What's the Matter with the Mad Hatter?
BY: ROCANA DASA
Sep 16, 2011 — CANADA (SUN) — Beginning in May of this year, our Sun readers have been presented with nearly a dozen articles inspired by the topic of Mahavishnu Swami's activities, as promoted by Parasuram dasa in lyrical poetic offerings like "Mahavishnu Swami and Hat Cit Ananda" and other video idylls. The pastimes of a few other sannyasis, notably Bhaktimarg and Prahladananda Swamis, have also come up in this lengthy discussion. Along with Parasuram prabhu's iambic contributions, we have heard from various devotees on the topic of Hatha Yoga in ISKCON, Bhaktimarg's walk-abouts, and the general state of sannyasa in ISKCON. Most recently we heard from Bhakta Matty, writing in support of Parasuram prabhu's selfless service to the UK yatra.
Bhakta Matty's comments in "Give Credit Where Credit's Due" came a day after Parasuram's latest editorial, "Go Easy on the Criticism". Bhakta Matty kindly provided all of us with a glimpse into Parasuram prabhu's life, which he depicts as a glorious existence serving Srila Prabhupada. As Bhakta Matty pointed out in his opening statement, throughout this discussion my criticism has been directed towards ISKCON swamis, not grihastas like Parasuram das:
"While I appreciate that your main focus of criticism was not aimed at Parasuram prabhu, nonetheless, to save any confusion in the future as to who does what in the U.K. Yatra, I would just like to point out a few facts about Parasuram prabhu."
I have gone to some effort to make a very clear distinction in my articles between activities engaged in by householders, and activities that are suitable (or not) for sannyasis to engage in. In fact, I think it's fair to say that I have contributed to Parasuram prabhu's legacy by publishing many of his articles and reports informing the public of the great preaching activities he is engaged in. Nonetheless, Bhakta Matty took me to task on Parasuram's behalf:
"So please cut the guy some slack if he has an occasional holiday or "Yamuna Adventure". At least his holidays still consist of preaching Krsna consciousness instead of maybe relaxing on some secluded island in the Bahamas or somewhere."
Of course, in my reply article to "Yamuna Adventure", entitled "Joyriding", I didn't even mention Parasuram das's name. I focused entirely on the joyriding Swami – not on grihastas having a holiday. What Bhakta Matty was really taking exception to were comments I made several months later, in "Party Line, or Party Time?" Matty wrote:
"For any devotee its always easy to find some service that they are most comfortable with and stick to it no matter how hard they work. As it is also very easy to be an armchair critic. Parasuram prabhu always pushes the envelope, he is the one who never gives up and will always go the extra mile in order to please Lord Krsna, Srila Prabhupada and the devotees. In your "Party Line, or Party Time?" article you say that "Parasuram does not hold a prominent position in ISKCON". Well officially you are correct, but for those devotees who know him and even among non-devotees he is one in a million and I am sure that in the eyes of Srila Prabhupada, Parasuram prabhu's contribution to ISKCON is in recent years very, very prominent indeed.
As Srila Prabhupada said himself, "You should give credit where credit is due.'"
If Matty had read my article carefully, he might have noticed that in "Party Line, or Party Time?", as in my previous article, I again did not criticize Parasuram. Matty paints me as an 'armchair critic' who should cut Parasuram some slack, suggesting that in comparison to Parasuram, I do not push the envelope or go the extra mile to please Sri Krsna and Srila Prabhupada. He missed the point I was making, that Parasuram and Mahavishnu Swami should be held to different standards – one is an ISKCON representative and sannyasi, the other a congregational devotee and grihasta. This is not criticism, it is fact. And it was stated in "Party Line", yet again, that it was the Swami who was being criticized, not the householder. But Matty missed that point, as well as the praise of Parasuram, when I wrote:
"Since that time we've gotten further reports from Parasuram prabhu, who is himself a householder, not a diksa guru, and does not hold a prominent position in ISKCON, as far as we know. Nonetheless, he is well known as a dedicated sankirtan devotee. Through his various articles and videos, we get a glimpse of how he expresses himself through the medium of preaching Krsna consciousness, in a manner he obviously feels is suited to his own character and nature. We haven't focused critical attention on Parasuram as an individual devotee, but we have focused on one of his key associates, Mahavishnu Swami. As an official representative of ISKCON and one of Srila Prabhupada's sannyasis, Mahavishnu Swami's activities are of interest to us, and are open to public discussion in the Sun."
If one refers to the list of articles below, which includes links to most of the editorials that have been submitted on the 'Joyriding' thread, they will note a large gap in the timeline. The first six articles were published in May 2011, then a gap, to the first of several August-September articles. Why the gap, you might wonder?
