Dear Godbrother (2) Prabhu,
Namonamaha. Jaya Srila Prabhupada!
Received your message:
I am writing to you only with this question, which unfortunately was not addressed in your reply.
What is the problem if ISKCON India does not allow ISKCON devotees in female bodies to initiate in India and ISKCON North America allows some but not many to initiate in North America?
My response:
First of all, the idea of women initiating is nonsense, not only in my personal view, but in the view of many godbrothers, and devotees in India, and elsewhere. So first, we need to be convinced that we are wrong, and the evidence points the other way. This push for women gurus is born not out of the instructions of vedic shastras and varnashram dharma, but out of the liberal, leftist/Marxist, egalitarian ethos so popular in Europe and the USA. In vedic literatures, there is no indication that woman be formal gurus. Informal – shiksha/pathapradarshaka gurus, yes: mother is the first guru! But the formal gurus, the “shrotriyam” gurus, are men – brahmanas who study the vedas in childhood in gurukulas: the home of the guru, as Lord Krishna and Balaram did, and became learned in them. As were read in Srimad Bhagavatam 10.45.33:
tayor dvija-varas tustah suddha-bhavanuvrttibhih
provaca vedan akhilan sangopanisado guruh
tayoh – Their; dvija-varah – the best of brahmanas (Sandipani); tustah – satisfied; suddha – pure; bhava – with love; anuvrttibhih – by the submissive acts; provaca – he spoke; vedan – the Vedas; akhilan – all; sa – together with; anga – the (six) corollary literatures; upanisadah – and the Upanisads; guruh – the spiritual master.
Translation
That best of brahmanas, the spiritual master Sandipani, was satisfied with Their submissive behavior, and thus he taught Them the entire Vedas, together with their six corollaries and the Upanisads.
——–
Do you find any such references to women studying vedas and being formal gurus – teachers of others, in Vedic literatures?
Sandipani Muni’s wife was very much present during Lord Krishna and Balaram’s presence at their home/ashram, and was an integral part of the decision to ask Lord Krishna to return their lost son as “guru dakshina”.
Srimad Bhagavatam 10.45.37
dvijas tayos tam mahimanam adbhutam samloksya rajann ati-manusim matim
sammantrya patnya sa maharnave mrtam balam prabhase varayam babhuva ha
dvijah – the learned brahmana; tayoh – of the two of Them; tam – that; mahimanam – greatness; adbhutam – amazing; samlaksya – observing well; rajan – O King; ati-manusim – beyond human capacity; matim – intelligence; sammantrya – after consulting; patnya – with his wife; sah – he; maha-arnave – in the great ocean; mrtam – who had died; balam – his child; prabhase – at the holy place Prabhasa; varayam babhuva ha – he chose.
Translation
O King, the learned brahmana Sandipani carefully considered the two Lords’ glorious and amazing qualities and Their superhuman intelligence. Then, after consulting with his wife, he chose as his remuneration the return of his young son, who had died in the ocean at Prabhas.
————–
Here the wife of Sandipani Muni is referred to as “his wife”! Women were always – in vedic culture – in the home, not acting as guru/teacher.
Further you wrote:
“I have cited a purport (Chaitanya Charitamrita, Madhya 23.105) in which Srila Prabhupada clearly endorses this preaching strategy. There are other purports as well.”
Would you be so kind as to answer my question friend to friend, for my edification, without broadcasting?
Thank you very much.
My response, in conclusion:
- The “problem” is that authorizing formal female diksha gurus in ISKCON will contradict what vedic shastras, varnashram dharma – created by Lord Krishna Himself – and Prabhupada taught.
- As the ISKCON India Governing Bureau adopted in it’s resolution on FDGs: Whereas, the members of the Bureau feel that the GBC resolution authorizing female diksha gurus even on a regional basis will adversely affect ISKCON India. As devotees around the world treat ISKCON as one united institution and not compartmentally, with each area having it’s own systems of initiation. So anyone who is initiated by a female guru outside of India cannot be denied as a bona fide initiated devotee within India. We wish to point out that ISKCON India has the most temples, the largest group of both fully dedicated and congregational devotees, and the most book distribution in the world. Moreover, we wish to point out that the vast majority of ISKCON’s congregation in the USA, Canada, UK, Australia, New Zealand, as well as to some extent in Western Europe, are Indians, and they naturally have a relationship with ISKCON in India.
Maybe you didn’t read this part of our resolution earlier? Because if you did, you might not have written asking this question!
- Regarding the purport to CC Madhya 23.105, well, how would it be reconciled with the following statements of Srila Prabhupada about women?
Reporter: Are men superior in your movement, though?
Prabhupada: Hm?
Reporter: Are men regarded as superior to women?
Prabhupada: Yes, naturally. Naturally, woman requires protection by the man.
