ethos

Shiva, all the mystical experiences and capabilities of the jivas are there in the scriptures. Look what Brahma can do and he's a jiva. (Is he? Or is he half-and-half like Arjuna or Siva) Anyway, the many, many examples are there of what is possible for the jiva. The modern scientists are controlling matter and they are discovering alot of powerful knowledge about how it works, including the bio-chemistry of the body such as heartbeats, etc. They do so well with this understanding of systems, that they are able to make artificial heart or dabble in cloning, etc. I'm not saying they have all the answers, not even the important ones. I too think they are barking up the wrong tree. But they make their little inroads into the quantitative aspects of knowledge. It should be obvious that we can do all the things God does on a limited level. And if we can't do particular things now, well someone else may be doing them. We can practically demonstrate anything the Lord does once our time and effort are mature. Of course, we cannot compete directly with the unlimited Lord. Yet, this whole material world is here for us to try it all. God is doing everything ...Yes! But we are also causing all kinds of things to happen through our will. ––Simultaneous oneness and difference! You can float smaller objects on ocean drops and the drops do contain minute living organisms. Hey, what topic were we talking about?

Prabhupada had alot of nice one-liners. You have some good quips Streetstraw. That's 3 or 4 I've copied now. I might very well use them on a website I'm doing. Hope 'ya don't mind?

Hayagriva dasa: Concerning early religious training, Freud writes: "So long as man’s early years are influenced by the religious though-inhibition and by the lower one drived from it, a well as by the sexual one, we cannot really say what he is actually like." Freud strongly believed that early religious education warps a man’s natural development. Srila Prabhupada: What is wrong with informing a child that there is a Supreme Being controlling the whole cosmic situation? Is it that Freud did not believe in education? Hayagriva dasa: He felt that children should not be indoctrinated with religious “thought-inhibitions.” Srila Prabhupada: But there must be some form of education, and spiritual education is the most important. The only business of human life is to learn about God. Lower species cannot understand God, but understanding is possible in the human form. Therefore spiritual education is primary. Hayagriva dasa: Marx called religion “the opiate of the people,” and Freud similarly says that "the consolations of religion may be compared to that of a narcotic." Srila Prabhupada: As I have said before, neither Marx nor Freud know what religion is, and that is their difficulty. First, they have to learn what religion is before they can discuss it intelligently. Hayagriva dasa: Freud writes: "The believer will not let his faith be taken from him neither by arguments nor by prohibitions. And even if it did succeed with some, it would be a cruel thing to do. A man who has for decades taken a sedative is naturally unable to sleep if he is deprived of it… " Srila Prabhupada: It is also cruel to mislead people by telling them that God the Father is simply an infantile conception. That is real cruelty. It is cruel to stress sex and death and eny the conception of God as the Supreme Father. Hayagriva dasa: Freud would not think that it is cruelty to disenchant man with an illusion. He writes: "I disagree with you when you go on to argue that man cannot in general do without the consolation of the religious illusion, that without it he would not endure the troubles of life, the cruelty of reality." Srila Prabhupada: Without a spiritual education, man remains an animal. A man’s life should be more than merely eating, sleeping, mating, defending, and dying. Man should stive to advance in spiritual knowledge. Spiritual education means understanding God. Freud may deny the existence of God, but in any case the conception of God is there in human society. One may accept or reject different conceptions of god, but the fact is undeniable that in every civilized country, there is some form of religion. One may be Christian, Buddhist, Hindu, or Muslem: the designation is not very important. Understanding God is the important factor, because that ultimate understanding is Vedanta, the ultimate conclusion of all knowledge. Athato brahma-jijnasa (Vedanta-sutra). Now, in this human form, is the time to inquire, "What is Brahman?" Brahman, the Absolute Truth, is the goal of real knowledge. Man does not have to be educated to understand sex. According to a Bengali proverb, you do not have to be taught how to cry, and when there is the impulse to enjoy sex, you enjoy it automatically. This doesn’t require the help of an educator like Mr. Freud. Everyone, animals and human beings, knows how to enjoy sex. There is no question of a “sex philosoophy.” Philsophy means inquiring into the Absolute Truth, Brahman, the supreme controller, He from whom everything has emanated. Philosophy is concerned with understanding where things come from. We may inquire into the origin of life on earth, and conclude that life comes from water, eath, or fire. Then, where do earth, water, and fire come from? He who is the source of everything is the Absolute Truth. In Bhagavad-gita, Lord Krsna says: "I am the source of all spiritual and material worlds. Everything emanates from Me. The wise who perfectly know this engage in My devotional service and worship Me with all their hearts." (Bg. 10.8) You become a devotee of Krsna when you perfectly understand that Krsna is the ultimate source. This knowledge comes after many lifetimes of searching and searching. "After many births and deaths, he who is actually in knowledge surrenders unto Me, knowing Me to be the cause of all causes and all that is. Such a great soul is very rare." (Bg. 7.19) After understanding that Vyasadeva, Krsna, is everything, the mahatma, the great soul, begins his bhajana, his worship. "O son of Prthu, those who are not deluded, the great souls, are under the protection of the divine nature. They are fully engaged in devotional service because they know Me as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, original and inexhaustible." (Bg. 9.13) Hayagriva dasa: Freud admits that without religion man will "find himself in a difficult situation. He will have to confess his utter helplessness and his insignificant part in the working of the universe." Yet he goes on to say that without religion, man will venture at last into the hostile world, and this venture is his "education to reality." Srila Prabhupada: And what service has Mr. Freud rendered? He has misled the world and mad it more difficult for people to accept the words of God. Men who are innocent accept the words of God, but now many have become “over intelligent,” and they think that sex is God. It will take some time to counteract this type of mentality, but man must eventually learn that his happiness is found in understanding and accepting the way of life defined by God Himself. Hayagriva dasa: Christ pointed out that unless one bcomes as a little child, he shall not enter into the kingdom of God, but Freud advocates “growing up” and setting this illsuion aside. Srila Prabhupada: He may advocate so many things, but if he does not know the meaning of God, or God’s nature, what is the value of his knowledge? According to the Vedic philosophy, we should receive knowledge from a person who knows God. If one has not known God, his knowledge is useless, or, even worse, misleading. It is a fact that there is a supreme controller, and real education means understanding how the supreme controller is working. Denying Him is useless. He is there beyond our control, and we cannot avoid His control. We may make plans to live here very happily, but today or tomorrow, we may die. How can we deny the fact that we are being controlled? Knowledge means understanding how the supreme controller is controlling. People who defy religion and deny the existence of a supreme controller are like the jackal that keeps jumping and jumping, trying to reach grapes on a high vine. After seeing that he cannot reach the grapes, he says to himself, "Oh, there is no need to reach them. They are sour anyway." People who say that we do not need to understand God are indulging in sourgrape philosophy.

