A few years ago, ISKCON officials in North America presented their objections to daiva-varṇāśrama.

They do not represent every current criticism of daiva-varṇāśrama, but they do cover the majority, at least in spirit.

There are seven and I will briefly address each one.

First is that ISKCON should not take up varṇāśrama now because no one understands it sufficiently.

It is true that, aside from establishing farm communities and cow protection, an ISKCON-wide consensus on how to further develop daiva-varṇāśrama does not exist. However, among those who have studied Prabhupāda’s instructions on daiva-varṇāśrama and gained decades of expertise, a few schools of thought and practice have emerged. Plus, there is general agreement about the basics.[1]

Among intelligent people, there will always be positive, productive disagreements. When scientists disagree, we do not say to reject science. When parents argue, the children have no right to say the parents should divorce. And to assume that “no one understands” is like an atheist who says that no one can know God.

Second is that varṇāśrama is for less intelligent people and thus we in ISKCON are not meant for varṇāśrama.

It is true that daiva-varṇāśrama invites śūdras to take part.[2] However, such an invitation broadens Mahāprabhu’s movement to include the masses[3] as Gauḍīya preachers did in Jaipur, Rajasthan, West Bengal, East Bengal (Bangladesh) and Manipur.[4] Some may wish to restrict ISKCON to brāhmaṇas, kṣatriyas, and vaiśyas; however, śūdras (the working classes) are an important part of modern society. They form the backbone of a democratic society, a culture that has egalitarian and liberal ideals, and an age in which everyone is basically a śūdra (kalau śūdra sambhava).[5]

Third, introducing varṇas is dangerous as it would promote the caste system and establish material designations.

True, historically, asura-varṇāśrama has led to discrimination. But even when people are not officially placed in classes, they still discriminate based on wealth, education, beauty, fame, power, etc.

Those who are tainted by leftist ideology seek to establish a utopia in which such discrimination does not exist, but seeking a utopia in this world is contrary to Vedānta philosophy.[6]

Instead, the four classes are established to organize a daivic society that leads to non-discrimination (sarvopādhi vinirmuktam and brahma-bhuta prasnnātmā).[7]

Both modern society and Indian varṇāśrama are asuric and prone to harmful discrimination.[8]

And here lies the dispute. Devotees who do not view modern society or Hindu social structure as asuric will undoubtedly disagree.[9] Such a belief is based not on evidence but sentiment. Thus, it will not be effective to present evidence in the face of sentimental attachment to either modern global culture or current Hindu society.

The evidence in Prabhupāda’s writings is abundant. There are many statements like “bringing about a revolution in the impious lives of this world’s misdirected civilization.”[10]

Those who desire to conform to the status quo are mistaken, even for a strategy like preaching by infiltrating society. Such a strategy invites māyā’s influence. For a few, it may be possible, but not as a rule.[11]

Fourth, Śrīla Prabhupāda at times adjusted things and even changed his mind.

I agree with that statement. However, there is a difference between adjusting a strategy and ignoring a core principle. For example, a few leaders have expressed embarrassment with book distribution. They say that the books have errors in them, and the distributors often do not give the impression of a sophisticated organization.[12]

Despite such a view, Prabhupāda did indeed establish book distribution as a core strategy, a principle that his followers must follow.[13] Daiva-varṇāśrama is like that. It is one of the principal strategies that, admittedly, Prabhupāda was not able to develop fully.[14]

When we decry daiva-varṇāśrama, we criticize the many devotees serving in farm communities throughout the world. When we disparage the institution of book distribution, we diminish the services of book distributors. That is Vaiṣṇava-ninda, an offense against Vaiṣṇavas.[15]

Fifth, ISKCON is meant to promote a totally different brand or approach from that of varṇāśrama.

Śrīla Prabhupāda discouraged the organization of ISKCON as a centralized corporation.[16] The idea of establishing a corporate brand is highly suspect. It is acceptable for some devotees to advocate their own approach to preaching, but many competing approaches are valid in spreading Mahāprabhu’s movement.

It is contrary to Prabhupāda’s guidelines for one powerful group to impose their view on all others to thus establish a totalitarian or corporate ISKCON “brand.”

Sixth, ISKCON devotees are very wealthy and will become wealthier than non-devotees within 20 years.

This is a spurious argument. ISKCON was founded as a brahminical movement, not a vaiśya movement.[17] It is true that modern society highly values money; however, brāhmaṇas value knowledge of Brahman above all else.

The third objection above was that varṇāśrama, a classed society, leads to discrimination. So does wealth accumulation.

