Every
society has some culture or way of living that encompasses norms of social
interaction, attitudes, ideas, beliefs, customs, laws, language, institutions,
diet, eating habits, art, rituals, and ceremonies, among other elements, that
are transmitted from generation to generation. Culture inculcates conformity to
and identification with a set of behavioral patterns considered normal and
proper by a particular society. The lifestyle of a people reflects their
values, which again reflect the underlying assumptions of their society.
Although no two persons ever think or act exactly the same, the culture that a
person is raised and live in or adopt affects his life so profoundly and so much influences his thinking, conduct,
and attitude that it is almost impossible to exaggerate the power and
influence upon an individual of the culture that surrounds him in all aspects. A
society without culture cannot have respectful, fair, pleasing dealings and
cannot be happy. Cultural practices help create and define personal character
and a society’s ethos / values / goals.
Culture is easier to embrace than to explain; akin
to love—easier to fall in, difficult to explain. Culture is an often elusive subject as it is multi-faceted
and cannot very satisfactorily be analyzed piecemeal. As with dharma, there
have been various attempts to define culture, but to do so fully and accurately
remains elusive.
As
in the word agriculture, culture
means development. A cultured person is developed in knowledge, aestheticism,
and good qualities.
Culture,
as in yogurt culture, is a means of transformation.
Culture conveys
a kind of academic attention to systematic behavior and allows us to identify
and isolate an idea, issue, or group: we speak of a “culture of transparency”
or “consumer culture.” Culture can be either very broad (as in “celebrity
culture” or “winning culture”) or very specific (as in “test-prep culture” or “marching
band culture”).[1]
Culture
has a very vast connotation. It deals with the concrete material world as well
as the abstract inner world. Social, “palpable” aspects of culture are dress,
food, appearance, etc. Its conceptual aspects are Vaiṣṇava-sevā, compassion, truthfulness, equal vision to all living entities,
etc.
Culture
means to know how to act with the right purpose and the right attitude. The
psyche is largely a product of culture. For a commoner, it means rites and
rituals, beliefs and practices, festivals and fairs and general norms of life. Although culture may be
seen as a way of thinking, living, and behaving it is more than simply these; it
is a matrix behind everything done, the outward expression of pure character.
Culture is a shared way of life with a
common set of beliefs and convictions that often even unknowingly guide the
thinking and actions of those who partake in them. Inherent in culture are
intellectual assumptions, for instance of the precedence of rationality. Most
people simply partake in the culture they are raised in without questioning its
core beliefs or values, and simply presume them to be axiomatically correct and
proper.
Therefore, although a single person may be
cultured, culture is a group project; culture means shared values. It is not
something where one cellist performs, and the others, who don’t know how to
play, listen to him. Culture is when everyone knows how to do something. (Otar
Ioseliani).
Besides this,
there is no one homogenous culture. Each culture consists of a myriad
overlapping cultures, a fabric made durable by its own inner tensions. Within
the same overarching culture, there are sub-cultures of men, women, city people
and villagers, the rich and the poor, the young and the old, etc.
Culture precedes even education. Only one
trained in culture is fit to be educated. Knowledge without culture is but
ignorance, and no knowledge plus no culture is the darkest of ignorance.
“Without culture, what is
the meaning of education.”[i]
Therefore, in Vedic culture, the normal system is to
learn cultural practices from the beginning of life, and then philosophy—not
vice versa, or with cultural usages considered an optional side issue.
Philosophy was not taught to barbarians. Even training in bhaktiśāstri is
nigh useless if the trainee does not understand or adhere to required standards
of submissiveness, humility, and morality.[2]
The term “Vedic
culture” is of course English; it appears throughout Śrīla Prabhupāda’s books,
which is good enough—and clear enough—for many thus inspired. If we find no
Sanskrit equivalent, it is probably because only we postulate that there could
be any other kind of culture. Saṁskṛti (culture) means saṁskāra (cultivation),
which are enjoined in Vedic śāstras. So culture actually means Vedic
culture.
The term
Vedic culture may suggest an extinct civilization, but in its broadest and also
most realistic sense Vedic culture
refers to an ancient tradition that is still alive,[3]
and although presently debilitated on this plane is eternally existent in the
spiritual world.[4]
Reflecting various ages, regions, and
circumstances, there have always been multiple applications and manifestations
of Vedic culture; it’s not by any means monolithic. However, it has
essential harmony, homological characteristics, and most importantly— śāstric
grounding, which is saliently observable in all of these.
Modern anthropologists
and sociologists posit that culture developed as man evolved through successive
phases of ignorance, and that different cultures are diverse manifestations of
ways of life based on a need to cooperate for survival and sense gratification.
This materialistic definition of culture is not accepted by the religious
traditions of the world, all of which claim to be divinely inspired and to have
a purpose beyond the merely temporal.[5]
Particularly,
Vedic culture is based on Veda, which means absolute knowledge from the
platform beyond matter. It leads one to understand that there is a higher
purpose to life and to act to attain that. It is actual culture because it
systematically raises its adherents to the platform of spiritual understanding,
far above animalistic sophistry. It is that which in its higher manifestations,
if properly practiced facilitates cultivation of the spiritual within every
aspect of temporal life, without itself being dragged down to the material
level. Rather, it spiritualizes that normally considered mundane. Spiritual
culture can convert the lowest, most heinous person into a self-realized
devotee of the Lord.
Vedic
culture means human culture, not animal culture. Animal culture means to
satisfy the needs of the body, and Vedic culture or human culture means to
satisfy the needs of the soul.[ii]
In the
system of the varṇāśrama institution there are many principles of
religious traditions to help members of the family grow properly and attain
spiritual values.[iii]
The aim of varṇāśrama-dharma is
to turn a crude man into a pure devotee of the Lord, or a Vaiṣṇava.[iv]
Why this love is not invoked or
awakened in us? Because we are covered by this material energy, and we have
become conditioned by the material energy. Therefore, to purify ourself we
require certain process. That process is called varṇāśrama. […]. And
this varṇāśrama is created by Kṛṣṇa so that one day one may become
devotee of Kṛṣṇa. […] Vedic civilization means to understand Kṛṣṇa. That is the
whole project.[v]
In every
advanced culture, codes of human behavior seek
to balance the needs, desires, and responsibilities of the individual with
those of other individuals and with those of society as a whole (although not
necessarily in an egalitarian manner). Every society has expectations of its
members. The essence of culture is knowledge of the higher purpose of life,
concern for the welfare of all living beings, and good behavior. Therefore, an advanced
human culture must breed strong-minded persons dedicated to higher principles,
not hedonistic parasites of no commitment who may do anything on a whim. Some aspects of higher
principles or good character are loyalty, discipline (ready to accept orders of
superiors), self-discipline (ability to adopt and follow restrictions for the
sake of self-improvement), spirit of sacrifice (accepting difficulties to
benefit others), sense of honor (Bali prāhrādiḥ), being highly principled with
developed moral sense (would rather accept
difficulties than break principles), and sense
of duty and responsibility over selfish personal interest.
Proponents
of Vedic culture proclaim it to be the most advanced, for it aims at the
ultimate need of all living beings—to revive their dormant love of Kṛṣṇa—and
gives elaborate and effective directions to help all members of society
cooperatively progress towards that goal. The tendency of material nature is to drag everything
down. Only high, principled culture can offset this. Therefore, the Vedic
culture espouses the ideal and accommodates
the real, giving a chance to all who remain within Vedic culture to eventually
rise to the ideal platform. Knowledge of the ultimate goal of life is presented
in the Vedic literature (śāstra), along with normative directions based
on that knowledge, and therefore a society can be said to possess Vedic culture
when the dealings and activities of its members directly correspond to or are
based upon the behavioral recommendations of śāstra.
Although
Vedic and other traditional cultures are in many ways similar, a crucial
difference is the level of spiritual understanding in Vedic culture. The
spiritual understanding in other traditional cultures rarely goes beyond
spirit-worship or nature-worship, impersonal concepts, or a rudimentary
understanding of a supreme being. Yet Vedic culture has an extraordinary
theological and philosophical tradition that defines it and sets it apart from
and above any other culture, modern or traditional. Due to being based on
deficient spiritual knowledge, other religious milieus in the world are much
insufficient in comparison with the depth and sophistication of Vedic culture.
Therefore, Śrīla Prabhupāda considered Vedic
culture as superior to other religious systems.
When Acyutānanda asked him which is
better, the worship of the Christians and Jews, which is mostly impersonal, or
the worship of the non-Absolute by the worshipers of Kālī, Śrīla Prabhupāda
replied: “Worship of Kālī is better, because the worshipers are in the Vedic
system. They are more likely to bow down to Rādhā-Kṛṣṇa or chant Hare Kṛṣṇa
than a Christian or Jew. There is a chance that they will become Kṛṣṇa devotees
in the future, if they lose their material attachments.”[vi]
Vedic
culture is the only one meant to systematically guide its members to conquer
over birth and death. The only other cultures that have knowledge of the
problems of repeated rebirth are those (principally Buddhist and Jain) that are
derived from Vedic culture, yet being in defiance of Vedic culture, lack its
specific knowledge of the process of birth and death and the social system (varṇāśrama) for transcending it. The
materialistic cultures that dominate the world today (even those that are
nominally religious) have no inkling of, let only solutions to, the problems of
birth and death, and simply perpetuate entanglement in the cycle of birth and death
by exacerbating individual identification with the body.
Vedic
culture thus stresses awareness of the subtle principles underlying existence,
that give rise to good behavior and appreciation of higher ideals, yet is far
more than the civility, sophistication, and good manners that help society
function less acerbically in basically barbaric cultures based on gross
selfishness, exploitation, and greed. Being so abstruse and fine, Vedic culture
can be properly appreciated by persons raised in it or those who enter deeply
into it, and practiced only by those who are highly civilized,
sense-controlled, and self-disciplined, and who have firm faith in the
authority of the Vedas. Indeed,
Vedic culture
entails a commitment to a way of life and an outlook that profoundly influences
one’s lifestyle and impacts everything one does.
However,
Vedic culture is not arbitrary, dogmatic, or sentimental. Its usages are all
scientific and purposeful, being based on knowledge of the purpose of life and
how to attain it—although their purpose may be unintelligible to persons unschooled
in their intricacies and subtleties. Incorporating knowledge of karma,
psychology, astrology, medicine, and other important disciplines, as well as
subtle knowledge of time, direction, respect for seniors, and ritual purity,
Vedic culture gives comprehensive directions on how to best live in this world
so as to ultimately come out of it. Vedic culture takes into account all human
needs—physical, intellectual, emotional, economic, social, and ultimately
spiritual; restricts its members from activities harmful to themselves and
others; and provides a framework for practically and sensibly fulfilling
temporal needs.
Saṁskṛti is the term for this cultural framework [that is based on Sanskrit].
It is the lore and repository of philosophy, art, architecture, popular song,
classical music, dance, theatre, sculpture, painting, literature, pilgrimage,
rituals and religious narratives, all of which embody pan-Indian cultural
traits. It also incorporates all branches of natural science and technology –
medicine (including veterinary), botany, mathematics, engineering,
architecture, dietetics, etc.[vii]
Still the Vedic civilization, notwithstanding
its high culture with respect to many branches of learning, never fostered
disciplines equivalent to modern psychology, anthropology, or sociology;
development of these modern notions was obviated by a shared sense of dharma, a
social reality comprehensive enough to encompass all three, plus what we now
call “ethics,” and yet more still. Persons dedicated to pursuing dharma had
neither any necessity for or inclination toward studying those modes of living
that, being outside the ambit of dharma, inherently lack both scientific
knowledge of the purpose of life (ātma-jñāna)
and a systematic program of self-purification (ātma-śuddhi).[6]
A
comprehensive understanding of Vedic culture requires knowledge of and
preferably formal training in traditional Vedic metaphysics, ritual, sociology,
smṛti-śāstras, law, ethics, mīmāṁsā, logic, and other related
fields. Yet even all such studies are insufficient without extended living
within that culture, preferably among exemplars, and without understanding the
ultimate purpose of that culture.
Vedic
culture is almost inevitably misunderstood by the superficial attempts of gross
materialists, such as the academic approach of empirical scholars or an
ethnocentric focus on controversial aspects such as satī. To surmise Vedic culture as backward, outdated, or outmoded
expresses the arrogance of a fool who thinks modern dog-culture the epitome of
human development, considers himself a sophisticated and worthy member of that
dog-culture, and fails to recognize the eternality of God-ordained Vedic
culture as the only genuinely human way of life. Contrary to such slanders, the Vedic culture was
so advanced that even those of demoniac nature brought up within it were
careful to protect their personal reputation and that of their dynasty. For
instance, Duryodhana kept his word and gave Arjuna the arrows that were meant
for killing the Pāṇḍavas, and Karṇa ripped his armor from his body to
supplicate Indra in the form of a brāhmaṇa.
Although today it may be in a debilitated state, Vedic culture should not be thought
of as a historical or mythical nicety with no relevance to contemporary life.
Vedic culture means spiritual culture or in other
words the culture whose essence and intent does not change. Its uniqueness is that it
is directly protected, preserved, and promoted by the Supreme Lord and therefore, although sometimes partially
unmanifest, it can at any time again become dominant. It is not utopian to hope that Kṛṣṇa
consciousness can radically alter the culture of the world, for cultures can drastically
change. For instance, several times in the history of Europe, from
pre-Christian to pre-industrial to industrial to post-industrial era, each period had
distinctive language, dress, intellectual life, core beliefs, and worldview.
And
even though it may
not be possible to revive pristine Vedic culture in its totality throughout the
world, still there are many aspects of Vedic culture that are practicable even
in contemporary life, such as dress, food, customs, behavioral norms, and
attitude towards life of which a sense of Kṛṣṇa consciousness is the essence.[7]
The use of
the word culture to indicate the
betterment or refinement of individuals has been extant in English since the
seventeenth century CE, but its usage in the anthropological and sociological
sense only began with the emergence of those disciplines during the nineteenth
century CE. The latter meaning of culture is among those conveyed in modern
Indian languages by the term saṁskṛti, an
ancient Sanskrit word, that, like culture,
has similarly been invested with new meaning. Yet, for what may be termed
linguo-cultural reasons, the words saṁskṛti
and culture are not precise equivalents.
Relating
to the adjective saṁskṛta, the noun sanskṛti can be explained as “that
which develops, purifies, and makes perfect and complete.” The word saṁskṛti particularly imparts the sense of that culture which is
intrinsically linked with and that develops from saṁskāras, purificatory ceremonies that are described in corollary
Vedic texts.[8]
Saṁskṛti means the culture of saṁskāra, which is variously defined as making perfect, purification,
cleansing, forming the mind, training, education, correction; not simply the
rituals of saṁskāra ceremonies. Habits such as dressing, eating, and so
on, like all else in this world, create particular saṁskāras, i.e., psychological imprints upon the subtle body. Such
impressions may be comparatively elevating or comparatively degrading,
depending on the modes of nature most closely associated with each one. The
sastras (including Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam—e.g., 1.2.23-25, 11.13.1-3, etc.)
encourage as much sattva-guṇa as possible, which facilitates clear
perception and awareness, i.e., knowledge. An authoritative and mature
understanding of, and a primary concern to cultivate, śreyas (ultimate benefit) rather
than preyas (immediate
benefit) are prominent hallmarks of vedic civilization.
Saṁskṛti
entails much more
than the Western concept of culture. In the West, a person may be considered
cultured if he is from an established wealthy family, is a connoisseur of fine
wines, has a wide range of intellectual interests, and is familiar with the
arts. Some features of Western culture can be considered sophisticated, yet by
Vedic standards is deemed barbaric because it does not give rise to discrimination
between spirit and matter and, lacking knowledge of right and wrong according
to the rules of dharma, allows grossly sinful activities such as cow slaughter.
Therefore, although saṁskṛti is usually translated as culture, it specifically means
the culture of purificatory and transformatory saṁskāras, and thus does not refer to the whole gamut of uncultured
usages that are subsumed by the English word culture. Nevertheless, in
deference to present worldwide trends, the word saṁskṛti is now employed in a broader, altered manner than it was
originally, similar to the present usage of dharma
to mean religion.
Saṁskṛti, which is ultimately the culture of
the soul, depends on a person’s behavior and attitude, according to the
training he has received according to the Vedic directions. It has nothing to
do with wealth, university education, social position or power, Hinduism, corruption,
Bollywood, etc. Saṁskṛti is difficult
to define because it is so extensive, diverse and deep, yet can be broadly
stated to be “Vedic culture,” or the way of life of those who practice Vedic
culture. Saṁskṛti thus specifically
refers to Vedic culture and not any analogous culture. The underpinning of
Vedic culture is a foundational understanding and practical observance of
dharma. Due to lacking this sophisticated system of dharma, all other systems
of social organization must be considered asaṁskṛta
(unpurified, uncultured).[9]
Saṁskṛti aims at inculcating cognizance of
the divine presence and will in every aspect of existence, of the sense of
importance of human birth, a heeding of each individual’s purpose and role
within society and within the universe, a philosophical awareness in every
sphere of life, and of existence beyond the immediately perceivable. It imparts
an awareness of the temporality of embodied life, an awareness that leads one to see the world and
interact with it not just in terms of the here and now, but with the understanding
of every living being’s placement on a long rung of karmic actions and
reactions. Saṁskṛti concomitantly
fosters reverence towards the creation and genuine respect for all living
beings, and especially for elders and superiors; and sad-bhāvana, or good feeling and consideration towards others,
expressed not simply as a sentiment, but as a principle of interacting with
others for mutual benefit rather than for exploitation. These ideals, combined
with this-worldly pragmatism that can practically solve all the problems of
material existence, for centuries sustained the unique accommodating spirit,
tolerance, and deeply spiritual and philosophical ethos that characterized
Indian society.
The
model for understanding Vedic culture is that of traditional Vedic society,
which is not easy of definition; for although highly structured, it was not
monolithic. There were and are countless variants of customs and rules for the
various varṇas and āśramas in different parts of Bhārata-varṣa,
and further differences based on sub-caste, sampradāya, gender, family
traditions, levels of spiritual advancement, and personal inclination and
ability to follow. Individuals may also adopt sva-niyama, or self-set practices or vows. There also are significant cultural
differences between urban, rural and forest life. The underlying factor,
however, is that behavior should be in accordance with the Vedic injunctions,
as understood and taught by the sages for practical application in human
society, and that are formulated to accentuate and develop the best qualities
in people, and restrict and overcome the worst, and thus prepare individuals
and guide them on the path of spiritual progress.
While
the apex of Vedic culture is the behavior of brāhmaṇas and sādhus,
nevertheless the innumerable Vedic injunctions are designed to accommodate many
classes of people, and each individual has to follow those rules that are
ordained for him according to his social, occupational, and spiritual status,
as defined by previous authorities and under the guidance of present
authorities. These are the rules of dharma, observance of which may be said to
be saṁskṛti.
Dharma
and saṁskṛti are intimately
connected. Saṁskṛti is the natural decoration of dharma. There is no
dharma without saṁskṛti and no
saṁskṛti without dharma.
Consideration of both govern life in Vedic society. Dharma refers to general
principles; and saṁskṛti to
the details or the practical enactment of the principles enshrined in dharmic codes, and the ethos
engendered by doing so. Yet saṁskṛti
constitutes more yet; in its essence, saṁskṛti is the underlying spirit of Vedic culture, the outward expression
of which are the rules and practices of Vedic culture.
<Insert the concept of winning
over Kama by cultivating sattva-guna the procedure of which is directly
explained by Lord in BG – tasmat tvam indriyanyadau niyamya… and ācāryas say
that this niyamana beginning with the senses is VAD rules, because we have to
start purification with senses by giving danda to them, thus bringing them to
sattva-guna and the purification and sattva-guna gradually reaches the mind and
the intelligence.>
The
Supreme Personality of Godhead is the upholder and objective of Vedic culture,
and a meticulous observer of its principles.[viii]
The pastimes of the Lord in His various incarnations are invariably set to a
background of Vedic culture, wherein the Supreme Lord instructs others in and
personally practices this exalted mode of living:
Although Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa is the supreme emperor of
the entire creation, while He was on this earth He never violated the
principles of the Vedic injunctions because they are the guide for human life.[ix]
The
Personality of Godhead, Lord Śiva and other devotees, in spite of their being
situated in exalted positions, instructed by practical example how to offer
obeisances to their superiors.[x]
To maintain
the proper etiquette for the principles of religion, Lord Caitanya would bow
down at the lotus feet of Advaita Ācārya with reverential prayers and devotion.[xi]
Lord Kṛṣṇa is the ideal personality of Vedic
culture. He is always in favor of brahminical culture and is very kind to the
qualified brāhmaṇas.[xii]
Indeed,
the Supreme Lord sets the highest standard of culture. For example, when Bhṛgu Muni severely insulted Lord Nārāyaṇa:
Bhṛgu Muni tested
the tolerance of the Lord by purposely kicking His chest, but instead of being
angry at Bhṛgu Muni the Lord begged his pardon, saying that Bhṛgu Muni’s leg
might have been badly hurt because His chest is too hard.[xiii]
Lord
Kṛṣṇa’s treatment of Sudāmā Vipra demonstrates the quality of honoring brāhmaṇas
for which He is known as brahmaṇya-deva.
Sudāmā
Vipra, externally he looked very poor, lean and thin, not very nice cloth... Kṛṣṇa
said: “My dear friend, sit down here.” He brought water, washed the feet, just
befitting a respectable person, guru, brahmana. This is etiquette. Kṛṣṇa is
showing personally. He is the king. He is the Supreme Personality of Godhead.
He also respects a brāhmaṇa. When Nārada used to come to Kṛṣṇa, immediately
He would get down from the seat and offer obeisances.[xiv]
And,
Again, when
Cupid and the beautiful women with him failed to disturb the penances of Nara-Nārāyaṇa,
they trembled in fear of being cursed. But the tolerant Lord, far from becoming
angry, presented them with gifts and thanked them for sanctifying His āśrama.[xv]
Similarly
when Lord Caitanya defeated in debate opponents like Keśava Kāśmīrī, Sārvabhauma
Bhaṭṭācārya, and Prakāśānanda Sarasvatī, He nevertheless dealt with them in an extraordinarily
respectful manner, thus conquering their hearts along with their intellects.
As
Śrīla Prabhupāda observed, “even though Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme Personality of
Godhead, He never forgets to show social etiquette in His dealings.”[xvi]And
even if Kṛṣṇa sometimes apparently violates Vedic principles, that is not His
general mode of activity.
When Kṛṣṇa
killed Kaṁsa He killed His maternal uncle, which is against the regulations of
Vedic injunctions. Although Kṛṣṇa is independent of all Vedic injunctions, He
violates the Vedic injunctions only in inevitable cases.[xvii]
One may argue that if all of Krishna’s activities
in this world are ‘Vedic’, then
Bhāgavatam 3.3.19 states that Lord Krishna Himself, appearing in this
world, followed the path not
only of Veda, but also of worldly custom: loka-veda-pathānuga. Therefore, we should also follow
the modern worldly customs. The answer is that here by the word laukika it means that
practiced by followers of the Vedas in accord with the overall culture, its siddhānta
and praxis. Practioners of
modern worldly customs are not followers of the Vedas.
That
Kṛṣṇa chooses to dress in Vedic style, eat Vedic-style food, interact with
others according to Vedic custom, and so on, is because Vedic culture is His
culture. In fact, Bṛhad-bhāgavatāmṛta 6.20-21 and Jīva Gosvāmī’s commentary on it,
establishes the culture of Āryāvarta, north central India, to parallel that of
Goloka:
In that realm (Goloka), beyond the reach of all
the demigods, planetary rulers, and personal attendants of the Supreme Lord, I
saw that life was going on just as here in this Āryāvarta country in Bhārata-varṣa
on earth. The sun was rising and the other natural events were taking place
everyday in the sky, and on the land the people were speaking and behaving the
same way as here. I was stunned by astonishments—extreme astonishment—and
immersed in an ocean of ecstatic rasa.
Excerpt from Jīva Gosvāmī’s Commentary
Gopa-kumāra, now gives a glimpse of how Goloka
resembles Mathurā-maṇḍala on earth. Gopa-kumāra directly saw for himself that the
culture of Goloka was just like that of earthly Āryāvarta, north central India,
refined in civilization. What he saw in the sky (divyam) and on the
ground (bhaumīm) could hardly be distinguished from the common
experience of life on earth. He saw rising and setting of the sun was exactly
like that in Āryāvarta. Similarly, the speech, activities, etc. of the people
were also exactly like those in Āryāvarta. This sight amazed him.
Therefore, what we herein refer to as Vedic or Indian culture is actually
the culture of Goloka and Vaikuṇṭha manifest on this plane.
Kṛṣṇa, in His natural life, is a village boy
in Vṛndāvana. Vṛndāvana is a village. There is no factory, there is no
motor-car, there are no big, big sky-scraper buildings. That Kṛṣṇa likes. In
the śāstra it is said, vṛndāvanaṁ parityajya, sa kvacin naiva
gacchati. Kṛṣṇa is so fond of that Vṛndāvana village life, with His cowherd
boys and cowherd girls, His gopīs, Mother Yaśodā, Father Nanda, and
Upananda, uncles, and big family, the cows and the calves, the trees, the Yamunā
River. He is satisfied in that life. So at least those who are Kṛṣṇa conscious,
they should be satisfied with simple life in the village. That is part of Kṛṣṇa
consciousness.[xviii]
If Kṛṣṇa
wanted he could wear jeans, eat with a knife and fork, and play guitar. But He
chooses to dress, eat, and behave as He does in the spiritual world, and it is up to
conditioned souls to choose whether to join Him on His terms, becoming
accustomed to thinking and acting in a manner pleasing to Him, or to eternally
remain in the material world expressing their individuality as rebels with
different ideas to Kṛṣṇa’s. Therefore,
devotees do not
aspire to enter a so-called
divine realm where
the inhabitants wear jeans and sunglasses, and thus the cherished goal of a Vaiṣṇava
influences all his life choices, including dress style.
Because
the Supreme Lord subscribes to Vedic culture only, sympathetic understanding of
that culture and its underlying mindset are essential to comprehend His
pastimes as narrated in śāstra. All aspects of Vedic culture derive from
Kṛṣṇa’s pastimes because it is the culture that He prefers, that manifests
usages, behavior, and art forms that He likes, and that nourishes the exchange
of rasa that is the ultimate meeting
point of culture, philosophy and spirituality, being the sweet taste derived
from Kṛṣṇa’s unlimited love for His devotees and of they for Him. In its higher
stages Kṛṣṇa consciousness affords entrance into appreciation of rasa. But these often subtle and
intricate exchanges take place on the template of Vedic culture, and therefore
to appreciate them necessitates immersing one’s consciousness in the subtleties
and intricacies of Vedic culture. In other words, without appreciating Vedic
culture, it is impossible to appreciate the fine points of kṛṣṇa-līlā.
In this universe, with the advent of the first human beings, Manu and his wife Śatarūpā,
human society was replete with all manner of ethnicities—from etiquette to
ornaments to art to technology, etc. All that was created by Brahmā, and Brahmā’s
template for creation was his darshan of the spiritual world. Therefore, it is
not a question of one culture versus another culture. It is a question of which
practices and understanding are descending from the spiritual stratum [and
thus] any liking for any facet of non-Vaiṣṇava culture is foreign to the inherent nature of the soul
and is thus a contamination.
However, having
abandoned his traditional roots, modern man has no culture to guide him. It is symptomatic of Kali-yuga
that having and adhering to high principles, far from being widely appreciated,
is generally at best considered a personal preference and more often a
disturbance in a society that respects above all the flouting of consumer products.
Modern culture can best be called rākṣasa culture,
wherein there is minimal regulation of social cooperation to facilitate impious
sense gratification. The more people are
inclined toward sense gratification, the less real culture they can have. What
is considered high culture by materialists is but sophisticated sense
gratification. A prominent symptom of people interested in gross sense
gratification is lack of respect or even feeling for others.
Much
of Western so-called high culture is simply a veneer over bestiality, and
consists of arbitrary, meaningless, and silly rules meant to create a sense of
exclusiveness for the adherents, such as that a soup plate should be tilted
away from, never toward, the diner; not placing the elbows on the table while
eating; or that the sleeves of a jacket should be shorter than that of the
shirt over which it is worn. For all their facade of civility the aristocratic
elite of the Western countries are mostly meat eaters, wine drinkers,
debauchees, and gamblers, and are quite ignorant of the purpose of life. Their so-called culture is one of
selfishness, mean individualism. Hence it is a mistake to associate
culture simply with wealth and so-called aristocracy.
Without
culture, every type of business creates confusion and chaos.[xix]
If there is
no culture, simply by money you cannot maintain a standard of civilization.
That is not possible. Now the American leaders are thinking, “Let us have
money, then everything...” Of course, by money you are covering all the defects
of the social culture. But this will not endure. The day will come when
everything will be exposed. Therefore culture is required.[xx]
Culturally
we Indians are better off. Materially, we are certainly very poor. But because
we are culturally advanced, even the actual poor man, he does not feel that he
is in poverty. This is culture. “So long as I have got money, I am very happy.”
No! “If there is not a single farthing, still, I’ll be happy.” That is real
culture. That is possible when one is Kṛṣṇa conscious. Guruṇāpi duḥkhena na vicālyate. Never disturbed. That is culture.
And “So long I have got money in the pocket, I am very happy”—that is dog
civilization.[xxi]
The
culture and sophistication, which you present as synonyms, are merely exercises
in self-deception. If a human being remains on the path of truthfulness, his
life is honest and simple. Leaving this straight path for that of deception, he
becomes sly, engages in unscrupulous dealings, and tries to hide his
crookedness behind a facade of sweet words and postured civility. Truthfulness
and simplicity are laudable human characteristics, whereas the culture and sophistication
you speak of generally lack these qualities. True culture, in its pristine
state, shorn of all immorality, is found amongst the Vaiṣṇavas, and the culture
of the non-Vaiṣṇavas is tainted by sinful ways. Real culture means sabhyatā,
worthiness to participate in a sabhā, serious truthful assembly—in other
words, simple decency—but the contemporary definition of culture is simply a
method of masking mischievous internal motives, which are gradually further
perverted into deceit. The so called ‘culture’ you have described has nothing
in common with the nitya-dharma of the jīva. If dressing
attractively is the standard of cultured activity, then an expensive prostitute
is certainly more civilized than you. Indeed, the real purpose of wearing clothes
is simply to cover the body. The clothes must of course be clean and fresh.
Similarly, foodstuffs should be pure and healthy. However, you insist that
primarily foodstuffs should be palatable, regardless of impurities. Alcohol and
meat, for instance, are naturally impure; therefore, to consume them is not at
all cultured, but is surely a sinful act. Today’s definition of culture is
actually based on the mores of Kali-yuga.[xxii]
The
symptoms by which a civilization may be considered elevated and cultured according
to Vedic understanding are quite different from those presently current in
societies throughout the world. In modern society people are impelled by the
culture, education, media and fake credit to increase and increase bhoga
and aiśvarya and that is considered the sign of advancement and the
measure of a man. Contrary
to this, in Vedic culture the measure of a man is how much he is
indifferent to bhoga and aiśvarya. Whereas modern society
emphasizes economic and technological progress and military capacity, Vedic culture was
traditionally practiced in society that met its material needs simply and
concentrated on the religious. It is systematically organized to maximize each
person’s contribution according to their abilities and propensities, and thus
easily and without excessive effort fulfils basic human needs such as food,
clothing, and shelter. Vedic
culture fosters a culture of respect and consideration, most respect being
accorded to those advanced in spiritual realization; that is the measure of a man in
Vedic culture. Indeed, the most cultured and learned class in
traditional Vedic society, the brāhmaṇas, deliberately remained poor so
as not to be degraded by wealth. In the West a totally degraded person may be
considered aristocratic just because he owns an expensive car, but in Indian
culture to be aristocratic one must be learned, religious, dignified, and
elegant in his whole way of life.
A dog is not considered a good
dog because he is a good barker. Similarly the best culture cannot be judged by
military might and big buildings or even by universities with learned scholars,
if the scholars are unaware of the purpose of life. A great memory does not
make a mind, any more than a dictionary is a piece of literature. Therefore, mere learning and sophistication do not
constitute culture, and indeed the much lauded intellectualism and philosophy
of the West, due to lacking genuine spiritual knowledge, is mere intellectual
animalism. [10]
Without the endeavor for self-realization, any so-called good behavior,
learning, or aestheticism is as artificial as the decoration of a dead body,
and due to lack of a substantial basis is certain to degrade. This is
observable in the modern Western milieu, wherein crude, rude, and disobedient
behavior is often lauded as independent thinking. And persons who are
submissive and gentle are taken as mindless.
In
social dealings everyone to some extent adjusts to everyone else; this is
regulated by social norms. In a particularly demonic society, social norms are
based on superficial criteria, particularly bodily and political strength and
expertise in enjoying sense gratification, and are observed as gross and subtle
attempts to dominate and exploit others. In civilized society, human culture means to
have moral standards to facilitate pious sense gratification—juniors
defer to elders, students to teachers, lower castes to brāhmaṇas. And in
truly godly society, the regulations and norms are observed not simply to
maintain civility, but specifically for inculcating and imbibing godly
qualities.[xxiii]
“One friend
of mine told me that this culture is vulture’s culture,” Dr. Patel said. “Yes.
Not vultures,” Prabhupāda clarified. “It is called hog civilization. The hogs,
they eat anything and they have sex with anyone. . . . Culture means human
life; otherwise, dog’s life. . . . Amānitvam, first of all you have to
learn how to become humble. And here all the people, they are educated how to
become proud. What is education? And this culture cannot be maintained unless
one is God conscious. Harāv abhaktasya kuto mahad-guṇā, there cannot be
any culture for a godless person, that is not possible. And, yasyāsti bhaktir
bhagavaty akiñcanā. Just like these European and
American boys are offering obeisances to the guru; this is culture. Why he has
learned this culture? Because he has become Kṛṣṇa conscious. Therefore, yasyāsti
bhaktir bhagavaty akiñcanā sarvair guṇais tatra samāsate surāḥ. If you make
one devotee of Kṛṣṇa, then all culture will automatically come. One thing.
Hare Kṛṣṇa“.”[xxiv]
The fundamental values of modern culture differ
significantly from those of Vedic culture.
For instance, modern
culture assumes people are basically good and intelligent and thus insists on
maximum freedom for the individual. Even accepting that some people are not
intelligent, it asserts,
that they should still be free to harm themselves as long as they don’t
harm others. However,
as opposed to the western moral
conception of “innocent until proven guilty,” the varṇāśrama-dharma’s
presumption is against innocence, which is a reasonable one, and
it is based on the correct idea that the vast majority of people, including
those on the path of spiritual advancement, are not liberated souls. Therefore, Vedic culture
is less indulgent and more kind. A high level of freedom is only given to persons responsible and
capable enough to beneficially exercise it, namely upper caste adult males. But
even they are bound to follow many laws. Freedom of speech is not allowed. Only
learned persons should project their views, and that too must be supported by śāstra
pramāṇa.
This culture is evident
in the pages of the Śrī Caitanya-caritāmṛta, where Mahāprabhu’s servants
and associates strove to prevent Him from doing anything that would even
suggest some sort of impropriety. Mahāprabhu’s chastisement of Choṭa Haridāsa further
exemplified this idea of culture.
Another example is that the Vedic and western cultures have different
conceptions of politeness. In Indian culture a man and woman whose ways cross
leave ample space for each other, not look at or talk with each other. Thus
they mutually recognize each others’ respectability without and by not getting
involved with each other. In Western culture this would be considered
impersonal and impolite; they should acknowledge each other at least by eye
contact if not by an exchange of words.
Even
those points in modern and Vedic cultures that may seem similar nevertheless
lead to very different results due to the very different premises of the
cultures. True
culture is based on sense control; it is not simply art and superfluous
sophisticated behavior. Therefore, in
Vedic culture, difficulties are voluntarily accepted for the sake of making
spiritual advancement. The best, highest culture is to remember and speak the
best that has been thought and said in the history of the world: [11]
kathā eva kathāsu sāram, the essence of all topics, kṛṣṇa-kathā.
This material world is forgetfulness, but
still Kṛṣṇa consciousness is maintained to some extent if you follow the Vedic
principles.[xxv]
So, the devotees should beware of considering
as acceptable cultures and behavior spawned by Kali-yuga, which deteriorates
all the good qualities of a human being,[xxvi] and should rather adopt pure Vaiṣṇava practices that specifically
protect their adherents against such contaminating influences. Although a
devotee might be otherwise proficient in Vaiṣṇava philosophy, if he does not
accept that contemporary Western culture is on the level of cats and dogs and
is not to be emulated, then he cannot understand what is real, dhārmic, culture, and he is thus unfit to
teach devotees about culture, or about anything.
A major
traditional method of imparting culture is by recitation and reenactment of
stories concerning great persons in Vedic culture. This process becomes skewed
when undertaken by persons not very conversant with the culture, as is common
in modern freestyle renditions of śāstrīya topics. Cultural ignorance
can lead to misrepresentation of Vedic culture. For instance, from Kṛṣṇa Dharma’s Mahabharata: The Pāṇḍavas Wed
Draupadī:
Bhīma and Arjuna,
both bruised and bloody from the battle with the kings, turned and walked
toward the stadium’s southern gate. They were surrounded by Brahmins, who
praised them with great joy. With difficulty the two brothers pushed their way
through the crowd and out of the arena.
Would they
have pushed their way through brāhmaṇas? Gītā Press translators, experienced in Vedic
culture, translates it thus: “because of being surrounded by the brāhmaṇas Bhīma
and Arjuna could proceed ahead very slowly and with great difficulty.”[12]
[xxvii]
This shows that they were
not able to proceed quickly because out of respect they cannot push themselves
through brāhmaṇas; that would be uncivilized behavior.
Another example of how ignorance of culture
can result in ridiculous narrations is Satsvarūpa Dāsa Goswami’s book on fallen
brahmana who saw Lord Caitanya, written by imagined Chāyādevī. For instance, (imagined) Chāyādevī, the wife of a fallen Brāhmaṇa
Harideva, writes to him in a letter:
But I have not shared the blame for your falldown,
and I think I have to look within myself and be more honest. I tend to think
you were the only wrong one, and I was great and good and remained faithful to
you.[xxviii]
Any Indian would laugh at this arrogant language
that is not expected of even a low class Indian wife even in dreams and what to
speak of the wife of a Vaiṣṇava Brāhmaṇa.
Similarly, the Brāhmaṇa Harideva starts off his
diary with arrogant words like “my sins are not so great,” and “I didn’t have
chance to talk it all out fully with the devotees, how I was a pakkā-pujārī
in the temple, and now my name is ruined.” This attitude is in complete
cotnrast with that of our ācāryas. For example, nitya-siddha Śrīla
Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura sings that his life is full of sins and there is no trace
of any piety—āmāra jīvana sadā pāpe rata nāhika puṇyera leśa. Obviously,
he was not at all contaminated with any sin still he felt he is full of sins.
Similarly, Kṛṣṇadāsa Kavirāja Gosvāmī often wrote and felt that “I am lower
than the worm in stool and more sinful than Jagāi and Mādhāi. One who hears my
name loses his pious credits and one who takes my name becomes sinful.” Quoting
this, Śrīla Prabhupāda says, “This is the way, nobody think himself as one has
become very big man and he has his own opinion to give. This is rascaldom.”[xxix]
Vedic
culture is the way of life based on the tenets of the Vedic literature, as was
previously, as even today to some extent, practiced predominantly in India as varṇāśrama-dharma.
