Judge for yourself

[Guest guest]

> 7. Srila Prabhupada also made statements in mild or in jest, which he

> never said are part of his teachings. By 'teachings', we mean the 'import

> of the disciplic succession'.

>

> So an inquisitive Vaishnava will not ridicule an individual, especially if

> he happens to be a maha-purusa mentioned in the Veda, without sufficient

> background research. If one does it, like Dhyana Kunda, then it is indeed

> pseudo-intellectual and fit for the garbage.

 

I missed another point:

 

8. Srila Prabhupada is our founder-acharya or foundational siksa guru of all

members of our ISKCON movement. And there are protocols in the Vaishnava /

Vedic tradition as to how to honor a spiritual master. Here are two

statements from a European translation of Manu-Samhita:

 

199. let him not mimic his [teacher's] gait, speech, and deportment.

 

200. Wherever (people) justly censure or falsely defame his

teacher, there he must cover his ears or depart thence to another

place.

 

Your servant,

Vidvan Gauranga das

[Guest guest]

>

>

> > A sincere Vaisnava understands that the path of transcendental knowledge

> > is completely different from so-called education of the demoniac society.

 

Different does not mean mutually exclusive. They are actually so different,

you can't even place them in opposition , one to the other.

 

A Chevy car is completely different from the color blue, yet we can have a

blue Chevy.

[Guest guest]

At 7:51 -0800 11/21/99, COM: Vidvan Gauranga (das) JPS (Mayapur - IN) wrote:

>

>One final point: Madhusudani Mataji and others may feel hurt with my

>appellation "trash", but I was a lot more hurt when I came to read some of

>Dhyana Kunda's statements and the existence of this TD conference.This is

>the last thing that I wish happens: offend Srila Prabhupada, and that too in

>his own movement! To me, this is just the height of insanity. If they want

>to 'freely' doubt him without following any Vaishnava protocol, then why do

>they have to be in ISKCON to do that?

 

OK, Vidvan, one last time: Please send me the texts in which I have stated

that I doubt Srila Prabhupada. If you can't find such a text, please

refrain from making any such statements about me in the future.

 

Besides, so because you feel hurt, you think you're justified in being

rude? Oh boy, the can of worm that such an attitude opens up. Now no one

has to be polite or civil on COM. It's so easy to simply reply "but I was

hurt, so I'm justified".

 

Ys,

Madhusudani dasi

[Guest guest]

Thank you Vidvan Gauranga Prabhu!

 

ys, Sdd

 

----------

> De: COM: Vidvan Gauranga (das) JPS (Mayapur - IN)

<Vidvan.Gauranga.JPS (AT) bbt (DOT) se>

> A: COM: Babhru (das) ACBSP (San Diego - USA) <Babhru.ACBSP (AT) bbt (DOT) se>; COM:

Tirtharaj (das) TKG (Brisbane - AU) <Tirtharaj.TKG (AT) bbt (DOT) se>; COM: India

(Continental Committee) Open (Forum) <India.Open (AT) bbt (DOT) se>

> CC: COM: DMW (Dharma of Men and Women) <DMW (AT) bbt (DOT) se>; COM: Granddisciples

(of Srila Prabhupada) <Granddisciples (AT) bbt (DOT) se>; COM: ISKCON India (news &

discussion) <ISKCON.India (AT) bbt (DOT) se>; COM: Secretary (of the) EC (Executive

Committee of the GBC) <Secretary.EC (AT) bbt (DOT) se>; btb (AT) georgian (DOT) net

> Asunto: Re: Judge for yourself

> Fecha: Domingo 21 de Noviembre de 1999 01:00

>

> [Text 2795631 from COM]

>

> > it's pity that you call such senseless writing "the couarge"! do you

know

> > that any uncivilised and ignorant person walking on a street can also

> > speak the same way or even with more "courage" against Srila

Prabhupada?

> > is it courage? no, it's ignorence.

>

> Regarding 'Topical Discussions', I have the following comments to make.

