Ātmā – Page 3 – Anuśīlana.in

tat sasarja tadā brahmā bhagavān ādi-kṛt prabhuḥ

tat sasarja tadā brahmā bhagavān ādi-kṛt prabhuḥ |
teṣāṃ ye yāni karmāṇi prāk-sṛṣṭyāṁ pratipedire |
tāny eva te prapadyante sṛjyamānāḥ punaḥ punaḥ ||
hiṁsrāhiṁsre mṛdu-krūre dharmadharmāv ṛtānṛte |
tad-bhāvitāḥ prapadyante tasmāt tat tasya rocate ||
(Viṣṇu Purāṇa: 1.5.60–61)

“Then Lord Bramā, the original maker and master, emanated them [i.e., all the living beings throughout the universe]. Being emanated again and again [in this way in each cyclic emanation of the universe], they acquired [in this present cyclic emanation] only those karmas of theirs which were acquired [by them] in the previous emanation [of the universe]. They acquired [dispositions and actions constituted of combinations of] violence and non-violence, gentleness and cruelty, dharma and adharma, truthfulness and untruthfulness, being steeped in [various combinations of] these [in accord with their previous karmas]. Thus, they liked them [i.e., thus they felt affinity for the dispositions and actions they adopted because they naturally gravitated to them as a result of their previous karmas, meaning, as a result of the vāsanās they were beset with in accord with their previous karmas].”

Read on →

prakṛtiṁ puruṣaṁ caiva viddhy anādī ubhāv api

prakṛtiṁ puruṣaṁ caiva viddhy anādī ubhāv api |
vikārāṁś ca guṇāṁś caiva viddhi prakṛti-saṁbhavān ||
kārya-kāraṇa-kartṛtve hetuḥ prakṛtir ucyate |
puruṣaḥ sukha-duḥkhānāṁ bhoktṛtve hetur ucyate ||
puruṣaḥ prakṛti-stho hi bhuṅkte prakṛtijān guṇān |
kāraṇaṁ guṇa-saṅgo’sya sad-asad-yoni-janmasu ||
(Śrīmad Bhagavad-gītā: 13.19–21)

“Prakṛti and the puruṣa—for certain know both to be verily beginningless (anādi), and know the transformations (vikāras) and functions (guṇas) [thereof] to be born of prakṛti. Prakṛti is said to be the cause in regard to being the producer of effects and instruments. The puruṣa is said to be the cause in regard to being the experiencer of happinesses and sufferings. The puruṣa situated in prakṛti experiences the functions (guṇas) born of prakṛti amid births in high and low wombs, and his attachment to [these] functions (guṇas) is the cause [thereof].”

Read on →

vaiṣṇave prītir āstāṁ me prītir āstāṁ prabhor guṇe

vaiṣṇave prītir āstāṁ me prītir āstāṁ prabhor guṇe |
sevāyāṁ prītir āstāṁ prītir ārtiś ca kīrtane ||
āśrite prītir āstāṁ me prītiś ca bhajanonmukhe |
ātmani prītir āstāṁ me kṛṣṇe bhaktir yathā bhavet ||
(Śrī Kṛṣṇa-bhajanāmṛta: 1.35–36)

“May I have love (prīti) for the Vaiṣṇavas;
May I have love for Prabhu’s qualities;
May I have love for service [to Bhagavān, Vaiṣṇavas, and so on];
May I have love and heart-ache for kīrtana;
May I have love for those who have taken shelter [in Bhagavān];
May I have love for those intent upon
bhajana [of Bhagavān];
And may I have love for my self,
So that I may have bhakti to Kṛṣṇa.”

Read on →

bodho’nya-sādhanebhyo hi sākṣān mokṣaika-sādhanam

bodho’nya-sādhanebhyo hi sākṣān mokṣaika-sādhanam |
pākasya vahnivaj jñānaṁ vinā mokṣo na sidhyati ||
(Ātma-bodha: 2)

“In comparison to other means (sādhanas), certainly understanding is directly the sole means to mokṣa. Mokṣa is not attained without knowledge, which is like fire for cooking [i.e., as cooking cannot be accomplished without fire, so mokṣa cannot be attained without knowledge].”

Read on →

nāsac-chāstreṣu sajjeta nopajīveta jīvikām

nāsac-chāstreṣu sajjeta nopajīveta jīvikām |
vādavādāṁs tyajet tarkān pakṣaṁ kañca na saṁśrayet ||
na śiṣyān anubadhnīta granthān naivābhyased bahūn |
na vyākhyām upayuñjīta nārambhān ārabhet kvacit ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 7.13.7–8; cited in Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu: 1.2.113)

“[Śrī Nārada to Śrī Yudhiṣṭhira regarding rules for a sannyāsī:] One should not foster attachment to texts related to the unreal (asat-śāstra), one should not subsist on a vocation, one should avoid arguments based on assertions regarding propositions, and one should not take any particular side [in such arguments]. One should not be followed by [many] disciples, one should not study many texts, one should not engage in teaching [many texts], and one should never start undertakings.”

