Pariprashnena — Q&A Archive

[youtube]SL7e0Lsj2v8[/youtube]

Honor or respect is mAna, hense it -- amAnina, without claiming any respect from others in Siksastakam 3. That is the difference between a Vaisnava and those who want to have respect.

[br][quote][cite] ccd:[/cite]Honor or respect is mAna, hense it -- amAnina, without claiming any respect from others in Siksastakam 3. That is the difference between a Vaisnava and those who want to have respect.[/quote][br]

[br]So when someone does something to a Vaisnava that would "ordinarily" be considered as an act of disrespect, the Vaisnava does not feel hurt or contempt for themselves?[br]

[br]Sometimes, I have gotten the impression that the devotees were saying things to me in the expectation that I should feel hurt or contempted. When I didnt feel and react that way, it seemed they were disappointed and took offense.[br]
[br]Sometimes, I have felt like asking them "How do you want me to feel when you say these words? How do you want me to feel when you look at me like that? Are you going to take offense if I dont feel the way you want me to, and I will go down as a Vaisnava offender?"[br]

[br]I realize this may seem strange to some people. I have always had problems with understanding emotions and non-verbal expressions, and taking counselling apparently didnt help.[br]

I find that you must go through a lot of tests to finally come out as not actually doing it for the motivation of respect. Another word is pratistha. I also have difficulty in understanding emotions and non-verbal expressions. The point is not to blame others for how you feel, for actually it is great if you are getting no respect, you chances of going back to godhead multiply! What can be worst then pride?

kanaka-kamini pratistha-baghini
chariyache jare sei to vaisnava

One who has been abandoned by the tigress of money, beautiful women, and respect (prestige) is truly a Vaishnava.

sei anasakta sei suddha-bhakta
samsar tatha pay parabhava

Such a soul alone is truly detached; such a soul is a pure devotee. The illusory creation of repeated birth and death is defeated before him.

dainyam, humility, is the healthy sign of a devotee. However if you use this philosophy and start disrespecting other devotees, you go to hell. It is a tricky balance, and I find it is not really working among the beginners. I do however that we should start actually respecting absolutely everyone who at least once chanted the holy name. I mean without any blacklists.

> To disagree with someone is considered tantamount to disrespecting that person.

No. On the level of material dharma one should respect superiors even if theyre not perfect (and one shouldnt adopt their imperfections):

Tamala Krsna: "It is better to live in this world by begging than to live at the cost of the lives of great souls who are my teachers. Even though they are avaricious, they are nonetheless superiors. If they are killed, then our spoils will be tainted with blood [Bg. 2.5]."

Prabhupada: This is another indication how superiors should be shown respect. Arjuna says, "Although they have become avaricious, still, they are my superior." Avaricious, why? "They have got full affection for me. My grandfather Bhisma has got full affection for me. And Dronacarya, I am his very dear student so he has also my very affection... good affection for me. But because Duryodhana has paid them, he has accepted their service. Paid them. So avaricious. Simply for money, in spite of so much affection and intimate relationship, they have accepted the service of Duryodhana, counting on money. So therefore they are avaricious. But in spite of their being avaricious, they are my respectful." This is respect. This is respect, that the respectful person who is my respectful, even there are some characteristics who does not command respect, still respect should be offered. (BG 2.1-10 and talk, Los Angeles, Nov 25 1968)

> So when someone does something to a Vaisnava that would "ordinarily" be considered as an act of disrespect, the Vaisnava does not feel hurt or contempt for themselves?

If hes somehow advanced. But Krsna doesnt like that attitude to his devotee.

> Sometimes, I have gotten the impression that the devotees were saying things to me in the expectation that I should feel hurt or contempted. When I didnt feel and react that way, it seemed they were disappointed and took offense.

Strange. Examples?

> Sometimes, I have felt like asking them "How do you want me to feel when you say these words? How do you want me to feel when you look at me like that? Are you going to take offense if I dont feel the way you want me to, and I will go down as a Vaisnava offender?"

So you should ask.

Actually what is missing is the inspiration and blessings of older devotee or devotees.....You should serve at a local temple.Regular devotional service allows krishnas mercy to infact manifest....through his genuine servants.Even if it is only washing the pots,or cleaning the floor.By taking steps to krishna he will reciprocate .Bhagavad gita chapter5 verse18......vidya -vinaya-sampanne brahmani gavi hastini,suni caiva svapake ca,panditah sama darsinah.All problems ,all differculties are intrinsically resolved in the mercy of an advanced devotee.The humble sage,by vrtue of true knowledge sees with equal vision.....a learned and gentle brahmana,a cow,an elephant,a dog and a dog eater.
My new freind baker,an advanced devotee is merciful to a lesser person.He is able to see krishnas indeliable hand moving around his environment.He is convinced because the supersoul....like the holy spirit ....the localised aspect of god is situated within him,yourself......the cow,the elephant ,the dog and even the lowly dog eater.He is never alone!So he pays respect to krishna within your heart.......Because you have common farther,Krishna who is seated in the region of the heart.Chanting together,taking prasadam ,hearing about krishna....in the preaching atmosphere will create a loving healthy respect.

[quote][cite] ccd:[/cite]I find that you must go through a lot of tests to finally come out as not actually doing it for the motivation of respect. Another word is pratistha. I also have difficulty in understanding emotions and non-verbal expressions. The point is not to blame others for how you feel, for actually it is great if you are getting no respect, you chances of going back to godhead multiply! What can be worst then pride?[/quote]

Yay! 8)[br]

[br][quote]One who has been abandoned by the tigress of money, beautiful women, and respect (prestige) is truly a Vaishnava.[/quote]

Are "respect" and "prestige" interchangeable?

[br]"I am doing this to get me some prestige/respect."
[br]"I am giving prestige/respect to others."[br]

[br][quote]dainyam, humility, is the healthy sign of a devotee. However if you use this philosophy and start disrespecting other devotees, you go to hell. It is a tricky balance, and I find it is not really working among the beginners.[/quote]

Many things are not working among the beginners ...[br]

[br][quote]I do however that we should start actually respecting absolutely everyone who at least once chanted the holy name. I mean without any blacklists.[/quote]

So a part of respecting others is that one has no blacklists - no memory of wrongdoings, but only a memory of credits?

[br]And keeping a list of both wrongdoings and credits is reserved only to those who are in some kind of position of control and who have power to decide on a persons rights and privileges?

