In Defense of a Free-Thinking Journalist
BY: ROCANA DASA
Jun 6, CANADA (SUN) — It was with a degree of surprise and great interest that I received the recent article submission from Kapila Monet in defense of Indradyumna Swami. Over the years I have been a friend of Kapila prabhu's parents, and have known him since he was a young boy. I have great admiration for his achievements in life and his intellectual capacity, and I applaud his efforts in showing expert leadership with respect to keeping his generation of Srila Prabhupada's followers in touch. He has helped to unite the second generation 'kulis' in a very positive manner.
In his opening remarks he makes it clear that he feels that my comments on Indradyumna Swami were of two categories: exaggeration and simplicity. He goes on to challenge me point by point. After briefly replying point by point to some of his comments, I will attempt to make the readers more aware of my particular relationship with Indradyumna Swami as his godbrother. My personal experiences with the Swami in the past have led me to have the sort of attitude I do towards him personally, and towards the excerpts I've read from his Dairy of a Traveling Preacher.
Kapila attempts to justify the value of the Swami's writings by saying they contain "some element of propaganda, much like any fable or moral story". It's beyond me why Kapila considers what the Swami writes to be propaganda, what to speak of morality in fable. In my mind, what he writes is simply a not-too-subtle means of self-glorification. Psychologically, his content is a mechanism by which he can make his mundane activities and thoughts appear to be transcendental in the mind of uninformed readers.
Kapila states that "Indradyumna Swami is a popular and effective preacher". I don't question the fact that the Swami is popular within the ISKCON community, although I think it's important to note just what groups he's most popular with. As for his effectiveness as a preacher, Kapila can't really speak to this given that he's never met him and admittedly has little to do with ISKCON. Unless he just buys into the myth the Swami is obviously trying to create by writing books like his Diary, how does Kapila actually measure 'preaching effectiveness'? In fact, the statement that the Swami "is a popular and effective preacher" seems to be an exaggeration on the writer's part.
With respect to the Swami's travel budget, Kapila writes that "Mention is made of the difficulties faced by many temples around the world, and also the travel budget of Jayapataka Swami. Neither of these relate directly to Indradyumna." The author infers that the only meaningful connection is between the Swami's travel budget and his preaching effectiveness. But the fact is that ISKCON presents itself as an international society, and the GBC are giving us the impression that they're managing the entire movement. The Swami is a GBC member.
The GBC are also making a great big point this year about the fact that many Swamis and GBC members are not submitting their annual financial reports, which even if submitted are kept secret. All we really know is that they do a lot of traveling. We get some leaks from insiders about the actual costs of all that travel, and it doesn't take a chartered accountant to calculate what it's likely costing, just on the basis of their reported schedule.
The fact is that it is Srila Prabhupada's assets that are being depleted, not the individual assets of the leaders, which appear to be increasing tremendously. I'm not sure why Kapila finds it difficult to see the correlation between how much any one of the GBC or ISKCON Swamis spend on travel, and the significant financial need of so many temples around the world. Are we to believe that none of the temples in Indradyumna's or Jayapataka Swami's zones need financial assistance? Or is it that they can only donate money from their travel budgets to struggling temples within their zones? Isn't Jayapataka free to peel off a few hundred thousand from his yearly travel budget to bail out the German temple? Couldn't Indradyumna Swami spend a year off the road, while encouraging his financial supporters to instead direct their money to save the Costa Rica project from being sold out from under the devotees? So clearly, there is a correlation between the big travel budgets of our ISKCON leaders and spiritual authorities, and the needs of the worldwide community of temples and devotees.
Kapila prabhu writes:
Certainly we are dependent on Krsna at all times, and chanting is an effective surrender when Krsna has utilised no other instrument. However, it was understood from the story that both the swami and the officer saw the officers' arrival as a timely intervention attached to God. Even when Draupadi was being disrobed her first appeal was to her husbands and to those assembled. And their inactivity is to their discredit. It was not wrong of her to approach them since that was their duty, and it was not wrong of a swami about to be accosted to ask an officer approaching to do his duty.
Similarly, if a devotee's car is damaged in an accident, that devotee should chant, but also ensure that the insurance company finds out and pays for the damage. He would not be advised to simply chant more. We are responsible to be Krsna's instrument and also to see Krsna's hand in the beneficial actions of others. We are not all blessed with Draupadi's personal piety where Krsna acts directly.
