According to religious principles, a female guru must be chaste assistant/helpmate to her husband. She is there-by called dharma-patni. If her husband is a diksa-guru brahmana, she becomes a brahmani/guru-patni/dharma-patni. Therefore, the term FDG for Female Diksa Guru is more aptly named Female Dharma-patni Guru for there is no authorized system in a bonafide Gaudiya Vaisnava sampradaya for a Female to supercede her husband as Acarya.

This paper examines the philosophical correctness of the Sastra Advisory Council’s FDG (“Female Diksa Gurus”) GBC Presentation and Conclusion, which attempts to reconcile selected sastric contraindications by considering them as external, spiritually irrelevant, “social concerns”.

Hari-bhakti-vilasa, Manu, Narada Muni and Srila Prabhupada define chastity as an exclusively female qualification which establishes women are differently qualified than men to accept initiation/diksa and give instruction/siksa. It has been asked whether/why women have to be “more qualified” than a man to become diksa guru but this question is based on a false premise of equality. One could similarly ask whether women have to be more qualified than a man to take sannyasa. Both questions deny the principle of female dependence and subservience.

Varnasrama Differences were followed, not neglected, by Jahnava Devi who is a recent example of a female acarya. According to ISKCON Law, a disciple who is not faithful to the teachings of our Acaryas (including chastity for a female disciple) is breaking a vow and clearly not qualified to be guru: