Honor or respect is mAna, hense it -- amAnina, without claiming any respect from others in Siksastakam 3. That is the difference between a Vaisnava and those who want to have respect.

I find that you must go through a lot of tests to finally come out as not actually doing it for the motivation of respect. Another word is pratistha. I also have difficulty in understanding emotions and non-verbal expressions. The point is not to blame others for how you feel, for actually it is great if you are getting no respect, you chances of going back to godhead multiply! What can be worst then pride?

kanaka-kamini pratistha-baghini
chariyache jare sei to vaisnava

One who has been abandoned by the tigress of money, beautiful women, and respect (prestige) is truly a Vaishnava.

sei anasakta sei suddha-bhakta
samsar tatha pay parabhava

Such a soul alone is truly detached; such a soul is a pure devotee. The illusory creation of repeated birth and death is defeated before him.

dainyam, humility, is the healthy sign of a devotee. However if you use this philosophy and start disrespecting other devotees, you go to hell. It is a tricky balance, and I find it is not really working among the beginners. I do however that we should start actually respecting absolutely everyone who at least once chanted the holy name. I mean without any blacklists.

Actually what is missing is the inspiration and blessings of older devotee or devotees.....You should serve at a local temple.Regular devotional service allows krishna's mercy to infact manifest....through his genuine servants.Even if it is only washing the pots,or cleaning the floor.By taking steps to krishna he will reciprocate .Bhagavad gita chapter5 verse18......vidya -vinaya-sampanne brahmani gavi hastini,suni caiva svapake ca,panditah sama darsinah.All problems ,all differculties are intrinsically resolved in the mercy of an advanced devotee.The humble sage,by vrtue of true knowledge sees with equal vision.....a learned and gentle brahmana,a cow,an elephant,a dog and a dog eater.
My new freind baker,an advanced devotee is merciful to a lesser person.He is able to see krishna's indeliable hand moving around his environment.He is convinced because the supersoul....like the ''holy spirit ''....the localised aspect of god is situated within him,yourself......the cow,the elephant ,the dog and even the lowly dog eater.He is never alone!So he pays respect to krishna within your heart.......Because you have common farther,Krishna who is seated in the region of the heart.Chanting together,taking prasadam ,hearing about krishna....in the preaching atmosphere will create a loving healthy respect.

VEDA:

> To disagree with someone is considered tantamount to disrespecting that person.

[br]No. On the level of material dharma one should respect superiors even if they're not perfect (and one shouldn't adopt their imperfections):

[br]Tamala Krsna: "It is better to live in this world by begging than to live at the cost of the lives of great souls who are my teachers. Even though they are avaricious, they are nonetheless superiors. If they are killed, then our spoils will be tainted with blood [Bg. 2.5]."

[br]Prabhupada: This is another indication how superiors should be shown respect. Arjuna says, "Although they have become avaricious, still, they are my superior." Avaricious, why? "They have got full affection for me. My grandfather Bhisma has got full affection for me. And Dronacarya, I am his very dear student so he has also my very affection... good affection for me. But because Duryodhana has paid them, he has accepted their service. Paid them. So avaricious. Simply for money, in spite of so much affection and intimate relationship, they have accepted the service of Duryodhana, counting on money. So therefore they are avaricious. But in spite of their being avaricious, they are my respectful." This is respect. This is respect, that the respectful person who is my respectful, even there are some characteristics who does not command respect, still respect should be offered. (BG 2.1-10 and talk, Los Angeles, Nov 25 1968)

I still don't understand what is supposed to go on in a person's mind when they respect someone, and how they should behave toward the respected person.[br]

[br]For example, when I feel I have respect for someone, I feel a kind of embarrassment of myself and I feel lowly. I never look the respected person straight in the eyes, I lower my shoulders, I don't sit down in front of them without being told or without asking permission to sit. If I sit in their presence, I don't lean back in the chair, I never cross my legs or arms, and have my hands always visible. I don't eat in their presence unless they invite me or tell me to. I apologize if I have to cough, sneeze or clear my nose in their presence. I am careful about my language and I don't use slang or colloquialisms. I answer straightforwardly every question they ask me, however intimate. I don't ask them intimate questions. I don't raise my voice. I don't argue, I don't disagree.
[br](I was brought up old-fashioned Catholic country style.)[br]

[br]Is this the sort of respect I am supposed to have toward every devotee, everyone who has chanted the holy name even just once?[br]


[br]

> Sometimes, I have gotten the impression that the devotees were saying things to me in the expectation that I should feel hurt or contempted. When I didn't feel and react that way, it seemed they were disappointed and took offense.

