Continued GBC Discussion on Female Diksha Gurus (from PAMHO)

PADA: For starters, a woman devotee wrote to complain to PADA that the proposed ISKCON female diksha gurus -- "have to have her living family members giving her financial support -- and if need be -- physical care support." So she is not going to get a "guru salary" and "guru servants" like the male gurus. Thus a woman  guru and a male guru are both alleged equals as "sum total of the demigods representatives of God," except one gets a salary and one does not? So its the same thing, women are still being repressed even when offered the carrot on a stick of being a co-guru with "the good ole boys." 

"This is misogyny right out of the gate," she protested. 

The female diksha gurus have to be financially secure to attain the post, none of the men have to? Well its simply another one of many items on a long list of complaints about this female diksha guru issue. Another complaint is: that we should not be consulting with "other sampradayas" when we were not ordered to do that. Anyway, it looks like the imbroglio continues on. 

*** Meanwhile no one seems to be able to explain how neophytes can absorb sins as diksha gurus, either male or female not being the main point? 

*** And since guru voting has produced a long line of failed voted in male gurus, why would the GBC fare any better selecting and rubber stamping better female candidates?

*** And wasn't one of the main female guru candidates, Malati dasi, one of the Prithu Putra apparent devil worship program cheer leaders and adherents?

And so on!

==========================   

Text PAMHO:31756408 (111 lines) From: Internet: "Srinjaya Dasa" 

<srinjaya.dasa@gmail.com> Date: 10-Nov-19 17:37 +0530 Reply-To: iskcon-india-leaders+owners@googlegroups.com To: iskcon-india-leaders@googlegroups.com Cc: ISKCON India (news & discussion) [10970] (sender: Basu Ghosh (das) ACBSP (Baroda - IN)) Bcc: ICC (Indian Continental Committee) [9171] (sender: Basu Ghosh (das) ACBSP (Baroda - IN)) Attached: 31756408.eml (22880 bytes) 

"Original email file" Subject: GBC EC Uses Knowledge Filters and Loaded Dice to push FDG -----------------------------------

------------------------- 

Excerpt: In 2013 the GBC resolved that a four-man committee comprising of Badrinarayana Swami, Bhanu Swami, Bir Krishna Goswami, and Praghosa Prabhu would write a paper on the female diksha guru (FDG) issue in time for the October 2013 interim GBC meeting. No such paper came forward but instead the SAC was secretly tasked to do this. 

The SAC paper was presented in October 2013. But it was not well received and generally lambasted as a "hack job" of incompetents and corrupt persons with a conflict of interest, so much so that out of embarrassment its availability to the public was delayed for a year. 

For reasons why the SAC paper of 2013 is deeply flawed see "*Politically Motivated Wrongdoings of the Sastric Advisory Committee* 

<http://www.harekrsna.com/sun/editorials/02-14/editorials11393.htm>". 

Because the 2013 SAC paper was obviously written with the pre-determined objective of sanctioning Female Diksha Gurus it was clearly biased and not acceptable to any fair minded lover of the truth. It was rejected by many especially the Indian Yatra. 

To deal with this debacle the GBC passed the following resolution in 2014 at the AGM in Mayapura. (Please note the parts I have put in *bold*.) 

321. Female Diksa Gurus The subject of Vaisnavis initiating in ISKCON is further tabled until additional discussion at the 2014 GBC Midterm Meeting. In the meantime the *GBC Executive Committee* [Anuttama, Pragosha and Sesa Prabhus] will work on the following process: 

1. Creating a committee of devotees *who have no pre-determined view on this topic* who will gather documents from *all sources* on the subject of female diksa-gurus. 

2. The committee will sort, summarize, and categorize all documentation. Categories could include Srila Prabhupada's quotations, varnasrama-dharma, history within our sampradaya and other Vaisnava sampradayas, etc. 

3. As far as possible all documentation will be verified for accuracy, authenticity, etc. 

4. As far as possible this committee will do whatever other research may be required. 

5. The committee will then provide all those documents to the GBC members prior to the Midterm meeting. Thus all GBC members will come to the Midterm Meeting well aware of *all the arguments, information, and evidences available. * This will then enable the GBC to make either informed progress or an informed decision on this matter. 

We had extreme doubts about this when we first read this. How, for instance, where are they going to find "devotees who have no pre-determined view on this topic?" That is simply impossible and ridiculous; unless they have been living in a cave in the Himalayas for last 15 years without seeing anyone or having Internet access. 

