Post by niscala on Jul 27, 2014 3:23:12 GMT -5
GROUPTHINK AND CONTROVERSY
It's quite astonishing how widely opinions vary in the vaisnava community, and sometimes it seems that we have less in common and more in difference. Controversy seems to pervade a vast range of issues, apart from core concepts such as the nine processes of devotional service, particularly chanting the mahamantra- but we saw even this challenged recently, as one lineage descending from Srila Bhaktisiddhanta is stressing that the mahamantra should be avoided until one can chant without offenses, and until then, one should focus on Nitai-Gaura nama-kirtan exclusively, as They are more merciful.
Many of these differences of opinion, however, are based on a particular acarya seeing a certain need in his disciples, which inspires him to stress a particular aspect of philosophy or practice, to the exclusion of all others. An acarya is always obliged to observe the effect of time, place and circumstance and adjust his message accordingly- and the adjustments can be quite radical.
The Case of Parakiya Bhava
One of the most famous vaisnava controversies was created by Jiva Goswami. Although Sri Chaitanya glorified the paramour love of the gopis, Jiva argued that it was illusory, that actually the gopis were never married to other men at all, but in due course they married Krsna, and that in the aprakata lila, they are eternally His wives.
Visvanatha Chakravarti Thakura, in Ujjvala Nilamani, proved that Jiva was simply trying to appease his followers by preaching in this way, and that the reason why the gopi's love excels that of the queens of Dwaraka is that they are, in fact, married to other men in an eternal relationship which defies moral codes, and continually challenges and places obstacles to their meeting with Krsna, thus bringing their prema to the heights of excellence.
The reason Jiva Goswami's version varied so radically from actual siddhanta was that his disciples were mostly staunch moralists who could not develop attraction for Krsna through seeing Him as a “upapati” or paramour- a character who was customarily condemned in Indian drama and literature, inspiring hatred and repulsion for his evil propensities. Thus Jiva Goswami adjusted the tattva to account for time, place and circumstances and serve the mission of attracting souls to Krsna. It is because we all have different qualifications, conditionings and inherent tendencies, that Sri Krsna, Who is in the heart of every devotee, allows us to approach Him in so many ways. It is also the reason He provides so many gurus, branches and lineages.
It is also the reason why He sends along various acaryas who make changes within those lineages, according to the changing circumstances and the now-different set of qualifications and mentalities of a new group of devotees. This is the way it should be, as acaryas should do that. The problem arises when, due to narrow-mindedness in the devotees of that group, a sectarian or group-think mentality arises that “Our way/understanding is the BEST way” or even “Our way/understanding is the ONLY way”.
This can result in offenses to other groups, and impositions on individuals entering the group, for times and circumstances are always changing, and what may, in any given lineage, have worked in the past so well, may not be working now.
To illustrate the need for flexibility, Srila Prabhupada once told a story of a guru who had a cat who was very affectionate to him. Every day, this cat would interrupt his classes by rubbing and purring, so the guru instructed that the cat should be locked up before every class. When the guru passed away, the disciples, believing their master's instructions to be eternally perfect, continued to lock up the cat before every class. One day, the cat disappeared, and they frantically looked for him- or another cat- to lock up, so the classes could continue. Though the need for cat-restraint had disappeared- the instruction which inspired it continued to be followed with great faith.
The tendency is to think “This is the way we do things in our group” or “This the tattva handed down by our acaryas, and so it is perfect”.
Limitations, not Differences, Removed
As explained above, the differences in instruction and practice in different lineages serve a certain purpose- which we should respect and honor, lest offenses be committed to other groups. Is there any value, then, to debating the differences of understanding? The illustration of the cat-restraint tradition, given above, stresses what will happen if we do not. As time and circumstances change in each group, we need to separate which instructions are eternal tattva, from those that were simply adjustments, and adjust the adjustments if need be, so that we remain always relevant and beneficial for any given situation.
Such a broadened understanding deflects misunderstandings and dissolves barriers between groups- because we can understand the situations which may have inspired them to adopt the change, and through didactic intercourse, these changes can be seen for what they are, absolutely necessary for a particular time, place and circumstance, but otherwise not.
Manjari-bhava and Rasa Inherency
For example, there is a current controversy regarding the universal relevance of manjari bhava. The manjaris are Sri Radha's maidservants who are in conjugal rasa with Krsna- indirectly- through experiencing Radha's love for Him, called tat-tad-bhaveccatmika- bhava. The controversy has three different aspects:
1. The belief that manjari bhava is the only way to enter madhurya rasa,
2. The belief that everyone should be cultivating madhurya rasa, as it's the mood that Sri Chaitanya came to distribute. Combining this with the former, everyone should be cultivating manjari bhava.
