Section 6

6.1 "Ardhabuddhi's Dasa's" version

Please note that even in this version the header says that there are 38 lines. So, where did they go? What was cut out? Why? To find out, please see the original version which follows. Or if you doubt our integrity, you can retrieve these texts from the COM sysops.

Letter COM:1714977 (38 lines)
From: Bhakti Vikasa Swami
Date: 24-Sep-98 10:47
To:
Comment: Text COM:1719236 by Basu Ghosh (das) ACBSP (Baroda - IN)
Subject: Re: malati's response
------------------------------------------------------------
"Purvapakshin" is the best word, as it brings images of a dignified,
rather than purely political, opponent. Often, the other party have made most undignified attacks (I was the subject of one of them, on Chakra); but
our hope should be that "amanina manadena" on our part will sober them up. We should bring discussion up from the emotional level and oppose them on sastric grounds, on which we are certain to prevail. Slanging matches are fit for uneducated village women. We can't win on that level.

I'm not suggesting that our presentation should not be strong. But the sastric quotes are in themselves so heavy that we hardly need to add our own expletives. For instance, using Srila Prabhupada's definition of a prostitute, we can (in polite terms) question the status of remarried Iskcon women. This is certain to get the feminazis highly riled, as they are mostly re-married divorcees, but we can simply cooly again present the Prabhupada quote to them, and not allow them to obfuscate the point with their name-calling.

The original version

Letter COM:1714977 (38 lines)
From: Bhakti Vikasa Swami
Date: 24-Sep-98 10:47
To
Comment: Text COM:1719236 by Basu Ghosh (das) ACBSP (Baroda - IN)
Subject: Re: malati's response
------------------------------------------------------------
"Purvapakshin" is the best word, as it brings images of a dignified, rather
than purely political, opponent. Often, the other party have made most
undignified attacks (I was the subject of one of them, on Chakra); but our
hope should be that "amanina manadena" on our part will sober them up. We
should bring discussion up from the emotional level and oppose them on
sastric grounds, on which we are certain to prevail. Slanging matches are
fit for uneducated village women. We can't win on that level.

I'm not suggesting that our presentation should not be strong. But the sastric quotes are in themselves so heavy that we hardly need to add our own expletives. For instance, using Srila Prabhupada's definition of a prostitute, we can (in polite terms) question the status of remarried Iskcon women. This is certain to get the feminazis highly riled, as they are mostly remarried divorcees, but we can simply cooly again present the Prabhupada quote to them, and not allow them to obfuscate the point with their name-calling.

Here's an example of what kind of response we can expect (Mad Radha re Basu Ghosh):

> I want nothing to do with these over-zealous, arch conservative,
>backwards, women-hating, oppressive people who give ISKCON a bad name.
> I've engaged in too many discussions with them already.
> Tired of it. Sick of it.

We can deduce from this that they don't want to discuss, no doubt because
they are exposed each time. Thus the obfuscatory invectives.

GHQ needs to present a comprehensive, balanced presentation that answers
every claim of the feminazis with ample evidence from guru (Srila
Prabhupada), sadhu and shastra. Let the feminazis know that we want to
respect them as our worshipable mothers, but that they cannot expect or
demand respect if they insist on taking the role of prostitutes.

From the story of Mohini murti we find that even the demons did not want to enter into stri-vivada (argument with a woman). Might it not be better to
discuss with the husbands of these women (if they have husbands, or even if
they are on their fourth husband)?
(Text COM:1714977) -----------------------------------------

6.2 "Ardhabuddhi Dasa's" version

"Shyamasundar wrote:
I have thought of asking Bharata Srestha for all the texts sent to that
conference during that time and then filtering out those of the variety that MR wrote. Could either of Guru-Krsna or Krishna Kirti Prabhus please get these texts. You are his god-brother and it would be less suspicious than if I asked. It would be important research."

