kaisersose

It's better than the caste by birth concept which put India in such a pathetic state that allowed it to be taken over by the British and other foreignors.

You will have to do better than that. Show me evidence that the Indian caste system was the reason for Indian colonization or are you just repeating something you heard somewhere without thinking it out?

And then, please explain how the British colonized almost the entire world, but it is only in the case of India that caste was the reason.

I'll wait,

Cheers

That's why he gave a complete explanation on this topic, since even in those days (second half of the 19th century) it was not very easy for brahmana community to understand vaisnavism and its relationship with the brahmana caste.

I dont know what you mean. Brahmana Vaishnavas have been around for thousands of years and the two major Vaishnava traditions in India were founded by Brahmanas. Why would they have any trouble knowing their own traditions and beliefs in the second half of the 19th century?

If you are specifically referring to Gaudiya Vaishnavas, then what you write is possible.

Vaisnava diksa aims at two things: 1. receiving divya-jnana (transcendental knowledge of one's relationship with the Lord) and 2. anartha-nivritti (liberating oneself from anarthas, bad habbits and most importantly, improper (unfavorable to bhakti) inclinations in the heart).

Neither of these goals require one to become a Brahmana. If anything, I only see danger in such a conversion process.

Cheers

Kyros says,

Satsvarupa I can confidently say is not a vaishnava nor a brahmana.

and SY responds,

Then you just exposed that you are neither a Vaishnava or a brahmana.

See why one cannot identify Varna by observation?

Cheers

Besides Raghu's criticisms, what is he proposing?

You did not get that yet? Amazing.

1) It is not possible to identify the varna of a person by observing him. Therefore, the only way to know varna is by birth - as has been followed for thousands of years. The human species has not developed new skills in the recent past for identifying varna by observation.

2) It is not necesssary to become a Brahmana to worship Krishna. No scripture places such a requirement.

Just these two points. And a smaller font will get you the answer too.

Cheers

Why this parampara thing is on spirituality thread?.If the admin thinks it is necessary to feed trolls like kaiserose,raghu etc why dont you create a trolls thread.

You dont even know why this topic is on the spirituality thread?

Dude, It is a good thing that you are not the admin!

Cheers

Also, where does it say that the "3" Vedas are Tier 1?

Also, it questions me. Srila Madvha is said to use verses from the Puranas. Why can he do it, but we can't?

Who said you cannot?

But here is the general practice common to all non-Gaudiya traditions.

The Vedas & the Brahma Sutras are self sufficient authorities [Tier1]. The Puranas and Itihasas & other Smriti are authority when they do not contradict Tier1 scriptures.

The heated discussions you see arises because the Gaudiyas broke the norm and disregarded tier1 scriptures. But not fully...they quote from them sometimes and then ignore them all other times.

You can understand how such an inconsistency can create problems on a general discussion forum.

Cheers

From your previous post it almost sounded like you knew what you were talking about.

Sorry to disappoint.

 

 

 

(As you can see from the above posts, the Puranas are important enough to be mentioned in the original Vedas).

 

Thanks Kyros,

 

Where did I say the Puranas are not important?

 

All I said was the the three vedas have a different set of rules in terms of audience, eligibility and procedures for study and this set of vedas is what Baladeva is talking about.

 

Note that I have left out the Atharvana which is the fourth Veda.

 

Cheers

 

 

 

I'm reading the Bhagavad Gita, Bhagavada Purana, and Garga Samhita.

These are not vedas kyros and have no Shakas. The Gita and Puranas are available for all without restriction, do not require initiation and do not require Gurus either.

It is the 3 vedas [Rig, Sama, Yajur] that are restricted and that is what Baladeva is talking about. It is a whole other ball game. Just in case you do not know, Gaudiya Vaishnavas do not study the Vedas, even if they get initiated as Brahmanas. None of them know what Shakas are available for study either. Like I rightly suspected, they have been led to believe that they should become Brahmanas to attain Krishna and hence all this hoopla.

Thanks for your time,

I agree and will no longer enable the perpetuation of such with those who actually are not seeking the truth, but seek only to denigrate others in order to feel better about their own imagined position in life.

Come on Andy...don't be a baby. It is not a Brahmana characterestic to run away from bonafide questions.

You did cleverly skip the fundamental question that was asked several times over and over again. How do you determine one's varna? You answered all around it, but never addressed the actual question, even after I underlined it for your convenience.

