Who is a brahmana?

[shiva]

Vajrasuchika Upanishad

 

 

I Shall set for Vajrasuchi (the diamond needle) which pierces ignorance, rebukes the ignorant and ornaments those who have wisdom as eye.

The Smritis affirm, following the Vedas that the Brahmana is the most important of the four castes. It must be asked, ‘Who is a Brahmana’ – the self, body, class, knowledge, action or virtue ?

The soul is not a Brahmana because the soul is the same in all bodies past and future. The same person takes many bodies according to karma, nor is the body Brahmana – the body is the same from the Chandala (to the highest caste) being made of the five elements and is seen to have old age, death etc., alike. There is no fixity (of colour) such as Brahmana is white, Kshatriya is red, Vaishya is yellow and Sudra is black; also when the father’s body is cremated, the son etc., may be guilty of killing a Brahmana.

Nor is the class a Brahmana. Then there would be many classes within the classes. Many are the great sages: Rishyasringa born of a deer, Kausika of reed, Jambuka of a jackal, Valmiki of an ant-hill, Vyasa of a fisher-girl, Gautama of a hare’s back, Vasistha of Urvasi, Agastya of a pot according to tradition. These are not Brahmanas by birth but by their knowledge.

Nor is knowledge Brahmana: Kshatriyas and others also have knowledge. Nor is karma: all creatures are seen to have similar karma of Prarabdha etc., and all creatures act being impelled by karma. Nor is a man of virtue: There are many givers of gold – Kshatriyas etc.

One who has directly realized, like the berry in the palm, the Atman without a second, devoid of class, quality and action and of defects like the six waves (like hunger), the states (like birth and death), of the nature of truth, knowledge and bliss, free from adjuncts, the basis of all thoughts, immanent in all creatures, present inside and outside like space. Bliss impartite, beyond (ordinary) knowledge, to be realized by experience alone – and having become successful, free from lust etc., rich in mental control, without greed etc., mind untouched by hypocrisy etc.

This is the intention of Veda etc. Otherwise the nature of Brahmana cannot be achieved.

One should contemplate one’s self as the spirit without a second, truth, knowledge and bliss.

This is the Upanishad.

 

Chandogya Upanishad

 

 

IV-iv-1: Once upon a time Satyakama Jabala addressed his mother Jabala, ‘Mother, I desire to live the life of a celibate student of sacred knowledge in the teacher’s house. Of what lineage am I ?’

IV-iv-2: She said to him, ‘My child, I do not know of what lineage you are. I, who was engaged in many works and in attending on others, got you in my youth. Having been such I could not know of what lineage you are. However, I am Jabala by name and you are named Satyakama. So you speak of yourself only as Satyakama Jabala.’

IV-iv-3: He went to Haridrumata Gautama and said, ‘I desire to live under you, revered sir, as a Brahmacharin; may I approach your venerable self (for the same) ?’

IV-iv-4: Gautama asked him, ‘Dear boy, of what lineage are you ?’ He replied, ‘Sir, I do not know of what lineage I am. I asked my mother; she replied, "I, who was engaged in many works and in attending on others, got you in my youth. Having been such, I could not know of what lineage you are. However, I am Jabala by name and you are named Satyakama". So, sir, I am Satyakama Jabala.’

IV-iv-5: The teacher said to him, ‘No one who is not a Brahmana can speak thus. Dear boy, bring the sacrificial fuel, I shall initiate you as a Brahmacharin, for you have not deviated from truth’.

 

Mahabharata - Vana Parva:Tirtha-yatra Parva

 

 

SECTION CLXXIX

 

At this Yudhishthira said, 'O serpent, ask whatever thou listest! I shall, if I can, answer thy questions with the view of gratifying thee, O snake! Thou knowest fully what should be known by Brahmanas. Therefore, O king of snakes, hearing (thee) I shall answer thy queries!'

 

The serpent said, 'O Yudhishthira, say--Who is a Brahmana and what should be known? By thy speech I infer thee to be highly intelligent.'

 

"Yudhishthira said, 'O foremost of serpents, he, it is asserted by the wise, in whom are seen truth, charity, forgiveness, good conduct, benevolence, observance of the rites of his order and mercy is a Brahmana. And, O serpent, that which should be known is even the supreme Brahma, in which is neither happiness nor misery--and attaining which beings are not affected with misery; what is thy opinion?'

 

"The serpent said, 'O Yudhishthira, truth, charity, forgiveness, benevolence, benignity, kindness and the Veda 1 which worketh the benefit of the four orders, which is the authority in matters of religion and which is true, are seen even in the Sudra. As regards the object to be known and which thou allegest is without both happiness and misery, I do not see any such that is devoid of these.'

 

"Yudhishthira said, Those characteristics that are present in a Sudra, do not exist in a Brahmana; nor do those that are in a Brahmana exist in a Sudra. And a Sudra is not a Sudra by birth alone--nor a Brahmana is Brahmana by birth alone. He, it is said by the wise, in whom are seen those virtues is a Brahmana. And people term him a Sudra in whom those qualities do not exist, even though he be a Brahmana by birth. And again, as for thy assertion that the object to be known (as asserted by me) doth not exist, because nothing exists that is devoid of both (happiness and misery), such indeed is the opinion, O serpent, that nothing exists that is without (them) both. But as in cold, heat doth not exist, nor in heat, cold, so there cannot exist an object in which both (happiness and misery) cannot exist?"

 

"The serpent said, 'O king, if thou recognise him as a Brahmana by characteristics, then, O long-lived one, the distinction of caste becometh futile as long as conduct doth not come into play.'

 

"Yudhishthira said, 'In human society, O mighty and highly intelligent serpent, it is difficult to ascertain one's caste, because of promiscuous intercourse among the four orders. This is my opinion. Men belonging to all orders (promiscuously) beget offspring upon women of all the orders. And of men, speech, sexual intercourse, birth and death are common. And to this the Rishis have borne testimony by using as the beginning of a sacrifice such expressions as--of what caste so ever we may be, we celebrate the sacrifice. Therefore, those that are wise have asserted that character is the chief essential requisite. The natal ceremony of a person is performed before division of the umbilical cord. His mother then acts as its Savitri and his father officiates as priest. He is considered as a Sudra as long as he is not initiated in the Vedas. Doubts having arisen on this point, O prince; of serpents, Swayambhuba Manu has declared, that the mixed castes are to be regarded as better than the (other) classes, if having gone through the ceremonies of purification, the latter do not conform to the rules of good conduct, O excellent snake! Whosoever now conforms to the rules of pure and virtuous conduct, him have I, ere now, designated as a Brahmana.'

