Neo-Atheistic Attacks on ISKCON
Views
by Damodara Das (BVKS)
[PADA: OK here we go, typical Bhakti Vikas swami style:
[1] The GBC are messiahs from heaven and acharyas, and therefore -- not priests.
[2] The GBC are constantly falling down and -- therefore --- MUST BE compared to priests in the Catholic Church -- and not gurus.
[2] The GBC are constantly falling down and -- therefore --- MUST BE compared to priests in the Catholic Church -- and not gurus.
[3] Anyone who says the GBC's gurus -- are not gurus --- but are like priests is -- a ritvik deviant.
[4] Women, who are leading the charge on the GBC's child molesting process, should be mothers and not masters, and therefore they should shut up and quit protesting our molester messiah's program.
Where do I sign up?
Oh oh:
[5] The other GBC, like for example Jayapataka and his followers, are atheists, but Jayapataka is simultaneosuly a guru and indeed our BVKS's sannyasa guru.
[6] Women can be gurus, or not be gurus, based on ancient sculptures of Goddess Parvati, or maybe not? Which sounds like really stretching things to make a point, or did they make any point at all? What do ancient sculptures of Goddess Parvati, which may or may not even be sculptures of Goddess Parvati, have to do with making neophyte women into diksha gurus.
So GBC camp #1 [we are gurus and Catholic Priest ritviks at the same time] is attacking GBC camp #2 [women should become gurus and not ritviks] as -- atheists. Really having a meltdown aren't we now? Maybe you guys should have a timeout and sit in a corner. They are gurus, and therefore, they are atheists. I need to go take my percodans now!
ys pd angel108b@yahoo.com]
-----------------------------------------------
I thought it is wise to publish this small excerpt from a larger work that refuted the "Women Diksa Guru" [atheistic] book of H G Kaunteya Prabhu. The arguments herein are relevant to the current misconception that he is trying to propagate through his various writings. He feels that the endeavors of sincere followers of Srila Prabhupada who are trying to propagate his varnasrama mission are actually bringing smarta considerations and are thus smartas in the garb of Srila Prabhupada's followers. He thus sees it as an attack of smartas on ISKCON. He has thus started a mission against them to undo that effect.
I am posting this excerpt only with an intention to convey the proper understanding and thus try to be an instrument of the parampara in try saving those sincere and dedicated devotee souls who may become influenced by the Neo-Atheistic attacks of Kaunteya Prabhu and like. Others may take it or leave it.
I know that there will hardly be any effect either in favor or against him by this small writing because factually speaking the fight is not of ascertaining what is the right philosophy or what is the right thing. It has taken more a shape of a political game and thus the discussion only reaches at the most up to the level of vitanda (sophistry).
I thought it is wise to publish this small excerpt from a larger work that refuted the "Women Diksa Guru" [atheistic] book of H G Kaunteya Prabhu. The arguments herein are relevant to the current misconception that he is trying to propagate through his various writings. He feels that the endeavors of sincere followers of Srila Prabhupada who are trying to propagate his varnasrama mission are actually bringing smarta considerations and are thus smartas in the garb of Srila Prabhupada's followers. He thus sees it as an attack of smartas on ISKCON. He has thus started a mission against them to undo that effect.
I am posting this excerpt only with an intention to convey the proper understanding and thus try to be an instrument of the parampara in try saving those sincere and dedicated devotee souls who may become influenced by the Neo-Atheistic attacks of Kaunteya Prabhu and like. Others may take it or leave it.
I know that there will hardly be any effect either in favor or against him by this small writing because factually speaking the fight is not of ascertaining what is the right philosophy or what is the right thing. It has taken more a shape of a political game and thus the discussion only reaches at the most up to the level of vitanda (sophistry).
Therefore, I am not enthusiastic to enter into a thorough discussion unless it is an official one and has some concrete results attached to it. Today is the age of internet in which anyone can speak anything and propagate and thus mostly it is a number game to decide who is able to influence the most people. Writing something doesn't take much time but to defend it requires a constant endeavor and time which is worthless if there is no concrete result attached to it.
