The Washington Post has an article today on the changing face of the Hare Krishnas. No longer are American Hare Krishnas predominately “crazy white people” as many of us had been taught to believe 
.
What became of the Hare Krishna devotees whose saffron robes and chanting once graced many a street corner? In the Washington area, they wound up in well-heeled Potomac, an appropriately mainstream location for a movement that has been transformed over its 40 years.In the mid-1960s, when the movement began on Manhattan’s Lower East Side, a Hare Krishna service would have been filled with robe-wearing, twentysomething Caucasian converts, who likely lived at the temple or on an ashram.
Today, the typical worshiper is an Indian American who lives in mainstream America and shows up weekly for services, in khakis and with a kid wearing an NBA tank top along with his tilak (the sacred stripe that Hare Krishnas display between their eyebrows, symbolizing the footprint of God). [Link]
I have been to the Hare Krishna temple in Potomac, MD that this reporter visited. At the time (probably like 8 years ago) it was still mostly white with a smattering of Indians (such as my family on that day).
Most notable among the changes are the Indian American faces — 90 percent of worshipers at the Potomac temple, compared with 50 percent in 1980 and 20 percent in 1970s, Dasa said. This is attributable partially to recent Indian immigration to the United States, he said. [Link]
Right now I live on the same block as a Hare Krishna temple in LA. At night when I open my windows I can sometimes hear Hare Krishna rock (imagine Christian rock but with fewer lyrics ). There are devotees all around my neighborhood who go for walks together every evening. In the same neighborhood we have several churches and sometimes you have to park in front of the church to go to the temple (which I find kind of cool).
As the drums and harmonium rocked on, the priests circled the bejeweled brown, gold and white-faced statutes with incense and presented them with gifts of water and orange-yellow flower garlands and peacock feathers.
Soon the room was quiet and people took seats on cushions on the floor for a 30-minute lecture about the nature of happiness and worship.
“This relation between servant and served is the most congenial form of intimacy,” said the acting temple president, Anuttama Dasa. As he spoke, a woman spotted an ant scurrying across the floor, scooped it up with her sari and carried it outside. [Link]
Note to reporter: When writing an article about Hinduism it is not necessary to describe a woman saving an ant. We get it already. Also even better than the article is the video clip with a good commentary that the Post attaches to the article (click picture above).
Thank you Former Krishna Kid and Videsi Gori. You guys have made this one of the more informative and interesting threads here on SM in a while. I really enjoyed learning of your perspectives. And as browniefromtx alluded to, there is also a sizable 2nd generation of ‘White’ Sikhs, many of whom also spent significant portions of their childhoods in northern India, and who undoubtedly have their own take on these issues (the website sikhnet.com is actually the creation of several such people).
HMF and GS — Its obvious that you both are intelligent, philosophically-minded individuals who are enjoying going head to head on varying interpretations of the Gita. Might I humbly suggest, however, that we are getting far from the original topic? If that is what you want to do, cool, but I’m not sure if this is the appropriate thread or forum to do it on. Not sure what other Mutineers think about it, but that’s my sense.
