The Words of Srila Prabhupada on Women

Beggar · May 7, 2008

BY: BRAHMA DASA

May 06, SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA (SUN) —

The following editorial contains excerpts from a letter and my response to the questions it contained. The letter was used with the permission of the author who is a member in good standing of ISKCON. Her name has been withheld at her request.

Dear Brahma Prabhu, I read your

posting on Vaisnavi.org

called Paternalistic Scriptures.

I noticed that dissatisfaction with certain statements from Srila Prabhupada on the nature of women comes up frequently enough to be considered one of the main topics that you are forced to address. Even though I have been a faithful devotee in Iskcon for many years, I feel that some of Srila Prabhupada's statements regarding women are keeping the Krsna consciousness movement in the dark ages. I appreciate the balanced and relevant way that you and Swami Tripurari have approached this subject so I would like to ask you some questions. Please excuse me if my questions are too straightforward.

Dear dasi,

Like many of Srila Prabhupada's initiated disciples, I became troubled by some of the statements he made about women and the way they were considered absolute. Only after I became acquainted with the teachings of Bhaktivinoda Thakura was I able to personally resolve these issues. It was Bhaktivinoda Thakura who pioneered the use of a more rational approach to presenting Krsna consciousness in modern times.

Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura writes, "Acaryas who appeared before Thakura Bhaktivinoda did not address their discourses so directly to the empiric thinkers." (The Harmonist, December 1931)

Bhaktivinoda's writings in Sri Krsna Samhita are distinguished from those of other acaryas by his discussion of the two sides of our religious tradition. These he refers to as artha-prada or relative information based on time and circumstance, and paramartha prada or the absolute or essential teachings of the tradition. According to Bhaktivinoda Thakura, relative information can be incomplete or incorrect even though it might be found in scripture or spoken by a self-realized devotee. To emphasize this point he states that one is free to disregard relative information in his own writings if it is found to be incorrect. This position would allow one to disregard certain comments Srila Prabhupada made on relative issues, the most obvious being that women's brain size was almost half that of men. This is a piece of information that he attributed to Dr. Urquhart, a professor at Scottish Churches College the institution that he attended in Calcutta.

The question is whether or not Srila Prabhupada's other comments on the nature of women fall within the category of relative or absolute. The dictionary defines absolute as complete, perfect, and free from limitation. Following Bhagavad-gita 2.16 devotees have defined absolute as that which is satah or true in all times and circumstances. Taken at face value do his controversial comments on the nature of women conform to either of these definitions of the word absolute? Are women always less intelligent and untrustworthy in comparison to men? Are women always required to be under the direct protection of a man? The answer to these questions is no. Neither do these contentions about women conform to Bhaktivinoda's concept of paramartha, as they are all nonessential to the culture of bhakti. Therefore according to Bhaktivinoda Thakura one is free to overlook them.

Furthermore Bhaktivinoda says that even scripture is affected by the bias of its author(s). He writes: "It is an obvious fact that a man is greatly devoted to his homeland and even great sages (who wrote scripture) were influenced by this tendency." Srila Prabhupada grew up at the turn of the 19th century in a culture where women were considered to be almost the property of men. In Srila Prabhupada's words, Woman is never to be given independence. According to Vedic civilization, woman should be given protection. Srila Prabhupada cites this scriptural advice throughout his writings and conversations, but did he think that it was absolutely essential to the practice of Krsna consciousness for women to be under the control of men? The answer is no. Though he considered the scriptural model ideal, Srila Prabhupada showed his flexibility in letters to his female disciples Yamuna and Dinatarini by approving of ashrams for women under their supervision.

Bhaktivinoda Thakura taught that devotees should know what is essential and also accommodate the provisional nature of scripture. This is what Srila Prabhupada did when he approved of ashrams for women under the supervision of women, rather than demand that scriptural mandates placing women under the protection of fathers, husbands, or sons be observed in all circumstances. Provisional means provided for a temporary necessity with the understanding that a permanent arrangement is forthcoming. The only permanent arrangement is Krsna consciousness, which transcends the provisional nature of scriptural advice. Bhaktivinoda taught that saragrahi or essence seeking devotees should understand this point and make whatever adjustments are necessary in order to be fixed in sadhana. Only sadhana, under the guidance of an advanced devotee, will enable one to realize absolute harmony and enter the mysteries of Krsna bhakti.

