Let Kids be Kids?

[RadheRade1657]

 

I'm honored to introduce everyone to this story [it should be done by Bollywood — or maybe it's actually a story derived from a Puranic story]:

"Marcelino Pan y Vino" [lit. Marcelino, Bread and Wine] (aka The Miracle of Marcelino) is a 1955 Spanish film. It was a resounding international success, so much so that other countries have produced versions of it. There has been an Italian, a Filipino, a Japanese-French television series based on the movie. The story, although heavily revised and somewhat modernized in both the book and film, dates back to an old medieval legend, one of many gathered together in a volume by Alfonso el Sabio

Plot

The story revolves around Marcelino, a young child abandoned as a baby on the steps of a monastery in eighteenth-century Spain. After trying, and failing, to find his parents, the monks realize that he is an orphan, and after searching unsuccessfully for someone to adopt him, decide to raise the child themselves. Marcelino grows into a cute, well-meaning, but mischievous and lonely boy who is always innocently getting into trouble. He has been warned by the monks not to visit the monastery attic, where a supposed bogeyman lives, but he ventures upstairs anyway, sees the supposed bogeyman, and tears off back down the stairs.

At a festival, Marcelino unintentionally causes havoc when he accidentally lets some animals loose, and the new local mayor, whom the monks would not let adopt the child because of his coarse behavior, uses the incident as an excuse to try to shut down the monastery.

Given the silent treatment by the monks, Marcelino gathers up the courage to once again enter the attic, where he sees, not a bogeyman, but a beautiful statue of Christ on the Cross. Remarking that the statue looks hungry, Marcelino steals some bread and wine and offers it to the statue, which miraculously comes to life, descends from the Cross, and eats and drinks what the boy has brought him. Eventually, the statue becomes Marcelino's best friend and confidante and begins to give him religious instruction. For his part, Marcelino realizes that the statue is Christ.

The monks know something is strange when they notice bread and wine disappearing, and arrange to spy on Marcelino. One day, the statue notices that Marcelino is pensive and brooding instead of happy, and tells him that he would like to give him a reward for his kindness. Marcelino answers, "I want only to see my mother, [she had died] and to see Yours after that". The statue cradles Marcelino in its arms, tells Marcelino to sleep - and Marcelino dies happy.

The monks witness the miracle through a crack in the attic door, and burst in just in time to see the dead Marcelino bathed in a heavenly glow. The statue returns to its place on the Cross, and Marcelino is buried underneath the chapel and venerated by all who visit the now flourishing monastery-turned-shrine.

The main story is told in flashback, and bookended by a more modern story in which a monk (played by Fernando Rey) visits a sick, possibly dying, girl, and tells her the story of Marcelino for inspiration. The film ends with the monk entering the now completely remodeled chapel in the monastery during Mass, and saying to the crucifix once kept in the attic: "We have been speaking about you, O Lord,", and then, to Marcelino's grave, which is situated nearby, "And about you, too, Marcelino".

The story is said to have many symbolic meanings, but is usually just enjoyed as a quietly moving religious fable, although some have seen a sinister meaning in the fact that Marcelino virtually asks to die and Christ grants his wish. The film remains one of the most famous and successful foreign films of the mid 1950's.

 

I saw that movie a few years back. I thought it was sweet I think, and I might be wrong, that the Catholic Church canonized the boy in the story as a saint. ((I could be wrong though... it's been years since I've read a book on saints))

[rsrowland]

I think perhaps the best thing to do is for everyone to reach out and be compassionate in their own "circles". This means family, friends, towns, countries, etc. I never give any donations or foodstuff to Africa, or India, or Mexico, etc. These are people and places not within my own realm of immediate and face to face influence. Help and teach where it matters most...home. If everyone could actually be compassionate to their own first and get their own "houses" in order...THEN we can reach out internationally.

 

>>>And I support you in trying to make these kids happy and I think the holy name would also give them much happiness.<<<

 

I disagree. This is the same line of BS that fundie Xians use to shove their brand of "religion" down kid's throats. Heck, the brain isn't fully formed until age 18 and even then, the rational frontal lobe isn't 100% until age 23 on average. Do you really think chanting some mumbo jumbo is gonna help them if they don't fully comprehend the why? No...let kids be kids.

[bhaktajan]

Almost all politicians are Lawyers. Better they are Dentists.

 

But my point is that the basis of law and thus economics and thus liberty etc. must originate with child welfare.

