© 2000 VNN
|
EDITORIAL April 7, 2000 VNN5815 Related VNN Stories Is Love Maya? BY PRTHA DEVI DASI EDITORIAL, Apr 7 (VNN) — "Krishna Kirti married someone with whom he brags that he's completely incompatible. It was supposedly an "arranged" marriage (ISKCON model, not vedic model) and they only saw each other for hours prior to the wedding. He now wants to push this model on everyone else too and brags about how surrendered he is to be staying with a wife who's so different from him. Are *these* the type of men we want to hold up as examples of great devotees? Who are they going to inspire to join ISKCON? How can Lord Caitanya's movement ever become attractive or even relevant to the modern world with these dysfunctional misogynists setting the agenda? All they do is complain about how women want to do service according to their propensities.
Why don't they worry about their own service instead and be happy that women even want to keep serving after how they've been treated? Why are they trying to control the wives of other men? - Pritha dd. ------------ First I would like to point out that the VNN editorial by Krishna-Kirti dasa titled, "Our Marriage" which indicates that I wrote the above comments about him is mistaken. It was not written by me. This is clear in the original. It was sent in anonymously by a godsister, which is also clear in the original as it was signed "Anonymous." It was not signed by me as appears in his VNN editorial. Secondly I would like to state that I am not against arranged marriages nor did I ever say I was. What I am against are two strangers getting married. We have seen the result of this in ISKCON as divorce. It is important that devotees take time to associate and get to know each other as a person (instead of a body) if we are going to realistically put a stop to this high divorce rate in our movement. It usually takes a couple of years or more to honestly get to know a someone. Prior to that time period they can hide who they are. Even in the Vedic system marriages are arranged according to astrological compatibility charts, not by pot luck -- who the temple president throws your way. Vedically there either was a natural attraction or at least compatibility was looked into. People were not tossed blindly into the ring. Although the science of astrology has been somewhat lost in this age it has not been totally lost. In my humble opinion a combination of longer association and more than one compatibility chart by honorable astrologers would greatly help put the right devotees together and decrease the divorce rate. Krishna-Kirti dasa uses the following quote: "There are eight forms of marriage mentioned in the scripture Manu-smrti, but only one process of marriage, brahma or rajasika marriage, is now current. Other kinds of marriage-by love, by exchange of garlands or by kidnapping the bride-are now forbidden in this Kali age."(SB 3.22.16 purport) I have heard of this loveless marriage some proclaim as Vedic. Yet we see Prabhupada says many things and one tends to focus on that which they like or serves them in one way or another. Lets look at the facts. Marriages without love in ISKCON have plummeted into divorce. We must also recognize that sometimes love is translated as lust, so of course we would not be instructed to go after a marriage of so-called love in kali yuga. It was not love in the first place, it was lust and therefore selfishness, which results in being devoid of responsibility and accountability. Therefore the reason love based marriages have not worked in our country is because they are were not love based at all, but lust based. However, it also must be noted that arranged marriages aren't working any better. We can see later in this very same purport that Prabhupada explains the reason marriage by love has been forbidden is because the strict rules of responsibility are no longer followed. "Such marriages were current in bygone ages, but at the present moment they are impossible because the strict principles of kstriya life have practically been abolished. Since India has now become dependent on foreign countries, the particular influence of her social orders have been lost; now according to the scriptures, everyone is sudra. The so-called brahmana, kstirya and vaisyas have forgotten their traditional activities, and in the absence of these activities they are called sudras" (SB 3.22.16 purport) Certainly in this age everyone is sudra and it is the sudras who are forbidden to have a love based marriage. However, Prabhupada gave us a chance to do something better, something higher, even higher than brahmana. If we start to behave like the Vaishnavas Prabhupada instructed us to become only than can we begin to understand the difference between lust and love in a marriage, and only than can we arrange marriages that are based on love not on lust. After all, a Vaishnava must be responsible. We also need to honor those who are naturally attracted to each other and marry for that reason. They could be sufficiently aware to do it successfully. To criticize them may be a sign of jealously over their good marriage. Prabhupada DOES offer quotes that marriage should be based on love. My reason for writing about this is that the future generations shouldn't have to go through what our generation went through. We do not want to set up impersonal marriage arrangements as if they are Krishna Consciousness marriage arrangements. Also, let us not confuse hardheartedness with spiritual advancement. It is not. "Just like love between two persons, it cannot be forced. 