By Kaunteya das
I read Devaki Mataji’s article “The Hot Issue – Female Diksa Guru”; I didn’t agree with her generalizations and her conclusions; in fact I found the article rife with contradictions and inaccuracies.
But let me take a step back and provide a premise: I have deep respect for Devaki Mataji; she is a courageous fighter in Lord Caitanya’s army; a determined devotee and a very austere preacher. She is active and dynamic; an example of dedication and self-sacrifice; and I offer her my respectful obeisances. What I am writing in this article is not an attack on her person but only on some of her ideas, and I believe she is a much better person than her ideas on this topic.
She states that “the female nature is more emotional” and that “this emotional nature can also become an impediment and obstacle, especially since emotions tend to cloudy our vision and intelligence to such extend that we cannot see things as they really are.”
And therefore I – and perhaps other readers of both genders – find myself scratching my head and asking myself: “If according to Devaki Mataji this is a hot issue and if women’s vision is clouded by emotions and ‘they cannot see things as they really are,’ why on earth she attempted to write this article and provide clarity? If she is clouded, why does she try to instruct the whole world?”
If what she writes is right, this article must be “clouded by emotions” and therefore unfit for consumption by the assembly of Vaisnavas.
She says that “the female vision and intelligence is always inferior to the man’s.” But then how to explain, for instance, that generally 91 to 98 percent of all the people in the world’s prison are male? (More details at: http://chartsbin.com/view/t5b or http://www.prisonstudies.org/news/all/155-more-than-625,000-women-and-girls-in-prison-around-the-world,-new-report-shows.html)
I certainly know that men’s rationality can also (and often is) “clouded by emotions.” I am also often “clouded by emotions.”
Therefore I suggest that in connection with this topic (women diksa-gurus) we all, men and women, defer to the wisdom of the Founder-Acarya and of the previous acaryas.
When I was requested by a devotee senior to me to delve into this topic, I did some research and learned a few things; for instance, I discovered three facts (and these are facts, not opinions based on emotions):
-
Srila Prabhupada ***always*** spoke positively about the idea of having women diksa-gurus in ISKCON. That is, in all circumstances in which he brought up the subject or the subject was brought up by others.
-
Srila Prabhupada ***never*** spoke negatively about the idea of having women diksa-gurus in ISKCON. There is simply no evidence that he ever expressed himself against women diksa-gurus in ISKCON.
-
There have been dozens of examples of women-diksa gurus in Gaudiya Vaisnavism. In other words, it is traditional and it’s accepted by the previous acaryas. If anyone disagrees, please request that person to produce a quote from any Gaudiya Vaisnava acarya in the last 500 years, a quote speaking against women diksa-gurus.
There is also the fact that the Governing Body Commission (GBC) of the International Society for Krishna Consciousness in two separate occasions (2005 and 2009) established that “a mature, qualified, female devotee may accept the role of initiating spiritual master.”
And that’s why I entitled this article “The Not-so-hot issue – Women Diksa-gurus”; because Vaisnava acaryas and authorized leaders have consistently upheld the same principle: Women can initiate disciples (when qualified, of course).
And we shouldn’t assume (as Devaki Mataji seems to imply in her article) that women who are willing to accept this service do so because of “running after recognition and fame.”
Anyway, people will have to decide for themselves if to embrace Srila Prabhupada’s vision or not. I only humbly suggest that his followers read the book “Did Srila Prabhupada Want Women Diksa Gurus?” – which is available for free here:
https://sites.google.com/site/eyeofthestormbooks
The book addresses virtually all arguments and smokescreens that have been raised (the varnasrama argument, the siksa-guru argument, the Suniti argument, and so on and on).
And, just for the record, this is not my book: I did play a small role in producing the book, but the text is full of the words of Srila Prabhupada and of the words of many ISKCON gurus, sannyasis and Srila Prabhupada’s disciples.
So far many senior devotees appreciated the book:
Bir Krishna Goswami (ACBSP): “I suggest the GBC members peruse this book, which is a pretty definitive study with a lot of good insights about the FDG issue.”