We simply *do not believe* that it is possible nor do we believe (as we shall demonstrate) that the committee that was put together fit this description. But there is more, there was no transparency, who was this group of devotees? We don't find out until it is a *fait accompli* thus no one can question if they are in fact qualified for the job or actually fit the description of having "no pre-determined view on this topic." 

This secrecy and lack of transparency puts a lot of doubt regarding whether this committee applied a knowledge filter of *confirmation bias* 

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias> in collecting evidence and presenting the GBC with "*loaded dice* 

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dice#Loaded_dice>" that came up "pro-FDG" no matter how many times you rolled them. Though the leaders of the Indian Yatra asked the GBC EC for copies of the documents that this so called non-partisan committee gave to the GBC they refused to give it even after repeated requests. Why was the GBC EC not forth coming with these documents if it was just evidence? 

Finally after two months the *GBC EC said* <http://www.dandavats.com/?p=14703> it was now ready to share their database of evidence which was available at the following *link* <http://vdg.iskconinfo.com/home>. 

[This site is designed in such a way that it is extremely difficult to give a link to a specific discussed section, hence the absence of such links. We try our best to point you in the right direction using nested ">" along with the name of the field.] 

Most Important Documents Missing 

5. The committee will then provide all those documents to the GBC members prior to the Midterm meeting. Thus all GBC members will come to the Midterm Meeting well aware of *all the arguments, information, and evidences available. 

* This will then enable the GBC to make either informed progress or an informed decision on this matter. Finally I had a chance to see what the GBC EC had refused to let us see for so long. I took a cursory look using the "one grain of rice test to see if the pot is cooked" method to gauge if this was an honest and fair endeavor. 

So the first thing I did was look for the paper sponsored by the Indian Yatra to counter the pro-FDG paper of 2005 and which the GBC action order 305 (2009) is based on. Continue at: *https://tinyurl.com/ufrmcpj <https://tinyurl.com/ufrmcpj>*====================================

Text PAMHO:31757403 (147 lines)From: Basu Ghosh (das) ACBSP (Baroda - IN)

Date: 11-Nov-19 10:34 +0530

To: ICC (Indian Continental Committee) [9173],
IIAC (ISKCON India Advisory Committee) [6199],
ISKCON (India) Bureau Discussions [3870]

Attached: sri_vaishnava_acharyas_on_iskcon_fdg_1.pdf (564771 bytes) "Three
letters - read them all",

other_sampradayas_support_of_iskcon_1.pdf (1492242 bytes) "Past
support from Sri Vaishnavas to ISKCON"

Subject: Regarding the Female Diksha guru issue

------------------------------------------------------------

Home Base: ISKCON Baroda
Camp: ISKCON New Delhi

Dear Maharajas and Prabhus,

Namonamaha. Jaya Srila Prabhupada!

Recently I was informed that when a GBC member brought up the issue of the
opinion of the Sri Vaishnavas regaring ISKCON allowing female diksha gurus,
during the discussion on the issue at Tirupati, a GBC man -- one of the main
proponents of female diksha gurus -- very vehemently responded that "we do
NOT follow the Sri Vaishnavas, we follow Prabhupada. We are Prabhupada
-anugas!"

[PADA: OK this is actually a good sign. We started writing documents around 1984 saying this is being published by "The Prabhupadanugas," which was really just myself publishing my own materials. Since then, all sorts of people jumped onto the "Prabhupadanuga" name usage, including for a time a paper written for ISKCON by Jnana das which said "Published by The Prabhupadanugas." Hey everyone is ripping off the title we originated at least in print. Forsooth! 

Never mind! 

That is fine, actually we need more of that title's use. Now even ISKCON people are saying they are the "Prabhupadanugas." Take that title and run with it, fine with us! Hee hee! OK that means they are not Radhanath-anugas, Sivarama-anugas and etc. Goody!]

So, I had a discususion about this with Damodar Das, a scholarly devotee,
and the discussion appears, below. He has raised very important and
pertinent points in this regard, that I feel we all need to be aware of.

Please read everything that appears herein below, all the way to the end.
If you do not, you WILL miss something!

Also, attached are two files. One contains letters from three Sri
Vaishnavas, two are well known scholars, and the third is from the direct
descendent of Venkata Bhatta, in who's residence Chaitanya Mahaprabhu stayed
at Sri Rangam for four months. Please do so through both attachments.

This issue will be discussed at the upcoming meetings at Ahmedabad, hence it
is important to know the issue, thoroughly.

