Changes

So sorrowfully he undertakes the journey to the land of death and awaits the return of Yama at his abode for three nights.  

So sorrowfully he undertakes the journey to the land of death and awaits the return of Yama at his abode for three nights.  

== Atithi maryada ==

== Atithi maryada ==

Meaning : This doubt that arises, consequent to the death of a man - some say, "It (the Self) exists" and others say, "It does not exist". I would like to know this, under your instruction as the third of all the boons.

Meaning : This doubt that arises, consequent to the death of a man - some say, "It (the Self) exists" and others say, "It does not exist". I would like to know this, under your instruction as the third of all the boons.

=== What is the meaning of this benediction? ===

=== Significance of third boon ===

Nachiketa’s question is very subtle and its significance needs to be understood. It can be said  that the entire maha purva paksha of vedanta  is hidden in this question. The question resembles Arjuna’s question in the 1st chapter of the Bhagvad Gita. The Charvaka school tells that there is no atma, separate from the body. The Charvaka’s philosophy has been one of the oldest and most prominent opponents of Vedanta philosophy.  

Nachiketa’s question is very subtle and its significance needs to be understood. It can be said  that the entire maha purva paksha of vedanta  is hidden in this question. The question resembles Arjuna’s question in the 1st chapter of the Bhagvad Gita. The Charvaka school tells that there is no atma, separate from the body. The Charvaka’s philosophy has been one of the oldest and most prominent opponents of Vedanta philosophy.  

The intelligent persons may ask whether Nachiketa’s question is  similar to the Charvaka school of thought?   If Nachiketa’s question was indicating that there is no atma beyond the body, and even if the atma exists, he does not  understand or believe in its existence?  If this is true, then why would Nachiketa ask Yamaraja about Paramapada (highest destination) for the atma which the Charvakas claim does not exist? Charvaka followers do not believe in the other world, but Nachiketa after understanding about atma, shows great faith in the highest spiritual abode, knowing the destination of jiva to be that abode. It is only after understanding this that one can think or discuss the process of  achieving that place. Therefore, Nachiketa is not questioning the existence of soul. Then what could be the meaning of such a question? (12-3-17)

The intelligent persons may ask whether Nachiketa’s question is  similar to the Charvaka school of thought?   If Nachiketa’s question was indicating that there is no atma beyond the body, and even if the atma exists, he does not  understand or believe in its existence?  If this is true, then why would Nachiketa ask Yamaraja about Paramapada (highest destination) for the atma which the Charvakas claim does not exist? Charvaka followers do not believe in the other world, but Nachiketa after understanding about atma, shows great faith in the highest spiritual abode, knowing the destination of jiva to be that abode. It is only after understanding this that one can think or discuss the process of  achieving that place. Therefore, Nachiketa is not questioning the existence of soul. Then what could be the meaning of such a question? (12-3-17)

== The ||swarupa () of the ||Jiva () at ||moksha () is the subject of the Nachiketa’s question. ==

== ||swarupa () of the ||Jiva () at ||Moksha ==

Even in Nachiketa’s time there were some people who accepted that the body as temporary and atma is eternl, here and there.  There were different understanding about life after death, lot of speculation and debate would happen.  Similarly there were diveristy of understanding in regards to Moksha.  For eg:- presently also it is observed that many different understanding are there in regards to mukti.

Even in Nachiketa’s time there were some people who accepted that the body as temporary and atma is eternl, here and there.  There were different understanding about life after death, lot of speculation and debate would happen.  Similarly there were diveristy of understanding in regards to Moksha.  For eg:- presently also it is observed that many different understanding are there in regards to mukti.

# In the Nirishwara sankhya philosophy and similar other philosophers, believe that body is flitting and the atma is nirlepa (without any covering) and free from any qualities, hence  it is only a witness. This raises question about what they are  trying to say, is  that the atma exists?  Does it describe the existence of  atma in moksha or indirectly saying the atma does not exist? 

# In the Nirishwara sankhya philosophy and similar other philosophers, believe that body is flitting and the atma is nirlepa (without any covering) and free from any qualities, hence  it is only a witness. This raises question about what they are  trying to say, is  that the atma exists?  Does it describe the existence of  atma in moksha or indirectly saying the atma does not exist?