Difference between Prasādam and Agape or Love Feast

[markandeya 108 dasa]

Pranams,

The word cult does have a negative impact in many cases, I read in parts recently a book called underground by haruki murakami, about the AUM cult and the underground gas attack in Tokyo, after being an institutional member of ISKCON for some years I did see some minor parallels in the mindsets of some of their members and the institutional conditioning that sometimes happens in ISKCON. Srila Prabhupada often used to describe his movement as a Bhakti Cult, but this definition I would put down to more of a sectarian term to differentiate the identity of the teachings of Gaudia from other sects within the Hindu model. So weather it be a sholarly use of the word cult or that of the layman whatever term is used should be backed up by the context. The cult AUM has no real context rather than idolizing a single personality figure who took bits and bobs from a number of scared texts to formulate his own school, ISKCON can never be guilty of this due its association with a parampara and refined siddhanta based on Shastric evidence that self supports itself through history. If memory serves when Prabhupada would ask if ISKCON was a cult he would agree but would then add the meaning of his use of the word cult refereed more to a culture.

Personally while having the deepest respect for the the Hindu identification as its part of my life for the last 25 years in acts of aspiring devotion have mixed feelings about called a Hindu or calling myself a Hindu, the word itself is slightly ambiguous because Sanatana Dharma or in our vernacular Bhagavata Dharma culture is diverse and not all of this deep culture (superficially) is in agreement with each other. And after all isn't it only a type of social convention, a concept or something which belongs to a geographical area, all of which at some point has to be given up just as much as the ego is let go to reach the sacred ground of transcendence.

As far as my understanding goes Srila Prabhupada while not averse to the word Hindu would also be more specific to identify his teachings as Gaudia Vaishnavism and Bhakti Yoga, if for example we say we are Hindu as our main identity for the public then exactly what type of Hindu are we, so why not be specific, at times for the people who are unfamiliar with Bhakti terms I am comfortable to say its within the teachings of Hinduism and at others times I will say I follow the culture and teachings of Vaishnavism and Bhagavata Dharma, I don't see it as having to be a problem, but in between these expressions it seems some confusion has arisen.

I do think the GBC is still predominatly managed by western devotees, but I do remember looking at the GBC resolutions in 1992 and at the time thought, well following all these minute details is not for me, and prefer to consult Bhagavad Gita, GBC while it serves a purpose is more or less purely political in nature and every society needs a political backbone for the general followers to build up wide bearing guidelines. So in some respects the GBC has nothing really to do with the finer aspects of either Hinduism, Sanatana Dharma or Bhagavat Culture and the spiritual aspects of Bhakti Yoga, so why equate the two?

[Michael Gressett]

"have you taken a look at the membership of the GBC? The majority of them are white with European ancestry" Fourteen out of 48 GBC members appear to be Indians. Indians taking over ISKCON in America has been noted by every researcher of the past 25 or so years. At the Sunday feast in Laguna Beach temple (I was there last night) about 80 per cent of the congregation were Indians. In Seattle, about 90 per cent. I visited the Los Angeles temple a couple of months ago and it was the same. As for temple president statistics, I don't know. But the administration of their New Vrindavan community in West Virginia is being done completely by Indians.

Namaskāra Michael!

What a surprise to hear from the author of a works! Thank you! I finished reading your paper last week. You gave me a deeper understanding in certain aspects of ISKCON. By gist of the feel so far, I approach SD from my own perspective, which parallels SD from India in many ways, rather than the ISKCON path. I was at an ISKCON in Dallas for nearly two months while I worked temporarily to the south, and then came down further south this month and started attending an Indian/Asian run temple, which is more what I look for.

By the way, have you taken a look at the membership of the GBC? The majority of them are white with European ancestry. You said, "They are the most Hindu of all the Hindu groups in the West that bothers to attract Westerners, and besides, Hindus from India have taken over the organization to a large extent." I'll give you that in the first half of the sentence, since usually, no single temple tries to reach out to people in the same manner that a Christian might, but they have taken over ISKCON?? Where do you see that? At the GBC level? At the Temple president level? The temple in Dallas definitely does not have a Hindu feel to it, as those born in Asia make up less than 15% of that temple.

By the way, I would like to see someone do a book about the GBC takeover of ISKCON subsequent to "Monkey on a Stick."

[Michael Gressett]

Here is something that denies your claim that ISKCON has been Hinduized http://www.harekrsna.com/sun/editorials/08-13/editorials10516.htm

And here is something that supports your claim http://www.b-i-f.com/De-Hinduization%20of%20Iskcon.html

I have read neither of these articles. But the point is that the issue is complex, and I suppose I need to clarify what I am saying. If you look more carefully you will see that overall, ISKCON temples in the U.S. are much more Indian than they used to be. When I first started to observe it in 1974, about 15% at the Sunday program were Indians. Now, at most U.S. temples, the opposite is true. Keep clicking around and see for yourself. More importantly, though, is that due to this population change ISKCON has altered its program somewhat. For instance, at the Laguna Beach temple last night, after the kirtan there was a period of congratulating people for marrying, graduating, getting a promotion, etc. Which means they are recognizing that their congregation has accepted family life as normative for a bhakta, and they are addressing people with these concerns. The old ISKCON would never have done that, and although this may not be the thing that is done in India, it is a play toward Westernized (not Western) Hindus in America.

