Defending the Words of Srila Prabhupada

[Guest guest]

The following is an excellent article by Hari Vilasa Prabhu in which he

completely deconstructs the arguments of fools who think themselves wise and

have the audacity to attempt to undermine the authority of Srila Prabhupada.

It is a long artcle so if you want to read it all follow the link at the

end.

 

yhs

 

Shyama

 

 

 

 

Hare Krishna Cultural Journal

A commentary on the culture, views and progress of the International Society

for Krishna Consciousness.

« What Purifies Us? | Main

January 16, 2005

Defending the Words of Srila Prabhupada

 

By Hari-Vilas dasa Adhikari (ACBSP)

 

[Editors note: This article has been edited and reformatted for web

browsers.]

 

Since the disappearance of Srila Prabhupada there have been attempts, some

crude and others more nuanced, to undermine the authority of his words. This

is a symptom of Kali yuga, the age of hypocrisy and quarrel. People in this

age misrepresent the truth and argue that they have not. A recent example of

a crude attempt to undermine the words of Srila Prabhupada is an article by

Brahma das on the VNN news. The following is an answer to Brahma das and all

others who are fool enough to think they are qualified to undermine the

words of Srila Prabhupada with their empirical flights of speculation.

 

Everyday we, the disciples, both siksa and diksa, of His Divine Grace A.C.

Bhaktivedanta Swami Srila Prabhupada honor him by singing the prayers to the

spiritual master wherein we say, guru mukha padma vakya/cittete kariya

aikya: "My only wish is to have my consciousness purified by the words

emanating from the lips of my spiritual master." There has never been an

assumption that some of the words are purifying and some are not or some are

transcendental and some are mundane, some can be accepted and some should be

ignored. This assumption is being introduced by Brahma das and others both

inside and outside of ISKCON. The following is a discussion of why such an

abomination is being attempted and how to see through such sophistry.

 

Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura has given a brilliant analysis in his Tattva

Viveka explaining why humans give various diverse answers to the same

questions. I will quote him exactly so that you can also appreciate his

explanation.

 

Human beings, many days after their birth in this world, efficiently

learn and collect the knowledge about the objects of the senses. The various

materials of this world and their qualities realized by the sense-organs are

called "Vishaya" or the object of the senses. As the sense equipments of

children gradually attain maturity, the dualities of the sense-objects also

are realized by them accordingly. When the sense organs learn to relish the

qualities of the sense objects, proportionally the sense organs are

influenced by their attraction. In this way the human beings get attached to

the objects of the senses that, in due course they engage themselves in no

other activity than in the contemplation of those objects. The affinity

toward sound, touch, form, taste and smell become the invariable companions

of the human mind and they make it to be their slave. Human beings get

engrossed into and enchanted by the respective sense objects. This becomes

the normal course of ordinary human life. Among such persons, some rare few

may have the discretion that the one who is born has inevitably to die and

after death one cannot continue his relation with the objects of senses. The

one who happens to be fortunate enough to have this discretion, will detach

himself from the sense objects and engage in the enquiry of the Reality.

That person will put to himself the following three questions, -

 

1. Being the enjoyer of this material world "who am I?"

2. What is the enormous universe in reality?

3. What is the true relationship between this world and myself?

 

. . . The answers given by the spirit (person who is dis-attached) for

the previous mentioned three types of questions are essentially of two types

viz., characteristic answer and multifarious answer. A doubt may arise in

this regard that, when the individual spirits are universally homogenous

principle why they will provide various diverse answers to the same

questions? The cause of this controversy is explained as follows: - The

unalloyed spirit is a purely transcendental principle. When they remain in

their characteristic nature, all of them will provide the same answer to a

given question. But this world, which has been inhabited by the bonded

souls, is not the normal abode of theirs. This mundane world is the abode of

Maya or the condemned, limiting potency of the Supreme Lord. This has been

manifested by that Maya, who is the shadow of the Internal Potency of the

Supreme Lord. Since the bonded souls inhabited in this mundane world of Maya

have accepted the phenomenal qualities of Maya as their own, their real

character has been eclipsed and encovered by the Mayik qualities which has

created a conditioned nature of the jiva-souls. Because of this conditioned

nature obtained from Maya the transcendental jiva-soul acquires a mixed

character and all its sentient faculties are conducted here under external

conditionings. The faculty of transcendental knowledge of the jiva-souls

gets degraded in to a mixture of sentient and non-sentient principles due to

the association of inanimate world, and gets converted and presented as the

mind of the jiva-souls. This mixed principle of mind when influenced by the

variegatedness of Maya provides the answers of the different questions

assuming the ego of the soul, these answers will naturally become

conditioned and multifarious.

