on loyalty - Let's see what the English dictionary says...

[Guest guest]

"COM: Basu Ghosh (das) ACBSP (Baroda - IN)" wrote:

 

> [Text 2748357 from COM]

>

> And the 1st definition of "faithful", if you look closely is indeed "loyal"!

 

The problem is when the leadership strays from the original vision of the

founder. Loyalty is good, yet devotees who remained loyal to Kirtananada were

condemned.

 

If the content of an institution were to change, simply demanding loyalty to

the form on basis of historical instructions could possibly lead to abuse and

misuse of the institution. That loyalty has to be earned, not demanded.

[Guest guest]

At 08:27 AM 11/2/99 -0500, you wrote:

>[Text 2748747 from COM]

>

>

>

>"COM: Basu Ghosh (das) ACBSP (Baroda - IN)" wrote:

>

>> [Text 2748357 from COM]

>>

>> And the 1st definition of "faithful", if you look closely is indeed

"loyal"!

>

>The problem is when the leadership strays from the original vision of the

>founder. Loyalty is good, yet devotees who remained loyal to Kirtananada

were

>condemned.

>

>If the content of an institution were to change, simply demanding

loyalty to

>the form on basis of historical instructions could possibly lead to abuse and

>misuse of the institution. That loyalty has to be earned, not demanded.

 

And I think this is the point Srila prabhu meant to make. Those who

inherited leadership of the Gaudiya Math seemed to miss the essence of

their founder-acarya's intentions for the institution. After the chaos

following the flight of the the original leadership, the institution

redoubled its demad for loyalty form the members, despite its deviation

from Srila Bhaktisiddhanta's spirit. It wouldn't be hard to imagine how

those who declined to submit were characterized in conversations, perhaps

even Bhagavatam discourses. We know the story. We also heard from Srila

Prabhupada that, even in the '40s, he wanted to start a new mission, with

one of his godbrothers with whom he associated closely as the head. Later,

he did begin his own mission, specifically to carry out the orders of his

spiritual master. He dedicated himself the the substance of the the

institution, and succeeded beyond imagination.

 

That the leaders feel the need to spend so much energy preaching "loyalty

to Srila Prabhupada" indicates a serious systemic pathology. (It has also

created a culture, some devotees feel, of vaishnava-aparadha that enervates

the institution.) Srila Prabhupada gave them responsiblity for encouraging

the rest of the devotees to follow the regulative principles, chant 16

rounds daily, and for organizing practical service, especially

progressively increasing book distribution. Their business is not to create

a totalitarian cult. Srila Prabhupada told us on a walk in Honolulu that

the leaders must be ideal--at least the temple presidents and GBC,

otherwise our institution becomes another fool's paradise. He also wrote

that he wanted all his disciples to become independently thoughtful and

decried attempts at centralization and bureaucracy. Now our leaders

actually tout their dedication to developing ISKCON's bureaucracy.

 

Loyalty to an institution's leadership must be earned, as Madhava Ghosh,

says, must be earned. I would add that it must be constantly earned, and

that it will only be earned by the leaders' humility and selfless

dedication to maintaining Srila Prabhupada's spirit in ISKCON.

 

I've been a loyal ISKCON man since 1969, surviving a couple of leadership

upheavals. That doesn't mean I don't think critically, that my support is

offered uncritically. Nevertheless, my difference of opinion from the GBC's

doesn't mean I'm not loyal to Srila Prabhupada. The leaders are seriously

mistaken both when they take our support for granted and when they dismiss

us when all their rhetoric fails to persuade us of their infallibility.

 

Your servant,

Babhru das

[Guest guest]

>>Re: on loyalty

 

Sitalatma wrote:

>>This words are very close synonyms, esp if you look in the definition

 

"Close, but no cigar!" as the saying goes. In order to really understand and

define the meaning of any word, we have look at its *etymology* and trace its

history and usage.

 

The two words come from distinctly different roots in Latin:

 

>LOYAL >> *legalis*: "of or relating to the *law*."

LAW = "a binding custom or practice of a community." [ie, social psychology]

 

FAITH >> *fides*: "trust" For our purposes, we can use Prabhupada's

translation of FAITH (cf. CC Mad 22.62) as "unflinching TRUST in something

sublime." [ie, real *sraddha*]

(Is this definition authoritative enough for everyone?)

