Harimedia Forum

Hariji,

What are your thoughts on the social issues, as they pertain to spiritualists? Should we try to build some kind of social structures among ourselves, or simply function within the existing fabric of materialists?

I think at one time this was a topic very dear to you, and you had a lot of interesting ideas.

What are your thoughts on the social issues, as they pertain to spiritualists? Should we try to build some kind of social structures among ourselves, or simply function within the existing fabric of materialists?

I think at one time this was a topic very dear to you, and you had a lot of interesting ideas.

Kulaji,

Still is an important topic to me and always will be as my academic qualifications and main interest were always in social sciences, more specifically social psychology.

Varnasrama has good elements in it, but implementing it is far too difficult at present. If even ISKCON could not and indeed, intensely refused to experiment with varnasrama you can be sure it has no chance of reviving until there are some really significant changes in society.

Aside from this already existing social structure which unfortunately carries with it unfavorable impressions and prejudices from most persons (especially in India), there are things that one can do to create a favorable social atmosphere.

1) Be a good person who is always endeavoring to do the right thing and evolve.
2) Avoid judging and condemning yourself and all others.
3) Be fair and always consider that there is only one of us, meaning, the affects received by one effect all in some way or other.
4) Expand that principle in your economic dealings and make decisions that are good for you, good for others, good for the environment, and good for the world.
5) Be charitable and help others in need.
6) Always desire to be of service according to your capacities.
7) Love yourself and love others.
Do not have false expectations and demands on yourself and others.
9) Have a stable family situation.
10) Be Non-Violent.

And so on...

If you live like this, then find others who agree with living like this. They do not need to believe in the same God or philosophy for society can run nicely if all are good people who follow the principles of personal integrity and respect of life.

You can then either:

1) Move all together in the same physical location (a lot of work and risky nowadays)
-- or;
2) Associate in ways that do not demand physical proximity, such as by creating events, projects, social gatherings, and so on, where you can essentially have a community without the hassle of working out the practical details.

Frankly speaking, I like the second. I live here in this town and have no contact with the people around me other than to wave to them and say hi and speak with them when we meet on the street or at community social functions (one or two a year). I associate through this web site, through my Saturday Broadcast, or when I go to Alachua, or when I meet people that either invite me to their place or who come here, or when we go to concerts together, or when we do something together. It makes much more sense.

Even a seemingly perfect society or situation can be distorted and even destroyed by economic entanglements. Friends can become enemies and familes can fall apart. When there are social, religious, or community restrictions placed on people which prevent them from doing something they should be doing for their own personal or familial benefit, it creates ruptures in their lives which affect the whole community. Fixing these broken elements is very hard and takes enormous effort. Better not to be bound to each other with any other force than mutual love, respect, or agreement to associate. There must always be freedom.

Normal society functions, for better or worse, in a structured manner and already has enough restrictions and rules for one lifetime. To create within it another subset of these rules makes life too complex unless you create another independent society with its own rules, but then you duplicate all the same mistakes and waste time.

Any endeavor to create a better society will always depend on the idealism and practicality of those who do it. Telling someone what or how to do it is not ultimately effective. But since you asked, I gave a brief reply. After all, one could write a book about it.

thank you for your thoughtful reply. yes, it is important to be realistic and practical when it comes to such big issues, so the points you outlined for "here and now" are completely valid.

yet, like you said: "Any endeavor to create a better society will always depend on the idealism and practicality of those who do it." One thing that inspired me over the years was the vision of a better society implemented through the change in consciousness.

In your analysis you said: "Varnasrama has good elements in it, but implementing it is far too difficult at present. If even ISKCON could not and indeed, intensely refused to experiment with varnasrama you can be sure it has no chance of reviving until there are some really significant changes in society. "

Perhaps this intense refusal to experiment with varnashrama had more to do with the lack of desire for it's implementation, than actual degree of difficulty?

I think there was simply no desire for sannyasis to act as renounced spiritualists, or for brahmanas to be unconcerned with wealth and position. In my opinion, the practical application of such social changes should be the domain of both brahmanas and kshatriyas. Brahmanas as a group are often too impractical to implement required changes, and keep forgetting that the Vedic system was not a theocracy...

