Who or what is a devotee?

Vaishnava or devotee of Krishna means almost the same thing, but to know exactly what or who they are theoretically is difficult, and it is even more complicated in real live. 

In the picture, Bhagavan and Vishambar are still in white

Dictionary shows that words possess several definitions. They often have a figurative meaning on top of it. Their history over the centuries evolved and may change their understanding. This is for example the case of the words science, myth, soul, democracy, person, intelligence, instinct, etc.

Who is a devotee or a vaishnava, that is the question? Srila Bhaktisiddhanta sets the bar very high for such qualifications.

 “The transcendental conception of thinking “I am dust at the lotus feet of my spiritual master; I am the servant of guru and Krsna” is what is meant by trnad api sunicena (becoming lower than grass). Jive-daya (compassion toward all living entities), nama-ruci (taste for the holy names), and Vaisnava-seva — these are Mahaprabhu’s three teachings. The meaning of trnad api sunicena is not disingenuousness, merely flaunting a show of humility; it means actual eligibility for kirtana by nama-ruci and considering oneself a servant of the holy name. Service is the gateway to nama-ruci; service to guru and Vaisnavas is trnad api sunicata. We should not become subordinate to nondevotees, but to devotees, from whom we should beg mercy and show respect. The mahajanas instructed us not to display humility before everyone. To show humility toward envious atheists like Ravana and the pretentious brahmanas is not Vaisnava-seva or trnad api sunicena. If we transgress this instruction we will never become qualified to chant the holy name or attain nama-ruci; rather, our actions will result in becoming envious of others.…”

Another question is (I underlined in the text the expressions which prompted me to ask): can you have compassion for all living entities, without humility toward them to some extent?

Is it a good question or not? Anyway, question are always welcome and are sign of intelligence, they say.

The meaning of "lower than a blade of grass" has not to do with a flaunting of humility, says Bhaktisiddhanta Maharaj. A devotee serves only another devotee, not demons or non devotees. Only someone who is pure and has attained perfection in kirtana deserves such service. Humility is to become the dust at the lotus feet of Guru and Krishna, that's it. It is the meaning of real devotional service such as instructed by the Mahajanas. 

Thus, I have paraphrased Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Maharaj. His disciple, the founder of the Hare Krishna movement, Srila Prabhupada, used to say that his own disciples, generally Westerners, could never qualify as servants of his guru.

We are not fit to serve Radharani, that's for sure, but we practice, thinking we are special since we have received the Guru's merci. We see that devotees like to wander through the streets of Vrindavan shouting "jay radhe!" They call themselves Radharani's servants. 

Devotees are of different kinds. That we know, we learned it. They are: kanistha, madhyam and uttama. We don't need to go through that again. However, we can discuss about disciples not being able to accompagne Srila Prabhupada during his daily walk... 

Only a few of them could enjoy his presence. Were they the best ones? The most humble? How about the other ones who were frustrated not to have his association? Is this because they didn't distribute enough books? Because they didn't make enough sacrifices, although they worked from morning to night to be in his presence after a separation of one or two years? Is it because they didn't understand, ahead of its time, what the ritvik system was, concerning the personal relationship with him? Was it a punishment or a subtil form of spiritual selection? 

We can discuss this to deepen our understanding of what is a devotee and the rationalization behind it.

•••

Another definition for humility given by Srila Prabhupada to Harivilas. 

Harivilas: I remember going on a morning walk around the Bois de Boulogne in which there are some lakes, and I remember asking Prabhupada a question. I asked several questions, but one specific question was, “Srila Prabhupada, what does it mean to be humble?” And his answer was really incredible. He said, “Humility means that you are convinced beyond any doubt that there is nothing in this world, absolutely nothing in this world, not your money, not your family, not your fame, not your gun, not your education, nothing that will save you except the mercy of Krishna. When you are convinced like this, then you are humble.” And that explanation really impressed me. In other words, he was saying when you depend completely on Krishna and no longer rely on any material thing or formula as a backup, you have no longer any backup, just the mercy of Krishna, then you will actually be humble. So that was a wonderful explanation that he gave, and that stayed with me all these years because that is actually the foundation of humility in Krishna consciousness. And obviously Prabhupada was an example of that.▪︎

This statement  should not override the fact that it does not exempt us from being humble in everyday life with our peers, and particularly the devotees. 

