From: Krishna Kirti (das) HDG (Baltimore - USA)
Date: 04-Oct-98 02:41
To: GHQ 
Subject: FYI From on the USENET Nothing important.
> On UK National News it has been announced that scientists have discovered
> a gene which it claims is responsible for the “Maternal Instinct” in women.
> Also Newsnight on BBC TV had a frank discussion on the implications by
> Jeremy Paxman, a well respected and incisive british TV journalist - a
> feminist writer who struggled to explain away the findings with mutterings
> about “environmental socialisation” had a hard time countering the
> overwhelming implication’s of this discovery. The explanations for those
> women who have claimed and shown a lack of maternal instinct could now
> be scientifically explained if it is found that they either don’t possess this
> gene or it it is in any way “damaged”. Other implications explored were that
> the so-called “glass ceiling” much harped upon by certain feminists,
> especially in regard for the apparent failure of women to penetrate the
> upper levels of management - particularly at CEO level despite ALL the
> initiatives to make workplaces more “woman friendly” - is now likely as a
> result of fall offs for the purpose of fulfilling maternal desires [i.e. having
> and looking after children].
> This research is BAD news indeed for those who have tried to convince that
> “socialisation” is the prime influence in gender and human behaviour. I
> expect to see fireworks as this research becomes more widely known and
> the implications are digested.
(Text COM:1742194) -----------------------------------------
9.3 Text COM:1758534 (7 lines)
From: Shyamasundara ACBSP
Date: 09-Oct-98 02:40
Subject: SHA FYI Chanakya on women leaders
“Countries which have no leaders in them perish, as do those with many
leaders, women leaders or child leaders.
One should not stay in a country, which is leaderless, has many leaders, a
9.4 Text COM:1763235 (56 lines)
From: Shyamasundara ACBSP
Date: 12-Oct-98 20:55
Subject: SHA PRS MAle body superior to womans for spiritual life
“A living entity who, as a result of attachment to a woman in his previous
life, has been endowed with the form of a woman, foolishly looks upon maya
in the form of a man, her husband, as the bestower of wealth, progeny, house and other material assets.
From this verse it appears that a woman is also supposed to have been a man in his (her) previous life, and due to his attachment to his wife, he now
has the body of a woman. Bhavagad-gita confirms this; a man gets his next
life’s birth according to what he thinks of at the time of death. If someone
is too attached to his wife, naturally he thinks of his wife at the time of death, and in his next life he takes the body of a woman. Similarly, if a
woman thinks of her husband at the time of death, naturally she gets the
body of a man in the next life. In the Hindu scriptures, therefore, woman’s
chastity and devotion to man is greatly emphasized. A woman’s attachment to her husband may elevate her to the body of a man in her next life, but a
man’s attachment to a woman will degrade him, and in his next life he will
get the body of a woman. We should always remember, as it is stated in
Bhavagad-gita, that both the gross and subtle material bodies are dresses;
they are the shirt and coat of the living entity. To be either a woman or a
man only involves one’s bodily dress. The soul in nature is actually the
marginal energy of the Supreme Lord. Every living entity, being classified
as energy, is supposed to be originally a woman, or one who is enjoyed.
****** In the body of a man there is a greater opportunity to get out of the material clutches; there is less opportunity in the body of a woman. *********
In this verse it is indicated that the body of a man should not be misused through forming an attachment to women and thus becoming too entangled in material enjoyment, which will result in getting the body of a woman in the next life. A woman is generally fond of household prosperity, ornaments,
furniture and dresses. She is satisfied when the husband supplies all these
things sufficiently. The relationship between man and woman is very
complicated, but the substance is that one who aspires to ascend to the
transcendental stage of spiritual realization should be very careful in
accepting the association of a woman. In the stage of Krsna consciousness,
however, such restriction of association may be slackened because if a man’s
and woman’s attachment is not to each other but to Krsna, then both of them
are equally eligible to get out of the material entanglement and reach the
abode of Krsna. As it is confirmed in Bhavagad-gita, anyone who seriously
takes to Krsna consciousness-whether in the lowest species of life or a
woman or of the less intelligent classes, such as the mercantile or laborer
class-will go back home, back to Godhead, and reach the abode of Krsna. A
man should not be attached to a woman, nor should a woman be attached to a man. Both man and woman should be attached to the service of the Lord. Then there is the possibility of liberation from material entanglement for both of them. (SB 3.31.41)
We note that that Srila Prabhupada didn’t say it is just true of old India thousands of years ago, but it is a general principle that is always true. Also he doesn’t specify whether it is a sudra or brahmana, just male versus
female. So even in a lower caste the male’s body will have a higher adhikara
than the female of similar community.
(Text COM:1763235) ------------------
9.5 Text COM:1765044 (20 lines)
From: Shyamasundara ACBSP
Date: 13-Oct-98 10:13
Subject: SHA Wife not to compete with husband
Therefore please accept her, O chief of the brahmanas, for I offer her with
faith and she is in every respect fit to be your wife and take charge of your household duties.
