Female sanyasis

[Guest guest]

I wrote:

 

>> . But as many on this

>> conference advocate the equality of men and women,

 

Madhava Ghosh responded:

>Not the equality of men and women, that is a strawman argument GHQ

>types stubbornly cling to. What many of us support is equal

>opportunity and judging position by qualification, not by birth. That

>is a big difference. shouldn't she be allowed to take sannyasa.

>No, she shouldn't be allowed to take sannyasa. Why? Because sastra

>forbids it.

>

>"Quoting from the Brahma-vaivarta Purana, Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu said:

>

>asvamedham gavalambham

>sannyasam pala-paitrkam

>devarena sutotpattim

>kalau panca vivarjayet

> [Cc. Adi 17.164]

>

>"In this age of Kali, five acts are forbidden: the offering of a horse

>in sacrifice, the offering of a cow in sacrifice, the acceptance of the

>order of sannyasa, the offering of oblations of flesh to the

>forefathers, and a man's begetting children in his brother's wife.

>>>> Ref. VedaBase => SB 9.6.7

 

Well, according to your quotation Srila Prabhupada, Srila Bhaktisiddhanta et

al also shouldn't have been allowed to take sanyasa. Also, there is no

mention of a particular restriction specific to the ladies here.

 

Perhaps you should have dug a little deeper into the folio and you might

have found the purport to the above sastric quotation in the purport to Adi

15.14

<<Nevertheless we see that Sri Caitanya Mahäprabhu Himself accepted sannyäsa

and approved of the sannyäsa of His elder brother, Visvarüpa. It is clearly

said here, bhäla haila,——viçvarüpa sannyäsa karila pitå-kula,

mätå-kula,——dui uddhärila. Therefore, should it be thought that Sri Caitanya

Mahäprabhu made statements that are contradictory? No, actually He did not.

It is recommended that one accept sannyäsa to dedicate his life for the

service of the Lord, and everyone must take that kind of sannyäsa, for by

accepting such sannyäsa one renders the best service to both his paternal

and maternal families. But one should not accept the sannyäsa order of the

Mäyäväda school, which has practically no meaning.>>

 

But still there is no specific mention of ladies not taking sanyasa so I

would still ask Hare Krsna dasi's indulgence (or anyone else) to list any

such quotes since the above mentioned quote falls far short in defining a

sastric answer. She has performed such a herculean task in researching these

topics that I am sure she has much info on the subject.

 

And finally, since I know Mother Malati corresponds to this conference since

I have seen previous submissions to her: do you still consider yourself a

sannyasini?

 

And to comment on Madhava Ghosh's earlier comment:

>Not the equality of men and women, that is a strawman argument GHQ

>types stubbornly cling to. What many of us support is equal

>opportunity and judging position by qualification, not by birth

 

I don't understand the response here. Is not equal opportunity the same as

equality. I think you are simply juggling words. Not to mention that you

contradict yourself by later stating that women don't have the opportunity

to take sannyasa even though you were speculating on the purport to this

sastric quotation. So make up your mind--which is it?