Hanumatpresaka Swami on Guru-Tattva
BY: ROCANA DASA
Apr 15, CANADA (SUN) — I recently received an email from one of our readers asking me to review a presentation by HH Hanumatpresaka Swami on guru-tattva. The article is found on his website, the Anjana Suta Academy. The presentation is in the form of a Q&A informational piece for those wishing to take diksa from the Swami, and basically provides the requirements to be met by the candidate for initiation. Judging from the content, it appears to be drawn from a dialogue with some of the South America devotees.
Although Hanumatpresaka Swami was born on almost the same day as me and was also involved in ISKCON during Srila Prabhupada's lila period, our paths never really crossed. While I recognize him from pictures, I confess I don't know him personally and have never served with him.
By reading the Wikipedia presentation on Hanumatpresaka Swami, one finds that he is part of the Bhaktivedanta Institute, and that he is considered one of ISKCON's scholars, philosophers, and teachers on a higher level of Krsna Consciousness. He goes to universities and gives lectures, and he accompanied Hridayananda and others on a South American tour of different universities.
Now taking all that into consideration, then reading what he has stated in his article on guru-tattva, one is somewhat baffled at how a scholar, philosopher, and noted Swami and Guru in ISKCON could present Krsna Consciousness philosophy in such a way to those interested in taking initiation from him. All I can say is that although the Swami can perhaps speak eloquently on all sorts of subjects involving our philosophy, in this circumstance he, amongst many ISKCON gurus and swamis, is quite handicapped. He and his peers have been given the standard ISKCON formula and philosophy as it pertains to guru, and they simply repeat this. They are not really permitted to elaborate upon it, or give their own understanding, so they just repeat.
The pre-qualifications for being a disciple appear on the surface appear to be the same qualifications as stated by Srila Prabhupada during his lila period. This is the basic information one is given soon after they walk through the door of the temple for the first time, or you meet a devotee distributing books on the streets. They tell you about chanting sixteen rounds and following the four regulative principles, and that you're encouraged to participate in the morning sadhana program that Srila Prabhupada established. And assuming that you're doing this, and some local authority verifies it, you become qualified to be initiated.
In his article, Hanumatpresaka Swami is giving us the understanding that Srila Prabhupada is an uttama-adhikari, a pure devotee (although whether most of ISKCON's gurus today even agree with this is hard to verify). The Swami claims that he himself is a madhyama-adhikari, but he can guarantee that you can come to the highest platform, uttama-adhikari, although you're diksa initiated by him, a madhyama-adhikari, because he's linked up to Srila Prabhupada, who is uttama-adhikari. He is apparently saying that it's Srila Prabhupada who will link you up with the disciplic succession, not him. Of course, we accept that Srila Prabhupada is the Sampradaya Acarya, an uttama-adhikari. My position is that every person who is qualified to give diksa and link you up to the eternal sampradaya, to the uttama-adhikaris, is qualified based on how closely they themselves are following the Sampradaya Acarya, having understood and adopted his mood and consciousness.
According to Hanumatpresaka Swami, one of the pre-qualifications beyond this is that you must accept the GBC as the ultimate managing authority in ISKCON. He writes:
"I accept the GBC as the Ultimate Managing Authority for ISKCON as stated by Srila Prabhupada in his Will with their authority ultimate and limited to management. I accept the elevated Brahmanas, Goswamis as the Ultimate Spiritual authorities in that context and Srila Prabhupada as their absolute monarch."
So this is an interesting characterization that he's made. You accept the GBC as the ultimate managing authority, but of course, the GBC are not simply managing – they are setting down philosophical programs and policies. In fact, this whole definition of guru that Hanumatpresaka Swami is presenting comes from the GBC.
He goes on to say that you have to accept elevated brahmanas, goswamis, as the ultimate spiritual authorities, which leads me to believe that he's having problems reconciling the difficulties that ISKCON is having, especially on the GBC level. The obvious confusion behind these remarks is understandable. Everyone has to accept the GBC as the ultimate managing authority, but what that really means has never been made clear.
What if the brahmans and goswamis, the ultimate spiritual authorities, have a problem with what the GBC have instituted as a philosophy? For example, they introduced the Zonal Acarya system. They introduced the Gopi Bhava concept in the early 1990's. They've introduced this whole idea of the GBC being higher than the gurus -- and there is a lot of controversy within the GBC about who is higher – the ultimate spiritual authorities, or the ultimate managing authorities?
