First think about this: Since you seem to consider 'many Christians' as authorities, will any answer mean any change in your life?

All theistic traditions stress that it's better to listen to God's words in sastra than to human opinions contradicting them. Where's it stated that torture is love? Never heard of that. If one can't change in the sense of metanoia and be released, the torture has no meaning. I gave my understanding of 'eternal' (aionios) earlier. Afaik, eternal hell isn't part of any official Creed.

> both seem to demand that a person do things they find repugnant.

That's news to me, I never had to do anything like that so far. Please clarify.

> But how can I know whether I understand scriptures correctly?

If your understanding agrees with gss. One needs to learn the proper siddhanta and practice. It's possible only in Vaisnava sangha.

> My understanding often seems to be completely at odds with that of the devotees, and this to the point that it seems I would have to do something repugnant if I were to accept their view.

Examples needed.

But aside from the practical examples, this is a formal question.

Is ti possible that a person may at some point have to do things they find wrong, in order to make spiritual progress?

This has come up for me before, when, for example, it seemed that the only way to be happy is to eat meat, drink coffee and aclohol and do the things that "normal people" do, even though I found those things to be wrong.

> You don't find it repugnant to believe it is love that God tortures the majority of His children? And yes, if you want to join the Catholic and many other Christian churches, this is what you have to believe.

- It's not God who forces anyone to go to hell. It's an individual choice to live a sinful life that leads one there. If you mean predestination, that's not Catholic concept, afaik.
- Catholic teachings speak of the Purgatory for lesser sinners.
- Sat-sanga can be done without any formal memberships.
- I don't need to join Catholic Church since I was baptized in it as an infant so I'm its formal life member. ;)
St. Jerome, patron saint of translators, once appeared in my dream to help me and I'm thankful to him.
At Korfu I prayed to its patron saint, St. Spyridon, who is actively fulfilling prayers to support me in preaching against deviations since he's known to strongly oppose the heretic Arius.

> Who decides whether my understanding is in such agreement with gss or not?

Basic comparison of ideas can be done by self-check. E.g.:

GV siddhanta: Krsna is the SPoG
person x: Krsna is an expansion of Visnu
result: person x differs from GV siddhanta

More intricate issues would have to be ascertained by someone more knowledgeable than us. Therefore devotees discuss such issues, sometimes at considerable length.

> I don't see how to survive in Vaisnava sangha to begin with.

That we already discussed. You just don't fit your local NH group, that's all. And you seem to have some psychological problems from your church past which need attention of a devotee psychologist.

> - Accepting the stance that the individual soul has no free will anymore once he surrenders to God. A stance not uncommon among devotees. If I disagree with it, I am "in maya"...

Not so. Within the 'surrender mode' one has a free will to do all kinds of decisions and services. Read SB 10 how life in Vrindavan dham looks like. Associates of Krsna have free will, they're not slaves or robots.

> - Accepting the stance that as soon as a person is called a "devotee" by someone who considers themselves a devotee, this person is beyond karma.

It's diksa which burns karma and continues to do so as long as our relationship with the guru lasts - keeping the vows and following siksa. It's not that after diksa one can do anything and everything on the pretext that 'there's no karma'. That's the 7th offense against the holy name.

> - Having to accept stances as scriptural/doctrinal, even though no scriptural reference has been provided.

Our philosophy is that they have to be provided. Sometimes younger devotees can't find the references or refuse to provide them though.
So one should approach senior devotee/s then.

> - Taking up a regimen of spiritual practice without having any positive conviction about it, but only on the grounds of having negative convictions about oneself.

So you feel manipulated by peer pressure to do a particular devotional service? It's not our system. Prabhupada at the beginning let anyone to do any service they wanted to get the taste of it. To overwhelm the beginner with tons of do's and don'ts is a sure way to 'burn' him.

> - Being expected to trust and respect everyone who came there before me or who is in any way deemed higher than me.

We trust people by default until they breach that trust. Respect to every living being is a common Vaisnava value. We keep distance from some though.

> You and the scriptures may keep saying that one ought to use intelligent discernment, but in reality, this doesn't work. Devotees get offended if I don't accept and believe everything they say, or at least I get accused of being "conditioned", "in maya" and such. Apparently, if I wouldn't be "in maya" and "conditioned", then I would think, feel, speak and act as they do.

