Part 3.3 - Jyotiṣa and Karman: Knowledge Form

[Full title: The Knowledge and Derivation of Form (3): Jyotiṣa and Karman: Knowledge Form]

i. The Point of Bifurcation

Later to the above development, whereas desire in human became the edifice for the succeeding moral theory and the overall philosophy, Prajāpati, its cosmic counterpart is literally a severed off connection in terms of morality though whether Prajāpati really had any such connection remains an enquiry. This point of bifurcation of Jyotiṣa from the Philosophy of the Veda at its very beginning run parallel in the literature with a few intersections of the two.

The emergence of Brahman as the original principle in the Upaniṣads^[1] on account of its imperceptibility to human senses necessitated perceptible means for its understanding. This requirement appears to be fulfilled by the cosmic objects of light and their order as representations of Brahman. In the Ṛgveda Karma finds a definition while explaining the creation of the sat (manifested) world as the creative activity from which the visible movable and immovable world emerged from the Asat (unmanifest).^[2] The cause of this creative activity is declared as the ‘līlā’ or the desire of the Creator to evolve,^[3] from which the active world of deeds resulted. The quality of light since being ascribed to the originally qualityless Creator named as Brahman or the Creative Ātman in the Upaniṣads from which the qualityful world emerged, the order of the cosmic light forms came to be recognized as the ‘work’ or ‘activity’ of the creator himself. Though actions based on the order of the light forms was a practice much prior to the emergence of the qualityful (Saguṇa) Brahman, the difference as that they being the metaphors to the qualityless Brahman occurs later.

The earlier study of the qualities of the cosmos was specified by the deities, the Nakṣatra system and even the ‘Timed form’ of Prajāpati on which actions were based and which constituted the process of conversion of Ṛta into Dharma. Subsequently the cosmic light objects and their motion represented the ‘desire’ and the ‘deeds’ of Brahman. If this transference of qualityless cosmos to qualityful differ Karma in form as to making perceptible the ‘Karmayoga’ of the creator, it also transformed Jyotiṣa which initially was of a form of direct perception and which later to this become the metaphoric means to reveal the ‘desire’ and ‘work’ of the Creator as Sattva in Cosmos.

Sattva on moral terms came to be defined as a quality. On account of which the plane of heaven where the deities resided became an impermanent one. The desire of Brahman released as Sattva in the cosmos, though exhibited light and knowledge of Brahman, they displayed only a part of the light and knowledge form of Brahman and not as a whole.

ii. Equable Nature of Sattva

In case with human, basically belonging to the Brahman world, his form being emerged out of the Rajas in the Prakṛti, the individuality in his shape and intellectual faculty is accounted to the Rajas, Tamas and the past actions.^[4] Thereby Sattva representing the light and knowledge of Brahman which inheres in human form or Jīva is a basic property and which is also a part of Brahman. In terms of relativity it is therefore a state of ‘equilibrium’ or ‘equability’ with the part form of Brahman. Cosmic activity of Sattva represented by the order of cosmic light objects is utilized to bring order in the cultural activity, inclusive of physical as well as moral one. If the calculations of the Gaṇita branch deal with the physical counterpart of time the work on the disciplined activity of cosmos to bring equability with the Sattva form of Brahman which is a moral counterpart. If work on the ordered rhythm of cosmic Sattva is proposed to create vibrations of Sattva on the qualitatively throbbing Citta, equilibrium with the part form of Brahman or the release of Citta being a propensity, such a result of the induced cultural activity reflects the Philosophy of the Culture as an intellectual one. More clearly it can be termed as “A morally activated philosophy aimed at an equable unity with nature.”

