Avidya or Balavidya?
BY: JANMASTAMI DAS
Sep 10, WEST VIRGINIA, USA (SUN) — The fallacious spiritual speculation put forth in Balavidya prabhu's recent posting raises more questions than it purports to put to rest. Revisionist history, as inventively interesting as it is spiritually detrimental, may serve the financial interests of these merchants of spiritual commerce, but is much less apt to bring spiritual success.
Bhaktivinoda Thakur has warned us that we are as likely to be cheated in the marketplace of The Holy Name as we are in any other marketplace, and the onus is on the buyer to beware. While this appears to be Balavidya prabhu's primary thesis, his conclusions serve the opposite purpose for those inquiring, hence the apparent need to continue debate on such subject matter, threadbare, if possible. This debate, "How does Srila Prabhupada want ISKCON run in His Absence?", although thirty years late in coming, will only be beneficial for the True ISKCON. Anything that may have masqueraded as
Srila Prabhupada's will, for however many weeks or months, will not stand the test of time and the scrutiny of Vaisnava discussion. It is also an effective way of purging the movement of the anartha elements.
First, a number of points of agreement. His Gita verse is quite on point. Even more so is Srila Prabhupada's purport, which Balavidya prabhu has neglected to include, but which we include here:
Bhagavad-gita 16:23 Purport:
"As described before, the sastra-vidhi, or the direction of the sastra, is given to the different castes and orders of human society. Everyone is expected to follow these rules and regulations. If one does not follow them and acts whimsically according to his lust, greed and desire, then he never will be perfect in his life. In other words, a man may theoretically know all these things, but if he does not apply them in his own life, then he is to be known as the lowest of mankind. In the human form of life, a living entity is expected to be sane and to follow the regulations given for elevating his life to the highest platform, but if he does not follow them, then he degrades himself. But even if he follows the rules and regulations and moral principles and ultimately does not come to the stage of understanding the Supreme Lord, then all his knowledge becomes spoiled. Therefore one should gradually raise himself to the platform of Krsna consciousness and devotional service; it is then and there that he can attain the highest perfectional stage, not otherwise.
The word kama-karatah is very significant. A person who knowingly violates the rules acts in lust. He knows that this is forbidden,
still he acts. This is called acting whimsically. He knows that this should be done, but still he does not do it; therefore he is called whimsical. Such persons are destined to be condemned by the Supreme Lord. Such persons cannot have the perfection which is meant for the human life. The human life is especially meant for purifying one's
existence, and one who does not follow the rules and regulations cannot purify himself, nor can he attain the real stage of happiness."
The hypocritical nature of a pretender is herein identified as the all-devouring undoing that will eventually reveal such charlatans, much to their dismay, as well as that of their followers. Having been "a follower" for a number of years of an entire hierarchy of such pretenders, all as per the instructions of the ruling GBC of the day, we can hardly find lasting comfort in the current scheme of the month, regardless the names of the current cadre of candidates to replace Srila Prabhupada. Offenses not intended to any individual prabhus, the authorization for such schemes does not exist and therefore, their failure is an absolute certainty. "Step down or falldown!" it has been said, but the stark reality of
that statement has apparently not yet dawned on those several hundred individuals who felt that they could simultaneously hold the dual positions of being both "a member in good standing of ISKCON" and "a diksa guru, initiating their own, not Srila Prabhupada's disciples". Such individuals were forced to the July 9th letter to attempt to justify their positions as successor gurus, lest they be accused of "jumping over" all the other acaryas in the Sampradaya by going directly to Lord Caitanya when quoting the verse: "Everyone, on My order, become guru!"
As Balavidya prabhu has pointed out:
"If we don't properly understand Srila Prabhupada's instruction and then comply, then how can we be considered qualified to continue the disciplic succession?" and "one who understands his guru's order, the same parampara, he can become guru." Logically, the converse of the latter statement, "one who does not understand the instructions of his own guru, he cannot become Guru", must be, and also is, a true statement. This then is the undoing of those not providing more specific instruction from Srila Prabhupada, post July 9th Letter, regarding their authorization for those lofty perches they have aspired to, regardless how noble their initial intentions may have been.
"Srila Prabhupada is saving the entire universe; I, too, shall save the entire universe." How pompous!
Balavidya prabhu has further said:
"Actually, we should try to understand the mood of the time and try to understand the events from that that perspective."
We do and we have, and therefore we must take serious exception to any number of his conclusions, unsupported as they are by his scriptural inclusions, not the least of which include these:
Firstly, he said "it was not a forgone conclusion that Srila Prabhupada was going to leave very soon." Fact is, Srila Prabhupada often said that "My allotted time, three score and ten years, has already come". Many other statements support this, not Balavidya prabhu's
position.
Secondly he stated, "if Srila Prabhupada had wanted the letter to be an absolute document meant to extend rtvik initiation beyond his departure, he would have made that perfectly clear." Many of us feel Srila Prabhupada did just that.
Next he stated: "Thirdly, if we are accept the assertion of the "posthumous rtvik" camp, then we must put aside everything that Srila Prabhupada had taught us previously, and even the order of Supreme Lord Sri Caitanya, "Everyone, on My order, become guru!"
Finally, drawn from these absurd allegations, "We may be assured that ISKCON will only show its true potential when the two whimsical concoctions of GBC guru-by-vote-Appointment/no objection and rtvik-posthumous-diksa-guru that have plagued the
society with bitter contention and philosophical deviation since November 1977 are kicked far away and replaced with the scriptural injunctions, As They Are."
Many find the "as they are" Gita to be a significant portion of the problem. "These are the changes; take them or leave ISKCON" and many have left for that very reason. This, coupled with the tacit admission "Accepting a guru superficially on the basis of an institutional rubber-stamp is pure foolishness. And the GBC, to their discredit, have created the dynamics for such foolishness within ISKCON." are exactly the nature of the complaint.
Balavidya prabhu's request that we resubmit ourselves to whomsoever it may be, institution or individual, that formerly was "infallible in all spiritual matters", that has since had a period where that infallibility did not exist, and now they would want us to place our faith, trust and spiritual lives in the hands of these, now, again, "pure devotee in all matters spiritual" individuals, this proposal is less than ludicrous, it is insulting. That is one opinion.
