Freedom of Speech

[Bhaktavasya 0]

Both Canada and the United States have been balancing the right to freedom of speech with the inntroduction of anti-hate laws.

Basically,what you say in private conversation is your own business, but it is illegal to publish or promote views that promote hatred of an ethnic group or race

based on those views.

 

Here are some suggestions on how we can excersize freedom of speech, which is vital to the pursuit of truth.

 

1) We shall retain the right to disagree with any statement, belief or religious doctrine and to express our own views, in the spirit of friendly discourse.

 

2) We agree to refrain from personally attacking or insulting anyone's teacher/guru or each other while maintaining the freedoms allowed in suggestion 1)

 

3) In the event of a discourse erupting into a battle, the rules of engagement are one on one, and that it be 'taken outside' the spiritual discussion forum and hashed on on the test forum. Suggestion 1) can be formatted to allow for spontaneity, with some restrictions applying. For example, someone may refer to their 'opponent' (and not the opponent's guru) as a jerk or a b**ch, but calling someone a f**khead would not be allowed. If the heat of the battle becomes too intense, the moderator can intervene by imposing a cool-out period for both forum members.

 

4) We acknowledge that our views, while different, may not be the highest truth, due to incomplete knowledge, faulty receptors, and personal basis.

 

5) We recognize that freedom from illusion comes from Divine Grace. Once freed, no-one's former illusion/delusion may be brought up and used against him/her.

 

********

 

Along with these suggestions, I propose that we wipe the slate clean and invite banned members such as Jayasriradhe back into the forums.

 

 

 

 

[This message has been edited by Bhaktavasya (edited 08-21-2001).]

 

[This message has been edited by Bhaktavasya (edited 08-21-2001).]

[Bhaktavasya 0]

 

The above message was edited due to typing mistakes and omission of a few intended words.

[Audarya lila 0]

I agree with these sentiments, but I defer to Jnana dasa as it is his site and as such he sets the rules. Jaya Sri Radhey is not silenced. She voices her opinions and posts on others sites on the web quite freely.

 

Personally, I find the rules set down by Jnana dasa to be easy to follow and I believe that he is not biased in his application of justice. Having said that, I also feel that everyone deserves a chance. Jaya Sri Radhey has a wonderful capacity to post inspiring scripture. If she could control herself from personal attacks, I for one would welcome her back.

 

Your servant,

Audarya lila dasa

[Janus 0]

I think that a lot of devottees think they have their butts covered simply because they never find fault with their spiritual masters. That's OK., but when someone else fids fault with a Spiritual Master that just happens to be the same one sas theirs, then all of a sudden whoever's finding fault is demonized.

Sounds like non-liberal fundamentalism to me, like people who really aren't that very clear on the concept, like people who would rather avoid taking any responsibility to even see, let alone voice or allow others to voice their thoughts.

An example of this: Several years ago I had a brief converstaion with one of my sisters old boyfriends, a Srila Prabhupada devotee. I forget how it came around to it but during the course of the conversation the old snake and rope came up. It was his opinion that if his spiritual master happened to mistake a snake for a rope that it wass just to darn bad for him, for it was his opinion that it was better for him to let his Spiritual Master die from a snake bite than it was to inform him that he was wrong. I don't understand people like that. Anyway just a few days later (the converstaion was still troubling me) I was going through some of my books and chanced upon a comment by Srila Bhaktisiddhanta on the same matter, and it was his opinion that the disciple who informed his spiritual master that what he had mistaken for a rope was really a snake was acting out of a higher realization.

Spiritual masters make mistakes, and it is a disciples duty to inform them of them. Had we done this there would perhaps not have been any problems occaisioned by the acceptance of scaliwags as acharyas, even when it was Srila Prabhupada who empowered them. If there was ever a more appropriate example of mistaking a snake for a rope then mistaking Kirtananada, Hansaduta, etc., as persons worthy of trust even, let alone authority over thousands or persons that he obviously cherished and an institution that he gave his life to the creation of, I don't know what it is.

Srila Prabhupada was wrong about a lot of things, but we were more wrong, because we didn't tell him. A goodly number of us still are today avoiding responsibility in this manner, and the persons who are not are lucky that they live in a society that allows them free speech, for if many had their way these outspoken individuals would have their tounges cut out, etc.

