Women's role and intelligence

[Guest guest]

> Men who take care of the house and children while the wife supports the

family

> are 82% more likely to die of a heart attack than men who support the

family.

> The more authority a woman has in her career, the more likely she is to

die of

> a heart attack. Such medical facts indicate that such activities are

against

> nature and Krsna's plan.

>

> Your servant, Urmila devi dasi

 

Agreed. In general yes.

 

Specifically we must consider "Sthane Sthita". If some one is already in

such a situation what can we do. We cannot overnight ask them to switch

over roles.

 

I know a devotee couple, both are wonderful devotees. Wife is working and

maintaining the family. Husband threw away his job and preaching full time.

They don't have any problem, they are very peaceful.

 

Your humble servant,

Bhadra Govinda Dasa.

[Guest guest]

Bhadra Govinda wrote:

 

> I have a few points to say.

>

> 1) General statments must be kept separate from specifics. No one

> should feel

> offended if the shastra says that women are less intelligent than men

> in *general*, and no one should feel offended if the shastra says that in

> Kaliyuga men in *general* as less intelligent as women, sudra and

> dvijabandhu

> as shastra is apurusheya. Specifically however, case to case it

> is different,

> as per the earlier analysis I gave based on Srila Prabhupada's quote.

 

ameyatma das:

Is this discussion regarding a specific case or the general application of

Srila Prabhupad's teachings for his mission to manage by?

 

As a society of followers of ACBSP we are to base our premises on his

teachings. Thus, it is Srila Prabhupad who *did* point out - many times -

that *in general* men are more intelligent then women. So many times in his

books or lectures he has referred to women as being "the less-intelligent

class of men". Not just before kali-yuga, but now, today. He has said this

many, many times. He has pointed out that all through history there are no

great philosophers who have been women - all men. Kali-yuga and Western

culture is also included in that historical evaluation. What great female

greek or roman age philosophers are there? What great philosophers of the

West are women?

 

Yes, all people in this age are born equally less intelligent, but, the male

body has more natural ability to develop intellectually then the female

body. So, both statements are true. In kali-yuga everyone is born equally

less intelligent, but still, Today, in kali-yuga - in-general women (young

ladies to adults) remain the less intelligent of the two genders. They do

not develop the same capacity as men - even though at birth all are born

equally less intelligent. There is no contradiction in the two Vedic

statements.

 

> 2) Krishna or His representative does not evaluate a person based on one's

> intelligence, but according to guna and karma. It does not

> matter whether one

> is a man or a woman.

 

That is a misleading statement. One's actions, karma, is reliant upon one's

intelligence, or lack of it. An intelligent person does not commit foolish

actions, a less intelligent person does. Karma is in-separably linked to

one's level of intellectual capacity. And also one's ability to grasp

intellectual concepts is dependent on how one is effected by the 3 gunas.

The intellectual capacity of a person who is bound by the modes of ignorance

is severely curtailed. A brahman, or man in the mode of goodness, or

transcendence, has a very high intellectual capacity, thus the brahman is

known as the "intellectual" class. The sudra is known as the less

intelligent class. Your statement that we do not evaluate based on

intelligence, but only by guna and karma has no actual basis, it is

contradictory and is misleading. Intelligence is inseparably linked to guna

& karma.

 

All men are born as less intelligent sudras in this age and therefore must

be specifically trained up to come up to the brahminical level of higher

intelligence. Yet, if a person cannot be trained, then he remains as sudra,

or only becomes vaishya or ksatriya. And women? Women are generally not

able to develop the capacity to comprehend the higher intellectual aspects.

Thus, in Vedic culture women are not accepted in the school, the ashram of a

guru. Men are to be trained up, the women are to marry a trained up man.

 

>>>

All äçrama means brahmacäré, gåhastha, vänaprastha, and sannyäsa. So dealing

with woman... Especially instruction are given to men. All literatures, all

Vedic literatures, they are especially meant for instruction to the men.