[br]This is one of those issues where having clear definitions of membership and levels of it would come in handy. As it is, I have to somehow from scratch figure out, for myself, whom to give what sort of respect and what sort of credence. And I see no other way of doing it but by keeping a list of a persons wrongdoings and credits and then based on that list trying to calculate how to think about that person and how to behave toward them. [br]

[quote][cite] VEDA:[/cite]> To disagree with someone is considered tantamount to disrespecting that person.

[br]No. On the level of material dharma one should respect superiors even if theyre not perfect (and one shouldnt adopt their imperfections):

[br]Tamala Krsna: "It is better to live in this world by begging than to live at the cost of the lives of great souls who are my teachers. Even though they are avaricious, they are nonetheless superiors. If they are killed, then our spoils will be tainted with blood [Bg. 2.5]."

[br]Prabhupada: This is another indication how superiors should be shown respect. Arjuna says, "Although they have become avaricious, still, they are my superior." Avaricious, why? "They have got full affection for me. My grandfather Bhisma has got full affection for me. And Dronacarya, I am his very dear student so he has also my very affection... good affection for me. But because Duryodhana has paid them, he has accepted their service. Paid them. So avaricious. Simply for money, in spite of so much affection and intimate relationship, they have accepted the service of Duryodhana, counting on money. So therefore they are avaricious. But in spite of their being avaricious, they are my respectful." This is respect. This is respect, that the respectful person who is my respectful, even there are some characteristics who does not command respect, still respect should be offered. (BG 2.1-10 and talk, Los Angeles, Nov 25 1968)[/quote]

I still dont understand what is supposed to go on in a persons mind when they respect someone, and how they should behave toward the respected person.[br]

[br]For example, when I feel I have respect for someone, I feel a kind of embarrassment of myself and I feel lowly. I never look the respected person straight in the eyes, I lower my shoulders, I dont sit down in front of them without being told or without asking permission to sit. If I sit in their presence, I dont lean back in the chair, I never cross my legs or arms, and have my hands always visible. I dont eat in their presence unless they invite me or tell me to. I apologize if I have to cough, sneeze or clear my nose in their presence. I am careful about my language and I dont use slang or colloquialisms. I answer straightforwardly every question they ask me, however intimate. I dont ask them intimate questions. I dont raise my voice. I dont argue, I dont disagree.
[br](I was brought up old-fashioned Catholic country style.)[br]

[br]Is this the sort of respect I am supposed to have toward every devotee, everyone who has chanted the holy name even just once?[br]

[br][quote]> Sometimes, I have gotten the impression that the devotees were saying things to me in the expectation that I should feel hurt or contempted. When I didnt feel and react that way, it seemed they were disappointed and took offense.

Strange. Examples?[/quote]

For example, once, after prasadam, a small group of devotees was having a casual discussion. I said something, and one devotee even agreed with me, but another devotee cut me off, saying "I know what you mean, but youre wrong". He didnt explain his answer nor did he give me any room to inquire, but I still wanted to (I started a sentence), and then he looked at me in a manner suggesting "Shut up".
[br]Perhaps this was a male vs. female thing as well.
[br]But like I said, this is all mostly about impressions and speculations, as there doesnt seem to be much room to talk about things.[br]

[br][quote]> Sometimes, I have felt like asking them "How do you want me to feel when you say these words? How do you want me to feel when you look at me like that? Are you going to take offense if I dont feel the way you want me to, and I will go down as a Vaisnava offender?"

So you should ask.[/quote]

Allright.[br]

Baker: Is this the sort of respect I am supposed to have toward every devotee, everyone who has chanted the holy name even just once?

Answer to your question is given by Srila Rupa Gosvami in Nectar of Instructions, Text5

krsneti yasya giri tam manasadriyeta
diksasti cet pranatibhis ca bhajantam isam
susrusaya bhajana-vijnam ananyam anya-
nindadi-sunya-hrdam ipsita-sanga-labdhya

TRANSLATION

One should mentally honor the devotee who chants the holy name of Lord Krsna, one should offer humble obeisances to the devotee who has undergone spiritual initiation [diksa] and is engaged in worshiping the Deity, and one should associate with and faithfully serve that Pure devotee who is advanced in undeviated devotional service and whose heart is completely devoid of the propensity to criticize others.

If you read nectar of instructions text 5 along with purports, that might help you.

> Is this the sort of respect I am supposed to have toward every devotee, everyone who has chanted the holy name even just once?

If you can. But the main thing is inside, to see the other devotee as ones superior. In dharmasastras therere different criteria of superiority for different varnas, the superiority by age is prescribed for sudras.
For devotees, the general superiority is understood by the criteria of length of active service, by official position, by spiritual knowledge and, especially, by the advancement in KC (kanistha, madhyama, uttama).

> He didnt explain his answer nor did he give me any room to inquire, but I still wanted to (I started a sentence), and then he looked at me in a manner suggesting "Shut up".
Perhaps this was a male vs. female thing as well.

Are you in a female body? So far it wasnt obvious from your words. This can be a factor when talking with male devotees. Still, theres no reason to suggest to anyone to shut up if the question is not offensive, etc.

> there doesnt seem to be much room to talk about things.

If theres not much room with some devotees, find others.

[quote][cite] VEDA:[/cite]> Is this the sort of respect I am supposed to have toward every devotee, everyone who has chanted the holy name even just once?

If you can. But the main thing is inside, to see the other devotee as ones superior. In dharmasastras therere different criteria of superiority for different varnas, the superiority by age is prescribed for sudras.
For devotees, the general superiority is understood by the criteria of length of active service, by official position, by spiritual knowledge and, especially, by the advancement in KC (kanistha, madhyama, uttama).[/quote]

I think I can understand that, at least ideally.[br]

[br]What is strange to me is this: Where I come from, the way I was taught to respect my seniors/superiors - all those relationships were a given, they came with the family and the environment I was born into. The respect for them comes naturally, it is something that goes without saying, it is a kind of given for me as well.
(Actually, I have never thought about it much before, although I did consciously adapt my behavior toward "city people" to "city people manners" once I started high-school in the city. "City people" tend to perceive our "country manners" as outdated, servile, that we lack self-esteem and such. There was, and there still is, quite a prejudice against "country people".)[br]

[br]But with the devotees, it is a matter of choice, and it all goes back to the fundamental choice regarding my commitment to the path of Krishna consciousness.
I have never been faced with a similar situation before where respect for someone would depend on my choice. And for me, each communication with the devotees brings in that enormous choice regarding my commitment to the path of Krishna consciousness.[br]

[br]What is the actual object of respect when it comes to devotees? Is it their Krishna consciousness, the fact that they are in some way or degree conscious of Krishna, while other people are not, and that being conscious of Krishna is the best one can be?[br]

[br][quote]Are you in a female body? So far it wasnt obvious from your words. This can be a factor when talking with male devotees.[/quote]

Yes, I am in a female body, I mentioned it once here. [br]
[br]And yes, I am aware of some of the issues pertaining to male vs.female, but I will certainly have to study up on that as well.[br]

[quote][cite] dweller-in-peace:[/cite]If you read nectar of instructions text 5 along with purports, that might help you.[/quote]

[br]I know this - reading it is what made me think about respect in more detail than I have so far.

