Reply to IWM statement by Guru Krishna das...

[Guest guest]

> X-Sender: afn39393 (AT) pop3 (DOT) afn.org

> Sun, 14 Nov 1999 11:14:52 -0500

> <news (AT) chakra (DOT) org>

> Guru-Krsna das <afn39393 (AT) afn (DOT) org>

> for CHAKRA

> Cc: HH <Vipramukhya.Swami (AT) bbt (DOT) se>, HG <Ajamila.ACBSP (AT) bbt (DOT) se>

>

>

> "Western civilization has broken the quality of shyness that

> was essential in preserving the dignity and virtue of women."

> -- His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada

>

>

> IS MY VOICE ALSO NEEDED?

> (A response to "Your voice is needed:

> A statement by the ISKCON Women's Ministry")

>

>

> IWM wrote:

>

> "We should understand that these gross aparadhas against Vaisnavis in one

> of ISKCON's main temples stand as testimony for the need on the part of

> all ISKCON temples to end--once and for all--the abuse and neglect, both

> material and spiritual, of women."

>

> Has the worldwide population of ISKCON devotees yet been informed as to

> what ACTUALLY happened? Allegations aside--what actually "gross aparadhas"

> and what actual "abuse and neglect" have been committed there and

> elsewhere throughout "all ISKCON temples"?

>

>

> "We propose a four-fold remedy: Insure that women have full facility: 1)

> to engage in all types of service"

>

> But this contradicts the Vedic standards and Srila Prabhupada's teachings:

>

> Equal rights is not allowed in the Vedic sastra. (Bg 16.7: Hawaii, 2/3/75)

> Equal rights is not Vedic idea. (SB 1.8.51: Los Angeles, 5/13/73)

> That is not Vedic civilization. (SB 7.9.24: Mayapur, 3/2/76)

> Equal rights is nonsense. (Morning Walk: Rome, 5/29/74)

> Equal rights is claimed by rascal Westerners. (Morning Walk: Ahmedabad,

> 9/25/75)

> Rascals give equal rights. (Morning Walk: Los Angeles, 6/27/75)

> Equal rights is rascaldom philosophy. (Morning Walk: Rome, 5/29/74)

>

>

> IWM continued:

>

> "2) to take darsana of the Deity up close"

>

> What does this mean? How close? Will space be allowed for sannyasis to

> greet Their Lordships according to the standard way? Wasn't proximity to

> the Deity the very point of contention that led to the recent controversy?

> How would this adjustment solve the problem?

>

> And what about the quality of shyness? Does the IWM endorse--or

> disparage--shyness in women? Srila Prabhhupada wrote:

>

> And shyness is a check to the unrestricted mixing. It is nature's gift,

> and it must be utilized. (SB 1.10.16p)

>

> There is one quality of shyness. If you break that shyness of woman, it

> will be very dangerous. It will be very dangerous. That is the one...to

> check. (Lecture: SB 1.7.43, Vrindavan, October 3, 1976)

>

>

> "3) to give Bhagavatam and other classes,

>

> Srila Prabhupada has taught:

>

> Kapiladeva was a brahmacari, and his mother took lessons from Him. That is

> the male prerogative. (TLK Chapter 5 page 43)

>

> Here Kapiladeva in a brahmacari dress, and mother is taking lesson from

> the son. Now, sometimes it is asked, "How the mother will take lesson from

> the son?" That is the prerogative of the male. (Srimad-Bhgavatam 3.25.5-6

> Bombay, November 5, 1974)

>

> ("Prerogative": "Exclusive or special right, power, or privilege;")

>

> Why should IWM object if the management of Vrindavan prefers to organize

> according to this bona fide "male prerogative"?

>

>

> IWM continued:

>

> "Until ISKCON authorities acknowledge their obligations to provide women

> with these four basic facilities, incidents like these will continue to

> occur."

>

> Herein IWM declares something to be an oligation upon ISKCON authorities

> and also declares what "will" happen if these four facilities are not

> granted. On who's authority does the IWM speak so?

>

>

> "Anything short of this will convince devotees that discussions are simply

> cosmetic and only intended to patronize...

>

> What devotees will be convinced? Why does IWM say who will or will not be

> convinced? In other words, what does this statement actually mean?

