VB: UB, I will not even attempt to summarize Chapter 4. I have read entire chapter 4 many times and I still find it very abstract. In the sense, it does not help me too much in how to apply it in practical life. I liked the simplistic summary of 4.11/12 given by PK. And it is – 4:11, 4:12 – Those who worship ME in anyway (that pleases them), I bless them in the way they recognize/ identify. There are many paths to come to ME. I take this as hope that any form of prayer pursued sincerely is fine-no absolute one right way of doing things (emphasis on puja rituals for my stubborn ego)- love the Sikh prayer PA quoted “Jo tees bhave so aarthi hove”. I tend to always question need to understand complex frameworks whose resultant messages are simple, though difficult to follow. Some folks need to understand the complete basics. And I am not one of them. I truly believe the framework is right (faith) and happy to follow its messages. So, while I am eager to understand it, at times it becomes overwhelming for me. I make efforts to understand and when I do not, I continue to have my faith and move on to next day verses.

PK: VB: love your analysis – probably one of the rare times when I have to confess the need to intellectualize complex frameworks in a futile attempt to simplify them 😃… your statement reminded me of a quote attributed to Einstein – “everything should be made as simple as possible but not simpler” … onward bound to chapter 5!

UB: अर्जुन: उवाच: संयासं कर्मणां कृष्ण पुनर्योगं च शंसति। यछ्रेय एतयोरेकं तन्मे ब्रूहि सुनिश्चितम् ।। (५:१)

अर्जुन said: O श्रीकृष्ण, you praised कर्म संयास (renunciation of कर्म), and you also advised to do कर्मयोग . Please tell me (ब्रूहि) decisively (सुनिश्चितम्) which of the two is more beneficial?

श्रीभगवान् उवाच । सन्न्यासः कर्मयोगश्च निःश्रेयसकरावुभौ ।तयोस्तु कर्मसन्न्यासात् कर्मयोगो विशिष्यते ॥५.२॥

श्रीभगवान् उवाच: Both (उभौ) सन्न्यासः and (च) कर्मयोगः lead to liberation (निःश्रेयसकरौ). But (तु), of these two (तयोः), the कर्मयोगः is better (विशिष्यते) than renunciation of कर्म (कर्मसन्न्यासात्).

ज्ञेयः स नित्यसन्न्यासी यो न द्वेष्टि न काङ्क्षति। निर्द्वन्द्वो  हि महाबाहो सुखं  बन्धात्प्रमुच्यते ॥५.३॥

The person (सः) who (यः) neither (न) hates (द्वेष्टि) nor (न) longs (for anything) (काङ्क्षति) should be known (ज्ञेयः) as a नित्य सन्न्यासी O महाबाहो, because (हि) one who is free from द्वन्द्व or dualities (निर्द्वन्द्वः) is effortlessly (सुखम्) released (प्रमुच्यते) from bondage (बन्धात्).

UB: So here itself, we have VB who prefers simple responses while PK is fine to dabble with some level of complexity. It is this subjective difference that is a Q in itself 😀. I will give a complex response to the point raised by VB. VB – most people I know who were keen to know the message of the Gita started sincerely but left it in the 2nd or 3rd CH itself – they found it too dry/ abstract/ repetitive. Why? It is a tough Q to answer. In a sense, I guess it is essential to empathize with the enormity of अध्यात्म crisis experienced by अर्जुन. Let us take the Q of decision of career:

1. At 8, an answer ‘Do what you like’ seems satisfactory
2. At 80, an adult may say ‘It does not matter as long as you do it well’
3. At 16-20 only, we ask Qs like – ‘What do I like’, ‘Why should I like what I do’, ‘What do we mean by like’, ‘Is money an important barometer for success’, etc. Our state determines the Qs. Empathy with this crisis is key and if such a person in crisis has a lot of Qs, a long answer becomes necessary. Here, we may have lazy minds who are fine doing what their parents have done or doing what friends/ environment are doing. Some rare ones who know their minds clearly and thus do not have such Q’s at all even though it may look as if they are also following their parents/ friends. Lazy minds do not need the Gita and rare ones also do not need Gita though for differing reasons. It is only the people like me in the middle who have to suffer the misery of the Gita. Even in the middle, if my tendency is तमोगुण, Gita will not appeal to me. If my tendency is सत्वगुण like अर्जुन, Gita will be essential and I will ask a lot of Qs. If my tendency is रजोगुण, I will focus on my BAU but use select verses of Gita to the extent it allows me to pursue by BAU and ignore other parts (I guess most of us are in this zone).

VB: Well, I would like to think I am a Rajogun person.

PS: BAU?

VB: Business as usual

PS: What does रजोगुण mean?  And तमोगुण and सत्वगुण? (A reference to it is fine, I’ll look it up).

VG: UB: my 2 cents:

1. you are doing a wonderful job, an ignorant slow learner like me is still interested in subject, all credit to you.
2. please don’t measure or categorise on the basis of questions asked in this forum. Some may be still those back benchers kinda students who seem to be disinterested and non participating but may be attentive 🙂
3. while you may be able to nudge few to change but some may still have their own believes ( like my belief in God is so strong that I don’t think I need to visit temple or offer prayers – for a person like me अच्छी सोच ही श्रधा है, कर्म ही पूजा है )
4. but like any good teacher, you are able to make most of us think and some of us question. So a big THANK YOU

UB: PS – Gunas is covered in detail in 14, 16-18. Gunas are essentially 3 tendencies that are present in all living beings. सत्व promotes aspect of seeking knowledge, रज promotes activity while तमस् promotes sleep/ inactivity. All 3 are present in all and essential for survival. All 3 are invoked at various times depending on our need. However, one of them tends to be dominant driving our life to be lead in a certain way. A ज्ञानी is however deemed as गुणातीत – beyond the Gunas. We will cover these in detail later and most people like these chapters because they can connect with this in a direct manner.

PS: 🙏🏼🙏🏼🙏🏼

PI: Kriya of karma happens only when the three gunas are part of us but as per gita we have go beyond these gunas but the question is will we not cease to exist? And if we go beyond these three gunas how will the body function…because the chemical combinations are completely driven by the mind set the person has?

UB: This will get clarified a few verses later. Body/ mind are expressions of प्रकृति which keep functioning but the “I ” which is neither the body or the mind just watches प्रकृति and is not connected with its actions. This was the focus of past 2 chapters and will be reiterated again later.

PA: A karmayogi is a renunciate internally. As he/she is working in a detached manner in this world. I think one of the key messages of the Gita is to take up the current framework of being a ascetic is normally misinterpreted as giving up all forms of actions in the world and shunning from ones duties; Also for example as described in the previous chapter the outer forms of yagna are not really bringing much of use of one does not practice it ones day to day attitude and life  ;(as vikas said) – Outer blind rituals are slowly being denounced I suppose.

UB: The so-called distinction between three types of योग may be given as below – using example of one who is engaged in a कर्म of climbing stairs:

1. ज्ञान योग – Discussion is only on the summit (परम्) stating how wonderful it is after one reaches the top. This then triggers one to continue to climb stairs excitedly. But this talk of परम् tends to be very abstract and dry.
2. सन्न्यासयोग – Discussion on this tends to focus on why it is necessary to ‘give up’ staying on lower floors. Once one is convinced, climbing stairs follows easily since they are happy to give up. But this discussion tends to be negative since it focuses only on why staying at lower floors is harmful.
3. कर्मयोग – Discussion is focussed on what one is already doing viz climbing stairs. Since one is climbing stairs anyway, कर्मयोग talks on what attitude one may adopt while doing the कर्म. This discussion tends to be practical since this limits itself to what we do. This talk is also supplemented by talk on परम् and negatives of life in lower floors and thus more all rounded in its structure. That is why Gita is more popular as a text unlike some other texts that focus too much on giving up or too much on परम् only.

