Call Off The Dogs!

April 16, 1999

> I recall hearing the philosophy, "Ignore them, and they will go away" as

> in the idea of tolerating the itch.

I am surprised some men devotees have not figured out that there are

drugs that can be taken that literally makes them go away. This in

light of some of the the stories I have head...

Or maybe even devotee males are proud of their maleness and actually

do enjoy the itch......

ys Prisni dasi

April 16, 1999

> What difference does it make what gender one identifies with? At this

> stage of the game we don't have a clue what our eternal identity could be.

> And if we did, our temporary material dress does not need to adversely

> effect our eternal relationship with Krsna.

I came to ISKCON, partly because devotees declare "we are not

our bodies, and it does not matter if you are male or female", but

after a while, when the honeymoon was over, I more and more

realized that the ISKCON society is as sex-oriented as the

western society, if not more. We are very full of distinctions because

of sex, with a lot of restrictions in both directions. The worst was that

I was not allowed to associate with women, which nearly drove

me crazy. That forced me into complete social isolation, since

I have very little in common with men and men's talk. Although

I think I did a good job of learning men's prajalpa :-) Ridiculus to

have to learn non-spiritual qualities in a spiritual movement.

My growth as a person was completely stunned, which also affected my

devotional life in an adverse way. I was constantly accused of my

bodily faults, as if it was me, and I was the body.

Now, in my transition to a women, I more and realize how unfair

I was treated, how much I was seen as my body and not a spirit soul,

how much problems were simply problems due to an inbalance

between the psyche and the gross body and really had nothing to

do with me or my spiritual life. Too big material disturbances

has to be eliminated, to be able to continue devotional life.

Everyone was wrong. I am fire, not butter. How many times have

we not heard that philosophy? But how many actually realize

what it means? How many recognize the difference in a person?

We use a rubber-stamp system. All we think are men are butter,

all woman fire. But is it wise to speak a philosophy that we actually

have no realization of? We think we are safe in parrot-repeating,

but some day someone is going to call our cards, and we are

going to be exposed in our bluff, that we actually do not know.

> While I can't claim to be experiencing boundless bliss as a man, being a

> women in conditional life ain't no bundle of joy either. Either way, I

> don't see the lasting value.

You seem to be set on enjoyment in the material world. How come

you immediately jump to that thought? What makes you think I do

what I do for enjoyment? Does it appear like women enjoy

more then men?

I never had a thought of changing sex in this lifetime. My mind

was completely set on suffering my karma, of whatever, until

end of this life, as we are supposed to do. But are we?

What if our particular karma we have been suffering from

suddenly runs out, or if Krsna interferes and change your karma?

For me it is like Krsna told me "now you change sex, become a

women in THIS lifetime, i already made all the arrangements".

I did not ask for it, it just suddenly started to happen.

Believe it or not, it really does not matter to me.

If you are a devotee, you can see the truth, if you are not,

nothing in the world can make you see it.

This touches directly into our philosophy. Do we belive Krsna

is arranging the life of his devotees, do we belive we are

devotees of Krsna? Is this just talk and imagination, or is

it reality? Do you let your own life be directed by Krsna, or

do you try to run it yourself? Can you differenciate between

the hand of Krsna, and the action of Maya? Do you belive

that you are protected by Krsna?

ys Prisni dasi

April 16, 1999

> I agree, but this confused gender situation does seem to have a degree of

> influence by the modes of passion and ignorance. I am not saying the rest

> of us are sattvic, but I find it hard to imagine someone grounded in a

> sattvic frame of mind would feel overwhelmed by this particular issue.

