Tattva-viveka
The Art of Communication
Syamasundara - September 27, 2008 8:46 am
Well, maybe I should have chosen a different title, since I am not exactly an artist of communication. However, having to juggle at least 7 languages in my brain on an almost daily basis, and increasingly so since I was 7, I do have a few insights at times.
This time I am not sharing any insights, but rather bringing up a topic, to see the feedback.
I can't remember what thread it was a month ago... but anyway, in general we usually express some concern about how the so called non-devotees perceive us, how to improve that perception, how to uproot misconceptions, and how to present our message in a way that is appropriate for our times and social context.
Which is all fine. However, I did notice that I don't see as much emphasis on the communication (rules and skills) within our group.
We are all trying to be sadhakas here, and inasmuch as we strive and progress, all the Vaisnava qualities will flourish in us, making us perfect from all points of view, but our type of "life-schooling" doesn't have a yearly program prescribed by the ministry of education, so we are all at different cooking points, at the expense of the cohesiveness of our group.
I'm sort of beating about the bush here, because the examples I am about to bring up are all from personal experience, but I don't want this to feel like I am seeking vindication or any such thing. It's just that, well, it's the examples I have available.
I remember years ago in Eugene, a senior disciple took over the lunch cooking, because there were problems with the current cook. I used to cook, too, and had an idea of what GM liked or not. One time at lunch I remember saying: "GM likes his dal creamy (or blended, or whatever I knew for a fact back then)." She said nothing at first, then came back into the prasadam room saying that this is too much, she is already sacrificing the editing and other services, and every day there is a complaint, etc"
What I was coming from was: "I have GM's satisfaction at heart, and so do you. Check out this bit of info that you might find of value in your seva."
However, it seems to have gone across as: "... and since your dal is thin, you are the scum of the earth."
Years after, during the Tattva Viveka era, I posted a few of my memories from the old days, and I was flabbergasted to learn by some that that was interpreted as: "Do you see how senior I am? How closely I was living with GM? How many things I did and know that you don't?"
In all honesty, I never once thought of myself as senior to anyone. I don't even consider Gaurasundara or Gaura-vijaya as junior to me; rather, whoever joins the guru-varga is a little demigod for me.
Speaking of that, once I was appreciating how after initiation Gaura Vijaya really bloomed, and that was taken to mean: "Now that you are part of MY group, you are worthy of my consideration and respect.
Some time before, I read a few questions by Wilfredo Flores, who had just joined, and reading which I was reminded of one or another of SSM's books, so I told him that (as in "Rejoice! Here are all your answers!); but my words were taken to mean (interestingly not by Wilfredo): "Go read SSM's books and catch up, you newbee, and then you can talk with us."
And the list could go on. Something happened with Gurunistha and the headset microphone for GM, a couple of times I was even censored on TV for things I allegedly said, and I remember my first words in response being: "That was the last of my thoughts."
I give suggestions about Costa Rica in a helping mood, and it's taken as backseat driving, since I am not even contributing financially.
I wonder what the situation is with our calendars and it's taken as a jab for the creator of one of them.
I think Babhru or someone else was bringing out the importance of Vijaya Kumara's signature: "Think the best first." Until then, when it was explained in context, I had no idea what that meant, but now I see it as a very good motto to keep in mind.
I know that some of the people I lived with know me as a fault-finder, but it's also true that we haven't lived in close contact for 8 years, and for the past 2 years only 3 days every 4 months. Still, with some (well, by now one, excluding GM) of them I get to the point of stammering when I speak, constantly speed-searching for synonyms in my mind that are absolutely unmistakable, so if I am asked to do a service, and all I mean is: "Do I have to do it by myself?" I have to say it in a roundabout way, lest it sounds too much like: "Can't you help me and do something for once, lazy bum?"
