Is internet as a medium inherently flawed? - ...as far as devotional exchanges are concerned

[ This topic consists of posts from two separate threads merged into one place, both dealing with the same issue: Are devotional exchanges possible over the internet? Is the internet an inherently flawed medium, so much so that no sadhu-sanga can take place over it? Discuss all of that in this topic. And not in any other topics. Thank you. - Mod. ]

(Please forgive me everyone for expressing it, I know this is not the kind of contribution you like to be reading here, but friendship sometimes may come in an apparently not so friendly manner.)

I disagree: I disagree with Jagat that we have here a very mellow medium for Vaisnava sanga. I am actually disappointed at Jagat - so celebrated, senior leading a figure in the vaisnava community- at his encouraging internet exchanges in place of sadhu sanga. A sadhu may be mellow, but irresponsible? While so many in the vaisnava world still struggle to recover from pain and bewilderment, shouldn’t we be giving honesty a more balanced chance?

To reiterate what has been said many times over, no-one is encouraging internet exchanges in place of sadhu-sanga in person. Rather, they are helpful in the absence of sadhu-sanga in person.

I invited you to open a dialogue on this objection of yours a while back. The call is still open, if you would like to review your objections (in a separate thread), and if you are open to the possibility that there is a positive use for the medium.

I'm sure my opinion is not cared for here as well, but I find that even though there is less participation here now that a lot of the same old stuffiness continues.

Before the 'big change' yes there were controversial issues and some very heated exchange, however at the same time, there seemed to be more of a feeling of community (at least I felt that). There was a buzz so to speak, now it has dried up a bit.

Personally I have had the most heated debates with my best friends...and at the end of the day remained friends.

I am also puzzled why Jagat has not come forth with any details of his trip to India, I'm sure many were expecting more than a few photos..did he question Ananta das baba about all those things people were wanting him to, like the billions of guards at Nanda Mhj's palace..?

jijaji

For Madhava: If you give me that choice (and chance), I like to keep the subject here, no need to start a separate thread – that would only serve as a distraction. The medium may be positive – it depends on the level of sadhu presence.

In person or not, to take sadhu sanga involves full honesty and surrender. When those two elements are consciously neglected, the sanga may be there, but is the sadhu?

No, I don't think a new thread would be a distraction at all. To the contrary, it would give the issue due focus, and at the same time let this thread be there for those who are happy to have Gaudiya Discussions back online.

(just talking about splitting has already created distraction )

Seriously, look into the subject and see that it has started off as feedback. Now there is apparent need to separate the happy from the unhappy feedback and I am going to just go ahead and use the whole thing as a providential example of how that would be, indeed, a distraction, one that only the medium can generate! Split it you may, but the point is that happy and unhappy reactions are part of the same subject and so it is only natural that they should remain together. There is always divertion from the focus, which is saranagati beyond ascertainment.

Human exchanges within this medium differ greatly than without. They are better without because within they are not integral. Sadhu sanga within this medium is a contradiction. At least as far as Gaudiya philosophy is concerned. Traditional Guadiya, especially.

As someone whose life has been benefitted and transformed by the sanga offered here, I have to disagree with the argument that real sadhu sanga isn't available. It may not be available to all but those people need to look at themselves, their aspirations and their personalities to see why it is not so for them. There are members here who, as a result of this sanga, have taken diksha, members who are hoping to take diksha, what to speak of the numerous visitors and participants who find a drop (or an ocean) of inspiration and knowledge.

If someone is having trouble building relationships with Vaisnavas here, trying clicking on the PM or email buttons. Enter an exchange with some of the wonderful people here. Ask them about their bios. Go and meet them. I've met many friends here and hope to meet many more. Each is a sadhu for desiring the service of Sri Gauranga and Sri Radha and I will seek their sanga in whatever form they offer it.

And while I hate to make anyone feel left out, I think it is worth pointing out that many of us have formed private groups here for different purposes--for discussing topics in confidence with like-minded people, topics of sadhana, of study, of practical matters of service to our gurus.

The medium isn't the problem. It's all a question of intent and reciprocation.

I take it that this is at the core of your objection.

Would you, then, since you agreed that the medium may be used in a positive manner, like to suggest specific remedial measures that would bring about the potential of the medium?

You may want to start by explaining how you feel that honesty and surrender are being consciously neglected.

Honesty itself is remedy for so many things.

The potential of this medium is that it is a communication device. It becomes a problem* when it is used as a means to arbitrary participation. Picking and choosing when to participate in acts of devotion (while carrying a separate everyday life) is contradictory to the principles of Gaudiya ideal. Endless random issuing of opinions is incompatible with that ideal. Gradual and progressive submission, commitment at every level, is required.

*Look carefully into it and see that the medium and the intent are one. Your life changed when you looked into your Baba’s eyes. All other moments have been simply supportive of that.

You're not the only one who asked that, Jijaji. The trouble was that when I came back, it was impossible to go back to things as they were. That meant just a lot less time on the computer, or at least on the internet.

As to talking to Ananta Dasji, to be honest, I can't recall asking him that question. Do you, Madhava?

No, I don't think it ever came up. I suppose there were so many other topics of greater concern and interest.

Such as? (if you don't mind me asking).

Such as matters of bhajan, as far as I was concerned. I try to limit my questions to topics that are of direct concern for my bhajana during the precious moments I have with my guru, other topics are subsidiary interests.

I wasn't present in all the conversations that Jagadananda had with Baba, but many of them, if memory serves, touched on different topics concerning rasa-tattva.

Would you like to elaborate on how practically honesty could be better exercised?



I believe we have a good many steady and regular members. How would you see arbitrarity at work in their participation? I don't think we can draw up a schedule on how much everyone has to participate and on what kinds of topics.

When I was in the dham for four months, it isn't that every day I had a schedule to go to particular persons to discuss a particular quantity of particular kinds of topics. Sometimes matters come up, and then you talk, and at other times you don't.

