Gita Bhashya -Sankara 823

Shri Sankara's Gita Bhashya

(Sri Sankaracharya's Commentary on the Gita)

CHAPTER -18

Moreover, since the trouble in performing the nitya-agnihotra [fire-worship as an obligatory (i.e. motiveless) duty] and the kāmya-agnihotra (fire-worship with a motive) is the same, there can be no reason for such distinction as that the trouble and pain involved in the performance of the nitya-agniholra is alone the effect of past sins, while the trouble and pain involved in the kāmya-agnihotra is not; and consequently it would follow that the latter is also the result of sins committed in the past. Such being the case, it would be wrong to make the supposition by arthāpatti (pre­ sumption or inference employed to account for an apparent in­ consistency!'0) that, since no mention is made in Śruti of the fruit of nitya-karma and since its injunction is not otherwise accountable, the trouble and pain involved in the performance of nitya-karma is the fruit of sins committed in the past. Thus, for the very reason that the injunction (as to nitya-karma) is not otherwise explicable, we should even inter that the nitya-karmas have fruits different from the trouble and pain involved in their performance. There is also the fault of inconsistency (in the statements of the objector). When it is accepted (by the objector) that through the performance of the nitya-ka;ma the fruit of other action (past sins) is being experienced, such experience itself is the fruit of nitya-karma; and to assert that there is no fruit for nitya-karma is therefore inconsistent.