Why consider or convince.

[renuka]

Share:

Facebook X (Twitter) LinkedIn WhatsApp Email Share Link

muktAbhimAnI mukto hi baddho baddhAbhimAnyapi |
ki.nvadantIha satyeyaM yA matiH sA gatirbhavet

I was reading this stanza from Ashtavakra Samhita and found it sort of "contradicting"

Translation:

He who considers himself free is free indeed and he who considers himself bound remains bound.
"As one thinks..so one becomes" is a popular saying in this world and it is quite true.



I was just wondering...Why should one who is free even need to consider himself to be free?

Doesn't it show a state of 'subtle' denial that is one is actually not free but wishes to convince himself he is free.

For the one who is free..there is no need even to consider or convince himself anymore.

A bird that is flying free in the sky does not think "I consider myself free" its just flies.

Its only the bird in the cage that has escaped that needs to consider that its free and still fears that he might be caught and put back into the cage again.

Only when there is fear of bondage one needs to convince himself that he is free.

I wonder why this stanza was written in this manner?

 

[sravna]

Dear Renuka,

Whether one considers himself to be free or in bondage depends on his thoughts and actions. The actions and thoughts of one who is free reflects this truth. I do not think one who is free consciously considers him to be free. Similarly for one who is in bondage.

 

[renuka]

Dear Sravna,

When I was driving home just now..a thought came to me.

It was this .."may be each verse written in any text has no fixed meaning..the meaning differs for each person who reads it"

That is if a person who is a beginner in his quest for spirituality reads this verse he would view this as an advice to start thinking that he is free and not bound..so that with constant practice he eventually is freed from duality..hence the 2nd line in the stanza says one becomes what he thinks.

Next is a person who reads this stanza out of curiosity and he does not really care to give a thought if he is free or bound becos he goes about life as usual.Even if he is in 'bondage' due to effect of Maya he still does not feel his bondage..so as you said..even one in bondage wont consciously consider himself in bondage too.

Then may be there is the ultimate type of person who has transcended the pairs of opposites and he feels he is "Na Muktir Na Bandha"(Neither free nor bound) as Adi Shankara said..that when you were never bound to start with..what is even the question of being free?
(this state is for realized souls and not the commoners like us!LOL)


Now then there is also the type who reads any stanza looking for some grammatical loopholes and starts to wonder and ponder..I think I am this type!LOL

 

[sravna]

Dear Renuka,

The twist is one who thinks he can have others in bondage and thinks he is free. Though that person thinks he is free he is really in bondage. So the verse should not be considered in a superficial way. All one's thoughts and deeds show whether a person is really free or in bondage.

 

[renuka]

Dear Renuka,

The twist is one who thinks he can have others in bondage and thinks he is free. Though that person thinks he is free he is really in bondage. So the verse should not be considered in a superficial way. All one's thoughts and deeds show whether a person is really free or in bondage.

Dear Sravna,

Why would anyone want to think that only he is free and others are in bondage? That seems selfish to me.What is the use being liberated if fellow mankind is suffering?

BTW I was discussing about freedom and bondage with another doc friend of mine and he told me this..he said "why is everyone wanting to be free from the cycle of birth and death when God Himself is not free from it? Avatars have come and gone and in Geeta Krishna Himself declared that He will incarnate from Age to Age..so when God Himself takes human form and undergoes birth and death..so why worry about being free or in bondage?

I was thinking somehow that friend of mine has answers for everything!LOL

 

[sangom]

muktAbhimAnI mukto hi baddho baddhAbhimAnyapi |
ki.nvadantIha satyeyaM yA matiH sA gatirbhavet

I am not qualified to interpret such highly philosophical statements. Even so, since the discussion has commenced, let me put forward my views, for whatever these are worth.

In the ultimate sense, nobody is completely muktA because, at the very root of human existence, there is this undeniable bondage to the body and thence to the mind, intellect, ego, etc. The Sanskrit root "abhiman-" means, to think one's self equal to, to think of self; to assent to, approve of; to covet, desire; to consider, imagine, fancy, think etc. Hence, the use of the word abhimAnI indicates the state when a person considers oneself to be free or bonded, etc.; it does not actually refer to the real liberated stage or the really bonded stage.