Wow, interesting. I really don't know. But I recall somewheres that the living entities are all given the chance to begin as Brahma. Some are Good Brahmas (like ours in this universe) and some are bad. Is this true anyone? Puzzling question though. Actually, couldn't you trace karma back to the spiritual world as "that one wrong decision" ? There's no karma as long as we're dovetailed with the Absolute; when we decide against that harmony our karma begins. And we begin by coming here. We always have the independence to decide. That first placement in the material world could simply come as a result of what they think our due is. Seems to me it would philosophically have to be some "anatomically correct" human form or something and that we should all start as equals. Thank Sadaputa for that "anatomically correct" phrase. I look forward to the many intelligent responses on this one.

Brajamandala, Enough of Vipramukhya Swami's personal problems. Your language now seems to be entering a more philosophical field. Since I know the issues of philosophy and duty alot better than Vipramukhya's personal circumstances, I feel more comfortable answering this. "I'm not using my points as justification for anything"... Yes, you have been justifying Vipramukhya's human frailty and failure of his responsibility. "but as you go along desires change"... That may be. Some people may wish to escape the encumbrance of children and family, but to abandon your "loved ones" for simple pleasures is nothing short of hedonism. Prisoners want to get out of jail. There are some decisions you make in life that can't be aborted due to duty. This journey in life with our present body is the ultimate example: you just have to live and let live. Sannyasa is another prominent example of commitment. "I just feel for those who are willing to take that kind of heavy responsibility"... Yes, we can all appreciate the resolve and renunciation it takes to live an austere life of complete devotion to God, accepting only the necessities. Prabhupada's personal possessions could be fit in a suitcase or two, even though he commanded millions of dollars! "So many who maybe oculd stand up and be counted do not take it on because of all sorts of fears"... Yes! ...fear of their ability to make that kind of commitment. I possess this kind of fear just as I possess the fear to not swim the Pacific Ocean. Until I feel certain I can do it, until I feel the Supersoul is giving me unequivocal assurance that I can surpass my limitations, I will reamain afraid. In this sense, perhaps one can philosophically argue that people who don't take the leap and fall actually had better discrimination. This does not allude to or say anything about the qualified gurus who don't fall. All glories to their service! They set the standards we should ascribe to. "He responded to the challenge and took it as far as he could."... Yes, but he overestimated his abilities and convinced others to do the same. The years he successfully practiced his duty and position are his assets, I'm not be-little-ing that. ...He just chose to accept a different lifestyle according to his dispostion; the "failure" and "shame" outweight the newfound possiblities or potential in his mind. But he has left devastation in his wake! Just ask his disciples. "There maybe some gurus around who feel the same way as this swami but will never come clean because they fear dishonour and poverty, they're use to the "high life... To assumes other's motives without obvious evidence is dangerous. But I can accept your statement for the sake of argument. It is certainly plausible. Still, even though motives may change, commitment to duty may not. You have to please your employer with service, you have to pay taxes, and you have to serve God. Motives may change, but duty is not likely to unless the surrounding circumstances change. "I've witnessed the personal torment a swami goes through long before he falls, his words, his body langage, his mood, his frustration and anger . It's just very sad and that's all I've got to say about it"... Yes, it's sad. The suffering in the world is sad. And the saddest part is that we bring it upon ourselves. "And as far as Mahak suggesting let the Supersoul guide naturally, I think many don't even know the supersoul in reality let alone be guided by Him"... This is obviously true - even as we speak. But some do better than others and it's not true for everyone. "I think their false egos guide them more, especially when there is a bit of pratistha to be had"... This last paragraph is long winded and rambling. I'm not a scholar and not familiar with the term "pratistha". We are all promoting ourselves. That's why we're here. That's the practical nature of a board like this. At least devotees are trying to turn things around. The more we can focus on reality as opposed to ourselves, the more transparent we become. We all have our moments and we are capable of helping each other. "instead of chosen, they end up choosing themselves and promoting themselves so subtly they fool their soon to be followers into thinking they're the naturally effulgent chosen one"... This is a bit loose for me to comprehend concisely. I not sure of your intended context. I'm not sure if this is a direct accusation or general philosophy. Please elaboate and clarify this closure.

Shiva, Actually we can do all those things God can, just in minute degrees. Qualitatively one, quantitatively different. Theists point remains.

The preacher must come down from his lofty platform of "everything's Krsna" to preach. I agreed with your last comment if you qualify it. But I could also say Prabhupada was too attached to his religion. Now if what you say is true, how is it much of Prabhupada's appeal was his no nonsense criticism of politics, philosophy, science... everything? To bad Prabhupada's not hear so you can set 'em stright on this response to Freud's rhetoric: Srila Prabhupada: He has reached this conclusion because he has seen so many sentimental religions, but first of all he must understand what religion actually is. Religion is not possible without an understanding of God, and a religion without God cannot truly be called a religion. According to the Vedic system, religion refers to the orders of God; therefore if we have no conception of God, we cannot be said to have a religion. If we do not know God or His nature, how can we know the orders God is giving? Prabhupada was generally considered advanced. It's actually hard to find anyone who "knows anything" to disagree. Now how could someone busy criticizing so much be advanced?

JNdas, I noticed I can't email you through your icon. I found Caste Pt 2 on page 24. Where is Caste Pt.1? Thankyou for your attention to this message.

This appears to be a heartfelt tune. Let's play it again.

Syamasundara dasa: Freud would consider this a form of repression. Srila Prabhupada: His idea of repression is different from ours. Our repression means rising early in the morning, attending mangala-aratik, chanting the Hare Krnsa maha-mantra, and engaging in devotinal service. In this way, we repress material propensities. Syamasundara dasa: In other words, it’s repression with awareness and knowledge. Srila Prabhupada: Actual knowledge will come later. In the beginning, there is obedience to the spiritual master. In this way, we will not become habituated to undesirable activity. Syamasundara dasa: Yet by remembering some traumatic or shocking experience, our tensions are often relieved, and personality disorders rectified. This is a fact of psychoanalysis. Srila Prabhupada: That may be, but when a seed has fructified and grown into a tree, it is no longer possible to rectify the seed. The seed is no longer there. It has changed into a tree. Freud may be able to find out the cause, but does he know the cure? Our cure is to divert the attention to Krsna. By understanding Krsna, we automatically forget our problems. Krsna is the panacea for all diseases.

