Fools Rush In…
BY: CANDRABHANU DAS
Nov 03, USA (SUN) — Rocana prabhu’s article, "Vaishnava Aparadha or Bona fide Criticism?", defending what he considers Sampradaya Sun‘s mandate and what I consider to be, in the case of Hrdayananda Goswami, Vaishnava aparadh, reveals the mind of a career critic whose use of the broad brush creates stereotypes and caricatures that ultimately render his opinions trite, predictable and somewhat melodramatic. His two dimensional world consists of the conspirators and the whistle blowers. There are no other colors on his palette.
Rocana prabhu doesn’t know me from Adam, yet he has drawn a picture of a mindless zealot, a sycophant, or worse, a minion who may even be paid to defend an evil empire. He considers me a coward, someone for whom criticism of the status quo is disquieting. To him I am merely a mouthpiece for dark forces that scheme to destroy our movement from within.
In truth I am none of the above. Those who know me can attest to my ability to hold more than one thought in my mind at a time. I have been on different sides of many issues in my tenure in temple management, business dealings and philosophical debate within and without ISKCON. I have been a strong critic of management policy both local and national when events have demanded. I am currently participating with a group of academic devotees to begin a process on the GBC level to reform and amend the current guru appointment laws. In short, I am not the blind ISKCON ideologue Rocana would paint me as to thus be easily characterized and dismissed.
And if I’m not that façade for the rich and powerful, if I’m simply a concerned, reflective individual like most of the Sun readership, if I am just a rank and file guy trying to use discrimination, logic, common sense, Srila Prabhupada’s example and sastra to sort through the myriad gray areas of our sincere but imperfect attempt to please His Divine Grace, then perhaps my perception regarding Hrdayananda Goswami can become more compelling. To the chagrin of demagogues like Rocana, maybe I’m worth listening to.
I was one of the first vocal critics (unsupported by the GBC) of Kirtanananda in 1978 and organized a rebellion in protest of his Zonal policies by leading an unprecedented mass defection of the Cleveland temple. I stood arm in arm on guru reform in the ‘80’s. I am no friend to initiatives like temple by-law changes that aim to centralize the institution. As previously stated, I disagree with a number of GBC rules that are not sastrically supported. I’m an active advocate for the establishment of varnashrama and have helped pass legislation on the local level to actualize real projects where the GBC has only dragged its feet. So a “poster boy" for the status quo, I’m not.
But taken as an individual case, beyond the cynical, historical context of Zonal Guruship, GBC management problems, and other ideological wrangling, I am certain that Hrdayananda Goswami is eminently worth defending. I don’t say so as an ISKCON “love it or leave it" patriot, but as someone who has and continues to critically observe his character and teachings and who finds little lacking besides the superficial regard for style over substance. He eschews orthodoxy for its own sake and has tailored a preaching agenda that is relevant and effective. His views and practices concerning the guru-disciple relationship (a sore spot for some) can be shown to be sastrically accurate, perhaps more so than most. Accusations regarding his inattention to sadhana are false. I defy anyone to prove otherwise. To place him in a category with devotees who have experienced serious fall downs and/or have left the movement is more or less despicable. One can only assume that such critics are hoping and praying for Vaishnavas to fail.
I will repeat the essence of my previous article: Please do not formulate judgments based on third party information, which in many cases comes from ill-motivated individuals. The sastric method requires personal “testing," that is, inquiring in person before deciding the stature of an individual who proposes to teach. The information gained through “news" sites like the Sun are often full of hyperbole, half-truths, outright lies and misleading innuendo. In many cases they constitute Vaishnava aparadha because they impugn a devotee’s character on the basis of falsehoods and unwarranted assumptions.
The so-called brave media watchdog here has become no more than a tabloid paparazzi going so far as to publish out of context photographs and issue news from reporters who were never actually on the scene. More intellectual exercise and less biased editorializing could raise Sun to the level of an important journal. The kind of un-researched, unverifiable, irresponsible reporting seen in Rocana’s and other recent articles is not real journalism and should not be taken seriously by any thoughtful reader.
I have nothing more to say on this matter. My response to anything further will be the same simple request. Go and do your own due diligence, and avoid aparadha!
