A major portion of the writings given to the world by His Divine Grace A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada consists of his English translation of and purports (commentaries) to the canonical biography of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu, the Caitanya-caritamrta, written in the early 17th century by Krsnadasa Kaviraja Goswami. Srila Prabhupada’s commentary to the verses of Caitanya-caritamrta consist largely of direct translations of the Bengali commentary written by his spiritual master, Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura. However, on occasion Srila Prabhupada either elaborated on the previous commentary or wrote his own for a particular verse.
In several of these purports Srila Prabhupada refers, in general terms, to persons and circumstances following the demise of his spiritual master-persons who were, like Srila Prabhupada, disciples of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura, and circumstances related to the progress or lack of progress in Gaudiya Vaisnava missionary activity. In such instances, apparently in response to criticisms from various quarters, Srila Prabhupada wanted to make clear that the society he founded in 1966, the International Society for Krishna Consciousness, is an institution to be recognized as authentically representing and realizing the wishes of his own spiritual master and of the previous acaryas (revered teachers in the succession of teachers reaching back to Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu). It is also clear that he sought to warn and immunize his own disciples against the failings he identifies in the post-Bhaktisiddhanta Gaudiya Math (the missionary institution founded by Bhaktisiddhanta Thakura).
The purpose of this article is to offer some further explanation to readers of Srila Prabhupada’s Caitanya-caritamrta who might wonder about the significance of some of his comments regarding the Gaudiya Math and related matters. While over the last forty years there have been some controversies arising with respect to ISKCON and its relation to other Vaisnava institutions or their leaders, I do not try here to provide a single definitive resolution to such controversies that all parties might agree with. Rather, I try to provide a brief and hopefully balanced presentation of key themes while suggesting viable ways to understand and cherish the words of Srila Prabhupada as teachings meant for all serious practitioners of Krsna consciousness, regardless of institutional affiliation.
There are several purports in Prabhupada’s Caitanya-caritamrta that make reference to the matters at hand, but for our purposes I will focus on only two, namely, that of CC Adi-lila 10.7, and that of CC Adi-lila 12.8. The former includes an assertion that ISKCON should be seen and respected as a “branch” of the “Caitanya tree” consisting of the followers of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu. The latter elaborates on what Srila Prabhupada identified as unfortunate developments among some followers of his own spiritual master. Together these two purports provide a general sense of Srila Prabhupada’s concerns regarding the ongoing and future culture of practicing and spreading Krsna consciousness. These concerns, though written more than forty years ago, are relevant today for many members of the expanding Krsna consciousness movement, so I hope that this brief essay may help members of ISKCON and the wider Vaisnava community to reflect more clearly on these matters for the benefit of all. I also hope that readers of Srila Prabhupada’s books who may be unfamiliar with ISKCON and the wider Vaisnava community may gain better understanding of the issues at hand.
Caitanya-caritamrta, Adi-lila 10.7
The seventh verse of chapter 10 in the Adi-lila of Caitanya-caritamrta is a Sanskrit prayer translated by Srila Prabhupada as follows:
I offer my obeisances to all the dear devotees of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu, the eternal tree of love of Godhead. I offer my respects to all the branches of the tree, the devotees of the Lord who distribute the fruit of love of Kṛṣṇa.
Throughout the ninth and tenth chapters of the Adi-lila Krsnadasa Kaviraja develops the image of a large and splendorous tree with numerous branches and “sub-branches” to represent the extended spiritual family of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu’s immediate followers. In these chapters he provides the names of those followers, indicating how each was related to others in the list, in terms of disciplic succession and, often, in terms of biological family affiliation.
In his purport to this verse Srila Prabhupada calls attention to the sense of equality suggested by the Bengali (based on Sanskrit) term bhakta-ganan, which he translates as “all the devotees.” He contrasts Krsnadasa’s admirable attitude of respect for all devotees with “many foolish so-called devotees of Lord Caitanya.” The latter, in his own recent experience, objected to himself receiving the honorific-affectionate title “Prabhupada” from his disciples in recognition of his outstanding accomplishment in spreading Sri Caitanya’s mission throughout the world. These same objectors, he goes on to explain, proceeded to “minimize the value of the Krsna consciousness movement.” He concludes the purport by referring again to the verse’s spirit of equality:
Kåñëadäsa Kaviräja Gosvämé therefore offers equal respect to all the preachers of the cult of Çré Caitanya Mahäprabhu, who are compared to the branches of the tree. ISKCON is one of these branches, and it should therefore be respected by all sincere devotees of Lord Caitanya Mahäprabhu.
Srila Prabhupada’s assertion that ISKCON is a branch of the “Caitanya tree” is clearly intended to remove doubt about his institution’s authenticity and its spiritual connection to the Caitanyaite tradition described by Krsnadasa. It implies, further, that it is and will continue to be a healthy branch, capable of bearing the “fruits” of love of Godhead.
Caitanya-caritamrta, Adi-lila 12.8
Srila Prabhupada’s translation of verse eight of Adi-lila chapter 12 is as follows:
At first all the followers of Advaita Äcärya shared a single opinion. But later they followed two different opinions, as ordained by providence.
In apparent contradiction to the spirit of the verse quoted previously, within the passage to which this verse belongs, Krsnadasa Kaviraja expresses strong condemnation of some persons who were seen as deviating from the way of following Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu. In verse nine such persons are accused of having been disobedient to the order of their guru-in this case Advaita Acarya-and they are roundly condemned in verse ten as being asara, which Prabhupada translates as “useless”.