Discernment (viveka) isn't maya. Lack of it is.

> In reality, I also wouldn't / don't get to associate with people like you. I get to be left with matajis who rub it into my face how I am "in maya" or give me a silence treatment whenever I say or do something they don't like. To be expected to give in to them is another thing I find repugnant.

If there're no senior matajis around you, that's a sort of a problem. But thanks to internet you can associate with many devotees worldwide and somehow overcome this deficiency.

> Is ti possible that a person may at some point have to do things they find wrong, in order to make spiritual progress?

I can't think of any examples. I didn't have to do anything like that so far.

> This has come up for me before, when, for example, it seemed that the only way to be happy is to eat meat, drink coffee and aclohol and do the things that "normal people" do, even though I found those things to be wrong.

Why should happiness depend on these things? And how are such people happier than others?

> the only way to be happy is to do something immoral.

This is not real, internal happiness but a superficial pleasure of the senses. The former is possible only within the framework of virtue and bhakti.

VEDA:

You just don't fit your local NH group, that's all.

The questions are why I don't fit in, how should I behave toward them if I do see them in some public space, and how should I think of myself for not fitting in.
[br]
Is it that I am not good enough for them, that I am not intelligent enough for them, not advanced enough?[br]
I want to know what my status is in all this, and I want some closure.
[br][br]

And you seem to have some psychological problems from your church past which need attention of a devotee psychologist.

I haven't yet recovered from my previous devotee psychologist ...
[br][br]

Our philosophy is that they have to be provided. Sometimes younger devotees can't find the references or refuse to provide them though.
So one should approach senior devotee/s then.

Sure. But what do I do when the devotee who doesn't provide a reference insists in their stance and apparently expects me to accept it?[br]
I easily feel swamped by other people's emotions and views. With non-devotees, I have strategies to avoid and overcome this - basic assertiveness strategies, but I fear that with devotees, it would be offensive to apply those strategies, or that it would at least be against the spirit of GV.
[br][br]

So you feel manipulated by peer pressure to do a particular devotional service? It's not our system. Prabhupada at the beginning let anyone to do any service they wanted to get the taste of it. To overwhelm the beginner with tons of do's and don'ts is a sure way to 'burn' him.

Of course I feel manipulated. Long ago, in the beginning, I did feel some affection for Krishna consciousness, but that soon waned when I was faced with devotees.
And yes, this is how I feel - burnt, and burnt-out.
[br][br]

We trust people by default until they breach that trust. Respect to every living being is a common Vaisnava value. We keep distance from some though.

I think we possibly mean different things by "trust" and "respect".

deena:

That means you're doing it wrong. For example, why do you keep placing yourself under the 'authorities' who, by your own admissions here, are often unreasonable, illogical, appear under some kind of power trip more or less, and are very uninspiring association? Why do you keep doing it?

I am not sure. It seems that it is either that I have an improperly formed conscience, or that I am making a conscious choice to say no to God, or both.[br][br]

Personally, I feel that I simply haven't learned and done enough, also not experienced enough to make any final decision about my involvement with the practice of Krishna consciousness.[br]
At the same time, I feel there is an enormous pressure to make such a final decision. I have the fear that my apparently slow pace will not be tolerated by devotees; in fact I know that some do not tolerate it ("I should either do it on their terms, or I am saying no to God altogether").[br] I also feel this pressure from Srila Prabhupada's writings and talks.[br][br]

Therefore I say you are not applying what you have learnt properly.

I agree.

>But to do so, would I not have to believe myself to know better than them?

It's enough to judge from the results. Devotee should attract others to Krsna, not to repell them. That's the realm of kanisthas.

Neither did I mean to equate "trust" and "respect".

Seems like I also fit this HSH definition to some extent. To me it looks like a result of some traumas in this and/or previous lives.
My situation improved much with KC and reiki.

> > Why do you keep doing it?

> I am not sure. It seems that it is either that I have an improperly formed conscience, or that I am making a conscious choice to say no to God, or >both.