The only person who I have the opposite situation with is Prahlada dasa. Every time we chat on yahoo, he'll say the most offensive or even obscene sounding things, at least at first, and when I beg him to clarify in a friendly and understanding way, they end up being of the most devotional nature. 
So, I know that at least he can relate to my frustration, and once he even thanked me for not jumping to conclusions, as the world is already full of people who behave like that, and we don't need that in a Vaisnava environment.
So, again, sorry if all the examples involve me personally. I am not asking for solutions or explanations. Just wondering if we can make an effort as a group to think the best first, give each other the benefit of the doubt, or a chance to explain ourselves, and exercise these qualities and attitudes, because, if we are more cohesive as a group, starting from aspects such as these, it will also overflow in our outreach, but before that, it will make our dealings sweeter.
On my side (and again, this is not a "me against the world" thing; I think the point can be applied to the whole group in every interaction) I'll try to measure my words, at the cost of sounding cold and bland or avoiding speaking altogether if possible.
Syama Gopala Dasa - September 27, 2008 12:44 pm
Syamasundara,
"the examples I am about to bring up are all from personal experience, but I don't want this to feel like I am seeking vindication or any such thing. It's just that, well, it's the examples I have available." This is not a very strong argument for your case. If you say communication is lacking in our sanga, then I would think there are more examples. It rather turns the piece upside down and puts the spotlight on you. You say this is not your intention, but this is where it leads. So, if this is not about you, then about who is this?
Moreover, I do not think you are proposing to do a virtual group hug, are you? The truth hurts sometimes. Words can not always be palatable, especially on a messageboard that lacks non-verbal communication apart from the occasional smiley. 
At the same time, and I think this is more what you mean, words should be suited towards a person's disposition. In other words, we should be sensitive.
Since you allowed yourself to be an example, please allow me to use one of your sentences to exemplify the above:
"I don't even consider Gaurasundara or Gaura-vijaya as junior to me."
Please reread the sentence. You are saying "not even." Do you understand the subtly of this and the way it might across to Gaurasundara and Gaura-vijaya? One could read this as you just labeled them as being the most junior in our group, as if everyone else considers them so. I think this is not what you intended. It indeed shows communicating is an art.
Syamasundara - September 27, 2008 1:19 pm
Well, there are more examples. It would be quite an extensive research to make, though. I figured each would remember the cases pertaining to themselves.
As far as the seniority, why would someone have to read more than what I said? They are to my knowledge the latest ones to receive formal initiation.
I couldn't have said "Not even Guruseva" or "Syama Gopala", it wouldn't make sense.
Madan Gopal Das - September 27, 2008 2:07 pm
I wonder what the situation is with our calendars and it's taken as a jab for the creator of one of them.
Who jab, what, huh?
Syama Gopala has a significant point that 1/2 (or more) of the communication is missing when all we read is type. Non-verbal communication is the major piece of communication that is missing and too many assumptions can be made too easily without it.
Braja-sundari Dasi - September 27, 2008 3:15 pm
I remember years ago in Eugene, a senior disciple took over the lunch cooking, because there were problems with the current cook. I used to cook, too, and had an idea of what GM liked or not. One time at lunch I remember saying: "GM likes his dal creamy (or blended, or whatever I knew for a fact back then)." She said nothing at first, then came back into the prasadam room saying that this is too much, she is already sacrificing the editing and other services, and every day there is a complaint, etc"What I was coming from was: "I have GM's satisfaction at heart, and so do you. Check out this bit of info that you might find of value in your seva."
However, it seems to have gone across as: "... and since your dal is thin, you are the scum of the earth."
Dear Syamasundara, from what you have written I see two possibilities why person reacted like that:
1. you made your statement DURING the lunch instead doing it before dal was cooked
2. maybe you complained several times about other things cooked by this devotee
We perceive this world in a certain way and there is tendency to think that others perceive it in the same way. But usually this is not true. Only people with whom we are really close can guess our intentions. Other people will judge our statements basing on our words, tone, bodily expression and the relationship we have with them. But we do the same...