The words grhamedhisu karmasu mean “in household duties.” Another word is also used here: sarvatmananurupam. The purport is that a wife should not
only be equal to her husband in age, character and qualities, but must be
helpful to him in his household duties. The household duty of a man is not to satisfy his sense gratification, but to remain with a wife and children and at the same time attain advancement in spiritual life. One who does not do so is not a householder but a grhamedhi. Two words are used in Sanskrit literature; one is grhastha, and the other is grhamedhi. The difference
between grhamedhi andgrhasthais that grhastha is also an asrama, or
spiritual order, but if one simply satisfies his senses as a householder, then he is a grhamedhi.For a grhamedhi,to accept a wife means to satisfy the senses, but for a grhastha a qualified wife is an assistant in every respect for advancement in spiritual activities. It is the duty of the wife to take charge of household affairs ***** and not to compete with the husband. *****
A wife is meant to help, but she cannot help her husband unless he is
completely equal to her in age, character and quality. (SB 3.22.11)
(Text COM:1765044) -----------------------------------------------
9.6 Text COM:1765045 (38 lines)
From: Shyamasundara ACBSP
Date: 13-Oct-98 10:22
Subject: SHA Wife should tolerate husband even if he is wrong.
O Vidura, Devahuti served her husband with intimacy and great respect, with control of the senses, with love and with sweet words.
ways, visrambhena and gauravena. These are two important processes in
serving the husband or the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Visrambhena means “with intimacy,” and gauravena means “with great reverence.” The husband is a very intimate friend; therefore, the wife must render service just like an intimate friend, and at the same time she must understand that the husband is superior in position, and thus she must offer him all respect. A man’s psychology and woman’s psychology are different.
As constituted by bodily frame, a man always wants to be superior to his
wife, and a woman, as bodily constituted, is naturally inferior to her husband.
Thus the natural instinct is that the husband wants to post himself as superior to the wife, and this must be observed. Even if there is some wrong
on the part of the husband, the wife must tolerate it, and thus there will be no misunderstanding between husband and wife.
Visrambhena means “with intimacy,” but it must not be familiarity that
breeds contempt. According to the Vedic civilization, a wife cannot call her
husband by name. In the present civilization the wife calls her husband by
name, but in Hindu civilization she does not. Thus the inferiority and
superiority complexes are recognized.
Damena ca: a wife has to learn to control herself even if there is a
misunderstanding. Sauhrdena vaca madhuraya means always desiring good for the husband and speaking to him with sweet words.
A person becomes agitated by so many material contacts in the outside world; therefore, in his home life he must be treated by his wife with sweet words. (SB 3.23.3)
9.7 Text COM:1772331 (3 lines)
From: Bhakti Vikasa Swami
Date: 16-Oct-98 00:28
To: GHQ 
Comment: Text COM:1772370 by Internet: Jivan Mukta Dasa
Subject: from SB 4.21.27 purport
Nor do atheists believe in the injunctions of the Vedas. According to them,
all the Vedic injunctions are simply theories that have no practical application in life.
(Text COM:1772331) -----------------------------------------
10.1 IWC tries to minimize Manu-samhita by presenting a few quotes and ignoring the many other quotes. The goal is to reconcile the apparent contradiction.
Text COM:1781511 (92 lines) [W1]
From: Shyamasundara ACBSP
Date: 18-Oct-98 23:24
Subject: FYI Manu-samhita
IWC tries to minimize Manu Samhita by presenting a few quotes. But there are many other quotes that they ignore. The goal is to reconcile both sides.
---------- Forwarded Message ----------
>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>Date: Fri, 16 Oct 98 13:59 -0700
>From: “COM: Vishaka (dd) ACBSP (Los Angeles, CA - USA)”
> >To: WWW: Madhusudani Radha (Devi Dasi) JPS (Berkeley CA - USA)
> IWC (Internat. Women’s Conference) >Subject: Re: Manu-samhita
>Basu Ghosh wrote:
>“Maharaj, I have read in a letter by one of the lady “leaders” (at least
>of a conference on COM) that this is the International Society of KC, not
>Yet, in the above purport, SP *himself* (not Basu Ghosh Das, et. al) says that:
>“Manu-samhita” (& other dharma shastras) “are considered the standard
>books *TO BE FOLLOWED* by human society.”
>Since it is clearly mentioned there that women’s duties are in the home, it
>would be incorrect to deviate from that too much.” (letter from Basu Ghosh)
>To get more of a perspective on the Manu-samhita, here are a few other
>texts in reference to it:
>“One who engages in full devotional service, who does not fall down in any
>circumstance, at once transcends the modes of material nature and thus
>comes to the level of Brahman.”
>Prabhupäda: The designations are on the material platform according to
>the quality. But in the spiritual platform it is transcendental to material
>qualities. So when one becomes Krsna conscious there is no more distinction.