Syamasundara dasa: For Freud, the sexual energy, or libido, is not only manifest through sexual intercourse. It is associated with a wide variety of pleasurable sensations relating to bodily activities and including pleasures of the mouth and the different organs. Srila Prabhupada: We have already said that the only happiness in this material world is considered to be sexual. Yan maithunadi (Bhag. 7.9.45). The word adi means the basic principle, which, in the material world, is sex. What is materialistic happiness? It is enjoying this life with one’s friends and family. But what kind of pleasure is this? It is compared to a drop of water in the desert. Actually, we are seeking unlimited pleasure. Anandamayo ’bhyasat. How can this drop of water in the desert, which is materialistic pleasure, ever satisfy us? No one is satsified, although people are having sex in so many different ways. And now young girls are almost going naked, and the female population is increasing everywhere. As soon as there is an increase in the female population, the woman say, "Where are the men?" Then there must be disaster because every woman is trying to attract a man, and men will take advantage of this situation. When milk is available in the market, what is the use of keeping a cow? The more men become attached to women, the more the female population will increase. Syamasundara dasa: How is that? Srila Prabhupada: When you have more sex, your power to beget a male child is diminished. When the man is less potent, a girl is born, and when a man is more potent, a boy is born. If a man’s discharge is larger, there will be a male child. If the woman’s discharge is larger, there will be a female child. When women are easily available, men become weak, and they beget female children because they loose their power from over-indulgence. Sometimes they even become impotent. If you don’t restrict your sex life, there will be so many disasters. Yamunacarya says: "Since I have been engaged in the transcendental loving service of Krsna, realizing ever-new pleasure in Him, whenever I think of sex pleasure, I spit at the thought, and my lips curl with distaste."

