[Anant ji] shUdras Not Qualified For Vedic Meditation

[Guest guest]

Dear Anant ji,

Namaste.

 

So far, your argument is only a plea on grounds of socio-political

convenience -- that by accepting an identifiable circumstance like

janma as THE decisive condition of (dis)qualification for

brahminical guruship, one can avoid false claims by pseudo-gurus and

preserve a nice social ettiquette. That is unconvincing.

 

I'm assuming the discussion is about trying to gain a qualitative

understanding about adhikAra -- and not a repetitive quote-fest to

show how one person's historical inference about a specific story

from shAstra has differed from another's. I think those shAstric

examples should be discussed in the context of a qualitative

discussion about the concept of adhikAra, rather than speculated

on the other way round.

 

> It is the main exponent of Caitanya philosophy - Baladeva - who

says

> that even when shUdras get mukti, there is a tArAtamya in the

phala

> they get. Thus, there is also a varNa classification at the level

of

> the soul, even as per Baladeva. (Note that this classification is

> not the aupadhika classification)

 

Agreed. In fact, this point serves as a good crux for this

discussion

 

Can you say more about how you understand the relationship between a

jIva's material (aupAdhika, kArmik) guNa, and its spiritual guNa?

 

MadhvAcArya's decisive statements on spiritual guNa-s and tAratamya

is certainly part of the Gaudiya Vedanta (including modern Gaudiya

AcAryas like Bhaktivedanta Swami, who taught "transcendental

variegatedness" as an artifact of spiritual existence).

 

1) Pls note that AcArya Madhva taught this concept partly in

connection with the problem of theodicy, which relates properly to

*this* material world. In the Gaudiya tradition also, the concept of

rasa is closely related with its reflected material manifestations

as karma.

 

In BG 2.45, when shrI kRSNa tells Arjuna "nitya-sattva-sthO niryoga-

kSema AtmavAn", he is asking him to realize his constitutional guNa

HERE and NOW. Assuming that this shuddha-sattva is an exclusive

constitutional guNa "at the level of soul", it is clear that this

inherent quality is meant to be manifest towards the end of the full

unfoldment of a person's spiritual identity.

 

You said you accept that a person from any jAti can become self-

realized in the full vaiSNava sense of the term. Then his unique

transcendental shade of sattva quality must be manifest in his

sharIra in this world. Sattva is brahminical. One cannot say

that a person of any jAti can become a realized vaiSNava in kali-

yuga, but still not be a brAhmaNa or a guru. That seems absurd.

 

Vedanta ultimately talks of an alchemy of consciousness through a

process that is of the very nature of consciousness itself (bhakti-

rasAyana). That transmutation happens in this material sharIra. the

transformation is ontological. When the transformation is complete,

it is deemed to be complete in the person's remnant material body.

 

2) It is generally understood that a jIva's relationship with its

manifested sad-guru is eternally in the "same direction w.r.t.

Godhead". To you, does that have anything to do with varNa? How

exactly do you understand "tAratamya"?

 

3) According to Madhva's Vedanta, no jIva can ever fully comprehend

the essence of Parabrahman. That means that even full self-

realization is defined in terms relative to the jIva. In that state,

the jIva is an embodiment of the "Word", and should logically be

able to serve as Spiritual Master to specific set of jIva-s.

 

In light of points like these (and others such as outlined in my

previous post), please explain how you understand the relation

between one's kArmik life situation (aupAdhika varNa, etc), and the

spiritual guNa-s. Here are my last 2 posts for reference:

achintya/message/7079

achintya/message/7042

 

Thanks in advance,

Carl