[Advaita-l] Result of karma where result is not mentioned
lalitaalaalitah at lalitaalaalitah.com
Fri Dec 25 10:37:24 CST 2015
On Fri, Dec 25, 2015 at 3:05 PM, Praveen R. Bhat <bhatpraveen at gmail.com>
> Namaste Swamiji,
> On Thu, Dec 24, 2015 at 10:32 PM, श्रीमल्ललितालालितः <
> lalitaalaalitah at lalitaalaalitah.com> wrote:
>> No difference. You just went for sUtra-s, while I mentioned adhikaraNa-s.
> Okay, thanks.
>> I'll try to write something.
>> But, it will be better if you could present your present understanding of
>> three adhikaraNa-s and the problems you are facing.
>> Then I will be able to help you understand the parts which are tricky or
> Here is what I understand:
> - All karmas given as vidhis in the Shruti have a result,
> First you will have to correct your wording, which will come out from
understanding of correct usage. I'll correct the first part of sentence as:
All karma-s prescribed by vidhivAkya-s.
Because karma is not same as vidhi.
karma is dhAtvartha, i.e. yAga, homa, etc.
vidhi is pravarttanA = shAbdabhAvanA = specific desire of pravarttaka, one
who is trying to generate pravRtti in other person.
Take the example of father and son. Father wishes that his son should study
and so utters a sentence - study that book. Here father is pravarttaka, he
is trying to generate pravRtti for study in his son. So, his desire is
vidhi. That is expressed by usage of vidhi-pratyaya(liN,loT, tavya, etc.)
So, karma is different from vidhi.
Hence, you can't use 'karma-s given as vidhi' which expresses abheda or
tAdAtmya of both.
> - because Vedas do not prescribe actions without result.
> (Interestingly, while going through the sutras that lead to adhikaraNa
> 4.3.5, I found that the exception to this is when the reward is in relation
> to the materials; then it is arthavAda).
> It appears incomplete as presented here. So, I'll add a little.
svAdhyAyodhyetavyaH prescribes adhyayana of svashAkhA. The prescription
will be useless if no one does adhyayanam of svashAkhA after hearing
vidhi-vAkya. And, people don't do anything without being lured by result.
So, the shruti, which is svataH-pramANa and is devoid of blemishes being
bereft of pauruSheyatva, forces us to imagine(do arthApatti of) some
result related to adhyayana to save it's validity.
This result can not be adRShTa, because arthaGYAna(knowledge of meaning of
veda-vAkya-s) is visible result(dRShTa-falam). But, mere artha-GYAna is not
enough for pravRtti in a student, since it is duHkha-rUpa owing to it's
kriyAtva. In other words, knowledge is not pleasure, instead for knowledge
we have to break inertia, so it is cause of pain; hence no one will work to
produce knowledge if the knowledge itself is ultimate result of that kriyA.
Nor can it be veda or it's saMskAra, etc. because they are not
sukharUpa(pleasure) and hence puruShArtha(desirable). No one desires
anything which is neither sukha(pleasure) nor it's means.
So, to make vedAdhyayana equipped with such a fruit which motivates
student, we imagine results(which are desired by puruSha) related with
meaning of veda without neglecting the arthaGYAna(which is dRShTafala) .
> - If the result is not directly given or mentioned in the proximity,
> they are to be inferred by connection with remotely mentioned result.
> Inferred? If it is equal to anumAna, then we can't agree.
I'll prefer arthApatti or imagination.
Another thing, mImAMsaka-s are dealing with words and sentences directly
and their meaning indirectly. They are trying to get best meaning of
veda-s, which are in the form of vAkya-s. So, they will make the vidhivAkya
complete by anuSha~Nga of fala-vAchaka-pada from elsewhere. They are not
going to imagine a result directly. Why ? Because the imagination of
artha(result) is not going to make the sentence complete. You can complete
a sentence with word(shabda), not with artha(result).
So, 4.35 says that the word which reminds result will be dragged to present
sentence and it will save vaidikatva of the sentence.
And 4.3.6 ponders upon what should be the word, will it be reminder of any
result or all results or a single one; and if single one, then which one
was decided in 4.3.7.
