Pariprashnena — Q&A Archive

Its important to understand the difference between the circle of influence and the circle of concern. The more we concentrate our energies in our circle of influence, where we can actually effect change, the more effective well be. The more we spend our time and energy outside our circle of influence the more frustrated we become.

Its important, especially in the beginning, to keep the two circles closely synchronized, and not to worry too much about the bigger picture. Once we become proficient in being effective locally, we can start to think globally. The first thing to master is controlling the senses and engaging them according to a plan, chanting 16 rounds every day with attention, studying Srila Prabhupadas books, and making some effective plan to be engaged in practical service that pushes on the mission.

After this has been mastered, an environmental scan needs to be carried out to align our actions with the broader scale. But there is little value in making too wide a scan and spending too much time in it if it is not realistically connected with our area of activity. People around us and above us can fall down, or can be involved in heinous activities while we are still focused on mastering chanting.

My wife was in a similar situation to Hrshikesh Prabhu, focused on collecting and developing her sadhana while all this was going on at NV. She joined in 86, but didnt even know that NV had been expelled from ISKCON until the nineties. We listened to the 20th anniversary collectors edition of the Bhaktipada expulsion tape that Eric posted the other day and she said: "I didnt know any of this while I was there."

Once we go back home, back to Godhead, this whole material existence becomes like a bad dream that quickly fades into obscurity. Thats how real it is. The items of our personal service to the Lord, such as sravanam and kirtanam are eternally real. Everything else is a sideshow, and ultimately a distraction.

The difference is similiar to the difference between night and day, " strict adherence to spiritual principles " is a requirement in ones struggle to attain eternal life with Lord Sri Krishna.

" fanaticism " or fanatic devotees,usually over-emphasize one or two principles of Krishna Consciouness,like " we should sell all the temples and use the money to print books ",this is a nice idea,but it is fanaticial.

[quote][cite] sitapati:[/cite] We listened to the 20th anniversary collectors edition of the Bhaktipada expulsion tape that Eric posted the other day and she said: "I didnt know any of this while I was there."[/quote]

I would like to listen to this. Please tell me where I can find it.

http://www.littleblackstar.com/blog/?p=1238

Let us know your comments

In March of 1987, ISKCON officially gave New Vrndavana and Bhaktipada the boot. The reasons were detailed in a '93GBC [Governing Body Commission] resolution.'94 Bhaktipada received the resolution and decided to respond.

This statement shows just how weak and unorganized the GBC was back then,how do you excommunicate a 4,000 acre farm with hundreds of innocent devotees and cows with their calfs,none of this was their fault.

Shouldnt they just have excommunicated Bhaktipada and His half-dozen zonked-out freinds instead?

[quote][cite] dave:[/cite]http://www.littleblackstar.com/blog/?p=1238

Let us know your comments[/quote]

Ah... Listening to this tape brought back many memories from 20 years ago. I may have even been at this darshan. I dont remember exactly, but it sounded familiar. I publicly thank Eric for making this priceless treasure from the past available on the Internet for our scrutiny.

Nityo-dita did not ask questions. It sounded to me like Tulasi dasa, a Bhaktipada disciple and former professor at a college in Parkersburg, West Virginia, who if I am not mistaken, was working toward his law degree at WVU at the time and assisting NV in legal defense.

On this tape I heard Devamrita Swami add several comments, and Umapati (one of the original Mott Street Boys who lived at NV at the time) and a long-time NV resident and Prabhupada disciple, Gadadhara dasa, who was later awarded sannyasa by Bhaktipada shortly before he passed away around 1993. He was given a samadhi at NV next to Hayagriva Swamis samadhi.

It is obvious to me that all of us at NV, including Devamrita Swami, Umapati Swami, and Radhanath Swami, sincerely believed Bhaktipada to be a fixed up pure devotee, the only one in ISKCON who was following Prabhupada cent per cent. We were caught up in the spell, and if there was conflicting evidence against him, we took his side and gave him the benefit of a doubt. Sexual child abuse? Nonsense! Impossible! Blasphemy!

Yet one 17 year old young man (who later testified against Bhaktipada during his 1991 trial in Elkins) had indeed reported to several community leaders including Temple President Kuladri and His Holiness Swami Radhanath in 1987--the same year in which the conversation posted by Eric was recorded--that Bhaktipada had given him oral sex a year earlier, shortly after he had returned from the hospital after his horrific head injury.

It is interesting to observe how the two most respected community leaders responded. Kuladri believed the boy and confronted Bhaktipada about it, and later testified about his confrontation during the trial. All this can be read in the transcripts. Kuladri left the community later that year (1987). He had lost his faith in Bhaktipada.

However, at the time it appears that Radhanath did not know if he should believe the accusations by the gurukula boy or not.

