On July 15th, 2006, the Charka.org website posted an article by a devotee claiming to be Ananda which took sharp issue with the idea of marriage of the girls at young age. On July 17th, 2006, Chakra published another article on the same topic this one by mother Niscala dd. Her article was more aimed directly at me personally as I and my website promote Srila Prabhupad's instructions that the girls are to be wed at early age. I have copied both of the articles above incase they are taken down or the links changed. As of Aug 14, 2006, the 2 articles are on the top of this Chakra.org page).
Since Chakra.org will not allow me to post articles on their website the only way i can issue a rebuttle is on this, my own website.
First, Ananda's article. .
Ananda's article refers to a recent New York Times report demeaning child marriages in Afghanistan. That article tells of a girl, 11, who was given in marriage to a 55 year old man as his second wife. The writer of the original NY Times article as well as Ananda find this to be thoroughly disgusting, uncivil, against women, against human rights, irreligious and immoral. While those are all my own words, that is the unmistakable conclusion one reaches on reading Ananda's article.
(I have addressed the subject matter of the NY Times article directly in a separate article here. The remainder of this article will deal with the overall aspects of Ananda's article.)
Ananda refers international law stating:
Such "weddings" are manifestly illegal, according to the international Convention on Consent to Marriage, Minimum Age for Marriage, and Registration of Marriages, which has had the force of international law since 1964, enforceable at the International Court of Justice at The Hague.
While we normally do not try to oppose governmental laws, there are times, however, when governmental law is blantantly irreligious and wrong and we must oppose it, if not breaking the law ourselves, we must take at least vocal issue with many such modern irreligious laws. Case in point is when certain communist governments outlawed the practice of Krsna Consciousness, whether public or private. They banned our books in their country, etc. Devotees defied those irreligious laws. We had no choice but to defy them and break them. Even many devotees were arrested, thrown in jail, some tortured and even killed, their lives destroyed, they never-the-less stood up in defience.
Further Ananda writes:
Child marriages are a relic of a long-ago time and have no place in today's world, nor in any sort of agrarian utopia that might be envisioned by a varnashram-dharma advocate for an intentional religious community. Child marriage deserves to be relegated to the scrap-heap of history, along with inhumane and repellent practices such as slavery, child labour, caste by birth, apartheid, genital mutilation, feudalism and polygamy.
We may wish that marriage endure for a lifetime, and we may wish that our children find responsible, loving spouses who will be unfailingly kind and supportive, but between one-third and one-half of marriages end in divorce, and neither the officious meddling of an authority figure, an arrangement by parents and in-laws, nor the coincidental positions of the sun, moon and particular planets can guarantee the continuation of any marriage.
While this Ananda has in the past claimed that he is a Prabhupad disciple, we find that he only refers to international law, he does not quote from our shastra or from Srila Prabhupad. He extensively promotes the ideology promoted by the Western idea of human rights and equal rights, etc., and promotes that this must be accepted and followed by ISKCON devotees, and yet he does not advocate that we follow Srila Prabhupad's instructions.
Rather, he outright rejects those who advocate the creation of a Varnashram-dharma community that adheres to the principles of arranged marriages for girls at a young age. Be it known, however, that it Srila Prabhupad who advocates such a culture and community. Thus, this so-called disciple of Srila Prabhupad is in reality not at all a devout follower of Srila Prabhupad (and it is my strong conviction that this person is simply using a pen name and not at all who they claim. It is my suspicion that this Ananda is, in fact, a woman, probably living in Canada and working for the US in support of women's so-called equal rights. That is only my suspicion). They reject Srila Prabhupad's teachngs, they reject the idea that a father is best qualified to find the best husband for the daugher, they reject that an authority figure (such as Srila Prabhupad) can give good guidance to society and they reject that astrogological science can help in determining a good marriage. While rejecting theVedic scriptures, Vedic culture and system and rejecting Srila Prabhupad's teahcings, they put forth the advice that we all follow international law and adhere to the mundane (yet false) ideals of equal-rights, human rights, etc.
As far as the high rate of divorce quoted, these are all twisted numbers. The fact is that the high rate of divorce is entirely related to the independence of women. In the US, in the past generations when women were more inclinded to become life-long housewives and mothers, when motherhood was properly respected, there was a very low rate of divorce. As women have moved out of the house and into the work force and demanded all equal this and that, the divorce rate has increased correspondingly. All throughout India's history when women accepted with feminine pride the role of the submissive wife divorce was virtually unheard of, espcially in the villages. And contraray to what these zealous fanatics who push for so-called equal rights say, the women of those times did not feel suppressed, but were happy with their positions.
