Do No Harm

[Guest guest]

Dear Krishna Dharma Prabhu,

PAMHO, AGTSP.

 

I want to thank you for your very intelligent answer to my inquiry. What

I have understood is that there is no shortcut for educating devotees and

leaders alike. Without the education, there is no way to resolve this

quandary. It also strikes me that in order to avoid placing devotees in

compromising circumstances, a great deal of self-restraint on the part of

the leaders is needed. If leaders rely primarily on the authority of power

to get things done, there will always be a great human cost.

 

I like to define power as the ability to direct people to take specific

actions without having to explain to them why they should do so. Like in the

army -- when the soldiers are told to march, they march, often without

knowing where they are going. While there is a role for this kind of

management, it's not a very good modus operandi for an organization such as

ours.

 

Once, after having been in positions of authority in ISKCON for many

years, I accepted an opportunity for service in a place where I knew no one

and where I had no authority at all. I interacted daily with devotees of a

large community and region. Over time, even though my service was not for

the temple or region, I was into various local issues and problems. I found

myself having a great deal of influence without having any power whatsoever.

 

When I wanted to get something done, I couldn't order anyone to do

anything. If I wanted their assistance or cooperation, I had to convince

them it was the right thing to do. However, I soon discovered that voluntary

cooperation was much better than forced compliance. People tended to do

things better and with more reliability. And they worked in a happier mood.

This turned out to be some of the most spiritually productive and satisfying

years I have experienced.

 

When I again returned to a position of so-called authority, I still

relied more on the voluntary approach. It was far more effective and

efficient in most situations I've subsequently been in. After hearing your

answer, I feel that if leaders concentrated on giving devotees the tools

they need to properly evaluate what they hear from others, they would

willingly do the right thing without the need for force, intimidation,

manipulation, motivated preaching, cheerleading or trickery. A leader who

finds he needs to rely on such methods should re-evaluate the program he is

pushing.

 

So it seems that experienced devotees can do their part through education

and leadership that respects the intelligence and integrity of the

individual. That answers one side of the equation. But still, what does the

newer devotee do when faced with a serious doubt about the wisdom or

propriety of an instruction? If after trying to clear up that doubt through

discussion and as much sadhu, sastra and guru as possible, what does one do

if the doubt remains? Nothing? Follow one's intuition? Surrender? Leave?

Rebel? Comply under protest?

 

Even trying to follow one's conscience can be difficult, as it is often

impossible to distinguish between Supersoul and the mind. Perhaps the best

alternative is to act under the principle of "do no harm" -- pick the

alternative you believe is least likely to give trouble to innocent living

entities.

 

Your opinion?

 

Your servant,

Sri Rama das

 

[srirama.acbsp (AT) pamho (DOT) net], or

[sriramadas (AT) home (DOT) com] < Please note new address.

[http://www.krishnagalleria.com]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

|

|Krishna.Dharma (AT) pamho (DOT) net [Krishna.Dharma (AT) pamho (DOT) net]

|

|Dear Sri Rama prabhu,

|

|Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to Srila

|Prabhupada. Thank

|you for raising these mature and pertinent points. What I am understanding

|from you is that, while the principle of following authorized direction is

|good, one needs to be cautious. Sometimes the so called authority

|is not so

|authorized, inasmuch as he is giving bogus instructions not based on guru,

|sadhu and sastra. Younger devotees, who lack sufficient knowledge, are

|especially vulnerable. From your own experience you know that we can

|sometimes be misled, and even though we are sincerely trying to serve

|Krishna we may end up damaging our spiritual lives, much in the way of the

|blind leading the blind and all of them falling in the ditch. You wonder

|then how we can protect inexperienced devotees, and at the same time

|preserve the principle of following authority.

|

|In response I have to say that I can fully empathise with you. I too was

|that soldier. Looking back on some of the things I was asked to do I can

|now understand that they were not so authorized. Maybe as a result I

|suffered, although I do try to console myself that things would have been

|much worse if I had not been a devotee. But I do accept your point. We

|cannot just expect someone without sufficient knowledge to blindly

|follow an

|authority. However, I don't think this is what Srila Prabhupada was

|teaching at all. As I understand it he only expected us to follow - even

|blindly - once we had first of all made an intelligent decision based on

|knowledge that the authority we are following really is authorized. In

|other words, the first responsibility we have to new devotees is not to

|issue orders to them, but to educate them in spiritual principles. Bring

|them to the point of being 'independently thoughtful', as Srila Prabhupada

|instructed, so that they will know what is right and wrong for themselves.

