|
Post by Vyckie D. Garrison on Jul 19, 2009 10:06:56 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by pandapaws on Jul 19, 2009 18:13:05 GMT -5
My attraction to this philosophy in so many other respects was challenged by this one aspect. I read the explanation that while we are spiritual beings, spirit souls, on a material level we had roles to fulfill in order for society to run smoothly and enable us to focus on achieving pure devotion to Krishna. On the spiritual level we were all equals. I put my misgivings on a dark shelf in the back of my mind and focused on the parts that resonated most with me. I never mentioned my doubts to anyone.--Tapati
I think this holds true for every single western female devotee. It was true for me!
I love thinking back to the days of my very first temple days. So exciting and intoxicating. I wish I could relive that every day. I felt like I was really "home."
|
|
lectio
Full Member
growing...
Posts: 128
|
Post by lectio on Jul 19, 2009 22:59:56 GMT -5
Aw, man... My only beef with this post is that it ended! lol... My appetite is whet for more. Looking forward to reading future installments, Tapati!
|
|
|
Post by tapati on Jul 20, 2009 1:32:55 GMT -5
My attraction to this philosophy in so many other respects was challenged by this one aspect. I read the explanation that while we are spiritual beings, spirit souls, on a material level we had roles to fulfill in order for society to run smoothly and enable us to focus on achieving pure devotion to Krishna. On the spiritual level we were all equals. I put my misgivings on a dark shelf in the back of my mind and focused on the parts that resonated most with me. I never mentioned my doubts to anyone.--Tapati I think this holds true for every single western female devotee. It was true for me! I love thinking back to the days of my very first temple days. So exciting and intoxicating. I wish I could relive that every day. I felt like I was really "home." I suspect there is an element of that with most any restrictive group...that moment or moments one's intuition tries to raise an objection...and yet there's a payoff somewhere that makes us stifle it. My payoff was getting away from my chaotic home, feeling like I could make a difference in the world, and believing that there was some peace, serenity, and happiness to be found. I had experienced precious little of those things in my life up to that point. I was reminded today also that I stifled my objections to the scientific errors and general attitude towards science. I knew a little too much about astronomy to be happy with the defense of scriptural views of the makeup of the solar system, pre-telescope.
|
|
|
Post by tapati on Jul 20, 2009 1:34:15 GMT -5
Aw, man... My only beef with this post is that it ended! lol... My appetite is whet for more. Looking forward to reading future installments, Tapati! I was kicking myself for being too wordy. I know that to keep people reading you have to end on a suspenseful note. And...thank you!
|
|
|
Post by sargassosea on Jul 20, 2009 6:04:33 GMT -5
A very interesting story so far. Thanks, Tapati for the inside look Also - I just have to say that I've found it interesting that Krishna seems to always be (beautifully, colorfully) portrayed as rather androgynous. Is there some particular reason for that? (My ignorance is showing again!)
|
|
|
Post by haggisforthesoul on Jul 20, 2009 10:05:33 GMT -5
Tapati, your story is fascinating to me. When I was a child, I remember riding along when my mom would drive my dad to work at the Chase Park Plaza Hotel, which wasn't far from the St. Louis temple. Even as a youngster, I had already read a lot about the ISKCON group and I remember being fascinated and kind of scared when we would pass the temple on the way to his work, especially if there were be-robed members sitting outside. It was so exotic! I made sure not to miss it every time we made that trip.
Over the years, I've read a lot about the group, about how women were treated and about the abuses of children at the gurukulas, etc. It's so sad when sincere devotees of any faith are mistreated. And, as you have suggested in this chapter of your story, some inherent beliefs of certain faiths can be damaging to believers who happen to be women.
Thanks so much for sharing your story. I'm looking forward to reading more.
|
|
|
Post by tapati on Jul 20, 2009 11:19:03 GMT -5
A very interesting story so far. Thanks, Tapati for the inside look Also - I just have to say that I've found it interesting that Krishna seems to always be (beautifully, colorfully) portrayed as rather androgynous. Is there some particular reason for that? (My ignorance is showing again!) The styles of that time possibly made most men appear androgynous to some extent, but yes even Krishna's features always seem to appear that way. I'm not sure if there's a meaning behind that, although scripture indicates that Krishna encompasses the masculine and the feminine and He even has female incarnations and expansions. Radharani is considered to be an expansion of Krishna (his energies taking form to create an independent entity). They are known as the Divine Couple.