For ISKCON the problem has always been ignorance. They think that varnashrama has to do with creating a society which is more or less an extension of ISKCON. ISKCON is a yoga ashrama (to one degree or another) and yoga ashramas have traditionally been places with strict rules and regulations meant to create an atmosphere devoid of anything that wasn't concerned with sadhana of one type or another.

Varnashrama is a totally different animal. It's really nothing more then (when you strip all of the variables away) a community of people who all in some way or another contribute to group spiritual/social activities.

The classifications of the 4 varnas are meant to give people an idea of what would be considered ethical social contributions that they can partake in. For instance a person who lives the life of a vaisya, they are given general advice of what they can do that would be helpful for the community. They are advised to use their wealth to aid the community. The Ksatriya is advised to use his talents to aid the community, and so on. The whole idea is that people are assured that they can live their lives and work and live doing what comes naturally, and at the same time they can feel like they are doing something worthy, spiritually speaking, with their lives.

The purpose is to create a social situation which would be something like what we see or used to see with ISKCON in the largest comunities, except without the authoritarian command structure, the uber judgementalism, rules and regulations, and without ISKCON itself being the source and controller of all the social and spiritual events.

Instead what would be ideal is that there is no leader, there is no authority, people give or engage their talents and wealth in the amount they choose. They follow whatever rules or regulations they see fit to follow, no one is judged. I know some people may say that in the vedic system there was some kind of authority figure i.e. a king or brahmana or guru who enforced rules, laws, etc. But that was a situation where all of society was under the rule of a king, or brahmanas or gurus. If you are going to create an entire society then there has to be some kind of authority in order to keep the peace etc.

But that kind of varnashrama is not something we need consider. For ourselves we are talking about social communties, not governmental entities ruling over a country. We can dispense with authority figures because they are only of necessity when you are actually ruling over a country, which we will not be doing.

For us varnashrama should only be about social and spiritual benefits. The benefit of living in a community of people who give of their time and energy to the spiritual and social activities of the community, rather then people living their lives without that.

As of now when it comes to vaisnavas of the ISKCON or Ex-ISKCON or of the assorted Gaudiya affiliations, when people get tired or turned off from participating within those communities, they simply leave and go live their lives more or less devoid of any type of communal vaisnava spiritual/social activity.

The reason they leave those scenes completely is because those communities are not based on being varnashrama social communities, they are based on being yoga ashramas, yet they try and fill the role of the varnashrama society. Of course they are total failures at that. In those communities they have very strict standards of behavior, strict rules and regulations, people are judged as fit or unfit for participation. They have very strict codes of social interactions between the sexes as well. Yet they try to position themselves as viable social communities with the ability to be the social centers of peoples lives.

Imagine if you were going to high school and instead of you hanging out with your friends and family after school and on weekends and during summer break, instead the school teachers and school administration tried to dominate and rule over your entire life all of the time. When you went home after a day at school you had a teacher there as well, and you had to raise your hand to speak, you had to get a hall pass to leave your seat. You couldn't go to your friends house unless you had a hall pass, and then you and your friends were watched over and given instructions by a teacher.

That is what the situation is like in the current ISKCON type communities. The temple social situation is a hierarchical authoritarian command structure which attempts to be all things to all people. In my experience whenever I hear vaisnavas writing or speaking about varnashrama, they always seem to be using the ISKCON and Gaudiya Math yoga ashrama social milieu as a template for imagining their paradigm of a varnashrama society. They always seem to have ideas about authorities telling people what to do and how to do it. They always seem to have ideas about enforcing rules and regulations. Essentially they just envision an expanded version of ISKCON. Which is the exact opposite of what would be needed for a modern day varnashrama community to be successful.

People need to get it out of their heads that varnashrama is all about enforcing lifestyles on people, enforcing occupations on people, enforcing anything on people. It's sole purpose is to create a social situation where people can have access to spiritual acitivites and be able to socialize with people who are also into the same spiritual activities. A community where people are free to contribute as much or as little as they feel comfortable doing. It is meant to be a place where people are able to feel like they are in heaven.

