During his recent visit to Brisbane His Holiness Devamrita Swami gave class on an interesting and potentially controversial verse and purport. The Bhaktivedanta purport to Srimad Bhagavatam 10.4.5 contains this paragraph:
As we learn from the history of the Mahābhārata, or "Greater India," the wives and daughters of the ruling class, the kshatriyas, knew the political game, but we never find that a woman was given the post of chief executive. This is in accordance with the injunctions of Manu-samhitā, but unfortunately Manu-samhitā is now being insulted, and the Āryans, the members of Vedic society, cannot do anything. Such is the nature of Kali-yuga.
Maharaja gave the class without touching on this point, so I took the opportunity to ask about it in the questions period:
Question: In the verse Devaki proposes to Kamsa that his son marry her daughter - that would make them cousins. And then in the purport Srila Prabhupada says that a woman should never be a chief executive. Both of these are culturally dissonant with our current society.
Answer: Yeah there are a lot of things in Bhagavatam that are "dissonant" with our current society. There's not much we can do about that. For preaching purposes we may stress such things more or less. They're not the "main thrust" - but they're there, and they're there for a reason.
That doesn't mean we have to, you know, get out on the streets, have a big harinam party, carry banners: "Do you know what the Manu Samhita says? It says that XYZ should never become president or prime minister. Ha ha! What do you think of that?"
Sometimes when Srila Prabhupada would speak about these controversial things in the sastra he would even directly say: "I know this won't be appreciated." Especially he would get on the Americans case: "I know you Americans won't like this." And then he'd say it anyway.
So he would acknowledge that there is controversy. At the same time, he stuck to what the sastra says but he was liberal in his application - that was his genius. He didn't compromise on the principle, but he could be flexible in the application. That's a big difference than being uncompromising on principle and application.
I agree with this statement
I agree with this statement of Krishna-kirti prabhu (not to say that I disagree with the others):
and this statement of Mother Gandhari:
and this statement of Lord Krishna:
- SB 10.77.19
Women CEO.
In regards to this statement,
"As we learn from the history of the Mahābhārata, or "Greater India," the wives and daughters of the ruling class, the kshatriyas, knew the political game, but we never find that a woman was given the post of chief executive. ---"
Madhava Gosh - has given very good suggestions.
"First lets see the sannyasis follow the specific injunctions of Manu Samhita for their ashram, then we can worry about the woman."
Let the leaders first show by example. If the Sanyas ashram follows its rules properly, then everything else should fall in place.
We should first clean up the messes in our society first, set the standards in ISKCON first, according to Srila Prabhupada's directions in the above quote, before we start to criticise the general topsy turvy society at large. Let us first show by example, then it will be easy to preach.
Kshatriya Women -
---This is exemplified among the remnants of Kshatriya tribes called Rajputs. - please watch the U tube videos of Rajput Women and Rajput Kshatriya. There it is said that women have all the training but they only use it in time of emergency.
Re: Women and Manu Samhita
I believe that in general, the roles and behaviors set for women in the smarta scriptures are favorable to the practice of bhakti. However, there are always exceptions and we must allow for them also. Sita-pati Prabhu makes a very valid point when he states that the men themselves must first be worthy of being dependent upon. If they are not, then there is no sense in asking women to be dependent upon such men. There are also women who, by their God-given nature, are extremely intelligent, strong-willed and independent by design. If we are to accept Srila Prabhupada's statements that qualification is more important than birth or bodily designations, then such women would also be an exception to the general rule. In any case, the smarta scriptures should be employed intelligently, for the advancement of bhakti, and not indiscriminately, harshly, fanatically, etc.
Daivi Varnashram and Women's Social Roles
It has been the tradition withn bonafide Vaishnava lines that if there is a difference between the Bhagavatam and Manu, for example, the Bhagavatam takes precedence. In fact, there is much in the Vedic literature that is like that. Within Vedic literature itself there is an hierarchy of authority.
What is actually at issue here are statements from Manu-srmiti that are not in conflict with Vaishnavism. SP himself has oft quoted Manu as regards to women being given indepence. On the authority of Manu, SP argues they should not be given independence.
On SP's authority (and Manu's), the notion that women should not be given freedom is a part of Daivi-Varnashram Dharma.
Visit http://siddhanta.com - the home of Hare Krishna Cultural Journal
Women & Freedom
Haribol Krsna Kirtiji, Do we have means of giving full protection for women at every stage of life yet in our society? according to the above quote.
