Quote
"This also becomes evident from the contention of Prabhupada, "in transcendance, notoriousness has the same absolute connotation as eminence." It is not surprising therefore to know that ISKON holds that "the yogi should be able when the occasion arises to reject even moral behavior to do what is necessary to serve Krishna." "A devotee in other words, can commit any evil because no action done for Krishna has any bad reaction."

Quote


The Deity Gopinatha is notorious as a thief because He once stole condensed milk for the sake of His beloved devotee. In the transcendental relationship between the Absolute Godhead and His devotees, both the devotees and God Himself take the risk of serving each other at all costs. In transcendence, therefore, notoriousness has the same absolute connotation as eminence.

The story behind Gopinatha's being notorious as Ksiracora ("the milk thief") was long before narrated to Lord Caitanya by His spiritual master, Isvara Puri, and the Lord wanted to repeat the story to His followers.

Quote

Now, Arjuna was asked by Krsna to kill, but that was an extraordinary circumstance. Since the Supreme Personality of Godhead was personally present on the battlefield, all who died there in His presence were liberated from the material world. So there is no question of violence. Krsna gave them the greatest gift.

Nonviolence, as also humility, tolerance, etc., is not meant to be taken as an isolated aspect of moral behavior. It is one facet of a transcendental process of purification from material contamination. Part of that material contamination is the mode of goodness; so the yogi should be able, when the occasion arises, to reject even moral behavior and do what is necessary to serve Krsna.

Devotees are usually vegetarian, but if they must eat a dog to stay alive to serve Krsna, then they will eat a dog. It is not recommended to eat dogs, however, and similarly it is not recommended to be violent in a bodily sense.

Actually it is possible to become completely liberated from attachment to sense gratification only after the point of being elevated to the material mode of goodness. Suta Gosvami says in the Srimad-Bhagavatam, "As soon as loving service is irrevocably fixed in one's heart, the effects of nature's modes of passion and ignorance, such as lust, desire and hankering, disappear from one's heart, and one becomes fixed in the mode of goodness which makes him completely happy.

Quote

Srila Prabhupada clarifies this in The Bhagavad-gita As It Is: "To pursue the transcendental path is more or less to declare war on illusory energy."
Krsna is supremely destructive. In His form as material time, He is killing millions of bodies daily. But that is all part of our desire; and part of His subsequent plan is to show us that real enjoyment is enjoyment according to His desire, not according to our plan for satisfying a miserable material body. So in the end, Krsna's activities are all nonviolent because His only purpose is to give peace. (The only place where there is no war is in the spiritual sky, where Krsna has His abode.)
We must declare war on maya, or illusion, and on her influence over our activities, if we are to become purified. Once having attained Krsna consciousness, however, there is no more war. The pure devotee is not touched by maya. He sees how the material nature is serving Krsna nicely deluding the fallen souls again and again until they slowly learn to take shelter of the lotus feet of Krsna and become freed from maya's laws.

Our present separation from Krsna is not caused by innocence or lack of knowledge. We are aware of what we're doing. We envy Krsna. We hate Him and the thought of bowing down to Him; we want to be Krsna. We are rebellious criminals; this world is a jailhouse where we continually riot, living like dogs and hogs.
To get out, we have to listen to the spiritual master, who is sometimes compared to a king visiting a penitentiary he is not subject to its laws. But many people are trying to get out the wrong way.

Quote

‘”Lo telech rachil b'ameicha” 'Do not go around spreading slander among your people, but also don't stand idly by when your neighbor's life is at stake; I am ADONAI.’” –Le 19:16.

Looking down on fellow brothers and sisters is in all manners wrong. All are of the same fabric and originate from The One Infinite, Perfect Source. The idea that His children are different in any way, lacking or wealthy, is the sole cause for all division and disharmony. God is the only judge, it is useless and time consuming for a human to try and assume His role. He does not condemn, but corrects, guiding toward an enlightened future." ~ Rabbi Israel Meir Kagan, DOB 2/6/1838 in Zhetel, Poland

Quote

The Chofetz Chaim tells us, “Come see, my brother, how carefully one has to weigh each word [before speaking negatively] when someone has wronged him, because when he speaks he stands in great danger of transgressing the sin of loshon hora (gossip). Clearly, it is regarding this that we can say, ‘Death and life are in the power of the tongue’ (Mishlei 18:21). If one will not consider carefully before he speaks exactly how he is going to present the matter, he will surely stumble, G-d forbid. For at that moment, his anger will get the better of him and it will be impossible to exercise proper caution.”