 

Mahabharata - Anusasana Parva:Anusasanika Parva

 

 

SECTION CXLIII

 

[Mahadeva speaking to Uma]

 

O goddess, that a person who has sprung from a degraded order, viz., a Sudra, may become a Brahmana refined of all stains and possessed of Vedic lore, One that is a Brahmana, when he becomes wicked in conduct and observes no distinction in respect of food, falls away from the status of Brahmanahood and becomes a Sudra. Even a Sudra, O goddess, that has purified his soul by pure deeds and that has subjugated all his senses, deserves to be waited upon and served with reverence as a Brahmana. This has been said by the Self-born Brahmana himself. When a pious nature and pious deeds are noticeable in even a Sudra, he should, according to my opinion, be held superior to a person of the three regenerate classes. Neither birth, nor the purificatory rites, nor learning, nor offspring, can be regarded as grounds for conferring upon one the regenerate status. Verily, conduct is the only ground. All Brahmanas in this world are Brahmanas in consequence of conduct. A Sudra, if he is established on good conduct, is regarded as possessed of the status of a Brahmana. The status of Brahma, O auspicious lady, is equal wherever it exists. Even this is my opinion. He, indeed, is a Brahmana in whom the status of Brahma exists,--that condition which is bereft of attributes and which has no stain attached to it. The boon-giving Brahma, while he created all creatures, himself said that the distribution of human beings into the four orders dependent on birth is only for purposes of classification. The Brahmana is a great field in this world,--a field equipped with feet for it moves from place to place. He who plants seeds in that field, O beautiful lady, reaps the crop in the next world. That Brahmana who wishes to achieve his own good should always live upon the remains of the food that may be there in his house after gratifying the needs of all others. He should always adhere to the path of righteousness. Indeed, he should tread along the path that belongs to Brahma. He should live engaged in the study of the Samhitas and remaining at home he should discharge all the duties of a householder. He should always be devoted to the study of the Vedas, but he should never derive the means of subsistence from such study. That Brahmana who always conducts himself thus, adhering to the path of righteousness, worshipping his sacred fire, and engaged in the study of the Vedas, comes to be regarded as Brahma. The status of a Brahmana once gained, it should always be protected with care, O thou of sweet smiles, by avoiding the stain of contact with persons born in inferior orders, and by abstaining from the acceptance of gifts. I have thus told thee a mystery, viz., the manner in which a Sudra may become a Brahmana, or that by which a Brahmana falls away from his own pure status and becomes a Sudra."

 

 

 

Mahabharata - Santi-Parva: Mokshadharma Parva

 

 

 

SECTION CLXXXVIII

 

"Bhrigu said, 'Brahman first created a few Brahmanas who came to be called Prajapatis (lords of creation). Possessed of splendour equal to that of the fire or the Sun, they were created out of the energy of that First-born Being. The puissant Lord then created Truth, Duty, Penance, the eternal Vedas, all kinds of pious acts, and Purity, for enabling creatures to attain to heaven (by practising them). After this, the Deities and the Danavas, the Gandharvas, the Daityas, the Asuras, the great snakes, the Yakshas, the Rakshasas, the Serpents, the Pisachas, and human beings with their four divisions, viz., Brahmanas, Kshatriyas, Vaisyas, and Sudras, O best of regenerate ones, and all the other orders of creatures that exist, were created. The complexion the Brahmanas obtained was white; that which the Kshatriyas obtained was red; that which the Vaisyas got was yellow; and that which was given to the Sudras was black.'

 

"Bharadwaja said, 'If the distinction between the four orders (of human beings) be made by means only of colour (attribute), then it seems that all the four orders have been mingled together. 2 Lust, wrath, fear, cupidity, grief, anxiety, hunger, toil, possess and prevail over all men. How can men be distinguished by the possession of attributes? The bodies of all men emit sweat, urine, faeces, phlegm, bile, and blood. How then can men be distributed into classes? Of mobile objects the number is infinite; the species also of immobile objects are innumerable. How, then, can objects of such very great diversity be distributed into classes?'

 

"Bhrigu said, 'There is really no distinction between the different orders. The whole world at first consisted of Brahmanas. Created (equal) by Brahman, men have, in consequence of their acts, become distributed into different orders. They that became fond of indulging in desire and enjoying pleasures, possessed of the attributes of severity and wrath, endued with courage, and unmindful of the duties of piety and worship,--these Brahmanas possessing the attribute of Passion,--became Kshatriyas. Those Brahmanas again who, without attending to the duties laid down for them, became possessed of both the attributes of Goodness and Passion, and took to the professions of cattle-rearing and agriculture, became Vaisyas. Those Brahmanas again that became fond of untruth and injuring other creatures, possessed of cupidity,--engaged in all kinds of acts for a living, and fallen away from purity of behaviour, and thus wedded to the attribute of Darkness, became Sudras. Separated by these occupations, Brahmanas, falling away from their own order, became members of the other three orders. All the four orders, therefore, have always the right to the performance of all pious duties and of sacrifices. Even thus were the four orders at first created equal by Brahman who ordained for all of them (the observances disclosed in) the words of Brahma (in the Vedas). Through cupidity alone, many fell away, and became possessed by ignorance. The Brahmanas are always devoted to the scriptures on Brahma; and mindful of vows and restraints, are capable of grasping the conception of Brahma. Their penances therefore, never go for nothing. They amongst them are not Brahmanas that are incapable of understanding that every created thing is Supreme Brahma. These, falling away, became members of diverse (inferior) orders. Losing the light of knowledge, and betaking themselves to an unrestrained course of conduct, they take birth as Pisachas and Rakshasas and Pretas and as individuals of diverse Mleccha species. The great Rishis who at the beginning sprang into life (through Brahman's Will) subsequently created, by means of their penances, men devoted to the duties ordained for them and attached to the rites laid down in the Eternal Vedas. That other Creation, however, which is eternal and undecaying, which is based upon Brahma and has sprung from the Primeval God, and which has its refuge upon yoga, is a mental one."

 

SECTION CLXXXIX

 

"Bharadwaja said, 'By what acts does one become a Brahmana? By what, a Kshatriya? O best of regenerate ones, by what acts again does one become a Vaisya or a Sudra? Tell me this, O foremost of speakers.'

 

"Bhrigu said, 'That person is called a Brahmana who has been sanctified by such rites as those called jata and others; who is pure in behaviour; who is engaged in studying the Vedas; who is devoted to the six well-known acts (of ablutions every morning and evening, silent recitation of mantras, pouring libations on the sacrificial fire, worshipping the deities, doing the duties of hospitality to guests, and offering food to the Viswedevas); who is properly observant of all pious acts; who never takes food without having offered it duly to gods and guests; who is filled with reverence for his preceptor; and who is always devoted to vows and truth. He is called a Brahmana in whom are truth, gifts, abstention from injury to others, compassion, shame, benevolence, 1 and penance. He who is engaged in the profession of battle, who studies the Vedas, who makes gifts (to Brahmanas) and takes wealth (from those he protects) is called a Kshatriya. He who earns fame from keep of cattle, who is employed in agriculture and the means of acquiring wealth, who is pure in behaviour and attends to the study of the Vedas, is called a Vaisya. 2 He who takes pleasure in eating every kind of food, who is engaged in doing every kind of work, who is impure in behaviour, who does not study the Vedas, and whose conduct is unclean, is said to be a Sudra. If these characteristics be observable in a Sudra, and if they be not found in a Brahmana, then such a Sudra is no Sudra, and, such a Brahmana is no Brahmana. By every means should cupidity and wrath be restrained. This as also self-restraint, are the highest results of Knowledge. Those two passions (viz., cupidity and wrath), should, with one's whole heart, be resisted. They make their appearance for destroying one's highest good. One should always protect one's prosperity from one's wrath, one's penances from pride; one's knowledge from honour and disgrace; and one's soul from error. That intelligent person, O regenerate one, who does all acts without desire of fruit, whose whole wealth exists for charity, and who performs the daily Homa, is a real Renouncer. 3 One should conduct oneself as a friend to all creatures, abstaining from all acts of injury. Rejecting the acceptance of all gifts, one should, by the aid of one's own intelligence, be a complete master of one's passions. One should live in one's soul where there can be no grief. One would then have no fear here and attain to a fearless region hereafter. One should live always devoted to penances, and with all passions completely restrained; observing the vow of taciturnity, and with soul concentrated on itself; desirous of conquering the unconquered senses, and unattached in the midst of attachments. All things that can be perceived by the senses are called Manifest. All, however, that is Unmanifest, that is beyond the ken of the senses, that can be ascertained only by the subtile senses, should be sought to be known. 1 If there be no faith, one will never succeed in attaining to that subtile sense. Therefore, one should hold oneself in faith. The mind should be united with Prana, and Prana should then be held within Brahma. By dissociating oneself from all attachments, one may obtain absorption into Brahma. There is no need of attending to any other thing. A Brahmana can easily attain to Brahma by the path of Renunciation. The indications of a Brahmana are purity, good behaviour and compassion unto all creatures.'"

