If we are asked in a public forum about spiritual teachers whose philosophy is different from ours, how should we respond appropriately?
When we go on public forums such as podcasts and are asked about other teachers within the Hindu tradition, how should we respond?
Our philosophy is one of bheda-abheda—there is both difference and non-difference. At times, we emphasize the difference, and at other times, the non-difference. For example, Srila Prabhupada once wrote a letter to the Pope suggesting that all religious leaders unite to fight atheism. That was an emphasis on abheda, unity.
In general, Prabhupada emphasized that realization means connecting the message of scripture (one circle) with the interest of the audience (another circle) and speaking at the intersection of the two.
So when we are invited to public forums, it means they have provided a platform, not us. And in such cases, we need to be conscious of the four types of communication:
- Insider to outsider – preaching (outreach to newcomers)
- Insider to insider – internal education (e.g., Bhakti Shastri courses)
- Outsider to outsider – reputation (how the world views us)
- Outsider to insider – awareness (how we understand the outer world)
Historically, ISKCON primarily focused on insider to outsider communication—we are enlightened, others are ignorant, and we are here to enlighten them. Over time, we developed more insider to insider forums like Bhakti Shastri and advanced devotee classes.
Outsider to outsider communication, which relates to our reputation, is now being handled through ISKCON Communications. The purpose here is not direct preaching but creating a favorable public perception so that outreach can happen more effectively. With the rise of social media and ISKCON becoming a recognized brand, this is gaining more importance.
Outsider to insider, i.e., awareness of how the world sees us and what’s happening in the world, is something leaders generally do, but it’s rarely acknowledged. We often respond only after a backlash, realizing only then that maybe we shouldn’t have spoken the way we did.
Understanding these modes of communication is essential. When we go on public platforms outside our usual circles—like college programs, corporate events, or podcasts—we must remember: we are insiders entering outsider forums. Therefore, we should speak more like sympathetic outsiders than strict insiders.
This affects both our language and our content. In such contexts, our primary goal is reputation building, not conversion. If people are inspired to explore devotional life, that’s a wonderful outcome—but it is secondary.
Srila Prabhupada once said the purpose of the Bhaktivedanta Institute was to increase the prestige of ISKCON. He didn’t expect scientists to start chanting 16 rounds, but by engaging respectfully in scientific circles, the intellectual credibility of ISKCON increased.
That same principle applies to other outsider forums. We aim to create positive impressions, not necessarily convey every detail of our theology. Of course, that doesn’t mean we compromise our philosophy—we simply prioritize truths that are non-agitating.
Interestingly, when Krishna describes the discipline of speech in the Gita, He first mentions anudvegakaram—non-agitating speech—even before satyam—truthfulness (Gita 17.15). While that may not necessarily indicate order of priority, it does offer insight: truth should be spoken in a way that avoids unnecessary agitation.
How to Speak About Other Teachers
Rather than commenting directly on any one teacher, we can divide our discussion into categories:
- Their philosophical orientation
- Their cultural influence
- Their humanitarian work
- Their political or social impact
The safest and most respectful approach is to appreciate the good work they are doing, especially in humanitarian and cultural domains. For instance, if someone asks about a specific teacher, we could say:
“Through his teachings, many young people are being inspired to explore Indian spirituality. Those who earlier saw spirituality as outdated or irrelevant are now taking interest. That’s certainly a positive contribution.”
We can then transition to a universal principle, such as:
“Sanatana Dharma contains timeless wisdom that can enrich everyone’s lives, and we need many sincere teachers to share this knowledge effectively.”
This approach is modeled beautifully by Radhanath Maharaj in his book The Journey Home. He describes how various teachers he met offered insights into universal spiritual principles like sadhana, satsanga, and seva—without endorsing their specific theological positions, many of which were impersonal.
Even if a teacher claims to be God, or is regarded that way by followers, we need not reject everything they do. We can focus on the aspects that align with universal values and gracefully shift the conversation.
What If They Ask About Specific Teachings?
It’s rare on such forums for people to ask about specific doctrines. But if someone asks, for example, “XYZ teacher says that the soul merges into God—do you agree?” we could respond:
“The Indian tradition includes many schools of thought that have historically debated such ideas. These technical discussions are best addressed in philosophical settings. For now, let’s focus on broader spiritual principles that are relevant for everyone.”
This avoids dismissing other schools while steering the conversation toward common ground.
However, if we must respond critically, we can point out logical or scriptural concerns without making it personal:
“This is not an attack on the teacher, but a scriptural analysis of a specific idea. Throughout Indian history, spiritual teachers have debated and refined ideas through respectful dialogue. That tradition of inquiry is what we are continuing.”
When presented this way—as part of a larger intellectual tradition—it doesn’t sound like we’re claiming superiority. We are simply participating in a shared tradition of philosophical discourse
Summary: Three Guidelines for Responding on Public Forums
- Prioritize reputation-building over precision preaching
Focus on making a good impression. If deeper engagement follows, wonderful. - Appreciate what aligns with universal values
Highlight their positive contribution to spirituality, culture, or humanitarian causes. - If critique is required, frame it respectfully
Use logic and scripture, not emotion, and present it as part of the broader spiritual tradition of dialogue and inquiry.