My last post on this conference.

[Guest guest]

The essence of Krishna Kirti Prabhu's last post is that the solution for

psychological problems is simply to adhere to the process of sravanam and

kirtanam as recommended in the Bhagavatam.

 

Variables of psychology and psychotherapy are starting to creep into ISKCON,

compromising the real solutions given to us by Srila Prabhupda.

 

Adding to the verse quoted by Krishna Kirti, is a most conclusive and

relevant Bhavgavatam verse on this issue of psychotherapy from SB 1st Canto

5th Ch. Text 32, as follows:

 

==============

 

etat samsucitam brahmams

tapa-traya-cikitsitam

yad isvare bhagavati

karma brahmani bhavitam

 

[Narada to Vyasadeva, ** for emphasis]

 

O Brahmana Vyasadeva, it is decded by the learned that the ** best **

remedial measure for removing ** all troubles and miseries ** is to dedicate

one's activities to the sevice of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Sri

Krishna.

==========

 

The words: tapa-traya-cikitsitam, are very significant and relevant - the

best remedial measure for removing ALL trouble and miseries.

 

Srila Prabhupada explains in his purport that this has been decided by the

learned, expert, and erudite scholars and that is the real meaning of

samsucitam.

 

So regular sravanam, kirtanam, visnoh smaranam is the BEST psychotherapy,

and it works without a doubt. It is the most powerful.

 

Those lacking sufficient spiritual strength to engage in sravanam and

kirtanam will of course seek other far less effective solutions that

seemingly make one feel good temporarily.

 

The wonderful gift of bhakti that Srila Prabhupada and the sages have given

us 'speicifally' for psychotherapy does not require any addition.

 

Hare Krishna

 

ys

 

ad

 

 

 

======================

 

Dear Maharajas, Prabhus, and Matajis, please accept my humble obeisances at

your feet. All glories to ISKCON Founder-Acharya Srila Prabhupada.

 

First of all I want to thank you all very much for allowing me, for some

time, to participate on your conferece for the sake of discussing a

particular subject of interest to the members--namely psychology. I have

noted that many of the members, for varying reasons, would rather further

discussion not take place on this conference, so this will be my last

posting here.

 

As this is my last posting, there are several points I wish to make which

are not necessarily related (they would have most likely appeared in

separate posts) and will likely make this a long post. Please bear with me.

 

Some members of this forum have raised the issue of my public conduct on the

Internet--on my web log Hare Krishna Cultural Journal

(http://siddhanta.com),

on this forum, and in other communications. I admit freely and openly that

in the past I have indeed wrongly offended some devotees, and I regret my

errors. Even now, as I sometimes puruse some of my earlier texts and essays

on my web log (blog), I cringe and ask myself, "Why did I write that?" On

my blog, sometimes when devotees have pointed out when my writing has been

out of bounds in the matter of etiquette, I have either offered a

correction, an apology, or in some egregious cases, an outright retraction

with an apology. Sometimes, I regret, I have failed to do this.

 

At the same time, I feel that sometimes devotees use the charge of

transgessing etiquette as an instrument of opprobrium--to silence views they

disagree with. Just because someone throws a tantrum and hurls an

accusation of offense does not mean he or she was offended. Within ISKCON

there is a long and prolific history of devotees using trumped-up charges of

offense to stigmatize others with views they find unpallatable. In my case,

at least, I find it is sometimes a hard call to ascertain whether someone

who objects to something I have written has legitimate grievances.

Consequently, I stand behind some posts and essays that I have written and

that some devotees object to, despite some charges that I have transgressed

etiquette.

 

So, now on to points more germane to the topic for which I was invited here

in the first place: psychology and psychotherapy within ISKCON.

 

I find it currious that Dhira Govinda Prabhu, despite being a recognized

expert in the field of psychology, has declined the opportunity to debate

the validity of theory and practice of psychotherapy within ISKCON in the

presence of ISKCON's most senior Vaishnavas. In fact, I find it odd that,

considering DG Prabhu is not the only expert on psychology present, all of

them thus far have elected not to address the countering arguments thus far

presented. I won't speculate as to why this opportunity has been turned

down by the experts, but I will say that the proliferation of psychology in

the matter of "helping" devotees represents a very big change from the way

we have previously thought of and dealt with material distress. Just

consider ISKCON's psychotherapy and self-fulfilment movement in light of

verse 1.2.18 of the Srimad-Bhagavatam:

 

"By regular attendance in classes on the Bhagavatam and by rendering of

service to the pure devotee, all that is troublesome to the heart is almost

completely destroyed, and loving service unto the Personality of Godhead,

who is praised with transcendental songs, is established as an irrevocable

fact." (SB 1.2.18)

 

However much one believes that psychotherapy can help devotees, the claim

that by sravanam kirtanam and sadhu seva "all that is troublesome to the

heart is almost completely destroyed" one cannot deny that the shift towards

psychotherapy that has developed in our movement is at odds with much of

what is in our scriptures. I believe the psychotherapy movement within

ISKCON raises this question: Do we nowadays really believe the claim made by

verse SB 1.2.18 or the many other verses like it? This silence on the part

of our experts in psychology and reluctance by more than a few of our

members to take seriously the objections that have thus far been raised

bodes ill for ISKCON's future.

