Vedic India?

[Guest guest]

>Westerners, however, suffer through marriage after divorce after marriage

>after divorce, etc. Not all of them, but certainly much more than their

>Indian counterparts.

 

Hmmmmm.... sounds like *somewhat* of an overgeneralization. But it's true,

these are problems, although I wouldn't generalize it to all westerners.

 

>Yes, and when they grow up, they also have a more difficult time with

>aspects of life, like marriage. Generally, Indian couples usually get along

>well with each other. And even if they don't, they still somehow manage to

>pull through.

 

Here are some facts: 95% of the Indian men (80% Hindu, who were mostly

Vaisnavas) who show up in the dermatology clinics of two large Mumbai

hospitals had visited sex workers in the past 3 months. 63% of them

reported that they got drunk on a regular basis, 16% of the men in one

hospital and 39% in another hospital reported having had anal sex with

other men in the past 3 months. Outreach workers can tell you which parks,

train stations and public restrooms where this happens. (same in Delhi and

Calcutta) and I can forward that information to anyone who wants to check

for himself.

 

They were in their 20s, 30s and 40s.

 

And for those of you who are convinced that these kinds of things only

happen in the big cities due to excessive western influence:

 

In the 4 health care clinics in rural south India that I visited,

alcoholism and domestic violence were the two biggest problems. Health

care workers from the rest of India who attended a conference in Chennai in

November all spoke of these problems as being prevalent in their

communities too, so it can hardly be called an isolated phenomenon. Women

were being beaten when they complained that their husbands had spent the

family's money on alcohol, so that the children were going hungry. They

were also being beaten when they requested health care.

 

Yes, it's true that most women still stay in their marriages. What other

alternatives are there for them if they don't want to get shunned? But

given the misery the families of these men have to endure as a consequence,

I'm not sure we can point to this situation as an example for us to follow.

STDs are also rampant in these settings due to extra-marital sex among the

men. HIV is not that prevalent yet (as far as we know) , but given those

behavior patterns and prevalence of other STDs, it's only a matter of time

before HIV infections become big problems in these areas too. I saw women

who were widowed at 16-25 due to having been married to much older HIV

infected men in these areas. Those women were now also infected, even

though they had only had sex with their husbands, and they had *no future*.

Their in-laws frequently threw them out after their husbands died, and were

only interested in keeping their uninfected male grandchildren, if there

were any.

 

The only positive sign in those villages was the fact that some women had

started organizing and borrowing money to start their own home-based

businesses. The banks were happy because the women were much better that

the men in terms of repaying their loans, and the money they made was more

likely to actually go to feeding and clothing the children.

 

Indian truck drivers (nation wide) who were interviewed at several rest

stops reported an average of 20 sex partners per month. These encounters

included both male and female sex workers, as well as their co-drivers

(assistants) giving them blow jobs.

 

In Manipur, 80% of the injection drug users (and there are many, given its

proximity to Burma) are HIV positive and are now beginning to infect their

wives and unborn children.

 

Due to all these slightly less than moral behaviors among Indians

(primarily men), India now has more HIV infections than any other country

in the world and the rate is increasing quickly.

 

So please before you go on another "Indian couples are superior to Western

couples" trip again, please look at the whole picture. It's not as idyllic

as you make it seem here in COM cyberspace.

 

Ys,

Madhusudani dasi

[Guest guest]

>95% of the Indian men (80% Hindu, who were mostly

>Vaisnavas) who show up in the dermatology clinics of two large Mumbai

>hospitals had visited sex workers in the past 3 months.

 

Your experience is limited to the clinics where you see the bad cases. And

considering your field of work seems to be with vernerial diseases (like

AIDS), it is hardly surprising that you only see this.

 

Why only a dermatology clinic? Did you take the survey at the rest of the

clinics in the hospitals. How many of the men who come in for malaria have

visited comercial sex workers in the last three months?

 

There are going to be an awful lot of life members who see your letter :-)

[Guest guest]

>Your experience is limited to the clinics where you see the bad cases. And

>considering your field of work seems to be with vernerial diseases (like

>AIDS), it is hardly surprising that you only see this.

 

Actually, although AIDS is my area of specialization, my work is broader

and the last India trip was about multiple health-related issues. That's

why those other topics, like alcoholism and domestic violence came up.

Secondly, my data are not limited to the clinics I visit. It's based on

national and regional surveillance. I don't for example work with truck

drivers, or with Calcutta MSMs, or with Manipur IDUs, which were some of

the data I cited. What I've personally seen are just tiny samples of the

picture, but from the data presented at the recent Kuala Lumpur conference,

the situation is very grave throughout the subcontinent in multiple

populations.

 

What's particularly sad is that HIV came to India much later than to many

other parts of the world, but it's taken off like wild fire. It is

therefore now of grave concern to the world wide community of health care

workers and international relief agencies. That's not because they only

look in certain places in India. They compare the same kinds of sites in

many different countries. It's called sentinel surveillance. In comparison

to other similar sites I've visited elsewhere in Asia, Europe or in North

America, I've never seen such high numbers of men visiting sex workers.

