VNN Editorial - Lord Krsna's Example Giving Shelter To 16,108 Wives

EDITORIAL

April 8, 1999 VNN3537 See Related VNN Stories

Lord Krsna's Example Giving Shelter To 16,108 Wives

BY AMEYATMA DAS

EDITORIAL, Apr 8 (VNN) — A reply to Babhru's March 25th editorial, "Lord Ramachandra's Example: Only One Wife"

Both examples are there. Both choices are bonafied. Babhru Prabhu says that I seemed "to miss one important source". The verse and purport of SB 9.10.54. which discusses Sri Ram's vow of taking only one wife. My previous editorial on this topic was not meant to be all inclusive. I am well aware of Sri Ram's eka-patni vow.

Srila Prabhupad makes the direct statement: "One should not accept more than one wife."

I have no problem with that. One should not marry more than one wife. He has also said, at times, that one should not marry at all, if one can keep from it.

I want to make 3 points in this dsicussion. The first concerns the real meaning and place (or uttilization of the verse and purport he refers to.

Secondly, what benefit to society, especially a spiritual/religoius society, is there for accepting it? That I went over in more detail in my previous VNN editorial. The third point is tied to the second and that is, what is the motive for promoting or supporting it, and what is the motive for opposing it? In otherwords, what is the personal objective for doing either?

To try and resolve the first point, a simple test to tell if Babhru's interpretation of it is correct is to analyze how is it supported by SP's many other referrences to this topic? How does it fit in to the overall mood of his many other instructions, especially those instructiions that he gave around the same time period.

Lets take more of the text Babhru quotes:
From SP's Purport SB 9.10.54
"The Lord punished Ravana and rescued His wife to instruct men to have only one wife. Lord Ramacandra accepted only one wife and manifested sublime character, thus setting an example for householders. A householder should live according to the ideal of Lord Ramacandra, who showed how to be a perfect person."

When we compare these statements with othere he made around the same time Babhru's interpretation of if seems weak? Babhru claims that the above statement is "abundantly clear:, that Srila Prabhupad does NOT want us to take more than one wife. He sees this verse as some sort of absolute dictum that is so strong and powerful that it totally overpowers and over shadows all of this other favorable instructions made around that time. All other instructions given before and after this are to be considered null and void. But, common sense with just a little research does not support that conclusion at all.

Whereas Ram Chandra showed us one facit of idea husband, Krsna and Arjun taught us another. Both examples are there. Ram Bhakta and Krsna Bhakta.

Ram's example and Krsna's example. Both are there. If you don't want to take more than one, then by all means don't. I will glagly give my full blessings to anyone who wants to follow Sri Ram Chandra's vow. It is very repectable. But, that does not mean that I see polygamy as something bad. I do not disdain Arjun for having 6 wives, or Vasudev for having 18 wives.

There are many other instructions Srila Prabhupad gave that were favorable to polygamy, including before and after he wrote this purport. If one wants to properly follow those other instructions, then I will also support that.

Both are valid, both are supported by dharma, both are respectable.

There is nothing in the purport that I read that was overpoweringly exclusive or prohibitive.

This was a verse in SB which dealt with Sri RamChandra's eka-patni vow.

Therefore, in the Purport Srila Prabhupad was explaining what was His vow and what was His purpose. It is more of an explanation of Ram's vow. It is instructive as well, and one is fully encouraged to follow if he is so inclined, but the wording used is not prohibitive and there is no absolute dictum. Neitehr Srila Prabhupad nor Sri Ram are saying that everyone is absolutely forbidden to take more than one wife. After all, Arjun, Beem, Vasudev, so many great devotees appeared after Sri Ram and all of them took more than one wife. Even our Lord Sri Nityananda Prabhu had more than one wife. Mother Jhanava Devi was not his one and only wife. Nityananda's only son was not born by M. Jhanava, but by one of His other wives. Are we to now judge all of them to be fallen because they did not follow this vow of Sri Ram? No. We are RadhaKrsna Bhaktas, not SitaRam Bhaktas. We may follow Ram's vow, but we are not obligated to do so.