So all this is very unclear, and it's obviously unclear to Hanumatpresaka Swami, as well. And this lack of clarity is being passed on to those who listen to him, including the individual who asked us to read Maharaja's presentation on guru-tattva.
He goes on to say that there are many types of gurus. Unfortunately he, like many other preachers in ISKCON, does not point to the exact verse or purport in the sastra that he's referring to. He refers to Dronacarya being a guru, as stated in the Gita, and says that he's a teacher. And this is my understanding of the diksa guru -- that when one accepts the responsibility of being a diksa and initiates someone into our Sampradaya, he assumes the responsibility of teaching the disciple. This is what Srila Prabhupada wanted. He wanted us to teach as the guru.
Whether one is a vartma-pradarsaka or siksa, an asrama guru, or pati-guru as he himself says, the fact is that you're passing on the knowledge that you have. But as a diksa you're not only passing it on, you're taking responsibility for the person. It's just like giving birth to a child. You then have to assume a great deal of responsibility. But this is not mentioned by Hanumatpresaka Swami, or by most of those giving diksa within ISKCON that I know of. They have adopted a whole new perspective -- the ISKCON version of diksa, not the Vedic version, not Srila Prabhupada's version. They say, 'Well Srila Prabhupada did like this.' In other words, he just gave initiation and then we were trained by local authorities. But as the diksa guru and teacher, Srila Prabhupada provided us with the temple structure, the deities, the program and the books. But today's ISKCON diksas have decided that now, you just follow Srila Prabhupada's program and do as we would do back in the Srila Prabhupada lila period, and that's sufficient.
Aside from the fact that we are not Srila Prabhupada, the Sampradaya Acarya, in this day and age such a scenario is not possible, not practical, due to various institutional factors. The fact is that the temples have temple presidents, and they have a certain structure. If you stay in the temple or you're single and live right next to the temple, or get involved in the temple business, then you can go about attending classes and taking instruction from the local persons. But in many cases, the local authorities are not disciples of the same guru as you, or they may consider themselves to be following a different GBC than you do. And this can result in some significant differences of opinion, philosophically. The chain of command, the link of spiritual authority, creates all sorts of confusion in ISKCON today. In fact, the spiritual authorities, and for that matter the managing authorities, don't agree with one another on so many issues today. And this dilemma arises right in the middle of Hanumatpresaka Swami's presentation.
Some of the devotees were putting the Swami on the spot by bringing up controversial issues, such as diksa gurus falling down in ISKCON. Of course, "falling down", according to ISKCON, is completely due to the fact that the person didn't maintain the basic programs: 16 round, 4 regs, morning program. If you fall down, it's because you didn't do these things… not because you're preaching bogus philosophy, or you're committing offenses to the Holy Name, to the Guru, to your godbrothers… that never enters into the explanation or qualification for "falldown" anymore.
The persons who are attending this darshan with the Swami, or are engaged in dialogue with him, are essentially saying well, you're saying that these things are the pre-requisites, but what we're observing is that many of the authorities -- many of the gurus and GBC -- are themselves not keeping to the program. And unless you attend the program, you don't know if other devotees are even attempting to appear to chant 16 rounds, what to speak of actually chanting them properly.
Hanumatpresaka Swami goes on to explain that he is only a diksa guru so long as you're doing these things properly, as the disciple. If you don't do these things, then he ceases to become a diksa guru until such time as you start doing them again. Now this we have never heard as part of our philosophy – guru-tattva has never been explained like this -- that as soon as you're not doing these things, then your guru becomes a vartma-pradarsaka guru, transforming in some mystical, magical way from a diksa, then back again.
Of course, the whole process that Hanumatpresaka Swami is involved in -- the ISKCON version of diksa -- is all based on such a mystical process. You have to have the name, the beads, the connection through an ISKCON-approved diksa, then you're magically connected. If you don't have these things, then you're not connected. Even though you may be reading Srila Prabhupada's books and may be much stricter in following Srila Prabhupada's program than someone who is initiated, and even though you may be working harder for Srila Prabhupada than another who is initiated, because you haven't had this formal mystical initiation, you're not connected. The person who has gone through the ceremony, he's more connected than you. These are the only considerations. That's why the institution maintains this whole "Bhakta Birthname" practice rather than giving you a spiritual name, even though parents give spiritual names to their children, and even to their cats and dogs. Still, ISKCON doesn't give anyone a spiritual name, or let a vartma-pradarsaka guru or a close siksa guru, or whoever, just bestow a name on someone. They want you to stick with the bhakta name, because it relegates you to the platform of just being a neophyte, uninitiated person. But this is just an institutional formula to try and coerce people to take initiation from an ISKCON-approved diksa guru.
