Participation, Protection, and Patriarchy
An International Model for Women's Roles in ISKCON
by Radha devi dasi
Reposted November 29, 2002
This paper examines the question of what constitute appropriate roles for
women in the International Society for Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON). I use
concepts developed in international law in this examination and I begin by
explaining the benefits of a model which incorporates international law. The
second section of this paper addresses the relationship of human rights law
to our own Vaisnava philosophy and raises problems in our treatment of women
up to this point. In section three I discuss the kind of rights that human
rights law embodies. Section four considers the application of those human
rights in ISKCON and looks at the issue of protection of women from an
international rights perspective. The concluding section highlights actions
which ISKCON should take in order to ensure appropriate roles for women.
Section I
The benefits of International Law
The first, and most important benefit of an international law approach in
defining roles for women in ISKCON, is that it gives us a coherent framework
for resolving many different tensions. The question of women's roles
includes a number of different considerations and impacts our society as a
whole. It is in some sense artificial to divide our analysis into "men's
issues" and "women's issues," because the treatment of women affects every
member of ISKCON, regardless of gender - women are wives, mothers, sisters
and service colleagues to men. Moreover, the question of women's roles in
ISKCON raises other questions, such as the relationship of our leaders to
ISKCON's members and the obligations of the individual to ISKCON as an
institution. International law provides an existing model which allows us to
integrate these various concerns into a coherent analysis.
The second benefit of international law is that it allows us to create
needed cultural variations in our practices. ISKCON is an international
organization facing cultural variations in different regions of the world.
If we are going to be an effective organization for all people, and for
women in particular, then we have to be sensitive to cultural variations.
Srila Prabhupada expressed this thought most easily and eloquently by saying
we have to be attentive to time, place and circumstance.
International law has already looked at these cultural variations, and
created a way of allowing people some flexibility to tailor a policy to
their particular region while maintaining a structure that keeps any
adjustment from sacrificing underlying goals.
I do not advocate that we take principles of international law and replace
our own philosophy with international law. However, I contend that we can
effectively use international law to develop a model within which we can
test our adherence to our own philosophy. We have numerous written sources
of religious principles, in addition to the examples implicit in the actual
behavior of Srila Prabhupada. It is our task to integrate this wealth of
instruction into a coherent policy on women in ISKCON. One part of our
problem, particularly in our treatment of women, is that we have focused on
one or two instructions, taking them out of context. We have also used
certain words arbitrarily without understanding what those words actually
mean. Finally, we have made sweeping statements as justification for our
policies even though those statements do not reflect our actual activity.
Consequently, we need to revisit this issue of women's participation in a
thoughtful and rigorous manner.
Law gives us the tools by which we can integrate numerous instructions on
individual issues. Law also teaches us to define our terms and to test our
rhetoric against our actions. The need to accomplish these goals is
peculiarly apparent when we examine women's roles in ISKCON. Some of Srila
Prabhupada's statements about women have been over-emphasized to the
exclusion of other, contrary statements. As a result, our policies on
women's issues are out of balance. The particular nature of the
misconceptions about women which we have developed in ISKCON is further
developed in Sections Two and Four of this paper.
Section Two
Human Rights Law and Vaisnava Philosophy
International law is a particularly useful tool for ISKCON because there is
a theoretical similarity between human rights law and our own sastra. That
similarity is the idea of equality. In some sense it's ironic for members of
ISKCON to discuss equality between men and women because we have not seen
much of it in practice. However, the principle of spiritual equality is
definitely described in our scriptures. There is a similar concept in
international law.
International human rights law rests on the principle that everyone is
entitled to certain fundamental things because all human beings share the
same essence and that essence is somehow sacred. This fundamental sacrality
is also described in our own sastra. Krishna goes even a little farther in
the Bhagavad Gita when he says that the enlightened sage sees a brahmin, a
cow, an elephant, a dog and a dog eater with equal vision. In the related
purport, Srila Prabhupada explains that this equal vision arises from the
fact that all living entities have the same essence and we all have the same
relationship to Krishna. There is, thus, an obvious philosophical basis on
which to compare our sastra and international human rights law.
