Modern Psychology Is Inescapably Demonic:looking within, rather than turning for help

[krsna]

 

"Notwithstanding modern psychology's claim to help people

 

become more loving, considerate, and personable, that its

 

very basis is mechanistic and humanistic renders it

 

inescapably demonic, as is apparent in its emphasis on the

 

individual's potential for self-actualization by looking

 

within, rather than turning for help to guru and Krsna and

 

understanding that real self-actualization means to

 

identify oneself as a servant of guru and Krsna."

 

-- Bhakti Vikas Swami

 

 

[Guest guest]

The problem is that modern psychology doesn't teach to look within deep enough. They are satisifed with the pyscho/emotional level and seeing no further they stop there.

 

Looking within is meant to look for Supersoul and one's own self.

 

Introspection is an attribute of human beings that takes us beyond the animal level.

 

Nothing wrong with looking within as long as we don't stop before reaching Vishnu's lotus feet.

[stonehearted]

Well, I hope there's some broader context for such comments that may help us make some sense of them. First, there may be some approaches to psychology that are strictly mechanistic, but much of what I've seen of contemporary psychology is hardly mechanistic. All the same, psychology is the study of the mind, which is a material element, so its limitations are inherent and admitted by all honest practitioners.

 

Also, I'm baffled by Maharaja's blanket condemnation of introspection, which is so important to serious spiritual practice. Looking within, after all, means looking past what's extraneous to our real identity to find out who we really are and why we suffer. This is such an odd assertion for a sannyasi to make. It seems something is missing here. Of course self-actualization requires understanding our real identity as "Krishnera nitya dasa"! That's the result of introspection. And introspection must be guided by guru, sadhu, and shastra. What materialistic psychology misses is the real guru, real sadhu, and apaurusheya shastras.

 

Many of the tools of psychology can be used to help people establish mental health which is conducive to spiritual progress. Srila Prabhupada personally told me "devotees and devotional service cannot be stereotyped. There is nothing that cannot be used in Krishna's service. Simply we require guidance from the expert spiritual master how to engage everything in Krishna's service. That is the only trick." I've also heard him say that brahmana means broad minded, not narrow minded, generous, not kripana. Those with broad vision will be able to establish Krishna consciousness in modern culture. Others may be able to perpetuate it as some sort of exclusive cult, always on the lookout for enemies. I'm more interested in working with the former.

[Kulapavana]

seems like lately certain elements of top Iskcon leadership are coming down hard on outside help aids for Iskcon members, things like outside mediation, counseling, etc.

[Guest guest]

"Certain elements" is right. It appears there's at least a perceived threat to devotees' complete dependence on ISKCON authorities in all matters. What's next--medicine? "Staph infection? Forget the antibiotics! Just chant extra rounds!"

 

Then auto mechanics? "Brakes going out? Don't give your money to Midas! Give it to me for my air fare here and there, and depend on Krishna! Oh, and chant really intently!"

[Kulapavana]

well, to be fair, some of such "outside" counseling is not very effective for devotees, but the trend of complete reliance on "inside solutions" has led to some serious failures in the past...

 

what I like, is when such outside solutions (such as psychological counseling) are applied by devotees with professional experience in the given field - then you are combining the best of both worlds. but even such devotee professionals are viewed with suspicion by these "elements" ...and that is really, really bogus.

[Guest guest]

Babhru you wrote:

 

 

psychology is the study of the mind, which is a material element,

 

 

Now this may be of no consequence to this discussion but it is something I have seen repeated by various devotees. The mind is not really a material element in the sense of being comprised of matter. In fact we are told chanting "cleanses the mind". "At present we have contacted a material body, material mind and material intelligence, but when we become free from these material conditions, our spiritual body, spiritual mind and spiritual intelligence become manifest." (S.B 4.23.11). In the spiritual world you have a mind.

 

For example

 

 

sri-suka uvaca

gopyah krsne vanam yate

tam anudruta-cetasah

krsna-lilah pragayantyo

ninyur duhkhena vasaran

 

Sukadeva Gosvami said: Whenever Krsna went to the forest, the minds of the gopis would run after Him, and thus the young girls sadly spent their days singing of His pastimes.

 

 

It's really no different then how you would view an apple, and an apple after it has been offered to the Lord. Before it is offered the apple is considered to be comprised of the material energy of the Lord. After it has been offered it is considered to be comprised of the spiritual energy of the Lord. The substance of the apple doesn't change, but the apple becomes transcendental when it is used for it's true purpose.

 

Here is a bit from Srimad Bhagavatam, 4.9.7

 

 

My Lord, You are the supreme one, but by Your different energies You appear differently in the spiritual and material worlds. You create the total energy of the material world by Your external potency, and after creation You enter within the material world as the Supersoul. You are the Supreme Person, and through the temporary modes of material nature You create varieties of manifestation, just as fire, entering into wood of different shapes, burns brilliantly in different varieties.