Strange. Examples?

For example, once, after prasadam, a small group of devotees was having a casual discussion. I said something, and one devotee even agreed with me, but another devotee cut me off, saying "I know what you mean, but you're wrong". He didn't explain his answer nor did he give me any room to inquire, but I still wanted to (I started a sentence), and then he looked at me in a manner suggesting "Shut up".
[br]Perhaps this was a male vs. female thing as well.
[br]But like I said, this is all mostly about impressions and speculations, as there doesn't seem to be much room to talk about things.[br]


[br]

> Sometimes, I have felt like asking them "How do you want me to feel when you say these words? How do you want me to feel when you look at me like that? Are you going to take offense if I don't feel the way you want me to, and I will go down as a Vaisnava offender?"

So you should ask.

Allright.[br]

> Is this the sort of respect I am supposed to have toward every devotee, everyone who has chanted the holy name even just once?

If you can. But the main thing is inside, to see the other devotee as one's superior. In dharmasastras there're different criteria of superiority for different varnas, the superiority by age is prescribed for sudras.
For devotees, the general superiority is understood by the criteria of length of active service, by official position, by spiritual knowledge and, especially, by the advancement in KC (kanistha, madhyama, uttama).

> He didn't explain his answer nor did he give me any room to inquire, but I still wanted to (I started a sentence), and then he looked at me in a manner suggesting "Shut up".
Perhaps this was a male vs. female thing as well.

Are you in a female body? So far it wasn't obvious from your words. This can be a factor when talking with male devotees. Still, there's no reason to suggest to anyone to 'shut up' if the question is not offensive, etc.

> there doesn't seem to be much room to talk about things.

If there's not much room with some devotees, find others.

dweller-in-peace:

If you read nectar of instructions text 5 along with purports, that might help you.

[br]I know this - reading it is what made me think about respect in more detail than I have so far.

I respected my uncle. Even as he was often very unclean in his habits I would not say about him that he was a pig - needless to say I would have never called him that to his face. Despite that flaw he was a good man, generous to his family and strangers - and for that I respected him a lot.

I respect a devotee whose ideas regarding Krsna consciousness I find somewhat troubling (like it's OK to lie, cheat and steal as long as you give 10% of money acquired in that way to the temple). I will not say that he is a common crook - but I will say or think that he is wrong thinking like that. Why do I still respect him? Because he tries to be Krsna conscious and makes an effort to improve himself.

Respect must be earned to be real, otherwise it is just a pose we are taking. Sure, all living entities deserve some respect as parts and parcels of Krsna, but that does not translate into a feeling of being somewhat selected as 'special'.

To show disrespect to a devotee is to put him down as a crook, liar, someone with ill intention, deviant, etc. That does not mean you have to be silent and accept whatever inappropriate behavior he may exhibit without protest. You can criticize the bad things in a dispassionate, factual manner, while keeping in mind the good things about him.

prabhu kahe jāṅra mukhe śuni eka-bāra
kṛṣṇa-nāma sei pūjya śreṣṭha sabākāra
eka kṛṣṇa-nāme kare sarva-pāpa kṣaya
nava-vidhā bhakti pūrṇa nāma haite haya
dīkṣā-puraścaryā-vidhi apekṣā nā kare
jihvā-sparśe ā-caṇḍāla sabāre uddhāre
anuṣaṅga-phale kare saṁsārera kṣaya
citta ākarṣiyā karāya kṛṣṇe premodaya