Radhanath many years later explained to me, after I questioned him about this, that he did not publicly speak out against Bhaktipada at the time, because he feared that his denouncement would be seen as a political coupe, or bid for takeover. Radhanath refused to let himself become involved in politics, and therefore decided to leave everything in Krishna'92s hands; to let Krishna take care of the situation. He would simply bide his time.

To be continued: post too long.

Perhaps readers might be interested in more details regarding Bhaktipadas expulsion from ISKCON:

---------------

After years of feuding with Bhaktipada, a GBC commission committee asked him to resign because '93of his abuse of the philosophy and all his legal problems.'94 Bhaktipada replied, '93I'92ll never resign.'94 (7)

On Monday, March 16, 1987, during their annual meeting at Mayapur, India, the ISKCON Governing Body Commission expelled Bhaktipada from the society for '93moral and theological deviations.'94 They claimed he acted in defiance of ISKCON'92s policies and also attempted to establish himself as the sole spiritual heir to Prabhupada'92s movement. Thirteen members voted for the resolution, two abstained, and one member, Bhaktitirtha Swami, voted against the resolution. After Bhaktitirtha Swami openly supported Kirtanananda, news of his preaching in Africa was banned from publication in the ISKCON World Review.

Ravindra Svarupa Das succinctly explained on the Larry King national television show, '93We worked very hard to expel Kirtanananda from the Hare Krishna movement. We found him a separatist, ambitious, arrogant, duplicitous. He was running his own movement. He was like a loose cannon on deck, and meanwhile more and more crimes were coming to light. . . . He'92s the fly in the ointment. He claims to be the heir of Prabhupada'92s movement.'94

--Cut--

Bhaktipada held a news conference at his home on April 8 about his expulsion from ISKCON and announced that his disciples intended to sue the GBC for their attempt to expel him. '93I'92m not taking any legal action myself,'94 he said. '93My disciples are taking the action. They are instituting a $50 million suit in India and a $100 million suit in the United States.'94 Bhaktipada added that the GBC operated illegally because they have violated the bylaws of ISKCON. '93The GBC members do not have carte blanche to do anything they please. . . . Legally speaking, the GBC is an Indian organization. It is organized under Indian law, and has no legal status in the United States. The members of the GBC have no authority to expel me, but my disciples are going to sue them for defamation and resultant damages to our Society. . . . I am the real ISKCON because ISKCON belongs to those who follow the rules, not to those who cheat and play politics. Some of the people who spoke against me in India have now been exposed for immoral behavior. How can they claim to represent ISKCON?'94 (12)

Bhaktipada also said he planned to call a meeting of all ISKCON life members at New Vrindaban to elect a new GBC according to the ISKCON charter. He claimed, '93They'92ve separated me. I will prove I am the real successor to our founder. They'92ve forced me to do it. It is not my intention and not my desire, but I'92m doing it in order to protect my devotees.'94 (13)

Bhaktipada wrote, '93There is no split in the real ISKCON. There are only sincere followers and insincere ones. The sincere ones chant sixteen rounds a day, follow the four regulative principles, and always preach Krishna consciousness. Those who don'92t aren'92t sincere.'94 (14)

-----------------------

Notes:

7. Kirtanananda Swami Bhaktipada, quoted by Lindsey Gruson in '93Two Hare Krishna Teachers Are Accused,'94 The New York Times (February 18, 1987).

12. Kirtanananda Swami Bhaktipada, cited in '93Local Swami'92s Disciples to Sue World Board,'94 Moundsville Daily Echo (April 8, 1987), 1.

13. Kirtanananda Swami Bhaktipada, quoted in '93Swami Claims Krishnas Forcing Him Into Takeover Try,'94 Wheeling News-Register (April 8, 1987), 1.

14. Kirtanananda Swami Bhaktipada, from a letter to Narasingha Guru Das (Athens, Ohio) dated January 9, 1987.

------------------

P.S. Priyavrata Prabhu, are you still here? Ive been wanting to get in touch with you for several years. Please send me a note to henrydoktorski [at] gmail [dot] com. Many thanks, godbrother!

I would like to know what is fanatics definition of fanatic. Just so that next time I meet one i know...

Something like anyone against me (me = guru + sastra + sadhu). :)

A fanatic is a man who consciously over compensates a secret doubt. (Huxley)

[quote][cite] mishra:[/cite]A fanatic is a man who consciously over compensates a secret doubt. (Huxley)[/quote]

good quote. Srila Prabhupada said that fanaticism is the inability to listen to logic and reason.

Here is a strange article on it: http://www.dandavats.com/?p=5615

It appears to me that one defeats the fanatic precisely by not being a fanatic oneself, but on the contrary by using ones intelligence - George Orwell