How to respond when a devotee is criticized by a devotee or a nondevotee?

Answer Podcast:

Transcript

This is an AI-generated transcript and may contain some errors.
question is that if one devotee criticizes another devotee how do I respond first of all all criticism is not necessarily bad there is a time and place for course correction sometimes someone might be going off track and then they need help to come back on track in general what differentiates gossip from criticism is firstly the intent and second the context that means now we can’t know who has what intent so it’s better to be safe and even if someone is criticizing we don’t have to ascribe any negative intent to them but in general gossip is when we speak about a situation to someone who is neither a part of the problem nor a part of the solution then that is gossip and that is something to be avoided so in every organization set up we are in the material world even if we are a spiritual movement so the resources are going to be limited and that is why it’s not possible to satisfy everyone so usually it’s going to happen that wherever we are some people are going to be dissatisfied and they are going to want to speak their dissatisfaction so that is just human nature it need not be because of malice we don’t have to necessarily ascribe negativity either to the person who is criticizing or to the person who is being criticized if we are in a position to help in some way then that’s a different situation but quite often it is just that is not a situation so then we better leave that situation now we can respectfully say that i have to go somewhere or can we talk about something else i don’t know about this subject i cannot make any comment about this be respectful but change the subject or move away from them that is the best way if we are a part of the solution it can be a part of the solution then maybe we can in a mild way convey that then they can clarify or whatever rectify the situation if it’s possible so it’s best to maturely respond according to the circumstances but in general to delve on it too much is not good if we can be a part of the solution then it’s best move the or move away or move away from the subject or move away from the subject or move away from or move away from the subject or move away from the subject or move away subject or move away the subject or gauge or gauge attention between and person and But in the beginning, we can’t know who is demoniac and who is under demoniac influence. So if you see, in the Bhagavad Gita, Krishna classifies in two main categories, Dvav-gutasar-gulokasmin-daivasur-evichar, divine and demoniac. But the Madhyamadhikari, it says there are four or three classifications, one is the Supreme Lord directly.
But then there is friendship with the devotees and then there is compassion towards the ignorant and there is negligence of the demoniac. So now, we could say that the asuras, the demoniac can be in two categories. Those who are outright demoniac and those who are under demoniac influence.
And in general, it’s safe to assume that if somebody is criticizing, there’s no need to say that they are demoniac. It’s quite likely that they are under demoniac influence. They may have got some perception from someone.
So, if we try to, without becoming knee-jerk emotional, if we try to logically explain, okay, this is what you heard and this is what is the response, this is the situation, people say like this. But this is what is the response. If we explain the situation and if they are ready to understand the explanation, that is good enough.
And they will change their perception. In general, trying to, if we take offense and if we, we may say that I am defending my acharyas, that is fine. But still, we should defend in a way that makes the things better, not in a way that makes the things worse.
So, Prabhupada explains that in Daksha Yajna, when the brahmanas criticized Shiva, at that time, his followers, at one level, for them to see Shiva being criticized, that was witnessing Guru Aparadha. And they became angry and they started counter-cursing and the whole assembly became devastation. So, what was the problem over there? It was right for them to be concerned when the spiritual master is being, the guy is being criticized.
But then, by counter-cursing, they ended up making matters worse. So, there are principles in scripture about how we should deal with blasphemy. But we also need to know the purpose of principles.
The purpose is so that we don’t become mediums for the widespread spreading of criticism. We don’t ourselves become influenced by the criticism. But as far as dealing with the situation practically is concerned, we may, if we become too judgmental and label somebody as demoniac just because he is criticizing a devotee, then we alienate that person and we come off as fanatical.
So, we need to objectively explain the situation. And by that, we can actually at least clarify with that person. And even if that person is not clarified, others, if they are in a situation, they will say, okay, this person is a reasonable person.
This person at least speaks in a way that makes sense. So, we live in a culture where religious fanaticism is, people are scared of religious fanaticism. And if we respond very aggressively to criticism, people start labeling us as fanatics.
And then we leave a lot of people unnecessary. So, looking at the content of the criticism and then responding to it adequately. And if the criticism is of such a nature that we don’t know the response, then better not hear it fully, just connect that person with some senior devotee who can answer the question.
What we should not do is, when somebody is criticizing, that we should submissively hear the criticism. That we shouldn’t do. That means, if we know the answer, well, I’m good.
But if we don’t know the answer, better say that, you know, okay, I’ll take you to some senior devotee and let that devotee answer the question. Now, the problem, see, I’ll just conclude with this. Kahi-kahi, the Maharamayana says that she was gentle, kind and wise.
But just because she heard mantra, heard, heard something. Kahi-kahi’s mistake was twofold. First was she heard mantra.
And second was she did not hear anyone else. Simply acted on that. She did not consult.
She did not consult her husband. She did not consult the chief priest Vasishta. She did not consult the minister Sumantra.
No one. Just acted on her words itself. So, it is just by hearing from mantra, the same Kahi-kahi who was wise, gentle and kind became harsh, cruel and foolish.
So, we, if this criticism is coming, if we are in a position to counter it objectively, we should do it. If we can’t, at least we shouldn’t submissively hear it and get poisoned by that. Thank you very much.
Krantraj Srimad Bhagavatam ki, Shri Prabhupada ki, I go and pray.