 |
 |
||||
 |
 |
 |
|||
 |
|||||
 |
 |
 |
|||
 |
|||||
 |
|
|
|
|
|
| Smorgasbord |
|
Part One of a
Three-Part Series “YOUR
MATERIAL LEGAL FORMULA WILL NOT HELP US Since the departure in 1977
of His Divine Grace A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada from manifest
existence, we have seen his original movement break into various factions.
Corporate ISKCON now has competition from both the post-samadhi rittviks as
well as former godbrothers connected in some way to Srila Prabhupada’s
godbrothers: The neo-Gaudiya Matha. Although there are devotees who eschew allegiance
to any of these factions, study reveals that most of this “outside” group also
has its own shared mindset, and this mindset includes a number of glaring
misconceptions. The source of these misconceptions is to be found in the similar
experiences they underwent separately, mostly in the late Seventies and early
Eighties. Serving Two Masters “So, In 1978, the zonal acharyas figuratively drew a line in the sand and more or
less demanded that devotees choose between them or a return to material
society. Those who tried to walk the fence soon found themselves portrayed as
being “against the movement.” Such premeditated arm-twisting on the part of the
zonals, when added to each individual devotee’s sense of loyalty to what used
to be the Hare Krishna movement, caused practically everyone still in the thing
to walk rapidly to the zonal acharya side. Most of
them did not give much thought to this decision, especially in relation to the
subtleties of History has spent a great
deal of time discussing the zonal acharya’s
ambitions, scandals, and deceptions. However, we find practically no analysis
of the short or long-term effects that were had by serving them. Occasionally,
someone will pick one of the most egregious examples (such as New Vrindavana) and demonstrate that the leader’s deviations there
from the standard removed the group from the sampradaya at that time. What is
overlooked in this narrow critique, however, is whether any of the zonal acharyas--or the Governing Body Commission that launched
them--were even a part of the sampradaya when they set
sail. “In the parampara system, the instructions
taken from the bona fide spiritual master must also be based on revealed Vedic
scriptures. One who is in the line of disciplic succession cannot manufacture
his own way of behavior. There are many so-called followers of the Vaishnava
cult in the line of Caitanya Mahaprabhu
who do not scrupulously follow the conclusions of the sastras, and therefore
they are considered to be apa-sampradaya, which means
‘outside of the sampradaya.’" Sri Chaitanya Charitamrita,
Adi 7.48, purport (emphasis added) Perhaps the reason we find so little critical
study of the malignant effects of serving the zonal acharyas
is that, at least initially, the vast majority of Prabhupada’s disciples and
all of the newcomers were subject to these zonal popes. Devotees consistently
consider their activities during this period to be some form of We find many passages where Srila Prabhupada
and the scriptures do not speak very kindly either about the fate of pretenders
to the position of guru or to their followers: “By a false display of religious sentiments,
they present a show of devotional service while indulging in all sorts of
immoral activities. In this way, they pass as spiritual masters and devotees of
God. Such violators of religious principles have no respect for the
authoritative acharyas, the holy teachers in the
strict disciplic succession. . . To mislead the people in general, they
themselves become so-called acharyas, but they do not
even follow the principles of the acharyas. These rogues are the most dangerous
elements in human society. Because there is no religious government,
they escape punishment by the law of the state. They cannot, however, escape
the law of the Supreme, who has clearly declared in the Bhagavad-gita
that envious demons in the garb of religious propagandists shall be thrown into the darkest regions of hell
(Bg. 16.19-20). Sri Isopanisad confirms that
these pseudo religionists are heading
toward the most obnoxious place in the universe after the completion
of their spiritual master business, which they conduct simply for sense
gratification.” Sri Isopanisad, Mantra 12, purport
(emphases added) “There are many renegades from the
Brahma-sampradaya whose only business is to make men more forgetful of the Lord
and thus entangle them more and more in material existence. Such persons are
never dear to the Lord, and the Lord sends them deeper into the darkest region
