Yogaḥ in the Purānas
Yogaḥ in the Viṣṇu Purānas
Sūtrajālam
Wisdom with Words
Yogaḥ of Liberation from the Viṣṇu Purāṇa
Article No. 2
[This Article covers Ṣlokaḥ [6/6/4] to Ṣlokaḥ [6/6/43]]
- Ramesh Shama Alvar
- July 18th, 2021
Ṣlokaḥ [6/6/4]
मैत्रेय उवाच :
भगवंस्तमहं योगं ज्ञातुमिच्छामि तं वद ।
ज्ञाते यत्राखिलाधारं पश्येयं परमेश्वरम् ॥६/६/४॥
maitreya uvāca:
bhagavaṃs tam ahaṃ yogaṃ jñātum icchāmi taṃ vada ।
jñāte yatrākhilādhāraṃ paśyeyaṃ parameśvaram ॥ 6/6/4॥
मैत्रेय maitreya-the Rishi Maitreya; उवाच uvāca-spoke:
भगवन् bhagavan-venerable/revered one; तत् tat-that; अहं ahaṃ-I; योगं yogam-that Yoga; ज्ञातुमं jñātum-to know/learn about; इच्छामि icchāmi-desirous of; तं taṃ-yourself; वद vada-do speak about; ज्ञाते jñāte-knowing which; यत्र yatra-because; अखिलाधारं akhilādhāraṃ-the one who upholds everything; पश्येयं paśyeyaṃ-be able to behold; परमेश्वरम् parameśvaram-the Supreme Lord.
“Rishi Maitreya spoke:
Venerable Teacher, I wish to learn about that Yogaḥ knowing which I shall be able to behold that Supreme Lord who is the Upholder of Everything.” ॥6/6/4॥
Rishi Maitreya is on the spot when he says that he wishes to learn all about that Yogaḥ, knowing which, he would be able to ‘behold that Supreme Lord who is the Upholder of Everything.’ He has summed up a most complex, difficult and extensive subject in a few words, lucid enough for all to understand. Rishis have always had the larger welfare of all mankind whether in their own age or of future human beings in the eons to come. That is why the Purāṇa have recorded the pronouncements of eminent Rishis faithfully.
In making this profound request to Maharishi Parāśara, Rishi Maitreya indirectly reveals what the aim of Yogaḥ might be. It is to behold or experience the Brahman. What about emancipation or final liberation from the shackles of births/deaths? That is automatic because one cannot experience the Brahman in Samādhiḥ without all past Karman and all past sins having been washed away. In the event, with no Karman and sins left in the account of a Jivātman, rebirth would have become redundant and that would amount to final liberation. Rishi Maitreya discloses another important tenet of Hindu Philosophy in his request to Maharishi Parāśara. It is that the Brahman is the Upholder or the Prop of everything. According to Hindu Philosophy, that means our own Universe or all the Multiverses at large owe their continued existence and functioning to the Brahman who is the sub-stratum of all.
Ṣlokaḥ [6/6/5]
श्रीपराशर उवाच :
यथा केशिध्वजः प्राह खांडिक्याय महात्मने ।
जनकाय पुरा योग तमहं कथयामि ते ॥६/६/५॥
Parāśara uvāca:
yathā keśidhvajaḥ prāha khāṇḍikyāya mahātmane ।
janakāya purā yogaṃ tat ahāhaṃ kathayāmi te ॥6/6/5॥
श्रीपराशर sriparāśara-the Rishi Pararāśara; उवाच uvāca-spoke: यथा yathā-even as; केशिध्वजः Keśidhvajaḥ-the King Keśidhvajaḥ; प्राह prāha-declared; खांडिक्याय khāṇḍikyāya-to Rājan Khāṇḍikyāya; महात्मने mahātmane-the great soul; जनकाय janakāya-bearing the name of Janaka; पुरा purā-in the days of old; योग Yogaḥ -Yogaḥ ; तत् tat-that; अहं aham-I will; कथयामि kathayāmi-will narrate; ते te-to you.
“Rishi Parāśara spoke:
I will narrate to you exactly what Keśidhvajaḥ declared in the days of old to the great Soul Khāṇḍikyā also bearing the (sur)name of Janaka .” ॥6/6/5॥
Ṣlokaḥ [6/6/6]
मैत्रेय उवाच खांडिक्यः कोऽभवद्ब्रह्मन्को वा केशिध्वजःऽअभवत् ।
कथं तयोश्च संवादो योगसंबंधकारणात् ॥६/६/६॥
maitreya uvāca:
khāṇḍikya ko ‘bhavadbrahmanko vā keśidhvajaḥ kṛtī ।
kathaṃ tayoś ca saṃvādo Yogaḥ saṃbandhakāraṇāt ॥6/6/6॥
मैत्रेय Maitreya-the Rishi Maitreya; उवाच uvāca-spoke:
खांडिक्यः khāṇḍikyaḥ-Rājan Khandikya; को ko-who; अभवत् abhavat-was; बह्मन् brahman-O! Brahmana Sage; वा vā-as also; केशिध्वजो Keshidhvajo-Rājan Keshidhvaj; अभवत् abhavat-was; कथं katham-do tell/narrate; तयो between; च and; संवादो saṃvādo-dialogue or discussion; योगसंबंध Yogaḥ saṃbandha-concerning Yogaḥ ; कारणात् kāranāt-the cause of.
“Rishi Maitreya spoke:
Who was Khāṇḍikyaḥ O Brahmana Sage ? And who was Keśidhvajaḥ? What was the cause of the dialogue and discussion pertaining to Yogaḥ that took place between the two? Do tell us all that.” ॥6/6/6॥
Ṣlokaḥ [6/6/7]
श्रीपराशर उवाच
धर्मध्वजो वै जनकस्तस्य पुत्रोऽमितध्वजः
कृतध्वजश्च नाम्नासीत्सदाध्यात्मरतिर्नृपः ॥६/६/७॥
parāśara uvāca:
dharmadhvajo vai janakas tasya putro ‘mitadhvajaḥ
kṛtadhvajaś ca nāmnāsīt sadādhyātmaratir nṛpaḥ ॥6/6/7॥
श्रीपराशर-Parāśara Muni; उवाच uvāca-spoke:
धर्मध्वजो dharmadhvajo-Dharmadhvajaḥ; वै vai-indeed; जनकस्तस्य janakas tasya-of that Janaka; पुत्रो -sons; अमितध्वजः amitdhvajaḥ; कृतध्वज kṛtadhvaja; च ca-and; नाम्नासी nāmnāsī-the latter of the two named; सदा sadā-always; अध्यात्मरतिर्नृपः ādhyātmaratir nrupah-a King who took delight in spiritual matters.
Ṣlokaḥ [6/6/8]
कृतध्वजस्य पुत्रोऽभूत्ख्यातः केशिध्वजो नृपः
पुत्रोमितध्वजस्यापि खांडिक्यजनकोऽभवत् ॥६.६.८॥.
kṛtadhvajasya putro abhūt khyātaḥ keśidhvajo nṛpaḥ
putro ‘mitadhvajasyāpi khāṇḍikyajanako abhavat ॥6/6/8॥.
कृतध्वजस्य kṛtadhvajasya-of kṛtadhvaja; पुत्रो putro-son ; अभूत्ख्यातः abhūt khyātaḥ-renowned; केशिध्वजो keśidhvajo-nmed Keśidhvajaḥ; नृपः nṛpaḥ-King; पुत्रो putro-son; मितध्वजस्यापि amitadhvajasya-of Amitdhvaja; api-also; खांडिक्यजनको khāṇḍikyajanako-named Khāṇḍikyajanaka: अभवत् abhavat-happened to be.
“Krutadhvaja’s son was the renowned/celebrated Keśidhvajaḥ. Also, Amitadhwaja’s son happened to be called Khāṇḍikya Janaka ॥6/6/8॥.
Ṣlokaḥ [6/6/9]
कर्ममार्गेण खांडिक्यः पृतिव्यामभवत्पतिः ।
केशिध्वजोऽप्यतीवासीदात्मविद्याविशारदः ॥६/६/९॥
karmamārgeṇ khāṇḍikyaḥ pṛthivyām abhavat patiḥ ।
keśidhvajo api atīvāsīt ātmavidyāviśāradaḥ ॥6/6/9॥.
