Artificially Manufactured Arguements

Bhakta Devarsi · March 1, 2007

In another topic, the following observation was made about a poster's technique, and it brought me to see clearly that someone is in danger, as actually anyone is who is found artificially manufacturing arguements, especially when it contradicts a great Acharya. Ouch.

Quote:

<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="100%"> <tbody><tr> <td style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding-left: 3ex; padding-right: 3ex;" bgcolor="#e0e0e0"> Originally Posted by Guestperson

"You are making arguments on this message board where very few people know all the intricacies of Gaudiya Philosophy."

</td> </tr> </tbody></table>

And making arguements IN THIS CASE means manufacturing arguements, a sure sign of slow poisoning taking effect.

The articles such a person chooses to contend are pointedly attacked by choosing main words that are actually broadly interpreted conceptual structures being applied quite suitably in a context to which they are perfectly applicable.

This is a classic straw man type of arguementation. Can't beat the essence, go for the strawman and beat him up. But this type of straw man is a ghost also.

The essence of the subject being presented is fine, but to manufacture arguement for arguements sake, one chooses a word in another's presentation and argues that it was used incorrectly, and goes on to imply that the other person's entire presentation had no transcendental value and was based on a foundation no sounder than a riven cloud.

When in fact the definition of the word was manipulated so narrowly that it only appears to contradict, and in reality, the word was used correctly to support the truth.

For example. In a thread where some people are repeating the instructions of the person they have chosen to their heart and mind to be the most prominent Acharya of the teachings of the Gaudiya line and the most current link (for them), in a preaching effort, based on quotations, Anadi had obliquely challenged the transcendental validity of the presentation based on a technical arguement regarding the definition of some key words, words which I will show are broadly interpreted without impropriety.

So Anadi says in regards to this statement of mine to which he adds emphasis in bold..

Quote:

<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="100%"> <tbody><tr> <td style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding-left: 3ex; padding-right: 3ex;" bgcolor="#e0e0e0"> Originally Posted by anadi

 Quote:

<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="100%"> <tbody><tr> <td style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding-left: 3ex; padding-right: 3ex;" bgcolor="#e0e0e0"> Originally Posted by Bhakta Devarsi

If the prescription is, "In my assessment of your presently manifested symptoms, Y'all are situated in the modes of nature, bereft of anything but a minute sentiment for Krsna, which you just got when you met me, and therefore divide up and practice Daivi Varnashrama Dharma so you can gradually attain the goal of Shudda Bhakti.

</td> </tr> </tbody></table>

</td> </tr> </tbody></table>

He replies,

Quote:

<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="100%"> <tbody><tr> <td style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding-left: 3ex; padding-right: 3ex;" bgcolor="#e0e0e0"> Originally Posted by anadi

This prescription is not from Sri Caitanya or His empowered representatives from Vrindavan, who followed His teachings.

</td> </tr> </tbody></table>

And of course it was a paraphrase of mine, and when I later went on to give direct evidence that Srila Prabhupada did prescribe the DVD system to "everyone" in his Iskcon society. And then logically concluded that since a purpose of Iskcon was to assist US in attaining the highest perfection, Shuddha Bhakti, that I was speaking in line with the Siddhanta.

but this point is only addressed later, as the diversion continued, as Anadi posts this.

Quote:

<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="100%"> <tbody><tr> <td style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding-left: 3ex; padding-right: 3ex;" bgcolor="#e0e0e0"> Originally Posted by anadi

"Bhakti is not related to any Institution.

Bhakti is the relation between the Worshipable Deity and the devotee, and guru assists his disciple in making conscious that loving relation."

When an Institution came into being, that is not because of bhakti, but because of material managerial considerations, and politics will come into life.

</td> </tr> </tbody></table>

And The definition of bhakti for the Gaudiya Vaishnavas has been clearly stated by Srila Rupa Gosvami.

Uttama Bhakti – pure divine loving service consists of activities –shilanam which are favorable anukulyena – give pleasure in the highest degree to <st1:place>Krishna</st1:place>.

It must be devoid shunyam of material desires anyabhilash, knowledge of the Absolutness of the Lord jnana, and karma – activities according varna-ashram dharma.