In addition to the basic varṇāśrama divisions as brāhmaṇa, kṣatriya, vaiśya, śūdra, brahmacārī, gṛhastha, vānaprastha and
sannyāsī, there are further
classifications of practitioners of Vedic culture as karmīs, jñānīs, yogis, and devotees of the Lord, according to
various understandings of the Vedas and of the aim of life. These groups are
further divided into many sampradāyas, or distinctive schools of
thought. Although the purposes of these various followers of Vedic culture are
different, varṇāśrama society is so perfectly designed by Kṛṣṇa that most of its
practices are suitable for all its practitioners. Karmīs desire sense enjoyment, jñānīs
want liberation, yogis are eager for mystic power, and devotees aspire only for
pure devotional service, yet all followers of mainstream Vedic culture accept
certain basic values and follow similar codes of behavior within the same
culture. They all adhere to norms concerning purity and cleanliness, and the
giving of respect to superiors. All followers of Vedic culture are enjoined to
rise before dawn, bathe regularly, respect brāhmaṇas, elders and other
venerable persons, accept a spiritual master, and so on. Such practices as
early morning bathing are obligatory and beneficial for all members of the
Vedic culture, and there are many such observances that they share in common
and that are still to some extent followed by pious Hindus today.
Therefore Śrīla Prabhupāda states
that the Vedic principles generally known as varṇāśrama is presently known as the Hindu system.[xxx] He refers to “the Vedic
culture known as Hinduism.”[xxxi]
When Śrīla Prabhupāda
referred to Vedic culture he indicated (a) the ethos that was existing under
ideal monarchs such as Rāma and Yudhiṣṭhira, and (b) aspects of that culture,
both śāstrically ordained and extant in tradition, that continued and continue
to exist even as India’s culture became gradually degraded over the years.
Unfortunately,
modern Hinduism, although derived from and based on the Vedic tenets of dharma,
has incorporated so many unauthorized theories as to now be a “hodgepodge
institution of various concocted ideas.”[xxxii]
[14] Many modern Hindus, even
pious ones, are unaware of basic etiquette such as not placing scripture on the
floor. Nor are the coarseness, grossness, vulgarity, and pettiness of much of
contemporary Indian life representative of her true pristine culture.
Nevertheless, although most modern Hindus have fallen far from the original
standard, the remnants of varṇāśrama culture are still followed in
India, and in a broad sense the terms “Hindu culture” and “Indian culture” may
be used to refer to varṇāśrama or Vedic culture, and “Hindu” to
designate a follower of the Vedic culture, as did Śrīla Prabhupāda in referring
to Hindus as “followers of the Vedic principles.”[xxxiii]
Vedic
civilization--you may call it Indian civilization or Hindu civilization.
Actually it is Vedic civilization.[xxxiv]
Hindu religious
traditions do not fall within the jurisdiction of any one central authority.
Hinduism has no ecclesiastic body that determines its beliefs, ritual practices
or social structure. There are, of course, a large number of religious sects (
* sampradāyas*), with a great number of prominent teachers (*ācāryas*),
but the authority of the religious sect and the individual guru extends only to
a relatively small range of followers. Consequently, Hindu beliefs and
practices vary widely from one religious sect to another and from one
geographic region to another. This creates a highly diffused and multi-layered
tradition. Therefore, it is difficult to determine which practices and beliefs
are original and which have been added. It is also virtually impossible to
assert that any given regional practice is standard.
Nonetheless,
the practical value of the Hindu or dharmic
ethos is attested to by the continuing political unity of
On the
whole, Hinduism is an unsatisfactory term, yet in such common use as to be
unavoidable in denoting the present deteriorated manifestation of Vedic
culture; and although Kṛṣṇa consciousness may in an extrinsic cultural sense be
identified with Hinduism, ontologically it stands above and apart from Hinduism
or any other –ism of this mundane world. As the intrinsic nature of the soul, Kṛṣṇa
consciousness is far more than merely Hinduism, Indian culture, or varṇāśrama-dharma.
It is the essence of Vedic culture and thus is nondifferent from Vedic culture,
yet it surpasses all manifestations of ordinary mundane Vedic culture that are
devoid of a clear sense of Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Rather, it removes the
contaminations that keep individuals in a mistaken concept of life, and
uncovers the real person hidden within the shell of contaminated mind,
intelligence, and ego. It revives the original consciousness and rehabilitates
people to act in a sane manner. Kṛṣṇa consciousness is the culture of the soul.
Hence it is in a completely different category than all kinds of mundane
cultures and is far more advanced even than ordinary Vedic culture.
Although
Śrīla Prabhupāda clearly delineated the difference between Kṛṣṇa consciousness
and mundane Hinduism, he also accepted the cultural identity of Kṛṣṇa
consciousness with India and Hinduism.
This Hare Kṛṣṇa
Movement is Indian culture.[xxxv]
Krishna
consciousness is the most perfect order of cultural understanding in India.
Lord Caitanya is the symbol of India’s original culture.[xxxvi]
India has
got a great culture, background: Vedic culture or Kṛṣṇa culture. Vedic culture
means Kṛṣṇa culture and Kṛṣṇa culture means Vedic culture.[xxxvii]
[15]
Śrīla
Prabhupāda specifically stated that he had spread Indian culture and that he
wanted his disciples to do the same.[16]
The Deity
worship and Indian real culture you develop. That is our contribution. Nobody
could do before me, in the Western countries, introduction of this Deity
worship and large-scale distribution of Indian cultural traditions. This is a
new contribution.[xxxviii]
However, Vedic culture is also called sanātana-dharma because it exists eternally. It is the universal
culture of the soul given by the Supreme Lord Himself. Thus it should not be
identified only with Hindus or with
Cow protection and expansion
of brahminical culture is essential throughout the whole world. We should not
think that brahminical culture is only limited within India. Kṛṣṇa says, cātur-varṇyaṁ
mayā sṛṣṭaṁ guṇa-karma-vibhāgaśaḥ
[Bg. 4.13]. What is created by Kṛṣṇa, or God, that is not for a
particular country or particular nation. It is meant for everyone. We invite
everyone; it doesn’t matter where he is born, because this is universal. Kṛṣṇa
claimed, sarva-yoniṣu kaunteya [Bg. 14.4], in any species of life,
whoever there is, “I am the seed-giving father,”ahaṁ bīja-pradaḥ pitā.[xxxix]
To presume
Indian culture to be just another that has developed from primitive origins
means to reject as mythology not only śāstric descriptions (including
those of Kṛṣṇa-līlā) but also the internal traditional approach to
Indian culture because the
very term “tradition” means “handing down of information, beliefs, and customs
by word of mouth or by example from one generation to another without written
instruction,”[xl]
while developing from primitive origins means the opposite. Traditional adherents of
tradition, trained by their parents and other elders in the various practices
and beliefs that constitute tradition, learn from their parents and other
elders that traditions enshrine all the wisdom of their forefathers.
When
Śrīla Prabhupāda spoke in an apparently nationalistic or dogmatic sense: “If
you take this Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement very seriously, you can make the
whole world Hindustan”;[xli] “I
am not a cheap patriot; I want to give Indian culture to the whole world”[xlii]
he was talking about establishing real human civilization, not about
propagating a sectarian religious identity.
The dharma
of Vedic culture should not simply be considered Indian or Hindu in a sectarian
sense.[xliii]
Hinduism...
practically we do not recognize because this word “Hinduism” is not mentioned
in any Vedic literature. It is a foreign term.[xliv]
We are not
Hindu.[xlv]
It should be clearly understood that Kṛṣṇa
consciousness is not intrinsically Indian but of the quintessential nature of
every person’s very being.
However, Kṛṣṇa consciousness is so inextricably rooted in Indian culture that
it is impossible to become absorbed in Kṛṣṇa consciousness without entering
deeply into that culture. For instance, most of the many metaphors employed in
Vaiṣṇava poesy feature a unique phraseology that is non-comprehendible to the
untrained. An example is the first line of the well-known song that begins śrī-guru-caraṇa-padma.
And the emotions that such metaphors are meant to evoke cannot arise in the
hearts of academic scholars, who study Vaiṣṇavism without the commitment of a
genuine practitioner.
Therefore
Indian or Vedic or varṇāśrama culture and Krishna consciousness as
practiced by all but avadhūtas are inseparable.[17] Particularly when
considering codes of behavior suitable for Vaiṣṇavas, Vedic (or Indian or
pristine Hindu) culture may be accepted as authoritative since so much of it
parallels practices incumbent upon Vaiṣṇavas.[18]
To
make successful the human life or the mission of human life, the Vedic culture
is very nice. And by spreading Kṛṣṇa consciousness, by adopting the process of
Kṛṣṇa consciousness, you can revive that cultural life, sublime life. If not
wholesale, if there are a few people trained up in this line, and they become
ideal examples to the society, immense benefit can be derived from their
examples of life.[xlvi]
So this is a culture. This
culture is meant for the human society. Fortunately this culture developed on
this land of Bhārata-varṣa. Unfortunately, people are so much bewildered that
they are giving up this culture. That is the most regrettable portion of, of
our movement. Anyway, my mission was that I shall go to America, and if some of
the American boys and girls, younger section, would accept it, then I’ll bring
them here to show these rascals that how great this culture is.[xlvii]
Sometimes it is argued that because the
Vedic culture is all lost so there is no way we can get to know and see what
genuine Vedic culture is and thus it is not possible to implement it today. Śrīla
Prabhupāda answers this:
Devotee: If the Vedic culture was a superior
culture, how come man gave up the Vedic culture to take to the materialistic
life? one
Prabhupāda: No one has given up. You are
taking up. No one has given up.
Devotee: But five thousands years ago...
Prabhupāda: That’s all right. Otherwise how
you are getting if it was given up? How you are getting now? It was not given
up. Who says it was given up?
Lakṣmī-narayana: They will say that it
became dormant. Not that many people liked it anymore so...
Prabhupāda: Not dormant. It is coming. It is
coming. We have not lost it. It may be that a few people know it, but it is not
lost. It is not that missing bone; it is not like that.[xlviii]
Vedic culture has vast range of
practices majority of which are common all over India. However, there are many
practices called deśācāra that vary according to place. Besides this,
different local situations give rise to different alternative practices. Therefore, in different parts of India different aspects of Vedic
culture are prominent. For instance, especially in Punjab it is the norm for
juniors to touch the feet of their parents and other seniors, and in parts of Karnataka
washing the feet before entering a building is commonly observed.
Thus, a common man will find that
Indian culture has so many different practices and which sometimes are even contradictory
to each other—like North Indian women have to cover their heads while in South
India covering head for women is not considered good. However, there are many
reasons for this: differing deśācāras, differing sampradāyas (sampradāyācāras),
differing family traditions (kulācāras), differing social positions (varṇas
and jātis), differing genders (liṅgas), differing theologies and
thus aims of life (darśanas), etc.
Besides these, it is also a fact that
there are degradations and deviations over the time from original traditional
practices, especially due to increasing secularism and socio-political
situations (like invasion by Mughals and British), that has resulted in
compromised practices, faulty practices, and interpolated practices. Therefore,
a natural question arises as to where to find the genuine Vedic culture
practiced in India?
Although all over India, specifically
villages, you will find much of Vedic culture, compared to North India it is
more intact in South India.
Especially South Indians, they are, still
their Indian original culture is still there in South India. Other parts of
India, they are not now Hindu.[xlix]
South India is far more staid
than North. Even in festivals, South Indians never lose their sobriety, whereas
at festivals in North India normal etiquette often gets swept away in an
overflow of ebullience. North Indians tend to be less philosophically inclined
than South Indians, but they naturally relate to the gusty singing and dancing
that are the principle Gauḍīya practices, but in South Indian such abandon is hardly
seen.
However, it doesn’t mean that you will not find
culture in other parts of India. It only means that the Vedic culture that was
prominent in South India is more intact. Still the cultural practices found in
other parts of India are also very valuable as many of these practices you won’t
find in South India as they were never a part of South Indian culture.
If we talk of Gauḍīya culture, much of Gauḍīya
culture today is practiced and thus preserved by adherents of apa-sampradāyas—but with admixed speculative understanding and practices that we need to filter out by
resorting to Gauḍīya śāstras. In Gaudiya Vaiṣṇava society as in any other widespread culture,
observances and usages will inevitably vary from place to place, and indeed the
observances of no two individuals will ever be exactly the same. Nevertheless
there are certain definitive principles that if not followed disqualify persons
and communities from the ranks of Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇavism. And even lesser principles
are not to be overlooked, for culture
is defined almost as much by its details as its basics. For instance, in Australia Śrīla
Prabhupāda asked devotees to learn Puruṣa-sukta.[l]
Socio-anthropologists
may view Vedic culture and Vaiṣṇavism as another manifestation of basic human
behavioral systems, yet in Śrīla Prabhupāda’s famous words “Kṛṣṇa consciousness
is not an artificial imposition on the mind.” For although within a historical
context bhakti may seem to be a movement that arose out of peculiar
social and cultural circumstances, in reality it is the basic and eternal
inherent tendency of the soul. Although devotional society and culture may in many ways resemble
the patterns of all others, in some important ways it is unique and thus not
understandable by ordinary sociological techniques.[19]
Vedic
culture is the bedrock of Kṛṣṇa consciousness in practice; indeed it can be said that
Vedic culture is the Vaiṣṇava culture as manifested on the temporal plane.
It is a systematic means of elevation
based on knowledge of the goal of life and how to attain it, plus activities
that reflect or manifest the self-realized state, of pure love of God.
From
the external point of view, Vaiṣṇava culture is indeed part of the broader
Vedic culture that encompasses karma, jnana, yoga, and bhakti. However,
a more correct philosophical understanding is that Vaiṣṇava culture stands
above ordinary Vedic usages. It is the ultimate goal of Vedic culture without
which Vedic culture has no meaning. Indeed, the whole orientation of Kṛṣṇa
consciousness is different from the nondevotees’ practice of Vedic culture (and from that of any other mundane
culture). Vaiṣṇavas
stress more on hearing and chanting about, serving and remembering the Supreme
Lord, than on the ritualistic performances so much valued by nondevotee
followers of Vedic culture.
Vedic
culture may also be called “brahminical culture” as true brāhmaṇas uphold
the highest principles of Vedic life, and because Vedic civilization aims to
ultimately elevate all its adherents to the platform of true brāhmaṇas.
Vaiṣṇava
culture incorporates brahminical purity of habits and nicety in dealings, and
is further much enriched with the transcendental endeavor to satisfy Kṛṣṇa.
This Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement is brahminical culture.[li] Śrīla Prabhupāda
says, “If one follows the brahminical
culture, he will become competent in Kṛṣṇa consciousness.”[lii] In Vaiṣṇavism, a
devotee is considered cultured to the extent that he is purified of degraded
intention and activities and sees himself as a humble servant of God, and acts
as such, or in other words how Kṛṣṇa conscious he is. The desire to please Kṛṣṇa
permeates everything a Vaiṣṇava says and does, and all the rules and
regulations of Vaiṣṇava life are meant for this purpose only. That is the
perfection of a Vaiṣṇava, and hence Vaiṣṇava culture, or Kṛṣṇa consciousness,
is the topmost standard of behavior and the perfection of Vedic culture. If Vedic culture is a golden
ring then Vaiṣṇava culture is “a golden ring with a diamond embedded on it.”
Our
ability to practice Kṛṣṇa consciousness will depend upon deep understanding of Vedic culture. The Kṛṣṇa conscious
worldview is harmonious with the social, psychological, economic outlike that
works with living simply the way that is conducive to spiritual life. That way
is to very little aspirations for improvement of the material scene and to be
more or less perfectly content to go on living in the village, in the
community, doing what his father and grandfather and great-grandfather did
before to get by in life. The mentality is one of giving not taking, serving
not exploiting. The subtlety, comprehensiveness, depth,
charm, and wholesomeness of Vedic culture are inconceivable to persons psychically
imprisoned by modern tinsel culture, who substitute tinsel bhakti for
the real thing.
Indeed
Vedic culture and Kṛṣṇa consciousness are so intimately connected that without
a background of Vedic culture it is very difficult for there to be proper Kṛṣṇa
consciousness.
The Vedic principles should be understood to
be Vaiṣṇava principles because Viṣṇu is the origin of the Vedas. The Vedas
contain nothing besides the instructions of Viṣṇu, and one who follows the
Vedic principles is a Vaiṣṇava.[liii]
When Śrīla
Prabhupāda spoke of Vedic culture he specifically meant culture with Kṛṣṇa
clearly at the center. We should not get stuck in the peripherals such as yoga,
music, Āyurveda, dance, etc,
In the Bhagavad-gītā
it is said, vedaiś ca sarvair aham eva vedyaḥ. Kṛṣṇa is to be
understood. Vedic culture means to understand Kṛṣṇa, what is Kṛṣṇa. Vedic
culture means Kṛṣṇa consciousness. There is no other meaning of Vedic culture.[liv]
All Vedic
culture is aiming at understanding Lord Viṣṇu.[lv]
There is no
culture. There is no attention. Therefore the whole world is in chaotic
condition. But if we accept the Vedic civilization which is in
nutshell—everything is there in the Bhagavad-gītā—then the whole world
will be Vaikuṇṭha. You haven’t got to go in the Vaikuṇṭha. Here you’ll have
Vaikuṇṭha. And next life will be Vaikuṇṭha. Janma karma ca divyaṁ me yo jānāti
tattvataḥ. Kṛṣṇa is giving the civilization, Vedic civilization. And if we
thoroughly understand it, then we are fit for going back to home. Tyaktvā
dehaṁ punar janma naiti mām eti [Bg.
4.9]. So this Vedic civilization is so nice, and it is given in nutshell in
simple words by the Supreme Lord Himself. If we take it, then immediately the
face of the world will change, immediately.[lvi]
The
difference between Vaiṣṇavas and other followers of Vedic culture is that Vaiṣṇavas
clearly understand that the goal of the Vedas is unmotivated devotion to Kṛṣṇa
or Lord Viṣṇu. All Vaiṣṇava behavior is meant for the satisfaction of Kṛṣṇa and
all other considerations of etiquette and social norms are secondary. An
extreme example of this is Śrīvāsa Ṭhākura’s telling his family members not to
cry on the sudden death of his son, lest they disturb Lord Caitanya’s dancing.[lvii]
Vedic
culture that does not come to the point of surrender to Kṛṣṇa must always be
imperfect. Because it is on the platform of duality, it must be full of contradictions.
For instance, Arjuna, from cultural considerations, did not want to fight his
superiors. But Kṛṣṇa taught Arjuna a higher concept of Vedic culture, namely
devotional service, or Vaiṣṇava culture, without which all mundane niceties are
incomplete and cause bondage and illusion. Such pure devotional service is
difficult to understand for ordinary followers of Vedic culture, who being on
the mundane platform are ensnared in considerations of puṇya (piety), pāpa
(sin), and prāyaścitta (atonement).
Indeed,
Vedic culture can only fully and properly be comprehended and practiced by
those who understand its ultimate goal: Śrī Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Personality of
Godhead. As in any culture, the religion, humor, art, music—everything—is
connected, so in Vedic culture the connecting principle is spiritual elevation,[lviii]
which ultimately means to understand Kṛṣṇa.
Even
rigid following of Vedic culture is useless unless it brings one to Kṛṣṇa
consciousness. Attention to the details of culture does not in itself
constitute bhakti, and a person who assiduously observes them is not
necessarily dearer to Kṛṣṇa than one who doesn’t.
dharmaḥ svanuṣṭhitaḥ
puṁsāṁ
viṣvaksena-kathāsu
yaḥ
notpādayed yadi ratiṁ
śrama eva hi kevalam
The
occupational activities a man performs according to his own position are only
so much useless labor if they do not provoke attraction for the message of the
Personality of Godhead.[lix]
ya eṣāṁ puruṣaṁ
sākṣād
ātma-prabhavam
īśvaram
na bhajanty
avajānanti
sthānād bhraṣṭāḥ
patanty adhaḥ
If any of
the members of the four varṇas and four āśramas fail to worship
or intentionally disrespect the Personality of Godhead, who is the source of
their own creation, they will fall down from their position into a hellish
state of life.[lx]
So
just following varṇāśrama dharma is not sufficient. Observance of varṇāśrama
dharma is not
necessarily synonymous with spiritual advancement, for there are many highly
cultured persons in
Even
so-called spiritualists who are apparently cultured yet not Kṛṣṇa conscious
cannot ultimately derive benefit from their good behavior—”operation successful, patient
died.” Thus it is understood that only a pure Vaiṣṇava can be fully
cultured in the truest sense.
