Dhana-da wrote:
1.In ISKCON dialogue is the important part of a spiritual life. In my case more than year especially, I do not communicate with anybody from ISKCON and I do not go to a temple. Thus I feel quite harmoniously. How you consider dialogue in a view of the personal experience?
It depends on who I am speaking with and for what reason. I do not like dialogue that is a contest. I do not enjoy having to prove my brain is better than yours, which is what arguing often means, for it is simply a waste of time. If someone wants to speak about a topic and thinks what I have to add to their life is worthwhile, then I like to have a discussion. I do not mind discussions which are in the format of presentations, where I have my say and others have their say. Hearing from others is interesting if what they have to say is something I would like to understand. I see no reason to speak with others to convince them of something they are not interested to understand. I dislike having conflicts with ISKCON people and try to avoid as much as I can getting into arguments with them or having to prove something to them. I do not see value in it. They can do what they like as they like. Outside of the rare times when I can input something valuable (according to their judgment of it) into what devotees are trying to do, I only get involved with ISKCON when devotees say something foolish about me or about what I am doing or saying. I have to say something about it as I cannot allow them to insult me like that. Beyond that, they will do what they wish. I do not shy from saying what I think they are doing wrong (or right! But then again, this is just my opinion) or how they could do it better since that is good for everyone. But there is a risk one takes while getting involved with people who do not allow themselves to question the fundamental axioms of their belief.
2. me the certain judgement ...90 % of members of religious systems-strange. A question such... Such people are drawn in the organization or they become such gradually? And all can people as a whole have mental and moral deviations? It not irony. It would be desirable to understand.
I cannot say as I do not know that many persons who are in other religious systems. I know a lot of ISKCON people, some Gaudiya people, and a few Christians. Not all are strange or weird, but some are. Those who had an inclination to disempower themselves without questioning continue to do so in whatever movement they are in. They become more intense when they think they have the absolute truth and this makes their defects more apparent. Those who did not have such inclinations before they joined a group can manifest certain of the symptoms of the more fanatic after some time, but ultimately they have a humanness about them which is their redeeming quality.
One cannot generalize about people, but one can make certain generalizations about the systems that people accept for these systems regulate what the people do and think to a large degree. Any critique of the persons would have to include a critique of what they are following for the two are inseparable. But all share the quality of having left a bit of their capacity to doubt and question whether what they are doing is right or the best for them when they signed into their philosophical value structure. The difficulty is when such persons act towards others according to what they think they are supposed to do rather than what they personally would do were they allowed (either by others or by themselves) to choose what values are right or wrong for them, or rather, are best for them at each moment in time. Since one chooses to limit oneself when one accepts such systems, it is therefore their own free borne of their needs that determines what they will follow and what not. But limitations imposed by guilt or fear ("I will go to hell if I do not do things in the 'right' way" and so on) our choices narrow dangerously and it is in this state of limitation that some persons become difficult to associate with. This is why most religious groups only associate within their own circles, for they make assumptions about each other according to their shared values which makes them comfortable with others like them for some time until they find out otherwise (an often shocking experience). This makes it tough for the rest of the world to see religious groupies as people to be taken seriously or to be accepted as friends. That does not mean it is bad to have inbred associations, simply one should recognize what is going on and deal with it. Those who do not limit themselves like this use this awareness of the self-imposed limiting mechanism of limitation to properly respond to those who are so limited.
3.Whether it was necessary to you to read book Eckhart Tolle-"The Power of Now" ?It seems to me very deep analysis of how our mentality operates. Very inspiring way will meet the soul!
I have not read it neither do I have it. The title sounds great for there is only power in the now. The past has power only so long as we hold onto it and the future has power only so long as we desire it to be a certain way.
