UB: चतुर्विधा भजन्ते मां जनाःसुकृतिनोऽर्जुन।आर्तो जिज्ञासुरर्थार्थीज्ञानी च भरतर्षभ।।7.16।।

7.16. Men (जनाः) of good action (सुकृति) who worship Me (मां भजन्ते) always are of four types (चतुर्विधा): the afflicted (आर्तो), the seeker of knowledge (जिज्ञासु:), the seeker of wealth (अर्थार्थी) and the man of wisdom (ज्ञानी), O भरतर्षभ!

तेषां ज्ञानी नित्ययुक्तएकभक्तिर्विशिष्यते। प्रियो हिज्ञानिनोऽत्यर्थमहं स च ममप्रियः।।7.17।।

7.17 Of these (तेषां), the man of knowledge (ज्ञानी), being ever engaged or united (with Me) (नित्ययुक्त) and devoted to the One only (एकभक्ति), is the foremost (र्विशिष्यते); because (हि) I am (अहं) totally (अथ्यर्थम्) dear (प्रियो) to the man of knowledge (ज्ञानिनो) and he (स) too (च) is dear to Me (ममप्रियः).

UB: 7:16/17 – ज्ञानी rocks!!!!! भगवान् has clearly chosen His favourite. While the previous verse focuses on people with आसुरी प्रवृत्ति, this verse specifies people who may be called as ones with दैवी प्रवृत्ति. And there are four types of दैवी प्रवृत्ति people – the आर्ता (persons in distress), the जिज्ञासु (curious types), अर्थार्थी (seekers of four पुरुषार्थ – धर्म, अर्थ, काम & मोक्ष) and the ज्ञानी. These four is seen as an order of hierarchy with ज्ञानी as the foremost प्रिय of भगवान्. भगवान् states that all four are worthy of praise. But a ज्ञानी rocks? Why? Who is a ज्ञानी? Not one who knows the शास्त्र in an academic sense but lives as a ज्ञानी. The one in whom परम् is expressed all the time, who is able to continually express परम् in every thought, deed and action owing to his एक भक्ती. Because परम् is expressed in him 24×7, he is always in परम् and therefore, by logical extension, परम् is always within such a person. Both are one. He seeks परम् for the sake of परम् only, not for limited reasons. Interestingly, the word भक्ति comes up for the first time here.

PS: How can someone who has no curiosity become a gyani?  How can someone who desires wealth be ranked higher than one who is curious?  If one is curious, wealth and gyan in all their forms will follow, so that should be the quality ranked highest?  Going a step further, distress usually leads to curiosity to alleviate pain, so shouldn’t that be of highest value?  Or is भगवान asking for a leap of faith here with blind acceptance (भक्ति?) and assigning the highest value to someone who takes the leap?  That sounds a bit self-serving. I’m just wondering if the fellow who said – Necessity is the mother of invention – got it all wrong.  PK – except for the mother part.  😀. It would be great if I were a gyani, but having failed that, seems to me that staying in a state of distress would be most productive since it should eventually lead to sequentially more “valuable” stages of being?  But when one attains stage arth, what will propel onwards towards gyan?

UB: Very good question PS. Some commentators actually change the order by moving जिज्ञासु as 3rd and seeker of अर्थ as 2nd. Purists however do not like the order changed. So as we discussed earlier, a seeker of परम् is one who expresses परम् within himself. Thus, those who are more selfless, more disciplined, etc are taken as people who are better seekers of परम्. With this idea, seekers at the time of distress are not selfless really. Seekers who are जिज्ञासु “give up” their pleasure time for trying to acquire शास्त्रज्ञान. They are thus better than people in distress. Seeker of अर्थ is taken as one who lives life as per four पुरुषार्थ (पुरुष + अर्थ) who sincerely follow the intense नियम of four वर्णाश्रम (ब्रह्मचर्य, गृहस्थ, etc). These नियम are intense thus calling for much more giving up and much more discipline thus expressing परम् much more intensely. Our hero, the ज्ञानी, however, is fully selfless and lives his whole life serving others like the Sun or a Banyan Tree with no trace of selfishness. Such a person thus becomes the favourite of श्रीकृष्ण.

PA: 👍👍PS and UB 🙏🏻👏🏻

PK: Very interesting question PS 👍👍👍 I see the word bhakthi as UB notes but in all the descriptions it is the service and selflessness that seems to be the defining feature characteristics of the true gyani… there is the beginning of expression of being in param constantly .. my sanshay (doubt) is similar to PS- suddenly there is this leap where Faith is becoming paramount .. and I am wondering if it is blind faith … I can understand proper actions, pursuit of knowledge , dedicated focus ,curiosity etc as we journey to warding finding the eternal truth but faith (implied blind) as being paramount is difficult for me to digest … I am very low in this spiritual scale 😃

UB: Both PS and PK see leap of faith in the words of Gita but I must confess I am not clear in which words you see faith being sought by Krishna.

PK: Bhakthi … it is different to me from shraddha (focus / devotion to a cause ) or yagya ( an attitude of pervasive gratitude for life and its bounties). Bhakthi implies blind faith .., I may be totally wrong .. the shlokas uses bhakthi more like shraddha when I attempt to read it knowing my rudimentary Sanskrit but the translation makes a jump to faith This is my interpretation .., I do not claim any expertise … this is just my less than 2 cents opinion 😃😃

UB: OK 😀 Bhakti is not faith. Faith as a call is alien to Gita. When he is saying that Gyani is his favourite, this cannot be seen as Faith. Gyan and faith do not go together.

