You can submit your article, report, announcement, ad etc. by mailing to

Comments Posted By Atmavidya Dasa

Displaying 1 To 30 Of 118 Comments

Are there different sizes of infinity?

You wrote:

“If the material world is literally unlimited how Maha-Visnu can expand and take it in again every
6.22 trillion years. This unlimited is figurative. ”

Material world doesn’t refer to just this universe but to the pradhana and maha-tattva which contain infinite number of material universes. Check the image at the top with quote from Brahma Samhita. Material world refers to the complete material manifestation not just our tiny universe, the smallest of all universes.

» Posted By Atmavidya Dasa On Nov 21, 2014 @ 10:23 am

The Lower Birth of Women

Am I the only one who this this is an inappropriate comment?

» Posted By Atmavidya Dasa On Oct 30, 2014 @ 9:51 am

Who is “Jaya devi” and why should we accept her opinion as an authority/

» Posted By Atmavidya Dasa On Oct 30, 2014 @ 9:48 am

Intelligence according to the Vedic standard is the capacity to distinguish matter and spirit.

The form determines the function. The female form is created for making new material forms, that is babies, this engenders the nesting syndrome, the need to accumulate all the material resources to raise that baby into an adult. This instinct is present even if women for some reason or other do not have children, that is, they do not fulfill the function of their form. Thus by nature the female form is focused on matter not spirit.

» Posted By Atmavidya Dasa On Oct 30, 2014 @ 9:44 am

As Baladev Vidya Bhusana says the more one tries to disprove sastra the more it gets proved.

» Posted By Atmavidya Dasa On Oct 30, 2014 @ 9:32 am

Many try to jump over Srila Prabhupada and Bhakti Siddhanta by quoting Sri Krsna Samhita and other texts by Bhaktivinode Thakura.

In the December 1931 issue of the Harmonist Srila Bhaktisiddhanta wrote an
article entitled “Thakur Bhaktivinode” therein he addressed the issue of how to
understand the life and teachings of Bhaktivinode. The following are some
pertinent excerpts:

“There have, however, already arisen serious misunderstandings regarding the
proper interpretation of the life and teachings of Srila Thakura
Bhaktivinode. Those who suppose they understand the meaning of his message
without securing the guiding grace of the acarya are disposed to unduly
favor the method of empiric study of his writings. There are persons who
have got by heart almost everything that he wrote without being able to
catch the least particle of his meaning.
“… The personal service of the pure devotee is essential for understanding
the spiritual meaning of the words of Thakur Bhaktivinode.
“…The present editor has all along felt it his paramount duty to try to
clear up the meaning of the life and teachings of Thakur Bhaktivinode by the
method of submissive listening to the transcendental sound from the lips of
the pure devotees.
“…Thakur Bhaktivinode is acknowledged by all his sincere followers as
possessing the above powers of the pure devotee of Godhead. His words have
to be received from the lips of a pure devotee. If his words are listened to
from the lips of a non-devotee they will certainly deceive. If his works are
studied in the light of one’s own worldly experience their meaning will
refuse to disclose itself to such readers. His works belong to the class of
eternal revealed literature of the world and must be approached for their
right understanding through their exposition by the pure devotee. If no help
is sought, the works of Thakur Bhaktivinode will be grossly misunderstood by
their readers.”

This is why there is a guru parampara.

» Posted By Atmavidya Dasa On Oct 30, 2014 @ 9:29 am

Brahma Dasa wrote:

“The notion that women are less intelligent–are never to be given independence etc. are not the essential teachings of Krsna consciousness.”

That they are not “essential” in your opinion, doesn’t make them false. And when it comes to making judgements on certain issues they are essential. Such as should women be in management positions should they be diksha gurus.

They are in fact true statements of guru, sadhu, and sastra and no amount of waving around the “essential” magic wand makes them any less true.

» Posted By Atmavidya Dasa On Oct 30, 2014 @ 9:19 am

I am am surprised that this topic is be rehashed again. Here links to two excellent articles on the topic by Hari Sauri Prabhu:

Srila Prabhupada said that women are less-intelligent than men. Can we support this?

