I WORSHIP GOVINDA, THE PRIMEVAL LORD
PADA: Some interesting histories here. Overall, throughout history "opportunists" seem to harm the original message and movement, and even hi-jack the original movement. Seems to be a pattern -- which repeats. Now there is a growing body of folks who think Srila Prabhupada was -- homicidally poisoned -- to make room for the hi-jackers take over ISKCON. That is the growing perception, and that is what the evidence suggests.
However, thanks to the recent historical advent of the internet and social media, hiding the plots and schemes of the hi-jackers, if not the exploiting and abuses made by the hi-jackers, is increasingly -- harder. Yup.
Someone asked if the POSCO law that protects children in India -- made in 2012 -- does not act retroactively, which would exclude many prior ISKCON victims. I don't know, but that is possible. Maybe someone can tell us.
ys pd angel108b@yahoo.com
Krishna Govinda
HISTORY OF THE VAISHNAVA COMMUNITIES
My vyasa-puja offering to beloved Srila Prabhupada, who built a house in which the whole world can live.
In Crnomelj, Slovenia, 27.8. 2024., Mahaprabhu Gaura dasa
1) PREFACE: A DUAL UNDERSTANDING OF THE SPIRITUAL COMMUNITY
The ultimate understanding of the spiritual community is "vasudhaiva kutumbakam", the whole world is the family of God. Bhakti-yoga, on the other hand, becomes a career ascent for some in the spirit of exclusionary competition. When they build walls instead of bridges, they call it a "community." Then, in a vicious circle of cognitive dissonances, they lose touch with reality. They close themselves in their own world of theological abstractions, idealizing dogmatic formulas, and floating in the vacuum of priestly privilege. They make the uncontrollable Divine Love a hostage to controlled religious protocols. They deform the spiritual community into a cheap substitute for an end in itself.
Modern man has become a vigilant critic of such an "organized religion", which repels more independent, already established and intelligent people, and attracts mainly mentally and economically unstable persons (B.G.7.16.: arto, artharthi). Lazy people and lunatics are very fond of equating spirituality with psycho-social small-mindedness, and they let themselves be guided by religious opportunists. But a contemporary modern man ridicules such "religious sheep" who, "spiritually blessed", celebrate "the emperor's new clothes".
On the other hand, belief in pure bhakti elevates our relationship with the religious community to a purified spiritual and salvific relationship. Into the esoteric affiliation of the immortal soul to the eternal spiritual community through guru-parampara (a higher affiliation that is not identical with an institutional scheme). Such a purely devotional affiliation and fidelity transcends secular religion, which is the prey of the opportunists, who enjoy priestly privileges in an exclusionary spirit. Belief in pure bhakti, despite the parallel accompaniment of a derailed religious community, purifies the heart and leads to spiritual insights.
An authentic relationship with the spiritual community goes to the core of personalism and answers our deepest searches, goals and needs. It is therefore essential to extract it from the dual, "schizophrenic" framework of secular religion. A schizophrenic split occurs when, instead of internalizing membership in a spiritual community (guru-parampara), we seek benefits in a religious corporation (institution, sect), and thus become obsessed with religious hierarchies, control, authoritarianism, and coercion.
However, when we re-evaluate our belonging and allegiance to Srila Prabhupada and ISKCON from obedience to a religious corporation to a central relationship to the guru-parampara, we see Srila Prabhupada's institutional experiments as secondary to the primary guru-disciple relationship. Otherwise, institutional consciousness damages our spiritual consciousness without us realizing it. Sectarian consciousness hardens the heart and makes us "witch hunters," or at least their intermediaries or silent supporters.
A bonafide guru such as Srila Prabhupada, however, is not a politician who divides devotees, but a philosopher who combines the full spectrum of human inclinations and tastes in the service of a mission that encompasses the whole range of devotional diversity and transcends political correctness. The spiritual community, then, is a spiritual family, not a religious corporation of faithful clerks who think they can "hold God by His testicles." (as our Balkan saying goes).
In the spiritual family, the spectrum of different devotional opinions does not compromise the spiritual-family affiliation itself. In the religious enterprise, however, institutional single-mindedness reigns over relationships and spiritual competence. Personnel politics and political correctness in Vaishnavism as a religious corporation act as a pyramid scheme, attracting narcissistic and psychopathic manipulators and serving them on a golden platter. An authentic spiritual community, however, has different laws.
2) INTRODUCTION: ORGANIZED RELIGION DID NOT EXIST?!
The preface appetizer is the glasses with which to read the rest of the text. The trigger for this essay, however, was someone's thesis that before Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakur and Srila Prabhupada Gaudiya-vaishnavism did not exist in the form of organized religion. This thesis is only partially and conditionally true. The traditional Gaudiya-Vaishnava movement first drew pragmatically on the various structures of Hindu and Islamic feudalism. However, Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura and Srila Prabhupada organized this traditional movement in a new way in the 20th century.
In the Treta- and Dvapara-yuga, there were structured Vedic-Vaishnava states. Later, Gaudiya Vaishnavism has the role of a "state religion" only at the level of municipalities and "pocket states". However, after the final collapse of Varnashrama micro-feudalism, Queen Victoria's decree of 1859 starts an era of modernist Hindu religious institutions, experimented with by Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura in the last third of the 19th century and Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati in the early 20th century in India, and Srila Prabhupada in the later 20th century worldwide.
Our spiritual movement is their institutional legacy. Therefore, we should know the difference between the Vaishnava movements in tradition and modernity, as well as the difference between the soft, middle, and hard institutionalization of Vaishnava organized religion in Shiksa- and Diksha-Sampradaya, as all of that was understood by our founding acharyas of our movements in early, mature, and late modernism: Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura, Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura, and Srila Prabhupada. And above all, we should understand all this institutional constellation through the glasses of spiritual consciousness.
J.T. O'Connell, (1999:215-239) divides the Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇava branches into hard, soft, and medium. The hard ones have centralized leadership and coercive sanctions, mechanisms for managing money and real estate, such as monasteries (matha). Soft are informal gathering and devotional singing. Medium are societies (sabha) with a semi-obligatory scheme, such as weekly meetings where someone cooks, donates, organizes something. It's the golden middle of the congregational movement.
