Comments Posted By Somayaji
Displaying 1 To 10 Of 47 Comments
If a case of illicit sex between a man and an unmarried woman were brought before Prabhupada, he never blamed the woman. He said it is the man‚Äôs fault because the man is supposed to be strong and intelligent, and that a woman naturally and innocently follows a man.
Can you please provide a reference for this?
Comment Posted By Somayaji On 04.09.2014 @ 06:40
Devaki Mataji wrote:
They have lost this most significant contribution to human society of being the very first Guru and creating the spiritual atmosphere within the family, and thus they are searching for other venues to be valued and respected.
Interesting, now we want to be respected. I prefer the views of Gaurangadeva:
One should chant the holy name of the Lord in a humble state of mind, thinking oneself lower than the straw in the street; one should be more tolerant than a tree, devoid of all sense of false prestige, and ready to offer all respect to others. In such a state of mind one can chant the holy name of the Lord constantly.
Comment Posted By Somayaji On 08.08.2014 @ 03:50
If I may, I would like to emphasise the fact that we shouldn‚Äôt view the respective position of man and woman in terms of competition (which is not completely absent in the approach of the above article), but in terms of being complementary to each other.
I would have to agree him, the competitive spirit was very alive and well in this article and basically ruined it for me even though I support women being called mother.
Comment Posted By Somayaji On 08.08.2014 @ 03:38
One of the subtexts of Mahatma‚Äôs article was that the majority of men in ISKCON are sub-human jerks that need to be domesticated and civilized by their long-suffering but morally superior and saintly wives. But, as Srila Prabhupada writes in his purport to Bhagavad-gita 16.7:
‚ÄúBut modern education has artificially devised a puffed-up concept of womanly life, and therefore marriage is practically now an imagination in human society.‚ÄĚ
And, in Srimad Bhagavatam 9.3.10: ‚ÄúIn the modern day, the wife is never submissive, and therefore home life is broken even by slight incidents.‚ÄĚ
Srila Prabhupada had abundant experience of dealing with his disciple‚Äôs marriages. As Srila Prabhupada warned Gopala Krsna Swami (then Prabhu) when he wanted to get married to a devotee girl.
‚ÄúAnother difficulty is that in modern civilization everyone is independent spirited. The girls are no longer very much humble and submissive to their husbands.‚ÄĚ
Letter to: Gopala Krsna, 26 November, 1969
The message is clear — modern women — devotee or not, are not inclined to be submissive making peaceful marriage an imagination. Thus, Mahatma Prabhu is flagrantly contradicting the founder acarya by saying the opposite and putting himself in a superior position that Srila Prabhupada as rightly pointed out by BVKS. He may hope to become popular with a certain group of women but this is not the behavior of someone dedicated to preserving the teachings of the guru parampara. I hope that the GBC EC will take steps to correct Mahatma Prabhu‚Äôs deviant teachings or stop him from being a guru, a role he seems unqualified for.
Comment Posted By Somayaji On 05.06.2014 @ 03:48
Dear Mataji I have very much appreciated your original text plus comments and agree with almost everything you have written. For example I could not understand what you meant when you wrote:
“The point is that women‚Äôs emotional nature can cloudy [sic] their vision, especially in challenging situations. And of course also men‚Äôs vision and intelligence can also be clouded, especially by their false ego. Indra is a good example for this.
Men have a stronger gross body (broader shoulders, bigger muscles, bigger feet), and also their subtle body is stronger as well: stronger mind, more (material!) intelligence and bigger false ego. This enables them to fulfill their purifying duty of protecting, providing and taking charge. And their ego often gets in their way and bewilders their intelligence and vision of things.”
Could you please explain with sastra pramana how it is that males have bigger false ego (ahamkara) than females.
It is ahamkara, which binds us to the material conception of life that “I am the gross and subtle material body.” I have nowhere read in any sastra that male‚Äôs identification with material body is greater than that of females.
Awaiting your response.
Comment Posted By Somayaji On 26.11.2013 @ 15:41
Regarding courses on Vaisnava Spiritual culture, HH Bhaktividya Purna Swami has been giving such courses since at least the mid to late 1990s.
You can find a whole series on Vaisnava etiquette and culture at ISKCON Desire Tree
There are many other classes and seminars by him at this site.
