Friday, January 30, 2009

Surya Gita Chapter 4

सूर्य उवाच
Surya said

अथातः संप्रवक्ष्यामि तस्यान्तर्यामिणो गुरोः। जगत्सृष्ट्यादिकर्माणि लीलारूपाणि सुव्रत॥१॥
O the one observing virtuous vows! Now I shall tell you about the playful acts, in the form of creation, sustenance and destruction of this universe, of him who is my inner-controller and teacher.

आदौ जगत्ससर्जेदं पंचीकरणकर्मणा। यः ईशो महामायः सर्वज्ञः सर्वशक्तिमान्
The one who created this universe in the beginning by the process of panchikarana, he is the Ishwar (the lord), the great illusionist, the omniscient and the most powerful.

चतुर्विधेषु भूतेषु निजमायावशीकृतान्। जीवान्प्रवेशयित्वानुप्रविवेश स्वयं वशी
He, the supreme controller, made the jivas, who had been brought under the influence of his maayaa, enter into the four kinds of bodies (those born out of eggs, out of sweat, out of womb and out of seeds). Later on he himself entered into those bodies.

लीलारुपमपीदं
कर्म तस्य महेशितुः। प्रारव्धकर्मजं ज्ञेयमाधिकारिकतावशात्॥४॥
Know this playful act of Shiva to be possible because of his authority (as the creator etc) which, in turn, is because of his own prarabdha karma.

ह्यादिकारिकः श्रेष्ठः पूर्वं जीवत्वमागतः समुच्चयादभूदीशो ज्ञानोपासनकर्मणाम्॥५॥
Because he, the primeval doer in the universe, the most excellent one, who had attained jivahood earlier, became Ishwar through the accumulation of knowledge, worship and action.

प्राक्कल्पाधिकृतो देवः स्वारब्धक्षपणात्स्वयम्। अपहाय निजां मायां प्राप्तवान्परमं पदम्॥६॥
The one who was authorized as the Ishwar in the previous kalpa, after of the exhaustion of his prarabdha karma, gave up his maayaa attained the supreme state.

अथ तामाश्रितो जीवः कल्पादौ पूर्ववत्क्रमात्। सृष्ट्वा सर्वाधिकारी सन्जगत्पाति हन्ति च॥७॥
Now, in the beginning of this kalpa, just as in the previous kalpa, another jiva acting as the supreme authority, having created the universe using that maayaa, maintains and destroys it.

क्रियमाणतया तेन नियमेनैव कर्मणाम्। त्रयाणां तस्य कर्मित्वमीशस्याप्युपपद्यते॥८॥
Because of the three kinds of karma (creation, sustenance and destruction) being carried out by the same rule, Ishwar attains the status of a doer.

जीवन्मुक्तसमानत्वं यतस्तस्यावगम्यते। अतः प्रारब्धकर्मित्वमवश्यं तस्य सिध्यति॥९॥
Since Ishwar is understood to be similar to a jivanmukta, hence it follows that he is certainly driven by his prarabdha karma.

ब्रह्मवित्त्वं हि तस्य स्यान्न तु ब्रह्मत्वमीशितुः। सृष्ट्यादिकर्मकर्तृत्वदर्शनान्माययापि वा॥१०॥
Shiva has the status of the knower of the Brahm but not of Brahm itself. This is because he is seen to be using maayaa to perform activities like creation etc.

जीवसृष्ट्यादिकर्तृत्वं ब्रह्मणोऽपि तु वर्तते। तथापि पूर्वकर्मित्वं तस्य श्रूयते क्वचित्॥११॥
The doership for the creation of beings etc. is attributable to Brahm also, but even then it is never heard that its previous actions are determining it's present state.

कर्मणः प्रागभावत्वाद्भावत्वाद्ब्रह्मणो विभोः। पूर्वकर्मवतो हि स्यात्कर्म प्रारब्धसंज्ञितम्॥१२॥
This is because of absence of deeds in previous lives and because of his being omnipresent (that is being present in past, present as well as future) . Prarabdha karma is possible only for the one who has a stock of previous life's karma.

सृष्ट्यादिकर्मबद्धत्वे तस्य मायावशत्वतः। वश्यमायत्ववचनं व्यर्थमेवेति चेन्न च॥१३॥
If one says that it is by the power of maayaa that Ishwar is caught in activities like creation etc. and hence his being called vashyamaayii (ruling over others using maayaa) is useless, then it is not so.

स्वाधिकारावसाने हि कैवल्यं नोपरुध्यते। अतस्तस्य प्रसिद्धं तद्वश्यमायत्वमर्थवत्॥१४॥
When Ishwar's prescribed duties are over then his kaivalya (ultimate liberation) is not obstructed. Hence his being famed as vashyamaayii (ruling over others using maayaa) is meaningful.

स्थितौ तु तस्य मायित्वं कामित्वादिवदिष्यते। धनित्वादिवत्कर्म पारवश्यान्निरन्तरम्॥१५॥
While sustaining the universe, Ishwar's grip over maayaa is likened to the one who has a desire for wealth and not likened to the one who already possesses wealth, because his actions are always under someone else's control.

जाग्रद्वत्सृष्टिकर्म स्यात्स्वप्नवत्स्थितिकर्म च। जगत्प्रलयकर्म स्यात् सुप्तवत्तस्य मायिनः॥१६॥
For that Ishwar, the ruler over maayaa, the activity of creation is like the waking state of mind, sustenance is like the state of dream and destruction is like the state of deep sleep.

अवस्थात्रयवत्त्वेन कर्मत्रितयवत्तया। शरीरत्रयवत्त्वेन जीवः सोऽपीति केचन॥१७॥
Some people think that because of possessing the three states of mind, because of possessing the three kinds of karma and because of possessing the three kinds of bodies, Ishwar is also a jiva.

तदयुक्तं पुरा जीवोऽप्यद्य ब्रह्मात्मवित्तया। सर्वज्ञत्वादिसम्पत्त्या हि जीवविलक्षणः१८
This is not correct. Even though he was a jiva earlier, but now, because he knows the Brahm and is endowed with qualities like omniscience etc., so he is distinct from a jiva.

जीवनमुक्तसमानत्वान्न कर्मत्रयमीशितुः। प्रारब्धमात्रबद्धत्वादधिकारवशादिह॥१९॥
Because of Ishwar's being similar to a jivanmukta, he does not have three kinds of karma (that is the ones which produce sorrow, the ones which produce happiness and the ones which produce both happiness and sorrow). He lives carrying out his prescribed duties, being bound only by his prarabdha karma.

अधिकारावसाने तद्ब्रह्मत्वं सम्भविष्यति। इति वेदान्तसिद्धेऽर्थे व्यभिचारः कुतो भवेत्॥२०
When his prescribed duties are over, he will unify with the Brahm. In this established conclusion of Vedanta, how can there be any confusion?

ब्रह्मैवैकमकर्मोक्तं
श्रुतिभिः स्मृतिभिश्च तत्। ईशस्य कर्मतोक्तिस्तु श्रूयते ह्यौपचारिकी॥२१॥
Brahm is the only non-doer, this is heard from the shrutis and smritis. Ishwar's doership, which is heard from the same texts, is a figurative

कर्मत्वेऽपि तस्य स्यात्कर्ममोचकतेशितुः। संचितागामिहीनत्वात्सर्वज्ञत्वाच्च सत्तम॥२२॥
O the best one! Even though Shiva is a doer, he still has the power to liberate others because he is free from sanchita and aagaami karmas and is omniscient.

ईश्वरब्रह्मणोर्भेदं सकर्माकर्मतादिभिः। सुप्रसिद्धिमपह्नोतुं कः समर्थोऽस्ति मानतः॥२३॥
The different between the Ishwar and Brahm as being a doer and a non-doer etc is well known. Who can refute this out of pride?

ईश्वरस्याप्यकर्मत्वं यदि ब्रूयान्निरंकुशम्। द्वैती कदाप्यस्मात्संसारान्मुक्तिमाप्नुयात्॥२४॥
If one proclaims the sovereign non-doership of the Ishwara too, then that dualist shall never attain liberation from the world.

यतस्तत्पदवाच्योऽर्थः हेय इति कथ्यते। अतस्तस्य नित्यत्वं नाकर्मत्वं युज्यते॥२५॥
Since the one which is signified by the term 'that' (in the famous vedantic phrase "That you are") is considered worthy of being rejected, hence it is not appropriate to ascribe permanence or non-doership to it.

अनध्यस्तात्मभावेन देहेनैव कश्चन। व्याप्रीयेत ततश्च स्याद्देहीशो ध्यानसंयुतः॥२६॥
Without identifying with the physcial body, one cannot perform any worldly activity. Hence, Ishwara, in the state of meditation, resides in a physical body.

स्वदेहेऽपीश्वरस्यास्ति नाध्यासः पारमार्थिकः। प्रातिभासिकमाश्रित्य स्रष्टृत्वादि निगद्यते॥२७॥
From an absolute viewpoint, even Ishwara does not have identification with the body. His being the creator etc is spoken of from the praatibhaasic viewpoint.

देहाध्यासस्य सत्यस्य कदाप्यस्ति संगतिः। प्रागीशदेहाभावेन देहाभावेन चाप्यये२८
Validity of the identification with the body (that is from the praatibhaasik viewpoint) never co-exists with either before the absence of body or upon the absence of body during the time of dissolution.

जगत्प्रलयकाले निर्व्यापारोऽपि सुप्तवत्। अध्यासबीजवत्त्वेन पुनः सृष्टौ प्रवर्तते॥२९॥
During the destruction of the universe, Ishwara is without any activity, as if in sleep. His identification (with the body) rests in the causal state, just like a tree rests in a seed, and manifests again when creation begins.

चतुर्युगसहस्रान्ते विधातुर्हि निशोच्यते। तदा सुप्तस्य तस्यापि जीवस्येव सबीजता३०
At the end of a thousand chaturyugas of the creator when everything is made to burn hot, the creator, who had entered into the state of sleep, enters into the causal state, like the jiva does in every cosmic destruction.

तथा विष्णोर्युगाः प्रोक्तास्तस्माच्छतगुणाधिकाः। तथा शिवस्य तस्माच्च विष्णोः शतगुणाधिकाः॥३१॥
Similarly a yuga of Vishnu is a hundred times the yuga of a Brahma and a yuga of Shiva is a hundred times the yugas of Vishnu.

कालैरवच्छिन्नांस्तारतम्येन जीववत्। ईश्वरांस्तान्कथं ब्रूयां देहकर्मादिवर्जितान्॥३२॥
Those Ishwars (Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva) being bound by time, therefore being similar to a jiva, how can I state them to be free from the bondage of body, karma etc?

व्यष्टिदेहत्रयं
स्वीयं मत्वा जीवत्रयं यथा। पारमार्थिकसंसारनिबद्धं कर्मितामगात्॥३३॥
Just like three jivas, after securing three individual bodies, attained to karmahood in the paaramaarthik world (continued in the next verse)

समष्टिदेहत्रितयं तथा मत्वेश्वरत्रयम्। प्रातिभासिकसंसारनिबद्धं कर्मितामगात्॥३४॥
(continued) similarly three Ishwaras, considering the entire world as their threefold body, attained to karmahood in the praatibhaasik world.

शुद्धसत्त्वप्रधानायां मायायां प्रतिबिंबितः। ईश इत्युच्यते तस्य निरुपाधिता कथम्॥३५॥
Because of being reflected in maayaa, which is dominant in pure sattva, he is called Ishwara. How can he be absolute?

औपाधिकस्य नित्यत्वं कथं वाच्यं मनीषिभिः। अनित्यस्य नैष्कर्म्यं कथं भवितुमर्हति॥३६॥
One who is not absolute, how can learned men ascribe permanence to it. If he is impermanent, how can he attain to nishkaamaa karma?

ब्रह्मण्यारोपितो भ्रान्तैरीशाख्यः सर्वसृष्टिकृत्। आत्मयोगिभिरभ्रान्तैः भवत्यवरोपितः॥३७॥
Ishwara, the universal creator, is falsely superimposed upon the Brahm by deluded men. The non-deluded yogis who know the Self, remove that superimposition.

अविद्यातिमिरान्धस्य स्थाणौ चोरवदीश्वरः। प्रतिभाति परब्रह्मण्यमले स्वात्मरूपिणि॥३८॥
Those blinded by the darkness of ignorance, they falsely conceive Ishwar in the pure Brahm, the Self, in the same way as a man standing in darkness falsely conceives a thief in a statue.

सद्यो मुमुक्षुदृष्ट्या हि नेश्वरस्यास्ति सत्यता। अतो विवर्तवादोऽयं सुतरामुपयुज्यते॥३९॥
From the viewpoint of immediate liberation (kaivalya), there is no truth in the existence of Ishwar. Hence, the falseness of the notion of Ishwar's existence is further strengthened

परिणामेऽप्यनित्यत्वसंसिद्धेरीश्वरस्य च। अद्वैतब्रह्मनिष्ठत्वं श्रोतुर्जीवस्य संभवेत्॥४०॥
When it is also proved that in the very end, Ishwar is impermanent, the jiva listening (to this doctrine) can gain faith in the non-dual Brahm (as opposed to having faith in the Ishwar).

