BY: ROCANA DASA
Dec 11, CANADA (SUN) — A weekly response to Dandavats editorials.
Last week in Obeisances I addressed an issue that has bothered me for many years, regarding what I see as an absence of philosophy and a proliferation of storytelling in ISKCON. Whether it be in the form of auto-biographies or memoirs, or devotees telling their stories from the asana, there seems to be an over-abundance of it in the movement since Srila Prabhupada's departure. I covered many of those issues in last week's segment, and tried to explain why I believe many of these stories aren't bona fide in terms of our tradition and Sampradaya. While I don't want to repeat myself, I do wish to build on that theme today.
I'm motivated to continue the discussion of these issues primarily because I've read "A Wonderful Story" by HH Radhanatha Swami. For all the same reasons previously stated, I find this article to be firmly placed in the category of sentimental stories having very little philosophical input.
Other than describing the so-called spiritual personalities, who in this particular case are completely unknown to anyone other than the author, this story has little to do with our Sampradaya. There's no qualification on Radhanatha Swami's part as to who these personalities are from a philosophical point of view, or how much they're in line with our siddhanta. Obviously he wasn't in line with our siddhanta at the time these pastimes took place, given that he was a devotee of Lord Shiva, whatever that means. Basically, he was a young American who came to India chasing a dream about spiritual life.
Of course, one has to keep in mind that Radhanatha Swami Maharaja, like many other gurus and notorieties in ISKCON in the past, and many in the present, has what I would call a "myth" to maintain. This story plays to Radhanatha's mystique in stereo. This story is about the mythical Radhanatha Swami who begins his past life, prior to coming to Krsna consciousness, traveling around India on a transcendental journey. The mystique insinuated in this story will undoubtedly be told and retold by his close admirers and followers, who will repeat it in tones of sastra-like awe and reverence.
The story tells us of the pastimes of Radhanatha while he was becoming a devotee in India. Of course, the pastimes that we rarely hear about are the ones that consumed most of his adult life and time in ISKCON - the time he spent at New Vrindavan under the wing and tutelage of Srila Bhaktipada. That part of his story he seldom broadcasts.
Just how much importance can we place on Radhanatha Swami's pastimes as a Shiva bhakta? This is a designation that Srila Prabhupada rejects completely, as he said those who worship Lord Shiva cannot be considered devotees unless they accept Lord Shiva to be the greatest devotee of Lord Krsna. Of course, if one knew of Lord Shiva's official philosophical status in comparison to Krsna, why worship Shiva? That's obviously something Radhanatha decided to do once he came into contact with an actual pure devotee.
As far as the story is concerned, one has to first of all assume that he was very advanced himself at that point in his life. What does that make him from a sadhana-bhakta point of view, considering he hasn't even begun to perform sadhana under the guidance of an actual bonafide Spiritual Master? We have to wonder what degree of realization he had during that era of his life… unless, of course, one wants to assume that he's a nitya-siddha, which I'm sure some of his followers actually do. If you listen to his story here, one might be inclined to come to that conclusion:
"By the end of the 2 months I came to the conclusion that of all the theologies, philosophies, religions and spiritual paths that I have experienced there is nothing higher, nothing as sweet, nothing more beautiful then the religion of Vrindavana. Devotion to Sri Sri Radharani and Sri Krishna. So I decided to spend the rest of the my life in Vrindavana and never leave."
I can't say for sure whether it was his intention to paint himself as being very advanced in this article, either overtly or subtly, but that's the overall impression I find the article gives. Basically, Radhanatha is a storyteller - he's both the narrator of the story and one of the main characters, although he puts a lot of focus on the pujari in question, Ghanshyam, and the Deities that Ghanshyam was worshipping, Sri Sri Radha-Gopijanavallabha.
The story is obviously well thought out and very expertly narrated, and the overall message or impression that Radhanatha Swami wants to project comes through clearly. While I have not heard Radhanatha speak in person in recent years, his 'voice' in the story is very telling in that he omits many nouns and articles, like "a", "an" and "the". The effect is a contrived mock Indian voice intended to add Vaisnava authenticity to the presentation. For me, it has exactly the opposite effect. I have never liked the practice of devotee's using a 'pretend voice' to imitate Srila Prabhupada's speaking style, or trying to sound like a homegrown sadhu from Vrindavan.
