Hare Kṛṣṇa. Namaskāra.
I’m Basu Ghosh Das, presently serving in ISKCON India as the General Secretary of the ISKCON India Governing Council, known as the Bureau. I’m also Regional Secretary for ISKCON in Gujarat and Madhya Pradesh.
As a way of introduction, I don’t have a regular podcast, but I do have a YouTube channel. I’m also a member of the ISKCON India Scholars Board, which—through my own efforts back in 2013, when I was Chairman of the then ISKCON India Advisory Committee (which is now called the ISKCON Bharata Advisory Committee)—we created this group of scholars, particularly on the issue of women dīkṣā-gurus.
I’m recording this today in response to my senior godbrother, His Holiness Hṛdayānanda das Goswami Mahārāja, whom I’ve known for almost 52 years—actually almost 53 years, since 1973 when I joined in Chicago. Of course, he had joined several years earlier, and I guess he’s a few years older than me. Well, I’m not a young man now; I’ve completed 70 years, so I’m elderly and aged at the present moment, and there’s no looking back.
So, Hṛdayānanda Mahārāja’s present position reminds me of a story that one of Śrīla Prabhupāda’s godbrothers told me many years ago about Śrīla Prabhupāda’s sannyāsa-guru, Bhakti Prajñāna Keśava Mahārāja. Bhakti Prajñāna Keśava Mahārāja passed away from this world in 1968. He had given sannyāsa to Prabhupāda in Mathurā in 1959, as I recall—that’s probably correct.
So, he was on parikramā in Navadvīpa, and his elder brother was also a sannyāsī who had actually taken sannyāsa from Bhakti Siddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura. Bhakti Prajñāna Keśava Mahārāja took sannyāsa from Bhakti Rākṣaka Śrīdhara Mahārāja, who lived in Prabhupāda’s house in Kolkata in the early 1940s for a year or two—I don’t know the exact timeline.
Auḍulomi Mahārāja—Bhakti Prajñāna Keśava Mahārāja’s elder brother—had taken off his sannyāsa dress to become a bābājī. But he wasn’t initiated as a bābājī by Śrīla Bhakti Siddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura; he was initiated as a sannyāsī. Bhakti Prajñāna Keśava Mahārāja disagreed with his having done so. When they met by coincidence on Navadvīpa parikramā, Bhakti Prajñāna Keśava Mahārāja asked his elder brother, “Where is the dress that Guru Mahārāja gave you?”
So I ask Hṛdayānanda Mahārāja today: Where is the dress that Śrīla Prabhupāda gave you when you took sannyāsa? Because you’re not wearing that dress. You’re not wearing the neck beads that you got at the time of initiation. You’re not wearing the tilaka. And you are talking about Vaiṣṇavī women devotees.
But a devotee—you know, we all who are initiated by Prabhupāda know very well that every morning after taking a bath we apply tilaka to twelve places on our body. We were mandated at the time of initiation to wear the tulasī kaṇṭhī-mālā—the kaṇṭh is the “neck” in saṁskṛtam. What happened to all that? That’s my first question to Hṛdayānanda Mahārāja.
Moving forward on the question of women dīkṣā-gurus: Hṛdayānanda Mahārāja recently made two videos on the subject. I particularly watched the second video, where he says again and again and again that Prabhupāda never said women could not be dīkṣā-gurus—women can be dīkṣā-gurus. That reminds me of Joseph Goebbels, the Nazi propaganda minister, who was quoted as saying, “If you tell a lie enough times, it becomes the truth.”
So, I want to read part of a transcription here from a lecture Śrīla Prabhupāda gave at Los Angeles on September 22, 1972, on Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam, Canto 1, Chapter 3, Text 17:
“Woman, they are generally equipped with the qualities of passion and ignorance. And man also may be, but man can be elevated to the platform of goodness. Woman cannot be. Woman cannot be. Therefore if the husband is nice and the woman follows—woman becomes faithful and chaste to the husband—then their both life becomes successful. There are three qualities of nature—sattva, raja, tama. So rajas-tama, generally, that is the quality of woman. And man can become to the platform of goodness. Therefore initiation, brahminical symbolic representation, is given to the man, not to the woman. This is the theory.”
