Varna first, then Asrama

[Guest guest]

>

> >

> > There was Indira Gandhi in Prabhupada's time. And what did he call her? A

> whore.

> >

> > ys. JMd

>

> Yeah, that's all she was. I bet when he met her in private he explained to

her

> why she was nothing but a useless.....

>

> You know, Prabhupada could attract even boorish misoginists, he was so great!

>

> ys,

>

> Sthita

 

Does anyone else note the irony that ISKCON got started because a woman gave

Srila

Prabhupada a free ride to America?

[Guest guest]

Sita Devi Dasi wrote:

 

> [Text 2849328 from COM]

>

> >It is certainly better for women stay at home, and it

> >certainly also better if certain men can earn their livelihoods by staying

at

> >home.

>

> Until this happens, varnasrama (and homeschooling for daughters) will not

> start to happen. But first the men must provide finacially for their

> families (at home or outside the home) to facilitate this.

>

> Ys, Sdd

 

I suppose that no one wants to hear this, but according to Marxian analysis,

for

the most part in the world economy as it stands now, both women and children

will

have to work outside the home. The purpose is to have a "reserve army of the

unemployed" who will help keep wages down for capitalist employers. (Also, as

a

matter of practice, things have not worked out any better in the so-called

communist countries -- which is why many people call them examples of "state

capitalism.")

 

To begin with demanding home schooling, means to propose a revolution in which

only wealthy and middle class can meaningfully participate -- since individuals

from the lower economic strata will not have the luxury of keeping women at

home

to tutor their children. Rather, those women will have to work. And in some

countries, so will the children.

 

your servant,

 

Hare Krsna dasi

[Guest guest]

Sita Devi Dasi wrote:

 

> [Text 2849328 from COM]

>

> >It is certainly better for women stay at home, and it

> >certainly also better if certain men can earn their livelihoods by staying

at

> >home.

>

> Until this happens, varnasrama (and homeschooling for daughters) will not

> start to happen. But first the men must provide finacially for their

> families (at home or outside the home) to facilitate this.

>

> Ys, Sdd

 

I suppose that no one wants to hear this, but according to Marxian analysis,

for

the most part in the world economy as it stands now, both women and children

will

have to work outside the home. The purpose is to have a "reserve army of the

unemployed" who will help keep wages down for capitalist employers. (Also, as

a

matter of practice, things have not worked out any better in the so-called

communist countries -- which is why many people call them examples of "state

capitalism.")

 

To begin with demanding home schooling, means to propose a revolution in which

only wealthy and middle class can meaningfully participate -- since individuals

from the lower economic strata will not have the luxury of keeping women at

home

to tutor their children. Rather, those women will have to work. And in some

countries, so will the children.

 

your servant,

 

Hare Krsna dasi

[Guest guest]

COM: Prsnigarbha HKS wrote:

 

> [Text 2850818 from COM]

>

> > Yes, it was his biology professor from the Scottish college and that

> > reflected the state of science at the time. Srila Prabhu once

> > supplied us with more current numbers pointing out that 64 oz is

> > actually *gigantic* and not found in any humans. Apparently, the

> > male brain size is closer to 46 oz and that of the female about 42

> > oz, but as earlier pointed out here, a larger brain does not

> > necessarily equal greater intelligence.

>

> I think it can be said that if the men used their brains, they would

> be more intelligent. :-)

>

> But this can also be seen from a different viewpoint. From the point

> of view how men and women use their brains. The specialization that

> men often do, requies more brains to get it right.

>

> ys Prisni dasi

 

A point of interest: evidently Einstein's brain was about the same weight

as everyone else's. Unlike back in Professor Urquarht's day, scientists

nowadays do not ascribe brain size to be a significant indicator of

intelligence, noting that Neanderthal man had a larger brain than modern

man. Still, the evidence was that Neanderthal man was less

technologically advanced than his other human contemporaries.

 

ys

hkdd

 

 

Copyright 1999 New Scientist IPC Magazines Ltd

New Scientist

 

June 26, 1999

 

SECTION: Comment: Editorial, Pg. 3

 

LENGTH: 733 words

 

HEADLINE: Raising Albert

 

HIGHLIGHT: Can studying dead brains ever tell us anything about genius ?