On top of that, Hanumatpresaka Swami is presenting this whole formula that even if you become initiated, you're not initiated at the moment you deviate from chanting your rounds or following the four regulative principles. Never mind that he knows full well that many, many of his colleagues on the GBC and diksa guru level, and throughout ISKCON management, don't do these things. In fact, in his presentation we see that he is put on the spot on account of questions stemming from this very reality.
Questions are asked of him wherein a controversial personality, one of the original Zonal Acaryas, was not following the program. Jayapataka Swami, who was a Zonal Acarya down in the region of South America, was notorious throughout the movement since the early days for not chanting his rounds and attending the morning program. While it's true that you cannot know if someone is chanting their rounds unless you're right there with him, even those who were close to Jayapataka Swami during the times he was visiting other temples could easily see that it was impossible for him to have chanted 16 rounds given the program he was following. This has been common knowledge amongst the devotees for years, and here we see that the devotees are making Hanumatpresaka Swami understand that this controversy exists.
Of course, given that Hanumatpresaka Swami is presenting that he's a madhyama-adhikari, he is also insinuating that Jayapataka Swami is also just a madhyama-adhikari, not an uttama-adhikari like Srila Prabhupada, who is apparently the only uttama-adhikari. So that means, according to him, that Jayapataka Swami will falldown. He writes:
"Personally I tell people that this is my position. I am a madhayama-adhikari. For considerable time I an undeviating in chanting my rounds, following principles, mangala-arati, sankirtana etc. but considering the history of our Western Godbrothers its not a question of if I will falldown, it seems more likely that I will falldown. Maybe some special mercy for the most fallen we'll be able to avoid that, God help us, but if we do then we plan to get back up in a wonderful way."
Now of course, "falldown" remains a very nebulous term. As the Swami has stated his formula, if he falls down, then he's no longer an initiated disciple of Srila Prabhupada. That's what he says to his disciples – that falldown means doesn't chant his 16 rounds, or doesn't attend the morning program, or whatever. Of course, we know that falldown can be much, much greater than that. It can be many things, very serious, or minor. But he says that if he falls, he will rise from this falldown, and "get back up in a wonderful way".
Now in a sense, Hanumatpresaka Swami is representing all of ISKCON, all of his fellow gurus, when he makes such statements. It's common knowledge that many gurus in the past have fallen and never risen again, what to speak of gloriously getting back up. They've given up sannyasa, given up being gurus, given up the principles, etc. They were all claiming to be authorized diksa gurus, some of them even claiming to be uttama-adhikaris. But here, Hanumatpresaka Swami is essentially stating that these falldowns are just accidental, and they should even be expected. He gives the analogy that they're likened to a baby's crying. So you just have to tolerate that, just like if a baby cries, and that crying is the equivalent of a falldown.
This is all bogus philosophy. This is not our philosophy. You don't find this anywhere in sastra. This is a concoction.
Hanumatpresaka Swami claims that it's the duty of the GBC, sannyasis and especially the gurus to set the example, but the audience members are saying well, you might say that, but many of them don't, and we know that. He then suggests that the solution is, you have to preach to them. But we know what a pointless suggestion that is. For some neophyte, or someone considered to be a neophyte by an authority, to start preaching to the authority to get their life or their act together, and start doing these basic things they're not doing, well that does not go over well in ISKCON. It's ridiculous advice.
As I read the rest of the comments and questions that are posed in the presentation, I had to admire the audience members. The questioners put some tough questions to the Swami. For example, there's this whole confusion over the 4 regulative principles and sex life, and whether illicit sex means sex outside of marriage, or does it mean going through the entire 64 rounds, varna samskara, with the sole purpose and consciousness of producing a child when having sex. Now that was Srila Prabhupada's program, and that's what was commonly understood during his lila period. I was a householder from the day I joined, and throughout Srila Prabhupada's entire lila period, I can say in all honesty that I followed that principle. In fact, at the time, my wife actually left me because I followed that principle. Nowadays, however, the different gurus and authorities are preaching something different.