The original version

The original text indicates Mother Madhusudani Radha dd's insistence that Srila Prabhupada's books be changed; after all, he had "misconceptions" regarding gender issues, due to his cultural upbringing:

Text COM:1737633 (137 lines)
From: Shyamasundara ACBSP
Date: 02-Oct-98 00:10
Cc: GHQ
Reference: Text COM:1733788 by Sita (dd) GKG (Back to Basics) (Ontario)
Subject: Re: more on compilation
------------------------------------------------------------

> The subject matter is so vast that a few books can easily be compiled.
> This may not be a bad idea as a future project. The immediate challenge
> is to make a comprehensive yet concise presentation of the issues at hand.

A very good idea that should be done as a follow through to the present
effort. If we don't follow through with more material things will flounder.
We should be able to get the BBT to pay for the publishing of these books
because they are mostly SP's guidance on a very important issue.

Svasa Prabhu, is on this forum and he is a BBT trustee. Svavas Prabhu, do
you think that the BBT would publish such a book(s)? It is sastra. In sanskrit Sastra roughly means "that which controls". It is like a weapon, or an elephant goad. It keeps people on the right track.

> Some thoughts:
>
> 1. We each assume responsibility for compiling a presentation on a
> particular issue. These are then send around for further input and editing.
> It is then compiled as a completed paper with various subcategories.

I have one topic I would work on "How feminism is a flavor of mayavada." I
have already developed this topic to a certain extent and published on DoW,
but I also want to include more by dealing with the "mahavakhya" of the
feminists. Which is "kalua sudra sambhava." This is one of the few points of
sastra that they quote, and they have essentially hoodwinked everyone into
thinking that since everyone is born a sudra in kali-yuga, then all is "one." So unless someone else wants to tackle that topic, I'll take it.

> 2. Many of the issues are dealt with in the papers by, Jyotirmayi,
> Visakha, Pranada and Radha (I haven't read a transcript of her
> presentation on the UN laws etc. Does anyone know how to get a copy?)
> We could summarize the points and respond to them in one paper.

I haven't got Jyotirmayi's paper, though I saw it. Nor the others. I believe
they are mostly all available on Chakra, but for the last few days when I
clicked on the women's issue page, that had all this stuff, the page was down. (Is this a good omen?) So if you have all this information please put it into one bundle and post it to the GHQ file area so that others can download it.

I do have the latest report from the European women's convention where they make such points as:

"Two presentations were made, one by Radha dasi about a model for women's participation in ISKCON from International Law and another one by Gaurangi dasi about the power of words and the correct understanding and use of certain expressions about women found in the sastras."

This last point suggests that soon we will see very twisted interpretations of what Srila Prabhupada said about women.

The following was sent to me by a nameless devotee who is member of the VAST forum in relation to Madhusudani Radha's (hence forth MR) insistence that Srila Prabhupada's books be changed because SP had "misconceptions" because he was culturally backward and not up to modern times:
__________________
"Dear Syamasundara Prabhu,

Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada.

I doubt if I have those texts to dig up. Perhaps the conference organizers,
Brahmatirtha Prabhu (bobcohen@ivs.edu) or Bharata Srestha Prabhu
(wwall@ivs.edu) will have them. Since her comments went to the whole
conference, her views are not particularly secretive. I seem to remember
that the discussion where she wrote about gender references in Srila
Prabhupada's books took place on the conference around March or April of
1998, though it could have been a little earlier than that. Again, the discussion was about whether to change Srila Prabhupada's books for presentation in academic circles, especially with regards to altering passages with politically incorrect gender references. Mother Madhusudani Radha opined that these passages shouldn't be changed merely as a preaching strategy, but because Srila Prabhupada had misconceptions, deriving from his cultural upbringing, about gender roles in society.

If you want to put me on some conference as an observer, that's okay with
me. If it's too much of a botheration, then I'll get myself off the conference.
I'm interested to hear what devotees are saying about so many topics, but my time is limited. Hare Krsna.