कर्ममार्गेण karmamārgeṇ-taking recourse to the Path of Actions/Karman; खांडिक्यः khāṇḍikyaḥ-Rājan Khāṇḍikyaḥ; पृतिव्याम pṛthivyām-on the Earth; अभवत् abhavat-became; पतिः patiḥ-Lord/Master; केशिध्वजो keśidhvajo-Rājan Keśidhvajaḥ; अपि अतिवासित् atīvāsīt-highly famous/celebrated; आत्मविद्या ātmavidyā-the knowledge of the Self/Aatman; विशारदः viśāradaḥ-famed for learning.
Sanskrit Words:
- वासित् vāsīt: [AK 3, 131/1] 1. 1 Perfumed. 2. Steeped, infused 3. Seasoned, spiced 4. Peopled, populous 5. Possessing, having. 6. Famous, celebrated 7. Purified, edified.
2.तिवासित् atīvāsīt: the meanings at Ser 1 above but to an excessive degree.
- अपि api: [AGK 1, 169/1] 1. (As a separable adverb or conjunction) and, also, besides, moreover. 2. It is often used to express emphasis in the sense of‘too’,‘even’, ‘very’ 3. though.
- विशारदः viśāradaḥ [AGK 3, 181/1] 1. clever, proficient. 2. learned, wise. 3. famous, celebrated.
“Taking recourse to the the Path of Karman, Rājan Khāṇḍikyaḥ became the Master (of that Path) on the face of the Earth. Rājan Keśidhvajaḥ, though, (acquired) great fame for his learning in the Knowledge of the Atman.” ॥6/6/9॥.
Ṣlokaḥ [6/6/10]
तावुभावपि चैवास्तां विजिगीषू परस्परम् ।
केशिध्वजेन खांडिक्यस्स्वराज्यादवरोपितः ॥6/6/10॥
tāv ubhāv api ca eva āstāṃ vijigīṣū parasparam ।
keśidhvajena khāṇḍikyaḥ svarājyād avaropitaḥ ॥6/6/10॥.
ताव tāv-those; उभाव ubhāv-two; अपि api-though; च एव ca eva-and verily; आस्तां āstāṃ-being intent upon/preoccupied with; विजिगीषू vijigīṣū-vanquishing; परस्परम् parasparam-each other; केशिध्वजेन keśidhvajena-by Rājan Keśidhvajaḥ;खांडिक्यः khāṇḍikyaḥ-Rājan Khāṇḍikyaḥ; स्वराज्याद svarājyād-from his own Kingdom; अवरोपितः avaropitaḥ-was uprooted.
Sanskrit Words:
- आस्था [AGK 1, 387/2] 1. 1 To stand by or remain, to occupy. 2. To ascend, mount. 3. take recourse to, resort to, practise, follow. 4. practising concentration of mind.
- विजि [AGK 3, 144/1] 1. overcoming, vanquishing, defeating. 2. to win, acquire by conquest. 3. to surpass, excel.
- उभय [AGK 1,486/1] 1. both. 2. dual.
- अवरोपितः [AGK 1,268/1] 1. uprooting 2. Causing to descend. 3. Taking away, depriving, diminishing.
“Those two were verily bent upon vanquishing and acquiring the kingdom of each other by conquest. (It so happened that) Khāṇḍikyaḥ was uprooted and his Kingdom taken away by Keśidhvajaḥ.” ॥6/6/10॥.
One may wonder why the two Kings Khāṇḍikyaḥ and Keśidhvajaḥ were bent upon vanquishing and annexing the territory of one another ? Could they not have lived in peace with dignity and mutual respect? One in whom such doubts may arise would be one out of with the realties of life in the real world. The history of mankind has always been full of wars and armed conflicts. The stronger nations prey upon the weaker. Just as criminals and robbers steal from their own citizens, nations also try to pillage the resources of other nations. If a man is ready to risk life and limb to defend his hearth and home, he and his family are that much safer. Nations that are not ready to defend themselves against aggressors have to pay a heavy price.
The more urgent question for those in power such as Kings, Presidents, PMs and Ministers is to investigate the moral reasons behind such conflicts much later after first taking steps to safeguard the nation against threats. The slogans of Ahimsa, Peace to all Men, Brotherhood of Man, Comity of Nations and so on are valuable by themselves. But they will sound hollow and valueless if a Nation cannot back its peaceful intentions with real strength. The ‘Big Stick Policy’ in International Relations is a case in point. It was first popularised by the US President Theodore Roosevelt. It was based on a West African Proverb which says, “Speak softly but carry the big stick; you will go far“. President Theodore Roosevelt made this proverb widely known. For instance, he supported the idea of enhanced naval build up to support the nations’ objectives by dominance when the use of force was considered a moral compulsion. The underlying secret here is that a political leader should be a realist and should have no illusions about the nature of conflicts.
From 1947 to 1962, India had men in power who had illusions about peace and moral force. They seemed to have more faith in the efficacy of moral force used against inimical nations than in the use of a big stick. No efforts were made in fifteen years to do something about India’s rotten/broken stick. In fact, the Defence Minister at that time voiced the idea of converting Ordnance Factories to make coffee-percolators for the common man. Then in 1962, the PM ordered the Indian Army to throw out the Chinese who had by then occupied large tracts of Indian Territory. The degree of delusion can be judged from the fact that the Indian Army then had a very small stick and that too in a semi rotten state. It was in no position to throw out any intruder let alone the Chinese. I recent times by effective retaliation on ground while avoiding unwarranted rhetoric or loud speaking, we have given Pakistan the message that we speak softly but carry a big stick.
The point is that if one is in power, one is obliged to be a realist and to protect the Nation whose perks one has been enjoying. If not, one should quit and allow another who is more of a realist with less illusions about realpolitik to take over. Endangering one’s nation from enemies within or without is treason. The two Kings were only following their Dharma to ensure the protection of their subjects. It is the Duty of every King to eliminate possible threats to the future security of his own territories and peoples. They have to be constantly on the lookout for possible threats in the short and long time-frames. They have to prepare well in advance for future wars by way of alliances, increases in the military forces, better training, better weapons and so on. That is how the real world is. In 1947, the Political Leaders in power neglected their Dharma. They failed to foresee the Chinese threat and were criminally negligent by not taking suitable steps to counter it. In fact, the two Indian Battalions had been stationed by the British in Tibet prior to 1947 anticipating a Chinese threat to Tibet. in 1947, these two Battalions were withdrawn by the then Indian Government to appease the Chinese. That Government and its Ministers committed a grave sin. Had the Indian military presence in Tibet not been withdrawn, the Chinese conquest of Tibet might have been stalled.
In any age, the Dharma of a Ruler whether a King or President, or Prime Minister or the Council of Ministers is to take steps in advance to meet possible threats to protect the Nation and its peoples. If they fail in their solemn Dharma, they would have committed grave Adharma and would have to pay for their sins. Rājan Keśidhvajaḥ committed no sin by defeating Rājan Khāṇḍikyaḥ in a just battle and annexing the latter’s land. As we shall see in due course, Khāṇḍikyaḥa too understood the intricacies of the Kshatriya Dharma involved and harboured neither any regret nor animosity against the victor. The Lesson contained in this Ṣlokaḥ is that even the Yogi must be alert to possible threats that could harm his family, his elders, his Guru, his values in life, and his practice of Yogaḥ. He cannot sit passively, or idly or pretend that it is not a Yogi’s duty to use force where needed for a just cause or to forcefully resist oppression and injustice. He cannot let others take the hard decisions, do the dirty work and suffer the unpleasant fallout in the process.
