[Advaita-l] Nitya Karma question

[Kathirasan K]

Namaste ji,

I find your views consistent with mine generally, except the following which
I would like to clarify:

1. karmaNA pitR^ilokaH - is the shruti which says that karma result in
achievement of pitR^iloka. This is opposed to sha~Nkara's view apparently.

KK: Why is there a compulsion to confine the above reference to 'karma' as
nitya karma exclusively? Why can't it be generally seen as it encompassing
all karmas including kamya karmas? Shankara mentions generally 'karmas such
as the agnihotra' for the above quotation of yours. (see Brhadaranyaka
Upanishad bhashya 1.5.16).

2. You are supporting view of sha~Nkara that non-performance doesn't harm.
So, how could you hold this ? You need to explain- is what I meant.

KK: I am supporting the view of Shankara because it is logically tenable and
consistent with the Upanishads (Shankara quotes Chandogya mantra 4.2.2 for
his support). The non-performance of nitya karma will allow the pratyavaya
to manifest. Therefore, the non-performance DOES no harm. However, we can
take the view that the non performance does harm PASSIVELY in that it does
not mitigate the manifestation of pratyavaya. So Shankara is not wrong.
Please reconsider your position.

2011/10/4 श्रीमल्ललितालालितः <lalitaalaalitah at gmail.com>

> *श्रीमल्ललितालालितः <http://www.lalitaalaalitah.com>
> lalitAlAlitaH <http://about.me/lalitaalaalitah/bio>*
>
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 06:52, Kathirasan K <brahmasatyam at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Namaste ji,
> >
> > Please my replies:
> >
> > OK.
> > > So says sha~Nkara :
> > > nityAnyadhigatAni karmANyupAttaduritaxayArthAni.
> > > But is there any scriptural proof(from veda-s) to support this view ?
> > >
> >
> > KK: I am sorry I don't know of any from the shruti. I don't have as much
> > references from the karma kanda too.
>
>
> dharmeNa pApamapanudati - is the shruti which says that one destroys pApam
> by dharma.
> By definition of pUrva-mImAMsA "chodanAlaxaNo.artho dharmaH". So, karma-s
> prescribed by veda-s are dharma.
> Now, dharma is of many types - nitya, naimittika, kAmya, prAyashchitta,
> etc.
> Among these kAmya is done to achieve desired things and prAyashchitta to
> destroy specific sins.
> So, rest two, i.e. nitya and naimittika, are left and they are told by word
> dharma in above shruti.
> So, this shruti proves that sha~Nkara-s view has vaidika-basis.
>
> I would be glad to know if there is
> > shruti pramana to show the disagreement with Shankara's view.
> >
>
> karmaNA pitR^ilokaH - is the shruti which says that karma result in
> achievement of pitR^iloka.
> This is opposed to sha~Nkara's view apparently.
>
>
> >  OK.
> > > So, do you mean to say that even a non-saMnyAsI can leave karma-s if he
> > is
> > > ready to face pratyavAya ?
> >
>
> Yes.
> Doing or not doing depends on us.
> Scriptures just tell us that this karma generates desired result and this
> one undesired. We are free to chose.
>
> People may leave karma in these conditions :
>
>   - If they don't accept validity of veda-s and hence doubt paraloka, etc.
>
>
>   - If they accept veda-s instrument of valid knowledge but don't fear
>   naraka, etc. (Actually this means that they don't accept validity of
> veda-s.
>   One who can't bear a wound, if says that he doesn't fear naraka, it only
>   means that he has doubts regarding naraka, veda--s, karma, etc.)
>
>
>   - If they accept validity of veda-s and shun karma according to
>   injunctions of veda-s, i.e., with formal saMnyAsa.
>
>
> So, there is only one way, which is valid, for traivarNika-s to shun karma
> and that is saMnyAsa.
>
> > Is it permitted to not perform nitya-karma without leaving three
> Ashrama-s
> > > ?
> >
>
> Not according to veda-s and shiShTa-s at least because it will cause
> suffering.
> Even if suffering is actually caused by performance of prohibited karma-s;
> nitya, etc. karma-s are provided to us to destroy there cause. So, not
> using
> these tools will only prove us fool.
>
>
> > KK: While it is a mandate for people of the 3 varnas to perform nitya
> > karma,
> >
>
> I was inquiring cause of mandate.
> Anyway, I've provided something above.
>
>
> > there are also others like Shudras, women and nastikas who seem to be
> very
> > comfortable facing their pratyavaya.
>
>
> Actually they have no right to perform nitya, etc. karma to avoid duHkham.
> So, their non-performance is because of unavailability of vaidika-tools and
> not because of stupidity. So, you can't blame them like this.
> And, whatever tool is available to them, as nAma-japa, etc., if not
> performed by them, then your words will fit them.
> But, we are not talking of karma-s prescribed by scriptures other than
> veda-s. So, it's wrong.
>
> As long as one is a ashrami, one should
> > not abandon the nitya karmas.
> >
>
>  I asked why ?
> You are supporting view of sha~Nkara that non-performance doesn't harm. So,
> how could you hold this ? You need to explain- is what I meant.
>
> > On the other hand, it only urges one to do one's
> > > > duties/karmas, especially for mumukshus who aren't sannyasins.
> > > >
> > >
> > > So, non-saMnyAsi-s, who are not-mumuxu-s and are still AshramI,don't
> need
> > > to
> > > perform nitya-karma ?
> > >
> >
> >
> > KK: The keyword is 'especially'.
> >
>
> OK.
> But, read my question. I was not wrong too.
>
> Anyway, I've replied my questions myself.
> _______________________________________________
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
>
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>