Katha Upanisad Verses 1.2.18 - 1.2.23 (while dwelling upon BG 2.19, 2.20)
Introduction
Sri Bhagavath Paada has clearly indicated (towards end of BG 2.18 commentary) the two main Katha Upanisad Verses which are the basis for Sri Krishna to give his teaching to Arjuna.Ka.Up 1.2.18 & 1.2.19.
We must first recognize -
BG 2.20 ~ KaUp 1.2.18
BG 2.19 ~ KaUp 1.2.19
-
This also shows how Sri Krishna took the Well Established Vedantic Method of Sruti Based reasoning, to Dispel the basis for Arjuna's sorrow - namely helping him recognize the changeless
amidst the changeful - help him in the process to overcome doubt and depression.
Katha Upanisad is that famous dialogue between Nachiketa and Sri Yama Dharma Raja. Therein, Brahma Vidya is lucidly expounded.
In that Upanisad the verse 1.2.18 - 1.2.23 are very key to developing Atma Jnana Nista by Mananam. I would recommend we read them.
A route I would recommend to take herewith would be
a) Read Verses 2.19 and 2.20 in BG and then read verses 1.2.18/1.2.19 which are similar verses in Katha Upanisad.
b) Read Sa.Bhasyam for the aforesaid four verses.
c) Continue with 1.2.20, 1.2.21, 1.2.22, 1.2.23 in Katha Upanisad
d) Then return back to BG verses 2.19/2.20 and then we can discuss, continue thereon.
In the blog below : -
"Commentary" - Implies Sri Bhagavathpaada's commentary.
"EXT" - implies notes by yours truly (for self-reflection).
Key Ref: Katha Upanisad along with Bhasyams
Key Ref: Bhagavad Gita Bhasyam
1. Since Verse Ka 1.2.18 and BG 2.20 are Identical we shall start with them first.
Katha Upanisad - 1.2.18
na jāyatē mriyatē vā vipaścinnnāyaṅ kutaścinna babhūva kaścit .
ajō nityaḥ śāśvatō.yaṅ purāṇō
na hanyatē hanyamānē śarīrē ৷৷ 1.2.18 ৷৷
The intelligent Atman is not born, nor does he die; He did not spring from anything, and nothing sprang from Him; unborn, eternal, everlasting, ancient, He is not slain although the body is slain.
English Translation Of Sri Shankaracharya's Sanskrit Commentary By Swami Gambirananda
Commentary: Vipascit, the intelligent One (Self)-intelligent, because Its nature of consciousness is never lost; na jayate, is not born.
It is not produced; na va mriyate nor does It die.
An impermanent thing that has origination, is subject to many modifications. With a view to denying all the modifications in the Self....'He is neither born nor dies.'
Moreover, ayam, this One-the Self; na kutascit, did not come from anything - did not originate from any other cause; and from the Self Itself na kascit babhuva, nothing originated - as something different from It.
Therefore, ayam, this Self; (is) ajah, birthless; nityah, eternal; sasvatah, undecaying. That which is impermanent is subject to decay, but this one is everlasting;
It is puranah, ancient-new, indeed even in the past (EXT: That is its ever new ~ Fresh)
A thing is said to be new now, which emerges into being through the development of its parts, as for instance, a pot etc. The Self, however , is opposed to them. It is anceint, i.e. devoid of growth. Since this is so, therefore, na hanyate, It is not killed-not injured; sarire hanyamane, when the body is killed-with weapons etc.-though It exists there, just like space.
EXT: Puranah is interesting epithet for Atman - It the ancient one which is ever fresh ! This word Puranah is dealt with also in BG 2.20 Bhasyam by Sri Bhagavath Paadaa.
-------------------
BG 2.20
na jāyatē mriyatē vā kadāci-nnāyaṅ bhūtvā bhavitā vā na bhūyaḥ.
ajō nityaḥ śāśvatō.yaṅ purāṇō
na hanyatē hanyamānē śarīrē৷৷2.20৷৷
2.20 He is not born nor does He ever die; after having been, He again ceases not to be. Unborn, eternal, changeless and ancient, He is not killed when the body is killed,
Commentary: Na kadacit, never; is ayam, this One; jayate, born i.e. the Self has no change in the form of being born to which matter is subject ; na mriyate, It never dies.