 

BODY:

 

 

WHAT would Albert Einstein make of all the recent fuss about the size and

shape of his brain ? Just after his death in 1955, his brain was weighed,

measured and photographed: its weight proved to be only average. Now,

however, the photographs and measurements have been re-examined and his

brain declared "exceptional".

 

According to "The Lancet" (19 June) parts of his parietal lobe, an area of

the brain associated with visuospatial abilities and mathematical ideas,

are larger than normal and not divided by a fold in the usual way. The

suggestion is that perhaps this allowed areas of his brain to develop more

cross connections than usual.

[Guest guest]

COM: Prsnigarbha HKS wrote:

 

> [Text 2850818 from COM]

>

> > Yes, it was his biology professor from the Scottish college and that

> > reflected the state of science at the time. Srila Prabhu once

> > supplied us with more current numbers pointing out that 64 oz is

> > actually *gigantic* and not found in any humans. Apparently, the

> > male brain size is closer to 46 oz and that of the female about 42

> > oz, but as earlier pointed out here, a larger brain does not

> > necessarily equal greater intelligence.

>

> I think it can be said that if the men used their brains, they would

> be more intelligent. :-)

>

> But this can also be seen from a different viewpoint. From the point

> of view how men and women use their brains. The specialization that

> men often do, requies more brains to get it right.

>

> ys Prisni dasi

 

A point of interest: evidently Einstein's brain was about the same weight

as everyone else's. Unlike back in Professor Urquarht's day, scientists

nowadays do not ascribe brain size to be a significant indicator of

intelligence, noting that Neanderthal man had a larger brain than modern

man. Still, the evidence was that Neanderthal man was less

technologically advanced than his other human contemporaries.

 

ys

hkdd

 

 

Copyright 1999 New Scientist IPC Magazines Ltd

New Scientist

 

June 26, 1999

 

SECTION: Comment: Editorial, Pg. 3

 

LENGTH: 733 words

 

HEADLINE: Raising Albert

 

HIGHLIGHT: Can studying dead brains ever tell us anything about genius ?

 

BODY:

 

 

WHAT would Albert Einstein make of all the recent fuss about the size and

shape of his brain ? Just after his death in 1955, his brain was weighed,

measured and photographed: its weight proved to be only average. Now,

however, the photographs and measurements have been re-examined and his

brain declared "exceptional".

 

According to "The Lancet" (19 June) parts of his parietal lobe, an area of

the brain associated with visuospatial abilities and mathematical ideas,

are larger than normal and not divided by a fold in the usual way. The

suggestion is that perhaps this allowed areas of his brain to develop more

cross connections than usual.

[Guest guest]

At 5:32 PM -0500 12/13/99, Noma Petroff wrote:

 

>To begin with demanding home schooling, means to propose a revolution in which

>only wealthy and middle class can meaningfully participate -- since

>individuals

>from the lower economic strata will not have the luxury of keeping women

>at home

>to tutor their children. Rather, those women will have to work. And in some

>countries, so will the children.

 

Not so. For thousands of years women and children have contributed to their

lower class family's income by working *within* the family enterprise or

earning their keep as an apprentice to someone else. Their work was

considered part of their educational training.

 

YS, Sdd

[Guest guest]

At 5:32 PM -0500 12/13/99, Noma Petroff wrote:

 

>To begin with demanding home schooling, means to propose a revolution in which

>only wealthy and middle class can meaningfully participate -- since

>individuals

>from the lower economic strata will not have the luxury of keeping women

>at home

>to tutor their children. Rather, those women will have to work. And in some

>countries, so will the children.

 

Not so. For thousands of years women and children have contributed to their

lower class family's income by working *within* the family enterprise or

earning their keep as an apprentice to someone else. Their work was

considered part of their educational training.

