Show us the Guru-Krsna Letter That's a Real Apology

[Guest guest]

Guru Krishna prabhu wrote:

 

> Other than being "guilty by association" with GHQ, I have not yet been

> told specifically what it was that I did or said that was directly or

> indirectly offensive to specific devotees. I have so far done my best to

> address the issue of "guilt by association." With regard to direct or

> indirect offenses committed by myself, I await response with details from

> individuals who took offense or who know of others who took offense.

 

I think I understand what you mean. My question is then; do you think that

your participation on the GHQ conferance was wrong, since you feel that your

main mistake was "guilt by association"? Do you regret that you were a

member of that conferance?

 

If so, I am sure that your apology will be taken serious. If not, you are

apologizing for something which you did not think was wrong, namely "guilt

by association". Do you agree?

 

> ''If you don't believe that you did anything wrong, then what is the value

> ''of the apology?

>

> Because since my own perspective is imperfect, it is therefore always

> possible for me to believe wrongly. Therefore, with straw in teeth, I take

> the most humble position (as far as I am able) and offer an apology

> regardless. If specific Vaisnavis or Vaisnavas respond and explain how I

> may have offended them, then I will proceed to do my best to reconclie

> with them for those offenses.

 

We have been going through a long dicussion about this these last weeks. You

have not always seemed to take the most humble position in these

discussions, even if many have pointed out things in the GHQ discussions

which disturbed them. That is "ok" if you think that everything that was

going on in the GHQ discussions was proper, but then your apologies seem

quite out of place.

 

> ''And if you now see that you did something wrong, then why not point out

> ''what you did wrong?

>

> Well, one point is that so many wrongs (mistakes) are committed by

> imperfect, conditioned souls. Our process is to push forward in

> *sadhana-bhakti*, not dwelling unnecessarily on past or even present

> faults, isn't it?

 

To analyze past and present faults in ourselves can surely help us

advancing. And it seems like there are many devotees who are not too happy

with what was going on in the GHQ conferance, so to take the criticism from

all of those opposing what happened there seriously, would maybe not be such

a bad thing to do.

 

Your servant,

Jatukarnya das

 

> ''That would be a truly satisfactory apology, otherwise it has limited

> value, ''because it could seem like it was made just to please the public.

>

> Yes, I agree. For my part, it's perhaps at best a humble begining measure.

[Guest guest]

On Sun, 13 Dec 1998, COM: Jatukarnya (das) HKS (Cintamani Intl, Oslo - N)

wrote:

 

''I think I understand what you mean. My question is then; do you think that

''your participation on the GHQ conferance was wrong, since you feel that your

''main mistake was "guilt by association"? Do you regret that you were a

''member of that conferance?

''

''If so, I am sure that your apology will be taken serious. If not, you are

''apologizing for something which you did not think was wrong, namely "guilt

''by association". Do you agree?

 

I never thought it was wrong to participate on GHQ, nor do I still. I

understand that many are judging me as "guilty," by dint of my association

with the obviously and unfortunately unsavory aspects of GHQ. But, as I have

stated many times by now (here and there), I would not have remained a

participant of GHQ, had I thought that the other members were deviants,

women-haters, incorrigibles, or worse. Nor do I find any logical reason to

agree with the opinion of certain partially informed bystanders of GHQ that

I myself fit any of those descriptions.

 

''which disturbed them. That is "ok" if you think that everything that was

''going on in the GHQ discussions was proper, but then your apologies seem

''quite out of place.

 

I do not understand your proposition, for GHQ was neither 100%

transcendentally perfect nor 100% demoniac. I apologize for the undesirable

aspects yet defend and support the bona fide aspects of GHQ.

 

''> ''And if you now see that you did something wrong, then why not point out

''> ''what you did wrong?

''>

''> Well, one point is that so many wrongs (mistakes) are committed by

''> imperfect, conditioned souls. Our process is to push forward in

''> *sadhana-bhakti*, not dwelling unnecessarily on past or even present

''> faults, isn't it?

''

''To analyze past and present faults in ourselves can surely help us

''advancing. And it seems like there are many devotees who are not too happy

''with what was going on in the GHQ conferance, so to take the criticism from

''all of those opposing what happened there seriously, would maybe not be such

''a bad thing to do.

 

That I am doing. Otherwise, I would not have responded at all to questions

coming through this conference, of which I have not yet been a member. (As I

said last time:)

 

''> Yes, I agree. For my part, it's perhaps at best a humble begining measure.

 

And I remain

ys,

GKd

*dharmo-rakshati rakshitaha*