On Female Diksa Guru – HH Sivarama Swami Maharaj

View Comments

• 1. Swami Tripurari basically says that Srila Prabhupada ignored Varnashrama roles; that's not true and we have the Vanisource website to prove it. Srila Prabhupada said that women cannot take sannyasa for example or that it is "artificial" for a woman to travel to different countries for preaching like a guru (reference has been shared on a separate comment here). Then Swami Tripurari calls Maharaj a sexist. Then he says "It would be interesting to play out his criteria in relation to black men. After all, Prabhupada did not name any black men as gurus." but Maharaj already addressed this point at the 32:07 minute mark in the video and so on.

  2. Gaura Das starts off by making a decent point that in general, women gurus are not a taboo in modern day India. However, if I'm not mistaken, Sri Vaishnavas are popular in South India and they can hurt ISKCON's preaching mission in the South by spreading negative propaganda. Another point is that when ISKCON was struggling to get accepted in India back in the day, the Sri Vaishnavas helped us get recognized and we have a moral obligation towards them to at least take their feelings into consideration. We can't just stab them in the back now that we have become powerful and don't need them. Gaura das ended by saying that "What ISKCON sanyassi would demand that all unmarried, beautiful female Vaishnavis should be initiated by himself instead of a female initiating guru?" and that was just an extremely extremely rude and offensive statement to make. Maharaj isn't *demanding* any "beautiful" and "unmarried" woman to take initiation from him. False accusation and I was quite disappointed to read such rhetoric. Women are free to take initiation from pro-fdg male gurus if they so wish to, for example. It is unfortunate that supporters of this resolution treat those who don't with so much disrespect just because they may have a different point of view.

  • Dear Miss or Mr "ISKCON108", whoever you are. You have taken my statement out of context. I was not accusing Maharaja of demanding anything. My point was that it makes sense to me for a grhastha guru to take responsibility for assisting aspiring Vaisnavis. I have seen too many of some of the most influential and powerful leaders in ISKCON become afflicted and I was trying to express some mercy towards them by suggesting that others taking up some of this responsibility. I apologise for sharing my views.

• In the conversation below, Śrīla Prabhupāda says that it is "artificial" for a woman to travel to different countries for preaching like a guru.

  ===
  Morning Walk - May 27, 1974, Rome

  Yogeśvara: So here's a problem: The women today want the same rights as men. How can they be satisfied?

  Prabhupāda: Everything will be satisfied. Just like our women, Kṛṣṇa conscious, they are working. They don't want equal rights with the men. It is due to Kṛṣṇa consciousness. They are cleansing the temple, they are cooking very nicely. They are satisfied. They never said that "I have to go to Japan for preaching like Prabhupāda." They never say. This is artificial. So Kṛṣṇa consciousness means work in his constitutional position. The women, men, when they remain in their constitutional position, there will be no artificial . . . (indistinct) . . . (loud traffic noises)

• He is wrong .Throughout orthodox Gaudya Vaisnava history there has been female diksha Gurus.There is no shastric injunction that female devotees cannot give diksha.

  Prof. O’Connell: Is it possible, Swamiji, for a woman to be a guru in the line of disciplic succession?
  Prabhupada: Yes. Jahnava-devi was Nityananda’s wife. She became. If she is able to go to the highest perfection of life, why it is not possible to become guru? But, not so many. Actually one who has attained the perfection, she can become guru. But man or woman, unless one has attained the perfection…. Yei krishna-tattva-vetta sei guru haya. The qualification of guru is that he must be fully cognizant of the science of Krishna. Then he or she can become guru. Yei krishna-tattva-vetta, sei guru haya. In our material world is it any prohibition that woman cannot become professor? If she is qualified, she can become professor. What is the wrong there? She must be qualified. That is the position. So similarly, if the woman understands Krishna consciousness perfectly, she can become guru.” (Conversation 6/18/76)

  Here Prabhupad complete contradicts S.R.Svamis view and opinion on this issue.

  Furthermore in another conversation, Prabhupada stresses the same point:

  “If a woman is perfect in Krishna consciousness … Just like Jahnava devi, Lord Nityananda’s wife, she was acarya. She was acarya. She was controlling the whole Vaisnava community…. It is not that woman cannot be acarya.” (Conversation 6/29/72)

  • FDG is the hallmark of the apasampradayas of Gaudiya Vaisnavism. If they have DGS then it is 99% certain they are bogus.

  • Refer to the 2:36min. mark in the video. Maharaj does say that Jahnava devi became a diksa guru. The argument he is making is something else. You'd know if you watched the video.

• Swami Tripurari makes some interesting points about this video:

  The Swami has decided which evidence he will accept, which conveniently appears to supports his thesis. I do not think his reasoning as to which evidence to accept and which to ignore is reasonable. Nor is all of the evidence he cites accurate.
  And he reaches a non-spiritual conclusion. For example, based on his conclusion, if a woman has attained asakti—the highest stage within sadhana bhakti-and a man has only advanced to a lower stage, the man is more spiritually qualified to initiate. Is a woman's nistha, ruci, asakti, etc less that the nistha, ruci, asakti, etc. of a man? And if he is saying that only women who have attained prema are qualified, is a woman's bhava less than a man's nistha?