PK: Interesting take UB .. For me #2 never works … the thought of renunciation always seem like I am being deprived and I end up doing more of what I am not supposed to do 😃😃..#3 seems the most practical and efficient way!

UB: साङ्‍ख्ययोगौ पृथग्बालाः प्रवदन्ति न पण्डिताः ।एकमप्यास्थितः सम्यगुभयोर्विन्दते फलम् ॥५.४॥

Those who are like children (बालाः), argue (प्रवदन्ति) that ज्ञान and कर्मयोग (साङ्‍ख्ययोगौ) are different (पृथक्), are not (न) पण्डिताः. The person who follows (आस्थितः) even (अपि) one (एकम्) (of the two) properly (सम्यक्), gains (विन्दते) the result (फलम्) of both (उभयोः).

यत्साङ्‍ख्यैः प्राप्यते स्थानं तद्योगैरपि गम्यते । एकं साङ्‍ख्यं च योगं च यः पश्यति स पश्यति ॥५.५॥

The end goal (स्थानम्) that (यत्) is gained (प्राप्यते) by the संयासी (साङ्‍ख्यैः) is also (तत् अपि) reached (गम्यते) by the कर्मयोगी (योगैः). The one who (यः) sees ज्ञान (साङ्‍ख्यम्) and (च) कर्मयोग (योगम्) as one (एकम्), that person (सः) (alone) sees (पश्यति) (the truth).

UB: 5:4/5 – सांख्य योग (word used in Ch 2) or सन्यास योग mean one and the same thing. सन्यास means to give up and to give up ‘work’ to pursue ‘study’ may be wrongly seen as pursuit of सन्यास योग. श्रीकृष्ण junks such a thought as conceivable only in unreformed minds who foolishly think of सन्यास as giving up family association. There is ‘work’ in ‘study’ too as there is ‘study’ in ‘work’. So how do we understand ‘giving up’ really?  One gives up something only to gain something else as any ‘giving-up’ cannot be purposeless. One thus gives up only that which has a lower value than that one hopes to gain. So both by ‘giving up’ (sensual pursuits) or ‘pursuing’ (परम्), both mean one and the same thing.

UB: सन्न्यासस्तु महाबाहो दुःखमाप्तुमयोगतः ।योगयुक्तो मुनिर्ब्रह्म नचिरेणाधिगच्छति ॥५.६॥

सन्यास of कर्म (सन्न्यासः), O महाबाहो, is difficult (दुःखम्) to accomplish (आप्तुम्) without कर्मयोग (अयोगतः). Whereas (तु), one who is capable of reasoning (मुनिः), who is committed to a life of कर्मयोग  (योगयुक्तः), gains (अधिगच्छति) ब्रह्म quickly (नचिरेण)

योगयुक्तो विशुद्धात्मा विजितात्मा जितेन्द्रियः। सर्वभूतात्मभूतात्मा कुर्वन्नपि न लिप्यते ॥५.७॥

The योगयुक्तो (meaning a कर्मयोगी) who is of purified intellect (विशुद्धात्मा) and who controls the mind & senses (जितेन्द्रियः) realize one’s आत्मा as the आत्मा in all beings. Though performing all kinds of कर्म, they are never entangled.

UB: 5:6/7 (1) – विशुद्धात्मा (purified intellect) is a key word for me that enables a योगयुक्त to experience सर्वभूतात्मभूतात्मा. Once चित्तशुद्धि is achieved, one becomes a विशुद्धात्मा post which one is able to see one’s own self in all भूत (beings/ elements & pronounced as Bhuta and not Bhoot). To see oneself in a blade of grass, to see oneself in plants, animals, other living beings, in enemies as well as non-living beings too is such a state. A powerful verse is this. How does one eat if one sees oneself in plants? How does one fight if one sees oneself in an enemy? How does one step on a blade of grass if one sees oneself in it? Can one throw away garbage carelessly if one sees oneself in garbage too? Is this verse insane?

UB: 5:6/7 (2) – The moment one experiences सर्वभूतात्मभूतात्मा, one feels a कृतज्ञता भाव for everything since one realizes that without using what सर्व भूत are giving to him, he cannot survive. And if this कृतज्ञता भाव is accompanied by seeing oneself in all, one automatically becomes a minimalist. One eats only when needed, one fights only when needed, one talks only when needed, one sees only what is needed especially because one realizes that one is taking himself when he takes from another. One would not like oneself to reduce (in the others) as a result of such a taking and minimalism thus follows as a natural outcome. And if one lives a need based life with need driven towards exercise of स्वधर्म, कर्म by such a person does not lead to कर्मबन्धन.

PA: Today’s slokas suddenly everyone resonates beautifully with the song from the film rockstar with rambir ka poor. It’s called Jaddoo.

Maine yeh bhi socha hai aksar, Tu bhi main bhi sabhi hai sheeshe

Khudhi ko hum sabhi mein dekhein, Nahin hoon main hoon main toh phir bhi

Sahi galat, tumhara main, Mujhe paana, paana hai khud ko

Jo bhi main kehna chahoon, Barbaad kare alfaaz …

Another paragraph on the illusion of this world;

Kabhi mujhe lage ki jaise, Saara hi ye jahaan hai jaadu

Jo hai bhi aur nahi bhi hai ye, Fiza, Ghata, Hawa, Baharein

Mujhe kare ishaare ye, Kaise kahoon, Kahani main innki ….

SK: Sarvam khalvidam brahma

UB: नैव किञ्चित् करोमीति युक्तो मन्येत तत्त्ववित् ।पश्यञ् शृण्वन् स्पृशञ् जिघ्रन्नश्नन् गच्छन्स्वपञ् श्वसन्  ॥५.८॥

The one who is focussed (युक्तः), who knows the truth (तत्त्ववित्), thinks (मन्येत), ‘I do not (न) do (करोमि) anything (किञ्चित्) at all (एव)’ (इति) even while seeing (पश्यन्), hearing (शृण्वन्), touching (स्पृशन्), smelling (जिघ्रन्), eating (अश्नन्), walking (गच्छन्), sleeping (स्वपन्), breathing (श्वसन्),

प्रलपन् विसृजन् गृह्णन्नुन्मिषन्निमिषन्नपि। इन्द्रियाणी इन्द्रियार्थेषु वर्तन्त इति  धारयन् ॥५.९॥

…even while (अपि) talking (प्रलपन्), releasing (विसृजन्), grasping (गृह्णन्), opening (उन्मिषन्) & closing the eyes (निमिषन्), (the person) knowing (धारयन्) (fully well that) (इति) the organs (इन्द्रियाणि) are engaged (वर्तन्ते) in their objects (इन्द्रियार्थेषु).

