© 1998 VNN
| WORLD November 20, 1998 VNN2531 See Related VNN Stories The So-Called Conspiracy Against Women's Ministry BY AMEYATMA DAS USA, Nov 20 (VNN) — To The Greater Vaishnav Community: PAMHO AGTSP And special thanks to Ardhabuddhi das, whom I do not know, but who took the issue to the public forum. Actually, on the conference in question devotees had been planning and were ready to take the issue public soon anyway. It appears, however, that others felt by beating us to it and airing our private discussions that it would some how work against us, but I am relieved that it is now an open public issue. I never liked the idea of any Private Forums anyway. That is why I kept away from COM for so long. There should be no private forums - but there are so many secret and private forums going on. The GBC have several, sannyasis have several, the devotees on our forum are by far not the only devotees to have done so. Personally I am opposed to private discussions by the GBC and our ISKCON leaders. We are Vaishnav's, we should have no closed door private meetings. Back in the mid 70's in LA I recall the temple authorities holding some closed door meetings. The majority of the devotees were held in the dark as to what was the purpose and nature of those meetings. A letter was sent to SP complaining and I recall he sent a letter, but I have not been able to find it on the BBT Folio CD. From memory I recall that Srila Prabhupad stated that there should be no closed door meetings among the leaders. Although I could not find that letter, I did find this one: "why you should be whimsically discharged? Only the GBC man shall be able to make these changes, not any so-called secret meeting of devotees. Why they have misunderstood these things? If they have objection they must lodge it with their GBC, and differences must be discussed openly amongst ourselves, not secret meetings. We are Vaisnava devotees, not politicians. So these things must be stopped, plotting." Letter to Nityananda Nov 25, 72 So, yes, I am relieved that our issue is now made public and we are now able to discuss this on a public forum. I have had my own public WEB page for years, I have never been secret about my position on these matters. So, let us discuss the actual issues, not mud sling. Since the GHQ conference was a 'private' discussion group, some devotees used language and spoke about others in a 'loose' way they would never have done in public. I have also observed that computers and the internet tend to bring out the impersonal side of many of us Here I am, not speaking to another Vaishnav, but clicking keys on some non-personal machine - whose only feed back is the tactile keyboard and a glaring monitor. So, combine the non-personalism of the internet with a 'private' discussion group and you may find devotees making a lot of statements they would never have made in public. Some of the statements made, or their mood and demeanor, at times on GHQ were also not to my liking, but, I will publicly stand behind everything I have said, privately and publicly. Also it was pointed out Shyamasundar's use of military battle mood and words. This came about because of a post by a mataji on a woman's conference who referred to herself as a private and the other mataji as the general who was leading their efforts. Shyamasundar develope his militaryese in response to that. Enough with all that, lets get to the issue at hand: What was the purpose of a group of devotees forming the GHQ? I am not the spokesperson. I only represent my own opinions, and I try as best I can to be a faithful servant and representative of my guru maharaj, Srila Prabhupad, so my response is not a formal one. I partook in the discussions because I am personally and philosophically opposed to a number of things I see our ISKCON society going. I see that we are often taking the wrong path, but labeling it KC, and therefore bonafied. For instance, on the DMW (ex-DOW) conference we discuss the social duties of men and women. Especially the duties of husband and wife. But, also, the qualifications of leadership qualities. All of these things are interrelated and I am very concerned about them, from the perspective of guru-sadhu-shastra. From the perspective of wanting to assist my guru, Srila Prabhupad, in establishing Varnashram-Dharma. My personal realization is that Dharma is the foundation for a functional varna and ashram system. Dharma - meaning the laws of dharma, the laws of social relationships and duties, forms the ethical and moral principles by which society and varnas and ashrams function. Thus, in our discussions we raised the issue of what are the qualifications for those who are in socially responsible positions in ISKCON. Many years ago (the late 80's) I personally wrote a letter and sent to all the GBC requesting that the GBC pass resolutions on this. At that time I was concerned about the large number of broken marriages, divorces - and then the equally high number of RE-marriages in ISKCON. Back in 1974 Srila Prabhupad instructed us in the basic principles of what is Varnashram-Dharma and he ordered us at that time, 25 years ago, to introduce and establish the system of Varnashram-Dharma in ALL of his centers IMMEDIATELY. 