Atmanivedana das: A fallacy, which for a few devotees, seems in vogue is that our ISKCON Founder-Acarya, Srila Prabhupada, who is the ultimate savior of humanity in Kali-Yuga, makes false statements about things of this world.
Now Srila Prabhupada acknowledged that he made errors in his grammar and spelling, etc., and asked for his work to be edited. Such mistakes in form are par for the course for the perfected soul. Indeed, S.B. 1.5.11 states: “Verses describing the name, form and qualities of Anantadeva, the unlimited Supreme Lord, are able to vanquish all the sinful reactions of the entire world. Therefore even if such verses are improperly composed, devotees hear them, describe them and accept them as bona fide and authorized.” Thus, the *form* in which a pure devotee makes a substantive statement may be imperfect, but the *substance* of the statement is pure knowledge descending from Goloka Vrindavana. “Golokera prema dhana harinama sankirtana…”
Acknowledging that a composition of Srila Prabhupada may be flawed in its form is completely different from claiming that there may be flaws in the subject matter of Srila Prabhupada’s statements about the constitutional nature of things and living entities in this and other worlds. When Srila Prabhupada makes such statements, we should understand that they are 100% in line with Krsna’s teachings. Generally such affirmative statements by Srila Prabhupada are confirmed by sastra. Where on occasion Srila Prabhupada says something that is not discussed directly in sastra such as the fallacy of the claim that we visited the moon, then we must accept that Srila Prabhupada knows what he is saying because he understands the implications of sastra and/or that Krsna conveyed such knowledge to him personally. Consider, for example, the famous story in which Srila Prabhupada corrected his disciple and said that he is literally seeing Krsna personally at all times.
I brought up Srila Prabhupada’s statement regarding our not having visited the moon as an example to shed light on the difference between finding fault in the form of statements made by the completely pure devotee and finding fault in the substance of his statements. I also used that example because some devotees, who consider themselves realistic and non-fanatical, may think or argue that one whose intelligence is functioning properly based on contemporary knowledge in fields such as science, sociology, psychology, would consider some of Srila Prabhupada’s statements, including his claim that we did not go to the moon, to be wrong and due to his supposed conditioned understanding. That would indicate that such devotees do not merely think that Srila Prabhupada can only make trivial mistakes in form, such as in spelling, but that they think that substantive points that Srila Prabhupada has made in his analysis of how we as human beings are affected by the modes of nature are also sometimes wrong and due to a conditioned vision.
As soon as one questions the supremacy of the substance of the words of the Founder Acarya of ISKCON even a little bit, one can slide down a slippery slope. I.e., if some things that Srila Prabhupada says are due to a conditioned nature, then why should we have to accept anything he says except that which merely repeats the philosophy of Bhagavatam? It follows that as soon as Srila Prabhupada applies Bhagavatam philosophy to this world and to our lives, we can mistakenly object that his supposed material conditioning may be the source of such analysis. Such a slippery slope can lead one downhill very, very fast to the nether regions.
In fact, the reason we need to accept Srila Prabhupada absolutely as our param guru is because he knows how to apply Bhagavatam to our lives. If we don’t want to accept our Srila Prabhupada’s analysis of real-life situations, then in effect we are only taking shelter of the book Bhagavatam, while casting off the person-Bhagavata. Yet, that is not what Krsna tells us we must do. Krsna teaches that we must accept guru to understand the absolute truth. B.G. 4.34. Therefore, for someone who accepts Krsna’s teachings, the premise — that Srila Prabhupada makes statements that in some cases are substantively false — must be wrong.
Your servant,
Atmanivedana das, New York
Comments