Some days ago a certain document was published in the internet (we don’t classify the document as there is neither a date nor a place and name of it, the signers are five persons). In the document some zonal secretaries of Russian GBCs have resolved to ban preaching of Balaramacharya prabhu and Chaitanya-vallabha prabhu in our country (Russia). We have studied the document and decided to give comments to certain parts of it.
The Document issued by Russian GBC
” Over the last two to three years we, as GBCs for Russia, have noticed a steadily increasing mood of concern amongst many ISKCON devotees in Russia, including many Temple Presidents and other leaders, regarding the preaching of Caitanya Vallabha dasa and Balarama Acharya dasa.
We have been informed that these two devotees are trying to preach forms of pure devotional service which, in some cases, are not truly representative of the teachings of Srila Prabhupada, which therefore sometimes confuse devotees, and sometimes have deeply divisive effects on ISKCON communities.
We have also been informed that sometimes, at least in private discussions, they are critical of some ISKCON spiritual masters in good standing, and of members of the GBC Body, and the Body itself, without good reason. This of course has the effect of reducing the faith the devotees have in the devotees criticized, and sometimes in the process of Krishna consciousness itself. Devotees complain of sometimes being treated offensively by some of these two devotees’ followers.
The expressions of concern and complaint have reached such a point that some action is required. Therefore a proceeding will be conducted into the preaching and behavior of Caitanya Vallabha dasa and Balarama Acharya dasa to ascertain clearly whether the allegations made against them are true or not, and if there is truth in them, what action should be taken to correct them and any situations they may have created.
Therefore we, as GBCs for Russia, have decided to hereby issue the following directive: That, until further notice, Caitanya Vallabha dasa and Balarama Acarya dasa may not preach in Russia. This includes preaching in any types of venues or programs of any types, public or private, be they in temples, Nama Hatta centers, homes or any other places.
This is in pursuance of GBC Resolution 406 of 2002, titled Zonal Preaching Management. The resolution is as follows: “Whereas, it is essential for the zonal secretaries to maintain a unified preaching strategy in their respective zones; “Whereas, certain preachers may not respect or support these preaching strategies; “Therefore it is Resolved as ISKCON Law, that the GBC Body invests the following power in the GBC Zonal Secretaries: The right to exclude any traveling preacher from his/her zone with the approval of the majority of the local temple presidents and after informing the Executive Committee of the GBC.”
We note that Srila Prabhupada issued similar directives regarding book distribution parties visiting areas under the jurisdiction of different temples and other projects. Srila Prabhupada invested the right to decide whether the presence of those parties was favorable or not in the temple authorities, and gave them the right to exclude those visiting devotees from their areas.
We are aware that there are devotees who appreciate the preaching of Caitanya Vallabha dasa and Balarama Acarya dasa. We apologize if the above directive upsets you. However, under the extraordinary circumstances we are facing in some areas of the country, we have no choice but to take this action. We request you to please tolerate any inconvenience caused, and cooperate with devotees who making proceeding.
Thank you very much.
Your servants,
Members of the GBC Body responsible for Russia. Acyutatma dasa
Bhakti Caitanya Swami (GBC 2nd Vice Chairman) Bhakti Vaibhava Swami (GBC Chairman)
Caitanya Chandra Charan das
Gopala Krishna Goswami “
Concern
The argument that the devotees’ preaching arouses some «mood of concern» among devotees isn’t in itself convincing. Concern may arise for different reasons. In the Prabhupada Lilamrita different cases are described when devotees were concerned about Srila Prabhupada’s preaching and even left ISKCON because of those concerns (e.g. universe structure according to the 5th Canto of SB; Srila Prabhupada’s opinion on the landing on the Mood, etc.). But those concerns were caused not by any seditious actions or statements of our acharya, but by the words of sastra. That’s why the nature of the concern should be identified: who is concerned, because of what and how? Only then one could come to preliminary conclusions.
It is obvious that because mostly leaders of Russian ISKCON have access to and trust of the members of the GBC, therefore their constant complaints (biassed and subjective) have caused an impression of a large-scale concern. Other devotees’ concern is caused by their trust in COSKR (Russian Centers of Krishna Consciousness), whose members distribute via different chats and other media channels information that defames the above-mentioned devotees (there are proofs).