Having made that very obvious point, I want to talk about the level at which
we, as a society, have not yet accepted this principle of equality. There is
a belief prevalent in ISKCON that souls in women's bodies are not equal, but
suffer instead from serious mental and emotional deficits. We are seen as
being less intelligent, untrustworthy and over emotional. Jyotirmayi devi
dasi thoroughly described in her paper, "Women in ISKCON in Srila
Prabhupada's Times," all of these misconceptions about women and explained
through Srila Prabhupada's own writings exactly why they are misconceptions.
A very brief examination of Srila Prabhupada's statements reveals that he
did not view his female disciples as being less intelligent or able than his
male disciples. In the Caitanya Caritamrita, Srila Prabhupada described his
disciples, saying, " . . . both boys and girls are being trained to become
preachers . . . these girls are not ordinary girls, but are as good as their
brothers who are preaching Krsna consciousness."
Srila Prabhupada made a similar statement about equality between Vaisnavas
and Vaisnavis in a lecture in which he described how women, vaisyas and
sudras are transformed through Krsna consciousness.
"Not that even though they become interested, they keep behind. No. . . with
equal force with men, they also promoted. So Kunti, out of her humbleness,
meekness, she is presenting herself that 'We are women, striya.' But she's
not ordinary woman. She's devotee. Similarly, any devotee woman is as good
as Kunti."
Srila Prabhupada never intended his female disciples to be disparaged on the
basis of their bodily forms. Rather, he clearly instructed us that women
engaged in the practice of Krsna consciousness make equal advancement with
male devotees. Indeed, to believe otherwise would indicate a profound lack
of faith in the process of Krsna consciousness.
However, the belief that women are inferior is still reflected in our policy
and in our practice. Women are dehumanized and devalued by our rhetoric and
by accusations used to marginalize them. At the Vaisnavis in ISKCON
Conference, one woman described how she was marginalized when she spoke out
on the need for women to give Bhagavatam class. She said it was the end of
her career in ISKCON management. Having lived in the same community, I can
speak from personal experience on her treatment. Many of us women who looked
to her as a leader were told that she did not want to give Bhagavatam class,
that she was more interested in making money than in working in ISKCON
management. Thus, she was presented as avaricious and the true facts of her
conflict with ISKCON management were concealed.
Similarly, I have heard the Women's Ministry described as a "group of women
who never cover their heads." This statement, in addition to being
inaccurate, misses an important point. The real issue is the purpose and
effectiveness of the Women's Ministry; the extent to which the Women's
Ministry does or does not propose and implement sensible, useful policy for
ISKCON. The fact that some members of the Women's Ministry may adjust small
externalities in their dress according to time, place, and circumstance
should not determine the value of the Women's Ministry as a whole. The need
to separate Krishna consciousness from external rituals has been the subject
of much discussion in our sampradaya. Similarly, this external consideration
is not the proper measure by which to judge the Women's Ministry.
There are even more insidious, subtle, day-to-day minimizations of women
that may be harder to observe. The language we use marginalizes women. When
we say "devotees and matajis," we are saying that women are in a category
separate from devotees. And that statement creates a psychological space in
which women can be ranked just a little bit lower than the rest of the
Vaisnavas, who oddly enough turn out to be all men. Clearly, not everybody
uses the statement in such a negative way, and the distinction may be made
in a mood of genuine respect. However, the language creates the space in
which minimization of women is possible. Those of us who are immature and
have not completely overcome our conditioning, naturally find those spaces
and take advantage of them.
Another instance of the minimization of women involves the Mayapur samadhi.
At the Vaisnavis in ISKCON Conference, His Holiness Bir Krishna Swami very
accurately described the historical photographs which have been reproduced
as paintings decorating the samadhi. The female disciples of Srila
Prabhupada are not in the paintings although they were in the original
photographs. It is obviously disrespectful and devaluing to women that they
have been deleted from our institutional history. More importantly, this
deletion involves the Mayapur samadhi, a place of enormous significance in
our movement. Thus, the message that we as women get is multifaceted and
extremely negative. First, we are told, "Don't speak." If you do speak, you
run the risk of being one of those women who never covers her head. In other
words, you become someone who should not be listened to, someone who is not
reliable. We are also told, "Don't act." Don't dance in the temple, don't
stand in front of the Deities, don't give class, don't lead kirtan, don't
participate in ISKCON. And the murals in the Mayapur samadhi say, "Don't
exist. Don't be here." Women leave ISKCON and we're surprised. To paraphrase
Srila Prabhupada, rather we should be surprised that women have stayed.