अधिकारिविभेदेन वादास्ते मतास्त्रयः। तत्रोत्तमाधिकारी स्याच्छृण्वन्नीशे विवर्तताम्॥४१॥
Based on the qualifications of the listener, three kinds of philosophies and beliefs have been advocated. Amongst these three, one becomes a listener of the first grade by listening to the falseness of Ishwar's existence.

जीवे तु परिणामित्वं शृणवन्नेवोत्तमोत्तमः। कीटवद्भृंगरूपेण परिणामे विमोक्षतः॥४२॥
By listening to these philosophies, the jiva undergoes transformation and sequentially attains higher and higher states and in the end attains liberation, just like an insect is finally converted into the Bhring bee.

जीवस्येश्वरतावाप्तौ क्रममुक्तिर्हि सिध्यति। अतोऽस्य सद्यो मुक्त्यर्थं ब्रह्मतावाप्तिरीर्यते॥४३॥
When the jiva attains liberation via (the stage of) Ishwarhood, then only step by step liberation is possible. Therefore for immediate liberation, the jiva has to attain Brahmhood (that is realize the Self).

तुरीयः
पंचमो वास्तामीश्वरः षष्ठ एव वा। तस्मादतीतं ब्रह्मेति सिद्धान्ते कोऽनुसंशयः॥४४॥
Whether (of krama mukti) turiya be the fifth stage or Ishwar be the sixth state, Brahm is beyond it. What doubt can be there in this regard?

ईश्वरे तिष्ठति ब्रह्म ब्रह्मणीशश्च तिष्ठति। अत एकत्वमेव स्याद्द्वयोरिति तर्क्यताम्॥४५॥
"Brahm is stationed in Ishwar and Ishwar is stationed in Brahm, hence both of them are identical", one should not argue like this.

ब्रह्मण्येवेश्वरः प्रोक्तो तु ब्रह्मेश्वरे क्वचित्। विभोरविभुसंस्थत्वासंभवात्परमात्मनः॥४६॥
Ishwar is said to be stationed in Brahm, never is Brahm said to be stationed in Ishwar because the omnipresent supreme Self (or equivalently the Brahm) can never be contained in a finite entity (Ishwar).

ब्रह्मक्षत्रमुभे यस्य श्रुत्या भवत ओदनः। यस्योपसेचनं मृत्युः यत्र ब्रह्मणीर्यते॥४७॥
For whom, according to shruti (Katha upanishad is referred to here), both the brahmans and kshatriyas are like food, for whom death itself it like a side-dish, he (the Purusha) is himself said to be stationed in which Brahm.

तदेतादृशमित्यत्र को वेदेदंतयाव्ययम्। अखंडं निर्गुणं ब्रह्म निराधारं परं महत्॥४८॥
The Brahm being such (that it is the basis for Purusha itself), who can know the unchangeable, indivisible, attributeless, baseless (but being the base of everything else), the supreme and immense Brahm?

परब्रह्मांशभूतोऽपि परमः पुरुषोत्तमः। ईश्वरादधिकः प्रोक्तः किं पुनर्ब्रह्म केवलम्॥४९॥
The supreme Purusha, who is a part of the Brahm, is said to be greater than Ishwar. So then what more can be said about the Brahm?

कारणं जगतामीशो जीवानां ब्रह्म कारणम्। एवं सतीशब्रह्मैक्यं व्यवहारे कथं भवेत्॥५०॥
Ishwar is the cause of the world and Brahm is the cause of the jivas. This being the case, how can there be a unity between Ishwar and Brahm from the worldly perspective?

ईशस्य कर्मितायां हि पुण्यं पापं संभवेत्। सुखं दुःखं तेनैव जीवत्वमिति चेच्छृणु॥५१॥
Even in the activities of Ishwar, virtue and sin are valid, as well as happiness and sorrow. (If you think that) hence he is like a jiva, then hear this.

ईशः
प्रवर्तते पुण्यपापयोर्लोकसंग्रहात्। तथापि सुखदुःखे स्तो नैवात्मज्ञानवत्तया॥५२॥
Ishwar is involved in virtuous and sinful deeds for the welfare of the world. Even then sorrow and happiness are not applicable to him because he knows the Self.