Your servant, XYZ dasa"
_____________________________

I have thought of asking Bharata Srestha for all the texts sent to that
conference during that time and then filtering out those of the variety that
MR wrote. Could either of Guru-Krsna or Krishna Kirti Prabhus please get
these texts. You are his god-brother and it would be less suspicious than if
I asked. It would be important research.

The point is that if these feminists continue in their ascendancy they will
force the BBT, that's you Svasa Prabhu, to edit Srila Prabhu's books so that
they are politically correct for the 90's.

> 4. Anything already written by any of the members (or non-members for
> thatmatter) should be made available and read by everyone on this
> conference. We may already have the main body of the paper in the form
> of these separate essays, articles etc. If so, they can be touched-up,
> reformatted, and expanded upon to meet our current objectives.

We should actively recruit writers on this issue. They don't have to join
GHQ but could work with a GHQ member as part of his cell.

> 5. Unlike the feminists, there is a vast amount of scriptural resources
> available to us. I have complied an index of quotes on many of these
> related issues. They also could be posted and used as a reference. More
> quotes and/or reference could be added to the list. This list in itself
> could be published as a reference guide for devotees.
>
> WOMEN QUOTES
>
> "Our Women"
> As Managers
> Become ideal
> Brahmacarini
> Breaking regs for husband
> Comte's view of Women
> Controlled by husband (men)
> Defects of ISKCON - Women

Are these already organized and ready to go? What is there state of
readiness?
(Text COM:1737633) -----------------------------------------

6.3

In further reference to removing "sexism" from Srila Prabhupada's books, we recently received the following text from another devotee, who also confirmed the above statements on this topic:

> If you are interested there is a core of devotees who are starting to
> counter this feminist cancer. It is shocking that "respected" leaders in
> ISKCON are supporting feminism.

I am interested. Don't let this out, but one of the most disturbing things I saw in my life was a post on VAST, by a highly intelligent scholar in a highly respected U.S. University who seriously suggested editing out all of the sexist statements from Prabhupada's books. These are the influential (if not also behind-the-scenes) devotees ISKCON has be cautious with.

Date: Fri, 27 Nov 98 10:19 -0500
From: "COM: Bharata Srestha (das) HDG (IPSET, CA - USA)"
To: <VAST@com.bbt.se>, Jan Brzezinski <janbrz@microtec.net>
Subject: Prabhupada and Hinduism article for ICJ

[Text 1887157 from COM]

PAMHO

I am glad that this forum is actually contributing to our work.

Also, a note regarding the recent faux pas on my part which led to postings
being published on VNN. The information was intended to advance a thoroughly misogynistic interpretation of Srila Prabhupada. Mercifully, by Krishna's arrangement, the texts from December 1997 to April 1998 vanished in a COM system crash. These texts contain our spirited discussions on the intellgence of women. Although I am sure that a summary of that discussion would have been valuable, I suspect that VNN reaction to several of posts would have created annoying "diversions" for many of us. Since that would have been my fault, I am glad it did not happen.

YS
Bharata
 
 
 
 

6.4 "Ardhabuddhi Dasa's" version

Forwarded text by Krishna-kirti:13

In my view, it seems that replying privately to her and others of her ilk is a waste of time. All replies to such letters should be public, even if they request a private reply. Otherwise we are wasting energy.

But anyway, you can see from the above how they argue, and what are their strengths and weaknesses.

One of their weaknesses is that they are deficient in shastra, and long on selectively quoting Srila Prabhupada.

For the paper to also be effective, we need a database of feminist arguments for "equality", because it is these points we are dealing with and have
enamoured many leaders as well as rank and file. Some of our strongest
arguments will come from arguments which they have also used:

sarganam adir antas ca
madhyam caivaham arjuna
adhyatma-vidya vidyanam
vadah pravadatam aham

"Of all creations I am the beginning and the end and also the middle, O
Arjuna. Of all sciences I am the spiritual science of the self, and among logicians, I am the conclusive truth."

