Encouraging celibacy

[Guest guest]

> >Some private discussions are going on to resolve the SW I issue. Many,

> >many devotees agree that BTS's projections on mother-ship, skull and bone

> >society

> >of aliens controlling Earth, and his "attunement" source for all this

> >"knowledge" has nothing to do with guru, sadhu, and sastra and that

> >involvement with this kind of stuff is very inappropriate for an ISKCON

> >guru. Not many books by other ISKCON gurus get this many complaints, and

> >so something is obviously wrong.

>

> If HH BTS had told that this mothership and skull bone society is based on

> "guru-sadhu-shastra" then it would be wrong or bogus or cheating. He

> himself has clearly said that this is based on some thing else and not

> pure knowledge. He has also clearly said that this is for some other

> audience and not for pure devotees.

>

> Yes we can move on with our lives.

>

> Hare Krishna,

>

> Your humble servant,

> Bhadra Govinda Dasa.

 

It is the other side of the coin that is causing the problem: Is it

acceptable for an ISKCON guru to be involved in projections that have

neither scientific nor sastric basis while authoring under his spiritual

guru name with a title containing "spiritual"? Hence many devotees are

objecting. And is it not the prime duty of a guru to repeat only that which

comes from or is clearly linked to guru, sadhu, and sastra? When Srila

Prabhupada talked about mundane things there was always a link to guru,

sadhu, and sastra. But the sastric link or parallel with the quotes in

question are not obvious. What about all the quotes where Srila Prabhupada

says that the only business of a guru is to repeat what Krishna has said? Or

at least link it to what Krishna has said?

 

Another minor perspective is that each guru has different styles of

preaching, but as part of a big spiritual society a preacher's individuality

should not cause concern to other members. Srila Prabhupada said that your

love for me will be tested by how much you co-operate for preaching. So

there needs to be some individual co-operation all round for the sake of the

movement as a whole.

 

ys

 

ada

[Guest guest]

pamho agtsp!

 

> I believe this is important and will bear precious fruits for the future

> generations because the ritivks and the like seem to wait until we are all

> asleep, the gurus are all too busy, and then they pounce with a

> regurgitation of the same old stuff again and again as is happening in

> different parts of the world right now....

 

and they are jubilant when they see us fighting among ourselves.... in fact

they would like to supply any material to accomplish this. we should be

very careful about this.

 

Hare Krishna.

 

ys, bb

[Guest guest]

One thing is that I read all of his books and I think that the detractors

will have a hard time finding objectionable things except for the few

paragraphs they quote from the first books.

 

His last three books are commentaries on Hari nam cintami, siksastaka, and

Madhurya kadambini. I suggest that all introspective devotees read them..

[Guest guest]

Leadership for an Age of Higher Consciousness 1 -- by HH BTS

 

Leadership for an Age of Higher Consciousness 2 -- by HH BTS

 

Many Many devotees say the above two books by HH Bhakti Tirtha Swami

Maharaja are highly recomended for leaders and followers both inside and

outside ISKCON.

 

Hare Krishna,

 

Your humble servant,

Bhadra Govinda Dasa.

[Guest guest]

Kavichandra Maharaja said:

 

> One thing is that I read all of his books and I think that the detractors

> will have a hard time finding objectionable things except for the few

> paragraphs they quote from the first books.

 

It is a very serious situation that our senior-most leaders who have read

his books didn't find anything objectionable when they read them. It is

even more serious that when they fail in their duty and such things have to

be pointed out by others, those who do are pejoratively labeled "detractors"

by these same leaders.

 

It should be remembered that what triggered this discussion was a recent,

speculative lecture by Maharaja regarding homosexuality, "gays", and the

"third gender", which is a loose translation of the term tritiya prakriti,

which does not refer to homosexuals. The objection was that the speculation

that resulted in patently objectionable language in the first of Maharaja's

Spiritual Warrior books has continued through the present.

 

Your servant, Krishna-kirti das (HDG)

[Guest guest]

Dear Maharaja and Prabhu's,

Please accept my humble obeisnaces. All glories to Srila Prabhupada.