Devoteees sometimes get the "I am holier than you" approach. I don't mean

you. But remember that even prostitutes were devotees,

during Krsna's time. Beeing devotee or not has nothing to do with social

position. Rather it appears that it is Krsna's desire that there are

devotees

in all different social positions. I think this is one of our failures with

our

understanding of Varnarama. Success with varnasrama means that you

understand your position in society, do your duty, think about Krsna,

and be happy. As soon as you start to judge other people, due to

their social position, you got big problems.

your servant Prisni dasi

April 16, 1999

>I had my favourite place, in the temple room, on the right side, in the

>front, near to Radharani. Later the right side in the temple room was

>changed to the ladies side. Maybe I just got the blessing of beeing able

>to remain in my favourite place. :-)

Oh no! I love to stand very close to the altar, where I don't see any

other devotees, just the Deities. Does that mean I'm going to have to

transition into a sannyasa?????? ;-)

Ys,

Madhusudani dasi

April 16, 1999

At 22:10 -0800 4/15/99, COM: Prsnigarbha (das) HKS (Goteborg - S) wrote:

>[Text 2238469 from COM]

>Or maybe even devotee males are proud of their maleness and actually

>do enjoy the itch......

>

and who argue that it's vedic to have multiple wives (incl. new young

models as the early models age) to help them scratch that itch.

Sigh.

Ys,

Madhusudani dasi

April 16, 1999

> I've heard the same description so many times, I've simply accepted that

> those who are going through this are the experts. I don't feel like I need

> to really understand first hand. Got enough of my own issues to work on.

> Better to accept others as experts on their own life and to assume they're

> making informed decisions for themselves (unless this involves hurting

> others of course). I'd certainly like for them to make the same

> assumptions about me. Some of my decisions may be less than ideal, but

> they're *my* decisions and I have to live with the consequences.

I can identify completely with this.

April 16, 1999

On 15 Apr 1999, Madhusudani Radha wrote:

> Oh no! I love to stand very close to the altar, where I don't see any

> other devotees, just the Deities. Does that mean I'm going to have to

> transition into a sannyasa?????? ;-)

I don't know but why don't you ask Malati dasi now being the first sannyasini

in the movement.

April 16, 1999

>

> > While I can't claim to be experiencing boundless bliss as a man, being a

women in conditional life ain't no bundle of joy either. Either way, I don't

see the lasting value.

> >

> You seem to be set on enjoyment in the material world. How come

> you immediately jump to that thought? What makes you think I do

> what I do for enjoyment? Does it appear like women enjoy

> more then men?

>

Even subtley, I don't see exactly how the endeavor is worth it--now that's

just my own opinion. I mean both genders are simply a life of tribulation when

conditioned by material desires. Spiritually, even a dog can take part, even a

child--as Srila Prabhupada says. What difference does it make?

On the other hand, the woman who felt slighted by Bhisma (one of three sisters

in a Mahabharata story) returned as a man to get even. Bhisma would not fight

considering his past history as a woman. So there appears there might have

been some gender adjustment that happened in a less than regular way which

motivated Bhisma not to fight. So these things happen.

Whatever gender ones finds themselves experiencing, either by natural methods

or otherwise, human life is meant for self-realization.

April 16, 1999

>

> I am surprised some men devotees have not figured out that there are

> drugs that can be taken that literally makes them go away. This in

> light of some of the the stories I have head...

>

> Or maybe even devotee males are proud of their maleness and actually

> do enjoy the itch......

>

The idea is to outgrow the scratching of the insect bites and taking that as

some kind of substantial experience. We are by nature pleasure seeking, but in

spiritual pursuits we have ambitions to actually acheive it.

Sure, drugs can do so many things, but utlimately we are cultivating a

relationship, which is a matter of the heart.

..

April 16, 1999

>

> Just same as in the case of changing one's "color" of a

> doty, from saffron to white. For some convinced brahmacary

> it simply makes no sense that to get married it helps or

> enables anything in regard to rendering devotional service.

> So similarly for a convinced male it really doesn't make

> any sense to change the gender, from male to female.

> So, you don't have to do it. That's all.

>

Look, if Prsna wants to be a girl, that's a personal decision. Still,

comparing mechanical gender changes to dealing with clubfoot or a brahmancari

taking to grhasta life could be a bit of a stretch.