Apprehension of forms is qualitative on account of the organs of sense which perceive the object in the presence of mind.^[5] If the variety of names and forms is due to the analytical aspect of mind in contact with the organs perceiving the gross forms, the ‘cakṣu’ (organ of perception) and the ‘rūpa’ (apprehended form) share a common origin in the element of fire (teja), extending the unity to an elemental equability pertaining to the entire cosmos. Such equability is displayed by the cosmic gross ordered light forms alongwith the innate nature of mind which makes it a fundamental unit carrying the immortal light^[6] its nearmost equability achieved by the state of Sattva.

iii. Knowledge of the Unmanifest

Extending beyond the manifested qualitative world and residing as immortal light in man and the entire cosmos is the unmanifested form of Brahman. Efforts to understand this form of Brahman is through the theory of Kalpa, Yuga, Mahāyuga and Manvantara. Such earlier efforts to measure the distance to Brahma is expressed in the literature^[7] and is a continuation in the later period where the form of Brahma is asserted in extensive time periods.^[8] This ‘Timed form’ of Brahman though at an unmanifest level of human understanding the form is active at the cosmic level. The construction and destruction of the cosmos is explained in terms of the ‘Ahorātra’ of Brahmā constituting his day and night at the joints of which the beings manifest and unmanifest.^[9]

In reality Brahman as a single principle beyond the manifest and the unmanifest is beyond space time and causality. It is also termed as nirguṇa (qualityless) Brahman and is cited in the Upaniṣads.^[10] Knowledge (Jñāna) identified as the state of becoming Brahmībhūta or merging in Brahman pertains to this form.^[11] Also the texts explain that the ‘realization’ of Brahman creates oneness with Brahman.^[12] This equable status with the qualityless Brahman is recognized as ‘Knowledge in its ultimate form’.

iv. Sāttvika Knowledge and the Role of Intellect

On the other hand, Jīva being a part and parcel of Brahman his permanent form is mentioned as beyond desires, of consciousness (cidrūpī) and is all pervading since fundamentally singular.^[13] In its purest state it realizes Brahman, the realization itself an attribute of knowledge. This form of knowledge pertaining to the fundamental element is the knowledge of all names and forms.^[14] In this ultimate form the perceptive diversity is supposed to disappear.^[15] This state itself is the state of Brahman which though uniform originally appears divisional on account of the variety of forms of beings.^[16] True Knowledge is therefore defined as that by means of which one views the uniformity amongst the diverse forms and ‘perception’ finds a definition in such a mode of Knowledge termed as ‘Sāttvika or synthesized Knowledge’.^[17] In human such a Knowledge is a property of the faculty of reason.^[18] The form of reason or intellect is through which the seer who is himself a witness receives vision of the outer world.^[19] Thereby modifying the intellect to an equable or stable form which is the original form of the Jīva as well as Brahman is the form of Knowledge to be acquired by the reason for the unity which is the fundamental percept of the philosophy of the culture.

v. State of Equability in Cosmos

Apart from the named and formed qualitative cosmic matter which undergo change in character,^[20] the literature talks of the non-qualitative form of the cosmos which is its fundamental non-modificatory state.^[21] The concept of eternal Time is perhaps concerned with such parts of cosmos as also the qualityless form of Brahman expressed as space.^[22]

Search of non-activity representing steady points in the cosmos amongst the visibly active cosmos finds mention in the literature. An early practice is the observation of the fixed star near the Sun.^[23] Also to such extent the beginning of activity from a fixed point as solstice is recorded.^[24] The Sun stands still for a moment at the point of culmination is also an observance.^[25] The Nakṣatra at the Equinox not swerving from the East is a topic of study.^[26] Equally important was ‘Viṣuvat’ in the Vedavedāṅga period.^[27] Viṣuvān day is mentioned as the soul of the year^[28] believed as the day on which the gods raised Āditya to heaven. The method of derivation of this day is a special mention in the Vedāṅga Jyotiṣa, whose chief aim was calculations of the parvans for sacrifices.^[29] These parvans or junctions in between the two moving cosmic objects could be representations of homogeneity in cosmos since they are the expressions of the gap in between two specific activities along with the end of one and the beginning of another activity. Sacrificial actions on these parvans lead to heaven and immortality is a statement of the Veda indicating these joints as openings to another world and in the later period they are deemed be termed as outlets to the qualityless Brahman on account of their non-activity.