25 years later is there one single temple that has done so? But, it has always been a major personal concern of mine. So, over the years I have studied this idea, what actually is Varnashram-Dharma. As I said, my conclusion is that Dharma is actually the foundation. The principles of religiosity, or Duty, the principles of Vedic social laws. Srila Prabhupad has several times used the terms Varnashram-Dharma and Sanatan-Dharma interchangeably. And he has referred to the Manu Samhita as the laws of both Sanatan Dharma and Varnashram-Dharma. So, 10 years ago I wrote a letter to the GBC, and on our Dharma conference we also discussed, about the qualities of leadership roles in our society. My long standing personal realization has been that divorce and remarriage are very, very socially disruptive and socially degrading. I have come to call divorce and/or remarriage of a woman Child Abuse. And modern statistics support this fact 100%. It is the children who suffer most in a divorce, and in remarriage. Children often become unwanted when a mother remarries and her new husband wants his own children. It also produces a very bad psychological situation for the children. The mother will obviously put full blame for a divorce on her fallen husband. To justify her leaving her husband she will repeatedly tell her children how disgusting and fallen her husband was. But, that husband she vilifies is also the father of these same children. A child, any child, all children, they naturally look up to their father and see him a their ultimate authority in life. Men have the deeper voice, the more forceful authoritative demeanor, and small children naturally see father as their ultimate authority in their early years. But, to constantly hear how disgusting he is, how wretched he is, all of this puts such children in a very precarious psychological disadvantage. The result is often a total lack of respect for authority, for society, for even themselves. And modern university research has provided us with the statistics to back this up. But, many women, in side or out side of ISKCON, will rightfully complain that to raise a child without a father is very difficult. Therefore many divorced mothers will argue that for the sake of their children they must remarry. However, all of this, divorce and remarriage, is fully condemned by the Vedas and by Srila Prabhupad. Prabhupad has said several times that there simply is no such thing as divorce. In the laws of Dharma, in the eyes of Shastra and the eyes of Krsna there simply is no such thing as divorce. A woman who leaves one man and sleeps with another - both Prabhupad and the Vedas describe this as prostitution. It is strong language, but it is the Vedic Truth. And for a mother to remarry, this Srila Prabhupad has many, many times quoted Chanakya Pandit (who bases his teachings on Manu Samhita) that such women become the worse enemy of their own children. But, so many women, they will claim that they are only remarrying for the sake of their children. Yet, modern research and statistics prove, without any doubt, that this is simply not true. Rather, modern research upholds the essence of Chanakya Pandits statement (that Srila Prabhupad also upheld): SAN FRANCISCO (Reuters) [from Aug 20-22 98] - Young men who grow up in homes without fathers are twice as likely to end up in jail as those who come from traditional two-parent families, according to a new study released Thursday. Cynthia Harper of the University of Pennsylvania and Sara S. McLanahan of Princeton University tracked a sample of 6,000 males aged 14-22 from 1979-93. They found that those boys whose fathers were absent from the household had double the odds of being incarcerated -- even when other factors such as race, income, parent education and urban residence were held constant. Surprisingly, those boys who grow up with a step-father in the home were at even higher risk for incarceration, roughly three times that of children who remain with both of their natural parents, according to a study being presented at a meeting of the American Sociological Association Friday. "Remarriage of parents doesn't help," Harper said. "A step-parent in the household doesn't erase the father absent problem." ... Harper and McLanahan's study found that young men whose parents part ways during their adolescence were roughly 1-1/2 times as likely to end up in jail as children from intact families -- faring slightly better than boys who are born to single mothers. ---- End of quotes from news service This study was done only on boys, and I have read other studies that were even worse for the girls. Boys who parents have divorced are 1 1/2 - 2 times more likely to wind up on the other side of the karmi laws. Yet, boys whose mother has remarried and who have a step-father are THREE TIMES more likely to wind up on the otherside of societies laws. That means that women who REMARRY are DOUBLING the Risk that their children will wind up on the wrong side of society - that is DOUBLING the risk for the children from just living with no father. But children of mothers who both Divorce then Remarry are THREE TIMES as likely to wind up on the wrong side of society then children raised by their natural mother and father. THREE TIMES. And there are so many other studies that confirm these statistics. Therefore I stand firmly opposed to divorce and