So at this point I tell him he is using a narrow definition of Bhakti to try to defeat me by attempting to show that my use of the word Bhakti is not applicable to my contention and thus my contention is not to be taken seriously. To which he replies.

Quote:

<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="100%"> <tbody><tr> <td style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding-left: 3ex; padding-right: 3ex;" bgcolor="#e0e0e0"> Originally Posted by anadi

The definition of Bhakti (as) Shuddha Bhakti is not a “narrow” definition, but the true definition of Bhakti. When a (Gaudiya) Vaishnava speaks of bhakti he means always shuddha bhakti, not aropa siddha bhakti, or sanga siddha bhakti.

This definition of bhakti was given by Srila Rupa Gosvami.

</td> </tr> </tbody></table>

To which I put forth the following to smash this crafty diversion once and for all.

Quote:

<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="100%"> <tbody><tr> <td style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding-left: 3ex; padding-right: 3ex;" bgcolor="#e0e0e0"> Originally Posted by BD

Now here we have HDG A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami apparently caught in the act!! Is he a "real" Gaudiya Vaisnava?

Purport: Adi 4:21-22

In the Caitanya-caritamrta three kinds of devotional service are described-namely, bhakti (ordinary devotional service), suddha-bhakti (pure devotional service) and viddha-bhakti (mixed devotional service).

</td> </tr> </tbody></table>

And of course back to that original gaff,

"This prescription is not from Sri Caitanya or His empowered representatives from Vrindavan, who followed His teachings."

We see again, that according to this approach, one must also reject Srila Prabhupada from being among such empowered representatives who followed his teachings, because in FACT it was part of his prescription according to his direct words. Holy Aparadha Batman!

And here we have a perfect example of....Poisoning.

HDG AC Bhaktivedanta Swami comes to the west, claiming to be the empowered Diksa Guru and Acharya for the Gaudiya Sampradaya. This is the first we hear of such. He gives us a way to understand the essence of the message of the past acharyas, by offering instruction on the matter.

But some decide they can understand the past Acharya's without first understanding the most current.

So they find themselves in a no mans land, and begin to attack the disciples of the Acharya using snippets from the teachings of past acharyas out of context just to appear to have superior knowledge of the intricacies of the various terms and tattvas involved, when in fact, in context, the terms were appropriately applied, though they have other applications on different levels of vision which are equally true, though not for consideration according to the CONTEXT.

CONTEXT CONTEXT CONTEXT.

IF the context is preaching with the Acharya's blessings, the preaching is clearly defendable.

If the context is preaching for self-aggrandizement without search for truth but simply the presumption of superior knowledge, the preaching is easily smashed.

In this instance a person did not come among a group of peers to submissively receive and carefully share the truth with integrity.

It was simply walking up to Audarya Fellowship Forums, and marking it with hormones, trying to egg someone into a mental pissing match.

Now, ask yourself this, what Gaudiya Vaisnava Acharya would approve of such antics, which end up excluding A.C.Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada from membership in the group of "Gaudiya Vaisnavas" by directly implying he diminished the use of the word Bhakti, and giving evidence from past Acharya's to rest his case.

The poison in the some of those wells along Radha Kund during Kali Yuga is quite potent. Those who indiscriminately drink will get Shuddha bhakti also.

Between now and then, I dare not guess what the present state of spiritual turmoil such persons are in for, but to each their own, I call em as I see em, and buyer beware. Here be dragons and pirahhnas, lions, tigers, and bears, Maya is crafty in applying her wares, Beware aspiring Bhakta Beware.

March 1, 2007

Dear Devarsi prabhu,

Your points are well taken. Indeed, Maya devi has a myriad of ways to mislead us.

However, I must ask ... just how effective are these kind of forums? Obviously, many people read what is written but do they take it seriously? Personally speaking, I take everything I read on internet forums with a big grain of salt. I am quite certain it is the case with most others as well, especially those that have a embodied Guru. Correct me if I am wrong though (therefore the question at the beginning of the paragraph). Now if that is the case indeed, any 'poison' that is being injected into these forums will have minimal effect, so do we really need to worry?

In another topic, the following observation was made about a poster's technique, and it brought me to see clearly that someone is in danger, as actually anyone is who is found artificially manufacturing arguements, especially when it contradicts a great Acharya. Ouch.

