BY: ROCANA DASA


Feb 21, CANADA (SUN) — Studying Srila Prabhupada's conversations with ISKCON leaders.

I recently offered my comments on a morning walk conversation from June 26, 1975. Today, by request, Talks considers a room conversation that took place on that same date. The devotee who asked us to consider this particular conversation indicated that he has had some difficulty understanding Srila Prabhupada's intentions and message in the conversation. As a result, his mind has been quite agitated on the matter. So, I will attempt to offer whatever comments I can from my point of view.

I, too, find this room conversation quite unusual, and I can see why it would be disturbing for some. Neither the text nor audio for this conversation appears to be available online, and in fact, the audio appears not to be available at all. That's unfortunate, because a lot could and should have been learned by listening to Srila Prabhupada's voice on this conversation. By hearing his inflections and mood, we would surely find it easier to understand, as the conversation dynamics take place on a rather subtle level.

Present with Srila Prabhupada for this room conversation are Jayatirtha, Revatanandana, Upendra, Satsvarupa, and two unnamed devotees. As the conversation develops, it's obvious that Srila Prabhupada has become very annoyed with the devotees appearing before him. I'm sure this would be even more obvious if we could hear the audio. If someone has a copy, it would be good of them to pass it on to us.

I did listen to some other audio conversations that occurred near this date, and discovered that I was personally in Los Angeles during this period. I attended various morning walks and garden conversations with the scholars who came to see Srila Prabhupada, but I wasn't invited to this particular get-together. It comes as quite a surprise to me that his meeting even took place, because this type of encounter wasn't the norm. Over the course of the conversation, Srila Prabhupada lets everyone know that he designed a hierarchy that would protect him from having to deal with such issues.

As the conversation unfolds, it becomes clear that Revatanandana Swami had sided with the devotees who were arguing with Srila Prabhupada. He had arranged it so that they could speak directly to Srila Prabhupada on their concerns, which were unresolved in the local temple community of Jayatirtha and Ramesvar. Therefore, the devotees wanted to present their arguments to Srila Prabhupada.

It's also interesting to note that practically everyone but Srila Prabhupada left their active involvement in Krsna Consciousness. Jayatirtha is deceased, Ramesvar is selling real estate in NY, Revatanandana left the movement shortly after this conversation. Of the two unnamed devotees, who I understand to be Jamadagni and Kanupriya, I believe Jamadagni is the one doing most of the complaining and pressing Srila Prabhupada to see his point of view. In fact, Jamadagni (Jeffrey Armstrong) is currently living in the same city as my wife and I- Vancouver, British Columbia. Basically, he's still doing all the same things today that he was doing on this very day, when he annoyed Srila Prabhupada so much. That is, he's wearing hair, he's not presenting Krsna Consciousness, and he's instead presenting himself as a Vedic astrologer. Basically he's trying to be a successful New Age guru, and this is basically what Srila Prabhupada was predicting or observing in his nature.

It also seems apparent that Srila Prabhupada had previously been made aware of the personal circumstances of these devotees, and what the position of their local leaders was on how to deal with them, or how to accommodate them (or not). Srila Prabhupada was obviously in disagreement with their philosophical position and their unwillingness to work in cooperation with the local authorities. He was also unhappy that they were not presenting themselves externally as devotees, i.e., they were not wearing sikha or tilaka. Thirdly, he was unhappy that they were complaining to him about the way Krsna consciousness was presented in the books, which they felt made it difficult for them to preach. They brought up a particular from Srimad Bhagavatam wherein Ugrasena is described as having four billion servants or bodyguards, although there were only 2 billion people on the planet at that time. Scholars had apparently put down the writings as being fictitious mythology rather than factual history, the way Srila Prabhupada has presented it. One can easily image that this didn't sit well with Srila Prabhupada.

At first he tried to give them some basic guidance, saying why present this particular aspect of the philosophy to such scholars and intellectuals? But the devotees pressed on, and Srila Prabhupada could only confront their own dismal lack of faith and surrender to him on the matter.

