Back To Prabhupada, Issue 66, Vol 2, 2020
During Srila Prabhupada's physical presence, it was self-evident that Srila Prabhupada was the source of all knowledge in ISKCON. If one wanted to consult "sastra", one did so via Srila Prabhupada's translations and commentaries. Thus, Srila Prabhupada's books were read in ISKCON. That the source of knowledge in ISKCON must be Srila Prabhupada is what we call the "Prabhupada-Only Paradigm" or "POP". POP follows automatically from the fact that Srila Prabhupada is ISKCON's Acarya and supreme authority:
"The GBC (Governing Body Commissioned) has been established by His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada to represent Him in carrying out the responsibility of managing the International Society for Krishna Consciousness of which He is the Founder-Acarya and supreme authority."
(GBC Resolution 1, 1975)
Otherwise, if there was any other source of knowledge independent of Srila Prabhupada that we could accept as authoritative, he would not be the "supreme authority".
In the last issue we had featured Krishna Kirti Dasa ("KKD"), who is a leading proponent of those who claim that only males, and not females, can replace Srila Prabhupada as ISKCON's diksa guru. He has written an article called the "Buddhafication of Srila Prabhupada", in which he states the importance of the IRM in pushing the "POP" idea:
"Another important example of ISKCON's members accepting Srila Prabhupada as the only source of legitimate knowledge is the paper titled "The Final Order", by Krishnakant Desai. This paper continues to be the intellectual basis of "rtvikism" – the idea that Srila Prabhupada only wanted representative acaryas called "rtviks" to initiate on his behalf after his passing, not full-fledged diksa-gurus in his absence. Not only does "The Final Order" extensively cite Srila Prabhupada, it also explicitly rejects any counter-evidence from scriptures or acaryas that Srila Prabhupada himself did not cite."
He goes on to state that some senior ISKCON leaders also agree with this:
"it is also seen that some senior ISKCON leaders also reject sources from other scriptures and acaryas in the same way that Krishnakant Desai rejected such sources in "The Final Order.""
However, in the same article, KKD attacks this POP. He first quotes –
"According to the Buddhists' fifth principle, Lord Buddha is the only source for the attainment of knowledge. We cannot accept this"
(Sri Caitanya-caritamrta, Madhya-lila, 9.49)
– and then adds:
"Now, a question here is that if we say that Srila Prabhupada is the only source for the attainment of knowledge, are we not also making the same mistake as the Buddhists?"
However, in the same quote, Srila Prabhupada explains exactly why we cannot accept that "Lord Buddha is the only source for the attainment of knowledge". Srila Prabhupada states, which KKD also cites:
"We cannot accept this, for Lord Buddha rejected the principles of Vedic knowledge. One must accept a principle of standard knowledge because one cannot attain the Absolute Truth simply by intellectual speculation."
Thus, the reasons that Srila Prabhupada gives for why we cannot accept that Lord Buddha is the only source of knowledge are:
(1) He rejects Vedic knowledge;
(2) One cannot get absolute truth by intellectual speculation.
But, neither of these points are applicable if one accepts Srila Prabhupada as the source of knowledge in ISKCON, since he does not reject Vedic knowledge, nor is the knowledge he gives us based on intellectual speculation, if we accept it verbatim, without change. So this quote given by KKD has no relevance to accepting the POP in ISKCON.
KKD's article continues by stating:
"Quoting Srila Narottama Das Thakura, Srila Prabhupada says, "[...] The actual center is the sastra, the revealed scripture. If a spiritual master does not speak according to the revealed scripture, he is not to be accepted. Similarly, if a saintly person does not speak according to the sastra, he is not a saintly person. The sastra is the center for all." (CC Madhya-lila 20.352)"
And then comments:
"Note that Srila Prabhupada says that the sastra is "the center for all." [...] So, it's not just Srila Prabhupada. But the way is shastra, and sadhu and guru, and they must be understood in a harmonious way"
Thus, KKD claims that "guru, sadhu and sastra" means that we cannot just accept Srila Prabhupada's teachings alone. But, Srila Narottama dasa Thakura himself explains what "guru, sadhu and sastra" means in practice:
"Narottama dasa Thakura states that one has to ascertain the right path for his activities by following in the footsteps of great saintly persons and books of knowledge under the guidance of a spiritual master (sadhu-sastra-guru-vakya)."
(SB, 4.21.28-29, emphasis added)
Thus, sadhu and sastra themselves are understood only through the spiritual master, Srila Prabhupada. Which leads us full circle back to ... POP!
In addition, Srila Prabhupada, being the bona fide spiritual master, always speaks in line with sastra and sadhu:
"Guru means who follows the sastra and sadhu. So there are three, the same."
(Srila Prabhupada Lecture, 30/11/76)
Thus, since the words of Srila Prabhupada are already in harmony with sastra and sadhu, by simply understanding his words, one is already understanding guru, sadhu and sastra "harmoniously". Thus, there is no need to independently "verify" Srila Prabhupada's words by consulting sastra and sadhu.
We have not even covered many other evidences for POP, such as Srila Prabhupada forbidding us to "jump over" him and consult the previous acaryas and so on, which we have detailed in previous issues. POP is supreme and cannot be defeated for the simple reason that Srila Prabhupada is the supreme authority for ISKCON!
Return to Krishna Kirti Dasa Index
Return to IRM Homepage
