Spiritual Strategic Planning Team - Dallas, January 22-23

I received the following letter a couple of days ago. I wasn’t going to answer, but later I could not help myself. Some others here might think it worth commenting or writing to the address given below.




Dear Prabhus,

Jai Srila Prabhupada!

I received a letter from Krishnadas Kaviraj Prabhu inviting me to send in comments. I will not be able to come to Dallas, I am sorry to say, but as I do have a rather strong suggestion, I will send it.

Srila Prabhupada's position as the primary pioneer of Krishna consciousness in the West is assured. The temples of Iskcon are the primary centers of Gaudiya Vaishnavism in the cities where they are situated. The position of Iskcon as the cultural focal points of Krishna consciousness is fixed. BE CONFIDENT. You have the PHYSICAL INSTITUTIONS that assure your central role for a long time to come.

At the same time, Iskcon's weakness is in its lack of self confidence, which results in feeling it necessary to control all aspects of doctrine, theology, etc., etc., in its centers.

ISKCON should think more liberally about not only allowing various Gaudiya Math sannyasis, other Gaudiya Vaishnava preachers, people initiated into other sampradayas, Ritviks, etc., to use its institutions--EXERCISE CONTROL ONLY WHERE REAL POLITICAL DISRUPTION THREATENS. Coopt rather than exclude. Be politically intelligent, not reactionary and stupid. You've got no real power--you can't divide and conquer. If all you do is exclude, you will exclude until you're left with empty temples, which is what is in danger of happening.

In other words, if other Vaishnavas are willing to honor Srila Prabhupada's preeminent role in bringing Krishna and Mahaprabhu to the west, why not let them use your temples? The benefit will be increased use of your buildings and increased financial benefits, guaranteeing the protection of these institutions.

Furthermore, having outside voices present Krishna consciousness will stimulate Iskcon's intellectual and spiritual life and make brahmacharis more enlivened. Excessive distrust of people like Sridhar Maharaj, Narayan Maharaj and other Gaudiya Math sannyasis has been very unproductive.

GET OVER YOUR IDEA THAT ISKCON IS GOING TO DO EVERYTHING ALONE AND THAT YOU ARE THE ONLY BASTIONS OF SPIRITUAL PURITY. It's time to start learning from others and learning how to take advantage of what they have to offer, instead of seeing everyone either as friends (fully committed blind followers) and enemies (everyone else).

In other words--learn how to use your advantage (temples, organization) to bring in other, learned, realized Vaishnavas to promote Krishna consciousness. THE GOAL IS KRISHNA, NOT ISKCON. IF YOU REALIZE THAT, HALF YOUR PROBLEMS WILL GO AWAY. Learn to tolerate a little theological controversy instead of trying to control everything--especially when a little self-reflection will show you that it is only because you are afraid that you cannot really compete in learning, sadhana, culture, etc. This can only be overcome by humility.

That WAS shouting, by the way!

Your servant,

Jagadananda Das.

I guess this is an open invitation from Iskcon to tell them what you really think...

Dandavats. All glories to the Vaisnavas.

I received the same e-mail. I didn’t know what to make of it as I thought it was just some mass mailing, which it may very well be.

I agree with most of Jagat’s points. ISKCON’s greatest attribute is both its greatest weakness. The focus on Srila Prabhupada being the center is one thing but to do it at other’s expense damages the very dynamic they are trying to create.

Personally I know a few individuals, who I think, if afforded the opportunity and if they chose to take the responsibility, could alter ISKCON’s course and make it a wonderful and effective preaching institution. It will require very thick skin and very strong convictions in order to change such a course. As they say you don’t turn the Titanic in a day.

I think, or rather I pray, that it will happen. In some respects the leaders of ISKCON have been forced to try to do too much too soon. If you think in terms of Srila Prabhupada he spent the majority of his life preparing, both subtly and materially, to do what he did. As he knew his days were numbered when he started ISKCON he made medics into doctors. Many failed but many are succeeding even if we don’t know their names. I think the next 15-20 years will plan the course of ISKCON as many of its member’s are still coming into their own and I believe they can bring a spiritual perspective, maturity and conviction that ISKCON lacks these days. It will start only when ISKCON and most importantly Srila Prabhupada’s followers develop true self confidence. Self confidence isn’t manifest when one needs to tear another down to feel whole. It is manifest in those that can stress who and what they are and allow that to stand on it’s own.