Contrast what so-called Ananda says with what Srila Prabhupad says:
These are psychology. It is the psychology of woman that before puberty, if she has got a boy, she loves forever. She’ll never be unchaste. So these marriage things are done very psychologically, scientifically, so that they may become happy, and then, in peaceful mind, combine together, good cooperation, they make progress, spiritual. This is the plan, varṇāśrama-dharma. Very scientific. And Kṛṣṇa says, “I am that.” Whatever Kṛṣṇa shall give—perfect. Nobody cares. They are suffering.
Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: Now you are introducing again to the world. There is good hope. Young girls in our society, they should be promised to some boy just in the same way, by their parents.
Prabhupāda: And if required, one man can take care of more than one wife because woman population is greater.
>>> Ref. VedaBase => Talk About Varṇāśrama, S.B. 2.1.1-5 -- June 28, 1977, Vṛndāvana
Ananda wrote:
Child marriages are a relic of a long-ago time and have no place in today's world, nor in any sort of agrarian utopia that might be envisioned by a varnashram-dharma advocate for an intentional religious community. Child marriage deserves to be relegated to the scrap-heap of history, along with inhumane and repellent practices such as slavery, child labour, caste by birth, apartheid, genital mutilation, feudalism and polygamy.
Actually, I simply have not got the time at the current moment to deal with each and every point made by this cheater who falsely posses herself as a Prabhupad disciple. These people obviously have no devotion or faith in Srla Prabhupad or his teachings. It is a great disservice to Srila Prabhupad and his mission for Madhusudani Radha and her Chakra.org website to publish such dangerous non-sense as this article. Especially when they do not allow me or others who support Srila Prabhupad's teachngs regarding these aspects of dharma to post a rebuttal.
Srila Prabhupad refers to the need to get the girl married before puberty. He claims that this is Krsna's Plan, Varnashram Dharma. He explains the religious and moral need for this to assure the chastity of the girls.
It is this knowledge taught us by Krsna's pure devotee and representative, Srila Prabhupad, that Ananda proclaims:
...deserves to be relegated to the scrap-heap of history
It is Srila Prabhupad's teachings on these topics that he wants to be thrown to the scrap heap of history.
While Srila Prabhupad had instructed that we marry our daughters no latter then 16 years of age, this so-called Ananda states:
All parents should vow that they will never wish for nor tolerate the marriage of their children before at least the age of 18.
He wants that we follow his teachings, the instructions of the crafters of so-called human rights, and that we relegate Srila Prabhupad's instructions on dharma to scrap-heaps of history.
Such people are possed with a poor fund of knowledge. They are so envious that they cannot understand nor appreciate the laws of dharma.
I had hoped to write a more full rebuttal, but I have other pressing issues in my life currently and simply do not have the time to complete this at this time. When i have time i will write a more in depth rebuttal.
However, one last repost of a quote by Srila Prabhupad and Rupa Gosvami which addresses the underlying issue directly (emphasis is mine):
SB 4.18.3
Translation
To benefit all human society, not only in this life but in the next, the great seers and sages have prescribed various methods conducive to the prosperity of the people in general.
Purport
Vedic civilization takes advantage of the perfect knowledge presented in the Vedas and presented by great sages and brāhmaṇas for the benefit of human society. Vedic injunctions are known as śruti, and the additional supplementary presentations of these principles, as given by the great sages, are known as smṛti. They follow the principles of Vedic instruction. Human society should take advantage of the instructions from both śruti and smṛti. If one wants to advance in spiritual life, he must take these instructions and follow the principles. In Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu, Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī says that if one poses himself as advanced in spiritual life but does not refer to the śrutis and smṛtis he is simply a disturbance in society. One should follow the principles laid down in śrutis and smṛtis not only in one’s spiritual life but in material life as well. As far as human society is concerned, it should follow the Manu-smṛti as well, for these laws are given by Manu, the father of mankind.
