How does the GBC propose to engage senior Vaisnavis in devotional

November 21, 1999

Basu Ghosh wrote:

>Mataji, honestly generalizations are not always true, are they?

What does it take to make the ladies' complaints substantial enough for us to

address their concerns and do something? 25%, 50%, 75%, 100%? What about all

the ladies (and men) who aren't around any more because of the pervasiveness

of such gender abuses?

> How can you say that "most" of the mataji's are "accustomed to be handled

roughly by ISKCON'S embrace"?

Your reasoning sounds strangely like the attitudes of white Southerners during

the Civil Rights era, "There's no racism around here. As long as those Negroes

know their place and keep to the back of the bus, etc. there ain't no problem!

The only problem is those damn Yankee activists who come down here and try to

stir things up. Why just ask any common Black folk, they's happy with the way

things are. Right, sonny?"

[uncle Tom:] "Yes, boss."

>Even if it were true, why blame ISKCON? Aren't we all suffering or enjoying

the fruits of our past karmas from previous lives?

>

>This is not a rationalization of abuse; not at all. It is a most humble

>request to try to even more deeply contemplate on the duties of women that

vedic culture, literature and tradition have recommended since "time

>immemorial".

>

>And isn't humility the greatest quality?

If women feel they are being abused or mistreated, then when, pray tell, is it

their right or "duty" to say or do something about it?

And isn't OUR duty as men to stand up and protect women if other *men* are

causing some abuse?

If many many women come forward and complain that there are serious problems

along gender lines in ISKCON, why do you try to explain it away?

The only righteous thing for ALL men to do is take these complaints of the

ladies seriously and deal with it to the satisfaction of all those who feel

transgressed. Otherwise, if we ACCUSE women of not being chaste and acting in

their role while we EXCUSE ourselves from our bounden duty as men to protect

them, then we are simply hypocrites.

Straightforwardly,

Srila dasa

November 21, 1999

[Text 2795537 from COM]

Basu Ghosh wrote:

> How can you say that "most" of the mataji's are "accustomed to be handled

roughly by ISKCON'S embrace"?

Srila dasa wrote:

>>Your reasoning sounds strangely like the attitudes of white Southerners

during

the Civil Rights era, "There's no racism around here. As long as those

Negroes

know their place and keep to the back of the bus, etc. there ain't no

problem!

The only problem is those damn Yankee activists who come down here and try to

stir things up. Why just ask any common Black folk, they's happy with the way

things are. Right, sonny?"

[uncle Tom:] "Yes, boss."<<

You have taken the words right out of my mouth. Secretly I have thought of

the treatment of women in this movement to be similar to the way whites

treated blacks (and some still do.) It is not Vedic. It is prejudicial.

Basu Ghosh wrote:

>Even if it were true, why blame ISKCON? Aren't we all suffering or enjoying

the fruits of our past karmas from previous lives?

>

>This is not a rationalization of abuse; not at all. It is a most humble

>request to try to even more deeply contemplate on the duties of women that

vedic culture, literature and tradition have recommended since "time

>immemorial".<<

I do find it rationalizing abuse, at least to a degree. Nondevotee who do not

like Vedic spiritual paths point out that in India the use of the philosophy

of karma is what the government uses to control the people who are suffering,

to get them to accept their suffering and not fight it, to keep them

impoverished. We have a higher understanding of karma, which is too detailed

to go in here, but we have seen over and over again where a gurukula teacher

has hit a student or a husband has hit a wife and said, "It is your karma."

We are not God, we do not KNOW what someone's karma is. It is usually our

uncontrolled anger that causes us to perform such violent actions and not

anyone's karma. Of course one could say it is till that persons karma, but it

may also be the karma of the abuser to be arrested. Let us not speculate on

karma is, as it is not as simple as many of us would like to make it. Karma

is very complex with many intricacies. Rather than passing it off as

someone's *karma* let us (ISKCON) take responsibility for it's actions. Let

us bring justice to those who have been hurt and abused. That will be their

karma too.

We need to remember, Prabhupada did not come here to teach us to accept our

karma, but to teach us to get above it. As the plug is pulled on the fan it

does not immediately stop but quickly slows down and unwinds until it finally

comes to a halt. When we joined this movement our karma did not immediately

stop though it did make a drastic turn around. It slowed down and the goal is

to get it to the point of stopping, which is achieved by becoming a pure

devotee. It is not achieved by playing the game of karma which keeps us

entangled and thinking about karma. Instead we are to rise about it and think

about Krishna, serve Krishna, read and chant about Krishna, etc. That is the

only way karma will be eliminated, not by surrendering unto it but by

surrendering unto Srila Prabhupada.