When someone, without proper forethought, tells others how someone has hurt him or is planning to hurt him, his emotions quickly override his intentions...

Once one has decided exactly what he wants to say, he should carefully examine his presentation in the light of the seven requirements of constructive speech. He should analyze each thought. Does it contain anything inflammatory? Are there any exaggerations? One should consider possible questions which the listener might ask and how to respond. One should be prepared to respond quickly, without stumbling, for once the speaker begins to stumble, it will be hard for him to regain control of the conversation—and that is when loshon hora can begin. Furthermore, if the speaker will not prepare himself well, the listener may elicit information that should not be offered.

If these precautions seem excessive, imagine the precautions a person would take if he were working in a lab where deadly viruses are studied. That is how situations involving potential loshon hora should be treated, for as Shlomo HaMelech declared: “Death and life are in the power of the tongue.”

Quote

However, there are some situations where we are not just permitted but are obligated to speak negatively of others. Usually (if not always), this is done in the defense of innocent victims and, as you say, is based on the second half of that same verse, “…do not stand idly by the blood of your neighbor.” If Bill is a kleptomaniac, do I have the right to share this information with Tony if there’s no conceivable chance Bill will ever get near Tony’s stuff? No. But if Tony is thinking of inviting Bill to stay for the weekend, I have the responsibility to tell Tony, in order to protect him from loss.

There are many situations where this principle could come into play. The most common is when being asked about a person for a job reference or for a shidduch (a prospective match). We don’t have free rein to go around badmouthing people, but there may be pieces of information that a potential boss or spouse needs to have in order to make an informed decision. You know that Bob made his MBA in PhotoShop? If you’re his reference, you must disclose that to the interviewer. You’re aware that Susie has a husband and six kids in another state? Her fiancé deserves to know that.

There are, however, conditions to sharing the negative that must be met:

(1) You have to know that the information you’re disclosing is true; you may not embellish or exaggerate;

(2) Sharing the information has to be the only way to protect the endangered party, or to accomplish some other necessary constructive purpose;

(3) The speaker’s intention must sincerely be to protect the endangered party or to accomplish the constructive goal. (If one is sharing information about a person he doesn’t like, it can be really hard to be objective about this!);

(4) The consequences of sharing the information cannot cause undue harm to the subject (and certainly not to anyone else!). If reporting that Joe took home a ball point pen from work will get him fired, the consequences are not commensurate with the offense and one might not be permitted to disclose that information.

Of course, there’s harm and then there’s harm. “Joe took home a ball point pen from work” is very different from “Joe is hiding in the alley with a machete, waiting to chop your head off.” The immediacy of the latter is clearly much more urgent. If you feel that a situation is truly dangerous, appropriate steps must be taken. That doesn’t necessarily make it easy.

Let’s take religion out of it for a minute and use the strictly-hypothetical example of someone questioning whether or not they should call Child Protective Services on a friend or neighbor. On the one hand, you’re hesitant to call – it will destroy your relationship, you’re afraid someone’s kids might get taken away unnecessarily, etc. On the other hand, you feel compelled to call – if you don’t and something bad happens, you’ll never forgive yourself! You’ll note how this scenario is a dilemma even before we add anyone’s religious sensibilities into the equation!

If you had a calling-CPS dilemma, you might describe the situation to a friend who’s a social worker and ask for guidance. They’re the expert and you value their insight into the matter. Similarly, if you have a non-urgent disclosure dilemma ...the best course of action is to ask an expert... There are times when we may or must disclose negative information but, when we’re involved, we’re not always the best judges of those situations.

However, as we said earlier, saving someone in imminent danger takes priority. In a case of clear and present danger, appropriate protective action must be taken immediately...and we don’t hesitate to reveal negative information. If your friend’s babysitter is a convicted sex offender, say something. Your neighbor’s daughter has been set up with a known date rapist? Share that information. This is even true in spiritual matters. For example, if your cousin’s new spiritual advisor is a [cult member], tell him.

We usually keep negative information to ourselves but sometimes we must reveal it. Just as we learn when to call an ambulance (for a heart attack, not for a splinter), we have to use good judgment to evaluate when to keep quiet, when to speak up, and when to ask for guidance."

Rabbi Jack Abramowitz, JITC Educational Correspondent