Just a thought…

Aspiring to serve the Vaisnavas,
Rasaraja dasa

My friend from Gita Nagari, is writing in the letter to me how is nice to have communication with somebody who is not Bhakti Robot these days.
Iskcon could be such great place, but never will be, they tried all those different kinds of approaches over the years, but what i see at the end is always total lethargy, apathy and spiritual and material incompetence. They will never grow up, and i don't see anything what could change. I am more than interested to read opinions, especially somebody like Dhyana and Ek.

They will never listen to anybody, especially with people like Ravindra Svarupa Das, Jahnu Das, Janesvara das from Sweden or Bhakti Vikasa Swami which are famous for their right wing Iskcon approach. Can you change those people? I guess not, they have firm positions and people behind them.

Where can you see with such devotees any kind of communication?
In other camps there is for example B.G. Narasingha Maharaja who accepts siksa from outside Iskcon, and he is outside Iskcon, but puts himself in position of some new Bhakti Siddhantha Saraswati Maharaja alike protector of Sampradaya...

People like Tripurari Maharaja, Kundali Das, Mahanidhi Maharaja, Vegavan Das or Bhakti Tirtha Maharaja, are rare, i will say extinct. They face opposition and rightwingers.

This may sound a little hard: I believe ISKCON's chances of evolving into something spiritually nourishing and not abusive will increase when ACBS' direct disciples have passed away. These people are too invested in making his dream come true to notice this is hardly anybody else's dream. And if any direct disciple of ACBS begins to feel a radical change is needed, the others gang up on him. Or his own vows don't allow him to make his ideas reality. I can think of several high-profile leaders who know very well, and even have said it in private, that they know their projects will collapse unless certains things in them are changed. But they will rather let them collapse than go against an explicit instruction they got from ACBS.

I think there are enough mature individuals in ISKCON, perhaps even some mature communities, to allow for a continuation of a spiritual movement. But they need to be set free. Left with ISKCON in their hands, theirs to do with as they please.

Incidentally... Gopal Bhatta das, on behalf of the Spiritual Strategic Planning Team, has just posted to the PAMHO conf. "Free Forum" an advertisement of this initiative. He says they have received a fantastic feedback, and he has included about a dozen chosen quotes from letters with advice that came to the projects. Not a single controversial idea! It's all about stuff like prasadam sales initiatives; how to cultivate the Hindu congregation; temple gift shops; how to make most out of festivals... one idea about accountability of leaders that discourages any set schemes and reduces accountability to the subordinates asking the leader how he is doing, and him asking them in turn. It's all about HOW to do things, not WHAT to do.

I agree with Dhy's observation regarding the direct disciples of ACBS. One of them, a GBC member, declared in 1999, "In thirty years from now the world will understand that Prabhupada was more powerful than Jesus." I do not think that this my-savior-is-better-than-yours attitude is a success formula. Anyway, it should be clear in 2029.

-ek

It may indeed sound hard, but several months ago I had a conversation with my wife (one of many regarding Iskcon) in which I said almost the same words. Growing up and observing the residual effects of racism in the American South, I had a chance to see how ideas, even if self-destructive, become so deeply engrained in the individual and group consciousness that it actually seems to take an entire generation (if not the subsequent as well) dying off before sanity slowly returns.

As far as practicalities are concerned, I agree with Jagat. The aggression towards all that is non-Iskcon seems to come from deep-seated (and often denied) fear that other doctrines and influences can destroy the heart of Iskcon; the institution then becomes the deity and the deity somewhat of a sidenote.

In the kanishta way of thinking: "let's rally and destroy that which challenges our faith, rather than just deepening our own faith." This approach has backfired so many times, and has rather served to expose ignorance within the GBC, yet few up top seemed to make a connection. Hmm...

I have realized over time that I differ from the Iskcon approach to Krsna-bhakti and life in general on so many levels that it's a waste of my time and energy to try to change them or offer any input on anything.

What can I say? I learned much in my Iskcon years, and I wish them the best...



Jai Shri Krsna

I met Krishnadas Kaviraj Das, who sent me this letter and is apparently a committee member, at Iskcon's Rathayatra last summer. He knows me from Toronto Iskcon days and so we had a friendly conversation, in which I probably shared some of my long percolating thoughts.

I can't really think why he would have sent me this letter except that I am perhaps on the Toronto temple e-mailing list. My first response was, "This was a mistake, right? You don't really want my opinion, do you?"