As far as the *duties* of women are concerned, their duty is to serve

Krishna, get off the bodily platform and go back to home, back to Godhead.

Basu Ghosh wrote:

>And isn't humility the greatest quality?<<

To be humble in the name of abuse is not humility, it is maya. Yet I have

heard this preached over and over - that if someone was truly humble they

would not complain but take whatever abuse came their way. This is not humble

at all and it is often used as an excuse for continuance of the abuse or to

close ones eyes and therefore become an enabler of the abuse. If we don't see

it, we don't have to take responsibility for it.

Basu Ghosh wrote:

>> If women feel they are being abused or mistreated, then when, pray tell,

is it

their right or "duty" to say or do something about it?

Srila wrote:

>>And isn't OUR duty as men to stand up and protect women if other *men* are

causing some abuse?<<

Exactly. Yet few men have the strength do to it. With all those *superior*

men out there, when it comes to woman protection they are weak, possibly

afraid what some godbrother will think of them, fear the names they will be

called, they will loose their position in the pecking order and so on. It is

the strong men who don't worry about such things and are not afraid to speak

up in favor of some REAL protection for his godsisters, not all this lip

service but when it comes time to act they are on the side of the abuser

blaming the women, once again, as was done in Dallas gurukula to the innocent

children. It is well known in literate on abuse that perpetrators blame the

victim. We have a pattern in this movement and it is time to clean it up

through cleaning and purifying our consciousness. No more stinking thinking

in the name of God/Krishna.

Srila das wrote:

>>The only righteous thing for ALL men to do is take these complaints of the

ladies seriously and deal with it to the satisfaction of all those who feel

transgressed. Otherwise, if we ACCUSE women of not being chaste and acting in

their role while we EXCUSE ourselves from our bounden duty as men to protect

them, then we are simply hypocrites.>>

You have said it perfectly Srila das.

YS,

Prtha dd

If many many women come forward and complain that there are serious problems

along gender lines in ISKCON, why do you try to explain it away?

The only righteous thing for ALL men to do is take these complaints of the

ladies seriously and deal with it to the satisfaction of all those who feel

transgressed. Otherwise, if we ACCUSE women of not being chaste and acting in

their role while we EXCUSE ourselves from our bounden duty as men to protect

them, then we are simply hypocrites.

Straightforwardly,

Srila dasa

November 21, 1999

On 20 Nov 1999, Sri Rama das wrote:

> Hare Krishna,

>

> "How does the GBC propose to engage senior Vaishnavis in devotional

> service?" This question begs another question: How do the senior Vaishnavis

propose to engage themselves?

>

Yep. Sometimes it does appear as if we are all indulging in too much

victimhood. We often talk of being self-sufficient, which might also suggest

taking personal responsibility and initiative in our spiritual life in as

cooperative of a mood of a we possibly can muster. There was never any

guarentee given to us that the going would always be 'pleasant'.

November 21, 1999

> >

> > OK. We should offer our respects even to an ant! I don't think the

> > present controversy is at all based on disrespect. It's a question that

> > in public; in society; there is the "principle of separation of the

> > sexes".

>

> Then why are the sannyasis so eager to enter the woman's space? Why don't

> they just stay on their own side of the temple? If the argument is that

> they want pay respects to all the Deities, then shouldn't the women be

> given a chance to also go to the men's side, say until the ghee wick has

> been passed?

Sorry, but it's neither the "sannyasis" space nor the "woman's space"; it's

the Mandir.

And since in vedic culture sannyasis are shown the utmost respect & regard,

it's natural for the women to "shy" away from them... and from other men

also. Remember; "shyness" is a woman's greatest quality!

But since you've never lived here in India... guess you might not have 1st

hand experience of that. Seems you never visited Mayapur... and seen how

traditional gaudiya vaishnava women behave... in the culture that Srila

Prabhupada wanted us to learn and follow...

Too bad... maybe next life... maybe never... Hare Krishna Prabhu.

I offer you my most respectful obeisances...

November 22, 1999

>

> Too bad... maybe next life... maybe never... Hare Krishna Prabhu.

Frankly, having interacted with these "Vedic"s, I really have no desire, not

this life, not next life, and never seems too soon.

Incidentally, please don't address me as prabhu when making snide

condescending

comments. That is rasa bhasa, and I certainly doubt it is Vedic.

November 22, 1999

> [Text 2795537 from COM]

>

> Basu Ghosh wrote:

> > How can you say that "most" of the mataji's are "accustomed to be

> > handled roughly by ISKCON'S embrace"?

