Author Archives: Nityananda Chandra Granger

Leaders of the Evangelical Immigration Table will meet on Capitol Hill Wednesday to continue praying for and advocating for a broad immigration reform. In other words, they want a package that goes beyond simply securing the border.

This group has a long list of supporters. They represent evangelicals from both conservative and liberal traditions. And they have a set of principles that guide their work. You can read all of this at this link:

This group also gathers regularly and continues to press for reform. Their outreach includes meeting with legislators, reaching out to media and generally lifting up Capitol Hill in prayer. They also are attracting press because evangelicals were not as outspoken for change back in 2007, when the last immigration debate took place. Here is an article from The Atlantic that details their work.

But this debate is about to get into some brutal politicking. The GOP-led House is clearly not interested in going as far as the Democratic-led Senate in crafting a comprehensive plan. For example, most House Republicans do not appear very eager to grant illegal immigrants a chance to earn citizenship or some kind of legal status.

Yet evangelicals could be the trump card. The Atlantic piece described the role of evangelicals this way, quoting Ali Noorani of the pro-reform National Immigration Forum: “Pro-reform groups view these efforts as essential. ‘I don’t think a House vote happens without evangelicals,’ Noorani said. ‘The only reason it happens is because evangelicals are engaged.’”

So, my question is this: How hard should evangelicals — or any other religious groups in favor of immigration reform — push for change?

This debate is not likely to move ahead in the House without a great deal of arm-twisting. But is that the role for people of faith?

NITYANANDA CHANDRA DAS, minister of ISKCON (International Society for Krishna Consciousness), Dallas 

Every spiritual minded person must stand strong against activities that are in opposition to spiritual principles. However those who have deeper spiritual realizations may have a different battle than those of lesser realizations. For example, one party may be fighting against the symptoms of ignorance and the other party may fight against the root cause of it. Both are doing great work according to their realization, however the latter group’s action will have a deeper, more profound effect. For the cause may have many symptoms, which people can address separately, but if you cure the cause the symptoms disappear.

The ultimate cause of difficulties and injustice is that people misidentify themselves with their temporal material body rather than seeing that the soul/consciousness is separate, transcendent, and eternally related to God with love.

To see all responses of the TEXAS Faith panel click here.

Whatever happened to shame? It wasn’t that long ago that a politician tainted by a sex scandal or caught cheating on a spouse was finished in public life. But a couple of political comebacks this year illustrate how things have changed. Two years after he resigned from Congress for sending a sexually suggestive picture of himself to a follower on Twitter, Anthony Weiner is in contention for mayor of New York City. Eliot Spitzer abandoned the state’s governor’s race in 2008 in disgrace following reports he frequented high-end prostitutes. He could be the city’s next controller.

And they’re not alone. Mark Sanford was elected to Congress in South Carolina after admitting an affair in 2009. David Vitter overcame scandal when his name showed up on the customer list of the “D.C. Madam” in 1999, winning reelection to the Senate and is at the top of the GOP list to be the next governor of Louisiana. And Bill Clinton, despite the White House intern scandal, is more popular than ever.

What’s happened? What does it say about the culture that behavior once considered inappropriate or indecent, doesn’t pack the same punch it once did. Are we more understanding, more willing to forgive? Or have we just become indifferent? In politics and religion, no narrative is more powerful than the backslider redeemed. But there’s another tradition in politics: we hold the leaders we elect to office to certain standards and believe that failure to meet those standards has consequences.

Here’s this week’s question: What do recent political comebacks by scandal-tarred politicians say about our culture? Have we become more tolerant and forgiving or grown more callous and indifferent

NITYANANDA CHANDRA DAS, minister of ISKCON (International Society for Krishna Consciousness), Dallas 

In the past, duty was of importance. Duty means acting in such a way that is helpful to everyone. By the influence of time, people have become more and more selfish and therefore concepts such as duty cannot even be conceived of by the common man. Selfish life has now become the norm.

The ancient Mahābhārata describes that in the days of yore, political leaders would gladly give up their life rather than go against their vows. For this reason and others the citizens experienced a parental relationship between the leaders and themselves. A genuine feeling of care.

The more we connect with Krishna, God (God has many names), the more we feel satisfied. Thus the propensity of selfishness gradually recedes. This connection can easily by established by calling on God’s holy names such as Hare Krishna.