On the other hand, there is a number of famous devotees in Russian ISKCON whose methods of preaching arouse concerns among many devotees as well (and these concerns are based on definite facts), such as:
● watering down the philosophy
● friendship with impersonalists and introducing their ideas into the devotee society
● endeavors to establish some inadmissible methods of preaching as standard (including
rejection of khantimalas and sikhas and any other connection with ISKCON and Krishna
Consciousness in public)
● inventing their own commentaries to Bhagavad-gita
● persistent introduction of karma-kanda and psychology
● yajnas to demigods
● paid preaching programs
etc.
All these tendencies have been there for many years but any attempts to change the situation by any traditional means within the etiquette doesn’t get any response either from the National Council (now COSKR – Russian Centers of Krishna Consciousness), or from the GBC. And because these problems are being suppressed by the leaders, the complaints are being ignored or just are classified as offensive even if they are very polite, therefore Balaramacharya prabhu and Chaitanya-vallabha prabhu have to address regularly those problems and analized them according to shastras and Srila Prabhupada’s statements while answering the questions of the concerned devotees, thus hoping that sometime ISKCON leaders would pay attention to those problems and start solving them.
But for some unknown reasons the leaders have started to act not against the problems themselves but against those who try to solve those problems and to preserve ISKCON by showing concern for those problems. And now follow attentively, as this is a brilliant magic trick: «We have got some complaints but we don’t know the facts, there are just complaints without examples and evidences. Based on these complains we have banned the preaching of these lectors and now we can peacefully start the investigation to understand if we should have banned them or not..» Do you see what the only outcome from this situation is? Right: to prove the initial decision by all means and by juggling with facts so that not to look foolish.
A comparison from civil life: not all people are being imprisoned for the period of investigation, and one needs to have a strong list of evidences so that the prosecutor signs the paper. We thought that in the vaishnav society there’s a presumption of innocence and common sense as well.
“Discrepancy” with Srila Prabhupada’s teaching
In every document about Balaramacarya prabhu and Caitanya-vallabha prabhu some “discrepancies” in their preaching are mentioned, but the problem is that those discrepancies have never been mentioned. Therefore this document which is signed by the Russian GBCs defames these qualified preachers. There are no decent proofs of their guilt. If these proofs existed and were presented, they would have corrected themselves and harmonized preaching with instructions of Srila Prabhupada (which they, according to the authors of the document, violate). Moreover, in such a case there would have been no need to write such a hasty resolution that tears devotees to pieces in front of the entire Russian ISKCON. It would have been sufficient just to approach them with a list of definite examples of their misapplying of Srila Prabhupada’s teaching with some links to Srila Prabhupada’s teaching and specific quotes (with a chance to explain themselves).
It seems that there is a lack of a proper procedural approach in this case: there are no proofs, no list of deviations from Srila Prabhupada’s philosophy (only some unsubstantiated accusations). So we see a fact of an intentional and unconcealed attempt of Russian ISKCON leaders to destroy the reputation of these devotees. Such accusations can destroy anyone’s reputation, because there is no need to prove anything – devotees have a culture of respect to authorities and senior devotees. Often new devotees blindly accept everything they are told, although Srila Prabhupada has stated so many times that one doesn’t need to be a “blind” follower.
Put it another way, this point is absurd. Of course, the devotees would be glad to accept any comments and corrections, because they understand – first of all, this is an opportunity to make their own spiritual progress. Just an example: about a year and a half ago, one of the authors of this letter commented on Caitanya-vallabha prabhu’s article. Caitanya-vallabha prabhu reviewed it, considered it reasonable and introduced a small correction to his article. At the same time, it is remarkable, that real, undeniable discrepancies in the statements of some well-known preachers and the message of our founder acarya, are being ignored by the Russian ISKCON leaders.
“Money”, “construction” and other dirty games
As a response to the previous petition, the Russian ISKCON leaders began some kind of a dirty game. They mentioned a situation with the house construction in Mayapur, in which Balaramacharya prabhu is involved. In their response to the disciples of Chaitanya Chandra Charan prabhu, they deliberately showed everything in a specific way just to point out, that Balaramacharya prabhu is a fraudster who took money for a construction work and then spent them for his own needs. And they described this really complex situation by a phrase “housing equity holders saw neither money nor apartments”.
In reality, the situation is completely different: indeed, the money was taken and invested in the construction, that means the house was partially completed and all the given money was used for this construction, but after that, due to the financial crisis in 2014, some interest holders stopped giving funds. But the construction of the house was stopped only after all earlier received funds had been entirely used for this purpose and finished. All the money was invested in the apartments, and devotees can see and touch the walls.
