സാ തീര്ഥവര്യാ മണികര്ണികാ ച ।
സാ കാശികാഹം നിജബോധരൂപാ ॥ 1॥
ചരാചരം ഭാതി മനോവിലാസം ।
സാ കാശികാഹം നിജബോധരൂപാ ॥ 2॥
ബുദ്ധിര്ഭവാനീ പ്രതിദേഹഗേഹം ।
സാക്ഷീ ശിവഃ സര്വഗതോഽന്തരാത്മാ
സാ കാശികാഹം നിജബോധരൂപാ ॥ 3॥
കാശ്യാം ഹി കാശ്യതേ കാശീ കാശീ സര്വപ്രകാശികാ ।
സാ കാശീ വിദിതാ യേന തേന പ്രാപ്താ ഹി കാശികാ ॥ 4॥
കാശീക്ഷേത്രം ശരീരം ത്രിഭുവന-ജനനീ വ്യാപിനീ ജ്ഞാനഗങ്ഗാ ।
ഭക്തിഃ ശ്രദ്ധാ ഗയേയം നിജഗുരു-ചരണധ്യാനയോഗഃ പ്രയാഗഃ ।
വിശ്വേശോഽയം തുരീയഃ സകലജന-മനഃസാക്ഷിഭൂതോഽന്തരാത്മാ
ദേഹേ സര്വം മദീയേ യദി വസതി പുനസ്തീര്ഥമന്യത്കിമസ്തി ॥ 5॥
ഇതി ശ്രീമദ് ശങ്കരാചാര്യവിരചിതം കശിപന്ചകം സമാപ്തം ।
We pass through three states every day of our life. These are the waking, dream and deep sleep states. These are called the jagrat, swapna and sushupti avasthas. In the waking state we are active and carry on transactions with the world that is outside us. In this state the other two states do not exist for us. Similarly, while in the the dream state, the dreamer is active and carries on transactions with the world that is outside him. While in this state also the other two states do not exist for the dreamer. Now, let us pause for a moment and find out where does the dream world as we would like to call the world one sees in a dream exist. He sees a procession with elephants, people etc., in his dream. Is it outside of the dreamer? The dreamer thinks so. But it is not seen by other dreamers and also disappears when he wakes up. So the dream world is not real but is a mental projection only. It exists within the dreamer’s mind only, but he sees it as though it is outside him. It has all the characteristics of the real world we find in our waking state. It has the dimensions of space, time etc. It may produce tangible effects in his body and mind. One may dream that he is falling from a precipice or chased by a tiger, and wake up but will continue to have palpitation and profuse sweating. The dream world is real, as far as the dreamer is concerned.
Do not what we said above apply to the real world we see in our waking state? Is there any difference at all between these two worlds? Not really. but we think the dream world is not substantial, but the other world is. Our philosophy questions this assumption and asserts that the so called real world is also not substantial but is a mental projection only like the dream world is. We may find it hard to digest this assertion but it is hard to refute it also. This is because of the fact that it does not exist in the other two states. In the deep sleep state, the sense organs and the mind are withdrawn. So, no world exists. We are ourselves in the form of bliss. This bliss is superior to any pleasure one may get through one’s sense organs. That is why even an emperor who may have all the wealth and power at his command will not be willing to remain awake and enjoy the pleasures that are at his command all the time. He would like to fall asleep and enjoy the higher bliss which is his true nature. But this state is temporary as our mind continues to be covered by ignorance. That is why when we wake up we are back where we were, into this world of ours with all its problems.
Mark, in the waking state the mind and the sense organs are active. In the dream state only the mind is active and the dreamer creates the dream world, transacts with it and withdraws it within himself at the end of the dream.
Similarly, when one goes to sleep and slips into a dream, the real world goes. That is why one may go to sleep with a jar of water by his bed side. He may feel thirsty in his dream, but the real water by his side cannot come to his aid. Only dream water can quench the thirst. Similarly, one may come across a windfall in his dream, but all that piles of dream money will not help him out of the financial crunch he may face on waking up. This is explained in our upanishads. The DakShinamurthy Stotram of Sri Sankaracharya explains this with many examples. A magician conjures up objects
out of thin air. These objects appear as real to the observer. But the magician knows they are unreal. Similarly, the world appears real to us. When the person gets jnanam and wakes up he realises that what he sees is God appearing as the world. It is his own self also. So, there is no world other than himself. It is born, exists and withdrawn by his mind; just as a dream is born, exists and withdrawn by a dreamer’s mind. This is said in the Kaivalyopanishad. mayyeva sakalam jAtam mayi sarvam pratishtitam, mayi sarvam layam yAti.
