More misunderstandings from Krishna Kirti about Manu Samhita

[Guest guest]

Krishna Kirti Prabhu commented:

 

> > Anyone who is chanting Hare Krishna is far superior to someone who is

> > not chanting. And anyone who is taking full shelter of the holy name is

> > far superior still. ISKCON members may appear to be socially disoriented

> > and managerially inept. But devotees are a different category, and in

> > that category different rules apply. It is not really a question of

> "advancement"

> > but of following the rules which are relevant to one's situation. (This

> > is what varnasrama is all about, isn't it?)

>

> Devotees - specifically those who have taken up the path of bhakti - are

> superior to the karmis (and superior to the jnanis, who are also superior

> to the karmis). However, it seems to me we need to refine our

> understanding of what our own position is, even if we are devotees.

>

> "Taking full shelter" of the holy name is not an ordinary thing, it is

> rare to find even among devotees. There are big differences between

> anyone who is chanting "Hare Krishna" and someone who has actually taken

> full shelter of "Hare Krishna". This is described in NOI 5.

 

Yes, but both are chanting the names of the Lord and are thus in a separate

category from the karmis.

 

> Most all of the devotees (with some exceptions) in our society will still

> be materially conditioned, to a greater or lesser extent. (Manushyanam

> sasreshu. . .) It is for this reason initiation is offered, devotees must

> engage in Deity worship, etc.[1] There are various rules and regulations

> in Deity worship to follow, but those don't deal with social interaction.

> Social principles and rules are to be especially found in dharma-shastras

> like Manu-samhita and Yajna-valkya Smriti.

 

Deity worship has rules and regulations and moral society has rules and

regulations. But again you are misleading the readers -- now you want them

to think that deity worship and moral life are in the same basic category.

Deity worship is one of the nine angas of bhakti mentioned by Sri Prahlad

Maharaja. Thus the rules and regulations are fully applicable for devotees.

Moral life according to social rules and regulations are not in themselves

bhakti, thus the rules and regulations governing them are not absolute

principles for one who is engaged in bhakti.

 

> With regard to bhakti-yoga, following such moral instructions is

> essential, because if one's activities are sinful, then he will not be

> able to make any advancement in devotional service: yesham tvanta gatam

> papam jananam punya karanam / te dvandva moha nirmukta bhajane mam drdha

> vratah, "Only those who have acted piously in this life and in previous

> lives, and whose sinful reactions are completely eradicated are freed from

> the dualities of delusion, and they engage themselves in My service with

> determination." (BG 7.28)

 

This is again most misleading. We must avoid sinful life, this is true, but

in order to avoid sinful life we must follow the rules appropriate to our

status of life. Manu and Yajnavalkya were unaware of the glories of the holy

name, so if someone is chanting even namabhas then how are their rules

applicable?

 

> A devotee who is still conditioned by the material energy cannot have any

> determination to make progress if he is acting sinfully, therefore

> so-called mundane moral behavior is also essential for his progress.

 

"Essential" is not the correct word here. "Helpful" would be more

appropriate. Srila Prabhupada very clearly stated that it was not necessary

to act morally in order to make progress. Chanting Hare Krishna is the only

essential factor.

 

> Regarding moral behavior, I want to point out the Manu-Samhita is not

> simply a book of nit-picky moral rules and regulations - it also contains

> principles on which those rules are based. In the wedding lecture in a

> previous text, Srila Prabhupada said "According to Manu-samhita, Vedic

> principle, woman has no independence [na striyam svatantratam arhati]."

