Waves of Devotion

Should we trust Dandavats.com?

By Jayadvaita Swami

Where is Dhanurdhara Maharaja? Why has this week’s Monday Morning Greetings been written not by him but by one of his readers—that is, me? Dhanurdhara Maharaja is alive and well, but something has happened that deserves to be told, and he shouldn’t have to be the one to tell it.

Two weeks back, as you may recall, Maharaja published a Monday Morning Greeting about the first Russian devotees to come to Vrindavana, back in 1991. He entitled the piece “Queen Kuntī was right!”

Two days later, the article appeared on Dandavats.com, an official ISKCON website that offers ISKCON news and teachings. Apparently Dandavats had thought the article would be an inspiring read for a wider devotee audience.

Only one thing: They stripped off the author’s name—Dhanurdhara Swami—and replaced it with the name of one of our godbrothers, Suresvara Dasa.

What?

When another of my godbrothers, a natural peacemaker, asked what had happened, an editor explained: Suresvara Dasa had read the article in a recent class, the editor had transcribed it from there, and since “Suresvara did not mention the author of the material he was reading from,” the editor attributed it to Suresvara.

Honest error?

When we listen to Suresvara’s class, here’s how he begins his reading:

This is a story. . . I have a godbrother—maybe you. . . . Dhanurdhara Swami. Or is it “Dhanurdhara Swami,” right? [Perhaps noting an issue in pronunciation.] So he has a blog, and he just shared a story, and the moral of this story is “Queen Kunti Was Right!” Listen to this. . .  This is Dhanurdhara Maharaja: [Begins reading the article.]

Suresvara mentions Dhanurdhara Maharaja three more times—twice in the middle and once more at the very end.

Meanwhile, the editor wrote, the article had “gone viral.” And since the peacemaker had now kindly let him know who the author was, “I’ve updated the article to more clearly present it as a narration from Suresvara Prabhu.”

When the peacemaker gently suggested that this wasn’t quite honest, Dandavats just took the article down.

When it comes to light that a responsible publisher has plagiarized, is taking down the offending article all he does? Or does he issue a correction and apology?

Well, having plagiarized the article in public, the editor now wrote to Dhanurdhara Swami privately. Offering his “heartfelt apologies,” he wrote:

It was never my intention to misrepresent or cause any disturbance to you or those close to you. I deeply regret this oversight.

The origin of the mistake lies in a class I recently listened to by Suresvara Prabhu, in which the story of the Russian devotees was shared. I found the narrative inspiring and wanted to make it available to our readers. To that end, I downloaded the automatic transcription from YouTube and used ChatGPT to extract and format just the story for publication. At the time, I did not catch that the story was actually being relayed by Suresvara Prabhu as originally told by you. I thus mistakenly attributed the story to him.

And so, the editor wrote, he had now removed the article “to avoid further misunderstanding,”

and am now writing to offer my apology and an explanation. I understand this may have left you wondering about how the article was handled, and I hope this message helps to clear up any confusion or ill feeling.

So this offense would never have happened were it not for the sins of YouTube and ChatGPT. To test the credibility of this story, we used a feature of Microsoft Word to compare Dhanurdhara Maharaja’s original article with the version published on Dandavats. Miraculously, apart from some editorial intrusions, the two versions matched, even down to the sentence and paragraph divisions and down to the very punctuation marks.

Among the editorial intrusions: It seems that at Dandavats we can’t say good things about anyone Officially Out of Favor. So not only had the editor replaced Dhanurdhara Maharaja’s name. He had also obscured the name of Kesava Bharati Goswami. And even Sannyasa Dasa and Kamala Mala Dasa—the two Russian devotees whose glories the article had celebrated—came in for similar treatment. No longer officially blessed. Names replaced.

Bringing all this to the editor’s attention, Dhanurdhara Swami wrote to him:

Dandavats is an ISKCON GBC sponsored publication. Overt plagiarism therefore puts them in a terrible light. No respectable institution does this and if it is done, they correct it.

Please don’t unnecessarily carry this controversy on. Own the mistake and rectify it, for my readers, Suresvara Prabhu, ISKCON and myself.

