You can submit your article, report, announcement, ad etc. by mailing to editor@dandavats.com

Comments Posted By Matsya

Displaying 1 To 15 Of 15 Comments

Why Veganism in Iskcon does not work, part 2

“Perhaps the best outcome of this discussion is a tacit admittance that veganism is an anartha in the same class as watching TV or shopping.
Accidentally, that would also explain long and passionate posts in the defense of this attachment. Try to take teenager’s phone away and see how irrationality ensues.”
Very funny Sitalatma. Nice to see some humor.

But like many other remarks or arguments, I’ve seen in this discussion, it simply brushes off many of the relevant facts and does not answer the questions asked. It’s akin to asking an evolutionist, to explain the gaps in that theory, and then have him answer with a funny comment like. “Well obviously none of us monkeys are capable of explaining evolution to you intelligent humans.” It’s a funny comment. However it also tries to throw the other side on the defensive, with a paternalistic tone, that suggests all their thoughtful, genuine, sincere, arguments are based on childish irrationality.

Anyway good luck on trying to take away your teenager’s phone, if and when that may happen in your household. You may find that teenagers are adept at spotting the hypocrisy of their parents. While we can get away with a wonderful external projection to the world at large, it falls flat when we try to do so with our teens. They’ve lived with us, and have seen all the ugly anarthas, and lies, we may try to hide. They know when we’re B.S.ing (appropriate term for this discussion :) They’ve seen us, when the masks down, and know when we’re saying something, we ‘want to project to the world’, that we believe, but in reality we don’t believe. I do appreciate your humor though.

» Posted By Matsya On Apr 10, 2013 @ 3:06 pm

I asked you a number of questions. Some of which, I don’t believe you really answered directly. So here goes again.

1. How do you know what is in the heart of every vegan? I thought only paramatama knows this?

2. As what you claim to be the motivation for every vegan, does not apply to me, or numerous friends I have, Do you then believe me to be a liar?

3. “The only damage vegans would sustain is to their precious philosophy. They CAN take milk prasadam but they refuse it to pamper their egos.”
How do you know, for certain, that 2 or 3 million vegans don’t take milk for the same reason? And again am I and my friends all liars, if we honestly say, that is not our reason for taking it?

4. Do you think you might have ulterior motives, that don’t necsssarily involve the good of all living entities, in your motivation for some of your statements?

For me, the main reason I write, is to try and explain the position of vegans, and to point out the inaccuracies and untruths that have been attributed to me, and them.
I don’t really want to change your belief about milk etc. I feel you’re entitled to it, and if it works for you, that’s great. I don’t want to change the vedic model of cow farming, or water down the essence of what Prabhupada said. In fact, I would say, that preaching compassionately, and getting souls to eat prasadam is much more the essence of his teachings.

I do believe that this type of ‘preaching’ is very counterproductive to the stated goals of Prabhupada, and I would like to influence those who argue this way, by giving them food for thought.( offered ‘food for thought’, that is.)
I hope that you will reconsider writing and speaking in the manner presented above. I believe that it is quite possible, that the desire to win the argument, and the egotistical desire to protect, (often) badly researched beliefs, is getting in the way of true compassion. My main desire, is to see these vegans attracted to KC. And I think the above article, and many of the above comments would have the opposite effect. So please consider, if your desire to win, and beat that ‘anartha’ out of those demoniac vegans, is based on compassion, or ignorance and pride.

You can judge this, by the results of your ‘preaching’. And the results of Gunagrahi Maharaj’s preaching to straight edge kids in the 90’s. Many of the kids were hard core vegans and many joined or took up K.C. I don’t believe, his initial preaching involved smashing that “anartha”.

» Posted By Matsya On Apr 9, 2013 @ 4:38 am

“but perfection means that one must give up his anarthas. Veganism is an anartha, a thing without value that we are being attached to.”

So you don’t play football? You don’t bring your kids to the movies? You don’t watch any TV or any movies, or read any newspapers? You never eat out in restaurants? You follow all 4 principles very strictly?
We might want to pull the plank out of our own eye, before we spend useless time chasing those demoniac vegans for the anartha off “compassion.”