>

> As we are from the Gaudiya Vaishnava Vedanta tradition, we are definitely

> into free inquiry. We want to have our doubts dispelled, etc. We want to

> know. In fact, Jiva Goswami and Baladeva Vidyabhusana in our line, have

> dealt with various doubts in the area of philosophy and theology in their

> writings. So there is nothing wrong with inquiry and doubts. But there is

a

> day-and-night difference between 'free speech' and 'free inquiry'. Let me

> explain.

>

> In free inquiry, we follow certain protocols in accordance with the

> established traditions of knowledge-acquisition, particularly of that

> educational institution that one happens to be a member of. Srila

Prabhupada

> wanted ISKCON to be an educational institution. So for those who are

> seriously interested in clearing their doubts, yes, we must provide all

> facilities PROVIDED they follow the protocols of knowledge-acquisition

that

> go along with such a free inquiry. You can't just say what you want.

That's

> not intellectual, that's pseudo-intellectual, especially to come to

> conclusions if you don't have sufficient evidence to back up your points.

>

> Let's take Dhyana Kunda's statements on Srila Prabhupada. She looks

through

> the VedaBase and finds contradictions between statement A made on date

> aa-bbb-19cc at place X and statement B made on date dd-ee-19ff at place

Y.

> Then she has a doubt, "How is it possible for a consistent individual

like

> Srila Prabhupada to make such contradictions?" (At this point, I assume

that

> Dhyana Kunda and others do accept the authority of the Vedas and the

Gaudiya

> Vaishnava sampradaya, though I am not so sure, after having seen her

comment

> on Lord Caitanya's father.) Now what do we do with these contradictions?

>

> An honest inquisitive Vaishnava (a follower of the Vaishnava intellectual

> tradition) would consider doing the following in an attempt to

objectively

> analyze the issue at hand:

>

> 1. Examine the context of the conversation wherein statement A was made.

> 2. Examine the context of the conversation wherein statement B was made.

> 3. The above two can be done in the following ways:

> (i) by interviewing individuals who were there with Srila Prabhupada

at

> the time statements A and B were made.

> (ii) by checking the memoirs and other sources of biographical or

> historical information from disciples of Srila Prabhupada who were

present

> surrounding those events

> 4. Many disciples of Srila Prabhupada state that Srila Prabhupada was a

very

> consistent individual. I have personally heard this from HH Jayapataka

Swami

> who had a lot of association with Srila Prabhupada. So I know that this

is

> more reliable than the interpretation of Dhyana Kunda who who didn't

> associate with Srila Prabhupada.

> 5. If one does accept sastra and previous Gaudiya Vaishnava acharyas as a

> source of authoritative objective knowledge, then there are statements by

> Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura, Padma Purana (Bhagavata-mahatmya), Caitanya

> Mangala and Brahma-vaivarta Purana, which predict a great personality

will

> come who will take KC from Vrindavan/India to the foreign mleccha

countries.

> These logically point to Srila Prabhupada.

> 6. If one does accept point 5: Then you can take up the logic that Srila

> Prabhupada being a maha-purusa, cannot be making contradictions in his

> teachings.

> 7. Srila Prabhupada also made statements in mild or in jest, which he

never

> said are part of his teachings. By 'teachings', we mean the 'import of

the

> disciplic succession'.

>

> So an inquisitive Vaishnava will not ridicule an individual, especially

if

> he happens to be a maha-purusa mentioned in the Veda, without sufficient

> background research. If one does it, like Dhyana Kunda, then it is indeed

> pseudo-intellectual and fit for the garbage.

>

> Educational institutions have certainly regulations on how knowledge is

> transmitted and how research works are done. In no university, will they

> allow a student to criticize the professor, his knowlege, etc. publicly,

No.

> You have to SUBMIT to the process of knowledge-acquisition in the

> university, once you have enrolled into one. If you don't follow the

> protocols of that university, you have to hit the road, because your

> behavior would be considered 'offensive'. If free speech were something

so

> valuable, then why is it that there is a distinction in a university

between

> who can teach in a class and who should listen and follow the university

> rules as students?