 

Yet the world market which is full of mutual dog-eat-dog cheaters are based on pleasing adults first. Simplistic proposal I know.

 

But the last century showed that as fast as the First world could educate their country's youth they also sent the best educated offto war along with the trappings of the best that technology could create, war after war, each country taking turns at bat.

 

A "Constitution of the Human Babies Rights" must be drafted--the same rights would extent to all Adults too--but the difference is that the unborn/the baby/teen/student are represented by 'Inalienable' Rights, not just as a consequential State mandated obligation to be protected by some adjunct agency.

 

Newborns should be announced & paraded & schooled as a 'little buddha' all.

[Beggar]

I remember reading about ten years ago how Mother Therressa noted that even the poorest people who she worked to help in Kolkata had a certain dignity about them that was almost entirely lacking in the West. She attributed this to a spiritual poverty that most Westerners were suffering from living in a culture of the most gross materialism possible.

[Beggar]

 

 

 

Cher monsieur, s'abstiennent svp à signaler cette image à l'avenir pour elle me conduit graduellement au bord de la santé d'esprit!

 

 

[indulekhadasi]

 

There are gradations of poverty in India and the Adivasi tribals are at the bottom of the ladder. This is a documented fact. It doesn't mean the children at ekachakra aren't poor. But your claim that they are more poor than adivasi tribals isn't accurate.

 

From an objective point of view the Adivasis are the poorest class in India. I have researched and worked against poverty in India for more than 10 years. I am sure you feel you know more, but I am equally certain I have studied the details of poverty in India more than you. I am sorry if that hurts you. I don't say it to try to make your opinion lesser. It is just that it is inaccurate and there are studies that have been done that prove this. Poverty is everywhere in India, but even in that poverty there are gradations. For example those who are facing starvation are worse off than those who are just poor. Those who are illiterate are worse off then those who are studying in government schools, etc.

 

I don't doubt what you say actually. I don't feel I know more, but I feel I know something also. I do agree with everything you wrote in this last post. No need to get defensive.

But I still think you should have some harinams in addition to toy giving. It is so satisfying to see smiles in the faces of these kids, isn't it?

Hare Krishna and Jai Nitai

indulekhadasi

[Redsox]

May Krishna give us the ability to appreciate those who serve others so willingly. May He fill us with love for another fellow human being, may He free us from the samsara, may Harinama allow us all, including poor children become free from our binding prarabdha karma.

[Sarva gattah]

 

While sitting at your computer in your luxurious house or office, you are writing a message that impoverished 6 year old starving children should be "shown the futility of seeking lasting happiness and fulfillment in mundane life" rather than helped. In this particular case you are an idiot. I am ashamed that a human being could say such a thing.

 

If you really meant to say all of this about the spoiled children in your house, then I could understand it. But when you aim it at particular starving children in a third world country, there is nothing positive I can say.

 

Hari bol!! Possitive actions speak louder than words, anyone can sit back on their armchairs and pick fault, but only a true Sadhu will do something to improve things

[Kulapavana]

Altough Prabhupada often spoke about doing charity work in less than ethusiastic terms, he also emphatically declared that nobody within a walking distance to our temples in India should go hungry. I do not think we are doing enough to turn that desite into reality.

 

I fully symphatize with JND position in this discussion. The fake renunciation of the world displayed by the pampered western devotees of all types is tolerable only when their fakery is not hurting others.

[Redsox]

 

The fake renunciation of the world displayed by the pampered western devotees of all types is tolerable only when their fakery is not hurting others.

:smash:

 

Sage on the left, World on the right.

[Murali_Mohan_das]

I don't see anything in the quote from Thakur Bhaktivinoda about buying toys for "starving" kids. You may think those kids are starving, but I can say, just from the pictures, they look a lot healthier than a lot of my children's classmates.

 

BhaktiK Maharaj. I'm sorry if I have offended you. I have heard about your Republican, conservative viewpoints. I'm sorry if I don't share them.

 

If I were to go to India to live in a mud hut, that would make me a poseur like JN Prabhu. I was born here. There is plenty of suffering here. Even *more* tragically, the people around me are suffering while believing that they are living the "good life".

 

As for poverty, it's very relative isn't it? It has everything to do with how wealth is measured. I may make a comfortable salary (though I work for government and not private industry), but by the day before my next paycheck is due, I'm lucky if I still have $200 in my bank account. After paying for health care (which we almost never use), taxes, child care, auto insurance, food, rent, etc., there's almost nothing left.