What about Lady (Rani) Subhadra? Sri Krsna Himself made arrangements for His own dear sister to marry. Yet, He did not choose a man who would take her as his one and only wife. Not even as his first wife. Krsna arranged for His sister Subhadra to marry Arjun as his 2nd wife (or maybe he had others by then as well). To become additional wife is not a bad thing. A responsible loving father should consider the example Krsna set. Sri Krsna showed by His personal example, in carrying out his duty to give proper protection to his younger sister. Balaram was about to marry her to someone far less qualified, so, the need was there to give her better protection.

In order to give His sister a better husband Krsna arranged for her to marry Arjun as his additional wife. Sri Ram's eka patni vow may be the highest ideal of a perfect husband, but Krsna showed that it is not for everyone. Krsna's father, Krsna, cousin-brother-friends all took more than one wife. And Krsna made arrangements for His loving sister to marry a man as his additional wife.

And Subhadra was very happy to have got the man she really wanted.

Draupadi was at first angry. And, note that Arjun didn't first approach his first wife and seek her permission first. Even Krsna instructed Subhadra and Arjun how to deal with Draupadi, they all knew she would boil over when Arjun brought home the younger and very charming Subhadra as an additional wife. And Krsna did not just 'permit this', He was the one who made all the arrangements. This is also an example we can follow that if needed the fathers can also consider this in order to protect their daughters properly.

Second point. Why promote this? (From letter to Karandhar Jan 10, 73 "So I can understand that many men of our society have got themselves married only for some disastrous result. That means that not all of our men are meant for married life, but because there are so many women we may not leave them unprotected without husband, that will also not serve us well. Therefore it will be the best idea if those who are well-qualified as husbands to keep more than one wife very much satisfied in every respect."

From SB lecture
"There is no widow marriage in India. They, the... Manu-samhita, the law-givers, the saintly persons, Manu samhita... Why widow marriage is prohibited? The idea is generally, everywhere, in all countries, the female population is greater than the male population. So the idea is that she has become widow. She was once married. Now if again she is married, another virgin girl, she does not get the chance of being married. Therefore there is no widow marriage according to Hindu scripture. And a man is allowed, if he is, I mean to say, able man, he can marry more than one wife. Not that simply marry. To get more than one wife does not mean sense enjoyment. The wife must be maintained very respectfully. She must have good house, good ornaments, good food, good servants, good children. Then one can marry. Not that simply for sense gratification." -- 690913SB.LON

To take more than one wife is not for sense enjoyment. It is to give protection to the women. Thus, ultimately polygamy is not for the benefit of the men, it is for the benefit of the women and for the society. To provide a system be which all girls can be properly married and protected with husband at a young age, instead of passing their youth spoiled in the association of so many irresponsible boy friends.

From BG Purport 1.40
"Good population in human society is the basic principle for peace, prosperity and spiritual progress in life. The varnasrama religion's principles were so designed that the good population would prevail in society for the general spiritual progress of state and community. Such population depends on the chastity and faithfulness of its womanhood. As children are very prone to be misled, women are similarly very prone to degradation. Therefore, both children and women require protection by the elder members of the family... ...On the failure of such varnasrama-dharma, naturally the women become free to act and mix with men, and thus adultery is indulged in at the risk of unwanted population.

Irresponsible men also provoke adultery in society, and thus unwanted children flood the human race at the risk of war and pestilence."

That is the basis for supporting polygamy.

Now to the 3rd point. What is the motive for allowing it and promoting it or disallowing it and speaking out against it? My motive for supporting it I gave a synapsis of above, as point 2. The purpose of this is to bring forth a generation of saintly souls who will be attracted to take birth in the womb of mothers who are well protected in their strict chaste characters.

My goal is to get the devotee community as a whole to at least develop an attitude of 'acceptance' toward polygamy, for the right reasons, ie protection of the women. This may take a very long time, so I view my efforts as a starting point.