> It is on that principle (yes, it's a principle, not simply a rule), in the

> wedding lecture, that Srila Prabhupada says women need protection. This

> isn't the only principle in Manu-Samhita, either. For example:

>

> daNDaH zAsti prajAH sarva daNDaH evAbhirakSati

> daNDaH supteSu jAgarti daNDaM dharmaM vidurbudhAH

>

> "Punishment alone governs all created beings, punishment alone protects

> them, punishment watches over them while they sleep. The wise declare

> punishment to be no different than the law." (Manu-Samhita 7.18)

>

> yAdi na praNayed rAjA daNDam daNDyeSvatindritaH

> zUle matsyAnivApakSyan durbalAn balavattarAH

>

> "If the king did not without tiring, inflict punishment on those worthy to

> be punished, the stronger would roast the weaker, like fish on a spit."

> (Manu-Samhita 7.20)

>

> sarvo daNDajito loko durlabho hi zucirnaraH

> daNDasya hi bhayAtsarvam jagadbhogAya kalpate

>

> "The whole world is kept in order by punishment, for a guiltless man is

> hard to find. Through fear of punishment, the whole world becomes fit for

> happiness." (Manu-Samhita 7.22)

>

> Now, we can understand that these principles are directly relevant to the

> welfare of our vaisnava society in ISKCON. If this weren't a fact, there

> would be no necessity for such inventions as the CPO (Child Protection

> Office).

>

> Of course, it can always be said that these have nothing to do with pure

> devotional service, but then who among us is a pure devotee?

 

This is most irrelevant and thus again misleading. One does not need to be

on some lofty high platform in order to be beyond the rules of karmakanda.

One who chants even a dim reflection of the holy name is freed from all sin.

 

> Sri Manu's

> mercy on is in the form of his instructions is to help keep us pure and

> free from sin so we can make progress in devotional service.

 

Grossly misleading. His writings are not at all intended for those engaged

in devotional service.

 

> --- Foot note ---------

> [1] yadyapi svarupato nasti, tathapi prayah svabhavato dehadi-sambandhena

> kadarya-silanam viksipta-cittanam jananam tat-tat-sankoci-karanaya

> srimad-rsi-prabhrtibhir atrarcana-marge kvacit kvacit kacit kacin maryada

> sthapitasti.

>

> "Although Deity worship is not essential [according to the Bhagavatam],

> the material conditioning of most candidates for devotional service

> requires that they engage in this activity. When we consider their bodily

> and mental conditions, we find that the character of such candidates is

> impure and their minds are agitated. Therefore, to rectify this material

> conditioning the great sage Narada and others have at different times

> recommended various kinds of regulations for Deity worship."

> (Bhakti-sandarbha 283-84 - ref. CC Madhya 15.108)

> ------ end footnote ----------

 

Again, you are trying to equate the rules of deity worship with the rules of

social life. Srila Prabhupada mentions deity worship to rectify the

impurities of bodily and mental conditions because deity worship is one of

the nine angas of bhakti. So why are you using these particular words of

Srila Prabhupada to make us think that we should follow the social rules of

Manu?

 

Please explain to me what is your understanding of the 8th offense:

dharma-vrata tyaga hutadi sarva subha kriya samyam. Following Manu Samhita

is clearly "dharma-vrata" or "subha-kriya". Just curious.

 

> Actually, we do agree on the role Manu-Samhita has to play. Where we seem

> to disagree is whether or not Manu-Samhita has any relevance at all to

> sadhana-bhaktas. My point is that since most devotees are not factually

> liberated from their material conditioning, they need to further regulate

> their lives through varnashrama-dharma. This was also Srila Prabhupada's

> desire. Manu-Samhita is a great, authoritative resource in practically

> establishing varnashrama.

 

But there is a very big problem. Manu Samhita may be full of practical

ideas, but how will we separate the wheat from the chaff? How will we avoid

accepting points in Manu Samhita which are irrelevant? How will we know when

some point is actually just a detail being filled in for us and when it is

something which is offensive to the holy name we are chanting? I am all for

varnasrama implementation, but unless we are thoroughly conversant with the

descriptions of varnasrama in the bhakti sastras -- specifically in the area

of what they DON'T say, then we will be bewildered by reading Manu Samhita.

 

Your servant, Bhaktarupa Das