So Prabhupāda clearly said in this lecture that a woman cannot take initiation. So if a woman cannot take initiation, how can she become a dīkṣā-guru?
I guess Hṛdayānanda Mahārāja missed that lecture, or he doesn’t want to consider it. And maybe if he did consider it, he would make some fanciful interpretation using sophistry, which he is quite expert at—after all, he has a PhD from Harvard.
In a lecture during a sannyāsa initiation in Māyāpura on March 16, 1976, Prabhupāda stated: “So guru is the post given to the sannyāsīs, to the brāhmaṇas. Without becoming a brāhmaṇa, nobody can become a sannyāsī, and sannyāsī is supposed to be the guru of all the āśramas—it’s a guru of all the āśramas and all the varṇas. So the preaching work, we require so many sannyāsīs.”
And in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam purport to Canto 3, Chapter 24, Text 40, Prabhupāda wrote:
“A woman is not supposed to take sannyāsa. So-called spiritual societies concocted in modern times give sannyāsa even to women, although there is no sanction in the Vedic literature for a woman’s accepting sannyāsa. Otherwise, if it were sanctioned, Kardama Muni could have taken his wife and given her sannyāsa. The woman must remain at home.”
So when Prabhupāda forbids a woman from becoming a sannyāsī—in absolutely clear, not-at-all-vague, straightforward terms—and then we heard his lecture from Māyāpura where he says only a sannyāsī can be a guru, or a brāhmaṇa can be a guru, and a woman cannot be a sannyāsī or brāhmaṇa because she can’t have the thread—how can she become a dīkṣā-guru?
So the question arises: Well, Prabhupāda gave second initiation to women—nobody can deny that. The explanation is simple: He made an adjustment. He did not give them the thread. But because he established the worship of the deities, the śrī-vigrahās, all over the Western world where there were no sannyāsīs and brāhmaṇas, he needed the women to help in the deity worship. So I know this is going to be challenged by some, but it’s a practical consideration that he, as a great ācārya, could do—but we are not on the same level as Śrīla Prabhupāda, so we cannot do that.
And then, you know, Hṛdayānanda Mahārāja used sophistry to deny what Prabhupāda wrote in his purport to the Bhāgavatam 4.12.32, where Prabhupāda wrote: “According to śāstric injunctions, there is no difference between śikṣā-guru and dīkṣā-guru, and generally the śikṣā-guru later on becomes the dīkṣā-guru. Sunīti, however, being a woman and specifically his mother, could not become Dhruva Mahārāja’s dīkṣā-guru.”
Now specifically his mother—Hṛdayānanda Mahārāja said that’s the real import of this sentence. So he has an agenda, and that’s the feminist agenda—gender equality.
But here Prabhupāda makes clear distinctions between śikṣā-guru and dīkṣā-guru, and “being a woman” is a clarification. “Specifically his mother” is also a clarification. But dīkṣā means the brāhmaṇa thread—it means the yajñopavīta saṁskāra.
And in that connection, Prabhupāda wrote a purport in Caitanya-caritāmṛta, Ādi-līlā, Chapter 1, Text 46:
“The spiritual master is also called ācārya, or a transcendental professor of spiritual science. The Manu-saṁhitā (2.140) explains the duties of an ācārya, describing that a bona fide spiritual master accepts charge of disciples, teaches them the Vedic knowledge with all its intricacies, and gives them their second birth. The ceremony performed to initiate a disciple into the study of spiritual science is called upanīti, or the function that brings one nearer to the spiritual master. One who cannot be brought nearer to the spiritual master cannot have a sacred thread and thus he is indicated to be a śūdra. The sacred thread on the body of a brāhmaṇa, kṣatriya, or vaiśya is the symbol of initiation by the spiritual master. It is worth nothing if worn merely to boast of high parentage. The duty of the spiritual master is to initiate a disciple with the sacred thread ceremony. And after this saṁskāra, or purificatory process, the spiritual master actually begins to teach the disciple about the Vedas—actually teaches them the Vedic mantras.