Section Three
Applying the principles of International Law to our society
Having identified some of the main problems in our treatment of women, we
must first ask how the law can help us in solving these problems. The law is
relevant here because law involves relationships. Law is a way of governing
relationships by creating structure and space in which those relationships
can take place. When law works well it is because it has minimized conflict.
We need that structure here. We have many spaces where it is possible for
women's interests and women's needs to be devalued or ignored.
One of the things which we have not yet examined and which is critical for
all of our social development policies is the question of what constitutes
the proper relationship between ISKCON and its members. At one point,
whether or not it was ever articulated, the relationship was viewed as an
autocratic tie with ISKCON functionaries giving pronouncements which could
not be questioned by individual members. This relationship lead to
situations which were destructive to both ISKCON as an institution and to
the individual members of ISKCON. Srila Prabhupada himself specifically
rejected this type of relationship between institutional leaders and those
in their care. A new relationship between ISKCON and its members has yet to
be articulated. However, there is currently much discussion of the need for
ISKCON to support and nurture its members.
In the law we call this type of relationship a social contract. It is a
mutual relationship. There is a lot of evidence in the sastra to support the
position that the relationship between institutional leaders and members is
based on a social contract. Krishna Himself and Srila Prabhupada have both
indicated that the relationship between individual and spiritual leader is a
mutual reciprocation. In the verses that Srila Prabhupada liked to quote so
frequently from the last chapter of the Bhagavad Gita, Krishna says,
"Engage always in thinking of Me, become My devotee, offer obeisances to Me,
worship Me. In this way you will come to Me. I promise you this because you
are so dear to Me."
This verse describes a promise - Krsna tells his devotees, worship Me and I
will reciprocate. In the next verse, Krishna says abandon all varieties of
religion and I will deliver you. Again, Krishna is describing a reciprocal
relationship. There is an important duty on the devotee to be obedient and
surrender, but an equally important promise of support and deliverance on
the part of the Lord.
This principle of mutuality is highlighted in the pastimes of Lord
Ramachandra. At one point, Ravana's brother, Vibhisana, attempts to
surrender to Rama. The Vanaras advise Rama to reject Vibhisana saying that
he may be an enemy. Lord Rama says, "I cannot reject anyone who surrenders
to me. I have no choice." So the Lord is bound, as Srila Prabhupada says, by
His devotee's love. That principle can apply to ISKCON as well. If we, the
members, surrender and we serve, then we fulfill our duty to participate and
to obey. At that point, ISKCON has an obligation to reciprocate and to see
that the devotees are cared for. In human rights terminology one would say
that there is a mutual relationship of rights and duties. In order to
articulate what ISKCON's duties would be we can talk about rights that we
would have.
In human rights law, at the international level, there are two kinds of
rights. There is an International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
which covers rights such as citizenship, voting, and ability to hold office.
There is a second International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural
Rights which includes rights such as housing, food, and education. For
purposes of our discussion in this paper, I will refer to these two
categories as participation rights and substantive rights. My theory is that
devotees in general and women in particular are entitled to both kinds of
rights in ISKCON. I further contend that there is an important link between
these two categories of rights.
Section 4
Women are clearly entitled to participation rights in ISKCON at some level.
We are allowed to become members of ISKCON. We are allowed to take
initiation. We are allowed to chant the holy names. The maha-mantra is not a
secret mantra given only to men. So we participate at some level. There has
been some controversy about what that level of participation should be. This
topic is thoroughly covered in Jyotirmayi's paper "Women in ISKCON in Srila
Prabhupada's Times," which is available through the Women's Ministry. In her
paper, Jyotirmayi devi dasi makes a compelling case for equal levels of
participation for men and women based on Srila Prabhupada's own writing and
practices. It is not my intention to revisit this issue in its entirety.
However, I would like to revisit one of the purports which Jyotirmayi devi
dasi cites and which is instructive in considering women's roles in ISKCON.