Adarsi das (ACBSP): “I have studied it cover to cover . . . For those philosophically inclined, it’s a pleasure to see learned devotees exchanging philosophical views with proper reference to guru, shastra, and sadhu.”
Akruranatha Das (ACBSP): “Wow, that is quite a thorough refutation of those opposed to women becoming diksa gurus in ISKCON . . . such a carefully researched and cogently expressed presentation . . . I think that any truly open-minded devotee curious about this subject will conclude that this book has resolved the issue once and for all . . . I myself found the book to be very well written and I appreciated that it bent over backwards to understand and sympathize with the mentality and concerns of those who very strongly oppose the GBC’s decision that qualified women can serve as diksa gurus in ISKCON.”
Some of those who liked the books are women; if you think that women – to use Devaki Mataj’s expression – “cannot see things as they really are,” you can skip their comments. Or perhaps you might want to read them anyway, since they agree with the men quoted above:
Urmila devi dasi (ACBSP): “What an incredible book. I believe this answers just about everything and considers every angle about women being gurus.”
Ragatmika-devi dasi (ACBSP, Mayapur): “I must say, I was extremely impressed by your conviction to support Srila Prabhupada’s vani and mood and, consequently, to identify so many contrived concoctions born of prejudice and fear. I read the book in almost one sitting. . . . It’s clear to me that you won the debate in support of the GBC resolution. Congratulations!”
Krsnanandini Devi Dasi (ACBSP) “This book is such a systematic, balanced presentation, solidly based on sastric references . . . I really appreciated the specific examples of “con” statements and their logical refutations based on guru, sadhu and sastra. You expertly demonstrated “Samanvaya”= the reconciliation of the various statements within an overall harmonious understanding.”
Visakha Priya dasi (GRS, Vrindavana): “I was extremely impressed by your masterful presentation. It is not just powerful but humorous as well. I just could not put it down . . . both the innocent readers and those willing to be educated will certainly benefit from your selfless efforts in compiling this elegantly written thesis.”
——————-
In conclusion: According to Srila Prabhupada, the previous acaryas, a number of Srila Prabhupada disciples and a number of Srila Prabhupada grandisciples, having women diksa-guru is not an issue. A saintly lady like Devaki Mataji is humbly invited to wholeheartedly join them. As she admits in her article, in connection with Srila Prabhupada’s teachings on men and women: “I have to be honest, it took me many years to not only swallow Prabhupada’s comments, but actually deeply within my heart accept them.” Let’s pray that she and her admirers can soon come to deeply accept within their heart also Srila Prabhupada’s teachings on women diksa-gurus.
Nothing else can be added…. perfectly presented!
Thank you Prabhu for the all the effort and the enormous amount of time spent on the research in order to obtain all the information held in the book.
Your servant Madhava Narasimha Das
I have a family friend. All members of that family are devotees including the parents. They come from a cultured Indian family. So one day after her daughters had gotten married there was one unmarried son who was also a devotee.The mother came to her son and with great love and compassion began to explain the part in the Srimad Bhagavatam where Urvashi instructed Pururava SB 9.14.36 that “you should know that the heart of a woman is like that of a fox. There is no use making friendship with women.” She then said,”what Urvasi said is true,therefore my son, please don’t get married.”
The son was stunned. Here was his mother who was also a female revealing the deep realities of life to him by confirming the statement in the sastras. Out of love she wanted to protect him and help him in his spiritual life so she told him the truth and it shattered any illusion he had about material happiness. He believed his mother because what she said was based on the sastra and never married. He is now a respected sannyasi in ISKCON.
But if Kaunteya had been the son he would have thought “well my mother is also a woman so she also has a heart like a fox so why I should I believe her, let me get married.”
Kauteya said:
Well you should bring these clear and unmistakable quotes into the public light and dispel all doubts. But as far as I have read they just don’t exist otherwise this issue would never have arisen.
There is not one female in our guruparampara. When Srila Prabhupada was asked about it he said it was very rare, BR Sridhara Swami they could be counted on the fingers of of one hand.