Woman is to follow the husband. That’s all. The husband will give

instruction to the wife. There is no such thing as the girl should go to

school to take brahmacäré-äçrama or go to spiritual master to take

instruction. That is not Vedic system. Vedic system is a man is fully

instructed, and woman, girl, must be married to a man. Even the man may have

many wives, polygamy, still, every woman should be married. And she would

get instruction from the husband. This is Vedic system. Woman is not allowed

to go to school, college, or to the spiritual master. But husband and wife,

they can be initiated. That is Vedic system.

So dhéräëäà vartma. Because people must be first of all gentle. Then talk of

Kåñëa and God consciousness. If he is animal, what he can understand? This

is Vedic system.

>>> Ref. VedaBase => Çrémad-Bhägavatam 1.3.13 -- Los Angeles, September 18,

1972

 

So, here SP is speaking of the 4 ashrams - which one dicriminates based on

guna-karma, but dealing with women, he makes a completly separate

distinction. Boys go to the ashram-school of the guru, women do not go to

the guru, they are not to take up brahmacari-ashram life, "woman is NOT

ALLOWED to go to school, to college Or The SPIRITUAL MASTER" to take

instruction. But every girl should be married and take instruction from her

husband. "This is the Vedic system". This is also the Krsna Consciousness

system Srila Prabhupad taught that we take up. Girls are NOT to go to

school, they are not to take instruction and guidance from the guru in the

ashram. Men are. Girls are to be trained up for marriage, then get married

to a trained up man and then take instruction from their trained up

husbands. These are the distinctions that SP has made.

 

>>>

Brahmacari is meant for the boys, not for the girls. Girls, they are to be

married. A brahmacari may remain unmarried for life, but according to Vedic

civilization, a girl must be married. As soon as... Before the age of

attaining puberty, it is the duty of the father, or if she has no father, it

is the duty of the elder brother to get her married somehow or other.

(laughter) Give her in responsibility to another young man. This is the

duty. Yes. This is the duty. So therefore... Female population is always

bigger than the male population. Then you can ask, "Where so many husbands?"

Therefore polygamy was allowed.

>>> Ref. VedaBase => Srimad-Bhagavatam 2.1.3 -- Paris, June 12, 1974

 

Writing to a gurukula teacher SP says:

>>>

You ask about marriage, yes, actually I want that every woman in the Society

should be married. But what is this training to become wives and mothers? No

school is required for that, simply association. And it is not necessary to

say that women only can instruct the girls and men only can instruct the

boys, not when they are so young. At 12 years, they may be initiated.

A woman's real business is to look after household affairs, keep everything

neat and clean, and if there is sufficient milk supply available, she should

always be engaged in churning butter, making yogurt, curd, so many nice

varieties, simply from milk. The woman should be cleaning, sewing, like

that. So if you simply practice these things yourselves and show examples,

they will learn automatically, one doesn't have to give formal instruction

in these matters.

>>> Ref. VedaBase => Letter to: Chaya -- Calcutta 16 February, 1972

 

"A woman's REAL BUSINESS", ie: ROLE, is to look after household affairs.

Cleaning, cooking, sewing, like that... From the horses-mouth, so to

speak. (Just a fallible Western expression, I would never refer to SP as a

horse.)

 

If this discussion is about "InGeneral" and not about rare exception to the

general rule, then we must accept that women are given totally distinct and

separate social roles then men. Not based on guna-karma - and not based

even on intelligence, but strictly on nothing more and nothing less then

"gender".

 

>>>

Now our policy should be that at Dallas we shall create first-class men, and

we shall teach the girls two things. One thing is how to become chaste and

faithful to their husband and how to cook nicely. If these two

qualifications they have, I will take guarantee to get for them good

husband. I’ll personally... Yes. These two qualifications required. She must

learn how to prepare first-class foodstuff, and she must learn how to become

chaste and faithful to the husband. Only these two qualification required.