Some Prabhupada-anugas believe that a hard, coercive and centralized form of community is a criterion for everyone, and that it defines orthodoxy and guru-parampara. All primary and secondary historiographic sources deny this. A spiritual community in our linegae (bhagavata-parampara) is a siksha-sampradaya and not a sectarian diksha-sampradaya, which imposes hard institutionalism and centralization in the style of a religious-business corporation.
The Vaishnava movement is neither a monastery nor a business-management corporation that is an end in itself, but a spiritual family (guru-parampara) that is unpredictably trans-institutional. The history of this movement always confirms the principle that the movement escapes from the box into which it is pushed by institutional officials who are pathologically obsessed with surveillance and hierarchy.
3) THE TRADITIONAL INSTITUTIONS OF VARNASRAMA AND PANCHARATRIKA AND REFORM THROUGH BHAGAVATA MYSTICISM
In the Vedic scriptures we find more detailed descriptions of the organization of Vaishnavism at the state level. Maharaja Yudisthira in the Mahabharata asks grandfather Bhisma, who was lying on a bed of arrows, how to organize the traditional Vaishnava state religion (theocracy). Likewise, Maharaja Yudisthira in the seventh canto of the Srimad Bhagavatam at the Imperial Rajasuya Sacrifice asks Narada Muni in more detail about spiritual Vedic social philosophy. There are many more such examples, and in them we read one and the same common analytical as well as synthetic scheme:
Ancient Puranic Vaishnavism defines organized religion as an institution of "varnashrama-dharma." The Vedic scriptures explain this umbrella institution at the level of the state, community, family, and individual. They introduce a collective institutional consciousness that each individual must be subject to such an organization of religion (be situated) because otherwise he cannot satisfy God (Vishnu Purana 3.8.9). Here, the acharyas also raise the question of the contradiction between varnashrama rigidity and the transcendent role of bhakti-yoga, which is independent of varnashrama-pancharatric institutions.
The organization of Vaishnava communities in the tradition has three factors: two institutionalizing (varnashrama and pancharatrika) and a third de-institutionalizing (the bhagavata school). Vedic social philosophy (varnashrama) is outlined in Pancharatrika (a system of vaishnavas-tantric religious organization) and bhagavata (a school of spiritual mysticism) through numerous stories of how vaishnavas in Vedic times took into account aspects of churchism (varnashrama-pancharatra) and mysticism (bhagavata) into account in their personal practices and the joint organizations of the Vaishnava community, or how they developed their understandings and relationships in the common practice of the nine processes of pure devotional service (S.B. 7.5.23: Sravanam kirtranam visnuh...).
Varnashrama families formed communities of Brahmanas, Kshatriyas, Vaiyshas, and Shudras. The Gurukula determined the personnel policy of the Varnashrama-Pancharatric religion, and the kings affirmed the religious dynamics. Varnashrama, however, soon degraded: the priestly elite looked down on the rest, obsessively fearing that someone more capable would wrest their power and privileges from them. Thus the priests start with totalitarianism and "mafia" activities, or plutocracy to defend their "status quo". The community begins to stagnate, spiritual dynamism dies, elitism and populism collide and clash.
Varnashrama is than replaced by a caste system, which can be pedigree-based (birth over qualities), party-spirited (the ethos of group political correctness), or "meritocratic", which in today's context would be, for example, for someone elbowing himself to Srila Prabhupada's inner circle 50 years ago, and using certain karmic skills to make himself to enjoy elite privilege for life. All these perversions of varnashrama-dharma are already transcended in the teachings of the theistic evolution of Vyasa-Buddha-Sankara-Madhva, which culminates with Lord Caitanya in the general Indian Renaissance of the 16th century.
The mysticism of Srimad Bhagavatam becomes the final code that outlines the civilization of Vaishnavism in very unconventional and de-institutionalizing (anarchic) ways. The dynamism of the Bhagavata school empowers everyone, as Lord Caitanya used to say to everyone throughout his six years of traveling through South India: "Stay where you are, stay at home and tell everyone about Krishna. In this way, become a guru at My command. With your actions like this, you are always in My company."
4) THE MIDDLE AGES AND THE HERITAGE OF MADHVA-SAMPRADAYA
In our list of thirty-two in the guru-parampara, Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura includes the names of the adherents of Madhva diksha-sampradaya: 5. Madhva, 6. Padmanabha, 7. Narahari, 8. Madhava, 9. Akshobhya, 10. Jaya Tirtha, 11. Jnanasindhu, 12. Dayanidhi, 13. Vidyanidhi, 14. Rajendra, 15. Jayadharma, 16. Purusottama, 17. Brahmanya Tirtha, 18. Vyasa Tirtha.
These are the superiors of monasteries. The monastic movement was a hard institution with the most rigid control of the Brahmacharis and Sannyasis who suppose to follow the Varnashrama-Pancharatric precepts, commandments and prohibitions perfectly. The head of the monastery, who administratively managed all this successfully, became an "acharya" and a "diksha-guru", and the above list of fourteen such "temple-presidents" who most strictly organized religion is in our list at the beginning of the Bhagavad-gita.
Then the story of the beginnings of Gaudiya-Vaishnavism says that the 19. Lakshmipati, 20. Madhavendra Puri, 21. Ishvara Puri and 22. Lord Caitanya resign from such organized religion and embark on a kind of "anarchic spiritual mysticism." The above four were not "temple-presidents", so they cannot possibly be in guru-parampara in Madhva-sampradaya. When Sri Caitanya visited the Vishnupada temple in Gaya, he did not take a pancharatriki-diksha from the head of the monastery there (which would have included him in the Madhviya organized religion), but a mystical initiation from some administratively incompetent marginal person.
The founding of Gaudiya-vaishnavism is therefore a good textbook example of the contradiction between traditional organized religion (pancharatrika, which leans firmly on varnashrama) and the school of Bhagavata (anarchic spiritual mysticism), which transcends hardened church structures in order to elevate the universal spiritual message to a trans-cultural, supra-civilizational, and global level.
This is precisely the success of Caitanya-vaishnavism. In the Middle Ages, the scholastic Vedantism of Ramanuya, Madha and others laid the monastic foundations for the movement. Gaudiya Vaishnavism de-institutionalizes the temple movement as an end in itself, and carries the purified essence of Krishna consciousness into the modern age and the Vaishnava Renaissance of the 16th century.