3. In relation to the above, the idea that the propensity for a certain rasa is not inherent in the jiva, but is determined entirely on the basis of impressions received from devotees who have that rasa- either from a past or present life.
These are controversies, because there is evidence in the sastra which contradicts these beliefs- evidence which establishes that one can enter Vraja in any one of the four rasas, evidence that if one is inclined to madhurya rasa, it need not only be through manjari bhava- but also through cultivating the mood of a priya sakhi. There is also evidence that the propensity for a certain rasa is not just governed by association, but by natural inclination as well.
For example:
“The rati takes on a specific type (one of the five, ie: santa, dasya, etc) according to the individual nature of the devotee. Bhakti-Rasamrita Sindhu 2.5.7
Knowing of such plurality of rasas, a devotee need not make assumptions that the group he has joined will turn him into a manjari in due course- unless he is naturally attracted to that rasa, it will simply not work. Indeed, our acaryas warn that such an attempt may produce rasabhasa and the concomitant absence of ruci:
“But what determines who takes up which type of rati? Is it decided by having no impressions of a particular rati from previous lives, by having an impression of one type of rati from previous lives, or by having impressions of many types of rati?
In the first option – absence of impressions – rati cannot occur at all, because no taste could arise. In the case of persons having impressions of many types of rati, a particular rati could not manifest prominently because conflicting tastes would result in the improper manifestation of rasa (rasābhāsa). Therefore, impressions of only one type carried from previous lives produce the specific taste. Though not being in a position to perceive the depth of that rasa, one can confirm its identity by comparing scriptural descriptions of rasas with one’s own inclinations, and by inference through seeing how rasas, different from one’s own rasa, either nourish or fail to nourish the total ingredients.” Bhakti-Rasamrita Sindhu 2.5.38
The assumptions that all devotees in the line of Sri Chaitanya are in the same rasa, and within that rasa- all have the mood of a manjari- completely ignore this warning, which not only indicates the plurality of rasas, but also the possibility that rasas may clash, if one receives the wrong instruction.
Does this mean the acaryas of that group gave wrong instructions? Absolutely not! Sri Krsna directs the wandering of each soul to ideal situations of guidance. Hence, it is likely that a guru in manjari bhava will attract devotees who by nature have the propensity for that relationship, and to those disciples, he will certainly say that they can only enter madhurya rasa through cultivating the mood of a manjari. He will also instruct that they cannot enter Vraja through any other rasa- this is all true- for that particular group of devotees.
Those disciples then worship those instructions and make them their life and soul. But worship and zealous sectarianism combined with group identity and pride, can give rise to a brand of loyalty that causes offense to other groups, when they present their version as the only way. It is certainly the only way- for them. But not for all.
Krsna consciousness can be- and should be- viewed differently from different angles, without minimizing the value of any angle in particular. Even Krsna Himself changes to meet the need in His devotees to appear in a certain form to which they are most attracted. Absolute sensitivity is needed in regard to the unique qualifications, taste, desire and circumstance of each individual, whether in one's own group, seeking to join one's own group, or in another group. Diversity is beautiful.
Not recognizing it, we can limit each others progress severely, both through offense and trying to make everyone “fit the mold” which is psychological bullying. We need to view, understand and apply Krsna consciousness differently from and for each other. The different approach will not hold any of us back- it will benefit us. The three beliefs described above are being criticized here by me, not because they are variations in understanding, indeed I have described how a certain time and place may necessitate such emphasis. I have criticized them being applied to everyone for all time, because the import of doing so completely denies variation in rasa- and the combination of all three obliterates variations entirely.
At some point, an acarya found the emphasis of manjari bhava as the only way to enter Vraja, to be a perfect instruction for his disciples. For a new group, such an instruction may be disastrous.
Radha Kunda Babajis
Similarly, Srila Prabhupada found the need to warn his disciples about “Radha kunda babajis” He often criticized the babajis living at Radha kunda, for their illicit connections with women and living a sinful life, smoking and so forth. This was well over 30 years ago, so there is no doubt that a completely new generation of babajis live there now, and there is no reason to assume that living beside the most sacred place on earth and adopting a dress of a renunciant inspires illicit connection with women- if anything, just the opposite! Currently the Mahant of Radha Kunda is a babaji whose vaisnava character is impeccable- who is saintly to the utmost degree, and who is incapable of committing vaisnava aparadha, even when it is given to him. Thus, while most ISKCON devotees put him in the category of sahajiya, if anyone dares criticize such ISKCON devotees in front of him, that great vaisnava becomes very angry. He forbids his followers any criticism of other sects- even if they criticize him.
