Can an woman be brahmana without a brahmana husband?

[Guest guest]

Sita Devi Dasi wrote:

 

> [Text 2843828 from COM]

>

>

> ...So when Hare Krsna Dasi states:

>

> "Srila Prabhupada also advised that the spiritual master should designate

> the varna of a disciple"

>

> we can add that Prabhupada designates a woman's varna to be that of her

> husband.

>

>

> Ys, Sdd

 

Sita's premise, if I understand it correctly is that (following Srila

Prabhupada's

example -- as she recognizes it) the spiritual master should designate a

woman's

varna to be that of her husband.

 

1. Question: According to the example of our founder-acarya, can a woman be a

brahmana without a brahmana husband?

 

 

your servant,

 

Hare Krsna dasi

[Guest guest]

At 5:09 PM -0500 12/9/99, COM: Hare Krsna dasi (Brunswick, Maine - USA) wrote:

 

>Sita's premise, if I understand it correctly is that (following Srila

>Prabhupada's example -- as she recognizes it) the spiritual master should

>>designate a woman's varna to be that of her husband.

>

>1. Question: According to the example of our founder-acarya, can a woman

>be a

>brahmana without a brahmana husband?

 

It is possible for her to be considered brahmana on the spiritual platform,

yes, but not by varna (unless her husband is such). Here are a couple of

examples supporting this.

 

1. "Mam hi partha vyapasritya ye 'pi syuù papa-yonayah. Never mind in

whatever family one is born, sinful family, never mind. Striyah sudras

tatha vaisyah, including woman and çüdras and vaisyas, they are considered

as less intelligent. They are considered as less intelligent. Therefore,

according to Vedic system, a boy born in a brahmana family, he is allowed

all the samskaras, reformatory, purificatory process, but the girl is not.

Why? Now, because a girl has to follow her husband. So if her husband is

brahmana, automatically she becomes brahmana. There is no need of separate

reformation. And by chance she may be married with a person who is not a

brahmana, then what is the use of making her a brahmana? That is the

general method. So therefore the, even born in a brahmana family, a woman

is taken as woman, not as brahmana. But Krsna says, "Never mind. Even if

she is woman, even she is sudra, even she is vaisya, or any other, I mean

to say, family born in, never mind." Mam hi partha vyapasritya, if anyone

is bona fidely made Krsna conscious, te 'pi yanti param gatim, so his way

is open to the path of Vaikuntha, param gatim. Kià punar brahmanah punya

bhakta rajarsayas tatha." (Sri Sri Rukmini Dvaraka-natha Deity

Installation, Los Angeles, July 16, 1969)

 

2. Indian man (6): Srila Prabhupada, since there is no distinction between

"man" and "woman"-these are both designations-is it possible for a woman to

become a brahmana?

Brahmananda: Is it possible for a woman to become a brahmana?

Prabhupada: He is... Woman is a brahmana's wife. Then she is automatically

a brahmana.

Indian man (6): Suppose she doesn't want to get married for the rest of her

life, just wants to serve the Lord?

Prabhupada: So in his spiritual position everyone is a brahmana.

Brahmananda: But you give brahminical initiation to unmarried women.

Prabhupada: Yes. But on spiritual point she is brahmana. On the spiritual

platform there is no such distinction. (Morning Walk, November 2, 1975,

Nairobi)

 

If the opposite was true, that Prabhupada wanted some women to be

considered brahmanas (varna) and trained as such, then he would have said

they should attend varnasrama college. But that is not the case.

 

Ys, Sita dd

[Guest guest]

At 5:09 PM -0500 12/9/99, COM: Hare Krsna dasi (Brunswick, Maine - USA) wrote:

 

>Sita's premise, if I understand it correctly is that (following Srila

>Prabhupada's example -- as she recognizes it) the spiritual master should

>>designate a woman's varna to be that of her husband.

>

>1. Question: According to the example of our founder-acarya, can a woman

>be a

>brahmana without a brahmana husband?

 

It is possible for her to be considered brahmana on the spiritual platform,

yes, but not by varna (unless her husband is such). Here are a couple of

examples supporting this.

 

1. "Mam hi partha vyapasritya ye 'pi syuù papa-yonayah. Never mind in

whatever family one is born, sinful family, never mind. Striyah sudras

tatha vaisyah, including woman and çüdras and vaisyas, they are considered

as less intelligent. They are considered as less intelligent. Therefore,

according to Vedic system, a boy born in a brahmana family, he is allowed

all the samskaras, reformatory, purificatory process, but the girl is not.