And, “A response to Hari-kirtana prabhu regarding my article“:

» Posted By Atmavidya Dasa On Oct 30, 2014 @ 9:10 am

A Happy Wife Has a Good Husband

Reading your recomedations of a how men should deal with their wives reminded me of the following verse from Srimad Bhagavatam:

“One should not associate with a coarse fool who is bereft of the knowledge of self-realization and who is no more than a dancing dog in the hands of a woman.” SB 3.31.34

» Posted By Atmavidya Dasa On Oct 1, 2014 @ 6:58 pm

Prabhupada did not want divorce to exist in Iskcon, an intelligent husband should ensure that his wife is happy, knowing that an unhappy wife is much more prone to consider divorce.

Am I the only one who thinks that something doesn’t quite seem right about this statement. It sounds like a formula for disaster that now the husband has to fulfill every whim his wife has in order to keep her “happy.” The husband should provide what the wife “needs” but heaven help the man who tries to fulfill everything that his wife “wants.” She will never be happy in such a case since a woman’s kama – material desires (not neccessarily sex) — are 9 times that of a man’s.

Better not to marry than to become a “wallet” for fullfilling some woman’s material desires.

Somehow I find that this article is not balanced this is just one example. The whole peice just doesn’t sit well with me.

» Posted By Atmavidya Dasa On Sep 4, 2014 @ 8:40 am

Continuation of Guru Issue

Dusyanta Prabhu wrote:

“Did Srila Prabhupada want Women Diksa Gurus” from eye of the storm books. In this download it came across that the book was biased towards trying to prove that Srila Prabhupada did want women Diksa Gurus. And I think that when you try to prove a point in this way the article takes on a biased colour and this colour shone through the whole download, unfortunately.

What you are describing is a classical case of Confirmation Bais

Confirmation bias (also called confirmatory bias or myside bias) is a tendency of people to favor information that confirms their beliefs or hypotheses.[Note 1][1] People display this bias when they gather or remember information selectively, or when they interpret it in a biased way. The effect is stronger for emotionally charged issues and for deeply entrenched beliefs. They also tend to interpret ambiguous evidence as supporting their existing position. Biased search, interpretation and memory have been invoked to explain attitude polarization (when a disagreement becomes more extreme even though the different parties are exposed to the same evidence), belief perseverance (when beliefs persist after the evidence for them is shown to be false), the irrational primacy effect (a greater reliance on information encountered early in a series) and illusory correlation (when people falsely perceive an association between two events or situations).

A series of experiments in the 1960s suggested that people are biased toward confirming their existing beliefs. Later work re-interpreted these results as a tendency to test ideas in a one-sided way, focusing on one possibility and ignoring alternatives. In certain situations, this tendency can bias people’s conclusions. Explanations for the observed biases include wishful thinking and the limited human capacity to process information. Another explanation is that people show confirmation bias because they are weighing up the costs of being wrong, rather than investigating in a neutral, scientific way.

Confirmation biases contribute to overconfidence in personal beliefs and can maintain or strengthen beliefs in the face of contrary evidence. Poor decisions due to these biases have been found in political and organizational contexts.

Full text at

» Posted By Atmavidya Dasa On Nov 26, 2013 @ 4:50 pm

Download for free the book “Did Srila Prabhupada Want Women Diksa-gurus?”

Brilliant points by Sitalatma Prabhu in #38. You can know if a pot of rice is cooked by testing just one grain. A reader of this book will not find an unbiased scholarly presentation of both sides of the issue meant to inform us of the relevant strengths or weaknesses of the opposing views despite Urmila mataji’s glowing review that it does just that.

Urmila devi dasi: What an incredible book. I believe this answers just about everything and considers every angle about women being gurus. A free download, too.

Rather what we get is a political propaganda piece with all the apparatus in place to give a distorted and biased view as Sitalatma Prabhu has pointed out. The fact that Kaunteya has purposely manipulated quotations of other writers (as Krishna Kirti Prabhu has pointed out) to give meanings that they never intended is revealing. If Urmila dd, who endorsed this book, and the pro-FDG camp actually had strong, solid arguments they would not have to resort to such chicanery. That they do indicates that they cannot be trusted in giving us the truth because they consider their dearly held beliefs to be subservient to the truth.

» Posted By Atmavidya Dasa On Mar 11, 2013 @ 7:40 am

Physiognomy of a Pure Devotee

part 2

Next she says: “The baggy eyes illustrate deep memory and facility to grasp facts.”

