desired activities

[Guest guest]

> You equate ashrama duties with spiritual duties. They are not equivilent.

> Spiritual duties are sravanam, kirtanam, etc. and have nothing to do with

> either varna *or* ashrama. Yes, I know that ashrama is refered to as

> "spritual" divisions; they more directly involve one's spiritual duties than

> does varna, but still they are designations of the *body.* For example,

> ashrama is basically designated according to *age.* Caitanya Mahaprabhu said

> the varnashrama (both varna and ashrama) was *external,* and so it is.

 

Shyamasundara Prabhu was saying, and I agree with him, that for girls/women,

training in chastity is "not just a material duty but a spiritual duty as

well". You disagree? How are they NOT equivalent if a girl performs her

duties for Krsna? Why separate her "ashrama" duties from the 9 processes of

devotional service? If the 9 processes of devotional service can't encompass

a chaste woman's or a dutiful man's occupational duty, then Bhagavad-gita

loses its essential meaning. Arjuna heard from Krsna and then he acted to

please Him. This action of Arjuna's, his ksatriya duty, was spiritual.

 

We shouldn't think that *only* chanting one's rounds, hearing Bhagavatam

class, etc. are spiritual and being chaste is external. Someone who chants

with offenses, gives class for self-aggrandizement, doesn't listen to

Bhagavatam class or is half asleep in mangal arotika is NOT on the

transcendental platform. Just because women's (what you call) "asrama"

duties are different from men's doesn't prove such duties are separate from

what is "spiritual duty".

 

> "According to the regulative principles, there are nine departmental

> activities, as described above, and one should specifically engage himself in

> the type of devotional service for which he has a natural aptitude. For

> example, one person may have a particular interest in hearing, another may

> have a particular interest in chanting, and another may have a particular

> interest in serving in the temple. So these, or any of the other six

different

> types of devotional service (remembering, serving, praying, engaging in some

> particular service, being in a friendly relationship or offering everything

in

> one's possession), should be executed in full earnestness. In this way,

> everyone should act according to his particular taste."

>

>>>> Ref. VedaBase => Eligibility for Spontaneous Devotional Service

 

Previously you were saying re. "desired activities" there was a difference

between one's work or "ordinary duties" and "spiritual duties". You gave the

example of a divorced lawyer woman who offered her legal services to Krsna.

A divorced woman lawyer is a clear example of someone not acting according

to the occupational duties of a woman that are described in Prabhupada's

books. You chose this to give an example of "desired activities" and you

chose it because you believe women should be engaged in ISKCON according to

their actual propensities ie. "varna", even if their husbands have different

occupations. Now you give an example which describes a different type of

"desired activity", ie. one that is referring to a favorite type of, or

taste for, devotional service. What is your point exactly? When Arjuna

wanted to leave the battlefield and not fight, did Krsna say, "Okay, be a

brahmana because you want to do that more than fighting"? Similarly, how

many women are going to think, "I'm really a ksatriyani because I don't like

to clean the house and would rather be a temple president or GBC" after

listening to your ideas about "women's varna"?

 

How you conclude from Shyamasundara's posting that he thinks "women are

blank, mindless beings" is beyond me. Neither did I see him say a girl's

*guna* will be the same as her father. But on this topic, do you suggest a

woman NOT mold herself to her husband?

 

Re. Devahuti- she was raised in a ksatriya environment. Whether or not she

also had a sattvic nature/guna according to astrology we can only guess but

because she was *chaste*, she was raised to the status of brahmani. I'm not

saying "a woman's varna is designated by birth" either because you are

defining varna differently. I agree that a woman's guna-based nature may not

be exactly the same as her parents but I don't agree that her astrological

horoscope be equated with real varna. Varna means occupational duty and,

scripturally speaking, it refers to men.

 

Yes, any woman should be able to mold to any man if he becomes her husband.

This is why we honour the stories of Sukhanya and Cyavana Muni,

Nala-Damayanti, and Gandhari. Once she has been trained in a "varna" as you

believe they should, other than what the scriptures deliniate, it'll be

much harder to chastely work in the mood of her husband's assistant. She

will want to act in her own independent career and disguise it as her

desired devotional service. Is this what Prabhupada taught? Please show me

where.

 

Re. Ajamila- his second "wife" was a prostitute! She was not just a sudrani.

She was unchaste! Ajamila did not lawfully take a chaste "sudrani" wife. You

can't use this story to prove women have varna.

 

> Another point in this connection is that as soon as one understands that

women

> have varna (though in a different way than men) then *so* many other

> scriptural and social points make sense and fall into place. I have seen

> hundreds of people be able to accept that women are less intelligent, more

> lusty, should serve their husband nicely, etc. etc. as soon as one explains

> 1)the difference between spiritual and material duties, 2)the three divisions

> of duties in each broad area, 3)women's varna. Judge by the results.

 

Since when does popularity determine the truth? How will your view help me

understand these statements by our Acarya, Srila Prabhupada:

 

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)

 

Your servant, Sita dd