“By demanding/expecting/insisting/appreciating clearly marked vegan prasadam they are trying to convert us, to convince us that their view deserves consideration and support and that we should accommodate their ideology.”
Again, are you for real? If you really feel your faith is that threatened, you may want to consider living in the woods. I’ve been in many devotee restaurants, that had clearly marked vegan foods. This was done, out of compassion, to give those souls, with that “anartha” the chance to eat prasadam. Something you apparently wouldn’t do. If your faith is strengthened, you will no longer feel this fear. You may come to the conclusion, that when Bhaktisidanta said “he would serve meat, to make devotees.” He probably wouldn’t have, but he was placing the principle of attracting souls to Krishna, way above any smarta Brahman considerations. Now, I’ve a feeling, that if he was willing to say that, he would have no problem serving vegan prasadam, if that’s the only simple step it took to bring these souls to Krishna.

So many times you make statements about Mayavadis etc, and your perception of Prabhupada’s attitude towards them, and then use it to justify your attitude to vegans. Again you’re no Prabhupada. These are not bewildered Indian Mayavadis. You interpret these actions, as justifications, for your belief about vegans. They appear to reflect your anger, which is raja. And it appears to be disguised or misunderstood as KC ( your words do come across to me as angry) It’s possible that you may be putting your ego and your interpretations above the essence of his mission.

» Posted By Matsya On Apr 9, 2013 @ 4:07 am

Let’s tie up the loose ends. Maybe we should tie up, anyone who disagrees with us, in any way, as well.

“In our tradition we must learn to discern between vaishnava and avaishnava behavior as well as differentiate between various classes of devotees, therefore judgments are necessary.”
For me, it’s not so black and white, but then I would appear to be in the lower class of devotees.

“Generalizations are also unavoidable in any discussion.”
This is another generalization, that seems to blindly imposes someone’s limited vision of the truth on everyone. I’ve been in many discussions where generalizations were avoided, by some very thoughtful participants. You may want to say, after many of your points. “I’m speaking for myself, but I’m again assuming I’m the paramatma, and will state my relative understanding and vision, of the truth, as absolute.”

“Our acharyas never invoked “not surrendered enough” reason to avoid smashing all kins of misconceptions. They never said “I don’t have an axe to grind” with apa sampradayas, mayavadis, sahajiyas and all other deviants.” “I’m just trying to follow their footsteps.”
Oh, I’ve heard that one so many times before. In almost every case, the ‘follower’, was using the philosophy, and the attempt to follow, or preach, partially as a shield, which they hid their false ego behind. Yes, we can use philosophy as a battering ram, to batter our fellow devotees and humans, into our (absolutely correct) way of seeing things.

We can hide behind Prabhupada and use him as justification, for our anger, pride and arrogance. We can use him as an excuse to avoid compassion or be impersonal. “I’m following in his footsteps.”
Well, as Prabhupada said, about the Saivites. “If you can drink an ocean of poison, then you can smoke ganja.”
So too, if you can invoke the great compassion that Prabhupada had. If you can sincerely see everyone, as pure spirit, without your ego and the modes getting involved, you can preach, in that heavy way.

I’m not arguing with the principal of preaching clearly, without watering things down. Just with the non compassionate and angry way it comes across to me, and my vegan friends. You may well be the current or next Bhaktivedanta in waiting, but you don’t come across like that. And the heavy preaching of Prabhupada, minus, the extreme compassion he showed (as he looked at people, seeing them only as pure spirit soul.) usually falls flat, when imitated by people swimming in the modes.