In Sri Caitanya Caritamrta, Adi Lila, chapter seven, Srila Prabhupada
describes how Lord Caitanya adapted many of the rules of Vaisnava etiquette
to increase the effect of His preaching and the spread of Krsna
consciousness. In the purport to verse 32, Srila Prabhupada writes,
Not knowing that boys and girls in countries like Europe and America mix
very freely, these fools and rascals criticize the boys and girls in Krsna
consciousness for intermingling. But these rascals should consider that one
cannot suddenly change a community's social customs. However, since both
boys and girls are being trained to become preachers, these girls are not
ordinary girls, but are as good as their brothers who are preaching Krsna
consciousness. Therefore, to engage both boys and girls in fully
transcendental activities is a policy intended to spread the Krsna
consciousness movement.
There are two points raised by this purport which we ought to carry into
further discussions on this issue. First, Srila Prabhupada indicates that
the test of whether a woman's participation role is appropriate is not
whether it's Vedic. Srila Prabhupada says here that the test of whether a
woman's role is appropriate is whether it helps to spread Krsna
consciousness. If we truly thought in terms of what is effective for
spreading Krishna consciousness, many of the controversies between men and
women would disappear.
The second point is the one I previously discussed in section two of this
paper, that Srila Prabhupada has just created an analytic exception to the
statements that women are less intelligent or untrustworthy, etc. Women
engaged in transcendental activities, that is women who are devotees are,
according to Srila Prabhupada, just as intelligent as men engaged in
devotional activities.
We can now examine the presumptions prevalent in ISKCON against the standard
Srila Prabhupada has articulated. My perception, and others may disagree, is
that we have a presumption against women's participation in ISKCON. That
presumption does not mean that women do not participate in our movement.
However, we start from the point of believing that women should not
participate and place the burden on women or their supporters to show why
women should be included. This presumption needs to be reversed if we are to
give women equal encouragement to develop in their spiritual lives and serve
Srila Prabhupada's mission to the best of their abilities. We should have a
presumption of equal participation for both genders. Then, the burden should
be on those who argue that women's roles should be circumscribed, for
reasons of etiquette or social custom, to articulate why and how such
restriction relates to our goal of spreading Krsna consciousness.
When we examine our treatment of women in a logically rigorous manner, many
of our practices appear unreasonable. For instance, we often speak of
"protecting" women whenever we are accused of gender discrimination.
Disparate practices are held to be necessary and even beneficial to women on
the grounds that women need special forms of protection. However, this
justification for discriminatory practices is incomplete. Those who would
use it must define what it is that women are being protected from. Current
ISKCON practice supports best the argument that women are being protected
from participating. Moreover, we must also decide what the form of that
protection should be.
We can examine these ideas about protection as they relate to Srila
Prabhupada's writings on the subject. We must first ask what Srila
Prabhupada intended ISKCON to protect women from. The most obvious context
in which Srila Prabhupada discussed protection occurs in the first chapter
of the Bhagavad Gita. Arjuna tells Krsna that when irreligion is prominent,
women are prone to degradation. Arjuna informs Krsna that such women may
bear unwanted children to the detriment of society. In his purport to this
verse, Srila Prabhupada says that women are prone to being misled by
irresponsible men and that the cause of their fall down is mixing too freely
with men. If that is the kind of protection we are discussing, I do not
understand how the dearth of women on the GBC or discouraging women from
accepting management positions in our movement protects us from sexual
exploitation. Such an argument requires a belief that the men we would be
working with under such circumstances are irresponsible men. The rules
ISKCON uses in this context do not appear rationally related to the purposes
Srila Prabhupada has described for us.
The next question is what form any protection offered to us should take. We
have in ISKCON an unspoken assumption that protection means restriction. We
protect women by telling them "you can't" and taken to its extreme form this
instruction becomes, "you can't leave the house." Even in slightly less
restrictive contexts which permit women to attend worship at ISKCON temples,
making flower garlands is seen as the most suitable service for a woman.
There is some similarity between the protection model currently applied to
women in ISKCON and the techniques I use in raising my children. I give my
children crayons and coloring books and protect them by instructing them to
sit quietly and color. Women in ISKCON get colorful bundles of carnation
blossoms along with tapestry needles and string. We are instructed to sit
quietly and make flower garlands. In ISKCON, the current perception seems to
be that women are comparable not only to children, but to very small
children.
