Hare Krishna Cultural Journal Update: Chakra Profanity Watch: News

[Guest guest]

Hare Krishna Cultural Journal Update: Chakra Profanity Watch: News Reporting

in the Mode of Passion

 

June 05, 2005

 

 

------

 

http://siddhanta.com/archives/culture/000281.html

 

 

 

------

 

 

Chakra often enough posts some genuinely Krishna conscious

articles--temple announcements, preaching engagements, Krishna

conscious festivals, and other articles that are of general interest

to devotees. But along side them they also post articles which are

categorically harmful to devotional life. Last November a devotee who

goes by the name Subhadra-mayi devi dasi posted an [1]article that

more or less stated that the events in the Bhagavatam were to varying

degrees imaginary. She especially took issue with descriptions of the

planet Rahu.

 

Some responses include [2]this one on Hare Krishna Cultural Journal,

which question that if the Bhagavatam's account of the origin and

existence of Rahu is imaginary because the description of its

formation and existence is [3]inconsistent with the current body of

scientific knowledge, then why should we still believe in things like

Krishna's universal form, or Goloka Vrindavan for that matter? Trying

to understand scripture from an empirical point of view means

eventually coming to a conclusion compatible with the current

scientific world view, that the Bhagavatam, for example, is just

another book.

 

Further back and forth on this issue includes a recent [4]article by a

bhakta, who defends the scriptural account, and a [5]rejoinder by

Subhadra-mayi devi dasi, who concludes that the Bhagavatam is a book

of myths. As I said months ago in my own response, if you buy into the

world views of the agnostics and atheists (even just a little), then

scripture itself ceases to be a meaninful source of information. The

reason is simple: if the stories themselves are myths, then perhaps so

is Krishna, what to speak of the effects scripture ascribes to

chanting Krishna's name.

 

There will always be agnostics like Mother Subhadra-mayi devi dasi,

but whoever gives them a platform to voice their opinions is also an

important consideration. Just like with animal slaughter, the person

who actually kills the animal is not the only one culpable for the

murder. There is the person who gives permission, the person who

transports the animal to and from slaughter, the person who sells it,

the person who cooks it, and also the person who eats it. All these

people are just as responsible for the death of the animal as the one

who carries out the murder. Because Chakra gives voice to such people,

and because various devotees contribute articles to Chakra, Chakra's

editors and its contributors are as responsible for the propagation of

offensive statements and atheistic ideas as are the authors of such

offenses themselves. Because with their submissions devotees and

especially ISKCON officers tacitly lend their legitimacy to Chakra,

they unwittingly lend their credibility to the atheistic and offensive

statements Chakra makes a point of publishing from time-to-time.

Contributing devotees and ISKCON officers thus share responsibility

for every single person who loses their faith in Krishna as a result

of reading on Chakra articles like those of Subhadra-mayi devi dasi's

or other blasphemy Chakra deems [6]fit to publish.

 

This means that the well-intentioned contributors to Chakra either

have yet to seriously consider their participation in the Chakra forum

or that, if they have, they are unable to distinguish between right

and wrong, between dharma and adharma. The inability to distinguish

between dharma and adharma is a symptom of the mode of passion: "O son

of Prtha, that understanding which cannot distinguish between religion

and irreligion, between action that should be done and action that

should not be done, is in the mode of passion." (Bhagavad-gita As It

Is. 18.31) But then again, if the Bhagavad-gita is part of yet another

body of mythology, then why take it seriously? We have a religious

movement to run, preaching to do, temple bills to pay, Sundary feasts

to cook, etc. All that has to be more important than any "myth", isn't

it?

 

References

1. http://chakra.org/discussions/ODiscNov01_04.html

2. http://siddhanta.com/archives/culture/000139.html

3. http://siddhanta.com/archives/culture/000052.html

4. http://chakra.org/discussions/ODiscJun01_05.html

5. http://chakra.org/discussions/ODiscJun05_05.html

6. http://siddhanta.com/archives/culture/000271.html

 

 

--

Powered by Movable Type

Version 2.661

http://www.movabletype.org/