[Advaita-l] {भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्} Jnani should give up karma why? from Shankara-bhashya

[Krishna Kashyap]

in particular my question is here:

यामिमां ब्राह्मीमुपनिषदं तवाग्रेऽब्रूमेति तस्यै तस्या उक्ताया उपनिषदः
प्राप्त्युपायभूतानि तपआदीनि । तपः कायेन्द्रियमनसां समाधानम् । दमः उपशमः ।
कर्म अग्निहोत्रादि । एतैर्हि संस्कृतस्य सत्त्वशुद्धिद्वारा
तत्त्वज्ञानोत्पत्तिर्दृष्टा ।

here once a person gets satva shuddhi through agnihotra, tapas, dama and so
on, if automatically one gets tatva jnana, then why does shankaracharya
denies that status of anga, sahakari karana and so on for the karma
portion, which includes these agnihotra and so on?

this is the question. I dont know of a clear answer here.


*Best Regards,*

*Krishna Kashyap*




On Thu, Dec 12, 2024 at 8:09 PM Krishna Kashyap <kkashyap2011 at gmail.com>
wrote:

> I am studying Kena Upanishad. at the end of 4th khanda, there is a
> discussion about why Jnani should give up karma. the vedadhyayana and other
> karmas are unnecessary for moksha. This kind of discussion occurs in all of
> Prasthana scriptures commented by Shankaracharya.
>
> If you see kena upanishad bhashya, invariably there will be a reference to
> bramhasutra bhashya or some brihadaranyaka or chandogya sentence. Has
> anyone done a document that indicates the root of all such arguments and
> why Shankaracharya is denying jnana-karma samucchaya or anga-angi bhava
> between jnana and karma?. Even in Isavasya, the same concept comes up.
> However, in every Upanishad or gita bhashya, there are a lot of references
> that go back to either Brahma sutra bhashya or some brihadaranyaka or other
> Upanishad bhashya.
>
> Obviously, if anyone quotes for example kena upanishad bhashya line to
> justify isavasya line, and vice-versa, that becomes a game or cyclic
> dependency issue.
>
> Has someone studied this issue and come up with a concept as to why
> Shankaracharya is against karma being an anga for jnana?
>
> I know we can study any particular upanishad bhashya of Shankaracharya and
> go on a linear line by line understanding. However, he often emphatically
> suggests how can you mix light and darkness? tejas timira iva? and all such
> powerful statements to prove this point. However, where is the root of such
> arguments? This is an academic study I am thinking about where the entire
> concept of why karma cannot be an anga for jnana. If so why karmas are
> prescribed and to whom? how does one transcend from being a karma-doer to a
> karma-ignorer?
>
> I am particularly looking for the concept behind it.
> I have come across things like seeing a serpent in a dream you cannot take
> a stick and chase it away. You have to get out of the dream state and then
> know there is no serpent to start with and you don't need a stick or
> action. so here the idea is ajnana is the reason for action. if one has
> atmaikya jnana no karma is possible. the problem is in the phase of
> sadhana, where does one give up and when should a person never give up.
>
> All these are stray concepts. I want the definitive concept and upanishad
> reference proof which is the origin behind why the shastras keep on
> insisting and prescribing so many karmas to people and at the same time a
> jnani should stay away from karmas.
>
> I know that if one knows that there is one entity atman, which is nitya,
> shuddha, buddha, mukta, nishkriya, shanta and so on, in addition to knowing
> that there is nothing else other than that atman, Obviously karma becomes
> superfluous and a jnani cannot do karma, since he is not an agent nor does
> he need something to achieve to start with. Where exactly is this concept
> first referenced in shankara bhashya so that we can avoid looking at so
> many upanishads and jump right to the origin of that argument within
> shankara bhashya.
>
> I prefer only shankara bhashya and not the later authors of advaita. Not
> that I don't respect them. However, I want to avoid post-Shankara-advaita
> branches and deal with the words of Shankaracharya only for now.
>
> sorry for the repetitive thoughts. I had to point out my question clearly
> and I have repeated some thoughts.
>
> *Best Regards,*
>
> *Krishna Kashyap*
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to bvparishat+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CANkLSM%3DqX7raBPk9LM%2B%3Dd0yLKGXzXJf9e7WSyjtDxMzQo6o6uA%40mail.gmail.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bvparishat/CANkLSM%3DqX7raBPk9LM%2B%3Dd0yLKGXzXJf9e7WSyjtDxMzQo6o6uA%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .
>