Maharaja -- I am very disappointed that we only have had time in this life to include deviations such as: -- illicit sex with men, women, children, and cats; porno swamis; vodka messiahs; illicit sex with half dozen disciples; offering LSD to the shalagram; orchestrating murders of dissenters; mass child molesting and $400,000,000 abuse lawsuits; condom wearing gurus; pedophile and porno swami samadhis -- etc. -- into our guru suck-session parampara.
I think we will have to take rebirth so we can add many more deviations to Krishna's guru succession. Yep, here we are, the molester's messiah's promoting twins! Did we forget to mention -- these guys have a current pedophile in their guru chain, which thousands of women are currently protesting?
And their answer is, women are not to be allowed to speak up and protest to us "most intelligent (pedophile guru promoting) men"? And Krishna Kirti is one of their hand maidens?
===================
Regarding their August 28th letter, the GBC EC wrote:
3. As discussed many times with the Bureau representatives, we find the quote from the SB 4.12.32 to be descriptive and not prescriptive for all times and places. Otherwise, why would Srila Prabhupada have written this:
“I hope that all of you, men, women, boys and girls, become spiritual master?” (Vyasa-puja Address, London August 22nd, 1973)
Although the GBC EC also said, "all sastra should be understood through the lens of his purports and example," this rule is never once cited by Srila Prabhupada, and they have never said where they got it from.
But their rule of "descriptive" versus "prescriptive" is actually a rule of interpretation from Purva Mimamsa. The rule says that one cannot derive a vidhi (prescription) from an arthavad (description).
As discussed in the ICC/IIAC/IISB response, under the heading of "Mimamsa Rules of Interpretation":
The rule you tried to apply is that an arthavad ("description") cannot add to, subtract from or modify a vidhi ("prescription"), nor can a new vidhi be derived from an arthavad. An arthavad associated with a vidhi is something like a lawmaker giving an explanation along with the law that he gives. It can be some statement of the vidhi's purpose, describe some benefit for following the rule, some enticement to follow it, etc.
In the time of Kumarila Bhatta and Shankaracharya, the Buddhists tried to show that if one could understand the purpose of a vidhi from its arthavad, then one could make some new way of achieving the same purpose. And because that purpose could be achieved by some other way not given in the sastras, the original injunction itself was untrue or useless, and that proved that the Vedas were imperfect and therefore also useless. But the Buddhists lost that debate, and the rule stands that an arthavad cannot modify, add to, or subtract from a vidhi, nor can a vidhi be derived from an arthavad.
So, you tried to apply this to Srila Prabhupada's purport to SB 4.12.32 (Suniti could not become diksha-guru because she was a woman). It is correct that this is a description (like "a brahmana tells the truth"), not a prescription (like "a brahmana must tell the truth"). But this is not the only Mimamsa rule to consider here. In this case the arthavad tells us that there is a vidhi that prohibits women from becoming diksha-guru. Despite this being an arthavad, this knowledge is actionable on the principle of arthi-bhavana.
## Arthi-bhavana ##
The principle of arthi-bhavana is connected with the sadhya (objective, or something desirable), in that once we become aware of some objective,
despite it being a description, we nonetheless gain inspiration to take up the means to obtain it. On the principle of arthi-bhavana, an arthavad may still motivate us to action.
Srila Baladeva Vidyabhushana gives an example of it in his Govinda-bhashya commentary to Vedanta-sutra 1.1.1.3 (sastra-yonitvat), in which he says that if someone tells you the location of a hidden treasure in your home and the means to get it, that knowledge is not without value. In the same way, knowing about the transcendental glories of the name and pastimes of the Lord inspires one to take up the means to obtain it (bhakti-yoga). Thus the arthavad also has value. It's not worthless.
Similarly, Srila Prabhupada's description of meat-eating as abominable in the following statement is also an arthavad (a description, not a prescription), but one will nonetheless be inspired by the knowledge of it being abominable to give up eating it.
"Fatty foods, as mentioned in the eighth verse, have no connection with animal fat obtained by slaughter. Animal fat is available in the form of milk, which is the most wonderful of all foods. Milk, butter, cheese and similar products give animal fat in a form which rules out any need for the killing of innocent creatures. It is only through brute mentality that this killing goes on. The civilized method of obtaining needed fat is by milk.
