Reading the books is like hearing the flute of Krishna

[Guruvani 0]

 

Are you suggesting that Prabhupada did not know the meaning of the word "rape" in English? that is beyond absurd as Prabhupada was very articulate in his writing and

 

Srila Prabhpada explained in the purport in what context he was using the word rape; "aggression toward a woman".

 

Srila Prabhupada was using the word "rape" in the context of it meaning "aggression toward a beautiful woman".

 

That is what he explained in the purport.

Rape means aggressive behaviour towards a woman.

 

You can deny that and try to screw out some heinous meaning, but it is only a stupid attempt to make Srila Prabhupada look bad.

 

In essence, you are raping Srila Prabhupada by accusing him of something he did not mean to say.

[suchandra 1]

 

In essence, you are raping Srila Prabhupada by accusing him of something he did not mean to say.

 

Typical case of Prabhupada's young uneducated editors didnt properly explain Prabhupada how to put it in proper English. And "Although rape is not legally allowed" also just refers to a ksatriya who kidnaps his future wive like vedic ksatriyas used to perform such rituals. In this way it became clear who is the strongest. Although brahmins would never do such a thing.

[Kulapavana 0]

 

Srila Prabhpada explained in the purport in what context he was using the word rape; "aggression toward a woman".

 

Srila Prabhupada was using the word "rape" in the context of it meaning "aggression toward a beautiful woman".

 

That is what he explained in the purport.

Rape means aggressive behaviour towards a woman.

 

 

Here is a quote in question: "A man is always famous for his aggression toward a beautiful woman, and such aggression is sometimes considered rape."

 

it all depends on the FORM such an aggression TAKES.

 

is it an aggressive philosophical debate with a beautiful woman Prabhupada is talking about here? or something else? what? brushing her hair? dont be ridiculous.

 

if that aggression is having sex with her against her will (as sometimes happens) "such aggression is sometimes considered rape". That is how I and most other people would understand that sentence.

[Guruvani 0]

 

Typical case of Prabhupada's young uneducated editors didnt properly explain Prabhupada how to put it in proper English. And "Although rape is not legally allowed" also just refers to a ksatriya who kidnaps his future wive like vedic ksatriyas used to perform such rituals. In this way it became clear who is the strongest. Although brahmins would never do such a thing.

Yes.

From a purely spiritual platform, a pure soul in a male body has NO aggression at all towards a woman.

From the topmost spiritual platform, what we call "romancing the girl" is seen as rape.

When a male feels physical lust and passion for a girl and he makes advances to obtain her as his lover or wife, then from the highest platform that is seen as one soul raping another.

 

From the very highest vision of spiritual understanding what we think of as "love for a woman" is simply the desire of one soul to rape another for personal sense pleasure.

 

From the platform Srila Prabhupada was on, he saw any attraction towards a woman by a man as a desire to rape that soul for sense pleasure.

 

Romeo was raping Juliet.

That is how the paramahansa sees it.

 

So, if Kulapavana has a wife, then from the highest vision he is also a rapist.

[Guruvani 0]

 

Here is a quote in question: "A man is always famous for his aggression toward a beautiful woman, and such aggression is sometimes considered rape."

 

it all depends on the FORM such an aggression TAKES.

 

is it an aggressive philosophical debate with a beautiful woman Prabhupada is talking about here? or something else? what? brushing her hair? dont be ridiculous.

 

if that aggression is having sex with her against her will (as sometimes happens) "such aggression is sometimes considered rape". That is how I and most other people would understand that sentence.

 

Srila Prabhupada said:

 

 

A man is always famous for his aggression toward a beautiful woman, and such aggression is sometimes considered rape.

 

Are you saying that Srila Prabhupada is saying that a man becomes famous for assaulting and sexually abusing a woman?

 

No, he is making reference to Vedic Kshatriyas who were famous for capturing their princess from her family by force.

 

There are many examples of that by great Vedic Kshatriyas, but according to Kulapavana they are all brutal men who sexually abused women.