Failure to answer basic questions is a bad sign for you and your partners. It almost always means you have not the answer and cannot bring yourself to admit it. You just joined the long list of your friends who have done the exact same thing several times in the past - run away from questions.

You disappoint me, dude. I was expecting better from you. On the bright side, you are not hurling abuses and adding us to your ignore list, which does place you a tad higher than the others.

Cheers

So raghu, kaiserone, why don't you follow Baladeva prabhu's advice and not study the vedas?

Unlike you, Kyros?

Which Veda have you studied or studying and which Shakha exactly?

Thanks,

Part of this was a preaching strategy aimed at the Smarta brahmanas who thought of themselves as superior to Vaisnavas just my their birth.

Exactly what was the strategy?

If I understand this right, the only goal of this diksha exercise was to snub Smarthas. If yes, that is a display of very silly behavior. Handing out Brahmana threads to all for no reason other than to thumb your nose at some people you dislike.

Cheers

Is it just me or does everyone notice a paradox here?

1) The Hare Krishnas make a big case for how Brahmanas are not by birth and how they can identify and intiate people into Brahmana status. All this leads one to understand that HKs attach a lot of importance to being a Brahmana, most likely thinking one has to be a Brahmana to attain Krishna or at least being a Brahmana gives them an extra edge.

2) When confirmation is sought, they deny (1) saying it is some narrow minded Indian Brahmins who take the position that Krishna is only available to Brahmanas (no evidence has been offered yet).

So what is your final position? Seems to me like you folks are confused as usual.

if you believe (2) is right, then why do you care for Brahmana status?

If you believe (1) is right, then note that such a position is peculiar to your tradition, which like I said earlier, is very weird for an organization made up mostly of westerners.

Cheers

Andy,

Do you agree that it is not possible to ascertain one's varna by visual observation? The chances of making a mistake are very high and therefore it is best not to attempt it?

And if we cannot know varna that way, then how else? And if a person is born into a Shudra family, he was given that birth for a reason, do you agree?

Who said the Shudra cannot attain Krishna? If no one, then what is the problem?

Cheers

Is this relevant or valid?:

 

Deepak Chopra said [i'm paraphrasing here]:

"We fear the known. We cannot fear the unknown".

We can fear both the known and the unknown. The kid is scared to enter water though he has never done it before. A person who has has suffered tooth pain is afraid that he may experience it again.

We fear any possible pain.

Cheers

The idea that some have that to know God one must take birth in a brahmana family (held by some) is obnoxious to me.

I am not aware of any orthodox tradition holding such a view - which is why I fail to understand the importance Hare Krishnas (who are mostly westerners) are attaching to these details.

Cheers

Someone please enlighten me.

Why are the Hare Krishnas obsessing about the varna-system? Why is it important for them to become Brahmanas?

I fail to get it. Since the Hare Krishna's goal is Krishna, why this deep-seeded need to become a Brahmana? I don't see the link.

It looks like they believe only Brahmanas are eligible for Krishna, which I find to be a very weird position for an international organization, not to mention lack of scriptural support for such a position.

Cheers

You withheld comment on the rest of my lucid analysis on the difference between the use of samskaras via the Vedic Vidhi system and those of Narada's Pancaratrika Vidhi, and how this relates to the saving of those souls born in gross ignorance outside of Bharata Varsa, and instead cherry picked a "candid admission" and twisted what was said to support your unsubstantiated claim that my Guru is taking license to be licentious similar to a known rogue and theif.

I agree with all this. But this is part two which comes after you have made the varna identification. The question is how do you make such an identification in the first place?

It is not necessary for one to be a Brahmana to be saved as you mistakenly have assumed. The Hari dasa cult has been around for centures and has the full sanction of orthodox Madhva Brahmanas. Hari is available to one and all. This has nothing to do with the discussion in hand.

Is this brahminical activity? Don't you have anything better to do with your time? Like perform a puja or cook some roti or something?

The answer is in the question. If I had something better to do with my time, I would not be here, just as you and everyone else here.

Cheers

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

First of all, there has been the appearance of another Acarya in Baladeva's line. He has, as acarya's are wont to do, taken into consideration the time place and candidates he was preaching to, and authorized...

That is a candid admission. Can we agree then, that just as Prabhupada did something that Baladeva would never have sanctioned , it is also ok for Hridayananda to bless same sex couples?