Quote:

<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="100%"> <tbody><tr> <td style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding-left: 3ex; padding-right: 3ex;" bgcolor="#e0e0e0"> Originally Posted by Guestperson

"You are making arguments on this message board where very few people know all the intricacies of Gaudiya Philosophy."

</td> </tr> </tbody></table>

 And making arguements IN THIS CASE means manufacturing arguements, a sure sign of slow poisoning taking effect.

The articles such a person chooses to contend are pointedly attacked by choosing main words that are actually broadly interpreted conceptual structures being applied quite suitably in a context to which they are perfectly applicable.

This is a classic straw man type of arguementation. Can't beat the essence, go for the strawman and beat him up. But this type of straw man is a ghost also.

The essence of the subject being presented is fine, but to manufacture arguement for arguements sake, one chooses a word in another's presentation and argues that it was used incorrectly, and goes on to imply that the other person's entire presentation had no transcendental value and was based on a foundation no sounder than a riven cloud.

When in fact the definition of the word was manipulated so narrowly that it only appears to contradict, and in reality, the word was used correctly to support the truth.

For example. In a thread where some people are repeating the instructions of the person they have chosen to their heart and mind to be the most prominent Acharya of the teachings of the Gaudiya line and the most current link (for them), in a preaching effort, based on quotations, Anadi had obliquely challenged the transcendental validity of the presentation based on a technical arguement regarding the definition of some key words, words which I will show are broadly interpreted without impropriety.

So Anadi says in regards to this statement of mine to which he adds emphasis in bold..

 Quote:

<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="100%"> <tbody><tr> <td style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding-left: 3ex; padding-right: 3ex;" bgcolor="#e0e0e0"> Originally Posted by anadi

 Quote:

<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="100%"> <tbody><tr> <td style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding-left: 3ex; padding-right: 3ex;" bgcolor="#e0e0e0"> Originally Posted by Bhakta Devarsi

If the prescription is, "In my assessment of your presently manifested symptoms, Y'all are situated in the modes of nature, bereft of anything but a minute sentiment for Krsna, which you just got when you met me, and therefore divide up and practice Daivi Varnashrama Dharma so you can gradually attain the goal of Shudda Bhakti.

</td> </tr> </tbody></table>



</td> </tr> </tbody></table>



He replies,

 Quote:

<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="100%"> <tbody><tr> <td style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding-left: 3ex; padding-right: 3ex;" bgcolor="#e0e0e0"> Originally Posted by anadi

This prescription is not from Sri Caitanya or His empowered representatives from Vrindavan, who followed His teachings.

</td> </tr> </tbody></table>

 And of course it was a paraphrase of mine, and when I later went on to give direct evidence that Srila Prabhupada did prescribe the DVD system to "everyone" in his Iskcon society. And then logically concluded that since a purpose of Iskcon was to assist US in attaining the highest perfection, Shuddha Bhakti, that I was speaking in line with the Siddhanta.

but this point is only addressed later, as the diversion continued, as Anadi posts this.

 Quote:

<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="100%"> <tbody><tr> <td style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding-left: 3ex; padding-right: 3ex;" bgcolor="#e0e0e0"> Originally Posted by anadi

"Bhakti is not related to any Institution.

Bhakti is the relation between the Worshipable Deity and the devotee, and guru assists his disciple in making conscious that loving relation."

When an Institution came into being, that is not because of bhakti, but because of material managerial considerations, and politics will come into life.

</td> </tr> </tbody></table>



And The definition of bhakti for the Gaudiya Vaishnavas has been clearly stated by Srila Rupa Gosvami.

Uttama Bhakti – pure divine loving service consists of activities –shilanam which are favorable anukulyena – give pleasure in the highest degree to <st1:place>Krishna</st1:place>.

It must be devoid shunyam of material desires anyabhilash, knowledge of the Absolutness of the Lord jnana, and karma – activities according varna-ashram dharma.

So at this point I tell him he is using a narrow definition of Bhakti to try to defeat me by attempting to show that my use of the word Bhakti is not applicable to my contention and thus my contention is not to be taken seriously. To which he replies.

