Vacation *is* finished....really!

[Guest guest]

My "vacation" really is over, but I've just now seen SDM's comments below

for the first, second, and third times this morning, so I take it that Krsna

wants me to respond to this before fully retiring from COMbat. I would have

seen them immediately had they been sent to DMW, as I am not a r to

these other conferences.]

 

> On 01 Jan 2000, Guru-Krsna Dasa wrote:

> > On 01 Jan 2000, Sthita-dhi-muni Dasa wrote:

> >

> > > I hate to be clueless, but what difference does this make?

> >

> > Now that's an interesting question, indeed: "What difference does it

> > make?

> Are you thereby implying that it makes little or no difference? And to

> whom or what? To ISKCON? To you? To the king of Nepal? In the context of

> discussions on varnasrama development, dharma, and so forth, what is the

> significant value of that question?

> >

> What other people does not necessarily have to effect me adversely, by

> Krsna's grace. But it seems that 'women' are so powerful that every time

> they breath some say you begin to barage the conference with a half dozen

> posts.

 

To those "some" who say that every time women breathe wretched I "begin to

barage the conference with a half dozen posts": Not true. Doublecheck your

arithmetic, please. I "barraged" without consideration of religious

affiliation, age, sex, race, creed, or national origin. The fact is that I

most certainly "barraged" the 3-person group consisting of Madhava Gosh

Prabhu, Janesvara Prabhu, and Mahanidhi Prabhu *moreso* than I "barraged"

the group consisting of *all other ladies* who have written on these

conferences during my "barrage campaign." Simple arithmetic.

 

> > >When I think of Srila Prabhupada instructions to his followers,

> > >obsessing on women...

> >

> > And perhaps you should verify your tele-cyberpsychoalyses with Dr.

> > Ekstrand before making such public pronouncements?

>

> Prabhupada obsessed on Krsna, if obsessed is the right word to describe

> such things.

 

The usual connotation of the word is: "to be abnormally preoccupied."

Psychologists/psychiatrists consider obsession to be a personality disorder.

(Is that not correct Dr. Ekstrand?) I suppose some would rationalize that

the "colourfully eccentric" (see CHAKRA article by Ananda Dasa) Srila

Prabhupada was also "obsessed" with Krsna consciousness. Anwyay, for now,

I'll grant that the pure devotee is "obsessed" with Krsna. But the above

phrase of yours indirectly states that certain contributors to these

conferences have been "obsessing on women." Prabhu, did you mean that to be

a compliment? Who would understand it in that way? The regular understanding

is that "obsessing on women" is an abnormality. Thus, I objected to your

layperson's suggestion that certain participants in these discussions are

psychologically "abnormally preoccupied with women."

 

>There seems to be a plethoria of talk from some quarters with

> regards what women should and shouldn't do, as compared to what they

> should or shouldn't be doing -- as if all the problems of life are found

> 'elsewhere'.

 

OK. But another opinion is that there's a plethora of talk from so many

quarters on so many issues of so many descriptions. Enter another arena and

there'll be a plethora of talk on rtvik, this-vik, or that-vik. What's so

unusual to find a plethora of talk on the role of women in a conference

called "Varnasrama Development," especially when women themselves are

rs of the conference?

 

Now I surely must rest up from my "vacation," by getting back to work!

 

Hari New Year/Century/Millennium to all!

 

--gkdas