As long as our Krsna conscious society remains this way I doubt very much that it will gain acceptance and I doubt also very much that it should.

Hare Krsna

[Audarya lila 0]

Dear Janus,

 

I couldn't help but respond to your provocative post. This is a delicate topic indeed and we would all do well to tread carefully. I agree with the concept of a spiritual master being capable of making mistakes such as seeing a snake where there is only a rope. On the other hand, the spiritual master is not to be seen as an ordinary person, just as the deity is not to be seen as a material object such as wood or stone. The spiritual master has two sides, the divine/inspired side and the devotional sadhaka side. He is both human and divine. We who are inspired by a particular teacher will naturally be more focused on his/her divine side. Those who are not so closely associated or inspired will have more of a tendency to see the 'human side'. Balance is necessary, but certainly hard to maintain. Wherever we see Krsna coming and feel inspiration we should bow our heads there. In the highest sense, of course, the spiritual master is incapable of making a mistake because his/her every act is an act of dedication and even though it may appear to be faulty because it is directed with love toward Krsna it is without fault.

 

Sridhara Maharaja has instructed his sisyas to be faith makers not faith breakers. We should have the same generous spirit towards those who are inspired by others whose views are not wholly in accord with our own.

 

For certain we can all find fault with anyone and everyone - that is not a difficult task. This is the realm of faults. What is more difficult is to see the divine in all. That is what we should strive for. Criticism and genuine inquiry is one thing. Meanness and derogatory statements meant to hurt are something totally different.

 

I do agree with you that Lord Chaitanya's movement will not be taken seriously unless we ourselves take it seriously and apply the precepts in our own lives with sincerity. There are many saintly devotees, but there are also many who certainly fall far short and seem to reflect badly on this choice of lifestyle. Still, one good example outshines thousands and thousands of bad ones. Let us all pray that we will become good examples ourselves someday and that until such time we will love and honor and defend the dignity of those who are and find ourselves in their company and service.

 

Your servant,

Audarya lila dasa

[talasiga 0]

Originally posted by Bhaktavasya:

 

Here are some suggestions on how we can excersize freedom of speech, which is vital to the pursuit of truth......

 

Yes as I have said elsewhere:

we must learn to cultivate

our differences

with love

 

.

.

.

companion planter

talasiga@hotmail.com

[JRdd 0]

Here are some suggestions on how we can excersize freedom of speech, which is vital to the pursuit of truth.

 

1) We shall retain the right to disagree with any statement, belief or religious doctrine and to express our own views, in the spirit of friendly discourse.

 

"...in the spirit of FRIENDLY discourse" being the key phrase here, the rest being a given.

3) In the event of a discourse erupting into a battle, the rules of engagement are one on one, and that it be 'taken outside' the spiritual discussion forum and hashed on on the test forum. Suggestion 1) can be formatted to allow for spontaneity, with some restrictions applying.

 

How do you FORMAT and RESTRICT SPONTANEITY though? And isn't that a bit controlling, to decide that there must be spontaneity? How could one be spontaneous in such a format? And why would want even want to, necessarily? Seems like thoughtfulness might work just as good if not better, in such situtations. Whichever works at the time.

 

For example, someone may refer to their 'opponent' (and not the opponent's guru) as a jerk or a b**ch, but calling someone a f**khead would not be allowed.

 

Now who got to decide that you could use "jerk" and "b**ch", but not "*uc*head"? And would this be the same person we go to to find out if "p*ssears" is acceptable but not "sh**shoes"?

 

 

If the heat of the battle becomes too intense,

 

(to everyone else's immense pleasure)

 

the moderator can intervene by imposing a cool-out period for both forum members.

 

Ooooo, more fun, jndas! A step up from the garbage man! Now you get to be referee! Whee!

 

4) We acknowledge that our views, while different, may not be the highest truth, due to incomplete knowledge, faulty receptors, and personal basis.