Māyāvādīs
may be suśīlāḥ sādhavaḥ (well-behaved saintly persons), but there is
nevertheless some doubt about whether they are actually making progress, for
they have not accepted the path of bhakti.[lxi]
However,
even though most followers of Vedic culture may not immediately come to the
stage of pure devotional service, they are at least given a chance to make
systematic advancement to gradually approach that point. Within the Vedas, the
Supreme Lord has given the paths of karma, jñāna, and yoga. These other paths,
although having little value in themselves, can serve as stepping stones
towards bhakti.
When a
human being comes to these institutional activities, varṇa and āśrama,
at that time he is recognized as human being. Varṇāśramācāravatā puruṣeṇa paraḥ pumān viṣṇur ārādhyate...that is
the beginning of Viṣṇu worship.[lxii]
The
ordinary karma-kāṇḍīya followers of varṇāśrama-dharma
worship innumerable demigods and have no clear idea of the purpose of life. Yet
even in that primary stage of the varṇāśrama system, the sadācāra (scripturally ordained proper
behavior) of Vedic culture promotes discipline, a sense of right and wrong, and
the vision to look beyond the immediate (śreyas, long term benefit, as opposed to preyas, immediate
benefit[lxiii]).
Karma-kāṇḍa is proffered for material gain, and thus appeals to the
selfish and foolish. But it is meant to gradually elevate them to the platform
of knowledge and desirelessness. Yet even at the beginning of karma-kāṇḍa,
Vedic culture begins to instill idealism, noble thoughts, and good character,
which all prepare a person for coming to the point of bhakti.
Furthermore, that karma-kāṇḍīs
somehow or other offer respect to Lord Viṣṇu is to their benefit and the
beginning of their spiritual life.
Varṇāśrama-dharma is the beginning of spiritual life... The spiritual
life is viṣṇur ārādhyate panthāḥ.
When one comes to the platform of worshiping Viṣṇu, that is spiritual life.[lxiv]
Even
non-Vaiṣṇava followers of the varṇāśrama system are enjoined to worship
Lord Viṣṇu and chant His holy names. Furthermore, followers of Vedic culture
have the opportunity to perform ajñāta-sukṛti (activities beneficial for
spiritual advancement performed without knowledge of their value). For instance,
planting trees along roads is recommended as a pious activity, for travelers
will benefit from the shade. If a pure Vaiṣṇava happens to be one of the
travelers who is shaded by such a tree, the soul who planted it gets ajñāta-sukṛti—even
though he may have died long before. Similarly, the Vedic culture teaches to
welcome guests, especially saintly persons and sannyāsīs. Those who
properly receive Vaiṣṇava guests may not be aware of the full value of their
doing so. Still, by pleasing Vaiṣṇavas, they please Lord Viṣṇu and thus
unknowingly make progress towards the path of devotional service. When by such
purification their intelligence is sufficiently awakened to submissively hear
from devotees, their actual spiritual life begins. Example is Nārada Muni who, in his childhood as a
son of a maidservant, served the Vaiṣṇava guests and his actual spiritual life
began.[lxv]
In this way, Vedic culture prepares nondevotees to eventually come to Kṛṣṇa
consciousness.
Śāstra recommends to be engaged always in
pious activities: “You do this. You do that. You go to the temple. You take
early morning bath. You take bath in the Ganges. You take bath in the Yamunā.”
That is the basic principles of Indian culture, to make all people sukṛtina.
Because without becoming pious, nobody can understand what is God, what is Kṛṣṇa.
That is not possible. The whole civilization is based on the process of making
people pious. Because in another place we’ll find Kṛṣṇa says that yeṣām
anta-gataṁ pāpaṁ janānāṁ puṇya-karmaṇām. Without puṇya-karma,
without pious activities, nobody can enter into the devotional service. So this
process should be adopted, how to become sukṛtina. Sukṛti means yajña-dāna-tapa-kriyā.[lxvi]
Those who
act piously have a better chance to become devotees.[lxvii]
The Vedic
ritualistic ceremonies and injunctions are not to be discounted; they are means
of being promoted to the spiritual platform. But if one does not come to the
spiritual platform, the Vedic ceremonies are simply a waste of time.[lxviii]
Therefore, in the Vedic
literatures, karma, jñāna and yoga are sometimes extolled and
sometimes criticized. They are extolled when compared
to hedonistic, uncontrolled, sinful life and criticized when compared to pure
devotional service to Kṛṣṇa. The idea is to encourage people to follow Vedic
culture and in that way gradually advance. However, if they become stuck at
some intermediate point, wrongly thinking they have reached the pinnacle, they
are mistaken, for the only true goal of Vedic culture is pure devotional
service to Kṛṣṇa.
But even if the progress of the followers of varṇāśrama
dharma is very slow, at least their adherence to the Vedic injunctions will
save them from falldown into grossly sinful activities, which lead to hellish
suffering and almost completely extinguish all hopes of spiritual development. Afterall, the behavior of
cultured persons cannot resemble that of coarse fools.
Vaiṣṇavas
perform many of the same activities as do smārtas
(rigid followers of Vedic smṛti
regulations), but for different reasons. For instance, both Smārtas and Vaiṣṇavas
rise before dawn, bathe, chant mantras and perform pūjās. Such auspicious activities bestow benefits upon the
performers according to their desires. Smārtas
aspire for pious enjoyment of material life and final merging into the
impersonal Absolute. But the Vaiṣṇava’s only intention in such regulated
activities is to please Lord Viṣṇu—kṛṣṇārthe ‘khila-ceṣṭāḥ. In Vaiṣṇava
culture all such performances are practised in such a way that at every point a
devotee is conscious of Kṛṣṇa.[20] Therefore, Vaiṣṇava
culture is the practical application of Vaiṣṇava philosophy.
The
rules and regs of Vedic life help to situate one in or gravitate toward sattva-guṇa.
However, when
devotional considerations override ordinary Vedic directions, Vaiṣṇavas may observe an etiquette
at variance with that of smārtas and
other materialistic followers of Vedic culture. For instance, when Lord Caitanya’s
devotees arrived in Purī, they did not observe the regulations for arrival in a
pilgrimage place, such as fasting, shaving and so on.[21] [lxix]
Vaiṣṇavas generally adhere only to those aspects of Vedic culture that are
specifically conducive to elevation to sattva-guṇa and beyond—which
includes many but not all of commonly practiced usages. Resultant differences
between Vaiṣṇavas and smārtas have sometimes led to major conflicts, such as that
over eligibility for brahminical status which came to a head during the time of
Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura.
Nevertheless,
conventional Vedic culture and Vaiṣṇava culture are inseparable, due to the
similarity of many values and practices, same source of authority (the Vedic
literature), and because they have been practiced side by side since time
immemorial. Because Vedic culture inculcates an elevated standard of behavior
that is largely conducive to and compatible with Vaiṣṇavism, scripture
recommends that the common man continue to follow the regulations of Vedic
life, even after taking to devotional service. Therefore, devotees generally
try to conform to the usages of conventional Vedic society, inasmuch as they
are favorable to devotional advancement.
Thus,
Vedic and Vaiṣṇava culture are simultaneously complementary and diverse, which
leads to a natural tension between them. Differences in understanding of the
purpose of the Vedas leads to some difference in practice between Vaiṣṇavas and
other sections of Vedic society. Vedic culture is meant for living in this
world so as to get out of this world. Smārtas misunderstand it as simply
a means for living in this world in as best a manner as possible and in that
major aspect they are akin to gross materialists in all times and climes. Although
Vedic society tends to be quite rigid, Vaiṣṇava culture is more flexible,
because as opposed to smārta understanding, the intention in executing
an activity is considered ultimately more important than the method of
performance. Smārtas traditionally
adhered to a plethora of intricate procedures. But Vaiṣṇavas are advised:
vidhi-mukta
anukhaṇa, sāra-grāhi śrī-kṛṣṇa-prapanna
Always be
free from unnecessary rules. Accept the essence: surrender to Kṛṣṇa.[lxx]
In its prevailing usage, the word culture also refers to the arts,
such as sculpture, architecture, music, dance, drama, and literature. These
arts, known in Sanskrit as kalā, are
a primary expression of every civilization’s culture, and are also integral to
the Vedic way of life, wherein they usually have the pastimes of the Lord as
their theme. Vedic culture is extremely rich, and fosters aesthetics and
refined taste. Śrīla Prabhupāda notes:
A royal
procession like that of Mahārāja Parīkṣit surrounded by well-decorated
chariots, cavalry, elephants, infantry and band not only is pleasing to the
eyes, but also is a sign of a civilization that is aesthetic even on the
fighting front.[lxxi]
A temple (devālaya) has
not only religious purpose but also spiritual, cultural, educational, and
social objectives. Art, dance, and drama bring Kṛṣṇa to our direct experience.
How would we know what Kṛṣṇa looked like if there were no paintings or deities
of Him. The arts help
make Vaiṣṇava communities attractive, creative, colorful and pleasing, and are
important in preaching. Tasteful, artistic presentations of Kṛṣṇa’s culture can
attract many people to devotional service and help educate them in Vedic
understanding. Therefore Śrīla Prabhupāda encouraged productions like dramas
and diorama exhibitions as powerful mediums for spreading Kṛṣṇa consciousness.
In Kṛṣṇa
consciousness, all art is meant for pleasing Kṛṣṇa, the supreme artist. In
spiritual culture, everything is done in the most aesthetic way for the
pleasure of the Supreme Lord.
We are
transcendental artists, musicians, writers, so everything should be beautiful
for Krishna.[lxxii]
Various
art forms, particularly literature and drama, can be didactic in a manner that
unembellished instruction can never be, for art appeals not simply to the
intelligence but to the emotions. Art is meant to be strikingly communicative,
and the value of any work of art lies in how much it stirs the emotions. In
traditional Vaiṣṇava culture, many works have been principally didactic, but
the great majority—especially poetry, music, and drama—have principally been to
foster rasa. Ability to appreciate Vaiṣṇava art depends on training in rasa-jñāna
and in personal spiritual advancement.[22] The arts are also
required to help develop people’s finer instincts and channel their creative
tendencies toward the Supreme Lord.
Aestheticism
means the good taste to add beauty and decorations even when there is no
functional need, just because it is pleasing. Such aestheticism is intrinsic to
Vedic culture, which is meant for developing finer propensities and ultimately
channeling them towards the Supreme Lord, who “lives wonderfully at the topmost
height of artistic craftsmanship.”[lxxiii]
Real
opulence is supplied by natural gifts such as gold, silver, pearls, valuable
stones, fresh flowers, trees and silken cloth. Thus the Vedic civilization
recommends opulence and decoration with these natural gifts of the Supreme
Personality of Godhead. Such opulence immediately changes the condition of the
mind, and the entire atmosphere becomes spiritualized.[lxxiv]
Indeed,
a sense of aestheticism and refinement are intrinsic to devotion and are
inherent traits of the spiritual world. In the natural course of advancement
devotees automatically acquire such sensitivity, without which they cannot be
tidy, cook nicely, dress the Lord tastefully, distinguish between sweet music
and mere clanking and clashing, or deal with other persons in a pleasing and
appropriate manner.
In
traditional Vaiṣṇava culture, emphasis is given to the sixty-four arts which
are the fine culture of the spiritual world. The first five are: (1) gīta—singing; (2) vādya—playing on musical instruments; (3) nṛtya—dancing; (4) nāṭya—drama;
and (5) ālekhya—painting.[lxxv]
Vedic knowledge also encompasses many elaborate fields of study, such as Vāstu-śāstra, Jyotiṣa (astrology), Gāndharva-veda
(music), Āyurveda, and Sanskrit language itself, that are all immensely
beneficial for human society. Although it is not the prime purpose of the Kṛṣṇa
consciousness movement to do so, all such Vedic arts and sciences can be
gradually introduced throughout the globe as part of varṇāśrama society.[23]
The Vedic
concept of art differs from that in Western culture. Originality, individual
expression, distinctiveness, and the endeavor to make a unique contribution,
are highly regarded in modern art, whether it be music, literature, drama or
fine art. But the Vedic ideal is of faithful reproduction of the same art forms
that have been rendered unchanged for eons. That which is perfect need not be
changed, but rather preserved to be relished in its original form.
Regularity, proportion, and harmony are elements of beauty
intrinsic to traditional art forms, especially painting, sculpture,
architecture, music, and poetic composition (especially Sanskrit poesy). Modern
art is deliberately irregular, disproportioned, and disharmonious. Its ugliness
and chaos appeal only to persons of low consciousness and disturbed minds.
Similarly Vedic literature and drama point ultimately to the great, the
positive, and the meaningful, and Vedic philosophy in its various branches
attempts to explain meaningfulness. The voidism, meaninglessness, hopelessness,
and absurdity of much of modern literature and philosophy are the psychic vomit
of persons who are physically, mentally, intellectually, and spiritually
totally disordered.[24]
The
vast heritage of Vaiṣṇava or Vedic artistic culture is so expansive and rich in
music, art, science, song, dance, literature and philosophy that no one can
know all of even a part of it.
No poetry,
no science, no philosophy, no religion, no culture, no knowledge we have today
can be said to be superior to that we find 5,000 years or more ago in India. [lxxvi]
The
discipline and culture of Vedic art has been largely lost and is difficult to
revive due to the superficiality in modern life and especially the whole ethos
of modern education militates against it. Very
few people today are aware of its extent. Therefore, this tradition needs to be revived and
protected.
Those who
are devoid of literature, music, and art are but animals without horns and
tail.[lxxvii]
Speaking
about several archeological specimens that reveal something of the Vedic civilization
around Kurukshetra from 800-400BCE, mainstream Indian historians Herman Kulke
and Dietmar Rothermund give a good idea of the amazing degree of cultural
conservatism that is characteristic of Vedic culture in general (1998: 45):
“Some kinds of vessels which were
found in the sites of this period, though unknown in the age of the Indus
civilization, are reproduced in essentially the same fashion today (e.g., the
thali, a kind of platre; the katora, a bowl; and the lotha, a small jar).
Even the glass bangles which Indian women still wear were known to the people
of these Late Vedic settlements.”
This
displays, from an empiric point of view, intact practices spanning nearly 3,000
years. Extreme cultural conservatism is a characteristic of Vedic paramparā
in general; those with doubts about this need to educate themselves more about
it and then seriously ponder why and how these people have fastidiously maintained the same
cultural habits for nearly 3,000 years. It seems like some would have us believe
that nobody in that vast stretch of time was able to question such scrupulous
conformity to traditions.
Previously,
orthodox followers of Vedic culture eschewed as contaminated all things
foreign: persons, words and language, food items, non-indigenous vegetables and
fruits, cloth, methods of agriculture, and so on.
Prabhupāda: In our childhood no one would eat the tomato. It is
not... It is red color, but everything vilaiti. It is called vilaiti begun. So
no one would touch.
Hari-Śaurī: Tomato?
Prabhupāda: There was prejudice because it was brought from... Even
potato. Strict Hindus would not take potato. Potato was imported from England.
It was not produced...[lxxviii]
<It seems that this section
needs more development; although the concept of cultural continuity is
explained but its importance, mentality behind it, etc. are not covered.>
But
gradually adjustments had to be made. Approximately 500 years ago the Sanskrit
classic scriptures began to be translated into Indian vernaculars, amidst
severe opposition from the brāhmaṇa caste, who considered the vernaculars
low-class and unfit for conveying scriptural topics. These translations
transformed the socio-religious ethos, to remain relevant within which many brāhmaṇas
felt obliged to adopt scriptural recitation in local vernaculars. These
vernaculars eventually adopted many Persian, Arabic, and later English words,
but orthodox followers of Vedic culture (although already less orthodox then
their forbears) rigidly stuck to the original or “pure” forms derived from
Sanskrit and employing mostly Sanskrit words within a much simplified grammar. Śrīla Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura’s
Bengali was not common but full of Sanskrit terms, difficult even for most
intelligent to understand. Even today these “higher” forms of
vernaculars are used by many Hindu religious speakers and writers, who
especially in formal deliveries scrupulously avoid Urdu, English or other “foreign”
words, their language thus differing much from the common forms.
Now, the battle for cultural purity is lost. The influence
of modern life is so ubiquitous that there is hardly a single person in India
today not compromised to some extent with modern life. Even among those who
consider themselves orthodox and strict followers of Vedic culture cannot avoid
(for instance) use of plastic and other synthetics, social dealings contrary to
those prescribed in varṇāśrama, and the whole ethos of not being ruled
by a dharmic king. The only possible exception might be one or two unknown
yogis who remain year-long high in the Himalayas far from human society, and
who never come down even for Kumbha-melā.
All
aspects of Vedic culture have generally been in decline since the beginning of
Kali-yuga, but particularly in the last generation the influence of modern life
has in various ways caused tremendous erosion. There are five reasons
which majorly contributed to the collapse of the Vedic culture—loss of divine
qualities and rise in negative qualities (lower nature) since the end of
Satya-yuga, muslim invasion from north-west, arrival of British colonialism,
Nehru’s vision of industrialised India, and influence of western media. The
legacy of shallow education and instant gratification has left few teachers
or students willing to impart or imbibe knowledge or artistic techniques by
traditional intensive methods based on profound respect for knowledge and
tradition and previous and present conveyors of knowledge. For example, fast living
and fast food make people think of cooking and serving as a chore, and thus the
joy and dignity of cooking, serving, and eating are lost, and eating relegated
to merely an animalistic function. Not only is much permanently lost of
culinary science, but also of Vedic scholarship, kīrtana culture, etc.
Śrīla
Prabhupāda several times described various ways in which India’s culture had
changed in “the last fifty years”.
Even fifty years ago, no one would
deprive a sadhu of a quart or two of milk, and every householder would give
milk like water.[lxxix]
Even fifty years ago in Hindu
society, … a wife could not see her husband during the daytime. Householders
even had different residential quarters. The internal quarters of a residential
house were for the woman, and the external quarters were for the man.[lxxx]
Some
sincere and advanced devotees, especially from the Western world, not only lack
knowledge of Vedic cultural usages, but are indifferent to or antipathetic to
them, thinking them as unnecessary and inferior to the mleccha ways they
were raised in. By thus maintaining their cultural anarthas and passing
them onto the next generation of devotees, they weave them into the fabric of
modern Vaiṣṇava society.
As
time goes on, standards slacken and rationale is found for abandoning
non-essential but nevertheless important cultural and social supports for our
devotional lives. Inevitably in time, divergent strains of culture will emerge
within Vaiṣṇava society, as in all societies, particularly intellectuals having
different values and attitudes and resulting different behavioral norms from
those more inclined to business or labor. Inevitably the Kṛṣṇa consciousness
movement will encompass multifarious cultural grafting—which is an important
reason why the original culture must be preserved as the authorized reference
point. Particularly, the original culture should be preserved by the
brahminical class at ISKCON centers. What others make of it
according to their personal inclinations should not influence the core group.
That Kṛṣṇa
consciousness is transcendental to all mundane culture and may be practiced in
any circumstances does not mean that it is equally adaptable to all cultures or
that we should discount the unique God-ordained role of Vedic culture in
helping to prepare conditioned souls for transcendental life.
Essential for progress
in Kṛṣṇa consciousness is the cultivation of a range of activities and
behaviors that are favorable for the spiritual progress of the individual and
for society in general. Śrīla Bhaktivinoda in his Vidvad-rañjana
commentary on Gītā (quoted in CB 1.2.17 ppt.) states that bhakti-yoga
is not properly practiced where there is no practice of varṇāśrama-dharma.
