are man above woman?

[Guest guest]

Are man really above woman ?

 

 

My answere would be:

Maybe so, but it would depend on the person, a woman can become stronger then a man with enough training, and vice versa,

 

I want to hear a answere from a fellow devotiee.

[Guest guest]

Does it really matter at the end? Does it matter to Lord of Death when He comes to take the body away from the soul?

 

Since both man and woman body are given the same fate... death, then they are equal.

 

That is my humble opinion.

[Guest guest]

Like lord jesus christ answers, angels, not burdened by forms such as described here.

 

There is always the injunction against associating with women, but there is simultaneous requirement to associate with vaisnavas. This means that when one becomes vaisnava, the primary understanding is that we are not these bodies, these physical forms. However, we are dealing with this duality world, so, we make interpretations. Women may tend to be more attached to matter, and men may be thios or that, but Srila Prabhupada also said that women are more devoted to krsna.

 

So, as sentiment and cold hard facts must be balanced in this science, we must assume that there is no discrimination based on gender. The ideal household combines the devotion with the more practical aspects to form a bond going back to Godhead without doubt. The superiority complex arrived at by foolish sanyassis and brahmacaris is not only ill advised, it virtually destroyed ISKCON and other mysogenistic societies. Even this question is somewhat ill advised because it just shows materialistic consciousness. Bhagavad Gita is our primer, yet before we can even approach this science, we must accept the speaker as God, as well as understand our position as spirit beings not bound by biology or other sciences of the physical realm. So, this discussion must be finished prior to entering the first phase.

 

Hare krsna, ys, mahaksadasa

 

PS I wont even read the other topic.

[Guest guest]

Maybe you people can help me.

I'm trying to find the origins of the institutionalized suiced known as "sati" in India.

I refuse to believe such a thing is "vedic" because vedic culture is supposed to be righteous.

Does anyone know from which culture this practice came and how it got introduced and assimilated in India?

 

[Guest guest]

this tradition is vedic, and it is a saint tradition in ages when so many people were extremely saint and heroic devotees of the lord.. it was voluntary, it was never obligatory.. the woman, having an husband that she followed as a real representative of god, and he was, when he died, he prefered to following him in paradise or spiritual world..

 

it was never obligatory, who did it had spiritual advantages... now it is almost incomprensible like many things who happened in the vedic ages (like the absolute king, polygamy, death penalty, forms of slavery, human and animal sacrifices, miracles etc.)

 

we do not do now, the sati in our times is not a sati, a sacrifice, it is simply an horrible homicide or suicide

[Guest guest]

My question is why, in a society where the inhabitants supposedly had atma jnan, would women think that they could attain any benefit in the afterlife by taking their own life?

Did the men also take their lives upon the deaths of their saintly wives to be with them in the next life?

Why didn't these people just do bhajan of Hari?

[yasodanandana]

Why didn't these people just do bhajan of Hari?

•••they did bhajan, they were absorbed in spiritual consciousness.

We cannot judge, we are so little, we are so identified in the body that we do not understand if one thinks that there's something more valuable of the human life on moral and spiritual plane. We have not even to think to do like that, but let us take it as an opportunity to learn that the body, the conditioned life is not everything (and this is essentially the reason for krishna, to put these stories on srimad bhagavatam and other scriptures)..

 

In kali yuga everything is little, we do not understand big personalities, big saints, big demons, big heroes, big sacrifices.. and we cannot in any way imitate

[Guest guest]

I guess their bhajan was not strong enough to free them from the attachments of their family members if they were willing to even kill themselves over them.

 

[yasodanandana]

better you read attentively some srimad bhagavatam, vedic customs are very complex, a civilization very different from our one... to accept or to criticize it, it is necessary a more deep study.. i hope you will do it.. otherwise you are missing the opportunity to learn some very special truths, very useful for your spiritual advancement

[Guest guest]

I have read extensively.

I myself am a Radha bhakta.

And after doing research on how the Vedas and their supplementary texts have been interpolated over the years I have come to the conclusion that this sati rite is not something that any Vaishnava or atma-jnani would partake in and therefore I am researching the origins of this mass gynocidal cult. I thought perhaps some people here could assist me but it seems you are not acquainted with ancient history/culture and how it evolved.

 

If you don't know the meaning of gynocide..... gyno is ancient greek for womb/female and of course "cide" is death or killing. Hence gynocide.

[Guest guest]

<< My question is why, in a society where the inhabitants supposedly had atma jnan, would women think that they could attain any benefit in the afterlife by taking their own life? >>

 

any my question is, why thos who are preachers in church and supposed to be monk-like do indulge in sex?

if you want to find faults in people, look around anywhere.

you will find it. question them also, not just the hindus

 

just as there are xians who erally do not know real message of jesus, there are and will be somehindus who do not know hinduism. so they malpractice it. their conduct does not define hinduism. so do not blame hinduism for it.

 

sati practice is gone. it will never come back.

still some may want to know why it happened.

here is an answer.

 

in the vedic society only one or a few in family earn.

all otehrs depend on it. a women traditionally do not go out for a job. so, if her husband dies, she becomes a burden for others in family. the rest of the family if exists, shoudl care for her, but some may not due to shortge of income. this sitution attracts other men to entice widows into secret sex erlations. also eh muslim invaders and rules would force widows and even unmarried girls to sleep with them. such sin is very serious for a hindu women and for the society. to avoid the possibility of such a sin, some chose to burn themselves with teh body of husband or after. then the society would know and remember the sati as of high character and sinfree.

teh most important thing to rememeber is that no one forced a woman to become sati. it was her free choice. if any incidence of forced sati has occured, then it is double malpractice. when a society has means by which a woman/widow can live happily, then sati or suicede or sex use of women do not happen in the vedic cultured society.