>

> Srila dasa wrote:

> >>Your reasoning sounds strangely like the attitudes of white Southerners

> >>during the Civil Rights era, "There's no racism around here. As long as

> >>those Negroes know their place and keep to the back of the bus, etc.

> >>there ain't no problem!

> The only problem is those damn Yankee activists who come down here and try

> to stir things up. Why just ask any common Black folk, they's happy with

> the way things are. Right, sonny?"

> [uncle Tom:] "Yes, boss."<<

There is a joke; "if you know more than 3 languages; you are multilingual.

If you know 2 languages, you are bilingual and if you know one langauge...

well, what are you? An American!

I bless you both to take your births again & again in that blessed "land of

the free and home of the brave" that you feel is the center of the universe.

> You have taken the words right out of my mouth. Secretly I have thought of

> the treatment of women in this movement to be similar to the way whites

> treated blacks (and some still do.) It is not Vedic. It is prejudicial.

Mataji; have you spent any time here in India at all... in this lifetime?

:-)

But seriously, if you haven't... I sincerely feel sorry for you.

"In India we have got almost all the year climate like this, except in the

rainy season—that is also not constantly. Therefore India is supposed to be

the best place for developing Krsna consciousness, because the climate is

very suitable." (SP in a lecture in Paris, Aug. 2, '76).

"And in India everybody is conscious of Krsna. Somebody... I am asked in

foreign countries, “How many Krsna conscious people are there in India?”

That “India... In India the cent percent, they are Krsna conscious." (SP SB

Lecture, Nov. 24, '74)

"At least, there must be this institution of Krsna consciousness in India so

that not only the Indians, but all outside India, they should come and learn

what is Krsna consciousness. (applause) So it is already explained. We are

trying to develop this institution in Bombay. Bombay is the best city in

India, and people are also very advanced, enlightened. So let us combine

together and develop this institution for the whole human society. That is

our ambition." (SP SB Lecture Mar. 29, '77)

"So far our program for India, at present we are trying seriously for a nice

house in the aristocratic section of Bombay, or also for a large plot of

land of several acres near Bombay, to establish our India headquarters.

Bombay is the richest city, the gateway to India, and in all respects the

most important city. So we must have something here. Otherwise, when funds

are there we shall construct very nice centers in Vrindaban and Mayapur,

that's all. Let many foreign students and disciples come to India for

staying with us in these places. We shall be content to sit down there,

chant and have kirtana very vigorously 24 hours, if anyone calls us we shall

go for a few days and have program. Our real interest is in the western

countries. The trouble in India is we cannot preach. There are language

difficulties and the people think they already know everything. But now many

foreign tourists are interested to come here to taste the spiritual life, so

we shall concentrate on that field. Recently we have received one letter

from Cox and King's, one of the world's biggest travel agencies, requesting

us to kindly assist them by providing facilities for all the tourists coming

from foreign places who are interested in seeing the real spiritual life of

India. So in this way we shall work here." (SP letter to Giriraj Dec. 28,

'71.)

> Basu Ghosh wrote:

> >Even if it were true, why blame ISKCON? Aren't we all suffering or

> >enjoying the fruits of our past karmas from previous lives?

> >

> >This is not a rationalization of abuse; not at all. It is a most humble

> >>request to try to even more deeply contemplate on the duties of women

> >>that

> >vedic culture, literature and tradition have recommended since "time

> >>immemorial".<<

>

> I do find it rationalizing abuse, at least to a degree.

That's because you are focused on abuse & not culture. Kindly change your

focus... Or go on mediating on abuse for the rest of your life. You have

unlimited faults to find...

saha-jam karma kaunteya

sa-dosham api na tyajet

sarvarambha hi doshena

dhumenagnir ivavrtaha

TRANSLATION

"Every endeavor is covered by some fault, just as fire is covered by smoke.

Therefore one should not give up the work born of his nature, O son of

Kunti, even if such work is full of fault." (BG 18.48)

> Nondevotee who do

> not like Vedic spiritual paths point out that in India the use of the

> philosophy of karma is what the government uses to control the people who

> are suffering, to get them to accept their suffering and not fight it, to

> keep them impoverished.

You are seriously misinformed here... must be because you've learned of it

2nd hand...

> We have a higher understanding of karma, which is

> too detailed to go in here, but we have seen over and over again where a

> gurukula teacher has hit a student or a husband has hit a wife and said,

> "It is your karma."