By this is denied the final change in the form of destruction. The word (na) kadacit, never, is connected with the denial of all kinds of changes thus never, is It born never does It die, and so on.
For, in common parlance, that which ceases to exist after coming into being is said to die. ...unlike the body, this Self does not again come into existence after having been non-existent. Therefore It is not born.
It is ajah, birthless; and since It does not die, therefore It is nityah, eternal.
[It does not have six changes - Birth, continuance, growth, transformation, decay and death.]
The change in the form of decay is denied by the word sasvata, that which lasts for ever. In Its own nature It does not decay because It is free from parts.
Change in the form of growth, which is opposed to decay, is also denied by the word puranah, ancient. A thing that grows by the addition of some parts is said to increase and is also said to be new. But this Self was fresh even in the past due to Its partlessness. Thus It is puranah, i.e. It does not grow.
So also, na hanyate, It is not killed, It does not get transformed; even when sarire, the body; hanyamane, is killed, transformed.
In this mantra the six kinds of transformations, the material changes seen in the world, are denied in the Self. The meaning of the sentence is that the Self is devoid of all kinds of changes. Since this is so, therefore 'both of them do not know' this is how the present mantra is connected to the earlier mantra (2.19 below)
----------------
2. Ka 1.2.19 and BG 2.19 Comparison
BG 2.19ya ēnaṅ vētti hantāraṅ yaścainaṅ manyatē hatam.
ubhau tau na vijānītō nāyaṅ hanti na hanyatē৷৷2.19৷৷
BG 2.19: He who takes the Self to be the slayer and he who thinks He is slain, neither of them knows; He slays not nor is He slain.
Commentary: 'Bhisma and others are being killed by me in war; I am surely their killer' this idea of yours is false. How? Owing to non-discrimination, they na, do not; vijanitah, know the Self which is the subject of the consciousness of 'I'.
The meaning is: On the killing of the body, he who thinks of the Self ( the content of the consciousness of 'I' ) as 'I am the killer', and he who thinks, 'I have been killed', both of them are ignorant of the nature of the Self.
For, ayam, this Self; owing to Its changelessness, na hanti, does not kill, does not become the agent of the act of killing; na hanyate, nor is It killed, i.e. It does not become the object (of the act of killing). The second verse (2.20 ABOVE) is to show how the Self is changeless.
EXT: The Key focus of this verse 2.19 (BG) is on Changelessness. This (i.e. Changelessness of Self) forms the link between verse 2.19 and 2.20 in BG.
Now Katha Upanisad 1. 2. 19
hantā cēnmanyatē hantuō hataścēnmanyatē hatam .
ubhau tau na vijānītō nāyaō hanti na hanyatē ৷৷ 1.2.19 ৷৷
If the slayer thinks ‘I slay,’ if the slain thinks, ‘I am slain, then both of them do not know well. This slays not, nor is slain.
Commentary: If; someone who looks upon the mere body as the Self, thinks of it as 'I shall kill it' or 'I am killed' -do not know their own Self as being unchangeable. It is not killed because of the very fact of un-changeability, as in the case of space.
EXT: Key additional comment from Katho Upanisad Bhasyam, is pasted herewith
"Therefore, the worldly existence, consisting of virtue and vice, relates merely to the ignorant man; it does not belong to the knower of Brahman, because for him virtue and vice are inappropriate according to both the Vedic authority and logic" - Says Sri Bhagavathpaada.
This implies that Dharma Sastra which helps with Dharma Nirnayam only applies so long as - one accepts Avidya (i.e. Swarupa vismRti or Absence of Tattva Jnana or Asraddha towards Swarupa lakshana) as Real - will not grant us unconditional peace and clarity (Mukti), in the absence of Jnana Vichara.
In fact deciding what is Dharma or Adharma itself can be a confusing, If the clarity on account of Jnana Vichara is absent.
---------
3. Verse 1.2.20, 1.2.21, 1.2.22, 1.2.23 Follow herewith (from Katha Upanisad)
Ka: 1.2.20
aṇōraṇīyān mahatō mahīyānātmā.sya jantōrnihitō guhāyām .tamakratuḥ paśyati vītaśōkō dhātuprasādānmahimānamātmanaḥ ৷৷ 1.2.20 ৷৷
।।1.2.20।। The Self that is subtler than the subtle and greater than the great, is lodged in the heart of (every) creature. A desire-less man sees that glory of the Self through the serenity of the organs, and (thereby becomes) free from sorrow.