» Posted By Matsya On Apr 9, 2013 @ 3:03 am

On a lighter note. I had a laugh at the choice of words for the first line of the original article.
“After having received a healthy feedback from my original article I thought it necessary to write another article.”
Was the feedback healthy, or were the people giving the feedback healthy? Perhaps due to their dietary choices :)

Anyway, try not to get too upset, if my opinions don’t match yours. Or if my questions are a little uncomfortable or pointed. The debate, if respectful, is healthy. I am aware that some vegans can be so arrogant and self righteous. I’m aware that a proud attitude like that, could, and probably would slow down that particular vegan’s spiritual advancement.
But it is not necessarily brought on by their dietary choice, as the same attitude exists in millions of people, vegan or not. it’s not an attitude exclusive to vegans. I just strongly dispute the conclusion, that being vegan bars one from spiritual advancement. Automatically makes one arrogant, or indeed, that one can attach the same motivations and beliefs to an entire group, based on any one thing, particularly their ahimsa diet.

» Posted By Matsya On Apr 1, 2013 @ 6:40 pm

So why push your higher realizations on the rest of us lower vegans. Why not just appreciate the service I do, and the simple choice I make to eat the healthier parts of prasadam ? Once in India as a young devotee, I went on parikrama. Hearing the transcendental glories of a holy well, that Krishna dug, I drank a lot from it. I was sure, that the water being transcendental, the problems of drinking Indian water, would not effect me. I got an almost immediate reaction and nearly dehydrated over the next 3 days, as I continually threw up. My realization, was obviously not up to par, with my action. Would you drink a cup of water from every holy well in Vrindavana ? If not, could you be accused of “Putting mundane considerations first, keeps you out of that wonderful transcendental zone that even someone like me has been given glimpses into.”

I’m sure I read somewhere in the SB that Krishna was absolute. He was non different from his picture, his food or his name. Is it possible that the real lack of spiritual vision, is from those who possibly see, non milk prasadam, a vegan eats, as being different and less effective from milk prasadam? Is it possible, the attack on vegans is partly due to seeing the arrogance, that a smug vegan can have, reflected back at us? As he argues the absolute correctness of his position. Thinking himself superior to devotees. There are some vegans, who can be righteous and who are condescending. It comes with the territory. just look at our own early devotional life, ( or even current one) and remember how arrogant we could be.

Finally,I thought I read in the SB, that there were 9 processes of devotional service. The performance of even a “single one” can bring the practitioner to perfection. So what to speak of a vegan, who comes to the temple and performs all 9, but just avoids milk products ? Will he not advance? Do we really believe that simply smelling the flowers alone, (without prasadam) can bring perfection? Does it not display a huge lack of faith in the holy name, to assume that the one ‘flaw’ of eating vegan, will stop him advancing? Is it not the 5th offense? Why risk being so petty and vindictive? The holy name will save us all, vegan and non vegan. Let’s not risk chasing compassionate souls away, for reasons that may have a lot more to do with our false ego, than genuine compassion and spirituality. I hope I haven’t hurt anyone’s feeling too much with these posts, and you can see my point of view.

» Posted By Matsya On Apr 1, 2013 @ 6:23 pm

I still am surprised at the answers here, and why some people are going to such lengths to prove that Vegans “don’t believe in Krishna’s ability to purify food. Don’t/won’t appreciate prasadam” etc.
Sitalatma wrote. “My question still remains – we know that ordinary people can easily embrace Krishna prasadam without any ideological or philosophical objections. What is the success rate with vegans finally deciding to accept milk because it’s Krishna prasadam?”
Don’t know the success rate. It would probably be higher if people didn’t seem to have such an anti vegan agenda. For God’s sake., They are avoiding killing animals and eating animal products, out of compassion. Can’t we be like Prabhupada, and see the positive in that. Perhaps if we were to encourage that, and be appreciative, we might have a better job of explaining the concept of prasadam.

