Idam na mama

[Srikanta Narayanaswami]

The starting shloka of Ishavasya Upanishad beautifully summarises this theme:
Ishavasyam idam sarvam yat kinca jagatyam jagat!
tena tyaktena bhunjita ma gridha kasyaciddanam!!

The Upanishath doesnot say "you should not enjoy'.it says "ma gridha kasyacit
danam.Don't be grredy as tgo covet another's money.
Sri,Adi Shankara Bhagawathpada the great Jnani that he was reflects this in his
"Bhajagovindam"stotram:

Mudha jahih danagama trishnam
kuru sadbuddhim manasavitrishnam
yallabhase nija karmopattam
vittam tena vinodaya cittam.

He does not say you should give up mundane things.But,yallabhase nija
karmopattam,vittam tena vinodaya cittam.This indeed is the sanatana dharma.
But,whither goes India!
Bhava shankara Desika me saranam.

Regards,
N.Srikanta.

[Jaldhar H. Vyas]

Post by Srikanta Narayanaswami
Ishavasyam idam sarvam yat kinca jagatyam jagat!
tena tyaktena bhunjita ma gridha kasyaciddanam!!
The Upanishath doesnot say "you should not enjoy'.it says "ma gridha kasyacit
danam.Don't be grredy as tgo covet another's money.

It does really. Everything belongs to someone else Ishvara who pervades
all. (Ishavasyam idam sarvam yatkincha jagatyam jagat.) Knowing this
_one_ _should_ _renounce_ (tena tyaktena). Renunciation with the idea
"whose is this wealth I enjoy?" is the opposite of covetousness.

I am reminded of the story of Vaman avatar. Proud Baliraja on seeing the
Brahmana dwarf who is paying a visit says take as much land as you can
walk three steps. He thought how much can this be for such a little man?
But Vishnu Bhagavan expanded in size and in two steps spanned the entire
universe. It was then that Baliraja realized his error and forsaking
pride offered his head as the third step.

Post by Srikanta Narayanaswami
I feel giving Dana is a better way to get Jnana than Self Inquiry like
Who am I. In another email reply to Sri Bhaskar I explained for us
Manushyas Dana is best path. Donating something a man cuts his
attachment to that thing.

The above story demonstrates that it is not always so. Without
understanding, even good deeds like charity can be a vehicle for ego and
arrogance.

[Bhaskar YR]

Without understanding, even good deeds like charity can be a vehicle for
ego and
arrogance.

Humble sAshtAnga praNAms Sri Jaldhya Vyas prabhuji
Hare krishna

That is indeed a good observation prabhuji. Yes, entertaining a thought
that I am a 'dAni' implies that he is thinking that he is a possessor!!
This would result in furthering the ego. A real dAni would not think that
he is a dAni...A thyAga bhAva is tyAga of the notion that he is a dAni or
tyAgi...And this ahaMkAra, mamakAra tyAga is what leads us to amrutatvaM.
'kereya neeranu kerage chelli' sings Sri purandara dAsa.

Your humble servant
Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
bhaskar

[Bhaskar YR]

Humble sAshtAnga praNAms Sri Jaldhya Vyas prabhuji

praNAms Sri Jaldhar vyAs prabhuji
Hare krishna

Kindly pardon me the above typo.

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
bhaskar

[Suresh Marur]

An interesting post that is close to my heart too. Many people have
posted by the time I could collect my thoughts and craft a response.

Renunciation and tyaaga is often misunderstood and people imagine
giving up things means living like a mendicant. Being a statement that
applies to everyone, this is clearly not required. In fact, this is
one reason many people think that spirituality and study begins at the
age of 60 when we are "incapable" of acquiring any more wealth.

It is really meant to imply a state of mind where we say "This is not
mine". This in obvious terms implies to things that belongs to others.
What about things that we "own"? It is the things we "own" that can
become problems for us. In reality, we OWN nothing. Everything is
provided for and we get the privilege of "exclusive" access from time
to time (including our own selves). It is when we take this for
granted and start calling things "mine" that problems start and the
mind gets attached.

It does not require any knowledge of Vedanta to build this attitude.
It is based on simple observation and reasoning. The attitude is
however the basis for honesty, humility, and contentment. Not having
this attitude is the root cause for all the negative traits
(dishonesty, pride, greed and jealousy respectively).

These three words of "idam na mama" IMO is the basis for all spiritual
growth... Before this attitude, any amount of theory and reading of
scriptures means nothing and amounts to empty gossip.