I found Kapila's reference to Draupadi to be a real stretch in terms of looking to the transcendental pastimes from Mahabharata and trying to make some sort of comparison to the pastimes of Indradyumna Swami. First of all, our Sampradaya Acaryas did not focus on the Mahabharata; Srila Prabhupada never gave purports on it. From the standpoint of Srila Prabhupada's followers, the philosophical value of the Mahabharata is to be found in the purports of our Acaryas, which don’t extend beyond Bhagavad-gita. So I find the Draupadi parallel to be quite an exaggeration.
In his writing, Indradyumna Swami leaves us all to interpret the philosophical message to mean that Krsna sent the officer to save the devotee. We are apparently to believe that this is some sort of sign from above, that Krsna is protecting Indradyumna Swami through the via media of the security guard. Of course, he doesn't say that in his Diary; it's left up to the reader's interpretation. But clearly he wants us to make that interpretation, as Kapila apparently does. Granted, there may be some truth to the timely intervention of the officer having something to do with Krsna, but the fact is that as the Swami describes his own actions, there can be described to be the actions of a neophyte devotee.
Let's also keep in mind who Indradyumna Swami is projecting himself to be, not only in the title of his book as the 'traveling mendicant', but also as a sannyasi. He's not just Joe Average Devotee using his God-given intelligence to get through life. He's writing a book about himself being a mendicant swami, so in that context one would expect a different type of behaviour than the average devotee getting into a car accident. Indradyumna Swami chose to include this as a pastime in his book, but from my point of view the way he acted and the circumstances he described have no real spiritual significance.
Kapila writes:
It is a fair argument to say that a swami should not travel alone. But of course, if he travelled with a companion, then the criticism might be that travelling swami's have doubled their travel budget just to have someone take care of all their needs on a flight and that they are over pampered. Surely in a situation where money is sparse, they should dispense with the air travel for servants since there are devotees available to drop them off and pick them up in the locations to which they travel.
This too seems to be a rather flawed argument. The matter is really one of perception, philosophy and historical fact. By traveling with someone, sannyasis are protecting their own image because they have someone to verify that they're staying true to their sannyasa vows at all times. The only time that Srila Prabhupada traveled alone was when he was alone, without any disciples. Once he established ISKCON and had disciples, someone always traveled with him. Furthermore, Lord Caitanya said sannyasis should never travel alone. Recent ISKCON historical fact is that many ISKCON swamis have fallen down, and a big contributing factor has been that they've traveled alone. Kapila's argument doesn’t take any of these important philosophical elements into account.
Perhaps one of the reasons Kapila doesn't understand what the role of an ISKCON sannyasi should actually be is because Indradyumna Swami himself doesn't set the example. Not only doesn't he live up to Srila Prabhupada's standard or set the proper example as a disciple of the Acarya, but the pastimes portrayed in his book are not the words and actions of an actual mendicant in our Sampradaya. So we can understand the confusion that comes from this. Sadly, Indradyumna Swami seems to be oblivious to this reality.
Kapila wrote:
Again, it is exaggerated to say that Indradyumna is to our society what Tom Cruise is to Scientology. In fact, Tom Cruise has spread the message of Scientology to the whole world, so one could only hope that Indradyumna could have this international presence where his message could be broadcast on Opera and through mass media.
While it's not very important, I can't help but point out that the message Tom Cruise has effectively spread throughout the world is that Scientology is a religion for crackpots. The Church of Scientology has never had so much bad press as it's gotten since Tom Cruise became it's evangelist. Let us pray that Indradyumna Swami does not follow in Tom's footsteps.
As Kapila has presented various analogies in his article, let me try to give him just one analogy in response. This analogy applies not only to myself personally, but to many of the kulis that he now associates with. We are all aware of the abuses that took place in the lives of so many ex-gurukula students (although to my understanding, Kapila was fortunately not included in that group). Many were abused in the international gurukulas, such as Vrindavan. As I have stated in previous articles on the subject, it wasn't only the children who were being abused in the movement. The attitude of abuse actually trickled down into the gurukula from higher levels of the institution, where it was propagated by personalities such as Dhanurdhara and other Swamis - particularly those who were the equivalent of headmasters and monitors in the temples of the Zonal Acaryas.