 

> How many of the men who come in for malaria have

>visited comercial sex workers in the last three months?

 

I don't know about malaria patients specifically, but among TB patients the

seroprevalence is also quite high and most of the infections are due to

sexual transmissions. However, what is most disturbing is that among

pregnant/post partum women who have no risk factors and who attend

prenatal/antenatal clinics in Mumbai the prevalence was recently measured

at 4.2%. That is considered extremely high (in the US after almost 20

years of HIV, it's a fraction of 1%) because this is considered a measure

of the general population.

 

>There are going to be an awful lot of life members who see your letter :-)

 

????? I'm not sure what your point is. Perhaps you could clarify.

 

I'm sorry this is painful news for devotees, I really am. However, these

facts are a part of India too. On the bright side, the India of

alcoholism, domestic violence and STDs is obviously not the whole picture

either. Also, please don't think I'm saying that all of India is degraded.

Some aspects are absolutely wonderful and there is a very rich spiritual

heritage that we all admire. However, we can't get so caught up in that

admiration that we kid ourselves into thinking that India doesn't have many

of the same problems that plague us here in the West. Sometimes it has

those problems to a lesser degree, sometimes to a greater one. We just

need to be careful before we preach to devotees that everything Indian is

good and everything Western is bad. It's obviously more complex than that.

 

Ys,

Madhusudani dasi

[Guest guest]

>I'm sorry this is painful news for devotees, I really am. However, these

>facts are a part of India too.

 

It is also Kali-yuga in India too--no one denies that--but your inuendo

(attempted with statistics), that Indian men in general are somehow either

as degraded or moreso than their western counterparts, is simply not true.

I lived in India for six years, and not in Vrindavan and Mayapur, where you

can avoid mixing with the locals, and the moral character of the Indian men

in general, is definitely superior to the moral character of western men, in

general.

 

You may object to my making these generalizations, but Srila Prabhupada made

such generalizations. By my personal experience, I can confirm his

generalization to be accurate:

 

Conversation, May 14 1975 Perth

------

Prabhupada: Yes, that is fourth class. This is the proof. Fourth-class men

administering... Just like misadministration not immediately detected. After

some time, when the case is unmanageable, it is detected. Therefore

fourth-class men. Simply these Western people, they know how to earn money

by hook and crook. So, so long the money is there it is covered, the

fourth-class men. And when the money is finished, they are exposed,

fourth-class men. They're simply covered by money. No social structure, no

spiritual understanding, no character, nothing of the sort. Still India, so

fallen, you... 95% people, living, husband and wife, very peacefully. And in

the Western countries after six months' marriage, divorce. Are they not

fourth class? Even the husband and wife cannot continue peaceful life, what

to speak of others. Now this rascal Jawaharlal Nehru has introduced divorce

in the Hindu society. Otherwise in the Hindu society separation between

husband and wife is not even dreamt of. That, it cannot be. However there

may be quarrelsome, but there is no question of separation. Husband and

wife, they fight, everywhere. I have seen. My father and mother was

fighting. I fought. (laughter) But there is no question of separation.

Separation, they never think. Neither the husband can think of, nor the wife

can think of. Even in the life of Gandhi there was fight between husband and

wife, and the Gandhi one day drove his wife, "Get out from my home." So she

was put into the street, and she began to cry, "Where shall I go?" And then

Gandhi ans..., "Come on." Yes. And Canakya Pandita said, bambharambhe

laghu-kriya. The husband and wife may fight. It becomes a very serious

thing, but don't take of it as serious. This is Hindu philosophy. Husband

and wife quarrel should not be taken as very serious. They fight and again

they live peacefully. Why this divorce? The divorce mean it kills the whole

family life. The children goes away; the father goes away; the mother goes

away. I have seen so many cases.

---------------------------

 

ys KKdas

[Guest guest]

>that Indian men in general are somehow either

>as degraded or moreso than their western counterparts, is simply not true.

 

You completely missed my point, so let me please try again:

 

I'm not saying that Indian men are not any more degraded that western men.

But what the statistics show is that Indian society is a complex one, with

many of the same problems plaguing the west.

 

The high prevalence of alcoholism, domestic violence and sexually

transmitted diseases in India show that we can not generalize and say that

all things Indian are good and all things Western are bad.

 

Before we hold another society up as a role model, we need to look at many

aspects and not just anecdotal data and wishful thinking. I just want some

balance in this discussion. It has been sadly missed in ISKCON to date.

 

Ys,

Madhusudani dasi

[Guest guest]

FYI. This summary appeared on the international health list serves this

morning:

 

"Wife Abuse in India Said Tied to Extramarital Sex"

Reuters (11/23/99)

A new study shows that abusive husbands in India are more likely

than non-abusers to have extramarital sex or to have contracted a

sexually transmitted disease (STD) from someone other than their

wife. Men with an STD were also more likely to abuse their

wives, the report found. Cheating husbands are most likely

responsible for the spread of disease to their wives, and they

may be responsible for the rising rate of AIDS among monogamous,

married women in the country. The researchers, who report their

findings in the Journal of the American Medical Association,

noted that almost half of the 6,632 married men they interviewed

in Uttar Pradesh acknowledged physically or sexually abusing

their wives.