[shiva]

Mahabharata - Vana Parva:Markandeya-Samasya Parva

 

 

SECTION CCXI

 

Markandeya continued, "O Bharata, the fowler having expounded these abstruse points, the Brahmana with great attention again enquired of him about these subtle topics. The Brahmana said, 'Do thou truly describe to me, who now duly ask thee, the respective virtues of the qualities of sattwa, rajas, and tamas.' The fowler replied, 'Very well, I shall tell thee what thou hast asked. I shall describe separately their respective virtues, do thou listen. Of them tamas is characterised by illusion (spiritual), rajas incites (men to action), sattwa is of great grandeur, and on that account, it is said to be the greatest of them. He who is greatly under the influence of spiritual ignorance, who is foolish, senseless and given to dreaming, who is idle, unenergetic and swayed by anger and haughtiness, is said to be under the influence of tamas. And, O Brahmana rishi, that excellent man who is agreeable in speech, thoughtful, free from envy, industrious in action from an eager desire to reap its fruits, and of warm temperament, is said to be under the influence of rajas. And he who is resolute, patient, not subject to anger, free from malice, and is not skilful in action from want of a selfish desire to reap its fruits, wise and forbearing, is said to be under the influence of sattwa. When a man endowed with the sattwa quality, is influenced by worldliness, he suffers misery; but he hates worldliness, when he realises its full significance. And then a feeling of indifference to worldly affairs begins to influence him. And then his pride decreases, and uprightness becomes more prominent, and his conflicting moral sentiments are reconciled. And then self-restraint in any matter becomes unnecessary. A man, O Brahmana, may be born in the Sudra caste, but if he is possessed of good qualities, he may attain the state of Vaisya and similarly that of a Kshatriya, and if he is steadfast in rectitude, he may even become a Brahmana. I have described to thee these virtues, what else dost thou wish to learn?'"

 

Mahabharata - Vana Parva:Markandeya-Samasya Parva

 

 

SECTION CCXIV

 

The fowler said, 'O Brahmana, as thou practisest with assiduousness those divine, ancient, and eternal virtues which are so difficult of attainment even by pure-minded persons, thou appearest (to me) like a divine being. Return to the side of thy father and mother and be quick and diligent in honouring thy parents; for, I do not know if there is any virtue higher than this.' The Brahmana replied, 'By a piece of singular good luck have I arrived here, and by a piece of similar good luck have I thus been associated with thee. It is very difficult to find out, in our midst, a person who can so well expound the mysteries of religion; there is scarcely one man among thousands, who is well versed in the science of religion. I am very glad, O great man, to have secured thy friendship; mayst thou be prosperous. I was on the point of falling into hell, but was extricated by thee. It was destined to be so, for thou didst (unexpectedly) come in my way. And, O great man, as the fallen King Yayati was saved by his virtuous grandsons (daughter's sons), so, have I know been saved by thee. According to thy advice, I shall honour my father and my mother; for a man with an impure heart can never expound the mysteries of sin and righteousness. As it is very difficult for a person born in the Sudra class to learn the mysteries of the eternal religion, I do not consider thee to be a Sudra. There must surely be some mystery in connection with this matter. Thou must have attained the Sudra's estate by reason of the fruition of thine own past karma. O magnanimous man, I long to know the truth about this matter. Do thou tell it to me with attention and according to thy own inclination.'

 

"The fowler replied, 'O good Brahmana, Brahmanas are worthy of all respect from me. Listen, O sinless one, to this story of a previous existence of mine. O son of an excellent Brahmana, I was formerly a Brahmana, well-read in the Vedas, and an accomplished student of the Vedangas. Through my own fault I have been degraded to my present state. A certain king, accomplished in the science of dhanurveda (science of archery), was my friend; and from his companionship, O Brahmana, I, too became skilled in archery; and one day the king, in company with his ministers and followed by his best warriors, went out on a hunting expedition. He killed a large number of deer near a hermitage. I, too, O good Brahmana, discharged a terrible arrow. And a rishi was wounded by that arrow with its head bent out. He fell down upon the ground, and screaming loudly said, 'I have harmed no one, what sinful man has done this?' And, my lord, taking him for a deer, I went up to him and found that he was pierced through the body by my arrow. On account of my wicked deed I was sorely grieved (in mind). And then I said to that rishi of severe ascetic merit, who was loudly crying, lying upon the ground, 'I have done this unwittingly, O rishi.' And also this I said to the muni: 'Do thou think it proper to pardon all this transgression.' But, O Brahmana, the rishi, lashing himself into a fury, said to me, 'Thou shalt be born as a cruel fowler in the Sudra class."

 

SECTION CCXV

 

"The fowler continued, 'Thus cursed by that rishi, I sought to propitiate him with these words: 'Pardon me, O muni, I have done this wicked deed unwittingly. It behooves thee to pardon all that. Do thou, worshipful sir, soothe yourself.' The rishi replied, 'The curse that I have pronounced can never be falsified, this is certain. But from kindness towards thee, I shall do thee a favour. Though born in the Sudra class thou shalt remain a pious man and thou shalt undoubtedly honour thy parents; and by honouring them thou shalt attain great spiritual perfection; thou shalt also remember the events of thy past life and shalt go to heaven; and on the expiation of this curse, thou shalt again become a Brahmana. O best of men, thus, of old was I cursed by that rishi of severe power, and thus was he propitiated by me. Then, O good Brahmana, I extricated the arrow from his body, and took him into the hermitage, but he was not deprived of his life (recovered). O good Brahmana, I have thus described to thee what happened to me of old, and also how I can go to heaven hereafter.' The Brahmana said, 'O thou of great intelligence, all men are thus subject to happiness or misery, thou shouldst not therefore grieve for that. In obedience to the customs of thy (present) race, thou hast pursued these wicked ways, but thou art always devoted to virtue and versed in the ways and mysteries of the world. And, O learned man, these being the duties of thy profession, the stain of evil karma will not attach to thee. And after dwelling here for some little time, thou shalt again become a Brahmana; and even now, I consider thee to be a Brahmana, there is no doubt about this. For the Brahmana who is vain and haughty, who is addicted to vices and wedded to evil and degrading practices, is like a Sudra. On the other hand, I consider a Sudra who is always adorned with these virtues,--righteousness, self-restraint, and truthfulness,--as a Brahmana. A man becomes a Brahmana by his character; by his own evil karma a man attains an evil and terrible doom.

