beatting women - is beatting all wrong?

[Guest guest]

Dear Jagajivan Prabhu.

Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada.

 

> I thank you for giving me an opportunity for speaking on this subject,

> although others might think that you have opened a can of worms (bees

> maybe).

 

Thank you for your kind words. I surely burned my fingers posting that quote

of relationshup between Srila Prabhupada and Pisima. A reason more, that I

do not wish to leave this subject open without trying to find some proper

conclusion. As you mention, Srila Prabhupada would be most displeased, if

his relationship with his sister was used as excuse for beating woman.

 

Actually there was something else, that caught my attention in that anecdote

regarding Pisima. It was the response of Srila Prabhupada's mother, that

struck me with wonder. She said that: “You don’t have to beat her now

because she has a husband. If she does something wrong, her husband can beat

her.” I think this words, describing the reaction of his mother, really

caught my attention. If beating was considered horrible and wrong, as

presented nowadays, she would react in different way. But she was reacting

more in a way "no need for you to beat her anymore, her husband will take

over now".

 

It seems to me, that beating women is more a traditional thing, obviously

one can find no support in sastra for it. Actually sastra always speak

against violence, and praises non-violence as part of spiritual practice.

Only whan shastra describes tradition, some beating seems to reflect through

such descriptions.

 

Regarding Mother Yasoda showing a stick, I believe that I learned properly,

that she never actually hit Krsna. Krsna was just acting as an ordinary

child. So we shouldn't think, that Yasoda was beating Krsna. What catches

attention is, while Krsna was acting as ordinary child in fear of his mother

showing stick, it seems that when children from that tradition were shown

stick, they knew well, what that means. As I mentioned, if I show stick to

my four kids, they have no idea that it could mean anything worth crying

about, and they just take it as a game. Therefore one could conclude, that

in that tradition, it may have happened sometimes, that kids were beaten

with stick, or tight with ropes. Otherwise kids would have no idea, what

stick in the hand means. As they say, once beaten, twice shy, something like

that. Let me repeat, this doesn't mean, that Mother Yasoda was beating Krsna

or something. It just shows, that since Krsna was acting as ordinary child,

in that tradition and time, it may have been quite ordinary that kids were

beaten with stick. And it may be, that it was not considered so horrible,

and was more a part of ordinary day to day relationships, otherwise why

would Krsna choose to take on that same mood?

 

Similar is with Jagannatha Misra in Caitanya lila. I believe that situation

is similar to Krsna lila, and parents of Caitanya Mahaprabhu never really

used any actual beating. But the reaction of brahmana in this lila is quite

curious, when he stopped Jagannatha Misra really dramatically, after he

already rushed to beat the Lord, by grabbing his hand, and reminding him on

cultural behavior of Aryans. Then Brahmana said : “Only one who can

distinguish between right and wrong can be beat. Therefore I forbid you from

beating this child.” Brahmana presented argument, that Nimai is too young to

be beaten, and that you cannot beat one, unless he is old enough to

understand his wrongdoing. In the case of Nimai, brahmana stopped his

father. And I'm sure that Jagannatha Misra was most gentle person in

existence. I do not dare thinking, that he was one of the most violent and

angry persons arround, and everybody else was more self controlled. We may

safely conclude quite the opposite, that he was most kind and gentle.

Therefore one can understand, that probably other villagers (or residents

from other villages) were not so soft hearted, and their kids, even the very

young ones, were not so lucky to be protected by brahmanas.

 

This details are interesting to me, as they raise some doubts in modern

non-violence trends, which are much present in modern ISKCON too. It is

obvious, that violence is a part of tradition. Curiously, all cultures,

which have behind them some ancient tradition and religion, still accept

some educational punishment as normal thing. And cultures without tradition,

like US and Canada, are horrified and deeply offended by even the slightest

thought of viloence. This raises even more doubt in non-violence ideas. Are

traditions really so wrong, and are Americans really the only ones, who

finaly got it right?

 

True, it is no use to find support for violence in sastra. But although

sastra speaks of non-violence, why is then certain amount of violence

present in traditions, even to the point of becoming visible in Krsna lila

and Caitanya lila and Prabhupada lila. Why didn't Mother Yasoda, Jagannatha

Misra and Mother of Srila Prabhupada speak strongly against violence, but

instead acted, as if it is a normal thing to do some beating in certain

circumstances?

 

your servant Giri-nayaka das

 

 

> The examples you have given, wherein Jagannatha Misra and Mother

> Yasoda and even Srila Prabhupada, as condoning violence against women or

> violence in general is really pushing it, as far as interpretation is

> concerned. On the other hand, the sentiment of violence is there, as we

> can also see in Srila Prabhupada's advice on how to deal with children,

> "showing the stick", but not using it. There is a suggested violence.

> Suggested violence, however, does not mean violence. I am sure you are

> not condoning "using" the stick, as some may suggest? Certainly the love

> of Jagannatha Misra, Mother Yasoda and Srila Prabhupada cannot be fully

> understood by us nor all their manifestations of their love of Krishna.