Commentary: Whatever great or atomic thing there be in the world, can be so by being possessed of its reality through that eternal Self. When deprived of that Self, it is reduced to unreality.
Therefore, that very Self is subtler than the subtle and greater than the great, for It is conditioned by all names, forms, and activities which are its limiting adjuncts.
And that Atman, Self; nihitah, is lodged, i.e. exists as the Self; guhayam, in the heart; asya jantoh, of this creature-(in the heart) of all beings beginning from Brahma and ending with a clump of grass.
[The phrase darsanasravanamanana-vijnana-lingam may also mean, 'the Self whose existence can be inferred from the acts of seeing, hearing,thinking, and knowing]
akratuh, a desireless man, i.e. one whose intellect has been withdrawn from all outer objects, seen or unseen;
dhatuprasadat, through the serenity of these organs; (he) pasyati, sees; tam mahimanam, that glory; atmanah, of the Self-which is not subject to growth and decay in accordance with the result of work he sees, i.e. he directly realizes the Self as 'I am the Self' , and thereby he becomes vitasokah, free from sorrow.
Otherwise, the Self is difficult to be known by ordinary people who are possessed of desire, because:... < Next Verse 1.2.21 below >
Ka: 1.2.21
āsīnō dūraṅ vrajati śayānō yāti sarvataḥ .
kastaṅ madāmadaṅ dēvaṅ madanyō jñātumarhati ৷৷ 1.2.21 ৷৷
While sitting, It travels far away; while sleeping, It goes everywhere. Who but I can know that Deity who is both joyful and joyless?
EXT: Under the spell of Avidya (i.e. Ignorance of Swarupa Lakshanam) the Self is seemed to possess of contradictory qualities - hence it is difficult to Recognize it in its Real Nature.
Only a Wise man of fine intellect, can this Self be known. The Self as told earlier is the basis for all experiencing all existence. No one can know anything apart from Self. The Self (as told earlier is all pervasive)
Commentary: When the Self is in such a state (of sleep), Its consciousness being of a general character, It yati sarvatah, seems to go, (to be present), everywhere. When It is in a state of particularized consciousness, It, though really stationary by Its own nature, duram, vrajati, seems to travel far, in accordance with the movement of the mind etc., because It is conditioned by those mind etc. In reality, It continues here (in this body) only.
EXT: This implies the only place where the Self can be known as "I" is in the body. But the same body is nothing more than a limiting adjunct or an object revealed by the I consciousness.
Yet in a bid to overcome Avidya, this body becomes an important stepping stone. This body is like the pole vault of the athelete jumping over the horizontal bar, in a pole vault leap.
Commentary: The text further shows how from the knowledge of the Self comes the elimination of grief as well:
EXT: This next verse shows how steadily by constant contemplation on the reality of our Swarupam ,we develop devotion to Its Reality (Satyam). This blossoms into the kind of StithaPrajna w.r.t our Swarupam. This is called Jivan Mukti.
Ka: 1.2.22
aśarīraō śarīrēṣvanavasthēṣvavasthim .
mahāntaṅ vibhumātmānaṅ matvā dhīrō na śōcati ৷৷ 1.2.22 ৷৷
।।1.2.22।। Having meditated on the Self, as bodiless in the midst of bodies, as permanent in the midst of the impermanent, and as great and pervasive, the wise man does not grieve.
EXT: This shows the Self can be known by its Swarupa Lakshanam - Satyam, Jnanam, Anantam while the body continues....hence the claim - wise man does not grieve. This itself is a Sruti Pramanam for Jivan Mukti - as propounded in Advaita Vedantam.
Excerpts from Commentary: The Self in Its own nature, is like space; (having meditated on) that Self (as following): -
a) (as) asariram, unembodied-as that bodiless Self;
b) (as) avasthitam, permanent (among the changeful); and
c) (as) mahantam, great-(and) lest the greatmess be taken relatively, the text says- vibhum, pervasive; atmanam, Self.
The word Atman (Self) is used to show the non-distinction (of Brahman) from one's Self. The word Atman (Self) primarily means the indwelling Self.