 

Mahabharata - Santi-Parva: Mokshadharma Parva

 

 

SECTION CCCXIX

 

Obtaining knowledge from a Brahmana or a Kshatriya or Vaisya or even a Sudra who is of low birth, one endued with faith should always show reverence for such knowledge. Birth and death cannot assail one that is endued with faith. All orders of men are Brahmanas. All are sprung from Brahma. All men utter Brahma. 1 Aided by an understanding that is derived from and directed to Brahma. I inculcated this science treating of Prakriti and Purusha. Indeed, this whole universe is Brahma. From the mouth of Brahma sprung the Brahmanas; from his arms, sprung the Kshatriyas; from his navel, the Vaisya; and from his feet, the Sudras. All the orders, (having sprung in this way) should not be regarded as pilfering from one another. Impelled by Ignorance, all men meet with death and attain, O king, to birth that is the cause of acts. 2 Divested of Knowledge, all orders of men, dragged by terrible Ignorance, fall into varied orders of being due to the principles that flow from Prakriti. For this reason, all should, by every means, seek to acquire Knowledge. I have told thee that every person is entitled to strive for its acquisition. One that is possessed of Knowledge is a Brahmana. Others, (viz., Kshatriyas and Vaisyas and Sudras) are possessed of knowledge. Hence, this science of Emancipation is always open to them all. This, O king has been said by the Wise. The questions thou hadst asked me have all been answered by me agreeably to the truth. Do thou, therefore, cast off all grief. Go thou to the other end of this enquiry. Thy questions were good. Blessings on thy head for ever!

 

Srimad Bhagavatam 7.11.35

 

 

yasya yal lakshanam proktam

pumso varnabhivyanjakam

yad anyatrapi drisyeta

tat tenaiva vinirdiset

 

SYNONYMS

 

yasya -- of whom; yat -- which; lakshanam -- symptom; proktam -- described (above); pumsah -- of a person; varna-abhivyanjakam -- indicating the classification (brahmana, kshatriya, vaisya, sudra, etc.); yat -- if; anyatra -- elsewhere; api -- also; drisyeta -- is seen; tat -- that; tena -- by that symptom; eva -- certainly; vinirdiset -- one should designate.

 

TRANSLATION

 

If one shows the symptoms of being a brahmana, kshatriya, vaisya or sudra, as described above, even if he has appeared in a different class, he should be accepted according to those symptoms of classification.

 

PURPORT

 

Herein it is clearly stated by Narada Muni that one should not be accepted as a brahmana, kshatriya, vaisya or sudra according to birth, for although this is going on now, it is not accepted by the sastras. As stated in Bhagavad-gita (4.13), catur-varnyam maya srishtam guna-karma-vibhagasah. Thus the four divisions of society -- brahmana, kshatriya, vaisya and sudra -- are to be ascertained according to qualities and activities. If one was born in a brahmana family and has acquired the brahminical qualifications, he is to be accepted as a brahmana; otherwise, he should be considered a brahma-bandhu. Similarly, if a sudra acquires the qualities of a brahmana, although he was born in a sudra family, he is not a sudra; because he has developed the qualities of a brahmana, he should be accepted as a brahmana. The Krishna consciousness movement is meant to develop these brahminical qualities. Regardless of the community in which one was born, if one develops the qualities of a brahmana he should be accepted as a brahmana, and he then may be offered the order of sannyasa. Unless one is qualified in terms of the brahminical symptoms, one cannot take sannyasa. In designating a person a brahmana, kshatriya, vaisya or sudra, birth is not the essential symptom. This understanding is very important. Herein Narada Muni distinctly says that one may be accepted according to the caste of his birth if he has the corresponding qualifications, but otherwise he should not. One who has attained the qualifications of a brahmana, regardless of where he was born, should be accepted as a brahmana. Similarly, if one has developed the qualities of a sudra or a candala, regardless of where he was born, he should be accepted in terms of those symptoms.

[raghu]

Several quick points:

 

1) The vajra-sucika upanishad is probably not a true Upanishad. It is thought by many to be a later smriti text that got passed off as an Upanishad. For something to be an Upanishad it should be passed down in the oral tradition and accepted across different Vedanta traditions as such.

 

2) The Chandogya Upanishad only states that Satyakama was accepted for initiation because of his truth-telling. It does not say that Satyakama was born a non-brahmin; on the contrary, it indicates that Satyakama did not know his father nor his lineage. If it were clearly indicated that Satyakama was a non-brahmin by birth, then and only then does this prove your point.

 

3) The multiple references alleged to be from the Mahabharata are provided without specific verse numbers and without Sanskrit. This makes them difficult to cross reference, which I suppose was intentional. However, one specific reference caught my eye:

 

 

"Bhrigu said, 'That person is called a Brahmana who has been sanctified by such rites as those called jata and others; who is pure in behaviour; who is engaged in studying the Vedas; who is devoted to the six well-known acts (of ablutions every morning and evening, silent recitation of mantras, pouring libations on the sacrificial fire, worshipping the deities, doing the duties of hospitality to guests, and offering food to the Viswedevas); who is properly observant of all pious acts; who never takes food without having offered it duly to gods and guests; who is filled with reverence for his preceptor; and who is always devoted to vows and truth. He is called a Brahmana in whom are truth, gifts, abstention from injury to others, compassion, shame, benevolence, 1 and penance.

 

This indicates that iskcon "brahmins" are not brahmanas because they do not study the Vedas. If you are going to take these English translations alleged to be from the Mahabharata as evidence, then you must be prepared to accept them even when they say things that you do not like.

 

4) The reference you provided from the Bhagavata says only that the individuals with the right qualities should be thought of or respected as a brahmana. It does NOT say that the person thus becomes a brahmana and then gets the duty of chanting the Vedas. This is a statement explaining the ideals of how a brahmana should behave, what he should do, etc. It does not give practical information saying who exactly gets designated as a brahmana. Ashvatthama was still regarded as a brahmana even though he did not have these qualities - the same Bhagavata says this in the first skandha. Again, this indicates that practically speaking people were regarded as belonging to the varna of their birth. Anyone can say that they have the qualities of a brahmana, and some people may recognize the qualities of a brahmana in a specific individual. But without some objective criterion that everyone in society can accept, it is meaningless to classify people merely according to qualities that one can only subjectively appreciate. Hence, birth is used by convention to determine varna, and people were raised within their varna to have the qualities as described here.

[shiva]

 

Several quick points:

 

1) The vajra-sucika upanishad is probably not a true Upanishad. It is thought by many to be a later smriti text that got passed off as an Upanishad. For something to be an Upanishad it should be passed down in the oral tradition and accepted across different Vedanta traditions as such.

 

2) The Chandogya Upanishad only states that Satyakama was accepted for initiation because of his truth-telling. It does not say that Satyakama was born a non-brahmin; on the contrary, it indicates that Satyakama did not know his father nor his lineage. If it were clearly indicated that Satyakama was a non-brahmin by birth, then and only then does this prove your point.

