CORRECTION TO: Being Chaste to Srila Prabhupada

[Guest guest]

Due to an editing oversight we omitted the Sanga question in our last

mailing. Please accept our apologies for this mistake and please read

this corrected version of the Sanga.

 

------------

 

Being Chaste to Srila Prabhupada

 

Q & A with Swami B.V. Tripurari

 

"Srila Prabhupada said that after his departure one could approach his

Godbrother B.R. Sridhara Maharaja for philosophical enquiries. This was

his final instruction regarding Srila Sridhara Maharaja, which I

followed, and as philosophical instruction constitutes siksa, Srila

Sridhara Maharaja became my siksa guru."

 

Q. In the International Society for Krsna Consciousness (Iskcon) the

phrase "being chaste to Srila Prabhupada" is used a lot these days,

even though he never used these exact words. This phrase is repeated

over and over in lectures and discussions in an effort to keep Iskcon

members from straying outside that organization, either to read

literature published by other Gaudiya missions or to take instruction

from devotees who are not members of Iskcon. The implication is that if

one takes a serious interest in either of these they are being unchaste

to Srila Prabhupada--and thus an offender to him. What is you opinion

about this?

 

I asked some Iskcon members how hearing from a devotee outside that

society would make one unchaste to Srila Prabhupada and the answers I

got were interesting. Many simply cited references from Srila

Prabhupada against hearing from his Godbrothers saying that these were

reason enough for them. Others said that hearing from a devotee outside

of Iskcon might confuse members, and others thought that being

initiated by a guru outside of Iskcon would connect one with a

different branch of our sampradaya and that such a branch wouldn't be

as bona fide as Iskcon. Most devotees acknowledge that in his last days

Srila Prabhupada said that his disciples could go to his Godbrother,

Srila Sridhara Maharaja--a guru outside of Iskcon, for philosophy.

However many believe that this was only for the purpose of asking for

technical information and not for taking shelter of as one's siksa

guru, which would in their minds be unchaste to Srila Prabhupada. As an

initiated disciple of Srila Prabhupada who later accepted a siksa guru

outside of Iskcon, do you consider yourself chaste to Srila

Prabhupada?

 

A. The ideal all devotees strive for is exclusive dedication to Sri Guru.

For myself and other disciples of Srila Prabhupada, this, of course,

means exclusive devotion to him. This certainly involves chastity, but

on a higher level it also involves purity, within which the dynamic

expression of chastity is contained. It is possible to be chaste but

not pure, but it is not possible to be pure and not chaste, for the

purity of spiritual advancement depends on the grace of Sri Guru. Only

when he or she is pleased with the disciple can the disciple attain

purity, and no one can please their guru by abandoning or relativizing

him or her-by not being chaste to Sri Guru.

 

Chastity, as opposed to purity, implies some force. The famous chastity

belts of old world Christian Europe are a good example. Whereas purity

denotes absence of temptation, chastity implies controlling one's

impulses and actions. In some ways, the concept that of chastity you

have described is similar to purdah, the Muslim idea of chastity

imposed on its women, involving total seclusion from the world.

 

Chastity of this sort does have its advantages--bad influences are kept

out and temptation is minimized; however, the fruit of these advantages

contains the seed of their downside: insularity. In the vacuum of

insularity, time stands still, and if one remains in this vacuum after

its fruits are attained and does not internalize one's chastity and go

forward, what follows is the rapid slowdown of both personal growth and

relevant preaching.

 

Going into the larger world of Gaudiya Vaisnavism, meeting other

devotees and conceptions, sorting out the relative from the absolute,

the siddhanta from the misconception--these things push and pull a

devotee and challenge his or her faith. Not everyone is ready to make

the transition from insular chastity to the madhyama stage that leads

to true purity, but one whose faith is strong enough knows that staying

too long in the nest of insularity actually checks the development of

one's service to Srila Prabhupada.

 

Let me relate to you how Srila Prabhupada himself addressed this issue.