>

>

> "...ladies 'who are incapable of true spiritual advancement and

> realization.'"

>

> Who is being quoted here? What Vaisnava would say that ladies "are

> incapable of true spiritual advancement and realization" ?

>

>

> "Further the absence of these facilities is the loudest testimony to the

> fact that women are often neither respected nor cared for."

>

> Another bold statement--can IWM verify it?

>

>

> "Providing these facilities fosters respect."

>

> But what about respect for sannyasis and brahmacaris? Srila Prabhupada

> wrote:

>

> Brahmanas and Vaisnavas should be accepted as earthly representatives of

> Narayana. (SB 3.16.12P)

>

> Of all classes of men, the brahmanas and the Vaisnavas should be given

> special protection. They should be worshiped. (SB 3.16.23P)

>

> If the authorities or the leaders of society do not give special respect

> to the brahmanas and Vaisnavas and do not offer them not only sweet words

> but all facilities, then the path of progress will be lost to human

> civilization. (SB 3.16.23P)

>

>

> Beyond that, of the five sectors of society to be protected, the woman

> class is *not* actually the foremost:

>

> The defenseless creatures, according to Brahma-samhita, are the cows,

> brahmanas, women, children, and old men. Of these five, the brahmanas and

> cows are especially mentioned in this verse because the Lord is always

> anxious about the benefit of the brahmanas and the cows... (SB 3.16.10P)

>

>

> IWM continued:

>

> "Violation of women, as exemplified in the outrages in Vrindavan..."

>

> What are the factual findings of specific violations and outrages? Can IWM

> verify these allegations? We have read radically opposite versions of what

> actually transpired.

>

>

> IWM continued:

>

> "...Every devotee needs to be able to go on pilgrimage to Vrindavan to

> take shelter, to be peaceful, and to be assured of protection within our

> very temple room."

>

> We are happy to know this, since "every devotee" obviously includes

> sannyasis and brahmacaris. And thus we wonder why the IWM has not equally

> censured the women in Vrndavana who (allegedly) infringed upon the needs

> of the brahmacaris and sannyasis to also "be peaceful, and to be assured

> of protection" (i.e. spiritual protection) within the temple.

>

>

> "Vrindavan ISKCON must be exemplary. Now it is a shame and a disgrace."

>

> I humbly ask the IWM why and how Vrindavan is now "a shame and a

> disgrace."

>

>

> "Unfortunately, ISKCON's Vrindavan center (and, indeed, other ISKCON

> centers in India) have long been seen as seats of intolerance--and at

> times even hatred-- toward women in our movement. Such unacceptable

> attitudes have been manifest in the denial to women of many facilities

> needed for their spiritual and material well-being."

>

> In a Bhagavad-gita purport, Srila Prabhupada explains that it was "not out

> of hatred for women" that Lord Caitanya denied them certain

> facilities--e.g., the facility to come near Him. And we question the IWM's

> qualification and right to decide what is or is not a needed facility.

>

>

> "If we acknowledge the depth of the problem in ISKCON's center in

> Vrindavan, then we see it is necessary to consider serious steps to

> correct these anomalies."

>

> What exact "depth of problem" are we supposed to acknowledge?

>

>

> "These may well lie at the root of the hatred of women..."

>

> This is quite a serious accusation, so I humbly request the IWM to be

> specific. Please tell us who in Vrindavan hates women.

>

>

> "We hope that further discussions of Vaisnava behavior are held and that

> an apology be made to the women who were physically manhandled."

>

> And we hope that those discussions will include the proper behavior and

> attitude that women should adopt when in the presence of Vaisnavas. We

> also hope that the women who blatantly disobeyed the temple authorities,

> causing them to enforce "strict disciplinary action," will apology for

> their offenses. And again we wonder why this global appeal by the IWM is

> so slanted.

>

>

> "We request that qualified women be given the opportunity to give

> Srimad-Bhagavatam classes in Vrindavan. In addition, women with

> organizational abilities, should be invited onto managerial teams in

> Vrindavan."

>

> I humbly submit that instead of delving into international managerial

> policy, the IWM should instead be conducting seminars on chastity,

> shyness, cooking, sewing, homely arts, etc., as instructed by Srila

> Prabhupada:

>

> Prabhupada:...Woman...Girls should be taught how to become faithful wife,

> how to learn nice cooking, cleansing, dressing....They have got natural

> inclination to give service by cooking, cleansing, dressing.

