True story of the Crying Bull

 
The Bull Who Cried:

Knowing it was about to be slaughtered, a bull in Hong Kong did what many people fail to realize or are skeptic about when it comes to animals – he showed emotion.As reported by “Weekly World News”, a group of workers walked a bull to a packaging factory. They were about to slaughter him to make steaks and beef stews. When they were close to the front door of the slaughter house, the sorrowful bull suddenly stopped going forward and knelt down on his two front legs. The bull… was all in tears.

How did he know he was going to get killed before he entered the slaughter house? He is even smarter than people.

Mr. Shiu, a butcher recalled, “When I saw this kind of so-called “stupid” animal sobbing and with his eyes in fear and sorrow, I started trembling.” “I called the rest over to see. They were just as surprised. We kept pushing the bull forward, but he just didn’t want to move and sat there crying.”

Billy Fong, owner of the packaging factory said, “People thought animals didn’t cry like human beings. However that bull really sobbed like a baby.” At that time, more than ten strong men witnessed the scene and they were all touched. Those who were responsible for slaughtering even felt more touched and teared as well.

Other workers working at the same slaughter house also came to see the crying bull. It was all packed with people. They were all shock by this scene. Three of them said they would never forget this crying bull when they slaughter other animals.

With both man and animal crying, everyone knew that nobody could kill the bull. The problem was, what should they do with him? In the end, they raised funds to buy this crying bull and sent him to a temple, where the kind monks would take care of him for life.

After the workers had made a decision, a miracle happened. A worker said, “When we promised this bull that we will not kill him, he started moving and followed us.”

How did he understand people’s words?

Mr. Shiu said “Believe it or not? This is real although it sounds unbelievable.” No doubt, this bull changed these butchers’ lives.

Hopefully this story has in turn changed yours.

Two main qualities of the crying bull:

1. Determination (not move an inch toward the slaughterhouse)

2. Feeling totally Helpless and crying out (just as we should always take shelter of the Supreme Lord)

What do we learn from this bull?:

We will all eventually be finished by the weapon of Time. We must therefore cry out and take shelter of the Holy Name of Lord. 

A Place from Which to Grow

 

Human life is meant for growth. Although physical growth stops before several decades, emotional, psychological, intellectual and spiritual growth can and should continue throughout every person’s life.  In order to grow properly however, we need a proper place. Place means not only a physical place such as household, but proper relationships with others and proper activity. All three of these are essential aspects for optimal growth. This paper addresses the question of people’s place in modern society and contrasts it with place in the varnashrama culture and the different results in society and people’s lives.

A potted plant offers a very good example of having a proper place. The pot is the physical place where the plant lives, but beyond the pot alone the plant also requires a proper environment in terms of soil conditions, atmosphere, temperature, water, and sunlight. When these conditions are minimally met the plant can live, but when they are optimal the plant can thrive.

Likewise we are meant to thrive, not just live. We need a properly clean house and environment where we can care for and give rest to our body, along with nourishing food. This alone will allow us to survive, but not thrive for as it is said, man does not live by bread alone. More than mere survival we all desire to have interesting and meaningful activity appropriate to our nature. In the modern world we generally call this “work.” Ideally that work will be a bit challenging so that we may make use of our faculties of understanding, ability, and reasoning. The challenge helps us to grow. If the work is too easy we will be bored and unengaged, and if the work is beyond our capacity or ability we will be overworked and stressed.

And we also need a place in relationship to others. These relationships must be appropriate to our respective stages of life and theirs. Thus we will have different relationships with those senior to us than we have with our peers or with our juniors. Having a proper place according these criteria will help us to be happy and balanced individuals. Like the potted plant without water, or sunshine, if any of these aspects of life are meager or missing, then life can run the gamut from drudgery to torture, conditions under which growth of any kind is difficult or impossible.

Place is so important in society that the war at Kurukshetra was fought to give the Pandavas a proper place. The war could have been avoided if Duryodhana would have allowed the Pandavas one village each, but he denied the Pandavas any land whatsoever, not enough for a single needle! The proper dharma of a ksatriya requires them to provide a place to others in his village or kingdom, and this is such a necessary and essential requirement that a ksatriya is forbidden any other engagement, even in times of emergency. The Supreme Lord Sri Krishna came to establish the principles of religion (paritranaya sadhunam) and to this end He admonished Arjuna to fight the battle to properly establish the .

Place in Ancient Cultures

Historically one’s place in society was both fixed and rigid. In both Western (Feudal society) and Eastern culture place was generally assigned according to one’s birth. Males generally did what their fathers did and females naturally became mothers and caretakers. You would become an aristocrat if your parents were aristocrats, and if they were peasants you would remain a peasant. The world was fairly well fixed at those times and there was no upward or even lateral mobility for the vast majority of people. In one sense this was bad and in another it was good. Bad in that if you had a different nature than your father you were unable to be fulfilled, but it was good in that a strong social contract existed. Every person had a definite place in society with well understood rules of behavior, knowing what they could expect of others and the expectations of themselves. In this sense nobody was alone in the world. Whatever their fate might have been, they were joined together with others of their kind with whom they would share their miseries and joys. For further insights into these types of culture and the differences before and after the introduction of Western influences read for example, Bhakti Vikasa Swami’s “Glimpses of Traditional Indian Life,” or Helena Norberg-Hodge’s “Ancient Futures: Learning from Ladakh.”

Finding Our Place in Today’s World

Modern society is just the opposite—we are not given a place in society—we have to find it, beginning even in childhood. Parents, pressed for time, find it much easier to do everything themselves rather than taking time to teach their children and guide them in building their skills, so that many have never washed a floor or even a dish by the time they leave home. Children lack a place even within their family. They are told to “go play,” or they entertain themselves with television and electronic games. Although they do not have an active role in life they are somehow suddenly expected to fit right into the adult world upon graduation from school. However they often cannot and it is taking increasing years for them to find their place in the adult world. Today most people do not marry until they are almost thirty years of age, indicating that this is when they are able to find their place in society; whereas just two generations back they would marry and begin their family lives just after high school.

Going back to the years when society was more formally structured and there was a subsistence economy children had a part in adult society and could take responsibility at much younger ages. For example, David Farragut (later Admiral Farragut) was a mere 12 years old during the War of 1812 when he was given his first command. Those who have visited India have undoubtedly witnessed children of very young ages taking responsibility to manage the shop of their father, the care of their siblings and even carry on entrepreneurial activities without any adult supervision. When I see such things I try to imagine any American boy or girl of the same age doing similar things. I cannot. Anthropologist Joseph Campbell also observed that many young men have great difficulty finding their place in modern society, to which he attributed the attraction of gang membership, and later involvement in the mafia, whose “codes of honor” do provide a place along with attendant duties and relationships. He suggested that until adult society finds some way to provide a place for young men they will naturally continue their involvement in gangs.

For most people their work provides their place and their orientation to the world—a way to think of themselves and their relationships with others. It provides the income with which they pay for their home, another aspect of place. Work is therefore an essential element of finding one’s place. Although we now have the freedom to choose our work, to be and achieve anything to the limit of our ability, this is a challenge that many people struggle with. Despite the many books to help people find the right job or occupation, despite the many career counselors and job placement companies, some 80 percent of workers are still unsatisfied with the work they do. This indicates that their work is not according to their nature, their guna and karma. Being improperly situated they can make a mess of things, especially in positions of leadership or management, and it is almost certain that in such situations they cannot grow.

