Is rejecting a fallen leader optional?
Philosophy · asked by user [] · 2008-06-02 · 3 answers
SB 7.15.38-39
guc0u7771 hasthasya kriyu257 -tyu257 go
vrata-tyu257 go vau7789 orapi
tapasvino gru257 ma-sevu257
bhiku7779 or indriya-lolatu257
u257 u347 ramu257 pasadu257 hy ete
khalv u257 u347 rama-viu7693 ambanu257 u7717
deva-mu257 yu257 -vimu363 u7693 hu257 u7745 s tu257 n
upeku7779 etu257 nukampayu257
TRANSLATION
It is abominable for a person living in the gu7771 hastha-u257 u347 rama to give up the regulative principles, for a brahmacu257 ru299 not to follow the brahmacu257 ru299 vows while living under the care of the guru, for a vu257 naprastha to live in the village and engage in so-called social activities, or for a sannyu257 su299 to be addicted to sense gratification. One who acts in this way is to be considered the lowest renegade. Such a pretender is bewildered by the external energy of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and one should either reject him from any position, or taking compassion upon him, teach him, if possible, to resume his original position.
PURPORT
We have repeatedly stressed that human culture does not begin unless one takes to the principles of varu7751 u257 u347 rama-dharma. Although gu7771 hastha life is a concession for the enjoyment of sex, one cannot enjoy sex without following the rules and regulations of householder life. Furthermore, as already instructed, a brahmacu257 ru299 must live under the care of the guru: brahmacu257 ru299 guru-kule vasan du257 nto guror hitam [SB 7.12.1]. If a brahmacu257 ru299 does not live under the care of the guru, if a vu257 naprastha engages in ordinary activities, or if a sannyu257 su299 is greedy and eats meat, eggs and all kinds of nonsense for the satisfaction of his tongue, he is a cheater and should immediately be rejected as unimportant. Such persons should be shown compassion, and if one has sufficient strength one should teach them to stop them from following the wrong path in life. Otherwise one should reject them and pay them no attention.
------------------------------
My thoughts:
Here we are given the option to either reject the fallen sannyasi or, if we have sufficient strength, compassionately teach him to resume his original position. There isnt a singular directive for how to react to such an abomination - the principle is given and the onus is then upon us to apply discretion in its application.
I do think that this decision could be influenced by the cultural environment of the persons involved. We are sometimes taught that a wife should not reject her husband even if he is fallen. Yet in the west, dismantling families is a lot more convenient than in eastern cultures. Some leaders in ISKCON have even taken it upon themselves to separate husband and father from wife and kids when he didnt tow the party line (Sulocana). Some westerners take these relationships as practically disposable, whereas in India this isnt so common. Hopefully it stays that way.
Similarly, some view their connection to guru in a similar context as the marriage commitment. Once formally initiated in front of the fire, thats it for life through all the ups and downs. The idea of rejecting may be very difficult for someone with this cultural outlook.
Does sastra accommodate that view? In this verse it does seem to.
-------------------------------
Another example where we are given options is when we hear someone blaspheme the Lord or someone pure like Srila Prabhupada.
We can then:
- cut out their tongue
- convince them to retract their offensive remark by sound reasoning
- leave the place
Again, we are required to use discretion.
-------------------------------
In the situation where the guru is speaking nonsense philosophy it doesnt seem like we are given an option though.
Nu257 rada-pancaru257 tra, as cited in Hari-bhakti-vilu257 sa, 1.62, states:
yo vyakti nyu257 ya rahitam
anyu257 yena u347 u7771 u7751 oti yau7717
tu257 v ubhau narakau7745 ghorau7745
vrajatau7717 ku257 lam aku7779 ayam
'93'91Any person posing as an u257 cu257 rya, but speaking unauthorized philosophy contrary to the teachings of the u347 u257 stra and any one who claims to be his disciple and hears such, thereby lending credibility to such nonsense, both of these are bound for Hell.'92
---------------------------
So Im interested to learn what our panel of sages thinks about these above pramanas. What do you think about how I understand them?
guc0u7771 hasthasya kriyu257 -tyu257 go
vrata-tyu257 go vau7789 orapi
tapasvino gru257 ma-sevu257
bhiku7779 or indriya-lolatu257
u257 u347 ramu257 pasadu257 hy ete
khalv u257 u347 rama-viu7693 ambanu257 u7717
deva-mu257 yu257 -vimu363 u7693 hu257 u7745 s tu257 n
upeku7779 etu257 nukampayu257
TRANSLATION
It is abominable for a person living in the gu7771 hastha-u257 u347 rama to give up the regulative principles, for a brahmacu257 ru299 not to follow the brahmacu257 ru299 vows while living under the care of the guru, for a vu257 naprastha to live in the village and engage in so-called social activities, or for a sannyu257 su299 to be addicted to sense gratification. One who acts in this way is to be considered the lowest renegade. Such a pretender is bewildered by the external energy of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and one should either reject him from any position, or taking compassion upon him, teach him, if possible, to resume his original position.
