PDA

View Full Version : Hare Krsna!



Devi Dasi
26 November 2013, 03:19 PM
"The two scriptural quotes you have provided do not address caste/origin in terms of them exclaiming that questioning a Vaishnava in terms of caste, race, origin, etc. is aparAdha/violation."
The quotes are very plain in what they state: 1. "The living entities in this conditioned world are My eternal, fragmental parts."

EVERYONE, irrespective of background, belongs to God/Krsna.

2. "When a person is admitted into Vishnu's family, he is called a Vaishnava."

Madai and Jagai, both born brahmins ate beef and intoxicated with alcohol could abuse an illustrious personality such as Lord Nityananda prabhu. In such a case, the lesson is clear the punya of past actions and birth only carry one so far... personal choices can negatively impact one's spirituality. The other lesson is found in personality such as Haridas Thakurji who was born a Muslim, but became a holy Vaishnava. The karma accrued from mleccha upbringing is elevated and blessed by choosing conscientiously to follow dharma and chant the Holy Names of our Lord.


When a person becomes a Vaishnava... he is acceptable to the Lord. If a person renounces the very definition of a Vaishnava by bad actions, regardless of merits of birth and upbringing, he is not acceptable to the Lord. If someone presents as a Vaishnava, and not with contemptible behaviors, what does it matter their background, race, caste or anything? Such a person belongs to Lord.

I did not wish to delve into the condition of aparadh, nor to prove a Court case regarding it. It seemed enough to bring it to attention that rejecting a Vaishnava or pointing out their cultural, racial, caste background is heading towards Vaishnava aparadh. I have read a few of this prabhu's posts and seen the contempt. For this reason I made the comment, so as NOT to lead the conversation into contempt for a person's background and referred to positive scriptural assertions of the merit of a Vaishnava and a human being.


It would be intellectually honest to mention the mere fact that the above is an opinionated insight derived from opinionated commentaries upon opinionated commentaries.
I have not asserted any opinion. I have no interest in asserting any opinion on the scriptures, hence my reply. To the best of my ability I try to conform to scriptural teachings.

It is also intellectually honest to admit this forum is rather contemptuous towards members of the Hare Krsna movement... hence the reason for my appearance here. It is my intention only to clarify what I perceive as misunderstandings. But if a person has degenerated to a level of hatred or other strong aversion, I will not succeed in changing his mind. Neither will I degenerate into any fighting over spiritual subjects, when the purpose of spirituality is to praise the Divine and not ourselves, and to taste the LOVE and BLISS of Divine presence and act with mercy towards one another.

We do not know what difficulties a person encounters in their life, whether they are having a surgery soon, or if a loved one is disabled. We don't know any of the conditions of life of the people we meet. But if we fail to share with them the blessings of spiritual sadhana and the peace of sadhu sanga, then I think we have missed the boat.

My sincerest dandavat pranams to you.

ShivaFan
26 November 2013, 03:36 PM
Namaste Devi Dasi

What a nice member name! It brings back memories of the 1970s and a wonderful Hindu who was American who authored a devotional song IN ENGLISH that was called "Devi Dasi" and he would play guitar and sing this and other very nice Hindu songs both in English, Sanskrit, Hindi, Bengali.

In one way, you remind me of my daughter. My wife is Bengali-Gujarati.

I hope everything goes well for you on this forum, you seem to know a lot and I am sure I will seek a question once in a while.

So you are a devotee of Krishna. Let me share my favorite artwork of Krsna by Raja Ravi Varma. He is one of my favorite artists, I sure you will recognize it as it was repainted by ISKCON, but this is the original:

http://storage.canalblog.com/12/58/771277/57687150_p.jpg

"Your ever well wisher"

Om Namah Sivaya

brahma jijnasa
27 November 2013, 05:44 AM
Namaste Sudas Paijavana and Devi Dasi

The two scriptural quotes you have provided do not address caste/origin in terms of them exclaiming that questioning a Vaishnava in terms of caste, race, origin, etc. is aparAdha/violation.

Actually it is a kind of violation. In the Padma Purāṇa it is said:


arcye viṣṇau śilā-dhīr guruṣu nara-matir vaiṣṇave jāti-buddhir
viṣṇor vā vaiṣṇavānāṁ kali-mala-mathane pāda-tīrthe 'mbu-buddhiḥ
śrī-viṣṇor nāmni mantre sakala-kaluṣa-he śabda-sāmānya-buddhir
viṣṇau sarveśvareśe tad-itara-sama-dhīr yasya vā nārakī saḥ

One who thinks that the worshipable Deity in the temple is made of wood or stone, one who sees a Vaiṣṇava guru as an ordinary human being, or one who materially conceives of a Vaiṣṇava as belonging to a particular caste is nārakī, a resident of hell.

The position of a Vaishnava is above all varnas. Obviously one who thinks that such a devotee of the Lord is a mleccha or a shudra has a hellish mentality (nārakī).

I've already mentioned that in "Misunderstandings - VAD Threads". There I also mentioned Lord Mahesvara's words from Mahabharata:


"In my opinion, if pious activities and good character are found in a sudra, it should be understood that he is better than a brahmana.
Birth, purificatory processes, study of the Vedas, and good birth are not the criterion for being a brahmana. The only criterion is one's behavior."

Here we have "he is better than a brahmana". Is there any varna higher than brahmana? No, there is no varna higher than brahmana, but there is someone even higher than a brahmana according to this words of Lord Mahesvara! This means that someone who is pious and of good character can be higher than all varnas! Guess who this person might be? ;)

--------------------------------

Namaste Devi Dasi

Welcome to HDF.


regards

Sudas Paijavana
27 November 2013, 08:12 AM
Pranam-s, Jijnasa:


Namaste Sudas Paijavana and Devi Dasi
Actually it is a kind of violation. In the Padma Purāṇa it is said...

Now, wouldn't it have been easier to quote the Padma PurANa instead of the other previous quotes? The one quoted by you does address it as a violation while the scriptural quotes by DD do not.


Guess who this person might be? ;)


Spock? :p

ShivaFan
27 November 2013, 12:02 PM
Namaste h(luv)k


A mlechha ( non-hindus) are not allowed to worship krishna. Only hindus twice born ( bramhana, kshatriya, vaishya) are elligible to worship krishna by vedic, tantrik and mixed way

Frankly, this isn't appropriate in an "introductions" thread. Someone, who is obviously an advanced devotee, comes to the form, who happens to worship Krishna, and you have to startup with this type of behavior? We do not know you from a hole in the wall as far as so-called "restrictions", you are just a member of a forum with no background we know of (as far as I know you could be a murderer or anything, on meds for psychotic lapses, a chandala, anything who knows?) and while I appreciate your ideas on Brahman and Adwaita, I am a "dualist" and I appreciate the wisdom of many in the Family of Hinduism and especially new guests such as Devi Dasi to the forum. Can't you just lighten up on the mleecha stuff and let others enjoy what new members introduce? Frankly, you now make zero sense to me, how can you call yourself an adwaitan adherent of Brahman, tell me Brahman is everywhere (and thus Krsna is everywhere, is that what you say?) and then worship of Krishna (be it Vedic in authority or chanting) cannot be everywhere? It makes no sense to limit the world IMHO. But just treat guests like a Hindu would, that is part of Hinduism too.
Om Namah Sivaya

Devi Dasi
28 November 2013, 01:59 AM
Pranam-s, Jijnasa:

Now, wouldn't it have been easier to quote the Padma PurANa instead of the other previous quotes? The one quoted by you does address it as a violation while the scriptural quotes by DD do not.

Unfortunately my posts are under moderation and there is a time lapse in when they appear, one at least did not appear, and I also cannot make corrections or read them over.

I stated already, and now the post has come through, there was a very specific purpose behind the scriptures cited which I wanted to convey, of a positive nature regarding that the humanity itself belongs to God/Krsna, and that humanity can uplift itself by worship of God/Krsna, and not to delve into the matter of aparadh directly, which apparently is your interest.

Hare Krsna.

grames
28 November 2013, 10:30 AM
Very Surprising and also harsh untruth!

Vaishnava is beyond the social caste classification meaning he/she is now just a devotee! Brahmana is a social caste and i am not sure why it hurts when some of them who does not even understand what a "Devotee" class is but keep their 'pride' of being just a social class.

The first and most revered SriVaishnava Alwar is not a Brahmana by birth and there are so many non social class Brahmana vaishnavas in that tradition.
The Ramanandi vaishnavas are not Brahamana's by birth and so many great vaishnavas appeared in that tradition who are not Brahamana by birth.
The great DasaKoota of Madhva tradition had so many great personalities like KanakaDasa who are not Brahmana by birth.

I still wonder, who are you against or what are you against? Just wearing another thread but not living and practicing the life style of a brahmana will not make you a brahmana. Someone who call himself a "Doctor" but never meet patients, do not know what medicines or medical treatments are available but always stay in the bar, clubs etc. all the time other than sleep will not be considered a Doctor by profession but just someone who secured a degree!" There is no point in arguing with such doctors about their "Doctorship"!

Vaishnava worships only Vishnu and Lord Vishnu is present everywhere and that truth is what makes a vaishnava worship everyone and everything! ( SamaDarshana - meaning a vaishnava will treat a Brahmana and others equally including a dog eater - even the insentient). It will be Ego of a person who assumed he is first class Brahmana so the worship from a vaishnava is meant for his social class but that's not the fact and such reverence, honor and respect is only to those who already shed this ego and surrendered their social life as well for the activities of Lord 24 hrs a day 365 days a year for their entire life time with no other business in their mind and heart. ( and such are already a vaishnava - A full time Bank Manager or IT professional working in the software industry cannot claim they are Vaishnava's as their social duty is different and such person by the standards of VarnAsrama, will not be considered a Brahmana. But, our pride is bigger than VarnAsrama and we don't want to give up this pride but gave up everything else that a Brahmana has to posses without compromise but argue that such Brahmana are worshippable etc. Practical life, economical requirement etc and change of social setup are good reasons but as much as the expectation is that we should admit and agree, the compromise of not being living the life of a Brahmana has also to be accepted and agreed with out pride.)

Its not a joke a surrendered Vaishnava is higher than a social class and spiritual class is always higher than your temporary social designation. It is intelligent and wise to understand such simple differences and meanings. Same time, a Vaishnava considers himself/herself lowest of low and with utmost modesty and this is the mood and characteristic of a Vaishnava. (Just like how a Brahmana have to exhibit the Brahamana Lakshna, a Vaishnava is not mere label and they do have to exhibit such modesty, total surrender to Lord Vishnu and utmost respect for everyone else). Anything contrary to this is not considered a Vaishnava and just carrying a japaMala or renaming yourself with some Dasa/Dasi will not make you any vaishnava unless you practice the life style of a Vaishnava.

Hare Krshna

hinduism♥krishna
29 November 2013, 07:33 AM
Namaste , grames and devidasi

I didn’t say Krishna is not lord of all . I ONLY said about worship.
Hindu sanatana dharma is the complete science of self.It is not just a culture.


Hindu means the one who follows veda and who is born in four varnas ie.bramhan ,Kshatriya ,vaishya and shudra .There are three compulsory things which should be considered to be called as a hindu. 1) he should be born in bharatavarsha. 2)He should be born in bramhana ,kshatriya ,vaishya or shudra families. 3)he should be follower of veda or vedic scriptures.
Our scriptures support varna by birth only . Karma and guna are the sub factors of birth.Because karma and guna are entirely dependant on birth. Birth is not just an ordinary thing . With birth ,you take all your previous karma and destiny. From this it is decided in which varna you will be born ,whether in bramhan,Kshatriya or vaishya OR in mlechhas . And it is well known fact written in scriptures that birth in hindu family (bramhana , Kshatriya) is the highest .Bramana ,vaishya and Kshatriya are very close to the supreme feet of Vishnu.
In Mahabharata , there is an incident. Karana who was very noble ,went to the school of drona to acquire dhanurvidya .But drona neglected him . Because guru can only give the vidya to those who are born in bramhana and Kshatriya varna. karna was born by impure birth . Karna was born to a Kshatriya mother but raised as the son of a charioteer, or lower class of Kshatriyas. That’s why drona rejected him as he has not born in bramhana or Kshatriya varna . Karna has all the qualities of Kshatriya , then why dronacharya rejected him ? It’s a birth only.

“vipro rajanya vaishyo cha harehe praptaha padantikam , shroten janmanathapi muhyantyamnayavadinah “ (BP 11.2.5)


Meaning:Brahmins, Kshatriyas and Vaishyas are very near Shri Hari’s feet by virtue of their birth and Vedic ceremonies, yet they are misguided by wrong interpretation of Vedas about the fruits of actions.

Who are twice born, i.e. Brahmins, Kshatriyas and merchant class are normally turned towards Shri Hari because of their initiation to Gayatri mantras etc., They are really of high rank because of their birth.

Actually these are the very Brahmins, who have the right for thread ceremony and Gayatri Mantra. They are supposed to have great interest in the worship of Hari, and these are the great persons by surrendering to whose feet, it is possible to meet the God Himself VERY EASILY. But SOME Brahmins become proud of their Vedic knowledge, and they are deceived by the illusion because of that pride.


“yada svanigamenoktam …….tanni bodha me (BP 11.27.8)

Meaning : First of all one should become a twice born (dvija) according to his veda (shastra vidhi ) ,then with faith and devotion ,how he should worship me ,I tell you ,listen now .

The Brahmins, the Kshatriyas and the Vaishyas are the three castes for which thread-ceremony is prescribed in the scriptures.
The Brahmins observe this ceremony in the eighth year of life. The Kshatriyas are authorized to do thread ceremony at the 12 year of life, and Vaishyas are authorized to do this at the 16t h year of age.

A thread-ceremony done with the advice of Gayatri-mantra, is the 2th
birth of that boy. It is called Savitri-birth. These three castes are twice born, and, therefore, they are eligible and authorized to worship krishna according to the Vedic method.


So please don’t put your personal claims about varna.This is our hindu-vedic tradtion .We hindus are protectors of veda and vedic traditions .It’s our first duty . So we know what we are and what is veda and its ancient tradions.

We don’t wana sacrifice our sacred varnashrama dharma and other vedic tradions just because of westerner’s and pseudo hindu’s mindsets.

Don’t alter our vedic tradictions which are being followed from ancient time. There was a prediction that mlechhas will try to destroy and alter hindu dharma according to their thinking and they will be the cause of end of hindu vedic dharma in kaliyuga . and it is happening now. No doubt ,its sure that vedic dharma will get completely collapsed in the flow of time of this kaliyuga. But we won’t give up the duty of saving vedic dharma.Because we know that hindu dharma is the eternal dharma and Vishnu is the protector of it.
Becasuse , we know that Vishnu himself is going to come at the end of kaliyuga to protect hindus and hindu vedic dharma. He will be born in hindu bramhana family in shambala ,small village ,which is predicted in south india .He will kill all shudra(mlechha) kings. The world will again fill with the fragnace of purity . He will become the protector of hindu bramhanas .Because bramhanas are dearest for Vishnu than his own self.

Not most ; all avataras of Vishnu are born only in bharata .Vishnu doesn’t take avatara in impure nations where there is no worship of bramhanas and cows. Remember this ! Every avatara of Vishnu is born in hindu vedic families ie either in bramhana , Kshatriya or vaishya . The recent complete incarnation of mahavishnu , Krishna , was in vaishya varna. The last incarnation ,kalki will be in bramhana family.In every human avataras , Vishnu is hindu only .Though he is all pervading bramhan , he acts as an ideal hindu. Though his real nature is atmaroopa , he appears in human form .But his essential formless nature doesn’t get tainted. See the greatness of bramhan ! Although he is all pervading , ignorant people see him only in vaikuntha. Although he is all pervading , ignorant people think that Krishna has taken avatara .