 

Who's rich and who's poor? Those who have a taste for the Holy Name are the richest of all.

[Murali_Mohan_das]

JN's arrogance is plain to see for all. Clearly he has some delusions of grandeur.

 

 

I don't doubt what you say actually. I don't feel I know more, but I feel I know something also. I do agree with everything you wrote in this last post. No need to get defensive.

But I still think you should have some harinams in addition to toy giving. It is so satisfying to see smiles in the faces of these kids, isn't it?

Hare Krishna and Jai Nitai

indulekhadasi

[Jahnava Nitai Das]

 

You may think those kids are starving, but I can say, just from the pictures, they look a lot healthier than a lot of my children's classmates.

Adios amigo. You have offended those children here for the last time. You can offend me, you can offend my religion, and you can offend "the vaishnavas", but when you want to offend starving children get out of here and don't come back.

 

You are a disgrace to the Vaishnava religion.

[indulekhadasi]

 

Adios amigo. You have offended those children here for the last time. You can offend me, you can offend my religion, and you can offend "the vaishnavas", but when you want to offend starving children get out of here and don't come back.

 

You are a disgrace to the Vaishnava religion.

 

So you think offending the Vaishnavas is ok? To help the starving kids you need to blaspheme Vaishnavas? I don't think thats nice. Vaishnava aparadha is NOT ok. Even a slight laugh at a Vaishnava can make a person undergo lifetimes of suffering.

[Jahnava Nitai Das]

 

So you think offending the Vaishnavas is ok? To help the starving kids you need to blaspheme Vaishnavas? I don't think thats nice. Vaishnava aparadha is NOT ok. Even a slight laugh at a Vaishnava can make a person undergo lifetimes of suffering.

 

I never said what is nice or not nice, I simply said I won't interfere as a moderator when someone criticizes my religion, my "vaishnavas" or myself. Those things don't bother me at all. I really don't get offended when a follower of Sai Baba says he doesn't like Prabhupada's teachings, or when a shaivite says he doesn't like Krishna being called supreme. Those are opinions that everyone has a right to have.

 

But when someone wants to offend starving children in India by saying his son's classmates in Santa Cruz are less healthy then them, at that point I won't let that person be around here. A little philosophy is dangerous in the hands of a fool.

 

 

Murali Mohan said: "You may think those kids are starving, but I can say, just from the pictures, they look a lot healthier than a lot of my children's classmates."

 

[Avinash]

 

You may think those kids are starving, but I can say, just from the pictures, they look a lot healthier than a lot of my children's classmates.

I have not seen your children's classmates. Therefore, I will not say anything about them. But I have spent lots of time in Orissa for doing geological and geophysical surveys. In the process, I met local people there. I can say that tribal kids in Orissa are really very poor. In fact you will find lots of such poor people in India. I personally have seen such poverty in Orissa, Bihar, Jharkhand and West Bengal.

Please do not go by their photographs. May be these children were given nice looking clothes to wear before being photographed. It does not mean that they have lots of clothes.

If it is true that lots of your children's class mates are less healthy than the tribal kids in Orissa, then those classmates of your children and these kids in Orissa both need to be given proper nourishment.

 

 

As for poverty, it's very relative isn't it? It has everything to do with how wealth is measured. I may make a comfortable salary (though I work for government and not private industry), but by the day before my next paycheck is due, I'm lucky if I still have $200 in my bank account. After paying for health care (which we almost never use), taxes, child care, auto insurance, food, rent, etc., there's almost nothing left.

 

But there is something called basic necessity. Food is a basic necessity. I am not talking here about eating in expensive hotels. I am talking about eating just enough to survive. There are many poor people in India, who do not get even that much. Those who know me personally say that I live very simple life. But I have known incidents in which a woman was willing to sell her son for an amount, which I very easily spend in one day. It does not mean that the woman did not care for her son. It also does not mean that she did it merely out of greed for money. Rather, she did it because she thought that the buyer of her son will be able to give her son food to eat daily. I also have read an incident in which a mother was willing to give her son for adoption for free. The reason is again the same i.e. she thought that she could not give enough food to her son, so let somebody else adopt her son, so that he can at least survive.

 

There are many children in India who do not get even the cheapest food, which is enough for them just to keep them alive. That is why, dying out of malnourishment is not any strange news here. It is sad but it is true. Poverty is relative. But these children are really poor.

 

 

Who's rich and who's poor? Those who have a taste for the Holy Name are the richest of all.

