Why is there the conservative-liberal divide everywhere, including even in spiritual organizations?

Answer Podcast:

Transcript

This is an AI-generated transcript and may contain some errors.
The question is we see people at the opposite end of spectrum, whether it be empiricists and rationalists or whether it be extremists of any kind, liberals or conservatives, we see this almost everywhere, even in spiritual societies.
So we see this universal polarity. But is there any universal thread of unity which can account for this? Firstly, our individuality is irreducible. We are all individuals and we are irreducibly individuals.
And because of this irreducible individuality, there will be diversity. Even in the spiritual world, we see there is the left-wing gopis, the right-wing gopis. Some gopis are they are very gentle and submissive and pleasing towards Krishna directly by offering service.
Some other gopis, they neglect Krishna. And so when Guru Goswami says in Patanjali Madhava that Chandravali, she keeps chasing Krishna. She is very eager for Krishna.
And Radharani turns away from Krishna and Krishna chases Radharani. So there are two different kinds of gopis and both of them, they serve and please Krishna in different ways. And Krishna doesn’t go on that Radharani becomes Chandravali, Chandravali becomes Radharani.
So they are different people and Krishna relishes their individuality. So the plan to serve Krishna is more important than the plans to serve Krishna. The plan to serve Krishna is the core principle that I am a servant of Krishna and I am going to serve Krishna.
And the plans to serve Krishna means the very specific plans I might have. Okay, I will preach in this way or I will do this kind of service. These plans are also important.
But if we take this as more important, the specific plans that I have for serving Krishna, if I make that as more important in the fundamental plan, I want to serve Krishna. So then it becomes a problem. So this polarity of extremes is always going to be there.
And we can’t avoid it. And in one sense they balance each other. So if we are only liberals, then we will get every tradition which is a living tradition has to connect with two things.
The living tradition has to connect with its past tradition and it has to connect with its contemporary audience. If it doesn’t connect with its contemporary audience, then it doesn’t remain a living tradition. It becomes a museum exhibit.
It becomes a fossil. So doing what it takes to connect with its contemporary audience is not compromise, it is not deviation. It is necessary.
Sometimes we say tradition means doing things as they have been done in the past. That is true. But one feature of tradition is innovation.
The Bhaktisthana Thakur innovated. He started traveling in cars. He started wearing a stitch cloth at Radha Kul.
He started doing so many innovations. So faithfulness to tradition also includes faithfulness to the innovativeness of the tradition. Prabhupada was innovative in so many ways.
The whole principle of Buddhist tradition is innovativeness. So faithfulness to tradition also includes faithfulness to the innovativeness of the tradition. And as a living tradition, we need to connect with people, with the contemporary people.
That’s what will keep us relevant. So that is, for that flexibility is required. Flexibility is not compromise.
Flexibility is adjustment. We have it as it is said in the Bhishma pastime also. Now, a tradition also needs fidelity.
Fidelity means its faithfulness to its predecessors. So that is the connection with the past. So often those whom we call liberals, they focus more on connection with the contemporary culture, contemporary audience.
The conservatives, they focus more on connection with the past. So both are important. So if we are only connected with the past, then we will become, as I said, museum pieces, fossils.
If we are only connected with the contemporary audience, not connected with the tradition, then we become deviations. So we need both. So both have their importance, but when there are these extremes, then there has to be some forums for dialogue by which some reasonable resolution will come.
And there will always be times when some conservatives will not be satisfied, some liberals will not be satisfied. But rather than saying that one is right and other is wrong, we need to have mature discussion and arrive at a reasonable understanding. So the general principle, the unifying principle is two things, that we are all individuals, and secondly, we are all striving to serve Krishna.
But we may focus on some things more. So especially the problem comes when we have liberals who are not very deeply rooted in the tradition or we have conservatives who are not exposed to the contemporary audience at all or very less. Then both of them, they become little, both of them are not actually doing service to the tradition properly.
So if somebody is well connected to the tradition and is also well aware of the contemporary cultural trends and things like that, that person can actually make sure the tradition keeps living. So in general when such differences happen, we should focus on the intention to serve Krishna that everyone has. And then have accommodation for how different people may serve in different ways.
Does this answer your question? Thank you.