Now, I ask, what is the motive in speaking out against this? I have quoted in my previous editorial that SP has said that polygamy will eliminate illicit sex in society. On June 8th, 74, on a morning walk Srila Prabhupad says that the system of monogamy creates prostitution.

"NitŠi: In Los Angeles, you were saying about the system of monogamy, how in this way most of the women are left unmarried.

PrabhupŠda: Yes. That is prostitution. "

He says that the system of monogamy leaves many women with no husband.

Unprotected. Anath. And he has said more than once that polygamy is the cure for illicit sex in society.

Thus, what is the objective, or more specifically, what is the result of opposing polygamy? To oppose polygamy leaves only 2 alternatives, either one supports monogamy or he supports unrestricted free sex, free from the bounds of religious restriction (animal life). Take your pick. Either way, if one opposes polygamy it means they are supporting illicit sex and prostitution. Srila Prabhupad says, monogamy means prostitution. Thus, if you only support monogamy, then you are supporting prostitution. Take your pick.

Therefor I support polygamy.

It can be noted that Sri Ram did not "prohibit" polygamy. He did not say that from now on it is to be considered irreligious and condemned for a man to marry more than one wife. No. What He taught by His example was that if a man wants to be the perfect ideal husband, he should not take more than one wife. But, He did not prohibit it in any way. And neither was Srila Prabhupad prohbiting it in his purport to that verse. Thus, what I have quoted from SP and logically deduced from those statements is not contradictory to what Sri Ram has taught. There is no contradiction. And it is not a situation where anyone and everyone HAS to vow to have a monogamous marriage or everyone HAS to vow to be a polygamists. Both both are there, both are sanctioned.

And what is the Eka Patni Vrata?

When Sita left this world Ram never remarried. Yet, we see that neither Sri Nitai or Gauranga followed Sri Ram's eka-patni vrata. Sri Nityananda Prabhu took 2 or 3 wives at the same time and even Mahaprabhu married twice. Thjerefor there is no absolute presidence in our sampradaya that we must all follow this vow. Almost just the opposite.

The vow of Eka-Patni-Vrata exemplified by Sri Ram is that He NEVER accepted another wife (in that pastime (life)), ever. No Divorce. No remarriage.

Even His wife left this world,. He was still young man, King of the whole World, with so many servants and willing young girls, but He NEVER married again. That is the sober and strict vow of Eka-Patni-Vrata. It does not just mean He did not practice polygamy, it meant one wife, period, no matter what happened. That is the example of a sold out ideal husband.

Yet, our Nityananda Prabhu and Mahaprabhu did not follow this vow at all.

We are not required to. It is respectable and one may if he so desires, but it is not required.

As I quoted in my previous article on VNN from the Purport to CC Adi Lila 14.58 Srila Prabhupad explains that, "Therefore it is a principle in the society that all girls should be married, unless polygamy is allowed it will not be possible. If all the girls are not married there is good chance of adultery, and a society in which adultery is allowed cannot be very peaceful or pure. In our Krishna Conscious society we have restricted illicit sex life. The practical difficulty is to find a husband for each and every girl. We are therefore in favor of polygamy, provided, of course, that the husband is able to maintain more then one wife".

This is the objective of promoting polygamy. To provide a system by which all girls can get a good husband. The chastity of the girls will be properly protected. Thus, the result will be that the society will become peaceful and pure and illicit sex and adultry will be stopped. That is the goal, which is directly supported by Srila Prabhupad's own words as to what will be the result of accepting polygamy in our soceity,

That is my motive. In the face of so much shastric and guru's support for this, then I ask again, what is the motive of those who are opposed? What is behind their unwillingness to accept these direct words and instructions of SP?.

