In the wake of the recent downfall of His Holiness Vipramukhya Swami, we wish to say that we will miss him. He has done much for ISKCON and inspired many people, and we pray to Krishna to protect him. Srila Prabhupada himself used to say that failure is the pillar of success. So even in this very difficult time for Maharaja, and for us who were his friends, well-wishers, or followers, we feel that there are some lessons to be learned from this episode, for the benefit of devotees of the Krishna conscious movement.

The second verse of Nectar of Instruction describes prajalpa (talking unnecessarily about mundane subject matters) as one of the anarthas that destroys one's devotional service. From the passages below, it is evident that Maharaja was mainly a victim of prajalpa.

Here are some excerpts from a letter Maharaja published on the CHAKRA website sometime back, which was written by a devotee cautioning him regarding his indulgence in prajalpa,etc.:

On your website we find a "doctored" picture of yourself flying on a broom stick in front of a painting of the rasa dance, which is just one among many strange pictures that you have put up on your website over the years. What purpose justifies the time spent on the creation of such pictures and their ridicule of the sannyasa ashram? And need you really inform the world about the Atkins diet and the books of Dr. Atkins? After all, the diet is almost purely meat based and his books are full of encouragement for eating meat. How do you believe to underline the graveness of the sannyasa ashram by using an online shopping cart system linked to a PayPal account for accepting donations, a live webcam, and a travel diary full of mundane topics? I am asking you.

Your Pilgrim's Diary, which is clearly an imitation of Indradyumna Swami's Diary of a Traveling Preacher, shows where your mind is at most of the time--and that isn't with spirituality. Whereas Indradyumna Swami's diary is full of spiritual realization, preaching efforts, and non-stop programs meant to spread the mission of the Lord, your diary is filled with talk about electronic gadgets and vacation experiences. I never find any substantial spiritual content.

For example, the recent entry of Wednesday, May 8, 2002. You tell your audience how bored you are with flying and watching the same old boring movies on airplanes. You tell them all kinds of technical details about your latest expensive laptop computer, and a longwinded story about your lost and found Palm handheld computer. After these mundane topics, you tell them that you are happy that you are not paying for any of your overseas travels yourself. [1]

And here is part of Maharaja's response:

"Well you got that right. To you. Anyway. If you're unhappy with me, and with my response to your email, you, fortunately, have another way to deal with wayward sannyasis like me. You can write a letter of complaint to the ISKCON Sannyasa Minister. I've taken the liberty of sending him a copy of this email message just to get you started."

Other prajalpa which Vipramukhya Swami was responsible for was written not directly by him but nonetheless had his sanction. He was one of the founding editors of CHAKRA, and under his editorship many texts that criticized or belittled Srila Prabhupada were posted thereon. Criticizing the Lord or his pure devotee is a sure way to check one's progress in Krishna consciousness. For instance, Dvivida Gorilla was once a soldier in Lord Rama's army and fought valiantly against Ravana; but Dvivida later criticized Laksmana, and because of this offense he became a demon and was later killed by Lord Balarama.

Below are excerpts of some of the offensive texts that were allowed to air on CHAKRA:

"Rather like a colorful eccentric, he [Srila Prabhupada] held some obviously wrong opinions -- for example, about the size of a woman's brain, or about the merits of astrology. None of this in any way detracts from my love for him as my real spiritual father. Rather, in some sense, it makes him more loveable, approachable and human, and less like some aloof demigod, which he clearly was not. He was a real person with whom one could have the warmest of all relationships. That he was flawed in minor ways only emphasizes his near approach to perfection in everything that was important."

"Erroneous Data of the Colorful Eccentric," by Ananda das (December 27, 1999) [3]

"With such an attitude we do not have to don blinkers whenever we see evidence that Srila Prabhupada was mistaken in his judgment of women and other things. This is what it means to not follow blindly."