Now the mainstream news missed this one, did they? SAMPLE: Impeach Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld/Ashcroft:Gonzalez Impeachment Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954(voice) 217-244-1478(fax) fboyle@law.uiuc.edu <fboyle@law.uiuc.edu> Dear Colleagues: In light of the House vote for war, we are trying to get one MOC who voted against war to support introducing our Bill of Impeachment against Bush et al into the House in order to prevent this war of aggression against Iraq. Our proposed Bill of Impeachment would be along the lines of the Gonzalez Bill of Impeachment against Bush Sr for his war against Iraq, plus an additional Article VI dealing with the Ashcroft Police State. I am willing to serve as Counsel to any MOC you can send my way-- just as I was honored and pleased to do so with the late and great Honorable Henry B. Gonzalez. Thank you for your consideration. Yours very truly, Francis Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954(voice) 217-244-1478(fax) fboyle@law.uiuc.edu <fboyle@law.uiuc.edu> Importance: High The Gonzalez Resolution to Impeach George Bush Congressional Record, Jan. 16, 1991, at H520-21. RESOLUTION OF IMPEACHMENT OF PRESIDENT GEORGE BUSH The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the gentleman from Texas [Mr. GONZALEZ] is recognized for 60 minutes. Mr. GONZALEZ, Madam Speaker, it is with great sadness, and yet with equally great, if not greater, conviction, that I introduce today a resolution of impeachment of President Bush. It is known as House Resolution 34, and I will provide this resolution as introduced to be appended at the end of my remarks today. At a time when our Nation is deeply divided over the question of war, we find ourselves on the brink of a world war of such magnitude that our minds cannot fully comprehend the destruction that is about to be leveled. The position we are in is a direct result of the actions of one man and the reactions of another. The Iraqi people are as opposed to war as are the American people. The difference is that the Iraqi people have no choice but to support their country's leader, but the American people not only have the right to oppose and speak out in disagreement with the President, but they have the responsibility to do so if our democracy is to be preserved. Today I exercise this constitutional right and responsibility to speak out in opposition to war in the Middle East and in support of removal of our Nation's Chief Executive. When I took the oath of office earlier this month, as I had numerous times before, I swore to uphold the Constitution. The President's oath was the same, to uphold the Constitution of the United States. We did not pledge an oath of allegiance to the President but to the Constitution, which is the highest law of the land. The Constitution provides for removal of the President when he has committed high crimes and misdemeanors, including violations of the principles of the Constitution. President Bush has violated these principles. My resolution has five articles of impeachment. First, the President has violated the equal protection clause of the Constitution. Our soldiers in the Middle East are overwhelmingly poor white, black, and Mexican-American or Hispanic-American. They may be volunteers technically, but their voluntarism is based on the coercion of a system that has denied viable opportunities to these classes of our citizens. Under the Constitution, all classes of citizens are guaranteed equal protection, and calling on the poor and the minorities to fight a war for oil to preserve the lifestyles of the wealthy is a denial of the rights of these soldiers. Let me add that since 1981 we have suffered the Reagan-Bush and now the Bush war against the poor, and to add insult to injury, we now are asking the poor to fight while here, as a result of this fight, even the meager programs that the Congress had seen fit to preserve as a national policy will suffer because the money for those programs will be diverted to the cause of this unnecessary war. Article II of this resolution states that the President has violated the Constitution, Federal law, and the U.N. Charter by bribing, intimidating, and threatening others, including the members of the U.N. Security Council, to support belligerent acts against Iraq. It is clear that the President paid off members of the U.N. Security Council in return for their votes in support of war against Iraq or to abstain from voting contrariwise. The debt of Egypt was, for example, forgiven--$7 billion, without congressional approval. That, I think, casts doubtful validity on that Presidential action. The reason for the cancellation of that debt is so that we can then provide an equally enormous amount of armament for Egypt which it cannot obtain because of the debt outstanding. A $140 million loan to China was agreed to. The Soviet Union was promised over $7 billion in aid. This is a sum totally unreported in our country but very well discussed in foreign country presses such as Germany and others. Colombia was promised assistance to its armed forces. Zaire was promised military assistance and partial forgiveness of its debt. Saudi Arabia was promised $12 billion in arms, and more than that. Actually in October, the President let them have $2.2 billion, and there was a commitment for $21 billion more, but