Women sannyasis

[Guest guest]

"COM: Madhava Gosh (das) ACBSP (New Vrindavan - USA)" wrote:

 

> [Text 2250045 from COM]

>

> Kardama Muni followed the Vedic injunction that no one in sannyasa life can

> have

> any kind of relationship with women. But what is the position of a woman who

is

> left by her husband? She is entrusted to the son, and the son promises that

he

> will deliver his mother from entanglement. A woman is not supposed to take

> sannyasa. So-called spiritual societies concocted in modern times give

sannyasa

> even to women, although there is no sanction in the Vedic literature for a

> woman's accepting sannyasa. Otherwise, if it were sanctioned, Kardama Muni

> could

> have taken his wife and given her sannyasa. The woman must remain at home.

She

> has only three stages of life: dependency on the father in childhood,

> dependency

> on the husband in youth and, in old age, dependency on the grown-up son, such

> as

> Kapila. In old age the progress of woman depends on the grown-up son. The

ideal

> son, Kapila Muni, is assuring His father of the deliverance of His mother so

> that His father may go peacefully without anxiety for his good wife.

>

> >>> Ref. VedaBase => SB 3.24.40

 

This is certainly Prabhupada's authoritative quote on women as sannyasis.

According to him, there is no scope for it.

 

It is interesting to note that for men, to put on white means to some extent to

give up renunciation, but according to Srila Prabhupada, for women to put on

white

means to take up renunciation:

 

***********************

Roof Conversation Mayapur, February 14, 1977 770214RO.MAY

 

Prabhupada: Silavati is in New York?

Tamala Krsna: Oh, yes...

Prabhupada: ...She is very nice woman. From the beginning she is devotee. She

is

about fifty years old? Hm?

Tamala Krsna: Yes, at least fifty years old. Yes, her hair is gray.

Brahmananda: She wears all white sari. Other women that age, they would be

looking

for another husband, another husband, another husband.

Prabhupada: This widow life is also brahmacari life.

 

*************************

 

But even though she is renounced when she puts on white, unlike a sannyasi, she

does not renounce her family (except for her husband in case he might have

taken

sannyasa):

 

***************************

 

Srimad-Bhagavatam Canto 4: Chapter Twenty-three, Text 20 :PURPORT

 

The chaste wife's duty is to keep her husband pleased in householder life in

all

respects, and when the husband retires from family life, she is to go to the

forest

and adopt the life of vanaprastha, or vana-vasi. At that time the wife is to

follow

her husband and take care of him, just as she took care of him in householder

life.

But when the husband takes the renounced order of life, namely sannyasa, the

wife

is to return home and become a saintly woman, setting an example for her

children

and daughters-in-law and showing them how to live a life of austerity.

 

************************

 

So, ideally, once the children are old enough to be left alone -- in other

quotes,

Prabhupada indicates that the son is married (not a brahmacari), then the

husband

and wife can take vanaprastha and go out together enriching themselves

spiritually

by travelling to places of pilgrimage and associating with various saintly

persons

there. According to Srila Prabhupada, only ksatriyas and brahmanas are

expected to

enter the vanaprastha asrama. And, of these two, according to Srila

Prabhupada,

only the brahmana men will enter the fourth asrama -- sannyasa -- a ksatriya

will

not take sannyasa.

 

But of the brahmana couples who have taken vanaprastha and visited the holy

places

and associated with sainly persons, it is interesting to see how the process

works. The man next renounces his wife and renounces family life altogether.

So,

to some extent, any wisdom and spiritual advancement which he gains is lost to

the

family -- he is meant to go out and spread his knowledge to the wider society.

But

still, by Krsna's arrangement, the family is not bereft of the spiritual riches

which have been gained in the travels of its parents, because the woman comes

back

home and can share the knowledge which she and her husband gained. Thus, the

family still makes spiritual advancement by sacrificing its parents to

vanaprastha,

because the mother will return in her retired condition and bring spiritual

knowledge with her. (Of course, indirectly, they are also benefitting from the

austerities and preaching work of their father, just as Srila Prabhupada's

children

benefitted from his preaching activities, but their opportunity to associate

with

him is generally greatly reduced.)

 

The interesting thing about this description of a woman's life after her

husband

leaves is that she does not go to some holy place to live a life of

renunciation.

Rather, her renunciation is at home with her family. Since the daughter-in-law

has

taken up the practical management of household affairs in the mother's absence,

she

can continue in that role, while the mother takes on a more retired role upon

her

return -- which would probably also include things like telling stories to

children

to keep them out of their mother's hair. But, since she has just returned from

these pilgramages with her husband, it is increasingly likely that the stories

she

tells will be about Krsna's pastimes and the pastimes of many saintly persons.

The

whole family will benefit from the spiritual knowledge she has to share.

 

So, the woman remains with her family. Yet, the focus of her nuturing them

shifts

from a practical focus to more of a spiritual focus.

 

The modern experience has shown that the idea of women leaving their family to

live

in some "holy place" leaves them vulnerable to abuse and exploitation. They

are

safer under the physical protection of their sons -- just as Kunti stayed with

her

sons.

 

And Srila Prabhupada gave the example of his own sister who became a widow at a

young age and returned to their father's home, since obviously she had no

married

son to take shelter of.

 

***********************

 

Having said all this, we need to see what is practical in our current

situation.

Some women do not have married sons when they become widows. They may be

divorced

by men who do not want to be devotees. In such a case, it is not beneficial

for

their spiritual life to return to their whiskey-drinking, meat-eating fathers,

so

our society needs to make other arrangements to help support them in their

spiritual life. And where it fails to make arrangements, it must also refrain

from

criticizing women who must support themselves. This has been best expressed by

Jaya Lalita prabhu's essay on so-called "Independence" published on Chakra and

VNN.

 

One way of strength is to get together with other women devotees in a similar

situation and to help each other in Krsna consciousness. This is apparently

what

Malati prabhu has done.

 

As far as I can see, Srila Prabhupada did not sanction women's taking sannyasa.

For women, renunciation was to wear white. I do not know Malati prabhu very

well,

but from being around her and seeing her postings, she strikes me as a

level-headed

and generous-spirited devotee. As Madhusudani prabhu has pointed out, she was

aware that a condition of coming back into ISKCON was to renounce her position

as

sannyasini, so it appears that she must have accepted that.

 

Nevertheless, it seems obvious that some doubts will remain until she steps

forward

and clarifies her position on women and sannyasa, and explains the significance

of

her saffron attire.

 

So, Malati prabhu, I hope that you won't mind taking this opportunity to

clarify

your position, and that you will not be too put off by any bitterness that

seems to

surround this issue. Most of us would be grateful if you could take the time

to

present your perspective on the matter and your understanding of Srila

Prabhupada's

instructions.

 

your servant,

 

Hare Krsna dasi