Erich Fromm writes that it is due to fear. The fear of being alone, isolated, leaving the security of the crowd. Fear of being rejected, told you are wrong, or an outcast. The need to avoid this fear it is so great that we will even willingly hand over our free-will. Why have you replaced your conscience and intelligence with (according to your own statements here) the very dysfunctional thought processes of other people? Stop it now and take responsibility for yourself.

> Therefore I say you are not applying what you have learnt properly.

> I agree.

So apply it properly. Give up the fear of social, instutional pressure and make your own decisions, based on sastra and your intelligence and act on them. We will be very happy to support you in whatever way we can through this difficult but essential and exciting stage. Give up the fear of being percieved as wrong (or straight-out told you are wrong) when your conscience tells you you're right. And if you are still unsure, confirm the dictates of your conscience with a senior, learned devotee who is not bound by similar institutional pressures or fears.

To use one analogy Srila Prabhupada used, a hospital is meant for sick people, not healthy ones. We're all in the process of curing and have to help those co-patients in need whom we can, even though they sometimes outwardly refuse it. This is Mahaprabhu's mission.

deena:

Why have you replaced your conscience and intelligence with (according to your own statements here) the very dysfunctional thought processes of other people? Stop it now and take responsibility for yourself.

If I did that, then I am afraid this could cost me my salvation or spiritual progress.[br]
I have always had the impression that in order to become eligible for salvation or spiritual progress, I would have to give up whatever conscience and intelligence I have. Hence this thread.[br][br]

I wish this agony of indecision would be over. But I fear the only way to make an end to it is to cut all ties to devotees and KC practices.

> I have always had the impression that in order to become eligible for salvation or spiritual progress, I would have to give up whatever conscience and intelligence I have. Hence this thread.

You would have got along well in the 1980s perhaps.

> avoidance of responsibility and making hard decisions

This is pretty much common to all materialists, to different extent. The more delusional stage is taking drugs to forget material sufferings of samsara. Srila Prabhupada saved us from this - all glories to him.

Some quotes about responsibility:

Animals, of course, have no sense of responsibility, but even humans, who have developed a sense of responsibility, while away their valuable time without engaging in devotional service to the Lord; they live merrily, unafraid of impending death. This is the madness of human society. The madman has no responsibility in life. Similarly, a human being who does not develop a sense of responsibility before he dies is no better than the madman who tries to enjoy material life very happily without concern for the future. It is necessary that every human being be responsible in preparing himself for the next life, even if he has a duration of life like that of Brahmä, the greatest of all living creatures within the universe. (SB 3.11.33 p.)

Therefore I, as spirit soul, I am not body. Body is changing; I am different from body. Therefore change of this body does not mean I am finished. I am continuing. Therefore I should be responsible: "What kind of body I am going to accept next?" That is my responsibility. If you don't take this responsibility, "What kind of body...?" It may be, if I am of doggish mentality, my next life will be just a dog because I will have to accept the dress of a dog. And if I am evolving my godly mentality, then I'll have to accept, or I will accept another body just like God. So that is in my hands.
So in the modern educational system, universities, there is no such information, we see. It is very lamentable, but these knowledges are there in the Vedic literature. The summary of all Vedic literature is Srimad-Bhagavad-gita and the Srimad-Bhagavatam. There are many other literatures-Ramayana, Mahabharata, eighteen Puranas. They are meant for human society, not for these cats and dogs. So our Krishna consciousness movement is just to awake people to their rightful position, which is called Krishna consciousness. (lecture at International Student Society, Boston, May 3, 1969)

Therefore, unless we take to Krsna consciousness movement, the human civilization is doomed. It is not human civilization. Human civilization is responsible life. Actually, we are being educated, we go to school, to college, to become responsible man. So this responsibility should be "How to stop this repetition of birth." In many places this is advised. And that is the only aim of human life. Punar-janma-jayaya. (SB 6.1.12, LA, June 25, 1975)

Therefore a human being should be very, very cautious and conscious. They should not do anything irresponsibly. And how to work with responsibility and how to work irresponsibly? Therefore sastra required. Sastra, these books, Vedic knowledge, books, why they are? So that a human being may take advantage of it and he act responsibly or irresponsibly. If he works irresponsibly, then his punishment is awaiting, lower grade of life. So human being should be educated how to... Therefore these children are being educated from the very beginning of their life how to become responsible man. This is the idea of our gurukula. (SB 6.1.48, Dallas, July 30, 1975)

