Renunciation and my beloved DVD collection
Rudra Chatterjee
Though born a Hindu, I didn’t really start learning about my religion until I was in my university years. And whenever one wants to learn about Hinduism, the natural first stop tends to be listening to what the swamis and gurus have to say; and they always seems to stress that one ought to practice renunciation; that desire is wrong and that one should be unattached to their work in order to be one with Brahman (as in the Universal Consciousness). Now for a novice in Hindu thought, learning all this is good and all, but unless it’s all placed in the wider perspective of Hindu teachings, it can actually lead to some really strange results. They certainly did for me.
May 4th, 2008 at 12:00 am
Awesome article! I think it is very much true that many swamis, gurus, and purohits stress the “higher” ideals of renunciation. Not everyone is ready for it and not everyone needs to dive headfirst, especially at such a “young” age - life experience can help a lot in understanding Dharma.
Think about this - Rama, Krishna, Parashurama, Hanuman and the Pandavas were not renunciates or ascetics.
More than just a personal revelation, it accentuates the problem with any Hindu education - that is, it is usually myopic. Even if one attends a Hindu school, you will only learn their version of religion and the student is completely not cognizant of the other traditions that are out there.
May 5th, 2008 at 9:07 am
An excellent article here by Rudra ji - many thanks for this.
May 8th, 2008 at 8:27 pm
I remember growing up and hearing my mother and nana talk about gurus in it for things other than the truth. Indeed my family was/is very secular and that gave me a desire to attempt objectivity. But all ideas that begin in childhood must evolve to a deeper connection with life and reality. I suppose experiences like yours allow one to pass the simplified framework of our ego-mind that wants to encapsulate Tat Sat into a finite collection of ideas or teachers - it is our own ego that wants to believe easy answers.
Thanks for sharing.
hariaum
May 8th, 2008 at 9:25 pm
I think that to be truly fit to be a religious teacher, one needs to be able to feel what it is like to be in other situations in life, and therefore be able to assess the impact that a teaching is likely to have. There’s a saying that to be a brahmin, a man needs to first know what its like to be each of the other three varnas. (i judge varna by temperament and station in life btw). because only then will the religious teacher deliver teachings that will be properly received by others. but today, the religious teachers often (not always - there are exceptions) don’t seem to have really got into the mindset of others in society. The teachings are hence only for people of the same temperament as the teacher.
May 17th, 2008 at 10:10 am
Dangerous, you make an interesting point. Following on from what you say, I wonder if I might ask about the place of empathy?
May 19th, 2008 at 6:18 am
Bagavad Geetha, the essence of Vedas, was taught in the battlefield. Its main purpose is to make Arjuna, the warrior to perform his duties. Of course Sankya Yoga, the path of renunciation is also taught. But Bagavan Krishna himself says the path of renunciation is not for everybody! Lord Krishna also says emphatically that one in million may think of Athma and it is rare to get a guru who himself has realised Athma who will be able to show the path for self realisation. Hence the emphasis of the gurus to the common man shall be, to do, whatever work he is doing, as a service he is doing to the Lord and take the result (whatever be it) as the prasad of Lord.
It only means that whatever work we have undertaken we shall do our best and leave the result to Lord. This will be true renunciation!
May 19th, 2008 at 10:26 am
I can tell you one thing for sure. The Gurus & Swamis are all partially right. Most of the modern day swamis etc. lay a greater emphasis on renunciation. But what is really required is not renouncing the objects, because these are only tools that are at our disposal to faclitate us doing our duty, our business. What we really need to do is renounce the obsession with our posessions, & our tendency to let our posessions define us. The DVDS & movies you own & even watch, do they actually reflect who you are? No, your interest in movie making requires that you see all those & analyze them in order to learn the craft. There may be times when you are not successful in what you do, or lose your favorite possessions, that is where it will really help you,as being emotionally detached from them, you will treat the loss just as an inconvenience, figure out a way to work around it & find another way to go about your goal, & not be hurt emotionally because you “lost your possession”.
Try this way, you will find a lot of difference just understanding this change in attitude makes in your life.
Good luck in youe endeavors.
May 20th, 2008 at 7:01 am
Sir,
we are seen your website Iam very interesting in this hindu ’sm please send dvd
May 22nd, 2008 at 10:44 pm
Many people of the authors age renounce in this current time,many to certain prominent sampradayas.what then,guides them, as opposed to the rest of us?
May 27th, 2008 at 11:02 am
I am not in favour of renunciation as understood and practiced by many. As I have understood renunciation is only from greed, possessiveness, anger, rat race, jealousy and super ego.
Every person needs to dream of becoming something, somebody, it is natural. Ego is God’s gift to humans only. The rest live by their instincts. Geeta certainly asks us to fight for righteousness and in doing so asks us to be efficient all your life without even thinking of results. Krishna guarantees such person of his help and rewards. Sooner one would realise to be efficient one has to be mentally and physically fit all the time. The very purpose of meditation and yogas is to keep us efficient in life. It doesn’t matter what one is doing at home or at place of work one has to be efficient with it. That doesn’t mean keeping one’s shop open till midnight, working in office more than ten/twelve hours, shopping till one drops, binge drinking and over eating. And Geeta doesn’t tell us to be equally efficient in begging, stealing, robbing, cheating, ill advising and certainly not lazing. Decision making also requires efficiency not necessarily haste. To me those who renounce their dreams, job, household, parents, wife/children, and duties are cowards and do not understand they have renunciated the ‘God given’ life itself. Of course it doesn’t apply to holidaying in the Himalayas for a few weeks to learn deep meditation.