Ṣlokaḥ [6/6/11]
पुरोधसा मंत्रिभिश्च समवेतोऽल्पसाधनः
राज्यान्निराकृतस्सोऽथ दुर्गारण्यचरोऽभवत् ॥ 6/6/11॥
purodhasā mantribhiś ca samaveto apasādhanaḥ ।
rājyān nirākṛtaḥ so atha durgāraṇyacaro abhavat ॥ 6/6/11॥
पुरोधसा purodhasā-family Priest of the King ; मंत्रिभिश्च mantribhiś-group of Ministers ; समवेतो samaveto-together ; अल्पसाधनः apasādhanaḥ- ; राज्यान् rājyān-from his own Kingdom; निराकृत: nirākṛtaḥ-having been expelled; सो so-having been brought to an end (his Rule) अथ atha-therefore; दुर्गारण्यचरो durgāraṇyacaro-wandered about in the mountainous and forested areas.
“Accompanied by his Family Priest and a small group of Ministers and carrying limited means, Rājan Khāṇḍikyaḥ expelled from his Kingdom, wandered about in the mountainous and forested areas. ॥ 6/6/11॥.”
Sanskrit Words:
- निराक्रुत् [Gode-Karve 2, 285/1] 1.to expel, drive away. 2. to refute. 3. to refute as an opinion. 4. give up, abandon, destroy, annihilate.
- सो so [AK 3, 412/2] 1. To kill, destroy 2. To finish, complete, bring to an end.
The scene now shifts to Rājan Keśidhvajaḥ who is engaged in the performance of rituals ordained in the Vedaḥ . He has a specific object in mind. The rituals he is performing are meant to secure that object.
Ṣlokaḥ [6/6/12]
इयाज सोऽपि सुबहून्यज्ञाञ्ज्ञानव्यपाश्रयः ।
ब्रह्मविद्यामधिष्ठाय तर्त्तुं मृत्युमविद्यया ॥६/६/१२॥
iyāja so ‘pi subahūn yajñāñ \jñānavyapāśrayaḥ ।
brahmavidyām adhiṣṭhāya tartuṃ mṛtyum avidyayā ॥6/6/12॥
इयाज iyāja-performed; सोऽपि so api-to bring to an end as well; सुबहून् subahūn-numerous; यज्ञान yajñāñ-sacrificial rites/rituals; ज्ञानव्यपाश्रयः jñānavyapāśrayaḥ-had taken shelter in Knowledge; ब्रह्मविद्याम brahmavidyām-in the knowledge of the Self; अधिष्ठाय adhiṣṭhāya-had been established; तर्त्तुं tartuṃ-to get across; मृत्युम mṛtyum-death ; अविद्यया avidyayā-through ignorance. ॥६/६/१२॥
“Although he had earlier taken shelter in Knowledge and had anchored himself in the knowledge of the Self, He (Keśidhvajaḥ), through ignorance or non-knowledge, performed and successfully concluded numerous sacrificial rites/rituals in order to get across death.” ॥6/6/12॥
One may get the impression from this Ṣlokaḥ that the Path of Karman/Action is to be considered as ‘avidya’ or ‘ignorance’ or ‘non-knowledge’. Does it also mean that the Path of Knowledge is ‘vidya’ or knowledge which is the opposite of ignorance? Does this Ṣlokaḥ hint indirectly that the Path of Karman might also be the Path of Ignorance? Let us examine these questions. Sri Krishna has clearly indicated in the Gita that the Path of Action or Karma Yogaḥ is superior to the Path of Knowledge or Jñyāna . He tells Arjuna [ibid/8]:
नियतं कुरु कर्म त्वं कर्म ज्यायो ह्यकर्मणः ।
शरीरयात्रापि च ते न प्रसिद्ध्येदकर्मणः ॥ ३.८॥
niyataṃ kuru karma tvaṃ karma jyāyo hy akarmaṇaḥ ।
śarīrayātrāpi ca te na prasidhyed akarmaṇaḥ ॥3/8॥
नियतं niyataṃ-prescribed/ordained; कुरु kuru-perform; कर्म karma-duties; त्वं tvaṃ-you; कर्म karma-actions; ज्यायो jyāyo-are superior; हि hi-indeed; अकर्मणः akarmaṇaḥ-than inaction; शरीर śarīra-of the Body; यात्रा yātrā-support/maintenance; अपि api-even; च ते ca te-and of your; न प्रसिद्ध्येद na prasidhyed-cannot be accomplished/cannot succeed; अकर्मणः akarmaṇaḥ-through inaction.
Sanskrit Words:
- नियतं niyataṃ: [AK 2(13), 277/2] 1. Always, constantly. 2. invariably, inevitably. 3. ordained/prescribed.
2.यात्रा yātrā [AK3, 22/1] 1. Going, motion, journey. 2. The march of an army, expedition, invasion. 3. going on a pilgrimage. 4. Support of life, livelihood, maintenance. 5. way, means, expedient.
- प्रसिद्ध्येद prasidhyed [AK 2, 489/2] 1. To be accomplished or effected. 2. To succeed, to be made known. 3. To be got or obtained. 4. to be established.
“You must invariably perform your obligatory actions because actions (Karma Yogaḥ) are indeed superior to non-action (Jñyāna Yogaḥ). Not even the bare sustenance/support of the body can be accomplished/would succeed through inaction.”
If one were to conclude from a cursory reading of the Vishnu Puraana Ṣlokaḥ [6/6/12], that the Path of Knowledge or Non-Action ( apparently based on vidya), is fundamentally superior to the Path of Action (apparently based on avidya), it would be a hasty conclusion. In the case of a vast majority of individuals, non-action is actually unhelpful in gaining the vision of the Self. This is because the Path of Knowledge is valid only in the extremely rare case of a person whose vision of the Self no longer depends on any means. But most human beings have to depend upon some means or the other of obtaining the vision of the Self. Rāmānuja [Gita Bhashya ibid.] says that, “Karma Yogaḥ is better in gaining the vision of the Self for one who is searching for the most reliable/effective means towards that end. Karma Yogaḥ is better because it is much easier to follow; because it is far more secure against possible errors; and most importantly because the contemplation of the true nature of the Self is included within it. Lastly, because even for a Jñyāna Yogin the performance of minimum activity is unavoidable and absolutely necessary to support existence. For these reasons, Karma Yogaḥ is better as a means for securing the vision of the Atman than Jñyāna Yoga.
Even a great Jñyāni like Rājan Janaka preferred the Path of Action for securing emancipation. In the Gita Bhashya [ibid/20], Rāmānuja says: “Because, Karma Yogaḥ is the best means for securing the vision of the Self, even in the case of a person fully qualified for Jñyāna Yogaḥ such as Royal Sages like Janaka and others, who were the foremost among the Jñyāni, preferred Karma Yogaḥ as the means for attaining perfection.” It would seem from all this that as compared to action, inaction might well have more of the characteristics of ‘avidya’ or ‘ignorance’ adversely affecting the goal of life. Then why does the Ṣlokaḥ say that Keśidhvajaḥ “taking recourse to Avidya, adopted the Path of Karman.”? Is the Ṣlokaḥ wrong? Is there some contradiction in what the Ṣlokaḥ says? No, that cannot be for the Rishis cannot speak an untruth or make a statement with self-contradictions. What then?
The answer lies in the nature of the Mimāṃsā Śāstram which consists of two parts. The first is the Pūrva Mimāṃsā also called the Karma Mimāṃsā because it gives importance to the Sections of the Vedaḥ that deal with rites/rituals commensurate with the attainment of various objects in mind. The second, and the immediately succeeding part of the Mimāṃsā Śāstram, is the Uttara Mimāṃsā which deals with the latter part of the Vedaḥ such as the Upaniśads and concentrates on the philosophical aspects of the Universe, the Jivātman, the purpose of existence, and so on, and most importantly the Brahman. The Sanskrit term मिमांसा Mimāṃsā connotes, “reflection, investigation, critical enquiry”. The Uttara Mimāṃsā is the critical examination of Karman or works or actions while the Pūrva Mimāṃsā is the enquiry into the Self and the Brahman. One should not jump to the conclusion that Uttara Mimāṃsā is superior to the Pūrva Mimāṃsā or the other way around. In other words, one should not accord a lower status to Karman and actions simply because, in content, they seem to be less philosophical, less altruistic and more oriented towards material objects of thought/desire. One should not accord a higher status to Knowledge just because it seems, apparently, to be more abstract, more detached from material things, or more altruistic in content.
