21st Century Mleccha-Sahajiya Cults, Part 2
BY: BHAKTA ERIC JOHANSON
May 31, UK (SUN) — Second of a Three-Part Series.
Roots of Sahajiya
siddhanta-alasa jana anartha to’ chade na
jade krsna bhrama kori’ krsna-seva kore na
“One who is lazy in properly understanding the Vaishnava philosophical conclusions can never become free from anarthas, the unwanted bad habits and philosophical misconceptions that impede devotional service.”
(Prakrta Rasa Sata Dusini by Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Prabhupada, 28)
“It is not so easy. That is called sahajiya. Why you want such exalted things so easily?”
(Room Conversation, July 8, 1976)
Like anything, cognitive dissonance is not, in and of itself, completely opposed to Krishna consciousness; many devotees surrendered because of a type of cognitive dissonance (the distressed). Many of us were thrown into a position of having two contradictory ideas simultaneously, a kind of double-crystallization, when we understood for the first time that we are not the body. Previously, we may have been convinced that we were “a spiritual person,” somehow or other.
For the devotee who follows the real path of yoga, cognitive dissonance is always engaged (and eventually eradicated) in the service of the Absolute Truth. When the genuine bhakti-yogi understands that he or she holds some position contrary to the Absolute Truth, he or she gives it up. It is the neophyte, whose insincerity led him to accept wrong conceptions, who becomes devastated by cognitive dissonance. This was the case for those who had been convinced to follow and surrender to the Zonal Acaryas.
Even previous to the departure of Srila Prabhupada, the leading “pet disciples” were engaged in the creation of their own separate cults; it is not that they only began diverting the devotees away from Srila Prabhupada after his departure. It is very easy to make the argument that it was their successful relegation of Srila Prabhupada to figurehead status that caused his departure. According to the method in which most of these “pets” engaged their godbrothers, how they controlled them, it was not really possible for those on the lower rungs to have much of a manifest individual relationship with His Divine Grace-at least, not independent of the pet just above them.
Those who refused to accede to seeing the pets as spiritual or even psychic intermediaries, who instead saw them as devotees who conducted the order (from the real guru), were branded as renegades in due course of time. They did not get any of the special favors granted to the amenable ones who gave in psychologically to the local leader. This is, of course and most unfortunately, a naturally occurring phenomenon in almost any religious institution. It is the essence of how ladder-climbing replaces yoga, and it is how real Krishna consciousness transforms into a mundane institutional religion.
(See "Organized Religion" by Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Goswami Prabhupada)
According to the pet-disciple model, the movement was a big family, a social arrangement backed by God to take over the world. Sure, philosophy played a part, but those who “over-emphasized” it were “too attached to jnana.” Interestingly enough, there was a certain overlap of these wrongly characterized “mishra-jnana” devotees with the renegades. However, what was of paramount importance in the pet disciple’s or bad leader’s conception of “Krishna consciousness” was something far less tangible: It was “the mood of Srila Prabhupada.” This “mood of Srila Prabhupada,” as interpreted by the pets, generally dictated the need for big results - more money, temples, devotees, etc. These were all things that, coincidently, benefited the pet disciples in their “transcendental competition” to climb to the top of the turtle tank within the institution.
This was the essence of how the pet disciples indoctrinated or mis-trained some of their original godbrothers. There should be no surprise that later they did the same damn thing in relation to their so-called initiated disciples. They had no real interest in elevating anyone philosophically, in the principles of yoga, or in becoming an independent and realized brahmana. It actually served their mundane and utilitarian purposes far more if these inmates remained ignorant about all of these things. Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Prabhupada refers to these types of misleaders rather unkindly:
“Those are, therefore, greatly mistaken who are disposed to look forward to the amelioration of the worldly state--in any worldly sense--from the worldly success of any really spiritual movement. It is these worldly expectants who become the patrons of the mischievous race of the pseudo-teachers of religion, the Putanas, whose congenial function is to stifle the theistic disposition at the very moment of its suspected appearance. But the real theistic disposition can never be stifled by the efforts of those Putanas.”
Organized Religion by His Divine Grace Sri Srimad Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Goswami Maharaja Prabhupada (emphasis added)
Srila Prabhupada certainly wanted to see his books distributed and devotees made. He created a house in which the whole world could live so that anyone could have the association of devotees. There was a little bit of society, friendship, and love in his movement, of course, but these were all in the family of Krishna and His devotees. These were, however, only the externally manifest activities of his movement, and a small part of the overall picture. The real purpose of the International Society for Krishna Consciousness was to provide a place where no one would be misled, a facility for anyone to become a pure devotee of Krishna:
“You cannot judge a movement simply by the number of its followers. If one man is genuine, then the movement is successful. It is not a question of quantity, but quality.”
(Science of Self Realization, Ch. 2, "Choosing a Spiritual Master-Saints & Swindlers")
“Ekas candras tamo hanti na ca tarah sahasrasah. If we can, I mean to say, raise one person to Krishna consciousness, that means we have successfully preached our mission. One moon is better than millions of stars.”
(Hare Krishna Press Release from Los Angeles on December 22, 1968)
It was only the brahmanas who had spent their time trying to become learned in the siddhanta--and saw service as an opportunity to control the mind--who were not devastated by cognitive dissonance when the movement began to crumble. Since they never accepted the Zonal Acaryas, they had expected that, sooner or later, the chickens were going to come home to roost. Those who were absorbed in society, friendship, and love were stolen from Krishna by the Zonal Acaryas; they were easy targets. They were like bowling pins that had been set up by previous indoctrination, and they are the ones who have populated the abovementioned three deviant factions.
siddhanta baliya citte na kara alasa iha haite krsna lage sudrdha manasa
”A sincere student should not neglect the discussion of such conclusions, considering them controversial, for such discussions strengthen the mind. Thus one's mind becomes attached to Sri Krsna.”
(Caitanya-caritamrta Adi, 2.117)
“You should be always alert in understanding the sastric conclusions that will help you, otherwise we can be misled by bogus philosophies."
(Srila Prabhupada Letter to Ayodhyapati from Vrindaban, Sept. 22, 1976) (emphasis added)
Encouragement Is Not Verification
“The transcendental symptoms of ecstasy certainly are auspicious, but they are not for advertising to others. One should not advertise directly or indirectly that one is feeling like this. They should be checked. Otherwise one will gradually become sahajiya or one who takes spiritual advancement as something materially manifest.”
(Letter to Makhanlal from Los Angeles on June 3, 1970) (emphasis added)
The Zonal Acaryas were never very concerned with the finer points of the philosophy. Although one of them could be called a scholar of some kind, they did not base their takeover on the strength of any kind of brahminical consensus within the movement; it was pretty much an act of raw power: One might say it was “ksatriya-like.” It was also their clumsy “shoot the moon” appointment of themselves to uttama adhikari, a devotee on the highest level, that later got them into all kinds of trouble.
Philosophical subtleties played a much bigger role in what came after their horrible reign, however. One of the most prominent “reforms” of the movement was to bring the “gurus” down from the level of extreme pretence to something more believable, a little less pretentious. It is still a common misconception that the “gurus” are (or were) madhyams, devotees on the middle level. Of course, this misconception allows disciples to still see their previously adored one on the highest level (to entertain their own fantasies), since it is well-known that even an uttama devotee must act on the middle level in order to preach to the general public and the neophytes.
vaco vegam manasah krodha-vegam
jihva-vegam udaropastha-vegam
etan vegan yo visaheta dhirah
sarvam apimam prthivim sa sisyat
“A sober person who can tolerate the urge to speak, the mind's demands, the actions of anger and the urges of the tongue, belly and genitals is qualified to make disciples all over the world.”
(Nectar of Instruction, Verse One)
This verse from Upadesamrita by Srila Rupa Goswami has been repeatedly cited by corporate ISKCON authorities to justify their new arrangement. Because the devotee being described in the verse is in a condition of simply being able to “tolerate” his material desires, there appears to be no requirement by Srila Rupa Goswami here that the genuine guru must always be on a realized level. It is quite easy to falsely conclude that this verse is describing a devotee who is merely following the four rules and regulations. A more thorough study of the verse, however, will discover that the word dhira is being used:
“Those who are dhira -- dhira means sober, thoughtful -- they are not bewildered. But those who are not dhira, adhira . . . There are two classes of men: dhira and adhira. Dhira means one who is spiritually situated. He is called dhira or brahma-bhutah prasannatma, dhira.”
