A STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION
by Niscala devi dasi
Posted December 8, 2002
It was wonderful to read "Healthy Discussions." , by Bhaktin Miriam,
someone daring to think independently and helping to fulfill Srila
Prabhupada's intent for ISKCON: "This Krsna Consciousness movement is for
training persons to be independently thoughtful." When Srila Prabhupada
designated the GBC as the "ultimate managerial authority" in ISKCON, he did
not expect us to follow them blindly, as is currently presumed. Logically,
if blind following of even the guru is condemned by him in his purport to Bg
(4.34), it follows that he would even more strongly condemn blind following
of a managerial authority, which in varnashrama categorization is the
ksatriya. Particularly if one is capable of independent thoughtfulness,
which is the quality of a brahmana, it would go against one's duty in
varnashrama, Krsna's blueprint for humanity, to follow a managerial
authority blindly! Actually, one's duty would be to advise those managers on
the basis of truth, and correct them if they are lacking in this quality, as
Miriam has found them to be.
I thank her for upholding the qualities of truth and courage as well as her
duty in varnashrama, as it is a step in the right direction and a good
example for us all. Srila Prabhupada told us that we must develop
varnashrama in ISKCON "to bring our members to the mode of goodness". This
is the remaining instruction of Srila Prabhupada's that we have not begun to
fulfill- the real "final order". Of course, numerous committees and meetings
have been held and formed about how to implement varnashrama, but little
progress has been made because they are barking up the wrong tree.
Varnashrama is not organized by committee or meeting, but by qualification
of the individual (Bg 18.41). If one values truth and morality over
gratification and flattery, then one is a brahmana by nature and should act
as one, by giving advice, by word or letter, to bring about the sanity of
the mode of goodness in the social body. If one is absorbed in control, one
is a ksatriya; in profit, a vaisya; and if one is none of these, but prefers
to be guided, one should know one is a sudra. These are all easily
identified, clearly recognizable qualities- both in oneself and in others.
If one who has the qualities of a certain varna, acts in that capacity-
presto! We have varnashrama, as that is exactly what it is, nothing more,
nothing less.
The trouble we have in implementing this simple, natural formula, is a
mistaken understanding in ISKCON- that is wrong or offensive to give
truthful criticism to senior Prabhupada disciples- seniority being based on
time and position in the movement (which is itself a fallacy, so it is a
fallacy built on a fallacy). Indeed we are led to believe it may be
"vaisnava aparadha", mistaking the function of the brain of the social body,
which is to give advice, to be harmful! This is amazing since most of us
know the words of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta, describing his critic to be his
best friend. He was a genuinely superior person in terms of spiritual
advancement- was he recommending that his contemporaries commit vaisnava
aparadha?
Another consideration.Did Lord Rama consider the washerman's criticism of
him offensive? No. Acting as the ideal managerial authority, he welcomed
advice from anyone, what to speak of advice from persons of truth and
integrity. Especially as vaisnavas we are supposed to exemplify humility,
and be able to "take gold even from a dirty place". Bilvamangala Thakura,
for example, took the advice of a prostitute, and benefited from it
immensely. He did not consider it offensive because of her position in
society. Truth, wherever it is to be found has value. No one should be
refrained from speaking the truth under fear of aparadha, or other illusion.
Indeed, any society in which criticism is considered to be offensive is only
a paradise for fools, for such an attitude stagnates one's progress. ISKCON
is presently in this place of stagnation, strangled by a mistaken
understanding of aparadha and other concepts. The only hope we have is that
we each individually learn to think clearly, independently of all this rife.
We each have a certain quality to our nature and certain work is
consequently required of us in Krsna's blueprint society. If we neglect our
God-given duties and follow another imposed duty, we create chaos by
compliance with what is not right. Reform, contrary to popular opinion, is
never solely the responsibility of people in position, as they are prone to
be corrupted by power. It is this very misconception of the nature of
reform, which has made it a difficult thing to attain, and consequently our
progress towards a varnashrama society has been virtually nil, despite it
being the only natural way to be.