Guest guest Posted July 19, 1999 Report Share Posted July 19, 1999 But if > anything tore it apart it was this renunciation thing. It was all false > renunciation, I believe. Thats the key issue. Material relationships let us down all the time. People who we think are friends, soon reveal their colours when you need help. Real friends are extremely rare. False renunciation also is usless. The camaraderie of advanced devotees of course is what we need. Such relationships can be eternal, if they are actualy based on spiritual mellow. We can have all sorts of friendships of varying qualities, and often they make us feel good. I guess the permanence of them depends on how much they are spiritualy based. > And isn't it this artificial renunciation that gets things so twisted up? Definately. A person whose renunciation is artificial is not being honest with himself or anyone else. > Would there be a huge court case today, if the emphasis hadn't been so > incredibly tilted toward a show of renunciation and misogyny in general. > "Stay bramacari whatever you do and if you are married, God forbid, don't > love your wife. Beat her, abuse her, ignore her, but God forbid you should > love her. Love, a little human love! Who knows; she could end up your good > friend, confidante, confessor, spiritual advisor. And who says our > relations don't last more than one lifetime, but I take on too much. You are dead right. For many years in ISKCON our leaders have used cooercion and repression as tools to manage. I feel that is becasue many of them were artificial renunciates, and because of that dishonesty, they were living a crooked lie. Such a person is not capable of giving their true self, so where is the question of real freindship. > So please don't take this as a personal attack, Samba. It didnt come across as a personal attack at all. Actualy I appreciate very much your comments, you come across as a very sincere and concerned person. YS Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 19, 1999 Report Share Posted July 19, 1999 On 18 Jul 1999, Kanti dd wrote: > Just because someone is an older man doesn't mean he is mature, > only that he is older. Many men have not grown up, only grown older. I would > think a sign of maturity would be a diminishing desire for sex not an > increasing desire. That some short pudgy balding old man feels he needs to quote Prabhupada in order to defend his desire to polygamize someone elses 13 year old daughter, (who, by the way, was practicing KC in an otherwise protected ashrama situation) is just in my mind way, way beyond any idea of normal social sensibility. It is just plain outlandish, and quite likely, perverse. Yes, I can see why some over the hill guy will feel rejuvinated to think that a young women starting out in life is showing him some interest. But then to act on it to the point of creating a public disturbance that needs to be defended on an open forum on COM is a situation that has just gone way too far out of line, Vedic or otherwise. And then we have the still unresolved issue that this appear to the be the caliber of certain so-called brahmanas who wish to guide us to a new golden age of Vedic prosperity. Look, from a general perspective of some guy simply appreciating a cute young girl, yes, this might not be such a big deal. But from another perspective of a parent who has invested maybe 10 to 20 years in another human being, this specific situation is crass beyond imagination. What takes the cake is then they try to hide behind Prabhupada to do it. Anyway, that is how is obviously looks to me. ys, sthita Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.