On May 29 2008 the chairman of the GBC-Ramai Swami-posted an article entitled International GBC Statement Reaffirming Vaishnava Respect for Women on chakra.org, dandavats.com, the sampradaya sun and other gaudiya news sites.
This was in reaction to complaints from many devotees about a blog entitled Hare Krishna Diary
What was the problem? The blog owner was in reality doing nothing more then repeating the words of Srila Prabhupada. So why were some followers of Srila Prabhupada so upset? Because they were not dealing with the reality of what Srila Prabhupada taught and it’s implications and effects on those people who accept Srila Prabhupada as infallible. Some people are able to deal with the truth that Srila Prabhupada said what he said. Others refuse to accept the truth and then attack those people who repeat what Prabhupada said and who live their lives by what he said. Those who refuse to accept that those who are repeating what Prabhupada said about women are in reality only repeating what Srila Prabhupada has said, remain oblivious to the fact that the cause of what they dislike in Prabhupada’s followers is the teachings of Srila Prabhupada. They believe that those who repeat what Prabhupada has said about women are somehow apostates from the teachings of Srila Prabhupada and worthy of being vilified and shut down. When they are confronted with their denial of reality–that it is Srila Prabhupada’s teachings which they are fighting against, they can experience a type of cognitive dissonance.
This was made clear recently by 2 articles appearing in Chakra and in a blog by ISKCON leader and guru HH Jayadvaita Swami.
In one article Jadurani Dasi writes to inform us that a youtube.com user had posted a video of a lecture by Sripad Bhaktivedanta Narayana Maharaja in such a way as to distort what he said in order to claim that he was speaking “blasphemy” of Srila Prabhupada. Jadurani Dasi was correct in showing that in fact Sripad Narayana Maharaja was actually defending Srila Prabhupada against what he considered to be bad editing by his disciples. But what was being said by Sripad Narayana Maharaja was incorrect in his “defense” of Srila Prabhupada. He was adamant in stating that it was the faulty editing of Srila Prabhupada’s books which can account for the places where you can read that women are “papa-yoni” i.e of sinful low birth, or that women are “less intelligent”, and that black bodied people are low class and sudras.
It is understandable that a person like Sripad Narayana Maharaja who has devoted his life to preaching would not be well versed in the teachings of Srila Prabhupada. After all he became a devotee long before Srila Prabhupada came to the west and no doubt has spent most of his time studying the books and lectures of others. Anyone who is well versed in the teachings of Srila Prabhupada knows that blaming the editors of his books is not going to explain the same teachings which are found in recorded lectures and conversations. For example Sripad Narayana Maharaja has blamed the editors for implying that Srila Prabhupada said that women are “papa-yoni”. He informs us that it is a mistake to claim that women are sinful or low birth and that Srila Prabhupada would never make such an untrue statement. He also makes the same claim about calling women “less intelligent” and black bodied people as sudras.
The reality is that it is not the fault of the editors because these types of statements are made in recordings of Srila Prabhupada. For example:
Answers to a Questionnaire from Bhavan’s Journal — June 28, 1976, Vrndavana
Otherwise, why Krsna says papa-yoni? Papa-yoni. Striyo (women) vaisyas tatha sudras. They are also taken as papa-yoni. And what to speak of the sudras and candalas? They must be papa-yoni. Only the brahmana, ksatriya, they are taken as highly elevated.
Lecture on BG 9.29-32 — New York, December 20, 1966
Mam hi partha vyapasritya ye ‘pi syuh papa-yonayah. Papa-yonayah… Of course, according to Vedic literature, there are mentions of papa-yoni. Yoni means species. Papa-yoni. Just like it is mentioned here, striyah sudrah, striyo vaisyas tatha sudras te ‘pi yanti param gatim. Even the striyah, even women, they are also classified amongst the papa-yoni. Papa-yoni means those who have got little facility for advancing themselves in spiritual life. So it is particularly mentioned here, striyah, the woman class, sudra—sudra means the laborer class—and the vaisya, mercantile class. Or less than that.
Because in India, according to the caste system, or varnasrama-dharma, the brahmana and ksatriyas are considered to be the highest in the society, and the vaisyas, a little less than them, and sudras, they are not taken into account. In the similarly, woman class, they are taken as sudra, sudra. Just like the thread ceremony is given to the brahmana, ksatriya, vaisya, but there is no thread ceremony for the woman class. Although the woman is born in the brahmana family, she has no that reformation. Because striyah, woman class, are taken less intelligent, they should be given protection, but they cannot be elevated. But here in the Bhagavad-gita, He surpasses all these formalities. Lord Krsna surpasses all these formalities. He is giving facility to everyone. Never mind what he is. In the social structure, you may consider that woman is less intelligent or sudra or less purified, but in spiritual consciousness there is no such bar.
Room Conversation Varnasrama System Must Be Introduced — February 14, 1977, Mayapura
Sudra is to be controlled only. They are never given to be freedom. Just like in America. The blacks were slaves. They were under control. And since you have given them equal rights they are disturbing, most disturbing, always creating a fearful situation, uncultured and drunkards. What training they have got? They have got equal right? That is best, to keep them under control as slaves but give them sufficient food, sufficient cloth, not more than that. Then they will be satisfied.
Room Conversation — January 21, 1977, Bhuvanesvara
Ramesvara: That’s the trend, then, everywhere, because unemployment is increasing.
Prabhupada: And especially in your country it will be dangerous because these blacks, if they don’t get employment, they will create havoc, these blacks. And they are not civilized. They want money, and if they don’t get money, then they will create havoc.
Gargamuni: Money and liquor.
Hari-sauri: Yes. If they do get money, they just buy it.
Lecture on BG 16.7 — Hawaii, February 3, 1975
Otherwise it doesn’t matter what he is, which family he’s born. It doesn’t matter. Krsna says, you’ll find, mam hi partha vyapasritya ye ‘pi syuh papa-yonayah BG 9.32 . Papa-yoni. To take birth low-grade family, or animal family, these are called papa-yoni. Krsna says that it doesn’t matter if one is born in the papa-yoni, low-grade family. It doesn’t matter. Mam hi partha vyapasritya ye ‘pi syuh papa-yonayah. In the human society, striyah sudras tatha vaisyah, even woman and sudra and vaisya, they are also taken in the category of papa-yoni. Papa-yoni means their intelligence is not very sharp. That is called papa-yoni. And a brahmana means to become very, very highly intellectual. That is called brahmana. Because he’ll understand Brahman.
Lecture on SB 1.2.2 — Rome, May 26, 1974
The duty of Vaisnava is to reclaim these fallen souls. Just like Krsna says in the Bhagavad-gita, mam hi partha vyapasritya ye ‘pi syuh papa-yonayah. Find out this verse:
mam hi partha vyapasritya
ye ‘pi syuh papa-yonayah
striyo vaisyas tatha sudras
te ‘pi yanti param gatimKrsna says, “Anyone who comes under My shelter, never mind he is the lowest of the low, lowborn…” The striyo vaisyah… Formerly, even the woman and the mercantile community and sudras, they were also considered as papa-yoni. Papa-yoni means whose brain is not very developed. That is papa-yoni. Blunt-headed. What is that?
Nitai:
“O son of Prtha, those who take shelter in Me, though they be of lower birth—woman, vaisyas merchants, as well as sudras, workers—can approach the supreme destination.”
Prabhupada: So the supreme destination, back to Godhead, back to home, is for everyone. It is not that God… God means for everyone. God does not say, “Only the brahmana class of men, please come here. Others all rejected.” No. He is inviting everyone. Even the lowest of the lowest, low-born, papa-yonayah, women, sudra, or vaisyas, everyone.
Morning Walk — January 9, 1977, Bombay
Prabhupada: I condemn everyone, that “You are all dogs and hogs.” And United Nations a pack of dogs barking. That’s a fact. And in Chicago I said, all women, “You cannot have freedom. You have got only thirty-four-ounce brain, and man has got sixty-four-ounce.” I told them. So I became a subject of very great criticism.
Trivikrama: Women’s liberation.
Prabhupada: I denied, “No, you cannot have.” I told them. One girl in the airship, she was seeing like (makes some gesture-laughter). I asked her, “Give me 7-Up.” “It is locked now.” So I frankly said that “No, no. You cannot have equal rights because your brain is thirty-four ounce.” Actually that’s a fact. Where is woman philosopher, mathematician, scientist? Not a single.
Dr. Patel: Apart from that, I mean, they are made for a particular mission.
Prabhupada: How they can have equal rights? Up to date in the history there is not a single woman who is a great scientist or great philosopher or great…
Dr. Patel: Madame Curie was a…
Prabhupada: All bogus. (laughter)
Dr. Patel: You are getting too harsh on them because…
Prabhupada: No, no. How can I give you equal rights, because your brain is less substance.
Dr. Patel: We cannot degrade our mothers that way.
Prabhupada: It is not degrading. It is accepting the actual fact.
Lecture on SB 7.9.10 Mayapur, February 17, 1976
Krnsa says. Krsna says even papa-yoni, less than the sudra… Sudra is also papa-yoni. Even woman is called papa-yoni according to strict… Striyas sudras tatha vaisya. Vaisya. Except brahmana and ksatriyas, everyone is considered to be lowborn, according to the Vedic injunction. But not that because he is lowborn, he cannot elevate himself. That is not the fact. The present, so-called Hindu society is degraded because if one is born in higher family, brahmana, ksatriya —he may be less than a svapaca —he’s accepted as a brahmana. That is the fault.
Press Conference — July 9, 1975, Chicago
Reporter (3): (a woman) Where… Do women fit into this social structure? You keep referring to man.
Prabhupada: Woman is not equally intelligent as a man.
Reporter (3): Equal in intelligence?
Prabhupada: Not equal intelligence. In the psychology, practical psychology, they have found that the man’s brain has been found up to sixty-four ounce, woman… Sixty-four ounce, man’s brain. And woman’s brain has been found, thirty-six ounce. So therefore woman is not equally intelligent like man.
Evening Darsana — July 8, 1976, Washington, D.C.
If you become dependent on others, then what is the value of this education? Therefore kalau sudra-sambhavah. Everyone is a sudra. But this Krsna consciousness movement says striyo vaisyas tatha sudrah: never mind, even if you are sudra, take to Krsna consciousness, you’ll become perfect. Either you become woman or vaisya or sudra, it doesn’t matter, or any other papa-yoni, mam hi partha vyapasritya ye ‘pi syuh papa-yonayah, te ‘pi yanti param.
Lecture on SB 1.3.21 — Los Angeles, September 26, 1972
And it has been found that a woman does not have more than thirty-six ounce of brain substance, whereas in man it has been found that he has got up to sixty-four ounce. Now, this is modern science. Therefore generally, generally, woman, less intelligent than man. You cannot find any big scientist, any big mathematician, any big philosopher amongst woman. That is not possible. Although in your country, you want equal status with man, freedom, but by nature you are less intelligent. What can be done? (laughter)
Interview with Trans-India Magazine — July 17, 1976, New York
So actually this varnasrama system is meant for bringing the man in the lower status of life to the higher status of life. It doesn’t matter one is born in a low-grade family. That is also said by Krsna: mam hi partha vyapasritya ye ‘pi syuh papa-yonayah. Papa-yoni, lower grade. Striyo vaisyas tatha sudrah BG 9.32 . In the human society, woman, the vaisya and the sudra, they are considered in the lower status, not very intelligent.
Lecture on BG 1.40 — London, July 28, 1973
Canakya Pandita says: visvasam naiva kartavyam strisu raja-kulesu ca. Visvasam naiva kartavyam. “Don’t trust women.” Visvasam naiva kartavyam strisu. Strisu means women. Raja-kula… And politicians. Yes. Visvasam naiva kartavyam strisu raja-kulesu ca. Never the trust the politician and woman. Of course, when woman comes to Krsna consciousness, that position is different. We are speaking of ordinary woman. Because Krsna says, in another place, striyo vaisyas tatha sudrah BG 9.32 . They are considered, women, vaisya, the mercantile community, and sudra, and the worker class, they are less intelligent. Papa-yoni. When the progeny is defective, then they become less intelligent.
Lecture on SB 1.16.20 — Hawaii, January 16, 1974
Formerly, in the Vedic civilization, even women and sudra, and vaisya, they were also considered amongst the papa-yoni, what to speak of others. But Krsna says, “Never mind whatever papa-yoni one may be.” Mam hi partha vyapasritya: “If one takes shelter of My devotee,” vyapasritya, “and works under his direction, then…” Vyapa. That is called vyapasritya. Visesa rupena asritya. “Then he also…,” te ‘pi yanti param gatim, “he can also go back to home, back to Godhead.” There is no bar.
Sunday Feast Lecture — London, July 25, 1976
People are generally against the mlecchas, yavanas or the candalas because according to Vedic system, the brahmanas, the ksatriya, they are supposed to be pious family, brahmanas and ksatriyas. Less than that, even woman, they are not so pious. So in that sense there is discrimination. But Krsna says that mam hi partha vyapasritya ye ‘pi syuh papa-yonayah. Anyone, it doesn’t matter, even he belongs to the papa-yoni, low-grade family. And because women and vaisyas are sudras are also considered as less important, so Krsna mentions, striyo vaisyas tatha sudras te ‘pi yanti param gatim: “Even women, sudras, or the vaisyas, everyone can be elevated to the higher transcendental platform, param gati.
Lecture on SB 1.7.36-37 — Vrndavana, September 29, 1976
Doesn’t matter whether you are a brahmana or a ksatriya. Krsna confirms it, api cet su-duracarah… No. Mam hi partha vyapasritya ye ‘pi syuh papa-yonayah. Papa-yoni means below the vaisyas, the sudras, they are papa-yonis. Vaisyas also. Striyo vaisyas tatha sudras te ‘pi yanti param gatim. So there is no impediment to approach Krsna because you are a sudra, or candala or woman or vaisya. No. Everyone can… That facility is there.
Lecture on CC Adi-lila 7.91-2 — Vrndavana, March 13, 1974
Vaisya, sudra and woman, they have been classified in the Bhagavad-gita as less intelligent. Striyo vaisyas tatha sudras te ‘pi yanti param gatim
Sri Sri Rukmini Dvaraka-natha – Deity Installation — Los Angeles, July 16, 1969:
Striyah sudrAs tatha vaisyah, including woman and sudras and vaisyas, they are considered as less intelligent. They are considered as less intelligent.
HH Jayadvaita Swami has made the claim that when Srila Prabhupada said that a woman likes to be raped that Prabhupada didn’t really mean it. He writes at http://www.jswami.info/rape
When you look at the translation and purport for Text 42 and consider the two purports together, you can get a better understanding of Srila Prabhupada’s point.
In essence: The male wants to conquer, and the female wants to be conquered. A woman does not want to be sheepishly asked her hand by a bashful, weak-kneed Milquetoast. She wants to be pursued and won, to be fought over by strong and eager suitors, to be “swept off her feet.”
What Srila Prabhupada said was nothing about being romantically swept off of your feet.
Purport SB 4.25.41
In this regard, the word vikhyatam is very significant. A man is always famous for his aggression toward a beautiful woman, and such aggression is sometimes considered rape. Although rape is not legally allowed, it is a fact that a woman likes a man who is very expert at rape.
Purport SB 4.25.42
When a husbandless woman is attacked by an aggressive man, she takes his action to be mercy. A woman is generally very much attracted by a man’s long arms. A serpent’s body is round, and it becomes narrower and thinner at the end. The beautiful arms of a man appear to a woman just like serpents, and she very much desires to be embraced by such arms.
The word anatha-varga is very significant in this verse. Natha means “husband,” and a means “without.” A young woman who has no husband is called anatha, meaning “one who is not protected.” As soon as a woman attains the age of puberty, she immediately becomes very much agitated by sexual desire. It is therefore the duty of the father to get his daughter married before she attains puberty. Otherwise she will be very much mortified by not having a husband. Anyone who satisfies her desire for sex at that age becomes a great object of satisfaction. It is a psychological fact that when a woman at the age of puberty meets a man and the man satisfies her sexually, she will love that man for the rest of her life, regardless who he is. Thus so-called love within this material world is nothing but sexual satisfaction.
Morning Walk — May 11, 1975, Perth
Prabhupada: Yes, that is law always. Rape means without consent, sex. Otherwise there is no rape. There was a rape case in Calcutta, and the lawyer was very intelligent. He some way or other made the woman admit, “Yes, I felt happiness.” So he was released. “Here is consent.” And that’s a fact. Because after all, sex, rape or no rape, they will feel some pleasure. So the lawyer by hook and crook made the woman agree, “Yes, I felt some pleasure.” “Now, there is consent.” So he was released. After all, it is an itching sensation. So either by force or by willingly, if there is itching, everyone feels relieved itching it. That’s a psychology. It is not that the woman do not like rape. They like sometimes. They willingly. That is the psychology. Outwardly they show some displeasure, but inwardly they do not. This is the psychology.
Then there is the person who recently made the blog called Dasi This was posted on May 31 2008 on chakra.org
The purpose of this blog is to discuss the position of women within our tradition and through the teachings of Srila Prabhupada.
In her first post she wrote
GBC Resolution 311
We need an icebreaker here. Let’s start off with the GBC Resolution.
_______________________________311. End Notes or Appendices in Srila Prabhupada’s Books
Whereas some of Srila Prabhupada’s books contain sentences such as the following, which when taken in isolation may be considered derogatory to and offensive against women:
Although rape is not legally allowed, it is a fact that a woman likes a man who is very expert at rape. (SB 4.25.41, p.)
When a husbandless woman is attacked by an aggressive man, she takes his action to be mercy. (SB 4.25.42, p.)
Generally, when a woman is attacked by a man–whether her husband or some other man–she enjoys the attack, being too lusty. (SB 4.26.26, p.)
Whereas some ISKCON devotees may have used these statements out of context as an excuse to offend, neglect and abuse women;
Whereas some people who read such statements may consider them to be derogatory or offensive, may misunderstand what Srila Prabhupada actually means, and may not want to further read those books, notwithstanding the many other beneficial statements in them;
RESOLVED: That the GBC Body recommends to the BBT Trustees that the above quotes, and other such statements as determined by the BBT, be explained in endnotes or in appendices.
________________________________What scriptural rebuttals do you have for this? Either for the annotation issue or for the above quoted material. Are there other quotes that need to be looked at? Are we looking at only statements about women? What about the idea that some of the guru’s instructions are relative and some are absolute? Don’t be shy. Now’s the time. What do you think?
In another post she wrote
Caitanya das, a disciple of Bhakti Vikasa Swami, continues to spew his distorted view of Vaisnavism. A few days ago there was an apology but now that has been withdrawn.
http://www.sankirtandiary.blogspot.com/
When it was pointed out to her that what she was objecting to were the teachings of Srila Prabhupada, that what she considers to be offensive and wrong in the words of devotees is really criticism of Srila Prabhupada, that it was Srila Prabhupada who taught them what she considered to be wrong and offensive, she got upset and announced that she is shutting down her blog, she wrote:
Dear Vaisnavas,
Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to Sri Guru and Sri Gauranga. All glories to Srila Prabhupada.
Today I write my final entry for this blog. In a few days I will delete it entirely. It was an experiment for me. I thought it might be possible to have a civilized discussion on some issues that are currently facing us. I was wrong.
I have never received such vituperative attacks in my life. I have also never heard such talk against our Srila Prabhupada. I am very disappointed. Initially I thought this blog would be a service to the devotees. Now, I feel it is a service to the devotees to take it down.
Thank you to all the devotees who sent in words of support. All the best to everyone. May you all dream sweet dreams of Sri Sri Radha and Krsna.
Your servant,
Dasi
In these three cases we can see devotees trying to justify what Srila Prabhupada has taught by either denying that he said what he said (Sripad Narayana Maharaja), trying to give a different meaning to the obvious and direct meaning (HH Jayadvaita), or by blaming Srila Prabhupada’s followers for repeating what he taught but being in denial as to the source of those teachings (Dasi).
In the recently released statement from the GBC about “offensive” statements about women they refer us to a statement they made in 1998 about a group of devotees (some were high ranking members of ISKCON) which had coalesced on the internet calling themselves GHQ. Their purpose was to start a movement to eliminate what they saw as female empowerment, feminism, female leadership, etc, in ISKCON. They taught that those things are a very serious deviation from what Srila Prabhupada taught, serious enough to get you thrown out of ISKCON if they had their way. This was what the GBC had to say about the GHQ:
1998 Statement by the North American Executive Officers
The North American GBC/Temple President Executive Officers wish to voice our strong disapproval of, and our protest against, the demeaning and ill intended statements made by some members of the GHQ com conference that were recently brought to public attention.
It is our firm position that Srila Prabhupada, the Founder-Acarya of ISKCON, intended his Hare Krishna Movement to be free from all prejudice, sexism, racism and other forms of bigotry.
We affirm that the first and foremost principle of our society is that all people (indeed all sentient beings) are eternal, sacred parts and parcels of the Supreme Lord Sri Krishna, and as such should be respected and affirmed in their individual relationship with the Lord, as well as their service to guru and Krishna.
Multiple statements made by members of this Internet conference ridicule, berate and vilify women, other minorities, and individual Vaishnava devotees. They document an organized attempt to prevent women from their God-given rights of self-expression and service to Srila Prabhupada. We denounce such views. They are opposed to the core values and principles of Vaishnava culture which upholds the devotional offerings of all souls as sacred and worthy of our respect and protection.
While we endorse open debate and dialogue within our Krishna Consciousness movement, we must speak out against any discussion that crosses the line of decency, morality, and Vaishnava etiquette and supports an agenda to exploit or minimize a section of our society.
Why do so many devotees disagree on what Srila Prabhupada taught? Isn’t it obvious, there in black and white for all to read?
Some people will read the above quotes from Srila Prabhupada and take them as absolute truth. Even though most of what he spoke in those quotes is objectively false. Then there are others who will take into consideration that Srila Prabhupada often would say that when you become a devotee that you transcend your low birth or low intelligence or low position in life. The members of the GHQ and the many devotees who think like them accept the former position while rejecting the latter. The official position of the GBC is to accept the latter position, at least the majority or those who control it. They openly reject the GHQ position of trying to disempower females in ISKCON and their acceptance of treating and speaking of devotee women in the same way that Srila Prabhupada describes women in general. But since the GBC is comprised of many different minded devotees we can be sure that there are some who believe as the GHQ believes. Also this dichotomy is sure to be found among the gurus in ISKCON.
So how do we rid the devotee community of the belief that Srila Prabhupada’s teachings were meant to be accepted as an absolute truth in their description of women and black bodied people for all times, in all circumstances? Should we try to be rid of those beliefs?
We need to first come to the understanding that Srila Prabhupada was not incapable of mistakes, he could make mistakes. Srila Prabhupada never claimed that he could make no mistakes. Yet many devotees deify Srila Prabhupada and by doing so they can experience cognitive dissonance and go into denial mode when it becomes obvious that Srila Prabhupada made mistakes.
For example in the above quotes about brain size, and how intelligence is based upon brain size. Srila Prabhupada based his idea about brain size and intelligence from a teacher of his from the 1920s. That man was wrong. In reality women do have larger brains then 34 ounces. Einstein’s brain weighed 43 ounces whereas the average female brain weighs between 40-44 ounces. The average man from 46-49 ounces. Different researchers have had slightly different results because brain size is dependent on body size. Tests which included more smaller people got a slightly smaller average for men and women. There are countless women who are very intelligent and have proved so by having won science awards for their discoveries in physics, mathematics, biology, etc. There are countless women scientists and professors today working in all fields of science, math, physics, biology, high tech etc. There are women intellectuals of all types who prove that what Srila Prabhupada said about women not being very intelligent is simply wrong. In fact more women go to college than men in the west. In comparing various intelligence tests for the difference between men and women there is much debate because different tests are argued to be biased in different ways. One thing they all agree on is that in general men are slightly better on average in math and science, while women are slightly better on average with verbal and literary skills and reading and memory. Those are just averages. In reality there are countless women who work in the sciences or academia, etc, who are vastly more intelligent than countless men. Srila Prabhupada was simply wrong on these points.
Not that it even matters about brain size. The brain is simply made up of chemicals. Chemicals do not cause intelligence. Intelligence comes from Krishna as Paramatma.
Srimad Bhagavatam 5.7.14
paro-rajah savitur jata-vedo
devasya bhargo manasedam jajana
suretasadah punar avisya caste
hamsam grdhranam nrsad-ringiram imahThe Supreme Personality of Godhead is situated in pure goodness. He illuminates the entire universe and bestows all benedictions upon His devotees. The Lord has created this universe from His own spiritual potency. According to His desire, the Lord entered this universe as the Supersoul, and by virtue of His different potencies, He is maintaining all living entities desiring material enjoyment. Let me offer my respectful obeisances unto the Lord, who is the giver of intelligence.
Bhagavad Gita 15.15
sarvasya caham hrdi sannivisto
mattah smrtir jnanam apohanam ca
vedais ca sarvair aham eva vedyo
vedanta-krd veda-vid eva cahamI am seated in everyone’s heart, and from Me come remembrance, knowledge and forgetfulness. By all the Vedas I am to be known; indeed I am the compiler of Vedanta, and I am the knower of the Vedas.
Bhagavad Gita 10.34
mrtyuh sarva-haras caham
udbhavas ca bhavisyatam
kirtih srir vak ca narinam
smrtir medha dhrtih ksamaI am all-devouring death, and I am the generating principle of all that is yet to be. Among women I am fame, fortune, fine speech, memory, intelligence, steadfastness and patience.
Some people have almost no brain matter whatsoever yet have high intelligence. The following is from http://www.flatrock.org.nz/topics/science/is_the_brain_really_necessary.htm
Later, a colleague at Sheffield University became aware of a young man with a larger than normal head. He was referred to Lorber even though it had not caused him any difficulty. Although the boy had an IQ of 126 and had a first class honours degree in mathematics, he had “virtually no brain”. A noninvasive measurement of radio density known as CAT scan showed the boy’s skull was lined with a thin layer of brain cells to a millimeter in thickness. The rest of his skull was filled with cerebrospinal fluid. The young man continues a normal life with the exception of his knowledge that he has no brain.
So why would Srila Prabhupada make those statements? There are also countless very successful, beautiful looking, law abiding, highly intelligent, highly educated black bodied people. Claiming that black people are all ugly, stupid, sudras, drunks, criminals, who should be enslaved and would be satisfied being enslaved…is totally ridiculous! Bhakti Tirtha Swami went to one of the most prestigious universities in the world, Princeton, he was a student leader there. Countless scientists and intellectuals, doctors and lawyers, politicans and preachers, artists and writers and professors, with black bodies exist and have existed for a very long time.
Krishna is in control over everyone and everything, that fact needs to be understood. No one is independent from the control of Paramatma in what they say and do. Srila Prabhupada did what Krishna had him do. Why would Krishna have Srila Prabhupada make so many wrong statements about women and black people? Statements which could cause people to lose faith in Krishna?
The way I see it is that what Srila Prabhupada was empowered to do was seen as so tremendous in creating a world wide organization of Gaudiya Vaisnavas in so short a period, that there was going to be a tendency to deify him. Early in ISKCON history that actually literally happened when a handful of sannyasis started to preach that Prabhupada was God until they were expelled by Prabhupada. Besides that literal deification there is another type of deification which can occur. It is most blatant in the ritvik promoters who want Srila Prabhupada as a kind of Jesus of ISKCON where no one can go to Krishna except through Prabhupada.
Then there are many many others who see Prabhupada as being without the possibility of error, and therefore anyone who doesn’t accept everything Prabhupada ever said as without possibility of error — are blasphemers in their eyes. There has grown a culture of Prabhupada deification in and around ISKCON. It is often used as a weapon to try to enforce personal and or political agendas on ISKCON. Prabhupada’s followers aren’t alone in this. The Narayana Maharaja sanga has shown the propensity to deify Sripad Narayana Maharaja as well by defending everything he has ever said as infallible regardless of what he has said or written. Also many disciples of ISKCON gurus show this propensity as well.
My view is that Krishna purposefully had Prabhupada say untrue and objectionable things in order to smash the natural growth of a Jesus like worship of Prabhupada, a growth of a Christian type of bastardization of Gaudiya Vaisnavism. When I first heard that many devotees, even long time devotees were praying to Srila Prabhupada with the belief that he could actually hear and respond to that prayer — I was taken aback at the ignorance of that belief. Leaders in ISKCON even preach that Prabhupada can hear and respond to your prayer. They tell stories bragging about Prabhupada appearing in dreams to them.
They have turned Prabhupada into a God. He has the powers of Paramatma because evidently he can be in Krishna Lila and yet hear and respond to your prayers in whatever language you speak. He can transport himself into your dreams as well. Even though in the Bhagavatam we are told that the jivas in Krishna Lila are kept in ignorance of Krishna’s divinity by the power of yoga-maya, still if you pray to Prabhupada to help you serve Krishna he can hear you, understand your language, understand that Krishna is God and that you want to serve God, and then somehow respond to you, all of you, millions of you, all of the time! That belief is widely held and has helped to turn modern Gaudiya Vaisnavism into a shadow of it’s original state. Prabhupada’s followers are not alone in this, I have heard other gurus claim to have divine powers like omniscience! These fraudulent teachings and beliefs are not true Gaudiya Vaisnavism. They may be taught and believed by many, but intelligent people will see the nonsense that has sprouted in the name of Gaudiya Vaisnavism.
The guru should be treated and seen as good as God, this is the teaching of the Bhagavata. But what that means in truth is not understood by many if not most people. The bona fide guru is as good as God because like an ambassador he is an empowered official representative. Not that we should see or treat the ambassador of a country exactly as we would see or treat the actual leader of a country. The ambassador brings the message of the leader but he does not have all the powers of the leader. The bona fide guru does not have the same infallible nature as God nor the divine powers of God. All jivas are under the control of God and can therefore be made to make mistakes. The bona fide guru may be very close to Krishna and still make mistakes because Krishna controls what the jiva does or does not do at any given moment. Everyone follows Krishna’s path in all respects.
Who among you will argue that black bodied people are all ugly low class drunkards who should be made into slaves and that they will actually be “satisfied” if they are forced into slavery and given a little cloth and a meal? Only a person who has deified Srila Prabhupada and become convinced that he is infallible and never made any mistakes would argue for slavery for black people. I know that many people will claim to be total supporters of everything Srila Prabhupada ever said and will see criticism of some of things he said as blasphemy. Then I say they should preach the good of enslaving black people and the stupidity of women. They should preach the above quotes from Prabhupada as well as the following without fear or regret to one and all, otherwise they are hypocrites. If you feel Prabhupada was always right no matter what he said then you should have no problem preaching slavery for black people and keeping your daughters without education or freedom and telling them the reason is because they are too stupid and will become prostitutes.
-woman has no independence, because they cannot keep their independence—it is not possible.
-By nature they are weak
-In the Western countries, the women are given freedom like man, but that is unnatural.
-So, the conclusion is that women are weak.
(SB Lecture, Los Angeles, 11/30/73)-Independence for women means they become like prostitutes.
-Women cannot do anything independently. To give them independence means to create some trouble.
(SB Lecture, Los Angeles, 5/19/72)Satsvarüpa: Yes. (break) Mainly it’s about the girls who are over ten. They were in Vrndävana and discussed this with Jagadisa, but they couldn’t settle up, so they wanted to know what you think. Their idea is that… As of now, there is no plan for a school for the girls over ten, but just that they should return to their parents and not get any more schooling. But they’re thinking that there should be, and one reason is that you said in France that the girls could learn these sixty-four arts. So they were thinking that there should be a school for girls over ten, and that it should be situated in India. One reason is that in India our teachers can take help from Indian Life Member ladies who know these arts. Our Western devotees don’t know them, the cooking and painting and things like this, but the Indian women do. …
Prabhupada: My opinion is already there according to the… They should be chaste, faithful to husband. Little literary knowledge, they can read. That’s all. Not very much.
(January 31, 1977 Room conversation Bhubaneshwar)-Women are inferior to men, and men are given full charge of the women.
-Women are supposed to be less intelligent.
(TLK 5)-Women should not be given freedom. Like a child, she is not given freedom.
(SB Lecture, Los Angeles, 7/11/74)-Women as a class are no better than boys, and therefore they have no discriminatory power like that of a man.
(SB 1.7.42, purport)-According to Canakya Pandita, women are generally not very intelligent and therefore not trustworthy.
-As children are very prone to be misled, women are similarly very prone to degradation.
(BG 1.40, purport)-Now, in the Manu-samhita it is clearly stated that a woman should not be given freedom. That does not mean that women are to be kept as slaves, but they are like children. The demons have now neglected such injunctions, and they think that women should be given as much freedom as men.
(BG 16.7, purport)-A woman’s attachment to her husband may elevate her to the body of a man in her next life, but a mans attachment to woman will degrade him, and in his next life he will get the body of a woman.
(SB 3.31.41, purport)-It may be concluded that white or a golden hue is the color of the higher caste, and black is the complexion of the sudras [lower class].
(SB 4.14.45, purport)-the higher classes of men are white (sukla), and the lower classes of men are black. This division of white and black is in terms of ones white and black duties of life. Pious acts lead one to acquire beautiful features. Impious acts lead one to acquire ugly bodily features.
(SB 3.5.9, purport)-Yes. We hate to mix with you (a man reported to be homosexual). No gentleman tries to mix with loafers. Even in America, they dont like to live with the blacks. Crows will not like to live with the ducks and white swans. And white swans will not like to live with the crows. That is natural division. Birds of the same feather flock together.
(1/11/77, Allahabad)Prabhupāda: Yes. They have got money. The Jews have got money. They want to invest and get some profit. Their only interest is how to get money, no nationalism, no religion, nothing of the sort. Therefore it is not now; long, long ago… Therefore Shakespeare wrote “Shylock, the Jew.”
Hari-śauri: Yes. “Shylock.”
Prabhupāda: “One pound of flesh.” The Jews were criticized long, long ago.
(Conversation During Massage — January 23, 1977, Bhuvanesvara)Tamala Krsna: So we’re… I thought there were girls in Vrindävana now. They said that they’re going to have the girls’ gurukula behind the boys’ gurukula. Gopäla was talking about that.
Prabhupada: No, no, no. No girls.
Tamala Krsna: It should be in another city or somewhere else.
Prabhupada: Yes. They should be taught how to sweep, how to stitch…
Tamala Krsna: Clean.
Prabhupada: …clean, cook, to be faithful to the husband.
Tamala Krsna: They don’t require a big school.
Prabhupada: No, no. That is mistake. They should be taught how to become obedient to the husband.
Tamala Krsna: Yeah, you won’t learn that in school.
Prabhupada: Little education, they can…
Tamala Krsna: Yeah. That they can get at home also.
Prabhupada: They should be stopped, this practice of prostitution.
Prabhupada: Ordinary education is sufficient, ABCD. This is all nonsense, so big, big, sound education and later on become a prostitute. What is this education? (laughter) To make them prostitute, it doesn’t require education.
