CHAPTER FORTY-NINE

DURING 1975 ŚRĪLA Prabhupāda increasingly referred management problems to the G.B.C., specifically to the annual G.B.C. meeting in Māyāpur. From the beginning of ISKCON he had been saying, “It is not one man’s work.” He had created the Governing Body Commission to relieve himself of the staggering burden of personally managing his growing world organization. “Always remember,” he had written to a G.B.C. member, “that you are one of the few leaders I have given this responsibility to … and your task is very great.”

Prabhupāda saw the progress of his movement as a wonderfully successful phenomenon, proof of the direct mercy of Lord Caitanya upon his humble efforts. ISKCON was his service to his Guru Mahārāja, and now his disciples should maintain it and increase it as their service to their spiritual master. He said he wanted to see 108 flourishing temples before his departure from the world. Keeping those temples alive was to be the work of his sincere followers. He wrote to his G.B.C. representative for Australia,

Problems were inevitable for a preacher of Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Many sādhus, therefore, preferred to remain in a holy place, without preaching. But Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī and the great ācāryas in the sampradāya of Lord Caitanya had been concerned with offering the Lord’s devotional service to as many conditioned souls as possible.

Yet to take up this path one would have to be tolerant. Financial needs, national and local governmental restrictions, ignorant and demoniac enemies of pure devotion to the Lord, envy, personal ambition and disagreements among neophyte devotees, struggles and falldowns in the attempt to avoid illicit sex and intoxication – all these and many more problems complicated the preacher’s mission. Śrīla Prabhupāda, however, knew the struggle was worth it, even to save just one soul from the cycle of birth and death.

Prabhupāda wanted his more advanced disciples to share the struggle with him. And when he saw competence and sincerity in some of his senior members, he tried to turn affairs over to them and concentrate more on his life’s mission of presenting all twelve cantos of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam. Always the devotees were enthusiastically pressing Prabhupāda to translate and write more books – so that they could read them and distribute them. Śrīla Prabhupāda replied that he was trying his best, but that the task was not mechanical; great concentration and peace of mind were required. He could not write while at the same time being besieged by dozens of threatening, complicated issues.

When the G.B.C. member responsible for Gurukula wrote Śrīla Prabhupāda with a plan that all ISKCON centers should support the educational system, Prabhupāda replied, “As far as taxing the centers for the maintenance, that should be considered amongst the G.B.C.”

When a controversy arose in the Stockholm center and devotees appealed to Prabhupāda for a judgment, he replied, “This must be considered at a full meeting of the G.B.C.” And he added, “All of our students will have to become guru, but they are not qualified.”

Śrīla Prabhupāda said that sexual attraction, making unnecessary changes, and fighting among Godbrothers were all Western “diseases.” Kṛṣṇa consciousness was the path of perfection, and if his disciples stayed persistently and sincerely on the path, they could certainly succeed.

Sometimes, however, Prabhupāda saw the Western diseases overcoming his disciples, and even the G.B.C. members would seem unable to stop it. Yet unless they spared him from such headaches, how could he do the higher work? “G.B.C.,” he said, “must mean that by his managing, there are not any complaints, so that I can be relieved to do the translation work.”

He had expounded on this principle in the Fourth Canto of Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam.

But it was like trying to control the wind. When the difficulties mounted, the devotees would run to him like children running to their father. Sometimes a disciple would simultaneously ask him to write his books and then drop a serious problem in his lap. One of the leaders in America reported to him that some devotees were not following the principles, but that Śrīla Prabhupāda should please stay in India and continue writing peacefully. Prabhupāda wrote back,

Sometimes Śrīla Prabhupāda uttered the phrase “let me sit in Vṛndāvana,” as if to give up managing the whole problematic Society. Everyone knew he would never leave ISKCON; he had already sacrificed his life to save the world by leading the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement. But when would his disciples mature? Śrīla Prabhupāda wrote, “I want that the G.B.C. relieve me of all management, which means they have to manage the way I manage.” And often he would say, “Do as I am doing.”

When controversies and disagreements among the G.B.C. secretaries themselves came before him, he would refer them to the G.B.C. body.

Śrīla Prabhupāda continued to hold the G.B.C. responsible for settling the affairs of ISKCON. For better or worse, he wanted all his disciples to accept the G.B.C. as their authority, and he trusted that when the G.B.C. members all met together, working under his guidance, they could solve the problems. But whether they could actually spare him, allowing him to peacefully write his books, seemed doubtful.

During 1975, a controversy arose among some of the ISKCON members, including some of the G.B.C. members, as to whether gṛhastha devotees, married men, could actually be spiritual leaders in ISKCON. Although the Kṛṣṇa consciousness philosophy clearly explained that any devotee, regardless of his āśrama, could become qualified and purified, the controversy grew.

In September a sannyāsī G.B.C. member flew from the U.S. to Vṛndāvana just to suggest to Prabhupāda that another G.B.C. member, a gṛhastha, was not qualified to lead. Śrīla Prabhupāda, however, said the matter could be settled at the annual G.B.C. meeting. But when the next day a letter came from Rāmeśvara, supplicating Prabhupāda to continue his translating work, Prabhupāda replied that he was prepared to work at his writing but that when one leader flies ten thousand miles to lodge a complaint against another, then, “What can I do?”

As the third annual international festival approached, the longstanding problems of various discontented parties awaited settlement in the court of the G.B.C. Śrīla Prabhupāda would be arriving in Māyāpur on January 17, almost two months before the G.B.C. meetings and the gathering of devotees. With perhaps a thousand devotees attending, there would be blissful kīrtanas, classes, and parikramas. And there would be problems. Prabhupāda made it clear that the proper way of settling the controversies was not by gossiping about them, not by pressing him for a ruling, but by trusting in the G.B.C. Prabhupāda himself would stand by the decisions of the G.B.C. or, if necessary, correct them, and so sincere followers should also not hesitate to follow.

January 17, 1976
  Enroute from Calcutta to Māyāpur, Prabhupāda stopped at the mango grove and took breakfast – fruit, vaḍa, nuts, and sweets. Even before reaching Māyāpur, he was enjoying the peaceful atmosphere of the Bengal countryside. Soon he would be at the Māyāpur Chandrodaya Mandir, his special place of worshiping the Supreme Personality of Godhead.

More than fifty adult devotees and thirty young Bengali gurukula boys were waiting for Śrīla Prabhupāda at the gate. For the first time, Prabhupāda beheld the large entrance dome, recently built over the gate. A thick, twenty-foot flower garland stretched across the gateway, and before it stood Bhavānanda Goswami, holding a small silk cushion on which rested a pair of scissors. Stepping out of the car into the bright sunlight, Prabhupāda took the scissors and cut the garland, sanctifying the gate. Prabhupāda smiled. Everyone cheered as the gate swung open and Prabhupāda entered, followed by the ecstatic kīrtana party.