The birth, lila and disappearance of the Supreme Lord as human being, to be a mere acting by the power of His Maya, which is potency to delude people as that of a dramatic performer. Having created this Universe by Himself from His own existence, and having entered it as its inner controller sported in it and having withdrawn from it into Himself at the end, (at final dissolution) and retired, Surely He is always in his atmaroopa. (BP 11.31.11)

His birth in the race of Yadavas was nothing more than a reflection in a mirror, and just like the movements of the reflections in the mirror, He performed all his miraculous feats.
If we put away the mirror, the reflection disappears. Similarly the seemingly happening of lilas ,death or passing away of the Lord was also an illusion, and not Reality.
A dramatic performer dons the dresses according to the role which he has to play and takes out the dresses when the role is over; but the actor does not die when the role is ended.
Similar to this was the incarnation of Shri Krishna.
Though Shri Krishna appeared in the Yadava race, He was untouched by all limitations of the body ie form, and actions. Though He appeared, lived and disappeared, He was eternally free, what wonder is there that gods like shankara were surprised by His disappearance?
The Lord brings into existence the world without any help from anybody. He protects it by His own power , what is protected , is only he and he destroys it when time comes, but remains as he is.
This power of the Lord is very evident to us. He acts but remains unaffected by those lila, and remains in His eternal Free State which is bramhan beyond vyakta and avyakta.

grames
29 November 2013, 09:35 AM
Hi.,

This is very unscientific and also unvedic under the label of vedic. First of all, Vedic life system advises strongly to follow the Acharya's and it is the cult of new age where everyone is a guru and define their own system of following whatever they believe but package it and sell it under the label of veda, vedic life etc. The known acharyas from all the different authentic schools condemn the practice of Varna by birth especially in the Bhakthi schools. But, still there are short sighted demons who put themselves above their acharyas and make the spiritual life style as their proprietary. Where were they when the VarnAshrama dharma is completely broken and what are you upholding now when there is no more VarnAshrama? Show me bunch of Brahmana's who knows four veda or one fully and also understood the actual purpose of meaning of what they have known? Man, with few tricks, piece of saffron cloth and a big beard you can make merry and create a big crowd falling at your feet in the name of spiritual life and i am sure there are millions of so called "Brahmana" by birth in such following who refuse to even do a single pooja at their house for their very own family God. Many families have replaced Krshna with some Babas, Anandas & Saraswati's and this is the gift of their "Birth"? Many so called noble birth happily claim there is no God but you are God and i am God and everyone is God! Those who are faithful and remain in the traditional following are victimized by another set of what you call 'hindus with mere pride but no wisdom" and not allowed to open the doors for fellow human to grow in their spiritual progress.

Your very own message is so garbled and it is sad that, majority of the people who gets their birth in India automatically push their life time to the past yug and qualify their births alone as noble. What about the very same declaring in Kali Yug, everyone gets birth as "Sudra" only? Brushing it aside for the comfort of self pride? :)

For Krshna, devotees are nearer and also the one who deliver his varna dharma be it even a chandala or outcaste. Varna by no means is by birth and there is another term for that which is most twisted and misunderstood and misguided term called "Jati". Varna is social occupation ( not "birth" - varna simply means color) and it is totally understandable that getting birth in to a noble family speeds up your spiritual journey and nothing more than that as in qualification, rights or exclusive ownership. (Such birth is noble but does not stop a Prahalada to earn the love of Nrashima even though he is son of a demon).

Since, you are talking about the practice of Dvapara and before, i wonder whether you are in touch with the current time and life standards of Kali Yug! No one can classify them as the VarnAshra varnas anymore and the "Jati" is the only remainder in the age of Kali and the only left over varna is "Sudra".

Looking at your interpretation of Krshna and His leela, it is so obvious that birth is an hindrance to the true devotional service and also explains why great Bhakthi saints longed to get birth in the "Sudra" varna even though they were born to Brahmin families. (The Jati). At least, follow his advice and He is lord of all automatically means, everyone can worship Him! Will everyone worship Him? Thats the puzzle!

Jaskaran Singh
29 November 2013, 07:38 PM
Hi.,
Your very own message is so garbled and it is sad that, majority of the people who gets their birth in India automatically push their life time to the past yug and qualify their births alone as noble. What about the very same declaring in Kali Yug, everyone gets birth as "Sudra" only? Brushing it aside for the comfort of self pride? :)

What else can you expect from a person whose AcArya said the following in his brahmasUtrabhAShyam:

इतश्च न शूद्रस्याधिकारः।
यदस्य स्मृतेः श्रवणाध्ययनार्थप्रतिषेधो भवति।
वेदश्रवणप्रतिषेधो वेदाध्ययनप्रतिषेधस्तदर्थानानुष्ठानयोश्चप्रतिषेधः शूद्रस्य स्मर्यते।
श्रवणप्रतिषेधस्तावत्'अथास्य वेदमुपशृण्वतस्त्रपुजतुभ्यां श्रोत्रप्रपूरणम्'इति।
पद्युह वा एतत् श्मशानं यच्चूद्रस्तस्माच्चूद्रेसमीपे नाध्येतव्यम्' इति च।
अत एवाध्ययनप्रतिषेधः।
यस्य हि समतीपेऽपि नाध्येतव्य भवति स कथमश्रुतमधीयीत।
भवति च वेदोच्चारणे जिह्वाच्चेदो धारणे शरीरभेद इति।
अत एव चार्थादर्थज्ञानानुष्ठानयोः प्रतिषेधो भवति'न शूद्राय मतिं दद्यात्'इति॥१.३.३८॥

Transliteration:
itashca na shUdrasyAdhikAraH|
yadasya smR^iteH shravaNAdhyayanArthapratiShedho bhavati|
vedashravaNapratiShedho vedAdhyayanapratiShedhastadarthAnAnuShThAnayoshcapratiShedhaH shUdrasya smaryate|
shravaNapratiShedhastAvat'athAsya vedamupashR^iNvatastrapujatubhyAM shrotraprapUraNam'iti|
padyuha vA etat shmashAnaM yacchUdrastasmAcchUdresamIpe nAdhyetavyam' iti ca|
ata evAdhyayanapratiShedhaH|
yasya hi samatIpe.api nAdhyetavya bhavati sa kathamashrutamadhIyIta|
bhavati ca vedoccAraNe jihvAcchedo dhAraNe sharIrabheda iti|
ata eva cArthAdarthaj~nAnAnuShThAnayoH pratiShedho bhavati'na shUdrAya matiM dadyAt'iti||1.3.38||

I guess Hinduism<loves>kR^iShNa should pour tin and rubber (or lac) down my ear[s] (since I wasn't born in bhArat). I'm sure it would make Adi sha~Nkara proud...

hinduism♥krishna
29 November 2013, 09:32 PM
Namaste ,everyone.

I am extremely sorry ! But you can not disprove what I said about varna and worship.

Please take a look on Bhagavat purana verses in #18 post.

Thank you. Shri Hari ♥

Jaskaran Singh
29 November 2013, 09:54 PM
Namaste ,everyone.

I am extremely sorry ! But you can not disprove what I said about varna and worship.

Please take a look on Bhagavat purana verses in #18 post.

Thank you. Shri Hari ♥
Namaste,
Yeah, and I proved that your AcArya was extremely casteist and quoted from the gautamadharmasUtra in regards to comparing shUdra-s to a shmashAna/cremation ground and supported pouring tin and lac down the ears of shUdra-s who listen to the vedAH. It makes sense that his "shiShya" would be similarly casteist...
oM namo nArAyaNAya

Devi Dasi
30 November 2013, 05:49 AM
Namaste,

On the other hand, it actually may be a good way for the new member to adapt and become comfortable with the rigorous critical thinking type of discourse that occurs on HDF.

Introductions (http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/forumdisplay.php?f=15) forum. Prabhuji, your words mask a contempt pretending to be rigorous critical thinking and discourse. Apart from challenging and invalidating everything I share, it would have been nice to have a simple introduction.

It is sad that in this world, despite all the wonderful, powerful and ecstatic spiritual teachings of the greatest Masters, people still find a way, in religion, to exclude, ostracize, humiliate, and unwelcome other human beings, who are in essence, a part of their very selves. Prabhuji, there is something greater than being "right" or "winning a debate" or even being exalted as a "scholar" by others...something far greater. If one day you are able to perceive who I really am, I will be enfolding you with arms of love.

You are my brother. You are my essence. You are my very self. In the interior of your being, though you don't know it yet, you are my friend.

Devi Dasi
30 November 2013, 08:16 AM
Namaste , grames and devidasi
So please don’t put your personal claims about varna.This is our hindu-vedic tradtion .We hindus are protectors of veda and vedic traditions .It’s our first duty . So we know what we are and what is veda and its ancient tradions.

We don’t wana sacrifice our sacred varnashrama dharma and other vedic tradions just because of westerner’s and pseudo hindu’s mindsets...

Don’t alter our vedic tradictions which are being followed from ancient time. There was a prediction that mlechhas will try to destroy and alter hindu dharma according to their thinking and they will be the cause of end of hindu vedic dharma in kaliyuga . and it is happening now...

...Vishnu is hindu only .Though he is all pervading bramhan...
Hare Krsna prabhuji,

There is nothing I can say or do or believe which can hurt you in any way or damage the eternal truth.

Even if all you say were true, is this the right way of talking to people? On an introduction thread and go on about how they are invalid, unwelcome, unqualified, mlecchan, unfit for worship, ignorant of scriptures, etc. Even if all this were true, you would attempt to publicly humiliate people in order to elevate your own social standing?

Isn't this the reason we have had the appearance of so many saints and social reformers? People are divided into jati's, with the weakest and poorest literally spit upon, raped and abused, neglected, plundered in most adharmic ways? Isn't it true this section of Indian society now comprises many tens of millions who are aligning with anti-national movements in retaliation and for basic survival? Are you are oblivious to the catastrophe in this world extreme rejection is creating worldwide, not just in India?

Isn't the cause of such created sufferings our inability to love who we call God, our failure to simply love a human being and thereby create a proper, just, and enlightened Vedic society? Varna is not jati. Jati cannot give spiritual qualification nor can it be a bar. Your varna is not a mirror of your soul.

God is not Hindu. God cannot be for Hindu's alone. What ludicrous thought that God could be material or worried about contamination of the material or that anything in the material nature would be a qualification.

When I was a child, my mother made me learn a poem. It was one of her favorites.
"Shunned at the temple gates by the pious,
the outcastes and uninitiates
seek their God beyond the artificial,
inwardly, in midnight skies, in forest flowers,
in love, and in separation.

Their image of God is not manhandled,
or imprisoned by Temple walls.
Along the edge of the Padma,
whose waves sweep away old temples,
I have seen one of them,
alone with his Ektara
seeking his soul's companion
through songs.

"I am an outcast
whose offerings cannot reach
the imprisoned god."
I am the outcaste, the uninitiate.
Born in the household of exile,
I was rejected by the respectable.

I pursued my fancies
at the crossing of the roads.
For their worship they plucked flowers
prescribed by scripture
And left for me and my God,
the garden of blossoms blessed by the sun.

By the contempt of the pious
I was thrust into the arms of man.
And I found solitary friends
whose light and voice
made history."

-Rabindranath Tagore

http://bhaktiyoga.com/files/images/janma/smiling_sp.jpg

Sri Guru Vandana ~ Svarupa Damodara Das
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JAEDDy_DTlQ

Caste System Cast Out HD
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oxCRgG0eAYM

(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oxCRgG0eAYM)Forum sanga, please forgive my mistakes.

Believer
30 November 2013, 08:10 PM
Namaste,

Everything, good or bad, comes through our posts - our humility, our arrogance, our thoughts about caste supremacy, our knowledge of the scriptures or lack there of, our justification of our thoughts with gross misinterpretations of the scriptures - it's all there for others to take a peek at our soul.

Pranam.

PS, If winning debates is all one cares about, here are some pointers to that game.
http://hindudharmaforums.com/showpost.php?p=51384&postcount=1

Jaskaran Singh
30 November 2013, 08:23 PM
Namaste,

Everything, good or bad, comes through our posts - our humility, our arrogance, our thoughts about caste supremacy, our knowledge of the scriptures or lack there of, our justification of our thoughts with gross misinterpretations of the scriptures - it's all there for others to take a peek at our soul.

Pranam.

Hey, I was just trying to troll hinduism♥krishna just to see his response. I don't literally believe that Adi sha~Nkara was casteist (although he [sha~Nkara] did use the trapu-jatubhyAM verse in his bhAShyam). Nonetheless, judging by hinduism<luv>krishna's inability to respond, I don't think he finds it morally reprehensible to pour molten tin down a person's ear as a punishment as if both Adi sha~Nkara and the dharmasUtra he quoted from agree on that and if he thinks it serves as pramANa, then it probably doesn't matter to him, even if it's inhumane and adhArmika.

Sudas Paijavana
30 November 2013, 08:59 PM
Hey, I was just trying to troll hinduism♥krishna just to see his response. I don't literally believe that Adi sha~Nkara was casteist (although he [sha~Nkara] did use the trapu-jatubhyAM verse in his bhAShyam). Nonetheless, judging by hinduism<luv>krishna's inability to respond, I don't think he finds it morally reprehensible to pour molten tin down a person's ear as a punishment as if both Adi sha~Nkara and the dharmasUtra he quoted from agree on that and if he thinks it serves as pramANa, then it probably doesn't matter to him, even if it's inhumane and adhArmika.

Dude,

I'm the one being trolled. You're the lucky one. Look at how my postings have been misconstrued. Heck, I'm getting more slack for just merely asking about scriptural citations, than HLK whose persistent casteism goes unchecked, unmarked, unaddressed, "tolerated", blah blah blah.

Who would have thought, eh?

"Madam, may I know the verse number?"

"You shall go to the netherworld, you usurper!"

- - - - - - -

"What caste are you? You do know that only certain caste members can be Hindu, blah blah blah, right?"

".....[I'll answer this dude kindly, because he didn't ask for scripture]....."

Pure madness, I tell you! Madness!

isavasya
30 November 2013, 09:23 PM
Hey, I was just trying to troll hinduism♥krishna just to see his response. I don't literally believe that Adi sha~Nkara was casteist (although he [sha~Nkara] did use the trapu-jatubhyAM verse in his bhAShyam). Nonetheless, judging by hinduism<luv>krishna's inability to respond, I don't think he finds it morally reprehensible to pour molten tin down a person's ear as a punishment as if both Adi sha~Nkara and the dharmasUtra he quoted from agree on that and if he thinks it serves as pramANa, then it probably doesn't matter to him, even if it's inhumane and adhArmika.

Dear Jaskaran Singh,

I must say I was hurt by your last post. But I am happy you were not serious.:) I will just like to say that, the stance of Sri Adi Shankaracharya, Ramanujacharya and madhvacharya are same as far as casteism is concerned. The Smartha, Srivaishnava and Madhva sampradaya believe the same regarding varna system. So it would be unfair if we single out any of them while blaming casteism on Acharyas. Also nobody can guarantee whether all texts ascribed to these acharyas were really written by them. I will not like to discuss though whether their stance is correct or not because last time I spoke against casteism, some members didn't liked my views. Another thing, India etc are political divisions merely. Aryavartha means land of noble people (potentially the whole world). I personally believe currently there is nothing special about India, which makes it better than many other countries. By the way Sindh pradesh will be part of Bharata under any description of Bharata.

Jaskaran Singh
30 November 2013, 10:00 PM
namaskAram,

Dude,

I'm the one being trolled. You're the lucky one. Look at how my postings have been misconstrued. Heck, I'm getting more slack for just merely asking about scriptural citations, than HLK whose persistent casteism goes unchecked, unmarked, unaddressed, "tolerated", blah blah blah.

Who would have thought, eh?

"Madam, may I know the verse number?"

"You shall go to the netherworld, you usurper!"

- - - - - - -

"What caste are you? You do know that only certain caste members can be Hindu, blah blah blah, right?"

".....[I'll answer this dude kindly, because he didn't ask for scripture]....."

Pure madness, I tell you! Madness!

LOL, that is hilarious.

Dear Jaskaran Singh,

I must say I was hurt by your last post. But I am happy you were not serious.:) I will just like to say that, the stance of Sri Adi Shankaracharya, Ramanujacharya and madhvacharya are same as far as casteism is considered.The Smartha, Srivaishnava and Madhva sampradaya believe the same regarding varna system. So it would be unfair if we single out any of them while blaming casteism on Acharyas. Also nobody can guarantee whether all texts ascribed to these acharyas were really written by them.

I don't remember madhvAchArya ever making a statement to the extent that tin should be poured down a shUdra's ear for listening to the vedAH, if you could provide the verse that would be nice. However, Adi sha~Nkara and rAmAnujAchArya did make statements to that effect. Regardless, I'm not a part of any of their (Adi sha~Nkara, rAmAnujAchArya, or madhvAchArya) sampradAya-s so it honestly doesn't matter to me whether they quote from such and such dharmashAstra and that won't influence my view on birth-based varNAshrama. I don't consider Adi sha~NkarAchArya any more casteist than the mImAMsaka-s or even bauddha-s of his time, yet he still made some very rude comments and quoted some of the strictest caste-based verses from the manusmR^iti, and that is undeniable. I was talking about him rather than rAmAnuja because H<heart>K was an advaitin and I'm pretty sure that talking about rAmAnuja wouldn't really provoke a response from him.