“A person born a śūdra is not barred from such spiritual initiation provided he is approved by the spiritual master who is duly authorized to award a disciple the right to be a brāhmaṇa if he finds him perfectly qualified. In the Vāyu Purāṇa an ācārya is defined as one who knows the import of all the Vedic literatures, abides by their rules and regulations, and teaches his disciples to act in the same way.”
So here in this purport—again, Chapter 1, Text 46—Prabhupāda clearly says that initiation is the sacred thread. So he did not give that to women. He considered women on the level of śūdras.
But not only Prabhupāda—there is all Vaiṣṇava sampradāya. The men are the gurus: Rāmānuja sampradāya, Madhva sampradāya, Nimbārka sampradāya, Viṣṇusvāmī sampradāya. All these four Vaiṣṇava sampradāyas—women are guru-patnī at the most, the wife of the guru. They are not the guru.
Sanīpani Muni in the Bhāgavatam, Tenth Canto, Chapter 45, Texts 33 and 34—it describes what Sanīpani taught to Kṛṣṇa and Balarāma. It’s the same subject matter that’s mentioned in this purport: Upaniṣads, Vedas, Vedāṅgas. And in order to study the Vedic literature, one has to become a dvija—a twice-born—by getting the yajñopavīta saṁskāra, which is not given to women. Therefore women cannot take initiation, and they cannot be dīkṣā-guru. They can be śikṣā-guru. They can be pāṭha-pradarśaka-guru—that’s also in the 4.12.32 purport. But they cannot be dīkṣā-guru.
Jāhnavā—is taken as an example. Was Jāhnavā a dīkṣā-guru? If we take what we call first initiation in ISKCON—which in the Gauḍīya Maṭha they call hari-nāma—then maybe Jāhnavā gave hari-nāma. But she did not follow the varṇa principles—she did not wear a sacred thread. The goddess Sarasvatī does not wear a sacred thread, and she’s the goddess of learning. Lakṣmī Devī does not wear the sacred thread. Viṣṇu wears the sacred thread. Kṛṣṇa wears the sacred thread.
So Hṛdayānanda Mahārāja—with all due respect to his seniority—is in his videos misleading our movement. He is misleading. He is ignoring these quotations. These are straightforward in Prabhupāda’s books—straightforward.
And he’s saying Prabhupāda never said a woman can’t be a guru. Well, here you have it. You also have it in Caitanya-caritāmṛta, Madhya-līlā, Chapter 15, Text 108, where it says that in the translation from the Bengali:
“Initiation is not required for liberation. The holy name alone is sufficient.” And in the purport Prabhupāda describes the system of initiation—he never wrote a separate book on the system of initiation. And in that purport he writes: “It is the sacred thread. Dīkṣā is the process by which one can awaken his transcendental knowledge and vanquish all reactions caused by sinful activities. A person expert in the study of the revealed scriptures knows this process as dīkṣā. The regulative principles of dīkṣā are explained in Hari-bhakti-vilāsa (2.3-4) and the Bhakti-sandarbha (283) as stated…”
Now, I will skip the Sanskrit because of time considerations and read the English translation:
“Even though born in a brāhmaṇa family, one cannot engage in Vedic rituals without being initiated and having a sacred thread. Although born in a brāhmaṇa family, one becomes a brāhmaṇa only after initiation and the sacred thread ceremony.”
So here, you have it.
