I was reading Brahmacarya in Krishna Consciousness yesterday.

Hold on. Let me rephrase that….

No. That is what I was doing. I really was reading Brahmacarya in Krishna Consciousness!

See?

I remember sitting in the Philly ashrama and we’d be tossing quotes back and forth, half making fun, half in awe that people could actually live like this.

My favorite? “If you’re thinking about getting married, stop it.” But then, of course, it goes on to explain that even though marriage isn’t the best thing to do, most folks will do it and here’s how to get to that point.

Now what am I doing reading this book? Me, the guy who has never been a brahmacari! Honestly, I just wanted to take a funny picture of me reading Brahmacarya in Krishna Consciousness.

But, truth be told, it’s a hard one to put down! Sure there are things I most definitely don’t agree with (the homosexuality bit being one of them). But his general mood is basically “be strict with yourself and lenient with others.” That’s a philosophy I can get behind. If only I were strict with myself, that is.

It then dawned on me just how conservative I can be about certain things in Krishna consciousness. Which is odd, because I’m fairly liberal with a lot of things too. On the liberal side, I’m pretty ok with females in the renounced order (sort of like Malati prabhu), I’m fine with gay folks and am very ok with having friends of both sexes in Krishna consciousness.

My more conservative side has to do with temple living. To live in a temple, I feel, that you should be a celibate monk, a brahmacari. I don’t think that Grhastas (householders) should live in a temple. If there’s an emergency or something like that, sure. But generally speaking, the ashrama is for monks.

I don’t feel that brahmacaris should get paid for their service. Ever. It’s service. If you want to be paid, get a job and become a grhasta. But, of course, the flip side to that is that the temple MUST supply everything the devotee needs. From living quarters to a library with all of Srila Prabhupada’s books to health care to proper meals. This includes temple presidents. TPs should live in the temple – how else will they know what really needs to be done? The temple should meet 100% of their needs as well.

I don’t think that temple devotees of different sexes should really have much to do with each other. I don’t think that’s too much to ask. Look at the Shakers, for example. Men and women lived in perfect harmony. They even used separate doors to enter the dining hall and the church. Sure, that was in Victorian and pre-Victorian times, but there’s no reason why that can’t be done today (I don’t mean the separate doors idea – just speaking in general).

I’ve got a problem with brahmacaris with computers. I know that for service, one is often needed. And a computer is a way to keep in touch with family, etc. That’s important. But for brahmacaris to have them in their rooms? I don’t think that’s a great idea. I’ve seen at New Vrndavana just how much they love the Tru ads on Myspace. I was going to install an adblocker on the second floor computer, but I would feel bad breaking their little saffron hearts.

Also, I don’t think that brahmacaris should be put in charge, or have much to do with, milking the Indian guests. I don’t think milking the Indian community is a good philosophy anyway, but to put brahmacaris in charge of it, where they are in contact with families, etc., it’s just a bad idea. It turns them into businessmen. Brahmacaris shouldn’t have to deal with that.

I also feel that every new devotee should live in a temple for at least three months. I know that’s a hard one to enforce. It’s pretty well impossible for a lot of people (it was impossible for me). But for those who can, they should. I lived in a temple for a little bit and loved it. I wish I could have stayed longer. And looking back, I should have stayed longer!

I guess I’m fairly old school when it comes to brahmacarya. I’d probably find myself agreeing with Danavir Maharaja more than not.

Though, speaking of sannyasis, I’m kind of conservative there too. Sannyasis (older men in the renounced order) should behave like sanyasis! They have no business at all arranging marriages, counseling marriages, giving marriage advice, etc. Not only is it something they know nothing about, the advice, which is often taken to heart, is often just bad… because they know nothing about marriage. And that’s ok. They shouldn’t know anything about marriage! Just because a sannyasi may be a pure devotee, doesn’t mean I’d get him to fix my car. A pure devotee may not be able to give material advice on issues he or she knows nothing about. Like, in this case, marriage. Go to sannyasis and elder devotees for spiritual advice. But sannyasis may not be the best devotees to go to for material or matrimonial advice.

Also, as Bir Krishna Goswami has stated, sannyasis have no business in managerial positions. That includes temple presidents. Their duty is to travel and preach (to the devotees and nondevotees alike). That’s it.

And speaking of business, sannyasis have no business in matters of business. I’ve seen some sannyasis with enough wealth to make Solomon blush! Why? The temple they’re based out of, or perhaps ISKCON in general, should fun the travels, the meals and maybe give a little laxmi when needed.

Sannyasis who can’t travel due to health reasons should be taken care of and respected. Just like in the case of the brahmacaris, every expense and need, including health care, should be taken care of by the temple.

The templeroom should be split down the middle with men on the right, women on the left. That’s how it’s traditionally done, that’s how Srila Prabhupada set it up. None of this women in the back crap. Some temples put men on the left, women on the right. Nono, you have it backwards. There’s a reason why it’s traditionally set up this way. Sure, on festivals and Sunday Feasts, when more devotees show up, it almost has to be whatever it is, but for the aratis, it should be traditional.

I also feel that money raised by the temple should be kept by the temple, as it’s generally done. But please, no weird charities. Srila Prabhupada didn’t risk his life to come to America so that we could open hospitals in India. Our charity is the holy name and prasadam distribution.

Wow. Maybe I’m coming off like our friend Bhakta Dick, but I don’t understand why this can’t be done? Buddhists and Catholic monks don’t have these problems. Why have we created all this extra silliness?

All of this is NOT to say that brahmacaris should act like jerks to the ladies (or vise versa). We can all get along perfectly if we’d just lose that ego thing. Remember: separate, but equal. Women should be encouraged to give classes, lead kirtana, etc., just as the men are encouraged to do so. Anything else is based upon a bodily/material conception. It’s not spiritual.

And to sum it all up, my hat is off to the devotees who can live this lifestyle. I secretly wish I could. And maybe someday I will.

I took the picture at the top this morning. I posted it on MySpace as a “funny picture.” In response, my friend Jagannatha Priya from Columbia took one of her own… Jaya!! Being a devotee is so much fun!

Related posts:

1. Tractors – Was Srila Prabhupada … wrong?
2. Happiest picture I’ve ever seen
3. passage. – picture of the books
4. Indian Vs. Chinese (not really, but here’s a picture of Calder)
5. Wages for Sages VS. Salaries for Sudras