Pariprashnena — Q&A Archive

I think the essential is the attitude, that is, why you are being critic, if it is for some ulterior personal motivation, then watch out.

Just a question: Isnt disriminating already an offence?
I heard somewhere that if you only look at the bad and wrong youll only see the bad and wrong and youll be blind for the good and right. And when you only look at the good and right youll only see the good and right and youll be blind for the bad and wrong (or something like that) :)

Somewhere we are forgetting (not everyone) that we just have to stick with doing the Harinama Sankirtanas.

If I have made an offence with this comment please forgive me for my ignorance...

ys, Servant Krsna

Re discrimination - all places where viveka is mentioned (esp. SB 11.24.2): http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=viveka+site%3Avedabase.net&btnG=Google+Search

But was/is it allright to discriminate even spiritually?

my question remains, please someone....

being more humble than a blade of grass, more tolerant than... you know.

"But was/is it allright to discriminate even spiritually?"

Not just alright but essential. Two classes of devotees dont discriminate - the Kanistha and the Uttama bhaktas.

The challenge here is to learn the proper means of discrimination according to guru, sadhu and sastra. So long as we use Krishnas criteria to discriminate then discrimination is helpful. And i think we should always keep in mind that we are students and be open to advice and even correction if needed.

Original question: "One can be totally blind to authority and make the mistakes like in the early acarya ISKCON times, or start criticizing all that moves out of anger, envy, etc
How to achieve the balance?"

Dont be blind to the past errors. Dont repeat them. Dont fall into the trap of frustration and hopeless cynicism by putting one foot in front of the other along the correct path. Absorption and satisfaction in doing the right thing will displace the despondency with which anger, envy and so many other negative things thrive. And always chant Hare Krishna (loudly if possible). Thats the best advice I can think to give.

Discrimination and making offenses are terms mutually excluded.

Discrimination means to ponder with good intelligence and scriptural evidence.

Making offenses: first we have to find someone to whom we can "blaspheme" or commit offences, unfortunately generally it all sums up in dissension ending in being catalogued, the person in power "has been offended" and the weaker devotee in the food chain is a demon with hell as the next destination.

blasphemy and offences arent the same thing. you can blaspheme krsna or srila prabhupada (if youre mad enough), but you can offend anybody quite easily - and thats something we should try to avoid like hell.

if you criticize someone in a constructive and proper way and that person labels you an offender, then hes offending you, and hell go to (or through) hell for it. that may not help in your present situation, though.

ys phani.

I am referring to what is commonly known and used as weapon of character destruction WCD: vaishnava aparadha, not simply offence as in the english term meaning.
You know what I mean, do you?

yes, i know what you mean, but i think you were using the term "offense" too loosely. offenses are a serious matter and even when talking about them i prefer to be clear.

not everything labeled "vaisnava aparadha" is an offense, and quite possibly using the term as a "WCD" is. on the other hand its easy to commit real offenses, against managers or others, and thats a bad and dangerous thing to do.

i dont know how involved you still are with these people youre writing about; is it possible to get into more detail, what you did or said, and what their reaction was?

ys phani.

I have been sooo involved, up to the neck for almost 30 years, I know what I am talking about.

It is just that every time one wants to start to talk about what is wrong, the same old story, called it offenses, aparadhas or whatever technical term you want, wise and politically correct people nod their heads, aha!

And then for no reason (or is there one?) start backfiring at the "offender".

Ask yourself why you do not want to go deeper in the problems, why you avoid discussing, what to speak of taking action.

This counter attack character assassination is usually produced and encouraged by the same people that are provoking the problems or not solving them.

And, sad as it is, promoted by what Wilhelm Reich calls "little men".

And I am not talking about problems that could arise from being not perfect (I myself know, have been, except for GBC, in all managerial positions).

I am talking about grave errors, profound mistakes anchored in philosophical deviances, and usually based on the lower modes of nature.

Talking about real felons that hold positions and are protected by the establishment.

That, is very serious matter, my friend, and cannot be dismissed by a "we are imperfect, Prabhu" type of approach.