In the Manu-smṛti it is stated that a woman should not be given independence, but should be given protection by her father, husband and elderly sons. In all circumstances a woman should remain dependent upon some guardian. Presently women are given full independence like men, but actually we can see that such independent women are no happier than those women who are placed under guardians. If people follow the injunctions given by the great sages, śrutis and smṛtis, they can actually be happy in both this life and the next. Unfortunately rascals are manufacturing so many ways and means to be happy. Everyone is inventing so many methods. Consequently human society has lost the standard ways of life, both materially and spiritually, and as a result people are bewildered, and there is no peace or happiness in the world. Although they are trying to solve the problems of human society in the United Nations, they are still baffled. Because they do not follow the liberated instructions of the Vedas, they are unhappy.
>>> Ref. VedaBase => SB 4.18.3
People such as this so-called Ananda and those who support their view, they are simply creating more disturbance for the society, that is all. |
|
It appears that I have lost my past email records, this goes back quite a few years. All I can do is write based on my memory. To better understand the information below, you should first read my article on how the Chakra website was created in a decitful manor.
Briefly many years ago I had sent in several articles to Chakra and they were published. But, then, without any one contacting me, they were taken off and Chakra no longer would publish anything I sent in. Then, sometime later, a godbrother emailed me. He had read my articles regarding polygamy and he had a few additional questions. Being satisfied with my answers this devotee then sent me a number of emails concerning the topic of my being banned off Chakra. Actually, it was more then just to ban me from Chakra, the request was basically to have ISKCON disassociate itself with me. To distance itself from devotees like me.
Why? What had I done that was so bad? Simple: 1) I had on my website articles that concluded that Srila Prabhupad was in favor of seeing polygamy accepted and practiced amoung his followers. And, 2), I had published an article which gave evidence that we did not go to the moon. The person who requested my being banned off Chakra was mother Madhusudani Radha devi dasi. And, to whom did she make this request? It was sent to a private email conference, I do not know who all was on that conference, but I do know that the email went to Vipramukha Maharaj, who had set up and was running Chakra at the time, and HH Tamal Krsna Gosvami. I think HH RavindraSwarup was also on the conference. And, the devotee who forwarded me these emails.
Madhusudani's reason was that these were very radical and controversial topics - polygamy and the claim that the moon landings were faked. Madhusudhani held university degrees and she put forth the argument that ISKCON must distance itself from radical and controversial topics and from those who promote such radical things. She debunked the idea that we did not go to the moon arguing that proclaiming this in the academic circles will surely cause us to be rejected by the intellectuals of the world as ignorant. We will lose all credibility. She also argued that the world opposed and condemned the idea of polygamy, thus ISKCON must disassociate itself from those radical devotees like me who actually promote that it be accepted.
The discussion was very short. Basically Virpamukhya and Tamal (I can't recall if RavindraSwarup was included, but i strongly recall he was) all rolled over and agreed. Not one of them suggested that i be contacted and asked my opinon or allow me to defend my position or discuss this with them in any way. They simply had their private meeting and agreed to have me banned from Chakra. And, basically they agreed that ISKCON should disassociate itself from devotees like me.
So, it was over a year after this conversation took place that this devotee sent me their emails. He said he did so because at the time of the conversation he simply remained quiet and went along with the decision. But, he did not feel good about it because he had found memories of our association in the past. At the time VNN had published some articles I sent in and this devotee had read them and in doing so he finally took a look at my website and there read my articles favorable to polygamy. What he found was that I did not simply promote polygamy, rather, I promoted Srila Prabhupad's instructions on the topic and he could see that it was Srila Prabhupad who actually promoted the subject. So, he emailed me and asked a few more questions, he was satisfied with my answers and realized he had made a major mistake in staying quiet on this issue previously. He was no longer invovled with Chakra and so he decided to send me the emails.
On reading how I had been banned without any of the partiies involved ever discussing this with me, they simply listened to this one woman and agreed with everything she said, but did not give me any opportunity to speak up in my own defense.
So, I wrote to both Tamal and Vipra and I demanded that they explain discuss this with me. I explained that if they wanted that they, Chakra, and ISKCON disassociate themselves from devotees who promote polygamy, or who support the claim that we did not go to the moon, then they must also dissassociate themselves from Srila Prabhupad himself (what to speak of Krishna who took 16,108 wives) because I was not supporting these things on my own, i was simply upholding the view of Srila Prabhupad himself.
