Madhwa Vallabha

Shri Bannanje Acharya has answered a question on varna

- jaati

Viju Rao NO!!! read my comment properly...i said if

anyone other than rama would have killed him then he would
accrue brahma hatya dosha..!!

Viju Rao even rama does sastang to ravana before

commencing war with him asrama was kshatriya and ravana was
brahmana...its lords lila only but he does this to educate the
masses...that brahmana is respectable..due to hari sannidhana in
him..
Nagendra Srinivasmurthy Is Karma is also for Jada?
Nagendra Srinivasmurthy Because, Lord Krishna clearly says that
Guna Karma Vibhaghashaha
Viju Rao now what ques is this...?? are u trying to shift from topic
coz u have no answers??
Nagendra Srinivasmurthy Why is there any rule that i should not
question?
Viju Rao u can but not out of context...i'm talking of varna here not
jiva kartrutva which is a very complex topic..there are 11 sutras
dedicated to it...
Nagendra Srinivasmurthy From the beginning I am saying that I
am not behind any person, I want to learn and am using these
groups for my knowledge. If anybody is saying something
different, i will try to learn .
Nagendra Srinivasmurthy Nothing wrong in that right?
Nagendra Srinivasmurthy Viju Rao, i am not out of topic, Lord
Krishna included Karma also in that shloka
Viju Rao the karma krishna is speaking of is svakulochit
karma...thats y he advises arjun as he was kshatriya to go for war
and not surrender and become sanyasi..
Sameer Khatavkar if jaati is samaaj vyavastha, then did manushya
did that vyavastha? If yes then on what basis?
Sameer Khatavkar in a given janma, can a shudra become
brahmana? If
yes then what are the types of sadhana one has to do? Where are

tthose mentioned? Till date why we have not seen /are not seeing
in
real life?
Sameer Khatavkar nagendra avare, if you have heard swamigala
pravachana reg. Varna vyvasthe and then putting it forward is
welcome.but saying that ur friends/relatives have heard and
toldyou, this is unacceptable. Because out of 100 things we hear,
we grasp 50 things, we remember 25 things and recall only 10
things. And when we tell others, we dont exactly use those words
that we listened, but add or minus some words. So pls quote 1st
hand information.
Madhwa Vallabha Viju Rao, You cannot silence anyone by saying
"read xyz properly and then speak". Coming to Karna, do you say
that Lord Parashurama gave shastra vidya to Karna thinking that he
is brahmana? Parashurama devaru didn't know about Karna's birth
details and his sUta samskara? And, cursed that he will forget all
he has learnt? (not immediately, but just before his death!).
Santosh Rao Namaste to all,
Just for the info and NOT for arguments posting this.
This section is from MahAbhArata , Vana Parva: AjagaraParva:
In the SamvAda between the Ajagara and YudhisTira:
18 []



19

20 []



21

22

23

24

"The serpent said, 'O Yudhishthira, truth, charity, forgiveness,

benevolence, benignity, kindness and the Veda 1 which worketh

the benefit of the four orders, which is the authority in matters of
religion and which is true, are seen even in the Sudra. As regards
the object to be known and which thou allegest is without both
happiness and misery, I do not see any such that is devoid of these.'
"Yudhishthira said, Those characteristics that are present in a
Sudra, do not exist in a Brahmana; nor do those that are in a
Brahmana exist in a Sudra. And a Sudra is not a Sudra by birth
alone--nor a Brahmana is Brahmana by birth alone. He, it is said
by the wise, in whom are seen those virtues is a Brahmana. And
people term him a Sudra in whom those qualities do not exist, even
though he be a Brahmana by birth. And again, as for thy assertion
that the object to be known (as asserted by me) doth not exist,
because nothing exists that is devoid of both (happiness and
misery), such indeed is the opinion, O serpent, that nothing exists
that is without (them) both. But as in cold, heat doth not exist, nor
in heat, cold, so there cannot exist an object in which both
(happiness and misery) cannot exist?"
Santosh Rao Now please please read difference between 'Jaati' and
'VarNa' in the below as the Ajagara asks YudhishTira, IS 'JAATI'
system futile ??
25 []


26 []


