VAST

[Guest guest]

At 7:24 -0600 2/3/2000, Patrick Hedemark wrote:

>Hare Krsna Mother Madhusudhani Radha,

>It appears then that in this regard I am ill-informed. So as to avoid any

>confusion on this matter, prehaps you could be so kind as to answer me a

>simple question. Do you now, or have you in the past, publically or

>privately, stated or agreed, with the suggestion that it might be necessary

>or beneficial to remove from Srila Prabhupada's Divine Purports any

>statements that could be construed or even misconstrued as sexists and

>discouraging to women?

 

As I previously mentioned, it definitely seems like you were

ill-informed. Since proper Vaisnava etiquette appears to be so

improtant to you, I'm actually surprised that you would repeat a

rumor, without first obtaining verification, but I guess you, like

the rest of us, are not perfect, so I won't dwell on it. Please find

below the most recent letter from me that I could find about this

topic. As you may have heard, the GHQ accusations were based on some

out-of-context texts that were leaked from the VAST conference, in

violation of VAST rules. The persons who did so definitely had an

agenda and at least one member was expelled from the conference as a

consequence. The VAST discussion at the time (2 years ago) was

focused on Prabhupada's purports and their possible usage in academic

settings. The letter below was posted in the same conferences we are

currently rehashing this. My apologies to those devotees who have

already read this text.

Ys,

Madhusudani dasi

 

At 20:46 -0800 11/18/99, Mahananda1 (AT) aol (DOT) com wrote:

>

>So I am

>going to assume that you are indeed a sincere devotee and maybe have been

>misunderstood in your statements that you have made about such things as

>Srila Prabhupada's books being sexists,

 

My reply:

This is one of the problems of people pulling quotes out of contexts. I

don't think that's what I have ever said. I'm assuming that you are

referring to a discussion that took place on Hridayananda Maharaja's

conference for devotee scholars almost two years ago. As part of this

discussion, different devotees in academe were complaining that current

publishing standards by various professional organizations didn't fit with

the language used in Srila Prabhupada's books. For example, if you use

"non-sexist language" as defined by the publication manual of the American

Psychological Association (which is a requirement in that field) you have

to use either "he or she" or the plural form "they" when referring to

people in general. Anything else is considered "sexist" and as not meeting

their standards. I believe that the sociological and anthropological

professional organizations have similar definitions, as do many others. This

does not mean that anyone else outside of academe would find this use sexist,

nor does it mean that I or any other devotees have stated that Prabhupada's

books are sexist. We're not talking about the common use of that word, simply

its usage in academe, because that's what the discussion was about. And this is

becoming the standard for literature used in university settings.

 

The second piece of our discussion, which drew a lot of criticism from

those not involved, was the brainstorm that followed about how we could

resolve the problem of Prabhupada's use of the English language being

considered sexist by academic organizations. Please note that at the time

that Prabhupada wrote his books, these standards did not exist and he was

very eager to have university professors use his texts. However, now, due

to changed standards in language use, that is becoming increasingly

difficult. So we were simply brainstorming about different ways that this

problem could be resolved. One such option included changing the pronouns

to fit with currently accepted academic use. Another one was to footnote

the books. A third one (and the one that seems to be the one that is actually

being adopted) was to leave Prabhupada's books the way they are, not use

them in settings where they are deemed unacceptable, and to instead have

his disciples and granddisciples write their own books to be used in

universities.

 

As you can see, no solution is perfect. Prabhupada wanted his books to be

used in universities, but because of a technicality that is becoming

increasingly difficult. So what should be done? My suggestion, which has

been widely quoted and misunderstood, was to try to interview those who

best knew Prabhupada's mood. If it was then concluded e.g. that

Prabhupada had not meant simply "he", but rather "he and she" in various

places, that would serve to justify changing the language. If not, we

shouldn't do this.

 

What's ironic is that this started out as a discussion among devotees who

were frustrated because they were unable to use Prabhupada's books in US

universities. They were frustrated because they appreciate him and *wanted*

to share their appreciation with their students. That was the *only* reason

these options were discussed in the first place. But ever since they were

leaked out of context all over cyberspace, people have twisted them to mean

that some of us did *not* appreciate Prabhupada and simply found him to be

sexist.