valaya

All this talk of hygiene, eating habits, and so on appears to confirm an obsessive-compulsive behavioural personality disorder.

That, along with a completely irrational pride that cannot allow even the possibility of anyone else on these forums having realizations that he so obviously cannot, might explain his adamantly offensive nature as desperate defensive posturing in an increasingly futile attempt to avoid facing the inevitable truth, which he unwittingly reveals to everyone but himself. In other words, the poor man has driven himself nuts, batty, round the bend, loony-tunes, and irretrievably whacko!

Perhaps gentle sympathy is warranted more than confrontation since that only enables him in feeding this pernicious mental disorder which lies at the root of his confused behavior. Comments, prabhus?

valaya RR

[This message has been edited by valaya (edited 09-28-2001).]

Originally posted by shvu:

kiddo? I am 29, dude. Paranoia? I just thought we would skip a whole round of discussion that we have already done twice.

 

But thanks, anyway

 

Cheers

29, eh? Well that explains it all! You're just a young WHIPPERSNAPPER! Now don't make me come out there and give you what for with my cane...! RR

[This message has been edited by valaya (edited 09-28-2001).]

Originally posted by talasiga:

If you don't like what I write

You will hate me when I ring !

 

 

 

 

Dear Talasiga, Please forgive any wrong assumptions or misperceptions on my part. I do like what you write, though often I'm not at all sure of my ability to grasp much of your meaning. You are obviously a deep, sensitive devotee and that's why I originally reached out for a closer personal connection by phone.

I sense that you may appreciate the value of painful separation in love which enables each one of us to individually relate emotionally with Srimati Radharani. That, as you and everyone else here must know by now, is my sole area of interest which I see as the key to everything else.

What does bother me is that sometimes a poetic response may not be appropriate and can even seem trite. Certainly, too much of even a good thing can provoke a negative reaction. Do you really want to communicate or just be cute? Others here use flowery glorification of gurus, or vast scriptural quotations, to avoid truly personal sharing.

After awhile those that appear to be refusing/unable to go deeper on a more intimate level start appearing to me as more like Krsna than Radhika, and my concern is only with Her. Since I believe we are all part and parcel of the internal potency personified as Sri Radha, those who hold onto Krsna exclusively and actually begin to emulate Him, even at His most charming, quickly become distasteful to me. This includes provocative teasing beyond a certain point...

My position is absolutely clear: when Krsna's `playfulness` brings pain and tears to Radharani and Her girlfriends, including His abandoning them to leave Vrndavana, my sympathies lie ONLY with them; while my anger, resentment, bitterness, etc. focus ENTIRELY on HIM. I am not at all interested in hearing any philosophical or shastric explanation that these are just `playful pastimes`. For those that are involved, they are very serious indeed. At least that's my reality.

Maybe when I become more purified, I will see things in a wholly different perspective. For now, I take this as deadly serious and my entire emotional self is firmly committed at the expense of everything else, including close relationships with other human beings (family, friends, romance, etc.).

I had thought you might be desirous of reciprocating such subject matter heart-to-heart, but you are not so alone as I since you do have a wife, at least. I'm also doubtful that your living situation is at all similar to the wretched sordid poverty of my own. That is not to say you, or anyone else, is not capable of experiencing what I'm describing, just that the cutting edge of desperation may not be quite so sharp...

valaya RR

[This message has been edited by valaya (edited 09-28-2001).]

Originally posted by talasiga:

Oh ! Begging your pardon, Sahib !

I hope I didn't startle you.

 

Ah ! But of course !

You naughty naughty actor you -

so many months you have fooled me.

 

Probably the pudding, prabhu...

Originally posted by talasiga:

Well put up the mast

and unfurl the sail.....

You do the cooking

And I'll start to bail!

IP: Logged

M-dd

Junior Member

 

posted 09-28-2001 12:24 AM

quote:

Originally posted by suryaz:

Originally posted by M-dd:

...

And that is not about putting blame for one's own set of conditioned being on another person, rather it is a process to disentangle oneself from entangling association.

......................................

