Download this in PDF format here:
Who or what is a Brähmaëa?
Q: Can a çüdra or a mleccha become
a brähmaëa in this birth?
A: In the Gauòéya Vaiñëava
missions that operate in the western countries we see everyone ultimately
receiving brähmaëa-initiation. But which varëäçrama-society has
only brähmaëas? Qualities and birth are non-different— käraëaà guëa
saìgo'sya sad asad yoni janmasu (Bhagavad Gétä 13.22). "The cause of
birth in either a good or a bad species is one's attachment to a certain
psychological quality (culture, habit)." Çré Caitanya Mahäprabhu has
taught His followers tåëäd api sunécena "One must consider oneself
lower than a blade of grass", not a mleccha claiming to be equal to
a brähmaëa. Caste is for life, just as one cannot change one's
biological father and mother during this lifetime. Once born a European one
cannot suddenly, during this lifetime, become an Asian or African. One cannot
change ticket mid-flight. A human being can and should not launch one’s own varëäçrama
dharma, for it is created by God Himself, and He is the highest authority— catur
varëyaà mayä såñöaà (Bhagavad Gétä 4.12) "The four castes are created
by Me (God, Kåñëa)”, and not by a human being, who wishes to ‘reform’ society,
however elevated he may have been. In Çrémad Bhägavata (7.15.14) human
concoctions about varëäçrama dharma are called äbhäsa dharma, or
fallacious religion – yas tvicchayä kåtaù pumbhir äbhäso hyäçramät påthak: “That
which has been created by man according to their own whim, separately from the
established äçramas, is called abhäsa.” Finding fault in a brähmaëa
or trying to usurp his position will cost you dear, for Çré Kåñëa Himself
says in the Bhägavata (10.64.41-42):
vipraà kåtägasam api naiva druhyata mämakäù
ghnantaà bahu çapantaù vä namaskuruta nityaçaù
yathähaà praëame viprän anukülaà samähitaà
tathä namata yüyaà ca ye'nyathä me sa daëòa-bhäk
"O My relatives! Do not harm a brähmaëa, even if he
mistreats you! Even if he is a sinner, abuses you or abundantly curses you, you
should always bow down to him. Even I bow down to the brähmaëas. Whoever
acts otherwise is punishable by Me!"
The best example is Indra, who had to suffer severely for killing
the brähmaëa Våträsura, even though he was a demon.
If the river Gangä is considered pure in spite of all dirt, if Go
is considered worshipable and inviolable even if it comes to kill, the brähmaëa
must also be considered worshipable right from birth despite his faults.
Just like gotva, it is the brähmaëatva which is glorified. This brähmaëatva
is by birth, just as the gotva of the cow is by birth.
The Lord further tells Çrutadeva -
brähmaëo janmanä çreyän sarveñäà präëinäm iha
tapasä vidyayä tuñöyä kim u mat kalayä yutaù
duñprajïä aviditvaivam avajanänantyasüyavaù;
guruà mäà vipram ätmänam Who and what is a brähmaëa? A
Guru? Or a sannyäsi?
2 December 31, 2013
“The brähmaëa is superior to all living beings by
birth. Let alone when he is austere, learned, content and devoted to Me…..”
“Men of crooked understanding, who do not know
this, disrespect a brähmaëa and are envious of him, who is
identical with Me and their very self." (Çrémad Bhägavata (10.86.53, 55)
In his commentary to verse 53, Çré Sanätana
Gosvämé says: janmanä jäti mätreëa – “janmanä means, just by jäti,
caste.”
Nanda Mahäräja told Garga Muni:
tvaà hi brahma-vidäà çreñöhaù
saàskärän kartum arhasi
bälayor anayor nåëäà janmanä
brähmaëo guruù
(Çrémad Bhägavata 10.8.6)
“You are the greatest knower of the Vedas, so you
are qualified to perform this rite on my sons. A brähmaëa is Guru by
birth.”
Jéva Goswämé Vaiñëava comments in his Toñaëé öékä–janmanä
jätyeva kià punar jïänädinetyarthaù - He is Guru by caste, what to speak of
by knowledge and so?
Jéva Goswämé Båhad Vaiñëava Toñané – janmanä
janma mätreëaiva kià punar jïänädinetyarthaù “janmanä means only by birth,
what to speak of knowledge and so?”
Jéva Goswämé Krama Sandarbha – janmanä jätyeva “By
birth means by caste only.”
The Bhägavata (7.11.13) declares that a brähmaëa
must first be born in a family that has always, throughout the generations,
followed all the saàskäras for the brähmaëas—
saàskärä yad avichinnäù sa
dvijo'jo jagäda yam
"A twice born brähmaëa is he in whose
family the (16) purificatory rites have been performed in unbroken succession
and whom Lord Brahmä has denominated as such."
Çrépäda Çrédhara Svämé comments on this verse:
çüdraà tu na mantravat
saàskära yuktaà jagäda na copanayanavantam ato näsau dvijaù....ato viväha
vyatirikta saàskäränavaçyakatvät upanayanasya tu sarvathä niñedhät na tasya
dvijatvam
"The çüdra is not to be invested with mantras
nor with the sacred thread, hence he is not a dvija." "Other
than marriage there is no saàskära for the çüdra, therefore the
sacred thread ceremony is forbidden for him in all respects and he cannot be a dvija."
1
1 prabhu häsi kohe – svämé nä mäne yei jana;
veçyära bhitore täre koriye gaëana (C.C. Antya 7.115) Çré
Caitanya Mahäprabhu smilingly replied, “One [a wife] who does not accept the svämé
(husband or Çrédhara Svämé in this context) as an authority I consider a
prostitute.” Who and what is a brähmaëa?
A Guru? Or a sannyäsi?
3 December 31, 2013
What to
speak then of a person who is born entirely outside of varëäçrama?
Çré Viçvanätha Cakravartépäda comments on this
verse:
saàskära mantravanto
garbhädhänädayo yasmin sa dvijaù. vichinna saàskäro dvijabandhur ityarthaù. ajo
brahmä yaà jagädeti brahma såñöyärambhata eva pravåttäyäà dvija jätau viçuddha
mätä pitåkaà janmaiva mukhya lakñaëam
"A dvija is a person whose parents have gone through
purificatory rites like the garbhädhäna saàskära. When there is no
unbroken succession of saàskäras the brähmaëa is called dvija
bandhu. This practise is going on since the creation by the unborn Brahmä.
The main symptom of the twice-born caste is merely birth from a pure father and
mother."
Those who preach mere meritocracy often quote this
verse from Çrémad Bhägavata (7.11.35):
yasya yallakñaëaà proktaà
puàso varëäbhivyanjakam
yad anyaträpi dåçyeta tat
tenaiva vinirdiçet
“If what has been declared as a feature of the
grade of society of a man is perceived even in another (person belonging to
another caste), the latter should be particularly called by that very
denomination (caste).”
Çrédhara Svämé comments on this verse:
çamädibhir eva brähmaëädi
vyavahäro mukhyaù na jäti mäträd ityäha yasyeti. yad yadi anyatra varëäntare'pi
tad varëäntaraà tenaiva lakñaëa nimittenaiva varëena vinirdiçet na tu jäti
nimittenetyarthaù
“One is not just a brähmaëa by birth - the main symptom
is good behaviour like self-control. If such virtue is found elsewhere, in
another caste, this determines the person's varëa, not just birth."
However, Çrédhara Svämé does not say here that
non-brähmaëas can receive the sacred thread. If he did, then he would
contradict his commentary of verse 13.
This verse from the Mahäbhärata (Anuçäçana Parva
chapter 163) is often quoted –
na yonir näpi saàskäro na
çrutam na ca santatiù
käraëäni dvijatvasya våttaà
eva tu käraëam
"Neither birth, purificatory ceremonies, nor
learning, nor progeny, but one's mode of life alone is the cause for dvijatva."
Who and what is a brähmaëa? A Guru? Or a sannyäsi?
4 December 31, 2013
The
meaning of this is that, if a brähmaëa leads his whole life in a manner
that is not conform to how a brähmaëa must live (as per çästras),
in his next life, he will attain that mode in which he led his life. In the
same mode often the Vajra Sucika Upaniñad is quoted, but this Upaniñad says
nothing about giving brähmaëa-threads to mlecchas or çüdras,
nor does it say that one should not be first born a brähmaëa to be
considered qualified.
Çrépäda Bhaktivinoda explains in his Jaiva Dharma
(Chapter 6):
"Cuòämaëi: “One must take birth in a brähmaëa-family
to perform yajïas and other such activities, and even one who is born in
a brähmaëa-family must be purified by the ceremony of investiture with
the sacred thread before he is eligible to perform the duties of a brähmaëa.
Similarly, a caëòäla may have become purified by the chanting of harinäma,
but he is still not eligible to perform yajnas until he acquires a
seminal birth in a brähmaëa-family. However, he can perform the limbs of
bhakti which are infinitely greater than yajïas."
Cuòämani: “What kind of conclusion is that? That a
person not qualified for an ordinary thing can be qualified for an exalted
thing! What is the clear proof for that?”