Then, in early, middle, and late modernism, this shiksha-sampradayic and from diksha-apa-samradayas purified movement blossoms in the trilogy of Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakur, Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati and Srila Prabhupada. The progressive anarchy of the Vaishnava Renaissance and Rupanuga Shiksha-Parampara transcends Diksha-Sampradic sectarianism. Our movement now is therefore global, universal, dynamic and progressive.
5) BHAKTI-ADHIKARA AND THE SYNTHESIS OF MYSTICISM AND CHURCHIANITY
The paradox between churchism and mysticism in organizing the Vaishnava movement encompasses the contradiction between the two interpretations of spiritual competence. Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura in Sri Gaudiya Kanthahara (3.3-23) gives two parallels to bhakti-adhikara, the question of who is a beginner (kanistha), mature (madhyama) and pure devotee (uttama). According to the Vaishnava organized religion, which relies on the Pancharatric definition of bhakti-adhikara in the Padma Purana, the novice is an external devotee, a mature devotee is a second-initiated "inner devotee" and a member of the priestly elite, and a pure devotee (uttama-adhikari) is an exemplary, established preacher and guru.
The model division "external devotee-inner devotee-guru" is the most appropriate and practical scheme for organizing religion. Yet the Bhagavata school overthrows this model with a definition in the Srimad Bhagavatam, where Havi Yogendra explains to King Nimi that the highly predictable and most practical model of pancharatrika organized religion is superseded by the unpredictable and unsystematic model of spiritual mysticism (S.B. 11.2.45-55). The Acharyas before Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakur attempt to harmonize this dual scheme of pancharatrika-bhagavata in different ways. Many aspirants are theologically confused by this.
Havi's short axioms are interpreted progressively in the Bhagavata school. The second-initiated inner devotee is only a kanishtha-adhikari if he looks down on the external devotees and confuses the ecclesiastical hierarchy with spiritual competence. A true madhyama-adhikari must have a healthy emotional relationship with God, camaraderie and genuine collegiality with equals, and a benevolent paternal role towards the younger ones, instead of treating them as "canon-fodder".
And most importantly, bhagavata-uttama-adhikari is an incomprehensible mystic who can only be understood by another uttama-adhikari. It is beyond our intellectual and cognitive capacity, so the movement therefore is not ours, but is the monopoly of bhagavata-uttama devotees, it is acharya-sampradaya. The movement, then, is not the prey of opportunists, but a monopoly of mystics, whom we serve in the spirit of the family, independent of corporate protocols.
Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura (Vimala-prasada) started the modern organization of our branch of Gaudiya-vaishnavism with such a predisposition. In his works, he reflects on the synthesis between the Pancharatrika and Bhagavata schools, and tries to inculcate his dual harmonic vani-vapuh movement in his students. Srila Prabhupada then reforms and revives his guru's ideas on a global and universal level. To understand this, one must not amputate him from his pre-1965 background, which is inadequately and insufficiently explained in Srila Prabhupada Lilamrita.
6) TWO PERFECT TRANSCENDENTALISTS IN THE ROLE OF FATHER AND SON
Vimala was from an aristocratic family. His father, Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura, raised him as a scholar and missionary from an early age. Vimala was the best student at the university, at the age of twenty he became the family guru at the royal court of the Vajshnava state of Tripura and then the secretary at the Tripura embassy in Kolkata. And yet, Vimala chose as his diksha-guru not another aristocrat, scholar and successful established man, but (from the outside) a "street mendicant" who was the complete opposite of the above. Thus Vimala completely transcends pancharatrika-ecclesiasticism and leans principally on the incomprehensible Bhagavata mysticism.
Vimala writes in 1917 (I paraphrase): if my guru had been fully Kṛṣṇa conscious for only 23 hours, 59 minutes and 59 seconds within 24 hours, and for a single second he had not been fully Kṛṣṇa conscious, I would not have been able to accept Him. But as he is fully Kṛṣṇa conscious 24|7 I am with each of my inhalations and exhalations (as Narottama dasa Thakura would say, "sei mora prana-dhana", you Rupa Manjari are my life air), fully aware of the fact that He is fully Krishna conscious. One uttama recognizes the other. We no longer have any intellectual, cognitive, or exegetical competence here. Through such a synthesis of mysticism and churchism, Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura established modern Rupanuga-gaudiya Vaishnavism as an organized religion. Understand who can.
Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura has been called a "living encyclopedia of the history of the Vaishnava movements" because he has studied all the books on the subject in the original monasteries of South India. On this subject, he wrote a framework study for his 800-page doctoral dissertation, "The History & Literature of the Gaudiya Vaishnavas and their Relation to Other Medieval Vaishnava Schools", which Sambidananda Prabhu, one of the three Gaudiya Matha missionaries in England in 1933-34, defended at the University of London against the demanding Indologists, historians, anthropologists and Orientalists there, to whom the entire Gaudiya-Vaishnava opus was accessible in the London Library. Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura could only dream of this 50 years earlier.
For over twenty years, Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura has been reflecting on the historical development of the organization of the Gaudiya Vaishnava communities in numerous articles in his newspaper Sajjana-toshani, where he connects the traditional basis with his contemporary preaching. During his long sick leave 1891-93 he preached extensively in Bangaldesh, which he describes in his diary. He travels with his preaching group, conducts harinama-sankirtana every day, and has evening programs in large tents where up to 4,000 villagers come. Thus, in a good year, he initiates over 15,000 students and establishes over 300 nama-hatta groups. He also writes six collections of poetry and a couple of books of prose. He took a break from his family and work and made the most of his sick leave.
And finally, by 1900, Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura "burns out". Although through his soft institutionalism (inviting villagers to an evening program) and middle institutions (nama-hatta groups, which he institutionalizes according to the model of the "market of the holy name", Godruma Kalpatavi), he achieves success, and as a highly successful civil servant with the highest administrative positions in the judiciary, tax administration and district headquarters that the English have given to the Indians, he is accustomed to everything and understands all aspects of management and administration, Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura eventually "burns out" and, deeply disillusioned with his followers, loses faith in organized religion.