I will not like to discuss though whether their stance is correct or not because last time I spoke against casteism, some members didn't liked my views. Another thing, India etc are political divisions merely. Aryavartha means land of noble people (potentially the whole world). I personally believe currently there is nothing special about India, which makes it better than many other countries.
Well then; that's too bad for them, isn't it. I guess they'll just have to suck it up. If comments such as this one by Mahahrada (http://www.hindudharmaforums.com/showpost.php?p=46061&postcount=4) aren't moderated, then I don't think my post (which merely quotes from sha~Nkara's brahmasUtrabhAShyam) will get deleted.


By the way Sindh pradesh will be part of Bharata under any description of Bharata.
Would you like to go to Sindh and ask whether Sindhi-s consider themselves to be bhAratvAsI-s? They would most likely say no...

isavasya
30 November 2013, 10:24 PM
namaskAram,
I don't remember madhvAchArya ever making a statement to the extent that tin should be poured down an shUdra's ear for listening to the vedAH, if you could provide the verse that would be nice. However, Adi sha~Nkara and rAmAnujAchArya did make statements to that effect. Regardless, I'm not a part of any of their (Adi sha~Nkara, rAmAnujAchArya, or madhvAchArya) sampradAya-s so it honestly doesn't matter to me whether they quote from such and such dharmashAstra and that won't influence my view on birth-based varNAshrama. I don't consider Adi sha~NkarAchArya any more casteist than the mImAMsaka-s or even bauddha-s of his time, yet he still made some very rude comments and quoted some of the strictest caste-based verses from the manusmR^iti, and that is undeniable. I was talking about him rather than rAmAnuja because H<heart>K was an advaitin and I'm pretty sure that talking about rAmAnuja wouldn't really provoke a response from him.



Dear Jaskaran ji
Sorry, I do not have any quote with me. My post wanted to convey that all these schools of Vedanta strictly preach birth based varna dharma. I learned it from 3 years of debating with knowledgeable members of these 3 sampradaya. Manu smriti does contains violent and discriminatory verses for one community and all these schools adhere to Manu smriti to my knowledge.

Regarding my comment on Sindh. It is not I who want to dictate which is part of Bharata or which is not. I was merely saying that Puranas and Smritis mention Sindh as part of Bharata. These books have already been written so cannot be changed. Though in my personal opinion, Bhagwan can incarnate anywhere in the world. I strongly attest to feeling that all the worlds are my country. Svadeso Bhuvanatrayam.

Jaskaran Singh
30 November 2013, 11:21 PM
Dear jaskaran ji
Sorry, I do not have any quote with me. My post wanted to convey that all these schools of Vedanta strictly preach birth based varna dharma. I learned it from 3 years of debating with knowledgeable members of these 3 sampradays. Manu smriti does contains violent and discriminatory verses for one community and all these schools adhere to Manu smriti to my knowledge.
That doesn't make sense though, as madhvAchArya was of the view that varNa-s are not hereditarily based, which pretty much goes against all dharmashAstras:
http://i1283.photobucket.com/albums/a554/jdhaliwal175/lll_zpsf1dfe743.png


Regarding my comment on Sindh. It is not I who want to dictate which is part of Bharata or which is not. I was merely saying that Puranas and Smritis mention Sindh as part of Bharata.
Yes, but most Sindhi-s themselves do not consider it part of bhArata.

These books have already written so cannot be changed. Though in my personal opinion, Bhagwan can incarnate anywhere in the world. I strongly attest to feeling that all the worlds are my country.. Svadeso Bhuvanatrayam.
Why are you telling this to me? Shouldn't you tell this to H<heart>K, who said the following:
"There are three compulsory things which should be considered to be called as a hindu. 1) he should be born in bharatavarsha. 2)He should be born in bramhana ,kshatriya ,vaishya or shudra families. 3)he should be follower of veda or vedic scriptures."

hinduism♥krishna
30 November 2013, 11:41 PM
Namaste ,singh.

I don't think any traditional sampradaya do not accept varna by birth. First thing I am not the follower of adi shankara. But I know that adi shankara was with varna by birth. If not, then post his writing wherein he has opposed varna by birth. First know that varna not by birth is a recent fad in this kaliyuga. No any scripture posits varna not by birth. About varna, you won't find too much references. Because it was followed perfectly. No one was against it. But kali yuga has changed everything. One can expect this, because this is a kaliyuga. Unfortunatelly ,day by day, more numbers of people are giving up the core teachings of varna dharma and have sticked to the varna not by birth.

In scriptures ,there are many supports of varna by birth. I have already posted one of them from bhagavar purana ;wherein it ia written that " bramhan, kshatriya and vaishya are very near to the supreme feet of vishnu by virtue of their birth

And critisizing of someone in order to disprove him doesn't work always.

Thank you.

hinduism♥krishna
30 November 2013, 11:49 PM
Namaste ,jaskarana.

Who said that madhawavharya is the absolute authority ? What you have posted is his interpretation or rather his views. Did he prove that with scriptural supports ?

If yes, post his commentry along with proper scriptural supports .It will be beneficial for all of us. That's it.

Hari krishna

Jaskaran Singh
30 November 2013, 11:53 PM
Namaste ,singh.
I don't think any traditional sampradaya do not accept varna by birth. First thing I am not the follower of adi shankara. But I know that adi shankara was with varna by birth. If not, then post his writing wherein he has opposed varna by birth.

I never said that Adi sha~Nkara opposed varNa by birth, I said that madhva didn't agree with varNa by birth (but he certainly didn't force others to reject varNa by birth). Please read what I wrote more carefully.


First know that varna not by birth is a recent fad in this kaliyuga. No any scripture posits varna not by birth. About varna, you won't find too much references. Because it was followed perfectly. No one was against it. But kali yuga has changed everything. One can expect this, because this is a kaliyuga. Unfortunatelly ,day by day, more numbers of people are giving up the core teachings of varna dharma and have sticked to the varna not by birth.
In scriptures ,there are many supports of varna by birth. I have already posted one of them from bhagavar purana ;wherein it ia written that " bramhan, kshatriya and vaishya are very near to the supreme feet of vishnu by virtue of their birth

I never said I opposed varNa by birth, but I do oppose pouring molten tin down a shUdra's ear just because he listened to Vedic chants and I do not agree with your view that only dvija-s can worship shrI kR^iShNa properly (as if chanting harinAma is not a proper method, which we know from the shrImad bhAgavatam, is a ridiculous conclusion). I also disagree with your view that to be a "Hindu" you must be born in bhAratavarsha. Could you please show me which shAstra defines a Hindu in such a manner or even uses the word Hindu to refer to a religion?



And critisizing of someone in order to disprove him doesn't work always.
Thank you.

Yeah, and strawmanning another individual's argument doesn't work "always" either. :rolleyes:

Jaskaran Singh
01 December 2013, 12:07 AM
Namaste ,jaskarana.

Who said that madhawavharya is the absolute authority ? What you have posted is his interpretation or rather his views. Did he prove that with scriptural supports ?

If yes, post his commentry along with proper scriptural supports .It will be beneficial for all of us. That's it.

Hari krishna
praNAm,
Why do I need to provide scriptural support for a claim I never made? If you understood the context, you would know why I pasted that (it was because IshAvAsya said that madhva followers follow the manusmR^iti which to me didn't make sense, as madhva himself didn't believe in varNa by birth, which is contrary to the view espoused by the manusmR^iti).

hinduism♥krishna
01 December 2013, 12:29 AM
Namaste, jaskarana.

You aked me about complex term hindu. For that you should read this thread :

http://hindudharmaforums.com/showthread.php?t=3462


Brihaspati Agama says :

himAlayaM samArabhya yAvadindu sarovaram |
taM devanirmitaM desha hindusthAnaM prachakShate ||

"Starting from Himalaya up to Indu waters is this God-created country Hindustan."

( It means hindu word is formed by joing 'hi' of himalaya and 'indu' of bindu waters and the residents of bharata are called as hindus)

• Parijat Haran Natak describes Hindu as:

hinasti tamasA pApAn daihikAn duShTamAnasAn |
hetibhiH shatruvarga cha sa hindurabhidhIyate ||

"Hindu is one who with penance washes one's sins and evil thoughts and with
arms destroys one's enemies."

• Madhava Digvijaya states:

oMkAramUlamantrADhya punarjanmadRuDhAshayaH |
gobhaktako bhAratagururhindurhisanadUShakaH ||

"One who meditates on Omkar as the primeal sound, believes in karma and reincarnation, has reverence for the cow, who is devoted to Bharat, and abhors evil, is deserving of being called Hindu.

• Vriddha Smriti defines Hindu as:

hiMsayA dUyate yashcha sadAcharaNatatpara |
vedagopratimAsevI sa hindumukhshabdabhAk ||

"One who abhors the mean and the ignoble, and is of noblebearing, who reveres the Veda, the cow, and the deity, is a Hindu."


From brihannaradi purana :

Himalayam samarabhya yavat bindusarovaram
Hindusthanamiti qyatan hi antaraksha-rayogatah

"The country between Himalayas and Bindu Sarovar (Cape Commorin Sea) is Hindusthan derived by combining the first letter 'Hi' of Himalayas and the last compound letter 'ndu' of the word Bindu."

Other instances are cited in Vishnu Purana, Padma Purana and the Brihaspati Samhita:

Aaasindo sindhu paryantham yasyabharatha bhoomikah
Mathrubhuh pithrubhoochaiva sah vai hindurithismrithaah

"Whoever considers the land of Bharatha Bhoomi between Saptha Sindhu and the Indian Ocean as his motherland and fatherland is known as Hindu."

From VishNu Purana, 2.3.1:

Uttaram yat samudrasya, Himadreschaiva dakshinam |
Varsham tad Bharatam nama Bharati yatra santatih ||

"Bharat is the name of country situated to the north of the sea and south of the Himalayas and its progeny is known as Bharati.

Know that bharati and hindus are just alternative words to define people of sacred land bharata. Sometimes we use bharati term also

Thank you.

Jaskaran Singh
01 December 2013, 12:47 AM
Namaste,
Seriously, do you honestly believe that only bhAratiya-s can be religiously Hindu when the only shAstra you have justifying Hindu as a religion are obscure ones like vR^iddha smR^iti and parijAta haraNa nAtaka (two scriptures which I've never heard of before), and that too copy-pasted from Saidevo's post? Wow, perhaps I should have said well-known scripture rather than "scripture" in general. Why am I to accept that these "scriptures" are reliable (as in, not interpolated) and not fraudulent; are they ever quoted elsewhere by any other text or referred to even indirectly?

hinduism♥krishna
01 December 2013, 12:57 AM
Seriously, do you honestly believe that only bhAratiya-s can be religiously Hindu when the only shAstra you have justifying Hindu as a religion are obscure ones like vR^iddha smR^iti and parijAta nAtaka (two scriptures which I've never heard of before), and that too copy-pasted from Saidevo's post? Wow, perhaps I should have said well-known scripture rather than "scripture" in general. Why am I to accept that these "scriptures" are reliable (as in, not interpolated) and not fraudulent; are they ever quoted elsewhere by any other text or referred to even indirectly?

What about vishnu purana ? Isn't this well know ?

But know that there was not common usage of hindu in very ancient times.
In acient time, during the time of krishna, there were only hindus in bharata. There were no christian or muslims.

However after invasion of muslims, it was necessary to separate muslims from sacred followers of veda (hindus). So the sacred name came - hindu ,which was not being commonly used before.

Thank you.

Jaskaran Singh
01 December 2013, 01:11 AM
What about vishnu purana ? Isn't this well know ?
Yes, but it doesn't use the term to refer to members of a certain religion.


But know that there was not common usage of hindu in very ancient times.
In acient time, during the time of krishna, there were only hindus in bharata. There were no christian or muslims.

However after invasion of muslims, it was necessary to separate muslims from sacred followers of veda (hindus). So the sacred name came - hindu ,which was not being commonly used before.

Thank you.
I'm sure there were bhAratiya-s back then who were not vedic as well, have you ever heard of the santhal people of parts of eastern India (a munda speaking AdivAsI group which worships the non-vedic deity bonga) or the vedda people of parts of shrI la~NkA who worship non-vedic deities like kande yakka? Also, nAstika bauddha-s would also classify as "Hindu" following your view that all bhAratiya-s living before Christian and Muslim arrival were "Hindus."

isavasya
01 December 2013, 01:31 AM
Namaste ,singh.

First know that varna not by birth is a recent fad in this kaliyuga. No any scripture posits varna not by birth. About varna, you won't find too much references. Because it was followed perfectly. No one was against it.


Namaste HK

Varna is not by birth but by guna and Vyahvar (actions/deeds). Story from Shruti will prove that.

Proof from Chandogya Upanishad - Book 4, chapter 4 (verse 1-5)


“Now Satyakama Jabala spoke unto his mother Jabala and said ‘Mother, I shall go and lead the life of the Brahmacharin; tell me what is my gotra.’ But she answered him, ‘This I know not, my son, of what gotra thou art; resorting to many as a serving woman in my youth I got thee, therefore I know not of what gotra thou art. But Jabala is my name and Satyakama is thine, Satyakama Jabala therefore call thyself.’ So he came to Haridrumata the Gautama and said, ‘I would stay with my Lord as a Brahmacharin, let me therefore enter under thee.’ And he said to him, ‘My son, of what gotra art thou?’ But the other answered, ‘This, alas, I know not of what gotra I am; I asked my mother and she answered me, Resorting to many in my youth as a serving woman I got thee, therefore I know not of what gotra thou art, but Jabala is my name and Satyakama is thine; Satyakama Jabala therefore am I.’ And he said to him, ‘None who is not a Brahmin can be strong enough to say this; gather the firewood, my son, I will take thee under me, for thou didst not depart from the truth.’ follow as a herd,’ and he set the cows in motion and said, ‘Return not until they are a thousand.’ And he fared abroad with them during the years till they were a thousand.”So HK, we see Rishi Gautama ask Gotra of satyakama, to which Satykama replied he had none. His mother was a maid servant serving many men in her youth and she didn't know with whom she had conceived satyakama. But what made Rishi gautama take Satyakama as his pupil brahmchari ? The dedication to truth. Which is what the quality of Brahmin should be.
You can see the various translation of above texts. Swami Nikhilananda or sri Aurobindo or anyone else. The fact cannot be disproved.



"There are three compulsory things which should be considered to be called as a hindu. 1) he should be born in bharatavarsha. 2)He should be born in bramhana ,kshatriya ,vaishya or shudra families. 3)he should be follower of veda or vedic scriptures."HK ,

You do not make any sense here. Sanatan Dharma is not a religion, it is eternal Dharma which governs everything. One does chose to be Hindu but not Sanatan dharmi. Law of karma and vedas apply to all irrespective of whether he calls himself Sanatan Dharmi or not or not. Christians and Jews are not exempt from law of Karma. Let alone people born in other religions, even Rakchasa and Daitya are what you will call 'Hindu'. Yes they received boons from our Devtas by chanting their mantras. So yes they were what now a days people call Hindu. Not just people born of parents of one of or mixture of 4 jatis are Hindu. And please don't give references from Brihaspati Agama type texts. Anybody can write anything. The Pramana comes from authentic texts like Vedas and Upanishads.

hinduism♥krishna
01 December 2013, 01:33 AM
namaste ,jaskarana.

Here common sense is necessary


know that that defination from vishnu purana was created when there were only hindus in Bharata. So obviously , when one says what is hindu's or bharati's dharma ? It is hindu's dharma. From this ,hindu word originated as a dharma from the concept 'hindu's dharma'. In this way People started to call dharma as hindu dharma. So it means ' hindu's dharma. '

You should know the basic fact that our dharma has no any name. In ancient times, it was simply being called as 'hindu' ; not vedic or sanatana. Hindu, sanatana, vedic are just the different adjectives of dharma . IN most ancient hindu scriptures, you won't find even the sanatana or vedic dharma words used as a religion . So why you have so much allergy of hindu word only ? :)

Hari krishna.

Jaskaran Singh
01 December 2013, 01:37 AM
Proof from Chandogya Upanishad - Book 4, chapter 4 (verse 1-5)

So HK, we see Rishi Gautama ask Gotra of satyakama, to which Satykama replied he had none. His mother was a maid servant serving many men in her youth and she didn't know with whom she had conceived satyakama. But what made Rishi gautama take Satyakama as his pupil brahmchari ? The dedication to truth. Which is what the quality of Brahmin should be.
You can see the various translation of above texts. Swami Nikhilananda or sri Aurobindo or anyone else. The fact cannot be disproved.

[/FONT][/COLOR]
It really bugs me to go against you in this case and support H<heart>K, but you are taking it out of context. This does not go against birth based varNAshrama as it is ultimately up to the R^iShi to chose who would be his pupil and saptarShi gautama did not care what his varNa was. That does not mean that his [satyakAma's] varNa was not based on his birth; how you came to that conclusion seems strange.