 

True. But there's lots of things we may acknowledge, for the benefit of all. We don't need all these rules about all this, although I think that you make some very good points. Just basic respect, sensitvity, and consideration would solve it all. In fact, it wouldn't happen in the first place if some were more careful with how they speak. There really and truly are basic tenents written in the books of truth at our disposal, which clearly state where one is crossing the line as regards attitudes toward exalted souls (and it should, for safety's measure, include the assumption that ANY Vaisnava is an exalted soul, one way or the other, on some level or other), and anyone who is aware of these tenets is dutybound or morallybound or compassionatelybound--in some way bound or inclined--to speak of this truth. We are all in the position of being a teacher at some point. Sometimes it's you teaching me, and sometimes it's me teaching you. There is nothing arrogant or wrong in pointing out where there is some serious or near serious aparadh, and asking for the offender to reconsider his/her words or, if it gets really out of hand and the person is incommunicado, to simply ignore the person and also see to it that anything that is truly poisonous to the heart of a loving disciple be removed from the place where it fouls. That's why the umpire cries "Foul!". Someone's gotta keep things flowing along. But we can make his job less time-consuming by honoring the basics of respectful dealings, and oh, run like anything from any crazy thoughts that spring to mind about speaking loosely about the Mahabhagavats.

 

Now as Vaisnavas there WILL also be times when we will hear Avaisnava attitudes being propounded, impersonal acaryas quoted, etc. One has the right to state clearly that it is avaisnava, etc., and if the material gets too voluminous or or inappropriate or offensive to justify its presence on a Vaisnava forum, calling the moderator's attention to this would be perfectly in order, and not at all oppressive or repressive. There is always too much discussion after someone gets banned by a moderator, simply because someone still doesn't understand what constitutes serious offenses.

 

5) We recognize that freedom from illusion comes from Divine Grace. Once freed, no-one's former illusion/delusion may be brought up and used against him/her.

 

Right on. You know, reading this last bit I realise you are not necessarily writing a charter but are simply putting food out for thought? Well, it's been a very good meal, thank you, and I hope an enjoyable discussion follows, if this thread continues. I think this last point about not bringing up one's past is vitally important. It is so irrelevant, and so contrary to the basics of our philosophy to bring up one's past, and the person who does this clearly engages in breaking the principle of mental speculation. How many lifetimes would we have to go back, anyway? We are not God that we can judge when someone has left their past behind, anymore than we can even know a smidgen of the other person's past. Nor is it our job to point the finger outward. If we could use more "I" statements, and avoid the "you" statements, always keeping in mind that I am expressing how I feel, what I think, etc., and not speculating about or accusating another person, we may find ourselves talking about something mutual, something central, outside ourselves, you and me. The ego is such an embarressing thing I would rather hide it anyway when I come here, and behave AS IF I were free from it. Wow if we all did, that imagine what this place would be like! Actually I just read today that the person with their moon in Libra (as mine is) always wants harmony in every dealing, big or small, business, family, friends, and that when there is harmony this person is in Paradise. But don't we all feel that way?

 

Along with these suggestions, I propose that we wipe the slate clean and invite banned members such as Jayasriradhe back into the forums.

 

I don't agree with this one at all. And I agree with Janus who said she has plenty of places where she expresses herself on the internet, I have seen it myself. And I would like just one place I know I can go where I don't have to hear my spiritual master and others' spiritual master grossly offensively put down. It is dangerous for any creeper of love, and it is also a hundred times more distasteful than quinine, for the one who tastes the sweetness of the pure and gentle devotee of the Lord.

 

Thanks, Jayaradhe

 

 

P.S. I won't be able to reread or edit this so please forgive any typos that may be there, or uneven flow.

 

 

 

[This message has been edited by JRdd (edited 08-21-2001).]

[amanpeter 0]

From Bhaktavasya prabhu:

 

3) In the event of a discourse erupting into a battle, the rules of engagement are one on one,

and that it be 'taken outside' the spiritual discussion forum and hashed on on the test forum.

Suggestion 1) can be formatted to allow for spontaneity, with some restrictions applying. For

example, someone may refer to their 'opponent' (and not the opponent's guru) as a jerk or a

b**ch, but calling someone a f**khead would not be allowed. If the heat of the battle

becomes too intense, the moderator can intervene by imposing a cool-out period for both

forum members.