A leader with selfless standards inspires their citizens with the greatness of selfless love.

To see all responses of the TEXAS Faith panel click here.

Whatever happened to shame? It wasn’t that long ago that a politician tainted by a sex scandal or caught cheating on a spouse was finished in public life. But a couple of political comebacks this year illustrate how things have changed. Two years after he resigned from Congress for sending a sexually suggestive picture of himself to a follower on Twitter, Anthony Weiner is in contention for mayor of New York City. Eliot Spitzer abandoned the state’s governor’s race in 2008 in disgrace following reports he frequented high-end prostitutes. He could be the city’s next controller.

And they’re not alone. Mark Sanford was elected to Congress in South Carolina after admitting an affair in 2009. David Vitter overcame scandal when his name showed up on the customer list of the “D.C. Madam” in 1999, winning reelection to the Senate and is at the top of the GOP list to be the next governor of Louisiana. And Bill Clinton, despite the White House intern scandal, is more popular than ever.

What’s happened? What does it say about the culture that behavior once considered inappropriate or indecent, doesn’t pack the same punch it once did. Are we more understanding, more willing to forgive? Or have we just become indifferent? In politics and religion, no narrative is more powerful than the backslider redeemed. But there’s another tradition in politics: we hold the leaders we elect to office to certain standards and believe that failure to meet those standards has consequences.

Here’s this week’s question: What do recent political comebacks by scandal-tarred politicians say about our culture? Have we become more tolerant and forgiving or grown more callous and indifferent

NITYANANDA CHANDRA DAS, minister of ISKCON (International Society for Krishna Consciousness), Dallas 

In the past, duty was of importance. Duty means acting in such a way that is helpful to everyone. By the influence of time, people have become more and more selfish and therefore concepts such as duty cannot even be conceived of by the common man. Selfish life has now become the norm.

The ancient Mahābhārata describes that in the days of yore, political leaders would gladly give up their life rather than go against their vows. For this reason and others the citizens experienced a parental relationship between the leaders and themselves. A genuine feeling of care.

The more we connect with Krishna, God (God has many names), the more we feel satisfied. Thus the propensity of selfishness gradually recedes. This connection can easily by established by calling on God’s holy names such as Hare Krishna.

A leader with selfless standards inspires their citizens with the greatness of selfless love.

To see all responses of the TEXAS Faith panel click here.

Yesterday we ventured down to the Houston Ratha Yatra Festival.   About 50 devotees went down from Dallas in a tour bus and several others drove as well.  The festival was held at Discovery Green, an attractive and very popular park in downtown Houston.  This park draws big crowds and many of the general public happily dove into the singing and dancing .

At the Houston temple we got to have darshan on the beautiful forms of Sri Sri Radha Nila Madhava and see Their magnificent upcoming temple.   We also got to play at the Krishna playground. 

Yesterday we ventured down to the Houston Ratha Yatra Festival.   About 50 devotees went down from Dallas in a tour bus and several others drove as well.  The festival was held at Discovery Green, an attractive and very popular park in downtown Houston.  This park draws big crowds and many of the general public happily dove into the singing and dancing .

At the Houston temple we got to have darshan on the beautiful forms of Sri Sri Radha Nila Madhava and see Their magnificent upcoming temple.   We also got to play at the Krishna playground. 

Last week’s week’s filibuster in the Texas Senate stopped an abortion bill and catapulted Sen. Wendy Davis to national political attention. Television stories beamed pictures of hundreds of cheering, jeering protesters who shut down Senate business while Republican leaders struggled to regain control. In the end, the bill that would ban abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy failed and Gov. Rick Perry called the Legislature back into another special session on Monday.

The protesters – criticized as a mob by some and hailed as heroes by others – were very much a part of the story, if only because it’s rare democratic institutions in this country are brought to a halt by people chanting from the balcony in a legislative chamber. The episode has been the focus of heated debate in terms of politics and ideology. Set aside which side you’re on. What if the roles were reversed. When is it ethical and moral to shut down a institution of government?

The question: Was it moral to shut down the Senate? Not whether it was politically successful or tactically expedient or even whether your side prevailed or not, but was it moral?

NITYANANDA CHANDRA DAS, minister of ISKCON (International Society for Krishna Consciousness), Dallas 

First of all, it needs to be pointed out that morality is a metaphysical concept. Morality cannot be established by science.