vi. Lakṣana

Such a point expressing non-activity also finds an expression in the explanation of the effect of ‘Lakṣana’ specified in the literature. Amongst the variety of effects occurring on the cosmic matter,^[30] Lakṣana extends from the absolute end of the qualities of a prior condition up to the arising of a new quality to its fullest extent leading to a certain state^[31] thereby it is a conjunction of two different characteristics. Any such point can also be said to be designating the point of disconnection since lying in between the qualitative separation. Such a point if dissected is supposed to divulge a non-activity area, also a timeless one being qualityless where to the complete transformation occurs.^[32] Search of such points which are non-active or where activity begins in the cosmic design are specified above, the search of which is a subject matter of Vedāṅga Jyotiṣa.

As of otherwise the term Lakṣana is commonly employed in the literature in its meaning as a ‘prognostic sign’ or a ‘distinctive mark’^[33] indicative of future which is studied either from a certain manifestation or more systematically from the beginning of a certain activity in cosmos. Yet if viewed as one of the ‘effects’ faced by the ‘beings’, Lakṣana exists as a natural process occurring spontaneously in case of beings as a response to external stimulus. If qualities inhering in a being ‘surface’ on such an interaction with the external factor as of ‘cosmic time’ which is said to bring forth the ‘resultant of work’ interacting with which a specific quality surfaces in a being, ‘knowledge’ brought forth as another counterpart of cosmic time presupposes an interaction with that part of knowledge which is residing in the being.^[34] Such a point of contact with Knowledge may be a connecting link to the qualityless Brahman, also specifying the end of Karman. Jyotiṣa from the above discussion secures a place at the threshold of work and Knowledge, any such threshold as the point of perception of the arising activity and its outcome. The light for the vision is a provision by the qualityless vacant point. Lakṣana in its sense of implied meaning^[35] at this point of state can be said to be a representation of Jyotiṣa as an eye of the Veda and equally the state of Parābrahman.^[36]

vii. Eschatology of Karman

The Eschatology of Karman in cosmos can be said to be at any such boundary defining non action and action. The non-active area is the point of perception or knowledge equally defining the area of the end of Karman bifurcated by the boundary from which activity arise. The concept of uncompounded, homogenous and unchangeable Brahman is seemingly applicable to such a point non-connected with actions.^[37] Such points in cosmos can be said to be the opening to the state of release.

Gītā (II.53) indicates to such an opening at which a steady reason rests in order to acquire a state of Yoga.^[38]

viii. Dream State

In case of Jīva dream state is a natural means for a vision of the light form of the Ātman and the arising activity is of the reason acquired on account of past actions.^[39] The Upaniṣads talk about the dream state (svapna) as one of the states of the Ātman.^[40] In a dream, the Ātman staying at the junction surveys the effects of merits and demerits in its own light.^[41] The flow of activity of the reason is said to be by means of ‘Akrama’ displaying ‘confusion’ or ‘want of order’ and is the outlet by which the activity moves out and the Jīva views the next world.^[42]

Dreams form a part of Śakuna section of Jyotiḥśāstra so as to give a vision of the past actions and thereby the knowledge of the concerned future. On account of its spontaneity it eludes from any human intervention as Muhūrtas yet it carries an inborn disposition to prove the quality of Jyotiṣa as the cakṣu of the Veda apart from its established affair as the vision of past actions. On the authority of the Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad on the theory of the dreams cited above, a dream as a Śakuna while it is happening is a live presentation of the experience of the light and knowledge form of the Ātman inclusive of its steady form and also of the motion of the intellect. Dream as a Śakuna is a perception of the above factual truth. Thus dream is also a visualization of the bifurcation of non-activity and activity and thereby a representation of the bifurcation of the areas of knowledge and action.

ix. Point of Transformation

Such a point of bifurcation stated above seemingly allows Transformation. If such a point specifies the arising of an activity as of the confused intellect connecting it to the world of motion, it also beholds the world of knowledge. Such a point thereby can be deemed as an outlet to the world of release. It sub serves as a natural providence for the derivation of knowledge.