Then her life is successful. So try to do that. (Car doors open, walk

begins) Ordinary education is sufficient, ABCD. This is all nonsense, so

big, big, sound education and later on become a prostitute. What is this

education? (laughter) To make them prostitute, it doesn’t require education.

>>> Ref. VedaBase => Morning Walk -- July 10, 1975, Chicago

 

Two things, other then basic KC, girls are to be taught. How to cook and

how to serve a husband submisively. BAS-KARO. Those TWO qualifications

REQUIRED - "O N L Y" - Then a KRSNA CONSCIOUS girl's life is successful. SP

made BIG distinction between girls and boys, how they are to be educated,

what is their social duties. He did not say that if a girl's guna-karma is

to lead society then train her to be big big head of state or corporate

officer - if she is more intelligent then give her leading roles. "O N L Y

these two qualifications required" of our daughters, how to cook first class

and how to submissively serve a husband. That is it. BIG distinction. Has

SP ever taught that we must train our boys how to submissively serve their

wives? No. We are to discriminate how we teach according to gender.

 

>>>

Mrs. Wax: I realize that we’re all considered spirit souls. But can a woman

be first-class if she...

Prabhupäda: Anyone can become first-class. Woman can become first-class if

she is chaste and very much attached to husband. And if the husband is

first-class, she becomes first-class. Because woman’s duty is to follow

husband. So if the husband is first-class, the wife is first-class, if she

sticks to the husband.

Mrs. Wax: But she can never be first-class unless she has a first class

husband.

Prabhupäda: No, she is first class by following faithfully husband. And if

the husband is first-class, then woman is first-class.

Mrs. Wax: Could a woman be a temple president?

Prabhupäda: Yes, why not?

Mrs. Wax: Glad to hear it.

Prabhupäda: But because women are less intelligent, they should remain

dependent on first-class father, first-class husband, and first-class son.

Then she is first-class. That is the injunction. Woman should remain

dependent in childhood upon first-class father, in youthhood upon

first-class husband, and in old age upon first-class son. Woman is never

independent. If she becomes independent, her life is not very good. She must

agree to remain dependent on first-class father, first-class husband, and

first-class son—three stages.

>>> Ref. VedaBase => Room Conversation with Mr. & Mrs. Wax, Writer and

Editing Manager of Playboy Magazine -- July 5, 1975, Chicago

 

Yes, women can be TP's, why not... but... "because women are LESS

INTELLIGENT". Do you accept SP as authority or not? Here HE is very

CLEARLY saying that women are less intelligent. And "because" they "are less

intelligent" they should remain dependent on men in all stages of life. And

if she is dependent on some man - how can she be leader? You cannot throw

these statements out. It has to be taken into account when assessing all the

other 'equality' sort of statements. You can't ignore these very blantant

statements. If you want to selectively reject SP's statements that you

don't like then you are not his actual follower, that is all.

 

>>>Once it is adopted, the grhastha life, even it may be troublesome at

times, it must be fulfilled as my occupational duty. Of course, it is better

to remain unmarried, celibate. But so many women are coming, we cannot

reject them. If someone comes to Krsna it is our duty to give them

protection. Krsna has informed us in Bhagavad-gita that even women and

sudras and others inferior class of men can take refuge in Him. So the

problem is there, the women must have a husband to give protection. Of

course, if the women can remain unmarried, and if there is suitable

arrangement for the temple to protect them, just like in the Christian

Church there is nunnery for systematic program of engaging the ladies and

protecting them, that is also nice. But if there is sex desire, how to

control it? Women are normally very lusty, more lusty than men, and they are

weaker sex, it is difficult for them to make spiritual advancement without

the help of husband. For so many reasons, our women must have husband.

That's all right, but if once they have got a husband he goes away so

quickly, that will not be very much happy for them.

>>> Ref. VedaBase => Letter to: Madhukara -- Bombay 4 January, 1973

<<<

 

Distinctions are made regarding women over and above, or in "addition to",

the distinctions of guna and karma. Getting a male or female birth is a

result of past karma - and the gunas are at work differently. We are to

discriminate - socially - on basis of sex. That distinction has everthing

to do with current bodily and mental (emotional) differences between the

genders. But, it also is out of social neccessity.