 

The answers given by the different jiva-souls are invariably influenced

by their associations of different behaviors, culture, clothing, food

habits, language, line of thought, etc., in accordance with the location of

this world wherein they live. In this way natural variegatedness is always

visualized according to the variation of time, space, and person. The basic

variation is due to the alloyed nature of the fallen jiva souls, and then

due to the various places, languages, and origins the variations become

multifarious. All these multifarious doctrines of varied nature can be

properly analyzed and understood by that person alone who has traveled all

the places of the world by learning all those respective languages and who

has studied the various traditions of those places.

 

To understand why there are divergent answers to a question one must analyze

the influence of the material energy on the jiva soul and ascertain the

particular way the person is affected. There are myriad varieties of

culture, language, customs, food, dress, etc., that can attract the mind of

persons and cause their mind to be attached to a particular set of objects

of sense enjoyment. This false attachment and contemplation denatures the

person's ability to see the truth clearly. This is also explained in the

seventeenth chapter of the Bhagavad-gita.

 

O son of Bharata, according to one's existence under the various modes

of nature, one evolves a particular kind of faith. The living being is said

to be of a particular faith according to the modes he has acquired.

(Bhagavad-gita 17.3 translation)

 

In the purport to this verse, Srila Prabhupada details the transcendental

origin of the living entity and the process by which he becomes tainted by

the material nature.

 

. . . every living being, as is stated in the Fifteenth Chapter

[bhagavad-gita 15.7], is originally a fragmental part and parcel of the

Supreme Lord. Therefore one is originally transcendental to all the modes of

material nature. But when one forgets his relationship with the Supreme

Personality of Godhead and comes into contact with the material nature in

conditional life, he generates his own position by association with the

different varieties of material nature. The resultant artificial faith and

existence are only material. Although one may be conducted by some

impression, or some conception of life, originally he is nirguna, or

transcendental. Therefore one has to become cleansed of the material

contamination that he has acquired, in order to regain his relationship with

the Supreme Lord.

 

Next, Srila Prabhupada explains the origin of faith and how it becomes

contaminated.

 

Sraddha, or faith, originally comes out of the mode of goodness. One's

faith may be in a demigod or some created God or some mental concoction.

One's strong faith is supposed to be productive of works of material

goodness. But in material conditional life, no works are completely

purified. They are mixed. They are not in pure goodness. Pure goodness is

transcendental; in purified goodness one can understand the real nature of

the Supreme Personality of Godhead. As long as one's faith is not completely

in purified goodness, the faith is subject to contamination by any of the

modes of material nature. The contaminated modes of material nature expand

to the heart. Therefore according to the position of the heart in contact

with a particular mode of material nature, one's faith is established. It

should be understood that if one's heart is in the mode of goodness his

faith is also in the mode of goodness.

 

By the process of Krishna consciousness a person is raised from the lower

modes of material nature to the mode of goodness. From the mode of goodness

one is raised to pure goodness, suddha sattva state, where the action of the

modes of material nature no longer affect the person. It is only in this

state that one can actually perceive the truth correctly.

 

Bhaktivinoda Thakur makes the point, "The unalloyed spirit is a purely

transcendental principle. When they remain in their characteristic nature,

all of them will provide the same answer to a given question."

 

In contact with the material world the pure soul becomes influenced by the

modes of nature and the objects of the sense

 

In contact with the material world the pure soul becomes influenced by the

modes of nature and the objects of the senses. Due to this attachment one

formulates a variety of answers different from the actual truth. Therefore,

there are many opinions, theories, beliefs, and philosophies.

 

Further, every living entity has four defects which are:

 

1. We make mistakes

2. We are easily put into illusion

3. Our senses are imperfect

4. We have a cheating tendency.

 

These four basic defects of every human being are impediments to discerning

perfect knowledge on our own. We need the help of higher perfect authorities

who are not subject to such defects and who are situated in pure goodness.