This is a very unpleasant situation for all participants, but there isn’t any cheating here. Only immoral people could blame the coordinator of the construction for a misappropriation of funds. Please note that this situation cannot even be compared with repeated disappearance of money collected for the construction of the Moscow Temple: in this case, a huge sum of money was collected and disappeared fully and not a single brick was bought for Temple construction. Here definitely one can say – neither money, nor Temple.
We don’t want to blame either Bhakti Vijnana Goswami Maharaja or his team for cheating or misappropriation of funds. We only point out that this attempt to accuse Balaramacharya prabhu is just a dirty game against an opponent who cannot be defeated honestly.
Recent incident with Bhakti Ananta Krishna Goswami Maharaja is also demonstrative. He continues to preach and occupies some leadership positions in Russian ISKCON, despite the proven etiquette violations in his relations with mataji, these violations are enough for the removal of sannyasa status, and Maharaja even had to apologize publicly after this incident. By the way, just a month after those apologies, he recorded a video with an invitation to his parikrama in the Dhama. Aren’t these double standards?
Using one’s position and offensive attitude
We have witnessed recently how COSKR-subordinate structures (COSKR – Russian Centers of Krishna Consciousness) are «taking care» of devotees and «acting with love and soft heart»:
1) A vaishnav family from Pyatigorsk who expressed their support to Balaramacharya prabhu and Chaitanya-vallabha prabhu and organized home programs with their participation have been threatened that they would be stripped of their initiation. Just because they supported someone who the leaders don’t like. We won’t dwell on the topic of the absurdity of this threat and the misunderstanding of guru tattva in order not to add to the volume of this letter.
2) In Perm a bhakta was banished from yatra because he had been posting (on his social media) quotes of Srila Prabhupada concerning mundane philanthropy. Another family in the same city was prohibited to perform further their service because they helped in organizing a home program with Chaitanya-vallabha prabhu.
3) Bhaktin Anna’s wish to switch to another ISKCON guru in her choice of pranama-mantra was declined (such situation is described in detail in ISKCON laws and the Yatra Council’s permission is not even required for that – one just needs to notify them). More than that, it turned out that in order to be a member of Saratov yatra and to attend temple programs and to receive any recommendations one must pay obligatory monthly fees to the community. Just see: obligatory monthly fees! And these people banned bhaktin Anna from participation in any temple or home programs! But nobody has even thought of reproving these people for how they are undermining Srila Prabhupada’s idea of ISKCON’s functioning.
4) A sankirtan brahmachari was literally sent out because he participated in programs with Chaitanya-vallabha prabhu (he was given 4 days to find a new place to stay). More than that Achyutatma prabhu wrote to him that he has no right to participate in weekend sankirtan program in his city and cannot distribute books without the Yatra Council’s permission.
There are many more documented facts of misusing their position where in some cases they are trying to justify their faults with some nonsense excuses but in other cases they just totally ignore the situation not even trying to rectify the problem.
«GBC does not mean to control a center. GBC means to see that the activities of a center go on nicely.»
(SP Letter to Giriraj, 12 Aug 1971, London)
How could a society based on the principle «one who is stronger is right» be healthy? Is this the idea of varnasrama-dharma and spiritual relations?
Evidence of guilt
The entire case is based on:
• personal impressions of several leaders who spoke with Caitanya-Vallabha prabhu and Balaramacarya prabhu;
• the complaints about these teachers from the Mayapur Institute students which have never been presented elsewhere (they seem to be gathered by Devakinandan prabhu, who later became — unexpectedly! — the new curator of MI. Seems like a conflict of interest);
• a letter from Chaitanya Chandra Charan prabhu to the National Council, which is based on similar mythical complaints, biased and emotionally loaded opinions about people whom he does not even know;
• one personal conversation of Balaramacharya prabhu,meanly recorded and distributed in violation of the right to secrecy of private telephone conversations and other messages, guaranteed by the Constitution of the Russian Federation. In the recording he criticizes the preaching of one of the local preachers (note that it was argumentative and verifiable).
So, what do we have so far? We have no real accusations against Balaramacharya prabhu and Caitanya-vallabha prabhu. Just some personal biased opinion. The situation is similar to Vysotsky’s song: “a tall giraffe – he knows the best.”
