Niscala

It is very disappointing that a devotee calls another devotee "sly" simply because he uses a dictionary definition. It is typical adhomenic attack used when we don't like the conclusion of the argument. Using dictionary definitions and gita definitions to determine what is absolute and what is not, is a sign of integrity, actually, not slyness. Hari Vilas wrote: Brahma uses the standard of absolute knowledge to debunk statements about relative knowledge... Firstly he is not debunking- he is simply saying that relative knowledge statements are not always true in all circumstances, following the definition of what is relative knowledge, and accepting the words of Srila Bhaktivinode Thakura that the self-realized soul does not always speak absolute knowledge. Obviously some women are less intelligent than some men. Other women are more intelligent than some men. SP admitted this himself when he said that devotee women were more intelligent and to be seen as good as their devotee brothers. So he makes it clear himself that his own statement that "women are less intelligent" is relative. What disturbs me most is the accusation of slyness, which is so clearly not true- all Brahma did was use definitions of absolute knowledge to determine what is absolute knowledge. I know Brahma can defend himself, but maybe out of lack of ego, he will not see the need to. But we should not tolerate seeing another devotee unnecessarily slandered in this way. Hari Vilas: His (Brahma Prabhu's) point is that if a statement of relative fact is wrong, then it can be disregarded. When statements of relative facts are not collaborated by shastra, then it is possible that the person making such statements is wrong due to the material conditioning as explained by Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakur and Srila Prabhupada above. That is your conclusion, not Brahma's, so don't put words in his mouth. Brahma's point is that according to Srila Bhaktivinode Thakura, a self-realized soul- not a conditioned one- but a self-realized soul- may sometimes make statements in regard to relative knowledge, and that such statements do not have to be accepted as always true- not because the speaker is conditioned- but because the nature of relative truth is changing. It is not eternal. Certainly a conditioned soul makes mistakes, but a self-realized soul does not. So when we see that his statements on relative truth are not true in all circumstances, we do not make assumptions that it is due to mistakes, as you imply Brahma is doing, but simply that the nature of the truth being discussed is different in the current context. The spiritual master preaches differently according to time, place and circumstances, but the essence of the message remains unchanged. Whenever we do the same, that is called following in the footsteps. On the other hand, strict adherence ...to the letter of the guru, like with the law, may ignore the spirit- which is to reach out to everyone, include everyone, not deter anyone, from the path of spirituality, not even demons, what to speak of feminists! "Somehow to trick them", was how Srila Prabhupada put it- not to encouarge us to misrepresent the philosophy, of course, but to change its face, its outward feature, its language, its presentation- as much and every bit as we see fit. We- that is our preachers- have the license to do so- it is called purity of motivation. Often the belief that women are less intelligent is mixed up with their need for protection, as if they need protection from their own lack of intelligence. Actually it is to protect them from rape, as there is definitely inequality in the way women are built in comparison with men. Never do we hear of women gang-raping a man, but the opposite happens far too frequently. No woman, even trained in martial arts can withstand a group of men wanting to rape her. Because the women are vulnerable, they deserve pprotection. They should not have to defend themselves, somehow, but strong men should fight off attackers. Fortunately, we have the police force, but it can't be everywhere at one time, so ideally every woman should have a chaperone, especially in lonely places, or at night- anytime when she is at risk. Therefore, all women should be taken care of especially when they are elderly.