Praghosa's Mantra of Simplicity
BY: ROCANA DASA
Nov 13, CANADA (SUN) —
Thank you, Praghosa dasa (NYC), for your most recent article. In response, I'd like to begin by saying that you and I, under the kind of circumstances you have described as being Srila Prabhupada's simple program -- mainly chanting, dancing, taking prasadam in one of Srila Prabhupada's temples, following the regulative principles, chanting rounds and so on -- under those conditions we'd undoubtedly be great friends. Prior to us getting into these Internet discussions, I had little connection with you, and you never crossed my "writer's radar" since you weren't a Zonal Acarya or other big leader in ISKCON.
As far as I can see, I pushed a main 'hot button' for you that resulted in you saying I have vilified you or misconstrued your intentions or your past history, which really wasn’t my intention. Maybe I haven't explained myself clearly enough in terms of why the things you've previously said in the context of explaining your 'simple theme' caused me to respond in the way that I did.
In terms of saying disparaging things about the fact that you're married and have six kids, that's taken totally out of context. It's not what I meant, and I think you know it. I really meant that if you're so dedicated to the concept of simplicity, you know that the great Acaryas have given a simple formula for escaping the complexity of the material world -- avoid the entanglements of family life. Period. That's a Vedic conclusion from sastra. So I was just using you as an example, since you're the one who's preaching simplicity on one hand, and telling us about your family on the other hand. I'm simply pointing out what appears to be a somewhat hypocritical position, considering your circumstances.
I was invited by the GBC to be a sannyasis at one point in my devotional career, and considering that the person who suggested it was taking psychedelic drugs at the time, I'm sure glad I didn't take him up on the offer. The other one who suggested it was shooting guns as his recreational pastime. I remember when you joined Bhagavan and he was hoping that you'd join the rest of the sannyasis who were running Europe (most of whom fell down). Suddenly the big news was that you had found the love of your life in Portugal, and the rest is history. To my knowledge, you fell off the ISKCON circuit for about 15 years, until you resurfaced in New York, but I have no doubt you were busy distributing Srila Prabhupada's books somewhere over those years. It seems that you survived much better than many of the sannyasis did, so your decision to get married and have a family was obviously the right one.
You also took offense with my suggestion that you tend to put one type of service above the others, namely big book distribution as being the ultimate service in ISKCON. In your article entitled ""More on Simplicity"", you wrote:
"I constantly insist - to the point of monotony perhaps and for that I apologise - that Srila Prabhupada made it sublimely simple. He said he was "whipping us" to distribute his books - in order to invite all "serious men" to take part in this movement and cooperate with us to share it worldwide "for the good of human society. The sincere and "serious" man will never be able to pretend that it is more difficult or complicated than it actually is."
And in our previous discussion you wrote:
"Those books were to be Srila Prabhupada's recoreded "devotional ecstacies" - The Bhaktivedanta Purports to Srimad Bhagavatam, Bhagavad Gita and Chaitanya Charitamrita. This was what we were doing [book distribution] - daily till he left us and he wished that this simple, simple, simple, simple, simple simple simple simple "system" remain intact and confidentally promoted by his loyal loving disciples - for the next 10,000 years. [ ] All parties should dedicate themselves to the distribution of Srila Prabhupada's books and the Holy Name.
In all fairness, I must admit that after taking the time to re-read many of your postings over the last year, I find that there aren't so many instances where you're really putting other people's service down in favor of book distribution. Rather, there is a consistent tone expressed in your writings, more often on the "it's simple" theme, in which you emphatically put down anyone who doesn't accept your position. This mood was expressed by you throughout the "It's Taboo, Prabhu" thread, a three-part Sun Blog in which the majority of our previous exchanges took place. Many other posters joined me in taking exception to your high-handed tone. Anyone interested enough to plow through those three, very long threads will understand my reactiveness to your recent comments, which I see as a continuation of the same old tune.
In our more recent conversation, I again pointed out that mood, which I believe was cultivated and nurtured by the Radha Damodar Party leaders, and Tamal Krishna Goswami in particular. You joined in Detroit during that era, and joined the Radha Damodar Party before you were initiated. Consequently you were trained up, or in other words conditioned, into a certain mindset. I also know that you quickly rose to the top, and as a natural big book distributor, you were hobnobbing with the 'big guys' very quickly in the primo sankirtana spots.
