© 1998 VNN
|
World 06/28/98 - 1889 (see also VNN stor# 1861) Chakra: What's Your Motivation?
by Riktaharsan Recently, someone named Madhusudani Radha devi dasi of the Chakra web site posted a column claiming that a recent article posted on the VNN (authored by myself) was "false psychology." The title of her article was False Psychology on VNN. My article was entitled: What Can Repression Accomplish? and cited a study that was performed on devotees in the mid-eighties by Dr. Weiss. The study described how devotees scored abnormally high in regard to compulsion. What Can Repression Accomplish? further elaborated how compulsion is not a quality that a spiritual person would generally associate with enlightenment, yoga, and liberation--or bona fide Krishna consciousness. Apparently my analysis did not sit too well with the folks at Chakra. In her supposed refutation of my conclusions Devi claimed that applying the dictionary meaning of the word compulsion was inappropriate--because the psychiatric meaning was quite different. She cited the meaning given by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders compiled by The American Psychiatric Association. She claimed that, because I avoided the psychiatric meaning there (which she conveniently chose), my "process of building an argument is an inappropriate one." Now, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) may be a good authority for psychiatric definitions, but it would have been better if Devi had read and quoted from the correct section of it. She conveniently cited the section dealing with Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder as opposed to the one for Obsessive-Compulsive Personality Disorder. The former is considered an anxiety disorder, whereas the latter is a personality disorder. Weiss was referring to personality traits (Comrey Personality Scales). If we read the description of Obsessive-Compulsive Personality Disorder in the DSM, we will find that there are indeed many criteria which coincide with the dictionary meaning of the word "compulsive." These criteria are easily observed in most Western devotees. Such was not true in the case of the criteria conveniently cited by Chakra. According to Devi’s quotes from DSM: ". . .compulsions refer to repetitive behaviors, such as handwashing, ordering, checking, praying, counting and repeating words silently . . ." (page 418, DSM IV). And. . . . "In order for a compulsion to be diagnosed as a disorder, it must cause marked distress, be time consuming (take more than one hour per day) or significantly interfere with the individual's normal routine, occupational functioning, or usual social activities or relationships with others." (page 419). The impression that Chakra would have us draw from the study is that Weiss and the karmi psychiatrists simply mistook the long time that devotees use to chant their rounds by considering it to be an interference with productive use of time. However, activities that are common to the way of life of all of the people within a certain environment are not considered by the DSM to be indicative of disorder: "In assessing an individual for Obsessive-Compulsive Personality Disorder, the clinician should not include those behaviors that reflect habits, customs, or interpersonal styles that are culturally sanctioned by the individual’s reference group." (P671) Why did Devi omit this? There is very little in the description, cited by Chakra from the DSM, which one can apply to devotees. Because devotees are urged to be productively engaged during their waking hours, and because of the constant association of other devotees, there is very little opportunity for someone to become overcome by time-consuming compulsive behaviors, such as taking a half an hour to wash one’s hands due to an extreme fear of disease. According to the DSM: "Despite the similarity in names, Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder is usually easily distinguished from Obsessive-Compulsive Personality Disorder by the presence of true obsessions and compulsions."(P671) And also: "Although some studies suggest an association with Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder, it appears that the majority of individuals with Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder do not have a pattern of behavior that meets criteria for Obsessive-Compulsive Personality Disorder."(P671) (emphasis added) Some of the criteria in the DSM for Obsessive-Compulsive Personality Disorder which apply to Western devotees--and very much agree with the dictionary meaning of compulsion--are: "Individuals with Obsessive-Compulsive Personality Disorder attempt to maintain a sense of control through painstaking attention to rules, trivial details, procedure, lists, schedules, or form to the extent that the major point of activity is lost (Criterion 1). (P669) "Individuals with Obsessive-Compulsive Personality Disorder . . . may force themselves and others to follow rigid moral principles and very strict standards of performance. They may also be mercilessly self-critical about their own mistakes. Individuals with this disorder are rigidly deferential to authority and rules and insist on quite literal compliance, with no rule bending for extenuating circumstances."