PART 1: WHY DO WE MAKE ALL THESE DISTINCTIONS?

This is the first of a series of articles under a common heading "Family Life 
in the Vaisnava Culture." Somehow or other, my attempts to begin writing have 
brought me to the conclusion that I cannot explain the topic properly without 
first addressing what is sometimes called "women's issue." This is so perhaps 
because in the family, the woman plays a central role. How we see woman 
determines how we see family.

"Ha!" -- I can already hear you, dear reader, saying: "Now the great 
Dhyana-kunda dasi, a woman, will prove that actually women are the crown of 
creation, and that family life is the nectar we are all hankering for!"

True, I have a body and mind of a woman, with all that it entails. And my 
motive to enter family life was not exactly to give glorious example for the 
fallen conditioned souls. Still, since about half of us ISKCON devotees are 
women, since most of all ISKCON devotees are married, and since sannyasis do 
not usually feel the vocation to elaborate on topics of women and family, 
someone else has to do it... Therefore please, bear with my 
still-too-materialistic and lowly self, and I will try to keep my explanations 
as close to sastra as I only can.


Once in the early days of ISKCON, Jadurani dasi asked Srila Prabhupada: "Is it 
true that women are less intelligent?" "If you think you are a girl," he 
replied, "then you are indeed foolish!"

I heard this story many times, in several versions, and it never failed to 
simultaneously delight and bewilder me. If foolishness is defined as one's 
identification with the body, why, then, does the stamp of "lesser 
intelligence" apply just to women? Do men not identify with their bodies? 
Maybe we should rather label materialists as less intelligent, and devotees, 
regardless of gender, as more intelligent? Well, this has already been done by 
the mahajanas, and there is plenty of sastric evidence to this effect (for 
instance, SB 2.3.10 and 3.32.25, and especially SB 11.5.32).

"This is all right," a lady devotee may say. "This after all is why I joined 
this movement: to stop identifying with the body. But why, then, does 
everybody around constantly remind me: You are a woman, you should keep your 
head covered. You are a woman, you should not talk with men. Frankly, in my 
karmi life I have never been so aware of my being a woman! And what about all 
these horrible verses, like "A woman is a gateway to hell for an advancing 
devotee" [SB 3.31.39]?! Looks like "woman" and "devotee" are opposites!"

At this point, the girl may even start to cry out of agitation and 
frustration. Seeing this, a preacher may think: "Just see. A typical mental 
woman. And how strongly she identifies with her nature as a woman! If she were 
an intelligent transcendentalist, surely she would not take these words so 
personal."

Let us try to disentangle this bunch of contradictions.

All the living entities are spirit souls, with their original svarupa, 
spiritual nature, which they manifest in the spiritual world, in loving 
service to the Supreme Personality of Godhead. This form may be of a man, 
woman, animal, plant, or even of what we would normally consider dead matter: 
a stone, a flute, a river. In the spiritual world, everything is living and 
conscious. Varieties of form and gender exist not in order to limit our 
capacities to render service, but to add variety to the Lord's enjoyment. 
Every living entity in the spiritual world is fully satisfied with the form he 
(she) has, and every one of them serves Krsna in full harmony and cooperation 
with all the others. Nobody is "worse." Nobody is "less."

Funny enough, if we were to ascribe one gender to all the living entities in 
their constitutional position, it would be feminine, prakrti, as opposed to 
the one Supreme Male, Krsna, who is purusa. Why are the living entities 
considered feminine? Because the quality of a female is to serve the enjoyment 
of the male and to depend on him for her own enjoyment. Perhaps you have known 
so-called modern women, who want to live independently and not be controlled 
by anyone; they may be beautiful and look elegant, but something else, deeper, 
is missing: they have lost their femininity.

In the material world, however, the living entities, instead of serving the 
pleasure of the supreme purusa, Krsna, try to take His position. "The living 
entities, in the guises of men and women, are trying to enjoy the material 
energy; therefore in one sense everyone is purusa because purusa means 
'enjoyer' and prakrti means 'enjoyed.' In the material world both the 
so-called man and so-called woman are imitating the real purusa, the Supreme 
Personality of Godhead..." writes Srila Prabhupada (SB 3.25.11 purport).

This attempt to reverse the roles is the cause of our feeling of unfulfillment 
in the material world. Our nature is to surrender to our Lord and enjoy by 
serving His enjoyment, not by forcing others to surrender to us and serve our 
enjoyment. Even a child knows that it's more fun to give gifts than to receive 
them.

The distinction of man and woman in the material world has nothing to do with 
our svarupa. It is not that if I am a man now, it means that in the spiritual 
world I will also serve Krsna in a male form. After all, what is so 
significant about my gender in this life? I have been through countless lives, 
switching from one gender to the other, back and forth. Actually, considering 
how easily the subtle body switches from masculine to feminine nature and vice 
versa at the moment when we pass from one gross body to another at death, it 
is quite fantastic how strongly we are conditioned by this particular 
designation, and how strongly we lust for the opposite sex: for another living 
entity's temporary dress...

Srila Prabhupada writes: "We should always remember, as it is stated in the 
Bhagavad-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." (SB 3.31.41 purport)

Why, then, do transcendentalists not simply give up all their bodily 
designations and stop making distinctions between men and women? Well, this is 
indeed one of the goals of the spiritual practice. And indeed, advanced 
transcendentalists do not see around just men and women; they see souls, 
servants of Krsna. This was the case with the young Sukadeva Gosvami. "When 
Sri Vyasadeva was following his son, beautiful young damsels who were bathing 
naked covered their bodies with cloth, although Sri Vyasadeva himself was not 
naked. But they had not done so when his son had passed. The sage inquired 
about this, and the young ladies replied that his son was purified and when 
looking at them made no distinctions between male and female. But the sage 
made such distinctions." (SB 1.4.5)

From this little passage, we can draw two conclusions: one, that the perfect 
transcendentalist does not distinguish between male and female, and two, that 
such an equal vision is something very exalted and should not be imitated by 
those transcendentalists who are not yet absolutely free from sex desire. 
Actually even those who indeed ARE absolutely free (like Vyasadeva), may still 
feel obliged to act as if they made distinctions, to set proper example for 
their less advanced followers. Srila Prabhupada explains in the purport: 
"...Srila Vyasadeva played the part of a householder. A householder has to 
distinguish between a male and female; otherwise he cannot be a householder. 
One should, therefore, attempt to know the distinction between body and soul 
without any attachment for male and female. As long as such attachment is 
there, one should not try to become a sannyasi like Sukadeva Gosvami. At least 
theoretically one must be convinced that a living entity is neither male nor 
female. The outward dress is made of matter by material nature to attract the 
opposite sex and thus keep one entangled in material existence. A liberated 
soul is above this perverted distinction."

Thus, an advancing transcendentalist, who is properly situated, is "at least 
theoretically" convinced that other living entities, including other 
transcendentalists, are neither male nor female. In the same time such a 
person honestly admits that he or she is still attracted by the opposite sex, 
and therefore observes the rules set in order to diminish such attraction. In 
this way, the devotee avoids the pitfalls of sex attraction, and does not put 
others in the same danger by his or her own too loose behavior.

PART 2: EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES?

Let us go back to the question we began our discussion with: Are women less 
intelligent? Or, what is perhaps more relevant to us spiritual practitioners: 
If women as a class are indeed less intelligent, does it make them less 
capable of achieving spiritual perfection?

In different places, Srila Prabhupada explains "lesser intelligence" from 
different (but complementary) perspectives. Let us consider three quotes.

QUOTE 1. "Generally all women desire material enjoyment. They are called less 
intelligent because they are mostly prone to material enjoyment." (SB 3.23.54 
purp.) In other places, Srila Prabhupada explains how the woman is generally 
fond of household prosperity, ornaments, furniture and dresses, and how she 
needs to be protected by men, so that her natural tendency for selfishness 
would not be manifested. Look into your heart: Are you not like that? This may 
be depressing. But, on the other hand, if you give up selfishness and become 
Krsna conscious, what will happen to your "lesser intelligence"?

QUOTE 2. "Srimati Draupadi [...], although begrieved for the murder of her 
sons, and although the murderer was present before her, could not withdraw the 
due respect generally offered to a brahmana or to the son of a brahmana. This 
is due to her mild nature as a woman. Women as a class are no better than 
boys, and therefore they have no discriminatory power like that of a man. 
[...] One must have good discriminatory power to judge a thing on its merit. 
We should not follow the mild nature of women and thereby accept that which is 
not genuine. Asvatthama may be respected by a good-natured woman, but that 
does not mean that he is as good as a genuine brahmana." (SB 1.7.42 purp.)

Personally, I find this quotation particularly helpful in accepting the idea 
of myself being less intelligent. The society I have been brought up in views 
those less intelligent (as defined by psychological tests) with disdain. 
Lesser intelligence is something absolutely negative, an unforgivable sin. It 
makes one an object of not only ridicule but also aggression (just remember 
your school days!). No wonder female readers of Srila Prabhupada's books tend 
to shrink with horror when they find they are supposedly "less intelligent."

The Vedic wisdom recognizes that people differ. Moreover, it builds on the 
differences. In the Vedic society, everyone has his or her place and 
engagement, where one's strengths are utilized to the maximum, and one's 
weaknesses cause minimum harm. Nobody attacks the ksatriya for his being 
proud. Nobody ridicules the woman for her being less intelligent.