Why? Now, because a girl has to follow her husband. So if her husband is

brahmana, automatically she becomes brahmana. There is no need of separate

reformation. And by chance she may be married with a person who is not a

brahmana, then what is the use of making her a brahmana? That is the

general method. So therefore the, even born in a brahmana family, a woman

is taken as woman, not as brahmana. But Krsna says, "Never mind. Even if

she is woman, even she is sudra, even she is vaisya, or any other, I mean

to say, family born in, never mind." Mam hi partha vyapasritya, if anyone

is bona fidely made Krsna conscious, te 'pi yanti param gatim, so his way

is open to the path of Vaikuntha, param gatim. Kià punar brahmanah punya

bhakta rajarsayas tatha." (Sri Sri Rukmini Dvaraka-natha Deity

Installation, Los Angeles, July 16, 1969)

 

2. Indian man (6): Srila Prabhupada, since there is no distinction between

"man" and "woman"-these are both designations-is it possible for a woman to

become a brahmana?

Brahmananda: Is it possible for a woman to become a brahmana?

Prabhupada: He is... Woman is a brahmana's wife. Then she is automatically

a brahmana.

Indian man (6): Suppose she doesn't want to get married for the rest of her

life, just wants to serve the Lord?

Prabhupada: So in his spiritual position everyone is a brahmana.

Brahmananda: But you give brahminical initiation to unmarried women.

Prabhupada: Yes. But on spiritual point she is brahmana. On the spiritual

platform there is no such distinction. (Morning Walk, November 2, 1975,

Nairobi)

 

If the opposite was true, that Prabhupada wanted some women to be

considered brahmanas (varna) and trained as such, then he would have said

they should attend varnasrama college. But that is not the case.

 

Ys, Sita dd

[Guest guest]

> Prabhupada: He is... Woman is a brahmana's wife. Then she is automatically

> a brahmana.

 

> If the opposite was true, that Prabhupada wanted some women to be

> considered brahmanas (varna) and trained as such, then he would have said

> they should attend varnasrama college. But that is not the case.

>

> Ys, Sita dd

 

 

Lets take one thing at a time. In his VAD morning walk conversations Srila

Prabhupada said:

 

"Varnasrama college is especially meant for the brahmana, ksatriya, vaisya.

Those who are not fit for education, they are sudras that's all. Or those

who are reluctant to take education are sudras. They should assist the

higher classes."

 

So if a wife of a brahmana is automatically a brahmana can she not go to VA

college according to the above?

 

Also in the walk conversation he said "Those who are not fit for education"

do not go to varnasrama college. This does not eliminate all women from VA

college, only those "unfit" for education for some reason.

 

Same for those reluctant to take education. Some women are reluctant to take

education, some men are reluctant to take education and some men are unfit

for education (sudras). Obviously neither of these types of individuals,

human beings, need to go to VA college.

 

Lets remember even if one goes to varnasrama college it is no guarantee that

he or she will also automatically go back to Godhead. And yet a sincere

sweeper of the street, male or female, who never attends a single day of VA

college, who is a devotee of the Lord will get there far sooner. It is a

matter of the change of heart.

 

We obviously see many MALE sannyasis in ISKCON who have presumably taken up

the varnasrama-dharma status of sannyasa but who fail to make a change of

heart towards sincere devotional service of the Lord but continue to pretend

they are advanced.

[Guest guest]

> Prabhupada: He is... Woman is a brahmana's wife. Then she is automatically

> a brahmana.

 

> If the opposite was true, that Prabhupada wanted some women to be

> considered brahmanas (varna) and trained as such, then he would have said

> they should attend varnasrama college. But that is not the case.

>

> Ys, Sita dd

 

 

Lets take one thing at a time. In his VAD morning walk conversations Srila

Prabhupada said:

 

"Varnasrama college is especially meant for the brahmana, ksatriya, vaisya.

Those who are not fit for education, they are sudras that's all. Or those

who are reluctant to take education are sudras. They should assist the

higher classes."

 

So if a wife of a brahmana is automatically a brahmana can she not go to VA

college according to the above?

 

Also in the walk conversation he said "Those who are not fit for education"

do not go to varnasrama college. This does not eliminate all women from VA

college, only those "unfit" for education for some reason.

