Jivan Mukta lashes out again. - Madhusudana Radha

[Guest guest]

The following is a response I have received from Mother Madhusudana Radha

and my response. We have neglected to add the varnasrama conference as a

receiver so I am submitting it here now.

 

Robert Cope <vyapaka (AT) accel (DOT) net>

MEkstrand (AT) psg (DOT) ucsf.edu <MEkstrand (AT) psg (DOT) ucsf.edu>

Thursday, May 20, 1999 9:18 PM

Re: reply

 

 

Vyapaka dasa:

>>>>If you don't care then why are you pushing for it so hard?

>>

Madhusudana Radha:

>>Huh?????????

>>

>>I wrote possibly a handful of texts if even that during a very lively

>>discussion over a year ago. That's it. I've never pushed for it

>>anywhere. This was simply a brain storm. I've never approached the GBC,

>>the BBT or anyone else about this. How can you call that pushing?

>

Vd.:

>I am sorry but I do read english and the text I was commenting on

explicitly

>stated that you were proposing footnoting Srila Prabhupada's books. Your

>statement about doing footnotes, etc. was not part of M. Ghosh's comments

>that you were responding to. Hare Krsna dasi also mentioned that footnoting

>the books was a good idea. So if you are bluffing, then you just got called

>on it.

>>

M. Radha:

>>About the response of the scholars. Yes, the early disciples were able

>>to dig up a few positive opinions, but that's nothing compared to the

>>numerous negative ones by others. And how many of those professors who

>>wrote some praise are catually using any of Prabhupada's books with

>>their students?

>

Vd.:

>I don't know. Do you? Have you or anyone esle published a study? When you

>make these statements, especially as a Phd, I would think that you wouldn't

>be speaking only emotionally but that your ideas are based on some study.

It

>isn't my field so please enlighten me.

>

M. Radha.:

>For that matter, how many academics anywhere are doing

>>so? I think it's very sad. Can't understand why you don't feel the

>>same way.

Vd.:

>Oh, I am sad also. But I am not going to change the writings of a

saktyavesa

>avatara, mahabhagavta in order to please a few non-admiring academics,

>feminists or homosexuals. That was Kirtananda's path and look where it got

>him. And frankly, since you have admitted that you are not engaging in

>preaching to the academics, then it would seem that your motivation behind

>these comments are more personal than you let on.

>>

M.Radha

>>It's sad.

>

Vd.:

>The saddest thing is that you and Madhava Ghosh publicly criticized Jivan

>Mukta when he has no opportunity to defend himself. You could have very

>easily debated his points on VNN but choose to do it in what is my opinion

a

>very non-vaisnava manner. It is obvious that you are both spiritually and

>morally bankrupt on this issue. Jivan Mukta was barred from the COM by

>Raktambara simply because he made a comment about Harikesa, or rather

Bhakta

>Robert or whatever name he wants to go by.

>

 

>Vyapaka dasa

>

[Guest guest]

>Jivan Mukta was barred from the COM by

>>Raktambara simply because he made a comment about Harikesa, or rather

>Bhakta

>>Robert or whatever name he wants to go by.

 

Not true. I have no intention of re-printing all the insulting and

offensive texts he submitted about different devotees, but you need to

check your facts more carefully before making such a statement.

 

and my name is spelled:

Madhusudani (with an i) dasi

[Guest guest]

>

> Vd.:

> >The saddest thing is that you and Madhava Ghosh publicly criticized Jivan

> >Mukta when he has no opportunity to defend himself. You could have very

> >easily debated his points on VNN but choose to do it in what is my opinion

> a

> >very non-vaisnava manner. It is obvious that you are both spiritually and

> >morally bankrupt on this issue. Jivan Mukta was barred from the COM by

> >Raktambara simply because he made a comment about Harikesa, or rather

> Bhakta

> >Robert or whatever name he wants to go by.

> >

>

> >Vyapaka dasa

> >

 

I think the problem here is that Vyapaka doesn't seem to understand what

brainstorming is, and how there is a difference between what is said in a

brainstorming session and what is publicized in a public forum like VNN.

 

Jivon Mukta was barred for repeated and incessant attacks on numerous devotees.

 

As for being spiritually bankrupt and morally bankrupt because I pointed out

that Jivon Mukta had written an article, I guess I might as well give up all

my

attempts and struggles at being a devotee, since they are all apparently come

to naught anyway.

[Guest guest]

At 4:14 -0800 5/23/99, COM: Madhava Gosh (das) ACBSP (New Vrindavan - USA)

wrote:

>

>As for being spiritually bankrupt and morally bankrupt because I pointed out

>that Jivon Mukta had written an article, I guess I might as well give up

>all my

>attempts and struggles at being a devotee, since they are all apparently come

>to naught anyway.

 

Or let's hope Krsna's definition of those terms is a little more

compassionate. Otherwise there is no hope for any of us on COM..