Bhaktivinoda's concept of saragrahi refers to devotees who are able to distinguish between the essential and nonessential and put the former into practice. In contrast he refers those who stress the nonessential at the cost of the essential as baravahi or outward-seeking devotees. Whenever there was a clash between the two Srila Prabhupada stressed the essential, adjusting his position on many relative issues. Establishing the brahmacarini ashram was one such instance, allowing his disciples to wear secular clothes for preaching purposes was another. Srila Prabhupada was devotionally perfected not perfect or infallible in any mundane sense. All considered, understanding Krsna consciousness in terms of absolute and relative is especially helpful in this information age when anyone can scrutinize Srila Prabhupada's exact words on any subject, words that in every case might not have been for consumption by the general public. In the opinion of Srila Prabhupada's esteemed Godbrother Srila B. R. Sridhara Maharaja, knowledge of the absolute and relative position of the guru is essential to a comprehensive understanding of guru tattva.

This is the background of our approach to harmonizing Srila Prabhupada's spirituality with his controversial words on women. The following are the questions that you posed in your letter followed by my comments.

Q: In 'Paternalistic Scriptures' you wrote that times have changed since Srila Prabhupada made those controversial statements about women and were he with us today he would surely present his message more in tune with modern times. I am a grand-disciple and can only go by what I have heard about him from others, but the idea in ISKCON is that Srila Prabhupada's words were for all people of all times. Why then do you feel that in modern times Srila Prabhupada would have adjusted his teachings on women?

A: In the 1960s and early 1970s America's conscience was centered on the Vietnam war, the civil rights movement, and the 'hippie' dilemma. These events had eclipsed the issue of women's rights to some extent. When Srila Prabhupada arrived in 1965 the National Organization for Women, which was to champion the cause of women's rights, had not yet been formed and the law did not provide women with equal employment opportunity or equal access to higher educational and professional schools. Thus there were not nearly as many women doctors, lawyers, engineers, architects and politicians as there are today. Reflecting their status at that time was the fact that married women were not issued credit cards in their own names and employment classifieds had separate columns for men and women which meant that women could not even apply for the majority of jobs that were available.

Also less than one out of twenty-seven girls played high school sports, as there was no facility provided for them to do so. The high school I graduated from in 1970 offered boys' football, baseball, basketball, swimming, wrestling, and track, but only swimming and cheer leading was available for girls. The ratio of girls who play competitive high school sports today is one in three.

Further revealing are the results of a poll taken in 1973 showing that twenty-six percent of both men and women, (one fourth of the nation's adults) said they would not vote for a women president, the figure is only around five percent today. Religion also played a major role in thwarting equal rights for women. Thirty-plus years ago America was still largely influenced by a Christian ethic that relegated women to subservience under men. Religious marriage ceremony at that time reflected this by requiring the bride to vow to honor and obey her husband to be, whereas the groom had only to vow to honor and cherish his future wife. Support for the subservience of women was taken from the Christian Bible, the same book that Southern Baptists and others had drawn their support of slavery and racial segregation from.

These examples illustrate that Srila Prabhupada faced a different preaching field than we do today. Women at that time were not as emancipated and the ideal of equal rights for women had not yet been embraced by American society to the extent that it is today. Although there was opposition to Srila Prabhupada's statements that women were less intelligent, there was at the same time still an underlying social acceptance that women were to be subservient to men.

Acceptance of this today is radically less than what it was in the sixties and early seventies. Even Srila Prabhupada's own disciples and grand disciples are reconsidering this contention and its relevance to practicing Krsna consciousness in modern times. The fact that Srila Prabhupada often made practical adjustments in consideration of social norms demonstrates that his mission was not based on establishing ancient Vedic rules in Western society. Rather his emphasis was the practice of essential Krsna consciousness, which transcends social rules and norms. Srila Prabhupada said, “The acarya knows how to adjust things. The real purpose is how one will take to spiritual consciousness, or Krsna consciousness. Keeping one's aim to that point some concession may be given. As far as possible, keeping pace with the time, circumstances.” (Prabhupada lecture 2-20-73)

Therefore I personally believe that had he come to America today, he would have adjusted his comments about women as he found that those who were sincerely interested in Krsna consciousness encountered them as a major stumbling block to practice. After all, his goal was to spread Krsna consciousness, not to alienate people from involvement in his movement. Another example of his flexibility is expressed in this letter where he de-emphasized statements he had made about Vedic astronomy after he understood how disturbing they were to some of his disciples.