For example, we have Jayapataka Swami and his Nama Hatta program, in which he emphasizes including as many people as possible into the family of ISKCON. He doesn't emphasize or include a lot of these strict programs, the strictest being that when you're with your wife, you can't have sex unless it's for procreation. Even though you may have given up a simpler life and gotten married because you want to have sex, all you are permitted to do is have sex at the proper time of the month, and after chanting 64 rounds, which takes well over six hours for most of us. In all honesty, in all reality, most of the householders don't follow this regulation and many of the gurus and authorities, wanting to ease their minds, basically water down the process, saying that it's OK. Hridayananda and Jayapataka Swami, who were the Zonal Acaryas in the region of South America for many years, both preached this way.
So here comes the strict sannyasi, Hanumatpresaka Swami, and the devotees are putting these heavy questions to him. Of course, he has to insure that he doesn't say anything directly that would indicate he disagrees with these other gurus, who at one time claimed to be uttama-adhikaris who would never falldown, even though they were preaching another philosophy than what Hanumatpresaka Swami believes.
Although he admits that it's a big controversy in ISKCON, he excuses himself from the discussion because being a sannyasi, he shouldn't be talking about sex. So he begs off on that basis. This is one of the weasel ways in which our ISKCON leaders shirk their duties. If you want to be a guru then you preach, and you preach what you believe to be what Srila Prabhupada accepts and presents as the philosophy, whatever the ramifications, reactions, or controversy. Not that you get to use the excuse that you're a sannyasi, so you can't preach about avoiding illicit sex and following the regulative principles.
Now if the Swami doesn't want to teach, he could say well, I don't have the time to teach; if you want to hear me teach, you have to make your way to Belgium, to the Bhaktivedanta Institute, where you can take one of my classes. But as far as setting out programs and monitoring and providing facility for the disciples to be taught properly this philosophy, he apparently doesn't believe that's part of his duties. Somehow this is all Srila Prabhupada's responsibility. Just read Srila Prabhupada's books.
We know that even within the GBC and amongst the authorities, there's a lot of controversy. The debates are ongoing about what Srila Prabhupada wanted, or what his philosophy was, or is. And all these controversies trickle down to the grassroots, so really it's up to the guru to instill within his disciples the fact that he, as guru, accepts this side of the controversy rather than the other side. In other words, if you want to be his disciple, then you have to accept that following the 4 regs in marriage means what it meant during Srila Prabhupada's lila period. And if you don't, then don't get initiated by him. Now this would be the honest way to present it. But saying, 'I can't talk about it because I'm a sannyasi', that is a contrivance.
So there are many controversies that go on, including the controversy over whether or not all the GBCs, gurus, sannyasis, and senior devotees have to go to the morning program and publicly chant their 16 rounds. It appears that the Swami does follow these programs, although he's not saying in his presentation that if you're my disciple, you have to do these things because I do them. He doesn't make that clear. He doesn't make much of anything clear in this presentation. Take for example his comments on Jayapataka Swami, in comparison to his emphasis on the importance of following the sadhana program. He knows very well who Jayapataka Swami is. He knows about his proclivities for being slack, yet he says that gets up most of the time early in the morning, thus inferring that he chants his 16 rounds. But he knows for certain that it's the other way – he knows for certain that Jayapataka Swami doesn't do these things, and hasn't done them since the mid-1970's. This has been widely known.
I've had my own personal experiences with Jayapataka in this regard, and frankly, he was one of my first big shocks as a new devotee. After spending a few years in the movement, I came into contact with Jayapataka in Mayapur. He shocked me in many ways, and this was one of them. So, Hanumatpresaka Swami is reinforcing a myth about the ex-Zonal Acarya, the ex-initiating guru in that area, quite likely because some of Jayapataka's disciples are in the audience. It might even be them asking the questions.
So is it the duty of the guru to speak the truth, regardless? Or is it his duty to maintain the ISKCON façade, the program of the GBC being so ultimately perfect, and all these gurus and authorities being way more advanced than they actually are? Of course, the Swami would know in detail what the local devotees wouldn't, but still they're presenting their doubts and concerns in this regard. And Hanumatpresaka Swami is propping up Jayapataka Swami's reputation and the ISKCON program, which is not based on our philosophy.
As a diksa guru, a teacher of Krsna Consciousness, it's his duty to just tell the truth, but he knows that those who tell the truth in ISKCON, their responsibilities are taken away. They are sidelined and ultimately drummed out of ISKCON. You cannot be publicly truthful, therefore you cannot actually be a bona fide diksa guru as Srila Prabhupada has presented in the sastra, and still be in ISKCON today.
