Pariprashnena — Q&A Archive

First think about this: Since you seem to consider many Christians as authorities, will any answer mean any change in your life?

All theistic traditions stress that its better to listen to Gods words in sastra than to human opinions contradicting them. Wheres it stated that torture is love? Never heard of that. If one cant change in the sense of metanoia and be released, the torture has no meaning. I gave my understanding of eternal (aionios) earlier. Afaik, eternal hell isnt part of any official Creed.

My fear is that in order to align myself with the Absolute Truth, I might have to do something I find repugnant.

CCD said that "yes, I must".

This is not about Christians, I just gave an example of something I find repugnant.

In some ways, I just dont see much difference between some forms of Christianity and GV: both seem to demand that a person do things they find repugnant.

>> All theistic traditions stress that its better to listen to Gods words in sastra than to human opinions contradicting them.

But how can I know whether I understand scriptures correctly?
My understanding often seems to be completely at odds with that of the devotees, and this to the point that it seems I would have to do something repugnant if I were to accept their view.

> both seem to demand that a person do things they find repugnant.

Thats news to me, I never had to do anything like that so far. Please clarify.

> But how can I know whether I understand scriptures correctly?

If your understanding agrees with gss. One needs to learn the proper siddhanta and practice. Its possible only in Vaisnava sangha.

> My understanding often seems to be completely at odds with that of the devotees, and this to the point that it seems I would have to do something repugnant if I were to accept their view.

Examples needed.

[quote][cite] VEDA:[/cite]> both seem to demand that a person do things they find repugnant.[br]

Thats news to me, I never had to do anything like that so far. Please clarify.[/quote]

You dont find it repugnant to believe it is love that God tortures the majority of His children? And yes, if you want to join the Catholic and many other Christian churches, this is what you have to believe.[br]
[br]

[quote]> But how can I know whether I understand scriptures correctly?[br]

If your understanding agrees with gss.[/quote]

Who decides whether my understanding is in such agreement with gss or not?[br][br]

[quote]One needs to learn the proper siddhanta and practice. Its possible only in Vaisnava sangha.[/quote]

I dont see how to survive in Vaisnava sangha to begin with.

[br][br]
[quote]> My understanding often seems to be completely at odds with that of the devotees, and this to the point that it seems I would have to do something repugnant if I were to accept their view.
[br]
Examples needed.[/quote]

- Accepting the stance that the individual soul has no free will anymore once he surrenders to God. A stance not uncommon among devotees. If I disagree with it, I am "in maya"...[br]
- Accepting the stance that as soon as a person is called a "devotee" by someone who considers themselves a devotee, this person is beyond karma. I was in a conflict once with a senior mataji - I said something about karma and its effects on me, and she replied, apparently upset, how can I even say something like that, now I am a devotee and not under the influence of karma anymore. There was no talking to her. Yet because she is above me in the hierarchy, I have to believe her.[br]
- Having to accept stances as scriptural/doctrinal, even though no scriptural reference has been provided.[br]
- Taking up a regimen of spiritual practice without having any positive conviction about it, but only on the grounds of having negative convictions about oneself.[br]
- Being expected to trust and respect everyone who came there before me or who is in any way deemed higher than me.

[br][br]
You and the scriptures may keep saying that one ought to use intelligent discernment, but in reality, this doesnt work. Devotees get offended if I dont accept and believe everything they say, or at least I get accused of being "conditioned", "in maya" and such. Apparently, if I wouldnt be "in maya" and "conditioned", then I would think, feel, speak and act as they do.[br]
In reality, I also wouldnt / dont get to associate with people like you. I get to be left with matajis who rub it into my face how I am "in maya" or give me a silence treatment whenever I say or do something they dont like. To be expected to give in to them is another thing I find repugnant.

But aside from the practical examples, this is a formal question.

Is ti possible that a person may at some point have to do things they find wrong, in order to make spiritual progress?

This has come up for me before, when, for example, it seemed that the only way to be happy is to eat meat, drink coffee and aclohol and do the things that "normal people" do, even though I found those things to be wrong.