Purport

". . .Among logicians there are different kinds of argument. Supporting one's argument with evidence that also supports the opposing side is called jalpa. Merely trying to defeat one's opponent is called vitanda. But the actual conclusion is called vada. This conclusive truth is a representation of Krishna."

I have heard that Jivan Mukta P. has such a database of their arguments. Is that true, JM Prabhu?

Another thing is that when we present quotations from Manu-samhita or
other dharma shastras not translated by Srila Prabhupad, we have to also quote the sanskrit and be sure that the translation is accurate. I would highly recommend Basu Ghosh Prabhu for this. For any Bengali, Bhakti Vikas
Maharaj. Our arguments have to be airtight.

Your fallen servant, Krishna-kirti das
(Text 1729912) ---------------------------------------------

The original version

Text COM:1729912 (323 lines) [W1]
From: Krishna Kirti (das) HDG (Baltimore - USA)
Date: 29-Sep-98 12:52
To: GHQ [14]
Reference: Text COM:1729178 by Basu Ghosh (das) ACBSP (Baroda - IN)
Subject: KK for "Vyasa"
------------------------------------------------------------
> I hereby recommend, subject to acceptance by KK, that he "compile" the
> collected points & data & prepare a draft proposal for presentation to the
> GBC. Since "time is of the essence"; he can begin at once!
>
> After we agree on the draft proposal, then we can "ferret" it around to the
> "sympathetic" leaders for their approval.
>
> Are you game, KK? What says Shyamasundara & the other Prabhus?
> Bhakti Vikas Maharaj, what do you think?
>
> Please accept my humble obeisances at your lotus feet. All glories to
> ISKCON Founder-Acharya Srila Prabhupad.

If you want me to, I can compile the the collected points and data. I'm soon getting a Prabhupada Folio anyway--I am being viciously attacked by the Mad Radha and some slightly lighter shades of ISKCON liberalism on another conference.

I would suggest that the points not only stand on Srila Prabhupada's words,
but that we also draw on a wide source of other supplementary sources, with
Prabhupada's words being the foundation. For example, in one of Pancaratna
Prabhu's letters, he said

"For gentlemen, ladies first, no?"

Where did Prabhupad say that?

Obviously, staying in our Angreji Mandirs (no offense intended, this is just
how the locals view/say it, and we give them reason to do so) has sheltered
him from the realities of Indian culture. So one source can be what is the
actual culture of India, from an Indian's point of view, especially if it comes from some pundit.

Here's a recent vituperative reply from Mad Radha regarding the use of the
word "Mataji"

> >Dear Prabhujis and Matajis, please accept my humble obeisances. All
> >glories to ISKCON Founder-Acharya Srila Prabhupad.
>
> This is a private reply. Please note that it is inappropriate to write
> "Prabhus and Matajis". You (and I, and all of us) should think of
> *everyone* as your Prabhu, including women. That's how Prabhupada
> taught us, and even how he addressed his female disciples. By saying
> "Prabhus and Matajis" you are implying that women are somehow lower
> than men. Mataji is not a group label. It is simply how you as a man should > think of each woman that you meet and talk with (except your wife). Just
> like I should think of you as a son. It would be perfectly appropriate for
> you to address me or any other individual woman as Mataji. But it is not
> OK for you to refer to all of us that way as a group, especially not when
> contrasted with your use of Prabhu for the men on this conference.
>
> Ys,
> Madhusudani

> > By saying "Prabhus and Matajis" you are implying that women are
> > somehow lower than men.

> That is only your opinion. Please provide references that refering to
> women as "Mataji," individually or as a group, is demeaning. Remember,
> our standard is guru, sadhu, shastra.
>
> ys KKd
>
> P.S. Do you have any objections to using the phrase "Ladies and
> Gentlemen"?