During that same period I was a Temple President, and I was at the receiving end of all the criticism that was coming down from the big saffron guys, who were causing untold misery for those running things at the local level - a place that you now highlight as being an intrinsic part of your 'simple formula'. The truth of the matter is that in those days, the Radha Damodar Party was hardly recruiting anyone, although that was their original formula when the party was run by its founder, Visnujnana Prabhu. Then Tamal Krishna took it over, and Visnujnana mysteriously disappeared. Tamal converted the Radha Damodar Party into a big money making/book distribution program, with little or no recruiting aspect of it. Consequently, they had to resort to stealing brahmacaries from the ISKCON temples that they happened to visit. They did this by convincing the brahmacaries that the Temple Presidents were a bunch of slacko, lazy good-for-nothing grhastas who were impeding their spiritual advancement, and they'd be much better off joining the bus party. Temple Presidents would wake up in the morning to find that half of their brahmacari contingent had left in the middle of the night, getting on the bus and going off into the sunset without a word.
My sankirtana leader at the time, who is now known as Ganapati Swami, was such a person. He got on the bus and disappeared with my biggest sankirtana man to join the big book distributors. As you yourself pointed out, it was Srila Prabhupada's formula to have the temples run by the Temple Presidents. Srila Prabhupada didn't come to America and say he wanted to start sankirtana or book distribution parties with just brahmacaries and sannyasis on buses. He undoubtedly liked the program at first, until he began getting the reports of all the problems it was creating. By the way, I was part of the committee generating the reports on the Radha Damodar Party, and the negative effects it was having on Srila Prabhupada's simple formula. As history shows, Srila Prabhupada took decisive action, and regardless of the fact that a great deal of books and money were being moved by these parties, he packed the whole thing up. He not only sent Tamal Krishna to China, he banished the whole mindset that Tamal had indoctrinated his people with, namely that they were better than everybody else and they should make that fact known to anyone who could be a part of their program. Distributing books was "real service", and anything else was "less than". My experience so far in our written exchanges is that you communicate this mood on a regular basis.
I'm sure in your capacity as a member of the Radha Damodar Party you had little to indicate that this was the real reason the party was dismantled, and it's my personal speculation that you haven't purified yourself from the contamination that was perpetrated upon you by all these so-called big leaders back then, in your impressionable years.
Unbeknownst to you, obviously, a great many individuals such as myself were spiritually damaged by what was going on back then. In fact, it's my opinion that many devotees who joined the bus parties and left the temples had their spiritual lives greatly interfered with. Considering Srila Prabhupada's reaction, I would conclude he felt that way, too. I've never heard any of the big leaders from that era give us any kind of philosophical reasoning behind Srila Prabhupada's dismantling of the Radha Damodar Party, nor any apologies for the damage done. They just shrugged it off, like they did the Women's Parties, the Zonal Acarya System, the Gopi Bhava Club, and other big bozo programs they instituted and forced upon us.
So it may be true that it's not your intention to trumpet book distribution over other types of service, but because we're both conditioned souls and we have a unique personal history, I felt that I had to let you know, and let my readers know, how I felt about the mentality displayed in your previous writings. Please forgive me if that mood wasn't your intention. In this regard I may be a little over-sensitive, something like the way the Jews feel towards religious hate mongering. Any tinge or twinge of that mood, and they're on it, like white on rice.
So now that I've gotten that off my mind, let's go forward and see what you wrote in your rebuttal. I apologize for the length of this article, but you included a great deal of material in your last paper, much of which invites rebuttal.
Simple, Not Easy
You make a pretty good argument for Srila Prabhupada emphasizing how simple Krsna consciousness is. You also make the point that just because it's simple, that doesn't mean it's easy. I certainly agree that it's not easy. You wrote:
"Srila Prabhupada stresses that those with "good brains" will recognize the simplicity and opportunity inherent in this "process" or "method""
Most dictionaries put the terms "simple" and "easy" on par with one another, and in terms of modern usage, they're certainly synonymous. We note, for example, definition #1 for the term "simple" at Dictionary.com, which defines simple as being "easy to understand, deal with, use, etc.".