Sitalatma wrote “Vegans do not believe in Krishna’s ability to purify offered food of all karma and they do not believe that prasadam has any transcendental qualities, they view offering food as a quaint and harmless religious custom, nothing else, ie they don’t believe in Krishna as the Supreme Personality of Godhead at all, they put their own understanding of morality above philosophy of Krishna consciousness.” Again, unless you are the Ishvara in the heart of every vegan, how can you make such a judgemental statement, that seems to be impersonalism. It again put a few million people together, ascribes the same beliefs, motivations, etc to them. And it doesn’t take into account their individuality. That’s what the Nazis did with the Jews. No wonder Vegans would be turned off, when a similar judgemental attitude is displayed, by the Spiritual people who are supposed to be compassionate. By the very people who are claiming “you’re not the body, you’re not protestant, Catholic, vegan?” etc.
So what of the many older devotees ( often Sanyassi’s) I have seen, who, now in poor health, eat mostly vegetables and fruit. Are they guilty of this maha apparadha of not seening prasadam as transcendental ?
According to Hari Sauri, an argument arose between devotees, who said everyone should eat the prasadam, regardless of if it was stale or had fallen on the floor, and those who refused to do so. Prabhupada answered. “let those whose have that realization take it, and let those who have the different realization not. He didn’t try to force anyone, and as always was accepting, compassionate and tolerant.

» Posted By Matsya On Apr 1, 2013 @ 5:25 pm

(Last) PART 3. I say all this, not to criticize you, Dusyanta. But to point out:
1.That most intelligent, (Yes, the intelligent class, that Prabhupapda wanted to join) rational people, would probably reject your arguments as sentimental, fanatical, speculative and not well researched. Therefore, the many wonderful aspects of Vedic farming, and lifestyle would be lost to them, as they would possibly reject all you say.
2. If I were an open minded, non devotee, vegan, who read this article, the tone, content, and arguments would probably turn me off, so much, that I would reject the devotees. Considering them, extremist and fanatics, I would miss out on all the wonderful beauty, that the society offers. I would guess many Vegans would react this way.
3. Why waste so much time and energy fighting and competing with something that, as you say “there is no Vegan competition to cow protection whatsoever.” Isn’t there enough meat eaters, that have few of the compassionate satvic principles of Vegans. Wouldn’t your time be better spent, trying to show them the error of killing animals.
4. Why not create the sustainable farm. Why not show the beautiful alternative of KC, rather than criticize. Is the KC philosophy and lifestyle, not beautiful enough to attract people on it’s own merits?

Finally. Sitalatma wrote. “but are they embracing Krishna prasadam”. They would willingly embrace Krishna prasadam, that is not made of animal products. The better question might be. ‘Am I compassionate enough, to make it for them?’.
Sitalatma also wrote, “like ordinary people do”..My God. When I joined I was considered anything but ordinary. Should I not have joined because the devotees were not ordinary? What is “ordinary” Sitalatma? Should we apply your personal, definition of ordinary to all who visit our temples, and reject those who don’t fit your criteria?
The irony of some of the arguments,is that they are often the exact same childish ones, meat eaters, use against Vegetarians. Like this one.”if we all stop eating meat, wouldn’t the animals over run us?” To which my standard answer is. 1.’ Don’t worry, unfortunately, the entire population will never stop eating meat,’ and 2.’ Yea, the cows will break out of their factory farms, grab their machine guns and kill us all.’ Let’s grow up, and realize that Vedic, cow-sustained farms can (and probably will) co-exist with Vegans. They are not mutually exclusive. There is no need to attack or disenfranchise Vegans from KC.