PK: But curiosity (jigyasu) is the path of gyan but seems lower than gyani… that is my conundrum .., beyond selfless service (can get that) is bhakthi not the only difference ?

UB: OK – understood. One who is curious is mere intellectual curiosity. It can be an initial step. Gita however does not respect such a person beyond a point. Such person has to act his knowledge. We have already seen earlier that both gyan and karma have to go together. Gyani is aware of selflessness and karmi lives the selflessness. When both go together, only then one becomes a Gyani – that is the idea here. Ekabhakti means that one is relentlessly focussed on being selfless at all times. Bhakti means focus and concentration of the highest order – maybe the coming few verses will expand or clarify this better.

VB: A lot of these different interpretations arise from the fact that we have grown up with some set understanding of some words like bhakti, shraddha. Sometime back too we had this discussion abt what comes first, faith, belief, science etc etc. I sometimes wonder if we need to know who is where in the ranking. All we need to know is what is the right path? Everything else is not relevant. And while I type this, I realize it is necessary as people like will me will ask stupid questions like yeh aisa kyun achha nahin or waisa kiya to kya galat. Actually, nowadays, I read your posts and try to understand the path that i should follow. Everything else becomes heavy for me. For e.g., should I know what param is, should I know the ranking etc. I take this path, as other stuff is too abstract for me to comprehend

UB: I guess all of us have our own inbuilt sensors to take certain items and reject others. The reason why one needs to know Param, who is better, etc is only to figure out for myself as to where do I stand. Unless there is a yardstick for comparison, one is not forced to think. Besides, it offers a direction to either continue our current approach to life or change it if convinced. But yes – repeated reading of Gita forced me to unlearn many of my current world view. And unlearning in this old age is difficult 😀. So it takes time. The same words which we have learnt earlier mean something else altogether as one attempts to imbibe the Gita message. But as we will see further on, there is a lot of repetition/ reiterating that one will see over the next few chapters.

PA: Wonderful discussion! Some thoughts: We do attach some sort of value to a perceived goal in the future which propels ours mental and physical faculties towards achieving that.  As PS said necessity is mother of invention. This apparent distress causes us to remember God – one form of worship. In the process one acquires skills and with which requires focus and dedication and discipline. This process is repeated over the life time for several Different goals; Some day there comes a time be a time when we are by gods grace pulled towards the brahm gyan and want to also achieve that. How much intense really is our desire to know param and how much further are we ready to walk on the path by incorporating in our practical life with determine our progress. I suppose the desire will intensify as our day to day actions are done repeatedly with an unselfish and seva Bhav. These actions are like the broom that help to clear the cobwebs of past karma. These actions done in such a spirit  helps to intensify the desire as the inner mirror is being scrubbed and cleared  and one realizes more and more  the transient nature of things the true wisdom will start dawning on us and that’s the stage of true Gyani. At that stage we have we have arrived and start seeing the unity in everything – we work and do things in an effortless and non-attached way – and have a blissful attitude towards everything

PK: 🙏🙏🙏

UB: Well put PA!!!! You anticipated श्रीकृष्ण line of सर्वम्  वासुदेवम् इति yesterday itself 👍👍 An expanding Universe today means there must have been a time when Universe must have been compact and dense. And then a Big Bang happened. We do not know if this BB really happened but it is a reasonable inference to make based on facts available at hand. Once we then hold on to BB as an idea to explain other aspects of creation of the Universe, this act of holding on may be termed as भक्ति. Similarly, by talking about परा & अपरा divide in all, the changeless beyond the changing, an inference is made of a permanent unchanging idea, the परा. Holding on to this idea is भक्ति to the परा. Now, one may say that a scientist is one who will change reliance on BB when new facts emerge. Frankly, so is the case with a thinking religious person – I know “thinking religious” is seen as an oxymoron. Such a “holding-on” is not a matter of a blind leap of faith but an inferential well thought-through conviction. The people who have reached the Highest have said that real Truth is beyond words but the परा – अपरा is the best expression one can stick too at initial stages. Thus, this भक्ति to परा is to be seen similar to भक्ति of a scientist to the idea of BB today.

PA: 🙏🏻🙏🏻Arrey prabhoo its under teacher like you and the discussion/critics and questions that the students are blossoming

UB: उदाराः सर्व एवैते ज्ञानी त्वात्मैव मेमतम्।आस्थितः स हि युक्तात्मामामेवानुत्तमां गतिम्।।7.18।।

7.18 All these are (सर्व एवैते) indeed generous or exalted (उदाराः), but I deem (मे मतम्) the ज्ञानिन् (ज्ञानी तु) to be My very self (आत्मा एव); for he (स: हि), integrated or ever engaged (युक्त आत्मा), has attained (आस्थितः) Me alone (माम् एव) as the highest goal (अन् उत्तमां गतिम्).

बहूनां जन्मनामन्ते ज्ञानवान्मांप्रपद्यते। वासुदेवः  सर्वमिति समहात्मा सुदुर्लभः ।।7.19।।

7.19 At the end (अन्ते) of many births (बहूनां जन्मनाम्), the man of knowledge (ज्ञानवान्) finds attains Me (मां प्रपद्यते) realising that ‘Vasudeva is all’ (वासुदेवः सर्वम् इति). It is very hard to find (सुदुर्लभः) such a great-souled person (स: महा आत्मा)

UB: 7:18/19 – Interestingly, भगवान् does not look down upon people who seek Him for limited reasons (like distress, for wealth, etc). Even such people do सुकृत and they are seen as exalted since they seek Him unlike the असुर who do not seek Him. वासुदेव: सर्वम् इति is a key phrase used here. वसु means one who resides and वासुदेव means one who resides in all, the परम्, the changeless substratum in all. After many lives of living life by doing सुकृत, a ज्ञानी experiences this Truth viz वासुदेव: सर्वम् इति viz EVERYTHING IS परम्, THERE IS NO OTHER. When one achieves such a vision, one attains Him. He has attained the Highest goal of all. There is nothing left for such a person to do – the river has merged into the ocean. This is however a rare event.