You cannot legislate befitting quantities of participation in discussions. People have other devotional engagements besides devotional exchanges here, and there is certainly no rule concerning regularity in additional devotional practices as long as the main limbs such as the chanting of the Name are going on on a daily basis.

And even if some are weak on that, isn't it good that they can come here at least now and then and read something of devotional inspiration?

Of course, if people come here to merely entertain themselves without caring for the function of sadhu-sanga that is at their disposal, such arbitrary participation is not what we're here to encourage.



As pointed out by Braja and others, the medium has brought a good many souls to look into my Baba's eyes, and I know it has also put a good many others on the track in pursuit of our Gaudiya ideals, offering support, encouragement and so forth. I know it because I have seen it, I have heard of it, and I have witnessed the fruits of it in person. And I should add, I have also heard from my Baba about its fruits.

If you see if like that, then why do you come here? Honestly. To save us? Your arbitrary participation isn't modelling a different or better way.

My Baba (with the eyes) explained the process of spiritualization of all things to me; if differs from the lines you have drawn and the judgements you are happy to make about others.

And as far as all other moments being simply supportive etc., I sorry but this is sheer hogwash. My life changes with each sincere interaction with a Vaisnava. It's not all about sentimental interaction with some great guru. This process is very rich, drops of mercy are available all around for those who seek it.

And I'm not sure why you are switching away from your initial specific arguments concerning sadhu-sanga. Endless, random quotes of profound ideals (that have little application in practical life) seems to be something you are arguing against, yet you are doing exactly that.

I have to second Braja here. I don't see any consistency in the objections being presented, it seems like many of them are made up as they are written, and change arbitrarily.

That's why I've been calling for a single, exhaustive summary of what exactly the problem might be. It needn't be long, as long as it covers the main issues and is clear and well thought out.

Yea well I can understand that coming back home you found yourself in a different situation,

I also would probably not ask Ananta dasji that question myself come to think of it

jijaji

Oops, did this little argument take place because I opened my mouth again?

Can I clarify what I meant with my initial comments/praise of Madhavaji's direction? I believe I was referring to how this place seemed to be populated with people who, despite some of them being sincere, seemed to have no other reason to hang out here. It now appears that such people have no inclination for following the path of Sri Gauranga or to engage in manjari-bhava-sadhana and all the rest of it. It seems that one of the main reasons for their hanging out here was to process their experiences that they gained in IGM, and this was the ideal place to do it since this is not an IGM forum.

That is why I appreciated very much Madhava's great distinction about the target audience: those who are initiated in the path of Sri Gauranga, and those who are aspiring for initiation in said path. Apart from those two types, the revised Board Rules give good guidance as to who else can fit in here.

So in a way, I appreciate the basic sentiments of Ananda's concern about sanga; I wasn't here for a long time but as I slowly catch up on all the topics that I've missed, I've seen some rather hurtful remarks made by such people about the mood etc. of the Gaudiya-marga, and I don't like to read such things. What is the logic of hanging out here in a Gaudiya forum and insinuating that our bhava is too narrow-minded, exclusive and whatnot? It's bad manners. So in my comments I was basically expressing my gratitude that this forum now seems to have become free from such malevolent influences and we can one again discuss Gaudiya topics with great relish. An exodus of members means that they have now gone and found their own place and I am happy for them. So now this is the pure vaisnava-sanga where we can discuss anything without unnecessary disturbance. I don't have a problem with controversial topics per se but I do have a problem when it degenerates into shouting and screaming. But now instead of having my mind disturbed by all the screaming, I am coming here to see nice quotes (pearls of wisdom) from shastra, Bhagavata slokas here and there, some nice sweet padavalis (even if I post them myself! ) as well as some good ol' thoughtful discussion to chew on. I like this forum now, it has become a much better place to sit here and read spiritual topics and my mind is at peace when I come here.

So one again, three cheers for Madhavaji! His direction is fantastic.

By the way Anand, I understand that you have been having these concerns about Internet-sanga for quite a while now, around two years. Not to slight your point or anything, but isn't two years a rather long time to hold the same grievance and bring it up whenever the opportunity arises?

Pssst. Everytime you bold those words, I feel a large circle being drawn on my back. Having been skillfully saved from giving life to old sampradayic battles, I hear the twanging of bow strings from a different direction.

Madhava, Braja, please remain peaceful, I am not attacking you, there is no need to get angry with me.

I am simply putting the proposition here that "Gaudiya discussions" may be a contradiction. Gaudiyas don't discuss. They inquire from an authority, and then, when it is the case, transmit the knowledge received. That is the process, honestly.

Gaurasundara, no, you don't understand for how long I am concerned with anything. Please don't assume much more than you can handle.

"Gaudiyas don't discuss?" Wow. So there are no peers, just gurus and disciples...Interesting. Sort of a George Orwellian/sci-fi sampradaya.

####$%%$%^Authority functioning.

Seeking recipient.

Connection established.

Transmitting knowledge.

Knowledge transmitted.

PROCESS successful. &&****####

BTW, I guess it needs to be asked: which authority asked you to post here?

Brajaji, ok.


But what did Mahaprabhu Himself do? Didn't He lock Himself away in Srivasa Angan and discuss rasika-lila with Svarupa Damodara and the like? And at other times He was discussing Bhagavata with others? Ramananda-samvada? Why did He "discuss" these things with contemporaries instead of simply going to His own authority?


Well I've seen you bring this topic (Internet-sanga) up around two or three times since about two years ago. The last time this occurred was just before Madhava made his big change. I thought the ins and outs of these concerns were dealt with several times in the past; what else is there to say except repetitions? Have any circumstances changed? I am not angry or anything with you either; I am just puzzled as to why such "concerns" are still around despite ruminating over them for two years or so.

Isn't there something missing here?

Whatever happened to peers discussing among themselves? Is every discussion supposed to be a submission to a higher authority? This isn't the Vaishnava culture I know; I don't know where you're coming from in this regard.


This would be an oxymoron if it were only a one-way alley, as you wouldn't go and enlighten your superiors and transmit knowledge to them.