[Kulapavana 0]

 

From the topmost spiritual platform, what we call "romancing the girl" is seen as rape.

 

for crying out loud, look at the purport... it is ALL talking about ordinary affairs of men and women from a material mode of goodness perspective - the rape part is no exception.

 

there is no question of blaming Prabhupada - relax! it is all about trying to understand what he wanted to say. people dont have to agree with everything he says - we are not all one. but it is fundamentally dishonest to try to interpolate meanings that are clearly not there in the original.

[Guruvani 0]

 

for crying out loud, look at the purport... it is ALL talking about ordinary affairs of men and women from a material mode of goodness perspective - the rape part is no exception.

 

there is no question of blaming Prabhupada - relax! it is all about trying to understand what he wanted to say. people dont have to agree with everything he says - we are not all one. but it is fundamentally dishonest to try to interpolate meanings that are clearly not there in the original.

 

Take your blinders off fella.

The verse is about a woman calling her rapist a hero.

 

Srila Prabhupada is commenting on a verse where the woman is refering to her man as her "hero".

 

In Vedic times, when a Kshatriya kidnapped a girl and made her his Queen, then this kidnapper was actually her hero in her mind.

 

Our problem is that we think the demonic western style of exploiting women is somehow superior to the Vedic culture.

 

I got news for ya'.

 

The Vedic culture and the kidnapping of young girls by great warriors is a lot more glorious and honorable that the prostitute factory we call "western civilization".

[Kulapavana 0]

 

No, he is making reference to Vedic Kshatriyas who were famous for capturing their princess from her family by force.

 

There are many examples of that by great Vedic Kshatriyas, but according to Kulapavana they are all brutal men who sexually abused women.

 

WHERE is the reference to vedic kshatriyas? in your head alone.

 

Prabhupada says: "A man is always famous for his aggression toward a beautiful woman". Even nowadays here in US such people are famous for such aggressive behavior towards women, we even call them studs (in Rig Veda they were called bulls). But SOMETIMES such aggression becomes an illegal act of rape. In vedic times kidnapped women were not raped by the kshatriyas. see the story of Krsna and 16,000 princesses. but they had very little choice but to eventually submitt, as there was no way back for them (see also the story of Amba).

[Guruvani 0]

 

WHERE is the reference to vedic kshatriyas? in your head alone.

 

 

 

Then tell me of any Brahmanas or sudras that are famous heros in romantic affairs of the Vedic scriptures?

[Kulapavana 0]

Like I said: read the purport from the beginning. It starts like this:

 

Every husband is certainly a great hero to his wife

 

you ritviks are professional contortionists. you would not "understand" anything unless you managed to twist it in five separate places. it is quite pointless to use reason and logic on you.

[Guruvani 0]

 

Like I said: read the purport from the beginning. It starts like this:

 

Every husband is certainly a great hero to his wife

 

you ritviks are professional contortionists. you would not "understand" anything unless you managed to twist it in five separate places. it is quite pointless to use reason and logic on you.

 

So, tell me, what rapist do you know that is a hero to the woman he raped?

You are obviously hell bent on making Srila Prabhupada into a maniac.

 

Send me a post card from hell.

I have nothing more to say to any fool who accuses Srila Prabhupada of saying what you say he is saying.

 

I think you are just a despicable character with some very rotten ideas about the personality of Srila Prabhupada.

 

Remind me never to discuss anything with you again.

[cbrahma 0]

How quickly these 'spiritual' discussions degrade into personal flaming.

[Guruvani 0]

 

How quickly these 'spiritual' discussions degrade into personal flaming.

Oh yeah, you are so right.

It's only acceptable to flame Krishna and his pure devotees on these forums, but we can't flame knuckleheads who present Srila Prabhupada as a cruel and violent person.

[cbrahma 0]

I would never be so bold as to blaspheme such an advanced personality as His Divine Grace Srila Prabhupada whose intelligence and knowledge is evidenced by the library of books he translated and purported.