You have certainly noticed a certain striking feature of the quote above: even 
though Srimati Draupadi is compared there to an undiscriminating child and her 
judgment is declared wrong, still she is glorified. If you read the whole 
discussion about punishing Asvatthama, from which the quote comes, you will 
see that all the men participating, including Lord Krsna, accepted Draupadi's 
arguments against killing the culprit as glorious. She had her own unique 
perspective which enriched the discussion and helped in finding the best 
solution. Thus the women's lesser intelligence' should properly be seen rather 
as 'different intelligence.' It is 'lesser,' because it generally requires 
male support; but it is good for delicate tasks for which male intelligence is 
less adapted (such as rearing children, solving interpersonal conflicts, or or 
counseling).

Let's note the difference between the Western and Vedic understanding of the 
term "intelligence." It is not just sharpness of mind, just brain power. It's 
rather the power of discrimination. HH Bhaktivaibhava Swami once explained in 
a class that intellectually, the woman may be as efficient as the man; the 
difficulty lies within the decision-making process. Even the most intellectual 
woman is never purely logical in her decisions; she tends to be driven by 
emotions, and is thus easily misguided.

QUOTE 3. "Here is a difference between male and female that exists even in the 
higher statutes of life -- in fact, even between Lord Siva and his wife. Lord 
Siva could understand Citraketu very nicely, but Parvati could not. Thus even 
in the higher statutes of life there is a difference between the understanding 
of a male and that of a female. It may be clearly said that the understanding 
of a woman is always inferior to the understanding of a man. in the Western 
countries there is now agitation to the effect that man and woman should be 
considered equal, but from this verse it appears that woman is always less 
intelligent than man." (SB 6.17.34-35 purp.)

In the last quote, Srila Prabhupada indicates how far the Vedic understanding 
of the nature and position of women is from the views of today's Western 
society. It does make for a painful transition for those Western women who, in 
their spiritual search, have found and seriously taken up the practice of 
Krsna consciousness. They used to be complimented and presented with flowers 
by men; they used to be ceremoniously served at social functions. Granted, 
such favors were largely inspired by lust on the part of men; nevertheless, 
many women devotees would rather see lust expressed in this way than through 
ostentatious indifference, aversion or even aggression, as is sometimes the 
case with our young brahmacaris, struggling to keep their vows of celibacy...

We may object the 'less intelligent' label, knowing how often it is misused by 
irresponsible men to put us down. But if we reject this, why not reject other 
statements made by Srila Prabhupada? Let us try to concentrate on our own 
understanding, rather than on that of others. This is where our responsibility 
before the spiritual master lies. If our understanding is right, if we 
maintain exemplary Vaisnava spirit, Krsna will protect us, and use us to teach 
a lesson to those less advanced.

It is a good exercise for the ego to humbly accept the idea that our feminine 
bodies, to which we are so attached and of which we may be so proud, are 
nothing else than the symbol of our sinful desires from the past life. On the 
strength of the law of karma, we get exactly what we asked for: a perfect 
vehicle for fulfilling our desires. The body is a symbol of the living 
entity's sinful desire. If we have thus gotten the body which is endowed with 
lesser intelligence and greater potential for becoming materially entangled 
(and for entangling others), such must have been our consciousness and our 
desires at the last moment of our previous life. Now, as we are trying to 
become purified of our material desires, is it any surprise, or is it in any 
way unjust, that we have to struggle through the hurdles we ourselves have 
erected on our path back to Godhead?

Thus, the austerities imposed upon us by the Vedic tradition (such as being 
assigned a not-so-prominent place in the assembly, being shun by male 
celibates, having to cover our bodies, having to observe restraint in the 
presence of men, or simply having to hear heavy statements about women from 
the sastra) are not the expression of social injustice of which we women are 
the victims; rather, they are part of the treatment for our material disease. 
Because, over and above all, both men and women are humans, and the human body 
is meant for curing the material disease once and for all, and going back to 
Godhead. Thus, achieving spiritual perfection must be possible for both men 
and women.

But, one may ask: If women are less intelligent, can they understand Krsna? 
Srila Prabhupada answers: No amount of material intelligence is sufficient to 
understand Krsna!

In her beautiful (and very wise) prayers to the Lord, Queen Kunti asks: "How 
can we women know You perfectly?" Srila Prabhupada writes: "Even the greatest 
philosophical speculators cannot have access to the region of the Lord. It is 
said in the Upanisads that the Supreme Truth, the Absolute Personality of 
Godhead, is beyond the range of the thinking power of the greatest 
philosopher. He is unknowable by great learning or by the greatest brain. He 
is knowable only by one who has His mercy. Others may go on thinking about Him 
for years together, yet He is unknowable. This very fact is corroborated by 
the Queen, who is playing the part of an innocent woman. Woman in general are 
unable to speculate like philosophers, but they are blessed by the Lord 
because they believe at once in the superiority and almightiness of the Lord, 
and thus they offer obeisances without reservation. The Lord is so kind that 
he does not show special favor only to one who is a great philosopher. He 
knows the sincerity of purpose. For this reason only, women generally assemble 
in great number in any sort of religious function. In every country and in 
every sect of religion it appears that the women are more interested than the 
men. This simplicity of acceptance of the Lord's authority is more effective 
than showy insincere religious fervor." (SB 1.8.20 verse and purport)

The last quote brings up a very important point: out of many spiritual 
processes, some may not be easily practiced by persons of lesser material 
qualification. Here, we hear that "women in general are unable to speculate 
like philosophers," in other words, they are less fit to perform jnana-yoga. 
One also rarely hears of women becoming mystic yogis. However, no material 
lack can be a disqualification for performing the most powerful and simple 
transcendental process: bhakti-yoga. All one needs to have is the sincere 
desire to take up devotional service, and willingness to obey the instruction 
of the bona fide spiritual master. The best illustration of this point is one 
of Krsna's most famous verses in the Bhagavad-gita, together with Srila 
Prabhupada's purport:

"O son of Prtha, those who take shelter in Me, though they be of lower birth, 
women, vaisyas [merchants] and sudras [workers], can attain the supreme 
destination."

Purport: "It is clearly declared here by the Supreme Lord that in devotional 
service there is no distinction between the lower and higher classes of 
people. In the material conception of life there are such divisions, but for a 
person engaged in transcendental loving service to the Lord there are not. 
Everyone is eligible for the supreme destination. In the Srimad-Bhagavatam 
(2.4.18) it is stated that even the lowest, who are called candalas 
(dog-eaters), can be purified by association with a pure devotee. Therefore 
devotional service and the guidance of a pure devotee are so strong that there 
is no discrimination between the lower and higher classes of men; anyone can 
take to it. The most simple man taking shelter of the pure devotee can be 
purified by proper guidance. [...]  As indicated here by the word vyapasritya, 
one has to take shelter completely of Krsna. Then one can become much greater 
that great jnanis and yogis." (Bg 9.32 verse and purport)

Therefore, women devotees have no reason to despair over their materially 
lesser intelligence. Rather than feel threatened and try to prove to others 
how intelligent we actually are, better humbly accept our position and praise 
Krsna for giving the process which even the less intelligent, like us, can 
successfully execute. By doing so, we have begun to develop spiritual 
intelligence, which is defined as ability to follow the dictation of guru and 
Krsna, and which has nothing to do with the body.

"A person who has broader intelligence, whether he be full of all material 
desires, without any material desire, or desiring liberation, must by all 
means worship the supreme whole, the Personality of Godhead." (SB 2.3.10)

"In the age of Kali, intelligent persons perform congregational chanting to 
worship the incarnation of Godhead who constantly sings the names of Krsna." 
(SB 11.5.32)

"O intellectual fools, just worship Govinda, worship Govinda, worship Govinda! 
Your knowledge of grammar and word jugglery will not save you at the time of 
death." (Sripada Sankaracarya)

PART 3: LUST: WHAT A SHAME!!!

It was a class by His Holiness Harikesa Swami, at the Polish farm. In the 
question period, a senior brahmana asked thoughtfully: "I have been reading 
Krsna's description of kama, lust, in the Bhagavad-gita 3.37, and I am 
wondering why it says there that lust is so particularly difficult to 
overcome..." Harikesa Swami's answer came as quick and unexpected as a 
thunderbolt. He pointed his finger right at the questioner and exclaimed: 
"It's YOUR fault! YOUR fault! YOU did not want to love Krsna!"

Lust (understood broadly in the sastra, as sexual desire first and foremost, 
but also including all other selfish desires) is not just another petty desire 
born from the mind; it is real energy coming from our very self, straight from 
the soul. It is the most powerful energy that exists: the energy of our 
original love of Godhead, transformed into kama by our unfortunate decision to 
give up Krsna. Therefore, lust is not something that can be simply abandoned 
(as many mystic yogis came to realize, when after years of deep meditation, a 
sight or even a thought of an attractive girl proved to deprive them of all 
their self-control). Lust can be dormant, it can also be controlled or 
suppressed for some time, but the only real way to get free from it is to 
retransform it into its original form, love of Krsna. Sounds simple?

As a young devotee, I liked to actively participate in temple classes. I would 
take notes, compare what I had just heard with what I had read recently, 
and... inevitably, I always had questions to ask. In those times, the feminine 
part of the Polish yatra followed the "mouse" style (sitting in the corner and 
squeaking softly, as one devotee put it), so my unusual behavior was soon 
noticed. With disgust. What a motive can a young brahmacarini have in publicly 
putting questions to the brahmacaris? "You want to be noticed! You want to get 
married! You are just lusty!"