In
Western society, proper etiquette and cultured behavior is only considered essential
among an elite minority, who have civility, politeness, refined manners and
tastes, who are well-educated and intellectually alert, and who appreciate art
and science. However, in
Vedic society, and especially among Vaiṣṇavas, there is no question of take it or leave
it: proper etiquette is a must. Etiquette, as described in the smṛti-śāstras,[25]
is expected for
proper behavior according to Vedic law, and must be followed. And in Vedic
society other qualities than those mentioned above are required for a person to
be considered actually cultured. Such qualities include, among others,
knowledge of and faith in the Vedas, observance of meaningful tradition, cleanliness,
self-control, sensitivity to the feelings of others, pleasing speech, and the
endeavor for self-improvement and the upliftment of others. Such culture,
although especially the prerogative of brāhmaṇas, is not meant for only
a few particularly sophisticated or fastidious devotees. Rather, the whole Kṛṣṇa
consciousness movement should be known for its culture.
This Kṛṣṇa
consciousness movement is to revive the Vedic culture.[lxxxi]
Underlying
the behavioral practices that typify a culture is a whole attitude to life that
is generally inculcated from birth within a certain society. A reason that
Western devotees who fall down often revert back to mleccha habits is because during their practice of devotional
service, even over many years, they never internalized the principles on which Kṛṣṇa
consciousness is based. Thus although bhakti-yoga is open to everyone
from all backgrounds, there is a definite advantage to being raised in Vedic
culture. Those raised in Vedic culture are naturally religiously inclined, as
is seen even today among Indians.
In
That
culture plays such a major role in preparing one for Kṛṣṇa consciousness is
apparent in that ISKCON first became strong in Christian countries (where
belief in a personal God was widespread), and after becoming established
exerted much appeal among Hindus. Progress has been slow among Muslims, who
decry personal theism and worship of images and who draconianally discourage
outward religious conversion, and Buddhists, who are anti-theistic. That
cultural background continues to prominently affect even those who have taken
to Kṛṣṇa consciousness is apparent in that devotees tend to retain their
national behavioral norms. Thus British and German devotees tend to be formal
and reserved, and rigid in their outlook, and Slavs and Latinos to be more
expressive, sentimental, and personal yet also more likely to squabble.
Similarly values and worldviews imbibed in youth tend to remain prominent in
the psyche of devotees, which can be a major obstacle in their truly accepting
Kṛṣṇa consciousness. An example of how intrinsically the cultural milieu in
which one is raised affects his manner of seeing the world is apparent in the
influence of modern psychology in the Western psyche, demonstrated in common
reference to terms such as “traumatic experience,” “inferiority complex,” and “balanced
person.” Devotees raised in the Western cultural milieu, even after years of
studying Vedic literature, use such terms to describe psychological phenomena,
never questioning the veracity of such concepts.
And in
areas where Vaiṣṇava culture is predominant, Kṛṣṇa consciousness is inseparable
from a person’s and a society’s very being. For those brought up in that ethos, it is most
natural to act according to it. Particularly in Bengal and Orissa many devotees
are trained from childhood in kīrtana, cooking, and other devotional
arts, and are automatically inclined to Lord Caitanya’s saṅkīrtana movement.
Basic points of Vaiṣṇava etiquette, such as offering respect to senior and
saintly persons, come naturally to them, for they are brought up in this
culture.
Kṛṣṇa consciousness
is much easier for persons raised in devotional culture than those who weren’t,
as observing the
usages of Vedic culture comes naturally for persons raised in it. They simply have to do whatever they have been doing all their
lives. It is for them easy, natural, and happy, especially if their childhood
was happy, which it should have been if they were raised in actual Kṛṣṇa
consciousness. But for persons raised in other cultures it is usually difficult
to fully embrace a concept and culture that may seem to them like an
imposition, even if they philosophically accept the truth of bhakti. For
those not, who are struggling to adopt the basic practices of Kṛṣṇa
consciousness, the elaborate rules of Vedic life may seem like an unnecessary
burden and distraction. This will be especially so for those accustomed to the
modern culture of convenience, which is based on making everything (including
even relationships) conducive to unobstructed sense gratification, and which
attempts to make life as smooth and trouble-free as possible. And especially
for those raised in hedonism, it may seem almost impossible to become free of
disgusting previous impressions that undesiredly recur in the consciousness.
Due
to their cultural background most Hindus even now are reluctant to perform
grossly sinful activities such as eating cow’s meat or blaspheming sadhus.
Vedic culture hence acts as an impetus and a safeguard.
Ajāmila,
although he was a very, very sinful man, still, because the culture was there,
he kept his son’s name Nārāyaṇa. He did not lose the culture, although he was
so sinful. This culture is so important.[lxxxiii]
We should be very serious. We should not
fall down from the standard of Vedic culture.[lxxxiv]
If a
circus performer falls from a tightrope, he does not attain his objective, and
may look foolish. But he will not be seriously hurt if a net is spread
underneath to save him, and he can soon go back and try again. Similarly,
training in Vedic culture acts like a behavioral net. Among those who fall from
devotional service, those with a background of Vedic culture generally do not
drop very far, and rarely give up Kṛṣṇa consciousness altogether. But those
without such an advantage may well revert back to grossly sinful life, and
again go far away from Kṛṣṇa.
“When
you lose your culture, then you lose everything. Forgetting your duty, that is
the beginning of loss of culture. A small beginning, it creates havoc.”[lxxxv]
Therefore it is a distinct advantage to be born in a family where the Vedic and
Vaiṣṇava principles are strictly practised.
To become a
pure devotee of Lord Kṛṣṇa, two things are very much essential, namely having a
chance to be born in the family of a devotee and having the blessings of a bona
fide spiritual master.[lxxxvi]
However,
most of the devotees joining this Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement outside of India can
hardly claim birth in exalted families. Therefore, while spreading Kṛṣṇa consciousness in such
hostile environments as the West, service is the primary concern;
consideration of cultural niceties, secondary. In pristine Vaiṣṇava society the
two are usually harmonious and maybe inseparable, but not so in the modern
world. To spread and establish Kṛṣṇa consciousness in a hostile environment, Śrīla
Prabhupāda practically as a policy overlooked and ignored cultural norms
considered essential in India. He broke rules—not out of disregard for them,
but knowing that rigid adherence to rules would undermine his purpose. He
stated his policy in Cc 1.7.37 purport,
First they should become Kṛṣṇa conscious, and all
the prescribed rules and regulations may later gradually be introduced. In our
Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement we follow this policy of Lord Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu.
Śrīla
Prabhupāda dealt with devotees whose understanding and cultural outlook was
quite different with that of traditional Indians. Making major cultural
adjustments was not an issue for ācāryas prior
to Śrīla Prabhupāda. Out of necessity Śrīla Prabhupāda allowed and encouraged
persons from non-Vedic backgrounds to continue with usages and even attitudes
that were not ideal. Understanding the inability of disciples from non-Vedic
backgrounds to fully accept Vedic culture in all its intricacies, Śrīla Prabhupāda
emphasized the essence—harināma and saraṇāgati. His concessions for them
should not be considered acceptable standards meant to replace those of sastra
and tradition, but as a starting point in bhakti for uncivilized,
uncultured, ignorant, and wholly misinformed persons. When the devotees came late for morning
program in Hyderabad Śrīla Prabhupāda sternly told Rāmaśraddha, who was a South Indian Iyer Brāhmaṇa from Kerela, “you know
better than this; it is not how your parents taught you. Don’t pick up the bad
habits of the Westerners.” Rāmaśraddha later told me that he learned so many
bad habits AFTER joining ISKCON.[lxxxvii]
Śrīla
Prabhupāda necessarily made various cultural modifications so that Kṛṣṇa
consciousness could be adopted in the West, whose lifestyle and outlook so much
differs to that of the pristine Vedic culture that is most favorable for
practice of Kṛṣṇa consciousness in this world.
Because
Śrīla Prabhupāda, considering the mleccha background of most of his
disciples, did not teach many of the niceties of Vedic culture does not mean
that he desired his disciples to remain forever as culturally backward mlecchas.
This is evident from
the fact that even when living and preaching in the West, Śrīla Prabhupāda
maintained his own outlook and standard of behavior, which he expected his
disciples to also adopt.
Just like I
am in
I am maintaining that
position of giving, not taking. Before me, so many swamijīs went there. They
did not give, but they took something and came here and advertised themselves
as foreign-returned sannyāsī and exploited the people. They lost even
their original dress. Everyone knows, I have never changed my dress. Rather, I
have given the dress to the foreigners, and they have taken it. The Ramakrishna
mission people came to request me that I dress myself in coat, pant, hat.
Because they are doing. Their so-called swamis, they are dressed in coat, pant,
hat.[lxxxix]
Here I am
now sitting in New York, the world’s greatest city, such a magnificent city,
but my heart is always hankering after that Vṛndāvana.[xc]
paścimera loka
saba mūḍha anācāra
tāhāṅ pracārila
doṅhe bhakti-sadācāra
Śrī
Caitanya Mahāprabhu Himself has certified: paścimera loka saba mūḍha anācāra
(Cc. Ādi 10.89). The more one goes to the western side, the more he will find
people disinterested in spiritual life. He will find them behaving against the
Vedic standards.[xci]
In spite of
the cultural boundaries he had to cross, Prabhupāda endeavored greatly to
maintain the integrity and continuity of the tradition.[xcii]
Therefore, adjustments that Śrīla Prabhupāda
made for the West need not necessarily be considered the ideal in all places,
times, and circumstances. Rather, the ideal is given in śāstra, and it
is that ideal that Śrīla Prabhupāda repeatedly pointed his followers toward as
the actual and proper standard of human culture. Better than formulating
various cultural hybrids according to ever-changing places, times, and
circumstances, is to aim at adopting this intrinsic culture of Kṛṣṇa
consciousness.
Thirst
for material development, particularly as is prominent in modern supposed
civilization, destroys traditions, families, and serious spiritual commitment.
It takes only one generation of neglect to erase thousands of years of
cumulative wisdom, cultural refinement, and spiritual attainment.
Even
the culture of the West was previously based on religion. But as scientific
research revealed church dogma to be insufficient and inaccurate in portraying
the universe, belief in scripture crumbled. The result is today’s permissive
society in which crass hedonism is considered the goal of life, and anyone who
can accumulate wealth and utilize it for sensual enjoyment is deemed a success.
Throughout the world today the accepted standard of civilized life is
materialistic (i.e. based on money, power, prestige, and sense gratification),
and the influence of modern Western materialism is particularly and ever more
widely and deeply pronounced, in education, worldviews, dress, mode of life
(rural/simple or urban/complex). The culture (for want of a better term) of
contemporary civilization is a merry-go-round of work, earn, spend and enjoy,
with nary a thought of higher values, and much influenced by demoniac theories
such as humanism and feminism.
Because
the Western countries are at present very wealthy, powerful, and influential,
and because Westerners consider their way of life to be superior, even devotees
often remain in the mindset that Western life is the epitome of human
civilization. But they should rather understand that despite its sophisticated
trappings, Western civilization promotes mass mother killing (cow slaughter),
child killing (abortion), and soul killing (the whole ethos of the society),
and is thus the most mean, low-class, and brutal society in history. Although
proud of its technology, it is the West that is underdeveloped: morally,
emotionally, and spiritually. The alleged progress that they want to foist on
the world is actually regress. Their so-called progress means that there is no
fixed standard of living and acting.
At least, devotees, particularly those
who have had the opportunity of being born and raised in India or within Indian
families, should grasp and internalize these points. By doing so, they should
avoid being influenced by the behaviors and customs of devotees from Western or
non-Indian backgrounds, often characterized by mleccha tendencies.
As vestiges of British colonialism
persist, many Indians still hold a deep-seated reverence for Westerners, often
equating white skin with greatness and excellence. Consequently, it is not
uncommon, especially in India, to witness a transformation in well-cultured
Indian devotees who join ISKCON, gradually
adopting certain mleccha habits and behaviors prevalent among Western
devotees, while relinquishing aspects of their own cultured upbringing.
For example, many cultured North Indian
women abandon the tradition of covering their heads after becoming a devotee in
ISKCON, a practice
ingrained in them since childhood. Similarly, many Brahmins adopt a practice of
walking while eating, akin to a casual party atmosphere, a behavior they would
have strongly refrained from before their association with ISKCON.
Therefore, it is imperative for such
cultured devotees to recognize the significance of the culture they have
imbibed since childhood, as underscored in Bhagavad-gītā 6.42. They
should recognize that this cultural heritage serves as a valuable asset in
progressing along the path of Kṛṣṇa consciousness and should never be forsaken.
Śrīla Prabhupāda, in his wisdom,
offered simple yet profound guidance to Indian devotees on this matter. He advised Bhakti-cāru Swami to glean dedication and Kṛṣṇa
consciousness from his Western disciples, while steadfastly holding onto the
cultural values instilled by his mother. A similar counsel was imparted to
Rāma Śaddha Prabhu.
Therefore, Indian devotees should
strike a delicate balance—embracing spiritual wisdom and devotion from their
Western counterparts, while cherishing and preserving the cultural heritage
bestowed upon them from their upbringing.
It should also be noted that the modern way of life, which
nowadays seems so normal, is all quite new. Three hundred years ago, there was
no
Rāmeśvara: Now in the Western countries, the
standard of culture and education is coming from the idea of the Renaissance in
Europe.
Prabhupāda: That is not culture. That is not
culture. As soon as you change, that means it is not culture. It is mano-dharma,
mental concoction. Culture is never changed. [xciii]
Americans, representatives of modern western culture, as a people have very little
concept of or respect for what it means to live by tradition. They want always
change for that is the ethos of America. They consider tradition as savage,
oppressive, and base, not being able to see these faults in their own way of
life.
That is your American disease. This is very
serious that you always want to change everything.[xciv]
“This is your American disease. Always changing!
Change every few minutes. Our qualification is we don’t change anything.” Then
he quoted Bhagavad-gītā 4.2: “This supreme science was thus received in
disciplic succession, and the saintly kings understood it in that way. But in
course of time the succession was broken, and therefore the science as it is
appears to be lost.” “This changing will ruin everything,” he told them.[xcv]
America is about the right to be
different. Tradition is about the obligation to conform. ISKCON’s cultural strife is merely a reflection of a broader struggle of
Americanism vs. tradition that may well be the major social determinant of this
century.
As soon as one is in charge, immediately he
invents something new: “This should be broken, and this should be done.” Then
another man comes. He breaks the same thing again. There are practical
experience I have got. Unless there is control over the mind, it will dictate
something new: “Do it like this.” […]
But the Vedic civilization is that “Do not try to
invent some order. That will create disturbance. Be satisfied. Whatever you
have got by nature’s way, be satisfied.[xcvi]
The
canons of such atheistic intellectuals as Darwin and Freud are officially
enshrined in the world’s educational systems, which indoctrinate children to
believe that life has no sublime purpose, being simply a chance combination of
chemicals that is terminated upon the death of the body; thus implying that
life should be enjoyed as much as possible before the body falls down. Hence
modern civilization is based upon a mistake, and all attempts to rectify the
inevitable faults of such a misdirected ethos without reference to this
original mistake simply result in more entanglement.
The
lack of true culture and ideals in the Western world, and resultant distress of
everyday life, is so dissatisfying even to materialists that the more
thoughtful of them have tried to evolve better manners of dealing suitable for
the current age.
Yet, many devotees are enamored by the claims of modern Western
humanistic society to be the zenith of human development, its promotion of such
qualities as equality, fairness, and individual freedom being proof of its
superiority to all previous and present civilizations, a model on which to base
and a yardstick to measure religions. But actually modern society is more
demoniac than all previous, its promotion of supposed human values being simply
disguised atheism, and hypocritical also, for it puts a smiley face over its
wholesale exploitation and abuse.
The
members of the International Society for Krishna Consciousness cannot even call
themselves brahma-bandhus.[xcvii]
Śrīla Prabhupāda admitted that the Vedic system is a “very difficult
civilization for the Westerners.”[xcviii]
The Vedic culture is very subtle and its nuances are likely to be misunderstood
by persons raised in the modern gross vulgar materialistic culture. Most devotees brought up
as mlecchas and yavanas remain to some extent influenced by the
culture and values they imbibed in youth, for the nature one has acquired is
difficult to change. Therefore,
it is understandable if Western devotees find it difficult to adopt themselves
to all the practices of Vedic culture, yet Kṛṣṇa consciousness is meant to
affect such a radical change and certainly has the potency to do so if the
practitioner takes up the process seriously. The disadvantages of unfortunate
birth may be overcome by surrendering at the lotus feet of a bona-fide
spiritual master and taking rebirth from him. Rebirth entails accepting the
teachings of the spiritual master, which for those not brought up in a traditional devotional
environment means learning anew attitudes to life and behavioral norms.
By
mixing with the pop culture, devotees lose their dignity. For instance, sales tactics adopted in ISKCON have spawned a culture of dishonesty. But
by promoting Vedic values, devotees demonstrate to [the] undignified and
uncultured world the actual standard of dignity and culture. That many devotees
of Western origin celebrate Christmas in the indulgent manner of most Western
nondevotees suggests that they are still strongly attached to their Western
cultural moorings, more so than orthodox Jews and Muslims in the West, who
celebrate their own festivals and not those of others. From this and many other
indications it seems that many devotees internally still strongly identify
themselves with the culture they were born into.
There has
been a tendency in recent years for devotees to adopt behavioral role models
propagated by nondevotees. Some devotees also, perceiving that lack of culture
in present Vaiṣṇava society has led to much suffering, have sought guidance
from supposed savants on human relationships. But although the insights of such
“new age gurus” may be somewhat useful, they are inevitably contaminated by the
defects of conditioned souls, namely mistakes, illusion, imperfect senses and
the cheating propensity. Although such people may be superficially God-fearing
and moral, they are after all materialistic, being ignorant of the goal of
life. Adopting their ideas is one kind of asat-saṅga (association with
nondevotees) that Lord Caitanya has warned against as a major cause of fall
down. Better that devotees study the lives of Prahlāda, Janaka, Bhīṣma, the
associates of Lord Caitanya, and other great ācāryas down to Śrīla
Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī Ṭhākura and Śrīla Prabhupāda. The first
principle of Vaiṣṇava behavior is to give up bad association—asat-saṅga-tyāga
ei vaiṣṇava-ācāra. To this end, the principles of Vaiṣṇava
culture help an aspiring devotee to withdraw from cultural usages that impede
progress in Kṛṣṇa consciousness.
Some devotees say that because in many parts of the world
devotees face an environment far from the ideals of gender separation better we
not employ a culture that will not serve us well in the field.[27] Well, if the practicality of following in
the footsteps of Vaiṣṇava ācāryas is called into question due to the
changed condition of modern society, it may be replied that Śrīla Prabhupāda
taught how to live as a devotee in the modern world, making necessary
adjustments without being compromised. A person who simply agrees to be carried
along by the current of modern society cannot be a devotee at all. Besides this, the real situation of the world
may not be so antagonisitic to Vedic culture as some so-called devotees may
want us to believe. For instance Bhakti
Rāghava Swami says,
You cannot have a magazine
[Reader’s Digest] of a more mainstream nature – middle of the road – and they
have articles on the Dalai Lama! They have articles on Indian culture and
religion, and people are interested. But devotees reject their own devotional
culture or are afraid to live accordingly. They have faith in the philosophy
but not the culture.[xcix]
Devotees
have to have enough conviction and character to choose to be different.
Hopefully, if Western devotees seriously try to adopt the spiritual Vedic
culture that is for their actual benefit, then within a few generations
devotional attitudes and usages will be as deeply ingrained in Western Vaiṣṇava
families and communities as they are among Vaiṣṇavas in India. And even today,
some Western devotees are living authorities on Vedic culture, sufficiently
adept to teach it to modernized Indians.
So rather
than being enamored by such flawed theories, devotees should adopt the real
solution, namely Vedic culture, which is the true culture of the soul and which
teaches the behavior of perfect human beings—”Human society without brahminical culture is animal
society.”[c]
Speculative philosophies come and go, but the Vedic directions remain unchanged
and perfect. Instead of awkwardly trying to adjust mundane morality to
spiritual life, devotees should accept the perfect Vedic culture and offer it
as a unique contribution to the misguided human civilization.
