Varnasrama: serving the Lord by serving His devotees

[Guest guest]

>

> > For myself, I do secretarial work for a professor, but she is not a

> > devotee either. For either Janesvara or myself to use our occupations

> > to serve the Lord, the main way that we can do it is by karma-yoga.

>

>

> I am in agreement with this but I think some additional scriptural

> references would be helpful to elaborate on the idea:

>

> In my opinion, for a devotee, karma-yoga is the same thing as bhakti-yoga.

 

The examples you provided are the case of karma-yoga executed

in pure Krsna consciousness, thus being non-different from the

devotional service:

 

> "Service for the cause of the Lord is called karma-yoga or

> buddhi-yoga, or in plain words, devotional service to the Lord." >

Bhagavad-gita 2.51

 

 

Still, there is something that is called "bhakti-yoga" and

something that is called "karma-yoga" In the BG (5.2) Krsna

states:

 

"The renunciation of work and work in devotion are both good

for liberation. But, of the two, work in devotional service

is better than renunciation of work."

 

 

However, simply having a job in some company, for the sake of

getting the pay-check that would provide me with the ability

to pay off my bills (flat, food, car, el, cloth, parking

tickets, a pizza-pie, much more, ...) we couldn't really call

"sevice for the cause of the Lord" nor "the renunciation of work"

either. But, by renouncing the portion of the fruit of our work

(our hard-earned money), as HKdd suggested, we are coming closer

to the "renunciation of work", that is technically called karma-yoga.

Personally, I would rather consider this (giving some of our money

in supporting preaching of KC) to be falling into the category of

"sacrificing the fruits of one's work for the spiritual cause".

 

But I wouldn't "nail it on the wall". It all, again, may differ

from an individual to another, depending on one's motivation and

consciousness. The example of Kolaveca-sridhar is there also.

And Bhaktivinode Thakura also had a job in the "karmi society",

just like many of us, right?

 

 

 

>

> While I would much prefer to be practicing and performing my duty directly

> in the society of varnasrama-dharma devotees I am not the director of the

> material nature and thus I will do my duty as the will of Providence has

> directed. There is no need for anyone to give up their duty as they were

> destined to perform; it is a matter of change of heart alone.

 

What HKdd is saying here, in the most bottom line, is:

"We need to perform our occupational duties in the daivi varnasrama

type of society in order to enhance our spiritual advancement."

 

And what you are replaying on, basically (as I see it, not your

original words):

"Not required. Though varnasrama would be preferable, to stay

employed in the present ugra-karma materialistic society is no

problem. That is what we have been given to by God, it is our

prescribed duty, so we got no need to change it, but only our

hearts alone."

 

The question is, then what varnasrama-dharma are you advocating

anyway? You are counting years, months, days and hours that the

same has not be implemented in ISCKON, getting on the case of

others, but on the bottom line you disclose to us how you yourself

don't really need it. You have provided yourself with the means

of maintenance, and all you feel the need for is the change of

the heart alone. Without being engaged in the performance of

specific prescribed duties as per your varna and asrama, under

the guidance of an authority within the structure of varna-asrama

system. No acceptance of particular responsibilities (apart the

responsibility of providing oneself with the required means).

 

 

 

> Bhismadeva

> was on the "wrong" side though a pure devotee. One of my worshipful

> deities, Sri Vivasvan Hiranmaya, whom I worship with prayers and

> obeisances every morning, performs his duty perfectly with no dampening

> effect on his pure devotion though he sheds his merciful heat and light on

> demon and devotee pursuits equally.

>

 

Maybe there are more differences here than similarities.

 

Bhismadeva was the great Grandfather of the Kuru dynasty. That

was "his side". Our employers are not our grand-grandsons, nor

the companies we work for to get the pay-checks are really our

dinasties in the varnasrama orginized society.

 

Comparing the position of Sun-god and our position, in term of

serving the "same side"??? He is one of the most important

Deities in the charge of running the Universe, executing it under

the order of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, in the "company"

with other demigods, the devotees of Visnu. And we? Going to

job from 7.30 till 15.30, on the assembling line of "Microchip".

Or whatever.

 

The Son-god (nor any other Demigod) definitely does not need

varnasrama system in order to get the chance to perform his

duty properly. But the small insignificant humans on the assembly

line of some "Microschip" might be the right candidates for it.

 

 

>

>

> I DO NOT disagree with Mataji, but I think it wise to keep things clear

> lest the oft-ISKCON-practiced "give up distasteful duties and pretend I am

> a brahmana" consciousness will continue to erode the varna society.

 

I have not noticed anything of a kind in HKdd's text that would

demand this emphasizing the need for such a clearance.

 

She suggested the execution of our prescribed duties within

the frame of daiva-varnasrama society, to be employed in the

service to/under *devotees* of the Lord, rather than the

payed service under materialists (regardless of how nice they might

be). And you objected it (though you said you agreed with her) by

explaing hoe there is no dumping effect to our spiritual advancement

when we are employed within this present ugra-karma society, so no

need for what she proposed (though preferable, yes).

 

Are we now in the situation to preach to Janesvara prabhu the

importance and the need for re-establishing the varnasrama system

in this world?

 

 

--------------------------

 

That what you are referring with in your above statement(s) would

be rather the case of our being advised to remain honest: "Better

to be a honest sweeper on the street than a renounciate-pretender."

However, we ought to be aware that this is not supposed to mean

"It is just fine to remain a sweeper on the street, don't go

changing your destiny". There is a verse in the BG where

Krsna speaks about this situation:

 

 

"So as to not disrupt the minds of ignorant men attached to the

fruitive results of prescribed duties, a learned person should

not induce them to stop work. Rather, by working in the spirit

of devotion, he should engage them in all sort of activities

[for the gradual development of Krsna consciousness]"

(BG 3.26)

 

In the purport, Prabhupada explains:

 

"The learned Krsna conscious person may act in such a way

that the ignorant person working for the sense gratification

may learn how to act and how to behave. Although the ignorant

man is not to be disturbed in his activities, a slightly

developed Krsna consciousness person may directly be engaged

in the service of the Lord without waiting for other Vedic

formulas. For this fortunate man there is no need to follow

the Vedic rituals, because by direct Krsna consciousness one

can have all the results one would otherwise derive from

following one's prescribed duties."

 

 

So let's examine carefully the type of our activities/jobs

and compare it with the above descriptions. But then, yes, the

possibility of our getting disturbed might be there. On the other

hand, I certainly am not one of those "learned Krsna conscious

persons" as mentioned above, so I am simply quoting Bhagavd-gita

without much of consideration for the type of effect.

 

 

 

 

ys mnd