UB: 5:8/9 – All bodily कर्म are covered here. As discussed earlier, all कर्म by the senses are within the realm of प्रकृति driven by the देवता. देवता as we saw earlier refers to forces/ impulses that trigger senses to seek their respective sense object. If we thus act under the influence of these forces with कर्तृत्व (meaning we do these कर्म as doers by seeking objects beyond our needs), such कर्म becomes OUR कर्म and thereby create कर्मबन्धन. If कर्म is done without कर्तृत्व, i.e, we live a disciplined life where urges like eating, sleeping, etc are within the confines of exercise of स्वधर्म, no बन्धन comes about for such कर्म. To take this further, one who has the mindframe of a सर्वभूतात्मभूतात्मा like श्रीकृष्ण, even though he has actively engaged in numerous कर्म all his life, all such कर्म are deemed as non-actions and he remains free from facing outcomes of such कर्म. Difficult of course to comprehend this …..

PA: So all our mental and physical faculties are in effect given to us to serve others and in the process to take care of us only to fulfill  our minimum needs. As soon as we reverse this process and use them to satisfy our wants and longings we are accumulating karma.

UB: Yes PA – fully agree with your lines

UB: ब्रह्मण्याधाय कर्माणि सङ्गं त्यक्त्वा करोति यः ।लिप्यते न स पापेन  पद्मपत्रमिवाम्भसा ॥५.१०॥

The one who (यः) performs (करोति) कर्म (कर्माणि), giving up (त्यक्त्वा) attachment (सङ्गम्), offering (आधाय) (one’s कर्म) unto ब्रह्म (ब्रह्मणि), is not (न) affected (सः लिप्यते) by पाप (पापेन), just as (इव) the leaf of a पद्म (पद्मपत्रम्) (is not wetted) by water (अम्भसा).

कायेन मनसा बुद्ध्या केवलैरिन्द्रियैरपि । योगिनः कर्म  कुर्वन्ति सङ्गं  त्यक्त्वात्मशुद्धये ॥५.११॥

Giving up (त्यक्त्वा) attachment (सङ्गम्), कर्मयोगी (योगिनः) performs (कुर्वन्ति) कर्म purely (केवलैः) (without attachment) with the body (कायेन), मन (मनसा), बुद्धि (बुद्ध्या), and also (अपि) by the senses (इन्द्रियैः), for the purification of the mind (आत्मशुद्धये).

UB: 5:10/11 – Why is a Lotus (पद्म) our national flower? A पद्म grows in dirt but shines in beauty. ज in the name पंकज signifies birth while पंक signifies mud;  पंकज is thus another word for पद्म. A पद्म is immersed in water but never becomes wet. Beauty thus comes from detachment even though one may be living in संसार that is infested with dirt. A human body is also seen in certain texts as a repository of dirt but if one lives with a free mind untouched by sensual pulls & pressures, one shines in beauty despite being infested with dirt. Next, why is an active life proposed for a कर्मयोगी instead of giving up कर्म? For आत्मशुद्धि or चित्तशुद्धि. One may be a businessman making profit or butcher cutting animals – if such a person is a कर्मयोगी, he is leading an active life only for आत्मशुद्धि, to purify himself. He is detached even though the world sees him as visibly active & possibly conniving, cruel, etc. A famous poet भास writes that while both a मूढ and a ज्ञानी may be doing the same कर्म, there is a vast difference in the inner space of both of them.

VN: Makes sense. …Once again a person should not be judged by the type of work that he is doing. …unless and until the work is done with total detachment…For atmashuddhi sanyas is not the only path ….much can be achieved while still being a part of this society. …I think later is more challenging and difficult.

PA: Beautifully said VN and totally agree with you 👍😊 PA: Being in complete surrender to your higher Self is always asked from us replacing mistrust with trust; fear with faith ; trusting in the universal intelligence; Surrender is a powerful word which is definitely not to be interpreted as being inactive or hyperactive (fear driven) rather working calmly with optimal efficiency. Hard to achieve this state of mind all the time; however we all experience this sometimes when we are in the flow and loose sense of time and space.

VN: “Working calmly with optimal efficiency”…that should be the motto. ..well said PA👏🏻

PA: Thanks VN 🙏 as I said before my stubborn mind is something that comes in the way from living in this state most of the time. However yudh jaari hai!!

VN: For me too, that conflict of “how it should be and how it is” is on daily basis. …but as you say. .yudh jari hai. Slowly moving towards our goal. 😊

PA: 😊👍

PK: I guess my conundrum is a little like VB- sometimes these instructions seem dry – I think joy in life is a vital component – and a feeling of lack of  deprivation or giving up -for me that seems hardest. Resisting sensual pleasures of life seems to be counterintuitive – a good meal, a glass of wine after a hard week of honest work – where does one draw the line of when it is minimal or for atmashuddhi? Gaining joy and peace vs giving up and feeling deprived seems to be key but I feel like I need more details😃😃…sigh 😃😃😃!  However I do agree with you all that one must just keep on the quest 😃😃😃… and do our best …that I have no doubt about 🙏🙏🙏

PK: My focus I think sometimes is to learn the knowledge ( probably mostly in theory) .., feels like the phase of data collection/ design of materials and methods  when I am starting a research study … I have a hypothesis which seems like it should be true but no idea how the results are going to play out 😃… but fun anyway and that may be all that matters !

VB: U r worse than me. Decadent lifestyle is what you want😀

PK: More than a grain of truth there VB … 😂😂😂 Trying to go down to mete luxury from decadence 😃

UB: A meal now and then does not make one sensual. One should not make such minor indulgences as evils. 😀 But yes, if absence of such a meal agitates us severely, we have a problem. One need not term such minor indulgences as evils. 😀

VN: PK. …If happiness and joy and pleasure is what we aim for. …does it’s source really matter. A child’s happiness after getting a toy may be same as a grown up winning a crore lottery . Both are happy sources are different. Material things may make you happy for time being but as rightly said. ..their absence should not agitate us. This is what I understand😊

SK: I try to remind myself … Attachment brings unhappiness, detachment brings peace.

VN: Not exactly SK all attachments don’t bring unhappiness and all detachments are not always peaceful. …I think it’s more to do with expectations.

SK: Eventually … I don’t know it is so hard … good to hear all this but how to train the mind?

VG: Yes, as far as happiness is concerned, we have a lot to learn from our kids. My daughter is excited just because she gets to carry a new pen to school. She is happy when my wife tells her that she will bring her favourite apple pie when she is back from school. We the adults, on the other hand, are not even happy after getting 10% increment because an undeserving colleague got more 😦

VB: Success is relative. More success more relatives

VG: One key difference between us ( the unhappier lot ) vis a vis the kids ( happier lot ) is that kids are into ‘absolute happiness’ but we are into ‘relative happiness’.

SK: Live in the moment.

VN: True👌🏻👌🏻

SPI: Actually every feeling and emotions one experiences there is nothing as good or bad…but they are necessary for the evolution of the soul..as the soul has to experience all those and has to reach the nirvikar state….basically our response relate to the orbit in which our soul currently is….so i feel you should not focus too much as to y sometimes we are not able to accept or relate …u just need to experience and move ahead…

PK: Thanks all! Esp UB for reassuring me 😃😃😃 My takeaway from all your comments is not to worry about my small indulgences ( which is relative but let’s assume that😃) ..,I am rarely severely agitated but will keep watch! PK: On second thoughts, forbidding my weekend glass of wine in a few hours that I am living the king forward to after a brutal week will probably agitate me 😂😂…so there goes that theory of me not getting agitated 😃😃

HB: 😀

UB: युक्तः कर्मफलं त्यक्त्वा शान्तिमाप्नोति नैष्ठिकीम्।अयुक्तः कामकारेण फले सक्तो  निबध्यते ॥५.१२॥

The one who is endowed with (कर्मयोग) (युक्तः), giving up (त्यक्त्वा) the फल of कर्म (कर्मफलम्), gains (आप्नोति) शान्तिम् born of a commitment to a life of कर्मयोग (नैष्ठिकीम्). (Whereas) one who is not committed to a life of कर्मयोग (अयुक्तः), led by काम (कामकारेण), is bound (निबध्यते), (being) attached (सक्तः) to the फल.

