gopal

Thanks for all the wonderful quotes!

Its Holiness BVI brings to mind a remarkable person I knew years ago, when hitchhiking through a yoga commune. At that time he was only Jesus, and spent the evening wooing my friend and I with his wonders, but he never succeeded in getting to the stage of extending his teachings to us in the bedroom. Years later I saw him at Rathayatra , and he had advanced to gopihood. I do not know which gopi he was, but there were many like him, long haired, some bearded, dressed in saris and ankle bells. I am sorry I did not take him seriously when he was Jesus. I could have been one of his first disciples and would have been able to say "I knew him when".

All glories to Srila Prabhupada! All glories to the devotees!

Hare Krishna, to keep it straight for Stonehearted, your post was not offensive and I apolgise for insinuating such by saying it was perhaps tasteless. Before that, I had stated that you made good points and that gHari's insults toward you were not befitting him, as you are a Vaisnava and his elder both. As a result, his offensive post has been changed. Living entity had nothing to do with it as far as I could tell, as far as taking offense to your post, but merely objected to a general air threatening to maybe sully the thread. For the record, your balanced view is most welcome, at least by me. It makes your eulogies seem all the more genuine, and not some displaced sentiment. I will change this post once it's been seen by you. But I do not consider it incongruous on this thread to deal with matters of respectfulness among devotees; that is crucial to anyone making advancement, and it is never inappropriate to take a younger devotee to task when the need calls for it. Its our duty.

No your admonishment was good. It was probably as tasteless of me to comment as it was for Stonehearted to interrupt the eulogies as it was for gHari to speak as he did to Stonehearted. Great posts this morning, good points from jijai too. Let's keep it up, any chance to glorify a wonderful devotee on his passing is a chance to grab at.

So sorry mataji. But I felt it important to deal out a little advice before it got even more uncivil. George's greatness was his humility. And I believe he would appreciate devotees not being offended and instead being glorified. I get heated when I hear devotees casually assaulted or insulted. But that is all I will say on this, I promise you. All glories to Bhakta George!

George really is a humble devotee, and undoubtedly generous in the right ways. But let's not overlook other devotees, who also have done gloriously, however small it may seem to the mundane eye. It is crucial that we show respect and proper dealings with the Vaisnavas regardless of our estimation of their level of advancement or we will make no advancement ourselves. George represents such a humble state of mind, so it makes sense that if one's affection and honor toward him is more than mere sentiment, but is actually deepfelt, this will be seen in one's attitude toward all Vaisnavas. (edited in deference to keeping more in mode with the thread) [This message has been edited by gopal (edited 12-05-2001).]

Could it be that the devotees can relate to Krsna katha but not to valaya katha? Could it be that there is a difference between the sweet pastimes of the Lord and the bitter outlook of valaya? Could it be that devotees read the original post which spoke for itself and there for they chose not to make comment? Could it be that devotees did not see this thread? Could it be that valaya needs to spend less time speculating about others' motivations, realizations, personal relationships with guru and Krsna, and levels of advancement, and spend less time too, criticizing the general group here and more time contributing nectar himself or better yet shut up altogether? Could it be that valaya has wrecked yet another great thread with his useless, envious, speculative, and bitter commentaries? Cute like a little boy someone said? More like a tantrum throwing egocentric little twit. [This message has been edited by gopal (edited 10-21-2001).]

The 92 per cent figure is simplistic, biased, speculative, and wishful. In any poll various factors have to be cited such as what sector of the population was polled, under what circumstances, whether educated or not, etc. Details such as Bhaktavyasa's attest to this fact. Besides, even if 92 per cent were for, that doesn't mean they include the majority of Americans who basically don't think much further than their own sense gratification and dont have a clue whats going on. Name calling on the other hand, does not support the other view, in any way shape or form. Just makes people laugh and shake their heads. Whatever someone does in their private life does not detract from the facts they present. Any discussion worth its salt will provide facts from both sides. Not this infernal inane immature and endless namecalling.

I volunteer to do the first yanking, Bhakta George/Whyspery. You're intoxicated. Got to be, to be talking like this. We don't need your wishywashy catering to whoever flatters you kind of help.

Analyzing the guru and listening to aparadh are two interiely different things. I hope most disciples have done the proper analysis before taking initiation> I think your point is off the track.

Are you a human encyclopedia on oldies but goldies? Are you a consultent to Stephen King? Best part of his books was the humor.

Good meassage there. Now how is this for accepting Prabhupad? Another from mr confused. QUOTE]Originally posted by amanpeter: Just for the record, prabhu, he is NOT my guru nor do I accept any other jiva soul, to the exclusion of others, in that role. My guru/God is Sri Radha ONLY, though I try to see Her in ALL others. I understand how important diksa and parampara are to you, but I believe as Divine Grace personified, in fact it's very source, She is beyond all that and nothing is impossible for Her. All necessary arrangements will be made in this or some future lifetime. At this point, thanks in no small part to my involvement with ISKCON, I am unable to see clearly who is who or what is what, let alone commit myself to anyone eternally but Her.

___________________ Don't know if this refers to me or not, but I don't change previous posts to obscure their original message. valaya RR [This message has been edited by valaya (edited 10-12-2001).] Constrast that with this: