Back To Prabhupada, Issue 55, Spring 2017
n BTP 35, "ISKCON's Parallel World - 1", we exposed the nonsense that Chaitanya Charan Dasa ("CCD"), a "spiritual" advisor to the GBC, spoke about Srila Prabhupada's teachings. Now he has been exposed for speaking nonsense about Srila Prabhupada himself.
On 13/4/17, CCD was found guilty by the ISKCON India Advisory Committee of making statements that reflect "doubt or misunderstanding concerning His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada's absolute position, and the exalted nature of his teachings." Just one example of CCD's many statements criticising Srila Prabhupada is the claim that Srila Prabhupada's statements are not in line with sadhu and sastra (saintly predecessors and scripture):
"Now, Prabhupada has said a particular statement about the intelligence of women. Where is it said by sadhus, where is it said in sastra? Where is it said? I have not found any statement in sastra talking directly about the intelligence level of women. [...] Our tradition means to teach the message of guru, sadhu, sastra. Not just that we take the message of guru and neglect sadhu and sastra".
He also justified his criticism of Srila Prabhupada by saying it is the same as when a child grows up and realises that his parents have faults:
"As we go through spiritual life, we all evolve in our understanding of things. Just like when a person is a small child [...] The parents are everything for the child. But that conception cannot be maintained throughout the life. As the children grow, they see, "Yes, my parents also have fault [...] Yes, my parents also have some limitations." "
Despite this criticism of Srila Prabhupada, CCD is a member of the "Sastric Advisory Council", which was established by the GBC as an advisory body of "senior, trusted and proven brahmanas that offers input to the GBC Body according to scripture, philosophy and realization" (GBC Resolution 604, 2002). Thus, a person found guilty by ISKCON of having doubts in Srila Prabhupada is who the GBC has selected to advise them on philosophical matters.
In addition to revealing the spiritual quality of those whom the GBC consider among the senior-most spiritually knowledgeable devotees in ISKCON, this whole incident has also revealed the importance of the Prabhupada-Only Paradigm (POP). Part of this paradigm requires that we only rely on Srila Prabhupada's recorded statements in order to be certain that we are actually dealing with Srila Prabhupada's statements. One of the main arguments that CCD offers in his "defence" for expressing doubts about Srila Prabhupada's statements is:
"If you believe I am wrong [...] how you would prove, for example, his (Srila Prabhupada's) statement that nobody will be able to live on the earth after 2000 AD. The best brains in our movement haven't been able to find a way to prove it."
But it seems that neither CCD nor his "best brains in the movement" thought to carefully check what Srila Prabhupada actually said:
"And it is suggested in your Almanac, World Almanac, that next hundred years they will break all these buildings and they will go underground. Yes. Because atomic age. So nobody will ... I have read it in the World Almanac. The prediction is there that world, next hundred years, nobody will live on the surface of the earth."
(Srila Prabhupada Lecture, 24/8/68, emphases added)
Note the underlined parts. Srila Prabhupada then repeats this same point a further three times in 1968 and 1969, each time referring to what the "World Almanac" states may happen within "the next hundred years". There is no mention of 2000 AD. Hence, at the very least CCD would need to wait a "hundred years" after the above statement was made, i.e. the year 2068, *51* years from now, before even discussing the accuracy of the above statement. And even then he would not be discussing Srila Prabhupada's statement, but only Srila Prabhupada quoting someone else's statement. Thus, this "2000 AD" argument has zero relevance to CCD's "defence" of his criticism of Srila Prabhupada, as Srila Prabhupada never made such a statement. All of which would have been clear if the POP had been followed.
Return to Chaitanya Charan Dasa Index
Return to GBC Index
Return to IRM Homepage