(Lecture on Sri Caitanya-caritamrta, Madhya-lila 20.101-104 -- Bombay, November 3, 1975) (emphasis added)
Here Srila Prabhupada definitively states that someone who is dhira is brahma-bhuta. In other words, the dhira devotee has already realized the brahman conception of the Absolute Truth. The qualities of the dhira devotee are further elaborated in this verse:
brahma-bhutah prasannatma
na socati na kanksati
samah sarvesu bhutesu
mad-bhaktim labhate param
“One who is thus transcendentally situated at once realizes the Supreme Brahman. He never laments nor desires to have anything: he is equally disposed to every living entity. In that state he attains pure devotional service unto Me.”
(Bhagavad-gita, 18.54)
There is another quote from the purport of The Nectar of Instruction, Verse Five, that is used by corporate ISKCON to justify its new and improved “initiation” arrangement:
“One should not become a spiritual master unless he has attained the platform of uttama-adhikari. A neophyte Vaishnava or a Vaishnava situated on the intermediate platform can also accept disciples, but such disciples must be on the same platform, and it should be understood that they cannot advance very well toward the ultimate goal of life under his insufficient guidance. Therefore a disciple should be careful to accept an uttama-adhikari as a spiritual master.”
(The Nectar of Instruction, Text 5, purport)
Although there is allowance in this quote for devotees on the lowest and middle levels to accept disciples, Srila Prabhupada offers no shortage of caution to any prospective disciples even considering this for themselves. As he said in May of 1977: “But by my order.” The type of neophyte being described here is clearly one who is on the highest level of that platform - anartha nivritti. It is at the next level of firm faith, or nistha, wherein one reaches the middle, or madhyama, platform:
adau sraddha tatah sadhu-
sango 'tha bhajana-kriya
tato 'nartha-nivrttih syat
tato nistha rucis tatah
athasaktis tato bhavas
tatah premabhyudancati
sadhakanam ayam premnah
pradurbhave bhavet kramah
"In the beginning, one must have a preliminary desire for self-realization. This will bring one to the stage of trying to associate with persons who are spiritually elevated. In the next stage one becomes initiated by an elevated spiritual master, and under his instruction the neophyte devotee begins the process of devotional service. By execution of devotional service under the guidance of the spiritual master, one becomes free from all material attachment, attains steadiness in self-realization, and acquires a taste for hearing about the Absolute Personality of Godhead, Sri Krsna. This taste leads one further forward to attachment for Krsna consciousness, which is matured in bhava, or the preliminary stage of transcendental love of God. Real love for God is called prema, the highest perfectional stage of life."
(Bhakti-rasamrta-sindhu, 1.4.15-16) (emphasis added)
Any neophyte who acts as guru must be an ideal man; he cannot act badly or require any kind of “reform.”
“Actually, a guru cannot be bad, for if someone is bad, he cannot be a guru.”
(The Science of Self Realization, Chapter Two, Choosing a Spiritual Master - "Saints and Swindlers”)
Anartha nivritti is translated as “disappearance of all unwanted contamination.” There are many places where Srila Prabhupada more or less equates this state with following the four regulations of no meat eating, intoxication, gambling, or illicit sex. Dealing with Westerners who were accustomed to these things from an early age, His Divine Grace used every opportunity to emphasize the need for these restrictions to be followed. Certainly following the four rules and regs is included in becoming free from unwanted contamination, but to conclude that this is all that is required to come to this stage of the platform is neither good logic nor honest. A sincere person will see that other things must be necessary; there are many of them and they certainly are necessary. In this regard, we see in the above translation to Bhakti-rasamrta-sindhu (1.4.15-16) that Srila Prabhupada has used the phrase “one becomes free from all material attachment.” (emphasis added)
We also find this verse by Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Prabhupada:
siddhanta-alasa jana anartha to’ chade na
jade krsna bhrama kori’ krsna-seva kore na
“One who is lazy in properly understanding the Vaishnava philosophical conclusions can never become free from anarthas, the unwanted bad habits and philosophical misconceptions that impede devotional service.”
(Prakrta Rasa Sata Dusini by Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Prabhupada, 28)
“The Lord was very pleased with those who could cleanse the temple by taking out undesirable things accumulated within. This is called anartha-nivrtti, cleansing the heart of all unwanted things.”
