"Senses withdrawn from sense-objects..."

[Martin]

I like Sankaracharya's commentary on this:

In the case of a man of steady wisdom in whom has arisen discriminating knowledge, those which are these ordinary and Vedic dealings cease on the eradication of ignorance, they being effects of ignorance. And ignorance ceases because it is opposed to Knowledge.

Swami, Gambhirananda. Bhagavad Gita : With the commentary of Shankaracharya (Kindle Locations 1865-1866). Advaita Ashrama. Kindle Edition.
​

Krishna clarifies what he said in verse 68 with this in verse 69:

The self-restrained man keeps awake during that which is night for all creatures. That during which creatures keep awake, it is night to the seeing sage.

Swami, Gambhirananda. Bhagavad Gita : With the commentary of Shankaracharya (Kindle Locations 1870-1871). Advaita Ashrama. Kindle Edition.
​

Sankaracharya's commentary on this verse:

Saṁyamī , the self-restrained man, whose organs are under control, that is, the yogī who has arisen from the sleep of ignorance; jāgarti , keeps awake; tasyām , in that (night) characterized as the Reality, the supreme Goal. That night of ignorance, characterized by the distinctions of subjects and objects, yasyām in which; bhūtāni , the creatures, who are really which night they are like dreamers in sleep; sā niśā , it is night; paśyataḥ , to the seeing; muneḥ , sage, who perceives the Reality that is the supreme Goal, because that (night) is ignorance by nature.

Therefore, rites and duties are enjoined only during the state of ignorance, not in the state of enlightenment. For, when Knowledge dawns, ignorance becomes eradicated like the darkness of night after sunrise. Before the rise of Knowledge, ignorance, accepted as a valid means of knowledge and presenting itself in the different forms of actions, means, and results, becomes the cause of all rites and duties. It cannot reasonably become the source of rites and duties (after Realization) when it is understood as an invalid means of knowledge. For an agent becomes engaged in actions when he has the idea, ‘Actions have been enjoined as a duty for me by the Vedas, which are a valid means of knowledge’; but not when he understands that ‘all this is mere ignorance, like the night’.

Swami, Gambhirananda. Bhagavad Gita : With the commentary of Shankaracharya (Kindle Locations 1876-1888). Advaita Ashrama. Kindle Edition.​

So according to this commentary, withdrawal from sense-objects results from wisdom? And presumably sense-objects would be seen as mithya (unreal) with this perspective?

I don't actually like the word "unreal" here. I think it means transient, and dependent upon consciousness.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Do you take sense-objects in the OP quote to include "internal" mind-objects like thoughts and feelings? I assumed it meant "external" sense-objects.

Yeah, all Dharmic religions include thoughts and feelings in being categorized as good or bad. They say Manasā, Vāchā, Karmanā (in heart, in speech and in action). Something bad is bad everywhere.

 

[Martin]

Yeah, all Dharmic religions include thoughts and feelings in being categorized as good or bad. They say Manasā, Vāchā, Karmanā (in heart, in speech and in action). Something bad is bad everywhere.

I'm not sure you understood the question I asked.

 

[Aupmanyav]

So according to this commentary, withdrawal from sense-objects results from wisdom?

I would replace withdrawal with aloofness. One will continue with all actions but without attachment (asakti). When one has a life, one will also have 'dharma'. So, do whatever your 'dharma' (duties and responsibilities) requires but do not be attached to the result of your actions and do not be inactive. That is what Gita also says: "ma karma-phala heturbhuh, ma sangostu akarmani". Act, but act without attachment with only the purpose of fulfilling your 'dharma'.

 

[Aupmanyav]

I'm not sure you understood the question I asked.

Quite possible. Enlighten me in what way.

 

[ajay0]

Do you take sense-objects in the OP quote to include "internal" mind-objects like thoughts and feelings? I assumed it meant "external" sense-objects.

Sense-objects does not necessarily mean the external ones, it can also mean the internal ones created from memories and imagination.

In fact Krishna had stated such conduct to be hypocritical where one abstains from external sensory objects but thinks of them in mind.

