Ritual purity in Hinduism
shankara
shankara
Nagaraj Paturi
--
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+...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to bvpar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
--
Nagaraj Paturi
G S S Murthy
and also my Sanskrit blog :
http://simplesanskrit.blogspot.com/
Nagaraj Paturi
V Subrahmanian
In Kannada too the washerman is known as 'maDivALa'.
',prayato bhUtvA' could come close to maDi.
Subrahmanian. V
shankara
shankara
From: Nagaraj Paturi <nagara...@gmail.com>
To: bvpar...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, 21 June 2016 10:40 PM
Subject: Re: {भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्} Ritual purity in Hinduism
Nagaraj Paturi
shankara
shankara
Nagaraj Paturi
shankara
shankara
Nagaraj Paturi
Sivasenani Nori
--
Nagaraj Paturi
shankara
shankara
From: Sivasenani Nori <sivas...@gmail.com>
To: भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत् <bvpar...@googlegroups.com>
Sent: Friday, 24 June 2016 5:02 PM
Subject: Re: {भारतीयविद्वत्परिषत्} Ritual purity in Hinduism
V Subrahmanian
On Jun 24, 2016 5:02 PM, "Sivasenani Nori" <sivas...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Shankar ji
>
> Pranaam.
>
> I know that you asked for texts crticially dealing with how an external event such as a death of a parent is related to a simple act such as going to a temple, but allow me to share my understanding which might be helpful.
>
> The connection between the external event (death of a parent etc.) and the body is the Manas. If there is a connection, then there is sorrow - Soka - in Manas. In such a state, the focus required on a given rite is not possible and hence there is no point in doing kAmyakarmas and nimittakarmas in such a state. Visiting a temple is also a kAmyakarma or a nimittakarma (for instance there is this rule that if we are passing respectable people, we must salute them and proceed further, if our salutation does not disturb them; similarly if we are in a kshetra, we must pay respects to the deity there - then it becomes a nimittakarma); celebrating festivals is a nimittakarma. Since these are optional and since one is not in the frame of mind to do those dedicatedly, they are avoided.
>
> On the other hand, nityakarmas like sandhyAvandanam (and devatArcana and pancamahAyaj~nas, as the learned Professor Nagaraj garu has quoted) need to be done -
Namaste
Can Atithtyam be performed during Ashaucham? Will shishtas come for food to such a house?
Regards
Subrahmanian. V
Nagaraj Paturi
The period here is the first one year, but later to the period of as'oucha.Nagaraj Paturi
Nagaraj Paturi
स पथि गच्छन्नपश्यदृषभमतिप्रमाणं तमधिरूढं च पुरुषमतिप्रमाणमेव। १०१।
स पुरुष उत्तङ्कमभ्यभाषत।
उत्तङ्कैतत्पुरीषमस्य ऋषभस्य भक्षयस्वेति। १०२।
स एवमुक्तो नैच्छत्। १०३।
तमाह पुरुषो भूयः।
भक्षयस्वोत्तङ्क।
मा विचारय।
उपाध्यायेनापि ते भक्षितं पूर्वमिति। १०४।
स एवमुक्तो बाढमित्युक्त्वा तदा तदृषभस्य पुरीषं मूत्रं च भक्षयित्वोत्तङ्कः प्रतस्थे यत्र स क्षत्रियः पौष्यः। १०५।
This leads to 'pollution' of Uttanka on account of which he can not see the wife of Paushya.
Paushya says:
न हि सा क्षत्रिया उच्छिष्टेनाशुचिना वा शक्या द्रष्टुम्।
पतिव्रतात्वादेषा नाशुचेर्दर्शनमुपैतीति। ११२।
Uttanka gets the ability to see her only after physically and ritually cleansing himself :
अथोत्तङ्कस्तथेत्युक्त्वा प्राङ्मुख उपविश्य सुप्रक्षालितपाणिपादवदनोऽशब्दाभिर् हृदयङ्गमाभिरद्भिरुपस्पृश्य त्रिः पीत्वा द्विः परिमृज्य खान्यद्भिरुपस्पृश्यान्तःपुरं प्रविश्य तां क्षत्रियामपश्यत्। ११५।
After returning to his guru's aas'rama, Uttanka requests his guru who the purusha who asked him to eat the pureesha and mootra of the rishabha was and what that rishabha, pureesha and mootra were.
पथि गच्छता मया ऋषभो दृष्टः।
तं च पुरुषोऽधिरूढः।
तेनास्मि सोपचारमुक्तः।
उत्तङ्कास्य ऋषभस्य पुरीषं भक्षय।
उपाध्यायेनापि ते भक्षितमिति।
ततस्तद्वचनान्मया तदृषभस्य पुरीषमुपयुक्तम्।
तदिच्छामि भवतोपदिष्टं किं तदिति। १७१।
Guru replies that that pureesha was amritam.
य ऋषभस्त्वया पथि गच्छता दृष्टः स ऐरावतो नागराजः।
यश्चैनमधिरूढः स इन्द्रः।
यदपि ते पुरीषं भक्षितं तस्य ऋषभस्य तदमृतम्। १७४।
Now, the question is, if that pureesha was amritam, why did its consumption lead to pollution ?
The only tenable answer is : at the time of consumption , Uttanka did not know that it was amritam. So, it was his view of it as pureesha that made its consumption polluting, though that was in fact, amritam.
Stories of this kind from our scriptures instruct us that it is our mind, it is our understanding that decides the purity and/or pollution.