He is so obviously an erudite scholar with a full grasp of the English language. So I understand your indignation.

 

I just never know how to deal with what is called 'apharada'.

 

 

Oh yeah, you are so right.

It's only acceptable to flame Krishna and his pure devotees on these forums, but we can't flame knucklheads who present Srila Prabhupada as a cruel and violent person.

[Guruvani 0]

 

I would never be so bold as to blaspheme such an advanced personality as His Divine Grace Srila Prabhupada whose intelligence and knowledge is evidenced by the library of books he translated and purported.

He is so obviously an erudite scholar with a full grasp of the English language. So I understand your indignation.

 

I just never know how to deal with what is called 'apharada'.

 

Kulapavana is trying to say that Srila Prabhupada believed than women love to be brutally assaulted and sexually abused.

Obviously, his opinion of Srila Prabhupada is very low.

[cbrahma 0]

It seems the whole business is one of culture and language.

 

Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) - Cite This Source

rape1 /reɪp/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[reyp] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation noun, verb, raped, rap·ing.

–noun 1. the unlawful compelling of a woman through physical force or duress to have sexual intercourse.

2. any act of sexual intercourse that is forced upon a person.

3. statutory rape.

4. an act of plunder, violent seizure, or abuse; despoliation; violation: the rape of the countryside.

5. Archaic. the act of seizing and carrying off by force.

–verb (used with object) 6. to force to have sexual intercourse.

7. to plunder (a place); despoil.

8. to seize, take, or carry off by force.

–verb (used without object) 9. to commit rape.

 

The archaic definiton (5) seems to be the intended one. Not being a woman of the time of Krsna and Arjuna I cannot speak with authority about their fantasies. The word 'rapture' has the same root I believe.

 

rap·ture (rāp'chər) Pronunciation Key

<!--BOF_HEAD-->n. <!--EOF_HEAD--><!--BOF_DEF-->

 

1. The state of being transported by a lofty emotion; ecstasy.
   
2. An expression of ecstatic feeling. Often used in the plural.
   
3. The transporting of a person from one place to another, especially to heaven.

<!--EOF_DEF--><!--BOF_HEAD-->tr.v. <!--EOF_HEAD--><!--BOF_SUBHEAD-->rap·tured, rap·tur·ing, rap·tures

<!--EOF_SUBHEAD--><!--BOF_DEF-->To enrapture.

<!--EOF_DEF-->

<!--BOF_DEF-->

[Obsolete French, abduction, carrying off, from <TT>rapt</TT>, carried away, from Old French <TT>rat</TT>, from Latin <TT>raptus</TT>; see rapt.]

<!--EOF_DEF-->

See defiinition 3

 

The Latin

 

<TABLE width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD vAlign=top width="20%" bgColor=#f7dca6>present

rapiō

 

</TD><TD width="1%"></TD><TD vAlign=top width="20%" bgColor=#f7dca6>infinitive

rapere

 

</TD><TD width="1%"></TD><TD vAlign=top width="20%" bgColor=#f7dca6>perfect

rapuī

 

</TD><TD width="1%"></TD><TD vAlign=top width="20%" bgColor=#f7dca6>supine

raptum

 

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

 

1. snatch, grab, carry off

It appears that the word over time has taken on more and more violent connotations.

Time again being the culprit.

 

 

Kulapavana is trying to say that Srila Prabhupada believed than women love to be brutally assaulted and sexually abused.

Obviously, his opinion of Srila Prabhupada is very low.

[Guest guest]

 

Kulapavana is trying to say that Srila Prabhupada believed than women love to be brutally assaulted and sexually abused.

Obviously, his opinion of Srila Prabhupada is very low.

 

This is how Tripurari Swami explained it in a sanga letter:

 

"Srila Prabhupada did not always use words that were appropriate to our frame of reference. In this case I always felt that he used the word rape in error. What Srila Prabhupada is saying in this purport is that women are attracted to aggressive lovers. Rape means something else entirely. Rape is defined as having sexual intercourse with a person against their will. Indeed, how does it make sense to say that a person wants something that is against their will?"

