtra symbolize going to saMnyAasa (though it is popularly understood so)
2. Can one go from any Asrama to saMnyAsa ..?

Many of our rituals are not farce. They have a meaning. We lost them. We are trying to uncover them.

On kAsi Yatra

KRN Sir, you wrote "saMnyAsam is going to back to our roots. It is about reaching to the Atman. It is not an easy thing. Few forutnate individuals only can achieve that detachment etc, - are right (which i also agreed in all the passages i wrote) to fully pursue AtmajnAnam, while in other Asramas it can be done with distraction etc.."

So you accept that going to saMnyAsa is an exception (for few people) and not the rule (for majority), which is what jabala upanishad also says. It gives rule first and exception later. Yes we disagree on Vi-rajas, the reason for exception being lack of raja-guna, lack of energy, being pure etc etc etc.. But that's another point.

Now coming back to question on kAsi yAtra, is it that we are enacting a drama to the boy that we have already given him an option to escape to saMnyAsa and he did not use it..? But we also know that in any asrama we can attain Atma jnAnam, we also know saMnyAsa is very tough and for few individuals and exceptions, then why are we making the boy to go through this farce..?

Is it a deficit of learning or teaching with with boys/gurus about saMnyAsa that every boy starts a saMnyAsa yAtra before his marriage and abandons it once he receives the offer of a daughter..? Are we not showing that our boy is fickle-minded..?

From the bride side, why should father of a daughter stop a person going to saMnyAsa yAtra and give his daughter..?

What does that ritual signify..?

That's where my explanation comes in as this ritual of going to a place for higher learning and the dad of bride finds a person who is equipped to learn more.

On second question

1. Your argument was about how in Jabala upanishad it is stated from any asrama one can go to another asrama. You said if one attains vairAgya. But then vi-rajas is not vairAgya. So this point is more about how we translate vi-rajas. But I think we agree that going to saMnyAsa asrama directly is an exception.

Now if the exception is for people without energy or people who are pure/detached can be debated. It is just a perspective difference. The point is going from any Asrama to saMnyAsa is an exception.

2. Then the issue of 'bhikSacArya' mentioned Br Up 4.4.22 which leads to translation that people in search of Atma lead the life of a saMnyAsa. But that is a larger treatment. I will deal in a separate OP or comment.

3. Then how in Br Up 4.4.23 virajo is used. I explained it previously.

4. It is absolutely true that theology on this is divided. In fact saMnyAsa from any asrama is an accepted norm these days. But what we are talking about is how Asrama dharma is seen in certain Upanishads and how it is interpreted/mis-interpreted to situations of today.

The above is a bit biased summary, when I read it again, as it carries my perspectives more. But I hope it does some justice to understanding what we learnt till now..?

-TBT

 

[thebigthinkg]

The same set of Brahmanas who have realised the Atman, are meant

In (4.4.22) the Upanishad talks of Vidvan Brahmanas who have taken to pArivrAjyam after realising the Atman. See 'etameva viditva munir bhavati. etameva pravrajino lokamicchantah pravrajanti''.

And (4.4.23) which immediately follows (4.4.22) deals with these Vidvan Brahmanas. See the expression 'tam viditva' in the Rik.



Sir,

The Brih Up doesn't talk about the guna theory anywhere. You are unnecessarily complicating it by introducing the rajo guna out of nowhere (and what about Sattva and Tamas then?)
And the meaning of vichikitsa is 'free of doubt'.
You cannot state that someone who has realized the Atman should be entirely free of physical diseases. Then are you implying that people like Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa and Ramana Maharshi who have have suffered from diseases till death, might not have realized the Atman?

Going back to the quote 'Yadahareva virajet tadahareva pravrajet' from Jabala Up, I have already provided a few translations matching with the interpretation I have given. Can you please provide links to any translation to the text, ancient or modern, which agrees with your interpretation?

Br Up does not have guna theory for sure. But it have words like sattva, rajas, tamas etc.

For Vi-rajas, i wrote lack of rajas is lack of energy. Rajas is energy or excess energy. Excess energy manifests as anger, passion, lust etc etc.. This is what in SaMkya is called as Rajo Guna. rajas is acknowledged as energy or excess energy in many translations.

