Thread #6: Proposal by Ajamila Dasa

[Guest guest]

> This is a very serious question raised regarding Ajamila Prabhu's proposal

> which needs to be addressed immediately.

>

> > SPECIFIC DUTIES FOR THE GBC (Ajamila Prabhu's proposal)

>

> > 10. He/she can have any required number of assistant or Co GBCs

>

> I strongly object to the word 'she' in this proposal.

>

> We are trying to introduce Varnasrama in the GBC with respect to the gurus

> & sannyasis but we are not considering that it includes that GBC

> management is not for the female-bodied devotees.

>

> If we are so much emphasising why Prabhupada wanted to replace Tamal

> Krishna Goswami when he became a sannyasi, why are we not considering that

> Prabhupada told mother Yamuna that since she was a woman she could not

> become GBC. Is this also not implementation of varnasrama in the GBC?

>

> [Note: Tamal Krsna Maharaja's recollection explains Prabhupada's

> ultimate decision NOT to put Yamuna as GBC. Why are there no other

> "evidences" from 1971-1977 of women being asked by Prabhupada to be GBC?

> Contradictory accounts from someone else don't prove anything.]

>

> Before assuming something, have we ever thought why did Srila Prabhupada

> not appoint one woman to post of GBC? Why were none of the 11 chosen in

> 1977 women? He had full opportunity. Why did he choose only men? Why?

>

> HH Bhakti Vikasa Swami and told me to make it clear to all the assembled

> devotees in this GBC Restructure conference that Varnasrama can never be

> established in the ISKCON leadership if:

>

> (1) Vaisnavis are given managerial positions in the GBC even if the GBC

> may be made up of only grhastas.

>

> (2) Grhastas on the GBC are divorcees.

>

> (3) If there is no immediately strong heavy-handed action taken against

> the belittling of Prabhupada going on in subtle ways.

>

> HG Devakinandan Prabhu (ISKCON Juhu Management Committee) has also read

> this proposal and instructed me to pass on this message to this

> conference:

>

> He feels that:

>

> (1) Vaisnavis should never be given managerial positions in leadership

> roles. (2) The IBC should not be involved in voting or any managerial

> decisions even once a year but it should only be consulted when there is

> great emergency managerial problem. Otherwise the restructuring will not

> be so effective.

>

> I personally also would tend to loose my complete interest in this

> conference if in the attempt to the restructure the GBC with respect to

> the sannyasis & gurus we end up introducing another big blunder by

> supporting the introduction of Vaisnavis in the GBC leadership positions.

> Then there is a chance that the new GBC comprising of grhastas will become

> worse than now because of the intermingling of the men & women at the top

> level which will then permeate throughout our Society in a very widespread

> manner. yad yad acarati sresthas. And the whole society will be doomed to

> sahajiyaism and apasiddhantavada. Atleast the sannyasis on the GBC now may

> not be very keen in introducing more women in the GBC (atleast I hope so)

> but when the grhastas come in, they may give a free license and start

> inducting Vaisnavis on the GBC, which will make it even worse than what it

> is now. So I wan't to know the views of the conference members on this

> issue and thus decide whether I should support this restructuring

> campaign.

>

> The present GBC is surely commiting this blunder (and that is one of the

> reasons it has become powerless) as pointed out by Paradhyeya Prabhu is

> his excellent essage to the GBC: Critical Analysis of "Women in ISKCON"

> GBC Resolutions, dated May 17, 2000. But they have not cared to even reply

> to Paradhyeya Prabhu's impeccable arguments what to speak of rescinding

> the resolution pertaining to women in ISKCON.

>

> At the GBC meeting two years ago (1997), a member, speaking for the

> inclusion of women on the GBC, said (as reported on Chakra): 'Don't see

> what Srila Prabhupada did, think what he would do now.' Isn't this

> statement very very odd, to say the least?

>

> It was very very surprising and disturbing to me that recently in their

> first meeting in Alachua on June 7th and 8th, the SMPDC members (most of

> them sannyasis like Jayapataka Swami, Gopal Krishna Goswami, Radhanatha

> Swami, Sivarama Swami {absent}, Bhakti Caru Swami {absent}) acknowledged

> the undue absence of any female members and accordingly invite

> nominations. (Since the meeting, Pranada d.d. was nominated and has agreed

> to sit on the SMPDC. Her nomination is waiting confirmation by the

> members).