 

Same for those reluctant to take education. Some women are reluctant to take

education, some men are reluctant to take education and some men are unfit

for education (sudras). Obviously neither of these types of individuals,

human beings, need to go to VA college.

 

Lets remember even if one goes to varnasrama college it is no guarantee that

he or she will also automatically go back to Godhead. And yet a sincere

sweeper of the street, male or female, who never attends a single day of VA

college, who is a devotee of the Lord will get there far sooner. It is a

matter of the change of heart.

 

We obviously see many MALE sannyasis in ISKCON who have presumably taken up

the varnasrama-dharma status of sannyasa but who fail to make a change of

heart towards sincere devotional service of the Lord but continue to pretend

they are advanced.

[Guest guest]

>

> If the opposite was true, that Prabhupada wanted some women to be

> considered brahmanas (varna) and trained as such, then he would have said

> they should attend varnasrama college. But that is not the case.

>

Very nice conclusion. Do you know that even in the west some time ago

women didn't go to the public schools, specifically if they were from the

higher class. But that doesn't mean that they didn't get an education. They

were getting education at home. This has something to do with a chastity and

not a varna. Specially women from the higher classes were very much kept

under protection. But that doesn't mean that they were stupid.

You know, if you should be able to assist a qualified man, you also have

to be qualified. Behind every grate man there is a grate woman. A shoemakers

daughter wouldn't be able to properly assist a brahmana husband.

Ys. Sraddha dd

[Guest guest]

>

> If the opposite was true, that Prabhupada wanted some women to be

> considered brahmanas (varna) and trained as such, then he would have said

> they should attend varnasrama college. But that is not the case.

>

Very nice conclusion. Do you know that even in the west some time ago

women didn't go to the public schools, specifically if they were from the

higher class. But that doesn't mean that they didn't get an education. They

were getting education at home. This has something to do with a chastity and

not a varna. Specially women from the higher classes were very much kept

under protection. But that doesn't mean that they were stupid.

You know, if you should be able to assist a qualified man, you also have

to be qualified. Behind every grate man there is a grate woman. A shoemakers

daughter wouldn't be able to properly assist a brahmana husband.

Ys. Sraddha dd

[Guest guest]

>It is possible for her to be considered brahmana on the spiritual platform,

>yes, but not by varna (unless her husband is such).

 

Setting aside, for the moment, the spiritual platform, if I may, what are

we expected to understand from the above quote re. varna of husband and

wife? And what is *non-spiritual* varna, for that matter?

 

In the Rg- and the Atharva-veda there is a hymn to Purusa, i.e.

Visnu-Narayana as the creator in our own solar system. Out of His body come

the sun and the moon, the five elements, etc. One amazing thing, though, is

that Purusa's head/mouth *is* the brahmana varna, His arms/chest *is* the

ksatriya varna, His thighs/abdomen *is* the vaisya varna, and then out of

His feet comes the sudra varna.

What is varna? From those ancient texts one gathers that it is a social and

cultural and even cosmic category, a defining feature of this world. A

coating over the soul; literally a cover or a color.

In Prabhupada and ISKCON culture, it seems, varna is defined according to

the person's guna and karma.

 

Now re. the varna of husband & wife, here are two possible readings of the

quoted line.

 

[1] A woman has no varna until the moment she ties her cloth with her

husband's during the wedding ceremony.

Before that momentous event, the woman is a blank slate (not even a human

being). In other words, we are being told that the woman before wedding has

no guna and no karma. Is that it?

To define the terms. A person's guna is their particular combination of the

three modes of nature, almost like an ayurvedic constitution; it

crystallyzes the person's samsaric evolution up to present. A person's

karma is the network of actions and reactions that keep them moving around

in samsara, as well as the results of those actions and reactions (personal

skills, tendencies, limitations, family background, health condition,

country, etc.).

Consequently, if a woman has no varna until she is given one by her

husband, where do her acquired samsaric guna and karma go? Do they

disappear at the time of birth? Or at the time of conception, rather, when

the soul suddenly finds herself in a female fetus?

Is an unmarried woman an empty question mark desperately needing a husband

to give her a sense of existence?

 

What do the advocates of this theory make of the following, samsaric,

scenarios: someone who is currently a woman may have been a man in a

previous life, someone who is currently a man may have been a woman in a

previous life, someone who is currently a woman may become a man in her

next life, someone who is currently a man may become a woman in his next

life.