Recently something Bhaktivinoda wrote on varnashrama has been posted on a bunch of blogs and forums. I read it. From my understanding it is of little value to our day and age. He was writing about changes that could be made in rural India in the mid to late 19th century. The social milieu he was writing about has no relevance outside of Indian rural life of 100 years ago. The thing about varnashrama is that it is not supposed to be a static lawbook of some type. Rather it is a dynamic principle in organizing communties. It's primary function is to enable a social community to flourish, materially and spiritually. The economics is always a variable and the implementation is always a variable, the one thing that does not change is the spiritual aspect. i.e Kirtan, festivals, etc.

http://varnashrama-maui.com

gangster_of_love wrote:The thing about varnashrama is that it is not supposed to be a static lawbook of some type. Rather it is a dynamic principle in organizing communties. It's primary function is to enable a social community to flourish, materially and spiritually. The economics is always a variable and the implementation is always a variable, the one thing that does not change is the spiritual aspect. i.e Kirtan, festivals, etc.

I like that approach, and have a very similar understanding.

Basically, you take human nature as is, and try to make the best use of people's natural tendencies for the benefit of the entire society. In the proces, the individuals gradually transcend their material qualities, while the community flourishes.

Yet, I do not see it in an idyllic way, because some divisions need to be made, and modern people are very allergic to that. Reflecting on the practicalities, I think we need to identify real brahmanas and real kshatriyas first, in order to get things going. There is probably no need to place labels on everybody at this time, just on the people in the leadership roles. Vaishya and sudra type people simply cannot lead. The spiritual leadership (and only spiritual leadership) should be placed in the hands of true brahminical people, and material leadership (and only material leadership) should be entrusted to the kshatriya types. Otherwise, no amount of lovey dovey hippie talk can make one bit of difference...

Hi Kula ji

I would have to disagree with you about the need in identifying people as belonging to a certain varna. What value or use does that have? A varnashrama community cannot function in the modern age like a mini-state unto itself. There cannot be any command structure. It cannot work because it is not how healthy communties thrive. Look at ISKCON, we see there an authoritarian command structure following a militaristic template for community activity. You have your leaders and you have your followers. The roles are very clearly defined. It is a total failure in trying to create communities.

In the traditional Bhakti Yoga ashrama culture the ISKCON style communities did not exist. The ashrama was a place where people living outside the temple could come and utilize the ashrama for sadhu sangha and particiption in ashrama/temple activities. They would also contribute financially to the ashrama. They were not under the command structure of the temple. People did not have to watch what they said to others in fear of being "excommunicated". The ashrama was a church, nothing more.

The people who lived under the temple command structure were people who had decided to renounce the life they had been living in order to devote themselves full time to Bhakti activities. They were not under the command structure of some type of organization which attempted to control their every move and word for the benefit of the leaders. It was not a cult seeking to enrich itself by utilizing the full time devotees as a slave labor force. It was a place of spiritual cultivation, nothing more.

Lets say this paradigm was found all over India in small towns. There would be a main temple/ashrama where the full time devotees would live and spend their time in temple activities. The rest of the town would live their lives and "go to church". They would throw festivals, gather among themselves or at the temple for spiritual acitivities, and life would go on. There would be no authority figure trying to figure out which varna a person was, there would be no authority figure trying to enforce anything on the people.

They would have some authority figures because they were independent towns with a need for some kind of judicial system, police, etc. But beyond that there were no authorities that people were forced to accept. There may have been people who were respected as spiritual authorities, but that was something that people chose to do. They were not told that "this person is a brahmana and therefore you need to listen to him". Thats not how it works. Brahmanas are given respect as spiritual authorities because they command respect, people respect them because they earn peoples respect. But at no time are there any types of rules and regulations which enforce any type of behavior on the people. Except of course as long as their actions are legally acceptable i.e no theft, no rape, no violence etc.

That lifestyle I just described is not some "lovey dovey hippie talk", it is common sense.

You wrote

Yet, I do not see it in an idyllic way, because some divisions need to be made, and modern people are very allergic to that. Reflecting on the practicalities, I think we need to identify real brahmanas and real kshatriyas first, in order to get things going. There is probably no need to place labels on everybody at this time, just on the people in the leadership roles. Vaishya and sudra type people simply cannot lead. The spiritual leadership (and only spiritual leadership) should be placed in the hands of true brahminical people, and material leadership (and only material leadership) should be entrusted to the kshatriya types.