The fact of the stollen phone call is worth discussing separately (by the way, Balaramacharya prabhu publicly apologized for it). What have we got? Meanly recorded personal conversation, which emotionally charged people accept as a legitimate argument, forgetting (or even not understanding) that the secrecy of correspondence, telephone conversations, mail, telegraph and other messages is guaranteed by article 23 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation. Violation of this secrecy constitutes crime under Article 138 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. Use of any evidence obtained in violation of the current legislation of the Russian Federation is unacceptable and unethical. By the way, those who try to justify the famous impetuous letter of Chaitanya Chandra Charan Prabhu to the National Council are trying now to appeal to exactly the same article, claiming it to be “intended for private use”. Was it really so or not, but some zealous and poorly educated activists seem to play a dirty trick upon their own guru, shamelessly and actively spreading the letter throughout Russia and abroad, to defame the devotees mentioned in it in the eyes of those who trust Caitanya Chandra Charan prabhu. This happened long before it came into our hands. Where is the logic, consistency and justice, unbiased attitude?
Taking measures
The document contains a reference to a point in ISKCON laws stating that the local leadership can decide whether to let a preacher into their area or not. But why is the attention of the document’s authors constantly concentrating on the duties of the accused party? Why they do not want to recognize the obvious: if the local leadership has such a right, their decision must be clearly substantiated, as this paragraph does not imply the absolute power of the president or regional secretary, it shouldn’t be like the whims of the boy who got up on the wrong foot and swept away the army of plastic soldiers.
This paragraph implies an adult reasonable approach and the duty of the leader to provide honest, definite, evidence-based arguments. Once again: the duty of a leader is to give detailed argumented reasoning of the ban, especially when the ban is for preaching throughout the country and even at home programs. This should be done before the ban. Otherwise it clearly contradicts Srila Prabhupada’s instructions.
The document also says: “The expressed concerns and complaints have reached a critical point, and we are forced to take action.” Why not get to the root of the problem and to solve real problems that are the cause of criticism? Because this is the essence. Why no actions have been taken against a number of leaders and famous preachers who send a message of philosophy that is very different from the Krishna Consciousness that Srila Prabhupada gave to us? This message has a negative impact on many devotees. After all, this is logical. Why silence the indignant, if you can just solve the problem itself?
This is a wise Ayurvedic approach: eliminate the root of the disease, rather than the visible reactions of the body; fight the causes, not the symptoms. ISKCON is sick in a way. And this has long been recognized by many disciples of Srila Prabhupada, the leaders of society. Maybe it’s time to get to solving really important problems and, following in the footsteps of Srila Prabhupada, not to ban the devotees, but positively engage their talents in serving the mission of Lord Caitanya?
As for the restrictions themselves, the ban on preaching at private programs violates the Constitution of the Russian Federation, which devotees are obliged to follow, according to the charter of COSKR and the “Declaration of Principles of State-Confessional Dialogue and Social Service of Russian Vaisnavas”.
Thus, Article 28 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation provides:
“Everyone is guaranteed freedom of conscience, freedom of religion, including the right to practice any religion individually or jointly with others or not to practice any religion, to freely choose, have and spread religious and other beliefs and act in accordance with them.”
If there are solid reasons and all administrative procedures have been followed, the ISKCON administration has the right to forbid lecturing in ISKCON temples and centers, but the authority of ISKCON administrators has no power outside the temples and centers (Vrajendra Kumar prabhu wrote about this in the section “Questions to the National Council” at the Krishna.ru forum, while explaining why devotees’ performing unauthorized yajnas were not stopped in the Far East of Russia). Do ISKCON administrators really want us to seem in the eyes of the state and society as an organization that violates the constitutional rights and freedoms of citizens, in other words, as a classic totalitarian sect?
It seems that the leaders take on such a degree of power that they consider themselves entitled to order to ISKCON members what to do at home, with whom to communicate, whether they should listen to lectures at private territory, etc. Even the state does not encroach on this. And if the Russian GBC indeed have such power, wouldn’t it be better to use it to prohibit devotees to have cats and dogs in their homes, have sex without procreation, to participate in the yagyas to the demigods, but rather force them to rise up early in the morning and attend morning programs, etc? This would be much more beneficial for the Russian ISKCON than a ban on programs with lecturers respected by many devotees.