Dear Jagat, you are correct. They don't want your suggestions. Nor mine either. Nor anyone's who is not a sycophant. This was a mass emailing. I got it too and promptly deleted it, as I do with all my spam.

I agree totally that we will have to wait for the next generation, if not the one after that (if the organization actually lasts that long). ISKCON is destined for decline just as the Theosophical society or other organizations have. It is only natural after the disappearance of the charismatic leader. Unfortunately the leaders have the chance to turn a Prabhupada cult into a real religion but have so far failed.

ACBVS's disciples are so locked in to his exact instructions in so many ways, and yet they do not realise that they have changed so many things without even realizing it. The archives has made it so that everybody with a computer can have every single word that was recorded or written by His Divine Grace to search at their fingertips. However the downside of this is that it is possible for any two-bit philosopher with a computer to pull a "Prabhupada Said" quote on practically any subject. So whether the quote is out of context or just plain outdated it doesn't matter, the archiving of many trivial remarks makes it difficult to understand sometimes what is meant to be taken ex cathedra and what is not.

We need a true returning to our roots, and by roots I mean the sastra. And by sastra I mean the ancient ones (Sanskrit and Bengali etc). There seems to be so much writing and publishing going on but who out ther is actually reading the original sastras. First people need to study then teach.

The problem is that even if people read the original sastras they cannot get away from the zenophobic attitude about the other interpretations of them. All groups need to start emphasizing the commonalities that all Vaisnavas have and not our differences. It's OK to have differences but please keep them to your own group.

The number one suggestion that I can give ISKCON which, by the way, will never be implemented is:

Term limits for GBC's.

Without a limit on the power of the GBC dinosaurs and some fresh blood on that body there can be no progress.

Remember: Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely.

Iskcon doesn't exist. It is actually some old guys repeating something like: Make peace not war paroles from 70es. They remind me of some bizarre Timothy Leary cult with sporadical students which leave after a few ˝˝Prabhupada said˝˝ lectures.

Speaking of Folios which are distributed with some almost Born Again C's fanaticism.... every time i used to speak with somebody it was: But, Prabhupada said this or that....

The problem with leading Iskcon people is that they actually do think, what is evident from participants experiences from above quotes and passages from this thread, that Iskcon is the only right and proper way for the world and spirituality. They are secretly thinking of themselves as some elite group of people deciding the future of the world. That is their downfall. Their hidden elite thinking, uniformed, almost right wing way. There is no place here for the ordinary people, they are karmis.

Anyway, i think i had enough of my thoughts here. I am away from Iskcon since 1998. I read about them here and there, but i am happy that i am out. I also wish them all the best in their search for making Iskcon better place.

Dear Tamal Baran das,

Dandavats. All glories to the Vaisnavas.

Your insistence that ISKCON is "dead" or doesn’t exist is absolutely silly. Bad experiences aside you cannot simply wave off so many sincere individuals commitment both to their spiritual life, their spiritual family and ACBSP's legacy. You can say it is downtrodden, you can say it is struggling, you can say it is far from it’s intent but to say it doesn’t exist... it seems like emotions have gotten the best of you.

I have been privileged enough to visit ISKCON Temples all over the world and I met many sincere and advanced souls. Regardless of the bitter feelings you hold due to mistreatment I think we both know many extremely sincere, dedicated, mature and advanced aspiring Vaisnavas that are within ISKCON so if for no other reason than their existence ISKCON is still alive.

Aspiring to serve the Vaisnavas,
Rasaraja dasa

I agree with Rasaraja.

So do I.

Amen Rasarajaji!
My pranam to all of you

I also agree with Rasaraja. Improvement concerning the institution wont take place by intelligent adjustements coming from individuals but only in due course of time just like nice round pebbles have been gradually worn smooth by water action and that might take some generations. A natural process also known as, generation tree, :
[attachmentid=1239]

or something similiar what is called evolution :

[attachmentid=1240]

Or the improvement will take place via the internet!

[attachmentid=1241]

I also agree with Rasaraja. Improvement concerning the institution wont take place by intelligent adjustements coming from individuals but only in due course of time just like nice round pebbles have been gradually worn smooth by water action and that might take some generations. A natural process also known as, generation tree, :
[attachmentid=1239]

or something similiar what is called evolution :

[attachmentid=1240]

Or the improvement will take place via the internet!

