In the very early days of our movement, when Srila Prabhupada started the first temple in the Matchless Gifts store, there was not much discussion about clothes. Srila Prabhupada was dressing like a sannyasi, and his first disciples were dressing in their regular street clothes. At that point, Srila Prabhupada was just teaching in the mood of “You don’t have to change anything, just add Krsna”. He was just making them chant Hare Krsna, hear from the Bhagavad-Gita and take prasadam. He was even washing their plates afterward!

However, as time went on, Prabhupada started to gradually implement more aspects. It happens that the practice of devotional service goes along two parallel lines: bhagavata-vidhi and pancaratrika-vidhi. Bhagavata-vidhi includes chanting, hearing the scriptures, taking prasadam, and spreading Krsna Consciousness to others, while pancaratrika-vidhi includes deity worship as well as different standards and rules. The aspects of bhagavata-vidhi are easier to follow, but without the rules and regulations of pancaratrika-vidhi, there is a risk one may gradually get off course, and end up becoming a sahajiya instead of attaining pure devotion to Krsna. Therefore, although in the beginning, Srila Prabhupada focused on the essential aspects of bhagavata-vidhi, gradually he started teaching also the principles of pancaratrika-vidhi, which balance it.

Apart from cleaning standards, aspects of behavior, etiquette in dealing with other devotees, and so on, he also introduced standards of clothing for the temple devotees, with the men using dothi, kurta, and chadar, and the ladies dressing in saris and cholis.

It’s mentioned in the scriptures that Sadhu-Sanga is the most important factor in the development of love for Krsna. Our spirtual path starts when we meet devotees, and our devotion to Krsna is nourished by their association. Association with other devotees is the most basic and essential aspect of spiritual life, but it can be at the same time one of the most difficult.

It can be quite hard to go along with other devotees, especially when there is some pressing service that needs to be performed. The potential problems include egos, differences of opinions, disagreement, fights for position, and so on. Why is it so that the most important factor for our spiritual development is also the most difficult to maintain?

Each one of us faces difficulties and challenges in life. Often people think that becoming rich is going to solve all their problems, but rich people also have problems, it’s just that these problems affect other areas of their lives instead of the financial sphere. Everyone has to carry his cross so to speak.

Human beings are very complex creatures. We have many different types of needs, starting from basic needs such as food and shelter, and progressing to more subtle, but not less important needs, such as relationships. Some, who due to good fortune find themselves in a more favorable position may have an easier time than others, but life has highs and lows and therefore even if someone is in a favorable situation now, it doesn’t mean he may not face difficulties later. There are of course also the ups and downs over different lives. Just because we are in a comfortable situation now doesn’t mean we will be again in a comfortable situation in the next life and vice-versa. No matter what we do, things are never stable in this material world.

One thing I learned in these years is that Krsna Consciousness is not so much about changing our material position (which is largely determined by factors beyond our control), but much more about finding ways to be Krsna Conscious in whatever condition we see ourselves in. This capacity of learning from our experiences, and connecting them with our search for Krsna is what really can have a transforming effect in our lives.

In the teachings of Prahlada Maharaja, narrated in the 7th canto of Srimad Bhagavatam, it’s described that “if a śva-paca or caṇḍāla is a devotee, he delivers not only himself but his whole family, whereas a brāhmaṇa who is not a devotee but simply has brahminical qualifications cannot even purify himself, what to speak of his family.”

This is one amongst many verses in the scriptures that describe the transcendental position of Vaishnavas, being superior to Brahmanas who are just following the prescriptions of the scriptures, without developing love for Krsna. This point is exemplified by the pastime of Druvada Muni offending Ambarisa Maharaja. Druvasa Muni was surely qualified as a Brahmana, but being a devotee, Ambarisa Maharaja was able to show qualifications that were far superior.

Based on these descriptions, we like to count ourselves as Brahmanas, or even higher than Brahmanas. In fact, Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura quoted from these same passages when he established brahminical initiation to his disciples, sustaining that there is no problem in a Vaishnava from a low family being initiated as a Brahmana and acting as one since in any case, a Vaishnava is superior to a Brahmana and automatically shows the qualities of a Brahmana.

