Pariprashnena — Q&A Archive

>Organizing ones online activities may require the introduction of several new organisational habits into ones life, and probably some new attitudes as well.

Intelligently using the internet means organising ones time....so the issue addressed in your response is how well devotees can organise their devotional life and a change in attitude rather than the so-called evils of Facebook....

>I would say, that using internet resources _ intelligently_ is not as easy as many would hope.

Then learn how to do that and rejoice!!

Rasa 108 - You have a point.

I also see you and Mishra have commented on SRSs site. I think that was bold! I wouldnt have dared.

The dangers of Facebook should not be underestimated, but hardly preaching should be discouraged. ( They removed Hridayananda das Goswami from GBC after they have discovered that he has 3 accounts on Facebook! So there are dangers of social networking... I know I should be posting it in the Vedic jokes tread)

Using internet socializing sites such as Facebook to spread Krishna consciousness is for the most part like having a big part of good land at ones house, but driving a hundred miles away to a plot of land to grow your vegetables.

Of course many things can be engaged for the spreading of Krishna consciousness. But to ignore more readily available avenues in favor of less readily available ones - that is abuse of resources.
The internet is generally a less readily available resource than face to face communication (unless one is living somewhere in the middle of nowehere and the interent is their only option for socializing - which for most people is not the case).

I also think that interent communication can foster complacency in communication and can lead one to develop an inflated sense of competence, especially in such things as preaching.

For example, online, one always has the time and the opportunity to quickly look up a verse or purport - so the need to actually memorize them becomes relativized. If one doesnt actually know the scriptures one uses in preaching, then what kind of a preacher is one?!

In face to face communication, one has to deliver every argument and every scriptural support on the spot. Living up to that standard, one has the opportunity to actually see the relevance in what one is doing, and other people can see that one is a knowledgeable and trustworthy person - which helps them to take one and ones message more seriously.

But if people have reason to believe that one is basically building up a Potemkin village - and online, they have every reason to suspect so - then how are they to take one seriously? And how are they going to be inspired to study scriptures and learn relevant arguments themselves, if the ones they are learning from are suspicious of not being capable of that themselves?

I have had quite a bit of experience online with devotees. In several cases, it was as if I were communicating with two separate persons: one was the one writing a blog or posting at forums, appearing very knowledgeable and elevated and kind, while the other one that I got to know via emails and chats was merely a shadow of the first one.
I have felt very confused, but also disappointed by that duplicity.

[quote][cite] ccd:[/cite]They removed Hridayananda das Goswami from GBC after they have discovered that he has 3 accounts on Facebook! [/quote]

Is this true?

>Of course many things can be engaged for the spreading of Krishna consciousness. But to ignore more readily available avenues in favor of less readily available ones - >that is abuse of resources.

Your making the assumption that devotees ignore more readily available avenues...not necessarily the case - in fact many many devotees advertise and promote their preaching on Facebook - good example is Indradumnya Swami and many others who are actively preaching.

How often does what is depicted in the attached cartoon happen?

And if it is once, it is once too often.

[quote][cite] rasa108:[/cite]
Your making the assumption that devotees ignore more readily available avenues...[/quote]

And no, I am not. I said, "But to ignore more readily available avenues in favor of less readily available ones - that is abuse of resources."[br] This doesnt yet imply that I think that all devotees who in any way use the interent are ignoring other avenues. Just that if someone uses the internet while other, more readily available avenues can be utilized, then this is abuse of resources.[br]

[br][quote]but like anything in the material world - if it can be engaged for broadcasting Krsna consciousness, what is the problem?[/quote]

SRS points out, among other things, the absence of proper emotional exchanges in online communication. Such absence is a problem. He also points out how online services like Facebook make a person too available to others, involving them into more interactions than they can realistically handle. This is also a problem.[br]
I pointed out that online interactions can foster complacency in communication and can lead one to develop an inflated sense of competence. This, too, is a problem.

That reminds me of SPL story of 1967, when Prabhupada was interrupted during his writing bhajana in the middle of night:

Getting up from his desk, Prabhupada went to the front room but did not open the door: "Who is there?"
A young woman answered, "I want to speak to you."
"Come back later in the morning," Prabhupada told her.
He knew that in San Francisco, just as in New York, he would not always be able to write peacefully. Preaching in America meant having to tolerate just this-a crazy call in the middle of the night, tearing one away from ecstatic concentration on the pastimes of Lord Caitanya.

---------

> I have had quite a bit of experience online with devotees. In several cases, it was as if I were communicating with two separate persons: one was the one writing a blog or posting at forums, appearing very knowledgeable and elevated and kind, while the other one that I got to know via emails and chats was merely a shadow of the first one.
I have felt very confused, but also disappointed by that duplicity.

One simple explanation is that they took their content from elsewhere. E.g. our content is quoted in many blogs and forums.

[quote][cite] ccd:[/cite]The dangers of Facebook should not be underestimated, but hardly preaching should be discouraged. ( They removed Hridayananda das Goswami from GBC after they have discovered that he has 3 accounts on Facebook! So there are dangers of social networking... I know I should be posting it in the Vedic jokes tread)[/quote]

Obviously I was joking. You can not seriously discuss this in a wholesale fashion, moreover if the question is asked by rasa.[br][br]

In fact the question is a contradiction in principle, you are using an online social forum to ask if it is okay to use online social forums. [br][br]

Having said that it is important to keep it personal and no, I do not think it is even productive to restrict devotees from participation, but it should be used nicely. ysccd

[quote][cite] Baker:[/cite][quote][cite] ccd:[/cite]They removed Hridayananda das Goswami from GBC after they have discovered that he has 3 accounts on Facebook! [/quote]

Is this true?[/quote]

Even if it is a gist. there are some elements of truth in it.