This is simply changing the subject. The subject here was what happened in

Vrindavan recently; not the multifarious cases of child abuse that are a

fact of the past. Please stick with the subject matter at hand. Otherwise,

you are free to raise the issue of child abuse in the appropriate forums; no

one is preventing you. But it is out of place here.

> We are not God, we do not KNOW what someone's karma is.

Yes, we ARE not God... thank you for the pertinent advice, Mataji.

As for knowing or not knowing someone's past karma... well... here is what

Srila Prabhupada instructed us;

"We must know for certain that the particular position in which we are now

set up is an arrangement of the supreme will in terms of our own acts in the

past. The Supreme Lord is present as the localized Paramatma in the heart of

every living being, as it is said in the Bhagavad-gita (13.23), and

therefore he knows everything of our activities in every stage of our lives.

He rewards the reactions of our actions by placing us in some particular

place." (SB 1.13.43. Purport).

No amount of letters from you, priya mataji, can change this instruction.

And I wonder why you use interpretation to avoid the "clear as the sky is

blue" teachings of Srila Prabhupada?

>It is usually our uncontrolled anger that causes us to perform such

> violent actions and not anyone's karma. Of course one could say it is till

> that persons karma, but it may also be the karma of the abuser to be

> arrested. Let us not speculate on karma is, as it is not as simple as many

> of us would like to make it. Karma is very complex with many intricacies.

> Rather than passing it off as someone's *karma* let us (ISKCON) take

> responsibility for it's actions. Let us bring justice to those who have

> been hurt and abused. That will be their karma too.

The fact is, according to Mahaman Prabhu & those who were present (including

a number of ladies) that no one was abused in Vrindavan during the incident

in question HERE. That there have been many other instances of abuse is

simply a different subject & I humbly entreat you to take it THERE.

> We need to remember, Prabhupada did not come here to teach us to accept

> our karma, but to teach us to get above it.

Simply your interpretation of his teachings. Please read & reread the

purport above written by Srila Prabhupada.

> As the plug is pulled on the

> fan it does not immediately stop but quickly slows down and unwinds until

> it finally comes to a halt. When we joined this movement our karma did not

> immediately stop though it did make a drastic turn around. It slowed down

> and the goal is to get it to the point of stopping, which is achieved by

> becoming a pure devotee. It is not achieved by playing the game of karma

> which keeps us entangled and thinking about karma. Instead we are to rise

> about it and think about Krishna, serve Krishna, read and chant about

> Krishna, etc. That is the only way karma will be eliminated, not by

> surrendering unto it but by surrendering unto Srila Prabhupada.

Yes... and surrendering to Srila Prabhupada means wearing a dhoti or sari,

putting on tilak, and adopting vedic/indian culture. And it is in that

culture that women adopt the quality of shyness.

"This incident from the Mahabharata period proves definitely that the ladies

of the palace observed strict pardaa (restricted association with men), and

instead of coming down in the open air where Lord Krsna and others were

assembled, the ladies of the palace went up on the top of the palace and

from there paid their respects to Lord Krsna by showers of flowers. It is

definitely stated here that the ladies were smiling there on the top of the

palace, checked by shyness. 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 the respect of many

respectable gentlemen simply by manifesting a lady’s shyness. Half-naked

ladies in the street do not command any respect, but a shy sweeper’s wife

commands respect from all." (SP SB Purport, 1.10.16)

> As far as the *duties* of women are concerned, their duty is to serve

> Krishna, get off the bodily platform and go back to home, back to Godhead.

"Pritha devi dasi uvacha". Or should we call it the "pritha gita"?

> Basu Ghosh wrote:

> >And isn't humility the greatest quality?<<

>

> To be humble in the name of abuse is not humility, it is maya. Yet I have

> heard this preached over and over - that if someone was truly humble they

> would not complain but take whatever abuse came their way. This is not

> humble at all and it is often used as an excuse for continuance of the

> abuse or to close ones eyes and therefore become an enabler of the abuse.

> If we don't see it, we don't have to take responsibility for it.

And if we go on crying "abuse", "abuse"... I'm sure we'll all become fully

Krishna conscious... or will be become "abuse conscious"? Or just plain

faultfinders!

> Basu Ghosh wrote:

> >> If women feel they are being abused or mistreated, then when, pray

> >> tell,

> is it their right or "duty" to say or do something about it?

>

> Srila wrote:

> >>And isn't OUR duty as men to stand up and protect women if other *men*

> >>are

> causing some abuse?<<

>

> Exactly. Yet few men have the strength do to it. With all those *superior*

> men out there, when it comes to woman protection they are weak, possibly

> afraid what some godbrother will think of them, fear the names they will

> be called, they will loose their position in the pecking order and so on.