As Prabhupāda walked toward the temple of Rādhā-Mādhava, everywhere he looked he saw blossoming flowers. Clay pots of burning frankincense billowed fragrant smoke, and women stood on the second-floor veranda offering showers of rose petals as Prabhupāda approached. The main building was decorated beautifully. Walking beneath an orange silk umbrella amid the devotees and exuberant kīrtana of the holy name, he appeared regal and triumphant.

Inside the temple, where dozens of garlands hung from the ceiling, Prabhupāda came before the golden forms of Rādhā-Mādhava and offered prostrated obeisances. He felt he was in Vaikuṇṭha. Because of the arrangements the devotees had made, he said, Kṛṣṇa was smiling.

Later that day, as Prabhupāda was taking his massage, his servant Hari-śauri suggested that this would be a good place for retirement. “Either Vṛndāvana or Māyāpur,” Prabhupāda replied. “No other place. That is sure.”

Śrīla Prabhupāda walked down to the bank of the Jalāṅgī to see the boat the devotees were using for traveling from village to village. Onboard, he praised the simple life of traveling and preaching. He also went to the gośālā and saw the calves and cows, and he drank a cup of the first sugarcane juice of the season, from cane grown on the ISKCON land.

As Śrīla Prabhupāda walked through the fields to the proposed site of the Māyāpur city, Surabhi described where various buildings could be located. Prabhupāda suggested they present their plan to West Bengal government officials and ask them to provide the necessary land.

Śrīla Prabhupāda continued to meditate on the Māyāpur city, and a few days later he composed a letter to the chief secretary of West Bengal, asking for help in acquiring land. ISKCON should not be misunderstood as a sectarian religious institution, he informed the chief secretary. Kṛṣṇa’s instructions in Bhagavad-gītā, beginning with “We are not the body,” were scientific and thus did not belong to any particular religion. Prabhupāda also asserted that ISKCON programs, especially the one contemplated for Māyāpur, would solve national and international problems through spiritual education. He mentioned features that would be particularly appealing to the chief secretary, such as the investment of foreign capital in the project, the flow of tourists who would come to Māyāpur, and the hiring of thousands of local workers for constructing and maintaining the city. His description of the project was fascinating.

In his letter Śrīla Prabhupāda referred to difficulties in purchasing land for ISKCON’s projects, since all the local landowners were escalating their prices far beyond the market value. If the government could make the land available at market prices, then ISKCON could immediately start its important work, officially inaugurating it on the birthday anniversary of Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu, March 16, 1976.

In the meantime, Prabhupāda was trying on his own to acquire enough land to begin. The Māyāpur City project would require extensive funding and many years of work to develop, but it would proclaim the glories of Lord Caitanya with unlimited potency. Māyāpur would become famous, drawing people from all over the world to see the unique, modern application of timeless Vedic wisdom.

Prabhupāda explained to his disciples that although a sannyāsī traditionally does not involve himself with money, the devotee’s desire is to unite Lakṣmī (the goddess of fortune, represented by wealth) with Nārāyaṇa (God). He said there was truth to the common saying “No one listens to a poor man,” and were he to advertise A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami discoursing in an empty field in Māyāpur, no one would come. Westerners especially should be able to hear about Kṛṣṇa in a comfortable, attractive setting. Prabhupāda planned, therefore, that visitors to ISKCON’s transcendental city be well accommodated. Gradually, the world would be deeply affected by the dynamic demonstration of the artistic, philosophical, and humanitarian aspects of Kṛṣṇa consciousness.

Prabhupāda asked Surabhi to draw a master plan for Māyāpur City. Staying up all night, Surabhi made a preliminary architectural sketch, showing specific areas of the city for brāhmaṇas, kṣatriyas, vaiśyas, and śūdras. The sketch also showed temples, schools, streets, walkways, residential buildings, cottages, a stadium and an airport, as well as self-sufficiency features like windmills, irrigation systems, and agricultural fields.

Prabhupāda was taking his massage when Surabhi brought him the drawing. Prabhupāda’s golden body was glistening with mustard oil as Hari-śauri carefully, strongly massaged his head, back, chest, and limbs. Prabhupāda was relaxed and silent, his eyes closed in meditation. But when Surabhi entered with the drawing of Māyāpur, he became animated. Prabhupāda liked the drawing and talked about it for an hour. Now Surabhi should make a formal drawing and approach professional architects and appropriate government agencies. The devotees coming to Māyāpur should also see it. As fabulous and far-reaching as it was, the Māyāpur City should now become a reality.

“To become sannyāsī,” Prabhupāda replied, “the other three processes are there – to become brahmacārī, to become gṛhastha, and to become vānaprastha. Stage by stage. But if one is able, he can take sannyāsa. And that competency is also very simple. If you become fully Kṛṣṇa conscious, then you can immediately become competent – brahma-bhūyāya kalpate. As soon as you fully engage yourself in Kṛṣṇa consciousness, then immediately you become more than a sannyāsī.”

Hari-śauri, a gṛhastha, inquired whether artificially accepting the renounced order could actually be indulging in another form of sense gratification.

“As soon as we manufacture something,” Prabhupāda replied, “that is sense gratification. When we think, ‘I want to fulfill my desire, that’s all,’ that is sense gratification. It may be that I sit down under a tree or I sit down in a palace – the basic principle is sense gratification. The other day I was talking about hīrā-corā and kīrā-corā. Hīrā means ‘diamond,’ and kīrā means ‘cucumber.’ One is thinking, ‘I shall steal one cucumber,’ and another thinks, ‘If I steal, I shall steal the diamond.’ But the stealing propensity is there. One may think that ‘I am only stealing a cucumber, and it is not very dangerous,’ but in the eyes of the law both of them are criminal. So if we manufacture a concoction – ‘Yes, I have got a stealing propensity, but I’ll not steal a diamond, I’ll steal kīrā ’ – that is only mental concoction. But he is a thief.”

Jayapatāka Swami: “So is gṛhastha life in Kṛṣṇa consciousness allowing us to steal kīrā?”

Prabhupāda: “Yes, kīrā-corā. The prostitute hunter is hīrā-corā, and the householder is kīrā-corā. That’s all.”

Again Hari-śauri inquired whether artificial renunciation was sense gratification. There were different views among the disciples, and they wanted Prabhupāda to make it very clear, so that one party could not take a quote from Prabhupāda and claim it was universal.

“Renunciation is not artificial,” said Prabhupāda. “It is a process. We have to give up this sense gratification. So go through a process to turn. Like sometimes in a health club there is artificial swimming, is it not? Artificial swimming is not actual swimming, but it is to practice.”

Dayānanda: “But sometimes people who renounce, they become very proud. What is that?”