 

Purport

 

Dhruva Maharaja realized that the Supreme Absolute Truth, the Personality of Godhead, acts through His different energies, not that He becomes void or impersonal and thus becomes all-pervading. The Mayavadi philosopher thinks that the Absolute Truth, being spread throughout the cosmic manifestation, has no personal form. But here Dhruva Maharaja, upon realization of the Vedic conclusion, says, "You are spread all over the cosmic manifestation by Your energy." This energy is basically spiritual, but because it acts in the material world temporarily, it is called maya, or illusory energy. In other words, for everyone but the devotees the Lord's energy acts as external energy. Dhruva Maharaja could understand this fact very nicely, and he could understand also that the energy and the energetic are one and the same. The energy cannot be separated from the energetic

 

 

The soul under the influence of the 3 modes of material nature has a mind which is considered to be a product of false ego and therefore it is considered to be comprised of a subtle form of the material energy. But that same mind when purified from false ego or false identification becomes recognized as spiritual energy and one with the Lord by the self realized soul.

 

Now here is what Lord Kapila says about the mind with commentary by Srila Prabhupada

 

Srimad Bhagavatam 3.28.35

 

When the mind is thus completely freed from all material contamination and detached from material objectives, it is just like the flame of a lamp. At that time the mind is actually dovetailed with that of the Supreme Lord and is experienced as one with Him because it is freed from the interactive flow of the material qualities.

 

PURPORT

 

In the material world the activities of the mind are acceptance and rejection. As long as the mind is in material consciousness, it must be forcibly trained to accept meditation on the Supreme Personality of Godhead, but when one is actually elevated to loving the Supreme Lord, the mind is automatically absorbed in thought of the Lord. In such a position a yogi has no other thought than to serve the Lord. This dovetailing of the mind with the desires of the Supreme Personality of Godhead is called nirvana, or making the mind one with the Supreme Lord.

 

The best example of nirvana is cited in Bhagavad-gita. In the beginning the mind of Arjuna deviated from Krishna's. Krishna wanted Arjuna to fight, but Arjuna did not want to, so there was disagreement. But after hearing Bhagavad-gita from the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Arjuna dovetailed his mind with Krishna's desire. This is called oneness. This oneness, however, did not cause Arjuna and Krishna to lose their individualities. The Mayavadi philosophers cannot understand this. They think that oneness necessitates loss of individuality. Actually, however, we find in Bhagavad-gita that individuality is not lost. When the mind is completely purified in love of Godhead, the mind becomes the mind of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. The mind at that time does not act separately, nor does it act without inspiration to fulfill the desire of the Lord. The individual liberated soul has no other activity. pratinivritta-guna-pravahah. In the conditioned state the mind is always engaged in activity impelled by the three modes of the material world, but in the transcendental stage, the material modes cannot disturb the mind of the devotee. The devotee has no other concern than to satisfy the desires of the Lord. That is the highest stage of perfection, called nirvana or nirvana-mukti. At this stage the mind becomes completely free from material desire.

 

Yatharcih. Arcih means "flame." When a lamp is broken or the oil is finished, we see that the flame of the lamp goes out. But according to scientific understanding, the flame is not extinguished; it is conserved. This is conservation of energy. Similarly, when the mind stops functioning on the material platform, it is conserved in the activities of the Supreme Lord. The Mayavadi philosophers' conception of cessation of the functions of the mind is explained here: cessation of the mental functions means cessation of activities conducted under the influence of the three modes of material nature.

[Guest guest]

shiva: "Now this may be of no consequence to this discussion but it is something I have seen repeated by various devotees. The mind is not really a material element in the sense of being comprised of matter."

 

I was making a rhetorical concession. The mind is listed as one of the elements of the material world in Bhagavad-gita, so those working with it are (depending on their consciousness, of course) working with a material element. But because the mind is the link between the senses and the intelligence, which is the soul's next-door neighbor, working with the mind can be very tricky. Kulapavana's most recent comments show that he sees just what I was thinking: when such work is done by those guided by guru and shastra, it can be very beneficial.

 

shiva: "In fact we are told chanting 'cleanses the mind.'"

 

Well, something like that. Cetah is a hard word to translate into English. It means consciousness, heart (int he subtle sense}, mind, or some combination. It comes from cit, which means consciousness. So chanting cleanses our consciousness. And the acharyas usually say it cleanses the "mirror of the mind [or heart]," which addresses our perception of ourselves. There's really a lot going on there.

 

And I think that pure immersion in chanting and serving the holy names is the ultimate cure for all ills. But the way this is presented to devotees by some leaders makes any incidental attention to the mind seem like some demonic activity meant to destroy Krishna or something, and some of us don't buy that. That's all I really meant to address.

[Guest guest]

Babhru I was pointing out a misconception that can arise if people think that the mind is a material element without furthur detail on the topic. What I wrote wasn't meant as a criticism of your post, rather it was meant to help people who may be confused.

