The Philosophy of the Bhagavadgita - 10.6. Swami Krishnananda.

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Wednesday, May 05, 2021. 06:47. PM. 
Chapter - 10 : Forms of Sacrifice and Concentration-6.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Therefore, in this connection, the Sixth Chapter, which is known as ‘The Yoga of Meditation’, tells us that nobody can be a Yogi who has not renounced the personal will or the mood of taking initiative for the satisfaction or the well-being of one’s own lower self. When the senses have no desire for any objects and they have no impulsion whatsoever towards any personalistic action, and one has inwardly renounced all motives of every kind, then it is that one is established in Yoga.

Yoga is a step that we take in the direction of establishment in impersonality, whatever be the degree of it. And every personalistic will or desire or action is a rootedness in personality. Impersonality is Yoga, which is attained by the stages mentioned in the Yoga scriptures. It is, again, mentioned that Yoga is the concentration which the lower self practises on the immediately superior, higher Self. There are various degrees of self, and so we may say that the whole universe consists of only Self, and nothing but that. There are no objects; there are only selves, by which what is intended is that unless an element of selfhood is present even in the so-called objects of sense, there cannot be love for the objects. Love is only the recognition of the presence of the self in that which we love. If the self is not there, love is unthinkable. All love is self-love in various connotations of the meaning of self. It is not without meaning that the metaphysicians of the Upanishads tell us that the whole universe is the Self, the Atman is all things.

But one has to be careful, again, in understanding what the Upanishads mean, or the Bhagavadgita intends, or anyone connotes when they say that the Self and the universe are identical. It is easy to misunderstand the statement and it is hard to make out the significance thereof. The self is that which we regard as our own psychophysical individuality, the Mr. or Mrs., the “I” that we regard ourselves to be, this is the self for our practical purposes today. But if we analyse the motives behind the moods and activities of the so-called self of ours, we will realise that its intentions are selfish—‘selfish’ in a particular interpretation of the meaning of the self. The urge of the senses towards the objects is the action of the self. 

It is the self that is propelling the senses towards the objects through the instrumentality of the reason and the mind, to come in union with the objects, under the impression that union with objects is the satisfaction of the self. So it is the satisfaction of the self that is the intention behind the coming in contact with the objects of the senses, and it is not the love for the objects that is the prime motivation. There is no love for objects, absolutely. There is love only for the satisfaction of one’s self, which is impossible, we feel, in a sort of illusion, unless we come in contact with the objects. Various reasons are given as to why this situation supervenes, or takes place. How is it that we make this mistake?

To be continued ...

=========================================================================