Please, note that exact words in commentaries may not be same, because it
is understood as default in mImAMsA-system.
It applies to vedAnta too, if we are talking about vAkya-s, either avAntara
But, I mentioned it to reveal the secret of that system.
> - There are karmas which may be subsidiary to a main karma which have
> the same result as the main result, being part of it.
> This is not connected to present problem.
> - If the result is not found to be connected elsewhere, it is svargaH,
> by ekavAkyatA, since it (happiness) is desired by all.
> I can't understand this sentence.
I will prefer:
If the result (= word reminding result) is not found in present
vidhi-vAkya, then it is svarga(the word svarga).
I also don't understand why you said ekavAkyatA.
I will prefer :
because it is pramANa and is pravarttka which can't be justified without a
> - Although this is discussed in the context of kAmyakarma, the same
> applies to nityanaimittika karma also.
> Not true from point of view of mImAmsaka-s.
vishvajidadhikaraNa-nyAya applies to kAmya-s.
Here what I know is:
By the definition, pApa-prAgabhAva-pariraxaNa(saving the lack of birth of
pApa) is AnuSha~Ngika-fala of nitya-naimittika-karma. It is not which is
needed to motivate people to do them.
pravRtti-prayojaka(motivator) in cases of nitya-naimittika-karma is
nimitta, as life or sUrya-chandroparAga, etc.
As fala is not pravRtti-prayojaka. So, we don't need to imagine any result
While bhagavatpAda adds to it:
न च नित्यनैमित्तिकानुष्ठानात् प्रत्यवायानुत्पत्तिमात्रम्, न पुनः
फलान्तरोत्पत्तिः इति प्रमाणमस्ति, फलान्तरस्याप्यनुनिष्पादिनः सम्भवात् ;
स्मरति हि आपस्तम्बः — ‘तद्यथा आम्रे फलार्थे निमित्ते छायागन्धावनूत्पद्येते
एवं धर्मं चर्यमाणम् अर्था अनूत्पद्यन्ते’ इति ।
> The difficulty right now is the last point, (assuming the others are
> correct) that whether the inference is correct in relation to nityakarma
No, since even without imagination of any other result vidhi-vAkya is
enough to generate pravRtti just because the nimitta is available.
Since अकुर्वन्विहितं कर्म ----नरः पतनमृच्छति says that negligence of karma
causes fall, so to avoid the fall people will perform the karma, even when
it is not going to generate any other result.
That's because as we desire pleasure and hence it's means, so we desire to
avoid pain and it's means.
So, even if we don't imagine svarga as result and do not bring reminder
word from elsewhere, people will perform nitya-naimittika-karma. So, the
validity of vidhi-vAkya-s will stay intact.
And, other cause of not imagining result is that there are vAkya-s (धर्मेण
पापमपनुदति) which clearly says that pApa-xaya is result of
We have कर्मणा पितृलोकः shruti too.
And, यज्ञेन विविदिषन्ति ।
And तपसा कल्मषं हन्ति ।
bhAShya reads :
नित्यानामपि कर्मणाम् इह फलवत्त्वस्य उपपादितत्वात् ‘यज्ञो दानं तपश्चैव
पावनानि’ (भ. गी. १८-५) इत्यादिना वचनेन ।
So, by संयोगपृथक्त्वन्याय nitya-namittika-karma can produce many results.
> The next question is what is the Vedanta view w.r.t. this.
vedAnta also says same that pApa-xaya, etc. are results of
धर्मेण पापमपनुदति etc are shruti-s. So we vedAntin-s can't neglect them. We
are aupaniShada-s. We are not independent inquirers, as many famous persons
Would it also be possible to cover the flip side of this, which is akaraNe
> pratyavAya shrUyate as says Bhashyakara; is it traceable to Shruti vAkya/
smRiti is able to cover this:
अकुर्वन् विहितं कर्म निन्दितं च समाचरन् ।
प्रसञ्जञ्श्चेन्द्रियार्थेषु नरः पतनमृच्छति ॥
If I find/remember any shruti/nyAya, I'll write it later.
Till then this post should not be kept as draft. So, pressing send button
> --Praveen R. Bhat
> /* Through what should one know That owing to which all this is known!
> [Br.Up. 4.5.15] */
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list