|
|
|
Post by tapati on Jul 20, 2009 11:29:23 GMT -5
Tapati, your story is fascinating to me. When I was a child, I remember riding along when my mom would drive my dad to work at the Chase Park Plaza Hotel, which wasn't far from the St. Louis temple. Even as a youngster, I had already read a lot about the ISKCON group and I remember being fascinated and kind of scared when we would pass the temple on the way to his work, especially if there were be-robed members sitting outside. It was so exotic! I made sure not to miss it every time we made that trip. Over the years, I've read a lot about the group, about how women were treated and about the abuses of children at the gurukulas, etc. It's so sad when sincere devotees of any faith are mistreated. And, as you have suggested in this chapter of your story, some inherent beliefs of certain faiths can be damaging to believers who happen to be women. Thanks so much for sharing your story. I'm looking forward to reading more. You're welcome. What year, if you don't mind my asking, were you passing by the temple? Just out of curiosity. The men outside the temple were probably chanting japa on their rosary beads (japamala). I still have mine; I should take a pic. In the picture of the temple in the first post I did, I think many if not most of us were holding bags that protected our beads. There was an opening on one side that our hand went in, and a smaller one on the other side that one finger could go through, for balance. Inside the bag we touched the beads and held them between our thumb and second finger, rolling them back and forth, as we chanted the mahamantra*, then we moved on to the next bead. Yes I will be getting to the abuses. I've seen that basically any time you put poorly trained or untrained people in charge of children with little oversight and no checks and balances...you'll get abuse. It doesn't say much about the state of the human race, I'm afraid. *Hare Krishna, Hare Krishna, Krishna Krishna, Hare Hare, Hare Rama, Hare Rama, Rama Rama, Hare Hare
|
|
|
Post by anotheramy on Jul 20, 2009 12:45:19 GMT -5
Wow. Thank you for sharing your story. I can't wait for the next installment.
Those blasted pop stars. I blame Adam Yauch (of the Beastie Boys) for my interest in Buddhism which eventually led to a spiritually abusive romantic relationship with a Buddhist. Bah.
|
|
|
Post by tapati on Jul 20, 2009 13:51:02 GMT -5
Wow. Thank you for sharing your story. I can't wait for the next installment. Those blasted pop stars. I blame Adam Yauch (of the Beastie Boys) for my interest in Buddhism which eventually led to a spiritually abusive romantic relationship with a Buddhist. Bah. I was being a little tongue-in-cheek with blaming poor George. He couldn't have known the dynamics of temple life because he was told he never needed to join and live there full time--he was doing his best "service" by writing songs about Krishna. I guess there are abusive people in every religion, even one that emphasizes loving-kindness like Buddhism!
|
|
|
Post by krwordgazer on Jul 20, 2009 14:15:48 GMT -5
What you said, Tapati and Pandapaws, about the way it felt so welcoming and homey when you first started visiting, was also true about the coercive religious group I got involved in, in college.
Most churches are friendly, but in a casual way. The Maranatha Campus Ministries group was intensely friendly. They were intense about everything-- which I learned later is a trait of codependency. I was codependent myself and loved the intensity of the welcome, the way they made me feel I belonged right from the start. . . It was only later, after I was well into it, that the coercion began. And by that time I was emotionally attached to the relationships I had formed, and didn't want to leave.
The relationships themselves, once we all got out (Maranatha eventually dissolved), were high quality friendships, and many of them remain to this day. I would say that in our culture, which tends to high degrees of independence and isolation (everyone home in front of their TVs and not interacting with the community so much anymore), many people are longing for deeper, more intimate relationships. And cults offer this.
|
|
|
Post by haggisforthesoul on Jul 20, 2009 15:20:40 GMT -5
What year, if you don't mind my asking, were you passing by the temple? I want to say it was around 1975 or so. I was about 12 then. My dad worked out that way for years, so I kept my eye out for the temple while driving down Lindell many, many times. Still do, actually. ETA: I just went back and read your first article and the picture says you were at St. Louis temple in 1975. That's so wild.
|
|
aimai
Full Member
Posts: 172
|
Post by aimai on Jul 20, 2009 16:45:29 GMT -5
I believe the same special dispensation for celebrity members occurs in all religious groups—from the tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/07/c_street_rebranding_gop_cheaters_need_our_discreet.php“C Street” Fellowship of evangelical christians that has recently been exposed in the news as the location of the frat house style corruption behind Senator John Ensign and Governor Sanford to the Celebrity scientologists like John Travolta, and that short actor who I can't bear to watch. Once someone is important enough, or socially central enough that their existence as a member of group X is public knowledge there's a huge amount of pressure on the group not to put that person through all of the same stuff they put lesser, lower, beings. And I believe its often the case that the celebrity member doesn't really grasp how different their experience of the religion, or cult, is from the ordinary plebe. Its definitely the case that men don't grasp what women go through within their own churches, or don't get that its happening to a human being just like them. And parents very often don't get what is happening to children either. Its a big mistake to get drawn into any religion for love of, or at the coaxing of, a celebrity spokesman. That person may be sincere in their beliefs and experiences but, generally speaking, it has nothing to do with the way the group will treat a low level “grunt” member if that member falls afoul of the rules.
|
|
|
Post by pandapaws on Jul 20, 2009 18:57:16 GMT -5
I think to join Iskcon there had to be more than just a liking of a specific celebrity that had an interest (there have been many but George Harrison is the most well known and sincere). I think that he introduced many to Iskcon but you really had to believe it to join. It was austere, intense, beautiful and confusing.