You also took exception with my use of the term "sophisticated", when I said that those who understand our philosophy consider the process of being Krsna Conscious to be extremely sophisticated and complicated. As with many words, there are numerous definitions for sophisticated, and meaning depends entirely on context and intention. In this case, my use of the term "sophisticated" means (and I quote the Dictionary): complex or intricate; not naïve; reflecting educated taste; knowledgeable use. The Thesaurus offers the following terms as being synonymous with "sophisticated": knowing, practiced, refined, seasoned, studied, world-weary.
Perhaps you have even more trouble with my use of the word "complicated" than you do with the term "sophisticated". I believe that I was also accurate in my use of the term "complicated", for the reasons described below.
The phrase that was often stated was that 'Krsna consciousness is simple for the simple, but difficult for the crooked'. Of course, if we understand our Vaisnava history, especially as it presents the Sampradaya Acaryas and the participants of Caitanya lila, it's easy to see that for a self-realized, very advanced devotee who's within our Sampradaya, Krsna consciousness is relatively easy compared to practicing other yoga systems in this age of Kali. So on that basis, yes, Krsna consciousness is simple. But becoming God conscious in this age, and going up to the more advanced levels of spiritual advancement, which this system allows and encourages us to do, that in itself is definitely not simple.
The perfect evidence that it's not so simple is that we can't find many devotees who are very advanced, other than Srila Prabhupada, regardless of the fact that they may have had every opportunity to advance. In fact, many of those who have supposedly made their lives simple by taking sannyasa and stripping away any external material advancements have not been able to achieve much success in the direction you would assume they'd be going under those circumstances. In fact, from what I see, many have voluntarily made their lives even more complicated than if they had simply remained householders.
I'm speaking, for example, about those who designed the GBC to be what it is today, and ISKCON to be what it is, which in all reality, is a complicated bureaucratic organization that is consuming their valuable time. We should look at Srila Prabhupada's original program for the GBC if you want to talk about simple programs and formulas. The simple plan was that the GBC would just travel and preach constantly, and do some writing like Srila Prabhupada did. In other words, he said the GBC should "do as I do." There's simplicity for you. But instead, they got up to heir necks in management. Never, ever did they simply adopt Srila Prabhupada's program.
You know and I know that people like Tamal Krishna Goswami and Rameswar, who was sitting in LA with a huge desk, three phones and a secretary, weren't following anything near Srila Prabhupada's simple formula. You know more than anyone the kind of program that Bhagavan set up in Europe, because you participated in it. Jayatirtha was no better. Jagadisa was running the Toronto temple instead of being the GBC, as he was assigned to do. I could go on and on. I don't know of one GBC who was actually fulfilling Srila Prabhupada's simple mandate. So in that regard, I'm actually advocating more of the "simple formula" than even you are.
You wrote:
"However - the simple and scientific procedure asserts the Absolute Necessity of our taking unreserved shelter of the Bonafide Spiritual Master coming in the Disciplic Succession. It also asserts our need for the association of the pure devotee(s) of the Lord to deliver us. Their association gives us the needed mercy and inspiration to actively pursue the "simple process"."
Here you have encapsulated what I consider to be one of the difficult aspects of Krsna consciousness. Although as you say, it's simple and scientific, it's also focused on the principle that you need to take shelter of a bona fide spiritual master coming in the disciplic succession. As I pointed out in my article, because Srila Prabhupada was such a rare personality, the daily activities in ISKCON during his lila period were infinitely more simple than they are today, when he's not here to personally direct ISKCON.
You acknowledge that you also need the association of pure devotees in order for the "simple formula" to work. That's really the only thing lacking in ISKCON today - pure devotees. So the simple formula or process you're describing is contingent upon such advanced personalities being part of the formula, whether they be the bona fide Spiritual Master or the local temple devotees. There's no use taking people to a local temple when it's run and managed by neophytes who have misconstrued Srila Prabhupada's simple formula. Agreed or not?