HMF, one of your original points (following Abhi’s posting of the WP story) seemed to indicate that 1)ISKCON was unique in taking a literal approach to Krishna — flute, cows, colored like a raincloud — being the one and only svayam-Bhagavan (Supreme Personality of Godhead, as Prabhupada and his predecessors often phrased it); and 2) that such an approach was narrow-minded and smacked of influence by (or co-opting of) a fanatical evangelical Christian understanding of God. I’m sorry if I’m misrepresenting you — thats how I read it. To these two points, I would say the following:
1) The Hare Krishna movement’s reading of Krishna’s “aham” and “mama” to refer to Himself as the individual Supreme Lord have strong historic roots that pre-date ISKCON or Prabhupada. As a start, check out the commentaries of Baladeva, Visvanath Chakravarti, Madhva, and Ramanuja on verse such as 2.12 (Krishna as being eternally distinct from the individual jivatma), 7.13-14 (Krishna being transcendent to the gunas and all living beings), 9.23-25 (Krishna’s position vis a vis the devatas), 12.5-8 (Krishna and Brahman), 9.343/18.65 (Krishna’s repeated instruction to offer all worship to Him), and of course 18.66 (the famous “sarva dharma parityajya” conclusion of the Gita). While you will find subtle differences, what all of these acaryas agree on is their conviction that Krishna/Vishnu is speaking as a distinct transcendant individual, not a metaphor or human stand-in for Brahman or Paramatma, and that He is the Supreme Lord. In fact, history has it that Ramanuja was such an outspoken advocate of this view that he clashed with his own teacher, the leading Advaitin of his day Yadava Prakash, ultimately leading to Yadava’s trying to kill Ramanuja (scandal!) and finally banishing him from the institution (excommunication?). Interesting sidenote: later Ramanuja would defeat and convert (convert!) Yadava into a Vaishnava. Anyway, my point is not to convince you that this reading of Krishna’s words is “the” right answer. My point is simply to say that in holding such a reading ISKCON is not doing something suspect, it is just remaining faithful to a long-standing tradition of fiercly outspoken Vaishnavas. You don’t have to agree with them or even particularly like their view. Personally, as someone who chooses to be a Gauidya Vaishnava, ISKCON member, and admitted fan of Ramanuja, I do agree with this view. But if you want to disagree, thats absolutely fine. I just ask you to do so in a way that is more informed of the tradition and history behind what you choose to disagree with.
2) There may be parts of Hindu or Vaishnava (or any) traditions which we haven’t come across before, don’t understand, don’t agree with, or simply piss us off. That’s to be expected to an extent. But to write them off as being proof that ISKCON is some co-opted Christian boogeyman seems to do a disservice to the complexity of theolgical, sociological, and cultural factors at play. Not to mention, it tends to breed narrow-mindedness, paranoia, defensiveness, scapegoating, and good-old fashioned rudeness… things that cut against the dignity and respect that you obviously value highly.
The fact is ISKCON has all sorts of members and former-members with all sorts of baggage, issues, personalities, and interpretations. So does every organization, institution, matha, mandir, church, mosque, whatever. You will come across fanatics and self-righteous people in every tradition and house of worship. You will also come across some beautiful people who really inspire you by the way that they live the essence of their faith. Sweeping generalizations and categorical judgments can sadly blind one to the latter, though.
Bottom line: it sounds like your ISKCON-devotee roomate was kind of a jerk. Or at least not very emotionally or spiritually mature in his ability to understand his own faith and respect others (like you) who may not agree with him. I’m sorry that you had such a negative experience, and can only hope and pray that its not the only kind you had or will have.
I hope that you will not take offense to what I’ve written or see it as an attack. I just wanted to share my view and express the understanding of the Vaishnava traditions — at least in as much as they’ve spoken to me.
By the way, feel free to interpret all of the “I” “my” and “me” references in the last paragraph however you’d like, although — at the risk of revealing my narrow-minded stance — I assure you that I am not merely a metaphor. 😉 Come on, HMF… if we can’t laugh a little, we’re all doomed.
All the best, DesiDasa
I was thinking of Sikhnet too. Based on my own interaction with so-called ‘White’ Sikhs with regards to the people running that website and some of the past-and-present regular commenters on their discussion forum, I would say that to some extent many of the people concerned actually have a better grasp of the religion’s tenets (with the consequent impact on their personalities) than many ‘hereditary’ Sikhs, because they don’t have the usual Indian cultural baggage affecting their behaviour, perceptions, and interpretation of the religion.
I recall quite a few Indian Sikhs commenting favourably on the above too.
Amitabh, did you notice this as well ?
Clarification: This includes Sikhs of Caucasian background too. A much smaller number of (female) African-American Sikhs have also occasionally participated there.
