© 1998 VNN
|
EDITORIAL January 8, 1999 VNN2810 See Related VNN Stories Sentiment Without Philosophy Is Fanaticism BY GOPA KUMAR DAS EDITORIAL, Jan 8 (VNN) — Dear Gauridasa Pandita Dasa, please accept my obeisances. All glories to Sri Guru and Gauranga. As I mentioned in my article, Swami B.B. Visnu Maharaja's book, Our Affectionate Guardians, gives references for all the points I made in the article. The VNN kindly formatted it such that the link in my article went right to the table of contents of the book, posted on the Guardian of Devotion Mission website. What is the use of off-handedly dismissing me without doing any research? The final instruction about Srila Sridhara Maharaja was given in a room conversation. Although it was not recorded, I will substantiate it below. Srila Prabhupada gave this instruction about a month before he left the world, when he was very sick. Tamal Krsna Maharaja asked, "If you should pass away- how will we perform the funeral?" Srila Prabhupada replied, "For that, you can see Narayana Maharaja in Mathura." There was a pause as everyone considered this, and then Tamal Krsna Maharaja ventured, "Is there anyone else we can consult after you're gone?" To which Prabhupada replied, "for philosophy, my Godbrother B.R. Sridhara Maharaja of Navadwipa." About your assertion that Srila Prabhupada didn't differentiate between the two, you should consider that Narayana Maharaja was in Mathura and Sridhara Maharaja was all the way in Navadwipa, all but unable to move from his verandah, much less perform the samadhi. This is further corroborated by the fact that after Srila Prabhupada's departure, the GBC went to Narayana Maharaja about the samadhi, and then went continuously to Sridhara Maharaja as a group for over three years for questions about philosophy. Some of these GBC meetings are transcribed in Our Affectionate Guardians (as well as how the GBC distorted what Srila Sridhara Maharaja said for their own purposes). There is also a pamphlet that the GBC published about these talks, called "In Consultation with Higher Authority," which is probably still available. In Our Affection Guardians, there are also transcriptions from a tape that Satsvarupa Maharaja sent to his disciples about the talks, etc. In which he makes clear that Prabhupada wanted us to consult Sridhara Maharaja for philosophy. Transcriptions of other GBC members (Jayapataka Maharaja, Bhakti Caru Swami, etc.) which support this conclusion are also cited. I hope that you read Our Affectionate Guardians so that you can have a better understanding of the history of the GBC's relationship with Sridhara Maharaja and what lead up to them scapegoating him and gravely offending him--it comprehensively pieces together the history, substantiated with references from letters, conversations, tapes, etc. By the way, it also addresses miscellaneous topics like the one you mentioned about the number of rounds one should chant. Although Srila Prabhupada said many things about his Godbrothers, we should be careful in our comments. When Harikesha asked Srila Prabhupada if any of his Godbrothers were not rascals, Srila Prabhupada replied that "only you are rascal." It is true that some of Srila Prabhupada's Godbrothers were envious, but the proof that Srila Sridhara Maharaja was not is that when several Godbrothers came to Sridhara Maharaja complaining that Srila Prabhupada said that his Godbrothers were mere "bell-ringers," Srila Sridhara Maharaja told them, "The drum that he is playing, if he accepts you as a player of the bell in that band, then you should consider this to be a great honor- he is playing a huge drum, a battle drum, so if you get a chance to play the kasi, or cymbals, along with that, that is a great honor to you. A more dignified position you get. " Another time, when someone told him that Prabhupada said that he was "the best of the lot," Sridhara Maharaja said, "he has not even spared me in his preaching, his intimate friend!" No one can take away from Srila Prabhupada his extraordinary service to Bhaktisiddhanta (in fact, it was Srila Sridhara Maharaja who first said he was a saktyavesa avatar) for which he stands glorious. The reason that Srila Prabhupada suggested going to Sridhara Maharaja for philosophy is not because he left anything out of his books--it is because we might not understand his instructions and need clarification on the siddhanta. For example, I read the Letter to the Temple Presidents that you suggested and wonder where in this you get that the ritvik initiations were to go on after Srila Prabhupada left. No one is disputing that Srila Prabhupada had ritvik initiations go on while he was present on the planet! When there is a conflict of understanding on a point, one should look for the concurrence of guru, sadhu, and sastra. For a beginning (kanista) devotee, there can be a problem in only getting our higher association from reading. In a posting from Swami B. V. Tripurari Maharaja's Sanga, he says: "The madhyama adhikary has firm faith, faith in sastra. He has faith, that is, in the descending path (avaroha pantha), and thus the spirit of the sastra. He can understand its essential meaning. He has a feeling for it, not merely memorization of the text. He can understand it relative to time place and circumstance. He can accommodate cultural and historical adaptation. He can understand that which pertains to material matters within sastra, and that which is transcendent in nature. His faith requires no enemy. It is strong, yet it too requires nourishment. He must associate with uttama adhikari Vaishnavas, their writings and personal association if possible. If he is a madhyama adhikari, he can get their association from their writings, while the neophyte can not. The neophyte will confuse the teaching when he reads it, while the madhyama will catch the spirit and progress. He will get 'ruci' and he will become an 'uttama adhikari' himself. This is our task. Nothing short of this. "But we are fighting about whether or not to associate with advanced Vaishnavas. Some argue against this policy in practice, while extolling its virtue in theory. Others argue in favor of such association and recognize it when it presents itself. Yet they like to argue in favor of it more than take advantage of it. They fail to put into practice that which advanced Vaishnavas embody and teach. The former group we may have to avoid, while the latter group we must minister to thus: 'Action speaks louder than words.'" You have made a error by saying that Tripurari Maharaja wrote that ISKCON's mistake is that they over-emphasize Srila Prabhupada in his Gaudiya magazine. Show me where he wrote that in the Gaudiya! Nevertheless, the point in theory is still there: that devotion that is not in accordance with sruti, smriti, puranadi, pancaratrika, etc. is simply a disturbance. Of course it is not possible to over-glorify Srila Prabhupada if done properly, but do not the Christians over-glorify Jesus by calling him (the guru) God? What about taking Srila Prabhupada out of the parampara, calling him the founder of a new sampradaya: what would Srila Prabhupada think of that glorification? It might sound like nice glorification to some people, but not to those who have knowledge of the scripture. And what about glorification that is on one side love (to Srila Prabhupada) but on the other side hate (to other Vaisnavas who are seen as an enemies)? You tell me not to minimize Srila Prabhupada, but what minimizes him more than misrepresenting him? You have a nice sentiment, but as we've all heard: sentiment without philosophy is fanaticism. Yours in the service of Srila Prabhupada, Gopa Kumar Das See Related VNN Stories | Comment on this Story This story URL: http://www.vnn.org/editorials/ET9901/ET08-2810.html
NEWS DESK | EDITORIALS | TOP |