"Can the Guru Make Mistakes?" by Niscala devi dasi (August 15, 2001) [4]

"I truly believe that each different type of human being has a special exalted gift and it was a desire of an individual to give that particular gift which caused incarnation into say, a black body. I've read all the stuff Srila Prabhupada said, and I used to try to justify it. But in my actual dealings with black people I find them very wise in a very special way. So finally I have to go with depth.. . . . If I were black, my hair would be natural, and I would possibly be an activist. If you were black, would you feel ashamed?"

"Women as a Subhuman Species?" by Nandarani devi dasi (September 9, 2001) [5]

A common thread among the texts criticizing Srila Prabhupada is that his views on particular social issues were wrong. In order to prove that Srila Prabhupada could definitely be wrong about social issues, the authors gave evidence that in some circumstances Srila Prabhupada was indeed capable of erring. They argue that since Srila Prabhupada was mistaken in certain circumstances, then why not also about other things, like women's issues and racial issues? Srila Prabhupada was once asked how to properly understand a liberated acarya's apparent mistakes, and he answered:

Jayadvaita: ...they know everything and they're perfect in everything. But sometimes, from our material viewpoint, we see some discrepancies. Just like we think that...
Prabhupada: Because material viewpoint. The viewpoint is wrong; therefore you find discrepancies.
Jayadvaita: So we should think that we have the defect.
Prabhupada: Yes. Acarya is explained, bhakti-samsanah: "One who's preaching the cult of devotional service, he's acarya." Then why should you find any discrepancy?
Jayadvaita: Because we see... For instance, sometimes the acarya may seem to forget something or not to know something, so from our point of view, if someone has forgotten, that is...
Prabhupada: No, no, no. Then...
Jayadvaita: ...an imperfection.
Prabhupada: That is not the... Then you do not understand. Acarya is not God, omniscient. He is servant of God. His business is to preach bhakti cult. That is acarya.
Jayadvaita: And that is the perfection.
Prabhupada: That is the perfection. Hare Krsna.
Jayadvaita: So we have a misunderstanding about what perfection is?
Prabhupada: Yes. Perfection is here, how he is preaching bhakti cult. That's all.
 
(Morning Walk, 8 April 1975, Mayapura)

This teaches us that finding discrepancies in the liberated devotee is due to worldly vision. So-called faults in the liberated devotee should be overlooked. But the question remains: Are Srila Prabhupada's stated views about women, Blacks, and other politically sensitive topics to be regarded as discrepancies that should be overlooked? The key for answering this question is whether or not Srila Prabhupada's views are supported by sastra. In fact Srila Prabhupada's views on these topics are supported by sastra.

Regarding Srila Prabhupada's statements about Blacks, we find them to be similar to his criticisms of other races. Srila Prabhupada did not single out Blacks for criticism and spare other peoples. For example, we find that his frequent criticism of Caucasians was scathing: "Western civilization is a rascal civilization. I do not take they are civilized even. No. White aborigines. That's all." (Morning walk, January 24, 1977, Bhuvaneshwar). Or about the Chinese: "Chinese, they eat everything. (laughter) They eat rats also. Rats, snakes. They are candalas." (Room conversation with John Griesser, 10 March 1972, Vrindavan) According to sastra these races are considered fallen:

kirata-hunandhra-pulinda-pulkasa
abhira-sumbha yavanah khasadayah
ye 'nye ca papa yad-apasrayasrayah
sudhyanti tasmai prabhavisnave namah

Kirata, Huna, Andhra, Pulinda, Pulkasa, Abhira, Sumbha, Yavana, members of the Khasa races and even others addicted to sinful acts can be purified by taking shelter of the devotees of the Lord, due to His being the supreme power. I beg to offer my respectful obeisances unto Him. (Srimad-Bhagavatam 2.4.18)