For me, this repeated accusation was something like a nightmare. "Why can't 
they believe one can have motives OTHER than lust?? How blinded by lust must 
THEY be!!"

The men would resort to sastra and quote verses stating that women as a class 
are representatives of Maya, very lusty, and that they are trap for men. I 
would get desperate. "I thought I asked my question because I desired 
knowledge. But since the devotees say otherwise, it must be that the desire I 
felt was nonexistent, and actually I was driven by another desire." From here, 
it takes only one step to the schizophrenic conclusion that "I cannot possibly 
know anything about my own real desires." That in turn means that "I have no 
freedom of desiring whatsoever!"

To save myself from desperation, I learned to differentiate between the 
conditioned thoughts/desires as described in the sastra, and my own conscious 
decision to direct my thinking and desiring towards a particular object. What 
is being described in the sastra is the nature of women in general. But beyond 
my nature as a woman is my nature as a person, an individual spirit soul with 
individual desires. In other words, when I read a statement like: "Women are 
self-interested by nature," I do not take it to mean: "I, Dhyana-kunda dasi, 
am absolutely self-interested, that's my nature and I can do nothing about 
it." Rather, I understand that due to my feminine body and mind, I can expect 
myself to display a tendency towards self-centeredness. Having understood 
this, I can decide to work to overcome this tendency. What else is this human 
life meant for?

Once I learned how to accept such unpalatable sastric statements without 
losing the sight of the ultimate goal, I felt safer and more open to honest 
introspection. Then I noticed something interesting: desires are not always 
manifest. They are like snakes, sometimes hiding in their holes, sometimes 
creeping out. My initial motive in asking so many questions in public might be 
what I believed it to be, however my material nature also has its part to 
play; there might be an additional lusty motive waking up at the 
opportunity...

I also noticed another interesting thing. When I identify myself as a woman, 
my mind becomes like a radar for negative statements relating to women. But 
when I identify myself as a devotee in a woman's body, my mind begins to pick 
up sastric statements that are most encouraging and which assure me that I 
will be able to transcend my material nature. If you read Srila Prabhupada's 
books carefully, you will see that after practically each passage speaking 
about material bad qualities of women comes another paragraph, stating that if 
a woman (or anyone, for that matter) takes up devotional service, she 
transcends all her material qualities and her association brings 
auspiciousness. (For a very vivid example of this, see SB 3.31.34-42.) Thus we 
can choose for ourselves: "hook up" on our material identity and be miserable, 
or work on developing our spiritual identity and be ananda.

Have you ever heard that "we women are supposedly nine times more lusty than 
men"? The statement may raise many eyebrows. Especially from those unfortunate 
women who are regularly forced into sex by their husbands... But it is there 
in the sastra, no way around it. "Here the daughter of Svayambhuva Manu, 
Devahuti ... naturally became sexually stimulated, and in order to satisfy her 
sexual desire, Kardama Muni expanded himself into nine forms. Instead of one, 
he became nine, and nine persons had sexual intercourse with Devahuti for 
many, many years. It is understood that the sexual appetite of a woman is nine 
times greater than that of a man. This is clearly indicated here. Otherwise, 
Kardama Muni would have no reason to expand himself into nine." (SB 3.23.44 
purport).

What do we do about it? Be enraged and lose faith? Be ashamed and pretend 
these statements cannot exist (but what will you say when the anticult people 
will point them to you?) Be curious and try to experimentally discover how 
this nine-times-greater lust works? Or apply our spiritual intelligence and 
try to gradually understand? His Holiness Suhotra Swami once said that 
Vaisnavas do not wonder IF the sastric statements are true, but they try to 
discover HOW they are true.

One frequently heard explanation is that the lust of a woman expands more than 
lust of a man. The man becomes sexually agitated, has an intercourse, and 
right after that his business with sex is finished; the woman requires more 
initial play to become agitated, but once agitated, does not calm down easily. 
Her sexual lust is just of a different quality. Another explanation along the 
same lines is that the lust of a woman expands into desire to have many 
children, nice house, furniture, ornaments. For that reason, she is called 
stri - she who expands (the field of material enjoyment).

For a man, his involvement with sex is short-lasting; soon he is free to turn 
his attention to other pursuits. The woman's very body is programmed to turn 
her towards thoughts and actions related to sex and family. Her body functions 
as a machine for production of children: she has monthly menstruation, and the 
discharge of hormones makes her especially sensitive to sexual stimulation at 
the fertile period. Quite some of the famous "mental platform" of the woman 
can be traced down to the particular period of the menstrual cycle with its 
hormonal storms.

If we still think this arrangement is unjust, we prove our enjoyer mentality 
("Why me??"). By the order of nature, in every species someone has to bear and 
rear the children. By the order of Krsna, every material propensity can be 
engaged in His service.

Pandava Bhima was famous as Vrkodara, "wolf's belly," for his voracious 
appetite. His fire of digestion burned so violently that poor Bhima had 
problems following full fast on Ekadasi. Therefore the wise Vyasadeva gave him 
the benediction that he could fast on just one Ekadasi (Bhima Ekadasi, also 
known as Pandava Nirjala Ekadasi) and attain the result of fasting on Ekadasis 
throughout the year. We can laugh at Bhima and say that he could not control 
the urges of his belly. But Bhima had no problem. He happily ate loads of 
Krsna prasadam, transformed it into extraordinary bodily strength, and used 
this strength to please Krsna by battling the demons and protecting the 
innocent.

Similarly, if a devotee (either woman or man) engages the natural propensities 
of his or her body in conceiving and bringing up Krsna conscious children, who 
dares point out that they are lusty?  Certainly not Krsna: dharmaviruddho 
bhutesu kamo 'smi, "I am sex life which is not contrary to religious 
principles" (Bg 7.11). Such sex life is not just piety. When executed 
according to the Vaisnava standards, it is devotional service. Elsewhere in 
the Gita, Krsna says: "My dear Arjuna, O winner of wealth, if you cannot fix 
your mind upon Me without deviation, then follow the regulative principles of 
bhakti-yoga. In this way develop a desire to attain Me." (BG 12.9)

Thus even for those of us who cannot develop pure love of Godhead quickly 
enough to get freed from the harassment of lusty desires, there is no reason 
to despair: Lust, what a shame!

PART 4: VEDIC FAMILY, KRSNA CONSCIOUS FAMILY: IS IT THE SAME?

I know an ISKCON family, consisting of husband, wife and two small sons. Both 
husband and wife are initiated. The man can work very hard for the temple 
practically all day long, because his wife stays at home and takes complete 
care of her "three men." The husband is fixed, responsible, a real head of the 
family. The wife is sweet, girlish, always dressed in beautiful saris, with 
ornaments in the hair. All her creativity is applied to making her home life 
peaceful and enjoyable. She planted flowers under her husband's office window. 
She knows all the samskaras, is expert in cooking and baking, and can talk 
endlessly about housekeeping and how to solve family conflicts. But to talk 
about Krsna with her is difficult, as she reads little. Also rarely one can 
see her with her japa beads. "Oh, I am so busy that I have little time for 
these things," she explains openly. "But I am serving my husband, so I have 
nothing to worry about: I will automatically share in his advancement."

I know another family. Here also the husband has a responsible service. He 
spends most of his time traveling, while the wife stays home and does various 
kinds of service he assigns her. He feels responsible for her sadhana, and is 
a demanding teacher. When he returns from his travels, she dresses herself 
nicely and wants to cook for him, but he does not welcome her attempts. 
Actually, he likes it best when she wears trousers and does not care for her 
hair, "Because then you look less attractive." She once complained that she 
felt neglected by her husband. She wants him to be home more often. She would 
like to have children. "You have no reason to feel neglected," said he. "I do 
care for you. This is why I am giving you so much service to do for our 
spiritual master. Actually, my duty as your husband is to prevent you from 
becoming attached to me. I should make you attached to Krsna."

The statements of both the wife from the first example and the husband from 
the second are correct. They can be supported by quotes from the Vedic 
scriptures. Surprising, isn't it? What exactly does "Vedic" mean? It may mean 
so many things, some of them -- contradictory.

Let us discuss family life in the context of two Vedic paths: 
varnasrama-dharma and bhagavata-dharma.

In the previous yugas the society was structured according to the varnasrama 
principles. The varnasrama system of the four varnas (social classes) and four 
asramas (stages of life of an individual) was created by Lord Krsna Himself 
(Bhagavad-gita 4.13). This system allows each and every member of the society 
to become gradually purified and make spiritual advancement. It takes into 
consideration individual propensities, talents and limitations of every member 
of the society. It also accommodates people on different levels of spiritual 
awareness: pure devotees, pious fruitive workers, gross sense-enjoyers.

We sometimes assume that in those good old days, when the varnasrama system 
was in place, everyone was certainly Krsna conscious. But it is not so. Of 
course, in the past people in general were more civilized than in our degraded 
age. Most of them were pious, moral, socially responsible. Still, there is 
never a society in the material world that consists exclusively of devotees: 
of those whose only goal in life is to terminate all the material attachments 
and go back home, back to Godhead. The value of the varnasrama system lies 
precisely in its potential to engage even those unwilling or "not yet ready" 
somehow or other, directly or indirectly, in devotional service to Krsna.