Yes. In fact not only in discussing, but at every act Gaudiyas submit to a superior authority. That is the meaning of Saranagati.

If this means there's no peer interaction, we're living in different worlds, then. Who is to say that isn't in accordance with the wishes of the guru? In my experience, it most certainly is.

And puzzled you may remain GS, because the fact is that despite my telling you directly that you are wrong, you appear to disregard my words. Again, no, I have not concerned myself with this subject since two years ago. Very well, yours will just be an exemple to illustrate the kind of thing I am trying to bring attention to: If in a period of two years all you know of me is a misconception, how much of everything else is really coming through? How much sadhu sanga you and I have been exchanging?

Radhe Radhe!

I have been away a bit with a hard drive failure, a Swamaji staying at my home, family, work and, of course, my service to my dear Thakurji. Upon returning I couldn’t help but chuckle at the latest being discussed here.

Anand: We simply don’t agree with your way of thinking. Part of the problem, in my humble opinion, is that you don’t believe in your way of thinking. Otherwise what are you doing here? Why are you still, somehow, one of the more prolific posters in the general discussions? After reading the latest I really feel like you are arguing with yourself. Do us all a favor: do what is favorable for your bhajan. If that is not participating at Gaudiya Discussions or using the Web then more power to you.

I think I speak for most here when I say that first in our lives is service to Guru and Vaisnavas. Each day I complete my sadhana, service to my dear Thakurji, spend time with my family before I even open up my web browser to click on Gaudiya Discussions. This is not our all in all but it is a way for us to communicate with one another. We would all love to converse with one another on the steps of Radha Kunda but time separates us from such an environment. So that is where GD comes in. As Braja mentioned, what you see at GD is not the entirety. Many of us study books together, talk of bhajan together and help one another through our lives.

Again if you really believe what you continually write then please remove GD from your “My Favorites” and close the web browser and get that Vaisnava sanga. Nothing can be everything for everyone; nor can anything be something for everyone. So find your something and leave us to enjoy our association.

Aspiring to serve the Vaisnavas,
Rasaraja dasa

And every time I read those words I feel like I am being told to leave, and wondering why the author maintains an account at the heretics' forum.

I would like to draw attention to those other than the target audience who may remain here respectfully:



Of course the needs of the "target audience" are the primary consideration but it is clear that others may exist here, respecting the needs of said audience.

Blessed Be--

your token pagan

Ah, someone who has read the principles and guidelines.

Yes, we do accommodate others, too, and they shouldn't be unnecessarily made unwelcome as long as they understand and respect the needs of our primary target audience. Italics added to emphasize the non-exclusivity of the concept.

Needless to say, all of the above classes of people have been included on account of my not considering them contrary to the needs of the primary target audience in the capacity expressed, and indeed supportive and enriching. If someone disagrees, I'm all ears; my other name is dialogue.

Thank you, Madhava.

Sorry Tapati but I wasn't specifically referring to you, but to a large group including some people who I'd rather not name. I believe that I am being entirely reasonable in saying that reading of smart remarks and other comments against Gaudiyaism and so on is hurtful to read, and I don't hide my pleasure at just simply not having to read such remarks any more. I don't have anything personal against anybody, except against the things they may say. Like I said earlier, I don't have a problem with criticism and controversy per se, but with facetiousness and arguing for the sake of arguing. The board rules definitely cater to the target audience as well as to the curious and inquisitive as you've pointed out. I don't have a problem with them either; I am a nobody! I didn't mean to make you feel unwelcome and sorry if I did so, I am just objecting to deliberate cutting remarks is all....

As for why I maintain an account at the "heretical" forum, I don't. I think it is obvious that I haven't participated there for well over a month or so, and the reasons for that are very obvious.

Anandji I'll say this in full awareness of my own faults in this regard, and I'm very much aware that you have participated in the spiritual discussions with many deep and valuable contributions and insights. Its just that whenever you bring a topic like this up, things tend to boil with almost everybody disagreeing with your viewpoint. It could be that people may tend to remember you for bringing up these points all the time as you have done so several times in the past already, and all the good contributions you have made sort of fade into the background; that's just human nature to forget the good and remember the bitter tastes.

I would love to have sadhu-sanga with you and get to know you and everyone else too, but just as Rasaraja et al are essentially saying; how are we supposed to have sadhu-sanga when you regularly undermine the very medium which will enable to have the same when there is a lack of possibility for other mediums?

However one has to wonder whether getting to the bottom of someone's complaints and objections counts for sadhu-sanga.

Perhaps if you, Anand, tried for change to participate in some of the topics we others relish on a regular basis, the world of Gaudiya Discussions might turn a different leaf for you. If I am not entirely mistaken, the good majority of your posts deal with varieties of problems and complaints, if they aren't one-liners.

However, I have a "good" feeling that you are talking about me. Specially when you refer to GM, which honestly I think it was ugly.

No Harisaranji, I was not referring to you either. You are a Gaudiya Vaishnava and thus my brother. My comments were essentially about how there seemed to be several non-Gaudiyas making sarcastic remarks here and there about our path. My initial comments were just to congratulate Madhavaji on his gallant and stellar leadership and how the situation has improved since then. I thought that the "internet-sanga" discussion arose out of a misunderstanding of my comments so I wrote another post to clarify what I meant. Perhaps I should just keep my mouth shut on these issues in future since what I say tends to be easily misunderstood. Sorry for any offences or misunderstandings. Ohe Gaura! I should have kept my mouth shut.

Radhe Radhe!

Honestly,
without the sadhu-sanga here, I would have NEVER EVER experienced the things (which many read here ) I did, especially and profoundly last year.

Although I too was at times fed up with some threads & topics ( mainly I was angry with my shallow and neophyte-responses), I am very thankful for all that I have come to learn here and integrate in my life.

Dear Anand, I can understand your points about honesty and surrender, but that doesnt mean that Gaudiyas are brainless zombies. One of Srila Rupa Goswami´s verses of the Upadesamrita deals with the interaction of devotees (inquiring from and sharing experiences with), right? So there is certainly nothing wrong for a Gaudiya to discuss "things".

