Never called women mataji

[Guest guest]

Thank you for the point that these things are significant if we think in

terms of establishing culture. What I wonder about is why devotees take such

things seriously in the sense that everyone has to do something in a certain

way all the time or else is doomed when cultural dealings are almost always

more fluid, individual, and based on circumstance, founded though they are

on general principles of etiquette.

 

Personally, I'm not concerned with what someone calls me. I only become

concerned if someone *insists* that I should or must be called this or that

or must call myself this or that in all cirucumstances to everyone, no

matter in what culture I am operating or what relationship I have to the

person.

 

Your servant, Urmila devi dasi

 

 

-

"Sridhar Swami" <Sridhar.Swami (AT) pamho (DOT) net>

"Bhakti Vikasa Swami" <Bhakti.Vikasa.Swami (AT) pamho (DOT) net>; "Urmila (dd)

ACBSP (ISKCON School NC - USA)" <Urmila.ACBSP (AT) pamho (DOT) net>; "Braja Sevaki"

<Braja.Sevaki (AT) pamho (DOT) net>

Cc: "India (Continental Committee) Open (Forum)" <India.Open (AT) pamho (DOT) net>;

"Aniruddha" <iskcon (AT) bigpond (DOT) net.au>

Sunday, November 16, 2003 10:01 AM

Re: Never called women mataji

 

 

>

> > As the saying goes, "call me anything you like, but not late for

> > dinner..."

>

> Actually I would like to be called late for dinner as I can't eat anything

> worth tasting (I mean honoring). I do not wish my hellish condition on

even

> my worst enemy. That would of course be someone who flatters me.

>

> The only thing is when addressing the ladies in class it is somewhat

> ludicrous to call them all mothers as a group.

>

> Also I feel funny hearing women (even single women) say "High, I'm mother

> so..and..so.

>

> I regularly address women as prabhu. I never thought to call them prabhvi

> although I know the term. I must say I do address single married women,

> without really discriminating whether they have children or not, "mataji".

>

> Why should anyone care to discuss these insignificant things ? I agree we

> are so careless in almost every finer aspect of vedic culture so why not

> this. My favourite is the way we murder sanskrit. Especially Prabhupada's

> pranam mantra. Then so many other of our regular prayers. I do think the

end

> would come when we stop trying to help people chant the maha mantra

> properly.

>

>

[Guest guest]

Dear Sridhar Maharaja,

 

Please accept my obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada!

 

Well, in this case Maharaja, at least, I agree with you 100%. Surely,

because we are individuals, I will/do disagree with you about something, but

as of yet I do not know what that something is. :-)

 

The principle of addressing others with respect and according to culture

should always be upheld. As for rules of address, the difficulty is that

quite simply, there is no one rule that can always be followed. One cannot

say that every single man should always in all circumstances when speaking

to every woman except for his wife use the term Mother in direct address.

Prabhupada himself did not do so. Rather, he addressed women in a variety of

ways. He also gave several different specific instructions as to how his

male disciples should address their godsisters and other Vaisnavi women,

what

to speak of other women, in direct address. So, clearly, there are several

principles which Prabhupada both instructed and exemplified--I can isolate

three: 1) think of other devotees of the lord, regardless of gender, as

one's master; 2) regard those other than your spouse as having a non-sexual

relationship, specifically like that of mother and son; 3) use forms of

direct address that show respect according to the culture in which you are

operating.

 

I do not think that comparing very specific rules regarding sex for

procreation can be compared to rules for direct address between men and

women. The analogy has too many dissimilar points.

 

However, the point regarding both is important. We wish to keep our

principles and culture pure without watering it down, even though some--or

many--individuals will struggle with various rules and even principles

according to their particular natures and circumstances.

 

Regarding the way we speak to and address one another in comparison to the

four regs, what we don't wish to encourage is casual or disrespectful forms

of address. Nor should we wish to encourage, may I be so bold as to suggest,

some sort of fanatic, self-righteous insistence on the following of *one* of

Prabhupada's instructions or examples in regard to how we speak to one

another. Nor should we concoct some strange system, such as having "mother's

quarters" in a temple and a "mothers' van" when we really mean facilities

for single and celibate women. It is equally strange to speak of the

"prabhus" in the third person as a group. We hear devotees make

announcements about the "prabhus" going to this room and the "mothers" going

to the other room for some program. These concoctions are silly and

insignificant on their own face, but they are also worrisome if they

represent a tendency to create our own version of culture, to misinterpret

Prabhupada's instructions, to distort principles and rules, and in general

to create our own hodgepodge. All this would still remain only of mild

irritation except when it becomes codified as an ISKCON standard with those

who do not participate labeled as deviants and new devotees duly instructed

in the practice of the concoction. And just a little aside--My final

personal gripe against the use of the term "mothers" when used to refer to

all women in the third or second person as a group or for women's quarters,

vehicles, etc. is that I personally feel it minimizes those of us who have

gone through the austerity of actually being mothers.

 

And, thanks, Maharaja for this nice text on culture and principles.

 

Your servant,

 

Urmila devi dasi

 

 

 

-

"Sridhar Swami" <Sridhar.Swami (AT) pamho (DOT) net>

"Bhakti Vikasa Swami" <Bhakti.Vikasa.Swami (AT) pamho (DOT) net>; "Urmila (dd)

ACBSP (ISKCON School NC - USA)" <Urmila.ACBSP (AT) pamho (DOT) net>; "Braja Sevaki"

<Braja.Sevaki (AT) pamho (DOT) net>

Cc: "India (Continental Committee) Open (Forum)" <India.Open (AT) pamho (DOT) net>;

"Aniruddha" <iskcon (AT) bigpond (DOT) net.au>

Monday, November 17, 2003 4:03 AM

Re: Never called women mataji

 

 

> I personally do not really care how devotees conduct their lives in KC. We

> are not judged by our adherence to rigid rules only or at all.

>

> However there is a standard which is important to clarify. Then yathecasi

> tatha kuru (do as you like).

>

> Although someone may not like the comparison but Srila Prabhupada was very

> clear about sex once a month, five days after the start of the menstrual

> period. There are many who struggle with that and either don't follow or

try

> to give some different interpretation.

>

> I have no problem with someone who can't follow. There is always hope to

> improve and after all we are all fallen to one degree or another. But

people

> who try to change the standards give me problems. I want to preserve what

we

> heard from His Divine Grace and what it translated to in practical terms.

I

> still feel totally dependent on him and have no desire to be creative.

>

> I fear our future incarnation if we are lax in regard to priciples.

>

> So cultural aspects are important. Why we follow should help us to follow

> with faith. Just this morning I was listening to a lecture of Srila

> Prabhupada in Seattle 1968. He was describing the development of a new

> devotee in regards to reading his books and also dress. He said it is very

> important to follow proper dress code. Gradually these things are changing

> in our society and soon we will be barely discernible in the greater

> society.

>

> So my point is clarification of principles and standards. I associate with

> many devotee friends who may be following the 3 regulative principles (no

> meat no fish no eggs). I am not pretentious or condescending but I reserve

> the right to speak what I feel in my heart when on the BIG SEAT or in

groups

> of devotees who are interested to discuss.

>

> I greatly indebted to Urmila for her presentation, her example and her

bold

> preaching even if she disagrees with me.

>

> Your humble servant

> Sridhar Swami

>

>