 

How would a gentleman (wherever his current headquarters may be) feel about

spending his next life, for a change, illiterate, cooking and mopping the

floors, while self-righteous people boss her around and demand vip

treatment?

 

[2] The woman has the same varna as her husband.

This is compatibility based on guna and karma. Thus marriages are described

in some texts as being either anuloma ("according to the hair", compatible)

or pratiloma ("against the hair", incompatible). In other words, both

husband and wife had their own samsaric varna before the first day they met

in this lifetime. Thus a brahmana woman, for example, could marry a

non-brahmana man and this would constitute a case of pratiloma marriage.

How to determine whether two persons' marriage would be anuloma or

pratiloma? One could apply here the guidelines given by Srila Prabhupada in

a quote posted recently from the ISKCON farm newsletter:

"By psychology, by horoscope, by birthright, the children of the

Gita-Nagari community shall be divided into different destined works."

 

your servant,

Kunti-Devi dasi

[Guest guest]

>It is possible for her to be considered brahmana on the spiritual platform,

>yes, but not by varna (unless her husband is such).

 

Setting aside, for the moment, the spiritual platform, if I may, what are

we expected to understand from the above quote re. varna of husband and

wife? And what is *non-spiritual* varna, for that matter?

 

In the Rg- and the Atharva-veda there is a hymn to Purusa, i.e.

Visnu-Narayana as the creator in our own solar system. Out of His body come

the sun and the moon, the five elements, etc. One amazing thing, though, is

that Purusa's head/mouth *is* the brahmana varna, His arms/chest *is* the

ksatriya varna, His thighs/abdomen *is* the vaisya varna, and then out of

His feet comes the sudra varna.

What is varna? From those ancient texts one gathers that it is a social and

cultural and even cosmic category, a defining feature of this world. A

coating over the soul; literally a cover or a color.

In Prabhupada and ISKCON culture, it seems, varna is defined according to

the person's guna and karma.

 

Now re. the varna of husband & wife, here are two possible readings of the

quoted line.

 

[1] A woman has no varna until the moment she ties her cloth with her

husband's during the wedding ceremony.

Before that momentous event, the woman is a blank slate (not even a human

being). In other words, we are being told that the woman before wedding has

no guna and no karma. Is that it?

To define the terms. A person's guna is their particular combination of the

three modes of nature, almost like an ayurvedic constitution; it

crystallyzes the person's samsaric evolution up to present. A person's

karma is the network of actions and reactions that keep them moving around

in samsara, as well as the results of those actions and reactions (personal

skills, tendencies, limitations, family background, health condition,

country, etc.).

Consequently, if a woman has no varna until she is given one by her

husband, where do her acquired samsaric guna and karma go? Do they

disappear at the time of birth? Or at the time of conception, rather, when

the soul suddenly finds herself in a female fetus?

Is an unmarried woman an empty question mark desperately needing a husband

to give her a sense of existence?

 

What do the advocates of this theory make of the following, samsaric,

scenarios: someone who is currently a woman may have been a man in a

previous life, someone who is currently a man may have been a woman in a

previous life, someone who is currently a woman may become a man in her

next life, someone who is currently a man may become a woman in his next

life.

 

How would a gentleman (wherever his current headquarters may be) feel about

spending his next life, for a change, illiterate, cooking and mopping the

floors, while self-righteous people boss her around and demand vip

treatment?

 

[2] The woman has the same varna as her husband.

This is compatibility based on guna and karma. Thus marriages are described

in some texts as being either anuloma ("according to the hair", compatible)

or pratiloma ("against the hair", incompatible). In other words, both

husband and wife had their own samsaric varna before the first day they met

in this lifetime. Thus a brahmana woman, for example, could marry a

non-brahmana man and this would constitute a case of pratiloma marriage.

How to determine whether two persons' marriage would be anuloma or

pratiloma? One could apply here the guidelines given by Srila Prabhupada in

a quote posted recently from the ISKCON farm newsletter:

"By psychology, by horoscope, by birthright, the children of the

Gita-Nagari community shall be divided into different destined works."

 

your servant,

Kunti-Devi dasi

[Guest guest]

>> If the opposite was true, that Prabhupada wanted some women to be

>> considered brahmanas (varna) and trained as such, then he would have said

>> they should attend varnasrama college. But that is not the case.

