beatting women

[Guest guest]

You've got me all wrong. But what can I say, thats well known "benefit" of

internet communication. I understand your dissatisfaction, no problem.

Situation is hopeless, lets give it some time to recover itself.

 

Hare Krsna

 

your servant Giri-nayaka das

 

> >

> > Was there some misunderstanding? Or do you still insist that all your

> > above statements, as expressed by your quoting my letter to Isvara

> > Prabhu, are connected to me personally?

>

> Actually to be perfectly honest I couldn't care less for this discussion;

> nor do i care whether or not you were responding to Kanti devi or Isvara

> prabhu or anyone else; your comments seem flip and insensitive and

> extremely holier than thou: "Prabhupada said it so get used to it," kind

> of thing. Prabhupada did and said a lot of things that he told his

> disciples they couldn't do. So use some discretion and get off this

> subject: what's the point of it? Besides that, the quote you are referring

> to was spoken by Tulsi das (that there were four things that could be

> beaten, including a woman and a mrdanga). As I said, and as someone else

> has said, Prabhupada didn't consider Tulsi das as much of an authority, so

> what's the point of quoting something like this and trying to convince

> everyone that "Prabhupada said it so you'd better like it." I'm a little

> tired of that kind of philosophy, and I've about had enough of you talking

> about beating women and how to justify it through our philosophy. There's

> been enough postings by esteemed disciples of Srila Prabhupada that should

> set you straight. I doubt there's much more to add.

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 12/8/2005 10:00:34 A.M. Eastern Standard Time,

Giri-nayaka.BVS (AT) pamho (DOT) net writes:

 

As your mother, Kanti

> devi can give you a thrashing and there's damn all you'd be able to do

> about it - THAT is Vedic.

 

 

 

Haribol prabhus,

Please accept my humble obeisances, all glories to Srila Prabhupada and his

faithful servants.

 

While I appreciate Brajasevaki prabhu coming to my defense, normally I am

not in favor of "thrashing" either figuratively or literally, as a first line

of action, and I suspect Srila Prabhupada was not either. It may be Vedic,

but probably not very devotional. However, I don't think it is western

sentimentality to suggest that one be very careful before justifying such

actions

against another living entity, whether it be child, wife, sibling or animal. I

 

am not sure that Girinayaka prabhu disagrees with me on this point, perhaps

the tone of his posts that made me think so was caused by language

differences,

not his intentions. In any case, discussion makes for understanding, even if

we only understand one another's point of view. We may not agree, but we

understand. Not everything in life can be legislated by ISKCON, some things

are

simply part of the learning process. But to be taken seriously as a spiritual

authority and guide in society, probably physical violence should not be the

first tool we pick up.

 

In our great Vaisnava tradition, we have so many other examples of

correction and protection available to us to explore first before resorting to

action

that represents an almost insignificant minority in our tradition. Discipline

and guidance may need to be there and how we handle that discipline when we

are in positions of authority of any kind is a measure of our spiritual

understanding and maturity. There is such a thing as righteous anger, it does

exist, but again, one should be very careful with assuming the cloak of such

emotion and the consequent actions. Even Arjuna did not rise to the level of

anger, however justified it might have been. His actions were based on duty,

and

Krsna's desire, not passion and or anger.

 

I was not accusing anyone of anything, only suggesting a huge amount of

caution in this regard. My intent was not to "thrash" anyone, I hope that was

not

the perceived flavor of my previous post. It was meant to be a cautionary

suggestion on a thread that I felt was justifying the use of force with a bit

too much relish and possibly admiration, with a bit of scorn for the perceived

 

"sentimentality" of more benign forms of discipline thrown in for good

measure. The internet is an interesting place to generate confusion and

distrust

among family members. As with any tool, to use it effectively, we must

appreciate its benefits and recognize its weaknesses. If I have offended

anyone,

please forgive me. yours in the eternal service of his divine grace, Kanti

dasi