BY: ROCANA DASA
Oct 23, CANADA (SUN) — A weekly response to Dandavats editorials.
Today's Obeisances is in response to the Dandavats article, "There is No Need to Give Up the Fight", excerpted from the Lilamrta. There's no forward or updated introduction by HH Satsvarupa das Goswami and we don't know if he directly submitted this article, so we're not sure how the author feels at the present moment in reflecting upon what he wrote back then.
Those who have read my previous writings, and especially my main thesis, will know that I have made a personal vow to expose the Lilamrta as being a great disservice to Srila Prabhupada and his transcendental movement, and therefore to the entire Gaudiya Vaisnava Sampradaya. Sometime in the future I plan to write a detailed critique of this book. The article published by Dandavats can be considered a drop in the ocean, and we can see much about the character of Lilamrta by studying this passage.
I've also written many times about my Godbrother, Satsvarupa. Over the years, I've had more personal experience with Satsvarupa as a GBC during Srila Prabhupada's lila period than anyone else, except Jagadisa. I know Satsvarupa very well, so I'm not talking abstractly, but rather very personally.
Before I get into the actual text published on Dandavats, I'd like to quickly outline my main concerns about the Lilamrta, which are all too evident in this particular excerpt. Firstly, Satsvarupa das Goswami's writing style, which could be considered "creative non-fiction" in literary circles, is completely unfounded in terms of our tradition. His approach in writing about Srila Prabhupada goes well beyond the boundaries of any previous descriptions of a Sampradaya Acarya or anyone of Srila Prabhupada's rarified spiritual status within our Sampradaya. And here I'm just referring to the writing style, what to speak of the actual message.
Secondly, one has to keep in mind that at the time he was writing this Lilamrta, Satsvarupa was the official spokesman for the Zonal Acaryas, and composed all the major philosophical papers in justification of the Zonal Acarya system. For example, he crafted the paper entitled "The Process for Carrying Out Srila Prabhupada's Desires for Future Initiations", written in March, 1978. In hindsight, we know that these papers were all totally asiddhantic and erroneous. I contend that the Lilamrta is simply an extension of that Zonal Acarya philosophy, as I'll point out in my comments on this passage.
For history's sake, our readers might also wish to refresh their memories by reading the transcript of the " First Two Official Meetings of Srila Sridhara Maharaja with the ISKCON GBC ", also from March 1978.
Following the release of Satsvarupa's paper, one of the first official acts made by he and the Zonal Acaryas was to kick Pradyumna dasa out of ISKCON for having written his letter to Satsvarupa Maharaj, which contains predictions about the negative impact the Zonal Acaryas' actions would have on ISKCON. Of course, all of Pradyumna's predictions came true. But does anyone consider that Satsvarupa's headaches may have been a reaction for the great offense of kicking out the single most advanced pandit in the movement? No one at that time could have been considered more brahminical than Pradyumna prabhu, who traveled everywhere with Srila Prabhupada, often chanting the Sanskrit before Prabhupada's classes.
I would not have such a personal charge about the Lilamrta had it just been Satsvarupa writing in the same way that he does his artwork or publishes his other books, which many devotees feel are totally nonsense. But this book, Lilamrta, has been adopted as ISKCON"s official presentation of Srila Prabhupada to the outside world. It has served as a template for all sorts of other biographies that have been produced by other participants in Srila Prabhupada's ISKCON lila. These memoir writers basically follow the same style of writing found in Lilamrta. Consequently newcomers and neophytes (including many of Srila Prabhupada's disciples) have adopted the Lilamrta as gospel truth, quotable from the asana, placing it unquestioningly on a sastra-like level. To challenge the Lilamrta is now equivalent to blasphemy within the institution. I have not heard a single GBC, ISKCON guru, sannyasi, or other institutional leader ever state that they disapprove of this book. It is unquestionably the institution's official stand on who Srila Prabhupada is. At the recent European meeting, the GBC announced that they will be making a detailed exploration of Srila Prabhupada's position. How they deal with the issue of this Lilamrta will be the 'canary in the coal mine', and will indicate their real level of commitment to fixing what's broken in this regard.