 

YS, Sdd

[Guest guest]

Sita Devi Dasi wrote:

 

> At 5:32 PM -0500 12/13/99, Noma Petroff wrote:

>

> >To begin with demanding home schooling, means to propose a revolution in

which

> >only wealthy and middle class can meaningfully participate -- since

> >individuals

> >from the lower economic strata will not have the luxury of keeping women

> >at home

> >to tutor their children. Rather, those women will have to work. And in

some

> >countries, so will the children.

>

> Not so. For thousands of years women and children have contributed to their

> lower class family's income by working *within* the family enterprise or

> earning their keep as an apprentice to someone else. Their work was

> considered part of their educational training.

>

> YS, Sdd

 

For thousands of years, the market-oriented, capitalist, global economy did

not

exist. Now we have a different set of rules. It is a fundamentally unfair set

of

rules. And it is a set of rules which is fundamentally opposed to the

development

of spiritual life.

 

That's why Srila Prabhupada said -- a number of times -- that we must

"thoroughly

overhaul" society.

 

your servant,

 

Hare Krsna dasi

[Guest guest]

Sita Devi Dasi wrote:

 

> At 5:32 PM -0500 12/13/99, Noma Petroff wrote:

>

> >To begin with demanding home schooling, means to propose a revolution in

which

> >only wealthy and middle class can meaningfully participate -- since

> >individuals

> >from the lower economic strata will not have the luxury of keeping women

> >at home

> >to tutor their children. Rather, those women will have to work. And in

some

> >countries, so will the children.

>

> Not so. For thousands of years women and children have contributed to their

> lower class family's income by working *within* the family enterprise or

> earning their keep as an apprentice to someone else. Their work was

> considered part of their educational training.

>

> YS, Sdd

 

For thousands of years, the market-oriented, capitalist, global economy did

not

exist. Now we have a different set of rules. It is a fundamentally unfair set

of

rules. And it is a set of rules which is fundamentally opposed to the

development

of spiritual life.

 

That's why Srila Prabhupada said -- a number of times -- that we must

"thoroughly

overhaul" society.

 

your servant,

 

Hare Krsna dasi

[Guest guest]

> At 5:32 PM -0500 12/13/99, Noma Petroff wrote:

>

> >To begin with demanding home schooling, means to propose a revolution in

> >which only wealthy and middle class can meaningfully participate -- since

> >individuals from the lower economic strata will not have the luxury of

> >keeping women at home to tutor their children. Rather, those women will

> >have to work. And in some countries, so will the children.

>

> Not so. For thousands of years women and children have contributed to

> their lower class family's income by working *within* the family

> enterprise or earning their keep as an apprentice to someone else. Their

> work was considered part of their educational training.

But, you see, women didn't for tousands of years live in this kind of

demoniac ugra-karma industrialized society. This started to happen only some

hundred years ago. And we have to take in a consideration which kind of

society we are living in. Or, are we supposed to live in some non existing

vacuum?

Ys. Sraddha dd

[Guest guest]

> At 5:32 PM -0500 12/13/99, Noma Petroff wrote:

>

> >To begin with demanding home schooling, means to propose a revolution in

> >which only wealthy and middle class can meaningfully participate -- since

> >individuals from the lower economic strata will not have the luxury of

> >keeping women at home to tutor their children. Rather, those women will

> >have to work. And in some countries, so will the children.

>

> Not so. For thousands of years women and children have contributed to

> their lower class family's income by working *within* the family

> enterprise or earning their keep as an apprentice to someone else. Their

> work was considered part of their educational training.

But, you see, women didn't for tousands of years live in this kind of

demoniac ugra-karma industrialized society. This started to happen only some

hundred years ago. And we have to take in a consideration which kind of

society we are living in. Or, are we supposed to live in some non existing

vacuum?

Ys. Sraddha dd

[Guest guest]

On 13 Dec 1999, Madhava Gosh wrote:

 

 

>

> Does anyone else note the irony that ISKCON got started because a woman gave

Srila Prabhupada a free ride to America?

>

>

 

 

And an extremely successful business person at that. She respected Vedic

culture, one of the motivating factors behind her assistance to Srila

Prabhupada. Curiously, she seemed to do more than most for Srila Prabhupada

during a difficult time.