PS: Just when you think you have seen it all, up pops a संस्कृत word that has both सु and दु as prefixes… how does that work?  😀

VB: 😀😀

UB: कामैस्तैस्तैर्हृतज्ञानाःप्रपद्यन्तेऽन्यदेवताः। तं तंनियममास्थाय प्रकृत्या नियताःस्वया।।7.20।।

7.20 Those deprived of their discrimination (र्हृत ज्ञानाः) by desires for various objects (तै: तै: कामै:) and guided by (नियताः) their own nature (स्वया प्रकृत्या), resort to (प्रपद्यन्ते) other deities (अन्य देवताः) following (आस्थाय) the relevant methods (तं तं नियमम्).

यो यो यां यां तनुं भक्तःश्रद्धयार्चितुमिच्छति। तस्य  तस्याचलांश्रद्धां तामेव विदधाम्यहम्।।7.21।।

7.21 Whichever (limited) form (of Mine) (यां यां तनुं) any devotee (य: य: भक्तः) wants to worship (अर्चितुम् इच्छति) with conviction (श्रद्धया), that very (तस्य तस्य) firm faith (ताम् एव श्रद्धां) of his I (अहम्) make (विदधामि) strengthen (अ-चलां).

स तया श्रद्धयायुक्तस्तस्याराधनमीहते। लभते  चततः  कामान्मयैव विहितान् हितान्।।7.22।।

7.22. Endowed (युक्त:) with that conviction (तया श्रद्धया), he (स:) engages in (ईहते) worship of (राधनम्) that deity (तस्या:) and therefrom (तत: च) receives his desired objects (कामान् लभते) – because (हि) those (तान्) are ordained (विहितान्) by Me alone (मया एव).

UB: 7:20/22 (1) – परा is the अदृश्य आधार of the अपरा; the change rests or is dependent on the changeless substratum – this is what we have seen thus far. In layman भाषा, we can say that the अदृश्य potency within a पर्वत is the आधार of all plant life on the पर्वत – the potency is अदृश्य but it does exist since without it, no life is possible. Equally, the potency at the base of the पर्वत is the आधार for certain type of plants while potency at the top of पर्वत for another kind of life. While both types of potency are अदृश्य too, these two potency represent a subset of the total potency on the पर्वत. This subset potency may be termed as देवता शक्ति while potency of entire पर्वत as that of परमात्मा. Now, one may make efforts of planting as many seeds as possible and water these and use fertilizers (all these may be taken as कर्म) but without the innate potency, the देवता शक्ति, our कर्म will not yield the desired outcome. All sensible कर्म needs thus the backing of an unseen but favourable ecosystem, the देवता शक्ति, for success in achieving a specific outcome. One must also note that there is actually no separate देवता शक्ति but only one अदृश्य आधार, the पर्वत शक्ति. So if one gets hold of the entire पर्वत शक्ति, the परा, all the देवता शक्ति automatically comes under one’s control. But do people really want the पर्वत शक्ति when they seem content with देवता शक्ति?

UB: 7:20/22 (2) – People may do sincere कर्म (charity, social service, disciplined life, good career, etc) from time to time. Now if such sincere कर्म is aligned with the अदृश्य potency in the form of a favourable ecosystem, success is guaranteed. But what do people at large seek as outcomes?  For most people, the primary trigger for कर्म is seeking of limited desires (family well-being, wealth, help from distress, etc). The ecosystem thus sought for is limited by our desires. Instead of seeking परम् (akin to seeking a potency of entire पर्वत), people seek a favourable ecosystem to fulfill limited desires (akin to seeking a single leaf of तुलसी from a तुलसी plant at the base of the पर्वत). People thus seek देवता शक्ति and not the परा. In India, people do seek limited desires by doing पूज of देवता – श्रीलक्ष्मी for wealth (देवता शक्ति of a bullish stock market), श्रीदुर्गा for strength (देवता शक्ति of powerful equipments), श्रीसरस्वती for बुद्धि (देवता शक्ति of healthy mind), श्रीआंजनेय for बलम् (देवता शक्ति of good physique), श्रीगणेश for विघ्न निवारण (देवता शक्ति of a trouble free day) etc. Owing to our own स्वभाव, compelled by our own situation, we do resort to such देवता from time to time. ALL देवता ARE EXPRESSIONS OF ONE महादेव ONLY BUT WHEN WHAT WE SEEK IS LIMITED, WE LIMIT THE परा, WE BRING परा DOWN TO THE LEVEL OF OUR NEED. Whether we seek from नारायण or लक्ष्मी or हनुमान or शिव (or even Allah or Jehovah), when we seek limited benefits, we are seeking देवता power only since all are seeking is favourable ecosystem that are adequate to meet our limited desires only.