 

Somehow I have become the recepitant of a number of forwards on this subject

matter. Unfortunately I am unqualified to speak in detail as I have not read

the recent books of His Holiness Bhakti Tirtha Swami. Here are a few thoughts

on principle.

 

Still as one prabhu has pointed out - protocal and seniority must be observed.

This is vaisnava achar and should be observed.

 

Secondly as this is not a BBT publication the same scrutiny if applied in one

case must be applied in all cases. There are many books by many authors

available in ISKCON or greater ISKCON and I am sure there is always someone

somewhere who objects that there is a fault in siddhanta or content in almost

every publication outside of Srila Prabhupada's books. Such reviews and

critical analysis's can only be done by a panel of highly qualified devotees

and not in a singular instance. So why single out one author if we are not

prepared to apply the same yardstick to all?

 

Lastly it is sad to note that our society has no forum or control over matters

as serious as publication of books by our senior most leaders that are alledged

to be apa siddhanta even if even one word or one line or one paragraph,

transcendental vaisnava literature comes under smrti literature which must come

from the heart of the pure devotee with the sole purpose of awakening pure

Krishna Bhakti. Nothing short of the absolute truth should be published in book

form. This is guru parampara.

 

Sorry if I am inadvertabtly said anything wrong, judgemental or offensive as I

have no such intention.

 

Your servant,

Tattva Darshan das

 

 

"Krishna-kirti das (HDG)" <krishna_kirti (AT) hotmail (DOT) com> wrote:

Kavichandra Maharaja said:

 

> One thing is that I read all of his books and I think that the detractors

> will have a hard time finding objectionable things except for the few

> paragraphs they quote from the first books.

 

It is a very serious situation that our senior-most leaders who have read

his books didn't find anything objectionable when they read them. It is

even more serious that when they fail in their duty and such things have to

be pointed out by others, those who do are pejoratively labeled "detractors"

by these same leaders.

 

It should be remembered that what triggered this discussion was a recent,

speculative lecture by Maharaja regarding homosexuality, "gays", and the

"third gender", which is a loose translation of the term tritiya prakriti,

which does not refer to homosexuals. The objection was that the speculation

that resulted in patently objectionable language in the first of Maharaja's

Spiritual Warrior books has continued through the present.

 

Your servant, Krishna-kirti das (HDG)

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

> Kavichandra Maharaja said:

>

> > One thing is that I read all of his books and I think that the

> > detractors will have a hard time finding objectionable things except for

> > the few paragraphs they quote from the first books.

>

> It is a very serious situation that our senior-most leaders who have read

> his books didn't find anything objectionable when they read them. It is

> even more serious that when they fail in their duty and such things have

> to be pointed out by others, those who do are pejoratively labeled

> "detractors" by these same leaders.

>

> It should be remembered that what triggered this discussion was a recent,

> speculative lecture by Maharaja regarding homosexuality, "gays", and the

> "third gender", which is a loose translation of the term tritiya prakriti,

> which does not refer to homosexuals. The objection was that the

> speculation that resulted in patently objectionable language in the first

> of Maharaja's Spiritual Warrior books has continued through the present.

>

> Your servant, Krishna-kirti das (HDG)

 

As they said, fools rush in where angels fear to thread, so Krishna-kirti,

such a young devotee as he is, has thrown out the very simple ethiquete in

spiritual life by lambasting spiritual authorities whom his spiritual master

would threat with dignity. I guess he has never has authority figure in his

life, which is typical of anybody born and bread in the West. In the West

there is no regard or respect for the elders, so it is no surprised that a

sharp-thonged fellow like Krishna-kirti will be vending off his mouth the

way he is doing now. I wonder what culture of Krishna consciousness he has

imbibed, and he should be asking himself if Srila Prabhupada will be proud

of his behaviours.

 

I am just too sick of uncivilised individuals who are too ignorant of basic

ethiquete of spiritual life.

 

I am the one who first alerted devotees about HH Bhakti-tirtha Maharaja's

lecture about gays, but was not expecting these amounts of venomous attacks

on Maharaja. I was hoping for a candid discussion on the issue.