If we stick to Srila Prabhupada's instructions as being “perfect for all time” then we may make offenses to this great vaisnava and his disciples – who become offended by our attitude and opinion.
Raganuga- Now or Never- Or Just Later?
Similarly, we shoot ourselves in the foot if we think that Srila Prabhupada's instructions to leave raganuga bhajan for later on when we are more mature, apply eternally. “Later” means later, not never. The qualification to enter ragaunga, described in the sastra, is greed for a particular mood of service and relationship with Krsna, following a particular Vraja-basi, and when that arises by good association and hearing and chanting, which it should, in due course, then we need to follow the numerous instructions of Srila Prabhupada regarding the absolute need to rise beyond rules and regulations (vaidhi bhakti) and come to raganuga, which he called “real bhakti”.
In this respect, we all have very different qualifications. Some of us having been performing devotional service over many many lifetimes, and some only one, some have been avoiding offenses and others not, and some have gotten mercy from a raganuga devotee, in this or a past life, and others have not. So what “later” means for one devotee may be very different for another devotee. Thus, just because ruci has not arisen in me yet, I should not minimize the relevance of raganuga bhakti for others. I may need many lifetimes to become purified, whereas others, having proceeded through the stages through which I am now struggling, are ready, even if they joined ISKCON yesterday. Thus, we need to honor our spiritual master's mission by applying his instructions differently for each different individual. If a person has taste or an interest to develop taste for ragaunga, it could be that, from a past life, he or she became qualified. We should not discourage anyone on the mistaken belief that only ISKCON can deliver, and that time in the movement is the only qualification- for it is not mentioned at all in the sastra as an adhikara for raganuga, and “the movement” cuts across all sectarian boundaries.
Thus, the effect of time, place and circumstance needs to be studied in order to be relevant for each individual that joins our group, as well as to respect and honor differences in other groups. Recognizing that there are many approaches to Krsna Consciousness, we avoid sectarian offenses, make adjustments so as to attract as many souls as possible to the lotus feet of Krsna, and after having attracted them thus, facilitate their further development as much as possible, by an approach which may vary widely between each individual.
It's quite astonishing how widely opinions vary in the vaisnava community, and sometimes it seems that we have less in common and more in difference. Controversy seems to pervade a vast range of issues, apart from core concepts such as the nine processes of devotional service, particularly chanting the mahamantra- but we saw even this challenged recently, as one lineage descending from Srila Bhaktisiddhanta is stressing that the mahamantra should be avoided until one can chant without offenses, and until then, one should focus on Nitai-Gaura nama-kirtan exclusively, as They are more merciful.
Many of these differences of opinion, however, are based on a particular acarya seeing a certain need in his disciples, which inspires him to stress a particular aspect of philosophy or practice, to the exclusion of all others. An acarya is always obliged to observe the effect of time, place and circumstance and adjust his message accordingly- and the adjustments can be quite radical.
The Case of Parakiya Bhava
One of the most famous vaisnava controversies was created by Jiva Goswami. Although Sri Chaitanya glorified the paramour love of the gopis, Jiva argued that it was illusory, that actually the gopis were never married to other men at all, but in due course they married Krsna, and that in the aprakata lila, they are eternally His wives.
Visvanatha Chakravarti Thakura, in Ujjvala Nilamani, proved that Jiva was simply trying to appease his followers by preaching in this way, and that the reason why the gopi's love excels that of the queens of Dwaraka is that they are, in fact, married to other men in an eternal relationship which defies moral codes, and continually challenges and places obstacles to their meeting with Krsna, thus bringing their prema to the heights of excellence.
The reason Jiva Goswami's version varied so radically from actual siddhanta was that his disciples were mostly staunch moralists who could not develop attraction for Krsna through seeing Him as a “upapati” or paramour- a character who was customarily condemned in Indian drama and literature, inspiring hatred and repulsion for his evil propensities. Thus Jiva Goswami adjusted the tattva to account for time, place and circumstances and serve the mission of attracting souls to Krsna. It is because we all have different qualifications, conditionings and inherent tendencies, that Sri Krsna, Who is in the heart of every devotee, allows us to approach Him in so many ways. It is also the reason He provides so many gurus, branches and lineages.