Therefore, I am open to discuss everything with H G Kaunteya Prabhu, threadbare, if that is arranged on an official and an open-to-public platform. Otherwise, Hare Krishna.
Contents of this excerpt are applicable even today to Kaunteya Prabhu and the like, in fact, it has only become more so. After reading this section, you can just pick up his other books that came out after this (i.e. after sep 2020). You will find more and more examples of this mentality or neo-atheistic outlook.
In short, H G Kaunteya Prabhu is very upset if some sincere followers of Srila Prabhupada try consult Sri Vaisnavas for certain issues and thus he calls them Neo-smartas. Of course in utmost disgust, anger, and envy he calls even Sri Vaisnavas smartas although Prabhupada never called them that way. However, what would you call him (and the likes) who try to judge the statements of Srila Prabhupada's books by consulting the rascal scholars of mundane universities?
Therefore, I am open to discuss everything with H G Kaunteya Prabhu, threadbare, if that is arranged on an official and an open-to-public platform. Otherwise, Hare Krishna.
Contents of this excerpt are applicable even today to Kaunteya Prabhu and the like, in fact, it has only become more so. After reading this section, you can just pick up his other books that came out after this (i.e. after sep 2020). You will find more and more examples of this mentality or neo-atheistic outlook.
In short, H G Kaunteya Prabhu is very upset if some sincere followers of Srila Prabhupada try consult Sri Vaisnavas for certain issues and thus he calls them Neo-smartas. Of course in utmost disgust, anger, and envy he calls even Sri Vaisnavas smartas although Prabhupada never called them that way. However, what would you call him (and the likes) who try to judge the statements of Srila Prabhupada's books by consulting the rascal scholars of mundane universities?
That is why I have kept the title of this article as "Neo-Atheistic Attacks ISKCON." Many of these scholars are beef eaters, wine drinkers, etc. and many belong to the universities that are well known for "debunking" Vedic culture as mundane, sastras as mere some mythical books, and so on.
When Srila Prabhupada says women are less intelligent, these greatly intelligent devotees like H G Kaunteya Prabhu show evidence from modern scientists and statisticians to show that Srila Prabhupada's statement cannot be true. Now, because they cannot outrightly say that Prabhupada was wrong so they try to interpret his statement in which they look so foolish.
For instance, Srila Prabhuapada, to establish that women are less intelligent, gives as an example that "Up to date in the history there is not a single woman who is a great scientist or great philosopher." Answering to this, Kaunteya Prabhu says in his recent book on Racism and Sexism in SP's books—
In the conversation we quoted above, Srila Prabhupada said, "Where is woman philosopher, mathematician, scientist? Not a single." (Morning Walk, Bombay, 9 Jan 1977) This is demonstrably incorrect.
And a little later he interprets Srila Prabhupada by saying,
So, Srila Prabhupada did acknowledge that there have been women scientists and philosophers; but they weren't "great" - whatever that means. (p.415)
So he gives much more credence to modern scientific data statistics than to Srila Prabhupada. One should beware from getting influenced by this subtle poisonous tendency.
An Excerpt from a short refutation to Women Diksa Guru book of H G Kaunteya Prabhu:
p.237-9 —Wearing sacred thread by women was a part of Vedic Culture
The authors, showing an icon of Pāravatī sculpted during Chola Kingdom, say,
“the sculpture was made by humans living in South India more than a thousand years ago; it shows that their culture was familiar – and apparently comfortable – with the idea of females wearing the sacred thread.”
This icon is also almost naked (bare chested). Does that mean that women in Chola Kingdom were living naked and that the culture was “apparently comfortable” with the idea of females’ being naked. We may get the idea of authors’ level of intelligence from this.
Mānasāra, the renowned text on śilpa-śāstra, does mention sacred thread for male deities (50.10) but doesn’t do so for any of the female deities.[1]
There is old commentary by a śilpa-śāstrī V. Venkatasubrahmaniya Sastri, who published a book in Tamil with Mānasāra verses presented in Grantha-lipi. It says that it is probable what appears to be a sacred thread on those iconographs are actually other ornaments such as Vaikakṣika that is adorned in a sacred thread fashion. However, this point is still under research and those who want more information and the book scans can contact us.
