Being Krishna's Successor is not to be taken lightly!
Hridayananda das Goswami
July 23, 2016
Table of Contents
Historical Moments for Non-GBC Help 4
Unity in Diversity 4
Prabhupada’s Will and the GBC 4
Danger on Both Sides 5
Engaging Scholarship to Understand ISKCON 5
The Term Political 6
Routinization of Charisma 7
Three Forms of Social Authority 7
Charismatic Authority 7
Routinizing Authority 8
Traditional and Rational-Legal Authority 8
GBC as Heirs 11
GBC Self-Understanding 11
Problems with GBC Self-Understanding 11
GBC Traits 15
Interpreting the Mandate 15
Danger of Bureaucratic Tyranny 15
Management Hierarchy and Spiritual Hierarchy 16
Decreasing Empathy 17
The Iron Law of Oligarchy 17
Sadhu Burnout 17
Austere and “Pious” Tyranny 18
Follow vs. Imitate 19
Justice Needed for Social Stability 21
Justice Linked to Ethics, Morality 21
Justice linked to Equality 21
Kṛṣṇa Acts Justly 21
Equality and Hierarchy 22
Types of Justice 24
Blindfolded Justice 25
ISKCON/GBC Law 26
Law and Language 26
Other Key Words 26
Justice in GBC Law 27
GBC Law 4.4.2 Justice Ministry 27
GBC Law 17.1-2 Justice 28
Unequal Law 30
Discipline of Devotees in General 30
Discipline of Lesser ISKCON Leaders 30
Discipline of Regional Secretaries and RGB 30
Discipline of GBCs, Compared to TPs 30
Conduct and Discipline of Dīkṣā Gurus 31
Regional Governing Board (RGB) Members 33
GBC Conduct 33
Compare Laws for GBCs and Gurus 34
Appeal in GBC Laws 38
Recourse and Appeal for Ordinary Devotees? 38
GBC Admission of Flawed Law Doesn’t Fix It 39
Stifling Debate Through Outdated Law 39
GBC Does Not Publish Self-Disciplinary Rules 40
Understanding ISKCON Lines of Authority 41
Public Reason 41
Two Visions of ISKCON 42
UILA Seems to Favor Controlled Society 43
GBC Subordinating Language 44
Nourishing Bhakti 45
UILA Undermines Preachers’ Autonomy 46
Sannyāsīs not in Management Hierarchy 47
Freedom in Devotional Service 48
Feudal ISKCON? 50
GBC and Philosophy 52
Avoiding the “GBC Word” 54
Social Contract vs. Tyranny 55
The Vanishing Reference Point 56
Prabhupada Calls for an ISKCON Constitution 57
What Is a Constitution? 57
Purpose Six, Devotee Rights, Unfulfilled 57
Four Conflicting Core Principles 57
Other Articles Give No Rights 58
Limited Call for Feedback 59
Proposed Social Contract 59
IR and IDRO 61
ISKCON Resolve (IR) 61
IDRO ISKCON Dispute Resolution Office 61
Summary of ISKCON’s GBC 63
Why Justice? 64
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.
[PADA: Srila Prabhupada says that acharyas do not need advice from others, in particular their subordinates or God brothers. Yet here Hrdayananda admits that the GBC's gurus are often unable to correct issues themselves, and so their subordinates or God brothers are often better at discriminating issues. Of course, never mind that, its more often that the mundane karmis see how ridiculous these GBC's gurus are, and even they know the GBC is deviating by promoting fools as their acharyas.
Then again, the karmi media, police, FBI and courts often had to reign in the GBC's bogus and even criminal programs because -- no one else could or would, certainly they could not police themselves. For example, the karmi courts had to prosecute the GBC's child molesting case, and have them sued for $400,000,000, because Hrdayananda and his GBC could not and did not properly address this issue, and they still have not still dealt with the issue properly ever since.
Thus! There are still victims who are bristling with anger over the fact that many of the leaders of the molesting infrastructure are still in big seats of authority. They feel betrayed because they were. But hardly no one listens to these victims, or those of us representing their case. So Hrdayananda is correct, they are not listening to others.
And what its come down to NOW is, the GBC's folks say that God's successors / gurus and acharyas are often engaged in illicit sex with men, women and children, but even the average "karmi" mundane person knows that God's successors are not EVER engaged in illicit sex. This is why the Isopanisad says that these false acharyas are far worse off than the average mundane person, and thus these false gurus will go to far worse hellish planets than the average mundane person. Notice, the average mundane person has a far greater understanding of God's successors, i.e. they are not EVER debauchees, so the karmis are vastly superior to Hrdayananda and his entire GBC program in terms of guru tattva realizations.
So Hrdayananda is actually correct, the GBC is adrift because of failing to listen, and thus the average hamburger eating mundane person knows that God's successor gurus are not illicit sex deviants, while only foolish people like the GBC and Hrdayananda are baffled on this point. And the reason they are totally baffled is -- that they do not consult with their God brothers, the shastra, Srila Prabhupada's directives, or even the average karmis etc.
