What happened?

[Guest guest]

Before the moderator went on vacation this board was full of dynamic

controversy. Now it is nearly dead.

 

Some may be bothered by controversial subjects, but in my humble

opinion as long as it is philosophical and remains civil, it is

beneficial.

[Guest guest]

achintya, "KrsnaNama <krsnanama@k...>"

<krsnanama@k...> wrote:

> Before the moderator went on vacation this board was full of

dynamic

> controversy. Now it is nearly dead.

>

> Some may be bothered by controversial subjects, but in my humble

> opinion as long as it is philosophical and remains civil, it is

> beneficial.

 

I definitely enjoy controversial discussions. But as far as the

paramparaa discussion goes, it looks like the proponents of the

alternative viewpoint have simply left. One simply d,

while the other communicated to me in private that he had other

priorities. A third became very hostile to me in private, and I asked

him to stop posting for a while so he could cool off.

 

How this reflects on the merit (or lack thereof) in their positions I

leave for the readers to decide. If memory serves, there are still a

lot of unanswered questions. There is no reason why we can't continue

the discussion, however, if they cannot do so. And I do agree that

controversial discussions, so long as they stay civil, can be a

source of much learning. I still hope our opponents will continue,

but I am not bothered if they choose not to.

 

As far as this most recent discussion went, it did bother me that one

participant in particular (who d) was given to lengthy

discourses with statements given as if they were undisputed facts,

and no evidence to back them up. Worse, he was given to posting

comments, which though civil, had an obvious motive in inflamming

devotee sentiments. Clearly, if someone's argument is based on making

unwarranted comparisons of our gurus to meat-eating, cigarette-

smoking karmis, then it isn't likely that he has much that will stand

up to scrutiny. I would prefer if netters kept away from such pseudo-

scholarly tactics and maintained a certain degree of culture and

etiquette. By this, I don't mean simply avoiding gross hostility, but

also in respecting devotees' faith in their gurus.

 

Admittedly, there is a thin line between scrutiny and disrespect in

this type of discussion, since the whole premise for the Babaji's

criticism is that Srila Bhaktisiddhanta misrepresented the

paramparaa, and is thus a liar (which I don't believe for a moment,

and frankly shame on those who do). On the other hand, there is much

well deserved criticism by Srila Prabhupada and his followers against

the attitudes of the various babajis, whether in terms of

philosophical attitudes towards preaching or more serious objections

to gross deviation from saadhana or siddhaanta. I try to let people

entertain their doubts: just as I've allowed the critics to post

their doubts about the authenticity of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta's

paramparaa, I have similarly allowed others to post their doubts

about the Babajis' qualification to represent Chaitanya Mahaaprabhu.

Obviously, this list's liberal policy of allowing doubt and scrutiny

extends both ways; one can question if he wants, but he has to be

prepared for questions to come back the other way. Unfortunately some

take the easy way out and just cry foul. Yes, the moderator (me) is

biased in the sense that he has his own views in this discussion. But

I try not to let it interfere with my moderation decisions. To be

honest, I even tried to hand off the moderator reins to someone else

so I could take part more freely in the discussion, but personal

circumstances made that impossible. And I have always been open to

polite and specific feedback directed to

achintya-owner. But not all choose to pursue that

option.

 

So, where does this leave us? This list will remain a list for all

Gaudiiya Vaishnava devotees, especially those in the line of Srila

Prabhupada. It will also continue operating with the zero-tolerance

policy towards fanaticism and sentimentalism, as much as I am capable

of enforcing that. I am happy to moderate more controversial

discussions, but also realize that this list has other purposes as

well. I want everyone to feel welcome and use it to discuss their

specific interests, within the limits of the list's scope.

 

yours,

 

- K