“If I hear someone chant Krishna’s Holy Name just once, I consider him to be worshipable and the best of all humans. A single repetition of Krishna’s holy name destroys all the consequences of a sinful life. All the nine processes of devotional service are completed simply by chanting the Holy Name. With the Holy Name, one does not have to undergo initiation or the puraścaryā observances as with other mantras. The Name delivers even a person in the lowest ranks of human society as soon as one chants it. Secondarily, the Holy Name dissolves one’s entanglement in material activities; it attracts the mind and awakens one’s love for Krishna.” (Chaitanya Charitāmṛta Madhya.15.106-109)

ataeva jāṅra mukhe eka kṛṣṇa-nāma
sei ta vaiṣṇava kariha tāṅhāra sammāna

Śrī Chaitanya Mahāprabhu then concluded, “Therefore one who chants the name of Krishna should be recognized as a Vaishnava and you should offer all respects to him.” (Chaitanya Charitāmṛta Madhya.15.111) (also relevant to Diksa tread)

Nrsingha:

Respecting someone is not concomitant with agreeing with them. We can and should respect those we disagree with,we hope!
Ysvt

Respect is just showing that someone is higher then ourself, and we are lower. One can be higher socially or intellectually and one has to show a material respect. One has to respect anyone who chants, it is respect to the Nama Prabhu. Just as when we bow to a sannyasi, we bow to the tridanda, and when we offer respect to all living beings because the Lord is in their heart. [br] However a true Vaisnava would consider himself lower then anyone, thus he offers respect to everyone (amAnina manadena).

Thank you all for your replies!

Please help me understand this too:


What is the relationship between respect, trust, believing and agreeing?


My default is to think they all four come together, and if one is missing, the other three are soon gone as well.
I often find myself in an internal conflict when I think I should respect someone, but I am in doubt whether and how much to trust or believe that person. And then if I find I can't trust them or believe them, I feel I am disrespecting them.

Is it possible to still respect someone, but not trust, believe or agree with them?

There association is essential for spiritual advancement.....hare krishna bhaktine baker.

VEDA:

> What is the relationship between respect, trust, believing and agreeing?

Respect is for all superiors. Trust for the trustworthy. The latter can be believed. And even if their opinion is correct, one may have a different one (eg. acaryas sometimes present various views of the same thing, both correct).

> Is it possible to still respect someone, but not trust, believe or agree with them?

I've given an example above that it's not only possible but wanted.

[br]This is very new to me. When I was younger, my seniors/superiors have mostly been people who were "all in one package" - they were respectable, trustworthy, truthful and commanding agreement. If there was something suspicious about them, I was used to blame it on myself, that either I saw wrongly or understood wrongly. But at some point, the discrepancies just seem to have gotten too large, and too much distrust of my own judgment was required to still maintain unlimited, undifferentiated respect for (some of) them.

Baker: That's also possible, esp. for the young who don't have much knowledge and experience. But I speak in general.

Let's take an example of Arjuna. Drona was his MA teacher and thus his respected superior. But he was obliged to Dhritarastra and Duryodhana and therefore untrustworthy. But Yudhisthira was both Arjuna's superior and trustworthy and therefore could be believed. Yet Arjuna sometimes used to have a different opinion, like what to do in the house of lac - to sneak away or to fight.

sri_govinda_das:

You are obviously ''cut to a pattern''...you will be unable to fully understand krishna's devotee's.

Are you going to be offended if I don't believe you this?

Baker:

[[br]I actually cried over being told that I am "obviously ''cut to a pattern''" and "will be unable to fully understand Krishna's devotees."[br]
[br]I've been told such things quite a bit by devotees, or witnessed such conversations between others. To the point that it made me wonder whether perhaps this is what Vaishnava culture actually is, that this is what the proper application of scriptures is.[br]

[br]And frankly, I am not sure that it isn't.[br]

The Vaishnava culture is an idealized concept. In real life, at least for those in the West, it is what the local devotees make it to be. It is you, me, and the local temple devotees. --------- It may be disheartening at times, and at times - very sweet. Try to focus on the good exchanges, and avoid devotees who treat you poorly. With time such shallow criticism (such as being ''cut to a pattern'') by people who know very little about you, will stop bothering you. -------- The main thing is NEVER TO GIVE UP trying to improve your Krsna consciousness.

Sri Govinda Das -

I repeat my question:

[quote]

sri_govinda_das:

You are obviously ''cut to a pattern''...you will be unable to fully understand krishna's devotee's.