'You must love him. You must love her.' Oh, that is not love. That is not love. When automatically you love one another, that is quality. Dora vede (?) prema. There is no quality in that quality. But gradually, remaining together, that quality of love increases. Then the wife takes care of the husband, and the husband takes care. They become bound up, united in love. That is quality." Morning Walk, Narobi, November 2, 1975 And later in that conversation: "But gradually they get the connection. In this way the love develops, and when they are fifteen sixteen, years old, they are allowed to live together. Because both of them have already developed that 'She is my wife, He is my husband' psychologically. And there was no question of divorce. The love is so strong, they cannot even dream that, 'I have to leave my wife, I have to leave my husband.' They cannot dream it." Morning Walk, Narobi, November 2, 1975 First I would like to comment that marriages of those who are too young have not worked in ISKCON so this is not what I am advocating. Prabhupada would give instructions, but he was always practical and realistic. Our children have so many more pressures than the average village girl/boy that such marriages usually backfire. Also because they are not mature enough or just are not ready, and the fact is, we have not created the kind of society to support it. However, with that said we can see in the above quote that divorce does not happen when there is love. With all the criticism of divorce in this movement it is time to accept that it is, in part, the result of a loveless marriages often arranged by a person other than ones caring parents who would try to find the best match for them. Again, we should also notice that arranged marriages have ended up in divorce court to the same degree as love based marriages, if not more, taking into consideration the majority of devotees marriages were arranged. Sometimes we find ourselves in a marriage with someone we are not compatible with. It is very possible this has happened to teach us something, to purify us and make us look within at the anarthas we need to uproot and at what this person has to offer us to help us uproot it. If we, instead, become too rigid or just tolerate the marital problems, certainly that is better than divorce and one is to be given credit, but we have also thrown the anchor off the boat going back to Godhead and into the water. We are no longer moving forward spiritually because we are pretending we do not have this anartha to uproot. Marriage is like a barometer. It reveals our consciousness, including the areas we need to purify. Husbands are no exception. To continue, we learn to love by extending it. First as children we love ourselves and our parents. As adults we are suppressed to learn to love our marriage partner, which extends to a child, the child must go to school and have friends so we are forced to extend our love to our community and in time we increase our love of Krishna. It is not that we aren't trying to love Krishna throughout all of this. We are. However, learning to love others who come into our life is a lesson which helps us to further develop love of God. "The real purpose of marriage is to get children. prayojnana-siddhi. So if the husband and wife simply love within the mind and there is no action, there is no prayojnana-siddhi. We should be practical, not simply theoretical. So love between two persons, there must be exchange of loving feelings. Unless the exchange loving feelings are there, that is not love. That is theoretical. That is not practical. It is.... I have explained in the beginning of Krsna Book that love is practical exhibition. It is not theoretical. We cannot keep love within our heart, it must be expressed practically, and these are the .....If I love, then as soon as there is some news, 'Oh, Dr. Gosh is coming? I shall be very interested to hear about how you, when you are coming, how you are coming." That is love." Morning Walk, Bombay, April 1974 One may argue, using a point Prabhupada made, that there is no love in the material world. Let us properly understand that and not use it as an excuse to remain hard hearted. Certainly we have a long way to go to fully and correctly love, but as devotees we are following the process and must allow our hearts to open. We have to start somewhere. If we put up blockades to our heart in the name of Krishna Consciousness, then we will get blockades and not Krishna Consciousness. Even the demon Kamsa was capable of loving his sister, as Prabhupada explains: "Naturally everyone has some love for younger brother and sister. So he (Kamsa) was affectionate. Although he was a nondevotee demon, still, natural attraction, one cannot avoid. Just like a tiger. Tiger is killer of everyone. But still, the tiger and tigress have got affection for the cubs. That is natural. So he had the natural affection for his sister..." Prabhupada Lecture, SB 1971 Here Prabhupada gives us the example that even an animal has love, a demon as large as Kamsa has love, so while we one may claim we do not have full realization of love, we are also not devoid of it! Especially, we are devotees. Devotees