|

|Education and empowerment. In my view this should be ISKCON's paradigm.

|But it seems to me that we have worked by a different and opposing

|paradigm,

|namely control and legislation. Instead of teaching and training devotees

|thoroughly so that they are empowered to make their own important

|decisions,

|such as who to accept as an authority, we have made those decisions for

|them, even formulating laws that effectively make those decisions, such as

|our guru legislation.

|

|If a devotee in our care does not know what is right and wrong then we have

|a job to do - educate him. Not that we take their initial commitment and

|turn it into blind faith based on no knowledge so we can exploit them to

|build our dreams. In my view proper training has been all but completely

|neglected. All the knowledge we need is right there in Prabhupada's books,

|but how much time do we spend studying them from 'different

|lights', hearing

|and chanting together, and systematically educating ourselves and others?

|Surely that should be our main business.

|

|In Bg 10.5 purport, Prabhupada says: "Asammoha, freedom from doubt and

|delusion, can be achieved when one is not hesitant and when he understands

|the transcendental philosophy. Slowly but surely he becomes free from

|bewilderment. Nothing should be accepted blindly; everything should be

|accepted with care and with caution."

|

|And in the SB, 3.25.25, cited in the Gita 9.1. purport: "As a

|devotee hears

|more and more about the Supreme Lord, he becomes enlightened. This hearing

|process is recommended in the Srimad-Bhagavatam: "The messages of the

|Supreme Personality of Godhead are full of potencies, and these potencies

|can be realized if topics regarding the Supreme Godhead are discussed

|amongst devotees." And further in that same purport: "Discussion of Krsna

|is very potent, and if a fortunate person has such association and tries to

|assimilate the knowledge, then he will surely make advancement toward

|spiritual realization."

|

|For me, then, it is this discussion and education that provides

|the solution

|to the question of spiritual authority in ISKCON, even to how it will

|manifest to our leadership. If our leaders take it as their first priority

|to hear and chant together, deeply understanding Prabhupada's instructions,

|then I am sure he will always be manifest. "If you want to know

|me, read my

|books."

|

|Here's another quote to end with, to back up my argument that education and

|empowerment is better than control and legislation: (it's a good one for

|the pro-varnashrama argument too)

|

|"Simply enforcing laws and ordinances cannot make the citizens obedient and

|lawful. That is impossible. Throughout the entire world there are so many

|states, legislative assemblies and parliaments, but still the citizens are

|rogues and thieves. Good citizenship, therefore, cannot be enforced; the

|citizens must be trained. As there are schools and colleges to train

|students to become chemical engineers, lawyers or specialists in many other

|departments of knowledge, there must be schools and colleges to train

|students to become brahmanas, ksatriyas, vaisyas, sudras, brahmacaris,

|grhasthas, vanaprasthas and sannyasis."

|SB 9.10.50

|

|"Schools and colleges". Hello ISKCON, that's your cue.

|

|Yhs

|KDd

|

|

|

|

|Sri Rama prabhu wrote:

|

|

|> Could you elaborate on the context of this statement? I definitely

|> followed this principle in the first years of my ISKCON life and, as a

|> result, I seemed to make a lot of advancement -- even when those

|providing

|> the authorized direction were often very much less than ideal. However, I

|> also picked up many anarthas and damage to my character that took decades

|> to become free of. And it was definitely not a case of becoming bound by

|> reactions because I was doing those actions in state of selfish

|> motivation. I was contaminated by the nature of the actions themselves.

|> There is no doubt in my mind, I should have refused to do some things I

|> was asked to do by my "authority."

|>

|> Later, I felt that I'd been brainwashed by the concept of perfection

|> through following authority and came to regret many things I'd done under

|> the umbrella of that principle. Now I would never consider following an

|> instruction that I felt wasn't to the benefit of (or at least not harmful

|> to) all concerned. So where does that put me in relation to the statement

|> above by Srila Prabhupada?

|>

|> Now, I could solve this quandary by designating the actions under

|> question as "non-authorized direction" on the basis of it not complying

|> with sadhu, sastra and guru. After a quarter century, my knowledge of

|> those confirming sources is sufficient to make me now personally

|> comfortable deciding what is "authorized direction." However, what is a

|> young devotee to do when there hasn't been enough experience to

|be able to

|> judge according to sadhu, sastra and guru? Should one fall back on

|> whatever sense of right and wrong one had before coming to Krishna

|> consciousness? Or speculate on what might be considered authorized if one

|> had better knowledge of the standards? Or follow direction, more or less

|> blindly?

|>

|> Your servant,

|> Sri Rama das