On the relative platform there was no moral issue with citizens using deceptive means when they are ruled by a deceptive government. It would not be the same if modern government were led by those who are not self interested.

On the absolute platform there would be a moral issue of disturbing government processes. Provided that government actually worked for the metaphysical rights of all of living beings without prejudice. Whether they are Black, White, animal, or even in the fetus stage. But that is not the case.

The metaphysical notion of morality can only be fully established when one understands the metaphysical. As long as one cannot see the soul there will be victims. Because of seeing African Americans as soulless beings we had slavery. Because seeing women as half souled beings we have exploitation. Because of seeing animals as soulless beings we have billions unnecessarily painfully slaughtered. And because of seeing the helpless unborn children as soulless beings their own mothers are being endorsed for murder.

To see all responses of the TEXAS Faith panel click here.

Last week’s week’s filibuster in the Texas Senate stopped an abortion bill and catapulted Sen. Wendy Davis to national political attention. Television stories beamed pictures of hundreds of cheering, jeering protesters who shut down Senate business while Republican leaders struggled to regain control. In the end, the bill that would ban abortions after 20 weeks of pregnancy failed and Gov. Rick Perry called the Legislature back into another special session on Monday.

The protesters – criticized as a mob by some and hailed as heroes by others – were very much a part of the story, if only because it’s rare democratic institutions in this country are brought to a halt by people chanting from the balcony in a legislative chamber. The episode has been the focus of heated debate in terms of politics and ideology. Set aside which side you’re on. What if the roles were reversed. When is it ethical and moral to shut down a institution of government?

The question: Was it moral to shut down the Senate? Not whether it was politically successful or tactically expedient or even whether your side prevailed or not, but was it moral?

NITYANANDA CHANDRA DAS, minister of ISKCON (International Society for Krishna Consciousness), Dallas 

First of all, it needs to be pointed out that morality is a metaphysical concept. Morality cannot be established by science.

On the relative platform there was no moral issue with citizens using deceptive means when they are ruled by a deceptive government. It would not be the same if modern government were led by those who are not self interested.

On the absolute platform there would be a moral issue of disturbing government processes. Provided that government actually worked for the metaphysical rights of all of living beings without prejudice. Whether they are Black, White, animal, or even in the fetus stage. But that is not the case.

The metaphysical notion of morality can only be fully established when one understands the metaphysical. As long as one cannot see the soul there will be victims. Because of seeing African Americans as soulless beings we had slavery. Because seeing women as half souled beings we have exploitation. Because of seeing animals as soulless beings we have billions unnecessarily painfully slaughtered. And because of seeing the helpless unborn children as soulless beings their own mothers are being endorsed for murder.

To see all responses of the TEXAS Faith panel click here.

Let’s return to an issue that we dealt with back in April, when I asked you all a question about belief. The question dealt with what it means that we may believe differently about different things. You can read answers at this link.

A couple of weeks ago, Keven Willey, the Morning News‘ editorial page editor, passed along this essay from Stanford anthropologist T. M. Luhrmann, author of “When God Talks Back: Understanding the American Evangelical Relationship with God.” As you will see from this link as well, Luhrmann gets into several lines of thought about belief and how we arrive at it religious convictions.

What I would like you to comment upon is this part of her New York Times essay:

“The role of belief in religion is greatly overstated, as anthropologists have long known. In 1912, Emile Durkheim, one of the founders of modern social science, argued that religion arose as a way for social groups to experience themselves as groups. He thought that when people experienced themselves in social groups, they felt bigger than themselves, better, more alive — and that they identified that aliveness as something supernatural. Religious ideas arose to make some sense of this experience of being part of something greater. Durkheim thought that belief was more like a flag than a philosophical position: You don’t go to church because you believe in God; rather you believe in God because you go to church.”

Applying that thinking to religion in general, not just churches, here is the question for the week:

Is belief overrated?

NITYANANDA CHANDRA DAS, minister of ISKCON (International Society for Krishna Consciousness), Dallas 

Belief is not only generally overrated, it is most often fallacious, because it is based on the material mind.

To say it is overrated is to say that it has some value. Blind faith and blind doubt are to be avoided in spiritual life.

(Atheist state that the theist’s belief in God is as reasonable as believing in a flying spaghetti monster)

The saintly do not believe in God, they experience and know God. Just as the educated do not believe that one plus one is two, the experience and know it.