Speaking of the local temple dynamic, in your latest article you wrote:
"…in all my discussions of the simplicity of Krsna Consciousness - I stress only what Srila Prabhupada himself stresses - The 4 regulative principles, 16 rounds and willing and enthusiastic cooperation with the LOCAL TEMPLE DEVOTEES."
In the mantra, above, you put the term LOCAL TEMPLE in capital letters in order to emphasize that part of the simple formula. So if I'm doing all the other parts right - namely chanting my rounds and following the 4 regs -- but I'm not associating or cooperating with the local temple authorities (who by the way have banned me from lecturing and leading kirtans simply due to something they read on HareKrsna.com) do I still fit into your simple formula? Is my non-cooperation justified? Or according to your simple formula, am I doomed? After all, based on the capitalization, you put chanting the 16 rounds and following the 4 regulative principles on a level slightly beneath cooperating with the LOCAL TEMPLE, regardless of any consideration to time, place and circumstance.
You often refer to Krsna consciousness as being "simple and scientific", but at the same time you admit that it's not "easy". You take exception to my characterization of Krsna consciousness as being "sophisticated" and complex", but those terms are also synonymous with "not easy", so your position seems rather contradictory. Perhaps we can compromise, and just for the sake of argument, lump "not easy" and "complex" together under the term "difficult".
Along with the many times Srila Prabhupada said that Krsna consciousness is "simple", he also tells us just how difficult it is:
"There are four principles--dharma (religion), artha (economic development), kama (sense gratification) and moksa (liberation). People accept religion to become materially opulent. And why should one be materially opulent? For sense gratification. Thus people prefer these three margas, the three paths of materialistic life. No one is interested in liberation, and bhagavad-bhakti, devotional service to the Lord, is above even liberation. Therefore the process of devotional service, Krsna consciousness, is extremely difficult to understand."
Srimad Bhagavatam 7-5-18 Purport
Now you may say that the process is so simple, we don't need to understand it, we only need to chant, dance, take prasadam, etc. (i.e., practice it). But Srila Prabhupada has clearly said that this is not the case, either: "Without jnana, there is no question of bhakta." (Morning Walk, Feb 17, 1974, Bombay) He also said:
"If one is serious about liberation from material bondage, one has to understand the distinctions between action, inaction and unauthorized actions. One has to apply oneself to such an analysis of action, reaction and perverted actions because it is a very difficult subject matter. To understand Krsna consciousness and action according to the modes, one has to learn one's relationship with the Supreme;"
Bhagavad-gita 4-17 Purport
Again, Srila Prabhupada tells us it's very difficult to understand Krsna consciousness, and one must analyze, not just practice.
"If one is seriously interested in Krsna conscious activities, he must be ready to follow the rules and regulations laid down by the acaryas, and he must understand their conclusions. The sastra says: dharmasya tattvam nihitam guhayam maha-jano yena gatah sa panthah (Mahabharata, Vana-parva 313.117). It is very difficult to understand the secret of Krsna consciousness, but one who advances by the instruction of the previous acaryas and follows in the footsteps of his predecessors in the line of disciplic succession will have success. Others will not.
Caitanya-caritamrta, Adi lila 18-7
Again, Srila Prabhupada instructs that simply following the process is not enough. One must also understand, and it is very difficult (not easy) to understand. So where is the great simplicity in this? Simple, yes, if only you can follow. But how to follow…. that's the difficulty. As we have discovered over the last nearly fifty years, following in the footsteps of the previous Sampradaya Acaryas is not so easy. You can say it's "simple", but it's actually very difficult.
What is Krsna consciousness? It is "simply" developing love of God:
"Krsna consciousness is a benediction to humanity. Lord Caitanya was appreciated by Rupa Gosvami as the most munificent man of charity because love of Krsna, which is very difficult to achieve, was distributed freely by Him. And if one worships as prescribed in the temple (in the temples in India there is always some statue, usually of Visnu or Krsna), that is a chance to progress by offering worship and respect to the Supreme Personality of Godhead. For the beginners in devotional service to the Lord, temple worship is essential, and this is confirmed in the Vedic literature."
