Guest guest Posted February 27, 2002 Report Share Posted February 27, 2002 > I heard this more than 25 years ago--that when someone leaves, we should > see that it's at least half our fault. Prabhupada cried when people left. However, I'm sure he'd be crying over much more than the people who left in respect of the Narayan Maharaj issue. In fact, I seriously doubt Prabhupada would be crying *at all* over those who went to NM - I think he'd be extremely disturbed by NM's behavior. I've no doubt either that he's helped a lot of people, and that's fine. The fact remains that he has been incredibly offensive to Prabhupada. The fact that he has been a magnet for all the disgruntled ISKCON-itesdoesn't alleviate his own wrong-doings. One does not offset the other. It's a little dangerous to let the issues merge. > One of the great faults of the > Zonal-guru days was the push to drive out all who didn't support the party > line. Any movement in that direction by anyone makes me want to find other > company. As you said yesterday, this is not a challenge, but I'd like you to please explain what you actually define as the 'party line'? And where would you draw that 'line'? Is that what we're reduced to calling Prabhupada's teachings? It seems like another diversion tactic - reduce everything to politics and make those who want strictness and purity of the teachings sound like fanatics. It's simply politics, and I won't be driven by those either. But I prefer to stay and defend rather than give up and leave. (Sorry to disappoint some of you Your servant Braja Sevaki dd Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.