In fact almost any hamburger eating person on the street knows vastly more than Hrdayananda's GBC probably ever will know in this lifetime, i.e. that God is pure and thus His successors are too. That is way over the head of dullards like Hrdayananda and his GBC, they cannot fathom this principle. Unfortunately, shastra is very clear, anyone who says acharyas are usually debauchees like Hrdayananda and his GBC pals, will be headed for a very bad future life, there is no way to escape this fate for these thinkers.
Hee hee! I just rescued a huge ugly black and brown spider from climbing on my wall, and escorted him outside into the plants. Yep, Krishna can EASILY and IMMEDIATELY put one into a place where one will be totally baffled and with no intelligence, and He does that to people who misuse their intelligence to make false gurus.
Shastra says these veda vada rata people go to a vastly worse fate than the ordinary mundane person, because they are misleading others. I just got a question from a person asking about Rupanuga's letter where he is saying these GBC 11 are madhyama gurus. So just see how badly these GBC and Rupanugas have confused people. First of all Rupanuga is attacking Srila Prabhupada as faulty and unable to determine who is a guru successor to Krishna and who is not, and so he appoints 11 unqualified people as Krishna's guru successors. That is not what happened!
Then Rupanga is attacking the religious sentiment of the mass of people, making them wonder why illicit sex deviants are madhyama gurus? So they are intentionally twisting the Vedas so they can support their idea that their illicit sex with men, women and children deviants are God's saintly successors. This is how they degrade the entire human society, according to shastra, and that is why they go to the lowest places after they leave their bodies. Of course in the meantime they have made ISKCON into a place where illicit sex predators can flock to in abundance.]
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.
[PADA: Great. So we have to petition the GBC's acharyas to correct themselves, but Srila Prabhupada says it is an offense to correct the acharyas? Why would acharyas have to be petitioned to correct "critical problems"? Which previous acharyas were petitioned for making critical problems for others? And why is Hrdayananda saying that acharyas are making critical problems, when Srila Prabhupada says acharyas are saving people from their problems? If the acharyas are deviating and need to be petitioned to stop deviating, what kind of acharyas are they promoting?]
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.
[PADA: Hrdayananda already injured the GBC system by declaring that 11 of its members are acharyas. When "the GBC" advised Harikesh, Jayapataka, Jayatirtha, Bhavananda and others about correcting their wrong behaviors, they argued that since they are "acharyas" -- they cannot be criticized. You cannot have a group of managers rule over the acharyas! That is still true today with Hrdayananda himself, the GBC has advised him to control what he says, and he really doesn't.]
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]
[PADA: Right, so this was the first thing Hrdayananda's party did, they purged out almost all of the God brothers, because the God brothers were objecting to their acharya status. So the whole platform of cooperation was dismantled. And this is still the case, the God brothers are objecting to the guru voting process, but it continues. The God brothers said we cannot offer bhogha to the conditioned soul GBC gurus, but that process continues.
Then again the God brothers said there was a child abuse problem, they were ignored. The God brothers said, do not consult with Narayana Maharaja, he was consulted anyway. The God brothers said, do not spend millions and millions suing Bangalore, but the GBC did that anyway, and the list is endless. The GBC has never consulted with us really, and Hrdayananda is perhaps the worst offender in this group, he does not consult with us -- ever.
Again, Hrdayananda is correct, the GBC should have consulted with the God brothers, that would have avoided the purge that made the temples into ghost towns, would have averted the child abuse lawsuit, would have averted the mass defections to Sridhara and Narayana and so on and so forth. They do not consult, yep! And now they have the karma of impeding if not halting Lord Chaitanya's movement on their necks, which means, they will be paying for that for probably eons of time. The good news is, they may eventually become a spider on the wall of a Vaishnava, so they will get a little mercy. As Srila Prabhupada says, false gurus are never tolerated by the Lord or any agents of the Lord. They will go down, period.]
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.
[PADA: Speaking from experience, devotees who disagree with the self-appointed gurus are consistently shunned, banned, -- and worse -- some are beaten and some are killed for dissenting. And now they are spending apparently $20,000,000 to ban the Bangalore devotees, and they are also banning more and more people from Brooklyn temple, Phoenix temple and so on and so forth. The banning continues unabated. Again, Hrdayananda is right, the God brothers are not consulted, and worse, they are treated like enemies who need to be banned, beaten, sued and maybe treated with fatal actions.
People like Bhakti Vikas swami, Rupanuga, Badrinarayan and others are still promoting the idea that the GBC gurus were appointed by Srila Prabhupada. There is no evidence he appointed gurus, or that he wanted these falsely appointed gurus -- to vote in more gurus. Their whole operation is operating on the false principle that Srila Prabhupada made a mistake and he appointed conditioned souls as his acharya successors. That is not what he did. And as long as we have these independent maverick acharyas, who often do not accept the rulings of the GBC committee, or worse, they concoct and modify the rulings to fit their false acharya's program, nothing substantial will change. ys pd]