>
>
> Heavy stuff. :-) The Manu Samhita is one of the most far out things I have
> read in my life. Interesting to know that at one time it was followed!
>
> your servant,
> Jayasri devi dasi

And people lived to be 1000 and temple worship was the yuga dharma. Plenty of
time to work out the details.

On Sat, 2 Jan 1999, COM: Jayasri (dd) VMS (Crescent City, CA - USA) wrote:

> [Text 1983257 from COM]
>
>
> Of course it does. :-) I was posting it for the "devoured by dogs" thing,
> pretty intense. My initial point was that many oppose looking to Manu
> Samhita, and when we talk about it, sometimes people get agitated because of
> certain things in it. In addition, as Janesvara prabhu nicely pointed out,
> maybe when we can follow the beginners guides, like Bhagavad Gita, then we
> could give more consideration to the more complicated Manu Samhita. What do
> you think?
>
> your servant,
> Jayasri devi dasi
>

As much as I appreciate Janesvara prabhu's contributions, in this instance
I have to agree with the devotee who very eloquently pointed out that the
Bhagavad-gita (Song of God) which is mostly directly quotes from the lotus
mouth of Sri Krsna is higer than Manu Samhita, which does not mention
Krsna at all, and only mentions Lord Visnu as one of several demigods.

It's not that Manu Samhita is higher than Bhagavad-gita, it's simply that
it cannot safely be applied in this age without the guidance of an
advanced devotee on the caliber of Srila Prabhupada -- and so far, I
haven't seen anyone on his caliber in my lifetime.

your servant,

Hare Krsna dasi

On 03 Jan 1999, Hare Krsna dasi wrote:

> As much as I appreciate Janesvara prabhu's contributions, in this instance
> I have to agree with the devotee who very eloquently pointed out that the
> Bhagavad-gita (Song of God) which is mostly directly quotes from the lotus
> mouth of Sri Krsna is higer than Manu Samhita,


I do not think what I said previously is contradictory to this. I said, "I did
not say one scripture is "higher" than another in the Absolute
spiritual sense. Only that we, as neophytes, cannot understand the higher
principles and lessons taught in certain scriptures. To me scriptures are like
a bag of sugar - no matter where you poke a hole and take a taste it is sweet!
But still you are supposed to start at the beginning like starting at Krsna's
feet and working your way up. Certainly Krsna's feet are not "lower" or
"inferior" to His head, right? Srila Prabhupada was the person who stated that
the Srimad-Bhagavatam was the "post-graduate" study of Bhagavad-gita."

Also, Srila Prabhupada stated: "One should first, with all conviction, believe
in the Personality of Godhead, Sri Krishna, and without making efforts to
realize Him by speculative philosophy, one should prefer to hear about Him
from the Bhagavad-gita and later on from the text of Srimad-Bhagavatam..."S.B.
2.9.18.

Krsna spoke the Bhagavad-gita for a specific purpose; to start another
parampara because it had been broken. He used Arjuna to start the new
parampara. The gita is Krsna's Own words, but the Srimad Bhagavatam is the
words of His pure devotees which Srila Prabhupada says are even higher and
sweeter. Would this not also apply to Manu-samhita which was written by a
Mahajana, pure devotee?



> which does not mention
> Krsna at all, and only mentions Lord Visnu as one of several demigods.

Manu-samhita was written by a Mahajana, Svayambhuva Manu. The Mahajanas are
the authorities on devotional service. I feel we should hold their works in
the highest respect even if we cannot understand them or live them to the
fullest capacity. One day perhaps when I take birth again in Satya-yuga I MAY
be in a position to finally follow Manu-samhita. Until then I want to follow
Srila Prabhupada's prescription for my elementary
education:

"The Krsna consciousness movement is based on Bhagavad-gita as it is, as
spoken by Lord Krsna." Srimad Bhagavatam 4.24.42.


> It's not that Manu Samhita is higher than Bhagavad-gita, it's simply that
> it cannot safely be applied in this age without the guidance of an
> advanced devotee on the caliber of Srila Prabhupada -- and so far, I
> haven't seen anyone on his caliber in my lifetime.
>
> your servant,
>
> Hare Krsna dasi

Pamho. AgtSP!

>Never said against women, prabhu! Better read my post again. :-)

Maybe I misunderstood you. Anyway ;-)

> Of course it does. :-) I was posting it for the "devoured by dogs" thing,
> pretty intense. My initial point was that many oppose looking to Manu
> Samhita, and when we talk about it, sometimes people get agitated because
> of certain things in it. In addition, as Janesvara prabhu nicely pointed
> out, maybe when we can follow the beginners guides, like Bhagavad Gita,
> then we could give more consideration to the more complicated Manu
> Samhita. What do you think?

Manu laws were not just some kind of theoretical points. People lived
in accordance with them in Vedic times, and they prospered and were quite
happy. In our present time, of course, not every step is acceptable.
So "devoured by dogs" is okey for previous ages, when the rules were
more strict. Now in Kali-yuga no one is faultless, and if Manu
laws would be applied to, then everyone should suffer from many severe
punishments.Maybe you missed my points, since I already told it before. :-)
We have to use a common sense and find things, which would be useful in
varnasrama. BTW Hare Krishna dasi uses in her preaching not only
Srila Prabhupada's instructions, but also applies scientific research
and results are great. Therefore I don't see a problem in addressing
Manu laws. Or Manu Smriti is worse than modern scientific magazines?
Any scriptures can be interpreted in twisted way, even
Srila Prabhupada's words (as we see in GHQ case). But it doesn't mean
that there is a fault in scriptures. The problem is in our approach.

Bhagavad Gita teaches us how be a good devotee, and Manu Samhita teaches us
how to be a good citizen in varnasrama. So I think both processes should
be there.

Actually in Eleventh Canto of SB, Lord Krishna gave so many instructions
for varnasrama, which are practically non different from those in
Manu Samhita. I haven't seen a single person who strictly follows
*all* of them. Have you? I guess not. But *some* instructions can
be easily handled by anybody. So let us use yukta vairagya, accept
favourable and reject unfavourable.

About agitation, I didn't become agitated by reading Manusmriti. Rather,
it pasified my mind. I'm sorry if anyone was displeased.

Next questions for conference: What prevents us from establishment of
varnasrama? How can we remove these obstacles?
(rather old question)

I haven't got answer on my previos question: duties of ksatriya women?