> It is the strong men who don't worry about such things and are not afraid

> to speak up in favor of some REAL protection for his godsisters, not all

> this lip service but when it comes time to act they are on the side of the

> abuser blaming the women, once again, as was done in Dallas gurukula to

> the innocent children. It is well known in literate on abuse that

> perpetrators blame the victim. We have a pattern in this movement and it

> is time to clean it up through cleaning and purifying our consciousness.

> No more stinking thinking in the name of God/Krishna.

>

> Srila das wrote:

> >>The only righteous thing for ALL men to do is take these complaints of

> >>the

> ladies seriously and deal with it to the satisfaction of all those who

> feel transgressed. Otherwise, if we ACCUSE women of not being chaste and

> acting in their role while we EXCUSE ourselves from our bounden duty as

> men to protect them, then we are simply hypocrites.>>

>

> You have said it perfectly Srila das.

Srila Prabhu, with all due respect, has written totally out of ignorance of

what actually happened in Vrindavan... so now here we have a case of "blind

following the blind". Too bad.

And it's too bad that you both with to foist utterly unacceptable ideas on

ISKCON devotees about women that so obviously go against the clear

instructions of both Srila Prabhupada and vedic/indian culture and

tradition... and wish to do so with abundant use of the new "buzzword"

"abuse".

Sorry, your attempts WILL NOT WORK. Because it's Lord Krishna's culture and

He IS in control.

> YS,

> Prtha dd

>

> If many many women come forward and complain that there are serious

> problems along gender lines in ISKCON, why do you try to explain it away?

First of all; let's get this straight. It's not "many many" who are

complaining; just a vocal few.

And the arguments about "gender problems" that I've come across on the

internet (as have a number of others, but men & women, by the way) seem to

be quite clearly attempts to introduce western concepts of "gender equality"

into ISKCON. And our present respected Chairman of the GBC and another

sannyasi who runs a prominent independent "web site" which purports to

"support the GBC" favor this line of thinking.

Well, I'm not the only one who will continue to "write out" (as it were)

against this artificial concept, which runs contrary to vedic morality and

teachings. It seems maya is attacking the movement in this way and we shall

resist maya's latest efforts.

VaiŠava d€sanud€s,

B€su Ghosh D€s

November 22, 1999

In a message dated 11/21/99 4:52:27 PM Central Standard Time,

Basu.Ghosh.ACBSP (AT) bbt (DOT) se writes:

<< But since you've never lived here in India... guess you might not have 1st

hand experience of that. >>

Since many (or most) women in Iskcon were neither raised in India nor live in

India, we cannot expect all of them to react in the ideal vedic way to

situations where they feel their rights are being minimized. Maybe you feel

this is a compromise, but I think that if we don't acknowledge the need for

adjustment to accomodate different mentalities, we will not succeed in

attracting a broad base of people. And we will discourage some of the

devotees we have. It is not just women who become discouraged. Men often

become discouaged by the way that some temples deal with women.

I don't mean to say that we whimsically throw out vedic principles. But we

need to evaluate what needs to be adjusted to produce a more desireable

result. After all is said and done, Prabhupada wanted all of us to be happily

engaged in devotional service. Sticking too strictly to traditional values

may not always bring about this result.

Your servant,

Mahatma dasa

November 22, 1999

> In a message dated 11/21/99 4:52:27 PM Central Standard Time,

> Basu.Ghosh.ACBSP (AT) bbt (DOT) se writes:

>

> << But since you've never lived here in India... guess you might not have

> 1st

> hand experience of that. >>

>

> Since many (or most) women in Iskcon were neither raised in India nor live

> in India, we cannot expect all of them to react in the ideal vedic way to

> situations where they feel their rights are being minimized. Maybe you

> feel this is a compromise, but I think that if we don't acknowledge the

> need for adjustment to accomodate different mentalities, we will not

> succeed in attracting a broad base of people. And we will discourage some

> of the devotees we have. It is not just women who become discouraged. Men

> often become discouaged by the way that some temples deal with women.

>

> I don't mean to say that we whimsically throw out vedic principles. But we

> need to evaluate what needs to be adjusted to produce a more desireable

> result. After all is said and done, Prabhupada wanted all of us to be

> happily engaged in devotional service. Sticking too strictly to

> traditional values may not always bring about this result.

>

> Your servant,

>

> Mahatma dasa

Mahatma Prabhu,

Namonamaha. Jaya Srila Prabhupada!

Prabhuji, believe it or not I do sympathize with what you have written and

in fact am not such a fanatic as it might seem here in these discussions.