27


28

29


30

31

32

"The serpent said, 'O king, if thou recognise him as a Brahmana by
characteristics, then, O long-lived one, the distinction of

caste becometh futile as long as conduct doth not come into play.'
"Yudhishthira said, 'In human society, O mighty and highly
intelligent serpent, it is difficult to ascertain one's caste, because of
promiscuous intercourse among the four orders. This is my
opinion. Men belonging to all orders (promiscuously) beget
offspring upon women of all the orders. And of men, speech,
sexual intercourse, birth and death are common. And to this the
Rishis have borne testimony by using as the beginning of a
sacrifice such expressions as--of what caste so ever we may be, we
celebrate the sacrifice. Therefore, those that are wise have asserted
that character is the chief essential requisite. The natal ceremony of
a person is performed before division of the umbilical cord. His
mother then acts as its Savitri and his father officiates as priest.
He is considered as a Sudra as long as he is not initiated in the
Vedas. Doubts having arisen on this point, O prince; of serpents,
Swayambhuba Manu has declared, that the mixed castes are to be
regarded as better than the (other) classes, if having gone through
the ceremonies of purification, the latter do not conform to the
rules of good conduct, O excellent snake! Whosoever now
conforms to the rules of pure and virtuous conduct, him have I, ere
now, designated as a Brahmana.' The serpent replied, 'O
Yudhishthira, thou art acquainted with all that is fit to be known
and having listened to thy words, how can I (now) eat up thy
brother Vrikodara!"
Santosh Rao Again in Yaksha Prashna:
Yaksha Asks:


The Yaksha asked,-'By what, O king, birth, behaviour, study, or
learning doth a person become a Brahmana? Tell us with certitude!'
:


Yudhishthira answered,-'Listen, O Yaksha! it is neither birth, nor
study, nor learning, that is the cause of Brahmanahood, without
doubt, it is behaviour that constitutes it.
Hrishikesh Srivatsa I think there are too many moving parts ... Lets
define questions one by one
1: Is a satvik person (or as is being argued a Brahmin varna
person) who is born in a shudra jati then based on the merit of the

soul can he follow Brahmana dharma ?

Chiraan Chidambar Santosh Rao the englih translations do not
depict the meanings of the verses in sanskrit , there is too much
addition ..... Nowhere in the yudhisthir samvaad [ that you have
quoted ] it is said that sudra if he displays qualities like bramhana
can be termed as bramhana ... on the contrary it is repeatedly
reprimanded that a bramhana by birth if he does not display or
manifest the qualities of shama dama he is akin to sudra [ not vice
versa ] ... again coming to translation of sankar intermixing of
castes verses accept accept caste differences by intermixing and
say intermixing of castes renders offsprings not able to display any
particular quality , in such cases sanskaar alone determines their
vrutti ... and those with snaskaara are better than those without it ...
Chiraan Chidambar then in the last line ... Yudhisthir is saying
bramhana by birth cannot become bramhana by svadhyaya or
shravan but by acharana ..... Here Yudhisthir is talking primary
birth and then acharana / I shall now give other pramana to show
that BIRTH is primary and guna is then CT ... without birth GUNA
cannot be applied ... let us see pramaana
Chiraan Chidambar In sattarkadeepavali Padnabhteertha while
discussing first sutra "athatho bramha jignyasa " the question arises
as to who is adhikari for jignyasa ? who can study vedas etc ? who
is eligible ?
Chiraan Chidambar to give elaboration on adhikari .. acharya
padmanabhteertharu quotes Bhagavttantra - " adhikarshchokto
bhagavttantre - tamadhikaram manda madhyadi bhedena tridha
vibhajya ..bhagavattantroktya darshayati ....... there are three
classifications of adhikari by manda madhya and uttama ... the
exact verses of bhagavtatantra are as follows ....
Chiraan Chidambar " mandamadhyottamatvena trvidha
hyadhikarinah | tatra manda manuhyeshu ya uttamguna mata ||
madhyama rushigandharva devastatrottama matah | Iti Jaatikruto
bhedhastatha anyo guNapurvakah ||
Chiraan Chidambar see manushyas are adham adhikari rishi
gandharva madhyam and devatas are uttam .. and such distinction
is made on the basis of JAATI and then subsequently on GUNA
Nagendra Srinivasmurthy Sameer Khatavkar, if it is from one
person then i agree that might be possibility. As i said, i argued
with one person on Guna system and again re-confirmed with other
person. Also, they are regular listener of Shree Sathyaathma
theertharu. And they were very confident on saying that Shree
Sathyaathma theertharu says that all guna exists in one jeeva. And
they are clearly saying that deha is medium for saadhane, but
person will grow based on Jeeva swabhava

