Any feedback?

[Guest guest]

At 10:26 PM 1/10/02 -0500, Akhilesvara (das) ACBSP (Montreal - CAN) wrote:

>Devotees are the best. There are selfless. Everybody else is selfish. Can you

>argue against that? Don't try!

 

OK, if that's the definition I guess I haven't met many devotees - and most

of the selfless people I've met don't even know about Krsna. Fuunny thing,

definitions.... Getting a bit tired of being told how I should think.

Madhu

[Guest guest]

On 10 Jan 2002, Balarama LOK wrote:

 

> My opinion is that this is exactly right -- if one is speaking of pure

> devotees. They are everything said above. The problem is that there are only

> a very very very very few who are actually pure, and an abundant oversupply

> of hard-hearted posers...

 

Thank you Balarama for your opinion. I should first define briefly what is

ethic. It is a "science" -I should better say a philosophy- by which we can

appreciate good actions and motives so that society can progress in harmony;

in our case BTG. I hope it is not too simple. The problem is how do you define

"a very very very very few who are actually pure"? For example there is

Narayana Maharaja; some say he is pure and some say he is kind of ...

whatever. Another example: Gour Govinda Maharaja. There was some dispute with

him and the GBC. Iskcon declared that ethic was to follow the decision lay out

by the GBC not by an individual. I think the GBC is right in principle. And

Srila Prabhupada has established it this way. Now we have to decide of course

if they have made an ethical application or not. That is part of the

discussion although not directly related to the article in question I hope I

am not stepping too hard on your toes. I’m sure that you don't even feel it

when that happens.

Akhiles