 

I will analyze the statements of Brahma das in his article "The words of

Srila Prabhupada on women." in light of the above authorized words of bona

fide Vaisnava acaryas.

 

Brahma das quotes Bhaktivinoda Thakur's Sri Krishna Samhita,

 

Bhaktivinoda's writings in Sri Krishna Samhita are distinguished from

those of other acaryas by his discussion of two sides of our religious

tradition. These he refers to artha-prada or relative information based on

time and circumstance, and paramartha prada or the absolute or essential

teachings of the tradition. According to Bhaktivinoda Thakura, relative

information can be incomplete or incorrect even though it might be found in

scripture or spoken by a self-realized devotee. To emphasize this point he

states that one is free to disregard relative information in his own

writings if it is found to be incorrect. This position would allow one to

disregard certain comments Srila Prabhupada made on relative issues, the

most obvious being that women's brain size was almost half that of men. This

is a piece of information that he attributed to Dr. Urquhart, a professor at

Scottish Churches College, the institution that he attended in Calcutta.

 

(Brahma das. "The Words of Srila Prabhupada on Women" November 1, 2004.

site: http://vnn.org page: http://vnn.org/editorials/ET0411/ET01-8742.html)

 

Contrary to what Brahma das says, it has been determined that men's brain

size are on the average larger than women's, with a mean weight of 1347

grams compared to 1223 grams. ("Bigger brains help hunt for mates" March 23,

1999. site: http://news.bbc.co.uk page:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/302152.stm)

 

In another reference, Amanda Onion, a researcher, has written in her article

"Sex in the Brain,Research has long shown that men's brains are larger,

on the average, than women's by about 100 grams." Brahma das wants to

quickly disregard a statement Srila Prabhupada made because it is "relative

information" …"if it is found to be incorrect." However, Srila Prabhupada's

statement is not found to be incorrect. It has been determined by modern

research that on the average men's brains are larger than women's.

 

Dr. Urquhart might have overstated the mean average size difference, but the

fact that men's brain size, on the average, is larger than women's is true.

After making this first misrepresentation purporting that Srila Prabhupada's

statement that the relative size of men's and women's brains is wrong, now

Brahma das proceeds to question, "…. Whether or not Srila Prabhupada's other

comments on the nature of women fall within the category of relative or

absolute." His point is that if a statement of relative fact is wrong, then

it can be disregarded. When statements of relative facts are not

collaborated by shastra, then it is possible that the person making such

statements is wrong due to the material conditioning as explained by Srila

Bhaktivinoda Thakur and Srila Prabhupada above.

 

Brahma das continues,

 

The dictionary defines absolute as complete; perfect; free from

limitation. Following Bhagavad-gita 2.16 devotees have defined absolute as

that which is satah or true in all times and circumstances. Taken at face

value do his controversial comments on the nature of women conform to either

of these definitions of the word absolute? Are women always less intelligent

and untrustworthy in comparison to men? Are women always required to be

under the protection of men? The answer to these questions is no. Neither do

these contentions about women conform to Bhaktivinoda's concept of

paramartha, as they are all nonessential to the culture of bhakti. Therefore

according to Bhaktivinoda Thakura one is free to overlook them. (Brahma das)

 

Brahma das begins to form a disingenuous argument to debunk Srila

Prabhupada's statements. These sly tactics are used when one is determined

to undermine another person's authority. Brahma das uses the dictionary

meaning and the Bhagavad-gita verse 2.16 to define the word absolute. His

slyness is to use this definition to test statements Srila Prabhupada makes

about materialistic women in the material world. Remember that Brahma's

point is, "According to Bhaktivinoda Thakura, relative information can be

incomplete or incorrect even though it might be found in scripture or spoken

by a self-realized devotee. To emphasize this point he states that one is

free to disregard relative information in his own writings if it is found to

be incorrect."