7) SRILA BHAKTIVINODA THAKUR'S MOVEMENT HIJACKED
In January 1900, Vimala-parasad receives initiation from a mystical guru in a very unusual way: no witnesses, no fire and no deities. Father and son then in a suspicious manner withdrew from active preaching in the metropolitan city of Kolkata in March 1900, and spent time in Puri until 1905. And then the son spent a full nine years and five months from 1905-1914 to chant 3x64 roundss of japa as Haridas Thakur, with the intention of reforming his father's movement.
Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura (Vimala-prasada) started the modern organization of our branch of Gaudiya-vaishnavism with such a predisposition. In his works, he reflects on the synthesis between the Pancharatrika and Bhagavata schools, and tries to inculcate his dual harmonic vani-vapuh movement in his students. Srila Prabhupada then reforms and revives his guru's ideas on a global and universal level. To understand this, one must not amputate him from his pre-1965 background, which is inadequately and insufficiently explained in Srila Prabhupada Lilamrita.
6) TWO PERFECT TRANSCENDENTALISTS IN THE ROLE OF FATHER AND SON
Vimala was from an aristocratic family. His father, Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura, raised him as a scholar and missionary from an early age. Vimala was the best student at the university, at the age of twenty he became the family guru at the royal court of the Vajshnava state of Tripura and then the secretary at the Tripura embassy in Kolkata. And yet, Vimala chose as his diksha-guru not another aristocrat, scholar and successful established man, but (from the outside) a "street mendicant" who was the complete opposite of the above. Thus Vimala completely transcends pancharatrika-ecclesiasticism and leans principally on the incomprehensible Bhagavata mysticism.
Vimala writes in 1917 (I paraphrase): if my guru had been fully Kṛṣṇa conscious for only 23 hours, 59 minutes and 59 seconds within 24 hours, and for a single second he had not been fully Kṛṣṇa conscious, I would not have been able to accept Him. But as he is fully Kṛṣṇa conscious 24|7 I am with each of my inhalations and exhalations (as Narottama dasa Thakura would say, "sei mora prana-dhana", you Rupa Manjari are my life air), fully aware of the fact that He is fully Krishna conscious. One uttama recognizes the other. We no longer have any intellectual, cognitive, or exegetical competence here. Through such a synthesis of mysticism and churchism, Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura established modern Rupanuga-gaudiya Vaishnavism as an organized religion. Understand who can.
Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura has been called a "living encyclopedia of the history of the Vaishnava movements" because he has studied all the books on the subject in the original monasteries of South India. On this subject, he wrote a framework study for his 800-page doctoral dissertation, "The History & Literature of the Gaudiya Vaishnavas and their Relation to Other Medieval Vaishnava Schools", which Sambidananda Prabhu, one of the three Gaudiya Matha missionaries in England in 1933-34, defended at the University of London against the demanding Indologists, historians, anthropologists and Orientalists there, to whom the entire Gaudiya-Vaishnava opus was accessible in the London Library. Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura could only dream of this 50 years earlier.
For over twenty years, Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura has been reflecting on the historical development of the organization of the Gaudiya Vaishnava communities in numerous articles in his newspaper Sajjana-toshani, where he connects the traditional basis with his contemporary preaching. During his long sick leave 1891-93 he preached extensively in Bangaldesh, which he describes in his diary. He travels with his preaching group, conducts harinama-sankirtana every day, and has evening programs in large tents where up to 4,000 villagers come. Thus, in a good year, he initiates over 15,000 students and establishes over 300 nama-hatta groups. He also writes six collections of poetry and a couple of books of prose. He took a break from his family and work and made the most of his sick leave.
And finally, by 1900, Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura "burns out". Although through his soft institutionalism (inviting villagers to an evening program) and middle institutions (nama-hatta groups, which he institutionalizes according to the model of the "market of the holy name", Godruma Kalpatavi), he achieves success, and as a highly successful civil servant with the highest administrative positions in the judiciary, tax administration and district headquarters that the English have given to the Indians, he is accustomed to everything and understands all aspects of management and administration, Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura eventually "burns out" and, deeply disillusioned with his followers, loses faith in organized religion.
7) SRILA BHAKTIVINODA THAKUR'S MOVEMENT HIJACKED
In January 1900, Vimala-parasad receives initiation from a mystical guru in a very unusual way: no witnesses, no fire and no deities. Father and son then in a suspicious manner withdrew from active preaching in the metropolitan city of Kolkata in March 1900, and spent time in Puri until 1905. And then the son spent a full nine years and five months from 1905-1914 to chant 3x64 roundss of japa as Haridas Thakur, with the intention of reforming his father's movement.
Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura, however, no longer returned to active preaching. Why these retreats when Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakur's preaching was at its peak? In a famous 1903 article, Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura reveals that his movement was hijacked by opportunists, which made him completely lose the will to preach:
''(…) Gradually, a number of groups were formed in villages and towns to sing the holy names of Hari. In this way, the glories of pure Vaiṣṇavism (...) overwhelmed everyone with their beauty and sweetness. Seeing such an unexpected response from the Bengalis, we began to preach pure Vaiṣṇavianism with increasing enthusiasm. (...). Then (...) there was a sudden change. Glowing superstitions (...) suddenly took various forms (...) The demonic religious principle reappeared in the form of māyāvāda (...) some Indian and foreign yogis began to support smārtism [obsession with rules and regulations] (...) some useless people who loved sensual gratification (...) began to create disturbances in society and identified themselves as sahajiyas and bāulas [sophisticated musical accompaniment to sankirtana for the purpose of enjoyment]. (...) A few worm-like people who enjoy the stool of glory began to advertise themselves as "the Incarnation of the Lord" (...) Some (...) acted as ācāryas and began to spread ideas that were opposed to Vaiṣṇavism, as if they were Vaiṣṇava religious principles. When we saw all such unimaginable activities, our hearts began to break. (...).''
Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura comes to the shocking conclusion that it is impossible to purify the hearts of religious opportunists who, under the guise of close disciples and closest associates and supporters, appropriate the spiritual movement. The guru cannot take karma away from false disciples, his instructions cannot enter their hearts, and no preaching helps here. This is made public to everyone:
''(...) As long as desires that oppose devotional service are not destroyed from the heart, no amount of good instruction can bring any benefit. Such instructions (...) will not enter the heart. No preaching or discussing devotional service will bring good results because of their bad karma. Your discourses and debates will therefore not yield any result. (...)''
Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura was a top civil servant, mediator and expert on interfaith disputes and terrorism. Over the decades of his professional career in this field, he has worked with traditional (Islamic and Hindu law) and modern (English law) views and aspects of religious organizations. He tries to warn his Vaishnava community about three factors that, in his estimation and experience, destroy every spiritual mission, both modern and traditional:
''(...) This community will not remain undisturbed if its members do not vigilantly avoid selfishness, hypocrisy, and the desire for honor and prestige. In Bengal, these three flaws pollute every great spiritual mission that is established and as a result, that mission is eventually destroyed. (...).''
Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura, however, could no longer stop his opportunistic disciples, whom he does not even mention by name, history has wiped them out. Our spiritual history skips those who cunningly administerate buildings, projects, and treasuries, and as acharya-sampradaya, it considers only pure devotees irrespective of bodily designations, personnel policies, and institutional schemes. This movement is not an institutional continuation, as an end in itself, but a spiritual family. The institution is only a temporary missiological means it is not identical with Sampradaya.
SRILA BHAKTISIDDHANTA SARASVATI THAKURA'S SECOND ATTEMPT
Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura, however, has not given up yet. To his father's soft and middle institutionalism (the Navadvipa Dhama Pracharini Sabha and the Vishva Vaishnava Raja Sabha), which he restored in 1919, he also added the Sri Gaudiya Matha in 1920, where he tried to reform the movement through hard institutionalism, control and coercion in the monasteries.
Throughout childhood youth, for 33 years, he actively observbed the development of movement together with his father and thought about how to improve it. In 1927, he writes that vaishnavas are divided into pure (shuddha), mixed (mishra) and corrupt (biddha). The mixed are sincere, and the corrupt practice the "almost completely perverse spirituality" that his father tried unsuccessfully to elevate:
"(...) he addressed the Miśra-Bhakta and Biddha-Bhakta classes, among whom he found supporters and sympathizers. (...) Ṭhākur Bhaktivinode, himself a pioneer of śuddha-bhakti, found that it was necessary to more or less tolerate the influence of misra-bhaktas and biddha-bhaktas [mixed and corrupt devotees] within the movement."
Through hard institutionalization, his son tries to avoid dishonest and corrupt opportunists taking over the movement. He is convinced that if he wants to spread the movement among the educated of the world, the sannyasis and brahmacharis (who should not own buildings, positions and enjoy privileges) will be an essential asset. Many of his disciples write that without sannyasis, his father's movement would have collapsed to the end. With his 24 sannyasis, almost all of whom highly educated, English-speaking itinerant preachers, he achieves great success. All this gives the appearance of lasting success, with which he is trying to convince the disciples of Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakur as well.
The vast majority of them adhere to the congregational movement of Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura (which Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura keeps in parallel), which is not so much avant-garde, progressive and dynamic, as it is based not on the "militant" monasticism of intense preaching, but on more static but stable family and neighborhood ties in mission. Very soon within ten years, however, Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura realizes that even Brahmacharis and Sannyasias in most cases preach intensely in order to enjoy luxury, prestige and followers. The litmus paper of this realization is the Bagh Bazaar Marble Temple, where great preachers expose their intrigues and tricks to gain rooms.
Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakur's Sri Gaudiya Matha, his reformist missiological experiment by 1932 deeply disappoints him. In the article, Putana, the second part of which is later subtitled "Organized Religion", he explains very directly why, 30 years after his father's disappointment, even the son has lost faith and hope that the intense preaching of Krishna consciousness can change preachers and the world. His conclusion is that in all the history of religions, no one has yet been able to find a solution to the inconveniences of organized religion, which is being hijacked by corrupt opportunists:
''(...).The idea of an organized church in an intelligible form, indeed, marks the close of the living spiritual movement. The great ecclesiastical establishments are the dikes and the dams to retain the current that cannot be held by any such contrivances. They, indeed, indicate a desire on the part of the masses to exploit a spiritual movement for their own purpose. They also unmistakably indicate the end of the absolute and unconventional guidance of the bona-fide spiritual teacher.(...).''
Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakur, deeply indignant at his self-serving disciples, therefore insists that his hard institution be continued collegially (through the GBC council) instead of calling a single successor. His leading disciples do not accept his idea, which led in 1937 to a posthumous split into first two and soon dozens of different groups, each operating for themselves, without being overarchingly connected according to the GBC's model proposed.
9) SRILA PRABHUPADA'S THIRD ATTEMPT
Srila Prabhupada participated as an "outside devotee" from 1922 to 1937. His independence is disparaged by some of his godbrothers, but Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati supports it. After the disappearance of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati (1937), Srila Prabhupada first endorsed the GBC-elected successor – the new acharya of Gaudiya-matha – in 1937-40. He then realizes that Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati wanted collegial leadership of the GBC Council and not one successor, so he distances himself from both the factions of Sri Caitanya Matha and Gaudiya Mission, and joins the third, independent confederation group of Sridhara Maharaja, Madhava Maharaja, Kesav Maharaja and others.
In 1942 he co-founded the Gaudiya Vedanta Samiti and the Gopinatha Gaudiya Matha with them, and in 1944 they conferred on him the title and name "Bhaktivedanta". But Srila Prabhupada maintains an independent position from the hard-institutional consciousness, and with his "solo-projects" such as Back To Godhead (1944-1960) and The Lague Of Devotees (1953) he aims at the global and universal supra-sectarian dimension of the movement. He wants to unite all his godbrothers through one common movement, even as he successfully leads ISKCON in the 1970s. At that time, he reformed the scheme of Gaudiya-matha, Gaudiya Mission and Vishwa Vaishnava Raja Sabha into a similar internal model: ISKCON, BBT and Life Membership.
He announces the congregational movement alongside the temple and varnashrama communities. He opens a franchise of Govinda's, Bhaktivedanta Institute, and Food For Life. In short, a whole range of soft, middle, and hard institutional schemes where he can embrace everyone, and place each devotee above secondary institutional affiliation and corporatism into the corresponding scheme of the primary relationship between guru and disciples. In 1700 letters, he clearly points out this primacy over the secondariness of institutional boxing and the exclusionary rivalry of beginners.
