The Female Diksa Guru Issue

BY: ROCANA DASA

Jan 16, 2015 — CANADA (SUN) — I have received a number of requests for me to make some comment on the burning issue of the day -- the "FDG issue", as it is commonly called. I've read with interest the input of other writers here in the Sun, and I have commented in a number of previous articles on the whole issue of institutionalizing diksa by requiring GBC approval for anyone to become a diksa guru in ISKCON today. My position has been that I disapprove of this whole practice. And surprisingly, that appears to be a very difficult concept for many devotees to accept or appreciate.

The fact is that sastra and the Sampradaya Acaryas have never condoned this practice. Despite the fact that the GBC consider themselves to be the Ultimate Managing Authorities, to manage on that level is not in line with, or in accordance with sastra.

There are so many examples that can be given if we analyze the Vedic literature in regards to who is eligible to become a diksa guru, and whether or not they have needed or sought approval from some administrative head in order to take up that service. Granted, there are examples of the overall etiquette involved in seeking some input from one's godbrothers, or from someone considered to be a siksa guru or authority in the local spiritual community. Before accepting disciples, one might choose to gain the blessings of respected seniors. But this commonly held practice does not extend to politicizing the guru position within the context of a spiritual institution, which is definitely the case within ISKCON today.

Mandatory GBC approval goes far beyond the simple etiquette of humbly approaching a fellow superior, asking for blessings prior to accepting disciples into a diksa relationship. Likewise, pushing for society-wide acceptance of FDGs is not the same as having sastric approval or the blessings of the past Sampradaya Acaryas. No one has been able to present verifiable evidence that the Founder-Acaraya of ISKCON, Srila Prabhupada, approved of or sanctioned this unusual practice. Instead, FDG proponents often point to one of the rare exceptions found in the history of our Chaitanya Sampradaya, namely the pastime of Jahnava Devi, Lord Nityananda's wife, initiating disciples after His departure. But Nityananda das, the author of Prema-vilasa, did not accept Jahnava Ma as his diksa guru until he saw Her in Her four-armed form.

This FDG issue also highlights the issue of GBC "ultimate" authority. Does being "ultimate" empower this group to sanction decrees that border on circumventing Vaisnava sastra? Are they going to include this alteration on their growing list of bold speculations, such as making copious changes to the Founder-Acarya's sastric commentaries, sanctioning homosexual marriages, and now acceptance of FDGs? As a self-confessed neophyte, I feel it is wise to embrace the principal that one should try to never contradict, change or even have an opinion that differs from that of the Sampradaya Acaryas.

To my mind, it is ludicrous for GBC authorities to champion the FDG issue, considering the reality that it only addresses the desires of a small number of women, and by doing so churns up so much unnecessary controversy. These few female disciples feel it necessary to be considered diksa gurus, when they already have the option and approval to be siksa guru. Is it because they hanker to be included among the elite of ISKCON simply by being recognized as a diksa guru? If they truly cared about ISKCON, they would refrain from creating such a disturbance by campaigning for the position As a bona fide siksa guru, they could recommend any of their would be disciples to take initiation from a qualified male diksa guru. This diksa guru could, in turn, instruct the disciple to take shelter of the female siksa guru. The two gurus could work cooperatively to oversee the advancement of the disciple.

Considering the myriad important issues facing the representatives of the Sampradaya Acaryas and the Six Goswamis, should we be forced to focus on the controversy surrounding FDG? Why GBC leaders -- ISKCON's Ultimate Managing Authorities – see this as a priority is a mystery. Unfortunately, the direction the GBC is taking ISKCON is towards being a western style church rather than a society of Gaudiya Vaisnavas. Our Sampradaya Acaryas have emphasized Sri Krsna's plan for human society, namely Varnasrama. Varnasrama in the context of being a western church is incompatible with the true principles of Varnasrama. The leaders of the church of ISKCON have condoned sannyasis and brahmans acting in the capacity of kshatriyas managing the society. In ISKCON many sannyasis openly live like kings or associate with women, and the GBC ignore these circumstances. Now sannyasis are getting absorbed in the topic of females becoming diksa gurus.

The western oriented GBC, many of whom are sannyasis, are actively directing ISKCON towards the model of a western-style religion. On the other hand, we have the eastern style religionists advocating that ISKCON follow an eastern style religious model, with guru and ashrams. The leaders in these two camps have differing perspective on the FDG issue, which emphasizes the great divide.

The western liberals look forward to communing with their ecumenical associates, pointing out just how inclusive modern ISKCON is by recognizing and including women diksa gurus, and homosexuals. They have experienced the criticism from other religious western scholars, who point to the exclusion of women as an indication that Krsna consciousness/ISKCON is a primitive, backward culture. So for the benefit of a few ISKCON leaders who feel it an important preaching program, communing with a few ecumenical fellows from other western religions, as a result the whole society is forced to go along with the debate on FDG.

If devotees find themselves entangled and dependent upon being a member in good standing within ISKCON, then for the sake of their own peaceful existence they may go along to get along, and accept a pro-FDG stance because their local leader/GBC supports it. I was asked for my opinion, and at the risk of appearing repetitive, I personally don't think the Sampradaya Acaryas would approve of female diksa gurus. Nor do I think they would be pleased with the unnecessary disruption this issue has brought to a society supposedly dedicated to preaching the glories of the Sankirtan Movement.


Homepage


| The Sun | News | Editorials | Features | Sun Blogs | Classifieds | Events | Recipes | PodCasts |

| About | Submit an Article | Contact Us | Advertise | HareKrsna.com |

Copyright 2005, 2015, HareKrsna.com. All rights reserved.