A fairly large number of devotees are already worried that the principles of purity, openness, truthfulness are disappearing, and non-authoritative types of preaching that were clearly not approved by Srila Prabhupada are widely spreading in ISKCON Russia. We appeal again to the National Council and the regional secretaries of the GBC: please do not drop that hammer, do not commit aparadhas, do not destroy the reputation of devotees for no reason.
There is one more thing. One of the signatories to the document is Bhaktivaibhava Swami, diksa-guru of Chaitanya-vallabha prabhu. The question may arise: how is that? Does not the signature of a spiritual master oblige a disciple to unconditionally obey a document? But in the guru-tattva there is a subtle moment when a guru and disciple meet in an administrative line. Here, the principle “I respect as a guru, but do not agree with him as the GBC” may be applied.
Sounds seditious? But, for example, Bhakti Vijnana Gosvami personally said that on some issues in the GBC he did not vote like his spiritual master. Radha Govinda prabhu said that as an administrative leader in the area where his guru Sivarama Swami was the representative of the GBC, he was obliged to argue with him on various issues (moreover, when Radha Govinda prabhu was given this post, Sivarama Swami himself said that he would not have to obey him blindly, but to argue where he considers it to be necessary). Jayapataka Swami’s students being members of various departments of Indian ISKCON regularly discuss with him various issues. And even Srila Prabhupada inspired students to think with their own brains. Moreover, they repeatedly argued with him, believing that in this way they serve him. And in a number of cases he approved of this.
What do we want
1. For the duration of the investigation, remove the ban on regional preaching of Caitanya-vallabha Prabhu and Balaramacharya Prabhu.
2. Drop the charges against them and publicly anounce this in the official resources of the Russian ISKCON.
3. Recognize the haste of the drafted document and the measures taken against the lecturers.
4. Conduct a fair unbiased investigation in compliance with all ISKCON legislation, honestly and openly, without rejecting the principle of the presumption of innocence.
5. To give a representative selection of lectures of Balaramacharya prabhu and Chaitanya-vallabha prabhu for a compulsory study to temple presidents and decision-making members of the National Council, the GBC for Russia and other devotees involved in the proceedings . For foreign devotees who do not speak Russian, we are ready to provide English subtitles for 10 randomly selected lectures of accused devotees.
6. To bring charges with reasoning, citing a sufficient number of serious facts and referring to the self-explanatory quotes from the sastras and the words of Srila Prabhupada.
7. Immediately present to Balaramacharya prabhu and Caitanya- vallabha prabhu the existing evidence that support the allegations against them so that they can debate them.
8. To withdraw from the internet the document which was drafted hastily and with violations of the procedures, and ask the devotees not to be directed by it.
9. From now on, do not distribute such documents via closed chats and personal social network pages, but rather publish them officially in the COSKR group, as this is relevant to the entire Russian community.
Information and Analytical Center of the “Hare Krishna Movement” Group https://vk.com/vedacoua
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Akincana Gocara website ( https://akincana.net/ ). When our output makes allegations of wrongdoing, iniquity or incompetence or lays out a strong and damaging critique of an individual or institution the presumption is that those criticised should be given a “right of reply”, that is, given a fair opportunity to respond to the allegations through an article submission to our website.
Prabhupad was in Los Angeles giving lecture , and all the ” GBC ” members were present , and Prabhupad pointed his finger at them , and said ” You’ll be the first ones to betray me ” !!! … and so they did …
I got a good one for all you fanatical kanishta adhikaris out there …
What did Prabhupad tell Baradraj ( one of ISKCON’ s best painter / artist at the time … if not the best !!! ) when Baradraj was in Prabhupad’s room ( alone with him ) after being summoned there , because the ( true ) rumor was going around the temple that Baradraj was smoking Ganja ?!?
Kali Yuga in full Bloom.
Hmm, now we’ve gone full ritvik in three comments or less. Maybe it’s the only logical alternative to accepting GBC’s full authority over ISKCON.
This solution, however, is even worse than the problem, because if we take up the role of the judges of who is kanishtha and who is uttama and how to run ISKCON, and we do this because we “know” what Srila Prabhupada wanted, then how’s that different from being GBC? They already perform this function and GBC, at least, were appointed according to established procedures after demonstrating a certain amount of skill and dedication, but we are simply appointing ourselves and want to grab power that belongs to someone else. What an asuric way of going about things!