Faith means a hope in an anticipated outcome. There is nothing that we do in life that does not involve faith. We perform our daily actions on the premise of some expected hope. However faith can be solidified by experiencing the applied hypothesis’ desired result. One needs only a small amount of belief that the experiment is worth one’s endeavor.

Information regarding non-material subjects can only come from a non-material source. The material mind, its senses, and the instruments of such senses, will never be able to validate, disprove, or discover something beyond matter.

The initial belief needed to apply the experiment of spiritual life grows from association of those are expert in the practice. Experiencing the expert’s difference in consciousness and hearing the sound philosophical principles they teach, attracts one to take up the experiment of spiritual life.

If the experiment is valid, then the result will be experienced. When the result

is experienced, the hypothesis is verified.

Therefore what Durkheim stated can be said to be true, as many religious adherents fanatically believe something yet there is no change away from exploitative consciousness.

The last consideration is that spiritual information can only remain intact if it is passed down in a teacher to disciple lineage. Just as the science of medicine cannot be preserved in books alone.

To see all responses of the TEXAS Faith panel click here.

Let’s return to an issue that we dealt with back in April, when I asked you all a question about belief. The question dealt with what it means that we may believe differently about different things. You can read answers at this link.

A couple of weeks ago, Keven Willey, the Morning News‘ editorial page editor, passed along this essay from Stanford anthropologist T. M. Luhrmann, author of “When God Talks Back: Understanding the American Evangelical Relationship with God.” As you will see from this link as well, Luhrmann gets into several lines of thought about belief and how we arrive at it religious convictions.

What I would like you to comment upon is this part of her New York Times essay:

“The role of belief in religion is greatly overstated, as anthropologists have long known. In 1912, Emile Durkheim, one of the founders of modern social science, argued that religion arose as a way for social groups to experience themselves as groups. He thought that when people experienced themselves in social groups, they felt bigger than themselves, better, more alive — and that they identified that aliveness as something supernatural. Religious ideas arose to make some sense of this experience of being part of something greater. Durkheim thought that belief was more like a flag than a philosophical position: You don’t go to church because you believe in God; rather you believe in God because you go to church.”

Applying that thinking to religion in general, not just churches, here is the question for the week:

Is belief overrated?

NITYANANDA CHANDRA DAS, minister of ISKCON (International Society for Krishna Consciousness), Dallas 

Belief is not only generally overrated, it is most often fallacious, because it is based on the material mind.

To say it is overrated is to say that it has some value. Blind faith and blind doubt are to be avoided in spiritual life.

(Atheist state that the theist’s belief in God is as reasonable as believing in a flying spaghetti monster)

The saintly do not believe in God, they experience and know God. Just as the educated do not believe that one plus one is two, the experience and know it.

Faith means a hope in an anticipated outcome. There is nothing that we do in life that does not involve faith. We perform our daily actions on the premise of some expected hope. However faith can be solidified by experiencing the applied hypothesis’ desired result. One needs only a small amount of belief that the experiment is worth one’s endeavor.

Information regarding non-material subjects can only come from a non-material source. The material mind, its senses, and the instruments of such senses, will never be able to validate, disprove, or discover something beyond matter.

The initial belief needed to apply the experiment of spiritual life grows from association of those are expert in the practice. Experiencing the expert’s difference in consciousness and hearing the sound philosophical principles they teach, attracts one to take up the experiment of spiritual life.

If the experiment is valid, then the result will be experienced. When the result

is experienced, the hypothesis is verified.

Therefore what Durkheim stated can be said to be true, as many religious adherents fanatically believe something yet there is no change away from exploitative consciousness.

The last consideration is that spiritual information can only remain intact if it is passed down in a teacher to disciple lineage. Just as the science of medicine cannot be preserved in books alone.

To see all responses of the TEXAS Faith panel click here.

Naomi Schaefer Riley has a new book out with the title Til Faith Do Us Part: How Interfaith Marriage is Transforming America. You can read about that book at this link and then this link.

Interestingly, Riley, a former Wall Street Journal editor who has written extensively about religion and culture, notes that 45 percent of all U.S. marriages in the last decade were between people of different faiths. Naturally, we may look at that as a sign of greater acceptance and tolerance, which a broad society needs to remain dynamic and growing.