While Srila Prabhupada didn't bring the point up in this conversation, I recently heard him say that Jiva Goswami's main philosophical point was that it is a pre-qualification for understanding God that you must accept the inconceivable nature of God. I'm sure that all honest devotees can recall that we had to apply this principle right from the very beginning when we read Srila Prabhupada's books. Descriptions of the Lord and His inconceivable potency, and the position of individuals like Ugrasena, can be very hard to understand. The absolute truth is inconceivable! But based on the principle that Srila Prabhupada and the previous Acaryas accept it to be true, and that we're just fallen conditioned souls hoping to make some advancement, we can trust that we'll eventually be enlightened to the true inner meanings. In the meantime, we must simply accept it as inconceivable.

As for the case of how many bodyguards Ugrasena had, this strikes me as a pretty minor point to churn into such a big preaching problem. Srila Prabhupada is basically saying that they have to educate themselves in the philosophy so they can deal with issues like this.

As the devotees continued to press Srila Prabhupada, he suggested they have a court (hearing) on the matter, with him as the judge. The complaining devotees would go before him and explain their positions, then the temple authorities who disagree with them would present their position, and Srila Prabhupada would decide. But because he's the judge, they have to accept whatever his position is. But they weren't in agreement with that suggestion.

Srila Prabhupada tried to address their issues, but in the end it came down to faith. Srila Prabhupada made the point that unless you have faith, you can't read the Puranas. And as anyone who's read Srimad Bhagavatam knows, you must have a lot of faith in order to accept all sorts of amazing facts that are presented. But the devotees in front of Srila Prabhupada were trying to understand sastra with their material intelligence, and Srila Prabhupada obviously detected that they didn't have the required faith, which time revealed to be true.

Srila Prabhupada appears to be quite annoyed at having been put in the position of dealing directly with these individuals, who should have been dealt with by the local leaders or his senior men. Srila Prabhupada ultimately just says to them that 'we're not forbidding for you to be part of the society, you're free to be part of it or not, to accept everything that's in the books, or not. We can't improve on anything in the books, so either accept or reject.' But these two individuals keep insisting that they just want to understand, that their only motive is to have this point cleared up, and that they represent a sub-group of devotees who are interested in varnasrama, farms and business. At one point Srila Prabhupada says strongly, three times:

    "Stop it. Stop it. I say stop it. You have come to me for my advice. I say you stop it."

And when they kept pressing Srila Prabhupada he said, well then just do your business. Earn money, and enjoy. The punch line, so to speak, and what I suppose most disturbed the mind of the devotee who requested my input, was when Srila Prabhupada ordered these two to just give up Krsna Consciousness. He said 'this is my advice to you'. Such a statement seems to be the direct antithesis of the concept that Srila Prabhupada wanted everyone to be Krsna Consciousness, and that we were all involved in trying to spread Krsna Consciousness. Yet here were a few of his disciples, who even mentioned that they'd been devotees for five years, and Srila Prabhupada is telling them to just give up Krsna Consciousness based on the principle that, as Srila Prabhupada says right after, they're finding so many faults. Of course, they were finding fault not just with the leaders, which Srila Prabhupada could easily have accepted, but rather finding fault with the books and the philosophy.

So Srila Prabhupada said there's nothing he could do. They either have to accept it or reject it. It's as simple as that. Srila Prabhupada said he doesn't have any other knowledge, nothing he can possibly say that he hasn't already said in his books will help them accept. When they said that they wanted to accept it and apply it, but they needed some input from him so they could apply it in the world, Srila Prabhupada said you can't apply it because you're not authorized to apply it. They came right back at him saying well, who's authorized? Srila Prabhupada basically let them know that he won't authorize them because they won't work according to his plan.

I think it's important for the reader to understand the difference between having this type of conversation with a 'regular guru', and having it with the Sampradaya Acarya himself. Standing in front of the Sampradaya Acarya, who is expecting you to work directly in his mission and under his personal guidance, but instead arguing with him, is extremely offensive and un-Vaisnava-like. So when they asked if they're not authorized, then who is, Srila Prabhupada just said 'that's none of your business, who's authorized. The main thing is you're not authorized'.