Here is example of strong misunderstanding based on cultural differences: Two Western devotees were going to Navadvip. One of them was living there for many years and knew Bengali, the other one was first time in India. Suddenly a Hindu man approached them and started to speak with his voice raised. He was speaking loudly and his voice sounded angry. He was shaking his hands and pulling the shirt of the guy who lived in India. So the other devotee became scared: "Oh my God, he wants to robber him!" But suddenly his friend said with a big smile on his face: "Oh, we have to go back, this nice man is inviting us for a lunch".
Syama Gopala Dasa - September 27, 2008 3:45 pm
Well, there are more examples. It would be quite an extensive research to make, though. I figured each would remember the cases pertaining to themselves.
Yes I understand that. At the same time, I do not remember any cases pertaining to myself. That's why I am questioning this lack of good communication you are referring to.
As far as the seniority, why would someone have to read more than what I said? They are to my knowledge the latest ones to receive formal initiation.I couldn't have said "Not even Guruseva" or "Syama Gopala", it wouldn't make sense.
Yes I understand what you meant, but that doesn't mean every one will. You may disagree with the example of course, but do you see where I'm pointing too?
Syamasundara - September 27, 2008 5:40 pm
Yes I understand what you meant, but that doesn't mean every one will. You may disagree with the example of course, but do you see where I'm pointing too?
Yes, and that's close to the gist of what I'm trying to address. Why, in front of a plain statement, should someone think of the worst possible intention and insinuation behind it? Especially in spite of the context?
In this case I was saying that I don't consider anybody inferior to me, I didn't say anything like: "Not even someone worthless or insignificant like so & so" which could have betrayed my real thinking (if that was the case), but a plain statement based on objectivity, yet again the worst possible meaning is extrapolated.
Another thing I noticed in people is that you could say 9 wonderful things about someone, followed by "although" and 1 negative one, and guess what they are going to retain and get offended by?
This blows my mind, and even more that in a spiritual environment, whether it's ours or a Zen one, somebody wouldn't think of keeping that inclination in check.
Feel free to think that I'm tooting my own horn again, but the temple president in Eugene was so abrupt and blunt most of the time, and I would be taken aback every single time for the first second, and then I'd be reminded of the Nectar of Devotion and the qualities of a Vaisnava, so I would think: "Oh, he doesn't want to waste Krsna's time/energy", "oh, he's enhtusiastic"; and that wasn't a philosophical exercise on my side, I really thought that was the case, and people who knew Sevananda better can probably confirm that. And believe me, he wasn't ambiguous, he was in your face and rude.
So, many times I just can't help wondering how is it that people who are rude or anything like that are surrounded by understanding and harmonizing people and someone who has the same good intentions of him, or at least no bad one, and says things plainly (when he hasn't lost his judgement or he's not being carried away by his bitchiness, as I am not claiming to be right all the time) is surrounded by people who think but the worst possible?
Syamasundara - September 27, 2008 6:00 pm
Who jab, what, huh? :Nail Biting:
Hehehe, well, we clarified this in private, and like I said, I wasn't really jumping to conclusions, it's just that the smiley you used seemed to say: "Get over it", and tender as I am with people's reactions all around me (as a catalyst keep in mind I'm working six days a week with 3 Indians who only seem to be speaking English, but they only listen to the first half of whatever I say before they interrupt me, and they don't even understand what I've said), I thought I got misunderstood once again.
After all, you didn't write: "Glad you got your fruit or or 
or "
The fact that I know you and am incidentally particularly fond of you also had an effect on the communication, and I guess the opposite is also true, so that's probably why people freak out when I say something to a newcomer here, and I mentally react like: "What! I obviously mean all the best for him/her!" and yet, it's taken to be unwelcoming.
So, I am not really addressing people and instances. I just wanted to see how many people were aware of the mechanisms of communication from an intellectual point of view, and how many remember about them at every given time.