You are talking about symantics here. Giving taste for the Holy Name is good. But, for chanting the Holy Name also, you need to be alive. And why treat Holy Name and food as mutually exclusive? Giving Holy Name does not mean keeping one starving.

[Kulapavana]

Prabhu JNdas, Murali has no clue how tough it is for these kids in India. He does not have to watch their misery day in and day out like you do. Seeing such suffering makes us different. Our heart melts and we cant stand to listen to people who while living a comfortable life in California think they have answers to everybody's problems. It is easy to philosophise on a full stomach. Even the worst poverty in US is nothing compared to poverty in India. Once you see children searching the trash for something to eat you are never the same. You will not see that in US.

 

Murali is not a bad guy by any means. He is just young and inexperienced in life. Have some compassion for him too. The heart must also be unlocked, just like the mind. Otherwise we are simply prisoners in the jail of our own limitations.

[indulekhadasi]

 

I never said what is nice or not nice, I simply said I won't interfere as a moderator when someone criticizes my religion, my "vaishnavas" or myself. Those things don't bother me at all. I really don't get offended when a follower of Sai Baba says he doesn't like Prabhupada's teachings, or when a shaivite says he doesn't like Krishna being called supreme. Those are opinions that everyone has a right to have.

 

But when someone wants to offend starving children in India by saying his son's classmates in Santa Cruz are less healthy then them, at that point I won't let that person be around here. A little philosophy is dangerous in the hands of a fool.

 

But the Vaishnavas aren't "yours". How can you tolerate Vaishnava aparadha? It is not something to be tolerated.

 

I am in total agreement with what you are doing for the kids now that I am getting a fuller picture here of what you are actually doing. But to say Vaishnava aparadha is better (can be tolerated) than starving kid aparadha is a little bit too much. Both are very very bad. Neither should be tolerated.

[indulekhadasi]

 

Prabhu JNdas, Murali has no clue how tough it is for these kids in India. He does not have to watch their misery day in and day out like you do. Seeing such suffering makes us different. Our heart melts and we cant stand to listen to people who while living a comfortable life in California think they have answers to everybody's problems. It is easy to philosophise on a full stomach. Even the worst poverty in US is nothing compared to poverty in India. Once you see children searching the trash for something to eat you are never the same. You will not see that in US.

 

Murali is not a bad guy by any means. He is just young and inexperienced in life. Have some compassion for him too. The heart must also be unlocked, just like the mind. Otherwise we are simply prisoners in the jail of our own limitations.

 

I agree with Kulapavana prabhu totally here. Unfortunately Murali Mohan prabhu hasn't even gotten the chance to go to these type of places and see the kids there.

[Beggar]

 

Adios amigo. You have offended those children here for the last time. You can offend me, you can offend my religion, and you can offend "the vaishnavas", but when you want to offend starving children get out of here and don't come back.

 

You are a disgrace to the Vaishnava religion.

 

Methinks Murali Mohan just got banned.

[indulekhadasi]

 

Methinks Murali Mohan just got banned.

 

Is that so? Well you are right, seems like it.

 

I wonder who will post on my threads now. He was one of the few interested.

 

Fall of the jiva issues are going on and on and when it comes to Nityananda Prabhu it is just "Put Him on the back burner." It gets annoying for me sometimes.

[Beggar]

 

Is that so? Well you are right, seems like it.

 

I wonder who will post on my threads now. He was one of the few interested.

 

Fall of the jiva issues are going on and on and when it comes to Nityananda Prabhu it is just "Put Him on the back burner." It gets annoying for me sometimes.

 

We could start a thread on how Murali Mohan Prabhu fell from Audarya Fellowship Spiritual Discussions. In one sense since spiritual discussions are going on eternally, then he is only dreaming that he got banned. No wait a minute maybe I'm dreaming it? Or maybe it's the dream of the Maha-Moderator?

[Jahnava Nitai Das]

 

How can you tolerate Vaishnava aparadha? It is not something to be tolerated.

Unfortunately the world doesn't run on the "aparadha" belief system. From the beginning of these forums I have made it clear that this is not a vaishnava only forum. As such we do not ban people based on some "aparadha" that they have committed towards "vaishnavas", or towards a particular religion. In the world people are going to disagree with you and your belief system. We all have to be mature enough to accept their right to disagree with our beliefs, even if we think it is a "vaishnava aparadha".

 

 

But to say Vaishnava aparadha is better (can be tolerated) than starving kid aparadha is a little bit too much. Both are very very bad. Neither should be tolerated.