Jyotiṣa as a cakṣu is a prognostication to this point as a basis of transformation. If dream as a divination is a spontaneous means for such a vision, the time points derived by Vedāṅga Jyotiṣa to perform actions locating non-activity or equability in cosmos could be deemed as specifying transformation.

x. Derivation of Knowledge

The path of transmigration of Jīva is dependent on conduct in the literature. The cosmic design is excavated to such an effect as to provide knowledge about the morality generated path since Ṛgveda and actions are arranged in accordance with it.^[43] The transmigration of Jīva from one birth to another is compared to the motion of a leech,^[44] the relation in between the two characterized forms, inclusive of the forms accounted to the desire of the past leading to such a fruition.^[45] Karma as a remnant of desire accords with ignorance which is proposed a cause for the contact (Saṃ-yoga) between the observer and the observed. Though such a contact deems to be a natural arrangement since each and every action leads to a fruition for which such a contact is conditional eventually leading to the realization by the self of its own form,^[46] the fact apart that such a knowledge derived by the Ātman is a sectional study on part of the culture. Since amongst the two types of actions,^[47] those that promote release of the Ātman from the cycle of rebirths are the ones concerned with knowledge. Actions kept the Ātman in transmigration and in contrast freedom from death was to be achieved through knowledge.^[48] Liberation meant the absence of adṛṣṭa,^[49] which was form of karma as opposed to knowledge. The knowledge of the rite held a connection with the cosmic cycle connected with actions the study of which was a subject of the Brāhmaṇas.^[50] Yet the knowledge it incurred was ‘object oriented’ which was subjective to transformations in contrast to the knowledge of the Ātman. Also such a knowledge was a prerequisite for the unity with the supreme Ātman, since an actual knowledge form was achieved as on aftermath of such a knowledge.

Actions to be undertaken to obtain such a knowledge finds mention in the literature,^[51] though non-contact with the objective world of activity remain the basic criteria of any such action. Knowledge or realization being a concern of the intellectual faculty of human as also non-contact with the empirical world were to be achieved by means of control of senses and concentration of mind more so by the isolation of the organs of senses and the mind.^[52]

The Ātman, a witness and without modifications and as the one subjected to the outer world in accordance with the faculty of its reason thereby an ‘equable status’ of reason also is a prior most concern to such a knowledge.^[53] Ultimate form of knowledge or release explained as an absence of dualistic difference of Ātman and Brahman such a form of knowledge where the diversity drops, is an acquisition by the means of reason, the state of union (yoga) being achieved by the priority of a ‘steady’ reason.^[54]

The initial form of the interaction between man and cosmos is an interaction between their qualityful aspects where Jīva equipped with instruments as body, mind and reason actively interact with the Prakṛti and its evolutes. Amongst the qualityful interaction knowledge is an attribute of the Sattva constituent of cosmos, work on which is a subject matter of Veda.^[55] Though for a complete knowledge form which can be declared as a state of ultimate release specifying unity with Brahman, along with actions suggested for such a form, the ‘eventual act’ where to the Jīva obtains the total knowledge form following a state of equable reason is a final interaction with the cosmos and thereby an affair of Vedāṅga Jyotiṣa and the concept of Karman.