We have got such a great
culture, Vedic culture, that we can give tremendous benefit to the whole world.[ci]
If Vedic
culture is spread all over the world, people will be benefited because at the
present moment people do not know what is the treasure house of spiritual
culture.[cii]
If
persons who are supposed to be Vaiṣṇavas nevertheless deprecate Vedic culture
or its usages or consider them negligible then it is clear that they have not
become purified and cannot become so because to deprecate Vedic culture means
to deprecate Kṛṣṇa from whom Vedic culture directly derives. Even after taking
to the practice of devotional service and learning of the culture of the
spiritual world, if a person nevertheless remains attached to the behavior,
usages, and accouterments of the material world (such as nondevotional dress,
music etc.), it suggests that he doesn’t want to fully identify himself as part
of the paraphernalia for Kṛṣṇa’s enjoyment, that his bhakti is not taken
up in surrender but as an adjunct to his endeavors for personal sensual
gratification.
It
certainly appears as arrogant and foolish if non-Indians who, out of immense
good fortune, are admitted into Kṛṣṇa consciousness, nevertheless are dismissal
toward the culture that from time immemorial has nurtured the practice of Kṛṣṇa
consciousness.
Sad to
say, even though Śrīla Prabhupāda repeatedly discussed the superiority of Vedic
culture and decried the foolishness and depravity that characterizes Western
behavioral norms, most of our Western devotees have not realized the importance
of adopting Vedic culture in their lives.
Most of them do not know them, and even if some of
them know, they have not the tendency to follow them. They have no faith, nor
are they willing to act in terms of the Vedic injunctions.[ciii]
Some
devotees maintain that the power of bhakti is such that a flexible
attitude may be maintained
toward contemporary culture. However, notwithstanding the unlimitedly
purificatory effect of bhakti, the hard fact is that many
devotees—probably due to their lacking in fully accepting bhakti—have
not remained above contemporary culture’s caustic influence. In fact, some of
the worst manifestations of contemporary life are as common in ISKCON as in Western secular society. A
prominent example is divorce and remarriage of initiated devotees. Are we not
hypocritical to dismiss others on the grounds of moral standards we appear to
offer only lip service to?
Modern education has artificially devised a puffed-up
concept of womanly life, and therefore marriage is practically now an
imagination in human society. Nor is the moral condition of woman very good
now. The demons, therefore, do not accept any instruction which is good for
society, and because they do not follow the experience of great sages and the
rules and regulations laid down by the sages, the social condition of the
demoniac people is very miserable.[civ]
Culture
means cultivation. Vedic culture cultivates higher values of life and Vaiṣṇava
culture cultivates the highest value of life. Mleccha culture cultivates
the hellish consciousness of selfishness and gross sensual indulgence.
As
Kṛṣṇa consciousness is meant to spread widely around the world, Kṛṣṇa conscious
societies will require their own culture and behavioral usages, to render them
authentic, sustainable, and distinct from nondevotee society.
Being that
culture pervades and influences all aspects of life, it is important that
devotees as far as possible try to adopt Vedic usages and paradigms in all
areas of activity and learning. For instance, modern systems of education may
seem to be more effective than those traditionally employed in India, but by
their very nature they implant different attitudes. Interactive teaching
techniques such as asking students their opinions about various śāstric
passages certainly stimulates the intelligence to think about the subject
matter, but for persons not deeply trained in śāstric understanding it
can only promote speculative freethinking, quite opposite to training the
intelligence to receive hallowed knowledge by the descending method.
That
Śrīla Prabhupāda introduced Kṛṣṇa consciousness in the West is a miracle,
considering the vastly different culture and outlook on life in the West.
However, it is hardly feasible to expect Kṛṣṇa consciousness to be maintained
and to flourish in such an alien setting. Kṛṣṇa consciousness is for most a
gradual haul rather than a quick dash, and Śrīla Prabhupāda understood the need
of introducing a way of life that could sustain and nurture the spiritual
experience he had given. He therefore wanted to transplant as much Vedic
culture as possible to the West.[28]
Consequently it is incumbent upon the followers of Śrīla Prabhupāda—those who
have adopted the culture of Krishna consciousness—to understand Vedic culture
as the best in all respects for human society, and to adopt that culture as
fully as possible in their daily lives.
Vedic
culture is, then, central to the Vaiṣṇava way of life. Indeed, Vedic culture is the Vaiṣṇava way of life, and because
it is the natural state of the soul the more a devotee becomes Kṛṣṇa conscious
the more he becomes inclined towards Vedic culture. And without Vedic culture,
the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement cannot last in the form Śrīla Prabhupāda
envisioned, let alone impart a positive alternative to the present misled
society. All devotees, therefore, should learn what Vedic culture is, adopt it
in their lives, and teach it to others. Śrīla Prabhupāda wrote that “Lord Kṛṣṇa
is never satisfied where brahminical culture is lacking,”[cv]
and hence wanted all his followers to adopt this culture.
Train up
all these boys and girls in the philosophy and brahminical culture and they
will become useful tools in the hands of Lord Kṛṣṇa for saving all the fallen
souls in this age.[cvi]
A devotee
of Kṛṣṇa is very much attached to brahminical culture. Indeed, an expert
personality who knows who Kṛṣṇa is and what He wants is a real brāhmaṇa...One
who desires to advance in Kṛṣṇa consciousness and spiritual understanding must
give the utmost importance to brahminical culture.[cvii]
At
least devotees should maintain a cultural identity distinct from what Śrīla
Prabhupāda called the “nasty Western culture”[cviii]
which automatically converts those who partake of it into demons. Śrīla Prabhupāda
also said that “European culture is caṇḍāla
culture, yavana culture,”[cix]
and certainly contemporary Western society is the complete antithesis of Vedic
culture. Vaiṣṇava understanding of the purpose of life being quite contrary
from that of prevailing worldviews, many Vaiṣṇava values are also distinct from
those considered normal in today’s secular society. For instance, Vaiṣṇavas
consider adherence to the tenets of śāstra more important than the
unbridled liberality that upholds the right to sin; and controlled, meaningful,
respectful speech more important than free speech. And many Vedic usages, such
as touching the feet of and serving one’s guru, worshiping “idols,” and rising
early for worship, are practically abhorrent to persons steeped in Western
culture. The concept of lotus feet is as ubiquitous in Vaiṣṇava culture as it
is incomprehensible to the Western mindset, and serves as an example of certain
intractable differences between the two cultures that indicate the unlikeliness
of any genuine fusion of the two. Thus in many cases devotees will have to go
against local vox populi by following śāstra (vox dei).
Advaita Ācārya
had confidence in the śāstric evidence and did not care about social
customs. The Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement, therefore, is a cultural movement
that does not care about local social conventions.[cx]
One should take as it is enjoined in the śāstra.
No opinion. [...] The people are trained up just like dogs and asses, then what
is the use of their opinion? [...] When we introduced this “No illicit sex.” I
never cared for their opinion. The opinion... immediately there will be
discussion. And what is the use of taking their opinion? It must be done. That
is the defect of Western civilization. Vox populi, taking opinion of the
public. [...] We do not advocate such opinion. What Kṛṣṇa said, that is
standard, that’s all. Kṛṣṇa is the Supreme, and His version is final.
When you go to a physician, doctor, for treatment,
the physician does not place his prescription for opinion of other patients: “Now
I am prescribing this medicine for this gentleman, now give me your opinion.”
Does he do that? [...] The physician is the perfect person. Whatever he has
written prescription, that’s all. [...] Daily one or two gentlemen, like you
they are coming. But they find our prescription very strict. (laughter) But we
are not going to change it. We are not after vox populi. That is not our
concern. We have got our standard method. [...] That is making us successful.
We do not make any compromise. This is our method. If you like, you take it. If
you don’t like, you go away.[cxi]
However,
some devotees opine that because Kṛṣṇa consciousness and the current
materialistic way of life are diametrically opposed, it is quixotically
impractical to expect those brought up in the West to accept all the details of
Vedic culture. Sometimes even devotees initiated as brāhmaṇas decry the
attempt to introduce the niceties of Vedic culture as artificial. “Just chant
Hare Kṛṣṇa,” they say. “All these rules and regulations are unnecessary.” They
call exponents of Vedic culture “fanatics” or “smārta-brāhmaṇas” and
feel themselves superior to smārta-brāhmaṇas—although they have little
knowledge of how smārta-brāhmaṇas live, nor appreciation of how elevated
they are in their personal
habits compared to the average mleccha in the West.
Actually, such an outlook shows indifference to Śrīla
Prabhupāda. Consider for example a vyāsa-pūjā
celebration for Śrīla Prabhupāda in which none of the foodstuffs prepared
include anything Śrīla Prabhupāda is known to have liked. Despite having
positive information about Śrīla Prabhupāda’s preferences and the ability to
cook according to them, the cooks still say, “As long as whatever we cook is
offered with love and devotion (and it is vegetarian), then Prabhupāda will
accept it.” But what does it mean to have “love and devotion” toward someone
yet be indifferent to his likes and dislikes? Obviously, someone prefers pizza
to pakorās, but it’s not Śrīla Prabhupāda. It is someone else. The
effort to cook the feast is motivated by the cooks substituting their own
preferences for Śrīla Prabhupāda’s and then ascribing those preferences to him.
It is much like what scholars do when they use Krishna’s words to promote some
idea of their own and then say that Kṛṣṇa endorses their idea. The indifference
is motivated by impersonalism, and all endeavors based on this indifference are
therefore opposed to bhakti.
To those
who plead that it is not realistic to follow Vedic culture in the present
milieu it may be replied that except in wholly repressive cultures every person
has some opportunity to shape his own life. Within every major culture there
are groups and individuals who choose to conform to their own norms quite
different to that of the larger society around them. So there is no reason that
devotees individually and collectively cannot live according to Vedic ideals
even within the macrocosm of modern materialistic life. It all depends upon
desire. And although society may have changed, dharma—the underlying principles
of the universe—does not change. Vedic culture is never outmoded. It is the
inherent dharma of the soul, and thus any person from any background and in any
time period can, with expert guidance, adopt the essentials of that culture. It
was with this conviction that in 1966 Śrīla Prabhupāda astonished Allen
Ginsberg by averring that he intended to make American boys into Vaiṣṇavas and brāhmaṇas.[cxii]
And Śrīla Prabhupāda himself set the
perfect example of how one can live in Western climates and in modern
situations while adhering to the essentials of Kṛṣṇa conscious brahminical
life. Satsvarūpa dāsa Goswami noted,
Śrīla
Prabhupāda disdained all such cultural items as music, fashion, sports,
politics, art, food—anything not related to Kṛṣṇa. He worked and traveled out
of an intense desire to benefit the world with real culture, to implant
spiritual culture in what to him was the desert of a materialistic society.[cxiii]
Prabhupāda cautioned his disciples not to be proud of their
so-called Western achievements as part of their upbringing in Western society.
The civilization where superhighways are as smooth as velvet, where instant
communications are available over vast distances, and where there is so much
money that they can throw it away was ultimately not something to be proud of.
Rather, it was something to become detached from in favor of Vedic society.[cxiv]
Considering the tremendous
influence that cultural conditioning exerts, it might seem presumptuous and
foolish to expect people to forswear the culture they were raised in and to
accept a wholly different set of values and practices. Notwithstanding, the
introduction of Vedic and Vaiṣṇava culture in places in which it is considered
foreign must be attempted. Persons who understand the necessity of taking to Kṛṣṇa
consciousness will also appreciate the necessity of adopting everything
favorable for practicing and achieving perfection in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, which
includes adopting Vaiṣṇava culture and forgoing non-Vaiṣṇava culture.
Of course, cultural adjustments may be made
in presenting Kṛṣṇa consciousness to mlecchas, but those who commit
themselves to the process should gradually rise above the lifestyle pertaining
to their present bodily entanglement, and adjust themselves to the eternal
usages inherent in pristine Kṛṣṇa conscious Vedic culture. If devotees do not make the adjustment from
being converted mlecchas to cultured Vaiṣṇavas, the risk of them
reverting to barbarism remains high. In fact, myriad
problems in modern society and in ISKCON arise due to lack of culture. Devotees do not live in a bubble
but within proximity of a society quite different to Vedic civilization. They
must thus be sensitive to and cautious of the deleterious effects of that
society.
It
is inevitable that as the Hare Kṛṣṇa movement spreads, it will adapt to varying
climes and at least superficially be influenced by local milieus worldwide.
This is not necessarily detrimental, and may be necessary for Kṛṣṇa
consciousness to spread effectively in differing environments. No culture in
this material sphere can be entirely rigid, and every culture becomes altered
at least partially by contact with other ambiences. Therefore, devotees should
be fixed in the essence of Kṛṣṇa consciousness not simply the outer form. The essence is to do
whatever is necessary to serve the mission of the Lord. The underlying essence
of Vedic culture is smaran nityam anityatvam, etc. Generally that will
entail adhering to pristine Vaiṣṇava culture, but not always so. For example, a
devotee should be ready to don Western clothes rather than traditional Vaiṣṇava
apparel if it is clearly better to do so for performing a particular service, such as travelling and preaching
in Islamic countries.
A
culture that has life and zest, that goes deeper than the external trappings of
mannerisms and dress, can incorporate complementary elements from other
traditions without losing its own essential nature. Vedic culture also is not
dogmatically inflexible. It has the strength to remain inherently unchanged
even when some minor adjustment is made in order to facilitate its non-changing
purpose, and is thus pragmatically open to adjustment according to regional and
other influences. Indeed, an innate understanding in Vedic culture is that śāstric
injunctions should be applied with consideration of local conditions.
Once
in Germany Śrīla Prabhupāda was asked, “How
can a crocodile of the
Hence
there is no harm if tasteful facets of Western life are adopted in today’s Vaiṣṇava
culture, as long as the essential philosophy and usages remain authentically
traditional and śāstrically based. Śrīla Prabhupāda himself allowed or
introduced some non-traditional details of practice—for instance that devotees
may wear Western dress to preach—to facilitate the prosecution of Kṛṣṇa
consciousness in a non-traditional age. Even in India, Vedic civilization has
retained its pristine distinctiveness while accepting elements of other
cultures that blend harmoniously with it, such as Moghul traits in
architecture, dress, music and language. Even facets of Indian culture that are
not strictly brahminical, such as kurtas, may be considered preferable
for devotees than Western equivalents, in this case for instance T-shirts. Kurtas
have been accepted by many cultured Indians for many generations, and have
become accepted at some level within a culture directly or indirectly aimed at
Kṛṣṇa consciousness. So devotees in the present milieu should be sufficiently
discriminating to accept some cultural integration with the West, and not
develop an unbalanced hatred towards anything Western. Śrīla Prabhupāda,
although strong in his criticism of many aspects of Western life, also
appreciated certain qualities of Westerners, such as their dynamism and
organization. Such qualities, even if accrued for mundane purposes, can be
dovetailed in devotional service.
However,
there is much difference between incorporating elements of a foreign culture
into the Vedic way of life, and attempting to “Kṛṣṇa-ize” non-Vedic culture.
Any local adjustments must preserve the spirit, if not the letter, of the śāstra,
and should be done cautiously and with the approval of learned, expert brāhmaṇas.
This does not give scope for wholesale adjustment of Aryan living to the
Western way of life, for the two cultures are quite opposite in activity and
purpose. Western culture is suitable for mlecchas, not brāhmaṇas
and Vaiṣṇavas. Unless devotees become strongly grounded in the original Vedic
culture, there is a danger of remaining rooted in Western materialistic values.
So the general trend of devotees should be to identify with and move as close
as possible towards the Vedic way of life understanding that certain details of culture are
external to the essence does not necessarily mean that they should be minimized—”external”
does not necessarily mean “irrelevant in this day and age.”
Śrīla
Prabhupāda writes:
Our Kṛṣṇa
consciousness movement is creating brāhmaṇas from Europeans, or, in
other words, from mlecchas and yavanas... at the present moment,
society is in a chaotic condition, and everyone has given up the cultivation of
spiritual life, which is especially meant for the brāhmaṇas. Because
spiritual culture has been stopped all over the world, there is now an
emergency, and therefore it is now time to train those who are considered lower
and condemned, so that they may become brāhmaṇas and take up the work of
spiritual progress.[cxvi]
It
is practically observed that without the training that Śrīla Prabhupāda refers
to here, persons engaged in brahminical duties due to emergency retain their
low-class mentality, behavior, and habits. Even Allen Ginsberg, himself “lower
and condemned” could understand the enormity of Śrīla Prabhupāda’s endeavor to
create brāhmaṇas from mlecchas and yavanas. The purity of
consciousness and behavior characteristic of those raised in genuinely
brahminical family and culture can be imbibed by mlecchas and yavanas
only if they very seriously take to Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Indeed, the very basis
of their brahminical status, for which they are otherwise unquestionably
disqualified, is their inclination to serve Kṛṣṇa—a tendency far more laudable
yet not a substitute for the ritual purity required to serve Kṛṣṇa.
Unfortunately, in many cases promoted mlecchas and yavanas are
too culturally disadvantaged to understand that they are culturally
disadvantaged. And mleccha-dom is not restricted to the West—many
Indians nowadays are wholly uncultured.
The problem
is to take an ancient religious tradition, long isolated from the impact of
modernity, and retrofit it for the modern world, while at the same time
transplanting it from its native soil into multiple outside cultures and
civilisations—all without vitiating or distorting its essential practices and
doctrines.[cxvii]
From a
letter from a godbrother, 14 Jan 08:
For the
past four months, I’ve been travelling in Europe to more than two dozen
temples, preaching centers, etc. In general, I find that devotees are untrained—in
particular, regarding the culture given us by Śrīla Prabhupāda.
Vedic
culture and Kṛṣṇa consciousness go well together, due to their intrinsic and
integral relationship. But those who try to retain mleccha habits and attitudes while practising Kṛṣṇa consciousness
face difficulties arising from incompatibility. For instance, modern society
stresses rights and the freedom of the individual to think and act as he or she
likes and to act principally for personal selfish interest, whereas Vedic
culture stresses dharma, the responsibility of the individual to act in a
manner beneficial to the whole of society, and to follow the authority of
seniors and of the Vedic injunctions. These two worldviews are totally
contrary, their whole sense of purpose being diametrically opposed. Quite commonly, persons
who have been raised in one culture consider the outlook and practices of
another culture to be abhorrent.[29]
So persons attracted to Kṛṣṇa consciousness yet unwilling to adopt its
intrinsic culture deprive themselves of the purification that it affords and
cannot but compromise, which they often attempt to justify by unwarranted
criticism of strict adherents of Vaiṣṇava life and by fanciful interpretations
of the dictates of guru, sādhu, and śāstra. Such persons, even if
apparently learned and sophisticated, remain mlecchas, i.e. “unfaithful to Vedic culture.”[cxviii]
By failing to submissively accept the superiority of Vedic culture and to adopt
it in their lives, they necessarily try to impose their own cultural bias into
understanding of sastra and are thus certain to misunderstand.[30]
They are hence prone to become blasphemous towards pure devotees (for instance
by considering them mundanely influenced persons whose outlook is primarily a
result of their cultural upbringing), Vedic injunctions (considering them as
non-divinely ordained mundane codes) and to Kṛṣṇa Himself, for instance by
accusing Him of being immoral.
Satsvarūpa
Dāsa Goswami writes
on culture
Prabhupāda was
aware that his Western devotees did not have any cultural training. He
encouraged his leading GBC members to go to
Of course,
we don’t become cultured by going to India and dealing with the taxi wallahs.
India is becoming overcome with the modes of nature and the influences of
Kali-yuga. Still, culture can be found in Vṛndāvana and in the way people
behave, and in almost any Indian family where piety is important. We can also
learn culture by reading and assimilating what Śrīla Prabhupāda taught us. The Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam
and other Vedic literatures are full of culture. By reading, we can learn about
kṣatriya codes and brahminical tolerance, and we can learn how to
practice Vedic etiquette.