Slaughter is the way of subhumans. Protein is amply available through split peas, däl, whole wheat, etc." (BG 17.10 purport)
So, when one understands that eating meat is abominable, one will at once be inspired to stop eating it. That is arthi-bhavana.
despite it being a description, we nonetheless gain inspiration to take up the means to obtain it. On the principle of arthi-bhavana, an arthavad may still motivate us to action.
Srila Baladeva Vidyabhushana gives an example of it in his Govinda-bhashya commentary to Vedanta-sutra 1.1.1.3 (sastra-yonitvat), in which he says that if someone tells you the location of a hidden treasure in your home and the means to get it, that knowledge is not without value. In the same way, knowing about the transcendental glories of the name and pastimes of the Lord inspires one to take up the means to obtain it (bhakti-yoga). Thus the arthavad also has value. It's not worthless.
Similarly, Srila Prabhupada's description of meat-eating as abominable in the following statement is also an arthavad (a description, not a prescription), but one will nonetheless be inspired by the knowledge of it being abominable to give up eating it.
"Fatty foods, as mentioned in the eighth verse, have no connection with animal fat obtained by slaughter. Animal fat is available in the form of milk, which is the most wonderful of all foods. Milk, butter, cheese and similar products give animal fat in a form which rules out any need for the killing of innocent creatures. It is only through brute mentality that this killing goes on. The civilized method of obtaining needed fat is by milk.
Slaughter is the way of subhumans. Protein is amply available through split peas, däl, whole wheat, etc." (BG 17.10 purport)
So, when one understands that eating meat is abominable, one will at once be inspired to stop eating it. That is arthi-bhavana.
Similarly, Srila Prabhupada's statement in SB 4.12.32 tells us that there is a shastric injunction that prohibits women from becoming guru. And the knowledge that there is a vidhi that prohibits it is sufficient for us to follow that injunction. So, in acting on the arthi-bhavana, there is no vidhi that is being modified or created. The vidhi exists in the sastra, and the arthi-bhavana is giving the inspiration to follow it. And we have verified that this injunction does in fact exist, and Srila Baladeva Vidyabhusana quotes it and also provides his own commentary on it . . ..
The full translation source of Srila Baladeva Vidyabhusana's Vaisnavanandini commentary on SB 1.13.15 mentioned above is available at the ISKCON India Scholars Board website: https://bit.ly/3dPrVTc
Your servant,
Krishna-kirti dasa
Convenor
ISKCON India Scholars Board (IISB)
https://iisb.co.in
===================
PADA: The "men gurus" of ISKCON have already been falling down left, right and center. Why are women going to fare any better? And if conditioned souls cannot absorb the sins of other conditioned souls, what does it matter if they are in male or female bodies temporarily? Neither male or female forms of conditioned souls can absorb sins, and if they attempt to do so, they will suffer.
Neither Krishna Kirti's / GBC's / ICC's pedophile gurus like Lokanath are going to be accepted as bona fide by nearly cent percent of the women class on planet earth. No ordinary mother wants their children to worship pedophiles as their children's gurus. Neither Krishna Kirti explains where in shastra we are advised to promote worship pedophiles as gurus and acharyas? Rather shastra says worship of deviants takes us to hell.
Anyway, the debate over ISKCON's women gurus is a little mute since, none of these women gurus are being given any real say in management, and they are just being handed a disciple or two here and there with little actual impact on the overall ISKCON situation. It is an appeasement to women bluff. ys pd
angel108b@yahoo.com
============
His Divine Grace A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada,
Founder-Acarya of the International Society for Krishna Consciousness
Letter to: Krsna Devi
Tittenhurst 2 November, 1969
=========================
Dear ICC/IIAC/Bureau members, please accept my humble obeisances. All
glories to Srila Prabhupada.
An important question is if women are qualified to become diksha-guru like
the men, then why do they need a special law that creates new protectors
for them?
The GBC law (701.06, 2021 in question says,
>"Vaisnavis are eligible to give diksa within ISKCON provided that they . .