Prabhupāda continued to reply that renunciation had to be actually practiced. “Everyone must attend the maṅgala-ārati,” he said. “One must attend this. Otherwise, no prasādam. If you are too sick, then also you should not eat. There should not be sleeping at the time of maṅgala-ārati because he says he’s sick, then at the time of prasādam, voracious eating.”

If the devotees were looking for Prabhupāda to make an absolute distinction between gṛhastha and sannyāsī, it was not there. He emphasized, rather, the actual quality and the practice of the individual devotee.

On another morning walk Hṛdayānanda Goswami told Prabhupāda of the sannyāsīs’ discussions.

Hṛdayānanda: “We were thinking that it would be nice to have the city centers for the preachers. And for the women and children, it’s much easier to maintain them on our farms. There they can do a little work and produce their own food.”

Prabhupāda: “Yes. In the farms they can live and do some handwork.”

Gurukṛpā Swami: “They won’t do it, though, Śrīla Prabhupāda.”

Prabhupāda: “Then you don’t allow. If they do not follow the rules and regulations, then what is the use?”

Another sannyāsī said that when many householders came together in big communities, an atmosphere of laziness developed, whereas when lots of brahmacārīs were preaching together, it was more enlivening.

Prabhupāda: “Anyway, everyone should be engaged. That’s all. No idle life. Never encourage laziness. If we maintain some lazy men, then everything will be spoiled.”

Devotee: “I heard, Śrīla Prabhupāda, that you remarked our Society is not a love-making Society, but these things are going on.”

Referring to an impropriety of two of his disciples, Prabhupāda replied, “Yes, I have seen in Vṛndāvana.”

Other complaints arose. One leader argued that the temple should not have to carry the burden of maintaining women with children but no husbands. Another complaint was that brahmacārīs, by selling books, were in effect supporting the householders.

Prabhupāda continued to reply in a philosophical and practical way that whatever discrepancies were present should be rectified. Sense gratification, laziness, and failure to attend the temple programs should not be tolerated. But this condemnation of malpractices in devotional service did not fall exclusively on any particular group.

Shortly after his arrival in Māyāpur, Prabhupāda had addressed a similar issue in his own correspondence. A Mr. Chatterji had written from Calcutta to say that he was preaching worship of Lord Caitanya and was eager to show Śrīla Prabhupāda some articles he had written. Mr. Chatterji stated, “My theme is we can get to see our God, Gauranga, by taking sannyasa. Those who are grhasthas reach to the Godhead through nam sankirtana.” Śrīla Prabhupāda encouraged the man with a reply.

“He says,” said Dayānanda, “that the devotees aren’t behaving, and so he’s criticizing. But they’re not accepting.”

“Simply criticism is not our means,” said Prabhupāda. “Our means is to show by example.” Dayānanda made a note of it to use in typing Prabhupāda’s reply.

“Now, Śrīla Prabhupāda,” Dayānanda continued, “he’s inquiring about his household life.”

“This is not the business of the guru,” said Prabhupāda “ – how to increase sex life and family life. They are not happy, these Western men and women. They become married, but they are not happy. Therefore I recommend brahmacarya and sannyāsa life.”

Several other devotees were also in the room with Prabhupāda, and Jagad-guru, a brahmacārī, spoke up. “Because they have no training, that’s why they have so many problems.”

“Whatever it may be,” said Prabhupāda. “But they are not happy. Therefore I recommend brahmacarya and sannyāsa.”

Śrīla Prabhupāda had already been disturbed by what he saw as a loose husband-wife situation in Vṛndāvana. Now, hearing this letter from a householder who was improperly inquiring about his family life, he again turned his attention to Vṛndāvana and asked to see his G.B.C. for Vṛndāvana, Gopāla Kṛṣṇa, who had recently arrived in Māyāpur.

“It is not a free hotel for love-making,” Prabhupāda began, even before Gopāla Kṛṣṇa entered the room. “Vṛndāvana is not a joking place. They must be serious for Kṛṣṇa, and I shall give them everything. Don’t worry about money, but manage. There is not scarcity of money. There is scarcity of management. Why so many children in the temple? It is not simply a place for husbandless women. Children should always be engaged, so they shouldn’t create a disturbance all over.”

Śrīla Prabhupāda said that if the mothers were irresponsible and only wanted to take care of their own children, then they should be sent away from Vṛndāvana. Two women could run a nursery and take care of many children, and the other women could work. “Not go to the roof and lovemaking,” said Prabhupāda, “and make a plan and go away.” He stressed that since all India came to Vṛndāvana, ISKCON’s center should be ideal in every respect. Otherwise, people would think that his disciples were hippies, and no one would come. A good example of responsible care for children was in Māyāpur, where a gurukula had already been organized.

“Children are welcome,” said Prabhupāda, “but make them jewels. Not spoiled children, varṇa-saṅkara hippies.”

For the sannyāsīs in Māyāpur, Prabhupāda’s heavy words about irresponsible gṛhastha life fueled their own arguments. A few of them felt that gṛhasthas should not even live in the temples. That evening, when the sannyāsīs gathered in Prabhupāda’s room, they discussed with him the position of families and children in ISKCON.

One sannyāsī reported not being allowed to preach in certain temples, because he was against marriage and favored brahmacārī life. Others complained that expensive properties were being purchased to be used mostly as residences. The preaching was suffering, they said, and brahmacārīs were being told to get married if they felt sexually agitated.

Prabhupāda felt the heavy force of the sannyāsīs’ protest, and he could perceive the antagonism between the āśramas. These things must be decided by the G.B.C., he said, and no one could go against their decisions. But he also expressed sympathy for what the sannyāsīs were saying. Families, he suggested, could serve in farm communities and live self-sufficiently in Kṛṣṇa consciousness.

“Our whole preaching program is detachment from material life,” said Prabhupāda, “to stop sex life altogether. Gṛhastha is a concession for those who cannot give it up immediately. Otherwise marriage is not required. It is simply burdensome. Legal or illegal, the after-effects of sex simply mean difficulty.”

March 7
  The G.B.C. members assembled. The process was to make an agenda, discuss each issue, and then pass resolutions by voting. At the end of the day they would go to Śrīla Prabhupāda in his room and read the day’s resolutions for his approval or amendment. The first day they spent mostly in assigning zones and duties for each G.B.C. member. They reported these results to Śrīla Prabhupāda, and he approved them.

Prabhupāda also addressed the issue of gṛhastha and sannyāsa life, saying that all the devotees should become attached to Kṛṣṇa’s family, not to the “stool” family or “pig” family. Sannyāsa life meant rejection of the false family, but not the family of Kṛṣṇa consciousness. The Kṛṣṇa consciousness society was based on renunciation, said Prabhupāda, and therefore all sincere devotees were as good as sannyāsīs. The actual dress didn’t matter, whether white or saffron,* although an ideal gṛhastha should eventually come to the stage of formal sannyāsa. He said that all his disciples should become gurus and each make thousands of disciples, just as he had, thus spreading Kṛṣṇa consciousness everywhere.