>>

> Very nice conclusion. Do you know that even in the west some time ago

>women didn't go to the public schools, specifically if they were from the

>higher class. But that doesn't mean that they didn't get an education. They

>were getting education at home.

 

JAYA! HARIBOL!

 

YS, Sdd

[Guest guest]

>> If the opposite was true, that Prabhupada wanted some women to be

>> considered brahmanas (varna) and trained as such, then he would have said

>> they should attend varnasrama college. But that is not the case.

>>

> Very nice conclusion. Do you know that even in the west some time ago

>women didn't go to the public schools, specifically if they were from the

>higher class. But that doesn't mean that they didn't get an education. They

>were getting education at home.

 

JAYA! HARIBOL!

 

YS, Sdd

[Guest guest]

At 11:33 PM -0800 12/10/99, COM: Kunti-Devi (dd) HDG (Berkeley - USA) wrote:

 

>>It is possible for her to be considered brahmana on the spiritual platform,

>>yes, but not by varna (unless her husband is such).

 

>Setting aside, for the moment, the spiritual platform, if I may, what are

>we expected to understand from the above quote re. varna of husband and

>wife? And what is *non-spiritual* varna, for that matter?

 

Varna is based on the material body, on the modes of nature. A woman's

occupational duties are based on her guna, and the karma/occupation of her

husband whom she assists; they become spiritual when performed for Krsna.

 

>In Prabhupada and ISKCON culture, it seems, varna is defined according to

>the person's guna and karma.

>

>Now re. the varna of husband & wife, here are two possible readings of the

>quoted line.

>

>[1] A woman has no varna until the moment she ties her cloth with her

>husband's during the wedding ceremony.

>Before that momentous event, the woman is a blank slate (not even a human

>being). In other words, we are being told that the woman before wedding has

>no guna and no karma. Is that it?

 

No. Her guna may be similar but her karma is different. I'm sure if we

studied the charts of animals, we'd find they have different gunas. But if

we look at the method of education Prabhupada prescribed for girls we find

it was based in the home.

 

>What do the advocates of this theory make of the following, samsaric,

>scenarios: someone who is currently a woman may have been a man in a

>previous life, someone who is currently a man may have been a woman in a

>previous life, someone who is currently a woman may become a man in her

>next life, someone who is currently a man may become a woman in his next

>life.

 

So? What does that have to do with varnasrama development and the dharma of

men and women?

 

>How would a gentleman (wherever his current headquarters may be) feel about

>spending his next life, for a change, illiterate, cooking and mopping the

>floors, while self-righteous people boss her around and demand vip

>treatment?

 

Why give such an extreme example? What's the point behind it?

 

How do you interpret the following statement by Srila Prabhupada?:

 

"And by chance she may be married with a person who is not a brahmana, then

what is the use of making her a brahmana?" (LA, July 16, 1969)

 

Ys, Sdd

[Guest guest]

At 11:33 PM -0800 12/10/99, COM: Kunti-Devi (dd) HDG (Berkeley - USA) wrote:

 

>>It is possible for her to be considered brahmana on the spiritual platform,

>>yes, but not by varna (unless her husband is such).

 

>Setting aside, for the moment, the spiritual platform, if I may, what are

>we expected to understand from the above quote re. varna of husband and

>wife? And what is *non-spiritual* varna, for that matter?

 

Varna is based on the material body, on the modes of nature. A woman's

occupational duties are based on her guna, and the karma/occupation of her

husband whom she assists; they become spiritual when performed for Krsna.

 

>In Prabhupada and ISKCON culture, it seems, varna is defined according to

>the person's guna and karma.

>

>Now re. the varna of husband & wife, here are two possible readings of the

>quoted line.

>

>[1] A woman has no varna until the moment she ties her cloth with her

>husband's during the wedding ceremony.

>Before that momentous event, the woman is a blank slate (not even a human

>being). In other words, we are being told that the woman before wedding has

>no guna and no karma. Is that it?

 

No. Her guna may be similar but her karma is different. I'm sure if we

studied the charts of animals, we'd find they have different gunas. But if

we look at the method of education Prabhupada prescribed for girls we find

it was based in the home.