remarriage. I don't require such outside statitstics, I took this view from study of Prabhupad's books, but these statistics confirm his teachings. Thus, I call divorce Child Abuse, and for a mother to remarry is Double Child Abuse. Therefore, I want to see that in ISKCON devotees confront these issues and see them from the view of Shastra. We are to establish Dharma, Varnashram Dharma, but our divorce rate and remarriage rate is no better than, if not worse then, the karmi world we live in. What is the use of our society if we cannot confront this issue head on and over come it??? So, I have long proposed that Divorce and Remarriage is a socially irresponsible act. For a man to leave his wife or a woman to leave her husband is socially irresponsible. (There are exceptions, of course, such as the man or woman become crazy and leave KC all together, etc. - BUT, the exceptions are not to become the rule). And for a woman, a mother with children, to Remarry, that is even much more socially irresponsible. And any man who would dare to remarry such a mother, he is also socially irresponsbile. They are not doing so for the sake of the children, Shastra, Prabhupad and even the hard cold statistical facts clearly show that it is just the opposite, that it is not for the benefit of the children, just the opposite, it works completely against them in a large number of cases. It is simply one man sleeping with another man's wife (since by Vedic law there is no such thing as divorce). And that is illicit sex. So, for the woman to remarry or for a man to remarry a women, that is Socially Irresponsible. Therefore, I have long advocated that the GBC pass formal resolutions that would remove and not allow people who have shown such social irresponsible actions from taking or holding any socially responsible posittion in our society. The whole basis of my stand on this is that such things are absolutely required in order to establish Varnashram DHARMA. It is not for political reasons. It has nothing to do with gender. I propose that men who have shown themselves as being irresponsible by leaving a wife and children via divorce, or even worse, to Remarry a devotee mother who has children and who was previously been married to a devotee man, is also very socially irresponsible. Thus, neither of these sort of men, or women who divorce or divorce and remarry, should be allowed to take up socially responsible roles of leadership in our ISKCON society. That is a simple logic based on shastra and which also has modern statistics to back it up. How can we establish dharma, how can we abolish divorce and remarriage, if we do not tackle this problem head on. If you do a search of Srila Prabhupad's personal opinons on divorce and remarriage you will find that he vehemently opposed it. Such as the following conversation: Morning Walk Rome, May 28, 1974 "PrabhupŠda: ...So you have to set up real human society in a small scale so people will see, "Yes." Because man has got intelligence. Just like, although I am condemning the western mode of life, still, so many western young boys, they have come. I never came to speak to flatter you, that "Your western civilization is very nice." I never said that. · Yogesvara: So here's a practical problem. People would be interested to know our position on divorce. Here in Rome they just passed a divorce law. PrabhupŠda: That is also animalism. Just like a dog having sex intercourse with another female dog, and another, another, another. It is also animalism. So that is your decision. They are animals, and different way they are coming to be naked animal, that's all. The divorce is also dog's business. Dog is having sex intercourse with this female dog and another, another, another, another. It is animalism, That's all." Divorce, remarriage, Prabhupad called it the business of dogs. Animalism. That's all. The fact that we are devotees, our position is that we have even a greater responsibllity to teach and help uplift society by our personal examples - yet in ISKCON what is our position? I have seen, when I have raised this exact issue that we must no longer give socially responsible positions to those who have proven to be socially irresponsible, those who hold some position but who are living with a woman who is divorced and remarried, or the woman is herself divorced and remarried, they will argue that under their unique circumstances they should be excused... yes, everyone should be excused, then where is the standard? If the leaders can be excused, then where is the standard? Where is Dharma? There is no dharma. There are no socially responsible heads of society. That is whjy Brahmans are to set the best personal examples for all others to follow. Where are ISKCON's brahmana's, where are our heads? Thus, on our Dharma conference this idea was discussed. Those of us who think like this, we agreed that ISKCON must set higher standards for those who take up positions of social leadership duties. Of course this applies to GBC's and TP's, but also to gurukula teachers and heads of any ISKCON Ministries, especially those concerned with grhasta or social standards, or public affairs or public communications. So, from this discussion it was brought up that the head of the Women's Ministry in ISKCON is headed by a mataji who is divorced