 

Brahma uses the standard of absolute knowledge to debunk statements about

relative knowledge. Whatever statements Srila Prabhupada makes about

materialistic women in the material world are based on shastra and not the

result of material conditioning on Srila Prabhupada by his cultural

upbringing. His statements are true for all time because he is repeating

what shastra says. However, Brahma das tries to point out in a crude way

that Srila Prabhupada's shastric statements about women are incomplete or

incorrect and can be disregarded. He attempts a logical argument that all

women are not less intelligent or untruthful than men nor do women always

require to be under the protection of men. He uses logic to undermine the

shastric statements of Srila Prabhupada. Such improper use of logic is an

abomination. Srila Prabhupada writes, "We don't use a combination of logic

and authority, we use authority. Logic we use to convince someone who

doesn't accept the authority. The basic principle is authority. Vedas say

that cow dung is pure and we accept it. There is no logic, but when we

practically use it we see that it is correct." (Letters, 75-10-32) Brahma

das tries to use logic to undermine the authoritative words of Srila

Prabhupada.

 

Relative, temporal knowledge cannot stand on its own as eternal, spiritual

knowledge. Something is relative because it depends on the absolute. The

material energy and knowledge within it is manifest and unmanifest

eternally. It is not independent of the eternally manifest spiritual

reality. It is a shadow reflection of the spiritual world. The living

entity, in a marginal position, may be bewildered by the material energy,

but does not have to be eternally conditioned by it. The material

conditioning is not the eternal nature of the living entity, therefore it

can be purified. Materialistic women and men can become pure devotees by

following the process of Krishna Consciousness under the guidance of a pure

devotee and free themselves of the influence of the material energy.

 

Brahma das wants to demonstrate that Srila Prabhupada's statements about

women are not absolute or essential teachings of the Vaisnava tradition. He

states, "Taken at face value do his controversial comments on the nature of

women conform to either of these definitions of the word absolute?" (". . .

absolute as complete; perfect; free from limitation. Following Bhagavad-gita

2.16 devotees have defined absolute as that which is satah or true in all

times and circumstances.")

 

Let us analyze Srila Prabhupada's statements correctly without an agenda to

debunk them, rather to understand the truth. Every word Srila Prabhupada has

spoken is shastrically correct. It is only "our conditioning" that hinders

us from understanding this basic fact. Since Srila Prabhupada has repeated

the shastric statements, his words are true in all times and circumstances.

We will demonstrate this fact.

 

The ninth Canto of Srimad-Bhagavatam reveals much truth about the material

and spiritual aspects of the relationship between men and women. In The

Srimad-Bhagavatam 9.10.11 it is said,

 

When Ramacandra entered the forest and Laksmana was also absent, the

worst of the Raksasas, Ravana, kidnapped Sitadevi, the daughter of the King

of Videha, just as a tiger seizes unprotected sheep when the shepherd is

absent. Then Lord Ramacandra wandered in the forest with His brother

Laksmana as if very much distressed due to separation from His wife. Thus He

showed by His personal example the condition of a person attached to women.

 

Srila Prabhupada writes in his purport to this verse,

 

In this verse the words stri-sanginam gatim iti indicate that the

condition of a person attached to women was shown by the Lord Himself. . . .

Whether in the forest or at home, if one is attached to women this

attachment is always troublesome, as shown by the Supreme Personality of

Godhead by His personal example.

 

Of course, this is the material side of stri-sangi, but the situation of

Lord Ramacandra is spiritual, for He does not belong to the material world.

Narayanah paro 'vyaktat: Narayana is beyond the material creation. Because

He is the creator of the material world, He is not subject to the conditions

of the material world. The separation of Lord Ramacandra from Sita is

spiritually understood as vipralambha, which is an activity of the hladini

potency of the Supreme Personality of Godhead belonging to the srngara-rasa,

the mellow of conjugal love in the spiritual world. . . . Lord Ramacandra,

therefore, manifested the truth both spiritually and materially. Materially

those who are attached to women suffer, but spiritually when there are

feelings of separation between the Lord and His pleasure potency the

spiritual bliss of the Lord increases.

 

It is said in the Isopanisad, verse 11, "Only one who can learn the process

of nescience and that of transcendental knowledge side by side can transcend

the influence of repeated birth and death and enjoy the full blessings of

immortality." Srila Prabhupada writes in his purport to this verse, "The

normal temperature should be maintained at 98.6 degrees, and the great sages

and saints of India have attempted to do this by a balanced program of

spiritual and material knowledge. They never allow the misuse of human

intelligence for diseased sense gratification."