The word is cikitSa. cikitSa means medicinal therapy.

[FONT=&quot]विपापो विरजोऽविचिकित्सो ब्राह्मणो भवति

[/FONT]Sir, on another note, I really thank you from the bottom of my heart for your time. I needed such challenges and that's the reason why I put my blogs/write-ups in this forum. Such challenges help me prepare for bigger challenges for the work I am doing.

KRN Sir, thanks once again for your time. I need your blessings.

-TBT

 

[KRN]

Br Up does not have guna theory for sure. But it have words like sattva, rajas, tamas etc.

For Vi-rajas, i wrote lack of rajas is lack of energy. Rajas is energy or excess energy. Excess energy manifests as anger, passion, lust etc etc.. This is what in SaMkya is called as Rajo Guna. rajas is acknowledged as energy or excess energy in many translations.

Lack of energy cannot be equated to lack of anger, passion, lust etc etc.

A lack of energy can never be the translation for Vi-rajas due to various reasons I have given yesterday and today.

The word is cikitSa. cikitSa means medicinal therapy.

विपापो विरजोऽविचिकित्सो ब्राह्मणो भवति

Sir, a Sanskrit word can have several meanings. If we blindly apply any meaning to a word, we will encounter several difficulties. You have not answered me how this is in alignment with the Brahmajnanis like Ramana maharshi who have suffered diseases.

Sir, on another note, I really thank you from the bottom of my heart for your time. I needed such challenges and that's the reason why I put my blogs/write-ups in this forum. Such challenges help me prepare for bigger challenges for the work I am doing.

KRN Sir, thanks once again for your time. I need your blessings.

-TBT

I may be perhaps younger than what you imagine..

Every interaction is a learning experience here

 

[thebigthinkg]

Lack of energy cannot be equated to lack of anger, passion, lust etc etc.

A lack of energy can never be the translation for Vi-rajas due to various reasons I have given yesterday and today.



Sir, a Sanskrit word can have several meanings. If we blindly apply any meaning to a word, we will encounter several difficulties. You have not answered me how this is in alignment with the Brahmajnanis like Ramana maharshi who have suffered diseases.

[/FONT][/COLOR]

I may be perhaps younger than what you imagine..

Every interaction is a learning experience here

Though a word can be interpreted to have many meanings, most of them derive from some root meaning.

Who realize the self are free of physical therapy (vi -cikitSa) could simply mean 2 things

1. They don't need any therapies which means free of illness of body
2. They don't see any therapies because they identify themselves with their Self and not with their body.

Ramana for example was supposed to have told his doctors that his body feels pain and he sees it, but he does not feel it. Now, I don't know what he meant. I was born 2 decades after he left.

But I take it as 'i am vi-cikitSa", free of any therapies.

And I also answered your other doubt.

-TBT

 

[KRN]

On kAsi Yatra

KRN Sir, you wrote "saMnyAsam is going to back to our roots. It is about reaching to the Atman. It is not an easy thing. Few forutnate individuals only can achieve that detachment etc, - are right (which i also agreed in all the passages i wrote) to fully pursue AtmajnAnam, while in other Asramas it can be done with distraction etc.."

So you accept that going to saMnyAsa is an exception (for few people) and not the rule (for majority), which is what jabala upanishad also says. It gives rule first and exception later. Yes we disagree on Vi-rajas, the reason for exception being lack of raja-guna, lack of energy, being pure etc etc etc.. But that's another point.

Sir, you have got it wrong. Jabala upanishad prescribes Sannyasa for everyone. Sannyasa is the rule.

For some, who wanted to enjoy the worldly pleasures for some time, the Asrama dharma is prescribed, finally ending in Sannyasa.

For anyone who has attained detachment (Vairagyam) at some Asrama/stage of their life, they can immediately skip the succeeding Asramas and go directly to Sannyasa.

For those who are outside the pale of Asramadharma (and this is elaborated in the Up), again whenever they get detachment, they can go directly to Sannyasa.

Going to Sannyasa is a must. It is the rule, not the exception.