>

> Are'nt all these actions making Varnasrama implementation almost

> impossible in our Society taking it towards sahajiyaism? Sometimes it is

> very very frustrating to be a witness to all this.

>

> And if the members of this conference or the new GBC does not the see all

> this as a breakage of Varnasrama principles in the leadership then I do

> not want to be a party to such restructural attempts.

>

> Here are some quotes from Srila Prabhupada where Prabhupada states very

> clearly that leadership positions are not meant for female-bodied souls:

>

> SB 4.16.23 purp

>

> Thus it is most regrettable when a woman becomes the executive head

> instead of a lionlike king. In such a situation the people are considered

> very unfortunate.

>

> Letter to: Jayatirtha Calcutta 13 January, 1976

>

> "You may check that they are chanting and following the rules but do not

> get involved with their management. So far your suggestion that they sew

> clothes for the sannyasis Deities it is not possible. Sannyasis may have

> no connection with women."

>

> Letter to: Yamuna, Dinatarine Mayapur 21 February, 1976

>

> "On the whole larger scale is not to be attempted by women. Manage a small

> asram, but don't try bigger scale, then you require the help of men. Don't

> try manual exertion, then again there is mixture and that is not desired.

> Simply keep yourself aloof from men--chanting, many more times as

> possible, read books, worship the deity."

>

> Bhagavad-gita 1.21-22, London, July 18, 1973

>

> After describing the material energy, bhumir apo analo vayuh, earth,

> water, air, fire, this material.... This is also female, prakrti. Female

> means.... In India we have got little experience. The female is always

> controlled. Female is never given the position of controller. Nowadays it

> is going on. Just like Indira Gandhi, she has given the position of

> controller. This is artificial. In the history of India, greater India,

> Mahabharata, you will never find that a woman has been given a position of

> controller. No. It is not possible. We have to take things from the

> sastra.

>

> Evening Darshan; Hrishikesha, May 9, 1977

>

> Prabhupada: Who will give protection? Sab scientific.(Hindi) "So don't

> trust women and politician". This is Canakya Pandita....We have got

> Mahabharata, there is not a single instance...We had very, very great,

> qualified women, but they were in charge of state...? Very, very qualified

> women. You know. Na svatanratam arhati, striyah. For women there is no

> independence. The Manu-samhita. They must stay under father, under

> husband, or under elderly sons. Three stages. Kunti....

>

> If you want to revive real Indian civilization for the good of the whole

> human society, take to Krsna consciousness. You'll be happy. There is no

> doubt. (Hindi) Why do you try to undo something which is spoken by

> Bhagavan, Vyasadeva?...Mahajano yena gatah sa panthah. We are not

> following mahajana, but we are transgressing...."

>

> Morning Walk March 19, 1976, Mayapura

>

> Ramesvara: The women argue, Srila Prabhupada, that they can be given....

> If they are given a good chance, they can make equal contribution in

> business, in science. So they are demanding equal rights, equal

> employment. Prabhupada: So why.... Why not equal rights that you stop

> producing children like the man? The man does not produce. Why you are

> obliged to produce?

> Ramesvara: That is their special qualification.

> Prabhupada: That is.... Similarly, everything is special. You are a

> different entity. You must have different engagements. That is your

> perfection.

>

> [Note: Prabhupada says very clearly that women have different engagements

> than men. Just because some Vaisnavis have a propensity for management

> doesn't mean they can act or demand accordingly. Lord Krsna says in BG,

> 18.47: "It is better to engage in one's own occupation, even though one

> may perform it imperfectly, than to accept another's occupation and

> perform it perfectly. Duties prescribed according to one's nature are

> never affected by sinful reactions."]

