Kanti Mataji - kindly reconsider your words...

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 09/26/2003 1:50:28 PM Eastern Daylight Time,

Basu.Ghosh.ACBSP (AT) pamho (DOT) net writes:

 

> Mataji, if these aren't enough quotes to convince you reconsider what you

> have written in the final para of your's letter written above, then... Hare

> Krishna! May the Lord bless you!

>

 

Prabhu, your mataji thanks you for your concern and blessings,.. He already

has. yhs, Kanti dasi

[Guest guest]

> In a message dated 09/26/2003 1:50:28 PM Eastern Daylight Time,

> Basu.Ghosh.ACBSP (AT) pamho (DOT) net writes:

>

> > Mataji, if these aren't enough quotes to convince you reconsider what

> > you

> > have written in the final para of your's letter written above, then...

> > Hare Krishna! May the Lord bless you!

> >

>

> Prabhu, your mataji thanks you for your concern and blessings,.. He

> already has. yhs, Kanti dasi

 

More evidence of the "humility" that Kanti Mataji wants us to emulate, eh?

 

"yad yad aacharti shreshtas"...

 

yad yad €carati re˜has

tat tad evetaro janaƒ

sa yat pram€Šaˆ kurute

lokas tad anuvartate

 

"Whatever action a great man performs, common men follow. And whatever

standards he sets by exemplary acts, all the world pursues." (Bg 3.21)

 

Guess Srila Prabhupada's words weren't convincing enough, Kanti Mataji?

 

Reminds me of the analogy that Srila Prabhupada used about waking up a man,

in this case a woman, who pretends to be asleep.

 

It's impossible!

 

das,

 

Basu Ghosh Das

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 9/26/2003 1:50:28 PM Eastern Standard Time,

Basu.Ghosh.ACBSP (AT) pamho (DOT) net writes:

 

> Srila Prabhupada's statements and "clear as the sky is blue" instructions

> that ALL WOMEN are to be addressed as "mother" by men.

>

 

Well, what about the fact that, as the great men do, the common person

follows, and we have women calling other women "Mother?" Just wondering what

your

take on this is.

 

yr dog-like servant,

Malati dasi

[Guest guest]

> In a message dated 9/26/2003 1:50:28 PM Eastern Standard Time,

> Basu.Ghosh.ACBSP (AT) pamho (DOT) net writes:

>

> > Srila Prabhupada's statements and "clear as the sky is blue"

> > instructions that ALL WOMEN are to be addressed as "mother" by men.

> >

>

> Well, what about the fact that, as the great men do, the common person

> follows, and we have women calling other women "Mother?" Just wondering

> what your

> take on this is.

>

> yr dog-like servant,

> Malati dasi

 

Mataji, it's clearly written by this wretch that "all women" are to be

addressed as "mother" by MEN (emphasis here).

 

So yes, women here in India don't usually call other women "mother".

 

They address them as per their "family relationship".

 

That's why you have specific words in samskritam for "mother's brother", for

example ("matulaha" - "maamaa" in Hindi).

 

That's part of "kula-dharma" - "family traditions", and that's part of the

confusion for us "mlecchas & yavanas": we don't have those traditions.

 

Mataji, you know that Srila Prabhupada wanted us, his disciples, to learn

something about that - as much as we could imbibe, by residing here in

India, and you had the unique opportunity to do so, as did I, after you (and

I had plenty of experience directly with Srila Prabhupada here), and onto

today.

 

Instead of trying to learn about these things, so that this culture might be

revived amongst the westerners (since our forefathers were orginally

kshatriyas driven out of "bhaarata" by Lord Parashurama [or so Srila

Prabhupada opined]), the "kusamkaras" (bad impressions) of our mleccha and

yavana childhood/youth, where we learned the wrong things (remember Srila

Prabhupada's analogy of the music school in Switzerland where they charge

you more if your learned music before coming there? Because it was probably

that your learned wrong?) continue to "dog" us: we can't give them up.

 

In a formal message, a woman should be referred to as "Mataji", rather than

"Prabhu". It's a matter of culture, since mostly men are involved.

 

When women deal with each other, then they address each other as "sister"

or, if they are related each other or know each other well as villagers

usually do (and the "ideal" life was "village life", which Srila Prabhupada

had the desire to recreate at his "New Vrindavan").

 

In this regard, read the CC, where Mahaprabhu discusses with the Chand Kazi.

 

They had a "village relationship" and Mahaprabhu referred to him as "uncle",

and likewise the Kazi addressed him as "nephew".

 

Women similarly addressed other women in terms of their age, etc.

 

The aim of all this, I hope, is that ISKCON attempt to move towards well

established vedic/indian/vaishnava traditions, and not concoct it's own

culture in the name of vaishnavism.