There are plenty of rank and file devotees who are seriously upset about this particular conflict, on both sides, and the dispute has been brewing for years. It also appears to be driven by a devotee who is not a target of “watered down ISKCON” allegations, certainly not in the English language sphere, so, effectively, we know nothing about it. Therefore we should think twice before enlisting ourselves into this battle.
That’s why I will repeat myself again – perhaps we need to rethink our relationships with the authorities first. We need the authorities but we don’t want to become complicit in the abuse, and we don’t want to slip into ritvikvada either. Once again, we can use examples of Narada Muni and Daksha and Srila Prabhupada and GM. They both walked very fine line and succeeded. I think it’s because they didn’t have any ambitions regarding how other people should manage their lives, and they embodied “isavasyam idam sarvam” verse from Isopanishad. Or we could also apply the “serenity prayer” – the problem is universal, we are not the first ones in this kind of predicament.
It’s really really sad that all of this is happening.
.
What is the ultimate cause for which all these situations exist within the ISKCON society?
It is clearly due to the lack of spiritual purity. This is elementary.
Why is there not enough internal spiritual purity although externally it is a very prosperous society for the benefit of the leaders?
Simply because they put conditioned souls in the position of guru, who are ordinary people under the influence of the modes of passion and ignorance as their way of acting demonstrates.
The ultimate cause of all these situations is an invented voting system of gurus who are ordinary kanistha-adhikaris devotees with a professional advertising device that makes humble and sincere devotees trust them.
There is a systematic and organized annulment of the intellectual capacity of the followers with the aim of maintaining a power structure and powerful men.
When a follower activates his intelligence then automatically he becomes a dangerous element for the regime.
These two devotees can fight as much as they can but in the end if they are lucky they will conclude that the only BONA FIDE guru is Srila Prabhupada and that all others are simply false gurus and deceivers.
Krishna consciousness is authentic and genuine but they are false gurus, therefore the perfect solution is to continue practicing Krishna consciousness, to continue preaching the real Krishna consciousness, but only on behalf of Srila Prabhupada.
It is best to continue preaching and serving Srila Prabhupada but outside that institution, as there are already several examples around the world.
.
Everything seems fine in the ISKCON society until someone disagrees with the authorities even if this person is presenting arguments and evidence that can prove that he is right and tells the truth.
At this moment when an idealistic devotee faces some authority to defend religion and truthfulness at this very moment all the machinery of power will be activated to destroy that devotee.
This is the usual way of acting of ISKCON in these cases.
The discordant elements must be suppressed even if he speak the truth because this truth is against the interests of local authorities that are being criticized or put into question.
As long as the followers do not have their own criteria, they do not give their own opinions, do not judge any leader or authority, simply sing and dance and give service and give money, everything will be harmony with these people.
But if someone wakes up and opens his eyes and sees that there are incorrect or even abominable actions performed by other people who are called leaders, authorities, gbc’s, or gurus, and expresses his intelligent criteria in public or private, then that idealist person is a dead man, because he is exposing the ISKCON mafia.
This ISKCON mafia like every mafia has its internal code of action, and one of its principles is to protect each other, today for you and tomorrow for me.
They are very united by personal interest in front of this kind of situations for the simple reason that today you (an authority) can be criticized and put into question but tomorrow it may be me (another authority) who is in this same situation.
Therefore today I defend you and tomorrow you defend me.
.
The first requirement to guarantee a minimum justice is THE NEUTRALITY OR IMPARTIALITY OF THE JUDGE OR JUDGES.
————————
If these two devotee preachers , Balaramacharya prabhu and Chaitanya-vallabha prabhu,disagree with certain local authorities or with some local GBC members and present arguments and evidence against certain forms of action of these authorities, this means that there are TWO PARTIES IN DISPUTE.
Therefore, in order to resolve this situation, it is necessary that a different party that is really NEUTRAL intervene to analyze all the facts of the two parties at issue.
In a civilized social system, one of the parties involved in the litigation is not allowed to be the judge of this conflict.
The first requirement to guarantee a minimum justice is THE NEUTRALITY OR IMPARTIALITY OF THE JUDGE OR JUDGES.
The judge should not be an interested party because then it is 100% certain that there will be no justice.
To guarantee justice the first condition is THE NEUTRALITY of the people who must judge or issue a judgment.
In this case the members of the GBC of Russia are one of the two parties in this litigation, a party directly involved in this conflict.