Vaiñëava däsa: "There are two types of human
activity: material activities that relate to practical existence (vyavahärika);
and spiritual activities that relate to the ultimate truth (päramärthika).
A person may have attained spiritual qualification, but that does not
necessarily qualify him for particular material activities. For example, one
who is a Muslim by birth may have acquired the nature and all the qualities of
a brähmaëa, so that he is a brähmaëa from the spiritual point of
view, but he still remains ineligible for certain material activities, such as
marrying the daughter of a brähmaëa.
Cuòämaëi: “Why not? What is wrong with that?”
Vaiñëava däsa: “If one violates social customs,
one is guilty of secular impropriety, and members of society who take pride in
their social respectability do not condone such activities. That is why one
should not perform them, even if he is spiritually qualified.”
Çré Raghunätha Däsa Gosvämi writes in his Çré
Manaù çikñä:
gurau goñöhe goñöhälayiñu
sujane bhü-sura-gaëe
sva-mantre çré-nämni
vraja-nava-yuva-dvandva-smaraëe
sadä dambhaà hitvä kuru ratim
apürväm atitaräà
aye sväntar bhrätaç caöubhir
abhiyäce dhåta-padaù ||1||
"O mind, I grasp your feet and beg you with
sweet words: please cast away hypocrisy at all times and have unprecedented
love for my Guru, Vrajabhümi, the people of Vraja, the Vaiñëavas, the brähmaëas,
the mantras given by my Guru, the holy name and the fresh young couple
of Vraja."
Here he uses two words, sujana (vaiñëavas) and
bhü-sura-gaëa (brähmaëas). If Vaiñëavas are automatically brähmaëas in
every respect, then there is no need to give two categories. Giving two
categories means each is unique and yet both have something in Who and what is a brähmaëa? A Guru? Or a sannyäsi?
5 December 31, 2013
common.
If a brähmaëa is to be worshipped only if he is a Vaiñëava, then there
is no need to specifically mention brähmaëa and Vaiñëava.
Çrémad Bhägavata (3.33.6) states:
yan-nämadheya-çravaëänukértanäd
yat-prahvaëäd yat-smaraëäd api kvacit
çvädo ’pi sadyaù savanäya
kalpate kutaù punas te bhagavan nu darçanät
“O Lord! By occasionally hearing and chanting Your
divine names, bowing to You or even remembering You, a pariah (a dog-eater) becomes
instantly worshipable as a Brahmin that performs a Soma-sacrifice. Who can then
imagine the benefit of seeing You directly?”
However, Çréla Jéva Gosvämé comments on Bhakti
Rasämåta Sindhu 1.1.22, which is Çré Rüpa Gosvämé’s comment on this verse:
tasmäd durjätir evetyatra
savanäyogyatve’pi käraëam iti tad-yogyatä pratiküla-päpamayéty arthaù. na tu
tad-yogyatväbhäva-mätra-mayéti. brähmaëäëäà çaukre janmani durjätitväbhäve’pi
savana-yogyatväya puëya-viçeña-maya-sävitra-janmäpekñatvät. tataçca savana-yogyatva-pratiküla-durjäty-ärambhakaà
prärabdham api gatam eva kintu çiñöäcäräbhävät sävitraà janma nästéti
brähmaëa-kumäräëäà
savana-yogyatväbhävävacchedaka-puëya-viçeña-maya-sävitra-janmäpekñävad asya janmäntaräpekñä
vartata iti bhävaù. ataù pramäëa-väkye’pi savanäya kalpate sambhävito
bhavati na tu tadaivädhikäré syäd ity abhipretam vyäkhyätaà ca taiù sadyaù
savanäya soma-yägäya kalpate. anena püjyatvaà lakñyata iti
“Therefore bad birth itself is here the cause of
being unqualified for Soma-sacrifice and that means possessing sin that is
antagonistic to qualification for that, not merely having an absence of
qualification for that. Even though there is an absence of bad birth in being
born from the seed of brähmaëas there is still the necessity for a sürya-birth
[ie sacred thread initiation] which possesses the merit suitable for qualifying
one for Soma-sacrifice. Therefore though the prärabdha that caused the
bad birth that is antagonistic to suitability for soma-sacrifice is
gone, like brähmaëa-boys who because of absence of cultured practice
have no sürya-birth and must await a sürya-birth that possesses
the merit that can cut to pieces their absence of suitability for
Soma-sacrifice, he (the dog-eater who chants the names of Kåñëa) must await another
birth. This is the position. Therefore, in the statement of authority (Ç.B.
3.33.6) the words savanäya kalpate, "he becomes fit for Soma
sacrifice," are intended to mean he becomes respected or honored, but not
that he has actually become qualified then and there (to perform that
sacrifice).”
Çrédhara Svämé comments on Çrémad Bhägavata
3.33.6: anena püjyatvaà lakñyate – “This verse just describes how the
chanting dogeater is worshipable.”
Çré Jéva Goswämé comments on this verse and
Çrédhara Swämé’s comment in Bhakti Sandarbha (128): tasmät püjyatva mätra
tätparyam ityabhipretya öékä-kådbhir apy uktam Who and what is a brähmaëa? A Guru? Or a sannyäsi?
6 December 31, 2013
anena
püjyatvaà lakñyata iti – “The only purpose of
Çrédhara Swämé’s commentary on this verse is to show how the chanting dog-eater
is worshipable (not that he literally becomes a Brahmin).”
Çré Sanätana Gosvämé repeats that point in his
Dig-darçini öékä to Hari bhakti viläsa:
brähmaëa-kumäräëäà çaukre
janmani yogyatve saty api sävitra-daikñya-janmäpekñävat. säviträdi-janmani tu
sad-äcära-präpter iti savane pravåttir na yujyate. tasmät püjyatva-mätre
tätparyam ity abhipretya öékä-kådbhir apy uktam anena püjyatvaà lakñyata iti
“Just as even though there is the eligibility in
the son of a brähmaëa through seminal birth, there is still the
dependence on the birth through sävitra-dékñä (initiation into gäyatré
mantra), birth through sävitra-dékña is but attained through sad-äcära
and thus, performing soma yäga is not suitable. Therefore, the
purport here is only püjyatva (being worshipable) and thus the
commentator (Çrédhara Svämé) too has said "anena püjyatvam lakñyata”.
In his Bhägavata öékä named Krama Sandarbha Jéva
Gosvämé says:
tatra yogyatäyäà labdhärambho
bhavatéty arthaù. tad-anantara-janmany eva dvijatvaà präpya tad-ädy-adhikäré
syäd
„It just means that there is a beginning made with
qualification – he only becomes really qualified by taking a brähmaëa-birth
in the next life.”
From this huge amount of authorised evidence it
must be clear that the phrase guëa karma vibhägaçaù, “divided according
to quality and activity”, which is often quoted from Bhagavad-Gétä 4.12 to
prove that mere qualification at this very instant is enough to qualify as a brähmaëa,
refers to previous births’ accumulation of a certain attitude (guëa) and
activities (karma) that cause one to take birth in a certain caste in
the present life. Çréla Baladeva Vidyäbhüñaëa comments on Bhagavad Gétä 18.41
that svabhäva, or nature, is formed by impressions from previous births
- svabhävaù präktana-saàskäras. You cannot reform the laws of karma,
nature and subsequent reincarnation.
Çré Viçvanätha Cakravartépäda has elaborated
further on this point to some degree, stating that since such sacrificial
activities are lower on the spiritual hierarchy than direct service to Kåñëa,
they are not to be taken up even by brähmaëa Vaiñëavas. Sanätana Gosvämé
says in Båhad Bhägavatämåta (2.2.57):
eñäà yajïaika niñöhänäm
aikyenävaçyake nije
jape ca sad gurüddiñöe
mändyaà syäd dåñöa sat phale
"Mahärñis offered Gopa Kumära the status of a
brähmaëa, but he thought to himself: "If I accept the position of a
brähmaëa, I will surely slacken in my practise of the mantra Who and what is a brähmaëa? A Guru? Or a sannyäsi?
7 December 31, 2013
that I
received from the bonafide guru, and that is certainly not good. brähmaëas
are only engaged in yajïas and are not engaged in other
matters."
Second initiation or mantra-initiation
is not brähmaëa-initiation
The brähmaëa-thread is only for practising
the Brahma Gäyatré, not for the Vaiñëava-dékñä-mantras like Gopäla mantra
and Käma Gäyatré. Only the last two are mentioned in Hari Bhakti Viläsa as
Gauòéya Vaiñëava dékñä-mantras. Proof that brähmaëa-initiation
and mantra initiation are two different things is shown in Hari Bhakti
Viläsa (2.3-4):
dvijänäà anupetänäà
sva-karmädhyayanädiñu
yathädhikäro nästéha
syäccopanayanäd anu
tathäträdékñitänäà tu mantra
devärcanädiñu
nädhikäro'styataù kuryäd
ätmänaà çiva saàstutam
A.C. Bhaktivedänta Swämé quotes this verse in his
commentary on Caitanya Caritamrita (Madhya 15.108) and translates it as
follows:
"Even though born in a
brahmana family, one cannot engage in Vedic rituals without being initiated and
having a sacred thread. Although born in a brahmana family, one becomes a
brahmana after initiation and the sacred thread ceremony. Unless one is
initiated as a brahmana, he cannot worship the holy name properly."