Most of the detail that Radhanatha chooses to go into makes no philosophical point. It's simply eloquent filler that keeps the spotlight on himself and the fact that he can so vividly remember what happened to him in 1971, prior to becoming a devotee. The story emphasizes the sense that Radhanatha is a very qualified, saintly person who was able to appreciate the Holy Dhama on a very high level. The story lets us know that he was able to ascertain, or was qualified to detect, the high degree of spiritual advancement in the characters we meet in the story. Basically, we all have to assume that the story is real, because there's no way we can verify that it actually took place, and the character Ghanshyam is who Radhanatha chooses to illustrate him to be. There are no quotes from sastra and no collaborating evidence from devotees who witnessed these events, so we can't determine the authenticity of the story. Yet we have to digest passages like the following:
"…we would go around Vrindavana every night in the moonlight. And one of these nice sadhus told me I want you to meet a very very very simple and pure soul. When you meet him you will understand what is bhakti."
Of course, when this story was unfolding, Radhanatha Swami didn't have access to our siddhanta, nor the mercy of the pure devotee, so all the detailed Vaisnava input that he's given is something he came to after the fact. In other words, he couldn’t possibly have been thinking all these things at the time, or been able to analyze the circumstance in the way he's describing it at this point in his life.
The timing of when Radhanatha met Srila Prabhupada and accepted him as his Spiritual Master is somewhat confusing in this story. It's not clear why Radhanatha was taking instructions from Ghanshyam if he had already accepted Srila Prabhupada as his guru. He writes:
"And he [Ghanshyam] and a couple others were saying if you have to leave Vrindavana, because I was crying I have to leave Vrindavana. They said if you have to leave Vrindavana you should go to New Vrindavana. I asked what is this New Vrindavana? They said Swami Prabhupada, when he was here in Vrindavana, because I had already accepted Prabhupada as my guru by that time in Vrindavana."
It's very interesting to consider the main character in the story, who we're told is an extremely advanced devotee and who personifies dedication to the Deities. This individual is described as extremely austere and has all the nice qualities one would expect to see in a true Vaisnava. In many of the stories Radhanatha Maharaja tells about his pastimes at New Vrindaban, he depicts himself in a very similar way to the description of Ghanshyam in this story. While one of the symptoms that an individual is not highly advanced is his tendency to self-glorify, these are the kinds of statements we read in Radhanatha Swami's presentation:
"I was such a simple new devotee. I was thinking how is it possible, he’s serving Radha-Vrindavananatha. He is a personal, he is bathing Radha-Vrindavanatha, he is dressing Them, he’s feeding Them, why in the world would anyone who had such a wonderful service would want to get married. Inconceivable!! So I went to that devotee I said if you want female association come and help me milk cows. It’s the safest way to associate to with the opposite sex. Somehow or other he didn’t accept my advice. So he got married. Then the temple president said you should be the pujari. I said who is going to take care of the cows? He said you, you do both. So I was pujari for Radha-Vrindavananatha."
In the years following his long service at New Vrindaban, Radhanatha has often explained to the devotees how he completely transcended all the nonsense that was going on at New Vrindaban over decades, how he never liked Bhaktipada, and how he kept his spiritual life alive by simply worshipping the Deities and staying aloof, transcendentally. Therefore he was untouched, like a lotus flower, from all the insanity, criminal activity and immoral pastimes that were going on all around him. Of course, this is not a verified version of the story. In fact, many, many persons who knew him during that period will attest to the fact that the image he's projecting is incorrect. It's not at all what he was like during those years at New Vrindaban, where he was actually playing a major role as one of Bhaktipada's main supporters and enforcers. In his article, Radhanatha essentially tells us that whatever he did at New Vrindaban was simply the result of his great surrender and service attitude:
"We would never ever, ever act outside authority or blessings. So for 11 years I remained there worshipping the deities."