People do not know the seriousness of material existence, and they continue and waste their, the chance, human being. Human form of life is a chance to rectify, but they do not care. Therefore the Krishna consciousness movement is so important. Everyone, door to door, a devotee has to go and teach them that "You are leading a very, very irresponsible life. Be responsible to your consciousness and be a devotee of Krishna. That will save you." (SB 7.9.16, Mayapur, February 23, 1976)

Therefore the real aim of life, how to get out of this bhavarnava, nescience, that is the aim of life. If we remain again like the monkeys and cats and dogs, eating, sleeping, mating, and dancing, that is not very responsible life. Every man should be responsible. That is Vedic culture, to create responsible man, not varna-sankara. (SB 7.12.2, Bombay, April 13, 1976)

As I have seen, people have very different ideas about what this "growing up and taking responsibility for one's spiritual life" is supposed to be.

Interesting Baker ...... but not unusual predicament, for especially those whom have had little experience of surrender or being swept up and surrendering in the sankirtan process.Interlectual appreciation is not spiritual advancement.Neither can one whom is asking questions on the internet,necessarily able to necessarily become nourished or even blessed by the senior devotee .Hardwork and grafting the hard yards .....for krishna ,while being chastised by a superior is necessary .Generally one needs an expert and spiritually resiliant sankirtan devotee to fully appreciate submission and service in a humble selfless mood.Humility is the stepping stone towards proper spiritual qualification usually referred to as adhikara.
In other words you need to hear from a personally present spiritual authority and intimately become ruled by them.For nityananda ram and chaitanya mahaprabhus mercy ..... you need the intimate blessings of a sadhurani or sadhu .Generally they are themselves involved in preaching,hence they have learnt to discriminate between the demons and devotees.They surrender there minds demands to engage in the tapasya of sankirtan ,either collecting laxsmi or selling books.When they preach to the innocent ,they try and inject krishnas mercy usually in the form of prasadam or a book to try and deliver the spiritual medicine.
Since naturally ''demons '' are averse they become expert on how to engage them.Hook or by crook methods are sometimes used to cheat the demons expertly ''BACK TO GODHEAD''.....hopefully they are happy when they leave the association of the devotee,otherwise they have failed!.However naturally the devotees are sometimes accosted ,insulted and generally looked down upon in a negitive light for serving krishna by the materialists.Hence learning to spoon feed ones self krishna conciousness is essential. Being convinced is based on reading the sastra developing a personal relationship with ones gurus and serving according to there dictations.Hence the need for submission to both diksa and ones many siksa(instructing) gurus.Then you are actually a real devotee ....everything else is merely preparation and simply for many it is a mystery,because they rebel due to the discipline demanded!
.Which ideally has been sharpened and honed to a precise piont,by constant prayer and intense fervour and desire to engage the conditioned souls in krishnas service.....in other words bhakti is a gift from one sadhu to another ,whom is dynamically surrendering and sacrificing literally everything for guru and krishna!
Interlectualism only goes so far......krishna cannot be cheated,even ones chanting is frail and like chewing black coal ''if not blessed.Hence seeking the association of sincere devotees,is the purpose of the sankirtan neophyte.Nothing else replaces the genuine sincerity and association of surrendered devotees, blissfully and ecstatically intent on doing others good by engaging them in krishnas service.

>Hardwork and grafting the hard yards .....for krishna ,while being chastised by a superior is necessary

Any sastric reference for these exact words? (I am sure none for other suggestions).

I meant that I can't discuss myself in open forums anymore, at least not the way I have been so far. It is too straining.
So this is one practical step.
Perhaps some people here think that I owe it to them to explain myself further and to say what I will do. And I do have some ideas. But I am reluctant to share them in open forums at this point, as I feel I would just once more be deprived of privacy and put under the scrutiny and criticism of everyone. I also don't want to be some kind of "forum help project" anymore either.

It is said one ought to reveal one's mind in confidence. But usually, I am not revealing my mind in confidence here, but much more in fear and under pressure. So I am doing something about that.


Thank you for your concern, Deena.

Mainly fear of asking or saying something that could endanger my progress. Also a generalized fear of devotees.

thread closed by request of the inquirer