In the purport of this verse Srila Prabhupada describes the Pulindas as the Greeks, from whom Western civilization has descended, and the Hunas as the Europeans, who later inherited the Greek legacy. The Khasas are the Chinese, or Far-Eastern peoples. The Kiratas are described in the purport as aboriginal peoples from the Kirata province of "old Bharata-varsa." However, it should be noted that Bharata-varsa once comprised what we now call the entire world. In another place Srila Prabhupada describes Kiratas as synonymous with Nisadas, residents of present-day Africa:

You are going to Africa to deliver these persons. Sukadeva Gosvami says, kirata-hunandhra-pulinda-pulkasa abhira-sumbha yavanah khasadayah, ye 'nye ca papa. These groups of men are considered very fallen, kirata, the black men. They are called nisada. Nisada was born of Vena, King Vena. So they are habituated to steal; therefore they have been given a separate place, African jungles. That is there in the Bhagavatam.
(Sannyasa Initiation, 18 November 1975, Bombay)

Srila Prabhupada's remarks about Blacks, which were artfully construed on CHAKRA as racial slurs, are supported by sastra. Therefore they cannot be accepted as "discrepancies that should be overlooked." They were the truth.

Some of Srila Prabhupada's seemingly less than politically correct views on women are also supported by sastra. The two most hotly contested views Srila Prabhupada held about women are that they should always remain under the control of men, and the related idea that women should not be political leaders:

Artificially do not try to become equal with men. That is not allowed in the Vedic sastra. Na striyam svatantratam arhati. That is called sastra. You have to understand that woman is never given to be independence. Independence means just like child has to be taken care, similarly, woman has to be taken care. You cannot let your child go in the street alone. There will be danger. Similarly, according to Vedic civilization, Manu-samhita, woman should be given protection. In this way, acara, this is called acara. So the demons, they do not know. The demons, they do not know what is what, how one thing should be treated, how... They do not know. In the Western countries there is no such distinction between man and woman, but there is. We have to accept it and construct this social institution in that way. Then it will be perfect. (Lecture: Bhagavad-gita 16.7, Hawaii, 2/23/75)

A young girl, if she surrenders to the wishes of the parents, and... That is the system, Vedic system. A woman, by nature, is dependent. Artificially, if woman wants liberty, then his [her] life is unhappy, her life is unhappy. Therefore Vedic system is... I am not manufacturing, I am speaking authorizedly on the Vedic principle. The Manu-samhita, the law of Vedas, Manu, the master of the humankind, Manu... Manu is the father of the mankind. So he has got his lawbook. That Manu-samhita lawbook is still followed in India so far as the Hindus are concerned. So in that book Manu-samhita, it is stated, na striyam svatantram arhati. (Lecture: Seattle, 10/7/68)

We note that Srila Prabhupada took trouble to clarify the authority of his statements. He pointed out that it was not merely his personal viewpoint, but that of sastra. Regarding women political leaders, Srila Prabhupada considered them to be contravening the principle that women should never be given independence:

Here we see that Devaki first focused Kamsa's attention on his atrocious activities, his killing of her many sons. Then she wanted to compromise with him by saying that whatever he had done was not his fault, but was ordained by destiny. Then she appealed to him to give her the daughter as a gift. Devaki was the daughter of a ksatriya and knew how to play the political game. In politics there are different methods of achieving success: first repression (dama), then compromise (sama), and then asking for a gift (dana). Devaki first adopted the policy of repression by directly attacking Kamsa for having cruelly, atrociously killed her babies. Then she compromised by saying that this was not his fault, and then she begged for a gift. As we learn from the history of the Mahabharata, or "Greater India," the wives and daughters of the ruling class, the ksatriyas, knew the political game, but we never find that a woman was given the post of chief executive. This is in accordance with the injunctions of Manu-samhita, but unfortunately Manu-samhita is now being insulted, and the Aryans, the members of Vedic society, cannot do anything. Such is the nature of Kali-yuga. (Srimad-Bhagavatam 10.4.5 Purport)

