Neo-Madhva misinterpretations [SatyakAma's being illegitimate]

[Guest guest]

Namaste Anant ji and others.

 

achintya, "anantshenoy2000"

<anantshenoy2000 wrote:

> Reassurance is necessary only if there is a doubt about the lineage

> being brahminical. The doubt exists only in the mind of modern

> Gaudiyas, not in the mind of Jabala or SatyakAma.

 

FYI, there have been many prominent modern Maadhvas (and others) also who concur with the minds of modern Gaudiyas. Following is an excerpt from one of the first English language books on Shrila Madhvacharya's Vedanta, by Shri Alur Venkat. The author himself is from a caste-Brahmin family, and from the Madhva sampradaya. This was published around 1954. Here's the relevant passage on brahminical culture and caste:

 

QUOTE "...It is to be specially noted here, that there is a general

agreement between the fammous religious teachers on this point.

Therefore, it is the bounden duty of every Bharatiya to protect this

sacredness of Vedas at all costs. And, it is in token of this, that

we wear and mst wear the sacred thread which is so spun as to be the

symbol of the Vedas. Brahmins, Kshatriyas and Vaishyas wear it.

Especially Brahmins, if they are to be real Brahmins, shall never

neglect it. Because after all, Bharatiya culture is nothing, on the

whole, but Brahminism, however much others may fret and frown.

 

"A time there was when Brahmins were taken to task for not allowing

others to study the Vedas. Brahmins were then guilty of not

explaining clearly the real spirit underlying such injunctions.

 

"Now that the doors are opened since many years, perhaps forcibly,

howmany are there who have taken advantage of the Vedas for their

spiritual salvation? By some, they have been utterly thrown into the

background, if not the lumber room. Some others who do study the

Vedas do soonly to drag them down to the level of historic or

prehistoric documents. In this connection, Brahmins themselves are

not free from blame. Mathadhipatis especially are open to this my

charge, since they should have been the real custodians of this

special spiritual treasure.

 

"Anyhow, the world should remember that the best way to remedy the

evil and out-do the Brahmins is to imitate Brahminism -- and let go

the Brahmin caste. But, the cast into which the ancient Brahmin

Rishis have poured Vedic culture and Sanatan-dharma must remain. So,

you can dispense with 'Caste' but not the Rishis' ancient 'Cast' or

mould. All the Acharyas' warnings that "Vaidik Dharma will be

protected only if Brahmanatva is protected" should always be kept

before our mind. [The author also quotes shankara's Gita bhAshya here.] Long, long ago Shri VedsVyasa reminded us, in the

Mahabharat and Bhagavatam, that a Brahmin's life is specially meant

for dedicating it, not for Bhoga, but wholly for hard tapas and for

ultimate thorough happiness...." UNQUOTE

 

On this and other subjects covered in the book, the author has stated:

 

QUOTE: "On this, the late Padmanabhacharya a perfect orthodox, is

with me, or rather I am with him. (The Life and Teachings of Shri

Madhwa, page 301)." UNQUOTE

 

So it looks like a lot of orthodox, thinking, modern Madhvas were

saying what the orthodox, thinking modern Gaudiyas said. The

difference is that no one actually managed to DO what certain modern

Gaudiyas accomplished, particularly Shrila Bhaktivedanta Swami. Only

after his mission did the world (including many modern Indians) hear

about Madhvacharya. There is also no doubt that Shrila Prabhupada put

maximum emphasis on the Brahminical mould, which was conceived in

terms of proven qualifications of guNa and karma, while also

acknowledging the great advantages of being born into that

environment.

 

IMPORTANTLY, in the very beginning of the first chapter, the author

has lamented:

 

QUOTE: "But most unfortunate and unpardonable it is, that he [Madhva]

should be misunderstood, misinterpreted and misrepresented by his own

followers, especially by the learned among them, and that too

without even caring to study properly." UNQUOTE

 

The above quote should not raise eyebrows, because such concerns were

expressed even as early as the great Tikacharya Jayatirtha.

Madhvacharya's works are full of very terse and pithy statements.

Without Sri Jayatirtha's TIka, we can forget about even beginning to

understand him. And Shri Jayatirtha sometimes corrected and

criticized the interpretations of other Maadhva acharyas like Sri

Narahari-tirtha, who were all committed to the truth. So what to

speak of cyber-Madhvas with a calumnious agenda.

 

Since this topic is about qualification to study shruti (versus

smRti), here's another excerpt from the above book:

 

QUOTE: "By shruti it is to be understood that collection of words of

which the sense and the words will never vary in every creation,

whilst Itihasas and Puranas, etc are not so. These also will never

vary in their sense, though they may ary in the words. That is the

difference between Shruti and Itihasa." UNQUOTE

 

In explaining Madhva's answer to the necessity for religion, the

author says:

 

QUOTE: "Religion is the science of Happiness. It teaches you how to

perform good acts, how to develop fully your thinking faculties and

raise them to their highest pitch, according to your capacity; it

teaches you how to purify your heart and obtain the pleasures of

loving..." UNQUOTE

 

In this light, I look forward to Anant ji's thoughtful input on how

the idea of adhikAra is to be understood, rather than just

introducing vague doubts about Upanishadic episodes, putting forward

weak pleas for the social convenience of birth-based caste, and

finally ad hominem attacks made in the party spirit for which cyber-

Madhvas have become notorious. IMHO, indulging in such nonsense

sectarianism in the name of "anyathA-jnAna-nindanaM" is ridiculous.

It does more harm to Shrila Madhva's cause than good.

 

Until the time of the above quoted book, the author himself says that Madhva caste-brahmins were doing little to keep alive, let alone aggressively propogate, the Acharya's teachings (as he explicitly wished). I guess they were too busy breeding pure caste-brahmins amongst themselves, instead of working to raise common people to a level at which they could see the light of Madhvacharya's teachings.

 

Lastly, just FYI on another related topic, the Madhva author of the

above book has also stated that Shri Chaitanya's teachings is to be

properly considered in the Madhva line (while he draws distinctions

with all others).

 

Regards,

Carl