(Purport to Sri Caitanya-caritamrta, Madhya 12.135) (emphasis added)
“As one cultivates and acquires knowledge about the goal of bhakti, the various stages of bhava and love of Krsna, problems may arise. The process of becoming free of these problems is known as anartha-nivrtti (the removal of unwanted elements).”
(Introduction to Prakrta-rasa Sata-dusini by Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saravati Prabhupada)
Here a much more exalted requirement is being described. This devotee is no longer under philosophical misconceptions and certainly does not speak or act upon material emotions. He does not offend other Vaishnavas. These stricter, more scientific understandings of our philosophy get in the way of the ambitions and managerial schemes of the current leaders, such as those of corporate ISKCON. These men are misleading their followers when they dumb down such key philosophical terms as anartha nivritti to supposedly the mere following of four rules and regulations. This is one of the ways in which they are falsely able to give the impression that they are “gurus” or even emergent madhyam-adhikaris.
The genuine madhyam-adhikari is one who has surpassed the level of anartha-nivritti and has come to the level of nistha or firm faith. As described above, he is brahma-bhuta, self-realized in brahman:
“The devotee in the second stage, the madhyama-adhikari, is completely aware of the sastric conclusion and has firm faith in his guru and the Lord.”
(Purport to Sri Caitanya-caritamrta, Adi 7.51) (emphases added)
The genuine madhyam is also included in a key verse from Bhagavad-gita: He is at least brahma bhuta, self-realized in brahman:
tad viddhi pranipatena
pariprasnena sevaya
upadeksyanti te jnanam
jnaninas tattva-darsinah
“Just try to learn the truth by approaching a spiritual master. Inquire from him submissively and render service unto him. The self-realized soul can impart knowledge unto you because he has seen the truth.”
(Bhagavad-gita 4.34)
Here the words tattva-darsinah refers to “one who has seen the truth.” That truth (tattva) is elaborated in Srimad Bhagavatam:
vadanti tat tattva-vidas
tattvam yaj jnanam advayam
brahmeti paramatmeti
bhagavan iti sabdyate
“Learned transcendentalists who know the Absolute Truth call this non-dual substance Brahman, Paramatma or Bhagavan.”
(Srimad Bhagavatam, 1.2.11)
This confirms that the genuine madhyam-adhikari is a realized soul; he is not an ordinary man. As the next verse describes, he is brahma-nistham, fixed in brahman:
tad-vijnanartham sa gurum evabhigacchet
samit-panih srotriyam brahma-nistham
(Mundaka Upanisad, 1.2.12
"’The genuine guru is well versed in the scriptures and Vedic knowledge, and he is completely dependent on Brahman.’ He should know what brahman is and how to become situated in brahman.”
(The Science of Self Realization, 2a: What Is a Guru?)
Misconception is due to misunderstanding. Another key misconception held by most of those who have been indoctrinated by the leaders of corporate ISKCON is that a siksa guru is merely someone who repeats the philosophy. Corporate ISKCON has utilized this false idea to create the impression that its society is authorized. Kailasa Candra dasa has written several articles on the exalted qualities of the siksa guru and has supplied numerous quotes where such an instructing spiritual master is described as being on the same platform as the diksa guru. (See A Closer Look At Siksa-Guru and Divine Mercy, Sacred Tradition, And Imitation)
“The initiating and instructing spiritual masters are equal and identical manifestations of Krsna , although they have different dealings .”
(Sri Caitanya-caritamrita Adi 1.34, purport) (emphases added).
“Therefore, there is no difference between siksa-guru and diksa-guru . . .”
(Room conversation in Bhubanesva on Jan. 31, 1977) (emphasis added).
“According to sastric injunctions, there is no difference between siksa-guru and diksa-guru , and generally the siksa-guru later on becomes the diksa-guru.”
(Srimad-bhagavatam, 4.12.32, purport) (emphasis added).
There are also a number of places in room conversations and lectures where Srila Prabhupada made statements that were clearly meant to encourage his neophyte disciples. Sometimes, he would describe how a devotee’s performance of a vidhi-marga service, such as making garlands every day, was like asakti or the advanced stage of attachment.