 

I'm not drawing any major conclusions about the results until I have read

the entire article and would advise others to do the same. Still I wanted

to alert you that this paper was published this week and should be easily

obtainable in most countries. JAMA is a highly respected journal and these

results and is likely to be widely read, including by those lifemembers

Krsna-Kirti prabhu was mentioning earlier.

 

Ys,

Madhusudani dasi

[Guest guest]

>>that Indian men in general are somehow either

>>as degraded or moreso than their western counterparts, is simply not true.

>

>You completely missed my point, so let me please try again:

>

And you also missed my point: Indian society, particularly with regard to

marriage, was considered by Srila Prabhupada to be a model for his disciples

to learn from.

 

Of course, there are also bad things going on India, it is also Kali-yuga

there too, but if you we have to choose between Srila Prabhuapda's opinon

and your opinion (or the UN's opinion, or whoever's opinion) on what Indian

society is (and there is a difference here) an intelligent devotee will

certainly choose Srila Prabhupada's opinion.

 

Srila Prabhupada certainly did consider Indian society to be something

Westerners should learn from, which is why he wanted his disciples to travel

to India and spend time there.

 

Why do you think Srila Prabhupada was erroneous in his generalization?

[Guest guest]

>Before we hold another society up as a role model, we need to look at many

>aspects and not just anecdotal data and wishful thinking.

 

Do you consider Srila Prabhupada's remarks, in this regard, "wishful

thinking"?

[Guest guest]

>And you also missed my point: Indian society, particularly with regard to

>marriage, was considered by Srila Prabhupada to be a model for his disciples

>to learn from.

 

Could you please supply a specific quote for that, so we don't get off on a

thread that's not based on what Prabhupada really said, but can discuss

Prqabhupada's actual words? Thank you.?

 

However, for the sake of the current discussion I'm going to assume that

you have such a quote. Then the issue is this: Since many Indian men seem

to be on the slippery kali yuga slope these days, I would hope we can agree

that Srila Prabhupada most likely would have modified that statement today

to include only *those Indian men who are following a Vaisnava lifestyle*.

I don't think anyone would argue that he would condone alcoholism, wife

beating and adultery, all of which are probably a larger part of Indian

society today than it was 20-30 years ago. Nor that he would want his

disciples to imitate those behaviors. It's an insult to Srila Prabhupada

to suggest anything else.

 

So let's stop generalizing to all Indians in future postings and qualify

our use of them as role models to those who are behaving like true

Vaisnavas.

 

>Why do you think Srila Prabhupada was erroneous in his generalization?

 

You are putting words in my mouth, dear son. I never said he was. Please

see the paragraph above.

 

I don't know why you're so stubbornly clinging to this total defense and

idealization of today's India. Your imbalanced view is really hurting the

point that you're trying to make. Yes, some Indians have a lot to teach us.

Otehrs are displaying behaviors that we want to stay far, far removed from.

It's not a black and white picture - not even in India.

 

Also, you never explained your previous statement about life members.

Personally, I hold them in high regard, often being both well educated and

Krsna Conscious. none of this information is going to be news to them. For

example, the lead story in Hinduism Today last month was on domestic

violence in Indian families. Many of them are also physicians and well

aware of the AIDS crisis there. There are several organizations of Indian

physicians, other professionals and industrial leaders who are funding AIDS

prevention work. Their children who are studying at US Ivy league colleges

are volunteering their summers to conduct AIDS prevention and other health

projects in several Indian cities. I traveled around in India with some of

them. hey are definitely not in illusion about anything that I've written.

 

Ys,

Madhusudani dasi

[Guest guest]

>>And you also missed my point: Indian society, particularly with regard to

>>marriage, was considered by Srila Prabhupada to be a model for his

disciples

>>to learn from.

>

>Could you please supply a specific quote for that, so we don't get off on a

>thread that's not based on what Prabhupada really said, but can discuss

>Prqabhupada's actual words? Thank you.?

 

 

Typical of you to pretend you didn't see a quote, particularly when it

doesn't suit your purposes.

 

Srila Prabhupada did make generalizations. Perhaps you consider this more

"wishful thinking" on his part.