"should be given protection at every stage of life"
Are the temple presidents taking care of all the needs of matajis, young bhaktinis and senior mothers in their temples yet. So unless we have that in place, the women have to go and find protection in their own way in the general society and fend for themselves and also help support the family because of the artificial living standards in the west and kali yuga.
So lets start by orgazing our society by bearing these principals in mind. That women, children, old men and cows should be given all protection.
In the Vedic Culture a young boy from a very young age is taught, that his duty is to protect and care for his sister all his life especially after her parents have dead. This means that he makes arrangements for her marriage as well, if the father is not capable of doing so. We can find such living examples in the lives of simple people in India as also mentioned in the pages of Bhagavatam and other puranas.
I would like to point out here that along with the descriptions of Pure devotional service, Bhagavatam also gives so many rules of the Vedic Path as in the 11th Canto and thoughout, So it would take a thoughtful brahman to understand differences between the rules of the Vedic Path and pure devotional service. So for the sake of implementing Daivi Varnashram we need to create booklets explaining the various duties, obligations and relationships among various family members, relatives and others as examplified by the great devotees mentioned in the Bhagavatam.
So lets not gravitate on only one point. There are so many aspects to Daivi Varnashram, starting from the duties of a Brahmans, Sanyasis and Gurus who are the heads of the society. Srila Prabhupada wanted to create brahmans who will guide the society.
So lets create Brahminical Councils and discuss the duties, obligations, relationshiops and rules of various ashrams and varnas. Let these brahmans create a system to help recognise a person's varna along with other superiors like guru, temple authority and (parents where applicable).
Normative vs. Positive Views
Mother Gandhari Dasi wrote: "Do we have means of giving full protection for women at every stage of life yet in our society? according to the above quote."
That depends on what "we" means. Social organization is a top-down affair--yad yad acarati shreshtas. That means that whatever the leaders, heads of society do, everyone else will follow. To answer your question, then, the "we" necessarily implies an elite "we". Do we have male leaders amongst us who can set a good example in this regard? I think so, and I know others who aren't as well known but I think are setting a good example in protecting their womenfolk.
Now, creating an entire society where this kind of protection is the cultural norm will take time. In the meantime, on the way to creating such a society we may still have to make certain adjustments according to time, place, and circumstance (our positive views)--women CEOs and the like. (The downside to this is that we will also have to bear the consequences of women largely being unprotected.) Nevertheless, statements from Manu such as this and SP's supporting statements informs our direction. Our time, place, and circumstance adjustments will be made for the sake of bringing us to this standard (our normative views)--that means creating qualified men and qualified women as well as a society in which they generally stay qualified.
Your servant, Krishna-kirti das
Visit http://siddhanta.com - the home of Hare Krishna Cultural Journal
Prabhu, could it also be
Prabhu, could it also be phrased as "Normative and Positive Views"? I see the two as complementary, not exclusive.
They are complimentary
They are complimentary views. I never thought of them as being opposed.
Visit http://siddhanta.com - the home of Hare Krishna Cultural Journal
Simply showing the quotes
Simply showing the quotes like this and others "women should not be given freedom" is becoming redundant.
These kinds of talks have been going on for so long now. what are the practical implementation initiatives?
Lets talk solutions.
We have the direction - "Nevertheless, statements from Manu such as this and SP's supporting statements informs our direction"
What are the next steps towards these directions. Any suggestions. Only the most concerned will do the work because 'they can see the truth'. Yjnanina tattva darshina
There are lots of other
There are lots of other notions in there too - like the ideal behaviour of men. I hear lots of noise about the ideal behaviour and role of women, but not much about the ideal behaviour of men. It's a little unbalanced. Let the brahmacaris be brahmacaris, and then go on to be ideal grhastas, and things will start balancing out naturally.
Otherwise it gets to be a little ardha-kukkuti-nyaya - the logic of half a hen.
I have no disagreement with the normative view. I just think that:
a) it's not healthy to overly stress half of it and neglect the other half
b) it's not utilitarian to do that - communication is interpretation, and what people are hearing when we talk about that is only half the story. They need to see both sides, so we need to show them, and once we've done that, we don't really need to tell them anything. It's just natural.
Dharma means free will, free will means following is not a given
"[Sitapati] There are lots of other notions in there too - like the ideal behaviour of men."
Granted.