Now as for the term cult, of course the Gaudiya Vaisnava religion is not a cult in India, it is a church there. In America it is a cult because it lacks power and prestige and is certainly in tension with American society's ideas and values. It aims to become an American church, as the title of my dissertation suggests. The terms describe ideal types a la Max Weber, which are based on opinion only. However, opinion is what makes something a cult or a church. If enough people endorse it, then it has become a church. All kinds of religion from India are cults in America. But if you were to take any form of Christianity and bring it to a place with no experience of it, then that too would be a cult. Now please remember that I do not use cult in a pejorative way. The social scientific definition makes sense, the popular definition is nonsense.

I would certainly use the term cult at a religious convention (or anywhere) and yes I would expect people to turn around and stare at me, and then I would take the opportunity to educate them on the social scientific meaning of cult, which is not exactly the same definition of cult prior to the 20th century, but is more like it than the post-20th century Christian appropriation of cult. Prior to this, a religious cult was simply a special form of a religion, such as the cult of St. Jude. It was the Protestants who appropriated the word for the purpose of demonizing all other religions. I'm firing back.

I also want to add that the terms church and cult may not actually make that much sense in the context of India at all, where people are much more accepting of religious innovation. Supposedly Buddhism rose as a cult in India to become a church (after all, Mathura was a Buddhist center for centuries) but in more recent times it seems that most Hindus don't insist on Vedic orthodoxy like they used to. Some do, but separating out the Vedic from extra-Vedic developments has become almost an academic task, and most people get their practices from their grandparents, who, after all, are usually not pandits.

Greetings,


Once I asked an ISKCON devotee to name one bible based religion to have successfully contested as not being Xitian and there was no response; yet a religion based on the BG, the most revered Hindu book shies away from being called Hindu.

Regarding Hindus having taken over ISKCON; I disagree. Every temple that I have visited in North America is headed by an American President appointed by the ISKCON powers to be. Indians have adopted their temples as their own, but have not taken them over.


Right!


ISKCON's values and ideas are not in conflict with the establishment and it does not lack power and prestige. The Indian Govt. owned Postal Dept. honored Prabhupad's contribution to the Hindu cause by releasing a stamp with his picture on it. Like other sects/sampradayes/traditions, it has its own unique set of do's and don't's under the general umbrella of SD. So, it is not a cult per you definition above.

May I remind you that till about 15-20 year back, the term gay meant happy? So, we have to take the meaning of words/terms in their present context. If I say the word cult in a room full of people at a religious convention, I bet everyone's ears will turn towards me to hear what religion I am calling a cult. In toady's vernacular, it is an unflattering word. But, please feel free to use it if you must.

In India, temples give visitors only simple prasaad, and it is the same here too. But a weekend visit to the temple becomes something of a social outing/cultural connection/offering respects to the deities and many people travel long distances to get there. So, it has become something of a custom in majority of the temples to provide a basic or elaborate meal. It helps to attract more people too. So, ISKCON does not have a monopoly on this tradition of after-service-meal in North America.

I am sure that you have done thorough research on the topic of your choice and don't mean to belittle any aspect of SD, but then there are sensitivities to contend with. And the use of words such as 'gay' and 'cult' fall into that category.


I apologize if some of my words are too harsh and make my comments sound like an 'accusation'. Appreciate your intention to be positive on the topic.

Pranam.

[Michael Gressett]

Right, in India ISKCON's power and prestige is growing and is strong. So it is not a cult in India by the definition I have been using for cult. But in America it is...NOT because of its beliefs and practices (as the Christians claim) but because of the way people (Christians, or influenced by Christians, usually without realizing it) feel about those beliefs and practices. There is no objective standard for cults and churches. It's all in the mind. For instance, this also explains the difference between Westerners' appreciation of "Krishna Consciousness" and Indians'. For the Westerners, it is a non-pejorative cult (not that they realize this is the way they see it, but they actually do) that they must make into a church for a variety of reasons (not least because the Founder charged them with doing so) but for Indians (in America or anywhere) it is already a church, so they feel no need to proselytize.

[Michael Gressett]

Eastern Mind, you are so correct. Each ISKCON temple is a bit different. This is partly because Prabhupada set up ISKCON as a loose confederacy instead of a cohesive body. There is plenty of cohesion in basic doctrine but each locale will have its own flavor. To me this makes it more Hindu, not less.

My dharma is to get the public to understand the proper meaning of cult. I may be shoveling against the tide, but one must do one's dharma regardless according to the Gita!

