ISKCON Social Model

[Guest guest]

> > The most contentious of these three duties is that of the husband as

> > guide for his wife, particularly a spiritual guide. Often the husband is

> > not an ideal devotee-he might be only a nominal or mediocre devotee-and

> > so the wife is not inclined to take instruction from him. Also, because

> > modern women are accustomed to the notion of equality with men, they are

> > not inclined to accept even a qualified husband as a guide. Still, the

> > ideal is that a husband must become a first-class man, or a brahmana.

>

>

> The above is taken from "Iskcon Social Model" sent by Shyamasundara

> Prabhu.

>

> Is it not that the wife must be inferior in all respects to the husband?

> Then the marriage may be successful. Like in the story of king Kakudmi who

> took great trouble to search out a qualified, or in other words superior,

> husband for his daughter. ...or the story of Sita devi, for example. That

> is an important aspect to be taken to consideration before a marriage is

> arranged.

 

The husband is always superior, that's the position of 'husband.' Whether

the wife is a pure devotee and the husband is a neophyte is irrelevant. The

fact remains that he is the husband, and respect must be given to his

superior position. Regardless of whether or not George W. Bush is a complete

moron, he occupies the position of President of the United States, a

powerful post. While one may find it impossible to respect the man, one

should understand that it is easy to respect the position. Same with the

husband and wife--the wife may be more qualified than her husband, but he is

superior because he's the husband.

 

However, he is only 'superior' in quality if he can deliver his dependents.

In the 5th canto, Srila Prabhupada refers to the wives of the Brahmanas as a

perfect example of women who rejected their husbands because they couldn't

free them from material entanglement. So right there is a scriptural

precedent for not following someone who cannot deliver you from death. He is

to be rejected.

 

"Anyone who is claiming to be superior, he should be responsible for the

inferior's spiritual advancement of life. So the conclusion is that they

should not claim to become such and such unless they are able to save the

subordinate from the imminent danger of death."

 

London, July 12, 1973