Considering the medical fact that old people tend to lose their memory and many Alzheimer patients have baggy eyes this is another meaningless statement. One need only google images “Alzheimer patients” to see what I mean.

She then wrote: “His thick and long eyebrows show deep thinking and an enormous capacity to love.”

As all men age it is common for their eyebrows to get bushy as well as development of hair in the ears and more hair in the nostrils.

And while Samudrika sastra is a bona fide Vedic science “Phrenology” is bogus.

It would be needlessly tiresome to pick through everything she wrote. In essence this article is meaningless, if it is meant to glorify Srila Prabhupada then IMHO it has not and I have demonstrated why. There are better ways to glorify Srila Prabhupada. One should at least be an expert in a subject like physiognomy or astrology before trying to apply it to Srila Prabhupada.


Atmavidya dasa

» Posted By Atmavidya Dasa On Dec 4, 2012 @ 2:59 pm

Reply to Abhya Mudra Devi Dasi’s “Physiognomy of a Pure Devotee”

Dear Vaisnavas and lovers of Srila Prabhupada,

Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada.

We all love and adore Srila Prabhupada. But as Srila Prabhupada once said to some devotees in Sweden who wanted to make a magazine to debunk science that “unless you are expert in it you will become the laughing stock.”

This text by Abhaya Mudra dd has many problems first of all the author gives practically no citations to support anything she says we are just expected to believe everything she says because if we don’t we will be offensive to Srila Prabhupada. To illustrate she says:

“Shrila Prabhupada had a small build like many powerful military leaders including Napoleon.”

In actuality Napoleon was 170cm tall (5ft 7in), average height for his period. It was the British propaganda machine that depicted him as short. See for more on this point

The author, Abhya Mudra dd, no where proves that it is a distinct feature that great military leaders are generally short in stature. Napoleon was average in height, Alexander the Great was short, while Julius Caesar was quite tall (according to Suetonius), George Washington was 188 cm, and Eisenhower 179 cm. These are just a few examples showing that great generals can be any height.

Then she writes: “Shrila Prabhupada’s eyes were warm and beautiful, with protruding skin all around them.”

Having skin protruding around the eyes is a common sign of aging in old people, hardly unique.

She says: “His brown eyes show warmth and a refined writing ability. “

Considering that brown is the dominant eye color in the world and only eye color in some countries like India and China renders her statement meaningless.

“Dark brown eyes are dominant in humans and in many parts of the world, it is nearly the only iris color present. Dark pigment of brown eyes is most common in East Asia, Southeast Asia, South Asia, West Asia, Oceania, Africa, Americas, etc. as well as parts of Eastern Europe and Southern Europe. The majority of people in the world overall have dark brown eyes.”


» Posted By Atmavidya Dasa On Dec 4, 2012 @ 2:58 pm

A Tale of Two Zodiacs

Re# 23

Abhirama das wrote:

Antardwipa Prabhu, I find no reason to respect an article that quotes only those shlokas that support the view of an author and conveniently ignores all tropical definitions of the Zodiac given in the various shastras. Shyamasundara Prabhu did the same in his articles. We all can do this. It is easy.

If you had actually read Antardvipa’s article he already admits that both Suryasiddhanta and Srimad Bhagavatam talk about the tropical zodiac and states in various places that since Vrajakishore has already quoted passages about tropical usage there is no need for him to quote them again. So your complaint suggests that you never actually read what he wrote otherwise why such a complaint?

Neither Antardvipa nor Shyamasundara Prabhus deny that the sastras refer to the tropical zodiac, but they are saying that the sastras also refer to the sidereal zodiac something that both you and Varaja Kishore religiously deny despite references that both Antadvipa and Shyamasundara provided from various sources.

Vraja Kishore even went to the extent of saying:

“Therefore where is the “guru” who has the bile to say that it is “Vedic” to use a sidereal zodiac.”

So Antardvipa has shown that the sastras do in fact explicitly mention the sidereal zodiac and what it is used for. Specifically it is used for locating the position of the planets. Thus sidereal system is to be used in astrology. Tropical zodiac has other uses not related to astrology.