If it helps you chant Hare Krsna, then who can argue it's anything but

auspicious. Those who wish to 'judge' the value of an activity can do so by

examining the results -- it's a scientific process, as they say.

..

April 16, 1999

>

> Male hormones are classified as a prohibited drug. It appears that

> the actions of that drug makes a person dangerous and violent. Maybe

> all men should be castrated, except for a selected few, for breeding,

> to take out all the violence of the world. Very much of which is due

> to the powerful hormone produced in males......

>

> (In case you did not get it, everything here is said in a joking

> mode. Even this sentence)

>

> ys Prisni dasi

Darn it, and here I was starting to do my resume to apply for being one

of the uncastrated.

April 16, 1999

"WWW: Vyapaka (Dasa) ACBSP (Montreal - CAN)" wrote:

> [Text 2239223 from COM]

>

> On 15 Apr 1999, Madhusudani Radha wrote:

>

> > Oh no! I love to stand very close to the altar, where I don't see any

> > other devotees, just the Deities. Does that mean I'm going to have to

> > transition into a sannyasa?????? ;-)

>

> I don't know but why don't you ask Malati dasi now being the first sannyasini

> in the movement.

Actually it was Visvakhika, Adhara, and Hladini, then a second group of

women, and then Malati after all those, just for historical accuracy.

Although I don't think Malati thinks of herself as a sannyasini these days,

and

has certainly eschewed the perks of the ashram.

April 16, 1999

I like your text, Mahanidhi, even though I don't comment on

the rest of it.

> The another moment is that we, normally, do not know how

> exactly to behave towards the person who does change

> his/her gender, our sexual conceptions gets disoriented

This is also my own observation.

Most people immediately catch on, see me as a women, use the

correct pronoun (she, her), and really have no problem with the

situation.

Rarely people don't catch on. In particular when they have

to deal with something written in my old male name, with me

in front of them. These persons can get really disturbed,

and look like they would like to disappear from the face

of the earth. That was one reason I wanted to change my

COM devotee name from "das" to "dasi", to save devotees

from coming into that situation, but I did not succeed

with that.

Devotees should really have no problem, we should

have a solid understanding of how the person remains the

same when the body changes, and easily adapt to the

situation.

ys Prisni dasi

April 16, 1999

I like your text, Mahanidhi, even though I don't comment on

the rest of it.

> The another moment is that we, normally, do not know how

> exactly to behave towards the person who does change

> his/her gender, our sexual conceptions gets disoriented

This is also my own observation.

Most people immediately catch on, see me as a women, use the

correct pronoun (she, her), and really have no problem with the

situation.

Rarely people don't catch on. In particular when they have

to deal with something written in my old male name, with me

in front of them. These persons can get really disturbed,

and look like they would like to disappear from the face

of the earth. That was one reason I wanted to change my

COM devotee name from "das" to "dasi", to save devotees

from coming into that situation, but I did not succeed

with that.

Devotees should really have no problem, we should

have a solid understanding of how the person remains the

same when the body changes, and easily adapt to the

situation.

ys Prisni dasi

April 16, 1999

>

> Look, if Prsna wants to be a girl, that's a personal decision. Still,

> comparing mechanical gender changes to dealing with clubfoot or a

> brahmancari taking to grhasta life could be a bit of a stretch.

>

The comparation was meant to be partial, not general. That

means, there are a lot of differences, but I hinted on that

what I find to be common in both these cases. That is, if

a brahmacari is very much disturbed, then don't force him

to stay as such. Better let him change his situation,

and "feel better". So, if a person is so much disturbed

with his present bodily gender, on the same way, don't

force him to stay in such disturbed condition. Let him

change it, if that would make him "feel better".

> If it helps you chant Hare Krsna, then who can argue it's anything but

> auspicious. Those who wish to 'judge' the value of an activity can do so

> by examining the results -- it's a scientific process, as they say.

