# Back to Godhead Magazine #16 *1981 (09)* Back to Godhead Magazine #16-09, 1981 PDF-View ## The Religion Beyond All Religions *A conversation with His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupāda, Founder-Ācārya of the International Society for Krishna Consciousness* *In June 1976 at New Vrindaban, the Hare Kṛṣṇa movement's farm community in West Virginia, Śrīla Prabhupāda fields questions sent to him from the editors of* Bhavan's Journal, *one of Bombay's leading cultural and religious periodicals.* Devotee: Here is the first question: "It is said that the greatest strength of Hinduism is its catholicity, or breadth of outlook, but that this is also its greatest weakness in that there are very few religious observances that are obligatory for all, as in other religions. Is it necessary and possible to outline certain basic minimum observances for all Hindus?" Śrīla Prabhupāda: As far as Vedic religion is concerned, it is not for the Hindus; it is for all living entities. That is the first thing to be understood. Vedic religion is called **sanātana-*dharma**,* "the eternal occupation of the living entity." The living entity is *sanatana* [eternal]. God is *sanatana*, and there is **sanātana-*dharma**. Sanātana-*dharma** is meant for all living entities, not just the so-called Hindus. Hinduism, this 'ism', that 'ism'—these are all misconceptions. Historically, *sanātana-*dharma** was followed regularly in India, and Indians were called 'Hindus' by the Muslims. The Muslims saw that the Indians lived on the other side of the River *Sind*, and the Muslims pronounces *Sind* as *Hind.* Therefore they called India 'Hindustan' and the people who lived there 'Hindus'. But the word Hindu has no reference in the Vedic literature, nor does so-called Hindu **dharma*.* Now that *sanātana-*dharma** or Vedic *dharma* is being distorted, not being obeyed, not being carried our properly, it has come to be known as Hinduism. But that is a freak understanding. We have to study *sanātana-*dharma**; then we’ll understand what Vedic religion is. [*To a devotee*] Read from the Eleventh Chapter of *Bhagavad-gītā,* eighteenth verse. Devotee: [Reads.] > tvam akṣaraṁ paramaṁ veditavyaṁ > tvam asya viśvasya paraṁ nidhānam > tvam avyayaḥ śāśvata-dharma-goptā > sanātanas tvaṁ puruṣo mato me “O Lord Kṛṣṇa, You are the supreme primal objective; You are inexhaustible, and You are the oldest; You are the maintainer of religion, the eternal Personality of Godhead.” Śrīla Prabhupāda: This understanding is wanted. Kṛṣṇa is eternal, we are eternal, and the place where we can live and exchange our feelings with Kṛṣṇa—that is eternal. And the system that teaches this eternal process of reciprocation—that is *sanātana-dharma,* which is meant for everyone. Devotee: So what would be the daily prescribed religious observances followed by one who is aspiring for this *sanātana-dharma?* What would he do? The complaint is that within Hinduism—or, let's say, *sanātana-dharma—*there is such a breadth, there is so much variegatedness in different types— Śrīla Prabhupāda: Why do you go to variegatedness? Why don't you take the real purpose of religion from Kṛṣṇa? Kṛṣṇa says [Bg 18.66], *sarva-dharmān parityajya mām ekaṁ śaraṇaṁ vraja:* "Give up all other so-called *dharmas* and just surrender to Me." Why don't you take that? Why are you taking up variegated practices under the name of so-called Hinduism? Why don't you take the advice of the *sanatana,* Kṛṣṇa? You refuse to accept *sanātana-dharma—*what the *sanātana,* God, says—but you say, "How can we avoid so many varieties and come to the right point?" Why accept varieties? Take to this one consciousness: *sarva-dharmān parityajya mām ekaṁ śaraṇaṁ vraja.* Why don't you do that? Devotee: How can people do this practically, on a daily basis? Śrīla Prabhupāda: How are *we* doing it? Is what *we* are doing not practical? People will manufacture their own impractical way of religion, but they won't take our practical system. What is that? *Man-manā bhava mad-bhakto mad-yājī māṁ namaskuru:* simply think of Kṛṣṇa, become His devotee, worship Him, and offer obeisances to Him. Where is the difficulty? Where is the impracticality? Kṛṣṇa says, "This is your duty. If you do this you will come to Me without any doubt." Why don't you do that? Why remain Hindu? Why remain Muslim? Why remain Christian? Give up all this nonsense. Just surrender to Kṛṣṇa and understand, "I am a devotee of Kṛṣṇa, a servant of Kṛṣṇa." Then everything will immediately be resolved. Devotee: But the Hindus would say, "There are so many other aspects to Hindu *dharma.*" Śrīla Prabhupāda: Real *dharma* is defined in Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam: *dharma*ṁ tu sākṣād bhagavat-praṇītam. "What God says—*that* is *dharma*." Now, God says, "Give up all other *dharma*s and just surrender unto Me." So take *that* *dharma*. Why do you want to remain a Hindu? And besides, what Hindu does not accept the authority of Kṛṣṇa? Even today, if any Hindu says, "I don't care for Kṛṣṇa and *Bhagavad-gītā,*" he will immediately be rejected as a madman. Why don't you take Kṛṣṇa's instruction? Why go elsewhere? Your trouble is *that* you do not know what religion is and you do not know what sanātana-*dharma* is. In our Kṛṣṇa consciousness society there are many who were formerly so-called Hindus, so-called Muslims, and so-called Christians, but now they don't care for "Hindu" or "Muslim" or "Christian." They care only for Kṛṣṇa. That's all. If you follow a false religious system, you suffer; but if you follow a real religious system, you'll be happy. Unfortunately, the Indian people gave up the real religious system—*sanātana-dharma,* or *varṇāśrama-dharma—*and accepted a hodgepodge thing called "Hinduism." Therefore there is trouble. Vedic religion means *varṇāśrama-dharma,* the division of society into four social classes and four spiritual orders of life. The four social classes are the *brāhmaṇas* [priests and intellectuals], the *kṣatriyas* [political leaders and military men], the *vaiśyas* [merchants and farmers], and the *śūdras* [manual laborers]. The four spiritual orders are the *brahmacārīs* [celibate students], the *gṛhasthas* [householders], the *vānaprasthas* [retired persons], and the *sannyāsīs* [renunciants]. When all these classes and orders work harmoniously to satisfy, the Lord, that is real religion, or *dharma.* Devotee: The next question is this: "In the Kali-yuga, the present Age of Quarrel, *bhakti* [devotional service to God] has been described as the most suitable path for God realization. Yet how is it that Vedantic teachings, with their accent on *jñāna* [knowledge, or intellectual speculation], are emphasized by noted savants?" Śrīla Prabhupāda: The so-called Vedāntists are cheaters; they do not know what *vedānta* is. But people want to be cheated, and the cheaters are taking adv*anta*ge of them. The word *veda* means "knowledge," and *anta* means "end." So the meaning of *vedānta* is "the ultimate knowledge," and the *Vedānta-sūtra* teaches this. (A *sutra* is an aphorism: in a few words, a big philosophy is given.) The first aphorism in the *Vedānta-sūtra* is *athāto brahma-jijñāsā:* "Now, in the human form of life, one should inquire about Brahman, the Absolute Truth." So the study of the *Vedānta-sūtra* begins when one is inquisitive about the Absolute Truth. And what is that Absolute Truth? That is answered in a nutshell in the second aphorism. *Janmādy asya yataḥ:* "Brahman is the origin of everything." So Brahman is God, the origin of everything. And all *veda,* or knowledge, culminates in Him. This is confirmed by Kṛṣṇa in *Bhagavad-gītā* [15.15]. *Vedaiś ca sarvair aham eva vedyaḥ:* "The purpose of all the *Vedas,* all books of knowledge, is to search out God." So the whole *Vedānta-sūtra* is a description of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. But because in this Kali-yuga people will not be able to study *Vedānta-sūtra* nicely on account of a lack of education, Śrīla Vyāsadeva personally wrote a commentary on the *Vedānta-sūtra*. That commentary is *Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam* (bhāṣyāṁ brahma-sūtrāṇām). *Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam* is the real commentary on the *Vedānta-sūtra*, written by the same author, Vyāsadeva, under the instruction of Nārada, his spiritual master. *Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam* begins with the same aphorism as the *Vedānta-sūtra*, janmādy asya yataḥ, and then continues, *anvayad itarataś cārtheṣv abhijñaḥ svarāṭ.* So, actually, in the *Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam* the *Vedānta-sūtra* is explained by the author of the *Vedānta-sūtra*. But some rascals, without understanding the *Vedānta-sūtra*, without reading the natural commentary on the *Vedānta-sūtra*, are posing themselves as Vedāntists and misguiding people. And because people are not educated, they're accepting these rascals as Vedāntists. Actually, the so-called Vedāntists are bluffers; they are not Vedāntists. They do not know anything of the **vedānta*.* The *Vedānta-sūtra* is explained in *Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam*, and if we take *Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam* as the real explanation of the *Vedānta-sūtra* we can understand what *vedānta* is. But if we take shelter of the bluffers, then we will not learn **vedānta*.* People do not know anything, so they can be bluffed and cheated by anyone. But now they should learn from the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement what *vedanta* is and what the explanation of *vedānta* is. Then they will be benefited. Devotee: Generally, those who follow the impersonalistic commentary on the *Vedānta-sūtra* are concerned with liberation from the miseries of the material world. Does *Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam* also describe liberation? Śrīla Prabhupāda: Yes. Since *Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam* is the real commentary on the *Vedānta-sūtra,* we find this verse describing liberation in this age: > kaler doṣa-nidhe rājann > asti hy eko mahān guṇaḥ > kīrtanād eva kṛṣṇasya > mukta-saṅgaḥ paraṁ vrajet In this Kali-yuga, which is an ocean full of faults, there is one benediction. What is that? One can become liberated simply by chanting the Hare Kṛṣṇa *mantra.* This is real *vedānta,* and actually it is happening. Devotee: Are you saying that the conclusion of the *Vedānta-sūtra* and the conclusion of the *Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam* are one and the same—*bhakti?* Śrīla Prabhupāda: Yes. Devotee: But how does *bhakti* tie in to the conclusion of Vedāntic knowledge or wisdom? Here it says that *bhakti* is the most suitable and easiest path of God realization, but it also says that the Vedāntic teachings stress *jñāna,* or knowledge. Is that a fact? Śrīla Prabhupāda: What is *jñāna?* That is explained by Lord Kṛṣṇa in *Bhagavad-gītā* [7.19]: *bahūnāṁ janmānām ante jñānavān māṁ prapadyate.* "After many, many births, he who is actually in knowledge surrenders unto Me." So unless one surrenders to Kṛṣṇa, there is no *jñāna.* This impersonalistic *"jñāna"* is all nonsense. The impersonalists are passing themselves off as *jñānīs,* but they have no knowledge at all. *Vedānta* means "the ultimate knowledge." So the subject matter of ultimate knowledge is Kṛṣṇa, God. If one does not know who God is, who Kṛṣṇa is, then where is one's knowledge? But if a rascal claims, "I am a man of knowledge," then what can be done? In the same verse we just mentioned, Kṛṣṇa concludes, *vāsudevaḥ sarvam iti sa mahātmā sudurlabhaḥ:* "When one understands that Vasudeva, Kṛṣṇa, is everything, one is in knowledge." Before that, there is no knowledge. It is simply misunderstanding. *Brahmeti paramātmeti bhagavān iti śabdyate.* One may begin by searching out impersonal Brahman by the speculative method, and then one may progress to realization of Paramātmā, the localized aspect of the Supreme. That is the secondary stage of realization. But the final stage is understanding the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Kṛṣṇa. So if you do not understand Kṛṣṇa, where is your knowledge? Halfway knowledge is no knowledge. We want complete knowledge, and that complete knowledge is possible by the grace of Kṛṣṇa, through *Bhagavad-gītā.* Devotee: Can I ask the next question, Śrīla Prabhupāda? "Is a *guru* essential for one to enter the spiritual path and attain the goal? And how does one recognize one's *guru*?" Śrīla Prabhupāda: Yes, a *guru* is necessary. That is explained in the *Bhagavad-gītā.* When Kṛṣṇa and Arjuna were talking as friends, there was no conclusion. Therefore Arjuna decided to accept Kṛṣṇa as his *guru*. [*To a devotee*] Find out this verse: *kārpaṇya-doṣopahata-svabhāvaḥ . . .