But Riley also reports that marrying across religious lines may be very difficult for the couples involved. Their deeply-held differences may eventually become a problem, especially when it comes to raising children.

There are a number of ways we could go with this question, including why dating couples may spend more time worrying about political differences than religious distinctions. Feel free to chime in on that aspect, if you like. But the main point I would like you to consider is this:

Interfaith marriages may help the broader society, but are they good for the couples?

NITYANANDA CHANDRA DAS, minister of ISKCON (International Society for Krishna Consciousness), Dallas 

Generally no. Couples who have different life goals will find conflicts. However, there are two circumstances where one would expect less conflict:

First, for many people religion is like a label. Their life, their habits, and their goals may not really differ from others. So no real conflict there.

Second, for the few who are spiritually mature, they may be able to appreciate their partner’s devotion to the same Lord who is known by different names. So for such people there may no conflicts.

To see all responses of the TEXAS Faith panel click here.

Naomi Schaefer Riley has a new book out with the title Til Faith Do Us Part: How Interfaith Marriage is Transforming America. You can read about that book at this link and then this link.

Interestingly, Riley, a former Wall Street Journal editor who has written extensively about religion and culture, notes that 45 percent of all U.S. marriages in the last decade were between people of different faiths. Naturally, we may look at that as a sign of greater acceptance and tolerance, which a broad society needs to remain dynamic and growing.

But Riley also reports that marrying across religious lines may be very difficult for the couples involved. Their deeply-held differences may eventually become a problem, especially when it comes to raising children.

There are a number of ways we could go with this question, including why dating couples may spend more time worrying about political differences than religious distinctions. Feel free to chime in on that aspect, if you like. But the main point I would like you to consider is this:

Interfaith marriages may help the broader society, but are they good for the couples?

NITYANANDA CHANDRA DAS, minister of ISKCON (International Society for Krishna Consciousness), Dallas 

Generally no. Couples who have different life goals will find conflicts. However, there are two circumstances where one would expect less conflict:

First, for many people religion is like a label. Their life, their habits, and their goals may not really differ from others. So no real conflict there.

Second, for the few who are spiritually mature, they may be able to appreciate their partner’s devotion to the same Lord who is known by different names. So for such people there may no conflicts.

To see all responses of the TEXAS Faith panel click here.

What does it mean to be an American today?

This question is more than an academic one. It goes to the heart of the immigration debate that is growing hot in the Senate this month.

The Senate is debating a reform bill that could come up for a final vote by July 1. A part of that legislation focuses on institutions that help immigrants become part of American society. I recently wrote a column about this aspect of the bill, which you can read at this link.

Tamar Jacoby of Immigration Works USA has written extensively about the concept of assimilation. As she has pointed out, what it means to be an American today is vastly different from what it meant in, say, the 1950s.

Almost a decade ago, Jacoby wrote this:

“We may need a new definition, or new understanding of assimilation — a definition that makes sense today, in an era of globalization, the Internet, identity politics, niche advertising and a TV dial that offers a choice among a hundred or more different channels.
“Even as they live out the melting pot myth, today’s immigrants and their children are searching for new ways to think and talk about it, and together, they and the rest of the nation face the challenge of updating the traditional ideal.”

(For more of her essay, see this link)

I would say we still are searching for an update for that ideal, including how immigrants become part of the mainstream without losing their ethnic identity.

This is obviously hard work. As our society becomes more diverse, America develops a broader and richer culture. At the same time, nations depend upon some common core of values, beliefs and identity to hang together. And that requires some kind of definition of what it means to be an American.

So, how would you define being an American today?

NITYANANDA CHANDRA DAS, minister of ISKCON (International Society for Krishna Consciousness), Dallas 

The Motto on every dollar bill is “In God We Trust”

The highest ideal would be that Americans embody this motto by becoming a nation of God-conscious people. For without God Consciousness, or Krishna Consciousness, society blindly wanders after the temporary.

Those who chase after temporary gains may sometimes be lawful or may sometimes be unlawful and exploitative. However in either case such hungry souls are never satisfied. They consume, they use, they exploit, they justify, and teach others to do the same.

Only those who are invested in the eternal can be satisfied and thus be peaceful. That society whose very example is of internal peace, are the ones fit to hold the influential position in the world that is known as America.

