By bhakta Eric Johanson
Part 3 – Caricatures
For the average devotee not much changed with Srila Prabhupada’s departure from the physical plane. They still went to the morning program and spent the day engaged in the services laid out by the temple leaders they were accountable to. However, for the leaders, especially the GBCs at the top of the above described military-like hierarchy, something very big had changed in regard to accountability. Suddenly the person who had kept them in line for years was no longer there. And it was these GBCs that had the most temptation to enjoy the movement’s facilities. For all the years under Srila Prabhupada’s direction they had had to limit their hedonism and domination so as to minimize the chances that it would get to his attention. If they had designs to create their own little cults from among their Godbrothers and Godsisters, it had had to remain pretty much unspoken and low key.
With Srila Prabhupada’s departure the lid blew off for these men. There was no longer a ceiling. Their “oppressor” now gone, there was no one who could stop them, especially if a number of them conspired so as to minimize doubt from others and infighting among themselves. For anyone in such a consciousness, their guru is no longer present before them. Earlier we had written that the serious devotee always senses the presence of their guru. They are always accountable to him. Satsvarupa might have thus made a Freudian slip when he asked Srila Prabhupada about “that time when you’re no longer with us.” Regardless of his mindset at that time, however, for the conspiring eleven Srila Prabhupada was no longer present. Spiritually this is a very serious falldown, especially for the entrusted leaders of his spiritual institution. The question must be asked, “Would they have misrepresented Srila Prabhupada’s words in such a grossly self-serving way if he could later chastise them for it?”
When it nonetheless came time to act in the role they had assumed for themselves, the eleven turned out to be little more than caricatures of spiritual masters. They demanded that big seats or Vyasasanas be constructed in every temple of their designated world zone, almost as high and grand as Srila Prabhupada’s. Most of them assumed some kind of exalted “pada” title for themselves, such as Kirtanananda calling himself “Bhaktipada.” Pada would denote worshipping their feet as spiritual. Their imitation of Srila Prabhupada was so blatant so as to be comedic, having been more recently compared to Hans Christian Anderson’s Naked Emperor(s).
No one could laugh at the time; however, because anyone who would not take the spectacle as deadly serious was in real trouble as far as retaining their place in what just days before had been Srila Prabhupada’s movement. The eleven’s newly deputed hatchet men were sure to make everyone aware of what a thin line they were now on. Since most had donated all their possessions and money to the movement, they were completely dependent on it for their life-purpose and subsistence.
In this regard, all of their Godbrothers and Godsisters were required to worship one of the eleven as if they were as great as Srila Prabhupada at the temple’s daily guru puja ceremony. It had been reported in virtually every temple that the eleven had been almost instantly promoted, through the grace of Srila Prabhupada, from the lower rungs of devotional service to the topmost uttama adhikari level of pure, unflinching love of Krishna. This supposed miracle allegedly made them worthy of the “Srila” title-honorific, something normally reserved only for recognized great devotees. At the least they or their hatchet men said nothing to contradict this spontaneous ascension. Some pronounced it far and wide. Tamal Krishna wrote in his book, Servant of the Servant, that Srila Prabhupada “has considered them to be uttama adhikari” by virtue of their dedication to his mission.
Obviously, this strained the credulity and tolerance of virtually all the older disciples of His Divine Grace. Yet they were constrained by etiquette or fear of banishment “to protect the faith of the new people” who were fated to become the first disciples of these men. The eleven thus put the other disciples of Srila Prabhupada in a kind of psychological vise. These dedicated servants were used to submissively doing whatever was needed to support the movement, but being suddenly forced to worship these former peers as if they were as great as Srila Prabhupada pushed their discrimination to the limit. And this was only multiplied for the temple managers, who now had to absolutely submit to the dictates of Srila Whoeverpada, the supposed perfect pure devotee.
However, according to Vaishnava tradition the Godbrothers and Godsisters of the eleven were under no real obligation to accept any of them as guru. Submission was absolutely required, however, thus indicating the political nature of the takeover. What happened was Machiavelli at his peak.