>

> This isn't blocking inquiry, but regulating how you go about it. ISKCON

is a

> Vaishnava educational institution (we learn from Srila Prabhupada and

teach

> based on it) and therefore these Vaishava protocols have to be followed.

>

> Madhusudani Radha dd mentioned that Dhyana Kunda has a lot of integrity.

If

> that is the case, why is she shuttling her subjective opinion (which is

not

> backed up by sufficient research) which is definitely offensive according

to

> Vaishnava protocols in this educational institution ISKCON as if they

were

> objective facts?

>

> I repeat: we are all for 'free inquiry' but not for mleccha-type 'free

> speech'. We are interested in knowledge and some protocols for knowledge

> acquisition need to be followed, since we are part of the Vaishnava

> tradition.

>

> Take for example, Arjuna in the Bhagavad-gita. In the Fourth Chapter of

the

> Gita, Lord Krsna says that He taught Vivasvan, the lord of the

sun-planet,

> teachings of devotional service. Arjuna becomes doubtful of this fact.

But

> watch how he brings this up his doubt. Note how he meticulously follows

> Vaishnava/Vedic protocols:

>

> arjuna uvaca

> aparam bhavato janma

> param janma vivasvatah

> katham etad vijaniyam

> tvam adau proktavan iti

>

> arjunah uvaca--Arjuna said; aparam- junior; bhavatah--Your; janma--birth;

> param--superior; janma--birth; vivasvatah--of the sun-god; katham--how;

> etat--this; vijaniyam--shall I understand; tvam--You; adau--in the

> beginning; proktavan--instructed; iti--thus.

>

> "Arjuna said: The sun-god Vivasvan is senior by birth to You. How am I to

> understand that in the beginning You instructed this science to him?"

>

> Worthy of noting is his submissive wording: katham etad vijaniyam

> (kathan--how; etat--this; vijaniyam--shall I understand) "How am I to

> understand..."

>

> With this wording, Arjuna makes it clear that he may not be able to

> understand many things in life, especially about Krsna. Therefore, he

asks,

> "How do I understand...?" He doesn't assume certain pseudo-intellectual

> conclusions: "Krsna contradicts reality", etc. He submissively asks Krsna

> (pari-prasnena) how he can understand statements made by the Supreme

Person.

>

> *Within* Vaishnava intellectual traditions, there is a protocol of

behavior

> and reference to one's spiritual master or previous spiritual master,

> founder-acharya, etc. Therefore I say that one can't make unsubmissive

> statements about Srila Prabhupada, even if it is an attempt to understand

> apparent contradictions in his statements.

>

> Without making a proper and intelligent analysis of an individual, how

can

> he/she make remarks about the individual's integrity, motives, etc?

> Especially if he/she makes such remarks in the name of free speech,

*within*

> the Vaishnava tradition, it is not accepted as honest inquiry or

> non-egoistic intellectualism. That is why I consider Dhyana Kunda's

> statements and Madhusudani Radha's policies regarding Topical Discussions

> trash.

>

> Your servant,

> Vidvan Gauranga das

[Guest guest]

> On a related topic, maybe it is because English is not your first

language,

 

It seems that english is not the first language of almost nobody, I read

this statement of MRdd in so many mails, even is not MRdd first language,

what can change if it is the first or not?

 

> but it's not exactly good manners to call someone else's view "trash".

> However much I disagree with you and some of the very hurtful things you

did

> and said last year while on the GHQ conference, I would never call your

> writings "trash" in public. Let's try to keep this conversation civil

and

> respectful.

>

I wander who can feel that belittle Srila Prabhupada and criticizing him is

"civil and respectfull" conversation. I must agree with Vidvan Gauranga

Prabhu that some 'ladies' go to far on her statements.

 

ys, Sridhari dd

[Guest guest]

Sábado 20 de Noviembre de 1999 19:00

Harsi (das) HKS (Timisoara - RO) wrote:

>

> We are living in a free world where everyone should be alowed to expres

his

> opinion and realizations freely even if they may not fit with ours.