* Devotee : [*Reads*] > kārpaṇya-doṣopahata-svabhāvaḥ > pṛcchāmi tvāṁ dharma-sammūḍha-cetāḥ > yac chreyaḥ syān niścitaṁ brūhi tan me > śiṣyas te 'haṁ śādhi māṁ tvāṁ prapannam "Now I am confused about my duty and have lost all composure because of weakness. In this condition I am asking You to tell me clearly what is best for me. Now I am Your disciple and a soul surrendered unto You. Please instruct me." [Bg 2.7] Śrīla Prabhupāda: Not only Arjuna but everyone is perplexed about his duty. Nobody can decide for himself. When a physician is seriously sick, he does not prescribe his own treatment. He knows his brain is not in order, so he calls for another physician. Similarly, when we are perplexed, bewildered, when we cannot reach any solution—at that time the right person to search out is the *guru.* It is essential; you cannot avoid it. So, in our present state of existence we are all perplexed. And under the circumstances, a *guru* is required to give us real direction. Arjuna represents the perplexed materialistic person who surrenders to a *guru*. And to set the example Arjuna decided on Kṛṣṇa as his *guru*. He did not go to anyone else. So the real *guru* is Kṛṣṇa. Kṛṣṇa Krishna is *guru* not only for Arjuna but for everyone. If we take instruction from Kṛṣṇa and abide by that instruction, our life is successful. The mission of the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is to get everyone to accept Kṛṣṇa as *guru*. That is our mission. We don't say, "I am Kṛṣṇa." We never say that. We simply ask people, "Please abide by the orders of Kṛṣṇa." Devotee: Some of these so-called *gurus* will say some things that Kṛṣṇa says, but they'll give other instructions also. What is the position of such persons? Śrīla Prabhupāda: They are most dangerous. Most dangerous. They are opportunists. According to the customer, they give some teachings so he will be pleased. Such a person is not a **guru*;* he's a servant. He wants to serve his so-called disciples so that they may be satisfied and pay him something. A real *guru* is not a servant of his disciples; he is their master. If one becomes a servant, if he wants to please the disciples by flattering them to get their money, then he is not a *guru*. A *guru* should also be a servant, yes—but a servant of the Supreme. The literal meaning of the word *guru* is "heavy"—heavy with knowledge and authority, because his knowledge and authority come from Kṛṣṇa. You cannot utilize the *guru* for satisfying your whims. Kṛṣṇa says, *sarva-dharmān parityajya mām ekaṁ śaraṇaṁ vraja:* "Abandon all varieties of religion and just surrender unto Me." And we say the same thing: "Surrender to Kṛṣṇa. Give up all other ideas of so-called *dharma,* or religiosity." We don't say, "I am the authority." No, we say, "Kṛṣṇa is the authority, and you should try to understand Kṛṣṇa." This is the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement. ## Ticket to a World Without Death *An ancient science provides the perfect vehicle for the ultimate journey.* ### by Giri-Yādava Dāsa If TWA were selling tickets for a flight to a newly discovered planet where no one grew old, no one suffered disease, and no one ever died, who wouldn't want to purchase a ticket to go there, at any cost? We all long to live forever, but have you ever stopped to wonder why? If death is natural, why does everyone just as naturally try to avoid death? In *Bhagavad-gītā,* one of the Vedic literatures, the ancient Sanskrit texts of India, Lord Kṛṣṇa addresses this very question: "For the soul there is neither birth nor death at any time. He does not come to be, has not come to be, and will not come to be. He is unborn, eternal, ever-existing, and primeval. He is not slain when the body is slain." (Bg. 2.20) The Vedic writings define *God—*or, more precisely, the *Absolute Truth—*as "that from which everything has emanated." God is eternal and full of knowledge and bliss, and we living entities, being part and parcel of God, have qualitative oneness with Him. As a drop of ocean water has the same qualities as the rest of the ocean but in a smaller quantity, we all have a minute quantity of God's qualities. Therefore, since God is eternal, we are also eternal, and thus we do not wish to die. At the present moment, however, we are under the false impression that we are the temporary material body. Everyone is thinking, "I am Canadian," or "I am American," or "I am black," or "I am white," or "I am Christian," or "I am Hindu." In reality we, the eternal conscious self, have nothing to do with these temporary external identities. Lord Kṛṣṇa elucidates this point in *Bhagavad-gītā* (2.22): "As a person puts on new garments, giving up old ones, the soul similarly accepts new material bodies, giving up the old and useless ones." To clarify this point further, let us consider the expression "This is *my* hand." The word *my* is a possessive pronoun denoting that the object, the hand, belongs to *me.* But let us reflect upon the word *me.* Who am I? I am obviously something other than *my* hand, because I am observing *my* hand. Then who am I? I am that which is aware, the conscious perceiver within the body: the self. Now, the special facility we have in the human form of life is that we can realize our true self, understand the relationship between the individual self and the Supreme Self, and ultimately develop love for Him. To achieve these goals, we must be trained by a self-realized person. Why people today refuse spiritual training has always puzzled me. To become an expert cook, painter, dancer, mechanic, technician, lawyer, or doctor, one must approach an experienced teacher and take instruction from him. Nevertheless, when it comes to the most important subject—the science of God realization—we stubbornly insist, "I don't need anyone's help." This false pride limits us to an incomplete understanding of the Absolute Truth. Because we are imperfect, our senses are limited, and we tend to make mistakes. How, then, can we possibly expect to attain liberation on our own? If I am bound hand and foot, how can I free myself? I need help from someone who is free. Out of his causeless mercy and kindness, the Lord sends His ambassador, the liberated spiritual master. Though in the material world, he is not in material consciousness, because he is in constant touch with the Lord in his heart. Just as a fish in an aquarium is in a room but simultaneously in a world apart, the water, so the spiritual master is in this material world but simultaneously in a world apart—the kingdom of God. If one takes shelter of the instructions of such a bona fide spiritual master, one's deliverance from the material world is guaranteed by Lord Kṛṣṇa: "Just try to understand the truth by approaching a bona fide spiritual master. Inquire from him submissively and render service unto him. The self-realized souls can impart knowledge unto you because they have seen the truth." (Bg. 4.34) The liberated, self-realized spiritual master is like the TWA airplane pilot who knows the bearings of the spiritual destination. The spiritual master, by imparting the knowledge contained in revealed scripture and by his own undaunted example, trains his disciples to render unconditional devotional service to Lord Kṛṣṇa despite all material difficulties. The Vedic literature declares that because God is absolute, there is no difference between the Lord and His name. In other words, one can associate with God by associating with His name. Thus the contamination of bodily misconceptions is cleansed away by the antiseptic power of associating with the Lord's holy name. This axiomatic principle is given in the Vedic literature, and those who are scientifically minded should make a spiritual experiment by chanting the Lord's holy names: Hare Kṛṣṇa, Hare Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇa Kṛṣṇa, Hare Hare / Hare Rāma, Hare Rāma, Rāma Rāma, Hare Hare. The Vedic literature recommends this chanting process as the most potent means of devotional service in this age. Lord Kṛṣṇa further reveals, "To those who are constantly devoted to Me and who worship Me with love, I give them the understanding by which they can come to Me. I, dwelling in their hearts, destroy with the shining lamp of knowledge the darkness born of ignorance."(Bg. 10.10–11) Thus the disciple's genuinely humble service attitude brings him to the point of firm conviction and steadiness in devotional service. Next, his taste for chanting the Lord's holy name and glories increases. Then he comes to the stage of spontaneous service, and finally he reaches the culmination of spiritual life: devotional service in pure love of God. If one stays aboard the airplane of devotional service, one is sure to reach his destination. "After attaining Me, the great souls, who are *yogis* in devotion, never return to this temporary world, which is full of miseries, because they have attained the highest perfection." (Bg. 8.15) This process of devotional service is scientific and authorized because we receive it directly from Lord Kṛṣṇa in *Bhagavad-gītā.* We should not manufacture any new method; the old method is perfect. Everyone who has stepped into the boxing ring of human life has been pulverized by the blows of death. Death is guaranteed. If there is even the slightest hope of escaping death and rebirth in this material world, why not take it? If your house is on fire and you see a door leading to safety, do you stop and look around for other possible exits? No! You take the first sure door to safety. That is intelligence. Why not set aside your doubts (at least temporarily) and make a scientific spiritual experiment? Chant the Lord's holy names. What Ponce de Leon searched for and never found—the fountain of eternal youth—can be tasted by anyone who purchases the ticket of the nectarean names of Kṛṣṇa. ## You Don't Need a Guru—or Do You? *Questions at Harvard Divinity School* *Recently Professor Harvey Cox of Harvard University invited Śubhānanda dāsa, a Hare Kṛṣṇa devotee, to give three talks on the traditional role of the* guru. *Later the talking went on, between Professor Cox and his divinity students and their guest.* Student: The idea of "spiritual guide" or "spiritual master" is not exclusive to the Indian spiritual tradition, as you know. It's found, in varying degrees of formality, in a wide spectrum of religious and cultural contexts: the Christian abbot or prior, the Jewish rabbi, the Zen *roshi,* and so on. Yet most people in the West seem apprehensive about the idea of submission to a spiritual guide. Why would you say this is? Śubhānanda dāsa: It's due to a lack of interest in spiritual life. We live in a society that is materially oriented, so most people simply aren't interested. This lack of interest in spirituality comes from our modern skepticism—our disbelief in the very notion of an absolute, perfect Truth. Most people—if they have any interest in philosophy or religion at all—tend to be relativists: "Everyone has his own truth." So if there's really no ultimate, objective, absolute Truth—if all is relative and subjective—then the idea of a *guru,* one who teaches Truth, becomes meaningless. And so we view *gurus* as merely people propagating their own or someone else's relative concept of truth or reality. Student: Also, most people are reluctant to accept the premise of human perfectibility. Even though there may be objective truth, they say, human nature is so terribly fallible—and therefore no one person can perceive truth in full. Śubhānanda dāsa*:* Yes. Absolute Truth, or God, appears so infinite, transcendent, or esoteric that it must be beyond our human powers to perceive it. So we think that no one can achieve perfect realization of Truth. We accept the idea of "teacher" only in a limited sense. One person, we think, may be able to tell us something of his own relative insights about relative truths. But anyone who reportedly possesses perfect knowledge of truth has to be immediately written off as a charlatan. We see this skepticism in the media's stereotypes—"the *guru*"*:* a skinny old fellow wearing long flowing hair and a beard, dispensing cryptic aphorisms and cosmic riddles, and milking his followers for all they're worth. Student: I think that—perhaps out of pride—some people dislike the very idea of submission. Śubhānanda dāsa: Yes. We'd rather be in the position of teacher than that of student. Submission to a teacher implies an admission that I need instruction and guidance. And this is humbling. Most of us will submit to another person for guidance only as a last resort, when all our own wisdom has failed. Student: But then, we all know that authority figures can become corrupt. All of us have, I suppose, experienced disappointment with authority figures—parents, teachers, politicians, clergy. I think we're leery of any *guru* because he may be corrupt. Śubhānanda dāsa: Unfortunately, that fear is well founded. For every genuine **guru*,* there are plenty of others who are not qualified, not genuine, whose motives are questionable. And for sure, some are outright charlatans and common. Often the problem is, "Power corrupts." And when a *guru* is invested, whether by tradition or by self-pronouncement, with absolute power, too often, "Absolute power corrupts absolutely." If a person's motives in becoming someone else's spiritual mentor are even slightly tainted with self-serving, quite likely he'll turn into an exploiter. So one has to be wary. There are bona fide *guru*s. But to find a bona fide *guru* one has to be a genuine seeker. Student: Why do so many people seem to fall in with *gurus* of such questionable qualifications or motives? Śubhānanda dāsa: It's because most self-styled seekers don't *really* want a genuine traditional **guru*.