 

ys, Isvara dasa.

[Guest guest]

> > Kavichandra Maharaja said:

> >

> > > One thing is that I read all of his books and I think that the

> > > detractors will have a hard time finding objectionable things except

for

> > > the few paragraphs they quote from the first books.

> >

> > It is a very serious situation that our senior-most leaders who have

read

> > his books didn't find anything objectionable when they read them. It is

> > even more serious that when they fail in their duty and such things have

> > to be pointed out by others, those who do are pejoratively labeled

> > "detractors" by these same leaders.

> >

> > It should be remembered that what triggered this discussion was a

recent,

> > speculative lecture by Maharaja regarding homosexuality, "gays", and the

> > "third gender", which is a loose translation of the term tritiya

prakriti,

> > which does not refer to homosexuals. The objection was that the

> > speculation that resulted in patently objectionable language in the

first

> > of Maharaja's Spiritual Warrior books has continued through the present.

> >

> > Your servant, Krishna-kirti das (HDG)

>

> As they said, fools rush in where angels fear to thread, so Krishna-kirti,

> such a young devotee as he is, has thrown out the very simple ethiquete in

> spiritual life by lambasting spiritual authorities whom his spiritual

master

> would threat with dignity. I guess he has never has authority figure in

his

> life, which is typical of anybody born and bread in the West. In the West

> there is no regard or respect for the elders, so it is no surprised that a

> sharp-thonged fellow like Krishna-kirti will be vending off his mouth the

> way he is doing now. I wonder what culture of Krishna consciousness he has

> imbibed, and he should be asking himself if Srila Prabhupada will be proud

> of his behaviours.

>

> I am just too sick of uncivilised individuals who are too ignorant of

basic

> ethiquete of spiritual life.

>

 

At this point, I have to say that Ishvara das nicely gives lessons about

etiquette he himself has yet to learn. Just a few days ago Ishvara was

speaking disparagingly about Bhakti Vikas Swami as biased and very junior.

 

"The reason being there

is a violation of ethiquete involved. Bhakti-tirtha Maharaja is a very

senior Vaisnava to Bhakti Vikas Maharaja, thus it will be quite improper to

be suggesting that BVKS head up a committee to scrutinize BTS books."

 

Considering what he has just said, who is Ishvara das himself to speak this

way? He even has the audacity to recommend which services are inappropriate

for BVSwami. In light of his good lessons above this is saying one thing

and doing another, but this isn't his fault as he has had a lot of

encouragement to do so and examples to follow.

 

I have known Bhakti Vikas Swami for many years and have served closely under

him; my acquaintence with him has not been sparse or casual. Many of his

godbrothers, sisters, and juniors such as Ishvara das have recently accused

him of misbehavior--some politely, others not so. But then this is not

something new.

 

Years ago when Narayana Maharaja was being feted by our leadership, Bhakti

Vikas Swami tried to alert the GBC of the dangers of this. At the GBC

meetings where Maharaja submitted his concerns, he was repaid with a sharp

reprimand from his GBC godbrothers for being envious of a pure devotee and

violating vaishnava etiquette. Not long afterwards Maharaja's concerns

proved valid and the situations he warned against started coming to life.

 

Today it looks like history is preparing to repeat itself. From the very

begining of this BVSwami and others like myself who support his position are

yet again being bludgeoned with shrill accusations of violating vaishnava

etiquette, wherever we have tried to expose dangerous ideas and the means

employed in protecting them, which happen to include accusations of

violating vaishnava etiquette.

 

Now I agree that vaishnava achar, or behavior, is very important and that it

must be followed. At the same time, what happens if we insist on following

vaishnava etiquette to a point that allows the continuation of a

circumstance where the very things that give structure and substance to

vaishnava etiquette are being compromised? If our siddhanta becomes

corrupt, then we become sahajiyas and the practice of vaishnava etiquette

will simply be show-bottle and useless.