 

Another thing:

 

 

"On The Way To KRSNA" by A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami (taken from lectures)Ch 2.

 

"The Way of Chanting and Knowing Krsna"

 

Hare Krsna, Hare Krsna, Krsna Krsna, Hare Hare/ Hare Rama, Hare Rama, Rama Rama, Hare Hare.

 

This is transcendental sound vibration. It will help us to cleanse the dust from the mirror of the mind. At the present moment we have accumulated so much material dust on the mirror of the mind, just as on Second Avenue (New York City) there is dust and soot over everything due to the heavy traffic.

 

Due to our manipulation of material activities, a great deal of dust has collected over our mind’s clear mirror, and as a consequence we are unable to see things in perspective. This vibration of transcendental sound (the Hare Krsna mantra) will cleanse away this dust and enable us to see clearly our real constitutional position. As soon as we come to understand “I am not this body; I am spirit soul, and my symptom is consciousness,” we will be able to establish ourselves in real happiness. As our consciousness is purified by this process of chanting Hare Krsna, all our material miseries will disappear.

 

 

[Guest guest]

 

Srimad Bhagavatam 4.23.17

 

 

He amalgamated the mind with the senses and the senses with the sense objects, according to their respective positions, and he also amalgamated the material ego with the total material energy, mahat-tattva.

 

PURPORT

 

In respect to the ego, the total material energy is sundered in two parts -- one agitated by the mode of ignorance and the other agitated by the modes of passion and goodness. Due to agitation by the mode of ignorance, the five gross elements are created. Due to agitation by the mode of passion, the mind is created, and due to agitation by the mode of goodness, false egoism, or identification with matter, is created. The mind is protected by a particular type of demigod. Sometimes the mind (manah) is also understood to have a controlling deity or demigod. In this way the total mind, namely the material mind controlled by material demigods, was amalgamated with the senses. The senses, in turn, were amalgamated with the sense objects. The sense objects are forms, tastes, smells, sounds, etc. Sound is the ultimate source of the sense objects. The mind was attracted by the senses and the senses by the sense objects, and all of them were ultimately amalgamated in the sky. The creation is so arranged that cause and effect follow one after the other. The merging process involves amalgamating the effect with the original cause. Since the ultimate cause in the material world is mahat-tattva, everything was gradually wound up and amalgamated with the mahat-tattva. This may be compared to sunya-vada, or voidism, but this is the process for cleansing the real spiritual mind, or consciousness.

 

When the mind is completely washed of all material contamination, the pure consciousness acts. The sound vibration from the spiritual sky can automatically cleanse all material contaminations, as confirmed by Caitanya Mahaprabhu: ceto-darpana-marjanam [Cc. Antya 20.12]. We need only take the advice of Lord Caitanya Mahaprabhu and chant the Hare Krsna mantra to cleanse the mind of all material contamination, and this may be considered the summary of this difficult verse. As soon as the whole material contamination is washed away by this process of chanting, all desires and reactions to material activities become immediately vanquished, and real life, peaceful existence, begins. In this age of Kali it is very difficult to adopt the yogic process mentioned in this verse. Unless one is very expert in such yoga, the best course is to adopt the ways and means of Lord Caitanya Mahaprabhu, sri-krsna-sankirtanam. Thus one can gloriously become freed from all material contamination by the simple process of chanting Hare Krsna, Hare Krsna, Krsna Krsna, Hare Hare/ Hare Rama, Hare Rama, Rama Rama, Hare Hare. Just as life in this material world has its beginning in material sound, similarly a spiritual life has its beginning in this spiritual sound vibration.

 

 

 

 

Srimad Bhagavatam 5.18.11

 

 

Bathing in the Ganges can certainly cure one of many infectious diseases, but it cannot cleanse one's materially attached mind, which creates all kinds of contaminations in material existence. However, one who directly associates with the Supreme Lord by hearing of His activities cleanses the dirt from his mind and very soon comes to Krsna consciousness. Suta Gosvami confirms this in Srimad-Bhagavatam (1.2.17):

 

srnvatam sva-kathah krsnah

 

punya-sravana-kirtanah

 

hrdy antah-stho hy abhadrani

 

vidhunoti suhrt-satam

 

The Supreme Lord within everyone's heart becomes very pleased when a person hears narrations of His activities, and He personally cleanses the dirt from the mind of the listener. Hrdy antah-stho hy abhadrani vidhunoti: He washes off all dirt from the mind. Material existence is caused by dirty things within the mind. If one can cleanse his mind, he immediately comes to his original position of Krsna consciousness, and thus his life becomes successful. Therefore all the great saints in the devotional line very strongly recommend the process of hearing. Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu introduced the congregational chanting of the Hare Krsna mantra to give everyone a chance to hear Krsna's holy name, for simply by hearing Hare Krsna, Hare Krsna, Krsna Krsna, Hare Hare/ Hare Rama, Hare Rama, Rama Rama, Hare Hare, one becomes purified (ceto-darpana-marjanam [Cc. Antya 20.12]). Therefore our Krsna consciousness movement is chiefly engaged in chanting the Hare Krsna mantra all over the world.