 

That's just "water in the milk".

 

It's obvious to me that I myself am weak in implementing so many aspects of

vedic culture... but then, I should admit my weakness, and continue the

attempt at implimentation, rather than make a bundle of excuses why I

shouldn't do so.

 

das,

 

Basu Ghosh Das

[Guest guest]

a message dated 9/27/2003 4:01:23 PM Eastern Standard Time,

Basu.Ghosh.ACBSP (AT) pamho (DOT) net writes:

 

>

> When women deal with each other, then they address each other as "sister"

> or, if they are related each other or know each other well as villagers

> usually do

 

Point: Prabhupada directly instructed that we NOT to refer to each other as

"sister,' or

"di di," (which, as you must know, is the address of choice of the NM

group).

 

This occurred on at least two occasions that I am aware of . The first being

in '67 in SF when we heard about "Rakhi" from some newly formed friends from

India. We all chose "brother's and sister's" and tied strings around our

wrists. SP chastised this concept and in particular he gave the instruciton to

Mukunda that we should not create our own ideas. This is probably somewhere on

the

data base. I recall Dayananda as being my "brother." (He also recalls it). The

other time was in India, that somehow, we started calling ourselves as "di

di's" or sisters. He did not approve of this at all, particularly coming from

the men. At this point, he did mention that men should see ladies as "Mother,"

not as sister.

yr servant,

 

Malati dasi

[Guest guest]

> a message dated 9/27/2003 4:01:23 PM Eastern Standard Time,

> Basu.Ghosh.ACBSP (AT) pamho (DOT) net writes:

>

> >

> > When women deal with each other, then they address each other as

> > "sister" or, if they are related each other or know each other well as

> > villagers usually do

>

> Point: Prabhupada directly instructed that we NOT to refer to each other

> as "sister,' or

> "di di," (which, as you must know, is the address of choice of the NM

> group).

>

> This occurred on at least two occasions that I am aware of . The first

> being in '67 in SF when we heard about "Rakhi" from some newly formed

> friends from India. We all chose "brother's and sister's" and tied strings

> around our wrists. SP chastised this concept and in particular he gave the

> instruciton to Mukunda that we should not create our own ideas. This is

> probably somewhere on the

> data base. I recall Dayananda as being my "brother." (He also recalls it).

> The other time was in India, that somehow, we started calling ourselves as

> "di di's" or sisters. He did not approve of this at all, particularly

> coming from the men. At this point, he did mention that men should see

> ladies as "Mother," not as sister.

> yr servant,

>

> Malati dasi

 

What you've mentioned herein above, Mataji, are dealings between men and

women...

 

But what you queried, as I recall was "how should a woman address another

woman", and that's what I was replying to.

 

Yes, it's obvious from so many quotations and personal experience also, that

men are not to address women in general (with the obvious exceptions of

one's own sisters) as "sister". But it's besides the point in this specific

context - even if it's what started this in the first place! Of course I'm

glad that you are now understanding the point that I and other's have been

trying to make in this regard.

 

Anyway, the point is that you wrote:

 

> Letter PAMHO:7292279 (14 lines)

> Malati (dd) ACBSP (GBC) (New Vrindavan/Columbus - USA)

> 27-Sep-03 12:06 -0400

> Basu Ghosh (das) ACBSP (Baroda - IN) [48459]

> Cc: Shyamasundara (das) ACBSP (Vedic Astrologer) (USA) [22230]

> Cc: Praghosa (das) SDG (IRL) [26466]

> Cc: krishna_kirti (AT) hotmail (DOT) com

> Cc: India (Continental Committee) Open (Forum) [3792]

> Cc: Prabhupada Disciples [5560]

> Comment: Text PAMHO:7292516 by Basu Ghosh (das) ACBSP (Baroda - IN)

> Re: Kanti Mataji - kindly reconsider your words...

> ---------------------------

> In a message dated 9/26/2003 1:50:28 PM Eastern Standard Time,

> Basu.Ghosh.ACBSP (AT) pamho (DOT) net writes:

>

> > Srila Prabhupada's statements and "clear as the sky is blue"

> > instructions that ALL WOMEN are to be addressed as "mother" by men.

> >

>

> Well, what about the fact that, as the great men do, the common person

> follows, and we have women calling other women "Mother?" Just wondering

> what your

> take on this is.

>

> yr dog-like servant,

> Malati dasi

> (Text PAMHO:7292279) ------

 

Hope you follow this additional point: women's relations with other women

are not governed by the rules that apply to relations between women and men

in vedic culture.

 

Simple.

 

Hope this finds you well.

 

Vaishnava dasanudas,

 

Basu Ghosh Das