[Guest guest]

On 13 Dec 1999, Madhava Gosh wrote:

 

 

>

> Does anyone else note the irony that ISKCON got started because a woman gave

Srila Prabhupada a free ride to America?

>

>

 

 

And an extremely successful business person at that. She respected Vedic

culture, one of the motivating factors behind her assistance to Srila

Prabhupada. Curiously, she seemed to do more than most for Srila Prabhupada

during a difficult time.

[Guest guest]

> .

> But, you see, women didn't for tousands of years live in this kind of

> demoniac ugra-karma industrialized society. This started to happen only some

> hundred years ago. And we have to take in a consideration which kind of

> society we are living in. Or, are we supposed to live in some non existing

> vacuum?

> Ys. Sraddha dd

 

There was no paper money in Vedic society. If you use paper money, you aren't

Vedic.

 

There were no automobiles or yantra airplanes in Vedic Society. If you use

them, you aren't Vedic.

 

Noone drank blood milk in Vedic society. If you drink blood milk, you aren't

Vedic.

 

There were no computers in Vedic society. If you use computers, you aren't

Vedic.

 

There were no educated outspoken women managers in Vedic society. Educated

outspoken women managers aren't Vedic.

 

It is not Vedic to pass stool into water. If you pass stool into water , you

aren't Vedic.

 

As soon as the men drink only milk from protected cows, don't use cars,

airplanes, computers or paper money, and get their stool together, I too will

agree that women shouldn't be managers.

[Guest guest]

> .

> But, you see, women didn't for tousands of years live in this kind of

> demoniac ugra-karma industrialized society. This started to happen only some

> hundred years ago. And we have to take in a consideration which kind of

> society we are living in. Or, are we supposed to live in some non existing

> vacuum?

> Ys. Sraddha dd

 

There was no paper money in Vedic society. If you use paper money, you aren't

Vedic.

 

There were no automobiles or yantra airplanes in Vedic Society. If you use

them, you aren't Vedic.

 

Noone drank blood milk in Vedic society. If you drink blood milk, you aren't

Vedic.

 

There were no computers in Vedic society. If you use computers, you aren't

Vedic.

 

There were no educated outspoken women managers in Vedic society. Educated

outspoken women managers aren't Vedic.

 

It is not Vedic to pass stool into water. If you pass stool into water , you

aren't Vedic.

 

As soon as the men drink only milk from protected cows, don't use cars,

airplanes, computers or paper money, and get their stool together, I too will

agree that women shouldn't be managers.

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 12/17/1999 12:50:31 AM Eastern Standard Time,

Madhava.Gosh.ACBSP (AT) bbt (DOT) se writes:

 

> As soon as the men drink only milk from protected cows, don't use cars,

> airplanes, computers or paper money, and get their stool together, I too

> will

> agree that women shouldn't be managers.

>

 

Thank you prabhu for your usual down-to-earth perspective. Either they can

lead or get out of the way and let anyone willing and capable do it. At this

point in the fledgling era of KC in the west, no talented and willing

administrator should be rejected because of gender. As our society evolves

over generations I am sure women will be satisfied to remain the organizers

of a happy home, but to expect us to jump to that at this point and

circumstance or limit our daughters, is unrealistic and unproductive. yhs,

Kanti dasi

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 12/17/1999 12:50:31 AM Eastern Standard Time,

Madhava.Gosh.ACBSP (AT) bbt (DOT) se writes:

 

> As soon as the men drink only milk from protected cows, don't use cars,

> airplanes, computers or paper money, and get their stool together, I too

> will

> agree that women shouldn't be managers.

>

 

Thank you prabhu for your usual down-to-earth perspective. Either they can

lead or get out of the way and let anyone willing and capable do it. At this

point in the fledgling era of KC in the west, no talented and willing

administrator should be rejected because of gender. As our society evolves

over generations I am sure women will be satisfied to remain the organizers

of a happy home, but to expect us to jump to that at this point and

circumstance or limit our daughters, is unrealistic and unproductive. yhs,

Kanti dasi