It has become fashionable for certain well meaning Scholars and sincere reformists to decry rites and rituals as altogether meaningless actions on the one hand, and on the other, to laud and glorify the concept of abstract thinking even while subsisting in an actionless state. The Vedaḥ advocate certain actions as rites/rituals for attaining certain ends. If one were to say that all rites/rituals are meaningless, it would be like saying that one part of the Vedaḥ dealing with actions is meaningless. Such a conclusion would be untenable fundamentally even before any discussions could begin. Faith in the Vedaḥ or its validity cannot be partial in substance. One cannot develop any logic from a partial premise in such matters. If actions in the form of rites/rituals and certain actions subserving certain ends are valid because they are given in the Vedaḥ , then why should such actions be deemed ‘avidya’?
The answer is that Karman by themselves cannot be deemed avidya since they have been ordained in the Scriptures. Further, non-performance of ordained Karman would be a sin and such non-performance would truly be a form of avidya or ignorance. It would be due to a delusion, in fact. The real reason, why the Ṣlokaḥ deems rites/rituals as avidya, is because the fruits obtained through ordained rites/rituals are impermanent whereas the Knowledge of the Self and the Supreme Self leads to permanent results. That is why the pursuit of the Knowledge of the Self and the Knowledge of the Paramātman are deemed to be ‘vidya’. The logic the Ṣlokaḥ uses to decide what is vidya and what is avidya is based only on the permanency or impermanency of the fruits accruing. It must be remembered that the enquiry into the Brahman can come only after the enquiry into Karman especially that associated with rites and rituals has been completed properly. The position is made clear by the Brahma Sutra [1/1/1], which says:
ॐ अथातो ब्रह्मजिज्ञासा ॐ ॥ १.१.१॥
The term अथ atha-now, denotes that precise moment in time when the enquiry into works has just been completed by the one who is the kind of Student who is a ब्रह्मजिज्ञासा brahma-jigñyāsā one who has developed the desire to know the Brahman. It also implies that the urge to know more about the Self and the Brahman has arisen during/as a result of the enquiry into the nature of works as expounded in the Karma Mimāṃsā. Careful study and due consideration of the texts of the Mimāṃsā Shastra would enable the student to ascertain the character of the injunctions related to works which form a part of the Vedaḥ . Yes the topic of Karman do form an integral and inseparable part of the Vedaḥ . The diligent student would also observe that all works lead only to non-permanent results. On the other hand, he would immediately become aware of the fact that the Upaniśad Sections—which also form part of the same Vedaḥ , refer to infinite and permanent results such as immortality. Then a student would be in a position to balance the two categories of results in his mind. He would be motivated to apply himself to the study of those Vedic Texts dealing with results, immense and permanent in nature. Those texts are the Śariraka-Mimāṃsā or the Puurva Mimāṃsā which consists of a systematic discussion of the Vedānta Texts dealing with indestructible fruits.
The aim of such discussion would be the accurate understanding the sense of the Vedic passages therein. Vedānta-Texts have declared in many places that the fruits of mere works is transitory, while the fruits by way of the knowledge of the Atman/Brahman is permanent. It must be noted that the Pūrva Mimāṃsā and the Uttara Mimāṃsā taken together constitute one integrated and continuous body of doctrine. The two parts are not mutually exclusive. They do not compete with each other. They complement each other. Rather, they follow an internal order of logical succession and support each other. The close relationship and mutual dependency between the two parts of the Mimāṃsā Śāstram should be kept in mind. One part cannot be viewed in isolation ignoring the other. One part cannot be torn, out of context, from the other. If that were to be done, it might lead to the Student or Scholar’s incomplete understanding of the Mimāṃsā Śāstram and its place in Vedānta. The Uttara Mimāṃsā , therefore, cannot be started without completing the study and due contemplation of the Pūrva Mimāṃsā. The knowledge of the true nature of the works, and the miniscule, transitory and perishable nature of the results accruing from mere works, are clearly dealt with in the Karma-Mimāṃsā. That is why the study of the Karma-Mimāṃsā has to be undertaken first regarding it as an injunction of the Scriptures. This mandatory study is to be regarded as the necessary/indispensable antecedent of the enquiry into the Brahman that is to be taken up subsequently in the Uttara Mimāṃsā.
Keśidhvajaḥ did not perform enjoined rituals or sacrificial rites out of avidya or ignorance. He was following the injunctions of the Vedaḥ. There was no element of ‘false knowledge’ or delusion in his decision to perform a given set of ordained sacrificial rituals. That decision was not due to some whimsical random thought. It was a deliberate and rational decision anchored in Dharma. He was well aware that the Vedaḥ contained various injunctions specifying which rites/rituals should be performed for obtaining which fruits. If a man desirous of some specific fruit were to perform the appropriate sacrificial rituals as given in the Vedaḥ, he would be performing Karman ordained as a Dharma to secure a given object in mind. These Karman would be out of the full knowledge of the scope of the Vedaḥ. Such authorized Karman cannot be casually denigrated or brushed away as being due ignorance or ‘false knowledge or avidya’ because that would mean the denigration and negation of one part of the Vedaḥ. One can hold such a view in a free society and Hinduism does tolerate divergent views. There is no concept of ‘blasphemy’ or ‘retribution’ for disagreement or dissension in Hinduism. Hinduism both in Theory and Practice is far more liberal and far less bigoted compared to other great faiths of the world. Many scholars and religious leaders have acknowledged it. But as a general principle, in any debate, the denigration of the Vedaḥ is deemed unacceptable. Rites/Rituals ordained in the Vedaḥ could be deemed philosophically as being ‘avidya’ only because, the fruits being sought by way of Karman done as rituals, would be small and impermanent compared to that which could be obtained by the pursuit of the Path of Knowledge of the Self or of the Brahman. That is why the Ṣlokaḥ correctly says that Keśidhvajaḥ resorted to Avidya to perform Karman to secure freedom from death.
The next question may arise as to why a person given to spiritual thinking and learned in the science of the ātman, should desire to conquer death as stated in Ṣlokaḥ [6/6/12]? Is it a desirable aim for one learned about the ātman? Conquering death would imply perpetuating embodiment with the odds favouring the development of greater attachments; the possibility of adding more and more Karman to the already bloated pending balance; increasing the chances of a fall from Yogaḥ and delaying mokśa. Who would want to postpone mokśa sine-die in this manner? I cannot say for sure why an enlightened person such as Keśidhvajaḥ took to sanctioned Karman to get over death and to attain immortality. My theory is that Keśidhvajaḥ had begun to get more and more enmeshed with Prakṛti following the increased responsibilities of a significantly enlarged dominion. One can only hazard a guess that the King may have begun to enjoy the taste of enhanced power and prestige. He may become loth to part from it due to death. In any case, to one given to the spiritual path, death would be a big relief because, in the event of death, one would either get mokśa, if qualified, or else another chance to begin again from the same point at which one might have fallen from Yogaḥ in the previous embodiment. In any case, this Ṣlokaḥ gives everyone the warning that material existence has many pitfalls for one desirous of striving for mokśa.
Ṣlokaḥ [6/6/13]
एकदा वर्त्तमानस्य यागे योगविदां वर ।
घर्मधेनुं जघानोग्रश्शार्दूलो विजने वने ॥६/६/१३॥
ekadā vartamānasya yāge yogavidāṃ vara।
dharmadhenuṃ jaghānograḥ śārdūlo vijane vane. ॥6/6/13॥
एकदा ekadā -once; वर्त्तमानस्य vartamānasya -during the time; यागे yāge -a Sacrificial ritual was in progress; योगविदां वर yogavidāṃ vara -by the best of those skilled in Yoga; घर्मधेनुं dharmadhenuṃ-the holy cow supporting the Dharma Rituals; जघानो jaghān-struck down/killed ; उग्रश्शार्दूलो ugrashaarduulo- by a fierce tiger; विजने vijane-devoid of people; वने – in a forest.
“Once, whilst the best of those learned in spiritual knowledge (Keśidhvajaḥ,) was engaged in a sacrificial ritual, a fierce tiger happened to slay the milch-cow supporting the Vedic Rituals, and this happened in a part of the forest devoid of people.” ॥6/6/13॥
Sanskrit Words:
1.वर vara [AGK 3, 102/1] 1. Best, excellent. 2. Better than. 3. act of choosing/selecting. 4. wish, desire.
