We all know that in science any experiment we do, we take a set of assumptions based on reasonable indications. Like while plotting Flow-rate Vs Head graph of a pump at a given constant angular speed, we accept that will stay constant.
When I was new in “bhakti” path, I used to read Srila Prabhupada’s book–“Life Comes from Life”. I was from science field and specifically I was more in researching various things and trying to understand scientists in depth. So I was very much in synchronization with the way scientists think. I did change my whole direction, by reading the books of Srila Prabhupada, based on a convincing fact that ascending process is faulty and guarantees failure to know the truth and that he was proposing a process that guarantees realizing the truth.
I got quite convinced of the fact that “sastra’s are the way and Krsna is the SUPREME. But I was not very much convinced of some of the arguments that Srila Prabhupada keeps against modern scientists to prove the existence of soul–for instance “because it is given in ‘sastra’s that’s why it is proved” and then he would go on saying that from centuries this process of evidence is followed (quoting from the Vedas) in Vedic India. I used to think “may be because Srila Prabhupada is not a scientist neither does he have much experience in science so he is not properly able to explain to these scientists.[...]
In the following exchange between Krishna Kirti Prabhu and Kaunteya Prabhu that took place on the GBC conference, we see that the Feminist party in ISKCON represented in this case by Kaunteya has to go to the enemies of our Sampradaya to gain support for their objective of establishing female diksha gurus.
The object of discussion is a book, Did Srila Prabhupada Want Women Diksa-gurus? written by Kaunteya dasa. Urmila devi dasi comments, “What an incredible book. I believe this answers just about everything and considers every angle about women being gurus.”[...]
Book writen by Gokula Candra das and printed by Bhakti Vikasa Trust. A book is based on the teachings of Srila Prabhupada and establishes the supremacy of Lord Krsna over the 33 crores of demigods. 160 pages with 8th color photos, hundreds of slokas quoted, and elaborate question-answers at the end of each chapter. Useful for preaching in India, or to Indians.
In 1982 the Chinese economy was less than the Italian but if predicted rates of growth continue it is slated to overtake the US and be the world’s #1 economy by 2018. This rapid transformation was all done without any women in leadership positions! The following BBC article is a feminist rant complaining about this fact and painting the male domination in as bad a light as possible. But in reality it underscores the fact that there are no women in charge, and despite the fact that at times the men behave badly (the biased article focuses only on the short comings of the men not their accomplishments) still they have managed to perform an economic miracle. Of course in the West where women are increasingly getting into positions of power they also behave badly falsifying one feminist myth after another. The fact that these Chinese men were able to put into practice policies to bootstrap the Chinese system without female leadership again falsifies the feminist myth that it is necessary to have women in leadership positions so that we can “profit” from their perspective.
We also note that in Vedic civilization women were also not given any positions of power or authority as Srila Prabhupada often quoted from Manu that under no circumstance should a woman be independent (see SB 10.4.5 purport).[...]
“Calling women Prabhu” Transcribed lecture of H.H. Sivarama Maharaja
This morning I am going to touch on a subject that I was asked about recently by one devotee, that subject is the addressing ladies by the title Prabhu. Devotee asked me that why is this going on in some parts of ISKCON. And then I’d to answer that I really didn’t know that why has this practice been introduced in ISKCON because it is some kind of new introduction. It didn’t exist in Prabhupada’s times and didn’t exist after Prabhupada’s times. Best of my knowledge is coming from last year or two and when asked what I thought of it, I told them I did not believe it was the right thing, was the wrong thing, which does not really have any other reference other than Srila Prabhupada on occasion calling some of his disciples “Prabhu” and that may be the case but it wasn’t what I experienced when I began associating with devotees in 1970. But that I was told that all women should be considered one’s own mothers and when I called my own wife “Mother” I was corrected, no no not your own wife, all other women. Since then I have read in Srila Prabhupada’s books, everywhere, Srila Prabhupada’s conversations, lectures, Srila Prabhupada constantly refers to this ideal of women being addressed as “Mothers”, what has been going on in last three decades or four decades in our Krishna Consciousness movement. For me it is like pulling a rabbit out of the hat, all of a sudden lets show respect to ladies and we’ll show them respect by calling them Prabhu. I don’t think this is what Prabhupada wants us to do that, he wants us to practice and follow Vaishnava tradition which means that the address co-relates the gender. You call a man ‘Mr. Smith’ and wife you call ‘Mrs. Smith’, you don’t call man’s wife Mr. Smith also just to show some respect. Respect is there and it is inherent in the title that is being given. And, mother is no lesser than a title than Prabhu, but it is correct, it is gender correct. The structure of KC Movement is ideally supposed to be about Vaishnavism and Prabhupada continually quotes this “matrivat paradaresu” from Chanakya Pandit, he calls it sastra. He says everyone else “paradaresu”, everyone else except your wife, “matrivat” is you call them your Mother, you deal with them as your “Mother”. That is meant to be our social interaction. Someone may say well in realms of pure Vaishanavism, transcendental Krishna Consciousness then the designations of body don’t matter. That I don’t believe that, for one and second we are not meant to be acting as if on transcendental platform even if we are, we are meant to be acting as conditioned souls within a social framework, a Varnashrama social framework and adopting those types of designations and appellations. I don’t believe that transcendentalists behave like that because the references which tradition seems to point to for instance when we read about Jahanava Devi, there is never anywhere, there is lot to be read about her in “Bhakti ratnakar” and other Vaishnava literature. She is always called Jahanava Ma or she is called Sri Isvari or she is called Acharaya Rani. These are appellations which are gender correct and they do not cross the grain of cultural norms. And from what we read about her even though she was the acharya, even though no doubt she was the transcendentalist but she did not mix with men, she did not eat with the men, she ate separate. She cooked for them, she served but she did not eat with them. We address Srimati Radharani, we don’t say Sriman Radharani, Srimat Radharani, we say Srimati. And, we say Radharani, we don’t say Radharana, Radharaj, we say Radharani.[...]
by Adbhuta Hari Dasa[...]
The Krishna Consciousness movement is meant for overhauling the whole situation. We are creating men of character, and we are training our disciples to become lovers of God, or Krishna. From the very beginning, they are trained to refrain from the following four principles of degradation: 1) sex life outside of marriage, 2) meat eating, or the eating of any animal food, 3) all forms of intoxication, and 4) gambling and idle sports. Our teachings are based on the authorized movement of Lord Chaitanya: on the principles of The Bhagavad Gita, as the beginning, and Srimad Bhagwatam as the graduation.