 

___

 

It's unfortunate that Kulapavana has such a base and low appreciation of Prabhupada. And he has even said that he helps translate Prabhupada's books into Polish. I can only imagine what those translations must be like.

[Jahnava Nitai Das 2]

Many times Srila Prabhupada's use of language differed from our common usage of words. Someone with a little intelligence can easily comprehend what Prabhupada is saying, but those who intentionally want to belittle Srila Prabhupada will be happy to stick with their misunderstandings.

 

A clear example of Srila Prabhupada using a definition not commonly accepted is the following use of "nonvegetarian" in Caitanya Caritamrita:

 

"Similarly, masura dhal and urad dhal are also considered nonvegetarian. These two dhals contain a great amount of protein, and food rich in protein is considered nonvegetarian." (CC Madhya 4.169)

 

Now, people like Kulapavana want to explain that Prabhupada's statements all must be understood exactly according to their 2006 Webster's dictionary, but Srila Prabhupada's language usage didn't follow such conventions. In the example above, urad dhal is not nonvegetarian by any literal definition of the word, yet Srila Prabhupada chose to convey his meaning through this word - using it in the context of a forbidden food. Of course nonvegetarian literally means not coming from vegetation, so there is no way according to the English language that urad dhal can be nonvegetarian. But understanding Srila Prabhupada's unique use of words is not difficult for one who is sincerely trying to hear from him.

 

Srila Prabhupada made a similar use of the word rape, taking an uncommon meaning for the word. If you do a search in google, and use their dictionary feature, the second meaning for rape is given as:

 

"The act of seizing and carrying off by force; abduction."

 

Guruvani has already explained that Kshatriyas were glorified in ancient times for their ability to carry off a woman from svayamvaras (an ancient form of marriage where the woman selects her husband from a large assembly of kings). The person would have to simultaneously fight against all the other kings and defeat them in battle while trying to carry off the bride. A sensible person would immediately understand that Srila Prabhupada was using the word rape in this context, but Kulapavana will insist that Prabhupada is saying all women like to be sexually abused by men. Kulapavana obviously thinks Srila Prabhupada was a nutcase. You really can't do a greater disservice to Srila Prabhupada than to twist his words. It is obvious that Kulapavana is struggling with his faith in Srila Prabhupada, and is looking for an easy exit by finding distasteful things in Srila Prabhupada's teachings, probably because of the fall of his previous living guru, Harikesh. I would be interested in knowing which of his present living gurus holds the same belief on this topic as he does, or whether this is just something he grew himself from his own fertile imagination.

 

Srila Prabhupada's original statement is as follows:

 

 

"A man is always famous for his aggression toward a beautiful woman, and such aggression is sometimes considered rape. Although rape is not legally allowed, it is a fact that a woman likes a man who is very expert at rape."

 

In reply Kulapavana states:

 

actually, because the phrase "not legally allowed" is used, it most likely is rape as we know it.

In India even today it is not legally allowed for boys to associate with girls, or for boys to talk to girls in a secluded place (they will still be beaten in public in most villages, with police arresting the boy who was beaten). This is very common and happens throughout India, and often comes on the news when someone catches it on film. So what does Srila Prabhupada mean by "legally allowed"? Is he refering to some particular section of the criminal code? No, he is obviously refering to the unwritten accepted cultural rules of interaction. It is not legally allowed for a man to carry off a bride without the parents permission - even if the bride agrees to it. This is still the rule in India, where the parents will get full support from the police in pusuing a boy who has eloped with their daughter. Even today the boy will be arrested when caught.

 

When Srila Prabhupada says, "Although rape is not legally allowed, it is a fact that a woman likes a man who is very expert at rape", only a dimwit will understand it to be refering to the modern definition of rape (sexual abuse). One such dimwit (Kulapavana) insists this is true, and even goes on to forgive Srila Prabhupada for his imperfections:

 

my father has some faults too, but I forgive him these imperfections out of love. I dont try to justify these faults, or twist logic and reason to explain them - that would be dishonest.