 

>What do the advocates of this theory make of the following, samsaric,

>scenarios: someone who is currently a woman may have been a man in a

>previous life, someone who is currently a man may have been a woman in a

>previous life, someone who is currently a woman may become a man in her

>next life, someone who is currently a man may become a woman in his next

>life.

 

So? What does that have to do with varnasrama development and the dharma of

men and women?

 

>How would a gentleman (wherever his current headquarters may be) feel about

>spending his next life, for a change, illiterate, cooking and mopping the

>floors, while self-righteous people boss her around and demand vip

>treatment?

 

Why give such an extreme example? What's the point behind it?

 

How do you interpret the following statement by Srila Prabhupada?:

 

"And by chance she may be married with a person who is not a brahmana, then

what is the use of making her a brahmana?" (LA, July 16, 1969)

 

Ys, Sdd

[Guest guest]

> Varna is based on the material body, on the modes of nature. A woman's

> occupational duties are based on her guna, and the karma/occupation of her

> husband whom she assists; they become spiritual when performed for Krsna.

>

Varna is not based on the material body. You have no idea what you are

talking about. Varna is nature (color, quality) of activity. Varna is a

combination of guna and karma.

It is like when you have a red color and an aple. Red color is not a red

aple, nor is an aple red aple (if it doesn't have the red color). Red aple

is the aple that has a red color. So, red color is guna and activity is

aple. Put them together you get red aple (varna).

 

To be able to understand varna, you have to understand what is guna (mode

of material nature) and what is karma (action).

 

You have to know that all the activities within material nature are

carried out by the modes of material nature, that is why they are colored by

the certain modes. Activities carried out in the mode of goodnes are colored

by that mode. Activities carried out by the mode of passion are colored by

that mode and activities carried out by the mode of ignorance are colored by

that mode. It means that activities within certain modes have certain nature

and that nature of activity, that's varna.

 

There are material bodies made of different combinations of material modes

and there are activities carried out by the different modes of nature.

For the bodies which are predominantly made of mode of ignorance it is more

difficult to performe activities in the mode of goodness. That's why sudras

are not able to be pujaris. Body has to have certain kind of set up in order

to perform certain kind of activities. It is easier for the bodies which are

made predominantly of the mode of goodness to perform activities

colored by the mode of goodness. That's why we have a problem when we try to

be transcendental and do any kind of activity. Because, we have to transcend

the nature of our material body.

 

You are preaching ignorance of the Absolute Truth. The truth is that

neither the soul in the male body which has the male gender, nor the soul

within female body that has the female gender, are acting. The soul is

within the body and only thing that soul does is desiring. The actions are

carried out by the material nature under the superintendence of the

Supersoul.

So, how can you say that you are acting according to the nature of your

husbands action? Your husband is not acting and you are not acting. Both of

you are just desiring. You are desiring to be in ignorance and to think that

you are the doer and that's why you can't accept that Krishna is the doer of

activities that are carried out by the material nature.

So long you think that you are the doer of activities you will have to

suffer the good and bad reactions of activities that you think that you are

doing. You think that you are acting and that it's your activity (karma), so

you get the reaction to enjoy and suffer consequencess of that action

(karma).

The nature of material energy is that it is inactive. Only when Krishna

glancess over material nature does the material nature move. Krishna

impregnates the material nature with the spirit souls. But it's not the

souls that are acting. Whatever soul does is spiritual. In the material

world soul is in the dormant, dreaming condition. Why is it said that the

soul is in the dormant condition? Because the soul is not acting. Soul can't

performe anything material. Activities of the soul are devotional service.

They are spiritual. The soul is spiritual energy, sac-cid-ananda vigraha.

This are the characteristics of the soul: eternality, knowledge and bliss.

The nature of soul is love.

It is like with sugar candy. Devotional service and developing love of God

and everything connected to love are always compered with sugar candy.

Sugar is always sweet, that's the nature of sugar. Sugar has different

shapes and it desolves in water: those are characteristics of sugar.

So, soul is the spiritual energy (sugar), the characteristics of the soul

are that it is eternal, full of knowledge and bliss. The nature of soul is

love (sweetness). The nature of spiritual energy is love. Wherever there is

something spiritual, love and bliss are present, because bliss is the nature

of love. So, those who are performing spiritual activities, they are

experiencing bliss. If you are not experiencing bliss, or you are

experiencing some kind of mixture, it means that you are not performing pure

devotional service. It means that you are identifying with the body and

thinking that you are the doer of material activities that are in actuality

carried out by the material nature. The real doer is Krishna. Material

nature can't act independently. The characteristics of material energy are

that is unconscious, temporary and inactive. The nature of material energy

is enviousness. Material nature is only active under the glance of the

Supreme Lord. That's why it is said that Krishna is the doer of activities

performed by the material nature.