And here, one more interesting sentence, “Unless one is initiated as a brāhmaṇa, one cannot worship the holy name properly. According to Vaiṣṇava regulative principles, one must be initiated as a brāhmaṇa.”
So Prabhupāda’s philosophy—Vedic philosophy, Vaiṣṇava philosophy—is that women have to serve their husbands. Women have to remain in the home. Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam 6.18.33 and 34. I’ll skip the Sanskrit and read the translation of Śrīla Prabhupāda.
“A husband is the supreme demigod for a woman. The Supreme Personality of Godhead, Lord Vāsudeva, the husband of the goddess of fortune, is situated in everyone’s heart and is worshiped through the various names and forms of the demigods by fruitive workers. Similarly, a husband represents the Lord as the object of worship for a woman.”
So, womanly life according to the Vedic concept—strī-dharma—in First Canto, Ninth Chapter, Text 27: dāna-dharmān rāja-dharmān mokṣa-dharmān vibhāgaśaḥ, strī-dharmān bhagavad-dharmān samāsa-vyāsa-yogataḥ. This is the śloka. Strī-dhamān, the duties of women, are separate from varṇāśrama duties of brāhmaṇas, kṣatriyas, and vaiśyas.
This reminds me of another senior sannyāsī guru, GBC member of the Bureau—godbrother—who in a lecture two-three days ago said, and it’s just shocking, that Kṛṣṇa didn’t instruct Arjuna to be a kṣatriya. Mind-boggling. Bhagavad-gītā, he is referring to Bhagavad-gītā, Kṛṣṇa instructed him to be a devotee, not to be a kṣatriya—but that is incorrect. It is incorrect. Again and again he’s telling Arjuna to fight. Sukhinaḥ kṣatriyāḥ pārtha labhante yuddham īdṛśam [BG 2.32], yaśo labhasva jitvā śatrūn [BG 11.33] “That kṣatriya is happy who gets an opportunity to fight.” And He tells him, tasmād (tvam) uttiṣṭha . . . yaśo labhasva jitvā śatrūn, “Get up and conquer your enemies”—which is a fight, to fight. Tasmād (tvam) uttiṣṭha . . . yaśo labhasva jitvā śatrūn, “Conquer your enemies,” bhuṅkṣva rājyaṁ samṛddham. Mayāivaite nihatāḥ pūrvam eva nimitta-mātraṁ bhava savyasācin, “Be my instrument, as a kṣatriya.” And the next verse is droṇaṁ ca bhīṣmaṁ ca jayadrathaṁ ca . . ., “All of these enemies of yours will be killed. I’ve already killed them. You fight. . .” Yuddhyasva mad anusmaram. . . “Fight, thinking of Me.” “Because you are a kṣatriya,” Sahajaṁ karma kaunteya sa doṣam api na tyajet, “The qualities you were born with,” [daivīm] abhijātasya bhārata, “You were born with these qualities.”
What I see here is ideological contamination due to feminism. Modern feminism is teaching that men and women are equal. And Prabhupāda was confronted with this time and again and said: On the spiritual platform we men and women are equal. But we are not on the spiritual platform.
If you pretend to be on the topmost platform but you’re just a sādhaka, you become a sahajiyā—a cheater—pretending to be on the topmost platform. So, it’s dangerous to pretend to be on the topmost platform.
And someone wjp gives up sadhana, like Vaṁśīdāsa Bābājī is very, very rare—very, very rare. Just like Kṛṣṇa says in Gītā that only one in thousands even tries to become perfect, and even out of those thousands who have become perfect, hardly one knows who is Kṛṣṇa.
And by instituting a regular regimen of female dīkṣā-gurus—vaiṣṇavī-īkṣā-gurus—sorry, because Mādhavīdevī wasn’t called a Vaiṣṇavī in Caitanya-caritāmṛta, I think it’s Ādi-līlā Chapter 10, Text 137—she’s referred to as a “half-being, a woman.” Now why was the word “woman” used for Mādhavīdevī and not Vaiṣṇavī?
