Comments Posted By Radhesyam.bap
Displaying 1 To 2 Of 2 Comments
Firstly I wanted to thank Urmila dd for her nice class.
Secondly I can’t believe that after so many years these issues are still being debated.
I read a quote just today from Srila Prabhupada - it was timely:
Prabhupada: Well, that is atmavat manyate jagat. That is the conditioned soul’s qualification: That if he is a fool (and) he thinks other (to be) fools. Everyone, he thinks, âHe is like me.â That is nature. Atmavat manyate jagat. Everyone thinks others like himself. If he is a fool, he thinks all are. Morning Walk, June 25, 1975, in Los Angeles
Some devotees just cant WAIT to jump in on a conversation that involves anything with women and start ranting about “subtle sex”
It makes me wonder how much of this is coming from THEMSELVES. Ive seen it time and time again the Prabhu who cries blue murder at the mere sight of a woman and yet is the first to bloop.
They are trying to externalize their own shortcomings by projecting them onto women - when it is THEY who are lusty.
They should try to be like Srila Prabhupada who told the reporter: “Yes the difference between you and me sir, is that in a room full of naked women I wouldn’t be disturbed”
Perhaps these devotees should wear ear plugs to every morning program. After all they should “not even hear from the lips of a woman” yet Srila Prabhupada likes to listen to Yamuna d.d. singing Govindam - OH THE HORROR!
Such devotees really need to sleeping on their stomachs and having hot showers, and get OVER the bodily concept. Either that or go live in Burka-land.
Comment Posted By Radhesyam.bap On 12.04.2011 @ 05:51
I find this an interesting article to read, as I have been watching the auroville project for the past 13 years (I even read the “news & notes” each week). I find it a very interesting concept, albeit with many flaws.
In regards to the subject of sole ownership, I think it is noteworthy to point out that while Aurovillians do not own property themselves - it is currently a requirement for all who wish to enter there that they either build or buy. BUY? yes buy.
“… as of January 2001, Newcomers will be admitted on the condition that they provide for their own housing. While this usually means coming with the money to build or buy a place….”
I wanted to make this point, because to many it may initially appear, that Auroville is a open and free commune style city - which IS how they like to portray themselves, however it is not the case as many hundreds of Russians found out in the early 2000’s after a TV station made a report on Auroville which resulted in entire families selling up, packing their cases and heading to Auroville - only to be turned back, returning to Russia with nothing.
This concept of having to BUY a house when you don’t actually OWN the house is something which I imagine would be very hard for many to accept. Putting all your savings into something which you ultimately have no say over is a gamble most would not want to take. How would this work in a society like ISKCON?After the recent lawsuits and threats of selling temples - how many ISKCON members are willing to hand over their life savings to the society now? (I’m not trying to be critical, just raising a valid point - please forgive any offense if I sound critical)
I also wanted to point out that while Auroville also likes to portray itself as a Cashless society, if you do your homework you will see that this is in relation ONLY to jobs undertaken INSIDE Auroville. What is not made initially clear is that ALL Aurovillians are required to give money each month to the “central fund” of Rs 2,000 per person per month.” (This Fee is IN ADDITION to any personal living expenses.)Whilst the equivelant of less than US$50 a month is still a very low cost, it’s still important to note that Aurovillians DO need some kind of “outside” income - it is certainly no hippie drop out utopia.
I think ISKCON can take a lot from Auroville- learning where they have succeeded AND failed.
Comment Posted By Radhesyam.bap On 26.03.2010 @ 05:45