Ṣlokaḥ [6/6/14]
ततो राजा हतां श्रुत्वा धनुं व्याघ्रेण चर्त्विजः ।
प्रायश्चित्तं स पप्रच्छ किमत्रेति विधीयताम् ॥६/६/१४॥
tato rājā hatāṃ jñātvā dhenuṃ vyāghreṇa ṛtvijaḥ ।
prāyaścittaṃ sa papraccha kim atreti vidhīyate ॥6/6/14॥
“When the Rājan heard that the cow designated for providing milk for the Vedic rituals had been killed, he asked the Priests Officiating at the Rituals, as to the procedure for the expiation/atonement of such a sin.” ॥6/6/14॥
treti vidhīyate ॥6/6/14॥
This Ṣlokaḥ namely [6/6/14] raises the question as to why a man learned in spiritual matters would want to atone for the doubtful sin of a holy cow being killed by a tiger. It is in the nature of carnivores to attack herbivores. The question of sin would arise when any act is pre-meditated even when the person committing the act has prior awareness that the intended act is wrong. That did not arise in the case of the tiger. Therefore, the killing of the holy cow by a tiger, being a part of its Dharma, could have been treated by Rājan Keśidhvajaḥ as an act of God and left at that. Then why did Keśidhvajaḥ feel the need for atonement of a sin? One reason could be that the Rājan had gone so far down the Path of Material Existence and all its enjoined Karman that an ethos may have been formed around him in which, he must have felt the need for ritual atonement. He may have become more dependent on Karman (practical works/actions) than upon philosophy and abstract reasoning.
Ṣlokaḥ s [6/6/15-16]
तेप्यूचुर्न वयं विद्मः कश्रोउः! पृच्छतामिति ।
कश्रोउ!रपि तेनोक्तस्तथैव प्राह भार्गवम् ॥६/६/१५॥
te cocur na vayaṃ vidmaḥ kaśeruḥ pṛcchyatām iti ।
kaśerur api tenoktas tatheti prāha bhārgavam ॥6/6/15॥
शुनकं पृच्छ राजैंद्र नाहं वेद्मि स वेत्स्यति ।
स गत्वा तमपृच्छच्च सोप्याह शृणु यन्मुने १६ ॥६/६/१६॥
śunakaṃ pṛccha rājendra nāhaṃ vedmi sa vetsyati ।
sa gatvā tam apṛcchac ca so ‘py āha śṛṇu yan mune ॥ 6/6/16॥
“The Priests Officiating at the Sacrificial Ritual told the King that they were not aware of any such propitiatory ritual. They suggested that he should consult one Kesharu. When Kesharu was duly approached, he said that he too was unaware of any specific ritual in the matter. He asked the King to seek the advice of one Shunak the son of Rishi Bhrigu. When the King went to Shunak and sought his advice, listen to what Shunak told the King , O Muni.” [6/6/15-16]
Ṣlokaḥ [6/6/17]
न केशरुर्न चैवाहं न चैकस्सांप्रतं भुवि ।
वेत्त्येक एव त्वच्छत्रुः खांडिक्यो यो जितस्त्वया ॥६/६/१७॥
“As of now, in the whole World, neither Kesharu nor myself nor anyone else knows anything about this matter except the one whom you have defeated, who is your enemy, namely Rāja Khāṇḍikyaḥ. He alone would know about it” ॥6/6/17॥
Ṣlokaḥ s [6/6/18-19]:
Ṣlokaḥ [6/6/18]
स चाह तं व्रजाम्येष प्रष्टुमात्मरिपुं मुने ।
प्राप्त एव महायज्ञो यदि मां स हनिष्यति ॥६/६/१८॥
sa cāha taṃ vrajāmyeṣa praṣṭumātmarīpuṃ mune ।
prāpta eva mahāyajño yadi māṃ sa haniṣyati ॥6/6/18॥
Ṣlokaḥ [6/6/19]
प्रायश्चित्तमश्षोए!ण स चेत्पृष्टो वदिष्यति ।
ततश्चाविकलो योगो मुनिश्रेष्ठ भविष्यति ॥६/६/१९॥
prāyaścittamaśeṣeṇa sa cetpṛṣṭo vadiṣyati ।
tataścāvikalo yogo muniśreṣṭha bhaviṣyati ॥6/6/19॥
Hearing the words of Shunak Muni, the King declared to him:
“I shall go to my enemy to ask him about the procedure for atonement. If he were to kill me, I would still get the reward accruing from the Sacrifice. On the other hand, if he were to tell me how to perform the necessary propitiatory rites/rituals according to the Scriptures, I would be able to complete the Sacrificial Rites without any impediment or defect.” ॥6/6/18-19॥
Notice the way of thinking of Keśidhvajaḥ who was basically learned in the science of spirituality and matters concerning the Ātman and the Paramātman. He saw a win-win situation in this dilemma in which others might have regarded the first option as untenable and the second as being most unlikely. We see Keśidhvajaḥ’s spiritual bent of mind coming to the fore here.
Ṣlokaḥ [6/6/20-27]
Ṣlokaḥ [6/6/20]
श्रीपराशर उवाच
इत्युक्त्वा रथमारुह्य कृष्णाजिनधरो नृपः ।
वनं जगाम यत्रास्ते स खांडिक्यो महामतिः ॥६.६.२०॥
śrīparāśara uvāca:
ityuktvā rathamāruhya kṛṣṇājinadharo nṛpaḥ ।
vanaṃ jagāma yatrāste sa khāṇḍikyo mahāmatiḥ ॥ 6/6/20 ॥
śrīparāśara said:
“Having said thus, the King put on a deer-skin dress, mounted his chariot and proceeded to the forest where the high-minded Khāṇḍikyaḥ was staying.”
॥ 6/6/20 ॥
Ṣlokaḥ [6/6/21]
तमापतंतमालोक्य खांडिक्यो रिपुमात्मनः ।
प्रोवाच क्रोधताम्राक्षस्समारोपितकार्मुकः ॥६.६.२१॥
tamāpatantamālokya khāṇḍikyo ripumātmanaḥ ।
provāca krodhatāmrākṣaḥsamāropitakārmukaḥ ॥6/6/21॥
“Seeing his enemy approaching, Khāṇḍikyaḥ took up his bow. With his eyes red with anger, he addressed Keśidhvajaḥ as follows.” ॥6/6/21॥
Ṣlokaḥ [6/6/22]
खांडिक्य उवाच:
कृष्णाजिनं त्वं कवचमाबध्यास्मान्हनिष्यसि ।
कृष्णाजिनधरे वेत्सि न मयि प्रहरिष्यति ॥६.६.२२॥
khāṇḍikya uvāca
kṛṣṇājinaṃ tvaṃ kavacamābadhyāsmānhaniṣyasi ।
kṛṣṇājinadhare vetsi na mayi prahariṣyati ॥ 6/6/22॥
“Khāṇḍikyaḥ said:
Hey you !! Having put on the deer-skin garb of an ascetic), would you slay us all? Do you think that (I will take it for granted) that you will not attack me in this deer-skin dress?”
Ṣlokaḥ [6/6/23]
मृगाणां वद पृष्ठेषु मूढ कृष्णाजिनं न किम् ।
येषां मया त्वया चोग्राः प्रहिताश्शितसायकाः ॥६.६.२३ ॥
mṛgāṇāṃ vada pṛṣṭheṣu mūḍha kṛṣṇājinaṃ na kim |
yeṣāṃ mayā tvāya cogrāḥ prahitāḥ śitasāyakāḥ ||6/6/23 ||
“O Fool! Do deer not have deer-skins upon their backs on which both you and I have rained showers of sharp arrows (in the past)?” ॥6/6/23॥
Ṣlokaḥ [6/6/24]
स त्वामहं हनिष्यामि न मे जीवन्विमोक्ष्यसे ।
आतताय्यसि दुर्बुद्धे मम राज्यहरो रिपुः ॥६.६. २४ ॥
sa tvāmahaṃ haniṣyāmi na me jīvanvimokṣyase |
ātatāyyasi durbuddhe mama rājyaharo ripuḥ ||6/6/24 ||
“Now I shall surely slay you. You will not return without losing your life. O Evil-Minded One! You are the heinous criminal and enemy who has snatched away my Kingdom.” (24).
