oldchakra.com

[HOME] [Printer-Friendly] [E-Mail This Link] 

Hare Krishna,

Thank you very much for publishing Sri Nandanandana Prabhu’s moving and heartfelt article regarding the heinous murder of Lovisha and Sri Nandanandana Prabhu’s subsequent realizations about the necessity of disseminating spiritual knowledge. I found the article to be well written, appropriate, and — albeit in a stark and sobering way — inspiring.

I forwarded the story along to a non-devotee friend who was also incredibly moved and impressed with the level of compassion and intelligence present in the article. She is only beginning to learn about ISKCON, and she shared her appreciation at how genuine, caring, and "real" the devotee-writer seemed to be.

So I was understandably dismayed to read a virulently negative response from CHAKRA reader Rahul Siotia. If Mr. Siotia disagrees with the point made by Sri Nandanandana Prabhu’s article he is certainly entitled to do so. However, I feel that it is both poor etiquette and faulty reasoning to condemn a devotee’s realization after a personal tragedy as "sensational" simply because it employs strong language or vivid imagery. Similarly, it is extremely poor form to demand that CHAKRA editors (or Sri Nandanandana himself) censor the article merely because it may provoke negative response or "disturb the devotee community."

Mr. Siotia feels that such "brutal stories" should not be published in a "spiritual forum." With all due respect, it seems that Mr. Siotia has missed the forest for the trees. Yes, Sri Nandanandana used stark and graphic language. I can only guess that he chose not to sanitize the inhumanity of Lovisha’s murder to get the urgency and importance of his message across. Personally, I applaud his decision to do so. But even if one disagrees with his approach, I am frankly shocked that one could fail to appreciate the bigger picture of what Sri Nandanandana Prabhu is saying. For the reader’s benefit, I’ll quote only one of several spiritually inspiring passages:

"So, as my spiritual master Srila Prabhupada would say, you have to make the best use of a bad bargain. Therefore, I also realize that while I’m here, I have to not only become as spiritual as possible, but I also have to help spread genuine spiritual knowledge. Such spiritual understanding is all that can really show us what our identity really is, how close we are to each other, how our differences are actually quite minor, what the goal of life really is, and how we could all be working together to help one another rather than merely trying to bring each other down. ..."

"It is also incidents like Lovisha’s murder that make it clear to me that there is no greater need in the world than to distribute deep spiritual understanding to the masses of people. It makes it clear that many of our concerns and the issues that seem to monopolize so much of our lives are not as important as we often think. When something like this happens, what is it that could be more urgent that it would keep us from working toward spreading spiritual knowledge? What is it that is so crucial that it distracts us from this purpose? If we cannot engage in distributing the deep spiritual wisdom that has been given to us, then what are we doing? How is our life truly beneficial to anyone?"

Astoundingly, despite the sincerity with which Sri Nandanandana Prabhu reveals his mind and heart to the sanga of Vaisnavas, Mr. Siotia’s conclusion is: "The statement that because of this incident I want to preach more... is completely [a]bsurd." With all due respect, such a rude and brash dismissal of a devotee’s realization is insulting and offensive. As one aspiring devotee to another, I urge Mr. Siotia to rectify this grave offense by apologizing to Sri Nandanandana Prabhu. Mr. Siotia indicated that "A Reason Why I Am Determined to Spread Spiritual Knowledge" should have been edited or censored, and that CHAKRA’s failure to do so betrays a lack of credibility. Yet, nothing in CHAKRA’s stated editorial policy remotely corroborates Siotia’s bold request. The admittedly simple policy is as follows:

"1.We [CHAKRA] will only publish material which, in the opinion of the editors, does not deviate from the Vaishnava siddhanta taught by Srila Prabhupada. 2.We reserve the right not publish material which we consider abusive, speculative or inaccurate."

Sri Nandanandana Prabhu’s post clearly falls within these parameters. Ironically, based on this policy, one may argue that Mr. Siotia’s post should have been censored instead. I respectfully submit that unjustifiably calling another devotee’s realizations "absurd" (1) deviates from the siddhanta taught by Srila Prabhupada (namely to observe proper Vaisnava etiquette, especially in regards to one’s seniors), and (2) can be construed as both abusive and inaccurate.

I have faith that Mr. Siotia has only good intentions in seeing that the devotee community is not needlessly disturbed. And yet when I see how easily and naturally my "karmi" friend could appreciate a devotee’s realizations, and then read Mr. Siotia’s bitter and hostile letter signed "Hare Krishna," I feel profoundly disturbed indeed.

Your Servant,
Vyenkata Bhatta Dasa

© CHAKRA 16 October 2002