> >P.S. Do you have any objections to using the phrase "Ladies and
> >Gentlemen"?
>
> nope. none whatsoever. those are both equally respectful, unlike masters
> and mothers.
>
> Here are some references of interest:
>
> The Lord Caitanya is called Mahäprabhu. Mahän-prabhu. Prabhu, master.
> There are different kinds of master, but He's the mahän-prabhu, the
> Supreme Master, Supreme Master, and Purusa at the same time. Prabhu,
> you can say... A woman also can become the master. . . (Cc Adi 7.108 lecture
> February 18, 1967)
>
> Now another thing, that girls should not be taken as inferior. You see?
> Sometimes... Of course, sometimes scripture we say that "Woman is the
> cause of bondage." So that should not be, I mean to say, aggravated.
> (laughs) That should not be aggravated, that "Woman is inferior," or
> something like that. So the girls who come, you should treat them nicely.
> After all, anyone who is coming to Krishna consciousness, man or woman,
> boys or girls, they are welcome. They are very fortunate. You see. And the
> idea of addressing "prabhu" means "you are my master." That is the...
> Prabhu means master. And Prabhupäda means many masters who bows
> down at his lotus feet. That is Prabhupäda. So each, everyone shall treat
> others as "My master." This is the Vaisnava (September 24, 1968
> conversation)
>
> From a letter to Himavati Devi Dasi, June 14, 1968:
> Yes, to call one another prabhu is all right, but not to become prabhu. To
> accept others as prabhu, and remain as servant is the idea. But because
> somebody is calling you prabhu, one should not become a prabhu, and treat
> others as servants. In other words, everyone should feel himself as servant, > and not to think himself prabhu because he is being called prabhu. This
> will make the relationship congenial.
>
> My Dear Ranadhira,
> Please accept my blessings. . . Yes, I have all blessings for the happy
> marriage of Haladhara Prabhu and Joan Prabhu, so you may immediately
> do the needful in this regards. (16 February, 1971)
>
> My Dear Rsabhadeva,
> Please accept my blessings. . . So long as there is Guru-Gauranga worship,
> Yamuna Prabhu may act as pujari . . . (March 25, 1971)
>
> Anna Prabhu may be initiated also and she has my blessings for being
> married to Puranda at the earliest convenience. (letter to Mukunda April
> 13, 1971)
>
> So the stock of japa beads I brought with me has been depleted. Malati
> Prabhu was supposed to have brought some beads with her from India,
> and so I would like that those beads be sent immediately to N.Y. center by
> air.