Bhagavad-gita 11-54 Purport
So we may engage in Deity worship and have a chance to progress in Krsna consciousness. Not easy. And if we want the 'chance' to become a sure thing, that's not so simple, either.
"A person in Krsna consciousness, engaged in devotional service, simply by the guidance of the bona fide spiritual master, simply by offering regulative obeisances unto the Deity, simply by hearing the glories of the Lord, and simply by eating the remnants of foodstuffs offered to the Lord, realizes the Supreme Personality of Godhead very easily."
Bhagavad-gita 12-5 Purport
In the passage above, Srila Prabhupada says it's easy for a person IN Krsna consciousness to realize Krsna. Of course, the difficult part is getting to the stage of being in that consciousness.
While there are many, many quotes like the ones above, I'll leave you with this familiar concept:
"Persons who are completely Krsna conscious are very rare and very peaceful. Out of millions and millions of people, it is very difficult to find one who is actually Krsna conscious"; this position of Krsna consciousness is so rare. But Krsna Himself, as Lord Caitanya, seeing the pitiable condition of the present day, is directly giving free love of Godhead
Topmost Yoga System, Chapter 9
In "Where Is the Disagreement?", you wrote:
"There is a marked difference between Simple and Easy. I have never declared the application to be easy OR difficult. The method employed in bench pressing 80 lbs. is essentially simple. Yet without the necessary strength - it is anything but easy. When I was going through my Chemotherapy for cancer even the simplest of tasks was at times anything but easy. The procedure for ascending a stairwell is always simple - yet my own experience taught me that it could also be anything but easy. I have and will continue to emphasize that the "procedure" or "process" for approaching and taking unreserved shelter of the Bonafide Spiritual Master - His Divine Grace Srila Prabhupada - is NOT complicated in the least. Neither is it "sophisticated", whose dictionary definition is "Experienced in the ways of the world; lacking in natural simplicity"."
So we agree there's a difference between simple and easy. You say the process is not complicated. I would appreciate hearing how you characterize the difference between your "not complicated" and Srila Prabhupada's "yes, difficult". On one hand, that difference perfectly illustrates the lofty complexity of Krsna consciousness (simultaneously one and different). But in terms of the discussions we've been having up to now, the difference seems rhetorical to me.
Your point #2 in "Where is the Disagreement?" states:
"If we are to hold a position of representative authority within Srila Prabhupada's International Society for Krsna Consciousness - and all of us do in some way or the other - then we are not free to portray this process to the public as other than scientific and simple, since THIS is exactly how Srila Prabhupada explained it to us. When I did a modest search on the Veda Base under the heading "Krsna Consciousness is Simple" I received 2463 references! So I cannot imagine anyone really disagreeing with the premise since it is so consistently voiced by our Spiritual Master."
As I've shown above, simply doing Vedabase searches and basing your conclusions on the count of keyword matches doesn’t mean much. You say we shouldn't portray Krsna consciousness as anything other than simple and scientific to the public, but it's not like you're having this discussion with a new person on the street, and you need to convince me (or our readers) that Krsna consciousness is so easy, everyone should try it. You're having this conversation with a Godbrother, a peer, so I think it's appropriate to stop pulling out the "simplicity mantra" and to instead confront the fact there we're talking about difficult problems. Suggesting that they're easily solved because Krsna consciousness is so simple is, I think, a pointless exercise.
Moving on to your point #3, you quote a long series of slokas and purports from Chaitanya-caritamrita Madhya Lila 7:126 -130, apparently for the purpose of supporting your argument that Krsna consciousness is very easy for everyone. You bolded the following point:
"In other words, one cannot relish transcendental bliss without being freed from the materialistic way of life." (Text 7:126)
Of course, in his purport to Bhagavad-gita 5:26 Srila Prabhupada also writes:
"In the conditioned soul the desire to enjoy the fruitive results of work is so deep-rooted that it is very difficult even for the great sages to control such desires, despite great endeavors. A devotee of the Lord, constantly engaged in devotional service in Krsna consciousness, perfect in self-realization, very quickly attains liberation in the Supreme."
As we know, most of Srila Prabhupada's seasoned disciples, who have supposedly been following the 'simple process' for more than 40 years now, are still not 'constantly engaged' or 'perfect in self-realization'. What to speak of the newcomers we're preaching to.