 

Conversation, May 14 1975 Perth

------

Prabhupada: Yes, that is fourth class. This is the proof. Fourth-class men

administering... Just like misadministration not immediately detected. After

some time, when the case is unmanageable, it is detected. Therefore

fourth-class men. Simply these Western people, they know how to earn money

by hook and crook. So, so long the money is there it is covered, the

fourth-class men. And when the money is finished, they are exposed,

fourth-class men. They're simply covered by money. No social structure, no

spiritual understanding, no character, nothing of the sort. Still India, so

fallen, you... 95% people, living, husband and wife, very peacefully. And in

the Western countries after six months' marriage, divorce. Are they not

fourth class? Even the husband and wife cannot continue peaceful life, what

to speak of others. Now this rascal Jawaharlal Nehru has introduced divorce

in the Hindu society. Otherwise in the Hindu society separation between

husband and wife is not even dreamt of. That, it cannot be. However there

may be quarrelsome, but there is no question of separation. Husband and

wife, they fight, everywhere. I have seen. My father and mother was

fighting. I fought. (laughter) But there is no question of separation.

Separation, they never think. Neither the husband can think of, nor the wife

can think of. Even in the life of Gandhi there was fight between husband and

wife, and the Gandhi one day drove his wife, "Get out from my home." So she

was put into the street, and she began to cry, "Where shall I go?" And then

Gandhi ans..., "Come on." Yes. And Canakya Pandita said, bambharambhe

laghu-kriya. The husband and wife may fight. It becomes a very serious

thing, but don't take of it as serious. This is Hindu philosophy. Husband

and wife quarrel should not be taken as very serious. They fight and again

they live peacefully. Why this divorce? The divorce mean it kills the whole

family life. The children goes away; the father goes away; the mother goes

away. I have seen so many cases.

---------------------------

 

ys KKdas

[Guest guest]

>

>

> There are going to be an awful lot of life members who see your letter :-)

 

Why would life members see her letter?

[Guest guest]

WOW! Thank you Madhusudani for opening our eyes!

 

The influences of the age are everywhere! I wish we could all read what you

wrote and feel a communal urgency to spread the Holy Name as a team;

women/men/children/bramacari/bramacarini/ householder /sanyasi/etc.

 

How strong can our army be if the soldiers are fighting?

 

Jagarini dd

 

 

 

 

----------

Maria Ekstrand [sMTP:ekstrand (AT) slip (DOT) net]

Tuesday, November 23, 1999 6:32 PM

ISKCON.India (AT) bbt (DOT) se; India.Open (AT) bbt (DOT) se; cshannon (AT) mdo (DOT) net;

Basu.Ghosh.ACBSP (AT) bbt (DOT) se; Mahat (AT) aol (DOT) com; Varnasrama.Development (AT) bbt (DOT) se

Cc: Women's.Ministry (AT) bbt (DOT) se; Babhru.acbsp (AT) bbt (DOT) se

Vedic India?

 

>Westerners, however, suffer through marriage after divorce after

marriage

>after divorce, etc. Not all of them, but certainly much more than

their

>Indian counterparts.

 

Hmmmmm.... sounds like *somewhat* of an overgeneralization. But

it's true,

these are problems, although I wouldn't generalize it to all

westerners.

 

>Yes, and when they grow up, they also have a more difficult time

with

>aspects of life, like marriage. Generally, Indian couples usually

get along

>well with each other. And even if they don't, they still somehow

manage to

>pull through.

 

Here are some facts: 95% of the Indian men (80% Hindu, who were

mostly

Vaisnavas) who show up in the dermatology clinics of two large

Mumbai

hospitals had visited sex workers in the past 3 months. 63% of them

reported that they got drunk on a regular basis, 16% of the men in

one

hospital and 39% in another hospital reported having had anal sex

with

other men in the past 3 months. Outreach workers can tell you which

parks,

train stations and public restrooms where this happens. (same in

Delhi and

Calcutta) and I can forward that information to anyone who wants to

check

for himself.

 

They were in their 20s, 30s and 40s.

 

And for those of you who are convinced that these kinds of things

only

happen in the big cities due to excessive western influence:

 

In the 4 health care clinics in rural south India that I visited,

alcoholism and domestic violence were the two biggest problems.

Health

care workers from the rest of India who attended a conference in

Chennai in

November all spoke of these problems as being prevalent in their

communities too, so it can hardly be called an isolated phenomenon.

Women

were being beaten when they complained that their husbands had spent

the

family's money on alcohol, so that the children were going hungry.

They

were also being beaten when they requested health care.

 

Yes, it's true that most women still stay in their marriages. What

other

alternatives are there for them if they don't want to get shunned?

But

given the misery the families of these men have to endure as a

consequence,

I'm not sure we can point to this situation as an example for us to

follow.

STDs are also rampant in these settings due to extra-marital sex

among the

men. HIV is not that prevalent yet (as far as we know) , but given

those

behavior patterns and prevalence of other STDs, it's only a matter

of time

before HIV infections become big problems in these areas too. I saw

women

who were widowed at 16-25 due to having been married to much older

HIV

infected men in these areas. Those women were now also infected,

even

though they had only had sex with their husbands, and they had *no

future*.

Their in-laws frequently threw them out after their husbands died,

and were

only interested in keeping their uninfected male grandchildren, if

there

were any.