The arguments that Kapila prabhu is making in regards to Indradyumna Swami one could also easily make in defense of Dhanurdhara Swami: he's sincere, he's preaching, he's traveling… so why are the gurukulis complaining about him? He's reformed now, so why bring up the past? Of course, we're well aware of the arguments of the kulis in this regard - the don't let the past sleep because they don't want people to forget what happened to them. They don't want such abuse to happen to an innocent gurukula student ever again.
Indradyumna Swami happens to be a prime example of this dynamic, as does Radhanath Swami. Both are now great luminaries in ISKCON's sky, and both were the close associates of the Zonal Acaryas. They enforced the policies and regime of the Zonal Acaryas on so many devotees, and this resulted in 95% of Srila Prabhupada's disciples leaving their Spiritual Master's movement as a result. We couldn't launch a lawsuit against ISKCON because we were consenting adults, but we were still scarred as a result of our experiences. Just as holocaust survivors have a different perception on the history of the Nazis than do the German citizens -- one group would like the world to never forget while the other group would prefer we put the past behind us - so can we compare the victims of the Zonal Acarya era to the institutional authorities who perpetrated the acts. So to a degree, this is how I identify myself with the abused kulis. I feel as they do, that a true depiction of history should be broadcast and understood by all in the movement, and the atrocities shouldn't be covered over lest they happen again. And people like Indradyumna Swami are basically like those who deny the holocaust.
I could launch into a long, non-simplistic explanation of some of the experiences I had with Indradyumna Swami during the Zonal Acarya period, and during the period when we were trying to bring about reform. As Ravindra Svarupa may remember, I accompanied him, along with Bahudak prabhu, to negotiate with Bhagavan and his closest associates -- namely Indradyumna Swami -- on the matter of bringing about the reform. And I can tell you from firsthand experience that Indradyumna Swami was not in favor. In fact, he was adamantly against changing the Zonal Acarya system. He supported Bhagavan's position 100% because, of course, he was enjoying the benefits - just as he is now enjoying the benefits of position within the institution. As Srila Prabhupada said, the servant of the king lives on an equal level with the king. And Bhagavan was the King.
So this aspect of my past might help in making my presentation seem less simplistic to Kapila. I admit that without understanding my position, my article may appear to be simply an expression of envy or undue criticism to readers like Kapila, who find reading Indradyumna Swami's Diary to be "a mildly inspirational experience". Of course, if the Swami was such a great preacher, why wouldn't he just publish his lectures and forget the Diary part, which regularly leans to the mundane?
Kapila makes the proper comparison when he states that Srila Prabhupada is like the sun and Indradyumna Swami is like a little light bulb, but still there's some light there. But the fact is that in ISKCON, personalities like Indradyumna Swami have eclipsed the sun, and they've done so consciously and purposefully. In other words, in the minds of many followers and disciples, these leaders don't make the same distinction Kapila apparently does between Srila Prabhupada and Indradyumna Swami.
According to ISKCON's present philosophical opinion on the guru disciplic succession, Indradyumna Swami is actually not that much different than Srila Prabhupada. As I've pointed out in my Sampradaya Acarya paper, ISKCON refuses or has declined to give Srila Prabhupada status as a nitya-siddha, Sampradaya Acarya. And in doing so, they have allowed personalities such as Indradyumna Swami to maintain the impression with their followers that their position is similar to, perhaps a little less than, Srila Prabhupada - but not a light bulb compared to the sun. And I would go so far as to say that the Swami's Diary is an attempt to keep people focused on him and not on Srila Prabhupada. Even Kapila admits that occasionally all he says about Srila Prabhupada is "my guru's instructions". It's all about him.
So while Kapila says it's unfair for me to compare Indradyumna Swami to Srila Prabhupada, I would ask him to remember the fact that the Swami is directly representing Srila Prabhupada. If he wasn't an ISKCON Swami, if he wasn't a GBC man and a Guru, then do you actually think he would be so popular? Do you think people would invite him to travel around the world and be treated the way he is? Obviously the answer is no. If it weren't for his association with Srila Prabhupada and the potency of his ISKCON legacy, what would he generate on his own merit - which is basically what we read in his Diary?