I think this question really deserves to be explained properly. What is the example in your life?

> You dont find it repugnant to believe it is love that God tortures the majority of His children? And yes, if you want to join the Catholic and many other Christian churches, this is what you have to believe.

- Its not God who forces anyone to go to hell. Its an individual choice to live a sinful life that leads one there. If you mean predestination, thats not Catholic concept, afaik.
- Catholic teachings speak of the Purgatory for lesser sinners.
- Sat-sanga can be done without any formal memberships.
- I dont need to join Catholic Church since I was baptized in it as an infant so Im its formal life member. ;)
St. Jerome, patron saint of translators, once appeared in my dream to help me and Im thankful to him.
At Korfu I prayed to its patron saint, St. Spyridon, who is actively fulfilling prayers to support me in preaching against deviations since hes known to strongly oppose the heretic Arius.

> Who decides whether my understanding is in such agreement with gss or not?

Basic comparison of ideas can be done by self-check. E.g.:

GV siddhanta: Krsna is the SPoG
person x: Krsna is an expansion of Visnu
result: person x differs from GV siddhanta

More intricate issues would have to be ascertained by someone more knowledgeable than us. Therefore devotees discuss such issues, sometimes at considerable length.

> I dont see how to survive in Vaisnava sangha to begin with.

That we already discussed. You just dont fit your local NH group, thats all. And you seem to have some psychological problems from your church past which need attention of a devotee psychologist.

> - Accepting the stance that the individual soul has no free will anymore once he surrenders to God. A stance not uncommon among devotees. If I disagree with it, I am "in maya"...

Not so. Within the surrender mode one has a free will to do all kinds of decisions and services. Read SB 10 how life in Vrindavan dham looks like. Associates of Krsna have free will, theyre not slaves or robots.

> - Accepting the stance that as soon as a person is called a "devotee" by someone who considers themselves a devotee, this person is beyond karma.

Its diksa which burns karma and continues to do so as long as our relationship with the guru lasts - keeping the vows and following siksa. Its not that after diksa one can do anything and everything on the pretext that theres no karma. Thats the 7th offense against the holy name.

> - Having to accept stances as scriptural/doctrinal, even though no scriptural reference has been provided.

Our philosophy is that they have to be provided. Sometimes younger devotees cant find the references or refuse to provide them though.
So one should approach senior devotee/s then.

> - Taking up a regimen of spiritual practice without having any positive conviction about it, but only on the grounds of having negative convictions about oneself.

So you feel manipulated by peer pressure to do a particular devotional service? Its not our system. Prabhupada at the beginning let anyone to do any service they wanted to get the taste of it. To overwhelm the beginner with tons of dos and donts is a sure way to burn him.

> - Being expected to trust and respect everyone who came there before me or who is in any way deemed higher than me.

We trust people by default until they breach that trust. Respect to every living being is a common Vaisnava value. We keep distance from some though.

> You and the scriptures may keep saying that one ought to use intelligent discernment, but in reality, this doesnt work. Devotees get offended if I dont accept and believe everything they say, or at least I get accused of being "conditioned", "in maya" and such. Apparently, if I wouldnt be "in maya" and "conditioned", then I would think, feel, speak and act as they do.

Discernment (viveka) isnt maya. Lack of it is.

> In reality, I also wouldnt / dont get to associate with people like you. I get to be left with matajis who rub it into my face how I am "in maya" or give me a silence treatment whenever I say or do something they dont like. To be expected to give in to them is another thing I find repugnant.

If therere no senior matajis around you, thats a sort of a problem. But thanks to internet you can associate with many devotees worldwide and somehow overcome this deficiency.

> Is ti possible that a person may at some point have to do things they find wrong, in order to make spiritual progress?

I cant think of any examples. I didnt have to do anything like that so far.

> This has come up for me before, when, for example, it seemed that the only way to be happy is to eat meat, drink coffee and aclohol and do the things that "normal people" do, even though I found those things to be wrong.

Why should happiness depend on these things? And how are such people happier than others?