  The "problem" is that some—like the swami in the video—conflate varnasrma dharma considerations with Gaudiya Vaisnava's prema dharma standards. In a relative varnasrama social construct women have a certain place/role, whereas within Gaudiya Vaisnavism, which transcends varnasrama, that place/role is transcended. What she can't do in varnasrama, she can do in Gaudiya Vaisnava's prema dharma. Similarly, as a western born person outside of varnasrama, there are things that I cannot do within varnasrama that I can do in Gaudiya Vaisnavism. Arcana is a good example. By varnasrama standards I cannot worship the deity, but by GV's standards I can.
  Of course the problem is also sexism and the extent to which this Swami does not seem to understand its implications. It would be interesting to play out his criteria in relation to black men. After all, Prabhupada did not name any black men as gurus. Where is the earlier precedent? And so on.

  ===================================================================================================================================

  Comments from me, Gaura das: I have read the concern of those who are against female diksa gurus that people in India will lose respect for us if we start having Vaishnavi diksa gurus.

  The following is not an endorsement of Amma, since her teachings are against Gaudiya Vaisnavism. Srila Prabhupada taught us that a true saint is one who is the most addicted to glorifying Lord Krishna as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and that we are all His servants, but consider this...

  Although she is unfortunately an advocate of advaita mayavadi impersonal philosophy, it is interesting to note that Mata Amritanandamayi or "Amma" , as she is popularly known, has 37 million followers that she has hugged, giving her the name of "The Hugging Saint". .

  Kerala's 'hugging Amma', Mata Amritanandamayi, maybe the richest "godwoman" in India. Even by modest estimates, the Amritanandamayi Trust, which she presides over, is said to have assets worth over Rs 1,000 crore. Today, her ashram at her native Vallikavu, a small island off Kollam, is a posh five-storey building.

  Are these examples of how much people hate female gurus, or even women who pretend to be Krishna's representatives?

  Is all of this popularity she has received an example how the masses of India and the world find it completely unacceptable for a woman to take a leading role?

  What sannyasi guru would not be grateful to have a female Vaishnavi guru take charge of a lot of beautiful young unmarried disciples?

  What ISKCON sanyassi would demand that all unmarried, beautiful female Vaishnavis should be initiated by himself instead of a female initiating guru?

  • Can you please provide the source of this comment from Swami Tripurari? Thanks!!

    • Sandro C. The discussion is going on in Srila Prabhupada Tributes, a FB group I created over 10 years ago. Tripurari Swami is commenting with others. Here is the link. You have to be vetted first to join:

      https://www.facebook.com/groups/SPTributes/permalink/3277145455742001/?comment_id=3279708668819013&reply_comment_id=3281942671928946

      • Thanks Gauradas Prabhu!!

• Isn't the push by ISKCON for allowing FDG actually seeing the body and not the soul? The Vedic literature states there are differences between male and female bodies. Haven't we all been female or male thousands of times? Why change thousands of years of practice and traditions to match the western idea of male and female equality. I'm a novice so please excuse my opinion if you think I'm wrong.

  • You may not be the body, but you still have one. Just because we see the tiger as being soul and not the body, we don't embrace a tiger.

• It's unfortunate that such an older devotee makes so many unwarranted assumptions. I was expecting clearer thinking from him. I am disappointed. What he suggests seems reasonable but is based on wrong axioms.

  Let me say what I liked about the points he brought up. (Nothing about the actual issue of Vaisnavi Diksha Guru)

  I liked the discussion he has about the comparative level of pramana (proof) between the letters, conversations and books, which is an important discussion and I do agree the leaders of ISKCON need to lay down some very clear doctrine of Ex Cathedra for ISKCON. Most devotees believe that everything written and spoken by Srila Prabhupada is Ex Cathedra but he doubts this. I agree. Though I doubt many agree with either him or myself on that issue.

  Unfortunately I feel that the presentation rather than adding to solving the problem which is the main topic i.e. Vaisnavi Diksha Gurus, in fact opens up a lot of other problems and specifically adds strength to the arguments of those who espouse the Rtvik-vada philosophy.

  I also think that the leaders of ISKCON should lay down an explicit system of epistemology which explains the clear levels of pramanas or proofs that are acceptable by Vaisnavas. What sastras are more important and what are less important for Vaisnavas, what doctrinal and social issues are also more and less important to Vaisnavas.

  Overall I enjoyed this presentation but came to a completely different conclusion than the presenter.

  • GK a few questions: Do you chant 16 rounds a day? Do you wear Gaudiya Vaisnava tilak exclusively? Do you minimize the position of Srila Prabhupada, that "he is just one among many gurus out there?" Are you dominated by your wife?

  • G Keshava Das, you say that you disagree with Maharaj but don't even bother to explain why. Perhaps it's because deep down you know that Maharaj has a point.

    • GK is bogus, and has been for decades.

  • G Keshava Das. what is the completely different conclusion ?

• Bravo, long life to you Swami Maharaj!