 

After one's mind becomes cleansed by chanting Hare Krsna, one gradually comes to the platform of Krsna consciousness and then reads books like Bhagavad-gita, Srimad-Bhagavatam, Caitanya-caritamrta and The Nectar of Devotion. In this way, one becomes more and more purified of material contamination.

 

 

[Guest guest]

Srimad Bhagavatam 5.11.8

 

 

When the living entity's mind becomes absorbed in the sense gratification of the material world, it brings about his conditioned life and suffering within the material situation. However, when the mind becomes unattached to material enjoyment, it becomes the cause of liberation. When the flame in a lamp burns the wick improperly, the lamp is blackened, but when the lamp is filled with ghee and is burning properly, there is bright illumination. Similarly, when the mind is absorbed in material sense gratification, it causes suffering, and when detached from material sense gratification, it brings about the original brightness of Krsna consciousness.

 

PURPORT

 

It is therefore concluded that the mind is the cause of material existence and liberation also. Everyone is suffering in this material world because of the mind; it is therefore proper to train the mind or to cleanse the mind from material attachment and engage it fully in the Lord's service. This is called spiritual engagement. As confirmed in Bhagavad-gita:

 

mam ca yo 'vyabhicarena

 

bhakti-yogena sevate

 

sa gunan samatityaitan

 

brahma-bhuyaya kalpate

 

"One who engages in full devotional service, who does not fall down in any circumstance, at once transcends the modes of material nature and thus comes to the level of Brahman." (Bg. 14.26)

 

We should engage the mind fully in Krsna conscious activities. Then it will be the cause of our liberation, for our returning home. back to Godhead. However, if we keep the mind engaged in material activities for sense gratification, it will cause continuous bondage and will make us remain in this material world in different bodies, suffering the consequences of our different actions.

 

 

[stonehearted]

Thanks, shiva. You've provided much food for reflection. Understanding even the gross elements can be challenging; the subtler ones can be even trickier, but we grow by our effort.

[Guest guest]

I actually have a high regard for Bhakti Vikasa Swami but like you, Babhru, I feel baffed by his blanket condemntation of introsepection.

 

 

[Guest guest]

TRANSLATION SB 3.9.22

 

Let the Supreme Lord be merciful towards me. He is the one friend and soul of all living entities in the world, and He maintains all, for their ultimate happiness, by His six transcendental opulences. May He be merciful towards me so that I, as before, may be empowered with the introspection to create, for I am also one of the surrendered souls who are dear to the Lord.

[Guest guest]

[snip]

 

Humane world is possible when we are really human being not by dresses or by designations but by the qualities just befitting human beings. Votes in quantity do not count before the votes in quality. Human civilization must be distinguished from animal frenzy busy in the matters of eating, sleeping, fearing and sense-gratifications.

 

The lower animals have no power of introspection but some of them are more powerful in the matters of other items of animalism. There are many flying birds, who can go up higher in the sky than any civilized man proud of his invention of aeroplanes. That does not make any difference between a man and an animal. The only difference between man and animal is that the one can be educated in the spiritual science while the other is by constitution incapable of receiving such education. Therefore a man devoid of this important part of introspecting power, is no better than a beast. Humanity therefore must be educated to revive its dormant divine nature or pure consciousness and thereby rise up to the plane of spirit soul. They must go Back to Godhead. Here is a tiny attempt to train up the human mind towards spiritual identity and we hope to get proper cooperation from all sections of people.---BTG 1956

 

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

 

I bet the swami just misspoke and would choose different wording if he thought about it. Even swamis need a do-over once in awhile.

 

 

[Guest guest]

in my opinion. Don't mean to condemn or critisize but the people in the world that have virtually no ability to be introspective are almost always the most materialistic seems like.

[Guest guest]

My dictionary says:

 

Introspection n. the examining of ones's mind or its contents reflectively...

 

I think introspection is an activity tha ALL gaudiyas must do.

 

There's Raghunath Dasa Gosvami's Manah Siska which are full of Dasa gosvami's introspections...

 

 

To not introspect leads to no thinking which is perfect if you want blind followers, or be a blind follower...

 

 

[krsna]

 

 

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Modern Psychology Is Inescapably Demonic:

 

Comments

I agree with Maharaja here. Real well being is something you can not gift to yourself. It is only available by the mercy of those above us.

 

Ys TS

 

Posted by: Trivikrama Swami | November 29, 2005 at 12:41 PM

 

Thank you for this quote, Krishna-kirti Prabhu, and thank you, Trivikrama Maharaja, for supporting it.

 

I'm just wondering why we can often hear the opposite on Sunday Feast lectures, different practical seminars organized in ISKCON and even on Srimad Bhagavatam lectures. And not just by small local devotees, but even by visiting preachers, gurus and sannyasis and GBCs.