@Rasaraja
Thanks for expressing so nicely the points about helping each other via this forum.
And guess what, even PM´s with you people here can be nectar if you dont have sadhu-sanga that much like I do and if you do your duties in the material world (job, house, garden,...). So I can only speak for myself: I really am happy about GD and although I dont post that much, I still enjoy being here nearly everyday.

Love
Tarunji

Please disregard what I said. I always have good impression about you, but that was a bit surprise for me to see you abstractly referring to people connected to GM.

Just some thoughts...

I think the main point in Anand’s proposition is about real-time-sanga; internet-sanga is not satisfying the needs. It is obvious that there are advantages in this type of medium, and those are about the speed, facility, audio-visual and accesses to information, however, one easily realizes that the virtual community can offer a limited level of association, only. In the real sense of the concept of association, internet offers only an indication of it; an image of what would be; idealism, if will. It is not real in terms of human’s sense. Indeed, it is mind’s playground. The artificiality becomes even more evident when talking to and through someone’s thoughts located in a far place. Therefore, very often people can be misunderstood. In other words, we have to take this medium with certain precaution, especially if it becomes the only means of Sadhu-Sanga; communication. Humans have the five senses to acquire knowledge, however, internet mainly works with 6th one; the mind and that is the nature of a virtual community.

Yet you still maintain an open account, a blog, and have logged in fairly recently. On one hand you are demeaning what we do there (which I assure you is considerably more than merely process our past) and on the other you saw fit to use us when GD wasn't available.

I accept your apology but I hope you understand that there are still some hurt feelings on our side from the way our parting came about, and a sense of being misunderstood, and that it is possible to praise GD without demeaning us and our new forum.

Blessed be--

Tapati

After more than a month? That's hardly activity. I haven't touched any blog there. Everything there of me stands the way it was when I left.


You've got the wrong impression somewhere along the line. I believe I have at least twice stated very clearly that I am happy that all of you have found your own place to discuss your own topics and that GD is now 'free' from those type of discussions. Where is the demeaning in there?

As for 'using' you when GD wasn't available, I sort of knew that would come up. My reply is that your forum was initially very nice and some good discussions were taking place (like about Shiva, neo-bhakti, etc). Then on a differerent thread I read something which was not only cheap and nasty as well as untrue, but blatantly ridiculous. To see it being said by someone who I had a great respect for and for their intelligence was even more dumbfounding. So I left. I decided that the 'honeymoon period' of GR was over and this was proved true by some other weird topics that were being discussed. So I left without seeing the need to kick up a major fuss. I believe that was the polite thing to do. Your forum is not for practicing Gaudiyas and is for ex-Gaudiyas (to relate it to a Gaudiya context), and you did warn everybody that there would be controversial things discussed there. So I am out of place there, and as soon as I saw those weird and controversial remarks appearing I was out of there. And by the way, I am not the only one who felt like that.

And, in my earlier posts I was not referring to remarks made there. I am referring to smart remarks made here, before GR even came about, as I keep seeing every time I click on some old topic for a read.


I'm afraid I still don't see what exactly I said that could be considered 'demeaning', since I have expressed gladness that you guys found your niche? Is there a possibility that you are being a little over-sensitive and taking things a little too personally? After all, my only intention here was to praise Madhava's leadership of GD and his direction, and I think I've clarified that point, so again I apologise for any misunderstanding.

I think I had really better stop talking as everythign I say seems to be misunderstood anyway. It's a wonderful life.

I'm fine with you being unhappy at GR, I didn't expect that you would be happy there. If you don't want your account, it is easy enough to take care of that. We exist to question and examine any and all philosophies, and this may be disturbing to some. We expect that.

Perhaps I am being oversensitive, but this is an example of what I am reacting to:



Malevolent? Isn't that a bit much? A quick web definition: "wishing or appearing to wish evil to others; arising from intense ill will or hatred." These are my friends you are talking about!

And this:



No, I didn't see the majority of people who landed in GR coming here to do much of this, certainly not intentionally. I've had many conversations about what brought each of us here. The subject would come up out of our shared past, but I think people were restraining any impulse to really enter into this kind of thing here, and it is evidenced by the initial surge of such topics when we first opened at GR, which have since died down considerably. I think that having lacked the freedom to do that before it simply was an opportunity to finally let go and say things that had been left unsaid for many years. But I didn't see that the IGM topic was the primary outlet here for those who moved over to GR. What we mainly relished here was the academic, controversial, eclectic area. Now we have an outlet for those topics and are happy to be doing so in a place that doesn't affect the atmosphere here. And in fact, it was Jagat's presence and posting in that area that inspired many of us to join.

I just didn't see a need for you to reference us or what we did or didn't do yet again. Why not just leave that topic alone and simply express positive things about what is happening here now?

It seemed like gloating. Your side won that dispute, it is time to be gracious about it as Madhava and Jagat have been.

We likewise have actually deleted inappropriate anti-GD commentary on our own site when it occurred and especially an insult leveled at Madhava.

Again I appreciate the sentiment of your apology and if you can follow through by ceasing to reference our experiences at GD and simply celebrate your own, we can all get along much better.

Blessed Be--

Tapati

Malevolent is most certainly an unfair overstatement, especially if applied to a group of people. If one wanted to express something along these lines, one could speak of a negative influence, and saying that while remembering that negativity is a subjective definition; what is negative at one place may be positive at another, and moreover its intentionality is yet another issue.

Thank you!

All of the people I have conversed with on this issue had the best of intentions and what was most hurtful was having them questioned or judged.

I am happy that you are all enjoying the new atmosphere here and glad that we can all have the forum experience we are looking for--or most of us, anyway. That may be all we can hope for in any group of fallible human beings.