of matter so that such envious demons may not be able to know the Supreme
Lord.” Srimad Bhagavatam 2.9.19, Purport "As for your next question: 'Can only a
few pure devotees deliver others?' Anyone, if he is pure devotee, he can
deliver others; he can become spiritual master. But unless he is on that
platform, he should not attempt it. Then they
will both go to hell, like blind men leading the blind." Letter
to Tusta “. . . because of the instructions of a
foolish guru, one remains perpetually in
material existence and suffers its tribulations.” Srimad-Bhagavatam,
8.24.51, purport (emphasis added) SB 7.5.31 TRANSLATION SB 6.7.14 TRANSLATION The consequences described here can hardly be
likened to those benefits and benedictions which are the result of authorized
devotional service. Free will was involved when devotees chose to serve the
zonal acharyas. Those devotees—or, at least, some of
them--may have been persuaded in part by ruthless “snapping” techniques. The
alternatives to not falling in line may have appeared dire. Nevertheless,
everyone made a choice. It should be noted here that not everyone made the easy
or convenient one. In early 1979, a group of senior disciples confronted the
zonal acharyas in Vrndavana. One of them was targeted
as the scapegoat for that defiance in the GBC resolutions of that
year. History has clearly shown, at least to anyone
outside the GBC’s Orwellian sphere of delusion, that the zonal acharyas co-opted Srila Prabhupada’s original Hare Krishna
movement. The collective loss of devotional enthusiasm (as a result of their
scandals) produced results quite different from those that have been reported
in the corporation’s official publications.
Prabhupada warned us in advance about all of this: “However, don't create any awkward situation
that may be criticized. Caesar's wife must be above criticism. Up to
now, as I have got respectable situation. I wish that all my disciples
will have similar respectable position in society. That will keep my name good;
like father, like son.” Letter to Caitya-guru, Ganesha: Srila Prabhupada, if the knowledge was handed down by the saintly
kings, evam parampara-praptam,
how is it that the knowledge was lost? Why do we find these dire warnings to those
who would pretend to be spiritual masters—and, yes, also to their followers? It
is repeatedly said that such people go to hell. This is because pretending to
be able to deliver others is ati-papam, a very great
sin. “One cannot deny the order of a spiritual
master. Therefore, one has to select a spiritual master whose order, carrying,
you'll not commit a mistake. You see? Now, suppose if you accept a wrong person as spiritual master, and if
you, if he, guides you wrongly, then your whole life is spoiled. So
one has to accept a spiritual master whose guidance will make his life perfect.
That is the relation between spiritual master and disciple. It is not a formality.
It is a great responsibility both for the disciple and for the spiritual
master. Bhagavad-Gita Lecture, 2.7-11 in “Reporter: I wondered how many people
you think might have been taken in by fake gurus. In the age of Kali, virtually everyone who
has only meager interest in spirituality will be cheated. Such people easily
accept the claims of the so-called guru, the church, or the governing body, and
thus they believe that they will be delivered by some person or dogma provided
by these agencies. At that point, they give up any further search for the truly
empowered person sent by Lord Krishna. Therefore, avoiding all bogus
arrangements and continuing to look is far better than surrendering one’s
discrimination to a flawed person or dogma. A result of the sin of the
pretender guru is that his follower’s meager desire to know the Truth becomes
extinguished immediately upon that fool accepting the pretender. This is one
reason why Srila Prabhupada says that such a chela’s “whole life is spoiled.”
Another reason is that, once he (or she) realizes that he has been misled, that
devotee will be much more hesitant to accept a correct devotee if and/or when the
real guru comes along later: “Once burnt, twice shy.” “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. The Putanas have power
only over the atheist. It is a thankless, but salutary, task which they perform
for the benefit of their unwilling victims.” Organized Religion by His
Divine Grace Sri Srimad Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Goswami Maharaja Prabhupada
(emphases added) Showbottle So-called gurus like the zonal acharyas may continue most of the practices and standards
of their authorized predecessors. They
may superficially appear to be quite pukka.