However, there ARE vedic ideals and what some of our godsisters &

godbrothers have written here is simply not acceptable. Why? Because they

want to eliminate the "ideal" in the name of "abuse".

When "abuse" doesn't even enter the picture at all! It's being raised as a

smokescreen to demand "gender equality", which Srila Prabhupada time & again

spoke out against.

As Guru Krishna Prabhu at Alachua points out in the following list of quotes

from Srila Prabhupada below:

> 1. It will be failure. (Arrival Lecture: Philadelphia, 7/11/75)

> 2. Equal rights is nonsense. (Morning Walk: Rome, 5/29/74)

> 3. Equal rights is claimed by rascal Westerners. (Morning Walk: Ahmedabad,

> 9/25/75)

> 4. By equal rights women are killing their own child. (Letter: Ed Gilbert,

> Vrindaban, 9/9/75)

> 5. I am not trying for equal rights. (Television Interview: Chicago,

> 7/9/75) 6. Rascals give equal rights. (Morning Walk: Los Angeles, 6/27/75)

> 7. If you want equal rights then stop giving birth to a child. (Morning

> Walk: Perth, 5/75)

> 8. Why you are accepting this nonsense philosophy? (Morning Walk: Rome,

> 5/29/74)

> 9. The equal rights movement is a means by which men cheat the women.

> (SSR, 1) 10. This equal rights philosophy is very appealing [to] fools and

> rascal. (Morning Walk: Rome, 5/29/74)

> 11. Equal rights is not allowed in the Vedic sastra. (Bg 16.7: Hawaii,

> 2/3/75) 12. Regardless of attempts for equality, unequality there must

> remain. (Morning Walk: Rome, 5/29/74)

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

> 14. It is not possible--it is not possible. (Morning Walk: Rome, 5/29/74)

> 15. Where is the benefit of equal rights? (Room Conversation after Press

> Conference: Chicago, 7/9/75)

> 16. Equal rights will not help the human society. (B.F. Skinner & Henry

> David Thoreau)

> 17. How she can be happy? That is not possible. (Bg Lecture: Ahmedabad,

> 12/8/72)

> 18. Equal rights is very grave problems. (SB 1.16.7: Los Angeles, 1/4/74)

> 19. You cannot make equality. (Morning Walk: Rome, 5/29/74)

> 20. That is not Vedic civilization. (SB 7.9.24: Mayapur, 3/2/76)

> 21. Do not artificially try to become equal with men. (Bg 16.7: Hawaii,

> 2/3/75) 22. There cannot be equality, sir. You are talking nonsense.

> (Morning Walk: Rome, 5/29/74)

> 23. Equal rights is an artificial introduction to human society. (Bertrand

> Russell)

> 24. Equal rights is rascaldom philosophy. (Morning Walk: Rome, 5/29/74)

> 25. It is already failure.(Arrival Lecture: Philadelphia, 7/11/75)

> 26. Equal rights is impossible (Cc. Adi. 17.44)

The present "discussions" in various conferences on COM were sparked by an

incident in Vrindavan wherein western ladies, in the name of this same

gender equality, are engaged in "throwing to the wind" the quality of

shyness & literally mixing up with the men during mangal arati.

How do I know this? I just returned from Vrindavan... where I found it

difficult to stand in the temple room during mangal arati... where it was

the first time in my many years in ISKCON that I saw ladies & men all in the

same area... literally "bumping shoulders", as the saying goes.

And by going on & on about "abuse" - which in fact, as I pointed out, is NOT

the subject of this discussion, a diversionary tactic is being raised by

which it is hoped that the "separation of the sexes" will end!

Do you think this is what Srila Prabhupada and vedic culture really desires?

I ask this without a bit of sarcasm; honestly.

VaiŠava d€sanud€s,

B€su Ghosh D€s

P.S. The quote below seems to me to represent what kind of behavior Srila

Prabhupada desired from all ladies; Western, Chinese, Indian or whatnot!

> "This incident from the Mahabharata period proves definitely that the

> ladies of the palace observed strict pardaa (restricted association with

> men), and instead of coming down in the open air where Lord Krsna and

> others were assembled, the ladies of the palace went up on the top of the

> palace and from there paid their respects to Lord Krsna by showers of

> flowers. It is definitely stated here that the ladies were smiling there

> on the top of the palace, checked by shyness. 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 the

> respect of many respectable gentlemen simply by manifesting a lady’s

> shyness. Half-naked ladies in the street do not command any respect, but a

> shy sweeper’s wife commands respect from all." (SP SB Purport, 1.10.16)

Ought we not stick to the ideals mentioned herein above & at least make an

attempt to teach them everywhere?