We wanted to continue this discussion back in May, particularly to address the issues raised about Prahladananda and Bhaktimarg Swamis. After his "Joy Riding for Krishna" article, Parasuram das submitted one further article in defense of Mahavishnu Swami that went unpublished, because we didn't have time to rebut it. We felt that it mis-represented the philosophy regarding sannyasa standards, thus we weren't willing to put it up without a simultaneous rebuttal. We had some correspondence with Parasuram about this; he was cordial and agreeable about the delay.
Over the summer months, Parasuram continued to submit video reports of the UK yatra's sankirtan activities, Rathayatras, etc., which we duly published. We were a bit surprised, however, to see that Parasuram was continuing to showcase in his videos – if not even emphasize – shots of Mahavishnu Swami in his kooky hat and get-up's. At one point we wrote a personal note to Parasuram, basically asking 'What's the attraction?' Why focus on this aspect of the Swami's unorthodox presentation? In other words… what's with the hat?! Parasuram gave a one-liner answer about not criticizing the devotees he serves with, and that was fine. But he didn't let it drop there.
Parasuram didn't take the hint that if he doesn't want his friend the Swami to get negative press, perhaps he shouldn't emphasize the kooky, un-sannyasa type pastimes Maharaja likes to engage in, in the articles he submits to the Sun. Instead, Parasuram re-started this issue by submitting his August poetical statement, "Mahavishnu Swami and Hat Cit Ananda". The article was accompanied by a picture of the Swami, which we commented on in our reply article, "Party Line, or Party Time?":
"In the pictures from today's report by Parasuram, we see the Swami laying on the ground, arms and legs askew, with Lord Jagannath's face pulled down like a mask over his own face. This is no way to represent the Lord of the Universe. It is not attractive, it does not promote Lord Jagannath as the Supreme Personality of Godhead… it simply makes the Swami look like a fool. Where is the preaching value in promoting pictures such as this?
As we can see in so many of the videos provided by Parasuram das, the Swami's attitude does not approach that of a sober, serious Vaisnava sannyasi who is strictly following the principles set down by Srila Prabhupada, which of course all the previous Sampradaya Acaryas have followed. Unfortunately, such eccentric behavior opens Mahavishnu Swami to criticism. One would think that if Parasuram wishes to promote the Swami, he would take a little more care not to wave examples of his offbeat practices in the air like a great flag. A little more decorum might result in a little less criticism for his friend. Certainly, we would be happy to see fewer examples of his non-Vaisnava preaching practices propagated across the Net, as though it represents Srila Prabhupada's strict standards."
In his "Hat Cit Ananda", Parasuram offers a warm message of support for the Swami's unorthodox practices, which no doubt brought smiles to the faces of kind-hearted devotees. That's all well and good. What Parasuram did not do, however – what none of the Swami's supporters do, including the Swami himself and the GBC responsible for overseeing his preaching activities – is offer any philosophical justification for the Swami's departure from Srila Prabhupada's standards.
The issue here is not the Swami's personality, or the fact that he chooses to preach to the most fallen, or in remote places. The issue is that he chooses NOT to follow the strict standards set down by Srila Prabhupada for his sannyasis. Parasuram doesn't seem to care about what Srila Prabhupada had to say on this subject. He apparently thinks that the Swami's personal choices trump the pure devotee's instructions and standards. While he's free to think that, thankfully we don't have to join him in making that mistake. Nor are the Sun editors interested in perpetuating what we see as just another example of spiritual leaders in ISKCON who do not make an effort to uphold Srila Prabhupada's program, choosing instead to follow their own whims and mundane desires.
We would have responded immediately to Bhakta Matty if time permitted, but we've been very pressed for time around here the last few months, working on an extensive rebuttal of Rtvik-vada. So we didn't reply to Matty prabhu on the points now mentioned above. What sparked today's editorial was the latest video submission from Parasuram das, which we did not publish. Entitled "Devotee Holiday", you can see it on Dandavats.
The Scandanavian 2011 tour video is very nice, and much of it is inspiring. Parasuram's opening comment -- "If it seems like a devotee holiday, well errr, that is probably right." -- an obvious reference to the Yaumna joyriding holiday discussion, didn't go unnoticed.
The reason the Sun didn't publish this report was due to the content starting at about 8:15 into the video – a section entitled "A small bit of… funny bites". While these clips might be of interest to those who went on the trip and their friends (or other Monty Python fans), we didn't think it was the kind of message Srila Prabhupada would like to see distributed for public consumption about how his devotees relax while on Sankirtan. Instead, we invited Parasuram to submit a revised, shortened version for the Sun, which he has not done.