The Consequences of Loss of Place

The sense of place, the psychological support that comes from it, and the result of losing it was studied by the pioneer sociologist, Emile Durkheim. Observing the rapid changes in the social and economic conditions of society during the industrialization of the late 19^th century, he found that in rapidly changing environments people became unsure of what was expected of them, and what they could or should expect from others. These expectations, known as social norms, are the basic rules of the culture. Durkheim observed that without having a place where they know the norms to guide them, people become dissatisfied, purposeless and alienated which leads to conflicts, crime, suicide and other social deviancies. He called this condition anomie, and wrote about it in his books “The Division of Labor in Society” and “Suicide.”

One of the great tragedies of the modern era is the lack of place for the hundreds of millions, even billions, of “unnecessary” and “unwanted” people—the unemployed, the homeless, street urchins, and slum-dwellers. Modern society affords them little if any place to give them even the simple honor of living. Who gets a place in modern society? Increasingly only those who can earn a profit for others, or provide money for others, that is, those who have employable skills for which there is a market. However, the need for employable people is diminishing with a diminishing economy. In the1930s some 60 percent of Americans lived on farms and could provide for themselves. Over the next 50 years 2,000 farms every week went under or were sold, their occupants moving to the cities. Today those remaining on farms number less than 5 percent of the population, and the other 95 percent require jobs that produce money in order to get their food. Because of the loss of manufacturing jobs to southeast Asia and service jobs to India and elsewhere there are simply not enough jobs available. The official unemployment figures are in double digits, but the real figure counting all people who would like to work if they could is more than 20% in America. That figure is similar throughout the world.

Worldwide more than 50 percent of the people now live in cities and the prediction is that by the year 2020, 90 percent of the people in large metropolitan areas will be slum-dwellers. This is almost half of the entire global population! By definition slum dwellers do not have sufficient earnings with which to properly maintain themselves. Either they are wage slaves that are forced to work long hours at wages insufficient to live on, or they have no regular job. In either case they have no place that allows them to grow. Wage slaves generally have no money and no time for anything else that might contribute to their growth. And no job means no place, no place means anomie, which means increased theft, crime, drug use, prostitution and suicide. This is what is meant by nirvishesha and sunnyavadi, the voidism and impersonalism of the Kali-yuga. What can we expect when half of humanity has no place? It is a house of horror. This is seen as such a problem that there is serious discussion at high levels of “culling” the human race to what is “needed,” and eliminating the “useless eaters.” (This is actually not new. The ideas of Thomas Malthus and eugenics have been around for several hundred years). These problems could and should be fixed by society’s leader but the policies of government only seem to make them worse.

Finding One’s Place in ISKCON

In the early days of Srila Prabhupada’s movement it was easy to find one’s place in the society. Indeed, this was one of the features that made ISKCON so attractive. Expansion was rapid and young people, or anybody actually, could easily find a place to make their contribution, whatever that was. Having a place and the opportunity to contribute to the effort gave the devotees great joy that happiness was expressed on their faces in kirtan, on harinam and in their service.

However, in ensuing years the social structure of the movement changed. As the devotees married and began families there was no longer suitable facility within the temples, and they were forced to live outside. To pay for that, most, but not all, had to find their work outside the movement as well. This generally resulted in not having close proximity to the temples, which meant less association and less service. The result was predictable—unable to maintain their active involvement in the movement these devotees no longer had a place. They became the congregation: attending the Sunday program, kirtan and taking prasadam, but that is not enough to have a place and a feeling of contributing to the mission, and a feeling of belonging. This trend continued through the 80s and ISKCON became like any other church, with majority of devotees participating as the congregation. In the process ISKCON ceased to be a counter-culture and had gone mainstream where life was compartmentalized—work in this arena, social life here, family life there, and spiritual life over there...

Today the vast majority of devotees have never lived in a temple, and never had the opportunity to engage cent per cent in temple service, harinam and book distribution. This means that many of them have never had the privilege to experience what it means to find their place exclusively in Krishna consciousness. It is my experience, having been both part of the congregation and on the inside, that spiritual progress is much easier and life is much happier on the inside. We also observe that the devotees who are the steadiest and strongest in their devotional service are those who have full-time devotional service that provides for their maintenance, giving them a place in all respects: the sannyasis, the leaders, the temple presidents, pujaris, cooks, those working with translation and book production and distribution, brahmacaris, etc. And even among these only a few are fortunate enough to have a place inside the movement their entire lives. Unfortunately there is limited engagement in the temple activities and many are forced to find a place in the dominant culture. For them Krishna consciousness becomes another of several other aspects of their life and may not be the most influential.

Place in Varnashrama Culture

The Vedic culture is created and arranged by what may be called “higher authority.” That is, the Supreme Lord has not only given us this world for our activities, but has also given instruction how we can live here happily, having meaningful work, and growing throughout our lives. Through the hierarchy of this world He has given these principles of living in the Codes of Dharma, or dharma shastra. The codes of dharma divide society into four working classes called varnas, and four stages of life for spiritual purposes called ashrama. Each of these has their specific obligations as well as defined relationships with the other sections. This scientifically arranged society is designed to provide everyone a place that will facilitate lifelong growth in all spheres of life.

In the varnashrama culture occupation is not simply a means of obtaining as much money as possible, nor is it merely a haphazard job taken simply for survival. The entire concept of varna is that work must be appropriate to one’s nature, or guna and karma. Lord Krishna emphatically states in the Bhagavad-gita that one must work according to their own nature and that it is dangerous to do the work of others. (3.35, 18.47) Why dangerous? Because by doing inappropriate work and being improperly situated we cannot fulfill the purpose of human life, which is to grow.

There are four varnas—brahmana, ksatriya, vaisya and sudra, or the priests and intellectuals, the political leaders, the organizers and producers and the workers. All occupations in every human culture can be broadly classified into one of these four. In the modern culture the relationship between these four is determined by money almost exclusively, with corresponding neglect of dharma, but in the varnashrama culture those relationships are prescribed by the codes of dharma.

In regard to place the ksatriya has a very important role—he is tasked with giving everyone a proper place in society—both in terms of housing and work. For his exercise in caring for the citizens as if they were his own children the ksatriya is considered the representative of the Lord. Not only is it his duty to see that there is no unemployment in the varnashrama culture, but everyone must also have work according to their nature. Hence besides no unemployment there is not even any underemployment. In such a system job dissatisfaction would approach zero percent.

Neither is there any homelessness in the varnashrama culture. Everyone has a place to live, a place to work, and proper relationships with others. This not only includes all human beings, but all species of life, especially including the bulls and cows, domesticated animals who provide for the needs of sustainable power and good nutrition.

Creating a Place for Everyone

We often repeat what one astrologer said of Srila Prabhupada, that he created a house in which the whole world can live. This is another way of saying that Srila Prabhupada arranged for everyone to have a place from which they can grow. Everyone means not only the devotees of his Movement, but all people of the world.