Hope this meets you all well.

dasanudas,

Basu Ghosh Das

Facebook: Basu Ghosh Das
Skype: Basu Ghosh Das
WhatsApp: +91-94260-54308

---------- Forwarded Mesage ----------

>> GBC member: *We do not follow Sri Vaisnavas, we follow Prabhupada. We are Prabhupada-anugas!*
>>
>> Response:

>> Sri Vaishnvas have supported ISKCON since Srila Prabhupada’s time.
>
> Sri Vaishnavas performed the Hyderabad temple Deity installation, where
> Prabhupada was personally present, and he was very pleased with how they
> performed the Deity installation rituals.
>
>> Srila Prabhupada would be very displeased that his GBC men have
>> ignored them. [note: meaning the Sri Vaishnavas].
>>
> Indeed.
>
>> We have common shastras: Sri Vaishnavas and Gaudiya Vaishnavas
>> both follow pancharatra shastra and Sri Vaishnavas are expert in them.
>> So, we should hear what they have to say.
>
> In fact ALL vedic shastras, shruti, smriti, puranas, itihasas, like
> Ramayana and Mahabharata, dharma shastras, darshana shastras, etc., are
> common between us. Only the type of worship - the Deities that are
> worshiped, may differ (and may not - we worship Nrsimha, for example, as
> they - Srivaishnavas - do.

======================

Pranam Prabhus,
Sri Sri Guru Gaurangau Jayatah.

Some Reasons why we cannot neglect Sri Vaisnavas:

1. Gauidya Vaisnavism takes 2 points (out of total 8, i.e. 25%) from Sri Vaisnavism. It is said by BVT that Caitanya Mahaprabhu took 2 points from Sri Vaisnavas -- unalloyed surrender and serving devotees, to build acintya bheda-bheda tattva.

2. Mahaprabhu stayed 4 months at Srirangam in Venkat Bhatt's house and
discussed. Remarkably, that's the highest time he stayed anywhere after Puri and Bengal. He did not convert Venkat Bhatt to Gaudiya Vaisnava.

** So Caitanya Mahaprabhu did not neglect Sri Vaisnavas

3. Venkat Bhatta's son Gopala Bhatta, was one of 6-gosvamis and remarkably he was given the task to write gaudiya-vaisnava smrtis:

Hari Bhakti Vilasa and Sat-kriya-sara-dipika, which were supposed to guide gaudiya vaisnavas on what to do and what not to do. The only mention of detailed procedure about initiations that is found in Gaudiya Vaisnava granthas is Hari-bhakti-vilasa (which is not so detailed).

** So Six Gosvamis did not neglect Sri Vaisnavism

4. BVT and Bhakti-siddhanta Sarasvati Thakura minutely studied Sri Vaisnavism and brought the panca-samskara procedure of initiations into Gaudiya Math. Also Tri-dandi sannyasa was brought in to Gaudiya Math from Sri Vaisnavas.

** So BVT (best of Rupanugas) and BSST did not neglect Sri Vaisnavism

5. Srila Prabhupada very extensively quotes Ramanujacarya and acaryas from Sri Sampradaya as authority and has never even indicated that we do not follow them in some aspects. Just search in Vedabase.

** Srila Prabhupada did never neglect Sri Vaisnavism

6. Whenever Srila Prabhupada speaks about sadhu pramana, he gives names of acharyas from other sampradayas. So if we neglect them then we are not taking in to consideration sadhu pramana. We have already rejected sastra pramana by rejecting Narada Pancaratra's statements in this regard. And from Guru pramana (Prabhupada) we have rejected many of his statements (at least one directly from SB 4.12.32). Thus at the max, the GBC resolution depends on 25% of pramans.

7. When there was a need for ISKCON to be identified as bonafide, ISKCON took help from Srirangam's Sri Vaisnava head, Murali Bhattar's father. Why did ISKCON not neglect them at that time? Or was it just a ploy -- just use Sri Vaisnavas for getting on top in India and then throw them away? Something we may do with politicians to get our work done.

8. Okay. Even if we neglect their opinion, there should be some genuine reason to do so. Just saying that we are not Sri Vaisnavas is not a genuine reason. If we say like this then we immediately come in line with bogus sampradayas like Swami Narayana who do not accept other acharyas and even acharyas of Sri Sampradaya. They say that Sahajananda Swami has brought something new and unprecendented to them and thus they are not obliged to follow anyone else. Thus, you cannot discuss anything conclusively with them. They even reject Vyasadeva in ultimate sense.

[Note: Sahajananda Swami was the first to bring FDG in. In their sampradaya women give diksa to women only]

Many more points could be thought of, but that's it for now.

Thank you,

Your servant,

damodara das


------- End of Forwarded Message ------
(Text PAMHO:31757403) --------------------------------------