In Shyamasundara Prabhu’s two articles he just specifically responding to the claims of the antagonist article he is refuting and does an excellent job of demolishing and reducing it to atomic particles and ultimately demonstrating that Tropical system of astrology is absurd by its own definition.

In your comment #6 at you imply that only you and Vrajakishore are “scientific” and that those who disagree with you are “religious fanatics.” But it seems that even after so much proof is given you still deny the reality and cling to your religious beliefs that Vedic culture only uses tropical zodiac and that there is no place for sidereal zodiac. So who is actually scientific and who is not?

» Posted By Atmavidya Dasa On Nov 18, 2012 @ 12:18 pm

The 12 Signs of The Zodiac

In #16 Vraja Kishore wrote:

All things considered, I beg to remain thoroughly unimpressed by the opposing view. I am openly inviting you to impress and educate me. I beg you to do it in an intellectual and rational manner.

You may want to consider this verse of Manu

“Unless one be asked, one must not explain (anything) to anybody, nor (must one answer) a person who asks improperly; let a wise man, though he knows (the answer), behave among men as (if he were) an idiot”. Manu Samhita 2.110

» Posted By Atmavidya Dasa On Sep 20, 2012 @ 3:14 am

Dear Vic,

Hare Krsna.

I am really amazed by your ability, superior intellect and perspicacious understanding in matters astrological. Your mastery of the subject is un-paralleled. All this time for thousands of yugas we have been in ignorance about the true position of the tropical zodiac and none of the great Vedic personalities or acaryas could understand it. Neither great stalwart Vedic astronomer-mathematicians like Arya Bhatta, Brahma Gupta, or Baskara Acarya who spent their lives studying the subject could fathom this secret. Even our Srila Bhakti Siddhanta Saravati Thakura, who was a walking encyclopedia, and a mathematical and astronomical genius who published the translations and commentaries of numerous Vedic astronomical texts could not uncover the secrets you are now disclosing to us. It is all the more wonder since you have not studied mathematics or astronomy and have only studied jyotish for 3-4 years and that without a teacher. Simply amazing that with practically no qualifications you have been able to dive deep into the heart of such arcane mysteries and over turn thousands of years of traditional knowledge and show it to be ignorance. Kudos to you. Your guru must be proud to have a disciple who is superior to all preceding Vedic astronomers and who puts Bhakti Siddhanta to shame.

» Posted By Atmavidya Dasa On Jul 9, 2012 @ 5:40 am

Letter of Bhakti Vikasa Swami

If my memory serves me right I believe I recall HH Bhaktivikasa praised “Food For All” as a good example. I don’t have access to the MP3s or a transcript of it now but I am pretty sure that if it were checked we will find that he didn’t criticize “Food For All.”

Could someone with access to the material do the needful. I’m traveling and don’t have access.

» Posted By Atmavidya Dasa On Nov 20, 2011 @ 1:19 pm

My Brief Against Feminism

I assume you are talking about “Female Diksha-gurus in ISKCON: A paper by the Sastric Advisory Council (SAC)”

I saw 2-3 papers written on behalf of the Indian RGB that seriously contested this paper and its conclusions. One should read them as well before drawing any conclusions. Because after reading these papers I thought the SAC paper to be, how shall we say in a tactful way, not very useful or accurate.

I wonder if these Indian RGB papers have been published anywhere? Maybe Dandavatas can host them as well. They are full of cogent sastric references and analyses that nullify the conclusions of the SAC paper which in my humble opinion seemed bias towards a certain predetermined conclusion.

In any case both views should be given equal time not just a one-sided view.

» Posted By Atmavidya Dasa On Apr 26, 2011 @ 6:04 am

Very nice article so many excellent points.

Bhakta Piyush is of course correct in his comments which I agree with.

I’m actually surpised it hasn’t been seriously attacked yet by the feminist camp.

» Posted By Atmavidya Dasa On Apr 13, 2011 @ 3:01 am

Live From Sri Mayapur Candrodaya Mandir! HG Urmila Mataji

Part 4

There are other varnas as well. Let us expand our proof by assuming a woman can be a full-fledged kshatriya. According the Gita 18.44 this is a concise description of Kshatriyas:

“Heroism, power, determination, resourcefulness, courage in battle, generosity and leadership are the natural qualities of work for the ksatriyas.”