 

In the history of ISKCON, aside from close calls, such rigid, fanatical

observance of vaishnava etiquette has resulted in the unnecessary downfall

of many prominent leaders and the duping of their disciples and followers

because criticism or concern of any sort from any quarter was simply

unacceptable. If there was a genuine issue brought up by someone, they were

shunted aside, called envious, or driven out of ISKCON. Leaders who really

were acting or speaking out of line were supported by peers who knew they

were off but nonetheless passed off their deviance as behavior or philosophy

that is not subject to scrutiny and must somehow be in line with Srila

Prabhupada's teachings. Nobody could save these people because nobody could

act to save them without being severely censured. Little has changed today.

If you want a live case of religion without philosophy current and

widespread within ISKCON, here it is--and it is alive and kicking.

 

As for myself, I brought up an important point: if our topmost leaders even

after reading something that is patently off could not see it for what it

is, then there is a very serious failure in our system. Such a failure

could spell the quick end of ISKCON as a spiritual society--this is not

hyperbole. But instead I (and others who have done similarly) are greeted

with ear-splitting charges that we are making "personal attacks",

blaspheming vaishnavas and that we are junior and have no business saying

what we are saying, etc., etc., etc. In this way the real issues are

avoided and a situation which threatens to invalidate even the excuses

offered to quell our protests is maintained. A general failure in our

leadership to detect philosophical deviance doesn't merit attention, but

anyone bringing up the possibility that it is an issue merits censure. Can

anyone say "religion without philosophy"?

 

In essense there has been no charge of impropriety, in this regard, that has

been brought against me that has not also been brought against Bhakti Vikas

Swami. The words may be a little different, and the people blaming us may

not be all the same, but nonetheless we are recipients of the same variety

of criticism. Since I am in good company, the issue was never my social

position or any of our positions within our vaishnava society--it was only

that we said something that someone needed to say and that some others did

not like that.

 

This discussion has turned into a Daksha-yajna, and so it is time to depart.

However, the future of ISKCON is at stake so we can't leave this issue alone

in spite of whatever our detractors might say about us or try to do to us.

In this regard we will soon be posting these discussions to

http://siddhanta.org , where we will make more widely available news of

relevant events, ongoing analyses, and thoughtful articles about the

evolution of ISKCON, its society, and its siddhanta.

 

Your servant, Krishna-kirti das (HDG)

[Guest guest]

Dear Isvara Prabhu

 

Krishna-kirti das has contributed much to the philosophical discussion, and

so have you by raising the issue in the first instance.

 

But it is very important that philosophical discussions carry on as

respectfully as possible. Krishna-kirti Prabhu's presentations to senior

devotees in this respect has room for improvement and with no philosophy

lost, and there is room for improvement on your side too.

 

So I sincerely implore both of you great souls to please keep the mood no

less philosophical but more respectful and in that way the many devotees

reading your texts might take your philosophical points more seriously.

 

Intense philosophical arguments or discussions must be there in our Society

in order for things to be understood in their proper perspective in

adherance to guru, sadhu, and sastra. But in the midst of philosophical

discussions Kali's influence of anger arises when it becomes personal: the

person is completely or to some slippery degree attacked instead of the

philosophical point.

 

The mood when discussing philosophy should always be with the greatest

respect; we are Vaisnavas, but at the same time there must be no holding

back when it comes to the philosophy and upholding the strict following of

guru, sadhu, and sastra. It's a fine line: having the greatest respect with

no philosophical compromise.

 

On that basis it should be understood and demonstrated by all that BVS and

BTS love each other very much as most dear servants of Srila prabhupada, but

they differ on details concerning the issues in question. We must never

forget that they are both trying their very hardest to please Srila

Prabhupada. Srila Prabhupada says that acarays can have differing opinions

when it comes to details, but of course they can never differ on unchangable

sastric principles.

 

In a worldwide sankirtana movement there must be regular philosophical

discussions to keep things from getting sentimental and/or whimsical, but

there must not be any personal attacks during that process. So all the

philosophical discussions in question as of late are all good and healthy

for our Society, provided they don't degenerate into personal attacks.