(Conversation: July 10, 1975, Chicago)Satsvarupa: Srila Prabhupada, is this school for women also, or just for men?
Prabhupada: For men. Women should automatically learn how to cook, how to cleanse home.
Satsvarupa: So they don’t attend varnasrama college.
Prabhupada: No, no. Varnasrama college especially meant for the brahmana, ksatriya and vaisya. Those who are not fit for education, they are sudras. That’s all. Or those who are reluctant to take education, sudra means. That’s all. They should assist the higher class. (Morning Walk: March 14, 1974, Vrindavan)
Obviously, Srila Prabhupada made mistakes, and many of the statements he made regarding women arose out of a particular cultural background, that of 19th century Calcutta, and India’s ancient Vedic traditions.
By and large–Should his controversial comments regarding women be considered absolute? No!
Are they important to the culture of Bhakti? No!
Must one adhere to them in order to be a follower of Srila Prabhupada? No!
Here is how I (briefly) discuss them in an article first published on VNN in 2004.
The Words of Srila Prabhupada on Women
http://www.harekrsna.com/sun/editorials/05-08/editorials2935.htm
Brahma Das (ACBSP)
I am glad to finally see someone bold enough to examine these issues in a honest and objective manner. It’s refreshing to see someone who is not superstitious and fearful of reprisals to make statements in standing for ones own precious dignity. Afterall, it is normal to have a sense of dignity, a feeling of worth and value to ourselves and to others. We are living in an age and culture here in the west that is the most conducive for living to our full potential. Men need to let go of their fears and overcome their low self esteem and allow women to progress in their careers and spiritual paths.
In Islamic society, men are so worried that their women would go astray that they threaten them with death. These poor harrased women, threatened since childhood beleive that wearing hoods and head/face wraps (in 90 F to 100 + F heat) is real freedom. Women that believe that they are nine times more lustier than men, that women like rape, and have a lower intelligence are similar to these Islamic women in that they are subjected to so much humiliation that they turn off their sense self in order to identify with the tribal identity of their religious society.
This whole website is a disgrace. You are just promoting feminism under the guise of Vaisnavism. That Hare Krishna Diary author guy was right! You all are simply a bunch of prostitutes!
I thank you first for this new blog and also wish you well. Secondly I thank the two men who have been the first to comment on your blog.
“Men need to let go of their fears and overcome their low self esteem and allow women to progress in their careers and spiritual paths.”
Thanks for being honest Rupapada Das. I am always so grateful to men who speak up without envy in support of women.
It’s time for women to shed a new compassionate light on the world. All this denigration of women is old thinking.
Men and women, together, as krsna-dasa and krsna-dasi, spreading the teachings of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu.
Maybe all these outmoded ideas about women and black colored people is a special mercy from Srila Prabhpada to wake up the fight in us, and move mountains.
God alone knows, I don’t.
Well unnamed, if you believe that women should be treated as second class citizens, without the same rights as men, why don’t you move to Saudi Arabia or Iran? I’m sure those and a few other countries in the world will welcome your views. As for the rest of the world…not so much.
So, um, good luck with that.
Don’t believe me? Let’s try an experiment alright? The next time you try and preach to people about Krishna you should tell them, especially if it’s a family situation with young daughters present who are in medical school and law school and in grade school, and also a successful professional woman as the wife and mother, that you believe God says to tell them that women are inherently stupid because they have tiny brains, and they should only learn how to read and cook and sew and sweep and clean–and if they do anything else they are prostitutes who will destroy society. Then when their black friends come over to visit while you are there you should tell them that your God tells you to tell them that they would be happier being slaves because they are stupid sinful drunks who can’t be allowed freedom. Tell them you have come to give them the love of God to set them free from misery.
Get back to me on that.
Vrajabumi, your problem is that you have no faith in Prabhupada. Why don’t you get lost? If you don’t want to surrender to Prabhupada, then you have the freedom not to. You also have the freedom to leave ISKCON.
In reference to the above post the translation and Bhag. ref. is:
bhave bhave yatha bhaktih
padayos tava jayate
tatha kurusva devesa
nathas tvam no yatah prabho
O Lord of lords, O master, please grant us pure devotional service at Your lotus feet, life after life.
Bhag. 12.13.22
And, really, is the post by ‘unamed’ really worth a reply? His anger is obvious.
Premasru, I believe in freedom of speech and I also believe that what unnamed says is a belief held by a lot of devotees. So he or she is providing a service so that we can all “hug it out”.
While I agree with the author that the “culture of Prabhupada deification in and around ISKCON” is unhealthy. I find this statement from the author to be quite odd.
“My view is that Krishna purposefully had Prabhupada say untrue and objectionable things in order to smash the natural growth of a Jesus like worship of Prabhupada, a growth of a Christian type of bastardization of Gaudiya Vaisnavism..”
Also I don’t agree: “that praying to Srila Prabhupada with the belief that he could actually hear and respond to that prayer—is ignorance and nonsense in the name of Gaudiya Vaisnavism.”
While, I don’t believe that Prabhupada was omniscient (only God is omniscient) –and I can understand how one might belittle the concept of praying to departed saints–there is however some scriptural support to the belief that a fully liberated soul (videha mukta) can hear the prayers of his disciples. (In Gaudiya Vaisnavism, a videha mukta is one who has left this mortal world altogether and joined Sri Krsna in his nitya-lila.)
Vedanta-sutra says that a fully liberated soul (videha mukta) can have pervasive knowledge by way of its aura, which extends like the light of a lamp into other things, pradipavat avesah tatha hi darsayati (Vs 4.4.15).
The idea being that Krsna’s–achintya shakti–makes it possible for the vedeha mukta to hear the prays of his/her disciple even after entering the nitya lila.
Here is more information:
Sanga: Omniscience of the Guru
http://www.swami.org/pages/sanga/2005/2005_13.php
For Those So-called Devotees Who Disparage and Find Fault With the Teachings of HDG Srila Prabhupada and His Disciples and Grand-disciples, A Fair Warning Is In Order: You Do So At Grave Risk of Destruction To Your Own Devotional Creepers
All glories to Srila Prabhupada. Please accept my humble obeisances. Hare krsna.
You write, among many other repugnantly offensive and profoundly arrogant statements, “My view is that Krishna purposefully had Prabhupada say untrue and objectionable things in order to smash the natural growth of a Jesus like worship of Prabhupada, a growth of a christian type of bastardization of gaudiya vaisnavism”
That is complete and utter mental speculation and is found nowhere in the teachings of Srila Prabhupada or the predecessor acaryas of the gaudiya vaisnava sampradya parampara, and in fact Srila Prabhupada was known to have declared of Jesus, one of numerous positive statements he made in regards to Christ, “He is our guru. He is preaching God consciousness, so he is our spiritual master.”
You absurdly and continuously dare serious-minded devotees to preach aspects of Srila Prabhupada’s teachings that you mentally speculate are unsavory, unfavorable or “politically incorrect” or not in line with the atheism of feminism and New Age paganism–illusory man-made philososphical concoctions that your anartha-hardened heart and mind are still addicted to–but you ignore Srila Prabhupada’s instructions that true preaching is repeating the words of the spiritual master, which you, in fact, insist is blind fanaticism and fundamentalism, code-words that you have co-opted from the bad association you keep in the so-called and fraudualant female- and minority- empowerment community.
Recently, there have been articles of dubious merit but of singular purpose (to poison, contaminate and discourage the minds of serious-minded, enthusiastic and dedicated–what the so-called devotees, like Lalita Madhava and Bhakta Eric of the greivously offensive website thehing.com, would insidiously label “ultra-conservative”, “fanatical”, “kool-aid drinkers” and, appalling as it may sound, even “brainwashed”–followes of Srila Prabhupada) posted to websites, like Chakra.org and Sampradaya Sun, of equally dubious merit and credentials, created and edited , for the most part, by envious, disgruntled, former ISKCON devotees–both Srila Prabhupada disciples and his grand-disciples or , worse even, former Prabhupada disciples (imagine the aparadha involved there) who have taken re-initation by Prabhupada’s godbrothers and disciples of godbrothers (Prabhupada warned his followers time and again of the consequences of even reading the books of these individuals what to speak of associating with them in such intimate and unauthorized ways)–who have long since lost the sincere sadhaka’s taste for strictly following the regulative principles of krsna conscious, rising early at 4 AM everyday for mangala aratrika, carefully and offenselessly chanting 16 rounds of the hare krsna maha-mantra, executing devotional service, associating with and humbly serving like-minded devotees and performing harinama sankirtana and brhad mrdangam. Due to the offenses–mad elephant and others of a lesser degree but nonetheless detrimental to a devotee’s delicate devotional creeper–commited by these unfortunate former devotees, they are now claiming to find, and in many instances even manufacturing, faults and errors (which are in actuality and reality non-existent and imagined by these so-called devotees, and offered up to unsuspecting and innocent readers just to introduce hidden agenda-laden ulterior motives such as feminism, New Age atheism and other such mental speculation and sense gratification) with Srila Prabhupada and his books and teachings, which in and of itself is a terribly egregious form of vaisnava aparadha.
Let Srila Prabhupada–from Chapter 6 of Sri Upadesamrta–have the first and last word on this matter of utmost importance and urgency:
“If we consider the bodily defects of a Vaisnava, we should understand that we are committing an offense at the lotus feet of the Vaisnava. An offense at the lotus feet of a Vaisnava is very serious. Indeed, Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu has described this offense as hātī-mātā, the mad elephant offense. A mad elephant can create a disaster, especially when it enters into a nicely trimmed garden. One should therefore be very careful not to commit any offense against a Vaisnava. Every devotee should be ready to take instructions from a superior Vaisnava, and a superior Vaisnava must be ready to help an inferior Vaisnava in all respects. One is superior or inferior according to his spiritual development in Krsna consciousness. One is forbidden to observe the activities of a pure Vaisnava from a material point of view. For the neophyte especially, considering a pure devotee from a material point of view is very injurious. One should therefore avoid observing a pure devotee externally, but should try to see the internal features and understand how he is engaged in the transcendental loving service of the Lord. In this way one can avoid seeing the pure devotee from a material point of view, and thus one can gradually become a purified devotee himself.
Those who think that Krsna consciousness is limited to a certain section of people, a certain section of devotees or a certain tract of land are generally prone to see the external features of the devotee. Such neophytes, unable to appreciate the exalted service of the advanced devotee, try to bring the mahā-bhāgavata to their platform. We experience such difficulty in propagating this Krsna consciousness all over the world. Unfortunately we are surrounded by neophyte Godbrothers who do not appreciate the extraordinary activities of spreading Krsna consciousness all over the world. They simply try to bring us to their platform, and they try to criticize us in every respect. We very much regret their naive activities and poor fund of knowledge. An empowered person who is actually engaged in the confidential service of the Lord should not be treated as an ordinary human being, for it is stated that unless one is empowered by Krsna, one cannot spread the Krsna consciousness movement all over the world.
When one thus criticizes a pure devotee, he commits an offense (vaisnava-aparādha) that is very obstructive and dangerous for those who desire to advance in Krsna consciousness. A person cannot derive any spiritual benefit when he offends the lotus feet of a Vaisnava. Everyone should therefore be very careful not to be jealous of an empowered Vaisnava, or a śuddha-vaisnava. It is also an offense to consider an empowered Vaisnava an object of disciplinary action. It is offensive to try to give him advice or to correct him. One can distinguish between a neophyte Vaisnava and an advanced Vaisnava by their activities. The advanced Vaisnava is always situated as the spiritual master, and the neophyte is always considered his disciple. The spiritual master must not be subjected to the advice of a disciple, nor should a spiritual master be obliged to take instructions from those who are not his disciples. This is the sum and substance of Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī’s advice in the sixth verse.”
In closing I would like to add that recently many of these so-called devotees are complaining that the devotees in ISKCON will turn away people who are sincerely interested in Krsna consciousness unless Srila Prabhupada’s teachings are watered down. These so-called devotees are complaining that ISKCON devotees shouldn’t preach certain so-called unsavory or unfavorable aspects of Krsna consciousness for fear of preventing or discouraging a conditioned soul from accepting Krsna consciousness. What nonsense ! Utter rubbish and arrogant deceit ! Srila Prabhupada often compared the priceless teachings of this great Krsna consciousness movement to a diamond and precious stone jeweler…in that not everyone will abandon their nonsense ways and surrender to Krsna, just as many people cannot afford real diamonds and will settle for less and an inferior product so that they may continue with sinful activity and at the same time practice a false and concocted form of spirituality as though it is the genuine article. Such is the charade of the cheater and the cheated…ISKCON is the genuine article…the real deal, as it were, and it must not be watered down, diluted and cheapened to attract thousands upon thousands of mudhas and miscreants the way the countless other fake, bogus and manufactured so-called yoga movements are being mass marketed…better ISKCON keep its preaching pure and unadulterated by serpent and maya philosophies, and attract a few good men and women, who will take Krsna consciousness seriously and not frivolously. Leave the cheating to the cheaters and the cheated.
Thank you and hare krsna .
Arjuna dasa,
disciple of HH Bhaktiswarupa Damodara Swami
Attract a “few” good men and women?! Well you are going to disappoint Prabhupada there Arjuna dasa prabhu, coz Prabhupada’s said to build a house where the whole world could live in. Doesn’t sound like you’re very loyal to the acarya yourself there my good man.
Vrajabhumi dear,
Love the blog and the nice picture of the energetic young women devotees. But why not feature also some older devotee women, the generation who certainly experienced the pre-debate phase of this mysoginy issue, and who therefore certainly have an added angle of view to offer. Thanks.
About folks like Unnamed, Arjuna dasa and the like: although fanatics seem impervious to logic and evidence based on direct sense perception regarding the success of women in western society, contradicting Islamic, Hindu caste or turn of the century English Victorian notions about women, there is a method to their madness. They view this type of discussion as a threat to their faith and survival and therefore react in a manner they know best, namely condemn, harrass and create fear in people for exploring these issues.
Srila Prabhupad came in a material body and had flaws that come with a material body. Although very compassionate to women in his personal relationships, he was bound by his time, place and circumstance and revealed himself to be a bigoted man who preached a misogynist attitude to women publicly. This was not the attitude of all men of his time in India – I have known many vaisnavas (and other) men of Srila Praphupad’s generation in India who were extremely respectful of women, always spoke of women and viewed women with utter respect, and even elevated women as naturally superior to men in intelligence, in managerial ability and as mother and ‘griha-laxmi’.
I am ever grateful that Srila Phabhupad brought me to Krishna, and I respect and love him for his immense compassion in bringing the BG, SG, Nectar of Devtion, Sri Isopanisad to the world outside India. To take as absolute truth Srila Prabhupad’s views on science or women is extremely foolish and ignorant-minded. Lord Sri Krishna is not limited by either Srila Prabhupad’s views nor by ISKCON’S dictates. I am a devotee of little merit and no importance, but unless ISKCON GBC comes forward dynamically to reject and negate the mysogyny that is floating in ISKCON society, I for one, am outta here!
The principle of Guru is that Krishna’s mercy can manifest within a devotee to inspire other souls through instructions on bhakti, however, it can also leave. When Swami Bhaktivedanta came to the West and spoke about Sri Krishna, the holy name of the Lord and devotional service, Krsna’s mercy manifestation of Guru appeared in him to inspire so many in chanting the holy names of Krishna. However, when he spoke disparaging remarks on women, Blacks, his God-brothers, Radha Kunda babajis and other Vaisnavas, the Guru manifestation left. It would return when he would glorify Lord Krsna and devotion service.
Swami Bhaktivedanta had very opinionated views from his upbringing and troubled married life. His zelous followers have taken these contraversal views as ‘truths’ but they are not. Is it a mad elephant offense to acnkowledge this? No, because these are not slanders towards him but merely pointing out that blanket diparaging remarks are unfair, damanging and hurting to others.
Arjuna you can believe as you like. But I and others will continue to disagree because we don’t see Krishna consciousness as dependent on teaching everything exactly as Prabhupada taught. I reject the idea that slavery is good. I reject the idea that women are not intelligent and need to be treated like little boys. I reject that girls should recieve no education other then reading and writing and household chores otherwise they will become “prostitutes”. I reject the idea that black people are all sudras and drunks and immoral. I reject many more teachings like these which are objectively false.
You claim that the guru is not supposed to be criticized. I reject the idea that a guru’s teachings cannot be criticized. If a guru is promoting a teaching which can be proven to be false then why should that teaching be accepted? If I criticize the person without acknowledging that Krishna is in control of what that person did or said then I am in ignorance. But if I acknowledge that Krishna as Paramatma is the controller behind what the guru says then I can criticize the gurus teachings without it being offensive to the guru because I do not blame the guru, it is Krishna who made him say what he did, for a specific purpose. If I criticize anyone for what they do without acknowledging that they are not the doers, then I am making an offense because that person is not the doer.
Krishna says in the Gita 13.30
One who can see that all activities are performed by the body, which is created of material nature, and sees that the self does nothing, actually sees.
PURPORT by A.C Bhaktivedanta Swami
This body is made by material nature under the direction of the Supersoul, and whatever activities are going on in respect to one’s body are not his doing. Whatever one is supposed to do, either for happiness or for distress, one is forced to do because of the bodily constitution. The self, however, is outside all these bodily activities. This body is given according to one’s past desires. To fulfill desires, one is given the body, with which he acts accordingly. Practically speaking, the body is a machine, designed by the Supreme Lord, to fulfill desires. Because of desires, one is put into difficult circumstances to suffer or to enjoy. This transcendental vision of the living entity, when developed, makes one separate from bodily activities. One who has such a vision is an actual seer.
——————
What is an offense? An offense is when you blame someone for something they are not to blame for. I don’t blame Prabhupada for the wrong things he said. Therefore I am not offending him. I can criticize what he said or wrote without it being offensive as long as I understand that I am not criticizing Prabhupada. Just like if you criticize a devotee for some reason-that is also considered an offense. But is it an offense if what that devotee was doing was wrong and you understood that the devotees action were outside of his control and you were trying to correct his mistake? Where is the offense?
An easy enough example for you to see is with Prabhupada’s claims that there are no women scientists nor mathematicians nor philosophers and that women’s brains are never larger then 34 or 36 ounces.
“Where is woman philosopher, mathematician, scientist? Not a single.”
Will you claim that he is not wrong fearing offense? or will you claim that others are offensive if they claim he was wrong?
We know for 100% fact that there are thousands of women scientists and mathematicians and philosophers teaching in universities all over the world and India and in research. There were probably fewer when Prabhupada was alive here on earth, but there were still many. We also know for a fact that women’s brains on average are larger then the 34 or 36 ounces. These are simple facts. Yet you have claimed if we point out that Prabhupada made mistakes then we are offensive?
There has to be a way to criticize a guru if he is making objective mistakes without it being offensive. Why would Krishna want his representative and his preaching mission to appear foolish? Prabhupada makes many wrong statements which are objectively wrong. If you claim it is wrong that people will not be favorable to Prabhupada and ISKCON if they hear those things and not see them criticized within ISKCON, then we have to wonder why ISKCON has lost a huge percentage of non-Indian membership around the world over time? Where are the hundreds of western devotees filling temples in the Americas and Western Europe like there used to be? Eastern Europe is doing well but it is just a matter of time before the same thing happens there. They were introduced to Krishna consciousness much later then the rest of the world.
And outside of India the Indian congregation loses as many people or more then it gains. I remember in the early 1980’s when New Dwaraka had a very large number of Indian people as congregational members. Sunday feasts or festival days were huge affairs. Nowadays it is much smaller, you can see on sundays using their webcam, it looks to be less then 1/10th the size of participation from what I remember.
What is the cause? From reading Indian blogs I have seen that many Indian women are very upset with the way Prabhupada writes about women. It is usually the women in a family who are the ones who are most enthusiastic for getting the family involved as congregational members. This is true for all religions. If the women feel that Prabhupada was offensive to them and they don’t see ISKCON trying to rectify the situation they simply stop being involved and then tell all their family and friends their reasons. Word of mouth can be very good or very bad, it is very important for developing an Indian congregation that it be good. They used to have little to no choice if they wanted to be involved in religious services because ISKCON was often the only game in town. It is no longer like that. ISKCON will continue on it’s path of losing respect and participation outside of India until they deal with the source of the problem. If they don’t then we can expect other organizations to replace ISKCON in popularity. In India it may not happen so fast, but it will among the higher educated class of people. Do you think they want their daughters to be taught they are prostitutes if they pursue careers other then being housewives? Do you think they want their children to hear them be called prostitutes if they have careers?
What needs to be done is a repudiation of the objectionable teachings. But it needs to be done in a respectful manner, teaching that Krishna had Prabhupada say what he said in order for all of us to learn a lesson about the problems that can be caused by deification of gurus as infallible.
The pure devotee is perfect in his bhajan. His bhakti is perfect.
Hi slove for Yugal-kishor is perfect. But we have to understand that even our archaryas make mistakes in their” external” dealings…..
..”Jiva Goswami Prabhu’s character was very strong, and he was very highly educated in Sanskrit and Scripture. Sometimes he even corrected the writings of Rupa Goswami. Rupa Goswami told him many times, “Jiva, you see if it is perfect or not. iva Goswami helped to make the Sat-Sandharbas, super-authentic Scripture in Mahaprabhu’s Sampradaya. Jiva Goswami said, “It was in a disordered form, so I am making it in an ordered form.” That way he gave explanation, but actually he made everything.
Once it happened that Vallabha Bhatta, who was very learned, saw there was a little fault in one sloka of Rupa Goswami, and he told Rupa Goswami, “Rupa, here is a little fault, you can correct it this way.” Rupa Goswami was always giving honour to everyone, and he gave honour to Vallabha Bhatta and corrected that. But Jiva Goswami knew that what Rupa Goswami wrote was correct. Then he went to take water from the Jamuna, and there he met Vallabha Bhatta. He told him, “The sloka you tried to correct is already correct, I think.”
Then Vallabha Bhatta debated with Jiva Goswami about that sloka and he was very happy to see what Jiva Goswami said was perfect. Then he came back to Rupa Goswami and said, “Rupa, I said to correct that sloka, but it was not necessary to corrected it. It was perfect. You can keep it.” Then he asked, “Who is that young boy, that seventeen or eighteen year-old boy?”…
there is nothing wrong in Prabhupada being wrong because we are not coming for material knowledge. We want bhakti.Nothing more and nothing less.
Brahma Das, this is the quote from Tripurari Swami that you linked to
You claim that supports your claim of
What the Vedanta-sutra is refering to is cryptic and can be interpreted in many different ways. I agree that it is possible for jivas to hear prayers if Krishna wants them to hear prayers, but not by their own power by what is described in the Vedanta-sutra. What is described there has a different conotation.
We should keep in mind that the purpose of the jivas in Krishna lila is to enhance the pleasure of the Lord, to enjoy with God in a relationship of love. The amount of time, energy, and knowledge they would need to enable them to even be able to deal with countless prayers in countless different languages would ruin their rasa pastimes with Krishna. But let’s say for arguments sake that Krishna would allow that. The jiva has to learn countless languages and spend all of his time listening to the prayers of who knows how many people? To what end?
So the whole concept is wrong. Krishna doesn’t have jivas in lila learn the knowledge which they would need to enable them to do what you think they can do, it would waste time for no reason. Krishna is the only person who can fulfill prayers and therefore there is no reason to waste anybody elses time and energy with peoples prayers.
You also objected to this from me
Obviously it is only an opinion. But it is true that Krishna is the controller. So the question was asked of me by someone elsewhere why would Krishna have Prabhupada say so many absurd things? My reason for saying what I said is because we can in fact see a Jesus like deification of Prabhupada by many devotees. That kind of attitude can lead to the giving up of the progressive path of bhakti. Not only the ritvik idea that nobody goes to Krishna but through Prabhupada, but also another type of Christian bastardization.
I have heard devotees claim that they are not philosophically inclined, that if they are faithful to following 4 regulative principles and chanting 16 rounds of japa per day that Prabhupada will take them back to Godhead. Or that if they can’t do that then if they pass out books or give money to devotees that Prabhupada will take them back to godhead.
Deifying the guru can lead to Christian, specifically Catholic theology. They will sin all week or all month or all year, then confess on sunday and they get a free pass to heaven. All they have to do is believe in Jesus.
Well what if your guru can’t take you back to godhead? What if it is up to you to become a better person? Where in the sastra does it teach that the guru takes people back to godhead? I have never seen that. The guru gives you the tools so that you can attain liberation, but he cannot liberate you, only God can liberate you. That is the bona fide sastric teaching. What I have witnessed in many devotees for a long time is the idea that the guru takes you back to godhead, the guru liberates you. That is a false teaching which is born from deifying the guru, thinking the guru has the powers of God. It is not just coming from fanatic Prabhupada deifiers, it also comes from many others in different ways. Even the babajis or those with ideas similar to them with their idea of siddha pranali. They teach that they have the power to liberate you by giving you your eternal swarupa. Fools believe them because they want spiritual advancement without earning it. They get what they pay for.
A good way to smash these deviant philosophies is to show that Prabhupada doesn’t have the powers of God. He was not infallible. You can’t ride on anyones coattails to become liberated. If you could then why are we still here? Why couldn’t Krishna just take us all to Goloka when Prabhupada left? Many people think they don’t need to actually advance spiritually, all we need to do is some rote chanting and rote following of principles or giving of some money or service as if we are accumulating pious dollars to pay for our way out of the material world. That may be how you can change one position in the material world for another. But to gain entrance into the spiritual world no amount of pious deeds or guru brownie points will make you automatically spiritually advanced. It’s not something you can buy or collect or catch a ride with into. The only thing Krishna is interested in is purity of heart, pure love, that is the only coin to pay for your ticket to the realm of absolute love and dedication. That pure love is part of us all and is awakened when the devotee takes the time and energy he puts into everything else in her or his life into sincerely approaching the path of bhakti with the mood of trying to please and give of oneself to Krishna, saranagati, rather then trying to attain liberation through bhakti practice. Pleasing the guru isn’t meant as a ticket to Goloka, you can’t pay him to take you there. The guru can show the truth, the path, and the methodology. A true guru knows that serving the guru with the idea of buying your way into heaven will not work, the true bona fide guru will tell you that. The real gift of the guru is Krishna consciousness. By becoming Krishna conscious we can enter into a relationship with Krishna. Either by the mercy of guru, sadhu, or Krishna, a person can become Krishna conscious.
“Even the babajis or those with ideas similar to them with their idea of siddha pranali. They teach that they have the power to liberate you by giving you your eternal swarupa. Fools believe them because they want spiritual advancement without earning it. They get what they pay for.”
This is wrong. Babajis who are followers of the Sri Caitanya Vaisnava tradition do not think that by receiving siddha pranali that they have attained liberation. Nor do those a Guru in the Tradition think they have the power to liberate their disciples. As you have correctly said, the Guru does not take the disciple to eternal kingdom of Radha and Krishna. It is up to the disciples progress in bhajan, to firm faith, attachment, bhava and prema. The Guru gives one tools for worship and devotional practice, like the sacred mantras, Harinam, the image of the Lord, tilak, siddha deha (in raganuga bhajan) and instructions in meditation. But it is all up to disciple to practice and intensify his bhajan Bhakti devi blesses the practicing sadhaka with advancement in bhakti. Nor is it foolish to accept siddha pranali because it is a connection with the disciplic succession or parivar by which the the flow of bhakti descends into this world from the nitya lila and eternal associating companions of Sri Mahaprabhu and their counterparts in Vrindavan as girlfriends of Sri Radha-Krishna. This is a practicing tradition since the times of Sriman Mahaprabhu’s manifest appearance and has been passed down through the generation of devotees.
You cannot hope to cure the ills of ISKCON society’s injustices towards women and minorities and not address the slander towards the Vaisnavas of the Sri Caitanya tradition who have dedicated their lives serving Sri Radha on the banks of her Lake, or in her garden of Sri Vrindavan. Many Vaisnavas there are high souls who chant hundreds of rounds, mentally meditate on serving within the eternal pastimes of Radha Krishna in the spiritual bodies, circumambulate the holy lands, daily worship their Murtis, hear and discuss the teachings of the six Goswamis. Swami Bhaktivedanta was also wrong in calling them monkeys, rascals, and whatever else he tried to spook his immature followers into believing.
Radhapada, I didn’t mean all babajis. I mean the ones that think they have the power to tell you your eternal swarupa .
I don’t want to turn this into a debate about the merits or demerits of siddha-pranali and the path propounded by certain teachers and traditions centered in Radha Kunda and Nabadvip. But it is historically inaccurate to say that the siddha-pranali tradition goes back to Mahaprabhu. That tradition was introduced at a later date. You won’t find Mahaprabhu or the Goswamis mentioning the giving of your eternal swarupa through siddha pranali or any similar type of process. I don’t accept that path and I know there are many devotees who revere that path. I don’t think I should have to support something that I believe is unhealthy for the path of bhakti just because others believe it is great. I don’t hold enmity for that path, I just think it is useless at best and harmful at worst.
I don’t want to offend you but I simply reject that path for personal reasons. I know that there are devotees who truly believe that path is authentic and I have heard all of their arguments for years. Madhavananda Das was the leading exponent of that path for many years outside of India and he ended up rejecting and belittling gaudiya vaisnavism and became a Buddhist because he claimed that that path was a fraud and made him lose faith in gaudiya vaisnavism. Jagadananda Das also was the other major proponent of that path and he has taken up the Sahajiya tradition. They were the leading proponents of siddha-pranali among western gaudiya vaisnavas and they both ended up where? Why? I believe there is a very good reason for why they ended up like they did. Krishna was making an example of them. He took the leaders of that path in the west and showed everyone the actual potency and authenticity of that path and where it can lead.
Yes that is just my opinion, and I don’t want to cause hurt feelings because I know you probably have feelings for a resident of Radha Kunda or Nabadvip who teaches that path. But I have my feelings as well and I believe that it is not only not helpful by creating a false identity for a sadhaka, but it is also easily used as vehicle for exploitation, As Madhavananda Das found out, and he was the leading proponent and best educated on that path outside of India.
I don’t want to veer off into this topic here because that is not what this blog is for. If you accept that path and follow it and preach it, that is what Krishna has planned for you. Good luck with it and I sincerely wish you success with it. Maybe it can work for some people. I don’t believe it can, from what I have seen and heard and experienced, but that is just my opinion.
Vrajabhumi, this sounds like something ripped from the pages of a Mayavadi handbook, as you try to impersonalize God, guru and your own abominable behavior toward both:
“You claim that the guru is not supposed to be criticized. I reject the idea that a guru’s teachings cannot be criticized. If a guru is promoting a teaching which can be proven to be false then why should that teaching be accepted? If I criticize the person without acknowledging that Krishna is in control of what that person did or said then I am in ignorance. But if I acknowledge that Krishna as Paramatma is the controller behind what the guru says then I can criticize the gurus teachings without it being offensive to the guru because I do not blame the guru, it is Krishna who made him say what he did, for a specific purpose. If I criticize anyone for what they do without acknowledging that they are not the doers, then I am making an offense because that person is not the doer.”
Your word jugglery, mental speculation and concoctions are astounding and border on the unprecedented. And its merely a superficial attempt at justifying your inexcusable arrogance and offensive misunderstanding and misappropriation of the words of jagat guru Srila Prabhupada. I am saddened by and for you, and I have to wonder what kind of sinful reaction is causing you such misfortune and degredation.
The depth and breadth of your ignorance and arrogance is quite astounding, and you come across as just plain mean-spirited, like an envious, vindictive, disgruntled former so-called devotee when you make such apasiddhantic and asampradayic statements as this:
“When I first heard that many devotees, even long time devotees were praying to Srila Prabhupada with the belief that he could actually hear and respond to that prayer-I was taken aback at the ignorance of that belief. Leaders in ISKCON even preach that Prabhupada can hear and respond to your prayer. They tell stories bragging about Prabhupada appearing in dreams to them. They have turned Prabhupada into a God. He has the powers of Paramatma because evidently he can be in Krishna Lila and yet hear and respond to your prayers in whatever language you speak. He can transport himself into your dreams as well.”
You belittle, ridicule and underestimate the power and potency found in the practice of a disciple praying to one’s own spiritual master, just as Srila Prabhupada did of his own guru Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati to gain the strength and inspiration to spread krsna consciousness to every town and village. And the previous Vaisnava acaryas like the 6 Goswamis of Vrndavana and Krsnasdasa Kaviraja and many of the authors of the songs of the Vaisnava Acaryas implore devotees to dream of, pray to–and in this way associate with–the spiritual master and pure devotee. So you have such little faith in the basic tenets of krsna consciousness? What about Srila Prabhupada’s murti and vani which Srila Prabhupada instructed are just as good as his own vapu, are they not worshippable? Of course they are, and why not pray to one’s own spiritual master, who is the representative of Lord Krsna. These are not fanciful, mythological, imaginative creations or embellishments borne of the modes of the material nature or mental speculation, they are bona fide and authorized truths of bhakti yoga and krsna consciousness given to the conditioned soul via the unbroken chain of the disciplic succession of previous and perfect self-realized souls who are infallible and, yes, highly worshippable.
First of all, “I” am not “claiming” anything, I am merely presenting you with the sobering, infallible and perfect words of the previous acaryas. So go ahead and “reject the idea that a guru’s teachings cannot be criticized” to your anartha-hardened heart’s content, but the teachings found in the Bhagavad gita, Srimad Bhagavatam, Nectar of Instruction and Nectar of Devotion–which I urge you to promptly re-read in place of the so-called self-help and women- and minority-empowering, New Age pamphlets and books (written not by enlightened sages, perfected souls and dear devotees of Lord Krsna but by meat-eating conditioned souls enmeshed in the 3 modes of material nature, “slaves” to Maya and Kali) whose message you appear to be co-opting and, in turn, contaminated by–are of the eternal Absolute Truth.
Can you possibly be more dishonest, disingenuous and scripturally deviant when you claim: “What is an offense? An offense is when you blame someone for something they are not to blame for. I don’t blame Prabhupada for the wrong things he said. Therefore I am not offending him. I can criticize what he said or wrote without it being offensive as long as I understand that I am not criticizing Prabhupada. Just like if you criticize a devotee for some reason-that is also considered an offense. But is it an offense if what that devotee was doing was wrong and you understood that the devotees action were outside of his control and you were trying to correct his mistake? Where is the offense.”
A kind reminder of what an “offense” is, without the word jugglery, mental speculation, and face-saving spin (actually in your case soul-saving might be more apropos because you appear subconsciously to be doing a lot of backtracking and sidestepping, perhaps in desperate avoidance of the mad elephant that is trampling you and your devotional creeper underfoot) which you cleverly employ and put to insidious use:
The offenses against chanting the holy name are as follows:
1) To blaspheme the devotees who have dedicated their lives for propagating the holy name of the Lord.
2) To consider the names of the demigods like Lord Siva or Lord Brahma to be equal to, or independent of, the name Lord Visnu.
3) To disobey the orders of the spiritual master.
4) To blaspheme the Vedic literature or literature in pursuance of the Vedic version.