You go on to write the following paragraph, which exemplifies the "Praghosa mood" that I find so arrogant and counter-productive:
"Srila Prabhupada is the "Person Bhagavat" and "Supreme Personality of Servitor Godhead". His every word is NON-different from the Scripture. In fact - the words of Srila Prabhupada - every single word - are as absolute and perfect as every single syllable of the Srimad Bhagavatam. His words stand alone and do not require yours or anyone's elucidation or explanation of their hidden meaning. I am not interested in your "interpretation" of what you pretend to imagine WHAT he means - when speaking to anyone - reporter or otherwise. I simply take his statements - AS THEY ARE. Absolutely. If you choose to do otherwise - or others choose to accept as absolute - your interpretations of his comments- what he REALLY meant - or WHAT his motives might have been for saying them - that is yours or their right. However - understand this - I came to Srila Prabhupada's service - on the strength of his words, not yours, as they were written - without anyone's interpretation - and the example set by devotees who were likewise affected by him. I am certain that most devotees see it this way as well."
First, you treat us to a good lecture about how absolute Srila Prabhupada and his words are. I couldn't agree more. You're preaching to the choir, prabhu. You then inform me that no one needs an explanation of the hidden meaning behind his words, from me or anyone else. You're not interested in my "interpretation", yet somehow or other, you want to come to my 'virtual home' and demand that I listen to your interpretation, which is all that you're actually spouting here, under the guise that you're so highly advanced, you have the ability to interpret the pure devotee's every word 'absolutely' - no discussion with your Godbrothers needed, thank you very much. You're a philosophical island unto yourself. Strangely enough, we don't see hoards of sold-out converts following you down the street. It would seem that there should be many aspirants following you if you're as advanced as you suggest you are: "I simply take his statements - AS THEY ARE. Absolutely." Can you understand that it is this mood that causes you to get the kinds of reactions you got from me and so many others back in the Sun Blog?
You say you came to Srila Prabhupada's service "without anyone's interpretation" but your own, but I don't believe this to be true. As I said earlier, I think you absorbed a great deal of your interpretation of the philosophy through the filters of the big personalities you served under in those early days on the Radha Damodar Party, like Tamal Krishna Goswami, who was renowned for his arrogance.
You went on to write:
"I have never discussed the simplicity of Krsna Consciousness in relationship to my history or service; ever. I have never "subtly and directly" spent a second "reminding" you or anyone of my past or present connection to book distribution. You make this claim - without citing chapter and verse so to speak. You provide no evidence of this. You just casually claim it and that's that. This is just an attempt to minimize my premise - by portraying me as materialistically boastful or pompous. This is again a logically fallacious misuse of your garden variety ad hominum attack. The simplest definition of ad hominum is a logical fallacy, arguing that an idea or concept is wrong because its proponent is flawed an attempt to argue against an opponent's idea by discrediting the opponent himself."
As I stated at the opening of this argument, I stand corrected as to the frequency with which you've connected the 'simplicity' concept with your own history of service - perhaps you haven't done it often, but you've certainly done it. What you most definitely have done with great regularity is communicate in a boastful, pompous way. And I'm not alone in that conclusion, as evidence by the numerous responses you got from devotees in the "It's Taboo, Prabhu" Sun Blog thread. So I have not committed the logical fallacy of relying on ad hominum attack.
The following exchange provides a good synopsis of one of the real points of contention between us. I previously wrote:
"From a Krsna conscious point of view the more advanced you are, the more elevated your service is, such as the example given earlier about the gopis. Yet the gopis never put down or minimized the service of any other members of Krsna's entourage in Vrindavan. The gopis never thought themselves above even the cows, the plants or the trees, what to speak of the cowherd boys. We never hear the gopis criticizing Mother Yasoda or Nanda Maharaja because their service is not as sublimely simple as their own. The biggest indication of how un-advanced you are is to think that you have the greatest service, and you have the answers to everyone's problems, if only they'd be just like you."