 

Exemplary behaviour would be as follows:

 

If Devotee A points out where Devotee B has even slightly deviated from

guru, sadhu, and sastra then Devotee B should be thankful and adjust rather

than accuse Devotee A of having a personal agenda. If Devotee B is on solid

ground he/she has nothing to worry about, he/she only needs to clearly

respond, verifying how his/her position is directly in line with guru,

sadhu, and sastra.

 

Philosohically speaking one can be "conservative" and stick very tightly to

philosophical principles or one can be "liberal" and utilise things not

normally used in Krishna's service in the spirit of yukta-vairgya. Both are

within our philosophy and therefore bona-fide.

 

So on the current issues in question there is room for liberality based upon

the yukta-vairagya principle that almost anything can be used in Krishna's

service. But one must be very advanced to employ that liberal concept to its

fullest extent. Many have tried and many have failed, and hence the voices

of concern.

 

At the end of the day if a devotee wishes to walk the tight rope of

employing yukta-vairagya to its fullest then he/she is free to do that so

long as that is within the realms of guru, sadhu, and sastra.

 

A solution is being currently discussed with H.H. Bhakti-tirtha Swami who is

a very advanced devotee and a unique yukta-vairagya preacher. He likes the

proposed idea of separating his direct and indirect preaching. In this way

the teachings of guru, sadhu, and sastra do not become blurred with his

effective unique indirect preaching methods which he is entitled to employ.

 

If H.H. Bhakti Vikash Swami is satisfied that BTS is within the bona-fide

realms of yukta-vairagya by separating his direct and indirect preaching

then we can all move forward. Let's see what happens.

 

Kavicandra Maharaja mentioned that there is a Sastra Advisory Committee

(SAC) in place to respond to such issues, but if it can be resolved

ammicably in the association of devotees then we'll all save time for more

seva.

 

ys

 

ada

 

 

 

> > Kavichandra Maharaja said:

> >

> > > One thing is that I read all of his books and I think that the

> > > detractors will have a hard time finding objectionable things except

> > > for the few paragraphs they quote from the first books.

> >

> > It is a very serious situation that our senior-most leaders who have

> > read his books didn't find anything objectionable when they read them.

> > It is even more serious that when they fail in their duty and such

> > things have to be pointed out by others, those who do are pejoratively

> > labeled "detractors" by these same leaders.

> >

> > It should be remembered that what triggered this discussion was a

> > recent, speculative lecture by Maharaja regarding homosexuality, "gays",

> > and the "third gender", which is a loose translation of the term tritiya

> > prakriti, which does not refer to homosexuals. The objection was that

> > the speculation that resulted in patently objectionable language in the

> > first of Maharaja's Spiritual Warrior books has continued through the

> > present.

> >

> > Your servant, Krishna-kirti das (HDG)

>

> As they said, fools rush in where angels fear to thread, so Krishna-kirti,

> such a young devotee as he is, has thrown out the very simple ethiquete in

> spiritual life by lambasting spiritual authorities whom his spiritual

> master would threat with dignity. I guess he has never has authority

> figure in his life, which is typical of anybody born and bread in the

> West. In the West there is no regard or respect for the elders, so it is

> no surprised that a sharp-thonged fellow like Krishna-kirti will be

> vending off his mouth the way he is doing now. I wonder what culture of

> Krishna consciousness he has imbibed, and he should be asking himself if

> Srila Prabhupada will be proud of his behaviours.

>

> I am just too sick of uncivilised individuals who are too ignorant of

> basic ethiquete of spiritual life.

>

> I am the one who first alerted devotees about HH Bhakti-tirtha Maharaja's

> lecture about gays, but was not expecting these amounts of venomous

> attacks on Maharaja. I was hoping for a candid discussion on the issue.

>

> ys, Isvara dasa.

[Guest guest]

Dear Maharajas and all Prabhus,

 

PAMFO. AGTSP!

 

I have not entered into this discussion in the past. But, I do strongly

agree with H.H. Bhakti Vikash's Swami points that we cannot go wrong if

we simply stick to BHAGAVAD GITA AS IT IS.