UB: 7:20/22 (3) – Whosoever approaches the देवता शक्ति of परा, if such a person has done commensurate कर्म (whether now or in the past), भगवान् fulfils such a काम that is tuned with the relevant देवता.  With the benefit secured, the conviction of such a person in such a देवता strengthens. Thus, if a stock trader made big gains during a big currency fall in the past, he will pray for a similar curency fall again to make money again. He eagerly worships for return of such situations again and again and even may even write articles in papers supporting for a currency depreciation. Now, if all such efforts lead to a currency depreciation and he makes money again, his आस्था in such a situation rises much more. While there is only ONE अदृश्य परा that grants all that one can desire, owing to one’s own स्वभाव, one seeks a specific देवता all their life. And परा allows such an आस्था to continue or persist since this at least brings focus and meaning to the life of such a person that is aligned to what the person is seeking. While an unstable mind of an असुर (seen in previous verse) makes one live an unhappy life, one seeking देवता of a certain kind gets what he seeks because of his or her ability to focus on his or her chosen goal. And thanks to such focus and persistence, परा grants the outcome to such a person. Better to have people with focus and persistence on something than people who have no conviction on anything.

VB: And how do we look to people who worship different devtas for different outcome? This is what most of us do. Worship lakshmi during Diwali, ganesh during ganesh chaturthi and so on… I guess the answer would be that if we do each with focus, we get the desired outcome. I have an uncle who goes to all temples and just thanks God for all he has given to him. No other statement. How does that work out? He does not do any Yagya, does nothing remotely religious throughout the day, just bows his head in all temples and thanks. Btw, that is not me.😀

PS: I wonder about dragging other religions into the discussion unless one has also studied them with equal vigour… else it is a leap of faith to assume one is superior to another.  Just my opinion.

PS: VB – go to the source, ask your uncle what he thinks of verses 7:20-22.  😀

VB: PS, good idea. Will ask him when I meet him. Sometimes, most obvious path escapes. Though I am sure he will tell me something on the lines of “that is all I want to say to him”. I am curious also as to how this verse applies to him.

UB: VB – Good Q which had bothered me too. when one pays close attention to the prayers uttered during festivals, one will spot the idea of परा & अपरा being expressed. Pick up any पुराण, say गणेश पुराण and गणेश is expressed as परा and त्रिमूर्ति along with other as देवता. In शिव पुराण, शिव is expressed as परा and त्रिमूर्ति along with other as देवता. Same goes for देवी पुराण where देवी is परा and श्रीमद्भागवतम् where श्रीकृष्ण is परा. So during festivals, it is up to us to figure out what we are doing पूजा for. If we do पूजा for wealth, etc., we are doing देवता पूजा but we are focussing on the परा, our भक्ति is for the ultimate. The act of showing gratitude to भगवान् is exemplary and praiseworthy too since he is disciplined in doing this. Any type of discipline is really praiseworthy. This then must eventually take him to वासुदेव: सर्वं इति state. If however it remains at the level of gratitude to maintain my current state, he is doing देवता पूजा while if he shows this gratitude even if he goes through severe crisis thanking भगवान् for the crisis, his भक्ति is परा भक्ति.

VB: If we do pooja for wealth, how does it align with the concept of work selflessly, be a karmayogi. We are then doing something for explicit objectives. And 99% of the the times, that wealth is for luxuries and not for fulfilling our duties as a husband, father, son etc.

UB: PS – I must say that I agree with you. My intent was primarily to convey that whatever name we take, श्रीकृष्ण, श्री लक्ष्मी, etc., or even donkey or dog, the net idea must be that of परा & अपरा. Use of a particular name is incidental. But you are right – it is avoidable to use names from other traditions without being aware of them.

PS: 🙏🏼🙏🏼  In my limited travels I have found that there are more similarities between cultures than differences… which can be understood in terms of cross-pollination via trade and enlightened rulers etc over the centuries.  Re reaction to crises, I was struck by how similar some concepts are between Stoicism and Gita, and I expect some other streams of thought like Zen Buddhism also…  So there, I’ve broken my own statement re invoking other streams of thought… 😀 And I just have to scratch this itch here after resisting for a while…

UB: So you have passed on your itch to us 😀😀 Jokes apart, a question that comes up is what approach one must follow to compare across traditions? So if all traditions say – “Do not lie”, do we say all traditions have commonalities too? Such seeking of commonality is not valid in my opinion. My view is that one must depict a tradition in its entirety by defining all its essential variables – परा, अपरा, देवता, कर्म, अकर्म, यज्ञ, etc and see if this answers all questions in its entirety. So if one picks by any Indian text – whether any Mahabharata or any पुराण, one can map the ideas contained there to every variable listed above. So while stress on a certain deity here and there may vary, once proper mapping is done, then the overall idea being conveyed is the same. Then if we pick up any non-Indian thought view, we must do a similar exercise. If mapping can be done fully, both traditions are saying the same thing but if there are some variables in one which are not present in another, then any comparison of common features will be suboptimal. I have hardly come across such type of comparisons.

VG: UB, I was wondering if Krishna ever talked about Radha during gita gyan? silly thought may be

UB: No Radha in Gita or even Bhagavatam

PA: The concept of para and apara is very nicely explained 🙏👏🏻. I agree PS I feel so too. At a deeper level we humans are more similar than different. Very well put UB 👍👍 Actually the challenges in terms of problems / issues are for our development – tests sent by the universe for us to progress further in our spiritual path and go to the next level – Easier said than done 😇

PK: I enjoy the comparison and discovery of commonalities with other streams if thought / religions. The test UB suggests seems restrictive and may result in experts assiduously defending what they know or believe but discouraging dissent …common principles, views across continents and cultures mostly as a result of cross pollination as PS suggests are interesting to me .. Why can one not be eclectic in pursuit of truth? The advantage of today’s world is the availability of knowledge of various kinds… why stick to one exclusively? My 2 cents is that Everyone starts somewhere and as long as one is cognizant of one’s lack of expertise and reasonably respectful of those who know more why be afraid to wade unknown waters? The goal is to look for connections wherever they may be 🙏

PS: Unless Radha is the अपरा seduction emanating from परम, slowly but surely enticing anyone who sees her towards भक्ति…  😀🙏🏼🙏🏼🙏🏼

UB: अन्तवत्तु फलं तेषांतद्भवत्यल्पमेधसाम्।देवान्देवयजो यान्ति मद्भक्तायान्ति मामपि ।।7.23।।

7.23 But for those (तेषां तु) of limited wisdom (अल्प मेधसां), that fruit (तद् फलम्) is (भवति) also limited (अन्तवत्). The people who seek limited conceptions of Mine (देव यज:) will go to the देव (देवान् यान्ति) but My devotees (मद्-भक्ता: अपि) will come to Me (माम् यान्ति).