 

>>>

Prabhupäda: Generally, women are interested in comfortable home life. That

is woman’s nature. They are not spiritually very much advanced or

interested. But the..., if man is interested, and the woman helps the man,

either as mother or wife or daughter, then both of them, if the woman

remains subordinate and the man is making spiritual progress and the woman

is helping the man, then both of them will make spiritual progress. Or the

woman, without working for spiritual elevation, because (s)he is helping the

man (s)he will share the profit, spiritual benefit.

>>> Ref. VedaBase => Auguste Comte

 

When speaking of VA, yes, by guna & karma a man is to be known as belonging

to a specifi class - and thus having specific social duties based on those

qualities. But, when speaking of gender, there is a whole other set of

discrimination - sex-discrimination. Men and women are physically and

psychologically different. There are distinct separate social roles based

on such sex-discrimination. I have no taste for political correctness. My

attitude is considered lawless in today's fallen and god-less western

society, but what can i do? SP and the vedas do teach sex-discrimination.

 

 

> 3) Krishna and His representative do not go by one's capacity but by

> utilisation of capacity. One may have 2 kg brain substance and

> some one may

> have 20 gram brain substance, but if the former utilises only 10

> gms out of

> 2000 gms and latter utilises 20gm out of 20 gm brain substance, the latter

> will be considered more intelligent.

 

Regardless of intellectual capacity of a particular woman (or man), there

REMAINs distinct and separate social duties and roles for men and women. If

there is a rarely exceptionally intelligent woman, then some rare exception

may be there, but, *in general* there are very strict and distinct roles

for men and women in society.

 

> 4) So in our society according to Srila Prabhupada and according

> to Krishna we

> must give roles according to their aptitudes and attitudes, and

> not according

> to brain substance, or whether some one is in a male body or a

> female body.

> That should not be the criterion.

 

On what teachings by SP are your formulating your ideas and opinions? Very

explicitly, according to scripture and SP, we MUST give roles based on

SEX-DISCRIMINATION. MUST. What books are you reading? Who are you

following? Srila Prabhupad "VERY MUCH" taught that we discriminate based on

sex. The above quotes by SP are not rare exceptions - it is the basis of VAD

understanding - the Vedabase is chocked full of such quotes - 100's of

them - no problemo. When discussing social roles and duties sex IS the

criterion for discrimination as to what one's proper social role and duty

is. Regardless, in-general, of one's intellectual capacity, guna, or

resultant karma lifestyle.

 

> 5) Talking about protection, men need protection as much as women need

> protection.

 

WHAT ??? On what teachings of SP is that statement based on? Socially

speaking, which is what this discussion is all about, that is NOT TRUE. Men

do not need to be protected from falling pregnant. That is one issue.

Chastity is another. By physical exam you can determine if a girl is virgin,

but not a boy. Boys and girls are different, in case you haven't noticed

yet (we aren't in kindergarden any more). So, if a play-girl prostitute

comes and takes advantage of a boy, other than to temporarily fall from

brahmacarya, there is no real social stigma. If the boy was 'taken advantage

of' (which is not really the same thing as a girl's being taken advantage

of - but i am making the distinction that a prostitute seduced the boy as

opposed to the young man who goes around and purposefully tries to polute

young chaste girls) a religious father would still consider the young man

qualified to marry his religious, chaste and virgin daughter, even if he had

some falldown from brahmacarya. His ability to be a religiosly responsible

husband is not jeapordised. Therefore young men do not require the same

social protection as girls. If a young virgin girl is taken advantage of by

an irresponsible unscrupulous playboy (I am not taking about forced rape, i

am talking about taking advantage by talking, associating, befriending and

getting the girl to let down her chastity belt - by being taken advantage

of - misled - by a playboy type), then her whole social life will be ruined

(because her chastity will be broken, not just her virginity, but her

ability to remain chaste and loyal to one husband has been broken). A man

of higher intelligence, a brahman, would no longer consider her for wife.