May 27th, 2008 at 3:47 pm
SS asks a good question. I am not sure the author is saying that. He seems to have tried renunciation and found it not to his karma at this time. So SS must be asking a different question: what makes a person chose the life of a monk unlike the rest of us? I suppose only the monks can answer that one. I chose not to be a monk for several reasons including that it seems that living life is why we are here, we have an ancestral debt, we have power to help others, … Then, of course, there is the Gita that says renounce the fruits, detach your ego, but live and act still - we use the thorn of ego to extract the thorn of ego as living creatures. As I see the buddhist monks and hindu monks that hide from the sight of a woman, etc - all I see is those who gave up on controlling their ego, still attached to their ego and the fruits of renunciation (moksha). I have also seen those that have truly renounced. Shri Shri Ravi Shankar says he just knew it. Swami Prabhupad saught it much later in life…
Not much of an answer, I suppose.
hariaum
May 28th, 2008 at 10:35 am
Navin, I don’t think moksha means renunciation. Moksha, Mukti and Nirvana mean the same thing. Nirvana only means salvation from the cycle of reincarnation, cycle of death and birth. In Hinduism reincarnation is an incentive to lead a fuller, creative and honest life, and one’s value of reincarnation is very much depends on the quality of it. Reincarnation is Krishna’s gift to all living things. Renunciation in the midstream of life is betraying Krishna and a gross wastage of reincarnation.
Renunciation is about leading a fuller and knowledgeable life first and then renouncing the fruits of it. One thing cannot be renounced is the Nirvana itself.
May 29th, 2008 at 8:45 pm
It seems to me that renunciation and detachment are the tools for effective living that is yagya. It is the yagya that is the gift of life. But yagya without detachment and renunciation is selfishness. To live life in the moment is to renounce moksha. Does Brahman attach to moksha? I think, quite possibly in error, that Brahman is beyond even moksha and thus the final state is one of ego dissolution (atman paratman equality), therefore, no desire for even moksha. But, since I’m not there yet, I open to other views.
hariaum
June 2nd, 2008 at 7:05 am
As said before, Moksha, Mukti and Nirvana are the same thing. It is a state to be achieved (you may call it a precondition), before one unites with our creator. So one cannot renounce Moksha or Nirvana, it is there for ever.
I don’t think yagya or yadnya means sacrifice, as sacrifice could only mean thing one is already so attached to or possessed by it. That doesn’t mean living without trying hard to achieve one’s dream or progressing one’s aptitude inherited from previous birth. I know one Doctor in India who practiced as doctor but retired at the age of 60 and preferred to be called Mr. than Dr. When asked why? He said he didn’t want to be treated as God and admitted he was completely ignorant about rest of the world. He is now an excellent oceanologist by knowledge. I told him that he must have been a fisherman in his previous incarnation. To me he has progressed himself now closer to achieving Nirvana.
So whether one likes it or not by following one’s instincts, aptitudes and by being good human being (remaining within the framework of Brahamatatwa) one progresses towards Nirvana. That is the responsibility one carries during one’s present life.
June 4th, 2008 at 7:38 pm
BGita: ch 3 v 9-10: (parenthetical comments are mine)
the whole world is bound by action except for actions sacrificed unto the supreme lord (renunciation), being free from attachment (detachment) perfectly engage in actions for the purpose of sacrifice
by the performance of sacrifice (yajnah) may you evolve and prosper, let sacrifice bestow all that is desirable to you
On the other hand; nirvana is a negation (particularly the negation of the phenomenal world). Moksha is a positive (realization of that which is - TatSat). The concepts are linked but the differences are much discussed by Buddhist-Hindu scholars.
hariaum
June 6th, 2008 at 7:56 am
Navin,
After reading the above I referred to the Sanskrit dictionary and I found Moksha, Mukti and Nirvana are same. They all mean achieving freedom from the cycle of birth and death. And the process set for humans by Krishna is practice of Bhaktiyoga, Dhyanayoga, Gyanayoga and Karmayoga. I find this very logical and workable. I also find these yogas are interlinked. It is only the degree and in what proportion one prefers to practice.
Nothing wrong in renunciation as long as due consideration is given this process. I know many who have renunciated but still practice the prescribed process. There are many in ISCON who have got themselves out of the rat race and found them very knowledgeable, in good health and doing ordinary but useful work.
June 6th, 2008 at 1:10 pm
Is Karma yog for us and sankhya for the monks?
June 9th, 2008 at 10:03 pm
As I understand it, all yoga is for everybody. It is your nature that is reflected in the yoga you feel most comfortable in, that most predominates in your way of living. The others are still there, even if you are not aware of it.
hariaum
June 16th, 2008 at 6:43 am
Definitely, the four yogas are there for everyone whether one likes them are not. But what is not understood, I find, is they are ‘a process’ for ultimately uniting with our creator individually once reincarnation for all is accepted. I find it very logical and remember reincarnation has been proved over and over again.
Navin is right; people have been latching on to some yoga in which they have found themselves more comfortable. It is bound to happen but are they following ‘the process’ consciously and understandingly? If they do then they will find performing other yogas in degrees every day is almost mandatory. I have asked many workaholics working overtime, shop keepers, factory worker, office goers in IT field making good money (they call it karma yoga) for the family whether they read any news paper, book or sit for ten minutes in meditation contemplating God, there answer is, ‘it is waste of time’. And most of them have told me they visit temple once in a while. To me, without hurting feelings, they are betraying their own reincarnation and Krishna who gave us this process.
July 2nd, 2008 at 6:03 am
Only thing I can add to the above is; Bhagwat Geeta by this process is asking us to lead an efficient life. Again I don’t think Geeta equates efficiency with collecting more things than one needs, keeping our shops open till midnight for making more money, eating more than what our body needs, buying bigger cars and being efficient in lying, spreading wrong information, gambbling and begging in the streets.