Men and women want to be attached to each other. "In these instructions of 
Lord Kapiladeva it is explained that not only is woman the gateway to hell for 
man, but man is also the gateway to hell for woman. It is a question of 
attachment. A man becomes attached to a woman because of her service, her 
beauty and many other assets, and similarly a woman becomes attached to a man 
for his giving her a nice place to live, ornaments, dress and children. It is 
a question of attachment. As long as either is attached to the other for such 
material enjoyment, the woman is dangerous for the man, and the man is also 
dangerous for the woman." (SB 3.31.42 purport)

What to do? Tell everyone "Don't get attached"? But who will hear? The Vedic 
approach is realistic. Instead of condemning materialistic people ("Then get 
attached and go to hell!"), it gives them principles they are able to accept, 
thus making the best use of a bad bargain.

Who should lead the family? There is no team in the world, even as small as 
two persons, in which the partners are absolutely equal. What to speak if the 
two differ as much as do man and woman. Men have a natural drive to lead, 
while women have a natural tendency to follow.

Dear reader, please do not reject these statements simply because you don't 
see ideal leaders and ideal followers in men and women around you. Habit is 
our second nature. What kind of habits does the modern society, with its 
disruption of values and chaos replacing order, form in our children? What 
does it KNOW about their natural potential, to begin with? Traditional 
societies had that knowledge. Religious scriptures spoke about this at length 
(we will discuss this more in detail later). Now the society worldwide is in 
such a disarray that the most important principle taught to children is 
survival of the fittest. I have recently read in a journal that big American 
cities now have gangs not only of boys, but of girls as well. Exclusively 
female street gangs, which are not less ingenious, efficient and cruel in 
robbery and murder than male gangs!

But -- back to our topic -- the most important reason to have the man lead the 
family is spiritual. "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." (SB 3.31.41 purport) Therefore, the boys were sent to the gurukula and 
taught the value of renunciation and direct spiritual practice. Those able to 
renounce sex would directly become sannyasis. Those unwilling to do this would 
marry, get what Srila Prabhupada called the "concession for sense 
gratification," and lead the family as best they could. One can say this was 
the second best solution. Still, the Vedic society was so nicely designed that 
nobody had a sense of failure and everybody's contribution was valued. 
Sannyasis helped grhasthas by preaching; grhasthas helped sannyasis by 
charity. In the ultimate issue, grhasthas produced sannyasis...

The Vedic society did not send girls to live the life of austerity in the 
guru's asrama; their particular nature would not let them benefit as much as 
the boys could. They got home education. They learned about God from traveling 
preachers (this is how Rukmini first heard of Krsna -- from Narada Muni!), and 
they mastered all the arts and skills of their varna under the guidance of the 
family elders. But they knew that their most important duty in life is to 
succeed in family life. They were carefully prepared for it. Family life can 
also serve as a workshop of spiritual training. It can help develop all the 
qualities of the mode of goodness, invaluable in spiritual practice. It 
requires sense and mind control. And in the older age, there would be 
renunciation as well.

"Of course the men did not send the girls to schools," cynics comment, "by 
keeping them in ignorance they forced them to remain slaves!" Anyone who has 
some knowledge of the Indian history of the recent ages has to admit that this 
was often sadly true. But the fact that a system can be distorted and abused 
does not prove that the system in itself is bad. And actually, it was none 
else than Vedic sages who said that the women must be kept satisfied and 
happy, because in any society if the women suffer, the whole society will 
suffer.

"For a chaste woman, faithfulness to the husband is the best religious 
principle," says Krsna to the gopis in the Krsna Book. "The husband should be 
a spiritually advanced devotee, and the wife should be a chaste follower," 
says Srila Prabhupada repeatedly in his purports to the Srimad-Bhagavatam. 
Does it mean spiritual practice was for men only, and all the women were good 
for was the endless treadmill of cooking, cleaning and looking after the 
children? Consider the next quote:

"By serving her devotee husband, Kardama Muni, Devahuti shared in his 
achievements. Similarly, a sincere disciple, simply by serving a bona fide 
spiritual master, can achieve all the mercy of the Lord and the spiritual 
master simultaneously." (SB 3.23.7 purport)

Is he a good disciple who simply serves the body of his spiritual master? 
Undoubtedly, but the best disciple is he who understands the guru's mission, 
takes it to heart and fulfills his desires even before they are expressed.

At this point a serious doubt may arise. Association and service lead to 
imbibing the mood of the leader only if they are voluntary. If the wife does 
not respect and love the husband, externally she may serve him flawlessly out 
of the sense of duty, but keep her heart closed. This was the case with Srila 
Prabhupada's wife. She served him and remained faithful, but still, after many 
years of marriage, she made a mistake of exchanging his Bhagavatam manuscript 
for tea biscuits! All the years of service did not develop in her an 
understanding of her husband's heart.

In the Vedic times, marriage was prearranged by the parents. How did they make 
sure the girl and boy would like each other? Sometimes (like in the cases of 
Diti or Devahuti) they simply asked the girl whom she would like. But what if 
they didn't? Of course, there were horoscopes and compatibility charts, but 
even with all of that, how can one fall in love "on the order"?

Do you still remember how it was when you were 15? Weren't you dreaming about 
a boyfriend who would be the object of envy of all your girlfriends, and who 
would take you with him and never leave you? At that time, 18-year old boys 
seemed big heroes, intimidatingly grown-up and serious. Imagine how it must 
feel when a 20-25-year old man, full of knowledge and shining with the luster 
of austerity, coming from the big world beyond the boundaries of your village, 
straight from his guru's asrama, comes to accept you as his wife? And it's all 
for real, for serious, from now on you are accepted as grown up and do not 
have to fear abandonment or condemnation, rather you are embarking on your 
sacred duty.

A girl cannot be possibly more ready to fall "head over heels" in love with 
her husband. Of course, love is a bird difficult to catch. Even in the Vedic 
times marriages were not 100% perfect. But let's look around: is our modern 
formula, which allows immature girls and boys to independently choose and test 
many partners before making a commitment, anywhere near the 100% success? Do 
these marriages blossom with love and respect? Doesn't the "testing period" 
really end in our choosing the partner, or rather in the forces of passion and 
ignorance making the choice for us? And in the meantime, doesn't the testing 
period irreversibly destroy our capacity to make the very commitment it was 
supposed to result in -- the commitment to marital love and fidelity?

Romantic love comes and goes. No woman will continue to love and respect her 
husband unless he inspires these emotions by his behavior. Men who demand from 
their wives to be Vedic (by which they usually mean submissive), should become 
Vedic themselves. That means "protective." The Vedic husband has to maintain 
the wife, protect her and keep her satisfied by fulfilling her material 
desires, such as the desire for children, home, ornaments etc. This is HIS 
duty, not anyone else's. At the same time, he must guide her in spiritual 
life. He cannot just exploit her for his own sense gratification. In SB 
3.14.19 purport, Srila Prabhupada gives a definition of marriage: "Marriage is 
actually a duty performed in mutual cooperation as directed in the 
authoritative scriptures for spiritual advancement."

"An ideal husband and wife are generally called Laksmi-Narayana to compare 
them to the Lord and the goddess of fortune, for it is significant that 
Laksmi-Narayana are forever happy as husband and wife. A wife should always 
remain satisfied with her husband, and a husband should always remain 
satisfied with his wife. In the Canakya-sloka, the moral instructions of 
Canakya Pandita, it is said that if a husband and wife are always satisfied 
with one another, then the goddess of fortune automatically comes. In other 
words, when there is no disagreement between husband and wife, all material 
opulence is present, and good children are born. Generally, according to the 
Vedic civilization, the wife is trained to be satisfied in all conditions, and 
the husband, according to Vedic instruction, is required to please the wife 
with sufficient food, ornaments and clothing. Then, if they are satisfied with 
their mutual dealings, good children are born. In this way the entire world 
can become peaceful." (SB 4.1.6 purport)

"It is the duty of the husband to liquidate his debt to his wife. The wife 
gives her sincere service to the husband, and he becomes indebted to her 
because ONE CANNOT ACCEPT SERVICE FROM HIS SUBORDINATE WITHOUT GIVING HIM 
SOMETHING IN EXCHANGE. THE SPIRITUAL MASTER CANNOT ACCEPT SERVICE FROM A 
DISCIPLE WITHOUT AWARDING HIM SPIRITUAL INSTRUCTION." (SB 3.23.52 purport)

A good example of how both fulfillment of the partner's material desires and 
spiritual guidance can be achieved simultaneously, we find in the Sixth Canto 
of the Srimad-Bhagavatam. Therein, we read about Diti and her husband Kasyapa. 
Diti served Kasyapa so nicely that he felt indebted to her and offered to 
choose a benediction from him. She then asked for a son who would kill Indra. 
This was a sinful desire and Kasyapa lamented, not willing to become 
implicated in such a sin. It's interesting to note how he solved the problem. 
He did not use his superior position to yell at Diti and refuse to fulfill her 
desire. Rather, he told her that in order to get such a son she would have to 
follow a strict vow, and when Diti happily promised to follow everything, he 
gave her detailed rules for practicing devotional service to Visnu. He hoped 
that as a result of such practice, Diti would become purified and give up her 
sinful desire. And so it happened.

This is how the Vedic marriage works: husband and wife cooperate on the basis 
of duty to get each other's material desires fulfilled (of all the four 
asramas, grhastha asrama is actually the only one where material desires can 
be legitimately fulfilled). It is done in a regulated way, sanctified by 
performance of various ceremonies, samskaras, yajnas. Thus the husband helps 
his wife advance, the wife helps the husband advance, and good children are 
raised for the benefit of the whole society. As soon as the children are grown 
up, the husband and wife should separate (this injunction refers first of all 
to the brahmana-varna) and dedicate themselves fully to spiritual practice, to 
counteract the negative effects of family attachment and to prepare the mind 
for the moment of death.

