Philosophy is approriate

[Guest guest]

Sorry I just realised that this is not really a Cow conference topic, so I

guess we'd better drop this thread from the conference.

 

YS Samba das

 

I suppose there are other more appropriate conferences, but this topic

actually is vital to cow protection. Just see what abuse went on of cows and

other helpless living entities went on, due to a misunderstanding of the

difference between criticism and aparadha, as Chayadevi pointed out. Your

mention of Draupadi's plight being ignored is completely relevant. You

cannot separate cow protection from the philosophy of Krsna consciousness,

or you have no better than a vegetarian movement. We are not divulging into

other topics, although it seems to be that way , we are looking at root

causes, as to how it happened in the first place.

I remember that the devotees at Murari Sevaka where the 12? cows were

killed, suspected that the murderer-to-be was off the wall, but failed to

speak up, due to fear of committing aparadha. They did not know the

difference between aparadha and criticism, which Bhaktisiddhanta recommended

for being a real friend. Or speaking facts not necessarily palatable- Srila

Prabhupada. We can do without a repeat of what happened there, which was

partly a result of this confusion.

 

Personally I find such discussions very enlivening because it proves to me

that we are developing problem-solving in the mode of goodness, which is to

learn from the study of past and present not just throwing solutions at the

problem, without having studied it properly, which is compared to blowing on

a boil.

If such topics were limited to another conference, I would not be able to

participate, as I cannot deal with that much correspondence, and as cow

protection is my primary concern, I am primarily intersted in that part of

our philosophy that makes it possible. I hope it will not be forbidden, as I

see it as just as essential as dealing with practical challenges like

composting, etc., which will not apply to me until I am on the land.

 

Some of your points...

A devotee is interested in the welfare of

all, and will not interfere if his actions are not helpful.

 

But who will decide on the outcome? That is up to Krsna. If the devotees at

Murari had protested, who is to say whether he would have gone ahead with

the murder anyway? How can we know such a thing. We only know what is our

duty- to protect cows- and if that means speaking up against those who are

responsible for or are apatheic to abuse, then we cannot be silent for fear

of that it will not be helpful. We can TRY to make it helpful, by using our

intelligence, but ultimately whether it is or not, is not in our hands,

neither are we to blame. "Do thou fight for the sake of fighting without

considering happiness or distress victory or defeat and by so doing you will

never incur sin"

This is my understanding of how Bg applies to this problem...

 

>it pays to be mightily afraid of the danger of commiting it, so if we

>refrain from naming names, when we have no clear evidence of wrongdoing, we

>are safe.

 

....not too mightily afraid like Chayadevi pointed out, but these are good

guidelines to avoid it, while still being able to present facts where

necessary. Thanks,

ys, niscala

 

 

 

____

Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com