Read on →

anādy-avidyā-yuktasya puruṣasyātma-vedanam

anādy-avidyā-yuktasya puruṣasyātma-vedanam |
svato na sambhavād anyas tattvajño jñānado bhavet ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 11.22.10)

“Knowledge of self shall not come about on its own for a living being beset with beginningless ignorance. [Therefore,] Another, a Knower of the reality and Bestower of [that] knowledge, shall be [i.e., must exist and also bestow that knowledge upon the jīva].”

Read on →

bhaktyāham ekayā grāhyaḥ śraddhayātmā priyaḥ satām

bhaktyāham ekayā grāhyaḥ śraddhayātmā priyaḥ satām |
bhaktiḥ punāti man-niṣṭhā śvapākān api sambhavāt ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 11.14.21; cited in Hari-bhakti-vilāsa: 11.602; Bhakti Sandarbha: 147, 241; Prīti Sandarbha: 1; Caitanya-caritāmṛta: 2.20.135)

“[Śrī Kṛṣṇa:] I, the Self—the Beloved—of the sat, am attainable by means of one-pointed bhakti with śraddhā. Bhakti fixed upon me purifies even dog-cookers of their birth.”

Read on →

ātmāparijñānamayo vivādo

ātmāparijñānamayo vivādo
hy astīti nāstīti bhidārtha-niṣṭhaḥ |
vyartho’pi naivoparameta puṁsāṁ
mattaḥ parāvṛtta-dhiyāṁ sva-lokāt ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 11.22.34; cited in Bhakti Sandarbha: 1)

“[Bhagavān Śrī Kṛṣṇa to Śrī Uddhava:] The disputation on the part of people of mind turned away from me, [their] own domain [i.e., their own shelter], which is fixed [only] on the object of a difference [between their own view and another’s], ‘It is [so]; [no,] it is not,’ and based on incomplete knowledge of the self (ātmā), shall never cease even though it is useless.”

Read on →

ādhyātmikādi maitreya jñātvā tāpa-trayaṁ budhaḥ

ādhyātmikādi maitreya jñātvā tāpa-trayaṁ budhaḥ |
utpanna-jñāna-vairāgyaḥ prāpnoty ātyantikaṁ layam |
ādhyātmiko’pi dvividhaḥ śārīro mānasas tathā |
śārīro bahubhir bhedair bhidyate śrūyatāṁ ca saḥ ||
śiro-roga-pratiśyāya-jvara-śūla-bhagandaraiḥ |
gulmārśaḥ-śvayathu-śvāsa-cchardyādibhir anekadhā ||
tathākṣi-rogātīsāra-kuṣṭhāṅgāmaya-saṁjñitaiḥ |
bhidyate dehajas tāpo mānasaṁ śrotum arhasi ||
kāma-krodha-bhaya-dveṣa-lobha-moha-viṣādajaḥ |
śokāsūyāvamānerṣyā-mātsaryādimayas tathā ||
mānaso’pi dvija-śreṣṭha tāpo bhavati naikadhā |
ity evam ādibhir bhedais tāpo hy ādhyātmikaḥ smṛtaḥ ||
mṛga-pakṣi-manuṣyādyaiḥ piśācoraga-rākṣasaiḥ |
sarīsṛpādyaiś ca nṛṇāṁ jāyate cādhibhautikaḥ ||
śīta-vātoṣṇa-varṣāmbu-vaidyutādi-samudbhavaḥ |
tāpo dvija-vara śreṣṭhaiḥ kathyate cādhidaivikaḥ ||
garbha-janma-jarājñāna-mṛtyu-nārakajaṁ tathā |
duḥkhaṁ sahasraśo bhedair bhidyate muni-sattama ||
(Viṣṇu Purāṇa: 6.5.1–9)