xi. Knowledge Form

The being and its experience is a part of knowledge on which depends the future or that which is about to happen. Ignorance believed as a cause of such a state and its series which brings contact with the objective world leading to unhappiness, the destruction of bhāvas constituting empirical knowledge^[56] is the way suggested by the culture for a total knowledge form. If organs connect with the knowledge of form related to the world of Karman subjected to modifications of which originates the activity world on part of both the cosmic and the individual constitution (Prakṛti), the actions in favour of release are inspired by the Ātman. Synthesized or unified knowledge is an attribute of Ātman and such a knowledge constitute a knowledge of time and space which are kinds of name and form. If Jīva is name and form of Brahman broken in by time and space,^[57] the knowledge of time and space in a unified form is essential for the knowledge of Brahman. Such a knowledge is a consideration of the correlation of Jyotiṣa and Karman which deals with the qualityful aspects of Brahman in its timed form displayed by the activity of matter and its qualityless aspect in concept of timeless form which is chiefly bifurcated in terms of vyakta (manifest) and avyakta (unmanifest) pertaining to the capacity of human sense organs about the manifestation and disappearance of matter form and its actions. Such a timed and timeless form of Brahman is initially conveyed in the form of Prajāpati and his parvans displaying his mortal as well as immortal forms, actions on which is the chief subject matter of the Brāhamaṇas. In the later period such a form finds mention in the concept of the cosmic flux which holds and releases activity displayed as the breathing of Brahman.^[58] Thereby perception of activity extends to its unmanifest form along with the manifested one thus widening the concept of future. The apprehension of such a unified form is synthesized knowledge, the perception a unified one achieved on account of equable reason, a requisite for unification with the world of Brahman, the realization an inherent one separating Ātman from the empirical world. Such a form in accordance with the culture is a ‘natural’ form and is apart from the form subjected to ‘being and becoming’ since the unified form of Brahman constituting matter and space is the one which displays relativity between them and is subjected to the Aparā world whereas the nature form in question is the one concerned with the P arā world. The motion to such a world is, namṃ J{V, the outlet to one a non-divergent point specifying Brahman independent of time and space and it is to this form of Brahman to which the Ātman belongs, unity with which is the acquisition of the light and knowledge form the culture talks about.

xii. The Perceiver and the Perceived

The philosophy of the culture isolates itself from the others at the stage where it bifurcate Brahman into a ‘time and space form’ and a ‘supreme form’ out of which Satya or real knowledge is akin to the supreme form. Also perception is inherent in Brahman inclusive of both its forms though the role of Supreme Brahman is of the ‘Perceiver’ whereas the Time and Space formed Brahman undergoing the modifications is that which is ‘Perceived’. If the cosmic philosophy of the culture annexes such a supreme form, the relativity between matter and space which is a general consideration receives an added angle as to a relativity between the activity oriented perceived world of transformation and the perceiving world of the Brahman Ātman. On this ground originates the controversy amongst the philosophical lineage of the culture regarding the nature of the origination of the qualitative world and the world of Ātman.^[59] Though knowledge as an inherence of Ātman and perception as a means to obtain knowledge is an equal acceptance. Thereby knowledge and perception are attributes of Ātman, the perceiver or seer and the knowledge of the qualitative world, the perceived or seen is dependent on the perception of the perceiver. If organs as a unitary whole connect the individual to the world of diversified qualitative world, synthesized knowledge and disappearance of diversity of forms, in accordance with the culture, is the perception of the perceiver situated within. This is termed as real knowledge. On the other hand, reason is a product of Prakṛti which is deemed to be illusionary on account of its modifications due to qualities and actions and a steady equable reason is the utmost form of action suggested by the culture for the unity between Jīvātman and Brahman. If an attempt to locate such a state in the cosmic form representing homogeneity could be pointing the parvans of Prajāpati or else the ones near to the beginning of manifesting activity in the cosmos such a location only points to the beginning of the region of knowledge and is essentially a part of the ‘perceived’. Also it is an ‘edge’ upto which actions performed on part of human free will extend thus ending there the concept of Karman as human actions equally ending there the role of Prakṛti as a perceptive means to perform actions. The derivation of knowledge and the role of the perceiver yet remain to be discovered on the background of the unity at this stage where release about to happen is a created Prārabdha by means of apūrva of equable reason or at that of mahat indicating the existence of the three guṇas as a prognostication of the remains of Prakṛti, the independent element standing in between the unity and on account of which the other two angles, the Jivātman and the Brahman are held apart.