The serious student of bhakti will try to understand such encouraging statements within the overall context of the philosophy and the full presentation of it made by His Divine Grace. There certainly are quotes (that can be singled out) which apparently give support to the cheap idea of a siksa guru (or diksa guru) being anyone who repeats the philosophy to some extent. Similarly, there are a number of quotes leading one to think that anartha-nivritti means just following the four rules and regs. Statements by the guru meant to provide encouragement or to make an illustration do not necessarily define conclusive truth. We should make a more thorough study before drawing any cheap conclusions. It is a great mistake to assume that the easiest interpretation is always the correct one:
“Sahajiya . . . Sahaj means easy, easy-going.”
(Conversation on May 1, 1974)
“. . . . actually, we do not want to create a group of prakrta-sahajiya, or devotees who do not know the science of Krishna and do not know the science of devotion but simply worship the Deity with no depth of knowledge.”
Srila Prabhupada Letter to Syamasundara from New Vrindaban on June 3, 1969)
“A Very Human Story”
In enumerating the background misconceptions that have provided fertile soil for what is now taking place, it would be completely remiss to not mention the so-called “Srila Prabhupada Lilamrita.” This contaminated, sometimes extremely mundane, depiction of the Sampradaya Acarya only served to make the Zonal Acaryas look better than they were, supposedly by comparison to Prabhupada. Since every effort was made to make them appear as elevated as possible, the only other means that could be utilized was to depict Srila Prabhupada as just like them. Let us consider this verse from the Padma Purana:
arcye visnau sila-dhir gurusu nara-matir vaisnave jati-buddhir
visnor va vaisnavanam kali-mala-mathane pada-tirthe 'mbu-buddhih
sri-visnor namni mantre sakala-kalusa-he sabda-samanya-buddhir
visnau sarvesvarese tad-itara-sama-dhir yasya va naraki sah
"One who thinks the Deity in the temple to be made of wood or stone, who thinks of the spiritual master in the disciplic succession as an ordinary man, who thinks the Vaisnava in the Acyuta-gotra to belong to a certain caste or creed or who thinks of caranamrta or Ganges water as ordinary water is taken to be a resident of hell."
(emphases added)
Now let us consider this passage from “Lilamrita,” where Srila Prabhupada is described as lower than a homeless person:
"Suddenly, he was as homeless as any derelict on the street. In fact, many of them, with their long-time berths in flophouses, were more secure than he. They were ruined, but settled . . . If he couldn't go to the loft, he had no place."
Srila Prabhupada-lilamrita, Vol. 2, Ch. 6, pg. 96.
It is no wonder that the author of this book is now a bewildered person who has recently written (Sanitorium) a book depicting illicit sex. Neither is it any kind of accident that practically every devotee who populated the three deviant cults had previously read the “Lilamrita” and thought it to be “nectar.” As the quote from Padma Purana makes clear, that “nectar” was laced with the poison of gurv-aparadha.
“The most grievous type of vaisnava-aparadha is called gurv-aparadha, which refers to offenses at the lotus feet of the spiritual master. In the chanting of the holy name of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, this gurv-aparadha is considered the most grievous offense. Guror avajna sruti-sastra-nindanam (Padma Purana).”
(Purport to Srimad Bhagavatam, 4.21.37)
Continuing the Wrong Tradition
“We will establish hundreds of temples, and they will all be very opulent. But if we do not follow the instruction of the Spiritual Master, they will just be show-bottle. Do you know what show-bottle means? It means colored water in a bottle which looks just like medicine, but which, when you take it, does not work.”
(Room Conversation, NY, July, 1970)
It is not difficult to look at the current state of the fabricated so-called “ISKCON” and conclude that it is practicing a form of sahajiyism. Many temples are run by skeleton crews and some others by are run by Hindu non-devotees. The practices of even the relatively prosperous ones, in regard to catering to the local Hindu communities, can be shown to contradict a number of Srila Prabhupada’s instructions:
"Uninitiated couples cannot be married by us. We shall not take the responsibility of an ordinary marriage-maker. Our practice is to help devotees for advancing in Krsna consciousness."
(Letter to Jaya Gopal, January 11, 1970)
"As a matter of fact, we should not allow anyone to hold any function in our temple other than Vaisnava principle"
(Letter to Hansadutta, October 10, 1968)
When we study how cognitive dissonance affected the followers of Srila Prabhupada after his disappearance, it is easy to see that the fabricated so-called “ISKCON” was decimated in order to populate the other two factions, the Neo-Gaudiya matha and the rittviks. The strength of corporate ISKCON has always been its control over the temples and the many devotees who mistakenly believe that the institution is automatically and intrinsically connected to Srila Prabhupada. The GBC will do practically anything to maintain this political advantage, and that has clearly included watering down so many strictures given by His Divine Grace. All in all, the thing is now run just like a mundane Western church.
