Thread by @kaundabhatta

She has misquoted Jagadguru, when I went to the chapter and verse, she has presented only half of it. The last part is conveniently ommitted. It is true unlike Smartas Vallabhacharya does not accept Varna at birth, but he does accept eligibility at birth which ill elaborate now +

https://twitter.com/RamaInExile/status/1390631422981906445

I have seen many political Hindus use Vaishnavacharyas to peddle false liberal notions, like Ramanujacharya for egalitarian equality, Madhvacharya for his cherrypicked statements on Varna by quality, The Yudhishthira-Sarpa conversation in MB and now Vallabhacharya. +

Varna isn't Jati, it is clear. Even the Smaartas she hates Shankaracharya doesn't accept any substance called Jati. But here we are not talking of Jati which is Varna synonym, but Jati which is an inseperable inherent attribute, which the Naiyayika system proposes. +

Such Jaati is rejected by all Vedantis as there is no proof of the relationship called समवाय to exist. Ramanuja has said Jati is nothing other than the संस्थान and Shankara has said  एतेन कर्मसामान्यविशेषसमवायादीनां द्रव्यात्मकता व्याख्याता (jati is not diff from dravya)

Now that the Jati which Vallabhacharya has denied is understood lets move on to whats written. Its written that Varna is a divine entity देवता. In Purushasukta, all Devas like Indra Vayu Agni are shown as emerged from different parts of Narayana. So are the 4 Varnas.

Hence these Varnas are also Devatas in their main form. The concept of Devata means, a special force, a specific power of Narayana which he uses for different purposes to govern the Universe. For eg, the Ganga Water, water isn't a Devata. Water is the one where Ganga Devi has +

entered into, hence water also is called Ganga. Similarly these 4 Varnas, who are special powers sprung from Narayana, enter a body, that Person is called a Brahmana, Kshatriya etc. I will further only use the word Brahmana and from that Kshatriya and Vaishya should be understood

The purpose of accepting this, is because there are several Puranic examples, like of Vishvamitra. He was a born Kshatriya but became a Brahmana. If Varna is the Inseperable Naiyayika concept of Jati, how did Vishvamitra get Brahmanatva? Its explained that this Devata entered +

body of Vishvamitra and hence he can be called a Brahmana. there Are many such examples in Puranas where parents are of different Varnas but son has mostly Varna of father. Its Jati not in the Naiyayika sense but Jati has another definition in Vedantis. +

For Vallabha, jati means संस्कारेण जायते इति जातिः (that which is obtained through Samskara/janeu ceremony) is Jati. Vallabha has defined Brahmanatva in 3 ways. Through Vritti Samskara and Birth. He has accepted a minor type of Brahmanatva at birth, but not the Devata one. +

Its not possible for a Vaishya to have Samskara of Brahmana and become Brahmana. Only a Brahmana at birth will become enjoined by the Devata after his Janeu. Similarly only a born Kshatriya can become a proper Kshatriya after his Janeu. This even Smartas accept, only the terms +

differ. There are various ways Varna Devata can enter the body. It can be through Tapas like in the case of Vishvamitra. It can be through a boon, like the case of Gautama's Shudra son. But if it is through Janeu Samskara, birth is important. As for janeu birth is prerequirement.

Now ill show the commentary itself and try to explain in simple terms whatever I could understand. He explains that Brahmana came out of Mukha/Mouth, hence he is Mukhya (major) of all other Varnas, and hence is a Guru. His creation is to Upadesha/preach.

Etymologically Vallabha has defined Brahmanhood into 3 ways. First is ब्रह्मणि स्थितम् = situated in Brahm (Akshara Brahm). This is the best form, as if he follows his Vritti (occupation to teach) he will be situated in Brahmajnana,the ideal Brahmana with janma+samskara+karma

Now second Brahmana is derived as तत्र भवः, here Brahm means Veda. One who has been born through Veda, ie through Vedic Mantras in Janeu Samskara, the Devataa has been born/enjoined inside this body. Which is like a new birth hence now He is Dvija (twiceborn).

The third and the lowest form of Brahmanhood is derived as तस्येदम् (related to brahm), which can mean born in a Brahmana family or as he commented उपदेशनार्थमेव ब्रह्म आधिभौतिकं निर्गतम् for the purpose to preach the physical brahm (born brahmana) has emerged. The next sentence

Is really important which translates as "aa emerged through bhautika/physical brahm, as been faced towards mouth, by that similarity, that physical brahm enters the first/major category of Varnas, hence such Brahmana only is teacher of 2nd Brahm/veda for the knowing 3rd Brahm +

Akshara Brahm, hence he (physical brahmana) is Upadeshta (Guru). This makes it pretty clear. That in the general case, a Born Brahmana is by birth a Guru, as he has got this birth only to teach. His creation is for Upadesha. The difference is that just by birth he wont +

be Pure or Eligible. As Vallabhas say by birth Everyone is a Shudra, actual shudra not shudra-like. The Brahmanhood at birth is not major Brahmanhood that comes after Samskara. At birth, such Brahmanhood is only as a precondition that makes you eligible for Janeu and eligible +

For the enjoinment with the Varna Devata. Otherwise anybody will become eligible for Samskara and become Brahmana. In Bhagavata 7.11.13 it is said that birth should be in such a family where the chain of Samskaras are Unbroken (from Garbhadhana to antyeshti). Such a person would

be eligible for being Brahmana Kshatriya or Vaishya after his Janeu depending on his birth.

Basically, in general cases what is your birth = your Varna after Janeu. If you're Vaishya at birth = you become Vaishya after Janeu. Now let us see something else. Commentary of Purushottamaji. आद्येन वृत्ततः द्वितीयेन संस्कारतः तृतीयेन जननमात्राद् =

Which is by first etymology, he is best brahmana through vritti (that is enjoined with birth samskara and karma), second is through Samskara and third is the lowest which is only through birth (जननमात्राद्)। another commentary on जन्मना ब्राह्मणः श्रेयान् verse is +

Subodhini = उत्पन्न.....गच्छति here Krishna has used कैमुतिककन्याय like he used in Gita. Commentary also says here that Brahmanas are Greatest of all Living Beings by birth itself (birth in a family where chain of Samskaras in unbroken shouldn't be forgotten). Also if by birth +

itself a Brahmana is Superior, as he is made for the purpose of Preaching the Vedas that lead to Brahmajnana. What if he is is endowed with tapas vidya and self-satisfaction. He is much greater than a born Brahmana. And the one who is endowed with my worship, ie a Vaishnava, +

There is nobody greater in this world than a Brahmana who is also a devoted Vaishnava. This is Kaimutikanyaya (if this is superior, what shall say of that). Vallabha says 'सर्वे वेदा ब्राह्मणे तिष्ठन्ति, मानाधीना मेयसिद्धिः' which means All the Vedas rest in the Brahmana,

Vedas are Proof मान, and the मेय (knowable of Vedas) is me. The way to reach me is through Vedas and Vedas rest in the Brahmana, hence Brahmanas are Superior. This is basically cherrypicking one part and not showing the rest. Fraudacy at its best. I hope all doubts are cleared. +

And i apologize in advanCED if i too have not able to interpret the intention of Vallabhacharya correctly as I haven't studied this under a Guru. I Have learnt Sanskrit Grammar Nyaya Mimamsa common knowledge based on that i read the commentary and said as it is what i understood.

@UnrollHelper