It is a different time after all, with different circumstances and just as Prabhupada deviated from tradition for this reason, Hridayananda should by the exact same logic, be able to do the same?

Cheers

You make believe Madhvas need to understand that you have no right to speak on behalf of Isvara Puru who was the Madhva acharya who initiated Mahaprabhu into the Madhva sampradaya.

 

Isvara Puri accepted Mahaprabhu and none of you little make believe Madhvas have any right to speak on behalf of Isvara Puru.

 

He accepted Mahaprabhu for initiation.

 

None of you guys can change that with all you big talking.

Again, I though you did not care a hoot. What's going on?

If your statement is true, then shame on Mahaprabhu for not following his Guru's teaching and introducing suprious material to create a new doctrine. That is serious Aparadha as you may already know. If not, picture a Prabhupada disciple starting a new doctrine.

Cheers

What period in history did that occur?

What were the names of personalities who participated in the debate?

What was the setting and topic?

What place did it occur?

I am guessing he means that classic incident when Chaitanya walked into Udipi and defeated Vyasaraya Thirtha and all the other Udipi Matha heads without offering any scriptural evidence! Check Dr. BNK Sharma's History of Dvaita Vedanta where he talks about this in an appendix.

About the Gaudiya acharyas frying big fish...I do not know what he means as Bengali Vaishnavas do not eat fish.

Cheers

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

It is you who cannot read the very words he wrote. He spoke of SUDRAS.

 

What he means is exactly that. One who is a Sudra.

 

Someone who is actually a Sudra actually has no qualification to read and understand Scriptures. They have at most the capacity to kindly surrender to and follow the instructions of the person of higher caste who decides what labors they should execute.

 

His use of the term Sudra in no way describes one born in a Sudra family who displays incongruity with Sudra varna and should be matched with Gurukula of higher varna.

 

This is the whole point and the only point that is crucial for you to understand.

 

I, and Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu, and all the Gaudiya branch acaryas strictly disagree with your criteria for determining who a sudra is, and nothing you have quoted from Srila Baladeva Vidya Bhushana indicates that he agrees with your caste by birth only theory.

You are almost there.

Now please explain how you determine a Brahmana or Shudra according to your "not by birth" theory?

It cannot obviously be the way Prabhupada identified the true nature of Tamal & his peers as Brahmanas as we all know he was dead wrong on that. So I am curious to know how this determination occurs in your new radical "out of birth" theory?

Remember that no scripture says that an individual displays different Varna characterestics at different times. "One individual, one varna for life" is how it is written everywhere and accepted as such. If you disagree with this too, please state your reasons.

Thanks for your time.

Advaita claims that the reflection can never be the real thing (or why do we call it a reflection?), and so everything, except Brahman, is an illusion. What you see in the mirror is an appearance, an illusion, not the 'real' you. This is their argument.

 

Which is true?

This is much the same as the statement "you are not the body". What does it mean to you? Do you stop caring for your body or do you start feeling different once you have heard the statement? Neither of the two. Everything remains the same as before.

Consider Vaishnava Liberation which is basically serving Shri Hari in Vaikunta at his lotus feet. There are a number of open questions here. What service does the Lord want from you & me? Assuming, he does need service, there are already a number of people there servng him. How does my service add value? It does not seem like much to keep one eternally happy - ocean of milk, a big snake and Vishnu. That is pretty much it.

As far as I can tell from studying the scriptures, all you do in heaven is pretty much just sit around all day and praise the Lord. I don’t know about you, but I think that after the first, oh, I don’t know, 50,000,000 years of that I’d start to get a little bored. - Rick Reynolds

The point, is post-Liberation is not a state that one can understand or even try to understand now.

The same logic applies with Jagat Mithya. It does not mean the world is an illusion to us (it is not). Rather, it is the Advaita position that on Liberation where only truth sans Maya prevails, Jagat is Mithya, Brahman is Sathya and Jiva is Brahman and nothing else.

The key point to be noted here is on Liberation. Some dunces on this forum have been posting nonsense about how Advaita says you are me and I am someone else and everything is an illusion anyway. Needless to say, all that is nonsense and all these wannabe critics have performed vanishing acts when asked for evidence.

In short, the world is not an illusion to anyone - Advaitin or Dvaitin. The daily life & mindset of a staunch Advaitin is no different than the daily life of a staunch Dvaitin.

Cheers