GHQ want women acaryas

[Guest guest]

"COM: Mahakratu (das) ACBSP" wrote:

 

> [Text 2825393 from COM]

>

> Reference: Text COM:2823009 by Isvara (das) GGS (Vrindavana - IN)

>

> > Certainly your portrayer of India is correct, and I am definitely not

> > blind to it. But as Canakya Pandita pointed out that an intelligent person

> > must be able to find gold in a pile of mud, just as a poor man marrying a

> > girl from a rich family.

>

> As far as I know, Srila Prabhupada left India to preach in the west, where

> he was able to make considerble progress making devotees. He then returned

> to India with those devotees to preach to the Indians. He said on different

> occasions that we should make America KC and the whole world will follow. He

> seemed to think that was possible, why don't we?

 

I think Srila Prabhupada clearly saw that what the West was then, was what

India would become in the future and went for the belly of the beast, trying

to

devise a way for Krsna consciousness to survive in a crumbling culture. Even

all the submissive women in India were unable to stem this inevitable tide of

the raising influence of ugrakarma in India.

 

The real dichotomy is between the simple ecologically sound lifestyle of the

villages and the ugrkarmic dominanted cities where the consciousness of

connectedness to the land has been lost. India versus West, woman versus men,

these are unproductive lines of argumentation. There are good people in the

West, arguably more per capita in India, but the problems of the West are the

future problems of India. I personally prefer to drive my auto looking forward

through the windshield than gazing longingly in the rear view mirror at what is

being left behind.

 

The transition in India from the 70s to date certainly validates Srila

Prbhupada's vision. Let's try to at least share a little in it. As a man, I

think blaming the problems on the women is weak. Something weak men will do.

Try to be a strong man first, then worry about the woman. Some expect all

women

to act like village women, yet feel no responsibility to build the village.

 

Women are thought to need to conform to old style Vedic conceptions, yet no

one thinks twice when a sannyasi doen't live in the forest, wears factory

produced cloth instead of bark or deerskin, and passes his stools into water.

I am not saying this to diminish what the sannyasis are doing, they probably

should and need to be doing these things. But if the "spiritual masters of the

society" are showing the example of not strictly following Vedic details from

the Manu Samhita, asking the women to "get up on the roof tops" is simply

hypocrisy. Why should the women be strict followers, when the "spiritual

masters of the society" are exempted. If the women were stricter followers,

then, by their example, by definition, they would supersede the sannyasis

as

the acaryas, (acarya = those who teach by example). Is that really what the

GHQ is trying to promote? They want woman as their acaryas?