> The rasa that Srila Prabhupada had with his sister was very, very special

> and we are not qualified to understand it fully, since we cannot perceive

> what was happening on the transcendental plane. One thing, though, is

> that it was evident how much he loved her and appreciated her as an

> advanced Vaisnavi. I think he would be extremely displeased with you if

> you tried to use this to even remotely suggest/condone violence against

> women.

> Changing the subject a bit, I would, however like to comment on how,

> sometimes, modern society obligates men to leave their role as protector

> and it tends to demasculate them. Perhaps you are reacting to this

> tendency. As Vaisnavas, however, as so many Prabhus have commented on, we

> are only really interested in being humble, always feeling subordinate to

> our "Prabhus", whether they be male or female.

> Hari Bol!

> Your servant,

> Jagajivana dasa

> P.S. Give Srila Prabhupada's books, first, as evidence. Everything else

> is secondary.

>

> >

> > > In one sense, how can Vedas advocate protection of the women,

> > > and the sametime making a provision for beating them. You protect

> > > someone, and then you smack the person on the head; the pieces just

> > > doesn't match together.

> >

> > This is interesting conclusion. Why would protecting one mean that you

> > make him/her/it feel good momentarily? And why would using physical

> > force exclude protection. Not to cause more disturbance to already

> > enough disturbed female members, lets switch to child protection. For

> > example, it was a common practice in schools, not so long ago, to punish

> > children physically. And it was ment to educate and protect them. Mother

> > Yasoda surely scared Krsna by showing him a stick, and why would he cry

> > because of seeing a stick? If I show stick to my kids, they just lough

> > at me, they take it as a joke. So, in the past, there must have been

> > something else in the mind of children, to make them cry upon seeing a

> > stick... Anyway, there are numerous details of protecting with

> > educational punishment. Like from certain Nimai-lila:

> >

> > "This naughty boy has spoiled the offering." When Jagannatha Misra heard

> > this he prepared to beat the boy in anger, but he was stopped by the

> > brahmana's request.

> > >>> Ref. VedaBase => CBP 5: Eating the Mendicant Brahmana's Offerings

> >

> > or

> > Everyone present tried to restrain Misra, but he said, "Leave me alone.

> > Today I'll beat Him!"

> > >>> Ref. VedaBase => CB Adi-khanda 5.71

> >

> > or

> > "Misra, you are supposed to be a cultured Aryan! What is the use of

> > beating this ignorant boy?

> > COMMENTARY

> > The brahmana said, "O Misra, you are elderly and respectable, and He is

> > only a foolish child. So it is not worth while to punish Him for His

> > foolishness."

> > >>> Ref. VedaBase => CB Adi-khanda 5.39

> >

> >

> > So maybe in some "cultured" parts of the world there is jail punishment

> > for strictness in physical way. But in many parts of the world it is not

> > so black/white. I come from southern europe and it seems that I can see

> > things a bit differently then Canadian or US born devotees.

> >

> > I'm more disturbed by this artificial sentimentalism, then violence in

> > the name of protection. Domesting violence, as they like to call it

> > nowadays, was usual part of life for a long time, even to the point,

> > that it is mentioned in sastras. This is not at all disturbing to me. It

> > doesn't mean, that I will beat my wife and kids now, but also I will not

> > get on case and blaspheme devotees, who want to discuss this things.

> > Using force in education was there in time of Krsna and Caitanya, it is

> > there nowadays, and it will be there even after western artificial

> > sentimentalism is long gone. It is a way to educate and protect. And

> > what disturbs me, is that some people now make a real big thing out of

> > it, like it is most sinful and anybody doing it deserves to go to jail,

> > or at least be thrown out of ISKCON. Like queen Kunti, who put her own

> > child in basket and sent him down the river. If any woman would nowadays

> > do this, put her newborn child in basked and send it down the river, she

> > would be considered crazy, charged of attempted murder, and put to jail

> > for eternity. Thats what I call artificial western sentimentalism.

> > Everybody is so careful, that everybody is happy and feeling good...

> > Cheating, just cheating!

> >

> > Anyway, I can see that such subjects cause strong emotions to surface,

> > so I will not push it any further here. Basically, this subject seems to

> > be just another on a long list of undefined ISKCON (mis)understandings.

> > And untill ISKCON comes up with some unified decision for us how to view

> > on this things, everybody is mercilessly left on his own with his own

> > opinion. We may fight about it, who is right, but it is useless. Rather

> > I suggest, that leaders come up with some ISKCON law regarding this

> > subject, and then it will be simple - either one is with ISKCON, or one

> > distances himself from ISKCON.

> >

> > your servant Giri-nayaka das

> >

> >

> > > The whole idea varies from culture to culture. Certain places,

> > > especially in some States in US, like California, if you dare touch a

> > > woman in an aggresive way, not to talk of beating her, by law, you

> > > will go to jail.

> > >

> > > It's better we are cool-headed and not be strong-headed in showing our

> > > machoness, just because we are male. A brahmana does not see a woman,

> > > a sudra, a cow, a dog or a dog-eater, rather he sees the spirit soul

> > > dwelling in all bodies. Srila Prabhupada said, in Krishna

> > > consciousness movement, we are trying to create brahmanas.