>Swiss Man (2): (French)
>Yogesvara: He says this seems to be somewhat different from the
>traditional Hindu practice, since in the Manu-samhitä, for example,
>südras are not to be instructed.
>Prabhupäda: Yes, but we do not keep him südra. A devotee is no longer
>südra. We are creating brähmanas. Just like these Europeans and
>Americans. They, according to Manu-samhitä, they are mlecchas, yavanas.
>But we are not keeping them mlecchas and yavanas. Just like these
>European and American boys. They are accepting the Vedic regulatives
>principles: no illicit sex, no meat-eating, no intoxication, no gambling. So
>they are no more südras or candalas. They are brähmanas.” (June 5, 1974,
>“Manu-samhitä is not religion. It is moral principles for conducting society.
>Religion is how to become devotee of Krsna. That is religion.” (April 20, >1974, Hyderabad)
>“There are twenty types of religious scriptures called dharma-sästras,
>beginning with the Manu-samhitä and paräsara-samhitä, but herein it is
>stressed that although one may become free from the reactions of the most
>sinful activities by following the religious principles of these scriptures, this
>cannot promote a sinful man to the stage of loving service to the Lord. On
>the other hand, chanting the holy name of the Lord even once not only frees
>one immediately from the reactions of the greatest sins, but also raises one
>to the platform of rendering loving service to the Supreme Personality of
>Godhead, who is described as uttamasloka because He is famous for His
>glorious activities.” (SB 6.2.11 purport)
>“For karma-kända there are eighty authorized scriptures, such as Manu-
>samhitä, which are known as dharma-sästras. In these scriptures one is
>advised to counteract his sinful acts by performing other types of fruitive
>action. This was the path first recommended by Sukadeva Gosvämi to
>Mahäräja Pariksit, and actually it is a fact that one who does not take to
>devotional service must follow the decision of these scriptures by pious acts
>to counteract his impious acts. This is known as atonement.” (SB 6.1.7
>------ End of forwarded message -------
(Text COM:1781511) -----------------------------------------
Text COM:1783257 (440 lines) [W1]
From: Shyamasundara ACBSP
Date: 19-Oct-98 10:46
Subject: SHA Manu Samhita
Dear Maharajas and Prabhus,
Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada.
In reference to the recent attempt by Vishaka to marginalize the Manu
Samhita I did a little research and looked in FOLIO. Here are a few of the
140 references that Srila Prabhupada made regarding Manu Samhita. Strange that SP would refer to such a marginal text so often if it was not important for KC. I have put noteworthy portions in CAPITALS for easy reference. We note that Vishaka has tried to minimize the Manu Samhita as simply a book of material affairs but as you will see in quotes below Srila Prabhupada states that the goal of Manu Samhita is Krsna Consciousness. He also states that the purpose of Manu Samhita is to create a favorable social situation, varnashrama dharma, by establishing laws which help people to be Krsna conscious. Instead the non-Aryan feminists want to scrap the Manu Samhita and introduce into ISKCON as law for us to follow, the UN bill of rights. This is complete non-sense. We have our Law Book already, Manu Samhita. Srila Prabhupada said in conversation with Professor Kotovsky, that it is valid in the past, present and future. It never becomes superannuated. It is always valid. The laws of Manu, SP states are of divine inspiration and
perfect, not imperfect and based on vox populi like the UN charter. Even a
person may be an Uttama Adhikari, still they don’t break the regulative
principles as enjoined in Manu Samhita. For example it is from Manu Samhita that our four regulative principles of No illicit sex, Meat eating, gambling and intoxication are drawn. Does Vishaka dd and the fems suggest that now because it has been revealed that the Manu Samhita “is only a dharma sastra” that it can be snubbed and its injunctions broken and not followed??????? That now we can eat meat, have sex indiscriminately, and booze it up in Las Vegas at the roulette wheel. Without following these regulated principles of the Manu Samhita we cannot become Krsna Conscious. Visaka dd is certainly treading a slippery slope leading to sahajiya tendencies. The fems are definitely in the sahajiya side.
If the purvas want law for protecting women then it is Manu that shall be
our policy. Most of the 140 references to Manu Samhita were in reference to
women. This should be stressed. Forget about the UN.
O King, if you can give proper protection to the living beings in the material world, that will be the best service for me. When the Supreme Lord sees you to be a good protector of the conditioned souls, certainly the master of the senses will be very pleased with you.
