[Advaita-l] Knowledge, renunciation and varNASrama rules

Venkatesh Murthy vmurthy36 at gmail.com
Thu Aug 19 12:12:51 CDT 2010

On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 1:19 AM, Vidyasankar Sundaresan
<svidyasankar at hotmail.com> wrote:
> Now you clarify the following. You claim that you are not talking of the daNDa,
> kAshAya vastra and kamaNDalu, but of leaving wife and family, possessions
> and titles behind. What is going to be your take on someone like vidura who
> has the brahmajnAna and has no desire to stay at home, but only wishes to>
> be brahmasaMstha for the rest of his natural life? What about someone like
> sulabhA, if she does not want to get married and produce children? Or, for
> that matter, if she is old and done with her family responsibilities and wants
> to leave everything behind and remain brahmasaMstha for the rest of her
> natural life? Is it your stance that the one's SUdra status and the other's strI
> status mean that being brahmasaMstha is impossible for them? What happens
> to the sage conclusion of Sankara bhagavatpAda in sUtrabhAshya 1.3.38 - na
> Sakyate ... pratisheddhum? Do you mean to say that they can (or should) stay
> in their usual routine, never renounce, and will still be brahmasaMstha and
> liberated? What happens then to the other sage argument in 3.4.20 that only
> the renouncer can be brahmasaMstha? So, the brAhmaNa male who gets
> brahmajnAna should renounce everything, as he incurs sin FOR NOT formally
> and really renouncing his life prior to brahmajnAna. But the strI or the SUdra
> male who gets brahmajnAna should NOT renounce anything, as they will incur
> sin FOR renouncing? What sort of logic is that? Note that if you say that a strI
> or SUdra can never get brahmajnAna without future birth as a brAhmaNa male,
> that stance has already been refuted by Sankara bhagavatpAda when he admits
> the possibility that pUrva-saMskAra-s may lead to brahmajnAna, like vidura
> and dharmavyAdha.
> Assuming that you agree there is internal consistency within the sUtrabhAshya
> about varNa, ASrama and adhikAra, please address every one of the points I
> have raised above, and tell me exactly where I am misinterpreting the bhAshya.

Namaste Sri Vidyasankar

Thank you. I will go through it carefully before my reply.

But kindly explain what do you think about 3 4.26 just few sutras
after 3 4.20.  Adi Sankara has said Vedic Yajnas and other Asrama
karmas are necessary for Utpatti of Vidya even though not after Vidya
rises.  He does not say some other secular karmas. How Sudras and
Stris can perform these Vedic Karmas?

Moreover in 3 4.38 he says widowers and other Brahmins outside Asramas
can do japa worship and other acts to get same effect as Asramis. But
don't again say these can be Sudras and Stris.  He does not say these
outside Asrama persons can be Sudras and Stris.

These are referenced again in Jabala Sruti 'Atha Punareva Vratee Va
Avratee Va Snatako Va Asnatako Va Utsannagnir Anagniko Va' in 3 4.20
about Anadhikrutas. What do you say for this Sruti sentence?



> Regards,
> Vidyasankar
> _______________________________________________
> 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

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list