Syamasundara - September 27, 2008 6:28 pm
For the sake of balance, though, I do have to admit that, as far I am concerned, sometimes I imply too much or expect too much that people understand my implications.
The first time we spent the night at Brahma's and Lila's in SF, Brahma asked us the following morning how we slept, and I plainly said that the couch was shorter than me, so I couldn't sleep a whole lot.
GM later expressed his embarrassment with me, and I remember thinking: "What is he (Brahma), identified with his couch after 40 years of devotional practice? I obviously appreciated his hospitality." In fact I still remember that day/night.
Brahma and Lila are the most gracious hosts I could possibly think of, and that was so evident to me that somehow I didn't think that I needed to refrain from talking about the short couch.
At the same time, had I been a host, and my guest had told me that they couldn't sleep, I'd feel like I've failed. So, there you have it. Sometimes I can't think that far, yet I expect people to see all the positive implications of my plain statements.
Once Gaura Krsna told me that when he's invited to dinner, he always compliments the cook, without even thinking if he actually likes what he's eating. Now, that would take me an incredible effort to do.
Once my sister lent me a book called "The Buttkisser's Manual" where I read an analysis of flattery from prehistoric times to today, and in various societies including the animal ones. It appears that people most of the times prefer a compliment to truth.
Again, in my specific case, I need to be able to balance out satyam bruhyat priyam bruhyat (truth should be said in a pleasant way) with atmavan manyate jagat, because I always tend to say the truth, yet I am very sensitive to what people say to me and how, and when they don't balance a negative statement with a positive one.
Gaura Krsna Dasa - September 29, 2008 9:00 pm
Once Gaura Krsna told me that when he's invited to dinner, he always compliments the cook, without even thinking if he actually likes what he's eating. Now, that would take me an incredible effort to do.
Once my sister lent me a book called "The Buttkisser's Manual" where I read an analysis of flattery from prehistoric times to today, and in various societies including the animal ones. It appears that people most of the times prefer a compliment to truth.
I'm an asskisser? Brother you need to let go of this stuff.
The Supreme Lord Hari has the entire universe as well as his own servants at his fingertips to destroy our anarthas. We should not look to devotees to help us feel good, right, or vindicated. I understand the devotees not as friends in the mundane sense but as agents of destruction. By helping us to progress beyond egotism, illusion, and self-absorbtion they become true friends. They are Nityananda's tools to remove our anarthas and reveal true self-knowledge. Maybe only Guru is conscious of the process, maybe not even he knows.
I would like to say something to help you feel better, but I don't think it's possible. Feeling good is not the point. I can only pray you get over your past ASAP and come out the other side with newer and deeper insight and faith.
Citta Hari Dasa - September 30, 2008 4:25 am
I'm an asskisser? Brother you need to let go of this stuff.
The Supreme Lord Hari has the entire universe as well as his own servants at his fingertips to destroy our anarthas. We should not look to devotees to help us feel good, right, or vindicated. I understand the devotees not as friends in the mundane sense but as agents of destruction. By helping us to progress beyond egotism, illusion, and self-absorbtion they become true friends. They are Nityananda's tools to remove our anarthas and reveal true self-knowledge. Maybe only Guru is conscious of the process, maybe not even he knows.
I would like to say something to help you feel better, but I don't think it's possible. Feeling good is not the point. I can only pray you get over your past ASAP and come out the other side with newer and deeper insight and faith.
Well said Gaura-Krsna!
Syamasundara - September 30, 2008 8:31 am
I'm an asskisser? Brother you need to let go of this stuff.
And here it happens again. 
Where did you get that from?? Because one paragraph later I mention the "Buttkisser's manual"?
Otherwise, I'll try to make treasure of the wise words you said afterward.