because of the outcry in Congress and the Israeli opposition, that is being postponed. But there is still a commitment for $22 billion. I am sure this month will see the initial efforts to bring about compliance with that commitment. Yemen was threatened with the termination of support, and the United States finally paid off $187 million of its debt to the United Nations after the vote President Bush sought was made. This is all so ironic. When our President ran for the U.S. Senate in the 1960's, he told the people of Texas that if he would be elected to the Senate, he would lead the fight to remove the United States from the United Nations if what he called Red China at that time was admitted. Fate and power almighty have a very, very mysterious way of working together. Who was to believe during that year in that race in Texas that years later this same man, now the President, would be the man the President would appoint to represent us in the United Nations and welcome Red China as a member of the United Nations. The vote was bought, and it will be paid for with the lives of our poor elements who are going to shoulder the fight. Article III states that the President has conspired to engage in a massive war against Iraq, employing methods of mass destruction that will result in the killing of tens of thousands of civilians, many of whom will be children. No civilian lives have yet been lost that we know of, but when we start using the weapons of massive destruction that are in place for this war, there is no doubt that thousands of innocent civilians will lose their lives. As killings occur, the principles laid down in the Nuremberg trials will be applicable. Their deaths will not only be a moral outrage, they will constitute violations of international law. Article IV states that the President has committed the United States to acts of war without congressional consent and contrary to the U.N. Charter and international law. From August 1990 through January 1991 the President embarked on a course of action that systematically eliminated every option for peaceful resolution of the Persian Gulf crisis. Once the President approached Congress for a declaration of war, 500,000 American soldiers lives were in jeopardy, rendering any substantive debate by Congress meaningless. It is also ironic that what we have ended up with now is that the President has exchanged about 200 to 250 so-called hostages, Americans, all of them employees of oil companies in Kuwait or Iraq, and in exchange we now have close to 500,000 American soldiers as hostages. Hostages to the whims, the caprices, and the decisions and judgments made by other leaders, over which this President and our country has no control, all the way from Shamir of Israel to the immigrants in the Saudi sands. Article 5 states that the President has conspired to commit crimes against the peace by leading the United States into aggressive war against Iraq, in violation of article 24 of the U.N. Charter, the Nuremberg Charter, other international instruments and treaties, and the Constitution of the United States. Again, there is a violation of law by a President, who, believing and acting as if he is king, decides for the country, unilaterally, that war is the answer. Madam Speaker, it is a sad day for our country, and it will be an even sadder day once the fighting starts. President Bush must be stopped. A divided Congress reflecting the divided country is no way to conduct a war. The preservation of lives is at stake, and the preservation of our country, indeed, our democracy, is at stake as well. I urge my colleagues to support this resolution. All I ask is a hearing, as I have before, before the proper committee of proper jurisdiction, and that is it. I will argue the case there. The rest is up to the Members' judgment. Madam Speaker, I urge interest and support of this resolution, and to stand up to the President on behalf of the soldiers who will die, the civilians who will be massacred, and the Constitution that will be destroyed if this country goes to war in the Middle East. _____________ IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES February 21, 1991 (originally January 16, 1991) Mr. GONZALEZ submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Judiciary. ___________ A RESOLUTION Impeaching George Herbert Walker Bush, President of the United States, of high crimes and misdemeanors. Impeaching George Herbert Walker Bush, President of the United States, of high crimes and misdemeanors. Resolved, That George Herbert Walker Bush, President of the United States is impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors, and that the following articles of impeachment be exhibited to the Senate: Articles of impeachment exhibited by the House of Representatives of the United States of America in the name of itself and of all of the people of the United States of America, against George Herbert Walker Bush, President of the United States of America, in maintenance and support of its impeachment against him for high crimes and misdemeanors. ARTICLE I In the conduct of the office of President of the United States, George Herbert Walker Bush, in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has violated the equal protection clause of the Constitution. U.S. soldiers in the Middle East are overwhelmingly poor white, black, and