Gokulananda's Necktie Party
BY: HARAKUMARA DASA
Mar 26, TORONTO, CANADA (SUN) — Well, Gokulananda dasa, in his admonitory "Just Simply Follow Sadhu, Sastra and Guru", writing from the nation's lotusland, bowls eastward the tumbleweed of hazy arguments near foggy inlets between smoky mountains high, in vain striving to knock down the pins and pillars upholding Srila Prabhupada's rtvik diksa system for ISKCON. Not being content to air an errored head, he initially moves to blowback in hot air belching out, "Now I have been compelled to join in due [to] the utter concocted nonsense written by Harakumara Dasa in his "Uno por Matha, Por Favor!" article."
And just where is "the utter concocted nonsense" in the researched, referenced, vetted and [imho] well-argued article? In a manner more befitting a scoundrel than a scholar, he does not deign to state where. More heat than light, it would seem. Not being able to point out explicitly and specifically where, he merely "wraps himself in the flag" of Srila Prabhupada's words, hoping that generalities will suffice. Because I also believe in following Sadhu, Sastra and Guru (and who doesn't?), there is obviously a difference
of opinion involved. Since Gokulananda has not done all of his homework: (1) WHERE EXACTLY IS "THE UTTER CONCOCTED NONSENSE" IN MY ARTICLE?
True to form, Gokulananda has also mis-entitled his compulsive article. We are to "Just ... Follow Sadhu, Sastra and Guru", not "simply", but 'with intelligence'. Nothing unintelligent (not even pretentiously quoting sadhu, sastra and guru) can be genuinely Krsna conscious. Lord Krsna's Bhagavad-gita is about BUDDHI- (bhakti-) YOGA. As Srila Prabhupada remarks in his lecture du jour (1977/3/24, Bombay) about Bhagavad-gita verses using "tattvatah" [or "tattvena", = in truth] to qualify knowledge of the Lord:
"But if you want to know Krsna as He is, that requires intelligence. ... So we have to understand Krsna tattvatah, as He is." And as Sarvabhauma Bhattacarya characterized the descent and the mission of Sri Krsna Caitanya Mahaprabhu:
vairagya-vidya-nija-bhakti-yoga-siksartham ekah purusah puranah
sri-krsna-caitanya-sarira-dhari krpambudhir yas tam aham prapadye"
The brahman platform is the one and only platform of pure, self-realized devotees who know Krsna as He is, because they are in direct and personal touch with Him. So it is not enough to merely quote sadhu, sastra and guru; one must comprehend and realize the same.
Gokulananda dasa then proceeds to generally quote thrice from Srila Prabhupada in support of the evidential importance of sadhu, sastra and guru---something that no one disagrees with. But if sadhu, sastra and guru are all necessary, then let Gokulananda, (2) PROVE THAT ISKCON RTVIK DIKSA IS CONTRARY TO SADHU & SASTRA & GURU.
As I pointed out in a previous editorial, the burden of proof weighs on the anti-rtvik, not on the rtvik, side. ISKCON rtvik diksa was mandated (and used) by Srila Prabhupada, and was never countermanded. No order for anyone to become diksa-guru was forthcoming, which is lack of an order that Srila Prabhupada said was necessary. So the onus of proof is on the side of Gokulananda and his anti-rtvik friends, and not on the side of the proponents of ISKCON rtvik diksa who merely want to carry on with what we were left with by Srila Prabhupada.
Furthermore the quotes he uses, presumably to discredit ISKCON rtvik diksa, actually support it. Re the first quote, Srila Prabhupada is a bona fide spiritual master. Srila Prabhupada mentioned the rtvik diksa system. Because a bona fide spiritual master does not mention anything not mentioned in the authorized scriptures, we can be confident therefore that the rtvik diksa system is mentioned in the authorized scriptures. Re the second quote, "Arjuna, the student who took lessons from [his Guru] Lord Sri Krsna, accepts everything that He says without contradicting Him."
In regard to ISKCON rtvik diksa, we would that Gokulananda and all of Srila Prabhupada's disciples would emulate Arjuna in this way. Regarding the third quote, Gokulananda later tries to pin the "imaginology" tail on the best of the bovine ISKCON rtvik diksa system, but he's got it backwards. He should leave that tail where it belongs, on the monkey-jumping/ass-stalling ISKCON 'guru' diksa system. "We have got some evidence, but you have no evidence." Where is the order from the Founder-Acarya for anyone to become diksa-guru within ISKCON? Are we to disbelieve Tamal Krishna Goswami, who says that it isn't there?
Gokulananda dasa now proceeds to organize his own necktie party for one by trying to hang ISKCON rtvik diksa on his tree of error. He tries to argue against Srila Prabhupada's rightful place as the only diksa-guru in his own matha, ISKCON, by using Hari-Bhakti-Vilasa, which states that the diksa-guru and potential disciple should live together in mutual examination for one year prior to diksa. He then argues that this cannot be done now in the physical absence of Srila Prabhupada, making necessary recourse to some-body warmer, but much inferior, to be diksa-guru. But Gokulananda mendaciously neglects to mention that, in the case of (I daresay) at least 80% of Srila Prabhupada's disciples, IT WAS NEVER DONE. I can confirm this spiritual historical fact with my own example. I was in ISKCON only 5 months at most before being given diksa, and I was under Srila Prabhupada's examination for less than 1 minute (at initiation). And so it was with so many others. How does that fit in with the HBV scenario? Was Srila Prabhupada not following Vaisnava sastra? Does anyone doubt on that basis that Srila Prabhupada was the sole diksa-guru in ISKCON? And if it was mostly not done in the past when it was possible, then why is it so important
for the future when it is not possible?