 

When I was serving as temple president in San Diego and San Francisco in

the 1970's, Srila Prabhupada instructed me that it is our western

disease to never be happy with the old ways, and to always want to

change things. Bhakti Yoga is for pleasing Krishna, not the masses of

people.

 

Did Srila Prabhupada not from the earliest days encourage us to "boil

the milk", and the "one sun is better than millions of moons", etc.?

Really, do we not so often look outside for results and assume when we

have hundreds or thousands of followers that this is a sign of Krishna's

blessings, whereas in fact is it often the trick of Maya to allow us to

think "I am the chosen one. I am the best devotee. I am unique and

special and empowered more than others.."

 

Having been intimate friends at one time or another with nearly all the

former and currently disgraced "Divine Grace's and "padas" of Iskcon,

and having lived with and felt the embrace of Srila Prabhupada, I am

confident that what Sripad Bhakti Vikash Swami is stating is true, is

for our welfare, and is the voice of reason in a word gone mad.

 

Purity is the force, not psychological mechanisms and tricks to enchant

the minds of fools.

 

Begging the mercy of all devotees and forgiveness for all offenses, I

am,

 

Your humble and eternal servant,

 

Bhakta dasa (ACBSP)

 

 

Bhakti Vikasa Swami [bhakti.Vikasa.Swami (AT) pamho (DOT) net]

September 10, 2003 6:29 PM

Bhakti-tirtha Swami; Manidhara (das) ACBSP (Prague - CZ);

Krishna-kirti das (HDG)

Cc: Dadhibhaksa (das) (Croatia); Ripuha (das) (Zagreb - HR);

bkgoswami (AT) compuserve (DOT) com; India (Continental Committee) Open (Forum);

ISKCON India (news & discussion); Prabhupada Disciples

Encouraging celibacy

 

 

Kavicandra Maharaja wrote me:

 

> what action do you want the GBC to do?

 

Let's take a walk down Wishful Thinking Alley.

 

I would like that the GBC (in their own Covey-jargon) be pro-active, and

on the basis of guru sadhu sastra define goals and policies for ISKCON.

The GBC's failure to do so has left the initiative in the hands of

whichever individuals happen to be the most dynamic and motivated; the

results are often not salubrious. The GBC's task then becomes hindsight

action against deviations; or worse still they incorporate deviations

into ISKCON life.

 

Hence individual devotees, however senior they may be, should not have

latitude to innovate without first getting approval from the GBC body.

Before launching any new maneuvers, especially those that will affect

our whole movement, the matter should be discussed in depth, on a

sastric and philosophical basis.

 

If the GBC body had taken charge of our movement in this way, as they

are supposed to instead of pandering to its members whims, we probably

could have avoided the Narayana Maharaja/premature gopi-bhava fiasco (as

an aside, although Narayana Maharaja has been shunted out of ISKCON, the

influence of premature gopi-bhava lives on in Prabupada's house); some

of our best preachers could have been released to preach and spared the

rigors of academic pollution; maybe hundreds of thousands of dollars of

Krishna's money could have been spent for the Mayapur project instead of

on nuclear shelters, seances, etc.

 

Etc.

 

At present the GBC seems to act rather impulsively, in the mode of

passion. Policies appear to be adopted on the basis of apparent

pragmatism; philosophical "justification" follows. A prime example is

the recent about-face on disciples initiating in their gurus' presence.

At first the GBC forbad it, and produced a "philosophical paper" to

state why. But when a certain individual continued to blithely violate

the ban, the GBC thought it best to accommodate rather than

excommunicate him and so reversed their diktat -- again with a

"philosophical paper" of explanation.

 

But this is not a philosophical approach. "Policies first, philosophy

later" will render us forever lurching and rudderless as at present.

Such apparent pragmatism has led ISKCON to adopt modern secular values

so imperceptibly yet seamlessly as to wholly undermine Srila

Prabhupada's vision and render ISKCON as "just another" religious

movement. Instead of giving vision to the world we have adopted the

vision of the world. An example is our rejection of gurukula in favor of

modern syllabi--which we're actually proud of!

