Trivikrama Maharaja's question

[Guest guest]

> >What if an Iskcon TP's wife serves him prasadam before she takes any

> >herself, will Vipramukhya Maharaja and the EC issue a directive condemning

him for accepting such "preferential treatment"???

> >Ys TS

 

Lola dd replied:

>Do you really think that a devotee lovingly serving prasad to a family

>member, male or female, is the same as being forcibly barred from being near

the Deity. The wife's service would be voluntary, not forced. I

 

This is the point. The question raised by Trivikram Swami is a *non-sequitur*,

using cunning logic to distract us from the real issue at hand. It is not

addressing the issue honestly, like any gentleman would.

 

It think the case at hand calls for *gentlemen*, no?

 

Serving prasadam PRIVATELY at HOME has little to do with PUBLIC standards in

the TEMPLE. Otherwise, why should we limit ourselves to eating habits? With

this kind of logic of mixing the public and private, why don't we accuse the

ladies of wanting to make unisex public toilets? In this way, we falsely

S-T-R-E-T-C-H the opponents to make it seem ridiculous. This shows *cunning

wit* but not *INTEGRITY*.

 

> Guru Krsna dasa is using a technique I heard Jayadwaita Swami teach in his

course years ago.(Was it called 'Clear Thinking and Strong Speaking'?) An

unfair trick some use when they want to defeat another is to twist the

original statement into something else that is much easier to defeat. Guru

Krsna's letter is irrelevant to the issue as it doesn't address the original

'preferential treatment', but equal rights, which are not the same.

 

Lola Didi, you've obviously learned your lessons well! "IRREVELANT" is

precisely the word for it. *Smoke-screen*, *straw-man* arguments are evasive

techniques routinely employed by those who seek to hide from the TRUTH.

 

 

Sincerely,

 

Srila dasa