Ṣlokaḥ [6/6/25]
केशिध्वज उवाच
खांडिक्य संशयं प्रष्टुं भवंतमहमागतः ।
न त्वां हंतुं विचार्यैतत्कोपं बाणं विमुंच वा ॥६.६.२५॥
keśidhvaja uvāca
khāṇḍikya saṃśayaṃ praṣṭuṃ bhavantamahāmāgataḥ |
na tvāṃ hantuṃ vicāryaitatkopaṃ bāṇaṃ vimuñca vā ||6/6/25 ||
“Keśidhvajaḥ said:
O Khāṇḍikyaḥ! I have come here only to to ask you about some doubts I have. I have not come to kill you. Therefore set aside both your arrow as well as your anger.” (25).
Ṣlokaḥ [6/6/26]
श्रीपराशर उवाच
ततस्स मंत्रिभिस्सार्द्धमेकांते सपुरोहितः ।
मंत्रयामास खांडिक्यस्सर्वैरेव महामतिः ॥६.६.२६॥
śrīparāśara uvāca
tataḥsa mantribhiḥ sārdhamekānte sapurohitaḥ ।
mantrayāmāsa khāṇḍikyaḥsarvair eva mahāmatiḥ ॥6/6/26॥
” Śrīparāśara:
Thereupon, the high minded Khāṇḍikyaḥ consulted all his Ministers and Priest alone in private.” ॥6/6/26॥
aḥsarvair eva mahāmatiḥ ॥6/6/26॥
Ṣlokaḥ [6/6/27]
तमूचुर्मंत्रिणो वध्यो रिपुरेष वशं गतः ।
हतेऽस्मिन्पृथिवी सर्वा तव वश्या भविष्यति ॥६.६.२७॥
tamūcurmatriṇo vadhyo ripureṣa vaśaṃ gataḥ ।
hate ‘smin pṛthivī sarvā tava vaśyā bhaviṣyati ॥6/6/27॥
aḥsarvair eva mahāmatiḥ ॥6/6/26॥
“All the Ministers and the Priest told the King that at this time since his enemy was under his control, he should be killed. If his enemy were to die, the whole Earth would come under Khāṇḍikyaḥ’s sway.” ॥6/6/27॥
What happens next is astonishing. The reaction of Khāṇḍikyaḥ when presented by pure chance with an extremely lucky and golden opportunity to get back his lost Kingdom in one easy stroke is the first high point of this narrative. If you bear in mind common human nature, you will agree that the odds that Khāṇḍikyaḥ would react in the way he did, would be more than several thousands to one against. His reaction will make a deep impression on those given to Dharma and to Yogaḥ in particular. Please read on carefully.
Ṣlokaḥ [6/6/28-31]
Ṣlokaḥ [6/6/28]
खांडिक्यश्चाह तान्सर्वानेवमेतन्न संशयः ।
हतेस्मिन्पृथिवी सर्वा मम वश्या भविष्यति॥६/६/२८॥
khāṇḍikyaścāha tānsarvānevametanna saṃśayaḥ ।
hatesminpṛtivī sarvā mama vaśyā bhaviṣyati ॥6/6/28॥
“Khāṇḍikyaḥ replied to them (his counsellors): ‘There is no doubt that by killing Keśidhvajaḥ, this सर्वा प्रुथिवी sarva prithvi-entire Earth (material world) would वश्या भविष्यति vashya bhavishyati-come under my sway.” ॥6/6/28॥
Ṣlokaḥ [6/6/29]
परलोकजयस्तस्य पृथिवी सकला मम ।
न हन्मि चेल्लोकजयो मम तस्य वसुंधरा ॥ ६/६/२९॥
paralokajayastasya pṛthivī sakalā mama ।
na hanmi cellokajayo mama tasya vasuṃdharā ॥6/6/29॥
But then परलोकजयस्तस्य or victory over the next world (the spiritual realms) would be his (Keśidhvajaḥ’s) whereas पृथिवी सकला prithvi sakalā-the entire Earth (mortal world) would be मम mama-mine However, if I were न हन्मि na hanmi-not to kill him, then परलोकजयो parlokajayō -victory over the other World (spiritual realms) would be mine and he would have वसुंधरा vasundharā-this Earth.” ॥6/6/29॥
Ṣlokaḥ [6/6/30]
नाऽहं मन्ये लोकजयादधिका स्याद्वसुंधरा ।
परलोकजयोऽनंतस्स्वल्पकालो महीजयः ॥६/६/३०॥
nāhaṃ manye lokajayādadhikā syādvasuṃdharā ।
paralokajayo ‘nantaḥsvalpakālo mahījayaḥ ॥6/6/30॥
I do not accept that victory over the (mortal) World such as the Earth is greater because victory over the other Worlds (higher/spiritual) is अनंत eternal; whereas स्वल्पकालो svalpakaalo-of limited duration is महीजयः mahījayaḥ-victory over the Earth (the present mortal world).” ॥6/6/30॥
Ṣlokaḥ [6/6/31]
तस्मान्नैनं हनिष्यामि यत्पृच्छति वदामि तत् ॥६/६/३१॥
tasmānnainaṃ haniṣyāmi yatpṛcchati vadāmi tat ॥6/6/31॥
“तस्मात् tasmaat-therefore, न एनम् na enam him (Keśidhvajaḥ)- I shall not हनिष्यामि hanishyaami -slay but यत्पृच्छति yatpṛcchati-whatever he may ask me; वदामि तत् vadāmi tat- so I shall tell him that (31).”
What do we make of these words of Khāṇḍikyaḥ to his counsellors? From whence did this high wisdom arise in a member of the Ruling Class of Warriors known for their Dharma of Just Rule, Protection of the Kingdom, conquests by aggressive action, and the enjoyment of material things of life? Previously, long given to the faithful adherence of the Codes of Conduct of the Warrior Caste, Khāṇḍikyaḥ should have seized this chance to win back his lost Kingdom. From whence did he acquire this buddhi of the critical differences between the material and the spiritual worlds?
Had Khāṇḍikyaḥ slain Keśidhvajaḥ, he would have incurred no sin. He would have merely abided by the Kshatriya Dharma. These three Ṣlokaḥ contain some profound lessons for the Yogi. Firstly, the Yogi must know the essential differences between the material and spiritual goals of embodiment and act accordingly. Secondly, he must resort to tranquil and quiet places to pursue Yogaḥ.
Ṣlokaḥ [6/6/32]
श्रीपराशर उवाच
ततस्तमभ्युपेत्याह खांडिक्यजनको रिपुम्
प्रष्टव्यं यत्त्वया सर्वं तत्पृच्छस्व वदाम्यहम् ३२
śrīparāśara uvāca
tatastamabyupetyāha khāṇḍikyajanako ripum
praṣṭavyaṃ yattvāya sarvaṃ tatpṛcchasva vadāmyaham
Śrīparāśara spoke:
“Thereupon Khāṇḍikyaḥ Janaka approached his enemy (Keśidhvajaḥ) and said: ‘Whatever subject or topic you may have in mind, do mention (ask about) all that. I shall answer (your questions).’ ” [6/6/32]
Sanskrit Words:
- उपेत्याह upetyāha/उपे upe: [AGK 1, 485/1] 1. to approach, come near, arrive. 2. to go to (a master), become a pupil.