My dear baker.....Veda has offered good advice....Since you are within a womans body ,find a married couple preferrable to make friends with...Whose husband is warm hearted,affable ,easy going,usually always smiling.Unless you are able to see such a person ....wait till someone openly starts a conversation....Older preachers usually encourage younger devotees....hopefully this will help.

I respected my uncle. Even as he was often very unclean in his habits I would not say about him that he was a pig - needless to say I would have never called him that to his face. Despite that flaw he was a good man, generous to his family and strangers - and for that I respected him a lot.

I respect a devotee whose ideas regarding Krsna consciousness I find somewhat troubling (like its OK to lie, cheat and steal as long as you give 10% of money acquired in that way to the temple). I will not say that he is a common crook - but I will say or think that he is wrong thinking like that. Why do I still respect him? Because he tries to be Krsna conscious and makes an effort to improve himself.

Respect must be earned to be real, otherwise it is just a pose we are taking. Sure, all living entities deserve some respect as parts and parcels of Krsna, but that does not translate into a feeling of being somewhat selected as special.

To show disrespect to a devotee is to put him down as a crook, liar, someone with ill intention, deviant, etc. That does not mean you have to be silent and accept whatever inappropriate behavior he may exhibit without protest. You can criticize the bad things in a dispassionate, factual manner, while keeping in mind the good things about him.

City tends to secularization, country preserves the tradition. This is found all over the world.

> I have never been faced with a similar situation before where respect for someone would depend on my choice.

Material dharma is related to our material bodies, paradharma (bhakti) to jivas. Devotees should be able to blend both in their lives, as expressed in Vaisnava etiquette.

http://www.veda.harekrsna.cz/library/VaisnavaEtiquette.zip
http://library.iskconmedia.com/social/vaisnava-etiquette-manual

> What is the actual object of respect when it comes to devotees? Is it their Krishna consciousness, the fact that they are in some way or degree conscious of Krishna, while other people are not, and that being conscious of Krishna is the best one can be?

Yes, KC. The fact theyre in the family of Krsna, Acyuta gotra, which youre joining.

prabhu kahe juc0u257 u7749 ra mukhe u347 uni eka-bu257 ra
ku7771 u7779 u7751 a-nu257 ma sei pu363 jya u347 reu7779 u7789 ha sabu257 ku257 ra
eka ku7771 u7779 u7751 a-nu257 me kare sarva-pu257 pa ku7779 aya
nava-vidhu257 bhakti pu363 ru7751 a nu257 ma haite haya
du299 ku7779 u257 -purau347 caryu257 -vidhi apeku7779 u257 nu257 kare
jihvu257 -sparu347 e u257 -cau7751 u7693 u257 la sabu257 re uddhu257 re
anuu7779 au7749 ga-phale kare sau7745 su257 rera ku7779 aya
citta u257 karu7779 iyu257 karu257 ya ku7771 u7779 u7751 e premodaya

'93If I hear someone chant Krishna'92s Holy Name just once, I consider him to be worshipable and the best of all humans. A single repetition of Krishna'92s holy name destroys all the consequences of a sinful life. All the nine processes of devotional service are completed simply by chanting the Holy Name. With the Holy Name, one does not have to undergo initiation or the purau347 caryu257 observances as with other mantras. The Name delivers even a person in the lowest ranks of human society as soon as one chants it. Secondarily, the Holy Name dissolves one'92s entanglement in material activities; it attracts the mind and awakens one'92s love for Krishna.'94 (Chaitanya Charitu257 mu7771 ta Madhya.15.106-109)

ataeva ju257 u7749 ra mukhe eka ku7771 u7779 u7751 a-nu257 ma
sei ta vaiu7779 u7751 ava kariha tu257 u7749 hu257 ra sammu257 na

u346 ru299 Chaitanya Mahu257 prabhu then concluded, '93Therefore one who chants the name of Krishna should be recognized as a Vaishnava and you should offer all respects to him.'94 (Chaitanya Charitu257 mu7771 ta Madhya.15.111) (also relevant to Diksa tread)

Respecting someone is not concomitant with agreeing with them. We can and should respect those we disagree with,we hope!
Ysvt

[quote][cite] Nrsingha:[/cite]Respecting someone is not concomitant with agreeing with them. We can and should respect those we disagree with,we hope!
Ysvt[/quote] Respect is just showing that someone is higher then ourself, and we are lower. One can be higher socially or intellectually and one has to show a material respect. One has to respect anyone who chants, it is respect to the Nama Prabhu. Just as when we bow to a sannyasi, we bow to the tridanda, and when we offer respect to all living beings because the Lord is in their heart. [br] However a true Vaisnava would consider himself lower then anyone, thus he offers respect to everyone (amAnina manadena).

Bakerji,

Hare Krishna. All glories to Srila Prabhupada.
Q "What exactly is respect?"

uc0u346 ru299 mad Bhu257 gavatam 4.3.22
pratyudgama-prau347 rayau7751 u257 bhivu257 danau7743 vidhu299 yate su257 dhu mithau7717 sumadhyame
pru257 j'f1aiu7717 parasmai puruu7779 u257 ya cetasu257 guhu257 -u347 ayu257 yaiva na deha-mu257 nine

TRANSLATION

My dear young wife, certainly friends and relatives offer mutual greetings by standing up, welcoming one another and offering obeisances. But those who are elevated to the transcendental platform, being intelligent, offer such respects to the Supersoul, who is sitting within the body, not to the person who identifies with the body.

Chapter 13, Verse 29.
One who sees the Supersoul in every living being and equal everywhere does not degrade himself by his mind. Thus he approaches the transcendental destination.

Bhagavad Gita As It Is, 6: Sankhya-yoga, Text 31.
The yogi who knows that I and the Supersoul within all creatures are one worships Me and remains always in Me in all circumstances.

Chapter 13, Verse 31.
When a sensible man ceases to see different identities, which are due to different material bodies, he attains to the Brahman conception. Thus he sees that beings are expanded everywhere.

Chapter 18, Verse 61 & 62
The Supreme Lord is situated in everyones heart, O Arjuna, and is directing the wanderings of all living entities, who are seated as on a machine, made of the material energy. O scion of Bharata, surrender unto Him utterly. By His grace you will attain transcendental peace and the supreme and eternal abode.

