A Response to the Racial Parallel in the Female Diksha Guru Debate

What follows below is a commentary from His Holiness Bhakti Raghava Swami on his recent article ISKCON on a Mission Drift. 

[From Bhakti Rāghava Mahārāja]

The main point of my article centered on leadership appointments and leadership qualifications within our ISKCON society as clearly articulated and defined in our Vedic culture.

During Śrīla Prabhupāda’s physical presence with us, not only did he not appoint women to leadership positions like Temple Presidents, BBT Trustees, Property Trustees, Regional Secretaries, GBCs, and at the end Ṛtviks whom he expected to become regular Gurus after his physical departure, but he also quoted from śāstra against such leadership appointments and reiterated again and again the subordinate and dependent role and position of women within society. Forget about black, white, pink or yellow, India, America or the North Pole.

In the famous March 14th 1974, Morning Walk Conversation in Vṛndāvana, when asked if women were also to study at the Varṇāśrama College, Śrīla Prabhupāda replied that it was for men. Why?

Satsvarūpa: Śrīla Prabhupāda, is this school for women also, or just for men?

Prabhupāda: For men. Women should automatically learn how to cook, how to cleanse the home.

Satsvarūpa: So they don’t attend varṇāśrama college.

Prabhupāda: No, no. Varṇāśrama college especially meant for the brāhmaṇa, kṣatriya, and vaiśya. Those who are not fit for education, they are śūdras. That’s all. Or those who are reluctant to take education — śūdra means. That’s all. They should assist the higher class.

(Varṇāśrama Walk, March 14, 1974, Vṛndāvana)

When speaking about Sannyāsīs, he pointed out how such a leadership position was not for women and of course he never gave Sannyāsa to any women.

Because we have neglected to implement the crucial instruction given by Śrīla Prabhupāda in the Varṇāśrama Walks of 1974 to establish Varṇāśrama Colleges, we have yet to understand basic concepts and principles of Varṇāśrama culture, beginning with our near total ignorance of the four basic Vedic sciences called Catur Vidyā that are meant to give shape to the four faculties within a Varṇāśrama College and those receiving such training and education would naturally and automatically know how to re-establish and re-build a Vedic society.

Those four sciences are:

1) Ānvīkṣikī, the Science of Philosophy (for the dvijas),

2) Trayi, the Science of Education (for brāhmaṇas),

3) Daṇḍa Nīti or Rāja Nīti, the science of Politics (for Kṣatriyas), and

4) Vārta, the Science of Economics (for Vaiśyas).

In Vedic culture, the natural leaders, specifically the brāhmaṇas and kṣatriyas, only they are meant to take up formal, academic education that requires years of intense training and study. It’s not for women.

There are basically two classes of people that make up any society, the natural leaders and the natural followers.

The natural leaders in society are meant to be the qualified and trained brāhmaṇas, kṣatriyas, and vaiśyas because they can give guidance (brāhmaṇas) protection (kṣatriyas), and food (vaiśyas) to their dependents.

The natural followers or assistants in society are meant to be those who don’t receive such leadership training and education, namely the śūdras and women. They receive another type of education, that is non-academic. By nature they are meant to be dependent and to follow.

It doesn’t mean that they are unqualified, rather they receive training according to their natures and inclinations and become most qualified in their respective fields of service.

In the above scenario, both the natural leaders and the natural followers are highly qualified, especially when they become devotees.

The “Vaiṣṇavī” argument is weak.

Prabhupāda: Vaiṣṇava is not so easy. The varṇāśrama-dharma should be established to become a Vaiṣṇava. It is not so easy to become Vaiṣṇava.

(Room Conversation, 14 February 1977)

Regarding Jita Girishji and his comment that Śrīla Prabhupāda instructed (actually Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu Himself instructed the same) that all disciples or devotees become gurus, yes, that is true but that needs to be properly understood as “śikṣā gurus”. It’s really very, very simple to understand.