Chiraan Chidambar ie such a person does not have adhikaara on

vedas or mantras or tantra ...
Chiraan Chidambar NOW PADMANABHTEERTHARU GIVES
THE ADHIKAAR BHEDHA .. WHAT EACH CAN DO .. EACH
MEANS THOSE disctinction by BIRTH ... ie he quotes
VYOMSAMHITA .. " antyaja api ye bhakta NAAM GYAAN
adhikariNAh .... stree shudraBramhabandhunaam tantragyaane
adhikanti .... ekdeshe parokte tu na tu grantha purassare |
traivarnikanaam vedokte samyagbhaktimataam harau || that
means .. if antyaj ... [ mletcha ,chandaal asprushya ] has VISHNU
bhakti then he has adhikaara on naam gyana only ...
Chiraan Chidambar STree shudra and bramha bandhu ... bramha
bandhu means those anulomaj born to BRAMHANA .. ie bramhan
father and other caste woman .. do have adhikaara on TANTRA
gyaana .. but then they should not be taught straight one to one . .
but they should learn while sitting aside while GURU is giving
lecture to Three varnas ie bramhan kshatriya vaishya and can listen
to shastraas ... now see here VYOMSAMHITA has not made any
disticntion of varna and jaati ...
Chiraan Chidambar These quotes are by
PADMANABHTEERTHARU .. and from vyomsamhita ..... who is
antyaj here .. who is shudra ...
Chiraan Chidambar The antayaja shudra that is being talked about
are those distinguished by birth only ... and hence prohibited from
vedadhyana ...
Chiraan Chidambar In the same vein
PADMANABHTEERTHARU adds .. uttam stree like URVASHI
yami shachi etc have vedhadikaar .. this should not be confused .
Chiraan Chidambar BUt then primary factor is VISHNU bhakti ..
without that not even bramhana should be accepted as shishya ..
antyaja should be given only naam upadesha ..
Chiraan Chidambar There should not be any doubt left that JAATI
is primary and Guna then has to be evaluated to give upadesha ...
just saying sudra is having shama dama so he is eligible for
vedadhikara and hence term him as bramhan is faulty
understanding because Padmnabhteertharu says humans are
adhamadhikari and are classified for adhyayana perpose only ...
Chiraan Chidambar If these pramanaas are not enough I shall give
few more .. if any learned memeber raises valid doubt
Nagendra Srinivasmurthy Chiraan Chidambar Sir, Guna what you
are talking abt., is the Guna that Jeeva has? Jeeva Swabhava?
Chiraan Chidambar Let me help analyse more to the members here
... Dr Bannaje has said and indicated only four ie bRAMHAN

Kshatriya aVaishya Shudra ..by saying this is Satva > 50 % Satva

=rajas rajas = tamas and tamas ... only four ... then HOW a
ANTYAJ comes into system ... ANTYAJ is one Born to Bramhna
woman and other FATHER .. how come GUNA makes one antyaja
... So antyaj and adhikara is BIRTH based only .
Santosh Rao Sir, firstly nobody is contesting that 'jAti' is not to be
considered at all for adhikArAs. Secondly, in all these discussion
in the forum, people have been asking for pramANAs for
difference between 'jaati' and 'varNa' and when provided, just say
'IT IS NOT MEANING DEPICTED'. So only, shlokas are also
provided. So no arguments. Let the people who can understand the
shlokas know what is correct and let the people who can't
understand believe in what they like to believe.
Chiraan Chidambar Nagendra Srinivasmurthy GUNA is for deha
only ..
Chiraan Chidambar Jeeva swabhava is only classified as
MUKTIYOGYA Nitya samsaari and TAMOYOGYA .
Chiraan Chidambar Santosh Rao YUDHISTHIR says :

is there "na kulena " in the answer
by yudhisthir ... its infact "yaksha kulam taat " - does that mean not
by birth ? ... please educate
Nagendra Srinivasmurthy Chiraan Chidambar Sir, you are saying
more than four, then why Lord Krishna said Chatur Varnyam?
Chiraan Chidambar rest of the castes are obtained by intermixing
of four .. there are 256 castes and beyond that if inetrmixing takes
they are known as antyaj mletcha.
Chiraan Chidambar Santosh Rao says " Sir, firstly nobody is
contesting that 'jAti' is not to be considered at all for adhikArAs. "
but if one says bramhnas son need not be bramhana and shudra's
son need not be shudra .... then where is JAATI and where is
adhikaara .. it is contradictory statements .. in one breath you say ..
a offspring is not jaati and in another one says jaati can be used for
adhikaara that means bramhana by birth [ he has to be born to
bramhana ] can be bramhana ... WHO IS CONFUSED ? we or the
varnavaadi ?
Viju Rao very stupendous posts by acharya chiraan...i ned not add
anything but let me make one point...mr B says that this varna
vyavastha is only among muktiyogyas and not others...it means
even if a sativka is born in lower jati he has all adhikara and tamas
jiva even in brahmana jati has no adhikara...let me cut this
argument out with puranic examples...1. vidura was a
parashava(brahman father sudra mother) he didnt had vedadhikara