“Discuss in the G.B.C.,” he said, “and make a decision. Question and put to vote. But if you make brahmacārī party, gṛhastha party, sannyāsī party, it will be finished. Everything should be done very openly. We have to work for Kṛṣṇa. Why this pss-pss whispering? It is not very good.”

The next morning while Śrīla Prabhupāda was on his walk around the Māyāpur fields, the G.B.C. vice-chairman, Madhudviṣa Swami, asked for guidance in preparation for the G.B.C. meeting that day.

Madhudviṣa: “The subjects that we are going to be discussing today in the G.B.C. meeting are about the role of sannyāsīs and brahmacārīs and gṛhasthas in ISKCON. In the Eighteenth Chapter of the Bhagavad-gītā, in one of your purports, you say that a sannyāsī should never discourage a young man from getting married. But on the other hand, we understand that a sannyāsī should encourage young men to remain brahmacārī. So it seems to me like there’s some kind of contradiction.”

Prabhupāda: “According to time and circumstance. Just like Kṛṣṇa says, niyataṁ kuru karma tvam: ‘Always be engaged in your prescribed work.’ And at last He says, sarva-dharmān parityajya mām ekam śaraṇaṁ vraja.* So now you adjust. That is not a contradiction. It is just suitable to the time and circumstance.”

Madhudviṣa: “But is there some conclusion?”

Prabhupāda: “The real aim is that you have to become the eternal servant of Kṛṣṇa. Either you go through karma or jñāna or yoga, it doesn’t matter. The ultimate aim is how to reach Kṛṣṇa. Arjuna achieved the favor of Kṛṣṇa by fighting and killing. Hare Kṛṣṇa.”

Prabhupāda said no more. He had created the G.B.C. to deal with just such problems, and he had instructed his G.B.C. men personally, in letters and in his books. Now they would have to apply those instructions according to time and place.

The G.B.C. met, discussed all day, and by evening had a list of resolutions pertaining to the divisions of āśrama in ISKCON: Husbandless women with children could not live in ISKCON temples. Husband and wife could not live in ISKCON temples, even if separately. Before entering marriage, devotees should have a means of supporting themselves and not expect to “live off” ISKCON. Upon getting married, a householder would be financially responsible for his wife until such time as he took sannyāsa.

Reading the resolutions to Prabhupāda in his room usually evoked little verbal response from him. His practice was generally to nod in approval, or occasionally to comment. But when he heard the resolution that husbandless women with children could not stay in the temples, he uttered a thoughtful “Hmmm.” Then he said, “As for me, my only concern is that they shall not waste their valuable human life.” He was speaking not in the tone of the official head of the society, who could veto resolutions, but in a very personal, humble way, as a pure devotee. “After so much struggle,” he said, “they have got this human form, and I do not want that they should miss the opportunity. As for me, I cannot discriminate – man, woman, child, rich, poor, educated, or foolish. Let them all come, and let them take Kṛṣṇa consciousness, so that they will not waste their human life.”

Although the G.B.C. members usually had plenty to say, after these remarks from Prabhupāda they remained silent.

Finally, Tamāla Kṛṣṇa Goswami, the elected G.B.C. chairman for the year, spoke. “Yes, Śrīla Prabhupāda,” he said. “So we will strike that resolution.”

Prabhupāda also disapproved the resolution that a householder would have to give financial support for his wife for the rest of his life until he took sannyāsa.

“You each be guru,” he said. “As I have five thousand disciples or ten thousand, so you have ten thousand each. In this way, create branches and branches of the Caitanya tree. But you have to be spiritually strong. This means chanting your rounds and following the four rules. It is not an artificial show. It is not a material thing. Chant and follow the four rules and pray to Kṛṣṇa in helplessness. We have to have enthusiasm. If we lose our enthusiasm, everything will become slack. In old age I came out from Vṛndāvana. I had no money, nothing. But I thought, ‘Let me try.’ ”

Bhagavān spoke out spontaneously: “You’re still enthusiastic, Śrīla Prabhupāda.”

“Yes.” Prabhupāda smiled. “I am enthusiastic. I don’t think I am an old man.”

“Sometimes we think we are old,” said Bhagavān.

“No one is old,” said Prabhupāda. “Na hanyate hanyamāne śarīre.* Sometimes in old age one is pushed down. But I am enthusiastic.”

Prabhupāda said he was pleased at most of the resolutions, because they indicated that a strong G.B.C. was now ready to relieve him so he could concentrate on his translation work. He said that the devotees would have to strictly follow for the entire year what the G.B.C. had agreed on. There should be no changes unless he approved, and at the next annual meeting they could make any changes necessary.

The G.B.C. chairman then called for a vote on an unresolved topic from the day’s meeting. The topic had been discussed, but since it had not been approved, the chairman called for a vote. Everyone voted yes by raising their right hand. Then Śrīla Prabhupāda raised his hand also. His disciples immediately laughed at this endearing gesture.

“Yes,” Prabhupāda said, “I am simply following the G.B.C. Whatever you say, I have to follow.”

Prabhupāda knew of the presidents’ discontent, and he brought up the subject on his next morning walk. Surrounded by sannyāsīs, G.B.C. men, temple presidents, and others, he brought out the issues, attempting to bring his spiritual family into harmony.

“I have heard,” he said, “that too much stricture on the gṛhasthas may cause some disturbance. Hmmm?”

“Yes,” admitted Madhudviṣa.

“So,” said Prabhupāda, “I think the gṛhasthas themselves should form a small committee and define what they will do, instead of forcing something on them. Because in this age, nobody can follow strictly all the strictures in the śāstras.”

Tamāla Kṛṣṇa objected to the idea of gṛhasthas revising the G.B.C. resolutions. “In none of our resolutions,” he argued, “do we say anything about how the gṛhasthas should live. The resolutions simply say how our Society should be run. It doesn’t say how gṛhasthas should live. And on points of objection, Prabhupāda has already corrected us.”

“I think it may be further decided,” Prabhupāda continued. “Make a small committee of three or four gṛhasthas. Then you define how you live.”

Changing the subject, Prabhupāda asked when the paṇḍāl was going to be built. Today 350 devotees were expected to arrive from the West. The paṇḍāl stage was supposed to have been erected, and festivities, including theater, would begin in the evening. But the devotees, irrepressibly absorbed in the gṛhastha-sannyāsī issue, could not refrain from pursuing it further.

“That is the distinction between the enjoying spirit and the renouncing spirit?” asked Puṣṭa Kṛṣṇa Swami, returning to the theme.