 

Not meaning to make fun, but just got a strangely comic picture of an enormous wrestling ring filled with diverse passionate personalities in extreme costumes, running about, frantically grappling with each other. More are climbing over the ropes on all sides, desperately struggling to join the fracas, while Bhaktavasya in a flashy referee outfit is swinging one of the rowdier participants over her head before flinging his screaming body into the raucous crowd of spectators!!!

[talasiga 0]

Originally posted by Audarya lila:

I also feel that everyone deserves a chance. Jaya Sri Radhey has a wonderful capacity to post inspiring scripture. If she could control herself from personal attacks, I for one would welcome her back.

 

Dear mister administrator,

please bring her back from outer space

I wish to put her in her place !

 

 

.

.

.

naive talasiga@hotmail.com

 

 

[kailasa 0]

Hare Krisna Janus!

 

>Srila Prabhupada was wrong about a lot of things, but we were more wrong, because we didn't tell him.

 

Could not you send a list of these errors me on mail? kailasa@novgorod.net Or though how à little. Devoteå speak about it, and I by any do not know. There can be it simplly ours not correct understanding?

 

kailasa.

 

[Bhaktavasya 0]

 

JRdd; these were just suggestions.

 

Originally posted by JRdd:

Here are some suggestions on how we can excersize freedom of speech, which is vital to the pursuit of truth.

 

1) We shall retain the right to disagree with any statement, belief or religious doctrine and to express our own views, in the spirit of friendly discourse.

 

"...in the spirit of FRIENDLY discourse" being the key phrase here, the rest being a given.

3) In the event of a discourse erupting into a battle, the rules of engagement are one on one, and that it be 'taken outside' the spiritual discussion forum and hashed on on the test forum. Suggestion 1) can be formatted to allow for spontaneity, with some restrictions applying.

 

How do you FORMAT and RESTRICT SPONTANEITY though? And isn't that a bit controlling, to decide that there must be spontaneity? How could one be spontaneous in such a format? And why would want even want to, necessarily? Seems like thoughtfulness might work just as good if not better, in such situtations. Whichever works at the time.

 

For example, someone may refer to their 'opponent' (and not the opponent's guru) as a jerk or a b**ch, but calling someone a f**khead would not be allowed.

 

Now who got to decide that you could use "jerk" and "b**ch", but not "*uc*head"? And would this be the same person we go to to find out if "p*ssears" is acceptable but not "sh**shoes"?

 

 

If the heat of the battle becomes too intense,

 

(to everyone else's immense pleasure)

 

the moderator can intervene by imposing a cool-out period for both forum members.

 

Ooooo, more fun, jndas! A step up from the garbage man! Now you get to be referee! Whee!

 

4) We acknowledge that our views, while different, may not be the highest truth, due to incomplete knowledge, faulty receptors, and personal basis.

 

True. But there's lots of things we may acknowledge, for the benefit of all. We don't need all these rules about all this, although I think that you make some very good points. Just basic respect, sensitvity, and consideration would solve it all. In fact, it wouldn't happen in the first place if some were more careful with how they speak. There really and truly are basic tenents written in the books of truth at our disposal, which clearly state where one is crossing the line as regards attitudes toward exalted souls (and it should, for safety's measure, include the assumption that ANY Vaisnava is an exalted soul, one way or the other, on some level or other), and anyone who is aware of these tenets is dutybound or morallybound or compassionatelybound--in some way bound or inclined--to speak of this truth. We are all in the position of being a teacher at some point. Sometimes it's you teaching me, and sometimes it's me teaching you. There is nothing arrogant or wrong in pointing out where there is some serious or near serious aparadh, and asking for the offender to reconsider his/her words or, if it gets really out of hand and the person is incommunicado, to simply ignore the person and also see to it that anything that is truly poisonous to the heart of a loving disciple be removed from the place where it fouls. That's why the umpire cries "Foul!". Someone's gotta keep things flowing along. But we can make his job less time-consuming by honoring the basics of respectful dealings, and oh, run like anything from any crazy thoughts that spring to mind about speaking loosely about the Mahabhagavats.