5) To consider the glories of chanting Hare Krsna to be imagination.
6) To give some interpretation on the holy name of the Lord.
7) To commit sinful activities on the strength of chanting the holy name of the Lord.
8) To consider chanting of Hare Krsna one of the auspicious ritualistic activities offered in the Vedas as fruitive activities (karma-kanda).
9) To instruct a faithless person about the glories of the holy name.
10) To not have complete faith in the chanting of the holy names and to maintain material attachments, even after understanding so many instructions on this matter.
Every devotee who claims to be a Vaisnava must guard against these offenses in order to quickly achieve the desired success.
“I don’t want to veer off into this topic here because that is not what this blog is for. If you accept that path and follow it and preach it, that is what Krishna has planned for you. Good luck with it and I sincerely wish you success with it. ”
Understood and repected. Thanks for your best wishes.
Just for the record, I was one of the ones who introduced Madhavananda to the path of traditional Sri Caitanya Vaisnavism, as well as others in the last 10 years. Madhavananda and others have left to various paths, but I have not heard any reports of anyone dancing ‘rasa lila’ with married women.
It would be nice if everyone who comments could identify the name of their guru–as Brahma das and Arjuna das did at the bottom of their first posts.
Madhusudan das (ACBSP)
Thank you, Vrajabhumi for creating this blog. It is much needed.
Speaking of offenses, Arjuna das, you are committing many by the things you are writing just right here. You can’t seem to have a conversation with Vrajabhumi without saying things such as “your anartha-ridden heart” and “you have little faith” and so on. I think you need to focus more on your own anarthas instead of focusing on what you believe to be the anarthas of others. You appear foolish and insecure by trying to belittle others with that kind of tone.
Do you give classes at a nearby Iskcon temple with a large Indian congregation? I hope you do, so you can let them know that if their wives or daughters have careers that they are just prostitutes because Prabhupada said so. Please inform them not to educate their daughters also. Take them right out of school. I don’t know how well this will go over with them since most of the Indian congregation I have met is very well educated regardless of their sex. The best time to do this would be at a Sunday feast or perhaps SP appearance day. As Vrajabhumi would say, good luck with that.
Arjuna dasa:
If you want to belief that any criticism of what a guru says regardless if what he says is objectively true or not, is an offense–fine. I don’t.
You wrote:
No I didn’t. All I said is that jivas in Krishna lila won’t hear your prayer. I also said that Krishna can allow Prabhupada (or really anyone) to hear your prayers, but I gave a reasonable explanation why that wouldn’t happen with a jiva in Krishna lila. Accept or reject, I don’t care.
Prabhupada makes the point that “no prayers go in vain”. Why? Because: “But one thing you must know that any prayer you offer to your Spiritual Master and Superior Spiritual Master, all of them are conveyed to Krishna, so no sincere prayers go in vain.”
The point is that prayers can aid-you-in your devotional advancement beause they can aid in developing devotional sentiment. But we should realize the limits that a guru has. No jiva has the power to hear your prayer because your prayer only exists in your mind, only Paramatma can hear your thoughts and if Paramatma desires then that prayer can be conveyed to a guru–but it would have to be translated into a language the guru understands. Prabhupada could only speak a few languages. But why would Paramatma do that? What would be the point?
No jiva has the time to listen to countless prayers. For an example: Let’s say there are 10,000 people praying to the same guru for an average of 1 minute every day. That is 10,000 minutes of prayer per day. There are only 1,440 minutes in a day. So at most the guru could only hear the prayersof 1,440 people if the prayers are all exactly 1 minute long and the guru does not sleep or do anything else.
If you think that Prabhupada or other gurus have the ability to hear your prayers–fine. I don’t.
Arjuna Das I think you need to realize how your views are going to be accepted by others who may think differently then you. For example ISKCON–they don’t follow your advice. They don’t say that gurus are above criticism. They have even kicked gurus out of ISKCON what to speak of criticizing. Also you are being illogical in your application of your interpretation of gaudiya philosophy. You don’t seem to have any problem with criticizing devotees you disagree with, yet don’t give that same prerogative to others.
Vrajabhumi dasi, spiritual time and space is nothing like we experience here in this material dimension. You attempt to calculate how many prayers per minute Srila Prabhupada is able to respond to. Well, it doesn’t work like that. In spiritual time things may happen, lets say, faster than in material time. As well, in the absolute plane one transcendental ear may decide to hear several separate sets of sounds simultaneously. It all works on the level of sudha-sattva, absolutely pure consciousness. Thus, God and/or His companions can hear and reciprocate unlimited prayers, its perfectly possible. Srila Prabhupada, following the course of the liberated souls in Krsna Consciousness, certainly does not sit somewhere as Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada of the 60s and the 70s, but exists as some companion of Krsna in the eternal lila. This is our belief. Thus, prayers directed to him are not wasted at all. And even if we don’t know what his eternal form in the lila is, and more pointedly, if we don’t want to know but prefer to pray to him in his form while here in the 60′ or 70′, the essence of the prayer goes to the pure servant of Krsna.
govindanandini you speak as if what you speak about is known by you to be true from experience of that reality. To me it sounds like speculation since I doubt you have experience of what you described. Speculation is alright I guess, most of us do it from time to time. But we should understand that when we are speculating that our speculations are after all, just speculations, and not anything that we have experienced as being absolute truth.
People sometimes feel it is necessary to create some fantasy reality they have imagined in order to convince people of things beyond their experience. I don’t have a problem with that, after all we create fantasy stories for children. For me I guess I am too logical a person to blindly accept people’s speculative stories when it comes to things beyond their experience. When it comes to what goes on in the minds of people in Lila I accept the version of the Bhagavatam. There we are told that yoga-maya keeps the jivas from knowing that Krishna is the Lord. That means that if Prabhupada is in Krishna Lila he will not know that Krishna is God, what to speak of knowing that he is a guru who has disciples on Earth living in New Jersey praying to him. I reject that theology.
If people believe that I doubt it causes any harm, but I find it to be without sastric basis and without any real basis in common sense.
Vrajabhumi,
I reiterate that there is some scriptural support to the belief that a fully liberated soul (videha mukta) can hear the prayers of his disciples. I used the words–some scriptural support—in the sentence to indicate a degree of uncertainty, as the reference is indeed vague. However, what is not uncertain is that there is no scriptural prohibition against praying to the guru.
Can you offer a sloka in support of your bold proclamation that “praying to Prabhupada with the belief that he could actually hear and respond to that prayer “is ignorance and nonsense in the name of Gaudiya Vaisnavism?”
What you offer instead is the odd theory—“that Krishna purposefully had Prabhupada say untrue and objectionable things in order to smash the natural growth of a Jesus like worship of Prabhupada.”
Its plain to see that your theory is a sincere attempt to find a Krsna conscious way of supporting Srila Prabhupada, regardless of the things he said that you find objectionable. The attempt I find laudable, but I feel that you ought to rethink your theory as it simply amounts to passing the blame off to Krsna as the Supreme Controller.
You also offer a diatribe against praying to the guru, one that you try to support with a material conception of communication in the spiritual realm. What language do you think they speak in Goloka—English, Hindi, Swahili?
For me your odd theory and your unnecessary, inconclusive, unsupported, speculative diatribe, taints your entire article.
Too bad, as otherwise I thought you made some insightful points.
All the best, Brahma
Brahma Das you wrote
What I said about the ability or inability of Prabhupada to hear your prayer in Goloka has nothing to do with what is quoted by you in the second paragraph above. Did you quote that on purpose or was that a mistake?
I already gave you my reason for Prabhupada not being able to hear your prayers in Goloka. Can you find support for your view with a sloka?
Brahma Das you wrote
Well, reality is by itself and for itself. Krishna is in control of reality so whatever occurs is sanctioned and controlled by Krishna for his own purpose.
Bhagavad-gita 3.27
prakrteh kriyamanani
gunaih karmani sarvasah
ahankara-vimudhatma
kartaham iti manyate
The spirit soul bewildered by the influence of false ego thinks himself the doer of activities that are in actuality carried out by the three modes of material nature.
PURPORT
Two persons, one in Krsna consciousness and the other in material consciousness, working on the same level, may appear to be working on the same platform, but there is a wide gulf of difference in their respective positions. The person in material consciousness is convinced by false ego that he is the doer of everything. He does not know that the mechanism of the body is produced by material nature, which works under the supervision of the Supreme Lord. The materialistic person has no knowledge that ultimately he is under the control of Krsna. The person in false ego takes all credit for doing everything independently, and that is the symptom of his nescience.
——————
Bhagavad-gita 13.3
ksetra-jnam capi mam viddhi
sarva-ksetresu bharata
ksetra-ksetrajnayor jnanam
yat taj jnanam matam mama
O scion of Bharata, you should understand that I am also the knower in all bodies, and to understand this body and its knower is called knowledge. That is My opinion.
PURPORT
While discussing the subject of the body and the knower of the body, the soul and the Supersoul, we shall find three different topics of study: the Lord, the living entity, and matter. In every field of activities, in every body, there are two souls: the individual soul and the Supersoul. Because the Supersoul is the plenary expansion of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Krsna, Krsna says, “I am also the knower, but I am not the individual knower of the body. I am the superknower. I am present in every body as the Paramatma, or Supersoul.”
One who studies the subject matter of the field of activity and the knower of the field very minutely, in terms of this Bhagavad-gita, can attain to knowledge.
The Lord says, “I am the knower of the field of activities in every individual body.” The individual may be the knower of his own body, but he is not in knowledge of other bodies. The Supreme Personality of Godhead, who is present as the Supersoul in all bodies, knows everything about all bodies. He knows all the different bodies of all the various species of life. A citizen may know everything about his patch of land, but the king knows not only his palace but all the properties possessed by the individual citizens. Similarly, one may be the proprietor of the body individually, but the Supreme Lord is the proprietor of all bodies. The king is the original proprietor of the kingdom, and the citizen is the secondary proprietor. Similarly, the Supreme Lord is the supreme proprietor of all bodies.
The body consists of the senses. The Supreme Lord is Hrsikesa, Which means “the controller of the senses.” He is the original controller of the senses, just as the king is the original controller of all the activities of the state; the citizens are secondary controllers. The Lord says, “I am also the knower.” This means that He is the superknower; the individual soul knows only his particular body. In the Vedic literature, it is stated as follows:
ksetrani hi sarirani
bijam capi subhasubhe
tani vetti sa yogatma
tatah ksetra-jna ucyate
This body is called the ksetra, and within it dwells the owner of the body and the Supreme Lord, who knows both the body and the owner of the body. Therefore He is called the knower of all fields. The distinction between the field of activities, the knower of activities, and the supreme knower of activities is described as follows. Perfect knowledge of the constitution of the body, the constitution of the individual soul, and the constitution of the Supersoul is known in terms of Vedic literature as jnana. That is the opinion of Krsna. To understand both the soul and the Supersoul as one yet distinct is knowledge. One who does not understand the field of activity and the knower of activity is not in perfect knowledge. One has to understand the position of prakrti (nature), purusa (the enjoyer of nature) and isvara (the knower who dominates or controls nature and the individual soul). One should not confuse the three in their different capacities. One should not confuse the painter, the painting and the easel. This material world, which is the field of activities, is nature, and the enjoyer of nature is the living entity, and above them both is the supreme controller, the Personality of Godhead. It is stated in the Vedic language (in the Svetasvatara Upanisad 1.12), bhokta bhogyam preritaram ca matva/ sarvam proktam tri vidham-brahmam etat. There are three Brahman conceptions: prakrti is Brahman as the field of activities, and the jiva (individual soul) is also Brahman and is trying to control material nature, and the controller of both of them is also Brahman, but He is the factual controller.
In this chapter it will also be explained that out of the two knowers, one is fallible and the other is infallible. One is superior and the other is subordinate. One who understands the two knowers of the field to be one and the same contradicts the Supreme Personality of Godhead, who states here very clearly, “I am also the knower of the field of activity.” One who misunderstands a rope to be a serpent is not in knowledge. There are different kinds of bodies, and there are different owners of the bodies. Because each individual soul has his individual capacity for lording it over material nature, there are different bodies. But the Supreme also is present in them as the controller. The word ca is significant, for it indicates the total number of bodies. That is the opinion of Srila Baladeva Vidyabhusana. Krsna is the Supersoul present in each and every body apart from the individual soul. And Krsna explicitly says here that the Supersoul is the controller of both the field of activities and the finite enjoyer.
Let me surrender to my spiritual master, Yadunandana Acarya. A powerful and dear devotee of the Supreme Lord, Yadunandana, he sprinkled the nectar of his mercy on me.
Perhaps, Vrajabhumi, you know the author of the above prayer? Surely you are aware that our tradition is filled with examples of disciples praying in glorification of their predecessor acaryas. In his Vilapa Kusumanjali, Ragunatha Das Gosvami’s prays to his diksha guru, Yadunandana acarya. And he also offers prayers in glorification of his siksa guru, Rupa Gosvami, in Rupa’s eternal form as Rupa Manjari, “O friend Rupa Manjari, although you are a famous and important person in this town, still you cannot see the face of the Supreme Personality of Godhead standing before you. Your husband is not here, and yet there is a mark on the bimba fruits of your lips as if someone has bitten them. Did a great parrot bite them?
Do you really mean to say that Ragunatha Das Gosvami, without any shastric basis, speculated in those prayers?
govindanandini you wrote
That kind of statement presumes that I am guilty of something that I never supported. It’s what’s known as a “straw man argument” This is a description of a straw man argument from Wikipedia
If we dont understand the Srila Prabhupada words, how we can claim to be his disciple. There were many Jesus Christ followers who simply choose whatever it was fitting for their ego. There is no harm of woman being like prostitutes and changing man like underwear, but if SP points out the mistake of feminism then we reject him. He was not illusioned that man created this system to exploit woman. But woman think its great. American culture which is making people to brainless victims of lust, greed, pride is great. Vedic culture is backward. Congratulation. It seems better that you dont claim to be disciple of SP. But honestly if you want open a new movement without using his fame to promote yourself. Good luck.
Dear Prabhus,
Please accept my humble obeisances. All glory to His Divine Grace Srila Prabhupada!
I joined SP in the summer of 1969 and by his mercy have not lost my faith. When I was with SP I knew I was with a person who was seeing God directly, and his words are the word of KRSNA coming through him. I was and am perpetually in awe of HDG.
He said many things that are not palatable for us conditioned souls, for instance in 1970 in a class he said “Either you love Krsna, or you love the vahjainah!” This one line was so stunning the entire temple was stone silent. Till now, if I repeat this sentence I am given the most hateful looks. Nevertheless, over the course of time, I realize this is the blunt and naked truth of this material world.
SP ’s concern is turning us away from all false identifications, but this whole issue bring us back to the same old illusion that we are black, or white, man or woman, and we again forget we are eternally KRSNA’S parts and parcels.
To add to his books, in my opinion is wrong and I am certain he would never agree in 10,000 years.
Your servant,
Bhakta dasa
Haribol, respectfull vaishnavas!
Reading the discussions, I think it is sad to bring down the sacred vaisnavism to such materialistic level of social-theology, for we are only the aspirants of pure devotion at best, and vaisnavism is in fact the monopoly of pure devotees, like Srila Prabhupada.
To compare Prabhupada to our level of intelectual skills tinged with traumatic character, which through bodily designations and identifications takes either shape of male-chouvinistic or feministic idea is wrong. Means we see Prabhupada as another protagonist of kaithava-dharma, and not transcendentalist at all.
So, when we will raise ourselves to transcendental platform, we will realize more, enter another dimension of Prabhupada’s words, before that, to put Prabhupada down to our kanistha-adikari ( at best) level, it is wrong .
Only when we purify our character, will we percieve the words of Prabhupada, as they are, before that, we may have a tiny glimpse , an occasional ray of the sun of Parbhupada purports, letters, etc, which shouldn’t make us arrogant, and increase our mat. consciousness in the name of religion.
An interesting reply of Romapada Maharaja, that transcendence and materialistic social philosophy are not identical:
Q. In the Srimad Bhagavatam – Third Canto, Chapter 15: Description of the Kingdom of God – we find some verses and purports with language I find problematic. For example, SB 3.15.17: “In the Vaikuntha planets the inhabitants fly in their airplanes, accompanied by their wives and consorts, and eternally sing of the character and activities of the Lord.”
In these verses it seems that the archetype of spiritual identity is characterized as inherently male (“The inhabitants” of the Vaikuntha planets) and the female form, even in spiritual perfection, is relegated to the role of sidekick (“accompanied by their wives and consorts”). The subject/object framing of the male/female forms and the inherent implication of relative status appears to contradict the assertions of absolute equality in a pure, spiritual atmosphere amongst all beings, moving and non-moving, to be found in other verses (such as SB 3.15.16: “everything in the Vaikuntha planets is spiritual and personal”) and numerous purports.
However, Srila Prabhupada’s wording in the purport to this verse seems to reinforce this understanding and sets us up for an even greater implication of inequity in verse 20– SB 3.15.17p: “The inhabitants of Vaikuntha give first preference to the service of the Lord, not their own sense gratification. Serving the Lord in transcendental love yields such transcendental pleasure that, in comparison, sense gratification is counted as insignificant.”
SB 3.15.20: “The inhabitants of Vaikuntha travel in their airplanes made of lapis lazuli, emerald and gold. Although crowded by their consorts, who have large hips and beautiful smiling faces, they cannot be stimulated to passion by their mirth and beautiful charms.”
Between the purport to verse 17 and the text of verse 20 we find the implication that even in this archetype of spiritual perfection the female form is relegated to a second-class position and is intended to function as a “passion stimulator”, a function the male-formed spiritual archetype is presumably immune to.
Despite considerable time given to the concept of spiritual equality of all Jivas in both verses and purports, the problem remains that an educated person may reasonably assert that a society’s biases are revealed in its language and when the language of gender inequality is found in a religious scripture, particularly one meant to be understood literally and even more particularly when the literature is describing the ultimate spiritual archetype to be aspired to by the faithful, then you have to expect a culture, a society, or a religious institution whose values are derived from such literature to instill in its members a sense of righteousness in the devaluing of the female form; a glaring imperfection that invalidates any claim that the literature itself is the word of God (since God would never countenance such inequity) as opposed to the word of a patriarchal power structure comprised of fallible human beings – men who contrive a misogynous theology to assuage their gynophobia and justify their social domination.
I know the issue of institutionalized sexism is not new to ISKCON, but this is the first time I’ve noticed the implication of the language found in verses directly referring to spiritual archetypes (no doubt the result of my education by a discerning cynic predisposed to feminist politics and testimony to 30 years of poor study habits that I’m trying to rectify). Do you have any suggestions as to how I may properly understand the nature of the language in these verses for myself and for the sake of explaining it to others as transcendental literature that informs a transcendental culture?
You are to the point in stating that Srimad Bhagavatam is a transcendental literature that is describing a transcendental culture. Therefore, to understand it we have to be free from biases and preconceptions that come with our own material culture and upbringing. We can admit, to begin with, it is quite likely that we are imposing the biases of our conditioning upon a transcendental literature, as opposed to presuming that the literature is reflecting the society’s bias. If we are seeing through red glasses, the world appears red! Thus it is quite possible that the perceived inequality is most likely springing from our own predisposition and sensitivity to this subject as you acknowledge, and the connotations we provide to the language based on our present social context. If we carefully reflect, we can understand that in reality the Bhagavatam is describing a totally different cultural paradigm – we have to have some appreciation of this culture to understand its conception of equality. There is certainly Absolute equality in Vaikuntha but not homogeneity; there is all variety and even hierarchy – we have discussed this in previous digests in different contexts. (see Digests 184, 194)
Let us try to just explore the theme of these verses in question from another perspective … suppose that a similar idea was conveyed in the following context: “the inhabitants of Vaikuntha were attended to by their ’servants’, and although they were given all sorts of comforts by these ’servants’, there was no sense of exploitation and the residents found no pleasure in these indulgences. They were simply absorbed in service to the Lord, indifferent to the attentions given by their servants.” Were such statements to be made, should it be taken to indicate that there are relative distinctions of master and servant and the position of servant is in some way inherently inferior? Not for those of us who understand the spiritual concept of servitorship. But the very mention of such a concept would be abhorred by someone who is sensitized by a proletariat idea of exploitation of working class and sympathetic to the cause of abolishing all distinctions between social classes. But those of us familiar with Srila Prabhupada’s teachings know well how he dismantled such ideologies of classless society as impractical and unnatural.
There is no claim of artificial equality in the spiritual world in some sense of utopian uniformity. The equality lies in the fact that everybody is engaged to their full capacity and full satisfaction in the service of the one Supreme Enjoyer, Lord Krishna – spiritual communism as Prabhupada would say. One in a subordinate position does not feel belittled or deprived in some way compared to a direct servitor of the Lord, nor does Krishna make such distinctions. Rather, in Vaikuntha consciousness, one prays to be servant of the servant of the servant, many times removed – such a position is more cherished than even direct service to the Lord. For example, the manjaris in Vrindavana whose service it is to assist the gopis do not feel inherently inferior in some capacity nor deprived of Krishna’s direct attention; rather they enjoy greater bliss in enhancing the service of the gopis. The gopis are very eager for Radha to meet Krishna, and Radharani in turn is eager to arrange the gopis’ meeting with Krishna, and so on. (Cc. Madhya 8.207-214) Although by material yardstick a bumblebee is not considered highly attractive, in Vaikuntha the cuckoo birds admire the song of the bumblebee. (SB 3.15.18) Thus the real basis of no-discrimination lies in the fact that there is no envy or exploitation in the spiritual world, not that there are no hierarchies and categories. If a soul, by constitution, has such a disposition of assisting their male counterpart in service to Krishna, they are provided with a suitable female form – there is no denigration in this.
Material world is simply a perverted reflection of the spiritual world – thus the categories and hierarchies we find here also exist in the spiritual sky, minus the inebriety found in this realm. The reflecting surface that perverts everything is the desire to enjoy and predominate. Here, those who have male bodies want to enjoy and thus exploit the female form rather than perform their designated service of offering protection; likewise, those with female bodies also want to enjoy and thus rebel against their subordinate position. The solution lies not in reversing the exploitation sequence by asserting oneself as equal and merging their respective roles, but in transforming the consciousness of both parties from the mood of enjoyment to service. The spiritual archetypes portrayed in the Bhagavatam – whether they are that of a male, female, bumblebee or lotus flower – highlights this perfection of the mood of service.
Not to speak of the Vaikuntha planets, even within this world there are illustrious examples of this paradigm in the Vedic culture. We do not find that powerful personalities such as Queen Kunti, Draupadi, Devahuti or Archi (the consort of King Prithu) were contending for equal rights and opportunities! Although in one sense they did enjoy equal footing with their respective husbands, they happily, willingly and gracefully accepted their roles as a dependent and subordinate, and as a fortress of support to their husbands. Did that diminish their qualifications or accomplishments in anyway or affect the Supreme Lord’s disposition or dealings with them? Not in the least. These ladies were fully content doing their specific services. Each of them also faced uniquely difficult challenges in their roles as wives and queens, which they faced very competently. They were grateful for the protection offered by their respective husbands and by the society. In turn, their exalted husbands were equally grateful for their extraordinary sacrifices and services. There was no sense of domination or exploitation, nor was there an artificial attempt at sharing of each other’s roles. The husbands saw themselves as humble servants of the Lord playing their part as a husband in extending to their wives the protection of the Lord. Thus they perfectly complemented and enhanced each other’s service to the Lord, who alone is the Supreme Master and Maintainer of everyone.
Quite contrary to giving room for minimizing womanhood, Vedic literatures and culture give tremendous emphasis and importance to respecting them as highly valuable members of the society even in this world, and as members deserving protection just as the brahmanas, cows, children and elderly deserve protection. An observant reader would not fail to notice this deep respect and importance given to women in the pages of Bhagavatam and Bhagavad-gita. We find powerful statesmen and world emperors such as Arjuna and Maharaja Yudhisthira giving considerable time and deliberation to the special interests of the women in society and the irreparable social consequences of neglecting their needs. If it should be considered that those performing the role of housekeeping, raising and training God-conscious children, protecting family tradition and offering much-needed support for the men constitute subordinate, unimportant roles, such an outlook reflects inequality in fact, because we are relegating these most crucial services to a denigrated position. This is not the outlook of Bhagavatam, for if it were so there would not be such concern expressed for their welfare. By Krishna’s natural arrangement, the female body is equipped to fulfill these roles which demand, in their own way, as much competency, resourcefulness and dedication as do the services traditionally assigned to men in a Vedic society. When the value of their roles is duly recognized and appreciated, competition for the latter’s role or for the form of respect offered to them is rendered meaningless and unnecessary.
We find this spirit also in Srila Prabhupada’s personal example – although he spoke quite candidly and openly about the myths of women’s liberation, in all of his dealings with the matajis (he trained us to see the women as mothers deserving the highest respect!) he treated them with utmost dignity and respect. It was unthinkable for him to neglect women as insignificant or secondary, what to speak of minimizing or exploiting them. Actual protection and dissemination of Vedic culture calls for imbibing this spirit.
Artificial attempts to create equality are bound to fail. In our attempts to negate the disparities and injustices found in this world, we seek to homogenize everything — not much different from the impersonal school of thought which aspires to “make everything zero” – but such a conception of equality is unnatural even in the spiritual world. Our expectation to find such uniformity in the pages of Bhagavatam leaves us disappointed and amounts to imposing our limited material conceptions on spiritual reality. Real equality lies in acknowledging that there are indeed differences in the natures and capacity of different classes of living entities and facilitating optimal engagement of everyone in their natural service to the Supreme.
When Prabhupada spoke about “women” he spoke about a bodily designation. He never spoke about queen Kunti or any other liberated Vaishnavi that way. At that time when Prabhupada made all these statements people understood it in context that we have to become liberated from the bodily platform of material existence – nobody objected, all became his disciples. Now 30 years later things seem to detoriate and many folks fell back right into the bodily concept of life and seemingly feel well with this situation. Being stuck in the bodily platform surely makes one feel offended by statements of a liberated soul like Prabhupada, especially when it comes to female attachments. Let me ask you one question, do you sincerely believe that there’s one single genuine preacher of trying to uplift a materialistic society and not having to deal with enemies? We have to learn one thing, material and spiritual don’t go together. Liberated souls preaching in materialistic societies will always be attacked. In fact, when you find a so called guru in close friendship with all those leaders of sinful orgs, be sure he is a fraud.
I think the main point that Vrajabhumi is expressing in her website (and she has her every right to despite what others think) is that she feels that the ISKCON religion has veered off to an exclusive cult following of Swami Bhaktivendanta epitimized in a deification of his every action and word ever emitted. As a result of the cult following, those statements concerning women such as women enjoying rape, women being of lesser intelligence, women should be denied education, etc., have had a damaging impact on the success of the growth of the religion and its members.
The theme of discussion of whether a devotee can hear prayers of their disciples is a side issue. In the Sri Caitanya Vaisnava tradition disciples glorify their Guru through prayers composed by the universally recognized acaryas within the Tradition, such as Narottama Das Thakur’s songs, or Sri Visvanath’s Guruvastaka. The glorifications are pleasing to Krishna because without the mercy of Guru, one cannot attain pure devotion service to Radha and Krsna. In the Tradition I belong to there is a concept of the aggregate Guru in the spiritual kingdom whose is non different from Krishna. The aggregate Guru manifest locally within a devotee in this world to a disciple in order to guide the sadhaka in bhajan. Therefore, if a disciple prays to the Guru for success in bhajan Sri Krishna will hear those prayers.
However, we don’t see in general within the Sri Caitanya tradition an exclusive cult deification of a paricular person who acts as a spiritual teacher. For the most part ones own Guru and bhajan practice is considered sacred and treasured and therefore is kept confidentially. If you were to ask a follower in the Sri Caitanya tradition who is their Guru, they would humbly fold their hands, lower their heads and recite in reverence the full title of their Gurudeva.
Within my days as an ISKCON member (Rati das, in case anyone is wondering), I came to the point of perceiving the aberrant cult following of Swami Bhaktivedanta as overshadowing the cultivation of devotion and love to Radha and Krishna. I joined ISKCON because I was interested in the cultivation of devotion towards Krishna not to be a cult follower of the Swami. I am glad I moved on. I survived and am well, by Sri Radha’s mercy. And if you don’t like the ways things are going, you can too.
Now if you want change within your religious society then more need to speak out. I think Vrajabhumi is a voice much needed in this regard and her rejection of these offensive and outlandish ideas about women should be supported strongly by other women and men as well because it is counterproductive to the efforts of expanding your mission. Why should she stand alone on this? “All it takes for evil to triumph is for good people to do nothing.”
Quote by Suchandra “At that time when Prabhupada made all these statements people understood it in context that we have to become liberated from the bodily platform of material existence – nobody objected, all became his disciples. Now 30 years later things seem to detoriate and many folks fell back right into the bodily concept of life and seemingly feel well with this situation.”
The problem arises when one never had the opportunity to associate with Srila Prabhupada and only have his words to go on. Most people who read his quotes and never associated with him do not know how he treated women. So many women become offended. Then you have many men in the movement (some who have met Prabhupada and many that didn’t) who take the things he said and apply it to all women and disrespect women feeling they have shastric evidence or the famous “Prabhupada said.” So it becomes problematic to take everything Prabhupada said as shastra. Men have used these quotes over and over in our movement as a way to feel superior and abuse their Vaisnavi sisters. Many women have seen this abuse or have been on the receiving end of it and are sick of it. It is not spiritual. Nor do I believe it is what Prabhupada wanted. But he isn’t here now to show by example how to treat women so we are just left with some very damaging quotes about women (and minorities). And we have generations that never had the pleasure of Srila Prabhupada’s association. Therefore it hurts the women and gives men the feeling of superiority and disgust towards women.
Vrajabhumi,
So then you do agree that, like Ragunatha Das Gosvami, disciples may pray to their spiritual masters in the spiritual realm, and the latter will “hear” those prayers accordingly, don’t you?
Mahaprabhu Gaura you quoted this from Romapada Swami:
There is a huge difference between wanting to accept a role as “dependent and subordinate” and being told that if you don’t accept that role then you are a prostitute. All women are not the same and all cultures don’t see women in the same way. Prabhupada would never claim that all men are the same. He never says that all men have the same dharma. They can be brahmanas, ksatriyas, vaisyas, sudras and choose any role they desire in society. There is no sastric basis for the teaching that all women are “blunt headed”, childlike, and must accept the role as “dependent and subordinate” housewife otherwise they will become prostitutes and destroy society.
Romapada Swami also said:
I think in this we find what’s very basically wrong and at the root of ISKCON dialogue about women. Prabhupada would teach on this idea quite often but I don’t remember seeing this conception taught in sastra. Why is equality between men and women “artificial”? This is how Srila Prabhupada explained this concept:
The above concept was repeated almost always when Prabhupada was questioned about equal rights for women. The idea that because women’s bodies are different then men because they can have children is how Prabhupada would explain that men and women are not equal. He would then make the point that since men and women are physiologically different therefore why should they have equal rights? This was the most common reason he would give for rejection of equal rights for women. He would claim that women become a burden on society and government if they have equal rights.
This is another idea he would teach often–that women not being subordinate is the cause of divorce.
This interview Srila Prabhupada gives to a TV reporter has all the reasons Prabhupada would usually give for denying women equal rights, you can see how an average person who doesn’t see Prabhupada as infallible reacts to hearing his reasoning:
http://vanisource.org/wiki/Television_Interview_–_July_9%2C_1975%2C_Chicago
In that conversation we can read what Prabhupada would say over and over whenever asked about the roles of women in ISKCON and why he taught that women should live the way he taught.
He claims that what he is saying about women is backed up by sastra, but I’ve never seen him quote any sastra to back up these ideas: divorce being caused by women not being subordinate, women can’t have equal rights because they can have children, or that society will be destroyed if women are not subordinate to men.
Many followers of Srila Prabhupada accept these ideas as gospel truth and they use these ideas as the basis for how they view what woman’s roles in marriage and society should be like. It can be shown that these ideas are not objectively factual.
Claiming that divorce is caused by women who are not subordinate enough is easily shown to be false as an absolute principle. There are divorces which can be attributed to women not being subordinate enough in the eyes of their husbands, but that is only going to be the cause of a small percentage of divorces. It should be obvious that there are many varied causes of divorce. To claim that divorce in general is caused by uppity women is obviously not true in most cases. In reality many men don’t want to be married to submissive women. Many divorces are caused because the man falls for another woman who is more exciting to him then his wife because of her independent spirit. Many divorces are caused because of boredom with each other, or the seeking of younger or more physically attractive mates, or wanting more money, and on and on.
Usually Prabhupada would use these verses from the Bhagavad Gita to support the claim that women should not be free and equal in society:
There is nothing in these words of Arjuna that instruct us that women should not have equal rights or else society will be harmed. What is being said is that if women have unwanted or uncared for children then that can cause havoc with society. But we should be able to understand that Arjuna was talking about ancient vedic society.
This verse preceded the above verses
And these verses followed the above verses
Arjuna is explaining that he doesn’t want to do battle because it will harm society by harming family traditions. He’s trying to get out of the battle and this is one of his excuses. Vedic society had taboos about women. Women were seen as damaged goods if they weren’t virgins before marriage. They were seen as unwanted for marriage if they were widows or divorced. If they had children out of wedlock then they and their children could be shunned. If there were many of these types of women and children in that society, that could cause a lot of potential problems. Children could grow up resentful and seek to take what was denied them, or they could seek to harm society or the people who they saw as their enemies for excluding them. These verses spoken by Arjuna can be seen as relevant to the story of Karna who was so similar to Arjuna. He was varna-sankara because his mother Kunti was not married. She got pregnant from the sun god Surya, and then abandoned the child. Because of that so many problems were caused for that society by the feeling of Karna’s resentment.
The problems of varna-sankara in vedic society were due to the taboos of vedic society. If those taboos don’t exist then the problems go away. Kunti abandoned her child because it was a taboo for her to keep him. Karna had great resentment and anger because of the treatment he received due to the taboos of that society. If society doesn’t have those taboos then that society will not be adversely affected by children born out of wedlock.
In India today there are still these ancient taboos for many of the people. Women are seen as used goods if they are not virgins, the taboos of the culture and the caste system makes life difficult for the social mobility and care for widows and unmarried women and their children. What Prabhupada preached about women and varna-sankara causing harm to society only has relevance to a society like India and to the people of India who still accept and believe in the traditional taboos about women and their children.
Outside of that particular culture of taboos what Prabhupada taught about women has no relevance. Women outside of those cultural settings do not necessarily harm society if they have children out of wedlock because there aren’t cultural taboos which will cause her and her children to be punished. She won’t be shunned or denied a place in society like women in India can be.