thats y when dhritrastra asks him to give updesha on brahma

vidya(vedas) he calls sanatsujatiya and did not sermon himself
though he knew as he was aproxa gyani...2.all kauravas were
kshatriyas dwijas by jati...but all were daityas tamas jivas...but they
did have access to veda gyana (astras are vedic mantras)...but
eklavya as he was non dwija was not accepted by drona...same
goes for karna..he knew he was not eligible for that gyana so he
lies to lord parshurama...3. ravana and his brothers were all
brahmanas is mentioned in ramayana and all puranas..but they
were daityas..even hiranyakasipu was brahmana...all these had
veda gyana...ravana used to perform trikal sandhya regularly
without fail...
Gururaj Kadiri Raguraman Kannan sir, All I am saying is that the
character of X is irrelevant to the discussion about a point made by
X. I am not sure if you have read the wiki article on Ad Hominem.
If so, please tell me if you agree that it is a logical fallacy.
Shreehari Kutsa Indeed, he who talks ill of a scholar is a fool!!
First 'try' to match him in his erudition, and then think of his
personal practices.
Only when you have no arguments to support your baseless and
bullshit theories, do you start getting personal and look into nonsubject issues to cloud your AgnyAna..
This is similar to what the present day Congress is doing to the
anti-corruption fighters, by avoiding the questions raised and
instead digging into personal practices of the crusaders..
Raguraman Kannan sk...B's scholarly aptitude did not and does not
bother me in the least...You got me completely wrong...yes I even
agree about my lack of scholastic ability compared to him...but that
was not my basis of criticism..
Vivasvan Govinda Acharya its really sad that people doesnt know
abotu Shree Bananje Govindacharya. He does visit mutt and he
doesnt visit few mutts as poeple over ther doesnt like him. He
doesnt want to hurt any one feeling by his visit to the place. This is
the fact. becos he speaks truth fact about the things which normal
gyana people will not understand.
Adithya Das Alright..let us call a ceasefire here and come back to
the topic. Can I request co-operation from honourable members
again and stick to the topic rather than going personal?
Viju Rao u speak relevant first..speak something in relevant to
debate..u r doing the same what u accused RK of..
Vivasvan Govinda Acharya To Understand Sri Bananje
govindacharya people should open up their wisdom/gyana eye and

see. he is called as vidyavachaspati not just like that. Can any one
give comparison to him in pravachanas??
Chiraan Chidambar the quote " To Understand people should open
up their wisdom/gyana eye and see " this statement is similar to the
one ADVAITIS make .. they say to understand ADVAITA one
needs REALISATION and those who do not have this wil always
struggle with dvaita // ..... IRONICALLY father of
TRIVIKRAMAPANDITACHARYA himself says In his entire life
he has never had such realisation nor has he heard any such
realisation having dawned his ancestors or others .. all the while
they were highest knowers [ that being confirmed as one doesnot
lie on death bed ] ..... so what does not exist ... thinking it exists is
mithya ... and against VISHNU BHAKTI .... so such abstract
feelings of realisation[ in this case wisdom eye ] are not
realistic ///// SHASTRAS should support ones statement ...THe
acharana of GREATS must also be cited as example ... and
MAHABHARAT RAMAYANA should also have events justifying
such views .. if there is no udaharan pratyudaharan for a statement
the it is not tenable concept ..... WE are madhwas and we have a
strong tradition of justifying everything through shastra artha ... so
one must debate on the basis of shastra ... nidarshana and
tradition .. VARNASHARAM dharma is backbone of our vedik
system ,falsifying it is akin to falsifying vedas themselves ... that
would lead to sin and hell and no amount of scholastic
achievements is going to save one when yamadoota drags
Viju Rao sri vivaswan,,VADIRAJ SWAMY says if one
misinterprets even one line of vedas then he gets papa of killing a
cow..go hatya dosha...!!
Viju Rao mr. aditya das....u asked to debate seriously..then reply to
acharya's chiraan's comments first then my posts on puranic
incidents...
Adithya Das Mr Viju Rao. First you reply to my post which none
of you have done. A case of deliberately ignoring the
inconvenient :)
Hrishikesh Srivatsa This thread is a continuation of this thread
http://www.facebook.com/groups/maadhwas/permalink/443618265
659206
The crux of the debate is
1: Is a satvik person (or as is being argued a Brahmin varna
person) who is born in a shudra jati then based on the merit of the
soul can he follow Brahmana dharma ?