- प्रष्टव्यं /प्रस्तावः [AGK 2, 492/2] 1. beginning. 2.mention. 3.occasion for a discourse, subject, topic
Ṣlokaḥ [6/6/33]
श्रीपराशर उवाच
ततस्सर्वं यथावृत्तं घर्मधेनुवधं द्विज ।
कथयित्वा स पप्रच्छ प्रायश्चित्तं हि तद्गतम् ॥६/६/३३॥
śrīparāśara uvāca
tataḥ sarvaṃ yathāvṛttaṃ dharmadhenuvadhaṃ dvija
kathāṃyatvā sa papraccha prāyaśtittaṃ hi tadgatam
श्रीपराशर उवाच
Śrīparāśara spoke:
ततःtataḥ-covering; सर्वं sarvaṃ -all; यथावृत्तं yathāvṛttaṃ-as it transpired; घर्मधेनुवधं dharmadhenuvadhaṃ-the killing of the sacred Cow; द्विज dvija-O First Born; कथयित्वा kathayitvā-narrated; स पप्रच्छ sa papraccha-he enquired; prāyaśtittaṃ prāyaścittaṃ-atonement/expiation; हि hi-verily; तद्गतम् tadgatam- the way to do it.
“Covering everything, as it transpired, he narrated all about the killing of the sacred Cow, O Twice Born! Then he enquired about the procedure for atonement and how to go about it.” ॥ 6/6/33॥
Ṣlokaḥ [6/6/34]
स चाचष्ट यथान्यायं द्विज केशिध्वजाय तत् ।
प्रायश्चित्तमश्षोएण यद्वै तत्र विधीयते ॥६/६/३४॥
sa cācaṣṭa yathānyāyaṃ dvija keśidhvajāya tat ।
prāyaścittamaśeṣeṇa yaddhai tatra vidhīyate ॥6/6/34॥
“Whatever Keśidhvajaḥ wanted to know about the procedure for performing rituals for atonement or propitiation, all the applicable injunctions appropriate to Keśidhvajaḥ were conveyed/given to him in full by Khāṇḍikyaḥ.” ॥ 6/6/34॥
Ṣlokaḥ [6/6/35]
विदितार्थस्स तेनैव ह्यनुज्ञातो महात्मना ।
यागभूमिमुपागम्य चक्रे सर्वाः क्रियाः क्रमात् ॥६/६/३५॥
viditārthaḥsa tenaiva hyanujñāto mahātmanā |
yāgabhūmim upāgamya cakre sarvāḥ kriyāḥ kramāt ||6/6/35||
विदितार्थ viditārthaḥ-according to the ordained Rules; स sa-he (Keśidhvajaḥ); तेन एव tena eva-from him (Khāṇḍikyaḥ) हि hi-verily; अनुज्ञातो anujñāto-having learnt; महात्मना mahātmanā-the high souled; he (Keśidhvajaḥ); यागभूमिं yāgabhūmim-the place designated for the sacrificial rituals; उपागम्य upāgamya-having gone to; चक्रे cakre-as the karta or the doer; सर्वाःsarvāḥ-all; क्रियाः kriyāḥ-rituals/rites; क्रमात् kramāt -performed in due order.
“Having learnt from Rājan Khāṇḍikyaḥ, the procedure for atonement prescribed according to the ordained Rules, the high souled Keśidhvajaḥ went to the site (in his own Kingdom) designated for the sacrificial rituals. There as the Kartā or the doer of Karman, he performed in due order all the necessary rites/rituals (prescribed for the atonement of the sin accruing from the killing of the sacred cow by a tiger within his dominions).” ॥ 6/6/35॥
Ṣlokaḥ [6/6/36]
क्रमेण विधिवद्यागं नीत्वा सोऽवभृथाप्लुतः ।
कृतकृत्यस्ततो भूत्वा चिंतयामास पार्थिवः ॥ ६/६/३६॥
krameṇa vidhivadyāgaṃ nītvā so ‘vabhṛthāplutaḥ |
kṛtakṛtyastato bhūtvā cintayāmāsa pārthivaḥ ||6/6/36||
Having performed the यागं Yagam-sacrificial ritual; क्रमेण krameṇa-in due order/course of time विधिवद vidhivad-according to the prescribed procedures; अवभृथा avabhṛthā- the purification customary after the Yagnya (Sacrifical Ritual); प्लुतः plutaḥ had a bath, कृतकृत्यस्ततो भूत्वा kṛtakṛtyastato bhūtvā-having done everything required to be done, चिंतयामास cintayāmāsa-began to reflect in his mind, पार्थिवः pārthivaḥ-the King/Sovereign.
“Having performed the Yāgam in due order/in due course according to the prescribed procedures (learnt from Khāṇḍikyaḥ earlier), upon its completion, Keśidhvajaḥ had a ceremonial bath customary after a yajñyā for purification. Thereafter, the King began to reflect as follows in his mind even though he felt that he had done everything required to be done.” ॥ 6/6/36॥
Sanskrit Words:
1.अवभ्रुथः [AKG 1, 265/1] 1.The end or completion of a principal sacrifice. 2.Bathing at the end of a principal sacrifice for purification. 3. Purification by bathing of the sacrificer and the sacrificial vessels at the end of a sacrifice. 4. The water for purification.
- प्लुतः [AKG 2, 515/2] 1. to float, swim. 2. to cross in a boat. 3. leap, jump, spring. 4. to plunge into, bathe. 5.to remove, wash away.
- पार्थिवः pārthivaḥ [AKG 2, 387/1] 1. earthen, terrestrial, related to the Earth. 2. ruling the Earth 3. a King, Sovereign, princely, royal. 4.an earthen vessel. 5. body
Ṣlokaḥ [6/6/37]
पूजिताश्च द्विजास्सर्वे सदस्या मानिता मया ।
तथैवार्थिजनोऽप्यर्थैर्योजितोऽभिमतैर्मया ॥६/६/३७॥
pūjitāś ca dvijāḥsarve sadasyā mānitā mayā |
tathaivārthijano ‘py arthair yo ‘rjito ‘bhimatair mayā ||6/6/37||
पूजिता pūjitā- duly worshipped or paid obeisance; द्विजा dvijāḥ-the twice born (the Brahmana Priests who officiated/performed the Rituals); सर्वे sarve-all; मया mayā-by me; sadasyā-the assisting Priests (as well) ; मानिता mānitā-have been honoured; मया mayā-by me; तथैवा tathaiv-and in addition; अर्थिजनो ārthijano-those who had come with expectations of some wealth/gifts; अपि apy-as well; अर्थै arthair-wealth/gifts; योजितो yojito-supplied/furnished with; अभिमतैर् abhimatair-as wished/desired by them ; मया mayā-by me.
“I have paid due obeisance to all the twice-born (the Brahmana Priests who officiated at the Sacrifice). In addition, to those who had come with expectations of receiving something, I furnished them wealth/gifts as they desired with due respect.” ॥ 6/6/37॥
Sanskrit Words:
- सदस्या sadasyā/ सदस्यः sadasyh [AKG 3, 325/2]: 1. any person present at or belonging to an assembly, a member of an assembly. 2. an assistant at a sacrifice, a priest assisting at a sacrifice.
- मानिता mānitā [AKG 2, 634/2] 1. honoured, respected, esteemed.
- अभिमतैर् abhimatair/अभिमत abhimat [AKG 1, 1/179] 1. desired, wished, liked, dear, beloved. 2. agreeable, desirable. 3.agreed or assented to. 4.honoured, respected.
Ṣlokaḥ [6/6/38]
यथार्हमस्य लोकस्य मया सर्वं विचेष्टितम् ।
अनिष्पन्नक्रियं चेतस्तथापि मम किं यथा ॥ ६/६/३८॥
yathārhamasya lokasya mayā sarvaṃ viceṣṭitam ।
aniṣpannakriyaṃ cetastathāpi mama kiṃ yathā ॥6/6/38॥
यथार्हमस्य yathārhamasya-according to the prescribed ettiquette लोकस्य lokasya-of this world; मया mayā-by me; सर्वं sarvaṃ-all of it; विचेष्टितम् viceṣṭitam-strived to complete with effort; अनिष्पन्नक्रियं aniṣpannakriyaṃ-some incomplete action; चेतस्तथापि cetastathāpi-thoughts in the Mind;मम mama-mine; किं यथा kiṃ yathā-how come?
“I have striven to complete all actions according to the prescribed rules/etiquette of this World. How come there is this thought in my mind that something has not been accomplished/that something has been left incomplete? ” ॥ 6/6/38॥
Sanskrit Words:
- विचेष्टितम् viceṣṭitam [AKG 3, 143/1]1. effort, exertion. 2. striven, tried, struggled. effort.