भ्रूणहत्यादिपापानि ह्यकरोद्विष्णुरिदृशः। तैर्दुःखमभूत्तस्य संप्राप्तं पारमार्थिकम्॥५३॥
Vishnu performed sins like killing a foetus etc. but he did not accrue any sin from them since he has attained the paramarthik state.

लोकक्षेमार्थकत्वेन तत्कृताघस्य निन्द्यता। वाच्या तेनास्ति जीवत्वं तस्य सर्वथा॥५४॥
Since those sins were performed for the welfare of the world, hence they should not be proclaimed as contemptible. Hence, because of this reason, Ishwar is totally unlike a jiva.

ऋगादिवेदकर्तापि यथोक्तं समाचरेत्। अन्यथा संप्रसज्येत ह्यप्रामाणिकतेशितुः॥५५॥
Either one should (by subscribing to the pratibhasik viewpoint) accept Shiva to be the creator of the Vedas or else one should (subscribing to the paramarthik viewpoint) stick to the non-authority of Shiva (and accept the authority of the Brahm).

संसिद्धे शास्त्रकर्तृत्वे कारयितृता वचः। व्यर्थमेवेति चेन्नैष दोष एव विचारणे॥५६॥
If one accepts Shiva to be the creator of the shastras, then the shastras are no longer the words of the Brahm, who is the cause of the creator. And hence if one thinks that they are useless, then this is not the case. This is a defect in thinking.

जीवस्य कर्तृतायां हि स्यात्कारयितृतेशितुः। शास्त्रस्य कर्मतायां तु महेशस्यास्ति कर्तृता॥५७॥
In the activities of the jiva, Shiva is the cause. In the creation of the shastras, Shiva is the doer.

नैतेन शास्त्रयोनित्वं निर्गुणस्यैव हीयते। निर्गुणोद्भूतशास्त्रस्य सगुणाद्व्यक्तिदर्शनात्॥५८॥
By this, shastras being having origin in the nirguna Brahm, is not violated. Because, the shastras, which have originated from the nirguna, are only seen to have originated from a saguna individual.

उपचर्यत ईशस्य गुणिनः शास्त्रयोनिता। यद्वास्तामुभयोर्वेदवेदान्ताभ्यां बीजता॥५९॥
The saguna Ishwar being the originator of the shastras is a merely figurative. Or else, the vedas and the upanishads are contained in both (saguna Shiva and nirguna Brahm) in the seed-form.

चैतेनास्ति कर्मित्वसाम्यं ब्रह्मेशयोस्तयोः। कर्तुश्च कृतकर्तुश्च भेदोऽस्ति स्पष्ट एव हि॥६०॥
But by this the doership of Shiva and Brahm does not become equivalent. The distinction between the doer and cause of the doer is quite clear.

कर्तृत्वं यस्य संसिद्धं कर्मित्वं तस्य सिद्ध्यति। इत्यत्र संशयः को वा तद्ब्रह्मेशौ कर्मिणौ॥६१॥
(One could argue like this) One whose doership is established, his being bound to bear the fruits of his deeds is also established. So what doubt there can be in the obligation of Ishwar and Brahm to bear the fruits of their actions?

इति चेत्कर्मितेशस्य कामित्वादिवदिष्यते। ब्रह्मणोऽपि तु कर्मित्वं धनित्वादिवदित्यतः॥६२॥
(If one thinks so then the reply would be that) Ishwara is comparable to a doer who acts to obtain wealth, but Brahm is like a doer who acts, even though he already possesses the wealth.

परतन्त्रो महेशः स्यात्स्वतंत्रं ब्रह्म निर्गुणं। आधाराधेयभावेन कार्यकारणता द्वयोः॥६३॥
Ishwar is dependent but the nirguna Brahm is sovereign. Because of one being the substratum and other being the superimposition, there is a cause and effect relationship between the two.

कर्मित्वे ब्रह्मणः सिद्धे कथं नैर्गुण्यमीर्यते। इति चेन्नैष दोषोऽस्ति मायागुणविवर्जनात्६४
If one thinks that, if Brahm is a doer then how can it be said to be free from the gunas, then this would be a faulty thinking since Brahm is not bound by maayaa and gunas.