Which one does Gokulananda prefer: HBV or ACBSP? Not realizing the instrumental extent of Krsna-sakti-pusta-parikara-Srila-Prabhupada, he has opted for the former. Wrong choice (sri-guru-carane rati, ei se uttama-gati). Without guru, no one can realize the sastra (heno nitai vine bhai, radha-krsna paite nai). If one has guru (sarva-devamayo guruh), he has (the essence of) sastra as well (not so easy the other way around---Srila Bhaktisiddhanta is a good example); Svetasvatara Upanisad 6.23:
yasya deve para bhaktir yatha deve tatha gurau
tasyaite kathita hy arthah prakasante mahatmanah
And to interpret Hari-Bhakti-Vilasa or have recourse to Srila Sanatana Gosvami over the head of Srila Prabhupada is a species of maryada-vyatikrama.
In "Believe It Or Else!" I showed on the basis of Srimad-Bhagavatam 7.9.29 (...manye sva-rsi-bhrtya-vakyam rtam vidhatum...), which is Sastra, that Bhagavan Sri Krsna, who is the Author of all Sastra (Bg 15.15), will support whatever means of diksa that Srila Prabhupada, who does not act contrary to the Sastra, sees fit to implement in his ISKCON, because Sri Krsna is bhakta-vatsala; Caitanya-caritamrta, adi-lila 6.100:
krsnera samata haite bada bhakta-pada
atma haite krsnera bhakta haya premaspada
"The position of being a devotee is higher than that of equality with Lord Krsna, for the devotees are dearer to Lord Krsna than His own self." More Sastra; Caitanya-caritamrta, Adi-lila 12.10:
acaryera mata yei, sei mata sara
tanra ajna langhi' cale, sei ta' asara
"The order of the spiritual master is the active principle in spiritual life. Anyone who disobeys the order of the spiritual master immediately becomes useless." ["Any opinion different from the opinion of the spiritual master is useless." Cc 1.12.9, pt.] So by rushing full throttle to garrotte the Founder-Acarya's rtvik diksa system for ISKCON, the hapless Gokulananda has merely strangulated himself. If you give some people enough rope, they will proceed to hang themselves (trai-gunya-visaya veda nistrai-gunyo bhavarjuna). The Guru can save us all from this kind of thing (Bg 18.73).
Having fallen to the ground and removed the knotted necklace of terminal misfortune, it is small wonder that the groggy Gokulananda is somewhat incoherent in his last gasping paragraphs. He claims the "current diksa process within ISKCON is also concocted imaginology", which to give him credit is correct, but why is it "imaginology"? Surely because it deviates from the will of the Founder-Acarya of ISKCON, not being based on his order. He also claims, without valid proof, that "one has to take diksa from a physically present spiritual master". This overlooks the fact that ISKCON is also a physical presence, and that Srila Prabhupada once referred to (real, spiritual) ISKCON as his "body". Srila Prabhupada is quite capable to be "physically present" in his (well-ordered) mystical body, ISKCON. But if the ISKCON guru diksa system is flawed and (hypothetically) one needs a physically present diksa-guru, then should one search outside ISKCON? No, says naïve Gokulananda, his arms out holding to enfold us in the brave new world of ISKCON, that hath such people in it, one should give it another go within because Srila Prabhupada said not to leave ISKCON (OK) AND "you should all become guru". But when Srila Prabhupada states this latter point, he is usually referring to the verse ... amara ajnaya guru hana ... (Caitanya-caritamrta, madhya-lila 7.128), which (as he makes very clear in his translations and purports to verses 127-130) refers to becoming a siksa-guru only. That is the reason why Srila Prabhupada comments in the purport to verse 130, "It is best not to accept any disciples." In other words, it is best not to falsely become a diksa-guru, i.e. without an order from Srila Prabhupada. The order has never been forthcoming. So the 'new, improved' ISKCON guru diksa system will be even less sweet than the old, due to chewing the chewed.
So, it is definitely not true that "Srila Prabhupada wanted all his disciples ... to become [diksa-] guru within ISKCON". He did, however, want them to "continue the work he started". And what was the work he started? He, as a diksa-guru, went out and built his own spiritual society. He wanted his disciples to "co-operate together" about him by not falsely claiming to be diksa-gurus for cuts of the ISKCON pie. If someone claims that Srila Prabhupada has mystically ordered him to be diksa-guru, then no argument, but let him prove it by establishing his own matha outside ISKCON. UNO POR MATHA is, in reality, ISKCON law.
I must admit that it is pleasurable to read such 'quoting automaton' articles as this, partly because Srila Prabhupada's words are a pleasure to read, and partly because they show that the opposition doesn't have much ammunition. As far as editorials are concerned, it's the weighty pieces you have to watch out for, not those that "simply" rest in pieces.