This is, however, not a correct translation. The
proper translation is:
"Just as an anupanita vipra (born brähmaëa
who is not yet initiated with the brähmaëa thread) does not yet
qualify to study the Vedas, but does so after getting the upanayana (sacred
thread) saàskära, similarly an uninitiated person does not qualify for
the Lord's arcana (temple worship). Hence one should take dékñä (çiva
saàstutam iti dékñitam)."
Noteworthy are the words tathä (also) and atra
(here), 'here' meaning "in practise of arcanä", showing
that this verse is a comparison between brähmaëa-hood on the one hand
and Vaiñëava-dékñä on the other, and that these are two separate things,
not one and the same.
A brähmaëa is called dvija, or twice
born. How can you have the second birth (upanayaëa saàskära) without
having had the first one (çaukra or seminal birth)? brahma gäyatri investment
is done by the father of a brähmaëa-boy when he is 11 years old.
The boy should not see the sun for many days (since the brähma gäyatré is
a solar mantra) and is locked up into a room with the windows shut,
given only haviñyänna (porridge without salt, spices or sugar) to eat.
Initiation into Kåñëa-mantra is a separate initiation which is only
given to active Vaiñëava-brähmaëas. For instance, Mahäprabhu already
wore His thread when He received kåñëa mantra from Éçvara Puri and
Advaita Prabhu had been doing brahma gäyatré for decades when He
received Kåñëa-mantra from Mädhavendra Puri. And what if the ‘qualified’
brähmaëa falls down and starts drinking and engaging in illicit sex?
Then we take his sutra away and give it back to him as soon as he
follows the principles Who and what is a brähmaëa?
A Guru? Or a sannyäsi?
8 December 31, 2013
again?
Isn’t this bizarre? Has this ever been shown in any Vedic scripture? We are
seeing that western Vaiñëava organizations, which have a 100% ‘brähmaëa’-population,
also have the highest divorce rate in the world, women have children from
different men - in India even the sweepers’ wives don’t do that. Some
‘qualified brähmaëas’ keep dogs in their houses, again something even
the sweepers in India won’t do – where is the qualification then?
“Qualified brähmaëas” drink beer and “qualified
brähmaëés” wear bikini.
Considering the dvijatva in the Haribhakti
Viläsa-verse that says -
yathä käïcanatäà yäti käàsyaù
rasa vidhänataù
tathä dékñä vidhänena
dvijatvaà jäyate nåëäà
“As bell metal is turned into gold through the
process of alchemy, similarly a human being attains twice born status through
the process of dékñä.”
In his commentary Sanätana Gosvämé confirms that dvijatva
means vipratä for everyone (sarveñäm eva dvijatva vipratä),
and this seems a justification for turning everyone into a brähmaëa.
However,
1) This does not mention the brahma gäyatré,
this statement deals with Vaiñëava dékñä.
2) If this referred to brahma gäyatré, then
that would contradict Çrédhara Svämé’s and Jéva Gosvämé’s verdict that this is
not attainable for non-brähmaëas in their current births.
3) In his Bhakti Sandarbha [298] Çréla Jéva Gosvämé
has quoted this verse under the heading athärcanädhikäri nirëayaù - ‘Now
follows the designation of eligibility for deity Who
and what is a brähmaëa? A Guru? Or a sannyäsi?
9 December 31, 2013
worship.”
Then he proceeds by quoting scripture on the eligibility of all castes and
genders for deity worship, ending with yathä käïcanatäà. This is the
context in which this verse appears.
4] None of Mahäprabhu's nitya siddha associates,
like Advaita or Nityänanda, Gadädhara, Çréniväsäcärya, Narottama, Çyämänanda,
nor any of Their disciples or grand-disciples have ever put such a 'brahmana-initiation'
into practise, involving the Brähma Gäyatré in the process. mahäjano yena
gata sa pantha — One must follow in the footsteps of the mahäjanas. All
the mahäjanas have considered such a practise to be an utpäta, or
social disturbance. Before 1918, 350 years after the compilation of Haribhakti
Viläsa, no one has ever given 'brähmaëa-initiation'. Shall we assume
that Çrépäd Bhaktisiddhänta Sarasvaté knew it better than the Païca Tattva, the
Six Gosvämés, and all their successor äcäryas?
5] In Bhakti Rasämåta Sindhu (1.2.62) Rüpa Gosvämé
quotes the Käçé-khaëòa —
antyajä api tad-räñöre
çaìkha-cakräìka-dhäriëaù
sampräpya vaiñëavéà dékñäà
dékñitä iva sambabhuù
“In that country even the outcastes wore conch and disc signs.
They received Vaiñëava dékñä and thus becames just like sacrificial
priests.”
Viçvanätha Cakravarté comments: dékñitä
yäjïikä iva sambabhur - “dékñitä means just like sacrificial
priests.” iva means ‘just like’, not that they actually became
sacrificial priests.
Gauòéya Maöha-followers try to dismiss or play
down the authority of the Haribhakti Viläsa by writing (as Swami A.C.
Bhaktivedänta did in his purport of Caitanya Caritämåta. Madhya 1.35:)
"According to Çréla
Bhaktisiddhänta Sarasvaté Öhäkura, the regulated principles of devotional
service compiled by Gopäla Bhaööa Gosvämé do not strictly follow our Vaiñëava
principles….It is Çréla Bhaktisiddhänta Sarasvaté Gosvämé’s opinion,
however, that to follow the Hari-bhakti-viläsa strictly is to actually follow
the Vaiñëava rituals in perfect order. He claims that the smärta-samäja, which
is strictly followed by caste brähmaëas, has influenced portions that Gopäla
Bhaööa Gosvämé collected from the original Hari-bhakti-viläsa. It is therefore
very difficult to find out Vaiñëava directions from the book of Gopäla Bhaööa
Gosvämé.”
However, when Çréman Mahäprabhu outlines the
contents of Haribhakti Viläsa, he assures Sanätana Gosvämépäda; yabe tumi likhibä
kåñëa koräbe sphuraëa, "Kåñëa will reveal to you what to write."
(Caitanya Caritämåta Madhya 24, 340)
It was not written under pressure of smärtas but
through the inspiration of Çré Kåñëa. That is an offence to Çréla Sanätana
Gosvämé, Çréla Gopäla Bhaööa Gosvämé and even to Lord Çré Kåñëa Himself, who
has revealed the text to Sanätana Gosvämé. Sanätana Gosvämé clarifies in the
very first verse of Haribhakti Viläsa that he has written this book for the Who and what is a brähmaëa? A Guru? Or a sannyäsi?
10 December 31, 2013
pleasure
of the Vaiñëavas (and not for smärtas and bodily conscious people) - caitanya-devaà
bhagavantam äçraye çré-vaiñëavänäà pramude’ïjasä likhan. To say that
certain statements of Sanätana's are for the appeasement of a certain class
would be like saying that Sanätana Gosvämé is not an äcärya at all. This
is the biggest aparädha. If indeed, he did appeasement, why did not
Gopäla Bhaööa Gosvämé clarify it in the Dig-darçiné-öékä written on those
verses of Haribhakti Viläsa? Why both Gopäla Bhaööa Gosvämé and Sanätana
Gosvämé are silent on this issue both in Haribhakti Viläsa and in Dig-darçiné?
Jéva Gosvämé clarifies in the beginning of his Locana-rocané-commentary on
Ujjvala Nélamaëi that svecchayä likhitaà kiïcit kiïcit likhitaà parecchayä or
“Some statements I have written according to my own desire, whereas some
statements are written keeping into mind the desire of others”. But, any such
statement from the two authors themselves i.e. Gopäla Bhaööa Gosvämé and
Sanätana Gosvämé – have not been issued in the case of Haribhakti Viläsa and
its commentary.
Çrémad Bhägavata 1.7.43 –
uväca cäsahanty asya
bandhanänayanaà saté
mucyatäà mucyatäm eṣa brähmaṇo nitaräà guruḥ
“Draupadi could not tolerate Açvatthämä's being
bound by ropes, and being a devoted lady, she said: Release him, for he is a brähmaṇa, our spiritual master.”
The text brähmaëo nitaräà guruù actually
means ‘brähmaëas are always Guru’. This clearly shows that Açvatthämä was
still referred to as a brähmaëa despite his heinous act. He did not get
demoted to a çüdra or less because of his sinful behavior. Even a dvija-bandhu
must be treated differently from others even if he commits the most
grievous sins and is an ätatäyé; he must never be killed - çré-bhagavän
uväca—brahma-bandhur na hantavya. The Lord said: “One should not kill a
fallen brähmaëa.” (Çrémad Bhägavata 1.7.53) Thus respect shown to brähmaëas
is real and a must.