Therefore by definition such a kshatriya woman should have great physical strength (power) and courage in battle. However in Sanskrit one common word for woman is abalA, devoid of strength,that is, weak. This is the opposite of strength and power.

We also note that Draupadi was the daughter of a kshatriya, the sister of many kshatriyas including Dristadyumna, she was the wife of five Kshatriya heroes, and she was the mother of five kshatriyas. But she could not defend herself when she was dragged by the hair, during her period, into a royal assembly by Dushasana. Nor could she defend herself from Jayadratha or Kichaka. So she was too weak and could not do battle with these persons. So here we have another contradiction and are forced to conclude that our initial assumption that a woman can be a kshatriya is falsified.

If we assume that a woman could be a kshatriya as per the definition of Gita 18.44 then we should see women kshatriyas on the battle fields of the Mahabharata, but there are none. Not only that but it is generally considered a sin to kill a woman. And because Sikhandin had previously been a woman Bhisma refused to fight with him. So here again we find contradictions and must assume that our assumption that a woman can be a kshatriya is false.

In conclusion it is proved by the method of Reductio ad absurdum” that women can not have a varna of their own. They are only called by a certain varna as a social convention as indicated by Srila Prabhupada in the following quote:

“The woman, when she becomes the wife of a brahmana, then she is called brahmani, but she’s not offered brahminical culture. She remains as sudra.” Room Conversation–August 2, 1976, New Mayapur (French farm)

Yours in service of Prabhupada

Atmavidya das

» Posted By Atmavidya Dasa On Jul 13, 2011 @ 8:14 pm

part 3

Let us assume again that a woman can become a brahmana in her own right. One of the karmas of a brahmana is to perform agni hotra yajnas. Hence a woman brahmana should be able to perform an agni hotra sacrifice.

But Manu says:

“An unmarried girl, a youthful matron, an unread brahmana, one of small learning, one afflicted with disease, or uninitiated with the sacred thread must not perform the Agnihotra homa. For having cast such libations in the fire, these (unmarried girl, a youthful matron, etc.) shall go to hell, together with the person on whose behalf they do such fire-offerings; hence (only) a Brahmana well versed in the Vedas and in the art of performing such fire-offerings, shall act as a Hota (that is, offerer of the libation, or doer of the fire-offering.)” Manu 11.36-37

He prohibits all females from performing Agni Hotra. I say all because while he does ban specific groups of unmarried and married women it has already been noted above that women cannot be initiated with the sacred thread and Manu completely bans such uninitiated persons from performing Agni Hotra. So here again we have a contradiction hence we again conclude that our assumption that a woman can be a brahmana is falsified.


» Posted By Atmavidya Dasa On Jul 13, 2011 @ 8:07 pm

part 2

“The Puranas are also supplementary to the Vedas. The Vedic mantras are too difficult for an ordinary man. Women, sudras and the so-called twice-born higher castes (brahma bandus) are unable to penetrate into the sense of the Vedas. And thus the Mahabharata as well as the Puranas are made easy to explain the truths of the Vedas.”


“Thereafter Sati left her husband, Lord Siva, who had given her half his body due to affection. Breathing very heavily because of anger and bereavement, she went to the house of her father. This less intelligent act was due to her being a weak woman.” Srimad Bhagavatam 4.4.3

Here again we have a contradiction, that brahmanas have studied and understood the import of the Vedas and that they (women as a class) are unable to penetrate into the sense of the Vedas and are less intelligent. This also forces us to conclude that our assumption that a woman can be a brahmana in her own right is false.

Let us again assume that women can be brahmanas in their own right. In the sastras such as Mahabharata and other places as quoted by Srila Prabhupada

janma jayate sudrah
samskarad bhaved dvijah
vedo-pathad bhaved vipro
brahma janatiti brahmanah

“Everyone is born a sudra, but by samskara one becomes a dvija, and by study of the Veda one becomes a Vipra and one who knows Brahman is a Brahmana.”

Morning Walk – June 23, 1975, Los Angeles

Thus if a woman can be a brahmana in her own right then she can also progress through the stages starting with the upanayanam samskara – the receiving of the sacred thread.