The whole administrative system is arranged for the purpose of going back
home, back to Godhead. Brahma is the representative of the Supreme
Personality of Godhead, and Manu is the representative of Brahma. Similarly,
all other kings on different planets of the universe are representatives of
Manu. THE LAWBOOK FOR THE ENTIRE HUMAN SOCIETY IS THE MANU-SAMHITA, WHICH DIRECTS ALL ACTIVITIES TOWARDS THE TRANSCENDENTAL SERVICE OF THE LORD. Every king, therefore, must know that his responsibility in administration is not merely to exact taxes from the citizens but to see personally that the citizens under him are being trained in Visnu worship. Everyone must be educated in Visnu worship and engaged in the devotional service of Hrsikesa, the owner of the senses. The conditioned souls are meant not to satisfy their material senses but to satisfy the senses of Hrsikesa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead. That is the purpose of the complete administrative system. One who knows this secret, as disclosed here in the version of Brahma, is the perfect administrative head. One who does not know this is a show-bottle administrator. By training the citizens in the devotional service of the Lord, the head of a state can be free in his responsibility, otherwise he will fail in the onerous duty entrusted to him and thus be punishable by the supreme authority. There is no other alternative in the discharge of administrative duty.
[Hear Srila Prabhupada points out that even Narada Rsi, the incarnation of
Bhakti follows the Manu Samhita, shouldn’t we? The purvas are trying to
state that since they are now devotees and KC they don’t have to follow
“mundane” literature like the Manu Samhita. This is the sahajiya mentality
is it not? Yet they want us to adopt the UN charter!!]
All these animals are awaiting your death so that they can avenge the injuries you have inflicted upon them. After you die, they will angrily pierce your body with iron horns.
Narada Muni wanted to draw King Pracinabarhisat’s attention to the excesses
of killing animals in sacrifices. It is said in the sastras that by killing animals in a sacrifice, one immediately promotes them to human birth. Similarly, by killing their enemies on a battlefield, the ksatriyas who fight for a right cause are elevated to the heavenly planets after death. IN MANU-SAMHITA IT IS STATED THAT IT IS NECESSARY FOR A KING TO EXECUTE A MURDERER SO THAT THE MURDERER WILL NOT SUFFER FOR HIS CRIMINAL ACTIONS IN HIS NEXT LIFE. ON THE BASIS OF SUCH UNDERSTANDING, NARADA MUNI warns the King that the animals killed in sacrifices by the King await him at his death in order to avenge themselves. Narada Muni is not contradicting himself here. Narada Muni wanted to convince the King that overindulgence in animal sacrifice is risky because as soon as there is a small discrepancy in the execution of such a sacrifice, the slaughtered animal may not be promoted to a human form of life. Consequently, the person performing sacrifice will be responsible for the death of the animal, just as much as a murderer is responsible for killing another man. When animals are killed in a slaughterhouse, six people connected with the killing are responsible for the murder. The person who gives permission for the killing, the person who kills, the person who helps, the person who purchases the meat, the person who cooks the flesh and the person who eats it, all become entangled in the killing. Narada Muni wanted to draw the King’s attention to this fact. Thus animal-killing is not encouraged even in a sacrifice. (SB 4.25.8)
[In the following text Prabhupada points out that the author of the Manu
Samhita is not some one working in the UN but God or His empowered
representative. His directions must be followed.]
All the Manus offered their prayers as follows: As Your order carriers, O Lord, we, the Manus, are the law-givers for human society, but because of
the temporary supremacy of this great demon, Hiranyakasipu, our laws for
maintaining varnasrama-dharma were destroyed. O Lord, now that You have
killed this great demon, we are in our normal condition. Kindly order us,
Your eternal servants, what to do now.
In many places in Bhavagad-gita, the Supreme Lord, Krsna, refers to the
varnasrama-dharma of four varnas and four asramas. He teaches people about this varnasrama-dharma so that all of human society can live peacefully by observing the principles for the four social divisions and four spiritual divisions (varna and asrama) and thus make advancement in spiritual knowledge. The Manus compiled the Manu-samhita. The word samhita means Vedic knowledge, and manu indicates that this knowledge is given by Manu. THE MANUS ARE SOMETIMES INCARNATIONS OF THE SUPREME LORD AND SOMETIMES EMPOWERED LIVING ENTITIES. Formerly, many long years ago, Lord Krsna instructed the sun-god. The Manus are generally sons of the sun-god. Therefore, while speaking to Arjuna about the importance of Bhavagad-gita, Krsna said, imam vivasvate yogam proktavan aham avyayam vivasvan manave praha: [Bg. 4.1]
“This instruction was given to Vivasvan, the sun-god, who in turn instructed
his son Manu.” MANU GAVE THE LAW KNOWN AS MANU-SAMHITA, WHICH IS FULL OF DIRECTIONS BASED ON VARNA AND ASRAMA CONCERNING HOW TO LIVE AS A HUMAN BEING. THESE ARE VERY SCIENTIFIC WAYS OF LIFE, but under the rule of demons like Hiranyakasipu, human society breaks all these systems of law and order and gradually becomes lower and lower. Thus there is no peace in the world.
THE CONCLUSION IS THAT IF WE WANT REAL PEACE AND ORDER IN THE HUMAN SOCIETY, WE MUST FOLLOW THE PRINCIPLES LAID DOWN BY THE MANU-SAMHITA AND CONFIRMED BY THE SUPREME PERSONALITY OF GODHEAD, KRSNA. SB 7.8.48
[Those who insult and minimize the Manu Samhita are non-Aryans. That
includes the feminists.]
