Who is the bona fide judge? - a stawman argument

[Guest guest]

Guru-Krishna prabhu wrote:

 

> ''You have simply created a big, fat straw-man for yourself,

> ''have given him the name "Mr. Bona Fide Judge", and are

> ''busy defeating it so soundly. Must feel good, I guess.

> ''What else.

>

> Maybe you'd like to explain this so that we can all understand exactly

> what you mean.

 

 

Yes, I can give an anoter, short try to you.

 

Though nobody here poses, nor has declared oneself, as the

bona fide judge, you insist "proving", again and again, that

we are not competent to be the bona fide judges. No, we are

not. We don't say we are.

 

A good attorney will not waste his precious time in a cangoroo

court with non bona fide judges. He will simmply glance over,

have a good lough, and walk out. But you are bussy "proving" to

the jury of a cangoroo court how the judges (that themselves say

that are not the bona fide) are not the bona fide judges.

 

Thus you got your straw-man argument to defeat soundly infront

the cangaroo jury. That nobody cares for, exept you. Since

actually nobody here is anyway such a fool to think on the

first place that Hare Krishna dd or Mahanidhi d. or Madhava

Gosh d. are, see, "the bona fide judges", so that you have to

tell them again, and again, and again, and again, and again,...

They ("jurors") got it already, don't think that did not.

 

 

Yes, it is the Supersoul that one who is the actual bona

fide judge. Worry about Him, not about cangaroo court and its

"judges." None of us here is the Supersoul (the bona fide judge),

if that is what you are bussy "proving." But we got our **own**

opinions, estimations, judgments that are NOT in your taste and

of your approval - if that is what bothers you.

 

 

> If the judgement is to be made on incomplete information, incomplete

> investigation, incomplete interrogation, etc., then my question is quite

> logical and fair: "Who is the bona fide judge?" And I agree with your

> grace that it is Supersoul. And since Supersoul is in the heart of

> everyone, anyone can know whether GHQ is guilty or innocent or in between

> simply by asking Supersoul to reveal His opinion.'

 

 

And, finally, then **leave it** to the Supersoul. You got

NO idea what the Supersoul is telling me within my heart

in particular instances.

 

 

 

ys mnd

 

PS:

 

 

I've just asked the Supersoul in my hearth, and He tells

me that you (GHQies) are - guilty. Quilty on ceratin charges.

Simple isn't? "Anyone can know," as you just said it yourself.

So can Mahanidhi das know it also.

[Guest guest]

On Fri, 11 Dec 1998, COM: Mahanidhi (das) HKS (Lund - S) wrote:

 

''if that is what you are bussy "proving." But we got our **own**

''opinions, estimations, judgments that are NOT in your taste and

''of your approval--

 

This is your prerogative, of course. And as long as that opinion is kept in

perspective as personal opinion, then I need not comment on that any longer.

It is only when that opinion is apparently being forced heavily upon GHQers

and the general devotee populace that I must question whether or not we

should be coerced to feel obliged also to necessarily accept it as the most

valid or just opinion to hold--or worse, to feel be coerced to feel guilty

for not holding the similar opinion.

 

''

''

''And, finally, then **leave it** to the Supersoul. You got

''NO idea what the Supersoul is telling me within my heart

''in particular instances.

''

''

''

''ys mnd

''

''PS:

''

''

''I've just asked the Supersoul in my hearth, and He tells

''me that you (GHQies) are - guilty. Quilty on ceratin charges.

''Simple isn't? "Anyone can know," as you just said it yourself.

''So can Mahanidhi das know it also.

 

So be it

 

Hare Krsna!

 

endeavoring to become your servant in service to ISKCON,

Guru-Krsna das (HDG)

 

*dharmo-rakshati rakshitaha*