and remarried. I have no personal agenda with mother Sudharma, she is a senior devotee and has done so much for Prabhupad and his movement. It is not for any personal reasons that I have taken my strong stand on these issues, but it is from the basis of Shastra, from the basis of Dharma, from the basis of simple logic - that socially responsible positions must be held by those who have proven themselves to be socially responsible by their own personal actions and examples. Now, if someone, anyone, who found themselves in an a-dharmic situation, divorced and remarried, and they personally and publically admitted this was wrong, that it is wrong, that is must be dealt with and stopped, that no matter the circumstance that ultimately there is no real excuse for it because it could be very damaging to the children, and thus they work to take steps to discourage others from following their path and work to encourage others NOT to divorce and remarry, then maybe they can be given some concession. But, if they argue and argue why they should be forgiven and why such things should be allowed for them and for others, then how can we give them any responsible position? What good will it do for establishing Prabhupad's instructions to establish dharma? And, even those who admit their position is wrong, it would be more effective if such positions of social leadership were occupied by ones who have set the best personal examples. Example is far more effective then precept. Bhagavad-gitŠ (3.21), "Whatever action a great man performs, common men follow. And whatever standards he sets by exemplary acts, all the world pursues." PURPORT "People in general always require a leader who can teach the public by practical behavior. A leader cannot teach the public to stop smoking if he himself smokes. Lord Caitanya said that a teacher should behave properly before he begins teaching. One who teaches in that way is called ŠcŠrya, or the ideal teacher. Therefore, a teacher must follow the principles of shastra (scripture) to teach the common man. The teacher cannot manufacture rules against the principles of revealed scriptures. The revealed scriptures, like Manu-samhitŠ and similar others, are considered the standard books to be followed by human society. Thus the leader's teaching should be based on the principles of such standard Šstras. One who desires to improve himself must follow the standard rules as they are practiced by the great teachers. The Srimad-Bhagavatam also affirms that one should follow in the footsteps of great devotees, and that is the way of progress on the path of spiritual realization. The king or the executive head of a state, the father and the school teacher are all considered to be natural leaders of the innocent people in general. All such natural leaders have a great responsibility to their dependents; therefore they must be conversant with standard books of moral and spiritual codes." Here Srila Prabhupad clearly states the same views that I hold on these issues. It is based on what Krsna teaches, Himself. And not just GBC or TP, but any socially responsible position, especially teacher - including our gurukula teahers. How can they teach what is dharma, what is moral socially accepted behavior, if they are divorced and remarried? The problem is that the majority of devotees, especially the older Prabhupad disciples, are in such marriage situations, and they don't want to hear such talk. I have lost many friends for taking such a strong view. But, I cannot give up the truth for such so-called friends. I would prefer to be friends with those who also uphold dharma and the truth. Even if someone is in such a marriage, at least let them be honest and admit it is wrong rather then to argue that we must all accept such lower standards. So, in discussing these topics on Dharma of Women conference it was mentioned how it would better serve Srila Prabhupad and our society if such standards could be presented to the whole ISKCON society and dsicussed more openly. It was also pointed out that the Women's Minsitry was headed by a mataji who had divorced and remarried. As I said, I have no personal agenda, but I do want to see Dharma established. So, I have personally questioned how can the GBC put in charge of an offical ISKCON Ministry that is to deal with the social issues of women in our society a woman who has not shown by her personal example a very high standard of social repsonsibility? Why not put in charge a mother who is very chaste, who understands the importance of chastity, who will promote social standards for women that are fully in line with Srila Prabhupad's teachings and the Vedic injunctions on the topic of social issues? What is the benefit to Prabhupad and our society to have people in charge of any ministry or temple, etc., who sets no high social standard and who even does not try to promote such higher standards? At the same time, there is this growing trend in our society to encourage more and more leadership roles in society for the women in general. That, also, I have reasons to oppose. I am not anti woman. I do respect the importance of the services many great mataji's have rendered to Srila Prabhupad and his society. In fact, I recall once that in LA years ago I saw this mother Govinda dasi. At the time she