Reflections on a conversation

There is a devotee in my temple who I had always admired from afar; he behaved very sweetly with everyone, not talking much 'prajalpa', always chanting and always having a nice smile for everyone. I never spoke with him much but we always exchanged greetings. A rather sweet person.

A conversation I had with him last week changed my opinion completely. Basically we were just having a chat about this-and-that when the topic came to sadhana (japa, etc). Then he started off with the usual "Prabhupada made many adjustments" line, so since we were talking about japa I decided to mention the "four rounds" rule. His face immediately screwed up so I quickly qualified my comments; "It may be that Prabhupada 'adjusted' the standard from 64 to 16, but it is interesting to note that throughout the whole Gaudiya tradition the barest minimum is taken at 4 rounds." I didn't have any particular agenda to push, as far as I was concerned we were just having an informal discussion.

Then he leaned over close to me and said, "I know where that idea comes from - Gaudiya Math." Well no, it didn't. The Gaudiya Math sure have this 4-round thing in their books (specifically, Sridhara Maharaja) but I was actually referring to the wider world of traditional Gaudiya Vaishnavism, something that this devotee obviously had no clue about and would just as easily dismiss the "babajis" just as he dismissed Gaudiya Math. Although I tried to explain to him that chanting four rounds is not meant to be a maximum for lazy people, but the barest minimum, fully affirming all injunctions to chant 16/64/lakh, but this guy just wouldn't understand. He then went into some sort of quiet tirade about the Gaudiya Math were watering the standards down even though their original founder (Sri Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati) had set it at 64.

I quickly understood that there was no point in continuing this discussion and, just then, the time came for arati and so we ended it there and went about our business. We also discussed some other interesting points, but I just wanted to reflect on this issue. It seems to me that a lot of people in ISKCON still suffer from the mentality of criticising other Vaishnavas and/or their organisations. Even though the GBC has formally banned criticising Sridhara Maharaja (et al.) in one of their resolutions, I could just see this devotee dismissing it ("GBC? What GBC? They are also watering things down").

But it is not a problem about GBC, Gaudiya Math or anything else. It is about the deep-set problem of criticising or blaspheming other Vaishnavas, which is the mad-elephant offence that is responsible for the complete uprooting of the tender bhakti-lata. It's amazing to see how far I've come too; a couple of years ago I would have totally agreed with this devotee and we would have chinwagged about setting the entire Gaudiya world to rights, but I just found this rhetoric deeply offensive and hurtful. I didn't get the chance to remind him: amanina mana dena, [One must] offer all respects to everyone. And needless to say, I no longer consider this devotee to be the sweet person that I thought he was. I was actually angry about it, but anyway I have decided that it is bad company to associate with those who offend other Vaishnavas, and this is perfectly in keeping with Vaishnava principles. Of course I will continue to greet him as a matter of politeness but I am not interested in any long discussions which is a shame since we also discussed many interesting things in Sri Visvanatha's Sarartha-Darshini (apparently in some kalpas Krishna visits Mathura riding on Kaliya instead of Garuda).

It's just a pity that he doesn't even know how wrong and offensive he is being; in his own mind he is staying true and faithful to the path chalked out by Prabhupada and there is nothing wrong with that in itself, but it becomes a burden when one points fingers at other Vaishnavas in a critical tone. First of all the discussion wasn't even on equal terms; he clearly had an idea that he was a "senior" devotee and I was a "junior" which account for the condescending style of some of his points. More on that in the next post.

To be honest I have been stewing about it all week and have been very hurt by it. I don't know why, maybe I am just getting disillusioned again. Yet another person who I thought would be good association turns out to be just like the rest. It's so hard trying to find the "ideal association", the sadhu-sanga that Mahaprabhu and His great devotees have praised so much. Maybe that's why sadhu-sanga is so praiseworthy, because it's so hard to find a real sadhu?

And then today I got a massive idea. I was reflecting on the bountiful prema of Nityananda and Gauranga after quietly singing 'Parama Karuna' to myself: The one thing that we have to keep in mind above all others is how Nitai and Gauranga came and opened Their arms for everyone without exception. I wonder if the human mind can even comprehend such boundless compassion and kripa? With the sole exception of Vaishnava-aparadha, Nitai and Gaura accept everyone into Their fold regardless of past histories, sins, and other disqualifications. They even tolerate insults and abuse against Themselves but They don't care. No one should be turned away. Contemplating this brings a feeling of humility.

And what this means is that since Nitai and Gaura have opened Their arms for everyone, you can be sure you cannot get along with absolutely everyone. But we must make an effort to try and do so if only to honour and uphold Their desire. It's not an easy task because much personal development has to be undergone before one can reach the stage of real implementation of trinad api sunicena taror iva sahisnuna. No wonder Kaviraja Gosvami said we must make a garland of this verse and string it around our necks, it is that important!! A lot of complications may arise but they should put aside in the face of the larger purpose of coming together under Nitai-Gaura's banner.