Suryaz:Yes Madhavi I agree with you on this point.

But where to begin? I say we nip it in the bud.

I do believe you have the best of intentions in trying to nip it in the bud, and I agree in principle. But I know from experience that that will sometimes only draw more attacks. Look at that horrible drawing that a big mysogenist put JR's name to! I once called that guy a mysogenist(which is fully confirmed by this awful act), in the same mood of nipping it in the bud, but in another discussion. It accomplished nothing but a horrific spew of mysogenism being directed at me, so powerful that I succombed to it temporarily. It accomplished nothing else. I think you might be making the same mistake here, unless you have personal knowledge of this devotee and/or his ex-fiance, in which case perhaps a public forum isn't the place to vent your feelings about it, but otherwise, if you do not know either of them personally, you do not really know how much blame he meant to put on her for his own behaviour. What I've found out with a lot, and I mean a lot, of men is that they actually believe, on the evidence of their being attracted to us(women), that it(their attraction) is coming from us(women) and our desire for the pleasure of their having sex with us. Even 'karmi' women are less interested in the sex act than men, and that is a well-known fact. I've learned that this is usually just an over-puffed-up male ego, related to their obsession with macho-ness, which they falsely believe centers on their sexual 'performance'. I've learned this the hard way by what felt like betrayal to me by several male devotee friends, who all thought it was coming from me, and myself never considering to entertain such an idea of intimacy with them, due to their being married, and to friends of mine as well. This phenomenon happened to me on three clear-cut occasions and I had to accept that this was the problem. I had set about trying to find out what it was that certain men became so angry at me about all the time. It turned out that simply because, due to my shyness and/or integrity(ie if they were married), I never reciprocated their subtle sex flirtations. Go figure. The other thing they always got angry about was their wives telling me about their beatings and stranglings and rapes and other assorted abuses.

quote:

Suryaz says, "It begins with misuse of language as the accepted norm. I do no understand why so may are against this, or the elucidation of it. What is wrong with establishing truth?"

I wholeheartedly agree to your intent of establishing the truth, but I dont think that abuse simply comes from language misuse. Like when I was 8 months pregnant and asked my ex to carry my 60# two yr old to mangal aratrika and he threw a rocking chair at me, missed luckily, but with such force as to smash it literally to pieces, the only connection with language was my request for aid. This kind of abuse is about rage, and it is rampant, very rampant.

Still, having said that, there is definitely the phenomenon of misquoting Srila Prabhupada in order to support abusive behaviour, and on that I agree totally with you that it is extremely important to nip such misuse of language in the bud. So I guess I agree and disagree overall on that point.

quote:

Originally posted by Suryaz: Moreover, when abuse (in whatever form, be it action, language, etc. etc.) becomes the accepted norm not only does toxic shame intensifies but also the whole society knows only hell (distortion) as truth.

YES! Wholeheartedly I agree. It is a historical fact that ISKCON became a hell to live in in many places and many ways.

quote:

Originally posted by Suryaz:

---M-d.d. said>>There is a subtle but all-important difference between humility and false humility.

Suryaz: Exactly my point. To use anything of distorted origin and promote it as truth is bad enough ? but then to present it as presented with humbleness, this brings into play distortion of the most deplorable sort.

Yes, true, but I still don't see the extent of your accusation as being based in a blatant case of this. I understand totally your reacting strongly to the idea of his fiance seducing him, but by his actual wording you could also take the meaning that he was saying that he was seduced by the material energy, which, imho, is a valid statement.

quote:

Originally posted by M-dd:

The first arises from spiritual advancement, the latter from shame.

......................................

Suryaz:Yes but shame in other ways also - shame to society and to those who accept it as truth.

I think maybe your point is divergent from the point I was making. I agree that many accepted shaming out-of-context quotes as true for themselves, and thus continued their entanglement, and society as a whole, ISKCON-style, also gave free reign to abusers due to these mis-truths full of toxic shame. I'm not sure if that's what you mean here.

quote:

Originally posted by Suryaz: Likewise those who are interested in upholding abuse, injustice distortion degradation etc., etc. at its point of entry VIZ lingo-symbolic confusion etc., etc. shifting the gaze etc., etc. are also as you put it [Madhavi ?nothing more than a jailer for the material energy,?] and should be rejected. It si simply WRONG to support abuse at any level.

