 | Historical Moments for Non-GBC Help
|
| ISKCON’s history shows that at times in crucial situations, non-GBC devotees can provide the impetus and logic needed to motivate and even guide the GBC Body. In the zonal acarya issue, the Narayan Maharaja issue, and the abusive Gurukula issue, non-GBC devotees powerfully brought the GBC’s and ISKCON’s attention to areas of vital concern, resulting in essential correction, compensation, and progress.
|
| I believe that such a historical moment is upon us again—a moment in which good and faithful ISKCON devotees, respecting Prabhupada’s GBC system, must petition the GBC to correct a critical problem with ISKCON leadership, including the GBC itself.
|
| Having served for many years as a GBC member, including four years under Srila Prabhupada’s direct training, and one year as GBC chairman, and serving now as a loyal yet concerned member of ISKCON, I here present my case to the loyal servants of Prabhupada, for their sober consideration. My sincere desire is to strengthen Prabhupada’s GBC system, and not to injure it.
|
| Unity in Diversity
|
| In convoking the first annual Mayapura GBC meeting, which took place in 1974 [not 1975 as stated on the GBC website], Prabhupada clearly indicated that the GBC should govern in cooperation with other senior devotees:
|
| “With all GBC and senior men present we should discuss how to make unity in diversity. But, if we fight on account of diversity, then it is simply the material platform. Please try to maintain the philosophy of unity in diversity. That will make our movement successful.”
[Letter to Kirtananda Swami—October 18, 1973]
|
| Accordingly, there must be dialogue between the GBC and senior devotees that disagree with them on practical points, or that advocate reform within Prabhupada’s principles, as I do here. After all, Prabhupada speaks of unity in diversity. He knew there would be different views. Prabhupada did not ask the GBC to eliminate bona fide diversity by punishing those who disagree with them, but rather to search for unity in diversity with other faithful devotees.
|
| Prabhupada’s Will and the GBC
|
| The first article of Prabhupada’s final Declaration of Will states that “the Governing Body Commission (GBC) will be the ultimate managing authority of the entire International Society for Krishna consciousness.”
|
| Prabhupada often warned his disciples not to follow the tragic example of the Gauḍīya Maṭha which disintegrated because Prabhupada’s godbrothers did not follow their Guru’s order to form a GBC.
|
| “Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura, at the time of his departure, requested all his disciples to form a governing body and conduct missionary activities cooperatively. He did not instruct a particular man to become the next acarya. But just after his passing away, his leading secretaries made plans, without authority, to occupy the post of acarya, and they split in...factions over who the next acarya would be.”
[Caitanya-caritāmṛta, Adi 12.8-10 Purport]
|
| Prabhupada himself diligently developed the GBC system in ISKCON, after introducing it in 1970. Given the dissolution of the Gauḍīya Maṭha, and Prabhupada’s personal crafting of the GBC to prevent history from repeating itself, it is natural that ISKCON has always aimed its radar at any possible challenge to the GBC system.
|
| Danger on Both Sides
|
| However, we must keep in mind that one can veer off any road to the right or left. Thus history teaches us that there are two dangers to Prabhupada’s GBC system:
|
| - 1. not accepting GBC authority;
- 2. giving oppressive power to the GBC.
|
| Failure to follow the GBC system will sabotage Prabhupada’s ISKCON. But an unjust or oppressive GBC can itself damage and even destroy Prabhupada’s GBC system. Consider the following.
|
| History and social science demonstrate that a political or managerial extreme will breed its opposite extreme. This dynamic is often called the pendulum effect. First described by Galileo in 1602 within the physical realm, the pendulum effect is the law that a movement in one direction eventually causes an equal movement in the opposite direction. Newton presents a related idea as his third law of motion: “For every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.”
|
| Social and political science often cite the pendulum effect to show that cultural, social, and political trends, when brought to one extreme, will tend to swing back to the opposite extreme. Thus throughout history, tyranny has often led to anarchy or democracy. A classic example is the oppressive French monarchy that led to the chaotic French Revolution. A current example is seen in Libya.
|
| Prabhupada himself said that in the West, monarchy fell and gave way to democracy because it grew corrupt and oppressive. The opposite is also true: anarchy leads to tyranny, as seen in Germany after World War I.
|
| I will argue in this paper that ISKCON has diligently guarded against one extreme: rejecting the GBC system. But ISKCON must also guard itself from the opposite extreme: tyranny. The GBC must take care not to claim, beyond Prabhupada’s mandate, an extreme power that will ultimately destabilize and undermine Prabhupada’s GBC system. Dictatorial authority may lead to a collapse of that authority, as with the Gauḍīya Maṭha, or to strong institutional democracy that jeopardizes the descending authority of the paramparā system.
|
| As Newton said, “for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction.” Thus moderate, balanced authority will generate moderate, balanced opposition. Judicious, moderate rule is stable and sustainable over the long term, and that is what ISKCON needs from the GBC.
|
| Engaging Scholarship to Understand ISKCON
|
| ISKCON governance, with its achievements and failures, does not take place within a vacuum, but within a specific historical context. An objective consideration of that context reveals much about where we are, how we got there, and where we need to go.
|
| In ISKCON’s early days, with youthful zeal we often thought that a sincere devotee is beyond the laws of nutrition, psychology, medicine, or sociology. We now know that even sincere devotees still live within human bodies and human communities. To be free of karma is not to be free of all of nature’s God-given laws, be they laws of gravity, nutrition, psychology, or sociology. Therefore, we can and should rationally study and engage those fields in a spirit of yukta-vairāgya, literally engaged detachment.
|
| In his purport to the Bhāgavatam 1.5.22, Prabhupada states: “Human intellect is developed for advancement of learning in art, science, philosophy, physics, chemistry, psychology, economics, politics, etc. By culture of such knowledge the human society can attain perfection of life. This perfection of life culminates in the realization of the Supreme Being, Viṣṇu…When advancement of knowledge is applied in the service of the Lord, the whole process becomes absolute…Therefore, all the sages and devotees of the Lord have recommended that the subject matter of art, science, philosophy, physics, chemistry, psychology and all other branches of knowledge should be wholly and solely applied in the service of the Lord.”
|
| In that spirit of using knowledge in Kṛṣṇa’s service, let us see what social science and history can teach us about the present state of ISKCON governance. While appreciating the sincere efforts and accomplishments of ISKCON’s governing body, we must also consider how Prabhupada’s GBC system can more effectively, fairly, and rationally govern his society. In that spirit, I turn now to the sociology of religion.
|
| The Term Political
|
| In this paper, I sometimes use the term political. Prabhupada often used this word in its derogatory sense: acting to achieve status or power within an organization, rather than acting on higher principle.
|
| However, the term political also has a primary, neutral sense that refers to the government or public affairs of a society. ISKCON has a government, and ISKCON has public affairs, issues that concern devotees in general. Therefore, ISKCON has a political dimension.
|
| Also, since individuals and groups manage ISKCON, power is wielded in ISKCON. In this way too, in the neutral sense, ISKCON has a political sphere. I suggest it is healthier to acknowledge this fact. We can then rationally study how power is, and should be, engaged inISKCON.
|
| We must consider how, within Prabhupada’s parameters, power can be engaged more consciously, rationally, and effectively for the good of ISKCON, in a spirit of informed yukta-vairāgya.
|
English
Español
Pусский
Português