All glories to Srila Prabhupada.

Thank you all for your replies!

Please help me understand this too:

What is the relationship between respect, trust, believing and agreeing?

My default is to think they all four come together, and if one is missing, the other three are soon gone as well.
I often find myself in an internal conflict when I think I should respect someone, but I am in doubt whether and how much to trust or believe that person. And then if I find I cant trust them or believe them, I feel I am disrespecting them.

Is it possible to still respect someone, but not trust, believe or agree with them?

You are obviously cut to a pattern...you will be unable to fully understand krishnas devotees.Myself i do not trust all devotees,because most are not sankirtan inclined.....they are self interested generally.This is a kanistha or neophyte devotee.Their faith is brittle and lacks genuine sincerity....You must learn to see krishnas will quickly.
Respect yes......all devotees but find senior devotee s women or men who have taken their gurus mood to heart.....who are commited and surrendered to sankirtan....wether it is collecting money for krishna,or selling books or preaching for krishna!

There association is essential for spiritual advancement.....hare krishna bhaktine baker.

> What is the relationship between respect, trust, believing and agreeing?

Respect is for all superiors. Trust for the trustworthy. The latter can be believed. And even if their opinion is correct, one may have a different one (eg. acaryas sometimes present various views of the same thing, both correct).

> Is it possible to still respect someone, but not trust, believe or agree with them?

Ive given an example above that its not only possible but wanted.

[quote][cite] VEDA:[/cite]> What is the relationship between respect, trust, believing and agreeing?

Respect is for all superiors. Trust for the trustworthy. The latter can be believed. And even if their opinion is correct, one may have a different one (eg. acaryas sometimes present various views of the same thing, both correct).

> Is it possible to still respect someone, but not trust, believe or agree with them?

Ive given an example above that its not only possible but wanted.[/quote]

[br]This is very new to me. When I was younger, my seniors/superiors have mostly been people who were "all in one package" - they were respectable, trustworthy, truthful and commanding agreement. If there was something suspicious about them, I was used to blame it on myself, that either I saw wrongly or understood wrongly. But at some point, the discrepancies just seem to have gotten too large, and too much distrust of my own judgment was required to still maintain unlimited, undifferentiated respect for (some of) them.

Yes, there is a difference with Catholic ethos. But we respect all living beings.

"Prajuc0u257 pati: There is no trust without obedience.

Prabhupu257 da: Yes, yes, yes. There is no... There is no question of trust. Yes. That is, that is the first requirement in the Bhagavad-gu299 tu257 . "You surrender unto Me." That means: "You trust." I cannot surrender unto you if I do not trust you. That is trust. I dont believe you; how can I trust you? "

Baker: Thats also possible, esp. for the young who dont have much knowledge and experience. But I speak in general.

Lets take an example of Arjuna. Drona was his MA teacher and thus his respected superior. But he was obliged to Dhritarastra and Duryodhana and therefore untrustworthy. But Yudhisthira was both Arjunas superior and trustworthy and therefore could be believed. Yet Arjuna sometimes used to have a different opinion, like what to do in the house of lac - to sneak away or to fight.

[quote][cite] Baker:[/cite]

Is it possible to still respect someone, but not trust, believe or agree with them?[/quote]

Of course it is possible!
Respecting someone is not essentially concomitant with thrusting them. We can and should ideally respect even those that could somehow be untrustworthy.

.

.

. Ideally we respect all living entities based on what Maal! posted. It is not some sentimental thing or mental adjustment. Sincere respect for all living entities naturally comes with and increases by spiritual realisation. Otherwise it might remain superficial.

[quote][cite] sri_govinda_das:[/cite]You are obviously cut to a pattern...you will be unable to fully understand krishnas devotees.[/quote]

Are you going to be offended if I dont believe you this?

[quote][cite] VEDA:[/cite]Baker: Thats also possible, esp. for the young who dont have much knowledge and experience. But I speak in general.

Lets take an example of Arjuna. Drona was his MA teacher and thus his respected superior. But he was obliged to Dhritarastra and Duryodhana and therefore untrustworthy. But Yudhisthira was both Arjunas superior and trustworthy and therefore could be believed. Yet Arjuna sometimes used to have a different opinion, like what to do in the house of lac - to sneak away or to fight.[/quote]

I understand that, at least in principle. But things seem to be quite different in practice.[br]

[br]I actually cried over being told that I am "obviously cut to a pattern" and "will be unable to fully understand Krishnas devotees."[br]
[br]Ive been told such things quite a bit by devotees, or witnessed such conversations between others. To the point that it made me wonder whether perhaps this is what Vaishnava culture actually is, that this is what the proper application of scriptures is.[br]

[br]And frankly, I am not sure that it isnt.[br]

[quote][cite] Baker:[/cite][[br]I actually cried over being told that I am "obviously cut to a pattern" and "will be unable to fully understand Krishnas devotees."[br]
[br]Ive been told such things quite a bit by devotees, or witnessed such conversations between others. To the point that it made me wonder whether perhaps this is what Vaishnava culture actually is, that this is what the proper application of scriptures is.[br]

[br]And frankly, I am not sure that it isnt.[br][/quote]

The Vaishnava culture is an idealized concept. In real life, at least for those in the West, it is what the local devotees make it to be. It is you, me, and the local temple devotees. --------- It may be disheartening at times, and at times - very sweet. Try to focus on the good exchanges, and avoid devotees who treat you poorly. With time such shallow criticism (such as being cut to a pattern) by people who know very little about you, will stop bothering you. -------- The main thing is NEVER TO GIVE UP trying to improve your Krsna consciousness.

Kula -pavanna in what way is Vaishnava culture a idealised concept?That means not only have you failed to incalcate what your older devotees have chosen to provide you, but you think with your heart....rather than your intelligence faculty...your brain. ,which is why Vedic society saves such brahminical conversations for men.
Unfortunately since you think what srila Prabhupada left is an idealised concept ...you will fail to surrender completely.Why because it is not real,tangible ,it is merely floss.You think because i am a foolish person unable to appreciate vedic culture in the west ,everyone else is also foolish.Sorry but i for one love the first deitys i worshipped...Sri Sri radha Gokulananda.
Yes good advice never give up....but she is like you unable to truly perceive the truly sublime vedic culture which is sorrounding you when you worship the deity form of Sri Sri radha gopinatha.That is why women and men who are unable to see through the sastra ,struggle to progress...Because they reveal to those superior persons the moment they open there mouths to speak.
At least that respect is usually there for women when they eventually get married.
Just a good guess go to a real temple to serve!
Where they infact have installed Radha krishna deities to worship....Our real vedic culture is based upon the two rails of deity worship and sankirtan .Harinam ...chanting in the streets and being at the service of your temple president .He is meant to be advanced enough to see krishna within the deity.....That is real vedic culture not a idealised concept ...Krishna is actually there in the wood or marble.... .If you are already there in krishnas prescence ..The main thing is to never give up.......but get yourself a good partner quick.