And what will be the result? Prostitution for our daughters? We will have our daughters in their 20's running around with boy friends and not protected via marriage. Then will come adultry, prostitution and out of wedlock unwanted children. According to SP's own instructions this is the result of advocating monogamy. This is the ultimate result of discouraging polygamy. Take your choice. Don't say that 'ameyatma' says this, The credit goes to SP, it is Srila Prabhupad who states that if polygamy is not allowed, this will be the result.

If you want to see more and more of our young girls becoming prostitutes and be mistreated like cheap toys and objects of sense gratification for the play boys in our society, then go ahead and speak out against polygamy.

Promote only monogamy. Then I question your motive? Are you trying to create a generation of young prostitutes so you can enjoy them?

Otherwise, if you do not want to see so many of our daughters become spoiled, unwed, unprotected and go on to become adulrous prostitutes, then we must accept polygamy. .

Babhru says that "Srila Prabhupada makes abundantly clear in this purport his desire that we establish daivi-varnasrama-dharma by marrying only one wife and remaining faithful to her throughout our lives."

No, it is not abundantly clear at all that SP said that in the purport.

That is not what I read. Besides, as I explained, even Nityananda and Mahaprabhu, Arjun, Beema, Krsna, Vasudev, and even Srila Bhaktivinod Thakur, none of them followed this Eka Patni vow. It is those who oppose polygamy who seem to be pulling at straws to try and find some way of rationalizing their unwillingness to accept.

Again I will refer to June 28th, of 77. Srila Prabhupad is instructing to marry the daughters by puberty, "This is the plan, varnashram-dharma. Very scientific. And Krsna says, "I am that."". Then ACBSP adds, "And if required, one man can take care of more than one wife because woman population is greater." ... "And those who are able, you can keep more than one wife."

We do not have to manufacture hidden meanings and put words in Prabhupad's mouth that he never said. Here he directly states that this is Varnashram-Dharma, Krsna's plan. This was his last instruction on marriage. We don't have to read into it something that is not there, it is direct. This is Krsna's plan. This is VarnashramDharma. I have been looked down upon for years for promoting this. I have had an older devotee call me, to my face, the scum of the earth for promoting this. Another devotee, current candidate for GBC and guru, once very angrily told me on the phone that in his (much more elevated) opinion, if any one even thinks favorably toward polygamy, he considered that person to be the lowest of all gross material sense enjoyers. (He must know much more about dharma then I do. After all, he remarried a mataji who had son from another devotee husband). But, according to HDG ACBSP, it is Krsna's plan. It is varnashramDharma. I am simply trying to promote His plan. But, it seems so many have strong personal vedetta against it.

What is their goal? Will they not be happy untill I publicly announce that I reject these direct statements of our spiritual master? They will not be happy until we delete those statements, and do away with those things they are unwilling to accept? (excuse me for purposefully over-stating these things. I know that is not these devotee's intensions, but it is the defacto result of their opposition to these direct statments made by SP).

Babhru says, "Ameyatma's research shows that, in the abstract, we should have little objection to the kind of polygamy practiced by men with qualifications similar to King Dasarath."

No. Not "little objection", in 75, 76, 77 I can supply (and did mention some in my previous editorial) Srila Prabhupad many times used the exact words "NO objection" when asked about ISKCON men taking more than one wife.

Not that we should have "little objection", there should be "NO" objection.

And does he mean by "in the abstract"? What is so abstract about the direct statements SP gave that I quoted? Who is being abstract here? It is being abstact to try and say that Sri Ram's eka patni vow is to be followed absolutely when even Mahaprabhu and Nitayananda did not follow it? Abstract or Obstruct? Babhru's interpretations are obstructive to those who to implement SP's instructions and varnashram-dharma.

Babhru, "We should also note, however, that even Dasarath's household was not perfectly peaceful. If men less qualified than he try to care for more than one wife, we can expect just the sorts of problems we have experienced over the years. "

If one is looking to avoid problems in married life, then let me be the first to advise, Do Not Marry ANYONE At ALL, Ever. And if one is thinking that taking additonal wife will bring one unfettered happiness devoid of all problems, he is the biggest fool of all times. Taking on a second wife means taking on many more hardships, more problems, more responsibilities.