 

Ys,

Madhusudani dasi

[Guest guest]

>> Vd.:

>> >The saddest thing is that you and Madhava Ghosh publicly criticized

Jivan

>> >Mukta when he has no opportunity to defend himself. You could have very

>> >easily debated his points on VNN but choose to do it in what is my

opinion

>> a

>> >very non-vaisnava manner. It is obvious that you are both spiritually

and

>> >morally bankrupt on this issue. Jivan Mukta was barred from the COM by

>> >Raktambara simply because he made a comment about Harikesa, or rather

>> Bhakta

>> >Robert or whatever name he wants to go by.

>> >

>>

>> >Vyapaka dasa

>> >

>M. Ghosh:

>I think the problem here is that Vyapaka doesn't seem to understand what

>brainstorming is, and how there is a difference between what is said in a

>brainstorming session and what is publicized in a public forum like VNN.

 

Vd.: I think I do undertand what brainstorming is. What I have been

commenting upon is the use of the same brainstorming ideas one year later by

two different individuals, Hare Krsna & Madhusudani Radha dasis. Would you

consider a one year lapse to be still part of a brainstorming session? If

so, that would go against the traditional definition listed in the

dictionary (I just checked with the Merriam-Webster version).

>

M. Ghosh:

>Jivon Mukta was barred for repeated and incessant attacks on numerous

devotees.

 

Vyapaka:

That is not what he told me. He stated that his expulsion was over a

statement he made about Srila Visnupada/Bhakta Robert by Raktambara. If so,

it further shows that this medium should be managed by a commitee and not

just one individual.

>

M. Ghosh:>As for being spiritually bankrupt and morally bankrupt because I

pointed out

>that Jivon Mukta had written an article, I guess I might as well give up

all my

>attempts and struggles at being a devotee, since they are all apparently

come

>to naught anyway.

 

Vyapaka:

I cannot say that they are apparently coming to naught but I will take your

word for it (Frankly, I don't know what your personally-stated lack of

spiritual advancement has got to do with the discussion). If you aren't

chanting any rounds then I would suggest that you start again; or if you

are, then try to improve their quality and/or quantity, whatever the

situation demands. I will also try to take this advice personally and try to

improve the quality of my rounds.

 

However, Jivan Mukta and our feeble spiritual lives are not what is being

discussed. It was Madusudani Radha's and Hare Krsna dasi's suggestions made

in this conference to footnote Srila Prabhupada's books. There still has

been no empirical evidence provided by Dr. M.Radha and I think for a person

of her position suggesting such radical action that some sort of study would

be required. Her statements portray that the books are not studied in

universities due to their denigration of the status of women and the use of

poor english or at least outdated english. Here in Canada many professors

invite the devotees to their classrooms and/or visit the temples so I am

unsure of how accurate her observations are. I think to say that

Prabhupada's books are not studied would also have to be substantiated by

how man of the books of other religions are being studied and then compare.

 

I am saying this mostly out of concern for Mother M. Radha's reputation. Her

strong support for feminist, homosexual and the frequenting of karmi schools

is often stated. In fact, her main points in changing Prabhupada books were

in relation to the use of english and references to women in an attempt to

make them palatable to academics, but no mention was made of evolution,

reincarnation, the existence of a soul and the portrayal of our scripture as

mythology. Aren't these of concern to the academics, as well? Then why is

the main concern seeminly only the women's issue and not these others? I

think these are important questions because it could be understood that

Mothers H.K and M. Radha's objections to Prabhupada's Gita, etc. are based

primarily on emotional perceptions about gender and not rooted in actual

concern for the parampara. This would put in jeopardy the acceptance of any

of their future writings including the eagerly-anticipated book on

varnasrama being penned/compiled by Mother H.K. dasi. It just might be

perceived as promoting one individual's perspective at the expense of

illustrating the fullness and richness of a varnasrama/Vedic society.

 

And certainly the worst conclusion would be that such an attempt by the

women to change Srila Prabhupada's books according to gender considerations

could be perceived as proof-positive that women are indeed less-intelligent.

This conclusion for being less intelligent would stem from the perceived

lack of understanding that spiritual life is dependent upon knowledge and

instruction passed down intact from the spiritual master, not to mention the

words of an acarya (I can provide quotes on this if anyone finds this

statement to be controversial). Please do not infer that I am making these

statements but I am simply making the points in the fear that Mothers H.K

and M.Radha's position would provide fodder to those inimical to their

cause.

 

Further clarification is requried and the position that they were simply

part of a brain-storming issue does not hold water due to the long time

lapse.

 

Respectfully,

 

Vyapaka dasa

[Guest guest]

>Vyapaka:

>That is not what he told me. He stated that his expulsion was over a

>statement he made about Srila Visnupada/Bhakta Robert by Raktambara. If so,

>it further shows that this medium should be managed by a commitee and not

>just one individual.

 

I was wondering where you got your info. Now it makes sense. Well, I

think his many insults to multiple devotees were compiled. I'd be glad to

track them down and forward them to you. May be educational to see how he

fares as a historian.

 

Ys,

Madhusudani dasi