Another curious aspect of the eleven becoming so-called gurus was how their “guru” duties largely overlapped with their GBC assignments to manage certain geographical areas or zones of the world. Each of them was assigned to “initiate” only in those temples. New uninitiated people were therefore encouraged to accept the “guru” assigned to their temple rather than examine a prospective guru in the scripturally recommended manner to determine if they could develop absolute faith in that person. The eleven therefore became better known as the “zonal acaryas.” This was another early manifestation of the overall GBC pattern described earlier – tradition or scriptural standards taking a back seat to those institutional management needs that arose from the political machinations of the most powerful.
There was, however, absolutely no room for entertaining doubt of any of the eleven. They were all put up on the same uttama level as Srila Prabhupada; so there was supposedly no need for a new person to examine their characters or histories, any more than one would do with His Divine Grace. Considering what was to come in this tragicomedy, this standard of perfection was more than laughable.
Anyway, as the eleven staked out their separate world domains, styles and modes of operation were established, what to speak of dissent. In regard to the latter, it was ultimately met with an iron fist, and many of Srila Prabhupada’s dearest disciples became its victims. The eleven’s handling of doubt and distrust on the part of their Godbrothers and Godsisters was what really betrayed their supposed perfection. Many of the zonals were all of audacious, aggressive, ruthless and harsh. And these are not the qualities of Godly men given in the Bhagavad-gita. In fact they are those of the opposite group of people – demons.
The zonal acaryas audaciously accused doubters of attacking both Srila Prabhupada and the movement. In September 1978, a few months into their regime, Giriraja Swami, the Bombay, Juhu Beach, temple president, wrote an essay to the GBC pointing out the obvious – that imitating an uttama adhikari was dangerous and could lead to falldown. Indeed, this same warning was to be found in Srila Prabhupada’s books, books that had supposedly been thoroughly read and realized by all of the eleven.
“However, one should not imitate the behavior of an advanced devotee or maha-bhagavata without being self-realized, for by such imitation one will eventually become degraded….. The devotee should also know his own position and should not try to imitate a devotee situated on a higher platform.” Purport, Nectar of Instruction, Text 5
Srila Prabhupada’s guru had been even more explicit in this regard:
“It is to be understood that those who artificially imitate the transcendental activities of the maha-bhagavata Vaisnava with the desire to accumulate mundane fame as a devotee have no attitude of service to the lotus feet of the Lord. Although in order to gratify their own material senses they proudly accept the dress of devotees, their artificial external exhibition of devotional symptoms is simply meant to cheat people. Pure devotion to Krsna is present wherever the symptoms of dharma-dhvajis, vaidalavratis, and baka-vratis are absent, and pride, duplicity, and extraneous motives are present wherever such faults are found.” Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Prabhupada, Commentary, Sri Chaitanya Bhagavata, Adi 16.229, English translation by Bhumipati dasa
Here Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Prabhupada states the obvious, a fact that the GBC has been unable to admit now for over 45 years – that the charade of imitating maha-bhagavatas turned the eleven into dharma-dhvajis or those who pretend to be devotees – “no attitude of service to the lotus feet of the Lord.” They may have once been serious neophyte devotees, but that certainly came to an end with their imitation. And we are herein only describing a fraction of their “pride, duplicity, and extraneous motives.”
Anyway, Giriraja Swami’s attempt to help the eleven avoid embarrassment and falldown netted him only spleen and contempt. Hamsadutta Swami’s 33 page reply said, among other things, that he was, “trying to depreciate Srila Prabhupada by depreciating the devotees who are appreciating Srila Prabhupada and trying to make others appreciate. . . ,” and that, “If anyone is trying to usurp Srila Prabhupada’s position it is Giriraja Swami and not anyone else. As a matter of fact, he has done so by issuing such a paper.”
Both Giriraja and the eleven were brahmana initiates of Srila Prabhupada. Giriraja’s paper should therefore have been met with polite debate on the philosophical points raised. Hamsadutta’s reply, on the other hand, was little more than a tyrannical attempt to silence the opposition with intimidation and political power. It was also pretty duplicitous; Hamsadutta knowing well there had been no direct order from Srila Prabhupada that named either him or the others as gurus. Apparently a good company man, however, Giriraja saw what was in the wind and came over to the zonal’s side.