My dear brother, by the influence of destiny you have already killed many
babies, each of them as bright and beautiful as fire. But kindly spare this
daughter. Give her to me as your gift.
Here we see that Devaki first focused Kamsa’s attention on his atrocious
activities, his killing of her many sons. Then she wanted to compromise with
him by saying that whatever he had done was not his fault, but was ordained by destiny. Then she appealed to him to give her the daughter as a gift. Devaki was the daughter of a ksatriya and knew how to play the political game. In politics there are different methods of achieving success: first repression (dama), then compromise (sama), and then asking for a gift
(dana). Devaki first adopted the policy of repression by directly attacking
Kamsa for having cruelly, atrociously killed her babies. Then she
compromised by saying that this was not his fault, and then she begged for a
gift. As we learn from the history of the Mahabharata, or “Greater India,”
the wives and daughters of the ruling class, the ksatriyas, knew the political game, but we never find that a woman was given the post of chief executive. THIS IS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE INJUNCTIONS OF MANU-SAMHITA, BUT UNFORTUNATELY MANU-SAMHITA IS NOW BEING INSULTED, AND THE ARYANS, THE MEMBERS OF VEDIC SOCIETY, CANNOT DO ANYTHING. SUCH IS THE NATURE OF KALI-YUGA. SB 10.4.5
[If the Manu Samhita is just a mundane book as the fems would have us
believe why is that Manu Samhita even gives codes regarding the duties of an Acarya!]
“One should know the acarya as Myself and never disrespect him in any way. One should not envy him, thinking him an ordinary man, for he is the
representative of all the demigods.”
This is a verse from Srimad-Bhavagatam (11.17.27) spoken by Lord Krsna when He was questioned by Uddhava regarding the four social and spiritual orders of society. The Lord was specifically instructing how a brahmacari should behave under the care of a spiritual master. A spiritual master is not an enjoyer of facilities offered by his disciples. He is like a parent. Without
the attentive service of his parents, a child cannot grow to manhood;
similarly, without the care of the spiritual master one cannot rise to the
plane of transcendental service.
The spiritual master is also called acarya, or a transcendental professor of
spiritual science. THE MANU-SAMHITA (2.140) EXPLAINS THE DUTIES OF AN
ACARYA, 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 upaniti, or the function that brings one nearer to the spiritual master. One who cannot be brought nearer to a spiritual master cannot have a sacred thread, and thus he is indicated to be a sudra. The sacred thread on the body of a brahmana, ksatriya or vaisya is a 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 samskara, or purificatory process, the spiritual master actually begins to teach the disciple about the Vedas. A person born a sudra 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 brahmana if he finds him perfectly qualified. In the Vayu Purana an acarya is defined as one who knows the import of all Vedic literature, explains the purpose of the Vedas, abides by their rules and regulations, and teaches his disciples to act in the same way.” CC Adi 1.46
[The fems think that because they are devotees that they can disregard the
MS but to be a devotee is very difficult. And even on being a devotee one
doesn’t break the regulative principles enjoined by MS.]
“Those who are envious and mischievous, who are the lowest among men, are cast by Me into the ocean of material existence, into various demoniac
species of life.”
Demons are always subject to be punished, and great demons like Ravana and Hiranyakasipu are personally punished by the Lord. Otherwise, ordinary
demons are punished by the laws of material nature. Krsna does not need to
come to punish the petty demons, but when there are great demons like
Ravana, Hiranyakasipu and Kamsa, the Lord comes as Lord Ramacandra, Lord Nrsimhadeva or Sri Krsna to punish them. If we do not want to be punished, we have to follow the rules and regulations (sad-dharma). Dharma means “the laws given by God.” Dharmam tu saksad bhagavat-pranitam [SB 6.3.19]. THE LAWS ARE GIVEN BY BHAGAVAN AND ARE WRITTEN IN BOOKS LIKE MANU-SAMHITA AND OTHER VEDIC LITERATURES. ACCORDING TO THE LAW, WE HAVE TO OBEY THE GOVERNMENT, AND ACCORDING TO DHARMA, WE HAVE TO OBEY KRSNA, GOD. WE CANNOT MANUFACTURE OUR LAWS AT HOME, AND WE CANNOT MANUFACTURE DHARMA. If one tries, he is simply cheating the public. Such false dharmas are kicked out of Srimad-Bhavagatam (1.1.2): dharmah projjhita. The real dharma is set forth by Sri Krsna when He says: sarva-dharman parityajya mam ekam saranam vraja (Bg. 18.66). All other dharmas are simply forms of cheating.
