ISKCON Communications Conference- Radhadesh, Belgium 2024

Presentation on Female Dīkṣā-gurus

By: Śrīdhara Śrīnivāsa dāsa

I was invited to attend the ISKCON Communications Conference at Radhadesh, Belgium (May 25-29, 2024) to present my views on Female Dīkṣā-gurus, Do we need them? I was one of the panel members consisting of seven speakers on the overall topic, "ISKCON and Women." The panel discussion, conducted on May 26th 2024, consisted of a series of presentations on the role of women to act as a spiritual master along with other topics related to eligibility of women devotees to receiving the Brahma-gyatri mantra, and nature and role of women in general. Except for my presentation, the theme of all other speakers and their mood revolved around advocating and embracing the liberal or modern world views on the role of women in society in general. My presentation focused on presenting the traditional and scriptural injunctions and recommendations for the role of women in a Daiva Varnasrama dharma based society (DVAD). The day's proceedings ended with an electric two-hour discussion with the audience posing questions to the panelists. Majority of the questions were directed towards my position paper since I was the odd one airing views contrary to that of the other panelists.

The conference was conducted by ISKCON Communications ministry and attended by various ISKCON dignitaries from all over the world.

The panel consisted of:

1. Smt. Rukmini Devi Dasi, Speaker on Women role and FDG

2. Smt. Vishaka Devi Dasi, Speaker on Women role and FDG

3. Sriman Anuttama Prabhu, Moderator

4. Sriman Garuda Prabhu, Speaker on Women role

5. Sriman Praghosha Prabhu, Speaker, advocate of FDG

6. Sriman Kaunteya Prabhu, Speaker, advocate of FDG

7. Sriman Gopala Hari Prabhu, SAC Brahma-gayatri research paper

8. my humble self, Speaker, Female Dīkṣā-gurus, Do we need them?

My presentations entitled, "Female Diksha-gurus, Do we need them?"

At this point of time, I am waiting to get access to the recordings of the entire event. I have access to the recording of my presentation that can be accessed via the link below:

https://youtube.com/live/oRvCNoKOpmk?feature=share or click on the embedded youtube video below:

Presentations from pro-FDG camp

The presentations vouching for FDG implementation not only had numerous errors that they did not care to check but also contained  bold proclamation that the opposing party had misinterpreted NP-BvS verse 1.44, without substantiating their claims with appropriate sastric basis. On the contrary the pro-FDG presentations not only failed to present the correct implementation had merely attacked the opposing side with ad-hominem remarks ("rape(ists) of Bharadvaja Samhita"). For instance, the commentaries of Srila Baladeva Vidya Bhushana to SB 1.13.15 verse glosses the term "PratyakSitAtmanAthAnAm," as "pratyakshakrti-pareSattat" (meaning "seeing the Supreme Lord in front of one's eyes" or "face-to-face") which is exactly why the translations for the verse NP-BvS 1.44 had made reference to the phrase "face-to-face" while glossing the term "PratyakSitAtmanAthAnAm." 

The other FDG presentation, blindly relying on pro-FDG authors books, had projected incorrect statements that derided Narada Pancaratra Bharadvaja Samhita as a scripture not suitable for ISKCON. The presenter stated that the use NP-BvS as a scripture for ISKCON mainly because the verses 1.61 and 1.62 of NP-BvS categorically states that the people from sinful background cannot remember Lord Krsna nor will they surrender to Him. But the fact of the matter is that the verses 1.61 and 1.62 of NP-BvS matches with other conclusions of other verses from other scriptures like Bhagavad-gita (verse 71.5) and with SB (10.2.32) and other acaryas' expert opinion. Hence, to reason against or to reject NP-BvS as a scripture not suited for ISKCON on the part of the pro-FDG presenters was simply inaccurate and incorrect. Furthermore, this point has already been addressed and the mischief behind wrong translations by the pro-FDG authors have been thoroughly exposed in my book on pages 300 and 301, as cited below:

==============page 300 and 301

In his attempt to paint the Nārada-Pāñcarātra Bhāradvāja-saṁhitā as a scripture not suitable for ISKCON, through questionable translation and by quoting its verses out of context, the author misinterprets verses from the scripture. An example from the book is cited below:

For a sample, look no further than Bhāradvāja-saṁhitā itself. There in verses 1.61-62 Bharadvāja Muni makes a blanket statement about conditioned souls who, due to their beginningless sinful inclinations and resultant births into sinful families, sinful communities, or sinful countries, or at inauspicious times, cannot develop remembrance of, surrender to, or servitude toward Lord Viṣṇu, or Keśava: – pages 11

Our refutations

In his translations of verses 1.61 and 1.62 of Bhāradvāja-saṁhitā, the author states that Bharadvāja Muni makes a blanket statement about sinful conditioned souls that they cannot ever develop remembrance of or servitude towards Lord Viṣṇu, which is not an accurate translation. The actual translations based on authentic commentary by vaiṣṇavas for the verses Np-Bs 1.61 and 1.62 are cited below:

anāder vāsanā-yogād viparītād ihātmanaḥ smṛtir na jāyate viṣṇau kuta evārpaṇe matiḥ: “From time immemorial conditioned souls in this world are addicted to sense gratification which is opposed to their real self-interest. This prevents them from even remembering Lord Viṣṇu, what to speak of understanding the necessity of surrendering to Him.” [NP-BS 1.61] 

sva-pāpa-saṁbhavād eva kulāt saṁsargato ’nyataḥ deśāt kālāt svabhāvāc ca prapadyante na keśavam: “People do not surrender to Lord Keśava (1) because of the influence of their sinful reactions, (2) because of being born in atheistic families, (3) as a result of associating with non-devotees, (4) due to unfavorable time, place, and circumstances, and (5) because of their demoniac nature.” [NP-BS 1.62]

The author’s accusation that Np-Bs verses 1.61 and 1.62 are not suitable for ISKCON, due to their discrimination against people of a western origin is ludicrous. Such interpretations are akin to rejecting the entire Bhagavad-gītā because one of its verses 7.15 promotes racism and casteism – permanently denying people born in the western countries any chance at surrendering to the Lord because their origin makes them grossly foolish (spiritually), lowest among mankind (mlechhās and yavanās), whose knowledge is stolen by illusion, and who partake of the atheistic nature of demons.

Using the same logic should we reject Lord Brahmā as a racist since in SB 10.2.32 (ye ’nye ’ravindākṣa… āruhya kṛcchreṇa) he states that non-devotees, who may be very learned, are fallen and have no chance of liberation since they disregard the Lord’s lotus feet? All these examples show that the author’s interpretation of Np-Bs verses 1.61 and 1.62 is certainly prejudiced and a total misrepresentation of that scripture.

============== end of quote from page 300 and 301 from FDG, Do We Need Them

In summary, the pro-FDG circle, combined verses 1.61 and 1.62 of NP-BvS sans their context and presented their own summary, by extracting portions of verses 1.61 and 1.62 (shown above in emphasis).

Discussion session (Fireworks)

The discussion session lasted for about 90 minutes. The best way to describe it would be to present  some of the witnesses' statements, as cited below:

1. Received through email:

There was a devotee from XXX, YYYY Prabhu, siting in the crowd, who was reporting to me via live chat:

"This disciple of BVKS is fighting alone against all of them like Abhimanyu against maharathas. Quotes from sastras are thrown around instead of brahmastras.

2. I received the following from one of the direct participants about my presentation:

Thank you prabhu for today's talks. I really appreciate the sastric pramaan you provide when answering questions. And thank you for tolerating all technical problems 🙏🏽

3. Another feedback from a direct participant:

On Sunday morning, Anuttama, in his role as the global director of ISKCON Communications, moderated a panel on Vaisnavi Diksa Gurus, which Sridhara Srinivasa Dasa contributed to via Zoom, along with Kaunteya Dasa and Praghosa Dasa in person.

A related panel on Vaisnavis in positions of leadership included Rukmini Dasi (Anuttama's wife) and Garuda Dasa in person, along with Visakha Dasi and Gopal Hari Dasa via Zoom.

A third session, after lunch, was a ninety-minute discussion of their seven presentations. A video recording was made of all three sessions. I will not try to describe more here, except to say that the lively discussion, which included fireworks, kept everyone awake after lunch.