"[Sitapati] I hear lots of noise about the ideal behaviour and role of women, but not much about the ideal behaviour of men.
I think what you may be conflating are actual instances of misbehavior with objections to the ideals themselves. I have yet to hear any man, what to speak of women, objecting to the ideals set out for men. However, I have heard many objections to the ideals set out for women.
"[Sitapati] It's a little unbalanced. Let the brahmacaris be brahmacaris, and then go on to be ideal grhastas, and things will start balancing out naturally."
I don't necessarily agree. Having good brahmacaris and hence good grihasthas is a necessary, not a sufficient condition. One has to have free will to follow dharma, so following stri-dharma is also necessarily a willful act. You pair a good man up with a bad woman, it just will not work out. Women have a tendency to follow their men, but that is not automatic. Free will is involved, so it's not a deterministic proposition.
To begin with, the idea of what is the standard behavior has to be preserved, otherwise, if that idea is belittled, minimized, avoided, etc., on whatever plea, then proper action becomes a very difficult proposition. In this regard, I find ideas of what men should aspire to uncontroversial. Ideas about how women should behave--the ideas themselves, not simply how women sometimes have to react to adverse circumstances--are very controversial.
Visit http://siddhanta.com - the home of Hare Krishna Cultural Journal
Daiva-varnasrama vs. Smarta-varnasrama
It is very important to distinguish between daiva-varnasrama and smarta-varnasrama. Srila Prabhupada instructed us to establish daiva-varnasrama, which--as stated by Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura--carefully employs regulations that are relevant to bhakti and rejects those that are not. Many of the rules and regulations cited in smarta texts like the Manu Samhita are irrelevant or, in many cases, even a distraction from bhakti. For instance, Vaishnavas do not waste time practicing all of the elaborate ceremonies recommended in the Manu Samhita for worshiping the ancestors. Rather, we utilize all of our time and worship for the Divine Couple, Sri Sri Radha and Krsna. Srila Prabhupada never wanted us to waste time establishing smarta- or asura-varnasrama, which is based on the body alone and wherein the practitioner burdens himself with countless regulations only to lose sight of bhakti. That would be a great deviation from Srila Prabhupada's original intent of employing daiva-varnasrama within his Krsna consciousness movement.
Varnashrama - temporary yet indispensible.
Varnashram is mandatory for conditioned souls, because it helps them maintain a level of purity necessary to nicely make spiritual advancement.
SP's reference to Manu is authoritative. He thinks that social rules and regulations should be based upon it. This itself can be used in part as an empirical measure for how much of a follower of SP one is. All other things being equal, someone who accepts SP's conclusion can be said to be more of a follower of SP than someone who doesn't.
Visit http://siddhanta.com - the home of Hare Krishna Cultural Journal
"SP's reference to Manu is
"SP's reference to Manu is authoritative. He thinks that social rules and regulations should be based upon it. This itself can be used in part as an empirical measure for how much of a follower of SP one is. All other things being equal, someone who accepts SP's conclusion can be said to be more of a follower of SP than someone who doesn't.
T1)his can not be a guiding principal yet, because, our society is still very young and has not yet established Varnashram Dharma. Therefore Vaisnava devotees are taking on the duties on the basis of what needs doing instead of what is one's dharma.
2)Moreover many devotees do NOT know the rules of Dharma Sastras and do not see the importance, similarity and benefits of following them for Bhakti.
3)This judgement can create vaisnava apradha.
Therefore lets start discussing Dharma Sastras seriously if we want to implement Varnashram Dharma by first creating a Brahaminical Council
Principle and Implementation
Srila Prabhupada said:
- Srimad Bhagavatam 7.8.48
In this quote Srila Prabhupada makes a distinction between the time, place, and circumstance specific rules in Manu Samhita and the principles that these implement. Smrti-sastra is generated by empowered brahmanas for the specific situation that it addresses.
- Letter to Madhusudhana, May 19, 1977
We might take this particular point which Srila Prabhupada has broken out from Manu Samhita (about women not being CEOs) and highlighted in his commentary, as being specifically indicated by his Divine Grace as normative and desirable, and I'm happy to do that.
At the same time, as Madhava Ghosh pointed out [in this comment], the healthy implementation of the normative role of women cannot be separated from implementation of the normative qualification of men. Varnasrama is about qualification, not just birth. You're not a man just because you were born with male genitals. You have to man up and step up to the role.