A Center of “Fault-Finding and Enviousness”
The only prominent temple not directly under the GBC management of one of the eleven was Guru Kripa Swami’s Krishna Balarama Mandir in Vrindavana, India, the sight of Lord Krishna’s most intimate pastimes. When zonal acaryas Bhagavan dasa and Tamal Krishna Swami visited there in August 1978 they were upset that their feet weren’t bathed, that their new “pada” titles not sung or that new Vyasasanas (thrones) had not been installed for their worship. Guru Kripa Swami said that Srila Prabhupada had given no instructions for such things. Another of the eleven, Ramesvara Swami, said that the Vrindavana temple was “anti-guru” and spreading “doubt and confusion and distrust.”
Guru Kripa Swami was good friends with Yasodanandana Swami, who was also based in Vrindavana. Srila Prabhupada’s longtime Sanskrit editor, Pradhyumna dasa, who was somewhat well versed in Vaishnava tradition and practice, was also there. In August 1978 Pradhyumna wrote a letter to Satsvarupa pointing out that Srila Prabhupada had named no successors, and that the standard of worship the zonals were accepting was way too high and should not be taking place in Srila Prabhupada’s temples but in a separate place. Godbrothers and Godsisters of the supposed guru were also said to not be required to worship him. The letter cited the practice of other Vaishnava gurus of only sitting on thin rugs and not before their guru’s seat. He also gave the same warning as Giriraja and pointed out that the zonal limitation or designation of each of the eleven was a “material consideration,” that it made the zonal’s temples a “private place.” Interestingly enough, in regard to Srila Prabhupada’s desire for what should have been done instead after his departure, he also referenced what was in a quote we had cited earlier:
“If Guru Maharaja could have seen someone who was qualified at that time to be acarya he would have mentioned. Because on the night before he passed away he talked of so many things, but never mentioned an acarya. His idea was acarya was not to be nominated amongst the governing body. He said openly you make a GBC and conduct the mission. So his idea was amongst the members of GBC who would come out successful and self effulgent acarya would be automatically selected.” Letter to Rupanuga, Tirupati, 28 April, 1974
Pradhyumna, however, was under the impression, due to not having been allowed access to the May 28th “appointment tape,” that the eleven had been appointed to initiate after Srila Prabhupada’s departure. Mainly he was questioning the level of worship they were accepting.
Through 1978 Krishna Balarama temple became the center of polite and scriptural resistance to the zonal takeover, and a debate challenge was made to the eleven. This was to take place at the spring 1979 GBC meeting there. Kailasa Candra dasa, a philosophical devotee, was commissioned by Yasodanandana to write the position paper for the dissenters, and Pradhyumna would debate for them. In addition to the points in Pradhyumna’s letter, the paper mentioned that some arrangement was needed for others to become guru and that the zonals, through Sridhara Maharaja’s recommended “Acarya Board,” had disproportionate power on the GBC. It was also written under the impression that the eleven had been appointed by Srila Prabhupada to initiate. Hridayananda Swami represented the zonals in the debate.
According to Kailasa Candra’s account, the debate was initially civil and Pradhyumna was clearly prevailing, something that made the eleven quite uncomfortable. When Pradhyumna brought out how the south Indian Vaishnava lines of Madhvacarya and Ramanujacarya more sedately handle succession of gurus, Hridayananda suddenly became aggressive and rude, saying there was no need to care what these lines did. He continued shouting, saying that Pradhyumna was only engaged in offending gurus, that the eleven were unassailable, that all the dissenters wanted only to become gurus themselves, and that the movement was going on fine everywhere else but that Pradhyumna and Yasodanandana had poisoned Vrindavana temple with fault-finding and enviousness. And so on. Hridayananda thus also made a mockery of both civility and brahminical conduct.
What followed were similar pronouncements by others of the eleven as well as their enablers on the GBC. The zonals clearly did not see the debate as a polite opportunity to resolve differences in such a way as to serve Srila Prabhupada’s desires. Their plan was, according to Kailasa Candra, to “invoke fear, doubt and guilt” in the dissenters in order to achieve complete triumph and further the momentum of their regime. Considering the politeness of the dissenters, as well as their not at all challenging the appointment of the eleven, such treatment was extremely harsh and disproportionate. Afterwards Pradhyumna was heard to say, “These men are not honest.”
The fallout of the “debate” was that Pradhyumna’s service of finishing the Srimad Bhagavatam translation and commentary, as ordered directly by Srila Prabhupada, was taken away and given to Hridayananda. Devotees who had signed the position paper were also commanded to disavow it or face being ostracized. Virtually all complied. The 1979 GBC resolutions also warned about the poisonous philosophy of Kailasa Candra, who did not remove his name from the paper. Finally he, Pradhyumna, Guru Kripa and Yasodanandana all sooner or later left the ISKCON institution.