Questions posed during discussion

Several questions were posed to me and due to technical difficulties I could not answer all of those questions to my full satisfaction. Nonetheless, later on I sent my answers to those who raised those questions via personal email. Amongst those questions posed, the following clearly stand out as important ones for which I would like to answer in this write-up, as cited below:

1. Question: Was Srila Prabhupada wrong in giving Brahma Gayatri mantra to women? Answer in one word, Yes or No!

Answer (given on the spot): 

"It is not possible to answer this question in one word, nonetheless I have discussed this in pages 229-233 of my book. So please get a copy of my book and read for yourself."

Answer (through email):

The answer is "No." But, my counter question would be, "Are the previous acaryas such as BSST wrong in not giving Brahma Gayatri to women. Yes or No?"

If the answer requires an explanation to follow the one word answer, so does mine.

Actually, on pages 229 through pages 233 of my book, I have presented a detailed response with the  history of events narrated by Srila Prabhupada's disciples in their respective memoirs, which would enable the readers understand the context that led to Srila Prabhupada giving Brahma Gayatri to women.

2. Question: Whether your Guru Maharaja is wrong in not following Srila Prabhupada by not giving Brahma Gayatri mantra to women and some male devotees. 

That answer is, in the form of a question, "Is ISKCON not wrong to completely disobey Srila Prabhupada's instructions by neglecting to implement the Daiva Varnasrama dharma? Are you not wrong by neglecting Srila Prabhupada's instructions and desire to implement DVAD within ISKCON?"

Sorry to answer a question with a question but the fact is that some of the situations especially the actions of pure devotees are not subjected to judgement.

3. Question (posed specifically to me): What was the best part that I liked in other panelists' presentation?

I answered this question at a bit length but in short my answer was that till now pro-FDG had derided Bharadvaja Samhita but for the first time it was nice to hear from Kaunteya Prabhu that Bharadvaja Samhita is a bona fide scripture and he quoted Srila Prabhupada's purport to support his statements.

General explanation or comment:

Now, I shall try to elaborate a bit more on my understanding of this topic. First of all, I highly recommend readers of this blog to please go through the following write-up on Brahma-gayatri that presents a succinct summary on the topic of Brahma-gayatri along with its fundamentals:

https://akincana.net/2024/04/10/initial-response-to-sacs-paper-brahma-gayatri-mantra-in-iskcon/

Unless we implement Daiva-Varnasrama dharma  (DVAD) based societies within ISKCON, which Srila Prabhupada wanted so intensely, we will not be able to understand or answer the above raised questions with a one word "yes" or "no." Obviously Srila Prabhupada is not wrong nor is Srila BSST wrong. Both wanted DVAD societies to be implemented. I understand that Srila Prabhupada faced with greater emergency situations in early days of the movement (late 60s), and he certainly didn't want a big divide between male and female followers within his society in such early days. He observed those symptoms as part of revolt by the two matajis at that first brahmana diksha ceremony. Hence, he chose to give the mantra alone without the sacred thread. However, the purpose behind Srila Prabhupada's numerous statements to implement DVAD societies within ISKCON is to relieve the curses of such emergency situations, a prime characteristic of advancement of Kali-yuga. At the same time, although in the initial days Srila Prabhupada didn't emphasize DVAD implementation, as ISKCON grew and matured into a movement of greater significance, especially so in the 70's, he wanted us to boil the milk and implement DVAD societies. In such  DVAD societies women and sudras are required to take on their respective roles and pancaratra allows them to receive gayatri mantras (but not Brahma Gayatri because it is Vaidika mantra). So, to implement Srila Prabhupada's desire to establish DVAD based societies within ISKCON, we need to first of all establish DVAD gender norms.

Conclusion:

I concluded my presentation with the following closing statements:

Initially my Guru Maharaja, HH Bhakti Vikasa Swami Maharaja was invited to attend this conference, but Maharaja declined and eventually I got nominated to attend. I would like to relay the message from my Guru Maharaja on this topic, as below: 

"FDG is allowed by guru, sadhu, and sastra in rare cases. Srila Prabhupada did not stress it. He stressed VAD. The push for FDG is affirmative action and militates against the establishment of VAD. Rare cases means exceptions to the norm but we still have to establish VAD gender norms."

This is a good start by getting all parties involved together for this conference but we should get all scholars from both sides to sit in a serene atmosphere and discuss all aspects of this issue based on sastras. Thank you for inviting me to the conference. Vanca kalpa tarubyasca krpa sindhubya evaca patitanam pavanebhyo vaishnavabyo namo namah.