The Bhägavata teaches respect for Guru-families as
well, as in this statement by Draupadé (Çrémad Bhägavata 1.7.46)-
tad dharmajïa mahä-bhäga
bhavadbhir gauravaà kulam
våjinaà närhati präptuà
püjyaà vandyam abhékñëaçaù
“O knower of dharma! You should not cause
suffering to the family of your guru, because they are always
praiseworthy and worthy of worship.”
Çrédhara Swämé and Viçvanätha Cakravarté both
gloss gaurava as guroù kulam, the family of the Guru.
Droëa: He was a brähmaëa but took to the life of a kñatriya
due to his warlike disposition. Was he then referred to thereafter as a kñatriya?
No. Anyone who has read the Mahäbhärata can tell you that the text continued to
refer to him as a brähmaëa. Who and
what is a brähmaëa? A Guru? Or a sannyäsi?
11 December 31, 2013
Arjuna:
He demonstrated a propensity towards renunciation
when he declined to fight on the battlefield of Kurukñetra. He was ready to
renounce everything and just live by begging. Did Lord Kåñëa accept it? No. He
argued that Arjuna was a kñatriya and should fight the battle despite
his brähmiëical disposition.
These examples refute the point of view that one's
varëa changes on the basis of his "mentality." Finally, let us
quote other çästric evidence that further refutes this point of view:
Bhagavad-gétä As It Is 18.41
brähmaëa kñatriya viçäà
çüdräëäà ca parantapa
karmäëi pravibhaktäni
svabhäva prabhavair guëaiù
“Brähmaëas, Kñatriyas, Vaiçyas and çüdras
are distinguished by the qualities born of their own natures in accordance
with the material modes, o chastiser of the enemy.”
The äcäryas wrote the following
commentaries –
Çrédhara Swämé - svabhävaù
pürva-janma-saàskäraù – “svabhäva means the cultivation from
previous birth.”
Çré Viçvanätha Cakravarté - svabhävenotpattyaiva
prabhavanti prädurbhavanti ye guëäù – “The guëas of the four varëas
appear due to svabhäva, utpatti (utpattyä) or birth.”
Iskcon’s own translations of utpattyä -
utpattyä — from the beginning of His appearance; SB 5.4.1 utpattyä
— because of my birth (in a demoniac family); SB 7.10.2 saha
utpattyä — by our very birth; SB 10.16.56 utpattyä eva —
simply by birth; SB 11.21.24
Baladeva Vidyäbhüñaëa – svabhävaù
präktana-saàskäras – “svabhäva means cultivation from previous birth”.
All äcäryas here confirm varëa is by
birth, not merely by quality.
Bhagavad-gétä As It Is 18.47
çreyän sva-dharmo viguṇaḥ para-dharmät sv-anuṣṭhität
svabhäva-niyataà karma kurvan
näpnoti kilbiṣam
“It is better to engage in one's own occupation,
even though one may perform it imperfectly, than to accept another's occupation
and perform it perfectly. Duties prescribed according to one's nature are never
affected by sinful reactions.”
Çré Baladeva Vidyäbhüñaëa's commentary to 18.47:
nanu kñatriyädi-dharmänäà
räjasäditvät teñu ruci-çünyaiù kñatriyädibhiù sättviko brahma-dharma
evänuñöheya iti cet taträha çreyän iti. sva-dharmo viguëaù nikåñöo’pi
samyag-anuñöhito’pi vä para-dharmäd utkåñöät svanuñöhitäc ca çreyän atipraçañöo
vihitatvät. Who and what is a brähmaëa?
A Guru? Or a sannyäsi?
12 December 31, 2013
“If it is
said by someone that, only sättvika brähmaëa dharma must be conducted by
those kñatriyas that have no taste for the dharmas of kñatriyas
and others because of their being in rajas, it is said, çreyän
svadharmo-viguëaù – it is better to practice one’s own dharma imperfectly
than another’s dharma perfectly….”
Bhagavad-gétä As It Is 18.59
yad ahaìkäram äçritya na
yotsya iti manyase
mithyaiṣa vyavasäyas te prakṛtis tväà niyokṣyati
“If you do not act according to My direction and
do not fight, then you will be falsely directed. By your nature, you will have
to be engaged in warfare.”
Why did Lord Kåñëa say it was Arjuna's nature to
fight? And that too despite Arjuna offering to give up everything and take to
begging? Because Arjuna was born a kñatriya and he was obligated to
follow kñatriya dharma. Arjuna did not get promoted to brähmaëa status
because of his compassion for his family.
Someone may argue:
janmanä jäyate çüdraù
saàskärät bhaveddvijaù
veda-paöhäd bhaved vipraù
brahmajänätéti brähmaëaù.
“The meaning of who is a brähmaëa is very
clear - one who knows brahman. Hence, all scriptural statements that
apply to a brähmaëa can only apply to one who has realised brahman and
is completely free of faults such as käma, krodha etc and does not
depend on considerations of one's birth.”
Refutation: The scriptural statements applicable to a brähmaëa apply
only to that person who has directly realised brahman and is completely
devoid of käma, krodha, lobha etc. Then, when it comes to practicality
the following points are to be considered:
a) Those who directly experience brahman and
are free from all six faults are very, very rare. One in a million. So what
happens to all the injunctions in the çästras meant for brähmaëas?
Are they to be done by anyone at all or wait only for those extremely rare
personalities to do whenever they become qualified by realising brahman?
If they are not done by the millions of so called brähmaëas citing
disqualification, it then leads to destruction of dharma. A result which
will be contrary to the purpose of those injunctions.
b) Once one becomes a true brähmaëa, what
interest does he have in performing the activities in the çästras for
all of them are laukika and he will have no laukika çraddhä,
having directly realised brahman? He practically is a non-starter and
these activities will never be performed by anyone at all. If he can do it only
after he attains such realisation, it is known that such realisation comes by
years of sädhana? What activities does he do till he Who and what is a brähmaëa? A Guru? Or a sannyäsi?
13 December 31, 2013
gets such
realisation? Anything that he pleases or his svadharma? If he does
anything that he pleases, there are numerous statements in all scriptures
including bhakti-çästras that stand against him. Thus he must only
follow his svadharma according to his birth.
So far no source reference is given for the above çloka.
Äcärya Vaàçédhara writes in his öékä of Çrémad Bhägavata 1.1.2 - ädhunikair
vipra dviòbhis tu 'janmanä jäyate çüdraù' iti päöhaù kalpitaù. sa cänädaraëéya
eva – “Modern quotes by brähmaëa-haters like ‘janmanä jäyate
çüdraù’ are concocted reading, which should be disregarded.” If the meaning
is taken literally as "by birth one is born a çüdra" and is
taken to apply to every human being born on earth, then this contradicts
numerous other statements which mention about a brähmaëa that he is a brähmaëa
right from birth.
Q.: There are numerous non-brähmaëas
who became brähmaëas in the same life. If brähmaëa-hood is by
birth then how did they become brähmaëas?
A: It is true that there were non-brähmaëas who became brähmaëas
in the same life, but these were exceptions, not the rule. The scriptures
themselves question these exceptions and answer them. For example, in the
Mahäbhärata, Anuçäçana parva (3.1-2) -
brähmaëyaà yadi duñpräpaà
tribhir varëair narädhipa
kathaà präptaà mahäräja
kñatriyeëa mahätmanä
viçvämitreëa dharmätman
brähmaëatvaà nararñabha
çrotum icchämi tattvena tan
me brühi pitämaha
'If, O prince, brähmaëa-hood is so hard to
attain by the three classes (Kñatriyas, Vaiçyas and çüdras), how then did the
high souled Viçvämitra, though a Kñatriya (by birth), attain the status of a
Brähmaëa? I desire to know this, O sire. Therefore, relate this matter to me in
truth please.”
The description continues wherein, sage Åcéka, a
son of sage Bhågu married Satyavaté, a princess. Please with her nature, he
blessed her that she will have a brähmaëa-son. Satyavaté's mother, wife
of King Gädhi also wanted a child. On Satyavaté's request, sage Åcéka gave both
of them 2 carus (päyasa) along with instructions to embrace two
different trees. The mother and daughter exchanged their carus and the
trees. Hearing this, sage Åcéka explained that he had infused the potency of an
effulgent brähmaëa in the caru meant for Satyavaté and that of a
fiery kñatriya in the caru meant for her mother. But since they
exchanged the carus and also embraced the trees meant for the other,
Satyavaté would give birth to a fiery kñatriya, though a brähmaëa by
birth and her mother an effulgent brähmaëa, though a kñatriya by
birth. On account of Satyavaté's pleas, he agreed to make her grandson instead
of son with the nature of a fiery kñatriya. The grandson was Paraçuräma.
The kñatriya who was actually a brähmaëa was Viçvämitra. Thus
Viçvämitra became a brähmaëa because of the grace of sage Åcéka. In
chapters 28 and 29 of Anuçäçana parva, Bhéñma-deva explained through the story
of Mataìga that it is not possible to become a brähmaëa in the same
birth even through the fiercest of penances. Who
and what is a brähmaëa? A Guru? Or a sannyäsi?