Are you going to be offended if I don't believe you this?[/quote]

sri_govinda_das:

My dear baker,please do not misquote me......

How have I misquoted you?

sri_govinda_das:

But how does a devotee progress in krishna conciousness without the mercy of his many siksa guru's?Which are always the sankirtan devotees.....it is an axiomatic truth...hare krishna .
Older devotees are able to see your situation within the modes of material nature.''Cut to a pattern''.....by your karma ,education,how one speaks,the very nature how you respond to questions.Most people reveal it ....but this is very uncomfortable for newer devotees .Since they are under so much ''conditioning'' from the modes of material nature.Under the modes it is very obvious they think,i am very special! he does not know me!,How puffed up he is!
However an older devotee sees ''just another prisoner....within mayadeva's prison fortress.In complete illusion who thinks they are free!...............The wonderful nature of this fortress is all the inmates are insane ,......they want to stay in maya's jail......An older devotee is meant to cut such persons free ,but they rebel......because they are cut from a 3 modes of material nature pattern.
They are not special ....infact usually we have seen there questions being asked hundreds of times previously.Slight variations but same energies.....hare krishna.

No, I have gotten the impression from the way you speak to me that unless I do and understand things exactly on YOUR terms, then I am wrong and offending, and should possibly leave.[br]

[br]Nevermind what any OTHER devotee says to me or thinks of me.

sri_govinda_das:

Kula -pavanna in what way is Vaishnava culture a idealised concept?

Idealized means: presented in an idealistic way, as opposed to fact based, or real life based. There is nothing wrong with that, as long as you don't expect everybody to achieve that ideal, or act exactly the way this ideal says.

Baker:

What has just happened in this thread is a good example of the problem with respect that I am poinitng at:

A devotee, senior to me, makes an analysis or diagnosis of me (not that I asked for one). I wish to be respectful toward everyone. But that analysis or diagnosis is such that if I believed it, it would be bad for me. For example, one devotee once said that I have no faith.

What do I do? Do I pretend to agree, in the name of keeping up a respectful appearance? Do I ignore the comment and afterwards have only diplomatic communication with that devotee? Do I engage that devotee in a discussion, requiring some justification for their analysis or diagnosis of me? Do I tell them I refuse to settle for their analysis or diagnosis of me? ...

When I get told that I have "no faith" or that I am "obviously ''cut to a pattern'' and will be unable to fully understand Krishna's devotees" or some other less than auspicious analysis or diagnosis - what should I think about it, about myself, about the one who told me that?

How should I respond, with respect, to the devotee who says that to me?

"

Mike Robinson: And when will we understand that?[br]
Prabhupäda: You can understand at any moment, but it requires a little intelligence."[br] I am sorry baker. It does look like you are right, and respect is not something you can just manufacture, you have it or you do not have it. And if you do not, you should 'show" respect. That is the best I can come up with. But gradually you will develop respect to all living beings...

ccd:

I am sorry baker. It does look like you are right, and respect is not something you can just manufacture, you have it or you do not have it. And if you do not, you should 'show" respect. That is the best I can come up with. But gradually you will develop respect to all living beings...

Actually, now that we are discussing this - it seems courage has something to do with it as well.[br]
[br]For example - your first reply in my thread on agnosticism didn't seem very cordial, and I was put off. My first reaction was to become defensive, but I didn't say anything. After a while, I decided to respond in goodwill anyway - and I myself felt better.[br]
[br]I should do that more often, right? Have some faith in the devotees even though they don't seem to have faith in me.[br]
[br]Although it is easier with some devotees than others.[br]

[br]Thank you.[br]

Baker -- The same thing that led you to the teachings/books/message/disciples of His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada; i.e. your intuitive gut feeling of what is right and what is wrong, what is authentic and what is phoney, who is a teacher and who is a cheater -- that is the Lord in your heart -- Paramatma -- Ksirodaksayi Vishnu -- guiding you. He is closer to you than your jugular vein. He knows the sincerity of your intentions and your innermost desires. Man proposes and God disposes. The fact that you have come to this point in your life -- situated on the spiritual transcendental path back to home, back to Godhead, means you are a very very rare soul. Only after many many lifetimes does one come to the understanding -- the faith -- that Krishna, Vasudeva -- is the all in all -- the Cause of all causes. Krishna is reciprocating with your faithful and sincere desire to know Him and when we take one step toward Krishna He takes two toward us. By the mercy of Krishna one gets guru and by the mercy of guru one gets Krishna. Krishna has led you to your eternal siksha guru, Srila Prabhupada. When the time is right Krishna will arranage for you to find your diksha guru. Don't be in a big rush for that. That will come in due time. Srila Prabhupada didn't get formally initiated until many years after his initial meeting with his guru maharaja, Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Thakur.