But Manu 2.67 states women do not get samskaras with mantras and especially that they do not get investiture with sacred thread. And Srila Prabhupada ratifies that thusly:

“The woman, when she becomes the wife of a brahmana, then she is called brahmani, but she’s not offered brahminical culture. She remains as sudra.” Room Conversation–August 2, 1976, New Mayapur (French farm)

So here again we have a contradiction they cannot both have upanayam samskara and not have it at the same time therefore we again conclude that our assumption that a woman can be a brahmana is falsified.


» Posted By Atmavidya Dasa On Jul 13, 2011 @ 8:02 pm

In #207 Kulapavana wrote:

2. There are countless examples in the shastras of women with a varna assigned to them by birth. In those days guna and karma directly corresponded with a birth in an appropriate family. And there is not a single example in the shastra of a woman whose varna was derived from marriage. That alone renders any notion that woman’s varna is derived from her husband null and void.

Dear Kulapavana Prabhu,

Hare Krsna. Thanks for raising these issues. You say that women have their own Varna. Let us see if this is true. To do this we will use a form of mathematical argument called Reductio ad absurdum”

In such a method of proof we shall assume that the given assumption is true. If by this assumption we arrive at a contradiction then the original assumption is held to be false.

Let us assume that a woman born in a brahmana family is a true brahmana then surely this is a very high birth for it is said:

“Among human beings, the society which is divided according to quality and work is best, and in that society, the intelligent men, who are designated as brahmanas, are best. Among the brahmanas, one who has studied the Vedas is the best, and among the brahmanas who have studied the Vedas, one who knows the actual purport of Veda is the best.” Srimad Bhagavatam 3.29.31

But in Gita 9.32 woman are categorized as belonging to papa-yoni or lower birth.

“O son of Prtha, those who take shelter in Me, though they be of lower birth-women, vaisyas and sudras -can attain the supreme destination.”

We now have a contradiction; a brahmana cannot simultaneously be a high and low birth. This forces us to conclude that our assumption that a woman can be a brahmana in her own right is false.

Let us again assume that a woman can be a brahmana in her own right. Using the same verse of Srimad bagavatam 3.29.31 we note that Brahmanas have studied the Vedas and know the real import of the Vedas.

But in the introduction of the Srimad Bhagavatam Srila Prabhupada writes:


» Posted By Atmavidya Dasa On Jul 13, 2011 @ 7:52 pm

I very much appreciated Bhaktilata mataji’s comments in #86-87

they hit the nail right on the head and kept the dicussion focused and not allowed to shift and wiggle around into irrelavant areas.

I also appreciated the comment 95 by siddhakrishnadas

I request that everyone read the Feb 14, 1977 Varnashrama Conversation. Prabhupada made it a priority to establish Varna Ashram Dharma (VAD) in ISKCON to stop the degradation of ISKCON into a sahajiya movement.

In fact Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saravati Thakur(BST) had to import VAD from the Sri Sampradaya to purify the Gaudiya Sampradaya. One of BST’s main missions–therefore Srila Prabhupada’s mission, therefore our mission–is to establish Daiva Varnashrama along with pure chanting of the holy name.

It would be better that we all thoroughly investigate what Srila Prabhupada wanted and why before attempting social engineering that Srila Prabhupada did not introduce. Srila Prabhupada did not make women TPs or GBCs and although he engaged Western women disciples as preachers (mostly in book distribution) his books clearly define the natural role of women as mothers and chaste wives. He spoke strongly against having women as leaders. As he himself wanted the then Prime Minister of India to step down!

Unfortunatley we can already see the symptoms of sahajiyaism creeping into the movement.

We simply cannot deny the fact that Srila Prabhupada wanted to establish Daiva Varnashrama Dharma and in DVAD women have their own roles and duties. And it is the women who follow such prescribed duties who should preach in order to help fulfill SP’s desires not those who are not agreeable to following his instructions.

» Posted By Atmavidya Dasa On Apr 26, 2011 @ 6:23 am

In 122 Urmila said:

“This is a most interesting discussion. I remain confused as to why women who think women should not preach in front of men and/or in the presence of senior men write comments and/or articles on Dandavats, public blogs, or other public places. Surely men read what they write. And surely there are enough senior men to write articles and comments. Some senior men have, indeed, commented here. Surely those women would, if following stri dharma as they understand it, be satisfied with the comments of men, especially senior men, and remain silent. It is also interesting that the men who promote these ideas of stri dharma do not complain about women who agree with them posting articles and/or comments in public forums.”