Almost everything Prabhupada taught about women was either only applicable in a culture of Hindu taboos, or he was simply giving out false information–like saying there are no intelligent women because of their small brain size.
govindanandini you wrote
I have already answered the question about why I don’t believe jivas in Krishna lila can hear your prayer. Maybe you can just accept what I said as my final answer? There is no need to belabor a point that has already been made. If you or others believe that jivas in Krishna lila can hear your prayers–that doesn’t bother me personally, I just think it goes against common sense. Nothing you say will change my opinion on this. I can only advise you to let it go. You can’t force people to believe what they don’t believe.
In respect to all of these speculative and decidedly unpleasant comments – I thought I might introduce a couple of quotes from our Param guru, Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakur. This I see as vital – because clearly some of the individuals offering comments are clearly passing themselves off as remotely respectful disciples or at the least – siksa disciples – of HDG Srila Prabhupada – when in fact their comments show no provenance to the teachings of our illustrious Parampara as they descend to us via Srila Bhaktisiddanta Saraswati Thakur and HDG Srila Prabhupada.
First is this one;
“The Guru is not a mortal erring creature like ourselves. He is the eternal servant of Krishna whom He sends into this world for the deliverance of causless Divine Mercy, in order to help us rise out of the depths of sin to our natural state of absolute purity by methods perfectly consistent with the principles of our unbiased reason.As long as we refuse to listen to him we are doomed to misunderstand everything.”
The second is this one:
The good preceptor asks the struggling soul to submit not to the laws of this world which will only rivet its chains but to the higher law of the spiritual realm. The pretence of submission to the laws of the spiritual realm without the intention of really carrying them out into practice is often mistaken for genuine submission by reason of the absence of fullness of conviction. We are, therefore, compelled in all cases to act on make-believes, viz. the so-called working hypotheses. The good preceptor tells us to change this method of activity which we have learnt from our experience of this world. He invites us first of all the be really and -fully informed of the nature and laws of the other world which happens to be eternally and categorically different from this phenomenal world. If we do not sincerely submit to be instructed in the alphabets of the life eternal but go on perversely asserting however unconsciously our present processes and so-called convictions against the instructions of the preceptor in the period of noviate we are bound to remain where we are. This also will amount to the practical rejection of all advise because the two worlds have nothing in common though at the same time we naturally fail to understand this believing all the time in accordance with our accustomed methods that we are at any rate partially, following the preceptor. But as a matter of fact when we reserve the right of choice we really follow ourselves, because even when we seem to agree to follow the preceptor it is because he appears to be in agreement with ourselves. But as the two worlds have absolutely nothing in common we are only under a delusion when we suppose that we really understand the method or the object of the preceptor or in other words reserve the right to assertion of the apparent self. Faith in the Scriptures can alone help us in this otherwise unpracticable endeavor. We believe in the preceptor with the help of the shastras when we understand neither. As soon as we are fully convinced of the necessity of submitting unambiguously to the good preceptor it is then and only then that he is enable to show us the way into the spiritual world in accordance with the method laid down in the shastras of that purpose which he can apply properly and without perpetrating fatal blunder in as much as he himself happens to belong to the realm of the spirit.”
I would like to suggest that everyone who has visited this discussion or offered a comment – take the time to very carefully read the entire essay “Initiation into Spritual Life” by HDG Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakur. It can be found here:http://guru.krishna.org/Articles/2005/01/Initiation.html
Clearly – the moderator of this site – has not accepted our Parampara’s message absolutely, nor its Current Link – HDG Srila Prabhupada as his or her Absolute Spiritual Master. The moderator of this site has not revealed his or her provenance at all. We know nothing of who she/he “represents” and when discussing Krsna Consciousness – all statements of absolute fact – must be accompanied by such reference; either the scripture itself or some statement of one’s accepted authority must be indentified as the “authority” of one’s statement.
From my vantage point – it appears that the moderator and some of her newfound supporters – resemble any number of “outside” academics who estimate the teachings of our Parampara – through their own value system entirely. That is certainly one’s right to do so. However – one cannot simultaneously pass one self off as a “disciple” whose every thought, word and deed – is informed by the Divine Parampara and its representatives – all accepted as equally absolute when perfectly representing the Parampara.
Such discussions as are taking place here – are divorced from any such “representation” and thus – fall within the category of idle talks only. They cannot benefit anyone – BUT can easily do a great deal of mischief with our devotional growth.
Might I suggest first off – that everyone – first divulge who IS their accepted guru and whether or not – they do in fact accept the Message of the Paramapara – AS IT IS – and AS IT HAS BEEN GIVEN by HDG Srila Prabhupada – 100% Absolutely.
For myself – I accept HDG – and the message of the Parampara – 100 % absolutely. AS they are Given by HDG Srila Prabhupada – without any need of adjustment or alteration and have done so for 22 years!
Because as Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakur said “As long as we refuse to listen to him we are doomed to misunderstand everything.”
[this comment did not appear immediately because it has a link in it. The spam filter on this blog is set to send all comments with links to moderation in order to block spam]
Radhapada Das you wrote
I agree with the above. Prayers to the guru or other acaryas in gaudiya vaisnavism are for glorification. They aid in smaranam and they aid in the feeling of saranagati. The idea of an “aggregate guru” is also the correct teaching of the sampradaya. Guru is God. Many times Srila Prabhupada would speak about the guru being the “transparent via-medium for the Lord”. The jiva is not the guru in the ultimate transcendental sense. The guru teaches you that everything and everyone is under the control of God. Guru tattva or the truth about the guru is explained here by Srila Prabhupada at the Vyasa-Puja celebration of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura in 1935
The jiva acting the role of the spiritual master is not the real guru. The real guru is God because we are all under the control of God, like puppets. Therefore Srila Prabhupada would call the guru a “transparent via-medium” of the Lord. Does that mean that everything a spiritual master says has to be accepted as the absolute truth? No. The jivas acting as gurus can be on different levels of knowlede about Krishna and about other things. They can be wrong about various things even though they are used by Krishna as a via-medium at various times to affect various people. If you are not very advanced but you have somewhat of a grasp of the teachings of Sri Chaitanya and teach that to people in ignorance then you are being used as a guru by God. Does that mean that everything you do or say is absolutely perfect and without error? No. Likewise you may be very advanced spiritually and have a lot of knowledge and experience with the teachings of Sri Chaitanya and yet still not be perfect in knowledge about everything. In Vraja Lila the jivas are not in perfect knowledge of everything, they don’t even know Krishna is God. That doesn’t mean that they are not pure lovers of God. Krishna decides who knows what, when, and where for his own purposes.
Wow,
Can we please seperate ourselves more please. You speak of dated modes of thought, yea they are dated, dated to a time when the madness of this present world did not exist. All sites like this do is attempt to water down teachings that have survived the ages because they work, the instructions provided do not need a modern spin because they exist to relive us from this modrn age of darkness.
vishnupriyah dasi you quoted this
Well, if I point out the errors Prabhupada made and prove that he was wrong does that mean he is not a guru since according to the above quote “The Guru is not a mortal erring creature”?
Clearly Prabhupada made errors. For example what he said about black people, or what he said about the size of women’s brains, or what he said about there being no women scientists.
Since you are so sure of what you wrote and try to come across as my devotional authority condemning me and others with similar opinions as being offensive non-devotional “academic” “mischief makers” who are engaged in “idle talk”, maybe you can explain how the above statement that “The Guru is not a mortal erring creature” relates to the simple fact that Prabhupada did indeed make errors in things that he said.
You can either deny that he made errors–which is nothing more then self deception. Or you can try to do what we are doing–trying to explain how a spiritual master can make mistakes and still be empowered by the Lord.
Which will it be?
I’ll add perspective which I get from Gaudiya tradition. It is obvious, that guru, who is declared perfect and spiritual personality, sometimes coughs, sometimes forgets, never speaks on special science in level far beyond any contemporary scientist in fields of chemistry, biology, electronics and so on. On the contrary, he even does not speak foreign language perfectly. Are these really “errors”? If I am to accept guru, I see all these things beforehand. Then, how do I accept, that he is perfect and in full knowledge of things, never commiting errors? That is faith, discipleship and understanding of guru concept. He is not supposed to not to make these “errors”, yet he is in full knowledge. He plays a part of common human being, who has a difficulty to learn foreign language, and etc., and that is a perfect play. I have no full realisation of this, but only slight understanding. That requires faith. And if there is no such faith, it seems there is no real discipleship.
So, when Sri Srimad Bhaktivedanta Svami Maharaja would say about ounces of man brain and woman brain, was it his error? Why should we see it this way? Considering deeply, we can understand that he just picked up some statement of some material scientist, used it in discussion, did not care for its accuracy, and thats all. Far away from any error. What is wrong there? According to time place and circumstances guru teaches his disciples using something which is a simple example, not perfect example.
When guru again picks up some fact, that black people are not very much cultured (everybody knows, in average it is so, or was so at that time in USA), then, whose error is that? Would his black skinned disciples object that? No, because they knew reality about their own people. According to time and place and circumstances statement may be seen as true or false. What error of guru is there? No error, he teaches using what he sees useful in that situation.
Really, something will not change with time. Women will bear children, men wont be able to do this. Bodies will remain somewhat different. Thinking feeling and willing on material platform will remain somewhat specific. Then, where is an error? No error.
Especially if disciple is supposed to see guru in light of devotion and heart realisation of his position and mercy, then those so called “errors” disapear in an enlightened vision of a disciple. Should be so, according to what we hear.
All glories to Sri Srimad Bhaktivedanta Svami Maharaja and Gaudiya guru parampara!
For sure, feminine nature is most exalted, because the gopis are most exalted and no one is greater than them. But this is pure spiritual. About material perverted platform, shastra and gurus sometimes explain for us some things, what is what and etc, to become materialy detached. Mostly they dont focus on material, but on spiritual. Every subject matter can be seen from many angles of vision, so sometimes best qualities of women are talked about (soft hearted and religiuos), sometimes – shastra says about lust and so on. Also, qualities of men are described, how they become playthings in a hand of woman, o how asociation of stri sangi is worse than stri sanga. and etc. Also, guru says, man may be called woman, and woman – man, according to propencities to control and enjoy or to be enjoyed. So, so many angles of vision, so where is a fault or error of shastra or gurus? There are many things to consider and to reconcile for a thoughtfull disciple.
If to accept that guru does not hear prayers when he is in nitya dham, then, Krishna also does not hear, because He is in nitya lila, forgeting that He is God. This is inconceivable subject matter.
Who can say, that he knows the position of his guru? Is guru in a category of jiva (tatastha shakti) or in a category of eternal associate of Krishna, direct expantion of internal shakti? To say this, one has to have full realisation. It is said in Gaudiya tradition, when highest guru is in this world, he is also in nitya lila, only at some time he has manifested vapu in this material world, and after dissapearance, it is said, he is unchanged in his presence and activity, but only unmanifested. Then how can this be? At same time he is in nitya dham, and here in this world? It is said, Krishna never leaves Goloka Vrindavana and never steps out a step from Goloka Vrindavan. Then, how can He hear or control anything, how is He everywhere?
When Sri Srimad Bhaktivedanta Svami would pray and sing pranama mantras for his Guru Maharaj, would he do it uselessely? Or when he wrote, that it was his Guru Maharaja, who through Sri Srimad Bhaktiprajnana Kesava Gosvami Maharaja pushed him to accept sanyasa, this is also impossible, because his Guru Maharaj was in nitya lila, Goloka Vrinavana, and could not do anything here? Or when he dreamed that his Guru Maharaj is calling him to follow and to accept sanyasa, was that not a spiritual interaction?
If nitya lila is without begining and end, that means, no interuption. Then, how can Krishna send any of his eternal associates to this world to teach as guru, and withdraw them from nitya lila? Is that interuption? How a manifestation of guru is possible at all? That is inconceivable. Nitya lila is above our time and space, and other limitations of mind.
janme janme prabhu sei – life after life guru is my master and takes care of me. Then, how is this statement true, if guru cannot do anything for me, life after life? Only a few year in this lifetime disciple meets him?
If anyone really prayed, they know, there is a reply. Then, how guru does not hear? Who can tell this?
There are Deity forms of Krishna and His devotees. Those, advanced who serve those murtis, they confirm what is said in vaishnava literature, that they feel how murtis are concious of service and reciprocate. Then, if they are in nitya lila, how is that possible?
Vrajabhumi dd,
Please read the following two emails from very senior devotees that are directly speaking about you and your blog.
Haripada Prabhu says about you:
Quite honestly, and kindly forgive me if I sound less than appropriately empathetic toward her, Mother Vrajabhumi, in my opinion, sounds more like a person with a Messiah complex who sees herself as the anointed savior of
“modern gaudiya vaisnavism,” rather than a sincere practitioner of bhakti yoga “with the courage to reveal her mind” as you seem to suggest.
And then Hari Sauri Prabhu says about you:
Thank you Haripad prabhu for your eminently sensible comments about Vrajabhumi dasi’s blog. This women wants Krsna without guru, that’s clear from her words. Because guru says something that is unpalatable to her conditioned mind, she wants to eliminate him while still claiming to be a gaudiya vaisnava. This is simply cheating. She is, as I said before, an athiest. She has no faith in the liberated acaryas and holds her own council. She is welcome to do that for the many crores of liftimes she has to come.
Your humble servant,
Hari-sauri dasa
You need to start seriously considering whether or not you are very rapidly destroying your own spiritual life. Do you know who Hari Sauri Prabhu is? He was Srila Prabhupada’s personal servant for two or three years. He is saying that you are an athiest, and quite strongly condemns you.
You could write a public apology on your blog, beg for the forgiveness of these exalted Vaisnavas, and perhaps your spiritual life can be saved. Other than that, if you pursue your present course of faithlessness, your future does not look very bright.
Also, if there would be such understanding, that guru makes mistakes as conditioned jiva sometimes, and other times, when he acts perfectly, then it is Krishna acting through him, such understanding is contradictory. From view of akhanda guru tattva, undivided conception of guru, guru is nondifferent from Krishna. We cannot say, sometimes that is Krishna acting, and sometimes there are just conditioned mistakes because at that time Krishna is not acting. Nondifferent always, never it is said that sometimes. Therefore, if we say, guru is making mistakes, and he is nondifferent from Krishna, then, Krishna makes those mistakes. But Krishna never makes mistakes. Guru also. Even if they pose as ignorant for specific purpose. Many times it is said, that there are jivas who are bound by maya, conditioned by four faults: cheating, sense imperfection, illusion, and mistakes. And it is always said, that guru is not conditioned by these four faults. ( I mean uttama guru, not false guru). Otherwise, what is the use of guru, who makes mistakes? Blind man leading another blind man?
Sometimes Krishna and His devotees may lie (“Ashvatama is dead”) but that is not cheating. Or when guru forgets something (“I do not remember”) is that out of conditioned nature? Then, what is the use of teachings, that guru is not a conditioned soul, free from four faults? Is that also cheating?
According to Vedas, Lord Brahma designed this universe, man and women also. So, he must be in perfect knowledge about what are man and woman qualities, 100 percent, who could know better than the maker himself? But we hear that guru is more than all demigods, more than Lord Brahma. Could it be so, that he is in illusion about man and woman, their roles and qualities? Or he just does not care about relative statements, because it is not possible to make them perfect anyway. For example, if there would be a statement – “man and women intelligence is completely equal”, would it be perfect? No, because from both sides we can find cases, where particular man is more intelligent than particular women, and particular women is more intelligent than particular man. Essence is most important, not perfection of words, examples, statements, which can never be fully perfect in material sphere. So guru teaches like this, that “generally it is like this”, “generally we havent seen many women amongst scientist or no women”. Wasnt guru aware that at that time there were many women scientist? Obviously, even any common man was aware, even child. Then, why he said, “no woman scientist”? It is a generalised argument, in earlier Western history, really, great majority scientist were men. What mistake was there? Sure, argument is relative. Why to try to find fault in such statements and then to conclude that guru is “making mistakes”. There is no need, because it is obvious, that statement is not perfect. Like many things. Like guru, who is having deseased body, imperfect pronunciation and vocabulary of foreign language, who forgets or does not know things, who has to eat every day, and etc. But same guru fully knows minds and hearts of his disciples. When having surgical operation and under anesthesis, he is concious and chants maha mantra, which is in any way imposible for conditioned soul. There is no need of mental running away from so called “mistakes” of guru, or to deny them, because it is obvious inherent part of guru manifestation, and anyone sees that always.
Nobody denies. There is no need for such complicated theories. Guru wrote “generally women are not intelligent” or something like this. Then what? Is it perfect or relative? Is it mistake or not? No mistake, according to time place circumstance and his purpose to say this. No mistake in general, because many would agree that it is so, though not all would agree. But gopis are most intelligent, so what about that? Also no mistake, because every statement should be considered and reconciled in essence and topic of discussion. One thing may be said about materialistic women, another thing – about vaishnavis sadhakas, and still other – about gopis. How could such statements apply to vaishnavi sadhakas, who are approaching madhyama platform? Are they lusty, non intelligent and so on? No. But shastra discusses women in this way in some place, and there is no mistake. It is just another topic.
Vrajabhumi, you wrote: “govindanandini you speak as if what you speak about is known by you to be true from experience of that reality. To me it sounds like speculation since I doubt you have experience of what you described.
Yes it is my experience that Prabhupada reciprocates my prayers. And your experience seems to be otherwise, that is, you don’t believe in praying to Srila Prabhupada. In my opinion, in this specific matter unfortunately you miss out while I am grateful for my good fortune. It is a matter of faith, not of proof. Ultimately reality is not perceivable by reason but by feeling. Reason is subservient to feeling. Of course one has the right, the free will, to believe or disbelieve others’ experiences, but one cannot expect to determine the reality (or lack thereof) of relationships of third parties.
I believe the error you make here is in thinking of guru as “jiva”. Guru is in a category by itself. The guru aspect overrules the jiva aspect. When empowered by Krsna to act as such, even guru’s errors are not to be treated the same as common jiva’s errors. The difference is in the intention. Guru is the ultimate well-wisher. You cannot have Krsna without guru, and in fact the more expanded one’s realization of Krsna, the more one will be enamored, so to speak, of the manifestation of Guru. You said somewhere in this blog “ultimately Guru is Krsna”. This is wrong. It is flagrant mayavada. Guru and Krsna are two eternally distinct entities and the way you relate to guru determines whether you know Krsna but NEVER the other way around. As it is, it seems you attempt to be your own guru. Again, this is mayavada and has no place in Krsna Consciousness.
Bhaktin M says:
[quote]The problem arises when one never had the opportunity to associate with Srila Prabhupada and only have his words to go on. Most people who read his quotes and never associated with him do not know how he treated women. So many women become offended. Then you have many men in the movement (some who have met Prabhupada and many that didn’t) who take the things he said and apply it to all women and disrespect women feeling they have shastric evidence or the famous “Prabhupada said.” So it becomes problematic to take everything Prabhupada said as shastra.[/quote]
Prabhupada repeatedly says, I live eternally within my books. Even then when Prabhupada was physically on Earth we mainly heard him talk on tape recorders and not physically present in our sankirtan van.
Prabhupada’s citing the ksatriya ritual of “rape” is of course something completely different with what people have in their minds nowadays. Something similar what Prabhupada meant we find in the description how during the time of knighthood a prince would “kidnap” a princess. This kind of “kidnapping” or “rape” had nothing to do with physically harming/insulting a woman, but it was a tradition, a ritual how to “force” a girl to sit on the throne and become the queen of a kingdom. Unfortunately these people don’t know that even Lord Krishna Himself used to kidnap princesses and made them into queens to live at the royal court. The arrangement was like that, that the princess was informed if she would agree to be “kidnapped” by prince such and such and only when the princess agreed a particular prince would kidnap her to bring her to his royal court.
Since this tradition to “force” a girl into the position of becoming the queen by “kidnapping” is lost and even forgotten, they consider “rape” as assaulting and violating a girl. This is not what Prabhupada meant. As soon a princess was kidnapped all the people knew that soon they will see her again, but this time sitting on the throne and receiving the consecration to be the queen of a kingdom. This is what Prabhupada meant when he said “they like rape”. Not that what we have nowadays in kali-yuga. It was rather a gesture of honouring the princess to install her on the throne and never to disgrace the princess.
Since today people’s thinking is strongly influenced by sexual perversion they cannot understand such rituals of the ksatriya class and instead drag everything down on their own level, their own situation which has become unfortunately more and more often the situation of confused, conditioned souls.
Vrajabhumi,
One more thing, if you expect to be a voice for women in the Hare Krsna movement, I suggest you get the sidhanta straight, please. Its not much help at this point in our religion to make this an issue of women being bold and outspoken, and fiercely active and liberated so that they can… speculate. This has already been achieved by the secular world feminism to a larger degree than we can expect to match. Rather the necessity is for women AS WELL AS MEN in this movement to deepen our understanding of our philosophy. It is actually become nothing less than a matter of our own survival.
That’s why hearing is so important, to hear from the right source. Mid may not have realized what she speaks but she has heard it from a bona fide authority so she can repeat it. Without hearing from a bona fide sadhu-guru you cannot get sraddha. Faith is the first thing, adau sraddha tatah sadhu-sango ‘tha bhajana kriya – (Bhaktirasamrta Sindhu). And we cannot see a sadhu. We don’t have that vision. We are not the seers, we are to be seen. Guru sees us and if we are fortunate he casts his merciful glance on us, then our bhakti can begin.
Mid said, “When guru again picks up some fact, that black people are not very much cultured (everybody knows, in average it is so, or was so at that time in USA), then, whose error is that?”
I will run this by Mr. Al Sharpton and Rev. Jesse Jackson and see what they think. Don’t get scared when they come to the temples to protest with their throngs of supporters. They are not the ones who used to do the lynching.
Suchandra: The point I was making is just this: Men in our movement have used these quotes to abuse and have a disgust for women for decades. Is it Prabhupada’s fault? No, I don’t believe he ever meant it to be that way. However, this is what has happened. And women have left over this. Most do not come out as saying so, they just leave quietly. Why? Because they still have faith in Krsna and do not wish to be labeled as blasphemers. They don’t want to be raked over the coals by the community, which is happening to Vrajabhumi right now. “We condemn you.” “You should beg for forgiveness” etc. “You are an athiest.” Come on now. If she didn’t really believe that Krsna is God why would she even bother with all this? That doesn’t even make sense.
Suchandra das said, “Prabhupada’s citing the ksatriya ritual of “rape” is of course something completely different with what people have in their minds nowadays.”
Hey, describe to me what’s it like. You mean the female organs don’t get ripped and experience trauma. You mean the women don’t scream in pain and feel ashamed of the humilition and are psychologically damaged for the rest of their lives? Prabhupada does not talk about eloping, he talks about rape and recognizes that it is ‘illegal’. Come on, his English was good enough to know his own choice of words.
Without realizing perhaps Mother Vrajabhumi – you are now directly accusing Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakur of himself – making a mistake (which means – he misrepresented the Absolute Truth as given by our spotless Parampara) by stating as fact “that the Guru is not a Mortal Erring Creature like ourselves.”
In objecting to his assertion – you object to his setting the message of the Parampara – and its pure representatives apart from the ordinary “mortal erring creatures” like ourselves. This “objection” on your part demonstrates that you admit FULLY that YOU are a mortal erring creature – and an admitted victim of the 4 principle defects shared by all conditioned souls; imperfect senses, the tendency to accept lllusion as reality as opposed to the opposite, your own inclination to make mistakes AND worst of all – the impulse to cheat whenever honesty does not achieve your purpose.
With this admittance – you automatically remove yourself – at least to myself – as a representative of the Absolute Truth as it comes to us via our Spotless Parampara.
Your premise is this: I – Vrajabhumi Dasi assert that HDG Srila Prabhuapda misrepresented the Absolute Truth in many ways – and thus the assertion – by the Parampara itself via Srila Bhaktissiddhanta Saraswati Thakur – that “the GURU is NOT A MORTAL ERRING CREATURE” – cannot or should not be accepted as factual. This premise – is itself a flawed presumption – that owes its authority – to YOUR already admitted ORDINARY CONDITIONED CONSCIOUSNESS. Its syllogistic reasoning is a common error in deductive reasoning. The guru IS obviously mortal – and mortal man makes mistakes – thus Srila Prabhupada – an obviously “mortal man” – guru or not, made mistakes – thus to say that – the guru is not mortal and cannot make mistakes – is OBVIOUSLY a misrepresentation of reality and further – to consider it to be otherwise – is a most repugnant form of cognitive dissonance.
The Spiritual Master “represents” the Absolute Truth. He has no “truth” of his own – anymore than a raincloud has its “own” water. The raincloud draws its water from the ocean – and delivers it – indescriminately – over the land, rocks and even some to the sea itself.
What you are failng to admit to yourself is that you are not yet willing to submissively hear the message of the Parampara – as it descended to us via Srila Prabhupada and his Gurumaharaja. You filter THE MESSAGE through the filter of your mind and desires and wish to reject the message – because it does not support YOUR admittedly conditioned aspirations.
Lord Krsna openly declares that learning the Absolute Truth is only possible – by submitting unambiguously to the Bonafide Spiritual Master – in a spirit of absolute surrender and a willingness to not only receive the message – but serve the purpose of the Spritual master with any service he might ask of you. Read the Bhagavad Gita Chapter 4:34 and all of this is explained by Srila Prabhupada.
You initially claimed that the young man who was attacked for writing the things he did in his site – was not to be blaimed. You laid the blame squarely on the shoulders of HDG Srila Prabhupada. Their is a bit of truth to that – but your “investigation” as to the genesis of all of Srila Prabhupada’s guidance on devotional service – or his depiction of ANY aspect of this material world – owes its authority to the direct and/or indirect teachings of The Divine Couple themselves – and most emphatically to the teachings of The Divine Couple’s most recent and Clorious appearance as Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu.
At least THIS is how the bonafide disciples of Srila Prabhupada and our Spotless Parampara accept THIS message.
Now – could you also come to that point – where you see beyond your own already admitted 4 defects – and receive the message of Lord Chaitanya AS IT WAS – IS and ETERNALLY WILL BE?
CERTAINLY – but – I would suggest you carefully resist the impulses you have demonstrated thus far – to voice your own – already admitted “defective” reasoning – and commit yourself to a more thorough reading of all of Srila Prabhupada’s writings. Along with that – strictly accept and follow the simple 4 regulative principles of freedom – and carefully chant no less than 16 rounds each day – preferably in the company of devotees who are possessed of full and unambiguous faith in the message of the Parampara – as it is delivered us by HDG Srila Prabhupada. He is accepted as the Current Link to that Parampara – by HIS BONAFIDE DISCIPLES.
ANYONE who does not accept his authority in this fashion – simply cannot understand him at all – and will view him as an ordinary “mortal” creature – possessed of the same defects as we all “admittedly” endure.
Srila Prabhupada’s disciples accept him as being “unbound” and fully capable of “unbinding” any and all who will but hear and follow him – unreservedly.
All that you have done with this “blog” is reveal that you do not accept Srila Prabhupada as your Spiritual Authority in your quest to solve once and for all – yours or our defective reasoning – the very reasoning that compelled your taking birth at all – in this material world – as man or as woman.
The explantion of our only real problems ie birth, death, disease, and old age – is given by Srila Prabhupada – as well – the solution to these four simple problems. As these “problems” do not discriminate between man or woman – so too the solution to them – perfectly provided by Srila Prabhupada – is open to all man and all women. We need only accept them – without malice, addition or subtraction.
Thank you
Vrajabhumi
Narayana Maharaja has not become a cultish christ-like figure amongst his disciples anywhere near the extent that Prabhupada has.
Two of my three children are initiated by Naryana Maharaja and there is much more dialogue between guru and disciple with Narayan Maharaja than there was between Prabhupada and us.
Narayana Maharaja himself says he has no disciples, only friends. The dynamic is one of less fear and awe and one of more personal exchange and openness of opinion.
You are right in saying that Narayan Maharaja is not aware of the tapes and videos where Prabhupada says controversial things about women and others. He was only made aware of what was in his books by western devottees. Narayan Maharaja has no need to read ISKCON publications, he is reading scripture in the original language.
But, he was trying his best to defend his friend and reconcile and keep the faith of Prabhupada’s disciples in tact.
Presently so many vaishnava scriptures have been translated into english that there is no need to read just ISKCON publications. We can read so many books no devotional service that do NOT have these negative statements in purports so why not do that?
Of course we disciples of Prabhupada have an attachment to his purports, but for disciples of other gurus there is no need, and I see that for the most part, they do not read Prabhupada’s books.
guna devi wrote:
“I will run this by Mr. Al Sharpton and Rev. Jesse Jackson and see what they think. Don’t get scared when they come to the temples to protest with their throngs of supporters. They are not the ones who used to do the lynching.”
Please, do not be offended by what I said. Im not from USA, not into controversies of USA (or political corectness), have no racial prejudice. Good example – we respect all who are born in India, but so many Westerners say, oh, in India it is so much dirty and so on. How does that come – for example in Navadvip perfectly all garbage is natural and blends into nature. But in cities, western style of packaging, but everything is thrown in a same manner on a ground. Then it becomes dirty. Whose fault – just time, inustrialisation and westernisation. The same with Africans – in England city when one goes in living area, everywhere it is clean, but near houses of black skinned people – oh, so much trash. Black people were kept as slaves in USA some time ago, then they found themselves in lower strata of society. But to consider Africa, also, there is so much unnecesary killing of each other, and there is no very much advanced culture or religion like in India. So in general, in comparison, Africans are less cultured than Indians. Would not say this comparing Europeans and Africans, because, it may be that European is more anticulture than culture. At least Africans are closer to nature.
So, in general sense, for me no difficulty to accept that statement of Srila Prabhupada, and I agree by my own reasoning. Though I wont claim that myself am more cultured than black people. Probably not. But all this is karmic. A few days ago I read someones past life rememberances. A person suffered sexual abuse in childhood. And what he/she saw in one of previous lives – he was a military man, maybe in time of Chingizhan or alike, and he was raping one child after another and killing just in a cource of war. That was the way of war. And the cosequences now. So all, white and black and yellow brown alike, more cultured or less cultured, all this is by karma.
Mid
Obviously your vision of gaudiya philosophy is very sentimental, and I can find no fault with that approach if it makes you happy. I’m not going to go through a point by point refutation of what you wrote. That doesn’t mean I agree with anything you said, philosophically speaking I think everything you wrote is without basis in philosophy and is nothing more then sentimental speculation and foolishness.
The question I have is that if all these racial issues and women issues are just modes of nature interacting, bodily concepts of life, conditioning, bla, bla, bla and don’t rely on the absolute nature of God and devotional service, then why are they made issues by Srila Prabhupada and his disciples? Why not just preach about Krishna and devotional service leaving out racial/sexual issues? What good does it do for his disciples and grand-disciples, and the generations in the future to go on about Blacks and women’s place in society if it does not pertain to the spiritual realm of bhakti? This is not about it being polictally correct or not, it should not have any place in spiritual precepts, classes or commentaries. Period. We do not need slavery for a Krishna conscioiusness society, nor do we need women to be dumb and uneducated, to the extreme submissiveness of getting beat up by a husband, having irresponsible or extra-martial affair husbands; or that divorce is soley the fault of women and that men do not share any responsibilty for failed marriages.
Look at Indian women now-a-days. Are they all village women who have been denied education? Many are doctors, government officials, some are astronauts, scientists, reseachers, and military leaders in the armed forces. Has it been bad for India and the Indian people to allow women equal rights for education and jobs? India is on the rise of being one of the economic giants of Asia and the world.
Personally, I do not care if it annoys anyone bringing this up. It is the questioning of blind faith that led to the Age of Reformaton and the later philosophies of the Enlightment hundreds of years ago that paved the way for a society in which people can have freedom of which we are all enjoying its fruits here in the west. Krishna consciousness would not have had much success within a cultural society of intolerance, inquisitions and witch burnings.
Haripada Dasa said
This is what I expect from a member of the GHQ. It’s called an Ad Hominem argument. This is from wikipedia:
Guna devi
There are so many living vaishnavas and gurus out there to choose your association and reading material from. There are so many that do not make disparaging remarks about women, black people, etc.
There is no reason to read books that do that when there are plenty of books about Krishna that do NOT do that.
That is why new people coming to devotional service are going to India and finding gurus there outside of ISKCON.
There are so many to choose from.
Dear Vrajabhumi,
You are doing a tremendous service with this blog. I’m sure it must undoubtedly be difficult to deal with all of the incredibly toxic people who are leaving comments, and your strength and conviction are admirable.
I am just now discovering this blog and it will take a while to catch up on all the comments.
For starters:
That sick individual in Comment #4 (“That Hare Krishna Diary author guy was right! You all are simply a bunch of prostitutes!”) proves your point that Srila Prabhupada himself is the source of all misogyny in ISKCON and that these wing nuts are taking their authority from him. This is the basis of the entire problem. That ignorant person, who says, “Why don’t you get lost?” and “you have the freedom to leave ISKCON” should get lost himself and either go join the Taliban in Afghanistan or crawl back under the rock he came out from.
And the venom-spewing Arjuna should join him. Arjuna has been on The Hing (where one reader wisely suggested he needed anti-psychotic meds), The Sampradaya Sun and other devotee sites spouting his poisonous rhetoric. We’ve all heard just about enough of him and he really needs to get lost, too.
And as far as “Anonymous,” Comment #54, quoting Hari Sauri and Haripada…here we go again with the irrational fear tactics. We’ve all had enough of that. If either of those senior and venerable Vaishnavas wishes to comment on this blog themselves, I am sure a mutually respectful dialogue would ensue. Otherwise, “Anonymous’” quotes of their alleged statements is neither appropriate nor appreciated.
More later, but for now, thanks to the many other thoughtful commentators. And thanks again to Vrajabhumi.
Hari Sauri Das wrote
I don’t consider an ad hominem argument to be “eminently sensible”, but if you do, good luck with that. I don’t know where you read that I “want Krsna without guru”. Maybe you could address what I actually said instead of your red herring ad hominem arguments.
I’m an atheist now? That’s news to me.. I especially like the part where you warn/threaten me with eternal damnation. That is odd coming from such an “advanced devotee”. Well, I feel sorry for you if you are not able to see my writing for what it is and feel the need to attack me instead of dealing with what I wrote without recourse to bellicoseness. I actually pity you because I can see you are seriously deluded.
It appears that Hari Sauri is assuming that Srila Prabhupada is the only guru/acharya or that all gurus/acharyas share his opinions.
There are so many to choose from, all with different approaches.
Dear Seeking the Essence,
I think it’s pretty obvious who “Anonymous” in Comment 54 is. I mean, how many people would have access to the private correspondence of Hari Sauri and Haripada? Haripada’s wife, Phalini dd, of course.
Vrajabhumi didi wrote:
“He claims that what he is saying about women is backed up by sastra, but I’ve never seen him quote any sastra to back up these ideas: divorce being caused by women not being subordinate, women can’t have equal rights because they can have children, or that society will be destroyed if women are not subordinate to men.
Many followers of Srila Prabhupada accept these ideas as gospel truth and they use these ideas as the basis for how they view what woman’s roles in marriage and society should be like. It can be shown that these ideas are not objectively factual.”