» Posted By Matsya On Mar 27, 2013 @ 6:14 am

PART 2. ‘The deep meditation that Veganism offers in the secular world does not exist.” What meditation do some? most? or all? vegans offer? This article is filled with “straw men arguments”, where an argument that nobody offered, is put forward, and then shot down.
“In fact there is no Vegan competition to Cow protection whatsoever.”
Exactly! Correct! The devotees who seem to view Veganism as a bad thing appear to be the only people “in a competition”. It really might be more useful, to ask, ‘why do I feel threatened enough by Vegans, and see their satvic, ahimsa diet, and principles as competition to mine? Am I envious of it? Do I feel guilty? Do I feel bad, that their diet can lead to greater clarity of mind and excellent health? Believe me ( If you’re still willing to base your evidence on an opinion) I’ve tried the ‘extreme total raw vegan diet, and I’ve never felt more clear minded, and conscious, than then.
” Out side of Iskcon there is debate, as the independence of every living entity is never called into question”
Do you seriously mean that ?…. I joined because I was questioning everything, and I have many ‘non devotee’ friends who question, these things.
“Because we have a Founder-Acharya of Iskcon, the antithesis of Veganism,”
You might want to consider, that you are projecting your beliefs onto Prabhupada. I always thought Prabhupada was the antithesis of a lack of KC. I always thought ‘utility was the principle’. I always thought the overriding principle was, ‘always remember Krishna and never forget him’. And in order to do so, we ‘accept whatever is favorable to KC’. You may want to consider, beyond your (possibly narrow) vision, that a Vegan diet may be very favorable to a particular individuals spiritual progress. This is a personal philosophy, is it not ? And we are all individuals, with individual desires and needs ?
“authorised practises, Instruction, association, and Scriptural evidences.”
“Are there not many sages and yogis who lived on the grains and fruits of the forests, in the SB? Where in, “a leaf, a flower, a fruit, or water, (note, does not specifically mention milk) does it exclude Vegans?….. Ok, I’ll stop here. This article, appears to be very badly researched, and written, with most of the evidence based on a few conversation with Vegans. I say this, not to criticize you, but to show you, that. (Cont)

» Posted By Matsya On Mar 27, 2013 @ 5:15 am

SOME THOUGHTS ON THE ARTICLE.
Let’s go back to the original stated argument. “Why Veganism in Iskcon does not work”. The very fact that there are many vegans, who practice “Veganism”, in Iskcon, would suggest, this is somewhat incorrect.
“it appears that in the secular world there is basically just one reason for being Vegan……just a dietary consideration ……based on the aversion to violence in the Dairy industry and….eating meat and fish.”
What is the secular world ? Do you believe that all the millions of vegans are ‘secular’, and therefore not religious, or do you only see religiosity, as belonging only to a/your very small tight knit group, and all others as being secular ?
If you speak to vegans, (like vegetarians), there are many many reasons for becoming one. It kind of amazes me, that a vegetarian would not know this. Some do it for health, some because of ethics, some because of morals, some because of a belief in the soul. Again, could you explain how you are privy to the thoughts of millions of vegans ? Is it based on a few conversation, with ‘non secular’ devotee Vegans ?
“Many Vegans take intoxications, engage in illicit sexlife and perhaps gamble, considering this lifestyle to be totally acceptable.” I know many vegans who, except for sexlife, follow the other principles, and are in monogamous relationships. I know plenty of devotees, (or ex devotees, if you wish to use that label) who break all of the above principles. Based on your logic, a non devotee, who keeps the principles, could reject the ‘Vedic Cow theory,’ despite it’s many wonderful merits, if a devotee who is not strictly following the principles, puts forward the cow protection argument. Surely, you can see, how illogical that is?
“I have not actually been able to find a Vegan producing farmstyle that is sustainable and eco friendly that actually follows its credentials.” Please do some research before writing these articles. Not sure if it is ok to put this link to a sustainable eco friendly farm :) If the moderator takes it out, then just do a simple google search. Also, I believe it would be possible to be Vegan and let bulls and cows live in peace, taking their manure, but now their milk.
“So where do Vegans draw the line? The answer is the line is arbitrary…Vegans are consistently inconsistent” Again so are the various groups of devotees, and individual devotees. Some use leather, some not, etc etc. (Cont)

» Posted By Matsya On Mar 27, 2013 @ 4:36 am

It is articles like these, that make me feel so welcomed amongst the devotees. I’m glad we’re using our energy to fight such a demoniac source. People who dare to be compassionate, even performing the greater austerity, of avoiding leather and dairy products. We can see from this type of commitment, the zeal of these fanatics. Prabhupada built a house the whole world could live in. Except for those of us who upon seeing, the horrific pain that cows are put through, in order to get milk and leather, decide out of horrible compassion, to try to limit our support of concentration camp, factory farms.