It is also the reason why He sends along various acaryas who make changes within those lineages, according to the changing circumstances and the now-different set of qualifications and mentalities of a new group of devotees. This is the way it should be, as acaryas should do that. The problem arises when, due to narrow-mindedness in the devotees of that group, a sectarian or group-think mentality arises that “Our way/understanding is the BEST way” or even “Our way/understanding is the ONLY way”.
This can result in offenses to other groups, and impositions on individuals entering the group, for times and circumstances are always changing, and what may, in any given lineage, have worked in the past so well, may not be working now.
To illustrate the need for flexibility, Srila Prabhupada once told a story of a guru who had a cat who was very affectionate to him. Every day, this cat would interrupt his classes by rubbing and purring, so the guru instructed that the cat should be locked up before every class. When the guru passed away, the disciples, believing their master's instructions to be eternally perfect, continued to lock up the cat before every class. One day, the cat disappeared, and they frantically looked for him- or another cat- to lock up, so the classes could continue. Though the need for cat-restraint had disappeared- the instruction which inspired it continued to be followed with great faith.
The tendency is to think “This is the way we do things in our group” or “This the tattva handed down by our acaryas, and so it is perfect”.
Limitations, not Differences, Removed
As explained above, the differences in instruction and practice in different lineages serve a certain purpose- which we should respect and honor, lest offenses be committed to other groups. Is there any value, then, to debating the differences of understanding? The illustration of the cat-restraint tradition, given above, stresses what will happen if we do not. As time and circumstances change in each group, we need to separate which instructions are eternal tattva, from those that were simply adjustments, and adjust the adjustments if need be, so that we remain always relevant and beneficial for any given situation.
Such a broadened understanding deflects misunderstandings and dissolves barriers between groups- because we can understand the situations which may have inspired them to adopt the change, and through didactic intercourse, these changes can be seen for what they are, absolutely necessary for a particular time, place and circumstance, but otherwise not.
Manjari-bhava and Rasa Inherency
For example, there is a current controversy regarding the universal relevance of manjari bhava. The manjaris are Sri Radha's maidservants who are in conjugal rasa with Krsna- indirectly- through experiencing Radha's love for Him, called tat-tad-bhaveccatmika- bhava. The controversy has three different aspects:
1. The belief that manjari bhava is the only way to enter madhurya rasa,
2. The belief that everyone should be cultivating madhurya rasa, as it's the mood that Sri Chaitanya came to distribute. Combining this with the former, everyone should be cultivating manjari bhava.
3. In relation to the above, the idea that the propensity for a certain rasa is not inherent in the jiva, but is determined entirely on the basis of impressions received from devotees who have that rasa- either from a past or present life.
These are controversies, because there is evidence in the sastra which contradicts these beliefs- evidence which establishes that one can enter Vraja in any one of the four rasas, evidence that if one is inclined to madhurya rasa, it need not only be through manjari bhava- but also through cultivating the mood of a priya sakhi. There is also evidence that the propensity for a certain rasa is not just governed by association, but by natural inclination as well.
For example:
“The rati takes on a specific type (one of the five, ie: santa, dasya, etc) according to the individual nature of the devotee. Bhakti-Rasamrita Sindhu 2.5.7
Knowing of such plurality of rasas, a devotee need not make assumptions that the group he has joined will turn him into a manjari in due course- unless he is naturally attracted to that rasa, it will simply not work. Indeed, our acaryas warn that such an attempt may produce rasabhasa and the concomitant absence of ruci:
“But what determines who takes up which type of rati? Is it decided by having no impressions of a particular rati from previous lives, by having an impression of one type of rati from previous lives, or by having impressions of many types of rati?
In the first option – absence of impressions – rati cannot occur at all, because no taste could arise. In the case of persons having impressions of many types of rati, a particular rati could not manifest prominently because conflicting tastes would result in the improper manifestation of rasa (rasābhāsa). Therefore, impressions of only one type carried from previous lives produce the specific taste. Though not being in a position to perceive the depth of that rasa, one can confirm its identity by comparing scriptural descriptions of rasas with one’s own inclinations, and by inference through seeing how rasas, different from one’s own rasa, either nourish or fail to nourish the total ingredients.” Bhakti-Rasamrita Sindhu 2.5.38
The assumptions that all devotees in the line of Sri Chaitanya are in the same rasa, and within that rasa- all have the mood of a manjari- completely ignore this warning, which not only indicates the plurality of rasas, but also the possibility that rasas may clash, if one receives the wrong instruction.