But you say there are dozens of examples. Does this mean that Srila Prabhupada was ignorant of the history of our sampradaya and needs to be educated by you? Does this mean Sridhar Swami had dozens of fingers on one hand? Or, is it that the so called examples you refer to are from bogus apasampradayas who should be shunned?
Dear Maharajs, Prabhus And Matajis,
Hare Krishna,
PAMHO,AGTSP.
Usually I don’t write a comments, But this time i just thought of writing something. I am a Grand Disciple Of Srila Prabhupada. I was reading some of the comments written by various devotees. In most of the comments one devotee is trying to put other devotees down, trying to prove their argument better than others. I as a junior grand disciple of Srila Prabhupada I would like to request all the devotees not to write these kinds of comments in public which ruins the image of ISKCON and Srila Prabhupada. This kind of discussion should be done among the senior devotees either sitting face to face or at least in email. At the moment the criticism to one and other is going on which leads to Vaisnava Aparadha (offences) and that leads one to fall from their spiritual practice.
Thank you.
Your humble servant
Tirtha Gauranga Das
Before everyone gets again dragged into this gender debate, with its pros and cons, let us not forget the main point:
Who will decide if you are qualified to become guru…?
Yourself?
or
Your peers, i.e. your Godbrothers or Godsisters…?
Thus one should remember this most important instruction of Srila Prabhupada:
• SB Lecture 1.2.18
You cannot become a spiritual master all of a sudden. There must be an order from a superior person, Superior to you. If he says, “Now you can make disciples,” then you can do that. That means, when one has received an order from the spiritual master, he can then be [spiritual master.]
• (SP lecture London Aug 3, 1973) … “On My order.” That is the crucial point. One does not become spiritual master by his own whims. That is not spiritual master. He must be ordered by superior authority. Then he’s spiritual master. Just like in our case. Our superior authority, our spiritual master, he ordered me .… The only qualification is that I have tried to execute the order of superior authority. That’s all. This is the secret of success.
• (NOD Lectures Vrndavan, India 10/31/72)
He is self-made guru. Therefore he’s not guru. Self-made guru cannot be guru. HE MUST BE AUTHORIZED BY THE BONA FIDE GURU. Then he’s guru. BONA FIDE GURU MEANS HE MUST BE AUTHORIZED BY THE superior GURU…. HE MUST RECEIVE THE ORDER FROM THE SUPERIOR. AND THE SUPERIOR MUST BE BONA FIDE. THEN HE’S BONA FIDE, NOT SELF-MADE.
Bhagavad-gita 7.2 — Nairobi, October 28, 1975
Indian man: When did you become the spiritual leader of Krsna consciousness?
Prabhupada: When my Guru Maharaja ordered me. This is the guru-parampara. … Try to understand. Don’t go very speedily. A guru can become guru when he’s ordered by his guru. That’s all. Otherwise nobody can become guru….You should know that one can become guru when he is ordered by his guru, this much.
• GBC Meets with Srila Prabhupada– May 28, 1977, Våndavana:
Prabhupäda: Yes. That is formality. Because in my presence one should not become guru, so on my behalf, on my order… Be actually guru, but by my order. … When I order, “You become guru,” he becomes regular guru. That’s all. He becomes disciple of my disciple. That’s it.
So, it’s no use fatasising about becoming guru, unless one is ordered by his/her own guru, who must also be bona fide, i.e. who must have been ordered by his/her own guru.
This is the Parampara system.
Otherwise, no one can represent the Parampara!
That book, “Did Srila Prabhupada Want Women Diksa Gurus?”, has been presented on Dandvats earlier this year. It didn’t go unnoticed and generated over fifty comments. Why plug it in again, ignore all the criticism it has attracted, and supply only glowing blurbs instead?
The gist of that criticism was that the book promotes a biased agenda and the author was not totally honest in constructing his arguments. Now that it’s been promoted again here and in the sister “Hot Issue” thread makes it look like a political ploy to sway public opinion.
It’s hard to believe that Kaunteya Prabhu, apparently the author of both the book and this article, hasn’t read the earlier Dandavats responses. There’s something definitely off about this kind of promotion.
Download for free the book “Did Srila Prabhupada Want Women Diksa-gurus?”