If the cause of the great disturbance is being removed, then

I would expect that it helps to that person. Wether it is

a brahmacari who is greatly disturbed whenever he hears that

an another girl got married (not to him), or wether it is

somebody who is greatly disturbed with his type of the bodily

gender, the basic idea is the same. And the basic motivation,

as well as - to feel better.

ys mnd

April 16, 1999

On 16 Apr 1999, Prsnigarbha das wrote:

>

> My gender is female. I was born with that gender. I was born with a

> male body. It would be much less of a problem if people could

> treat me according to my gender, and not my body. But so far the

> only person who did was my spiritual master, who could see through

> the gross bodily covering. Because all you others would see me

> as a man, which I never was, I have to change my gross bodily

> appearance to a woman to be able to function in society. So don't

> look at me, look at yourself for a reason.

>

I've got this problem where I was born thinking I'm a cool dude, but everyone

else keeps telling me I'm a jerk. It can all be so confusing. Boy, life is

tough -- see, I can relate!

..

April 16, 1999

>

> Our philosophy have never been that the sudra, posing as

> ksatriya, should just stay in his position, and just chant

> hare krishna, and everything will be allright. Our philosophy

> is - away with him, and put a person with ksatriya qualities in

> his place.

>

I agree, we should all feel properly situated, and sometimes physical

adjustments are required. Still, there does not seem to be a plethoria of

examples relating to mechanical gender adjustments as there are for other

types of occupational duties -- that's just a fact based on the available

sastric evidence. If someone feels the need to do such things, that's a

personal decision that might not require official support from the Vaisnava

siddhanta.

April 16, 1999

On 16 Apr 1999, Madhava Gosh wrote:

> Actually it was Visvakhika, Adhara, and Hladini, then a second group of

> women, and then Malati after all those, just for historical accuracy.

>

> Although I don't think Malati thinks of herself as a sannyasini these days,

> and

> has certainly eschewed the perks of the ashram.

She explicitly implied when she commented to me and others that she would

never take off saffron no matter who told her to do so. I deduced that she

meant that she was stillconsidering herself a sanyasini or whatever the

Kirtananda concoction was (and she seems to share). But as many on this

conference advocate the equality of men and women, shouldn't she be allowed to

take sannyasa. Does anyone have any sastric quotes? How about Mother Hare

Krsna dasi who has researched varnasrama and cow protection so well.

April 17, 1999

>

> She explicitly implied when she commented to me and others that she would

> never take off saffron no matter who told her to do so. I deduced that she

> meant that she was stillconsidering herself a sanyasini or whatever the

> Kirtananda concoction was (and she seems to share). But as many on this

> conference advocate the equality of men and women, shouldn't she be

> allowed to take sannyasa. Does anyone have any sastric quotes?

But out of what reason you would want to steer up such kind

of discussion or debate? As far as you are concerned, you seem

to be quite clear about ISKCON women taking a sannyasa - a

"Kirtananda's concoction". And I haven't noticed anybody here

being interested to push forward the idea of "sannyasinis in

ISKCON." So what is your point?

ys mnd

April 17, 1999

> I agree, we should all feel properly situated, and sometimes physical

> adjustments are required. Still, there does not seem to be a plethoria of

> examples relating to mechanical gender adjustments as there are for other

> types of occupational duties -- that's just a fact based on the available

> sastric evidence. If someone feels the need to do such things, that's a

> personal decision that might not require official support from the

> Vaisnava siddhanta.

It is something very rare. Today it is something like one person

ion 20 thousands, that change their body from male to female. There are

many other very rare diseases and other bodily afflictions that common

people does not know about.

There are stories about sex changes in

our books, but how they are accomplished is never explained. Mostly

by *magic*. But many other common day-to-day activities was also

accomplished by *magic*, in our books, so I don't find that too odd.

Today it appears that everything has become much more troublesome.

In Vedic times, someone could just us a mantra, and an ordinary bow

and arrow, to get a very forceful weapon. Today, you need a big weapon

industry to get the same effect. That is the nature of these times,

everything is much more cumbersome, and even with all that effort,

gives a doubtful result.

ys Prisni dasi

April 17, 1999