 

FREE WORLD? do you remember that this is not a free world? Please don't

forget that the mode of nature influence us constantly so what you call

free speaking, isn't not exactly that. I agree that realization cann't fit

with mines, but we are speaking here of Vaisnava aparadha prabhu!

Srila Prabhupada gave us a PERFECT example of behaviour.

 

Tue, 19 Oct 99 11:41 +0200

"COM: Dhyanakunda (dd) KKD (NE-BBT, Almvik - S)"

<Dhyanakunda.KKD (AT) bbt (DOT) se>

Topical Discussions <topical.discussions (AT) bbt (DOT) se>

contradictions in Prabhupada's writings? - 3

 

 

I have singled out this example since it's a different kind of

contradiction. Not a logical one but rather psychological. Prabhupada

first exhibits a very negative attitude toward one Richard, and a few

sentences later, he becomes quite positive about him and sees good

qualities in him. What has changed?

 

This kind is what bothers me, personally, perhaps more than the simpler

kinds. I just have a big problem trusting persons who label others so

easily and so unpredictably.

 

here we find a text that clearly speaks of having BIG PROBLEMS TO TRUST

PERSONS.... (in this speciffic case she is speaking about Srila Prabhupada)

 

nobody is obligated to trust on SP, but if you don't ISKCON isn't the ideal

place for those persons.

 

I agree with you that we have to have a friendly mood even with those

persons, but friendly doesn't meant to allow such behaviour, and for my

understanding, please correct me if I am wrong that is the duty of the

Guru.

 

ys, Sdd

[Guest guest]

At 03:51 PM 11/21/99 +0000, COM: Vidvan Gauranga (das) JPS (Mayapur - IN)

wrote:

 

>I must acknowledge that Babhru Prabhu's observation is valid. In fact, after

>sending my text off, I realized that in other parts of the world things may

>well be different, especially as Kali yuga advances.

 

Thanks, prabhu. I appreciate your candor, and I'm sure the other devotees

do, too. You're setting a good example for us all here.

 

>This is the last thing that I wish happens: offend Srila Prabhupada, and

that too in

>his own movement! To me, this is just the height of insanity.

 

I agree; however, we have to be candid enough to admit that there has been

plenty of offences against Srila Prabhupada, right here in his own

movement, much of it perpetrated by some of its leaders. I have no interest

in getting into a spitting contest here or blaming anyone for the problems

we've had over the last 30-35 years; I just hope we can all be honest and

open enough that we can find real solutions to these problems--together.

 

Your servant,

Babhru das

[Guest guest]

>

> Maybe we're hitting on a cultural difference. If so, that might explain

> some of the different reactions we are encountering.

 

so are we supposed to learn from Indian university or American on this

particular issue of arguing with professors?

 

ys, bb

[Guest guest]

>so are we supposed to learn from Indian university or American on this

>particular issue of arguing with professors?

 

I don't have an answer for that, but since Vidvan Prabhu brought up that

even in universities, students don't get to challenge, both Babhru and I

apparently wanted to share that this is not a universal phenomenon.

Personally, I'm not sure we have to imitate either one. But "courtesy"

seems to be a feature of both systems - and not always found on COM. So

maybe we can start there? Kind of like getting to the mode of Goodness

before we start imagining ourselves to be transcendental.

 

Ys,

Madhusudani dasi

[Guest guest]

> At 04:23 AM 11/21/99 +0000, COM: Vidvan Gauranga (das) JPS (Mayapur - IN)

> wrote:

>

> >Educational institutions have certainly regulations on how knowledge is

> >transmitted and how research works are done. In no university, will they

> >allow a student to criticize the professor, his knowlege, etc. publicly,

> >No. You have to SUBMIT to the process of knowledge-acquisition in the

> >university, once you have enrolled into one. If you don't follow the

> >protocols of that university, you have to hit the road, because your

> >behavior would be considered 'offensive'. If free speech were something

> >so valuable, then why is it that there is a distinction in a university

> >between who can teach in a class and who should listen and follow the

> >university rules as students?

