Srila Prabhupada

[JayaRadhe]

And yet, he initiated Blacks, including thread initiation, which is not consistent with the view of being racist against blacks.

And when he says things like "blacks should be enslaved" - a statement which ISKCON members do not deny he said - that is consistent with racism.

And yet, he initiated women, including thread initiation, which is not consistent with being sexist against women.

Denying girls the right to be educated is sexist. I don't care if you give her a sacred thread or not, denying any woman education is sexism.

No, I avoid interpreting scripture as a general rule. I have a problem with people interpreting scriptures that they never read.

I love your baseless assumptions and the conclusions you draw from them based on reading someone's seventy or so posts on an online forum, most of them not directed toward you and not dealing with interpretation of scripture.

Rejecting smRiti-s that are referenced in mainstream purANas on one hand, and yet accepting the reality of deities who are spoken of only in non-Vedic scriptures, is basically a double standard.

How is that a "double standard"? You're right, I reject anything that belittles or degrades people based on their birth and am a proponent of religious dialogue. I'm sorry if that goes against your own puritanical, self-righteous dogmas.

Bhaktivinod Thakur also denounced the Adam and Eve myth as a fabrication for unintelligent people, but doubtless you have problems with that, too, based on what you wrote here.

I don't believe the Adam and Eve myth. I think it's a myth steeped in metaphor. I also don't believe that the world is held up by elephants who cause earth quakes when they stomp or that the the sun is carried by seven horses in a chariot across the sky. Call me liberal, but I can't lead myself to believe it.

No, you are lying to the forum, by making claims like this and still not acknowledging the fact that you have never read the unabridged Ramayanam. If you had, you would know why your theories about his 10-heads are wrong.

I have read the unabridged Ramayan. Believe what you want. I know you enjoy attacking those who dissent from your rigid interpretation of all scripture as strictly literal, with no room for metaphor, and directly inspired by God, based on your own erroneous conclusions on people you've never met.
If anyone is the liar, it's you.

[philosoraptor]

And when he says things like "blacks should be enslaved" - a statement which ISKCON members do not deny he said - that is consistent with racism.

Denying girls the right to be educated is sexist. I don't care if you give her a sacred thread or not, denying any woman education is sexism.

I can't speak for what he said, since I am not a Prabhupada follower, but only for what he did. And the point remains that your conclusions are not consistent with the known facts that he (1) did initiate Blacks and (2) did educate women. You can't make a case that he "denied education" to women when he initiated them and instructed them in the same classes in which he instructed men, even to the point of allowing them to do deity puja in the temples (a fairly liberal allowance by Vedic standards). As an aside, it's pretty low-class to attack a religious leader with labels like "racist" and "sexist" when he is no longer alive to defend himself, and that too in an anonymous forum. Of course, no one ever accused you of having class, so I won't be the first.

Let's review a few definitions and see why they are important here:

Ethnocentrism is judging another culture solely by the values and standards of one's own culture.

Bigotry is the state of mind of one who "obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices; especially: one who regards or treats the members of a group (as a racial or ethnic group) with hatred and intolerance."

Those Westernized folks who attack Vedic culture because of its stance on gender- and class-relations are ethnocentric bigots, because they judge Vedic values based solely on the fact that they are different from Western values. This attack on Prabhupada (excepting any beliefs he may or may not have had in racial inferiority since those have no Vedic basis) is really nothing more than a transparent manifestation of your Westernized animosity towards Vedic/Hindu culture. After all, let's acknowledge reality: Prabhupada made many liberal modifications of tradition to suit his Westernized audience. In traditional sampradayas, women are not initiated into doing temple puja and men are not normally initiated into a varna other than that of their birth except in very exceptional cases. Vedic culture is far more socially conservative than Prabhupada was, so if you consider Prabhupada "sexist," then you must logically consider Vedic culture "sexist." Hence, your ethnocentrism. It probably baffles you that educated women raised in brahminical culture don't demand to become priests or gurus and find the very idea bizarre. Temple-worship is traditionally the role of the brahmin-male, and this is the rule in traditional temples all over India, and it is even expected by women as well as non-brahmins. Women were not educated in gurukulas, either - only twice-born males were. Calling this by such trite, unimaginative labels as "sexist" only reveals your pathological misunderstanding of Vedic culture.

I love your baseless assumptions and the conclusions you draw from them based on reading someone's seventy or so posts on an online forum, most of them not directed toward you and not dealing with interpretation of scripture.

