Executive Decision - No more Tattvavadi discussions for now

[Guest guest]

Dear devotees,

 

The discussion with the Tattvavadis, which was formerly about birth and

caste, and then later about Prabhupada's commentary on Gita 1.1, and

now about Madhva's omission on commenting on the Brahma-vimohana-lila

(and which tomorrow will be about something even more esoteric), has

now spilled out onto the Cyber-Maadhva Sangha. True to form, it is

being completely misrepresented to make it seem as if Gaudiyas are

making falsehoods against Maadhvas - nevermind that the whole thing

started with Maadhvas coming to attack Gaudiyas on this very forum.

 

This is generally been my experience with these Cyber-Maadhvas. They

are only too happy to point out all sorts of supposed "errors" in your

own guru which you are supposed to just happily accept, but if you say

anything by way of disagreement with their acharya, then they take it

as a personal slander against their sampradaya.

 

The individual who has had his postings moderated due to flaming and

rudeness has led the Cyber-Maadhva audience to believe he was censored

for no obvious reason. He obviously does not feel constrained by the

need to be honest. Nor does he seem to experience any inhibitions about

stirring up the Cyber-Maadhva audience over an issue that is tangential

to the discussion he intitiated here (probably because he could not win

that debate, and now wants something else to make trouble over). By the

way, as far as rejected postings are concerned, we keep copies of them,

flames included, for our permanent records. This is just in case

someone wants to make a public outcry over it.

 

To the best of my knowledge, Maadhvas don't allow Gaudiyas to defend

their own philosophy on Maadhva forums, what to speak of questioning

Madhva. Yet here on this Gaudiya forum, we allow Maadhvas to

participate freely, only to see that time and again they are more

interested in attacking Gaudiya Vaishnavism than in learning anything

from it. Culture dictates that when you are a guest in someone else's

home, you don't make yourself comfortable just to launch criticism

after criticism about the way your host dresses. Common sense also

dictates that you can't have a sensible discussion with someone who

covers both of his ears while insisting that you listen to what he

says, or with someone who keeps changing the topic so that he will have

a basis for which to keep up his criticism.

 

This discussion is going nowhere. There are some intelligent points

within to be sure, but they are buried within the same condescending,

dishonest, and evasive style I have observed amongst these Cyber-

Maadhvas time and again. These people are just trying to stir up

trouble. The kind of personal flames they have been sending to the

moderation staff lead me to believe that they lack the maturity to

engage in rational discourse. Consequently, I am declaring an end to

the BG 1.1 thread and all similar threads involving Tattvavadis or

Tattvavada until such time as our Cyber-Maadhva friends can cool off

for a bit.

 

Yes, they will accuse us of "censoring" them. Yes, they will say that

the Gaudiyas could not stand up to their "doubts." Yes, they will rant

and rave on their forums and accuse you of saying all sorts of things

that you never said. Just let them. It's their way. Simply because the

dog barks is no reason to get down on all fours and bark back.

 

We want thought-provoking discussion with some semblance of civility

and culture, but we aren't going to get it from these people. Please

understand that I also want these things, but I also have an obligation

to maximize the signal to noise ratio on this forum, and I can't wait

for something intelligent to come out of what is nothing more than

sectarian bickering from pseudo-pundits whose only knowledge of

Sanskrit is how to transliterate devanagari into itrans.

[Guest guest]

achintya, "krishna_susarla"

<krishna_susarla wrote:

I can't wait

> for something intelligent to come out of what is nothing more than

> sectarian bickering from pseudo-pundits whose only knowledge of

> Sanskrit is how to transliterate devanagari into itrans.

 

Sorry, that last part should read as "sectarian bickering from a pseudo-

pundit..." (singular).