And, for the record I am not a disciple of His Holiness but appreciate his efforts that have been on going through thick and thin for several decades.
Comment Posted By Somayaji On 26.11.2013 @ 19:54
Are the great warrior devotees the Pandavas “feminine?” Are Krsna’s male gopa friends in Goloka Vrndavana feminine?
In the 3rd canto it is described that the Vaikuntha vasis have wives.
It is self evident that the great devotee Bhimasena is not feminine like his equally great devotee of a wife Draupadi.
It is obvious that the concept of “feminine” in the spiritual context is not properly understood.
Such a childish man (which most men are today) is not very strong.
There are over 3 billion men in the world today, how do you know that most of them are childish? #2 is.
You said :
This is also the reason why they are not considered very intelligent (in the Vedic culture an intelligent person is one who can distinguish between matter and spirit, and women are more easily swayed to identify with their material body on account of its external beauty).
So only “hot” women are less intelligent but ugly one’s are smart? No. (The time factor will make all of us ugly.) The real reason is because the function of the female material form is to create more material forms - babies. For that to succeed means she must always be conscious of acquiring material facility to enable her “nesting” instinct. This happens even if she never has children, she is naturally materially acquisitive. Economists will tell you that more than 80% of all consumer purchases are done by women. That is a lot of material acquisition. So such focus on material things is by the Vedic definition –less intelligent.
The feminist trope is that women are spiritual. What about men’s spirituality.
Comment Posted By Somayaji On 09.10.2013 @ 18:49
In #37 Mother Visakha Priya dd wrote:
‚ÄúFrom my point of view, using the same words, phrases, and expressions as someone else to make a different point doesn‚Äôt constitute a breach of etiquette as long as it is not attributed to the person from whom one borrows the terminology. Does this refutation make sense to you, my son?‚ÄĚ
I don‚Äôt know if it makes sense to Krishna Kirti Prabhu but it doesn‚Äôt make sense to me. Kauteya did not specifically attribute the lexically engineered text to Krsna Kirti Prabhu but he did attribute it to his opponents, which is just as unethical.
Kaunteya Prabhu purposely kept everyone in the dark as to who or what he was quoting so that you could not check his sources to see if he did so correctly. We would not have known this if Krsna Kirti Prabhu had not pointed out what Kaunteya had done to his writing, slicing and dicing it to fit his needs. That is unethical. Who knows what else he has done. Such lack of transparency certainly makes it justifiable to doubt his motives, especially since this seems to the modus operendi of the pro-FDG camp.
Comment Posted By Somayaji On 11.03.2013 @ 08:58
regarding comment #8 by “bbd” (who is bbd?) I would have to whole heartedly agree with Nitai Prabhu’s comment #9 bbd’s comments are complete speculation or wishful thinking and have no support in sastra. It’s as if “bbd” never read any of Srila Prabhupada’s books. Just last night I was reading in Krsna book about the marriage of Usa and Annirudha and the great efforts that were taken by Usha’s father to keep her away from boys. This was not a singularity but the theme of the sastras. So we find it very strange that “bbd” comes to the exact opposite conclusion regarding the mixing of the sexes than that of Vedic culture as explained in sastra and by our acaryas and sadhus.
Regarding the so called influence of Islam and the British regarding mixing of the sexes a study was done which showed that for North Indian girls they began to feel uncomfortable if an unknown male came within 2 meters, whereas in South India where Vedic culture is much stronger because of little Islamic influence because of the Vijayanagar Empire which kept them out the S Indian girls feel uncomfortable if an unknown male comes within 4 meters, twice that of the N Indian girl. So in areas of India where Vedic culture is strongest (S India) there is stronger aversion for free mixing of the sexes.
Comment Posted By Somayaji On 01.01.2013 @ 16:12
Acyuta Prabhu wrote:
I don‚Äôt believe it has yet been mentioned that the GBC‚Äôs Sastric Advisory Council has already (nearly ten years past) completed an investigation of this issue.
Though not available as a download there is a paper commissioned by the Indian RGB that resoundingly rebuts the SAC paper. It is widely distributed on the net in different locations. If you google “A Reply to the GBC Action Order 305 (2009)” including the “” you get about 900 results on the SERP.
To quote you “I urge all devotees interested in this topic to take the time to read it.”
Comment Posted By Somayaji On 06.12.2012 @ 08:54