Once her chastity has been broken, she is no longer seens as fit for

marriage by the higher class (more responsible) men, an intelligent man will

know that once she has become unchaste she may not stay loyal to him, and

she may not make a good chaste mother for his children. So, it is

imperative that girls, especially young girls, be protected. A young girl,

even a woman, SP has said, is very easily misled. Very easily women can be

taken advantage of by an irresponsible man. That is the entire basis of why

women require such social protection where men do not. There is no basis to

your statement that men require as much protection as women. That not based

on intelligentual understanding, it is a false statement. SP never taught

like that. It has nothing to do with KC.

 

> 6) Ideally speaking what ever Ameyatma Prabhu has written is

> acceptable. But

> we don't see such ideal cases in Kali Yuga very often.

 

No we don't. That is the whole problem. That is why Krsna sent SP and he

came and taught these things. All that remains now is for us to understand

it and take it up. We don't see many pure devotees of Krsna in Kali Yuga

either, so does that mean no one should preach what it is to be a pure

devotee? That no one should even try to become so purified? The fact we do

not see many ideal cases of proper vedic society in this kali yuga means

what? It means that as devotees of Krsna, followers of Prabhupad, as

brahmanas, we take it up, we increase those cases by our own living example,

and by propagating it, try to teach it, spread it.

 

> 7) Also, in devotional service, everyone has to take a

> subservient position,

> why only women.

 

In DEVOTIONAL SERVICE to KRSNA - Yes, we must all take to the subserviant

position. You me, our daughters, wives, even Srila Prabhupad and all the

great acharyas. Even Brahma and Shiva, we all take to the subserviant

position before Ishvar Parama Krsna. But, we are not talking of devotional

service to krsna, this discussion, as far as i could tell, was about the

roles of women in society. Even a KC society. What we are speaking of is not

actually spiritual, but it is no less spiritual then discussion of sannyas

or the other ashrams. Brahmcarya or even sannyas is no more spiritual then

grhasta or vanaprastha. The varnas and ashrams are not spiritual, they are

material. Still, for the organization of society we must make distinctions.

The Sudras are meant to serve the higher classes. Why not the sannyasis

serve the grhastas? Why not the brahmanas serve the (uncontrolled less

intelligent minds of the) sudras? Won't society be so nice then? No, that

is what we have today - and it is hellish and degraded.

 

> I don't see anything wrong, or that we are going against

> Srila Prabhupada's teachings, if the wife goes to office and earn money to

> take care of family and the husband stays back at home and takes care of

> children, and house hold activities, as long as they follow regulative

> principles and chant 16 malas and preach to the extent possible.

> I know a

> few devotees having this arrangement, circumstantially.

 

Then you are lacking in understanding. There are problems, many problems.

The whole Western society is full of all such problems. Varna sanskar, so

many problems. All problems are due to these things, SP has said. The

reason you are not seeing any problems is because you have not properly

understood. SP explained so nicely, i already explained, but here is

again, SP's direct statements to those exact opinoins you just expressed:

 

>>>

Woman reporter: Where do women fit into these four classes?

Prabhupäda: 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.

...

Woman reporter: What happens when women are not subordinate to men?

Prabhupäda: Then there is disruption. There is disruption, social

disruption. If the woman does not become subordinate to man, then there is

social disruption. Therefore, in the western countries there are so many

divorce cases because the woman does not agree to become subordinate to man.

That is the cause.

Woman reporter: What advice do you have to women who do not want to be

subordinate to men?

Prabhupäda: It is not my advice, but it is the advice of the Vedic knowledge

that woman should be chaste and faithful to man.

Woman reporter: What should we do in the United States? We’re trying to make

women equal with men.

Prabhupäda: I am not trying. You are already not equal with the man because

in so many respects, your functions are different and man’s functions are

different. Why do you say artificially they are equal? ...

