stonehearted

Stonehearted: Here's where the dispute is: your contention that others whose perspective is different from yours must necessarily be deviants. In the process, you'll not only say any damned thing, but publish it. (There's an old Prabhupada says: "You may say any damned thing, but don't write it.") Caveat interlocutor.

Mahalo, prabhu. Did you transcribe this yourself?

Considering the tone of some of the discussions I've reviewed on this site, I hesitate to jump in here. But, since fools rush in where angels fear to tread, here I go: There's really no dispute that SBSST told Srila Prabhupada to preach in English--at their first meeting as well as the letter written just before the end of his pastimes. Quibbling over whether calling it a suggestion that Srila Prabhupada took so seriously that he came to save us is evidence of a proclivity for picking quarrels. In fact, there's no reason to assume that SBSST didn't make such suggestions to any educated men he met (remember that he made the 1922 suggestion to the group with which Srila Prabhupada came--"You are all educated young men. Why don't you take this movement seriously and preach it widely."). We know that he sent disciples to the west. We have heard that he sometimes said that if he had another 10 years, he would go to New York to preach. And we know that at the end he repeatedly exhorted all his disciples to be willing to give 200 gallons of blood to relieve the fallen souls' suffering. To say, then, that preaching in the west was a suggestion,and that our guru-maharaja's guru-nistha was so strong that he took it as an order is not denigrating to Srila Prabhupada, but glorifying his example of taking the word of the spritual master as our life and soul. However, to try to "defend" Srila Prabhupada by denigrating other vaishnavas--including SBSST(I find it hard to express how shocked I was by some of jndas's remarks in this regard; I can't imagine that Srila Prabhupada would have approved of them in any way)--glorifies no one.