Thanks to JM for the Short Course on VAD Pitfalls

[Guest guest]

Pancha Tattva prabhu wrote:

 

>

> In one sense, the demonstrations of Jivan Mukta and others are very good

> lessons in what to avoid in the on-going dialogue on varnashrama dharma.

 

 

You have just written down my very thoughts about the

"issue".

 

 

 

I have been thinking during the day on what the "normal"

course of the discussion on varnasrama could be, taking

the turn from what we have had this past month or so.

You have mentioned already many points.

 

My essential thought is, "What form/extent of daiva varnasrama

dharma is at all possible forn this age of hypocrisy and quarrel,

Kali-yuga?

 

I am for one more than convinced that "strict" form of VAD,

as seen in the previous yugas, is simply not possible. And

taking more distance from "GHQ-debate", I may more clearly

perceive how the general "strategic" idea of forcing the model

of perfect Vedic woman, in the given circumstances, is simply

not sane. Somebody mentioned "30 years" of ISKCON, so therefore

it is time now for our women to be the perfect Vedic women.

While in the same time the "society" is in the complete

infantile stage where ISKCON brahmacarinis are in fear to say

something openly about their living conditions - the obvious

risk is be thrown out onto the street by their authorities.

 

 

If there is any genuine interest in re-establishing

varnasrama dharma in this world, in whatever extent that

might be, then I would expect it to start first manifesting

itself in some reforms of the *leading* institutions in

ISKCON in term of assuming the traditional vedic models immage.

Like, the reform of sannyasa asram. Like, the separation of

"wordily" affairs from the "spiritual" affairs (thus the function

of "sadhus" in the GBC to be clearly defined). Like outlining

the four varnas and the corresponding performance of the

prescribed duties. Like that. Start from the top. From the

"reformers" themselves. Not from those who are said to be

weaker, always dependent, less intelligent, and so on. Then it

is simply a farce. The farce with some sinister motivations to

be fulfilled. You outlined some of these already.

 

Basically, I agree with your observation that the lesson

to be learned from this "GHQ issue". Just as it is said

that the knowledge is not complete without knowing avidhya

also, so, yes, we seem to have gotten here that "avidhya part"

of the implementation of daiva varnasrama-dharma.

 

 

 

ys mnd