[Michael Gressett]

It is quite unfortunate that some (not all) ISKCON devotees reject the term Hindu. My dissertation chair at the University of Florida, Distinguished Professor Vasudha Narayanan, says about ISKCON, "It looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck...it's a duck." In other words, they worship a Hindu deity with Hindu mantras, on a Hindu holiday, etc. Whatever we want to call the Hindu traditions, ISKCON is a modern manifestation of the Gaudiya Vaisnava sampradaya, which is most certainly Hindu (or whatever your prefer...SD perhaps). Check out the FB group I run, dedicated to Tulasi Maharani. I don't see how you can get more Hindu than this. What they call themselves or consent to be called makes little difference.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/TulsiMaharani/

As a post script, did you know that both ISKCON and the Ramakrishna Mission have publicly denied being Hindu in Indian courts? It's about politics and money issues. But is the Ramakrishna Mission not Hindu? Of course it is.

[Believer]

Namaste,

In the context of a write up or a sermon, the originator will define the term cult and anyone assimilating the thought in its entirety will be on the same page as the presenter. But these things trickle down to the high school book levels sans the definition of the word. So, the young minds would simply be familiarized with ISKCON as a cult without giving the definition of the word cult. That is where the problem comes in. Masses of young folks being educated will be given misinformation and unless they do research later on in their lives, they will live with a negative impression of ISKCON and so many other paramparas all their lives. Not making the general populace aware of the true nature of Hinduism is a shortcoming of the educators and researchers and insisting on using the word 'cult' is a disservice to the religion as well as to the people who need to be educated with the right information.

Pranam.

[Eastern Mind]

As a post script, did you know that both ISKCON and the Ramakrishna Mission have publicly denied being Hindu in Indian courts? It's about politics and money issues. But is the Ramakrishna Mission not Hindu? Of course it is.

Vannakkam: RK Mission did it for an entirely different reason, as a protest against the government's discriminatory funding of non-Hindu religions. It brought some attention to the matter, but didn't change much. Perhaps it's changing now, with the new more pro-Hindu government.

Aum Namasivaya

[Michael Gressett]

But if people are not informed about the true definition of cult, the anti-cult people will continue to pollute people's consciousness with accusations of "cult." The more you deny it, the more they will claim it. Better to claim it first, give the proper meaning, educate people, and then the truth will come out. You can't allow people to appropriate words to use against you. If you do that you have already lost.

You could just as easily say that the word "religion" is a disservice to the Hindu traditions, as Malhotra would point out. It does not exist in Sanskrit, and it has a negative connotation for many people.

[Believer]

Namaste,

For the record, the previous Indian federal Govt., unofficially headed by a Roman Catholic, started taking over the Hindu temples and their associated assets, and using the money thus collected per their whims. The R K Mission fought in the courts to disassociate itself from Hinduism so as to protect their mandirs and their schools, libraries and other assets. BTW, all this discussion is just academic BS and has nothing to do with the spiritual content of SD.

The Abrahamic faiths dictate what goes in the American school books in terms of portrayal of their religions. But in case of Hinduism, the misinformed academia gangs up to block the changes proposed by Hindus for an accurate description of their faith. This has been documented to happen on numerous occasions in California. So, where I might ask are the Hindu sympathizers from academia? Why are they not fighting the bigots? Simply writing papers for one another for survival in the academic field does very little to portray Hinduism for what it is. Also, when the research papers trickle down to the school level books, they NEVER contain the definitions used by the authors. So, we can argue in favor of using the word cult as a non-pejorative word till the cows come home, or where ever they go to rest for the night , but the bottom line is that school kids will stay misinformed and they are tomorrow's adults who will keep looking at SD in a negative way. So, why insist on using a word which has the potential for being misunderstood? Are we down to a pi$$ing contest here?

ISKCON congregation was 85% American in 1974 and now it is 15% American is easy to explain. But before I do that, not understanding and raising this as an issue brings to the fore the complete ignorance on the part of the presenter. Hippies and stoners were the people who were influenced by Praphupad initially. Hindus had just started arriving in the US as a result of the visa liberalization for South Asians; and their numbers were quite small. That is why Indian Hindu participation was marginal. Now Praphupad is gone and so is the initial fervor. New recruits from among the ranks of American Xitians and jews are a mere trickle. Indian Hindu immigrant population in the mean time has become very large in size as compared to the early days and keeps growing. So, their participation percentage-wise has gone up dramatically. They provide support to ISKCON mandirs, but that is about all. Each mandir is run by an American President and that is not a complaint. I understand that GBC does not need to sell the ISKCON/SD concept to Indian Hindus; and to sell it to Americans, they need Americans as the front men/women to be able to communicate effectively. That takes care of some of the points raised.

I think I am done with this hot air topic. We have strayed too far from the topic of this thread. I am bowing out of any further discussion. Please keep the campfires going till everyone is done with their two bit.

Pranam.

PS, Before we take up the merits of using the word 'cult' in SD discussions, we need to ask ourselves, 'How much do I care about Hinduism?'

http://hindudharmaforums.com/showpos...1&postcount=21


-