Having meditated-as 'I am this'-on this Self that is of this kind (i.e. as indicated by the Jnana Vichara or Swarupa Lakshana Vivekam), the dhirah, the wise man; na socati, does not grieve.
For grief cannot reasonably belong to a man of this kind who has known the Self (as it Really is).
The text says that though this Self is difficult to know, It can be known well through proper means
EXT: (see next verse on what constitutes proper means - namely - Seek to know Atman as Atman)
-------------
Ka: 1.2.23
nāyamātmā pravacanēna labhyō na mēdhayā na bahunā śrutēna .
yamēvaiṣa vṛṇutē tēna labhyastasyaiṣa ātmā vivṛṇutē tanūōsvām ৷৷ 1.2.23 ৷৷
।।1.2.23।। This Self cannot be known through much study, nor through the intellect, nor through much hearing. It can be known through the Self alone that the aspirant prays to; this Self of that seeker reveals Its true nature.
Commentary: Ayam, atma, this Self; na labhyah, is not to be attained, is not be known; pravacanena, through the acquisition of many vedas; and na medhaya, not through the intellect-through the power of grasping the meaning of texts; na bahuna srutena, not through much hearing-alone. How is It then to be known?
This Self; tasya, of that seeker of the Self [Some take tasya to mean 'to that seeker'.]; vivrnute, reveals; svam, Its own-Its real; tanum, body, i.e. Its own nature.
The meaning is that to a desireless man who seeks for the Self alone, the Self becomes known of Its one accord.
Commentary from Mundaka Upanisad on same verse -
In the Mundaka Upanishad commentary, Shankara writes:
*yameva paramAtmAnameva eshhaH vidvAn vRNute prAptum-icchati,
tena varaNena
eshha para AtmA labhyaH, nAnyena sAdhanAntareNa,
nitya-labdha-svabhAvatvAt *
The very supreme Self this man of knowledge seeks to
reach, by that very exclusive hankering this supreme Self is attainable, not
through any other spiritual effort, for It is by Its very nature ever attained.
------------------
EXT: The Self can't be realized so long as there is trace of potentiality for Anyata Bhaavam. This Anyataa Bhavam is destroyed by Sraddha in Brahma Vidya Upadesam. This Sraddha is visibly seen to manifest in the seeker who intensely & with great clarity, longs to abide as the Self, by seeking refuge in the Self (Aashrayam).
This Sraddha Bhavam leads to Swarupa Pratyabhijna without the least trace of doubt.
A key/keen take-away here is that the person seeking to abide in his Swarupam - does so with Sraddha (complete doubtless un-denying faith) in His Swarupa Lakshanam.
If he or she tries to grasp the Atman with his or her finite mind - Sruti says it will not work - All that study, talking, etc...will be of no help IF we do not accept Sruti's express declarations w.r.t our Swarupam.
If he or she tries to grasp the Atman with his or her finite mind - Sruti says it will not work - All that exercise in intellectually objectifying the goal of our search - only reinforces the Anyatha Bhavam (which is Avidya), which will only create further barriers, instead of accepting our Nitya Mukta Swarupam.
He will realize it - by Knowing Self as the Self - not as something different from it.
For this reason Sraddha becomes paramount in Jnana maargam.
This acceptance that one’s nature as Pure Awareness and as
indicated by Sruti PramAnam (Swarupa Lakshanam or Mahavaakya Taatparyam)
& Guru Sampradhayam (Sri Vyasa Sri Sankara...) & Sruti Anugrihita
Tarkam ("Adhyaropa Apavada Nyayam", "Avasta Traya Vivekam"
and consequent "Clarity" - is like the dawn prior to the sunrise of
complete Abidance.
This acceptance that one’s nature as Pure Awareness nothing
MORE nothing LESS – in other words holding one to one’s AWARENESS as REAL &
abandoning thoughts that arise (while in exclusive contemplation) as “Un-Real” -
is like the dawn prior to the sunrise of complete Abidance.
This acceptance that one’s nature as Pure Awareness which
is the Locus of My Real Individuality which is Infinite & not the
personality, ego etc., which are but mere shadow of the Self - is like the dawn
prior to the sunrise of complete Abidance.
Comments
Post a Comment