“O Maitreya, having understood the three miseries, [viz.,] ādhyātmikā and so forth, a wise person in whom knowledge (jñāna) and non-attachment (vairāgya) have arisen attains absolute dissolution [i.e., mokṣa]. Ādhyātmikā [misery], furthermore, is twofold: bodily and mental. The bodily [type] is divisible into many divisions. This too should be heared about. Misery produced by the body is divisible in various ways with names such as head diseases, colds, fevers, colic, fistula, splenomegaly, hemorrhoids, intumescence, asthma, vomiting, ophthalmia, dysentery, leprosy, rheumatism, and so forth. The mental [type of ādhyātmikā misery] is [also] befitting to hear of. O best of the twice-born, mental misery too occurs in various ways, such as that produced by lust, anger, fear, enmity, greed, delusion, and dejection, and that constituted of lamentation, detraction [i.e., attributing faults to others’ qualities], disrespect, hostility [i.e., non-forgiveness], envy [i.e., intolerance of another’s excellence], and so forth. In this way, ādhyātmika misery is known by many divisions. The ādhibhautika [misery] of human beings arises from animals, birds, [other] humans, piśācas, serpents, rākṣasas, reptiles, and so forth. Ādhidaivika misery is known by the exalted, O best of the twice born, as that produced by cold, wind, heat, rain, water, lightning, and so forth. O best of the sages, suffering produced by the womb, birth, aging, ignorance, death, and Naraka, is divisible in thousands of divisions.”

Read on →

anena jīvenātmanā’ iti tadīyoktāv idantā-nirdeśena tato

‘anena jīvenātmanā’ iti tadīyoktāv idantā-nirdeśena tato bhinnatve’py ātmatā-nirdeśena tad-ātmāṁśa-viśeṣatvena labdhasya bādarāyaṇa-samādhi-dṛṣṭa-yukter atyabhinnatā-rahitasya jīvātmano yad ekatvaṁ ‘tat tvam asi’ ity ādau jñātā, tad-aṁśa-bhūta-cid-rūpatvena samānākāratā | … yathā janma-prabhṛti kaścid gṛha-guhāvaruddhaḥ sūryaṁ vividiṣuḥ kathañcid gavākṣa-patitaṁ sūryāṁśu-kaṇaṁ darśayitvā kenacid upadiśyate ‘eṣa saḥ’ iti | etat tad-aṁśa-jyotiḥ-samānākāratayā tan-mahā-jyotir-maṇḍalam anusandhīyatām ity arthaḥ, tadvaj jīvasya tathā tad-aṁśatvaṁ ca tac-chakti-viśeṣa-siddhatvenaiva paramātma-sandarbhe sthāpayiṣyāmaḥ |
(Tattva Sandarbha: 52)

“The oneness (ekatva) [with the Para-tattva] which is known [from the statement in Chāndogya Upaniṣad 6.8.7], ‘You are that’ (tat tvam asi) of the jīvātma, who is not possessed of extreme non-distinctness (atyabhinnatā) [from the Para-tattva] as per the reason seen in the samādhi of Bādarāyaṇa [i.e., Śrī Vyāsadeva in SB 1.7.5] and [who] is apprehended as being a particular part (aṁśa) of his [i.e., the Para-tattva’s] self (ātmā) as per the designation of selfness (ātmatā) [in regard to the jīvātmā on the part of the Para-tattva] even while being distinct from him [i.e., from the Para-tattva] as per the designation of ‘this-ness’ (idantā) [in regard to the jīvātmā] in the statement [in Chāndogya Upaniṣad 6.3.2] of his [i.e., of the Para-tattva], ‘Entering [the realm of prakṛti] with this jīva-self (ātmā) [i.e., with this distinct entity known as the jīva who is a part of my self], I shall manifest names and forms,’ is being of the same constitution [lit., ‘form’] (samānākāratā) on account of [the jīvātmā’s] being an entity the form of which is consciousness that is an existent part (aṁśa) of him [i.e., of the Para-tattva; meaning, the oneness of the jīva with the Para-tattva is on account of the jīva being a part (aṁśa) of the Para-tattva that is conscious in constitution just as the Para-tattva is]. … As someone confined, beginning from birth, within a cavern in a house who wishes to know the sun, after having been shown a particle-ray of the sun that has somehow fallen through an air hole [into the cavern], is instructed by someone, ‘This is that [i.e., ‘This light you see here is the sun’], meaning, ‘Because of this [i.e., this sun-ray that you have seen] having the same constitution of light [as the sun] on account of [its] being a part (aṁśa) of that [i.e., of the sun], a vast orb of that light is to be conceived [i.e., you can acquire an understanding of what the sun is by imagining a vast orb made up of a huge number of the rays of light you see here], so [i.e., in a manner akin to the aforementioned method of instruction] we shall establish in Paramātma Sandarbha (18–46) the jīva’s similarly being a part (aṁśa) of him [i.e., of the Para-tattva] on account of [the jīva’s] being existent (siddha) as a particular śakti of his.”

Read on →