>

> Discussions with Hayagriva dasa about Auguste Comte

>

> Prabhupada: These are all imagination. When woman, when she is misguided,

> she becomes dangerous. There is no question of love. But one thing,

> according to Vedic conception life, that women and children are on the

> same level, so they should be given protection by men. In childhood the

> protection is from the father, in youthhood the protection is from the

> husband, and in old age the protection is from the grown-up sons. So they

> should never be given independence. They should be given protection, and

> their natural love for father or for husband or for children, then that

> propensity will grow very smoothly, and that will establish the

> relationship with woman and man very happy, and both of them will be able

> to execute their real function, spiritual life, by cooperation. The woman

> is known as his better half, so if she looks after the comfort of the man,

> a man is working and he is looking after the comfort, then both will be

> satisfied and their spiritual life will progress. Woman is meant for

> certain duties; man is meant for... Man is meant for hard working, and

> woman is meant for homely comfort, love. So both of them, if they are

> situated in their respective duties under proper training, then this

> combination of man and woman will help both of them to make progress in

> spiritual life.

>

> Thakura Bhaktivinoda in his commentary on Upadeshamrita

>

> "Householders should not closely associate with others' wives or

> prostitutes. They should not indulge in any association with the opposite

> sex other than with their wives according to religious scriptures."

>

> Basu Ghosh Prabhu

>

> "A women who acts as a leader in management position will necessarily have

> to CONSTANTLY interact with the men. And there is a chance that it may

> lead to illict connections, albeit not in every case. But in many."

>

> Guru-Krsna Prabhu

>

> On the one hand we have Vaisnavis pleading for protection; on the other,

> they will be vying for power in the form of a leadership position--a

> guaranteed lose-lose situation. They'll not get protection by competing

> with their protectorates, because it "just ain't no fun" for a man to try

> to protect a contrary-minded subordinate. And they won't get power either,

> because the power of a woman is her shyness.

>

> Ofcourse that does not mean that ksatriya ladies weren't involved in

> military arrangements where they assisted their male leaders? King

> Dasaratha's wife was near enough to the battlefield to exercise the

> courage and ability to rescue her husband. A woman can do it only as a

> service to help her husband managing service, in a direct way she should

> not.

>

> Though it may not pertain directly to our discussion, there are quotes

> from Prabhupada which are emphatic that women in the normal course should

> not also become acaryas or diksha-gurus:

>

> SB 4.12.32

>

> "Suniti, however, being a woman, and specifically his mother, could not

> become Dhruva Maharaja's diksa-guru."

>

> "t is not that woman cannot be acarya. Generally, they do not become.

> In very special case. (From transcript of original tape of SP dictating

> BGAII intro. 660219BG.NY)

>

> Ofcourse there can always be some rare exceptions to this rule like in our

> parampara we see great great Vaisnavis like Jahnava Devi, Hemalata

> Thakurani, Gangamata Goswami taking on the role of acaryas and gurus who

> had many male disciples.

>

> Furthur it is clear from the quotes below that Prabhupada surely did want

> to implement the varnasrama dharma in a complete manner gradually & slowly

> by separating the intermingling of the men & women devotees in our

> society. So how can we promote it in our leadership i.e the GBC body? Dear

> conference members, please answer this question and don't evade it.

>

> "Sometimes jealous persons criticize the Krishna consciousness movement

> because it engages equally both boys and girls in distrubuting love of

> Godhead. Not knowing that boys and girls in countries like Europe and

> America mix very freely, these fools and rascals criticize the boys and

> girls in Krishna consciousness for intermingling. But these rascals should

> consider that one cannot suddenly change a community's social customs."

> (Cc. Adi 7.31-32, Purport)

>

> "In our society the girls and boys mix, intermingle together and this is

> practically impossible to stop because you Western people are accustomed

> to this habit. Sometimes my Godbrothers critize me for intermingling of

> girls and boys....But there is no way out of it--you boys and girls will

> mix even if I say....they cannot avoid it. They sit separately in the

> temple and then outside mix again. So this was not possible from the

> beginning...." (Letter to Govinda dasi, 30 April, 1974)

>

> "But because in your country there is no distinction between boys and

> girls, or man and women, they can freely mix without any restriction, I

> did not (therefore) give much stricture on this point because by such

> stricture they might be annoyed, and whatever Krishna Consciousness they

> are trying to develop might be checked." (Letter to Satvarupa, 68-07-12)

>

> Vaisnava dasabhas

> Nayana-ranjana das

Very good points,but I know GBC will never accept it.I donot know if they

want to hear this kind of quote.