Of course, the effect of bhakti yoga is that one gets purified emotions.
Rationalitiy is important, given the chances of sahadja nonsense, but most secondary to bhakti.
Personally I judge SP’s BG 3.9 purport to be wonderful in regard to “disciple” and “guru”.
From the article – “And therefore I – and perhaps other readers of both genders – find myself scratching my head and asking myself: “If according to Devaki Mataji this is a hot issue and if women’s vision is clouded by emotions and ‘they cannot see things as they really are,’ why on earth she attempted to write this article and provide clarity? If she is clouded, why does she try to instruct the whole world?”
I’m scratching my head, too – this argument is actually counterproductive to pro-FDG agenda!
If Devaki Mataji’s vision is clear than we should accept her conclusion, which is anti-FDG, and if her vision is clouded then it’s a further testament that women should not be be gurus.
Either way, pro-FDG can’t win with this.
Dear Puskaraska prabhu,
PAMHO, AGTP!
Below one of the quotes you give on your comment.
“Bhagavad-gita 7.2 — Nairobi, October 28, 1975
Indian man: When did you become the spiritual leader of Krsna consciousness?
Prabhupada: When my Guru Maharaja ordered me. This is the guru-parampara. … Try to understand. Don’t go very speedily. A guru can become guru when he’s ordered by his guru. That’s all. Otherwise nobody can become guru….You should know that one can become guru when he is ordered by his guru, this much.”
There is no account whatsoever of BST giving SP the order to become a diksa guru.
I know many vaisnavas who analyse according their materialistic and very formal, one dimensional views. Many vaisnavas don’t have a philosophical mind although some make the claim pretty easily. This should imho always be taken into account when talking philosophy and vaisnava tattva.
Apart from so many statements SP also stated, “Actually, I am tricky, because I have tricked all of you into surrendering to Krsna, and now you are caught and you cannot get away.”
I concur with the comments above by Puskaraksa prabhu. The gender debate is a a non-issue. The real issue is, ‘Am I authorized by the previous acarya?’ If so, you’re okay. If not, you’re outside the parampara by default (see below).
“One should take initiation from a bona fide spiritual master coming in the disciplic succession, WHO IS AUTHORIZED BY HIS PREDECESSOR ACARYA.” (SB 4.8.54)
“NO ONE can be a bona fide spiritual master without following this principle of disciplic succession.”
(Bg, 4.34 purport)
“GURU CANNOT BE SELF-MADE. No. There is no such single instance throughout the whole Vedic literature. And nowadays, so many rascals, they are becoming guru without any authority. THAT IS NOT GURU. You must be authorized. Evam parampara-praptam imam ra… [Bg. 4.2]. As soon as the parampara is lost, sa kalena yoga nasto parantapa, IMMEDIATELY FINISHED. The spiritual potency finished. You can dress like a guru, you can talk big, big words, but it will never be effective. (SB class, Mayapur, Feb 27th, 1977)
No order from Prabhupada means you’re not authorized. Doesn’t matter whether you’re man or woman.
What specific instruction did Srila Prabhupada receive from Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura to become diksa guru?
Actually, you get the request from the aspiring disciple. And when you know the science of Krsna and refrain from animal slaughter, illicit connections, intoxications and gambling you can become guru. btw, Siksa is more important than diksa, since diksa is only formal.
Dear Raja Gopal Prabhu
Pranams. All glories to Srila Prabhupada. All glories to Sri Guru & Sri Gauranga.
The point you raise of not having an account of exactly when and how Srila Bhaktisiddantha Sarasvati Thakur Maharaja Prabhupada ordered his disciple, our Prabhupada, to become guru, is important, as according to the rittviks’ materialistic reasonning, since there is no order supplied in a written form or recorded by some machine, then no one, including Srila Prabhupada, should be trusted to have been ordered to become guru by his bona fide guru and thereby no one should be accepted as guru from time immemorial, as this type of material evidence seems to never have been provided, which would end up implying that there is no (and never was any) Parampara …!
Thus, you are right; some may not have been put in contact with the spiritual dimension yet!