This authoritarian tendency is what I wrote about in my first post. You said:
"some divisions need to be made"
Why? Says who?
You said:
"I think we need to identify real brahmanas and real kshatriyas first,in order to get things going."
Why? Says who?
You said:
"Vaishya and sudra type people simply cannot lead."
Lead what?
You said:
"The spiritual leadership (and only spiritual leadership) should be placed in the hands of true brahminical people"
And who will be doing the "placing"? And where or how will they be "placed" into positions of "spiritual leadership"? This idea of the necessity of a command structure that everyone must accept is not going to work, it is not the traditional way. People earn respect as spiritual authority, people give their respect or not, freely, of their own choosing based upon their own conscience. No one is forced onto people as the "spiritual authority"

You said:
"and material leadership (and only material leadership) should be entrusted to the kshatriya types."
And who will be the ones to tell people that so and so is to be their leader? A Ksatriyas role in a community where there is not an independent legal system, which is the only practical community worthy of discussion for ourselves, is pretty limited. The traditional role of the ksatriya was in law enforcement and matters of state or local governing. In todays world that role is pretty much not going to be a factor in any attempt to create a varnashrama community. The matters of law enforcement and governing are already being performed, whether you like or not, by the civil authorities of the worlds various countries. So unless you plan to start your own country, the role of a ksatriya is more or less moot.

So my point is that varnashrama can only succeed in this day and age if we take the dynamic approach. We shouldn't take the rigid dogmatic approach where we feel that we have to create a mini replica of an entire vedic country and then enforce that on people if they wish to take part. That is what ISKCON tries to do, and it is a splendid failure.

What is the purpose of varnashrama?

It's purpose is to create a community of people who want to associate with others who share the same desire i.e to take part in communal spiritual acitivities. That is the essence and that is the foundation which everything else revolves around. Everything else can be adjusted for time, place and circumstance. The idea behind dividing up society into 4 varnas is not about enforcing rules or regulations or ideologies on people, rather the whole idea is about hearing from sastra about what would be considered a wise choice of action for yourself, spiritually speaking. Varnashrama is not meant to be a draconian militaristic authoritarian social and civil milieu. It is meant to be helpful for people in their attempt to find spiritual meaning and association in their lives. It is not meant to be used for people seeking power as a dogmatic stick which they can then use to beat people into submission with.

gangster_of_love wrote: I would have to disagree with you about the need in identifying people as belonging to a certain varna. What value or use does that have?

If you think like that, than please stop using the term varnashrama when you describe your social concepts, because it is very misleading. Varna divisions are REAL, and they DO exist even now. Are asramas irrelevant as well in your concepts? are we going back to "free love" as well? deja vu all over again...

gangster_of_love wrote:unless you plan to start your own country, the role of a ksatriya is more or less moot.

have you ever heard of administration and management? oh, sorry... I forgot... everyone will just "groove" in that new society


Anyway.... I have a feeling that you are Shivaji, and we talked before about these things...

Kula-pavana wrote:

gangster_of_love wrote: I would have to disagree with you about the need in identifying people as belonging to a certain varna. What value or use does that have?

If you think like that, than please stop using the term varnashrama when you describe your social concepts, because it is very misleading. Varna divisions are REAL, and they DO exist even now. Are asramas irrelevant as well in your concepts? are we going back to "free love" as well? deja vu all over again...

No need to take what I write as a personal rebuke, it's not meant that way. So chillax cuz.

By your attitude (the free luv comment) I can see that you think in an authoritarian way. Are you saying that promiscuous people should be shunned or treated badly or disallowed in a varnashrama community? I don't think it's your fault that you tend to see varnashrama in a dramatic anti-enjoying spirit, that is the rule rather then the exception for people who have received their education in ISKCON or the Gaudiya Math. They teach a very renunciative mood, they belittle people who do not share that mood. That mood rubs off on almost everyone coming out of those institutions. That mood is A-Okay for life in a yoga ashrama. But for a varnashrama community that mood will bring nothing but tension. Judgementalism shoud be left at the door.

Tolerance is the key to harmonius social interactions among vaisnavas. Generally speaking vaisnavas are very proud people. They get easily offended if you take the attitude you have taken with me in a social situation, even if they do not follow any kind of strict sadhana, or follow regulative principles, they are still very proud. So any kind of contemptuous attitude towards them because of their lifestyle choices will greatly offend them and they will seek to avoid you.