That’s pretty much my contention, although, I did acknowledge that ISKCON didn’t necessarily start this line of thinking (narrowmindedness has existed as long as humanity has), but because of a dissemination strategy and lots of western financial banking (earned in various, hmm, ways), they are the largest and most visible proponents of it, within the larger “Hindu” framework.
As for Christian influence,I wasn’t completely clear, but I believe in addition to the dualistic understanding of God (ie I can never merge with Bhagavan, I can only become a servant of Krishna) , more so it’s the methodology adopted that’s uniquely ISKCON. By that I mean the high public visibility, airport recruitment, condescending attitudes held towards non “believers” etc.. Perhaps I’m biased because the sample points I’ve always heard from say things like “It would be great if you could practice Krishna consciousness” in a very patronizing tone…
I don’t think the scholars from Vishishtadvaita traditions for example equate Krishna/Vishnu as you’ve implicitly done with the slash. Most interpretations have Krishna as the 8th avatar of Vishnu, a clear subordination. But to your point about different interpretations, I personally believe the entire BG is one big metaphor. Think about it from a practical sense – Two large armies about to fight, and these two guys come out and have a talk right before? Dharmakshetra (the field of dharma) I believe are our very bodies and minds, not a grassy field in Northern India.
But I do believe worshipping Krishna personally can work for those who choose that path, as are those who choose to worship
Incidentally I actually looked up Ramanuja’s Gitabhashya regarding 2.12, it seems to me a counter against the Advaitin (bimba-pratibimba) that jiva is a mere reflection of the supreme, and any perceived distinction is out of ignorance. – But I didn’t see any commentary stating those who do not follow Krishna, as in, blue hue, flute, cows, butter are ignorant, deluded, spiritually defunct, etc…. which as I said, is the interpretation some ISKCONians seem to take.
Anyhow, I’ve already earned a reputation as an ISCKON hater – but I will say I do appreciate certain things about them. 1. The food and “feasts” they have weekly, Govindas in LA is fantastic 2. The information and literaature they provide on vegetarianism 3. The artwork – some of the best I’ve seen 4. A few of the posterboards provide good, concise little ‘nuggets’ of info.
Jai:
I agree with you. I remember on Sikhnet there used to be a regular poster called Prabhu Khalsa, a young caucasian guy living in New Mexico who was born and raised as a Sikh, and really exemplified many Sikh qualities (at least in his posts but I have no reason to suspect his conduct in real life was any different). He had very strong love for Sikhi, and as per his anecdotes, suffered tremendously for his Sikh roop as a little kid growing up in a predominantly hispanic locale. He stopped posting on Sikhnet a long time ago though.
Amitabh,
Hey, I remember Prabhu Khalsa 😉 He was very enthusiastic about the whole Khalsa thing, wasn’t he. Kudos to him.
Do you remember Ek Ong Kaar Kaur Khalsa from a few years ago (during the time of the legendary Dr Yuktanand Singh) ? She was wonderful — even if you go through Sikhnet’s archives and read some of the discussions from those times (often involving Yuktanand ji), it’s amazing how inspiring and, indeed, broadminded they are. And, of course, totally in line with the fundamentals of Sikhi, at least in my view.
Carol Kaur was also great. I thought she was such a positive influence on that discussion forum.
I really thought these people had a real grasp of the “reality” of Sikhism, compared to some of the more conservative patriarchal types who didn’t seem to know where Sikhism ended and Indian/Punjabi culture began.
Amongst the ‘hereditary’ Sikhs, I mean. It was much more of an issue amongst some (not all) of the older generation gentlemen though (Harprit Singh Sandhu being a notable, and very positive, exception), along with some of the guys who still live in India or who had relatively recently emigrated to the West.