Tamal chose not to reply to me at all on this topic, while he had replied to me during the same period on other topics. On this topic he chose to stay out of it. But, it was too late for him to do so as he had already been involved. Still, even after I sent him additional requests to answer me, he refused to do so.
As far as Vipra, he also would not discuss with me any thing of substance. He would not discuss with me on the basis of what Srila Prabhupad said, or his books, or shastra. No. He simply brushed it off saying that he was no longer running Chakra, that I would have to deal with Madhusudani Radha about this, he was too busy playing the role of guru for his disciples, he claimed he did not have time to deal with this, that this was now Madhusudani's service. None of these rascals would deal with this like a man.
The result was I remained banned from Chakra not because of any fall down, but because I upheld and promoted Srila Prabhupad's teachings, even the most controversial and unpopular ones. That was my fault. I admit, i am a river full of faults that i am only ashamed of, but this fault, i am proud to stand punished for such a fault.
|
This is not meant as a personal attack on anyone. It is simply a statement of facts.
It is my understanding that Chakra is today still headed by mother Madhusudani Radha devi dasi (for brevity we will refer to her as MRdd). I do not recall ever personally meeting mataji, but, we have crossed paths on the internet. It is obvious that she takes issues with many of Srila Prabhupad's teachings regarding dharma - especially as such dharma apply differently toward men and women.
About 4-6 years ago mother MRdd ran a devotee conference called Topical Discussion on the now defunct COM. COM was ran by the European BBT devotees operating under Harikesh at the time. There were other conferences on COM where devotees discussed such issues as the Dharma of Men and Women. It almost seems that MRdd has started her Topical Discussion group with the purpose to present opposing views on the dharma issue. Whether or not that was her original intention, this became a part of the discussions on Topical Discussions (TD).
To give some understanding of the background - it should be kept in mind that around this time Harikesh was the GBC for Europe and the initiating guru of many of the devotees who were running the European BBT and COM were his disciples. Harikesh himself was manifesting signs of a major fall down. He, himself, was known to have made some offensive derriding remarks toward Srila Prabhupad as he was on his way out. It seemed that several of his embittered disciples felt empowered to follow suit in taking jabs at Srila Prabhupad's teachings or his character, etc.
I have not had time to see if i have any of the postings on COM from that period, but i rather doubt that i do. So,I am forced to write this from memory. As such a few quotes i may attribute to the wrong person, but the point is to understand the mood that was prevalent at the time. I recall one post, and i am sure it was posted by MRdd herself, but either way, it exemplifies the mood, in which the writer commented that they 'cannot accept instructions by Srila Prabhupad concerning women because Srila Prabhupad was not only not a woman, but was a sannyasi to boot. So, how can he possibly know anything about how women feel or think or how they should be engaged?.' It was posts like this that sparked emotional responses from some of Srila Prabhupad's disciples. A number of other posts made similar remarks aimed at diminishing the importance of selected instructions by Srila Prabhupad.
Some devotees on that conference then posted warnings to those making these remarks that the remarks were offensive toward a pure devotee. They warned them of the hellish life that awaits those who make offense to a pure devotee. In response to those emails MRdd actually booted several of those devotees off the conference. She had posted the rules for her TD conference and one was that there would be no tolerence for devotees who make threats against another devotee. Thus, she concluded that the Prabhupad disciples who were giving good advice in warning those who were making offensive remarks to stop or they risk falling into hellsih life, she interpretted the shastrically based advice as 'threats' of violence against another devotee. After kicking several devotees off the TD conference other devotees complained that this was not right, and asked how she could allow the remarks that were offensive toward SP to stand? Actually, the example above is mild, some posts were actually blasphemous and offensive. So, how could such offensive posts be allowed, yet preaching from shastra was disallowed? MRdd then defended the offensive posts by defending the right to "freedom of speech". She claimed that those devotees were simply expressing their feelings and their doubts and that this is why she set up TD to provide a place for such devotees to express themselves openly and publicly where they could be freed of feeling supressed by such threats that they may go to hell if they speak out.
Under the banner of "freedom of speech" she was allowing the deridding of Srila Prabhupad's character, and the outright rejection of his teachings. This is ISKCON, the TD conference was hosted by funds from the BBT. A number of Prabhupad disciples took issue with this. MRdd defending the offending devotee's so-called right to freedom of speech, but then turned around and banned those devotees who disagreed with her who expressed their feelings and understandings. Thus, her idea of freedom of speech was simply a rouse. She did not support freedom of speech at all, she was only supporting the freedom of the dissenters to express their often offensive speech, while banning those who disagreed.