[attachmentid=1241]

I also agree with Rasaraja. Improvement concerning the institution wont take place by intelligent adjustements coming from individuals but only in due course of time just like nice round pebbles have been gradually worn smooth by water action and that might take some generations. A natural process also known as, generation tree, :
[attachmentid=1239]

or something similiar what is called evolution :

[attachmentid=1240]

Or the improvement will take place via the internet!

[attachmentid=1241]

Radhe Radhe !

i also agree with Rasaraja.
good points.

same with me, i am still welcome in our nearby ISKCON temple ( although they dont know about the new initiation ).

i also met many very nice people who helped me very much in my life.

but if they dont get rid of that "we have the only truth"-attitude, i fear it then will take many more years until one can speak of a reformation to the good.

i will try to be of assistance instead of shooting against. i think if those outside of ISKCON behave nicely towards those within ISKCON, maybe something can be changed.
still many of the devotees i know there are young and openhearted.

no need to fight with them for anything...
just having some spiritual association via bhajan, prasadam, conversation.

just some 2 cent-thoughts...

Tarunski

I too have good experiences with visiting Iskcon temples, be it in Amsterdam, Zurich, Atlanta or Vrindavan. Most devotees are innocent and sincere, especially the younger ones, and the kirtans are great. I think we should respect their Guru Nistha. If they want to hear nothing but Prabhupada then that is their good right and this is a genuine and fine way of devotional loyalty. Of course, many Iskcon devotees have not been exposed to alternative bhakti- practises or - philosophies and should get the opportunity to hear them. I don't think, however, that Iskcon should be obliged to sell out to other groups. They have worked hard to build up their own society. We must work hard to build up our own societies and not try to use the facilities of Iskcon for that.

I was not talking about "using their institution." I am thinking of helping them out. From what I see, they stifle their own attempts at spiritual progress. That is why I said, keep the politics out.

That is obviously the difficult part. If you go in and say, "Bhaktisiddhanta was an apostate and your initiation is good for nothing," then you are causing a disturbance. If the Ritviks go in and say, "The GBC and gurus are ruining everthing, etc." then that is politics.

If, however, a person such as yourself could go in and speak on your devotional realizations, it might stimulate their bhakti.

Of course, I really have no idea of how or if that could work. I am sure it would be practically impossible for me to speak more than two or three times without crossing some kind of limit. I would then be kindly shown the door.

My $.02, and not about ISKCON proper...

Its interesting to someone like myself, having read ISKCON material, but having had very little practical contact with ISKCON as an institution (not initiated, never living in a temple) to see the dichotomy presented by former ISKCON members here.

On the one hand, its an institution with 'many sincere and advanced souls' (Rasaraja das), or an institution that 'stifle(s) their own attempts at spiritual progress' (Jagat).

I really appreciate Advaitadas-ji's comments, that steadfast devotion to ACBP is a fine form of devotion, but, as just about everyone else has commented, one that limits exposure to 'alternative ' forms of bhakti. I wonder how much of the concern over ISKCON is due to pure sentement, as I don't see the sink or swim future of ISKCON affecting me in the least.

Thanks for a very entertaining thread.

You're quite right, of course. I think that most people on this forum, at least, have a mature attitude toward Iskcon. The last time I visited the Iskcon temple, the ideas I expressed above came to me. I thought that with Prabhupada's murti there, what did they have to worry about? And yet, they stand like guard dogs for any word that somehow contravenes the purity of their interpretation.

I thought of the Iskcon temple functioning as a Gaudiya Vaishnava cultural center, without specific sampradayika attachments. I cannot see this idea ever taking hold in Iskcon. They'll have to work things out within the parameters they set for themselves.

Iskcon does stifle its own progress by cutting off the life blood of education. The brahmacharis are treated as sources of income instead of as long term investments. But then, around here at least, they really don't seem to have anyone to train them up.

I personally think all Iskcon brahmacharis (who have the requisite high school diplomas) should do a BA in comparative religion, while simultaneously studying Vaishnava shastras in a coherent way under the guidance of a Vaishnava scholar.

It is hard not to have strong feelings for an enterprise that one has risked so much for, and invested in, and in the end decided one had to leave it for the sake of one's spiritual life -- the same reason one had joined it for.

I do feel emotionally engaged in ISKCON's fate. Not the institution, but the people in and around ISKCON. As a member, I was working a lot with people -- counseling, teaching and training. I was a (small-time) manager, too. I hate to see the abusive dynamic replay itself again and again, with new people.

