Page 20 - Defending Prabhupada Words - By Harivlas Das

be exploited by Raksasas like Ravana. Here the words
vaideha-raja-duhitari indicate that before mother Sita
was married to Lord Ramachandra she was protected by
her father, Vaideha-raja. And when she was married she
was protected by her husband. Therefore the conclusion
is that a woman should always be protected. According
to the Vedic rule, there is no scope for a woman being
independent (asmaksam), for a woman cannot protect
herself independently.”

Brahma das writes, “The question is whether or not Srila
Prabhupada’s other comments on the nature of women fall
within the category of relative or absolute. The dictionary
defines absolute as complete; perfect; free from limitation.
Following Bhagavad-gita 2.16 devotees have defined
absolute as that which is satah or true in all times and
circumstances. Taken at face value do his controversial
comments on the nature of women conform to either
of these definitions of the word absolute? Are women
always less intelligent and untrustworthy in comparison
to men? Are women always required to be under the
direct protection of a man? The answer to these questions
is no. Neither do these contentions about women conform
to Bhaktivinoda’s concept of paramartha, as they are all
nonessential to the culture of bhakti. Therefore according
to Bhaktivinoda Thakura one is free to overlook them.”
19

09-02-2023 17:30:16
e.indd 19
Defending Prabhupada Words inside.indd 19 09-02-2023 17:30:16
Defending Prabhupada Words insid