If the answer is no from both parties then the debate is closed; as

both parties agree and have different terminoligies.
In the earlier thread it was being debated that if a soul is of higher
varna (as per their terminology) and jati by birth is lower; then the
person can override their jati and follow the soul's varna dharma.
This is the point of debate; from the early comments of the thread
it is clear that there are a lot of people who support this view. I
wanted to make it clear because some comments were on this side
of the fence for varna and that side of the fence for jati.
Sameer Kahtavar's point is valid; if scholars argue that varna is for
soul and it trumps jati by birth; then there should be acceptance by
the scholars themselves; else they would be guilty of preaching one
thing and following another. It does not form a logical argument;
but for introspection it does drive home the point.
Last time; Adithya Das had contested that if the soul is of lower
birth but higher varna (as they have proposed) ; then by his actions
he can raise himself to the level of his varna.
Some of the arguments that were posted in the other thread; for
which there was no answer:
In MBTN; SriMadAcharya explains how as Bheemsena he
maintained perfect Kshatriya Dharma ;even when in disguise he
upheld Kshatriya Dharma everytime. Now regarding Varna of Soul
... no one can argue that Vayu is Brahmana !!! But still he took care
of the minutest details to follow Kshatriya Dharma !!! Why ??? If
he wanted to show that Varna overrides Jati; why not show it?
I brought the Karna example here because it fits the situation
perfectly ...
For Karna;
Deeds - Learnt astras right upto BrahmaAstra from Lord
Parshurama himself !!!
Quality - One of the best
Soul/Nature - Satvik ( Surya)
Birth - Kshatriya
Sanskara - Sootha
Except Sankskara; Karna checks every box to be a Kshatriya
sa sarva vettuH cha vibhoH bhayena

vipro aham iti avaday astra vara ati lobhAt |

jAnann api pradadAv asya rAmo
divyAni astrANi akhilAni avyayAtmA || 15.48||
"He introduced himself as a braahmaNa to the omniscient and
omnipotent parashuraama, for fear of preclusion, but parashuraama
accorded mystical missiles to him, though he is aware that karNa is
a suuta. "
Note : Karna had to rely on physical caste system to get the
knowledge; not just in society even between God and his devotee
he had to take help of physical caste system to get knowledge.
So far the logic seems correct; he is born a Kshatriya; deeds wise
he has had best training; superb skill; best astras ( from
Sarvothamma himself); he has Kshatiya attitude. Therefore he
qualifies to be a Kshatriya. If you see the arguments presented
above; all points that have been discussed above have been
covered.
Now comes thunderbolt from Bheemsena Devaru; in Ranga Bhumi
... he hands Karna a chariot whip; effectively declaring that he is
still a Sutha. So whatever efforts Karna has put in; even after
whatever training he has got; however satvik he may be; even if he
is born a Kshatriya; he is still a Sutha.
Why? Just because he has had Sutha sanskara !!!!
This single action of Vayu effectively stamps out all arguments;
just because of Sanskara; inspite of Training/Deeds/Satvik/Birth he
is still a Sutha. This clearly hilights the importance of sanskara !!!
VedaVyasaru himself refers to Karna as Sutha. When SriHari-Vayu
have clearly expressed their opinion; where is the confusion?
Lastly; let's refer from harsh comments against Sri Bananje; on the
other hand we should see a lot more arguments than just Bannanje
says this and that .
Hrishikesh Srivatsa *let's not make harsh comments against Sri
Bannanje*
Chiraan Chidambar DOES human body has SATVA RAJAS
TAMAS prakruti guna or NOT ?
Chiraan Chidambar Adithya Das quoted 'janAH
sAtvikaHsAtvikAH rAjasasAtvikAstAmasasAtvikAshchEti
trividhAH|