The varnashrama community cannot work unless everyone takes the mood of being tolerant of perceived faults in others. My experience with the "fringie" community (southern california, hawaii) is that the vast majority of the vaisnavas are not into the ISKCON or Gaudiya Math renunciative demagogic mood. For the most part they are enjoyers and few follow more then 2 regulative principles (no meat, no gambling). If a varnashrama community is to be harrmonius and a happy place where vaisnavas interact gracefully with each other, love each other, then there can be no ISKCON Gaudiya Math intolerance, that is for the yoga ashrama, best leave it there.

Back to the point at hand. I had asked what use or value is there in an attempt to identify a persons varna. I didn't say that the varna does not exist. A person will naturally be attracted to his comfort zone, that would be his or her varna. So if you can, please tell us why you think it is a requirement to identify a persons varna, what makes that necessary?

gangster_of_love wrote:unless you plan to start your own country, the role of a ksatriya is more or less moot.

have you ever heard of administration and management? oh, sorry... I forgot... everyone will just "groove" in that new society

Administer what? Manage what? I'm not being facetious, I'm just wondering what you are refering to. In my idea of a practical varnashrama community, people will manage their own property and finances, people will administer their own lives. What exactly do you see as a ksatriya role in a community where there is nothing to manage or administer outside of people's own businesses, or a temple?

In vedic society because the ksatriyas are naturally adept at law enforcement, military, and governing, those would be the jobs they would be attracted to. For a varnashrama community which exists in a country that takes care of those things, then none of those roles are necessary for the varnashrama community. Imagine a neighborhood in an american county. The neighborhood is populated by vaisnavas. There is a central temple or two or three. The people own businesses of various types. Some will be craftsman. Some will be teachers etc. Because the county, state, and federal government of the USA is taking by force the role of ksatriya, what ksatriya activities would be necessary in the varnashrama neighborhood? Can you give a practical example?

gangster_of_love wrote:I had asked what use or value is there in an attempt to identify a persons varna. I didn't say that the varna does not exist. A person will naturally be attracted to his comfort zone, that would be his or her varna. So if you can, please tell us why you think it is a requirement to identify a persons varna, what makes that necessary?

I see varna identification as important, just as important as asrama identification (if not more) because it is a FACT on the ground, not just to you, but to the entire community. If the varnas exist, why should we not speak about them openly? more below.

gangster_of_love wrote: What exactly do you see as a ksatriya role in a community where there is nothing to manage or administer outside of people's own businesses, or a temple?

temple president should be a kshatriya type, while temple board should be mainly brahmanas. in every community (I currently live in one and know these issues firsthand) there are events to organize, disagreements that need to be resolved and common projects that need management (like roads or schools for example).

a group of people who do everything separately except meeting together once a week for a bhajan and some prasadam is not a community, but a club.

In real communities you have a temple, a school, and some common infrastructure (roads, parks, etc.). In every community you have communal projects that need the right people in the right positions - that is the essence of varna designation and the reason for it.

I'm tired of mismanaged projects and resources, tired of boring classes in the temple given by devotees who only think they are brahmanas, tired of sending my kids to teachers who have no clue what the educational system should be. I'm tired of vaishya types turning preaching activities into personal money making schemes, often giving our movement a bad name. That is why I want people to declare their varna and act accordingly - especially if they are to have any function in my community. That is beginning to happen, at least in our community (Prabhupada Village).

Maybe your idea of community is a country club where instead of playing golf people play the game of spirituality. Fine. Open one. But do not delude yourself that it will have anything to do with the varnashram system. Sorry if it sounds harsh but I feel it needs to be said.

May I be so blunt to ask, what your varna is?

dear GOL - perhaps, all this discussion is completely irrelevant, and there is no need for any critical comments, as we have no control or influence over any such communities.

so please accept my sincere apologies for all my transgressions in this conversation. you are one of very few people genuinely interested in the social side of spirituality, and I truly appreciate that. I agree with many poinst you make - probably with most of them, yet as a kshatriya by nature I'm very pragmatic and appreciative of order and structure in society.

My apologies to Hariji as well, for a somewhat partisan tone in my previous posts on this thread.