I still maintain faith in Krishna and I still consider myself a devotee. I just do not consider myself a member of Iskcon. It's not any different than a person leaving a Christian cult but still maintaining Christian faith.
I still think I may have joined Iskcon knowing what I know now, I just would have done it much differently and not as seriously. Some of my best and worst memories are from that time. It's really confusing to think about.
|
|
|
Post by tapati on Jul 20, 2009 19:18:33 GMT -5
I think to join Iskcon there had to be more than just a liking of a specific celebrity that had an interest (there have been many but George Harrison is the most well known and sincere). I think that he introduced many to Iskcon but you really had to believe it to join. It was austere, intense, beautiful and confusing. I still maintain faith in Krishna and I still consider myself a devotee. I just do not consider myself a member of Iskcon. It's not any different than a person leaving a Christian cult but still maintaining Christian faith. I still think I may have joined Iskcon knowing what I know now, I just would have done it much differently and not as seriously. Some of my best and worst memories are from that time. It's really confusing to think about. I agree, I didn't actually join because of George (hence the tongue-in-cheek remark), he just introduced us and lent an air of legitimacy to the whole thing. We knew, for instance, the the Beatles found Maharishi to be "bogus" and so we figured George had learned his lesson and wouldn't make that mistake again. Plus we were teenagers and not terribly discriminating, but we did know there were cheaters out there. What impressed me about Prabhupada was that for someone in charge of such a large organization he did seem to practice what he preached and wasn't womanizing, didn't have terribly opulent quarters, and so on. I helped do his laundry once and we hung it on the line outside the Chicago women's ashram--the whole thing fit into a paper grocery sack when dry. Nothing fancy for his "every day" wear. It was my visit to St. Louis that really confirmed to me that the movement was right for me. And for the time, perhaps it was. Aimai, I do agree with you about the celebrity experience of these various groups though. They have no clue what goes on when one lives in the group or works directly for the group all the time.
|
|
|
Post by tapati on Jul 20, 2009 19:19:28 GMT -5
What year, if you don't mind my asking, were you passing by the temple? I want to say it was around 1975 or so. I was about 12 then. My dad worked out that way for years, so I kept my eye out for the temple while driving down Lindell many, many times. Still do, actually. ETA: I just went back and read your first article and the picture says you were at St. Louis temple in 1975. That's so wild. That is quite a coincidence! So the guys you saw outside are in that picture.
|
|
|
Post by tapati on Jul 20, 2009 19:21:42 GMT -5
What you said, Tapati and Pandapaws, about the way it felt so welcoming and homey when you first started visiting, was also true about the coercive religious group I got involved in, in college. Most churches are friendly, but in a casual way. The Maranatha Campus Ministries group was intensely friendly. They were intense about everything-- which I learned later is a trait of codependency. I was codependent myself and loved the intensity of the welcome, the way they made me feel I belonged right from the start. . . It was only later, after I was well into it, that the coercion began. And by that time I was emotionally attached to the relationships I had formed, and didn't want to leave. The relationships themselves, once we all got out (Maranatha eventually dissolved), were high quality friendships, and many of them remain to this day. I would say that in our culture, which tends to high degrees of independence and isolation (everyone home in front of their TVs and not interacting with the community so much anymore), many people are longing for deeper, more intimate relationships. And cults offer this. I think the anti-cult people have a word for it: love-bombing. It is a sad commentary on our culture that we are so starved for human love and affection! Or at least, some of us. That name sounds familiar. What was the group like other than intense? What did they believe?
|
|
|
Post by tapati on Jul 20, 2009 22:02:20 GMT -5
For anyone interested in reading more about women and other marginalized people in the Hare Krishna Movement, there is an excellent and very entertaining blog by Vrajabhumi at: harekrishnawomen.wordpress.com/She has a great sense of humor.
|
|
|
Post by rosa on Jul 20, 2009 22:04:48 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by arietty on Jul 21, 2009 0:19:15 GMT -5
Krwordgazer what does it mean that intensity is a sign of codependency? I had not heard that before but it rings a lot of bells. I think of friends of mine who went from one super intense christian experience to the next and would never find any contentment in a mundane church life, and whose romantic relationships ran a parallel course.