November 22, 1999

> Basu Ghosh wrote:

> > How can you say that "most" of the mataji's are "accustomed to be

> > handled roughly by ISKCON'S embrace"?

>

> Srila dasa wrote:

> >>Your reasoning sounds strangely like the attitudes of white Southerners

> >>during the Civil Rights era, "There's no racism around here. As long as

> >>those Negroes know their place and keep to the back of the bus, etc.

> >>there ain't no problem!

> The only problem is those damn Yankee activists who come down here and try

> to stir things up. Why just ask any common Black folk, they's happy with

> the way things are. Right, sonny?"

> [uncle Tom:] "Yes, boss."<<

There is a joke; "if you know more than 3 languages; you are multilingual.

If you know 2 languages, you are bilingual and if you know one langauge...

well, what are you? An American!<<

Again the idea that if one is an American they can't be a good devotee. This

is bogus. Anyone can be a good devotee and it does not matter where they live

or what *culture* they follow. We are not interested so much in culture. We

are interested in transcending culture.

>>I bless you both to take your births again & again in that blessed "land of

the free and home of the brave" that you feel is the center of the

universe.<<

What an offense! Whatever makes him think he can make such a decision is

arrogance. If anything, he better start praying he does not come back as a

woman in America. <g> Actually, it just might do him some good.

> You have taken the words right out of my mouth. Secretly I have thought of

> the treatment of women in this movement to be similar to the way whites

> treated blacks (and some still do.) It is not Vedic. It is prejudicial.

Mataji; have you spent any time here in India at all... in this lifetime?

:-)<<

In this lifetime? I suppose that is more important to you than if I have

spent many years in Krishna Consciousness, the *land* where I live, the

*culture* that I follow. I joined the Hare Krishna movement. That is good

enough for me. It is kali yuga in India too you know, and as we can see it

has confused Hinduism with Krishna Consciousness. I am glad I am in America.

I have a better chance of not being confused in this way and following

Prabhupada clearly. Nor am I puffed up running around proudly pointing *I am

in INDIA..* Good for you. I am happy you are in India but it seems you are

missing the point. It is not to make one arrogant but humble.

But seriously, if you haven't... I sincerely feel sorry for you.<<

I suggest you start feeling sorry for yourself. Prabhupada left India to come

to American for a REASON. They Hindus do not take properly to Krishna

Consciousness. We are supposed to straight that out, not take a liking to it.

"In India we have got almost all the year climate like this, except in the

rainy season-that is also not constantly. Therefore India is supposed to be

the best place for developing Krsna consciousness, because the climate is

very suitable." (SP in a lecture in Paris, Aug. 2, '76).<<

I can also find you many quotes where Prabhupada was unhappy with what was

going on in India, so lets not go there.

"And in India everybody is conscious of Krsna. Somebody... I am asked in

foreign countries, "How many Krsna conscious people are there in India?"

That "India... In India the cent percent, they are Krsna conscious." (SP SB

Lecture, Nov. 24, '74)<<

And I have also heard many Indians say, "Oh yes, I know Krishna." Than they

walk away, do not give a donation, show no interest. So they know Krishna,

yes, but it is up to us to actively engage them in direct and pure Krishna

consciousness not this bodily consciousness of who is higher birth, who is

lower bit - the caste system which Prabhupada was strongly against. Life is

so short. Why waste it on the mundane body?! Tomorrow one may die. Let us

think of Krishna instead of caste.

> Basu Ghosh wrote:

> >Even if it were true, why blame ISKCON? Aren't we all suffering or

> >enjoying the fruits of our past karmas from previous lives?

> >

> >This is not a rationalization of abuse; not at all. It is a most humble

> >>request to try to even more deeply contemplate on the duties of women

> >>that

> >vedic culture, literature and tradition have recommended since "time

> >>immemorial".<<

>

> I do find it rationalizing abuse, at least to a degree.

That's because you are focused on abuse & not culture.<<

I am focused on Krishna Consciousenss, though you are right that I am not

focused on culture. While I have an interest in culture, I am not going to

let it get in the way of my Krishna Consciousness.

>> Kindly change your

focus... Or go on mediating on abuse for the rest of your life. You have

unlimited faults to find...<<

Or you can close your eyes to the large statistics of abuse that has gone on

in this movement, put your head in the sand and claim it is because you are

simply focusing on Krishna and on culture.

karma kaunteya

sa-dosham api na tyajet

ssaha-jamarvarambha hi doshena

dhumenagnir ivavrtaha

TRANSLATION

"Every endeavor is covered by some fault, just as fire is covered by smoke.