अदृश्यत्वादिभिर्विद्यागुणैरानन्दतादिभिः।
सगुणव्यपदेशः स्याद्ब्रह्मणस्त्विष्ट एव सः॥६५॥
If Brahm is stated to be a saguna entity with additional attributes like invisibility etc. knowledge etc. and bliss etc. then it is only desirable to do so.

जगत्संसारकर्तृत्वं यथा जीवेशयोर्मतम्। तथा जीवेशकर्तृत्वं परस्य ब्रह्मणो मतम्॥६६॥
Just like jivas and Ishwar are considered to be the doers of the world, similarly the supreme Brahm is considered to be the doer of the actions of jivas and Ishwar.

ब्रह्मणोऽन्यो कर्तास्ति प्राक्कर्मादिविवर्जनात्। अनाद्यनन्तं ब्रह्मैकमकर्माकर्तृ हीयते६७
There is no doer other than the Brahm since he is devoid of any previous karma. If the Brahm, who is without beginning and end, is considered to be a non-doer then it would lead to a fallacy.

कालत्रयेऽप्यकर्तृत्वं ब्रह्मणः सम्मतं यदि। जीवेशरचना स्यात् जगत्संसारयोरपि६८
If the non-doership of the Brahm is accepted in all three times, past, present and future, then there can be no creation of the jiva and Ishwar and hence there can be no creation of the world either.

प्रत्यक्षसिद्धा
रचना कर्तारं समपेक्षते। अतोऽद्यकर्मकर्तृत्वाद्ब्रह्मणः कर्मितोचिता॥६९॥
A created entity which can be seen expects to have a creator. Hence, Brahm being the primeval creator, his doership is apt.

कर्मित्वे ब्रह्मणोऽप्येवं किं वाच्यं ब्रह्मवेदिनः। ब्रह्मीभूतो कर्मी स्यादित्येतच्च सिद्ध्यति॥७०॥
If, in this way, Brahm is established as a doer then what should be said about the knowers of Brahm (that is the self-realized men)? Because now (saying that) a person who has become one with the Brahm is not a doer, is invalidated

यादृशं ब्रह्म निर्णीतं तद्भूतोऽपि तादृशः। इति निर्णय एव स्याद्युक्तेरपि समंजसः॥७१॥
The way Brahm has been concluded (to be a doer) similarly a one who has attained unity with the Brahm is also a doer, such should be the conclusion. It shall also be consistent with the above statement.

कालत्रयेऽप्यकर्मित्वमकर्तृत्वमकालता। कस्य चिद्ब्रह्मणोऽन्यस्य नीरूपस्यास्ति वस्तुनः॥७२॥
Non-doership and timelessness, despite being in past, present and future, is possible for which object other than the formless conscious Brahm.

तत्र कालत्रयातीतं नेह ज्ञेयं विवक्षितम्। प्रमेयत्वप्रमाणत्वप्रमातृत्वादिवर्जनात्॥७३॥
Here, the one who has transcended time, should not be considered to be implied, since there is no object to be known, knowledge and knower (in the transcended state).

ये तु ब्रह्मेशजीवाः संप्रोक्ताः कर्तृत्वसंयुताः। विद्यया मायया ते हि कर्मिणोऽविद्ययापि च॥७४॥
But Brahm, Ishwar and jiva which are said to be doers, they are doers by the virtue of knowledge, maayaa and ignorance respectively.

कर्मिषु त्रिषु चोक्तेषु ब्रह्मणः श्रैष्ठ्यदर्शनात्। अकर्मत्वं श्रुतिस्मृत्योः प्रोच्यते युक्तमेव तत्॥७५॥
Because of the superiority of Brahm amongst these three kinds of doers, the non-doership ascribed to it in the shrutis and smritis is apt.

एतेन कर्मिणः श्रैष्ठ्यं संसिद्धमिति ये विदुः। औदासीन्यं तेषां स्याच्छ्रुतिस्मृत्यक्तकर्मसु॥७६॥
In this way those who know about the superiority of the doers, they do not disregard the actions mentioned in the shrutis and smritis.

ज्ञानदुपास्तिरुत्कृष्टा कर्मोत्कृष्टमुपासनात्। इति यो वेद वेदान्तैः एव पुरुषोत्तमः॥७७॥
Worship is superior to knowledge and karma is superior to worship. The one who knows this from the upanishads, he is the best of men.

॥इति सूर्यगीतायां चतुर्थोऽध्यायः॥
॥Thus ends the fourth chapter of Surya Gita

No comments:

Post a Comment