अव्यक्तं व्यक्तिमापन्नं मन्यन्तेमामबुद्धयः।परं भावमजानन्तोममाव्ययमनुत्तमम्।।7.24।।

7.24 The unintelligent (अबुद्धय:), not knowing (न जानन्त:) My (मम) supreme state (परं भावम्) which is changeless (that is not divisible) (अव्ययम्) and unsurpassable (अन्-उत्तमम्), think of (मन्यन्ते) Me (माम्)  who is not manifestable (अव्यक्तं)  that has become (आपन्नं) manifest (व्यक्तिम्).

UB: 7:23/24 (1) – As a person thinks, so become his words. As are his words, so become his actions. As are his actions, so become his habits. As are his habits, so becomes his character and as becomes one character, so one becomes focussed on being within an ecosystem aligned to one’s own character; he remains there all his life as well as future lives. Thus, people remain where they are as per their own choice and decision. And भगवान् says here, whatever देवता one seeks, so he gets and remains there. One cannot blame परम् for choosing where one is. One seeks success in medicine, one dwells in such an ecosystem. One who seeks to earn wealth from trading dwells in such an ecosystem.

UB: 7:23/24 (2) – भगवान् calls people who choose to remain with a देवता as अबुद्धय: – this is not a castigation however. While the positive is that they remain within the ecosystem of their choice, it is negative from the perspective of ब्रह्मज्ञान since they have chosen to become happy with the limited. They are happy with the अपरा प्रकृति instead of the परा since देवता comes under अपरा and not परा. THEY ARE SPIRITUALLY STAGNANT. They may be thriving in the ecosystem of their choice; this gives them a lot of joy too since they conclude that देवता is showering them with bounty. It is like a person who keeps getting happy scaling the Everest base camp again and again or a pig being happy born in a gutter again and again (Indra born as a pig is a story in पुराण who does not want to give up pig body even after he found out the truth about himself). But श्रीकृष्ण calls them अबुद्धय since they have not developed विवेक to discover or be aware of परा, the highest bounty, the अव्ययम्. Life after life, they stagnate from a ब्रह्म ज्ञान perspective. Equally, life is not easy for people choosing a certain देवता too since they have to do नित्य देव पूजा (meaning that they have to be fully focussed, work hard, be selfless, etc within their choice of ecosystem too to remain happy and successful). Essentially, these guys are good guys but constrained by their vision of the Highest; their ambition is limited by their own बुद्धि.

VB: About your yesterday’s post about comparison, you gave a framework – para apara devtas….this is one framework. However, we cannot claim that all should be evaluated against it. Some other religions can have a different framework and it could be right too. Saints like tukaram worshipped only vithhal. How does that work?

UB: The answer to Tukaram Q is the focus of Chapter 8 😀

VB: BTW, I do not remember if PA ever posted meaning of ek onkaar hymn. Did he?

UB: Absolutely agree. My point is that comparison must be based on an objective listing of specific variables or components. When the focus is only on what is common, this can be akin to “feel-good” reductionism while focus on differences only is akin to creating discord. Both are emotional extremes. To me, just because all traditions say – ‘Do Charity’ does not mean all traditions have common features. The reasons for such a stipulation could vary as below

1) Do Charity and one goes to heaven

2) Do charity because you give joy to another

3) Do charity since what you give as charity is not yours in the first place.

Without accounting for such differences, any commonality observed is superficial – that is my point.

VB: 100 percent agree

PA: ੴ ਸਤਿ ਨਾਮੁ ਕਰਤਾ ਪੁਰਖੁ ਨਿਰਭਉ ਨਿਰਵੈਰੁ ਅਕਾਲ ਮੂਰਤਿ ਅਜੂਨੀ ਸੈਭੰ ਗੁਰ ਪ੍ਰਸਾਦਿ ॥

Meaning:

Ik- There is ONE(Ik) reality, the origin and the source of everything. The creation did not come out of nothing. When there was nothing, there was ONE, Ik.

Onkaar- When Ik becomes the creative principal it becomes Onkaar. Onkaar manifests as visible and invisible phenomenon. The creative principle is not separated from the created, it is present throughout the creation in an unbroken form, ‘kaar’.

Satnaam- The sustaining principle of Ik is Satnaam, the True Name, True Name.

Kartaa Purakh- Ik Onkaar is Creator and Doer (Kartaa) of everything, all the seen and unseen phenomenon. It is not just a law or a system, it is a Purakh, a Person.

Nirbhau- That Ik Onkaar is devoid of any fear, because there is nothing but itself.

Nirvair- That Ik Onkaar is devoid of any enmity because there is nothing but itself.

Akaal Moorat- That Ik Onkaar is beyond Time (Akaal) and yet it is existing. Its a Form(Moorat) which does not exist in Time.