To the disciple Yamuna, who laments that she can no longer preach because she is "no longer [in the hard-line] ISKCON", he writes, "wherever you sing Hare Krishna, there is ISKCON". At a public program at the Albert Hall in London, he tells random visitors who have come out of curiosity for the first and last time, "thank you for participating in this Krishna Consciousness ovement." Srila Prabhupada understands that the movement encompasses soft, medium, and hard institutionalization, and that ISKCON is not a closed club of elite select people who enjoy privilege at the expense of others and deny others personal access to Srila Prabhupada.
10) DIFFERENT INTERPRETATIONS OF SRILA PRABHUPADA'S MOVEMENT
It usually takes at least a hundred years, or three generations of disciples, to think through the full range of interpretations of the life of the great spiritual founder. It is impossible to have the whole picture on the basis of Srila Prabhupada Lilamrta (1978-1983), who breaks new ground and outlines the basic scheme of bhaktivedanta-vapuh, but on the other hand exaggerates interpreting Srila Prabhupada through the glasses of the sannyasis who took over the movement. The Lilamrita narrative is therefore later supplemented by over 35 alternative biographies that shed light on other aspects of the movement and student-teacher relationships.
The first question is whether Srila Prabhupada is an "ISKCON devotee" or whether he also belongs to the Gaudiya Mathu in parallel, as he documentedly nourishes both parallels of relationship, and even in the 1970s he allegedly considered himself a member of both the ISKCON and the Gaudiya Math. This apparent contradiction particularly evident in the years 1978-1982, when the vast majority of Srila Prabhupada's disciples refused to submit to the administrative-spiritual authority of the self-proclaimed maha-bhagavata uttama-adhikaris, or ''zonal acaryas'', who subjugate the GBC system in the style of mafia godfathers by removing as much as 90% of their godbrothers. They interprete disobedience to themselves as disobedience to Srila Prabhupada. They then fill the movement with their students.
The movement is also interpreted in two opposing ways. "Grihasthas and Matajis" testify to Srila Prabhupada's accessibility and personalism, and how he empowered them as full-fledged preachers and leaders of the movement. Some sannyasis have a different story: Srila Prabhupada endured the company of grihastas and matajis because he had no choice. He was pretending to be nice in front of them to wait for the proper opportunity to hand the movement over to the sannyasis in the second part of his ISKCON parties, turning the movement into hardline militant monasticism and into a money-collecting factory.
Most of Srila Prabhupada's disciples did not come to terms with the sannyasa-centrist movement. The first posthumous phase (1978-1986), also called the "Zonal Acharya System", removed about 90% of Srila Prabhupada's disciples from the movement, because the movement was now supposed to be primarily concerned with the relationship between the Zonal acharyas and their disciples, and the God-brothers of the Zonal acharyas were supposedly hindering this.
''(…) Gradually, a number of groups were formed in villages and towns to sing the holy names of Hari. In this way, the glories of pure Vaiṣṇavism (...) overwhelmed everyone with their beauty and sweetness. Seeing such an unexpected response from the Bengalis, we began to preach pure Vaiṣṇavianism with increasing enthusiasm. (...). Then (...) there was a sudden change. Glowing superstitions (...) suddenly took various forms (...) The demonic religious principle reappeared in the form of māyāvāda (...) some Indian and foreign yogis began to support smārtism [obsession with rules and regulations] (...) some useless people who loved sensual gratification (...) began to create disturbances in society and identified themselves as sahajiyas and bāulas [sophisticated musical accompaniment to sankirtana for the purpose of enjoyment]. (...) A few worm-like people who enjoy the stool of glory began to advertise themselves as "the Incarnation of the Lord" (...) Some (...) acted as ācāryas and began to spread ideas that were opposed to Vaiṣṇavism, as if they were Vaiṣṇava religious principles. When we saw all such unimaginable activities, our hearts began to break. (...).''
Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura comes to the shocking conclusion that it is impossible to purify the hearts of religious opportunists who, under the guise of close disciples and closest associates and supporters, appropriate the spiritual movement. The guru cannot take karma away from false disciples, his instructions cannot enter their hearts, and no preaching helps here. This is made public to everyone:
''(...) As long as desires that oppose devotional service are not destroyed from the heart, no amount of good instruction can bring any benefit. Such instructions (...) will not enter the heart. No preaching or discussing devotional service will bring good results because of their bad karma. Your discourses and debates will therefore not yield any result. (...)''
Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura was a top civil servant, mediator and expert on interfaith disputes and terrorism. Over the decades of his professional career in this field, he has worked with traditional (Islamic and Hindu law) and modern (English law) views and aspects of religious organizations. He tries to warn his Vaishnava community about three factors that, in his estimation and experience, destroy every spiritual mission, both modern and traditional:
''(...) This community will not remain undisturbed if its members do not vigilantly avoid selfishness, hypocrisy, and the desire for honor and prestige. In Bengal, these three flaws pollute every great spiritual mission that is established and as a result, that mission is eventually destroyed. (...).''
Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura, however, could no longer stop his opportunistic disciples, whom he does not even mention by name, history has wiped them out. Our spiritual history skips those who cunningly administerate buildings, projects, and treasuries, and as acharya-sampradaya, it considers only pure devotees irrespective of bodily designations, personnel policies, and institutional schemes. This movement is not an institutional continuation, as an end in itself, but a spiritual family. The institution is only a temporary missiological means it is not identical with Sampradaya.
SRILA BHAKTISIDDHANTA SARASVATI THAKURA'S SECOND ATTEMPT
Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura, however, has not given up yet. To his father's soft and middle institutionalism (the Navadvipa Dhama Pracharini Sabha and the Vishva Vaishnava Raja Sabha), which he restored in 1919, he also added the Sri Gaudiya Matha in 1920, where he tried to reform the movement through hard institutionalism, control and coercion in the monasteries.
Throughout childhood youth, for 33 years, he actively observbed the development of movement together with his father and thought about how to improve it. In 1927, he writes that vaishnavas are divided into pure (shuddha), mixed (mishra) and corrupt (biddha). The mixed are sincere, and the corrupt practice the "almost completely perverse spirituality" that his father tried unsuccessfully to elevate:
"(...) he addressed the Miśra-Bhakta and Biddha-Bhakta classes, among whom he found supporters and sympathizers. (...) Ṭhākur Bhaktivinode, himself a pioneer of śuddha-bhakti, found that it was necessary to more or less tolerate the influence of misra-bhaktas and biddha-bhaktas [mixed and corrupt devotees] within the movement."