Blessed Be--

Tapati

Malevolence, perhaps I chose the wrong word as I have been busy lately and must have written that post a little too fast with the first word that came into my head. 'Mocking' could be a better alternative. Or 'negative' as Madhava suggests. Given that no one knows who I am talking about, I'd steer clear of referring to an entire group of people (who I may not have been refering to) and sentimentally referring to them as friends doesn't fly very well with me. Several of them I consider to be close friends too even now, that doesn't change the fact that they made very hurtful statements about Gaudiya bhava and siddhanta. It's bad manners, plain and simple.

On a tangential note, Tony Blair looks set to win the UK General Election that has been taking place tonight. Here's to another four prosperous years of continued economic growth, falling interest rates and higher employment.

The majority of those who left were and are my friends, and if you don't want people to mistake whoever you are talking about, then perhaps it is best not to make vague references which could include anyone who is no longer here after the purge.

I am glad you are re-thinking the use of the word malevolent. Thank you.

Radhe Radhe!

I think it is best that if anyone feels someone is taking subtle digs at them, or their friends, that they should handle such concerns via PM. Public posts where we read into one another and then go back and forth with an author about what they actual meant seems a bit unproductive.

Take Gaurasundara on his word and if anyone has any further concerns please handle it in private. If you feel that such issues cannot be settled between said parties and/or are blatantly disrespectful please hit “Report” and explain to the Moderator the history and what issues you see as relevant and we can then deal with the issues on the back end. Furthermore if we find that such concerns are indeed an issue we will ensure such posts are correctly addressed both with the author as well as on the site.

Aspiring to serve the Vaisnavas,
Rasaraja dasa

It almost sounds like we've hired a professional moderator...

Indeed, Srila Narayana Maharaja does not put emphasis on instituting temples with living facilities for newly recruited members. However, he does encourage followers to congregate in settlement-like communities such as New Braja in Badger, California, Hawaii, New Zealand, Alachua, and so forth.

As far a familiarity breeding contempt, this view of Srila Narayana Maharaja has been reiterated by Aranya Swamy also in regard to cyber communes. Aranya Maharaja is a firm disbeliever of everyday internet life as a means of sadhu sanga.

He personally told me of his inexperience with the internet, so I would have to question the experience based on which he presents his opinion. Everyone can have an opinion on so many topics. Then again, educated opinions are another matter.

Radhe Radhe!

Anand: It is becoming very tiresome that you continually bring the same theme to every thread. We simply don’t agree with your way of thinking and part of the problem, in my humble opinion, is that you don’t believe in your way of thinking. Otherwise what are you doing here? Why are you still, somehow, one of the more prolific posters in the general discussions of this Website if you really believe in what you keep saying? After reading your last two posts it seems fairly evident that you are arguing with yourself. Do us all a favor: do what is favorable for your bhajan. If that is not participating at Gaudiya Discussions or using the Web then more power to you. Turn it off. Personally I always found most "devotional" websites to be distasteful and in many cases appalling. Know what I did? I never returned. It really is that simple.

As we have all pretty much continually stated the first priority in our lives is service to Guru and Vaisnavas. Personally each day I complete my sadhana, service to my dear Thakurji, spend time with my family before I even open up my web browser to click on Gaudiya Discussions. This isn’t a replacement for sanga but an available access to it.

This is not our all in all but it is a way for us to communicate with one another. We would all love to converse with one another on the steps of Radha Kunda but time separates us from such an environment. So that is where GD comes in. As Braja mentioned in the other thread, what you see at GD is not the entirety. Many of us study books together, talk of bhajan together and help one another through our lives.

If you really believe what you continually write then please remove GD from your “My Favorites” folder and close the web browser so you can get that Vaisnava sanga you continually tell us about.

Nothing can be everything for everyone; nor can anything be something for everyone. So find your something and leave us to enjoy our association.

Madhava made a great point that perhaps if you tried to participate in some of the topics we relish, on a regular basis, the world of Gaudiya Discussions might turn a different leaf for you. You are one of the Top 10 most prolific posters and your posts generally deal with varieties of problems and complaints, if they aren't one liners. So for you this clearly isn’t sanga.

So please, once and for all, make up your mind. If that means no more GD then good luck but stop insisting, on a devotional web forum, that sanga isn’t possible on a devotional web forum. Stop coming into our home and telling us how faulty it is.

Aspiring to serve the Vaisnavas,
Rasaraja dasa

Educated opinion by means of experience? Would you consider Ananta das Baba's opinion an educated opinion?

-------

Not every thread Rasaraja.

I know Aranya Swami's opinon on devotional communities better than Jagat does. So I am expanding on the aspect he has presented here.

If you believe your concept of Gaudiyaism and sadhu sanga is final and not open for differing opinions, then you are not open to discussions. But you are, you are Gaudiya Discussions.

No, I would not, unless he were first thoroughly briefed on how the internet works, how the communities work, and so forth. It would be an opinion, but since he wouldn't have been educated on the matter, it wouldn't be an educated opinion. What's the point in asking questions on topics another isn't familiar with?



Well, is your concept open to discussions?

If it indeed is, I would like to repeat my request I believe I've said a couple of times over:

Please present concicely the points you feel are the core of the problem, in a single post if at all possible. Also, please then present whether these problems are something that may possibly be rectified, and if so, how?

I would appreciate it if that were the next thing you wrote on this matter. Otherwise you are turning this discussion into exactly what you spoke against, a list of random opinions.

Radhe Radhe!

I guess I should have been more clear. You continually bring the same theme to every thread since you decided Vaisnava sanga, via the internet, was an issue. I am waiting for you to reflect on your position in comparison to your actions. I believe if you finally do that you will either:

A. Leave and improve your life by finding the sanga conducive to your bhajan and stop coming here to tell us that our sanga here is not conducive to our bhajan.

B. Stop participating in discussions that don’t encourage your bhajan and primarily concern yourself in discussions that will be conducive to your bhajan.

Rasaraja dasa

I believe that Anand is primarily taking aim at a certain type of person here. She is legitimately concerned that individuals like myself, who have no bhajan or spiritual depth, come onto the internet and pontificate about this and that, creating the illusion that they actually have some spiritual worth. The internet makes it possible for people like me to hide the reality of their situation and enchant innocent people into thinking that they may be a guru or something like that.

