Disclaimer: This translation does not guarantee complete accuracy, please confirm with the original page text.
## 54
**Pindaniyukti** (Pindaniyukti) leads to the downfall of the soul. The **Moolachar** (Moolachar) illustrates this point through an example: A monk who stands in **Viraasana** (Viraasana), practices **Kayotsarga** (Kayotsarga), maintains silence, meditates, fasts, and observes **bela** (bela), but is still involved in **Aadhkarma** (Aadhkarma) food consumption, renders all his efforts futile.
An **Aadhkarma** (Aadhkarma) eater not only binds his lifespan to a downward path but also directs other karmas towards the same. He accumulates karmas every moment, intensifying the binding and extraction of karmas associated with intense emotions. These heavy karmas drag him down.
An **Aadhkarma** (Aadhkarma) eater, by consuming food, harms the life force and beings, and also destroys his own knowledge, perception, and conduct. Therefore, **Aadhkarma** (Aadhkarma) is also called **Aatmaghna** (Aatmaghna) - the destroyer of the self. According to the text, the destruction of conduct leads to the destruction of knowledge and perception. However, from a practical perspective, the destruction of conduct leads to the loss of knowledge and perception.
An **Aadhkarma** (Aadhkarma) eater, consumed by negative emotions, connects himself to the actions of others, particularly the **Parakarma** (Parakarma) - the actions of householders, such as cooking and eating. Due to the complex consequences, he binds himself to karmas. Therefore, **Aadhkarma** (Aadhkarma) is also called **Aatmakarma** (Aatmakarma) - the action of the self.
A question arises regarding **Aatmakarma** (Aatmakarma): How can the actions of others be transferred? If this were possible, then a monk who has attained the **Kshapaka** (Kshapaka) stage could, out of compassion, absorb the karmas of others and destroy them. However, this is never possible.
In response to this question, Acharya Yashobhadrasurī presented the example of a deer and a trap. Explaining this, the commentator Malayagiri states that a skilled and vigilant deer avoids traps. Even if it gets caught in a trap, it escapes before the trap is closed. However, a careless and unskilled deer gets trapped. Therefore, simply being in the presence of others does not lead to karmic bondage. Similarly, simply preparing **Aadhkarma** (Aadhkarma) food by a householder does not bind the monk to **papakarma** (papakarma) - negative karma. A monk who, due to carelessness, consumes **Aadhkarma** (Aadhkarma) food with negative intentions, makes promises, associates with **Aadhkarma** (Aadhkarma) eaters, and approves of their actions, binds himself to the actions of others, particularly the **Parakarma** (Parakarma) - the actions of householders, such as cooking and eating.