14 December 31, 2013
In his
purport to Caitanya Caritämåta, Madhya lélä 1, 63, Swami A.C Bhaktivedänta
says:
“Çré Rüpa, Çré Sanätana and
Çré Haridäsa were prohibited from entering the Jagannätha Mandir and Lord
Caitanya did not approve of such dogmatic prohibitions. To avoid unnecessary
turmoil, however, these great personalities would not enter the Jagannatha
temple.”
The Caitanya Caritämåta text says, however:
haridäsa öhäkura ära rüpa-sanätana
jagannätha-mandire nä yäna
tina jana
"Haridäsa Öhäkura and Rüpa and Sanätana,
these three men, did not go to the Jagannätha Mandir."
From this it is clear that they voluntary, out of
sheer humility, did not enter the Jagannätha Mandir, not grudgingly, due to
prohibition or to avoid turmoil. There is no mentioning anywhere in this
Bengali text that they wanted to avoid turmoil, that they were prohibited to
enter or that they protested or resisted such prohibitions. If that were so,
then why did Sanätana Gosvämé prefer to have his foot-soles scorched over
having to touch Lord Jagannätha's püjärés? If Çré Caitanya Mahäprabhu
wanted to overthrow the caste system He could have done so easily. Pratäparudra
Mahäräja was at His feet:
prabhura nikaöe äche joto
bhakta-gaëa; mora lägi’ tä-sabäre koriho nivedana
sei sab doyälu more hoiyä
sadaya; mora lägi’ prabhu-pade karibe vinaya
tä-sobära prasäde mile
çré-prabhura päya; prabhu-kåpä vinä mora räjya nähi bhäya
yadi more kåpä nä koribe
gaurahari; räjya chäòi’ yogé hoi’ hoibo bhikhäré
In a letter King Pratäparudra requested
Särvabhauma Bhaööäcärya, “Please appeal to all the devotees associated with Çré
Caitanya Mahäprabhu and submit this petition to them on my behalf. If all the
devotees associated with the Lord are favorably disposed toward me, they can
submit my petition at the lotus feet of the Lord. By the mercy of all the
devotees, one can attain the shelter of the lotus feet of the Lord. Without His
mercy, my kingdom does not appeal to me. If Gaurahari, Lord Çré Caitanya
Mahäprabhu, will not show mercy to me, I shall give up my kingdom, become a
mendicant and beg from door to door.”
With such influence Mahäprabhu could have easily
told the king to lift the ban on non-Hindus entering the Jagannäth Mandir so
that Rüpa Gosvämé, Sanätana Gosvämé and Haridäs Öhäkur could enter, but there
is no evidence from any çästra that He never did that.
During Advaita Prabhu’s feast in honor of
Mahäprabhu, when He had just taken sannyäsa, Çréla Haridäs Thäkur humbly
said:
mui päpiñöha adhama, bähire
eka muñöi päche korimu bhojan
(Caitanya Caritämåta Madhya 3.63) Who and what is a brähmaëa? A Guru? Or a sannyäsi?
15 December 31, 2013
“I am a
fallen sinner – I will eat a handful later, outside.”
When Rüpa Gosvämé’s dramas were about to be read
to the Lord, Rüpa and Haridäs humbly sat at the base of the platform where the
other devotees were seated:
rüpa haridäsa duìhe bosilä
piëòätale; sabära agre nä uöhilä piëòära upare
(Caitanya Caritämåta Antya 1.111).
When the brähmaëa Kälidäsa glorified his çüdra-friend
Jhaòu Öhäkura, stating that a low-caste devotee is greater than a non-devotee brähmaëa,
Jhaòu Öhäkura did not say: “Yes, you see I am greater than or equal to you!”
Rather, he said:
çuni öhäkura kohe – çästre ei
satya hoy; sei néca nahe – yäte kåñëa-bhakti hoy
ämi – néca jäti, ämär nähi
kåñëa-bhakti; anya aiche hoy, ämäy nähi aiche çakti
“The scriptures speak the truth, a low caste
person is not low if he/she has devotion for Kåñëa. I, however, am low-born and
I have no devotion for Kåñëa. This may apply to others, but I do not have such
a power.” (Caitanya Caritämåta Antya 16, 28-29)
These are perfect examples of maryädä-pälana,
maintaining the etiquette.
Çré Caitanya Mahäprabhu was NOT AGAINST THE
CASTE SYSTEM. When He heard that Sanätana Gosvämé had burned his footsoles
to avoid touching Lord Jagannätha’s püjärés, He praised him, saying
(Caitanya Caritämåta Antya 4, 129-132):
yadyapi tumi hao jagat pävan;
tomä sparçe pavitra hoy deva muni-gaëa
tathäpi bhakta svabhäva -
maryädä rakñaëa; maryädä pälana hoy sädhura bhüñaëa
maryädä laìghane loka kore
upahäsa; iha loka, para loka - dui hoy näça
maryädä rakhile, tuñöa hoy
mora mana; tumi aiche nä korile kore kon jana?
"Although you are the purifier of the whole
world and the demigods and sages are purified by your mere touch, still it is
the nature of a devotee to follow the social protocol. Maintaining the social
protocol is the ornament of a sädhu. When a Vaiñëava violates the social
protocol people will ridicule him and he will perish in this birth and in the
next. By keeping the social standard you have pleased My mind. Who else but you
could do such a thing?"
By saying: ‘Although you are the purifier…’, Mahäprabhu acknowledges
the spiritual superiority of a Vaiñëava, but then He immediately warns that the
external social protocol must be maintained. These are two separate worlds, one
spiritual and the other material.
On the other hand, a person who violates the
social protocol can expect Mahäprabhu’s wrath: maryädä laìghana ämi sohite
nä päri (Caitanya Caritämåta Antya 4.166) “I cannot tolerate violation of
the protocol.”2
2 Although the direct context of this statement
is Jagadänanda Pandit’s treatment of Sanätan Gosvämé, Mahäprabhu spoke this as
a general statement, applying to all circumstances and relationships. Who and what is a brähmaëa? A Guru? Or a sannyäsi?
16 December 31, 2013
When
Çréman Mahäprabhu travelled Çré Svarüpa Dämodara and Çré Rämänanda Räy wanted
to take a brähmaëa with Him - He would not eat grains from non-brähmaëas:
ämä duìhära mone tabe boro
sukh hoy; ek nivedana yadi dhara, dayämaya
‘uttama brähmaëa’ ek saìge
avaçya cähi ; bhikñä kori bhikñä dibe jäbe pätra bohi
banapathe jäite nähi
‘bhojyänna’ brähmaëa; äjïä koro – saìge coluk vipra ekjan
(Caitanya Caritämåta Madhya 17.10-12)
“We would both be very happy if you could heed our
plea, O merciful One! You should definitely travel with one topmost brähmaëa,
who can beg alms for You, serve You these alms and carry your vessels. When
You traverse the forest path You will have no brähmaëa with You who will
cook and serve Your grains. Order us to send a brähmaëa along with You.”
ye gräme rohen prabhu tathäya
brähmaëa; pänca sät jan äsi kore nimantraëa
keho anna äni dey bhaööäcärya
sthäne; keho dugdha dadhi keho ghåta khaëòa äne
jähä vipra nähi tähä
‘çüdra mahäjana’; äsi sabe bhaööäcärye kore vanya vyaïjana
bhaööäcärya päka kore vanya
vyaïjana; vanya vyaïjana prabhura änandita mana
(Caitanya Caritämåta Madhya 17.58-60)
“In whatever village the Lord stayed five to seven
brähmaëas invited Him. Some gave grains to Bhaööäcärya, others gave
milk, yoghurt, clarified butter or rock candy. Wherever there were no brähmaëas
the great devotee-çüdras came and gave Bhaööäcärya forest-vegetables
to cook for the Lord. Prabhu was very happy to eat these vegetables cooked by
Bhaööäcärya.”
Note here that the Lord accepted only vegetables
from the çüdra-devotees.
In Caitanya Caritämåta (Antya 10.139-141):
äcärya-ratna, äcärya-nidhi,
nandana, räghava; çréväsa-ädi joto bhakta, vipra sab
eimata nimantraëa koren jatna
kori; väsudeva gadädhara, gupta muräri
kuléna-grämé, khaëòaväsé, ära
joto jan; jagannäthera prasäda äni koren nimantraëa
“Devotees like Äcärya-ratna, Äcärya-nidhi,
Nandana, Räghava and Çréväsa were all brähmaëas and they invited the
Lord for meals. Väsudeva, Gadädhara, Muräri Gupta and the villagers from Kuléna
and Khaëòa (who were not brähmaëas) brought prasäda from Lord
Jagannätha.” And later on in that chapter (verses 154-155):
gopénäthäcärya, jagadänanda,
käçéçvara; bhagavän rämabhadräcärya, çaìkara, vakreçvara
madhye madhye ghara bhäte
kore nimantraëa; anyera nimantraëa prasäde kauòi dui paëa Who and what is a brähmaëa? A Guru? Or a sannyäsi?