Polygamy isn't for the weak and feable when it comes to owing up to being a responsible husband. If you can't cut it with one, don't dare spoil another life. And I am not speaking just about dharmic responsible parallel polygamy, but that also very much applies to the a-dharmic irresponsible serial polygamy in the form of marriage, divorce, remarriage, ad infinitum.

Eka Patni vrata means only one wife, for the whole life, not one wife, divorce, then another one wife, divorce, then another one.....divorce, then another one... Even the wife dies, eka-patni-vrata means that is it, no second marriage. That is Eka Patni Vrata. It is strict vow. So far I can say I have lived in accordance with eka-patni standards up to this point in my life.

Babhru, "In fact, our godbrothers' attempts at polygamy were really meant for increasing their sense gratification..."

I do somewhat agree that in the past the majority, if not all, of the very few God brothers who have tried to create a polygamous marriage have failed and often the reason may very well be that their motives were more for the purpose of personal sense enjoyment then the protection of the women and helping society.

But, that is why I keep preaching about it and defending it. I am trying to emphasis the proper application of it. It failed in the past because it was not executed properly. That does not mean we throw the whole thing out.

It means we learn from the mistakes and pick our selves up and do it right the next time. While it is a fact that some have tried their hand at polygamy in the past and those marriage did not work out, it is also a fact that most of the monogamous marriages didn't work out either, so I guess we should scrap marriage all together and start having sex like the pigs, no rules, no discrimination. No, we analyze what went wrong, we analyze what did those that suceeded do right, and we keep making positive progress toward Vedic culture and dharma.

I gave referrence in my previous article, SP has clearly stated that if the man has not got the means to maintain a second wife, then to take another wife means he is only interested in irresponsible sense-enjoyment. That sort of relationship is condemned by SP and also by myself. The purpose of allowing this is to properly care for more than one wife. The purpose is to take in another girl and give her a home, provide for her all living arrangements so she need not work outside the home, give her children, provide for her saris and some ornaments. Nice foods. Take good care of her and engage her in service to Krsna, Guru and Gauranga. That is man's duty in taking more than one wife. It is not to increase sex life. That is what prostitutes are for. And Monogamy, SP said, gives rise to prostitution.

Polygamy reduces it.

My goal is to educate devotees so that if and when they do practice this they will not make the same mistakes as were made in the past. The goal is to make the men first class husbands and the women first class wives. The goal is to introduce dharma and peace in society, peace in family life.

Unbroken homes for our future generations. That is our goal.

Babhru says, "In the conversation Ameyatma cites as Srila Prabhupada's last and final instruction on the matter, Srila Prabhupada says another wife would be allowed [i]f the woman allows husband. He imposed the same restriction on acceptance of the sannyasa ashram by his married disciples.

This shows the wife's importance in the family and underscores Srila Prabhupada's assertion that both husband and wife should be faithful."

I don't argue the wife's importance in the family (without wife, where is the question of family?) But, Babhru seems to be reading things that just aren't there and putting words in SP's mouth that he didn't say. I can not find where SP said that the first wife must first allow it before the husband can take. (Arjun didn't seek out Draupadi's permission first).

Here is the quote I was referring to (June 28th, 1977),

"She must have children, she must have good house, good eating, good clothing, good ornament. Then she is satisfied. They want these things. A woman does not mind very much, "My husband has got more than one wife." If she gets all the comforts of her wishes, some children and some comforts, then she is... She does not grudge because woman knows man's psychology. A man is not satisfied with one woman. So he must be given that. But she must be chaste. She cannot have more than... Then their relation is all right.

If the woman allows husband"He likes. Let him have more than one woman, but I must be chaste"

I only read that SP says the wife must not mind very much if her husband takes more than one wife. But, the criteria is that the husband gives her a home, family, some comforts. The criteria is that he be a very caring husband who takes very good care of his wife. Then the wife must not grudge him, and she must allow him. I do not see how Babhru interprets this to mean that husband can only take if the wife allows him to do so. Arjun did not seek out Draupadi's prior approval. We don't read that Krsna had to take permission from Rukmini devi before He married another 16,107 wives.