Coming to Sankaracharya’s Kasi Panchakam, he, being an awakened person or jnani, sees no world outside of him. So, where will he go for a pilgrimage? By whatever name you may call the place, Kasi, Prayaga etc., it exists within him only. So, where will he go? There is an incident connected with Sri Ramana maharshi of Tiruvannamalai that vividly illustrates this fact. Once someone asked him why he is staying all the time at Tiruvannamalai only and not go on any pilgrimage. Ramana promptly asked the person where can I go? But, Sankaracharya retained his ego for carrying out his mission as a teacher. Most of us believe in a god with form and name. We believe in the efficacy of puja, pilgrimage etc. Gita says that a man of wisdom should not confuse such people with talks about formless god etc., till they are mentally mature and are able to swallow such teachings of the upanishads. But, instead he should strengthen their faith by himself joining them in their method of worship. The Lord says in Gita that such devotees will gradually progress to higher form of devotion. So, the Acharya, like us, went to different places, worshipped the deities there, and composed hymns in their praise. All these are for the benefit of lay people only. But he had also composed works like DakShinamurthy stotram that disseminate advaitic phhilosophy. Trust this answers the question.
Above commentary by N.Balasubramanian. bbalu at satyam.net.in
തീര്ഥ is a word which occurs in most sanskrit literature from the
times ofഋഗ്വേദ, however inഋഗ്വേദ the word is used
to mean a way, a path , flow of water or a part of river where one
can safely bathe e.g.1.169.06 ഈ.
പ്രതി പ്ര യാഹീന്ദ്ര മീല്ഹഷോ നൃന് മഹഃ പാര്ഥിവേ സദനേ യതസ്വ ।
അധ യദ് ഏഷാമ പൃഥബന്ധാസ ഏതാസ് തീര്ഥേ നാര്യഃ പൌസ്യാനി തസ്ഥഃ ॥
at times it is (though rarely in ഋഗ്വേദ) it is used to
mean as a sacred place(പവിത്ര) e.g. 10 31.03
അധ്യായി ധീതര് അസസൃഗ്രം അംശാസ് തീര്ഥേ ന ദസ്മമ ഉപ യന്ത്യ് ഊമാഃ।
അഭ്യ് ആനശ്മ സഃവിതസ്യ ശൂഷം നവേദസോ അമൃതാനാം അഭൂമ ॥
it can therfore beconcluded that certain parts or provinces of the
sub-continent were considered to be sacred in quality and volumes of
sanskrit literaure post vedic period advises that these places be
visited for spiritual enhancement. It will be shocking but
matsyapurANaമത്സ്യപുരാണ puts the figure at 30.5 Million
places in entire universe as tIrthas (തീര്ഥ) However Vedas
mostly aknowlege the places near major rivers like sindhU , sarasvati
, gangA and sarayuസിന്ധൂ, സരസ്വതി, ഗങ്ഗാ, സരയു as
tirthas. In vedas particularly sindhU, sarsvati and sarayu rivers are
treated as mothers.
This is not a difficult to understand. The whole aryan civilization
was considered advanced because of their knowledge about techniques
of cultivation of land. The cultivation of land offered man ,
vis-a-vis any other living organism on the earth, control over his
food. It also reduced the risk of death which is associated with a
unter-gatherer. (that we were). It was also recognised early in
the civilisation that certain diseases which affect the animals also
affect the humans, increasing mortality. However diseases affecting
plants are different from than those which affect human beings. These
things together probably laid the foundation of vegetarianism.
In the light of the above terming the places near the rivers or the
fertile deltas as .sacred. or as god.s gift to humanity appears
justified and insistence on visiting such places is also
understandable. (e.g the meaning of the word kurukhetra
കുരുക്ഷേത്ര is land brought under cultivation by kuru dynasty.)