>

> I'm not sure where you live or of the extent of your experience with

> university life; however, I've taught at a university for the last 10

> years, and I'd like to assure you that students certainly may and do

> criticize their professors without fear of sanction by the university.

> There may be some etiquette involved (although that is certainly

> changing), but such challenge is considered part of the academic process.

> It's not a prison.

>

> Your servant,

> Babhru das

 

I think what Vidvan intends to say, if I may take the liberty to interpret

him... is that questioning of the teacher by the student should be done

submissively... and that is the vedic concept.

 

Simple.

 

VaiŠava d€sanud€s,

 

B€su Ghosh D€s

[Guest guest]

At 04:14 AM 11/22/99 +0530, COM: Basu Ghosh (das) ACBSP (Baroda - IN) wrote:

 

>I think what Vidvan intends to say, if I may take the liberty to interpret

>him... is that questioning of the teacher by the student should be done

>submissively... and that is the vedic concept.

>

>Simple.

 

I simply responded to what he DID say, and he has since conceded the point.

He is obviously intelligent enough to speak for himself. As for his overall

point, I conceded that a priori in another posting.Ther is an ocean of

difference between spiritual dialog and teaching in the university. The

remark you intend to defend Vidvan Gauranga prabhu against addressed a

detail inhis argument (that's part of my job--I can't help it), and nothing

more.

 

Simple.

 

Your servant,

Babhru das

[Guest guest]

> > I repeat: we are all for 'free inquiry' but not for mleccha-type 'free

speech'

>

> precisely.

>

> ys, bb

 

 

Still, coming late to this debate, one finds themselves wondering what she

could have possibly said that was so mindblowing. Was it an offensive doubt,

or was it something else?

 

Since it appears the text is unavailable, I guess we'll never know.

[Guest guest]

> > On a related topic, maybe it is because English is not your first

> > language,

> but it's not exactly good manners to call someone else's view "trash".

> However much I disagree with you and some of the very hurtful things you

> did and said last year while on the GHQ conference, I would never call

> your writings "trash" in public. Let's try to keep this conversation

> civil and respectful.

 

There seems to be an attempt here to blur the issues, using the weary excuse

of English not being somebody's first language. No, I don't think Vidvan

Gauranga Prabhu wrote it that way because of any weak grasp of language. He

said what he wanted to say, in a language that can be understood loud and

clear by the intended audience.

 

Blunt? Perhaps, but objective, no doubt. What's the use of being "civil" and

"respectful" without objectivity?

 

On the other hand, if your oft-repeated excuse of English not being

somebody's first language is intended as a putdown, let it be known that

some of the best writers of the English language are NOT necessary

Englishmen who speak it as their first language. Check out the literary

awards lists. Or visit a well-stocked bookshop.

 

> Yes, this 'trash' talk is more appropriate for a playground forum as

> compared to a Vaisnava forum.

 

Actually "garbage" (synonym of trash) is an acceptable and appropriate term

even in the highest forums of technology. It's a word commonly spouted by

the demigod of American technology, Bill Gates, and others in reference to

the GIGO principle: Garbage In, Garbage Out - when writing and testing a

program, any error at the input end will surely produce rubbish at the

output end.

 

Similarly, when one doubts the position of the spiritual master or the

founder-acarya and considers him to be "inconsistent", the spiritual content

of all her output, writing, etc produced in that consciousness will be as

Vidvan Gauranga Prabhu termed it. Pick your choice: trash, rubbish, garbage.

Gross materialists like Gates and company have no problems being objective

in calling flawed writing garbage. Why are we being prickly when somebody

shows up our stance to be flawed (text 2795631)? Vidvan Prabhu has quoted

the example to follow even if there seem to be apparent inconsistencies to

one's mind - the example of how Arjuna submitted his doubts to Krsna as to

how He can be senior to the sun god. BG 4.4).