 

Another example: the granting of equal social status to female devotees.

Seeing as this is a major departure from traditional and sastric

standards and from the actual praxis of Srila Prabhupada, this should if

at all been adopted have first been discussed for months, considering

long-term effects and an overall social manifesto for ISKCON. But no, it

took merely one afternoon session of the GBC. A few women came in and

cried a bit, the GBC crumbled and the women got their job done. Is this

brahminical or even sane management?

 

And once new mechanisms are in place, they are very difficult to undo.

We become so accustomed to them that we take them as normal even if they

are opposed to guru, sadhu, and sastra.

 

All we need now to be fully integrated into modern life is to grant

acceptability to practicing gays. Seems like that's on the way in.

 

As an ISKCON sannyasi said to me way back in 1989, "This is not the

movement I joined."

 

So what would I like for the GBC? Again in Covey-jargon, a "paradigm

shift."

 

Or is such wishful thinking merely a daydream?

 

-----------------------

To from this mailing list, send an email to:

Prabhupada.Disciples-Owner (AT) pamho (DOT) net

-------------------

This message has been processed by Firetrust Benign.

 

---

Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).

Version: 6.0.517 / Virus Database: 315 - Release 09/08/2003

 

 

---

Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.

Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).

Version: 6.0.517 / Virus Database: 315 - Release 09/08/2003

[Guest guest]

> > > Can you prove that there is no such thing as the "skull and

> > > crossbones" society.!

> > > It is said that the Bushes are primier members.

>

> To be fair to his HH Bhakti-tirtha Maharaja, there do exist private

> societies that control the world. These societies are well known to those

> in metaphysical circles.

 

"Metaphysical circles" are hardly an authoritative source of information.

"Metaphysical circles" were predicting the end of the world, massive wars,

an earth shift and resultant ice age, and so on, by the year 2000, and even

many ISKCON devotees believed them, including at least two of our "ISKCON

gurus" who were openly warning of such impending catastrophes.

 

Statements such as: "there do exist private societies that control the

world" may be true (it may also be true that the moon is made of green

cheese) but if there is no way to substantiate it then it should not be

stated as if it were an accepted or acceptable fact.

[Guest guest]

> You might not even realize the societies exist until Tap Night, the April

> evening when societies invite select juniors to join their ranks. Cloaked

> and hooded seniors lead the blindfolded "taps" around campus in obscure

> initiation ceremoniesthat often involve screaming and bizarre behavior.

This

> year, one tap had to hump a pole while munching Nilla Wafers and shouting,

> "Scooby snacks!"

 

Uh, right... So this and the rest of that article is somehow supposed to

legitimize SWI's claims regarding Skull and Bones society? I wish that we

were defending a supermarket tabloid instead of a book written by a guru and

leader in ISKCON.

 

ys KKdas (HDG)

 

-

"Isvara (das) GGS (Vrindavana - IN)" <Isvara.GGS (AT) pamho (DOT) net>

"Bhakti-tirtha Swami" <Bhakti-tirtha.Swami (AT) bbt (DOT) se>; "Manidhara (das)

ACBSP (Prague - CZ)" <Manidhara.ACBSP (AT) pamho (DOT) net>; "Pancaratna ACBSP"

<Pancaratna.ACBSP (AT) pamho (DOT) net>; "Krishna-kirti das (HDG)"

<krishna_kirti (AT) hotmail (DOT) com>

Cc: "Tattvavit (das) ACBSP (NE-BBT)" <Tattvavit.ACBSP (AT) pamho (DOT) net>;

"Dadhibhaksa (das) (Croatia)" <Dadhibhaksa (AT) pamho (DOT) net>; "Ripuha (das)

(Zagreb - HR)" <Ripuha (AT) pamho (DOT) net>; <bkgoswami (AT) compuserve (DOT) com>; "India

(Continental Committee) Open (Forum)" <India.Open (AT) pamho (DOT) net>

Saturday, September 27, 2003 6:42 PM

Encouraging celibacy

 

 

> Behind the sacred walls of Yale's secret societies

> BY MOLLY BALL AND EMILY BELL

>

> While the past three presidents hold Yale degrees, two of them are members

> of one of Yale's more infamous secret societies: President George W. Bush,

> DC '68; and his father, former President George H.W. Bush, DC '48. Recent

> exposure in the big-budget thriller Skulls and a more intellectual

Atlantic

> Monthly article has only added to the mystique and notoriety (or infamy)

of

> Yale's exclusive societies.