Dhanurdhara Maharaja made three requests:

First, Dandavats should publish “an article whose headline clearly says it’s a correction and (should you choose to apologize) an apology.” Maharaja didn’t ask that his own name be mentioned, but Dandavats should admit the wrong attribution, put a link to Maharaja’s original post, and properly identify the three devotees whose names Dandavats had changed.

Second, “I also request you to contact some of the major ISKCON blogs where the plagiarized article was shared and ask them to publish your apology. I found the plagiarized version on Desire Tree, for example.”

Third, “I also request you to arrange a zoom call to speak to me personally.”

Maharaja wrote that if Dandavats did this, that would be the end of the issue. And if not, then in the next Monday Mornings Greetings “I will use my experience with Dandavats to highlight an important message—the challenges institutions face in adhering to even the most basic ethical guidelines.”

Maharaja ended, “Ultimately, for your sake, I pray you correct this egregious mistake that hurt many Vaisnavas.”

Well, Dandavats did reach out to “Desire Tree.” And Dandavats did publish an apology (https://www.dandavats.com/?p=115718). The apology admits the misattribution, expresses regret, credits the original author, provides the link, tells all the real names—and once again assigns the blame to YouTube and ChatGPT.

Oh, and one thing more: Dandavats published their apology on May 20 but dated it May 16, so that when published it lay buried under three or four days of intervening articles and news.

Should we trust Dandavats.com? It’s up to you. But this isn’t the first time I’ve seen Dandavats pull this kind of trick. So they and I have for many years had an understanding: They are not to publish any of my classes or any of my writings on Dandavats.com.

I was intrigued by the papal conclave. I was happy the new pope looked and acted saintly, a pastor to the poor and not just a prince of the church. I also looked at it through the lens of my own tradition. I had a few insights.

A reporter asked his older brother, also a devout Catholic, about the pope’s youth:

“He always wanted to be a priest from the earliest age. Even at five years old he would get my mother’s ironing board and have us cover it with a white cloth. He would call the rest of the family, and he would imitate the Eucharist by handing out the small Necco wafers that my mother provided him. Many of our neighbors seeing his saintliness would joke that he would one day be the pope.”

The reporter followed up his first question by asking if the pope was like this from birth:

“No, I think maybe he just picked up something from my parents who were devout Catholics.”

I thought my tradition explains such phenomenon much more clearly through the concept of reincarnation.

“The unsuccessful yogī, after many, many years of enjoyment on the planets of the pious living entities, is born into a family of righteous people, or into a family of rich aristocracy.” Bhagavad-gītā 6.41

It seems that his desire to be a priest was the result of a pious past life, or many such lives. In other words, he was just continuing his spiritual evolution in this life from a past life. Therefore the transmigration of the soul is the best explanation for why a child without prompting develops such a strong desire to be a priest from the earliest age and never wavers in that commitment. In that sense, I am proud of the insights of my own tradition.

Everything concerning the conclave intrigued me. I watched as about thirty young seminarians (priests in training) were glued to their seats after seeing the white smoke bellowing from the chimney of the Vatican awaiting the announcement of who the new pope would be. When his name was finally announced, and they realized that the pope would be American, I was shocked and amused by their reaction.

Like young “middle Americans” at a MAGA rally they wildly pumped their fists in the air again and again and in a type of euphoria shouted for some time:

“USA! USA! USA!”

Strange! I couldn’t understand how a limited nationalistic expression came from their hearts after such deep theological training.

“One who identifies his self as the inert body composed of mucus, bile and air, who assumes his wife and family are permanently his own, who thinks an earthen image or the land of his birth is worshipable, or who sees a place of pilgrimage as merely the water there, but who never identifies himself with, feels kinship with, worships or even visits those who are wise in spiritual truth — such a person is no better than a cow or an ass.” Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam 10.84.13 [emphasis mine]

Two seminarians in Rome were interviewed after Pope Francis died. They were impressed:

“He told us not to give up playing sports and our taste in music.”