 

Judging from their etymological roots, TRUST (*fides*) and LAW (*legalis*)

respectively, means we are talking about two different animals.

 

On the other hand, there is inherent circularity when we define *loyal*

and *faithful* in terms of one another. The beauty of parsimonious (simple)

definitions is that they use basic core concepts (such as *belief*) to define

more complex ones. Therefore, I have relied on Webster's 3rd International

and Oxford English Dictionary (OED) Unabridged for my analysis. Doesn't that

sound like a more thorough and definitive process?

 

Less exacting editions (such as American Heritage as Basu Ghosh has pulled off

the internet) or other abridged versions appeal to common usage. Srila

Prabhupada, however, rejected common, imprecise definitions. The prime example

was RELIGION "as a kind of faith." Prabhupada rejected that definition.

Philosophy demands EXACTING definitions. Otherwise, any rascal can come along

and juggle vague definitions to make them say whatever they like.

 

The Mayavadis juggle vague and secondary word meanings and thus claim

everything is "all one." Prabhuapda warned us, however, that the more we try

to obliterate distinctions and variety, the more we become Mayavada. Is this

what you are advocating?

 

 

Basu Ghosh wrote:

>And the 1st definition of "faithful", if you look closely is indeed "loyal"!

 

I guess it depends on how "closely" you look. As I have pointed out, LOYAL

and FAITH derive their meanings from TWO distinctly different roots and have

divergent usage. In the name of preserving variety as well as our own

intellectual integrity, let's keep it that way.

 

Praise God for the ability to discriminate! It seems a rare gift indeed.

My sincere respects to all clear thinkers.

 

A servant of all faithful followers of Guru and Gauranga,

 

Srila dasa

 

PS: Rememer Prabhupada's analogy about the unabridged dictionary and lesser

versions (ie on-line, or pocket edition), comparing it to the Vedas versus

other scriptural sources? Other scriptures could to some extent inform us with

spiritual ideas, but if we want to know conclusively, we have to consult the

Vedas -- the unabridged dictionary to get the full meaning.

[Guest guest]

<< Nevertheless, my difference of opinion from the GBC's

doesn't mean I'm not loyal to Srila Prabhupada. >>

 

If one is loyal to Srila Prabhupada, one should differ in opinion from the

GBC or any authority if he sees they have made a wrong decision or have done

something wrong.

 

If one's intentions are to improve Iskcon, he should not be seen as

envious.To assume that a person is envious because he doesn't agree with the

status quo will not lead to progress. Unless this is acknowledged by

leaders, improvement will be slow because they may end up lending deaf ears

to persons who are offering viable solutions to troubling and burdensome

problems. Then they are left to fend for themselves.

 

I have seen this dynamic in place since I joined the movement. Often many

devotees realize a problem and its solution years before leadership comes to

grips with it and figures out how to deal with it.

 

Ys, Mahatma dasa

[Guest guest]

At 08:25 AM 11/3/99 -0500, COM: Mahatma (das) ACBSP (Vrindavan - IN) wrote:

 

>If one's intentions are to improve Iskcon, he should not be seen as

>envious.To assume that a person is envious because he doesn't agree with the

>status quo will not lead to progress. Unless this is acknowledged by

>leaders, improvement will be slow because they may end up lending deaf ears

>to persons who are offering viable solutions to troubling and burdensome

>problems. Then they are left to fend for themselves.

 

Another consequence is that many devotees, seeing this more clearly than

the leaders themselves, become deaf to the leaders' advice. Then things

fall apart, the organization becomes ineffectual (asara). Srila Prabhupada

told us repeatedly that the basis of our institution is mutual love and

trust. That's impossible when those in leadership positions don't take

other members seriously (unless they uncritically support the

leadership--the sort of mutual admiration sociiety Srila Prabhupada often

decried) and the other members begin to perceive that the leaders think of

themselves as a class apart from the rest of the devotees (they don't see

themselves as one of us, and they don't see us as one of them).

 

Your servant,

Babhru das

[Guest guest]

> At 08:25 AM 11/3/99 -0500, COM: Mahatma (das) ACBSP (Vrindavan - IN)

> wrote:

>

> >If one's intentions are to improve Iskcon, he should not be seen as

> >envious.To assume that a person is envious because he doesn't agree with

> >the status quo will not lead to progress. Unless this is acknowledged by

> >leaders, improvement will be slow because they may end up lending deaf

> >ears to persons who are offering viable solutions to troubling and

> >burdensome problems. Then they are left to fend for themselves.