Sri Govinda Das -

I repeat my question:

[quote][quote][cite] sri_govinda_das:[/cite]You are obviously cut to a pattern...you will be unable to fully understand krishnas devotees.[/quote]

Are you going to be offended if I dont believe you this?[/quote]

My dear baker,please do not misquote me.......You are obviously cut to a pattern...you will be unable to fully understand krishnas devotees.Myself i do not trust all devotees,because most are not sankirtan inclined.....they are self interested generally.This is a kanistha or neophyte devotee.Their faith is brittle and lacks genuine sincerity....You must learn to see krishnas will quickly.
Respect yes......all devotees but find senior devotee s women or men who have taken their gurus mood to heart.....who are commited and surrendered to sankirtan....wether it is collecting money for krishna,or selling books or preaching for krishna! ......This is what i said....No i am not offended that you dont beleive this well intentioned understanding.

[quote][cite] sri_govinda_das:[/cite]My dear baker,please do not misquote me......[/quote]

How have I misquoted you?

But how does a devotee progress in krishna conciousness without the mercy of his many siksa gurus?Which are always the sankirtan devotees.....it is an axiomatic truth...hare krishna .
Older devotees are able to see your situation within the modes of material nature.Cut to a pattern.....by your karma ,education,how one speaks,the very nature how you respond to questions.Most people reveal it ....but this is very uncomfortable for newer devotees .Since they are under so much conditioning from the modes of material nature.Under the modes it is very obvious they think,i am very special! he does not know me!,How puffed up he is!
However an older devotee sees just another prisoner....within mayadevas prison fortress.In complete illusion who thinks they are free!...............The wonderful nature of this fortress is all the inmates are insane ,......they want to stay in mayas jail......An older devotee is meant to cut such persons free ,but they rebel......because they are cut from a 3 modes of material nature pattern.
They are not special ....infact usually we have seen there questions being asked hundreds of times previously.Slight variations but same energies.....hare krishna.

[quote][cite] sri_govinda_das:[/cite]But how does a devotee progress in krishna conciousness without the mercy of his many siksa gurus?Which are always the sankirtan devotees.....it is an axiomatic truth...hare krishna .
Older devotees are able to see your situation within the modes of material nature.Cut to a pattern.....by your karma ,education,how one speaks,the very nature how you respond to questions.Most people reveal it ....but this is very uncomfortable for newer devotees .Since they are under so much conditioning from the modes of material nature.Under the modes it is very obvious they think,i am very special! he does not know me!,How puffed up he is!
However an older devotee sees just another prisoner....within mayadevas prison fortress.In complete illusion who thinks they are free!...............The wonderful nature of this fortress is all the inmates are insane ,......they want to stay in mayas jail......An older devotee is meant to cut such persons free ,but they rebel......because they are cut from a 3 modes of material nature pattern.
They are not special ....infact usually we have seen there questions being asked hundreds of times previously.Slight variations but same energies.....hare krishna.[/quote]

No, I have gotten the impression from the way you speak to me that unless I do and understand things exactly on YOUR terms, then I am wrong and offending, and should possibly leave.[br]

[br]Nevermind what any OTHER devotee says to me or thinks of me.

Like i suggested previously ....Veda prabhu and ccd are more qualified than myself......i am a dinosaur ....i still beleive what srila Prabhupada and my gurus gave us is the real thing......Also i was trained up in a different environment Bhaktine Baker,we were trained to be sankirtan devotees....krishnas frontline soldiers.....obviously i have possibly hurt one of our own.So please forgive my rough attemps to help you.....hare krishna ....good luck.

[quote][cite] sri_govinda_das:[/cite]Kula -pavanna in what way is Vaishnava culture a idealised concept?[/quote]

Idealized means: presented in an idealistic way, as opposed to fact based, or real life based. There is nothing wrong with that, as long as you dont expect everybody to achieve that ideal, or act exactly the way this ideal says.

What has just happened in this thread is a good example of the problem with respect that I am poinitng at:

A devotee, senior to me, makes an analysis or diagnosis of me (not that I asked for one). I wish to be respectful toward everyone. But that analysis or diagnosis is such that if I believed it, it would be bad for me. For example, one devotee once said that I have no faith.

What do I do? Do I pretend to agree, in the name of keeping up a respectful appearance? Do I ignore the comment and afterwards have only diplomatic communication with that devotee? Do I engage that devotee in a discussion, requiring some justification for their analysis or diagnosis of me? Do I tell them I refuse to settle for their analysis or diagnosis of me? ...

When I get told that I have "no faith" or that I am "obviously cut to a pattern and will be unable to fully understand Krishnas devotees" or some other less than auspicious analysis or diagnosis - what should I think about it, about myself, about the one who told me that?

How should I respond, with respect, to the devotee who says that to me?

[quote][cite] Baker:[/cite]What has just happened in this thread is a good example of the problem with respect that I am poinitng at:

A devotee, senior to me, makes an analysis or diagnosis of me (not that I asked for one). I wish to be respectful toward everyone. But that analysis or diagnosis is such that if I believed it, it would be bad for me. For example, one devotee once said that I have no faith.

What do I do? Do I pretend to agree, in the name of keeping up a respectful appearance? Do I ignore the comment and afterwards have only diplomatic communication with that devotee? Do I engage that devotee in a discussion, requiring some justification for their analysis or diagnosis of me? Do I tell them I refuse to settle for their analysis or diagnosis of me? ...

When I get told that I have "no faith" or that I am "obviously cut to a pattern and will be unable to fully understand Krishnas devotees" or some other less than auspicious analysis or diagnosis - what should I think about it, about myself, about the one who told me that?

How should I respond, with respect, to the devotee who says that to me?[/quote]"

Mike Robinson: And when will we understand that?[br]
Prabhup'e4da: You can understand at any moment, but it requires a little intelligence."[br] I am sorry baker. It does look like you are right, and respect is not something you can just manufacture, you have it or you do not have it. And if you do not, you should show" respect. That is the best I can come up with. But gradually you will develop respect to all living beings...