There was a controversy about the new pope. Was he a Chicago Cubs fan or a Chicago White Sox Fan? He was for the Sox! In the same regard, it was mentioned that Pope Francis was a lifelong and passionate fan of soccer, particularly his hometown team, San Lorenzo de Almagro. He was even a card-carrying member of the club.

I don’t get it. Shouldn’t the pope or an ācārya, especially as renunciates, exemplify a higher level of transcendence? I like my tradition’s definition of pure devotion:

“Bhakti, or devotional service, means engaging all our senses in the service of the Lord, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, the master of all the senses. When the spirit soul renders service unto the Supreme, there are two side effects. One is freed from all material designations, and one’s senses are purified simply by being employed in the service of the Lord.” From Nārada-pañcarātra quoted in Bhakti-rasāmṛta-sindhu 1.1.12 [emphasis mine]

My tradition is bhakti. Although, I may see the universality of religion, what I attempt to show here is that I trust the tenets and metaphysics of my tradition over others. That’s natural for any adherent of a tradition. But what I also want to make clear is that if one has allegiance to a tradition, that doesn’t mean one is more spiritually elevated than an adherent of another faith, even if one feels that other faith is philosophically less comprehensive. Substance is more important than allegiance. One must do the work of the tradition, not just belong to it.

When I visit Colombia, I am in awe of the depth with which the general populace accepts Jesus. I often don’t see that degree of piety in my own tradition, which was transplanted in the west.

By cable car and hiking I visited Monserrate, a sacred place and shrine 10,000 feet above sea level in Bogota. When I ascended the steps and reached the shrine I was huffing and puffing. I was therefore shocked when I saw people up there who were much older and very frail. When I entered the church, I saw so many ordinary people deep in prayer at the various shrines within the church, almost in trance. As I sat in one of the beautiful shrines in my brownish tinted robes with a matching hoodie, one old lady came up to me to offer respects and seek my blessings. She mistook me for a priest! I humbly indicated with my hands that I wasn’t a Catholic priest, but I still put both hands up in the air to give her blessings. She smiled reflecting a humility and devotion of heart that I can only pray to obtain in this life.

I was surprised that some of the things expressed during the conclave seemingly lacked the depth of philosophy of my tradition, including the explanatory power of reincarnation. I was also left, however, with an admiration for the depth of their tradition and the power of the Catholic Church to inspire love for Jesus.

I wish the new pope well and pray that his mission to spread love of God succeeds. My deep personal prayer is that I develop in substance the ideals of the profound spiritual tradition gifted to me by our divine master.

Śrīla Prabhupāda ki jaya!

When I grew up in Krishna consciousness, we were very sympathetic to the Vaiṣṇavas in the former Soviet Union. After all they were persecuted, jailed, and tortured by the KGB, but they were seemingly indomitable and couldn’t be broken. In 1991, however, the Soviet Union disbanded and we soon received word that the first group of Russian devotees would come to India.

Kesava Bharati Maharaja was one of the Vaiṣṇavas who greeted them in Calcutta when they first arrived. He told me a touching story:

“When the devotees from the Soviet Union came, we offered them a big feast. I sat next to one humble soul. He looked at his plate and picked up a piece of papaya in his hand raised it up and turned to me and asked, ‘A fruit?’ I nodded. He bit it and cried. I was shocked that his previous existence was so seemingly deprived.”

When the first contingent of devotees from the former Soviet Union visited Vrindavan, we met them at Bhaktivedanta Gate on Bhaktivedanta Swami Marg and then ushered them into the temple for kirtan. As they approached the front entrance to the temple, we showered them with rose petals from above.

Sivarama Swami and Govinda Swami were especially eager to honor them, and Govinda Swami, a gourmet Hare Krishna cook among his many talents, made them an amazing feast which they served in Tamal Krishna’s house. They had a plan to honor them for their sacrifice. When I describe it, it may seem strange, but their plan represents how much we honored these devotees’ courage, and the sacrifice they underwent to spread the mission of Śrī Caitanya. Their plan was as follows.

