|
Radha Devi Dasi
A practical question: How does a Vaisnava behave
in modern society? Radha Devi Dasi compares and contrasts the role
of the devotee as a bearer of compassion and humble servant of all
with the practice of using 'transcendence' as a cover for condescension
and dishonesty.
In the wake of the disastrous events of 11 September 2001, when
thousands of people died in infernos created by hijacked airplanes
in New York City and Washington, DC, I was asked to write an article
on Vaisnava ethics. As I struggled to articulate standards of Vaisnava
behaviour that I find difficult to apply in my own life, I listened
to other devotees wrestle with their attempts to understand and
respond to evil actions taken in the name of religion. I heard some
in my community dismiss the events of September 11 as the karma
of those who died, meriting little sympathy, merely natural reactions
of a hellish material world. I saw the tears and heard the pain
in the voices of other friends who were heartbroken at the suffering
that was taking place, the inevitable suffering that would result
from America's reaction to the attack, and what they perceived to
be callousness in the hearts of others.
The Vaisnava Family and Youth Conference at the New Raman Reti
community in Alachua, Florida, provided a forum where devotees could
discuss the Vaisnava perspective on world disasters and possible
courses of action that concerned Vaisnavas could take. The unifying
theme of all discussions was the duty of the Vaisnava to respond
to the needs of other living entities with compassion. This theme
of care and concern, while expressed in different ways by different
people, convinced me that Vaisnava ethics is ultimately the application
of the love for each other that springs from recognition of our
common Father, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, and His merciful
love for us. We cannot be indifferent to the suf-fering of others,
because Krsna is never indifferent toward us.
Ethics addresses the question of how we behave and how we ought
to behave. Behaviour springs from belief. Our metaphysical view
of the universe and its constituent parts gives us the framework
for ordering our daily life choices. In his essay 'Our Ecological
Crisis', Tamal Krsna Goswami (1998) treats ethics as a moral theology
which seeks to apply religious doctrine to practical life. How does
a Vaisnava live in the world?
For Vaisnavas, examination of ethical behaviour may, but need not
always, deal with the actions expected of a pure devotee. Such souls,
serving Krsna's will in all situations, have no need of instruction
in proper behaviour.
Of more benefit to the rest of us is an articulation of the principles
by which the unperfected may regulate behaviour. Lacking pure Krsna
consciousness, we may be misguided as to what constitutes proper
behaviour. Ethical principles, like a roadmap, offer direction to
those who have not travelled this way before.
Our understanding of how to relate to others springs from our understanding
of our own nature and of our relationship with our creator. Almost
without exception, people in general gain their sense of how they
ought to act in the world, of what is right and what is wrong, from
their religious world view (Carmody, p. 6).
For the Vaisnava, identity is clear. We are spirit souls, parts
of our Supreme Lord Krsna, and we are His eternal servants. Such
an identity has immediate implications for our relationship to other
living entities. If, as we are taught, all living entities are spirit
souls, then we are all interconnected by virtue of our relationship
to Krsna. We are, as Kipling puts it, 'sisters under the skin'.
Moreover, there is an inherent equality of all living entities because
we all share the same spiritual essence. Thus, our relations with
others must be guided by principles of egalitarianism and concern
for others.
Indeed, our Vaisnava tradition articulates specific injunctions
for behaviour, the foremost of which is compassion. The incantation
we recite daily, offering our obeisances to other Vaisnavas, explicitly
states that such persons are 'full of compassion' for the living
entities. Indeed, it is the duty of the Vaisnava to become the humble
servant of other living entities.
This duty of service to others, while not the main tenet of bhakti-yoga,
follows logically from our objective of serving the Supreme Lord.
The Lord describes Himself, in Bhagavad-gita, as 'suhrdam
sarva-bhutanam', or the well-wishing friend of every living
entity. If we desire to please the Lord, then we must accept as
our mission the roles of friend and helpers of others in their various
material manifestations.
