Comments Posted By bhakta_corey
Displaying 1 To 4 Of 4 Comments
The words of Srila Prabhupada can shed much light on this subject.
If one wants to get freedom from the material bondage of conditional life, he must get free from the attraction for the form of woman. Woman, or the fair sex, is the enchanting principle for the living entities, and the male form, especially in the human being, is meant for self-realization. The whole world is moving under the spell of womanly attraction, and as soon as a man becomes united with a woman, he at once becomes a victim of material bondage under a tight knot. The desires for lording it over the material world, under the intoxication of a false sense of lordship, specifically begin just after the man’s unification with a woman. & Studying the whole scheme of disassociation from women, it appears that a woman is a stumbling block for self-realization, and the Lord appeared as NÄrÄyanĢ£a to teach the principle of womanly disassociation with a vow in life.
The association of woman is very much restricted in the Vedic civilization. Out of the four social divisions, the brahmacÄrÄ«, vÄnaprastha and the sannyÄsÄ« ā three orders ā are strictly prohibited from the association of women; only the grĢ£hasthas, or householders, are given license to have an intimate relationship with a woman, and that relationship is also restricted for begetting nice children. If, however, one wants to stick to continued existence in the material world, he may indulge in female association unrestrictedly.
The basic flaw in modern civilization is that boys and girls are given freedom during school and college to enjoy sex life.
Women are self-interested by nature, and therefore they should be protected by all means so that their natural inclination to be too self-interested will not be manifested. Women need to be protected by men. A woman should be cared for by her father in her childhood, by her husband in her youth and by her grown sons in her old age. This is the injunction of Manu, who says that a woman should not be given independence at any stage. Women must be cared for so that they will not be free to manifest their natural tendency for gross selfishness. There have been many cases, even in the present day, in which women have killed their husbands to take advantage of their insurance policies. This is not a criticism of women but a practical study of their nature.
How much clearer can Srila Prabhupada make it?
For those who are not willing to accept Srila Prabhupada as their authority, no amount of his teachings can help them.
Comment Posted By bhakta_corey On 06.12.2006 @ 17:03
We also need to understand that this debate about women’s “liberation” in our society is not a game of “man vs. woman”. It is a matter of Vedic culture vs. Western civilization.
To keep the point simple, let’s look at the following quote from Bhaktisiddhanta.
“Western civilization must be crushed”.
Why is it that we as a society can not seem to grasp our founder acharya’s purports, which in Srila Prabhupada says time and time again that this Western civilization is demoniac. We should be working to crush it (through preaching), not encouraging it by trying to “westernize” our movement.
It goes back to the point about how our movement has developed an anti renunciate mentality, and thus we no longer see the need to give protection to the renounced ashrams “brahmacharis and sannyasis”. Because of this, the preaching has died, and our movement (in America, at least) is very weak. Until we learn once again the importance to give protection to this most vital part of our movement, we will not grow. And instead of trying to then justify changing things simply because the movement is no longer working, why not go back to the basics, e.i. brahmacharya and book distribution? This is what built the movement. I do not understand why this point is so difficult to understand. If you want this movement to expand, you must once again start giving support to renunciates, not being envious of them and subconsciously wanting them to fall down.
So what it comes down to is, what are our true ambitions? Is it to become preachers and deliver fallen souls, or is it to live a life of comfortable sense gratification?
Comment Posted By bhakta_corey On 03.12.2006 @ 18:25
Haribols prabhus and matas, pls accept my obeisances.
I wanted to further elaborate on the previous point I made about there being a general trend in our movement towards this “anti-renunciate” mentality.
Out of the different devotees I have spoken to, who either subvertly, or directly, espoused this “anti-renunciate” mentality, I have noticed three general characteristics. Of course, they are all wonderful devotees doing wonderful service, but still, I could not help but notice the following three characteristics in 90% of them.
1. They themselves never went through the training period of brahmacharya, so in general, they have no solid foundation for sadhana.
2. They do not do any direct preaching, except for maybe once a month, but certainly not every week, or every day, for that matter.
3. They also tend to fall under the category of “modernists”, who believe that Srila Prabhupada’s books are no longer relevant to the “modern day age” and believe that certain points should be edited out of his books and purports. Now, I can understand the need to EDIT Prabhupada’s books to bring them closer to what He originally said.
But, I, and many other devotees, just can’t seem to grasp the logic of CHANGING, or deleting, certain points in Prabhupada’s books that certain devotees do not seem to agree with, or feel are “politically correct”.
No massive social changes have occured in the past 40 years, if anything, people are more open spiritually now than ever before. So this idea that we need to change the books, and our ISKCON society, to change with the “new times” just doesn’t seem to have any rational foundation.
Just some thoughts.
Comment Posted By bhakta_corey On 01.12.2006 @ 19:49
Hare Krishna, please accept my obeisances prabhus and matajis.
I’ll keep my comments very short. Basically, I’d like to add my own view, a view that is not heard from very often, especially over the internet, of the brahmachari.
Let us look at the role that renunciates play in our movement. Renunciates do not have the obligations of family life, and thus their sole obligation is preaching to the fallen souls.
As a society, we are all supposed to work together. Let us look at what that means. Householders responsibilities are to raise responsible, mature devotee children. Renunciates responsibilities are to create responsible, mature devotees.
So, what happens when these two ashrams start fighting? Society no longer works, new devotees are no longer made, and basically the movement grinds to a halt.
Renunciates are like children, they are meant to be PROTECTED by the householders, as women are similarily supposed to be protected.
Now, an unbiased observer cannot help but notice a general trend in our movement (also observed in a few comments above) is that certain individuals have developed an anti-renunciate mentality. Let us simply face this fact honestly.
So the simple question is this- How do we expect our movement to grow, if the people who are fully dedicated to expanding the movement no longer feel that they are being protected?
This question will no doubt draw much criticism. But until we all begin facing these serious questions, we will make progress neither individually nor collectively.
Comment Posted By bhakta_corey On 28.11.2006 @ 06:48