What qualifies a written work as scripture?

[philosoraptor]

Pranams,

Perhaps I can make my point better by approaching the subject from a different angle.

The following Wikipedia link describes in fairly neutral language the guru system of one particular Hindu movement which began initiating non-brahmins (by birth) as brahmins (according to their "quality"). This article describes in some detail the problems that occurred with this system specifically in regards to those "brahmins" who became gurus:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISKCON_Guru_System

Note that, for the purposes of this discussion, we can safely assume that the twice-initiated disciples were considered "brahmins" in the movement (however one chooses to define it) because they were given sacred thread initiation and gayatri mantra, and many went on to become gurus.

Note also that this is a fairly neutral (some might say white-washed) article. It does not even delve into the more outrageous scandals, of which there were many, in this organization.

The point of posting this is not to make members of that group feel bad. The point is merely to illustrate the problems of a system in which birth is ignored, and one is merely designated a brahmin based on the guru's perception that the disciple has the right "qualities." That system failed miserably for the organization in question. Since the point of designating varna based on qualities is to escape from a corrupt system in which varna is assigned based on birth regardless of the actual dharma the person follows, one might reasonably question what the point is if we are still left with corrupted "brahmins" who don't follow the principles. If varna is supposed to be determined based on the guru's perception, then what are the implications of the reality in which guru's perception led to outcomes that are no better than those seen in the birth-based system?

In the traditional vedic system, a child's varna was understood based on his birth, and from a very early age he underwent the reformatory practices necessary to cultivate him for a role appropriate to that varna. I think most people looking for a guru would like to find someone who is a brahmin by his qualities and will still remain a brahmin by his qualities for the rest of his life. Is it better to find such a person trained from a young age in a brahminical lifestyle, or is it better to find someone who might have been engaged in all kinds of sinful habitus until just a few years ago when he chanted some mantra and *poof* he is now a brahmin?

I leave it for each individual to decide.

regards,

[Seeker123]

When we start rationalizing that birth does not matter,

I think what I was getting at was birth merely provides a starting score (brahmin starts at a higher score) but a bigger weightage is on what one does with this life which is what determines one's progress towards Moksha.

As far as shruti statements disqualifying shuudras from studying veda, this is implicit in the chAndogya upaniShad when Gautama asks Satyakaama his gotra as a prerequisite for taking initiation.
regards,

The following link states that Sudras also have gotra. If Sudras were not allowed to read Vedas I think it would have been stated in many other portions of the Sruthi. Anyway my 2 paisa - today Vedanta should be (and is) provided to all sincere seekers.

http://www.trsiyengar.com/id273.shtml

Q-31. Do sudras see gothra for marriage?

A-31. Shudras also have gotras, and follow it in marriages. For example a weaver falls under Markandeya gotra. Markandeya was known be a Maharishi and had 60 sons. Marriages are held within Markandeya but never in same family name. So, every weaver falls under one of these gotra. Marriages within the gotra ("swagotra" marriages) are banned under the rule of exogamy in the traditional matrimonial system. People within the gotra are regarded as kin and marrying such a person would be thought of as incest.

[charitra]

I think what I was getting at was birth merely provides a starting score .

no one starts on a higher score by birth into any said caste or varna. Vivekanada, Gandhi, Ambedkar and Gadse, all had started at zero point level at birth, from there they all had built it up on their own. Thy are equal in the eyes of God at birth, their freewill contributed to all their acquired gunas and their karma that accompanied their actions.

[philosoraptor]

The following link states that Sudras also have gotra.

Pranams. Yes, they have gotra, and by the gotra one can tell what one's lineage is. Hence, the question about Satyakaama's gotra. If people of any varna/gotra could study the Vedas, then there is no logical reason to check the gotra prior to intiation.

If Sudras were not allowed to read Vedas I think it would have been stated in many other portions of the Sruthi.

How many times does it have to be stated, exactly, in order to be accepted as truth? And what do you make of the other chAndogya upaniShad references which speak of birth being linked to previous karma, and duties prescribed based on birth? Are we supposed to just ignore those? Meanwhile, are you really going to assert that the real scholars of the Veda like Shankara, Madhva, Ramanuja et al. in addition to the multiple smRitis (gItA, bhAgavata, mahAbhArata, etc) where this is all spelled out, were just wrong all along, while a handful of internet users whose only knowledge of shruti is whatever Sanskrit slogans they read on the website know something that they did not?

Anyway my 2 paisa - today Vedanta should be (and is) provided to all sincere seekers.

