Tags

, ,

This is a response to a comment from Dharmapad on the About page part 2. He wrote:

Sanyas was part of the general environment of aversion to the opposite sex that was established. Why? Well, if you turn your efforts towards supporting and developing your family life, instead of working and giving everything to the movement, then the preaching effort stops. No more farm lands get bought, no more temple buildings, no more books, et cetera. I imagine that is why.

I don’t think that is why Prabhupada made ISKCON the way it is. Householders did a lot of the temple starting, sannyasis usually just preached, but the business of getting things done was done by many householders. Prabhupada would brag that his sannyasi contemporaries couldn’t get a temple started in London, but a few of his married disciples were able to do so with great success — corralling in the Beatles.

You also wrote:

So family life suffered in spite of any rhetoric, (and I am disappointed that he didn’t give more to his family), and oftentimes gays took sanyas because they wouldn’t be at all sympathetic to family life. Much more of a life subjugated to bureaucratic hierarchy was asked from us that the average person could cope with so, of course, devotees walked off the job in droves.

But I still wish to point out the other side of things … he established and built temples with the money and printed books. Would it all have happened if devotee men and women had mingled freely?

I think your question at the end is answered by your preceding statement. It wasn’t just the management system which caused people to walk away, it was also the social system.

One of Prabhupada’s biggest mistakes was the social system he created, which is wrongly cited as a brilliant innovation by him and his followers. He tried to combine the traditional ashram lifestyle with that of the Indian social lifestyle. Traditional ashrams were single sex for a reason, when you put men and women so closely together you can’t demand that they ignore each other, as Prabhupada did.

Traditional ashrams are either all men or all women, the entire point of ashram life is to live in a setting completely cut off from all interference to a contemplative life. The worst thing you can do is mingle the sexes because the opposite sex is the single biggest distraction for most people (obviously for gay people this isn’t the case).

The result in ISKCON is you have a lot of people who outwardly look like monks, but inwardly are obsessively thinking about the opposite sex all the time. On the one hand they preach that the best life to lead is that of a brahmachari (celibate monk) but then those brahmacharis are constantly surrounded by young women. They also preach that there should be no social interaction between men and women besides husband and wife, and even then the wife should act the part of a servant to her husband and treat him like her guru, and should only have sex to make babies.

What those teachings lead to is a dysfunctional social system, both for married and unmarried people, and we have seen the truth of that fact come to fruition. Most people who join ISKCON don’t remain involved for very long, and divorce is rampant. The reasons are:

1) They tire of the sadhana demanded of them (waking up by 4 a.m. every day)
2) They tire of following the policies of celibacy and no intoxication
3) They tire of working without making money for themselves
4) They tire of the autocratic management system (not feeling free to do as they like)
5) They tire of the judgmental social system which looks down on the above 4 things as well as free friendly social interaction between non-spousal men and women, and husband and wife

If ISKCON or other Gaudiya sanghas really want to be successful in expanding from where they are and have been, they need to change the above things which are holding them back and keeping them stagnant. You don’t need to act and live as they proclaim as an absolute necessity in order to live and advance in spiritual understanding. They insist they are presenting an authentic recreation of Vedic life, but in reality that is not true. In Vedic society men and women weren’t so restricted, women didn’t have to cover themselves (see http://harekrishnawomen.wordpress.com/2010/07/18/l-a-woman/ ) celibacy and teetotalism wasn’t the norm, ganja was a major part of their lives (see Vedic use of cannabis) as was alcohol, madhu (mead–honeywine) was consumed regularly.

If ISKCON or similar organizations want to be able to really expand and be successful in keeping people involved they need to radically change what they present and how they expect people to live. Make it more about having a good time and less about being a strictly priggish and puritanical (socially) movement.

In fact Prabhupada may have insisted that sex for any other purpose than procreation and any type of intoxication is harmful and sinfully against God, but he did make an exception for Kshatriyas:

From his purport to Srimad Bhagavatam 4.22.13:

Four kinds of sinful activities — associating with woman for illicit sex, eating meat, intoxication and gambling — are allowed for the kṣatriyas. For political reasons, sometimes they have to take to these sinful activities. Kṣatriyas do not refrain from gambling. One vivid example is the Pāṇḍavas. When the Pāṇḍavas were challenged by the opposite party, Duryodhana, to gamble and risk their kingdom, they could not refrain, and by that gambling they lost their kingdom, and their wife was insulted. Similarly, the kṣatriyas cannot refrain from fighting if challenged by the opposite party.