 

The only positive sign in those villages was the fact that some

women had

started organizing and borrowing money to start their own

home-based

businesses. The banks were happy because the women were much better

that

the men in terms of repaying their loans, and the money they made

was more

likely to actually go to feeding and clothing the children.

 

Indian truck drivers (nation wide) who were interviewed at several

rest

stops reported an average of 20 sex partners per month. These

encounters

included both male and female sex workers, as well as their

co-drivers

(assistants) giving them blow jobs.

 

In Manipur, 80% of the injection drug users (and there are many,

given its

proximity to Burma) are HIV positive and are now beginning to infect

their

wives and unborn children.

 

Due to all these slightly less than moral behaviors among Indians

(primarily men), India now has more HIV infections than any other

country

in the world and the rate is increasing quickly.

 

So please before you go on another "Indian couples are superior to

Western

couples" trip again, please look at the whole picture. It's not as

idyllic

as you make it seem here in COM cyberspace.

 

Ys,

Madhusudani dasi

[Guest guest]

Christopher Shannon wrote:

 

> And you also missed my point: Indian society, particularly with regard to

> marriage, was considered by Srila Prabhupada to be a model for his

> disciples to learn from.

>

 

Etc.

 

Indian society... The International Society for KC was started in Western

countries, and many times Srila Prabhupada glorified us for being able to

understand and take up this worship and philosophy. It is because of Western

men and women -alike- that this movement spread in India. On the contrary

Srila Prabhupada was quite deceived with the Indian mentality. The incident

in the Ramana temple is very significant in this regard. Prabhupada gave

more spiritual credit to his Western disciple than to the Indian pujari.

I am not saying here that this side or that side is better, (it is a false

debate; it is like saying the right brain is better than the left brain,

especially in regard of our society.) I am only trying to point out to you

that your are simplifying without taking in consideration many important

facteurs. In this regard, Madhusudani brought us some interesting

information. I did not read the whole discussion, but I thing she did that

just to give a more balanced perspective to those who may have an ideal view

of what is Indian society. And in that sense, she did well. Before that,

already, I have heard horrible facts regarding homosexuality in bengal. Your

hair will erect still on your head if you knew about them.

 

Ys

[Guest guest]

>I don't know why you're so stubbornly clinging to this total defense and

>idealization of today's India.

 

Probably because Srila Prabhupada did.

 

>Your imbalanced view is really hurting the

>point that you're trying to make.

 

Is my view "imbalanced"? Then we could also call Srila Prabhupada's views

imbalanced:

 

"Everyone is under the control of the Supreme Personality of Godhead,

exactly like dancing dolls controlled by a puppeteer or a woman controlled

by her husband. A woman is compared to a doll (darumayi) because she has no

independence. She should always be controlled by a man. Still, due to false

prestige, a class of women wants to remain independent." (SB 5.18.26

purport)

 

Aparently, your views, and Srila Prabhuapda's views, do not concur. Is that

not correct?

[Guest guest]

>On the contrary

>Srila Prabhupada was quite deceived with the Indian mentality. The incident

>in the Ramana temple is very significant in this regard. Prabhupada gave

>more spiritual credit to his Western disciple than to the Indian pujari.

 

First of all, marriage, in and of itself, is not spiritual. However, since

most people are not liberated (and yes, that includes women), many of them

(if not most) must get married.

 

That is why Srila Prabhuapda's generalization with regard to married life is

quite appropriate, even if not everyone Srila Prabhupada used as an example

was a vaishnava. like Gandhi, for example. Mataji Madhusudani's quoting of

statistics in order to discredit Indian society as something we should look

to for instruction is therefore contrary to Srila Prabhupada's purpose,

which is to describe what is the proper way to conduct one's self in a

marriage. And Srila Prabhupada often refered to Indian society, IN GENERAL,

as an example. (and as in the example I have provided)

 

If you've spent a good deal of time in India, you will know that these

generalizations Srila Prabhupada made are still quite true today.

 

ys KKdas

[Guest guest]

Hmm? "Prabhupada was quite deceived with the Indian mentality?" What are you

saying? Did you mean to use a word other than "deceived?" If so, what should

the word have been????

 

 

YS,

 

PTD

 

 

On 24 Nov 1999, Akhilesvara das wrote:

 

 

> men and women -alike- that this movement spread in India. On the contrary

> Srila Prabhupada was quite deceived with the Indian mentality. The incident

> in the Ramana temple is very significant in this regard.

[Guest guest]

> >that Indian men in general are somehow either

> >as degraded or moreso than their western counterparts, is simply not

> >true.

>

> You completely missed my point, so let me please try again:

>

> I'm not saying that Indian men are not any more degraded that western men.

> But what the statistics show is that Indian society is a complex one, with

> many of the same problems plaguing the west.

>

> The high prevalence of alcoholism, domestic violence and sexually

> transmitted diseases in India show that we can not generalize and say that

> all things Indian are good and all things Western are bad.

 

Mataji & other readers; the observations on the degredation of Indian

society are sadly true.

 

But why?