"jIvigaLu sAthvika, rAjasa, tAmasa eMdu mooru

vidhavAgiddAre.
Raguraman Kannan now that is what is called wrong translation
Chiraan Chidambar HOW can JANAH be translated as
jeevigaLu .. kindly put some light ... by translating janah as jeeva
one is trying to impose the concept of PRAKRUTI GUNAH to
SOUL ... SATVA RAJAS TAMAS are LAxmi adheen prakruti
guna .
Chiraan Chidambar human body is made up of 5 karmendriya 5
jnanendriyas . 5 tanmatras 5 panchammahabhutas ... manas
ahankar mahattava .... DOESNT mahattatva ahankara all the tatvas
made up of SATVA RAJAS TAMAS
Chiraan Chidambar isnt there a ratio in these SATVA RAJAS
TAMAS that makes up differences in BODY ...
Adithya Das Request the members to post in a single post than in
multiple posts .
Chiraan Chidambar SWAROOPA DEHA is not created LINGA
DEHA is not created /// ANIRUDHDHA DEHA is created and
STHULA deha is yonija ....
Chiraan Chidambar COMPOSITIONS OF ANIRUDHDHA DEHA
AND STHULA DEHA MAY DIFFER >> and can cause
disparity ... BUT SOUL remains intact all through ...
Hrishikesh Srivatsa I will consolidate these posts into a single one
Aditya Das ... from smartphones its easier to type smaller posts
Chiraan Chidambar LEts look at the TATPARYA vachan by
MADHWACHARYA on the same verse ... " satva
stavaadhikorajorajobhistamasa tatha | VARNA
vibhaktashchatvaarah satvika eva VAISHNAVAh | ..... which
clearly says ... satva satvaadhik rajas rajas and tamas .. these are
classifications and madwacharya clearly says SATVIK is
vaishnava ... ie satvika satvadhika rajas both are VAISHNAVAS ie
MUKTIYOGYA ... these are bramhana kshatriya ... and vaishyas
are RAjas NITYA samsaari not vaishnava no vishnu bhakti ...
tamas is tamoyogya ie // no vishnu bhakti is another meaning
Chiraan Chidambar because MADHWACHARYA reiterates in the
next verse of tatparya " VASHNAVA satvika eva TAMASa eva
chaapare | daurlabhya sulabhatyena teshaam varNa adi bhinnata ||
the avialablity of these gunas satva rajas etc more or rather with
ease in majority is what leads to VARNA bhinnata
Chiraan Chidambar BUt in entire all these shlokas there is no
mention of satvika being attributed to JEEVA SOUL .... its pure

imagination of authors .
Adithya Das " HOW can JANAH be translated as jeevigaLu ..
kindly put some light ... by translating janah as jeeva one is trying
to impose the concept of PRAKRUTI GUNAH to SOUL ...
SATVA RAJAS TAMAS are LAxmi adheen prakruti guna"
BUt in entire all these shlokas there is no mention of satvika being
attributed to JEEVA SOUL .... its pure imagination of authors"
The jIvAs are intrinsically made up of sattva guNa, rajO guNa and
tamO guNa. Vishnu Rahasya states the following (Source:
Philosophy of Sri Madhvacharya by Dr BNK Sharma)
jIvAstu trividhA rAjan nAnAkArAH svabhAvataH|
sAtvikA muktibhAjaH syuH tAmasAstu tamO&nugAH|
madhyamAH saMsRutau nityaM UrdhvAdhaHparivartinaH||33||
Dr Sharma goes on further to add the following:
"All that we can say is there is as much to be said in support of
'Jiva traividhya', objectively speaking, as perhaps against it. An
INTRINSIC divergence of nature and faith into sAttvika, rAjasa,
and tAmasa which is rooted in the core of individual nature
(dEhinAm svabhAvajA) as stated in the gIta, is the ultimate basis
of this theory according to Madhva. What is thus ultimately traced
to the essential nature (svabhAva) of the selves must indeed be
UNALTERABLE. "
Hence it is not a figment of imagination by authors of PPVP in
interpreting 'janAH' as jIva..There is absolutely nothing wrong in it
either. The intrinsic classification is further divided and
chaaturvarNa in the gIta refers to intrinsic classfication of the
souls.
Viju Rao das,,the quote u have referred just says srt exists in
jiva..who is denying that..but satvikas are muktiyogyas rajas are
nitya samsari and tamas dushtas/daityas..this is diff from prakruti
gunas...ur again doing the same mistake of equating guna with
varna there is no relation... both are diff...
Raguraman Kannan AD you are connecting and creating a link
between different contexts..the question is why janAh is
interpreted as jiva .
Chiraan Chidambar JANAH means group of people not SOULS ..
there is never such a illustration where group of souls are addresed
as JANAH .. If SATVIK jeeva is MUKTIYOGYA then RAJAS
NITYASAMSAARI then HOW can SATvadhik RAJAS be defined