Omkara
01 December 2013, 01:47 AM
That doesn't make sense though, as madhvAchArya was of the view that varNa-s are not hereditarily based, which pretty much goes against all dharmashAstras:


Where did Sri Madhvacharya say this?

isavasya
01 December 2013, 01:49 AM
That does not mean that his varNa was not based on his birth; how you came to that conclusion seems strange.

Dear Jaskaran Ji

A few things here. Birth of satyakama happened from an unwed mother. Her mother was a Dasi serving in Households, so definitely not a Brahmin woman by sanskar and Guna. Some could argue that father could have been a Brahmin. But a Brahmin does not indulges in unlawful sex (though he can in case like the birth of Ved Vyasa). But by all means the satyakama was definitely not a Brahmin by birth. Unless one leaves guna and sanskar as criteria of one's Varna.

Omkara
01 December 2013, 01:56 AM
Dear Jaskaran Ji

A few things here. Birth of satyakama happened from an unwed mother. Her mother was a Dasi serving in Households, so definitely not a Brahmin woman by sanskar and Guna. Some could argue that father could have been a Brahmin. But a Brahmin does not indulges in unlawful sex (though he can in case like the birth of Ved Vyasa). But by all means the satyakama was definitely not a Brahmin by birth. Unless one leaves guna and sanskar as criteria of one's Varna.

In the vedanta sutras, this same story is used to support varna by birth. Please read the relevant sections.

Also there is no information on the background of Satyakama's mother. You are just speculating. Shankaracharya says she was a brahmin and was married to a Brahmin but he died early and she did not know his gotra.

isavasya
01 December 2013, 01:59 AM
That doesn't make sense though, as madhvAchArya was of the view that varNa-s are not hereditarily based, which pretty much goes against all dharmashAstras:

Jaskaran Ji,

I cannot comment upon this, and right now I am not in india, so cannot give you any proof. But from my knowledge Madhva Vaishnavas do not even consider Ravana as a brahmin as his mother was not a Brahmana. From my knowledge and experience Varna dharma by birth alone is criteria described by Madhvacharya. And that too both parents should be of same caste. However I retire from this issue as I have no resource available to prove my stance.

Jaskaran Singh
01 December 2013, 02:06 AM
namaste ,jaskarana.

Here common sense is necessary


know that that defination from vishnu purana was created when there were only hindus in Bharata. So obviously , when one says what is hindu's or bharati's dharma ? It is hindu's dharma. From this ,hindu word originated as a dharma from the concept 'hindu's dharma'. In this way People started to call dharma as hindu dharma. So it means ' hindu's dharma. '

You should know the basic fact that our dharma has no any name. In ancient times, it was simply being called as 'hindu' ; not vedic or sanatana. Hindu, sanatana, vedic are just the different adjectives of dharma . IN most ancient hindu scriptures, you won't find even the sanatana or vedic dharma words used as a religion . So why you have so much allergy of hindu word only ? :)

Hari krishna.

No, you seem to be the one lacking common sense. If we go from a orthodox "hindu" perspective, the purANAni were composed during the vaivasvata manvantara [the present era] by kR^iShNa dvaipAyana vyAsa before he split the single veda, as the mantradraShTAraH themselves did not separate the text into four parts. At that ancient time, no one (except for the seers themselves) understood the veda-s. If that was the case, then how could they be Hindu-s or follow Vedic practices? If we were going from an Indological perspective, however, then the viShNupurANam was composed after 400 AD as it speaks of the gupta kings, well after the growth of bauddhadharma, so that means that nAstika buddhists were also considered "hindus," lol. Honestly, I don't have any allergy to the word "hindu;" I am just trying to prove that it was never used to refer to a religion in ancient times and actually has foreign origin (it was used in the gAthA-s by the asura worshiper Zoroaster who, being Persian, couldn't pronounce saptasindhavaH, and instead referred to it as haptahindu [or something like that]).


Where did Sri Madhvacharya say this?




Jaskaran Ji,

I cannot comment upon this, and right now I am not in india, so cannot give you any proof. But from my knowledge Madhva Vaishnavas do not even consider Ravana as a brahmin as his mother was not a Brahmana. From my knowledge and experience Varna dharma by birth alone is criteria described by Madhvacharya. And that too both parents should be of same caste. However I retire from this issue as I have no resource available to prove my stance.

I vaguely recall madhvAchArya arguing against birth-based varNa in the tantrasArasaNgraha, although my memory of where the verse is seems to be failing me...

isavasya
01 December 2013, 02:07 AM
In the vedanta sutras, this same story is used to support varna by birth. Please read the relevant sections.

Also there is no information on the background of Satyakama's mother. You are just speculating. Shankaracharya says she was a brahmin and was married to a Brahmin but he died early and she did not know his gotra.

Namaste Omkara,

I will be even happier if you direct me to the relevant section of Chandogya Upanishad for any further history of Satyakama's mother or Father. I have not read the whole Upanishad but it is only right to back up any theory on a given text by claims of that that text. One can interpolate texts or write any smriti to link up stories from Shruti. Sudas ji debunked one today. I am not speculating or declaring that Satyakama's father could not have been a Brahmin. But for sure the conduct of her mother was not that of a Brahmin and and on that basis I am not recognising her as a Brahmin.

hinduism♥krishna
01 December 2013, 02:11 AM
Dear, isavasya.

What you have posted doesn't support the varna not by birth. You have interpreted it wrongly and you are explaining it as if it is contradicting varna by birth .

You said, all are sanatani or hindu. Is this possible ever ? You said christians and jews are also sanatani. Who told you this? :D

So do you wana say, the one who follows jesus is a sanatani or vedic follower or a hindu. :D . So there is no difference between him and the hindu who worships krishna ? Think about it.

Besides, I didn't say law of karma is not applicable to non-hindus. I only said who is hindu. You are intentionally misunderstanding me.

Yes, varna is dependant on on guna and karma. But know that these both are dependant on birth. For that you should study vedic jyotisha. According to the birth, jyotishi can tell you the future karma. Even it can describe who were you in your last birth and what will you become in next birth. So, what I mean to say, karma and guna are dependant on birth including family background.

Hare krishna ♥

isavasya
01 December 2013, 02:19 AM
Dear, isavasya.

What you have posted doesn't support the varna not by birth. You have interpreted it wrongly and you are explaining it as if it is contradicting varna by birth .

You said, all are sanatani or hindu. Is this possible ever ? You said christians and jews are also sanatani. Who told you this? :D

So do you wana say, the one who follows jesus is a sanatani or vedic follower or a hindu. :D . So there is no difference between him and the hindu who worships krishna ? Think about it.

Besides, I didn't say law of karma is not applicable to non-hindus. I only said who is hindu. You are intentionally misunderstanding me.

Yes, varna is dependant on on guna and karma. But know that these both are dependant on birth. For that you should study vedic jyotisha. According to the birth, jyotishi can tell you the future karma. Even it can describe who were you in your last birth and what will you will become in next birth. So, what I mean to say, karma and guna are dependant on birth including family background.

Hare krishna ♥

Dear HK
I didn't interpret satykama's varna from ambiguity of their parents varna but made case of his parents not being brahmin from their conduct.

Second thing, Christians and Jews are jeevas trapped in maya. One can be a good sanatani or a bad Sanatani, still everyone is governed by laws of Sanatan Dharm only. I gave you example of Daityas. They were not from one of the 4 castes but still Sanatanis. They did recite mantras and got boons from our devtas.

Omkara
01 December 2013, 02:24 AM
Namaste Omkara,

I will be even happier if you direct me to the relevant section of Chandogya Upanishad for any further history of Satyakama's mother or Father. I have not read the whole Upanishad but it is only right to back up any theory on a given text by claims of that that text. One can interpolate texts or write any smriti to link up stories from Shruti. Sudas ji debunked one today. I am not speculating or declaring that Satyakama's father could not have been a Brahmin. But for sure the conduct of her mother was not that of a Brahmin and and on that basis I am not recognising her as a Brahmin.

As I said, there is no information anywhere about the background of Satyakama's parents. That being the case, the simplest explanation is to presume that she was a brahmin woman married to a brahmin husband who failed to tell her his gotra before he died. Any other interpretation needlessly casts doubt on the character of Sayakama's mother. One can argue that Shankaracharya is whitewashing her, but the revisionists are doing the opposite, and that is even worse.

Omkara
01 December 2013, 02:28 AM
I vaguely recall madhvAchArya arguing against birth-based varNa in the tantrasArasaNgraha, although my memory of where the verse is seems to be failing me...


You are wrong. Not only did Madhvacharya argue for birth based varna, he said that varna and gender are intrinsic to the soul and a jiva is always born in the same varna and gender, and retains the same varna and gender in moksha.

hinduism♥krishna
01 December 2013, 02:35 AM
Dear HK
I didn't interpret satykama's varna from ambiguity of their parents varna but made case of his parents not being brahmin from their conduct.

Second thing, Christians and Jews are jeevas trapped in maya. One can be a good sanatani or a bad Sanatani, still everyone is governed by laws of Sanatan Dharm only. I gave you example of Daityas. They were not from one of the 4 castes but still Sanatanis. They did recite mantras and got boons from our devtas.

yes, there may be good sanatani or bad sanatani .But know that by following jesus principles ,you wouldn't be called as sanatana. Jesus principles has nothing to do with hindu sanatana dharma.

You are misinterpretating our,sanatana dharma concept. Why hindu dharma is appropriately referred as sanatana dharma ?
Because it gives us the eternality. That's why it is called as eternal religion.

How hindu or sanatana dharma can be eternal in the way you think ? Yes, it is eternal. But dharma has no absolute eternality. After self realisation, there is no dharma. There is only the wholeness of bramhan. No any veda, upanishada or purana.

Hare krishna ♥

Sudas Paijavana
01 December 2013, 02:37 AM
Pranam-s, Everyone:

I would just like to add that the father of Rishi Śiśu (R.V.9.112) was not a Brahmana. His dad was a leech (i.e., a physician, which - if I recall correctly - is a "Shudra" caste as per the Smriti-s).

Jaskaran Singh
01 December 2013, 02:42 AM
You are wrong. Not only did Madhvacharya argue for birth based varna, he said that varna and gender are intrinsic to the soul and a jiva is always born in the same varna and gender, and retains the same varna and gender in moksha.
As far as I know, he was of the view that the jAti of the soul is unaffected by the "udAsIna" karma-s of the current and previous lifetime, but takes the view that the varNa is based on the guNa-s at the present time, not at birth, so perhaps you and IshAvAsya are mixing up the two terms? I explicitly referred to birth-based varNAshrama. Also, he says in the bhAgavatatAtparyanirNaya that the guNa's are constantly evolving (svataH pariNAminI) indicating that one's varNa is (from his perspective) constantly evolving.


Pranam-s, Everyone:

I would just like to add that the father of Rishi Śiśu (R.V.9.112) was not a Brahmana. His dad was a leech (i.e., a physician, which - if I recall correctly - is a "Shudra" caste as per the Smriti-s).

No one ever said that all the Vedic R^iShi-s were brAhmaNa-s, so I don't see your point, as this does not prove that varNa is not based on birth.

Sudas Paijavana
01 December 2013, 02:52 AM
No one ever said that all the Vedic R^iShi-s were brAhmaNa-s, so I don't see your point, as this does not prove that varNa is not based on birth.

Dude,

You have me all wrong. It strictly proves that if you are a wonderful poet and a master of Vedic meter, you can be a Rishi. :p

Anyways, the Rishi, in said question, says that "we all follow our desires like kine". So, if your future son wants to be a hockey player, all the best to him. And, if your son wants to be a yajna priest and go through tutelage, all the best to him. After all, he will only be "following his desire".

hinduism♥krishna
01 December 2013, 02:57 AM
Namaste,

I really got surprised when I read madhava interpretations about varna .When I was reading it, I felt like I am reading the abrahamic religion type data. Its not a vedic at all.

shudra soul ,bramhana soul? Don't you think this is something new and non-vedic type. Soul is attributeless. It is omnipresent .So how can one adjoin any attribute to shiva soul ?

isavasya
01 December 2013, 02:57 AM
yes, there may be good sanatani or bad sanatani .But know that by following jesus principles ,you wouldn't be called as sanatana. Jesus principles has nothing to do with hindu sanatana dharma.

You are misinterpretating our,sanatana dharma concept. Why hindu dharma is appropriately referred as sanatana dharma ?
Because it gives us the eternality. That's why it is called as eternal religion.

How hindu or sanatana dharma can be eternal in the way you think ? Yes, it is eternal. But dharma has no absolute eternality. After self realisation, there is no dharma. There is only the wholeness of bramhan. No any veda, upanishada or purana.

Hare krishna ♥

Dear HK,

I am not misinterpreting Sanatan Dharm. As a matter of fact, I am asking you to look from perspective of Shruti or even itihaas. You are looking at things from today's perspective when there are organised religions like Christianity and Judaism etc. Lets roll back time to Mahabharata. Now good or bad everyone was only a Sanatan Dharmi. Nobody was denied the right to be a Sanatani. Even the Atyachari, Asuras, Villains were allowed to pray. The grace of Parameshwara is not denied to anyone. Whoever wants to worship Bhagwan is allowed to and solely by virtue of being a Bhakt, she is a Sanatani.

Jaskaran Singh
01 December 2013, 03:18 AM
Namaste,

I really got surprised when I read madhava interpretations about varna .When I was reading it, I felt like I am reading the abrahamic religion type data. Its not a vedic at all.

shudra soul ,bramhana soul? Don't you think this is something new and non-vedic type. Soul is attributeless. It is omnipresent .So how can one adjoin any attribute to shiva soul ?

Namaste,
I'm not trying to defend madhva or anything, but if you actually bothered to read his siddhAntasAra or padArtha sa~Ngraha, you would realize that he views the jIva as a reflection or pratibimba of "brahman" (pratibimbastu bimbAvinAbhUtsatsadrshaH) so it makes sense to give qualities to the jIva from his perspective, but he never says that the sharIra of a human is "made in the image of viShNu," that would sound abrahamic. In addition, the jIva is separated from brahman due to aha~NkAra, not due to "original sin" or something. Can you please not call a Hindu philosophy "abrahamic," especially if you don't know much about it, thanks.

hinduism♥krishna
01 December 2013, 03:19 AM
Dear HK,

I am not misinterpreting Sanatan Dharm. As a matter of fact, I am asking you to look from perspective of Shruti or even itihaas. You are looking at things from today's perspective when there are organised religions like Christianity and Judaism etc. Lets roll back time to Mahabharata. Now good or bad everyone was only a Sanatan Dharmi. Nobody was denied the right to be a Sanatani. Even the Atyachari, Asuras, Villains were allowed to pray. The grace of Parameshwara is not denied to anyone. Whoever wants to worship Bhagwan is allowed to and solely by virtue of being a Bhakt, she is a Sanatani.

Namaste ,

Asuras are not sanatani. Sanatani or hindus means the one who follows veda and vedic scriptures and asuras don't follow it. They are opponents of veda. However there are very few exceptions like pralahda.

Yes, everyone is allowed to chant names of bhagavan ( I don't support this in regards with vedic or tantric worship. Only twice-born hindus are elligible to worship according to the view of krishna ) .But one would not be called as,sanatani unless he doesn't accept and follow hindu dharma.

Hari narayana ♥

Sudas Paijavana
01 December 2013, 03:24 AM
Pranam-s,

Please click me (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5n3B2K-nOFU).


What are you trying to prove from this video ?

I'm not trying to prove anything. It's a good song; I like it. That's all. I just wanted to share it. I also like this one: click me (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P-vEfCaWW9I&feature=player_embedded#at=19).

"குறை ஒன்றும் இல்லை மறை மூர்த்தி கண்ணா
குறை ஒன்றும் இல்லை கண்ணா
குறை ஒன்றும் இல்லை கோவிந்தா"

"I have no regrets, [my] Lord Krishna"

The song is pretty much pure genius.

And, please do not forget that I worship every Hindu God and Hindu Goddess. They all are worthy of equal worship, IMHO. I do not discriminate when it comes to the Divine. Pranam-s.

hinduism♥krishna
01 December 2013, 03:28 AM
Pranam-s,

Please click me (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5n3B2K-nOFU).

What are you trying to prove from this video ?

Jaskaran Singh
01 December 2013, 03:29 AM
They are opponents of veda. However there are very few exceptions like pralahda.
Yes, and if a daitya (like prahlAda, who was the son of hiraNyakashipu) could classify as a "Hindu" in your opinion, then why can't a manuShya who is not born in India? Just wondering...