“Hmmm?” Prabhupāda asked. Although the question was pointed, he remained poised, and detached from their party divisions. His idea of what to do was definite, but his method of teaching it was careful and gradual. He already knew well the difficult task of satisfying divergent views among his strong-minded disciples. For years he had been making the ultimate decisions and teaching his disciples how to go forward in a united way. Once again, an issue was building that only he could solve – if they would listen.

Puṣṭa Kṛṣṇa: “For example, as we have been discussing, there are different tendencies between the brahmacārīs and the gṛhasthas. The attitude of the brahmacārīs is toward renunciation. If a brahmacārī gives up his brahmacārī life to become a gṛhastha, that means he is more inclined to the enjoying spirit. At least to some extent. So how to deal with this situation?”

Prabhupāda: “If you want to enjoy, who can stop you?”

Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: “But we cannot support it. We cannot support his enjoyment. That he should take on himself.”

Prabhupāda: “According to different positions and attitudes, the four āśramas are there – brahmacārī, gṛhastha, vānaprastha, sannyāsa. This means that everyone is not on the equal platform. There are different platforms. But the whole idea is how to give up the propensity of enjoyment. That is wanted.”

Puṣṭa Kṛṣṇa: “We find in the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam that Śukadeva Gosvāmī would approach the householders in the morning just so long as to give them a little bit of spiritual knowledge, and he would accept the offering of some milk. So the sannyāsīs and renunciants, generally they wouldn’t very much relish the association of householders because of this enjoying spirit and the association that it entails. So we are finding also within our Society that those who are inclined to remaining celibate, they are finding the association of persons even within our movement who have this enjoying spirit to be somewhat detrimental to their own spiritual life.”

Prabhupāda: “Then what is your proposal? You should drive them away?”

Madhudviṣa: “Unless there is association, then they will never become purified.”

Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: “No, that is not the problem, because everyone comes together for association. They come together in the temple for kīrtana, for lectures, for prasādam … These things are common activities. There’s no question that we should not have common activities between all the āśramas. But for living there must be separate arrangement.”

Prabhupāda: “Now, even in the temple, you are complaining that a husband and wife are talking.”

Prabhupāda seemed almost coy in the way he gradually led and manipulated the issue. He was also hearing more clearly the minds and hearts of his divided disciples.

Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: “Yes, they are not talking Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam.”

Prabhupāda: “That you will find everywhere.”

Bhāgavata: “There’s a complaint that sometimes is made that there’s too much aversion on the part of the brahmacārīs. But isn’t that a quality of a brahmacārī, that he should have a healthy contempt for sense gratification?”

Prabhupāda: “I do not follow.”

The devotees crowded around as closely as possible. This was an important point.

Puṣṭa Kṛṣṇa: “He’s saying that sometimes the brahmacārīs and even the sannyāsīs may have a strong aversion to association with women and householder life. But sometimes the gṛhasthas will criticize the sannyāsīs and brahmacārīs and say, ‘This is fanaticism.’ The gṛhasthas say that this is just as bad as the enjoying spirit, because a sannyāsī is meditating on the same thing, except that he’s averse to it. So Bhāgavata dāsa’s question is, ‘Is it better to be neutral or to be averse?’ ”

Prabhupāda: “These are all fanaticism. Real unity is in advancing Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Kalau nāsty eva nāsty eva … . In the Kali-yuga you cannot strictly follow, neither I can strictly follow. If I criticize you, if you criticize me, then we go far away from our real life of Kṛṣṇa consciousness.”

Puṣṭa Kṛṣṇa: “So is it correct to say that if we are not Kṛṣṇa conscious, then if it’s not the gṛhastha problem it would be some other problem?”

Prabhupāda: “Yes. We should always remember that either gṛhastha or brahmacārī or sannyāsī, nobody can strictly follow all the rules and regulations. In the Kali-yuga it is not possible. If I simply find fault with you, and if you find fault with me, then it will be factional, and our real business will be hampered. Therefore Caitanya Mahāprabhu has recommended that hari-nāma, chanting Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra, should be very rigidly performed, which is common for everyone – gṛhastha, vānaprastha, and sannyāsa. They should always chant Hare Kṛṣṇa mantra, then everything will be adjusted. Otherwise, it is impossible to advance. We shall be complicated with the details only. This is called niyamāgraha. I think I have explained it.”

Madhudviṣa: “Yes, in The Nectar of Instruction.”

Prabhupāda: “Niyamāgraha is not good. Niyama means ‘regulative principles,’ and āgraha means ‘not to accept.’ Agraha means the opposite – too eager to accept the regulative principles, but no advancement spiritually. Both of them are called niyamāgraha. So the basic principle is that niyamāgraha is not recommended. If we advance in Kṛṣṇa consciousness by the simple method of chanting twenty-four hours – kīrtanīyaḥ sadā hariḥ – then things will be automatically adjusted.

“You cannot find in Kali-yuga that everything is being done very correctly to the point; that is very difficult. Just like our poet Allen Ginsberg, he was always accusing me, ‘Swamiji, you are very conservative and strict.’ Actually I told him, ‘I am never strict. Neither I am conservative. If I become conservative, then I cannot live here for a moment.’ So I am not at all conservative. I was living with one boy, Carl Yeargens. I was cooking, and I saw in the refrigerator some pieces of meat for his cat. So still I kept my food in that refrigerator. What can be done?”

They had been talking for over an hour, and Prabhupāda had given definitive instructions. But it was not over yet. It was clear, however, who was in control.

After three hours on the road, the buses had entered Māyāpur, and soon the devotees were seeing the Gaudiya Math temples, the Śrīvāsa Aṅgana, the samādhi of Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī, and the birthsite of Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu, all appearing one after the other, as the buses, horns blaring almost incessantly, veered around the winding turns of Bhaktisiddhānta Road. Villagers on foot and in rickshas, buffalo, goats, and cows moved hurriedly aside. Local residents looked up with curiosity and surprise at the sight of hundreds of Western bhaktas arriving to celebrate Gaura-pūrṇimā.

Then the arriving devotees saw, on the flat Māyāpur landscape, the pinkish hue and beautiful features of ISKCON’s Mayapur Chandrodaya Mandir, the place Śrīla Prabhupāda had prepared for them, the home of which they had heard so much. As the buses arrived at the gate to the ISKCON property, the devotees cheered to see the new domes and fields of flowers. And their eagerness to see Śrīla Prabhupāda increased. There would be formalities of registering and receiving a room, a few complications in locating and settling in, but nothing major. They were home now among fellow devotees. Soon they would be able to bathe in the Ganges and to hear the schedule for parikramas to the holy places.

Some devotees rested, while others met with friends from various places in the world. They shared the latest news and received experienced advice about the Ganges’ swift current and about avoiding dysentery and mosquitoes. By early evening they had all moved into their rooms and taken prasādam. The śāhnāi musicians, in a small room above the entrance gate, began playing an evening rāga. The sky darkened, and devotees began gathering in the brightly-lit temple room for a gigantic kīrtana.