 

On this forum there is no ban on vaishnava aparadha, as it is all a subjective opinion. One's person's vaishnava is another person's rascal (just put a follower of Sai Baba, Swaminarayan and Prabhupada together in the same thread).

 

There are bans for offensive statements in general (nothing to do with whether one is a vaishnava or not), and that is a higher morality whether you are able to understand that or not. Regulating offensive statements is more objective then regulating "vaishnava aparadha".

 

Its basically the same with religions. If one vaishnava has the right to say Sai Baba is a rascal, then the Sai Baba follower has the right to say the vaishnava is a rascal. Unless one person is willing to apply rules to their own religion and own faith, they cannot expect other religions to be censored just because it offends them.

 

With that in mind, I do not moderate what you consider to be vaishnava aparadha, or insult to vaishnavism. For that one would need to go to a vaishnava only website or forum, which at present doesn't really exist.

[indulekhadasi]

 

 

There are bans for offensive statements in general (nothing to do with whether one is a vaishnava or not), and that is a higher morality whether you are able to understand that or not. Regulating offensive statements is more objective then regulating "vaishnava aparadha".

 

 

 

I see what you are saying here. But Vaishnava aparadha is also a type of offense. So I hope you are banning people from commiting any type of offenses. But I think they need some sort of a warning also. It is then up to them to change.

[shiva]

Jahnava Nitai is and has been doing exemplary service for many years. He could easily remove his operation from where it is and go to some well off area and "preach" to well off people. He could easily avoid the disease ridden people, their misery, their lack of ability to aid him in his mission, and set his sights on gaining a reputation in Bangalore or Mumbai or New Delhi as a great bhakta, he could spend his time eating luxurious prasad and being worshipped for nothing more then speaking flowery words and affecting an expected pose towards fat greedy businessmen and their families who look for "sadhus" to worship in hope of some pratistha and sukriti. If Jahnava Nitai really wanted to stroke his ego he could do like so many other supposed gurus and guru wannabes.

 

Murali has shown in the past that often his words are coming from a place of pratistha. He often just wants to be honored as an advanced spiritualist, so he will often say things that he thinks will get him that honor. If his words provoke people to criticize him, then in order to defend his pratistha he oftentimes will say things trying to convince others that he is right, even if he knows he is wrong.

 

In this current flare-up we see what I believe has been a problem with the way many devotees think children need to be treated, especially seen manifest in the way gurukulas were run in the past, and also some in the present. What I mean is that people project their own views of what they think adults should be doing to achieve "Krishna Consciousness", and then force that onto children. The adults get to choose to follow a renunciative life, the children are forced to live like hard core brahmacaris, all day long they are either studying, chanting, or working, without any time to be children. The result we have seen for years, most of the children raised like that develop the vision that vaisnavism equals unhappiness due to being unhappy children, most of them end up wanting nothing to do with vaisnavism. But does ISKCON learn? Some of the devotees have learned, they won't send their kids to those schools which are run like prisons, they won't force their children into being hard care renunciative "sadhus". But we still see that ISKCON is operating schools which do that, of course in the name of those programs being "authorized" in some way or another. Yet the people who run these schools of course would not like to have had their own childhood turned into a forced prison camp, but they are eager to convince others that they should turn their children over to them in the name of their childrens salvation (in reality it is money they really want).

 

So I see Murali as a person with that same type of vision that has been and is all too common amongst gaudiya vaisnavas, that children are better off living a life of the full time sadhaka brahmacari. With that vision Murali has a hard time seeing how toys will help those children, after all aren't they better off learning that the material world is a place of misery, aren't they better off hearing someone say "Hare Krishsna" then playing? Isn't all they really need is a mat to sleep on, enough food to keep body and soul together, and to be free from all influences of non spiritual society? Isn't the life of a brahmacari sadhaka really what those kids are living? Why should their life of renunciation be contaminated? All they need to perfect their life now is to chant, they have the rest down pat. If they are educated they will simply get caught in the rat race of material society, better they stay how they are for their own good. Murali may not have those exact thoughts, but it is that mentality which he has displayed, which he has been indoctrinated into by others with the same mentality. As Jahnava Nitai pointed out, it is usually a belief held by hypocrits, usually held by people who weren't forced into an unhappy deprived childhood like that which they see as good, although I am sure you can find ex-gurukulis who were subjected to such unhappy childhoods but have still fallen to the indoctrination of belief that for the welfare of their souls, children should be deprived of a happy childhood.