[quote] Baker: How should I respond, with respect, to the devotee who says that to me? [/quote]

How you should respond depends on how you feel about his comments, what you think your position/status is in the world and what you think his position/status is in the world.
Is he right? Then thank him for the observation and think about his words.
Is he wrong? Then thank him for his observation and respectfully defend yourself.
Is he part right and part wrong? Thank him for his observation and leave it at that.

Then...when dealing with the same person in the future keep in mind that they are the type of person who makes broad sweeping statements about you without knowing anything about you. Respect yourself and dont bother too much about a person with that approach, unless they show otherwise. But always listen to them if they are talking to you, because some things they say might be right...gold can even be found in a dirty place, but rarely.

If you cant respect someone, for whatever reason, at least dont disrespect them.

[quote][cite] ccd:[/cite] I am sorry baker. It does look like you are right, and respect is not something you can just manufacture, you have it or you do not have it. And if you do not, you should show" respect. That is the best I can come up with. But gradually you will develop respect to all living beings...[/quote]

Actually, now that we are discussing this - it seems courage has something to do with it as well.[br]
[br]For example - your first reply in my thread on agnosticism didnt seem very cordial, and I was put off. My first reaction was to become defensive, but I didnt say anything. After a while, I decided to respond in goodwill anyway - and I myself felt better.[br]
[br]I should do that more often, right? Have some faith in the devotees even though they dont seem to have faith in me.[br]
[br]Although it is easier with some devotees than others.[br]

[br]Thank you.[br]

Gurun is plural in number because anyone who gives spiritual instructions based on the revealed scriptures is accepted as a spiritual master. Although others give help in showing the way to beginners, the guru who first initiates one with the maha-mantra is to be known as the initiator, and the saints who give instructions for progressive advancement in Krsna consciousness are called instructing spiritual masters. The initiating and instructing spiritual masters are equal and identical manifestations of Krsna, although they have different dealings. Their function is to guide the conditioned souls back home, back to godhead......from chapter i verse 34...by krishna das kaviraj goswami.....this is sastric understanding of respect concerning our spiritual elders......male or female....Our many guru.

Baker -- The same thing that led you to the teachings/books/message/disciples of His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada; i.e. your intuitive gut feeling of what is right and what is wrong, what is authentic and what is phoney, who is a teacher and who is a cheater -- that is the Lord in your heart -- Paramatma -- Ksirodaksayi Vishnu -- guiding you. He is closer to you than your jugular vein. He knows the sincerity of your intentions and your innermost desires. Man proposes and God disposes. The fact that you have come to this point in your life -- situated on the spiritual transcendental path back to home, back to Godhead, means you are a very very rare soul. Only after many many lifetimes does one come to the understanding -- the faith -- that Krishna, Vasudeva -- is the all in all -- the Cause of all causes. Krishna is reciprocating with your faithful and sincere desire to know Him and when we take one step toward Krishna He takes two toward us. By the mercy of Krishna one gets guru and by the mercy of guru one gets Krishna. Krishna has led you to your eternal siksha guru, Srila Prabhupada. When the time is right Krishna will arranage for you to find your diksha guru. Dont be in a big rush for that. That will come in due time. Srila Prabhupada didnt get formally initiated until many years after his initial meeting with his guru maharaja, Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakur.

As for your dealings with other devotees. First of all -- many things might be said to you and ... "if it dont apply, let it fly." The guidelines for dealing with others are like this .... we show due respect toward those who are above us ... we befriend those on our level ... and we are compassionate toward those who are not as advanced. The other side of that is the materialistic egotistical person who envies those above him, competes covetously with his peers and shows scorn toward and condescends to those below him. So much of this is common sense. Be guided by the Lord in your heart as He reciprocates with your level of faith and sincerity ... and study the writings of Srila Prabhupada. Everything is there in his books. He made sure of that. Nothing is lacking. You are well on your way. Chant Hare Krishna, read Srila Prabhuapdas books and be happy.

sa mahatma sa durlabhah .. such a soul is very rare (that means you).

[quote][cite] Baker:[/cite][quote][cite] ccd:[/cite] I am sorry baker. It does look like you are right, and respect is not something you can just manufacture, you have it or you do not have it. And if you do not, you should show" respect. That is the best I can come up with. But gradually you will develop respect to all living beings...[/quote]

Actually, now that we are discussing this - it seems courage has something to do with it as well.[br]
[br]For example - your first reply in my thread on agnosticism didnt seem very cordial, and I was put off. My first reaction was to become defensive, but I didnt say anything. After a while, I decided to respond in goodwill anyway - and I myself felt better.[br]
[br]I should do that more often, right? Have some faith in the devotees even though they dont seem to have faith in me.[br]
[br]Although it is easier with some devotees than others.[br]

[br]Thank you.[br][/quote] Okay, the cycle is there. However the procedure or formality is to override this cycle. You show the respect even if you do not feel it. That is one of the reasons it is said -- you respect in your mind (not in your heart).

[quote][cite] ccd:[/cite]That is one of the reasons it is said -- you respect in your mind (not in your heart).[/quote]

But is this not hypocrisy then, and should be avoided as such? [br]

[br]There is the conviction among many Westerners that it is better to show true emotions, whatever they are, including hostility or anger, than to put on a show of propriety.[br]

[br]In comparison, from what I have seen from Buddhists, they dont seem to be concerned with genuineness, but with appropriateness. They consider mental states and attitudes to be something one should control and strategize with, deliberately choosing among them according to the principles of the Eightfold path. What to think or feel about something or someone is to them as much a matter of choice as it is a matter of choice which clothes one will wear or whether to choose an apple or orange if both are available.[br]

[br]Is Vaishnava culture more similar to the above Western type, or the Buddhist type?[br]

[quote][cite] ccd:[/cite]Respect is just showing that someone is higher then ourself, and we are lower. One can be higher socially or intellectually and one has to show a material respect. One has to respect anyone who chants, it is respect to the Nama Prabhu. Just as when we bow to a sannyasi, we bow to the tridanda, and when we offer respect to all living beings because the Lord is in their heart. [br] However a true Vaisnava would consider himself lower then anyone, thus he offers respect to everyone (amAnina manadena).[/quote]

I have always thought that thinking oneself lower than everyone else means one thinks that everyone is beautifuller, more intelligent, richer, more loved, more famous, more well-versed in scriptures, more pious, more spiritually advanced, faster, stronger, ... than oneself.[br]

That is actually a stage of pure chanting, I am not at that stage, how can I tell you?