Not to speak of the obvious reality of live instructions given in private by Sri Guru to his disciple, which simply are not recorded.
Nevertheless, some may wonder: How will one receive the instruction to become guru, once one’s spiritual master has physically departed…?
“Because I have always served my Guru Maharaja and followed His teachings, I am now even never separated from Him.”
(73-11-25. Letter to Cidananda)
Indian Lady: … is that spiritual master still guiding after death?
Srila Prabhupada: Yes, yes. Just like Krsna is guiding us, similarly spiritual master will guide us. (General lecture, 69/09/23)
“Whether I am present or not present, it doesn’t matter. I shall remain your personal guidance, physically present or not physically, as I am getting personal guidance from my guru maharaja”
(Srila Prabhupada to Tamal Krishna, 14 July 1977)
Srila Prabhupada refers here to personal guidance, such as undergoing personal training (since “the training must be complete”) and being then ordered to become guru (“when I order, you become guru”) and not just to his global teachings made available to one and all through his books.
So, Sri Guru, who is always present, can manifest in any way he may judge appropriate to instruct and guide his sincere and faithful disciple.
An example of that is the way Srila Prabhupada was personally instructed by his spiritual master to take sannyasa, even after his beloved Gurudeva had physically departed.
…/…
“One night Abhay had a striking dream, the same dream he had had several times before, during his days as a householder. Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati appeared, just as Abhay had known him, the tall, scholarly sannyasi, coming directly from the spiritual world, from Krishna’s personal entourage. He called to Abhay and indicated that he should follow. Repeatedly he called and motioned. He was asking Abhay to take sannyasa. Come, he urged, become a sannyasi.
Abhay awoke in a state of wonder. He thought of this instruction as another feature of the original instruction Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati had given him at their first meeting in Calcutta, the same instruction that his spiritual master had later solidified in a letter; become an English preacher and spread Krishna consciousness throughout the Western world. Sannyasa was for that end; otherwise, why would his spiritual master have asked him to accept it? Abhay reasoned that his spiritual master was saying, “Now take sannyasa and you will actually be able to accomplish this mission.”
(From Prabhupada Lilamrita)
“No order from Prabhupada means you’re not authorized. Doesn’t matter whether you’re man or woman.”
Such a statement only gives evidence that one doesn’t understand vaisnava tattva, nor Srila Prabhupada, nor the Vedic transcendentzal scriptures.
In response to Raja Gopal prabhu (comment 14):
You have not provided any sastric evidence to back your claim, whereas I have quoted Srila Prabhupada’s direct words, as have others on this topic. Who should we believe? You, with your unsubstantiated claim, or Srila Prabhupada? Why should I accept your opinion if you haven’t provided any evidence from guru, sadhu and sastra?
The plain facts rare that:
“One should take initiation from a bona fide spiritual master coming in the disciplic succession, WHO IS AUTHORIZED BY HIS PREDECESSOR ACARYA.” (SB 4.8.54).
Thus, one must have been ordered by Srila Prabhupada to perform this duty, or from someone who was ordered by Srila Prabhupada to be a spiritual master coming in the disciplic succession. This is called our parampara. Otherwise, no one is unauthorized. This is the conclusion of Srila Prabhupada himself. Why do you say it is not tattva? Are Prabhupada’s words not tattva?
Prabhupada clearly explains this conclusion. To whit:
“NO ONE can be a bona fide spiritual master without following this principle of disciplic succession.” (Bg 4.34 ppt)
“GURU CANNOT BE SELF-MADE. NO. There is no such single instance throughout the whole Vedic literature. And nowadays, so many rascals, they are becoming guru without any authority. That is not guru. You must be authorized. Evam parampara-praptam imam ra… [Bg. 4.2]. As soon as the parampara is lost, sa kalena yoga nasto parantapa, immediately finished. The spiritual potency finished. You can dress like a guru, you can talk big, big words, but it will never be effective. SB class, Mayapur, Feb 27th, 1977)
So, your claim that such a statement is against Prabhupada and tattva is clearly incorrect. Please produce evidence that Prabhupada’s words here are not tattva. As yet, you haven’t provided anything that contradicts the words of the acaryas, nor the statement of Prabhupada’s that you quoted. Your claims should always be supported by guru, sadhu and sastra otherwise it’s just your mundane opinion, which is useless.
