Amnesty for sannyasis

[Guest guest]

I'm commenting on a text by Mahanidhi Prabhu:

 

And I am thanking him for his points.

 

> Bhaktarupa (das) ACBSP wrote:

> >

> > The "shame" or "dishonor" of giving up saffron and wearing white is one

> > of the features of present day ISKCON which is based upon karmakandiya

> > smriti principles.

>

> I believe I wouldn't be the only one to disagree with this kind

> of approach that gives the green light to an ISCKON sannyasi to

> simply get a wife whenever his sex urge tells him it's a "good"

> time to do it. Please, let's have on the mind that we speak here

> about braking the oats given to Guru and Deities and to the whole

> Universe, and for the sake of what? For the sake of satisfying the

> lower kind of a taste.

>

> Sorry, I see this issue having nothing to do with some "we don't

> follow karmakandiya smrti". It's about a fall down of a sannyasi.

> Clear.

 

Your basic proposal was for making a special amnesty for those who wanted to

leave sannyas in order to continue in management. Now you are suggesting

that this desire to engage in management in ISKCON is equivalent to wanting

to engage in sex life for sense gratification. I mentioned in my text that

anyone who takes sannyas for gaining prestige or who gives it up for sense

gratification is a cheater. I would suggest that we do not need to waste our

time in this forum discussing how to deal with cheaters. They should be

neglected and routed out of ISKCON management at the earliest opportunity.

The only point worth discussing is whether a sannyasi who is more inclined

to management rather than direct preaching should be allowed to fully absorb

himself in management, and in order to keep the social order intact, wear

white. Whether they also get married is a side issue. A former sannyasi

getting married is not an automatic indication of a cheating mentality. (The

cheater sannyasis described in the Bhagavatam were those who acted

improperly WHILE DRESSED IN SAFFRON.)

 

The mentality in all cases should be to continue to fight maya and serve the

spiritual master to the best of one's ability.

 

>

> BTW, do we agree at all that there is such thing as a fall-down

> of a sannyasi? (Just to be sure)

 

A devotee falls down if he leaves the service of Krishna and the spiritual

master. This is the only kind of fall down that we really care about. But I

did state clearly that a sannyasi leaving the sannyas asrama often causes

harm to the preaching mission.

 

> > Karmis who have no access to bhakti must accept sannyas in order to

> > achieve sayujya moksa. But Vaisnavas do not accept sannyas for any form

> > of liberation. Liberation is already there as a byproduct of bhakti.

> > Karmis who give up sannyas are called vantasi because they lose their

> > moksa and return to the path of karma. Vaisnavas who give up sannyas do

> > not return to the path of karma, thus the term "vantasi" cannot be

> > factually applied to them. (Think about it before you hit the folio

> > button!) Sannyas is accepted by Gaudiya Vaisnavas only for preaching. So

> > later for preaching sannyas can also be given up. Preaching is a higher

> > principle than any of these social considerations.

>

> I do not have the Folio to hit its button, but I doubt one

> really needs the Folio. I think we have quite misunderstood each

> other here. What I am having on mind, is giving up a sannyas out

> of not being able to maintain the required standards of it, out

> of the desires to enjoy/control the material energy. While you

> are speaking something that I do not understand what it got

> to do with that. "A higher principle"?? The sex desire (in its

> both subtle and/or gross form) is definitely NOT "a higher

> principle", in my conceptions of "higher", at least.

>

> So, we perhaps can't really go along with this line, seeing that

> we are quite possibly on totally different issues. I really would

> be able to understand your eventual objection of a suicide as the

> recommended atonement for a fallen sannyasi, as a karmakandiya

> smrti that we ought not to follow, that the preaching is a higher

> principle here. But braking the vows given to Guru and Krsna...???

> That _is_ a shame and a dishonor.

 

What exactly are the vows taken by a sannyasi at the time of sannyas

initiation? In order to answer your question we would need to have solid

information about this, which I don't have right now. Perhaps someone can

help with this.

 

> May we all now start braking the principles and oats left and

> right, as it pleases our senses, and then say how it is not

> a shame, since, "Preaching is a higher principle than any of

> these social considerations."?? Please.

 

I am not suggesting this.

 

> But you have also touched something that certainly lays in

> my interest of consideration these days, as well. That is,

> The purpose of sannyas asram in ISCKON.

 

> I suppose it's quite known already how sannyas is one among

> few forbidden things in this age of Kali.

 

Yes. Sannyas is forbidden.

 

> Goudiya Vaisnavas,

> prior to Caitanya Mahaprabhu's appearance, seamed not to be taking it.

 

Prior means "before". Gaudiya vaisnavism is considered to have (more or

less) started with Mahaprabhu. Perhaps you mean "after". It is true that

after Mahaprabhu and a few personal associates, no one took sannyas until

Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Thakur. And a major reason he accepted sannyas was in

order to counteract the influence of the Ramakrishna Mission sannyasis.

 

> But then Mahaprabhu took. I have to admit that I have not

> red the relevant CC purports for a long, so please correct me

> if I am wrong here. The reason for taking sannyas was explained

> that Mahaprabhu wanted to counteract the influence of Mayavada

> sannyasis who were then respected in the society more than Vaisnavas.

> Since people in India, by dint of culture, pay respects and obeisances

> to a sannyas on very sight of him, so if that sannyasi happens to be

> a Vaisnava, thus people will be making an advancement by way of

> performing agnjata-sukriti. So thus they would be "tricked".

 

Sriman Mahaprabhu is the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Anyone who bows

down to Him achieves ajnata sukriti. This was certainly Mahaprabhu's trick

to benedict the souls of the world. But, of course, this was just the

external reason. He delivered everyone in the universe whether they bowed

down to Him or not. He had more confidential reasons to take sannyas.

 

> Now, is this the tradition in ISCKON? I suppose it should be.

> But let's analyze it for a moment. In the West, when people

> see a sannyasi, they rather look around to see wether there

> has some circus landed in their town (please, bear with me

> my figurative style of expression). They pay no respect, most

> often than that they make an offence in their mind.

 

This is very bad. Respect must even be offered to the dress of a sannyasi

who has a cheating mentality.

 

> And in ISCKON?

> In ISCKON, Srila Prabupada thought us to not judge according to

> a dress in order to recognize a Vaisnava and respect him.

 

We should respect sannyasis from a distance at least.

 

> As far

> as the individual himself, one doesn't need to take a sannyas in order

> to serve Krsna.

 

Some can improve their service to Krishna by taking sannyas.

 

> So, what's left, yes, it's -- people in India. OK,

> for them, it makes some use. But then, those people aren't really

> necessary to understand nicely what you were explaining to us

> about "karmakandiya smrti" and "higher principles", they will simply

> see, "Oh, here's an another ISCKON sannyasi getting married... oh,

> of course, they are anyway the Westerners, mlecchas, can't keep up

> the vows.. useless.."

 

There is still a high level of respect in many places in India for our

western ISKCON sannyasis. It is quite amazing, actually, in spite of all the

falldowns.

 

> Well, even this last useful cause being blown away, one may wonder

> what's the use... at all.

 

If we can have some nice, simple, qualified sannyasis placed in the

forefront of the preaching then it will help not only the public but the

young (and old) ISKCON devotees as well.

 

We have failed miserably to actually institute the kind of system desired by

Srila Prabhupada. Let's fault the application, not the basic system.

 

Your servant, Bhaktarupa Das