- निष्पन्न niṣpanna [AKG 2, 302/2] 1. born, arisen, sprung up, produce. 2. effected, complete, accomplished.
Ṣlokaḥ [6/6/39]
इत्थं संचिंतयन्नैव सस्मार स महीपतिः ।
खांडिक्याय न दत्तेति मया वै गुरुदक्षिणा ॥ ६/६/३९॥
itthaṃ saṃcintayannaiva sasmāra sa mahīpatiḥ ।
khāṇḍikyāya na datteti mayā vai gurudakṣiṇā ॥6/6/39॥
इत्थं itthaṃ-thus; संचिंतयन्नैव saṃcintayannaiva-verily thinking; सस्मार sasmāra-remembered; स sa-that; महीपतिः mahipatih-King/Ruler of the Land; खांडिक्याय khāṇḍikyāya-to Khāṇḍikyaḥ; न na-had not; दत्तेति datteti-been given; मया mayā-by myself; वै vai-indeed; गुरुदक्षिणा gurudakṣiṇā-the traditional offering given to a Guru after the course of instruction.
“Ruminating in his mind thus, the Ruler of the Land (Keśidhvajaḥ) remembered that, indeed, he had not given to Khāṇḍikyaḥ the traditional offering due to a Guru at the end of the instruction.” ॥6/6/39॥
Ṣlokaḥ [6/6/40]
स जगाम तदा भूयो रथमारुह्य पार्थिवः ।
मैत्रेय दुर्गगहनं खांडिक्यो यत्र संस्थितः ॥ ६/६/४०॥
sa jagāma tadā bhūyo rathamāruhya pārthivaḥ ।
maitreya durgagahanaṃ khāṇḍikyo yatra saṃsthitaḥ ॥ 6/6/40॥
स sa-He (Keśidhvajaḥ); जगाम jagāma-hastened/hurried; तदा tadaa-thereupon; भूयो bhuuyo-once more; रथम ratham-the chariot ; आरुह्य āruhya-mounted/climbed; पार्थिवः pārthivaḥ-the King (Keśidhvajaḥ); मैत्रेय maitreya- O Maitreyi (Rishi); दुर्गगहनं durgagahanaṃ-dense and inaccessible forest; खांडिक्यो khāṇḍikyo-Khāṇḍikyaḥ; यत्र yatra-where; संस्थितः saṃsthitaḥ-had settled.
“He (Keśidhvajaḥ) hastened thereupon and hurriedly mounted/climbed his Chariot once more, O Maitreya Muni, and the King went to that dense/inaccessible forest where Khāṇḍikyaḥ had settled.” ॥ 6/6/40॥
Ṣlokaḥ [6/6/41]
खांडिक्योऽपि पुनर्दृष्ट्वा तमायांतं धृतायुधम् ।
तस्थौ हंतुं कृतमतिस्तमाह स पुनर्नृपः ॥ ६/६/४१॥
khāṇḍikyo ‘pi punardṛṣṭvā tamāyāntaṃ dhṛtāyudham ।
tasthau hantuṃ kṛtamatistamāha sa punarnṛpaḥ ॥6/6/41॥
खांडिक्यो khāṇḍikyo-Khāṇḍikyaḥ; अपि api-also; पुनर्दृष्ट्वा punardṛṣṭvā-seeing or spotting again; तम tam-Him (Keśidhvajaḥ); आयांतं āyāntaṃ-approaching; धृतायुधम् dhṛtāyudham-to fight resoutely; तस्थौ tasthau-in order; हंतुं hantuṃ-to kill; कृतमतिस् kṛtamatis-of resolute mind became; तम tam-he (Khāṇḍikyaḥ); आह aaha-so to say; स sa-he Khāṇḍikyaḥ; पुनह punah-once more; न्रूपः nṛpaḥ-the King .
“Khāṇḍikyaḥ also, seeing Keśidhvajaḥ approaching him, (felt that Keśidhvajaḥ had come) determined to fight with him resolutely in order to kill him. The King’s own mind became stern, so to say, once again, O King !” ॥ 6/6/41॥
Ṣlokaḥ [6/6/42]
भो नाहं तेऽपराधाय प्राप्तः खांडिक्य मा क्रुधाः
गुरोर्निक्रयदानाय मामवेहि त्वमागतम् ॥ ६.६.४२॥
bho nāhaṃ te ‘parādhāya prāptaḥ khāṇḍikya mā kruddhāḥ ।
gurornikrayadānāya māmavehi tvamāgatam ॥6/6/42॥
भो bho-alas Sir; नाहं nāhaṃ-I have not come; ते te-you; अपराधाय aparādhāya-harm or injury; प्राप्तः prāptaḥ-to cause; खांडिक्य Khāṇḍikya-O Khāṇḍikyaḥ; मा maa-do not; क्रुधाः kruddhāḥ-be angry; गुरोर् guror-to the Guru; निक्रयदानाय nikrayadānāya-to give a gift to remedy a lapse; माम maam- by me; एव eva-alone; हि hi-verily; त्वमागतम् tvam āgatam-I have come to you.
“O Hello! I have not come to cause you any injury or harm O Khāṇḍikyaḥ! Do not be angry. In order to give my Guru a gift (traditionally given by a student to his Teacher at the end of the instruction) to make up for my earlier lapse, have I verily come for that alone to you.” ॥6/6/42॥
Sanskrit Words:
- भो bho [Monier 723/3] an interjective or vocative particle generally translatable as ‘O’, ‘Ho’, ‘There’, ‘Hello’, ‘Alas’ before vowels and soft consonants. It can be used as an interjection of sorrow and of interrogation.
- अपराधाय aparādhāya [GK 1, 159/2] 1. An offence, crime, injury. 2. Sinned, offended; having committed an offence, guilty, an offender, criminal
- निक्रय 2(a) नि ni [AKG 2, 264/2] used in the sense of low, group or collection, insult, wrong.
2(b) क्रय kraya [AKG, 628/1] buying, selling, trade, striking a bargain.
Ṣlokaḥ [6/6/43]
निष्पादितो मया यागः सम्यक्त्वदुपदेशतः
सोऽहं ते दातुमिच्छामि वृणीष्व गुरुदक्षिणाम् ॥ ६/६/४३॥
निष्पादितो niṣpādito-completed; मया mayā-mine; यागः yāgaḥ-sacrificial rites; सम्यक्त्वदुपदेशतः samyaktvadupadeśataḥ-your comprehensive teaching; सोऽहं so ahaṃ–therefore I; ते te-you; दातुमिच्छामि dātumicchāmi-desirous of giving something; वृणीष्व vṛṇīṣva-ask/demand; गुरुदक्षिणाम् gurudakṣiṇām-the gift traditionally given to the Guru at the end of the instruction.
Sanskrit Words:
निष्पादित [Monier 539/3] done, effected, made produced, prepared, achieved.
“My Yāga or Sacrificial Rituals have been completed through your comprehensive teaching. Therefore, I am desirous of giving (some gift) to you. Ask what Gurudakśina (gift traditionally given to the Guru at the end of the instruction) you would like to have.” ॥ 6/6/43॥
Here was yet another golden opportunity that had come to Khāṇḍikyaḥ of its own accord to regain his Kingdom without any effort or harm to himself or to his supporters. There were no strings or pre-conditions or catches in that offer made by. There would be no adverse repercussions of any kind except for unalloyed sovereignty and the enjoyment of power by a Kshatriya rightfully entitled to that. Had Khāṇḍikyaḥ asked for the return of his Kingdom as a Gurudakśina , He would be committing no adharma in abiding by the age old Dharma of the warrior class to regain old kingdoms and acquire new ones as a rule. What could have been a better stroke of luck? Yet did Khāṇḍikyaḥ Rājan; deprived of his Kingdom, wealth, power and status, and living in hard conditions in exile in a remote forest with but a handful of followers; grab this golden chance with both hands?
We will answer this in our next Article. No.3 in this Series.
Made with 
Designed by Munnitin-FB and Tata Hugger Productions
for happiness, zest, efficiency and good cheer in good heart
Copyright 2021 – Sūtrajālam.com, All rights reserved.