“If you remain on the spiritual platform, if you try, then it will increase. Anandambudhi-vardhanam. It will increase. As soon as there is any contemplation of sense gratification, then the spirit will be lost. Then instead of Christianity, it will be ‘Churchianity,’ officially going to the church, doing nothing, and gradually nobody will go.”
(Morning Walk in April 7, 1975 at Mayapur)
“For the sake of attracting larger numbers of followers, true devotees never abandon the correct systematic practices of devotional service.”
(Prakrta Rasa Sata Dusini by Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Prabhupada, 56)
The GBC is now primarily concerned with generating money and attracting members. For all practical purposes, the heavy-handed, “my way or the highway” management is now more or less a thing of the past; it just cost too many members. Pujaris, managers, and others are now often paid salaries. Sometimes they are brought in from India or Poland, so that their wages can be kept as low as possible. On the whole, there has also been a major move towards making the institution more appealing to the Western “demon-cratic” mindset; the recent decision to allow female “gurus” is evidence.
As many devotees have left corporate ISKCON, those that have remained have only become more deeply immersed in the previously described “test” mentality. They sometimes even see themselves “going down with the ship” in order to prove their dedication to what they only imagine is Srila Prabhupada’s movement.
At this late stage, however, the additional contradictions and complications have only made the GBC juggling act more difficult. Currently, only one of the original eleven Zonal Acaryas is regarded as “a bona fide guru” by most of the bewildered congregation. The others, who have fallen in the public and devotee eye, naturally still claim and exploit many disciples nevertheless; some of these disciples have become GBC’s in their own right. To demand that such big managers should now be forced to accept re-initiation (according to the former standard) would mean loss of face--and a certain decline in their managerial effectiveness; they may even leave the congregation for another cult. The previous “re-initiation” mandate is clearly still in the way of today’s “Churchianity” public relations model.
There is sometimes a feeble comparison of these senior managers to Sri Ramanujacarya, in terms of how he (Ramanuja) was more advanced than his guru; these new people can rationalize anything. Such rationalizations, however, will not receive general acceptance beyond the institution; almost everyone else recognizes that the emperor is actually naked. The objective devotee can easily see that not forcing non-Prabhupada “initiates” with influence to accept re-initiation just creates another covert form of rittvik.
The formal rittvik faction is de-jure rittvik, where Srila Prabhupada is legislated as the “diksa guru” for everyone. The current GBC standard, however, creates a de-facto rittvik system, where either the GBC or Srila Prabhupada functions as the default authority for those whose so-called gurus have fallen in the public eye. Unscrupulous types who want to break free from the GBC but work their way up the corporate ladder, by adopting de-jure rittvik, are quick to point this out.
Of the thirteen classic varieties of sahajiyism originally described by Srila Bhaktivinode Thakura, the one that bears the greatest resemblance to corporate ISKCON, is jati-goswami. Opponents may argue that in corporate ISKCON there are no hereditary goswamis. However, the word “jata” also means group. An explanation of this has been nicely presented by Kailasa Candra dasa in this YouTube audio/video: "Getting Back To Our Roots: Part 4".
In the case of corporate ISKCON, the “group” is the GBC. It is the GBC that is the real (de-facto) authority of the institution. They are above the so-called gurus in that they approve of who will, and who will cease to, occupy the post. This should be clear proof to any objective person that the so-called gurus are just that, so-called. A truly realized madhyam guru, what to speak of the fully empowered Vaishnava mahabhagavat, has absolutely no need to submit himself to a group of power-obsessed conditioned souls like the GBC. To do so would constitute, in and of itself, immediate falldown.
Publicly, there has always been a kind of murkiness on the issue of whether the GBC is the authority over the individual “gurus.” To state in resolutions that the GBC is the highest spiritual authority is not parampara philosophy - it creates the type of sahajiya deviation described here. It should be clear to anyone familiar with GBC standard operating procedures, however, its movement is a new kind of sahajiyism: Neo jata-gosani.