But, if it comes down to breaking up with the first wife and destroying one family just to take a second wife, then I agree a responsible man would never do this, and only responsible men shoud take more than one wife anyway. But, if the wife were a genuine follower of SP then it would never come down to that, because she would read that she must allow him to take.

Babhru, speaking of the failures of the past attempts continues, "...regardless of their attempts to rationalize their behavior.I know of no such arrangements in which the wives were all equally satisfied with the results over the long run."

Who is making attempts at rationalizing? Every thing I am stating is based on a logical, reasonable analytical study of the what Srila Prabhupad has taught and on the study of the science of social culture in accordance with the principles of dharma. The arguments I am making are not weak and shallow. Rather, those who are opposed seem to be pulling at straws trying to rationalize their unwillingness to accept SP's favorable instructions that we should allow and practice polygamy in our society. They are the ones with the weaker arguments.

I am tired of devotees pointing their fingers at me and falsely acussing me of only preaching this as a means to increase my sense enjoyment. I have been trying to promote it and preach in favor of it for 7 years and am still following eka-patni marriage. (one and only one wife for over 18 years). I am strictly opposed to divorce and remarriage. And I can say publicly that I have only engaged in sex life to procreate God conscious children. I don't engage in illicit sex. I do not use contraceptives, I do not engage my wife as some sex machine, and I have never had an affair.

That is my track record. Where is the evidence that I am motivated to only enjoy my senses with another vagina? I am not a pure devotee, but I honestly don't think you can find evidence that I am only seeking to enjoy my senses. I also don't speak freely with other men's wives or the unwed girls. You don't find me standing around taking with women. You won't find me hanging around unwed women talking and joking, trying to enjoy their association. I am very strict about chastity, and protecting unwed girl's chastity. So, where is any evidence to acuse me of being only motivated for sense enjoyment? The only thing is that I have offered that I could give protection to some unwed girls as second wife. Either some refused or other's did not wish to permit it, and that has been that. Possibly if I were to lower my standards and accept a non virgin or not so chaste girl, Iam sure I could find much easier. But, that is not my standard. That is not the Vedic standard of dharma.

As some criticise me for trying to promote this or for having made a few meager attempts to take another wife, on the other hand I have had more then several devotees tell me that simply promoting it theoretically has no weight without some practical sucessful examples being set for others to follow. So I have also been advised that I should do less talking and more acting. Accept some additional wives and set an example for others to follow. Actions talk louder then words.

I agree with that. Brahman's teach by words and by example. And of the 2, example is far better then precept. ("Example is not the main thing in influencing others; It is the only thing". ---Albert Schweitzer )

But, I am 48 now, and I have a family with 3 young children. I cannot accpet just anyone just anyone. My children are everything, I will not do anything that will risk their having an intact unbroken family. My motive and goal is not just to have a second wife for myself, but to make it suceed in order to set a working example. If I cannot be certain that will be the result, then I will not be able to practice what I preach. (Yet, that in and of itself is practicing what I preach, as I am remaining strict to my standards and will not compromise them for less then proper reasons)

I will be honest and straightforward. I put this here just incase anyone is interested they will know what are some of the criteria. If I could find the right person I would do this in order to set some sucessful example.

But, I haven't found that person or situation yet after so many years, so I am not holding my breath. Instead, example or not, I will keep promoting and defending not just this specific topic, but all principles of dharma.

ys ameyatma das

ameyatma@iname.com

Chk out my web page at:
http://home.earthlink.net/~kgrafx

See Related VNN Stories | Comment on this Story

This story URL: http://www.vnn.org/editorials/ET9904/ET08-3537.html

NEWS DESK | EDITORIALS | TOP

Surf the Web on