 

Now as Vaisnavas there WILL also be times when we will hear Avaisnava attitudes being propounded, impersonal acaryas quoted, etc. One has the right to state clearly that it is avaisnava, etc., and if the material gets too voluminous or or inappropriate or offensive to justify its presence on a Vaisnava forum, calling the moderator's attention to this would be perfectly in order, and not at all oppressive or repressive. There is always too much discussion after someone gets banned by a moderator, simply because someone still doesn't understand what constitutes serious offenses.

 

5) We recognize that freedom from illusion comes from Divine Grace. Once freed, no-one's former illusion/delusion may be brought up and used against him/her.

 

Right on. You know, reading this last bit I realise you are not necessarily writing a charter but are simply putting food out for thought? Well, it's been a very good meal, thank you, and I hope an enjoyable discussion follows, if this thread continues. I think this last point about not bringing up one's past is vitally important. It is so irrelevant, and so contrary to the basics of our philosophy to bring up one's past, and the person who does this clearly engages in breaking the principle of mental speculation. How many lifetimes would we have to go back, anyway? We are not God that we can judge when someone has left their past behind, anymore than we can even know a smidgen of the other person's past. Nor is it our job to point the finger outward. If we could use more "I" statements, and avoid the "you" statements, always keeping in mind that I am expressing how I feel, what I think, etc., and not speculating about or accusating another person, we may find ourselves talking about something mutual, something central, outside ourselves, you and me. The ego is such an embarressing thing I would rather hide it anyway when I come here, and behave AS IF I were free from it. Wow if we all did, that imagine what this place would be like! Actually I just read today that the person with their moon in Libra (as mine is) always wants harmony in every dealing, big or small, business, family, friends, and that when there is harmony this person is in Paradise. But don't we all feel that way?

 

Along with these suggestions, I propose that we wipe the slate clean and invite banned members such as Jayasriradhe back into the forums.

 

I don't agree with this one at all. And I agree with Janus who said she has plenty of places where she expresses herself on the internet, I have seen it myself. And I would like just one place I know I can go where I don't have to hear my spiritual master and others' spiritual master grossly offensively put down. It is dangerous for any creeper of love, and it is also a hundred times more distasteful than quinine, for the one who tastes the sweetness of the pure and gentle devotee of the Lord.

 

Thanks, Jayaradhe

 

 

P.S. I won't be able to reread or edit this so please forgive any typos that may be there, or uneven flow.

 

[This message has been edited by JRdd (edited 08-21-2001).]

 

[Bhaktavasya 0]

Originally posted by amanpeter:

From Bhaktavasya prabhu:

 

Not meaning to make fun, but just got a strangely comic picture of an enormous wrestling ring filled with diverse passionate personalities in extreme costumes, running about, frantically grappling with each other. More are climbing over the ropes on all sides, desperately struggling to join the fracas, while Bhaktavasya in a flashy referee outfit is swinging one of the rowdier participants over her head before flinging his screaming body into the raucous crowd of spectators!!!

Valaya, that part was spoken in as a comedic vein, as three different forums have been shut down due to infighting that sometimes inevitable take place (Chakra, VNN, Dharma Mela). I have no intention of referring any fights. As I indicated, battles are not spiritual instructions, that's why I suggested another forum for those who are intent on getting into a heated argument.

 

And why focus on that one and not the main body of the suggestions anyway?

 

 

[Janus 0]

Dear Audarya lila das

Tread softly upon my heart oh master of my spirit, of my soul. Love is our faith, modeling us in it's nature. Faith is very strong in Srila Prabhupada but it enfolds the entire devotional community, not just those who are activly persueing Krsna consciousness, but everyone, irregardless of their affiliation, whether they have ever heard of Sri Krsna Caitanya or whether their love is a stone cold place in them asleep seemingly forever in their own undiscovered hearts.

Our faith must be wise, I agree. It must be so on account of the softness of the spirit faiths but freshly born, easy to be broken.

It is not then our choice to break the faith of anyone in Sri Guru and Gauraga, but only in illusion. You have seen Krsna. You have smeared your eyes with the pulp of Lord Gauransudaras Harinama Sankirtana, with pure love of Krsna. My eyes have seen this.