So this word vaiṣṇavī has been taken up and it’s been made into a smoke screen to promote those who are ordinary human beings to the topmost platform.
Now Prabhupāda said things like that: “All my devotees are pure devotees.” But we’ve seen how many people have come and gone—how many of the original gurus that Prabhupāda appointed as ṛtviks that became gurus, and we had no objection to that because that is the system—evaṁ paramparā prāptam.
But how many of them fell down? So just take putting on the dress of a Vaiṣṇava—and Hridayānanda Mahārāja doesn’t do that—doesn’t make one on the topmost platform.
Now Prabhupāda—we believe he was on the topmost platform. He didn’t take off the Vaiṣṇava dress. Bhakti Prajñāna Keśava Mahārāja didn’t take off the Vaiṣṇava dress. And many of the godbrothers—and they’re still members of the godbrothers—they don’t take off the Vaiṣṇava dress even if they’re on a higher platform. They’re setting an example.
Prabhupāda put foreign women in saris, put foreign men in dhotis. And why? Because he said it’s a “Vaikuṇṭha dress.” He wanted to create a Vedic society, a Vaiṣṇava society. There are so many instructions—I don’t want to take too much time because people don’t have a long attention span, that’s well-known.
So I’ll end this video here and maybe think about making another one, because there are many, many more quotations to prove that Prabhupāda wanted to establish varṇāśrama. Read his purport to Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam 9.10.50—it’s very clear: The entire varṇāśrama scheme is intended to enable people to become Vaiṣṇavas—viṣṇur asya devatā. When people worship Lord Viṣṇu as the Supreme Lord, they become Vaiṣṇavas. Thus people should be trained to become Vaiṣṇavas through the system of varṇa and āśrama, as they were during the reign of Lord Rāmacandra, when everyone was fully trained to follow the varṇāśrama principles.
Recently the sannyāsī guru GBC Bureau member—godbrother—very senior disciple of my guru, our guru—he said, “We don’t want to make a caste system.” Well, in the Gītā Kṛṣṇa says I created the varṇāśrama in 4.13—catur varṇaṁ mayā sṛṣtam. And his guru—our guru—says that in order to become a Vaiṣṇava, the purpose of varṇāśrama is to make people Vaiṣṇavas, to make them God-conscious.
Read Prabhupāda’s purports. The purports are more important in order of importance as compared to Prabhupāda’s lectures, conversations, and letters. So, these are his instructions for his disciples and for humanity for the next 10,000 years.
So varṇāśrama—you cannot denigrate it by calling it the caste system and be true to the teachings of Śrīla Prabhupāda. Whether you are ABC, GBC, or XYZ, you must accept these instructions to be a real follower of Prabhupāda.
I’ve spoken a lot, and I hope the viewers could. . . Maybe you want to watch it again and note down the numbers that I’ve given. Maybe we can provide uh the quotes uh at the end of this instead of interrupting the talk—to prove that Prabhupāda did not intend women to be dīkṣā-gurus, because it’s the function of brāhmaṇas, and he gave brāhmaṇa initiation to mlecchas and yavanas like myself and Mahārāja and so many other Westerners—in order to establish a varṇāśrama-based society.
Mahārāja, sannyāsī is a part of the varṇāśrama dharma. It’s one of the āśramas: gṛhastha, brahmacārī, āśrama, sannyāsa āśrama. You cannot attack varṇāśrama as the caste system and say that you are so-and-so swami and so-and-so Mahārāja belonging to the sannyāsa āśrama. It’s hypocrisy.
So sorry I didn’t want to make this so passionate. Please with a dispassionate mind, a cool head—read these purports and find out for yourself. Prabhupāda never intended for women to be dīkṣā-gurus.
Vaiṣṇavebhyo namo namaḥ.
Hare Kṛṣṇa.