>

> (Photo by PATRICK MCGARVEY/YH inserted)

> The windowless tomb of Skull and Bones, Yale's oldest secret society,

looms

> over High Street.

>

> Although associations such as Skull and Bones, Book and Snake, and Scroll

> and Key are inextricably linked to the Yale name, these societies play a

> small part in the lives of most undergrads, since they consist solely of a

> few seniors. Nonetheless, the looming presence of their respective "tombs"

> and the awe they inspire make secret societies an intriguing part of Yale

> environment.

>

> There are reportedly about a dozen senior-only societies, only a few of

> which have tombs. The oldest, Skull and Bones, was founded in 1832. Not

all

> secret societies date back that far; some formed in response to the

> entrenched elitism of their better-known counterparts. Most choose juniors

> and conduct interviews at the end of each year, though some do accept

> applications.

>

> You might not even realize the societies exist until Tap Night, the April

> evening when societies invite select juniors to join their ranks. Cloaked

> and hooded seniors lead the blindfolded "taps" around campus in obscure

> initiation ceremoniesthat often involve screaming and bizarre behavior.

This

> year, one tap had to hump a pole while munching Nilla Wafers and shouting,

> "Scooby snacks!"

>

> The dark, ancient "tombs" where the societies meet add to their air of

> bizarre mystery. Hardly noticeable to the casual passer-by, the tombs have

> few or no windows and are enclosed by locked gates. You rarely see anyone

go

> in or out, and the details of what transpires inside are kept as secret as

> possible. Rumor has it that Skull and Bones has the highest water bill in

> all of New Haven-enough to fill several swimming pools every month.

Rumpus,

> Yale's campus tabloid, routinely reports on societies' alleged naked

parties

> and debauched rituals.

>

> Most societies meet Thursdays and Sundays for dinner. Sometimes a guest

from

> the community, such as a professor or local businessman, is invited to

> speak. Often, societies have members present their "autobiographies,"

> revealing personal details-from childhood scars to sexual exploits-using

> props or slides. "Normally you become friends with people and then get to

> know them; here you get to know people and then you become friends with

> them," one tapped junior said.

>

> All the elitism that surrounds traditional secret societies, however, is

> missing in the Pundits. A mock secret society, the Pundits ridicule the

> stuffy atmosphere that their serious counterparts cherish. A traditional

> Pundit prank is the once-a-semester streak through Cross Campus and

Sterling

> Memorial Libraries during finals week. The group also once nearly

succeeded

> in impersonating the all-senior Whiffenpoofs a capella group on The Today

> Show.

>

> The purpose of secret societies is not simply clandestine fun and

games-many

> members join for the promise of getting to know people they ordinarily

would

> never meet. "There's just 15 or 16 people depending on each other," one

> society member said. "Everyone starts on level ground." The all-male, Old

> Blue mold is no longer dominant, and most societies strive to represent

the

> diverse Yale community.

>

> No matter how hard secret societies try to project a politically correct

> image, they are undeniably exclusive. Tapped juniors have been known to

turn

> down bids from even the most prestigious societies. One tapped junior who

> did accept was nonetheless hesitant; he said, "I was worried that I might

> feel it was too elitist, that it would mean I wouldn't be able to spend as

> much time with my current group of friends."

>

> However, for some of the "chosen" ones, it is exactly this exclusivity

that

> makes secret societies so appealing. According to one senior society

member,

> "The exclusive element of it makes you have a closer relationship more

> quickly."

>

> -----------------------

> To from this mailing list, send an email to:

> Prabhupada.Disciples-Owner (AT) pamho (DOT) net

>