17 December 31, 2013
“Gopénäthäcärya,
Jagadänanda, Käçéçvara; Bhagavän Rämabhadräcärya, Çaìkara, Vakreçvara (who were
all brähmaëas) cooked for the Lord in their homes while others bought prasäda
for Him for (a price of) 2 kauòis.”
çréväsädi joto prabhura vipra
bhakta-gaëa; prabhuke bhikñä dite hoilo sobäkära mana
“(When the Lord took His first alms in Advaita
Prabhu’s house just after taking sannyäsa) Çréväsa and all the other brähmaëa-devotees
of the Lord wanted to invite the Lord for a meal.” (Caitanya Caritämåta Madhya
3. 168)
Caitanya Caritämåta (Ädi 7.45-46):
käçéte lekhak çüdra
candra-çekhara;
tär ghare rohilä prabhu
svatantra éçvara
tapana miçrera ghare bhikñä
nirvähaëa……
“When in Benares, the independent Lord
(Mahäprabhu) stayed in the house of the scribe Candraçekhara, who was a çüdra,
but He took His meals in the house of Tapan Miçra (who was a brähmaëa)…”
Also in Caitanya Bhägavata (Antya 9.118-119) it is
described that Mahäprabhu ate only from brähmaëas -
tathä bhikñä ämära, ye hoy
lakñeçvara; çuniyä brähmaëa sab cintita antara
vipragaëa stuti kori bolen gosäi; lakñera ki däy sahasreko käro näi
“I will invite invitations only from those who
have one lakh. Hearing this, the brähmaëas were all worried. The vipras
said ‘O Lord, what to speak of a lakh, we don’t have even a thousand.”
It is also very clear from all these quotations
that no one in Mahäprabhu’s entourage was initiated as a brähmaëa without
being born one first, otherwise the above distinction would not have been made.
Although Mahäprabhu played the pastime that a brähmaëa
and sannyäsé can be enlightened by a çüdra and a gåhastha like
Rämänanda Räya, who, in Caitanya Caritämåta Madhya lélä chapter 8, took Him to
the limit of Vaiñëava teachings as a çikñä guru (kibä vipra kibä
nyäsé çüdra kene noy ye kåñëa tattva vettä sei guru hoy), Mahäprabhu would
not accept meals from him. First He humbly submitted (Caitanya Caritämåta
Madhya 8.43):
ei jäni – kaöhin mora hådaya;
çodhite särvabhauma kohilen tomära milite
“I know that My heart is hard, hence Särvabhauma
told Me to meet you.”
But then He did follow the maryädä, or
external protocol - Who and what is a brähmaëa?
A Guru? Or a sannyäsi?
18 December 31, 2013
heno
käle vaidika eka vaiñëava brähmana; daëòavat kori koilo prabhura
nimantraëa
(Caitanya Caritämåta Madhya 8.45)
“At that time a Vedic Vaiñëava brähmaëa came
and invited Mahäprabhu.” This proves that external protocol and spiritual
appreciation are two separate worlds, which should not be mixed.
Çré Kåñëa proclaimed in Bhagavad-Gétä (3.21-24)
that He follows the rules, otherwise the worlds would go to ruin. Indeed, even
in the añöakäliya lélä Kåñëa followed the external protocol -
tuìgé subhadra janané
jananéti vijïä vijïäpitä vrajapayä pariveçanäya;
bhojyaà kramät pariviveça
sarohiëékä viprätmaja svadhava devara putrakebhyaù
(Govinda Lélämåta 20.45)
“Subhadra's mother Tuìgé was expert in etiquette
and serving, so on mother Yaçodä's request and with Rohiëé's help she served.
First she served the brähmaëas, then her husband, then her
brothers-in-law and then the boys (including Kåñëa).”
Kåñëa was the last to get prasäda. If
the Supreme Lord can be that humble, should not çüdras and mlecchas follow
suit by simply accepting the fact that they do not belong to the upper class?
kià punar brähmaëäù puëyä
bhaktä räjarñayas tathä
(Bhagavad Gétä 9.33)
“(If the women, vaiçyas and çüdras can
attain the Supreme Destination) What to speak then of the brähmaëas, the
virtuous and the saintly kings?”
One may challenge here: “But what about these
verses then, that are quoted in the Gosvämés’ books?”
çüdraà vä bhagavad bhaktaà
niñädaà çvapacaà tathä
vékñate jäti-sämänyät sa yäti
narakaà dhruvam
“A votary of the Supreme Lord may be born a çüdra,
or niñäda, nay, even a dog-eater, but anyone who views such a votary
according to pedigree or caste, most certainly percipitates his fall to the
infernal regions.” (Hari Bhakti Viläsa 10,119 ), or:
arcye viñëau çilä-dhér guruñu
nara-matir vaiñëave jäti-buddhiù….yasya vai näraké saù Who and
what is a brähmaëa? A Guru? Or a sannyäsi?
19 December 31, 2013
“Those
who consider the deity of Viñëu to be a mere stone, one’s superiors to be mere
human beings and the Vaiñëava to belong to a certain caste…..are surely hellish
persons.” (cited in Çréla Rüpa Gosvämé’s ‘Padyavalé’, 114)
To that the response is: These verses are
glorifications of the Vaiñëavas, that caution us not to treat lower born
Vaiñëavas with disdain or contempt and urge us to keep them in honour. As in
Çréla Rüpa Gosvämé’s ‘Upadeñämåta’ (5)- kåñëeti yasya giri taà manasädriyeta
dékñästi cet praëatibhih, “Mentally honour anyone who says Kåñëa, and bow
down if someone has received initiation”, and the following verse -
dåñöaiù svabhäva janitair
vapuñaç ca doñair
na präkåtatvam iha bhakta
janasya paçyet
gangämbhasaà na khalu budbuda
phena pankair
brahma-dravatvam apagacchati
néra-dharmaiù
“Though a devotee may have bad habits or a faulty
body he should not be seen (judged) in this mundane way, just as Ganges-water
is considered a divine substance though it may be covered with bubbles and
foam.”
However, in practical Vaiñëava-life we see that
distinction is being made. Mahäprabhu would not eat grains from non-brähmaëa
Vaiñëavas, including Rämänanda Räya (see pages 14-16), and Vaiñëavas were
mentioned with their caste-adjectives – certainly that wouldn’t make Çré
Caitanya Mahäprabhu a ‘hellish person’. Examples –
miçrera sakhä teìho prabhura
pürva däsa
vaidya-jäti, likhana-våtti, väränasé-väsa
(Caitanya Caritämåta Madhya 17.92)
“Candraçekhara was a friend of Tapan Miçra and a
former servant of the Lord. He was of a Vaidya-caste. His profession was
writing and he lived in Benares.”
heno käle äilo vaiñëava
'kåñëadäsa' näma
räjapüta-jäti,----gåhastha, yamunä-päre gräma
(Caitanya Caritämåta Madhya 18.82)
“Just then a Vaiñëava arrived named Kåñëadäs. He
was of the räjapüt-caste, a householder who lived in a village on
the other bank of the Yamunä.”
çüdra viñayé-jïäne upekñä nä koribe
ämära vacane täìre avaçya
milibe
(Caitanya Caritämåta Madhya 7.63) Who and what is a brähmaëa? A Guru? Or a sannyäsi?
20 December 31, 2013
"Please
do not neglect him, thinking he belongs to a çüdra family engaged in
material activities. It is my request that You meet him without fail."
yähäì vipra nähi tähäì 'çüdra-mahäjana'
äsi' sabe bhaööäcärye kore
nimantraëa
(Caitanya Caritämåta Madhya 17.60)
“Wherever there were no brähmaëas - nonetheless,
great çüdra saints came and extended invitations to Balabhadra
Bhaööäcärya.”
Çré Caitanya Mahäprabhu had His Raghunäthas – one
was Raghunätha Vaidya, one was Raghunäth Bhaööa and one was Raghunäth Däs - all
named according to jäti.
Even Nityänanda Prabhu, who is considered most
liberal, had himself served by brähmaëas during the chipped rice
festival in Pänihäti –
ära tina kuëòikäya avaçeña
chilo; gräse-gräse kari’ vipra saba bhakte dilo
puñpa-mälä vipra äni’
prabhu-gale dilo; candana äniyä prabhura sarväìge lepilo
“There was food remaining in the three other big
pots of Lord Nityänanda, and a brähmaëa distributed it to all the
devotees, giving a morsel to each. Then a brähmaëa brought a
flower garland, placed the garland on Nityänanda Prabhu’s neck and smeared sandalwood
pulp all over His body.” (Caitanya Caritämåta Antya 6.95-96).
All members of Çré Caitanya Mahäprabhu’s entourage
followed the social protocol. Çré Gadädhara Paëòit was once forced by
Vallabha Bhaööa to hear his devotional explanations (bhaööa jäy, tabu poòe
kori balätkär, Caitanya Caritämåta Antya 7.96), although no one in Puré
would hear them because they had already been rejected by Mahäprabhu (prabhur
upekñäy sab néläcaler jan; bhaööera vyäkhyän kichu nä kore çravaë, 7. 91).
