Women's role and intelligence

[Guest guest]

Dear Maharaj,

 

Dandavat-pranams. Srila Prabhupada jayatah.

 

> It may be clearly said that the understanding of a woman is always

> inferior to the understanding of a man. - SB 6.17.34-35 ppt

 

I am not one to provoke controversy or doubt in the least any statement of

Prabhupada's but in the interest of possibly mitigating some of the

unfairness that has for long womens lot to be the object of, I would like to

say that I feel that the above statement is one a general nature (among

maybe a few other similar ones of his). Lord Buddha (having no reason to say

something on this topic contrary to the Vedas that I can perceive), said

'some women are better than some men'. (I can't give the reference for this

statement at the moment.) (A wife is called the "better half" of a man

because Brahma created women from the better half of man's body. [sB

6.18.30] Even "the goddess of fortune... is always the better half of the

Supreme Lord" [sB 10.9.20]. "wife is considered to be the half, better half.

She is the better portion. So she automatically becomes better brähmana [it

appears Prabhupada made this staement in a jockular tone as it provoked

laughter among the devotees assembled [the Archives transciber-editor

inserted "(laughter)" after it]. There is no mention of intelligence or

understanding in this connection.) (My raising this point in also not meant

to be an implied commentary on women's eligibility to occupy positions of

power... a topic that was I feel adequately dealt with in one of these

conferences a year or more ago.)

 

In the next paragraph of the purport quoted by you Srila Prabhupada says:

Mother Pärvaté could not appreciate Citraketu’s position, and therefore she

cursed him, but when she understood the instructions of Lord Çiva she was

ashamed." From this it appears that Mother Parvati was not incapable of

proper understanding... only the understanding manifested after instruction

from her husband. May that not be the essence of the vedic way, just as the

enjoyment of prakriti is not in any way inferior to that of purusa but is

just dependent on, or secondary to the enjoyment of purusa?

 

While on the topic, this may be comparatively incidental but I have for long

been interested in hearing some informed opinion on the statement in the

Garuda Purana (as published by Motilal Benarsidass in English) that woman,

(along with certain animals when they are "seizing their prey" and maybe

some other things in nature under certain circumstances... I don't

remember), is 'pure'. Women's menses being referred to as their 'monthly

impurity' seems to imply the same.

 

Ys

 

Rasananda das