Sannyasa? Not for us ?

Jiva Atma on 28. October 2011 at 7:35 pm said:

Why not do as Prabhupada instructs? :

Forbid sannyasa as a fashion, but maintain the sannyasa order for suitably qualified devotees “at the last stage of life.”

Lectures : General Lectures : Evening Lecture — Bhuvanesvara, January 23, 1977 : 770123LE.BHU :
Prabhupāda: …So to accept this position-brahmacārī, gṛhastha, vānaprastha, and sannyāsa—is compulsory. It is not that one has to take sannyāsa as a fashion. No. Actually it is absolutely necessary for any person at the last stage of life to accept sannyāsa…”

Because; “…without this classification, the whole society will remain in chaotic condition… ”

These are Prabhupada’s instructions, reaffirmed again, more than four months after the January 7 quotes banning sannyasa in ISKCON; On May 13, 1977, Prabhupada makes his position on Varṇāśrama-dharma, including the sannyasa order abundantly clear:

“According to Vedic civilization, the bodily identification is divided into eight: brāhmaṇa, kṣatriya, vaiśya, śūdra, brahmacārī, gṛhastha, vānaprastha, and sannyāsa. Varṇāśrama-dharma. So human civilization begins, according to Vedic understanding, when there is varṇāśrama system. Otherwise it is not human civilization. Therefore in the Bhagavad-gītā it is stated, cātur-varṇyaṁ mayā sṛṣṭam [Bg. 4.13].This system should be followed. Then, gradually, one has to come to the spiritual. Chaotic society cannot help us. There must be systematic social order: brāhmaṇa, kṣatriya, vaiśya, śūdra, cātur-varṇyam, and brahmacārī, gṛhastha, vānaprastha, and sannyāsa. Sannyāsa is not voluntary, but it is compulsory. At the last stage one must take sannyāsa.”

Sannyasa Asrama

Jun 2, CALGARY, CANADA — Further to the article "Sannyasa, or Sans Us", I have a relevant quote from our Spiritual Master. The current arrangements within ISKCON clearly fly in the face of the spirit of these instructions.

Sannyasa is a natural progression on the path of devi varna ashrama. This has been hijacked for political ends by those who have twisted the meaning of sannyasa. Now it has transmuted into something quite like the Catholic Church’s cardinals. This is not what Srila Prabhupada wanted, if the following has any relevance. Just read and judge for yourselves:

Prabhupada: YES. THAT IS A FORMALITY. THAT IS NOT VERY IMPORTANT. BECAUSE MAYAVADI SANNYASIS, THEY ARE ALSO VEDIC SANNYASIS. THEY ARE NOT OUTSIDERS. BUT THEIR INTERPRETATION OF VEDA IS DIFFERENT. BUT THEY FOLLOW THE VEDIC RULES. SO THIS ACCEPTANCE OF SANNYASA IS FOLLOWING A PRINCIPLE OF THE VEDIC RULES. SO THE MAYAVADI SANNYASI MAY DIFFER IN HIS INTERPRETATION, BUT HE'S FOLLOWING THE VEDIC RULES. SO THIS ACCEPTANCE OF SANNYASA IS FOLLOWING THE VEDIC RULES. SO YOU CAN ACCEPT SANNYASA EVEN FROM MAYAVADI. IT DOESN'T MATTER. BUT YOU HAVE TO TRANSCEND THE LIMITS OF VEDIC RULES. THAT IS KRSNA CONSCIOUSNESS. That also Caitanya Mahaprabhu... Although He took sannyasa, He did not assume the sannyasa title. His sannyasa guru was Kesava Bharati. Naturally, He would have accepted the Bharati title. Sri Krsna Bharati, or something like that. But He remained Sri Krsna Caitanya. Caitanya is the name of the brahmacari under the Bharati sannyasi. One brahmacari... The brahmacaris, they are assistant or personal servitors of a sannyasi. That is the system. So Caitanya Mahaprabhu was... In the beginning, He was accepted... That is the Mayavadi system. One is accepted first of all as brahmacari. So that, His name was Caitanya. But even after His acceptance of sannyasa, He did not assume the title Bharati. That means actually He did not take sannyasa. That was simply formality. Because Mayavadi sannyasi thinks that he is God; so how He can assume that title? He was preaching, He was going to preach that we are servant of God; therefore He did not assume that title. And besides that, when Caitanya Mahaprabhu was going to Lord..., see Jagannatha Puri, His rod was taken away by Nityananda and it was broken and thrown away. So He, apparently He became very angry that "You have broken My rod, sannyasa rod. So I am not going with You." He separated. These statements are there in the Caitanya-caritamrta. So in one sense, Caitanya Mahaprabhu did not require to accept any sannyasa guru, BUT HE ACCEPTED THE FORMALITY THAT IF ONE TAKES SANNYASA, ONE HAS TO TAKE SANNYASA FROM ANOTHER SANNYASI. THAT IS THE SYSTEM. JUST LIKE IF YOU WANT TO GET YOURSELF MARRIED, YOU HAVE TO CALL FOR A PRIEST. THAT DOES NOT MEAN THAT YOU HAVE TO AGREE WITH THE PRIEST'S PERSONAL OPINION. DO YOU FOLLOW? YES. HE MAY EXECUTE THE RULES AND REGULATION OF MARRIAGE CEREMONY, BUT THAT DOES NOT MEAN THAT ONE HAS TO AGREE WITH THE PRIEST'S OPINION, PERSONAL OPINION. THIS IS THE ANSWER. But when you accept a spiritual master, that is not allowed. Unless you cent percent agree with the spiritual master's opinion or philosophy, there is no need of accepting a spiritual master. There is no need. Yes.

