More about so-called misunderstandings from Krishna Kirti about Manu

[Guest guest]

> > > 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.

 

This I have already pointed out above. We agree here.

 

> > 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.

 

I think you're getting a little excited. Please reread my statement. I

have not at all classified the rules of Deity worship with the rules of

varnashrama, I have only mentioned that these different sets of rules are

concerned with different topics.

 

Deity worship does not deal much (if at all) with varnasrama-dharma, and

vice versa.

 

Consider that devotees both perform Deity worship and many of them (if not

most) get married. Both Deity worship and marriage are prescribed for those

devotees' progressive spiritual development, although one is directly bhakti

and the other, although material, represents a favorable circumstance for

those particular devotees to practice sadhana-bhakti. At the same time

(assuming a devotee is properly following principles, etc.), we don't say

his devotion is mixed simply because he is married and simultaneously

practicing the rules and regulations prescribed for grihasthas.

 

> > 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?

 

Manu is a Mahajana. How could a Mahajana not be aware of the glories of the

holy name? Manu is very much aware of the glories of the holy name - moreso

than you or I.

 

Regarding namabhas - Ajamila is an excellent example of chanting the Lord's

name in namabhas. The effect was that besides freeing him from the

reactions of his sinful activities, he actually was able to give up his

sinful life. So Ajamila also fits the description of Bhagavad-gita 7.28, as

he was freed from sinful life and its reactions.

 

But I would hesitate to call Ajamila a sadhana-siddha, it seems like he

would better be considered a kripa-siddha. For us sadhana-bhaktas, we do

have to follow regulative principles, refrain from sinful activity (our

vows), etc. The below reference nicely describes our general program of

sadhana and service:

 

"Only those who have passed their lives in practicing the regulative

principles of religion, who have acted piously and who have conquered sinful

reactions can accept devotional service and gradually rise to the pure

knowledge of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Then, gradually, they can

meditate in trance on the Supreme Personality of Godhead. That is the

process of being situated on the spiritual platform. This elevation is

possible in Krsna consciousness in the association of pure devotees, for in

the association of great devotees one can be delivered from delusion." (BG

7.28 purport)

 

Verse 7.28 is therefore relevant to the everyday lives of ISKCON

sadhana-bhaktas. The kripa-siddhis can do as they like.

 

 

> > 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.

 

Yes, you are right in pointing this out. Thank you for the correction.

 

> > 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.

 

Irrelevant to what? Your comment misses the point I made, which was an

observation that many, if not most, devotees in our movement are not

factually liberated from the bodily conception of life. As such, their

sadhana will either be favorably or adversely affected by their environment.

In this regard, institutions like marriage and a judicial system contribute

to a favorable environment. Manu-samhita simply gives guidance w/ regard to

managing these institutions. Nothing misleading here.

 

> > 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.

 

Srila Prabhupada quoted not infrequently from Manu-samhita. You may say

that not all of Manu-samhita is intended for devotees (like the section on

attonement), but you certainly cannot say none of it is applicable to

devotees.

 

> > --- 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?

 

Prabhu, you really are getting excited. This is a footnote whose reference

is near the beginning of this text. I haven't made any comments here.

 

> 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.

 

See my latest comments near beginning regarding the alleged attempt to

classify VAD w/ Bhakti :-).

 

> > 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.

 

That will depend on how much we understand the books Srila Prabhupada has

given us. If we don't understand Srila Prabhupada's books, how will we

understand anything else, what to speak of Manu-samhita? "Books are the

basis". Of course, I'm stating the underlying theory.

 

Practically there should be some group of devotees who have some

demonstrated competency and familiarity with the body of Srila Prabhupada's

literature. They should also have some knowledge of Sanskrit, as devotees

should not be completely dependent on a tranlation made by a scholar who may

or may not himself be a devotee.

 

A further suggestion is that whoever takes up this task (if anyone takes it

up), a good literature to start with would be Hari-bhakti-vilasa. In HBV,

Sanatana Goswami has made exhaustive references to many and various

different Vedic scriptures, including Manu-smriti.

 

Your servant, Krishna-kirti das (HDG)