* They don't want spiritual life strongly enough to make the necessary sacrifices. A genuine *guru* will require real personal surrender and real renunciation of worldliness. Most people simply don't want to go that far. They want a *guru* who will make few demands and provide a cheap artificial "high." Another thing is that hardly any *guru*s on the American scene talk about the traditional texts that provide criteria by which would-be followers could judge a teacher's authenticity. In many cases, I'm sure, the *guru*s do this quite consciously. Some teachers go so far as denying the importance of the traditional texts and arguing that they themselves can provide the spiritual experience that the scriptures can only describe. This is a ploy to save themselves from being exposed. The followers are left with no criteria for judging the authenticity of their *guru*—except, of course, the *guru*'s own criteria. Anyone who knows the Indian spiritual tradition through the texts of the tradition can see through all this. But many followers are spiritually illiterate, ignorant of the depth and richness of the traditions their *guru*s claim to represent. Under the banner of "experience" they imagine that analytical thinking is a waste of time—and so they have no grasp of any spiritual realities other than vague concepts like "the light," "the spirit," "love," "the One," and so on. You may consider this a bit of an exaggeration. If you do, go and see for yourselves. Talk with the followers of some *gurus.* You'll be surprised. Student: I think what you've said about inauthentic **guru*s* has been helpful. I'd like to hear you speak a little more about the concept of *guru* in the ideal, as articulated in your own tradition. Śubhānanda dāsa: Well, the basic thing about a *guru* is that he is fully conversant with the science of the Absolute Truth. Also, a genuine *guru* is a fully self-realized soul. He is free from illusion. He knows himself as an eternal, spiritual being, and thus he no longer identifies himself with materiality. He knows the Absolute Truth as the source and essence of everything. And his knowledge isn't theoretical or speculative; it's based on direct perception of reality. He *experiences* truth directly, not merely in theory. He isn't just a philosopher or theologian, but a mystic. He has experienced, and is experiencing, that of which he speaks. And not only does the realized *guru* know the truth. He *loves* the truth. In its original sense, the term *philosopher* means "one who *loves* truth." So one might say that the spiritual master is the ideal *philosopher*. Nor is it a mere concept or idea, however grandiose or sublime, that he *loves*. It is the Personal Truth, God, who elicits his deepest devotional sentiments. There are, of course, many interpretations of the nature and function of the *guru,* even within the Indian spiritual tradition. But rather than try to provide a survey, I'm speaking from the viewpoint of India's chief and most influential theistic tradition, that of Vaiṣṇavism, represented by such seminal thinkers as Rāmānuja, Madhva, and Śrī Caitanya. Student: Earlier you spoke of the *guru's* asceticism ... Śubhānanda dāsa: Yes. This is another classical characteristic of a genuine *guru.* He has renounced the desire for material acquisition and gratification. Because he is free of *ahaṅkāra,* false ego, he isn't physically or mentally self-indulgent. In other words, it's not enough for one to know oneself to be different from one's material body merely in theory. One has to understand his spiritual identity through direct realization. And one who directly realizes his spiritual identity renounces those objects, those pleasures, that have to do with the temporal body. He realizes that just as the body is temporary, so its possessions and its pleasures are also temporary and therefore of no real, ultimate significance. Compared to the sublime pleasure he gets from his devotional service to Lord Kṛṣṇa, all mundane pleasures appear dull and lifeless. This renunciation or asceticism can come only from real spiritual advancement. That's why Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī tells us, "Only a spiritually advanced person who can tolerate the urge to speak, the mind's demands, the actions of anger, and the urges of the tongue, the belly, and the genitals is qualified to take the position of **guru*.*" If someone has taken the position of *guru* and yet we see he's still attached to materialism, this should give us pause. Student: So practice is at least as important as precept? Śubhānanda dāsa: Yes. If the *guru* himself is not renounced—if he is still addicted to worldly activities and gratification—how will he succeed in freeing others from egoism and illusion? He himself must set the highest example. The *guru* is also called *ācārya—*one who teaches by personal example. In other words, he himself lives by the knowledge he teaches. His actions, his words, his entire disposition reflect the sublime truth of which he speaks. His actions set an example for others to follow. His very presence can, if one is a little sensitive, soften the heart, elevate the feelings, and inspire sublime action. Student: The qualifications for the *guru* that you've discussed so far—that he must be spiritually realized, that he must be materially renounced, and that he must set a high example—sound like general criteria for holiness. What uniquely distinguishes a person as a *guru* over and above a holy man? Śubhānanda dāsa: The obvious distinguishing factor is that the *guru* teaches. Not only is he a holy man, but he also makes others holy. This means compassion. He isn't content with his own spiritual advancement, liberation, or salvation. He desires these things for others. In fact, this compassion is the real symptom of spirituality. It's important to note *how* the *guru* transmits knowledge to his disciple. There's a popular misconception that the *guru*'s enlightenment of his disciple is a kind of magical feat whereby he magically injects spiritual knowledge into his disciple as if surcharging him with an electrical current. In reality, the *guru* explains everything to the disciple in accordance with logic and reason, as well as scriptural authority and tradition. Student: Earlier, you were speaking about how to be sure of the validity of the knowledge the *guru* teaches, and you were tying that in with historical disciplic succession. Śubhānanda dāsa: This is a crucial point. There has to be a test for validity. Nowadays, everyone considers himself a *guru*, in the sense that everyone instinctively assumes that he's seeing things as they really are. We draw upon the vast and murky data of our ordinary daily sense perceptions and mental impressions, and we form broad conclusions about the nature of things. But because one person's sensory and mental impressions differ vastly from any other person's, we come to vastly differing conclusions. A multitude of individuals, a multitude of weltanschauungs. We all think we're our own *guru*. But clearly anyone who thinks he's his own *guru* has a fool for a disciple. The idea of a *guru* presumes the existence, the reality, of perfect objective knowledge—knowledge that can be directly perceived, if only we have the eyes to see it. Within the broad tradition that I'm taking part in, perfect and infallible knowledge is called *veda—*divine, eternal wisdom, preserved through oral tradition and later compiled in the form of the Vedic scriptures. Traditionally, Vedic knowledge is transmitted through what is called *parampara,* disciplic succession. The knowledge is carefully preserved and passed down from master to disciple, generation after generation. In other words, the *guru* has the sacred duty to transmit Vedic knowledge *as it is,* without subjective taint or speculative interpretation. Professor Cox: I'd like to raise in a friendly way what I think might be an interesting contrast—not in this case, I think, between the Hindu tradition and the Christian, but between what might be referred to as the lineage and the antilineage elements within any particular religious tradition. I think that in Christianity one finds examples of both lineage and antilineage, or disciplic and anti-disciplic, understandings. There's the concept of apostolic succession, which the Pope is said to represent, and many churches are based on this notion of disciplic succession. There are, however, and I think also stemming from Jesus, antilineage, anti-disciplic visions of truth. The underlying thought here is that a lineage can become corrupt and often is corrupt. In fact, many of them have within their very structure the possibility of corruption. And therefore God sometimes appears in human society as a critic of lineage rather than its perpetuator. When Jesus criticizes the existing lineage of his time, he says, "You say you have Abraham as your father, but I tell you that God is able to raise up out of the stones children of Abraham." He affiliates himself with John the Baptist, who founded what you might call an antilineage movement. And also, interestingly enough, we have the example of St. Paul, who was a kind of epitome in the early Christian period of the antilineage disciplic notion. That is, he had a direct revelation from God and Christ and carefully did not seek legitimization from the early disciples. So, maybe you'd like to respond to this theme—the tension between the disciplic transmission and the ... let's call it the charismatic or visionary revelation of truth, which is often anti-disciplic. Śubhānanda dāsa: You're certainly correct in pointing out that a lineage can and does become corrupt. Lineages become weak or cease to function altogether. Religious h*is*tory provides many examples of th*is*, for sure. But it *is* important to understand Vaiṣṇava d*is*ciplic succession as not merely h*is*torical but revelatory. That *is*, it by no means precludes char*is*matic or v*is*ionary revelation of truth. Succession does not necessarily imply merely mechanical transm*is*sion of dogma. The *guru* *is* no mere pedantic functionary. With each link in the d*is*ciplic chain, the eternal Vedic knowledge comes to life. It becomes real and dynamic through the *guru*'s own spiritual vitality. He realizes truth and he transmits the fruits of that realization, including the very *process* through which h*is* d*is*ciple can himself achieve realization. Kṛṣṇa tells Arjuna in the *Gītā,* "The self-realized soul can impart knowledge unto you because he has *seen* the truth." It *is* further understood that the Lord, in H*is* form as the indwelling witness and guide, the Supersoul, the Paramātmā, *is* forever revealing spiritual understanding within the heart of H*is* pure devotee. So d*is*ciplic succession *is* a revelatory function, although that function remains intact only so long as the links of the chain are strong. But, because for one reason or another a disciplic succession may be corrupted or lose its spiritual vitality, God *will* intercede, either personally or through an agent. You gave the example of Jesus Christ, who criticized the lineage existing in his time. But it seems to me that what he was criticizing was not the notion of lineage per se, but the corruption of lineage, or the decadence or misuse of lineage, or simply the limitations of a particular lineage. Catholics, at any rate, would argue that Jesus himself established a new lineage, that of the apostolic succession, although, as you imply, Protestant thinking would tend to be antilineage in that respect. In Vaiṣṇava understanding, the Lord can and does intercede historically when a tradition has been corrupted or lost, or is in need of revitalization. In *Bhagavad-gītā,* Lord Kṛṣṇa Himself explained to Arjuna that with the ancient disciplic succession now broken, the eternal science of *yoga* had become lost, and therefore it was necessary for Him to personally present again this science to His disciple, Arjuna, through the *Gītā.