What we overlook, however, is that these passages from the scriptures speak mainly about pure Vaishnavas, who already situated themselves in the liberated platform. On SB 7.9.10, for example, Prahlada Maharaja mentions that:

Does Bhakti include a culture that we need to adopt in order to be able to serve Krsna? Can I just keep my own culture, continuing to dress in the same way, eat the same type of food, and so on, and at the same time worship Krsna?

It’s possible to put forward arguments on both sides. Yes, Bhakti includes a form of culture, in the form of the classic Vedic culture and the system of Varnasrama, which is favorable for the cultivation of love for Krsna, but at the same time, bhakti can be practiced by people in all ways of life, regardless of which type of culture they identify with. Both ideas are simultaneously acceptable, and we can see that Prabhupada emphasizes one or the other side while talking to different people in different circumstances. Just following rules is not as important as understanding the essence of it.

At the end of the 5th canto of Srimad Bhagavatam, Sukadeva Goswami describes the hellish planets to Maharaja Pariksit. Being a compassionate Vaishnava, Pariksit immediately asks how people can save themselves from all this suffering, which leads Sukadeva Goswami to speak about the glories of the holy names, using the story of Ajamila as an example.

Ajamila was originally a Brahmana from a good family, who fell down into a life of sins and crime after seeing a prostitute having an affair with a drunk man on the street. He eventually went to live with the same prostitute he saw and engaged in various criminal acts to get money to keep her satisfied. It’s mentioned that Ajamila spent most of his life with this prostitute, begetting 10 children.

One tendency we often have is to equate material talents and spiritual advancement. That’s probably one of the greatest mayas of our movement.

Ordinary people have a tendency to worship materially powerful persons, like rich or famous people, artists, etc. and it usually doesn’t bring anything good, since these people are usually not very good examples. This comes from a mixture of two things: identification and the desire to be like them. Just like we identify with our own bodies, we may identify with other people, and thus feel happy when we see these people enjoying. From this identification, comes a desire to be like them, which leads us to try to be close to and imitate them. That’s why people who are beautiful and materially talented become celebrities on social networks, for example, everyone wants to be like them. Celebrities are respected and even worshiped, becoming authorities and role models.

Understandably, devotees are not free from this propensity. We are also inclined to worship materially powerful people, as well as to create stars out of entertainers. Anyone who has a special talent for singing, acting, cooking, speaking in public, and so on, may become be object of worship. If one can sing very beautifully this means he or she must be a pure devotee, right?? We thus equate such material qualities with spiritual advancement and prematurely elevate people to the position of spiritual authorities and role models.

Some pure devotees were great singers, like Narotama Dasa Thakura, but not all of them. Similarly, many great singers were not pure devotees. Many pure devotees were very rich, like Pundarika Vidyanidhi, but no one in the right consciousness would argue that it is a rule that all rich people are pure devotees. Similarly, Maharaja Patraparuda was a very powerful political leader, but not all politicians are devotees. In this way, when we carefully analyze, we see that material qualities have little correlation with one’s level of spiritual advancement. Some advanced devotees show a great deal of material talent, but most appear to be just humble and unassuming people.

Material talents are just skills one gets due to his past karma. If one uses these talents for Krsna, this can surely help him or her to advance, but it’s a mistake to equate these talents with spiritual advancement. Material talents are just a tool that a person can use. Spiritual advancement can come over time from correctly using the tool, but not from the procession of the tool itself.

The test of spiritual advancement is not in measuring the skills one has, but the determination he shows in using these skills for Krsna. One may chant very beautifully, but how many hours per day he is chanting for Krsna? One may manage well, but how busy he is in using this talent for Krsna? One may speak well, but how tirelessly is he using this talent to spread Krsna Consciousness?

Actually, even the determination one shows in using his talents for Krsna is not a direct measure of his advancement, but it is usually a more reliable parameter. Anyone may have talents, but only a sincere devotee will be able to use his talents for Krsna incessantly, for many years, without stopping. By acting in this way one may gradually become advanced, although the determination itself is not a direct measure of advancement.

Another measurement is to observe how one is able to control his senses. Srila Prabhupada mentions that the symptom of one who is advancing in spiritual life is that he becomes averse to sense gratification. Therefore, a truly advanced devotee will not just incessantly serve Krsna, but he will be very serious in following the principles of spiritual life and avoiding questionable activities.