was living in Hawaii and had come to LA to see Prabhupad when he was visiting there. I was thinking to my self, what a nonsense devotee. She did not seem to be that chaste, and other things, I was inwardly very critical. But, when Srila Prabhupad saw her I could see he had so much personal concern for her. Then Srila Prabhupad told her that he could never repay her for the service that she had rendered him, that he was eternally indebt to her. He said that in the beginning in NY when he had nothing, no one to help him, that she came and rendered so much service to help him establish ISKCON in the very beginning. For this he was eternally indebted to her. I never saw mother Govinda dasi the same after that. I respect her position very much. As Prabhupad says, if you really love me, then love my dog. So, if we really want to please Srila Prabhupad, we should try to please such great souls as mother Govinda dasi. So, personally, I do have great respect for such devotees, male or female, it doesn't matter. And I am sure that matajis such as mother Sudharma, or mother Malati are in this same catagory and Srila Prabhupad must feel the same way toward them as he does mother Govinda dasi. But, on the other side, on the practical matter of what is best for the management of a social body, what is best for the guidance and functioning of a religious - spiritually based society, I also strongly feel that the leaders of our society, the gurukula teachers, the TP's ISKCON Ministers, GBC's, all of these posts should be occupied by those who qualify in accordance with the verse and Prabhupad's purport to BG 3.21 as noted above. One cannot teach society how to put an end to divorce and remarriage - how to stop families from destruction, how to prevent the child abuse of divorce and remarriage and degradation of motherhood and family values by divorce and remarriage if he or she themselves are not setting an exemplary personal role model. What the leaders do, what they set by their own example, the whole world pursues. Now, let me rebute some of the false alligations made by Ardhabuddhi das in his VNN article. He stated: "Originally organized [the GHQ conference] by Shyamasundara (the astrologer), the goal of this conference was to turn back the clock on the recent progress made by ISKCON Vaisnavis in their struggle to be recognized as individuals with the right to serve guru and Krsna according to their propensities." First, the conference was not originated by Shyamasundar. It was a collecitve idea. And the goal has nothing to do with turning back clocks or supressing any so-called 'progress' by female devotees. But, not only are we to engage in serving Krsna according to our propensities, we are also to serve in accordance with the our social duties. Krsna did not instruct Arjun to give up his duties and go flee to the forest and sit down and chant japa. He told Arjun that he was ksatriya and that he must perform his social duty in accordance to his social position in Varnashram. To perform another person's duty is wrong. To create a society, to manage a society, means we have to deal with social issues. Society means a community, communities are made up of the members of the different ashrams, including families. These social issues all come under the banner heading of Varnshram Dharma. In Varnshram we have different social duties according ot our varna, ashram and "gender". Srila Prabhupad and the Vedas very clearly defined separate social roles and duites of men and women. But, it is often counter-argued that ISKCON is a transcendental spiritual society. We see not the body, but the eternal soul. Male and female are material designations only. They say to discriminate on the basis of gender is mundane and non-Krsna Conscious. To this I give the example of Suka dev Goswami and Vyasdev. Suka dev was born at the age of 16. (He saw no difference being in his mother's womb out. So, he stayed there for 16 years before coming out... Hey, I didn't make this up). At 16, naked, he decided to leave home. He went running into the forest. His father, Srila Vyasadev, went running after him. The boy, Suka dev, when running past a pond where a number of simple forest girls were bathing naked. Suka was young man, also naked, but the girls simply stood there naked and smiling and did nothing. Following behind was Vyasadev, fully dressed, but when the girls saw him, out of shyness they quickly covered their private parts. Vyasadev, the compiler of the Vedas, the great acharya of our disciplic line, stopped. He was puzzled and he went back and asked these girls why they did not cover themselves when his son ran by naked, but did so when he passed fully dressed. They replied that they could see that Suka dev was completely transcendental to all material designations. He did not see them as women, but as eternal souls. But, they said that Vyasadev was a grhasta. Being a grhasta he was forced to discriminate on the bodily platform and makes distinctions between male and female. My point is that yes, this society, like the Bhagavatam, teaches the highest transcendental science, but the fact is that most, if not 100%, of the members of our society are no where near the transcendental position of Vysasadev, what to speak of on the level of Suka dev. Most of our members are