> . 1.c. Are in a stable family situation living under the protection of a
> husband, elder son or son-in-law, qualified householder couple or senior
> Vaisnava or Vaisnavi sanga;"
But how come the men who are candidates don't need any such law? it's
because it has always been assumed that candidates for guru would be
qualified by work and nature as brahmanas. And brahmanas are independent.
Women, however, are enjoined by shastric injunction to never be independent.
Srila Prabhuapda says,
>"The woman must remain at home. She has only three stages of life:
> dependency on the father in childhood, dependency on the husband in youth
> and, in old age, dependency on the grown-up son, such as Kapila. In old age
> the progress of woman depends on the grown-up son. The ideal son, Kapila
> Muni, is assuring His father of the deliverance of His mother so that His
> father may go peacefully without anxiety for his good wife." (SB 3.24.40)
But if you are never allowed to have independence, then how can you act for
the sake of your disciples without the permission of your father, husband
or son? What if you think something is best for your disciples but your
husband or son thinks otherwise? That is why women almost never have become
acharyas, except in the rarest cases.
As Baladeva Vidyabhushana confirms, only women who are actually liberated
from the influence of the material energy are allowed to become diksha-guru:
>[Baladeva Vidyabhusana] And so, though Vidura was younger [to Dhṛtarāṣṭra
> and] though he was a śūdra [by birth], because he was Dharmarāja himself,
> he had directly realized the Supreme Lord; therefore, he instructed
> Dhṛtarāṣṭra. It is for this reason that the Bhāradvāja-saṁhitā forbids
> women, śūdras and the like [from becoming gurus] and allows women, śūdras
> and the like who have directly realized the Supreme Truth [to become gurus].
(The full translation and purport is available here: https://bit.ly/3dPrVTc)
Therefore Srila Prabhupada has said that women acting as diksha-guru have
to be "very special case":
>"I don't think. But there are many ācāryas. Maybe somewhere I might have
> mentioned. It is not that woman cannot be ācārya. Generally, they do not
> become. In very special case. But Jāhnavā-devī was accepted as, but she did
> not declare." (Room conversation, 29 June 1972)
This is guru, sadhu and shastra. The unanimous conclusion is that women who
are not yet liberated cannot become diksha-guru, because that would be
incompatible with their prescribed rules and regulations as a woman.
Men from fallen races who are purified and considered brahmana by the
spiritual master can become guru despite not yet being liberated, because
the prescribed rules and regulations for them at that stage do not block
them from performing the duties of a diksha-guru.
To many this may seem unfair, but as long as one is not liberated, one is
obliged to follow the particular shastric rules and regulations prescribed
for time, plce, person and circumstance. And it so happens that there are
different rules and regulations prescribed on account of gender.
Your servant, Krishna-kirti dasa
Convenor
ISKCON India Scholars Board
https://iisb.co.in
M Dasi: Pretty obvious isn't it? Pedophiles are welcome to be gurus ... taxi driver sex gurus ... still welcome at Mayapur. Child abusers like Gaura are welcome. Kavicandra and Bhakti Chaitanya are always welcome too ... because they have been part of the "most intelligent men" GHQ pedophile's men worshiping club.
ReplyDeleteWhat about us women? We have to sit down and shut up. It has always been a male bodied ... woman dominating ... pro-pedophile ... GHQ misogynist ... men's bodied program. They think a man's body can be worshiped ... even if he is a pedophile ... because men's bodies are automatically pure spiritually ... while women's bodies are contaminated and unholy. Oh yeah ... just like the Church used to burn us women as witches.
They are misogynists for sure ... but really ... making children worship pedophile men is simply ghastly. It is hard to imagine their future ghastly life ... after a lifetime of making pedophiles into the successors of Krishna.
Even if I was to sit down for years ... and try to think about the worst offense to Krishna I could ... I never would have dreamed up saying pedophiles are His successors. They have outdone even what I could even have imagined as the worst offense.
Their whole program is ghastly. And they will take ghastly forms in their next life ... because their consciousness is ghastly and we get a body according to that.
Krishna saved me from their association. Thank you Krishna! Eternally in debt for Your help.