And you replied by writing:
"The entire paragraph above? More "Straw Man". I agree with everything you said above. HOWEVER there is nothing in anything I have ever written - that demonstrates that I am possessed of such a mentality you describe. In fact - in all my discussions of the simplicity of Krsna Consciousness - I stress only what Srila Prabhupada himself stresses - The 4 regulative principles, 16 rounds and willing and enthusiastic cooperation with the LOCAL TEMPLE DEVOTEES. There is no example of my expressing or implying the above mentioned mentality."
First, you admit that you agree with everything I said in the paragraph above, except you accuse me of asserting a strawman argument because you supposedly have never demonstrated an arrogant mentality by putting others down or thinking you have all the answers. But of course, you've done that repeatedly, as illustrated above.
You went on to say:
"If anyone studies any of my comments - they will find that I seek to encourage - not discourage - every single soul who approaches Srila Prabhupada and his International Society for Krsna Consciousness. I advise all to take full and unreserved shelter of Srila Prabhupada - exactly as he taught us to do. I encourage them to do so - LOCALLY - with full confidence that if they approach as he has taught us - follow the 4 Regulative Principles, Chant 16 rounds, exclusively and faithfully reading HIS Books and adjusting their life in accordance to the directions in those books and then use their God-Given talents in the service of this wonderful Krsna Consciousness movement - then they will successfully fulfill the mission of their human form of life: To Please unlimitedly Lord Sri Krsna."
While I admire the way you encourage everyone to approach Srila Prabhupada, I also find that you exhibit a tendency to try and discourage the devotees from discussing problems in ISKCON. Keep in mind that part of the process Srila Prabhupada taught was that the devotees should engage in serious philosophical discussions amongst themselves. It's difficult to do that with you when you keep hammering away at the discussions with your 'simplicity mantra' and reminders that you know EXACTLY and ABSOLUTELY what Srila Prabhupada's instructions are. I can understand the mentality behind your approach, which is exposed in the following comment. You wrote:
"My point has always been that if in fact Srila Prabhupada's simple and sublime program for becoming and/or spreading Krsna Consciousness - is established and accepted as the "means" to success - then the blissful atmosphere of Krsna Consciousness in any temple is guaranteed."
We obviously have many, many serious problems in ISKCON that prevent the local temples from being blissful. If it were so easy to apply Srila Prabhupada's simple formula, we'd already be doing it, wouldn't we? But that's not what's happening in ISKCON because, in fact, applying the simple formula is very difficult and challenging. So what's the point in reiterating how simple it is?
I accept your offer to work together to try and find solutions to the problems. But instead of jetting off to Mumbai, how about we start right here in North America, where we both live. We don't you fly out to Vancouver for a visit. Maybe we can sit down together with Hari Vilasa dasa and work out why the preaching in Vancouver has gone so far adrift from Srila Prabhupada's program.
In your last article you quoted me, saying:
"8. If everyone was a very advanced devotee, then of course, Srila Prabhupada's simple plan would simply work. But the reality is that due to a lack of Krsna consciousness, the plan is not working, and to deny that is foolish and simply untrue."
Your rebuttal:
"Again - very poor application of logical argument. You have it backwards prabhu. It is not that the "simple plan" can only be enacted when we are Krsna Conscious! It is our application of the "simple process" that produces the Krsna Consciousness. WE are individually responsible to adopt the simple process. "If we have and use our good brain" as Srila Prabhupada said "
First of all, you mischaracterized my statement. I didn't say in the paragraph above that 'the simple plan can't be enacted until you're Krsna conscious'. However, I would remind you that Srila Prabhupada essentially said that very thing, in the purport quoted above to Bhagavad-gita 12-5:
Granted, it's the application of the simple process that produces Krsna consciousness. However, given the difficulty of properly analyzing and applying the process, we (the community of devotees) are obviously very slow at making the simple plan work. It's been over 40 years, and it hasn’t' worked yet. Thus my actual statement: if everyone was advanced, the simple plan would simply work. So it's not "simply working". It's working slowly as the devotees struggle with the difficult nature of becoming purified enough to become Krsna conscious.
Next you tell us twice, for emphasis, why you are personally prevented from successfully executing Srila Prabhupada's simple formula: either a) you don't know what it is or how to execute it, or b) you don't desire to do so strongly enough.