By observing these two things in parallel, we may be able to better differentiate real spiritual advancement from mere material opulences due to past karma and gradually learn to find truly spiritually advanced people whom we can take as role models, avoiding the maya of taking entertainers and talented public speakers as pure devotees.

One of the points Vedic literature emphasizes is that we should surrender to superior authorities, culminating with Krsna Himself. As one learns to be respectful to seniors, parents, rulers, spiritual teachers, etc., and get valuable instructions from them, he gradually learns to curb his false ego and his rebellious nature and thus learns how to surrender to Krsna. In other words, the Vedic idea is that we start by surrendering to Krsna’s representatives and gradually learn how to surrender to Krsna Himself.

The problem is that if the superiors don’t give a good example, or worse, if they exploit their subordinates, a great scar is created: someone sincerely surrenders to an authority, but the authority betrays him, and now he has difficulties in surrendering to other authorities, which creates a problem for his spiritual advancement since without surrendering to proper authorities it becomes much harder to surrender to Krsna.

Once, Srila Prabhupada was giving a lecture to a small group of disciples in India, when a cat unexpectedly appeared and laid on his lap. Srila Prabhupada didn’t seem disturbed by the cat and allowed it to stay there for some time. Later he used this situation to illustrate the point that betraying someone who takes shelter of us in good faith is an extremely serious sin. He said: “If I take shelter of you, if I put my head on your lap, and you cut my throat, that’s the worst sin.”

A few days ago I wrote about how the Mayavada philosophy contradicts the Vedanta Sutra, the book on which their philosophy is based. The Vedanta Sutra is not a very difficult book to understand when the direct meaning is accepted, but by twisting it the Mayavadis impose an artificial and contradictory interpretation that is actually much harder to understand than the book itself.

During the time Caitanya Mahaprabhu was present on the planet, most of the great logicians of the time accepted his direct interpretation of the Vedanta Sutra, abandoning the imaginary and contradictory explanations of Sankaracarya, and most of their followers went on the same path, becoming Vaishnavas. However, not everyone accepted it. Even after the advent of Lord Caitanya, the Mayavadi philosophy remained popular, and it ended up serving as a basis for most of the modern gurus and spiritualist movements.

We may not notice it at first, but Mayavada philosophy is not so much about being an impersonalist and believing everyone is God, as it is a process of mental speculation that allows one to milk out the conclusion he wants from the scriptures. Mayavada philosophy is thus more about a certain mental mindset, when one ignores the authorized acaryas and instead accepts some bogus interpretation of the scriptures, which he further deviates using his own speculations. We can see that Mayavadis in India started as a group of austere sannyasis who passed their time studying Vedanta and gradually morphed into an eclectic group of so-called “sadhus” who go to the West to teach hedonism.

Srila Prabhupada explained that there are two great dangers for an aspiring Vaishnava. The first is to become a sahajiya, the second is to become a Mayavadi. It’s just like a straight road, where one can get off course by going too much to the left or to the right. Just like Sahajism is not just about men dressing in saris, Mayavada is not just about people thinking that they are Narayana.

It’s well documented that Prabhupada wanted all his disciples and followers to write regularly. This includes both men and women. Disciples of both genders were encouraged to write regularly about Krsna Consciousness and try to publish these articles not only in the Back to Godhead magazine and internal publications of our movement but also in newspapers and other media. When we take into the current context this obviously includes the internet and social media.

Of course, the problem when devotees start to write is that often the false ego grows a little and we start to fight. The ones who were around during the 1980s, 1990s, and 2000s can surely remember extremely long debates and battles of quotes going on on PAMHO, Dandavats, and other lists and forums. Such discussions created lots of disagreements, splits, and issues that remain unresolved. As a result, many of the devotees who went through it started recommending devotees to stop writing about any potentially polemic topics (which means basically anything) and just keep their heads down to avoid problems. This is an understandable reaction to past problems, but it’s not a viable long-term solution. If we stop using our brains for fear of hurting the sensibilities of others, our movement will not have much of a future.

This brings us back to the initial point. Prabhupada wanted us to not just practice Krsna Consciousness for ourselves, but learn to explain it to others. Yes, we should write and we should debate, Prabhupada expected this from us, we just need to learn from past mistakes and learn to do it in a respectful and civilized way, that’s all.