matarisvan

The Sri-Vaishnava sect.

<o:p></o:p><o:p></o:p> It does not matter what Prabhupada’s intentions were. He is not capable of making that determination and as known to everyone, he clearly failed. <o:p></o:p> <o:p></o:p> Actually there is another way of reading this which reflects even more badly on Prabhupada. He knew these people lacked Brahmana virtues and in spite of that made them Brahmanas and gave them power they did not deserve. That is committing mistake knowingly which is a sin. <o:p></o:p> <o:p></o:p> Either way you look at it his experiment failed and should be a clear example that Varna cannot be determined outside birth based on external traits. I call it an experiment because such a practice of determining Varna is absent in tradition. <o:p></o:p> <o:p></o:p> If Prabhupada himself could not do it correctly, as his disciple how do you think you can? And we already said we cannot either. So if no one can determine Varna, the only way is by birth which is how it has been always done. <o:p></o:p>

<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:" /><o:p></o:p> <o:p></o:p> Right. When you said it was foolish to consider Varna by birth you took a cheap shot at countless traditional Vaishnava Gurus of thousands of years who were a hundred times exalted than Prabhupada. <o:p></o:p> <o:p></o:p> But that does not matter. If a blunder of Prabhupada is pointed out, then it is a cheap shot and upsets you to the point of tears. <o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> Well…boo-hoo. Your double standards are only making you look worse, if such a thing is possible. <o:p></o:p>

Once again, I am not calling you a shudra (I never did). You considered yourself to be at the level of a shudra and I am pointing out the consequences of your assumptions.

Rather, Raghu is saying as you claim to be at the level of a shudra you are not qualified to be discussing these topics, much less correcting others. On the other hand we never claimed to be at the level of shudras. The restriction does not apply in that case. You cannot object to this as you were the one who claimed to be shudra. It is not that someone else is accusing you of being one. Now you cannot call me a shudra because your shudra intelligence (your own admission) makes it impossible for you to make that determination.

Ok. I will say this once more. Varna is by birth only. This is how it has been understood, accepted and handed down for thousands of years. It is not for me or you as individuals to determine our "real" varnas. It is not something that Prabhupada or any other Guru can determine either. You know the kind of disastrous results that came out of elevating iskcon Gurus to Brahmana status by Prabhupada. But the important point is if your intention is to worship Vishnu/Krishna then Varna does not matter. You simply worship Vishnu and do not bother with Varnas. And since it does not matter it is not important to you to try to beat into other people that varna cannot be by birth. Iskcon does not provide an IQ test to determine if your intelligence is low or high. Do not be taken by these silly concepts.

Theist needs to learn a number of things instead of wasting his time making one offensive post after another on a discussion forum. These discussions are bringing out a nice side in him. No doubt the cumulative effect of his decades of association with his special brand of transcendental Vaishnavism that he has been highly praising. Imagine how his posts will read if he spends another two decades doing what he is doing.

If you really believe your intelligence is to a Shudra level, then on what basis are you making arguments? With your low intelligence most of what you say will be incorrect. Or in truth you do not really believe your intelligence is down to a Shudra level. You have been told that for a number of years and you just started repeating it. Which one is it?

Right...That is a better example than Prabhupada assigning Brahmana status to Pedophiles. Your depth of knowledge is impressive.

Already answered in previous posts on this thread.

Me too.

By reading the Gita and knowing your birth.

You are of the Varna you were born into. It is better do one's own duty imperfectly than to do someone else's perfectly. Remember? This statement has no meaning if Varna can be assumed at will and modified every day. It makes sense only when varna is assigned to you by Krishna at birth and remains unchanged through life. Overriding Krishna's assigned Varna and claiming to be something else or taking on Krishna's role by assigning varnas to others should be considered a sin. It is a waste of time to discuss this with people who do not have Varnas as they will try find a position that is convenient for them. But it had to be said anyway to set the record straight.

Give it some more time. Unless you are a christian fanatic yourself you will get to see the truth sooner or later.