We have got Mahabharata, there is not a single instance... We had very, very great, qualified women. But they were in charge of state...? Very, very qualified women. You know. Na svatantratam arhati, striyah. For woman there is no independence. The Manu-samhita. They must stay under father, under husband, or under elderly sons. (Evening Darshana, 9 May 1977, Hrishikesh)

In ISKCON there has been much acrimonious debate on this subject; we will not discuss that here. However, our point is that Srila Prabhupada's remarks about women, for which he is being criticized, are supported by sastra. As such, it is erroneous and a great offense to say that Srila Prabhupada was mistaken in his above-mentioned, so-called politically incorrect views of women.

Since the remarks critical of Srila Prabhupada that aired on CHAKRA were thus also criticism of sastra, they were necessarily atheistic. They constitute the fourth offense against chanting Krishna's holy names: sruti-sastra-nindanam, "blaspheming Vedic literatures." They also constitute criticizing devotee preachers like Srila Prabhupada (first offense). These statements, broadcast under Vipramukhya Swami's editorship, certainly did not belong on a devotee forum. Is it any wonder that such serious and prolonged nama- and vaisnava-aparadha caused his loss of taste for chanting Hare Krishna?

There are four lessons to be learned here: (1) do not engage in prajalpa or frivolous mundane activity; (2) never minimize the acarya or find fault in him; (3) never blaspheme Vedic literature; and (4) "where there is smoke there is fire." The first, second, and third lessons have already been explained. The fourth lesson applies to the failure of ISKCON's leadership to correct Maharaja and save him from his frivolous behavior and offenses.

If Maharaja did indeed forward the letter he received to the ISKCON Sannyasa Minister, did that minister investigate? If so, it seems that no action was taken. But if he did not investigate, then why not? Aside from the possibility that there was some investigation, the more important question is: Since it is likely that his authorities did not raise any objection, why should Vipramukhya Swami have taken that letter seriously? Maharaja even asked this question. His question was meant to be rhetorical and the answer obvious--that he was doing fine--but time eventually proved the opposite. It is unlikely that his authorities did not care about Vipramukhya Swami's welfare, so why is it that none of them noticed Maharaja's symptoms of maya? If Maharaja's juniors noticed, how is it possible that his seniors did not? Unfortunately, his seniors were aware of many of the significant details that led to Maharaja's downfall. In January 2000, two of our topmost leaders, H. H. Bhakti Caru Swami and H. H. Sivarama Swami, submitted their resignation after becoming aware of these details.

Your humble servant, Bhakti Caru Swami (See HH Bhakti Caru Swami Resigns >From GBC) [7]

Vipramukhya Swami is not mentioned in this excerpt, but in the full text of his letter Bhakti Caru Swami explicitly pointed out that CHAKRA, which Vipramukhya Swami bore responsibility for, was a venue for minimizing Srila Prabhupada.

More evidence that our leadership was aware of the situation is detailed here (VNN) [8]:

Sivarama Swami Resigns From The GBC [9]
In Defence Of Srila Prabhupada [10]
Ravindra Svarupa Steps On A Land Mine [11]
Ravindra Svarupa's Response To Praghosha [12]
Reply To Rabindra Swarup Prabhu [13]
Senior Or Senile? [14]
Reply To Mother Malati [15]

It is not our intent to fault any specific individual(s) on this matter. But since it is a fact that Vipramukhya Swami's authorities were aware of his spiritually self-destructive activities, it can be said beyond a reasonable doubt that they bear some responsibility for his demise. Yet neither is this dereliction of duty exactly the fault of his authorities. A prominent social attitude many of us bring to ISKCON is the idea that the individual is more important than the social body in which he resides. A legal principle derived from this attitude is that a person is "innocent until proven guilty." While it is certainly desirable that people not be falsely accused of wrong doing, it is no less desirable to save people from harming others or themselves, especially when there is forewarning.