 

I think that Srila Prabhupada's message of full surrender should be preached so strongly, that all other inventions will will be seen as glowworms in the sun. Glowworms look nice in the darkness, but in the sun they are just repulsive bugs.

 

ys gnd

 

Posted by: Giri-nayaka das | November 30, 2005 at 02:28 AM

 

Actually, that well-being is in fat inherent in our nature and is brought out by the mercy of those above us. Most psychology I've seen is not particularly more mechanistic than would be appropriate to a field of study dedicated to the mind, which is, after all, a material element. Many of the tools of psychology may be helpful to some spiritual practitioners, under the guidance of those with sufficiently broad vision.

 

I'm a little baffled by Maharaja's blanket condemnation of introspection, which is so important to serious spiritual practice. Looking within, after all, means looking past what's extraneous to our real identity to find out who we really are and why we suffer. This is such an odd assertion for a sannyasi to make. It seems something is missing here. Of course self-actualization requires understanding our real identity as "Krishnera nitya dasa"! That's the result of introspection. And introspection must be guided by guru, sadhu, and shastra. What materialistic psychology misses is the real guru, real sadhu, and apaurusheya shastras.

 

Srila Prabhupada personally told me "devotees and devotional service cannot be stereotyped. There is nothing that cannot be used in Krishna's service. Simply we require guidance from the expert spiritual master how to engage everything in Krishna's service. That is the only trick." I've also heard him say that brahmana means broad minded, not narrow minded, generous, not kripana. Those with broad vision will be able to establish Krishna consciousness in modern culture.

 

Posted by: Babhru | November 30, 2005 at 01:04 PM

 

Once I heard, second hand, a story, as told by Satsvarupa Maharaja, about how Srila Prabhupada once was given some pamphlets published by a Mayavadi sect. Later, while talking with a group of devotees (and I think some guests), he was given some fruit to distribute among them, but he first passed out the Mayavadi pamphlets to everyone. Everyone was a little bewildered as to why Srila Prabhupada would pass out condemned literature, but when the fruit was passed around, it became obvious to everyone that the Mayavadi pamphlets were to be used as plates for the fruit.

 

Psychology is something like this: it has its uses in Krishna's service, but not necessarily for its generally intended purpose. Just recently, for example, two Mormon psychologists successfully countered some initiatives within the APA that were stigmatizing the LDS. That is not the intended purpose of psychology, but it is a use of psychology that is compatible with KC.

 

As to psychology's ability to help people introspect, that is where psychology is in many ways at best deficient and at worst misleading. Introspection, as the word indicates, is about understanding what goes on inside of us--an act that is not empirical. Because it is not empirical, the conclusions psychologists arrive at regarding the nature of one's "inner self" are based largely on presumption. Conclusions regarding the nature of the self from the point of view of KC are also presumptions, but those presumptions rest on shastra and tradition. Leading psychologists themselves have indeed argued that an a priori understanding of human nature is required for the formation of any psychology. This I pointed out in my essay at http://www.siddhanta.com/2005/11/the_essentials_.html

 

That essay also pointed out that psychological presumptions about *conditioned human nature* are quite a bit more optimistic than KC presumptions about conditioned human nature. And these different presumptions, furthermore, produce different approaches to uncovering the basically good person which both psychology and KC agree exists.

 

Modern psychology introduces an epistemology and ontology that markedly differs from KC epistemology and ontology, and when closely scrutinzed we can understand that the significant presumptions in each are for the most part incompatible.

 

Posted by: krishna-kirti | November 30, 2005 at 03:16 PM

 

This all presumes that "modern psychology" is some sort of monolithic structure, which it is not at all. Like all academic disciplines, there's a very broad spectrum of perspectives. Broad-minded devotees will be able to extract the gold from the muck. Those who can't will be repulsed, and rightly so. My only point is that psychology and spiritual life are not necessarily mutually exclusive, and setting psychology up as some sort of boogeyman may ultimately not produce the results we really want.

 

You seem enamored of the idea that psychology is not empirical. In fact, there's a lot of empiricism in the discipline, and one of its problems, especially for devotees, is the extent to which it is grounded in a positivistic world view, of which empiricism is an essential element.

 

Srila Prabhupada didn't oppose science, or say that it wasn't useful. If you examine what he teaches, he opposes what many call scientism, which is the idea that the only knowledge worth having is that obtained through empirical observation and mental speculation. Since our goal is adhoksaja (since we are adhoksaja), we aspiring vaishnavas are acutely aware of the limitations of such a view. Nevertheless, we benefit from scientific research incessantly, from our medicine to our cars, form airplanes to our computers, and on ad nauseam.

 

I personally think that if we're going to wage a war, it should be on vaishnava aparadha, which is really destructive of the devotees' faith and spiritual progress.

 

Posted by: Babhru | November 30, 2005 at 03:49 PM

 

Babhru Prabhu wrote: "This all presumes that 'modern psychology' is some sort of monolithic structure, which it is not at all. Like all academic disciplines, there's a very broad spectrum of perspectives."