We may
sometimes appear to practice only the external trappings of Vedic culture, but
real Vedic culture is Kṛṣṇa consciousness and the process by which a heart is
softened and improved and brought to the human standard. That is not external. Prabhupāda
defined culture as mātṛvat para-dāreṣu—seeing
every woman except one’s wife as mother. A cultured person also has other
qualities. For example, a cultured person is non-violent. Prabhupāda
appreciated that his disciples, seeing some ants on a table, didn’t kill them,
but carefully removed them. Prabhupāda said, “Formerly, you would have killed
them. Now you are purified.”
We can also
learn culture by examining Śrīla Prabhupāda’s dealings with us. Everything Śrīla
Prabhupāda did was cultured, even down to how he drank water. Prabhupāda was
such an aristocrat and gentleman. He honored elderly people, even if they were
nondevotees. He honored the devotees’ parents. He was respectful to people in
high positions. He did not accept anything for himself, but lived like a
mendicant. He didn’t take advantage of being the guru of wealthy disciples. He
was a cultured sannyāsī mendicant living under the care of his
disciples. In return he gave them Kṛṣṇa consciousness. The ultimate culture is
transcendental knowledge and to remain immersed always in Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Prabhupāda
encouraged his disciples to help people obtain this culture by using “cultural
weapons” as a means of conquest. In that sense, he meant art and literature and
beautiful ways to present Kṛṣṇa consciousness. He was even willing to take what
passes for culture in the West and use it in Kṛṣṇa’s service.[cxix]
Although
many aspects of Vaiṣṇava behavior have been adopted in ISKCON, most devotees need more training
in Vaiṣṇava culture, for one who aspires to be a devotee must first learn to
fully behave as a devotee. In the absence of Vedic cultural training, devotees
today each follow certain Vaiṣṇava rules according to individual liking and
convenience. For instance, some who rinse their mouth after eating may drink
water directly from a glass, touching it with their lips. Others may drink
water without touching the glass to their lips, but do not rinse their mouth
after eating. Or devotees tend to adhere to the norms and values they were
brought up in, to somehow graft Kṛṣṇa conscious practices onto the lifestyle
and mindset they are used to. But this is not very feasible, for the values of
contemporary society are opposed to those in Vedic culture.
Vedic society is far superior than any other
social system but it needs the mode of goodness to be able to operate it
nicely. And by associating with it, it helps us to be elevated to the mode of
goodness. But those who are attached to the modes of ignorance and passion
cannot operate it and at the same time because of the modes of ignorance and
passion don’t want to operate it.
Therefore, giving up
attachment to the modes of ignorance and passion, devotees should strive
as far as possible to adopt Vedic culture within their lives, and even if
deficient in doing so, should not be against the spirit of Vedic culture or
attribute deficiency to it. Afterall,
Culture develops by
a sincere desire to please guru and Kṛṣṇa by one’s ideal behavior, austerity,
study of scripture, and association—God helps those who help themselves.
In the beginning of Kṛṣṇa consciousness, one may
not fully discharge the injunctions of the Lord, but because one is not
resentful of this principle and works sincerely without consideration of defeat
and hopelessness, he will surely be promoted to the stage of pure Kṛṣṇa
consciousness.[cxx]
Devotees desirous of establishing Vedic
cultural norms in today’s society will have to tirelessly repeatedly correct
infractions such as eating with the left hand and standing with one’s back
toward deities. Only if enough concerned devotees take seriously such education
on a day-to-day basis can progress gradually be made.[31]
The responsibility
for establishing and upholding Vaiṣṇava culture lies with every devotee,
especially with leaders, beginning with all brahminical initiates and
especially including sannyāsīs and office-holding leaders of Vaiṣṇava
society. Repeated misbehavior and aberrations by leaders provoke uncultured
responses and help perpetuate deviant philosophies such as Ṛtvikism.
This responsibility is more incumbent on devotees
with Indian background because of following reasons:
1. They are ordered so by Lord Caitanya— bhārata-bhūmite
haila manuṣya-janma yāra …
2. They are the most suitable candidates to absorb
and preserve practices and attitudes of Vedic culture because they have not
gone very far.
3. They consist more than 80% of ISKCON and therefore
can play a vital role in changing its whole modern ethos.
Overall the test of ISKCON’s
culture will be to the extent that it fulfills its most important purpose:
elevating its participants to kṛṣṇa-prema. Without imbibing the Vedic culture, the
culture of respect, no one can be a proper disciple, nor understand or enter
into the spirit and subtleties of Vaikuṇṭha and Vraja. In other words,
spiritual culture or Vedic
culture is necessary for taking to Kṛṣṇa consciousness seriously and for
preparing to enter the spiritual world. Probably because of their lacking this
culture was it considered impossible for non-Indians to take to bhakti.
Nonetheless,
There is no hopelessness; if we revive Kṛṣṇa
consciousness in a systematic way, within a very short time we can revive our
original Indian culture on the basis of the teachings of Lord Kṛṣṇa and the Bhagavad-gītā.
So we have to work very hard for this purpose and if you follow the path of Śrī
Caitanya Mahāprabhu, it will be very easily done.[cxxi]
***
Bits left to be dubbed ***
Regarding Cultural Continuity query
by me, Guru Maharaja answered in an email: It can simply be noted that even
secular scholars recognize that India has the longest continuing culture of
any, and some references could be given.
Culturally
Challenged
Develop this section from
scratch.
Culturally challenged means
that due to one’s cultural baggages one is not able to keep pace with the
changing current world and society. For instance, for persons grown up in
cultures with sexual taboos won’t be able to gel well with modern American
free-mixing groups and thus will be disadvantaged in his business, job, etc.,
just as a lame person is physically challenged and thus disadvantaged in
business, job, etc.
The heading could be changed
to Beware of challenges to Vedic Culture or Attacks on Vedic Culture. This
could involve addressing the culturally challenged trick alongwith other tricks
like “The most effective way to destroy people is to deny and obliterate their
own understanding of their history.” ― George Orwell, and other tricks
prominent in ISKCON today..
In answer to your question as to why
the Indian population is so slack in spiritual life: during the British rule
there was a secret policy by the British to cut down the Vedic civilization in
India. There was a confidential policy by the British government to kill India’s
original culture and everything Indian was condemned. From the very beginning
they took this position. In our childhood and boyhood we had to read some book
by a Mr. Ghose called, “England’s Work in India’’. The purport was that we are
uncivilized and the British had come to make us civilized. Later on the policy
became successful because in our childhood days any anglicised gentleman was
considered to be advanced in civilization. [cxxii]
<A section yet to be
developed>
Vedic way allows the brahmacārī to beg just to learn humbleness,
not beggar. Coming from very big, big family, all family, they practice it.
This is not begging. This is to learn how to become humble and meek. And Christ
said, “To the humble and meek, God is available.” It is not begging. You do not
know what is this culture. You have your own culture, devilish culture, to kill
even one’s own child. How you’ll understand what is this culture?[cxxiii]
“One of the signs of a great society is
the diligence with which it passes culture from one generation to the next.
This culture is the embodiment of everything the people of that society hold
dear: its religious faith, its heroes.....when one generation no longer esteems
it’s own heritage and fails to pass the torch to its children, it is saying in
essence that the very foundational principles and experiences that make the
society what it is are no longer valid. This leaves that generation without any
sense of definition or direction, making them the fulfillment of Karl Marx’s
dictum, ‘A people without a heritage are easily persuaded.’ What is required
when this happens and the society has lost its way, is for leaders to arise,
who have not forgotten the discarded legacy and who love it with all their
hearts. They can then become the voice of that lost generation, wooing an
errant generation back to the faith of their fathers, back to the ancient
foundations and bedrock values....[cxxiv]
Monarchy,
not democracy. Arranged marriages. Sati. Polygamy.
There
cannot be any real bhakti where Vaiṣṇava culture is weak, for without
proper practice of devotional service and dealings between devotees…
*** Bits
to be shifted somewhere else ***
Pomp, ritual, and ceremony is prominent in Dvārakā-līlā
and occasional in Vraja-līlā, e.g. Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam 10.5 describes how Nanda
Mahārāja performed the birth ceremony of Kṛṣṇa.
In Vedic culture, as exemplified in countless
śāstric anecdotes, leadership is based on character, not merely position.
The squatting posture in itself helps to
shield the penis from one’s own view (and that of others, if urinating in a public place); further,
when squatting the penis may be further shielded from view by one’s dhoti or gamcha, which is
impractical if standing.
Orthopraxy stems from orthodoxy.
<This concept needs further development>
Analyze “worldview”—goals, norms, perspectives on right
and wrong, on acceptable and unacceptable behavior, on what is desirable and
undesirable, on what happens after death, on other people and other living
beings, etc. It influences every factor of cultural life. According to most
pre-modern worldviews, humankind was divided and stratified and individuals
viewed others and behaved markedly differently with them according to factors
such as their race, religion, and age.
Not only does Sanskrit, like all languages, encode specific
and unique cultural experiences and traits, but the very form, sound and
manifestation of the language carry effects that cannot be separated from their
conceptual meanings.[cxxv]
Dharma intersects and interfaces the world and the
divine.
Until relatively recently, even in the Western countries
it was considered indecent for women to expose any part of their legs.
*** Bits
Already included in another essay ***
For books on Bengali culture, Mukunda Datta
Prabhu suggests following through with leads from the bibliographies of Stewart
& Dimock (perhaps also see those by Tarapad Mukherjee, June McDaniel,
Joseph O’Connell, William Radice, and others); for academic resources, bookmark
and search the Columbia University directory of South Asia scholars: http://www.columbia.edu/cu/lweb/indiv/southasia/cuvl/
Dharma is traditionally practiced with VAD, the social
system that fosters dharma. But a person with a clear sense of dharma can
adhere to it even in the most adharmic atmosphere.
Bhagavat-dharma operates on the platform of no material
desires. Varṇāśrama-dharma
operates on the platform of regulated material desires. Attempting or
pretending to act on the platform of bhagavat-dharma, yet being insufficiently
qualified, leads to discrepancies. Therefore a marriage of bhagavat-dharma and varṇāśrama-dharma
is required.
The authors of Hari Bhakti
Vilasa maybe were writing for more than just Gaudiya Vaiṣṇavas
or were writing at a time when Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇavism had not become such a
distinct doctrine. Observance of Sivaratri is mentioned whereas no observance
of Radhastami is mentioned, salagrama and dvaraka silas are mentioned but no
mention of govardhana silas. It seems that Hari Bhakti
Vilasa was written at a time when many customs and doctrines of Gaudiya Vaiṣṇavism
were not as codified as they are today. There is good reason to believe that
Haribhaktivilasa
was compiled for a wider audience of Vaiṣṇavas
than the Gaudiyas.
/Feminine role demure, subtle.
Behave-women?This and below bit possibly in Dharma.doc
/Women, subdued, subtle, and highly respectedbehav-women’s?
*** Bits
dubbed ***
Relativistic views of Vedic culture
exist, e.g., Anachronistic.
When
Śrīla Prabhupāda referred to Vedic culture he indicated (a) the ethos that was
existing under ideal monarchs such as Rama and Yudhisthira, and (b) aspects of
that culture, both śāstrically
ordained and extant in tradition, that continued and continue to exist even as
India’s culture became gradually degraded over the years.
The whole Vedic culture aims at inculcating a
feeling of reverence, of the sense of importance of human birth, a heeding of
each individual’s purpose and role within society and within the universe, a philosophical
awareness in every sphere of life of the Supreme Person who pervades and
sustains the cosmos, and of the world beyond the immediately perceivable.
Only with propagation of God
consciousness can human society properly be known as such.
How it [culture] develops: by a sincere
desire to please guru and Kṛṣṇa by one’s ideal behavior, austerity, study of
scripture, association.
Americans as a people have very little
concept of or respect for what it means to live by tradition. They want always
change for that is the ethos of America. They consider tradition as savage,
oppressive, and base, not being able to see these faults in their own way of
life.
America is about the right to be
different. Tradition is about the obligation to conform. ISKCON’s
cultural strife is merely a reflection of a broader struggle of Americanism vs.
tradition that may well be the major social determinant of this century.
Genuine cultural practices can be misappropriated by demons, such as
self-declared avatars who arrange for traditional rituals and usages to be
executed in their own praise.
Culture means shared values.
In Australia Śrīla Prabhupāda asked
devotees to learn Purusha Sukta says Gaura Kesava.
Sales tactics adopted in ISKCON
have spawned a culture of dishonesty.
In answer to your question as to why the
Indian population is so slack in spiritual life: during the British rule there
was a secret policy by the British to cut down the Vedic civilization in India.
There was a confidential policy by the British government to kill India’s
original culture and everything Indian was condemned. From the very beginning
they took this position. In our childhood and boyhood we had to read some book
by a Mr. Ghose called, “England’s Work in India’’. The purport was that we are
uncivilized and the British had come to make us civilized. Later on the policy
became successful because in our childhood days any anglicised gentleman was
considered to be advanced in civilization.
So it is a long process how Indians,
especially educated Indians, have become victimized by the slowly deteriorating
position of Indian culture, but there is no use tracing out the history but
generally we have lost our own culture and our leaders are not very serious to
revive our own culture to the point. But still the mass of people, not being
very much advanced in education, stick to the Indian culture. For example,
lakhs of people still visit Jagannatha Puri during the Rathayatra Festival,
lakhs still visit the Kumbha mela, and lakhs still visit the holy places of
India, but there is no encouragement by the leaders. It is only a continuation
of the original culture.
So there is no hopelessness; if we revive
Krishna consciousness in a systematic way, within a very short time we can
revive our original Indian culture on the basis of the teachings of Lord
Krishna and the Bhagavad-gītā.
So we have to work very hard for this purpose and if you follow the path of Sri
Caitanya Mahaprabhu, it will be very easily done.[cxxvi]
Samskrti
doesn’t mean bollywood, corruption, hinduism.
Quite commonly, a person who has been raised in one
culture considers the outlook and practices of another culture to be abhorrent.
For instance, eating of pork is customary in most cultures, but to Muslims it
is harām (abominable).
Some symptoms of a cultured person:
clean, religious, considerate, polite, observant of meaningful tradition
Much
of Gauḍīya culture today is practiced and thus preserved by adherents of apa-sampradāyas—but with admixed speculative understanding and practices.
In different parts of India different
aspects of Vedic culture are prominent. For instance, especially in Punjab it
is the norm for juniors to touch the feet of their parents and other seniors,
and in parts of Karnataka washing the feet before entering a building is
commonly observed.
Prabhupāda: (Bengali) South India, Indian
culture is still there. Other parts of India, they are not now Indian.
(8/17/76)culture
South far more staid than North. Even in
festivals, South Indians never lose their sobriety, whereas at festivals in
North India normal etiquette often gets swept away in an overflow of
ebullience. North Indians tend to be less philosophically inclined than South
Indians, but they naturally relate to the gusty singing and dancing that are
the principle Gauḍīya practices, but in South Indian such abandon is hardly
seen.Culture-Cult
Upbringing section, India-imbibe-Where to find India Cult par 3
In Gaudiya Vaiṣṇava society as in any other
widespread culture, observances and usages will inevitably vary from place to
place, and indeed the observances of no two individuals will ever be exactly
the same. Nevertheless there are certain definitive principles that if not followed
disqualify persons and communities from the ranks of Gaudiya Vaiṣṇavism. And
even lesser principles are not be overlooked, for culture is defined almost as
much by its details as its basics
One may claim that all Krishna’s activities in this
world are ‘Vedic’, yet the Bhagavatam 3.3.19 states that even Lord Krishna
Himself, appearing in this world, followed the path of Veda, but also of
worldly custom: loka-veda-pathānuga. However laukik means that practiced by
followers of the Vedas in accord with the overall culture, its siddhānta and
praxis.
We think sometimes that what we are doing is
so-called “Vedic” when in fact it may only be semi-Vedic.
Maryādā means to know ones limits.
The English word “etiquette” is not an exact synonym
for maryādā. Etiquette is a series of conventions meant to help regulate a
social system of mutual cooperation and rivalry, with no basis in higher
principles. Such conventions have no fixed basis, and may thus change as the
values of the society changes. But maryādā is derived from śāstra and the
tradition based on śāstra, and although it may adjust as society changes, its
basic principles and practices remain constant. Its ultimate aim is that of śāstra,
to help participants on the path of ultimate perfection.
Devotee: If the Vedic culture was a
superior culture, how come man gave up the Vedic culture to take to the
materialistic life? one
Prabhupāda: No one has given up. You are
taking up. No one has given up.
Devotee: But five thousands years ago...
Prabhupāda: That’s all right. Otherwise
how you are getting if it was given up? How you are getting now? It was not
given up. Who says it was given up?
Devotee: Well, America was formed on a
materialistic society.
Prabhupāda: America may say, but if it
was given up, then how you are getting now?
Brahmananda: Now Americans are taking it
up.
Prabhupāda: Yes. How it is given up?
Laksmi-narayana: They will say that it
became dormant. Not that many people liked it anymore so...
Prabhupāda: Not dormant. It is coming. It
is coming. We have not lost it. It may be that a few people know it, but it is
not lost. It is not that missing bone; it is not like that.[cxxvii]
With
the advent of the first human beings, Manu and his wife Shatarupa, human
society was replete with all manner of ethnicities--from etiquette to ornaments
to art to technology, etc. All that was created by Brahma, and Brahma’s
template for creation was his darshan of the spiritual world. Therefore, It is
not a question of one culture versus another culture. It is a question of which
practices and understanding are descending from the spiritual stratum [and
thus] Any liking for any facet of non-Vaiṣṇava culture is foreign to the
inherent nature of the soul and is thus a contamination.
Sometimes mundane scholars object to Śrīla
Prabhupāda’s use of the terms Vedic
and Vedic culture to mean Kṛṣṇa
consciousness or a culture centered on Kṛṣṇa consciousness, because Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇavism
is not directly based on the four Vedas, giving more importance to Srimad
Bhagavatam and Bhagavad-gītā.
However, as these two books convey the essence of and fulfill the purpose of
the Vedas,[cxxviii]
the teachings of Gaudiya Vaiṣṇavism are Vedic in the truest sense.
Human
culture—moral standards to facilitate pious sense gratification
Raksasa
culture—minimal regulation of social cooperation to facilitate impious sense
gratification
Devotees
should beware of considering as acceptable cultures and behavior spawned by
Kali-yuga, which deteriorates all the good qualities of a human being, and
should rather adopt pure Vaiṣṇava practices that specifically protect their
adherents against such contaminating influences.
The
tendency of material nature is to drag everything down. Only high, principled
culture can offset this.
We have got such a great
culture, Vedic culture, that we can give tremendous benefit to the whole world.[cxxix]
In many parts of the world devotees face an
environment far from the ideals of gender separation. Better we not employ a
culture that will not serve us well in the field. (Hridayananada)
Although devotional society and culture
may in many ways resemble the patterns of all others, in some important ways it
is unique and thus not understandable by ordinary sociological techniques. For
instance, among non-devotees prestige is an important motivation, but devotees
deliberately reject the desire for prestige.
The normal system is to learn cultural practices
from the beginning of life, and then philosophy—not vice versa, or with
cultural usages considered an optional side issue. Philosophy was not taught to
barbarians.
How ignorance of culture can result in ridiculous
narrations, e.g. SDG book on fallen brahmana who saw Lord Caitanya, written by
imagined Chhayadevi. <develop this
point>
Thus, in the Vedic literatures, karma, jnana and yoga are sometimes extolled and sometimes criticized. The idea is
to encourage people to follow Vedic culture and in that way gradually advance.
However, if they become stuck at some intermediate point, wrongly thinking they
have reached the pinnacle, they are mistaken, for the only true goal of Vedic
culture is pure devotional service to Kṛṣṇa.
Traditionally culture is taught first then gradually
surrender but in the modern world surrender first then culture gradually for in
the absence of widespread Vedic culture only the committed will agree to adopt
it.