It is doubtfull that it can be shown that it is not factual. Because this kind of subject matter is more subjective than objective, and it depends on who is evaluating things. “These ideas” needed not to be so much backuped by shastra, because that was not a shastric debate, but popular presentation for common public, and “these ideas” are also common in average public (do not say about USA nowadays, but in Europe and more for East, for sure). It is a matter of common sense.
For example, what is meant by disruption of society? Do we have society now or not? By shastras vision, this is not society what we are having. Society is disrupted long ago. And it is factual. There is even a claim in USA, that legalisation of abortions diminished criminal activity of “mad teenagers” (they were killed in a womb instead and before they could become criminals). What may that mean, apart from that killing is going on? That unwanted children realy make life like hell, thats what somebody is trying to prove by statistics. And that is warned by shastra. No chastity, no family culture, then unwanted children, and then chaos.
Lets consider these three statements a bit:
1. divorce being caused by women not being subordinate
2. women can’t have equal rights because they can have children
3. that society will be destroyed if women are not subordinate to men.
1. It is also natural common sense. It really happens so, that husband and wife began to quarell, and no one wants to “step down” from their own equal and independent positions, and in this way, family relationship is finished. More natural is that one person should be somewhat dominating, another somewhat dominated whether it is a man or a woman, then harmony is more permanent. This can be seen in more traditional societies, like Eastern countries. The statement is obviously relative not absolute – it is not possible that all divorces are caused by one circumstance. And it is not claimed so. It is just one simple generalisation, following the topic of discusion. No mistake, nothing wrong. It requires just a little broadmindedness to see it for what it really is. Two extreems would be to take it as an axiomatic truth to all circumstances (which was not intended) and to take it as false statement, because it does not apply to all times and all places and every case (which was also not intended).
2. It is somewhat metaphoric. If somebody say that there should be absolutely equal rights for man and woman, then, this is impossible. In all respects, bodily, mentally, they are somewhat different, then there is no use of talking about absolute equal (identical) rights. Those rights in social life are also relative, if they are relative, they will depend on circumstance, and also on bodily and mental circumstance. Thats all. They can have “equal rights”, but that will require much artificial endevour in political and legal field, what to talk of common social life. Women are women, thats what meant by. Those who have a body, that bears children, are women. And shastra for sure tells about different social roles for man and women. It is imposible not to notice that.
3. Again, there are so many reasons why society is disrupted, which are discussed in Srila Prabhupada commentaries. To take only one statement from one interview, and to try to find fault in that – this goes against serious consideration. In Jaiva Dharma Srila Bhaktivinode Thakur says, that to understand Vedas, one has to scrutinisingly study every shastra and every sloka, and then draw conclusion. Not that to take separate statement out of context. There is always some contradiction, in one place something is more emphasised, in another place – other thing. This is natural. But feminism (women “non-subordination”) really brings problems, which is obvious when we look at USA society’s trends from abroad. Sincerely, we hear some things as anecdotes, which in USA is normal and progresive understanding. That there are many social phobias, such as that man are afraid to talk to women at work, because that may bring about some legal process, or that people are afraid to talk to children in the street, because this is also seen as potential crime. So this is not society, that is more like chaos and fear zone. So that seems factual, that normal society is disrupted already.
Vrajabhumi, why are you even lowering yourself to address Hari Sauri Prabhu in Comment 71? He has not had the decency to address you personally, and some cowardly person is quoting his letter anonymously. Who cares what he says?
I would think that because women are the bearers of civilization in the form of carrying life in their wombs and giving birth to humans, that they would be given MORE rights and privileges in a civilized culture, would’nt you think?
Wonder how he deduced that therefore they should be given less rights?
Mid, about black people.
Prabhupada said they would be happy and they in fact should be made into slaves.
That has nothing to do with the culture of Africa versus the culture of India or America or Europe. (btw Africa can be shown to have been adversely affected by colonialism and currently affected by exploitation of corporations). The culture of Africa is not in good shape because of the exploitation of outsiders. Racism is nonsense in any form. The color of your skin, the shape of your eyes, the shape of your lips or nose or cheecks or hair, has absolutely zero effect on the quality of the person. As for the rest of your writings, it’s just all sentimental and without logic or philosophy. You want to defend what Prabhupada said by trying to convince that what he said wasn’t wrong using some sentimental flawed reasoning.
Hari Sauri’s comments are ridiculous. He may be a bit more progressive than some, but he’s still one of the pillars of dysfunction within Iskcon. I agree with Radhika-seva. Why are you even bothering to address his comments?
Please accept my obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada!!
Thank you Vrajabhumi for opening this dialog. It is one of the most interesting exchanges I’ve read on the internet in years.
I think one thing we have to remember is that Srila Prabhupada undertook the very difficult task of introducing to the western world not only Krsna consciousness but the Vedic culture, which has prescribed duties for women that are very different than what is seen in western culture. That is a huge gap that he was trying to bridge, while on the one hand being faithful to the essential principles of the Vedic culture and Krsna consciousness and on the other hand trying to infiltrate and engage westerners in Krsna consciousness and the Vedic culture. I think he did an astonishingly good job of bridging a very large gap. Many of the quotes that you refer to are aimed at that attempt to bridge that gap, and to challenge western ideas that differed from the Vedic perspective.
I would like to chime in on the largest point in my mind.
the rape quote. This was a very unfortunate choice of words. No one will ever convince me that Srila Prabhupada was an advocate of rape. If I thought for a moment that he was I would not be interested in taking any guidance from him whatsoever. He wasn’t. There is no evidence that he was. I think the point he was making he was that a woman enjoys being seduced by a man she is attracted to. This is a far cry from rape and to those who say that he is an advocate of rape and knew very well what he was saying I can’t more strongly disagree. It would be totally antithetical to what Krsna consciousness is.
We also have to balance out the statements you quote with the many other statements Srila Prabhupada made in his books about the good qualities in women and, more importantly, that the bodily conception is an illusion and that staying in that paradigm is not helpful in practicing Krsna consciousness.
For what it’s worth, I agree with you that everything a pure devotee does is not materially perfect. That idea would disagree with the Bhagavad Gita which says (18.48) “Every endeavor is covered by some fault, just as fire is covered by smoke. Therefore one should not give up the work born of his nature, O son of Kuntī, even if such work is full of fault.” It would also disagree with this verse: SB 1.5.11 “On the other hand, that literature which is full of descriptions of the transcendental glories of the name, fame, forms, pastimes, etc., of the unlimited Supreme Lord is a different creation, full of transcendental words directed toward bringing about a revolution in the impious lives of this world’s misdirected civilization. Such transcendental literatures, even though imperfectly composed, are heard, sung and accepted by purified men who are thoroughly honest.” But because everything a pure devotee does is meant for the mission and pleasure of Krsna it is perfect on the absolute platform.
I also have to say that I respectfully disagree with Hauri Sauri Prabhu. An atheist would have no interest in any of these topics. To have a different understanding of Krsna consciousness does not make one an atheist.
Hari Sauri Prabhu allegedly wrote in a letter to Haripada Prabhu, “Because guru says something that is unpalatable to her conditioned mind..” and “she has no faith in the liberated acaryas.”
Really? “Unpalatable”? Sickening is more like it. Sickening and disturbing and offensive. To thousands of devotees besides Vrajabhumi.
Does Hari Sauri Prabhu seriously believe that it is symptom of a liberated acarya to authoritatively state that women enjoy being raped? That, like dogs and mrdangas, they should be beaten? That black people should be kept as slaves? That Hitler was a gentleman?
Prabhupada’s disturbing “quotes” go on and on and on, and if Hari Sauri thinks these are the expressions of a “liberated acarya,” he is seriously in illusion.
Dear Makhanchor Prabhu,
You wrote: “This was a very unfortunate choice of words. No one will ever convince me that Srila Prabhupada was an advocate of rape. If I thought for a moment that he was I would not be interested in taking any guidance from him whatsoever.”
Please consider the following:
“Yes, that is law always. Rape means
without consent, sex. Otherwise there is no rape.
There was a rape case in Calcutta, and the lawyer was
very intelligent. He some way or other made the woman
admit, “Yes, I felt happiness.” So he was released.
“Here is consent.” And that’s a fact. Because after
all, sex, rape or no rape, they will feel some
pleasure. So the lawyer by hook and crook made the
woman agree, “Yes, I felt some pleasure.” “Now, there
is consent.” So he was released. After all, it is an
itching sensation. So either by force or by willingly,
if there is itching, everyone feels relieved itching
it. That’s a psychology. It is not that the woman do
not like rape. They like sometimes. They willingly.
That is the psychology. Outwardly they show some
displeasure, but inwardly they do not. This is the
psychology.”
“Although rape is not legally allowed, it is a fact that a woman likes a man who is very expert at rape.” (SB 4.25.41)
Taken together, these two quotes prove beyond the shadow of a doubt that Srila Prabhupada knew exactly what he was saying. There is no question.
vishnupriyah you said
You didn’t seem to understand my point. Clearly gurus make mistakes. That is a fact. Bhaktisiddhanta was quoted by you saying that a guru doesn’t make mistakes. So we can believe our eyes or we can believe what someone says. My explanation has been that we can see this in two ways. If we see the guru or any jiva as independently acting then we can blame that person for making mistakes. If we see that no one is independent, that Krishna as Paramatma is controlling everyone, then we can’t blame people for any mistakes they may make. So I agree with Srila Bhaktisiddhanta that “a guru is not a mortal erring creature”. If we see that a guru does make mistakes the point is that we should understand that Krishna is in control, the guru was not to blame, the guru is under the direction of Krishna for his own purposes.
I’m saying that purpose is to break people from their unrealistic philosophically incorrect vision of the powers and abilities of a guru.
If a guru appears in a dream–that is paramatma using that form to inspire you. Our connection is with God. The guru aids in bringing that connection to our awareness. God is the guru. The jiva acting as a guru is not the real guru, as Prabhupada said
And also from Srimad Bhagavatam 1.6.23
We need to discriminate between what is spiritual truth and what is not. A guru can make mistakes, but the real truth of the guru is deeper. His mistakes are not his own, they serve God’s purpose under God’s direction to aid the disciple in coming closer to Krishna, to see that it is Krishna who is in control, it is Krishna who is our Guru, using the devotee like a puppet.
So some of you were wondering why I responded to an email from Hari Sauri–what can I say? I am a puppet–not the puppetmaster “)
Rupa Manjari,
You say “Taken together, these two quotes prove beyond the shadow of a doubt that Srila Prabhupada knew exactly what he was saying. There is no question.”
Let’s look at the context:
“TRANSLATION
O my dear hero, who in this world will not accept a husband like you? You are so famous, so magnanimous, so beautiful and so easily gotten.
PURPORT
Every husband is certainly a great hero to his wife. In other words, if a woman loves a man, that man appears very beautiful and magnanimous. Unless one becomes beautiful in the eyes of another, one cannot dedicate his whole life to another. The husband is considered very magnanimous because he gives as many children to the wife as she likes. Every woman is fond of children; therefore any husband who can please his wife by sex and give her children is considered very magnanimous. Not only does the husband become magnanimous by begetting children, but by giving his wife ornaments, nice food and dresses, he keeps her completely under submission. Such a satisfied wife will never give up the company of her husband. Manu-saḿhitā recommends that to keep a wife satisfied a husband should give her some ornaments because women are generally fond of home, ornaments, dresses, children, etc. In this way the woman is the center of all material enjoyment.
In this regard, the word vikhyātam is very significant. A man is always famous for his aggression toward a beautiful woman, and such aggression is sometimes considered rape. Although rape is not legally allowed, it is a fact that a woman likes a man who is very expert at rape.”
How does your import have anything to do with the context of this verse?
Do not know whether it is sentimental or not, but I have no difficulty to accept those two points (though it is not serious to take something out of some informal conversation and to give it too much attention, because when guru speaks, he speaks according to qualifications and perceptions of of then listeners):
1. Black man
2. Rape
Simple generalised relative statements should be understood in simple generalised relative way. That is logical. Otherwise, it is not very sound approach.
That is simple. If people have problems with living and working, then, if they have good master why they should not be happy, whatever color they be? Who is more happy – a slave with civilised master or lonely person in crazy city? That is philosophical question.
That some women sometimes like sex without consent – (do not mean to offend anyone) – that is psichological question. I think, it is possible to find some claims by psichologists supporting this. Try google.
Quoting and responding to “Mid”, Guna devi said,
“’When guru again picks up some fact, that black people are not very much cultured (everybody knows, in average it is so, or was so at that time in USA), then, whose error is that?’
I will run this by Mr. Al Sharpton and Rev. Jesse Jackson and see what they think. Don’t get scared when they come to the temples to protest with their throngs of supporters. They are not the ones who used to do the lynching.”
That’s exactly what needs to happen. Iskcon never listens unless there are lawsuits or pressure from the outside. I just sent the slave quote to Rev. Sharpton.
Dear Vrajabhumi,
You wrote, “So some of you were wondering why I responded to an email from Hari Sauri–what can I say? I am a puppet–not the puppetmaster.”
Please do not compromise your dignity to become the “puppet” of these foolish, ignorant and dysfunctional men. It is really beneath you.
I wonder what Prabhupada would’ve said about this year’s presidential race – a woman AND a black man running for president?!?! Oh my! What is this world coming to?
Dear Makhanchor Prabhu,
I am not trying to be confrontational and I appreciate your sincerity in “defending” Srila Prabhupada. But at the same time I am really tired of devotees engaging in never-ending convoluted word-jugglery to “justify” his statements. He says, “Although rape is not legally allowed.” Is that not perfectly clear?
Makhanchor Prabhu,
Please explain this one:
“Sudra is to be controlled only. They are never to be given freedom. Just
like in America. The Blacks were slaves. They were under control. And
since you have given them equal rights they are disturbing, most
disturbing, always creating a fearful situation, uncultured and drunkards.
What training they have got? They have got equal right? That is best, to
keep them under control as slaves but give them sufficient food,
sufficient cloth, not more than that. Then they will be satisfied.”
(Room Conversation, Varnasrama System Must Be Introduced, Mayapura,
February 14, 1977)
These statements are DISGUSTING.
Mid, you showcase the purpose of this blog. By accepting Prabhupada, or anybody but God, as infallible, you try and convince people that when he said something which is untrue, is true. In so doing you lose the respect of others who don’t believe Prabhupada is infallible, which is 99.9999% of the people in the world. You and other devotees like to claim that ISKCON is the savior of the world and that it is meant for the spiritual upliftment of humanity at large. How is that going to happen when 99.9999% of the people in the world are going to lose respect for ISKCON if they do not renounce some of the things Prabhupada said?
If you seriously believe that black people would be satisfied being slaves, and that they should be forced into slavery, then you have become deluded by faith in the infallibility of Prabhupada. You claim that you would enjoy being a slave if you had a nice master more then if you were lonely? That is certifiably insane. This is what I am fighting against–insanity in the name of Krishna. Krishna stands for real dharma, not racist barbarism nor sexism in the name of dharma.
“That is certifiably insane. This is what I am fighting against–insanity!”
I am sorry to disturb you in any way. I am speaking more from my own mental and experiental make up. It is just difference of culture and expierence. So there is misunderstanding. What I am saying, I understand what guru says in a different light, and I dont take it so mechanisticaly, as others, whatever they be – radical feminist or radical “prabhupadanuga”. I do not find anything insane in my words, that if I would be lonely and with problems such as no work, no accomodation, than better to be like slave. This is not an official statement, excuse me :). It is reality of life in my own imperfect words, again excuse me, that words and expresions are not perfect. Sometime I returned from India without money. What I have done? I went to a farmer and asked for work and shelter. That is like slavery, modern slavery. Is it better to sit in the street and to beg money? To sleep in coach station or hostel for homeless?
There are various people and various experiences. I do not know, why anyone should be called insane for expresing his natural feelings and philosophy based on real experience :). Maybe internet brings us too close from too far away :)
Haribol
Hare Krsna, Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada. Here is something for everyone’s consideration.Please read The Nectar Of Instruction,text six.”Being situated in his original Krsna conscious position, a pure devotee does not identify with the body.Such a devotee should not be seen from a materialistic point of view.Indeed, one should overlook a devotee’s having a body born in a low family, a body with a bad complexion,a deformed,or a diseased or infirm body.According to ordinary vision, such imperfections may seem prominent in the body of a pure devotee, but despite such seeming defects, the body of a pure devotee cannot be polluted. It is exactly like the waters of the Ganges, which sometimes during the rainy season are full of bubbles,foam, and mud. The Ganges waters do not become polluted. Those who are advanced in spiritual understanding will bathe in the Ganges without considering the condition of the water.Now please read the five and 1/2 pages purport.
I also suggest reading The Spiritual Master and the Disciple. It will clarify your relationship with the Guru.
You will always have to serve somebody,whether it is obeying the laws of the land,your employer, your parents, your children etc. On the front page you talk about empowerment. Real empowerment is seeing beyond the material nature to our real nature which is spiritual. I know I am not this body, and I know that when someone makes offenses because they see this body as a “woman” that is their lack of understanding . Srila Prabhupada always engaged the devotees according to their natural abilities So he had Vaisnavi’s become pujaris,give class, lead kirtan etc.So, when Prabhupada talked about women in his books it is my understanding , he was talking about Karmi women, and also about the symptoms of a female human form.
nirmana-moha jita sanga-dosa
adhyatma-nitya vinivrtta-kamah
dvandvair vimuktah sukha dukha samjnair
gacchanty amudhah padam avayam tat
One who is free from illusion, false prestige, and false association, who understands the eternal, who is done with material lust and is feed from the duality of happiness and distress, and who knows how to surrender unto the Supreme Person, attains to that eternal kingdom. BG ch 15 text 5 . So, better to be humble. ISKCON is full of examples of “great big important devotee” who are now fallen, or who now have no credibility due to their actions.
Please chant Hare Krsna and be happy.
Vrajabhumi didi wrote:
“Mid, you showcase the purpose of this blog. By accepting Prabhupada, or anybody but God, as infallible, you try and convince people that when he said something which is untrue, is true. In so doing you lose the respect of others who don’t believe Prabhupada is infallible, which is 99.9999% of the people in the world. You and other devotees like to claim that ISKCON is the savior of the world and that it is meant for the spiritual upliftment of humanity at large. How is that going to happen when 99.9999% of the people in the world are going to lose respect for ISKCON if they do not renounce some of the things Prabhupada said?”
You see, thats a fact, that our experiences makes our mind. For example I have nothing to do with ISKCON, never been in ISKCON temple, but you firmly guess, that “You and other devotees like to claim that ISKCON is the savior of the world”. Thats our perceptions. World is much broader than two sided ISKCON/others. Yes, I have some faith in Gaudiya gurus, and in Srila Prabhupada. What is wrong there? It is not mechanistic, and I am happy with that. How can one define “fallibility” of guru, where is such concept in Gaudiya siddhanta?
There was one accident described by some religion scientist, when Srila Prabhupada in a morning walk with disciples by seaside noticed a crab or something and told “look, there is a scorpion”. Some disciples whispered amongst each other: “Thats not a scorpion”. Then, they could not understand how guru did not know. Scientist also. Is that “fallibility” of guru? Or just having no realisation of guru tattva by disciples? First, we have to understand, what is guru, what is his qualities, then we may try to know, whether particular guru is “fallible”. Otherwise, we just do not understand, what we are talking about. It is obvious, everyone sees, that guru: “forgets”, “does not know”, sleeps, eats, “has desease” and etc. But what Gaudiya siddhanta says about this? That is main point, not what we think about this from our own experience.
Mother Mahesvari says, “So, when Prabhupada talked about women in his books it is my understanding , he was talking about Karmi women…”
The word “karmi” is completely obnoxious. In our Hare Krishna “vernacular,” it is no better than “nigger” or “spic” or “wop” or “chink.” How will we ever attract people to our movement with words like this?
Rupa manjari the word Karmi or Karmis means fruitive workers.How is that obnoxious? If someone has not taken to spiritual life they are on this plane. May I respectfully suggest you do more reading. Please see Bhagavad-gita As it is pages 232,352,387,801,802,807. Hare Krsna
All I’m seeing on this blog from “defenders” of the horrific statements made by Prabhupada is denial, denial, denial. All the so-called “philosophical” explanations they offer are nothing but convoluted word jugglery and cultish fear tactics. That’s all.
Mother Mahesvari,
The Sanskrit may literally translate as “fruitive worker,” but, as we all know, in ISKCON the word “karmi” has become the ultimate pejorative for “non-devotees.”
Clearly I did understand your point. You write
“You didn’t seem to understand my point. Clearly gurus make mistakes. That is a fact. Bhaktisiddhanta was quoted by you saying that a guru doesn’t make mistakes. So we can believe our eyes or we can believe what someone says. My explanation has been that we can see this in two ways. If we see the guru or any jiva as independently acting then we can blame that person for making mistakes.”
You are engaged in sophisticated word jugglery. I directly stated that you now accuse SBSST of “erring” by saying that the Guru does is not a Mortal erring creature like ourselves”.
Guru is Guru. He speaks only what Krsna has spoken and for the exact same purpose. He is never independent or free to speak anything other than exactly what Krsna has spoken and for the exact same purpose – to liberate the soul from ignorance and deliver them back to their original Krsna Consciousness.
There is no such thing as a bad guru or one who misrepresents the Truth. One is either representing Krsna completely without addition or alteration – or they are not.
Your idea is – that you or I – can use our defective senses and/or reasoning – to determine that the Guru is wrong – inspite of his being in total harmony with the both the scriptures and the previous acharyas – and then assert that though we – the admittededly imperfect – have established the Guru’s imperfect or mistaken representation of Truth – based upon our “superior” understanding of what is what – make the additional claim that it was Krsna Himself – who caused the Guru to err in this way – and all is well precisely because the whole business fits so perfectly within the plan of Lord Krsna! Hmmmmm….
I suggest you actually read the essay I provided you from SBSST – Inititation into Spiritual Life. Therein you will find that he states the obvious that one “Reserves the right to reject the preceptor – the moment he or she realizes that the Guru is in fact a fallible person – just like ourselves”. Submission to the absolute is only genuine – when it is likewise – absolute. But if you do in fact reject the guru as fallible – you cannot then pretend that I at least accept him – a little. No. This is nonsense and meaningless as far as how Lord Chaitanya has instructed us to see the Spiritual Master; “As my very Self”!
You want to imagine that you can have it both ways; pretend to yourself or others that you understand and embrace the process of Krsna Consciousness – as given by Srila Prabhupada – which includes the above mentioned method of approaching the Guru – while at the same time openly and most defiantly declaring your “picking and choosing” which elements of Srila Prabhupada’s guidance you will accept and which elements you will reject as coming from the mind of a defective jiva as opposed to the perfectly transparent via media to Lord Sri Krsna.
This premise is most illogical and specious.
I have enough experience to know how all this works in these blogs and websites. You are the moderator and thus – unless I continue to wrangle with you here – you will of course get to finish the discussion with your last word. So be it.
You have succeeded in showing all your cards. You are not the first devotee to reject HDG Srila Prabhupada in this fashion; I am sure you will not be the last.
thank you
vishnupriyah you preach and preach and preach about how the guru is perfect in all things and to suggest otherwise is the greatest sin, but it’s obvious to any sensible person that you are wrong. I see in you someone who cannot face reality. Mid tells the story above you about Prabhupada misidentifying a crab for a scorpion and that there is some great mysterious tattva that we can’t understand how Prabhupada was correct. You folks can believe what you like, but reasonable people will see your type of belief as the product of a lack of perspective and bad education.
Mahesvari you wrote
He was still wrong regardless of it being about non-devotees or not. It is not a true “symptom” for women to be:
-Because of her nature, a woman can respond to even a slight offense from her husband by not only leaving him but even killing him if required. To say nothing of her husband, she can even kill her brother. That is a womans nature.
(SB 9.14.37)
-It is the nature of women to fight verbally at even a slight provocation. As we see from this incident, this has been their nature for a long, long time.
(SB 9.18.16, purport)
-Women should not be given freedom. Like a child, she is not given freedom.
(SB Lecture, Los Angeles, 7/11/74)
-Women as a class are no better than boys, and therefore they have no discriminatory power like that of a man.
(SB 1.7.42, purport)
Or how about when asked how to educate devotee girls he said they should only be taught how to read. They should not recieve any more education because they will become prostitutes?
Tamala Krsna: So we’re… I thought there were girls in Vrindävana now. They said that they’re going to have the girls’ gurukula behind the boys’ gurukula. Gopäla was talking about that.
Prabhupada: No, no, no. No girls.
Tamala Krsna: It should be in another city or somewhere else.
Prabhupada: Yes. They should be taught how to sweep, how to stitch…
Tamala Krsna: Clean.
Prabhupada: …clean, cook, to be faithful to the husband.
Tamala Krsna: They don’t require a big school.
Prabhupada: No, no. That is mistake. They should be taught how to become obedient to the husband.
Tamala Krsna: Yeah, you won’t learn that in school.
Prabhupada: Little education, they can…
Tamala Krsna: Yeah. That they can get at home also.
Prabhupada: They should be stopped, this practice of prostitution.
Prabhupada: Ordinary education is sufficient, ABCD. This is all nonsense, so big, big, sound education and later on become a prostitute. What is this education? (laughter) To make them prostitute, it doesn’t require education…. (Conversation: July 10, 1975, Chicago)
vishnupriyah d.d. writes:
“Guru is Guru. He speaks only what Krsna has spoken and for the exact same purpose. He is never independent or free to speak anything other than exactly what Krsna has spoken and for the exact same purpose…There is no such thing as a bad guru or one who misrepresents the Truth. One is either representing Krsna completely without addition or alteration – or they are not.”
1. Clearly, Srila Prabhupada has not “spoken only what Krishna has spoken and for the exact same purpose.”
2. Clearly, Srila Prabhupada was one who “misrepresented the truth” in his statements about women liking to be raped, black people being best off kept as slaves, and in many, many other areas.
3. By your criteria, Srila Prabhupada clearly fits in the “or they are not” category due to his “representing Krsna WITH addition AND alteration.
Rupa-manjari, the words “nigger”, “spic”, “chink”, and “wop” and the unsavory like are terms coined by karmis–itself a word which is NOT a pejorative used by devotees to insult non-devotees but an appropriate and authorized description from the Vedas and writings of the predecessor acaryas of the guru parampara (and used often by Srila Prabhupada himself) of the soul caught in the web of maya’s snare–which do not describe the eternal and originally transcendentally-situated jivatma but are words in the modes of passion and ignorance used by the demoniac to describe another demon’s false ego and bag of stool, all components of the illusory energy of maya.
The problem, Rupa-manjari, is not with ISKCON devotees describing non-devotees as karmis–which is an accurate and sastrically correct description of a fruitive worker’s unfortunate condition in the material world–but your lack of Krsna conscious realization and proper understanding of the soul caught in the and unforgiving and unyielding clutches of maya and the stringent laws of material nature and karma on the soul who thinks he can act independently of Sri Krsna. You are approaching the subject matter from the perspective of bodily designation and attatchment. The fact that you are so appalled, offended and enamored by such illusory and materialistic bodily designations and concoctions such as racism, sexism, feminism, political incorrectness and any other imaginable ism and schism–employed and utilized by those conditioned souls in a jaundiced state–is an indication of your own improper and jaundiced (mis)understanding of the transcendental and eternal message of the Bhagavad gita and Srimad Bhagavatam, which I would humbly urge you, echoing Mother Mahesvari devi dasi’s advice, to carefully and promptly re-read–in place of the karmi literature borne of the modes of material nature and describing the exploits of the false ego and the conditioned soul and its cycle of repeated births and deaths–that you appear to have the misfortune to be addicted to.
Finally, this argument that you pose–”The Sanskrit may literally translate as “fruitive worker,” but, as we all know, in ISKCON the word “karmi” has become the ultimate pejorative for ‘non-devotees.’”–is a basically a sympathy for karmis and their abominable and ungodly behavior and sinful activities. So-called devotees have even argued that calling non-devotees “meat-eaters” or criticizing them for their addiction to illicit sex and intoxication should be ceased by devotees during preaching or BG or SB temple classes. This is because the so-called devotee still holds these things near and dear to their anartha-hardened hearts and because their offense-laden chanting of the Hare Krsna maha mantra has yet to have effectively abated the taste for these activities of the lower modes and karmis, and, in turn, prevented them from having gained a taste for the transcendental platform of Krsna consciousness and an aversion to the mental and bodily platform and its concomitant entanglings and sufferings.
Hare Krsna,
Arjuna dasa
Rupa Manjari said, “The word “karmi” is completely obnoxious. In our Hare Krishna “vernacular,” it is no better than “nigger” or “spic” or “wop” or “chink.” How will we ever attract people to our movement with words like this?”
Even the term ‘Muggles’ is nicer than ‘Karmis’ or ‘Mlecchas’ when describing people.
“Do you know who Hari Sauri Prabhu is? He was Srila Prabhupada’s personal servant for two or three years. He is saying that you are an athiest, and quite strongly condemns you.”
Was he there in India in the 1970’s when one sannyasi God-brother of his brought a wad a money to Prabhupada for the temple constructions in India, money from the sannyasi’s dope trafficking?
Rupa Manjari,
You say “He says, “Although rape is not legally allowed.” Is that not perfectly clear?”
The problem is that your interpretation of what he is saying 1. does not fit the context 2. nor does it align with everything else he has said, 3 nor is it true. I don’t think is is unreasonable to assume he chose the wrong word.
If we take this explanation 1. it does fit the context and 2. does not conflict with everything else he said, and 3. it is true. It’s not a very convoluted word jugglery, like you say, it’s just a recognition that a particular statement does not appear to be in alignment with who Srila Prabhupada is or what he taught. For all we know it could be an editorial mistake. But the more important fact is that it is NOT typical of what Srila Prabhupada taught. It is one thing to notice that Srila Prabhupada presented a more traditional Vedic perspective on womens duties and to disagree that that fits with our western culture. It is entirely different to think that he advocated rape. That he chose the wrong word to make a point one time in his books does not establish this.
It is sad to see how dangerous the internet can be.I find it strange that this blog started as a way of rebuking another devotees blog in which some women felt offended.This blog is being used to denigrate a pure vaisnava.Lest we forget that members of both sexes have taken shelter of Srila Prabhupada and his teachings,it is also important to note that members of almost every race have joined his movement and were all taking his glorious association while he was still on the planet.I personally wonder who is actually behind this blog.There are many who would like to see the Krishna Conciousness movements of the world stopped.Sad guru is the knower of all revealed truths he does not need to change the truths so they may be more palitable for those who are controlled by the bodily platform.This is the most blasphemous and ultimately useless blo I have ever seen.Do all of the frequent writers chant Hare Krishna daily and follow the four regs,have they taken shelter of a Bonafide Guru?I have never found Srila Prabhupada to be offensive in any way.I am ever grateful that almost 25 yrs ago a sankirtan devotee was steadfast in his desire to have me attend a temple program.I spend time on the streets everyday engaged in sankirtan and I am ever grateful to have heard about what it means to live life based around Krishna which inevitably means to abandon that which is of no good use to anyone.Just ask yourselves who might really have started this blog.As this person writes I do not believe that this is really a woman and certainly not a devotee.Hare Krishna
One final point,it would seem inevitable that the uproar caused by the sankirtan blog led to this nonsense.Many women were angered that his guru did not come forward to reprimand him.If the writer of this blog is initiated I am furious that their guru has not taken offense to the fact that this has become an open forum for criticizing Srila Prabhupada.If you find him to be so offensive then why not abandon Krishna conciousness?do you really believe that this site is going to enact change.There have been so many so called gurus who themselves have jumped on the new age boat and who have tried to take devotees in new and different directions,only to have failed in the end.This blog is filled with the most offensive crap that I have ever read and the developer of this site should be shunned.May Krishna be merciful unto you.Guru is not a mortal erring creature such as ourselves.The Uttama Bhagavat is the direct representative of the Supreme Lord.Everyone should keep this in mind.
A bit frustrating point for me in this discussion is that there is no need for anyone to deny any visible external quality of guru, but still somebody finds, that we are denying. I am not denying, on the contrary, I say, anyone sees that, and guru himself says something like “I do not know”, “I forgot the word”, etc., but that is explained by Gaudiya siddhanta, that this does not mean, that guru is an ordinary or conditioned soul. Uttama guru is perfect in knowledge, he just do not reveal himself this way. To realise his position, disciple has to pass from sradha to nistha to bhava. Then he may realise something. Not by logic. And not by external observance and fault finding.
I am taking these quotes from some articles in vnn.org and bvml.org
[mid this comment was caught by the spam filter and put into moderation that is why it didn't appear, I removed all the quotes because there were too many of them, this comment would have been way too long, if you want you can post links to those quotes--vrajabhumi]
Prabhupada clearly taught that women re like children (Bhagavad-gita, purport 4:13) and are inferior to men. We cannot dispute the infallible words of a jagadguru!
I apologize for misquoting Prabhupada. I meant to cite his infallible purport for Bhagavad-gita 16:7:
“Now, in the Manu-samhita, it is clearly stated that a woman should not be given freedom. That does not mean that women are to be kept as slaves, but they are like children. Children are not given freedom, but that does not mean that they are kept as slaves. The demons have now neglected such injunctions, and they think that women should be given as much freedom as men. However, this has not improved the social condition of the world.”
Vrajabhumi dd,
you have now openly insulted Hari Sauri Prabhu, saying that he is “nonsense”. How foolish can you be? He is one of the most highly respected devotees in our movement. That you call him “misguided and foolish” is proof of your insanity. You are about to go to hell for your offenses against Srila Prabhupada and his pure disciples.
Who will you offend next? Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati? Srila Bhaktivinode Thakur? Lord Caitanya? or even Krishna Himself?
You are going to soon find yourself in hell for your grevious offenses.
Oh God! Reading some of the very offensive comments on this blog, is showing me that those who are rejecting Srila Prabhupada’s teachings are on the way to hell. Not only do they reject SP’s teachings, but they are very offensive in doing so.
Yes, Annonmous 112! To reinforce the infallible teaching of Srila Prabhupada, we need to use threats of hellfire to awake all the karmis and the atheists. It is utterly blasphemous to express any doubts whenever we find that the writings of the great acaryas go against our logical reasoning. It is also offensive to be critical of people who believe 100% in Prabhupada’s infallible teachings! Whereas Prabhupada and his followers are empowered to use words like “rascal”, “fool”, “nonsense” , etc. to describe non-believers, it is absolutely prohibited that the same words be used on them.
I love Prabhupada and am grateful for everything he did. But from my very first visit to a temple I heard his version that women are less intelligent. I never bought it, but hearing and chanting was attractive to me still so gradually I thought that the misogyny was a small price to pay. Throughout the years (28 now) however, I have become increasingly bothered that Gaudiya Vaisnavism, a belief system that claims to be the most complete (the final conclusion in all matters) could harbor such absurd, backward “teaching”. Recently I read a book titled “History of Celibacy”, by a Canadian female scholar who researched the subject extensively throughout a decade. Her main finding was that all religions throughout history have used women as a scapegoat for men’s difficulties in giving up sex. The lie that women are less intelligent is just one among many dishonest fabrications of men throughout history who, by the power of bullying and nothing else, attempt to achieve their own liberation. But we like to hope that Gaudiya Vaisnavism will indeed be the religion which will bring forth the truth. Thus perhaps Vrahabhumi dasi’s theory that Krsna is using Srila Prabhupada to stir up things a little is not too far off. In fact, she is probably right since the speciality of guru cannot be dismissed but at the same time this absurd misconception simply cannot go on.