 

I think it would be more correct to say there are many variations on a few specific kinds of psychology. Most all schools of therapy are of three main kinds of psychology: psychoanalytic, cognative, and humanistic. The first two are empirical, especially cognative, and humanistic psychology is existentialist.

 

Babhru: "Broad-minded devotees will be able to extract the gold from the muck. Those who can't will be repulsed, and rightly so."

 

The gold from the muck might indeed by as in the annecdote I gave from Srila Prabhupada.

 

 

Babhru: "My only point is that psychology and spiritual life are not necessarily mutually exclusive,"

 

Which means you are still open to the possibility that they might be? Are Mayavada and spiritual life mutually exclusive?

 

Babhru: "and setting psychology up as some sort of boogeyman may ultimately not produce the results we really want."

 

I think I've taken the time to do what practically no other devotee in ISKCON has attempted--research its history and claims and subject it to a critical analysis.

 

Babhru: "You seem enamored of the idea that psychology is not empirical."

 

I never claimed psychology was not empirical. I would say that psychology's area of legitimate research is in behavior, because that is, indeed, measurable. What goes on underneath the hood--thoughts, feelings, introspection--is something not subject to empirical investigation, not reliable investigation, anyway.

 

Babhru: "In fact, there's a lot of empiricism in the discipline, and one of its problems, especially for devotees, is the extent to which it is grounded in a positivistic world view, of which empiricism is an essential element."

 

I agree with this. To what extent psychology is actually empirical and that it can avoid bias (since the scientist is of the same category as that which is being studied) is a matter of judgment.

 

Babhru: "Srila Prabhupada didn't oppose science, or say that it wasn't useful. If you examine what he teaches, he opposes what many call scientism, which is the idea that the only knowledge worth having is that obtained through empirical observation and mental speculation."

 

I agree.

 

Babhru: "I personally think that if we're going to wage a war, it should be on vaishnava aparadha, which is really destructive of the devotees' faith and spiritual progress."

 

I agree that Vaishnava aparadha should be minimized and curbed however possible, but I don't think the pressing need for that overrides or renders less important the need to scrutinize other ideas or philosophies, such as those on which the different kinds of psychology are based.

 

Posted by: krishna-kirti | November 30, 2005 at 05:47 PM

 

Kk: "Which means you are still open to the possibility that [psychology and Krishna coonsciousness] might be [mutually exclusive]? Are Mayavada and spiritual life mutually exclusive?"

 

B: Mayavada is inherently averse to Krishna, and there's now way to engage that desire to, as Bhaktivinoda Thakura puts it, "dismember the Personality of Godhead." Some approaches to psychology are most likely just as atheistic, but there are probably elements that could be engaged. My sense is that the more wedded an approach is to existentialism, the harder onw would have to work to find a Krishna connection. I do remember, when reading existentialist literature, that it seemed at least thoughtful, though bleak (like Buddhism with absolutely no hope--life sucks, then you die). I also think that thoughtful devotees trained in psyshology could find much in Rogers, May, Maslow, and others that's useful. My general approach to everything is dictated by Srila Prabhupada's personal instruction that devotees and their service cannot be stereotyped, and his own example to that effect. C'mon--he never said anything about psychology like Bhakti Vikas Maharaja said. Have you read or heard his conversation with Dr. Gerson in '75?

 

Kk: "I would say that psychology's area of legitimate research is in behavior, because that is, indeed, measurable."

 

B: But that's the mechanistic and, frankly, less-interesting area.

 

Kk: "What goes on underneath the hood--thoughts, feelings, introspection--is something not subject to empirical investigation, not reliable investigation, anyway."

 

B: "But that's much more interesting to work with. When I was in graduate school, I was a member of the first seminar on cognition, affect, and composition. The area I ended up working with, even in my thesis, was the affective dimension of composing-process problems. The cognitive dimension had been thoroughly covered because researchers can make quantifiable stuff look "scientific." But my own experience as a writer has been that being blocked, and other problems, had very little to do with what I knew (about the subject, about writing, or whatever), and much to do with my attitude toward a project, or how I felt about myself as a writer, or what I believed I could or could not do, etc. Anyway, I digress . . .

 

Kk: "I think I've taken the time to do what practically no other devotee in ISKCON has attempted--research its history and claims and subject it to a critical analysis."

 

B: I don't buy that at all. I know some of the devotees who have studied social work, psychology, etc. I'm certain that they have put the whole business to much more critical analysis than you could even imagine. That's inherent in graduate work in any field, and an essential element of an MA thesis or PhD dissertation. I think you're selling these people short and that you should reconsider any such claim.

 

Kk: "agree that Vaishnava aparadha should be minimized and curbed however possible, but I don't think the pressing need for that overrides or renders less important the need to scrutinize other ideas or philosophies, such as those on which the different kinds of psychology are based."