It is also wonderful to know, that impersonalism, does not mean, that you can ascribe the same motivation, judgement, and understanding of what someone is thinking, to a couple of million people. Apparently impersonalism, has nothing to do, with depersonalizing, and avoiding seeing the individuality of 2 or 3 million vegans. It’s not impersonal to lump 3 million people together, call them ‘vegans’ and then tar all of them with the same motives, and criticize them.

I will now inform my numerous vegan friends of the error of their ways. I will let them know, that their current abhorrence of the horrific violence of modern factory farms, is really bad, and not the act of a compassionate soul. I’m sure these misguided souls will come flocking to the temple, ready to drink the millions of gallons of non violent milk, that our farms are currently producing. I’m sure they’ll be delighted to see, that this is not mere rhetoric, and we have tons of practical examples of sustainable Ahimsa farms. They’ll be delighted to know, these farms exist all over the west, at present. They’ll be happy to know that Prabhupada didn’t believe in telling people, that something would exist in the future. That he often said to the scientists, “What is this, ‘we will produce life in the future’, let me see you do it “now”. Yes, they will be glad to know, that their mere ‘actions” are no match for our ‘words’, and we back up our rethoric, of thriving sustainable compassionate farms, with unlimited examples of successful farms, in the West, run by Westerners who are no mere ‘keyboard generals’. but follow through with positive action.
I’m also sure that, this criticizing of vegans, who often perform an immense amount of austerity to follow their principles, has nothing to do, with a slight feeling of inadequacy, or even jealousy, or guilt, on our behalf.

» Posted By Matsya On Mar 18, 2013 @ 6:17 am

Twenty Foot Flames: Lord Nrsimhadeva

“Unable to find any other source of deliverance, they all approached Govinda to take shelter of his lotus feet. At that time all the inhabitants of Vrndavana began to pray to Lord Krsna. Dear Krsna, they prayed. You are all-powerful, and You are very affectionate to Your devotees. Now please protect us who have been much harassed by angry Indra……. Lord Krsna…… I have lifted this hill, which will protect you exactly like a huge umbrella I think this is a proper arrangement to relieve you from your immediate distress. Be happy along with your animals underneath this great umbrella. ”
I sometimes think that one of the greatest struggles in KC as a westerner is not recognizing the degree that we have impersonal tendencies. I tend to think that the impersonalism is a Mayavadi/Indian issue but constantly find myself struggling over simple things like, should I pray to Krishna when in material distress. We are persons, he is a person. We feel material distress and therefore pray to him for protection. Surely if the residents of Vrindavana do it, then it is something we should emulate, but the impersonal, unfeeling side of me, thinks I should not do what is the most natural thing in the world for the soul to do. Which is see that I am powerlessly trapped in this material energy, am unable to do anything but desire and therefore take shelter of Krsna and ask him to protect me. Is this not our natural constitutional position? I would also like to hear other devotee’s opinion on this, particularly any senior devotees who have lifetimes of realizations on this. I only have my limited realization on this issue to go on.

» Posted By Matsya On Jan 8, 2010 @ 5:49 pm

How Will the Forthcoming Eclipses Affect You?

