Regarding TD

[Guest guest]

> I agree that this is a real problem. Since we seem to be at a

> juncture now, maybe we could devote this list to discussing it instead

> of the GBC or child abuse. It's not by any means less important than

> either of those two topics. It's probably even more important than both

> combined, if we're interested in *acting* as pure Vaisnavas.

 

I don't mind at all, but first GBC Unmoderated should get an organizer and

be renamed. Second, to discuss what is going on in Topical Discussions, all

the members of this conference should read all the texts in TD (more than

3500) so that they know what they are discussing.

 

ys, mdd

[Guest guest]

> I think what both Jahnu and I meant above isn't really limited

> to TD, which is more of a symptom than the real problem; there's no

> essential need even to involve TD at all, though it is an example at

> hand. I'm more concerned with addressing the causes.

 

I am afraid it's a lost cause. It seems nobody here [except a very

few] is interested in a discussion like that - it would be like

digging their own grave.

 

ys, Jahnu das

[Guest guest]

On Mon, 25 Feb 2002, Mukhya (dd) (BES Asst. SysOp) wrote:

(Faithlessness, blasphemy, criticism, etc., on TD)

> > I agree that this is a real problem. Since we seem to be at a

> > juncture now, maybe we could devote this list to discussing it instead

> > of the GBC or child abuse. It's not by any means less important than

> > either of those two topics. It's probably even more important than both

> > combined, if we're interested in *acting* as pure Vaisnavas.

>

> I don't mind at all, but first GBC Unmoderated should get an organizer and

> be renamed. Second, to discuss what is going on in Topical Discussions, all

> the members of this conference should read all the texts in TD (more than

> 3500) so that they know what they are discussing.

 

I think what both Jahnu and I meant above isn't really limited to

TD, which is more of a symptom than the real problem; there's no essential

need even to involve TD at all, though it is an example at hand. I'm more

concerned with addressing the causes.

 

MDd

[Guest guest]

> I think what I meant

> is more of a symptom than the real problem;

> I'm more concerned with addressing the causes.

 

You've been adressing the causes since two years now. It is faith, is it

not? Therefore I asked you to share with us your understanding by an essay,

which you never provided. Although its conclusion is obvious: some devotees

are only by name and cannot be called as such, since they don't have as much

faith than your ideal devotee: something like that and worse. In other

words, "people" like me for exemple can show their face in a "vaisnava"

assembly but should not try to make any impression. Anything new?

 

Don't you have something more positive to offer so that we can get inspired

by? I mean you sound like a devotee with spt resources; can't you devotail

your time and writing talents in something else than just finding faults

with individuals? Is that so important for you to get involved in forum like

TD and now here just to be a watchdog?

[Guest guest]

> > I think what I meant

> > is more of a symptom than the real problem;

> > I'm more concerned with addressing the causes.

>

> You've been adressing the causes since two years now. It is faith,

> is it not? Therefore I asked you to share with us your understanding

> by an essay, which you never provided. Although its conclusion is

> obvious: some devotees are only by name and cannot be called as

> such, since they don't have as much faith than your ideal devotee:

> something like that and worse. In other words, "people" like me for

> exemple can show their face in a "vaisnava" assembly but should not

> try to make any impression. Anything new?

 

Why invent something new when our philosophy is so complete and

explains it all?

 

It is clearly explained by Rupa Goswami in NOD that devotees are

Kanistha, madhyama, or uttama according to their degrees of faith. I

think in ISKCON we find examples of all such devotees, and according

to Bhaktivinod Thakur it is our duty to discern the different

categories so we know whom to revere and receive instructions from,

whom to make friends with as equals, and whom to _give_ instructions

and encouragement.

 

Ys, Jahnu das

[Guest guest]

On Tue, 26 Feb 2002, Jahnu (das) (San Rafael, CA - USA) wrote:

> > I think what both Jahnu and I meant above isn't really limited

> > to TD, which is more of a symptom than the real problem; there's no

> > essential need even to involve TD at all, though it is an example at

> > hand. I'm more concerned with addressing the causes.

>

> I am afraid it's a lost cause. It seems nobody here [except a very

> few is interested in a discussion like that - it would be like

> digging their own grave.

 

That may be, but there's no harm in soliciting discussion of such

consequential issues; isn't human life meant for inquiring on these things?

They definitely fall within the general category of sambandha-jnana. If

we're all prepared to state our views cogently like ladies and gentlemen,

then it should be a very easy thing to determine where the anarthas are

and aren't. My experience on TD was that people would never agree to

substantiate their radical views, apparently because they knew very well

that this was impossible, but I don't see any reason to assume that that's

the case here too.

 

MDd