The individual who forcibly controls the organs of action, but whose mind rotates around thoughts of sense objects, is said to be a hypocrite, deluding himself. ( BG 3:6)


It is the incessant thinking and emoting brought about by our cravings and aversions that veil the ever-present Self.

These thoughts are stimulated by external objects as well as those from our memories by habitual thinking. Both tend to be compulsive and consequently veils the Self.

“When one’s mind dwells on the objects of senses, fondness for them grows on him, from fondness comes desire, from desire ( when obstructed) arises anger. Anger leads to bewilderment, bewilderment to loss of memory of true Self, and by that intelligence is destroyed, and with the destruction of intelligence he perishes.” ( BG 2.62)


So the focus is to ensure non-stimulation of thought by external sensory objects as well as from internal memories/imagination. This helps to bring about the state of meditation or thoughtless awareness characteristic of joy and peace. This is also of great aid in calming and composing oneself , especially when the mind is chaotic with numerous conflicting thoughts and emotions.

“Decision making, like coffee, needs a cooling process.” - George Washington

One should obviously think when performing complex work of a practical nature. Thought involved in practical work is calm, equanimious and does not have emotional involvement or feverishness as long as the ego or greed is not involved. Such calm work tends to be productive and satisfactory too.

 

[Martin]

I would replace withdrawal with aloofness. One will continue with all actions but without attachment (asakti). When one has a life, one will also have 'dharma'. So, do whatever your 'dharma' (duties and responsibilities) requires but do not be attached to the result of your actions and do not be inactive. That is what Gita also says: "ma karma-phala heturbhuh, ma sangostu akarmani". Act, but act without attachment with only the purpose of fulfilling your 'dharma'.

There are probably different ways of looking at this.
You could say that greater insight into the nature of sense objects leads to more detachment from sense-objects, which in turn leads to less action fuelled by desire.

 

[Martin]

Sense-objects does not necessarily mean the external ones, it can also mean the internal ones created from memories and imagination.

In fact Krishna had stated such conduct to be hypocritical where one abstains from external sensory objects but thinks of them in mind.

The individual who forcibly controls the organs of action, but whose mind rotates around thoughts of sense objects, is said to be a hypocrite, deluding himself. ( BG 3:6)


It is the incessant thinking and emoting brought about by our cravings and aversions that veil the ever-present Self.

These thoughts are stimulated by external objects as well as those from our memories by habitual thinking. Both tend to be compulsive and consequently veils the Self.

“When one’s mind dwells on the objects of senses, fondness for them grows on him, from fondness comes desire, from desire ( when obstructed) arises anger. Anger leads to bewilderment, bewilderment to loss of memory of true Self, and by that intelligence is destroyed, and with the destruction of intelligence he perishes.” ( BG 2.62)


So the focus is to ensure non-stimulation of thought by external sensory objects as well as from internal memories/imagination. This helps to bring about the state of meditation or thoughtless awareness characteristic of joy and peace. This is also of great aid in calming and composing oneself , especially when the mind is chaotic with numerous conflicting thoughts and emotions.

“Decision making, like coffee, needs a cooling process.” - George Washington

One should obviously think when performing complex work of a practical nature. Thought involved in practical work is calm, equanimious and does not have emotional involvement or feverishness as long as the ego or greed is not involved. Such calm work tends to be productive and satisfactory too.

Yes, I agree that detachment from internal objects like thoughts and feelings is also important. I was querying whether the OP verse actually includes these.
Coming from a Buddhist background, I'm used to thinking of mind as the 6th sense, and thoughts and feelings as sense-objects. But I'm not sure that applies here. The koshas (sheaths) and skhandhas (aggregates) are different models of experience.

 

[ajay0]

Yes, I agree that detachment from internal objects like thoughts and feelings is also important. I was querying whether the OP verse actually includes these.
Coming from a Buddhist background, I'm used to thinking of mind as the 6th sense, and thoughts and feelings as sense-objects. But I'm not sure that applies here. The koshas (sheaths) and skhandhas (aggregates) are different models of experience.

