No Subject

[Guest guest]

On 09 Dec 1999, Guru-Krsna Dasa wrote:

 

>> *nari-rupam pati-vratam* (the beauty of a woman is

>> how much she if firmly devoted to her husband).

>>

>> --gkd

 

>That's alright. But what does that has to do with woman's varna? You see,

the >qualified ksatriya lady would be somebody who is able to manage, is

married, is >nicely assisting husband and is chaste. Is that alright with you?

 

Sounds good.

 

>But you know, if there are no qualified husbands available and ksatriya ladies

 

Is there such a real situation: *no* qualified husbands *and* ksatriya ladies?

 

>[ksatriya ladies] grew up in a completely demoniac culture and are trained

to be independent

 

Is this also a real situation: *ksatriya* ladies trained to be independent?

 

>than you got a problem.

 

It sounds like one of those brain-teaser puzzles. I'll let someone else

solve that "problem."

 

>They would still be able to manage, because that's their nature, and they

>wouldn't be that shy.

 

Generally speaking, if women who aren't "that shy" are managing not only

other women but men as well, then we can expect degradation, can't we?

 

>Because they have desire to serve Krishna they would still go on managing

no >matter what you do. And those are the one's who know how to protect

themselves >even without a husband.

 

I suppose there are exceptions to every rule, but the acaryas advise that we

*not* become such exceptions. The rule is that women do *not* "know how to

protect themselves without a husband." And therefore SP has instructed over

and over and over ... and over again that "women must *always* be protected

at *every stage* of life!"

 

Now, my question to you, Mataji, is, Will you propagate *that* teaching of

your spiritual master as the overriding *rule* for all [meaning "practically

99.9% of" all] women?

 

--gkd