Ajooni- That Ik Onkaar does not condense and come into any birth. All the phenomenon of birth and death of forms are within it.

Saibhang- That Ik Onkaar exists on its own, by its own. It is not caused by anything before it or beyond it.

Gurprasaad- That Ik Onkaar is expresses itself through a channel known as Guru and it is only its own Grace and Mercy (Prasaad) that this happens.

Ik­oaʼnkār saṯ nām karṯā purakẖ nirbẖa­o nirvair akāl mūraṯ ajūnī saibẖaʼn gur parsāḏ.

One Universal Creator God. The Name Is Truth. Creative Being Personified. No Fear. No Hatred. Image Of The Undying, Beyond Birth, Self-Existent. By Guru’s Grace – That’s the mool mantra – Guru Granth Sahib begin with that – the first lines of the first Sikh prayer (japji) in the morning –  everything is contained in it

UB: नाहं प्रकाशः सर्वस्ययोगमायासमावृतः।मूढोऽयंनाभिजानाति लोकोमामजमव्ययम्।।7.25।।

7.25 Being enveloped by yoga-maya (योगमाया समावृतः), I (अहम्) am not (न) evident (प्रकाश:) to all (सर्वस्य). This world (अयं लोक:) which is deluded (मढ:) does not (न) know (अभिजानाति) Me (माम्)  who am birthless (अजम्) and undecaying (अव्ययम्).

वेदाहं समतीतानि वर्तमानानिचार्जुन। भविष्याणि च भूतानि मांतु वेद न कश्चन।।7.26।।

7.26 O अर्जुन, I (अहं) know (वेद) the past (समतीतानि) and the present (वर्तमानानि च) as also the future (भविष्याणि च) of all beings; but no one (न तु कश्चन) knows (वेद) Me (माम्)!

UB: 7:25/26 – People are deluded by My योगमाया. योगमाया (like the people living within the Matrix in the Matrix movie) makes people within it believe that their गुण orientation is true and that the world of name and form is true. Because they take it to be true, they are unable to discern or spot the changeless. It escapes their eye. They are मढ: or deluded. Such people behave in predictable forms life after life. I thus know their past, present and future too. I know the future because if, for example a person is oriented with earning money or enjoying food or playing football, his character is geared to such activities only throughout life. Life after life, they remain in such ecosystems only. If they work hard, they will achieve more success on the football ground or if they do not work hard, they will not achieve so much success. But they will always remain on the football ground only life after life. Their future is defined by the path they take. None of such people know Me who is living within them and watching them thinking and doing the same thing life after life, year after year, day after day, hour after hour. They have taken their अपरा प्रकृति as their परा and are unable to grow beyond this. Thus they stagnate.

PA: This is too profound! The logical extension is quite understandable that one is in ecosystem till one realizes that it’s not helping him grow towards experiencing the para.  The question is how do we know What should be our next step? What is real growth and how do we know we really are growing?

UB: इच्छाद्वेषसमुत्थेन द्वन्द्वमोहेनभारत।सर्वभूतानि संमोहं सर्गेयान्ति परन्तप।।7.27।।

7.27 O भारत, O परन्तप, all beings (सर्व भूतानि) at birth (सर्गे), due to the delusion (मोहेन) of duality (द्वन्द्व) arising from (समुत्थेन) likes (इच्छा) and dislikes (द्वेष), all creatures become bewildered (संमोहं यान्ति) at the time of their birth.

येषां त्वन्तगतं पापं जनानांपुण्यकर्मणाम्। तेद्वन्द्वमोहनिर्मुक्ता भजन्ते  मांदृढव्रताः।।7.28।।

7.28 But those (येषां तु) men (जनानां) of virtuous deeds (पुण्य कर्मणाम्) whose sins (पापम्) have come to an end (अन्त-गतं), and who are freed (निर्मुक्ता) from the delusion (मोह) of the pairs of opposites (द्वन्द), worship Me (मां भजन्ते), steadfast in their vows (दृढव्रताः).

UB: 7:27/28 – People are born with innate prejudices acquired in the past. Thinking in terms of द्वन्द्व (duality) is thus innate in them. They are born with ideas of progressive – regressive, good – bad, valid – invalid, likes – dislikes, etc that are tuned with their own innate prejudices. One whose पाप कर्म has been exhausted (meaning prejudiced thinking has been brought down) and one who does पुण्य कर्म (meaning that all his actions are objective actions tuned with धर्म) is able to undertake actions without मोह. Such actions than become non-actions as all his actions are done with mind focussed on the परा, the अव्ययम्, and he becomes free.

UB: It is indeed profound. Answers will however come only from CH 16 onwards.

PA: – shedding of all sorts prejudices 👏🏻👏🏻 So living in the opposite emotions of love hate, like dislike basically creates more paapum. Again the concept of equanimity! It’s quite a challenge

VB: I had once asked that if it is the same PARA thru all, why do we behave differently? And you had talked about electricity and devices and I agreed. Very convincing analogy. However, now my quesion is, if the oneness is in all of us, why does it allow to go on a different path? It knows what we are doing, then why does it let us go astray?

PS: Really now, how much responsibility should One have to take?  😀

VB: Nice pun PS😀.

UB: जरामरणमोक्षाय मामाश्रित्ययतन्ति ये। ते ब्रह्म तद्विदुःकृत्स्नमध्यात्मं कर्मचाखिलम्।।7.29।।

7.29 Those who (ये) strive for (यतन्ति) freedom (मोक्षाय) from old age and death (जरामरण) – taking refuge (आश्रित्य) in Me (माम्), they know (ते) that ब्रह्म (तद् ब्रह्म) in entirety (कृत्स्नम्) as अध्यात्म and they know (विदु:) all (च अखिलम्) about कर्म (कर्म).