To see all responses of the TEXAS Faith panel click here.

What does it mean to be an American today?

This question is more than an academic one. It goes to the heart of the immigration debate that is growing hot in the Senate this month.

The Senate is debating a reform bill that could come up for a final vote by July 1. A part of that legislation focuses on institutions that help immigrants become part of American society. I recently wrote a column about this aspect of the bill, which you can read at this link.

Tamar Jacoby of Immigration Works USA has written extensively about the concept of assimilation. As she has pointed out, what it means to be an American today is vastly different from what it meant in, say, the 1950s.

Almost a decade ago, Jacoby wrote this:

“We may need a new definition, or new understanding of assimilation — a definition that makes sense today, in an era of globalization, the Internet, identity politics, niche advertising and a TV dial that offers a choice among a hundred or more different channels.
“Even as they live out the melting pot myth, today’s immigrants and their children are searching for new ways to think and talk about it, and together, they and the rest of the nation face the challenge of updating the traditional ideal.”

(For more of her essay, see this link)

I would say we still are searching for an update for that ideal, including how immigrants become part of the mainstream without losing their ethnic identity.

This is obviously hard work. As our society becomes more diverse, America develops a broader and richer culture. At the same time, nations depend upon some common core of values, beliefs and identity to hang together. And that requires some kind of definition of what it means to be an American.

So, how would you define being an American today?

NITYANANDA CHANDRA DAS, minister of ISKCON (International Society for Krishna Consciousness), Dallas 

The Motto on every dollar bill is “In God We Trust”

The highest ideal would be that Americans embody this motto by becoming a nation of God-conscious people. For without God Consciousness, or Krishna Consciousness, society blindly wanders after the temporary.

Those who chase after temporary gains may sometimes be lawful or may sometimes be unlawful and exploitative. However in either case such hungry souls are never satisfied. They consume, they use, they exploit, they justify, and teach others to do the same.

Only those who are invested in the eternal can be satisfied and thus be peaceful. That society whose very example is of internal peace, are the ones fit to hold the influential position in the world that is known as America.

To see all responses of the TEXAS Faith panel click here.

Should we Americans boycott sweatshops in places like Bangladesh?

That’s the question many people are facing after a horrific fire in a Bangladesh sweatshop recently killed more than 1,100 workers. But it isn’t always an easy one to answer.

As New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof explains in this link, workers in some underdeveloped nations see a sweatshop as preferable to conditions they otherwise might work in. Here’s how Kristof put it in a 2009 column:

“I’m glad that many Americans are repulsed by the idea of importing products made by barely paid, barely legal workers in dangerous factories. Yet sweatshops are only a symptom of poverty, not a cause, and banning them closes off one route out of poverty. At a time of tremendous economic distress and protectionist pressures, there’s a special danger that tighter labor standards will be used as an excuse to curb trade.”

In essence, sweatshop employees may be making a rational decision to work in places most Americans would not set foot in. The demand for their goods leads to jobs that pay better than in other parts of a developing nation’s economy. And in better conditions, as hard as that might be to imagine

On the other hand, our demand for their goods is why sweatshops exist. And while those facilities may be better than others in a country, they also can be exploitative and even deadly.

I am also including a link to an interview that ran in The Dallas Morning News Points section. The Q&A is with Texas Tech professor Benjamin Powell, author of the forthcoming Sweatshops: Improving Lives and Economic Growth. He explains why he thinks Americans should not boycott sweatshops.

What do you think?

NITYANANDA CHANDRA DAS, minister of ISKCON (International Society for Krishna Consciousness), Dallas 

The exploitation is a symptom of a greater spiritual problem. Sharing on a practical level how one can get rid of the exploitive nature through spiritual realization is more productive than fighting the symptoms. Don’t blow on the boil, operate!

To see all responses of the TEXAS Faith panel click here.

Should we Americans boycott sweatshops in places like Bangladesh?

That’s the question many people are facing after a horrific fire in a Bangladesh sweatshop recently killed more than 1,100 workers. But it isn’t always an easy one to answer.

As New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof explains in this link, workers in some underdeveloped nations see a sweatshop as preferable to conditions they otherwise might work in. Here’s how Kristof put it in a 2009 column:

“I’m glad that many Americans are repulsed by the idea of importing products made by barely paid, barely legal workers in dangerous factories. Yet sweatshops are only a symptom of poverty, not a cause, and banning them closes off one route out of poverty. At a time of tremendous economic distress and protectionist pressures, there’s a special danger that tighter labor standards will be used as an excuse to curb trade.”

