Prabhupada says: Guru determines Varna? Is this siddhanta?

September 15, 1999

On 15 Sep 1999, Srirama das wrote:

> Krishna didn't agree with Arjuna's proposal to accept the dharma of a

> renunciate. He told Arjuna to act according to the varna he was trained

> in--but to do it because He wanted it that way. Of course, if guru or

> Krishna orders one to act in a certain role, then that's what we should do.

> Krishna's pleasure is our only goal. The issue here is not that guru or

> Krishna couldn't direct a devotee to a particular varna, but rather, do they

> in practice do so?

>

In Arjuna's time, the person was appropriately trained according to their

quality. Lord Krishna's instruction is to act according to one's instrinsic

quality and He indicates in Gita 18.59 that Arjuna was ksatriya by

qualification (not just by training). Therefore, all of the instructions and

encouragements to fight beginning with "Don't be impotent (klaibyam)" can be

seen as a direction to Arjuna to act according to his natural varna. Bhurijana

Prabhu notes that the acharyas explain the word "impotence" as a contrast to

the more appropriate ksatriya virility. To not act according to one's

intrinsic varna position is "impurity" or "dirtiness" (kashmalam). By acting

in one's natural position, one becomes pure and develops their dharma-kavacha,

which provides the Force in Krishna consciousness. It would be therefore

natural for at least one of one's many gurus to help the devotee discover his

varnasrama position. comments?

ys

Gerald Surya

September 15, 1999

>

> > ... If one's position is ascertained by a bona fide spiritual master

> > and one is properly trained to engage in the service of Lord Visnu

according

> > to the

> > four social divisions [brahmana, ksatriya, vaisya and sudra] and the four

> > spiritual divisions [brahmacari, grhastha, vanaprastha and sannyasa], one's

> > life

> > becomes perfect.

>

> I have not read the rest of your letter yet, but in addition to our own guru,

> Srila Prabhupada, stating that the guru determines his disciple's varna, and

> the

> example of sastra, we also incidents of other sadhus in giving a varna

> determination for their disciples:

I think the difficulty might lie in semantics here. You are using the word

determine. In the purport the word used is ascertain. You seem to be using

them

as synonyms. To me, to ascertain means to figure out what something already

is,

but to determine implies having a hand in the outcome.

For example, if you were to come to me and tell me you were going on a

journey,

and wanted some instructions, then I would first try to ascertain where it was

you

wanted to go, and then instruct you how to get to that place, but it seems to

me

that if I were to make a determination of where I think you should go, or

where I

want you to go, and then give you instructions to that place, that is

something

else.

I think too many devotees have had too many bad experiences with "gurus"

telling

them what they should be doing that pushing a platform of gurus determining

varna

might be a bit much to swallow.

But yes, a guru recognizing what someone's true potential is and helping them

achieve it, is a nice concept.

September 16, 1999

Hare Krishna,

I still stand by my opinion that there is a serious lack of evidence to

support codifying the diksa-guru as the selector of the disciple's varna.

Varnashrama is the recognition of one's best position in society--not a

selection process. (Please see the next text, replying to Janesvara Prabhu.)

There is a big jump in logic here: Preaching is brahminical +

Bhaktisiddhanta told Srila Prabhupada to preach = Bhaktisiddhanta told

Prabhupada to be a brahman.

Also, the Bhagavatam verse you're quoting begins with "If. . ." My point

is it can be that way, but it's certainly not exclusive nor mandatory. If it

began, "Only if" or "Only by," I might feel differently.

But maybe I'm getting nit-picky on this. That me reveal my mind a little

and explain why I'm taking this position:

As well as being opposed to varna selection, I'm also opposed to forced

marriages. Of course, one can say, "there are no forced marriages, but there

are arranged marriages." Furthermore, there is usually a safety valve

allowing young men and women to back out of such arrangements before

anything is final and irrevocable. "So where is the force?" one can say.

Well, what happens when the guru says, "You and you get married." The boy

or girl can refuse to do that, but then what is their position with their

guru and his orders? This is very dangerous because if the disciples do

accept such an order and the marriage fails horribly (and I've seen plenty

of cases where this has happened), who gets blamed? You can make all kinds

of arguments about karma and neglecting to follow all the guru's orders, but

deep in the mind, what happens to the disciples' faith in the order of the

guru? This is definitely a very touchy area.

When we talk about a social system such as varnashrama, ISKCON leaders on

all levels need to realize and acknowledge that devotees are adults who can

and should take responsibility for their lives. This responsibility can be

undermined in many subtle ways, and we should guard against doing so with

steadfast determination and constant vigilance in order to avoid the

mistakes of the past.

Your servant,

Sri Rama das