Besides this, even if we accept that the icon wears sacred thread, it is worth considering that the deity is that of Pāravatī, a goddess, not a human of mortal world. It is foolish to conclude what applies to gods applies to humans also
How the people of that time took it? Simple. People understood the fact that “Pāravatī can wear it, we can’t. what is applicable to gods is not to be imitated by humans.”
Atheism in the authors’ works exposed:
Just have a short look-back. In the first part, the author said that the sacred thread was not a fixed part of brahmana’s attire and in the latter part they say that even the women wore sacred thread showing Pāravatī idol wearing sacred thread.
Now what’s going on here? If the sacred thread is not an age old tradition then it shows that the authors think Pāravatī is not from age-old times but is of recent origin.
When Srila Prabhupada says women are less intelligent, these greatly intelligent devotees like H G Kaunteya Prabhu show evidence from modern scientists and statisticians to show that Srila Prabhupada's statement cannot be true. Now, because they cannot outrightly say that Prabhupada was wrong so they try to interpret his statement in which they look so foolish.
For instance, Srila Prabhuapada, to establish that women are less intelligent, gives as an example that "Up to date in the history there is not a single woman who is a great scientist or great philosopher." Answering to this, Kaunteya Prabhu says in his recent book on Racism and Sexism in SP's books—
In the conversation we quoted above, Srila Prabhupada said, "Where is woman philosopher, mathematician, scientist? Not a single." (Morning Walk, Bombay, 9 Jan 1977) This is demonstrably incorrect.
And a little later he interprets Srila Prabhupada by saying,
So, Srila Prabhupada did acknowledge that there have been women scientists and philosophers; but they weren't "great" - whatever that means. (p.415)
So he gives much more credence to modern scientific data statistics than to Srila Prabhupada. One should beware from getting influenced by this subtle poisonous tendency.
An Excerpt from a short refutation to Women Diksa Guru book of H G Kaunteya Prabhu:
p.237-9 —Wearing sacred thread by women was a part of Vedic Culture
The authors, showing an icon of Pāravatī sculpted during Chola Kingdom, say,
“the sculpture was made by humans living in South India more than a thousand years ago; it shows that their culture was familiar – and apparently comfortable – with the idea of females wearing the sacred thread.”
This icon is also almost naked (bare chested). Does that mean that women in Chola Kingdom were living naked and that the culture was “apparently comfortable” with the idea of females’ being naked. We may get the idea of authors’ level of intelligence from this.
Mānasāra, the renowned text on śilpa-śāstra, does mention sacred thread for male deities (50.10) but doesn’t do so for any of the female deities.[1]
There is old commentary by a śilpa-śāstrī V. Venkatasubrahmaniya Sastri, who published a book in Tamil with Mānasāra verses presented in Grantha-lipi. It says that it is probable what appears to be a sacred thread on those iconographs are actually other ornaments such as Vaikakṣika that is adorned in a sacred thread fashion. However, this point is still under research and those who want more information and the book scans can contact us.
Besides this, even if we accept that the icon wears sacred thread, it is worth considering that the deity is that of Pāravatī, a goddess, not a human of mortal world. It is foolish to conclude what applies to gods applies to humans also
How the people of that time took it? Simple. People understood the fact that “Pāravatī can wear it, we can’t. what is applicable to gods is not to be imitated by humans.”
Atheism in the authors’ works exposed:
Just have a short look-back. In the first part, the author said that the sacred thread was not a fixed part of brahmana’s attire and in the latter part they say that even the women wore sacred thread showing Pāravatī idol wearing sacred thread.
Now what’s going on here? If the sacred thread is not an age old tradition then it shows that the authors think Pāravatī is not from age-old times but is of recent origin.
However, śāstras say that Pāravatī is jagad-dhātrī, the creator and maintainer of universe.
This brings us to the platform of atheism which declares that Pāravatī etc. icons as mere imaginations that different cultures depict in their own ways as per the culture they are living in.