सर्वकर्माणि मनसा सन्न्यस्यास्ते सुखं वशी ।नवद्वारे पुरे देही नैव कुर्वन्न कारयन् ॥५.१३॥

The indweller of the physical body (देही), the one who is self-controlled (वशी), having renounced (सन्न्यस्य) all कर्म (सर्वकर्माणि) mentally (by knowledge) (मनसा), remains (आस्ते) happily (सुखम्) in the nine-gated (नवद्वारे) city (the body) (पुरे) neither (न एव) performing कर्म (कुर्वन्), nor (न) causing (others) to act (कारयन्).

UB: 5:12/13 – Are we a युक्त: or अयुक्त:? भगवान् clearly says that a युक्त: is in a state of शांति while a अयुक्त: is फलाकांक्षी and thus suffers. Next, one who lives in a देह (body) is a देही. An interesting idea of expressing देह as a place having नवद्वार or nine doors is seen here (and other texts too) – two eyes, two ears, two nostrils, one mouth and two below. In the उपनिषद्, two more are given – the navel & the ब्रह्मरन्ध्र (located on the top of the skull). Just like one living inside the house is not the house itself, a देही merely lives in the देह but is not the देह itself. Some elaborate temples are built on this principle of nine द्वार; the गोपुरम् representing the द्वार that surround the temple; the आत्मा representing the देही is living deep inside this देह within the गर्भ गृह in a room with no doors, windows or light. However, one who develops ज्ञानचक्षु can see It and hence we are shown परम् using दीप (that signifies ज्ञानचक्षु) in that room. परम् is also visualized as living deep inside our हृदय (and is thus अदृश्य) but can be seen once we develop ज्ञानचक्षु (third eye is lit up). Live with this idea that one is a देही who lives inside the देह having नवद्वार, be a वशी (कर्म expressed by and experienced through the नवद्वार are only for स्वधर्म) and not attaching कर्तृत्व for our कर्म, one is thus a true कर्मयोगी.

VB: Last week I had some naive and stupid questions, at this stage, in our conversations between and I asked UB about it. Q was – If we are to all actions without any expectations of a phal, why is being a karmayogi to reach the ultimate stage , not an instance of an act where we r doing something for a result. All the while u say, if u do x, u will gef this. If u do not do x, u will not get this. This is an exact instance where our motives r directing our action. Be like a flute. Why? So that u can become a true karmayogi. So u r being a flute to be a karmayogi. So, this is doing an action for a result. And his answer was and I am trying to understand it was – There is a distinction between a goal and a desire. The goal of an athlete is to perform well and win a medal. The medal is a direct outcome of exercise of his स्वधर्म of an athlete in the best way. Yearning for a medal is thus a goal and not a desire. Thus, if the person is asked to adopt a lifestyle of eating a protein diet or sleeping at least 8 hours daily or exercise at 5am daily so as to achieve the goal of getting a medal, the urge to push for a certain lifestyle is not to satisfy desire of a medal since medal is a goal and not a desire. Then what is a desire? To become rich, to own a hotel, to be a brand ambassador for many FMCG products, to get Bharat Ratna, to come on TV daily, etc are not linked to स्वधर्म of an athlete. If the outcome is directly linked to स्वधर्म, it is a goal but if it is unrelated to स्वधर्म, it becomes a desire. But I agree that making this distinction is tough owing to lack of clarity on the meaning of the word स्वधर्म. कर्मयोग is pushed for not to pursue a desire of becoming a Superman. Pursuit of कर्मयोग is to remove अज्ञान in our minds about who we are and regain our original state of a Superman. I think I said earlier that desire for परम् is similar to a desire to come back home after a wonderful holiday outside. To return home can never be seen as a desire though one may use the word desire to describe this longing.

PK: Very very interesting answer UB to a very pertinent question by VB …it is a subtle distinction that you draw between a goal and a desire( Kaam) but that distinction is  crucial and hence seems worth it to ruminate/ introspect… and share any specifics that works 😃🙏 VB: the only naive question is the one that is not asked 😃😃… me thinks better to ask and hopefully learn than not ask and be confirmed as an idiot …😃😃😃 So keep bringing up ypur naive questions as they make UB give us detailed answers … which hopefully is not a total waste of time for UB / PA and others 😃😃😃

UB: More questions the better. As I had said in the beginning, I am doing this Yagna for myself and I will thus learn a lot more if questions are received/ violent debates occur 😀

HB: We are non-violent people

UB: 😀👍

PK: Inter-being: If you are a poet, you will see clearly that there is a cloud floating in this sheet of paper. Without a cloud, there will be no rain; without rain, the trees cannot grow; and without trees, we cannot make paper. The cloud is essential for the paper to exist. If the cloud is not here, the sheet of paper cannot be here either. So we can say that the cloud and the paper inter-are. “Interbeing” is a word that is not in the dictionary yet, but if we combine the prefix “inter-” with the verb “to be,” we have a new verb, inter-be. Without a cloud and the sheet of paper inter-are. If we look into this sheet of paper even more deeply, we can see the sunshine in it. If the sunshine is not there, the forest cannot grow. In fact, nothing can grow. Even we cannot grow without sunshine. And so, we know that the sunshine is also in this sheet of paper. The paper and the sunshine inter-are. And if we continue to look, we can see the logger who cut the tree and brought it to the mill to be transformed into paper. And we see the wheat. We know the logger cannot exist without his daily bread, and therefore the wheat that became his bread is also in this sheet of paper. And the logger’s father and mother are in it too. When we look in this way, we see that without all of these things, this sheet of paper cannot exist. Looking even more deeply, we can see we are in it too. This is not difficult to see, because when we look at a sheet of paper, the sheet of paper is part of our perception. Your mind is in here and mine is also. So we can say that everything is in here with this sheet of paper. You cannot point out one thing that is not here-time, space, the earth, the rain, the minerals in the soil, the sunshine, the cloud, the river, the heat. Everything co-exists with this sheet of paper. That is why I think the word inter-be should be in the dictionary. “To be” is to inter-be. You cannot just be by yourself alone. You have to inter-be with every other thing. This sheet of paper is, because everything else is. Suppose we try to return one of the elements to its source. Suppose we return the sunshine to the sun. Do you think that this sheet of paper will be possible? No, without sunshine nothing can be. And if we return the logger to his mother, then we have no sheet of paper either. The fact is that this sheet of paper is made up only of “non-paper elements.” And if we return these non-paper elements to their sources, then there can be no paper at all. Without “non-paper elements,” like mind, logger, sun-shine and so on, there will be no paper. As thin as this sheet of paper is, it contains everything in the universe in it.

Thich Nhat Hanh.

PK: I found this very interesting and connected to 5: 4 – I am fascinated by how different folks from varied religions/ cultures are essentially saying the same thing – may be obvious to some of u but this synchrony does not fail to amaze me!

VB: Right PK. Fascinating to see how the same idea emerges from different cultures

UB: Good write up – reinforcing the sameness idea again. This will come up here in 5:18 again. It is all a factor of the kind of दृष्टि we have – how we look at things. As for different religions having the same idea, I guess Buddhist ideas will definitely not be different from Gita since Buddhism is not a separate religion in the first place 😀.