grhasta, or want to be... so, where is it that we are such a transcendental society. To try and act as if we were all so transcendental would be totally artificial. Rather, most of us are grhasta, and thus we have to organize soceity in accordance with the principles of Varnashram-Dharma. This means that we must also perform our precribed social duties. Being that most of us are grhasta, that means we have so many children, and about 1/2 of them are girls. So, lets assume that we encourage that the young girls, our daughters, they should all become GBC, TP's, and other leaders of society. Then who will take care of their children? Who will become the mothers of society? Rather, Srila Prabhupad himself has often taught that a woman's prescribed duty is to become a chaste submissive wife. He instructed the female gurukula teachers that they are to teach the girls domestic services by their own examples. Woman, he said, are to churn butter, sew, cook, clean and learn to serve a husband. He even said once that Krsna Conscious women do not want to travel and preach like him, but they are satified cooking and cleaning. Letter 16th February, 1972 My dear Chaya dasi, All the children should learn to read and write very nicely, and a little mathematics, so that they will be able to read our books. Cooking, sewing, things like that do not require schooling, they are learned simply by association... ...You ask about marriage, yes, actually I want that every woman in the Society should be married. But what is this training to become wives and mothers? No school is required for that, simply association... ...****A woman's real business is to look after household affairs, keep everything neat and clean, and if there is sufficient milk supply available, she should always be engaged in churning butter, making yogurt, curd, so many nice varieties, simply from milk. The woman should be cleaning, sewing, like that. So if you simply practice these things yourselves and show examples, they will learn automatically, one doesn't have to give formal instruction in these matters. Morning Walk May 1, 1974, Bombay 740501mw.bom PrabhupŠda: Put problems. I'll solve. Yogeshvara: Here's a problem. The women today want the same rights as men. How can they be satisfied? PrabhupŠda: Everything will be satisfied. Just like our women, Krsna conscious, they are working. They don't want equal rights with men. It is due to Krsna consciousness. They are cleansing the temple, they are cooking very nicely. They are satisfied. They never say that "I have to go to Japan for preaching like PrabhupŠda." They never say. This is artificial. So Krsna consciousness means work in his constitutional position. The women, men, when they remain in their constitutional position, there will be no artificial (indistinct) (loud traffic noises) BhagavŠn: They say that our women are unintelligent because they submit so easily, but... ...BhagavŠn: But actually, our women are so qualified in so many ways, but these girls who simply work in the city can do nothing. They can't cook, they can't clean, they can't sew. PrabhupŠda: All rubbish. These modern girls, they are all rubbish. Therefore they are simply used for sex satisfaction. Topless, bottomless... So, in educating our daughters, on training them, he has instructed that we are to train them in domestic duties. No where, not once, have I seen that he has instructed that we are to train our girls to become the leaders of society. So, my contention is that on one hand it is not totally forbidden to allow - as the exception - a qualified mataji to take a leadership position - but, for the proper functioning of a SOCIETY, a social body with intact functional families, that it remain an execption to the general rule, and not the general rule of the society (that women are trained for and take up leadership roles). Srila Prabhupad was very specific and he discriminated on the basis of gender how we are to train our children. I and others have written many times on this topic and so many posts were made on the conferences. I also have written some books and have published articles on my web page ( http://home.earthlink.net/ kgrafx - see the sections on Dharma of Marriage - I have also begun a Message Board for open discussion of this topic, and provide a place for interested parties to try and find compatible partners. But, it is very new, so give it some time, and give it your participation as well). So, in light of the fact as to how Srila Prabhupad instructed us that we are to train our own daughters how to become submissive, chaste wives, mothers, and to learn all domestic household duties (he has said the duty of the wife is household duties, the man is to work in society, provide for his family), how does this relate to giving so many women leadership roles? It doesn't mean a chaste submiisive wife cannot preach, that she cannot serve Prabhupad and Krsna. But, there is a point of what is most beneficial for the society in the long run? Is it best to place many women in social leadership positions and thus encoarage young girls to also follow in their footsteps, or should such things be the rare exception, while the young girls are encouraged to follow chastity, dependence, submissiveness and other good qualities of motherhood? In my, and many