Anyone who feels he is qualified to forgive Srila Prabhupada for his imagined "mistakes" is something like a worm in stool.

 

Kulapavana tries to defend his insults to Srila Prabhupada as follows:

 

Are you suggesting that Prabhupada did not know the meaning of the word "rape" in English? that is beyond absurd as Prabhupada was very articulate in his writing and certainly came across this word in his life. besides, whatever happened to the idea people like you propagate that his books were dictated by Krsna?

First, I would offer that it is Kulapavana who does not know the definitions of rape, as pointed out earlier. The second definition given for "rape" is to "forcibly carry away", not to sexually abuse someone. It is only Kulapavana who insists Srila Prabhupada is refering to sexually abusing someone.

 

Secondly, as has been shown in the example of "nonvegetarian", Srila Prabhupada often used uncommon or nonexistant meanings for words. These are easily understood by context and sincere study of Srila Prabhupada's books. Fools like Kulapavana who are very proud of their so-called academic qualifications are bewildered when confronting such statements by Srila Prabhupada.

 

I shudder to think how Kulapavana must have really destroyed Srila Prabhupada's books while working on translating them in the past.

[Kulapavana 0]

you all imply a lot of things in your posts. they may or may not be true. you want to portray me as an aparadhi with no faith in Prabhupada, because I dare to disagree with your notions of who Prabhupada is. to you - he could never be wrong, and could never make a mistake. that is the core of your belief. personally, I do not share that belief. I owe a tremendous debt of gratitude to Srila Prabhupada, he is my siksha guru, I understand him to be a true Vaishnava Acharya of the greatest caliber, but I refuse to twist reason and logic to support the notion that he was always right. I simply do not believe that, after encountering enough examples to the contrary.

 

people like JNdas and Guruvani will not shy away from fabricating all kinds of lies and bogus explanations to support their belief. I think this behavior actually hurts Prabhupada's reputation. He does not need your lies to shine.

 

why do you feel compelled to tell lies such as "Kulapavana obviously thinks Srila Prabhupada was a nutcase"? where did I suggest that? show me. You tell such blatant lies because you have to resort to lies in keeping your belief system alive. you have no problem telling lies if you find it suitable. you are not honorable. you are not Aryan. what is that about truthfullness being the last leg of dharma in this age? you dont even have that leg.

 

yes, there are errors in the books which need to be fixed. that purport above is one of them. either way you look at it it is an error. erroneus word use or an error in judgement - take your pick. over the years I have spent countless hours explaining such passages to bewildered people, defending guru, shastra, and the vedic tradition. but I dont need to lie to people to explain these things. neither do you. the truth shall set you free. people know right away you are lying to them. ask any objective reader how they understand that passage. ask any woman how she feels about it. and stop lying to yourself and others.

 

because of liars like you, people dont trust Hare Krishnas. from telling people lies to sell a book in the airport, to telling them lies about Vaishnava traditions in order to capture material power for themselves. you always justify telling lies by some crooked logic and obscure references. whatever works, right? well... it doesn't work, not in the long run. shreyas and preyas.

[Guest guest]

 

Fools like Kulapavana who are very proud of their so-called academic qualifications are bewildered when confronting such statements by Srila Prabhupada.

 

 

Dear Das,

 

Why the name calling? I may not agree with Kulapavana, but he hasn't abused any member. He's simply posted some controversial views, but who hasn't? Some members have attacked the movement started by Prabhupada, nearly alleging that every HK guru is fallen, child abuse is regular in HK, and so on.

 

How come they get away with it despite their abusive language, whereas a decent member like Kula is being targeted over and over again? I am really surprised by this attitude. An old member is being called names for stating his views, whereas it's perfectly justifiable for a johnny-come-lately to attack SP's movement in almost every thread!

 

Why these double standards?