<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:" /><o:p></o:p> <o:p></o:p> We consider ourselves fortunate and blessed for that. It is a pity you have nothing to be proud of. <o:p></o:p> <o:p></o:p> <o:p></o:p><o:p> </o:p> How about, <o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> 1. it is from the heart of the soul that Shaivism emanates<o:p></o:p> 2. it is from the heart of the soul that Islam emanates<o:p></o:p> 3. it is from the heart of the soul that Baha’ism emanates<o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> See the nonsensical thinking you have? I am sure you don’t which is again a pity. <o:p></o:p> <o:p></o:p> <o:p></o:p><o:p> </o:p> I agree with the worms part. Most candid confession you ever made. <o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> By now, the people on this forum are aware of your fanaticism and your inability to think clearly. No one is going to change their views by reading your posts. Or to say your posts are as good as not existing. <o:p></o:p>

Can you show me a Vaishnava commentator of the Gita (including Prabhupada) who allowed for Shaivas, Buddhists and Shaktas to be part of the Gita ruling that all paths lead to Krishna? No one has. All Vaishnava groups rule out Advaita, Shaivism, Shaktism, Buddhism and Jainism as valid paths to Krishna. Why would Islam and Christianity be different? The only reason this discussion is dragging here is Theist and CBrahma are Christians and are too hot headed to accept the truth.

I agree.

The problem is we are not competent enough to determine our nature. Prabhupada thought he was capable of doing this and commited a big blunder by awarding Brahmin status to incompetent people. In absence of such ability we should simply stick to the duties prescribed for our varna and try to follow them to the best of our ability. But in the practical world, this is easier said than done. We may end up with a completely different set of duties due to circumstances, but we should still worship Vishnu with full devotion.

The Varna is more relevant to the duties one takes up than with the nature. About the duties to be taken up there is a lot of clarity in the Gita. The important point is a soul is born into the varna that is most appropriate for it. The varna in the next life will depend on the activities and goals during the present life. With this in mind whatever maybe the present varna, the person should worship Vishnu with full devotion through his or her life.

Kulapavana is a Gauidya and he sees it that way. Proved. And the original question was about Vaishnavism in general. If 99% of Vaishnavas say one thing and you alone are say something else, guess what?

Your nose is growing Pinochio... You have been shouting all this time that Krishna told Arjuna to give up religions and sects. Now when cornered did you suddenly develope short term memory loss? Here is one post in your own words. CBrahma - Krsna said to abandon all varieties of religion. The word 'dharma' is used. That must certainly cover religious sects

Then Krishna told Arjuna to give up Hinduism (which was not existing during his time). As Krishna is an integral part of Hinduism you are saying Krishna told Arjuna to abandon Krishna and simulatenously surrender to Krishna too? Forget the rest of the world one other than theist will agree to your way of thinking on this forum.

That is not a condition and he certainly did not tell Arjuna to give up religions and sects. That is a silly interpretation of the verse. Here is the dictionary definition of Sect as posted by someone earlier. Sect - A group of people following a certain teacher or doctrine. Even if you want to take your statement to be true, when you make that statement you are following a doctrine and therefore you are in a sect.

Agreed. Every traditional Vaishnava system (including Gaudiya Vaishnavas) have a system in place for a Guru/Shishya realtionship and disciplines. Each group has a teaching unique to itself although some parts of it may be common with other groups. I do not see the usage of sect for Vaishnava as bad. But it appears some people have a problem with the word.

<?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:" /><o:p></o:p><o:p> </o:p> This is about semantics. Otherwise there is no point in asking the question as anyone can say anything they like. <o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> <o:p></o:p><o:p> </o:p> how do you know that? The statement you make can be valid only if it is part of a teaching. <o:p></o:p> <o:p> </o:p> <o:p></o:p><o:p> </o:p> I can surrender to Krishna by belonging to the Vaishnava sect. I see nothing wrong there and most Vaishnavas would agree with this. <o:p></o:p>