Syamasundara - September 30, 2008 8:51 am
At the same time, the two things are unrelated. Your words are addressing an underlying desire for vindication that may come through my words, and what you said about that is very wise and precious.
However what I was addressing is a general process among people. General and ongoing. Past? The last instance is from 12 hours ago. I was neutrally quoting what you said in your living room to me and your housemate the night before I left Portland. When you said that you always compliment the cook (without even being asked "How is it?"), that struck me, because I had never heard of such a thing, and it certainly was foreign to my m.o.; whether it is compulsive lying, asskissing, or spreading the good vibes and making people feel good no matter what. I didn't even think that far. Apparently you did, isn't it another instance of wanting to understand the worst possible meaning out of someones' words?
That's what I was addressing and trying to figure out.
Otherwise, if you are really saying that the two things are related, and whenever people misunderstand someone because they don't want to take a breath and think the best first, they are really being the Lord's agents of destruction (whether they know it or not), because after all, who are we to want to be understood and taken in good faith, well, that's a little harder to accept, although from the highest point of view, humility is always the best choice.
Karnamrita Das - October 2, 2008 1:21 pm
Pranams to Syam and all the assembled Vaisnavas. I have been following this topic and discussion, and have been wondering if I should say my observations at the risk of being misunderstood. Or even my smileys. Many of you have old relationships and see each other accordingly. It seems natural that we tend to categorize each other and sort of have certain boxes and labels, even though admittedly we are much more than that. I get the feeling some of the exchanges on this topic are based on your past dealings.
So I can't comment on that specifically, though perhaps I can speak as a somewhat neutral party, since I don't know you very well, and some not at all. I could be worried to be labeled as one of those Prabhupada disciples know-it-alls or any of number of stereotypes, but I don't. We have unity and diversity amongst all of us. I am here as a brother of sorts (I guess technically an uncle, yet that does create some distance between us, and I don't want that) by affection, appreciation and respect for Swami and all of you. I have been impressed by all the disciples and consider myself fortunate to have the opportunity to be here.
I hope my words will not irk or offend anyone. That is not my intention. I think my comments here are a sincere attempt to say something useful. You will have to be the judge of that.
First I think Syamasundara Prabhus reminder to endeavor to see the best in others is a good one, though I don't know if this is necessarily the best way to help foster that. Can we make mandates to be non-judgmental? You seem to be asking for comments about the topic you brought up, which involves relative evaluations and judgment. In any case here is a great quote from Prabhupada on this topic [sB 4.4.12]:
"There are some highly qualified persons who accept only the good qualities of others. Just as a bee is always interested in the honey in the flower and does not consider the thorns and colors, highly qualified persons, who are uncommon, accept only the good qualities of others, not considering their bad qualities, whereas the common man can judge what are good qualities and what are bad qualities.
Among the uncommonly good souls there are still gradations, and the best good soul is one who accepts an insignificant asset of a person and magnifies that good quality."
It is certainly true that communication of all sorts, perhaps especially in written form can easily be misconstrued. We do have to ask questions of each other for clarification. There is a counseling principle that is useful to understand, that we don't see the world as it is, but as we are. Which means according to our conditioning and experience---our personal lens or filter. In a way people are like mirrors to us. They mirror our qualities and faults, or we see our faults in them.
Although I didn't think this when I first read the beginning of your post Syam, later I thought that it could be thought that you were saying that you were a victim of misunderstanding, and that if only everyone else would practice seeing your good intentions, then there would be no more problems. You could be thought of as putting the blame on others, and not accepting personal responsibility. These are my thoughts which are meant to be considered, not seen as an attack. Whether or not they will be is subjective, the interaction of people. If I receive comments back, and it seems I was misunderstood, I will have to evaluate what I said, and try to clarify.
In any dealings between others, we are at least 50% of the equation, and that 50% is all we can really do anything about. Sorry, but I have to see this more as a psychological than spiritual problem. I would say to you Syam, if you are being misunderstood, then what could you do differently to avoid that in the future? Certainly everyone should see your best intentions, but you can't control that. You can only change yourself, and teach by your example.