In discussing this issue with my Godbrothers, I've detected that for those who actually participated in Srila Prabhupada pastimes, the detrimental effect of this Lilamrta is not as profound as it is with those who did not participate in the lila, and especially newcomers. In this article I won't get into a discussion about how it affects a newcomer's state of consciousness in regards to Srila Prabhupada, but more on that later.
Having said that, let us look at the actual passage from Lilamrta published recently on Dandavats. I find this text to be extremely relevant to today's circumstances, and to my recent "Talks With the Sampradaya Acarya" regarding Srila Prabhupada's instructions about taking sannyasa. That morning walk conversation was close in time to the circumstance Satsvarupa is writing about in this passage. I don’t know if Srila Prabhupada knew about Madhudvisa's problems at the time of his morning walk conversation, which took place a few months prior to the Hawaii scenario Satsvarupa is describing here.
The first paragraph in itself says a lot about Satsvarupa's tendency to not shed any negative light on the Zonal Acaryas. Prior to writing the Lilamrta, Hansadutta was having his well known serious difficulties. His problem, interestingly enough, didn't have to do directly, as Satsvarupa says, with "sensuality". Satsvarupa speculates about all Srila Prabhupada's disciples, saying:
"In most cases, the difficulties of Prabhupada’s disciples were urges toward sensuality. Almost never did disciples turn against Prabhupada, nor did they often reject the philosophical conclusions of Krsna consciousness [sic]."
This is a very simplistic analysis. It doesn't address the fact that even during Srila Prabhupada's lila period, especially in the later portion about which this passage is referring, all the big sannyasis and GBC were cutting a very high profile. This means that they were enamored by adoration, distinction and false prestige. They had a great deal of access to money, which of course all the Zonal Acaryas had many times over by the time this Lilamrtawas written. The Zonal Acaryas put Madhudvisa, or any one of those that fell down due to sensuality, to shame. In hindsight, we see that the demise of many of the Zonal Acaryas themselves, such as Rameswar, Bhagavan, Jayatirtha, and later Harikesa, were all due in great part to adoration, distinction and false prestige.
Satsvarupa sums it up by saying, "They simply fell victim to maya’s allurements." In fact, it wasn't simple at all. Maya's "allurements" is a huge subject matter. It's not just women. Sannyasis attracted to women represent a very small portion of Maya's allurements. Of course, Maya is represented by women, but so are money and false prestige.
I find it very interesting that in the third paragraph, Satsvarupa quotes Srila Prabhupada in this way:
"What can I do?” Prabhupada said sadly. “I am working with all third-class men - fools and rascals. Things are going on simply by Krsna’s mercy."
Of course, throughout the whole Lilamrta, Satsvarupa never provides citations for where these quotes are coming from. This is another example of the literary license he takes which, for a creation like this, is way out of the realm of being bonafide.
Satsvarupa then goes into his classical speculation about what Srila Prabhupada was thinking or feeling:
"Although he restrained his emotions, the devotees could see that he was distracted."
He further extrapolates this sentimental statement:
"It was another case of a strong affectionate bond for a son who had rendered wonderful service, a disciple whom he had patiently trained over the years. Again the possibility of Prabhupada’s retiring from active management looked doubtful."
This is nothing but speculation as to what the pure devotee is actually thinking. He mentions in the earlier quote that Srila Prabhupada is working with all third class men, fools and rascals, yet a few years later these very same third class fools and rascals suddenly transformed themselves into being pure devotees who were qualified to become the exclusive Zonal Acaryas. At the time Satsvarupa wrote this, he was a Zonal Acarya himself. How he can't put two and two together here is beyond me.
Interestingly, the conversation turns to the subject of falling down from sannyasa. Satsvarupa chooses to quote Srila Prabhupada's reference to the sastric description of what it's like to falldown from sannyasa:
“One who falls from sannyasa,” Prabhupada replied, “is called vantasi, one who vomits and then eats it.”