-Suresh

Post by Bhaskar YR
Without understanding, even good deeds like charity can be a vehicle for
ego and
arrogance.
Humble sAshtAnga praNAms Sri Jaldhya Vyas prabhuji
Hare krishna
That is indeed a good observation prabhuji.  Yes, entertaining a thought
that I am a 'dAni' implies that he is thinking that he is a possessor!!
This would result in furthering the ego.  A real dAni would not think that
he is a dAni...A thyAga bhAva is tyAga of the notion that he is a dAni or
tyAgi...And this ahaMkAra, mamakAra tyAga is what leads us to amrutatvaM.
'kereya neeranu kerage chelli' sings Sri purandara dAsa.
Your humble servant
Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
bhaskar
_______________________________________________
Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l

[Venkatesh Murthy]

Namaste

Post by Srikanta Narayanaswami
Ishavasyam idam sarvam yat kinca jagatyam jagat!
tena tyaktena bhunjita ma gridha kasyaciddanam!!
The Upanishath doesnot say "you should not enjoy'.it says "ma gridha kasyacit
danam.Don't be grredy as tgo covet another's money.

It does really.  Everything belongs to someone else Ishvara who pervades
all.  (Ishavasyam idam sarvam yatkincha jagatyam jagat.)  Knowing this _one_
_should_ _renounce_ (tena tyaktena).  Renunciation with the idea "whose is
this wealth I enjoy?" is the opposite of covetousness.
I am reminded of the story of Vaman avatar.  Proud Baliraja on seeing the
Brahmana dwarf who is paying a visit says take as much land as you can walk
three steps.  He thought how much can this be for such a little man? But
Vishnu Bhagavan expanded in size and in two steps spanned the entire
universe.  It was then that Baliraja realized his error and forsaking pride
offered his head as the third step.

Post by Srikanta Narayanaswami
I feel giving Dana is a better way to get Jnana than Self Inquiry like
Who am I. In another email reply to Sri Bhaskar I explained for us
Manushyas Dana is best path. Donating something a man cuts his
attachment to that thing.

The above story demonstrates that it is not always so.  Without
understanding, even good deeds like charity can be a vehicle for ego and
arrogance.
--

Bali Chakravarti got warning from Guru Sukracharya but he did not
listen. Dana cannot be given to anybody. The receiver must be fit to
receive the gift. Only Anna Dana is allowed to be given to anybody.
You cannot give donation to a person who can misuse the gift.
Sukracharya warned Bali about Vamana because he knew Vishnu was
deceiving Bali. Another point. Dani cannot give Dana expecting some
return. Then he is not Dani and there is no Dana. It is a business
deal. It is not true Dana. You cannot give donate something you do
not have. It is not possible. When Dana is given in proper way it
will get rid of Ajnana in the best way.

[V Subrahmanian]

On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 9:00 AM, Srikanta Narayanaswami <

Post by Srikanta Narayanaswami
Ishavasyam idam sarvam yat kinca jagatyam jagat!
tena tyaktena bhunjita ma gridha kasyaciddanam!!
The Upanishath doesnot say "you should not enjoy'.it says "ma gridha kasyacit
danam.Don't be grredy as tgo covet another's money.

(Even as I was composing the following reply Jaldhar ji's message popped
up. I am posting this anyway.)


The bhAShyam says:

//Through renunciation protect yourself. You who have thus renounced
desires, do not covet, do not cherish any desire for wealth. Do not long
for कस्यस्विद् धनम् anybody's - either your own or somebody else's wealth.
This is the meaning.
OR the meaning is this: Do not covet. Why? कस्यस्विद् धनम्. This question
(कस्य?) is used in the sense of denial: आक्षेपार्थे प्रश्नः न तु प्रश्नार्थे
because nobody has any wealth which can be coveted. The idea is this:
Everything has been renounced through this thought of the 'Lord' - All this
is the Self so that all this belongs to the Self, and the Self is all
Therefore do not have any hankering for things that are unreal.//

Here is an interesting anecdote on 'renouncing', tyAga, dAna:

Paul Brunton asked Ramana: Should I not give up all possessions?

Ramana: The possessor too.

This reply of Ramana is reminiscent of the VAmana-Bali episode. The Lord,
as vAmana, the young brAhmaNa, sought three foot steps measure of land.
When by the first two steps the entire universe was measured up, there was
nothing for Bali to give for the third step. He knew what was remaining to
be given away and that was himself, the ego. He offered his head for the
Lord to place his foot for the third step, signifying that after having
given up all possessions, the possessor too had to be given up in order that
the tyAga, dAna, was complete.

Br.Sri Nochur Venkataraman, the famous exponent of Bhagavatam and Vedanta
narrated the above.

Regards,
subrahmanian.v
_______________________________________________
Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita

To unsubscribe or change your options:
http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l

For assistance, contact:
***@advaita-vedanta.org

[Srikanta Narayanaswami]

With reference to Sri.subramaniam and Sri.Jaldhar vyas's Email on the above
topic in reply to my Email on the above topic,I would like to say that It may
not be possible to even giveup one's own things,but it is possible not to be
greedy.This is supported by Adi shankara,when he says,"Yallabhase nija
karmopattam vittam tena vinodaya cittam".The first verse of Ishavasyam is
addressed to the Sanyasis as the bhshya of Shankara clearly explains.The second
verse,:
Kurvannevehakarmani jijivisheccatagm samah!
evam tvayi nanyahetosti
nakarma lipyate nare!!

