By B. V. Tripurari Swami http://www.swami.org/sanga

Question:      In a previous discussion, 'Women, degradation and trust,' re: Prabhupada's statements on the role of women, you wrote, "The statements themselves arise out of a particular cultural background...had he written his commentary today, it may very well have been different." I agree that we should understand these issues intelligently. My concern is how to be intelligent and innovative for the times we live in, yet not minimize what Prabhupada said.

Answer:       We have to understand this issue in light of the concept of a parampara, or succession of gurus, who explain the tradition relative to time and circumstance and whose teaching, while constituting a divine dispensation, overflows into the realm of social reform. Caitanya Mahaprabhu represents the zenith of divine dispensation but he is also known as a social reformer. With regard to the place of women in Bengal society, in particular, he improved their plight considerably.

Prabhupada was no different. Indeed, I have often heard criticisms of him from members of other Gaudiya missions for his liberal policy with regard to women. For example, he engaged women in ways that others, even his own guru, had not permitted. Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakura did not allow women to live in the monastery, to chant and dance together in the same room with men, to cook for the temple deity, or to engage directly in the seva puja of the temple deity.

Prabhupada allowed women to do all of these things and in many instances gave women the position of head priest in charge of the deity's daily service. He also allowed women to travel with him as his personal cook at times. Prabhupada's disciples take these things for granted, as if they were the norm, but others from outside of Prabhupada's mission often consider these policies to be deviations.

It is true that Prabhupada maintained his position, one that could be considered sexist by some today, in the face of modern thinking. But in relation to his own tradition and cultural background, he was often viewed as giving in to modern thinking. In reality he was neither sexist nor compromising. He was disseminating the essential teachings of Sri Gaurangadeva in light of modern times through the cultural filter of his own background. In his Sri Krsna-samhita, Bhaktivinoda Thakura acknowledges the cultural bias through which divinity expresses itself and he calls upon his readers to distinguish the relative from the absolute in their approach to scripture.

To do as you suggest in your question, to understand these issues intelligently, is to be spiritually vital. My suggestion is that you follow the example of Srila Prabhupada and step away from the crowd. Nothing risked, nothing gained. Use your Western intelligence in Prabhupada's service. He wanted that very much. Although divine faith is superior to intellect, it must pass the test of reason to be so. Then, with reason fully at its disposal, divine faith will conquer over all.