>(letter to Tribhuvanatha July 4, 1971)
>
> My Dear Kirtanananda Maharaja, Vrindaban Candra, and Silavati,
> Please accept my blessings. I beg to acknowledge receipt of your letters
> just now received by me here in Calcutta and describing your plans for
> travelling Sankirtana party, and it is very much encouraging news for me.
> Silavati Prabhu said that this was her long cherished dream. It has been
> mine also. . . (November 6, 1971)
>
> In Los Angeles I personally advised them in all the different aspects of
> deity worship, so you may consult, especially with Silavati Prabhu (now in
> Dallas) and do the needful. . . (letter to Sri Govinda, January 31, 1973)
>
> My dear Gangamayi,
> Please accept my blessings. . . I am glad to hear that you are determined to > stay and live in the temple now and that you are becoming very much
> attached to the Deity worship and very serious about serving the Deity
> along with Malati Prabhu. . . (May 9, 1974)
>
> My Dear Sacimata Prabhu,
> Please accept my blessings. I am in receipt of your letter dated 3rd
> October 1976 and I have noted the contents carefully. . .
>
> We are teaching our disciples to address amongst themselves "prabhu."
> This is not new thing. This is very old. Now Närada is addressing
> Vyäsadeva, "prabhu," his disciple. His disciple, he's addressing prabhu. So
> we should give respect. Just like we address, "Kirtanänanda Mahäräja."
> Although he's my disciple, but the respect should be given. Here, see,
> Närada is addressing Vyäsadeva: "Prabhu." "My dear prabhu. . (lecture, SB >1.5.1-4, May 22, 1969)
>
> A spiritual master takes his disciples as his spiritual master. That is the
> position. He thinks that "Krishna has sent me so many spiritual masters."
> He does not think himself as spiritual master. He thinks himself their
> servant. Because they have to be trained. Krishna has appointed him to
> train them. Therefore he thinks himself as servant of the disciples. This is
> the position. So when one is advanced, he can see the importance of
> devotees.
>
> Advanced devotee never disobey or disrespect another devotee. Disrespect
> to another devotee is a great offense. Vaishnava aparädha. Vaishnava
> aparädha is very serious offense. Therefore we teach to address amongst
> the devotees, "Prabhu", "Prabhu", "Such and such Prabhu." This should not
> be simply spoken by the lips. It should be realized. Everyone should think
> other devotee as his prabhu, master. Not he should try to become master.
> trnäd api sunicena
> taror api sahisnunä
> amäninä mänadena...
> Mänadena. We should be always ready to offer respect to all, not only
> devotees, but everyone. Everyone. Because every living entity is originally
> a devotee of Krishna. But circumstantially, being covered by the coat of
> mäyä, he's playing like demon. But his original nature is a devotee of
> Krishna. Jivera svarüpa haya nitya krsnera däsa. Everyone is eternally
> servant of Krishna. But being influenced by mäyä, when he gets this body,
> given by mäyä... Prakrteh kriyamänäni gunaih karmäni sarvasah, when
> he's conducted by the three gunas of mäyä, he thinks himself otherwise.
> He thinks himself independent of Krishna. But actually, nobody is
> independent of Krishna. (lecture NOD October 23, 1972)
>
> We advise everyone to address one another as Prabhu. Prabhu means
> master, so how the master should be disobeyed? Others, they are also pure
> devotees. All of my disciples are pure devotees. Anyone sincerely serving
> the spiritual master is a pure devotee . . . Do not try to make a faction
> . . . Amongst ourselves one should respect others as Prabhu, master, one
> another. As soon as we distinguish here is a pure devotee, here is a non-
> pure devotee, that means I am a nonsense. (letter: Tusta Krishna,
> December 14, 1972)
>
> Any Vaisnava is addressed as prabhu, but Sri Caitanya Mahäprabhu is
> Mahäprabhu, the topmost prabhu, the master prabhu. All others are
> servant prabhu. . . all Vaisnava should be addressed as prabhu; that is the
> etiquette. (CcAdi 7.2 lecture March 2, 1974)
>
> In Krishna consciousness we address our contemporaries as "prabhu."
> Prabhu means master. And the real idea is that "You are my master, I am
> your servant." Just the opposite number. Here, in the material world,
> everyone wants to place himself as the master. "I am your master, you are
> my servant." That is the mentality of material existence. And the spiritual
> existence means "I am the servant, you are the master." Just see. Just the
> opposite number. (lecture Bg 4.9, June 19, 1968)
>
> A real devotee, he does not show any disrespect even to the ant, and what
> to speak of the demigods, because he is in knowledge that "Every living
> entity is part and parcel of the Supreme Lord. They're playing different
> parts only. So in relationship with the Supreme Lord they're all my
> respectables." Therefore a devotee is taught to address all his
> contemporaries as "Prabhu, my dear sir, my dear lord." That is the position
> of Krishna consciousness. (lecture Bg 7.18 October 12, 1966)

> > >P.S. Do you have any objections to using the phrase "Ladies and
> > >Gentlemen"?
> >
> > nope. none whatsoever. those are both equally respectful, unlike
> > masters and mothers.
>
> Two points here:
>
> (1) You assume that a mother is not respectable--that is unfortunate.
> That idea is from western cultural conditioning. In the Vedic conception,
> Mother is always respectable.
>
> (2) Here was my query:
>
> > Please provide references that refering to women as "Mataji," individually
> > or as a group, is demeaning.
>
> You didn't do that, did you? The word "Mata" or "Mataji" didn't even show
> up in any of your quotes. So how do your quotes demonstrate that the
> word "Mataji" is disrespectful when they don't even mention the word?
> Don't obfuscate or change the subject, give facts.
>
> ys KKd

In another letter. . . hot on the heels of the last. . .