PK: You may be right UB but many Buddhists may not agree 😃😃😃

UB: Yes – many may not agree.

PK: Totally agree about Dhristi…

UB: न कर्तृत्वं न कर्माणि लोकस्य सृजति प्रभुः। नकर्मफलसंयोगं स्वभावस्तु प्रवर्तते ॥५.१४॥

आत्मा (प्रभुः) creates (सृजति) neither (न) doership (कर्तृत्वम्) nor (न) कर्म (कर्माणि) for any person (लोकस्य) nor (न) the connection with the फल of कर्म (कर्मफलसंयोगम्). But (तु) one’s own स्वभावः leads to कर्म (प्रवर्तते).

नादत्ते कस्यचित् पापं न चैव सुकृतं विभुः ।अज्ञानेनावृतं ज्ञानं तेन मुह्यन्ति जन्तवः॥५.१५॥

The आत्मा (विभुः) accepts (आदत्ते) neither (न) the पाप (पापम्) nor (नच एव) the पुण्य (सुकृतम्) of anyone (कस्यचित्). ज्ञानम् is covered (आवृतम्) by अज्ञान (अज्ञानेन) and because of that (अज्ञान) (तेन) people (जन्तवः) are deluded (मुह्यन्ति).

ज्ञानेन तु तदज्ञानं येषां नाशितमात्मनः ।तेषामादित्यवज् ज्ञानं प्रकाशयति तत्परम् ॥५.१६॥

Whereas (तु) for those whose (येषाम् तेषाम्) अज्ञान (तत् अज्ञानम्) of the आत्मा (आत्मनः) is destroyed (नाशितम्) by ज्ञानम् (ज्ञानेन), the ज्ञानम् (ज्ञानम्) reveals (प्रकाशयति) (the self as) that (तत्) परम्, like the Sun (आदित्यवत्) (reveals objects previously covered in darkness).

UB: 5:14/16 (1) – All of us come into life with a स्वभाव or innate orientation. In a sense, all of us are not born equal. Our own कर्म over eons of lives created a certain tilt or orientation giving us our स्वभाव. We are born in a family where this स्वभाव is further nurtured either positively or negatively. And since we are born with red specs or blue specs, our world vision is thus red or blue. This tinted vision of ours is referred to as अज्ञान. Why blame our eyes when the reason for seeing the world as red or blue is that of the tinted glasses?  This tinted vision permeates our मन & बुद्धि filled with a certain kind of स्वभाव.  पाप or पुण्य thus come about on account of exercise of कर्म performed by मन & बुद्धि owing to its स्वभाव while आत्मा merely provides the operating environment.  पाप or पुण्य do not attach to the आत्मा just like one cannot blame the full moon for acts of a thief who stole money in midnight.

UB: 5:14/16 (2) – In ध्यान अवस्था, there is this reference to emptying the mind. This does not mean that we become mindless but it means we declutter it with our innate tilts through चित्तशुद्धि. Once such a शुद्धि happens through practice of discipline of कर्मयोग, मन & बुद्धि act as agents of our आत्मा or we may say that when the clouds pass away, the Sun shines fully in its glory. Just like the Sun is always there, आत्मा is always present but covered by अज्ञान covering our ability to shine in fully glory.

VN: UB …enjoyed reading this particular post a lot. Gives me a hope that someday the clutter of अज्ञान accumulated over the years and some carried from previous ķarma will get cleared and the pure atma which always has been their will shine withs it’s maximum glory.😊 PA ….enjoy and accumulate priceless memories . Do post pics…have fun.

UB: VN👍👍

UB: तद्बुद्धयस्तदात्मानस्तन्निष्ठास्तत्परायणाः ।गच्छन्त्यपुनरावृत्तिं ज्ञाननिर्धूतकल्मषाः ॥५.१७॥

Those whose बुद्धि is awake to That (तत् / परम् / ब्रह्म) (तद्बुद्धयः), for whom the self is That (ब्रह्म) (तदात्मानः), who are committed only to That (ब्रह्म) (तन्निष्ठाः), for whom the ultimate end is That (ब्रह्म) (तत्परायणाः), whose कल्मष (impurities) have been destroyed by ज्ञान (ज्ञाननिर्धूतकल्मषाः) — they attain (गच्छन्ति) a state from which there is no return (अपुनरावृत्तिम्).

विद्याविनयसम्पन्ने ब्राह्मणे गवि हस्तिनि । शुनिचैव श्वपाके  च पण्डिताः समदर्शिनः ॥५.१८॥

Wise people (पण्डिताः) are indeed (एव) those who see the same (ब्रह्म) (समदर्शिनः) in a ब्राह्मण who is endowed with विद्या & विनय (विद्याविनयसम्पन्ने), in a cow (गवि), in an elephant (हस्तिनि), in a dog (शुनि) and (च) (even) in a dog-eater (श्वपाके).

UB: 5:17/18 (1) – 5:18 is the verse referring to अध्यात्म equality attained by those who are fully awakened and see and experience ब्रह्म in all. In this state all कल्मष (impurities) have been removed through ज्ञान. Such a person then has समदृष्टि towards all. Such समदृष्टि is not an academic or ideological intellectual idea of समत्व or equality but an experiential realization. Everyone is powered by the One ब्रह्म. The same ब्रह्म resides in all be it a ब्रह्मण who is संपन्न with विद्या & विनय, a dog or even a dog eater. A पण्डित is not one who knows शास्त्र or one who can chant them effortlessly. One who sees the same परम् in all is the only who really sees. While वेद refer to चतुर्वर्ण, the same texts also refer to the underlying unity that unites this diversity. While thus there is no स्वभाव unity among various beings and we are thus unequal, at an अध्यात्म level, our core identity is ब्रह्म. A पण्डित is one who experiences समदृष्टि. Chapter 9 & 10 expand on this idea here on how one can practice समदर्शन among all in this universe. Better than Gita, one can see the highest idea of समदर्शन expressed in all grandeur in श्रीरुद्रम् or शटरुद्रीयम्. These powerful मंत्र come up within the यजुर्वेद and even hearing these are said to uplift oneself. If any of you get a chance to listen to a commentary on these from a learned Vedic ज्ञानी, do listen to such wisdom without fail.

UB: 5:17/18 (2) – A small caution is advised here – भगवान् used the word समदर्शन: for a Yogi in this state; He did not use the word समवर्तिन:. Just because medicine and poison have the same परम्, we do not consume both of them. We put a rose on our head but do not wear a garland of thorns though both are from the same plant. Once while a गुरू  was giving the ज्ञान of सम दर्शन, a mad elephant was seen rushing in the vicinity. All including the गुरू ran for their safety. A शिष्य was however very enthused by the message of सम दर्शन and did not move even while the elephant rushed towards him. The elephant caught him by his trunk and threw him away. The शिष्य came disturbed to the गुरू asking why the elephant threw him though he saw the परम् in the elephant. The गुरू replied that even the Mahout sitting on the elephant had परम् and asked the शिष्य why he ignored the urges of the परम् in the Mahout who was shouting asking people to move aside. Do not abandon common sense. True equality is not one where we behave in the same way with all but only if we practice an action that is in tune with the स्वभाव of such other person too. A criminal must be sent to jail, a naughty kid must be scolded, a king ruling well must be respected, etc. If we behave equally with all, society will collapse since we are in reality practicing inequality by ignoring the innate स्वभाव of people. Behaving in a same manner with all is what pop spirituality encourages but such kind of spirituality is infantile and thus useless since this may encourage अधर्म.