Through hard institutionalization, his son tries to avoid dishonest and corrupt opportunists taking over the movement. He is convinced that if he wants to spread the movement among the educated of the world, the sannyasis and brahmacharis (who should not own buildings, positions and enjoy privileges) will be an essential asset. Many of his disciples write that without sannyasis, his father's movement would have collapsed to the end. With his 24 sannyasis, almost all of whom highly educated, English-speaking itinerant preachers, he achieves great success. All this gives the appearance of lasting success, with which he is trying to convince the disciples of Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakur as well.
The vast majority of them adhere to the congregational movement of Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura (which Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura keeps in parallel), which is not so much avant-garde, progressive and dynamic, as it is based not on the "militant" monasticism of intense preaching, but on more static but stable family and neighborhood ties in mission. Very soon within ten years, however, Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura realizes that even Brahmacharis and Sannyasias in most cases preach intensely in order to enjoy luxury, prestige and followers. The litmus paper of this realization is the Bagh Bazaar Marble Temple, where great preachers expose their intrigues and tricks to gain rooms.
Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakur's Sri Gaudiya Matha, his reformist missiological experiment by 1932 deeply disappoints him. In the article, Putana, the second part of which is later subtitled "Organized Religion", he explains very directly why, 30 years after his father's disappointment, even the son has lost faith and hope that the intense preaching of Krishna consciousness can change preachers and the world. His conclusion is that in all the history of religions, no one has yet been able to find a solution to the inconveniences of organized religion, which is being hijacked by corrupt opportunists:
''(...).The idea of an organized church in an intelligible form, indeed, marks the close of the living spiritual movement. The great ecclesiastical establishments are the dikes and the dams to retain the current that cannot be held by any such contrivances. They, indeed, indicate a desire on the part of the masses to exploit a spiritual movement for their own purpose. They also unmistakably indicate the end of the absolute and unconventional guidance of the bona-fide spiritual teacher.(...).''
Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakur, deeply indignant at his self-serving disciples, therefore insists that his hard institution be continued collegially (through the GBC council) instead of calling a single successor. His leading disciples do not accept his idea, which led in 1937 to a posthumous split into first two and soon dozens of different groups, each operating for themselves, without being overarchingly connected according to the GBC's model proposed.
9) SRILA PRABHUPADA'S THIRD ATTEMPT
Srila Prabhupada participated as an "outside devotee" from 1922 to 1937. His independence is disparaged by some of his godbrothers, but Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati supports it. After the disappearance of Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati (1937), Srila Prabhupada first endorsed the GBC-elected successor – the new acharya of Gaudiya-matha – in 1937-40. He then realizes that Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati wanted collegial leadership of the GBC Council and not one successor, so he distances himself from both the factions of Sri Caitanya Matha and Gaudiya Mission, and joins the third, independent confederation group of Sridhara Maharaja, Madhava Maharaja, Kesav Maharaja and others.
In 1942 he co-founded the Gaudiya Vedanta Samiti and the Gopinatha Gaudiya Matha with them, and in 1944 they conferred on him the title and name "Bhaktivedanta". But Srila Prabhupada maintains an independent position from the hard-institutional consciousness, and with his "solo-projects" such as Back To Godhead (1944-1960) and The Lague Of Devotees (1953) he aims at the global and universal supra-sectarian dimension of the movement. He wants to unite all his godbrothers through one common movement, even as he successfully leads ISKCON in the 1970s. At that time, he reformed the scheme of Gaudiya-matha, Gaudiya Mission and Vishwa Vaishnava Raja Sabha into a similar internal model: ISKCON, BBT and Life Membership.
He announces the congregational movement alongside the temple and varnashrama communities. He opens a franchise of Govinda's, Bhaktivedanta Institute, and Food For Life. In short, a whole range of soft, middle, and hard institutional schemes where he can embrace everyone, and place each devotee above secondary institutional affiliation and corporatism into the corresponding scheme of the primary relationship between guru and disciples. In 1700 letters, he clearly points out this primacy over the secondariness of institutional boxing and the exclusionary rivalry of beginners.
To the disciple Yamuna, who laments that she can no longer preach because she is "no longer [in the hard-line] ISKCON", he writes, "wherever you sing Hare Krishna, there is ISKCON". At a public program at the Albert Hall in London, he tells random visitors who have come out of curiosity for the first and last time, "thank you for participating in this Krishna Consciousness ovement." Srila Prabhupada understands that the movement encompasses soft, medium, and hard institutionalization, and that ISKCON is not a closed club of elite select people who enjoy privilege at the expense of others and deny others personal access to Srila Prabhupada.
10) DIFFERENT INTERPRETATIONS OF SRILA PRABHUPADA'S MOVEMENT
It usually takes at least a hundred years, or three generations of disciples, to think through the full range of interpretations of the life of the great spiritual founder. It is impossible to have the whole picture on the basis of Srila Prabhupada Lilamrta (1978-1983), who breaks new ground and outlines the basic scheme of bhaktivedanta-vapuh, but on the other hand exaggerates interpreting Srila Prabhupada through the glasses of the sannyasis who took over the movement. The Lilamrita narrative is therefore later supplemented by over 35 alternative biographies that shed light on other aspects of the movement and student-teacher relationships.
The first question is whether Srila Prabhupada is an "ISKCON devotee" or whether he also belongs to the Gaudiya Mathu in parallel, as he documentedly nourishes both parallels of relationship, and even in the 1970s he allegedly considered himself a member of both the ISKCON and the Gaudiya Math. This apparent contradiction particularly evident in the years 1978-1982, when the vast majority of Srila Prabhupada's disciples refused to submit to the administrative-spiritual authority of the self-proclaimed maha-bhagavata uttama-adhikaris, or ''zonal acaryas'', who subjugate the GBC system in the style of mafia godfathers by removing as much as 90% of their godbrothers. They interprete disobedience to themselves as disobedience to Srila Prabhupada. They then fill the movement with their students.