I think the reason is that if a man tried to bring this topic up he would be attacked and called a misogynist as pointed out by Narada Priya dd in

“Meanwhile, while thousands of women from other faiths are waking up from the madness, back in ISKCON, several male leaders have been falsely accused of “conspiracy” against women or they’ve been offensively labeled as “misogynists”, because they support Prabhupada’s teachings about a woman’s position according to varnasrama dharma. More amazingly, Srila Prabhupada himself has become an object of ridicule by certain women as well as their male supporters who consider it their duty to correct the founder acarya on these matters, assuming that he didn’t know what he was talking about, was “old-fashioned”, etc.”

So I am glad that there are still women in ISKCON like Bhaktilata dd, Tungavidya dd, Hemamalini dd, Narada Priya dd and Sita dd who actually want to follow Srila Prabhupada’s instructions and have the courage to speak up on this sensitive topic. It gives me some hope for the future of ISKCON.

» Posted By Atmavidya Dasa On Apr 26, 2011 @ 5:52 am

In 115 Urmila said:

Vishaka-priya had written:
“I am wholeheartedly convinced that Srila Prabhupada is proud of having such a disciple and that he will continue to pour his blessings upon her more and more. All glories to Srila Prabhupada, who can turn mlecchas, yavanas, and women into transcendental loving servants of Krsna.”

My response:
“Thank you, Vishaka-priya devi dasi! By your blessings Srila Prabhupada is pleased with me! The words of a Vraja-vasi as you are cannot be false, so surely Krishna will make them true.

My response, therefore, was simple gratitude for her blessings. “

If you had just left it at “Thank you, Vishaka-priya devi dasi!” that would have been gratitude but it is the rest of what you wrote that got the attention of Tungavidya dd and others. You singled her out as the only one inspired not others. That by her words SP was pleased and not by the other’s words that Srila Prabhupada was displeased. So you were selective in your hearing. Of course you are not the first nor will you be the last person to see things the way they want to.

» Posted By Atmavidya Dasa On Apr 26, 2011 @ 5:48 am

Re 104

Dear Urmila mataji

I don’t think what Tungavidya was talking about blessings and curses but rather why should we only single out one comment to be inspired and others not. Is Paramatma not in the hearts of everyone? Is Paramatma not inspiring them to write? Could it be that Krsna is trying to tell you something through others? We read in sastra that there are so many gurus who instruct us.

My experience is that if I don’t listen to that small voice, then it gets louder, and louder until eventually Krsna gets my attention either through other people or some major incident. I have found that listening at the beginning is less painful than waiting till Krsna hits me over the head. Of course in each case it is for my benefit and I appreciate it in the end. It just depends on how obstinate I am.

» Posted By Atmavidya Dasa On Apr 19, 2011 @ 2:44 am

Dear Bhaktilata Mataji,

I very much appreciated your comments #86-87 on Urmila dd’s comment #61 even though she was writing to me but as you have rightly stated I was simply quoting you.

You gave a very nice explanation of the situation and that it is not about our material qualifications before initiation but our spiritual qualifications after initiation.

I am waiting to read Urmila mataji’s response to your comment.

» Posted By Atmavidya Dasa On Apr 19, 2011 @ 2:40 am

Gopi Gita said:

How will we assist his mission going forward in the 22nd century with such parochial philosophical ideas as this!

Wow you are light years ahead of me. We just started the 21st century and you are already planning for the 22nd century. (-: A typo I know.

And of course their are idiots like me who think that Krsna’s Vedic culture is not “parochial” but eternally true in the past, present, and future.

It is being “modern” which is delusional. For by definition “modern” is what exists in the present moment but is not so in the next. Or, to put it in context how many people have closets full of clothes they would not be caught wearing today because they are out of style and not modern.

So to be modern means to to live in the ephemeral moment which by the definition of the Gita is “non-reality.”

That which is real has no cessation and that which is unreal has no-duration.

» Posted By Atmavidya Dasa On Apr 13, 2011 @ 3:13 am

 Page 1 of 4  1  2  3  4  » 
«« Back To Stats Page