This is perhaps true. There are, for instance, pedophiles who cleverly use the anonymity of the internet to win over innocent hearts and then exploit them. The same may apply in this case, though in my internet experience (now running over 13 years, from the first user and newsgroups) I have seen many pontificators trying to sound wise, but they are usually laughably easy to pick out and anyone who is fooled by them deserves to be fooled. Seducers are also generally transparent to all but the blindest.

I would like to say what Gaudiya Discussions and its predecessors have done for me:

• It has given me the impetus and the desire to clarify my thoughts on many subjects, thus spurring me to a period of great intellectual creativity.
• It has given me a place to compensate for my lack of other kinds of association. In fact, the quality of discussion ("satataM kIrtayanto mAM" and all the other instructions to glorify Krishna in the association of devotees) has been, as far as I am concerned, consistently higher than in most face-to-face contacts that I have had.
• It has, I feel, brought me genuine friendships with other who share many of the same concerns and desires that I have.
• Not only this, but it has clearly led to some projects of practical significance being begun, such as the work on the Madhurya-kadambini. I think that this is likely to continue.
• Gaudiya Discussions is not, as Rasaraj clearly stated, meant to replace "real life." But it may well be a place that can provide various kinds of services to supplement aspects of our so-called real lives. After all, our real life is service to Radha and Krishna. Anything that is "anukula" should be accepted. If it is pratikula, then drop it. In all cases, be judicious with this, as with everything else you do in life.
• Finally, it is a place where I can come and ask other devotees for their mercy. Even though the devotees here are not physically present, I know that their well-wishes for me transcend time and space and will affect me and my spiritual life positively. Similarly, even if my Harikatha is false or the result of other, impure motivations like labh, puja and pratishtha, there is still a chance that I may accidentally bring some devotee somewhere some pleasure and thus win his or her favor.

This list might well be lengthened, but I'll let it go there for now. If devotees have found me wanting, then I am sorry to have disappointed. Please do not kick me away, but pray for me that I may be able to serve the Vaishnavas in this and every future life.

Your servant,

Jagat

You might even be using your left hand (yuch) for typing, unlike our Rasaraja, and contaminate the entire board. We just won't know what you're doing, will we.

I honestly don't think of this as an issue as long as everyone is forthcoming about their own situation, should such issues become relevant. Pretending is obviously not something we would like to encourage, but then I don't see it as pretense if someone has something worth saying and he comes forth and says it. If others appreciate what he said, then all the better, and if they think he was a wise man, then all the better, but that does not a pretender make.

Individuals such as your good self have plenty of experience in Gaudiya Vaishnavism and plenty of knowledge and wisdom to share for a good many souls, regardless of how much or how little you are engaged in this or that, as long as you are somehow engaged and maintain the right direction.

So take things for what they're worth and take advantage of them. Is the pint half empty or half full? Then drinketh, ye thirsty folk. What's the problem?

If this is primarily an issue between Anand and yourself, then I don't see why she has to take it out on the rest of the world.

Jaya Sri Radhe!

Aho! Who would swap a taste for Hari-katha for all the righteousness in the world!? If we pass from here with only a few minutes of relish to our names, so be it.

I must say that I have never - NEVER - had the kind of intimate contact with spiritual discussions of all kinds that I have got from the Internet, I have never experienced that in my real life no matter how many devotees I have spoken face-to-face with. In fact, I have experienced the complete opposite; face-to-face contacts always seemed to fill my head with queer ideas and direct me away from the goals which I aspired for. This has been true even in regards to the directions I followed in my spiritual past; it has always been the case that Internet discussions have provided me with far greater opportunity to discuss and clarify issues, and it has especially helped me greatly in the procedure of learning new things. If that makes me some sort of nerd, then so be it.

I know I've probably voiced these feelings in different words before, but the full impact and realisation of the above paragraph just hit me in the heart at this moment.

Yikes, I am lefthanded and I type with my left hand....
Me, the contaminator...

I think Rasaraja made the point clear:

Why posting in a forum when you are against the idea of "internet-sadhu-sanga"?
Better to leave and be happy with whatever else.

Great points, dear Jagat, I am one of those pretenders too. So I decided not to poste just for the sake of showing off or just for the sake of posting.

Sometimes its better to just read and think.

Like I said before, with the help of this forum here, my life certainly changed.

It is just a matter about how you handle the internet.
I do it like Rasaraja, after a hard working day, before some evening bhajan, or on weekends after morning sadhana...Its always an enriching experience to come here.

Only if you have NO life outside the net and you really replace this kind of sadhu-sanga with real person-to-person-sanga, then its dangerous and you can loose yourself in endless debates and often in wasting valuable time, speaking from my own "mayavadi"-encounters, ...

2 cents.

Tarunji

I have been trying to say that this is relatively a modern way of communication, and most people are learning how to understand the process of actions and reactions in this type of environment. I would not say it’s a” New Age Community”, but a “cyber-community”, where things and personalities get really magnified. Therefore, (by the power of the strong marketing behind it) if internet definitely has became part of your daily-life, just don’t get scared of how giant someone or something may appear on your monitor; it is just the web-effect on your mind... And be ready for the surprises and wonderful things that may happen...

Having said that I must admit that it was from this very regal cyber-community that my mind has been open to the multiform elements of constructive thoughts, enriched with transcendental knowledge, which I never imagined that would be manifest, as it did in here.

Many thanks to Jagat-ji, and all others, by whose kindness, enlightening insights have been pouring down upon us.

I am sorry everyone for inconveniencing the board with this issue. I have decided to present my concerns direcly to Ananta das Baba.

Thank you for your patience.

If you cannot summarize your concerns in a coherent manner to fluent English speakers either in public or in private correspondence despite repeated requests, what possibly are you hoping to present to him?

Why don't you first try to solve the issue with those who are creating it. Otherwise this just smells like "I'll go tell your papa, and he'll tell you what to do." Please don't try to make Baba a vehicle of your politics.