.. is he intermix of MUKTIYOGYA and NITYASAMSAARI that

leads to contradiction of SHASTRA .. or then is there a state in
between MUKTIYOGYA and NITYASANSAARI to accomodate
SATVADHIKA RAJAS .. [ logic seems untenable ]
Raguraman Kannan your quote says 'janAH sAtvikaHsAtvikAH
rAjasasAtvikAs tAmasasAtvikAshchEti trividhAH|
sAtvikaHsAtvikAH
rAjasasAtvikAH
tAmasasAtvikAH
Adithya Das Kannan avre: I thought people here did not believe
that SRT applies to a jIva as well. Hence I created that post to state
that 'svabhAva' of jIva is related to SRT (intrinsic) which is
aprAkruta..
This intrinsic classification is further divided into 9 groups: S-S, SR, S-T, R-S, R-R, R-T, T-S, T-R, T-T. Let us literally interpret
janAH as people (human). Rayaru states that chaaturvarNa refers
to human race (manushyOttama) which is 32nd in taaratamya that
falls under R-S category.
Chiraan Chidambar SRT is not aprakruta .. now kindly state if you
have faith in VISHNU RAHASYA as you ahve quoted it .. I shall
quote many many verses from VISHNU RAHASYA which implies
JAATI only as main factor for adhikaara .. ..
Raguraman Kannan AD, we had this discussion long back....the 9
groups cannot refer to jiva...Please consider Vyasaraya's
Prameya...muktirnaijasukha anubhutiH...anubhuti means complete
experiencing of naijasukha here
Adithya Das If SRT is not embedded within jIva, then the words of
Dr Sharma are wrong which I find hard to believe :)
Chiraan Chidambar I ahve already given the 32 groups and SRT
combination of those groups as gven by Vijaydasaru .. it is based
on THree S S S grops and not two .. and RS is not human there ,..
so this is just imagination and has no support of shastra
Adithya Das Kannan avre: Can you please elaborate on why those
9 groups cannot apply to jIva?
Raguraman Kannan My understanding is because if jIva svarupa of
sAtvika jivas have rajas or tamas, that would lead to misery, even
in moksha according to that prameya .
Adithya Das My understanding (I cant back it up with pramANAs
currently) is that, in mOksha, the R and T guNAs even though
present within the jIva are disabled with only aavishkaara of sattva
guNa. I dont know how this works but this is what my

understanding is.
Raguraman Kannan doesn't make sense, then what is the basis for
identifying a sAtvika jiva? Did Shri Hari arbitrarily decide to
demarcate sAtvika jivas from others?
Adithya Das A sAtvika jIva is predominantly made up of sattva
guNa with mix of R and T. the proportions are intrinsically
present!
Raguraman Kannan what is predominance? How did Shri Hari fix
this percentage? This is all arbitrary conclusion..please quote
pramanas
Adithya Das Predominance in the sense that greater percentage of
sattva guNa is present in saatvika jIva compared to R and T that is
also present within it. Sri Hari didnt fix this percentage as it
formed the very essence of the soul.
Chiraan Chidambar Adithya Das what you are saying is true of
LINGA DEHA and not soul
Raguraman Kannan still turning off part of jiva is a kin to killing
its very nature...you did not still counter anubhUtiH
Adithya Das hmmm. If you can give me the complete quote then I
shall get back to you regarding this..
Raguraman Kannan I already gave it...9 Prameyas of
Vyasatirtha..one of them says "muktirnaijasukha
anubhUtiH"...thats it
Adithya Das thanks.. I shall discuss about my understanding of non
avishkaara of R&T in mOksha and get back..
Venugopalabn Dheeravenugopala it is sad to see that some people
have started talking about the very personality and integrity of Sri
Bannnanje Govindacharya, dear friends, I have listened to his
lectures and have got new insights into Madhwa Philosophy
through his lectures, he is really KARANA JANMA, born to the
cause of propagating Madhwa Philosophy, his commitment
towards Madwa philosophy is undisputed and unquestionable, Sri
Madwa's philosophy should never be restricted to one sect, he is
VISHWAGURU, in his writings he has made it clear a person who
has qualities like SHAMA, DAMA and JNANA should always be
regarded as
Venugopalabn Dheeravenugopala Contd- Brahmana,
SWABHAVIKO BRAHMANADI SHAMADYIREVA
BHIDYATE- Shamadi gunagullavane Brahmana, Sri Bannanje has
just re articulated what Sri Madhwa has said, why should there be
controversy in this regard, let us try to become brahmins in the true
sense, this caste and the ego associated with the birth can also be