PURPORT
We have repeatedly stressed that human culture does not begin unless one takes to the principles of varu7751 u257 u347 rama-dharma. Although gu7771 hastha life is a concession for the enjoyment of sex, one cannot enjoy sex without following the rules and regulations of householder life. Furthermore, as already instructed, a brahmacu257 ru299 must live under the care of the guru: brahmacu257 ru299 guru-kule vasan du257 nto guror hitam [SB 7.12.1]. If a brahmacu257 ru299 does not live under the care of the guru, if a vu257 naprastha engages in ordinary activities, or if a sannyu257 su299 is greedy and eats meat, eggs and all kinds of nonsense for the satisfaction of his tongue, he is a cheater and should immediately be rejected as unimportant. Such persons should be shown compassion, and if one has sufficient strength one should teach them to stop them from following the wrong path in life. Otherwise one should reject them and pay them no attention.
------------------------------
My thoughts:
Here we are given the option to either reject the fallen sannyasi or, if we have sufficient strength, compassionately teach him to resume his original position. There isnt a singular directive for how to react to such an abomination - the principle is given and the onus is then upon us to apply discretion in its application.
I do think that this decision could be influenced by the cultural environment of the persons involved. We are sometimes taught that a wife should not reject her husband even if he is fallen. Yet in the west, dismantling families is a lot more convenient than in eastern cultures. Some leaders in ISKCON have even taken it upon themselves to separate husband and father from wife and kids when he didnt tow the party line (Sulocana). Some westerners take these relationships as practically disposable, whereas in India this isnt so common. Hopefully it stays that way.
Similarly, some view their connection to guru in a similar context as the marriage commitment. Once formally initiated in front of the fire, thats it for life through all the ups and downs. The idea of rejecting may be very difficult for someone with this cultural outlook.
Does sastra accommodate that view? In this verse it does seem to.
-------------------------------
Another example where we are given options is when we hear someone blaspheme the Lord or someone pure like Srila Prabhupada.
We can then:
- cut out their tongue
- convince them to retract their offensive remark by sound reasoning
- leave the place
Again, we are required to use discretion.
-------------------------------
In the situation where the guru is speaking nonsense philosophy it doesnt seem like we are given an option though.
Nu257 rada-pancaru257 tra, as cited in Hari-bhakti-vilu257 sa, 1.62, states:
yo vyakti nyu257 ya rahitam
anyu257 yena u347 u7771 u7751 oti yau7717
tu257 v ubhau narakau7745 ghorau7745
vrajatau7717 ku257 lam aku7779 ayam
'93'91Any person posing as an u257 cu257 rya, but speaking unauthorized philosophy contrary to the teachings of the u347 u257 stra and any one who claims to be his disciple and hears such, thereby lending credibility to such nonsense, both of these are bound for Hell.'92
---------------------------
So Im interested to learn what our panel of sages thinks about these above pramanas. What do you think about how I understand them?
user [154] · 2008-06-03
Usually if one becomes 1) an atheist 2) a mayavadi or 3) hopelessly engrossed in gross sense gratification (eats meat, eggs and all kinds of nonsense) and demands self praise a follower can consider rejecting such leader after a due process of trying to help him. However majority of what some ISKCON fanatics call fallen leaders are actually nice devotees (with a problem or two or a resolved problem in the past). Of course there are different kinds of sages, and according to different muni you will get a different opinion, but in general and culturally pancaratrica tradition does not allow rejection of a leader, that one has voluntary selected (unlike a kula-guru who is imposed) and there is no such thing in the tradition and sastra. A few years back there was a case of a disciple of Krishnadasa swami trying to reject his guru and to follow BT swami. Two swamis were critical of each other, but essentially, sastra did not support one guru taking away disciples of another, what to speak of giving a re-initiation. Probably the major difficulty is a disregard to sastra that is prevalent in some ISKCON circles, and that is one of the main reasons for huge difficulties with leadership, as people keep fabricating systems of leadership without knowledge of the sastra or even on purpose going against sastras based on some temporary concerns such as humanism or equality or institutional innovation.user [19] · 2008-06-03
you may want to listen to this seminar:Dynamics of Vedic Psychology by Bhakti Vidya Purna Maharaj
http://gokulananda.co.uk/?q=taxonomy/SocialPsychology
He said there that all this problems are because we westeners understand the philosophy but not the culture.
user [149] · 2008-06-04
If we didnt have the option of rejecting a fallen leader, wouldnt that constitute blind following?Id be interested to find out what the term "sufficient strength" refers to in the sentence from Prabhupadas above purport "...if one has sufficient strength one should teach them to stop them from following the wrong path in life."