* Disciplic successions can degrade into archaic orthodoxy, but they don't have to. Student: If the *guru* is primarily a transmitter of Vedic knowledge, can't one simply guide one's life in terms of that scriptural knowledge, without having to associate himself with a *guru*? Why can't one deal directly with the scripture? Śubhānanda dāsa: Adherence to Vedic scripture without the direct, practical guidance of a spiritual master is insufficient for spiritual advancement for a few reasons. First, Vedic literature describes the Absolute Truth from various angles and prescribes a variety of paths to that Truth. The spiritual master knows the particular mentality of each disciple and instructs him personally, in a manner appropriate to his mentality. The example is given that a pharmacy may contain thousands of medicines, but one requires a doctor who can prescribe the appropriate medicine for the particular ailment. Second, the spiritual aspirant benefits from the personal example of a perfected soul. Because the *guru* personally exemplifies Vedic wisdom, that wisdom becomes a tangible, real thing for the disciple. Further, it's not by the disciple's own efforts, in the ultimate sense, that he advances on the spiritual path. It is by divine grace. The Lord's blessings are delivered by the Lord's representative, the spiritual master. A verse in the *Śvetāśvatara Upaniṣad* states, "Only unto those great souls who simultaneously have implicit faith in both the Lord and the spiritual master are all the imports of the Vedic knowledge automatically revealed." Student: I wonder if you could explain again the *guru's* emissary function—what you referred to as his being an "external manifestation" of God? Śubhānanda dāsa: The authentic *guru* is God's representative. He acts as the intermediary between the spiritual aspirant and God. The *guru* does not obstruct the soul's approach to God. He facilitates it. While under the influence of *māyā,* illusion, the unaided soul can neither perceive nor approach God directly. He makes this approach *through* the spiritual master. The disciple sees God, you might say, *through* his spiritual master—and this vision is really still direct. You may view a tree *through* your bedroom window, but your perception of the tree is still direct. What this means is that the *guru* must be "transparent"—a transparent medium for the disciple's approach to God. The *guru* doesn't take the disciple's worship as his own, but he passes it on to God. God appears, as it were, *through* the agency of the *guru* to liberate the seeking soul. *(To be continued.)* ## The Biography of a Pure Devotee *A Refuge For The Hippies* Winter-spring, 1967: San Francisco’s Haight-Ashbury district. "It was like opening a temple in a battlefield." ### by Śrīla Satsvarūpa dāsa Goswami Śrīla Prabhupāda had come to San Francisco from New York just when the hippie movement was reaching its height. Now he found that his small temple on Frederick Street, in the heart of San Francisco's Haight-Ashbury district, was becoming a spiritual haven for troubled, searching, and sometimes desperate young people. Prabhupāda's thoughtful followers felt that some of the candidates for initiation in San Francisco did not intend to fulfill the exclusive lifelong commitment a disciple owes to his **guru*.* "Swamiji," they would say, "some of these people come only for their initiation. We have never seen them before, and we never see them again." Śrīla Prabhupāda replied that that was the risk he had to take. One day in a lecture in the temple, he explained that although the reactions for a disciple's past sins are removed at initiation, the spiritual master remains responsible until the disciple is delivered from the material world. Therefore, he said, Lord Caitanya warned that a *guru* should not accept many disciples. One night in the temple during the question-and-answer session, a big, bearded fellow raised his hand and asked Prabhupāda, "Can I become initiated?" The brash public request annoyed some of Prabhupāda's followers, but Prabhupāda was serene. "Yes," he replied. "But first you must answer two questions. Who is Kṛṣṇa?" The boy thought for a moment and said, "Kṛṣṇa is God." "Yes," Prabhupāda replied. "And who are you?" Again the boy thought for a few moments and then replied, "I am the servant of God." "Very good," Prabhupāda said. "Yes, you can be initiated tomorrow." Śrīla Prabhupāda knew that it would be difficult for his Western disciples to stick to Kṛṣṇa consciousness and attain the goal of pure devotional service. All their lives they had had the worst of training, and despite their nominal Christianity and philosophical searching, most of them knew nothing of the science of God. They did not even know that illicit sex and meat-eating were wrong, although when he told them they accepted what he said. And they freely chanted Hare Kṛṣṇa. So how could he refuse them? Of course, whether they would be able to persevere in Kṛṣṇa consciousness despite the ever-present attractions of *māyā* would be seen in time. Some would fall—that was the human tendency. But some would not. At least those who sincerely followed his instructions to chant Hare Kṛṣṇa and avoid sinful activities would be successful. Somehow or other, Śrīla Prabhupāda would say, people should be engaged in Kṛṣṇa consciousness. And this was the instruction of Lord Caitanya's chief follower, Rūpa Gosvāmī, who had written, *tasmāt kenāpy upāyena manaḥ kṛṣṇe niveśayet*. . . : "Somehow or other, fix the mind on Kṛṣṇa; the rules and regulations can come later." Inherent in this attitude of Śrīla Prabhupāda's and Śrīla Rūpa Gosvāmī's was a strong conviction about the purifying force of the holy name; if engaged in chanting Hare Kṛṣṇa, even the most fallen person could gradually become a saintly devotee. Śrīla Prabhupāda would often quote a verse from *Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam* affirming that persons addicted to sinful acts could be purified by taking shelter of the devotees of the Lord. He knew that every Haight-Ashbury hippie was eligible to receive the mercy of the holy name, and he saw it as his duty to his spiritual master to distribute the gift of Kṛṣṇa consciousness freely, rejecting no one. The morning and evening *kīrtana* (chanting) had already made the Rādhā-Kṛṣṇa temple popular in Haight-Ashbury, but when the devotees began serving a daily free lunch, the temple became an integral part of the community. Prabhupāda told his disciples simply to cook and distribute *prasādam*—that would be their only activity during the day. In the morning they would cook, and at noon they would feed everyone who came—sometimes 150 or 200 hippies from the streets of Haight-Ashbury. Before the morning *kīrtana*, the girls would put oatmeal on the stove, and by breakfast there would be a roomful of hippies, most of whom had been up all night. The cereal and fruit was for some the first solid food in days. But the main program was the lunch. Malati would go out and shop, getting donations whenever possible, for wholewheat flour, garbanzo flour, split peas, rice, and whatever vegetables were cheap or free: potatoes, carrots, turnips, rutabagas, beets. Then every day the cooks would prepare spiced mashed potatoes, buttered *capātīs*, split-pea *dāl*, and a vegetable dish—for two hundred people. The lunch program was possible because many merchants were willing to donate to the recognized cause of feeding hippies. Harṣarāṇī*: The lunch program attracted a lot of the Hippie Hill crowd, who obviously wanted food. They were really hungry. And there were other people who would come also, people who were working with the temple but weren't initiated. The record player would be playing the Swamiji's record. It was a nice family atmosphere.* Haridāsa: *The people would just all huddle together, and we would really line them wall to wall. A lot of them would simply eat and leave. But we were welcoming everybody. We were providing a kind of refuge from the tumult and madness of the street scene. So it was in that sense a hospital, and I think a lot of people were helped and maybe even saved. I don't mean only their souls—I mean their minds and bodies were saved, because of what was going on in the streets that they just simply couldn't handle. I'm talking about overdoses of drugs, people who were plain lost and needed comforting and who sort of wandered or staggered into the temple. Some of them stayed and became devotees, and some just took prasadam and left. Daily we had unusual incidents, and Swamiji witnessed it and took part in it. The lunch program was his idea.* Larry Shippen: *Some of the community of loose people cynically took advantage of the free food. They didn't appreciate the Swami, because they said he was, in his own way, an orthodox minister and they were much more interested in being unorthodox. It was a fairly cynical thing.* Those who were more interested and had questions—the spiritual seekers—would visit Swamiji in his room. Many of them would come in complete anxiety over the war in Vietnam or whatever was going on—trouble with the law, bad experiences on drugs, a falling out with school or family. There was much public concern about the huge influx of youth into San Francisco, a situation that was creating an almost uncontrollable social problem. Police and welfare workers were worried about health problems and poor living conditions, especially in Haight-Ashbury. Some middle-class people feared a complete hippie take over. The local authorities welcomed the service offered by Swami Bhaktivedanta's temple. Master Subramuniya: *The young people at that time were searching and needed somebody of a very high caliber who would take an interest in them and who would say, "You should do this, and you should not do that." The consensus was that no one could tell the young people what to do, because they were completely out of hand with drugs and so forth. But Swamiji told them what to do, and they did it. And everyone was appreciative, especially the young people.* Harṣarāṇī*: Just from a medical standpoint, doctors didn't know what to do with people on LSD. The police and the free clinics in the area couldn't handle the overload of people taking LSD. The police saw Swamiji as a certain refuge.* Michael Bowen*: Bhaktivedanta had an amazing ability through devotion to get people off drugs, especially speed, heroin, burnt-out LSD cases—all of that.* Haridāsa*: The hippies needed all the help they could get, and they knew it. And the Rādhā-Kṛṣṇa temple was certainly a kind of spiritual haven. Kids sensed it. They were running, living on the streets, no place where they could go, where they could rest, where people weren’t going to hurt them. A lot of kids would literally fall into the temple. I think it saved a lot of lives; there might have been a lot more casualties if it hadn't been for Hare Kṛṣṇa. It was like opening a temple in a battlefield. It was the hardest place to do it, but it was the place where it was most needed. Although the Swami had no precedents for dealing with any of this, he applied the chanting with miraculous results. The chanting was wonderful. It worked.* Śrīla Prabhupāda knew that only Kṛṣṇa consciousness could help. Others had their remedies, but Prabhupāda considered them mere patchwork. He knew that ignorantly identifying the self with the body was the real cause of suffering. How could someone help himself, what to speak of others, if he didn't know who he was, if he didn't know that the body merely covered the real self, the spirit soul, which could be happy only in his original nature as an eternal servant of Kṛṣṇa? Understanding that Lord Kṛṣṇa considered anyone who approached Him a virtuous person and that even a little devotional service would never be lost and could save a person at the time of death, Śrīla Prabhupāda had opened his door to everyone, even the most abject runaway. But for a lost soul to receive the balm of Kṛṣṇa consciousness, he would first have to stay awhile and chant, inquire, listen and follow. As Alien Ginsberg had advised five thousand hippies at the Avalon Ballroom, the early-morning *kīrtana* at the temple provided a vital community service for those who were coming down from LSD and wanted "to stabilize their consciousness on reentry." On occasion, the "reentries" would come flying in out of control for crash landings in the middle of the night. One morning at two a.m. the boys sleeping in the storefront were awakened by a pounding at the door, screaming, and police lights. When they opened the door, a young hippie with wild red hair and beard plunged in, crying, "O Kṛṣṇa, Kṛṣṇa! Oh, help me! Oh, don't let them get me. Oh, for God's sake, help!" A policeman stuck his head in the door and smiled. "We decided to bring him by here," he said, "because we thought maybe you guys could help him." "I'm not comfortable in this body!" the boy screamed as the policeman shut the door. The boy began chanting furiously and turned white, sweating profusely in terror. Swamiji's boys spent the rest of the early morning consoling him and chanting with him until the Swami came down for *kīrtana* and class. As for challengers, almost every night someone would come to argue with Prabhupāda. One man came regularly with prepared arguments from a philosophy book, from which he would read aloud. Prabhupāda would defeat him, and the man would go home, prepare another argument, and come back again with his book. One night, after the man had presented his challenge, Prabhupāda simply looked at him without bothering to reply. Prabhupāda's neglect was another defeat for the man, who got up and left. One morning a couple attended the lecture, a woman carrying a child and a man wearing a backpack. During the question-and-answer period the man asked, "What about my mind?" Prabhupāda gave him philosophical replies, but the man kept repeating, "What about my mind? What about my mind?" With a pleading, compassionate look, Prabhupāda said, "I have no other medicine. Please chant this Hare Kṛṣṇa. I have no other explanation. I have no other answer." But the man kept talking about his mind. Finally, one of the women devotees interrupted and said, "Just do what he says. Just try it." And Prabhupāda picked up his *karatālas* and began *kīrtana.