Srila Prabhupada wrote, "These things are not very important, we may not waste our time with these insignificant questions. There are sometimes allegorical explanations, we are concerned with Krsna Consciousness, and even though there is some difference of opinion between modern science and allegorical explanation in the Bhagavata, we have to take the essence of Srimad-Bhagavatam and utilize it for our higher benefit, without bothering about the correctness of modern science or the allegorical explanation sometimes made in Srimad-Bhagavatam." (Letter 72-11-07)

Q: Isn't it true that Srila Prabhupada's controversial comments about women are over-generalized, making them inconclusive by objective analysis? Doesn't the growing trend of women to become financially and socially free from their otherwise decreed position of dependency under men show that they prefer this when given the choice?

A: The guru's statements are not always conclusive when they refer to material issues. This is Bhaktivinoda's point about relative and absolute. Your words growing trend indicate that during Srila Prabhupada's preaching years, American women were much more resigned to dependency under men then they are today. Many women, especially those in third world countries still remain entirely dependent on men by force of culture or religion. Regardless of socio-religious ideals, the fact remains that in modern times men cannot be fully trusted to honorably protect women or to consistently supply their livelihood and spiritual education. Therefore quite naturally women will feel the need to become socially, financially, and religiously independent. Independent women are in no way barred from practicing essential Krsna consciousness, and in many cases independence from men has been helpful to their spiritual practice.

Q: In Canto Four of Srimad Bhagavatam Srila Prabhupada states that women like a man who is expert at rape. Why would Srila Prabhupada write this? This statement, even if it were true, does not help the cause of bringing readers to Krishna consciousness.

A: Srila Prabhupada did not always use words that were appropriate to our frame of reference. In this case I always felt that he used the word rape in error. What Srila Prabhupada is saying in this purport is that women are attracted to aggressive lovers. Rape means something else entirely. Rape is defined as having sexual intercourse with a person against their will. Indeed, how does it make sense to say that a person wants something that is against their will?

Either way this statement about what women are attracted to sexually is not absolute by any means. In this case, and in many others, I personally feel that his editors, in a spirit of humble service to him, might have done him a disservice by not bringing to his attention the negative side of some of the controversial things that he wrote about women. In his book The Hare Krsna Explosion, Hayagriva dasa relates that Srila Prabhupada told him to edit his Bhagavad-gita so that it would be acceptable to the academic community. In our present social climate writing that women are less intelligent, untrustworthy, or like men who are expert at rape, is certainly not acceptable to anyone in the academic community. Therefore I believe that Srila Prabhupada would have wanted to be advised how statements like this would affect appreciation for his books, as we know that he wanted his books to serve future generations by helping to bring them to essential Krsna consciousness.

Q: This brings up the point of how those who consider themselves the followers of Srila Prabhupada want to take his statements on women. Taking them verbatim for all time seems to be one reason why ISKCON is so bogged down with the problems it is having in this area. Don't you think that continuing in this way will make ISKCON more and more irrelevant to educated people as time marches on?

A: I agree that the Krsna consciousness movement is bogged down with misogyny, gender bias, and fundamentalism, making it irrelevant to educated people in the west. This may be one reason why Iskcon must now largely look to members of the Indian immigrant community for support of its temples here in America. ISKCON's position on women's rights, although unacceptable to the vast majority of Americans, may still be somewhat acceptable to the Indian immigrant community, but I believe not for long. Iskcon has made some progress in the right direction, but I feel that the real solution lies in understanding and preaching the difference between what is essential and nonessential to the practice of Krsna consciousness. This dynamic preaching would help make the Krsna consciousness movement respectable to educated people. This is what Srila Prabhupada wanted. He was not interested in rigidly promoting nonessential cultural rules at the expense of spreading Krsna consciousness.

Q: I have seen a number of women reject Krishna consciousness or leave even after years of practice because of the constant discouragement they face in the struggle to overcome gender bias passed off as something spiritual. What can be done to help them?