Jaskaran Singh
01 December 2013, 03:41 AM
I'm not trying to prove anything. It's a good song; I like it. That's all. I just wanted to share it. I also like this one: click me (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P-vEfCaWW9I&feature=player_embedded#at=19).
That's no fair, I already shared it with you before on Religious Forums:
http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/hinduism-dir/146762-hindus-what-your-opinion-srila-prabhupada-13.html

Sudas Paijavana
01 December 2013, 03:45 AM
That's no fair, I already shared it with you before on Religious Forums:
http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/hinduism-dir/146762-hindus-what-your-opinion-srila-prabhupada-13.html

Pranam-s,

Yes. I bookmarked it as soon as you posted it. Heck, I listened to it more than 50 times that day.

There is just something beautiful about the singer's voice, and plus: I find Tamil to be most beautiful [more than Vedic Sanskrit, and additionally: I love South India :p :p]. A few more weeks from now, and I'll have the whole song memorized.

"I have no regrets, [my] Govinda."

Remember what KT said? "Not of this world!" Haha. Spot on!

hinduism♥krishna
01 December 2013, 03:48 AM
Yes, and if a daitya (like prahlAda, who was the son of hiraNyakashipu) could classify as a "Hindu" in your opinion, then why can't a manuShya who is not born in India? Just wondering...


Because even if pralahda was born in daitya family, he was pure devotee of hari right from his birth. When He was born from the womb of his mother, he started to chant hari nama. He was beyond gunas .His birth was to teach the importance of hari nama to the ignorant daityas. Bhagavan is the sea of kindness He doesn't differ between deva and asura.Though he was born in daitya kula, he had no any quality of asura.

Shri hari shri hari ♥

Jaskaran Singh
01 December 2013, 03:54 AM
Bhagavan is the sea of kindness He doesn't differ between deva and asura.Though he was born in daitya kula, he had no any quality of asura.

Shri hari shri hari ♥
Then why should he differentiate between a devotee not born in bhArata and a devotee born in bhArata?

isavasya
01 December 2013, 04:02 AM
Namaste ,

Asuras are not sanatani. Sanatani or hindus means the one who follows veda and vedic scriptures and asuras don't follow it. They are opponents of veda. However there are very few exceptions like pralahda.

Yes, everyone is allowed to chant names of bhagavan ( I don't support this in regards with vedic or tantric worship. Only twice-born hindus are elligible to worship according to the view of krishna ) .But one would not be called as,sanatani unless he doesn't accept and follow hindu dharma.

Hari narayana ♥

Dear HK
Lets talk about Shukracharya. He is the guru of Asuras. The one who increseas the strength of Asuras ? The one who can even give life to asuras and make them fight harder against Devtas. Why do we worship him ? Why does Vyasa Rishi eulogise him ? The fact is all are sanatani and love for parameshwara is enough to make anyone Sanatani.

Hima kundaa mrinalaabham daityanaam paramam gurum
Sarv shastra pravaktaaram bhargavem pranamamyaham

I pray to Shukra, the utimate preceptor of demons, promulgator of all learning, he who shines like the fiber of snow-white jasmine.

Navgraha Stotram is so good.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/84/Shukradeva.jpg

Jaskaran Singh
01 December 2013, 04:04 AM
Pranam-s,

Yes. I bookmarked it as soon as you posted it. Heck, I listened to it more than 50 times that day.

There is just something beautiful about the singer's voice, and plus: I find Tamil to be most beautiful [more than Vedic Sanskrit, and additionally: I love South India :p :p]. A few more weeks from now, and I'll have the whole song memorized.

"I have no regrets, [my] Govinda."

Remember what KT said? "Not of this world!" Haha. Spot on!

Woah, if you liked that so much, you would probably love this pAsuram from the thiruppavai (where AnDAl praises varuNa asking him to darken so that he appears like shrI padmanAbha/kR^iShNa (paRpanApan) and then release rain for the pAvai nombu vratam during the Tamil month of mArghazhi):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PuYVtWyNIFk

Sudas Paijavana
01 December 2013, 04:14 AM
Woah, if you liked that so much, you would probably love this pAsuram from the thiruppavai (where AnDAl praises varuNa asking him to darken so that he appears like shrI padmanAbha/kR^iShNa (paRpanApan) and then release rain for the pAvai nombu vratam during the Tamil month of mArghazhi):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PuYVtWyNIFk

Pranam-s,

I didn't like that as much as the other video, because Kurai was just out of this world, and it was a devotional song. But, I bookmarked the above anyway. Thanks for sharing it with me.

Amrut
01 December 2013, 05:18 AM
Wow, is this an intro thread !!!

W E L C O M E !!!

Seems you are popular from the beginning.

Welcome Devi dasi :)

Hare Krishna

hinduism♥krishna
01 December 2013, 05:35 AM
Wow, is this an intro thread !!!

W E L C O M E !!!

Seems you are popular from the beginning.

Welcome Devi dasi :)

Hare Krishna

I too got surprised . Maybe this is because she is a girl .Just guessing :D

ShivaFan
01 December 2013, 02:57 PM
Namaste

Maybe she is popular not because she is a girl, but rather because she can write a literate, grammatical and coherent sentence. Maybe that scares some boys who cannot put a coherent sentence together.

Perhaps some of the boys can learn from her, perhaps even some of those "secrets" which others are "not supposed to know", so "privie" that some boys cannot even put together two slices of bread from the dharmic bread box to explain it without sounding like profound truth is being reduced to writs that one cannot help laugh at the sophomoric construct of the sentence.

Om Namah Sivaya

ShivaFan
01 December 2013, 04:15 PM
Namaste Omkara


You are wrong. Not only did Madhvacharya argue for birth based varna, he said that varna and gender are intrinsic to the soul and a jiva is always born in the same varna and gender, and retains the same varna and gender in moksha.


What?!? There is no way Madhvacharya believed such nonsense that a soul keeps the same varna and gender in moksha, and still be respected as knowing Ishwara or Brahman or having jnana on anything. I suppose there are some more primative regional jingoism exposed in such nonsense but no way could this be the ideation of someone who is speaking truth or purported to be.

Are you saying Madhvacharya thinks whatever "heaven" or moksha that place is, that it requires shoeshiners and ragpickers, servants to "upper castes" and whatever some think varna means when they link it with caste and such nonsense? Next are you going to tell me that in moksha, that this saint believes there is an apartheid section just for Brahmins, another for Sudras, a temple where one side the "eternal males" sit and another side where "eternal females" sit? Don't make me laugh.

Either this means Madhvacharya actually believed such nonsense in which case all the renowned and praiseworthy pronouncements and teachings were the actual interpolations by others who were actual saints, or this nonsense is what it is, some odd twist to promote some self-promoting fakery.

Please spare me the "reference".

How did an intoroductory thread descend to this? Just because someone is a girl and perhaps a member of ISKCON or a Gaudiya of some type? Just say "Hi" and be done with it. But no, we can't expect that.

Om Namah Sivaya

grames
03 December 2013, 12:07 PM
Hi.,

Thats the beauty and mastery of Shri Madhva! Lot of things said in this chain and adulterating a nice devotee prabhuji's intro in to a dog-fight proves the acharya's judgements that, Varna is not and never be by birth. A brahmana class belongs to intellectual one and simultaneously peaceful and looks like we haven't seen one in this thread yet. :) So much noise and even go to the extend to disapprove Shri Madhva's philosophy as non-vedic.

samo damas tapah saucam
ksantir arjavam eva ca
jnanam vijnanam astikyam
brahma-karma svabhava-jam

This is the nutshell of Brahmana Lakshana!

Some who believes or ought to believe all these are "illusion" does not even recognize the unjust idea of social classes being upper and lower or only "hindu" qualifies for knowing that "Brahman" etc. but asking for using common sense? Why or where did that "One Brahman" being in all lost or thrown away and where is the color of that soul? If the idea is, the Maya has the Varna, then talking about it, is useless for their very own spiritual progress and such believers already know that transcending the Maya is the Moksha. (Transcending your idea of 'varna' is what it means - not sticking to it which is still moha) Who can transcend is not restricted to any class of "mayic" 'Brahmana'or Hindu Varna and where is the common sense then? It only proves that, some section of the society exploiting the vedic dharma (still call it dharma, varna dharma etc. with out giving any meaning to such claims) for their personal gain and worried about someone who is not gotten the birth in certain varna to take over their 'socio economical" occupation of "Priesthood" and the subsequent income as there is no one who is going to claim they are 'kshatriyas or vaisyas as these are already completely lost. When you accept all the vedic social classifications are diluted, in what sense we are upholding something that is not existing or no longer exist but twisting and teaching with a false pride that it is how it was Vedic?

Sudra wanting to be called/identified as "Brahmin" because of just birth is ill nature and that is what is going on and that is the effect of this "unintelligent" idea of Varna by birth theory! But, as an individual, do we ever go to a doctor for our disease if we got to know such doctor is not qualified but got the degree by paying money?

I am alone qualified for "Krshna's Love" is product of your Ego! Understanding the fact that, the root cause of loss of qualities of our social living is due to this false pride and instead of cultivating the "Brahminhood" or a "Brahmana Varga", we are sticking to the unproductive and unjust idea of Brahminhood by birth but on the other side, the number of dull headed and ill witted are getting produced outnumbering the selfless intellectual. It is very common to witness an "" intelligent thief "" nowadays which was an oxymoron term in vedic system and please put your thoughts and efforts to help fix this instead of making unintelligent, unvedic idea of "intelligence" belongs to a family or power and rule belongs to a family etc. It is not a surprise why few families loot all your money and happiness along with the your hard work because, you support the idea that "all the money and power" belongs to someone's family by birth alone. Recognize that and understand that, when you are dreaming of life in paradice, the reality has stolen everything else from you and be alarmed about that please.

brahmana-ksatriya-visam
sudranam ca parantapa
karmani pravibhaktani
svabhava-prabhavair gunaih

They are distinguished by their work! Not by birth!

sreyan sva-dharmo vigunah
para-dharmat svanusthitat
svabhava-niyatam karma
kurvan napnoti kilbisam

'svabhava" and not "janma" and there is more importance to the nature of the soul and that is not gotten by birth (as this complete thread is advocating - when karma results in good birth, the svaBhava drives the soul to accumulate the punyas - for getting such good birth and it is not the BIRTH which is determining the svaBhava - sva - inherent and nothing to do with Birth. When there is inherent quality, the birth in such noble family helps or birth in not so noble family deteriorates what is already gained - so qualifying the inherant nature and suiting the occupation matching to the nature of the atma is the ONLY means of spritual progress - Son of a president is not automatically a president unless until he qualifies for that designation. But your system is making it compulsory and day dreaming of great noble character because someone is son of a PM or President)

sa vai puṁsāṁ paro dharmo
yato bhaktir adhokṣaje
ahaituky apratihatā
yayātmā suprasīdati

Such duty is duty of mankind and that is the Dharma and not "hindus" alone qualified for it unless you are going to claim "mankind=hindu" or mankind='those who are born in the boundaries of Himalayas and sea" etc. Why the word hindu is not used here?

sarva-dharman parityajya
mam ekam saranam vraja
aham tvam sarva-papebhyo
moksayisyami ma sucah

Its even more clinching...abandon "sarva dharma" and choose the path of surrender! Proving again, it is advised and also practiced that, those who are surrendered are above the social vocational occupation of varna and such vaishnavas are guaranteed to get Krshna's protection and love! This is the philosophy and life of Shri Ramanuja, Shri Madhva and all the Vaishnava traditions! They are more "Brahminical" and vedic and we do require such stalwarts of Jnana and humble bhakta as acharyas for guiding us in the path of Love for Lord to gain anything positive in our spiritual quest!


Hare Krshna!

hinduism♥krishna
03 December 2013, 12:14 PM
Hi.,

Thats the beauty and mastery of Shri Madhva! Lot of things said in this chain and adulterating a nice devotee prabhuji's intro in to a dog-fight proves the acharya's judgements that, Varna is not and never be by birth. A brahmana class belongs to intellectual one and simultaneously peaceful and looks like we haven't seen one in this thread yet. :) So much noise and even go to the extend to disapprove Shri Madhva's philosophy as non-vedic.

samo damas tapah saucam
ksantir arjavam eva ca
jnanam vijnanam astikyam
brahma-karma svabhava-jam

This is the nutshell of Brahmana Lakshana!

Some who believes or ought to believe all these are "illusion" does not even recognize the unjust idea of social classes being upper and lower or only "hindu" qualifies for knowing that "Brahman" etc. but asking for using common sense? Why or where did that "One Brahman" being in all lost or thrown away and where is the color of that soul? If the idea is, the Maya has the Varna, then talking about it, is useless for their very own spiritual progress and such believers already know that transcending the Maya is the Moksha. (Transcending your idea of 'varna' is what it means - not sticking to it which is still moha) Who can transcend is not restricted to any class of "mayic" 'Brahmana'or Hindu Varna and where is the common sense then? It only proves that, some section of the society exploiting the vedic dharma (still call it dharma, varna dharma etc. with out giving any meaning to such claims) for their personal gain and worried about someone who is not gotten the birth in certain varna to take over their 'socio economical" occupation of "Priesthood" and the subsequent income as there is no one who is going to claim they are 'kshatriyas or vaisyas as these are already completely lost. When you accept all the vedic social classifications are diluted, in what sense we are upholding something that is not existing or no longer exist but twisting and teaching with a false pride that it is how it was Vedic?

Sudra wanting to be called/identified as "Brahmin" because of just birth is ill nature and that is what is going on and that is the effect of this "unintelligent" idea of Varna by birth theory! But, as an individual, do we ever go to a doctor for our disease if we got to know such doctor is not qualified but got the degree by paying money?

I am alone qualified for "Krshna's Love" is product of your Ego! Understanding the fact that, the root cause of loss of qualities of our social living is due to this false pride and instead of cultivating the "Brahminhood" or a "Brahmana Varga", we are sticking to the unproductive and unjust idea of Brahminhood by birth but on the other side, the number of dull headed and ill witted are getting produced outnumbering the selfless intellectual. It is very common to witness an "" intelligent thief "" nowadays which was an oxymoron term in vedic system and please put your thoughts and efforts to help fix this instead of making unintelligent, unvedic idea of "intelligence" belongs to a family or power and rule belongs to a family etc. It is not a surprise why few families loot all your money and happiness along with the your hard work because, you support the idea that "all the money and power" belongs to someone's family by birth alone. Recognize that and understand that, when you are dreaming of life in paradice, the reality has stolen everything else from you and be alarmed about that please.

brahmana-ksatriya-visam
sudranam ca parantapa
karmani pravibhaktani
svabhava-prabhavair gunaih

They are distinguished by their work! Not by birth!

sreyan sva-dharmo vigunah
para-dharmat svanusthitat
svabhava-niyatam karma
kurvan napnoti kilbisam

'svabhava" and not "janma" and there is more importance to the nature of the soul and that is not gotten by birth (as this complete thread is advocating - when karma results in good birth, the svaBhava drives the soul to accumulate the punyas - for getting such good birth and it is not the BIRTH which is determining the svaBhava - sva - inherent and nothing to do with Birth. When there is inherent quality, the birth in such noble family helps or birth in not so noble family deteriorates what is already gained - so qualifying the inherant nature and suiting the occupation matching to the nature of the atma is the ONLY means of spritual progress - Son of a president is not automatically a president unless until he qualifies for that designation. But your system is making it compulsory and day dreaming of great noble character because someone is son of a PM or President)

sa vai puṁsāṁ paro dharmo
yato bhaktir adhokṣaje
ahaituky apratihatā
yayātmā suprasīdati

Such duty is duty of mankind and that is the Dharma and not "hindus" alone qualified for it unless you are going to claim "mankind=hindu" or mankind='those who are born in the boundaries of Himalayas and sea" etc. Why the word hindu is not used here?

sarva-dharman parityajya
mam ekam saranam vraja
aham tvam sarva-papebhyo
moksayisyami ma sucah

Its even more clinching...abandon "sarva dharma" and choose the path of surrender! Proving again, it is advised and also practiced that, those who are surrendered are above the social vocational occupation of varna and such vaishnavas are guaranteed to get Krshna's protection and love! This is the philosophy and life of Shri Ramanuja, Shri Madhva and all the Vaishnava traditions! They are more "Brahminical" and vedic and we do require such stalwarts of Jnana and humble bhakta as acharyas for guiding us in the path of Love for Lord to gain anything positive in our spiritual quest!


Hare Krshna!