[quote][cite] Baker:[/cite][quote][cite] ccd:[/cite]That is one of the reasons it is said -- you respect in your mind (not in your heart).[/quote]

But is this not hypocrisy then, and should be avoided as such? [br][br][/quote] I think it in all cases closer to eastern values then to western... but some will disagree with me. Yes respect is about being appropriate. I know some vaisnavas who will be very appropriate with everything, they create a mood of respect and deserve respect. I am not one of them, but I will try to learn a bit more... (I am by my nature disrespectful even before I started to pretend to be a devotee...)

Tell me -- what is better --- to show mercy or justice? The spiritual world is the realm of mercy. In his preaching Srila Prabhupada used words and terms like rascaldom, dull-headed, insufficient brain substance, poor fund of knowledge, fools, asses, cheaters, demons ... and other such "terms of endearment." One with mundane vision might think that Srila Prabhuapda was being disrespectful but in reality he was showering his causeless mercy upon one and all. In ordinary dealings Srila Prabhupada was always the perfect gentleman and he employed diplomacy and tact like none other; however, when it came to spreading the message of Caitanya Mahaprabhu .... teaching the absolute truth .... he was a warrior who,cut to pieces the enemies of the Lord such as impersonalists and atheistic scientists. He called libraries and universities slaughterhouses. He challenged highly positioned clergymen on the subject of meat eating and animal slaughter and would not back down even when they tried to find some neutral ground with him. Srila Prabhupada was not out to win a popularity contest. His mission wasnt to speak some pleasing words and tell people its alright to have illicit sex, eat meat, gamble and take intoxication. He didnt conform to Western dress out of some "respect" for the culture of the place he came to preach. He didnt tell us what we wanted to hear. He told us we were diseased, fallen, miserable, ignorant, blind hogs, dogs, camels and asses. When that book "Im OK, Youre OK" came out we showed it to Srila Prabhupada and his comment was, "We say "We are OK but you are not OK." Respect? In the traditional sense -- perhaps not Mercy? In the absolute sense -- definitely yes. So we are not interested in respect in and of itself. If one is a true devotee it means he is compassionate and he cant bear to see others suffer. What greater respect is there than give someone enlightenment, the secret of all secrets, the king of knowledge, the absolute truth. A pure devotee is in the business of saving souls and he is thus the well-wisher of all living beings. Respect is automatically present in one who is pure of heart and motive. If I love you then I automatically respect you. No? Just as mercy is higher than justice -- love is higher than respect. If one is a surrendered soul he/she automatically possesses all good qualities. Thats the standard. Can somebody support all this with Bhagavad-gita verses? There are many. Seek them out. It will be a good exercise.

[quote][cite] portnoy:[/cite]Tell me -- what is better --- to show mercy or justice? [/quote]

I would think that to show either, one would first need to know (and know one knows) which is which.[br]

[br][quote]In his preaching Srila Prabhupada used words and terms like rascaldom, dull-headed, insufficient brain substance, poor fund of knowledge, fools, asses, cheaters, demons ... and other such "terms of endearment." One with mundane vision might think that Srila Prabhuapda was being disrespectful but in reality he was showering his causeless mercy upon one and all.[/quote]

I dont know how calling someone a rascal etc. is mercy?[br]

[br]Myself, I dont necessarily take offense when someone calls me a rascal etc. It all depends who calls me that: if it is my grandparents, parents, the priest or my other seniors/superiors, I dont take offense. But I do take offense if a stranger, an equal or an inferior/junior calls me that.[br]

[br]Also, if a senior/superior calls me names, and then this person behaves lowly in some way or other, that renders the name calling offensive.[br]

[br][quote]In ordinary dealings Srila Prabhupada was always the perfect gentleman and he employed diplomacy and tact like none other; however, when it came to spreading the message of Caitanya Mahaprabhu .... teaching the absolute truth .... he was a warrior who,cut to pieces the enemies of the Lord such as impersonalists and atheistic scientists. He called libraries and universities slaughterhouses. He challenged highly positioned clergymen on the subject of meat eating and animal slaughter and would not back down even when they tried to find some neutral ground with him. Srila Prabhupada was not out to win a popularity contest. His mission wasnt to speak some pleasing words and tell people its alright to have illicit sex, eat meat, gamble and take intoxication. He didnt conform to Western dress out of some "respect" for the culture of the place he came to preach. He didnt tell us what we wanted to hear.[/quote]

Sure, and I understand how somoene of his position and mission can speak like that.[br]

[br]But I have noticed that some people, perhaps in an effort to walk Srila Prabhupadas path, try to be like him or imitate him - but they imitate him only in some aspects, not in all. So for example, they will call people rascals, go on karmi bashing sprees and such. But as long as they also dont chant 64 rounds daily at least, dont speak Sanskrit fluently and translate large volumes of Vedic literature, dont set out for a new country to preach while already in an old age, and so on - it seems to me it is sheer disrespect to call people names.[br]

[br][quote]If one is a true devotee it means he is compassionate and he cant bear to see others suffer. What greater respect is there than give someone enlightenment, the secret of all secrets, the king of knowledge, the absolute truth.[/quote]

Sure, but to actually do this, and rightfully expect others to take ones actions as giving them enlightenment, one actually has to be in possession of that absolute truth. Otherwise, one is nothing but a spiritual bully, dont you think?[br]

[br]All kinds of people are saying they just wish to enlighten us, and we take them in good faith, we let them call us names and take our money, we respect them and obey them - but at the end, we dont feel enlightened at all.[br]

[br][quote]If one is a surrendered soul he/she automatically possesses all good qualities.[/quote]

Again - sure. But can someone who is not surrendered adequately recognize those good qualities?[br]

> There is the conviction among many Westerners that it is better to show true emotions, whatever they are, including hostility or anger, than to put on a show of propriety.

In material life this doesnt work. If you want to graduate, you have to get along with your teachers regardless of what youl feel about them. Same with your job, state representatives, neighbors, family, etc. Basically with everyone whom you "cant avoid" and that means majority of people around you. You can choose only your friends.
The whole material life is about hiding true emotions. This is one of the factors why depression spreads so much alongside the global civilization.

Heres an example. A person is giving a lecture or a class in the temple and he keeps talking in terms of "the karmis ... they" or "you have to follow strictly...." rather than including himself and using "we." Its not so much what a person says or does but HOW. Yes -- if some person is calling you a fool and a rascal and is doing so out of anger or envy or passion then naturally you will be offended. When a pure devotee uses those terms it is out of pure love and compassion. As far as imitating the guru --- that is a big mistake. Emulate but dont imitate.