(P670) "People with this disorder may be especially attentive to their relative status in dominance-submission relationships and may display excessive deference to an authority they respect and excessive resistance to authority that they do not respect." (P671) Emphasis has been added by myself to those criteria which coincide with the dictionary definition of compulsion cited in my article, as well as the concept of repression. Interestingly enough, the description listed in Criterion 1 (above) closely coincides with Srila Rupa Goswami’s description of niyamagrahah in the Nectar of Instruction: "practicing the scriptural rules and regulations only for the sake of following them." Besides that, there is this super-excellent quote: "But no mechanical regulation has any value, even for such a purpose. The bona fide teacher of religion is neither any product of, nor the favorer of, any mechanical system. In his hands, no system has the chance of degenerating into such a lifeless arrangement. The mere pursuit of fixed doctrines and fixed liturgies cannot help a person to hold the true spirit of doctrine or liturgy." Organized Religion by Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati (adapted) All the above descriptions of Obsessive-Compulsive Personality Disorder were observable on a daily basis in the Society - and not only in the early eighties. "In psychiatry or abnormal psychology, a compulsive state represents a neurosis and is classified as a mental illness" (Fontana Dictionary of Modern Thought). Dr. Weiss was referring to this state in his various aforementioned articles, which studied institutional devotees in the mid-eighties. The dictionary definition of compulsion does not really differ all that much from the clinical understanding. In abnormal psychiatry, the compulsive state represents an individual’s exaggerations of normal or existential difficulties. This also entails a warped or reactionary response to counter (or cover over) normal impulses and feelings - the repressive response. The compulsive person in general--or the compulsive devotee in particular--does not genuinely confront his or her difficulties. Unable to legitimately free himself from desires and situations he deems distasteful (and requiring resistance), he plunges headlong into a more disgraceful counter-measure. This drives him into a kind of ritualistic conduct, which always orbits around that same ideal. Thus, compulsion is an insidious neurosis, particularly when it is considered to be an integral component of true devotional service. It is an obsessional disorder. The early eighties in the movement was characterized by intense competition between the various "zones" and their "absolute acharyas." In order to keep pace with the ongoing demand for "results" made by the "acharyas," practically every temple engaged several people whose sole duty was to compel as many devotees as possible to go out and get money from the karmis, and this was advertised as the most exalted activity that they could do for their "spiritual master" and Krishna. Books were no longer considered the basis of collection in most temples. Devotees were systematically trained in all sorts of con games by their "sankirtan leaders." These cons included selling oil paintings made in the Orient (in assembly line fashion) by artists who received starvation wages, "changing-up" donors out of the window of a van, and passing out bumper sticker "citations." All of these showbottle practices were completely illegal. Nor was there was any mention of Krishna in any of this "preaching," lest the police find out what was behind the solicitation. Devotees who were unable to repress their consciences were considered to be "unsurrendered," and often relegated to temple or farm duties. This was a period of extreme compulsion in what was passed off under the label of being Prabhupada’s movement. To this day, anyone who has repressed these memories is still under the influence of that same compulsion. It is not the business of devotees to quibble over empirical studies that have been made by people in material consciousness. Such studies are nice if they give evidence in support of the real authority, sastra pramana. If they do not, such studies and definitions have very little value. For the most part, devotees should confine their discussion to the points of sastra in regard to a particular contention. We are interested in truth: shastra, logic, and fact. Collection techniques such as those described, and the extreme use of compulsion in temple management practices, should not necessarily be considered evils in themselves. One should examine the philosophical underpinnings of the leaders who implement such practices to determine if those underpinnings are in line with the predecessor acharyas. Generally, degraded superficialities are symptomatic of substantial deviance from the philosophy of the Vaishnava parampara. According to the statements of Srila Prabhupada, anyone who imitates a pure devotee of the Lord is condemned: "However, one should