We shall make faith strong as you suggest, by helping to remove the impediments that stand in the way of the creation of the world as one big facility for pure devotion. This is a seeminly impossible task, but as Srila Prabhupada was fond of reminding us, it is by Krsna's strength that everything in accordance with the desire of Sri Caitanya Mahprabhu is possible through His mercy; simply by this, and our williness to take up the task of spreading Krsna consciousness.

I spoke with a young man, an impassioned preacher the other day and he was as convinced as I am that through Krsna's mercy that we can change the world, and what's more he even had a plan for doing it. Ragunatha Stocker and many of the younger men and women of our mission remind me more of Old Testament Prophets than they remind me of the success so far of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu's mission here in the West, where the signs of it are visible, audable, present in the consciousness of every single soul who has through Srila Prabhupadas grace come into contact with Krsna's name.

The Holy Name of Krsna has been broken in the hearts of many, their love, their hope, and all their trust and innocence broken in two, but yet they have knit their hearts back together, without anasetic, ising only the cold presicion instruments of their analytical reasonings. They are an inspiration to me, but I am their senior and thus it is I who must also serve as an inpiration to them. I understood the heart of Krsna sufficiently that Srila Prabhupada corrected the perspective of the entire world authority of all of Sri Krsna Caitanya Mahaprabhu's disciplic succession in the West. This he did to build my faith at a time when otherwise I would have been lost. I can pray that I can repay the greatness of that gift in someway sufficient to make possible and understanding of all that must be done and how it may be accomplished.

Lord Sri Caitanya is here, Krsna's name is here, and guru is everywhere, and Srila Prabhupada is present in his books. What all then are we lacking? Each other? Let us work to remove that lack. Then perhaps we may really become faith builders.

Hare Krsna

 

 

Dear Janus,

I couldn't help but respond to your provocative post. This is a delicate topic indeed and we would all do well to tread carefully. I agree with the concept of a spiritual master being capable of making mistakes such as seeing a snake where there is only a rope. On the other hand, the spiritual master is not to be seen as an ordinary person, just as the deity is not to be seen as a material object such as wood or stone. The spiritual master has two sides, the divine/inspired side and the devotional sadhaka side. He is both human and divine. We who are inspired by a particular teacher will naturally be more focused on his/her divine side. Those who are not so closely associated or inspired will have more of a tendency to see the 'human side'. Balance is necessary, but certainly hard to maintain. Wherever we see Krsna coming and feel inspiration we should bow our heads there. In the highest sense, of course, the spiritual master is incapable of making a mistake because his/her every act is an act of dedication and even though it may appear to be faulty because it is directed with love toward Krsna it is without fault.

 

Sridhara Maharaja has instructed his sisyas to be faith makers not faith breakers. We should have the same generous spirit towards those who are inspired by others whose views are not wholly in accord with our own.

 

For certain we can all find fault with anyone and everyone - that is not a difficult task. This is the realm of faults. What is more difficult is to see the divine in all. That is what we should strive for. Criticism and genuine inquiry is one thing. Meanness and derogatory statements meant to hurt are something totally different.

 

I do agree with you that Lord Chaitanya's movement will not be taken seriously unless we ourselves take it seriously and apply the precepts in our own lives with sincerity. There are many saintly devotees, but there are also many who certainly fall far short and seem to reflect badly on this choice of lifestyle. Still, one good example outshines thousands and thousands of bad ones. Let us all pray that we will become good examples ourselves someday and that until such time we will love and honor and defend the dignity of those who are and find ourselves in their company and service.

 

Your servant,

Audarya lila dasa

 

 

[amanpeter 0]

Originally posted by Bhaktavasya:

Valaya, that part was spoken in as a comedic vein, as three different forums have been shut down due to infighting that sometimes inevitable take place (Chakra, VNN, Dharma Mela). I have no intention of referring any fights. As I indicated, battles are not spiritual instructions, that's why I suggested another forum for those who are intent on getting into a heated argument.

 

And why focus on that one and not the main body of the suggestions anyway?

 

Sorry, prabhu, didn't notice your post until now. What I said was shared solely for humorous relief. Sometimes I get a little giddy, I guess, as you may have noticed. It all seems so impossibly chaotic at times, does it not? Hope you're O.K. Peter/valaya

 

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

amanpeter@hotmail.com