Temples Maintained By Whom?

[suchandra]

Indian brahmana families, especially brahmana families in the Holy Dham of Vrindavan and Navadvip are often criticized by prominent spiritual leaders of having degraded to be "nothing more than rogues and thieves and more or less having given up the principles of brahmana".

However, when looking for sastric reverence we find, it is actually the business of the government/ksatriyas, to take care of the temple maintenance. There're 3 or 4 big temples in India running successfully, but 99.9% of India's temple buildings are totally neglected, endangered of decay and often we find dirt and garbage all over.

 

Endangered of decay, 10th-century mandir in Khajuraho, Madhya Pradesh

The same we see all over the world, it is demanded by Vaishnava leaders to open temples all over the world, but they are maintained by whom? So far we see, that as soon it comes to pay for temple maintenance, it is at first the brahmanas who are ordered to raise the funds, go out and collect or to donate their whole family heirship.

This is not only a great misunderstanding of vedic culture, but a dangerous policy to entangle brahmanas with the material mode of rajas. Vedic culture actually means that the brahmanas should demand payment from the governments/ksatriyas and not allow them to spent all the tax money for materialistic purpose only. Unfortunately present brahmanas are trained up by big spiritual leaders as such to climb-down and agree that the governments don't pay one paisa for temple maintenance and simply use 100% all the taxpayers money for karmic activities. This might look like an exalted quality of generosity but actually what is it really? Foolishness? Stupidity? Devotedly digging the grave of brahmin culture? Becoming hooked to the same karma like the material governments?

In Tibet the government has the understanding that without paying for the maintenance of the temples and monks, the whole state becomes degraded and fit for hell. You find all the temples in Tibet in perfect condition and no temple complex neglected. Somehow it is astonishing to find this basic simple understanding in present Vaishnavism completely missing and all over the world brahmanas all day busy to collect funds for temple sustainment, degraded to become beggars while they devotedly agree that the governments spent all the tax money for generating huge amounts of vikarma. Vedic culture is something different, vedic culture is that brahmanas only teach and the temples maintained by the governments/ksatriyas.

 

"Teaching is free. It is the business of a brahmana to give free education to everyone." (720527SB.LA Lectures)

[Kulapavana]

 

However, when looking for sastric reverence we find, it is actually the business of the government/ksatriyas, to take care of the temple maintenance.

 

And what these shastric references might be?

[suchandra]

 

And what these shastric references might be?

 

Not so overhasty, please re-read post.

[suchandra]

See Manu-samhita,16.3.12.6 Bestowing; protection of the brahmanas

- 16.3.10 Honouring the brahmanas

Manu-samhita (Manu-smrti) overview

 

JanM, Aug 2002

description: dharma-sastra (duties of varnas and asramas)

author: Svayambhuva Manu (Manavacarya), later other Manus added changes (SB 4.28.31 p., 7.8.48, 8.14.5).

relevance to Vaisnavas: indirect (Bhakti-rasamrta-sindhu contains the essence of Manu-samhita for Vaisnavas)

chapters: 12

texts: 2685

text file cca 505 kB

Manu-samhita (trans. G. Buehler, with added tags for easier study)

[suchandra]

16.3.12.6 Bestowing; protection of the brahmanas

(Manu-samhita, download, 990 KB, pdf )

 

"Though dying (with want), a king must not levy a tax on Srotriyas, and no Srotriya, residing in his kingdom, must perish from hunger. [v.7.133.]

The kingdom of that king, in whose dominions a Srotriya pines with hunger, will even, ere long, be afflicted by famine. [v.7.134.]

Having ascertained his learning in the Veda and (the purity of) his conduct, the king shall provide for him means of subsistence in accordance with the sacred law, and shall protect him in every way, as a father (protects) the lawful son of his body. [v.7.135.]

Whatever meritorious acts (such a Brahmana) performs under the full protection of the king, thereby the king’s length of life, wealth, and kingdom increase. [v.7.136.]"

[theist]

You have certainly identified a major kali-yuga problem suchandra. In America it is known as this wall of separation between church and state. Here we have demon atheists who raised a huge stink when Bush proposed his "faith-based initiative". All that did was allow religious groups who did basic humanitarian work like feeding and clothing the poor, medical aid to third world countries etc. to receive tax money for those efforts (not to build and run temles and chuchs even). This inflamed the demons because they saw it as supporting the theists.