As far as KAshiകാശീ is concerned, it was a place where most
of the knowledge during the time of writing of most brahman-granthas
(ബ്രാഹ്മണ്ഗ്രംഥ) was born. During Mahabharata period kAshi was
a kingdom and Varanasi was the capital city of Kashi. In the first or
second century AD most literature refers to .kAshi. as a .nagari.
Insistence on visiting such places where nature and human together
worked in synergy to generate prosperity is natural. It is the
advise that any civilised society should give to its members.
Therefore the importance of visiting tirthas made sense during the
time when most of the Sanskrit literature was scripted. The story of
these places during the modern ages has changed dramatically and the
appropriate changes which should have been rightfully made in the
granhtas have not been made during the Middle Ages. The main reason
for this appears to be, as appropriately noted by the great
Indologist Dr D. D. Kossambi, .Brahmins who were traditionally the
keepers of knowledge, in Middle Ages, engaged themselves in the
meaningless activities to preserve orthodoxy and ignored progress.
One more point is important and needs to be emphasissed: one of the
most important aspects of Vedic philosophy is the importance that it
gives to the .doer. കര്താ than to the .method. arguing that an
accurate aetiology does not exist in nature. Vedic .vidhi.വിധീ
(to be translated as .command.) has three parts 1. doerകര്താ 2.
mantra (methodology)മംത്ര and 3. deityദേവതാ . Out of
these deity is always used to denote a set of qualities or set of
adjectives and, contrary to the common belief, is the least
important. (eg. the word vasudevവസുദേവ means one who possesses
all of the following qualities simultaneously : 1. Greatness (
ശ്രീ)2. Success (യശ) 3. Bravery(വീര്യ) 4. Wealth
(ഐശ്വര്യ) and, 5. Detachment from the material world (
വൈരാഗ്യ). (ref: viShNupurANa).)
Therefore by merely performing the rite according to the methodology
does not obtain the desired result unless an individual performing
the rite is .eligible. (the word used in vedic literature is
adhikAraഅധികാര). One must first acquire the eligibility and
then perform the rite. One who is not knowledgeable or has behaved in
a fashion detrimental to the Manav SamAja (Human Society) cannot
perform aShTiShToma yaGYa . When the Vedas ordain that .one who wants
to go to heaven must perform aShTiShToma yaGYa., it is automatically
assumed that you have the eligibility to perform the rite.
Unfortunately, this is being totally ignored and the large portion of
the society indulges in meaningless rites and rituals.
The concept can be very easily elucidated: there are hundred of
recipe books about French cuisine. Try the recipe yourself and then
visit a reputed place in Paris to taste the same product. Will the
taste be same? The chef has more eligible therefore the same
methodology produces a different result or in other words .there is
no accurate aetiology..
Vyasa in Van-parva or araNyaparva (വനപര്വ orഅരണ്യപര്വ)
i.e. chapter III of mahabharata) (sec 82 ) says:
I will tell thee of the merit which is attached to tirthas and which
constitutes the refuge of the Rishis. .He, whose hands and feet and
mind and knowledge and asceticism and acts are under wholesome
control, enjoys the fruits of tirthas. He who has ceased to accept
gifts, he that is contented, he that is free from pride enjoys the
fruits of tirthas. He that is without sin, he that acts without
purpose, he that eats light, he that has his senses under control, he
that is free from every sin, enjoys the fruits of tirthas. O king, he
that is free from anger, he that adheres to truth, he that is firm in
vows, he that regards all creatures as his own self, enjoys the
fruits of tirthas.. (translation by Kisari Mahan Ganguly 1893-96)
Similarly skandakAshi purAN (6.1) and padya pauraN uttarArdha
3.237 states that control over the senses, adherence to truth and
purity of mind to be the highest tIrthas.
Against this background if you read the sha.nkarAchArya and near
complete translation that Nandu has offered I think the latent
meaning would be apparent to you.
Also you may be interested that the meaning of the word tIrthakara
തീര്ഥകര് is .one who makes path through life by his own prowess
. generally referred as shiva.
If you are keen I would suggest that you go through vanparva of
Mahabharata chapter 82 carefully . That would give you Vyasas
interpretation of .sacrifice. by the kings etc. Please understand
that the name of a deity is used at many places mean only a set of
adjectives. In sanskrit literaterature it is called prasha.nsa.nka
svarUpa പ്രശംസംക സ്വരൂപ.
(Researched and written by Surin Usgonkar. Mumbai , India )