other devotees study of these things, it has become very obvious that in order to establish Varnashram-Dharma, and in order to create a peaceful and organically functioning SOCIETY that motherhood and family must be protected, and separate social duties must be encouraged. Another similar philosophical point we have discussed on our conferences is this: In the Manu Samhita, as many times quoted by Srila Prabhupad, it is stated that women are NOT to be given independence. A woman is to always remain under the dependence of a father, husband or older son. She is not to act independently. And women are to be Protected by a man. There are many times Srila Prabhupad has quoted this. Thus, the question becomes how can a chaste female follower of Srila Prabhupad follow his teachings on this point, and yet take up the role of TP or GBC or other social leadership role? How is it that she is not independent, and still is dependent under a male authority, yet she is a TP or GBC? Or how is it that she is being protected by a man, when the position of TP or GBC is to provide protection for others. And how can a widowed lady or brahmacarini be properly protected and dependent on a man if her TP and her GBC are both women? To say that the GBC body has a male majority and that the woman is under the protection of guidance of a male GBC body is not sufficient. The post of TP or GBC means social leadership. Besides, what if the majority of the GBC became female devotees, as some have promoted, then where is their dependence and protection under a man. Besises, Prabhupad and shastra are very specific that a woman is to be under the protection and guidance of one specific man, her father, her husband or older son. So, how can a woman be chaste, set a high moral example for all others to follow, yet be in a social leadership role and also be dependent on the guidance and protection of a husband, father or son? If she is all of the above, then why is she artificially trying to act as if she is leader, when in actualily she is under the authority of her husband or other man? So, we have also debated this topic and it is our conclusion, based on Shastra, based on the laws of dharma, based on how to best establish Varnashram-Dharma, that allowing and encouraging a number of women to take up such social leadership positions is not ultimately for the benefit of our society. It will only create more disturbance. I know there are many who will be upset with us for our strong convictions and realizations, but, our realizations are all based on shastra and logic. And the motive is not to suppress anyone, not to belittle or take away any one or any gender, but our whole concern and motive is to fulfill Srila Prabhupad's mission to establish Varnashram Dharma. Our sincere desire is to help educate others in the science of what is truly dharma, and what is ultimately best for Prabhupad's society. It is not to suppress anyone, but to uplift everyone. Ardhabuddhi continues: "The men appear to have been inspired by their discussions on the COM conference "Dharma of Women" (recently strategically renamed "Dharma of Men and Women") in which they tried to explain many current ISKCON problems as being due to women not acting according to Vedic principles. These men have been known to selectively use quotes by Srila Prabhupada, Manu Samitha and Chanakya Pandit to blame everything from divorce to wife abuse on the women's attitudes and behaviors." I do not know who Ardhabuddhi is, but this is very devicive wording he has used, saying that we selectively use quotes by SP, etc..... Selectively "use" quotes from Srila Prabhupad. I totally reject this sort of attack. I have been a devotee for 25 years and just on this topic of Dharma and Varnashram I have made a 15 year study of his teachings and my realizations are fixed and non-moveable because they are based on the absolute truth of Vedic principles. There is no 'selectively' choosing only what I like and recjecting all else. The conclusions I have reached are solid and based on deep study and then actual realization of the truth. And damn right I will back up and support every conclusion on the evidence of quoting from Srila Prabhupad, and Manu Samhita, etc. (which Srila Prabhupad often states as the authority on these topics). As far as what is the core cause of the problems of society, yes, I may quote from this one following conversation often, but for good reason. One is that Srila Prabhupad was asked very direct confrontational questions on these very same controversial topics. He was asked by a modern feminist so called liberated female new reporter. And his answers were also very direct and to the point. And this conversation was broadcaste on TV on the news in Chicago and was printed in many newspapers. Afterwards devotees brought it up in a number of recorded conversations, and even Srila Prabhupad himself referred to the inciddent months later when similar topics were raised. Thus, Srila Prabhupad also emphasised the importance of this conversation (it was a long interview, this is only edited portionis of it): Television Interview July 9, 1975, Chicago 750709iv.chi Woman reporter: But you say women are subordinate to men? PrabhupŠda: Yes, that is also natural. Because when the husband and wife are there or the