Dandabats pranams to all...

gangster_of_love wrote: What exactly do you see as a ksatriya role in a community where there is nothing to manage or administer outside of people's own businesses, or a temple?

temple president should be a kshatriya type, while temple board should be mainly brahmanas. in every community (I currently live in one and know these issues firsthand) there are events to organize, disagreements that need to be resolved and common projects that need management (like roads or schools for example)


In real communities you have a temple, a school, and some common infrastructure (roads, parks, etc.). In every community you have communal projects that need the right people in the right positions - that is the essence of varna designation and the reason for it.

I'm not so sure about your ideas of what a ksatriya is naturally adept at. Whenever sastra speaks about the nature of a ksatriya it often includes administrator along with government and military. I don't think this really applies to business or teaching leadership but to governmental administration, or military administration.

You mention communal projects like schools or roads as needing a ksatriya to lead the project. Those are really a combination of vaisya and brahmana duties. Both vaisyas and brahmanas are also leaders. All three of the twice born varnas have leadership skills in different areas. It's not that the ksatriya is the only leader. The ksatriya has leadership skills when it comes to law enforcement, military duties and government. Brahmanas have leadership skills in teaching, and vaisyas have leadership skills in financial related areas. So I'm not so sure there is some need for a ksatriya to lead a temple or lead infrastructure projects.

Temple leadership in my opinion should be a communal decision. Whomever has the best ideas, the community can decide on that as a whole. Unless of course someone owns his or her own temple. But if a temple is a community project, in a vaisnava community, then for there to be no ill feelings, things shoud be done by consensus with everyone having their say.

Vaisyas are naturally adept at business and financial dealings. Infrastructure in todays world is all about businesss and finance. Anyone can come up with an idea, but it takes finance business acumen to see it through properly. So again in a vaisnava community, if there is going to be a communal project, not a privately paid for one, then consensus is the best way.

I'm tired of mismanaged projects and resources, tired of boring classes in the temple given by devotees who only think they are brahmanas, tired of sending my kids to teachers who have no clue what the educational system should be. I'm tired of vaishya types turning preaching activities into personal money making schemes, often giving our movement a bad name. That is why I want people to declare their varna and act accordingly - especially if they are to have any function in my community. That is beginning to happen, at least in our community (Prabhupada Village).

I don't think the problem with your experience of ISKCON style communities is due to people not "declaring" their varna. The real problem is much deeper then that. I think I've written about that to some degree already.

Maybe your idea of community is a country club where instead of playing golf people play the game of spirituality. Fine. Open one. But do not delude yourself that it will have anything to do with the varnashram system. Sorry if it sounds harsh but I feel it needs to be said.

I don't think you have really understood what I have been writing. Like I wrote, the essential aspect of varnashrama is the spiritual aspect i.e kirtan, sadhu sangha, festivals, etc. The purpose of varnashrama as I have written is to give facility for spiritual activities, otherwise it has no purpose. If it isn't fun, if you do not experience Ananda, bliss, from that situation, then something is wrong. The spiritual side is the important side, having a community where there is facility for vaisnava sangha is the essence, everything else is a variable. Like I said, my vision is not about trying to create a mini version of an entire vedic society, that is impractical, and unnecessary.

May I be so blunt to ask, what your varna is?

We're playing those mind games together
Pushing the barriers planting seeds
Playing the mind guerrilla
Chanting the Mantra peace on earth
We all been playing those mind games forever
Some kinda druid dudes lifting the veil
Doing the mind guerrilla
Some call it magic the search for the grail

Love is the answer and you know that for sure
Love is a flower you got to let it grow

So keep on playing those mind games together
Faith in the future out of the now
You just can't beat on those mind guerrillas
Absolute elsewhere in the stones of your mind
Yeah we're playing those mind games together
Projecting our images in space and in time

Yes is the answer and you know that for sure
Yes is surrender you got to let it go

So keep on playing those mind games together
Doing the ritual dance in the sun
Millions of mind guerrillas
Putting their soul power to the karmic wheel
Keep on playing those mind games together
Raising the spirit of peace and love
(I want you to make love, not war
I know you've heard it before)

gangster_of_love wrote:I'm not so sure about your ideas of what a ksatriya is naturally adept at. Whenever sastra speaks about the nature of a ksatriya it often includes administrator along with government and military. I don't think this really applies to business or teaching leadership but to governmental administration, or military administration.