These devotees had been working very hard in various cities throughout the world, and coming to Māyāpur was like a reward for their austerities and patient service. Now they could relax and enjoy spiritual life, with no responsibilities other than to worship the Deities, to see and hear Śrīla Prabhupāda, to chant Hare Kṛṣṇa, and to simply be Kṛṣṇa conscious in the eternal abode of Lord Caitanya.

When Prabhupāda heard that now almost six hundred devotees were gathered in his Māyāpur place of worship, he was very pleased. He inquired whether the prasādam and accommodations were sufficient and whether there would be a full schedule of engagements for everyone. Otherwise, he said, if the devotees remained idle, they would get sick or would gossip. He said everyone should simply chant Hare Kṛṣṇa, go on parikrama and engage in kṛṣṇa-kathā.

Prabhupāda had praised the party, which was responsible for thirty to forty percent of the total remittances to the American BBT. Men on the Rādhā-Dāmodara party lived with spiritually advanced sannyāsīs; they developed traits of austerity and detachment and had an enthusiasm for remaining celibate, without a need for marriage.

The Rādhā-Dāmodara party broke all records for book distribution and outdid all other zones and temples. An elite army of saṅkīrtana soldiers, they were the recognized world leaders of book distribution. More than eighty members of the party had arrived at the Māyāpur festival, and they were given a special reserved section in the best building for their residence.

But in their zealousness for renunciation and saṅkīrtana leadership, some of the Rādhā-Dāmodara brahmacārīs had developed a condescending attitude toward temple life and householders. This materialistic conception had reached the point where some men were judging the worth of a devotee on the basis of whether he wore white cloth (as a gṛhastha) or saffron (as a sannyāsī or brahmacārī). Anyone in white could not be a spiritually advanced devotee. At least, this was the misconception that the temple presidents felt had developed among some of the more immature members of the Rādhā-Dāmodara party.

The greatest grievance, however, was more practical than philosophical. The presidents claimed that the Rādhā-Dāmodara party was stealing men from the temples. The temple presidents compared stories and cited numerous instances to prove that men had been lured from their services in the temples to join the Rādhā-Dāmodara party. The philosophy that sannyāsīs were superior to gṛhasthas, the presidents said, was being used in an opportunistic way to convince men – the very best brahmacārīs – to give up their posts in Prabhupāda’s temple and join the Rādhā-Dāmodara group. This often caused serious difficulties.

The temple presidents considered the preaching of the Rādhā-Dāmodara party to be unbalanced and selfishly motivated. So acute had the disagreement grown that some temples had forbidden the Rādhā-Dāmodara party to visit, and some had banned Rādhā-Dāmodara sannyāsīs from lecturing to the devotees. The Rādhā-Dāmodara men, however, saw these restrictions as further proof of the householders’ small-mindedness and attachment.

Śrīla Prabhupāda bided his time on the volatile issue and went about his duties, receiving guests and supervising the management of the Māyāpur temple and the festival. He was lecturing daily in the temple and satisfying everyone. To his servants and secretaries, however, he revealed that the schism was causing him anxiety. That the temple presidents were angry disturbed him. One afternoon, he could not even take his nap because of worry.

“This is a very serious thing,” he said to Hari-śauri during the massage “ – this difference of sannyāsa and gṛhastha. Everything will be spoiled.”

Hari-śauri compared the present schism to the schism that had destroyed the Gaudiya Math.

Another time, when sitting in his room, Prabhupāda picked up a decorative bookmark a brahmacāriṇī had made for him. “Such nice service,” he said. “How can it be refused? I have never stopped them serving simply because they are women.”

Rāmeśvara came to Prabhupāda’s room and showed him some of the recent BBT publications. They discussed their business, turning at last to the sannyāsī-gṛhastha issue. As Rāmeśvara began to offer his opinion, Prabhupāda asked that other available sannyāsīs and G.B.C. men come in for the discussion.

Rāmeśvara was championing the temples’ cause, relating some of the financial and practical problems the temples were experiencing due to losing men to the Rādhā-Dāmodara party. When men left, then book distribution declined in those temples. In the face of the heavy propaganda for joining the traveling bus parties, how could the loyal temple devotees remain satisfied collecting money mostly for maintaining the temples, without being able to afford to distribute books? The temple devotees also wanted to have the ecstasy of book distribution, but that was becoming increasingly difficult due to the crippling tactics of the traveling bus parties. Rāmeśvara asked Śrīla Prabhupāda to clarify the philosophical misconception that gṛhasthas were not advanced enough to manage the brahmacārīs.

Prabhupāda mentioned the sannyāsī Choṭa Haridāsa, whom Lord Caitanya had rejected for only slight association with a woman. Yet Lord Caitanya had embraced a gṛhastha, Śivānanda Sena, on learning that Śivānanda Sena’s wife was pregnant. Prabhupāda said that although Lord Caitanya’s relationship with His sannyāsīs was different than His relationship with His gṛhasthas, both were transcendental. The gṛhasthas were encouraged to perform family duties and raise Kṛṣṇa conscious children.

Addressing the sannyāsīs present, Prabhupāda said that for them to be dwelling so much on the activities of the householders was inappropriate. It meant that the sannyāsīs were thinking about sex more than the householders were. If the sannyāsīs were thinking all day long about married life, they would become contaminated.

Prabhupāda then told a story to illustrate his point. Once two brāhmaṇas were about to cross a river when a lady appeared, in need of assistance in crossing. So one of the brāhmaṇas offered to carry her on his back. The other brāhmaṇa was shocked, but refrained from saying anything. After crossing the river, the lady thanked them very much and went her way. The two brāhmaṇas continued walking, but for hours the other brāhmaṇa continued to talk about the incident. “You let that woman climb on your back and touch your body,” he said, and he continued talking. Finally the other brāhmaṇa corrected him: “I carried her on my back for ten minutes, but you’ve been carrying her on your mind for three hours!”

Jayādvaita explained to Prabhupāda that the temple presidents felt the propaganda that gṛhasthas were incompetent to lead brahmacārīs was actually just a device. The real issue was men and money. By telling the temple brahmacārīs not to work under gṛhasthas, the Rādhā-Dāmodara sannyāsīs were able to lure the men from their authorized services in the temples.

Tamāla Kṛṣṇa agreed that if such false ideas were circulating, then they should be stopped, but he maintained that his party was not actually perpetrating such a philosophy.

Accusations passed back and forth before Śrīla Prabhupāda, who then delivered his opinion: “The standard should be not discrimination between gṛhastha and sannyāsī. We should simply see according to the advancement in Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Yei kṛṣṇa-tattva-vettā, sei ‘guru’ haya.* This principle should be followed – by his advancement in Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Phalena paricīyate. Judge by the results, not by the dress. We can see his position. By making party politics, everything will be finished.”