 

> Maybe English isn't this prabhus first

> language, but he might be accused of talking like an American football

> player.

 

It would be highly flattering for the average American footballer if his

colorful language is limited to just words like "trash" etc. In fact it

would highly flattering for the average American (karmi). Period.

 

Your servant,

Goloka Candra dasa

[Guest guest]

>

> Actually "garbage" (synonym of trash) is an acceptable and appropriate term

even in the highest forums of technology.

 

 

Mabye for Billy G., but for us?

 

 

 

>

> Similarly, when one doubts the position of the spiritual master or the

> founder-acarya and considers him to be "inconsistent", the spiritual content

of all her output, writing, etc produced in that consciousness will be as

Vidvan Gauranga Prabhu termed it. Pick your choice: trash, rubbish, garbage.

>

 

 

Fortunately or unfortunately, I missed the bliss of getting to see the

original erroneous post, and I find myself wondering how many of the other

participants in this discourse actually read it either. In any event,

sometimes it is better to deal with doubts up front rather than to pretend

they are not there. I mean, if we were that free of doubts, what the heck are

we doing in the material world in the first place.

 

Geex, if this mataji actually expressed something horrible about her

appreciation for Srila Prabhupada -- I say so what? It's not my personal

problem and it doesn't effect my personal convictions. I mean in this day and

age, 'new bhaktas' as well as old bhaktas hear so many things -- in case you

haven't heard.

 

Sometimes better that we hear about it and then learn to deal with it

rationally, rather than we try to pretend such issues and people with such

issues do not exist. Better to train our devotees with the philosphical tools

to progressively deal with such issues, rather than simply offer a bunch of

over-zeleous dogmatic knee-jerk pontification. Of course, I would never dream

that any of us would ever act like that on an elevated conference such as

this.

 

In any event, since our GHQ types are so much more advanced, who cares what

the matajis have to say, anyway?

 

>

> > Maybe English isn't this prabhus first

> > language, but he might be accused of talking like an American football

player.

>

> It would be highly flattering for the average American footballer if his

colorful language is limited to just words like "trash" etc. In fact it would

highly flattering for the average American (karmi). Period.

>

> Your servant,

> Goloka Candra dasa

 

 

Gosh, I'm feeling flattered already!

 

ys,

 

Sthita-dhi

[Guest guest]

At 17:40 -0800 11/21/99, COM: Goloka Candra (das) JPS (Malaysia) wrote:

>

>No, I don't think Vidvan

>Gauranga Prabhu wrote it that way because of any weak grasp of language.

 

I believe Vidvan Gauranga Prabhu is perfectly able to answer for himself,

especially as he's already done so.

 

>On the other hand, if your oft-repeated excuse of English not being

>somebody's first language is intended as a putdown,

 

No it isn't. It's to give someone the benefit of the doubt. By the way,

it's not my first language either.

 

I'm not replying on the rest of your text as it was a comment on Sthita-dhi

Muni prabhu's text. I assume you know that, even though your comments on

both of our texts were combined.

 

Ys,

Madhusudani dasi

[Guest guest]

>

> >

> > > Maybe English isn't this prabhus first

> > > language, but he might be accused of talking like an American football

> player.

> >

> > It would be highly flattering for the average American footballer if his

> colorful language is limited to just words like "trash" etc. In fact it would

> highly flattering for the average American (karmi). Period.

> >

> > Your servant,

> > Goloka Candra dasa

 

Dear Goloka

 

Apparently English isn't your first language, as "trash talking " to a

footballer has a very sprcific meaning, refering to a particular genre of

expression meant to make your opponent angry and break his focus on the game

so

you can take an advantage.

 

As far as trying to rationalize calling someone's opinions "Trash" as

flattering

- give us a break, please.

 

As for your put down on the language useage of an entire population, which

quality of a devotee were you manifesting there?

[Guest guest]

In a message dated 11/21/1999 8:30:29 AM Eastern Standard Time,

Harsi.HKS (AT) bbt (DOT) se writes:

 

>

> Offense, Offense when will it end...?