> (Conversation: Bombay, January 8, 1977)

>

> 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. (Letter to: Chaya dasi, Feb 16, 1972)

>

>

> IWM continued:

>

> "When women are respected in these tangible, practical ways abuse

> automatically declines."

>

> Indeed, when women are respected abuse automatically declines. As for "in

> these tangible, practical ways," we request IWM to verify that statement.

> I propose differently, both from my own (male) perspective and from the

> teachings of Srila Prabhupada:

>

> This shyness is a gift of nature to the fair sex, and it enhances their

> beauty and prestige, even if they are of a less important family or even

> if they are less attractive. We have practical experience of this fact. A

> sweeper woman commanded respect of many respectable gentlemen simply by

> manifesting a lady's shyness. (SB 1.10.16P)

>

> It is a lady's shyness--not her passion to participate in the male

> sphere--that commands a gentleman's respect. Why does the IWM *not*

> conduct seminars and courses primarily and mostly in stri-dharma? Why does

> it instead advocate for and facilitate women to act contrarily to the

> Vedic standard?

>

>

> So Bhismadeva also advised that the shyness of woman, lajja, is the

> control. If you break that shy, what is called, shyness, then there will

> be disaster. That is the control valve naturally given. And woman's

> shyness is one beauty, beauty. (Lecture: SB 5.6.4, Vrndavana, November 26,

> 1976)

>

> If we care about our preachers--sannyasis, vanaprasthas, brahmacaris, and

> restrained grhastas--then we must protect them also. Why should Vaisnavis

> "be invited onto managerial teams in Vrindavan," thus forgoing womanly

> shyness and risking their own and others' spiritual downfall? Or is it no

> longer dangerous to perform another's duty?

>

>

> IWM continued:

>

> "This has been practically demonstrated."

>

> By whom, when, and where? I humbly request the IWM to document this.

>

>

> "Unfortunately, in the name of 'protecting' the women men have taken

> opportunities to degrade and disrespect women. Therefore continuing that

> course will not be effective."

>

> Agreed. But what are the statistics, please? How, and when, and where, and

> what percentage of devotee men have taken or still are taking

> "opportunites to degrade and disrespect women?"

>

> And does IWM also recognize this fact?: In the name of past abuse--whether

> real or exaggerated--many women now clamor for equal social status, thus

> contravening Vedic principles of varnasrama-dharma.

>

>

> IWM continued:

>

> "Therefore we now look to Gopala Krsna Maharaja to see that men in

> Vrindavan receive education about properly respecting women..."

>

> And we look to His Holiness and all leaders of Vrndavana and ISKCON at

> large to teach and preach the essential aspects of stri-dharma and the

> necessity for ladies to cultivate chastity, shyness, submissiveness, and

> satisfaction in their natural womanly functions.

>

>

> "...and that he insures women are given all facilities for their Krsna

> consciousness."

>

> We also look to Maharaja and all mature Vaisnavas and Vaisnavis alike to

> not be swayed by emotional appeals by ladies ambitious to achieve

> artificial equality within ISKCON. Rather, devotees must remain fixed in

> the mission of Srila Prabhupada to spread Vedic culture, or

> varnasrama-dharma (which includes stri-dharma), not only in Vrindavan or

> India but all over the world.

>

> And we humbly look to His Holiness Gopal Krsna Gosvami to especially

> consider the following letter written to him by His Divine Grace Srila

> Prabhhupada, our beloved founder-acarya of this wonderful ISKCON:

>

> "Why there are so many women in Vrindaban? Vrindaban is meant for

> retirement, elderly persons in Krishna Consciousness can devote all their

> time to devotional service. Such men are wanted to live in Vrindaban, not

> women and children. That is a fact, the holy dhamas are meant for the

> sannyasis and brahmacaris especially. If necessary, the management must be

> done by sannyasis and brahmacaris, not grhasthas." (Letter to: Gopala

> Krsna, Los Angeles, 9 June, 1976)

>

>

> Thank you very much.

> Hare Krsna.

>

> Sincerely, your aspiring servant of the servant of the servants of ISKCON,

> guru-krsna das

>

>