From my limited reading of your examples I would say that you may be overly sensitive of the criticism of others, and under sensitive to how your words---however well intentioned---may affect others. The idea of speaking the truth to benefit others is a great idea, though the execution is not so easy. In psychology there is the concept of INTENT and IMPACT. Any of us may have an intent in our communication with someone else, though our impact on them may be completely different. Their response to what we said is FEEDBACK, and we have to step back emotionally to be able to evaluate it, rather than just taking offense. I realize that is not always easy. We still can practice that.
Having been a Temple cook for many years, I would never offer what might be taken as a criticism to a cook. Usually the only time I heard from devotees, was if there were some problem. I never received any compliments. You saw it as informing them, they took it as criticism. Every interaction with others depends on the strength of your relationship, and what we say has to take into consideration what is going on in their life and service. As a cook and pujari, I was always over taxed to the max, and perhaps not in my most favorable mood for what might be thought of as criticism.
A few general comments:
Now while others have rightly said that we shouldn't look to others for validation, that doesn't mean we shouldn't offer genuine appreciation for others service---which I think devotees do here. We have the ideal and the real. Most everyone I know blossoms with appreciation---not flattery just to be nice, but genuine appreciation. In the past devotees have been famous for their failure to give praise and appreciation, in the name of being detached or something like that. I think we have to be careful about holding up how we operate, and expecting that just by sharing this others will get it. (I don't think I am doing that, and just offering you up some theory) We should just "get over the past", though that is not so easy for many people.
In my opinion we all have to do a lot of constant self examination, and think about how our personal conditioning and "issues" may be impacting our relationship with others. Our relationship with devotees is essential, like a laboratory of loving dealings. How to really help one another in all ways? If we have affection for one another, then on the strength of our relationship, we may be able to point out each others shortcomings and how they are impacting our relationship and/or our service to Shri Guru and Gaura-Nityananda. Everything should relate to going deeper in our service, and pure chanting.
at your feet,
Kad
Vamsidhari Dasa - October 5, 2008 9:31 pm
Wow, i was just wondering since when Sadhu Sanga became "Let's-help-Syamsundar-to-find-himself Sanga?" 
Citta Hari Dasa - October 6, 2008 1:26 am
Wow, i was just wondering since when Sadhu Sanga became "Let's-help-Syamsundar-to-find-himself Sanga?"
Oooooooooooh, snap!!
Karnamrita Das - October 6, 2008 1:41 am
Wow, i was just wondering since when Sadhu Sanga became "Let's-help-Syamsundar-to-find-himself Sanga?"
Or in general we might frame the question as to where "horizontal" development, being a balanced human being, getting along with others, etc, fits into to the discussion of the philosophy of KC or "vertical" cultivation. Admittedly this may not be the ideal place to discuss personal issues, though it is the only forum for Swamis' disciples to come together regularly. I am a bit surprised that you would bring this point up being a therapist, though perhaps since you do this all day, you want to focus exclusively on direct KC topics, getting a break for peoples personal issues. I'm sure we are all here for that reason: to go deeper into Krishna katha. Yet in my mind Syams' questions poses that very question of whether this is a place to discuss relationship problems, and if not, what venue is there?
I am sure you know very well how peoples imperfect conditioning negatively impact their relationships, and I have seen the same dynamics working amongst devotees. So how to address those types of concerns in the context of KC? Although getting along is generally easier in this virtual world, if we were living together in an ashram or had to deal regularly in a Temple community, working on smooth communication and understanding would be very important to enable a spirit of cooperation for the Deity and Guru Seva.
I only commented on this discussion because it seemed there was a high level of misunderstanding going on.