Of course, he goes on to describe exactly the opposite scenario, as well:
"Kirtananda Maharaja made a rule that I was not allowed to speak about Vrindavana. That rule was very very difficult to follow. Sometimes devotees would come way up to that old mountain farmhouse where the temple was of Radha-Vrindavanatha and it would be just me and them looking after the offerings and the aratis. In between they would say tell me about Vrindavana. And I would start telling them about the places of Govardhana and the places of Vrindavana and the places of Nanda-ghama, Varsana."
In fact, the more I study how Radhanatha Swami runs his 'institution within the institution' today in Chowpatty, the more I see that he uses a lot of the tricks of the trade that were sharpened to perfection by Kirtanananda. Kirtanananda was an expert cult leader, and he appeared to be very austere, very saintly, and very dedicated. He was a strict sadhana man, and he forced the members of New Vrindaban to be the same way - they worked really hard under very austere conditions, showed up for the morning program, and chant their rounds. Externally, Kirtanananda looked like he was into the Deities and he was dedicated to building Srila Prabhupada's Palace of Gold, but in reality he was into himself and his vision. Everything ultimately came down to Bhaktipada, because he controlled every aspect of New Vrindaban. He was the king - he even had the crown and scepter.
There is absolutely no question that Radhanatha was one of Kirtanananda main lieutenants. In fact, even though Bhaktipada had his administrative leaders like Kuladri and others who were running his construction program, on the so-called spiritual side, it was Radhanatha who helped prop-up Kirtanananda's spiritual mirage. He was joined in that role by Bhakti Tirtha Swami, Umapati Swami and Chandramauli Swami. These Swamis helped to give the impression that Kirtanananda was actually advanced because they supported him and worshipped him. Today we see that the image Radhanatha emphasizes at this point in his career doesn't include the most significant part of his life story -- his relationship with Kirtanananda and New Vrindaban during the most notorious part of their history.
Considering all this, what is Radhanatha's "wonderful story" really all about? What is the message behind it? Now people may think I'm cynical, conspiratorial, or fault-finding, but to me, this story is nothing but a story. It has no real significance and no purpose other than for the reasons I've stated above. Basically, the story helps to highlight and enhance Radhanatha's image.
It's interesting to note that the character Ghanshyam is not only described as having been instrumental in Radhanatha's spiritual development, he also perfectly highlights many of the mythical qualities that Radhanatha is becoming known for having. Ghanshyam has apparently impacted Radhanatha's life to such a degree that throughout his whole life he has emulated this person. Of course, one should question that, considering that Radhanatha has a Spiritual Master who's a Sampradaya Acarya while Ghanshyam, as far as we know, has no connection to our Sampradaya at all.
The way Radhanatha depicts Ghanshyam, he's an extremely advanced devotee. In fact, it's interesting to note that the characteristics of this person were far beyond anything that I've seen anybody in ISKCON exhibit, except for Srila Prabhupada. Of course, Srila Prabhupada's mood and qualities were far broader, deeper, and wider than anything this other character exhibits, so what does that really tell you?
Radhanatha tells us that Ghanshyam was practically a pure devotee, but only a few people in the whole world had the mercy of knowing that… and of course, HH Radhanatha was one of the persons advanced and fortunate enough to have the eyes to see what others could not:
"When we read about qualities of selfless service, when we read about the principle of servant of the servant of the servant, when we contemplate actual humility of the heart, Sri Gopijanavallabha empowered him to be a very wonderful wonderful example of that. But only a few people in the whole world ever saw him or knew him. He was just totally an unknown person."
Frankly, I find the way Radhanatha is depicting himself throughout this article to be questionable. At one point he emphasizes that his transcendental adventures in Vrindavan happened very early in his life:
"Because one great sadhu living in Vrindavana had given me a name when I was little, the name Ratin-Krishna dasa. I never got initiated but he gave it out of affection. So Ghanshyam always called me Ratin."
Of course, "little Ratin" was actually a full-grown man by this time. He tell us "I was such a simple new devotee", but at the same time, denigrates the New Vrindaban pujari in his story about the pujari giving up his service in order to get married. On one hand he tells us that these are the thoughts of someone who's a simple, new devotee, yet the actual message is that these are the thoughts of an advanced devotee. So throughout the whole article we get this duality wherein he's depicting himself in a very humble way, and then on the other hand, he's portraying himself to have this advanced spiritual vision.