One of the worst abuses of the Zonal Acaryas was their “might makes right” Machiavellian dominance. When they first took over in 1978, there was no question in anyone’s mind that each “acarya” was absolute authority for his disciples and followers. However, when disciplinary actions became necessary, contradictions became immediately apparent. During one such incident, I asked the scholar of the zonals, “Who is the authority for the individual disciple here: His ‘guru’ or the GBC?” The scholar unequivocally answered “the GBC.” Later, the chastised but determined zonals fought back, armed with a weapon from Swami B.R. Sridhara that, in essence, claimed that the disciplinary action the GBC had taken against them was “a death blow to the disciples.” I again asked this “scholar” the same question. His new answer was: “I don’t know.”
One can easily make a persuasive presentation that the whole Zonal Acarya charade of 1978 was the result of all the other GBCs bowing to the Machiavellian audacity of their most powerful member at that time, Kirtanananda. He started acting like an uttama adhikari and “initiating” less than two weeks after Srila Prabhupada’s disappearance. This element of raw power still remains very prominent in the GBC, in the sense that those “gurus” with the most disciples and temples have a lot more “authority” than those who don’t. Kirtanananda’s excommunication and eventual exile (by the “reform movement”) irrevocably established that remaining in good graces with the GBC, especially as an “initiating guru,” was absolutely dependent upon not doing anything which caused it to roll over you.
Although the current political situation in the GBC still carries a bit of the old Zonal Acarya odor, the “reform movement” has today left its indelible mark. As described previously, this transformation was made necessary in order to retain the faith of as many as possible after the murder of Sulocana prabhu.
Certainly there are many differences in detail between classic jati-gosani sahajiyism and corporate ISKCON. However, it is in the acceptance of a certain group of conditioned souls--as allegedly being automatically and intrinsically linked to God--that we find the common principle. What corporate ISKCON practices, therefore, might best be termed “neo jata-gosani” sahajiyism. Ecclesiastical arrangements were intrinsic to the classic model and are intrinsic to this new one; this has been rejected by both Srila Prabhupada and Srila Jiva Goswami:
"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.”
(Sri Chaitanya-caritamrita, Adi, 1.35, purport) (emphasis added)
As described in a previous section, regardless of what level he is on, the genuine guru is free from all anarthas; this includes all philosophical misconceptions; this is the sine quo non. He certainly does not advocate that a group of conditioned souls (such as the GBC) can be authority is regard to voting, vetoing, or dictating who is guru. The fact that all corporate ISKCON “gurus” preach this is clear indication that ABSOLUTELY NONE of them is any kind of bona fide spiritual master. This is the anartha they all share; it is an institutional anartha. There is, therefore, no question of one of them “falling.” They are already fallen simply by virtue of accepting the vote, veto, or appointment (in queue) of the GBC.
Any talk about sastra, logic, or siddhanta is meaningless to those who will never allow themselves to even consider that corporate ISKCON is not automatically linked with Srila Prabhupada. This is what makes them sahajiyas, however. No one with such meager discrimination, no one this determined to ignore real facts, can ever be considered a brahmana--not according to the real meaning of the term.
“Fortunate means everyone has got his discretion. So one who has the fortune to discriminate, then he can understand Krishna very easily.”
(Srimad-Bhagavatam 6.1.15-Lecture in London on July 30, 1971)
Neo-Kartabhaja
The rittviks also practice an ecclesiastical form of so-called Krishna consciousness, although it is certainly looser. Everyone supposedly gets Srila Prabhupada as his or her initiating guru. Because there is absolutely no sastric verification for the rittvik dispensation, it should be clear that accepting “diksa” from Srila Prabhupada at the current time is also not sanctioned “in terms of the sastric injunctions.” (c.f., Cc. Adi 1.35)
The advocates of rittvik like to say that Srila Prabhupada was the shaktyavesa avatar, the Sampradaya Acarya, and that he could, therefore, override all of the previous Vaishnava traditions and sastra regarding initiation. This is not, however, confirmed by Srila Prabhupada:
"One should accept a thing as genuine by studying the words of saintly people, the spiritual master and sastra. The actual center is sastra, the revealed scripture. If a spiritual master does not speak according to revealed scripture, he is not to be accepted. Similarly, if a saintly person does not speak according to the sastra, he is not a saintly person. Sastrais the center for all."