I agree. And we saw historically in the most blatant example, how this foolish 'linguistic' support of abuse supported even the most horrific abuses of rape of children. Without so much of a supporting structure, these thugs would have been rooted out, so in that way, I wholly agree with you. But the misuse of language didn't actually cause the rapes, it just served to allow it to go on so long unchecked.

quote:

Originally posted by M-dd:

But the sad history is that these very women have been categorically blamed for the resultant disastrous volume of ISKCON divorces, lack of submission and lack of chastity being cited, in the name of Srila Prabhupada. The idea, as Srila Prabhupada presented it, was supposed to be that the woman benefits by submitting to her husband because he lifts her up spiritually. I cannot say it enough times that there is an extremely large number of godsisters who did submit to their husbands, only to be dragged down, and I'm not talking about dragged down through sex, which is an oversimplistic idea, but dragged down by abuse, by toxic shaming, usually accompanied by physical violence or the threat of physical violence. That is not to blame the woman's conditioning on the man, rather it is to enlighten society to the fact that when a woman leaves such a situation it is a move on her part up the ladder of spiritual evolution, not down.

.......................................

Suryaz:Why? Because of use (misuse) of language.

I'm unclear here if you are blaming the actual abuse on the misuse of language? I can't agree with that, but I do agree that it was greatly enhanced. I remember being a new devotee on the way to sankirtana. One godsister spoke irreverently to her husband and he turned around and attacked her and started beating her. I was then told by another godsister present that Srila Prabhupada said, 'there are three things a man can beat, a dog, a mrdanga and his wife'. I was shocked and I found this very bewildering, but today, I will only agree that if these exact words were actually said by His Divine Grace, they were meant as in, a man can, cuz he can get away with it, not because it was ok. This is a good example of the misuse you're talking about, but I'm certain that this guy would have beat his wife that day regardless. It is conditioned into the abuser to abuse, and the misquoting was simply a vehicle to justify, and in that way, yes, increase their evil behaviour, as it went unchecked.

quote:

Suryaz said>

Yes Madhavi I certainly believe chivalry was dead in the movement. Women and children especially were abused. Some men also ? but the culture gave more privileges to men and the abuse was less severe. But abuse was throughout given the accepted norms I cannot see how 99% if not all of the membership did not suffer. What is more shocking is the continued denial of abuse.

Yes, I'm picking up some pretty heavy denial on this thread even. Too bad. Thus the cycle of conditioning continues.

quote:

Suryaz said>

Glad you put this bit in.

Madhavi: PS. It is important to note that in the age-old expression, 'it takes two to tango', sometimes the one is an abuser and the two is a victim. And in such a case the responsibility for the tango itself is not equal. To simplify what I mean, let's just use the analogy of rape, what intelligent person will say it takes two to tango for violent rape, giving equal responsibility to raper and rapee? Similarly, in any severe abuse, the abuse itself is SOLELY AND ENTIRELY the responsibility of the abuser, and the responsibility of the abusee becomes simply a responsibility to remove oneself from the abusive situation, as stated before, from the entanglement that it fosters.

Suryaz: Furthermore, what of the rape of the intelligence through the acceptance of abusive language to as a mean to judge/justify or even conceptualise a given situation?

How can one aspire for any kind of devotion where socially accepted abuse is the norm?