[quote][cite] Haridas:[/cite]I think this question really deserves to be explained properly. What is the example in your life?[/quote]

This is a fairly common problem, sometimes summed up in the question "Is it possible to be both happy and virtuous/moral?"
Some people answer that this is not always possible; in fact, it seems like the common answer is that one cannot have it both ways, that "doing the right thing" can come at the cost of happiness and often does; and that sometimes, the only way to be happy is to do something immoral.[br]
[br]This seems to be inescapable as far as run-of-the-mill life is concerned, but perhaps it reaches beyond that life as well. If the latter, then this could imply that Gods sense of right and wrong, good and bad is somehow incompatibly, irreconcilably different from the individual souls sense of right and wrong, good and bad - which opens up new questions.

> the only way to be happy is to do something immoral.

This is not real, internal happiness but a superficial pleasure of the senses. The former is possible only within the framework of virtue and bhakti.

> Must a person be willing to do things they find repugnant, if they are to return to God?

No. "Among all means of suppressing lawlessness I am punishment, and of those who seek victory I am morality." (Gita 10.38) In special cases it may be so, but that is on a transcendental level for e.g Arjuna killing his guru.

> You and the scriptures may keep saying that one ought to use intelligent discernment, but in reality, this doesnt work

That means youre doing it wrong. For example, why do you keep placing yourself under the authorities who, by your own admissions here, are often unreasonable, illogical, appear under some kind of power trip more or less, and are very uninspiring association? Why do you keep doing it? The result you are experiencing is never going to change, but you keep doing it like banging your head against a wall. Therefore I say you are not applying what you have learnt properly. It seems to me a case of intelligent enough to see through it, too scared to do anything about it.

> I dont see how to survive in Vaisnava sangha to begin with.

Then you have an incorrect idea of what Vaisnava -sangha is. It appears that you are accepting the above-mentioned dysfunctional association as bona-fide vaisnava-sangha (when you really seem to know otherwise) and when it gives its destined dysfunctional result, you complain It doesnt work! Therefore I say you are not applying what you have learnt properly.

[quote][cite] VEDA:[/cite]You just dont fit your local NH group, thats all. [/quote]

The questions are why I dont fit in, how should I behave toward them if I do see them in some public space, and how should I think of myself for not fitting in.
[br]
Is it that I am not good enough for them, that I am not intelligent enough for them, not advanced enough?[br]
I want to know what my status is in all this, and I want some closure.
[br][br]

[quote]And you seem to have some psychological problems from your church past which need attention of a devotee psychologist.[/quote]

I havent yet recovered from my previous devotee psychologist ...
[br][br]

[quote]Our philosophy is that they have to be provided. Sometimes younger devotees cant find the references or refuse to provide them though.
So one should approach senior devotee/s then.[/quote]

Sure. But what do I do when the devotee who doesnt provide a reference insists in their stance and apparently expects me to accept it?[br]
I easily feel swamped by other peoples emotions and views. With non-devotees, I have strategies to avoid and overcome this - basic assertiveness strategies, but I fear that with devotees, it would be offensive to apply those strategies, or that it would at least be against the spirit of GV.
[br][br]

[quote]So you feel manipulated by peer pressure to do a particular devotional service? Its not our system. Prabhupada at the beginning let anyone to do any service they wanted to get the taste of it. To overwhelm the beginner with tons of dos and donts is a sure way to burn him.[/quote]

Of course I feel manipulated. Long ago, in the beginning, I did feel some affection for Krishna consciousness, but that soon waned when I was faced with devotees.
And yes, this is how I feel - burnt, and burnt-out.
[br][br]

[quote]We trust people by default until they breach that trust. Respect to every living being is a common Vaisnava value. We keep distance from some though.[/quote]

I think we possibly mean different things by "trust" and "respect".

> The questions are why I dont fit in,

Why you dont fit may be quite complex and I cant tell you anything conclusive without knowing the whole situation.
So far the local devotees seem to me as quite neophyte and unable to interact with someone like you with emotional problems from the past.

> how should I behave toward them if I do see them in some public space,

Simply greeting from your side as the minimal interaction should work.