...

Woman reporter: ***What happens when women support men?***

Prabhupäda: First of all try to understand that you depend. The... After man

and woman unite, there is children, and the man goes away, and you are

embarrassed. The woman is embarrassed. Why? Why this is, is made possible? A

man and woman unites, and the woman becomes pregnant, and the husband goes

away. Then the poor woman is embarrassed with the child. She has to beg from

the government. So do you think it is very nice thing? The Vedic idea is

that woman should be married to a man and the man should take charge of the

woman and the children independently so that they do not become a burden to

the government or to the public.

Woman reporter: Do you think the social unrest...

Prabhupäda: I am thinking like this. You give me the answer. Simply you go

on questioning. I question you, do you think this burden to the government

or the public is good?

...

Prabhupäda: So that has happened. Because the woman does not agree to be

subordinate—she wants equal freedom—so the husband goes away and the woman

is embarrassed with the children. And it becomes a burden to the government.

Woman reporter: ***Is there anything wrong when the woman works?***

Prabhupäda: ***There are so many things wrong.*** But first thing is the

wife, the woman, the wife of somebody, and the child born by somebody, they

should become burden to the government or to the public? First of all answer

this thing. Why she should become burden to the government? What is your

answer? Do you think, from social point of view, this position of woman and

the fatherless children are very nice thing? No.

...

Woman reporter: What I’m trying to say is that... This may happen to some

women. I’m talking about women who are not...

Prabhupäda: Not... These are the general cases. You cannot say, “some.” I

see in America mostly the woman...

Woman reporter: Oh, then what you’re saying is not all women should be

subordinate to all men.

Prabhupäda: No, woman should be subordinate to the man, so that the man can

take charge of the woman. Then that woman is not a problem to the public.

Woman reporter: ***Is it true for all woman and all men?***

Prabhupäda: ***Yes, that is the nature.*** You take even in the dogs. The

dogs they also take care of their children. The tigers, they take care of

the children. So in the human society, if the woman is made pregnant and the

man goes away and she is embarrassed, she has to beg from the government,

that is not a very good situation.

...

Woman reporter: ***Is the social unrest in this country caused because...***

Prabhupäda: ***Because of these things. They do not know that.***

Woman reporter: ***And if women were subordinate to men, it would solve all

of our problems?***

Prabhupäda: ******Yes.****** Man wants that woman should be subordinate,

faithful to him. Then he is ready to take charge. The man’s mentality, woman

’s mentality different. So if the woman agrees to remain faithful and

subordinate to man, then the family life will be peaceful.

>>> Ref. VedaBase => Television Interview -- July 9, 1975, Chicago

 

Don't take these things from me, ameyatma, i am more fool then you, i am

less intelligent, no college degree, i have no qualifications. But, take

these things from Srila Prabhupad. All that is discussed is answered by

him. Espcially this topic he clearly gave his teachings in the above

interview. Very explicit and clear. We either follow his teachings or

not.

 

ys ameyatma das

[Guest guest]

> Syamasundara,

> Thank you for your attempt to enlighten me. There is definitely a barrier

> here but I have hard time to identify it. At first, it appears by your

> answer that you are not inclined to help for some reasons unknown to me

> other than a barrier language. If this is so, I think it would have been

> easy for you to explain my psychological linguistic problem. I can

> understand that. You must be busy.

>

> I am not the only one to be confused on the subject. Will you like me to

> ask some questions so that you can help clarify the text? Between other

> things, the text seems to propose that women can “receive equal rights”

> but then it denies the role of GBC for them. What it the problem for a

> woman to be GBC? That is my first question.

> Tell me please, if my ability here to communicate with you is deficient,

> and I will try to make another effort. Thank you. Akhilesvara dasa

 

 

 

Dear Akhilesvara Prabhu,

 

PAMHO AGTSP

 

You have deduced correctly that I am busy. Perhaps later I will be find the

time to answer your queries.

 

yhs

Shyama