Regards,
N.Srikanta.

[Srikanta Narayanaswami]

Dear Sriram.

With reference to your Email on the above topic,You are talking about the
"Yajna"as it is understood commonly,i.e pouring oblations to the fire to get
something in return from the Devatas.I am talking about the 'JnanYagna"which is
glorified by the Bhagavan in the Bhagavadgita.In the Upanishath which belongs to
the uttarakanda(uttaramimamsa),only Jnanayagna is relevant.without obtaining
Jnana,.pouring all the wealth like tins of ghee,silk,barley,millets is a
collossal waste.Many could be fed with that money.
Regards,
N.Srikanta.

[Satish Arigela]

Post by Srikanta Narayanaswami
without obtaining
Jnana,.pouring all the wealth like tins of ghee,silk,barley,millets is a
collossal waste. 

Once Jnana dawns upon a being, it no longer needs to perform any yAga or homa or
japa.

Arent these karma-s meant for one who has not yet attained Jnana?

Post by Srikanta Narayanaswami
Many could be fed with that money.

Dont be so sure. One wouldnt be if they observe the workings of nature closely.

[Vidyasankar Sundaresan]

Post by Srikanta Narayanaswami
With reference to your Email on the above topic,You are talking about the
"Yajna"as it is understood commonly,i.e pouring oblations to the fire to get
something in return from the Devatas.I am talking about the 'JnanYagna"which is
glorified by the Bhagavan in the Bhagavadgita.In the Upanishath which belongs to
the uttarakanda(uttaramimamsa),only Jnanayagna is relevant.without obtaining
Jnana,.pouring all the wealth like tins of ghee,silk,barley,millets is a
collossal waste.Many could be fed with that money.

This is a peculiar mix up of economic and religious motivations, is it not? Feeding the
needy is good, but better would be to help the needy get to a point where they can
feed themselves. Money does not grow on trees; it is a product of human activity.

And within the vast sphere of human activity, yajna has religious significance. It can
be done for selfish reasons (kAmya) or because it is ordained so (nitya-naimittika)
or it can be given up by the jnAnI.

In the same bhagavadgItA, there is a verse yAvAnartha udapAne ... which refers to
the jnAnI. Only the one without jnAna has any motivation to pour ghee and material
goods into the sacrificial fire. It could be for kAmya reasons or it could be done in a
nishkAma fashion. What is waste for one man is food for another. For instance, if
one were to think that performing SrAddha is a waste and that one should instead
feed the poor or do something else, then that falls under the avidhi-pUrvaka action
that the bhagavAn also criticizes in the gItA.

Please also see the ending portions of the mahAnArAyaNopanishat, where satya,
tapas, dama, Sama, dAna, dharma, agni, agnihotra, yajna and mAnasam are all
extolled before saMnyAsa leading to brahman. When it comes to satya, tapas, dAna,
dharma, tapas, yajna etc., it is never a question of one or the other exclusively. Prior
to jnAna, one needs everything. Only the jnAnI needs nothing. You cannot say, "I
always speak the truth (satya), so I don't need tapas." or "I meticulously perform
all the yajnas, so I don't need any self-control (dama)," or "I donate generously
(dAna), so I can neglect truth (satya) and can afford to earn through corruption
and other dishonest means." There is absolutely no point achieved in neglecting or
ridiculing one aspect and elevating another exclusively.

Regards,
Vidyasankar

[Srikanta Narayanaswami]

Same again - trying to make it look silly. Nobody said  performing a homa to a
certain devata  automatically grants brahma jnana. It is one of the many things
that help remove obstacles on the path.

some times the very purpose of removing the obstacles creats obstacles.Just as
what happened at Tanjure bitemple,that the priests made a bonfire which causes
many deaths and loss to property

There are many stanzas which substantiate this.n his karikas,Gaudapada the supre
teacher says:
"Upasnasritasya brahmasya jnate Brahmani vartate
prag utpatter ajam sarvam tenasau krpanah smtah"
 
This forum is not meant to discuss the ritualistic aspects.It is to discuss
Advaita as enshrined in the Upanishads.For this to happen,one must leave trivial
things aside.Remember,it was you who started this trivial exchanges.
N.srikanta.

[Srikanta Narayanaswami]

Dear Sriram
With reference to your lengthy post,I only have this to say.It is left to any
one to jolly well believe that these yagnas,yagas and other rituals bring rain
or whatever it is performed by some sastry as you wrote.How is that without
performing these,there are floods,and half of Andhra was washed off in these
floods.!who performed yagna for sunami to occur in Japan?.But,jnanayagna
requires no such dravyas or things.Only a mind which is not clear will combine
the Jnana-karma samuccaya.
N.Srikanta.