How about constructive dialogue...? Sure. . .

[Guest guest]

>(Srila Prabhupada Lilamrita, Chapter 4)

>

> So what to do when there is nothing found in the sastras about some

> specific situation or problem? ...still thinking about it not alowed?

 

Vedic literature is so vast; it covers virtually any topic or situation that

we can deal with. What's more, our acharyas have expounded on the already

vast Vedic literature. Considering these points, it is my conviction that

there is no situation or problem that is not dealt with in the Vedic

tradition--all we have to do is take shelter of it, always refering to it to

properly understand a situation.

 

Vedic literature contains both principles and specific directions for how

one should live one's life. In case there do not seem to be any specific

directions, there are always principles which do cover ever situation, even

the so-called "modern" problems. Yavan artha udapane sarvatha samplutodake

/ tavan sarvesu vedesu brahmanasya vijanatah, "All purposes served by a

small well can be at once served by a great reservoir of water. Similarly,

all purposes of the Vedas can be served to one who knows the purpose behind

them." (Bg 2.46)

 

Regarding useful and specific instructions, here are some quotes from an

article titled "Manu Samhita and Other Dharma-Shastras on Remarriage", by

Jayatirtha Caran Prabhu (JPS):

 

----------------------Start of Quote-------

> Though a man may have accepted a damsel in due form, he may abandon her if

> she be blemished, diseased, or deflowered, and if she have been given with

> fraud. [Manu 9;72]

> If anybody gives away a maiden possessing blemishes without declaring

> them, the bridegroom may annul that contract with the evil-minded giver.

> [Manu 9;73.]

>

> The bound of marriage can be dissolved if subsequent to the marriage

> either party is found to be blemished. The blemishes are; In both parties;

> 1. Affliction with a chronic or disgusting disease 2. deformity 3. madness

> 4. inability to have sexual relations and in a girl; 5. loss of virginity

> [that was not previously declared] and in a man; 6. committing of a crime

> for which loss of caste is the penalty. 7. if the groom has forsaken his

> family. [Manu 9;72.]

>

> When a faultless maiden has been married to a man who has a blemish

> unknown before the marriage, and does not take to another man after

> discovering it, shall be enjoined to do so by her relatives. If she has no

> relations living she may go to live with another man of her own accord.

> [Narada 12;96]

>

> If the husband went abroad for some sacred duty, the wife should wait for

> him eight years, if he went for acquiring learning or fame six years and

> if he went for pleasure three years.

> [Manu 9;76]

>

> Thereafter she may remarry with incuring any sin or guilt.

> For one year let a husband bear with a wife who hates him; but after that

> let him deprive her of her [share] of the property and cease to live with

> her. [Manu 9;77.]

 

> But he should still make arrangements for her clothing and food. She who

> drinks spiritous liquor, is of bad conduct, rebellious, diseased (with

> leperosy), violent, or wasteful of money, may at any time be superseded by

> another wife. [Manu 9;80]

>

> If a man is unable to have sexual relations with his wife then she may

> divorce him and take another husband. [Narada 12;18.]

>

> The five cases of legal remarriage for women are:

> Death of the husband [while the wife is still young, with very small

> children] The husband disappears.

> Husband abandones her and becomes a monk.

> The husband becomes impotent [while the wife is still young].

> The husband commits a crime deserving of loss of caste.

>

>

>

> If the husband is untraceable, dead, renounced the world, impotent or

> degraded - in these cases of emergency a woman CAN remarry. [Parasara 28]

>

> A woman should wait four years for the return of her husband, if he fails

> to return she may remarry.

> The five legal reasons for divorce by men:

> If the wife squanders his property.

> If she procures an abortion.

> If the wife makes an attempt on the husband's life.

> If the wife continually shows him malice.

> If the wife slanders her husband.

>

> The real issue is how can we abandon someone with whom we should have

> developed a deep and caring relationship? Separation allows for

> reconciliation. Divorce does not. And how does such divorce affect the

> morality of ISKCON as a whole?

----------------------End of Quote-------

 

 

> How about a constructive dialogue about different themes, would this also

> be considered "criticism" in the sastras, and thus not very helpfull in

> spiritual life.

> Would you prefer or accept such an expression of words instead of

> "criticising"?

 

I suppose the word "criticism" does have negative connotations. Because it

has strong negative connotations, its usage is easily and wrongly

equivocated with enviousness and fault-finding. Your suggestion for

renaming seems quite reasonable.

 

> Would this also fall under the -propensity to criticize, from wich we

> would have to get free, in order to become pure devotees.

>

It wouldn't because the object is purification, not villification.

 

> Thats of course a different kind of critic, which is not very helpfull and

> should be avoided, in my opinion. (Hope to have an opinion is still alowed

> )

 

Very difficult for me to say. Typically, an opinion is a belief for which

we have no supporting evidence. For example, I may have an opinion about

something, and I feel it is relavant to you. I convey my opinion to you,

and, especially, if you hold a different opinion, you may well ask, "Why

should I accept your opinion?" Good question, isn't it? But as soon as

reasons that are (1) acceptable, (2) relevant, (3) sufficient, and (4) can

effectively answer possible counter arguments, are offered in support of

your opinion, then your opinion is no longer an opinion but a point of view

to be seriously considered and, possibly, replace cherished opinions.

 

On matters that are subjective, like tastes in food, decoration, clothing,

etc., opinions are refreshing. On important matters, opinions tend to

obscure true understanding.

 

But of course, that's just my opinion :-)

 

> What if the institution of varnasrama dharma is not taken seriously in the

> society but instead an atempt to become a church like religious

> organization.

 

Then we become a church. We'll have to wait for the next avatar to

reestablish religion.

 

> Who is atracted to any churches nowadays...?

 

Here's an interesting verse from the CC:

 

bhaktira virodhi karma-dharma va adharma

tahara ’kalmasa’ nama, sei maha-tamah

 

"The greatest ignorance consists of activities, whether religious or

irreligious, that are opposed to devotional service. They are to be known as

sins [kalmasa]." (CC Adi 3.61)

 

> Are you maried...?

>

Yes. For the last 5 years, going on 6. No children (yet). My wife is

Indian and a disciple of Sri Gopal Krishna Goswami.

 

Your servant, Krishna-kirti das