>

> Another consequence is that many devotees, seeing this more clearly than

> the leaders themselves, become deaf to the leaders' advice. Then things

> fall apart, the organization becomes ineffectual (asara). Srila Prabhupada

> told us repeatedly that the basis of our institution is mutual love and

> trust. That's impossible when those in leadership positions don't take

> other members seriously (unless they uncritically support the

> leadership--the sort of mutual admiration sociiety Srila Prabhupada often

> decried) and the other members begin to perceive that the leaders think of

> themselves as a class apart from the rest of the devotees (they don't see

> themselves as one of us, and they don't see us as one of them).

 

My experience of late, especially in Europe, has been that leaders are more

than happy to have the input of any senior devotee willing to give time and

effort to help straighten out the mess there. I feel that those days of

envious snakes are pretty much over. There are those that may be giving a

hard time to ISCKON authorities these days, but no one is calling them

snakes or the likes. Any help that can be renedered during these times of

great difficulty and danger to Srila Prabhupad's mission, is appreciated and

accepeted as much as is possible.

 

As far as being loyal goes, I feel that being loyal to srila Prabhupada's

misssion is very important. In that respect it is different to being

faithful. Loyalty indicates action, whereas being faithful could easily mean

being passive and inactive. We can and must be fully faithful to His Divine

Grace, but we can also give a message of loyalty to those whose faith has

become shattered by the fall downs of Gurus and inadequecies of other

leaders. Otherwise other organisations will clean up on the confusion that

ensues after such fall downs and bumbling management.

 

We are seeing more and more of late, that there are those who will capitilze

on the confusion left within ISKCON. We at least have to know what is to be

done and not to be done. Then maybe there will be a chance of our own

spiritual growth and try to develop some harmony and better relationships

amongst Godbrothers (which is almost non-existant at present). Instead of

being at each others throats, let's try and work together. Maybe we will

differ on some points, but who says we must agree on every detail? We all

have our experience and understandings from our past and seeing the mistakes

of ourselves and others, should help us to not make the same mistakes and

errors of judgement. In this way we can become part of the solution rather

than part of the problem.

 

Those that have left ISKCON and joined other parties (Gaudiya Math), are no

longer loyal to Srila Prabhupada's mission. They may claim many things, but

Srila Prabhupada himself said: If you love me then stay with my mission

(don't leave). So despite there being difficult times, we should somehow

become loyal to his mission and his instructions to continue to practice and

if we have little energy and intelligence to propogate the movement of Lord

Caitanya Mahaprabhu.

 

Srila Prabhupada's movement must be protected and promoted. Just as he made

a sacrifice to save us, we must also make some sacrifice to assist him in

continuing this movement, despite all the set backs and difficulties. It

maybe hard, but who said it was going to be easy? Is this loyalty or what?

 

Your servant

Mahakratu Das Vanacari

[Guest guest]

> "Social psychology" doesn't mean group norms and folkways are necessarily

> good or bad. But if we are blind to the natural faults of institutions in

> the name of some supposed LOYALTY, that will inevitably promote entrenched

> bureaucracy, managerial mediocrity and spiritual stagnation.

>

> >> > > Being loyal to the International Society for Krsna Consciousness is

> another expression. Loyalty to Srila Prabhupada without loyalty to ISKCON

> is impossible.>>

>

> I express by "loyalty" to our Gaudiya philosophical truths (*ideals*) and

> mission (*cause*) by disagreeing with this statement. This is an example

> of what Prabhupada meant when he implied that institutionalism or

> sectarianism turns religion into "a kind of faith."

>

> If we are truly LOYAL, we will not make such false statements.

>

> Aspiring to become a LOYAL servant in the service of Guru and Gauranga,

 

Is this being cynical or what? It seems you are using two opposite

statements here. Please explain further?

 

Ys, Mkd

[Guest guest]

>

> My experience of late, especially in Europe, has been that leaders are

> more than happy to have the input of any senior devotee willing to give

> time and effort to help straighten out the mess there.