Thus Gadädhara ended up in a dilemma (sankaöe poòilo paëòit, koroye saàçoy,
7.95). Nevertheless, because Vallabha Bhaööa was of a high birth Gadädhara
did not forbid him to speak his rejected theories (äbhijätye paëòit
korite näre niñedhan, 7.97). He followed the protocol, though he risked
scorn by his fellow Mahäprabhu-followers because of it, and actually received
it too (tathäpi prabhur gaë kore praëaya roña, 7.99).
Çréla Raghunätha däsa Gosvämé
is the rägänugä äcärya pur sang, but he too
kept the protocol, however transcendental rägänugä bhakti is to the
external world and even to compulsory devotion (vidhi bhakti). Though in
the second verse of his Manaù Çikñä (teachings to the mind) he warned na
dharmaà nädharmaà çrutigaëa niruktaà kila kuru “Do not engage in either
religious or irreligious activities mentioned in the Vedas” and thus showed
himself as being aloof from the world, still in the opening verse, yes even in
the Who and what is a brähmaëa? A Guru? Or a sannyäsi?
21 December 31, 2013
opening
line of Manaù Çikñä he said: gurau goñöhe goñöhälayiñu su-jane bhü-sura
gaëe “Oh mind, worship the Guru, Vraja-bhümi, the Vrajabäsés, the
saints and the brähmaëas.”
In short, there is the internal world of bhakti
and there is the external world of maryädä (respect, protocol). The
12th Canto of
the Bhägavata predicts a decay of Vedic society and the 6 Gosvämés have read
the Bhägavata very well and commented upon it as well. They were therefore
aware of what was going to happen later on in Kali yuga and could have created
an artificial new caste system if they had wanted to, or, as they are puppets
in Mahäprabhu’s hands, if Çréman Mahäprabhu had wanted to. But they did not do
that and later äcäryas should respect that and not speak before their
turn.
Who or what is a Guru?
Q: Can a non-Hindu become a
Guru in this life?
A: Non-Indian Vaiñëava Gurus are falling down from Vedic and
Vaiñëava principles much more often than their Indian counterparts do. The
Vaiñëava scriptures show us why. Proponents of casteless Gurus quote this verse
from Caitanya Caritämåta (Madhya 8,128):
kibä vipra kibä nyäsé çüdra
kene noy; yei kåñëa tattva vettä – sei guru hoy
“Whether someone is a brähmaëa, a sannyäsé
or even a çüdra – whoever knows the thruth about Kåñëa is a Guru.”
However, the context in which this verse was
spoken is as follows: Although Himself a brähmaëa and a sannyäsé, Caitanya
Mahäprabhu considered the çüdra and gåhastha Rämänanda Räya to be
His çikñä guru, since He was on the receiving end of all the
enlightenment passed on by Rämänanda Räya. In the preceding verses Caitanya
Mahäprabhu said about His personal äçrama-status:
mäyävädé ämi to sannyäsé;
bhakti tattva nähi jäni mäyäväde bhäsi
särvabhauma saìge mora mon
nirmala hoilo; kåñëa bhakti tattva koho, tähäre puchilo
tiho kohe ämi nähi jäni kåñëa
kothä; sabe rämänanda jäne; tiho nähi ethä
tomära öhäi äiläm tomära
mahimä çuniyä; tumi more stuti koro sannyäsé jäniyä
“I am a mäyävädé sannyäsé, hence I don’t
know about bhakti. I was purified in Särvabhauma’s company, so I asked
him: ‘Tell Me the truth about devotion to Kåñëa.” He (Särvabhauma, although he
was a brähmaëa) said: “I don’t know about Kåñëa. Rämänanda knows all,
but he is not here.” So I have come here after hearing of your greatness, but
you praise Me because I am a sannyäsé.” (Caitanya Caritämåta Madhya
8.124-127)
And then Mahäprabhu speaks the famous
verse, in this context – kibä vipra kibä nyäsi çüdra kene noy; yei
kåñëa tattva vettä sei guru hoy - Rämänanda Räya never gave Who and what is a brähmaëa? A Guru? Or a sannyäsi?
22 December 31, 2013
dékñä
to Mahäprabhu. The context of this verse is a
personal one, and there is no question here of dékñä. The word guru in
this verse means çikñä guru. The words yei kåñëa tattva vettä (“Whoever
knows the truth about Kåñëa”) clearly show that this verse refers to the
qualification of a çikñä guru. After the famous kibä vipra-verse
Mahäprabhu continues:
sannyäsé boliyä more nä koro
vaïcana; kåñëa rädhä tattva kohi’ pürëa koro man
“Don’t deprive Me because I am a sannyäsé;
fulfil My desire my speaking of Kåñëa and Rädhä.”
Indeed, throughout the lengthy conversation
between Rämänanda Räya and Çré Caitanya Mahäprabhu there is no mentioning of dékñä
anywhere!
Many westerners, who are not acquainted with Vedic
culture, think that this idea of ‘brähmaëa by quality alone’ has always
been the Vedic norm, but, in his comment on Caitanya Caritämåta Madhya 8.128,
A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami himself confirms that it was introduced by
Bhaktisiddhänta Saraswati:
“Çréla Bhaktisiddhänta
Sarasvaté Öhäkura therefore introduced the sacred thread ceremony for all
Vaiñëavas according to the rules and regulations.”
In the Haribhakti Viläsa (chapter 1), Çréla
Sanätana Gosvämé and Gopäla Bhaööa Gosvämé state that the first choice of a
qualified guru should be a born brähmaëa — vipraà pradhvasta käma (1.29)
avadätänvayaù çuddhaù svocitäcära tatparaù (1.32) “He must be from a
spotless dynasty and dedicated to proper conduct.” brähmaëaù sarvakälajïa (1.36).
varëottame'tha ca gurau (1.37) These traits are not secondary requirements
of a Guru. They are listed under the heading viçeñataù çré guror lakñaëa – ‘Special
characteristics of Çré Guru’. Çréla Sanätana Gosvämé’s commentary on Haribhakti
Viläsa 1.32 –
avadätaù çuddhaù pätityädi
doña rahito’nvayo vaàço yasya sad vaàça jäta ityartha. çuddhaù svayam api
pätityädi doña rahitaù.
“The word avadäta means that his family is
free from the faults of being fallen. That means he comes from a good family.
The word çuddhaù means that he himself is also not fallen.”
Monier Williams’ Sanskrit dictionary translates patita
as: “fallen, dropped, descended, alighted, fallen upon or from, fallen
(morally), wicked, degraded, out-caste…”
In the Brahma Vaivarta Puräëa (Kåñëa Janma Khaëòa
83.42) it is also said:
jäti hénäd guror mantraù
gåhnéyän na kadäcana
"Never take mantra from a casteless guru."
Who and what is a brähmaëa? A Guru? Or a sannyäsi?
23 December 31, 2013
If a
qualified brähmaëa cannot be found, a qualified kñatriya must be
sought, and so on downwards:
tad abhäväd dvija çreñöha
çäntätmä bhagavanmayaù
bhävitätmä ca sarvajïaù
çästrajïaù sat kriyäparaù
siddhi traya samäyukta
äcäryatve’bhiñecitaù.
kñatra viö çüdra jäténäà
kñatriyo’nugrahekñamaù
kñatriyasyäpi ca guror
abhäväd édåço yadi
vaiçyaù syät tena käryaçca
dvaye nityam anugrahaù
sajätéyena çüdrena tädåçena
mahämate
anugrahäbhiñekau ca käryau
çüdrasya sarvadä
“In the absence of a qualified brähmaëa Guru,
one can take a kñatriya Guru, who is filled with God consciousness,
peaceful, knows all about the dékñä ritual, knows scripture, is
conversant with all rites, has the three siddhis (perfection in practise
of mantra, worship of the Guru and the demigods, attained through practises
like puraçcaraëa). Such a kñatriya-Guru can give dékñä to
his fellow kñatriyas as well as to vaiçyas and çüdras.
Similarly çüdras can always give dékñä to their fellow çüdras.”
(Haribhakti Viläsa 1.47)
Furthermore, these verses of Haribhakti Viläsa say
that one should not give pratiloma dékñä, viz. a low caste Guru giving dékñä
to a high caste disciple — pratilomyaà na dékñayet (1.52). Çréla
Narottama Däs Öhäkura was an exceptional case - he gave dékñä to high
caste persons, but at the end he rose from the dead and his body melted like
milk into the Gaìgä. This is not something that every non-brähmaëa that
gives dékñä to brähmaëas can imitate.
There has never been a
prohibition by the Vaiñëava Äcäryas or the scriptures to calling householder-äcäryas
'Gosvämé'.