In the childhood she is protected by the father, and youth time she is
protected by the husband, and old age she is protected by elderly sons. That is natural.
Female Reporter: That goes against the thinking of a lot of people in
America now. Do you know that?
Prabhupada: No… America, maybe, but this is the natural position. Women require protection.
March 5th, 1975 / Room Conversation / New York City
————
Prabhupada: And the women are declaring, “independent.” They are begging door to door to a man, “Please give me shelter. Give me a child,” and they’re independent. One American woman, was…. She was speaking that “In India the woman are treated as slave. We don’t want.” So I told her that it is better to become slave of one person than to slave of become hundreds. (laughter) The woman must become a slave. So instead of becoming slaves of so many persons, it is better to remain satisfied, a slave of one person. And our Vedic civilization says, nari-rupam pati-vratam: “The woman is beautiful when she remains as a slave to the husband.” That is the beauty, not the personal beauty. How much she has learned to remain as a slave to the husband, that is Vedic civilization… And the beauty of woman is how much she is devoted and obedient to the husband. So it is very difficult.
(Srila Prabhupada, Morning Walk, March 19, 1976, Mayapur, India)
————————–
Prabhupada: We shall teach the girls two things. One thing is how to become chaste and faithful to their husband and how to cook nicely… These two qualifications required. She must learn how to prepare first-class foodstuff, and she must learn how to become chaste and faithful to the husband. Only these two qualifications required. Then her life is successful. Educate the girls how to become faithful, chaste wife and how to cook nicely. Let them learn varieties of cooking. Is it very difficult? And by fifteenth, sixteenth year they should be married. And if they are qualified, it will be not difficult to find out a nice husband. Here the boys, they do not want to marry because they are not very much inclined to marry unchaste wife. They know it, that “I shall marry a girl, she is unchaste.” What do you think?
(Srila Prabhupada, on a Morning Walk, July 10, 1975, Chicago, USA)
———————————–
In Vedic society, no girl was allowed to remain independent and unmarried. Independence for women means they become like prostitutes, struggling to capture some man who will take care of her. In this way the so called independent woman has to work very hard to make herself attractive by artificially wearing cosmetics — mini skirts and so many other things. Formerly the girl would be married to a suitable boy at a very early age, say six years old. But although a girl was married early she did not stay with her husband immediately but was gradually trained in so many ways how to cook, clean and serve her husband in so many ways — up until the time of her puberty. So all the time there was no anxiety because a girl would know — I have got a husband, and the boy would know I have got this girl as my wife. Therefore when the boy and girl would come of age there was no chance of illicit sex-life. And the psychology is the first boy that a girl accepts in marriage, that girl will completely give her heart to, and this attachment on the girls side for her husband becomes more and more strong, thus if a girls gets a good husband — one who has accepted a bona fide spiritual master and is firmly fixed up in his service, automatically the wife of such a good husband inherits all the benefits of his spiritual advancement. So you are fortunate. Go on in this present attitude, serve your husband always and in this way your life will be perfect, and together husband and wife go back home — Back to Godhead.
—————————————–
From Srila Prabhupada’s letter to Naiskarmi — Bhaktivedanta Manor 28 July, 1973
————————–
You see, my friend, that there is “preaching strategy”, and then, our own ideals as taught in vedic literatures, and culture, about the role of women in society. As disciples of Srila Prabhupada, and students of vedic culture, Prabhupada expected us to adopt these principles. The egalitarian view – that the GBC, consisting mostly of Western devotees have adopted – is that “women should have equal opportunity for service”, and that is just not the Vedic view!
So I say again, that this resolution of the GBC is not based on Prabhupada’s teachings or Vedic culture and religion. This resolution contradicts what is taught in Bhagavad-gita 16.23/24
Bg. 16.23
yah sastra-vidhim utsrjya vartate kama-karatah
na sa siddhim avapnoti na sukham na param gatim
yah – anyone who; sastra-vidhim – the regulations of the scriptures; utsrjya – giving up; vartate – remains; kama-karatah – acting whimsically in lust; na – never; sah – he; siddhim – perfection; avapnoti – achieves; na – never; sukham – happiness; na – never; param – the supreme; gatim – perfectional stage.
Translation
He who discards scriptural injunctions and acts according to his own whims attains neither perfection, nor happiness, nor the supreme destination.
Show us the “scriptual injunction(s)” calling for/authorizing female diksha gurus. Women are already shiksha (“non-different from diksha”) and patha pradarshaka gurus. We find no scriptural injunction/evidence that women should be diksha gurus – otherwise, we would not be opposing this at all!
We find that this – the GBC resolution instituting female diksha gurus – is just affirmative action – only. Not that which is taught in Vedic shastras.
Thanks for your understanding of the above logic and reason. I hope you’ll have a change of mind!