Although he is not following Srila Prabhupada's example or instructions for his sannyasis, he's still given all the adoration, distinction and facility, and dare I say money, he wants. He's supposed to be a direct representative of Srila Prabhupada, not only in the fact that he's a disciple, but because as an ISKCON Swami, he's supposed to be trying to emulate Srila Prabhupada and follow in his footsteps. And by following in Srila Prabhupada's footsteps, no one is expecting or requiring him to be as advanced as Srila Prabhupada. But at the same time, it appears to me he's not making much of an effort. His Diary, in itself, it exposing him in that regard. Now that may not be important to many people today, perhaps including Kapila prabhu, who is obviously representative of the audience the Swami is directing this sort of dialogue to. But according to our philosophy and teaching, this is not preaching. It doesn't even come close to the standard. I feel I can say for certain that Srila Prabhupada would not be pleased with this. Yes, perhaps Srila Prabhupada would be pleased with the Swami's big festival program in Poland. I've never been to one, so I can't say for sure. But when it comes to the Traveling Diary, believe me, I'm not alone in concluding that Srila Prabhupada would never find this acceptable.
Kapila prabhu essentially admits that he doesn't know much about Srila Prabhupada, his teachings, or ISKCON, and if he did, I seriously doubt whether he would have such an attraction for this kind of stuff. I can venture a guess that even within ISKCON, other Swamis share the same kind of doubts that I have. Of course, within the institution they don't dare say what I'm saying. And because of this, I feel that Indradyumna Swami himself, as a godbrother and a person, is in spiritual danger. I sincerely hope this gets back to him (which I doubt very much), and that he has second thoughts about what he's writing and his overall lifestyle.
As previously mentioned, Kapila defends the Swami in terms of the great austerity of his travel agenda and the fact that the money it takes for him to travel has no relationship to Srila Prabhupada's temples that are being neglected and falling apart. Nor, I suppose, does Kapila see the correlation between the fact that while the Swami is jetting about the planet, the money hasn't even been forthcoming to allow the BBT to process and release the approximately 40% of Srila Prabhupada's audio instructions which have never yet been made available to the devotees to listen to. So what's more important? The sound vibration of the Sampradaya Acarya, or the ISKCON Swamis being free to fly from city to city to city, year after year?
The problem with all these representatives of Srila Prabhupada is that they don’t consider their money to be Srila Prabhupada's money, as they should. Srila Prabhupada was extremely careful with his Spiritual Master's money and kept track of every paisa that he spent. So these are big issues that we as Srila Prabhupada's disciples have to come to understand. And then, of course, there's the fact that so many of the godbrothers and sisters have been excluded from participating in their Spiritual Master's society by people just like Indradyumna Swami, who never travel and preach to their godbrothers - only to the disciples, followers and prospective candidates.
We all know that 'travel is exhausting and airports are dull', but it's also an interesting phenomenon how the materialist who accumulates money runs right out and spends it on private jets and yachts -- means of moving their own material body from place to place on this planet. It's the nature of the soul to want to be free and as a result, the materialists have created all these facilities such as planes and boats. Simply because a passenger rides in the garb of a mendicant does not mean we should have no concern about his materialistic tendencies.
I'm aware of the argument that devotees use everything in Krsna's service, as taught by the Acaryas, and therefore we use the facilities created by the materialists. But as in all aspects of using something created originally for sense gratification, this has to be done extremely carefully, so the mood cannot be that we do it for enjoyment. Obviously one might argue that Indradyumna Swami doesn't fly for sense gratification, but we read in his most recent Diary excerpt that he's anxious to go to the airport early. And we read in the Diary excerpt that was commented upon by Navadvipcandra dasa where the Swami candidly says he would prefer to go sightseeing rather than go to the temple. In fact, most of his Diary refers to him traveling around here and there on airplanes. So forgive me for coming to the conclusion that he's extravagantly flying around. Kapila himself points out that the money he needs for traveling is acquired by traveling. In other words, people give him donations and he uses that money to travel. So it's like a chicken and egg scenario - which comes first?
As already stated, it's been our experience that many of these sannyasis have fallen into maya on account of traveling too much, alone. It appears to me that there are telltale symptoms that this is the case with Indradyumna Swami, and these symptoms seem quite evident right there in his Diary. Call me simplistic or cynical, but it's due to many, many years of observation and analysis that I come to these conclusions.
The mantra that Kapila repeats throughout his article is that my comments on Indradyumna Swami are "exaggerated criticism", whether it be about his travel budget or the parables that he uses. In other words, it is unwarranted for me to make disparaging comments on this type of content. But the fact remains that the Swami is presenting himself to the world and, of course, to the members of ISKCON, as a "mendicant" and a great preacher. And frankly, I don’t consider these kinds of parables to be "first-class preaching". In fact, I don't even consider these travel stories to be on the level of preaching.
