Dear Śrīla Prabhupāda,
Please accept my respectful obeisances. All glories to Your lotus feet.
There are so many topics I was about to write to you, Śrīla Prabhupāda. The glories of the won-
derful devotees in the area in which I’m serving and how they are striving to please Your Divine
Grace, like the amazing preaching and community development in Romania, or the outstanding
saṅkīrtana results in Turkey, the dedication of the Cyprus yātrā to kīrtana and harināma, the sin-
cere efforts of the Greek devotees, and of course the inspiring results of the Hungarian yātrā – in
book distribution, the college, the high standards of Deity worship, festivals, and so much more …
I was also thinking to write about the efforts of devotees amid great challenges, like the war in
Ukraine, the earthquake in Myanmar, or even the recent outbreak of foot-and-mouth disease in
cows in parts of Europe, and how devotees still continued your movement’s activities steadily …
But no, I have decided not to write about these now.
There is one topic I would like to write about. A concern. A fear. A burden I carry in my heart.
And that is the possible mission drift among the intellectuals within ISKCON and what appears
to be the gradual dilution of the teachings of the Bhagavad-gītā and Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. It worries
me deeply.
Recently, in an official gathering of devotee scholars, a majority of the speakers supported the
idea of theistic evolution. Some even publicly dismissed the Purāṇic account of creation and ques-
tioned whether Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam offers a clear picture at all. One well-known devotee speaker
claimed that the Bhāgavatam’s description of the origin of species is vague or metaphorical.
Another argued that such topics are not important for today’s society, and that accommodating
modern scientific views would help make Kṛṣṇa consciousness more acceptable.
But this is not what you taught, Śrīla Prabhupāda.
Your purports are clear. You repeatedly emphasized that life does not come from matter, that
there is no evolution from chemicals, and that all living entities were created by the Prajāpatis, as
stated by Lord Kṛṣṇa Himself: maharṣayaḥ sapta pūrve (Bhagavad-gītā 10.6). In your purport you
explain how the universal population came from Brahmā and the Prajāpatis. This is repeated
throughout the Second, Third, and Fourth cantos of the Bhāgavatam. The process of creation is
personal, purposeful, and transcendental, not random or evolutionary.
You also warned against compromising the truth to gain followers. In Bhagavad-gītā 4.2 you
write: “As soon as the original purpose was scattered by the motives of the unscrupulous commen-
tators … the purpose of the Gītā appeared to be lost.… Since there is a great need of an edition
of the Gītā in English, as it is received by the paramparā (disciplic succession) system, an attempt
is made herewith to fulfill this great want. Bhagavad-gītā – accepted as it is – is a great boon to
humanity; but if it is accepted as a treatise of philosophical speculations, it is simply a waste of
time.” This seems to be happening in subtle ways. The line between thoughtful engagement and
selective reinterpretation is being crossed. Some now use terms like “independent thoughtfulness”
to justify openly disagreeing with your statements, or to suggest that science and śāstra can be bal-
anced by downplaying śāstra.
But if we begin to dilute one part of your teachings, where will it stop? Will it one day reach
the four regulative principles? Or even the chanting of the holy name?
Freedom of thought does not mean freedom to contradict guru, śāstra, and sādhu. You never
discouraged genuine inquiry, but you never approved of speculation that leads us away from the
conclusions of the ācāryas. You warned us of this many times. In a class on Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam
2.3.24, given on June 22, 1972, you said, “Suppose you write one book, or anything; if it is just
according to the Vedic conclusion, then it is also … it is called smṛti. By remembering the Vedic
conclusion … You cannot go beyond the Vedic conclusion. Then it is useless writing. Vedic con-
clusion must be there. The guide must be there. On that conclusion, if you write something, that
is right, and if you deviate from that conclusion, then it is wrong. So we want to read authorized,
right books – not by imagination. You can write so many nonsense things by imagination. That is
useless. You must remember what is the Vedic conclusion.”
In the name of dialogue or academic acceptance, if we begin to reject the foundational truths
of our philosophy, then we may win the respect of the world but lose the shelter of your lotus feet.
Śrīla Prabhupāda, I don’t write this in criticism. I write this out of concern. I know I am not a
scholar, not a preacher of worldwide fame, but I want to be loyal. I want to protect your teachings
in whatever little way I can. I want to serve as a guardian of your instructions, to remind myself
and others that the foundation of our movement is not up for revision. As one article recently
stated: “So, there is no need to fear that by doubting evolution, we will be seen as unscientific;
rather, it is science and logic that provide strong arguments against gradual evolution and for
a higher origin of species.” (ISKCON News: “Vedic Origin Theory Gains Credibility,” Īśvara
Krishna Dāsa (István Tasi, PhD) The Bhāgavatam’s fabric of metaphysics and ontology are inter-
woven; pulling out one thread risks unraveling the whole.
Śrīla Prabhupāda, please guide me. Please empower me to stand up respectfully but firmly,
with humility but also with clarity. Let me never compromise your words for the sake of popular-
ity. Let me never think I know better. And please bless me that I may inspire others to follow your
path with the same loyalty.
Your servant,
Rādhā Kṛṣṇa Dāsa

Translate »