not imitate the behavior of an advanced devotee or maha-bhagavata without being self-realized, FOR BY SUCH IMITATION ONE WILL EVENTUALLY BECOME DEGRADED. ...The devotee should also know his own position and should not try to imitate a devotee situated on a higher platform." Nectar of Instruction, Text 5, purport (emphasis added) If such imitators acquire large numbers of disciples based upon pretence and compulsion, can one really consider these followers to be linked to the eternal Vaishnava disciplic succession? One of the qualifications of the bona fide guru is that he does not cheat--or preach that he is something which he is not. As such, how can a person who knowingly misleads thousands of his godbrothers and disciples by imitating the uttama adhikari be considered any kind of genuine guru? If such people "reform" and give up the showbottle that is nice. However, unless and until they simultaneously come clean, uproot all the forces of compulsion they have subjected their deluded followers to, and make it clear to all of these followers that the influence they acquired under false pretence was ill-gotten--and renounce that influence--then that so-called reform has no real value. Everything downline from a cosmetic reform becomes just as valueless, also. It remains cosmetic only, or, in the words of Srila Prabhupada, "showbottle." And what of those who continue to defer to "gurus" who are clearly more interested in reputation and followers than in simple honesty? Those who condone (or otherwise tacitly acknowledge) any misuse of the position of guru must be bewildered--and also implicated in the falsity. How can such bewildered and implicated people also be considered gurus? They must be repressing much within themselves in order to carry out this hypocrisy. Such "gurus," under the banner of being so-called reformed madhyams, themselves create compulsive and repressed disciples. In addition, since the departure of Srila Prabhupada, anyone who becomes recognized as a so-called guru in the Society has had to pass through some sort of institutional selection process. Either in the beginning he had to be "appointed," or he now has to not invoke the disapproval of a certain number of board members. Whichever way you approach this sort of selection process, it is based upon the control of the institutional hierarchy, an ecclesiastical arrangement condemned by both Srila Prabhupada and Srila Jiva Goswami, the foremost scholar in our line: "It is imperative that a serious person accept a bona fide spiritual master in terms of the sastric injunctions. Sri Jiva Goswami advises that one not accept a spiritual master in terms of hereditary or customary social and ECCLESIASTICAL CONVENTIONS. One should simply try to find a genuinely qualified spiritual master for actual advancement in spiritual understanding." Chaitanya Charitamrita, Adi 1.35, purport (emphasis added) "(The organized religion) that has the best chance of survival in this damned world is that of atheism under the convenient guise of theism…(It has) always proved the staunchest upholder of the grossest form of worldliness, from which even the worst of non-ecclesiastical criminals are found to recoil." Organized Religion by Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati (adapted) (emphasis added) Whether one uses the dictionary definition or that supplied by the DSM for Obsessive-Compulsive Personality Disorder, there is no shortage of evidence--both from the study of Dr. Weiss and practical experience--to show that compulsion played an disproportionate role in the lives of devotees in the early eighties. It is only by the mercy of the Book Bhagavat and those devotees who follow the Book Bhagavat that someone such as myself can address the world community of devotees on topics such as these. Srila Prabhupada’s divine instructions and the instructions of all of the previous acharyas constitute the Book Bhagavat. Devotees who repeat those instructions in an unadulterated manner will never leave the shelter of these two Bhagavatas. Ironically, Devi, in her article criticizing me, asks: "So what may be the motivation behind using the wrong definition of these findings?" Indeed. We only need to replace two words of her interrogatory in order to get to the real question: "So what may be the motivation behind omitting the correct definition of these findings?" (emphasis added) Such a sloppy and inappropriate attack by Chakra is nothing new. Always expect that any revealing and thought provoking article published by VNN will be countered via the contemptuous, diversionary, and partisan style patented by Chakra as the product of the polluted consciousness of the people behind that propaganda page. KRISHNA CONSCIOUSNESS METAMORPHOSIS LEAGUE FOR MONASTIC STUDIES: THE VAISHNAVA FOUNDATION Following in the footsteps of the foremost promulgator of Krishna consciousness in the western world HIS DIVINE GRACE A.C. BHAKTIVEDANTA SWAMI PRABHUPADA 3135 S 48th St suite 104-126
Other writings of the Vaishnava Foundation
E-mail the author or the Vaishnava Foundation Quotes from the books of His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada
|