Varna: bit by bit

[Guest guest]

>

> But constructive criticism does have its place, no?

 

Certainly. But simply getting on the key-board in order to

blast the spiritual masters in ISCKON for being just so-called

"gurus," for misleading their disciples, for disobeying the

orders of Srila Prabhupada, for being unqualified, and so on,

I doubt one can call a "constructive criticism". If Janesvara

think he's right in his judgments and if he got the proper

motivation along it, then I would expect from him to try

to rather approach those gurus privately, and speak to them

as a godbrother to godbrother. But what does he do instead?

 

I can just not bother if somebody has his personal opinion how

they (the gurus) are unqualified, and to which extent they are

unqualified (the range is wide). And I can go along with somebody's

expressing his opinion of the kind in the public ("We are

America, after all", as I heard Mr. Clinton saying so). But then

it doesn't stop! It goes and goes and goes... year in year out..

...this "constructive criticism."

 

Personally, I haven't really step on Janesvara's way so long so

he kept his "constructive criticism" basically in the domain of

merely his opinion how they are unqualified. But then he came

out with the very concrete "additional" accusation of spiritual

masters disobeying Srila Prabhupada's order to become "varna gurus".

He distinguishes between a spiritual master (one that teaches a

"spirit stuff", in his words) and a "varna-guru" (one that teaches

a varna). He is accusing ISCKON "gurus" (the quotation marks his)

for assuming the position of being the teachers of a "spirit stuff"

(for what they don't meet the required qualifications) instead of

following the order of Prabhupada (sic!) to be the teachers of

varnas. For the later another qualifications are required.

 

All what he does to provide the "evidence" is to quote the

conversation where Srila Prabhupada is telling to some of his

senior disciples that varnasrama colleges should get established,

and that there should be the teaching of varnas going on. Thus

Janesvara das is misconstruing such an accusation that goes far

beyond simply having an opinion how they are unqualified to be

spiritual mastares. And comes not even close to some "constructive

criticism".

 

How do you expect, even theoretically, that this "constructive

criticism" could possibly fructify in some positive realization?

The attempt is to reform the spiritual masters in ISCKON, to make

them realize how they are wrong in the vary base of their being

designated as "spiritual masters". But got to be "varna-gurus".

 

 

"My varna-guru is such and such, and I am a carpenter. And

who is your varna-guru, prabhu? Ah... He is really good in

shooting from a riffle on 200m, I heard. You got really an

expert guru, prabhu. But he doesn't accept any disciples but

ksatriyas anyway, naturally. He's not en expert in making the

furniture, of course, our spiritual master Srila Prabhupada

ordered them to divide themselves into varnas."

 

 

 

ys mnd