Does this mean the acaryas of that group gave wrong instructions? Absolutely not! Sri Krsna directs the wandering of each soul to ideal situations of guidance. Hence, it is likely that a guru in manjari bhava will attract devotees who by nature have the propensity for that relationship, and to those disciples, he will certainly say that they can only enter madhurya rasa through cultivating the mood of a manjari. He will also instruct that they cannot enter Vraja through any other rasa- this is all true- for that particular group of devotees.
Those disciples then worship those instructions and make them their life and soul. But worship and zealous sectarianism combined with group identity and pride, can give rise to a brand of loyalty that causes offense to other groups, when they present their version as the only way. It is certainly the only way- for them. But not for all.
Krsna consciousness can be- and should be- viewed differently from different angles, without minimizing the value of any angle in particular. Even Krsna Himself changes to meet the need in His devotees to appear in a certain form to which they are most attracted. Absolute sensitivity is needed in regard to the unique qualifications, taste, desire and circumstance of each individual, whether in one's own group, seeking to join one's own group, or in another group. Diversity is beautiful.
Not recognizing it, we can limit each others progress severely, both through offense and trying to make everyone “fit the mold” which is psychological bullying. We need to view, understand and apply Krsna consciousness differently from and for each other. The different approach will not hold any of us back- it will benefit us. The three beliefs described above are being criticized here by me, not because they are variations in understanding, indeed I have described how a certain time and place may necessitate such emphasis. I have criticized them being applied to everyone for all time, because the import of doing so completely denies variation in rasa- and the combination of all three obliterates variations entirely.
At some point, an acarya found the emphasis of manjari bhava as the only way to enter Vraja, to be a perfect instruction for his disciples. For a new group, such an instruction may be disastrous.
Radha Kunda Babajis
Similarly, Srila Prabhupada found the need to warn his disciples about “Radha kunda babajis” He often criticized the babajis living at Radha kunda, for their illicit connections with women and living a sinful life, smoking and so forth. This was well over 30 years ago, so there is no doubt that a completely new generation of babajis live there now, and there is no reason to assume that living beside the most sacred place on earth and adopting a dress of a renunciant inspires illicit connection with women- if anything, just the opposite! Currently the Mahant of Radha Kunda is a babaji whose vaisnava character is impeccable- who is saintly to the utmost degree, and who is incapable of committing vaisnava aparadha, even when it is given to him. Thus, while most ISKCON devotees put him in the category of sahajiya, if anyone dares criticize such ISKCON devotees in front of him, that great vaisnava becomes very angry. He forbids his followers any criticism of other sects- even if they criticize him.
If we stick to Srila Prabhupada's instructions as being “perfect for all time” then we may make offenses to this great vaisnava and his disciples – who become offended by our attitude and opinion.
Raganuga- Now or Never- Or Just Later?
Similarly, we shoot ourselves in the foot if we think that Srila Prabhupada's instructions to leave raganuga bhajan for later on when we are more mature, apply eternally. “Later” means later, not never. The qualification to enter ragaunga, described in the sastra, is greed for a particular mood of service and relationship with Krsna, following a particular Vraja-basi, and when that arises by good association and hearing and chanting, which it should, in due course, then we need to follow the numerous instructions of Srila Prabhupada regarding the absolute need to rise beyond rules and regulations (vaidhi bhakti) and come to raganuga, which he called “real bhakti”.
In this respect, we all have very different qualifications. Some of us having been performing devotional service over many many lifetimes, and some only one, some have been avoiding offenses and others not, and some have gotten mercy from a raganuga devotee, in this or a past life, and others have not. So what “later” means for one devotee may be very different for another devotee. Thus, just because ruci has not arisen in me yet, I should not minimize the relevance of raganuga bhakti for others. I may need many lifetimes to become purified, whereas others, having proceeded through the stages through which I am now struggling, are ready, even if they joined ISKCON yesterday. Thus, we need to honor our spiritual master's mission by applying his instructions differently for each different individual. If a person has taste or an interest to develop taste for ragaunga, it could be that, from a past life, he or she became qualified. We should not discourage anyone on the mistaken belief that only ISKCON can deliver, and that time in the movement is the only qualification- for it is not mentioned at all in the sastra as an adhikara for raganuga, and “the movement” cuts across all sectarian boundaries.
Thus, the effect of time, place and circumstance needs to be studied in order to be relevant for each individual that joins our group, as well as to respect and honor differences in other groups. Recognizing that there are many approaches to Krsna Consciousness, we avoid sectarian offenses, make adjustments so as to attract as many souls as possible to the lotus feet of Krsna, and after having attracted them thus, facilitate their further development as much as possible, by an approach which may vary widely between each individual.