 

3) The multiple references alleged to be from the Mahabharata are provided without specific verse numbers and without Sanskrit. This makes them difficult to cross reference, which I suppose was intentional. However, one specific reference caught my eye:

 

 

 

This indicates that iskcon "brahmins" are not brahmanas because they do not study the Vedas. If you are going to take these English translations alleged to be from the Mahabharata as evidence, then you must be prepared to accept them even when they say things that you do not like.

 

4) The reference you provided from the Bhagavata says only that the individuals with the right qualities should be thought of or respected as a brahmana. It does NOT say that the person thus becomes a brahmana and then gets the duty of chanting the Vedas. This is a statement explaining the ideals of how a brahmana should behave, what he should do, etc. It does not give practical information saying who exactly gets designated as a brahmana. Ashvatthama was still regarded as a brahmana even though he did not have these qualities - the same Bhagavata says this in the first skandha. Again, this indicates that practically speaking people were regarded as belonging to the varna of their birth. Anyone can say that they have the qualities of a brahmana, and some people may recognize the qualities of a brahmana in a specific individual. But without some objective criterion that everyone in society can accept, it is meaningless to classify people merely according to qualities that one can only subjectively appreciate. Hence, birth is used by convention to determine varna, and people were raised within their varna to have the qualities as described here.

 

Well, clearly you are a sudra...and a mudha.

 

The Mahabharata quotes are from the famous Ganguli translation and I give the chapter number of each quote, you can check them here http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/maha/index.htm

 

Of course since these quotes demolish your bogus philosophy, since you are a mudha all you can do is claim they are bogus, instead of accepting the obvious truth of your ideas being so.

[raghu]

 

Well, clearly you are a sudra...and a mudha.

 

The Mahabharata quotes are from the famous Ganguli translation and I give the chapter number of each quote, you can check them here http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/maha/index.htm

 

Of course since these quotes demolish your bogus philosophy, since you are a mudha all you can do is claim they are bogus, instead of accepting the obvious truth of your ideas being so.

 

Well, if I am a sudra, then what are you? A brahmin? Do brahmins speak like this?

 

Do you accept the conclusion of the Mahabharata translation which *you* quoted as follows:

 

 

"Bhrigu said, 'That person is called a Brahmana who has been sanctified by such rites as those called jata and others; who is pure in behaviour; who is engaged in studying the Vedas;

 

that defines a brahmana by his study of the Vedas? And then logically the conclusion that iskcon brahmins are not brahmins since they do not study the Vedas?

 

It was you who brought these quotes up. It makes little sense to quote them when they appear to support what you say and then reject them when they say more that you do not want to accept.

[raghu]

I apologize, I just realized that this was the thread where I should have posted this.

 

 

The Sri Vaishnavas did not accept, so Baladeva composed the Govinda Bhasya.pdf as a Gaudiya commentary on the Brahma Sutra.

 

Since *you* are the one providing the link to the iskcon translation of Govinda Bhashya (above), I trust you will not take issue with anything I quote *from* it. So take a look at VS 3.34-38 along with the accompanying commentary by your own Baladeva Vidyabhushana. Therein, Sri Baladeva says repeatedly that shudras are not eligible to study the Vedas. Now one might think that a shudra can become a brahmana and then study the Veda, but Baldeva refutes this as well by stating that a shudra cannot undergo any reformatory samskaras.

 

So I guess Baladeva Vidyabhushana, the Vedanta commentator for the Gaudiya sampradaya, is also a bigoted caste brahmin who s to a bogus idea.

 

If it is beginning to bother you that your own acharyas disagree with your ideas, feel free to just flame me again as always.

[kaisersose]

 

Well, clearly you are a sudra...and a mudha.

 

The Mahabharata quotes are from the famous Ganguli translation and I give the chapter number of each quote, you can check them here http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/maha/index.htm

 

Of course since these quotes demolish your bogus philosophy, since you are a mudha all you can do is claim they are bogus, instead of accepting the obvious truth of your ideas being so.

 

Here we go with the same nonsense all over again. How many times should your errors be pointed out before your thick heads can grasp them?

 

1) Brahmana is by birth only. Prabhupada disagreed with tradition and tried to play God by giving Brahmana status to some of his followers and we all know how that went.

 

So if you disagree that Brahmana is by birth, then how do you identify a Brahmana or better how does a Brahmana identify himself? Consult an Iskcon scholar?

 

2) The chandogya story actually refutes your position and you are so dumb that you have quoted it in support of your position!

 

Note that Jabala's question to his mom is about his lineage. When he approaches his Guru, the Guru's question is abut his lineage as it is evidently a pre-requisite. The Guru did not say, "varna is not by birth..I have a test that determines varna". He ascertains the boy must of Brahmana lineage as he spoke the truth without fear.

 

Next time, you may want to read your own posts before embarassing yourself by posting evidence against your own position! The Chandogya ranks as the highest authority among all the various quotes you posted and by showing that the Chandogya rejects your position, the rest of the quotes become moot and do not warrant a response.

 

And btw, your own Hare Krishna colleagues do not take your position. That is why they write articles titled "Vaishnava is better than Brahmana" and post them on gosai.com. Hence, if you are eager to convince anyone, first convince your own people.

 

Better luck next time,

Cheers

[Kyros]

 

 

(ISKCON does study the Vedas. The Puranas are considered to be a part of the Fifth Vedas.)

 

Sama Veda 7.1.2

 

 

"O venerable Sir, I studied the Rg, Yajur, Säma, and Atharva Veda as well as the Itihäsas and Puranas, which are the fifth Veda."

Atharva Veda 11.7.24

 

"The Rg, Säma, Yajur, and Atharvaveda, along with the Puranas, and all the demigods residing in the heavenly planets appeared from the Supreme Lord."

 

Atharva 15.6.10 and 15.6.12

 

 

"He moved favorably towards Brhati and thus the Itihäsas, Puranas, Gäthäs, and Näräçaàsé became favorable to him. One who knows this verily becomes the dear abode of the Itihäsas and Puräëas, Gäthas and Näräsaàsé."

 

(As clearly stated by the above verses, the Puranas and epics, like Mahabharata and Ramayana, are clearly Vedic. Indeed they are the Fifth Vedas.)

 

 

Bhagavad Gita 3.5

 

 

 

 

 

na hi kaścit kṣaṇam api

jātu tiṣṭhaty akarma-kṛt

kāryate hy avaśaḥ karma

sarvaḥ prakṛti-jair guṇaiḥ

 

 

 

 

 

Everyone is forced to act helplessly according to the qualities he has acquired from the modes of material nature; therefore no one can refrain from doing something, not even for a moment.

 

 

 

Bhagavad Gita 18.41

 

 

 

brāhmaṇa-kṣatriya-viśāḿ

śūdrāṇāḿ ca parantapa

karmāṇi pravibhaktāni

svabhāva-prabhavair guṇaiḥ

 

 

Brāhmaṇas, kṣatriyas, vaiśyas and śūdras are distinguished by the qualities born of their own natures in accordance with the material modes, O chastiser of the enemy.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(As clearly stated by Lord Krishna. The caste system is based on qualities of the person's nature. To determine the person's nature is to WATCH THEM GROW UP.