साधिभूताधिदैवं मां साधियज्ञंचये विदुः। प्रयाणकालेऽपि च मां तेविदुर्युक्तचेतसः।।7.30।।

7.30 Those who (ये) know (विदुः) Me (मां) with the अधिभूत (स अधिभूत), अधिदैवं and with the अधियज्ञं (स अधियज्ञं) know Me (मां विदु:) even (अपि च) at the moment of death (प्रयाणकाले), steadfast in mind (युक्त चेतसः)

UB: 7:29/30 – श्रीकृष्ण throws a googly here – he uses six new technical terms all of a sudden. Maybe He was testing whether अर्जुन is listening with sincerity or not. If अर्जुन was not sincere, भगवान् would not have continued further. He says that at end of one’s lifr life, one who knows the meaning of six terms will certainly reach the Changeless state – ब्रह्म, कर्म, अधिभूत, अधिदैव, अधियज्ञं & अध्यात्म. The next chapter begins with श्रीकृष्ण giving the meaning of these terms and focus on what is the गति that various people take post death. It is a very technical chapter and my own ज्ञान on this domain is limited but I will convey in tune with my reference books.

इति श्रीमद्भगवद्गीतासु उपनिषदसु ब्रह्मविद्यायां योगशास्त्रे श्रीकृष्णार्जुन संवादे ज्ञानविज्ञानो नाम सप्तमोध्याय:।

UB: Wherever I do not know the answer, I will give a long response to side track the Q. So be prepared for a long response. 😀. Later in the day

SK: If you don’t know … then I am lost 😀. Just my reasoning so you can correct me. Gita is so powerful, for me it will be an eternal journey to understand/assimilate some of it. Many times I go back to my comfortable zone – Patanjali yoga. From the very little that I know – We are not meant to go astray. The divine wants us to unite and is always guiding us. All our actions, experiences, speech are ingrained deeply in our consciousness as samskaras (Deep impressions). These samskaras are at the root of all our karmas (actions – good and bad). There is this cycling between deep impressions and actions (which is also affected by other factors that which I am still trying to understand). Samskaras created by truth, love, service, (dedicating all actions to the divine)) will nurture spirituality, and guide us towards practice (Abhyasa) and maybe Vairagya. Patanjali narrates the ways to purify these samskaras and regulate our karmas. So the way I see it the divine within all of us is always trying, but we need to be mindful of our center (Consciousness).

UB: If your comfort zone is Yogasutras, Gita should be a cakewalk. 😀👍. I found it very difficult to absorb despite multiple readings. While you are right about Divine guiding us, I guess VB’s Q is why cannot Divine just give it to us? Or Why did Divine even create us in the first place only to allow us to go astray as he watches us and go through this long and painful process? VB – am I correct in framing your Q?

VB: Absolutely right UB.

UB: He may just say – मेरी मर्जी!!!!!😀

VB: 😀

SK: Sorry I misunderstood. 🙂

UB: क्या Sorry Madam!!! Thanks to your response, I know you are a योगसूत्र expert. And I am waiting for the day when the morning posting will be a सूत्र 😀👍

SK: Oh no 😀. UB your are teasing 🙂 I have guidance, someone like you to help me. Also, I was fortunate to learn yogasanas (yam, niyam, some Pranayam) from a Hatha yogi when I was very young. I guess that’s what I meant by comfortable place (takes me back to my yoga guru). It has nothing to do with being expert/knowledgeable. I still struggle every day. But I look forward to the sutra discussion. Gita is very intense for me.  I have not been reading all the posts regularly 🙂

UB: 👍 Let us hope that a Sutra a day materializes one day.

SK: And you are a poet as well 😀 🙏

PS: UB, waiting for your long answer.  😀

UB: Was hoping the question will be forgotten 😀

UB: VB/ PS: Here is the long response. No clear answers on the Q you have raised. Thus far in my limited readings, i have not found a direct answer. Instead, the approach adopted is that the question is wrong😀. So what you get is – Given my low level of spiritual achievement, I will not be able to comprehend the answer. So do साधना and answers will slowly start coming. A plausible answer that I have gleaned thus far is as below:

Let us take example of individual desires first –

1) Suppose one day, it is raining outside and I decide to make and eat Pakodas. While my stomach may be full, काम consumed me – so I eventually got hold of Pakodas, ate them, then became happy and reentered a joyful state.

2) On another evening, I tell my wife ‘Let us go for dinner at the Taj’. Maybe the trigger could be काम to experience the joy based on my previous dining experience with my wife 15 years back. I indulge in dining, become happy and reentered the state of joy.

3) One day, all of a sudden, I decide to scale the Everest Base Camp. I may not have a past experience of even climbing the hill behind Nandadevi but suddenly, this काम has consumed me (maybe triggered by a Nat Geo program). It is not that I am unhappy but I suddenly feel that only such an experience will make me complete. So I work hard, plan, do the trek, become happy and enter a joyful state.

In all cases, some kind of काम overtook me and i was not at ease till i indulged in the experience. I was happy earlier too but i felt more complete after the experience. Interesting point to note is that in each of the above, we seek an experience from outside us, indulge in it and become joyful. We experience a sense of incompleteness, do an activity, experience joy and become complete again.