In social dealings everyone to some
extent adjusts to everyone else; this is regulated by social norms. In a
particularly demonic society, social norms are based on superficial criteria,
particularly bodily and political strength and expertise in enjoying sense
gratification, and are observed as gross and subtle attempts to dominate and
exploit others. In civilized society, juniors defer to elders, students to
teachers, lower castes to brāhmaṇas. And
in truly godly society, the regulations and norms are observed not simply to
maintain civility, but specifically for inculcating and imbibing godly
qualities.culture--pg1 after par 2, the Unique position This par is abt the
PURPOSE OF SOCIAL REGULATIONS
significant cultural differences in Vedic culture
between urban, rural and forest life
“”References to Vedic culture in the
past tense are mostly to the not very distant past, when Vedic culture was
still strong. References in the present tense are to usages still prominently
extant.
Although a devotee might be otherwise proficient in
Vaiṣṇava philosophy, if he does not accept that contemporary Western culture is
on the level of cats and dogs and is not to be emulated, then he cannot
understand what is real, dharmik, culture,
and he is thus unfit to teach devotees about culture, or about anything.
because only one generation of neglect will wipe
out thousands of years of cumulative experience, wisdom, discipline, and so on
Consider for example a vyasa-puja celebration for Śrīla
Prabhupāda in which none of the foodstuffs prepared include anything Śrīla Prabhupāda
is known to have liked. Despite having positive information about Śrīla Prabhupāda’s
preferences and the ability to cook according to them, the cooks still say, “As
long as whatever we cook is offered with love and devotion (and it is
vegetarian), then Prabhupāda will accept it.” But what does it mean to have “love
and devotion” toward someone yet be indifferent to his likes and dislikes?
Obviously, someone prefers pizza to pakoras, but it’s not Śrīla Prabhupāda. It
is someone else. The effort to cook the feast is motivated by the cooks
substituting their own preferences for Śrīla Prabhupāda’s and then ascribing
those preferences to him. It is much like what scholars do when they use
Krishna’s words to promote some idea of their own and then say that Krishna
endorses their idea. The indifference is motivated by impersonalism, and all
endeavors based on this indifference are therefore opposed to bhakti.
I am maintaining that position
of giving, not taking. Before me, so many swamijis went there. They did not
give, but they took something and came here and advertised themselves as foreign-returned
sannyāsī and exploited the people. They lost even their original dress.
Everyone knows, I have never changed my dress. Rather, I have given the dress
to the foreigners, and they have taken it. The Ramakrishna mission people came
to request me that I dress myself in coat, pant, hat. Because they are doing.
Their so-called swamis, they are dressed in coat, pant, hat.
So this is a culture. This
culture is meant for the human society. Fortunately this culture developed on
this land of Bhāratavarṣa. Unfortunately, people are so much bewildered that
they are giving up this culture. That is the most regrettable portion of, of
our movement. Anyway, my mission was that I shall go to America, and if some of
the American boys and girls, younger section, would accept it, then I’ll bring
them here to show these rascals that how great this culture is.[cxxx]
Brhad-bhagavatamrta 6.20-21 and purport based on
Sanatana Gosvami’s own commentary, establishes the culture of Āryāvarta, north
central India, to parallel that of Goloka.
tasminn agamyo ‘khila-devatānāṁ
lokeśvarānām
api pārṣadānām
etasya tu bhārata-varṣakīyār-
ya-vārta-deśasya
nirūpya rītim
divyāṁ dineśodgamanādinaitāṁ
bhaumiṁ nṛbhāṣā-caritādināpi
mahā-camatkāra-bhareṇa ruddho
nyamajjam
ānanda-rasāmbu-rāśau
There, in Goloka, which the
demigods, kings of the planets, and their associates could not approach, seeing
a country glorious as the sunrise, where there were the ways and customs and
human language of Bhārata-varṣa’s Ārya-varta, I became filled with wonder and I
plunged in an ocean of bliss.
Commentary
Saṅkṣepeṇoktaṁ śrī-golokasya
bhauma-māthura-maṇḍala-sādṝśyam atra vakṣyamāṇa-prātaḥ-sāyaṁ-kālādy-upapattaye
kiñcid vistārya darśayati—tasminn-iti dvābhyām | akhilānāṁ devatānāṁ sūrya-candrādīnāṁ
tathā lokeśvarāṇāṁ śakra-brahmādīnāṁ pārṣadādīnām api śrī-garuḍādīnām agamya
gantum aśakye ‘pi tasmin śrī-goloke etasya sākṣād anubhūyamānasya bhuvaḥ pṛthivyāḥ
bhārata-varṣa-sambandhinaḥ āryāvarta-sajña-deśasya rītiṁ vyavashāṁ nirūpya samālokya
mahatā camatkāra-bhareṇa kautukātiśayena ruddhaḥ san ānanda eva raso drava-viśeṣaḥ
cittasya ārdrīkaraṇāt amburāśo sāgare | yad-vā ānanda-rūpa-bhāva-viśeṣa-samudre
nyamajjam iti dvābhyām anvayaḥ | dineśasya sūryasya udgamanam udayas-tad-ādinā
divyām antarīkṣa-vartinīṁ nṛṇāṁ bhāṣā-caritādinā bhaumīṁ bhūmi-vartinīm api |
Feature of culture: shared assumptions and values
devotees do not aspire to enter a divine realm where
the inhabitants wear jeans and sunglasses, and thus the cherished goal of a Vaiṣṇava
influences all his life choices, including dress style.
Today’s culture one of selfishness, mean
individualism.
Those who criticize Smārtas without knowing how exalted they are in, particularly in
THEIR PERSONAL HABITS (not in all respects).
Human society without brahminical culture is animal
society.[cxxxi]
Cow protection and expansion of
brahminical culture is essential throughout the whole world. We should not
think that brahminical culture is only limited within India. Kṛṣṇa says, cātur-varṇyaṁ
mayā sṛṣṭaṁ guṇa-karma-vibhāgaśaḥ [Bg.
4.13]. What is created by Kṛṣṇa, or God, that is not for a particular country
or particular nation. It is meant for everyone. We invite everyone; it doesn’t
matter where he is born, because this is universal. Kṛṣṇa claimed, sarva-yoniṣu
kaunteya [Bg. 14.4], in any species of
life, whoever there is, “I am the seed-giving father,”ahaṁ bīja-pradaḥ pita.[cxxxii]
You cannot have a magazine
[Reader’s Digest] of a more mainstream nature – middle of the road – and they
have articles on the Dalai Lama! They have articles on Indian culture and
religion, and people are interested. But devotees reject their own devotional
culture or are afraid to live accordingly. They have faith in the philosophy
but not the culture.[cxxxiii]
The first principle of
Vaiṣṇava behavior is to give up bad association—asat sanga tyāga ei vaiṣṇava ācāra.
The principles of Vaiṣṇava culture help an aspiring devotee to withdraw from
cultural usages that impede progress in Kṛṣṇa consciousness.
Cultures can drastically change, as for instance
several times in the history of Europe, from pre-Christian to pre-industrial to
industrial to post-industrial, each of which periods had distinctive language,
dress, intellectual life, core beliefs, and worldview. So it is not utopian to
hope that Kṛṣṇa consciousness can radically alter the culture of the world.
Devotees should be fixed in the essence
of Kṛṣṇa consciousness not simply the outer form. The essence is to do whatever
is necessary to serve the mission of the Lord. The underlying essence of Vedic
culture is smaran nityam anityatvam etc. Generally that will entail
adhering to pristine Vaiṣṇava culture, but not always so. For example a devotee
should be ready to don Western clothes rather than traditional Vaiṣṇava apparel
if for performing a particular service it is clearly better to do so. That
certain details of culture are external to the essence does not necessarily
mean that they should be minimized. “External” does not necessarily mean “irrelevant
in this day and age.”
[1] The word culture to define
ideas in this way has moved from the classroom syllabus to the conversation at
large, appearing in headlines and analyses across a wide swath of topics.
[2] It should also be considered that although traditionally
culture is taught first then gradually surrender but in the modern world we may need to teach surrender first then
culture gradually for in the absence of widespread Vedic culture only the
committed will agree to adopt it. “First they should
become Kṛṣṇa conscious, and all the prescribed rules and regulations may later
gradually be introduced.” (CC 1.7.37, ppt.)
[3]
In this essay, the references to Vedic culture in the past tense are mostly to
the not very distant past, when Vedic culture was still strong. References in
the present tense are to usages still prominently extant.
[4]
See section titled “The
Supreme Lord Practices Vedic Culture.”
[5] Those schools of Buddhism that deny
being divinely inspired do not classify themselves as religions.
[6] Therefore, unlike today they did not need to use the word
saṁskṛti (or culture) for non-Vedic modes of living. When asked “what do
you think of Western civilization?,” M. K. Gandhi wittily said, “I think it
would be a good idea”.
[7] Take, for example, one can cultivate habit of giving and
taking things with the right hand and not with the left,
cultivate habit in one’s house to honor prasādam sitting on floor
(unless that is physically impossible), chant maṅgalācaraṇa after
applying tilaka in the morning, wear dhotī-kūrtā at least in home
and whenever possible outside (at least when coming to temple), etc.
[8] This word is another derivation from
the same verbal root. For discussion of saṁskāras,
see p. XXX.
[9]
For more details about the sophisticated concept of dharma, see the essay
titled “Considerations of Dharma.”
[10]
See Lecture, “SB 5.5.1, Generations of Sophisticated Animals, 14 Jan 2005, Pune,
India,” at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c̮nzmqK̮0VA
[11]
Mathew Arnold (1822 - 1888) defined culture as ‘the best that has been thought
and said in the world,’ in his Culture And Anarchy Essay.
[12] The
original Sanskrit is brāhmaṇais tu praticchanau…kṛcchreṇa jagmatus
tau tu bhīmasena dhanañjayau.
[13]
Also see the author’s 5-part seminar titled “Stupid Irrational Hinduism (?),”
at <insert link>
[14] We think sometimes that what we are
doing is so-called “Vedic” when in fact it may only be semi-Vedic or non-Vedic
[15] Sometimes mundane scholars object to Śrīla
Prabhupāda’s use of the terms Vedic and Vedic culture to mean Kṛṣṇa
consciousness or a culture centered on Kṛṣṇa consciousness, because Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇavism
is not directly based on the four Vedas, giving more importance to Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam
and Bhagavad-gītā. However, as these two books convey the essence of and
fulfill the purpose of the Vedas, the
teachings of Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇavism are Vedic in the truest sense.
[16] Devotees should clearly understand that
spreading Hinduism is not the purpose of preaching Krsna consciousness.
Devotees should not acquiesce with or promote, but rather preach against, Hindu
misconceptions such as demigod worship, Māyavāda, sentimental so-called bhakti,
commercialized bhakti, and everything else but pure devotion to Krsna. Devotees
should also understand that it is not their duty to promote manifestations of
Indian culture such as dance or Sanskrit studies unless they are clearly
dovetailed with Kṛṣṇa consciousness.
[17] Highly advanced devotees who, being
above regulative principles, do not adhere to social conventions.
[18] Of course, genuine cultural practices can be misappropriated by demons, such as
self-declared avatars who arrange for traditional rituals and usages to be
executed in their own praise. Still, misuse of a cultural practice doesn’t render that practice
unauthorized.
<I had to alter the
meaning of this bit by adding a statement because I could not see otherwise how
to fit it in the theme of the essay. So please review it>
[19] For instance, among non-devotees prestige is an
important motivation, but devotees deliberately reject the desire for prestige.
[20]
In fact, the culture of Varṇāśrama dharma is Kṛṣṇa’s practical design
for this purpose—smartavya satatam viṣṇur vismartavyo na jātucit.
[21] This is further discussed in the
chapter on dharma. See p. xxx.
[22]
With regards to this last point, see Caitanya-candrodaya-nāṭaka, conversation
between Sarasvatī and another devī, watching a drama enacted by
Gaura-Nitāi.
[23] Considering that each branch of Vedic science
requires years of dedicated study to master, and considering the time and
energy required to attain expertise in such disciplines, it is better that
already accomplished specialists in these fields are brought in, rather than
dedicated devotees be diverted into these important yet secondary subjects.
[24]
New Age is a
pseudo-spiritualism for an age of shallowness and self-deception, by which
people try to feel spiritual without actually being so. It is a sham that they
and others can be comfortable about within their mutual pact of superficiality.
[25]
The actual word is maryādā, which
means to know ones limits. The English word “etiquette”
is not an exact synonym for maryādā. Etiquette is a series of
conventions meant to help regulate a social system of mutual cooperation and
rivalry, with no basis in higher principles. Such conventions have no fixed
basis, and may thus change as the values of the society changes. But maryādā
is derived from śāstra and the tradition based on śāstra, and
although it may adjust as society changes, its basic principles and practices
remain constant. Its ultimate aim is that of śāstra, to help
participants on the path of ultimate perfection.
[26]
For a detailed exposition on this topic read the author’s treatise, “Mood and
Mission of Śrīla Prabhupāda.”
[27] H. H. Hṛdayananda Dasa Goswami’s
argument.
[28]
For details, see the essay titled “Revolution.”
[29]
For instance, eating of pork is customary in most cultures, but to Muslims it
is harām (abominable).
[30]
For instance, there exist several “Anachronistic” views of Vedic culture in
modern academia that have entered ISKCON scholars
and devotees’ understanding of Vedic culture, viz. historical contexts of the
Bhakti movement, that it began in South India around the 7th century
and reached North India around 15th century.
[31]
See the Essay titled “Training Devotees” for more details on nuances of imparting
training to devotees.
[i] Conversation, 19 December 1975.
[ii] Lecture, 20 December 1975.
[iii] Bg 1.39.
[iv] SB 1.2.2, ppt.
[v] Lecture, 14 March 1974. (last sentence slightly edited).
[vi] SPL 28: India Revisited: Part 2.
[vii] Being Different, Introduction, Rajiv Malhotra.
[viii] See BG 3.22–23.
[ix] SB 3.3.19, ppt.
[x] SB 4.6.40.
[xi] CC Adi 6.41.
[xii] See KB 80.
[xiii] SB 2.7.7.
[xiv] Lecture, 10 November 1976.
[xv] SB 11.4.7-14.
[xvi] NoD 22.
[xvii] KB 45.
[xviii] See Conversation, 15 Jul 1976, Philadelphia, Gita Nagari Farm
[xix] JSD 6.3: Spiritual Advice to Businessmen.
[xx] Room conversation, 14 June 1976.
[xxi]
Evening Darçan – January 7,1977,
[xxii] Jaiva-dharma 9: Nitya-dharma and Material Science and Civilization.
[xxiii]
Morning Walk, 19 December 1975
[xxiv] A Transcendental Diary, 19 December 1975.
[xxv] Lecture, 16 Jul 1976.
[xxvi] SB 1.1.22.
[xxvii] Mahabharata, Ädi Parvan, 191.41, Gitapress (Hindi).
[xxviii] SDG, Çré Caitanya Dayä, Day One, Chäyädevé.
[xxix] Lecture, 30 July 1973.
[xxx] SB 5.5.21-22.
[xxxi] Madhya 1.63.
[xxxii] CC Ädi 12.73.
[xxxiii] CC Adi 17.126.
[xxxiv] Lecture, 19 December 1974.
[xxxv] Letter, 1 November 1976.
[xxxvi] Letter 14 September 1968.
[xxxvii] Lecture, 29 March 1977.
[xxxviii] Room Conversation, 27 May 1977.
[xxxix] Lecture, 17 Mar 1972.
[xl] Merrium Webster Dictionary.
[xli] Interview, 25 May 1975.
[xlii] Room Conversation, 22 March.
[xliii]
Elevation to Krsna Consciousness
[xliv] Interview, 26 December 1968.
[xlv] Morning Walk, 8 December 1976.
[xlvi] Lecture, 27 Mar 1969.
[xlvii] Çrémad-Bhägavatam 1.9.48 -- Mäyäpur, June 14, 1973.
[xlviii]
Morning Walk, 11 July, 1975.
[xlix] Conversation, 17 August 1976.
[li] Lecture, 17 Mar 1972.
[lii] SB 6.18.52.
[liii] SB 6.1.40.
[liv] Lecture, 14 January 1973.
[lv] NOD 35.
[lvi]
Çrémad-Bhägavatam 6.1.21,
[lvii] CB Madhya Ch. 25.
[lviii] SB 1.15.24, ppt.
[lix] SB 1.2.8.
[lx] SB 11.5.3.
[lxi] SB 6.1.17.
[lxii] Room Conversation, 11 July 1973.
[lxiii] NOI 1.
[lxiv] Lecture, 27 February 1974.
[lxv] SB 1.5.23– 27.
[lxvi] Pandal Lecture -- Bombay, April 7, 1971.
[lxvii] SB 7.15.47.
[lxviii] SB 7.6.26.
[lxix] CC Madhya 11.111.
[lxx] Kalyana-kalpataru 1.15.5.
[lxxi] SB 1.16.11.
[lxxii] Letter, 15 June 1972.
[lxxiii] NoD 21.
[lxxiv]
SB 4.21.1
[lxxv] All sixty-four are listed in Brahma-samhita 5.37 purport.
[lxxvi] Letter, 8 Dec 1971.
[lxxvii]
Nīti-śataka
of Bhartṛhari,
11
[lxxviii][lxxviii] Room
Conversation, 31 December 1976.
[lxxix] SB 1.17.3 ppt.
[lxxx] SB 3.31.40 ppt.
[lxxxi] Lecture, 14 January 1973.
[lxxxii]Letter, 19 October 1975.
[lxxxiii] Lecture, 17 September 1975.
[lxxxiv] Lecture, 22 May 1976.
[lxxxv] Morning Walk, 19 December 1975.
[lxxxvi] SB 2.4.1.
[lxxxvii] See Srila Prabhupada Rememberances, Siddhanta Dasa ITV, Ch.62, Rama Sraddha.
[lxxxviii] Lecture, 16 December 1968.
[lxxxix] Çrémad-Bhägavatam 1.9.48 -- Mäyäpur, June 14, 1973.
[xc] Lecture, March 4 1966.
[xci] SB 4.25.52
[xcii] Ravindra Svarupa Dasa ICJ 1.1.
[xciii] Lecture,11 January 1977.
[xciv] Letter, 24 November 1974.
[xcv] A Transcendental Diary, 2 June 1976.
[xcvi] Lecture, 26 November 1976.
[xcvii] Adi 17.78.
[xcviii] Conversation, May 1975, Hawaii.
[xcix] Traditional Education, by Bhakti Räghava Swami, Chapter 2: Interview of Bhakti Vidyäpurëa Swami, p.59–60.
[c] Lecture, 10 Nov 1976.
[ci] Lecture, Mahamsa Swami sannyasa initiation.
[cii] Lecture, January 15 1974.
[ciii] BG 16.7, ppt.
[civ] BG 16.7, ppt.
[cv] SB 1.8.21.
[cvi] Letter, 27 March 1972.
[cvii] CC Madhya 9.9.43.
[cviii] Letter, 20 January 1976.
[cix] Morning Walk, 25 September 1975.
[cx] CC Antya 3.221.
[cxi] Conversation, 21 May 1975.
[cxii] SPL 20.
[cxiii] SPL 36.
[cxiv] PN.
[cxv] SPL 44.
[cxvi] SB 7.11.17.
[cxvii] Ravindra Svarupa Dasa ICJ 2.1.
[cxviii] SB 9.16 introduction.
[cxix] Niti-sastras pp. 226-229.
[cxx] BG 3.31, ppt.
[cxxi] Letter to Gaura Govinda, 18 September 1976.
[cxxii] Letter to Gaura Govinda, 18 September 1976.
[cxxiii] Conversation, 4 February 1977
[cxxiv] (Allegedly cited in Stephen Mansfield - Never Give In, The Extraordinary Character of Winston Churchill)”
[cxxv] Being Different, Introduction, Rajiv Malhotra.
[cxxvi] Letter to Gaura Govinda, 18 September 1976.
[cxxvii]
Morning Walk, 11 July, 1975.
[cxxviii] SB 1.3.40–41.
[cxxix] Lecture, Mahamsa Swami sannyasa initiation.
[cxxx] Çrémad-Bhägavatam 1.9.48 -- Mäyäpur, June 14, 1973.
[cxxxi] Lecture, 10 Nov 1976.
[cxxxii] Lecture, 17 Mar 1972.
[cxxxiii] Traditional Education, p.59–60. Check this ref.