The two maharajas would serve them so much prasadam that their plates would be piled with their remnants. They also placed sand in front of the doorway so that when they left “the dust of their lotus feet” would mix with that sand. After the Russian devotees left, they would eat their remnants and bathe in the dust of their lotus feet. And they did!

As for me, I was housing arguably the most persecuted and toughest of the Russian devotees, three Armenian brothers—Sannyasa Dasa, Kamala Mala,  and a third brother whose name I forget. After the feast at Tamal Krishna’s house, Sannyasa, who was tortured in prison, started to complain to me. He was disturbed when he found out that the maharajas had eaten their remnants and bathed in the dust of their feet. In general, the high level of respect he received since coming to India upset him. In broken English with a heavy Russian accent he expressed his feelings about it.

“I think it is even more dangerous here than in prison. In prison they can only harm your body, but here with all this worship they can kill your bhakti!”

Just as he was griping about the worship he was enduring, Kamala Mala, a very tall imposing person, was walking by and overheard what his brother was saying. He, stopped and turned his head to me and in a very heavy tone commented:

“Queen Kuntī was right!”

For those unfamiliar with that reference, he was referring to the famous statement by Queen Kuntī. She lamented that Krishna was leaving because the horrible war which called for His presence, and caused her family untold suffering, had now ended.

“I wish that all those calamities would happen again and again so that we could see You again and again, for seeing You means that we will no longer see repeated births and deaths.” Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam 1.8.25

We generally feel closer to God in times of tragedy, but how many of us value God’s presence and shelter to that degree?

Dear Śrī Lord Krishna, I pray that one day I can value your presence in my life so much that I too may proclaim:

“Queen Kuntī was right!”

Recently I gave a talk on forgiveness titled “How to give up justified hate?” While giving the talk it dawned on me how important it is for one on the path of yoga to be forgiving. My reasoning, which connected yoga with forgiveness, was based on a quote that connected the two:

“The shadows of resentment keep our spiritual light from shining through, never allowing us to fully experience who we are.”[1]

Yoga means to bring the mind to sattva, literally the original state of being. The mind is like a lens or mirror. Its original state of being, the state of sattva, appears therefore when it’s clean and not distorted. This is accomplished by meditation which means concentrating on one thing, usually a mantra. By doing so, the other disruptive thoughts emerging from the ego, which distort or sully the mind, are quelled. The mind then naturally moves toward sattva, its natural state, where the lens of the mind is clear and we can perceive or experience who we really are.

Meditation means controlling the mind. It begins with rules or instructions on how to control the mind’s activity in relationship to others. Such rules are called yamas. The first and most important yama is ahiṁsā, nonviolence, and it takes precedence over all other rules and regulations. For example, one can even lie and transcend the second yama of satya (truthfulness) if the intention is to protect another from violence. In that way ahiṁsā takes precedence over every other yogic ethical rule and is thus the foundation of yoga. If you can’t control the mind to the extent that violence against others physically, verbally, or even in your thoughts, is restrained, you haven’t even attained the most rudimentary platform of yoga.

Forgiveness means “to give up resentment against, to give up desire to punish, stop being angry with, pardon, to overlook.”

What about a situation in which someone has done something horrible to you or others? There is certainly a discussion to be had about when it’s appropriate to drop one’s resentment, or if there is a psychologically needed period of moral outrage required for one who has faced or witnessed such abuse. That is a deep subject beyond the scope of this post. Still, any type of hate, even “justified hate,” “keeps our spiritual light from shining through, never allowing us to fully experience who we are.” A yogi must therefore be forgiving and rid the heart of resentment.

There are many good reasons to forgive. A thorough discussion of the topic would certainly cover many of them. The ultimate reason to forgive, however is simply spiritual. Resentment deters our movement towards a clear mind and the realization of the self. It’s often a great challenge. But a yogi must forgive, even when our hate is “justified”!

“Forgiveness means to give up all hope for a better past!”

[1] I had been careless taking notes and as a result I often there have forgotten to put the attribution to the citations I collected. Therefore, in my posts occasionally I list a citation without citing its source. I have two such instances in this post.