Going back to were we are. Spirit soul within material body think himself

to be the doer of activities that are in actuality carried out by the

material nature.

 

It is very important to understand what is action and what is inaction.

 

Krishna says:

"One who sees inaction in action, and action in inaction, is intelligent

among men, and he is in the transcendental position, although engaged in all

sorts of activities." Bg. 4.18

 

Looking from the material world, action is every activity that brings

about reaction. As long as we think that we are the doer of activities, we

have to eat the fruits of action. We have to enjoy and suffer the reaction.

But if we performe devotional service, that is inaction, because it doesn't

give any material reaction. So, from this point of you, spirit soul is

inactive (although acting). That's the inaction in action.

From the other side, if we stop acting in order to escape reaction, we

still get the reaction, because we didn't performe devotional service.

That's the action in inaction.

 

There are material activities and spiritual activities. Spiritual

activities are activities of spirit soul which don't carry any material

reaction. Material activities are carried out by the material nature and as

long we think that we are the doer of those activities, we have to come back

to enjoy and suffer different reactions. Both material and spiritual

activities have natures. Spiritual activities have sac-cid-ananda nature,

eternality, knowledge and bliss. Material activities have nature of

goodness, passion and ignorance. The nature of activity is varna.

 

I hope this helps.

Ys. Sraddha dd

[Guest guest]

> Varna is based on the material body, on the modes of nature. A woman's

> occupational duties are based on her guna, and the karma/occupation of her

> husband whom she assists; they become spiritual when performed for Krsna.

>

Varna is not based on the material body. You have no idea what you are

talking about. Varna is nature (color, quality) of activity. Varna is a

combination of guna and karma.

It is like when you have a red color and an aple. Red color is not a red

aple, nor is an aple red aple (if it doesn't have the red color). Red aple

is the aple that has a red color. So, red color is guna and activity is

aple. Put them together you get red aple (varna).

 

To be able to understand varna, you have to understand what is guna (mode

of material nature) and what is karma (action).

 

You have to know that all the activities within material nature are

carried out by the modes of material nature, that is why they are colored by

the certain modes. Activities carried out in the mode of goodnes are colored

by that mode. Activities carried out by the mode of passion are colored by

that mode and activities carried out by the mode of ignorance are colored by

that mode. It means that activities within certain modes have certain nature

and that nature of activity, that's varna.

 

There are material bodies made of different combinations of material modes

and there are activities carried out by the different modes of nature.

For the bodies which are predominantly made of mode of ignorance it is more

difficult to performe activities in the mode of goodness. That's why sudras

are not able to be pujaris. Body has to have certain kind of set up in order

to perform certain kind of activities. It is easier for the bodies which are

made predominantly of the mode of goodness to perform activities

colored by the mode of goodness. That's why we have a problem when we try to

be transcendental and do any kind of activity. Because, we have to transcend

the nature of our material body.

 

You are preaching ignorance of the Absolute Truth. The truth is that

neither the soul in the male body which has the male gender, nor the soul

within female body that has the female gender, are acting. The soul is

within the body and only thing that soul does is desiring. The actions are

carried out by the material nature under the superintendence of the

Supersoul.

So, how can you say that you are acting according to the nature of your

husbands action? Your husband is not acting and you are not acting. Both of

you are just desiring. You are desiring to be in ignorance and to think that

you are the doer and that's why you can't accept that Krishna is the doer of

activities that are carried out by the material nature.

So long you think that you are the doer of activities you will have to

suffer the good and bad reactions of activities that you think that you are

doing. You think that you are acting and that it's your activity (karma), so

you get the reaction to enjoy and suffer consequencess of that action

(karma).

The nature of material energy is that it is inactive. Only when Krishna

glancess over material nature does the material nature move. Krishna

impregnates the material nature with the spirit souls. But it's not the

souls that are acting. Whatever soul does is spiritual. In the material

world soul is in the dormant, dreaming condition. Why is it said that the

soul is in the dormant condition? Because the soul is not acting. Soul can't

performe anything material. Activities of the soul are devotional service.

