It’s not uncommon to see religious movements changing over time and adopting views that are different or even contrary to the original teachings of the founder. We also have this tendency.
It's ok to say Prabhupada was not right on everything. It's ok to say Prabhupada didn't knew all the scriptures. It's ok to say Prabhupada was wrong on certain things - Hitler, some comments on history. It's ok to say some of his statements are outdated. It's ok to say he didn't give clear instructions on succession - a ghost that still haunts us. What is really required for the greater good of the movement is progressive theologizing (vide TKG paper), intellectual honesty and open mindedness to prevent churchification, fundamentalism. We can still honor, respect and celebrate Prabhupada for his courage, dedication, selflessness and compassion authentically.
We need to take into consideration that many of these remarks are from private conversations that were recorded by his disciples and transcribed, often spoken in a light or even joking mood. It should not be taken very seriously unless confirmed in the books, which are the material that contains the spiritual instructions.
With due respect, tradition and scriptures aren't reducible to srila Prabhupada's books. There's nothing wrong in studing the books of previous acaryas, which prabhupada himself has opined (a sincere student would do well.. ). The idea that each and everyone should maintain similar opinions of that prabhupada on every topic and issue he commented on is really extreme. Your article frames anyone who disagrees with prabhupada on specific points, which are corroborated by larger vedic canvas as deviants, is problematic. Prabhupada never claimed omniscience and finality on his words. Ekam sat viprah bahudha vadanti. I appreciate if we can all cultivate a broad mindset and culture of tolerance to multiple approaches
This is directed to followers of Prabhupada, who take initiation on his school. Vedic schools follow a different process from modern academia, based on transmitting knowledge through the parampara system, that preserves transcendental knowledge generation after generation without change. The success of the student is measured in understanding and applying the knowledge of the school he joins, and not in creating new theories.
One os free to disagree and debate as much as one wants, and in this way test the knowledge of different teachers and different schools. However, when one commits to a certain school, he or she should try to understand the philosophy from the perspective of this particular school. If one disagrees, one is free to leave and join another school, or to create his own
However, to clain to be part of a certain school and at the same time disagree with the philosophical conclusions of this particular school is duplicity. That's all.
It's ok to say Prabhupada was not right on everything. It's ok to say Prabhupada didn't knew all the scriptures. It's ok to say Prabhupada was wrong on certain things - Hitler, some comments on history. It's ok to say some of his statements are outdated. It's ok to say he didn't give clear instructions on succession - a ghost that still haunts us. What is really required for the greater good of the movement is progressive theologizing (vide TKG paper), intellectual honesty and open mindedness to prevent churchification, fundamentalism. We can still honor, respect and celebrate Prabhupada for his courage, dedication, selflessness and compassion authentically.
Would like to hear your thoughts
We need to take into consideration that many of these remarks are from private conversations that were recorded by his disciples and transcribed, often spoken in a light or even joking mood. It should not be taken very seriously unless confirmed in the books, which are the material that contains the spiritual instructions.
If some one feels my comment is difficult to digest. I suggest reading this book https://archive.org/details/kaunteya-das-tough-questions-difficult-answers-on-srila-prabhupadas-contentious-remarks-17.05.2023/page/20/mode/1up by Kaunteya Das
Sounds offensive
With due respect, tradition and scriptures aren't reducible to srila Prabhupada's books. There's nothing wrong in studing the books of previous acaryas, which prabhupada himself has opined (a sincere student would do well.. ). The idea that each and everyone should maintain similar opinions of that prabhupada on every topic and issue he commented on is really extreme. Your article frames anyone who disagrees with prabhupada on specific points, which are corroborated by larger vedic canvas as deviants, is problematic. Prabhupada never claimed omniscience and finality on his words. Ekam sat viprah bahudha vadanti. I appreciate if we can all cultivate a broad mindset and culture of tolerance to multiple approaches
This is directed to followers of Prabhupada, who take initiation on his school. Vedic schools follow a different process from modern academia, based on transmitting knowledge through the parampara system, that preserves transcendental knowledge generation after generation without change. The success of the student is measured in understanding and applying the knowledge of the school he joins, and not in creating new theories.
One os free to disagree and debate as much as one wants, and in this way test the knowledge of different teachers and different schools. However, when one commits to a certain school, he or she should try to understand the philosophy from the perspective of this particular school. If one disagrees, one is free to leave and join another school, or to create his own
However, to clain to be part of a certain school and at the same time disagree with the philosophical conclusions of this particular school is duplicity. That's all.