Tapati I found your posts very interesting, thanks so much. When I was younger I often felt a real pull towards the "small blue god" as I thought of him, and have tried to analyze what the heck that was all about. Certainly on one level it is the pull of an alternative society, a way to step out of the tedium or pain of one's current life. Whether it's Krishna or the Amish or homesteading with 12 kids.. lol. But I believe that personally there was a pull towards a pure form of devotion. I had that same experience of almost-envy when I knew some very Mary oriented Catholics (the Blue Army and others). Mary/Krishna offered something incredibly pure and beautiful that called forth a spiritual relationship based on devotion.. this is just not found in your basic protestant evangelical church. It's an interesting need or impulse. I only have little wisps of it now and can't imagine disengaging my brain to the point of being able to pursue it, its time has passed.
I used to eat at the ISKCON outreach restaurants. I was a vegetarian and the food was good and payment was by donation. I found many elements of it very attractive but the devotees that would sit and talk with me I did not find attractive. I was a very new christian at the time and one fellow who was always there was deeply sarcastic and almost nasty when I told him this, and he continued to deride me in subsequent visits until I actually stopped coming because of him. He was the son of a Baptist minister and I've often wondered where his life took him. Other devotees seemed to me to be arrogant and always correcting me. This was in contrast to the weekend I spent with the Moonies where every word I uttered was greeted as being incredibly spiritual and insightful and wonderful.. boy that was love bombing and I wasn't fooled by it for a second.
But I guess I was just waiting for the perfect thing to fall for.
|
|
|
Post by haggisforthesoul on Jul 21, 2009 7:11:25 GMT -5
I think to join Iskcon there had to be more than just a liking of a specific celebrity that had an interest (there have been many but George Harrison is the most well known and sincere). This is true, but a well-known and admired celebrity can provide quite a jumping off point for some people. People often have a tendency to associate the person with the thing and it can lend an undeserved legitimacy to a group that someone we admire belongs to. I'm sure certain controlling sects count on this, which is why groups like Scientology treat their celebrities so well in comparison to the rest of the membership. It doesn't have to be a celebrity, though. Having a friend or someone you admire in an abusive religious sect can lend it legitimacy if you're not familiar with the group's darker side.
|
|
|
Post by debrand on Jul 21, 2009 8:46:22 GMT -5
I think to join Iskcon there had to be more than just a liking of a specific celebrity that had an interest (there have been many but George Harrison is the most well known and sincere). I think that he introduced many to Iskcon but you really had to believe it to join. It was austere, intense, beautiful and confusing. I still maintain faith in Krishna and I still consider myself a devotee. I just do not consider myself a member of Iskcon. It's not any different than a person leaving a Christian cult but still maintaining Christian faith. I still think I may have joined Iskcon knowing what I know now, I just would have done it much differently and not as seriously. Some of my best and worst memories are from that time. It's really confusing to think about. Thank you. I was about to ask if Krishna has less extreme followers or denominations then the group described in the article.
|
|
|
Post by anotheramy on Jul 21, 2009 9:00:24 GMT -5
Its a big mistake to get drawn into any religion for love of, or at the coaxing of, a celebrity spokesman. That person may be sincere in their beliefs and experiences but, generally speaking, it has nothing to do with the way the group will treat a low level “grunt” member if that member falls afoul of the rules. Yes, I definitely agree, and it's one message (among many) that I really want to drive home about religion to my daughters. Tapati - I don't have anything against Adam Yauch, btw, or doubting his sincerity. I was just drawing my own connection. He's just announced that he's got cancer, and I hope his faith helps him through it all. Sadly, Buddhism is much more beautiful as a philosophy than a religion. As a religion it has all the nasty sides of any other religion. I mean even Christianity is supposed to be based on loving kindness. I still admire Buddhism a lot but don't want to be in any system.
|
|
|
Post by debrand on Jul 21, 2009 11:33:12 GMT -5
Sadly, Buddhism is much more beautiful as a philosophy than a religion. As a religion it has all the nasty sides of any other religion. I mean even Christianity is supposed to be based on loving kindness. I still admire Buddhism a lot but don't want to be in any system. I think that all belief systems, no matter how beautiful, can be twisted by bad people. Communism should be a wonderful, very fair system, but it doesn't take into account human nature. That is why communism doesn't work. I think that the safest course is to always ask questions and to be a little bit anti authority. That is why I am bringing up my children to be little rebels. LOL I am not very knowledgeable about Buddhism but isn't there some Buddhist who practice their faith as a philosophy? I thought that Buddhism in its purest form was not a religion.(Again, I know very little about Buddhism)
|
|