Guest guest Posted June 25, 2002 Report Share Posted June 25, 2002 Dear Matajis, Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada. Bhakta-vigna-vinasa Nrsimhadeva Bhagavan ki jaya! First of all I want to say that something is wrong with PAMHO. Texts that Urmila responds to Sita get sent to me but not Sita, texts like the following where she responds to me get sent to Sita but not me that is why I am responding to what Sita wrote because I never got the original text that Urmila wrote. I don't know if I missed any other texts either. Needless to say it makes matters confusing. In any case I will try to respond. > > Sita Devi Dasi [sitadasi (AT) sympatico (DOT) ca] > Monday, June 24, 2002 10:25 AM > Katha (AT) pamho (DOT) net; Brahmacarya (AT) pamho (DOT) net; Vedic.Astrology (AT) pamho (DOT) net; > Urmila (dd) ACBSP (ISKCON School NC - USA); Krsna-krpa (das) SDG (BI) > (Alachua, FL - USA); (Krsna) Katha > Cc: Trivikrama Swami; Ameyatma Prabhu; Bhaktivedanta Academy (Mayapur - > IN); Vidvan Gauranga (das) JPS (Mayapur - IN); vyapaka Prabhu > Re: Women's role and intelligence > > > > "Shyamasundara (das) ACBSP (Vedic Astrologer) > > (USA)"<Shyamasundara.ACBSP (AT) pamho (DOT) net> > > > Dear Mataji, > > > > Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada. > > Bhakta-vigna-vinasa Nrsimhadeva Bhagavan ki jaya! > > > > I found the following statement by you oxymoronic: > > > > "to keep purity and sastric authority." > > > > Why? Because you never once in your response to me or Sita > Mataji quote any > > sastra. Not even once. What you would do is along the following lines: > > Shyamasundara Prabhu, I never received the text to which you are replying. > Re. these references which Urmila Devi has supplied, perhaps you > can provide > some comment when you get a chance. My view, boring by now, is as > follows... > > >>>> Ref. VedaBase => SB 9.18.23 > > >>>> Ref. VedaBase => KB 60: Talks Between Krsna and Rukmini > > These first and second quotes refer to compatibility. Sita is right they only refer to compatibility, it doesn't establish that women have a varna. It is only natural that their svabhava tends one way or the other according to birth, education, association, etc., so practically they can be classed as 'brahmin girl' 'ksatriya girl (meaning from the family of a brahmin, ksatriya, etc). But the quality of their husband will be the final determining factor. So when doing a compatibility it would be desirable for a Brahmana to marry a girl raised in the household of brahmana because she will be familiar with the way brahmanas live and be better able to serve her brahmana husband. > > >>>> Ref. VedaBase => SB 1.14.42 > > refers to the caste of the girl's family. Ditto > > >>>> Ref. VedaBase => SB 11.17.39 > > These are not Srila Prabhupada's words. I am more liberal, even it is not Prabhupada's words it is the same case as the previous: it refers to the family the girl belongs to. And it should be remembered that I said it is axiomatic that females have different qualities under the three gunas hence a brahmana should be married to a girl with predominantly sattva guna, better still if she comes from a cultured family of a brahmana father because in such a family satva guna is cultivated the girls will be educated in misic and dance and similar kalas. A Kshatriya who wants to have strong sons would be inclined to marry the daughter of a strong fighter if she displayed other rajasic qualities as well. The same for men of other varnas would want a women who was a similar guna. But remember varna requires guna+karma, whereas for women there is guna but no karma other than SB 7.11.25-29 > > >>>> Ref. VedaBase => KB 78: The Killing of Dantavakra, Viduratha and > > Romaharsana > > Refers to caste. > > >>>> Ref. VedaBase => Bhagavad-gita 9.29-32 -- New York, December 20, 1966 > "Of course, according to Vedic literature, there are mentions of papa-yoni. Yoni means species. Papa-yoni. Just like it is mentioned here, striyah sudrah, striyo vaisyas tatha sudras te 'pi yanti param gatim. Even the striyah, even women, they are also classified amongst the papa-yoni. Papa-yoni means those who have got little facility for advancing themselves in spiritual life. So it is particularly mentioned here, striyah, the woman class, sudra-sudra means the laborer class-and the vaisya, mercantile class. Or less than that. "Because in India, according to the caste system, or varnasrama-dharma, the brahmana and ksatriyas are considered to be the highest in the society, and the vaisyas, a little less than them, and sudras, they are not taken into account. In the similarly, woman class, they are taken as sudra, sudra. Just like the thread ceremony is given to the brahmana, ksatriya, vaisya, but there is no thread ceremony for the woman class. Although the woman is born in the brahmana family, she has no that reformation. Because striyah, woman class, are taken less intelligent, they should be given protection, but they cannot be elevated. But here in the Bhagavad-gita, He surpasses all these formalities. Lord Krsna surpasses all these formalities. He is giving facility to everyone. Never mind what he is. In the social structure, you may consider that woman is