 

This shortcoming is also institutional. Despite the proliferation of

psychotherapy as well as the sheer number of devotees who are spending time

and money to acquire advanced training in the field of psychology, there has

been no official, high-level investigation commissioned by official ISKCON

to explore and evaluate the fitness and limits of modern psychology from the

perspective of the parampara. The aim of such an investigation would be to

produce a document that explains to devotees the scope, limits, and

compatibility of modern psychology within the context of the Hare Krishna

Movement. No such document exists, nor am I aware of any efforts to produce

such a document.

 

As I have demonstrated elsewhere (on my blog), the presumptions about human

nature behind much psychotherapeutic technique are widely at odds with

Krishna conscious presumptions about human nature. Modern psychology

(particularly the humanistic and transpersonal psychology devotees seem most

inclined to study and practice) and Krishna consciousness also diverge

widely on issues of ontology and epistemology. Because therapeutic

technique is derived from psychological theory, it is artificial to try to

discuss the merits of technique seprately from a discussion on psychological

theory.

 

Considering these differences, and considering both the silence from the

experts and the lack of an institutional desire to investigate the

theoretical and practical issues of psychology and Krishna consciousness, it

is likely we are headed for a fate similar to that of mainline Protestant

Christian denominations, who have also rushed headlong into embracing

psychology with little reservation. These demonimations have become so

thoroughly secular that they have little to offer to seekers of the Truth

anything different from what they might find in newspaper editorials or

learn from the therapist's couch. In this regard, the scholar Clifford

Orwin writes,

 

*** QUOTE ***

 

". . .within the pastoral realm, the discourse of psychotherapy and personal

fulfillment appears to have established itself as thoroughly in the mainline

churches as in the lay world. Those who are looking for something different

in church than is on offer outside it are increasingly less likely to find

it there. Each of these denominations has by now alienated its more

traditionalist members, especially during these recent decades of increasing

cultural polarization, and many have voted with their feet."

 

(Orwin, Clifford. "The Unravelling of Christianity in America." Spring 2004.

The Public Interest. 18 Dec 2005 <

http://thepublicinterest.com/archives/2004spring/article2.html>)

 

*** END QUOTE ***

 

Is ISKCON headed for a similar fate? Again, I think the silence of the

experts and the resistance of many--at all levels of ISKCON--to seriously

discuss this issue is a sign that we may be headed in a similar direction.

 

Few devotees seemed to have noticed serious mistakes in Dhira Govinda

Prabhu's understanding of Krishna consciousness theory. These mistakes are

in claims fundamental to his understanding of the compatibility of modern

psychology with Krishna consciousness. For example (and this is only one,

more can be found at siddhanta.com), Dhira Govinda Prabhu says this about

the Krishna conscious process of discovering the weeds in one's own heart:

 

*** QUOTE ***

 

"A common dynamic is that, when the process of Krsna consciousness reveals

weeds, we will deny they are there, because such adulterations do not

conform with an image of ourselves as advanced and humble devotees,

respectable members of the Vaisnava community, etc."

 

(Dhira Govinda Das (David B. Wolf, Ph. D.). "Vaisnava Life Skills/Personal

Transformation Seminars and the Process of Krsna Consciousness." 23 Sep

2003. Jagannatha's Chakra. 20 Dec 2005. <

http://www.chakra.org/announcements/eventsSep23_03.html>)

The essence of Krishna-Kirti's concluding words that the best psychotherapy

comes from applying sravanam, kirtanam, visnu smaranam as recommended in the

Bhagavatam is real solution for all troubles and anxities.

 

 

====================

*** END QUOTE ***

 

The illogical claim here is "when the process of Krsna consciousness reveals

weeds, we will deny they are there. . ." If we deny "the weeds", then how

is it that the weeds were revealed? We could say the weeds were not yet

revealed, but we cannot say that they were revealed and we "denied" their

existence, because revelation, after all, includes acceptance.

 

Again, there are other claims Dhira Govinda Prabhu has made and which can be

demonstrated to be either illogical or incompatible with Krishna conscious

theory. Because this is my last post on this conference, I will not

elaborate on them here; further elaboration can be found at siddhanta.com

 

I have found that in all of the arguments made in support of psychotherapy

so far, none have considered whether the short-term "positive results" are

hiding long-term "negative" consequences. Just as thalidomide, used in the

early 1960s by pregnant women, worked in supressing morning sickness but

produced tens of thousands of babies without hands and legs, psychology may

also have long-term, adverse consequences that may not manifest until it is

too late to reverse the damage. And there is reason to believe psychology

will have long-term adverse consequences. We have seen that despite the

dominance of modern psychology for the last half-century or more, people in

general have developed more psychological problems, not less. So there is

plenty of reason to be skeptical of the psychotherapeutic enterprise within

the Hare Krishna Movement.

 

I am not totally against the use of psychology, and I believe that some

forms of psychology are more compatible with Krishna consciousness than

others--specifically behavioral psychology since it does not transgress its

epistemological boundaries as do other approaches to psychology. (At least

it does not trangress its epistemological boundaries as much as others do.)

But I have found that the existentialist (humanistic) psychology most

devotees seem to be receiving advanced training in are quite opposed in

principle to Krishna consciousness.

 

Of course others will disagree with me, but aside from all else that I have

said, the silence of the experts and the silence of the institution should

be cause for great concern. You don't stand by silently while major changes

in the way we understand Krishna consciousness are underway, as the expets

and the institution are doing.

 

Your servant, Krishna-kirti das (HDG)

 

p.s. Since I will no longer be posting here, if you wish to discuss this

further, I ask that you to write me privately.