Thus we find that in a society based on varnasrama-dharma, everyone is concerned about each other's spiritual welfare. For example, when Lord Brahma was about to perform the sinful act of uniting with his daughter, the demigods, headed by Marici, approached Brahma to request him to desist. Also, Lord Caitanya was on occasion corrected by Govinda and Damodara Pandita; and of course the Lord Himself acted to correct devotees like Bhagavan Acarya (for associating with a Mayavadi) or superiors like Brahmananda Bharati (for wearing dear skin). In a varnasrama society the social norm is that "everyone's business is everyone's business." This is for our protection, because people are reticent to perform in public sinful acts, or activities considered socially disgraceful.

The fourth lesson to be learned from these unfortunate events is the importance of sad-acara, or good behavior. If someone is not behaving properly, then it is a very good indication that he has a character flaw which, if left uncorrected, could lead to his downfall. Therefore, "where there is smoke, there is fire." Besides this, either because of a lack of will among our leadership to correct Maharaja, or because a section of our leadership considered the complaints brought against him to be without merit, we can say with confidence that a fine devotee and preacher who was Vipramukhya Swami was unnecessarily lost. His downfall might have been prevented.

For whatever reason, Vipramukhya Swami's authorities, even after becoming aware of his irregularities, apparently did not try to save him. That negligence of duty thus partially contributed to Maharaja's feeling that there was nothing wrong with those activities of his which some were questioning; he even said so. This is not to absolve Maharaja of his personal responsibility; he certainly was responsible for his own downfall. However, leaders exist for a reason: People make mistakes, and thus a prominent feature of every civilized society is a class of people whose duty is to guide and correct the rest. But if the leaders do not uphold what is proper, by precept and by example, then why should others be expected to do the right thing? Yad yad acarati sresthas tat tad evetaro janah/ sa yat pramanam kurute lokas tad anuvartate "Whatever action a great man performs, common men follow. And whatever standards he sets by exemplary acts, all the world pursues." (Bhagavad-gita 3.21)

It is presently Kali-yuga, so not only do we have to be very tolerant, but we also have to be very vigilant in practicing Krishna consciousness. We have to help others by looking out for them, and we have to help ourselves by allowing others to look out for us. So how do we protect one another?

First, we must have solid faith in Krishna, in Srila Prabhupada, in the acaryas, and in those contemporary sadhus who are strictly following Srila Prabhupada. In order to factually know what is truth and what is untruth, to know what to do and what not to do, Srila Prabhupada has given us this formula:

Srila Narottama dasa Thakura says, sadhu-sastra-guru-vakya, cittete kariya aikya. One should accept a thing as genuine by studying the words of saintly people, the spiritual master and the sastra. The actual center is the sastra, the revealed scripture. If a spiritual master does not speak according to the revealed scripture, he is not to be accepted. Similarly, if a saintly person does not speak according to the sastra, he is not a saintly person. The sastra is the center for all. (Sri Caitanya-caritamrta 20.352 Purport)

And even if the entire world falls down, we should not:

yah sastra-vidhim utsrjya
vartate kama-karatah
na sa siddhim avapnoti
na sukham na param gatim

tasmac chastram pramanam te
karyakarya-vyavasthitau
jnatva sastra-vidhanoktam
karma kartum iharhasi

"He who discards scriptural injunctions and acts according to his own whims attains neither perfection, nor happiness, nor the supreme destination. One should therefore understand what is duty and what is not duty by the regulations of the scriptures. Knowing such rules and regulations, one should act so that he may gradually be elevated." (Bhagavad-gita 16.23 - 24)

Your servants,

Trivikrama Swami (ACBSP)
Ameyatma das (ACBSP)
Basu Ghosh das (ACBSP)
Haripada das (ACBSP)
Vatsala das (ACBSP)
 
Guru-Krsna das (HDG)
Krishna-kirti das (HDG)