OK, I'm calling your bluff. Which unabridged translation of the Valmiki Ramayana have you read? Please disclose publisher and translator information. And while we're at it, can you explain how Valmiki's mention of golAngUlas is consistent with your view that Sugriva's army were only metaphorically described as monkeys? You do know who the golAngUlas were, right? Obviously you do, since you claim you read the unabridged Ramayana, and you have very pointed "interpretations" which, I'm sure you only considered after reviewing and explaining away all contradictory evidence (such as mention of golAngUlas). Note: Google searching will not help you here.

How is that a "double standard"?

Why is accepting the Bible and denouncing the Manu Smriti a double standard? That should be obvious to anyone who is capable of thinking. If your standards were consistent, you ought to denounce the Bible as well. Instead, you put pictures of Biblical deities on your altar, which comes across as a ringing endorsement.

I also don't believe that the world is held up by elephants who cause earth quakes when they stomp or that the the sun is carried by seven horses in a chariot across the sky. Call me liberal, but I can't lead myself to believe it.

You aren't liberal. You are just confused (again), because you are still failing to grasp the point. What you or I believe is besides the point. What matters is what the author of the text intended for us to believe. When you read any work of literature, you endeavor to understand what the author was trying to say, and not what you want him to say. The latter has no value in any context, be it academic or spiritual, and is no more significant than the hallucinations of a drug-intoxicated hippie. If you were in an English literature class taught by a quality professor, and you were trying to defend a literary interpretation that contradicted the facts of what the author actually wrote, you would get a failing grade. So far, your presentation of Valmiki is just that - a failure - because you just gloss over all contradictory evidence that does not support your opinion. Whereas an objective person would put his/her beliefs aside and try to understand what the author was conveying first and foremost.

If you had actually read Valmiki's Ramayana, it would have been clear to you that Ravana's having 10 heads or Sugriva's army being monkey-type beings were not intended by the author as metaphors. Human beings don't leap from branch to branch, uproot rocks and trees, or fight with teeth and claws. And a 10-headed demon being described as such when he is lamenting the death of a loved one does not serve the purpose of describing his fearsome nature. You would similarly note that Ravana's head regenerated after being decapitated by Rama, and Rama says some things which reveal that this too, is a literal event per Valmiki, and not a metaphor. If you were honest, you would admit that you just don't accept what Valmiki said. Professing appreciation for his work while concealing your rejection of his statements as "metaphor" is disingenuous.

[Believer]

Namaste,

Please keep in mind the following:

If you have a mind full of question marks, consider yourself wise.
Only the very young and the very immature think that they know everything.

Pranam.

[philosoraptor]

Namaste,

Please keep in mind the following:

If you have a mind full of question marks, consider yourself wise.
Only the very young and the very immature think that they know everything.

Pranam.

Very wise, and very timely!

[grames]

Lets bend anything and everything to suite our needs and blame something that cannot be bent!

BTW, Lord Krshna must be sexist too! So many He said that will not fit in to the western dictionary of definitions! Lord Rama is racist too! So many He said that cannot fit in to the ordinary opinions! But, we are bigger and better than Lord Rama or Lord Krshna and they MUST obey our rules of social living and standards!

[Nondual]

If prabhupada did indeed say all this, then it is very wrong. It doesn't befit an acharya to speak like a common person. Even if he initiated people, verbal abuse is wrong. It reflects badly on hindu dharma.

[philosoraptor]

If prabhupada did indeed say all this, then it is very wrong. It doesn't befit an acharya to speak like a common person. Even if he initiated people, verbal abuse is wrong. It reflects badly on hindu dharma.

Common people don't leave their country of origin at an advanced age and in failing health, and translate previously-unavailable Sanskrit classics for the benefit of those who would otherwise never have the chance to read them. It's a good thing he did this too, so now all kinds of meat-eating mlecchas who would otherwise be paving their own paths to Naraka can now turn around and criticize him later for out-of-contextual remarks that he made due to his probably less-than-accurate grasp of American history.

This is known as the Western concept of "gratitude."

[ShivaFan]

I would like to take a moment to mention a moment of the goodness of Prabhupad, and why Srila Prabhupad is loved and beloved by so many of what some call “mleechas”. An example within a Life certainly explains many things. Before the beautiful Jagannath murtis appeared in San Francisco, and then were established in Berkeley, California, the beautiful faces of Jagannatha, Sister Subhadra and Brother Balarama were something unknown to most “mleechas”.