 

Prabhupada used the example that Buddhism was spread throughout India by the sponsorship of King Ashoka. Kystriyas have a parental role for the rest of society. Is it not the duty of the parents to look after the spiritual welfare of their children as well as their material needs?

[Kulapavana]

The problem is with the more militant religions. If they are sponsored by the state the religious coercion usually follows suit. To the Southern Baptists we are heathens and worse.

 

As to the government maintaining temples that is a very complicated issue. But even in Vedic times brahmanas were usually dirt poor and that kept them honest. Modern caste brahmanas in India who have a lot of land and income are not really the solution. In some countries in Europe the clergy is on government payroll and I'm not sure that helps their purity.

 

It is easy to make demands on others, but lets look at ourselves: what have we delivered in the social sense to our own members, let alone the society in general? do we want our current leaders and gurus to be supported by the government? What good will that do?

 

If and when we become pure and pragmatic, Krsna will give us all the facility we need.

[suchandra]

 

You have certainly identified a major kali-yuga problem suchandra. In America it is known as this wall of separation between church and state. Here we have demon atheists who raised a huge stink when Bush proposed his "faith-based initiative". All that did was allow religious groups who did basic humanitarian work like feeding and clothing the poor, medical aid to third world countries etc. to receive tax money for those efforts (not to build and run temles and chuchs even). This inflamed the demons because they saw it as supporting the theists.

 

Prabhupada used the example that Buddhism was spread throughout India by the sponsorship of King Ashoka. Kystriyas have a parental role for the rest of society. Is it not the duty of the parents to look after the spiritual welfare of their children as well as their material needs?

 

India's Vaishnava brahmins accepted to be treated like dogs by their so called government, which is in actuality nothing but a shadow cabinet of the super rich globalization network. This might have been unavoidable due kali-yuga gradually progressing, but why the Vaishnava brahmins kept silent about this crime?

Why ISKCON keeps silent, that their brahmins are illegally engaged in collecting funds for temple maintenance instead of following the brahminical law to only engage in teaching others?

What this talk of NOT introducing varnasram because "we're not only brahmins, but Vaishnava-brahmins"?

Seems like ISKCON's GBC is a similiar shadow cabinet who only transmits what is ordered from other source. This would also explain why people of such character like ISKCON leadership are still united - they are forced to obey to some hidden power.

[suchandra]

 

The problem is with the more militant religions. If they are sponsored by the state the religious coercion usually follows suit. To the Southern Baptists we are heathens and worse.

 

As to the government maintaining temples that is a very complicated issue. But even in Vedic times brahmanas were usually dirt poor and that kept them honest. Modern caste brahmanas in India who have a lot of land and income are not really the solution. In some countries in Europe the clergy is on government payroll and I'm not sure that helps their purity.

 

It is easy to make demands on others, but lets look at ourselves: what have we delivered in the social sense to our own members, let alone the society in general? do we want our current leaders and gurus to be supported by the government? What good will that do?

 

If and when we become pure and pragmatic, Krsna will give us all the facility we need.

I'm not demanding anything from others but simply repeating what is stated in the Lawbook for Humanity, the manu-samhita - in vedic culture brahmins are supported by the government. If present Vaishnavas don't agree and even pay taxes to open state-run slaughterhouses and governmental abortion clinics, it is fine for me, what sin is left where present Vaishnavas hesitate to indulge in?

[Kulapavana]

 

I'm not demanding anything from others but simply repeating what is stated in the Lawbook for Humanity, the manu-samhita

 

Manu-samhita has been edited many times over the centuries and many of it's laws can easily be contested by any rational person. It allows sudras to be killed by the higher castes with minimal justification and practically no punishment, for example. Do you want to introduce this law as well? Laws must be applied by kshatriyas as they have the common sense required for administration of human society.

 

I brought up several points regarding state sponsorship of religious institutions, maybe you can adress them.

[suchandra]

 

Manu-samhita has been edited many times over the centuries and many of it's laws can easily be contested by any rational person. It allows sudras to be killed by the higher castes with minimal justification and practically no punishment, for example. Do you want to introduce this law as well? Laws must be applied by kshatriyas as they have the common sense required for administration of human society.

 

I brought up several points regarding state sponsorship of religious institutions, maybe you can adress them.

Looks like that Harvard works on this issue:

http://www.indiadivine.org/audarya/spiritual-discussions/444951-conversion-experience.html