Our Vaisnava acaryas have clearly modelled the role of compassionate
servant for our benefit. Haridasa Thakura, associate of Sri Caitanya
Mahaprabhu and the acarya of the holy name, embodied concern
for others in his response to the soldiers who were ordered to execute
him. Because of his great spiritual potency, their severe beatings
did not have the expected effect of ending his life. However, when
they informed him that failure to carry out their instructions and
execute him would cause them suffering, Haridasa Thakura arranged
his apparent death to protect these soldiers from punishment.
This history is significant in that Haridasa Thakura's concern
extended to the material well-being of the soldiers and was not
conditioned upon their acceptance of any religious practice or philosophical
perspective. Haridasa did not dismiss the potential suffering of
his tormentors as material illusion, nor did he dismiss the potential
consequences to the soldiers as their karmic reaction for the harm
they had inflicted on him. His concern for his persecutors transcended
considerations of his own well being.
Haridasa Thakura's example of extreme tolerance and compassion
perfectly embodies the instructions of his spiritual master, Sri
Caitanya Mahaprabhu. In the Sri Siksastaka, Lord Caitanya
instructed His followers on the behaviour required to reach transcendence.
One must think himself lower than the grass. One must be more tolerant
than a tree and always prepared to give respect to others.
This injunction of tolerance requires compassion toward other living
entities. Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura wrote in his Sri Sanmodana
Bhasyam that the servant of Lord Krsna is kinder than the tree
which gives shade to everyone. The Vaisnava is 'compassionate to
every living entity, whether friend or foe, desiring only their
highest welfare ... He understands that all living entities are
eternal servants of Lord Krsna, so he is never envious of anyone'.
(Sarvabhavana Dasa, pp. 35-6)
Another way to understand the Vaisnava's duty toward others is
to examine the meaning of leadership and mastery within the Vaisnava
tradition. Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu has enjoined us to 'become spiritual
masters'. The materially conditioned response to such an injunction
is to seek a way to control other living entities. Mastery, in the
material world, has been historically associated with conquest and
domination. The Vaisnava understanding of 'master', however, is
that of servant leader, of one who empowers others to find their
full potential. The Vaisnava encourages others to take up the practice
of bhakti-yoga. He never mistreats anyone or views anyone
as his inferior. (Sarvabhavana Dasa, p. 38)
Lord Caitanya used humility to conquer the false ego of the mayavadi
sannyasis in Nadia. Rather than defeat them in a philosophical
debate, demanding the respect that was surely His due, He humbly
seated Himself in an unclean place and listened respectfully to
their words, even though He fully intended to persuade them of their
error. Thus, to perfectly follow this instruction of Lord Caitanya's,
to become spiritual masters to the whole world, Vaisnavas must humbly
approach others. We must kindly listen to their concerns and beliefs.
We must lovingly persuade, not condescendingly debate.
Two particular areas of behaviour have proved dangerous to Vaisnavas
attempting to practice Krsna consciousness in society at large.
First, the false ego is a very real barrier to spreading the practice
of bhakti-yoga. Condescension is an obvious and extremely
distasteful attitude which can be more of a barrier to Krsna than
locking the temple room doors. Our false ego may be stimulated by
the assumption that, because we have been extended the mercy of
access to a spiritually advanced philosophy, we are superior to
other living entities and may exploit them.
Aspiring Vaisnavas are unlikely to articulate the foregoing mentality
overtly. However, the mindset of superiority and exploitation may
be reflected in language which dismisses our non-Vaisnava neighbours
as 'karmis' or 'meateaters', intimating a very real and substantial
basis for condemnation. In the past, ISKCON's unfortunate practice
of 'transcendental trickery' provided a rationale for everything
from raiding our neighbours' gardens for flowers to misrepresenting
our identity on sankirtana; these practices rested firmly
on the notion that Vaisnavas are ethically superior. Our superiority
became a philosophical basis for lying, stealing, and other unsavoury
practices.
