Varnaashrama

[Guest guest]

Just as an aside, it might be a good idea, if you know you are

replying to multiple messages with multiple subjects, that you divide

up your response into several replies with appropriately title

subjects. This way, we can make the messages easier to read and refer

to, and encourage discussion amongst those who wish to respond to

specific points. I have therefore taken the first step here by

dividing my reply into each of the subjects mentioned (varnaashrama,

Chaitanya, nirguna, etc), each of which makes for worthy discussion

by itself. This might help us to do more justice to each issue.

 

achintya, Sanjay Dadlani <dark_knight_9> wrote:

 

> So can you please provide some of these Shastric

> examples that supposedly backup the "birth" system of

> Varnashrama, so that we may discuss?

 

I myself am not familiar with such references, because I do not

believe they exist. I have always historically argued AGAINST the "by-

birth" system, and that too with explicit pramaanas.

 

I actually corresponded with Sri Ranganathan, and it turns out that

the Sri Vaishnava individual he mentioned happens to be an internet

friend of mine whom I have always known to be a nice Vaishnava and a

gentleman. He (not Sri Ranganathan but the individual whose arguments

he is bringing up) would always argue that varna is fixed by birth

with arguments like the following:

 

1) varna does not change - i.e. we have individuals like Yudhisthira

and Arjuna who were clearly better than brahmins, but nevertheless

continued to be known and functioned as kshatriyas

2) BG does say that by guna and karma varnaashrama is created. Thus,

by birth one gets the appropriate guna and karma for his/her varna.

3) Those few examples of a great sage who changes his varna are

exceptions to the rule, and cannot be used to say that birth does not

fix varna.

 

My responses, in a nutshell, were usually like this:

 

1) Varna does not *usually* change after one receives diksha. I

conceed that a kshatriya like Arjuna is always known as a kshatriya

by convention. However, this still does not demonstrate that before

diksha, his varna was fixed as such.

 

2) The fact that anyone can change his varna, even after thousands of

years, shows that varna is by no means rigid, even if it were fixed

at birth

 

3) The idea that one gets, by birth, the appropriate guna and karma

is interpolation. No such statement is there in the "chaturvarnam

maya srishtaa guna karmaa vibhaagaShah" verse (BG chapter 4).

 

4) There are explicit pramaanas from Vajrasuuchika Upanishad which

state that one does not become a brahmin by birth, and then it goes

on to give examples of brahmins who did not have brahminical birth,

such as Vishvaamitra, Agastya, Vyaasa, and so on. Please the GV verse

list for the specifics.

 

In such a case, such a

> sadhana-siddha devotee would then live the rest of his

> life practising pure devotional service PERFECTLY

> according to all religious principles. Part of his

> "dharma" may be to get married and have children to

> set an example to all other devotees. Since he is a

> sadhana-siddha and is carrying out the process

> perfectly, he will not be subject to maya and will

> thus not fall down.

 

Perhaps I should not have said "prema bhakti" but used some other

term. I was referring to devotees who are not quite on the level of

pure devotion in Vaikuntha, but rather at some penultimate stage at

which there is still a theoretical risk of falldown, however remote.

 

If you read Srila Prabhupada's purport to "sarva dharmaan

parityajya..." verse, it is clear that he speaks of giving up things

that are not conducive to Krishna-consciousness. Varnaashrama is

briefly mentioned in this context (see purport BG 18.66):

 

"The Lord has described various kinds of knowledge and processes of

religion -- knowledge of the Supreme Brahman, knowledge of the

Supersoul, KNOWLEDGE OF THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF ORDERS AND STATUSES OF

SOCIAL LIFE, KNOWLEDGE OF THE RENOUNCED ORDER OF LIFE, knowledge of

nonattachment, sense and mind control, meditation, etc. He has

described in so many ways different types of religion. Now, in

summarizing Bhagavad-gita, the Lord says that Arjuna should give up

all the processes that have been explained to him; he should simply

surrender to Krishna. That surrender will save him from all kinds of

sinful reactions, for the Lord personally promises to protect him."

 

The emphasis above is mine.

 

Clearly, Srila Prabhupada includes varnaashrama dharma in the list of

things which Krishna is advising Arjuna to give up. Why is this?

Given that varnaashrama dharma is helpful for most of us in Krishna-

consciousness, are there some levels of devotion at which

varnaashrama dharma could be considered a hindrance? I am referring

to those devotees who are not quite on the level of pure devotion,

but are nevertheless at such an exalted level that they do not feel

motivated to get married. Of course, many devotees fool themselves

into thinking that they don't want to get married, but if they

experience material desire then such thoughts are just self-delusion.

The position of a devotee who is really qualified to surrender in

this way has got to be as exalted as Arjuna was.

 

> Again we can remember the statement of Srila

> Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura that he himself was

> prepared to have sex even a hundred times to beget

> Krsna-conscious children. Whether he may have actually

> done so is not the point, but marriage and children

> and other so-called "falldown practices" should not

> pose a problem for a pure devotee.

 

How do we define a "pure devotee" in this context? Certainly if we

are talking about someone who has attained prema bhakti, then I agree

with you. But then again, such a person wouldn't even be in the

material world, so what question is there of his wanting to get

married? On the other hand there are many other devotees who are

certainly very exalted, but who take to marriage. Clearly, we do not

think less of them.

 

For all of us, marriage according to Vedic principles is clearly

conducive to Krishna-consciousness, because it keeps us with one

spouse and forces us to subordinate our baser instincts according to

scriptural injunctions. But what about an individual who does not

experience those baser instincts, but is not yet having prema bhakti?

Why should such a person be married? And is such a person not

justified in rejecting marriage according to the principle of

surrender? The 10,000 sons of Daksha Prajaapati rejected their

father's desire that they procreate after Naarada inspired them. If

they were such pure devotees that they could just give it up and go

to Vaikuntha, then why not just stay in the material world and become

householders in Krishna-consciousness?

 

> How do we get sense gratification if we perform

> varnashrama-dharma to please Krishna? Isn't that

> invalid on the basis of hrsikena hrisikesa-sevanam

> bhaktir ucyate? One may say that this is not

 

Most saadhana-bhaktas don't get married because they want to serve

Krishna. They get married because they have material desires, and

they recognize that marriage is a lawful approach to serving Krishna

while having this "so-called enjoyment" as Srila Prabhupada called

it. This is the kind of situation I was referring to.

 

> and having your senses become purified. I have never

> heard it said that one can perform varnashrama to

> please Krishna and yet get sense gratification too?

> Please explain.

 

Certainly that kind of sense gratification may not cause falldown, if

it is done according to Vedic principles. But the point I was making

is that the desire was there for sense gratification, even if it

ultimately is subordinated to Krishna's service.

 

> >> I'm very Thankful for having such adiscussion

> group. There was a time when I did not know where to

> discuss specifically about the Gaudiya Vaishnava

> sampradaya.All glories to Achintya Group!! <<

>

> JAI !! Jai Achintya! Jai Krishna Susarla Prabhu for

> creating it!

 

Please don't praise me. My body is so fragile that if you pat my

back, my head could grow bigger. That said, thank you for

participating in and enjoying Achintya. I'm immensely gratified that

the devotees have always commented positively about it.

 

ys,

 

- K