Mexican-American, and their military service is based on the coercion of an system that has denied viable economic opportunities to these classes of citizens. Under the Constitution, all classes of citizens are guaranteed equal protection, and calling on the poor and minorities to fight a war for oil to preserve the lifestyles of the wealthy is a denial of the rights of these soldiers. In all of this George Herbert Walker Bush has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President and subversive of constitutional government, to the great prejudice of the cause of law and justice and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States. Wherefore George Herbert Walker Bush, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office. ARTICLE II In the conduct of the office of President of the United States, George Herbert Walker bush, in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has violated the U.S. Constitution, federal law and the United Nations Charter by bribing, intimidating and threatening others, including the members of the United Nations Security Council, to support belligerent acts against Iraq. In all of this George Herbert Walker Bush has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President and subversive of constitutional government, to the great prejudice of the cause of law and justice and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States. Wherefore George Herbert Walker Bush, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office. ARTICLE III In the conduct of the office of President of the United States, George Herbert Walker Bush, in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has prepared, planned, and conspired to engage in a massive war against Iraq employing methods of mass destruction that will result in the killing of tens of thousands of civilians, many of whom will be children. This planning includes the placement and potential use of nuclear weapons, and the use of such indiscriminate weapons and massive killings by serial bombardment, or otherwise, of civilians violates the Hague Conventions of 1907 and 1923, the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and Protocol I thereto, the Nuremberg Charter, the Genocide Convention and the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights. In all of this George Herbert Walker Bush has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President and subversive of constitutional government, to the great prejudice of the cause of law and justice and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States. Wherefore George Herbert Walker Bush, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office. ARTICLE IV In the conduct of the office of President of the United States, George Herbert Walker Bush, in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has committed the United States to acts of war without congressional consent and contrary to the United Nations Charter and international law. From August, 1990, through January, 1991, the President embarked on a course of action that systematically eliminated every option for peaceful resolution of the Persian Gulf crisis. Once the President approached Congress for a declaration of war, 500,000 American soldiers' lives were in jeopardy - rendering any substantive debate by Congress meaningless. The President has not received a declaration of war by Congress, and in contravention of the written word, the spirit, and the intent of the U.S. Constitution has declared that he will go to war regardless of the views of Congress and the American people. In failing to seek a declaration of war, and in declaring his intent to violate the Constitution in disregarding the acts of Congress - including the War Powers Resolution - George Herbert Walker Bush has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President and subversive of constitutional government, to the great prejudice of the cause of law and justice and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States. Wherefore George Herbert Walker Bush, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office. ARTICLE V In the conduct of the office of President of the United States, George Herbert Walker Bush, in violation of his constitutional oath faithfully to execute the office of President of the United States and, to the best of his ability, preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution of the United States, and in violation of his constitutional duty to take care that the laws be faithfully executed, has planned, prepared, and conspired to commit crimes against the peace by leading the United States into aggressive war against Iraq in violation of Article 2(4) of the United Nations Charter, the Nuremberg Charter, other international instruments and treaties, and the Constitution of the United States. In all of this George Herbert Walker Bush has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as President and subversive of constitutional government, to the great prejudice of the cause of law and justice and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States. Wherefore George Herbert Walker Bush, by such conduct, warrants impeachment and trial, and removal from office. Francis A. Boyle Law Building 504 E. Pennsylvania Ave. Champaign, IL 61820 USA 217-333-7954(voice) 217-244-1478(fax) fboyle@law.uiuc.edu <fboyle@law.uiuc.edu>