>

> Respectfully,

> Harsi das

>

Probably when grand disciples learn how to act properly and not feel they

have to pick apart every post they have some disagreement with. To be honest

I don't even know you and I don't care for your argumentativeness. Try and

give some worthwhile philosophy by repeating your guru's transcendental

teachings and don't waste your valuable time in challenging everyone. So what

you don't agree with the way I wrote my text? It would help if you would

explain to me who you are so I can understand if I should respectfully

receive instructions from a senior Vaisnava and if there is need,

submissively correct myself. But if you are a junior upstart who thinks he

can just attack anyone, godbrother, godbrother of your guru, new devotee, old

devotee, anyone, as long as you can argue loudest, regardless of respect and

Vaisnava etiquette, they why get into it. It is destructive to Srila

Prabhupada's purpose, self serving, and itself leading to offenses. Do me a

favor and just think about it without some clever reply, and we will just

drop the subject. Rather than just taking apart other's writings, try and

write something worthwhile that will help others remember Krsna. If you are

sincere and want to actually propagate Krsna consciousness and goodwill, why

not start from there. I will do the same. Of course, if you cannot resist and

need to get off another round, I will understand. Mahananda dasa

[Guest guest]

I can't think any good reason why i shouldn't drop out of all conferences and

try and improve my devotional service somehow. Therefore, anyone who can do

it, please remove me from any or all conferences that i am d to.

Respectfully Mahananda dasa

[Guest guest]

> At 04:14 AM 11/22/99 +0530, COM: Basu Ghosh (das) ACBSP (Baroda - IN)

> wrote:

>

> >I think what Vidvan intends to say, if I may take the liberty to

> >interpret him... is that questioning of the teacher by the student should

> >be done submissively... and that is the vedic concept.

> >

> >Simple.

>

> I simply responded to what he DID say, and he has since conceded the

> point. He is obviously intelligent enough to speak for himself. As for his

> overall point, I conceded that a priori in another posting.Ther is an

> ocean of difference between spiritual dialog and teaching in the

> university. The remark you intend to defend Vidvan Gauranga prabhu against

> addressed a detail inhis argument (that's part of my job--I can't help

> it), and nothing more.

>

> Simple.

>

> Your servant,

> Babhru das

 

OK, Prabhuji. I aquiese.

[Guest guest]

> > > > Maybe English isn't this prabhus first

> > > > language, but he might be accused of talking like an American

> > > > football

> > player.

> > >

> > > It would be highly flattering for the average American footballer if

> > > his

> > colorful language is limited to just words like "trash" etc. In fact it

> > would highly flattering for the average American (karmi). Period.

> > >

> > > Your servant,

> > > Goloka Candra dasa

>

> Dear Goloka

>

> Apparently English isn't your first language,

 

aha, here comes a white knight charging in to the defence of his

accomplices. Question is, where was he when somebody was insulting his

spiritual master and some others were trying to rationalize it?

 

> as "trash talking " to a

> footballer has a very sprcific meaning, refering to a particular genre

> of expression meant to make your opponent angry and break his focus on the

> game so you can take an advantage.

 

Thanks for the education. So we are agreed on this point - that "trash" is a

term in common usage, not only in hi-tech but also in that sacred topmost

showpiece of American culture - football. Nothing vulgar about the word,

right? So kindly explain why you and some others are kicking up a fuss over

it?

 

> As far as trying to rationalize calling someone's opinions "Trash" as

> flattering - give us a break, please.

>

> As for your put down on the language useage of an entire population,

> which quality of a devotee were you manifesting there?

 

Poetic? No?

 

(Seriously though, the intent was not to put down an entire population, but

to show that it begins to sound like a lame excuse when people keep blamimg

careless writing on English not being a first language. This thread alone

had many such utterances, and you added one more to the count with with your

opening line. This is not the issue being discussed, only somebody who wants

to divert the issues would resort to such tactics).