* One evening while Prabhupāda was sitting on his dais, lecturing to a full house, a fat girl who had been sitting on the window seat suddenly stood up and began hollering at him. "Are you just going to sit there?" she yelled. "What are you going to do now? Come on! Aren't you going to say something? What are you going to do now? *Who are* you?" Her action was so sudden and her speech so violent that no one in the temple responded. Unangered, Prabhupāda sat very quietly. He appeared hurt. Only the devotees sitting closest to him heard him say softly, as if to himself, "It is the darkest of darkness." Another night while Prabhupāda was lecturing, a boy came up and sat on the dais beside him. The boy faced out toward the audience and interrupted Prabhupāda: "I got something to say. I want to say what I have to say now." The devotees in the audience looked up, astonished, while the boy began talking incoherently. Then Prabhupāda picked up his *karatālas:* "All right, let us have **kīrtana*.*" The boy sat in the same place throughout the **kīrtana*,* looking crazily, sometimes menacingly, at Prabhupāda. After half an hour the *kīrtana* stopped. Prabhupāda cut an apple into small pieces, as was his custom. He then placed the paring knife and a piece of apple in his right hand and held his hand out to the boy. The boy looked at Prabhupāda, then down at the apple and the knife. The room became silent. Prabhupāda sat motionless, smiling slightly at the boy. After a long, tense moment, the boy reached out. A sigh rose from the audience as the boy chose the piece of apple from Prabhupāda's open hand. Haridāsa: *I* used to watch how Swamiji would handle things. *I*t wasn't easy. To me, that was a real test of his powers and understanding—how to handle these people, not to alienate or antagonize or stir them up to create more trouble. He would turn their energy so that before they knew it they were calm, like when you pat a baby and it stops crying. Swamiji had a way of doing that with words, with the intonation of his voice, with his patience to let them carry on for a certain period of time, let them work it out, act it out even. *I* guess he realized that the devotees just couldn't say, "Listen, when you come to the temple you can't behave this way." *I*t was a delicate situation there. *Often someone would say, "I am God." They would get an insight or hallucination from their drugs. They would try to steal the spotlight. They wanted to be heard, and you could feel an anger against the Swami from people like that. Sometimes they would speak inspired and poetic for a while, but they couldn't sustain it, and their speech would become gibberish. And the Swami was not one to simply pacify people. He wasn't going to coddle them. He would say, "What do you mean? If you are God, then you have to be all-knowing. You have to have the attributes of God. Are you omniscient and omnipotent?" He would then name all the characteristics that one would have to have to be an* avatāra*, to be God. He would rationally prove the person wrong. He had superior knowledge, and he would rationally explain to them, "If you are God, can you do this? Do you have this power?"* *Sometimes people would take it as a challenge and would try to have a verbal battle with the Swami. The audience's attention would then swing to the disturbing individual, the person who was grabbing the spotlight. Sometimes it was very difficult. I used to sit there and wonder, "How is he going to handle this guy? This one is really a problem." But Swamiji was hard to defeat. Even if he couldn't convince the person, he convinced the other people in the crowd so that the energy of the room would change and would tend to quiet the person. Swamiji would win the audience by showing them that this person didn't know what he was talking about.* *So Swamiji would remove the audience rather than the person. He would do it without crushing the person. He would do it by superior intelligence, but also with a lot of compassion. He had the sensitivity not to injure a person psychologically or emotionally, so that when the person sat down and shut up, he wouldn't be doing it in defeat or anger—he wouldn't be hurt. He would just be outwitted by the Swami. When I saw the Swami do these things, then I realized he was a great teacher and a great human being.* *(To be continued.)* ## Śrīla Prabhupāda : A Modern Saint Among the hippies in San Francisco were many young people who were sincerely searching for spiritual enlightenment—and who found it when they met His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupāda. As recently as 1965, Śrīla Prabhupāda, at age 69, had been living as a renounced ascetic in the holy town of Vṛndāvana, India, where he was regarded as a pure, saintly devotee of Lord Kṛṣṇa. He had lived there in simple quarters in a famous medieval temple, working tirelessly to translate ancient Sanskrit scriptures into English. In 1921, Śrīla Prabhupāda’s spiritual master had requested him to spread the science of Kṛṣṇa consciousness in the West. So in 1965, after a lifetime of preparation, Śrīla Prabhupāda had come to America to do it. In the whole history of Indian spiritual life, no one had ever attempted something as bold and seemingly impossible—to transform Westerners into full-fledged devotees of Lord Kṛṣṇa. But by his intense spiritual energy and compassion Śrīla Prabhupāda was successful beyond his own expectations, thus earning recognition as a great spiritual figure of the modern age. In the *Encyclopedia Brittannica Book of the Year* for 1975 we read “His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupāda astonished academic and literary communities worldwide by writing and publishing 52 books on the ancient Vedic culture. The International Society for Krishna Consciousness which he had established in 1966, had expanded by the end of 1975 to seventy eight temples on 5 continents.” But in 1966, when Śrīla Prabhupāda had come to San Francisco, he had brought only himself. It was by his own qualities of spiritual warmth, humor, mercy, knowledge, friendliness, and love that Śrīla Prabhupāda had charmed and won over the hippies of the Haight. One of Śrīla Prabhupāda’s early disciples, Mukunda dāsa, tells how it was in San Francisco. We would just say to people, “You have to come and meet the Swami. They would come, and their lives would be transformed in some way, great or small.” ## ISKCON’S Anti-Drug Programs Win Worldwide Praise From it’s very beginning, the International Society for Krishna Consciousness has been active in helping young people from becoming free from drug abuse. Through a well structured program including a Vegetarian diet, yoga techniques, and meditation on the Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra, ISKCON has succeeded in giving thousands of young people the self-confidence and inner satisfaction that enable them to willingly reject all forms of intoxication. Here are a few of the many appreciations ISKCON has received for its work. "Krishna consciousness is close to 100% successful in stopping drug use among those who voluntarily enter the program."—*Addictions Magazine, Washington, D.C, Area Council on Alcoholism & Drug Abuse, Inc.* "Mayor Lindsay is most appreciative of the work that your Society is doing, especially in the realm of combating drug addiction"—*Woody Klein, Press Secretary, Office of the Mayor, City of New York.* "The combination of our medical care and the spiritual care from the Hare Kṛṣṇa philosophy has resulted in a very powerful tool indeed for the treatment of drug addiction, and for this we are very greatful"—*Fraser McDonald, Medical Superintendent, Carrington Hospital, Auckland, New Zealand.* “You have done good work in establishing a workable alternative to the problem of drug addiction and alienation."—*Morris Jeff, New Orleans Welfare Director.* ## Letters We welcome your letters. Write to BACK TO GODHEAD 51 West Allens Lane Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19119 Once again, your latest edition of BACK TO GODHEAD was a smasher. I read it through with tear-filled eyes. Especially, the article "Impressions of India" was a most moving and accurate account of "Indian" attitudes toward life. Although an Indian myself, I've never been to India and yet I hope to go (I'm just 18). The spirit within me pulls me strongly toward India, not because it is "my" country but because Kṛṣṇa, the essence of life itself, is perfectly understood in that country, where so much time and energy are spent for Him even now. Please don't misunderstand me when I say "perfectly understood." Of course not everyone in India understands Kṛṣṇa, but practically everyone at least makes an effort to understand Him. I have a question. Since we are all part and parcel of Śrī Kṛṣṇa, why were we separated from Him in the first place? In the beginning, why did God create the universe—and then separate the souls and let them loose in the material world? Once again, thanks for your wonderful magazine. It helps me dream of a time when all the world will be at peace, there will be no cow-slaughtering, no nuclear horrors or political haggling or wars—just a little piece of land for everyone, a few cows, and the Hare Kṛṣṇa *mantra* to chant! Arti P. London, England *Kṛṣṇa has complete independence, and because we are small parts of Kṛṣṇa, we have partial independence. That independence consists of the freedom to choose whether or not we want to serve Kṛṣṇa. Most living entities eternally serve Kṛṣṇa, and they are ever-liberated souls who reside in the spiritual world. But a small number of us misuse our independence by choosing to neglect Kṛṣṇa rather than serve Him. Instead of desiring to give enjoyment to Kṛṣṇa, we desire to be the center of enjoyment ourselves. In this way we separate ourselves from Kṛṣṇa, by our own desires. Because all living beings are constitutionally Kṛṣṇa's servants, our desire to enjoy separately from Kṛṣṇa is unnatural. Nonetheless, when we want to enjoy in this way, Kṛṣṇa Himself reluctantly fulfills our desires by placing us in the illusion that we are fully independent and can do whatever we like. The Lord creates the material universe to provide a place where those of us who want to forget Him can seemingly do as we please, without Kṛṣṇa consciousness. But for our benefit the Lord gives us His instructions in the Vedic literature and sends us His representatives, the pure devotees, to try to persuade us to give up our separatist mentality and return to our natural position as His servants. Separation from Kṛṣṇa is only an illusion, but we are now in that illusion, because we desire it. As soon as we desire to be Kṛṣṇa conscious, Kṛṣṇa withdraws that illusion and helps us make progress back to our real life of devotional service in eternity, knowledge, and bliss.