I have been working as a manager most of my adult life. I managed all kinds of projects, people and resources, working for private companies and the government. Currently I'm a VP in charge of operations for a $4M/year scientific services company. In my opinion, both vaishyas and brahmanas make poor managers. Vaishyas are too concerned with making money and easily loose sight of the big picture. Brahmanas tend to overcomplicate things and are not practical in their approach. Smart vaishyas hire good kshatriyas to manage for them. Smart brahmanas concentrate on spirituality, science and intellectual pursuits.

These are my observations, based on both shastra and some 25 years of practical experience.

I dunno Kulaji, you may be right. But I don't think you can find anywhere in sastra where a ksatriya manages a business, thats vaisya activity in me 'umble opinion.

gangster_of_love wrote:I don't think you can find anywhere in sastra where a ksatriya manages a business

I dont think you can find anywhere in shastra a business that needed to be managed ;) back then business was a family affair. nowadays some business enterprises are bigger than most vedic kingdoms.

My two cents:

I do not believe that the circumstances of today can be successfully adapted into 'vedic' terms or definitions. Life and time is not static and things do change. The changes that are present today as compared to the historic past in India are massive. Attempts to fit the present manifestation of the modern world into the patterns that were comfortable to people in ancient times will be troublesome. Some will defend the past and its conclusions to the bitter end. Some will call to throw it all to the wind and start again. Others will try to compromise and balance the disparate cultures and people. I am sorry to suggest that I do not see anyone or anything resurrecting the past in a practical format. Often it just becomes further impetus to argue and fight. Kali strikes again, to use the language introduced by the erstwhile and prolific writers in this thread.

I do see paradigms which make sense to me. I see the problems of brahmanas when I associate with University professors. I see the problems of ksatriyas when I watch the President on the news or read the papers. I see the problems with vaisyas when I use their products and am forced to upgrade my systems all the time to keep pace. I see the problems with sudras when they dominate what is presented to me in the media or in the stores.

I see problems based on personalities as they relate to the working environment. I see human psyche at work in basic patterns. Perhaps it is better to call these patterns archetypes for the four basic varnas are indeed archetypes and it could be clarifying to treat them as such. Even when there was a real varnasrama social organization in India, there were so many subdivisions within the varnas and so many special circumstances and situations that the archetypical responses were often challenged, discussed and fought over.

Instead of trying to resurrect something that never existed in the simplistic forms we sometimes present it, wouldn't the discussion be more interesting if we could extract the specific relevant aspects of these archetypes and their interactions and apply them to ourselves in our own environment when we relate with each other in a social setting?

If you try to outwardly discriminate between people using these forms you could find yourself in a dangerous situation for no one wishes to be categorized in this way with all the connotations and class prejudice that come with them. But if you were to observe the mentality of the people with whom you relate and understand them from the archetypes, your relations with them can improve.

For example, if a sudra needs praise and appreciation and you find yourself with someone who seems to fit within that form, praise and appreciate them and see what happens. If you are with a person who seems to fit within the brahminical form (skip their having to act perfectly as this is not relevant to the experiment) listen to them, respect their intelligence and learning, and inquire from them in a way which will amplify their gifts. Although brahmanas love to argue and justify their existence by being smarter or sharper than others, arguments usually get nowhere fast, whereas researching what someone has to offer and integrating it into [whatever you feel you can] has some value and will earn you a friend and allow you to sleep better and live longer. Anyway, you get the point.

In case you do not, when you meet a person who fits within the vaisya mold, do business or engage in charity with them. Make sure that there is some profit involved. And for those very determined ksatriya types, say, in a very innocent, sincere, and subtle manner that their clever detective minds cannot catch, "Yes Sir!" Or figure out how you can assist them in protecting others.

All this is an extreme over-simplification of a very complex and interesting topic. I thought to bend the discussion in a new direction.

I see the present value of varnasrama as a psychological tool to dealing with people who touch upon qualities that fit into basic patterns. I see little value in trying to make the structure of social, economic and governmental organization work in the modern world for a few billion reasons. This does not mean it can never. I do not wish to limit the future. I am sure there is much to be learned from these psychological profiles and the interactions they suggest. It is another way at looking at interactions and I am sure when those who have the opportunity to utilize these profiles do so within a work or social environment it will give them the tools to make things better. After all, this is all that ultimately counts within any organization: to make things better for those within it.