 

B: Sorry--I'll give no quarter here. I've read Sri Chaitanya-charitamrita too many times, and Harinama Chintamani as well, to tolerate anything less than full-scale war on vaishnava aparadha. It's much more corrosive than superficial use of extraneous ideas. The core of these folks' lives is service to Lord Chaitanya Mahaprabhu and the vaishnavas. No matter how we disguise our criticism of their attempts' superficial differences from ours, it's still the same poison, which will keep us far from experiencing real bhakti. No way around it. It appears that it's just too hard for us to confront it directly, so we come up with reasons to criticize the "other.Oh, Trivikram Maharaja is too conservative, anti-woman, and narrow-minded!" or, "Oh, Bhakti-Tirtha Maharaja is too liberal with gay disciples, too accommodating of UFO's, etc." It's all bull pucky, and it's the real problem our society is not more influential than it is. People see that we can't keep from fighting among ourselves (the one thing that Srila Prabhupada said would hinder our success), and they find it hard to take us seriously.

 

Sorry for the length.

 

Posted by: Babhru | November 30, 2005 at 08:13 PM

[stonehearted]

Of course! Neither can it be given by any superior person, as Krishna-kirti and Trivikram Maharaja assert. It's inherent in the nature of the jiva:

nitya-siddha krsna-prema ‘sadhya' kabhu naya

sravanadi-suddha-citte karaye udaya

 

Pure love for Krsna is eternally established in the hearts of the living entities. It is not something to be gained from another source. When the heart is purified by hearing and chanting, this love naturally awakens.

 

Since real happiness is attainable only on realizing our eternal relationship with Krishna, it's inherent in Krishna-prema. The language in this instruction to Sanatana Gosvami is precise: That love is the essential nature of the jiva, and it cannot be gained by any effort. Rather, it naturally arises (udaya) in the heart purified by hearing and chanting about Krishna.

 

There's no real controversy here.

[Guest guest]

I always like reading your posts they make a lot of sense to me.

[krsna]

 

******************************************

 

 

sei 'suddha-bhakta', ye toma bhaje toma lagi'

apanara sukha-duhkhe haya bhoga-bhogi'

 

He is a pure devotee who worships You only for Your satisfaction. He does not care about his personal happiness or distress, for that is the business of a materialist.

 

Cc Antya 9.75

 

 

 

*******************************************

 

 

Bhaktivinoda even prays to His Lord 'Don't change my karma.'

 

In other words, one should be prepared to suffer for his 'karma' of taking birth in this world and not try in vanity to use psychology/therapy to better himself so that he can then 'enjoy' pleasant relationships with the opposite sex(or same sex). /images/graemlins/blush.gif

[Guest guest]

Babhru you wrote:

 

 

No matter how we disguise our criticism of their attempts' superficial differences from ours, it's still the same poison, which will keep us far from experiencing real bhakti. No way around it. It appears that it's just too hard for us to confront it directly, so we come up with reasons to criticize the "other.Oh, Trivikram Maharaja is too conservative, anti-woman, and narrow-minded!" or, "Oh, Bhakti-Tirtha Maharaja is too liberal with gay disciples, too accommodating of UFO's, etc." It's all bull pucky, and it's the real problem our society is not more influential than it is

 

 

Babhru if we use that standard of what vaisnava aparadha is then we can call your critique of Bhakti Vikas or Krishna Kirti vaisnava aparadha. Aren't you saying they are being too conservative and close minded etc?

 

I don't think Krishna Kirti's or Bhakti Vikas's statements amounted to vaisnava aparadha. Nor do I think criticism in general of vaisnavas is automatically vaisnava aparadha. I think the aparadha comes in the intent of a criticism from Krishna's perspective. If the criticism is heartfelt and meant to illuminate (even if it is wrong) then I don't think it is aparadha. But if the intent is to cause harm to a vaisnava then it is aparadha. Maybe Bhakti Vikas and Krishna Kirti were making aparadha, but their statements alone were critiques and not necessarily aparadha.

 

If there is no room for critique in a large preaching mission with many vaisnavas with different theories and philosophical approaches by calling up the fear of God onto critics, then that is a disservice in my opinion for a free forum for progressive and intermingling of ideas. There has to be room for criticism otherwise people will feel stifled and pressured into accepting the pronouncements and opinions from people who feel free to do so.

 

For example you mention Bhakti Tirtha Swami and criticism of his lectures and writings on UFOs etc. Do you really want to have people associate and or conflate your preaching efforts with vaisnavas who speak about alien overlords who control the government?

 

 

 

[stonehearted]

shiva: "Babhru if we use that standard of what vaisnava aparadha is then we can call your critique of Bhakti Vikas or Krishna Kirti vaisnava aparadha. Aren't you saying they are being too conservative and close minded etc?"