UB: NM 👍👍👍 As I have mentioned earlier, the Gita is divided into three parts aligned with the उपनिषद महावाक्य ‘तत् त्वम् असि’ which first 6 chapters focussed on त्वम् viz the individual. The त्वम् portion ends with ध्यान योग. My sense is that भगवान् is pushing a गृहस्थ like us to live by कर्मयोग principles since this makes us focussed/ disciplined. Such life is discipline or focus eventually needs to culminate in ध्यान since ध्यान essentially also means focus or concentration. But concentrate on what comes up as a natural question? It is परम् and thus the focus on Chapter 7-12 is to describe the nature of परम्.

VA: Am i free to decide who is ‘criminal’/adharm and the ‘punishment’?

UB: We are free to have an opinion of course. We have an opinion anyway whether we express this or not except that our opinion is also as per our own स्वभाव and thus may be coloured.

VA: Will i accumulate ‘karma’ if i express it as per my swabhav?

VA: Who decides what is dharm/adharm/right/wrong/criminal or not

VA: I may need extra coaching separately😊 feel free to say if my questions are naive/basic

UB: I am also a student 😀. Focus of this shloka is that everyone is powered by the One – be it a so-called criminal or a so-called educated person or even a dog or an elephant. As for your Q on ‘who decides’, it is a very wide and generic question. Tough for me to answer this generic Q.

UB: इहैव तैर्जितः सर्गो येषां साम्य स्थितं मनः ।निर्दोषं हि समं  ब्रह्म तस्माद्ब्रह्मणि ते स्थिताः ॥५.१९॥

The cycle of birth and death (सर्गः) is won over (जितः) by those (तैः) whose (येषाम्) mind (मनः) is rooted (स्थितम्) in the same (that is ब्रह्म) (साम्ये) here (इह) itself (in this life) (एव). Since (हि) ब्रह्म that is free from any defect (निर्दोषम्), is (always) the same (समम्), therefore (तस्मात्) they (the wise people) (ते) abide (स्थिताः) in ब्रह्म (ब्रह्मणि).

न प्रहृष्येत् प्रियं प्राप्य नोद्विजेत् प्राप्य चाप्रियम् ।स्थिरबुद्धिरसम्मूढो ब्रह्मविद् ब्रह्मणे स्थितः ॥५.२०॥

The one who knows ब्रह्म (ब्रह्मवित्), who is established (स्थितः) in ब्रह्म (ब्रह्मणि), whose knowledge is firm (स्थिरबुद्धिः), and who is free from delusion (असम्मूढः), should (does) not (न) rejoice (प्रहृष्येत्) over gaining (प्राप्य) that which is desirable (प्रियम्) and (च) should (does) not (न) resent (उद्विजेत्) gaining (प्राप्य) that which is undesirable (अप्रियम्).

UB: 5:19/20 – इहैव is a key word here. गीता talks about gaining the ब्रह्म state here only. Right here, right now. It is not an after-death gain. Such a person who gains ब्रह्म while having a body remains स्थित in that state and is called here as ब्रह्मवित् (earlier names in the Gita – तत्ववित/ कृत्स्नवित्). Since he has a glimpse of the ब्रह्म state, he will not bother about the so-called gains and losses that are relevant from a human body perspective. Will an ant who gained an elephant body continue to be enamoured by the ant-mind gains & losses? When one is established in the higher, the lower automatically falls away. One may achieve stupendous gains from a human perspective, but if one remains distant from ब्रह्म awareness and instead lives within the स्वभाव prism even in old age, one will not gain ब्रह्म even after one’s death. ब्रह्मज्ञान does not offer any  post-death magic; if one has not achieved vision of truth while living, how can one expect such vision post death? Human life is thus a rare opportunity; avoid squandering it by pursuing the petty पुण्य & पाप कर्म. Orient oneself properly towards the One, gain स्थिरबुद्धि (stable mind) in the One and success is guaranteed इहैव.

UB: Thinking about VA’s Q on who decides one is an enemy/ criminal and another as a friend, given that I am on leave now and have spare time to kill, I am sharing some ideas to trouble all of you:

1. At a personal level, our स्वभाव prism makes us label some as friends while others as enemies. Thus, a दुर्योधन can choose the insecure & jealousy filled कर्ण or violent जरासंध as a friend and label पांडव as enemy while अर्जुन chose श्रीकृष्ण on his side even though He chose not to fight the war. Our स्वभाव prism thus decides how to apply this label.
2. At a national level, if the idea of a nation is construed as a भोग भूमि, enemies are those who create obstacles in pursuit of our भोग viz to make money or to pursue Arts, study, entertainment, etc. Essentially, purpose of life is seen as भोग (enjoyment) and social amity becomes the key driver of the society. Thus anyone who upsets social Amity is seen as an enemy and one who maintains this as a friend.
3. And then we have the construct of a society which models itself as a पुण्य भूमि where its denizens may agree that pursuit of freedom (मोक्ष) is the true pursuit of life. Such a society may regard the भोगी who pursuits enjoyment often at the expense of others as an enemy and those who pursue मोक्ष and see others as a part of the One as friends.

From a ब्रह्म perspective, there is no enemy or friend. All are One. People who are moving towards the One or moving away, both are One only. Since He is all there is, all other views or lives are relative or transitory or temporary constructs formed only to know Him better.

VN: UB…very well explained👍🏻 According to me we ourselves decide and label our actions as good or bad and often we end up questioning or own decisions but the beauty of being close to Param is we don’t feel the need to choose or question our actions. Effortlessly we chose what is right and go with the flow. 😊

VA: i am trying to connect the ‘accumulating karma’ and ‘swabhav’ – are they related in any way…does ‘accumalating karma’ take into account my swabhav – if swabhav is pre-determined – what basis is used to give someone a certain ‘swabhav’ – accumulated karma?

UB: In Hinduism, since we have the concept of multiple lives, स्वभाव can be seen as predetermined only in the context of a single life but it is our own actions and reactions that we have based on our own actions that creates our स्वभाव. As for relation with कर्म, it is a lot more complicated (meaning I do not know 😀). It is said that animals do not accumulate कर्म since their life is fully in tune with their स्वभाव. But humans accumulate कर्म if they do धर्म which is outside their स्वभाव. Which is why our texts prescribe different धर्म for different स्वभाव and people who go beyond it are said to suffer. So they key Q that comes up is – what is my own स्वभाव? Tough Q to answer – I need to study more on this really. Having said that, ब्रह्मविद्या is meant for all since it takes us to a state beyond स्वभाव and this text is thus meant for all in a general sense. Beyond this generic opinion, even I will struggle on specifics of this point.

VA: thx UB – ur explanation helps a little, but it also raises questions – so if my swabhav is to be stingy, should i continue to be stingy or try to be a bit benevolent? worse, will i accumalate karma if i go against my stingy swabhav? 🙂 (i am not stingy by the way, just using an example ;))

UB: Hahaha – this Q comes to me too. 😀 Our texts do not talk of स्वभाव in terms of criminality, stinginess, charitable, etc. These aspects are स्थूल expressions of सूक्ष्म thoughts. So if Osama looks after his wife and kids well but bombs another country, is he a noble man or terrorist? If कर्ण indulges in a lot of दान on one end, looks after his wife and kids well and is willing to die for a friend while being extremely insecure as well as jealous about अर्जुन, what is his स्वभाव? This is why our folks refer to गुण when talking about स्वभाव and this is how त्रिगुण and चतुर्वर्ण  ended up being postulated. So if I am stingy (a स्थूल manifestation), I can be stingy in being critical of others or be stingy in praising or supporting people who trouble others – this way, I retain my nature but orient this towards Unity than creating discord.