Eleven Big Animals
Giriraja, Pradhyumna and the 1979 Position paper had pointed out how other Vaishnava gurus avoided the danger of false pride and falldown by not expecting honor in accepting too high a standard of worship. This was also exactly what was expected of a “regular guru,” which is the standard ordered by Srila Prabhupada in the same “appointment tape” conversation that supposedly made the zonals gurus. It is therefore interesting that they used this conversation for their “appointment” but then blatantly ignored it in regard to how they conducted themselves.
In general a serious devotee is very careful about excessive honor and distinction, especially if they are still a conditioned soul not on the platform of love of God. This is because all conditioned souls are demons of some kind. The sincere soul tries to be constantly aware of this evil inherent in their conditioned nature.
“Every one of us who is in this material world is more or less a demon. Every one of us. Because just like in the prison house there may be some first-class prisoners, second-class prisoners or third-class prisoners, all of them to some extent are criminals—violated the laws of the state. That is the position. Everyone. Similarly, anyone who is in this material world, he is to some extent a criminal. Criminal in this respect: that he has defied the authority or the supremacy of God. The degree may be different, but all of them, they have defied.” Class on Bhagavad-gita 10.1-3, Calcutta, March 6, 1973
“The personified Vedas continued: ‘Dear Lord, when a person is able to purify his mind, senses and intelligence by engaging himself in devotional service in full Kṛṣṇa consciousness, his mind becomes his friend. Otherwise, his mind is always his enemy.’” Krsna Book 87
The serious devotee is therefore constantly alert to keep the mind fixed on Krishna and His service so as to prevent it from taking them back to their previous conditioned mentality. And what are some of the things the conditioned mind wants most?
“Everyone is doing like that: ‘I shall acquire so much money, bank balance, and my business should be so big, and I shall be minister, I shall be president, so that everyone will offer me respect.’ Lābha-pūjā-pratiṣṭhā: profit and adoration and fame. These three things everyone wants.” Class on Bhagavad-gita 10.1-3, Calcutta, March 6, 1973
The 1979 dissenters were therefore acting as the eleven’s well-wishers when they pointed out the dangers of accepting the same opulent and high standard of worship as Srila Prabhupada. Pūjā-pratiṣṭhā indeed. At this point it should be clear that the reason the dissenters were treated so harshly was because they were seen, not as well-wishers, but as threats. But threats to what? Although they were certainly threats to the zonal’s great charade, primarily they threatened the Machiavellian takeover of the movement’s assets. In other words, the zonals saw this fundamentally as a turf war, the same way a bull elk views his rivals. This then was the new consciousness that the zonals were propagating throughout the movement, and what they were initiating the newcomers into. And this turf staking mentality was indicated by how each of them had an exclusive world zone. That way the lesser of the eleven animals would be assured of at least some turf of their own.
The commodity of greatest interest on this turf was worship as well as the domination that comes with being a “guru,” – overlording, adoration and fame. And as implied by the dissenters, the eleven became intoxicated with it. This being the fate of dharmadhvajis, as indicated previously by Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Prabhupada, the eleven, both individually and collectively, eventually created chaos of one degree or another. Some fell down with drugs or alcohol, some with women and one with men. Jayatirtha dasa was beheaded by an angry disciple. Tamal Krishna, almost certainly the driving force behind the whole zonal scam, died in his sleep in a horrific 2002 car crash.
aikāntikī harer bhaktir
“Devotional service of the Lord that ignores the authorized Vedic literatures like the Upanishads, Puranas, and Narada-pañcaratra is simply an unnecessary disturbance in society.” Bhakti-rasamrita-sindhu 1.2.101
However, in keeping with the GBC’s coverup and denial of the truth of the zonals, Tamal was still honored as a “guru” at the time of his demise. In an act of supreme audacity they even erected a tomb-samadhi to house his shattered bones in the greatest holy place in Gaudiya Vaishnavism, Vrindavana. This alone is indicative of how much the institution is invested in perpetuating the lies of its past. The man died in a completely inauspicious manner. It is almost certain he wasn’t thinking of Krishna – because he was sleeping. Yet they treat him as if he was on the highest level of Krishna consciousness, when now, in reality, he is probably a ghost roaming the crash site or his tomb. This man may have once been a good devotee, but he died a great pretender and materialist, committed to elevating his position in the institution. That is undoubtedly why he is still honored by the other ladder climbers.
