URGENT: Does anyone really care about this debate?

[Guest guest]

I regret having to continue this seemingly endless "debate" and apologize to

any participants of this conference who have no interest in this type of

argument.

 

I find it troublesome to have to try so hard to defend Srila Prabhupada's

heartfelt and high priority wishes that his disciples would carry out his

mission of establishing varnasrama dharma. The GBC and others like

Sthita-dhi-Muni Prabhu seem hellbent on figuring out every possible excuse

there is to delay even the attempt at starting varnasrama counseling in EVERY

center, for EVERY devotee, EVERYDAY. To argue against such orders of Srila

Prabhupada for TWENTY-FIVE YEARS and still say they are doing "everything"

possible to manage the movement according to Srila Prabhupada's wishes is

ludicrous.

 

If Sthita does not want varnasrama dharma in his life or in the society of

devotees why participate in the conference? Are you here to tell all of us

that we aren't doing devotional service because varnasrama isn't devotional

service as far as you are concerned?

 

 

You are still yet to provide one single reference from scripture to support

your position that ISKCON does not need to implement varnasrama.

 

 

 

On 01 Aug 1999, Sthita-dhi-muni Dasa wrote:

 

> He became a pure devotee, the real point of VAD, duh. I'd rather be a pure

> devotee than a 'respectable brahmana' any day of the week, something it

would

> seem Prabhupada might agree on.

 

 

 

Please name me some pure devotees who are not known as a brahmana, ksatriya,

vaisya, sudra, brahmacari, grihasta, vanaprastha or sannyasi - any one of the

varnasrama titles you so object to.

 

Pure devotees, paramhamsas (the highest) always identify with the varnasrama

system because they respect it as divine. They don't ever try to constantly

separate devotional service from varnasrama like you endlessly attempt to do.

It is so obvious you are opposed to varnasrama. For what reason?

 

 

"Maharaja Prithu did not allow himself to function outside the institution of

four varnas and four asramas, although as a Vaishnava he was a paramahamsa,

transcendental to all material activities." S.B. 4.22.50.

 

 

If he was performing pure devotional service as a paramhamsa why would he

engage in varnasrama which you say is external and not devotional service. Was

Prithu in maya, Prabhu.

 

 

You try so hard to distance yourself from varnasrama with the excuse that you

are doing devotional service as if it is something different. What is it you

are doing in devotional service that is outside of the varnasrama institution?

"The Vedic system of four varnas and four asramas is very scientific, and its

entire purpose is to enable one to control the senses." SB 5.1.18.

 

 

Is controlling the senses unnecessary in devotional service, Prabhu?