Amnesty for sannyasis

[Guest guest]

Bhaktarupa (das) ACBSP wrote:

 

>

> The "shame" or "dishonor" of giving up saffron and wearing white is one of

> the features of present day ISKCON which is based upon karmakandiya smriti

> principles.

 

I believe I wouldn't be the only one to disagree with this kind

of approach that gives the green light to an ISCKON sannyasi to

simply get a wife whenever his sex urge tells him it's a "good"

time to do it. Please, let's have on the mind that we speak here

about braking the oats given to Guru and Deities and to the whole

Universe, and for the sake of what? For the sake of satisfying the

lower kind of a taste.

 

Sorry, I see this issue having nothing to do with some "we don't

follow karmakandiya smrti". It's about a fall down of a sannyasi.

Clear.

 

 

BTW, do we agree at all that there is such thing as a fall-down

of a sannyasi? (Just to be sure)

 

 

>

> Karmis who have no access to bhakti must accept sannyas in order to

> achieve sayujya moksa. But Vaisnavas do not accept sannyas for any form of

> liberation. Liberation is already there as a byproduct of bhakti. Karmis

> who give up sannyas are called vantasi because they lose their moksa and

> return to the path of karma. Vaisnavas who give up sannyas do not return

> to the path of karma, thus the term "vantasi" cannot be factually applied

> to them. (Think about it before you hit the folio button!) Sannyas is

> accepted by Gaudiya Vaisnavas only for preaching. So later for preaching

> sannyas can also be given up. Preaching is a higher principle than any of

> these social considerations.

 

I do not have the Folio to hit its button, but I doubt one

really needs the Folio. I think we have quite misunderstood each

other here. What I am having on mind, is giving up a sannyas out

of not being able to maintain the required standards of it, out

of the desires to enjoy/control the material energy. While you

are speaking something that I do not understand what it got

to do with that. "A higher principle"?? The sex desire (in its

both subtle and/or gross form) is definitely NOT "a higher

principle", in my conceptions of "higher", at least.

 

So, we perhaps can't really go along with this line, seeing that

we are quite possibly on totally different issues. I really would

be able to understand your eventual objection of a suicide as the

recommended atonement for a fallen sannyasi, as a karmakandiya

smrti that we ought not to follow, that the preaching is a higher

principle here. But braking the vows given to Guru and Krsna...???

That _is_ a shame and a dishonor.

 

 

May we all now start braking the principles and oats left and

right, as it pleases our senses, and then say how it is not

a shame, since, "Preaching is a higher principle than any of

these social considerations."?? Please.

 

 

-

 

But you have also touched something that certainly lays in

my interest of consideration these days, as well. That is,

The purpose of sannyas asram in ISCKON.

 

 

I suppose it's quite known already how sannyas is one among

few forbidden things in this age of Kali. Goudiya Vaisnavas,

prior to Caitanya Mahaprabhu's appearance, seamed not to be taking

it. But then Mahaprabhu took. I have to admit that I have not

red the relevant CC purports for a long, so please correct me

if I am wrong here. The reason for taking sannyas was explained

that Mahaprabhu wanted to counteract the influence of Mayavada

sannyasis who were then respected in the society more than Vaisnavas.

Since people in India, by dint of culture, pay respects and obeisances

to a sannyas on very sight of him, so if that sannyasi happens to be

a Vaisnava, thus people will be making an advancement by way of

performing agnjata-sukriti. So thus they would be "tricked".

 

Now, is this the tradition in ISCKON? I suppose it should be.

But let's analyze it for a moment. In the West, when people

see a sannyasi, they rather look around to see wether there

has some circus landed in their town (please, bear with me

my figurative style of expression). They pay no respect, most

often than that they make an offence in their mind. And in ISCKON?

In ISCKON, Srila Prabupada thought us to not judge according to

a dress in order to recognize a Vaisnava and respect him. As far

as the individual himself, one doesn't need to take a sannyas in order

to serve Krsna. So, what's left, yes, it's -- people in India. OK,

for them, it makes some use. But then, those people aren't really

necessary to understand nicely what you were explaining to us

about "karmakandiya smrti" and "higher principles", they will simply

see, "Oh, here's an another ISCKON sannyasi getting married... oh,

of course, they are anyway the Westerners, mlecchas, can't keep up

the vows.. useless.."

 

Well, even this last useful cause being blown away, one may wonder

what's the use... at all.

 

 

(Maybe I am just being a bit depressed today, my wife didn't

manage the lunch at time.)

 

 

 

 

 

- mnd