 

 

Goloka Candra dasa

[Guest guest]

> I am surprised that so many devotees are defending the right of a second

> generation disciple to express their doubts of Srila Prabhupada's

> transcendental nature in such a manner as to be offensive according to

> Vaisnava philosophy.

 

Perhaps there is a merciful and learned sadhu who can dispel her doubts

point by point?

 

ys Anantarupa das

[Guest guest]

>> it begins to sound like a lame excuse when people keep blamimg

careless writing on English not being a first language>>

 

OK, would you rather we criticize devotees for careless writing as opposed to

giving them the benefit of the doubt? I guess I could handle that.

 

Ys,

Madhusudani dasi

[Guest guest]

> I agree; however, we have to be candid enough to admit that there has been

> plenty of offences against Srila Prabhupada, right here in his own

> movement, much of it perpetrated by some of its leaders. I have no

> interest in getting into a spitting contest here or blaming anyone for the

> problems we've had over the last 30-35 years; I just hope we can all be

> honest and open enough that we can find real solutions to these

> problems--together.

 

I also agree with your point, Prabhu. As MRDD Mataji suggested in a

different text, I think that we should go for some sort of mediation done by

a mediator like Braja Bihari Prabhu. It should help.

 

Your servant,

Vidvan Gauranga das

[Guest guest]

At 01:21 PM 11/22/99 +0530, you wrote:

>[Text 2798075 from COM]

>

>> At 03:51 PM 11/21/99 +0000, COM: Vidvan Gauranga (das) JPS (Mayapur - IN)

>> wrote:

>>

>> >I must acknowledge that Babhru Prabhu's observation is valid. In fact,

>> >after sending my text off, I realized that in other parts of the world

>> >things may well be different, especially as Kali yuga advances.

>>

>> Thanks, prabhu. I appreciate your candor, and I'm sure the other devotees

>> do, too. You're setting a good example for us all here.

>>

>> >This is the last thing that I wish happens: offend Srila Prabhupada, and

>> that too in

>> >his own movement! To me, this is just the height of insanity.

>>

>> I agree; however, we have to be candid enough to admit that there has been

>> plenty of offences against Srila Prabhupada, right here in his own

>> movement, much of it perpetrated by some of its leaders. I have no

>> interest in getting into a spitting contest here or blaming anyone for the

>> problems we've had over the last 30-35 years; I just hope we can all be

>> honest and open enough that we can find real solutions to these

>> problems--together.

>>

>> Your servant,

>> Babhru das

>

>Good sentiment to hold, Prabhuji.

>

>Just hope that it might happen... someday. :-)

 

So do I. Perhaps we'll celebrate this together some day soon. I'm still

trying, after 30 years and some cool tests.

 

Your servant,

Babhru das

[Guest guest]

>

> > Dear Goloka

> >

> > Apparently English isn't your first language,

>

> aha, here comes a white knight charging in to the defence of his

> accomplices. Question is, where was he when somebody was insulting his

> spiritual master and some others were trying to rationalize it?

 

How wonderful of you to provide an example of trash talking. This is quite a

good one - all the elements are there. The "white knight" thing and

"insulting

the spiritual master" combine both irrelevnce and insult to my intelligence.

 

>

> Thanks for the education. So we are agreed on this point - that "trash" is a

> term in common usage, not only in hi-tech but also in that sacred topmost

> showpiece of American culture - football. Nothing vulgar about the word,

> right? So kindly explain why you and some others are kicking up a fuss over

> it?

 

The issue was not the vulgarity of expression, rather the vulgarity of the

content.

 

> > As for your put down on the language useage of an entire population,

> > which quality of a devotee were you manifesting there?

>

> Poetic? No?

 

Trash talking devotees

Always putting down

Are so very expert

At eliciting a frown

 

How could your post be poetic?

It lacked rythym rhyme and soul

Yes, I would prefer football

To the dogma that is your goal

 

So if you think you were poetic

I suggest you reassess

Not only what is poetry

But all your "Vedic" mess