Jayananda was a devotee of Krishna. He was a “Westerner” before he was a devotee – in fact I understand he was a simple taxi driver- but I am not so sure, perhaps he was always a devotee. He is gone now. Among those in ISKCON, I have heard so many good things about him, especially in regards to his associations with Lord Jagannath. He joined ISKCON in 1967 in San Francisco, California. He was a founding contributor to the success of the very first Jagannatha Ratha Yatras in America in the 1970s. Many, many hours he spent on the chariots for the Lord. He was not a sannyasi, his seva to the Ratha Yatra was obvious to everyone, and especially to Prabhupad. Jayananda would sit in the back of the room, but Prabhupad told Jayananda loudly “Come up to the front! Come!”, and Prabhupad said, “Jayananda PLEASE come up to the front!”. Three time insisting, and all the devotees cleared the path for him, and that included the sannyasis who were at the front and moved away to give him the front “seat”.

Prabhupad would call him “Jayananda Maharaja”. Why?

Have you ever heard of the “Cost Plus” store? The first one that opened was in San Francisco in 1958, the very first one, and I remember going there in the late 1960’s and early 1970’s, it was a place of amazing things in those days. In those days, I recall seeing HUGE wooden murtis of the Devas and Devi, very exotic for that time. Today, you see all sorts of items, including sometimes small murtis – but back then, my goodness, lots of murtis, these being ones which if you purchased them at that time for $20 to $40 dollars sometimes even less (though that was good money back then), they sell today in a store in Carmel California for thousands of dollars in some cases.

Many would go into the Cost Plus in SF back in those days, just to see. It was an adventure in itself. There was a devotee back then, she went to this same Cost Plus store. She bought Prabhupad a little gift. She brought a little wooden “curio” from India for Prabhupad to see.

She went to Prabhupad’s little apartment where he was staying, and the 3 inch “curio” was placed down for Prabhupad to see. In front of everyone, Prabhupad bowed giving obeisance to the “curio” which was Jagannatha. Why are you doing that? – was the question. “You have brought Lord Jagannatha, the Lord of the Universe” he said with a huge smile and sparkling eyes which because of their wettness they would so often reflect light from his eyes.
So it began.

She went back and purchased the other two. Subhadra and Balaram.

Prabhupad arranged the three for others to see, in Their proper places and position. “Does anyone know how to carve?” he asked the devotees. One said he was a sculptor. These three Murtis were 3 inches tall. “You carve three foot high copies” he told him.

Prabhupad himself said why there is to be the Ratha Yatra in the West. “Jagannatha is the Lord of the Universe. Some they cannot come to the temple. Jagannath is merciful, if some will not come to the temple, He wants to come out with Sister Subhadra and Brother Balarama to see them. Let Jagannatha come out to them, and let them see Him.”

There are no words to describe the goodness of the heart of Prabhupad. He did not say, “let us hide Jagannatha from blacks, mleechas should not see the Lord”. There are no words to describe. When that moment was decided. Prabhupad told the devotees to bring Jagannatha out to the street for all to see.

And thanks to Prabhupad, that is exactly what happened.

The first Ratha Yatra was in North America in the middle of the 1960’s in San Francisco, California. I myself have seen many, the chariots which wind down “JFK Drive” in Golden Gate Park. Across all of America, the Chariots are now familiar.

For everyone to see. Mleechas, too.

Om Namah Sivaya

[devotee]

An excellent post, Shivafan !

OM

[philosoraptor]

Exactly. So now just imagine if some of these people, whose previous lifestyles were sinful in the extreme (i.e. they ate meat, may have done drugs, having illicit sexual relations, etc) and having no knowledge of Krishna-bhakti until Sri Prabhupada came along, becoming reformed in their habits only because of his grace, later turning around and attacking him. Not merely disagreeing with him, but actually attacking him based on one-sided view of the facts as a "racist" and a "sexist," and that too after his death, when neither he nor his followers are around to defend him, from the relative comfort behind a computer terminal, and in an anonymous forum where non-Prabhupada followers are likely to read.

One might conclude that such people are cowardly and low-class, and one would be correct in that assessment. Such people need to analyze their own position, and consider where they would be had Sri Prabhupada never taken the trouble to build the temples and publish the books that reformed them. It reminds me of Indian diaspora kids who attack their parents in public because they disagree with arranged marriages, or Madhu & Kaitabha attacking Vishnu from whom they took birth.

The Lotus feet of Narayana are for everyone, male and female, human and non-human, brahmin and mleccha, but not for those who offend His devotees. Mature disagreement is one thing, but attacking someone who was responsible for your upliftment is just slimy on so many levels. Try to have some culture, please.