On the contrary, Çré Narottama Öhäkura Mahäçaya
sang: doyä koro sétäpati, advaita gosäi, addressing the
householder-Guru, the husband of Sétä, Advaita Prabhu as gosäi. Advaita
is also repeatedly called gosvämé in Kavi Karëapüra's 'Caitanya
Candrodaya Näöakam', and in Gaura Gaëoddeça Dépikä (76) he writes: sa
evädvaita gosvämé caitanyäbhinna vigrahaù “He, Advaita Gosvämé, is
non-different from Lord Caitanya.” To see the ‘caste-‘ Gosvämés as different
from the Lords - Nityänanda and Advaita - that they directly descend from in
family line is an offence to Nityänanda and Advaita, for the Vedas teach us ätmä
vai jäyate putraù — "So father, so son", or: "The child is
the image of the father." (CC. Madhya 12.56) Lord Balaräma said in Çrémad
Bhägavata (10.78.36): ätma vai putra utpanna iti vedänuçäsanam; tasmäd asya
bhaved vaktä “O worshipable sages, the Vedas declare that one’s own self is
reborn as the son, therefore let Romaharñaëa’s son recite the Puräëas to you!” pituù
putro yena jäta sa eva saù (Ç.B. 9.20.21): “The son belongs to the father.
Indeed, the son is the father.”
Staying with family-succession, it is not true
that one can/should not be initiated by one's parents: Hemalatä Öhäkuräëé, guru
of Yadunandana Öhäkura, took initiation from her father Çréniväsäcärya,
Kåñëa Miçra took initiation from his mother Sétä-devé and Vérabhadra Who and what is a brähmaëa? A Guru? Or a sannyäsi?
24 December 31, 2013
Prabhu
took intiation from his co-mother Jähnavä-devé. Vérabhadra was a son of
Nityänanda Prabhu, but according to 'Advaita Prakäça' he went to Advaita Prabhu
for dékñä. Advaita Prabhu, however, sent him back to his own family to
take dékñä there, which confirms that it was the wish of Nityänanda and
Advaita Prabhu that these family-guru paramparäs would be created.
Family gurus ('caste Gosvamés') are
sometimes rejected by pointing at Çré Jéva Gosvämé's Bhakti Sandarbha (210) tad
etat paramärtha gurväçrayo vyavahärika gurvädi parityägenäpi kartavyam "One
should give up a mundane guru and take a spiritual guru", but
this 'mundane guru' refers to a marriage-priest, village elder or
parent, not to a family guru, for in Haribhakti Viläsa (4.141) the
Brahma Vaivarta Puräëa is quoted:
upadeñöäram ämnäyägataà
pariharanti ye
tän måtän api kravyädäù
kåtaghnän nopabhuïjate
"Even the vultures will not eat the dead
corpse of the ungrateful one who abandons the ämnäyägataà guru."
In his commentary to this verse Çréla Sanätana
Gosvämé writes: ämnäyägataà kula kramäyätaà— This ämnäyägata guru means
a guru who has come in a family succession." For example, Çré
Raghunätha däsa Gosvämé was initiated by the family-guru Yadunandana
Äcärya, but he did not leave him to take dékñä from, for example, Çré
Rüpa Gosvämé. On the contrary, in Mukta Caritra [4] he acknowledged that he had
gotten everything from his family Guru Yadunandana Äcärya -
näma çreñöhaà manum api
çacé-putram atra svarüpaà
rüpaà tasyägrajam uru puréà
mäthuréà goñöha-bäöém
rädhäkuëòaà girivaram aho
rädhikä mädhaväçäà
präpto yasya prathita kåpayä
çré guruà taà nato'smi
“I bow down to my blessed Çré Guru (Yadunandana Äcärya), by
whose grace I have received the greatest name in existence, the holy name of
Kåñëa, the 18-syllable Gopäla-mantra, Çré Caitanya Mahäprabhu, the son
of Mother Çacé, Svarüpa Dämodara, Rüpa Gosvämé, his elder brother Sanätana
Gosvämé, the great city of Mathurä, the pastures of Vraja, Rädhäkuëòa, the best
of mountains Govardhana, and the hope of attaining Rädhikä and Mädhava.....”
With ‘Çré Guru’ he could not have meant anyone
else but Yadunandanäcärya, for he lists all his other possible ‘gurus’
like Mahäprabhu, Svarüpa Dämodara and Rüpa Gosvämé as his great gifts.
Who or what is a sannyäsé?
Çréla Viçvanätha Cakravartépäda comments on the
famous Bhagavad Gétä verse sarva dharmän parityajya (18.66), refuting
Çankaräcärya’s explanation that ‘giving up all dharma’ means that Arjuna
should have taken Sannyäsa: parityajya sannyasyeti na vyäkhyeyam Who and what is a brähmaëa? A Guru? Or a sannyäsi?
25 December 31, 2013
arjunasya
kñatriyatvena sannyäsänadhikärän… ”Completely giving up dharma cannot mean sannyäsa for
Arjuna, for as a kñatriya he had no right to take sannyäsa.”
This confirms the Vedic teaching that only brähmanas
are eligible for sannyäsa, what to speak of çüdras or mlecchas?
Çrémad
Bhägavata (11.17.38) clearly says that sannyäsa is only for brähmaëas
- pravrajed vä dvijottamaù.
Preaching is not a ground to give sannyäsa -
a vow of lifelong celibacy - to young westerners. The western audience is
anyway not impressed nor does it respect saffron cloth, like Indians. They
simply know nothing about it! Indeed, all devotees who opened the temples in
America and Europe were white-clad householders!
Who or what is a spouse?
Due to air travel everyone mixes nowadays -
Africans marry with Eskimos, Latinos with Chinese and Brahmins with Russians.
Spiritual oneness and equality is transported down to the physical plane, with
the slogan ‘we are all spirit souls anyway’. If we are all only spirit souls,
with no subtle cultural coverings at all, then - 1) Why marry at all, because
we are not at all this body (why even dress then?) 2) Why not marry a fly or a
pig? They are also spirit souls. Despite spiritual equality there are huge
cultural and economic differences between all the peoples that become Vaiñëavas
- the result of genetically mixing them up is confused children who are part of
neither parents’ ethnicity or culture. This is called varëa saìkara, or
a mixed race, in Bhagavad Gétä (1.41-43). Spouses from poor countries
(especially Indian men) exploit their rich spouses (usually naive gullible
western girls). After they flattered them into sending them a plane ticket to
the rich west they call them prostitutes and abandon them to start businesses
in the west. For material relationships one must follow material rules. Çrémad
Bhägavata says: (11.17.39) gåhärthé sadåçéà bhäryäm „A brahmacäré who
wants to marry should seek a bride like him.” sadåçéà (like him) is
glossed by Çrédhara Swämé as savarëa, ‘of the same caste’. A marriage
CAN be spiritual, as a side effect, but it is never the root cause of marriage.
“I want sex, but only with a devotee girl/boy.” But the first motive is sex,
not bhakti.
About respect in general
From Caitanya Caritämåta (Antya 4. 135-169) we
learn that junior devotees should not instruct senior devotees. In this
narration we see that Jagadänanda Paëòit advised Sanätana Gosvämé to go to
Våndävana, but when Mahäprabhu heard that he was very angry, because
Jagadänanda Paëòita was junior to Sanätana not just vyavahäre, materially,
by being younger in age, but also paramärthe, spiritually, because
Sanätana Gosvämé was like his Guru (Caitanya Caritämåta Antya 4.159, vyavahäre
paramärthe tumi - tära guru tulya). Mahäprabhu thus set the standard for
devotees of all time to act according to maryädä, or protocol. He will
be very angry when junior devotees instruct senior ones - Who and what is a brähmaëa? A Guru? Or a sannyäsi?
26 December 31, 2013
maryädä
laìghana ämi sahite nä päri (Caitanya
Caritämåta Antya 4.166) "I cannot tolerate breach of the protocol."
One should note, however, that if a devotee senior
in age is inferior in spiritual advancement one need not heed the instructions
of such a senior devotee-by-age-only. After all, Mahaprabhu said of Sanatana
Gosvami:
kähä tumi - prämäëika, çästre
pravéëa; kähä jagä - kälikära baöuyä navéna
(Caitanya Caritämåta Antya 4.167) "Where are
you, expert in the scriptures and a great authority, and where is Jagadänanda
in comparison, a new student?" Sanätana Gosvämé was not just superior in
age.…….
Giving a 'brähmaëa’-thread is meant to give respect
to aspirants and flatter them into becoming your follower. It does not change
the quality of your semen into brähmaëa-semen.
Without humility one cannot enter into the kingdom
of God, and Vaiñëava leaders that encourage their followers in thinking that
they are equal to or even higher than brähmaëas thus throw up serious
barriers for them. Çréman Mahäprabhu kindly gave the keys to the kingdom of God
with this formula:
tåëäd api sunécena taror iva
sahiñëunä
amänina mänadena kértanéya
sadä hariù
“Lower than a blade of grass, more tolerant than a
tree.
Expecting no honour for yourself, always giving
honour to others.
In this way Hari is always to be glorified.”
maryädä pälana, or observing the protocol, is the way to get there.
No comments:
Post a Comment