All these questions and concerns have their place but the fact of the matter is --- the more we awaken our dormant spiritual nature as eternal loving servants of the Supreme Personality of Godhead -- the more everything will become clear to us. In a dark room we cant distinguish what is what and we become confused but as soon as some light enters into the room all that darkness is dissipated and everything becomes clear. Everything!! In that clarity we will be able to comprehend the relative in the absolute and the absolute in the relative .. we will be able to see harmony and symmetry with what previously appeared to be contradictions and moreover, we will experience by direct perception of the self -- eternal bliss and knowledge. From faith comes realization and from realization comes more faith which brings more realization which gives us more faith and on and on and on. Its a wonderful process. Dive in to the ocean of the nectar of devotion.

[quote][cite] VEDA:[/cite]> There is the conviction among many Westerners that it is better to show true emotions, whatever they are, including hostility or anger, than to put on a show of propriety.[br]

[br]In material life this doesnt work. If you want to graduate, you have to get along with your teachers regardless of what youl feel about them. Same with your job, state representatives, neighbors, family, etc. Basically with everyone whom you "cant avoid" and that means majority of people around you. You can choose only your friends.
The whole material life is about hiding true emotions. This is one of the factors why depression spreads so much alongside the global civilization.[/quote]

Of course it doesnt work in material life to show ones "true emotions". But at the same time, we are often expected to show only our "true emotions". I know many people who react very negatively once they have some reason to conclude that a persons politeness or kindness werent "genuine".[br]

[br]But while we in the West tend to say we "hide our true emotions", I think the Buddhists, for example, would envoke neither the concept of "hiding" nor of "true (emotion)". It seems to me their way of understanding human behavior is cause to a lot less stress than the Western one.[br]

[br]What about the devotees? It seems that many operate out of the paradigm that there are true and false (staged, pretended) emotions, and that one either shows or hides ones true emotions - which is quite the usual Western paradigm.[br]

[br]If, for example, the first feeling that comes up in one for someone is anger, but one then doesnt show that person that one is angry: According to Vaishnava culture, should one think of this as "hiding true emotions" or as "acting appropriately"?[br]

[quote][cite] portnoy:[/cite]All these questions and concerns have their place but the fact of the matter is --- the more we awaken our dormant spiritual nature as eternal loving servants of the Supreme Personality of Godhead -- the more everything will become clear to us. In a dark room we cant distinguish what is what and we become confused but as soon as some light enters into the room all that darkness is dissipated and everything becomes clear. Everything!! In that clarity we will be able to comprehend the relative in the absolute and the absolute in the relative .. we will be able to see harmony and symmetry with what previously appeared to be contradictions and moreover, we will experience by direct perception of the self -- eternal bliss and knowledge. From faith comes realization and from realization comes more faith which brings more realization which gives us more faith and on and on and on. Its a wonderful process. Dive in to the ocean of the nectar of devotion.[/quote]

I suppose so ... I wouldnt know. I have no personal realization of any truth presented in the scriptures, no experience of any bliss, only some mild affection for the color saffron and the Pancatattva mantra, and some small determination to find the Absolute truth. I feel I am left to the mercy of the devotees, hence my focus on social issues.

[quote][cite] ccd:[/cite](I am by my nature disrespectful even before I started to pretend to be a devotee...)[/quote]

To me, its a bit as if you had "Dont waste my time" written on your forhead. It can be intimidating, but I dont think its bad. :)

I read this today in the Manu-samhita.

2.136: Wealth, kinship, age, actions and the fifith, learning are the basis for respect.
2.137: Whoever has these five in quantity and quality is worthy of respect among the three classes, and even a servant [the fourth class] if he has reached one hundered years of age.

So the reality and expectations together make the hide and seek game of materialists. Was it Shakespeare who compared this world to a theater? Its quite apt.

I dont know too many Buddhists but from my limited experience with Japanese their hiding of their emotions behind the polite mask is one of the first things one wonders about when meeting them. If its related to Buddhism I cant say.

True emotions pertain to jiva, false ones to the subtle body. A devotee should behave as a perfect gentleman (SPs definition) who doesnt disturb others unnecessarily.

As one advances, the anger comes less and less. If it still comes, hiding it is the way of a gentleman.

From Shakespeares "As You Like It"

All the worlds a stage,
And all the men and women merely players:
They have their exits and their entrances;
And one man in his time plays many parts,
His acts being seven ages. At first the infant,
Mewling and puking in the nurses arms.
And then the whining school-boy, with his satchel
And shining morning face, creeping like snail
Unwillingly to school. And then the lover,
Sighing like furnace, with a woeful ballad
Made to his mistress eyebrow. Then a soldier,
Full of strange oaths and bearded like the pard,
Jealous in honour, sudden and quick in quarrel,
Seeking the bubble reputation
Even in the cannons mouth. And then the justice,
In fair round belly with good capon lined,
With eyes severe and beard of formal cut,
Full of wise saws and modern instances;
And so he plays his part. The sixth age shifts
Into the lean and slipperd pantaloon,
With spectacles on nose and pouch on side,
His youthful hose, well saved, a world too wide
For his shrunk shank; and his big manly voice,
Turning again toward childish treble, pipes
And whistles in his sound. Last scene of all,
That ends this strange eventful history,
Is second childishness and mere oblivion,
Sans teeth, sans eyes, sans taste, sans everythin

[quote][cite] VEDA:[/cite]I dont know too many Buddhists but from my limited experience with Japanese their hiding of their emotions behind the polite mask is one of the first things one wonders about when meeting them. If its related to Buddhism I cant say.[/quote]

According to Buddhism, as far as I understood and practiced, there are only four appropriate attitudes - called the four sublime attitudes or the four brahmaviharas: goodwill, compassion, sympathetic joy, and equanimity. One always has to make an effort to choose between these four with discernment. From the outside, this then tends to look like traditional Japanese behavior.[br]

[br][quote]True emotions pertain to jiva, false ones to the subtle body.[/quote]

Thus the true emotions are related to being eternally full of knowledge and bliss ...[br]

[br][quote]A devotee should behave as a perfect gentleman (SPs definition) who doesnt disturb others unnecessarily.

As one advances, the anger comes less and less. If it still comes, hiding it is the way of a gentleman.[/quote]

"We should be too big to take offense and too noble to give it."[br]
[br]Abraham Lincoln

[quote][cite] deena:[/cite]I read this today in the Manu-samhita.

2.136: Wealth, kinship, age, actions and the fifith, learning are the basis for respect.
2.137: Whoever has these five in quantity and quality is worthy of respect among the three classes, and even a servant [the fourth class] if he has reached one hundered years of age.[/quote]That possibly relates to the standard, where the kinship is the reason of seniority/respect among ksatriyas, wealth is the base of respect/seniority among vaisyas, among sudras it is age and among brahmanas its learning.