[Advaita-l] Knowledge, renunciation and varNASrama rules

Vidyasankar Sundaresan svidyasankar at hotmail.com
Thu Aug 26 12:08:26 CDT 2010

> > You have still not addressed the other major issue, that of pUrvakRta
> > saMskAra that leads to jnAna, as per 1.3.38. May I also point out that
> > a close study of the commentary on sUtra-s 3.4.1-19 is necessary before
> > jumping to 3.4.20? It sets out in what way jnAna is independent of the
> > adhikAra for karmA. Neither is jnAna an accessory or result of karmA nor
> > is it necessary that someone with qualification for jnAna should be bound
> > to karmA because of incidental factors. The jAbAla Sruti "yad ahar eva
> > virajet tad ahar eva pravrajet" is a universal statement, with its only
> > requirement being the ripeness of vairAgya.
> >
> But not neglecting 3.4.26. This is very important Sutra. Karma is
> necessary for Citta Suddhi. It will remove obstruction. Jnanotpatti is
> from Karma. Adi Sankara has accepted this. Karma is necessary for
> Jnanotpatti. Utpattau Karmani Apekshyante. Vidura and Dharmavyadha
> are exception cases. but it proves they had Citta Suddhi by Karma in
> past lives.

We are going around in circles in this conversation. My point is that citta
Suddhi leading to jnAna from past lives did not ensure brAhmaNa janma
even for these exceptional cases. Therefore, you cannot make a general
rule that a strI or a SUdra needs to obtain a future janma in a brAhmaNa 
male body before attaining jnAna. That is all. You are focused on karmA
and adhikAra, which is okay in its own realm, but note that jnAna involves
renouncing karmA, at least in Sankara's book. Now if you say that strI-s
and SUdra-s have no adhikAra for vaidika karmA (a point debated with 
many different opinions on both sides in the dharmaSAstra-s), because
you cannot assign them to any specific ASrama, and that they also have
no adhikAra to renounce even their regular non-vaidika karmA, because
you cannot conceive of them stepping out of the bounds of their gender
or varNa, you are effectively saying that brahman/Atman is always limited
by gender and caste, and that jnAna is strictly a result of performing karmA
- this position is diametrically opposed to that of Sankara bhagavatpAda.

Please move out of the arguing in circles and address one or more of the
numerous other points I have made so far earlier in this thread.

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list