When Men are Men, Women are Women
As His Holiness Bhakti Vidya Purna Swami put it so succinctly: "When men are men, women are women."
That's a simple yet powerful statement with profound implications in terms of both ideal and strategy for implementation.
A lot of problems come when unqualified men demand that roles be respected when qualification is not present. This is the same dynamic that lead the people to reject the varnas at the time of Buddha. Similarly people have rejected traditional gender roles.
Just as both Buddha and Sankara demonstrated at their relative points in the course of social development, we need intelligent readjustment. We have to keep the goal in sight like the pole star ("normative view" in the language of Krishna-kirti prabhu), and work our way back onto the "royal road" of varnasrama (as Srila Prabhupada describes it Bhagavad-gita - the safer path).
There's not much point dogmatically following the same route the road follows when you've stepped off it. We have to negotiate the actual terrain we are on, and make our way simultaneously forward, and back onto the road.
If we want to see traditional gender roles remanifested in a contemporary context, then we need to understand the essence of them, and also understand how their misuse has lead to their abandonment. Then we can create something that is at the one time contemporary, natural, organic, and functional.
First Deserve, then... you don't even have to Demand
From Satsvarupa Goswami's ISKCON in the 70s:
So first gain power. That means become qualified to lead before demanding that others follow.
As the maxim has it: "He who thinks he leads but has no-one following is merely taking a walk".
- Srimad Bhagavatam 1.9.27
Qualification is a pre-requisite, and then implementation follows naturally. As Prabhupada points out here, if you have the qualification, you don't need to spend so much time arguing with people about how they should follow you, you just spend your time actually leading them. In the words of Srila Prabhupada, "first deserve, then desire".
So a lot of our time could be better spent focusing on our own qualification than railing at people for not following. It's a poor workman who blames his tools, and a poor leader who blames their "followers".
Andy Stanley puts it: "As soon as you blame your followers you've stopped leading".
This is not to devalue the valuable work that is done by thinkers who contemplate normative views and discuss implementation pathways. However, especially for new devotees their initial focus is better directed to the essential practices of bhakti, such as sadhana, study of sastra, and cultivating Vaisnava qualities and relationships.
I've found that if people respect you as a person they naturally respect what you say. When you give them relevant advice on their personal situation they are more likely to follow it. Change begins with us and then goes one person at a time. A brahmana is one who thinks globally (in fact universally, and beyond), and acts locally. He becomes an empowered agent of positive change.
"This is not to devalue the
"This is not to devalue the valuable work that is done by thinkers who contemplate normative views and discuss implementation pathways."
The normative view of Varnashram is the asure Varnashram and the implimentation pathways would be to add the principals of Pure Devotional service along with the duties of varnas and ashram. That would make it Daivi Varnashram Dharma.
"However, especially for new devotees their initial focus is better directed to the essential practices of bhakti, such as sadhana, study of sastra, and cultivating Vaisnava qualities and relationships" This pricipals should go on for all devotees, why just new bhakta. That is the path of going back to Godhead. That is the purpose of Varnashram as well. So rules of Bhakti should go on in all cases.
Thank you for your comments
Thank you for your comments Mother Gandhari.
That's why I said "especially for new devotees". :-) That means for everyone, and especially as a primary, if not an exclusive focus in the beginning when someone still has a big mashup of ideas and very mixed motivations.
Re: Manu Samhita and Female Heads of State
I think it's dangerous when devotees start preaching from Smarta texts like the Manu Samhita rather than offering the pure, transcendental knowledge of Vaishnava scriptures such as Bhagavad Gita and Srimad Bhagavatam. There are certainly many useful instructions in the Manu Samhita but there are also some that are highly irrelevant and--according to many--adulterated by smarta-brahmanism.
Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura explains this point very nicely in his book, Jaiva Dharma:
"Naimittika-dharma is commendable because it aims at the truth, but it is eventually meant to be abandoned, and it is mixed with undesirable results; only spiritual reality is truly beneficial. Although the jiva should relinquish matter and its association, materialism is prominent in naimittika-dharma. Moreover, naimittika-dharma produces such an abundance of irrelevant results that jiva cannot help but get entangled in them."