Nevertheless, this is little more than sweet rice that masks the poisonous
effects of following them. Srila Prabhupada: . . . So, therefore, the conclusion is guru is
necessary, and guru is he who is representative of A pretender may have an outward appearance somewhat
similar to his authorized predecessor, but he will either be adding or
subtracting something from the siddhanta or process,
and, in actuality, he will not be on any advanced platform. The bona fide guru
has been ordered by his own spiritual master to take up the post, and, at the
absolute minimum, he must have reached the level of anartha nivritti (freedom
from all unwanted activities). There can be no such thing as a “bad” or “reformed”
guru: “Well, if he is bad, how can he become a guru? How can iron become gold? 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" “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.” Nectar of Instruction, Text 5,
purport (emphasis added) The genuine guru must first be ordered by his
spiritual master to be guru before he can become guru. Srila Bhaktisiddhanta
Sarasvati also makes clear that the stage of anartha nivritti is far beyond
simply following the four regulations: siddhanta-alasa jana anartha to’ chade 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 “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, Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Prabhupada Brahmananda: He's asking: ‘When did you become the spiritual
leader of The pretender cannot deliver the same product
as that which is delivered by the bona fide spiritual master. Even if
everything appears exactly the same, the fake guru’s offering is
pretentious or showbottle. Anyone pretending is dishonest;
he is not straightforward or arjavam.
Therefore, the bogus guru is not on the brahminical platform, what to speak of being
free from all unwanted activities. All of the zonal acaryas, without exception,
were guilty of many such deceptions. “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 showbottle. Do
you know what showbottle means? It means colored
water in a bottle that looks just like medicine, but which, when you take it,
does not work. Room conversation, NYC,
July, 1970 In 1978, the zonals initially claimed to be
appointed by Srila Prabhupada. They buttressed their takeover with a document that
contained quotes from a so-called “senior authority,” viz., Swami B.R. Sridhara,
a godbrother of Prabhupada’s. However, in 1980, the southern Nevertheless, after being beaten at New Vrindavana for preaching this message to devotees there, Jadurani connected with remnants of the original 1979 zonal
acharya challenge group (aforementioned) and began to
produce position papers further exposing the sham. Within a relatively short span
of time, Kirtanananda Swami made a pronouncement that it did not matter if
Srila Prabhupada had appointed them as mahabhagavats,
because the GBC had done so, and the GBC was Prabhupada’s authorized
representative. Changing their story (like criminals), the
zonal acharyas repeatedly deceived the mass of
devotees in order to perpetuate the charade. Recently on the Sampradaya Sun,
a demand has been made to one of the remaining (former) zonal acaryas and
so-called mahabhagavats: Provide proof of your claim that
Srila Prabhupada directly ordered you to be guru. He did not respond,
of course. Dishonest people can never be spiritual masters. “Nowhere in authentic scriptures is it said
that one will ultimately reach the same goal by doing anything or worshiping
anyone. Such foolish theories are offered by self-made ‘spiritual
masters,’ who have no connection with the parampara, the bona fide system of
disciplic succession.” Sri Isopanisad, Mantra 13, purport
(emphasis added) So, the question now becomes, “What were
those who followed the zonal acaryas actually serving?” They appeared to be
serving Srila Prabhupada (as they had previous to his departure), but there was
one all-important difference. Previous to the spring of 1978, the directions
given by most of the soon-to-be zonal acharyas were still
(except in very egregious cases) under the authority of Srila Prabhupada. After
the zonal acharya dispensation, however, they were
not. Therefore, service performed after that date was done under a lack
of genuine authority in the chain of disciplic succession. The results were no
longer conducted to Srila Prabhupada and on up the chain of succession to Lord Caitanya. The service results were kept from reaching the
spiritual sky by the bloated false egos of bogus gurus, who were engaged
according to material ambition, not spiritual purpose. Previous to his departure, Srila Prabhupada’s
movement offered real medicine for recovering from the disease of birth and
death. Afterwards, even though the corporate bottle appeared pretty much the
same (for awhile), the medicine had been replaced with a zonal acharya watered-down concoction. Lord Krishna ceased to be
pleased by any service to it, and this has been effectively proven by
subsequent results. Although the real Service to the Supreme Personality of Godhead
is supposed to be performed favorably; for one thing, this means that Lord Krishna
likes it. There can be no doubt—again, with a few egregious exceptions--that this was the case during Srila Prabhupada’s manifest
presence. However, those who served the zonal acharyas
in rendering his movement impotent and fraudulent can hardly be said to have
produced divine and favorable results by their service. The subsequent
suffering of all the conditioned souls (who never came in touch with the real
process) is immeasurable. How can that kind of “service” be considered anything
but a great sin? Sahajiya When Srila Prabhupada was present, devotees
were frequently warned about associating with deviants who posed as Vedic or
Vaishnava authorities, whether impersonalists or sahajiyas: “In the parampara system, the instructions
taken from the bona fide spiritual master must also be based on revealed Vedic
scriptures. One who is in the line of disciplic succession cannot manufacture
his own way of behavior. There are many so-called followers of the Vaisnava cult in the line of Caitanya
Mahaprabhu who do not scrupulously follow the
conclusions of the sastras, and therefore they are considered to be apa-sampradaya, which means ‘outside of the sampradaya.’