 

Material knowledge that analyzes the defect of false material attachment and

sense gratification should be cultivated side by side with spiritual

knowledge so that the material side does not interfere with our spiritual

quest. A good example in this respect is Rsyasrngha who was never taught by

his father about the existence of women, nor did he associate with a woman,

not even his mother. The first time he encountered a woman, he was

bewildered and was unable to understand or control his attraction. There is

a definite need for men and women to understand the conditioned nature of

persons attracted and bewildered by sense objects so that they will not

become overwhelmed and ignore their spiritual quest.

 

to continue go to

 

http://siddhanta.com/archives/culture/000199.html#more

[Niscala]

It is very disappointing that a devotee calls another devotee "sly" simply because he uses a dictionary definition. It is typical adhomenic attack used when we don't like the conclusion of the argument. Using dictionary definitions and gita definitions to determine what is absolute and what is not, is a sign of integrity, actually, not slyness.

 

Hari Vilas wrote: Brahma uses the standard of absolute knowledge to debunk statements about relative knowledge...

 

Firstly he is not debunking- he is simply saying that relative knowledge statements are not always true in all circumstances, following the definition of what is relative knowledge, and accepting the words of Srila Bhaktivinode Thakura that the self-realized soul does not always speak absolute knowledge. Obviously some women are less intelligent than some men. Other women are more intelligent than some men. SP admitted this himself when he said that devotee women were more intelligent and to be seen as good as their devotee brothers. So he makes it clear himself that his own statement that "women are less intelligent" is relative.

 

What disturbs me most is the accusation of slyness, which is so clearly not true- all Brahma did was use definitions of absolute knowledge to determine what is absolute knowledge. I know Brahma can defend himself, but maybe out of lack of ego, he will not see the need to. But we should not tolerate seeing another devotee unnecessarily slandered in this way.

 

Hari Vilas: His (Brahma Prabhu's) point is that if a statement of relative fact is wrong, then

it can be disregarded. When statements of relative facts are not

collaborated by shastra, then it is possible that the person making such

statements is wrong due to the material conditioning as explained by Srila

Bhaktivinoda Thakur and Srila Prabhupada above.

 

That is your conclusion, not Brahma's, so don't put words in his mouth. Brahma's point is that according to Srila Bhaktivinode Thakura, a self-realized soul- not a conditioned one- but a self-realized soul- may sometimes make statements in regard to relative knowledge, and that such statements do not have to be accepted as always true- not because the speaker is conditioned- but because the nature of relative truth is changing. It is not eternal.

 

Certainly a conditioned soul makes mistakes, but a self-realized soul does not. So when we see that his statements on relative truth are not true in all circumstances, we do not make assumptions that it is due to mistakes, as you imply Brahma is doing, but simply that the nature of the truth being discussed is different in the current context.

 

The spiritual master preaches differently according to time, place and circumstances, but the essence of the message remains unchanged. Whenever we do the same, that is called following in the footsteps. On the other hand, strict adherence ...to the letter of the guru, like with the law, may ignore the spirit- which is to reach out to everyone, include everyone, not deter anyone, from the path of spirituality, not even demons, what to speak of feminists! "Somehow to trick them", was how Srila Prabhupada put it- not to encouarge us to misrepresent the philosophy, of course, but to change its face, its outward feature, its language, its presentation- as much and every bit as we see fit. We- that is our preachers- have the license to do so- it is called purity of motivation.

 

Often the belief that women are less intelligent is mixed up with their need for protection, as if they need protection from their own lack of intelligence. Actually it is to protect them from rape, as there is definitely inequality in the way women are built in comparison with men. Never do we hear of women gang-raping a man, but the opposite happens far too frequently. No woman, even trained in martial arts can withstand a group of men wanting to rape her. Because the women are vulnerable, they deserve pprotection. They should not have to defend themselves, somehow, but strong men should fight off attackers. Fortunately, we have the police force, but it can't be everywhere at one time, so ideally every woman should have a chaperone, especially in lonely places, or at night- anytime when she is at risk. Therefore, all women should be taken care of especially when they are elderly.