Prabhupāda said that a brahmacārī generally assisted a sannyāsī, and a sannyāsī was a preacher. The gṛhastha is also the appropriate man to take care of the temple. If a brahmacārī wanted to travel with a sannyāsī, therefore, that was all right. “But if he has a responsibility,” said Prabhupāda, “he must stay.” The real point, he said, was that the devotees should all think of themselves as servants of the six Gosvāmīs. The whole problem before them was caused by “forgetting we are servant of Kṛṣṇa.”

“It is not that a particular service is especially for a gṛhastha or a sannyāsī,” Prabhupāda continued. “He must be kṛṣṇa-dāsa. A servant’s service is judged by the results. Why this party and that party? Yei kṛṣṇa tattva-vettā, sei ‘guru’ haya. Bhaktivinoda was a gṛhastha. Bhaktisiddhānta was a sannyāsī. Is one better than the other? No. So there should not be threatening. We are now worldwide organization.”

Prabhupāda repeatedly quoted the verse kibā vipra, kibā nyāsī, śūdra kene naya / yei kṛṣṇa-tattva-vettā, sei ‘guru’ haya, thus dispelling the contention that āśrama determines the quality of a devotee. Whoever knows the science of Kṛṣṇa, whoever is fully engaged in the service of Kṛṣṇa, Prabhupāda stressed, that person is a pure devotee.

A sannyāsī, Prabhupāda said, could preach, but he could also manage. A gṛhastha could manage but could also preach. Although Prabhupāda had already brought up these points, now he was settling the issue completely. This discrimination, he said, must stop. It was not Kṛṣṇa conscious. And the G.B.C. should remove all resolutions discriminating against gṛhasthas.

Prabhupāda emphasized that the real standard was to be kṛṣṇa-dāsa, the servant of Kṛṣṇa. In that surrendered mood, a devotee should be expert and willing to do whatever service was needed. He gave the example that some fifty years ago, when he had been the manager in Bose’s laboratory in Calcutta, the workers had gone on strike. To the remaining workers he had said, “Come on, let’s pack.” They had accepted the menial labor, and the strike had been ended. Similarly, whatever capacity of service was required, a devotee should do it. “We must be very stubborn servant of Kṛṣṇa,” Prabhupāda said.

Prabhupāda pointed out that he was probably the first bona fide sannyāsī to arrange for his disciples’ marriages. Certainly he did not encourage disobeying the regulative principles, he said, but the real business was Kṛṣṇa’s service. If that included arranging for marriages, then it should be done. “But generally the division is that the sannyāsī is fully engaged in preaching,” he said. “And the sannyāsīs’ preaching should not be checked. Whoever is in charge of something, let him remain. If there is some discrepancy, try to correct it. In every rumor there is a grain of truth.”

Prabhupāda was not only defining and settling the immediate quarrels, but he was elevating all the devotees to the level of dedicated and inspired Kṛṣṇa consciousness. He was not siding with one party or watering down the philosophy to make peace. He was appealing to his disciples’ intelligence. And more than that, he was entering their hearts and making them satisfied and truly desirous of working with one another.

When Śrīla Prabhupāda stopped speaking, he asked for a response. Jayādvaita said he thought the presidents would be completely satisfied with Prabhupāda’s decisions. Tamāla Kṛṣṇa said that the G.B.C. would also be satisfied and that everyone, by Prabhupāda’s grace, could now go forward with the right understanding.

The devotees then left Prabhupāda’s room in a joyful mood, prepared to join the others and take part in an uplifting, nonpolitical Gaura-pūrṇimā festival.

The next morning Prabhupāda went for his walk on the roof of the Māyāpur building. As soon as he began circumambulating on the roof, at least two dozen devotees, mostly temple presidents and sannyāsīs, joined him.

The temple presidents felt victorious. Their positions were vindicated, and the misunderstandings of the philosophy had been straightened out. Now everything was proper. The whole affair had increased the devotees’ faith in Prabhupāda and in the wisdom of following his order without false prestige.

As they walked, Pañcadraviḍa Swami, in a mood of humorous relief to the tension of the past days, began questioning Prabhupāda in an odd way.

“Śrīla Prabhupāda,” he said, “there is one thing I don’t understand. In the Caitanya-caritāmṛta, that story of Sākṣi-gopāla – the Deity who came to witness for the young brāhmaṇa? So the young man was serving the old brāhmaṇa, and then the old brāhmaṇa promised the hand of his daughter in marriage, and then the Deity came to bear witness. So if he was such a pure devotee, why did he call the Deity to come such a great distance just so he could become married? Why didn’t he want to remain single? And why did he make the Deity come just for his marriage?”

It was not only the words but the way Pañcadraviḍa said them, jesting in the role of an overly-critical sannyāsī. And Prabhupāda immediately entered the joking spirit: “We are not against marriage. We are against illicit sex. But because no woman would have you, now you are saying that no one should marry. Just see the psychology here.”

The devotees began to laugh wildly.

“This is the sour grapes philosophy,” said Śrīla Prabhupāda. “Because no woman will have you, nobody wants you, therefore you are feeling this rejection and thinking that nobody should get married.”

Seated comfortably on his vyāsāsana, Śrīla Prabhupāda looked out over his reading spectacles at the long hall full of seated disciples. Two devotees fanned him with big cāmara whisks. The many glass chandeliers sparkled. At the opposite end of the hall stood the forms of Rādhā-Mādhava and Lord Caitanya.

“So here is a very specific statement about Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu,” said Prabhupāda. “He is avatāra. Caitanya Mahāprabhu is the same Supreme Personality of Godhead, but He is channa. Channa means covered, not directly. Because He has appeared as a devotee.”

Śrīla Prabhupāda explained why the Supreme Lord appeared in Kali-yuga as a devotee. “When Lord Kṛṣṇa appeared, He ordered everyone to ‘Surrender to Me.’ But they took it, ‘Who is this person asking like that? What right does he have? Why shall I give up?’ But God Himself, the Supreme Being, He must order. That is God. But we think otherwise: ‘Who is this man? Why is he ordering? Why shall I give up?’ ”

The whole process of Kṛṣṇa consciousness is submission, surrender to Kṛṣṇa, Śrīla Prabhupāda explained. But the way to surrender to Kṛṣṇa is to submit to His devotee, His representative.

“So Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu appeared this day for giving mercy to the fallen souls who are so foolish they cannot take to Kṛṣṇa consciousness. He is personally teaching them. That is this kīrtana.”