Srila Prabhupada then gives a concession in the sense that he indicates that you can go from sannyasa back to grihasta, and still stay active. This is the theme of this whole presentation. As we know and can confirm with a quick Google of "Satsvarupa", which now brings up a Wikipedia reference, Satsvarupa fell down from sannyasa into 'sensuality'. Of course, we note that he didn't follow Srila Prabhupada's instructions, and change his asrama. So what qualified Satsvarupa not to change his asrama after he specifies these very instructions in his own Lilamrta? Srila Prabhupada said you have to change your asrama if you fall down from sannyasa, not just that you later recommit to sannyasa without doing the honorable thing, and becoming a grihasta.
I could mention time and time again throughout the article where Satsvarupa speculates on what Srila Prabhupada is thinking. To make his story flow, he keeps mentioning that Srila Prabhupada is thinking of Madhudvisa all the time, but there's no evidence of that being the case.
Then Srila Prabhupada goes into the story of the elephant Gajendra's crisis. One can read from Srimad-Bhagavatam, 8th Canto to get the true story of this pastime as purported by Srila Prabhupada, rather than Satsvarupa's generalization. When I read this excerpt from the Lilamrta about Gajendra's story, then read the same story in Srimad-Bhagavatam with Srila Prabhupada's purports, I can't help but reflect on Satsvarupa's personal circumstances. Shortly after the Lilamrta was written and published, Satsvarupa began having crocodile-sized headaches, which lasted a very long time - some 20 years. This is very similar to Gajendra's fight with the crocodile. Like Gajendra, Satsvarupa was really out of his element in having taken on the big responsibilities of guru, GBC and sannyasa. Consequently, he fell down, although he didn't change his position, as was recommended in the purports Srila Prabhupada gave about Gajendra. In other words, Satsvarupa didn't change his asrama so he could fight from a position of power to regain his spiritual balance. Instead he went on hiatus, changing only his physical environment instead. We now see that he's again changed his circumstances, moving into a grand hacienda in San Miguel de Allende, Mexico. Meanwhile, back at the ranch, the GBC continue to publish all the absolute nonsense known as the Lilamrta. Not only has this book caused tremendous loss to Srila Prabhupada's movement on the philosophical front, it also cost the movement untold millions of dollars for all the accommodation Satsvarupa was given to research and publish the book, the facility he enjoyed in Ireland, the cost of his recovery while ensconced in opulent facilities in northern California, now on to his palatial new residence in Mexico. All this money could have gone to printing and distributing Srila Prabhupada's books. Instead, the new Mexico facility will publish Satsvarupa's own ridiculous books - and of course, all of that money should also be going to printing and distributing the Sampradaya Acarya's books. And the GBC just looks on, apparently having absolutely no input or control whatsoever.
The excerpt from Lilamrta ends with an almost prophetic statement by the author, which in due course became applicable to his very own circumstance:
"Prabhupada’s job was to strengthen his disciples so they would not fall. Even if they took to the grhastha-asrama, the crocodile of sense-gratification was still very strong. And illicit sex was the “permanent disease” of the Western people."
The author, a western person, fell down into illicit sex. If it's a "permanent disease" what does that say? And Satsvarupa didn't even step down to the grhastha platform.
In closing, I'd like the readers to know that Satsvarupa Maharaja, despite his image of being humble and brahminical, was and in my estimation still is, a bewildered personality that does not in any way deserve the kind of distinction that he still carries, and the immunity which he enjoys in terms of not only his past, but what he's doing at present. While Satsvarupa gave up all his GBC responsibilities some years ago, he didn't gave up sannyasa, and he didn't give up his guruship or the adoration and distinction that goes with it. And as the evidence presented here shows, he continues to enjoy the benefits of these positions, without taking any responsibility within ISKCON.
It's just astounding that the GBC are turning a complete blind eye to this obvious travesty. Keep in mind that they did the very same thing with Kirtanananda for many years. What is the GBC for, anyway, if not to deal with situations like this?
Obeisances to Dandavats, and to HH Satsvarupa dasa Goswami.