> and how should I think of myself for not fitting in.
Is it that I am not good enough for them, that I am not intelligent enough for them, not advanced enough?

See above. Take it that youre different, without undue self-criticism or self-pity.

> I havent yet recovered from my previous devotee psychologist ...

What happened?

> But what do I do when the devotee who doesnt provide a reference insists in their stance and apparently expects me to accept it?

In case of doubt, ask some other devotee for a second opinion.

> And yes, this is how I feel - burnt, and burnt-out.

Consider the possibility that your local devotees arent representing KC well. I met some like that, thats life.

> I think we possibly mean different things by "trust" and "respect".

Mine are standard dictionary meanings. I dont use any nonstandard definitions just for devotees.

[quote][cite] deena:[/cite]That means youre doing it wrong. For example, why do you keep placing yourself under the authorities who, by your own admissions here, are often unreasonable, illogical, appear under some kind of power trip more or less, and are very uninspiring association? Why do you keep doing it?[/quote]

I am not sure. It seems that it is either that I have an improperly formed conscience, or that I am making a conscious choice to say no to God, or both.[br][br]

Personally, I feel that I simply havent learned and done enough, also not experienced enough to make any final decision about my involvement with the practice of Krishna consciousness.[br]
At the same time, I feel there is an enormous pressure to make such a final decision. I have the fear that my apparently slow pace will not be tolerated by devotees; in fact I know that some do not tolerate it ("I should either do it on their terms, or I am saying no to God altogether").[br] I also feel this pressure from Srila Prabhupadas writings and talks.[br][br]

[quote]Therefore I say you are not applying what you have learnt properly.[/quote]

I agree.

[quote][cite] VEDA:[/cite]> I havent yet recovered from my previous devotee psychologist ...
[br]
What happened?[/quote]

The whole thing didnt go beyond a few introductory interviews, mind you. I have felt that he was glossing over my problems, and that my attempts to explain myself only seemed to have made matters worse.[br]
I suppose there are capable devotee psychologists, but my experience with this one has made me cautious of them.[br][br]

[quote]Consider the possibility that your local devotees arent representing KC well.[/quote]

But to do so, would I not have to believe myself to know better than them? That would be conceited![br][br]

[quote]> I think we possibly mean different things by "trust" and "respect".[br]

Mine are standard dictionary meanings. I dont use any nonstandard definitions just for devotees.[/quote]

I think esp. the emotional thrust I feel with notions of "trust" and "respect" are different.[br]
I fit the criterion for a "highly sensitive person" (this is a term - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highly_sensitive_person).

>But to do so, would I not have to believe myself to know better than them?

Its enough to judge from the results. Devotee should attract others to Krsna, not to repell them. Thats the realm of kanisthas.

Neither did I mean to equate "trust" and "respect".

Seems like I also fit this HSH definition to some extent. To me it looks like a result of some traumas in this and/or previous lives.
My situation improved much with KC and reiki.

> But to do so, would I not have to believe myself to know better than them? That would be conceited!

If you have small intelligence then yes it would be conceited. But if you have a reasonable amount of intelligence, are thoughtful and honest, then it is foolish not to listen to your own conscience.

To hand over the power of thought and decision making to someone else is a prime symptom of dysfunctional institutionalisation. It disempowers and is the opposite of what spiritual practices aim for. See the results you are experiencing - you dont even trust yourself. It must be hell to live with. yourself. This whole dynamic is slowly killing you.

> > Why do you keep doing it?

> I am not sure. It seems that it is either that I have an improperly formed conscience, or that I am making a conscious choice to say no to God, or >both.

Erich Fromm writes that it is due to fear. The fear of being alone, isolated, leaving the security of the crowd. Fear of being rejected, told you are wrong, or an outcast. The need to avoid this fear it is so great that we will even willingly hand over our free-will. Why have you replaced your conscience and intelligence with (according to your own statements here) the very dysfunctional thought processes of other people? Stop it now and take responsibility for yourself.

> Therefore I say you are not applying what you have learnt properly.