should have soft hearts or try to be developing soft hearts. Too often we see hardheartedness passed off as *staunch,* or as Krishna Consciousness. It is usually meanness or cruelty, at best, stubbornness. Further, Prabhupada has explained that the closest thing of pure love of God in the material world is the love a mother has for her child. So we cannot say we can't experience love. We can say we have yet to open up to it or find it in a safe place, or at best, we have not found it to the degree we will find it with God. However, too many gurukulis have suffered from the philosophy that their fathers and mothers could not love each other. The children are the ones who pay the highest price. Anarthas we don't uproot get passed down to the child. As adults we may choose a loveless life but those who are born into it have no choice, and for that matter, they are just children. We may think that since we showed love toward them that they did not suffer. However, they have expressed otherwise and find it unnatural as well as psychologically disturbing that parents do not love each other. (And I did not say lust each other.) Is anybody listening to them? I see so many editorials on women and marriage yet they omit the gurukulis/children and who else to tell us of our mistakes but those who had to live under us? Have we lost all humility and are too puffed up to hear from them? If what we preach only works for us and not the youth, than there is something wrong with our understanding of the philosophy and we need to be brave enough to look at it and purify ourselves of it. Though it is so much easier to pass the buck and blame them for being in maya, weak, insincere and the entire slew of excuses. While one may claim that love based (really lust based) marriages are the results of hormones, therefore fail and are not Vedic, it is also unvedic to have ones spouse picked by a temple authority. Sometimes the temple president is arranging a marriage which would be best for the temple, such as marrying the best Sankirtan devotee to the Sankirtan leader or wanting two devotees to remain in the community and do service. Of course this is not always the case as some authorities arrange marriages better than others, but the point remains that this method of marriage is also unvedic. This idea of accepting the temple authority to pick, and then in the name of surrender only spend an hour together is as unvedic as a western-style love marriage. The commitment is commendable but it has nothing to do spousal selection. Vedically when we look at spousal selection we see that those who were betrothed either knew each other for quite a while (often since their sandbox days), or at least their families knew each other for YEARS. This is why it is so important that we start to lengthen the time to associate for the new devotees. It is more Vedic and therefore more lasting. Marriages succeed because the couple have gotten to know the other person and are *committed* to staying together, not because authorities picked them out for each other. What the focal point should be is not that of arranged marriages vs. love (in truth -- lust) marriages, but commitment. We can't realistically put a stop to love based marriages anyway. And who dares to say some can't succeed? After all, they are devotees. Who dares to judge and claim it is not really love instead of lust, again since they are devotees? We need not waste time on the details of how couples get together. More importantly, devotees need to take their marital vows seriously regardless of the "who, what, when, where and why" of the marriage. It is not about surrendering to the temple authority, it is about surrendering to the *marriage* and doing whatever inner purification is necessary to make the marriage work, which isn't always what temple authorities taught us it would be. It does not always fit in with our preconceived idea's of what it *should* be, or our neophyte belief's about this ashrama. Marriage is a growing experience and opportunity to wake up out of illusion, if we don't put up a false ego's to fight it. It is better to place our focus on what needs to be done to keep couples together in a *functional and happy* marriage. We can site many examples of those who have stayed together for years but can't stand each other. That is not a successful marriage nor will it attract anyone to join our movement. Bad preaching. They deserve credit for staying, but marriage should be Krishna Conscious and Krishna Consciousness is blissful! Lets get honest, to whatever degree there is dysfunction in the marriage, to that degree there is Maya in the marriage. In a way we should thank that difficulty for manifesting. It has helped us see where we need purification, again, husbands included. I humbly suggest if anyone wants to know what is really in my AHAM BRAHMASMI Newsletter that they get it directly from me rather than have it forwarded via email and possibly edited, or reading it in an editorial where the author of a letter was changed. If interested, ask me about it. Parijata2@aol.com Those who do not believe in fairness of women in this movement but in male superiority, need not subscribe. Thank you for your time. Hare Krishna. Your Servant, Prtha devi dasi Related VNN Stories  Comment on this storyContact VNN about this storySend this story to a friend
NEWS DESK | EDITORIALS | TOP |
