The whole Vedic civilization is meant for making people brahmana. Not to keep him in ignorance, not to keep him in the position of a shudra. The whole Vedic scheme is that from the lowest grade of existence one can be elevated to the highest grade.

Varnashram: progressive, cooperative society

Elevation, not oppression of human society

The whole Vedic civilization is meant for making people brahmana. Not to keep him in ignorance, not to keep him in the position of a shudra. The whole Vedic scheme is that from the lowest grade of existence one can be elevated to the highest grade. Shudhyanti. Shudhyanti, purification. That is purification.

In ordinary life also, there are purificatory methods, dasha-vidha-samskara. That purificatory method begins before the birth, which is called garbhadhana-samskara. Not that a man, a high-caste brahmana or kshatriya or even vaishya—especially brahmana and kshatriya, especially brahmana—he's not meant for giving birth to a child like cats and dogs. He has to observe the garbhadhana-samskara. In the shastra it is said in a brahmana family, if the garbhadhana-samskara is not observed, he immediately falls down to the shudra class. Kalau shudra-sambhavah. Because this garbhadhana-samskara is not observed, therefore it is to be taken, accepted that everyone is a shudra.

But the Krishna consciousness movement is to again elevate the shudra to the standard of brahmana. This is the Krishna consciousness movement. Because without brahmana... Just like without head, what is the value of your body? Brahmana means the head.

mukha-bahuru-padebhyah
purushasyashramaih saha
chatvaro jajñire varna
gunair vipradayah prithak

Brahmana means the head. Therefore brahmana is offered so much respect. Because with head, in the brain, you conceive something, and the hands and legs, they execute the order. Similarly, the head of the society, they should be the brahmanas. They are not interested in capturing political power. No. Brahmana is to give instruction. We find from Vedic literature. There were committees, privy council committees of great sages and brahmanas. They would give the king advice that "You rule in this way." And if the king is disobedient, sometimes the brahmanas would dethrone him. Or kill him. That was the Vedic system. We find from the life and ruling of Maharaja Prithu, how he was ruling over the world, how he was observing that every community, either brahmana or kshatriya or vaishya or shudra, they were properly employed. There was no unemployment question. It was the duty of the king to see that not a single man is unemployed. He must be engaged. So they made arrangement like that.

So what is the idea? The idea is to elevate everyone gradually to the position of brahmana and Vaishnava and thus make their life perfect. That is the scheme of Vedic civilization. Chatur-varnyam maya srishtam guna-karma-vibhagashah [Bhagavad-gita 4.13]. Not that "Keep the shudras or the mlecchas [outcastes] in the downtrodden position, and let me advance." No. Everyone should cooperate. Why the shudras or mlecchas and yavanas should remain as such? Actually, India's falldown is meant by that process. Nobody cared. So many Muslims, they converted, but the higher caste, they did not care. "Oh, they have become Muslims. Reject them." Why reject? Krishna says,

mam hi partha vyapashritya
ye pi syuh papa-yonayah
striyo vaishyas tatha shudras
te 'pi yanti param gatim

"Those who take shelter in Me, though they be of lower birth—women, vaishyas [merchants] and shudras [workers]—can attain the supreme destination." [Bg. 9.32]

Why these Muslims were neglected? Why they were not turned into Vaishnavas, just like we are doing? This is the fault of the leaders. Therefore India is now divided, Pakistan and Hindustan.

So if we actually try to understand Krishna and Krishna consciousness, there is solution for all the problems of society, of government, and everything. It is not a sentimental movement.

Divisions of society natural and necessary

PRABHUPADA: This word Hindu is not a Sanskrit word. It was given by the Muhammadans. You know that there is a river, Indus, which in Sanskrit is called Sindhu. The Muhammadans pronounce s as h. Instead of Sindhu, they made it Hindu. So Hindu is a term that is not found in the Sanskrit dictionary, but it has come into use. But the real cultural institution is called varnashram. There are four varnas (social divisions)—brahmana, kshatriya, vaishya, and shudra—and four ashrams (spiritual divisions)—brahmacharya, grihastha, vanaprastha, and sannyasa. According to the Vedic concept of life, unless people take to this system or institution of four varnas and four ashrams, actually they do not become civilized human beings. One has to take this process of four divisions of social orders and four divisions of spiritual orders; that is called varnashram. India's culture is based on this age-old Vedic system.

PROFESSOR KOTOVSKY: Varnashram.

PRABHUPADA: Varnashram. And in the Bhagavad-gita—perhaps you have read the Bhagavad-gita?

PROFESSOR KOTOVSKY: Yes.