There is a very interesting article in the new Journal of Vaishnava Studies that speaks of Bhaktivinoda Thakur generating "imaginary communities" through his publishing.



Thought-provoking and relevant. I'll summarize the article at some point.

Anand,

What do expect to gain from this..? Confirmation from Baba that you were right all along and come back and present it and expect Madhava to close up shop..? I personally dont think your going to get that confirmation.... it just sounds silly really.

And why can't you stay away..if your so adamently against this type of medium..?
Are you so addicted that the only way you can stop coming here is if Madhava shuts it down..?

namaskar,

jijaji

Who is the author?

Jason D. Fuller

(Is it wise to publish such detailed CVs on the web?)

Forgive me for this digression, but I assume most of us are using both hands to type. Is it not?

Well it depends on how strict you are.

Maybe that accounts for the difference in frequency and length of posts. Those strict sadhus who use only the right hand take much longer to peck out their observations. Fallen souls such as I use both hands and can easily post at length. Thus we are often engaged in prajalpa.

I think the malice is in the mind not at the hands.

Anand, if the concern is just about this cyber-communa, I already got the message, but if there is something else that you know (witnessed) let everyone know; dump it all out.

Why would it be unwise?

Somebody might want to hire you.



Before there are many more comments on this: it was a j-o-k-e.

I guess it is too late.

I was joking too--though I do use both hands to type, of course.

Yes, while everyone is joking, the Lady here sounds very serious...

I doubt that it will accomplish what she's imagining. I suspect that he trusts Madhava's judgment about GD over her observations.

But in light of her concerns, perhaps it's to her benefit if she takes her questions offline.

Scary.

For the record: If someone has a personal problem with spending too much time at GD, you can kindly contact the administration, and we can have accounts removed, and even IP address ranges banned, so you won't be able to read GD even if you wanted to. Please don't be shy if you have a problem at GD, get help. We'll help you out.

Dear Govinda dasi,

Radhe Radhe!

I would hope that you will be kind enough to share with all of us the excerpt of the letter that you are writing concerning GD and internet sanga as a whole so we can all get a better understanding as to what you are trying to say as well as give us any context to a reply received by Baba.

Personally I find it a bit strange that when your position or actions are challenged or if you are asked to clarify what your position actually is that you simply decide not to respond and think the best route of action is to actually reach outside of GD, or those involved with such discussions and mediums, to try to get the answers you are looking for.

In any case it will be hard for anyone to properly respond to someone’s concerns when they can’t or won’t clarify and articulate their point. It becomes even more of an issue if you can't properly represent or articulate what the counter points are. This is something I believe you will not be able to do as you have taken such points out of context in the presence of those you are having the conversations with and generally when the context can’t be avoided you simply avoid the point and change the entire point of discussion. So how will this change in a letter exchange with Baba who has no context to the points and counter points of what is being discussed? Will you suddenly be able to make it crystal clear?

If you at least share the portion of the letter dealing with your concerns as well as the follow up then at least we will have some context to understand what is being presented to Baba which will set the tone on what his reply is. That will at least be a somewhat productive alternative to simply clarifying yourself to those you initially engaged in your position.

It seems that you will stop at nothing until you can get someone to concur with her opinion. However unless your position is actually clear and unless it truly encompasses and articulates the points made by those that disagree then what can one actually hope to get from such communications? For instance if you simply state your position is that in personal sanga is better than internet sanga then who would disagree? However that isn’t what these exchanges have been about. They have really been routed in the assumption that mediums are inherently good or bad and that the internet is indeed bad. The counter point is that internet association is simply what you make it. If you engage in politics, fighting and unsavory topics it is indeed bad just as in person association rooted in such things would be bad.

The real counter point is that it isn’t the medium but how one uses it which defines, for that individual, its merit or harm. One can use a knife to cut butter or cut oneself; the knife is neutral the intent is not. Don’t blame ones lack of control, maturity and responsibility on a blank medium.

So depending on how you actually present your opinion to Baba and, as importantly, as clearly as your present the counter points is really what will determine how much we can all gain from Baba's insights. As you know you can build almost any argument in the world if context is lacking. So please ensure if you are going to bring such discussions outside of those who have a true understanding of the context of the discussion at hand that you can clearly articulate the context, points and counterpoints. Otherwise you will have what is termed in ISKCON as a "Prabhupada said"... and we all know how relevant those are.

Aspiring to serve the Vaisnavas,
Rasaraja dasa

Madhava,

I had thoughts about that for now I'm ok... I let you know if I have problem, thanks

I think this is somewhat of a personal issue with Anand that she is unwilling to admit, but wants to project it on others who participate on forums and especially Moderators.

I say this objectively as I witnessed her behaviour and response that was directed towards me when I tried to be part of that new forum that bombed with Madhavachari.
As soon as we announced we we doing a forum (that in fact was centered around other paths of sanantan dharma - Sri Vaishnava/ Pusthi Marg/Advaita etc) she started PMing me from out of nowhere, practically shaking her finger at me, warning me, saying that I had better be careful and that being a MOD can change people and all the pitfalls and evils.

Like I was walking on thin ice over a blazing pit of fire. She was clearly disturbed.

She's got a hard road to hoe in front of her if she thinks she can stop all internet exchange between spititual aspirants.

Does she do this to the folks at beliefnet...?

For me, detailed would mean revealing past or present religious affiliations. I'm always fascinated to know how someone became interested in studying Bhaktivinode Thakur or Visvanatha Chakravartipada. (There's a fellow in Australia who did his PhD thesis on Sarartha-varsini. I'm pretty sure he is/was an ISKCON devotee.)

I like to again apologize for inconveniencing this board by bringing up the issue of internet as a flawed medium. I must admit that although my convictions on the matter haven’t changed, but on the contrary, strengthened, I do realize now that, considering the complexity of the matter, I am not yet in a position of making a public presentation of my views. Thus, I recognize that my timing and specially the manner I raised the issue here may not have been well thought out. However, in my defense I like to state that I only acted out of a sense of urgency and duty; (duty born of love, if you will).