> I agree.

So apply it properly. Give up the fear of social, instutional pressure and make your own decisions, based on sastra and your intelligence and act on them. We will be very happy to support you in whatever way we can through this difficult but essential and exciting stage. Give up the fear of being percieved as wrong (or straight-out told you are wrong) when your conscience tells you youre right. And if you are still unsure, confirm the dictates of your conscience with a senior, learned devotee who is not bound by similar institutional pressures or fears.

[quote][cite] VEDA:[/cite]Its enough to judge from the results. Devotee should attract others to Krsna, not to repell them.[/quote]

But how much am I to be blamed for feeling repelled?[br]

Someone could simply say that it is all entirely my failing, that if I had been more advanced / more interested / more honest / more ..., then I would not have any problems with those devotees. I cant object to this.[br][br]

[quote][quote]I think esp. the emotional thrust I feel with notions of "trust" and "respect" are different.[/quote]

Neither did I mean to equate "trust" and "respect".[/quote]

I apologize, I tried to make the sentence as short as possible, but that cost me its meaning. I meant that my understanding of "trust" and "respect" is possibly different from your understanding of "trust" and "respect".

To use one analogy Srila Prabhupada used, a hospital is meant for sick people, not healthy ones. Were all in the process of curing and have to help those co-patients in need whom we can, even though they sometimes outwardly refuse it. This is Mahaprabhus mission.

Veda -
I am not sure what you wish to communicate here, to me specifically -?

[quote][cite] deena:[/cite]Why have you replaced your conscience and intelligence with (according to your own statements here) the very dysfunctional thought processes of other people? Stop it now and take responsibility for yourself.[/quote]

If I did that, then I am afraid this could cost me my salvation or spiritual progress.[br]
I have always had the impression that in order to become eligible for salvation or spiritual progress, I would have to give up whatever conscience and intelligence I have. Hence this thread.[br][br]

I wish this agony of indecision would be over. But I fear the only way to make an end to it is to cut all ties to devotees and KC practices.

I just meant to say that were all in various stages of purification (and thus have our blames to various degrees) and should help those we can.

> I have always had the impression that in order to become eligible for salvation or spiritual progress, I would have to give up whatever conscience and intelligence I have. Hence this thread.

This is not the Vedic way, rather the other way round. Krsna says SB 11 etc. to use intelligence in devotional service.

> I wish this agony of indecision would be over. But I fear the only way to make an end to it is to cut all ties to devotees and KC practices.

No, you need proper sadhu sanga.

> I have always had the impression that in order to become eligible for salvation or spiritual progress, I would have to give up whatever conscience and intelligence I have. Hence this thread.

You would have got along well in the 1980s perhaps.

> If I did that, then I am afraid this could cost me my salvation or spiritual progress

Dont you see that, by your own admission, you current method of practice is costing you your spiritual progress and your sanity? Your indecisiveness coupled with your continued attempts in allowing dysfunctional people to think for you are a very inauspicous combination.

Time to grow up and take responsibility for yourself, your progress, your association, your momentum and your relationship with the philosophy, devotees and Krishna. Stop blaming others, stop sustaining and enjoying the agony of indecision and hopelessness of it all. It is in your hands to address, but you choose not to. The number of texts by you that have this similar mood indicate to me that you have an subconcsious need to indefintely agonise indecisively, be helpless and generally lost, forlorn, sorrowful and exasperated and are expert at paralysing yourself into inaction and inertia. Generally this is a psychological front to avoid many things, all of which can generally be boiled down to avoidance of responsibility and making hard decisions, coupled with the desire to be loved or accepted.

You agreed with me previously that you are not applying what you have learned properly. What practical steps are you going to take to address this? And dont tell me fourteen differnent semi-realistic options you could do depending upon seventeen other conditions which may or may not occur, just keep it very simple tell me three things you are capable of doing, and will do.

> avoidance of responsibility and making hard decisions

This is pretty much common to all materialists, to different extent. The more delusional stage is taking drugs to forget material sufferings of samsara. Srila Prabhupada saved us from this - all glories to him.