Dr. O.B.L. Kapoor (Adi Kesava dasa), a dear Godbrother of Srila

Prabhupada who assisted him in Vrindavana and contributed articles to

"Back to Godhead," once expressed concern that Prabhupada's disciples

might eventually suffer from insularity by not taking advantage of the

association of other advanced devotees and the entirety of the Gaudiya

scriptural cannon. Furthermore, he suggested, they might succumb to

offensive thinking toward other advanced devotees, thinking only Srila

Prabhupada as worthy of hearing from. Srila Prabhupada replied that he

looked at his disciples as young trees around which he had built a

fence to protect them in their early stages of growth. However, he said

that as they grew to maturity they would naturally reach beyond that

fence. Firmly rooted in one place in exclusive devotion to Sri Guru,

they would then also be able to take advantage of the association of

others without being confused.

 

Another way of thinking of how to proceed from insularity to a

well-integrated and mature understanding of chastity is in terms of

Srila Prabhupada's books. Reading Srila Prabhupada's books carefully

leads one naturally into the entirety of the Gaudiya cannon with his

particular emphasis, that of the line of Thakura

Bhaktivinoda-Bhaktivinoda parivara. After all, are the innumerable

references within Srila Prabhupada's books to other Gaudiya texts not

there to tell the reader that he or she can look to those texts for

further information on a particular subject? Only one lacking interest

in a particular subject would react otherwise.

 

In the beginning it is natural and quite appropriate for a guru to tell

the student to listen to him or her alone. However, if the student

listens well, he or she will eventually realize that guru is

everywhere-the universality of Sri Guru-and that our initiating (diksa)

guru can speak to us through other devotees, devotees who are pure

enough to serve in the capacity of an instructing (siksa) guru. How

shall we regard them? Scripture is clear on this point: the diksa and

siksa guru are equal manifestations of divinity and thus must be

honored equally.

 

Ideally it is not lack of faith in one's diksa guru that leads one to

one's siksa guru. Identifying one's siksa guru is an exercise of faith

by which divine faith is nourished, fostering its growth. In contrast

to strong faith, weak faith requires an enemy. As I have said earlier,

there is a place for that--but not a place in eternity.

 

Divine faith is independent and may appear wherever she likes. We

offend her by any attempt to rule over her and legislate where and in

whom she can appear. We are her servants, not her master. Divine faith

is our Deity, not our doormat.

 

You write of your experience of Iskcon. I have not been a member of

Iskcon for more than twenty years, but some of its leading members do

keep in touch with me, and I think they would agree with everything I

have written above. They would likely agree with you to some extent as

well and honestly admit that in many instances Iskcon is troubled by

weak faith in the name of chastity while lacking purity (which is a

problem that is hardly exclusive to Iskcon). My humble advice is that

while it is appropriate at one stage to advocate insularity, if in

doing so this in turn fosters offensive thinking towards more advanced

devotees whose chastity is dynamic within the scope of spiritual

purity, then leaders must correct the situation. They must speak up

against this, as it is counterproductive to that which it seeks to

accomplish: maintaining and increasing the ranks of the institution for

the pleasure of its Founder Acarya and Sri Krsna Caitanya.

 

Without speaking up, moderates leave the microphone in the hands of

fanatic flag-waving fundamentalists, who take pride in trampling on the

faith of others in the name of chastity to their Founder Acarya.

Moderates must speak up for the simple reason that they know better,

and the gift of knowledge brings with it the mandate to share it with

others. Only as much as the leaders speak up will Iskcon experience

dynamic chastity within purity. Of course in doing so leaders must

exercise spiritual discretion, for while a carte blanche rejection of

everyone outside of the institution in the name of chastity is faulty,

it is also true that not every devotee's association is favorable and

complimentary to the emphasis of Srila Prabhupada.

 

In my particular case, I accepted Pujyapada Bhakti Raksaka Sridhara

Deva Goswami as my siksa guru. I did so following the suggestion of

Srila Prabhupada, who told us that after his departure we could

approach Srila Sridhara Maharaja for philosophical guidance.

Philosophical guidance is siksa, not technical advice on how to perform

a particular ritual. Furthermore, no single devotee has received a more

glowing endorsement from Iskcon's Founder Acarya than Pujyapad Sridhara

Maharaja. God knows that I and other ex-members of Iskcon have made the

case time and time again, even while blocked from the podium. In the

face of this historical record and Gaudiya siddhanta, the arguments you

cited that others raised against Iskcon members accepting someone like

Pujyapada Sridhara Maharaja as a spiritual authority are unbecoming an

institution that prides itself in representing Srila Prabhupada. These

arguments have been answered many, many times.