In his last days Srila Prabhupada spoke to Kuladri about this:

Kuladri das:  “I was the temple president at New Vrindavan for so many years, and Prabhupada had a vision for a pilgrimage site in North America and a farm community. So he never emphasized book distribution to us. He explained to me, especially at the end when I was with him in Bombay and in Vrindavan just before he left, that the second half of his movement would be dramatically different than the first half. The emergency tactics that he used to distribute books and give young people sannyasa and open as many temples as possible would end. He wanted places like New Vrindavan to establish the culture of Krishna consciousness with colleges, grihastha lifestyle, all of the things to demonstrate the philosophy that he was so careful to present in his books. So he right up to the end he was telling me that the farm communities were so important for the second half and the vision would be very different than when his movement got started in the Western world.”

In my way of understanding this statement, Srila Prabhupada was preparing us to lead a great social movement based on his teachings to give a place to the millions of people that modern society discards like so much rubbish. This is where I see the varnashrama culture playing a significant role. If the world’s unfortunate people are to be saved it cannot be that we simply help them find a place again in the same culture that spit them out. There must be something different that will give them hope to have a meaningful life, and a place from which to grow. That something different is the sustainable village life where every person has a proper place to live, proper engagement, and proper relationships.

On various occasions Srila Prabhupada instructed that the householders should all live on the farms. Why? Because the village can provide a proper place for everyone to live in the context of Krishna consciousness. This is due to the fact that agriculture can provide an economic alternative to the city job in an environment that supports Krishna consciousness, frees the devotee from having to associate with non-devotees, and helps them to become free from rajas and tamo-guna and established in goodness—an important step to rising to suddha-sattva, the transcendental plane of existence. Moreover, the village offers many different types of engagement and it is much easier to find work that is according to one’s guna and karma. Although this instruction of Srila Prabhupada has been neglected, the advantages of the village life remain. Devotees who are struggling in the cities both with earning sufficient money and in their spiritual lives may find it helpful to find a place in the village.

The Result of Giving the Bulls a Place

Not only does the village provide the devotee with the necessities of life, but also provides the bull with much needed engagement. The bull also is given a place in the spiritual culture, but he has also been rejected from the atheistic, materialistic, dominant culture, and replaced by oil-consuming machines that wreak havoc on the environment and our sanity. At our Gitagrad community in Lithuania, New Gaudadesha, Bhakta Petras has taken up the care and engagement of the bulls. I asked him what he had learned while he was training them. His reply was profound, indicating that all of human society will benefit greatly by again giving the bull a place in society. Bhakta Petras replied that from the bull he has learned:

1. They do not learn quickly; one must go slow as they learn slowly day-by-day
2. Therefore great patience is required. A local man told Petras early on that he would have to be patient, but that man himself did not even know how patient one must be. Researching Srila Prabhupada’s book Petras found that that patience is the most important quality and the mother of all other virtues.
3. As you are training them, they are also teaching you.
4. Because they are very regulated in their actions, they force you to be regulated in yours.
5. The bull teaches you sattva; he is an animal of a sattva nature, and he will not go to rajas—you cannot make him get passionate. Instead, you yourself must come to sattva if you want to work with him—he will thus force you to come to sattva.
6. Working with the bull may be compared to working with children or women, in that, if you get angry with them they will refuse to cooperate with you. If you are calm and reasonable they will work with you.
7. Rajo-guna (increasing speed) and tamo-guna (negative reinforcement—hitting them) does not work with these animals.
8. Petras recently read from very old records how if a person had been drinking and the bulls smell that they will refuse to work with the man. Indeed, they will even try to gore him. They don’t want to associate with such people in the lower modes of nature.
9. The bulls and man are a team; they work together. Unlike driving a car or tractor, where the driver simply controls the machine. With the bulls one must learn to cooperate and work as a team.
10. There is mutual dependency between the bulls and the teamster; the bulls depend on the man to feed and care for them, and the man depends on the bulls to provide necessary power for accomplishing things.

Petras’ comments gave me many realizations. The first is that Petras himself is not just training the bulls, but they are also training him. By his effort he is receiving valuable personal training in sattvic qualities, conditioning him to sattva-guna. Such training is difficult to come by in a world that is driven by passion and ignorance. Srila Prabhupada has taught us that we must come to the platform of sattva before we can progress to suddha-sattva, or the transcendental plane. How valuable are the cow and the bull to help us stay fixed in sattva-guna.

I also realized how our dependence on the cow and the bull teaches the entire human society sattva, and keeps them in sattva. Having abandoned the bull we have lost our tether to sattva and are the entire human race is drifting inexorably to rajas and tamo-guna, with the attendant terrible consequences that we are now beginning to reap, economically, socially, politically, etc.

Next I realized that the reason that Petras has had so many wonderful realizations because he made room for, and a commitment to Dharma (the bulls) in his life. He gave the bulls a place in his world. Giving them a place means giving them a duty, and that is the birth of yajna (yajna is born of prescribed duties). Only interested in what they can take from others, modern man does not realize what the cow and bull have to give to us. Neither does modern man understand sattva-guna or the tremendous benefits that accrue to society as a whole by giving these animals their place in human society. Indeed, that is the case with all living beings in this world since, Om purnam ada purnam idam, this world is perfectly equipped as a complete whole and every thing and every living thing has its place.

Modern man instead thinks he can do better by killing the bull and exploiting the cow for milk and the earth for oil. There is a very old bull at New Gaudadesh, Nandi. The neighbors ask why we bother to keep an old bull. They tell us we should kill him. Such an impoverished mentality of selfishness denying this living entity his place does not allow them to recognize the value of the bull, dharma, or reap the benefits of associating with these wonderful animals.

We Are Missing Parts of the Social Machine

All devotees, but the brahmanas and ksatriyas in particular are meant to be the leaders of society meaning that they are concerned with the welfare of others, particularly those who are suffering:

çiväya lokasya bhaväya bhütaye ya uttama-çloka-paräyaëä janäù

jivanti nätmärtham asau paräçrayaà mumoca nirvidya kutaù kalevaram

Those who are devoted to the cause of the Personality of Godhead live only for the welfare, development and happiness of others. They do not live for any selfish interest. (S.B. 1.4.12)

To this end Srila Prabhupada had wanted his followers, engaging what he taught them, to correct the defects of modern civilization by establishing daiva-varnashrama, or the divine culture of Krishna consciousness. This daiva-varnashrama culture can give everyone a place to grow and so doing cure all of the ills of today’s society.

What is greatly needed now are men of ksatriya and vaisya natures to take their proper place in the spiritual society, for they are essential to make the whole scheme work. The ksatriyas and vaisyas must perform their dharma as given by Sri Krishna in the Gita and dharma shastra. For the ksatriya this means they must establish and take care of a village and provide a place for the praja and insure that they have work according to their nature. And the vaisyas are needed to organize the practical activity of day-to-day life to see that people have food to eat, clothes to wear and the other necessities of life. This is their dharma. Where are they? Why are they not doing their duty? Unless and until these qualified men take up their dharma this Krishna consciousness movement will not be able to show the way out of the darkness of the modern materialistic way of living. People today are becoming increasingly confused by the economic and political changes and are looking for leadership. The needed concepts are given in Srila Prabhupada’s teachings, but unless we put them to practice they remain nothing more than the study of an earlier grand culture that has seen its day and remains lost in a bygone era, and this Krishna Consciousness movement will have missed its calling of showing the way out of the darkness of nescience in this time of great adversity.

I hope that this has helped you appreciate what place means in the life of any person and the necessity of establishing the divine varnashrama culture to once again provide a place for everyone. I encourage all devotees to cooperate together to create healing communities for the benefit of all the devotees, as well as all the people of this world.

The "Boys" Are Beginning to do Useful Work

I just received this video from Krishna Katha up at New Gaudadesha, our Gitagrad community in Lithuania. The two oxen, Balai and Kana (affectionate names of Balarama and Krishna) have grown up and can pull heavier loads. They have recently been fitted with a new yoke (which has to be changed as they grow and their necks become thicker) and a new wagon has been made for them to pull. Petras, their teamster, is steady as a rock, and continues to work with them daily. I've also heard that Petras is looking for a wife. I am certain that he will make a great husband who will care for his family with the same steady determination that he has demonstrated in working with the bulls. Ladies?

More Milk News...

 Genetically modified cows produce 'human' milk

The insanity is increasing beyond all conceivable proportions. Now the mad scientists are trying to improve on nature by making cows produce human milk. Where will all of this lead? Eventually, we know the result will be 'human beings' dumber than animals. Well, let me rephrase that since a case can be made that we have already met that benchmark. The conclusion is described in the 12th canto of the Srimad Bhagavatam:

By the time the age of Kali ends, the bodies of all creatures will be greatly reduced in size, and the religious principles of followers of varnashrama will be ruined. The path of the Vedas will be completely forgotten in human society, and so-called religion will be mostly atheistic. The kings will mostly be thieves, the occupations of men will be stealing, lying and needless violence, and all the social classes will be reduced to the lowest level of sudras. Cows will be like goats, spiritual hermitages will be no different from mundane houses, and family ties will extend no further than the immediate bonds of marriage. Most plants and herbs will be tiny, and all trees will appear like dwarf sami trees. Clouds will be full of lightning, homes will be devoid of piety, and all human beings will have become like asses. At that time, the Supreme Personality of Godhead will appear on the earth. Acting with the power of pure spiritual goodness, He will rescue eternal religion. 12.2.12-16

Other parts of the predictions of Kali have already come to pass. These include such things as:

In Kali-yuga, wealth alone will be considered the sign of a man's good birth, proper behavior and fine qualities. And law and justice will be applied only on the basis of one's power. Men and women will live together merely because of superficial attraction, and success in business will depend on deceit. Womanliness and manliness will be judged according to one's expertise in sex, and a man will be known as a brähmaëa just by his wearing a thread. A person's spiritual position will be ascertained merely according to external symbols, and on that same basis people will change from one spiritual order to the next. A person's propriety will be seriously questioned if he does not earn a good living. And one who is very clever at juggling words will be considered a learned scholar. A person will be judged unholy if he does not have money, and hypocrisy will be accepted as virtue.

Marriage will be arranged simply by verbal agreement, and a person will think he is fit to appear in public if he has merely taken a bath. A sacred place will be taken to consist of no more than a reservoir of water located at a distance, and beauty will be thought to depend on one's hairstyle. Filling the belly will become the goal of life, and one who is audacious will be accepted as truthful.

He who can maintain a family will be regarded as an expert man, and the principles of religion will be observed only for the sake of reputation. As the earth thus becomes crowded with a corrupt population, whoever among any of the social classes shows himself to be the strongest will gain political power. Losing their wives and properties to such avaricious and merciless rulers, who will behave no better than ordinary thieves, the citizens will flee to the mountains and forests. Harassed by famine and excessive taxes, people will resort to eating leaves, roots, flesh, wild honey, fruits, flowers and seeds. Struck by drought, they will become completely ruined. The citizens will suffer greatly from cold, wind, heat, rain and snow. They will be further tormented by quarrels, hunger, thirst, disease and severe anxiety. 12.2.2-10

These conditions are being brought about by the extreme influence of tamo-guna, the quality of ignorance that destroys intelligence for doing good. Instead, people act against their own best interests thinking that they are somehow improving their situation. Genetic modification of life forms will create much havoc in this world. When questioned about dinosaurs Srila Prabhupada replied that that is not what we have come from but what we are going to! In the 70s we couldn't quite understand that statement, but now, 40 years later, we can see that this genetic modification can indeed create dinosaurs. In fact, some scientists have tried to extract genetic material from dinosaur remains, and it should not surprise us if indeed they attempt to create T-rex as a zoo attraction, and we have a live version of Jurassic Park. Such people are referred to as mayayaparita-jnana in the Bhagavad-gita -- those whose knowledge is stolen by illusion.

These foolish people, acting under the influence of atheism, think that this world was created by chance combination of chemicals and that they can improve on it. In fact it was created by the most intelligent scientist, the Supreme Lord Himself. He created the cow and the bull to be the helpers of human beings, and He has made cows milk as the most precious substance to develop the brain tissues giving superior intelligence. Now they want to destroy what the Lord has given and with that they begin to destroy their own future. Such is the nature of Kali-yuga. These people need to be stopped before they irrevocably destroy everything good about this planet. The best way to raise the society out of the depths of tamo-guna is by harinam sankirtan, or chanting the holy names of the Supreme Lord. There is actually no solution without a spiritual revolution.

Here is more of the GM milk story:

Scientists have created genetically modified cattle that produce "human" milk in a bid to make cows' milk more nutritious.

The scientists have successfully introduced human genes into 300 dairy cows to produce milk with the same properties as human breast milk.

Human milk contains high quantities of key nutrients that can help to boost the immune system of babies and reduce the risk of infections.

The scientists behind the research believe milk from herds of genetically modified cows could provide an alternative to human breast milk and formula milk for babies, which is often criticised as being an inferior substitute.

They hope genetically modified dairy products from herds of similar cows could be sold in supermarkets. The research has the backing of a major biotechnology company.

The work is likely to inflame opposition to GM foods. Critics of the technology and animal welfare groups reacted angrily to the research, questioning the safety of milk from genetically modified animals and its effect on the cattle's health.

But Professor Ning Li, the scientist who led the research and director of the State Key Laboratories for AgroBiotechnology at the China Agricultural University insisted that the GM milk would be as safe to drink as milk from ordinary dairy cows.

He said: "The milk tastes stronger than normal milk.

“We aim to commercialize some research in this area in coming three years. For the “human-like milk”, 10 years or maybe more time will be required to finally pour this enhanced milk into the consumer’s cup.”

Can you believe this? And at the same time there is a great amount of propaganda to discourage women from breast feeding their babies. So get ready...we have about ten years to prepare to have our own cows that give wholesome A2 milk. Thank God!

Actually, all of these genetically modified foods are being created to reduce the birth rate and that is why they are being foisted on the public despite the strong resistance. More on that later.

The original article and remainder of the article about human milk from cows is found here:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/agriculture/geneticmodification/8423536/Genetically-modified-cows-produce-human-milk.html

Milk Is In The News

Researchers have found that most of the cows in N. America and Europe are producing milk containing a protein that leads to health problems. Here is the description given from one book on the subject "Don't Drink A1 Milk!!" The publishers description explains:

Don’t Drink A1 Milk !! is an expose’ of the potential health hazards of drinking Type A1 cow’s milk, and the implications for the dairy industry, government, and , most importantly, the consumers. We now know that Type A1 cow’s milk genetically differs from the original A2 milk, and can generate the casomorphin peptide, BCM-7. The BCM-7 molecule can attach itself to the insulin-producing beta cells in the pancreas, prompting an autoimmune destruction of the beta cells, leading to diabetes. It is a strong oxidant, and can oxidize LDL cholesterol, contributing to plague build-up in the arteries. It is also a powerful morphine-like opiate, and can pass through the blood-brain barrier, promoting neurological disorders such as schizophrenia and autism. The evidence is credible and compelling, and cannot be ignored.

Our dairy industry has decided not to confront the enormous implications to their status quo, and does not want you to know about this issue. Our various governments and regulatory agencies have chosen to ‘bury their heads in the sand’, claiming that the BCM-7 hypothesis is not ‘proven’ and that no risk assessment or protective action is warranted. Dairy farmers in the U.S., Canada, and Europe know little about this issue. Ironically, the dairy farmers in New Zealand, where the research originated, are quietly converting their herds to A2-only producers. Almost all of the milk produced and sold in the U.S. is Type A1 or is contaminated with A1.

The author suggests that what is at stake is more than simply a challenge to the dairy industry. Even more important is our health, and that of our children, and of generations to come. And what about the increasing millions who suffer and will suffer from diabetes, heart disease, and neurological disorders? He proposes that it may not be so much a matter of what science finally concludes … although this is extremely important … but may be more a matter of consumers knowing the truth, being protected, and having a choice. Yet there is a positive side to this new knowledge … we may suddenly have at our fingertips a key to eliminating a significant cause of chronic disease and the opportunity to uplift our human health to an even higher level. An urgent call for accountability and action is warranted. Consumers are asked to place their vote in both the political arena and the marketplace to insist on transparency, courage, and integrity on the part of the dairy industry, government, and science to correct this unacceptable dilemma.

There is also another book on the subject "Devil in the Milk: Illness, Health and the Politics of A1 and A2 Milk" for which the publishers description mentions this:

All milk was once A2, until a genetic mutation occurred some thousands of years ago in some European cattle. A2 milk remains high in herds in much of Asia, Africa, and parts of Southern Europe. A1 milk is common in the United States, New Zealand, Australia, and Europe.

It is the cows of India and S. America, and perhaps even the pacific, the "Zebu" cows that have the hump, give A2 milk.

Hmm, if I had to guess I would say that somebody learned that more milk could be gained by making this change to the cow and for that reason all producers began to switch to the more productive breed. In India I have never seen a cow with a full udder the size of what we see in American cows. The cows that I have seen in India typically give less than 4 gallons a day, while it is not uncommon that American cows give up to 100 lbs. per day or almost 12 gallons.

Both books are available from Amazon, the first one is also available for the Kindle. I'll be buying it to find out if my hunch is correct. The question is, if this change was deliberately introduced, can it be deliberately un-introduced? 

Absolutely Essential Items for Every Community

Eco-village is a “human-scale, full-featured settlement in which human activities are harmlessly integrated into the natural world in a way that is supportive of healthy human development, and which can be successfully continued into the indefinite future.”This is just what the world needs now. 

The question is: how do we get there from here? It takes more than idyllic dreaming and wishful thinking. It takes a lot of hard work and learning many new skills, particularly learning how to work with and depend on others, and becoming a dependable and valuable community member ourselves. There is a great deal to learn.

Anyone who is interested in starting or participating in an intentional community needs to know what they are facing, and the sooner the better. Fortunately help is available. Diana Leaf Christian has been through it all for more than 25 years as a co-founder and resident of the Twin Oaks Community. She has taken her experience and written “Creating a Life Together: Practical Tools to Grow Eco-villages and Intentional Communities.” The is book is an absolute must read for anyone embarking a creating a life away from the modern norm. So many attempts have been made with so many failures, and we can learn from the successes and failures of others. 

Here are the seven essential points that every community must deal with:

1. Identify your community vision and create vision documents There is probably no more devastating source of structural conflict in community than various members having different visions for why you are together.

2. Choose a fair, participatory decision-making process appropriate for your group. And if you choose consensus, get trained in it. Unless you’re forming a spiritual, religious or therapeutic community with a spiritual leader who’ll make all decisions — and you all agree to this in advance — your members will resent any power imbalances.

3. Make clear agreements — in writing. (This includes choosing an appropriate legal entity for owning land together). People remember things differently. Your agreements — from the most mundane to the most legally and financially significant — should absolutely be written down.

4. Learn good communication and group process skills. Make clear communication and resolving conflicts a priority. Being able to talk with one other about sensitive subjects and still feel connected is my definition of good communication skills.

5. In choosing co-founders and new members, select for emotional maturity. An often-overwhelming source of conflict is allowing someone to enter your forming community group, or later, to enter your community, who is not aligned to your vision and values. Or someone whose emotional pain — surfacing weeks or months later as disruptive attitudes or behaviors — can end up costing you untold hours of meeting time and draining your group of energy and well-being. There must be methods for holding each other accountable for agreements.

6. Learn the head skills and heart skills you need to know. Forming a new community is like simultaneously trying to start a new business and begin a marriage — and is every bit as serious as doing either. It requires many of the same planning and financial skills as launching a successful business enterprise, and the same capacities for trust, good will, and honest, kind interpersonal communication as marrying your sweetheart.

7. You will need to create an internal community economy with means and methods of equitably meeting your cash needs and for refinancing any initial loans.

The book is available from Amazon.com both in print and as an kindle e-book.

New Indraprastha Dham, a Gitagrad Community in Russia

 

Outdoor kirtan at New Indraprastha

During the first two weeks of April I visited the New Indraprastha community in north Rostov Oblast, almost due east of Lugansk, Ukraine. The winter snows were finally gone and there was a slight hint of spring in the air. After the first spring rain the hint of green was visible in the gently rolling hills to the south. The New Indraprastha community was founded by Vaikunthanatha Dasa and his wife Kisori Murti Devi Dasi along with their daughter Nama Rasa some three years ago. 

I first met Vaikunthanatha and Kisori Murti in May of ’09 at the vyasapuja ceremony of their spiritual master His Holiness Indradyumna Maharaja. They had approached Maharaja for his blessings for their endeavors to establish a Krishna conscious village according to the vision of Srila Prabhupada. By Sri Krishna’s arrangement I was with Maharaja just at that time and he instructed them to work with me. We sat and talked about community development and I was impressed by their understanding and approach. And to my delight they not only understood the concepts of Spiritual Economics better than anyone else I’d discussed them with, but they had genuine realization on the subject. We immediately became very close.

I had wanted to get to New Indraprastha last October. It was my desire to settle in there for the winter and write volume two of Spiritual Economics. However, there were repeated delays in our efforts to get a proper invitation that would allow for a one-year stay in Russia. As it turned out I obtained the visa only in January this year, and made a brief first visit to New Indraprastha during the snowy and cold month of February before going to Rostov for another two weeks.

New Indraprastha in February

After studying Srila Prabhupada’s books for almost two decades Vaikunthanatha concluded that the most important thing needed push on Srila Prabhupada’s vision was to create a village community. At that point in time the immense country of Russia had but one village community at Kurgenova, further to the south, but it was something of a retirement community where devotee pensioners retired. Vaikunthanatha saw the need for a dynamic spiritual community dedicated to living the principles of the Bhagavad-gita for giving shelter to the Lord’s devotees. Daringly alone, they set out to establish New Indraprastha in a village that they had visited before, about 3 hours drive north of Rostov-on-the-Don.

The cows are coming home

At New Indraprastha there is a very well developed program for introducing potential members to the community. First of all they have a great deal of introductory material at the website. Upon reading over the website if someone expresses a desire in the community they are given access to further information at the website and they begin a dialogue with Vaikunthanatha and/or Kisori Murti. Progressing from that step, they are then asked to listen to a number of lectures on specific aspects of Krishna Consciousness, Srila Prabhupada’s desire for village communities, Varnashrama Dharma, etc. If after that step interest continues then the candidate is asked to view several videos giving yet further detail about village communities as the solution to problems at many societal levels. After all of this, if the candidate desires he is invited to spend some time at the community for some real life experience.

The Nature Sprites of New Indraprastha

New Indraprastha is a Daiva-varnashrama community, meaning that they follow the Isavasyam principle, that everything belongs to God, and the members are caretakers, not owners, of whatever is in their possession. They follow the principles of Spiritual Economics in that all work is done as devotional service without consideration of fruitive results. And as the community grows they intend to fully implement the Daiva-varnashrama culture, including the establishment of the social orders of life, the varnas.

As with almost every new community the membership waxes and wanes. Last summer there were as many as 25 people staying at New Indraprastha . This spring there were seven members present with an additional family coming from Israel after their infant child is a bit older. Additionally, a family from Germany that has been receiving training via the internet visited early in April and decided that, yes, this was the place for them. So they will be returning later this year to make New Indraprastha their home.

I am personally enthusiastic about New Indraprastha community because their leaders are serious about implementing the philosophy of Krishna Consciousness as a matter of daily living. I look forward to spending more time there to help these dedicated devotees become well-established in both theory and practice of Daiva-varnashrama dharma as an example for the rest of the world how to live a happy life in Krishna Consciousness.

 

From right: Dhanesvara, Vaikunthanatha, Anton, Kishori Murti, Andrei, 

and in front are Tanya and Nama Rasa 

Check out their website: www.pravednost.net. Although it is in Russian Google translator will give English-speaking people a bit of a glimpse into what the community is all about, and the wonderful devotees of Krishna who make it up.

Gandhi on the Future of the Village And The World

"In the future set-up we shall have only two things, the village and the world. We have the names of the countries on the map for the sake of convenience, but in reality, there will be no intermediary between the world and the village.  All the authority concerning the material side of life will rest with the village. The village will have power to order its own life. The power of moral advancement of the whole world will rest in the world center. The districts of the States will only be the agents of the Village community. Thus we shall have the village at the base and the World Authority at the Centre. Human society will be organized on the basis of small village communities, of, say, 2 to 3 thousands souls each. There would be no private ownership. The village will be a model of corporate life. The world centre will be the ultimate co-ordinating link between these primary communities." -- Mahatma Gandhi

This is my vision also. As the world increases in sattva-guna, artificial and impersonal political structures will fall due to being superfluous. It is only due to the demonic nature of increasing control that "countries" were created to begin with (please see chapter four of Spiritual Economics for more details on this). Some NWO hack has even been quoted as saying something to the effect that "countries were never that good an idea anyway." Of course he has it in mind that we shall do away with countries and have a global government under the control of a demonic oligarchy. 

Well, if we do not have a spiritual revolution, that is indeed what will happen. But, it is Lord Chaitanya's desire that the world will swim in the nectar of the holy names of the Lord, and if He wants it, that's what we shall have. Still we have to do the work. 

After we clean out the crud of Kali-yuga and sattva takes hold, what need is there for a political structure that is beyond any persons ability to participate? None. And so we shall see villages, wherein everyone has a voice in those questions that affect him or her, as the standard of life everywhere. It is our  business to create these villages in the standard of the Bhagavat culture. This is what we call Gitagrad -- the place where everyone lives according to the standard of the Bhagavad-gita.

Just a few days ago a friend introduced me to the concept of the "Chaordic organization," created by Dee Hock, the man who created the concept of the VISA credit card. He is an extraordinary man as you can read briefly in Wikipedia. Chaordic is a word that he created to describe systems that are both chaotic and ordered. It is worth the time to read and learn these concepts and I am now studying them to see how they apply or describe the varnashrama social system. My gut tells me that what he is explaining is the varashrama system, or at least that the concepts can be applied to create the neo-varnashrama that we will have in the future. 

For example, here are a few of the characteristics of chaordic organizations. They:

• Are based on clarity of shared purpose and principles.
• Are self-organizing and self-governing in whole and in part.
• Exist primarily to enable their constituent parts.
• Are powered from the periphery, unified from the core.
• Are durable in purpose and principle, malleable in form and function.
• Equitably distribute power, rights, responsibility and rewards.
• Harmoniously combine cooperation and competition.
• Learn, adapt and innovate in ever expanding cycles.
• Are compatible with the human spirit and the biosphere [and Bhagavat principles :-)].

 This is a great match with the varnashrama ideal and Gandhi's statement: "All the authority concerning the material side of life will rest with the village. The village will have power to order its own life. The power of moral advancement of the whole world will rest in the world center. The districts of the States will only be the agents of the Village community. Thus we shall have the village at the base and the World Authority at the Centre." 

Daiva-varnashrama, Gandhi's statement and the chaordic method all turn the present world order on its head. And that is how life should be. And, except for those who now run the world for their own pleasure, the world would run like this, and it the future it shall.

I invite you to read and learn about the chaordic way from the Permaculture Institute's Wiki. They see the chaordic principles as a natural harmonious fit with the ideas of permaculture and are endeavoring to apply them to practicing and teaching permaculture practices. There are very good articles there from Dee Hock and others. Please check it out here. You will find not only permaculture, but many ideas that can be applied now and in the coming post-modern world.

Another Reason to Spend More Time with Your Favorite Cow -- Bacteria Found In Cow Dung Can Make You Smarter

Researchers from the Sage Colleges in Troy, NY, reported today their findings that specific bacteria common to our environment may increase learning behavior. Dorothy Matthews and Susan Jenks, who conducted the study, shared their findings with those in attendance at the meeting of the American Society for Microbiology in San Diego.

The bacteria, Mycobacterium vaccae, is well known to scientists, as the dead bacteria is being tested as immunotherapy for asthma, cancer, depression, psoriasis, dermatitis, eczema and tuberculosis. M. vaccae, so named because it was first discovered in cow dung in Austria, is naturally found in soil, and it is inhaled when people spend time outdoors, especially where there are plants and trees.

It was found in previous research that heat-killed M. vaccae had anti-depressant effects on mice by stimulating the growth of neurons and levels of serotonin.  Mathews and Jenks, however, were curious about the effects of live M. vaccae, and fed live bacteria to an experimental group of mice to see how it would effect their navigation of a maze. 

The mice that were fed the live M. vaccae learned the maze twice as fast as the control group, which had not received M. vaccae, and the experimental group exhibited less anxiety as well.

Some time later, the experimental group was taken off the bacteria and tested again against the control group.  This time, the experimental mice did not learn the maze as fast as when they were given the bacteria, but they were still faster than the control mice.

In yet a third maze learning experiment, conducted after the mice had rested for three weeks, the experimental mice ran faster than the controls, but not fast enough to make a statistically significant difference. This suggested to the researchers that the effects of M. vaccae are temporary.

"This research suggests that M. vaccae may play a role in anxiety and learning in mammals," says Matthews. "It is interesting to speculate that creating learning environments in schools that include time in the outdoors where M. vaccae is present may decrease anxiety and improve the ability to learn new tasks."

Take a walk outdoors when you take a break.  You'll return more relaxed and smarter! 

Original article is here

A New Trend for the Cow Conscious

Fashionable or Freaky Hoof Footwear- Cloven Hoof Boots

Bovine footwear helps bring out the mooo in you. Check it out here.

The Peasant Commune in Russia: Rural Anarchy and Feudal Socialism

This is a fantastic article that I wish I would have had when writing the first volume of Spiritual Economics. Johnson explains in some detail how the communes of 19th century Russia functioned, and reveals that they functioned very much like that reported in other cultures. We are not surprised. What is surprising is how different the village life actually was from what we think it was. Please take time to read the entire article. It is well worth it.

By M. Raphael Johnson

The Russian peasant commune was an example of a real rural and Christian anarchism at work. The commune protected the peasantry from want, alienation, poverty and tyranny. By the end of the 19th century, the nascent capitalist classes were screaming for the commune to be destroyed, for peasants could not be dragooned into the cities or to work on the railroads or factories while protected by numerous layers of communal obligations, immunities and rights. In England at the same time, the capitalist ruling classes had already succeeded in tearing apart rural society, turning it over to landlords to exploit for personal profit, eliminating the small holdings and self-sufficient communities that were a threat to the stage, as well as to capitalism. By the beginning of the 20th century, English and American working class kids were being mutilated in the robber baron factories in huge numbers, with no advocacy or protections of any kind. The formerly protected rural peasants were turned into miserable proletarians. In Russia, the trend was precisely the opposite, as the Russian royal state introduced even more protections to the commune and immunities for workers. 


The institution of the peasant commune in pre-revolutionary Russia is one of the world’s unique institutions; and also one that is almost unknown. As Americans continue to work long hours for comparatively less pay, continue to see unions disappear, and see any kind of job security dissipate, maybe it is time to look at other models of economic organization.

It need not be said that the commune, for American historiography, is basically derided. This is largely for one important reason: the architects of liberalism and capitalism in Russia were the elite: the elite political and economic forces. For them, the commune was an irritant, a set of protections that permitted the average peasant a great deal of protections against exploitation. The destruction of the commune, then, was absolutely necessary for the Russian neo-Jacobins to impose constitutional capitalism on royal Russia. (cf. my The Third Rome: Holy Russia, Tsarism and Orthodoxy for a more detailed argument in support of this thesis.)

In the commune, the Church calendar was the primary medium for telling time. This meant that the work year was extremely short, for the calendar of traditional Christianity saw four fast period yearly as well as hundreds of feasts, either local, national or pan-Orthodox. One of the main reasons the liberal bourgeois in Russia hated the commune was that it sanctioned the traditional agrarian practice of only working about 2/3 of the year. The rest was made up in fasting, feasting and cultural pursuits. Therefore, the protections, immunities and traditions of communal life were absolutely incompatible with capitalism, “constitutionalism” and liberalism.

In a powerful and seminal article from Boris Mironov, “The Russian Peasant Commune after the Reforms of the 1860’s.” (Slavic Review, Vol. 44, Number 3 (Fall 1985)), is extremely important for the understanding of the peasant commune. Its significance lies in the fact that it takes its data from the survey of 816 communes between 1878 and 1880, sponsored by the Russian Geographical Society and the Russian Free Economic Society. Its results were astounding, and largely supported the claims of the pro-agrarian and pro-monarchist elements in Russia, then and now. The Russian peasant had it better in Russia than likely anywhere else in the world. This data proves it.

It is important to keep in mind the structure of the Imperial Russian state around the middle of the 19th century. The tsar’s power was basically limited to foreign policy and general taxation. He, of course, was the chief spokesman for the nation and the defender of the Orthodox church. However, at the agrarian level, where 90% of the population lived, royal authority was basically invisible. The peasant commune was the only relevant authority the peasant had to deal with.

Therefore, it is accurate to say that Russia was not a single, unitary state, but rather a collection of thousands of independent agrarian republics, held together by rather weak cords to the central monarchy. Professor Charles Sarolea, who visited Russia regularly, wrote in the 1925 issue of the English Review:

On closer examination we find the [Imperial] Russian state was a vast federation of fifty thousand small peasant republics each busy with its own affairs, obedient to its own laws and even possessing its own tribunals of starotsas (elders). The Russian state was not undemocratic, on the contrary if anything, there was too much democracy.

What makes the peasant commune such a unique institution is the power that it had. Each commune was a completely self-contained unit, answering to no other authority than its own body of elected elders. All police functions were discharged by the communal authorities, all legal matters were dealt with by the same. Any damage to property, any criminal offence whatsoever, was dealt with at the communal level. All public works besides were also within the jurisdiction of the commune. It maintained stores of grain during famines and assisted poorer members who suffered during the lean months of the spring. It controlled the cultural life of the people as well as all education. It even built its own parish churches and trained many of the rural clergy. The commune maintained all schools and hospitals. In short, it was absolute.

Now, the state’s interest in this was clear. For the commune to be self governing, yet still loyal to the monarchy, it was necessary for it to be completely independent of the state. Mironov writes “The government did not risk appointing its own people, who would have been independent of the peasant, to official positions in the commune; that would have been too expensive and ineffective at the same time” (445)

However, to make sure any village executive (specifically its chief executive) was loyal, he could be removed by the royal-appointed district governor. This, however, rarely occurred, largely because irritating the peasants, the great bastion of loyalty in the country, would not be in the interests of the royal state. Mironov continues in this vein:
If however, one analyzes how these officials actually functioned, it is clear that the government did not reach its goal: elected officials did not stand above the commune but operated under its authority, and all administrative and police measures in the commune were taken only with the consent of the village assembly. Only very rarely did elected officials become a hostile authority standing above the peasantry: they had to be periodically reelected, had no significant privileges, did not break their ties with the peasantry (elected officials were freed from taxes and other obligations, except those in kind, and continued to perform all forms of peasant labor), remained under the control of public opinion of the village (and in the event of malfeasance faced the threat of retribution), and shared the common interest of the peasants, not the interests of the state. As a rule the elected officials acted as the defenders of the commune, as petitioners and organizers. Frequently they emerged as leaders of peasant disorders despite the threat of harsh punishment. (445-6).

Many liberal Russia scholars might counter this by claiming that the elected village heads were required, after the 1860s, to faithfully carry out the will of the district authorities. However, though this is true, it was also true that no decree of the district authorities had validity in the commune unless it was approved by the village assembly.