So, perhaps now its time for the Hare Krsna movement start looking more rationally and sensibly in to the issue of the ‘infallibility’ of the acarya instead of insisting in proving that 2+2=5.
Regarding another myth in this movement: devotees such as Hari Sauri das are NOT pure representatives of Srila Prabhupada. Like many ex-sannyasis, Hari Sauri das was a man who could not maintain his vows of celibacy despite the clear desire of Srila Prabhupada that he did so. Yet, from his own experience of how difficult it is to follow an extreme and indeed irrational practice (celibacy at 23), Hari Sauri das does not hesitate to condemn women in this movement who reject misogyny passed as spiritual teachings.
Vrajabhumi didi wrote
“Mid tells the story above you about Prabhupada misidentifying a crab for a scorpion and that there is some great mysterious tattva that we can’t understand how Prabhupada was correct. You folks can believe what you like, but reasonable people will see your type of belief as the product of a lack of perspective and bad education.”
The point is that misidentifying crab for scorpion is not any “prove of fallibility” of guru. The same, many many times Srila Prabhupada would say: “how is that called, I do not know that English word”. Or many things alike. Shastra says, guru is sum total of all devatas. Then, what is a difficulty to know English perfectly? No difficulty, it is just not bussiness of guru to display these material perfections. He is in naravata lila, human like pastimes, where he is making some minor “errors” externally, as if he was ordinary old man. That is siddhanta, that is guru tattva. That is what sane Gaudiya followers have faith in, if they have got proper education about Gaudiya siddhanta.
Mother Vrajabhumi
You provide a list of “offensive” depictions of women proferred by HDG Srila Prabhupada. You simply say “Obviously these are all false claims”.
On what basis. What is your means of deducing this? You will claim that “I Vrajabhumi – THE GREAT OZ of all women – has spoken!” and Ouila! – it is a fact!”
Your claim is that Srila Prabhupada has stated something as fact – and you reject his “facts” as being sourced essentially from his imagination or envy – or being simply misinformed.
OK let us for the time being accept your premise.
Now – since you reject his claims and their “fanciful” origin – I likewise claim that the genesis of your “counterclaims” is equally fanciful and specious – your own imagination and envy.
How to prove otherwise?
You cannot.
This is why – in answer now to Mother Kamala as well – The Spiritual Master – simply provides us with the sciptural basis of his “facts” as they pertain both to the “reality” of this world and the “reality” of the Spiritual World as well. In addition – the Spiritual master – will likewise defer in his elucidation of all scriptural information – to all the realizations passed down to us via the previous Acharya’s in our Spotless Parampara.
This is our system. When Srila Prabhuapda says “Fools and Rascals” in reference to those who do not accept Krsna’s Verdict in all things – he is merely employing the terminology of Lord Krsna. Bhagavad Gita 9:11 says
avajananti mam mudha
manushim tanum asritam
param bhavam ajananto
mama bhuta-mahesvaram
TRANSLATION
Fools deride Me when I descend in the human form. They do not know My transcendental nature as the Supreme Lord of all that be.
One of the ways in which the Lord “descends” is in his manifestation as SRi Guru Tattwa. No – the Guru is not God. He is though – described as “Servant God” and when he ONLY speaks what is spoken by God and for the same purpose – to liberate us from our ignorance – then The Guru is to be honored every bit as much as God Himself. He is THE GIFT OF GOD and as Lord Krsna Himself says in the above cited verse from His previously spoken Bhagavad Gita – ONLY FOOL or RASCAL would dare to deride HIM in whatever form HE descends. Only a FOOL would disregard the help he offers.
Kamala dd has also employed a twisted syllogism to establish her gripe. She writes ” By your criteria, Srila Prabhupada clearly fits in the “or they are not” category due to his “representing Krsna WITH addition AND alteration.”
Really? on what basis my dear? You establish your premise upon your own claims only.
1.Clearly, Srila Prabhupada has not “spoken only what Krishna has spoken and for the exact same purpose.”
2. Clearly, Srila Prabhupada was one who “misrepresented the truth” in his statements about women liking to be raped, black people being best off kept as slaves, and in many, many other areas.
These are merely you again repeating your repugnance for true or poorly and/or incomplete replications of some of Srila Prabhupada’s statements. We are all now well aware of what elements of Srila Prabhupada’s teachings you and the moderator hold as so obviously untrue and offensive. However – why on earth do you imagine that others would automatically share either your understanding of them – or see them as anything less than absolutely truthful – such that – without as much as a whisper of dissent. When you or Vrajabhumi state “These statements are OBVIOUSLY UNTRUE and thus Srila Prabhupada was grossly mistaken in his presentation of this aspect of his depiction of the realities of this world” – you are indeed foolish if you imagine that intelligent and discerning women or men are just going to automatically submit THEIR ESTABLISHED POWERS OF DISCRIMINATION to the likes of either of you. You write as if it is a forgone conclusion – that in order for a woman to be understood as “intelligent” she would OBVIOUSLY have to perceive HDG Srila Prabhuapda and his guidance – in exactly the same way you do. This is patently FOOLISH.
Intelligence is described by Lord Krsna in the 2nd Canto of Srimad Bhagavatam as one of the means by which we(the jiva soul in either male or female form) can actually percieve the presence of the Supersoul. REAL INTELLIGENCE is manifested by one who is TAKING HELP from Lord Krsna – to discriminate between that which will benefit one eternally – from that which will serve some temporary purpose. Krsna appears internally as the Supersoul Himself – and externally – as The Bondafide Spiritual Master. These are the teachings of our Spotless Parampara.
What I find ironic and in some ways – the most offensive aspect of all of this is the fact that the moderator of this site – Vrajabhumi dasi – WILL ACTUALLY QUOTE SRILA PRABHUPADA’S BHAKTIVEDANTA PURPORTS – THE VERY PERSON SHE HAS REJECTED AS THE BONAFIDE LINK TO THE TEACHINGS OF OUR SPOTLESS PARAMPARA – in her efforts to support her ideas – when those purports seem to support her premise and its conclusions.
This is beyond the pale as one might say.
I have never read a single statement – about anything or anyone – any gender – any race – any anything in fact – in Srila Prabhupada’s books or lectures – that ever appeared as anything less than the Absolute Truth.
Blacks happier as slaves? You bet? Why only Blacks? Everyone is more or less already a slave. You make sure that the majority of blacks and whites have enough to eat and a decent place to sleep and a woman or two to “play” with… and a dancefloor – and they are as happy as a Cat in a Kiddle. The world’s leaders know this – even if you don’t.
Women love to be raped? You bet baby? 50% of all women fantasize being “taken”. Of course they don’t want to suffer along with it – but Saying No to the Man only feeds his passion and “YEP” women love to think that they drive men just that crazy. It is all part of nature and biology of procreation. Srila Prabhupada had THAT ONE 100000% RIGHT. The only women who find the idea of being taken by the most passionate man (nature translates that as THE BEST MAN TO PASS ON THE GENETIC CODES) are women – who love women….but that is another thing. Of women who covet the vysasana! But real women – real “mothers” – you got that right. Women can smell ambition on a man – and that is closely related to sex drive. Women want sons – cuz previous to monetary “insurance” – healthy capable sons – were her “insurance” policy. Just plain old biology.
“Women as a class are no better than boys, and therefore they have no discriminatory power like that of a man.”?
Well – this site proves that one – hands down!
“It is the nature of women to fight verbally at even a slight provocation. As we see from this incident, this has been their nature for a long, long time.”?
I repeat myself.
“Or how about when asked how to educate devotee girls he said they should only be taught how to read. They should not recieve any more education because they will become prostitutes?”????
Well – I challenge anyone – anywhere – to show me – where 99% of the citizens of any country retain anything more than the basic ability to read and write (at best) and do basic arithmetic – anywhere in the world. Sure their are PLENTY of exceptions…but exceptions – prove the rule. They do not disprove it. If the real carreer of women – is marriage and motherhood – her “education” needs to revolve around that. It is a very taxing job and she needs all the wisdom and help she can muster to master it.
One could – and all disciples indeed do – (that is why they are in fact disciples!) assess every statement of HDG’s you find so unwelcome and come to a complete accord with him.
You find that they do not please you. They do not “fit” with your present “perception” of reality. So you reject them.
But again I stress – that this only means that you will have to continue searching for the Bonafide Spiritual Master – since taking “help” from your intelligence – which you assume to be the unfiltered manifestation of the Supersoul – has led you to conclude that you are obliged to both reject Srila Prabhupada – and villify him openly as well.
I wish you both well only. May your hearts someday melt with love, repspect and most importantly – gratitude to His Divine Grace Srila Prabhupada. May you embrace the Holy Name with that same spirit.
“Blacks happier as slaves? You bet? Why only Blacks? Everyone is more or less already a slave. You make sure that the majority of blacks and whites have enough to eat and a decent place to sleep and a woman or two to “play” with… and a dancefloor – and they are as happy as a Cat in a Kiddle. The world’s leaders know this – even if you don’t.
Women love to be raped? You bet baby? 50% of all women fantasize being “taken”. Of course they don’t want to suffer along with it – but Saying No to the Man only feeds his passion and “YEP” women love to think that they drive men just that crazy. It is all part of nature and biology of procreation. ”
50% Vishnupriya Dasi? Can you provide your readers with the source of those statistics? Or are they just a product of your own fantasy on what Srila Prabhupada might have meant?
“Blacks happier as slaves? You bet? Why only Blacks? Everyone is more or less already a slave. You make sure that the majority of blacks and whites have enough to eat and a decent place to sleep and a woman or two to “play” with… and a dancefloor – and they are as happy as a Cat in a Kiddle. The world’s leaders know this – even if you don’t.
Women love to be raped? You bet baby? 50% of all women fantasize being “taken”. Of course they don’t want to suffer along with it – but Saying No to the Man only feeds his passion and “YEP” women love to think that they drive men just that crazy. It is all part of nature and biology of procreation. ”
Vishupriya, you are DISGUSTING.
Bhaktin M:
You are defending the indefensible–and thus accepting the bad association of a demoniac individual–when you make these kinds of statements: “…come on now. If she (Vrajabhumi) didn’t really believe that Krsna is God why would she even bother with all this? That doesn’t even make sense”.
Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura warns us about Kali-chelas, disciples of Kali, who wear tilaka and neck-beads, but who are actually opposed to the principles of devotional service. There is no more sinister Kali-chela than someone who tries to subvert Srila Prabhupada’s movement. So yes it is possible that the author of this blog make a show that she believes Krsna is the Supreme Personality of Godhead but it is obvious and sadly clear by her continuous venomous and poisonous statements thatshe does not believe Srila Prabhupada to be the spotless and empowered representative of Sri Krsna. And this nonsense that she is not actually offending Srila Prabhupada because she is not directly criticizing is utter rubbish and word jugglery at its worst. Not only is she directly offending Srila Prabhupada–Vrajabhumi writes “He (Srila Prabhupada) was still wrong regardless of it being about non-devotees or not.”–
but by Vrajabhumi posting such nonsense by so-called devotees like “Swami Iconoclast” and the various cowardly anonymous posters–who don’t have the intestinal fortitude and credibility to state who they really are, thinking that just because the readers don’t know who they are they will be saved from offending the devotees which is more nonsense because there are other witnesses to this travesty other than the readers, namely Sri Krsna as Paramatma situated in the hearts of all the readers and Vrajabhumi herself–she is basically co-opting and advocating their unfortunate, sastrically deviant and demonic perspectives borne of the modes of material nature, ahankara and the conditioned soul.
And Govindanandini is directing the readers–some of whom are serious-minded, sincere and enthusiastic devotees of Sri Krsna and disciples or grand-disciples of Srila Prabhupada– to read karmi literature–“History of Celibacy”, by a Canadian female scholar who researched the subject extensively throughout a decade–which is borne of the material modes and written by a meat-eating conditioned soul, something that was strictly forbidden by not only Srila Prabhupada but the Six Goswamis Of Vrndavana; please carefully take note of the directions of the spiritual master, from the Nectar of Instruction, forbidding devotees, those residing in AND out of the temple, from indulging in prajalpa, gramya katha and karmi literature:
“Another impediment is prajalpa, unnecessary talking. When we mix with a few friends, we immediately begin unnecessary talking, sounding just like croaking toads. If we must talk, we should talk about the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement. Those outside of the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement are interested in reading heaps of newspapers, magazines and novels, solving crossword puzzles and doing many other nonsensical things. In this fashion people simply waste their valuable time and energy. In the Western countries old men, retired from active life, play cards, fish, watch television and debate about useless socio-political schemes. All these and other frivolous activities are included in the prajalpa category. Intelligent persons interested in Kṛṣṇa consciousness should never take part in such activities.
Jana-sańga refers to associating with persons not interested in Kṛṣṇa consciousness. One should strictly avoid such association. Śrīla Narottama dāsa Ṭhākura has therefore advised us to live only in the association of Kṛṣṇa conscious devotees (bhakta-sane vāsa). One should always engage in the service of the Lord in the association of the Lord’s devotees. Association with those engaged in a similar line of business is very conducive to advancement in that business. Consequently materialistic persons form various associations and clubs to enhance their endeavors. For example, in the business world we find such institutions as the stock exchange and chamber of commerce. Similarly, we have established the International Society for Krishna Consciousness to give people an opportunity to associate with those who have not forgotten Kṛṣṇa. This spiritual association offered by our ISKCON movement is increasing day by day. Many people from different parts of the world are joining this Society to awaken their dormant Kṛṣṇa consciousness.
Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura writes in his Anuvṛtti commentary that too much endeavor to acquire knowledge on the part of mental speculators or dry philosophers falls within the category of atyāhāra (collecting more than needed). According to Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, the endeavor of philosophical speculators to write volumes of books on dry philosophy devoid of Kṛṣṇa consciousness is entirely futile. The work of karmīs who write volumes of books on economic development also falls within the category of atyāhāra. Similarly, those who have no desire for Kṛṣṇa consciousness and who are simply interested in possessing more and more material things — either in the shape of scientific knowledge or monetary gain — are all included under the control of atyāhāra.”
Govindanandini is one of those type of so-called devotees who would do away with the regulative principle forbidding illicit sex–because in her own words it is “extreme and indeed irrational practice”–and inject–via mental speculation and various other unauthorized means–so-called feminist women- and minority-empowering ideologies into ISKCON by suggesting the elimination of the sastrically bina fide parts of varnasrama dharma and krsna consciousness that her false ego finds unsavory and unacceptable such as replacing the honorific title “mother” or ‘mataji” with “prabhu” or some other random nonsense when addressing female devotees, and co-opting various other “politically correct” atheism and impersonalism by criticizing sincere devotees for calling meat-eating non-devotees karmis, mlecchas, mudhas and rascals, which are all sastrically bona fide and authorized descriptions of the athesitic class of men.
One last item, a website called “the hing”–created by a so-called devotee named Bhakta Eric–offensively lampoons, ridicules, and makes a gross farce and travesty out of ISKCON, hare krsna devotees, disciples and grand-disciples of Srila Prabhupada, long-time seniormost sanyassis, brahmacaris, grhastas, and Srila Prabhupada and Sri Krsna Himself in the name of “satire” and so-called devotee humor and or Vaisnava comedy. In actuality, the site reeks of the envy of a disgruntled, former, so-called devotee whose sour-grapes complex is thinly veiled by lackluster and egregiously offensive attempts at “devotee humor”. It is basically a spin-off of the karmi publication and website “The Onion” which “Bhakta Eric” kindly directs the readers to via a link on the hing website. So instead of directing the attention of devotees to purifying and transcendental websites glorifying Krsna and Srila Prabhupada, “Bhakta Eric” squanders his own precious opportunity and limited time in the rare human form–and those of his readers–by engaging visitors to his site in a great disservice–the performance of Vaisnava aparadha–to the devotee community. Hare krsna.
Arjuna dasa,
disciple of HH Bhaktiswarupa Damodara Swami
Vishnupriya Dasi, this site may not prove the intelligence of anybody but it sure is a testimony to the fallibility of Srila Prabhupada. Have he stuck to facts, decades later into his campaign there would be no need for a revision of some of his very unfortunate remarks. Those of us who prefer honesty over fanaticism are not happy with the matter as you may like to accuse us; we love Srila Prabhupada and would rather be proud of all of his words than sorry for some. But the facts speak for themselves and there is no use to resort to denial. Srila Prabhupada made the mistake and we had best begin sanely dealing with it.
Vishupriyah dasi, you are a sick, sick person. You need some serious therapy. You are beyond disgusting in minimizing the violent trauma experienced by millions of women.
Finally there are devotees who are showing signs of sanity here.This world is in no way a nice place.We can witness this fact on a daily basis.Step outside and see all of the nonsense that we are fed.We are bombarded with ads encouraging us to slowly and at times to quickly kill ourselves.As devotees we have been given a clear understanding of what is real.Sadly though we see that there are many who are not convinced of the absolute nature of scripture.I personally would like to know who is the person behind this blog.Who is their Guru,and I would like to know if they are aware of the nonsense that is taking place here.Will this individual please stand up.Let us know your identity please!!!!!!!
As a former rape victim, I am sickened and offended by Vishnupriyah’s statements. She is a disgrace. A complete pig.
“This world is in no way a nice place.We can witness this fact on a daily basis.Step outside and see all of the nonsense that we are fed.”
No need to step outside Madhumangal. Just stay right there inside your bubble where you are fed nonsense such as “women like to be raped and blacks love to be enslaved”. No need to step outside…
Arjuna dasa is absolutely correct. Those who disagree with the infallible teachings of Prabhupada, no matter how reasonably their arguments are phrased or how sound their logic, are demoniac individuals. It is better to demonize those whose views differ from ours because to sit down and empathize with them is a waste of time that can be better utilized for devotional service.
My statement that celibacy, at around the age of 23, is a irrational practice is corroborated by shastra. Shastra recommends that at the onset of pos-puberty a man enters married life. The reasoning behind is a purely management one. Management of sex impulse. For most males, to adopt sannyasa in early youth is nothing short of irrational. But personally I don’t have a problem conceding that a 50%-50% chance for progress in Krsna consciousness be given to either celibacy or to sex life according to religious principles, at any age from early youth to end of life. It is a matter of free-will. And those readers who will say I am speculating on this, please check Bhaktivinod Thakur. He has said grihasta or renunciant, both are equal if engaged in Krsna Consciousness. Equal means equal last time we checked, right?
As for the reading of non devotional sources, well, if one wants statistics on a specific area and there isn’t a devotional source for such, then the non devotional source will do just fine. Scholar studies deal with facts so there is no harm in using their studies as source. And wherever there is opinion from a non devotional source, we of course take that with a lofty grain of salt.
Madhumangal says, “I personally would like to know who is the person behind this blog.Who is their Guru,and I would like to know if they are aware of the nonsense that is taking place here.Will this individual please stand up.Let us know your identity please!!!!!!!”
DON’T FALL FOR THIS. IF THEY KNOW WHO YOU ARE YOU YOU MIGHT RISK PHYSICAL HARM. IF NOT, AT LEAST HARASSMENT.
Govindanandini,I do not live in a bubble.I am a man with a wife and children.I am aware of the sickness which surrounds us on a daily basis as I am always interacting with the public.I wonder if the GBC will publish a statement regarding the offensive nature of this blog now.What we see here is that since women felt offended by one prabhus blog,they in turn have created a blog where they find fault with not only Srila Prabhupada but with our parampara.I had read Srila Bhaktisiddhantas Initiation into Spiritual Life quite some time ago and in it he states that even though the Guru is full of mercy he will not force you to accept it.I will follow the words of the Acaryas long before I will follow the words of the conditioned souls.So much identity with the body indicates that there hasn’t been much advancement made.In this world people are discriminated against every day.Regardless of race.I live in a Muslim country where Americans are dispised and say many derogatory things about them,I however have never taken offense to such rants.All of these things are merely distractions to stray us from our true goal of developing our Bhakti and the pursuit of prema.How far will all of this nonsense here take anyone???????The million dollar question.I personally beg for the mercy of my Most Beloved Gurudeva.I pray that I will always be alowed to associate with his devotees as this is truly what brings happiness and a reprieve in this world.Hare Krishna
Guna devi there is no threat of harm as that is not the ehavior of a devotee.I am simply saying lets be forthright in our dealings.So many women took offense to one male devotee who’s name was well known and he was villifiied.Now there are so called devotees who are villifying Srila Prabhupada and I as well as many others find this to be utterly offensive and if given the information I would contact her Guru as well as the GBC and make the aware of the nonsense that is taking place here.I would be mortified if my children visited this site.The link for which is being given at many other so called devotee sites.You obviously have no faith in Krishna as he states that no one can harm who I wish to save.I have never harmed my own wife what to think of another woman.I would like to know the identity because I do not believe that this person is actually a devotee.My wife is a first class woman.I have never met a better woman than you,she herself always alludes to the emotional nature of women.She is the greatest mother.She herslf has never objected in any way to the teachings of our Acaryas.There are men who are for the protection and respect of women.I am convinced that Srila Prabhupada himself was at the head of the line for this.
Now we came to absurd. What do we think? Pure devotee full of divine love, accepted by all level of vaishnavas in the world as such, is advocating slavery and rape? How absurd. Even if you have that “mistake” theory, it should be absurd for you, because such mistake is impossible even for an ordinary man. What to talk of such intention.
Why not take things as they are? Why not take the essence of guru teachings, and not project our fault finding mentality on it?
1. Srila Prabhupada made a remark, that black skinned people in general are not cultured. That is one point. Another – shudras should not be given independence, otherwise they degrade and disturb. Both these points are from shastra: Srimad Bhagavatam considers dark skinned people, and position of shudras. Has he ever said – “now, marsh on and make afroamericans into slaves? Or brake the tractors and machines, and stop social trends of Kali yuga?” By reaction it seems so, as if he said.
2. He said, that woman nature in material gunas is such, that sometimes they enjoy sex without consent. Also there was reference to shastra and practical experience.
Has he ever said – “oh, rape is good, rape should be legal”? Or that sex should be forcefull in any case? Or has anybody inquired to explain more explicitely, what he meant by rape in that commentary? Which kind of rape? With beating to death? Or maybe when there is no actual physical danger? Not to talk of forcefull sex, the rule is – no illicit sex. And also shastra says, women approaches first, not by desire of man. Then, who is advocating what? What are you becoming disgusted with? Apply your intelligence. No guru ever advocated any crime, any immorality or anything alike. They preach divine love, not these things. What you see and react to, is non-existing.
What does pure devotee have to do with these material things? Is it the essence of his teachings? No. That is just some explanations of material nature for disciples, they are not essential. Is he advocating anything here? No, he is just explaning workings of material energy, taking somewhat controversial examples of particular phenomena. Why? Because to some extent such education is also required. Can explanations of material energy be perfect to all times all cirumstance? Srila Sukadeva Gosvami in Srimad Bhagavatam says: it is not possible to perfectly discribe material energy even in a liftime as long as Lord Brahmas.
It is sad to see, how easily people take everything in one place: shlokas from shastra, commentaries, letters, conversations, from all these they take some excerpts, then mix everything. The result has nothing to do with reality and what guru actually told and intended. Then, they agressively try to find fault with that guru perception, which they made up for themselves by not considering carefully and patiently. That again has nothing to do with guru, as he is.
There is one simple trick, how not to become offensive or offended – guru always speaks according to shastra. Sometimes he may say something according to time place and listener, what is not told in shastra, for specific purpose of instruction, which ordinary jivas never will now (nobody can know mind of vaishnava, shastra says). Then, if you dont like some statements, cannot accept them, do not find them in shastra (so long, maybe later you will find), but have respect and faith in guru, then why just not consider, that those statements are just made according time place and listener, and are not so important? Because it is really so – what is not said in shastra, is not important subject matter for sadhana. What is important everything has been put into shastra.
(Editing job)
In my previous post I stated: “”For most males, to adopt sannyasa in early youth is nothing short of irrational”. This sentence needs revision. This board does not offer the feature of editing original posts, so here I am presenting the edited version of that sentence and which best reflects what I meant to convey:
“For most males, to adopt sannyasa in early youth is nothing short of unreasonable.”
Irrational would imply that any early life celibate is necessarily in delusion, which is of course not a fact. So I am reviewing that term.
It is unreasonable to impose renunciation where it does not occur naturally. So it is reasonable to expect that in general young men will be attracted to the opposite sex.
But it is also reasonable, on the premise of free will as a fact, to conclude that there is a simultaneous 50% chance of an individual, male or female, at any age, attaining spiritual perfection via celibacy, as there is the other 50% chance for that individual attaining spiritual perfection via regulated sex life if that is the said individual’s natural inclination. In other words, spiritual perfection ultimately does not depend on varna or ashram but is fueled most entirely by lobh.
Prabhupada did allow women to get initiated and serve Krishna in the temples. There is another angle one should consider. After some time, Prabhupada and ISKCON temple managers realized the power of sex appeal in women as an aid in spreading his movement. Just look at some of the pictures of old BTGs advertisements of the Sunday Love Feast. You would generally see a pretty face chanting japa or a cute young woman holding a big maha plate. Yummy?
Undeniably, within the early years of ISKCON the temples that were opened and maintained were due to a great part of the work of women devotees whose sex appeal were exploited by working in public transportation terminals and so forth soliciting large sums of money from the public for the advancement of the financial growth of Prabhupada’s movement, and later the gurus of ISCKON. The mere presence of women in temple communities attractively dressed in saris enticed many men to join, whether they want to admit or not.
There is a contradiction in the teachings of Prabhupada on this matter. On one side there are many lectures and writings extolling the virtues of submissive women, their place at home and the need to be under the control of men. On the other side I see how the same women were encouraged to go out and work at undomesticated, ‘unchaste’ and aggressive activities such as pinning flowers on men’s lapels and fleecing them of their money at airports. So, what shall be? Stay home moms or cut-throat businesswomen? When there is a need, does the power of the dollar prevail?
Vrajabhumi wrote:
[blockquote]People sometimes feel it is necessary to create some fantasy reality they have imagined in order to convince people of things beyond their experience.[/blockquote]
There’s absolutely no problem that you reject Prabhupada, in fact 99,999% of humanity is doing the same. It should be clear however that Vrajabhumi dd also rejects anything from other religions what makes women look inferior to men. Adam was with Eve while a tempting dialogue with the serpent was going on. Sadly, Adam did not say a word, he felt allured by Eve and then he sinned willfully by eating of the fruit. Make no doubt about it; although the woman was deceived, the man was induced by her. Adam passively watched everything and finally sinned willfully, eyes wide-open, without hesitation. His sin was freighted with sinful, self-interest. He had watched Eve take the fruit, and nothing happened to her. He sinned willfully, assuming there would be no consequences. Everything was upside-down. Eve followed the snake, Adam followed Eve, and no one followed God. It is analogous to a wife and the husband sitting in the family room watching the Super Bowl. All of a sudden the doorbell rings. The wife gets up to answer it while the husbands keeps on watching the Super Bowl. He can overhear his wife letting in a vacuum cleaner salesman and listening with increasing interest to his sales pitch. The husband doesn’t want to stop watching the game, so he lets the conversation continue, even to the wife signing a contract. If she were then to come into the room and say, “Here, you have to sign this, too,” it will come as no shock if the husband signs it without protest. By default, he has allowed his wife to make a decision and has chosen to go along with it.
In this biblical account, the man chooses to obey his wife rather than God. Adam sees and hears Eve in a fallen condition, spiritually dead and different, and having all the facts, he must decide to embrace her or to embrace God. With all the facts, Adam rejected his relationship with God and embraced Eve. He said no to the Creator of all his blessings, and said, “Yes,” to a created one. He turned down the divine design of Genesis and turned it over to Satan.
Now when a spiritual teacher like Prabhupada’s says, this is how maya works, but Vaishnavis are above this on the spiritual platform, Vrajabhumi dd says, no, this is an insult against women and Prabhupada made mistakes. Vrajabhumi dd, see it this way. You can surely protest like you do, don’t feel patronized by anyone, from material point of view you might be right. But be prepared that there will be many people who won’t accept what you say. Especially those who have understood how material illusion works.
Suchandra Das’s analysis is absolutely brilliant. The existence of women, rather than lack of self-control is the source of maya for men!
Madhumangalji, I am sorry but you do live in a bubble, as do so many in Iskcon, married or not, outside or inside the temples, who either believe the world out there is full of demons, or don’t quite believe so many of these things anymore but still choose to remain silent. Both types stay snugly in a house that is clearly crumbling. There is need for this discussion. And in your late waking up you miss the point: The women of this movement are not angry at the words of a silly brahmacari and his blog. We have gone through worse humiliation and assault through the years. We are frustrated, fed up, and yes angry, with so much more. Much more. We were woman who grew up in homes where parents never separated us by gender and said, “boys for achievement, girls for sex”. Even though our Christian-Judeo upbringings lacked in comparison with other aspects of Vaisnavism, in this we were ahead of the so called vedic culture that we were respected in equal footing with our brothers. In churches we did not have to stay in the back while our fathers and brothers went up front on the premise that women tempt men sexually. We grouped as families, or just as a congregation.
In the Hare Krsna movement we were introduced to a lie when we were introduced to the concept of our “dirty” sexuality. We were told that we were lustier than men, and less intelligent, and incapable just like children. Did this improve our consciousness and furthered our prospects? No. Forty years later we have a messy system where clearly biased men such as Hauri Sauri das still insist in calling us names or simply patronize us with posed support, while the world “outside” laughs at it all. And we mothers of children born in this movement are supposed to pass these lies on to their children? I don’t think so. I want to tell them the truth.
If outside is madness, outside is now in, my friend. Open your eyes. No sane person in the world is coming forward to touch this movement, not even with a ten foot pole. Whom do you think you are converting?
What is wrong with calling a spade a spade? Krsna is there, in the gleam of the blade.
My Prabhupada is the one who made a mistake but whom I love perhaps even more so for it. How? Because I feel it is a a larger feeling for me to love a father in spite his struggles, than to force him to be something which he clearly is not and then call my projection unconditional love. The point is the love, not the changing goalposts.
One life – man, another – may be woman, other – may be again man. Nothing personal. Bodies are maya, not a soul in a body.
There are many materialistic approaches. Feministic is not the only one. While we are not on a level of madhyama, all we are materialistic, the only qualification may be faith, if it is there.
So, I’d like to add non-feministic approach to material life. My country is more traditionalist. Here ussualy when exchanging with women, I hear from them, that no matter what, there is always a desire to have such relationship, where she can feel safe, weak, “behind the wall”, loved. (do not say that men do not have the same tendency, because they are also prakriti). It is very common, any sincere conversation about this subject ussualy reveals this desire. So, I also hear, when they become aquainted in some way with Eastern or Indian way of “men goes in front”, they also say, it is a bit unusual for them, but inside they feel more feminine in that way, more natural. So, maybe feminist are offendend by this, but non-feminist find something deeper and natural. When majority of women in my country is non-feminist, then, there is no problem. In average, in the world also, majority is non-feminist. So, another materialistic angle, another conclusion.
About ISKCON I do not know. May be women were opressed. Many bad things happened. But what vaishnavism has to do with struggles of Western men and women, and especially with mutual fight of men and women of USA, in ISKCON, I do not know also. These karmic “bills” that you have for each other (feminist-mysoginist) is for one lifetime only (if wont continue to other lifetimes). We are younger generation, we havent participated in this, now we see broad vaishnava movement in the world, not identifying it with ISKCON. We want to understand real vaishnava siddhanta in a deep way, and keep our faith and reverence to guru parampara according to siddhanta and realisation. I think, most of younger people do not have taste in inventing new siddhanta according to bad experience of ISKCON, or to become very radical in taking every word of guru as absolute, without trying to understand the essence.
Govindanandini dasi thanx for your personal attack on me.Let me make you aware of the fact that I am not part of Iskcon as you have assumed.I will not be a part of a society that has minimized the position of Srila Prabhupada while encouraging others to take initiation from those who are obviously not uttama bhagavats.I myself have never found it fashionable to put women down,however I have my reasons for which I elieve that this has all taken place.The main goal is to impress upon others the absolute importance of surrendering to the will of the Supreme Lord.I am in way living in a bubble as you might suggest.You imply a similiar tactic as many in that you attack a person instead of seeing the validity in what they are saying.I have a great deal of experience in this world.I am not hung up on the fact that I am a man or that you are a woman.I respect my wife and have tried to see women as someone to be respected as I was taught by my Irish mother.She would tolerate nothing less than this.This world is full of animosity and hatred,why should we as devotees feel inclined to stoke the flames of such madness.As per another point,I have not taken offense to entering Krishna Balaram Mandir in Vrindavan and having been told that the area directly in front of the deities is reserved for Srila Prabhupadas disciples.I simply was happy to see the deities from whatever vantage point I was givenI do live outside the temple and I want the very best for my daughter.I want her to be respected by all that meet her.I want her to be viewed as a wonderful little girl.To assume otherwise is a major mistake on your part.We can all complain about things,and in the end it is just another distraction to keep us from our real priority,our personal bhajan.I would rather converse about the glories of the Holy Name rather than trying to make everyone aware of discrimination that takes place daily in this wretched world.Hari Katha is so much more tasty than all of this bickering over what will never be changed.We live in the Age of Quarrel and as such we must realize that conflict is inevitable.while others may choose to find fault with Srila Prabhupada,I am simply ever grateful to have been awakened to the beauty of Lord Krishna thru his divine teachings.Radhe
vishnupriyah dasi you wrote
Please stop misrepresenting what I have said. You do this over and over. I never claimed to reject Prabhupada as a link in the Parampara. I said over and over that I consider Prabhupada to have been empowered by Krishna, to be close to Krishna, to now be in Goloka with Krishna, etc. For example I wrote this
You seem to be blinded by anger to what I am doing here. I accept Prabhupada as a pure devotee on the highest level who was made to say silly and untrue things by Krishna so that devotees would learn not to deify the guru. I have given long detailed explanations for this. Yet all you do is rant and rave because I say a guru can make mistakes, you do not take into consideration the context nor the intent of what I say. So please stop with the lies and misrepresentation of what I say. You sound like a raving lunatic, if you think that is what properly represents guru and Krishna and the parampara, well it isn’t, it only represents your lack of experience and maturity.
I see that some people do not know how to use the proper code on this blog for quoting someone. Go here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blockquote
Govindanandini, I very much appreciate your courage in speaking the truth. I also admire your wisdom and maturity in finding the perfect balance between loving and honoring Srila Prabhupada for giving us everything that is good and right and meaningful in our lives, while at the same time honestly acknowledging that he clearly made mistakes.