In Vedic stories you hear often of famous ksatriyas having all sorts of sex, intoxication, gambling, even meat eating! So here we see a double standard, invented by Prabhupada to try and explain why famous Vaishnavas from Vedic history didn’t follow “the 4 regulative principles.” Sex is sinful unless you are a kshatriya? That makes no sense. There is no logical reason that sex for pleasure is sinful. The idea that men lose health, virility and intelligence is not backed up by anyone’s experience. Sex is good for you. Are ISKCON swamis shining standards of health and virility? Not so much. How about intelligence? Is everyone having regular sex stupid from your experience?

The idea that loss of semen for men is unhealthy and causes less intelligence is wrong. There is no way for semen to transform into a substance or travel anywhere in the body which can affect your health or intellect. How can intelligence be helped by semen? What is semen but some chemicals? Chemicals do not aid intelligence, intelligence comes from paramatma from control over our minds and intellect, not from chemicals. Loss of semen doesn’t make you unhealthy either. That’s a myth propagated by the tantric yoga traditions, which seek mythical mystic powers which never actually come, and is a contamination into the bhakti tradition, which is supposed to teach that health is karmic. It’s your destiny to be healthy or unhealthy regardless of what you do. God controls health and intelligence, not chemicals or magic from semen.

And even if that was true, how about tantric sex where you don’t lose semen? Or how about women having to be celibate?

Why did Krishna create the male-female dynamic only to then insist we must resist at all costs what is natural for all of us? How is getting a massage any different than sex? Both are the rubbing of skin, but one is great and the other sinful? It simply makes no sense that God would demand that we give up sex for pleasure when it’s painfully obvious that sex life for us was specifically designed for pleasure, if not then we would be like most animals who are only interested in sex at certain times, i.e. when they are in heat. But we’re not like that, sexual relationships are designed by God to be a major focus of our lives, and even in the ultimate spiritual reality the same thing is true.

The true teachings of Gaudiya Vaisnavism is that strictly following and depending on following the rules and regulations, or vaidhi bhakti, is considered the lower path and strictly for neophytes, not something that has to be followed by everyone for your entire life, even Prabhupada said just that on a handful or very rare occasions where the truth slipped out:

From http://vanisource.org/wiki/Lecture_on_SB_1.2.33_–_Vrndavana,_November_12,_1972

Prabhupada: So you have to uncover. You have to discover. That discovering process is devotional service. The more you are engaged in devotional service, the more your senses become pure or uncovered. And when it is completely uncovered, without any designation, then you are capable to serve Kṛṣṇa. This is apprenticeship. Vaidhī-bhakti, that is apprenticeship. Real bhakti, parā-bhakti, that is rāgānugā-bhakti. This rāgānugā-bhakti, we have to come after surpassing the vaidhī-bhakti. In the material world, if we do not try to make further and further progress in devotional service, if we are simply sticking to the shastric regulation process and do not try to go beyond that… Shastric process also regulation, that is required. Without shastric process you cannot go to that platform. But if we stick to the shastric process only and do not try to improve ourself… The shastric process is kaniṣṭha-adhikāra, lowest stage of devotional service.

From Nectar of Devotion:

Persons desiring to follow in the footsteps of such eternal devotees of the Lord as the Vrsnis and the Vrindavana denizens are called raganuga devotees, which means that they are trying to attain to the perfection of those devotees. These raganuga devotees don’t follow the regulative principles of devotional service very strictly, but by spontaneous nature they become attracted to some of the eternal devotees such as Nanda or Yasoda, and they try to follow in their footsteps spontaneously. There is a gradual development of the ambition to become like a particular devotee, and this activity is called raganuga.

From Sri Caitanya Caritamrta Madhya.8.221

In all, there are sixty-four items listed for the rendering of service unto Krsna, and these are the regulative principles enjoined in the sastras and given by the spiritual master. One has to serve Krsna according to these regulative principles, but if one develops spontaneous love for Krsna as exhibited in the activities of those who live in Vrajabhumi, one attains the platform of raganuga-bhakti. One who has developed this spontaneous love is eligible for elevation to the platform enjoyed by the inhabitants of Vrajabhumi. In Vrajabhumi, there are no regulative principles set forth for Krsna’s service. Rather, everything is carried out in spontaneous, natural love for Krsna. There is no question of following the principles of the Vedic system. Such principles are followed within this material world, and as long as one is on the material platform, he has to execute them. However, spontaneous love of Krsna is transcendental. It may seem that the regulative principles are being violated, but the devotee is on the transcendental platform. Such service is called gunatita, or nirguna, for it is not contaminated by the three modes of material nature.