Kīrtana: Sorting through the evidence

“Srila Prabhupada’s Kirtana Standards,” installment 3:
Introduction (part 2–concluded)

My use of evidence

What right do I have to claim “These are the standards”? In titling this book Śrīla Prabhupāda’s Kīrtana Standards, I might seem cheeky, presumptuous. Who am I to claim to set forth Śrīla Prabhupāda’s standards?

Good question.

What I have tried to do here is convey instructions received from Śrīla Prabhupāda himself. These generally take two forms. First we have direct statements set down by Śrīla Prabhupāda in his books or letters or preserved through recordings of his classes or conversations. Second, we have testimony from his disciples about instructions he gave and how he did things.

When referring to these sources, we always need to take note of context. To whom was Śrīla Prabhupāda speaking? Why? When? Under what circumstances? And we need to be alert for different examples or conflicting instructions, given to someone else or in a different time or place. We can also ask with how much force Śrīla Prabhupāda gave a particular instruction. And we can give extra weight to teachings he gave more than once, perhaps many times.

The devotees I cite or quote from in these pages are direct disciples of Śrīla Prabhupāda, unless otherwise mentioned. Apart from their testimony, this book also offers some of their thoughts and realizations.

I have tried not to pose as the final arbiter of what is right and what is wrong in kīrtana. My tastes and opinions are not entitled to special privilege. Sometimes there are points I amplify, and you won’t have a hard time knowing my biases and peeves. But I have tried to make what I say serve what Śrīla Prabhupāda said. You can decide for yourself to what extent that attempt has been successful.

I recognize, too, that other devotees may see things differently. They may sometimes have a different take on how particular instructions from Śrīla Prabhupāda should be understood or applied. Again, I don’t claim to have the final word. Thoughtful discourse should always be welcome.

Negative evidence

Now let’s look at two kinds of what I call “negative arguments.” The first takes the form “Did he ever say we shouldn’t do X?” We don’t want to be fenced in by excessive restrictions: You can’t do this, you can’t do that, “Śrīla Prabhupāda never ate avocados.” We’re not meant to live in a police state. So after a while we say, “Come on, back off. Give me a break.” And we ask, “Did Śrīla Prabhupāda ever say we shouldn’t eat avocados?”

Fair enough.

But this sort of argument—“Did he ever say we shouldn’t?”—has its limits too. One could never compile an exhaustive list of the things we shouldn’t do, or even imagine all that might be on it. “Did Śrīla Prabhupāda ever say we shouldn’t lead maṅgala-ārātrika while standing upside down in our underwear?” Well, no, but. . .

That’s the problem. The mere fact that Śrīla Prabhupāda never spoke out against something doesn’t make it right or mean he would have approved.

But in our Vaiṣṇava system of understanding, where teachings are handed down from master to disciple in an endless line, and where ācāryas teach by their personal example, we naturally place special emphasis on following. So the second, opposite sort of argument has more weight: “Did Śrīla Prabhupāda ever do this? Did he ever tell us to do this? And if not, why should we do it?”

More times than we can count, Śrīla Prabhupāda admonished us, “Don’t concoct,” “Don’t invent,” “Don’t manufacture,” and so on. This was how Śrīla Prabhupāda trained us.

So of the two negative arguments – “He never said we shouldn’t do it” and “He never did it or told us we should” –the first is weak, the second strong. Accordingly, in this book I give little weight to the first but often invoke the second.

What Śrīla Prabhupāda said and did is of course the best evidence, but noting what he didn’t say and didn’t do can also help guide us.

Contradictions and exceptions

While we’re talking about evidence, two more items deserve our attention— contradictions and exceptions. Sometimes Śrīla Prabhupāda’s instructions may seem contradictory: He says one thing here, the opposite there. Why? It may have to do with whom he’s speaking to, or the circumstances, or what he wants to emphasize at the time—or something else. After all, Śrīla Prabhupāda was a person, not a mere rulebook. Sometimes, in fact, when seeing such contradictions, we can’t reliably know what standard, if any, Śrīla Prabhupāda might have intended to set. But most often we can. We just need to patiently look at the evidence, and we’ll see the main current of what he is teaching.

Often, in fact, what he means to teach is loud and clear—yet still there can be exceptions. For example, as we’ll find later in this book, Śrīla Prabhupāda made clear that he didn’t like kīrtana sung with long, extended notes. Yet one melody for Gaura-ārātrika that Śrīla Prabhupāda liked and asked us to sing has some extended notes in it. Under such circumstances, we should understand the rule yet also recognize that rules may have exceptions.

But we should be honest. We should not try to turn the occasional exception into proof that the rules don’t exist.

Traps to avoid

As we become aware of Śrīla Prabhupāda’s standards for kīrtana, there are some traps for us to avoid.

First there is the trap of taking pride in hyper-correctness. Mere following of rules is not a fitting substitute for purity of heart.

Still worse, we may allow ourselves to become prigs and critics. Instead of entering humbly and deeply into the holy name, we assume the air of judges and find fault with kīrtana leaders for transgressing this or that rule. And while others drink the nectar of the holy name, we will drink the poison of our offenses to the devotees who serve the holy name.

To blaspheme the devotees who have dedicated their lives to propagating the holy name of the Lord is the first offense in chanting Hare Kṛṣṇa. Let us be careful.

Disclaimer—and an offering of respects again

In this book I’ll have some fairly negative comments to make about various things people do in modern ISKCON kīrtana. Practically all of my friends, all the devotees I most admire, and all my favorite kīrtana leaders regularly do one or another of these things. So I don’t mean to attack anyone or insinuate that anyone is spiritually lacking or defective. But I wouldn’t mind if we were to think again about some of the things we do in kīrtana. And at least I can hope that this book will help carve out some space for devotees who prefer kīrtana performed in a plainer and simpler way.

I offer my respects again to all who chant the holy name of Kṛṣṇa, my still greater respects to the initiated devotees who chant and follow the regulative principles of devotional service under proper guidance, and my utmost respects to the expert devotees, advanced in pure devotional service, whose hearts are free from such faults as the tendency to criticize others.

[end of the Introduction]

---

This is an installment of a draft for an upcoming book.

I especially welcome comments—suggestions, criticisms, questions, whatever.

Among other things: If you were personally present with Srila Prabhupada and received or heard instructions from him about kirtana, or were present at an instructive incident, I’m all ears.

I’m also particularly interested in hearing from “second generation” devotees (or third generation)—those born into the Hare Krishna movement or who joined after Srila Prabhupada’s departure. Again, I’m all ears.

Especially welcome: Thoughts or evidence that runs contrary to what’s in the draft or that adds a different perspective or nuance.

The draft has not yet been reviewed for spelling, italics, diacritic marks, and so on. I’ll handle that later. The same goes for formatting—headlines, subheads, and the like. For now, what matters is the content.

You can reach me by the contact form on this site. Or if you have my contact details, feel free to call me, message me, or send me an email.

Thank you very much. And happy chanting!

---