They are spiritual. The soul is spiritual energy, sac-cid-ananda vigraha.

This are the characteristics of the soul: eternality, knowledge and bliss.

The nature of soul is love.

It is like with sugar candy. Devotional service and developing love of God

and everything connected to love are always compered with sugar candy.

Sugar is always sweet, that's the nature of sugar. Sugar has different

shapes and it desolves in water: those are characteristics of sugar.

So, soul is the spiritual energy (sugar), the characteristics of the soul

are that it is eternal, full of knowledge and bliss. The nature of soul is

love (sweetness). The nature of spiritual energy is love. Wherever there is

something spiritual, love and bliss are present, because bliss is the nature

of love. So, those who are performing spiritual activities, they are

experiencing bliss. If you are not experiencing bliss, or you are

experiencing some kind of mixture, it means that you are not performing pure

devotional service. It means that you are identifying with the body and

thinking that you are the doer of material activities that are in actuality

carried out by the material nature. The real doer is Krishna. Material

nature can't act independently. The characteristics of material energy are

that is unconscious, temporary and inactive. The nature of material energy

is enviousness. Material nature is only active under the glance of the

Supreme Lord. That's why it is said that Krishna is the doer of activities

performed by the material nature.

Going back to were we are. Spirit soul within material body think himself

to be the doer of activities that are in actuality carried out by the

material nature.

 

It is very important to understand what is action and what is inaction.

 

Krishna says:

"One who sees inaction in action, and action in inaction, is intelligent

among men, and he is in the transcendental position, although engaged in all

sorts of activities." Bg. 4.18

 

Looking from the material world, action is every activity that brings

about reaction. As long as we think that we are the doer of activities, we

have to eat the fruits of action. We have to enjoy and suffer the reaction.

But if we performe devotional service, that is inaction, because it doesn't

give any material reaction. So, from this point of you, spirit soul is

inactive (although acting). That's the inaction in action.

From the other side, if we stop acting in order to escape reaction, we

still get the reaction, because we didn't performe devotional service.

That's the action in inaction.

 

There are material activities and spiritual activities. Spiritual

activities are activities of spirit soul which don't carry any material

reaction. Material activities are carried out by the material nature and as

long we think that we are the doer of those activities, we have to come back

to enjoy and suffer different reactions. Both material and spiritual

activities have natures. Spiritual activities have sac-cid-ananda nature,

eternality, knowledge and bliss. Material activities have nature of

goodness, passion and ignorance. The nature of activity is varna.

 

I hope this helps.

Ys. Sraddha dd

[Guest guest]

>>What do the advocates of this theory make of the following, samsaric,

>>scenarios: someone who is currently a woman may have been a man in a

>>previous life, someone who is currently a man may have been a woman in a

>>previous life, someone who is currently a woman may become a man in her

>>next life, someone who is currently a man may become a woman in his next

>>life.

>

>So? What does that have to do with varnasrama development and the dharma of

>men and women?

>

>>How would a gentleman (wherever his current headquarters may be) feel about

>>spending his next life, for a change, illiterate, cooking and mopping the

>>floors, while self-righteous people boss her around and demand vip

>>treatment?

>

>Why give such an extreme example? What's the point behind it?

 

I wrote what I wrote. Please feel free to take it according to your own

understanding, Sita.

And, if you feel you may also benefit from someone else's insights, I

believe the right person for you to ask is your brahmana husband, isn't he?

 

your servant,

Kunti-Devi dasi

[Guest guest]

>>What do the advocates of this theory make of the following, samsaric,

>>scenarios: someone who is currently a woman may have been a man in a

>>previous life, someone who is currently a man may have been a woman in a

>>previous life, someone who is currently a woman may become a man in her

>>next life, someone who is currently a man may become a woman in his next

>>life.

>

>So? What does that have to do with varnasrama development and the dharma of

>men and women?

>

>>How would a gentleman (wherever his current headquarters may be) feel about

>>spending his next life, for a change, illiterate, cooking and mopping the

>>floors, while self-righteous people boss her around and demand vip

>>treatment?

>

>Why give such an extreme example? What's the point behind it?

 

I wrote what I wrote. Please feel free to take it according to your own

understanding, Sita.

And, if you feel you may also benefit from someone else's insights, I

believe the right person for you to ask is your brahmana husband, isn't he?

 

your servant,

Kunti-Devi dasi