 Quote:

<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="100%"> <tbody><tr> <td style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding-left: 3ex; padding-right: 3ex;" bgcolor="#e0e0e0"> Originally Posted by anadi

The definition of Bhakti (as) Shuddha Bhakti is not a “narrow” definition, but the true definition of Bhakti. When a (Gaudiya) Vaishnava speaks of bhakti he means always shuddha bhakti, not aropa siddha bhakti, or sanga siddha bhakti.

This definition of bhakti was given by Srila Rupa Gosvami.

</td> </tr> </tbody></table>



To which I put forth the following to smash this crafty diversion once and for all.

 Quote:

<table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="100%"> <tbody><tr> <td style="border: 1px solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding-left: 3ex; padding-right: 3ex;" bgcolor="#e0e0e0"> Originally Posted by BD

Now here we have HDG A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami apparently caught in the act!! Is he a "real" Gaudiya Vaisnava?

Purport: Adi 4:21-22

In the Caitanya-caritamrta three kinds of devotional service are described-namely, bhakti (ordinary devotional service), suddha-bhakti (pure devotional service) and viddha-bhakti (mixed devotional service).

</td> </tr> </tbody></table>



And of course back to that original gaff,

"This prescription is not from Sri Caitanya or His empowered representatives from Vrindavan, who followed His teachings."

We see again, that according to this approach, one must also reject Srila Prabhupada from being among such empowered representatives who followed his teachings, because in FACT it was part of his prescription according to his direct words. Holy Aparadha Batman!

And here we have a perfect example of....Poisoning.

HDG AC Bhaktivedanta Swami comes to the west, claiming to be the empowered Diksa Guru and Acharya for the Gaudiya Sampradaya. This is the first we hear of such. He gives us a way to understand the essence of the message of the past acharyas, by offering instruction on the matter.

But some decide they can understand the past Acharya's without first understanding the most current.

So they find themselves in a no mans land, and begin to attack the disciples of the Acharya using snippets from the teachings of past acharyas out of context just to appear to have superior knowledge of the intricacies of the various terms and tattvas involved, when in fact, in context, the terms were appropriately applied, though they have other applications on different levels of vision which are equally true, though not for consideration according to the CONTEXT.

CONTEXT CONTEXT CONTEXT.

IF the context is preaching with the Acharya's blessings, the preaching is clearly defendable.

If the context is preaching for self-aggrandizement without search for truth but simply the presumption of superior knowledge, the preaching is easily smashed.

In this instance a person did not come among a group of peers to submissively receive and carefully share the truth with integrity.

It was simply walking up to Audarya Fellowship Forums, and marking it with hormones, trying to egg someone into a mental pissing match.

Now, ask yourself this, what Gaudiya Vaisnava Acharya would approve of such antics, which end up excluding A.C.Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada from membership in the group of "Gaudiya Vaisnavas" by directly implying he diminished the use of the word Bhakti, and giving evidence from past Acharya's to rest his case.

The poison in the some of those wells along Radha Kund during Kali Yuga is quite potent. Those who indiscriminately drink will get Shuddha bhakti also.

Between now and then, I dare not guess what the present state of spiritual turmoil such persons are in for, but to each their own, I call em as I see em, and buyer beware. Here be dragons and pirahhnas, lions, tigers, and bears, Maya is crafty in applying her wares, Beware aspiring Bhakta Beware.

bhaktatraveler · March 1, 2007

Dear Devarsi prabhu,

Your points are well taken. Indeed, Maya devi has a myriad of ways to mislead us.

However, I must ask ... just how effective are these kind of forums? Obviously, many people read what is written but do they take it seriously? Personally speaking, I take everything I read on internet forums with a big grain of salt. I am quite certain it is the case with most others as well, especially those that have a embodied Guru. Correct me if I am wrong though (therefore the question at the beginning of the paragraph). Now if that is the case indeed, any 'poison' that is being injected into these forums will have minimal effect, so do we really need to worry?

There are innocent people/devotees now and again looking in. That is who I try to reach. It is just sh-ts and giggles though, interactive TV.

But I have meet in real life some devotees I was posting to and each time we meet I was equally impressed with the person behind the cyber wall. I would not stop posting as I see fit, because a new devotee friend is just around the corrner. And I need all I can get. 1000's are not enough.

Hare Krsna, Caturbahu das Bhakti-raja