In the form of Bhaagavata and Mahaabharata, perhaps. Really, I think people of all varnas should be focusing on these sources.

no one starts on a higher score by birth into any said caste or varna. Vivekanada, Gandhi, Ambedkar and Gadse, all had started at zero point level at birth, from there they all had built it up on their own. Thy are equal in the eyes of God at birth, their freewill contributed to all their acquired gunas and their karma that accompanied their actions.

If it's unthinkable to accept from a religious standpoint that people are born unequal, then is it similarly unthinkable to accept that some people are born with biological or economic advantages? Because I am not clear on why one is hard to swallow while the other is not.

regards,

[philosoraptor]

Meanwhile, I'd be very interested in getting charitra, seeker, and others advocating the "varna by quality" approach to comment on the case-study of the Hindu organization mentioned previously whose "brahmins by conduct only" were involved in sex scandals, child-abuse scandals, embezzlement, etc etc etc. Let's try to have some practical discussion, since the theoretical discussion seems to be pointless as much evidence is simply being ignored by the revisionists for no good reason other than that it is not politically correct.


regards,

[Seeker123]

Pranams. Yes, they have gotra, and by the gotra one can tell what one's lineage is. Hence, the question about Satyakaama's gotra. If people of any varna/gotra could study the Vedas, then there is no logical reason to check the gotra prior to intiation.
regards,

Not necessary. It could be to determine if he was from outside the 4 varnas.

How many times does it have to be stated, exactly, in order to be accepted as truth? And what do you make of the other chAndogya upaniShad references which speak of birth being linked to previous karma, and duties prescribed based on birth? Are we supposed to just ignore those?
regards,

If Sudras are not to study Vedas it would have been stated explicitly in many Upanishads. After all the same subject matter is dealt with in different ways in different Upanishads so why not such an important subject as to who is allowed to read Upanishads.

In my earlier post I already agreed that birth is linked to past Karma (Krishna himself says so in Gita) and yes Varna is based on birth - so no need to set up a straw men. My position is birth has a small weightage than present life's actions as far as spiritual progress is concerned. You perhaps believe birth has a higher or equal weightage to present life's actions. If that is so let us agree to disagree.

Nowadays discourses on Upanishads offered by Swamijis (even traditional ones) is open to everyone.

[Seeker123]

no one starts on a higher score by birth into any said caste or varna. Vivekanada, Gandhi, Ambedkar and Gadse, all had started at zero point level at birth, from there they all had built it up on their own. Thy are equal in the eyes of God at birth, their freewill contributed to all their acquired gunas and their karma that accompanied their actions.

Namaste Charitra,

Rather than react to a phrase try to read all the posts I have made in this thread (#115, #128) and my position will become clearer.

[philosoraptor]

If Sudras are not to study Vedas it would have been stated explicitly in many Upanishads.

Namaste,

If we were not supposed to accept dogs as gurus, it would have been stated so in the Upanishads. Since there is no statement restricting us from accepting dogs as gurus, QED by your logic, it is acceptable to accept dogs as gurus.

regards,

[philosoraptor]

There is no statement in the scripture that we must accept a guru who is living.

Therefore, it is acceptable to take initiation from a guru who is no longer alive.

There are deviant sects of ISKCON who believe this, and use Seeker's logic to assert that there is nothing wrong with their practice of getting "initiation" from a statue or icon of their long-departed acharya.

Of course, Seeker would have absolutely no problems with their logic...

[philosoraptor]

Pranams,

I just found another verse that is quite damning to the theory that "birth is not relevant for determining varna."

This is in Raamaayana, Ayodhya-Kaanda, in the chapter in which King Dasharatha narrates the tragic tale of his accidental killing of the risihi boy. This boy was performing austerities in the forest along with his parents who were both elderly and blind. He was serving them in this way faithfully. The poet says that the boy's only wealth was his asceticism. In other words, this boy was brahminical in every aspect of his conduct and qualities.

As he lays dying, his body pierced with Dasharatha's arrow, he is concerned that the king feels he will be punished for the sin of killing a brahmin. The boy then says:

na dvijaatir aham raajan maa bhuut te manaso vyathaa |
shuudraayaam asmi vaishyena jaataH jana pada adhipa || 2-63-53

53. raajan= O, king; janapadaadhipaa= the ruler of the country! aham= I; na= am not; dvijaatiH= a Brahmana; maabhuut vyathaa= let there be no agony; manasaH= in your mind; asmi= I am; jaataH= born; shuudraayaam== through a Sudra woman; vaishyena= by Vysya.

'O, king the ruler of the country! I am not a Brahmana. Let there be no agony in your mind. I am born through a Sudra woman by a Vaishya.

But wait! He is a brahmin by quality, right? So why bother mentioning his birth?