Replies

Welcome February 9, 2012 10:01

Sannyasa Asrama

Jun 2, CALGARY, CANADA — Further to the article "Sannyasa, or Sans Us", I have a relevant quote from our Spiritual Master. The current arrangements within ISKCON clearly fly in the face of the spirit of these instructions.

Sannyasa is a natural progression on the path of devi varna ashrama. This has been hijacked for political ends by those who have twisted the meaning of sannyasa. Now it has transmuted into something quite like the Catholic Church’s cardinals. This is not what Srila Prabhupada wanted, if the following has any relevance. Just read and judge for yourselves:

Prabhupada: YES. THAT IS A FORMALITY. THAT IS NOT VERY IMPORTANT. BECAUSE MAYAVADI SANNYASIS, THEY ARE ALSO VEDIC SANNYASIS. THEY ARE NOT OUTSIDERS. BUT THEIR INTERPRETATION OF VEDA IS DIFFERENT. BUT THEY FOLLOW THE VEDIC RULES. SO THIS ACCEPTANCE OF SANNYASA IS FOLLOWING A PRINCIPLE OF THE VEDIC RULES. SO THE MAYAVADI SANNYASI MAY DIFFER IN HIS INTERPRETATION, BUT HE'S FOLLOWING THE VEDIC RULES. SO THIS ACCEPTANCE OF SANNYASA IS FOLLOWING THE VEDIC RULES. SO YOU CAN ACCEPT SANNYASA EVEN FROM MAYAVADI. IT DOESN'T MATTER. BUT YOU HAVE TO TRANSCEND THE LIMITS OF VEDIC RULES. THAT IS KRSNA CONSCIOUSNESS. That also Caitanya Mahaprabhu... Although He took sannyasa, He did not assume the sannyasa title. His sannyasa guru was Kesava Bharati. Naturally, He would have accepted the Bharati title. Sri Krsna Bharati, or something like that. But He remained Sri Krsna Caitanya. Caitanya is the name of the brahmacari under the Bharati sannyasi. One brahmacari... The brahmacaris, they are assistant or personal servitors of a sannyasi. That is the system. So Caitanya Mahaprabhu was... In the beginning, He was accepted... That is the Mayavadi system. One is accepted first of all as brahmacari. So that, His name was Caitanya. But even after His acceptance of sannyasa, He did not assume the title Bharati. That means actually He did not take sannyasa. That was simply formality. Because Mayavadi sannyasi thinks that he is God; so how He can assume that title? He was preaching, He was going to preach that we are servant of God; therefore He did not assume that title. And besides that, when Caitanya Mahaprabhu was going to Lord..., see Jagannatha Puri, His rod was taken away by Nityananda and it was broken and thrown away. So He, apparently He became very angry that "You have broken My rod, sannyasa rod. So I am not going with You." He separated. These statements are there in the Caitanya-caritamrta. So in one sense, Caitanya Mahaprabhu did not require to accept any sannyasa guru, BUT HE ACCEPTED THE FORMALITY THAT IF ONE TAKES SANNYASA, ONE HAS TO TAKE SANNYASA FROM ANOTHER SANNYASI. THAT IS THE SYSTEM. JUST LIKE IF YOU WANT TO GET YOURSELF MARRIED, YOU HAVE TO CALL FOR A PRIEST. THAT DOES NOT MEAN THAT YOU HAVE TO AGREE WITH THE PRIEST'S PERSONAL OPINION. DO YOU FOLLOW? YES. HE MAY EXECUTE THE RULES AND REGULATION OF MARRIAGE CEREMONY, BUT THAT DOES NOT MEAN THAT ONE HAS TO AGREE WITH THE PRIEST'S OPINION, PERSONAL OPINION. THIS IS THE ANSWER. But when you accept a spiritual master, that is not allowed. Unless you cent percent agree with the spiritual master's opinion or philosophy, there is no need of accepting a spiritual master. There is no need. Yes.

This reply was deleted.