Here’s another:
Indian man: When did you become the spiritual leader of Krsna consciousness?
Prabhupāda : When my Guru Maharaja ordered me. THIS IS THE GURU-PARAMPARA.
Indian: Did it…
Prabhupāda: Try to understand. Don’t go very speedily. A GURU CAN BECOME GURU WHEN HE’S ORDERD BY HIS GURU. THAT’S ALL. Otherwise nobody can become guru.(Bg class Oct 28th, 1975 Nairobi)
Raja Gopal das, in Post 11, should we understand that you are doubting Srila Prabhupada’s very own words, in regards to his having been order by his guru to become guru, as per our process of Parampara…?
Rather, you think that it is a conditioned soul in the shape of a so-called aspiring disciple, be it a minifestation of Maya Devi, who is supposed to determine who is fit to be guru and who is not…!
What nonsense!
It is not a prospective fan or groupie in the worst case, or even a sincere aspiring disciple who establishes the disciple in the position of guru… It is his own guru !
He has to be nominated by a superior authority, not by an inferior. It is not an ascending process; it is a descending process, through a line of authority, called Parampara, originating in Krishna Himself and not, to the contrary, a line of so-called gurus voted in by other conditioned souls…!
On Post 14, Raja Gopal das, you deny Srila Prabhupada’s crucial point, i.e.:
• (SP lecture London Aug 3, 1973) … “On My order.” That is the crucial point. One does not become spiritual master by his own whims. That is not spiritual master. He must be ordered by superior authority. Then he’s spiritual master. Just like in our case. Our superior authority, our spiritual master, he ordered me… The only qualification is that I have tried to execute the order of superior authority. That’s all. This is the secret of success.
When Vraja Vilasa Prabhu makes that statement: “No order from Prabhupada means you’re not authorized. Doesn’t matter whether you’re man or woman.”, he is obviously addressing direct disciples of Srila Prabhupada.
In the case of grand-disciples of Srila Prabhupada, before they can become guru, first of all, according to our Vaishnava etiquette, they ought not give any initiation, while their gurudeva is still present in his body and second of all, they must receive the instruction to become guru in our line of diciplic succession from their own guru, provided their own guru is bona fide, that is to say that he must have received the same instruction to become guru from Srila Prabhupada himself, be it before or after November 14, 1977.
• (NOD Lectures Vrndavan, India 10/31/72)
He is self-made guru. Therefore he’s not guru. Self-made guru cannot be guru. HE MUST BE AUTHORIZED BY THE BONA FIDE GURU. Then he’s guru. BONA FIDE GURU MEANS HE MUST BE AUTHORIZED BY THE superior GURU…. HE MUST RECEIVE THE ORDER FROM THE SUPERIOR. AND THE SUPERIOR MUST BE BONA FIDE. THEN HE’S BONA FIDE, NOT SELF-MADE.
Raja Gopal’s comment #7 states: Personally I judge SP’s BG 3.9 purport to be wonderful in regard to “disciple” and “guru”.
I looked up B.G. 3.9 (I am always eager to read something wonderful in regard to ‘disciple and guru’) , but I was not sure which part of the Purport he meant. There was a statement in the second paragraph that says, “One should therefore act very diligently, under the expert guidance of a devotee of Lord Krsna, or under the direct instruction of Lord Krsna Himself (under whom Arjuna had the opportunity to work).”
The words “guru” and “disciple” are not actually found in that particular Purport.
I guess I am asking Raja Gopal to explain which part of the Purport he found wonderful in regard to “guru” and “disciple”, or whether he was actually referring to a different Purport?
It is a nice Purport, no doubt, but I just could not see what Raja Gopal meant. I want to hear something “wonderful”.
The following article http://www.dandavats.com/?p=12087 by Dusyanta Prabhu is an excellent response to your book and position in general. Dusyanta writes:
Read the whole article http://www.dandavats.com/?p=12087