As for your dealings with other devotees. First of all -- many things might be said to you and ... "if it don't apply, let it fly." The guidelines for dealing with others are like this .... we show due respect toward those who are above us ... we befriend those on our level ... and we are compassionate toward those who are not as advanced. The other side of that is the materialistic egotistical person who envies those above him, competes covetously with his peers and shows scorn toward and condescends to those below him. So much of this is common sense. Be guided by the Lord in your heart as He reciprocates with your level of faith and sincerity ... and study the writings of Srila Prabhupada. Everything is there in his books. He made sure of that. Nothing is lacking. You are well on your way. Chant Hare Krishna, read Srila Prabhuapda's books and be happy.

sa mahatma sa durlabhah .. such a soul is very rare (that means you).

ccd:

That is one of the reasons it is said -- you respect in your mind (not in your heart).

But is this not hypocrisy then, and should be avoided as such? [br]

[br]There is the conviction among many Westerners that it is better to show true emotions, whatever they are, including hostility or anger, than to put on a show of propriety.[br]

[br]In comparison, from what I have seen from Buddhists, they don't seem to be concerned with genuineness, but with appropriateness. They consider mental states and attitudes to be something one should control and strategize with, deliberately choosing among them according to the principles of the Eightfold path. What to think or feel about something or someone is to them as much a matter of choice as it is a matter of choice which clothes one will wear or whether to choose an apple or orange if both are available.[br]


[br]Is Vaishnava culture more similar to the above Western type, or the Buddhist type?[br]

That is actually a stage of pure chanting, I am not at that stage, how can I tell you?

Tell me -- what is better --- to show mercy or justice? The spiritual world is the realm of mercy. In his preaching Srila Prabhupada used words and terms like rascaldom, dull-headed, insufficient brain substance, poor fund of knowledge, fools, asses, cheaters, demons ... and other such "terms of endearment." One with mundane vision might think that Srila Prabhuapda was being disrespectful but in reality he was showering his causeless mercy upon one and all. In ordinary dealings Srila Prabhupada was always the perfect gentleman and he employed diplomacy and tact like none other; however, when it came to spreading the message of Caitanya Mahaprabhu .... teaching the absolute truth .... he was a warrior who,cut to pieces the enemies of the Lord such as impersonalists and atheistic scientists. He called libraries and universities slaughterhouses. He challenged highly positioned clergymen on the subject of meat eating and animal slaughter and would not back down even when they tried to find some neutral ground with him. Srila Prabhupada was not out to win a popularity contest. His mission wasn't to speak some pleasing words and tell people it's alright to have illicit sex, eat meat, gamble and take intoxication. He didn't conform to Western dress out of some "respect" for the culture of the place he came to preach. He didn't tell us what we wanted to hear. He told us we were diseased, fallen, miserable, ignorant, blind hogs, dogs, camels and asses. When that book "I'm OK, You're OK" came out we showed it to Srila Prabhupada and his comment was, "We say "We are OK but you are not OK." Respect? In the traditional sense -- perhaps not Mercy? In the absolute sense -- definitely yes. So we are not interested in respect in and of itself. If one is a true devotee it means he is compassionate and he can't bear to see others suffer. What greater respect is there than give someone enlightenment, the secret of all secrets, the king of knowledge, the absolute truth. A pure devotee is in the business of saving souls and he is thus the well-wisher of all living beings. Respect is automatically present in one who is pure of heart and motive. If I love you then I automatically respect you. No? Just as mercy is higher than justice -- love is higher than respect. If one is a surrendered soul he/she automatically possesses all good qualities. That's the standard. Can somebody support all this with Bhagavad-gita verses? There are many. Seek them out. It will be a good exercise.