Crossing the Line
BY: CANDRABHANU DAS
Nov 06, USA (SUN) — Kripamoya prabhu's inquiry, "Vaishnava Aparadha", and Rocana prabhu's attempt at an answer, "Vaishnava Aparadha or Bona Fide Cricicism?", reveal the key question in this exchange. When does the analysis of alleged mistakes in a Vaishnava's preaching cross the line to become personally offensive?
Rocana prabhu asks, "What is a Vaishnava?"
The Nectar of Instruction (5) states:
krsneti yasya giri tam manasadriyeta
diksästi cet pranatibhis ca bhajantam isam
susrusaya bhajana-vijnam ananyam anya
nindadi sünya-hrdam ipsita-sanga-labdhya
If you hear someone sincerely chanting the Holy Name, then you should offer him respects in your mind, again and again.
If he has joined a devotional line (sampradaya) through initiation and is engaged in worshiping Krishna, then you should respectfully fall down and take the dust of his feet.
And if you meet a devotee who has no concept of anyone belonging to his or to an opposing group, and is simply engaged in undeviating devotion to Krishna, then serve him constantly
It's not offensive to address suspected errors in siddhanta in a civil manner devoid of hostility. But to speak harshly and disrespectfully either before or even after a fair hearing on these matters is treading on very dangerous ground.
To again look at the Skanda Purana verses:
"4. To not glorify. All Vaishnavas are worthy of respect. To not respect a Vaishnava in accordance with his qualification, or to refuse from recognizing a particular good quality or deed of a Vaishnava, is unbefitting. Everyone is to be given all the respect they deserve, regardless of their having different opinions from ours.1"
In the case of Hridayananda Goswami:
In an outright philosophical debate over Vaishnava siddhanta and shastric authority HG will be a formidable opponent. It would be naïve to assume from his critic's side that that debate is open and shut.
Regardless of the outcome of such a debate, respectful language and etiquette should always be observed.
Encapsulating the 6 verses from the Skanda Purana:
"Regardless of what anyone has said or done, we should not (1) assault him or his followers, (2) call him names or speak of him harshly, or (3) wish anything bad for him. We should (4) justly give him all the credit he is due and praise his achievements, (5) avoid anger towards him as a person, and (6) be happy upon seeing or hearing of him or his followers, remembering that despite all differences, they also chant the all-auspicious names of Krishna."1
Two things can be said about this regarding the Sampradaya Sun's coverage:
That the true philosophical debate over a large portion of HG's position has been virtually non existent and
That defamatory, strident and cruel language has been the hallmark of these discussions.
For these reasons I submit that whereas, in general, alleged philosophical deviation can and should be called into question, in this case the issue has been handled irresponsibly to the point of crossing the boundary of civility and entering the realm of Vaishnava aparadha.
Again, I beg the Sampradaya Sun, please do not traffic in this kind of destructive Vaishnava aparadha.
Your servant,
Candrabhanu das
____________________
[1] Madhavananda das; Gaudiya Discussions 2002