Now let us go back to the point where we mentioned two Vedic paths: 
varnasrama-dharma and bhagavata-dharma. It's time to describe family life 
according to the bhagavata-dharma.

But we are almost at the end of the article now!

Not by chance. Essentially, there is NO model of marriage recommended in the 
bhagavata-dharma. Bhagavata-dharma is the path of those who have decided to 
become pure devotees of the Supreme Personality of Godhead and fully dedicate 
their lives to hearing, chanting, and remembering Him with love. It's the path 
for those who understand, "I am not the body." If I am not a man, not a 
woman... why should I marry at all?"

Here are a few quotes to illustrate what maha-bhagavatas think of family life:

"My dear sons, there is no reason to labor very hard for sense pleasure while 
in this human form of life; such pleasures are available to the stool-eaters 
[hogs]. Rather, you should undergo penances in this life by which your 
existence will be purified, and as a result you will be able to enjoy 
unlimited transcendental bliss. [...] When the strong knot in the heart of a 
person implicated in material life due to the results of past action are 
slackened, one turns away from his attachment to home, wife and children. In 
this way, one gives up the basic principle of illusion [I and mine], and 
becomes liberated. Thus one goes to the transcendental world." (SB 5.5.1 and 
5.5.9, speaks Lord Rsabhadeva, an incarnation of Godhead)

"One who aspires to reach the culmination of yoga and has realized his self by 
rendering service unto Me should never associate with an attractive woman, for 
such a woman is declared in the scripture to be the gateway to hell for the 
advancing devotee. The woman, created by the Lord, is the representation of 
maya, and one who associates with such maya by accepting services must 
certainly know that this is the way of death, just like a blind well covered 
with grass. 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. A woman, therefore, should consider her 
husband, her house and her children to be the arrangement of the external 
energy of the Lord for her death, just as the sweet singing of the hunter is 
death for the deer." (SB 3.31.39-42, speaks Lord Kapiladeva, also an 
incarnation of Godhead)

Well, well, then it looks like we should all give up our families, or the 
thought of creating families, and immediately set off to the forest! But then, 
why do we have in the Bhagavatam, Canto 7, a naisthika-brahmacari Narada Muni 
instructing King Yudhisthira in the principles of married life? Why was 
Bhagavad-gita spoken by a grhastha to a grhastha?

This we will talk about in the next issue. But meanwhile, if you can guess the 
answer, then you will certainly be able to tell what was wrong in the two 
families we described in the beginning...

PART 5: "TO MARRY OR NOT TO MARRY"

Let's begin with a short discussion of the role of the varnasrama-dharma in 
the sankirtana movement of Lord Caitanya. It is relevant to our theme, because 
it is within the varnasrama system that family life takes place.

Among the favorite verses of Lord Caitanya is this one:

naham vipro na ca nara-patir napi vaisyo na sudro
naham varni na ca grha-patir no vanastho yatir va
kintu prodyan nikhila-paramananda-purnamrtabdher
gopi-bhartuh-pada-kamalayor dasa dasanudasah

"I am not a brahmana, I am not a ksatriya, I am not a vaisya or a sudra. Nor 
am I a brahmacari, a householder, a vanaprastha or a sannyasi. I identify 
Myself only as the servant of the servant of the servant of the lotus feet of 
Lord Sri Krsna, the maintainer of the gopis..." (CC Madhya 13.80)

A Vaisnava, following in Lord Caitanya's footsteps, does not identify with his 
position within the varnasrama system. Should he, therefore, reject it? Our 
Western brains, used to the quick, black-and-white logic may judge so. But 
"not identifying" with something and "rejecting" it are two different things. 
Do we kill ourselves just because we have realized we are not these bodies?

For a Vaisnava, varnasrama practiced for its own sake has no value. Therefore, 
when Ramananda Raya suggested executing one's duties within the 
varnasrama-dharma to be the ultimate goal of life, Lord Caitanya rejected his 
proposal saying, "This is external." (Cc Madhya 8.59) A sincere, genuine 
Vaisnava is transcendental to any social obligation, having taken full shelter 
at the Lord's lotus feet: devarsi-bhutapta-nrnam-pitrnam... (SB 11.5.41, 
quoted in Bg 1.41)

However, the varnasrama-dharma system does have its place in the community of 
Vaisnavas. After all, any community has to be organized somehow, in order to 
maintain order and effectively reach its goals; why not use the perfect 
blueprint given by Krsna, the creator of the varna-asrama system? What better 
system can we find?

The varnasrama-dharma practiced by the Vaisnavas is not exactly the same as 
the varnasrama-dharma practiced by the general society. Therefore the acaryas 
have termed it DAIVI (divine) varnasrama-dharma.

The most fundamental difference between the ordinary varnasrama and daivi 
varnasrama is that the participants of the latter do not identify themselves 
with their positions. True to the mood of Lord Caitanya, they do not think, "I 
am a brahmana," "I am a sudra," "I am a householder," "I am a sannyasi." 
Rather, they know: "I am a servant of the servant of the servant of Lord 
Krsna, and I am rendering service in the capacity of a brahmana, sudra, 
householder, or sannyasi." A Vaisnava is not attached to any role within the 
social system, nor is he averse to any. He is ready to accept any role within 
the varnasrama that will be conducive to his spiritual progress. Spiritual 
progress is his ultimate goal, in relation to which he evaluates things.

For instance, a Vaisnava brahmana doesn't think himself too elevated to wash 
the floor in the prasadam room if it needs to be washed, even though washing 
floors is generally thought of as a sudra occupation. He is simply concerned 
with keeping Krsna's floor clean. (Actually, in daivi-varnasrama everyone is a 
brahmana, since everyone has perfect knowledge of Brahman. Still, these 
Vaisnava brahmanas not only teach and worship Deities, but also manage, engage 
in agriculture and trade, and do menial services for Krsna. Everything with 
love and devotion.)

A Vaisnava may reject a varnasrama position, even exalted, if it hampers his 
service and progress. Giving up one's home, family and wealth at an early age 
is a well-known example. Here is a less known one: when Srila Prabhupada found 
out that some of his young sannyasi disciples were struggling with their 
sexual desires, he instructed them to give up their sannyasa asrama and marry 
-- a thing unheard of in the traditional varnasrama! This decision is echoed 
in a certain passage in the Srimad-Bhagavatam, Eight Canto, on which he was 
working at that time. It is the story of the elephant Gajendra's dramatic 
fight with the crocodile.

"Thereafter, because of being pulled into the water and fighting for many long 
years, the elephant became diminished in his mental, physical and sensual 
strength. The crocodile, on the contrary, being an animal of the water, 
increased in enthusiasm, physical strength and sensual power." (SB 8.2.30)

Srila Prabhupada comments: "From this we may take the lesson that in our fight 
with maya we should not be in a position in which our strength, enthusiasm and 
senses will be unable to fight vigorously. Our Krsna consciousness movement 
has actually declared war against the illusory energy, in which all the living 
entities are rotting in a false understanding of civilization. The soldiers in 
this Krsna consciousness movement must always possess physical strength, 
enthusiasm and sensual power. To keep themselves fit, they must therefore 
place themselves in a normal condition of life. What constitutes a normal 
condition will not be the same for everyone, and therefore there are divisions 
of varnasrama -- brahmana, ksatriya, vaisya, sudra, brahmacari, grhastha, 
vanaprastha and sannyasa. [...] Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu showed us an example 
in taking sannyasa at the age of twenty-four years, but even Sarvabhauma 
Bhattacarya advised Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu to be extremely careful because He 
had taken sannyasa at an early age. For preaching we are giving young boys 
sannyasa, but actually it is being experienced that they are not fit for 
sannyasa. There is no harm, however, if one thinks that he is unfit for 
sannyasa; if he is very much agitated sexually, he should go to the asrama 
where sex is allowed, namely the grhastha-asrama. That one has been found to 
be very weak in one place does not mean that he should stop fighting the 
crocodile of maya. [...] If sannyasa is not suitable, one may enter the 
grhastha-asrama and fight maya with great strength. But one should not give up 
the fighting and go away." (SB 8.2.30 purport)

The key phrases here are:

THAT ONE HAS BEEN FOUND TO BE VERY WEAK IN ONE PLACE DOES NOT MEAN THAT HE 
SHOULD STOP FIGHTING THE CROCODILE OF MAYA,

and

WHAT CONSTITUTES A NORMAL CONDITION WILL NOT BE THE SAME FOR EVERYONE, AND 
THEREFORE THERE ARE DIVISIONS OF VARNASRAMA.

The Vaisnavas adopt the varnasrama system to facilitate both their devotional 
cooperation and individual progress. But they don't label the devotees as 
"more advanced" and "less advanced" according to their varna or asrama. Such a 
labeling tendency proves our lingering materialistic identification and 
enjoying spirit. It means we have not yet reached the madhyama-adhikari level, 
on which one can judge advancement from the actual symptoms, not from external 
designations. Let us remind ourselves: Lord Caitanya Himself said 
varnasrama-dharma is external. What makes a devotee advanced is solely and 
exclusively his consciousness. Or, as HDG Krsna-ksetra Prabhu, my spiritual 
master, once put it, "Maya is not THINGS we do. It's our MOTIVES for doing 
them." We can rephrase it: Maya is not asramas we are in. What counts is for 
what we are using our asrama. As Mother Haripuja (Kirtiraja Prabhu's wife) 
once said, in response to a brahmacarini who stated entering marriage seemed 
like entering a swamp to her: "Krsna can make our marriage like a swamp if we 
are cheaters, and like soft grasses if we are honest."