UB: In chapter 17 & 18, this will come up in good amount of detail

PK: I think I disagree with the concept of svabhav as a fixed predetermined state …,I think we have natural inclinations ( Guna) such that aptitudes vary among individuals but I also think we can modify our behaviours and in certain circumstances change drastically .. there are many such examples of sinners becoming saints to support … svabhav is modifiable .. I am beginning to think that it thus misconception of determinism / Fate that makes our philosophy somewhat less interesting/ attractive to some folks.. I also disagree with Obama example … I think he is a brilliant and compassionate guy whose loss will be felt deeply in January! He may not be perfect or correct all the time but if good intentions, relying on present data and introspection are a filler to one’s actions (which I believe to be true), he probably represents one of the rare individuals who is true to himself … svadharma being followed.. Sorry could not resist as I am trying to find folks in real life who I admire and he is one of them …

VA: i believe people are born with certain dispositions/’svabhav’ how else do u explain siblings given same environment/exposure with totally different temperament and behaviours

PK: I agree VB -LWW all have dispositions/ inclinations -,no doubt about that. All I S saying is that it is not immutable or fixed. Our actions and responses are based on our perceptions which in turn are influenced by our biases … many of which are unconscious … this may be part of svabhav as well .. the goal is also to recognize these unconscious bias and modify our actions

VA: i personally have not seen people change the basics easily – i have seen many try v hard and achieve change to some extent, but that is by masking/hiding/pretending or controlling. As UB says – they might change how it manifests. For eg. Ashoka the great was always aggressive but it changed from showing aggressiveness on battlefield to aggressively spreading Buddhism

PK: I agree with you that folks changing radically are rare and there are many fakers … but it is not impossible and small changes should not be discounted. I can speak for myself and I am a different person in many ways than I was20 years ago… I agree that essentially my inclinactions and aptitude are the same but the. Modifications cannot be discounted. entirely – that’s all I am saying . Everything is not predetermined – if that is so then hope is redundant and I am not certain I agree with that. I think we are saying the same thing only differing on the extent of it

UB: I gave the Osama (Bin Laden) example, not Obama 😀

VA: Both have similar “swabhav” UB its ok😉 sry PK

UB: 😀

PK: Let’s agree to disagree on that false equivalency VA!

UB: sorry about that – my bad 😃😃😃

UB: बाह्यस्पर्शेष्वसक्तात्मा विन्दत्यात्मनि यत्सुखम् । स  ब्रह्मयोगयुक्तात्मा सुखमक्षयमश्नुते ॥५.२१॥

The one whose mind is not attached (असक्तात्मा) to the external विषय that contact (इंद्रियाँ) (बाह्यस्पर्शेषु) gains (विन्दति) that happiness (सुखम्), (fullness), which (यत्) is in oneself (आत्मनि). One (सः) whose mind is endowed with the knowledge of ब्रह्म (ब्रह्मयोगयुक्तात्मा) gains (अश्नुते) that happiness (सुखम्) that does not wax & wane (अक्षयम्).

ये हि संस्पर्शजा भोगा दुःखयोनय एव ते ।आद्यन्तवन्तः कौन्तेय न तेषु रमते बुधः ॥५.२२॥

Because (हि) those (ये) enjoyments (भोगाः) that are born of contact (between the इन्द्रियाँ & विषय) (संस्पर्शजाः) are the (ते) sources of pain (दुःखयोनयः) alone (एव), and have a beginning and an end (आद्यन्तवन्तः), O कौन्तेय, the wise person (बुधः) does not (न) revel (रमते) in them (तेषु).

UB: 5:21/22 – Dependence on बाह्य स्पर्श alone for seeking joy in life is also deemed as painful. Why? As they say, one Jalebi gives joy but ten ruins my stomach (too much of a good thing is also painful).  The body स्वभाव cannot allow eating 10 Jalebi even though there is joy in eating it. One may argue – I agree that eating 10 does not maintain the same joy level but why can I not be happy the whole life eating one Jalebi daily instead of terming even such a joy sinful? So the natural answer in the form of a counter Q is – is there happiness in the Jalebi itself or is its स्पर्श with my tongue the cause of joy? One will have to answer – स्पर्श with our tongue brings joy to the mind. If the joy is in Jalebi only, all of humanity will have the same joy eating a Jalebi which we know is not the case. If joy is within our इंद्रिय, logically, all इंद्रिय must have similar experience. Equally, the इंद्रिय must not feel tired even after eating ten – but what we see is that joy reduces as an additional Jalebi is consumed. We have to thus conclude that neither our इंद्रिय stimuli nor Jalebi (विषय) have joy within them. But why does the mind experience joy? There is a certain स्वभाव lodged in the mind that makes it experience joy for certain tastes and feel revulsion at some other tastes. Past experience of a wrongful ascribing of joy or unhappiness to a certain kind of act has embedded this idea onto the mind causing these two extreme reactions. As per our texts, It is आत्मा that loans a bit of Itself by giving us what our own स्वभाव seeks. And when we obtain what we seek and when we are able to avoid what we do not seek, we experience joy as an outcome. But this joy is also painful since it is an expression of अज्ञान, a mistake of the mind that keeps us away from seeking the fountain of joy already lying within. If we can find a way to dip into this fountain of joy, we have cracked the mystery of life since we have discovered राम within us. When this source of all joys, the ब्रह्म state is achieved, we remain perpetually in that state free of the dependency on बाह्य स्पर्श between इंद्रिय & विषय.

PS: Going in the other direction, from spiritual to scientific, a couple of suggestions in case someone is interested.  First re discussion on right/wrong/स्वभाव look up the book “Character strengths and virtues” by Christopher Peterson and Martin Seligman.  It is a fairly exhaustive text on what is commonly considered virtuous, across various religions and cultures.  Second, re jalebis, look up the phrase Hedonic Adaptation.  😋

UB: Thanks PS. Read about Hedonic adaptation 😀👍 So, this explains why we keep eating Jalebi again and again – though nothing scientific really since there is a reference to this idea in the writings of St Augustine.

PS: Yes, I suppose the “scientific” part is the body of recent studies on the subject, trying to explain the observations.

VB: So much stuff going on that I think I understand but no time to post. Unlike other groups you need to think before you post here

PS: It is an interesting book, I have read it.  Didn’t think I could.  Though in all honesty I don’t remember what it said…  😀

UB: The book is tough – the 19 page extract is very very dry. Could not grasp most of it

PS: Jump to the list of virtues if you can find the text… introductions are usually dry, a justification for the existence of a thick book.  😀

UB: There is no neurobiological work on curiosity per se but there is extensive work on related positive biobehavioural system. ….In modelling the structural framework of BAS, curiosity is included as one of the processes mediating relations between the initial reward cues and goal directed approach behaviours. On a neurological level, evidence finds greater dopamine activity to coincide with positive affective responses to rewarding stimuli …..I need to relearn English 😀😀😀

UB: Chapter 5, Page 137

PS: I read it as “curiosity is good”.  😀

UB: Yes – no need to know all the words I guess

PS: Just skimmed through it, yes I agree re dry in a sense; all the references get in the way of the text.