Therefore they cannot be the judges because THEY ARE NOT NEUTRAL.
Logically they will judge penalizing the other party.
In situations of a certain severity, of a certain magnitude, of a certain importance or relevance, A GROUP OF NEUTRAL PERSONS who analyze and judge this conflict should be named.
This group of neutral persons must be appointed with the participation and consent of both parties involved, otherwise the GBC may appoint a group of persons who are not neutral either.
What must be guaranteed is an objective and neutral analysis of the conflict, if what is intended is to improve a society for the good of all and not to defend the selfish interests of the so-called authorities.
If the complete neutrality of the judges is not guaranteed then there is no justice.
A society without justice is hell, it is not the spiritual world.
——————————————————
It’s not surprising, given how GBC (mis)handled the ban on “Masters or Mothers”. One of the objections this time is that sanction is applied before investigations are concluded, or even commenced. Right now we don’t know what the offence was exactly, I checked Russian social media pages and no one knows what went wrong there, too. The brahmachari who was asked to leave the ashram allegedly showed disloyalty to his guru and the gurus of ashram devotees (in addition to closely associating with Balaramacharya who is now officially banned).
When we start criticizing programs like Midday Meals it will surely ruffle a lot of feathers and co-existence might become impossible and it can’t be forced, whatever laws are there on paper. Which comes back to my earlier point – today’s ISKCON belongs to GBC, not to its members and not to Srila Prabhupada.
GBC carries the proverbial danda and has the authority to use it, while their compliance with orders of Srila Prabhupada is voluntary. This is the obvious but never articulated meaning of “in my absence”. It was also Srila Prabhupada’s intention for GBC service to be for life so whatever deviations they might occasionally engage in cannot be overruled as long as they follow the basic program and dedicate themselves to devotional service.
Various laws and resolutions passed by GBC are also complied with voluntarily because, by design, the king is above the law. For those under GBC authority compliance is, of course, compulsory – because they carry the danda and we don’t.
The point is that we should seriously rethink our relationships with power and, perhaps, realize that our demands and accusations have as much effect on GBC as online rants by disgruntled Democrats have on president Trump, who, incidentally, gives us a live demonstration of how power actually relates to laws.
There are various ways to play politics if we want to steer GBC in the “right” direction. Staffing GBC with like-minded members is one way. Raising loud objections to force GBC to listen is another. There are probably several others, but what should be a genuinely devotional approach? Put straw in one’s mouth and humbly beg to reconsider? That would require us ourselves to become perfect devotees, which is not as easy as raising hell on the internet, and prospects are bleak. Who will even listen?
The idea that GBC isn’t controlled by anyone except Krsihna Himself from within their hearts is very hard to digest for its numerous critics, but that is what “voluntarily” and “lifelong” effectively means – they surrender and He takes control. They decide to do something else and they leave. There are no other options, come to think of it.
Then in the practice of each day
they apply the regulations that interest them and
ignore other regulations that do not interest them.
Unfortunately ISKCON does not have a judicial system that has a bit of credibility,
in reality it does not have any judicial system.
Leaders are not interested in having it, since this would be a problem for many of them.
There are some rules created by the GBC but that do not apply in daily practice.
It has a decorative function whose sole purpose is to give a false image of a society with laws and justice.
But this is only on paper as they are never usually applied.
Devotees who are not authorities or who are not leaders are totally unprotected because the rules are applied according to the interest of the local authority.
In fact, with respect to a judicial system, the judicial system of a totalitarian or fascist regime is very flawed in terms of protecting the most elementary human rights.
But even worse than a fascist regime is a system in which each authority has absolute power to do what he wants, his word is the law.
There are no practical rules to follow.
Simply this person applies justice at his convenience.
In ISKCON, each leader respects this way of functioning, so that each one of them exerts an indisputable absolute power in the area in which he is authority
The leaders of ISKCON in the practice of each day, they do not have a legislation to follow, not even a fascist legislation.
Each leader has the real power to apply the operating rules that the consider more appropriate at all times.
.
It would be necessary to look for year and article number,
but there is a regulation legislated by the GBC that
establishes the correct procedure to follow
when some authority considers that a devotee should be sanctioned.
This mandatory procedure is that
the devotee to be sanctioned must be informed officially and in writing at least twice
,before being sanctioned, about the attitude to be corrected.