* ## Every Town and Village ### A look at the worldwide activities of the International Society for Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON) *Hare Krishna—You Can Look It Up* *Hare Krishna* is now a dictionary word. While browsing through the most recent edition of *The Random House Dictionary of the English Language,* we were pleased to find this entry: "*Hare Krishna*. A religious sect based on Vedic scriptures, whose followers engage in joyful congregational chanting of God's name: founded in the U.S. in 1966. [from part of the chant]" Of course, *Hare Krishna* was part of the Sanskrit lexicon before English even existed. But in the short time since His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupāda brought *Hare Krishna* to the West, these ancient Sanskrit words have become an accepted part of the modern English language. *“Desire Tree" Offers Japanese the Fruit of Vedic Knowledge* Tokyo—The Japanese branch of the Bhaktivedanta Book Trust has just published the first full-color Kṛṣṇa-conscious magazine in Japanese. Called *Nozomi no ki (Desire Tree),* the twenty-four-page magazine contains articles on Buddhism (and its roots in Vedic culture), reincarnation, and chanting Hare Kṛṣṇa. *100,000 in Gujarat Inaugurate Cultural Project* Baroda, India—The Hare Kṛṣṇa movement has begun constructing a new cultural center in the heart of Baroda, an elegant old city in Gujarat (a state on India's west coast that is home for more than five million devotees of Lord Kṛṣṇa). The center, situated on five acres of land, will include a Rādhā-Kṛṣṇa temple surrounded by a tropical garden, a theater, a restaurant, a guesthouse, an *āśrama,* and a *guru-kula* school for primary education. More than 100,000 guests attended the three-day festival to dedicate the project, which the movement plans to complete by 1985. *Vedic Culture Now Taught in German University Town* Heidelberg, West Germany—Nestled in the green valleys along the River Neckar, the town of Heidelberg, famous as a center of education since medieval times, has now added a new feature to its long cultural tradition: The Center for Vedic Studies. Just a fifteen-minute walk from the university, the Center is the Hare Kṛṣṇa movement's way of presenting the ancient philosophical, cultural, and religious experience of India to Heidelberg's residents and visitors who have an educated interest—or just simple curiosity. The Center sponsors films, slide presentations, art exhibits, lectures on Vedic philosophy, and a daily program of lunch, devotional music, and brief talks about the Vedic experience. The Center also includes a shopping annex, offering Indian clothes, handicrafts, and devotional items, and it houses the publishing offices for the German-language counterpart of BACK TO GODHEAD. *Hare Kṛṣṇa In the Holy Land* Haifa, Israel—The Hare Kṛṣṇa movement now has a rural *āśrama* near this Israeli port and industrial center. The ten-acre community, called Neve Hemed, "the Oasis of Sweetness," lies in Israel's most fertile valley, the Emeq Yisrael, and is surrounded by many kibbutzim (communal farms). *Rockefeller Praises Work of Kṛṣṇa Devotee* Wheeling, West Virginia—Jay Rockefeller, Governor of West Virginia, recently came to the Wheeling Civic Center to dedicate two historical murals, one of them painted by Muralīdhara dāsa, a devotee of Kṛṣṇa. Appreciating Muralīdhara's work, which the Governor praised as "beautiful" and "extraordinary," the Wheeling newspaper said that the Ohio Valley (of which Wheeling is a part) is "fortunate to have an individual of his caliber." Muralīdhara is the artistic director for Prabhupāda's Palace of Gold, the Hare Kṛṣṇa movement's memorial to His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupāda at the nearby New Vrindaban Community. Muralīdhara donated for the Palace the $5,000 fee he received for the mural. *150,000 Celebrate "Festival of the Chariots"* Bombay—The Hare Kṛṣṇa movement recently sponsored Bombay's first Jagannātha Ratha-yātrā, "The Festival of the Chariots." Some 150,000 people took part in the eight-mile procession from Shivaji Park to Chowpatty Beach, where the movement held a week-long festival of Hare Kṛṣṇa chanting, devotional dramas, lectures on Kṛṣṇa conscious philosophy, and feasting on food offered to Lord Jagannātha—Kṛṣṇa, Lord of the Universe. *Kṛṣṇa Philosophy "En Espanol”* Los Angeles—The Spanish Division of the Bhaktivedanta Book Trust has now shipped more than fourteen million Spanish books of Kṛṣṇa conscious philosophy and culture to sixteen countries, including Spain, Mexico, and the United States. Last year alone, the division printed more than 2,700,000 books. Among the books in print are illustrated hardbound editions of *Bhagavad-gītā As It Is* and the multi-volume *Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam,* as well as numerous paperbacks. *Indian Associations Award Drama Prize To Hare Kṛṣṇa Troupe* New York City—A drama troupe from the Hare Kṛṣṇa movement recently won first prize at an Indian drama festival held at the Columbia University School of International Affairs. The troupe, the Brijbasi Players, came from the movement's New Vrindaban community in West Virginia. They performed a dramatization from the *Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam,* an ancient Indian classic that is one of the movement's principal scriptures. The festival was sponsored by the Federation of Indian Associations. ## The Yoga Dictionary *The Sanskrit language is rich in words to communicate ideas about spiritual life, yoga and God realization. This dictionary, appearing by installments in BACK TO GODHEAD, will focus upon the most important of these words (and, occasionally, upon relevant English terms) and explain what they mean.* Ātmā. The word *ātmā* means "self." The *ātmā* is what we really are, as distinct from what we falsely think we are. Generally we think of ourselves in terms of the various labels we've pinned on ourselves or had pinned on us—American, English, Christian, Hindu, white, black, liberal, conservative, father, mother, Jones, Smith, or whatever. But these are only temporary tags. Time unpins them and replaces them with new ones. After all, the label is different from the merchandise. Therefore, although *ātmā* sometimes refers to one's temporary body, mind, or intelligence, the *ātmā* is ultimately the eternal consciousness (the spirit, or soul) that is present within the body of every living being. This *ātmā*—higher than the senses, the mind, and even the intelligence—is most mysterious and subtle. The *Bhagavad-gītā* describes it in this way: "For the *ātmā* there is neither birth nor death at any time. He does not come to be, has not come to be, and will not come to be. He is unborn, eternal, undying, and primeval. He is not slain when the body is slain. . . .The *ātmā* can never be cut to pieces by any weapon, nor burned by fire, moistened by water, nor withered by the wind. This individual *ātmā* is unbreakable and insoluble, and can be neither burned nor dried. He is everlasting, all-pervading, unchangeable, immovable, and eternally the same." One who realizes this eternal *ātmā* within himself—that is, one who recognizes himself to be the eternal consciousness or soul within the body—becomes a perfectly self-realized person. There are innumerable *ātmā*s, all in essence the same yet each eternally distinct. And above all these *ātmā*s is the Param*ātmā*, or supreme *ātmā*—God. God, too, is distinct from all other living beings, and this distinction is eternal. God, the supreme infinite, is the complete spiritual whole, and all other living beings are infinitesimal parts of God. A living being can never "become God" any more than a drop of water can become the entire ocean. Avatāra. An *avatāra* is an incarnation of God who descends to the material world. As the president of a country may enter a prison to oversee its management or bestow clemency on prisoners, the Supreme Lord, from time to time, enters the material world to oversee the workings of the material creation and bestow His mercy on fortunate souls. The purpose or mission of *avatāras* is explained in a famous passage from *Bhagavad-gītā* in which Lord Kṛṣṇa says, "Whenever and wherever there is a decline in religious practice and a predominant rise of irreligion—at that time I descend Myself. To deliver the pious and annihilate the miscreants, as well as to reestablish the principles of religion, I Myself appear, millennium after millennium." Although the Supreme Lord eternally resides in His own abode, beyond the material world, He has the power to appear within the material world. He can do this by His spiritual potency. The Lord is beyond the restrictions of time and space. An ordinary living being can work in only one place at any one time, but the Lord, by His unlimited spiritual capabilities, can appear in many places simultaneously, in an unlimited number of forms, and perform unlimited activities. An *avatāra* may resemble an ordinary human being, but He performs extraordinary acts. Lord Kṛṣṇa, for example, lifted a mountain when a mere child, killed demons like Pūtanā and Kaṁsa, and gave the world the immortal teachings of *Bhagavad-gītā.* An ordinary person is born by the force of nature, according to the laws of *karma,* but God's birth as an *avatāra* takes place by His own choice, as a supernatural event, transcendental to nature's laws. As stated in *Bhagavad-gītā,* one who understands the transcendental birth and activities of the Lord's *avatāra* becomes free from birth and death and returns to the kingdom of God in the spiritual world. The genuine **avatāra*s* of the Lord are all described in revealed scriptures, which give details of the **avatāra*'s* physical appearance and His specific activities and purpose. An *avatāra* never invents a new method of self-realization, but upholds the eternal methods set forth in authentic scriptures. One whose teachings contradict those of the scriptures cannot be a genuine *avatāra*. One should be wary of fraudulent incarnations—cheap self-proclaimed Gods who preach their own concocted philosophies, imitate the Supreme Lord, and swindle the naive. Recent years have seen such frauds in abundance, and people who lack scientific knowledge of God consciousness offer them honor. Scientific knowledge about God and His *avatāras* is at hand in **Bhagavad-gītā*,* and one who understands the science of *Bhagavad-gītā* will not be cheated. One should not be gullible. The president may enter a prison to favor the inmates, but it's useless to seek favors from a prisoner who claims to be president. ## Science *A Dialogue on “The Ghost in the Machine"* Is the existence of the soul merely a myth propagated by fuzzy-minded fanatics—or a fact verifiable by a nonmechanistic science? ### By Sadāpūta Dāsa *The prevailing view among modern scientists is that a human being is in essence a complex machine. According to this view, our life and consciousness have their source in the interactions of our bodily parts—neurons in the brain, organelles in the cells, and so on. Mechanistic scientists scoff at the idea that a transcendental entity—the self, or soul—could be the source of life and consciousness. "The ghost in the machine" is a favorite epithet they use to turn thumbs down on the idea of the soul and attempt to dismiss it from serious consideration.* *What follows is an excerpt from* Mechanistic and Nonmechanistic Science, *a forthcoming book that explores in depth the question of the origin and nature of life and consciousness. Dr. Avaroha expresses the views of the author; Drs. Kutark and Shunya are composite characters who express views widely held by members of the modern scientific community.* Dr. Avaroha: The *Bhagavad-gītā* states that each individual organism consists of an irreducible conscious entity riding in a physical body composed of gross material elements. The body is insentient—a complicated machine, according to *Bhagavad-gītā* [18.61]. In contrast, the conscious entity, or **jīvātmā*,* is the actual sentient self of the living being, and it cannot be explained in mechanistic terms [Bg Ch. 2]. Each *jīvātmā* possesses all the attributes of a person, including consciousness, intelligence, and innate sensory faculties. These attributes cannot be reduced to the interplay of some underlying impersonal entities that we might hope to describe by a mechanistic theory. In a sense, we can compare the *jīvātmā*s to the hypothetical fundamental particles sought by physicists. Just as these particles are envisioned as having certain irreducible material properties, the *jīvātmā*s can be thought of as fundamental units of conscious personality endowed with certain irreducible personal traits. Dr. Kutark: So you are proposing a theory that features a transcendental soul as a primitive element. A priori, I suppose there's no reason why we can't propose such a thing. But are there any experiments proving the existence of the soul? Dr. Avaroha: To answer this question, let's consider how physical experiments are conducted. In physics we can show that an entity exists only by performing an experiment that takes advantage of that entity's mode of interaction with other matter. Take for example the cloud-chamber tracks made by charged particles such as electrons. These tracks result from the ionization of atoms near the path of the particle, and this ionization is caused by the electromagnetic interaction between the particle and the electrons in the atoms. Neutral particles do not interact in this way and thus leave no tracks. The neutrino, for example, is famous for interacting with matter in a very weak way—by what is known as the weak force, in fact—and thus it is very hard to detect experimentally. Dr. Kutark: So to detect the soul in an experiment we would have to take advantage of the soul's particular mode of interaction with matter. That's reasonable. But what *is* that mode of interaction? At present, physic*is*ts know of four basic types of forces: strong, weak, electromagnetic, and gravitational. You are suggesting, I gather, that the soul does not interact in any of these modes? Dr. Avaroha: That's correct, and so we can't hope to detect the presence of the *jīvātmā* directly with any of our usual physical instruments. The *jīvātmā* does interact with matter, but in a very indirect and subtle way. As a result of the *jīvātmā*'s primary interaction, secondary electromagnetic interactions are induced in the body, and these affect the nervous system in particular [*Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam* 3.26.34]. These electromagnetic effects are detectable in principle, but they are very complex. Therefore, it would be very difficult to unambiguously single out the influence of the *jīvātmā* on the body by analyzing physical measurements. Dr. Shunya: This makes it seem very implausible that you could ever verify the existence of this hypothetical *jīvātmā.