We must accept the principles of Bhavagad-gita, which constitute the ABC’S of dharma. ACTUALLY, WE ONLY HAVE TO ACCEPT THE PRINCIPLE OF SURRENDER UNTO KRSNA, BUT THIS ACCEPTANCE COMES AFTER MANY, MANY BIRTHS. IT IS NOT VERY EASY, FOR ONLY AFTER MANY BIRTHS OF STRUGGLE DOES ONE COME TO HIS REAL PERFECTION AND SURRENDER UNTO KRSNA. At this time he understands perfectly that Vasudeva, Krsna, is everything. This is the greatest lesson of Bhavagad-gita, Everything is Krsna’s energy, and whatever we see is but an exhibition of two types of energy.” (Teachings of Lord Kapila 6.11)
“Srila Prabhupada: Yes, he was a great brahmana politician, and it is by his
name that the quarter of New Delhi where all the foreign embassies are
grouped together is called Canakya Puri. Canakya Pandita was a great
politician and brahmana. He was vastly learned. His moral instructions are
still valuable. In India, schoolchildren are taught Canakya Pandita’s
instructions. Although he was the prime minister, Canakya Pandita maintained his brahmana spirit; he did not accept any salary. If a brahmana accepts a salary, it is understood that he has become a dog. That is stated in the Srimad-Bhavagatam. He can advise, but he cannot accept employment. So
Canakya Pandita was living in a cottage, but he was actually the prime
minister. This brahminical culture and the brahminical brain is the standard
of Vedic civilization. The Manu-smrti is an example of the standard of
brahminical culture. You cannot trace out from history when the Manu-smrti
was written, but it is considered so perfect that it is the Hindu law. There is no need for the legislature to pass a new law daily to adjust social order. THE LAW GIVEN BY MANU IS SO PERFECT THAT IT CAN BE APPLICABLE FOR ALL TIME. IT IS STATED IN SANSKRIT TO BE TRI-KALADAU, WHICH MEANS “GOOD FOR THE PAST, PRESENT, AND FUTURE.
Prof. Kotovsky: I am sorry to interrupt you, but to my knowledge all of
Indian society in the second half of the eighteenth century was, by order of
the British administration, under a law divergent from Hindu law. There was
a lot of change. The actual Hindu law that was used by the Hindus was quite
different from the original Manu-smrti.
Srila Prabhupada: They have now made changes. Even our late Pandit
Jawaharlal Nehru introduced his own Hindu code. He introduced the right of
divorce in marriage, but this was not in the Manu-samhita. There are so many things they have changed, but before this modern age the whole human society was governed by the Manu-smrti. Strictly speaking, modern Hindus are not strictly following the Hindu scriptures. BUT OUR POINT IS NOT TO TRY TO BRING BACK THE OLD TYPE OF HINDU SOCIETY. THAT IS IMPOSSIBLE. OUR IDEA IS TO TAKE THE BEST IDEAS FROM THE ORIGINAL IDEA. For example, in the Srimad-Bhavagatam there is a description of the communist idea. It is described to Maharaja Yudhisthira. If there is something good, a good experience, why shouldn’t you adopt it? That is our point of view. Besides that, modern civilization is missing one all-important point-the aim of human life. Scientifically, the aim of human life is self-realization, atma-tattva. It is said that unless the members of human society come to the point of self-realization, they are defeated in whatever they do. Actually it is happening in modern society, despite all economic advancement and other advancement: instead of keeping peace and tranquillity, they are fighting-individually, socially, politically, and nationally. If we think about it in a cool-headed way, we can see that in
spite of much improvement in many branches of knowledge, we are keeping the same mentality that is visible in the lower animal society. Our conclusion,
according to the Srimad-Bhavagatam, is that this human body is not meant for working hard for sense gratification. But people do not know anything beyond that. They do not know about the next life. There is no scientific
department of knowledge to study what happens after this body is finished.
That is a great department of knowledge.” (SSR 6)
[Manu: one of the Mahajanas; not a UN worker.]
“Therefore our duty is, mahajano yena gatah sa panthah. “We have to accept
that way which is given by the mahajana.” Mahajana. So sastra... We are
sometimes in difficulty to find out the mahajana, who is mahajana. That
mahajana is also described in the sastras, who can be accepted the greatest
authority, mahajana. That is stated in the Sixth Canto of Srimad-Bhavagatam.
Svayambhur naradah sambhuh [SB 6.3.20]. They are mahajanas. Svayambhuh means Brahma. Brahma is mahajana. Svayambhu, Narada. Narada Muni is mahajana. And Sambhu, Lord Siva, he is also mahajana. Svayambhur naradah sambhuh kumarah [SB 6.3.20], four Kumaras. Sanat-kumaradi, they are also mahajanas. Kapila, Kapiladeva who expounded that Sankhya philosophy, Kapiladeva. He is incarnation of God. Kumarah kapilo manuh.Svayambhuva Manu, he is also authority. Manu’s name is also mentioned in the Bhavagad-gita. Imam vivasvate yogam proktavan aham avyayam vivasvan manave prahuh [Bg. 4.1]. So therefore Manu is also mahajana, he’s authority. There is Manu-samhita. Our Vedic system is conducted, the law, the law-giver is Manu. From Manu, the manusya, “man”, these words have come, Manu. Descendant of Manu, human society, manusya.” (Bhavagad-gita 13.8-12--Bombay, September 30, 1973)
[The Laws of Manu are meant for regulating the government. Do the fems
propose that they can break the Law of God because they believe in God? Very strange.]
