|
Srimad Bhagvata Mahapurana: Book 11: Chapter 23: Verses 50-56
Taking this body (of their own)-a creation of their mind (alone)-as their very self and the body of their son, wife etc., as theirs, men of clouded judgment, labouring under the misapprehension that this is my own self and he is another, revolve in the world of matter (enveloped in the darkness of ignorance), the end of which is difficult to reach. If, however, an individual is (held to be) responsible for our joy and sorrow, even in this case what does it matter to the soul (which is neither the giver nor the experiencer of joy and sorrow) ? The capacity to give and experience joy and sorrow indeed belongs to two earthly bodies (and not to the soul, which is devoid of action and as such incapable of giving or experiencing sorrow). If ever a man (unwittingly) bites his own tongue with his own teeth, with which of them should he get angry on his experiencing pain through such biting ? If any god (presiding over any particular Indriya) is held to be responsible for (our) sorrow (or joy), let it be so. Even then what does it matter to the soul (which neither inflicts nor suffers pain) ? The capacity to inflict and suffer pain belongs to the two gods inflicting and suffering pain (through the organs presided over by them and not to the soul, which is devoid of form and beyond all change).When a (particular) limb (presided over by one deity) in one's own body is (ever) smitten by another (presided over by a differeent god) at which of the two limbs (or gods) should the man get angry ? If the sould is responsible (for our joys and sorrows) (even) then what blame attaches to another, one's own intrinsic nature being responsible for one's joys and sorrows ? (If, however, it is argued that others becomes instrumental in such modification of the soul, my reply is that) there is no entity other than the soul (which is all comprehensive-'14 (9 t*as the Sruti says); if there is (or appears to be), it is illusory. Hene their is neither joy nor
sorrow. Wherefore (then) should one feel angry (at all) ? If the stars (are held to be) responsible for (one's) joys and sorrows, what responsibility attaches to the soul, which is birthless? They exert their influence only on a body which is subject to birth (and death). (Moreover) the astrologers declare the evil (or good) influence exerted by the stars as falling directly on a (fellow) star (the star which happened to be at the ascendant at the birth of a man and only indirectly on the personality born at that particular time because of the deity presiding over that star identifying itself with the said personality). At whom (then) should the soul, which is other than the star as well as from the body born under its influence, get angry ? If Karma (action done in a previous or even the present life) is (held to be) responsible for (one's) joys and sorrows, let it be (so). (Even in that case) what responsibility attaches to the soul ? For, action is possible only in the event of the being a substance (both) material and conscious. (That alone which is material is subject to change and no one who is not conscious can engage in a pursuit conducive to one's own interests.) The body, however, is material (and is not alive to its own interests); while the soul consists of pure wisdom (and is therefore never liable to change). Hence Karma, which is the root of joy and sorrow, does not exist (at all). At whom (then) should one feel angry ? If, however, Kala (the Time Spirit) is (believed to be) responsible for one's joy and sorrow, (even) in that case what responsibility attaches to the soul ? (For) the soul (being a fragment of Brahma) is the same
as Kala (which is identical with Brahma). No suffering can come to a part from the whole'any more than the heat of fire could burn an individual flame or the coldness of ice could benumb
[1]
a particle of it. (Nay, the soul is the same as the Supreme and) there can be no pair of contraries (e.g.,joy and sorrow) to the Supreme. (Such being the case,) at whom should one be angry ?
|
|