UB: Now let us turn to परा felt like – I am One. Let me be many. And he became many. Now this desire of परा, is it similar to our limited desire? In the case of परा, there is nothing outside it. It is everything. And it is joyful and blissful already. So if it desired to become many, we cannot say it felt lonely or felt incomplete and hence it desired because loneliness is a feeling of incompleteness while परा is complete and blissful. Hence, when परा desired to be many, the scriptures use the words लीला as against काम for us. We cannot comprehend such a state since all joy experiences for us individuals are outside of us based on incompleteness but for परा, there is no outside. And if one wants to know how लीला feels, there is no other way other than become the परा ourselves.

UB: Now for my खयाली पुलाव. So what did परा do? It wanted to know itself better. It is already joyful/ blissful but it wanted to realize this in a better way. So it came up with an idea viz the लीला; it indulged in a play. It created small units of experience (viz us, plants, animals, maybe others too which are beyond our comprehension) so that it can experience joy within these individual units of experience. It sent miniatures of itself, gave them ego, gave them apparatus for experience and created conditions for them to live and learn about themselves. Above all, it stepped back to watch how miniatures of itself behave. It is a witness, an eternal witness. It signed a “No interference contract” to ensure that it learns best by allowing the miniature units of itself to learn the best. The conditions created by it were the Cosmic laws. The same laws that govern It also govern the miniatures. It is very keen that its miniatures attain the same level of joy as itself. In the start, the miniatures were as joyful as Itself (that is the सत् युग). Over time, the sense of ego of the minis intensified and their sense of limitedness increases.  The kept losing their unitive truth and experienced separatedness with all other miniatures. But the परा is always keen that its minis return back to itself. So it keeps watching. But ego level made things difficult. So it sent a fresh miniature of itself fully connected with it to teach others (अवतार, संत, etc). Some benefited, others did not. So it put Its own truth in scriptures and sent these to people. Some benefited, most did not. And so it keeps trying, nudging, life after life. It wants all minis to reconnect with Itself on their own. And it keeps trying. And it keeps watching. And it keeps playing and enjoying the show. सब भगवान्‌ कि लीला है

PA: Your khayali pullav is a very tasty Pullav that I am enjoying! Wonderful answer as always ! Thank you for such a nice response 🙏🙏👏🏻👏🏻 The thing is that how could one describe how one feels when one is on top of Mount Everest? One has to stand on top of it to describe the expedience of course. So difficult to describe and describe the Lila or play of the Divine and understanding the purpose of it. The feeling of this oneness we have that fleeing experience – a few moments here and there. As PK says to be in the flow. The rest of the time we have this feeling of being disconnected and then of course depending upon our mind consciousness / ego consciousness and under the influence of the 3 gunas we behave differently. How do we always promote a feeling of unity inside of us? One method that the Dalai Lama suggested and I have practiced with good results isnto use the antidote method. If you feel weak and helpless practice courage. If one feels selfish and want to hold on start to give away. For exAmple calling someone although you don’t like the person and wish the person genuinely on an occasion like a birthday …

UB: 😀😀

PK: Catching up … love your explanations of life being param’a game UB .. reminds me not to take too many trivial things seriously and to heart .., PA -your method described by Adlai sounds intriguing .., will try it and see if it works .. i wonder if this is a form of fake it until you make it for the mind 😃

UB: Fake it till it becomes a living experience 😀😀. PA – what you have written today is also what you had sent yesterday – same idea. Worth thinking more and more about it. Being genuine with all irrespective of their behavior with you. A difficult Sadhana. Equally, Gita forces you to think as to whether Sadhana also includes a situation where you even angrily fight with another person in the outside but with love inside – like parents who hit kids who are getting close to an exposed electric wire. The act is violent outside but driven by love inside – a much more difficult Sadhana

UB: I had once practiced this with my boss a few years back. She was a Chinese boss who stopped speaking to me and used to engage by mails only even though she was sitting next to me. This went on for more than a week and initially, even I was pissed by this infantile behavior and ignored her. Beyond a week, I suddenly started feeling sorry for her thinking that she is putting herself into so much misery needlessly. My anger went away and one evening, when I finally confronted her with a smile and eagerness, she melted immediately. She said she was not upset on me but her boss. 😀. Since that day, she was my boss for four more years and we were always thick with one another. So, it works…. sometimes 😀

PA: What a wonderful example! Mostly it’s actually nothing to do with us! It’s just our translators that interpret a event behavior to strengthen or justify reiterate our internal programming or belief system. Also regarding people behaving differently as Smita had mentioned about. Deep sanskaras which drive our action and behaviors and one needs to cultivate impressions of kindness and compassion for which the medicine of antidote works over time. Also I feel any moment of uneasiness inside of us that leads to violent emotions should be later looked into closely to see what is it that the universe is asking in us to be healed and bettered? Finally every external event is a form of test for us to scrub our internal mirror a bit more and more till the divine light shines and radiates through us. So we have been given this choice at each moment and depending upon the step we take steps towards or away from para – different behavior

UB: 👍👍👏👏

VB: Hi UB, khayali pulav was creative. Though I do not reconcile that something as deep, all knowing, pure, eternal, without any desires, would have any need to experience the experiences of its creation. To my highly ignorant mind, it sounds like, virat kohli training more cricketers to be like him and then experiencing their joys, to understand his own joy. Why would he do that? As we were discussing earlier, question to my mind was why were we created? And that explains my frame of mind due to work pressure on last week.😀

PK: Why not VB? I was thinking of it more like burst Kohl’s wanting to share his love and boundless expertise and do decides to volunteer and teach little kids … more to share the joy of creation in a spirit of fun (Leela) …Luke a parent inventing a game for their little child and being amused by their antics … Knowing that in the end they are both safe and loved … but letting them play make believe