 

Editors note: Further information on this controversial subject can be

found in the book "Our Affectionate Guardians" by B.B. Visnu Maharaja,

which is available at:

http://www.gosai.com/chaitanya/saranagati/html/vishnu_mjs/affection_unabridged/

index.html

 

However, I understand the pragmatic institutional concerns and

sentiments that may make it difficult for Iskcon to allow its members

to accept spiritual authorities who are not members of the institution.

If someone is a member of a particular institution, he or she must

accept the spiritual authority of that institution, and if such a

person has a second spiritual authority while remaining within the

institution, this could be a recipe for problems. It is also best to

remain with those who share the same sentiments and important to

preserve the personal sentiments of Srila Prabhupada within Iskcon. At

the same time, I believe that a policy that takes individual cases into

consideration is better than a blanket policy forbidding all Iskcon

members from accepting siksa from devotees who are not Iskcon members.

Furthermore, in instances where it may not be appropriate for a given

member to remain in Iskcon while accepting a siksa guru outside Iskcon,

the faith of such persons should be honored, and all dealings between

such ex-members and members should remain cordial and mutually

respectful, fostering unity in diversity. It is no more spiritually

correct to be on one side or the other. What is correct is to honor the

free flow of divine faith.

 

Let me conclude by explaining further how I view my own position, about

which you have asked. I am one and different from my Godbrothers and

Godsisters who have not embraced Srila Sridhara Maharaja as their siksa

guru. We are all initiated by Srila Prabhupada and are thus members of

the Gaudiya sampradaya and the Bhaktivinoda Parivara. Thus we should be

one philosophically. We have the same diksa guru. We also share the

same religious sentiment for our guru. However, I have another

religious sentiment for Sridhara Maharaja that they do not share. While

we must be one philosophically (abheda), there is also room for a

variety of religious sentiments (bheda). This difference is not

philosophically wrong, nor is it somehow inordinate. The variety of

sentiments in the philosophy of Mahaprabhu constitutes its beauty.

Furthermore, the sentiment I have for Srila Sridhara Maharaja, although

not shared by some of my Godbrothers and Godsisters, is one that I

share with Srila Prabhupada himself, who called Srila Sridhara Maharaja

his siksa guru. If Srila Prabhupada had affection for Srila Sridhar

Maharaja, as he made clear, and if he felt that Sridhara Maharaja

helped to prepare him for coming to the West in the capacity of a siksa

guru, as he publicly told us in Mayapura, how can anyone justifiably

object to my affection for Srila Sridhara Maharaja and my faith in his

instructions?

 

Ultimately, all of Iskcon's objections to my accepting Srila Sridhara

Maharaja as my siksa guru are based on institutional concerns, not

guru, sadhu, and sastra. Sastra does not place institutional limits on

accepting a diksa or siksa guru. It speaks in universal terms and

leaves practical details to the faith and discretion of the guru and

disciple. In proportion to the disciple's level of advancement, the

guru guides him or her according to time, place, and circumstance; thus

the record shows that in most cases before his departure Srila

Prabhupada did not want his fledgling disciples to associate with many

of his Godbrothers. However, his final words on the matter were that

his disciples could go to Srila Sridhara Maharaja for philosophy, which

I did. I never regretted this decision even though because of it I am

no longer welcome in the institution that Srila Prabhupada founded.

Still, I believe now, as I did then, that in the matter of accepting a

siksa guru I have been truly chaste to the instructions and mission of

my diksa guru, His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada. By

his grace may I also become pure.

 

Questions or comments may be submitted at the Q&A Forum:

http://www.swami.org/sanga/ or email sangaeditor (AT) swami (DOT) org.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++

Moderator: sangaeditor (AT) swami (DOT) org

Saturday, December, 24, 2005, Vol. VII, No. 17

Readership: 11,797

Back issue archive: http://www.eScribe.com/religion/sanga

Sanga website: http://www.swami.org/sanga

Audarya Bookstore: http://www.swami.org/store/

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

If you need to update your contact address, please drop us a note at

editor (AT) swami (DOT) org. Thank you.