Comments Posted By Rasasthali
Displaying 1 To 10 Of 10 Comments
Dear Ajjita Krishna Prabhu,
This is only a proof that Srila Prabhupada felt this way in this time. Prabhupada did not want us to be blind fanatics and just repeat things that we have completely no realization of.
Could you then please provide a factual, historical evidence ? We live in a modern world and other people do not accept Prabhupada’s authority, therefore to convince anybody else (other than Iskcon devotee, and even including some Iskcon devotees) you must have some solid proof.
Comment Posted By Rasasthali On 28.02.2009 @ 10:57
“Although it is not an official international ISKCON statement we suggest to use this text (or its modified version) in local languages all over the world.”
Don’t you think that it is a bit presumptuous to suggest that your personal approach to the issue should we made an Iskcon world-wide statement and translated into many languages? I was really shocked to read that.
I am a Krishna believer (and also a scientist, if that matters at all) but I would never sign that. Who was consulted by formulating this press release statement?
“Darwinâs theory is thus not only unproven, but, to a large extent, also responsible for the moral decline of human culture.”
I could not disagree more. Your statement is unproven - what evidence do you have for that? On the contrary, there is an evidence that Darwin’s view on evolution was actually influenced by moral issues. For instance, he was very concerned about the slavery, what is summarized in the book below:
“This view has formed the basis for the emergence of the hedonist, greed driven, consumer attitude of modern society that has led to the present economic, environmental and food crisis looming over humankind”
What is the proof for that? Any book references would be appreciated. Blaming Darwin’s theory for all the problems of the world is really out of place. Reasons for each one of the problems you mention are inredibly complex, thus simplification just misleads and manipulates some of the less informed readers.
“According to a well-known approach the evolution theory should be integrated into religious teachings. Proponents of this idea say that, although the creation of the world was initiated by God, the species are not the products of His actions but of natural processes.”
Nope. This is not their belief! They usually say that God creates species THROUGH evolution. This issue is more complex than that, because theistic evolutionists do not represent just one religion, but we have ortodox, catholic, jewish etc. proponents of theological evolution.
These are some of the points that could, in brief, demonstrate that this statement requires much further thought and in my mind should not be by any means distributed worldwide.
I would like to know how other Iskcon devotees see this statement and whether they would sign their names under this - please do respond if you have an opinion.
ys, Rasasthali dd
Comment Posted By Rasasthali On 21.02.2009 @ 20:35
you said: “The winners should be gracious, though.”
Prabhu, I would like to encourage you not to make such judgements. Who are you to judge who is a winner and who lost? And why are you trying to set a mood of competition here? I noticed that you did that a few times in your posts on dandavats.com. I must add that usually I enjoy reading your posts because I found many of them very insightful.
The bottomline is that we are all trying to serve lord Sri Krishna through the service to Srila Prabhupada. All of the devotees involved in the discussion have the same goal. Judging and making them ‘wonners’ and ‘losers’ does not bring any relevant contribution to the discussion and may offend those devotees, in your terms ‘losers’, who try to serve Srila Prabhupada with all their hearts. I know them well and I know that they are really devoted to Prabhupada’s mission. Besides, I do not see any conclusion yet and I do not understand why you see yourself in position to conclude the whole debate at this point.
Now, when Sadaputa Prabhu left us :( (this is the saddest for Iskcon news since a long time! ) the Planetarium Project will be hugely affected. Sadly! This is yet another reason to wait and to proceed with the plan in the mode of goodness…
I hope it does not offend you because it was not my intention.
Comment Posted By Rasasthali On 20.09.2008 @ 13:21
I support Tattvavit Prabhu and Janakirama Prabhu’s statements.
As I have been working with the research team working on the content of
the Planetarium museum (research on Puranas and other sctriptures), co-organizing it, I must admit that there are a very few devotees who want to work on the research on sastra and the ones that tried often lack qualifications. Achitecture aside, there is no way that we are ready to show the puranic view on cosmology to the world and we will not be ready for a long time. Why to rush then with the construction itself? First, as a ‘vedic’ planetarium it must at least be built according to some cosmological/vastu rules (like the Anghora temple). I think that the first step it to educate specialists in this field. Then something very powerful could be created.
All enthusiasts of the project like those devotees speaking here who want a progress with the construction, are very welcome to contact the planetarium team if they have not done that already, because there is plenty of research to be done. If you want it to be done quick, then please, do something practical!
Comment Posted By Rasasthali On 29.08.2008 @ 07:18
It was very nice that Radhika Pr was invited, and it was undoubtedly an honour . However, in my mind this meeting had not much to do with an interfaith meeting. It is quite sad and disappointing that Benedikt XVI takes a step back and arranges (or approves of) a meeting in which representatives of other religions pay him respect and present some symbolic gifts. This has very little to do with a sense of equality that is required for a serious dialog. In this context, I did not really understand the meaning of this event. Any thoughts?
Comment Posted By Rasasthali On 30.04.2008 @ 00:08
Dear Nityananda Chandra Das,
Thank you for your response, yet it has not answered my question.