 

It is the influence of "things western"; added to the fact of 1,000 years of

mleccha & yavana governence... the over commercialization of society (thank

the capitalist Americans & British for that!)

 

This is the point.

 

> Before we hold another society up as a role model, we need to look at many

> aspects and not just anecdotal data and wishful thinking. I just want some

> balance in this discussion. It has been sadly missed in ISKCON to date.

>

> Ys,

> Madhusudani dasi

 

Still, there are many aspects of vedic culture, religion, etc., still quite

previlant here in India and that is why Srila Prabhupada concentrated his

efforts & major projects here, which our learned, PhD holding Mataji has yet

to take into full consideration (although I agree she's taking it into SOME

consideration... otherwise... she wouldn't be here!)

 

Role models for society... Srila Prabhupada spoke about that time & again

too... instead of projecting our concepts... why don't we try & learn from

his teachings on the subject?

 

VaiŠava d€sanud€s,

 

B€su Ghosh D€s

[Guest guest]

At 17:40 -0800 11/24/99, COM: Basu Ghosh (das) ACBSP (Baroda - IN) wrote:

>

>Role models for society... Srila Prabhupada spoke about that time & again

>too... instead of projecting our concepts... why don't we try & learn from

>his teachings on the subject?

 

I agree completely. If the issue is that we need to focus on those aspects

of Indian culture that are condusive to developing our Krsna Consciousness,

then we're in complete agreement.

 

It's just this complete idealization of Indian culture and complete

demonization of all things western, that are starting to feel a little old

and completely out of balance. And I just don't seee how imitating those

aspects of Indian culture that are associated with alcoholism, domestic

violence and STDs are going to get us any closer to Krsna.

 

Like the rest of you, I feel sad about the problems that exist all over the

world, including in India. None of us take pleasure in them. We just can't

deny that they're there. Thank you, Basu Ghosh Prabhu, for acknowledging

that the picture is not black and white.

 

Ys,

Madhusudani dasi

[Guest guest]

>[Text 2805070 from COM]

>

>>I don't know why you're so stubbornly clinging to this total defense and

>>idealization of today's India.

>

>Probably because Srila Prabhupada did.

 

But even Basu Ghosh has agreed that India has changed a lot in the past 30

years as Kali Yuga has made inroads. Do you really think Prabhupada would

approve of its increased prevalence of alcoholism, drug use, extramarital

sex, STDs and domestic violence? Of course he wouldn't.

 

 

>Aparently, your views, and Srila Prabhuapda's views, do not concur. Is that

>not correct?

 

A double negative, "Is it not correct that my views and Prabhupada's

views do not cuncur"? Hmmmmmmm. I'll have to restate that one: I do

concur with Prabhupada. He had no problem speaking out against immoral

behaviors wherever they occurred - even when this was in India. So it

appears that it is you who are in disagreement with Prabhupada, since you

appear to want to deny or minimize the very real problems that are plaguing

India.

 

Your quote is irrelevant to this discussion. We're not discussing women's

submissiveness to their husbands. We're discussing what a balanced picture

of India looks like.

 

Ys,

Madhusudani dasi

[Guest guest]

> Before that,

> already, I have heard horrible facts regarding homosexuality in bengal. Your

> hair will erect still on your head if you knew about them.

>

> Ys

 

>From what I know of these rah rah India guys and their treatment of gurukulis,

it's not their hair we have to be worried about being erect.

[Guest guest]

Christopher Shannon wrote:

 

> [Text 2805070 from COM]

>

> >I don't know why you're so stubbornly clinging to this total defense and

> >idealization of today's India.

>

> Probably because Srila Prabhupada did.

>

 

So India was so rich. But now how that India has become so poor? The same land

is there. Why? Because they have lost that old culture, God consciousness. You

see? And at least my calculation is that, that a state, a secular state...

Secular state means he has no... Here in America you have got state religion.

You have got state religion. But in India there is no state religion. Every

country has state religion. Even Pakistan, it has divided. It is now a part of

India. But they have also their state religion. But unfortunately India has no

state religion. That means deliberately they are trying to disconnect with God

relation, godly relation.

 

>>> Ref. VedaBase => Bhagavad-gita 2.48-49 -- New York, April 1, 1966

 

 

 

Since India has become dependent on foreign countries, the particular

influences

of her social orders have been lost; now, according to the scriptures, everyone

is a sudra. The so-called brahmanas, ksatriyas and vaisyas have forgotten their

traditional activities, and in the absence of these activities they are called

sudras. It is said in the scriptures, kalau sudra-sambhavah. In the age of Kali

everyone will be like sudras. The traditional social customs are not followed

in

this age, although formerly they were followed strictly.

 

>>> Ref. VedaBase => SB 3.22.16

 

 

 

 

 

 

>

>

> Aparently, your views, and Srila Prabhuapda's views, do not concur. Is that

> not correct?

[Guest guest]

> All of this has come into being literally after I

> came here to India in 1974.

 

Ah, yes, finally a reality check.