PRABHUPADA: There, in the Bhagavad-gita (4.13), is the statement chatur-varnyam maya srishtam: this system was created by Vishnu [God]. So since varnashram is a creation of the Supreme, it cannot be changed. It is prevalent everywhere. It is like the sun. The sun is a creation of the Supreme. The sunshine is there in America, in Russia, and in India—everywhere. Similarly, this varnashram system is prevalent everywhere in some form or another. Take, for example, the brahmanas, the most intelligent class of men. They are the brains of the society. The kshatriyas are the administrative class; then the vaishyas are the productive class, and the shudras are the worker class. These four classes of men are prevalent everywhere under different names. Because it is created by the original creator, so it is prevalent everywhere, varnashram-dharma.

PROFESSOR KOTOVSKY: It is interesting that in the opinion of some European and old Russian scholars, this varnashram system is a later creation, and if you would read the old texts of Vedic literature, you would find a much more simple and agrarian society. It is the opinion of these scholars that the varnashram system was introduced in Indian society in the late age of the Vedic era but not from the beginning. And if you would analyze the old texts, you would find that in the old classical India it was not so prevalent.

PRABHUPADA: As far as we are concerned, it is mentioned in the Bhagavad-gita. Chatur-varnyam maya srishtam [Bg. 4.13]. The Bhagavad-gita was spoken five thousand years ago, and in the Bhagavad-gita it is said, "This system of the Bhagavad-gita was spoken by Me to the sun-god." So if you take an estimation of that period, it comes to forty million years ago. Can the European scholars trace back history five thousand years? Can they go back forty million years? We have evidence that this varnashram system has been current at least five thousand years. The varnashram system is also mentioned in the Vishnu Purana (3.8.9). Varnashram charavata purushena parah puman [cited in Chaitanya-charitamrita Madhya 8.58]. That is stated in the Vishnu Purana. Varnashram-dharma is not a phenomenon of a historical period calculated in the modern age. It is natural.

In the Srimad-Bhagavatam the comparison is given that just as in the body there are four divisions—the brain division, the arms division, the belly division, and the leg division—so by nature's way these four divisions are existing in the social body. There exist a class of men who are considered the brain, a class of men who are considered the arms of the state, a class of men who are called the productive class, and so on. There is no need of tracing history; it is naturally existing from the day of creation.

PROFESSOR KOTOVSKY: You have said that in any society there are four divisions, but they are not so easy to distinguish. For instance, one can group together different social classes and professional groups into four divisions in any society; there is no difficulty. The only difficulty is, for instance, in the socialistic society—in our country and other socialist societies—how you can distinguish the productive group from the workers.

PRABHUPADA: For example, we belong to the intellectual class of men. This is a division.

PROFESSOR KOTOVSKY: Intelligent class, brahmanas. And you can also put together all the intelligentsia in that department.

PRABHUPADA: Yes.

PROFESSOR KOTOVSKY: And then the administrative class.

PRABHUPADA: Yes.

PROFESSOR KOTOVSKY: But who are the vaishyas and shudras? That is the difficulty. Because all others are workers—factory workers, collective farm workers, and so on. So from this point of view there is a great distinction, in my opinion, between socialist society and all societies preceding socialism, because in modern Western society you can group all social and professional classes in these particular class divisions—brahmanas, kshatriyas, vaishyas, and shudras: intellectuals, productive class, owners of the productive system (factory owners, for instance), and menial workers. But here you have no vaishyas because you have administrative staffs in factories, and you can call them kshatriyas, and then there are the shudras, the workers themselves, but no intermediate class.

PRABHUPADA: That is stated: kalau shudra-sambhavah. In this age practically all men are shudras. But if there are simply shudras, the social order will be disturbed. In spite of your state of shudras, the brahmana is found here, and that is necessary. If you do not divide the social order in such a way, there will be chaos. That is the scientific estimation of the Vedas. You may belong to the shudra class, but to maintain social order you have to train some of the shudras to become brahmanas. Society cannot depend on shudras. Nor can you depend on the brahmanas. To fulfill the necessities of your body, there must be a brain, arms, a stomach, and legs. The legs, the brain, and the arms are all required for cooperation to fulfill the mission of the whole body. So in any society you can see that unless there are these four divisions, there will be chaos. It will not work properly. It will be maya [illusion], and there will be disturbances. The brain must be there, but at the present moment there is a scarcity of brains. I am not talking of your state or my state; I am taking the world as a whole. ... If you want to maintain the peace and prosperity of the whole world society, you must create a very intelligent class of men, a class of men expert in administration, a class of men expert in production, and a class of men to work. That is required; you cannot avoid it. That is the Vedic conception, mukha-bahuru-pada jah (Srimad-Bhagavatam 11.17.13). Mukha means "the face," bahu means "the arms," uru means "the waist," and pada, "the legs." Whether you take this state or that state, unless there is a smooth, systematic establishment of these four orders of life, the state or society will not run very smoothly.

