Women's role and intelligence

[Guest guest]

> Syamasundara,

> Thank you for your attempt to enlighten me. There is definitely a barrier

> here but I have hard time to identify it. At first, it appears by your

> answer that you are not inclined to help for some reasons unknown to me

> other than a barrier language. If this is so, I think it would have been

> easy for you to explain my psychological linguistic problem. I can

> understand that. You must be busy.

>

> I am not the only one to be confused on the subject. Will you like me to

> ask some questions so that you can help clarify the text? Between other

> things, the text seems to propose that women can “receive equal rights”

> but then it denies the role of GBC for them. What it the problem for a

> woman to be GBC? That is my first question.

> Tell me please, if my ability here to communicate with you is deficient,

> and I will try to make another effort. Thank you. Akhilesvara dasa

 

 

 

Dear Akhilesvara Prabhu,

 

PAMHO AGTSP

 

You have deduced correctly that I am busy. Perhaps later I will be find the

time to answer your queries.

 

yhs

Shyama

[Guest guest]

Haribol Matajis and Prabhus,

 

(Note- this text is respectfully intended for Katha (AT) pamho (DOT) net and those who are

following the thread, and not for those who have withdrawn from discussion.)

 

The essence of both Mother Urmila's and Bhadra Govinda Prabhu's concluding

texts follow this line of argument:

 

A. Women, like men, have qualities independent of their parents' qualities and

varna.

 

B. There are discussions on marital compatibility which refer to women's varna.

 

C. Therefore women have independent varna status like men.

 

 

The conclusion © doesn't follow from A and B.

 

First of all, statement A is true. In classical Vedic culture, the children

matched the parents very commonly. Therefore, the terms "son of a brahmana" and

"brahmana" were generally synonymous. However, in this age there is increasing

discrepancy and one must be careful to distinguish one's guna from that of the

parents.

 

Secondly, B is true. The problem is understanding what it means. The term

"women's varna" can mean either of two things:

(1) women's independent varna, or

(2) women's guna.

 

Which interpretation is best? Srila Rupa Gosvami outlines two rules of

hermeneutics in his Laghu-bhagavatamrta:

 

1. Every statement must be seen in relation to its context

2. The statements of shastra should be understood in a way to not conflict with

other such statements.

 

Interpretation (1) conflicts with usage of words in the Bhagavad-gita

(9.33-34), Srimad Bhagavatam (1.4.28, 7th canto), and Mahabharata as well as

with the practical performance of women's duties (isvara-bhava vs dependence).

Interpretation (2) runs into no such problems and is therefore the preferable

approach.

 

Statement C, then, does not follow at all from the previous true statements.

 

The question may arise, why does sastra say "women's varna" if it really meant

"women's guna"? In classical Vedic culture, it was implicit because they were

synonymous. A women of the ksatriya parents were generally of the corresponding

guna and therefore one could refer to a woman's guna by indirectly indicating

her birth, or father's status. This usage of terms, however, causes confusion

when there are regular discrepancies in one's parent's qualities and one's own.

Therefore the injunctions regarding marrying a women according to her varna do

not implicitly confer a varna status to women, but are rather references to the

woman's guna.

 

 

ys

Gerald Surya