Only a little maturity is needed to see the counterproductivity
of such actions. If our duty is, as we are instructed, to engage
other living entities in Krsna's service, we should avoid wrongdoing.
The neighbour whose rose bush is stripped before each festival is
more likely to resent Krsna than to worship Him. To say that the
unwilling service of providing flowers is better than no service
at all is to assume that Vaisnavas could not attract such persons
to the worship of the Lord over time. Surely a willing and committed
servant is preferable to one who serves only by being robbed.
Moreover, our philosophy makes clear that we who practice bhakti-yoga
are not superior to other living entities. In reality, all spirit
souls are minute parts of the Supreme Lord. Devotional service is
the eternal duty, or sanatana-dharma, of every living entity.
Some souls are more entangled in material illusion than others.
However, our true identities are similar and equal. How can we be
superior to others on the basis of an illusion?
Indeed, the less covered we are by material energy, the
more we should fulfill our duty of serving other living entities.
We are enjoined to work for the highest welfare of others. To bring
others to Krsna's service, we must first attract them to hear our
words and consider our example. Thus, we must be involved and caring
members of society. Otherwise, we remain on the fringes of society,
without the influence that will permit the Vaisnava message to be
heard.
A second pitfall for the Vaisnava in dealing with the larger society
arises in the area of social disobedience. Many major religious
traditions have articulated theories which justify ignoring social
law and convention. Indeed, the recognition of a Supreme Being implies
the possibility of His will being contrary to the laws or conventions
of mankind.
ISKCON has in the past taken social disobedience to unreasonable
lengths. Some of our members have articulated a belief that following
local laws and customs is unnecessary for anyone practicing bhakti-yoga.
Such an attitude is at best duplicitous and at worst exploitative.
One who truly renounces society may also renounce its rules and
regulations. However, this article concerns itself with the behavioural
practices of Vaisnavas living in 'the world', society at large.
We accept the benefits society provides. For example, I drive on
roads maintained by government agencies. When at work, my right
to wages is protected and enforced by law. Policemen, firefighters,
emergency medical personnel will come to my aid if I need them.
If I become impoverished, the government and private religious and
charitable agen-cies will help me and my family obtain food, shelter,
and medical care.
When in need, I can avail myself of these services. I benefit from
the way my society is organised and from the rules which enforce
proper behaviour. Thus, I am a liar and a cheater if I unilaterally
and covertly decide that I need not respect the social and legal
structures which work to my benefit.
ISKCON temples and members around the world are generally protected
by the governments and societies in which we live. We have a duty
of reciprocation for the benefits and services we receive. Certainly,
those living in countries where the practice of Krsna consciousness
is forbidden will be forced to hide their behaviour and secretly
break the law. But civil disobedience, where necessary, must be
limited in scope and practiced only in extreme circumstances.
Vaisnava ethics do not differ greatly from the ethics of other
major religions. Moreover, they are easily discernible by the exercise
of basic common sense. When in doubt, we can always refer to the
four moral precepts which uphold our regulative principles. Truthfulness
is preferable to dishonesty. Kindness and compassion are preferable
to cruelty. Generosity and renunciation are preferable to greediness.
Order and cleanliness are preferable to the shabbiness and littering
which sometimes result from our failure to maintain the facilities
we have been given.
Srila Prabhupada wanted his followers to be recognisable as perfect
gentlemen. As we make our way in the larger human family, we should
be welcomed on the basis of our kindness and consideration for those
around us. If we remember to treat others with the kindness we have
received from the devotees who inspire us, our temples will not
be large enough to hold all those who wish to enter.
Bibliography
Carmody, D. L. & J. T. How to Live Well: Ethics in the World
Religions. Belmont, California: Wadsworth Publishing Co., 1988.
Sarvabhavana Dasa (translator). Sri Siksastaka. Vrndavana:
Rasbihari Lal & Sons.
Tamal Krsna Goswami. 'Our Ecological Crisis', in A Hare Krishna
at Southern Methodist University. Dallas: Pundits Press, 1998.
< Back · Top
^
|