"Therefore, O Strong-armed Warrior, he whose senses have been withdrawn from sense-objects is said to be well-established in his wisdom." Bhagavad Gita, 2.68

If the senses are just withdrawn from external sense-objects , it does not mean that the mind is not ruminating on these objects in imagination. The objective of this exercise is to be established in the Self or Awareness, but if the mind is thinking and emoting while abstaining from external sensory objects, it would still mean that the Self is veiled.

The individual who forcibly controls the organs of action, but whose mind rotates around thoughts of sense objects, is said to be a hypocrite, deluding himself. ( BG 3:6)

However, as you said, if the mind is also considered as a sense as in Buddhist psychology, then Krishna's statement is accurate.

It is the still mind that reflects the Self, and such stillness should not be agitated by external or internal disturbances.

 

[Aupmanyav]

You could say that greater insight into the nature of sense objects leads to more detachment from sense-objects, which in turn leads to less action fuelled by desire.

I perfectly agree with you. Without insight we will be making mistakes. Only when we understand things correctly, then our actions also will be correct. That is what Buddha did all his life-time, bringing attention to clear understanding. And that is what Krishna trying to do in BhagawadGita in many ways to make Ajuna understand what was his duty.

I take Buddha as my guru (one of the two whom I accept), he put me on a new journey with Kesamutti Sutta. I may not be able to discuss what I got from him very scholarly, but I have tried to implement that in my life. Greater insight in sense-objects and equally great insight in our own thinking/our reactions to that insight.

 

[SalixIncendium]

So according to this commentary, withdrawal from sense-objects results from wisdom? And presumably sense-objects would be seen as mithya (unreal) with this perspective?

I don't actually like the word "unreal" here. I think it means transient, and dependent upon consciousness.

I prefer the term "avidya" (incorrect knowledge/ignorance), but essentially, yes.

 

[Martin]

I prefer the term "avidya" (incorrect knowledge/ignorance), but essentially, yes.

In relation to avidya, do you mean like the rope and snake simile?

 

[SalixIncendium]

In relation to avidya, do you mean like the rope and snake simile?

I'm sorry for my delayed response. I saw this yesterday and attempted to respond, but lack of sleep had me in a bit of a fog yesterday.

The rope and snake analogy is useful in describing avidya, but I'm not sure it's the best example for this context.

All sense-objects exist only in pragmatic reality. In a theater, you watch cops and robbers and hear the car chase. These are sense-objects, but are incorrect knowledge/ignorance. A person of steady wisdom understands that if s/he walks to the screen and touches it, there is only the screen. There are no cops, robbers, or cars. The images and sounds (sense objects) are in perpetual change, but the screen itself (Brahman) is unchanging. Tat tvam asi.

 

[Martin]

I'm sorry for my delayed response. I saw this yesterday and attempted to respond, but lack of sleep had me in a bit of a fog yesterday.

The rope and snake analogy is useful in describing avidya, but I'm not sure it's the best example for this context.

All sense-objects exist only in pragmatic reality. In a theater, you watch cops and robbers and hear the car chase. These are sense-objects, but are incorrect knowledge/ignorance. A personal of steady wisdom understands that if s/he walks to the screen and touches it, there is only the screen. There are no cops, robbers, or cars. The images and sounds (sense objects) are in perpetual change, but the screen itself (Brahman) is unchanging. Tat tvam asi.

The way I'd put it is that sense-objects are transient, and dependent upon consciousness.
In which case, increasing insight into the ephemeral nature of sense-objects would lead to reducing desire for these sense-objects. Or you could say the mind is less inclined to "go out" to sense-objects, hence a "withdrawal" from sense objects (OP verse).

 

[Aupmanyav]

.. hence a "withdrawal" from sense objects (OP verse).

I am not in favor of withdrawal (and that is what Gita says too). We are in a world of perceptions (Vyavaharika), we have our duties and responsibilities (dharma), we will need to act (like we need to eat and sleep and for that need to have a job, and fulfill the responsibilities of that job, like getting up early and be at office at a set time, etc.), withdrawal is no answer.
What is real understanding is to touch the screen and realize the truth. After that, even if you engage in actions, it does not matter. Don't get emotionally involved. "Anasakti Yoga" which Mahatma Gandhi tried to follow (not being emotionally involved but still do the job vigorously). It comes with practice.

