[Advaita-l] vedic yajna

Venkatesh Murthy vmurthy36 at gmail.com
Thu Dec 1 21:55:40 CST 2011


On Thu, Dec 1, 2011 at 9:54 PM, Vidyasankar Sundaresan
<svidyasankar at hotmail.com> wrote:

> Again and again, we come back to the same difference of perspective.
> I understand your point perfectly. However, I am pointing out that you
> fundamentally misunderstand the SAstra and its interpretation.
> First, please address the internal contradictions in your stance that I
> pointed out earlier. Second, you are perfectly right that we have to go
> by the advice and conduct of SishTa-s. However, if you think that the
> SishTAcAra fundamentally modifies what is said in Sruti, you are totally
> mistaken. Please go to the SishTa-s you named earlier and ask them
> about it. By definition, a SishTa is one who knows the SAstra really well
> in its vast breadth and his AcAra will, by default, be consonant with it.
The named Sistas will not ask anybody with any qualification like
knowing Vedas with desire to have learned son to eat Beef under any
circumstance. This is first point. Second point is what is wrong if we
follow Nirnaya Sindhu prohibition of Beef for all irrespective of the
Varna, qualification, desire and other things. It is like Samanya
Dharma in Kali Yuga. Nobody can eat Beaf in this age. It is simple. It
applies to all. Kindly say if there is something wrong in this. Why
should we not simply accept Nirnaya Sindhu prohibition instead of
finding some escape from  Sruti Vakya asking to eat Bull meat?  You
are trying to find escape exit from Sruti Vakyas asking to do
prohibited things in our times. I am saying take a simple approach
because books like Nirnaya Sindhu are guiding us. I will show how you
are trying for escape exit now.

In the case of Bull meat Sruti may be saying if you have such and such
qualification and such and such desire to have learned son and such
and such conditions are satisfied you should eat Bull meat with rice
and other ingredients. But Nirnaya Sindhu is saying don't eat Beef
under any circumstances irrespective of who you are your
qualifications, desires, and any conditions. You are looking at Sruti
Vakya and finding escape exit saying if I don't have the desire I
don't have to eat Bull meat. I will not eat it.  But I am saying
looking at Nirnaya Sindhu I will not eat Beef. The result for both is
the same for this case but the reason given is different. It is
strange we have to find escape exit when important books like Nirnaya
Sindhu are available to help.

>> Take the example in Bruhadaranyaka Upanishad 6-4-7 it is asking the
>> man to strike his wife with a stick or hands if she is not yielding to
>> have sex with him to produce a son. He can strike her and make her
>> yield to sex desire. Can you follow this Sruti Vakya today?
> If you can get your mind a little bit out of issues relating to sex and
> think about the larger context of dharma, you will realize that this act
> too is kAmya. The Sruti is absolutely not saying that a husband should
> beat up his wife every time he feels like having sex and she doesn't.
> That is an absolutely wrong interpretation here. Rather, the upanishad
> is describing an ugly and highly negative situation within a marriage. I
> would suggest that you read the bhAshya on this passage too, where
> ayaSA = vandhyA. It takes a lot of souring of the marriage if a husband
> were to entertain a terrible wish that his wife should be sterile. Anyway,
> for this one passage that talks of a really bad situation of what a man
> may do with a woman under the sway of kAma, there are thousands
> that teach the same man the value of Sama, dama etc. and not to be
> a slave to his kAma. It is up to the kartA what course he chooses to
> follow. And if he were to go ahead and abuse his wife, thinking that he
> is being dhArmika, he also has to think about the negative consequences
> to himself. What is the point of desiring that one's son should be a
> trivedi or caturvedi and highly respected in society, if one can't regulate
> one's own anger and other desires? This particular passage is not to be
> taken lightly at all.
Above point applies in this case also. Why take escape exit? There is
a direct way. Respect the law of the country.

> Again, take the entirety into consideration and please, please, if you
> are interested in these matters, get a good grounding in fundamental
> principles of dharma, SAstra and SishTAcAra. As a kartA, one always
> have the choice to do, not to do or to do otherwise. It is in the "doing
> otherwise" that you have to worry about whether how you do an act
> is in line with dharma or not. In choosing not to do, the problem only
> arises in not doing action that is absolutely enjoined. For actions that
> are totally kAmya, there is absolutely no loss of dharma if you choose
> not to do it. First internalize well the fundamental understanding of
> nitya, naimittika and kAmya karmA, along with the restrictions imposed
> by adhikAra, then talk about these matters.
But what is position of Dharma Sastra books like Nirnaya Sindhu in
your opinion? You think they cannot prohibit things not prohibited by
Sruti? Kindly answer this.



More information about the Advaita-l mailing list