When the devotee to be sanctioned persists in an attitude considered incorrect
even in spite of receiving these official notices
it is when that sanction can be applied
due to the refusal to correct his attitude and to be persistent in it even in spite of the recommendations.
Applying a penalty without following this procedure would be against GBC regulations.
The law of ISKCON, legislated by the GBC, establishes the obligation to follow this procedure of
officially notifying the alleged offender
to allow him to correct his attitude without needing to apply any penalty unnecessarily,
since what is intended is to correct an incorrect attitude and
not destroy the person,
at least this is so in the plane of theory.
.
It would be necessary to look for year and article number,
but there is a regulation legislated by the GBC that
establishes the correct procedure to follow
when some authority considers that a devotee should be sanctioned.
This mandatory procedure is that
the devotee to be sanctioned must be informed officially and in writing at least twice
,before being sanctioned, about the attitude to be corrected.
When the devotee to be sanctioned persists in an attitude considered incorrect
even in spite of receiving these official notices
it is when that sanction can be applied
due to the refusal to correct his attitude and to be persistent in it even in spite of the recommendations.
Applying a penalty without following this procedure would be against GBC regulations.
The law of ISKCON, legislated by the GBC, establishes the obligation to follow this procedure of
officially notifying the alleged offender
to allow him to correct his attitude without needing to apply any penalty unnecessarily,
since what is intended is to correct an incorrect attitude and
not destroy the person,
at least this is so in the plane of theory.
Then in the practice of each day
they apply the regulations that interest them and
ignore other regulations that do not interest them.
Unfortunately ISKCON does not have a judicial system that has a bit of credibility,
in reality it does not have any judicial system.
Leaders are not interested in having it, since this would be a problem for many of them.
There are some rules created by the GBC but that do not apply in daily practice.
It has a decorative function whose sole purpose is to give a false image of a society with laws and justice.
But this is only on paper as they are never usually applied.
Devotees who are not authorities or who are not leaders are totally unprotected because the rules are applied according to the interest of the local authority.
Of course they are not the final authority, but they have been deputized, so to speak. Moreover, they have been given the power to create new temples and devotees according to their understanding and take responsibility for it. Each one in this GBC structure, actually each one of us, too, does whatever service we can according to our personal capacity and preferences, so differences will always be there and we can classify things according to kanishtha-madhyama-uttama or karma-jnana-misra bhakti or in whichever way we like, but we can’t take away someone’s deserved authority or encroach on his or her domain. We can try, but they will legitimately resist and will pray to Prabhupada and Krishna just as we do. They are not disconnected, they still pledge their loyalty to guru and Krishna and are given shelter and protection and facilities.
Srila Prabhupada didn’t fit with Gaudiya Math way of doing things. There’s even a chapter called “Crying Alone in the Wilderness” in Prabhupada Lilamrita, so we can learn from his way of going about it, too.
The GBC is not the final authority in all this. For example, they cannot just wake up one morning and decide that we are no longer going to not eat meat. They would not be able to survive as leaders. What matters is legitimacy; is your authority legitimate? And that is what this is a contest of: legitimacy.
Perhaps we should disabuse ourselves from the notion that ISKCON belongs to every one of us and to Srila Prabhupada. Fact is, it belongs to hierarchy of GBC structure who then, in turn, pledge allegiance to Prabhupada. And it’s not that they just came and took over, but they build today’s ISKCON brick by brick, devotee by devotee, yatra by yatra. They own practically each part of it. We can use words like “turf”, “fiefdom”, or even “Gestapo”, but that’s how the world works and we should at least respect this arrangement.
If we think that the leaders are deviating but we cannot change their behavior, going to their followers and trying to “poach” them won’t work either. They have their faith in their leadership and it’s this faith that sustains their Krishna Consciousness. Their leaders accept responsibility for their spiritual and material well being, we do not. We can only come and break what was built by others.
Having said that, I can’t imagine how this group of leaders is going to report their progress in creating unity in diversity in Mayapur in a few months time. “We’ve banned two inconvenient preachers from speaking”?
The whole conflict seems to be a replay of Narada Muni being cursed by Daksha in the 6th Canto. I hope we all automatically take Narada’s side there, but the fact is that the world is populated by Dakshas and, like Daksha with his Hamsa Gupta prayers, they all derive their authority from the Lord, or from Srila Prabhupada in this case. Narada didn’t dispute that and, perhaps, we should study his reaction a little bit deeper.