Given your repeated and emphatic statements about how you simply take Srila Prabhupada's statements AS THEY ARE, ABSOLUTELY, and you don't need to hear anyone else's interpretation of the pure devotee's instructions, your problem is presumably not that you don't know what the formula is or how to execute it. You think you've got that part under control. So you apparently conclude that your personal obstacle on the path of the simple process is that you just don't want it enough. Of course, that's one of the weaknesses of the fallen conditioned soul that Srila Prabhupada's referring to when he tells us how difficult it is to become Krsna conscious.
Next you comment on my statement that part of the difficulty is that Srila Prabhupada is no longer here personally to intervene and help us solve problems by himself taking direct action. To this, you respond with the simplistic assertions that "Srila Prabhupada is not absent", and "Srila Prabhupada is just as present with us today - as he was when he walked this earth - IF we can recognize it and act upon it." As already stated and obvious to most, we clearly can't simply 'act on the recognition' that Srila Prabhupada is here and get the same kind of results (eliminate the same kinds of problems) that we could if he were here physically. To think we can is folly.
Back to Square One
Near the end of your article, you make a 90 degree turn and launch into a discussion of ISKCON guru tattva. Here, you suggest that the only real problem in ISKCON is their guru tattva position, but I think that's another overly simplistic characterization. For example, will changing ISKCON's position on guru tattva eliminate the institutional minimization of Srila Prabhupada that goes on under the banner of the Lilamrta? Will it result in reforming the GBC body or establishing justice in the society? Granted, guru tattva is an enormous problem, but it's not the only one.
What I find most interesting about this part of your paper is that you've now adopted a tone closer to the tone I used in expressing my thoughts to Praghosa dasa (Ireland) about the status of his guru, Satsvarupa dasa Goswami. In your article entitled "His Guidance is Already There!", you write:
"It is this one simple aspect of the "process" of Krsna Consciousness that has been made more complicated than was arranged by our Srila Prabhupada. This one simple aspect of the process needs to be addressed. Not necessarily by "The Mission" so to speak. It can be addressed by an individual himself. He can simply act like a man - and accept Srila Prabhupada's direct provisions as this is his right and it is established by Srila Prabhupada himself. He is free to say "Enough! I refuse to offer assent to anyone's claim that I must do other than exactly what Srila Prabhupada arranged."
Again, your statement is a great simplification. Many other "simple aspects" of Srila Prabhupada's formula have been changed and these changes have complicated the ability of both newcomers and seasoned devotees alike to practice the simple process. Take, for instance, the difficulties found at the local temple level, which features so prominently in your interpretation of the 'simple process'. Srila Prabhupada's formula was that local leaders, under the direction of the Temple President, are to run the local scene. But ISKCON has changed that process in many places, relying instead on local temple control by Boards, gurus and GBC men. This results in the disenfranchisement of many devotees and complicates their efforts to apply the simple process.
Coercively barring aspirants from requesting initiation based upon a proffered letter, which you outlined point by point, happens not only due to the asiddhantic guru tattva policies, but also to the breakdown of management at the local level.
You write:
"…you will find that I emphatically encourage those who are responsibly placed as LOCAL TEMPLE PRESIDENTS - first and foremost.
Local leadership and Caretaking - is - "where the rubber meets the road" in all matters pertaining to preaching. Period "
Again, the 'simple' fact is that in many cases, and particularly in North America, the local Temple Presidents are only in power by the grace of the GBC and local Boards. Under such circumstances you cannot expect that a Temple President who is compromised in such a way has the freedom or independence to right wrongs or implement siddhantically correct practices, particularly in the area of guru tattva. Yes, you can and should put pressure on the local leaders to demand change from the leadership above them, but you can't rely on the hope that they'll succeed - that effort hasn't succeeded since the day Srila Prabhupada departed.
In closing, I appreciate the effort you've made to share your thoughts, and I thank you for the positive mood expressed in your last article, in which you said: "Where we differ is in some details and I am certain that we are much closer to agreement than we are to opposition." I will look forward to your response, and to finding out how close we actually are in our understanding of the philosophy.
Your servant,
Rocana dasa