Give the scriptural proofs that posit varna not by birth .:Cool:

grames
03 December 2013, 12:21 PM
Hi.,

Shri Madhva did not believe in the Social Varna by birth theory and attributing such to him is wrong! He revealed three class of Souls ( pure class and no mayix mix) one who is sattvic who attains the Moksha and lives in the company of Lord Vishnu, second the ever transmigrating Rajasa soul and three the ones who are always opposed to the Lord as tamasmic! And yes, all soul got inherent gender in the service of Lord and they act in accordance with their gender! The respect is not because someone is higher as in class etc. since in Moksha, its only all sattvic but the ladder of "qualified" soul is due to their eve increasing Jnana by the grace of Lord. So, the liberated Guru still receives the utmost respect of the Sishya jiva and since there is no jealousy or competition, there is no question of envy or ego and all are acting, living and serving the Lord to their utmost capacity! (This is very very important concept of Shri Madhva and none of the words can be thrown out of context here)

A jiva born in Sudra family but intrinsically a sattvic soul will still attain the Moksha and such is the explanation for jiva like Prahaladha ( who appeared as Shri Raghavendra in the Shri Madhva chain of disciples). The opposite is also true that, a soul which is tamasmic can get birth in noble families and of course, look around and we got unlimited examples. :). So, no where he says, your social occupation is same as your "varna" and also very strictly he says, only a "Sattvic soul, inherently sattvic" will ever surrender to the Lord and other types either just argue or always oppose refusing such surrender as it is their very own nature. (Again, such has nothing to do with their birth)

Hare Krshna!

hinduism♥krishna
03 December 2013, 12:24 PM
Namaste , grames

Yes , varna is dependant on guna and karma . But know that guna and karma both are dependant on birth . Have you forgotten 'law of karma' ? So varna doesn't depend on family/birth ? You will not see a bramhana in daitya family or you will not see asura in bramhana family ? Yes , there are few exceptions too. But it doesn't matter .They are just exceptions .

So what do you think ? Will not be there any difference between the person who borns in hindu vedic family (consider krishna devotee) and the other who borns in christian family ? Just tell me . There is much difference as like the difference between sky and ground .

grames
03 December 2013, 12:26 PM
Dear.,

When two verses from the same source gives out opposing meaning, you cannot pick what is interesting and suitable to your theory alone. :) I guess, you have rushed and didn't see some of the BG verses i have posted and if you don't consider them as proof, i can actually provide more. I can explain all that you have posted ( in fact, ran in to the perimeter of such already) fitting in to the intelligent social classification which is purely by the inherent nature of the soul and its "so far" merits opposing to "such nobility by birth alone" idea. But, disapprove the verses i have quoted and they are in fact sufficient to prove what the "Lord Krshna" advised as vedic standards.


Hare Krshna!

hinduism♥krishna
03 December 2013, 12:31 PM
Dear.,

When two verses from the same source gives out opposing meaning, you cannot pick what is interesting and suitable to your theory alone. :) I guess, you have rushed and didn't see some of the BG verses i have posted and if you don't consider them as proof, i can actually provide more. I can explain all that you have posted ( in fact, ran in to the perimeter of such already) fitting in to the intelligent social classification which is purely by the inherent nature of the soul and its "so far" merits opposing to "such nobility by birth alone" idea. But, disapprove the verses i have quoted and they are in fact sufficient to prove what the "Lord Krshna" advised as vedic standards.


Hare Krshna!

What you have posted doesn't disprove varna by birth . Swabhava , karma , guna all are dependant on birth /family background . The support is from vedic jyotisha .

So please post something horrifying which would clearely disprove varna by birth ?

hinduism♥krishna
03 December 2013, 12:36 PM
Namaste , I have one of the big proofs from the most authentic purana that clearely states that varna is by birth . :)


“vipro rajanya vaishyo cha harehe praptaha padantikam , shroten janmanathapi muhyantyamnayavadinah “ (BP 11.5.5)


Meaning:Brahmins, Kshatriyas and Vaishyas are very near to Shri Hari’s feet by virtue of their birth and Vedic ceremonies, yet they are misguided by wrong interpretation of Vedas about the fruits of actions.

What do you say ?:) This verse is from the most reliable purana , bhagavat purana . Now you should disprove this , then we would accept your view .Come on

grames
03 December 2013, 12:50 PM
Dear HK.,

Very valid questions and i appreciate it. Take this example....

When you go to war, you are not going to pick the list of Kshatriyas alone for the war - Mahabharata has the list of groups who fought the war from both the sides - That includes so many social class who are not Kshatriya by birth - that even includes mlechaas

I dont want to detail the history of Sikhs, Kashmiri pundits etc. but google it if you want to know how they accommodated the different people in to their own social rights and the changes.

When the objective is intact, ie to achieve something very noble, the social setup should help "each and everyone" with out sacrificing any section of the society! In the war, one cooks the meal, one takes up the sword and fights, one has to setup the tents and beds etc. But, do we read or give any damn time or interest to those events apart from the ones who has taken the sword and who won the war? We don't? But, all equally participated and the victory belongs to the mass and not to just some individual. It is not Sachin who wins cricket but it is India where someone is still waiting for his chance but sacrificed or few in the rest of the 11 who accompanies him for his very own success! Understand that, there is a wicket keeper, bowler etc. for the purpose of winning a match and not to discriminate between each other. This is the intelligence and this is what should be understood as the "secret". So, it is only Maharastra which can produce great batsman and all others are not allowed to bat? No one from Kashmir can be included in the cricket team because they are not fit? That is silly and that is exactly what we are sharing here.

If the purpose of Veda or Vedic life is with out a goal or a noble achievement, i would happily agree as such in-fight and social drama will be very joyful to our ego.

Guna and Karma is not because of Birth! Most who believe genetic theory etc. ought to believe such but rationally, you can only define and justify half part of Guna by Genes inherited from parents. It is not uncommon that, child having opposing characters and it is also scientific in fact most common that, children do inherit the 'modified' genetic sequences and not replica of either father or mother. (The mirroring or part reflection of Shri Madhva is very sound concept to admit even by science). What is that fixes or regulates the "process of modification" of gene sequence?? That has to happen before the birth itself and it cannot come to existence "after birth" and thus "Birth cannot fix your Guna, as it requires the Guna to be already fixed and that is the LAW OF NATURE that i have known, science has rationally proven to be true" as well.

But my acharyas says, such Guna's are of two types viz one that is inherent to the jiva itself ( no we don't call Jiva = Brahman at any point of existence) and the other one is acquired based on the "Karma" governed by the Laws of Nature ( Laws of Nature does not change the svaBhava or inherent guna of the jiva - such can be only changed by the grace of Lord). This is how, Guna and Karma plays the role in ones social occupation rather than "birth" giving such Guna or Karma! Once jiva starts its Karma ( life in the material world), the Laws of Nature works naturally witnessing the Karma of the Jiva and the Guna acquired drives the current Karma of the Jiva either in the direction of Lord or against the Lord and also combination of both as in neutral. In Chapter 18, this is what Lord Krshna explains in detail, mode of nature, working in the mode of nature etc. ( Please read them in detail so that the above framework will explain why Birth cannot give any Guna or Karma).

With all this, am i denouncing the merits of birth in a noble family. No. Not at all. It is surely a gift and also a curse if not 'given' a birth in noble family but that is not end criteria is the ONLY point that our acharyas insisted and guided us to follow and that is also the vedic life system. What you call as "Exceptions" are not exceptions with the above understanding and they are also natural! Prahalada is a sattvic soul and his Guna is always sattvic and so even though born to HiranyaKasibu, he only exhibited his satvic nature and his birth did not affect his intrinsic nature.

Such philosophical framework which can validate the finding of science is the greatness of our Acharyas and following their foot steps is, in my humble opinion very much vedic way of living.

Hare Krshna!

Sudas Paijavana
03 December 2013, 12:51 PM
Namaste,

^Dang, Grames. HLK went all scriptural on you.

grames
03 December 2013, 12:58 PM
Dear Sudas.,


Surely. I don't believe in making empty statements and yes there are quotes! I have made a statement also that, when two opposing statements are found, there should be a way to normalize with out killing the meaning of either one of them and this is the way it should be understood. ( If you kill one, you are disloyal to the very same source you claim to support you - This is the strongest point where neo scholars lost their claim of being vedic)

So, why the verses i quoted does not support the "guna karma" not by birth? Isn't opposing and saying, the devotion is the duty of Man Kind? So, to disapprove that, devotion can only by the Hindus, you have to come up with an alternative that does not kill the "pumsam" found in the particular verse and show me one such with the right explanation? In fact, for advocating Varna by birth, it is very difficult to disapprove a lot of scripture which goes against such theory, it is also against science.

Hare Krshna!

grames
03 December 2013, 01:01 PM
Great.

I will respond and give the proper meaning to this verse...

But, in the very same chapter, what is the verse you have for 11.2.36?

In the copy of Srimad Bhagavatam i have, the content of 11.2.5 is not what you have posted so lets first fix on the verse numbers.

Hare Krshna!

Sudas Paijavana
03 December 2013, 01:02 PM
Grames,



In the copy of Srimad Bhagavatam i have, the content of 11.2.5 is not what you have posted so lets first fix on the verse numbers.


All you have to do is provide the edition/copy name of the text (year number, author/editor, etc.) along with the full quote in question.

Sudas Paijavana
03 December 2013, 02:47 PM
Namaste,

I might get slack for saying this: but, social origin, social standing (caste-wise, class-wise, monetary-wise, etc.), and heritage are completely trivial and unnecessary when it comes to consideration for becoming a Hindu.

The concept, the act, the nature of "becoming" a Hindu is more important - for, some never "become" Hindu but dharmically live as "Hindus". And likewise, many Hindus live like they aren't even "Hindu", but are just Hindu by name and convenience.

As long as one betters oneself, does good to those around him/her, stands up for him/herself and others against what is a-dharmic, and attempts to contribute to society and help better the world...that's really what is crucially important. I think that is "Hindu".

^IMHO

ShivaFan
03 December 2013, 11:09 PM
Kidos! You are a GREAT Hindu! Jai Rig Ved, Shree Devas!
Namaste,

I might get slack for saying this: but, social origin, social standing (caste-wise, class-wise, monetary-wise, etc.), and heritage are completely trivial and unnecessary when it comes to consideration for becoming a Hindu.

The concept, the act, the nature of "becoming" a Hindu is more important - for, some never "become" Hindu but dharmically live as "Hindus". And likewise, many Hindus live like they aren't even "Hindu", but are just Hindu by name and convenience.

As long as one betters oneself, does good to those around him/her, stands up for him/herself and others against what is a-dharmic, and attempts to contribute to society and help better the world...that's really what is crucially important. I think that is "Hindu".

^IMHO

hinduism♥krishna
03 December 2013, 11:11 PM
Dear grames ,

That verse is from bP 11.5.5 .

Narada says :

“vipro rajanya vaishyo cha harehe praptaha padantikam , shroten janmanathapi muhyantyamnayavadinah “ (BP 11.2.5)

vipro : bramhanas , rajanya : kshatriyas , vaishyo : vaishya , cha : and , harehe : hari's , praptaha : aquired , padan : feet , antikam : near to , shrauten : by veda (vedic ceremonies ) , janmana : by birth , athapi : yet , muhyanti : got misguided , amnay : vedic wisdom , vadinah : speaking , declaring or interpretation


Meaning : Brahmins, Kshatriyas and Vaishyas are very near to Shri Hari’s feet by virtue of their birth and Vedic ceremonies, yet they are misguided by wrong interpretation of Vedas (about the fruits of actions.)


So the varna by birth is surely confirmed by the most authentic purana -bhagavat purana .

grames
04 December 2013, 12:06 AM
Hi.,

Here is the source of misunderstanding

Brhaahmanosya Mukmaaseeth Bhaahoo Raajanyakruthah: |
Uruthathasya Yadhvaisyah: Pathbyaagum Soodhro Ajaayatha ( Not going to put the verse number for a purpose as this is one of the most popular suktam)

This is the origin of Varna and this is the only place where "Varna" is by Birth. That Purusha manifests the eternal principles and thus, these varna are already existing even before any Jiva got its birth! (Literal translations will be of bad taste and there is no birth by arms, chest, belly and feet etc.). Some also interpret the above principles as the choices to choose and follow! ( Again, such goes against the theory and faith of Varna by birth)

On the contrary, no where (as of i know) it is mentioned that, a Brahmana will get birth only in the family of Brahmana and ditto for other three classes and also the outclasses that were not mentioned. To uphold such faith or belief, we require a vedic proof as well. The idea of Dvija ( twice born - the second one is not from a yoni and such birth is noble and acceptable and agreed and now who can take that second birth? :) anyone as they qualify) again derails the faith of Varna by birth!

On Jati, it is not to be again tied to the "birth" caste as some selfish saffron clothed monks advocating and following not being true to the vedas. Jati simply means "kind" or type or classification of Jiva's material form and again the subsequent suktas details the various Jati's that gets manifested from the Purusha. Jati is acquired by material birth and that is determined by the Laws of Nature as SD knows the transmigration of Soul and its evolution in advancing through suitable forms. Bharata maharaja taking the form of a deer is not a secret ( detailed in the 5th Canto of SBP). That is "Jati" and there is no difference between two human or two dogs and they all belong to same jati.

All the vedantic schools admits the "three Gunas" of Maya and its governing nature during the material existence for the Jiva! This is the second form of Varna - the temporary which will be given away as the material existence gets over.I have already quoted the chapter 18 BG verses which confirms clearly that, the mode in which the jiva comes in to contact and acts, determines the karma and also the reward for such Karma. But this is not fixated and the jiva has the choice to choose and if it is not a choice to choose, Krshna will not advice the Surrender and give the guarantee of complete protection where "Surrender" is the choice and who can surrender is open to "all man kind" defying the ideas that

1. Varna is by birth and also
2. Surrender to Krshna as exclusive rights of Brahmana

The above explains the acceptance of many popular vedic personalities like Veda Vyasa, Parashara, Vashista who did not have birth in the family of Brahmins yet as "Brahmanas". They are not exceptions and branding such as exceptions only shows the pride and ego rather anything intelligent since the very source they bring in to support such idea is in fact, composed by someone who is not "qualified" to do so as he is not Brahmana by birth! Even the author of Ramayana was not a Brahamana by birth!

Dear Sudas., i am not worried to bring in even more resources for the above vedic ideals but worried if they can be understood well and accepted as truth shedding the ego and false pride.

Hare Krshna!

grames
04 December 2013, 12:28 AM
Dear HK.,

Thanks for giving the right verse and the interpretations fitting to the context does not glorify any exclusiveness to these four but explains the bad state of affairs of the jivas :)

King Nimi ask about the unfortunate souls like us about what will be the destination if we fail to worship the Lotus feet of Hari because we are attached to our desires and material pleasure!

In fact, 11.5.4 details the compassion of the King on fallen souls (not to ignore but to show them the path to Lord Krshna - again bombarding the exclusive access to only to the so called geographically bounded society)

Just two verse above states, worship by all varnas and in all ashramas!

Now, the 11.5.5 flowing with the context is not glorifying the four caste but only three and why just three and not four even though all four are creation of the very same Lord? That is the question to be asked and the 'srautena janmana' by the vedic standards is possible only for the three classes and thus, it addresses the "Twice born" and not glorifying the Yonic Birth! Yet, this is not discarding the others but only highlights the fact that, even though they can be "twice born" and can "acquire the feet" of Hari, they are misguided! It is not a proof that, no one else can acquire Hari as the previous verse request the King to show His mercy to the "others".

There is a warning also in the 11.5.9 that comes from the pride of being born in the noble family.

So, i will still wait for a proof which clearly states, ONLY these can approach Lord and no one else can!

Hare Krshna!

devotee
04 December 2013, 04:37 AM
Dear all,

This is the most unfortunate discussion on this forum which has been repeated again and again so many times. Nothing has harmed Hindu Dharma as much as Caste system. Today's Indian political parties are having a good harvest by investing in dividing people on caste lines. India's sorry state can be attributed to this system to a great extent.

"Aham Atman gudAkesha sarvabhUteshu sthitah"

If that is so, every human being (in fact, all beings) is temple of God. Do we differentiate between piety of different temples ?

BTW, if we read the quoted line correctly :

"Brahmins, Kshatriyas and Vaishyas are very near to Shri Hari’s feet by virtue of their birth and Vedic ceremonies, yet they are misguided by wrong interpretation of Vedas (about the fruits of actions.)"

It nowhere says that by birth means that the son of Brahmin would be Brahmin and son of a Kshatriya would be Kshatriya. By "birth" one acquires his/her natural guna/qualities so birth to a particular parent is important but we know that a person of Veda-scholar needn't be Veda-scholar, a son of engineer may not be an engineer and a son of a doctor needn't be a doctor.

Because if the above is an scriptural authority, it must be true without exception. ... and data shows that unfortunately, the "exceptions" in fact are exceptionally high.

What does the verse actually say ? By birth and by virtue of Vedic knowledge (Shrauten means "by virtue of having knowledge of Shruti") these three Varnas are nearer to God's feet.