 

 

>

>

> It DOES NOT teach that women should be abused/battered/locked away in a room

> or whatever apprehensions in this regard you have presented so far. Far

> from that... females were to be shown the highest regard as "devis" or

> goddesses...

 

Thank you for a much more realistic response.

 

I too am no fan of modern society. Unfortunately, the whole world is, as

has

been pointed out, becoming, or trying to become, Westernized. so while it

is

important for preservation efforts to go on to try and salvage what is left of

Vedic culture in India, it is also important to face reality and think of how

Krsna consciousness can not only survive, but thrive in modern culture.

Idealistically clinging to some remnant of past glory may not be effective.

 

Spirituality is not dependent on any material standard. Yes, wouldn't it be

wonderful if all the women were first class. But we have seen that the women,

who were submissive to the instruction to send their children away, then saw

them abused Is it any wonder that the women might not consider the men first

class?

 

As men, let's worry about being first class men. Even as big a feminist as

Jane Fonda, once she met a man who was appropriate for her... So let's not

wait for the women to become submissive village women while the men live urban

lifestyles, dependent on others for the very food they eat. First let's

see

what kind of a system we can evolve that makes ISKCON a land based society in

the modern world of current reality. It may mean that some of the old customs

aren't as viable as they once were in order to accomplish that.

[Guest guest]

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

> Is my view "imbalanced"? Then we could also call Srila Prabhupada's views

> imbalanced:

>

> "Everyone is under the control of the Supreme Personality of Godhead,

> exactly like dancing dolls controlled by a puppeteer or a woman controlled

> by her husband. A woman is compared to a doll (darumayi) because she has

> no independence. She should always be controlled by a man. Still, due to

> false prestige, a class of women wants to remain independent." (SB 5.18.26

> purport)

>

> Aparently, your views, and Srila Prabhuapda's views, do not concur. Is

> that not correct?

 

What Srila Prabhupada´s view is can be severely changed by taking such a

small part of a text out of context.

 

Actually the point in the verse to the purport, does not have as its

purpose to establish the superiority of neither men or women, allthough it

is mentioned for the sake of example. The verse and the whole chapter speaks

of the superiority of the Supreme Lord and the helplessness of the tiny

living entity and the term false prestige is mentioned in many connections

both towards men and women as an impediment since neither are independent

controllers but simply servants.

 

Just after the part you quote, Srila Prabhupada continues:

"What to speak of women, all living entities are prakrti (female) and

therefore dependent on the Supreme Lord, as Krishna Himself explains in the

Bhagavad Gita (apareyam itas tv anyam prakrtim viddhi me param). The living

entity is never independant. Under all circumstances he is dependent on the

mercy of the Lord."

 

The verse itself goes like this:

"My dear Lord, just as a puppeteer controls his dancing dolls and a husband

controls his wife, Your Lordship controls all the living entities in the

universe, such as the brahmanas, ksatriyas, vaisyas and sudras. Although You

are in everyone`s heart as the supreme witness and commander and are outside

everyone as well, the socalled leaders of societies, communities and

countries cannot realize You. Only those who hear the vibration of the Vedic

mantras can appreciate You."

 

The purpose of the whole chapter is not to establish men as superior to

women, which will be obvious to everyone who reads it, but to establish the

supremecy of the Lord:

 

"My dear Lord, You are certainly the fully independent master of all the

senses. Therefore all women who worship You by strictly observing vows

because they wish to acquire a husband to satisfy their senses are surely

under illusion. they do not know that such a husband cannot actually give

protection to them or their children. Nor can he protect their wealth or

duration of life, for he himself is dependent on time, fruitive results and

the modes of nature, which are all subordinate to You." (text 19 same

chapter) This is Laxmidevi speaking.

 

In the purport we find many statements regarding the superiority of

worshipping Krishna compared to worshipping husband or wife:

 

"There are many examples of a woman whose husband, being dependent on the

result of his own fruitive actions, cannot maintain his wife, her children,

her wealth or her duration of live. Therefore, factually the only real

husband of all women is Krishna, the supreme husband. Because the gopies

were liberated souls, they understood this fact. Therefore they rejected

their material husbands and accepted Krishna as their real husband. Krishna

is the real husband not only of the gopis but of every living entity."

 

"Krishna is the original purusa and the living entities are prakrti. Thus

Krishna is the enjoyer, and all the living entities are meant to be enjoyed

by Him. Therefore any woman who seeks a material husband for her protection,

or any man who desires to become the husband of a woman, is under illusion."

 

"Therefore if one proudly thinks he can protect his wife, he is under

illusion."

 

Text 20.

"He alone who is never afraid but who, on the contrary, gives complete

shelter to fearful persons can actually become a husband and protector.

Therefore, my Lord, you are the only husband, and no one else can claim this

position. If you were not the only husband, You would be afraid of others.

Therefore persons learned in all Vedic literature accept only Your Lordship

as everyone´s master, and they think no one else a better husband and

protector than You."

