The Fire and the Renouncer
May someone who has come to know the self walk away from the household fire that scripture commands him to keep for life? The long introduction answers before a single line of the Upanishad is explained.
The ritualists had texts on their side: offer the fire sacrifice as long as you live, every man is born owing three debts, the dead are burned with their sacrificial vessels. Śaṅkara replies that knowledge of the self leaves nothing for an act to achieve, and that a command binds only someone who still wants its result. The debts fall on the householder, so a student who never married may become a wandering renouncer at once. Even the seer Vāmadeva, who knew the self in the womb, serves the argument.
- renunciation
- ritual action
- ritual
- scriptural authority
- scriptural interpretation
- karma
- liberation
- self-knowledge
- knowledge
- desire
- scripture
- action
Enter a dialogue
- Your ritualist objectors say a man is cremated with his sacrificial vessels, so he must tend the sacred fire until he dies. What is wrong with that argument?
- Scripture says everyone is born owing debts to sages, gods and ancestors. Why may a young student, on your reading, renounce home without paying them?
- A person no longer wants anything their duties could bring them. Why, on your account, do those duties stop binding that person?
- Knowledge of the self, you argue, leaves nothing for any act to achieve. What then is the long ritual text this Upanishad sits inside still good for?
- Vāmadeva, a seer, knew the self while still in his mother's womb, the Upanishad says. What does a knower who never kept a fire show you about rites?