Some of these groups are known as aula, baula, kartabhaja, neda, daravesa, sani, sahajiya, sakhibheki, smarta, jata-gosani, ativadi, cudadhari and gauranga-nagari. In
order to follow strictly the disciplic succession of Lord Caitanya
Mahaprabhu, one should not associate with these apa-sampradaya communities.” Purport to Sri Chaitanya
Charitamrita, Adi, 7.48 Among other things, GBC men had been deputed
to protect the philosophical purity of the movement from deviants. However,
after Srila Prabhupada’s departure, they became the very danger they were
supposed to prevent. The GBC was the instrument that set the zonal acharya dispensation into motion and the “guru by vote”
mechanism on its way. There is an idea, often attributed to Srila Prabhupada, that the movement could not be stopped from
without but only from within. Phalena-pariciyate:
This was conclusively shown to be the case in due course of time. “If every time someone
feels something, they call for changing everything. Then all that I have done will very quickly be lost.” Letter to Hansadutta
from “And I
am surprised that none of the GBC members detected the defects in the procedure.
It was detected only when it came to me. What will happen when I am not here, SHALL EVERYTHING BE SPOILED BY
GBC?” Letter to Hansadutta, Although the worst manifestations of the
imitation ended when the zonal acharyas were forced
to a lower profile, the deviation they introduced has never been entirely removed
from the movement—and it must be entirely removed. Primarily, it is not removed
because the zonals (those still recognized in corporate ISKCON) retain
privileged positions and still keep all of their fraudulently obtained
disciples. The closest of the twelve sahajiya groups to
corporate ISKCON is jati goswami. In jati goswami society, one is considered to be authorized
because he is a member of a familial group; philosophical purity and
realization are secondary considerations, if they are considerations at all. In
corporate ISKCON, the group does not have a hereditary or seminal commonality
(yet), but the current arrangement is ecclesiastical. According to the mystique
propagated by the institution, whatever the GBC men decide is accepted as the
will of Srila Prabhupada. They can change their minds and do a complete
about-face, just as they did in regard to the level of worship offered to the
so-called zonal gurus. This kind of whimsy is regarded as being on the same
level of Prabhupada himself, i.e., it is as if he had decided upon the change. In genuine It should be noted that jati
goswamis are not fools; they don’t wear some big
“sahajiya” sign around their necks. These heavy-duty Indians could easily
defeat a corporate ISKCON chela in debate. A sahajiya
is indicated by his philosophical deviations from the Gaudiya Vaishnava
parampara, because he makes the whole process unauthorized, easier (sahaj). A genuine guru does not give a fig for what
groups like the GBC think; he has already been chosen and empowered by “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.” Chaitanya Charitamrita, Adi
1.35, purport (emphases added) “Mundane votes have no jurisdiction to elect
a Vaisnava acarya. A Vaisnava
acarya is self-effulgent” Purport to Chaitanya Charitamrita, Madhya,
1.220 This is the reason why there is no genuine
guru among the many who have been selected or not vetoed (waiting in queue) by
the GBC since Srila Prabhupada’s departure. Disregarding the injunction of
Srila Jiva Goswami and thinking that the GBC can select gurus is a clear
indication that one “is lazy in properly understanding the Vaishnava
philosophical conclusions.” According to the quote attributed to Srila
Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati earlier, such a person is certainly under the
influence of anartha. Accepting anything unauthorized, whether inadvertently or
consciously, is anartha. Such people who do this can never be guru, and their
disciples are being misled. All Spiritual Progress Bollixed Up The only real qualification of the
post-samadhi GBC is their ability to climb the ladder of the institution. Such