That is happening today in ISKCON. Those who have wealth are targeted by the ISKCON authorities as valuable contributors and others are often neglected. Moreover, among devotees, those who are wealthy sometimes think of themselves as above the other devotees. During festivals, especially in India, the wealthy donors are given preferential seating. Wealth is a dangerous commodity unless used fully in devotional service, and that tends to be the exception not the rule. Therefore, in a daiva-varṇāśrama society, the duty of the brāhmaṇas and sannyāsīs is to guide the others in using their wealth for Kṛṣṇa.[18]

Seventh, ISKCON should not go against the present trends of egalitarianism as found especially in America.

This point is at the heart of most objections to daiva-varṇāśrama and possibly even book distribution. It implies, at least in part, that we should be careful not to make waves in modern society.

Modern society or American society is asuric. Again, as mentioned above, due to sentimental attachment to modern society, reason and evidence may not be effective enough to prove that position.[19]

Instead, I assert that those who are not willing to stand against American society are afraid. Prabhupāda said that a preacher must be fearless.[20] He was Abhay or fearless. There have been many fearless devotees in ISKCON’s short history.

And to back down from challenging modern society admits weakness.

Of course, any challenge must be done cleverly. Cāṇakya Paṇḍita said when an opponent is stronger, one must be cunning to overcome him.[21] But to back down in the face of asuric society shows fear, weakness, and a lack of ingenuity.

In WWII, Neville Chamberlain wanted to appease Hitler, but Winston Churchill and the allies waged war and defeated him. Thus, Churchill is celebrated as the important figure, not the one who desired appeasement.

[1] See “Daiva-Varṇāśrama Definition and Goals,” Daiva Varṇāśrama Journal, Issue One, https://cvc.guru/1-goals.

[2] Bhagavad-gītā (BG) 9.32, striyo vaiśyās tathā śūdrās te ‘pi yānti parāṁ gatim: “Although women, vaiśyas and śūdras are considered less intelligent, they also can become devotees and return home, back to Godhead.”

[3] Prabhupāda Conversation, Feb 14, 1977: “In order to serve the mass of people, to bring them to the ideal position, we should try to introduce this varṇāśrama…”

[4] There are roughly three million Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇavas in Bangladesh and one million in Manipur.

[5] Skanda Purāṇa

[6] BG 8.15

[7] Śrī Caitanya-caritāmṛta (CC) Madhya 19.170 and BG 18.54

[8] Śrīmad Bhāgavatam (SB) 5.5.29, Nov 16, 1976, lecture: “The human society begins when there is varṇāśrama-dharma. Otherwise, it is animal society. There is no human society.” And BG 16.7-9, Jan 23, 1975 lecture: “They have established their civilization, as it is stated in the Bhagavad-gītā, animal or asuric civilization.”

[9] Prabhupāda’s letter, Aug 26, 1958: “The cult of Hinduism or the system of varṇāśrama are not being utilized in the spirit of the Bhagavad-gita and as such the abovementioned cult is waning day by day.“ Civilization and Transcendence, “Concocted Religion:” “Nowadays India, like the rest of the world, has also given up the real religious system – sanātana-dharma, or varṇāśrama-dharma. In India they have accepted a hodgepodge thing called ‘Hinduism.’” BG 1.20 lecture, July 17, 1973: “This is called asuric varṇāśrama.”

[10] SB 1.5.11

[11] We see clearly that the influence of modern education and materialistic society erodes Vaiṣṇava values, if not in one generation, then two.

[12] Several years ago, this view was privately held by a few of ISKCON’s leaders and one of them expressed it to me.

[13] Our Family Business, Vaisesika Dasa

[14] Prabhupāda increasingly spoke of varṇāśrama toward his final years. It was not during one or two brainstorming sessions as an optional direction. See “Daiva-Varṇāśrama Definition and Goals,” Daiva-Varṇāśrama Journal, Issue One: “During the first few years of ISKCON, Śrīla Prabhupāda focused on saṅkīrtana and book distribution as mass activities. Then in the last three years, he began emphasizing daiva-varṇāśrama as a mass solution, conforming with Mahāprabhu’s “para-upakāra” verse.”

[15] CC Madhya 15.261, purport

[16] Prabhupāda letter to Karandhara, a GBC and BBT trustee, Dec 22, 1972: “Do not centralise anything. Each temple must remain independent and self-sufficient.”

[17] “Yajña or Sacrifice to the Supreme,” Back to Godhead, May 20, 1956.

[18] SB 1.17.39-42

[19] The same as the above footnote: BG 16.7-9, Jan 23, 1975, lecture: “They have established their civilization, as it is stated in the Bhagavad-gītā, animal or asuric civilization.”

[20] BG 16.1-3, purport: “For a sannyāsī, the first qualification should be fearlessness.”

[21] Kautilya Arthaśāstra, Book 10, 3.2-24