xiii. Perception and the Activity of Release

‘Synthesized knowledge’ on part of the Ātman could be termed as a ‘stimulus’ for the ‘change in perception’ of the Jivātman. As the cause of perception changes from the outer diversified world to the Ātman world, the form of knowledge no more diversified takes a form which acknowledges the Supreme Ātman in a unified form of ‘knowledge’ as well as ‘to be known’.^[60] While the Supreme Ātman is perceived with such a unified knowledge, Perception becomes a Kriyā (activity) on part of the Jivātman and not a Karman^[61] since Perception at this stage is a ‘Form’ itself and not a mere quality incurred by the Jivātman. With such a Perception when the Jivātman achieves oneness of form with the perceiving supreme Ātman the perception becomes a unification of the Jivātman and the Supreme Ātman. Such a unified Perception perceiving the remains of Prakṛti could be leading to end the role of Prakṛti in and around the Jivātman where supposedly happens the final activity of liberation of “knowledge derived in the form of light”.

If such an explanation could be provided as an act of final interaction between man and cosmos, the event happening at the point of release, Vedāṅga Jyotiṣa as an eye of the Veda, has an extension up to this point in the form of ‘unified perception’ and ‘release of light’ as also the concept of Karman which at this stage extends beyond willful human actions projecting as the ‘activity of the release of knowledge in the form of light’.^[62]

Footnotes and references:

[1]:

Taittirīya-upaniṣad III. 1.

[2]:

Gītā VIII.3.

[3]:

Ṛgveda-saṃhitā X. 129.4.

[4]:

Caraka-Saṃhitā IV. 2.36.

[5]:

Gītā Rahasya p 295-296

[6]:

Vājasaneya-saṃhitā 34.1-6.

[7]:

H/o. Dh. Vol. V.1. p. 690.

[8]:

For instance, A day of Brahmā equals fourteen Manvantaras constituting a Kalpa. Viṣṇupurāṇa VI. 3.11-12. Also Manusmṛti I.73.

[9]:

Gītā VIII. 18,19.

[10]:

Bṛhadāraṇyaka-upaniṣad III. 9.26, IV. 5.15, Chān Up. VII. 24.1, Śvetāṣvatara-upaniṣad VI. 19; Kaṭha Up. IV. 10- 11.

[11]:

Gītā Rahasya p. 382.

[12]:

Bṛhadāraṇyaka-upaniṣad X. 4.10.

[13]:

Bṛhadāraṇyaka-upaniṣad IV. 3.21.

[14]:

Chāndogya-upaniṣad 6.8-16.

[15]:

Vedāntasūtra 4.3.14.

[16]:

Gītā XIII. 16.

[17]:

[...] Gītā XVIII.20. Also XIII.27.

[18]:

Knowledge as pure discerning reason, Gītā Rahasya p. 312. 189

[19]:

[...] Patañjali’s Yogasūtras II.20.

[20]:

Patañjali’s Yogasūtras III. 13.

[21]:

Prakṛti or Pradhāna, _ybāHÑ {Va{dHÑ {V_©hXmÚm… āHÑ {V{dHÑ V‘… gá& Sāṃkhyakārikā 3.

[22]:

Vaiśeṣikasūtra II. 2.8.9., Chānd. Up. IV. 10.4.

[23]:

Taittirīya-brāhmaṇa I.5.2.1.

[24]:

Also the equinoxes. Hindu Astronomy p. 27.

[25]:

Kauṣitaki Brāhamaṇa 19.3.

[26]:

Śatapatha-brāhmaṇa II. 1.2. 2-4.