I do not believe that this "woman as small child" model is the one Srila
Prabhupada intended. In fact, examination of the histories told by many of
his early female disciples reveals that Srila Prabhupada himself did not
treat women in this way. Their stories reveal that Srila Prabhupada
protected them in three ways. First, he educated his female disciples about
their true identities as spirit souls. Second, Srila Prabhupada engaged
women in devotional service. Finally, as Kausalya devi dasi detailed in her
presentation at the Vaisnavis in ISKCON Conference, when limited facilities
were available for the devotees' use, Srila Prabhupada protected his female
disciples by giving them the lion's share of those physical resources.
In examining Srila Prabhupada's actual behavior toward his female disciples,
it seems fair to conclude that far from comparing women to children who
could not function on their own, Srila Prabhupada desired a model in which
women would be nurtured and supported and above all encouraged to contribute
as much as they could to the Krsna Consciousness Movement, rather than being
reviled and restricted. Perhaps we should redirect our efforts towards a
model designed to ensure that women are educated, engaged and provided with
sufficient resources in order to perform their various services effectively
within our organization.
This question of protection through providing resources raises the second
category of human rights, that is, substantive rights. If protection is
really our goal, then as an outside, academic observer I would expect to see
policies directed to that goal. The Women's Ministry and other members of
ISKCON have engaged in significant discussion concerning policies which
would be necessary to protect women members of ISKCON. That list is legion,
but if we examine protection from sexual exploitation specifically, I would
expect to see, among many other things, education about our proper roles as
men and women, ashram facilities for women, and a policy prohibiting sexual
harassment. In fact, we have some of these things. We have training manuals
for our new members, but they do not often include material on how to
respect and protect women. We have ashram facilities. However, we spend more
resources on men's training and men's ashrams than we do on comparable
programs for women. The Women's Ministry is drafting a policy on sexual
harassment, but without effective support from ISKCON's management, that
policy is unlikely to result in meaningful social change. Thus, in spite of
our rhetoric about protecting women, an outside observer will find that we
give more substantive rights to men than to women.
In ISKCON we find ourselves in the position of telling our women members
that they do not need participation rights because we will protect them. But
we then fail to provide the resources by which that protection might come
about. Human rights analysts will tell you that when you decrease somebody's
participation rights without a corresponding increase in their substantive
rights, that person will be worse off than when you started. That situation
is the very definition of oppression and dictatorship, which is surely not
what Srila Prabhupada intended.
There is another aspect of the protection issue which raises a slightly
different philosophical basis for a duty on ISKCON's part. That issue is
domestic violence. In his presentation at the Vaisnavis in ISKCON
Conference, His Holiness Bir Krishna Swami mentioned a letter he had seen in
which a male member of ISKCON expressed his understanding that our Vaisnava
etiquette permitted him to beat his wife as long as he used only a leather
belt on her back or a sapling on her legs. Some male members in Southern
California have expressed the belief that Srila Prabhupada stated that both
a wife and a mrdanga required beating.
Given this institutional force which misguided members are using to promote
domestic violence, ISKCON has a duty to create policies which will counter
domestic violence. While the ISKCON Women's Ministry has undertaken to
create some policies and substantive programs to meet this need, we often
hear a number of excuses for institutional inaction on this issue. The
excuses we hear, lack of resources and an inability to interfere between
husband and wife, are clearly insufficient. Given our somewhat chequered
history which includes (at the very least) the public perception that we
have a poor record on domestic violence, we have a duty to find the
resources to counter this destructive influence. Moreover, having given
numerous, repeated public instructions on the duty of the wife to tolerate
any of her husband's abuses and having given men some (false, but well
promoted) basis on which to justify their abuses, it seems a little late to
make the claim that we cannot become involved in the marital relationship.
If we make the claim that we protect women, then we must become responsible
and actually protect them.
I want to return now to the issue of participation rights because there is a
clear link between participation rights and substantive rights. The best way
to ensure that people have substantive rights is to give them participation
rights. So the claim that we can safely relinquish our participation rights
in exchange for protection is simply untrue. Even with the best of
intentions, our leaders will be unable to safeguard our substantive rights
if we have too few participation rights. I am deeply suspicious of anyone
who tells us that we do not need participation rights. Experience shows that
we do need such rights.