According to the data collected by the Russian Geographic Society, the Russian peasant assembly consisted of all male heads of household. Decisions were not finalized until unanimity was reached, or, as Mironov has said, disagreement was brought to a level of silent sulking, which, at this level, was considered agreement. It is important to note, therefore, that each peasant had a specific stake in communal affairs as well as a corresponding voice. Any specific peasant, therefore, could not afford to be alienated from the community, as all decisions could be vetoed even by a relatively small group of disgruntled peasants.

In her “The Russian Peasant Family in the Second Half of the 19th Century” (Russian Studies in History, vol. 38, n.2, (Fall 1999)), Svetlana S. Kriukova sheds some more light on the structure of the family in the peasant commune. Now, though this article is not nearly as rigorous as Mironov’s (and is geographically limited to the black soil region), it is still very useful.

Because all legislation needed to pass the communal assembly, which was a function of direct democracy, the family became a far more important institution than the modern bourgeois understand. The structure of the peasant family was headed by the oldest male, though women would have that title if she was unmarried, and her sons were also unmarried (39). The wife dealt with domestic affairs and supervised the female members of the house. The wife had substantial authority in ordering marriages and the timetables concerning various economic projects. Now, the family acted as sort of a mini-commune, it was rational for the male to cast the deciding vote. However, a “mistress of the house,” that is, the mother of the wife, had relatively equal authority with the husband. Generally, disagreements within the family were solved by any elderly living within the neighborhood (41). But, regardless of who made the final decision, all functions of the household ultimately were under the scrutiny of the commune. Interestingly, the communal structure (at least in southern Russia), invented an innovation called “women’s weeks,” which were times during the year where the females of the household would be released from family or communal obligations in order to work purely for themselves. This was done both to raise more money and goods for dowries as well as provide the women in question with sufficient resources for old age or infirmity (45).

This, in many respects, was to maintain domestic solvency, for the assignment of tax duties made it imperative that each household maintained a proper standard of living. If the head of household was a drunk, or was incapable of keeping the family money properly, he was publicly berated by the communal authorities, often beaten and, in many cases, deprived of his status as head of household. It is clear that those who developed bad reputations as head of household either reformed quickly or lost their status. Many wound up in the army, with the commune then resuming care for the family until the minor male children came of age.

Those members of the family incapable of working, such as the elderly, the mentally ill crippled or sick, were guaranteed support. Whatever the family could not provide was provided by the commune. The communal courts rearranged debts and taxes, as well as the more important area of land allotment, for those families who dealt with sick or invalid members. No one was permitted to enter severe poverty.

If the state desperately needed the communes to pass certain forms of legislation, they were in no position to force the matter on them. Russian peasants are rebellious; they are fanatical traditionalists, the worst threat to any bureaucracy. The state, then, would resort to every sort of preaching and begging of the village males and elders in general to get things passed, largely in the realm of taxation. But even here, only the commune was capable of assessing tax burdens according to the ability to pay. The royal state, allegedly absolute, had no clue how much money each peasant was making or how wealthy any commune might be. All taxing decisions therefore, were made by elected elders and the assembly.

The commune, through its assembly and elected elders, decided on a periodic land redistribution, where peasant families with many children were granted more, while those with fewer were granted less. The point of work for the communal peasantry was to reach a balance, to maintain a standard of living that could provide all objective needs of the family itself. Profit was unknown, distrusted and, even until the revolution, scorned. Need was the key, and all forms of exploitation were condemned not only by law, but also by the common law of communal custom.

The communal system was based around basic subsistence agriculture as well as the periodic redistribution of land, tax duties and public works. All of this was done within the village assembly in respect to the state, the informal structure of older men in the village who exercised quite a bit of moral authority (men retired at 60 and all dues were forgiven at this time) and the elected executives. This constitutional structure permitted the wealthier peasants to pay the dues of the poorer, which was considered a moral obligation taken from Byzantine times. Poorer households were maintained in lean times largely due to the communal virtue of charity, a virtue maintained not necessarily by law, but by the strong hand of communal custom, which, if it might be said, was actually the basis of the constitution of any commune. In other words, if such ancient virtues were violated, it was not uncommon for severe punishments to me meted out by the people as a whole. Chronic violations were usually punished by banishment or, if the criminal was of the proper age, induction into the army.

As Mironov reports, one of the astonishing and revisionist aspects of communal life as the 19th century began to draw to a close was its amazing vitality. It is common in the Russian history literature in English to paint a picture of the oppressed peasants chafing at the commune (when they mention it at all) waiting to escape to take advantage of the money economy. This is nothing more than bourgeois, Whig history.

There is every reason to believe that the peasantry looked upon the bourgeois with disdain, as well as their competitive money economy. The date collected clearly proves this. When the reforms of Petr Stolypin made it easier for peasants to remove themselves from the commune and enter the bourgeois economy, very few actually did. According to the data, by the end of the 19th century, almost 90% of peasants were functioning within the communal structure. By Stolypin’s reforms in 1905-06, “only an insignificant number of peasants found an alternative to the commune in trade, industry or in the sale of their labor. As in the past, the great majority placed their hopes for a better life in the commune and a new agrarian reform. . .” (464). This shows, without question, that the peasantry had no use for the liberal capitalist parties, westernizers or western socialists. It was the commune that maintained the peasant’s loyalty to tradition and the tsar. It was only those at the extremes of the communal structure that actually left the community for the city. Those who became wealthy and sought even more wealth moved away, and those extremely poor who, for whatever reason, could not function were the two elements that left, but these never amounted to any more than 4 or 5%. Those that were criminal, slow or just plain uncooperative were inducted into the army where the famous harsh discipline of the Russian infantry would solve those problems.

The peasant commune is likely one of the greatest supporters for family liberty devised. But its superiority to western models exists not merely in the results of such organization, but also because it was no “devised.” It was perfected over 1,000 years of often hard experience. The communal structure, the tightly organized extended family and the traditional peasant love for communal and family liberty kept the state at bay right up until the revolution. The destruction of the communes, naturally, came immediately under Lenin’s rule.

The dishonest “radicals” saw the commune s a threat. Many Russian populists (narodniks), such as Alexander Herzen, believed the communal system to be the means whereby a native Russian socialism would challenge the western, Marxism brand. However, for these liberals, the communal structure was to be completely denuded of traditional culture and be largely a dependency of the New State. All that the socialists wanted had already been part of peasant life for a millennium, but the socialists simply lied as to what they wanted. They sought a non-Christian, secular state run by urban elites who treated communes as departments of state. Ultimately, this is largely the reason the Bolsheviks liquidated large segments of the peasantry. Comparisons of the peasant communal system and modern socialism are pedestrian, they have nothing in common. This is why the Russian New Men of the 20th century ultimately destroyed the commune while publicly professing devotion to it. The commune was a Christian anarchist collective, based around ethnic tradition, the church and the extended family, all interacting on the level of basic equality. Anarchists sounded ridiculous to the peasantry largely because their secular ideas, to be imposed by force, already existed, and where the virtues of charity and mutual self-government not only existed, but were part of the traditional mindset of the peasantry. The bizarre nature of Russian Masonic “radicalism” was that they were advocating what already existed. The catch was, however, that their new society was to be run by them, on secular and materialist principles with the state, of course, being all -powerful. Peasants then would be truly mere chattel at the service of the New Men.
From: http://www.rosenoire.org/articles/Peasant_Commune.php