I am simply pointing out that I don't think the Swami's actions and words come up to the standards set by the Acaryas. I feel it is my duty to point these things out. One can easily discover what these standards are by studying Srila Prabhupada's life, actions and words, what to speak of all the sastra that is available to us -- particularly the pastimes of Lord Caitanya Mahaprabhu and his associates. If Kapila prabhu wishes to further shore up the Swami's reputation, I urge him to do so by hitting the books, and arguing his case from sastra.
We're at a crucial junction today in terms of Krsna consciousness and the sankirtana movement, because we are introducing it to the western world, and thereby to the greater world. Personalities such as Indradyumna Swami, as the first wave of sannyasis or mendicants, are setting a precedent for future generations. Kapila himself, although he finds Indradyumna Swami "mildly inspirational", has to admit that no one in ISKCON, including Indradyumna, has inspired Kapila himself to use all the talent and brainpower he possesses directly in the service of Srila Prabhupada by joining ISKCON and taking initiation, although he says that in the future he plans to do this. It's obvious that the lightweight preaching that Indradyumna Swami is doing is not moving him, as Srila Prabhupada's preaching moved us when we were the same age. We were so moved that we gave up everything to follow him and preach.
In a sense, Kapila is a living example. Most of us didn't have the opportunity of being born into a family of devotees, or being introduced to Krsna consciousness at a young age. I find it somewhat ironic that Kapila, of all people, rather than Indradyumna Swami's direct followers and disciples, have chosen to come to his defense. Those the Swami is hopefully training up in Krsna consciousness apparently don’t have the potency or ability to come and challenge me in the same way that we, as Srila Prabhupada's disciples, would certainly challenge anyone who was criticizing him. We find little or no response from this quarter of the devotee community, and it's hard to believe that they don't hear about the challenges being put forth in critiquing their guru.
Unlike them, I welcome criticism and response, and am happy to respond, just as I'm responding to Kapila prabhu. I'm not presenting myself as an absolute authority. These are just my personal thoughts on the particular circumstances and writing that is presented. I feel I have a right and a duty to do this. But within the community in which Indradyumna Swami is a high-ranking member, this same opportunity or freedom is not afforded to the members. Now whether Kapila agrees with this or not, I'd be interested to hear.
One of the major problems that ISKCON has had is that these Teflon individuals don't get any feedback whatsoever, from anyone, even their own peers, regardless of what they say or do. I could offer a long list of previous "great personalities" who have fallen, but who likely could have been saved had they been able to hear from their well-wishing godbrothers and associates. A perfect example is Satsvarupa. And I feel Indradyumna Swami also needs to be told that according to my observation and understanding of the philosophy, a lot of what he has to say is absolute nonsense. It was his choice to put this Diary out into the public arena.
I know for certain that I speak for many of my godbrothers, just as Kapila may be speaking for the Swami's supporters, in the same way that he speaks for many of the kulis - not on this particular issue, perhaps, but on many other issues. Kapila has a God-given ability to be articulate and intelligent, and he employs great organizational qualities in representing the kulis. Similarly, I try to represent my own constituency, i.e., a large group of devotees who've had experiences similar to my own. As such, Kapila and I have many things in common.
I'm asking Kapila to try and reflect on the fact that what he's accusing me of is the same as what many of those in ISKCON accuse the second generation devotees of -- namely that the kulis are exaggerating, over-simplifying, not understanding time and circumstance, and so on, and that their whole vision of reality is tainted by their past trauma and abuse. I admit that to a certain degree that applies to me and my fellow godbrothers and followers of Srila Prabhupada, who are being excluded and ignored by ISKCON and have been seriously abused by these same leaders that Kapila now finds entertaining and "mildly inspirational".
So Kapila may consider my criticism of the Swami to be "of the most dangerous variety", but the only danger to me is of two varieties:
1), that one of the Swami's fanatical followers will try to do me physical harm, which is not out of the question given the history of other godbrothers who have actually died on account of criticizing these people; or
2) that he actually is a great, advanced devotee and I'm committing some serious offense, for which the demigods and the universal laws will deal with me.
I have long ago given up the aparadhi fear syndrome, and I don't adhere to Kapila's argument that I may be disturbing the minds of many souls who look to the Swami as a great spiritual leader. This mentality is the reason why so many of the leaders have been able to fool and abuse so many devotees over the years, just as the gurukulis were abused.