Suryaz

Very good point. What gets me is the incorrect use of language that leads to the false understanding that it was some kind of equal thing, like a fight, when the truth is there was a very insidious evil of abuse growing out of control like a raging cancer. I find that men who aren't abusive seem to feel threatened by women talking about mysogenistic abuses, and I take it that they don't have it in them so can't fathom the truth of it, thus they will say things like, oh, let's hear what the abuser has to say about this, [yeah right, he's got some good lies for ya]. I know two devotee men who each kicked his wife in the stomach while she was very pregnant. Each of them, and these guys didn't even know each other, claimed to know how to kick her without hurting the baby. Perhaps Valaya and others here would like to hear from these men? Or how about the one who raped his very sick wife in Vrndavan, and left her to raise the kid alone? Then there's the guy who was strangling his wife and when the baby woke up and saw started screaming at her for making him see it! And that is just a small sampling of the true stories I have been told by the recipients, not by second- or third-hand gossip. So if you guys who think these husbands have some valid points, you're just simply wrong about that. And if you won't hear the truth, then I will have to agree with Suryaz on all points and stop my generosity of benefit of doubt.

So when is a post not a post? When it takes up an entire PAGE! One big difference between men and women is that men prefer solving problems to talking about them! I know, it makes you feel better, but it drives us NUTS!

Alright already! I never abused women, in fact they abused me! O.K.? As for these so-called `men` you speak of, I certainly would like to speak with them and even meet them. Not so much to discuss though, but so we could SOLVE the problem! I say we because I know other men here would feel the same way and want to act, not talk, talk, talk ad nauseum.

This thread, which appears to have killed the `relationships` thread it split off from, is entitled `sexism`, not `MALE sexism`. The topic of abuse by ISKCON husbands is another separate thing altogether. Yes, I realize everything is related, but we mere men can't deal with it coming at us all mixed up like this. Our minds and emotions don't function like yours! Somehow you manage to lump everything into one big indigestible chunk, as evidenced by such enormously long posts, confusing the hell out of us; then we get beaten about the head with that same heavy chunk for not listening enough to understand correctly or, God help us, trying to offer some explanation of our own personal problems with women.

Maybe we understand more than you think, after all we're here, are we not? Try to appreciate that one point at least, otherwise you'll end up `discussing` with each other with no one to help sort out the muddled mess. Yes, we approach things differently, which enables the sexes to compliment one another. Hear that, prabhus? COMPLIMENT one another!

Please consider what I've said here deeply. Thank you. valaya RR

[This message has been edited by valaya (edited 09-28-2001).]

Tarun, you're really too clever for your own good...

Originally posted by Satyaraja dasa:

Some want us to believe that religion means blind following without question. They make such claims without having read the Gita, for the Gita is nothing but questions and answers between Arjuna and Lord Krishna. (Jndas)

 

Here we can argue if Gaudiya-vaisnavas really read Gita. As Gita 18.66 is to be considered as the essence of all instructions given in Gita, in that sloka it is clearly stated that one should abandon all kind of religion, including for certain Vaisnava-dharma, yuga-dharma, etc.

 

If one claims to read Gita and is even distributing so many Gitas, and he is proselytizing on Gita’s instructions, how can he follows practices such as cow’s worshiping, bush’s worshiping, idol’s washing, mantra-japa, and so on? These are all religious practices that are rejected by Krsna in Gita 18.66!!!

All prescribed practices are valid, but some have increased potency due to being more personal. Absolute Truth is a person possessing all power and the more intimate our relationship, the more powerful the connection.

Personal relationship always transcends impersonal religion, by it's very nature. External packaging can be confusing, but `it's what's inside that counts...`

JAI RADHE!

Originally posted by Bhaktavasya:

Valaya, you are SO dramatic! In the words of Sri Chaitanya, "Your body is not yours to give up, it belongs to Radha and Krishna", and you are using it for Their Service, so what's the problem?

 

be of good cheer, a new beginning is near

Thank you, Bhaktavasya prabhu. RR

Guess I should have said, enter slowly with full awareness, but dive deep once you're fully immersed. Then, for a few moments at least, you're all alone and fully surrounded by Her. Wish I'd never come back up! RR

Originally posted by Satyaraja dasa:

Valaya: Many here are more than willing to help in any way they can, but without the proper attitude on your part, they ultimately become frustrated and alienated.

 

Satyaraj: What a show of modesty! Or it may be hypocrisy? Are you a mukta Valayaji? Did you have attained Hari? For certain you did not, as well as many of these so-called gurus. Action is better than precepts, so first find a help to yourself and after your own self-realization you may help someone else.