 

Part of purport:

"Since socalled leaders or dictators are completely under the control of

material nature, they can never give complete protection to others, although

they claim this ability due to false prestige. Na te viduh svartha-gatim hi

visnum: people do not know that real advanchement in life consist of

accepting the Supreme Personality of Godhead as one´s master. Instead of

decieving themselves and others by pretending to be all-powerful, all

political leaders, husbands and guardians should spread the Krishna

consciousness movement so that everyone can learn how to surrender to

Krishna, the supreme husband."

 

And even though we are aware that we might not be on the pure platform of

devotional service yet, still in the purport of text 21 same chapter it is

said:

Therefore the Srimad Bhagavatam enjoins:

"A person who has broader intelligence, whether he is full of all material

desire, is free from material desire or has a desire for liberation, must by

all means worship the supreme whole, the Personality of Godhead."

(Bhag.2.3.10)

 

Submitted with pleasure.

Your servant Gunamani d.d.

[Guest guest]

> >[Text 2805070 from COM]

> >

> >>I don't know why you're so stubbornly clinging to this total defense and

> >>idealization of today's India.

> >

> >Probably because Srila Prabhupada did.

>

> But even Basu Ghosh has agreed that India has changed a lot in the past 30

> years as Kali Yuga has made inroads. Do you really think Prabhupada would

> approve of its increased prevalence of alcoholism, drug use, extramarital

> sex, STDs and domestic violence? Of course he wouldn't.

>

>

> >Aparently, your views, and Srila Prabhuapda's views, do not concur. Is

> >that not correct?

>

> A double negative, "Is it not correct that my views and Prabhupada's

> views do not cuncur"? Hmmmmmmm. I'll have to restate that one: I do

> concur with Prabhupada. He had no problem speaking out against immoral

> behaviors wherever they occurred - even when this was in India. So it

> appears that it is you who are in disagreement with Prabhupada, since you

> appear to want to deny or minimize the very real problems that are

> plaguing India.

>

> Your quote is irrelevant to this discussion. We're not discussing women's

> submissiveness to their husbands. We're discussing what a balanced

> picture of India looks like.

>

> Ys,

> Madhusudani dasi

 

I thought we were talking about the incident at the Krishna Balaram Mandir

in Vrindavan where Western ISKCON Matajis have demanded & seemingly been

awarded "equal rights" with the men.

 

Not a very palatable situation; at least in public & during mangal arati.

And also we were discussing the kind of formal regard that is to be given to

sannyasis; which is where the incident began in the first place.

 

VaiŠava d€sanud€s,

 

B€su Ghosh D€s

[Guest guest]

>I thought we were talking about the incident at the Krishna Balaram Mandir

>in Vrindavan where Western ISKCON Matajis have demanded & seemingly been

>awarded "equal rights" with the men.

 

OK. Here are some relevant words from Srila Prabhupda on the topic of equal

spiritual rights.

 

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

Morning walk Dec 10 1975:

 

Indian man: Women are subordinate.

Prabhupada: Not subordinate actually. The occupations are

different. It does not mean... That is another mistake.

 

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

 

Prabhupada: There are so many Western woman, girls, in our

society. They are chanting, dancing, taking to Krsna

consciousness. Of course, because superficially, bodily, there is

some distinction, so we keep women separately from men, that's

all. Otherwise, the rights are the same.

 

Prof. O'Connell: Is it possible, Swamiji, for a woman to be a guru in

the line of disciplic succession?

 

Prabhupada: Yes. Jahnava devi was -- Nityananda's wife. She

became. If she is able to go to the highest perfection of life, why it

is not possible to become guru?

 

>>> Ref. VedaBase => Interview with Professors O'Connell, Motilal

 

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

 

Who has introduced these things, that women cannot have

chanting japa in the temple, they cannot perform the arati and so

many things? If they become agitated, then let the brahmacaris go

to the forest, I have never introduced these things. The brahmacaris

cannot remain in the presence of women in the temple, then they

may go to the forest, not remaining in New York City, because in

New York there are so many women, so how they can avoid

seeing?

 

>>> Ref. VedaBase => Letter to: Ekayani -- Bombay 3 December,

1972

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

Devotee (9): What I meant to say is he does not want to chant with

women in the temple room. I have seen this before. He says, "I do

not want to chant in a room with women. I would rather be away

from the women."

 

Prabhupada: That means he has got distinction between men and

women. He is not yet pandit. Panditah sama-darsinah [bg. 5.18].

He is a fool. That's all. He is a fool. So what is the value of his

words? He is a fool.

 

Indian man (4): So he'll go first to make...

 

Prabhupada: He should always consider, "There is woman, that's

all. She is my mother." That's all. Matrvat para-daresu. Then what

is the...? Suppose you sit down with your mother and chant. What

is the wrong? But he is not so strong; then he should go to the

forest. Why he should live in the Nairobi city?

 

>>> Ref. VedaBase => Morning Walk -- November 2, 1975, Nairobi