A: I reiterate that the teachings of Bhaktivinoda Thakura on the relative and absolute aspects of religion are helping many devotees avoid such crisis of faith. However, we must understand that the ability to separate the essential from the nonessential and put it into practice on some level is largely a matter of one's underlying spiritual eligibility. Bhaktivinoda describes the vast majority of devotees as having komala sraddha, or tender faith. Those of tender faith will be distracted from the practice of Krsna consciousness by almost any opportunity that arises, regardless of which organization they are affiliated with. Our solace lies in knowing that life after life souls are progressing toward Krsna through bhakti. Bhakti qualifies one for further bhakti; bhakti is the means and the end. As a soul becomes genuinely attached to the practice of bhakti, material issues become less and less significant. Other than this there is no end to the problems of life.

Obviously there is more to say and it may not be possible to address this matter to the satisfaction of all concerned. Still, all devotees should try to empathize with those whose practice of Krsna consciousness is affected by this sensitive issue. Mahaprabhu Sri Caitanyadeva was concerned with how even the trees could be engaged in devotional service. We are more than trees; we are human beings with diverse psychologies. According to Mahaprabhu we are superior to plants and animals not because of our ability to philosophize, but because of our ability to love. Bhaktivinoda Thakura wrote that chanting the Holy Name and kindness to everyone is the essence of the religion of Sri Caitanya. Being true to his spirit requires that we try to help one another make progress in devotion. What the word help indicates will vary according to ones realization, but in all cases it is through chanting, kindness, and service to a higher Vaisnava that our love for Sri Krsna is actualized.

Sarva gattah · May 8, 2008

These comments are now on the right thread

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #666666 1px solid; PADDING-RIGHT: 3ex; BORDER-TOP: #666666 1px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 3ex; BORDER-LEFT: #666666 1px solid; BORDER-BOTTOM: #666666 1px solid" bgColor=#e0e0e0>Originally Posted by Sarva gattah

311. End Notes or Appendices in Srila Prabhupada’s Books

Whereas some of Srila Prabhupada's books contain sentences such as the following, which when taken in isolation may be considered derogatory to and offensive against women:

Although rape is not legally allowed, it is a fact that a woman likes a man who is very expert at rape. (SB 4.25.41, p.)

When a husbandless woman is attacked by an aggressive man, she takes his action to be mercy. (SB 4.25.42, p.)

Generally, when a woman is attacked by a man--whether her husband or some other man--she enjoys the attack, being too lusty. (SB 4.26.26, p.)

Whereas some ISKCON devotees may have used these statements out of context as an excuse to offend, neglect and abuse women;

Whereas some people who read such statements may consider them to be derogatory or offensive, may misunderstand what Srila Prabhupada actually means, and may not want to further read those books, notwithstanding the many other beneficial statements in them;

RESOLVED: That the GBC Body recommends to the BBT Trustees that the above quotes, and other such statements as determined by the BBT, be explained in endnotes or in appendices.

SHOULD THEY BE LEFT IN OR TAKEN OUT?

The English word rape in the old English dictionary Prabhupada had did not mean abduction and forced sex, it meant play where the women teases the man in a kind of game who then forcibly has sex with the women in a kind of play of 'keepings off' enjoyed by both. Obviously there is a fine line here but the modern version of the word rape ia a human rights violoation.

What do you think do you think?</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #666666 1px solid; PADDING-RIGHT: 3ex; BORDER-TOP: #666666 1px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 3ex; BORDER-LEFT: #666666 1px solid; BORDER-BOTTOM: #666666 1px solid" bgColor=#e0e0e0>Comment on this Originally Posted by Suchandra

Well, the problem is indeed that it might not be properly translated and also presented out of context. When Prabhupada said "rape", he meant that this is when a prince conquered a princess and brought her by force to his castle.

There were even in advance arrangements if the princess would agree to be kidnapped by such and such prince. And the actual kidnapping performed like a ritual.

Since this tradition to "force" a girl into the position of becoming the queen by "kidnapping" is lost and even forgotten, they consider "rape" as assaulting and violating a girl.

This is not what Prabhupada meant.

As soon a princess was kidnapped all the people knew that soon they will see her again, but this time sitting on the throne and receiving the consecration to be the queen.

It was rather a gesture of honouring the princess to install her on the throne and never to disgrace the princess. Hopefully they do the right thing and not create confusion. Thanks sd.

http://pratyatosa.com/GBC/

Prabhupada's citing the kysatriya ritual of "rape" is of course something completely different with what people have in their minds nowadays. Something similar what Prabhupada meant we find in the descriptions how during the time of knighthood a prince would "kidnap" a princess.