“Hayagriva: “This would be a commonwealth of which indeed God would be the law-giver.”
Prabhupada: Yes. That is the best quality of state. If we abide by the
orders of God, or the king or the government abides by the order of God,
that is ideal state.
Hayagriva: He says, “Thus the constitution of the state would be theocratic,
but man as priest receiving his bequests directly would build up an
aristocratic government,” like the brahmanas would receive the knowledge
Prabhupada: That theocratic government is Manu-samhita. That is Vedic
literature given by Manu for the benefit of the human society.” (Discussions
with Hayagriva on Emmanuel Kant)
[Manu Samhita is a law for conducting a sane society so that a favorable
environment can be established.]
Pancadravida: These Bible and Koran, how did they get here? They were just
inventions or what?
Prabhupada: Convention means they are partially good for the time being,
that’s all. They are not eternally... Just like in the Bible it is said, “Thou shalt not kill.” (chuckles) But this is not, does not come within the category of eternal religion. People were so corrupted that they were forbidden, “No, don’t do this.” “Thou shalt not covet,” a little moral instruction. That also, they could not follow. There is no religion. And little God consciousness, “There is God, kingdom of God,” little idea for the persons who could understand. Otherwise, do you think that if somebody says, “Thou shalt not kill,” is that any religious principle? It is ordinary thing. Where is the question of God?
Pancadravida: These things, they are also in (sic:) Manu-samhita?
Prabhupada: That is for... Manu-samhita forbids completely. MANU-SAMHITA IS NOT RELIGION. IT IS MORAL PRINCIPLES FOR CONDUCTING SOCIETY. Religion is how to become devotee of Krsna. That is religion. That is natural. [break] “...shalt not kill,” this is expectation. “Someday, in future, one may become religious.” That’s all. Because by killing, killing, they are going
downer, down. So if they stop killing, some day they will be able to
understand what is religion. Sukrti. Because, without being freed from all
sinful activities, nobody can understand what is God. Therefore about God,
in India they can understand very easily. In other countries they cannot.
Very few because always engaged in sinful activities, all forbidden sinful
activities. Just like you said that gambling has been introduced in religion. Killing has been introduced in religion. What is that religion? The more they take to the sinful activities, the more they become implicated-again birth and birth and birth and birth. Unless one is completely free, he cannot understand what is God. Yesam anta-gatam papam. You know this verse? The Bhavagad-gita, yes.
Pancadravida: When one becomes free of sinful activities, then he can begin
devotional life. (Morning Walk--April 20, 1974, Hyderabad)
Brahmananda: Srila Prabhupada, there is one lady. She would like to come and see you. She is the mother of one of our devotees. But she is coming wearing tilaka and a bead bag.
Prabhupada: Very good. (pause) But I am not speaking of my experience. WHEN WE SPEAK, WE SPEAK FROM THE SASTRA. SO THIS WOMAN’S DEPENDENCE IS DESCRIBED IN MANU-SAMHITA. AND THERE ARE MANY INSTANCES. JUST LIKE KUNTI. KUNTI WAS NOT ORDINARY WOMAN. SHE WAS VERY LEARNED, EXALTED WOMAN.
Brahmananda: This is one point, that in our devotional line there are
spiritual leaders who have been women such as Kunti. She gave...
Prabhupada: But still... Therefore I say. Still, she remained dependent on their son. That is is my proposition. Just like the sons, they lost the game and they were to be banished. Kunti was not banished. So when the sons went to forest, Kunti also followed because she thought that “I am widow. I am dependent on my sons. So wherever my sons will remain, I shall remain.” She was not... She did not lose the game; neither she was ordered to go to the
forest. Similarly, Sita, Sita, wife of Lord Ramacandra. Lord Ramacandra was
requested by His father to go to the forest, not Sita. Sita was also a king’s daughter. So she could go to her father that “My husband is going to the forest. Let me go to my father’s house.” She did not go. She preferred that “I shall go with my husband.” So when husband said that “You are not banished. You stay at home,” she said, “No. I am dependent on You. Wherever You shall go, I must go.” This is Vedic culture.
Brahmananda: Her chastity was her great virtue.
Prabhupada: Yes, that is the thing.
Brahmananda: Nowadays that is no longer true.