I agree that there are a few individuals that go around criticizing all that moves and you can see, they even use foul language and

of course have no philosophical solid ground: It is easy to see that they are driven by anger, etc

But to drop all of us that try to discuss and make devotees conscious of the defects with the intent of helping this movement... no, I do not

accept you people that dismiss us. You are throwing the baby with the bath water; you are the ones really responsible for the big problems,

as you are, in the name of sanity, being the ones that support the wrongdoers.

Do you want to really help ISKCON? Help devotees. Start being brave.

yeah, the usual mentality is:
haribol, i am going for a japawalk...

Hare Krishna.

Tamala Krsna: Burnt off. [break] What is the way to draw the line
between the following three things: blasphemy, fault-finding, and
calling a spade a spade?

Prabhupada: A spade a spade... Just like I am saying that "What you
are? You are small fig only." That is reality. And what is the other?

Tamala Krsna: The other is fault-finding and...

Prabhupada: Fault-finding, that is another fault, that... vranam
icchanti, maksika vranam icchanti, madhum icchanti(?) Just like the
flies, they are finding out where is sore, and the bees, they are
finding out where there is honey. So two animals, they have got two
business: fault-finding and collecting the good things. These are
two... Just like creature. They are two classes. Similarly, there are
many rascals who are simply fault-finding.

Tamala Krsna: And blasphemy?

Prabhupada: Blasphemy means you have good qualities, but still, I am
defaming you.

Tamala Krsna: So the saintly person tends to overlook the bad
qualities and see the good ones.

Prabhupada: Yes.

>>> Ref. VedaBase => Morning Walk -- February 6, 1976, Mayapura

I found myself in a similar dilemma. Instead of discriminating I would use word questioning.
[cite] [/cite]
My resolution was that because we are not in the exactly Vedic culture the etiquette can be somewhat modified. Thus one may question seniors and even spiritual authority, but the attitude to this should be of genuine desire to help and again trinad api sunicena in the same time.
[cite] [/cite]
We do not live in a hierarchical society, and should not pretend that seniors are purfict. Its not middle ages. Its good to speak up, but [b] in private, with good intentions and with [i] at least [/i] external humility.[/b]
[cite] [/cite]
Unless you want to achieve an opposite result...

Bhakti Vikas Maharaj wrote this on his email sangha:
[br][br][quote]
This answer by quoting Srila Prabhupada gives the key to the answer for the
query: "How to understand Maharajs lectures?"[br][br]

I just wrote to one devotee:[br][br]

"Vaisnava education is superficial if it does not aim to impart discernment
of maya both inside and outside of ISKCON, if it overlooks or promotes
insitution-friendly misconceptions -- such as that philosophical deviations
of devotees in the role of gurus should not be addressed or even considered
as such for fear of Vaisnava-apar'e4dha. Education should be in Vaisnava
philosophy, not ISKCON philosophy--between which there should be no
difference."[br][br]

I invite others on this forum, who live within ISKCON with eyes open yet not
making offenses, to address these points further.[br][br][/quote]

Another example of this is a story of how Srila Prabhupada was approached by a devotee from ?Miami temple. He said that there is one devotee who he just can not stand. Everything he does - he does wrong. Srila Prabhupada asked him to see at least one good quality of that devotee. I always try to do just that, to see at least one good quality, its natural to see faults but if we can see at least one good quality (example of discrimination..).. Just like in these case of Bhaktivikasbhiksu - he gives such a nice Sunday feast classes...

The simple method given to us devotees would be to learn the symptoms of the three modes, apply it as simple as possible, then preach the problem off/away even if it would mean calling a spade a spade or a thief a thief!!
Why not???????
easy said and not so easy done, however Its always done well! Krsna says: Im the knowledge know-er and the known" Why not teach/preach it?

Let people get their own conclusions, without the fear of "aparadha", "not humble", etc. Vaishnava aparadha is dangerous, but probably there is not much opportunity to incur on it.
Shouldnt we be prepared to "offend" whilst denouncing nonsense rather than to be gullible in the name of humility?