I have done some research on Varna and Jaati. My understanding is that barring Brahmin Varna/Jaati, there are many instances where a Jaati which was considered Sudra was accepted as Kshatriya and vice-versa depending upon whether the King family was of that caste or whether the King-family lost in war and accepted menial jobs to survive in society. If we go by birth to parents then VyAsa was born to Parashar Muni, brahmin and Satyavati, a Sudra ... and so VyAsa would be a Sudra as per Manusmriti which says that if anyone parent is Sudra then the children born to those parents would be Sudra.

*********

Isa Upanishad teaches us that everything in this world is pervaded by God ... VedAnta tells us that God alone is the reality and everything else is mithya. Then why bother for caste or even varna ? Even if one is Brahmin or a Sudra is the path of Bhakti or JnAna different for him/her ? Does it make more difficult for a Sudra to attain God if he is fully devoted to God ... or does it make easier for a Brahmin to attain God if he is a thief, a liar or a hurtful to others ?

Dear sir, if that were so, Prahlada would not have been so dear to God. If that were so, Vidur would not have been so dear to Lord Krishna. If that were so, Sabri would not have been so dear to Lord Rama. If that were so, Hanuman would not have been so dear to Lord Rama. If that were so, saint Ravidas would not have been such a great God-realised person.

OM

hinduism♥krishna
04 December 2013, 07:36 AM
Dear HK.,

Thanks for giving the right verse and the interpretations fitting to the context does not glorify any exclusiveness to these four but explains the bad state of affairs of the jivas :)

King Nimi ask about the unfortunate souls like us about what will be the destination if we fail to worship the Lotus feet of Hari because we are attached to our desires and material pleasure!

In fact, 11.5.4 details the compassion of the King on fallen souls (not to ignore but to show them the path to Lord Krshna - again bombarding the exclusive access to only to the so called geographically bounded society)

Just two verse above states, worship by all varnas and in all ashramas!

Now, the 11.5.5 flowing with the context is not glorifying the four caste but only three and why just three and not four even though all four are creation of the very same Lord? That is the question to be asked and the 'srautena janmana' by the vedic standards is possible only for the three classes and thus, it addresses the "Twice born" and not glorifying the Yonic Birth! Yet, this is not discarding the others but only highlights the fact that, even though they can be "twice born" and can "acquire the feet" of Hari, they are misguided! It is not a proof that, no one else can acquire Hari as the previous verse request the King to show His mercy to the "others".

There is a warning also in the 11.5.9 that comes from the pride of being born in the noble family.

So, i will still wait for a proof which clearly states, ONLY these can approach Lord and no one else can!

Hare Krshna!

Namaste , grames.

That verse clearely sates that varna is by birth . I don't think there should be any more misinterpretation ! The verse is crystal clear independant of other verses . I didn't say that only twice-born can attain that . I said they are near to the supreme feet of vishnu because of their birth in bramhana ,kshatriya and vaishya families .

The pride is the other thing .Here we are talking about varna by birth ,; not on its pride . You are just misinterpreting and thinking the opposite .

Narada says that No doubt, Bramhana ,kshatriya and vaishya (now generally referred as hindus ) are the highest births . But most of them gets misguided only because of pride of veda ; Otherwise there are very close to feet of vishnu and they can easily achieve that supreme goal by giving up that pride . :)

So the conclusion is that though twice born bramhana ,kshatriya and vaishya have highest births , they should drop that pride .In this way there are not far away from that bramhan .;)

Hari krishna hari

grames
04 December 2013, 09:15 AM
Dear HK.,

I am not misinterpreting but pointing out the flaw of your self promotion and misinterpretation. If VarnAshrama cannot guarantee the Moksha, nothing else can and VarnAshrama does include "Shudra" as the foundation. So, why this verse is neglecting the shudra varna and why the rest three is generally referred as "Hindus"? Don't you see you are introducing your personal false pride hiding the actual message the verse is passing across?

The actual fact is, only a twice born can attain Moksha and you won't say it even if the verse conveys that message subtly excluding the Shudra varna (and then subsequent verses asking to show compassion towards 'others') that, everyone who gets birth is in fact a "Shudra" and a Shudra can adopt or get another Varna "Birth" in to either Brahmana, Kshatriya or Vaishya and that is the message which fits perfectly with the context. (This is the explanation for some of the verses in BG, Bagavatam and BS regarding not to teach the vedas to Sudhras as long as they remain just Sudhras - not a discrimination but forcing the shudra to be qualified before receiving the knowledge - Not allowing them to take the Dvija is not the idea and taking the vow as a varna is not prohibited anywhere even by Manus Smriti - When you shed your ego, you will understand all these intelligent social connection and perfection of the SD) The listed examples are just to prove the fact that, it is all caste-less personalities who got glorified as "Top Class Brahmana". The conclusion is not that, the birth gave them the varna and someone who is already born as a Brahmana need not require another birth to be called or considered Brahmana (and you asked for common sense and hope you read my earlier message where common sense shows varna was manifested much before any jiva's birth and also scientifically genetic sequences are not duplicated but inherited with 'change' in the sequences). By doing this disservice to the verse, you have comfortably and conveniently ignored the list of personalities with out any explanation about their "noble" birth as they do not support your "theory"! Calling them exception puts a hole and punctures the pride but remember, you are bringing the reference from the same group of people when they are not "Qualified" in first place as per your theory to uphold the Birth by Varna!

To make it simple, even as per your explanation, the verse still does not convey the message of yours that, "Varna is by birth" and nowhere i see the "And" part in the verse connecting "Vedic ceremonies and Birth" and the translation can simply means "Vedic ceremonies birth" which actually means Dvija and not the yonic birth! Lord Krshna gives this message

manushyanam sahasreshu
kascid yatati siddhaye
yatatam api siddhanam
kascin mam vetti tattvatah BG 7.3

It is not "Brahmana" but manushyanam and everyone are engaged in "Vetti Tattva" meaning useless theories as the fact. Expanding this verse, it also means it is not that simply by taking birth, one is near to the feet of Lord and at least the orthodox families who follow undiluted practice of Hinduism knows for the fact that, it is the Samskara that you do that purifies and takes you near to the Lord qualifying you for His mercy! If that is not the case, Krshna will not say, 'thousands among the men' where he can simply say 'thousand among the Dvija' or "Brahamana" etc. So, giving such meaning to "birth" alone makes someone near to Lord is nonsensical and that is not the intelligence of SD and such theories lives only in the minds of selfish people who are still in the process of enjoying the material desires as stated in the verse and who are "Far away from the Lord" even though they for namesake could have taken the Dvija.

Also, not listing the shudra in the varna class creates the social imbalance and now the Purusha is attributed for creating a class that is not "qualified" to reach him back ever! Attributing flaws to the "Purusha" is a sin and only a "Papa Yoni putra" commits such sin is also the SD's verdict.

Hare Krshna!

hinduism♥krishna
04 December 2013, 09:37 AM
Dear grames , you can not disprove that verse in any way .

There , it is mentioned the three varnas . Because in varnashrama dharma , the first three are considered as the highest births . The last varna shudra is not included in noble birth . Know that shudra too are the hindus.




To make it simple, even as per your explanation, the verse still does not convey the message of yours that, "Varna is by birth" and nowhere i see the "And" part in the verse connecting "Vedic ceremonies and Birth" and the translation can simply means "Vedic ceremonies birth" which actually means Dvija and not the yonic birth! Namaste , grames.

Unfortunatelly , I think You don't know about sanskrit and its grammar . .So you don't know how to interprete . In sanskrit , sometimes 'cha' is not used while writing the verse . 'Cha' has many times a hidden usage . But the fact about that verse is different.

Even if we accept ' vedic ceremonies birth ' , it will be certainly a foolish thing . Because ,

The both words are not used as nouns . 'shrauten ' is used as a suffix 'ten' .So it means ' by birth' . Besides , janmana also means ' by birth ' . Moreover , 'by' suffix is used for both words . So the two words automatically gets connected with 'and' word .According to sanskrit grammer , in such cases ' cha ' is generally neglected .

grames
04 December 2013, 09:47 AM
A simple "A" missing in your verse makes so much difference but what is missing is, the POINT! which you seems to brush it aside because it is so much opposing to your belief! My Sanskrit knowledge is so limited but at least it helps me to connect with the Acharya's pronunciations rather than dictionary ones.

My interest is not to change your false ego but to point out the fact that, your messages missing the POINT and attributing a lot of flaws to VarnAshrama and also to the ultimate Purusha! Looking at your avoidance of those points, i can simply conclude that you have no answer to them.

Hare Krshna!

hinduism♥krishna
04 December 2013, 09:54 AM
A simple "A" missing in your verse makes so much difference but what is missing is, the POINT! which you seems to brush it aside because it is so much opposing to your belief! My Sanskrit knowledge is so limited but at least it helps me to connect with the Acharya's pronunciations rather than dictionary ones.

My interest is not to change your false ego but to point out the fact that, your messages missing the POINT and attributing a lot of flaws to VarnAshrama and also to the ultimate Purusha! Looking at your avoidance of those points, i can simply conclude that you have no answer to them.

Hare Krshna!
Dear, grames.

Because, what you have posted your claims don't get contradicted to varna by birth.

Really, You have no any answer to my verse. You are mixing that verse with pride etc and so on......blah blah

First you ignored the verse and tried to give your personal opinions. Then after knowing the true meaning of that verse, you tried to distort the meaning of that verse . Later on after knowing fallacy of your distortion, You are saying that i should accept your opinion.

I don't think I should reply on your personal opinions. :)

hari krishna

grames
04 December 2013, 10:20 AM
Dear HK.,

No i am not insisting or demanding you to accept my opinions anywhere. No hard feelings and take it easy.

In fact, i did not distort your verse or its meaning and letting you know that, it is not conclusive as you are dreaming and your conclusion will impart "partiality" to the Purusha which is considered a Sin! May be you have to open your eyes and admit these questions to participate in a discussion.

Also, most of what i have posted are not my personal opinions and i have to my ability, connected the dots for the complete picture. Those who can see, can see it and those who cannot see, will not and i am aware of that.

So, take care.

Hare Krshna!

hinduism♥krishna
04 December 2013, 12:15 PM
Dear HK.,

No i am not insisting or demanding you to accept my opinions anywhere. No hard feelings and take it easy.

In fact, i did not distort your verse or its meaning and letting you know that, it is not conclusive as you are dreaming and your conclusion will impart "partiality" to the Purusha which is considered a Sin! May be you have to open your eyes and admit these questions to participate in a discussion.

Also, most of what i have posted are not my personal opinions and i have to my ability, connected the dots for the complete picture. Those who can see, can see it and those who cannot see, will not and i am aware of that.

So, take care.

Hare Krshna!

Your posts contain too much fallacies ,like You asked me why shudra varna is not listed in that verse ? Is this a valid question ? Besides you don't even know that upanayan sanskar is only for first three varnas . All your arguments are like this .

You intentionally are not accepting that verse. The meaning of that verse is very clear. Yet you are constantly saying that I am misinterpreting.How rude !

In that verse narda has highlighted two things :

1) By birth and having vedic sanskaras ,thery are progressed very high in attainment of bramhan ..They are very fit for attaining vishnu. (This is secondary meaning we get) ..this is related to the subject varna by birth.

2) Now the main meaning. : Those who have taken birth in highest families, most times they get misguided because of the karma Khanda of veda.Because they don't know the hidden meaning behind various sacrifices and worships .They think that they are for attaining of higher lokas and pleasures .In this way ,they get misguided about fruits of action. In reality, various sacrifices and worships are not for attainment of pleasures. Their only aim is to make the mind self-controlled. They teach the tyaga due to which mind gets purified slowly. After this, that person entirely gives up the the karma-khanda of veda .He remains satisfied only in the self. After getting mind purified, one thinks about the subject of atma and bramhana ie dnyana khanda and the journey of moksha starts from there.

This is the interpretation . Only the person who knows the secret of three subjects of veda can interprete that verse in broad sense. From your posts, it is clear that you do not know the hidden meaning of three subjects of veda. Only the knower of veda can understand this , probably you can't.

So who would accept your personal claims ? You called me sinful.How rude! You are just typical iskconite who belives that those who don't accept their philosophy are sinful and demons. Know that this is our varnashrama dharma . It's very bad thing that nowdays castless persons are saying to varna people what is varna and what are its basics. :(

That verse is crystal clear and we don't want yours personal interpretations. That's it.

Take care!

Hari krishna.

grames
04 December 2013, 12:54 PM
Not sure if you have a big gang sitting behind you to write some "hindu constitutional" rules identifying who can be labeled as "hindu" and who cannot be! or Who can attain the Brahman and who cannot be!

Its very clear, you now have to jump to personal opinions or identifying my versions as my personal instead of looking at the content. Look at what is said instead of who is said. :)

Ask yourself, why the Upanayanam is only for the three varna - What is the varna before Upanayanam and after the ceremony! There is an very important step in that where "Change of cloths" symbolically indicating 'new birth" to the body! Why something like that has to be done when the birth already determined the "Varna"? Upanayanam is not only the beginning of study or brahmacharya but also as the word indicates, the first step to the Brahma Vidya - the three threads being the Vow! (If you haven't gone through one, ask your family elders and also know for the fact that, your varna is not automatically Brahamana after upanayana and it can be Vaishya or Kshatriya. Why not a Shudra? Because, it is only the Sudhra who is waiting to be identified by the Guru for his Varna and as plato says, it is impossible to train a weak as a great soldier or wicked in to sadhu. Ask for the meaning behind the very ritual and ask why it is performed if birth has already sanctioned such merits.

The vedic system always believed, those who gets the yoni birth are always Shudra but it is only the Samskara they perform, qualifies them as the one of the three different classes!

janmana jayate shudrah samskarairdvija uchyate

There is no qualification before such Samskara and there is no restriction who can perform such samskara. Birth in the noble family is never questioned as gift of punya but that is not an automatic "qualificaiton" and the arguments are only from those WHO DO NOT FOLLOW anything that makes them such qualified or do/did any Samskara other than a symbolic upanayana for pride but still want to be identified as "SOLE PROPRIETORSHIP" of Vedic Science!

Teaching higher and lower in the creation of Brahman shows your distasteful understanding and it is even more selfish when you are talking about Advaita where the oneness is preached. This is not my personal opinion but your lack of understanding the philosophy and also your strongest desire to hold a sinful theory where the Brahman gets a devesha and only people with demonic thoughts can do such things.

Hare Krshna!

grames
04 December 2013, 12:57 PM
One of Adi Shankaracharya's (eighth century) finest poems, 'Manisha Panchakam', was inspired by his dialogue with a Chandala, a member of the lowest caste. Once, when Shankara was on his way to the temple after a bath in the Ganga, he found a Chandala with four dogs blocking his path. His caste prejudice flared up when the Chandala refused to step aside, and asked him to do so. But the Chandala asked: "If there is only one existence, what is it that you want to drive away: My body or my soul? If it is my body, both your and mine are made up of the same physical elements.

But if it is my soul, it is also no different from yours. How can therefore be any distinctions of caste and creed?" Filled with remorse, Shankara prostrated himself before the Chandala. The bard in him sang: "He who has learnt to see one existence everywhere/ he is my master - be he a Brahmin or a Chandala."

More here with all five http://sanskritdocuments.org/sites/snsastri/Manishapanchakam.pdf

Again, when Goswami Tulsidas recreated Valmiki's Ramayan in Awadhi, the language of commoners, he was denounced by the purblind Brahminical order of the day. It was the then Shankaracharya who gave dharma's sanction to the transcreation of Ramayana, which reached out to a vast populace. It was a revolutionary movement, a reinvention of such brilliance that only Sanatan Dharma was capable of.

hinduism♥krishna
04 December 2013, 01:14 PM
So much unrelated and unnecessary claims are continueing again and again ! By posting too much you can not disprove that 11.11.5 verse. Know that varna dharma is within the maya ; not beyond the maya.

Ok , I stopped here until you don't disprove that verse and until you don't post the scriptural supports that clearly states varna is not by birth.

Live with your opinions , don't change them ever. Outsiders can assume whatever they want. It doesn't matter. Because Varna dharma is the duty of those who are born in 4 varnas. :)

Thank you. Bye and take care.

Hari krishna hari

grames
04 December 2013, 01:22 PM
What is not proved cannot be disproved!

Same rule applies to you as well.... that Varna is by Birth!

When the dots are connected, it is a proof and if you cannot see, that is the Qualification of your individual status. I cannot help it.

My birth did give me what you are celebrating here but i have no pride in that rather my faith is in being qualified or getting qualified. So, i am surely not part of your so called "Circle" and i will be always an outsider to your circle.

Hare Krshna!

hinduism♥krishna
04 December 2013, 01:47 PM
Dear grames.

This is another which clearely proves varna by birth.


