Varna first, then Asrama - comments by Ameyatma Prabhu

[Guest guest]

In remarks attributed to Ameyatma das, Basu Gosh prabhu posted the

following paragraph:

 

>So, yes, Plato, Soccratees, Pythagorus, Kant, Narad Muni, Chanakya,

>Einstien, Edison, Ben Franklin, Issac Newton, De Vinci, SP, to name a few

>off the top of my head, they are all men. What great female thinkers are

>there in hisotry (outside of very unique and special Vaishnavis, such as

>Sarasvati)? So, he told his own lady disciples that actually shastra and

>philosophy is mostly only for the men.

 

Such silly rubbish. Einstein, whom Ameyatma prabhu cites, actually

published as his own a lot of maths which were actually worked out by his

wife. Pierre Curie and Marie Curie were very much a team of scientific

collaborators. And Aristotle famously maintained, utterly without

foundation, that women had more teeth than men, but he never asked his

wife to open her mouth.

 

No doubt there were many great thinkers in history other than the men

usually cited in such lists. Many of these thinkers were certainly women.

A lot of feminine lore was, no doubt, passed on via oral tradition rather

than through writing. But because the contributions of women, even if of

excellent calibre, have historically been undervalued or devalued by the

men who compiled the surviving histories, the cycle of men valuing only

the contributions of other men goes on, self-perpetuating and

unquestioned. Ameyatma provides no useful information when he writes a

message like the above, which essentially reduces to nothing more

thoughtful than, "It is so, because it is so."

 

Best wishes,

Ananda das

[Guest guest]

In remarks attributed to Ameyatma das, Basu Gosh prabhu posted the

following paragraph:

 

>So, yes, Plato, Soccratees, Pythagorus, Kant, Narad Muni, Chanakya,

>Einstien, Edison, Ben Franklin, Issac Newton, De Vinci, SP, to name a few

>off the top of my head, they are all men. What great female thinkers are

>there in hisotry (outside of very unique and special Vaishnavis, such as

>Sarasvati)? So, he told his own lady disciples that actually shastra and

>philosophy is mostly only for the men.

 

Such silly rubbish. Einstein, whom Ameyatma prabhu cites, actually

published as his own a lot of maths which were actually worked out by his

wife. Pierre Curie and Marie Curie were very much a team of scientific

collaborators. And Aristotle famously maintained, utterly without

foundation, that women had more teeth than men, but he never asked his

wife to open her mouth.

 

No doubt there were many great thinkers in history other than the men

usually cited in such lists. Many of these thinkers were certainly women.

A lot of feminine lore was, no doubt, passed on via oral tradition rather

than through writing. But because the contributions of women, even if of

excellent calibre, have historically been undervalued or devalued by the

men who compiled the surviving histories, the cycle of men valuing only

the contributions of other men goes on, self-perpetuating and

unquestioned. Ameyatma provides no useful information when he writes a

message like the above, which essentially reduces to nothing more

thoughtful than, "It is so, because it is so."

 

Best wishes,

Ananda das