Then what IS the difference

[Guest guest]

> Actually it sounds like downright oppression of males to me!

 

No wonder we have so many women upset with men with attitudes like this.

Though a sannyasi, I'm happy to say I don't share your attitude.

 

I have covered the whole story in a balanced way on CHAKRA.

 

Your servant,

Vipramukhya Swami

[Guest guest]

At 9:46 PM +0100 11/14/99, COM: Madhusudani Radha (dd) JPS (Mill Valley -

USA) wrote:

 

>The directive says nothing about personal family relationships, nor does it

>say anything about preferential treatment based on seniority.

 

The directive says: "The GBC will not tolerate any...preferential treatment

given to male devotees IN ANY FORM."

 

Are sannyasis not male? Yes they are. (It is against ISKCON Law and Vedic

culture to award women sannyasa.)

Are husbands not male? Yes they are. (Unless we take the advice of demons

and allow same sex marriages in which case one of them is the wife and the

other gay is the hubby.)

 

Do sannyasis get preferential treatment? Yes they do.

Is it because of the asrama? Yes.

Is it due to their gender? Indirectly yes. Because only men and especially

brahmanas are allowed to take to the sannyasa order of life.

 

Do husbands get preferential treatment? Yes.

Is it because of their asrama? Yes.

Is it due to their gender? Indirectly yes. Because a wife is always to

remain subordinate to her husband. She is to see him as non-different than

the Supreme Personality of Godhead. A husband is never to remain

subordinate to his wife. And he is never to see her as non-different than

the Supreme Personality of Godhead. If he does so, he is, according to

sastra, a shameless and pathetic dancing dog in the hands of a woman.

 

>Thus the fact that sannyasa and male sex are correlated are irrelevant to this

>discussion. It only says that you can't treat anyone preferentially due to

>their *sex*. It says nothing about preferential treatment due to asrama or

>seniority.

 

If gender and asrama are two different issues (which they are not), i.e. if

it is not OK to show preference to gender but it is OK to show preference

to asrama, then why did those respectable matajis not show preference to

the sannyasis, grhasthas and brahmacaris? No one will argue that a sannyasi

has preference over all varnas and asramas. A grhastha has preference over

his wife and mother. And according to Srila Prabhupada, a brahmacari also

has preference over his mother(s). Hence why did the respectable matajis

refuse to comply with these prerogatives of the sannyasis, grhasthas and

brahmacaris?

 

ys JMd

[Guest guest]

> The directive says: "The GBC will not tolerate any...preferential

> treatment given to male devotees IN ANY FORM."

>

> Are sannyasis not male? Yes they are.

 

Take it up with Bir Krishna Maharaja who wrote it and leave me out of this

discussion. I personally feel you have an agenda I want no part of, and your

attitude is causing Gurukula alumni everywhere to seriously think the

lawsuit against ISKCON is justified because people like you have the

attitudes you have. All future messages on this topic will be deleted by me.

 

Yours in Srila Prabhupada's service,

Vipramukhya Swami