> > you wrote:
> > >I did, maybe you didn't see my reply to Mataji.
> >
> > Which woman?
> >
> > Now you're getting silly. It's one thing if you refer to one woman as
> > Mataji when you're talking *to* her but *about* her? Are you really that
> > sexually agitated? No please don't answer that, I don't really want to
> > know. But that is the reason you're supposed to think of each woman as
> > mother. However, I'd like for you to rpoduce some quotes showing that
> > Prabhupada addressed his female disciples as Mataji or Mother so-and-so.
> > Not one of the women who was around at the time can recall that.
> > However, they all recall being addressed as "Prabhu." Now if Prabhupada
> > who was clearly so much more advanced than any of us, could call his
> > female disciples Prabhu, who on earth do you think you are to change
> > that?
>
> Stick with the point. Here is my previous letter:
>
> > Two points here:
> >
> > (1) You assume that a mother is not respectable--that is unfortunate.
> > That idea is from western cultural conditioning. In the Vedic conception,
> > Mother is always respectable.
> >
> > (2) Here was my query:
> >
> > > Please provide references that referring to women as "Mataji,"
> > > individually or as a group, is demeaning.
> >
> > You didn't do that, did you? The word "Mata" or "Mataji" didn't even
> > show up in any of your quotes. So how do your quotes demonstrate that
> > the word "Mataji" is disrespectful when they don't even mention the
> > word? Don't obfuscate or change the subject, give facts.
>
> Again, none of your quotes even mentioned the word "Mata" or "Mataji".
> Your idea that the word "Mataji" is somehow demeaning is therefore
> baseless.
>
> The fact is this: you won't find Prabhupada referring to "Mataji", "Mata"
> or "Mother" as a demeaning address.
>
> For the third time, "Please provide references that referring to women as
> 'Mataji,' individually or in a group, is demeaning." ys KKd.

In my view, it seems that replying privately to her and others of her ilk is
a waste of time. All replies to such letters should be public, even if they
request a private reply. Otherwise we are wasting energy.

But anyway, you can see from the above how they argue, and what are their
strengths and weaknesses.

One of their weaknesses is that they are deficient in shastra, and long on
selectively quoting Srila Prabhupada.

For the paper to also be effective, we need a database of feminist arguments
for "equality", because it is these points we are dealing with and have
enamoured many leaders as well as rank and file. Some of our strongest
arguments will come from arguments which they have also used:

sarganam adir antas ca
madhyam caivaham arjuna
adhyatma-vidya vidyanam
vadah pravadatam aham

"Of all creations I am the beginning and the end and also the middle, O Arjuna. Of all sciences I am the spiritual science of the self, and among
logicians, I am the conclusive truth."

Purport

". . .Among logicians there are different kinds of argument. Supporting one's argument with evidence that also supports the opposing side is called jalpa. Merely trying to defeat one's opponent is called vitanda. But the actual conclusion is called vada. This conclusive truth is a representation of Krishna."

I have heard that Jivan Mukta P. has such a database of their arguments. Is
that true, JM Prabhu?

Another thing is that when we present quotations from Manu-samhita or other dharma shastras not translated by Srila Prabhupad, we have to also quote the sanskrit and be sure that the translation is accurate. I would highly recommend Basu Ghosh Prabhu for this. For any Bengali, Bhakti Vikas
Maharaj. Our arguments have to be airtight.

Your fallen servant, Krishna-kirti das
(Text COM:1729912) -----------------------------------------