people are skilled at determining how the winds of power are blowing and then
allying themselves with the most powerful political bloc. Through foresight and
fortune, they hope to eventually become the most influential and powerful
individual in the group. This is, incidentally, not exactly the mentality of
someone who aspires to be a pure devotee; it is more like that of turtles in a
turtle tank. Unfortunately, this is the context and
mentality that has given rise to the zonal acharya
phenomena. Those eleven men were the most powerful bloc in the then twenty-three
man GBC. They united and projected an illusory reality that is still permeating
the atmosphere today. The history is that Kirtanananda Swami had
started initiating, while posing as an uttama adhikari (a devotee on the
highest level), just a few days after Srila Prabhupada’s departure. His zone deviated
from the parampara a number of months before the others followed his bad
example. He had the biggest temple with the most inmates. He indirectly dared
the other GBCs to discipline him; as he expected, the ten others fell in line. The official rhetoric regarding this is all
meant to obfuscate reality. Is this an arrangement we would expect of surrendered
souls ready to give up everything for guru and The real reason that the GBC began selecting
gurus is as deceptive as the zonal acharya’s claim of
being appointed by Srila Prabhupada. As with all of the pivotal machinations of
this body since the departure of Srila Prabhupada, one will inevitably find
that power has the prominent position: Just follow the power. After Srila Prabhupada’s departure, a
question was on everyone’s mind: “What will happen to the new people?” It was
commonly accepted, with the possible exception of Kirtanananda’s inmates, that
no one among Srila Prabhupada’s disciples was a self-effulgent acarya. Certainly,
His Divine Grace recognized nobody as being even near this exalted level of
purity and realization. The leaders knew, however, that it was only a matter of
time before some of the uninitiated people would start leaving the institution
to find a guru, unless one (or more) became available within it. Kirtanananda certainly did not have any
hesitation to offer himself up as a mahabhagavat candidate. He was playing a
game of no-limit high stakes poker in order to pick up as many chips as
possible. Not only was he going for the uninitiated in his own temples, he was
going for his godbrothers and every other uninitiated person as well. This was
a mentality the other GBCs knew all too well--“transcendental” competition. The
longer they delayed making a decision on him, the more he would establish
himself as superior. Waiting to determine conclusively what Srila Prabhupada
had said about succession—which would have been a solution in the mode of
goodness--quickly lost its appeal. The GBC also knew that, if they confronted
and disciplined Kirtanananda, the path was fraught with difficulty and
explosive repercussions. This path
required spiritual courage and the willingness to wait until one of Srila
Prabhupada’s disciples became qualified or self-realized. The longer the
movement failed to push forward someone like this, the more of the new people
would go over to one of Srila Prabhupada’s godbrothers. The GBC also could have allowed
any of Srila Prabhupada’s disciples to act as guru and then disciplined those
who deviated. This was certainly within the paradigm that His Divine
Grace had prescribed for the commission. However, that
decision could have allowed some godbrothers to ostensibly get a leg up on the
group; apparently, the GBC attitude was not amenable to sharing this kind of
power. The easiest way to connect all the dots--and least offend the
most powerful and audacious leaders--was to create the zonal acarya
dispensation. As a result, eleven
unqualified men began to imitate Prabhupada and conduct initiations. “The first thing, I warn Acyutananda,
do not try to initiate. You are not in a proper position now to initiate
anyone. . . Don't be allured by such Maya. I am training you all to become
future spiritual masters, but do not be in a hurry. .