I sincerely apologize to all the devotees on GD if I have ever appeared to consider the community (as a whole) or anyone in particular as unworthy of my respects. I do respect this community greatly; in fact I have trusted and respected some of you to such a degree that I have sacrificed aspects of my personal life to support (some of) your endeavors and concepts.

I am going to meet Baba personally, so there is no letter to show. I have been unable to sort certain things out on my own. I will humbly submit the matter to him and let him decide what is to be done. I beg everyone to please allow me to follow my heart in the matter and seek the help I need. Please trust Baba on this as I do.

Sincerely,
Govinda dasi

Anand,

Aren't you a disciple of Narayan Maharaja..? What will he think of you going to see Baba? Be careful you may get caught and unable to free yourself from the Raganuga camp...but maybe this is Krishna's way of 'getting you'

Dear Govinda dasi,

Radhe Radhe!

Thank you for your clarification. One thing I did want to address is the following:

"Please trust Baba on this as I do."

For disciples and followers of Baba I don't think this is an issue at all. The only issue would be what and how you present the issue at hand. As I stated in my last post you must ensure if you are going to bring such discussions, outside of those who have a true understanding of the context of the discussion at hand, that you can clearly articulate the context, points and counterpoints. You can think of this importance in terms of any conversation as it is hard to address an issue if one doesn't clearly articulate both your point and the counterpoints. Otherwise you will have what is termed in ISKCON as a "Prabhupada said" in which answers are applied to questions or points in which the answer doesn’t represent the question in which the answer was originally given... and we all know how relevant those are.

Rasaraja dasa

Do you really trust him?

I remember the conversations where his going to preach in the West was brought up by yourself, and Baba pointed out that he is already old and also doesn't know English that well. We still remember your comment about how Baba's statement about his not knowing English that well was "a poor excuse". That doesn't reflect a sense of trust to me.

From where I look, the only thing you care to hear are words of support for your strong convictions. People always come to Baba to push their agendas. Most of the time he just says "yes yes" without the slightest interest to get involved in anyone's politics, hoping that they would just go away and mind their bhajan instead of this and that issue for which they want an "authoritative" statement to use in furthering their agenda. Then people come with their "Baba said yes yes! Just see!" statements, and everyone who knows Baba goes "Yeah, sure. Radhe Radhe."

For the record, when we discussed the topic of preaching in the West with Baba later on, and as I also inquired about his interest in coming to the West, he said that "of course everything is be possible if Radharani desires", but then smilingly remarked, "it is better that you do there by computer", "like this you can preach to whole world all at once". He also said that "there's no need for me to come because you are doing there."

One of the first things he told me when we met him last winter was, "Now everyone is coming and saying, 'I know Madhavananda.' 'Have you met in person?' 'No, by computer.' (laughs) 'Computer is very powerful media!'"

I also remember him lively relating to some the kirtaniyas whom I filmed how by computer their kirtan could be seen "in whole universe". This was followed by enthusiastic sounds of "Accha? Accha!"

So clearly the issue of the medium is settled as far as I am concerned. If you come from Baba with a "yes yes" statement, I will not be terribly convinced about anything but the fact that you have just gone to Baba to waste everyone's time, including yours, and have squandered an opportunity to inquire about actual matters of bhajan, which is what most of us who go to him are inclined to inquire into.

Very well! All the best on your trip!

This is also not a great idea to disturb sadhaka all the time with this type small worldly matter.

Baba has to take a lot of it, being the Mahant. Not only his disciples, but the whole of Radha-kund come to him with their petty issues, and then there's the Panch committee who quarrel on this, that and the other issue. Most of the time Baba chants and occasionally says "yes yes" or something like that. Oh when will the day come when people understand the reason why one goes to the sadhu.

Going to a sadhu with trivial concerns is like going to a fine restaurant to use the latrine for passing stool.

I have sincerely tried to follow your line of reasoning as it applies to Vaishnavas and as of yet I simply do not understand what danger you are concerned about here.

If you are going to take up the valuable time of Ananta das Babaji then I hope you put some time and effort into creating a succinct and coherent presentation for him. Perhaps you should illustrate it with any posts that concern you.

Going to him with vague concerns that you can't clearly identify in a way others can understand is a big waste of his time and your travel money.

For my part, I don't observe that any of the traditional Vaishnavas here are suffering from internet addiction or neglecting their personal practices, but I do see a lot of sharing of stories, pastimes, good books supportive of their bhajan, and other such things. I cannot imagine Baba will look at any of that as a bad thing, especially for geographically isolated bhaktas.

Now I am sure he would be less happy if shown my forum, but that's a whole other issue, and not his problem.

I do find myself wondering why this crusade to prevent others from being harmed by this medium...aren't they all adults here making their own decisions? Are you going to try to shut down their neighborhood bars and brothels in case they might be led astray by them? You can't protect people from their free will.

It seems a bit codependent to me.

Well if Anand is going to Baba to tattle,

I'm going to Narayan Maharaja and Aranya Maharaja to tell them about her being on forums constantly telling people to stop being on them...

I leave tonight..

Radhe Radhe!

There is no need for anyone to go to Govinda dasi's guardians to report anything. She is a grown woman and can make her own judgments and manage her own relationships. Let's ensure no one ever gets the feeling they are being reported on or threatened in any manner. Jijaji, I know you don’t mean to threaten her in any real way but it comes off a bit bullish and can be construed as such.

Rasaraja dasa

Feedback about moderator decisions is posted via PMs to the moderator concerned, or otherwise to other moderators.

Your wrong here..

That was nothing but a joke...I would not go to her 'guardians' to tell on her

lighten up Rasaraja!

gee

I think that is the hard (or funny) part of the daily-life of most cyber-communa; miscommunication.

It happens in real life as well.

Oh come on now, you gotta be kidding!

No! I'm not!...

I type with my tongue.
It is not forked -
only white with indigestion .....