“I accept Prabhupada as a pure devotee on the highest level who was made to say silly and untrue things by Krishna so that devotees would learn not to deify the guru.”
But that is only a theory. And apasidhantic. That is axiomatic in Gaudiya tradition, that guru never departs from shastra, so there is no possibility for him to say something “silly”. He may use something controversial in support of shastra, but he does that knowingly. If he goes against shastra, shastra herself instructs, that such guru should be rejected. Then, how such theory is possible? Krishna makes guru to “say silly things”, and in a same blow makes him to be rejected as a guru? Because guru is the only one who never speaks silly. All other are fools or are made to be fools by maya. But guru is never a fool. Even Sri Krishna Caitanya, giving an example, said, that he is a fool before his guru.
“Such a person is an eternally liberated associate of the Lord, and his body is completely spiritualized. Although he is visible to material eyes, he is spiritually situated, and all his activities are spiritual.
By the will of Krsna, such a devotee is understood to possess a spiritual body.” [Antya-lila, 5.49-50]
“An advanced devotee, therefore, does not live within the material body but within his spiritual body, just as a dry coconut lives detached from the coconut husk, even though within the husk. The pure devotee’s body is therefore called cin-maya-sarira” (spiritualized body).
[S.B. 4.22.26, purport]
According to siddhanta, guru of highest level is spiritual, he is not in the gunas, like Krishna is not in the gunas. Sat cit ananda. So guru can not make any mistake by influence of gunas. One may speculate, that Krishna by yogamaya potency makes guru to say “silly things”, but this is against any reason. Krishna destroys guru parampara system which He Himself established? He does not keep His own promises and promises of His own devotees? He deprives as of full faith in spiritual guru?He Himself in shastra instructs to have full nishta in guru, and informs that only then one can have realisation, and He Himself makes all this into “fools race”? What kind of theory is this? What is the evidence in shastra, guru, sadhu supporting such theory? Has Krishna said it anywhere, that “sometimes I make guru look like a fool”?
“Yasmin vijnate sarvam evam vijnatam bhavati. Anyone who is a devotee of the Lord knows about the Lord to some extent, and devotional service to the Lord makes him able to know everything by the grace of the Lord. ALTHOUGH A DEVOTEE MAY APPARENTLY EXPRESS HIMSELF TO BE IGNORANT, he is full of knowledge in every intricate matter.”
(Srimad-Bhagavatam Canto 3: Chapter Seven, Text 8)
Mid you wrote:
Mid again you miss the point. There is a difference between femininity and forcibly being made to act in a role which you do not want to act in. We should understand that a guru who is teaching that girls should not be educated beyond reading and writing because they will become prostitutes who will destroy society, is going to be believed by people who see that guru as infallible and the mouthpiece of God’s absolute truth in all he says. It is the taking away of a person’s choice for their role and goals in life which is objectionable and wrong. It is easy to say being a slave isn’t so bad until someone locks your door and controls your life without hope of escape for the rest of your life, then your idea of slavery as fun may quickly disappear. If you tell a 10 year old girl that she has no choice but to be a baby machine with no education and no prospects for anything else in her life, that will crush her spirit and hopes and dreams.
In fact even though, of all of you who rant and rave about “offenses”, how many of you actually treat your daughters like that? I don’t know of any devotees who don’t want their daughters educated, nor do I know of any who keep their daughters without education waiting for a man to come and claim her as his virgin bride. Maybe there are devotees like that, but I don’t know of any. I know in India that the poorer people train their daughters like that. But when I look at the Indians involved with ISKCON or other gaudiya associations they usually are the better educated and wealthier class of people and their daughters go to school and are not trained like Prabhupada wanted. The point is that even though Prabhupada wanted girls to be uneducated and taught to see themselves as inferior, no one really follows that because we know it is wrong and harmful to a girl emotionally and spiritually to treat her like Prabhupada wants.
Yet the teaching in his books and lectures goes on and our daughters hear that, our friends hear that, the public at large hears that. Maybe that is the main reason that devotee children for the most part have little to do with ISKCON when they grow up. They see the nonsense and they see the good, but the nonsense is just too much for them to have much to do with ISKCON. So they keep the good and reject the bad. Not just children of devotees, but their parents as well. How many Prabhupada disciples are still active with ISKCON? Less then 10%, probably around 5%. It’s not that they are all “fallen”, of course probably 20% or so would like to be in ISKCON but have problems with the management. But most of Prabhupada’s disciples and the many many disciples of other gurus who have also left ISKCON simply don’t want to live in an environment where prejudice and bigotry and misogyny and sexism is seen and taught as “high thinking”.
P.S.
I complained bitterly to the GBC about the Hare Krishna Diary because I was concerned that, given its prominence in a Google search, its misogynistic mood would create a horrible impression of Srila Prabhupada and ISKCON.
Now we have this “Hare Krishna Women” blog which, in attempting to get to the root of misogyny within ISKCON by tracing its origins to Srila Prabhupada’s own statements, quotes many statements that are far worse than those made by Caitanya dasa. And in an interesting turn of events, this blog comes up much closer to the top than the other one did.
Therefore it appears that the Lord wanted these many disturbing statements to be brought out into the light of day for the whole world, including members of ISKCON, to see.
Mid:
Krishna can do as he likes, he is not bound to your conception of what is right or what he can do or why he would do it. The following is from a recent article in the Sampradaya Sun:
Another great one:
Prabhupada: So sasan ke adhikari means they should be punished. (laughs) Punished means, just like dhol, when the, I mean to say, sound is not very hard, dag-dag, if you beat it on the border, then it comes to be nice tune. Similarly, pasu, animals, if you request “My dear dog, please do not go there.” Hut! (laughter) “No, my dear dog. Hut!” This is the way.(?) Similarly, woman. If you become lenient, then she will be troublesome. So in India still, in villages, whenever there is some quarrel between husband wife, the husband beats and she is tamed. (laughs) In civilized society, “Oh, you have done this??” Immediately some criminal case. But in uncivilized society they dont care for court or civilized way of…
Room Conversation—April 12, 1969, New York
I think, the problem is that, not Krishna makes guru “say silly things”. But that we catch some phrase of guru, take it as all in all, and then make a great problem out of it. Not only that, it is then broadcast all over to uninformed public, who can only misunderstand.
Srila Prabhupada was a great scholar of shastra. But usually he talked and instructed in a very simple way and simple words. So how to reconcile – intelectual giant speaking so simply? Whas he so simple or was he speaking so simply? A food for thought.
No education for girls? I read those quotes long time ago, and saw no problem. Statement seems simple, but there so many things to consider.
Did ever Srila Prabhupada force anyone to do anything? He just expressed his essential idea. For whom? Who is the target? Devotee girls, Indian girls, American girls? To which framework of culture? Because he was expert in adjusting. How he adjusted Vaishnava culture to be spread, no one else could.
If devotee girl after gurukula would come back to parents, would he ever by force forbid her parents to educate her as they see fit? Dont think so. Was he some type of dictator or loving guru, who let disciples act by their free submision and desire? My impression is that latter.
Best system of marriage was in Bengal, according to Srila Prabhupada. Girl was given to a husband at age of 12-13. Then, if she is already a wife, what use of futher education in mathematics and so on? But Western culture is different. Did Srila Prabhupada ever forced anyone to follow him and Vedic teachings? Or in Western countries not to let parents to do as they think needed by circumstance? His idea was for strong devotee community, not for cases “in between” devotee culture and western culture somewhere in city of USA. He instructs how to make exemplary gurukula system. He presented what is most favorable for devotional cultivation, but never he forced anyone who could not accept such standart. That is vaishnava way, not by force, by love. Do as much as possible for you, according to faith. It seems to me, that in many instances devotees at that time acted as if forced to do so, because of relation with other “leader” devotees, fear of opinion of devotee group, or of fear of Srila Prabhupada, or for whatever reason. But they can blame themselves. Why sometimes Srila Prabhupada is depicted as some kind of dictator is a mystery for me. Was he fearsome? Or was he locking doors of his temples, so that anyone could not escape? Did not he care for everyone in a personal way?
In essence I agree, that girl does not need much secular education, like in our school and universities. But if I had daughter, I would help her educate herself in a way, which would be favorable by circumstance, and her tendencies also. Ideal is set by guru, but if that is not possible because of karmic circumstance or anything, then it is not possible. Always by all intelectual ability and endevour I was considering what I heard, and in ideal, that is not at all “silly”. This system of marriage and education continued in India from oldest times for ages. Srila Prabhupada explained, that, which I also heard even earlier from girls practically, about psychology of women. How she is chaste and attached to first man. Do you really think, that Indian rishis did not know what is best for men and women, and how the life should be adjusted? If they knew much more higher things, then, marriage system was also made according to known laws of nature.
But if the culture is different, there is not much chance to go back. Make best use of bad bargain. If possible, if environment is favorable, then why not educate a daugher in devotional science and let her be a wife of nice vaishnava? If possible, I would choose this in a role of a father. If not then something else. What is a problem? I do not expect that non devotees will understand inner advantages of such system. It is enough, that I understand. I would not broadcast this as a good method for materialistic people, because this is for devotees, who have faith in shastra, and whose children have a tendency for devotion, when environment is favorable enough. Nobody can be forced to do anything, and no guru taught us to use force, either mental or physical.
Mid you say you have never been to an ISKCON temple, if that is true, it shows in your lack of understanding of how ISKCON operated and operates.
Of course Prabhupada didn’t use force, but his followers do and did. Look at the history of gurukula in ISKCON. Those children were forced. What happened to them? Look what happened to ISKCON and Prabhupada’s reputation because of the gurukula disaster. Look at the very young girls who were forced into marriages to older strange men they didn’t know because their parents had faith in what Prabhupada said was the best thing for them. They have some stories to tell that are shocking. What about the way that women were used as gifts in marriage to men who were able to make lots of money? How did that turn out? All of this was due to the fact that the devotees were taught to see women as property rather then as people with equal rights under God. Women were beaten and probably still are because of things Prabhupada said.
John Lennon – Woman is the Nigger of the World
I understand the mentality of the “fundamentalist” Hare Krishna devotees, who believe that every word ever uttered by Prabhupada (regardless of how offensive or how totally wrong) is absolute truth…..because I used to be one.
But such mindless, cultish fanaticism is not unlike the irrational fanaticism of the Islamic fundamentalists or the born again Christians. It seems to have more to do with aberrant psychology on the part of the “true believers” than with any sound philosophy. These are people who, for their very identity and self-worth, NEED to believe that they are the “chosen people,” the only ones with access to the Lord.
“Govindanandini, I very much appreciate your courage in speaking the truth. I also admire your wisdom and maturity in finding the perfect balance between loving and honoring Srila Prabhupada for giving us everything that is good and right and meaningful in our lives, while at the same time honestly acknowledging that he clearly made mistakes.
Well yes, and I want to state again that in my heart I love Srila Prabhupada. He is my grandfather. I firmly believe that he saved me as he saved so many of us from a life without Krsna Consciousness. It sounds cliche but there is no other way to describe it – he is our savior. So now we need to show our gratitude by loving him even as we find that he is not the superman but a man who shared deeply his journey to Krsna with the world. I don’t want to see that world now rejecting Prabhupada because we do not know how to present the essence of his heart.
I am sorry dear Vrajabhumi for posting a link to John Lennon and his song about women.
I did not realize how serious this site is.
I am all for Women to be respected on the highest platform, and i mean that most sincerely. Your servant, SKd
Vrajabhumi you are so far off of the mark that it is ridiculous.The devotees that have left Iskcon that were initiated by Srila Prabhupada chose to leave for reasons which you obviously do not understand at all.When devotees were instructed to surrender to their God brothers as Pure devotees they refused and as such they became persona non grata.The pure devotee is self effulgent.How many devotees can marry their disciples and be removed from initiating and then be reinstated?Who invented the term retired sanyassi?How can devotees bring so much shame to Srila Prabhupadas movement in New Vrindavan and then be allowed to become GBG members after having stuck by an individual who tried his best to reinvent Krishna conciousness and when his godbrother wouldn.t accept him as a pure devotee had him killed.These are the real issues.I am a parent and I can assure you had anyone ever harmed my child they wouldn’t even have the time to consider if there would be consequences to face as I would be on them in a heart beat.This is the responsibility of every parent not the responsibility of a society.No one will love our children as we will.The teachings that you allude to are ridiculous as I never experienced them and if I had I would have first looked into the person that was speaking in such ways.Devotees are leaving and going else where because there is no Bhakti present at the moment.There is too much mis and over management.Then the things that really matter are never really addressed.Ask yourself if you would have ever sent your daughter to live in a womens ashram in Ohio that was under the direction of a woman that was previously the madam of a New York based prostitution ring.I have direct knowledge of this.Now how twisted is that.I sat in a class on Mothers day one year as a devotee read aloud all of the quotes from Srila Prabhupada glorifying the importance of women and was in utter amazement.This enforced upon me the need for respecting women.So what I am saying is that there are far greater issues that need to be addressed that you feel take a back seat,and you obviously do not see how these have led to the exodus of devotees from Iskcon.These are just a few things to consider.I have sent percent faith in the teachings of my Gurdeva as I have accepted him as my life and soul.He is the personification of Love.I wouldn’t have life any other way.
When there are living, very advanced vaishnavas on the planet, why brood over and over again over things that Prabhupada said?
There are other books and teachers. And for those of us who were initiated by Prabhupada, there are even shiksha gurus also.
Time to move on.
SriKrsnadas your comment was caught by the spam filter because of the name of the song you linked to, also you used the wrong kind of code for this blog, this blog uses html. I fixed the code. I don’t think the comment was bad so I am allowing it.
Madhumangala I have been a devotee a long time and know many Prabhupada disciples and disciples of other gurus. From my experience of their association only around 20% of Prabhupada disciples left ISKCON because of management issues, at most 30%. If we take into account the much larger number of devotees who aren’t Prabhupada’s disciples and who also left for management reasons we get quite a large number, even more so if we add in Indian congregational members who left because of management. But an even larger number is the people who ended up rejecting what Prabhupada taught, either some part of his teachings or all of it. You may think otherwise, but of all the devotees I know most did not leave for the reasons you claim are common to most. Most devotees left and don’t have much or anything to do with ISKCON because they no longer believe in everything Prabhupada taught as absolute truth. Most find his teachings and his followers as too authoritarian and too hypercritical and too judgemental of other beliefs. Many reject his various teachings about sex, gender roles, vairagya, etc. Many reject gaudiya vaisnavism altogether. Even if management was perfect they wouldn’t come back to ISKCON because they don’t see that lifestyle and belief system as worthy of their devotion anymore.You may not believe that, but all I can say is that you probably do not know a lot of ex-ISKCON devotees.
A problem with us, conditioned souls, is that we always misunderstand and misrepresent pure guru. For our own purposes we quote and misquote unlimitedly, and do not care for guru, who is our own heart. We just exploat his words in whatever way we like. For quarelling. Why they have done those recordings? For this kind of bussiness? Or they wanted to learn something from him about divine love? If so, why from him? Because that was the only thing, what he had. No impurity, no fault. Pure devotee.
We do something bad, then even blame guru or find excuse in his words – “he has said this”. Not, “I have done wrong”. But, “oh, my guru taught me to do wrong”. That is really silly. Some say: “Oh, Prabhupada said, to beat women is allright”. Then, they beat. Did he instruct like this? Never. That quote, to consider in a context, and then end, no instructions, just explanation of Tulasi das views, where he says: “So in many passages of his poetry he has not done very justice to woman” That was his opinion. http://vanisource.org/wiki/Room_Conversation_–_April_12,_1969,_New_York. Foolish always misunderstand guru. What can be done? Guru even instructs disciples: “you should not quarell amongst each other”, what to talk of one disciple beating another… That is what is silly. In the eyes of foolish, guru is advocating beating of women, rape, slavery, and many things. So some act accordingly, and some are blaming accordingly. Both are the same.
Where in vaishnavism it is taught to beat a vaishnava? To offend any living entity?
Then another comes: “oh, foolish took the words of guru and beat and everything”. This is because “guru said”. Guru is to blame. Why they dont realise anything? Guru does not care for one culture, one set of social norms. He is explaining reality of material life. These are not instructions to apply something from different culture where it is not applicable by any sane person. Good example of this is democracy. To say against democracy in Western countries may be qualified as legally offencive. Srila Prabhupada always said, that democracy is wrong system. But what he did? In management of Western temples he instructed disciples: local devotee community should be managed in democratic way, because you are attached to democratical way. That is guru. Then come foolish, and say: “oh, we should fight for Vedic dictatorship in the world”. Or, “GBC rules, no democracy”. Another foolish blame: “Oh, Prabhupada said this, so this is his fault”. Is vaishnavism meant for this kind of bussiness? Is it fault of guru parampara that we degrade ourselves to such level?
“I had no tendency to be bad”, “but guru instructed, and so I became bad”. What kind of logic is this?
“Oh, guru instructed, and so, they became criminals”. What is this? We were pure, but by coming into vaishnavism, we became impure, contaminated ourselves? And all is Krishna’s and guru’s fault. Krishna made guru say silly things, and then we acted accordingly. All is Krishna’s fault.
All Gaudiya tradition proclaims, and one may have faith in this, or not, as he likes: Krishna and guru is the only well whisher and friend. Only by great spiritual fortune one meets them. They have pure love for every soul. Krishna is good, and guru is good. Shudha sattva. They are all good, unlimitedly mercifull.
Nobody can blame Krishna or guru for his problems or misfortune.
Yes, Prabhupada did glorify the importance of women. Even though they are not worthy of receiving higher education (because such education will turn them into prostitutes) they are still important because they can function as important roles in reviving Vedic culture – a timeless system where women are to remain in the kitchen because their inferior brains cannot allow them to be given the same rights as men.
Oh god, how can you people say that Prabhupada made mistakes? Such hellish comments!
Who is your guru, Vrajabhumi dd? (Please answer this question).
Vrajabhumi didi wrote:
What can be said? There so many branches of Chaitanya tree. If we like the tree, if we have faith in it, then we can sit on any branch. Birds of same feather flock together. It is advised by shastra and guru, that one should asociate with those, whom he finds favorable, more advanced and kind to him. ISKCON collapsed? No problem for us on other branches. Is there much meaning in fighting over the control and direction of collapsed material institution (I mean, conglomerate of buildings and management system). Never I asociated with ISKCON (because gurukula disaster and spread of bad news happened before I became interested in this Gaudiya tradition), but I have faith in Srila Prabhupada and do not find any fault in his teachings. It is fully in line with all Gaudiya parampara, the only thing is that his style of preaching was very bold, and he discussed a few controversial points at lenght, which can be sometimes misunderstood in Western environment. Why he did so, who can know the mind of vaishnava? Sri Krishna and Srila Vysadeva did something alike. Sri Krishna organised great Kurukshetra war, to broadcast Bhagavat-gita, Srila Vysadeva in certain Purana wrote, that in Goloka there is is quarell and curses (which is not true according to guru parampara). This kind of controversy serves Krishna’s purpose, but to speculate how – no need. What is the use of speculation? Truth is truth, it is to be realised by proper process, guru padasraya and so on.
Yes, it is hellish to say that Srila Prabhupada made mistakes. Even though he appointed people such as Kirtanananda, Bhavananda, Ramesvara
Harikesa, Bhagavan and Jayatirtha to the GBC and even empowered them to be his ritvik acaryas, all these people later revealed themselves to be crooks. But that was not an error of judgment because perfect gurus never make mistakes. Even though Prabhupada made many statements that appear to be bigoted (women should only learn to be literate and do not deserve higher education) and racist (black-skinned people should not be given freedom as they are sudras), these are not mistakes as a perfect soul can only speak perfection. Even though Prabhupada once said that Hitler was a gentleman who had to kill the Jews since they were “financing against Germany”, these are not sweeping statements made by a person with an ignorance of history. These remarks have become true simply because Prabhupada uttered them! A perfect guru can never make mistakes.
Just to let people know, if there is a link in your post it will automatically be sent to moderation before it is posted. This is to keep this blog from being spammed. Also the spam filter is not perfect, sometimes it may send your comment into moderation if it feels a word you use implies your comment is spam, this has happened a few times.
Vrajabhumi mataji!
Thank you for taking time to give a big reply(45) to my comment.(39)
You are materially very intelligent person, it’s wrong devotees curse you, send you to hell, I respect you and have further points to be considered.
It is not easy to understand Srila Prabhupada, who speaks from another platform ( tattva-darsan, tattva-vijnana) and is not conditioned by Hinduistic bigotism in the garb of Vedic culture, althogh Prabhupada’s body appeared in that background.
He surely makes different sorts of parallels, which can be classified according to our cultural conditionings , (vedic, so-called vedic, categorically non-vedic) yet Prabhupada is transcendental to such concepts of mundane sociology .His message is far beyond, he is inviting us rather, to penetrate into transcendental world of selfless servants of God, and in this perspective he transparently thought real vedic culture, refering also to it’s apparent contardictions.
He often illustrates differnet views, makes classical bridge-preaching approaches of his school ( Canakya, Manu-samhita,..) with the sole goal of student’s transcending bodily platform, not to inforce and strenghten our bodily designations with religious bigotism, dogmatism, prejudices.
This can be accepted as such by the sincere follower of Prabhupada, who is ready to rectify his envy to guru and Krsna ( regardless of statistics , institutional conventions or views of non-devotee public) in a balanced way, without becoming feminist, or msygonist in the name of Krsna consciousness.
Therefore the vaisnava etiquette, which is higher than ”being right” helps us to see, that submissivenes to pure devotee is our constitutional spiritual attitude, which rectifies gradually our original cause of envy to guru and Krsna, which made us fall from transcendental realisation to mundane sociology.
Like the example of Karna, ( you gave) he had a choice, he could surrender to Krsna, but he thought himself better moralist, and more intelligent that God, so he ultimately chose to be overwhelmed by his traumatic consciousness, ( thinking that God and pure devotees (Pandavas, Kunti) did unjustice to him), rather than transcend it by surrendering to what was beyond his cultural undersatanding, karmic conditionings and mundane moralism.
If Brahma, Shiva admit, they are not intelligent enough to fully understand Krsna, but prefer, to simply surrender, than our big material intelligence can also be curbed by understanding our 4 mistakes, understaning how Prabhupada is pure devotee and therefore he should be approached through esoteric process of pranipat, pariprasna and seva, not by our over-intelligence.
Transcendental realisation alone ( or at least balanced submissivenes to guru) can testify our competence in the real and final understanding, and action, not the skills in materialistic methodologies, statistics, karmic experiences and all of such conventional materialistic intelectualisms.
The last comment by mahaprabhu Gaura is the best in this discussion. Well done!
Mahaprabhu Gaura and Mid:
When Mid said
I thought something was wrong because Mahaprabhu Gaura’s comment was really kind of sentimental and not well thought out or well written, plus it seemed to be written in the same style as Mid. So I checked the IP address of each, even though they are different they both come from the same city and the same ISP, probably due to his/her ISP providing dynamic IP addresses.
In other words they are one and same person. I won’t argue this point, so no use denying. So, whoever you are Mid or Mahaprabhu Gaura, you get one warning, this is it. If you continue posting under different names your comments will be deleted. Since you have a unique style it won’t be hard to find you out.
Well mid, I guess you didn’t take my words seriously. Since you posted another comment with a new name you are now banned and all your comments will be deleted, so don’t waste your time, not only can I see your IP address even if I couldn’t your style is totally unique.
Mid don’t waste your time arguing, I can see your IP provider and your city, plus your writing style is very unique, you can lie and lie and lie, it won’t work. All your comments will be deleted. If you think I will believe that many different people have the same writing style with the same poor command of english, plus have the same IP provider from the same city, and say the same things…and praise each other, you are really dumb. Again…whatever you write will be deleted. So I’m saying this for your own good so you won’t waste your time and energy, all your time and effort in your long comments or lies in trying to convince me that you are not posting under different names will be for nothing.
Vjajabhumi said, “If you think I will believe that many different people have the same writing style with the same poor command of english, plus have the same IP provider from the same city, and say the same things…and praise each other, you are really dumb.”
Mid, she OUTSMARTED you. She has proved her point. Women are as sharp, and in this case sharper then men. Case closed.
Radhapada,
Why only in this case? Women of this movement have beat the men to it in that they have figured the spiritual master may make mistakes but still be worthy of our love and reverence. Duh.. We have been doing it for decades.
All this is bogus. It is impossible for a woman to outsmart a woman. Thus declared Prabhupada: “How can I give you equal rights, because your brain is less substance.” (Morning Walk — January 9, 1977, Bombay)
Vrajabhumi dasi,I must again differ with you on your reasons for the mass exodus of devotees from the Iskcon mission.For years many were and still are being instructed to take initiation from individuals that are not qualified to be guru.Srila Prabhupada gave us a translation of the Nectar of Instruction in order to help us understand who is qualified.It is also stated in the Gita.For those who were not studying Srila Prabhupadas books being cheated was much easier.The pure devotee can plant the seed of Bhakti within our hearts,so many were not given this seed.You have been asked by myself and another individual to tell us who your guru is.You seem very reluctant to divulge this information.Although you claim to have been around devotees for many years I am becoming inclined to believe that you have never taken initiation.I have implicit faith in the teachings of My Gurudeva His Holiness Bhaktivedanta Narayan Maharaj as well as in my Siksa Guru Srila Prabhupada.When someone tells you they are something that they are not and then they fall,most devotees fall with them.Most individuals do not want to abandon the desire to be the ultimate enjoyer so given the chance to reject Krishna conciousness they do.I have never met a former devotee and I do know a great many as I had previously lived in many Iskcon temples,that said they left because they found flaws in Srila Prabhupada or his teachings.This notion on your part is ridiculous.Srila Prabhupada has given everyone that has come in contact with his teachings the opportunity to becom a better man or woman.Some have rejected this but the chance is still there.You espouse your views as a way of convincing others to think the way that you do,you are simply trying to be a guru of sorts your self.Your fault finding is completely based on the bodily conception of life.Now lets see if you are able to let your readership know who you really are and to whom you have surrender to as a disciple.Hare Krishna.
Hare Krsna,
PAMHO. AGTSSG&G!
It is disheartening to see so many aspiring vaishnavas caught up in so much quarreling over what really should be a non-issue. Srila Prabhupada blessed us with much information, but several very relevant things stand out in my mind:
(1) Anyone can just chant the maha mantra and be happy.
(2) There are no qualified brahmins in kali yuga.
(3) We should not identify with the body, as we are all eternal spirit soul and part and parcel of the Supreme Lord.
In light of these facts (which rather clearly trump the minutiae so often cited by the more bigoted among us), it seems quite clear to me that those who are trying to determine who is superior and who is inferior are the greatest of fools, working only to satisfy their material desire to lord it over the rest.
So we should not concern ourselves with the mundane details of “whose brain and body is superior”, “who is fit to lead”, etc. This way of thinking is just a trap of Maya.
If you want to discriminate against women (or blacks, or gays) just be honest and admit you are a bigot and pray to be delivered from your madness. Bigotry is not transcendental, it is Maya! Did Haridasa Thakur condemn the prostitute sent to bring his demise? Was she “punished” by vaishnava men for her actions? Indeed, she became a celebrated Vaishnavi by his mercy!
What a shame that so many men today loudly imagine themselves more qualified than Haridasa Thakur…
Swami Iconoclast, #172: Dr. W.S. Urquhart’s foolish theory that women’s brains are smaller is no less foolish than previous “scientific” theories that the earth was flat, that diseases could be cured by draining the blood from the body, and so forth. Yet Prabhupada exalted this foolish, ignorant and untrue idea as if it was absolute truth and based his teachings on it, repeatedly stating it in his allegedly “infallible” purports, in lectures and in conversations.
The question of whose brain is superior is not a mundane detail because the perfect guru Prabhupada spent a lot of time talking about women’s brains being smaller than men. It is a transcendental issue.
Anonymous 175:
It is a scientific fact that women’s brains are smaller than men’s. It is a transcendental fact that because of this difference, women are less intelligent and can never become philosophers or scientists. Because the perfect guru Prabhupada said so. All that is required for women is to become basically literate, chaste and proficient in cooking. The men will take care of the rest. That is the infallible teaching of Prabhupada.
Swami Iconoclast: Your statements in your role as “devil’s advocate” would be funny if they weren’t completely depressing in that there are still many devotees who actually believe these things. It is all very surreal.
What is surreal is that people who use their so-called logic and modernity cannot see the simple truth that women cannot be given freedom. They must be subordinated to the authority of intelligent men. That is why there is so much chaos in the world now. Because women have declared freedom and want their hopes and aspirations to be realized. They should hope and aspire to cook sumptuous prasadam in the kitchen. What is the point of trying to be philosophers or scientists when such accomplishments are, in the words of the perfect guru Prabhupada, “not possible”?
This is just not true, Prabhupada never said that Queen Kunti’s prayers are less intelligent or not philosophical. Why he wanted a separate book being published just about Queen Kunti? Because we have here a bunch of conditioned souls commenting on a lberated acarya, what comes out is conditioned understanding. A fully liberated soul might sit in any body whatever and not be conditioned by the bodily deficiency of this particular mode of nature and fully display all the transcendental qualities of a perfect servant of the Supreme Lord Sri Krsna. This is what Prabhupada says in all his books. Why people don’t read it?
Swami Iconoclast said, “The question of whose brain is superior is not a mundane detail because the perfect guru Prabhupada spent a lot of time talking about women’s brains being smaller than men. It is a transcendental issue.”
No, it is rather obviously a bodily issue. Are you jiva, or are you your brain?
Also, the time Srila Prabhupada spent discussing such things was quite minute compared to the time he spent disseminating the practice of chanting the maha mantra.
Prabhupada did say that women are inherently inferior to men because they are like children and less intelligent (as their brains are smaller than men). These are facts. I am merely repeating the infallible teaching of Prabhupada.
Even though we are conditioned souls with imperfect senses, we are still capable of recognizing that Prabhupada is perfect through our imperfect senses. This is not a contradiction because Prabhupada said that his teaching is perfect and because he is a liberated soul, we realize that his teaching is perfect.
During a morning walk conversation on July 10, 1975, Prabhupada spent some time with his disciples talking about an article written by a woman reporter in which Prabhupada’s infallible views about women’s brain size and their lesser intelligence were quoted. Prabhupada remarked: “That is fact. She is prostitute, that’s all. If you classify, then she is prostitute. (laughter) That’s all. There is no other way.”
Although the woman reporter was, ultimately, a jiva, Prabhupada skillfully ignored this and concentrated on her gender. This is not a mistake. Rather, a woman reporter who dared to criticize the perfect guru has forfeited her jiva-ness and has become a prostitute. That is fact.
Swami Iconoclast, can you please provide the quote for #183. That’s one I must have missed. Thanks.
Swami Iconoclast,
You don’t seem interested in helping the community cope with the contradicting nature of our leader’s words, but simply ridicule him at any cost.
So,
my question is this: are you even part of this or just someone who left and now, disgruntled, has developed a hatred for Prabhupada that goes beyond what he has or has not said? You sound a bit on the unhealthy side, ready to blame Prabhupada for all evil and misdeeds of the world.
We KNOW the quotes.
Slow down on the bile churning there, would you?
http://vanisource.org/wiki/Morning_Walk_–_July_10%2C_1975%2C_Chicago
During a speech by Harry S Truman during the 1948 Presidential election campaign, a supporter yelled out, “Give ‘em Hell, Harry!”. Truman’s famous reply: “I don’t give them Hell. I just tell the truth about them and they think it’s Hell.”
Madhumangal, all I can relate is that from my experience that most devotees who left ISKCON did so because they no longer believed in various things Prabhupada taught. They rejected one or more of the following teachings: all the things about women, the racism, children should be taken from their families at age 4 or 5 and raised in ISKCON gurukulas, you have to get up at 4 every morning and do the morning program and serve in ISKCON or you cannot become Krishna conscious (you may say Prabhupada didn’t say this but it is widely taught in ISKCON and in fact Prabhupada taught a lot that you cannot become Krishna conscious outside of ISKCON, for example this from the Bhagavatam “Anyone who is trying to be aloof from this Krishna Consciousness Society and yet engage in Krsna consciousness is living in a great hallucination, for this is not possible”, sometimes Prabhupada would say you can be Krishna conscious from just chanting etc, but he would often teach that one must be in ISKCON) all the things about sex being the worst thing, all the things about not associating with members of the opposite sex unless it is a relative–so far those are people who are still gaudiya vaisnavas but reject a lot of what Prabhupada taught as extremist and untrue, then there are many who reject Prabhupada as a bona fide guru in the tradition of Sri Caitanya and accept many other gurus, and then there are many who reject gaudiya vaisnavism altogether because of their experience with ISKCON.
There are many devotees who left ISKCON for the reasons you give, but that is a small percentage compared to all of the devotees who left. If they left for the reasons you believe then we would see tens of thousands of ex-ISKCON devotees serving in the Narayana Maharaja camp, the Sridhar Maharaja camp, and the other gaudiya camps, but we don’t. Only a small percentage of the total number of ex-ISKCON members, which must be at least 100,000 people over the many years of ISKCON who have joined and left, have joined other gaudiya groups. Most simply reject various teachings taught in ISKCON and in those groups.
No, govindanandini, I do not hate Prabhupada. And I am not inclined to blame him for all the evil and misdeeds of the world. He was a sincere missionary of his religion, which he sincerely believed could benefit the whole world.
However, I do blame him for leaving behind a legacy where reason became hijacked by a fundamentalism that elevates certain gurus into a sphere that is automatically protected from criticism and rational scrutiny because it is “demonic” to consider the spiritual master as an ordinary man and because “conditioned souls” are not fit to comment on a liberated acaryas.
But all the authority that we recognize in these gurus ultimately come from our own selves, doesn’t it? If you are a conditioned soul with imperfect senses, how is it possible for you to accurately recognize someone who is perfect? With what criteria can a imperfect person use to decide that the teaching of someone is perfect?
Also, the belief that the preservation and propagation of Vedic culture is suitable for the whole of humanity for all time is one of those legacies of Prabhupada’s teachings. Humanity has progressed to the point that the vast majority of educated women will no longer find it enough to just read, write, be chaste and stay in the kitchen. They have dreams and aspirations in the area of sports, science, politics, arts, philosophy, etc. Yet, Prabhupada and many of his hard-core followers were oblivious to this and insisted on women returning to an ancient era where they are to remain subservient. How can any philosophy that desires to to build a house for the whole world be so devoid of empathy for one half (figuratively speaking) of humanity?
As an outsider (yes, I was once part of the movement many years ago), I cannot help but respond to such backwardness with criticism, using irony as an expression.
I am changing the moderation rules, I had it set to put comments into moderation if they had links, this was to prevent spam, I am changing that to 3 links since many devotees are adding links.
Your “devil’s advocate” comments are thought-provoking. We welcome them. Most of us spent a great many years in that fanatical mindset and there are many still in it. It is important to take a look at that, and you are helping us to do that.