 

<< Did the men also take their lives upon the deaths of their saintly wives to be with them in the next life? >>

 

no. they simply would not marry again, nor would they have sex relation with any one. the point you do not seem to be aware of is that hindu men and women do not compete with each other. they live a coopertive dharmic life. vedic married life is of mutual respect, cooperationa and harmoney, not of male-female competition for freedom and rights.

 

<< Why didn't these people just do bhajan of Hari? >>

 

they did. a widow who jumps in fire does chant -rememer god while jumping.

 

anta kaale cha maam eva smaran uktvA kalevaram..

 

 

[Guest guest]

In reply to what you wrote above.....

 

"in the vedic society only one or a few in family earn.

all otehrs depend on it. a women traditionally do not go out for a job. so, if her husband dies, she becomes a burden for others in family. the rest of the family if exists, shoudl care for her, but some may not due to shortge of income. this sitution attracts other men to entice widows into secret sex erlations. also eh muslim invaders and rules would force widows and even unmarried girls to sleep with them. such sin is very serious for a hindu women and for the society. to avoid the possibility of such a sin, some chose to burn themselves with teh body of husband or after. then the society would know and remember the sati as of high character and sinfree.

teh most important thing to rememeber is that no one forced a woman to become sati. it was her free choice. if any incidence of forced sati has occured, then it is double malpractice. when a society has means by which a woman/widow can live happily, then sati or suicede or sex use of women do not happen in the vedic cultured society."

 

 

1.You said that women were not forced to commit suicide, yet you are citing the fact that a poor family would see the widow as a financial burden and hence, sati may be an option. In such a case then, they would be forcing her to kill herself as no woman with sane mind would take her own life just because she was a financial burden on her "family". Family is supposed to mean love and I know so many families that are poor but they cannot think of killing anyone just to relieve them of their burden.

 

2. There is not even a need for the widow to live with her in-laws and become a financial burden to them. She has 3 choices:

A. return to her parents home

B. start earning money for herself through some occupation or business

C. re-marry

 

All three of these choices are lakhs times more noble and righteous than death.

 

3. What you have cited is not the ORIGIN of sati but it's later developments. I want to know from where it originated. For example, we have the case in Mahabharat of Madri who committed suicide on the death of her husband while Kunti lived on to care for the family. Why did Madri, a Vaishnava with atma-jnan and sanga with Krishna do such a thing? She was not poor. Doesn't this set a bad example for women and humanity at large? Afterall, Gita says, "what great leaders do, common people follow".

Did she actually do it in reality or was that a part of the Mahabharat that may have been interpolated as we know that most, if not all, of shastra has been interpolated over the years by various parties.

That is the only logical answer that I have come up with.

I find it very hard to believe that Vaishnavas like Madri and Krishna himself would partake in such events.

Therefore I have concluded that this part of the Mahabharat has been fabricated by some anti-vaishnava party to give Vaishnavas a bad name.

 

 

[Guest guest]

<< Madri who committed suicide on the death of her husband >>

 

you are looking the conduct of madri from a . point of view. the fact is that if a man or a woman cannot live in peace without her spouse, then it is very difficult for any one to stop him/her from meeting death after the spouse.

 

one does have freedom to die. whether othres likes it or not. no one encouraged madri to become sati. every efort was made to discourage her for it. madri was not even insane. she dd not decide to become sati under the influence of drug or anything like that. it was her sober decision. she was happy with it. keeping her alive (any one alive) against his/her will is torture to the person. it is robbing the freedom of another person.

 

it is the force of love that is that motivates to nourish, care, create, maintain, and also kill.

 

there is no conspiracy to make vaishnavas feel bad or low about it. you just have to understand it and live with it.

 

also each hindu knows that the soul never dies.

so technically a hindu cannot be afraid of death.

some even want to live in such a way that they have no fear of death. they are ready to meet death fearlessly if it comes, but will not be willing to just die for no good reason.

 

just living for no matter what is not in hindu mind.

 

[danava]

you are not man nor woman.

There is eternal duties (nitya-dharma) for the living entity and temporary duties (naimittika-dharma).

Nitya-dharma correponds to our eternal true nature -- jiva-shakti, servant of Sri Krishna and naimittika-dharma arises from our temporary conditioned position.

So while you are in woman body you should be carefully protected by man. In childhood it is father then it is husband. But it all is temporary. As soon as you give up all illusions about "I am this body, I am wo/man" and engage in pure devotional service, your only protector and Lord is Sri Krishna.

[Guest guest]

As qouted by a guest above "no one encouraged madri to become sati. every efort was made to discourage her for it. "

 

 

As per your qoute, can you please give the chapter number from the Mahabharat where Madri was DISCOURAGED from sati? Or maybe you can even qoute the exact words for it hear. My version of Mahabharat does not have that and I would be interested in reading the translation that you have.

 

Regarding different duties of men and women, which shastra lists a duty of a woman as committing suicide when widowed?

[Guest guest]

By man or woman do you mean souls who have taken male or female bodies? Do you mean to ask whether a female body is superior to a male body or vice-versa? Today I might have a male body but next life I might take a female body. Each time I take any of these bodies the social roles might change but i have no permanent connections with these bodies.

However I would like to know why the gopis took on male bodies when they accompanied Lord Chaitanya from Vaikuntha on His mission.