I am glad a number of devotees pointed out the flaws in the original article. I had also been having difficulty making a connection between the eclipses and what ever is currently in the news cycle. Many more similar “horrific” events occur daily, but if the western news media does not deem them newsworthy we don’t hear of them. Almost 5.5 million people have died in the last six years in a war in the Congo. That is greater than the number of Jews killed in the holocaust in a similar period, yet hardly anyone hears of it. The random events used in the examples, for the effects of the solar eclipse, pale in comparison to the hundreds and thousands who are dying daily in that one war.
Having said that, I believe that the tone and delivery of some of these rebukes has been anything but proper Vaishnava behavior. I perceive some of the attacks to be very bitter, personal and hurtful. It is my perception, but judging from other comments, I am not alone. Why not make these valid points without the (perceived) sarcasm, judgment and criticism.
Trying to justify Vaishnava apparadha with an unrelated excerpt plucked from the Mahabharata is almost laughable were it not so serious. It is apples and oranges. Vidura’s position was an advisor to the King.( a far cry from our lowly state) His job, was to advise the King. (Maybe Patita can confirm, if he has you in his employ:-) )
You cannot compare this with an online Vaisnava forum. There are many more differences. Like Lord Siva drinking poison, while also taking drugs, it would mean that we would have to follow all the examples set by the pure devotees in this pastime. Would we humbly sit by, as our wife was disrobed and dishonored? Would we return for another gambling match when Dhritarastra beckoned again? Would we ask for blessing from Dhritarastra and still honor and take care of him after he had caused the murder of all our children? If we are to follow the example of the Mahabharata, then surely it is unbearable tolerance, humility and (to my modern day mind) an insane level of respect for elders that we must copy. This conversation with an older Godbrother would not even exist if we did that. You ask “what is our offense”. It is not the pointing out of the flaws in the original article (that was a good service), but the manner, language, words and way that it was done, which often comes across to me as nasty and spiteful. Hoping my perception is clouded and incorrect :)

» Posted By Matsya On Dec 22, 2009 @ 6:46 am

Srila Prabhupada was not alone to claim the monlanding was a hoax

(continued) Which brings me back to Varnadhi’s original point. Quoting some, “whack job” that you downloaded from the internet as an authoritative source is the same mad science approach that I have seen numerous devotees (often insecure ones) use, over the years, to the discredit of Iskcon and Prabhupada. It only perpetuates the belief, by many non devotees that we are ignorant. And why wouldn’t it, when you take such bogus material practitioners as your guru, and quote them like they are Prabhupada. Your inconsistency in arguing, and your refusal to answer some basic questions, leaves me unconvinced. Unfortunately, the people you meet on the street, (who come to the same conclusion) don’t have the faith in Prabhupada that I have and may never get to hear this beautiful philosophy because of this.

» Posted By Matsya On Oct 16, 2009 @ 8:14 pm

Thank you Varnadi, for taking this stand. I don’t quite get it. Payonidhi and a number of other devotees shoot down any proof that Varnadi presents, which goes against their opinions, with an argument that goes like this: The karmis who have done this research are subject to the 4 failings of the senses, tendency to cheat etc. Therefore I am not interested and will not believe what they say. Here are a few quotes from past posts. “Instead of relying on imperfect mind and senses I am more interested in what the acaryas and Krsna has stated about the moon” plus “a mundaner (1) is sure to commit mistakes, (2) is invariably illusioned, (3) has the tendency to cheat others and (4) is limited by imperfect senses.”
However Varnadi’s original point was “my issue is not with Prabhupada or sastra; it is with using pseudo-science and quickly Googled quotes to back up poorly understood concepts and somehow or other trying to change someone’s opinion into some kind of absolute truth.” Although I don’t agree with everything Varnadi has said, I find his arguments to be reasonable, logical understandable and most of all consistent.
His original point still unanswered. The tactic of quoting large tracts of scriptures is then added, by those against him. The basic message then transmitted is “ You are wrong, the shastra is right and it agrees with me. It is not subject to the 4 flaws and is infallible, therefore my opinion is infallible.
However, hardly any of his detractors have answered his questions. Maybe they will answer mine.
1. Payonidhi, if you truly are “only interested in what the acharyas say” and consider any opinion by the karmis to be subject to the four defects: Why did you start this post by putting up a web link to someone who is neither an acharya nor is free from the four flaws? Why did you then continue to put up numerous links to these faulty individuals, and quote it as proof that the moon landing did not occur?
2. Why is it ok for you to quote these individuals as proof of your arguments but not ok for Varnadhi to quote, far more (albeit materially) qualified sources?
3. Most people would consider it hypocrisy to say you are only interested in the Acarya’s opinion, but act the opposite by quoting the non vedic sources. Would you agree that this is hypocritical and there is a duality between your statements, stated beliefs and your actions?
Which brings me back to

» Posted By Matsya On Oct 16, 2009 @ 8:13 pm

«« Back To Stats Page

TOP