>SRS points out, among other things, the absence of proper emotional exchanges in online communication. Such absence is a problem. He also points out how online services like >Facebook make a person too available to others, involving them into more interactions than they can realistically handle.

Its individual...like a knife, it can be used for something constructive or destructive. I think the preaching on Facebook and other forums is very valuable and far outweighs any mundane consideration that it may pose for some. Internet addiction is a fact of life, emails will always be a reality for most devotees....you can say that email can encourage gossip and an impersonal approach to interaction but who will not use email anymore? Even SRS and Niranjana Swami admit that they would not stop using it themselves....SRS actually mentions about sending an SMS to another Godbrother in the beginning of his presentation (instead of talking with him)...so lets face it, if used intelligently then there is no harm.

>I have had quite a bit of experience online with devotees. In several cases, it was as if I were communicating with two separate persons: one was the one writing a blog or posting at >forums, appearing very knowledgeable and elevated and kind, while the other one that I got to know via emails and chats was merely a shadow of the first one.
>I have felt very confused, but also disappointed by that duplicity.

This duplicity also exists in person....a devotee who gives class and appears very learned, realised and advanced but at home is a totally different person.

>I pointed out that online interactions can foster complacency in communication

Doubtful, since one objection by SRS is that devotees are communicating on Facebook too much. Actually without devotees networking - either online or on the phone or in person....there is less communication.

>can lead one to develop an inflated sense of competence

Agree with you on this one Baker ;-)

>In fact the question is a contradiction in principle, you are using an online social forum to ask if it is okay to use online social forums.

LOL

ccd>>In fact the question is a contradiction in principle, you are using an online social forum to ask if it is okay to use online social forums.

I like ccd he often hits the nail right on the head.

There are good points to online communication in that you can communicate globally and without timezone restrictions, however It cannot be a substitute for associating with devotees in person.

Lets face it back in the 70s Iskcon would never let you discuss what is often standard fare in an online forum. That is also partly due to the changing times, but the internet has done a lot to make Iskcon more accountable for its actions because its very easy for the dirty laundry to be hung out to dry in full public view, they can no longer hide it like they once could.

answering the question:
If your only devotional life is internet, yes, shut down the computer and go look for devotees
If it is a complement of your preaching and or devotional research, why give it up?

I mostly see criticism of the social networks and internet in general by people who feels control slips off their hands and fears open truth and free communication.

mishra>>I mostly see criticism of the social networks and internet in general by people who feels control slips off their hands and fears open truth and free communication.

Yes great point mishra, I agree. Its making hard for backward governments to keep their people suppressed so it has to be healthy when authorities know that if they misbehave the world will know about it.

Thanks misra.

[quote][cite] rasa108:[/cite]so lets face it, if used intelligently then there is no harm.[/quote]

This is obvious, isnt it? It is also well-known, I would say, that using internet resources _ intelligently_ is not as easy as many would hope.[br]
I remember, for example, reading an article in the local Hare Krishna magazine where a devotee complained about how the internet takes up so much of his time.[br]

[br]Organizing ones online activities may require the introduction of several new organisational habits into ones life, and probably some new attitudes as well. And as Mishra can tell you, not everyone is fluent with these things.[br][br]

[quote][cite] rasa108:[/cite]>I pointed out that online interactions can foster complacency in communication[br]

Doubtful, since one objection by SRS is that devotees are communicating on Facebook too much. Actually without devotees networking - either online or on the phone or in person....there is less communication.[/quote]

By "complacency in communication" I meant what I wrote about in rest of that sentence that you quoted and the sentences following it.[br]
And youve just set an example of such complacency by responding only to a small portion of what I said. :p[br][br]

In person, one has to deal with all the emotions, non-verbal expressions, interjections, requests to be allowed to finish a sentence and such. Online, it is easy to skip that (and directly or indirectly accuse the person of "quarrel and hypocrisy").

[quote][cite] VEDA:[/cite]One simple explanation is that they took their content from elsewhere. E.g. our content is quoted in many blogs and forums.[/quote]

Sure. But it does seem like using someone elses feathers to beautify oneself. Generally, this is considered a form of hypocrisy.[br][br]

Although I suppose that the whole issue can be seen from the perspective that all those "feathers" belong to God anyway, and the most one can do is borrow them from Him - so it is also pointless to hold it against others if they do that. [br]
At least they borrowed from God, as opposed to concocting things up on their own and presenting them as the path to the Absolute.

> all those "feathers" belong to God anyway, and the most one can do is borrow them from Him - so it is also pointless to hold it against others if they do that.

This is also an argument against anti-piracy organizations. :)

You convinced me. C U on the Facebook;-)

U r already there. SDG.

[quote][cite] VEDA:[/cite]> I have had quite a bit of experience online with devotees. In several cases, it was as if I were communicating with two separate persons: one was the one writing a blog or posting at forums, appearing very knowledgeable and elevated and kind, while the other one that I got to know via emails and chats was merely a shadow of the first one.
I have felt very confused, but also disappointed by that duplicity.

One simple explanation is that they took their content from elsewhere. E.g. our content is quoted in many blogs and forums.[/quote]

really Veda? Do u have examples.

Look up verbatim at http://www.veda.harekrsna.cz/rlinks2.htm

>I think that was bold! I wouldnt have dared.

I think it was bold of them to publish the comments!!

"Should devotees take part in social networking sites such as Facebook?"
IMHO, everything can be used in Krishna consciousness, even Facebook - if that is not against 4 regulative principles, but used for Krishna-conscious activites