That is why, Yajnavalkya who was a Brahma jnani himself, nevertheless took up Sannyasa (after his discussion with Maitreyi).

Now coming back to question on kAsi yAtra, is it that we are enacting a drama to the boy that we have already given him an option to escape to saMnyAsa and he did not use it..? But we also know that in any asrama we can attain Atma jnAnam, we also know saMnyAsa is very tough and for few individuals and exceptions, then why are we making the boy to go through this farce..?

I have explained Kasi Yatra's significance. It now a farce, just like many things are. Who does Agnihotram nowadays?
But at least, we won't be discussing it's significance here, if we have done away with it entirely

That's where my explanation comes in as this ritual of going to a place for higher learning and the dad of bride finds a person who is equipped to learn more.

Sir, that's an insightful explanation as it made me think of the Raikva episode. But otherwise that explanation does not jell at all, because anyone who simply states that he wants to go to Kasi, cannot be presumed to be an eligible son-in-law. And there are other reasons like the remoteness of Kasi, that I have given earlier.

Your argument was about how in Jabala upanishad it is stated from any asrama one can go to another asrama. You said if one attains vairAgya. But then vi-rajas is not vairAgya. So this point is more about how we translate vi-rajas. But I think we agree that going to saMnyAsa asrama directly is an exception.

Now if the exception is for people without energy or people who are pure/detached can be debated. It is just a perspective difference. The point is going from any Asrama to saMnyAsa is an exception.

Sir
I have shown with reference from Apte's dictionary that Viraja means lack of passion, and you in turn translated Vairagya as lack of passion/desire etc. So they are not dissimilar words. The point is, Viraja cannot be translated as 'lack of energy' here with which I guess you too agree now. Moreover, with reference to Jabala upanishad, which prescribes Sannyasa for all, the dictionary meaning of viraja as lack of passion or detachment holds well, as it is in sync with the eshana-tyagam outlined in the Brih Up for parivrajya. So there is really no confusion in the translation of the word viraja.

 

[KRN]

Sir, on another note, I really thank you from the bottom of my heart for your time. I needed such challenges and that's the reason why I put my blogs/write-ups in this forum. Such challenges help me prepare for bigger challenges for the work I am doing.

KRN Sir, thanks once again for your time. I need your blessings.

-TBT

Thank you Sir, for the kind words It's my pleasure.

 

[KRN]

Though a word can be interpreted to have many meanings, most of them derive from some root meaning.

Who realize the self are free of physical therapy (vi -cikitSa) could simply mean 2 things

1. They don't need any therapies which means free of illness of body
2. They don't see any therapies because they identify themselves with their Self and not with their body.

Ramana for example was supposed to have told his doctors that his body feels pain and he sees it, but he does not feel it. Now, I don't know what he meant. I was born 2 decades after he left.

But I take it as 'i am vi-cikitSa", free of any therapies.

And I also answered your other doubt.

-TBT

Sir,
That is an interesting and insightful interpretation. It was nice interacting with you Sir.

Please do not take my messages as a challenge to you or to anyone. I have a certain perspective of things in mind, (Sannyasa and Atmajnanam in this case) and I feel excited about it, so sometimes if I am in the mood, I enjoy by writing or debating about it. In the process I get to learn from these interactions, which is a definite bonus.

Now that my doubt is answered, you will need to give me your blessings

 

[thebigthinkg]

Sir,
That is an interesting and insightful interpretation. It was nice interacting with you Sir.

Please do not take my messages as a challenge to you or to anyone. I have a certain perspective of things in mind, (Sannyasa and Atmajnanam in this case) and I feel excited about it, so sometimes if I am in the mood, I enjoy by writing or debating about it. In the process I get to learn from these interactions, which is a definite bonus.

Now that my doubt is answered, you will need to give me your blessings

tadAstu

 

[thebigthinkg]

In these threads, I had stated that 'theology' is differentiated on how Asramas had to be adapted and there was also a question to show proof apart from my own statements. I record this just for information sake, for future use. Here is how different sutras talk about Asramas.

https://www.tamilbrahmins.com/showthread.php?t=38819

-TBT