soybean2k@stop.hotmail.com wrote:
>dturina@geocities.com (Danijel Turina) wrote:
>
>> I'm sorry, but I don't share your opinion on Prabhupada; as a matter
>> of fact, I don't even see him as a figure of any importance
>> whatsoever:
>
>Well, you certainly spend a good deal of time focusing on a figure
>you claim to see as one of no importance. 

Yes I do. It's a nice exercise to attack and destroy a false system. 

>Of course, according to
>*any* translation of Bhagavad-Gita, the self-realized soul sees
>all the conditioned entities as equal. 

By Prabhupada's translation, maybe. Actually it says that those who
know, see the same essence in all beings. (5.18)
That is quite different, of course.

>> his teachings found a fertile ground in the hippie era,
>> but it was soon analyzed and rejected as inferior, by everyone but a
>> handful of fanatics. The numbers seem to speak for themselves, since a
>> large number of his disciples already left ISKCON, seeing it as a
>> failure. Besides, I fail to notice the hippie reasoning in my
>> arguments;
>
>Then you've either got blinders on, or you're being openly dishonest.
>Your reasoning is ALL hippie stuff: the "truth within," and so forth;

Calling everything that is true "hippie stuff" might help you to
preserve your own illusions, but it does nothing more.

>You're a New Age fellow.

Actually I'm very, very old age fellow.

>> as before, you again put words in my mouth and misinterpret
>> my arguments in some strange way that seems logical to you, because
>> you find some similarity with something else that you read somewhere,
>> but that superficial attitude is of no help in a serious discussion.
>
>Nice ad hominem! Looking forward to more like it.

The truth is ad hominem if you are a liar.

>> You can attempt to underestimate my teachings, but that will not
>> decrease their value. If you are so good at analyzing people's
>> motivations, why don't you reverse your scope and direct it at
>> yourself?
>
>You don't call that sort of stuff hippie rhetoric? I do.

I call it Mt 7,3 and Lk 6,41.
"Why do you look at the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do
not notice the log that is in your own eye?" 

>> You might end up gaining a substantial benefit from such a
>> change. Try to see your motivations for adopting a Hare Krishna
>> philosophy, which is a mental prison of rules, regulations and
>> limitations?
>
>Unlike hippies, I *like* restrictions. I'm not looking to live
>in an unrestricted world that's all about freedom and lack of
>limitation. Hippies are; they're welcome to it. My mental prison
>suits me fine, thanks -- I want to serve God, not be Him. I have
>no interest in a spiritual which will free me from my limitation.
>My limitation is self-imposed and a welcome, light yoke: I am
>the slave of Krsna. That is how I want it, thanks.

Then keep your walls. But the truth will set you free. Eventually...
when you dare to open up to it. Not before.

>> Do you really think that you can hide in such a small
>> world?
>
>Hide from what?

 From God. God is the reality without any limitations whatsoever. No
limitations can enter, they all belong to the relative sphere of
existence. Only those who are ready to surrender their own
constructions become liberated, not others.

>> If you close your mind in a can, the vast universe will still
>> exist on the outside. Can you accept its challenge? Can you drop the
>> imitations and breathe in the world that has no walls anywhere?
>
>You have truly out-hippied yourself here. Please differentiate between
>your philosophy as indicated in the paragraph above and the hippie
>philosophy.

How could I, when "hippie philosophy" isn't clearly defined? You just
make up some label and put it on the stuff that you don't like, this
time it's "hippie stuff", before it was "19 century romanticism",
tomorrow it will be something else. It doesn't mean that those labels
say anything really significant, they just point out your fears.

>> That is, of course, true. Those who know have God's presence as a
>> guide, and such a guide is far more reliable than a book of
>> regulations. After all, the teachings of Jesus are all about the Holy
>> Spirit, who carves the Law into people's hearts; the higher love that
>> does no harm, with or without the regulations.
>
>"All is permissible, but not all is recommended...Am I then to
>live without the Law? By no means!" --St. Paul. 

"In everything, therefore, treat people the same way you want them to
treat you, for this is the Law and the Prophets." 
Mt 7,12 ? This law? 

Or maybe Mt 22,34-40? 
"One of them, a lawyer, asked Him a question, testing Him, 'Teacher,
which is the great commandment in the Law?' And He said to him, 'YOU
SHALL LOVE THE LORD YOUR GOD WITH ALL YOUR HEART, AND WITH ALL YOUR
SOUL, AND WITH ALL YOUR MIND. This is the great and foremost
commandment. The second is like it, YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS
YOURSELF. On these two commandments depend the whole Law and the
Prophets.'" 

Or is that too hippie stuff? ;))

>Well, they come into this newsgroup full of curse words, evidently unable
>to rid themselves of the defending propensity, which *any* translation
>of the Srimad-Bhagavatam will tell you is an animalistic propensity. So
>your lack of limitations has resulted in students without self-discipline.
>You must be very proud.

Yes, indeed I am.

-- 
Web (Kundalini-yoga): http://danijel.cjb.net