This is contamination resulting from secular atheistic scholarly pursuit
This brings us to the platform of atheism which declares that Pāravatī etc. icons as mere imaginations that different cultures depict in their own ways as per the culture they are living in.
This is contamination resulting from secular atheistic scholarly pursuit
They opine that because in the Chola Kingdom women wore sacred threads, they depict Pāravatī wearing sacred thread. Sculptors from other cultures depict her in a different way. Thus we can get an idea of a culture by looking at the icons that are sculpted by the people of that culture.
Some of them use such iconography to prove that women did not cover breasts in Vedic culture.
However, our devotee friends (the authors), trying to support FDGs, borrowed arguments from the canons of such atheistic scholars and thus ended up with atheism.
Readers may be reminded of a similar approach by the propounder of Hrdayananda's Krishna West, who says that Srila Prabhupada depicted Lord Krishna according to Indian culture he was brought up in. He opines that Krishna did not wear dhoti and that dhoti is not necessarily a Vedic dress. [2]
Besides this, almost all secular atheistic scholars repeatedly use one trick to establish liberalism: quoting one or two exceptional examples from whole Vedic canon to establish them as norm. For instance they give examples of Gārgī and Maitreyī to establish that all women in Vedic culture got upanayana, underwent brahmacarya, and studied the Vedas.
Some of them use such iconography to prove that women did not cover breasts in Vedic culture.
However, our devotee friends (the authors), trying to support FDGs, borrowed arguments from the canons of such atheistic scholars and thus ended up with atheism.
Readers may be reminded of a similar approach by the propounder of Hrdayananda's Krishna West, who says that Srila Prabhupada depicted Lord Krishna according to Indian culture he was brought up in. He opines that Krishna did not wear dhoti and that dhoti is not necessarily a Vedic dress. [2]
Besides this, almost all secular atheistic scholars repeatedly use one trick to establish liberalism: quoting one or two exceptional examples from whole Vedic canon to establish them as norm. For instance they give examples of Gārgī and Maitreyī to establish that all women in Vedic culture got upanayana, underwent brahmacarya, and studied the Vedas.
What we know now from our acharyas like Śankarācārya, Rāmānujācārya, and our known tradition was actually instituted by evil minded, male dominated, brahmanas, who created many dharma-sastras like Manu-samhita. (see p.240 for such a conclusion reached by the authors).
However, the vedic method (SB 10.33.31) says,
“The statements of the Lord’s empowered servants are always true, and the acts they perform are exemplary when consistent with those statements. Therefore one who is intelligent should carry out their instructions.”[3]
Thus, proper method to know anything about the Vedic Culture is to approach those who have lived it and believe in its eternity, who have unflinching faith in guru-sādhu-śāstra.
For those who want to see the full version of the book against FDG refuting the works of Kaunteya Prabhu and the like on FDG, you can order the below book.
Contact, Sridhar Srinivasa Das: +91 7373089272
However, the vedic method (SB 10.33.31) says,
“The statements of the Lord’s empowered servants are always true, and the acts they perform are exemplary when consistent with those statements. Therefore one who is intelligent should carry out their instructions.”[3]
Thus, proper method to know anything about the Vedic Culture is to approach those who have lived it and believe in its eternity, who have unflinching faith in guru-sādhu-śāstra.
For those who want to see the full version of the book against FDG refuting the works of Kaunteya Prabhu and the like on FDG, you can order the below book.
Contact, Sridhar Srinivasa Das: +91 7373089272
[1] Chapter 50 belongs to male deities, Chapter 54 to female deities
[2] <insert link some Krishna West material or lecture for these points>
[3] īśvarāṇāṁ vacaḥ satyaṁ tathaivācaritaṁ kvacit | teṣāṁ yat sva-vaco-yuktaṁ buddhimāṁs tat samācaret ||
[2] <insert link some Krishna West material or lecture for these points>
[3] īśvarāṇāṁ vacaḥ satyaṁ tathaivācaritaṁ kvacit | teṣāṁ yat sva-vaco-yuktaṁ buddhimāṁs tat samācaret ||
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.