 

BTW Narayan Maharaja has never suggested me curtail my reading, on contrary. Everyone knows that acceptance of Guru means much more than initiation, but this is Hari’s concern, not ours. Do you really think that you can find a guru by your own account?

Valaya is certainly a `muckta`, though hardly a hypocrite. Valaya has obtained the `special causeless mercy` of Srila AC Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada personally.

Krsna (Hari) has taken everything away from Valaya and left him wretched, forlorn and alone in this world. However, Valaya has been blessed by Srimati Radharani Herself for which he can only be humbly grateful.

Again Satyaraja, I'm sorry to find myself unable to share all of the above with you. Maybe next lifetime, eh prabhu?

valaya RR

Originally posted by Maitreya:

JR, I took valaya's comment about the turtles at straight value.He wasn't calling you or anyone else here a turtle.

 

Found it funny also as I have heard stories of these monster turtles that live in Radha-kund and had become resigned to just pouring some water over my head.

You are right about the turtles, of course. From `discussed` to `disgust` and guess whose to blame, as usual?!! RR

Originally posted by Maitreya:

Valaya,

 

Thanks for the good advice on the previous page.I'm taking it.

 

One thing I noticed about this thread is that the pop-pyschology is thick and characteristically missing Krishna's name.

 

Just because you are remaining doesn't mean you must beat your head against this wall bro.

 

Hare Krishna

I hear you! BTW don't let anyone stop you from diving right into Radha-kund. This may be your one and only opportunity. Look on it as full-immersion baptism!

Contrary to popular opinion, the turtles don't actually bite, though they may nibble a little...RR

Yes, they are sirens on the reef. Pull

harder on your oar.....

That's what got me into trouble in the first place!

Too bad formerly married couples aren't both posting here at the same time! Next best thing might be happily married couples. At least they could shine a more positive light on male-female (oh, alright! Female-male...) relationships. I hope...RR

Who knows?

Who cares?

Why bother?

If both RadhA and Baladev expand from KRSNa, how can They control Him?

Ask Radhika, but you'll have to make friends and that means sharing your secrets with Her first...RR

Originally posted by Gauracandra:

Oh no, I've been mistaken for Caitanyacandra. This is almost as bad as when my co-worker said that for maximum sales she should put the candy bars next to my desk

 

Gauracandra

 

PS

Are you inferring that your co-worker calls you `Supercow`...? moooo!

When it comes to manic-depressives, I much prefer the depressives...more real, in my humble opinion, not to mention stable. Maybe it's my increasingly old age. Just too tired of the roller-coaster! Besides, it upsets my stomach. RR

Originally posted by suryaz:

Telasiga,

 

The

· Neglect of abuse

· Distortion of abuse

· Abuse of abuse

· Acceptance of that abuse

· Promotion of abuse

· The silencing of

· Etc. etc.,

Is "not of sound mind" they are of distortion.

 

I am sure you can make some logic, as with some good poetry out of the above.

 

Perhaps you may begin with “To thine own self be true” and move on from there.

 

Valaya,

 

My apology, - however, we must become more aware of inaccuracies as they occur.

 

Suryaz

 

 

[This message has been edited by suryaz (edited 09-27-2001).]

I prefer to try and look for the essence and thereby bring out the best in others, whenever possible, rather than using them to justify my own position as superior in any way. Sometimes that entails voluntarily assuming the position of inferior myself.

You may feel obliged to be more aware of "inaccuracies as they occur", but I am not similarly inclined, so please refrain from use of the word "we" in this regard. My role is neither defined nor controlled by anyone other than myself and God. Thank you.

valaya RR

Originally posted by dasanudas:

Here's a young guy just asking for a simple bit of guidance in increasing his faith. Why do some on this forum have to turn his heart and mind into another battlefield, I think it would serve new people who visit this place if the regulars who take pleasure in duelling with each other keep it on threads that carry that mood, or maybe there should be a place devoted to War, difference, dissention, offence,vindictiveness, scorn, argument, slander, and all the other stuff and anyone who has some, can hang out there and dump on each other, or if one wakes up in another bad day you just get into it with others in that mood, down at the dumping ground, call it 'Kuruksetra'.