* But I would like to make another, more fundamental point. Suppose you could demonstrate from experimental data that some new fundamental law of nature was needed to explain the functioning of the brain. A theory incorporating this law would still be mechanistic. All our scientific statements—and, in fact, all valid statements of *any* kind—refer to patterns in measured data, and they are therefore necessarily mechanistic, even though we may not always try to express them in formal mathematical language. Since you are describing consciousness and personality as nonmechanistic, you are in effect saying nothing at all. It is meaningless even to talk about verifying such statements experimentally. Dr. Avaroha: You are partly right. It is indeed true that we cannot study consciousness per se by examining its influence on the motion of matter. Of course, we can make indirect inferences about consciousness by such methods. But to make a real study of consciousness, we have to take advantage of the higher cognitive potencies of the *jīvātmā* itself. To understand consciousness and deal with it in a practical way, we need to enter a domain of discourse and experience that goes beyond the mechanistic world view. If we were simply machines, then this would not be possible. But, according to *Bhagavad-gītā* our own existence transcends the mechanistic realm. When the *jīvātmā* is embodied, its innate senses are linked up with the information-processing system of the physical body, and thus the normal sensory perceptions of the *jīvātmā* refer almost exclusively to the physical states of machines, including the machine of the brain [Bg 15.7]. Only the embodied *jīvātmā*'s direct perception of its own internal sensory and cognitive activities involves something that cannot be described in terms of mechanical configurations. For this reason, there is a strong tendency for the *jīvātmā* to overlook its own nature and view the world in an entirely mechanistic way. But the inherent senses of the *jīvātmā* are not limited to observing the states of the physical body. The *jīvātmā* is capable of direct reciprocation with other *jīvātmā*s and the Paramātmā, or Superconsciousness. Since this mode of interaction directly involves the use of all personal attributes and qualities, it cannot be described in mechanistic terms. But it can be understood and meaningfully discussed by persons who have attained to this level of experience by direct realization. Dr. Shunya: Such "realization" is purely subjective! Anyone can claim to have all kinds of remarkable realizations and mystical visions, and in fact there are many thousands of such people, and thousands of conflicting sects composed of their gullible followers! But science is limited to knowledge that can be verified objectively. For an observation to be considered objective it must be possible for several different people to make the observation independently and then correlate their results. Dr. Avaroha: Two persons able to function on a higher level of consciousness would certainly be able to recognize each other as realized souls, and they could also meaningfully discuss their realizations with other similarly endowed persons. We can partially illustrate this situation by the analogy of two seeing persons discussing a sunset in the presence of a congenitally blind person. The blind person would not be able to appreciate their statements, and he might take the skeptical viewpoint that talk about sunsets is simply meaningless. Nonetheless, the seeing persons would go right on discussing the sunset, and each would feel confident that the other was sharing his experience and understanding what he was talking about. Another point is that realized persons are able to perceive themselves and others directly with their innate transcendental senses. Such persons are not restricted to external observations of behavior. Thus, confirmation of higher states of consciousness is not limited simply to the subjective perception of each individual. You are certainly correct in pointing out that there are many people who delude themselves and others by claiming to have attained various kinds of mystical realizations. But the existence of such cheating does not imply that a genuine science of higher consciousness is impossible. Such a science must indeed be based on verification of crucial observations by more than one person, but such verification is possible by realized persons. *Bhagavad-gītā* outlines a practical system for attaining higher realization. In this system the seeker of knowledge must take instruction from a realized soul [Bg 4.34]. By following these instructions, the person's higher cognitive faculties awaken by the grace of the Supreme [Bg 10.10]. His realizations, however, can readily be evaluated by his teacher, who is fully capable of detecting mistakes and illusions. Furthermore, one can check the conduct of both teacher and disciple by consulting other self-realized souls and by referring to a standard body of authoritative literature. This system is like modern science in that the findings of individuals are scrutinized by their peers and evaluated in the context of standard knowledge. Dr. Kutark: You have referred to the Supreme and to Superconsciousness. What do you mean by these terms? Also, just what does one realize by "awakening his higher cognitive faculties"? Can this realization be conveyed to a person whose experience is limited to the ordinary functioning of the five senses? Dr. Avaroha: *Bhagavad-gītā* explains that consciousness exists in two aspects, the infinite and the infinitesimal. The infinite consciousness is the very basis of reality and the ultimate source of all phenomena. According to *Bhagavad-gītā*, this absolute consciousness is the Supreme Person, who is fully endowed with all personal attributes—such as senses, will, and intelligence—and who is known in the Vedic literature by many names, such as Kṛṣṇa and Govinda. This is, of course, the same Supreme Being known as God in the Judeo-Christian tradition, or as Allah in Islam. The infinitesimal aspect of consciousness consists of the innumerable atomic selves called *jivatmas.* We can illustrate the relation between atomic and infinite consciousness by a simple analogy. In classical physics we can fully characterize an electron as a minute charged particle that interacts in a certain way with an electromagnetic field. Similarly, we can understand the true character of the *jīvātmā* in terms of its natural interaction with the Supreme Person. Just as we can think of the electron as being defined by its interaction with an electromagnetic field, we can understand the *jīvātmā* as being defined by its personal interaction with the Supreme Conscious Being. Thus, the final goal of self-realization is to attain this state of natural reciprocation with the Supreme. This mode of interaction is entirely personal, being based on the exchange of loving service. We get some hint of the quality of this exchange from the following characterization of the Supreme Person in the *Brahma-saṁhitā* [5.38]: > premāñjana-cchurita-bhakti-vilocanena > santaḥ sadaiva hṛdayeṣu vilokayanti > yaṁ śyāmasundaram acintya-guṇa-svarūpaṁ > govindam ādi-puruṣaṁ tam ahaṁ bhajāmi "I worship Govinda, the primeval Lord, who is Śyāmasundara, Kṛṣṇa Himself. with inconceivable, innumerable attributes. The pure devotees see Him in their heart of hearts with the eye of devotion tinged with the salve of love." Of course, we can attain full understanding of what this description means only by direct experience, just as we can understand the taste of a fruit only by actually eating it. *SADĀPŪTA DĀSA studied at the State University of New York and Syracuse University and later received a National Science Fellowship. He went on to complete his Ph.D. in mathematics at Cornell, specializing in probability theory and statistical mechanics.* ## The Saga of Lord Rāma > A classic Indian epic of > the eternal war between Good > and Evil comes to the television screen. ### by Draviḍa dāsa The Vedic literature describes how Lord Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, appears in the material world throughout history to eradicate evil, establish the principles of religion, and enliven His devotees. Sometimes He comes Himself, but more often He expands as an incarnation who manifests a certain portion of His supreme glories. Among these incarnations, one of the best known and most revered is Lord Rāmacandra, the hero of the *Rāmāyaṇa*, a Sanskrit epic written by the great sage Vālmīki. Recently ISKCON Television, the team of devotees that produces television programs on Kṛṣṇa conscious topics, shot a video version of Lord Rāma's pastimes. Under the direction of Nṛsiṁhānanda dāsa, who has worked extensively with professional TV studios in Hollywood, ITV staged an all-devotee *Rāmāyaṇa* at the Hare Kṛṣṇa movement's New Vrindaban farm community in West Virginia. Śrīla Prabhupāda 's Palace of Gold (see *Back to Godhead* Vol. 16, No. 7) and the woodsy New Vrindaban landscape provided the perfect setting. Nṛsiṁhānanda adapted a script condensed from the original *Rāmāyaṇa* by Nanda-kiśora dāsa, a seasoned Kṛṣṇa conscious director and actor. What follows is a synopsis of the plot, with highlights of the ITV production. Millions of years ago a king named Daśaratha ruled the world from his capital city, Ayodhyā, which lies about midway between present-day Calcutta and New Delhi. By his queens Daśaratha had many sons, but the jewel among them was Rāmacandra, the Personality of Godhead Himself. Even from His youth Rāma possessed all the qualities of a leader. His magnanimity was unrivaled, as were His religious wisdom, prowess in fighting, and freedom from greed for the privileges of power. His strength knew no limit: He won the hand of Sītā-devī, the goddess of fortune herself, by breaking a huge bow His rival suitors couldn't even lift. When the time came for King Daśaratha to retire, he naturally chose as his successor his eldest and most qualified son, Rāma. All Ayodhyā rejoiced at hearing the news and prepared for the coronation of the beloved prince. But the coronation was not to be. Kaikeyī, one of Daśaratha's queens, was incited by a malicious maidservant to block Rāma's ascendance to the throne. Some time before, Daśaratha had promised Kaikeyī two boons, but she had asked that they be deferred. Now, blinded by envy, Kaikeyī held Daśaratha to his word and forced him to fulfill two wishes: first, she wanted Rāma exiled to the forest for fourteen years; and second, she wanted her own son, Bharata, crowned King of Ayodhyā. Daśaratha felt Kaikeyī's demands to be like a thunderbolt striking his head. How could he banish his most beloved son, Rāma, on the eve of His coronation! What would become of Ayodhyā? What would become of Sītā? Daśaratha saw only calamity on all sides—yet his word was his very life, and he yielded to Kaikeyī's will. Rāma accepted His exile cheerfully, but He worried that His father and mother might die of grief. (His father did, in fact, die of despair soon after Rāma left Ayodhyā.) Nonetheless, Rāma was determined to follow His father's order, come what may. When Rāma told Sītā and His brother Lakṣmaṇa of the impending exile, they insisted on accompanying Him. Thus Lord Rāma, the personification of righteousness, Sītā-devi, the personification of faithfulness, and Lakṣmaṇa, the personification of fraternal devotion, entered the Daṇḍaka Forest for the fourteen-year ordeal. Of course, since Rāma and Lakṣmaṇa are none other than the Personality of Godhead and His first expansion, Their stay in the Daṇḍaka Forest proved no ordeal at all. For some time They and Sītā lived peacefully and happily, enjoying nature's gifts and making friends with many sages who had repaired to the forest for seclusion and meditation. But then came a fateful turn of events ... One day a hideous man-eating demoness named Śūrpaṇakhā came upon Rāma's cottage. Overwhelmed with lust at seeing Rāma's handsome figure, she attempted to seduce Him. When that failed she turned to