"What constitutes a normal condition will not be the same for everyone," Srila 
Prabhupada said. This means there are no absolute prescriptions. What is good 
for my friend may not be good for me. What was good for me five years ago may 
not be good now. We must apply our own spiritual discrimination and consult 
more experienced devotees to determine what is better in our individual case.

I remember a girl who once came to Moscow from another town to talk with me. 
This was the first time I met her. She had made no appointment and so when she 
came, I had no time. I was just going home. "But I don't need much time" -- 
she pleaded. "Just one question, five minutes!"

Five minutes is the time I need to get home from the temple. So I walked out 
with her to talk on the way. "I want to ask you whether I should get married," 
she said. But this is by no means a five-minute question! How could she think 
it's so simple? Basically, at that point one could answer already, "No, you 
shouldn't get married now." It's like in the old ISKCON joke about a 
brahmacari who has just gotten a new dhoti-and-kurta set after India. "But it 
is white," he tells his friend. "They had no time to dye it yet. How do you 
think, what is more practical: dye it, or get married?"

Back to the girl. Our conversation looked more or less as follows:

- Why are you thinking of getting married?
- Because some ladies in our temple have told me I should.
- Why?
- Because I have been having problems in my spiritual life. I have lost my 
taste for reading the books, my japa has deteriorated, I don't know anymore 
what is going on with me...

This is a valid reason. This kind of weakness may be a symptom of one's being 
situated in a position unnatural to him. But it may also have other causes: 
offenses, being overworked, neglecting one's sadhana, doubts one is afraid to 
confront... Therefore I continued asking.

- Why are you having these problems? In which way do you think getting married 
would help you?

The girl gave me a blank look. Obviously, "some ladies" just told her so and 
she accepted it without thinking.

- What kind of family life would you like to have?

Another blank look. I switched to more concrete questions. "What do you expect 
from your future husband? Do you see yourself as a traditional surrendered 
housewife, or would you rather want partnership in your marriage? What do you 
have to offer to your husband? Would you like to stay in the brahmacarini 
asrama, serve in the temple and be maintained by it, or rather move outside, 
have a home and a job? Do you want children?"

With each question, the girl seemed more and more confused. From her eyes I 
could see that not only did she have no idea of what she wanted; she did not 
even understand why she SHOULD have any idea about it.

- If you have no idea about the cause of your problems, no idea of what you 
are getting yourself into, and no idea of how it would help you in overcoming 
your difficulties, then how do you think: how big is the chance that getting 
married will indeed help you? - I asked.

She said nothing. Her eyes pleaded with me: "Why are you torturing me with all 
these strange questions? I am just a less intelligent mataji, it is my 
constitutional position to know nothing. Why don't you just wave your magical 
wand and give me the verdict, yes or no, and I will follow!"

It would be pointless to plan everything to the last detail. We do not know 
ourselves so well. Marriage changes many things. Our desires may change when 
the new unknown aspect of our personality becomes activated. Our priorities 
may change under the influence of our partner. Mental rigidity is a sure 
recipe for suffering. Therefore, we should not be inflexible in our plans. But 
we should have some general idea of what we want. Details can be filled in 
later.

The girl went back to her town without the answer she hoped to get. I don't 
know what happened to her later. Maybe she is still angry with me?

This girl was at least honest. Not all those who consider getting married are 
equally honest. For a Vaisnava, a person who makes developing love for Krsna 
his prime goal in life, it is painfully humiliating to admit that his mind is 
shamelessly dwelling on images of the opposite sex, and that his senses are 
agitated by any female form that happens to pass by. Vaisnavis feel the same. 
A lady devotee may realize her mind is just a prostitute, unfaithful to Krsna, 
without any dignity begging shelter from any man that happens to offer help or 
say a friendly word.

We so much want to believe we are Vaisnavas. We want others to accept us as 
such. Letting others know we are considering marriage, when we could just 
remain celibates and go the shortest way to Krsna is as if the king were to 
publicly declare, "I am naked!" We feel threatened. We feel avaisnavas. We are 
afraid of falling down. We hate the persons of the opposite sex who make us 
feel this way.

And so we invent rationalizations, good-sounding slogans. I knew a boy, 
attached to a girl who repeatedly refused him. He hoped maybe his guru could 
convince her. So he tried to inspire his spiritual master by saying that his 
sole reason to get married was that he should set a good example, because he 
could see that marriages were breaking in ISKCON all around. "No," his guru 
dragged him from the clouds down to earth. "Your motive for marrying should be 
that you are so lusty you cannot tolerate celibacy any longer!"

Before making up our mind, we must come to terms with our real position, real 
needs and motives. Deciding to remain a brahmacari out of fear to lose the 
respect of others, or out of reluctance to take responsibility will surely 
lead to problems. Getting married thoughtlessly, just because one has got 
attracted to a person of the opposite sex ("And after all, grhastha-asrama is 
also allowed!") will lead to even bigger problems. Often enough -- even though 
it sounds funny -- the former mentality directly leads to the latter.

As a principle, remaining unmarried IS better. But it is difficult. Difficult 
for men, and more difficult for women. Therefore, 95 per cent of all devotees 
do marry. Brahmacarya has its price. As years go by, the price becomes higher. 
Few can pay it. If we are not among these few, a time may come when the effort 
to maintain brahmacarya may take up almost all our energy. How much is then 
left for serving Krsna?

There was a period in my devotional life when brahmacarini mentality was 
becoming more and more difficult to maintain. I was feeling unprotected, 
easily discouraged, and my mind was constantly drawn towards men. Yet, I was 
afraid of losing the spiritual benefits of my asrama. I told my spiritual 
master: "On one hand, in the Vedic culture every woman should be protected by 
her husband. On the other, now, as a brahmacarini, I can dedicate myself fully 
to devotional service: I can travel and preach, I can serve your orders 
directly. If I marry, I will spend much of my time serving a man who is not a 
pure Vaisnava. Isn't this lowering the standards?"

My Guru Maharaja answered: "If you can remain satisfied simply serving Krsna, 
this is the best!"

I opened my mouth to complain, "But I am afraid I cannot remain satisfied in 
this way...?" and just then it hit me what he meant: in order to be safely 
situated to fight with maya, we must find some kind of healthy satisfaction in 
our lifestyle. It must somehow fit our nature. If we are deeply unsatisfied, 
unhappy, "not in our shoes," we may easily fall down. In essence, the answer 
was: Yes, remaining a brahmacarini IS the best. But if YOU are not good enough 
to take this best thing, then it is NOT best for you!

At another occasion, I asked my spiritual master about the same thing, only in 
general words: "Srila Prabhupada says somewhere that devotional service can be 
obtained within a second's time, or it may not be obtained in entire 
lifetimes. That it's a question of our desire. Why, then, are some people 
encouraged to take the shortest path to Krsna, while others are recommended to 
take a longer and lighter path?" His answer was: "Indeed, basically, 
everything depends on desire. But some people are born into this body with a 
burden of karma heavier than others. They are more entangled. Due to karma, 
their material desires and needs are greater. For such people, a spiritual 
desire which would conquer over these material desires would have to be 
extraordinarily strong. Therefore, a roundabout way to Krsna may be more 
practical for them."

This explains why it is customary for a Vedic grhastha to feel himself lowly 
and fallen before celibate devotees. It does not mean he is having illicit 
sex. Neither does it mean he regrets having gotten married. Rather, he 
understands he was not strong enough to choose the path of lifelong celibacy, 
and therefore he had to make a compromise with the material energy. But if he 
follows the principles strictly, he loses nothing of the spiritual benefits he 
enjoyed before marrying. "A person whose sex life is restricted in marriage is 
also called a brahmacari." (SB 3.28.4 purport). In fact, such a grhastha is 
more of a brahmacari than the saffron-clad fellow from an old ISKCON joke (for 
quoting which I beg forgiveness of all the real brahmacaris): Two old 
brahmacari friends meet after a long separation. "Haribol prabhu, how are you 
doing?" "Fine, and you?" "Oh, nothing new: eating, sleeping, and defending 
from mating."

There is an often quoted statement of Srila Prabhupada that brahmacaris have 
100 per cent chance of going back to Godhead, while grhasthas -- only 50 per 
cent. We should not naively equate asrama with the color of dhoti. 
"Brahmacarya, the life of celibacy, has eight aspects: one should not think of 
women, speak about sex life, dally with women, look lustfully at women, talk 
intimately with women or decide to engage in sexual intercourse, nor should 
one endeavor for sex life or engage in sex life. One should not even think of 
women or look at them, to say nothing of talking with them." (SB 6.1.14 
purport). Elsewhere it is stated that a real brahmacari does not think of 
women even in dreams! SUCH a person has 100% chance of going back to Godhead. 
Every brahmacari can judge himself against this standard and reach his own 
conclusions.

