Already Vaisnavas?

[Guest guest]

>If a person clearly has the nature and predominant qualities of a sudra,

>why desperately fight it?

 

BG (4.13): caturvarnyam maya srstam guna-karma-vibhagasah. "According to the

three modes of material nature and the work ascribed to them, the four

divisions of human society were created by Me."

 

So based on the modes or qualities of the person he is designated as shudra

or brahmana. Also I quoted earlier how Srila Prabhupada defines it by the

level of intelligence. Bhagavata Purana Prabhu has presented that shudra is

also defined by his lack of faith in Krsna's protection. He wrote:

 

>because he doesn´t have fear. The ksatriya has less faith, so he arrange

>something to get the taxes; the vaisya has less faith and engages in

>commerce and agriculture; the sudra has not faith, so he works for others.

 

Leaving aside occupation of the person, all of this things should be

changed. One has to get free from the modes of material nature. And yes it

may be a struggle for some and easy for others. Yes one has to educate

oneself in the science of Krsna one has to approach a spiritual master "Not

for some material thing but if you want Krsna". And the faith should

progress.

 

<<Nectar of Devotion, Ch 10, Techniques of Hearing and Remembering.

 

In the Tenth Canto, Fourteenth Chapter, verse 8, it is said, "My dear Lord,

any person who is constantly awaiting Your causeless mercy to be bestowed

upon him, and who goes on suffering the resultant actions of his past

misdeeds, offering You respectful obeisances from the core of his heart, is

surely eligible to become liberated, for it has become his rightful claim."

This statement of Srimad-Bhagavatam should be the guide of all devotees. A

devotee should not expect immediate relief from the reactions of his past

misdeeds. No conditioned soul is free from such reactionary experiences,

because material existence means continued suffering or enjoying of past

activities.>>

 

You write:

>Most of the people in this world are sudras by

>nature, so it is natural that those who have their main qualities in the

>sudra category should be trained to enhance those qualities.

 

I see it this way: one who has no qualities of vaisya, ksatriya, brahmana,

should be trained to get ones. Yes I agree that most of people of the world

are shudras (or less), but shudra(or less) is not one who has qualities but

one who doesn't. I know that vedic shudra is very qualified compared to the

standards of the present day, but I'm using this word the same way as you

'most people of the world'. So someone who FAILS to be brahmana, kshatriya,

vaisya, can be shudra.

 

>I see no

>point in focusing too much on trying to change their nature, especially if

>they don't want it themselves.

 

If someone doesn't want to change his nature it is spiritual masters duty to

incourage him. To get qualities that are needed. To get the best faith.

 

Ok. Forgetting about the qualities. Regarding the practical engagement of

the person in 'shudras' work. That is perfect if applied in the service of

Krsna. Prabhupada would personally teach his disciples to do certain types

of work. BUT HE NEVER said that this was so that his disciples will remain

shudras. Rather he wanted by performing this work to become brahmanas,

gurus. And he wanted it from all of his disciples.

 

>... not a sudra, but a vaisnava. If he gets most properly situated in

>spiritual life while serving as a sudra, then what is the problem for the

>Guru to train him to become a sudra? If not, I agree that it is invalid to

>train him as a sudra.

 

Yes it is possible for a person to be most properly situated in his

spiritual life and do work of shudra or be shudra by qualities and work. But

it is not a permanent stage. It is not the svabhava and not the sreyas for

the devotees. And guru cannot say that he wants this or that disciple to be

shudra becouse it is perfection for him. Prabhupada never said it to

relation to any of his disciples, sorry.

 

I just remembered this letter Prabhupada wrote to one of his disciples where

he was saying that there is no need for him to train his son in the same

profession that he is doing himself (this particular devotee was from

Australia, I think Bharadvaja Pr.) and he was doing dioramas from clay and

straw. Something he learned from indian workers. Prabhupada said that he may

ask him to do some different job for Krsna next.

 

Also the approach to the guru (taking view of the disciple) should be to get

perfection not the comfortable situation:

 

<<Teaching of Lord Kapila, Ch 4:

One should approach a guru to learn about tattva, the Absolute Truth. One

should not search out a guru to cure some material disease; rather, one

requires a doctor. Similarly, people think that if a person can make him

successful in business, that person is a guru. The sastras do not confirm

this either. A guru is one who knows the Vedas and the Vedic conclusion. The

Vedic conclusion is the understanding of Krsna. Vedais ca sarvair aham eva

vedyah: "By all the Vedas, I am to be known." (Bg. 15.15)>>

 

lecturing on the BG Srila Prabhupada said in 1973:

 

<<The sudra has no initiation. So in India there are

professional gurus. They initiate shudras, but do not eat foodstuff touched

by the disciple. So there are so many things.. If he's initiated, how he can

remain sudra?>>

 

You said:

 

>But I think it is pretty obvious that one has to look at each individual.

 

Agreed.

 

>To say that the Guru should not train anyone as shudras would be, according

>to my understanding, to take things out of context.

 

Maybe depends what is the context. For me the context is what actually

Prabhupada set as the example. He wanted to go to Gita Nagari to teach his

disciples how to live of the land (as vaisyas). He trained some of his man

as organizers (kshatrias) ("Therefore we have created these GBC. So they

should be very responsible men. Otherwise, they will be punished. They will

be punished to become a sudra." LSB 06.04.1974) And he also trained his

disciples to be brahmanas, but there are falldowns (and gross ones you

know).

 

Mayapur Conversation, 1977: <<Satsvarupa: If in our society we say, "Srila

Prabhupada wants some to be

sudra..."

 

Prabhupada: No, no, no. I DON'T WANT. I want everyone to become Vaisnava.

But because he's a sudra, it is not possible to bring him immediately to the

platform of brahmana, or Vaisnava. Therefore falling down. Therefore system

must be. But even if he remains a sudra, he's a Vaisnava.>>

 

Note the words 'even if he remains' and 'immediately'. Yes we should give

training to shudras. But not to remain shudras but to be elevated, not

automatically but through education. How many of the devotees who work for

you in your factory in Norway get regular and nourishing Vaisnava education?

Do you truly belive all of the them got all the chances they could to become

educated brahmanas? Or educated ksatrias or vaishyas who know how live off

the land?

 

 

ys

 

Caitanya candrodaya das