The story you give about the dog does not seem to have anything to do with the St Pats parade. In the dog story, attending the funeral was directly related to chanting for 2 hours. But how did wearing those hats, garlands, etc. directly encourage chanting? From the pictures and videos posted above, I hardly saw 100,000 people welcoming the holy name; I saw some devotees chanting among themselves — maybe that is just because of the photos that were posted?
I do not like you implying that I have ‘the miserly mentality’; my goal was just to help to improve the way Iskcon approaches preaching. I believe that Iskcon should try to concentrate on connecting with the highest aspects of western culture.
Ps. Thanks for the invitation, but I cannot come at this occassion, it would mean flying from another continent. :)
Comment Posted By Rasasthali On 12.04.2008 @ 11:13
What was the reason behind having devotees wearing those green hats and garlands? I understand that it was the St Patrick’s day, but what was the reason for aligning themselves with this aspect of american/irish culture? From my perspective it just looks quite silly and out of place that devotees are trying to integrate themselves with one of the lowest aspects of modern christian/american culture… These two (Ratha yatra and St Patricks day) do not seem to belong together at all.
Comment Posted By Rasasthali On 06.04.2008 @ 19:51
To the Srimad-Bhagavata-vidyapitham,
While I applaud your efforts to teach and study Caitanya-vaishanava Sastras and congratulate you on the great successes, I question the first sentence in your introduction here.
Why are you placing an “academic scholar” as opposed to a “natural scholar”? And what is the Sanskrit meaning of “natural scholar”; is this a term you have derived from Shastra? What is your understanding of an academic scholar? (Note: these are not rhetorical and/or polemical questions, as your question appears to be.)
As a general comment it seems entirely unproductive to your mission and even subversive to the ideals of Vaishnava sanga to so polemically set your school against the service that devotee scholars are doing in academia. Isn’t cooperation better than polemics, or am I misreading your question?
Looking forward to your thoughts.
Rasasthali dd and Janakirama dasa
Comment Posted By Rasasthali On 30.06.2007 @ 11:38
I am not exactly sure about the real impact that authors like Dawkins, Dennett or Hitchens have and whom do they really influence. I have an impression that they are just preaching to the choire, to the group of people that already have doubts. I would not even say that scientists are the ones that get influenced. I work as a scientist at Oxford and none of my collegues, professors and advisors even read Dawkins or Dennett’s works - in fact I may be the only one that is really familliar with them.
Next thing is that the arguments they use in their books are often not valid in case of vaishnavism and we should use it for our advantage. Indeed, when I heard Dawkins speaking at the University, he made it clear that his arguments were directed against Christianity only, because he has no real knowledge about other religions.
But overall I do agree that we should educate ourselves in order to be able to get good arguments agains the scholars that Swami mentioned in the article. Of course good scholarship is not enough. As Alistair McGrath (an author of several books being a criticism od Richard Dawkins’s works) mentoned in his recent talk he gave in Oxford, a good argument is not enough - the real power of Dawkins is his charisma, harsh arguments and ability to speak with a great confidence. Sometimes, unfortunately, the more uncultured a scholar/preacher is, the bigger audience he gets.
Comment Posted By Rasasthali On 16.06.2007 @ 12:35
Thank you for the article. However, I suggest you do quite a bit more homework before setting up your argument. You’ve left out the most important parts of the 9/11 Truth Movement’s story–the evidence. There are at least a dozen books on 9/11 Truth; I’d suggest you start with David Ray Griffin, Steven Jones, Webster Tarpley and Dan Orr. You might also check the website “Scholars for 9/11 Truth,” in which over 200 high ranking military, CIA, FBI and a wide range of scholars and scientists have said “I don’t think some fanatics living in a cave could have subverted the most powerful military force, and here is why I think this.” Spend a few weeks reading over the quality literature…then write an article.
As to your point that we shouldn’t speak against Americans because Prabhupada liked them; I think you’ve made a category error. Prabhupada liked America because it was and is influential, not because it has transcended rajas and tamas. I don’t think that his affections would prevent him from making an objective study of the evidence in favor of 9/11 being an inside job, and nor should we. Its not offensive, its just an examination of facts.
Regarding your last question: If you had actually read any of the quality literature on 9/11 Truth (which it seems you haven’t) you’d know that the so-called conspiracy theory is only an alternative to the mainstream conspiracy theory. The official story, as documented in the NIST report and the Commission Report, is also a conspiracy; we are told that a small group of disorganized and technologically unadvanced men living in caves conspired together to do the impossible…and the Americans, British, Polish, Spanish, etc. still can’t find them! Now that is a conspiracy. Besides, historically a small group of government leaders have been able to conceal truth from the masses for extended periods of time; Nazi Germany comes to mind first.
I guess the message is: don’t be so terribly convinced of your view when you are so terribly uninformed.
Yours, Janakirama dasa & Rasasthali Dasi
Comment Posted By Rasasthali On 17.06.2007 @ 15:50