[quote][cite] deena:[/cite]Time to grow up and take responsibility for yourself, your progress, your association, your momentum and your relationship with the philosophy, devotees and Krishna.[/quote]

Have you any idea how many devotees would be offended if I did that??[br]
I would cut myself off from the devotees if I did what you suggest. I would forfeit my future among devotees and thereby my spiritual progress.

Some quotes about responsibility:

Animals, of course, have no sense of responsibility, but even humans, who have developed a sense of responsibility, while away their valuable time without engaging in devotional service to the Lord; they live merrily, unafraid of impending death. This is the madness of human society. The madman has no responsibility in life. Similarly, a human being who does not develop a sense of responsibility before he dies is no better than the madman who tries to enjoy material life very happily without concern for the future. It is necessary that every human being be responsible in preparing himself for the next life, even if he has a duration of life like that of Brahm'e4, the greatest of all living creatures within the universe. (SB 3.11.33 p.)

Therefore I, as spirit soul, I am not body. Body is changing; I am different from body. Therefore change of this body does not mean I am finished. I am continuing. Therefore I should be responsible: "What kind of body I am going to accept next?" That is my responsibility. If you dont take this responsibility, "What kind of body...?" It may be, if I am of doggish mentality, my next life will be just a dog because I will have to accept the dress of a dog. And if I am evolving my godly mentality, then Ill have to accept, or I will accept another body just like God. So that is in my hands.
So in the modern educational system, universities, there is no such information, we see. It is very lamentable, but these knowledges are there in the Vedic literature. The summary of all Vedic literature is Srimad-Bhagavad-gita and the Srimad-Bhagavatam. There are many other literatures-Ramayana, Mahabharata, eighteen Puranas. They are meant for human society, not for these cats and dogs. So our Krishna consciousness movement is just to awake people to their rightful position, which is called Krishna consciousness. (lecture at International Student Society, Boston, May 3, 1969)

Therefore, unless we take to Krsna consciousness movement, the human civilization is doomed. It is not human civilization. Human civilization is responsible life. Actually, we are being educated, we go to school, to college, to become responsible man. So this responsibility should be "How to stop this repetition of birth." In many places this is advised. And that is the only aim of human life. Punar-janma-jayaya. (SB 6.1.12, LA, June 25, 1975)

Therefore a human being should be very, very cautious and conscious. They should not do anything irresponsibly. And how to work with responsibility and how to work irresponsibly? Therefore sastra required. Sastra, these books, Vedic knowledge, books, why they are? So that a human being may take advantage of it and he act responsibly or irresponsibly. If he works irresponsibly, then his punishment is awaiting, lower grade of life. So human being should be educated how to... Therefore these children are being educated from the very beginning of their life how to become responsible man. This is the idea of our gurukula. (SB 6.1.48, Dallas, July 30, 1975)

People do not know the seriousness of material existence, and they continue and waste their, the chance, human being. Human form of life is a chance to rectify, but they do not care. Therefore the Krishna consciousness movement is so important. Everyone, door to door, a devotee has to go and teach them that "You are leading a very, very irresponsible life. Be responsible to your consciousness and be a devotee of Krishna. That will save you." (SB 7.9.16, Mayapur, February 23, 1976)

Therefore the real aim of life, how to get out of this bhavarnava, nescience, that is the aim of life. If we remain again like the monkeys and cats and dogs, eating, sleeping, mating, and dancing, that is not very responsible life. Every man should be responsible. That is Vedic culture, to create responsible man, not varna-sankara. (SB 7.12.2, Bombay, April 13, 1976)

> Have you any idea how many devotees would be offended if I did that?

Do you think that someone who is offended at seeing a devotee grow up and take responsibility for his spiritual life is really a devotee? Goodness, you really do have everything back to front.