Later that morning Prabhupāda came down to the temple room again, this time to perform initiations. Fifteen devotees were receiving brahminical initiation, twenty-five were receiving first initiation, and seven men were receiving sannyāsa. Again Śrīla Prabhupāda quoted the verse that had become a theme for the festival: kibā vipra, kibā nyāsī, śūdra kene naya: “Either he is a gṛhastha or a sannyāsī, it doesn’t matter. He must become a guru. How? Yei kṛṣṇa-tattva-vettā. One who knows the principles of Kṛṣṇa consciousness, one who understands Kṛṣṇa, he can become a guru. Guru is the post given to the sannyāsīs and to the brāhmaṇas. Without becoming a brāhmaṇa, nobody can become a sannyāsī, and the sannyāsī is supposed to be the guru of both all the āśramas and all the varṇas. So, for preaching work we require so many sannyāsīs. People are suffering all over the world for want of Kṛṣṇa consciousness.”

Śrīla Prabhupāda cautioned the young men to live as very strict sannyāsīs. He also stressed that all his disciples should be training to become qualified as gurus. He quoted, “Yāre dekha tāre kaha kṛṣṇa-upadeśa. Anywhere, either you are in this district or that district, it doesn’t matter. Either you are at home or outside home, it doesn’t matter. You become a guru – everyone. ‘How shall I become guru? I have no qualification.’ Caitanya Mahāprabhu said that you don’t require any qualification. You simply require one qualification, that you repeat the instruction of Bhagavad-gītā, that’s all. Yāre dekha tāre kaha kṛṣṇa-upadeśa. You become a guru. Don’t adulterate kṛṣṇa-upadeśa like a rascal or nonsense. Present it as it is – Bhagavad-gītā. Then you can become a guru. You can become a guru in your family, you can become a guru in your society, your nation – wherever you are. And if it is possible, you go outside and preach this mission of Bhagavad-gītā. Therefore our movement’s name is Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Whatever Kṛṣṇa says, you accept and preach. You become guru.”

On Gaura-pūrṇimā day everyone fasted until moonrise, and most of the devotees walked down to the Ganges to bathe. Jayapatāka Swami told them that, according to śāstra, whoever bathed in the Ganges at Māyāpur during Gaura-pūrṇimā would become liberated from birth and death. In the early evening, pilgrims began arriving in great numbers. From all over West Bengal, people yearly visited the temples in Māyāpur, especially the birthsite of Lord Caitanya Mahāprabhu, and more recently ISKCON’s Mayapur Chandrodaya Mandir.

In Calcutta, people had seen the billboards advertising the ISKCON Gaura-pūrṇimā festival, and by word of mouth tens of thousands of villagers had heard about the longest building in West Bengal and the “golden” Deity of Rādhā-Mādhava. Devotees greeted the guests with prasādam and sold copies of Geetār gan, Śrīla Prabhupāda’s Bengali versification of Bhagavad-gītā.

By nighttime long streams of people were flowing in and out of the front gates. The crowds raised a cloud of dust, and the air filled with sounds of ricksha bells, women singing, friends talking, and the amplified kīrtana emanating from the temple. Most of the visitors walked through the temple, visited the photo exhibit, and then stayed for a while, watching the kīrtana or the theater performance at the outdoor paṇḍāl stage. Although the number of visitors approached a hundred thousand, the scene remained peaceful, as people moved along without pushing or hurrying, observing the customary respect of visiting a holy place.

Ānakadundubhi: Śrīla Prabhupāda would sit on the veranda looking over all of Māyāpur. I saw him watching some boys herding their cows. He was absorbed in watching the whole place. Then someone gave him a little pair of binoculars, and he would look out across Māyāpur, with one finger up in the air. He looked like a general. He was looking across to Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura’s house, and then he spotted the birthplace of Lord Caitanya. He looked at it very closely, and then he said, “Almost no men. They have no men.”

Satsvarūpa dāsa Goswami: One day Prabhupāda called in the G.B.C. members. It was in the afternoon, and we could see he was feeling very blissful. He was hearing the kīrtana in the temple. He said everyone should come to Māyāpur and chant twenty-four hours a day. He said, “There is so much room here. The morning class is so nice – Prahlāda Mahārāja’s instruction a million years ago. A five-year-old boy was speaking. The chanting, according to Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura, is the only solace. It is nothing material, the chanting. Ajāmila called the name of Nārāyaṇa and was saved.”

Prabhupāda said that batches of devotees should come to Māyāpur so that there should always be five hundred men present. Then a devotee said, “In America they are trying to chant more, twelve hours a day, trying to get a twenty-four-hour kīrtana schedule.” “Yes, everywhere,” Śrīla Prabhupāda said, “this chanting should go on. Instead of meetings, resolutions, dissolutions, revolutions, and then no solutions, there should be chanting.”

Gopavṛndapāla: I had guard duty, and Prabhupāda would get up around twelve midnight or one o’clock. He would be upstairs, and I would be one floor below. He was chanting a lot, pacing back and forth on the balcony. I couldn’t see him, but I could see his shaven head silhouetted. He was walking about ten steps one way and then ten steps the other way. I had a three-hour watch, and I sat there chanting my japa and watching Prabhupāda’s head go back and forth. Sometimes I could hear when his chanting was louder. I was reminded of Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī, because Śrīla Prabhupāda described many times the balcony where Bhaktisiddhānta Sarasvatī paced back and forth, envisioning and considering how to spread the Kṛṣṇa consciousness movement. So Prabhupāda was also pacing and thinking how to spread Kṛṣṇa consciousness.

Ānakadundubhi: In Prabhupāda’s room on the wall there was a beautiful sandalwood carving of Rādhā and Kṛṣṇa, just like on the Kṛṣṇa book cover, with Rādhā and Kṛṣṇa standing, Rādhārāṇī with Her arm around Kṛṣṇa, holding His flute, and Kṛṣṇa holding His cape around Her. When there weren’t any guests for darśana, Prabhupāda would just sit and look at that picture. He loved it very much. When I would take his garland up to him, he would wear it during darśana for about an hour and a half, then after darśana he would get up and go to the bathroom after first taking the garland off. Then he would come back and give the garland to Rādhā and Kṛṣṇa. A number of times I gave him garlands made of very fragrant little white flowers that Jananivāsa would give me. Prabhupāda used to take that garland and put it on Rādhā-Kṛṣṇa in such a beautiful way. It was the perfection of Deity worship, the way he put that little garland there.

Jananivāsa: Just before Prabhupāda left, I came up and I asked him, “Frankincense, Śrīla Prabhupāda?” There was no one else in the room at the time, and he was just chanting japa sitting in his room. I started to fill up the room with smoke from the frankincense. Smoke was coming out everywhere, and Prabhupāda kept the windows closed. He looked up and said, “This creates such an atmosphere of spiritual understanding. This is so nice, so nice.” Then he started chanting again.

Puṣṭa Kṛṣṇa: When Prabhupāda was finally finished conducting the Māyāpur festival, I asked him if he was tired. Prabhupāda said, “What tired? So many people are coming and hearing about Kṛṣṇa. When preaching, you feel refreshed.”