What inspired us to re-open this discussion from our side were the images of Mahavishnu Swami included in Parasuram's latest video short. To our mind, they illustrate and emphasize many of the points made in our past articles about how loose the Swami plays with sannyasa standards.
In this picture, we have a close-up shot of the Swami's outlandish hat. This is the paraphernalia regularly worn in public by Srila Prabhupada's senior sannyasi preacher, Mahavishnu Swami. Lord Jagannatha's beautiful face is surrounded by what appear to be plastic action figures (presumably 'characters' in the Swami's preaching stories), and Srila Prabhupada is seated next to a couple kewpie dolls. We are supposed to believe that this get-up somehow enables the Swami to impress a transcendental vibration upon the minds and hearts of the fallen conditioned souls as he delivers the Absolute Truth to them on behalf of the Sampradaya Acaryas.
In this picture, we see that the Swami's headgear wardrobe is not limited to 'fascinators' bearing images of the Supreme Personality of Godhead and His representatives. No, the Swami is also inclined to wear hats that look like something that might be worn by Diana Ross and the Supremes. Somehow, the saffron color of renunciation just doesn't stand up under the white frou-frou. Sad to say, this outfit only inspires us to wonder if Mahavishnu is yet another ISKCON Swami struggling with homosexual tendencies. It does not inspire us to wonder about Sri Krsna Chaitanya and His inconceivably transcendental sankirtana pastimes.
In the images above and below, we see Mahavishnu Swami in his 'back to nature' look. I'm sure he was thinking about Krsna as he plucked these flowers and ferns to dress up in. Who knows… perhaps the devotees were having a friendly game of Paintball after evening prasad, and the Swami was serving as Sri Decoy.
While the Swami's preaching tactics leave us scratching our heads, we are also bewildered as to why Parasuram das saw fit to submit this video content to the Sun. We thought he'd be anxious to let the contentious discussion of Mahavishnu Swami's unorthodox behaviour fade into the sunset, but instead he seems to be pushing the issue and submitting even more oddball material for publication.
While we have made an effort up to this point to not criticize Parasuram das, it seems that we now need to make the point more clearly to him: we are not interested in using the Sun as a venue to promote and encourage ISKCON's spiritual leaders to ignore and transgress Srila Prabhupada's standards and instructions. We find it offensive, and not at all humorous or inspiring. We would be far more inspired, even blissful, to receive pictures of Mahavishnu Swami dressed like a very pukka sannyasi, playing mrdanga or kartals rather than gypsy accordion; wearing a simple garland, fresh tilak and a bead bag. This we would find inspiring. This would lift our spirits, reminding us of the potency and presence of Lord Caitanya's sankirtan mission being carried forward in the mood of the most recent Sampradaya Acarya, Srila Prabhupada.
We have made it clear on several occasions now, that we take exception to some of Mahavishnu Swami's activities, which are improper for one in the renounced order of sannyasa. But not one of these points has yet been addressed by Parasuram, the Swami, or any of his supporters.
Here at the Sampradaya Sun we are also focused on our service, although that may come as a surprise to Bhakta Matty. The Sun is not simply a news site or a vehicle for armchair critics. Our underlying intentions and goals are to glorify Srila Prabhupada, to establish him as the Sampradaya Acarya, to encourage strictly following him. We regularly make these points when addressing those in prominent positions in ISKCON, such as Swamis, Gurus, GBC's and other authorities both within the institution and in the Gaudiya Matha or spin-off camps like the Rtviks. Our viewpoints are always based on this principle.
Unlike most of our critics, including recently Parasuram das, we accommodate and give our critics an opportunity to express themselves, even in criticizing our service at the Sun. Parasuram is now criticizing me for criticizing people he thinks are not worthy of criticism, like his good friend Mahavishnu Swami, Bhaktimarg Swami and Prahladananda Swami. So this is Parasuram's perspective.
As I've stated, and as Bhakta Matty also points out, Parasuram das is not an official authority within ISKCON, although he's very ISKCON friendly. Let's not forget that some authorities within ISKCON (particularly those often under scrutiny) are not happy when people representing the institution broadcast or promote themselves in the Sampradaya Sun, as Parasuram freely does. His program is dependent upon his being ISKCON friendly and he cooperates with the institution's leaders, although there have been a few occasions when even he has offered some positive criticism to the leaders, e.g., chiding them to get the transport vehicle he needed for his service back into operation.