The movement is also interpreted in two opposing ways. "Grihasthas and Matajis" testify to Srila Prabhupada's accessibility and personalism, and how he empowered them as full-fledged preachers and leaders of the movement. Some sannyasis have a different story: Srila Prabhupada endured the company of grihastas and matajis because he had no choice. He was pretending to be nice in front of them to wait for the proper opportunity to hand the movement over to the sannyasis in the second part of his ISKCON parties, turning the movement into hardline militant monasticism and into a money-collecting factory.
Most of Srila Prabhupada's disciples did not come to terms with the sannyasa-centrist movement. The first posthumous phase (1978-1986), also called the "Zonal Acharya System", removed about 90% of Srila Prabhupada's disciples from the movement, because the movement was now supposed to be primarily concerned with the relationship between the Zonal acharyas and their disciples, and the God-brothers of the Zonal acharyas were supposedly hindering this.
1987-1993 was followed by a partial reform that did not completely eliminate these problems, but only consolidated the "GBC Church" as it is in today's corporate-collegiate form. The reform only increased the circle of loyal clerks and apparatchicks, but does not eliminate the problems of authoritarianism and abuse.
Srila Prabhupada's devotees then become "ISKCON devotees", the GBC-tattva largely replaces the guru-tattva, as the guru must primarily be an employee of the GBC system, the maintenance of which is an end in itself. Administrative and spiritual authority merge into one supra-personal "juridical person". Then comes the entry into the 21st century, into the age of electronic hyper-information, where the entire opus of bhaktivedanta-vani and siksa is accessible to everyone.
11) CONCLUSION: SRILA PRABHUPADA'S LEGACY IN THE 21ST CENTURY
In the pre-internet world, the ideology that ISKCON is "Srila Prabhupada's body" reigns. God leave no doubt that this body is not "spiritual." This indoctrination slogan of "ISKCON devotees" was demystified by the Internet revolution at the end of the 20th century and by the availability of the Bhaktivedanta Vedabase Folio. However, after the founding of Facebook (2008), the social media revolution reached the point that nothing can be swept under the carpet anymore. Google's algorithm exposes abuses of women and children, and abuses by institutional employees are openly discussed in public forums on social media.
Social networks introduce an egalitarian platform to communicate over hierarchical bullying of the "aparadha-police". In the cyber world, facts and informations apply over authoritative bullying and the manipulation of cognitive dissonances. The Internet essentially implements a "Brahminical forum", where freedom of speech transcends the threats of "authorities" who, in the style of "feudal lords", threaten and blackmail their subjects with personnel policies and political correctness in exchange for recommendations for the first and second initiations.
The Internet revolution intellectualized ISKCON in much the same way that the printing revolution in the last third of the 19th century in Bengal gave rise to the mission of Sril Bhaktivinoda Thakur. At that time, literacy tripled, and printers printed eighty times as many books in three decades as the Brahmacharis transcribed by hand in a thousand years. Every gentleman of the town reads his copy of the book . No more illiterate villagers who humbly listen to the village Brahmana who is threatening them with hell. Similarly, the Internet revolution empowers independent thinkers and gives them a platform to assert themselves without being intimidated by "lifelong authorities."
And Srila Prabhupada was a man of dynamism, progress, innovation and freedom. He escaped from the narrow-minded Vedic box and even broadened the horizons of freelance bohemians. Those who try to be more Vedic than Srila Prabhupada stifle the organic development of his movement with the idea that they have to destroy the movement from within in order to save it. The history of the Vaishnava communities, however, teaches us that Acharya is not a Talibanic warlord or a political commissar from North Korea, but a person of free-thinking views who encourages independent thinking, a culture of relationships and an authentic community that embraces all people. Srila Prabhupada built a house in which the whole world can reside. Thank you, Srila Prabhupada, for your living spiritual community.
Srila Prabhupada's devotees then become "ISKCON devotees", the GBC-tattva largely replaces the guru-tattva, as the guru must primarily be an employee of the GBC system, the maintenance of which is an end in itself. Administrative and spiritual authority merge into one supra-personal "juridical person". Then comes the entry into the 21st century, into the age of electronic hyper-information, where the entire opus of bhaktivedanta-vani and siksa is accessible to everyone.
11) CONCLUSION: SRILA PRABHUPADA'S LEGACY IN THE 21ST CENTURY
In the pre-internet world, the ideology that ISKCON is "Srila Prabhupada's body" reigns. God leave no doubt that this body is not "spiritual." This indoctrination slogan of "ISKCON devotees" was demystified by the Internet revolution at the end of the 20th century and by the availability of the Bhaktivedanta Vedabase Folio. However, after the founding of Facebook (2008), the social media revolution reached the point that nothing can be swept under the carpet anymore. Google's algorithm exposes abuses of women and children, and abuses by institutional employees are openly discussed in public forums on social media.
Social networks introduce an egalitarian platform to communicate over hierarchical bullying of the "aparadha-police". In the cyber world, facts and informations apply over authoritative bullying and the manipulation of cognitive dissonances. The Internet essentially implements a "Brahminical forum", where freedom of speech transcends the threats of "authorities" who, in the style of "feudal lords", threaten and blackmail their subjects with personnel policies and political correctness in exchange for recommendations for the first and second initiations.
The Internet revolution intellectualized ISKCON in much the same way that the printing revolution in the last third of the 19th century in Bengal gave rise to the mission of Sril Bhaktivinoda Thakur. At that time, literacy tripled, and printers printed eighty times as many books in three decades as the Brahmacharis transcribed by hand in a thousand years. Every gentleman of the town reads his copy of the book . No more illiterate villagers who humbly listen to the village Brahmana who is threatening them with hell. Similarly, the Internet revolution empowers independent thinkers and gives them a platform to assert themselves without being intimidated by "lifelong authorities."
And Srila Prabhupada was a man of dynamism, progress, innovation and freedom. He escaped from the narrow-minded Vedic box and even broadened the horizons of freelance bohemians. Those who try to be more Vedic than Srila Prabhupada stifle the organic development of his movement with the idea that they have to destroy the movement from within in order to save it. The history of the Vaishnava communities, however, teaches us that Acharya is not a Talibanic warlord or a political commissar from North Korea, but a person of free-thinking views who encourages independent thinking, a culture of relationships and an authentic community that embraces all people. Srila Prabhupada built a house in which the whole world can reside. Thank you, Srila Prabhupada, for your living spiritual community.