There was one mataji who then made a very deridding and derogatory post regarding Srila Prabhupad. I do not have a copy of those emails, but they were sent to the GBC at the time and everyone agreed the remarks were plainly offensive. The writter was a mataji called Niscala devi dasi. A disciple of the then recently fallen Harikesh.
I do not recall the details of her posting, but it was obviously offensive. This outraged a number of us. It wound up that Shyamasundar (the astrologer), Praghosh (the book distributor) and myself strongly petitioned the GBC to take action. To do something about those making those offensenses. We also took issue that the posts were made on COM funded by BBT money. We demanded the GBC do something. We had to take very strong position and wound up demanding action because many on the GBC did not take this seriously. Srila Prabhupad's character was being derided, he was being openly disrespected, his teachings openly rejected by people who claimed themselves to be ISKCON devotees. And for some time the GBC brushed it off as being not a big deal. So, we wound up having to make strong demands that they act.
MRdd's initiating guru was Jayapataka. He did hardly nothing about this. At one point after we made numerous demands he finally posted to the GBC conference that he had met with MRdd and all he said was the matter was taken care of and we were all supposed to drop the matter.
But, within a month additonal offensive remarks were made and another Prabhupad disciple was kicked off the TD group. So, again we demanded Jayapataka and the GBC take action.
Eventually the GBC asked the European BBT to do something. Those who were running COM decided to take COM private and pulled the operation from out under the BBT and ran it as their own private entity, thus they claimed they were no longer under the control of either the BBT or the GBC and then they continued to allow the offensive remarks toward Srila Prabhupad to go on.
At this the GBC commissioned other devotees to start a separate and similar service to replace COM, and thus PAMHO was founded. The GBC then pushed that all ISKCON devotees drop their COM emails and conferences and switch over to PAMHO which was again under the GBC control. COM then quietly disappeared.
But, MRdd and her friends continued.
At one point we started seeing posts from a devotee who called himself Ananda and claimed he is a Srila Prabhupad disciple living in Canada. Several devotees tried, but no one could find any proof or evidence that he actually is a Prabhupad disciple. Ananda claimed that he had gone back to college and worked in the academic circles. This Ananda then made some other offensive posts on TD. He proposed that Srila Prabhupad's books be edited and all the politically incorrect items in his books be removed. He pointed out that the educated scholars laugh at us when we say we had not gone to the moon. They disdain Srila Prabhupad when they read that Srila Prabhupad claimed that women are not to be given equal rights. Srila Prabhupad had said that women are to be protected, not allowed independence. A woman must remain always dependent - as child she is dependent on her father, in youth she is dependent on her husband, in older age she is dependent on her older son. In this way SP taught that women are not to be given independence, they must remain always dependent upon some man. Obviously the staunch feminists choke on instructions like that. So, this Ananda proclaimed that we must edit such WRONG things out of SP's books. He argued that it was for 'preaching'.
I responded to his postings, but this so-called Ananda was not interested in quotes from Shastra, rather, he would quote International Law regarding Human Rights, women's rights, etc. He had no respect for Srila Prabhupad's teachings of dharma. Thus, my suspicion was that this Ananda may very well be a made up person, that possibly one of MRdd's friends simply use Ananda as a pen name. In fact, I am sure that this Ananda is not a Prabhupad disciple and never was. I suspect that she is actually not even a man (but must want to be). I suspect this Ananda works for the UN and supports women's so-called rights issues and is usng theis psuedo name to propogate this a-dharmic non-sense into ISKCON and has found an outlet through MRdd to do so. These are only my personal suspicions, i have no evidence to back them. Vur, ir ia obvious that this Ananda has no faith in the words of Srila Prabhupad nor the Vedic scriptures. He accepts and rejects at his own whim which parts he wants to follow and which parts he wants to reject.
All of that was many years ago, back around 2000-2002 or so. MRdd, Niscala dd and this Ananda.
We had asked the GBC to do something about Chakra. To replace MRdd. The GBC told us that Chakra was an independent website. But, this was not really true. We found out that it was set up clandestently by the GBC in collaberation with Vipramukhya to be the covered voice of the GBC. Still, they claimed it was independent. Vipramukhya was still active in ISKCON at the time and he claimed that basically he had handed Chakra over to MRdd and he was not going to remove her. Still, somehow, aked by the GBC, Umapati got involved and tried to run Chakra as a co-manager along with MRdd. But, eventually he had to resign stating that he could not get along with her.