 

> Srila Prabhupada's movement must be protected and promoted. Just as he

> made a sacrifice to save us, we must also make some sacrifice to assist

> him in continuing this movement, despite all the set backs and

> difficulties. It maybe hard, but who said it was going to be easy? Is this

> loyalty or what?

>

Mahakratu Prabhu,

 

Sorry for this intrusion, especially because I did not follow the thread. I

just read quickly your message and I want to give you a brief opinion. In my

language I call that rationalization. It is nicely said but avoiding

carefully or not seeing the serious problems. Every year, in Mayapura, we

hear such presentation by the loyal devotees. In the new vyasapuja book,

some of our leaders have for the first time realize and admit openly the

chaos. Only with such sincere attitudes, we may be able to get devotees work

together in ISKCON.

I hope that this reply doesn't upset you. It is my perception and the one of

thousands of others.

[Guest guest]

Mahakratu prabhu makes some very good points here. Thank you.

 

We have to ourselves demonstrate a cooperative mood to try to effect

change. I cannot force this one or that one to be cooperative, but I

can be cooperative. Perhaps this mood then can become contagious

enough that we can establish a stronger mood of love and trust

amongst those who wish to work within ISKCON.

 

Certainly every individual has his limits and his shortcomings. But

when it appears that everyone, friend and antagonist, are attacking

and criticizing, it is somewhat difficult not to want to retreat from

the fight. Or worse one may try to counter attack and mistake friend

for an antagonist.

 

I personally see that being any sort of leader in ISKCON at this

point in time is more difficult than ever in our history. Even if

one is one of the most exemplary devotees, still the criticisms and

unfriendly attacks are a continuous experience. Therefore no one

wants to be TP or GBC any more. It is a most thankless, stressful

and difficult service. Anyone who does take it up will be perceived

as full of false ego and put under a microscope from even before the

moment he starts. It has become a service for the martyrs only.

 

Your servant,

 

Ramiya dasa

 

 

> [Text 2753679 from COM]

>

 

> My experience of late, especially in Europe, has been that leaders are more

> than happy to have the input of any senior devotee willing to give time and

> effort to help straighten out the mess there. I feel that those days of

> envious snakes are pretty much over. There are those that may be giving a

> hard time to ISCKON authorities these days, but no one is calling them

> snakes or the likes. Any help that can be renedered during these times of

> great difficulty and danger to Srila Prabhupad's mission, is appreciated and

> accepeted as much as is possible.

>

> As far as being loyal goes, I feel that being loyal to srila Prabhupada's

> misssion is very important. In that respect it is different to being

> faithful. Loyalty indicates action, whereas being faithful could easily mean

> being passive and inactive. We can and must be fully faithful to His Divine

> Grace, but we can also give a message of loyalty to those whose faith has

> become shattered by the fall downs of Gurus and inadequecies of other

> leaders. Otherwise other organisations will clean up on the confusion that

> ensues after such fall downs and bumbling management.

>

> We are seeing more and more of late, that there are those who will capitilze

> on the confusion left within ISKCON. We at least have to know what is to be

> done and not to be done. Then maybe there will be a chance of our own

> spiritual growth and try to develop some harmony and better relationships

> amongst Godbrothers (which is almost non-existant at present). Instead of

> being at each others throats, let's try and work together. Maybe we will

> differ on some points, but who says we must agree on every detail? We all

> have our experience and understandings from our past and seeing the mistakes

> of ourselves and others, should help us to not make the same mistakes and

> errors of judgement. In this way we can become part of the solution rather

> than part of the problem.

>

> Those that have left ISKCON and joined other parties (Gaudiya Math), are no

> longer loyal to Srila Prabhupada's mission. They may claim many things, but

> Srila Prabhupada himself said: If you love me then stay with my mission

> (don't leave). So despite there being difficult times, we should somehow

> become loyal to his mission and his instructions to continue to practice and

> if we have little energy and intelligence to propogate the movement of Lord

> Caitanya Mahaprabhu.

>

> Srila Prabhupada's movement must be protected and promoted. Just as he made

> a sacrifice to save us, we must also make some sacrifice to assist him in

> continuing this movement, despite all the set backs and difficulties. It

> maybe hard, but who said it was going to be easy? Is this loyalty or what?

>

> Your servant

> Mahakratu Das Vanacari

>