Prabhupada: Nowadays may be different, but I am speaking of the Vedic ideas, that woman in all circumstances, unless the husband is crazy or something like that, mad, or..., in every case the instance is that wife is faithful and subservient to the husband. That is the Vedic culture. Even the husband goes out of home, vanaprastha, the wife also goes with him. When he takes sannyasa, at that time there is no accompaniment of wife. Otherwise in grhastha life and even vanaprastha life, the wife is constant companion and subservient. That is the history of Vedic culture. History, Gandhari,
because her husband was blind, so when the marriage settlement was done, she was not blind, but she voluntarily became blind by wrapping cloth.
Devotee (2): She remained with the cloth wrapped for her whole life?
Prabhupada: Whole life.
Devotee (2): Whole life.
Prabhupada: She voluntarily became blind. And up to the last point of her
husband’s precarious condition, she remained with him. These are the
examples. There are other examples. Damayanti. They became so poor that they had no clothing. So the one cloth divided into two, husband and wife. So
these instances are in the Vedic literature, that wife remains always faithful and subservient to the husband. That is their perfection. Now the Americans may not like this idea. That is different thing. But we are speaking of the Vedic culture. And these are the instances, vivid instances. Why Sita accompanied her husband? And because she accompanied her husband in the jungle, the war between Rama Ravana became possible. And it is the advice that “When you go to other countries you should not take your wife.” Pathe nari-vinarjitah. Because it may create some trouble. But still, the faithful wife goes with the husband.
Harikesa: Argentina, and India. Now there will be war. Wherever there is
woman in charge, there is war, disruption. But they think because they are
in charge, that proves they are equal.
Prabhupada: I think in Indian history she is the first woman to be in charge
of the state. Before her, there is no instance of woman becoming in charge.
Brahmananda: In Sri Lanka also, they have woman in charge. That is also
Prabhupada: According to Manu-samhita, which is Vedic laws, it is said that
“Woman is not to be given freedom.” They have to be protected. According to
Vedic civilization, women, children, old man, brahmana, and cow-they are to
be given protection. The state should give protection. [break] ...the defect
of modern civilization is that vox populi.
Prabhupada: Everything is passed by popular vote. But that is also defective.
(Room Conversation after Press Conference, Chicago, July 9, 1975, )
10.3 Text COM:1801403 (15 lines)
From: Vidvan Gauranga (das) JPS (Mayapur - IN)
Date: 27-Oct-98 00:15
To: GHQ 
Reference: Text COM:1783257 by Shyamasundara (das) ACBSP
Subject: SHA Manu Samhita
An addition to Shyamasundara pr’s statement:
> If the purvas want law for protecting women then it is Manu that shall be
> our policy. Most of the 140 references to Manu Samhita were in reference
> to women. This should be stressed. Forget about the UN.
It is Manu that shall be our policy BECAUSE every time SP spoke about women being protected, he quoted the Manu Samhita, even in his Gita commentary. We follow SP and because SP adamantly insists that women have to be protected as per the principles of Manu Samhita, we have no choice but to follow the MS at least in this regard even though SP told us “the Americans may not like this idea.” What to do? ara na koriho mane asa.
From: Vidvan Gauranga (das) JPS (Mayapur - IN)
Date: 27-Oct-98 00:15
To: GHQ 
Reference: Text COM:1783257 by Shyamasundara (das) ACBSP
Subject: SHA Manu Samhita
> Prabhupada: She voluntarily became blind. And up to the last point of her
> husband’s precarious condition, she remained with him. These are the
> examples. There are other examples. Damayanti. They became so poor that
> they had no clothing. So the one cloth divided into two, husband and wife.
> So these instances are in the Vedic literature, that wife remains always
> faithful and subservient to the husband. That is their perfection. Now the
> Americans may not like this idea. That is different thing. But we are
> speaking of the Vedic culture. And these are the instances, vivid
> instances. Why Sita accompanied her husband? And because she
> accompanied her husband in the jungle, the war between Rama Ravana
> became possible. And it is the advice that “When you go to other countries
> you should not take your wife.” Pathe nari-vinarjitah. Because it may
> create some trouble. But still, the faithful wife goes with the husband.
Please do include this in our research reference also: NOW THE AMERICANS MAY NOT LIKE THIS IDEA. THAT IS A DIFFERENT THING. BUT WE ARE SPEAKING OF VEDIC CULTURE.
10.5 Text COM:1791327 (10 lines)
From: Trivikrama Swami
Date: 22-Oct-98 13:54
To: GHQ 
Reference: Text COM:1783257 by Shyamasundara (das) ACBSP
Subject: SHA Manu Samhita
Here is a pertinent quotation where Srila Prabhupada refers to the Manu-samhita:
Srila Prabhupada: Just like they say, a change of theories by the rascals. Change means rascals.
Harikesa: But as soon as the government changes.....
Srila Prabhupada: Anything change means it is the domain of rascals,
pandemonium. Just like in Manu- samhita it is said that, nasyam
svatantratam arhati, women should not be given independence. Once said, that is fact. If you want to change you suffer. That’s all. (Conversations with SP. Vol. 37 pp.397)
(Text COM:1791327) -----------------------------------------