The two devotees didn't want to give an inch on this subject and basically said to Srila Prabhupada, what's the use of being a disciple if you won't answer our questions? He replied that in reality, they had already given up being his disciple, because they refused to accept his authority but instead just kept arguing with him.

Finally, rather than try to deal with two such contaminated personalities as these, Srila Prabhupada did what he so often did with Christians and scholars -- he just went to their weakest point to defeat them. This time, he said 'it's because you're wearing hair'. Of course, they came back at Srila Prabhupada again and said well, we're not the only one, many of your disciples wear hair. Srila Prabhupada said well, I'm talking about "big hairs". And if you look at a current picture of Jamadagni on his website, you'll see that he still has pretty big hair, today.

Interestingly, the subject of hair is still a controversy, and often comes up in reference to the standards followed by members of the Gaudiya Matha. It's their standard program to only shave once a month or so, I believe on a schedule that has something to do with the moon. Much of the time they look pretty scruffy. I've heard Srila Prabhupada say that he doesn't accept this look, because his disciples have been branded, i.e., our identity has been established on the principle that we wear shaved heads and tilak, and people recognize us in that particular uniform. If you're preaching in this dress it immediately establishes who you are as a follower of Srila Prabhupada's and of the philosophy. So this was very important in his mind.

As the two devotees continued to belabour the point about hair, Srila Prabhupada pointed out that they weren't wearing tilak either. When Lord Caitanya say anyone who came before Him without tilak, he looked upon their forehead as a crematorium.

Overall, Srila Prabhupada appeared to be very disappointed in their attitude, which was obviously displayed by the dress they were wearing, the lack of Vaisnava symbols such as tilak and shaved head, and especially in their un-surrendered mood when coming before Srila Prabhupada himself, the Sampradaya Acarya. On top of that they were very irreverent and foolish.

Srila Prabhupada said that as far as he could see they weren't strictly following, and one of the devotees said "I'm sorry it has to be this way." Srila Prabhupada replied with a particular statement that is the key to the whole discussion. He said:

    "So what I can do I am doing. Therefore you have no right to ask me. What is possible by me I am doing. And those who are able to follow, they are following. That’s all."

They tried to appease Srila Prabhupada by saying well, we're trying to be your disciples, and we're sincerely trying. Srila Prabhupada just said, 'so why are you bothering me? Do your business'. Apparently trying to end the conversation and not wanting them to continue repeating themselves, he said very bluntly: 'I do not accept you because you are wearing hairs'. So they had a choice right then and there... and we know they made the wrong choice.

They even had the audacity to point out to Srila Prabhupada that they saw pictures of him wearing a moustache and hair. In other words, they inferred that he's a hypocrite. Of course, that was when Srila Prabhupada was a householder and was doing business. Srila Prabhupada simply said 'that was before I was initiated'. After being initiated, he said, he always shaved his head.

These two individuals were amazingly persistent, which is an indication in itself of how un-submissive they were. Although they kept trying to state that they were submissive and humble, by their very actions they were proving it not to be true.

Srila Prabhupada asked why didn't just ask these questions of his disciples. They had apparently already gone to Revatanandana Swami and Jayatirtha, and I assume these two authorities didn't have the answers, so they allowed them to come in and present their challenges directly to Srila Prabhupada. But Srila Prabhupada said if they can't answer the question, it's too bad, I'm sorry, I cannot answer the question. He had appointed the GBC to deal with this, and they were obviously not dealing with it, and it was not that important for him to become involved in.

The devotees then said they had the impression that Srila Prabhupada knew everything, and was speaking directly for Krsna, and Srila Prabhupada said well I've already said everything in my books, and it's not possible to answer every individual person's questions. He appears to have assumed that they weren't reading his books, and he was probably right. They were too busy making money, and basically wanted Srila Prabhupada to resolve a dispute rather than clear up an actual philosophical issue.

The devotees wanted to clarify whether they were supposed to blindly accept whatever the GBC or Srila Prabhupada's representative authorities had to say as being absolutely correct. And Srila Prabhupada simply said, "There is no reply."