Gandhi's 'Anasakti Ashram' and Himalayan views from there (Kausani, Uttarakhand, is not very close to the Himalayan range, but was a nice peaceful retreat before tourism changed all that)

 

[ajay0]

The way I'd put it is that sense-objects are transient, and dependent upon consciousness.
In which case, increasing insight into the ephemeral nature of sense-objects would lead to reducing desire for these sense-objects. Or you could say the mind is less inclined to "go out" to sense-objects, hence a "withdrawal" from sense objects (OP verse).

Yes, understanding the temporary nature of all sensory objects will help us to be detached from them, and not be inordinately attached to them.

We can use sensory objects which caters to our needs/duties and yet be equanimous if we lose them.

That man alone will be able to get the best of nature, who, having the power of attaching himself to a thing with all his energy, has also the power to detach himself when he should do so. ~ Swami Vivekananda

Some are not able to detach so, not just from external objects or people, but also from inner objects, ideas and fancies due to numerous attachments or cravings , which eventually becomes a source of misery and suffering for them. In extreme cases, they can lead to delusion and madness as well.

Mental equanimity emphasized by Krishna is necessary for the maintenance of Self-awareness or mindfulness, which is the true source of peace and joy. It is mental agitation caused by inner and outer attachments that veils this ever-present source of bliss within.

 

[Martin]

I am not in favor of withdrawal (and that is what Gita says too). We are in a world of perceptions (Vyavaharika), we have our duties and responsibilities (dharma), we will need to act (like we need to eat and sleep and for that need to have a job, and fulfill the responsibilities of that job, like getting up early and be at office at a set time, etc.), withdrawal is no answer.
What is real understanding is to touch the screen and realize the truth. After that, even if you engage in actions, it does not matter. Don't get emotionally involved. "Anasakti Yoga" which Mahatma Gandhi tried to follow (not being emotionally involved but still do the job vigorously). It comes with practice.

Gandhi's 'Anasakti Ashram' and Himalayan views from there (Kausani, Uttarakhand, is not very close to the Himalayan range, but was a nice peaceful retreat before tourism changed all that)

Yes, it seems to have the sense of withdrawing interest, withdrawing desire, not getting emotionally involved, detachment.
Verses 2.61 and 2.64 appear to confirm this view (I quoted them in post #7).

 

[Martin]

Yes, understanding the temporary nature of all sensory objects will help us to be detached from them, and not be inordinately attached to them.

We can use sensory objects which caters to our needs/duties and yet be equanimous if we lose them.

That man alone will be able to get the best of nature, who, having the power of attaching himself to a thing with all his energy, has also the power to detach himself when he should do so. ~ Swami Vivekananda

Some are not able to detach so, not just from external objects or people, but also from inner objects, ideas and fancies due to numerous attachments or cravings , which eventually becomes a source of misery and suffering for them. In extreme cases, they can lead to delusion and madness as well.

Mental equanimity emphasized by Krishna is necessary for the maintenance of Self-awareness or mindfulness, which is the true source of peace and joy. It is mental agitation caused by inner and outer attachments that veils this ever-present source of bliss within.

As well as detachment from sense-objects, I think the OP verse also has the sense of turning attention inwards, rather than outwards. Self-enquiry. Possibly it's that realignment of attention that leads to detachment.

 

[ajay0]

As well as detachment from sense-objects, I think the OP verse also has the sense of turning attention inwards, rather than outwards. Self-enquiry. Possibly it's that realignment of attention that leads to detachment.

Obviously, a degree of introvertness comes about when there is detachment from all external sensory objects. It takes a certain amount of mental strength and concentration just to break this spell though, for some.

And yes, the absence of external distraction can help set the foundation for self-inquiry. But this is not the case if there are inner distractions as Krishna pointed out. ( BG 3:6 )

That is a harder hurdle to surmount, imho.

 

[Aupmanyav]

I will say we need to balance the both, external and internal. I will not like to become a recluse.