Ditto that Theist. That's a nice bunch of words. Anyway, I have my faults and I'm certainly not qualified to dwell on Vipramukhya's. Still the matter of duty and institutional consequences should be gravely examined. My conscience is satisfied now that I barked my warning of maya's prescence. I won't be pursuing this again ..that is, until the next swami falls.

Brahmamandala, action originates as desire. The reason people do anything is because they think they should do it. One could use your arguments against anything that invloves commitment or inconvienience: "I can't chant my rounds" or "I'll abort my baby" or "I just can't help myself." I think that's the whole guist behind "I did it but I'm not responsible." Some people will follow through, some won't. He obviously got tired and gave up. I think if Prabhupada had been around (as in your Arjuna example), he probably wouldn't have fallen. He did function for more than a quarter century and no one can take that from him. On the other hand, I think it makes the fall greater. I don't know the whole scenario and I might think different if I did. But I do know philosophically, that these kinds of falls can jeapordize the entire institution as evidenced by the many Rtvik complaints. I'm not a Rtvik proponent, but I can understand how their faith has been compromised. If the pillars of society fail, then everything based on them fail also. It's a domino effect that can invlolve alot of people. It's a serious philosophical issue that lies at the heart of our religious and social science. It is much bigger than the sum of it's parts!

I agree with you Theist. The verses below include memory in the conscious process: Bg. 2.62 & 63: While contemplating the objects of the senses, a person develops attachment for them, and from such attachment lust develops, and from lust anger arises. From anger, complete delusion arises, and from delusion bewilderment of memory. When memory is bewildered, intelligence is lost, and when intelligence is lost one falls down again into the material pool. It must be a fundamental symptom of consciousness; we are to "remember our duty" and "remember who we are." We call the soul our own, even though it's provided by Krsna. Surely, we can do the same with memory.

Brajamandala, your defense of Vipramukhya was full of personal empathy. I'm happy to hear such sensitive words. But what about duty? He made the decision to accept the renounced order knowing full well what it entailed. I guess he successfully practiced it for many, many years. Why couldn't he just finnish what he started? It seems to me he just personally gave up and opted for some stimulation. Yes, sometimes we fail and I certainly can't speak for his personal demons or circumstance. But why didn't he just put aside his troubles and fulfill his obligations, even if it meant resigning himself to unhappiness? These big leaders who fall hurt alot of intimate associates and create alot of political damage when it is seen that they can't practice what they preach. That's the bigger issue if only by the numbers. Outsiders especially, probably view Krsna consciousness as some cheap show when the people at the top opt for common sense gratification. This is extremely detrimental to ourselves and those we wish to impress with the highest truth. He probably preached duty over desire most of his life - only to surrender.

Ha, ha, ha! I really enjoyed this one.

Shive, do you live in America? I'm just curious? ...No hidden meanings.

Mahak, you replied to me... I didn't understand most of what you said, much less your point.

I think I normally want to scrap myself. Right now I'm just tired. I think everyone here has valid points - including you Guest. Really. We can't all be like each other. Let's just be a family for awhile.

God, you can spell good! ...anybody that can spell "delimnas"... 1st part, very humorous. I'll remember to sleep in first class. 2nd part, I guess we're always being tested. There were headlines in America not far back about some group sueing McDonalds. McDonalds had been selling veggie burgers in place of their meat ('cause it was cheaper I''m sure) and somebody or somebodies found out and sued 'em to sell meat again. Now, who's controlling things 'round here?

Hayagriva dasa: Freud also tied infantilism in with the religious impulse. He wrote: "Psychoanalysis, which has taught us the intimate connection between the father complex and belief in God, has shown us that the personal God is psychologically nothing but an exalted father… Youthful persons lose their religious belief as soon as the authority of the father breaks down." Thus Freud sees God as a father figure arising out of the helplessnes experienced by the little child. Srila Prabhupada: How can the little child invent his father? Was he not born of his father? And how can he abandon the idea of his father? Without a father, how can one come into being? even Freud had a father, grandfather, and so on back. We speak of God as the first father because there is no one beyond Him. Hayagriva dasa: Still, Freud considers belief in God as infantile. In The future of an Illusion, he writes: "Man cannot remain a child forever; he must venture at last into the hostile world." Instead of continuing to dwell in such a nursery, man should try to rid himself of the psychic crutch of religion. Srila Prabhupada: What is his definition of childishness? Everyone must be a child, and everyone must have a father. Just as we cannot deny our biological father, we cannot deny the ultimate Supreme Father. Hayagriva dasa: It is not that he is denying biological fathers, but the idea of a Supreme Father, which he felt arouse out of man’s initial helpless state. Srila Prabhupada: Helplessness is always there, because the threefold miseries will always exist in material life. There will always be miseries arising from the body and mind, miseries inflicted by other living entities, and natural catastrophes. In addition, there is always birth, old age, disease, and death. it is only a fool or a rascal who hopes against hope and makes plans to overcome all these difficulties. However we may plan, nature is so strong that it will smash our plans to pieces with the kick of death. Man hopes against hope to adjust material things so that he can be happy in this world, but this is foolishness. Man is helpless at every step. Hayagriva dasa: Freud felt that belief in God the Father is “so patently infantile, so incongruous with reality, that to one whose attitude to humanity is friendly, it is painful to think that the great majority of mortals will never be able to rise above this view of life.” Srila Prabhupada: So what is his reality? Belief in god may be infantile to him, but what is he except a child? How is it that he is more than a child? Can he give an ultimate solution that will rid man of his helplessness? Hayagriva dasa: Well, he personally hoped that psychoanalysis would provide the answers. Srila Prabhupada: How can a common man understand psychoanalysis? The fact is that there is a suprem controller who is present everywhere. Psychoanalysis should begin with this point. Why is he defying this fact? Hayagriva dasa: He sincerely believed that the maturation process necessarily entails ridding oneself of religion. He writes: "If one attempts to assign religion its place in man’s evolution, it seems not so much to be a lasting acquisition as a parallel to the neuroses which the civilized individual must pass through on his way from childhood to maturity." Srila Prabhupada: He has reached this conclusion because he has seen so many sentimental religions, but first of all he must understand what religion actually is. Religion is not possible without an understanding of God, and a religion without God cannot truly be called a religion. According to the Vedic system, religion refers to the orders of God; therefore if we have no conception of God, we cannot be said to have a religion. If we do not know God or His nature, how can we know the orders God is giving?