 

Babhru: I implied that they're missing something. I didn't say anything about them. Their critique is part of a package intended to marginalize (or worse) many Vaishnavas whose perspective on how to serve is different from theirs. That's all I intend to point out. Although TS and I don't agree on many details, he and I have always had a friendly relationship. And no one knows how closely I work with Krishna-kirti. On the other hand, much criticism of Bhakti-tirtha Maharaja, or Tripurari Maharaja, is based on (perhaps deliberate) misunderstanding of what they have said, including its context. They imply (or state explicitly) that these vaishnavas intend to undermine the work of our guru varga. I think that's a serious mistake.

 

s: "If there is no room for critique in a large preaching mission with many vaisnavas with different theories and philosophical approaches by calling up the fear of God onto critics, then that is a disservice in my opinion for a free forum for progressive and intermingling of ideas."

 

B: I find it odd that you don't object when they critique more "liberal" preachers, but you question my critique of what they say. At least you'll never see me imply that they're not sincere and acting according to their best understanding of Krishna consciousness. But when they say, or imply, those same things with regard to others, it's cool. Okay--I get it now.

 

s: "For example you mention Bhakti Tirtha Swami and criticism of his lectures and writings on UFOs etc. Do you really want to have people associate and or conflate your preaching efforts with vaisnavas who speak about alien overlords who control the government?"

 

B: I haven't read those books, nor do I have the time and interest necessary to do so. If he had a particular audience and purpose in mind when writing those books, they should be seen in that light. Plenty of "orthodox" vaishnavas were quite put out by some of Bhaktivinoda Thakura's stuff. I'm not comparing BTS with BVT as far as their realization, just pointing out a superficial similarity. Do with it what you will. Because I haven't read those books, I don't concern myself with them. I prefer to try following Raghunath Bhatta Goswami's example of seeing only what service they do. Same goes for Trivikram Maharaja, Bhakti Vikas Maharaja, Danavir Maharaja, and Krishna-kirti. If I catch you calling them names, I hope I'll call you on that, too. (And if I don't, I'm sure you'll be quick to point it out in public.)

 

But what about my critique of others? If you pay close attention, my concern is their rhetoric. I think it's important for us to pay attention to how we discuss even contentious ideas among ourselves. I contend (just try to budge me! I dare you!) that sadhu-ninda is the most corrosive influence on our work. And if you think it only means making up horrible lies about a vaishnava in public, look up nind in your handy Monier-Williams. Make your points, but do it out of respect for the others' work, not contempt.

 

Srila Prabhupada pointed out before he started a Bhagavatam class one morning that because the Yadu dynasty was Krishna's family, the only thing that could destroy them was fighting among themselves. Then he paused for a few moments--then started a class with a different theme.

[Guest guest]

I read this and could go no farther. Prabhupada can utilize everything in Krsna's service.

 

 

Once I heard, second hand, a story, as told by Satsvarupa Maharaja, about how Srila Prabhupada once was given some pamphlets published by a Mayavadi sect. Later, while talking with a group of devotees (and I think some guests), he was given some fruit to distribute among them, but he first passed out the Mayavadi pamphlets to everyone. Everyone was a little bewildered as to why Srila Prabhupada would pass out condemned literature, but when the fruit was passed around, it became obvious to everyone that the Mayavadi pamphlets were to be used as plates for the fruit.

 

 

[Guest guest]

 

s: "If there is no room for critique in a large preaching mission with many vaisnavas with different theories and philosophical approaches by calling up the fear of God onto critics, then that is a disservice in my opinion for a free forum for progressive and intermingling of ideas."

 

B: I find it odd that you don't object when they critique more "liberal" preachers, but you question my critique of what they say. At least you'll never see me imply that they're not sincere and acting according to their best understanding of Krishna consciousness. But when they say, or imply, those same things with regard to others, it's cool. Okay--I get it now.

 

 

Why assume that I don't object to "their critique of more "liberal" preachers". I wasn't taking a side in any specific point under your discussion. I was simply saying that we shouldn't carelessly throw around accusations of aparadha or threaten people with God's wrath. That shuts down discussions and creates an enmity that doesn't need to be there.

 

 

Babhru: I implied that they're missing something. I didn't say anything about them. Their critique is part of a package intended to marginalize (or worse) many Vaishnavas whose perspective on how to serve is different from theirs. That's all I intend to point out.

 

 

Maybe so but since they do not come right out and say so and then you make a statement like the above, there then seems to be some discrepancy between walking the walking and talking the talk. Your standards for aparadha don't seem to apply to you it might seem to the casual observer. I just think that when we start to bring up aparadha as some kind of warning to other vaisnavas that it is unseemly when our own words can be seen to be comparable to what we condemn.

 

Fact is I agree with you to a degree in your debate with Krishna Kirti, it's not like I am defending his point of view. I just think we should leave the wrath of God to more obvious serious flagrant words or actions. Otherwise almost anytime there is disagreement people can start pointing the finger of aparadha at others. That creates aparadha by inciting anger and the feeling of being personally denigrated as an offender worthy of the wrath of God. Maybe we can chillax with the aparadha talk?