There are two reasons why ISKCON needs to pay particular attention to this
link between participation rights and substantive rights. The first is that
we have a limited ability to enforce any substantive rights we create. We
have no functioning justice system in our movement. Although we have a
Justice Minister and have developed some grievance policies, our Justice
Ministry has no staff and no financial resources. Hence, our grievance
policies are routinely ignored. It would be unreasonable to assume that
substantive policies protecting women can be enforced effectively in this
environment.
Furthermore, there are important transaction costs which function as
barriers preventing our leaders from developing and enforcing policies which
would truly meet the needs of ISKCON's women in an environment which
excludes women from upper management. Basic economic theory informs us that
the development of any policy to protect women will bring with it
transaction costs including the costs of gathering the information necessary
to develop that policy. Those transaction costs will include both monetary
costs and opportunity costs. If our leaders wish to develop substantive
policies to protect ISKCON's women, rather than allowing the women to
participate in management and work out for themselves what they need, then
our leaders must be willing to invest both time and money.
These costs will operate as a significant barrier to the development of
substantive rights for women in ISKCON. ISKCON leaders already plead lack of
financial resources to explain lack of substantive social development
policies in our movement. Furthermore, our leaders are consistently over
engaged, that is, they have less time available than they need to accomplish
the tasks already assigned to them. So there is little realistic likelihood
of them as a group, or even more than one or two individuals, making it
their business to find out what the women of ISKCON really need and to
develop the structures to meet those needs. Again, we return to the idea
that women need participation rights if they are going to have a meaningful
role in ISKCON and if ISKCON can truly claim to protect them.
There is another kind of transaction cost which is raised by the exclusion
of women from positions of authority in ISKCON. That cost is the difficulty
for women of identifying other women who are spiritual role models. There
are many visible male role models, advanced spiritual leaders, whom we can
easily identify because they have visible symbols of advancement. They have
dandas, they have titles such as GBC representative or temple president. At
the very least, they sit on the vyasasana during the morning program and
give Bhagavatam class. The women in our movement, many of whom have been
practicing Krsna consciousness longer than some of the male role models, are
very hard to find. They lack the visible symbols of advancement. Thus, it
has taken me more than ten years just to begin to identify the women who can
act as my spiritual mentors. Giving women participation rights which permit
them to give Bhagavatam class, to run projects and temples, to sit on the
GBC, allows the women of ISKCON to find the role models we need to advance
in Krsna consciousness.
Conclusion
There are three points which are essential to any policy which would permit
ISKCON to ensure appropriate roles for women. First, as I mentioned before,
there should be a presumption against limiting women's access to spiritual
resources. Where women's access is limited, policy makers must provide a
written justification for their decision, articulating how their policy is
necessary to increase the spread of Krsna consciousness.
Second, we need women in leadership roles from the highest levels down to
the local temple communities. We need women in leadership roles in
significant numbers to prevent these leaders from being isolated or
marginalized by male administrators. One aspect of this issue of female
leadership which we have not yet addressed is the extent to which men get a
significant amount of informal support in rising up through the ranks in
ISKCON. This phenomenon is not necessarily a sign of malice on the part of
our leaders. Rather, men develop intimate relationships with men in our
society, as they should. However, anyone in an intimate relationship with a
leader has access to a great deal of support and resources. Women do not
have that opportunity and will not have that opportunity until we have
significant numbers of women at high levels. Thus, ISKCON has a duty to
foster the development of women leaders. It is not sufficient for ISKCON's
management to say, find some qualified women and bring them to us. ISKCON
has the duty to find women who can lead and also to find women who have the
potential to be leaders and to give these women the same opportunity to
develop that is given to similarly qualified men.
When we have done these two things we can progress to the final prong,
developing substantive policies, more effectively. We must identify the
needs of the women so that we can do two further things. We must empower the
women to meet some of their own needs and we must develop structures which
will provide women with the resources and facilities they need.
The focus of the Women's Ministry has been, in large part, on providing
women with a forum for working together to meet their own needs. The recent
Vaisnavis in ISKCON Conference embodied that philosophy, involving women
from across North America who worked together under the direction of
Sudharma devi dasi to organize what His Holiness Hridayananda Swami
described as an historic event which could vastly improve our movement.
Finally, we must all work together as a movement to develop the structures
and policies which will provide women with the substantive rights they need
for their protection and in order to meet our goals of advancing Krsna
consciousness. However, we will work most effectively together if we
increase participation roles for women in ISKCON.
CHAKRA 14-Oct-98