In essence, sweatshop employees may be making a rational decision to work in places most Americans would not set foot in. The demand for their goods leads to jobs that pay better than in other parts of a developing nation’s economy. And in better conditions, as hard as that might be to imagine

On the other hand, our demand for their goods is why sweatshops exist. And while those facilities may be better than others in a country, they also can be exploitative and even deadly.

I am also including a link to an interview that ran in The Dallas Morning News Points section. The Q&A is with Texas Tech professor Benjamin Powell, author of the forthcoming Sweatshops: Improving Lives and Economic Growth. He explains why he thinks Americans should not boycott sweatshops.

What do you think?

NITYANANDA CHANDRA DAS, minister of ISKCON (International Society for Krishna Consciousness), Dallas 

The exploitation is a symptom of a greater spiritual problem. Sharing on a practical level how one can get rid of the exploitive nature through spiritual realization is more productive than fighting the symptoms. Don’t blow on the boil, operate!

To see all responses of the TEXAS Faith panel click here.

SB 07.09.18 Sacinandana Swami
Sum: Prahlada expresses his deep faith in the chanting the holy names of the Lord.
Two minds sets for the this festival.

1. Let me see what is happening.
2. Or How can use the days to the best of my abilities how can I go deeper.
As a neutral observer or an active participant.

Faith III
Faith is the ground on which we walk.
No faith no results.
Two things in the beginning. Place. A resting place

Viśvanātha Cakravartī Thakura says it is sastra & process
Śaraṇām gacah
Faith and surrender
Faith in the upaya, the sadhana, by which you reach your upeya, the goal.
Gold nuggets in Alaska. Journey made on faith, so much austerities.
As one attempts to find gold whether he is successful or not.

Jīva Goswami
Virya strength comes from faith, no wobbly knees
smriti remembrance, clarity
Prajña realization of Krishna.
Samadhi Nama samadhi

“Sanga is the birth place of faith”
Therapeutic efforts.
Prajña nuggets prospector

Story of Sumanasena Maharaja.
Nārada Muni came, why depressed?
Yes help me. Are youu Bahir Mukha  or Antar Mukha.
You body will have you smelly body go quickly down a river.
Only thing permanent, Bhakti.  When Kali Yuga come, Gauranga.
Chanting Pancha Tattva
But he wanted to see Lord Caitanya
Then one night a dream
A golden flash in a dark night.

QUESTIONS
Question 1: the king he had no faith. He got he highest associating. Faith vs association.
Answer: One make offenses & seal heart off
Or
Left me follow. – Viśvanātha Cakravartī Thakura
Did not seal off. Open his heart.

Question 2: difference between intellectually understand. In the mind Vs  movement of heart.
Answer: How do we know the difference.
When we get the fruit.
A matti? Will arise. Leaning towards goal. Encouraged good, discouraged then did not work. Not to validated in our maya. No prajalpa

SB 07.09.18 Sacinandana Swami
Sum: Prahlada expresses his deep faith in the chanting the holy names of the Lord.
Two minds sets for the this festival.

1. Let me see what is happening.
2. Or How can use the days to the best of my abilities how can I go deeper.
As a neutral observer or an active participant.

Faith III
Faith is the ground on which we walk.
No faith no results.
Two things in the beginning. Place. A resting place

Viśvanātha Cakravartī Thakura says it is sastra & process
Śaraṇām gacah
Faith and surrender
Faith in the upaya, the sadhana, by which you reach your upeya, the goal.
Gold nuggets in Alaska. Journey made on faith, so much austerities.
As one attempts to find gold whether he is successful or not.

Jīva Goswami
Virya strength comes from faith, no wobbly knees
smriti remembrance, clarity
Prajña realization of Krishna.
Samadhi Nama samadhi

“Sanga is the birth place of faith”
Therapeutic efforts.
Prajña nuggets prospector

Story of Sumanasena Maharaja.
Nārada Muni came, why depressed?
Yes help me. Are youu Bahir Mukha  or Antar Mukha.
You body will have you smelly body go quickly down a river.
Only thing permanent, Bhakti.  When Kali Yuga come, Gauranga.
Chanting Pancha Tattva
But he wanted to see Lord Caitanya
Then one night a dream
A golden flash in a dark night.