Just out of interest, I was living in the Hare Krishna chateau in France in 1985. One day we went to “preach” to the Yogi Bhajan people who had another chateau a couple of hours drive in our bus throught the countryside. They were all caucasian and wore all white and white turbans. We wore saris or dhotis. We looked down on them because they had supposedly had free sex. We did a kirtan and they loved it, and we all danced in long snakes through the trees on their property for what seemd like hours. Then we dished out plates of prasad. That’s all I can remember really. It’s said that Chaitanya Mahaprabhu and Guru Nanak met and danced in ecstacy together. Could this be likely? They lived at the same time, right?
I tend to avoid ISKCON now. So exhausting – all that cult business! There are other branches of Gaudiya Vaisnavism where the flow of bhakti is strong. ISKCON isn’t the only way. Of course there’s a such a sweet nostalgia … the Beatles, the sixties. The problem is, ISKCON sees mature, non-Indian, born Vaisnava, often elderly Gaudiya Vaisnava gurus as a threat, and have been known to commit the most terrible insults. It’s not the way to go.
This is something I was thinking about actually, if Chaitanya predated Prabhupad by a significant amount of time, about the behavior of other Gaudiya Mathas in India (in terms of conversion, aggressive recruiting etc..), obviously all Gaudiya’s believe in Krishna’s unique form being superior to all others. In fact, I think they even believe Chaitanya is an incarnation of Krishna.
test
The above was a test obviously,to see if my post would work, sorry about that…
HMF –
The difference between ISKCON’S version of Gaudiya Vaishnavism and the more traditional and older forms found in India (and now around the world too), is the difference between a more internally focused contemplative one and a more externally focused one.
Other Gaudiya Vaishnava schools, along with preaching and “out-reach” programs, also lay alot of emphasis on internal development and meditation. ISKCON does not. Hence, as you have noted, they appear more vocal and aggressively proselytizing. Even if one is a “preacher”, if they are sufficiently grounded in quiet stillness within, due to the influence of intensive meditation, their preaching will take on a more refined and peaceful aura, as opposed to that person who is 99% of the time engaged in external activities and only does some semblance of meditation for a very short period of time.
ISKCON functions as a sort of bridge between the West and more contemplative schools of Gaudiya Vaishnavism in India. It’s a good introduction to the basic tenents of the Vaishnava faith. To go deeper one would have to connect with other more meditative schools which systematically study authentic Vaishnava scriptures under the guidance of gurus who are adept in meditation as well as the original languages of Gaudiya Vaisnava texts – Bengla and Sanskrit.
Amitabh and Jai –
That people born outside of the “cultural trappings” of certain religions, can sometimes be seen practicing a more “pure and authentic” version of the religion, is a commonly found phenomena. Often times non-Arab Muslims can be found to be practicing the core tenants of Islam quite proficiently, minus all the Arabian cultural baggage – good or bad. Same goes with Sikhi and other religions out of India, like Vaishnavism, or whatever. On the other hand sometimes non-Indian sikhs or Hindus tend to take up some aspects of Indian cultural baggage that have nothing to do with their religions, mistakenly thinking that it might be connected.
Then you get Indians who may criticize non-Indian adherents of their religions for NOT taking up external aspects of Indian culture (that have nothing to do with the religion per se) such as dress, food, modes of behaviour (particularly between the sexes) etc.
I know in India I’ve experienced quite some disdain for not acting like an “Indian girl” – and I’m NOT an Indian girl!
It’s like some people could not reconcile the fact that a “religious woman” could act so free, vocal, open and opinionated on a wide variety of (often taboo subjects)in public.
You find this attitude especially amongst the older generation. Younger Indians seem to welcome these things as a sign that they also can be “religious” and “progressive” at the same time. (Both those terms being open to interpretation).
I was formulating a post for the “Are We American” thread but the comments have since been closed.
My comments are anyway more suitable and “on topic” here, since much of what I have to say reflects a commonly held belief between my religion and the “Hare Krishnas” or ISKCON. And like ISKCON, my religion has it’s roots and origins in India itself.