To further press this point, one of the devotees challenged Srila Prabhupada by telling a story about an "unnamed leader", who I understand was Subal Swami. The Swami was involved as a temple authority in Hawaii at the time. The devotee told Srila Prabhupada that some temple authority said he wanted the devotee to have homosex with him. He used this as an example, saying should I just have said OK, whatever you want.

Srila Prabhupada had already clearly said that we stand on principles, and the principles are set down in his books. So the challenging devotee should not have had to ask him this challenging question, because it had already been answered. No, you don’t have to follow such an instruction. But this individual wanted Srila Prabhupada to know how bad his authorities were, so he provided the most dramatic possible example.

Srila Prabhupada actually asked at this point to talk to Subal (name withheld). Satsvarupa indicated that he was across the street. I know from listening to other morning walks around this time that Srila Prabhupada definitely got back onto this issue with Subal, and it was a problem that had to deal with.

So even without listening to the audio of this conversation, the tension in the air is unmistakable. Revatanandana Swami began trying to get the devotees out the door, telling them not to pursue it any further. But the devotee argued back with him, saying he's not speaking to him, but to Srila Prabhupada, and he didn't want to hear from anyone other than Srila Prabhupada.

In the end, Srila Prabhupada had made his position crystal clear, saying that these were not his disciples because they weren't surrendered to him. Therefore, none of it was really any of their business. Of course, the temple authorities should have taken care of this problem with Subal Swami, and Srila Prabhupada shouldn't have had to deal with it. But the leaders obviously couldn't deal with Subal… they couldn't even deal with these two devotees. So this very awkward and unnecessary set of circumstances was on account of their own lack of advancement and taking responsibility. Not only that, but none of the devotees seem to have recognized who Srila Prabhupada really was. Of course, if we'd had any idea who he was, we would never have bothered him with issues such as this. Here we have a personality of such exalted stature, and who knows how long it may be until someone so elevated is sent by Krsna again to give commentary on the revealed scriptures? If we had any idea of how important that was, then we would have allowed Srila Prabhupada far more time to engage in his writing activities. But out of the goodness of Srila Prabhupada's heart, he would often meet with devotees and encourage them.

As I mentioned earlier, every one of these devotees has now fallen by the wayside: the leaders, the two devotees who were challenging Srila Prabhupada, Revatanandana, Upendra, even Satsvarupa. In the end, all we have is Srila Prabhupada, and Srila Prabhupada's books.

In conclusion, it may seem like Srila Prabhupada didn't act the way he would normally have acted when presented with questions from his disciples, but the dynamics of this situations were obviously different than in such a "normal" circumstance. Srila Prabhupada didn't appreciate or like this particular set of circumstances. These devotees had taken initiation, but had decided to move out and be independent. They were really no longer part of his organization, and had just come back to criticize the local authorities and try to appear self-important in their confrontive mood. Somehow they had penetrated Srila Prabhupada's hierarchy and had found their way to his personal rooms, where they so irreverently challenge him. Srila Prabhupada may appear to be harsh, but of course that's the prerogative of the guru. A disciple is supposed to immediately pick-up when the guru is not happy or is annoyed, at which time they should take an entirely different and humble stand or approach. These two individuals did exactly the opposite.

Srila Prabhupada tried to wind up the conversation by just pointing to their hair as an important indication of the true circumstances. One should read it in this way rather than trying to understand it literally, as though the hair was really such a big issue in and of itself. In fact, there can be but a hair's difference between humbly following and not truly respecting the guru. But in this case, there was a mile of difference, and these two individuals found themselves on the wrong side of the ocean. They refused to humbly step into the boat of the Spiritual Master's mercy, and as a result, they essentially drowned in the material ocean, sinking under the weight of their own false ego.


Homepage


| The Sun | News | Editorials | Features | Sun Blogs | Classifieds | Events | Recipes | PodCasts |

| About | Submit an Article | Contact Us | Advertise | HareKrsna.com |

Copyright 2005, HareKrsna.com. All rights reserved.