The dharmadhvaji takes falling into material consciousness to a whole other level. An ordinary devotee may contemplate sense gratification or even fall down into sinful activity. Still, if he or she remains rightly situated in devotional service, the Gita says they remain saintly:
api cet su-durācāro
bhajate mām ananya-bhāk
sādhur eva sa mantavyaḥ
samyag vyavasito hi saḥ
”Even if one commits the most abominable actions, if he is engaged in devotional service, he is to be considered saintly because he is properly situated.” Bhagavad-gita 9.30
The dharmadhvaji, on the other hand, makes an occupation of being in material consciousness, of making a show of something they are not. For the ordinary devotee who is sincere (not pretending), devotional service is so powerful that it eventually purifies them of their bad habits. Srila Prabhupada writes in the purport to the above verse:
“On the other hand, one should not misunderstand that a devotee in transcendental devotional service can act in all kinds of abominable ways; this verse only refers to an accident due to the strong power of material connections. Devotional service is more or less a declaration of war against the illusory energy. As long as one is not strong enough to fight the illusory energy, there may be accidental falldowns. But when one is strong enough, he is no longer subjected to such falldowns, as previously explained. No one should take advantage of this verse and commit nonsense and think that he is still a devotee. If he does not improve in his character by devotional service, then it is to be understood that he is not a high devotee.” Purport, Bhagavad-gita 9.30
The dharmadhvaji is among those described at the end of this purport – “No one should take advantage of this verse and commit nonsense and think that he is still a devotee.” Also, as stated there, this applies to a (“not a high”) weak devotee that remains a victim of bad habits. However, because such a devotee can be shamed into admitting their flaws, even they are better association than the dharmadhvaji. This is because, despite the dharmadhvaji’s dedication to the bad habit of pretense (duplicity), he demands that others worship him and treat him as a great saintly person. In the case of the zonals, they demanded that be seen on the highest, uttama level. The dharmadhvaji thus makes a declaration of committing nonsense, a kind of vow of preaching untruth, a formal arrangement that others are forced to accept. The 1979 dissenters more than learned the price of trying to shame a dharmadhvaji(s). This pretentious propagation of untruth in the name of truth is why Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura says that even the materialistic non-devotees are better association.
“One should give up the association of dharmadvajis, the hypocritically devout, with special care. Those who accept the external signs of dharma but do not actually follow dharma are called dharmadvajis. There are two types of dharmadvajis—the hypocrites and the fools, or the cheaters and the cheated. Such hypocrisy in jnana-kanda and karma-kanda is also condemned. In devotional service this hypocrisy ruins everything. Better associate with sense enjoyers, for in this whole world there is no worse association than the dharmadvaji. The deceitful dharmadvajis accept the signs of dharma with a desire to cheat the world, and to fulfill their crooked desires they cheat the foolish by helping them in their rascaldom.” Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura, Sri Bhaktyaloka, Six Faults that Destroy Bhakti, Jana Sanga
Here the Thakura dispels the illusion of the ISKCON institution claiming that the zonal acaryas were good devotees as long as they chanted their rounds and followed the four rules and regulations. If we take this quote at face value, these dharmadhvajis are even worse association than māyāvādīs, who are said by Sri Chaitanya Mahaprabhu to doom those who hear from them. If, as Srila Prabhupada wrote in the purport above, the dharmadhvaji continues to commit their pretending nonsense, then they should not think of themselves as devotees. This means that dharmadhvajis like the eleven have reverted to a very insidious type of demoniac consciousness.