QUESTIONS
Question 1: the king he had no faith. He got he highest associating. Faith vs association.
Answer: One make offenses & seal heart off
Or
Left me follow. – Viśvanātha Cakravartī Thakura
Did not seal off. Open his heart.

Question 2: difference between intellectually understand. In the mind Vs  movement of heart.
Answer: How do we know the difference.
When we get the fruit.
A matti? Will arise. Leaning towards goal. Encouraged good, discouraged then did not work. Not to validated in our maya. No prajalpa

Dhanudhara Swami – 10 sentences about Sadhu Sanga

Nityananda Prabhu – liberate the 3 worlds, ABCDE,

Gaura Sakti – anarthas dissolving,

Mother Chandravali – amazing, I thought I had to go to India.

Braja Mandala Priya – only shelter, holy name,

Purushartha Prabhu – the bass player – saintly persons all leading kirtan, book distribution. Now a new wave, hours and hours of kirtan festivals.

Sudevi Sundari – my husbands name sake.  Thanking all the helpers. Thanking Indradyumna Swami.

Mother Kosa Rupa – last year I thought that this was the best festival. This weekend was especially wonderful, I got to meet so many wonderful devotees, new devotees will chant all the way Back to Godhead.

Edhaniaswabhava – giving thanks

Devarsi – no anxiety, just come and chant.

Syamala Kisori – so many great devotees helped us to focus on the only name.

Lila suka – top most favorite gathering, even though I am from Alachua

Nityānanda Chandra Dās – dreams of Krishna

Kapil Patel – reflecting on Kirtans, this helped me chant deeper.

Lalita Madhavi – thank Maharaja and others

Sundara – cry out to the Holy Name,

Mother Guru Bhakti – so much better than last year. New people were blown away. What people are looking for.

List of thanks.

Kirtaniyas

cooks

Transportation

VIS Very Important Sadhus hospitality

Child care

Registration

Deity Sevaka

Clean up crew

Flight arrangement

CYJ Helpers

Organizers

Indradyumna Swami – thanks Caturatma.

My heart of hearts is bringing Krishna to the public.  I haven’t been to a temple in months due travel festivals.  But I feel that this festival is like a reward.

Giriraj Swami

Memorial Day weekend there is a Prabhupada Festival in Los Angeles.

“I hope you can change your plans.” – Indradyumna Swami

Prabhupada’s Sanskrit editor, Pradyumna Prabhu said a Striking statement.

Śrīla Prabhupāda took the same principles. That most acharyas take it for personal advancement to the advancement of the world.

Purport of this verse refers to Cetah Darpana marjanam.

It shows his inner mood.  Śrīla Prabhupāda is telling us what is going on inside him. He wants the leaders of the world to take it. So Revolutionary

Reforming the world.   

Tamal Krishna Goswami had a hernia operation. There was no phone.

America phone story with Śrīla Prabhupāda “Is this the time to inquire”

They decided to the hospital. Śrīla Prabhupāda was so concerned about Tamal Krishna Goswami.

When he was wheeled out, he said. “I just I had a dream. You were reporting to previous acharyas on your preaching mission, you said on Earth they have:

No good qualities.

No knowledge

No background

But one good quality

What ever I tell them they do.”

That is the what Śrīla Prabhupāda is saying in this purport.

Did not care even if they were not Indian.

Smartas say. Greatest disservice by giving sacred thread.

What is more powerful Paapa or Naaama. .?

Tree of Lord Caitanya

Rupa and Sanantan, the best of all.

They spread Krishna Consciousness in pascyamdesha.

How does Kaviraja Goswami describe such residents,no good behavior or well educated and etc

And trained them

When Śrīla Prabhupāda returned to India he went to a Sadhu Mela on the sands of Chowpatty

Long winded dry talks by impersonalist.

Śrīla Prabhupāda instead did kirtan

Malati then got everyone dancing.

“I don’t wish to speak much” He said.

But these Americans. Sad achar

They had never seen white sadhus. Nor such enthusiasm.

One man said, “”I get people to chant Hare Krishna for health, can we join forces?”

“No! We serve Naama”

Our own worse enemy like the panic of a drowning man is his worse enemy