It may well be the flavour of the month, but don't some of you ever grow tired of it? Can't we change channels. It just makes me wonder if others may wish to participate here, but they've got to wait for a moment to come in between bullets and suicide bombings, we don't deny this is the nature of the world and the age we're living in and perhaps some don't wish others to taste this particular kind of KC, but according to my understanding this example isn't the Krsna Consciouness that most are searching for. I just request of the contributors to give the newcomers a chance to even get in the door.

Is this unreasonable to ask for just a little discernment where devotees have their skirmishes, or am I just out of step with the rasa.

I have to excuse myself for expressing this on Sanjays thread, but he must be asking himself what a lot of it has to do with his question, so I hope you are still with us and the responses haven't blown you away.

Ys

das

When it takes most of one's energies to avoid getting caught up oneself in this nonsense, there is little left to use in mediation attempts, let alone trying to encourage or inspire. Like I've said before more than once, if I had any other life...this is my `devotee` association and service, probably better than I deserve. As far as I'm concerned, my next body can't come soon enough! RR

Originally posted by talasiga:

The whole world is ringing

And you are so hung up

on the telephone ?

 

 

 

 

You were offered the same opportunity for more personal interaction, but preferred to remain hidden while sniping at us with `poetry`. Sad...

Suryaz:

Valaya you posted the following. In so doing you altered the contents. It was not like this (below)

Originally posted by Maitreya:

Suryaz said [quoting Rishi]:

Nooo, women don't practice seduction,no way.Ha ha ha.That is evident in the chaste way they dress here in the West.Tight, low cut, see through blouses, look at me look at me.Titilation nation.I'm a lusty dog so I'm not complaining just stating the obvious.

Rather it should be like this (below)

Suryaz said [quoting Rishi]:

quote:

My "fire and butter" analogy was rejected outright. I was "the man" and I was supposed to "protect". Well, okay, so I decided I would muster up all the strength that I could, to not allow myself to be seduced.”

“not allow myself to be seduced”. What ????? poor victimized Rishi

Nooo, women don't practice seduction,no way.Ha ha ha.That is evident in the chaste way they dress here in the West.Tight, low cut, see through blouses, look at me look at me.Titilation nation.I'm a lusty dog so I'm not complaining just stating the obvious.

……………

Remember do not change the contents of any post

……….

My post was in reply to the one made by Maitreya and addressed to him personally. It was done by clicking on the `Reply with Quote` icon which autmatically quotes the post being replied to. I don't alter posts, except to edit my own.

When the boys refuse to play, they can't be forced to. We're not married to you, after all, and can share ourselves or not, as we please. Of course you can try to `seduce` us, but I doubt you'll have much luck now that we've seen the only game going on here is `Pin the Tail on the Donkey.` Besides, what have you got left to `seduce` us with? RR

[This message has been edited by valaya (edited 09-27-2001).]

Dear leyh prabhu, you really need to know the history on these forums, personal and philosophical, even to begin to understand what's happening, let alone why. Also, many of us have another history with ISKCON and it's environs, going back 20-30 years.

My advice is to not get into it too deeply with those who seem to be making a career, or at least a hobby, out of dissention. Why shvu would want to waste his time with fools such as we is quite beyond me. Still, he is obviously highly intelligent and has many other qualities that help keep things interesting. His unique sense of humor is one trait I personally appreciate.

BTW how's your spoken English? Maybe we could speak by phone sometime! valaya RR

Time for valaya to vamoosa! You started two good threads, JRdd. Both owe much, if not most of their vitality to male input. Again a word of caution: emasculation will destroy everything you're trying to achieve here and elsewhere.

When the women start revealing themselves personally and admitting certain negative gender characteristics, perhaps I will be inspired to participate further. Real communication and confidential confession is a two-way street.

Little girls never seem to understand why little boys are so uncomfortable playing house or why they don't want to sit through their carefully orchestrated tea parties.

valaya RR