 

 

Conclusion: The Caste System is based on qualities of work, not birth. The only people against this truth are those pathetic people who do not want to let go of their acquired position.)

 

 

[andy108]

 

1) Brahmana is by birth only. Prabhupada disagreed with tradition and tried to play God by giving Brahmana status to some of his followers and we all know how that went.

 

So your arrogant presumption as to your ability to have assessed the character of each person who Bhaktivedanta Swami awarded a Brahmana thread to is an indication of your...

 

1. Elevated character due to your advanced birth in this lifetime?

2. Vedic scholarship?

3. Qualification to be taken seriously?

4. Suitability to by chastised by Lord Yamaraja for blashpheming a pure devotional servant of the Lord?

[kaisersose]

 

So your arrogant presumption as to your ability to have assessed the character of each person who Bhaktivedanta Swami awarded a Brahmana thread to is an indication of your...

 

1. Elevated character due to your advanced birth in this lifetime?

2. Vedic scholarship?

3. Qualification to be taken seriously?

4. Suitability to by chastised by Lord Yamaraja for blashpheming a pure devotional servant of the Lord?

 

Try "common sense".

 

Since Prabhupada claimed to follow Madhva and yet disagreed with his teachings, he has commited serious Vaishnava aparadha (for ignoring the words of a sampradaya acharya). I am sure you agree with this, as you disagree with the concept of a Prabhupada disciple differing from Prabhupada's teachings and yet claiming to be in his parampara. The second aparadha he commited was his attempt to play God & assign Brahmana status to pedophiles, etc.

 

Those are very two serious counts of Arapadha that no one can deny - except for sentiments that is. But again, this requires some common sense and at least a modicum of honesty - both of which are seriously lacking in your case as most people here already know. The rest will know soon and then you will probably have to come back with yet another new identity.

 

Cheers

[andy108]

 

Kaiser say-so says:

 

Since Prabhupada claimed to follow Madhva and yet disagreed with his teachings,

 

He claimed to follow in the footsteps of Sri Madhvacarya in the following manner. from Purport to SB 1.4: The Appearance of Sri Narada : SB 1.4.17, SB 1.4.18, SB 1.4.17-18

 

 

The greatest philanthropists are those transcendentalists who represent the mission of Vyāsa, Nārada, Madhva, Caitanya, Rūpa, Sarasvatī, etc. They are all one and the same. The personalities may be different, but the aim of the mission is one and the same, namely, to deliver the fallen souls back home, back to Godhead.

 

And he did not "disagree" with his teachings.

 

He added Sri Madhvacarya promulgated personalism, but Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu expanded on this to enhance it.

 

Bhaktivinoda Thakur writes: “Madhavendra Puri was a well-known sannyasi of the Madhva-sampradaya. His grand-disciple was Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu. Prior to his appearance, there was no evidence of prema-bhakti in the Madhva line. In his verse, ayi dina-dayardra-natha (CC Madhya 4.197), the seed of the religious doctrines of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu can be found.” Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati similarly states,

“Madhavendra Puri was the first shoot of the desire tree of divine love that came out of the Madhva lineage. Prior to his appearance, there was no sign of the conjugal mood of devotion in the Madhva line.

 

<nobr>.</nobr>

[raghu]

 

He claimed to follow in the footsteps of Sri Madhvacarya in the following manner. from Purport to SB 1.4: The Appearance of Sri Narada : SB 1.4.17, SB 1.4.18, SB 1.4.17-18

 

Perhaps someone could explain to this dull-witted, bigoted caste brahmin, wretched as I am for not being in the iskcon clique, as to why the above shlokas substantiate a Prabhupada link to Sri Madhva.

 

 

And he did not "disagree" with his teachings.

 

Prabhupada's commentary on bhagavata 1.3.28 is *clearly* in disagreement with Madhva's commentary on the same. This is just one example, but since "Krishna is the Original supreme Personality of Godhead" is such a core facet of your beliefs, I think it will suffice to make the point.

 

 

Bhaktivinoda Thakur writes:

 

This would be the same Bhaktivinoda who, according to your friend Sonic Yogi, says that the mAdhva caste-brahmins are the greatest enemies of the world?

[raghu]

Since andy108 and shiva are (once again) hijacking the thread by posting irrelevant responses and generally trying to change the subject rather than admit when they are wrong, I have posted here about the Govinda Bhasya passages that are relevant for the original discussion

[andy108]

 

Since andy108 and shiva are (once again) hijacking the thread by posting irrelevant responses and generally trying to change the subject rather than admit when they are wrong, I have posted here about the Govinda Bhasya passages that are relevant for the original discussion

 

Nice diversionary tactic. Shiva actually corrected me in favor of YOUR position that Srila Bhakitvedanta Swami did disagree with certain conclusions purported by the authorized translations of Madhva's doctrine.

 

But since we clearly show our understanding and acceptance of these differences yet point to how the Gaudiya view generally accepts and adds to the teachings of Sri Madhva, you take exception and seek to divert from this MAIN POINT.

 

When describing the enemies of Gaudiya Vaisnavism, Srila Bhaktivinode is not speaking of the broad-minded brahminical disciples of Sri Madhva, but those that adhere to and promulgate the false-crystalized tradition of caste-by-birth ONLY. Which is the scourge of India and all the world as it seeks to restrict the Lord in his dance of distribution of Love of God to petty mundane parameters.

[kaisersose]

 

When describing the enemies of Gaudiya Vaisnavism, Srila Bhaktivinode is not speaking of the broad-minded brahminical disciples of Sri Madhva, but those that adhere to and promulgate the false-crystalized tradition of caste-by-birth ONLY....

 

You can scream from rooftops, but that will not change a thing. Varna is by birth alone and it is made abundantly clear in scripture and has been accepted that for thousands of years. "Prabhupada said so" does not change things even a little bit. And who gives a damn what a forger like Bhakti Vinoda says? If anything, you should take offence at him for giving you false stories about how he discovered a Chaitanya Upanishad. Instead of dealing with your own unscrupulous Gurus, you are living in denial choosing to attack people who are showing you facts instead of fabricated stories. To me, that is a blatant display of lack of intelligence.

 

 

Which is the scourge of India and all the world as it seeks to restrict the Lord in his dance of distribution of Love of God to petty mundane parameters.

 

It does no such thing. Show me how, if you know what you are talking about (which is highly doubtful). Else, I would advice you to keep your mouth shut and focus on matters you really know.

 

Cheers

[andy108]

 

You can scream from rooftops, but that will not change a thing. Varna is by birth alone and it is made abundantly clear in scripture and has been accepted that for thousands of years. "Prabhupada said so" does not change things even a little bit. And who gives a damn what a forger like Bhakti Vinoda says? If anything, you should take offence at him for giving you false stories about how he discovered a Chaitanya Upanishad. Instead of dealing with your own unscrupulous Gurus, you are living in denial choosing to attack people who are showing you facts instead of fabricated stories. To me, that is a blatant display of lack of intelligence.

 

It does no such thing. Show me how, if you know what you are talking about (which is highly doubtful). Else, I would advice you to keep your mouth shut and focus on matters you really know.