UB: शक्नोतीहैव यः सोढुं प्राक्शरीरविमोक्षणात् ।कामक्रोधोद्भवं वेगं स युक्तः स सुखी नरः ॥५.२३॥

The one who (यः) is able (शक्नोति) to master (सोढुम्) the force (वेगम्) born of काम and क्रोध (कामक्रोधोद्भवम्) here (in this world) (इह) before (प्राक्) release from the शरीर (शरीरविमोक्षणात्) is a युक्त: (सः युक्तः). He (or she) (सः) indeed (एव) is a सुखी person (नरः).

योऽन्तःसुखोऽन्तरारामस्तथाऽन्तर्ज्योतिरेव यः ।स योगी ब्रह्मनिर्वाणं ब्रह्मभूतोऽधिगच्छति ॥५.२४॥

The one (यः) whose fulfilment is in oneself (अन्तःसुखः), the one who revels in oneself (अन्तरारामः), the one whose mind is awake to oneself (तथा अन्तर्ज्योतिः), that (सः) योगी alone (एव), whose self is ब्रह्म (ब्रह्मभूतः), gains (अधिगच्छति) the निर्वाणम् that is ब्रह्म (ब्रह्मनिर्वाणम्).

UB: 5:23/24 – How does one define a free person? Both these verses are popular in this connection. We are a bundle of energy. This energy comes from the power source within us, our आत्मा. However, owing to tinted nature of our स्वभाव present in मन & बुद्धि, we get distracted by काम & क्रोध. In fact, there are 6 holes or causes of leakage also known as षड्रिपु – काम (longing), क्रोध (anger), लोभ (greedor covetousness), मोह (delusion), मद (pride/ arrogance) and मात्सर्य (jealously). If we gain control over ourselves, these leakages are plugged. The energy within us then shines in its glory and our tinted vision becomes clear. Gaining such clarity, we attain freedom. So be  अन्तःसुखः, revel in अन्तरारामः and be situated in अन्तर्ज्योतिः – you are then in ब्रह्म.

UB: लभन्ते ब्रह्मनिर्वाणम् ऋषयः क्षीणकल्मषाः ।छिन्नद्वैधा  यतात्मानः सर्वभूतहिते रताः ॥५.२५॥

ऋषि (ऋषयः) whose कल्मष have been destroyed (क्षीणकल्मषाः), whose doubts arising from द्वन्द्व भाव have been resolved (छिन्नद्वैधाः), who have self-mastery (यतात्मानः) (and) who are happily engaged (रताः) in the good of all beings (सर्वभूतहिते), gain (लभन्ते) निर्वाण (ब्रह्मनिर्वाणम्).

कामक्रोधवियुक्तानां यतीनां यतचेतसाम् ।अभितो ब्रह्मनिर्वाणं वर्तते विदितात्मनाम् ॥५.२६॥

For यती (यतीनाम्), those who are free from काम & क्रोध (कामक्रोध वियुक्तानाम्), whose mind is under control (यतचेतसाम्), (and) who know the आत्मा (विदितात्मनाम्), there is (वर्तते) निर्वाण (ब्रह्मनिर्वाणम्), both here and in the hereafter (अभितः).

UB: 5:25/26 – Four aspects given here to gain निर्वाण

1. Destruction of कल्मष (impurities) which comes through अध्यात्म कर्म like नित्यपूज, जप, दान, etc. This is an active engagement but can get ritualistic if done mechanically.
2. Destruction of द्वन्द्व (duality) – us & them, good and bad, friend & enemy, us and परम् – these ideas of duality get removed through ब्रह्म ज्ञान as postulated in 2:16 that there is only One. Disciplines of भक्ति starts appealing to such people. This is hugely intellectual though the study tends to get dry.
3. One achieves mastery over oneself through pursuit of कर्मयोग orientation. This can be done well after basics of 1 & 2 above are absorbed to some extent.
4. Practice of हित of सर्व भूत (all beings) then becomes a natural outer expression of one who has achieved all the three given above.

Such a यती (सन्यासी) gains निर्वाण इहैव and remains in that state both here (viz during lifetime) as well as hereafter (even after the body drops away).

UB: स्पर्शान् कृत्वा बहिर्बाह्यान् चक्षुश्चैवान्तरे भ्रुवोः ।प्राणापानौ समौ कृत्वा  नासाभ्यन्तरचारिणौ ॥५.२७॥

Keeping (कृत्वा) out (बहिः) the external (बाह्यान्) objects (स्पर्शान्), and (चएव) keeping (कृत्वा) the eyes (चक्षुः) between (अन्तरे) the two eyebrows (भ्रुवोः), (closed), keeping (कृत्वा) the movement of the प्राण and अपान (प्राणापानौ) in the nostrils (नासाभ्यन्तरचारिणौ) equal (समौ),

यतेन्द्रियमनोबुद्धिर्मुनिर्मोक्षपरायणः ।विगतेच्छभयक्रोधो यः सदा मुक्त एव सः ॥५.२८॥

… the मुनिः (यः मुनिः), who has mastered his (or her) organs of action, senses, मन, and बुद्धि (यतेन्द्रियमनोबुद्धिः), one for whom मोक्ष is the ultimate end (मोक्षपरायणः), who is free from इच्छ, भय, and क्रोधः (विगतेच्छभयक्रोधः), that person (सः) is always  (सदा) मुक्तः indeed (एव).

भोक्तारं यज्ञतपसां सर्वलोकमहेश्वरम् । सुहृदंसर्वभूतानां ज्ञात्वा मां शान्तिमृच्छति ॥५.२९॥

Knowing (ज्ञात्वा) me (माम्) as the sustainer (भोक्तारम्) of यज्ञ and तप (यज्ञतपसाम्), the महेश्वरम् of सर्व लोक: (सर्वलोकमहेश्वरम्), friend (सुहृदम्) of all beings (सर्वभूतानाम्), he gains (ऋच्छति) peace (शान्तिम्).

 UB: 5:27/29 – 27 & 28 talk about mode of ध्यान leading us straight to ध्यानयोग in Chapter 6 that focuses approach / attitude to ध्यान. In verse 29, भगवान् refers to Himself as महा ईश्वर of all लोक, सुहृदम् (friend of all) and interestingly, the भोक्त (eater, taker, etc) of all यज्ञ & तप कर्म done by all – this thread is elaborated from Ch 7 onwards. When we use the word God, it gives impression of an entity that is at a distance from us and someone separate from us. However, the presence of HER to the Universe as well as each of our lives is as fundamental as tracks over which trains run or air we breathe to live. No train can exist without tracks nor can we without air but we do not feel their presence; just so, we do not see HER though we live in HER bosom owing to HER being the subtlest expression of life. SHE allows us to do all our कर्म and equally, all our कर्म are resolved in HER. SHE is all there is, the तत्, परम्, ब्रह्म, देवी, विष्णु, शिव, etc, all are HER different expressions. Just like we give up a lower step when we move to the higher one, our giving up lower कर्म cannot happen nor can ध्यान happen unless we cling on to something higher viz HER. Given that SHE is the most fundamental truth of all and the only one worth pursuing, योगी clings to HER by aligning his mind and entire persona on HER only. Because SHE is everything, once the mind rests in HER, one becomes HER and one thus becomes everything. भगवान् has just given a hint of this idea here and will elaborate of HERSELF in the later chapters.

(I have used the feminine expression of Truth keeping with the spirit of नवरात्रि now)

Thus ends सन्यास योग पञ्चम अध्याय.