In my service, I facilitate Parasuram. In his service, perhaps it's convenient for him to sometimes criticize me or the Sun, because it deflects any criticism he may get from certain ISKCON authorities on account of him submitting articles to the Sun. Whatever the dynamic, that's not what's important here. What's important is the issue of how ISKCON sannyasis present themselves to the public, and the potency and purity of their preaching. All this argumentation, like Bhakta Matty's article, does nothing but deflect attention from the real issue by making it look like this is all about Parasuram das, when it's not.
We continue to be concerned – and after the Scandinavia 2011 video, even more so – about how Mahavishnu Swami presents himself on Srila Prabhupada's behalf. He appears in the videos like some kind of a carnival clown, wearing funny hats, draped in nonsense paraphernalia, playing his accordion and engaging in various antics. Of course, he was doing none of these things when Srila Prabhupada was here… he wouldn't have dared to.
As I've said repeatedly, my overall focus is based on the principle: would Srila Prabhupada approve of these activities? If I don't think Srila Prabhupada would approve, then I make my points accordingly. The readers are invited to counter my points with their own arguments. Of course, neither Bhakta Matty nor Parasuram actually address any of the points I've made, what to speak of Mahavishnu Swami himself.
The Swamis that Parasuram recently defended, including Bhaktimarg and Prahladananda Swamis, don't hold a candle compared to the big deviators in ISKCON, who receive a great deal more critical coverage here in the Sun. But Parasuram chooses not to acknowledge this. The fact that he did not mention these big deviators leaves me to believe that he agrees with me about them: Radhanath Swami, Indradyumna Swami, the Million Dollar swamis, Hridayananda and other so-called swamis… none of them are acting inline with the Acaryas or with sastra, by any stretch. But because the devotees either keep their mouths shut or actually agree with them, they continue on, degrading Srila Prabhupada's ISKCON.
While I'm sure that Parasuram das sets a good example for householders by his energetic preaching, because he's willing to present Srila Prabhupada through his representative sannyasis such as Mahavishnu in the way that he does, and because he's defending Bhaktimarg and Prahladananda Swamis, that means he's essentially defending the activities they're engaged in, like teaching Hatha Yoga. And he's basically defending the concept that you cannot criticize Swamis, at all, just because they're swamis and they're 'doing some preaching'. Now, we know Srila Prabhupada didn't agree with this. He even set the example of being somewhat critical of his own father for associating with unqualified swamis. And of course, sastra is just full of not only the standards that a sannyasi should maintain, but of strong criticism for those who deviate.
Among the incredible number of problems ISKCON has encountered since Srila Prabhupada's departure, most could have been avoided if the devotees had the opportunity and the gumption to challenge the leaders. If they were not so overwhelmed or snowed, or cowed by the fear of losing their service, and by this myth that 'you can't criticize a sannyasi'. Just look at Kirtanananda, or Jayatirtha, who really went overboard when he became a sannyasi, what to speak of Bhagavan, Ramesvar, Hridayananda, Satsvarupa, so many others… I'm sure most devotees who have been involved in Krsna consciousness for some time can point to examples where, on account of the fact that devotees didn't open their mouths and call a spade a spade, not only were others led astray, disappointed, and perhaps discouraged to the point of leaving, but the Swamis themselves hit the rocks and were not saved by their own followers or Godbrothers, what to speak of the GBC.
So we reject this whole idea that you can't point out defects in persons such as Mahavishnu Swami, or Bhaktimarg Swami, or Prahladananda Swami, or any of these other Sannyasis who are not coming up to Srila Prabhupada's standards, but are instead deviating from sastra and not following in the footsteps of the previous Acaryas. I feel it's a sincere service to Srila Prabhupada, to the Sankirtan movement and to the Swamis themselves to call a spade a spade. And if someone disagrees with what I have to say, then they should at least make the effort to address the philosophical points that have been made. Address the actual issues. Don't just give us this blanket criticism of people criticizing those they feel should never be criticized.
Related Articles
Yamuna Adventure by Parasuram das – May 4, 2011
Joyriding by Rocana dasa – May 16, 2011
Joy Riding for Krishna by Parasuram das – May 17, 2011
Hatha Yoga from an Entirely Different Standpoint by Hamsavatar das – May 18, 2011
The Well Intended Pilgrim by Krishna dasa – May 18, 2011
Why Should We Compromise? by Bhaktin Jane – May 23, 2011
Mahavishnu Swami and Hat Cit Ananda by Parasuram das – August 19, 2011
Party Line, or Party Time? by Rocana dasa – August 19, 2011
Go Easy on the Criticism by Parasuram das - September 1, 2011
Give Credit Where Credit is Due by Bhakta Matty – September 2, 2011