 

Cheers

 

 

Kaiser Says so]"Varna is by birth alone and it is made abundantly clear in scripture and has been accepted that for thousands of years"

 

 

The burden of proof is on you to provide evidence of such a statement. I have seen none. Although, if you were to show such a scriptural statement that argued it was not possible for a person to be placed into a birth family whos father's varna did not match his inner qualities, I would be suspicious that the translation was simply a motivated interpretation because I have seen evidence with my own eyes, corroborated by the similar perceptions of countless others, that the birth cycle is not so cut and dry. To imagine that God Almighty, (source of all scripture), would contradict what is plainly evident to untold numbers of persons of "average intelligence" stretches the boundaries of sanity.

 

Of course, Lord Buddha rejected the Vedic evidence completely to fulfill his particular mission of gradually enlightening those who were so lost as to twist scripture to suit their own sensual gratification.

 

Buddhists would declare whatever translation a Gaudiya Acarya ascribed to Devanagari Sanskrit text from Vedic Scritpure as irrelevant because it was made abundantly clear to them that the Vedas are worthless.

[kaisersose]

 

The burden of proof is on you to provide evidence of such a statement. I have seen none. Although, if you were to show such a scriptural statement that argued it was not possible for a person to be placed into a birth family whos father's varna did not match his inner qualities

 

 

There is plenty of proof -

 

Madhva followed the practice back in the 1300s

Shankara followed the practice back in the 700s

Gautama the Guru from the Chandogya followed the practice back in 1500 BC or somewhere in that range.

Though Drona was a warrior, he was never identified as a Kshatriya.

Though Arjuna faltered before the war, that did not do away his Kshtriya status. He was told by Krishna to clean up his act and perform his Kshatriya duty.

 

I can go on & on...what else do you need? However, to be fair, a very rare instance exists of the Kshatriya Vishwamitra becoming a Brahmana after severe hardships - which is a clear exception that literally took an act of God.

 

 

I would be suspicious that the translation was simply a motivated interpretation because I have seen evidence with my own eyes, corroborated by the similar perceptions of countless others, that the birth cycle is not so cut and dry.

 

Everyone agrees that the cycle is not perfect. We all know that someone born in Shudra family can display Brahmana characterestics and vice-versa.

 

Madhva has acknowledged this too, which is why he has (uniquely) assigned varnas to souls. That explains why a Shudra can display Brahmana traits - for he is a Brahmana soul and he was temporarily born as a Shudra owing to past Karma. But he will eventually get back on track.

 

The key point is, he was born as a Shudra for a reason, and therefore he should perform the approprate Karma for his varna. No one has the ability to identify their own "actual" varnas or someone else's and change their Karma's based on such identification. As a Hare Krishna you have direct evidence of how this failed in the case of the ISKCON tradition. Such an identification procedure is not mentioned anywhere in scripture.

 

Cheers

[raghu]

 

The burden of proof is on you to provide evidence of such a statement.

 

How about bhagavad-gItA?

 

Arjuna wanted to reject his duty of fighting in favor of nonviolence. He did not want to enjoy the spoils of war and did not have any ambition to be reinstated to power. In other words, he was displaying brahminical traits.

 

Andy, being the ignorant, wretched, enemy-of-the-world mAdhva brahmin that I am, can you kindy show me where in the gItA Arjuna got promoted to the brAhmana varna, and where it was that Sri Krishna told him that he need not fight the battle?

 

Thanks for your help.

[andy108]

 

The key point is, he was born as a Shudra for a reason, and therefore he should perform the approprate Karma for his varna. No one has the ability to identify their own "actual" varnas or someone else's and change their Karma's based on such identification.

 

Wrong. I can identify someone elses actual varna by simply observing their behavioral tendencies and qualities. And I can change their karma too. For if they have the karma of being born into a situation where their father is not qualified to engage them according to the actual guna that is attached to their soul, I could recommend that child be placed into Gurukula with a teacher of higher varna, or instruct them myself. Very simple. Karma is altered due to mercy. If the soul is willing and surrendered to the step, and the father amiable, it is a done deal. Try and stop me. So I have proved you wrong inherently.

 

Or you can take the words of Srila Sanatana Goswami in Hari Bhakti Vilas, or Srila Jiva Goswami, or Vyasa's Srimad Bhagavatam as mentioned in the purport to CC Adi 7.47...

 

 

In this Hari-bhakti-vilāsa Śrī Sanātana Gosvāmī gives definite instructions that by proper initiation by a bona fide spiritual master one can immediately become a brāhmaṇa. In this connection he says:

 

yathā kāñcanatāṁ yāti kāṁsyaṁ rasa-vidhānataḥ

tathā dīkṣā-vidhānena dvijatvaṁ jāyate nṛṇām

 

 

"As bell metal is turned to gold when mixed with mercury in an alchemical process, so one who is properly trained and initiated by a bona fide spiritual master immediately becomes a brāhmaṇa." Sometimes those born in brāhmaṇa families protest this, but they have no strong arguments against this principle. By the grace of Kṛṣṇa and His devotee, one's life can change. This is confirmed in Śrīmad-Bhagavatam by the words jahāti bandham and śudhyanti. Jahāti bandham indicates that a living entity is conditioned by a particular type of body. The body is certainly an impediment, but one who associates with a pure devotee and follows his instructions can avoid this impediment and become a regular brāḥmaṇa by initiation under his strict guidance. Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī states how a non-brāhmaṇa can be turned into a brāhmaṇa by the association of a pure devotee. Prabhaviṣṇave namaḥ: Lord Viṣṇu is so powerful that He can do anything He likes. Therefore it is not difficult for Viṣṇu to change the body of a devotee who is under the guidance of a pure devotee of the Lord.

 

 

 

As a Hare Krishna you have direct evidence of how this failed in the case of the ISKCON tradition. Such an identification procedure is not mentioned anywhere in scripture.

What is a "Hare Krsna"?

 

Anyway, this procedure is mentioned in scripture as above.

 

As regarding the process used by Srila Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, he said that if someone is for a moment honest and sincere about endeavoring to know God, and inquiring "who am I", they are qualified to be initiated into the Maha Mantra. Which is the only way to save the grossly ignorant western world who didn't have the privelege of your own good karma and birthright.

 

harer nāma harer nāma harer nāmaiva kevalam kalau nāsty eva nāsty eva nāsty eva gatir anyathā. [Cc. Adi 17.21]

 

SYNONYMS

hareḥ nāma—the holy name of the Lord; hareḥ nāma—the holy name of the Lord; hareḥ nāma—the holy name of the Lord; eva—certainly; kevalam—only; kalau—in the Age of Kali; na asti—there is none; eva—certainly; na asti—there is none; eva—certainly; na asti—there is none; eva—certainly; gatiḥ—destination; anyathā—otherwise.

TRANSLATION

" 'In this Age of Kali there is no other means, no other means, no other means for self-realization than chanting the holy name, chanting the holy name, chanting the holy name of Lord Hari.'

 

 

And then trained as brahmana. He also qualified this by stating that any dishonesty or insincerety that crept in to the student would prevent him from taking guidance and training seriously and strictly and prevent him from making further advancement, as per the elucidation of Sanatana Goswami's conclusion. But there is no loss or dimunition on the path any advancement on the path is permanently stored in the Samchit storehouse despite falldowns.