less intelligent or sudra or less purified, but in spiritual consciousness there is no such bar. Here Krsna accepts everyone. Either you become woman or you are sudra or a vaisya or whatever you may be, that doesn't matter. If you simply take to Krsna consciousness, the Lord is there. He will give you all protection, all protection, and gradually He will help you. You are already..." This text supports the position I have been presenting. > >>>> Ref. VedaBase => Srimad-Bhagavatam 6.1.66 -- Vrndavana, > September 2, 1975 > > > > > > My comment: In the first quote, Prabhupada says that women in > general are > > classed as "sudra" but in the second quote he refers to "sudra women" as > > distinguished from women of a higher caste or varna. Therefore one can > > conclude that, although women are equivilent to sudras, in > another sense they > > are also of the different varnas. > > Refers to the caste of the girls' families and that in Vedic times, > prostitutes were not found from higher class families. Agreed > >>>> Ref. VedaBase => SB 6.2.26 > > Refers to astrological compatibility. This text could support you except that there are many other texts which more clearly explain what is meant by a woman being a brahmani, ksatrayini, etc. Alone, if no other text, reference or explanation existed, it supports your case but when taken in context of the rest of the chapter, the rest of the canto, the rest of Srimad Bhagavatam, the rest of the puranas and rest of the Vedic literature it doesn't support your case because it would be inconsistent with the rest of the sastra. When seen in context of the rest of sastra we can understand that when in this purport is says girl of a particular varna it means coming from a family whose father was of that varna. One has to maintain sastra sangati when engaged in Vedic dialectics. The following explains in more detail what sastra sangati is. It is from a discussion of the Rtvik issue but is applicable to this situation as well, just replace Rtvik with the appropriate variable: ________________ Regarding the Rtvik philosophy, which I prefer to call the proxy-guru-vada, much ink has flowed on this topic. Many devotees have written detailed point for point rebuttals of this subject. I do not propose to do the same here. For me it is not necessary to get into the details. I take a different view. In all my years of study of Vedic culture and science, I've seen that all parts are interconnected and that there is a great underlying consistency between all the parts. In the traditional Vedic disciplines such as astrology or ayurveda everything has as its basis the Vedic philosophy. For example in Jyotish, the Sun and the Moon represent the right and left eye respectively. This is the same as the Vedas, which tell us that the Sun and Moon are the eyes of God. So all the subjects in Vedic culture are connected together in a consistent harmony. And it is important to maintain the logical consistency of Vedic philosophy. This consistency of sastra is called Sangati. The necessity of Sangati is explained in the introduction to the Vedanta sutra: "This Sastra consists of several Adhikaranas or topics or propositions. Every proposition consists of five parts: (1) Thesis or Vishaya, (2) Doubt or Samsaya, (3) Antithesis or Purva Paksha, (4) Synthesis or right conclusion or Siddhanta, and (5) lastly Sangati or agreement of the proposition with other parts of the Sastra. Sangati or consistency shows that there is no conflict in what proceeds and what follows. It is of three sorts:- (1) Consistency with the scripture called Sastra Sangati, (2) consistency with the whole book or Adhyaya Sangati, (3) consistency with the whole chapter or Pada, called Pada Sangati. Thus in the whole book of the Vedanta-sutras Brahman is its main theme, it is the subject matter of discussion. Therefore, an interpretation of any passage, in order to fulfill the condition of Sastra Sangati, must not go away from the subject matter of Brahman. Secondarily, with the Adhyaya or portion of the book of the Vedanta-sutras, each Adhyaya has a particular topic of its own and a passage must be interpreted consistently with the topic of that Adhyaya. Similar is the case with Pada Sangati. Besides these three sorts of Sangatis, there is a certain relation between Adhikaranas themselves. One Adhikarana leads to another through some particular association of ideas. In a Pada there are many Adhikaranas and they are not put together at haphazard. The Sangati which binds one Adhikarana with another is of six sorts:- (1) Akshepa Sangati or objection, (2) Drishtanta or illustration, (3) Prati Drishtanta or counter-illustration, (4) Prasanga Sangati or incidental illustration, (5) Utpatti Sangati or introduction, (6) Apavada Sangati or exception. All these various kinds will be shown in there proper place in explaining these Sutras. An Adhikarana or topic is also called Nyaya.'" The point I'm trying to make is that anything Srila Prabhupada said must be interpreted in such away that it is consistent with everything else that Srila Prabhupada taught, as well as the rest of the Vedic literature and culture. What the proxy-guru proponents such as Mr. Desai does is create a