In our tradition, one of the main aspects of our philosophy is that an advanced devotee is, by nature and by activities, very humble. So by portraying oneself in a humble way, you're essentially glorifying yourself, because that's the sign of an advanced devotee. So calling yourself a lowly person or a wretch is really a form of self-glorification. Of course, those who are listening to Radhanatha in this story would think the opposite, but the fact is that he's portrayed throughout ISKCON as being one of the great gurus and sannyasis, and on account of that he gets a great deal of adoration and distinction.
The way the whole story of the Deities and Ghanshyam unfolds as it's told here puts the reader on the spot, so to speak. You either have to think of Radhanatha as being an extremely rare and advanced soul, or you have to suspect that he's pulling a Kirtanananda on us. I feel fortunate that I'm not put into this quandary, like so many devotees are, because his existence doesn't directly impact me or my life, as it does so many others.
One of the great pains that I've experienced in my devotional career is seeing the devastation that's created when a guru falls down, and those who have worshipped him as good as God and spent innumerable hours serving him, have to come to grips with the fact that they've been cheated, and the person wasn't at all what they said they were. Not only does that impact the disciples psychologically, emotionally and spiritually, but it's very hard for them to regain faith. Inevitably you are a neophyte if you have a guru who is of this type of character, and it's very difficult for a neophyte to recover when the guru falls down. And it is even more difficult in the case of a fallen guru who had all along been presenting himself as highly advanced, when he was not. This is not an isolated case in ISKCON; many disciples of fallen gurus have lost faith in Srila Prabhupada and the whole process that's presented by Lord Caitanya Mahaprabhu. That's the great loss, ultimately. I've seen this so many times, so forgive me if it appears that I'm looking at Radhanatha from this critical perspective - but I am. My fears and skepticism have been reinforced after reading this 'story'.
The only time Radhanatha mentions Kirtanananda in this story is in the context of making Kirtanananda look bad, as in the story about Kirtanananda muzzling Radhanatha from telling stories about Vrindaban. All this would make sense, except that it doesn't match the reality of Radhanatha's relationship with Kirtanananda over the years. Perhaps Radhanatha was simply living a false life all those years, inwardly disliking Kirtanananda while outwardly acting as if he was the next great Sampradaya Acarya. But I don’t see how an advanced devotee could tolerate acting like that. The fact is that anyone who had any degree of spiritual enlightenment would have left New Vrindaban, and not have been faulted for it. History proves that to be a fact. Of course, this is the part of the Radhanatha myth that has to be covered up. And it appears that so many neophyte devotees are ready to buy into the perception he's now projecting.
We should keep in mind that in around 1987, New Vrindaban was kicked out of ISKCON. There was a period of time thereafter when Kirtanananda was still in charge, and was busy changing everything at Srila Prabhupada's Palace of Gold over to the neo-Christian motif. Radhanatha Swami stayed with Kirtanananda that whole time, even after he and his aberrant community were kicked out of his Spiritual Master's movement. As recently as the 1990's, Radhanatha was still on the record (via taped lectures) in which he was glorifying Kirtanananda.
When Kirtanananda was completely de-throned and sent to prison, then the GBC came up with a "plan" to get New Vrindaban back into the ISKCON fold and to minimize the fallout from Kirtanananda's departure. They hand-picked Radhanath to become the person who re-initiated all Kirtanananda's people in India and Bombay. Similarly, Bhakti Tirtha Swami got to re-initiate all the African disciples. Basically, Radhanatha was installed by the GBC and vaulted into notoriety, not because of his spiritual purity, but because he knew the inside story, and was in a position to help them with damage control. For those who knew the events of the day, all this history comes flooding back when you read stories like the one Radhanatha is telling here, the sanitized, spiritualized version of his devotional career in which he is clearly self-proclaimed as being a highly advanced Vaisnava.
Obeisances to Dandavats and to HH Radhanath Swami.