In practice, the most reasonable policy for those who join being single is to 
remain single for a few more years and get maximum benefit available from a 
life of detachment, study and intense devotional service in the association of 
the Vaisnavas. Don't make plans: "I will never marry!" or: "I will surely 
marry in 5 years." Postpone the decision. Don't think of family life. Just be 
a brahmacari(-ni), engage in service fully, and depend on Krsna. Develop your 
spiritual intelligence and master the techniques of the spiritual life. Get 
initiated, or second initiated, gain experience in preaching and other kinds 
of service. Then you will be qualified to make a wise decision about your 
future. And after you have made it, you will have all the knowledge and skills 
you need to make your life a success -- be it as a lifelong brahmacari or a 
family man.

PART 6: HOW DO I FIND MY SECOND HALF?

'In the Vedic times...' How many far-off, difficult to believe tales begin 
with these words?... Tales of princesses getting married are perhaps amongst 
the most fantastic. The system of arranging marriages followed in the ancient 
Vedic society is one of the things most difficult for a Westerner to 
comprehend -- perhaps even more so than the news that we are all situated 
within the stem of a gigantic lotus flower!

But I am not going to talk about the Vedic times. I will talk about the 
present-day practice in ISKCON, which is an absolutely unique creation: not 
entirely Vedic, not entirely modern, something from the spiritual world and 
something from the material one...

"You ask about marriage, yes, actually I want that every woman in the Society 
should be married." (Srila Prabhupada, letter to Chaya dasi 2-16-72)

I do not have a certified step-by-step method to reveal by which one is 
guaranteed a good husband or wife within six months. If I had such a method, I 
would be the wealthiest person in the world! Marriage is related to our 
material nature and consequently, to our karma. Whether we will be able to 
find a partner, whether our family life will be happy is largely determined by 
our past deeds. But within the limits created by the results of our past 
activities, we have freedom and can make things more auspicious by acting 
maturely and wisely, or we can create our private hell by unwise, 
irresponsible dealings. We can create new karma as well. Or, if we somehow or 
other secure the Lord's special mercy, He may change our karma.

"Only by God's grace can one get a nice wife just as he desires. Similarly, it 
is only by God's grace that a girl gets a husband suitable to her heart. Thus 
it is said that if we pray to the Supreme Lord in every transaction of our 
material existence, everything will be done very nicely and just suitable to 
our heart's desire. In other words, in all circumstances we must take shelter 
of the Supreme Personality of Godhead and depend completely on His decision. 
Man proposes, God disposes. The fulfillment of desires, therefore, should be 
entrusted to the Supreme Personality of Godhead; that is the nicest solution. 
Kardama Muni desired only a wife, but because he was a devotee of the Lord, 
the Lord selected a wife for him who was the Emperor's daughter, a princess. 
Thus Kardama Muni got a wife beyond his expectation. If we depend on the 
choice of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, we will receive benedictions in 
greater opulence than we desire." (SB 3.21.28 purport)

Let us talk about practical aspects of getting married. I want to share with 
you my own experience and observations of others, my understanding. Please 
don't consider it absolute, and use your discrimination.

In the Vedic tradition, girls married early. If we wanted to be very Vedic, 
then practically all our new bhaktins should get married urgently (v srochnom 
poryadke), because they are already too old! But this is usually not 
recommended. As one of the ISKCON gurus initiating in Russia has written 
regarding a 16-year-old bhaktin who found an initiated devotee (his disciple) 
willing to marry her: "Marriage now is out of question. She should become a 
disciple first, then wife." The usual ISKCON practice is to get initiated (or 
second initiated), then marry.

First things should be put first. Best is to learn one thing at a time. 
Spiritual sphere is the most important sphere of our life, and the 
relationship with the spiritual master is the most important relationship. 
Unless we are clear about our spiritual identity, unless we have proper 
guidance, unless we have become a strong, balanced devotee, we have no safe 
foundation to build other relationships and take up other responsibilities.

In the ideal Vedic society girls can marry early because they have learned 
spiritual life right from the cradle. We are all latecomers. Therefore waiting 
a few years before marrying may mean marrying later than in the old Vedic 
times, and often later than our nondevotee peers do. It may even seem risky. 
But it's a risk worth taking.

There are exceptions. Some girls come from a traditional background where 
women marry early; others may be exceptionally timid and dependent, obviously 
in need of protection; yet others may be so much influenced by the mode of 
passion that they need to marry before their youthful passionate energies push 
them into illicit sex.

Let's say there is a devotee who has already received initiation, is 
established in regular service, and has decided she wants to get married. She 
has also received the blessings of her spiritual master. How should she 
proceed?

First clarify your needs and expectations. I already wrote about it in the 
previous issue. The most important thing is to know what role my marriage is 
to play in my spiritual life. If we do not know this, we will not be able to 
secure Krsna's help. Even if we get a nice partner and the best facilities for 
spiritual life in grhastha-asrama, we will be unable to take advantage of 
them. Harikesa Swami once said, "If you do not know where you want to get, you 
will never get there. And even if you get there, you will not know you are 
there."

I sometimes met ladies who obviously needed to get married and who even got 
proposals but declined by saying, "I am afraid" or "I do not want to marry; 
but if this were to save this man's Krsna consciousness, I would consider 
making a sacrifice." They played princesses or sannyasinis and gave some 
hopes, but staunchly refused to take responsibility for making a choice. Such 
ladies behave as if they expected a hero will come on a white horse to kidnap 
them and thus their fate will be decided without their having to take any 
stance. Such behavior may be feminine, but it is not very mature. Not 
favorable for spiritual life either.

If you ever meet a person (be it woman or man; such men also exist) who tries 
to manipulate you into making a decision for both of you and avoids declaring 
his/her desires clearly, don't marry. It's a trap. If you later face any 
difficulties in your life together (and who doesn't face them?), your partner 
will not be cooperative. "I did not ask you to marry me; YOU wanted to be with 
me, so now YOU must deal with the problem!" He/she will maliciously play an 
innocent victim. Such relationships are full of disappointments.

The next important thing to do is to create a mental "portrait" of your 
desired partner. Some features will be common for all portraits: "not yet a 
pure devotee," "desiring to have some amount of permitted sense 
gratification." I mention these because we tend to be unrealistic and wait for 
someone almost on the level of our spiritual master. Of course, Srila 
Prabhupada did say many times that the husband should be qualified to act as a 
spiritual master for his wife. It's good to want a husband more advanced than 
ourselves. But we should not dream of a Prabhupada disciple, rasika-bhakta, a 
person "not from this world." First, where will we find him? Second, we will 
tend to impose our ideal on the real partner we get, and this will bring a 
bitter disappointment.

Someone once asked Harikesa Swami in a class what is a recipe for successful 
marriage. (I am quoting from memory) "How can I know? - Harikesa Swami 
laughed. "I never married! But one thing that I think most important is mutual 
respect. Husband and wife live so close to each other that they may easily 
become too familiar. Then they cannot respect each other any more, won't 
cooperate, and Vaisnava aparadha begins. If you can maintain respect for each 
other, you will be able to solve all your problems."

Respect is the attitude that allows us to care for what the partner thinks and 
feels, put the partner's needs above our own, adjust to him/her. It is not so 
that only the wife should respect her husband. The husband should also respect 
the wife.

We respect each other for being Krsna conscious and for being nice persons, 
but there is another dimension of respect that is important in marriage, 
particularly for ladies (I will explain why in one of the future texts). It is 
admiration for the husband's competence. I will explain this on my own 
example. I once sat in a Bhagavatam class. The speaker was unprepared and he 
did not even seem to care. He made mess of the Gita verses he quoted. His 
wife, sitting next to me, tried to keep cool face, but she was obviously 
disturbed. When the question period came, she asked a question meant to 
restore balance to his presentation. But he didn't get the point. As I watched 
this, I resolved in my mind: "I do not want to ever be embarrassed like this. 
My future husband must give good Bhagavatam classes!"

For each of us there are abilities and skills we admire in others. This has 
something to do with our material nature, or varna. We may not be able to 
determine our varna before we get married, given our Kali-yuga birth and mixed 
upbringing. (If we can do it, it would be good, but better check our 
self-perceptions with several other senior devotees!) We should, however, be 
aware which material qualities, what kind of competence our partner must have 
in order for us to admire him. For me, one such quality is knowledge. Try to 
determine which ones are essential for you: is it courage? social influence? 
protectiveness and ability to provide maintenance? physical strength and 
skill? sense of humor? ability to speak well? ability to work hard? good 
manners? Or yet something else?

We want our marriages to be spiritual, and so we may consciously try to 
disregard the material side. This is noble, but it won't get us far. (Unless 
we are paramahamsas, of course. But do paramahamsas need to get married?) 
Marriage is an arrangement to accommodate our material nature, and material 
factors need to be considered. "I somehow can't relate to him. Our minds don't 
seem to be working on the same 'wavelength.' Actually, I don't like him. But 
he has been a devotee for ten years and everybody tells me he is a good 
devotee, so..." The point is, as a devotee he has relationships with so many 
other devotees. But you will have to live with the man he is. You must like 
that man.

"Tamala Krsna: It was suggested that she get married and because of her body 
she said no... the only reason she said no, was because of a material reason. 
Not a spiritual reason. She said no because of her preference, material 
preference.
Prabhupada: Of course, as long as we have this material body, some material 
consideration must be there. (Chuckles) It is not possible to avoid 
completely." (Room conversation 9-24-68)

But please, be honest and use common sense! I met a man who wanted to marry a 
girl "...because she is a disciple of Rohini-suta Prabhu, and I want to 
develop the sankirtan mood." But that particular girl had nothing to do with 
sankirtan!