As I have seen, people have very different ideas about what this "growing up and taking responsibility for ones spiritual life" is supposed to be.

true Baker. Different views. In a way you are both right. But the truth is in the sastra and the conclusion is that sadhu-sanga sadhu-sanga sarva-sastre kaya, However one should not think that you should overdue it if you can not handle, still lava matra sadhu sanga sarva-siddhi haya -- do not mind a long time or just a moment, that is what gives you perfection. Just get some pada-rajo-bhisekam if you can and even a moment will give you the perfection. Look for that, not for "fitting in".

Interesting Baker ...... but not unusual predicament, for especially those whom have had little experience of surrender or being swept up and surrendering in the sankirtan process.Interlectual appreciation is not spiritual advancement.Neither can one whom is asking questions on the internet,necessarily able to necessarily become nourished or even blessed by the senior devotee .Hardwork and grafting the hard yards .....for krishna ,while being chastised by a superior is necessary .Generally one needs an expert and spiritually resiliant sankirtan devotee to fully appreciate submission and service in a humble selfless mood.Humility is the stepping stone towards proper spiritual qualification usually referred to as adhikara.
In other words you need to hear from a personally present spiritual authority and intimately become ruled by them.For nityananda ram and chaitanya mahaprabhus mercy ..... you need the intimate blessings of a sadhurani or sadhu .Generally they are themselves involved in preaching,hence they have learnt to discriminate between the demons and devotees.They surrender there minds demands to engage in the tapasya of sankirtan ,either collecting laxsmi or selling books.When they preach to the innocent ,they try and inject krishnas mercy usually in the form of prasadam or a book to try and deliver the spiritual medicine.
Since naturally demons are averse they become expert on how to engage them.Hook or by crook methods are sometimes used to cheat the demons expertly BACK TO GODHEAD.....hopefully they are happy when they leave the association of the devotee,otherwise they have failed!.However naturally the devotees are sometimes accosted ,insulted and generally looked down upon in a negitive light for serving krishna by the materialists.Hence learning to spoon feed ones self krishna conciousness is essential. Being convinced is based on reading the sastra developing a personal relationship with ones gurus and serving according to there dictations.Hence the need for submission to both diksa and ones many siksa(instructing) gurus.Then you are actually a real devotee ....everything else is merely preparation and simply for many it is a mystery,because they rebel due to the discipline demanded!
.Which ideally has been sharpened and honed to a precise piont,by constant prayer and intense fervour and desire to engage the conditioned souls in krishnas service.....in other words bhakti is a gift from one sadhu to another ,whom is dynamically surrendering and sacrificing literally everything for guru and krishna!
Interlectualism only goes so far......krishna cannot be cheated,even ones chanting is frail and like chewing black coal if not blessed.Hence seeking the association of sincere devotees,is the purpose of the sankirtan neophyte.Nothing else replaces the genuine sincerity and association of surrendered devotees, blissfully and ecstatically intent on doing others good by engaging them in krishnas service.

I cant do this anymore. Please close this thread.

>Hardwork and grafting the hard yards .....for krishna ,while being chastised by a superior is necessary

Any sastric reference for these exact words? (I am sure none for other suggestions).

> I cant do this anymore.

You mean to tell me that although you agreed previously that you are not applying what you have learned properly, you cannot come up with a few practical steps you are going to take to address it?

I meant that I cant discuss myself in open forums anymore, at least not the way I have been so far. It is too straining.
So this is one practical step.
Perhaps some people here think that I owe it to them to explain myself further and to say what I will do. And I do have some ideas. But I am reluctant to share them in open forums at this point, as I feel I would just once more be deprived of privacy and put under the scrutiny and criticism of everyone. I also dont want to be some kind of "forum help project" anymore either.

It is said one ought to reveal ones mind in confidence. But usually, I am not revealing my mind in confidence here, but much more in fear and under pressure. So I am doing something about that.

Thank you for your concern, Deena.

Fear of...?

Mainly fear of asking or saying something that could endanger my progress. Also a generalized fear of devotees.

If one is a sincere beginner, Krsna tolerates if he says something improper. Alternatively, He tells you in the heart what is improper.

I have no idea how devotees can be a source of fear unless theyre in tamo guna - fanatical. violent, etc. (SB 3.29.8)

thread closed by request of the inquirer