"[A Vaishnava] never adheres blindly to the rules and prohibitions of the sastras. He accepts the instructions and prohibitions of the sastras graciously, but only when they are favorable to his practice of hari-bhajana. When they are unfavorable, he immediately rejects them." (Jaiva Dharma, pp. 53-54)
In regard to the idea that women shouldn't be allowed to serve as presidents or prime ministers, this is only according to smarta- or naimittika-dharma. In the transcendental Vaishnava philosophy, anyone who is qualified for a task may render it regardless of their body type. Furthermore, the Artha Shastra (another naimittika-dharma text) mentions that in some instances a qualified woman certainly may serve as head of state.
"In regard to the idea that
"In regard to the idea that women shouldn't be allowed to serve as presidents or prime ministers, this is only according to smarta- or naimittika-dharma. In the transcendental Vaishnava philosophy, anyone who is qualified for a task may render it regardless of their body type. Furthermore, the Artha Shastra (another naimittika-dharma text) mentions that in some instances a qualified woman certainly may serve as head of state."
If this was the case, then Srila Prabhupada would Not have made this statement. There are many reasons why a woman should not be in the post of a n executive head. It is not only a smarta or naimitika dharma.
"the wives and daughters of the ruling class, the kshatriyas, knew the political game, but we never find that a woman was given the post of chief executive."
The transcendental Vaisnava philosophy is referring to the spiritual rights of jiva in a womans body for (nitya dharma) elevation to spiritual platform B.Gita 9.31. As long as the jiva is in a material body and living in the material world, they have to follow the laws of the society which were the laws of Mankind (Manu Samhita).
Women and Manu Samhita
Madhava Gosh
If you want to start quoting Manu Samhita and commenting on its contextualization, my suggestion would be to at least read it first.
First lets see the sannyasis follow the specific injunctions of Manu Samhita for their ashram, then we can worry about the woman.
For the general population of devotees, not just swamis, the following are some examples of what needs to be done:
"Chap 2
"132. (The feet of the) wife of one's brother, if she be of the same caste (varna), must be clasped every day; but (the feet of) wives of (other) paternal and maternal relatives need only be embraced on one's return from a journey."
I wonder if that would apply to Godbrothers' wives?
"Chap 4
"45. Let him not eat, dressed with one garment only; let him not bathe naked; let him not void urine on a road, on ashes, or in a cow-pen,
46. Nor on ploughed land, in water, on an altar of bricks, on a mountain, on the ruins of a temple, nor ever on an ant-hill, "
Did you catch that about not passing urine in water? When the "treat women as their bodies" crew stops passing urine in water flushing toilets and urinals, then they will be qualified to speak on the role of women according to the Manu Samhita.
Rules of Dharma Sastra
"Chap 2
"132. (The feet of the) wife of one's brother, if she be of the same caste (varna), must be clasped every day; but (the feet of) wives of (other) paternal and maternal relatives need only be embraced on one's return from a journey."
I wonder if that would apply to Godbrothers' wives?
"Oh Please - Kindly do NOT come up with all new concoctions. this also means wife of an Older brother (because she is considered like his mother - not the wife of younger brother (who is like a daughter) . Brahma Vaivarta Purana also lists all the duties, rules, obligations and relationships towards eachother in the extended bodily family.
These duties are only pertaining to material bodily relatives becuase these are rules from Dharma Sastra for the Varnashram (external - bodily relationships).
This is what I mean that the statements of all the Dharma Sastras should be explained by devotees who can understand them otherwise there is going to be havoc.
"When the "treat women as their bodies" - The sanskrit word is "Arthangani" half my body.- from the time of marriage.
"Not passing urine in water" - this is sinful. I believe this is also mentioned in the deity worship handbook. Therefore the need for creating homesteads according to Vastru sastras are important.
These are all important injunctions that ISKCON as a society has to start implementing. Even if we are not yet capable of doing that, then by Lord Caitanya's mercy so many other groups are already doing so much. Followers of Mahesh yogi are creating so many homes according to vastu sastras. Western regulation may not allow all the standards but keeping the goals in mind and educating the public on the real principals will help menifest them in due cause of time (third generation may be!)
Dharma sastra also gives reasons why one should follow these rules.
E.g. if one fails to offer respect of an elder, then he loses part of his life. Ayurveda explains why. When a senior or elder walks in the room, his aura pulls onto the younger persons aura. So the younger person should stand up to regain his life air. So scientific.
Touching the feet of a senior, makes one humble and gets the blessings of success, good luck, prosperity and spritual upliftment.
That is why implementation of Varnashram means teaching Dharma Sastras.