We demanded that if the GBC could not remove MRdd from Chakra that the GBC stand up on another website and denounce the writings of MRdd and denounce any affiliation with Chakra. That they pass a resolution requesting ISKCON devotees in good standing to no longer send articles to Chakra. We asked this because so many devotees saw the Chakra site as being the most official ISKCON news website. It was wrong to allow this perception as many will see some of the offensive articles on Chakra as being sanctioned by the GBC. But, the GBC rejected such requests. Thus, no further action was taken.
Well, here it is July of 2006 and we find on Chakra, still ran by MRdd, and on July 15th, 2006 an article by Ananda and then on July 17th, 2006 an article by Niscala both deridding Srila Prabhupad's instructions regarding the marriage of girls in their youth. See the above article for more information. |
|
Many devotees do not realize this, but even though Chakra was promoted by it's founder, Vipramukhya (ex) swami, as an independent website, not directly associated with the GBC, this was actually an out right LIE. I am sorry if that word sounds sharp and stings. The truth is the truth, the facts are the facts. Actually, I have know this for many years, but only recently when my I was explaining the origins of Chakra to my family my oldest daughter said made the remark that what was done was not at all right, that the devotees had 'lied' to the devotee community in general. She asked, how can the leaders of ISKCON do such a thing? Her sharp questions prompted me to write this.
Vipramukhya (ex) maharaj had long had a pre-internet BBS (bulletin board service), and he was one of the first devotees to set up a Krishna Conscious website. He was not a GBC, but he was favorable to the GBC (as all of us were and wanted to be). The GBC also voted him to become a guru. Even though he told me privately once that he fully supported the on-going Rtvik system, and wanted that Srila Prabhupad be promoted as the only real qualified guru, he told me that he had no choice but to go along with the GBC in opposing the Rtvik idea because the GBC had come out so strongly against it. He did not want to be rejected by the GBC, he would lose his postion and status if he spoke out in favor of the Rtvik idea. So he told me he had to publicly put forth that he opposed the idea.
Well, that was not the direct topic of this article, but, does anyone see anything wrong with this? Such as where is the HONESTY of charactor? It is dishonest to accept one idea and yet oppose it simply for social or political advancement. Anyway, such is the charactor of some of those whom the GBC have rubber stamped as guru.
But, back to the issue with Chakra.
On the Chakra website they (at least they used to, for years) state that they were an independent site and that Chakra was not a 'GBC' commissioned site, but that it favored the GBC. While that had some truth to it, it was very vieled. The fact is that the GBC had lost it's respect amoung many of the senior Prabhupad disciples. There were many who vocally opposed the GBC's decisions opposing the on-going Rtvik system.
The GBC wanted to get their word out, they wanted a website where they could promote their views, and where they could openly attack those who opposed their points. But, rather then doing this openly and straightforwardly, for some strange reason they decided it would be more potent if someone other then the GBC put forth their arguments. Vipramukhya's site was chosen because Vipra was not a member of the GBC. He could be seen as an independent. If his website were to be seen as standing for the Truth, and independent of the GBC, and yet it were to support the GBC views, then the GBC felt it would have more value.
Behind Chakra was formed a handful of devotees to direct it. Virpa, Tamal I know, but I am sure Ravindra Swarup and there were others. At some point Madhusudani Radha was included as those involved wanted the devotees who held university degrees to be given a platform and voice and hand in guiding the movement.
So, I was explaining this to my daughter and she exclaimed that this was so decitful, so dishonest. I really could not argue with her. At first I felt that i should defend their actions, even i, one who was banned from Chakra, but, then i realized the truth of her words.
Yes, it was decitful. Then she asked, how could the leaders, the GBC, do something like this? What sort of devotee has such disrespect for other devotees that they would lie to them like this? When she asked that, again, I had to agree, she was right. Why try to defend something that is inherently wrong? I have not trained them to be disrespectful. I have trained them to touch the feet of the senior devotees. And they do so to this day. But, I have also trained them to be truthful and honest. And, this is a lesson in honestly. This took place many years ago, but it is posted here for others to know the truth of the defenders of the truth, Chakra. |