Comment #191 was for Swami Iconoclast.
Swami Iconoclast,
It seems that you are simply trolling now. Anyone can plainly see that your arguments are disingenuous at best and vaishnava aparadha at worst.
If you really feel that dredging up small details from Prabhupada’s instructions and trumpeting them out-of-context over the big instructions (i.e. chant and be happy, you are not the body, no-one is qualified in this age) then you are missing the point completely.
For me, I will not post anymore to this thread. I’ve said all I have to say, and you should also stop speaking on this matter before you do irrevocable harm to your spiritual life.
Though we disagree, I do wish you only the best.
Hare Krsna!
There was no difference in the quality of ‘bhakti’ back when Prabhupada was alive till the present that would be cause for devotees society to leave. There are other considerations:
1) Devotees in general were much younger, stronger and therefore could dance harder, work harder.
2) Devotee were more naive regarding economic realities, parenting. They believed all the material resources for living would be provided by the institution. No need to get a ‘karmi’ job.
3) There was present in ISKCON an element of mass hysteria that has long gone since the various departures of many ISKCON gurus from the institution. Within the bubble of most members there was a collective idea that ISKCON would take over most affairs within the world as predicted by Prabhupada (in 18 days, if the faith was there).
Dear Indulekha Prabhu, your comments in #174 and following are intelligent, mature, balanced and wise. Fortunately, it seems that your views are shared by most of the GBC and most of the devotees in ISKCON nowadays.
Unfortunately, not everyone in our movement is as balanced as your good self. There are many “fundamentalists” who DO live and breathe by Prabhupada’s statements that women are less intelligent, unmarried women are prostitutes, women enjoy being raped, women should be beaten like dogs and mrdangas, black people should be kept as slaves, etc.
Just because devotees like Govindanandini and yourself are able to approach these issues in a healthy way, that doesn’t mean that everyone is. On the contrary, there are many disturbed individuals in our movement, and this issue really needs to be brought to light, even if it is unpalatable.
Swami Iconoclast is right on his various points.
If you say that imperfect people cannot tell what is perfection, then how can you claim Prabhupada was perfect in all he said or did without implying that you are perfect?
Also the idea that Mahaprabhu and the previous acaryas had as their mission the rebuilding of some type of “vedic culture” was never taught before Prabhupada. Mahaprabhu, Sri Rupa, Sri Sanatana, Sri Jiva, etc spoke and wrote about developing Krishna consciousness, suddha bhakti, not about changing the world into some kind of vedic society. In ISKCON we get this idea taught that Krishna consciousness comes inherently with so many cultural aspects and taboos. That is not a fact. Indian culture or vedic culture or varnashrama-dharma was rejected by Mahaprabhu as what he was bringing.
In Caitanya Caritamrta Madhya 8 Mahaprabhu asks Ramananda Raya
“Recite a verse from the revealed scriptures concerning the ultimate goal of life.”
Ramananda replies that by acting in ones prescribed dharma then that is vishnu-bhakti, he then quotes a sloka from the Vishnu Purana which states that only by following varnasrama-dharma is Vishnu pleased. This is what follows:
Mahaprabhu rejected everything Ramananda Raya said as being “external” until Ramananda said
Basically Ramananda is saying that the path of the jnani should be given up and that people who take up bhakti and surrender to or honor hearing about the Lord, that they conquer the unconquerable Lord. This was the first thing from Ramananda which Mahaprabhu didn’t reject as external or superfluous. Mahaprabhu said eho haya — this is all right, age kaha ara — speak something more; raya kahe — Raya replied; prema-bhakti — is–sarva-sadhya-sara — the essence of all perfection.
Then Ramananda would be prodded by Mahaprabhu to go deeper and deeper into what is the highest thing, saying that what he was describing was good, but go furthur, deeper.
Mahaprabhu rejected everything until Ramananda spoke about pure bhakti. Mahaprabhu rejected varnashrama, karma yoga, renunciation of ones occupational dharma, and the path of the impersonal jnani mixed with bhakti. We are being taught that these things are external to what Mahaprabhu has come to teach. But Prabhupada made varnasrama and the renunciation of ones occupational dharma as cornerstones of his teachings. ISKCON was taught as being for the creation of some kind of version of a vedic society, also to try and change the larger society into a a perceived type of vedic society. Of course the vedic society Prabhupada envisioned was a totalitarian state headed by a theocratic dictator, who enforced his “regulative principles” on everyone, slavery, etc. Real vedic society was not like that. Real vedic society can be read about in the Mahabharata, it is not a society where there is a dictator enforcing “regulative principles” where everyone is forced to be follow Prabhupada’s program and vision for spiritual advancement. He envisioned a neo-vedic society were everyone followed his teachings only–and ISKCON society is it.
For example in the above verse by Ramananda Raya where Mahaprabhu first accepts what he says without rejection, Prabhupada’s translation of what Mahaprabhu accepts from Ramananda tells a lot about how Prabhupada sought to change the message of Mahaprabhu. Look at the word for word compared to the translation of Prabhupada:
In the verse there is nothing about the “They should completely follow the principles of devotional service and remain free from illicit sex, gambling, intoxication and animal slaughter.” Surrendering themselves fully with body, words and mind has to with attitude towards bhakti–sthane sthitah — situated in their own positions. He has translated a verse telling us that the Lord is conquered by those who devote themselves to hearing about the Lord, into the Lord is conquered by someone who follows 4 regulative principles and surrenders full time to nothing but bhakti, in other words the Lord is conquered by someone who surrenders to Prabhupada and his organization.
“”During a morning walk conversation on July 10, 1975, Prabhupada spent some time with his disciples talking about an article written by a woman reporter in which Prabhupada’s infallible views about women’s brain size and their lesser intelligence were quoted. Prabhupada remarked: “That is fact. She is prostitute, that’s all. If you classify, then she is prostitute. (laughter) That’s all. There is no other way.”
Although the woman reporter was, ultimately, a jiva, Prabhupada skillfully ignored this and concentrated on her gender. This is not a mistake. Rather, a woman reporter who dared to criticize the perfect guru has forfeited her jiva-ness and has become a prostitute. That is fact.”"
OK. I think this shows more than anything that Prabhupada had no training in logical argument and debate.
Also that he was probably not used to anyone challenging him.
In his culture people who are significantly younger than someone do not voice their opinions when their opinions are contrary to the elder.
I’m sure alot of things would have shocked Prabhupada when he came here, the vocalness of women and younger people would have been one of them.
Not knowing how to deal with that, and not being proficient in debate or not having access to alot of scientific info, he could only say “prostitute”.
How a person chooses to conduct their professional or personal life has no bearing on whether or not what they say is correct however.
The woman could have been anything,what does that have to do with the points she was making?
It simply doesn’t make any sense.
A simple course in debate and logic would have served him well.
Also, it’s disheartening to see a vaishnava disrespect a woman so.
And why is “prostitute” consider such an insult? I never got that either.
It’s interesting how Prabhupada would translate bhakti. Traditionally it refers to bhakti practice:
sravanam, kirtanam, visnu-smaranam, pada-sevanam, arcanam, vandanam, dasyam, sakhyam, and atma-nivedanam – hearing, chanting, and remembering, serving the lotus feet, worshiping (those two are about deity worship), praise or prayer, serving, making friends with, and offering one’s self to.
Prabhupada would translate bhakti as devotional service. The idea was to get people to see bhakti as something which was about serving Krishna, specifically through serving the guru because “you cannot approach Krishna until you are advanced”. But serving Krishna is only one of the aspects of bhakti. And it doesn’t necessarily mean serving the guru. Prabhupada changed how gaudiya vaisnavism was taught. In it’s original form it is about a wide range of activities, the ones mentioned above, used for the purpose to develop prema-bhakti, to develop a close relationship with Radha-Krishna. There were no 4 regulative principles that were taught as being absolutely necessary “otherwise you are animal”. There was no insistence on following the daily program Prabhupada set up as being absolutely necessary. Bhaktisiddhanta had similar programs and teachings, but it was for his ashrams, for people who lived as monks for a period of time, short or long, just like the rest of the traditional ashrams of other sects in India where they had similar rules and lifestyles. Prabhupada taught ashram standard of living as absolute necessity for all people. Traditionally the gaudiya society had few renunciates, it was almost all householders. Ashrams were places where people may stay for awhile to get intense spiritual association and where you renounced everything else for short periods. Just like today where people visit ashrams in India for short stays. They pretty much all have the same rules of no sex, no drugs or alcohol, and vegetarianism. They get up early and do various spiritual activities like chanting, kirtan, puja, pravachan, meditation, some do asanas. They aid in ashram maintainance, cooking, etc, throughout the day as well as do more spiritual activities. This has gone on for thousands of years. Bhaktisiddhanta created the first organization of gaudiya ashrams where they followed the same ashram tradition as the rest of India, except they also proselytized, as some other ashrams do as well.
Prabhupada took that ashram standard of living and taught it as absolutely necessary for everyone, full time. If you don’t follow the ashram standard of living then you are not a human, you are an animal, according to his teaching. And not only must you follow the ashram standard of living, but you have to sell yourself cent per cent to the service of the guru if you are really a serious and devoted practitioner of bhakti, you have to become literally a slave to your guru.
Bhakti was never taught in that way before. Clearly it was done in order to create a dedicated work force for his missionary plans. He wanted people to have no other things going on in their lives other then helping to proselytize, to enlarge ISKCON, to spread his teachings. In order to do that he changed the idea of what was traditionally seen as expected of a bhakta or of ashrams in the gaudiya tradition. He turned the ashram from a place where people would go for short periods of intense spiritual association and acitivity, where a handful of monks would live, mostly coming and going for short periods as well, into a complete counterculture society, which was taught as “setting the standard” of human life for all of society.
Prabhupada changed the teaching of the role of a bhakta in the gaudiya sampradaya. It went from people in society concerned with hearing and chanting about Radha-Krishna and the Bhagavatam etc, holding festivals and kirtans, with a few renunciates; changing it into a bhakta having to join a missionary force for the purpose of changing the world into a neo-vedic society, into a society where everyone is supposed to follow the traditional ashram standards of conduct.
Vedic India was never like that. Gaudiya society was never like that. But many or most gaudiya vaisnavas (outside of traditional gaudiya circles) believe that it was, and that it is their purpose, the purpose of bhakti, to bring that to the world.
indulekha dasi:
You wrote: “Anyone can plainly see that your arguments are disingenuous at best”. Merely asserting that someone’s arguments are “disingenuous” without explaining why is not a very good sign.
And your use of the “vaisnava aparadha” threat is so typical of the religious intimidation that ISKCON followers use to stifle dissent and doubt. A long time ago, I used to tremble in fear of creating aparadha merely by mentally questioning some of the the teachings of Prabhupada or other “senior devotees”. But since then, I have come to discover that there is nothing so sacred that is beyond criticism. We need to investigate everything or everyone that has been placed on a pedestal instead of kow-towing blindly to their elevated position.
Many Hare Krishnas have been conditioned to believe that Swami Prabhupada is a divinely empowered liberated soul and it is blasphemous to criticize him. But could such a belief be one that is accepted on emotional grounds (the need for a perfect guru-figure) instead of reasonable ones? No one here has been able to provide a satisfactorily answer to my question: How can a conditioned soul claim to be able to perfectly recognize perfection?
It does irrevocable harm to one’s spiritual life if one suppresses one’s critical faculties and doubts for fear of committing aparadha to a person who is supposedly insulated from criticism merely because tradition dictates it to be so.
I wish you well to, my fellow human being.
All glories to Sumati Murarji, the head of the Scindia Steamship Nagivation Company, Limited! Without her kindness in giving Prabhupada a free ticket when he needed one, he would have never made it to the west!
Vrajabhumi I am amazed at the way that you interpret the words of Srila Prabhupada.He clearly states in the CC that there are many disciples of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta preaching although maybe somewhat differently none the less they are still preaching the message of Lord Chaitanya.The Krishna Concious Movements are many and are to be recognized as such.I am thoroughly convinced that you are not initiated as you are reluctant to make everyone aware of from whom you take shelter.You in turn may not even be a woman.Srila Prabhupada himself said be amazed by who stays not by who leaves.Who really wants to give up being the Supreme enjoyer.In previous posts there has been exception taken to the fact that Srila Prabhupada used the word karmi to describe non devotees.This is in actuality proper in that he who is trying to enjoy encrues karma for this.Agreeing with Swami Iconoclast is no surprise as he is constantly tooting the same horn as yourself.The devotees that took the helm of Guru after the disappearance of His Divine Grace were polluted with the desire for recognition and power,and nothing more.I am glad that my wife and mother in law as well as my daughter do not think in the same way as you.Living overseas I can appreciate the chastity of both men and women.In the city in which we live man and woman never display affection in public at all.This is most honorable.My wife has never had a boyfriend and she was raised alone by her mother.She is a first class mother ,daughter and wife.If our daughter turns out to be like her it will truly be a blessing to us.My wife in turn has never felt oppressed as a mother and house mom.She has been given the chance to impart her values to our children.This is something seriously lacking in societies where women leave their children in the care of others while they are off earning an income.All of this talk about material advancement is ridiculous.This world is filled with vultures that will offer you credit at a young age and enslave you to the banking system.A prime example insupport of this is the newly released and promoted movie Sex in th City.One of the main characters has slept with over 40 men while the others have slept with nearly 20 apiece.Prior to the release of this film in New York an article was published that stated that the average american woman has had 8 sexual partners before her marriiage and the average New Yorker has had 16.This is the demoniac nature at work in trying to convince people that this is acceptable behavior.This is absurd.If my daughter told me that she had given herself to so many men I would be mortified.Srila Prabhupada spoke of all of the unwanted progeny in this world,this is a result of the exploitation of women.So in the eyes of some his teachings are ridiculous,when in reality they are very wise.Srila Prabhupada was a great debater and very well respected religious leader.From where you get all of your information is a complete mystery to me.I am appalled by some of the things that I read.I truly do not think that all of this is at all pleasing to Sri Krishna nor to Srimati Radharani.
The gospels of Jesus in the New Testement are not biographical. They were not written by the disciple associates of Jesus. The earliest one was written no early than about half a century after his death. The later ones were written about almost a century and a half later. The theology of the early Christianity went through many developments, addressing the needs of the Christian communities to hear particular concerns and doubts in their faith. The theology of Jesus’ second coming for instance was introduced almost a hundred years when he did not show up in the flesh, despite the anticipation of his followers.
What am I getting at? Jesus is somewhat mythological, a creation of his followers and church. Did he really exist? The Roman historian Tacitus only briefly mentions his execution. No other information exist.
Prabhupada’s ‘perfection’, ‘infallibilty’ ’savior of world’ is also mythological. We read in his biography that after his initiation as a very young teenager by the guru arranged by his father, Prabhupada was not much interested in sadhana bhakti. Are there any biographical material that is non-ISKCON on his married life? Why were not his sons interviewed for the biography? Maybe they were, but the materials were not included for whatever reason. Was his wife still alive when the biography was research? Why was that not included? What exist is mostly the gospel of his disciples.
Prabhupada’s followers certainly created a divinity about him. I think Prabhupada encouraged it too. Read the purports where he goes on and on about criticising the guru and the pure devotee, like the one quoted in the Nector of Instruction above. Who is he referring to? Himself, whether you want to see or not. He hammered it in, Founder Acarya of ISKCON, make it known.
So, what most Hare Krishnas equate with a ‘pure devotee’ is someone who, asides from having deep faith in Krishna and his name, has managerial success, charisma, owns many buildings as asramas and temples, took pot shots at people who exhibited qualities of the modern age, had throngs of submissive followers, wealthy from preaching, published many books and made predications of Krishna appearing in the womb of his movement , how the whole world will take shelter of his self sufficient farm commuities and his books (including the statements of women and blacks) will be the law books for the next ten thousand years. And it all sounds like Jesus coming again to claim all the faithful to heaven.
Madhumangal says, “This is something seriously lacking in societies where women leave their children in the care of others while they are off earning an income.All of this talk about material advancement is ridiculous.”
The negative side of stay home moms is that there is not enough income to live a comfortable life, live in a nice neighborhood away from trash and sexual predators and give a quality upbringing for your children by providing them extra-curricular activities like sports, music lessons and travel. These things costs money and living a poor life around poor uneducated people is not a very encouraging for children. They say the rich get richer. The point is not to get rich but to live in a plentiful environment for your children so that they can have opportunities to have a life without struggles. Look at most of the ‘gurukul’ kids from the academiclly worthless school systems? How many have become doctors, lawyers, scientists? Seeing their parents collect money from selling bumper stickers is not impress upon a child impetus to do something great with their lives, regardless if they take to bhakti or not. ISKCON temples are dependant on fleecing life members for money, many whom are educated engineers, doctors, and college professors.
It’s a hypocrasy of Prabhupada’s teachings, ’simple living and high thinking’ and condenming material advancement, but yet he was dependent on it because the big donations to his movement did not come from department store clerks and poor farmers. ISKCON cannot survive without money, which is why it is a material institution. It needs money from the wealthy to continue its megalomania projects like the contruction of a huge temple in a flood zone in Mayapur.
Madhumangal,
Yours, your wife’s and daughter’s experience as Indians following Indian culture is typical. You and your family may be happy with it, but please don’t take offense when I tell you that in the West such culture is seen as backwards. And especially the western Hare Krsna women, despite our gratitude for Prahbupada and all that, we see that culture not only as backwards but as abhorrent. We have come to this sentiment, yes. Why? Because we have seen that, while in the west women may be exploited for sexual purposes, in Indian culture women are exploited for sexual purposes IN THE NAME OF GOD. It doesn’t get any more disgusting than that. All this so called protection of women in a so called vedic model is nothing but grooming of females to serve as objects of use for men. The woman is kept pure ultimately for the enjoyment of a man much like in the way a pig is fattened for dinner. And that is called dharma – stri dharma. The woman has no choice in life but submit to a man for his need for sex. There is no freedom to choose, as men have, a life of independence in pursuance of spiritual perfection. The only “opportunity” is to serve a man.
And Madhumangal,
Have you seen the famous indian film, “Water”? It tells the story most Indians don’t like to tell, the story of what happens to Indian women when they are not good for sex anymore. Take a look.
You speak of unwanted progeny in the West. Surely you are aware of the millions of Indian girls killed in their mother’s wombs simply because they are not boys. What do you call these exactly, “wanted” progeny?
What many Indians and some fanatic westerners fail to address is the fact that the so called vedic model failed. If India followed it, it failed, and now the West is blamed for this failure. Best you revise your values from their very twisted roots, I think.
Vrajabhumi and Govindanandini dasi sorry to disappoint you,however I am not Indian nor is my wife or daughter.My mother and father are both Irish and my wife is TurkAzeri.This must really eat at you since you seem hell bent on making India and Srila Prabhupadas teachings look out dated.Govindanandini you mock me referencing Srila Prabhupada in regards to unwanted children by referencing India.When in fact in America you can find Planned Parenthood clinics as well as many other killing centers everywhere.You speak of living in comfort and away from predators when in fact they can be found everywhere even among the richest of the rich.Are you women married?Do you have children of your own?Do you even have a Diksa Guru?My Gurudev always speaks of the temporary nature of this world and how tricky maya can be.I believe him in everyway.While pursuing the comforts of life which you seem to covet it is easy to be drawn away from our own bhajan.I chant everyday as this is truly beneficial to me.My Gurudev has the utmost love and respect for Srila Prabhupada and I do as well.While some things may be hard to swallow it doesn’t mean that they are not true.I pray that my daughter will grow to have the same self respect that my wife does and realize that she doesn’t have to validate herself thru physical interactions with men who will not take care of her.My wife is a shining example of what a woman should be.I wonder how many so called progressive women can say the same about themselves.So this in the end has nothing to do with being Indian and out dated as neither of us are from India and it has everything to do with living with dignity.Hare Krishna
Madhumangala I didn’t imply you were Indian and it doesn’t matter to me at all. If you are happy with your situation as well as your wife and children, then that is good. One thing I find odd though is your guru Sripad Narayana Maharaja has defended Srila Prabhupada when it was brought to his attention the statements saying that women and black people are low class less intelligent sudras etc. Your guru claimed that Prabhupada would never say those things because those statements and that ideology is totally false and not supported by sastra. He blamed the editors of Prabhupada’s books for making a mistake in attributing those words to Prabhupada. I then started this blog and pointed out that Sripad Narayana Maharaja was wrong in blaming the editors of Prabhupada’s books for the statements that he disagreed with. I pointed out that the same statements can be found in numerous recorded lectures and conversations and interviews. So here you are defending what your guru claims is bogus teachings. Why is that?
Also, if you feel that women “are taken advantage of by men” whenever it comes to sex outside of procreation in marriage–then you are no more then a child when it comes to understanding women. How is it that women are 9 times lustier then men but men are always to blame when it comes to sex? Women are to blame for making men lusty, but men are not blamed for making women lusty? Women are held up as some delicate hoity toity delicate creatures that are simultaneously dangerous, wicked, pure and innocent. They are lustier then men but always being taken advantage of by men if actual sex is involved. There is nothing worse then the lure of a women for sex for men, yet there is nothing worse then a women being taken advantage of for sex by a man. Women are everything bad and everything pure. Sex is always bad except for procreation, so bad that it “defiles” and makes women “impure” and “prostitutes”. Why? Why is it that if the skin of one person touching another when giving a massage, which is greatly valued by Prabhupada and his followers as really healthy and good and wholesome, but if genitals are involved in touching then that is the worst thing in the universe? How is it dirty or impure? It’s just skin touching skin.
The sexual taboos which Prabhupada introduced and which are believed by many Indians are ridiculous. They don’t have such taboos in Goloka, which is considered to be the perfect society, so why are these ridiculous taboos believed by people who see Goloka as the perfect society? You can believe all your nonsense of all of your sexually retarded taboos if you like and pretend you are superior to everyone else because of it, but it’s a fraud.. How many devotees are actually celibate or only have sex for procreation? I bet zero or almost zero. You can lie or pretend otherwise, but anyone who is honest with themselves knows this to be the truth. Plus the idea that loss of semen for men is unhealthy and causes less intelligence is wrong. It is totally bogus. How can intelligence be caused by semen? What is semen but some chemicals? Chemicals do not cause intelligence, intelligence comes from Krishna, not from chemicals. Loss of semen doesn’t make you unhealthy either. That is a myth propagated by the tantric yoga traditions which seek bogus mystic powers and is a contamination into the bhakti tradition which is supposed to teach that health is karmic. It is your destiny to be healthy or unhealthy regardless of what you do. God controls health and intelligence, not chemicals in semen.
bhakta james you wrote
You don’t understand the basics of gaudiya philosophy. Everything is being controlled by Krishna. It was Krishna who brought Prabhupada to the west, it wasn’t Prabhupada who brought Krishna to the west. Try to understand reality.
yo mam pasyati sarvatra
sarvam ca mayi pasyati
tasyaham na pranasyami
sa ca me na pranasyati
For one who sees Me everywhere and sees everything in Me, I am never lost, nor is he ever lost to Me
update: bhakta james has asked me to delete all his comments so I am quoting a comment that no longer is viewable
Vrajabhumi it is obvious that you are controlled by your emotions and that I have clearly struck a nerve.You have never stated if you are initiated or clarified what your position is within the Krishna conciousness movements.The reference that you made to Narayana Maharaj has been doctored and you are greatly misinformed once again.You clearly have contempt for the position of guru.Guru is Krishnas direct representative.It is clear that you have no respect for the Acaryas of our great tradition.This blog has proven to be poisonous as it is aimed at breaking the faith that so many have in His Dive Grace Srila Prabhupada.The petition to repeal GBC resolution 311 is filled with many men and women who do not wish to see Srila Prabhupadas words changed.This has turned out to be like the movie a Few Good Men where Jack Nicholson tells Tom Cruise that “You Can’t Handle the Truth.”There is something honorable about a man and a woman having a sacred union.You obviously don’t feel this way as you have expressed such with great enthusiasm.Are You actually a Woman or evan a Devotee.Let me remind you .That We are Not In Goloka and as such we are controlled by the desire for sex life.You may think differently and that is fine.Srila Prabhupada was a shining jewel in this hellish world and it is obvious that the further we progress in Kali Yuga the more demonic people are becoming.No real woman could ever argue with what I have said regarding women.I have shown them to be worthy of great respect and the greatest woman is the woman that has the utmost respect for herself.Lastly you in your own words clearly stated that my wife and I are Indian!!!!!!!!What is in writing is undeniable.While you are at it,if you do have any real desire to change things look up the word Iconoclast,and see what the meaning is.This blog is empowering to no one and especially not to Women….Every woman could learn from my wife.I am firmly committed to the message of Sri Guru and Gauranga.
Madhumangala you wrote
The reference to your guru claiming Prabhupada’s words are the faults of his editors is a video recording of a lecture transcribed onto a page on your guru’s official website at:
http://www.purebhakti.com/index.php/teachers/bhakti-discourses-mainmenu-61/24-discourses-2005/465-for-proper-understanding-of-srila-prabhupadas-books.html
Why would he doctor his own website? You are talking about something else. There is one video recording of a lecture on youtube where someone claims Sripad Narayana Maharaja is blaspheming Srila Prabhupada because he says that what is written in his books about women and black people is wrong and not based upon sastra, that person just didn’t show the whole video where later in the lecture you can see Sripad Narayana Maharaja blaming the editors for what is in Prabhupada’s books. He says Prabhupada would never say what is in those books. Which is wrong because Prabhupada said the same things many times in lectures, conversations and interviews. I wrote about this in my article, did you read it before you started making comments? I guess not. These are Sripad Narayana Maharaja’s words from Sripad Narayana Maharaja’s official website from that video and others:
You are clearly less intelligent, on many issues. As well as a liar. I never said you are Indian, if you think otherwise show me where. Clearly your spiritual path has made you into a fool, or maybe before you started you were an even bigger fool and you have progressed a little bit, either way you are still a fool.
Thank you for showing your true colors.You never have addressed the question of whether you are a woman or not and whether you are an initiated devotee.You prove the pointlessness of your sight thru qouting His Divine Grace Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Maharaj.This site is 100 percent useless.As far as Gurudeva is concerned one individual had doctored a class and put it up on you tube saying That Srila Gurudev had blasphemed Srila Prabhupada.The more you speak the more you prove Srila Prabhupada a genius.There is no way that you could be a mother.You have also proven to be very adolescent in your ability to communicate.You calling me a fool is like a fly on the neck.I am glad that I was given such a nice wife.My mother who is not a devotee has shown me many wonderful things in life,and I for one am glad that she never showed me how to behave in a manner such as yours.You claim to be able to trace the writings of others but you show extreme cowardice in your inability to let others know WHO YOU REALLY ARE!!!!!!!!Anyone can spew from behind a computer,You are like The Great Oz cloaked in secrecy only later to be revealed as no one of substance.You are completely controlled by your desire for recognition as a trumpeter for the truth but once again you can’t handle it.Only cowards hide from others!!!!!!!!!!!
Madhumangala you are clearly a mad person. I’ve had enough of your nonsense. You are now banned, not because I am offended by your lies and your inability to deal with your lies, honestly, I’m just tired of dealing with such a moron. I think we can all learn from the people who are attacking me and my position, clearly Krishna is showing us all how foolish they seem and act. This isn’t an accident… there are no accidents.
All comments for the next 12 hours or so will go into moderation, I’m busy and will get back tomorrow. Jai Radhe everyone.
Madhumangal,
You sure fooled me there, you sound just like an Indian. But for Indians to think as you do, as I said, is typical. They have been brought up in that culture, so basically it can’t be helped. For a westerner like you to buy into these concepts however, it is, as I said, pure hysterical fanaticism.
Guna devi #204:
You write, “ISKCON temples are dependant on fleecing life members for money, many whom are educated engineers, doctors, and college professors.”
Many of whom are educated FEMALE engineers, doctors, and college professors,” is more like it.
Accusing saintly persons was always going on – what is new?
Btw, one post just quoting Bhagavad-gita got deleted.
suchandra, I don’t see any other comment of yours in moderation, if you are positive you posted correctly a comment, well, these blogs aren’t always perfect.
As for your point in your latest comment, what is it? If someone is saintly then that makes everything they do and say above any possibility of error or fault and everything they say or do should be accepted as perfect? Do you have a point which you can explain?
Narayana Maharaja does not read Prabhupada’s books. Why should he?
Therefore he is not versed in what his letters and conversations books say, he has only read portions of his NOI and CC and is familiar with whatever he may have written in them through his (Prabhupada’s) disciples and other western devottees who read his books.
Nobody in Narayana Maharaja’s temples read Prabhupada’s books except for devottees who are there from ISKCON.
Narayana Maharaja was simply sticking up for his friend and trying to uphold the faith of Prabhupada’s disciples.
He does not tell his own direct disciples to read Prabhupada’s books.
Two of my 3 children are his disciples and he has never told them to read Prabhupada’s books.
The Indian devottees in Narayana Maharaja’s temples never read Prabhupada’s books.
For most of Narayana’ Maharaja’s disciples this is a non issue that does not concern them.
There is a quote where Narayana Maharaja says that he has read all of Srila Prabhupada’s books cover-to-cover…
Sharanagati
And also
Both quotes are from http://www.purebhakti.com/index.php/teachers/bhakti-discourses-mainmenu-61/24-discourses-2005/465-for-proper-understanding-of-srila-prabhupadas-books.html
To sum it all up, your accusations against Prabhupada are as such that you should definitively reject Prabhupada and his books for good and look somewhere else for spiritual guidance. Don’t feel bad, so many rejected Prabhupada and found siksa somewhere else. As you see, you create two camps, those who already thought like you and those who will never change and stick to Prabhupada. So far newcomers are concerned they are of course confused about all this and wonder if they’re not better off in any kind of Christian church where their guru Jesus Christ is worshiped as above all this conditioned soul errors and nobody will phone you, you were betting on the wrong horse, it’s all over, Jesus fell in maya.
Don’t get stuck, move on, stop looking back, there’re so many spiritual leaders who will give you what you’re looking for.
suchandra your “point” has nothing to do with your previous post.
As for your belief that if you do not accept everything a guru says then you should reject everything he says, well that is up to you to decide. I see Krishna empowering Prabhupada to speak on certain aspects of gaudiya theology and I see him as an authority on gaudiya theology to some degree. I also see many aspects of Gaudiya theology which are misrepresented by his teachings. I can accept one side of him as the empowered side and the other side of him as the human side. For example I have mentioned his belief that establishing some neo-varnasrama as being important as something I reject, his views on women and their roles in society, how men should or should not relate to women I reject as well, I reject his views on black people, I reject the idea that sex is unhealthy and makes men dumb and is sinful unless it is for procreation, I reject the idea that everyone has to live like a renunciate devotee in an ashram and rise every morning by 4 am every day of his life in order to progress spiritually, I reject his idea that intelligence is based upon brain size, I reject many things he said which are external to what I consider to be essential gaudiya theology. I don’t see him as an expert on all things.
Krishna is in control of everything, that is the basic level of Krishna consciousness. Without that understanding there can be no Krishna consciousness. So whatever Prabhupada said or did or whatever I say or do or whatever anyone says or does, all of it is controlled by Krishna.
Krishna says to Uddhava in Srimad Bhagavatam 11.13.24
manasa vacasa drstya
grhyate ‘nyair apindriyaih
aham eva na matto ‘nyad
iti budhyadhvam anjasa
Within this world, whatever is perceived by the mind, speech, eyes or other senses is Me alone and nothing besides Me. All of you please understand this by a straightforward analysis of the facts.
Why does he say that? Because Krishna is controlling everything, everything exists within Krishna and everything is comprised of Krishna. So he says whatever you perceive in the mind, whatever you perceive in your speech, whatever you perceive through your eyes or other senses, it is Krishna and nothing but Krishna. But that doesn’t mean that we should accept everything as true because Krishna is controlling everything. There are people who claim that there is no God, Krishna is controlling what they say but we don’t accept what they say as true. People may say all sorts of untrue things and do all sorts of wrong things. Even though Krishna is controlling what they say and do we cannot accept what they say and do as correct. This applies to the devotee or guru as well. The devotee or guru is controlled by Krishna, is empowered by Krishna, but that doesn’t mean we have to accept everything he says and does as being true or correct just because Krishna is controlling what he does.
So how do we know what to accept and what to reject as spiritual truth since Krishna is controlling everything and everyone and causing everything to happen the way things happen? Krishna tells us in the Gita
ye yatha mam prapadyante
tams tathaiva bhajamy aham
mama vartmanuvartante
manusyah partha sarvasah
As all surrender unto Me, I reward them accordingly. Everyone follows My path in all respects, O son of Prtha.
Don’t worry about it. Krishna is in control and you will be led to your destiny. Krishna will lead you to where you belong. What you need to hear and understand according to your ability to understand and accept will be provided by Krishna through his control over his devotees or directly to you through Paramatma.
I wonder suchandra; if you accept everything Prabhupada ever said as without any possibility of error or fault? For example all the things I mention in my article.
Why should Vrajabhumi reveal her guru? You just want to know who she is so you can figure out who she is and harass her. Of course you will never admit that. I don’t blame her. She has to protect herself. I don’t even own this log and I don’t want you knowing who I am. Many of you are obviously psychologically disturbed!
To 225
With all due respect there is a valid reason for Vrajabhumi to answer the initiation/guru question. Hiding behind the computer anyone can scour Vedic websites and quote anything to support whatever position they chose and mislead people.
For me this is a valid issue and agree or not hiding oneself behind a keyboard does nothing to advance any real understanding. In my humble opinion these actions of hiding and whispering are exactly why ISKCON is but a shadow of what it should be. Too many people would rather hide and whisper than act. There are several strong female devotees who use their voices without hiding.
Tom, can you please tell me who the other “strong female devotees who use their voiced without hiding” are? Have they spoken up against what Prabhupada taught about women and minorities? Many people are vocal when disagreeing with other devotees, but to disagree with Srila Prabhupada and openly say so isn’t something any devotees have done.
I still fail to see what importance the guru issue is. She is broadcasting her opinions and it doesn’t matter if if her guru is Srila Prabhupada or anyone else. You are on a witch hunt. She isn’t obviously just “anyone .” She knows way too much. As much as you hate it, yes she is a devotee of Krishna. End of story. NEXT! Now deal with the real issues.
I’ve posted a new article called Obamarama
Not sure I can post links here or not so just google Souls Lost in Time and read some of what Bhaktin Sara is writng for a start.
As far as knowing way to much , please, as I said it takes 10 seconds to hit google and find any scripture or opinion to support any side of an opinion being stated. However there is this little thing called credibility that comes up, I for one put no value on anonymous opinions since there is no accountability nor commitment to the statements.
You need to do a little bit of self checking, accusing me of a witch hunt. I think you narrow field of vision has gotten the best of you or you just can not read. I clearly stated in my post that the issues discussed were valid. Get off your high horse please.
Tom if you don’t “put value” on my opinions that is how Krishna wants it to be. I can accept that. Your idea that you need to know my name, when it is more then likely that you w