[27]:

Bhāratīya Jyotiṣaśāstra p.48.

[28]:

Tāṇḍya Brāhmaṇa IV. 6. 3-1, IV. 7.1.

[29]:

Bhāratīya Jyotiṣaśāstra p. 47,48.

[30]:

[...] Patañjali’s Yogasūtras III. 13.

[31]:

Commentary of Kolhatkar on Patañjali’s Yogasūtras IV. 2. p.563.

[32]:

Such a reference finds mention in the 16th digit of Prajāpati which is the constant one. Bṛhadāraṇyaka-upaniṣad I. 5. 14, 15 and Śaṅkarācārya’s commentary on it.

[33]:

Apte, V.S. p. 473.

[34]:

Commentary of Śaṅkarācārya on Bṛhadāraṇyaka-upaniṣad I. 2.4.

[35]:

[...] ref. of Tantravārttika in History of Dharmaśāstra V. 2. on p. 1293.

[36]:

Maitri Upaniṣad VI. 15.

[37]:

Nirguṇa Brahman Chāndogya-upaniṣad VII. 24.1., Śvetāṣvatara-upaniṣad VI. 19., Viṣnupurāṇa Chap. III.

[38]:

Gītā II. 53.

[39]:

Śaṅkarācāryas commentary on Bṛhadāraṇyaka-upaniṣad IV. 3.7.

[40]:

Bṛhadāraṇyaka-upaniṣad IV. 3.19.

[41]:

Bṛhadāraṇyaka-upaniṣad IV. 3.9.

[42]:

Commentary of Śaṅkarācārya on Bṛhadāraṇyaka-upaniṣad IV. 3.9.

[43]:

Ṛgveda-saṃhitā I. 24.8, VII. 87.1, History of Dharmaśāstra, V.2. p.948, pp. 1555-1558.

[44]:

Bṛhadāraṇyaka-upaniṣad IV. 4.3.

[45]:

Chāndogya-upaniṣad III. 14.1.

[46]:

Patañjali’s Yogasūtras II. 24. 190

[47]:

Gītā Rahasya p. 362.

[48]:

Kaṭha Up. I. ii.5., Śvetāṣvatara-upaniṣad I.7.

[49]:

Vaiśeṣikasūtra V. 2.18.

[50]:

Taittirīya-brāhmaṇa III. 10.11.2, III. 11.8.5.

[51]:

Chāndogya-upaniṣad 2.23.1., Kena Up. 33.

[52]:

Gītā XV. 3,5., Patañjali’s Yogasūtras I. 16.

[53]:

Patañjali’s Yogasūtras II. 20., Gītā II. 54-68.

[54]:

Gītā II. 51,53.

[55]:

Vedāntasūtra IV. 3.15.

[56]:

Śvetāṣvatara-upaniṣad VI. 5.

[57]:

Gītā Rahasya p. 339-340.

[58]:

“The cosmic body of Virāt, the cosmic reservoir from which all particular forms of actions are drawn out, he is the equalizing factor, source of all activity, the cosmic prāṇa,” Bṛhadāraṇyaka Upaniṣad, summary of Śivānanda, p. 139., Also Bhava and Bhāva, Chāndogya-upaniṣad VIII.8.1.

[59]:

Jīva and Cosmos as real and illusionary respectively, The Philosophical Schools represent them as independent elements though Vedānta and Gītā extends to express Prakṛti (cosmos) as illusionary.

[60]:

kmZṃ ko‘ṃ kmZJū‘ṃ& Gītā XIII. 17.

[61]:

Difference between ‘kriyā’ and ‘karman’, ‘kriyā’ is activity whereas ‘karman’ is action inclusive of will, desire, act. Every ‘karman’ is a kriyā but every kriyā is not a karman. Karmācā Siddhānta p. 100.

[62]:

Knowledge as light. Gītā XIV. 11.