let's be constructive, OK prabhu.

[Guest guest]

Krishna Kirtan dd wrote:

>

> The persons, I would like as GBCs are not at all like your guru-maharaj.

 

your beginning itself shows that you are not serious, nor sincere in your

endeavor to be constructive. Sorry to say that either you don't know how to

do it or you seem to have biased opinion due to whatever reasons you may

consider valid.

 

> I will simply give you some hints, so that you can discover by yourself,

> about whom I am presently thinking, to perform these topmost managerial

> duties, as fresh and inspired new members.

 

thankyou for your attempt but better, as you suggested, I wait for the

Restructure conference to come up with names than speculatinng over it

meaninglessly.

 

> conference. I have found him most confused, personally, and not ready to

> listen to what we told him.

 

is this your idea of good leaders-- that they don't want to help the "most

confused" people who may not be honest in their (leaders') view, and force

such people to "listen to what we told" ? I thought this is what we are

trying to get rid of, isn't it? I personally would like to have leaders who

are able to cool headedly reply and remove all doubts of their juniors and

don't try to shut them up by all means, and if they (the juniors) are not

honest then teach them how to be honest by own example.

 

> So please respect my silence now.

 

Frankly speaking, I was inspired to do so but then I read the following and

realised that you don't really want to let me respect your silence.

 

> Yes , he was also speaking in the same manner as you do, and had been

> trained by the same guru-maharaj, so forget about it, please.

 

first of all it's not proper to bring in someone's spiritual master in such

discussion and accuse him. Srila Prabhupada wouldn't encourage such a

policy. It's simply dirty and against the instructions of guru, sadhu and

sastras. I noticed you have done this twice-thrice now. I hope some senior

devotee will advise you stop it.

 

Also it makes no sense that on one hand you say gurus have no time for their

disciples and here you say I and BG pr are trained by the same guru maharaj.

Please don't reduce the value of yourself by making some cheap statements

without any proof. You can ask any nutral person and he/she will agree that

your above statement sounds sentimental.

 

> Please contact Ajamila Prabhu if he trusts you, he will answer you.

 

I don't know if he trusts me but I certainly trust him. Honestly speaking,

for a while I started trusting you also but later on changed my mind after

seeing you were getting personal and were not sincerely trying to help your

juniors.

 

> Thank you to please not bother me anylonger with your questions.

 

Same to you except that questions are welcome. We don't want to shut up

people who make inquiries with proper etiquette. We have seen how it works

and don't want to repeat.

 

> Yes, prabhu, you are forgiven.

 

Thankyou for forgiving me and I hope you will continue it if I sound

offensive due to improper presentation. I need to learn how to present my

views better. Hare Krishna.

 

ys, bb

[Guest guest]

>Bhadra Balarama wrote:

> > "can you give say 25 to 30 names who can replace the present GBC body?"

 

It seems like developing such a list right now would be jumping the gun a

bit. Aren't we still trying to figure out what exactly the GBC job

description should be? It would make more sense to hold off with specific

nominations until that has been established.

 

Ys,

Madhusudani dasi

[Guest guest]

>

> >Bhadra Balarama wrote:

> > > "can you give say 25 to 30 names who can replace the present GBC

> > > body?"

>

> It seems like developing such a list right now would be jumping the gun a

> bit. Aren't we still trying to figure out what exactly the GBC job

> description should be? It would make more sense to hold off with specific

> nominations until that has been established.

 

this is a reasonable answer :-).

 

ys, bb