A word about trust: trust is related to respect, but is a more intimate thing. 
You may respect someone and keep distance. Trust means you feel safe with that 
person, you would not be afraid to show yourself to him as you really are, 
with all your faults and weaknesses. You are able to surrender to him and are 
confident he will protect you.

The last piece of advice on the "mental portrait" is: Don't put too much 
there. Identify one or two qualities that are essential, and add a few more 
that are desirable. Be consistent in your expectations. In other words, if you 
want your husband to be brahminical, don't expect he will have money. If you 
want a ksatriya, don't expect him to be soft and henpecked.

Don't form detailed expectations as to where you will live and exactly what 
your life will be like. Once a couple marries, many unplanned changes may 
happen in their life. Be flexible. You can have dreams, but, as one Christian 
family counselor put it, "make your dreams portable." This means these should 
be dreams that can be fulfilled in many places, in many ways.

This advice saved me personally so much suffering. At the time when I decided 
I wanted to marry my present husband, I lived in Korsnas Gard, a place I was 
very attached to. He lived in North America. I had no desire to move there, 
but I made a firm resolve that the person was more important to me than the 
place. In the end, I did not have to move to America, as he moved to Sweden. A 
few months later we were asked to go to Moscow. This was the last thing I had 
dreamed of. I would have felt bankrupt and cheated in my life, I would have 
regretted having married that man, if not for the resolve I had made at the 
beginning of our marriage.

A question may come: If I have not been thinking of marriage yet, or at least 
not in that much detail, and now I have got a marriage proposal, do I still 
need to go through this "mental portrait" exercise? My suggestion is yes. Do 
it. You may feel much of the mental work is not really needed here, the only 
thing you need to find out is whether this particular man is the right one for 
you. But without clearly formed expectations, how will you know what is 
"right"? Once we get a proposal, our intelligence tends to switch off as the 
mind chants really loud: 'Here is my chance, God knows if I will get another 
one, and how sweet it is that someone wants me, how can I break his heart?...' 
Your well-wishing sakhi friends will all tell you they have a feeling it will 
be really great. The senses add their voice to the chorus. After all, no 
matter who the candidate is, he is compatible in at least one fundamental 
regard, namely, that he is a man. Therefore when you begin to associate with 
him, you will feel attracted.

What if no proposals are coming? The Vedic way, through parents, won't work 
for most of us as our parents are not devotees. Should a woman devotee wait 
until she receives a marriage proposal? Is it alright to make a proposal 
herself? Yes, you can do so. But the proposal for one man should be made only 
once, and through the proper channels.

One thing you can always do is to reveal your mind to senior grhasthas you 
trust, or to your temple authorities. Maybe they know someone who fits your 
portrait. Or maybe someone will come and ask them to help him find a wife. If 
there is an ISKCON matrimonial service available, you can send your data 
there.

If you live in the temple, it would actually be required that you inform the 
authorities of your desire to get married. The spiritual master should also be 
asked for permission (unless he has an explicit policy that he does not wish 
to be informed.)

You can also ask someone for a more active help as your matchmaker. A senior, 
respectable grhastha couple would be ideal. There is a phenomenon of very new 
couples, freshly engaged, becoming enthusiastic to help the whole world taste 
the honeymoon nectar they are currently tasting. Be aware such devotees are 
currently under a strong influence of the mode of passion. Unless you can keep 
your head cool and your intelligence working, the results may be: nectar in 
the beginning, poison in the end.

I was lucky to have my spiritual master personally appoint a matchmaker for 
me. When we first met to talk about my marriage, he said: "I will try to help 
you get married, but remember, it is you who will have to live with your 
partner. Therefore the responsibility is on you to make sure you marry the 
proper person. I am just the instrument in your hands. I may suggest someone 
to you, but you should not feel obliged to accept him just because I suggested 
so. You have a right to be picky. You have a right to change your mind at the 
last moment. But once you marry, you cannot blame me for anything."

It is important that you trust the matchmaker's discretion, and over and 
above, his/her sincere desire to help you. You certainly know devotees who 
express their desire before, let's say, a temple president. He approaches the 
other party, gets negative answer, and the proposing devotee thinks: "He just 
does not want me to marry that person at all. He must have presented my 
proposal in such a way that there was no hope it would be accepted. I do not 
accept this negative answer. I KNOW that person has tender feelings for me. 
Maybe the president did not even ask but just lied to me. I should send 
someone else or just go myself."

And this rascal mind is such a cheater! I have seen again and again ladies 
coming and telling me they are attached to someone and he is attached to 
them... 'How do you know?' 'Oh, it's the way he looks at me. And he smiles to 
me. He somehow always dances in front of me. He once approached and asked me 
something." And so on. My statistics is: in no less than seventy per cent the 
man could not care less for the girl! With one particularly insistent girl, 
who was refused by a devotee but could not believe it, arguing she knew his 
heart and was having a continuous intimate communication with him through 
little subtle gestures and glances, my husband instructed her to act, for one 
week, as if he did not exist. Stop all the subtle communication. And he asked 
several other men to observe that devotee. If the man is really attached -- he 
reasoned -- then such a change in her behavior should disturb him! Guess what 
happened? Absolutely nothing. But, do you think she became convinced?...

If you have been refused, you may be tempted to try to reach the person again 
-- through others, by letter, or even personally. From the experience of many 
devotee ladies it is clear that if a man refuses once, he will not change his 
mind. Many women, once they have set their mind on someone, decide to wait, 
hoping his heart will gradually soften. This is a nice trait of chastity. 
Unfortunately, male false ego doesn't work this way. A man wants either to win 
his princess himself, or to accept the one who has won his heart. Rejected 
princesses patiently waiting in a queue and believing the waiting period earns 
them extra points just do not appeal to his masculinity. He finds it 
embarrassing and disgusting, and a threat to his freedom. If he is not a man 
of high moral caliber, he will share his problem with other men and thus give 
you a bad name. Men gossip no less than women do. Later you may want to 
approach another man, but he will not be inclined to accept you if he finds 
out you have already approached someone else and fought to attract him even 
after being refused. Men respect dignity, too. They do not want women 
doormats.

The mind will lament very convincingly: "But he is my second half! I am 
destined for him. There is nobody else in the whole world that I can marry." 
Don't believe your mind. You CAN become as attached (or even more attached) to 
another partner. We do not like to think about ourselves in this way because 
we still believe, somewhere deep in our hearts, that our material attachment 
is something unique, divine, eternal. And, let's face it -- we LIKE to be 
helpless victims. It is so romantic.

You can become unattached by an act of will. "Oh, I have tried so many times! 
It doesn't work!" The only reason it doesn't work is that we do not really 
want it to work. But it can work. It can really be done, if only we become 
deeply convinced, on the platform of intelligence, that we do not want this 
attachment anymore. Actually, it works even better if instead of focusing on 
the negatives ("I don't want this") we focus on positives ("I want something 
else"). Please forgive if I sound preachy. I am telling this from my 
hard-earned experience.

Going through the process of arranging marriage can be a difficult test for 
our Krsna consciousness. It takes courage to decide upon a candidate without 
knowing him well and without having had any closer exchanges with him. We are 
afraid to expose our intimate side in this way and risk rejection. And we know 
that once we have set our mind on someone, we will get attached. Once we get 
attached, we lose balance and we will suffer if we are refused. Then the whole 
process has to be repeated again with another man, and so on, as many times as 
required. And all of this just in order to be properly situated for a lifetime 
of devotional service to Krsna, which is to ultimately result in the 
realization that attachment between man and woman is maya, illusion...

At such times we should approach Krsna in helplessness, go before our favorite 
Deities, and pray. Pour our hearts to Them. I composed a prayer I repeated 
before the Deities: "My dear Gandharvika-Giridhari, if You think marriage with 
this person will be good for my spiritual life and for his, please inspire him 
to accept me. If You think it will not be good for me or for him -- please 
inspire him to reject me." It helped me accept rejection.

If we are going through intense anxiety and suffering, waiting for the answer, 
the best thing to do is force ourselves to help others, to preach. "What? 
Preach? In this state of mind? Impossible! I feel like sitting in the corner 
and crying, that's all I can do today!" Not true! Don't believe your mind. 
Turn on your intelligence. It may be difficult to force your mind to think of 
preaching because the mind finds perverted pleasure in magnifying and chewing 
on your suffering. But if you try, you will see the anxiety goes away and you 
feel Krsna is with you.

On the day when I knew my husband would receive my proposal, I scheduled 
myself to give the Gita class. I knew: "I am finished, it's too much, I am 
going crazy! But no matter what happens, what answer I will get, I cannot 
afford to go crazy, because I have to give class tonight." It was 2.1, Arjuna 
in tears surrendering to Krsna. I still remember that class. I rarely spoke 
with so much realization.

If you feel lonely, unwanted, you have no more hope and you begin to 
experience anger at Krsna, try to remember that Krsna is not just a poor 
overworked temple president: "Yes, O My devotee, I know you need a husband, 
but sorry, I have none in stock. Come next life." No. Krsna wants to help you 
in spiritual life and He has absolutely everything you need for that. He knows 
your pain and anxiety. He can create a perfect husband for you just by 
snapping His fingers, and send him down on a flower chariot right away, at 
this very second. If He is not doing it, it means that this is not the best 
thing for you now. He has something better in His pocket. Of course, better 
things cost more. So maybe He wants you to surrender more. But one thing you 
can be sure of: a day will come when you will look back at your present 
suffering and understand with absolute clarity why Krsna allowed you to 
suffer, why He did not answer your prayers. And you will be grateful to Him!