hindrance and an obstacle in the Sadhana Patha, let us come out of

it and be the true followers of Sri Madhwa
Viju Rao mr.venugopalabn,,the debate isnt over yet...and it was
cleared in start of thread this isnt a personal debate...if mr.B has
right to criticise other scholars and challenge tradition; we too have
right to challenge his views...this is democracy man..and no one
has given mr.B the authority to be the jury of madhva
philosophy..just praising him blindly only points to fanship and not
logical enquiry...
Chiraan Chidambar svabahaviko ..... " is narada purana statement
quoted by MAdhwacharya in support of his taatpary vachan that
satvika means VAISHNAVA [ muktiyogya ] and they are found in
abundance naturally easily in bramhna and kshatriya ...
"daurlbhyasulabhatvena " is the word used by
MADWAHCHARYA .. ... and hence Bramhanadi is classified on
the basis of shamadama etc karma ... IT does not mean that anyone
displaying SHAMA dama is BRAMHANA ..... If for any reason an
antyaj or shudra etc displays such qualities as exception ...
VYMSAMHITA is quoted by PADMANAABhteertharu saying
antyaj api vishnu bhaktah ..... then he can be given NAAM gyaan
or tantra gyaan ... NOT treated as BRAMHANA as the entire zunta
here is deriving .. ... the verses clearly means .. BRAMHAN should
be one born a bramhana and then shama dama should be there ..
and shudra displaying shama dama cannot be termed as bramhana
as he has been clearly prohibited to recite by
PADNABHTEERTHARU ...
Nagendra Srinivasmurthy Chiraan Chidambar Sir, is this Satvika
means VIASHNAVA (muktiyogya) is related to jeeva swabhava?
Again, I guess everyone doesn't have any question on adhikara is
based on Jaathi. Everyone agrees that. Only saying is that Satvika
etc Guna is that what jeeva is having its own swabhava but not for
deha. Deha is the media for sadhane. And Jiva vikasa is based on
its own swabhava ie saatvika etc. Guna/Guna combination which
each jeeva has exclusively but not based on Deha. Is it not Acharya
Madhwa says? God only provides environment to Jeeva for its
vikasa i.e., S-R-T combination which Jiva has
Viju Rao sri nagendra,,'muktiyogya' term is used to denote jiva
svabhava only...but this jiva can be born in any deha/jati..he has to
follow rules of that jati..as ordained by law/smritis ..that is
svakulochit acvhara...and that is what lord preaches in gita...if he
overrides varnashram dharma then it is not pleasing to the lord but
results in papa/patana and narkadi anartha...he must behave acc. to
his jati only...jati is limited to sthula deha ...but it has to be
respected thats y sthula deha is called sadhana sharira..as sadhana
is done through stula deha only...

<HTML><META HTTP-EQUIV="content-type"
CONTENT="text/html;charset=utf-8">
<H6 class=uiStreamMessage data-ft='{"type":1,"tn":"K"}'><SPAN
class=messageBody
data-ft='{"type":3}'>
<P><SPAN class=userContent>Padmini ekadashi 27 aug 2012.
(method and
story).<BR><BR>Padmini Ekadashi Fast Method<BR>Fast is
started on Dashmi. Person
needs to mentally prepares himself for the fast, on the night of
Dashmi Tithi
only. After having night meal on Dashmi, nothing else should be
eaten. A person
should have only Satvik (food with no garlic and onion) meal on
this night.
Person should not eat food in utensils of bronze, he should not eat
meat,
masoor, gram, honey, leafy vegetables, and borrowed food, on the
Dashmi. On this
day, pure and Satvik meal should be eaten and use of salt should be
avoided.
Person observing fast should sleep on earth on the day of Dashmi
and should
follow Brahmacharya.<BR><BR>...He should wake up early in
the morning, on the
day of Ekadashi. And, after completing the routine works, he
should not do the
Datun and rinse his mouth 12 times.(if mouth is not rinsed 12
times then u are
considered unclean unfit for pooja). Mud, Til, Kush and Amla
should be used for
bathing. While bathing, first of all , mud is applied and a prayer is
performed.<BR><BR><BR>On this utensil, idol of God is placed
and worshipped with
incense stick, lamp, navedy, saffron etc. After that, Bhajans are
performed.
Avoid speaking lie if by chance untruth comes from mouth go

before surya and

pray surya antargata narayana .On the day of fast, the story of fast ,
bhagvatam
,satvik puranas should be read or heard. Jagran should be
performed at night and
Lord vishnu along with rama devi should be worshipped.
<BR><BR>Padmini Ekadashi
Fast Story<BR>The story of Padmini Ekadashi is related of Ravan,
the king of
Lanka. Once, Ravan went for Digvijay (getting victories in all
directions). In
this journey of victory, he got defeated by Kartavirya Sahastrarjun.
On getting
defeated, he had to stay in prison of that king for many years.
Finally he got
free by the grace of Agastya Rishi(acc to our shastras it is vijay
who is asking
this ). God Narad was very happy by the imprisonment of Ravan
and he asked Rishi
the reason behind Ravans defeat. <BR><BR>Then, Rishi said
that Kartavirya Arjun
can be defeated only by Lord Vishnu, Because, his mother Padmini
(padmini
ekadashi) and father Kartavirya performed strong meditation in
wish of a child.
And, as told by Mahasati Anusuiya, both of them observed the fast
of Padmini
Ekadashi. Pleased by their devotion, Lord Vishnu appeared before
them. And,
blessed them with a heroic son, Arjun. That is why, Ravan also got
defeated by
Arjun. krityavirya arjun was human and ravan is kali himself so
one can
imagine that this ekadashi reduces effect of kali as he is
imprisoned...