In his purport to verse eight, Srila Prabhupada echoes Krsnadasa’s critical tone to note a parallel with more recent Vaisnava history and to express his deep disappointment with the behavior of leading followers of his own guru, Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura. As in his purport to Adi-lila 10.7, Prabhupada points to his own success in preaching, here attributing his success to his obedience to the order of his spiritual master (namely, to preach Krsna consciousness in the English language, implying that he should spread the Caitanyaite teachings beyond India to the rest of the world, especially by printing and distributing books profusely). He thus contrasts the “useless” followers who “could not make any progress in preaching” with his own and his ISKCON followers’, who “are getting results beyond [their] expectations.”
I shall now make some brief observations with respect to these two purports.
My comments on Adi-lila 10.7 purport:
Prabhupada asserts that ISKCON is a branch of the Caitanya tree of disciplic succession (repeated in the Adi-lila 9.18 purport), clearly intending to emphasize that an institution (namely ISKCON) that may have not been recognized as authentic by certain members of the wider Caitanya Vaisnava community deserves to be recognized as such. Using Krsnadasa’s analogy of a tree with its branches, Prabhupada notes that “ISKCON is one of these branches.” We must note that Prabhupada does not write that ISKCON is the entire Caitanya tree. Rather, he recognizes that there are other branches which, by implication, are either thriving or capable of doing so, and therefore capable of bearing the desired “fruit,” love of Godhead. The further implication would necessarily be that, as many ISKCON members have come to realize, it behooves all members of ISKCON to respect members of other Caitanyaite branches, and to appreciate their sincere efforts and successes in practicing Krsna consciousness and spreading the teachings of Caitanya Mahaprabhu throughout the world.
My comments on Adi-lila 12.8 purport:
Srila Prabhupada’s echoing of Krsnadasa’s strong discriminatory language is, in my view, meant above all to serve as a teaching and warning, especially to his own followers, members of ISKCON, to not make the same mistakes that were made by some of his godbrothers (disciples of the same guru). That the thrust of this purport is didactic and not condemnatory can be safely assumed in light of another statement by Prabhupada, in his purport to Srimad Bhagavatam 4.28.31:
Among Vaisnavas there may be some difference of opinion due to everyone’s personal identity, but despite all personal differences, the cult of Krsna consciousness must go on. [. . .] The disciples of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Goswami Maharaja are all Godbrothers, and although there are some differences of opinion, and although we are not acting conjointly, everyone of us is spreading this Krsna consciousness movement according to his own capacity and producing many disciples to spread it all over the world.
One might indeed wonder whether these two contrasting passages cancel each other out. In one statement Prabhupada seems to condemn some of his godbrothers as “useless” and in the other he acknowledges their preaching success. What are we to make of this? After leaving aside speculation on the mind of the guru and on his relations with his godbrothers, all that can be safely and constructively assumed is that from the Caitanya-caritamrta purport in question, Prabhupada’s followers are to draw a warning in order to be successful in their important undertaking, by following Prabhupada’s instructions.
Undoubtedly Srila Prabhupada uses strong language in this purport, indirectly but clearly urging every member, every “branch,” of the Caitanya tree, to engage vigorously in work to realize Caitanya Mahaprabhu’s vision for the world. By implication, members of ISKCON have no business condemning other branches. Rather, they should see the changes that have taken place in recent years in a positive light. Largely following Srila Prabhupada’s example, leaders and members of present-day Gaudiya Math branches have become much more active in propagation work, and they deserve acknowledgement and congradulation for their efforts and successes.
I should further mention that, given the critical tone and content of this purport, it is understandable that some respected members of Gaudiya Math have found it unsettling and counter-productive to the cultivation of harmony among the branches of the Caitanya tree that we all seek. They have therefore humbly requested the publisher of Srila Prabhupada’s books, the Bhaktivedanta Book Trust, to remove this purport (and any others considered disturbing) from future editions of its Caitanya-caritamrta. All of us share the same concern to cultivate harmony. This we can certainly pursue effectively without making what could only be a further mistake: To excise the purport would be exactly counter to the spirit of the purport itself, which emphasizes the necessity to diligently follow the instructions of the spiritual master. Since Srila Prabhupada never suggested that any of his purports might in the future be eliminated, there would be no way to do so without violating the principle of following the guru’s order. Indeed, to remove a purport in which he so strongly emphasizes what should not be done, namely, to disobey the orders of the spiritual master, would be deeply problematic.
Gaudiya Math members need not feel pained or implicated by such designation asasara, because clearly they are now inspiring many souls to take up the path of Krsna-bhakti given by Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu, under the inspiration and guidance of their gurus. Nor need they assume that such designation was meant to refer specifically to their own spiritual masters, all of whom Prabhupada ultimately appreciated for their dedication to the greater mission of spreading Krsna consciousness, as is understandable from another of his Caitanya-caritamrtapurports (Cc Adi 7.37):
Every acarya has a specific means of propagating his spiritual movement with the aim of bringing men to Krsna consciousness. Therefore, the method of one acarya may be different from that of another, but the ultimate goal is never neglected.
The “ultimate goal,” by implication, is that which unites all Vaisnavas, despite their different means of propogation. It is this unity of purpose for which Srila Prabhupada constantly strove, and for which he sometimes expressed his disappointment at its temporary obscurity.
The consistent message of the Vaisnava acaryas is always one of urgency, calling us to take up and propogate the teachings of Caitanya Mahaprabhu. Sometimes the tone of their call is soft and sweet, while other times it is sharp and pointed. Whatever the tone, it behooves us who try to be serious readers to acknowledge and respond to the message. It also behooves us to constantly seek deeper understanding of the message in order to receive and take full advantage of the blessings coming from the acaryas through their writings. In this way we can “catch the truth” (SB 1.3.1 purport) of the often challenging words of the previous acaryas as our guiding light for approaching the lotus feet of Lord Krishna.