Knowing without thinking?

[Guest guest]

> Such phrases and terminology as "I think. . ." should be avoided because

> conclusions based on them will also be speculative. Our specific standard

> of knowledge is that it is not speculative.

 

Dear Krishna Kirti Prabhu, please accept my humble obeisances.

All glories to Srila Prabhupada!

 

You seem to be a learned devotee, I assume therefore that you agree with

me that before knowing there comes thinking, even on the basis of guru,

sadhu and sastra, for without thinking there is hardly any knowing, or maybe

the knowing of a parrot.

But wath`s the use of that.

 

I think, (or I made the observation!) that too often devotees or aspiring

devotees, seem to close down theyr natural ability to "think", given to them

by Krsna and just bubble wathever they have heard, or read somewhere to

whomever they meet, without taking into consideration also the time, place

and circumstances, or the person to whom they speak, or if they have a

little moore propensity of fanaticism in them, they just do whatever they

supose to do like robots without involving also theyr thinking capacity in

it.

 

I give you some examples of this "knowing without thinking".

For instance I saw ones a video from ITV with a film made by a TV company.

They filmed the marriage of a devotee couple and the reporter invited the

next day the newly weddid woman to an interview in the TV studio where he

was asking her with a smiling on his face, how she feels and if she is happy

now and some other personal questions about her marriage.

 

The newly weddid mataji started speaking with a very serious face and

monoton voice, that "we in the Iskcon society follow the four regulative

principles, NO eating of meet, fish or eggs, No intoxication, coffe or tea,

NO gambling and NO ilicit sexlife only for procreating children, and some

other things about our filosophy. What impression she made by "her knowing

preaching" you could see in the face of the reporter, who thanked her for

her coming in his show and moved swiftly to other topics of the day.

 

I remember also, many years ago when I was serving Lord Nrsimhadeva and

Sri Sri Radha Madana Mohan taking care of theyr cows and bulls and making

agriculture at the NJNK farm, a new bhakta was helping us together with the

temple president in making silage for the winter.

 

We just bought the expensive plastic wrap or foil for covering the silage

and started to press the silage with the traktor, while the bhakta was

working with the fork in moving the silage here and there. At the end we

started to cover it with the plastik wrap and the temple president told the

bhakta, he should take care to NOT make holes in the wrap with his fork.

Somehow it happened so, that the bhakta was left alone to finish with the

covering of the silage, while we had to go to milk the cows, it was evening

time. When I went back after an hour or so, to look how he had finished the

covering of the silage, to my big surprise the plastik wrap was so full of

holes like a swiss cheese. The bhakta did not heard the word NOT, due to the

motor of the tractor or whatever and started to make holes everywhere with

his fork, thus the covering of the silage was endeed "finished".

 

We had to buy another one. This I call doing without thinking.

I,m shure many devotees can add many similar stories to this knowing or

doing without "thinking". It happens quite often in our society, I think -

or maybe I should say, I know?

 

 

> Even some citizens of Ayodhya could find discrepancies in Lord Rama, or

> Ramacandra Puri also found discrepancies in Lord Caitanya. But that does

> not mean such descrepancies are actually there.

 

Of course not, Lord Rama and Lord Caitanya are situated above all critik.

They are the Supreme Personality of Godhead.

But who are we? Or anyone else in this material world. Are we visnu tattva?

Free from any propensity of making mistakes? To err is human...or not?

 

> Also, please consider that the duty of a spiritual master is to reform the

> character of his disciples. How can he do that without pointing out

> errors?

 

Well, you started to critizize all critizizing, I have no problems with it

when it is utilized properly for the benefit of the devotees and theyr

society, and acording to guru, sadhu and sastra and common sense If I may

alowed to add this also.

 

> This propensity to criticize spoken of by Rupa Goswami is therefore of a

> different category, just as Prajapati Daksa's cursing Lord Siva is

> different from Narada Muni's cursing of Manigriva and Nalakuvera.

 

Thats obvious to me. Hope for others also.

 

> It therefore does NOT logically follow, as you have insinuated, that I am

> refering to Srila Prabhupada.

 

Rather...?

 

> > The kanishta and madhyama adhikaris do not have this qualification. We

> > have to be realistic about where our society is at, or where we can

> > possibly expect it to be. If most devotees are not completely pure,

> > then they will necessarily have a propensity to criticize--that is the

> > verdict of Srila Rupa Goswami.

>

> So all devotees in this conferences who "criticise" and don,t just follow

> like sheeps the party line have "a propensity to criticize" and are

> therefore "not complitely pure."

>

> Is it that wath you want to say by this?

 

> The "party line" is following conclusions based on Guru-Sadhu-Shastra.

 

That means we can judge them or should I say "critizize" them on that basis

also. Or?

 

> If we don't follow, then we are offending either guru, previous acharyas

> or scripture.

 

Any support from Guru-Sadhu-Sastra for your statemnt?

 

> How can offenders be pure?

I dont know, you supose to know?

 

> We have to be honest with ourselves and ask, "Am I a pure devotee?" If

> the answer is "no", then we should be aware of our shortcomings.

 

What is your definition of a pure devotee?

 

> We should at least understand that somewhere we are not cent percent

> surrendered.

 

What does cent percent surrendered means to you?

 

> If we aren't pure we aren't pure.

And..?

 

> But at least if we actually have reverence for guru-sadhu-shastra, there

> will be purification.

 

I can fully accept that.

 

> So much trouble has been caused by "premature purity".

 

Such as...? (You supose to know, I think)

 

 

Ys. Harsi das