The simple meaning is that yA matiH sA gatirbhavet; one's progress or path will be in accordance with what he/she thinks about oneself as.

 

[renuka]

I am not qualified to interpret such highly philosophical statements. Even so, since the discussion has commenced, let me put forward my views, for whatever these are worth.

In the ultimate sense, nobody is completely muktA because, at the very root of human existence, there is this undeniable bondage to the body and thence to the mind, intellect, ego, etc. The Sanskrit root "abhiman-" means, to think one's self equal to, to think of self; to assent to, approve of; to covet, desire; to consider, imagine, fancy, think etc. Hence, the use of the word abhimAnI indicates the state when a person considers oneself to be free or bonded, etc.; it does not actually refer to the real liberated stage or the really bonded stage.

The simple meaning is that yA matiH sA gatirbhavet; one's progress or path will be in accordance with what he/she thinks about oneself as.

Dear Sangom ji,

Thank you for the explanation..so it is at the stage when one is still in contemplation.

But then another question arises.."why would anyone even want to think he is bound?..One can surely falsely think that he is free..but would anyone want to imagine that he is bound?"

 

[sangom]

Dear Sangom ji,

Thank you for the explanation..so it is at the stage when one is still in contemplation.

But then another question arises.."why would anyone even want to think he is bound?..One can surely falsely think that he is free..but would anyone want to imagine that he is bound?"

Nobody may ordinarily think, "I am bound...etc.", but one's actions may be very much dependent upon his feeling about his body, wife, children, wealth, etc. Normally, all of us so bound to some of these things, and that is where the question of someone thinking to be bound, arises. Even for taking on Sanyasa, many people will be bound, not to do so and that is why some people take "aapatsanyaasa" when they are just on the death-bed!

 

[renuka]

Nobody may ordinarily think, "I am bound...etc.", but one's actions may be very much dependent upon his feeling about his body, wife, children, wealth, etc. Normally, all of us so bound to some of these things, and that is where the question of someone thinking to be bound, arises. Even for taking on Sanyasa, many people will be bound, not to do so and that is why some people take "aapatsanyaasa" when they are just on the death-bed!

Dear Sangom ji,

A person who is "bound" does not realize he is "bound"..so technically he does not identify by being 'bound'.

I agree about the Sanyas being bound part..I had written in another thread yesterday that I was reading a book written by a Swami ji where he was down right judgmental about Non Believers calling them bad and evil.

So as a Sanyasi he was still bound becos he had a preference.

 

[Vaagmi]

1. The "I"ness of a human being is such that it is not only aware of what is around it in this universe but also about the "I"ness itself also. So I can stand away from myself and take a good look at myself also. That is done by almost every human being. It does not require any great yogic practice or tapas to get this unique ability. It is bestowed by God as a natural attribute of human beings. About other beings we do not know because this is about their mind if they have one. So being bound can be seen by the self without any problem. And being free from such binding constraints can also be seen by the self.

2. Whatever may happen or not to the individual self there is a universal truth. It remains just that- a truth always. What is good and bad, right and wrong etc. are contextual and have meaning only if the substrate is not forgotten from the scheme of things. A self may have something which is good but it may be universally bad. Example-substance abuse. A self may think something bad but it may be universally good-Ex. a sanyasi thinking that marriage is bad.

3. When a self says something is universally bad it is not trying to be judgmental about it. It makes just a statement of universal truth/fact.

Hope this helps the discussion.

 

[renuka]

3. When a self says something is universally bad it is not trying to be judgmental about it. It makes just a statement of universal truth/fact.

Hope this helps the discussion.

I was driving by a new place yesterday becos the main road was closed for repairs.

I saw a signboard by the side of the road in Malay that said "Cintai Kebersihan..Benci Kekotoran" which means "Love Cleanliness and Hate Dirtiness"

I was wondering what is the need to induce Hate Dirtiness in order to Love Cleanliness?

For example when have a baby..we start to love the baby..the mind just loves..it does not say "Love the Baby and Hate Adults"

Likewise there is no need even to state anything as good or bad..if we focus on what we are doing..anything else does not matter and leaves no impact on us...constant harping on positivity or negativity we actually never get over anything.