father and daughter is there, so the daughter is subordinate to the father and the wife is subordinate to the husband. [ commentary by Ameyatma: The situation is here is a modern feminist female reporter with a microphone and TV camera asking such a controversial question. How would most devotees answer this question? Most of us would go into a song and dance to avoid conflict. We would emphasis how our philosophy sees all living entities as equal, and that we don't discriminate. - who would answer in the footsteps of Srila Prabhupad? - So if a woman is always subordinate to a man, how can she also be a leader, a provider of protectino and guide to others in the position of TP or GBC or ISKCON Minister? ] Woman reporter: What happens when women are not subordinate to men? PrabhupŠda: Then there is disruption. There is disruption, social disruption. If the woman does not become subordinate to man, then there is social disruption. Therefore, in the western countries there are so many divorce cases because the woman does not agree to become subordinate to man. That is the cause. [Ardhabuddhi claims that I and others use selective quotes from Prabhupad to show that women are the cause of social problems. DAMN IT, Yes I am mad. To hell with his wishy-washy thinking, it is Srila Prabhupad who said this, not ameyatma das. I am only a fool. I don't know what is what. I only know one thing, and that is that Srila Prabhupad knows Krsna, and Krsna knows everything., That is all I know. Of course I will quote from Srila Prabhupad. Who else am I to quote from, anti cult groups? And if you want to call this a selective quote, then do so. Yes, I selected it because of the reasons states. Srila Prabhupad was asked direct questioins on this topic and he answered them as a great acharya, directly speaking only the Vedic truth. And here he is very speicific, THREE times he says that when women are not submissive to their husbands there will be what? Disruption, disruption, social disurption. This quote has been selected because it is very precise, very clear, very Prabhupad. And there are other quotes from his books that back up and support this statement, it was not simply an idea he only expressed once] Woman reporter: What advice do you have to women who do not want to be subordinate to men? PrabhupŠda: It is not my advice, but it is the advice of the Vedic knowledge that woman should be chaste and faithful to man. Woman reporter: What should we do in the United States? We're trying to make women equal with men. PrabhupŠda: I am not trying. You are already not equal with the man because in so many respects, your functions are different and man's functions are different. Why do you say artificially they are equal? Woman reporter: Is the social unrest in this country caused because... PrabhupŠda: Because of these things. They do not know that. Woman reporter: And if women were subordinate to men, it would solve all of our problems? PrabhupŠda: Yes. Man wants that woman should be subordinate, faithful to him. Then he is ready to take charge. The man's mentality, woman's mentality different. So if the woman agrees to remain faithful and subordinate to man, then the family life will be peaceful. [Srila Prabhupad, not the insignificant fool ameyatma das, but Srila Prabhupad says that this will solve all of the problems of modern society, if women will simply be subordinate and faithful to their husbands. Call me any name you want for selectively quoting from Srila Prabhupad, I will not stop from doing do] Woman reporter: You have different schools for men and women, is that correct? PrabhupŠda: Yes. Man is regulated to become a first-class man, and woman is regulated to become very chaste and faithful wife. [man is regulated one way, first class man, Srila Prabhupad has said, brahman - leader of society, woman is regulated to become very chaste and faithful wife. What is the problem with our ISKCON society. If I repeat these words to non devotees I would expect some controvsial discussion. But, I consider it even more controversial that it is the ISKCON devotees who seem to take these words by Prabhupad just as, if not more, controversial then the non devotees do ] Prabhupad ...Then the life will be very successful. And marriage, compulsory. Marriage, compulsory. Woman reporter: Everyone should marry? PrabhupŠda: Yes. Every woman, at least, should be married. Therefore, according to Vedic conception, polygamy is allowed. Woman reporter: Is allowed? PrabhupŠda: Yes. Because every woman must be married. But every man may not be married. Therefore man has to accept more than one wife. So, yes, I do select quotes by Srila Prabhupad. I select the quotes that pretain to the topic at hand. Why quote something he says about some other topic? These quotes are very representative of his teachings, of the Vedic culture and are very direct, to the point and instruct us what is the real cause of the problems. Why devotees like Ardhabuddi have a problem with this? There is so much more to say, and so many points to make, but I am running out of time, and I wanted to make this repsonse timely. I am sure other conference members will also respond. Hare Krsna ys Ameyatma das ameyatma@iname.com Chk out my web page at: http://home.earthlink.net/~kgrafx See Related VNN Stories |