. don't be attracted by such cheap disciples immediately. One has to rise
gradually by service. . . These services are most important. Don't be allured
by cheap disciples. Go on steadfastly to render service first. If you
immediately become guru, then the service activities will be stopped; and as
there are many cheap gurus and cheap disciples, without any substantial
knowledge, and manufacturing new sampradayas, and
with service activities stopped, and all spiritual progress stopped up.” Letter
to Acyutananda, Who Offended? Following the departure of Srila Prabhupada, articles
of protest have been labeled political by the Governing Body and its loyalists.
As is inevitably the case with these institutions, one will find that there are
very real political power plays that predated any later attempt to describe
them. A perceptive person understands that such accusations by the GBC and
their adherents are inherently political in and of themselves. They are meant
to separate those who still have some bewildered loyalty to the institution
from those that have less; they are meant to polarize. As described previously, the zonal acharyas, in a very heavy-handed manner, declared
themselves the successors to Srila Prabhupada. Disciples of His Divine Grace
found little wiggle room between bowing down before them or
leaving the movement. History has shown that many of those driven out were far
from the “offenders” they continue to be portrayed as. Some were
unsophisticated scholarly types who simply found something rotten in Mayapura. Indeed, Srila Prabhupada’s long-time personal
secretary, Pradhyumna dasa, perhaps the most learned of Srila Prabhupada’s men,
was among such scholarly bhaktas. Many others were
just sincere servants. Those who decided to stay with the zonal acharyas found themselves in very uncomfortable positions.
For the most part, they had nothing against the godbrothers who left, yet they
were obliged to speak ill of them and to keep them from having any influence in
corporate ISKCON temples. Albeit reluctantly, such loyalists also became
offenders in order to stay on the boat. For the most part, the longer one
stayed, the more Vaishnava aparadha he or she invariably became implicated in,
and that is not devotional service. History has further shown that virtually all
of these godbrothers (and godsisters) got played for suckers. They were essential
in 1978; they were needed in order to provide the numbers necessary to convince
new people that the dispensation was bona fide. However, as time passed and the
number of new initiates (initiated with what?) grew, the godbrothers became
increasingly expendable. The new people, of course, were bound to see their “pada” as the personality of servitor Godhead, a level of
dedication the disciples of Srila Prabhupada would rarely even consider. In
this way, the zonal’s godbrothers were eventually removed
and replaced in their positions by more zealous and dedicated newcomers. This
resulted in many godbrothers and godsisters expressing bad feelings as they
left the temples. Regardless of what one said while departing, such sincere and
serious devotees (although not all of them were in that category) undeservedly became
derided as “fringies.” This plus thirty years old habit of Vaishnava
aparadha against those “living outside the walls” remains one of the
cornerstones of the current institution. The original “offenders” from the 1979
Vrndavana meeting are still persona non-grata, despite the fact that many
issues they brought forward have now been either accepted as fact or even adopted.
Half-hearted blanket “pardons” may sometimes be offered at events like the
Srila Prabhupada Centennial, but always implicit in these welcome mats is the
condition that one now become uncritical. The unspoken
policy is that, as long as one is critical, he must remain an Orwellian un-person. The fundamental condition has remained that
you not say that the zonal acharyas offended, and
summarily disposed of, practically all of their godbrothers and godsisters.
Those party men who wallow in such self-interested ignorance create legislation
turning unqualified men into sacred cows. Disciples of those cows are now in
senior positions; the whole house of cards would come down if fact and Truth became
the official position. “Ahimsa, nonviolence, means that one should
not do anything which will put others into misery or confusion. . . Ahimsa
means that people should be trained in such a way that the full utilization of
the human body can be achieved. The human body is meant for spiritual
realization, so any movement or any commissions which do not further that end commit
violence on the human body. That which furthers the future spiritual happiness
of the people in general is called nonviolence.” Purport to Bhagavad-gita
10.4-5 Official policies opposed to fact or Truth
cannot be connected with the Absolute Truth. Something that is against End
of part One of Three Quotes from the books of His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada are copyright by the Bhaktivedanta Book Trust |