The Lord tells Srideva in Srimad Bhagavata (10.86.53):

" brahmano janmana sreyan sarvesam praninam iha
tapasa vidyaya tustya kim u mat kalaya yutah "

"The brahmana is superior to all living beings by birth , let alone when he is austere, learned, content and devoted to Me."

grames
04 December 2013, 02:25 PM
Dear Hk.,

I am not frightened and i will not but i want to caution you that, you are now getting to inner circle of who is better and who is not when the original objective is whether someone who is not born in the land of India is qualified to follow SD or not! We are not discussing whether Brahmana is best or Shudra not!

If you can just prove this statement of yours, it will settle the score

"Guna and Karma acquired by birth"

Thanks
Hare Krshna!

hinduism♥krishna
04 December 2013, 11:14 PM
Dear Hk.,

I am not frightened and i will not but i want to caution you that, you are now getting to inner circle of who is better and who is not when the original objective is whether someone who is not born in the land of India is qualified to follow SD or not! We are not discussing whether Brahmana is best or Shudra not!

If you can just prove this statement of yours, it will settle the score

"Guna and Karma acquired by birth"

Thanks
Hare Krshna!

Namaste , really you don't have any answer to my proofs .

"The brahmana is superior to all living beings by birth , let alone when he is austere, learned, content and devoted to Me."

You said this verse is only stating that bramhana is superior to others . So funny interpretetion ! Did you eat the word " janmana-by birth ? or you have some defects to see it .

That verse clearely says that bramhanas are superior than anything . By what ? The verse answers that ' by birth ' . This simple thing you can not understand , then what to talk about basics of varna dharma ? I really surprised by seeing that you are not using your common sense .
You asked me the proof to show guna and varna dependant on birth . However the answer is hidden in just two verses . One verse where krishna says varna is classified according to varna and other verse from bhagavat puranas which is stating varna by birth and which was too spoken by krishna . We should know that there can not be the two opposing statements in most authentic scriptures like gita and bhagavat purana . At least shri krishna can not say two contradictory statements . So this is the indirect proof which shows guna and karma are dependant on birth .

Now the direct understanding ! KARMA AND GUNA are dependent on birth is a very well known fact .It doesn't need any proofs . It is explainable and logical .
Varna dharma is not the matter of just one life . It is the matter of all previous lives . There is a law of karma who says ' By what way you act , in the the same way i will act ' . Guna and karma have a direct relation with the ' papa ' and 'punya' . In reality , this law of karma governs the varna dharma . Only he decides the person's future varna or birth . If the person was under the predominant 'tamas guna' in his previous lives , law of karma won't give him birth in bramhana family in next birth

.Similarly if the person was predominantly under satwik guna , the law of karma won't give him birth in shudra varna in his next birth . This is the simple understanding .

Whatever you do in your past lives , it has a direct impact on sins and virtues and on your position of varna in the next birth . In short , The order is like this .The karma and guna are dependant on birth , the birth is dependant on sins and virtues and these sins ,virtues are dependant and governed by law of karma .
If you are not understanding this simple thing , then fault will be in the intelligence ; not in bhagavta purana's sacred verses.

Another point ! In bhagavat gita , lord krishna says ' varna is classified by me according to guna and karma . He didn't say that varna is only by karma and guna . The correct understanding by considering verses from bhagavat purana would be like this : The varna is by birth and by what nature they are classified ? They are classified according guna and karma . It means guna and karma are the natures of varna . So it doesn't get contradicted with varna by birth .

Besides i can prove varna by birth with the help of gita only . :)

devotee
05 December 2013, 12:16 AM
Namaste HLK,

Though I don't want to spoil the party you and Grames are enjoying but :

I don't think the verses you have quoted support that only children born to Brahmana are Brahmana. Can you show any verse from Bhagwad Gita or Upanishads which say so ? I don't think there is any verse in Bhagwad Purana too which supports this.

In my humble opinion :

BrAhmana by Birth ===> Those who have BrAhmANa qualities (as stated by Lord Krishna in Chapter 18 of BG) by birth i.e. acquired naturally at the time of birth due to their past samskArs.

BTW, will you please refer VajraSuchikA Upanishad, which enjoys higher authority than PurANa being Upanishad http://www.vedarahasya.net/vajra.htm , doesn't support your theory ?

Please refer these too :

Those greats who were non born in Brahmin family :

I am a poet, my father is a doctor, my mother a grinder of corn.
Rigveda, 9.112.3

===> This shows that in Vedic times, in one family alone there could be many VarNas.

Maharshi Aitreya Mahidasa: According to tradition, his mother was a maid named ‘Itara’. This Rishi is credited with the compilation of the Aitreya Brahmana and sections 1-3 of the Aitreya Aranyaka (the latter contains the Aitreya Upanishad- one of the 10 canonical Upanishads for Hindus) belonging to the Rigveda.

Maharshi Matanga: He was the son of a Shudra mother and a Vaishya father. In fact, Chandalas are often addressed as ‘Matanga ’in passages like Varaha Purana 1.139.91

Maharshi Valmiki: He was descendant from Sages but had become a chandaala (= an outcaste) named Ratnakara, because he took to murder and highway robbery. He was reformed by Prajapati Brahma and was inspired by the divine Sage Narada to compose the Hindu epic par excellence- the Ramayana.

Bhakta Nammalvar: The foremost of the Alvar Vaishnava saints, he was a Shudra by birth. His composition ‘Tiruvayamoli’, which is in the Tamil language, is considered at par with the Vedas by the Sri Vaishnava Hindus.

Saint Kabir: He was brought-up by ‘Julaha’ couple. Julahas are a Muslim caste of weavers. A Sef-realised saint. He preached in the language of the masses and many of his verses are common proverbs in North India.

Vatsa, a descendant of Kanva RV 6.1; 8.8 etc; was called a Shudra-putra (Panchavimsha Brahman 14.66).

Kakshivat, a Brahmavadin, was the son of Dirghatamas by a Shudra maid servant (Brihaddevata 4.24-25).

According to Mahabharata (Anushasana Parvan 53.13-19), Sage Kapinjalada was a Chandala and Sage Madanapala was the son of a boatwoman.

According to Mahabharata Shanti Parvan, King Sudas was also a Shudra. Sudas is one of the most celebrated kings of the Rigveda, being the hero of the Dasarajna war.


Some important passages :

"I do not know this, Sir, of what family I am. I asked my mother. She answered me: 'In my youth, when I went about a great deal serving as a maid, I got you. So I do not know this, of what family you are. However, I am Jabala by name; you are Satyakama by name.' So I am Satyakama Jabala, sir." To him he then said: "A non-brahmin would not be able to explain thus. Bring the fuel, my dear. I will receive you as a pupil. You have not deviated from the truth."
Chhandogya Upanishad 4.4.1-5


“Listen about caste, Yaksa dear, not study, not learning is the cause of the twice-born status. Conduct is the basis, there is no doubt about it.”
Mahabharata III.312.106

“O King of Serpents! He in whom are manifest truthfulness, charity, forbearance, good conduct, non-injury, austerity and compassion is a Brahmin according to the sacred tradition.”
Mahabharata III.180.20

“O Serpent! He, in whom this conduct is manifest is a Brahmin, he in whom this is absent treat all such as Sudra.”
Mahabharata III.180.27

“The gods consider him a Brahmin (a knower of Brahman) who has no desires, who undertakes no work, who does not salute or praise anybody (with a selfish motive), the fruits of whose deeds have exhausted and who maintains equanimity.”
Mahabharata, XII.269.34

“If one’s birth were to decide one’s caste, then all should be Brahmins because all humans beings have one Father- Prajapati (God, the protector and master of all creatures).”
Shukraniti, Chapter 1

“Vyasa, born of a dancing girl, became a great Rishi;
Hence, it is tapas that makes one a Brahmin, and not his birth.
Sakti, born of a Chandala woman, became a great Rishi.
Hence, it is tapas that makes one a Brahmin, and not his birth.
Parasara, born of SwapAki, became a great Rishi;
Hence, it is tapas that makes one a Brahmin, and not his birth.
Vyasa, born of a fisherwoman, became a great Rishi;
Hence, it is tapas that makes one a Brahmin, and not his birth.”


Again, the verse "ChAturvarnyam mayA srishtam guna karma vibhAgshah" (BG) does say that the four VarNas are classified on the basis of guNa and karma that clearly means that guNa and karma are the main consideration for anyone getting classified into a particular varNa.

.... but you both can keep the fight on, if you so wish. I quit here.

OM

Ganeshprasad
05 December 2013, 05:43 AM
Pranam all
Wow
There I thought we must have one very popular introduction here! so I thought to join in to welcome our new member, alas it is another very popular subject that has taken over!

Welcome Devi Dasi

Welcome back Devotee ji

PS
Can this current discussion be conducted in its appropriate thread please

Jai Shree Krishna

hinduism♥krishna
05 December 2013, 07:33 AM
BrAhmana by Birth ===> Those who have BrAhmANa qualities (as stated by Lord Krishna in Chapter 18 of BG) by birth i.e. acquired naturally at the time of birth

Exactly , bramhana qualities are aquired naturally through their birth .That's why varna is by birth . :) . The son of bramhana will be a bramhana only .

hinduism♥krishna
05 December 2013, 07:47 AM
Namaste devotee ,

Even in upanishada and veda , there is not any acceptable proof that clearely shows that varna is not by birth , while In puranas , there are many incidents which clearely posit varna by birth as a fact .Eg - In ramayana epic , ravana was born in bramhana family .So he was a bramhana . He was the knower of the vedanta. But later on You know that he was overwhelmed by the pride . Moreover he kidnapped rama's wife sita . He didn't show the bramhana qualities at that time . So if we believe in varna not by birth , ravana should not be considered as bramhana . Finally rama killied ravana .But after the death why did rama perform sanskara on his body after killing the ravana if he was not bramhana ? it is known that one should perform sanskara when one kills the bramhana . The killing of bramhana is called as 'bramhahatya ' which is the greatest sin .

hari krishna

hinduism♥krishna
05 December 2013, 08:15 AM
Namaste ,

First, this was not even a problem until recent times. Even today, the Varna/Jati system is not a problem for the Vaidheekas, i.e. those who derive religious doctrine from Vedas and other sources affiliated with the Vedas. For them, and in earlier times, Varna/Jati was understood as a strictly endogamous and hierarchical system based on one’s birth. That was just the way things were. But, in recent times, with the ascendancy of natural rights, equality, democracy, the natural understanding of the Varna system has become increasingly indefensible.

There are many myths created by anti-varna dharma people such as jati is man made . Jati and varna have no any connection ,like this . of course Jati is the same as Varna; there may be thousands of Jatis, but they can be neatly grouped into one of the four Varnas .

Even a cursory reading of Manu Dharmashsthras will clearly show that the four Varnas are intrinsically defined by birth and it stays till death.
Oh well, I can already hear their protestations -- Manu is obsolete, no one even reads it any more. It does not matter how widely read Manu is today, it still occupies the highest realm of sacred texts next in authority only to the Vedas.

hinduism♥krishna
05 December 2013, 08:25 AM
Namaste , devotee .

Apart from puranas , bhagavad gita also accepts varna by birth if we look carefully . Some people claim that Getha makes no mention of Varna being determined by birth. Let us examine this claim carefully .


On the issue of Varna and birth, we find answer in the very first chapter. In Shloka 41 of Chapter 1, Arjuna declares that Varna Sankraha, i.e. mixing of Varna, will result if the women of the clan become blemished. Further, in the next Shloka, Arjuna says that due to the mixing of Varna, the virtues of Jati and Kulam (clan) that have existed from beginningless time, will be destroyed. In this Shloka, Arjuna makes a clear connection between Varna and Jati. Finally, Arjuna cites the authority of clan elders for this position, in Shloka 44. So, Arjuna claims, on the authority of elders, mixing of Varna will result if the chastity of women is not preserved. If Varna is strictly determined by one’s conduct and is not a function of one’s birth, why would there be mixing of Varna that Arjuna speaks of ?


In the seventeen chapters that follow, Lord Krishna never once disputes Arjuna on this issue of connection between Varna and birth. He dispels Arjuna of many of his delusions, yet the Lord chooses not to dispel him of this one. The Lord does speak of Varna several times in the course of his teachings to Arjuna, yet, never once does he correct him on this connection. So, the only conclusion we are allowed is that the Lord does not consider the connection between Varna and birth, a delusion.


However strong the above evidence may be, some persons won't accept this . Now see the next evidence .


Let us look at Shloka 33 of chapter 9. Lord Krishna is in the process of explaining to Arjuna that anyone can seek his refuge and attain freedom (moksha). To emphasize this, the Lord states that even women, Vaishya, and Shudra, who are born out of Papam, can achieve the supreme goal by surrendering to Lord Krishna -- so, it goes without saying that Brahmanas and Kshatriyas, who are born out of Punya and Bhakthi, can surely achieve it through him. Here, the Lord states unequivocally that the four Varnas are determined by birth, resulting from Papam or Punyam, and for good measure, he adds women as well in the mix. The term he uses is “papa yonayaha”. There cannot be any ambiguity what the Lord states -- Women, Vaishyas and Shudras are born out of Papam. In other words, just as gender is determined by birth , Varna is determined as a result of birth and is generally unchangeable. Here the another thing we came to know that guna and karma are dependant on birth or papa , punya .


Hari krishna hari hari

grames
05 December 2013, 10:12 AM
Just a quick reply....

If Arjuna is worried about "mixing" of Varna, what he has done in his marriages is already what he is worried about if at all, it is all by mere birth alone.

You said, Arjuna claims such varna is eternal - not sure if you have copy pasted or consciously typed it. ("Arjuna says that due to the mixing of Varna, the virtues of Jati and Kulam (clan) that have existed from beginningless time")

What you are getting in to is not the objective of whether someone born outside the land of India has any rights to worship Lord Govinda. Now, you are focusing on, who is best among the varna ( again, something very much refutable when the Prema Lakshna of Jiva is expanded and Krshna clearly states and also demonstrated, the Prema Bhakta is His life line and He gives up Himself and becomes their servant, child and lover and takes up all possible relations and services just for their unalloyed Love - That has no Jati or Varna attached to it) so, if you want to change this discussion to who is best among varna, that is fine but we are loosing track on the proof that, Is guna karma acquired after birth or not! ( You haven't provided a proof yet for this - instead of statements)

Hare Krshna!

Sudas Paijavana
05 December 2013, 10:32 AM
Pranam-s,

HLK, can you take this conversation onto another thread, and leave this one alone? It's just an introduction thread - not, under any circumstances, to be used for continuous debate. I could understand if it was just a discussion - but, this has turned into a full out debate. Please, for the love of Krishna, take it somewhere else. Leave this thread alone.

Believer
05 December 2013, 08:39 PM
Namaste,

The good Lord has been periodically sending people to this forum whose thinking, shall we say, has been different from the majority of the members in the forum. That becomes a test of our patience, our spiritual maturity and our humility. Common sense tells us that we should ignore their posts and they would wither away for want of an audience. Once we start challenging them, things get ugly very quickly and the conversation goes downhill. The case of the just banned member is a testimonial to that, whereby all of us felt a need to respond, against our better judgement. Perhaps we can do better next time the Lord sends someone to the forum to put us through a test.

Pranam.

brahma jijnasa
06 December 2013, 05:57 AM
Namaste

Namaste,

The good Lord has been periodically sending people to this forum whose thinking, shall we say, has been different from the majority of the members in the forum. That becomes a test of our patience, our spiritual maturity and our humility. Common sense tells us that we should ignore their posts and they would wither away for want of an audience. Once we start challenging them, things get ugly very quickly and the conversation goes downhill. The case of the just banned member is a testimonial to that, whereby all of us felt a need to respond, against our better judgement. Perhaps we can do better next time the Lord sends someone to the forum to put us through a test.

Pranam.

Indeed.
Although I know that I'm just wasting my time with HLK I still answer his posts. :)

regards

Anima Deorum
30 December 2013, 11:17 PM
Namaste Devi Dasi

What a nice member name! It brings back memories of the 1970s and a wonderful Hindu who was American who authored a devotional song IN ENGLISH that was called "Devi Dasi" and he would play guitar and sing this and other very nice Hindu songs both in English, Sanskrit, Hindi, Bengali.

In one way, you remind me of my daughter. My wife is Bengali-Gujarati.

I hope everything goes well for you on this forum, you seem to know a lot and I am sure I will seek a question once in a while.

So you are a devotee of Krishna. Let me share my favorite artwork of Krsna by Raja Ravi Varma. He is one of my favorite artists, I sure you will recognize it as it was repainted by ISKCON, but this is the original:

http://storage.canalblog.com/12/58/771277/57687150_p.jpg

"Your ever well wisher"

Om Namah Sivaya

Beautiful. Thank you.