[Kulapavana 0]

 

Srila Prabhupada made a similar use of the word rape, taking an uncommon meaning for the word. If you do a search in google, and use their dictionary feature, the second meaning for rape is given as:

 

"The act of seizing and carrying off by force; abduction."

 

First, I would offer that it is Kulapavana who does not know the definitions of rape, as pointed out earlier. The second definition given for "rape" is to "forcibly carry away", not to sexually abuse someone. It is only Kulapavana who insists Srila Prabhupada is refering to sexually abusing someone.

 

 

Srila Prabhupada writes about kshatriyas carrying off women by force many times in his books and NOT ONCE does he use the word "rape" in that context. Why? Perhaps because he understands that the word "rape" in that context is simply not appropriate.

 

That is why I think that is case of the above discussed purport the word "rape" refers to a sexual assault. I may be wrong, but it certainly looks that way for all the above referenced reasons.

[Guest guest]

 

When Srila Prabhupada says, "Although rape is not legally allowed, it is a fact that a woman likes a man who is very expert at rape", only a dimwit will understand it to be refering to the modern definition of rape (sexual abuse).

 

Unless familiar with SP's style and his limitations vis-a-vis English language, a person should be startled by this statement. Reading this statement, most people would conclude that:

 

* SP is glorifying rape

* SP alleges that women are often attracted to the best rapist in town.

 

Sorry, but this is how most people feel when they read SP's conclusion: a woman likes a man who's expert at rape. It's impossible to rationalize this, which is what you're doing. Instead, why can't we just agree that SP has made mistakes and leave it at that? He wasn't god. He was human at the end of the day.

[cbrahma 0]

As a poet and writer, I understand words have several meanings in different contexts and with different authors.

The previous posts have pointed out that 'rape' has an archaic sense of 'being carried off', which fits perfectly with the context. I had no problem with it.

 

 

 

Unless familiar with SP's style and his limitations vis-a-vis English language, a person should be startled by this statement. Reading this statement, most people would conclude that:

 

* SP is glorifying rape

* SP alleges that women are often attracted to the best rapist in town.

 

Sorry, but this is how most people feel when they read SP's conclusion: a woman likes a man who's expert at rape. It's impossible to rationalize this, which is what you're doing. Instead, why can't we just agree that SP has made mistakes and leave it at that? He wasn't god. He was human at the end of the day.

[Guest guest]

Kulapavana said: "you always justify telling lies by some crooked logic and obscure references"

 

Jndas is not telling a lie, he has simply pointing out to you that "rape" has another meaning given in the dictionary as "carrying off by force". The fact that your mind, being conditioned by this day and age, automatically thinks of forced sexual intercourse and then saying that that is obviously what Prabhupada ment by it, is very unfortunate. It shows more the state of your mind, then the mind of a cultured elderly gentleman from India.You do Prabhupada such a great disservice, yet you seem to think you are qualified to translate Prabhupada's books into Polish, and when someone points your mistakes out to you, you can only revert to calling them a liar. Which books of Prabhupada did you translate to Polish, and under whose authority were you working.

[Kulapavana 0]

 

Kulapavana said: "you always justify telling lies by some crooked logic and obscure references"

 

Jndas is not telling a lie, he has simply pointing out to you that "rape" has another meaning given in the dictionary as "carrying off by force".

 

Here comes another "defender of the truth"

 

I called JNdas a liar in THAT context:

 

"why do you feel compelled to tell lies such as "Kulapavana obviously thinks Srila Prabhupada was a nutcase"? where did I suggest that? show me."

 

it should be plain to anybody what the reference was. does that still confuse you? no wonder you have hard time grasping what I said on this thread.

 

in short: Prabhupada did NOT use the word rape in the context of forceful abduction of a girl by a ksahtriya previously in his books - thus it may be reasonably concluded that in this purport he is referring to a sexual assault.

 

 

Which books of Prabhupada did you translate to Polish, and under whose authority were you working.

 

for your information, it was in the early eighties, first three Cantos and several other books, under Harikesh. have a field day with that one, prabhu.