Lakṣmaṇa, but both He and Rāma ridiculed her. Infuriated, Śūrpaṇakhā rushed toward Sītā to devour her. Rāma stopped Śūrpaṇakhā and had Lakṣmaṇa cut off her nose and ears to teach her a lesson. Then the demoness ran into the forest, screaming in agony and vowing that her brother Rāvaṇa would avenge her humiliation. Rāvaṇa was the king of the man-eaters. By practicing severe austerities, he had won from Lord Brahmā, the chief demigod, several boons that gave him near-invincibility. From his kingdom on Laṇkā, the island off the southern tip of India, the fearsome Rāvaṇa and his man-eating minions would roam the earth and the heavens, pillaging, raping, and devouring at will. Rāvaṇa cared for neither God nor law nor morality. Always intoxicated by pride and arrogance, as well as by strong drink, Rāvaṇa was sin incarnate. Rāvaṇa had several brothers who were equal to him in vileness. One of these, named Khara, lived in a part of the Daṇḍaka Forest near Rāma's cottage and led an army of man-eaters who fed on the flesh of saintly hermits. From Rāma's cottage Śūrpaṇakhā fled to Khara, and when he saw what Lakṣmaṇa had done to his sister he flew into a rage and sent out 14,000 of his formidable warriors to slay Rāma and Lakṣmaṇa. But Khara didn't realize with whom he was dealing. Rāma's arrows, like shafts of fire, flew from His golden bow with unerring accuracy, annihilating Khara and his army. A lone survivor escaped to Laṇkā to tell Rāvaṇa of the disaster wrought by the supernatural valor of Rāma. Hearing of Rāma's exploits, Rāvaṇa thought it wise to adopt a devious tactic. Rather than confront Rāma directly, Rāvaṇa would kidnap Rāma's beloved Sītā so that Rāma would die of a broken heart. Not only would this plan avenge the humiliation of Śūrpaṇakhā and the slaughter of Khara and the 14,000 warriors, but it would also provide Rāvaṇa with the consummate object for his lust: the chaste and beautiful Sītā. Rāvaṇa paid a visit to his warlord, Mārīca. Like many other demons, Mārīca could change his form at will. Rāvaṇa ordered him to take the form of an irresistibly charming deer and then to frisk before Sītā. When the deer would run into the forest, Rāvaṇa hoped, Sītā would insist that Rāma and Lakṣmaṇa capture it for her. Left alone, Sītā would then be easy prey for Rāvaṇa. The ruse worked, and Rāvaṇa came before the lone Sītā disguised as a robed renunciant. Sītā welcomed him into the cottage and offered him refreshment, but suddenly Rāvaṇa cast off his disguise and declared his purpose. Despite Sītā's piteous entreaties and prophetic warnings, Rāvaṇa abducted Sītā and carried her off toward Laṇkā. Along the way Rāvaṇa met and mortally wounded Jaṭāyu, a huge bird who was a lifelong friend of King Daśaratha's. Jaṭāyu tried to stop Rāvaṇa, but was no match for the world-conquering demon. When Rāma and Lakṣmaṇa discovered that Sītā had been kidnapped, They were overcome with grief. In anguish They searched everywhere, finally coming upon the dying Jaṭāyu, who told them with his last breath that it was Rāvaṇa who had made off with Sītā. Later Rāma learned that a certain tribe of monkey warriors, headed by Hanumān and Sugrīva, could find Rāvaṇa's kingdom and help Rāma regain Sītā. Rāma and Lakṣmaṇa sealed an alliance with the monkey warriors and found them to be fiercely devoted followers. Among them all, Hanumān stands as the very emblem of the faithful, dedicated servant. Being the son of the Wind-god, Hanumān could fly, and when he learned that Rāvaṇa's kingdom lay on the island of Laṇkā, he used his prodigious strength to leap over the sea. All he knew was that he must find Sītā and help retrieve her for Rāma. Shrinking himself down to the size of a cat, Hanumān walked freely through the fabulous city of Laṇkā, reconnoitering its defenses. Finally, he found Sītā in the heart of a dense forest of Aśoka trees. She was wan and weak, wracked with grief at her separation from her beloved Rāma. Because of a demigod's curse, Rāvaṇa had been unable to force himself upon her, and she had resisted all his advances. Though the torment had taken its toll, she was still radiant with beauty. Hanumān gave Sītā one of Rāma's rings to prove he was a messenger, not a man-eater. Then the noble monkey soothed Sītā with sweet remembrances of her Lord. Hanumān assured her that Rāma would soon rescue her, and she sent him forth with one of her pearls so that Rāma would know that Hanumān had indeed found her. Before leaving Laṇkā, the jubilant Hanumān set fire to large sections of the city and slew thousands of Rāvaṇa's soldiers. Upon hearing Hanumān's report, Rāma at once prepared to invade Laṇkā. He led the army of monkey warriors to the sea and told Sugrīva to build a bridge of boulders across to Laṇkā. The faithful monkeys had no idea how such a feat could be accomplished, but they dutifully began heaving huge rocks into the ocean—and Rāma made them float, by His divine energy! Rāma's legions of monkey warriors marched across the miraculous bridge to Laṇkā, and soon the great siege began. Rāvaṇa's men were trained in the art of war and armed with bows and arrows, swords, lances, tridents, and other such weapons. The untrained monkeys had only boulders and tree trunks for weapons. But they had one insuperable advantage: they were empowered by Lord Rāma, the Personality of Godhead Himself. For some days the two armies fought ferociously, with heavy casualties on both sides, and finally Rāma's forces routed the man-eaters. At last Rāvaṇa himself had to confront Rāma. Even now the demon wouldn't believe his power could be cut down. Rāma rebuked Rāvaṇa for cravenly kidnapping Sītā in His absence, and the demon in turn cast low insults at the Lord. The furious battle that then ensued between Rāma and Rāvaṇa lasted for days without letup. The earth, the seas, and the heavens were disturbed by the sheer force of their combat, and various astronomical events portended the imminent defeat of Rāvaṇa. Finally, the Lord released an arrow from His bow that struck Rāvaṇa's heart like a nuclear bomb. The demon tumbled to the ground, vomiting blood. Having at last rid the world of the curse of Rāvaṇa, Rāma installed Vibhīṣaṇa, Rāvaṇa's pious brother, as King of Laṇkā. Rāma went at once to the Aśoka grove to find Sītā. Joyously reunited, they flew back to Ayodhyā in a glorious airplane bedecked with flowers. At last Lord Rāmacandra had retrieved Sītā, the fourteen-year exile was over, and the long-awaited coronation could take place. ## Notes from the Editor *Reincarnation and the Holy Name* *Is there life after death? If so, what is the nature of that life?* These questions have always been with us, and the search for their answers is an intrinsic function of the human psyche. In recent years interest in reincarnation has grown, with new advocates, theories, and discoveries. Testimonies by persons who have returned from the verge of death after supposedly glimpsing the hereafter have intrigued modern parapsychologists, as well as researchers like Elizabeth Kubler-Ross, author of *On Death and Dying,* and Raymond Moody, author of *Life After Life* and other bestsellers. The original source—books on reincarnation—however, are the Sanskrit Vedic literatures. The *Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam,* for example, gives a fascinating account of the near-death experience of a man named Ajāmila. Unlike modern investigations, the case of Ajāmila lets us study the near-death experience not from the viewpoint of the dying person but from the viewpoint of higher beings present at the time of the soul's passing out of the body. *Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam* relates how the messengers of Death and the messengers of Lord Viṣṇu, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, disagreed over where Ajāmila should reincarnate in his next life. Being deathless, the *ātmā,* or self, must take birth in another body when the present body ceases to function. And that next body is determined by one's individual *karma:* "As you sow, so shall you reap." In the case of Ajāmila, the messengers of Death wanted to drag the soul to hell because of his life of sin. Although Ajāmila lay in a coma, he was conscious of the messengers of Death preparing to transfer him to the lower regions. But suddenly the beautiful, effulgent messengers of Viṣṇu arrived and intervened. The messengers of the Lord said the messengers of Death had misjudged the soul of Ajāmila and had no right to take him. Incensed, the messengers of Death explained why Ajāmila should be taken and punished. Judging a person's *karma,* they said, is a relatively simple thing. At the time of death, when a soul is ready to enter another body, the superintendent of Death arranges for a future body in accordance with the particular soul's past sinful and pious acts. Because Ajāmila had led a sinful life, he was now due to be punished. The messengers of Death gave an analogy: As springtime in the present indicates the nature of springs in the past and future, so this present life of happiness or distress indicates one's activities in the past, and one's present activities are an index of one's future incarnations. In other words, on the basis of the activities a person performs in his present life, the higher authorities determine his destiny in the next life. Since most people incur at least some bad **karma*,* it is the duty of the messengers of Death to transfer them to a lower position. Most people act without any understanding of the law of *karma* and thus commit all kinds of abominable acts for the pleasure of the present body. They do not know that their present suffering is a result of past sins, nor are they able to understand that their present sins will cause them future suffering. Acting in the darkness of ignorance, most people are unable to know their past or future lives. And even when they hear from the Vedic literature about transmigration of the soul and the law of **karma*,* they refuse to accept that there is anything beyond this present life of sense gratification. Such an ignorant person was Ajāmila. And because of his life of sin, the messengers of Death saw no reason why the messengers of the Lord should obstruct their work of awarding him his just *karma.* The messengers of Lord Viṣṇu, however, asked the messengers of Death on what basis they had judged Ajāmila. The messengers of Death replied that they had judged him according to the religious scriptures. They then read a long list of criminal, violent, irresponsible, irreligious, and perverted acts Ajāmila had committed. At this, the messengers of Viṣṇu admitted that hellish punishment would ordinarily await such a sinner but in the case of Ajāmila, this did not apply. The extraordinary circumstance in Ajāmila's case was that at the last moment of his life he had called out the name of God, Nārāyaṇa. Although he was not thinking of God but of his son Nārāyaṇa, he had nevertheless called out, "Nārāyaṇa!" This had neutralized all Ajāmila's bad *karma* and had saved him. The messengers of Viṣṇu explained that Ajāmila's uttering the name Nārāyaṇa had absolved him of all his sins—not only those of his present life but those of millions of past lives. He had chanted without offense and was therefore purified and eligible for liberation. The messengers of Viṣṇu explained that even if a person chants the name of God indirectly (to indicate something else), jokingly, for musical entertainment, or even neglectfully, the holy name will still free him from the reactions of all sins. No matter how sinful a person may be, the holy name of God has the power to absolve him and save him from hellish punishment. Unable to oppose the higher authority, the messengers of Death released Ajāmila. The supernatural beings vanished, Ajāmila awakened from his coma, and by the grace of the Lord he was able to spend his remaining days in devotional meditation on the Supreme Personality of Godhead. This account from *Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam* gives us valuable information about the soul, the next life, the laws of *karma,* and the potency of the holy name of the Lord. For those interested in reincarnation, the Vedic literatures are worth investigating. Rather than limit oneself to empirical data from modern researchers, one should consult *Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam* and *Bhagavad-gītā* for a clear understanding of reincarnation and the specific importance and responsibility of the human form of life. As Socrates said, "The unexamined life is not worth living." And an essential part of one's life to examine is one's death. What happens at this critical time? Is there a next life? If so, how can we assure the best next life for ourselves? Certainly any introspective, openminded investigation into the subject of reincarnation would be incomplete without careful study of Vedic writings like *Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam* and *Bhagavad-gītā*. —SDG