This kind of "kidnapping" or "rape" had nothing to do with harming a woman, but it was a tradition, a ritual how to "force" a girl to sit on the throne and become the queen of a king. Unfortunately these people don't know that even Lord Krishna Himself used to kidnap princesses and made them into queens to live at the royal court.

The arrangement was like that, that the princess was informed if she would agree to be "kidnapped" by prince such and such and only when the princess agreed a particular prince would kidnap her to bring her to his royal court.

Since today people have become like hogs and dogs they cannot understand such rituals of the ksatriya class and instead drag everything down on their own level, their own situation which has become unfortunately more and more often the situation of sickos. Only sickos would attack Prabhupada and interpret Prabhupada's words into sexual abuse.</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

Quote:

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #666666 1px solid; PADDING-RIGHT: 3ex; BORDER-TOP: #666666 1px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 3ex; BORDER-LEFT: #666666 1px solid; BORDER-BOTTOM: #666666 1px solid" bgColor=#e0e0e0>Originally Posted by suchandra

http://www.chakra.org/discussions/BMMay05_08.html

"So bhaktyā anuvṛtyā. Anuvṛtyā means following. Not that I have become more than my guru, I can invent something. No. Bhakti means, sādhu-mārgānugamanam. You have to follow the sādhu, the ācārya. That is bhakti. Bhakti does not means that I am so learned I can manufacture something.

That is rascal.

Caitanya Mahāprabhu says, gopī-bhartuḥ pada-kamalayor dāsa-dāsa-dāsa-dāsānudāsaḥ. That is bhakti. You have to become servant of the servant of the servant of the servant.

Not that at a point you become suddenly very learned scholar, and you do not remain a servant, but you want to become a master, to dictate the guru. That is rascal. That will not help us. Here it is said, bhaktyānuvṛtyā. Bhaktyā, bhaktyā, bhakti means sevā. Bhaja sevayā.

When bhakti, bhajata sukti. Bhaja means sevayā. Tad viddhi praṇipātena paripraśnena sevayā [Bg. 4.34]. So we have to understand this bhakti-yoga by bhaktyānuvṛtyā, not otherwise. Not that I am very learned scholar, I can give a different interpretation and… No, that is not bhakti. Bhaktyānuvṛtyā vitṛṣṇayā dvandva-titikṣayā ca."

Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam 5.5.14

by His Divine Grace A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupāda

Vrndāvana, November 2, 1976

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

Beggar · May 8, 2008

It was Bhaktivinoda Thakura who pioneered the use of a more rational approach to presenting Krsna consciousness in modern times.

Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura writes, "Acaryas who appeared before Thakura Bhaktivinoda did not address their discourses so directly to the empiric thinkers." (The Harmonist, December 1931)

Bhaktivinoda's writings in Sri Krsna Samhita are distinguished from those of other acaryas by his discussion of the two sides of our religious tradition. These he refers to as artha-prada or relative information based on time and circumstance, and paramartha prada or the absolute or essential teachings of the tradition. According to Bhaktivinoda Thakura, relative information can be incomplete or incorrect even though it might be found in scripture or spoken by a self-realized devotee. To emphasize this point he states that one is free to disregard relative information in his own writings if it is found to be incorrect. This position would allow one to disregard certain comments Srila Prabhupada made on relative issues, the most obvious being that women's brain size was almost half that of men. This is a piece of information that he attributed to Dr. Urquhart, a professor at Scottish Churches College the institution that he attended in Calcutta.

The question is whether or not Srila Prabhupada's other comments on the nature of women fall within the category of relative or absolute. The dictionary defines absolute as complete, perfect, and free from limitation. Following Bhagavad-gita 2.16 devotees have defined absolute as that which is satah or true in all times and circumstances. Taken at face value do his controversial comments on the nature of women conform to either of these definitions of the word absolute? Are women always less intelligent and untrustworthy in comparison to men? Are women always required to be under the direct protection of a man? The answer to these questions is no. Neither do these contentions about women conform to Bhaktivinoda's concept of paramartha, as they are all nonessential to the culture of bhakti. Therefore according to Bhaktivinoda Thakura one is free to overlook them.

Therefore conceptions given by the guru that are not paramartha but rather naimittika (not eternal dharma) are not essential to the cultivation of bhakti. This would also include the Moon and Sun distances from Earth, the death penalty etc.