Being humble means also being practical and having our feet on the ground, if we are not a sannyasi, and certainly much less an avadhutta.

This remark is not adressed to his Grace Harivilas Prabhu; he knows this truism better than anyone else. When he was in France, he always resisted Bhagavan, ex guru called the King, and tried to make him understand the primacy of this attitude: grihasthas must work to sustain their families and not be mendicants, depending on the good will of Providence (or the government). 

In regard to humility, I remember him when he was president of Paris temple in the end of the 70s. He had the toilets cleaned by the brahmanas, instead of new devotees.

Although Prabhupada gave to Harivilas the ultimate or absolute definition of humility, he applied it to make the brahmana I was to clean the toilets for the karmis, I mean the guest who came every day for a free prasadam meal. In France, philosophers call this application of humility —pragmatism. 

Read or hear more from Harivilas das.

•••

When discussing with devotees, they tell you they have no interested in history or any science, they are concerned only with Prabhupada's teachings.

"Better to die without a doctor." Prabhupada said. "That’s the best principle. Don’t call any doctor. Simply chant Hare Kṛṣṇa and die peacefully. These hospitals are just for giving experiences."

Srila Prabhupada did not like doctors. Therefore, devotees take example on him. One of them published this, paraphrasing him: "Going to see a doctor is demonic. People going to see doctors are demons."

What about humility, I wrote back? You can judge who is demon? You got such power? There is no demon. To say "demon is demon" is a wrong logic. There is no such thing as demonic essence. All living entity are servant of God, this is their constitution. Kamsa or the drunker who beat Nityananda on the head are pure devotees. Only ourself are not devotees. If your child is sick, you bring him to the doctor. You bring him to the hospital. You don't think the doctor is a demon. That will not help your child. If you are a sadhu, a sannyasi, you do that, you die without medical care, if you like. That's all right. But we don't make this posture a philosophy. A balanced mind is preferable for a devotee. We can find this teaching in Bhagavad-gita.

He called me a mayavadi?!? And to shut up!

•••

We accuse Putin of starting a war in Ukraine. He responds: "It is not a war, but a special operation." This confusion has been going on for one year. 

This military aggression has all the appearances and the consequences of a war: more than two hundreds thousands of soldiers and civilians have died. Someone is certainly missing something. It is a denial of reality.

A few days ago, a lady devotee wrote a commentary on my page saying that I was wrong in my understanding of the Mahabharata 's war. She took Bhismadev for an ordinary devotee, despite the fact that Krishna concluded in Mahabharata that he was a Mahajana. 

Srila Prabhupada, about the 12 mahājanas: "Nāradaḥ svayambhūḥ śambhuḥ. Nārada is mahājana, and Brahmā is mahājana, Svayambhū. And Lord Śiva is mahājana. Kapilaḥ kumāro manuḥ prahlādo bhīṣmaḥ. The mahājanas are there. So we have to follow. Mahājano yena gataḥ sa panthāḥ. We should not remain mūḍha-dṛśā. We should follow the mahājanas and the sādhus, śāstra."

This is the conclusion of the Mahabharata war. But she don't agree this fact and erased all our exchange. A Mahajana is not high enough for her... How can that be?

Lenny Sislac (a devotee) said that "the conclusion of the Mahabharata was not to take the side of the enemy, because it angers Krishna". 

That it makes Krishna angry, yes, I can admit; in a lila he acts like an ordinary person. But she should know that life is more complicated than that. He sent his own soldiers, an army, to join the side of Duryodhana. They accepted this sacrifice. Doesn't she know that? Why did she refuse my opinion? Because I'm bad? Why a devotee suppress the expression of another devotee instead of welcoming it when it makes sense? This is a practice they have included in their daily conduct. It is so sad. (She erased everything I wrote to her in a respectable manner.)

■

If the guru is the representative of all the demigods and not an ordinary man, as the Srimad-Bhagavatam says, then it is easy to understand why this movement is in such a mess.

Bhakti Bhringa Govinda Swami, in the center, joined the Krishna consciousness movement in Buffalo, USA, in 1971.