Therefore one should not give up the work born of his nature, O son of

Kunti, even if such work is full of fault." (BG 18.48)<<

You can quote and think I can't quote? lol For every quote you can give, so

can I. Let us not play that game. You obviously have a different belief

system of Krishna Consciousness and so do I. As you feel sorry for me, that I

do not believe the way you do, I similarly feel sorry for you and hope you

will figure it out so you do not have to come back as a woman in American. I

suggest you follow your own quote and stop fault finding with women.

> Nondevotee who do

> not like Vedic spiritual paths point out that in India the use of the

> philosophy of karma is what the government uses to control the people who

> are suffering, to get them to accept their suffering and not fight it, to

> keep them impoverished.

>>You are seriously misinformed here... must be because you've learned of it

2nd hand...<<

And I find you to be seriously misinformed.

> We have a higher understanding of karma, which is

> too detailed to go in here, but we have seen over and over again where a

> gurukula teacher has hit a student or a husband has hit a wife and said,

> "It is your karma."

This is simply changing the subject. <<

No, I was not changing the subject in the least. Maybe you just do not want

to hear the truth.

>> The subject here was what happened in

Vrindavan recently; not the multifarious cases of child abuse<<

That is not changing the subject because any good psychologist will tell you

to look for patterns and belief systems. If we did not hold, for so many

years, a belief system that abuse was acceptable then the incident in

Vrindavana wouldn't have never taken place.

>> that are a

fact of the past. Please stick with the subject matter at hand. Otherwise,

you are free to raise the issue of child abuse in the appropriate forums; no

one is preventing you. But it is out of place here.<<

You simply do not want me to raise the issue of child abuse because it is

true. Or maybe you have not educated yoursel fon the topic. It remains a

fact, like it or dislike it, that where there is child abuse there is women

abuse. Therefore it IS the proper place to raise the subject. If those women

in Vrndavana are abused it is only a matter of time until someone finnds it

acceptable to abuse their children! I will not brush this under the rug.

> We are not God, we do not KNOW what someone's karma is.

<<< Yes, we ARE not God... thank you for the pertinent advice, Mataji.

<<As for knowing or not knowing someone's past karma... well... here is what

Srila Prabhupada instructed us;

<<"We must know for certain that the particular position in which we are now

set up is an arrangement of the supreme will in terms of our own acts in the

past. The Supreme Lord is present as the localized Paramatma in the heart of

every living being, as it is said in the Bhagavad-gita (13.23), and

therefore he knows everything of our activities in every stage of our lives.

He rewards the reactions of our actions by placing us in some particular

place." (SB 1.13.43. Purport).

No amount of letters from you, priya mataji, can change this instruction.<<

I have no idea what would make you think I do not agree with that or would

want to change that instruction, other than the pleasure to fight, however,

it still does not reduce the fact that karma is too intricate for the human

being to understand and we therefore should STOP our speculations.

And I wonder why you use interpretation to avoid the "clear as the sky is

blue" teachings of Srila Prabhupada?

>It is usually our uncontrolled anger that causes us to perform such

> violent actions and not anyone's karma. Of course one could say it is till

> that persons karma, but it may also be the karma of the abuser to be

> arrested. Let us not speculate on karma is, as it is not as simple as many

> of us would like to make it. Karma is very complex with many intricacies.

> Rather than passing it off as someone's *karma* let us (ISKCON) take

> responsibility for it's actions. Let us bring justice to those who have

> been hurt and abused. That will be their karma too.

<<The fact is, according to Mahaman Prabhu & those who were present

(including

a number of ladies) that no one was abused in Vrindavan during the incident

in question HERE. That there have been many other instances of abuse is

simply a different subject & I humbly entreat you to take it THERE.>>

The fact is, you men are trying to cover it up and brush it under the rug. I

know Parvati personally and she might be an intense women, but she is not a

liar.

> We need to remember, Prabhupada did not come here to teach us to accept

> our karma, but to teach us to get above it.

<<Simply your interpretation of his teachings. Please read & reread the

purport above written by Srila Prabhupada.<<

And that is simply the interpretation of his teachings, as anyone can take

this or that quote which pleases their senses and meditate on all of those

verses, ignoring or minimizing the others. If you think he came here to teach

us to focus on and surrender unto our karma, you are sorely mistaken. He came

here to teach us how to GET RID of our karma. Any devotee woth their salt

will preach THAT point. I can give you big fancy quotes too, but I know that

no amount of preaching is going to help you. So I wish you well.