Sysmasundara dasa: Freud felt that most of our problems , which are sexual in nature, can be cured by recalling painful experiences and objectively analyzing them. Srila Prabhupada: We must understand why this sex problem is there. If we tolerate a little itching sensation, we will be spared much pain. Yan maithunadi-grhamedhi-sukham hi tuccham kanduyanena karayor iva duhkha-duhkham. "Sex life is compared to the rubbing of two hands to relieve an itch. Grhamedhis, householders without spiritual knowledge, think that this itching is the greatest platform of happiness, although actually it is a source of distress." (Bhag. 7.9.45) When ordinary men are overly attached to materialistic life, their only happiness is sexual intercourse. The sastras say that happiness derived from sexual intercourse is very, very insignificant. Indeed, it is not even happiness. At best, it may be considered a tenth-class happinness. because people have no idea of the happiness of Krsna consciousness, they think that sex is the highest happiness. But if we analyze it, what kind of happiness is it? When we have an itch, we scratch it and feel some pleasure, but after that pleasure passes, the effects are abominable. The itch becomes worse. The sastras tell us that if we just try to tolerate this itching sensation, we will be spared a great deal of pain. This is possible if we practice this Krsna consciousness. Sysmasundara dasa: Freud believed that neuroses, disorders, anxieties, and frustratins have their origin in repression. Srila Prabhupada: And I am telling you that all these are due to sex. But we are not advocating repression. We give facility in the form of a wife. The sex impulse is to be directed to the wife. Sysmasundara dasa: But Freud insisted that the sex impulse is present at the very beginning of life. Srila Prabhupada: We also admit that We say that as soon as the living being is embodied, he experiences hunger and sex. Why is that? Ahara-nidra-vyavayah. We find these impulses even in the animals. These drives are already there. What is the use in philsophizing about them? Sysmasundara dasa: Through psychoanalysis, pent-up emotions can be released, and the original shock mitigated by remembering and confessing. Srila Prabhupada: But what guarantee is there that we will not receive another shock? The living entity is recieving shock after shock. You try to cure him of one, and another comes. It is a fact tha material life is painful. As soon as you receive this material body, you must suffer the threefold miseries. Everyone is seeking happiness, but unless materialistic life is stopped, unless we put an end to birth, old age, disease, and death, there is no question of happiness. Materialistic life is a disease, and Vedic civilization attempt to cure this desiease. Our program is total cure. No more shock. Freud’s treatment is useless because he cannot guarantee that there will not be another shock. If you are situated in real Krsna consciousness, the worst type of misery may face you, and you will not be disturbed. you will not experience any shock at all. Freud was trying to cure his patients of the results of some shock they had experienced years ago, but there is no guarantee that a similar shock will not come again. Rather, the living entity will receive one shock after another after another. "This divine energy of Mine, consisting of the three modes of material nature, is difficult to overcome. But those who have surrendered unto Me can easily cross beyond it." (Bg. 7.14) As soon as we try to solve one problem, another problem comes, then another. If we are in Krsna consciousness, there are no more shocks. Sysmasundara dasa: Freud believed that our present personality is greatly influenced by our sexual experiences in infancy and childhood. Srila Prabhupada: Therefore we are trying to train our boys as brahmacaris. Of course, there is the tendency for sex, but by practicing brahmacarya, by diverting our attention to Krsna, there will be very little chance that a shock will come about. If the Vedic system is followed by human society, these shocks will not be there.

Yes, I agree with your acute observation. A "personal link to Krsna" is quite flattering and supportive to the ego. Are we realistic about this "authorized" perspective?

Nice insights Shiva! Resplendent!