PROFESSOR KOTOVSKY: Generally it seems to me that this whole varnashram system to some extent created a natural division of labor in the ancient society. But now division of labor among people in any society is much more complicated and sophisticated. So it is very confusing to group them into four classes.

PRABHUPADA: Confusion has come to exist because in India, at a later day, the son of a brahmana, without having the brahminical qualifications, claimed to be a brahmana; and others, out of superstition or a traditional way, accepted him as a brahmana. Therefore the Indian social order was disrupted. But in our Krishna consciousness movement we are training brahmanas everywhere, because the world needs the brain of a brahmana. Although Maharaja Parikshit was a monarch, he had a body of brahmanas and learned sages to consult, an advisory body. It is not that the monarchs were independent. In history it is found that if some of the monarchs were not in order, they were dethroned by the brahminical advisory council. Although the brahmanas did not take part in politics, they would advise the monarch how to execute the royal function. This is not too far in the past. How long ago was Ashoka?

PROFESSOR KOTOVSKY: That would be equal to what we call, in our terminology, ancient and medieval India.

PRABHUPADA: Yes.

PROFESSOR KOTOVSKY: In old and feudal India—you are right—it was very open, and the major part of the high administrative staff in the legislative department were brahmanas. Even in the Mogul era there were brahmanas to advise the Muslim emperors and administrators.

PRABHUPADA: That is a fact—the brahmanas were accepted. They formed the advisory committee of the king. For example, Chandragupta, the Hindu king, was in the age of Alexander the Great. Just before Chandragupta, Alexander the Great went from Greece into India and conquered a portion. When Chandragupta became emperor, he had Chanakya as his prime minister. Perhaps you have heard this name Chanakya?

PROFESSOR KOTOVSKY: Yes.

PRABHUPADA: Yes, he was a great brahmana politician, and it is by his name that the quarter of New Delhi where all the foreign embassies are grouped together is called Chanakya Puri. Chanakya Pandit was a great politician and brahmana. He was vastly learned. His moral instructions are still valuable. In India, schoolchildren are taught Chanakya Pandit's instructions. Although he was the prime minister, Chanakya Pandit maintained his brahmana spirit; he did not accept any salary. If a brahmana accepts a salary, it is understood that he has become a dog. That is stated in the Srimad-Bhagavatam. He can advise, but he cannot accept employment. So Chanakya Pandit was living in a cottage, but he was actually the prime minister.

This brahminical culture and the brahminical brain is the standard of Vedic civilization. The Manu-smriti is an example of the standard of brahminical culture. You cannot trace out from history when the Manu-smriti was written, but it is considered so perfect that it is the Hindu law. There is no need for the legislature to pass a new law daily to adjust social order. The law given by Manu is so perfect that it can be applicable for all time. It is stated in Sanskrit to be tri-kaladau, which means "good for the past, present, and future."

PROFESSOR KOTOVSKY: I am sorry to interrupt you, but to my knowledge all of Indian society in the second half of the eighteenth century was, by order of the British administration, under a law divergent from Hindu law. There was a lot of change. The actual Hindu law that was used by the Hindus was quite different from the original Manu-smriti.

PRABHUPADA: They have now made changes. Even our late Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru introduced his own Hindu code. He introduced the right of divorce in marriage, but this was not in the Manu-samhita. There are so many things they have changed, but before this modern age the whole human society was governed by the Manu-smriti. Strictly speaking, modern Hindus are not strictly following the Hindu scriptures.

But our point is not to try to bring back the old type of Hindu society. That is impossible. Our idea is to take the best ideas from the original idea. For example, in the Srimad-Bhagavatam there is a description of the communist idea. It is described to Maharaja Yudhishthira. If there is something good, a good experience, why shouldn't you adopt it? That is our point of view. Besides that, modern civilization is missing one all-important point—the aim of human life. Scientifically, the aim of human life is self-realization, atma-tattva. It is said that unless the members of human society come to the point of self-realization, they are defeated in whatever they do. Actually it is happening in modern society, despite all economic advancement and other advancement: instead of keeping peace and tranquillity, they are fighting—individually, socially, politically, and nationally. If we think about it in a cool-headed way, we can see that in spite of much improvement in many branches of knowledge, we are keeping the same mentality that is visible in the lower animal society. Our conclusion, according to the Srimad-Bhagavatam, is that this human body is not meant for working hard for sense gratification. But people do not know anything beyond that. They do not know about the next life. There is no scientific department of knowledge to study what happens after this body is finished. That is a great department of knowledge.