GHQ: all misogynists?

[Guest guest]

Guru Krishna wrote:

 

> I'm asking Madhava Ghosh Prabhu to prove his claim (or

> better yet, to withdaw it) that the GHQ members are misogynists. Now how

> will he do that? How will he do it on the authority of guru-sadhu-sastra,

> since misogyny per se is not directly discussed in SP's books? I agree

> that mental disorder and disease *are* discussed, but only very generally.

> My previous point was that illicit sex is *explicitly* defined and so

> therefore pedophilia is easily understood to obviously be illicit sex. But

> how does one identify a misogynist based upon Srila Prabhupada's

> teachings--that is my question?

 

Dear Guru Krishna Prabhu, from your texts I can understand that you are a

sincere follower of Prabhupada and that you are doing your best to uphold

the banner of dharma, particularly the dharma of women. Basically, I think

that this a very good thing and I have no problem with it at all but I have

to admit that, in my mind, some of the statements made by GHQ about various

Vaishnava women don´t sound very respectful at all. In fact, some of them

could be bordering on mysoginy.

 

I am thinking here of terms like "prostitute, whore or shameless madwoman"

which have been hurled at female devotees because they took up some

managerial responsibility or became vocal about the emotional or physical

needs of other women. Senior matajis like Vishakha Dasi, Malati Dasi,

Jyotirmayi Dasi, Pranada Dasi and other members of the women´s ministry have

been painted in very dark colours. Now, I dont know all these women, but

from the GHQ texts they come across as veritable demons who have to be

excommunicated lest ISKCON will go to hell. I wonder if these matajis who

probably chant Hare Krishna and attend temple programs just like any other

ISKCON devotee are really that dangerous, unintelligent and misguided as

they are made out to be.

 

I also wonder if this is really the spirit Prabhupada and your respected

Guru Maharaja want us to emulate. After all your Guru Maharaja attended the

international women´s conference and had many favourable things to say about

it and about some of the matajis in attendance. And Prabhupada instructed:

 

"Now another thing, that girls should not be taken as inferior. You see?

Sometimes... Of course, sometimes scripture we say that “Woman is the

cause of bondage." So that should not be, I mean to say, aggravated.

(laughs) That should not be aggravated, that “Woman is inferior," or

something like that. So the girls who come, you should treat them nicely

. . After all, anyone who is coming to Krishna consciousness, man or

woman, boys or girls, they are welcome. They are very fortunate. You

see. And the idea of addressing “prabhu" means “you are my master." That

is the... Prabhu means master. And Prabhupäda means many masters who

bows down at his lotus feet. That is Prabhupäda. So each, everyone shall

treat others as “My master." This is the Vaisnava." (September 24, 1968

conversation)

 

Here you have your shastric statement about mysoginy. Prabhupada says that

someone who continually overemphasizes points like "women are less

intelligent, women are 9 times more lusty than men" etc. even when these

women are Vaishnavis is guilty of disrespect. This is not good because

 

"Advanced devotees never disobey or disrespect another devotee. Disrespect

to another devotee is a great offense. Vaishnava aparädha. Vaishnava

aparädha is very serious offense. Therefore we teach to address amongst

the devotees, “Prabhu”, “Prabhu”, “Such and such Prabhu.” This should

not be simply spoken by the lips. It should be realized. Everyone should

think other devotees as his prabhu, master. Not he should try to become

master."

 

You reacted sensitively about Madhava Ghosh´s accusation that GHQers are

mysoginists and indicated that this might be a serious offense. Obviously

you do not want to be called a mysoginist and I understand that. But how do

you think Malati, Vishakha and other senior women feel when they are

constantly described as demons, whores, less intelligent etc?

 

"Our Krsna consciousness movement is based on complete fellow feeling and

love, but there is a word maryada which means respect which should always be

offered to the spiritual master and elderly members."(SPL to Jayapataka,17th

April,1970)

 

"So far Devahuti is concerned, she is elder women but very nice and sober

as well as qualified. Because she is the age of all your mothers she should

be treated very respectfully. Nothing should be ordered to her but simply

suggested so that she may work in her own way."(SPL to Jadurani, 14th

January, 1970)

 

Of course one could now begin to argue whether or not the matajis named

above are "very nice and sober as well as qualified elder women". But please

don´t. What is the use of getting into endless verbal battles which are

often nothing more than "I know better than you".

 

My main point is: I respect GHQ for trying to create chaste women and I wish

them all the best but I wonder why GHQ have to get so much on the case of

some matajis who don´t exactly correspond to their image of ideal vedic

women. Calling them whores, demons, shameless, lusty and unintelligent will

certainly not win them over to your cause. So why not leave them alone and

focus on your real agenda which is to turn your own daughters into chaste

vedic ladies. By creating just one vedic woman who is ideal you can

accomplish more than by chastising millions of those who are not.

 

ys Anantarupa das

[Guest guest]

>

>

> So in the absence of sastic evidence, what is your material evidence that GHQ

> members were following the *misogynist* vani of Kirtanananda? I'm

specifically

> asking you to back your claim that these members are *haters of women," if

you

> would be so kind as to explain.

>

> Thank you, prabhu.

>

> --gkd

 

And I am specifically saying that trying to explain the obvious to you would be

a

waste of my time.