As I was going to address over on the other thread;
Gautham and Metric –
Collective karma is not my theory and I don’t neccessarily agree with it. That’s why I don’t feel the slightest personal guilt regarding America’s ugly past history with slavery. However, there are some people (my boyfriend included), who try to pass off that guilt on to me. How am I guilty? I was born only a few decades ago (being generous to myself here, hee hee hee)! Moreover, as I am a believer in purva-janma-vada (past life theory), I understand that in a previous life I may very well have been a slave, and my black American boyfriend may have been a slave master. So someone’s gonna hold me accountable for oppression I never committed? Uh-huh. Not gonna happen.
On the other hand, America as a country does have an evil history in this regard so I can see why how COLLECTIVELY Americans have to deal with that. Americans include all colors here.
On a personal note however, whatever we experience in this life is a reaction to something said or done previously, so I acknowledge karma-phal at work in my life too. Example; maybe I never owned a slave in any previous life and maybe I never oppressed anyone in this one, but the fact that hurtful words are finding their way to my ears, proves that at some point somewhere I similarly accused someone else and hence, am now getting my karmic due. This theory and belief has helped me deal pyschologically with alot of personal suffering in life. And I applied it to my experiences in India too, accepting that yeah, on some level what I faced was simply reactions to previous actions. I believe this applies to everyone everywhere at all times. However, that does not negate the need to stand up against injustice, because in standing up against injustice (while acknowledging that they are reactions to previous actions, even if in previous lives), we can break the cycle. But acknowledgement of the cycle is a pre-requisite for breaking it.
OK I don’t want to push my beliefs or “religion” onto anyone. I’m not a “preacher”. And no, I cannot prove in a lab that I existed in any previous life. Just trying to give a more philosophical viewpoint as to why humans suffer.
Gautham –
Regarding, “If you feel the need to justify prejudice against Indian people, it would be preferable if you stopped using Hindu and Indian cultural insignia to do so. The two are not distinct; the very Indian people and society you are railing against is the same culture that produced the Gita, the Vedas and the rest of it. It’s a package deal; you can’t live in India and pretend to be living an Indian or Hindu lifestyle while simultaneously decrying and denigrating the people that created it.”
Hold on. Does this hold across the board? Does this mean that an immigrant to America cannot criticize American people, culture or policies here just because they are living here and utilizing what people before them built up? Are they also pretending to live an American lifestyle while simultaneously decrying and denigrating the people that created it?
I don’t agree. First of all, the people I’m living amongst in India did not create the Gita or the Vedas. Many of them don’t even have an interest in either. Secondly, the Gita contains universal truths applicable across the board, meaning it contains principles that cross national, cultural and racial boundaries, and speaks of the nature of oneness in all living beings. As far as the Vedas, I cannot say I accept them at all since I have never read them. But I do accept the Gita, specifically the shlokas that have universal application. I also read other Indians shastras and no, I do not blanketly accept everything in them. Should I? Why? What applies to me and all other living beings at all times is applicable. Things that point to specific cultural traditions of specific time periods, no, I don’t need to accept those. Neither do Indians. Cultures change with time but there are some things that do not change – ever. Those would be the spiritual concepts, that are universally applicable.
And just because I read the Gita and just because the Gita sprang forth from an area of our planet known presently as “India”, does not mean I have to drip honey over everything and everyone coming from India. That would be patronizing.