(Sri Caitanya-caritamrta, Madhya 20.352, purport) (emphasis added)
The classic sahajiya group known as kartabhaja actually takes this type of deification of the spiritual master to its ultimate end by saying that he is identical with God. Their philosophy has therefore been termed “guruvada.“ One of the more modern branches of kartabhaja was started in Bangladesh and centered around one Anukul Chandra, who was born 120 years ago. He also supposedly accepted disciples after his disappearance through “initiations” performed by “ritwiks.”
This has been nicely presented by Kailasa Candra dasa in another YouTube video, "Guru and Disciple: Part 3".
Although the classic kartabhaja sect is known for its tantric sex debauchery--something that is not associated with today’s rittvik faction--the similarity of the two cults in regard to their “initiations” makes it very easy to know that the current rittvik faction is “neo-kartabhaja” sahajiyism. In addition, Swami B.R. Sridhara ordered his followers to institute a kind of rittvik system of “initiation” after his departure:
"With this I transfer these beads; from now he [Govinda Maharaja] will do so on my behalf as ritvik. The ritvik system is already involved both here and in the foreign land. The ritvik is the representative, so if you want to take [initiation] from me and you take from his hand then it will be as well and as good as taking from me.
In the maha mandal [a Neo-Gaudiya group] Sagar Maharaja [formerly Akshayananda Swami] and many others, they are also ritviks of Swami Maharaja [Srila Prabhupada] and also myself and they may do so. But in this Math he, Govinda Maharaja will be the representative. Henceforth he will represent me in this affair beginning from today's function.
Now I shall go from here [depart the material world], he will do the necessary on my behalf. He will give Hari Nama diksa, sanyasa and everything."
(From Sermons Of The Guardian Of Devotion)
In this quotation-and his final will and testament contained a similar statement--Swami B.R. Sridhar authorized one of his own senior men, as well as some refugees from corporate ISKCON, to perform these “initiations” on his behalf. Swami B.R. Sridhara was apparently under the mistaken impression that Srila Prabhupada had instituted a rittvik process in corporate ISKCON. However, please note that this was not his view when he was advising the Zonal Acaryas in 1978. This statement by Swami B.R. Sridhara, just before his departure in August of 1988, was previous to the manifestation of the current rittvik faction, which took place in 1989. Some of them like to use this in an attempt to prove that a rittvik system is what is “wise” at the current time--as if disciplic law is now radically changed. The practice of this conception-to the degree that they believe in it, preach in this way, and employ it-could also group the current followers of Swami B.R. Sridhara in the Neo-Kartabhaja sect of sahajiyism.
“Real law means there is no change. Just like day and night, it is coming. The fortnight, the dark period and the light period, it is coming for millions and millions and time immemorial. The same law is going, going on. You cannot change. So as soon as you change, that means it is imperfect.”
(Lecture on Srimad-Bhagavatam 1.3.15 in Los Angeles, September 20, 1972)
“Regular” Sahajiyism
Most of Srila Prabhupada’s statements about sahajiyas concern those who imitate Lord Krishna’s pastimes with the gopis or who discuss the intimate pastimes of Sri Sri Radha Krishna according to their materially contaminated desires and sensual predilections.
There is one leader of the Neo-Gaudiya matha who regularly describes these intimate pastimes in assemblies that include neophytes. This practice was condemned by Srila Prabhupada and has never been part of the strict Gaudiya tradition coming down from Lord Chaitanya Mahaprabhu. We find these statements in this regard:
“An ordinary person cannot understand the transcendental ecstasies in the mode of Srimati Radharani. Unfit persons who try to understand them are perverted into the sahajiya, baula and other sampradayas. Thus the teachings are perverted.”
(Sri Chaitanya Caritamrita, Madhya 2.83, purport)
“The conditioned jiva who still has anarthas should hear and chant about the pastimes of Lord Gauranga and the childhood pastimes of Krsna. If (there is) the unqualified attempt to hear and speak about the confidential pastimes of Sri Sri Radha-Krsna, it will not bring auspiciousness to them, rather it will bring misfortune.”
(Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Goswami, Sri Srila Prabhupader Upadesamrita)
“Without coming to the perfectional stage, if anyone tries to understand the Gopis, he becomes a sahajiya.”
(Letter to Visvambhara from Ahmedabad on December 14, 1972)
End of Part 2
Back to Part One
Other writings by the Vaishnava Foundation