[quote][cite] afflelou:[/cite]One can be totally blind to authority and make the mistakes like in the early acarya ISKCON times, or start criticizing all that moves out of anger, envy, etc
How to achieve the balance?[/quote]

In my experience, there are some areas where there is a lot of potential for conflict and offenses, and that it is therefore prudent to take special care in those areas:

1. Humor
What is funny to one person might be offensive to another. It pays off to be very careful when trying to be humorous. In order for intended humor to come accross as humor, both the speaker and the listener(s) need to have a comparable knowledge and interests, and they need to know this about eachother, they need to be on reasonably good terms with eachother, or the atmosphere of the individual situation should be relaxed enough.

For example, I once, with the intent to be humorous, commented to a brahmacari how much he ate. He frowned at me, and it was a frown I will not forget anytime soon. I know another brahmacari who would have laughed at this comment of mine, but this one did not.
Trying to be humorous about the specifics of devotee life (either ones own or of others) takes very much tact, even though it might seem easy enough to be humorous about it.

I am finding that a good way to gauge someones sense of humor is to watch what they laugh at. At lectures or in kirtan breaks, there is usually some conversation going on, and sooner or later someone says something that some people will laugh at, but others wont. See which group one is in, thats a way to find ones own reference group better.

2. Philosophy
Bringing in heavy philosophical topics is often the nr.1 conversation killer. So one needs to be super careful when to bring up such topics, or when to even just hint at them.

Inquiring into the details of someones beliefs, understandings and practices can easily come across as questioning the legitimacy of them, and as such be disrespectful. Even though one inquired about them for the purposes of simply getting to know the other person better.

Same with pointing out contradictions or inconsistencies in what the other person said. Generally, the more unacceptable, awkward and inconsistent the other persons statements seem to one, the less one should point this out or comment on if one wishes to avoid conflict and offense.

Requesting scriptural evidence is another delicate point. Sometimes devotees claim "it says so in scripture", but requesting them to provide the exact reference for their claims is a potential bomb. Before asking someone for such a scriptural reference, its prudent to check oneself, phrase ones request very politely, and rethink whether to make that request at all.

3. Offers and promises
Are an easy to spot area. People in general may be eager to offer and promise things, but not be so eager to deliver them. To avoid conflict and resentment, it pays off to accept offers and promises only from those people for whom one is reasonably sure they will deliver or whom one wishes to be friends with. Same care is needed for making offers and promises oneself.

4. Familiarity
Is in relation to all of the above. It is all too easy to assume too much familiarity. This can show in persistently sitting down next to the same person, chatting them up when one incidentally meets them in a public space, readily talking about private issues, readily bringing up heavy philosophical topics or otherwise readily bringing in philosophical analysis.

Its worth it to make and effort to try to avoid assuming too much familiarity. A good question to ask oneself: "Am I really on such close terms with this person that what I am about to say would comfortably fit into our current relationship?"

Anyway, this is what I have been able to glean from my experience so far, I hope it may be helpful to others too.

One thing I dont yet know how to deal with effectively is this: If someone is too nosy or too bossy for ones comfort, this can be tricky. I have noticed that directly defending oneself, excusing oneself from the conversation, or clearly stating one isnt comfortable talking about what the other person brought up often doesnt end well.

If its done in a detached mood the chance itll work is higher.

Or if you give out nice prasadam at the end of the session...

Interestingly enough spiritual questions and answers are the life blood of devotee nourishment and loving reciprocal relationships.Discrimination is a blessing,which is especially given to those empowered to spread sri chaitanya mahaprabhus movement which is and was intended to be a preaching mission.We are not meant to be a mundane group intent on making a comfortable situation within the material world.Therefore most facility is to be given to the front line preachers,whose sole duty is to preach to the innocent , the curious and those who are possessing a humble attitude to their many instructing spiritual siksa gurus.
Thus this vedic inspired ISKCON culture,left to us by his divine grace srila Prabhupada is potent in my humble opinion when certain prerequisite conditions amongst devotees are present.Envy is incompatible amongst those whose duty it is to preach.Thus neophytes are gradually elevated by the senior devotees loving encouragement and loving chastisement both these must be present for us to progress positively and dynamically.