MD in her post # 228 on the other thread –
http://www.sepiamutiny.com/sepia/archives/003731.html#comment83024
siddhartha – I think some of your comments against Pardesi Gori sum up how I feel about super-educated upper middle class Indians in the US from privileged, well-to-do families, claiming a mantle of oppression……like, say, professors who write articles for the Washington Post in which they state they can never really be Americans 🙂
Again something that relates to both your above comment as well as this thread on the “new hare krishnas”…. Years ago when we first accompanied our Indian Guruji to North American shores we all witnessed a sort of “clash of the classes” phenomena. Many of the white and black American members of our spiritual group are not at all what you would call “wealtlhy”, nor are they poverty stricken, but financially they would be considered in the lower-middle class to middle-middle class range, and the neighborhoods in which they reside reflect that. Hence when they hosted Guruji in their homes, a curious reaction was found in Guruji’s assitant, whom I will refer to as “Assistantji”. Although born and bred in a simple Indian village, he was dismayed at the living conditions of some of his American sisters and brothers in the faith. They were living cleanly and very civil, but not what he EXPECTED for “paisa walla firangis”. Although Guruji was quite content in such atmospheres, Assistantji was not, and henceforward he arranged for Guruji to stay with only very wealthy Indian American congregation members. When us “commonfolk” attended the classes in their homes, or were graciously hosted by them, we are amazed at the size of the homes as well as the display of wealth. I’d never seen anything like in the neighborhood where I grew up. I’m talking very very very wealthy people.
That’s all fine and good, I don’t begrudge anyone their wealth, especially when they work hard for it, which, as professionals, I’m sure they all did, but I’m just making a point here regarding Taz’s assumptions about my supposed “priveleged” position. I’d like to know exactly what she means by “privelege”. I come from a working class family. No doctors, engineers, professors, lawyers or even computer programmers amongst my lot. I am not financially priveleged at all in America, although I’ve never been poverty stricken here, my grandparents were poor. In India also I have lived on a very tight budget in conditions that many of my Indian friends from cities like Mumbai and New Delhi say they could not tolerate for even one day. Somehow I adjusted.
I have faced a phenomena in India whereby most people I meet assume I am wealthy because of the part of the world I am from (that goes hand in hand with what I will be asked to pay for certain items which I know the locals cannot possibly be paying). When I explain to them the financial realities of many working class Americans, they seem dismayed and some refuse to believe it. It’s almost as if a deeply held belief is being deconstructed right before their eyes.
I know an American guy in India who is trained in Indian Classical Music. He is friends with many other musical enthusiasts in the town, mostly of the brahmin caste. He lives in India most of the time to pursue his love for Indian Classical Music, playing before large crowds and learning from masters of the art. He finances this by returning to USA once a year and working as a JANITOR (cleaning toilets) for 4 – 6 months, and then flies back to India to get his Lucknowi Gharwana on. Now, where he lives the brahmins do not clean their own toilets but rather hire “bhangis”, the toilet cleaning caste people, to do the job for them. The do not mix socially with people from this caste but rather simply pay them for their job, however I don’t know if “untouchability” still applies in this case. Anyway, whenever the American musician is asked by his brahmin friends what he does to maintain himself, he replies simply, “management”. Both of us wonder what reaction he would get if he told his brahmin friends that he is a toilet cleaner.
I always notice a different reaction when I tell people the profession of my father in India as compared to when my friend’s who are the sons and daughters of doctors or professors tell theirs.
Even here in America, my Indian-American friends tend to be the Donut Shop wallas, 7-11 wallas, and Faiz’s Indo-Pak store wallas more so than Indian-American engineers, lawyers, etc.
There’s alot of assumptions and presumptions about “firangis”, “videsis”, “angrez” and “pardesis” in India.
Anyway, here you can see http://www.sepiamutiny.com/sepia/archives/003731.html#comment83042 that I have made a sincere apology for any possibly biting or stinging words that may have hurt anyone here personally. Again I make the same apology and have hence, on the good advice of Jai and others, tried to tone down my tone and weigh my choice of words before typing them. I hope that my attempt proves fruitful but just in case not, I will give posting a rest for some days.
Thankyou for allowing me to say my peace.
I am never manifest to the foolish and unintelligent. For them I am covered by My eternal creative potency [yoga-maya]; and so the deluded world knows Me not, who am unborn and infallible.
http://asitis.com/7/25.html
Hi,
IAM AN INDIAN 38YRS LIVING IN BHILAI( CHATTISGARH).I WANT TO JOIN YOUR ORGANISATION AND DEVOTE 24 HRS,PLEASE GUIDE ME FOR JOINING THE ORGANISATION