 

There are plenty of people who are intellectual by nature, yet have little or none of the other positive traits of a Brahmana. This is Kali Yuga. There were millions of such souls born outside of Bharata Varsa left for dead eternally. He had the mercy and compassion to step out of his comfort zone and start the ball rolling for all of them. Even if they immediately turned on him in a fit of selfishness.

 

Savior of the fallen. Patita Pavana. You cannot see the forest for the trees, are throwing the baby out with the wash water, and are missing the glory in the situation.

[raghu]

 

Wrong. I can identify someone elses actual varna by simply observing their behavioral tendencies and qualities. And I can change their karma too. For if they have the karma of being born into a situation where their father is not qualified to engage them according to the actual guna that is attached to their soul, I could recommend that child be placed into Gurukula with a teacher of higher varna, or instruct them myself. Very simple. Karma is altered due to mercy. If the soul is willing and surrendered to the step, and the father amiable, it is a done deal. Try and stop me. So I have proved you wrong inherently.

 

SO if you can do that, then why could not Prabhupada?

 

Why did Prabhupada mistakenly identify Kirtananda and many others as brahmanas?

 

What do you have that he lacks?

[andy108]

 

SO if you can do that, then why could not Prabhupada?

 

Why did Prabhupada mistakenly identify Kirtananda and many others as brahmanas?

 

What do you have that he lacks?

 

you again miss the point.

 

He did not make a mistake. It is you who cannot recognize that he came to reclaim the most fallen of the brahminical varna. Including me.

 

Many of those who the Lord sent to my Prabhupada had mostly poor moral and ethical qualities, and only the intellect.

 

He saved us anyway, giving us his association, reducing the punishment for the eons of demoniac sins we committed by virtue of our high level of material intellectual intelligence, and probably saving the entire universe from our perverted wrath.

 

And not all were as degraded as I allude. You are simply and wholly ignorant as to the existence of hundreds of his disciples who had actually some of the more refined moral, ethical, and equalminded qualities of a Bramana, who rejected the ostentatious and abusive institutional power grab of the worst of Prabhupada's disciples.

 

They are in exile on the fringe of society. Working quietly as librarians, teachers of young children, writers, grocery store clerks, some living off inheritances. They chant, read, pray, hold kirtanas, generally keep a low profile, sometimes participate in internet forums, but rarely.

 

So you again are locked into your assumption of the "great failure of Gaudiya Vaisnavism, by focusing solely on the little blip on the radar which is the false abusive Iskcon of the tabloids as ammunition to prove your criticisms.

 

Too bad for you.

 

But now, perhaps, you can see the hidden mercy distribution even in that apparently horrendous escapade, and rejoice. If not that is ok, just go easy with the blasphemy for your own sake.

[kaisersose]

 

you again miss the point.

Andy,

You are missing the point. No one disagrees that many souls may have been saved by Prabhupada, many who never even met him. That is not the point in contention.

The question is this and let us stay focused on it. How does one identify one's varna, if not by birth? Is this identification something anyone can do or only some gifted souls can? If yes, how do we identify these gifted souls? Where is the procedure to identify such gifted souls laid out?

For example. From past observation, I gauged you incorrectly as yet another foul-mouthed, arrogant, shallow Hare Krishna incapable of dealing objectively with facts and instead going into a rage, calling the opponent a Prabhupada-hater, putting people on ignore lists...you know what I mean. But you are obviously capable of sustained objective thinking. Do you see how tricky it can be to evaluate people?

 

Your argument of visual observation is not perfect. Prabhupada attempted this and it did not work. If he could see ahead in time and see the the true nature of Tamal, etc., he would have given them the boot. But he had no way of knowing and so his evalutation eventually turned out to be wrong, which proves visual observation is not an absolute science. So what is your basis then for still holding on to this approach?

 

Cheers

[bhaktajan]

 

you again miss the point.

 

He did not make a mistake. It is you who cannot recognize that he came to reclaim the most fallen of the brahminical varna. Including me.

 

Many of those who the Lord sent to my Prabhupada had mostly poor moral and ethical qualities, and only the intellect.

 

He saved us anyway, giving us his association, reducing the punishment for the eons of demoniac sins we committed by virtue of our high level of material intellectual intelligence, and probably saving the entire universe from our perverted wrath.

 

And not all were as degraded as I allude. You are simply and wholly ignorant as to the existence of hundreds of his disciples who had actually some of the more refined moral, ethical, and equalminded qualities of a Bramana, who rejected the ostentatious and abusive institutional power grab of the worst of Prabhupada's disciples.

 

They are in exile on the fringe of society. Working quietly as librarians, teachers of young children, writers, grocery store clerks, some living off inheritances. They chant, read, pray, hold kirtanas, generally keep a low profile, sometimes participate in internet forums, but rarely.

 

So you again are locked into your assumption of the "great failure of Gaudiya Vaisnavism, by focusing solely on the little blip on the radar which is the false abusive Iskcon of the tabloids as ammunition to prove your criticisms.

 

Too bad for you.

 

But now, perhaps, you can see the hidden mercy distribution even in that apparently horrendous escapade, and rejoice. If not that is ok, just go easy with the blasphemy for your own sake.

Andy Ol'dude-ster, Yall is first rate!

If you have eyes to see, Behold the hidden mercy distribution.

[bhaktajan]

What's the big deal here!

Brahmana is a job title! --that's all.

Senator, Prime minister, King, wife, husband, student are all job titles.

If you can do the work expertly then you may be a canidate for the available position --but the most ideal employment is bestowed to canidates by 'higher' authorities.

[bhaktajan]

 

you again miss the point.

 

He did not make a mistake. It is you who cannot recognize that he came to reclaim the most fallen of the brahminical varna. Including me.

 

Many of those who the Lord sent to my Prabhupada had mostly poor moral and ethical qualities, and only the intellect.

 

He saved us anyway, giving us his association, reducing the punishment for the eons of demoniac sins we committed by virtue of our high level of material intellectual intelligence, and probably saving the entire universe from our perverted wrath.

 

And not all were as degraded as I allude. You are simply and wholly ignorant as to the existence of hundreds of his disciples who had actually some of the more refined moral, ethical, and equalminded qualities of a Bramana, who rejected the ostentatious and abusive institutional power grab of the worst of Prabhupada's disciples.

 

They are in exile on the fringe of society. Working quietly as librarians, teachers of young children, writers, grocery store clerks, some living off inheritances. They chant, read, pray, hold kirtanas, generally keep a low profile, sometimes participate in internet forums, but rarely.

 

So you again are locked into your assumption of the "great failure of Gaudiya Vaisnavism, by focusing solely on the little blip on the radar which is the false abusive Iskcon of the tabloids as ammunition to prove your criticisms.

 

Too bad for you.

 

But now, perhaps, you can see the hidden mercy distribution even in that apparently horrendous escapade, and rejoice. If not that is ok, just go easy with the blasphemy for your own sake.

"to reclaim the most fallen of the brahminical varna"

Sometimes I've thought that SP did just that: He knew canidates who had practiced all levels of Vedic tapasyas &/or suffered through all the requisite paths had arrived on Bhumi-loka and the time was ripe.

He was the Paramahansa that taken-up the nectarous ones from among the rat race competetors.