situation which glaringly breaks the Sangati, and undermines the internal consistency of Vedic philosophy and culture. That is why I greatly object to his point of view, and so do many other rank and file devotees. It is intuitively obvious that he is wrong, no matter what he may say, because he shatters the consistency of everything Srila Prabhupada has taught us regarding the guru parampara. _______________ > > >>>> Ref. VedaBase => SB Introduction > > Refers to caste by birthright. Caste refers to the man's caste. > > >>>> Ref. VedaBase => Bhagavad-gita 2.33-35 -- London, September 3, 1973 > > Refers to the husband's ksatriya spirit which the wife understood. > > None of the above quotes demonstrate that women have varna, Agreed. other than an > astrological term used for marital compatibility or the family caste Regarding some astrological terms used: The astrological reference would be confusing to a non-astrologer. Terms such as deva gana, manushya gana, and raksasha gana has to be taken very cautiously. This refers to the 27 nakshtras which are divided into three groups of 9 each and classed in this way. If we were to accept the statement literally without proper understanding we would have to assume that 1/3 of the population was made up of devas-not so. It refers to one astrological factor that must be weighed with many others before a conclusion is arrived at. It is misleading because a person could have their Moon in a naksatra of the deva category like Anuradha but if it is conjoined with Rahu and Mars you will get someone like Saddam Hussien who had this combination. He is more along the line of being a card carrying Raksasa. Conversly you could have a person whose Moon fell in a Raksasa gana star but aspected or conjoined by Jupiter, Venus and Mercury who would a wonderful person. > (father's or husband's varna). If a woman actually has varna of > her own but > it is actually something different from a man's varna, then we shouldn't > call it that because they are not equivalent. > > Again, I offer these quotes, which don't make sense if women have > independent varna/caste. What Sita is pointing out is that Urmila Mataji has not properly reconciled the "apparent" discrepancies. To reconcile means that you have to explain it in such a way that there is no inconsistencies or contradictions. Urmila Mataji's explanations are not consistent with the quotes provided by Mother Sita whereas the explanation that Mother Sita gives is consistent for all the texts. This is sastra sangati as explained above. I have only one further comment. Mataji when I asked you to provide sastric support for your views I didn't mean that you just throw a bucket of quotes at us. Not even quotes. You made us do all the work of looking them up, and in some cases this was tedious as we had to wade through some long passages hoping we might find what you were getting at. By providing sastra I meant that when you make an assertion back it up at that time with a reference. Just follow in the footsteps of Srila Prabhupada and use his example of presentation. Vedanta Sutra also shows how Vedic dialectics are done. yhs Shyamasundara Dasa www.ShyamasundaraDasa.com > > 1. "The woman, when she becomes the wife of a brahmana, then she is called > brahmani, but she's not offered brahminical culture. She remains as sudra" > (Conversation 8-2-76) > > 2. "Striyah sudras tatha vaisyah, including woman and sudras and vaisyas, > they are considered as less intelligent. They are considered as less > intelligent. Therefore according to Vedic system, a boy born in a brahmana > family, he is allowed all the samskaras, reformatory, > purificatory process, > but the girl is not. Why? Now, because a girl has to follow her > husband. So > if her husband is brahmana, automatically she becomes brahmana. > There is no > need of separate reformation. And by chance she may be married > with a person > who is not a brahmana, then what is the use of making her a brahmana? That > is the general method. So therefore the, even born in a brahmana family, a > woman is taken as woman, not as brahmana." (Sri Sri Rukmini Dvaraka-natha > Installation, LA, July 16, 1969) > > 3. Woman reporter: Where do women fit into these four classes? > Prabhupada: That I already explained. Women's position is subordinate to > man. So if the man is first-class, the woman is first-class. If the man is > second-class, the woman is second-class. If the man is third-class, the > woman is third-class. In this...Because woman is meant for > assisting man, so > the woman becomes suitable according to the man, her husband. (Television > Interview, Chicago, July 9, 1975) > > In the third quote, Prabhupada was asked a direct and specific question: > "where do women fit into these four classes?" It was a television > interview > and the reporter was a feminist. What an opportunity to talk about > pratiloma, anuloma, sudrani, brahmini, caste by birthright, etc. Same for > the other 2 quotes. But Prabhupada made it simple. He spoke of > class and how > a woman is classified in the social system according to the > husband she has > molded herself to and is assisting. > > Ys Sita dd Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.