“Cheating and weakness are two separate things. Persons devoid of a cheating propensity achieve perfection in life, but a cheater is never successful. Vaishnavism is another name for simplicity. Cheaters are non-devotees. Sincere persons can be weak, but they are not cheaters. Cheaters say something and do something else. Weak people are embarrassed by their defects, whereas cheaters are maddened by their achievements. They think, ‘I will cheat the ācārya,’, ‘I will deceive the doctor,’, ‘’I will nourish the poisonous snake of my sinful propensity with banana and milk, hiding him in the hole of my cheating propensity,’ and, ‘I will demand name and fame from the people while posing as a saint.’ These are not symptoms of weakness but of utter deceitfulness. Such cheaters will never achieve any good. By hearing humbly from saints with a sincere attitude, however, one will gradually attain auspiciousness. After accepting tridaṇḍi-sannyāsa, if one remains busy with worldly activities, thinking that family life is more important than spiritual life or maintaining the sinful mentality of kidnapping Sita from Rama as Ravaṇa did even while dressed as a devotee, then one is a self-killer. We are far from the worship of Hari. Even if we have weakness and have enough anarthas to last us for millions of years, we are not as plagued by misfortune as if we possessed a cheating propensity. It is better to take birth as animals or birds than to take shelter of cheating.” Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura Prabhupada, Amrta Vani: Nectar of Instructions of Immortality, Translated from Bengali by Bhumipati dāsa
“Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu has therefore strictly forbidden us to associate with Māyāvādī philosophers. Māyāvādi-bhāṣya śunile haya sarva-nāśa: if one associates with the Māyāvāda philosophy, his devotional life is doomed.” Purport, Srimad Bhagavatam 7.15.6
A dharmadhvaji is dangerous because they pollute the intelligence of those who accept their pretense. Real Krishna consciousness, on the other hand, is a process of reforming or purifying the intelligence of the conditioned soul. The criteria that one uses to optimize sense gratification are replaced by those in the guidance of the pure devotee in regard to optimizing the pleasure of Krishna. Thus the mind, now accepting and rejecting on the basis of Krishna’s sense gratification, becomes the devotee’s real friend, as stated previously by the Personified Vedas.
“In the Bhagavad-gītā you’ll find this word, buddhi-yoga. What is that buddhi-yoga? Buddhi-yoga means yena mām upayānti te, dadāmi buddhi-yogaṁ tam. That is buddhi-yoga. Intelligence means to know how to go back to home, back to Godhead. That is intelligence, not that intelligence how to cheat you, how to get some money, hook and crook. That is not intelligence. . . . To endeavor too much for the āhāra-nidrā-bhaya-maithunaṁ ca, that is not considered buddhi. That buddhi, intelligence, is there even in the ant, a small ant. The real buddhi-yoga is how to be engaged in devotional service of the Lord. That is buddhi-yoga. How to become first-class devotee of Kṛṣṇa. That is called buddhi-yoga. Buddhi-yogaṁ dadāmi taṁ yena mām upayānti te. That is buddhi-yoga. How to go back to home, back to Godhead, that is buddhi.” Lecture on Srimad Bhagavatam 7.9.9, Mayapur, February 16, 1976
“Therefore you have to go to an intelligent person. . .. . Real intelligence means…, seriousness means that he takes knowledge from a man who is better intelligent than him. That is real intelligence.” Philosophy Discussion on Edmund Husserl
The dharmadhvaji’s inflated status itself immediately pollutes the intelligence of anyone who accepts it. They thus discriminate on the basis of something false instead of factually true. The followers of the pretender operate under at least this one misconception. This alone contaminates the supposed purity of the followers otherwise fixing their minds on Krishna. And this just leads to more misconception, because they accept everything that the pretender says as non-different from Krishna or Srila Prabhupada.
In regard to the zonal’s other deviations from Vaishnava standards or Srila Prabhupada’s guidance, the 1979 position paper and Pradhyumna’s 1978 letter are a good start. We should not forget that the eleven zonals had free reign to say and enact virtually anything in the name of Krishna consciousness. After Srila Prabhupada’s immediate departure, book distribution continued as the primary fund raising technique virtually everywhere. However, as time passed many of the individual zonals switched over to materialistic paraphernalia sales simply because it brought in more money.
“We give different varieties of engagement, Kṛṣṇa consciousness. We should not divert our energy. Now when we are selling book, that is Kṛṣṇa consciousness. We are selling book. But if we think that the selling book may be diverted into selling jewelry, that is not very good idea. That is not very good idea. Then we become again jeweler. Punar mūṣika bhava. Again become mouse. We should be very much careful. Our Kṛṣṇa consciousness cannot be diverted. Then you are gone to hell.” Lecture on Srimad Bhagavatam 1.08.25, Los Angeles, April 17, 1973