Citta Hari Dasa - October 6, 2008 5:04 pm
Or in general we might frame the question as to where "horizontal" development, being a balanced human being, getting along with others, etc, fits into to the discussion of the philosophy of KC or "vertical" cultivation. Admittedly this may not be the ideal place to discuss personal issues, though it is the only forum for Swamis' disciples to come together regularly. I am a bit surprised that you would bring this point up being a therapist, though perhaps since you do this all day, you want to focus exclusively on direct KC topics, getting a break for peoples personal issues. I'm sure we are all here for that reason: to go deeper into Krishna katha. Yet in my mind Syams' questions poses that very question of whether this is a place to discuss relationship problems, and if not, what venue is there?
I am sure you know very well how peoples imperfect conditioning negatively impact their relationships, and I have seen the same dynamics working amongst devotees. So how to address those types of concerns in the context of KC? Although getting along is generally easier in this virtual world, if we were living together in an ashram or had to deal regularly in a Temple community, working on smooth communication and understanding would be very important to enable a spirit of cooperation for the Deity and Guru Seva.
I only commented on this discussion because it seemed there was a high level of misunderstanding going on.
I think Tattva-viveka is not the place for dealing with personal or relationship issues. As we all know the forum was created by Guru Maharaja for the purpose of his students to get a better understanding of Mahaprabhu's philosophy and teachings, not to help them deal with their stuff. He has said that what he has to offer is Krsna consciousness, and that if we need help in our horizontal development that is not his area of expertise and we must then seek out help accordingly. Since this forum is a guru-created venue with a specific focus, i.e., vertical growth, I think our horizontal growth can be much more effectively addressed elsewhere. What those venues are is up to each person to figure out.
Syama Gopala Dasa - October 6, 2008 9:05 pm
Don't blame Karnamrta.
I think Tattva-viveka is not the place for dealing with personal or relationship issues. As we all know the forum was created by Guru Maharaja for the purpose of his students to get a better understanding of Mahaprabhu's philosophy and teachings, not to help them deal with their stuff. He has said that what he has to offer is Krsna consciousness, and that if we need help in our horizontal development that is not his area of expertise and we must then seek out help accordingly. Since this forum is a guru-created venue with a specific focus, i.e., vertical growth, I think our horizontal growth can be much more effectively addressed elsewhere. What those venues are is up to each person to figure out.
Gaura-Vijaya Das - October 6, 2008 9:50 pm
Don't blame Karnamrta.
yes karnamrta is just answering the query of syamasundar so I don't see how he is wrong here.
Madan Gopal Das - October 7, 2008 12:04 am
Wow, there really seems to be a lot of misunderstanding here. I did not pick up any blaming of Karnamrta by Citta Hari, rather Citta was commenting on the nature of the thread and further, the nature of the forum; which Karnam brought up - vertical vs. horizontal. I think the flow of this thread only underscores Citta's point; horizontal development, in this case communication in relationships, cannot be done well in an internet forum and is not the purpose we pursue here. This thread was started based on several misunderstandings of cyber communication. I feel like I can work out some misunderstanding with Shyam via some more personal communication (email, phone call, or face to face) because I know him, understand some of his personality from meeting him, etc. When two or more people meet in person and have communication "issues", they can work it out between themselves, they can work it out with some assistance from a qualified helper, or they can avoid the issue and just decide to not like each other. On a forum such as this I think we are called more to see beyond the personality issues to find what we're here for; tattva viveka. It is my opinion that we will run ourselves in circles and total distraction of interesting discussion of tattva by trying to have group communication therapy on a message board.
Swami - October 7, 2008 1:03 am
It is my opinion that we will run ourselves in circles and total distraction of interesting discussion of tattva by trying to have group communication therapy on a message board.
Mine too.
Babhru Das - October 7, 2008 1:19 am
Good sense from Dr. Gopal. I think such matters can be taken care of off the board, among those affected.
Syama Gopala Dasa - October 7, 2008 5:31 pm
Fully agree.