This is one reason I work with the Chakra website. Chakra publishes mostly perfectly mainstream ISKCON stuff, but with some exceptions: no syrup (excessive honorifics, claims of spiritual perfection about gurus, "come and relish the nectar from the Swami's lotus lips..." etc.) and no ad hominems. Chakra will publish almost any opinion as long as it is expressed civilly. Also, we don't publish articles where points are made simply by litanies of quotes.

I think/hope that Chakra helps model for its visitors a healthier attitude to the issues in ISKCON's daily life. We have some controversies playing themselves out eternally, it seems. But so what? The readers see there are many valid perspectives on issues, and that devotees can disagree with one another and still be respectful.

I think that those of us who have been outside Iskcon for many years have developed a sense of detachment (hence "maturity"), but at the same time, we tend to think that the experience we have accumulated OUTSIDE Iskcon could be used profitably.

Personally, since my goal in life is the same one that I received from Prabhupada, namely to become a servant of Krishna, I feel a kinship with Iskcon. But no doubt I exaggerate the extent to which anything I could say or do would be useful to them. So a spirit of distant well-wishing seems to be the best stance to take.

Like so many devotees I came to bhakti yoga through Iskcon so I am grateful for their presentation. Jai Srila Prabhupada.

Since leaving Iskcon association I have come to the realisation that I should think a lot less and become emotionally deeper. One of the amazing results of this is that I keep meeting really chilled out beautiful people. Why am I saying this? Because if Iskcon could move away from the kind of fanatical teaching we have seen and become more open and accepting and humble then people will love the devotees for that and many beautiful sincere people will come to give them their association. I think it's a pity that most of the devotees after making some advancement feel the need to leave Iskcon. But hey maybe that is Krishna's plan. I haven't been to every Iskcon temple so I can only comment on a small drop of the ocean. The small drop I have seen lacks love. I have met many beautiful individuals who are in Iskcon but the pervading mood is somewhat impersonal. I feel a little sickened when I hear the robotic comments like, 'Anyone who doesn't follow (externally) Srila Prabhupada's full program is in maya and should think of themselves as the most fallen blah blah blah.' That kind of negativity really stinks. People who want to be positive will not be attracted to that rubbish. There are some weird bad vibes that emanate from fundamentalist religious folk like some in Iskcon. Iskcon should perhaps see those bad vibes as anarthas to be exorcised from the heart of the institution.

Thinking back to my Iskcon conscious days I realise that if an Iskcon devotee were to read this thread they may feel bad. So I want to say to any Iskcon devotees who read this that you should know that I think there are so many wonderful things about Iskcon. The chanting, dancing and feasting! It really is very possible to become absorbed deeply in Krishna while an Iskcon member. I know Iskcon devotees who have way more love for Radha-Krsna than me. So please be very positive about spiritual advancement in Iskcon.

Send them all off to college for a PhD, scrap the kirtan programs. Did you forget that ACBS dealt with all the philosophers, Marx, Hegel, Jesus, Kierkegaard, Sartre etc in his morning walks and darshans? The 1970s Back to Godheads were filled with it.

YES. This is an excellent suggestion. Brahmacharis should study the shastras and related disciplines on a university level and such education will be very valuable not only for their spiritual life, but also for becoming mature, useful and qualified people.

I read recently "Dance of a Fallen Monk" by George Fowler who was a Catholic Trappist monk for 19 years. He followed a very rigid lifestyle, much more austere and isolated than the average ISKCON brahmachari experience, including not only celibacy, simple vegetarian meals (just boiled vegetables without salt and coarse bread), wearing only Medieval robes, attending choir seven times a day, studying intensely and the most typical for this order, a vow of silence and a vow never to leave the monastery.

But when he left the monastery and the order, he had a full-fledged priest training and a Ph.D and could immediately apply his knowledge and skills in the secular world, first as a counselor and then as a manager. Whereas when a brahmachari (or any other full-time devotee) leaves ISCKON, he has to continue exactly from where he left off five, ten or twenty years ago when he joined ISKCON.

And the most exasperating thing is not having to study and begin a career in one's 30s or 40s (I must say that after tackling ISKCON and surviving, nothing can scare me anymore), but the feeling that I spent nine years in some black hole outside the normal society. No official legal records of ISKCON members are kept, except for those who have temple properties, phones or cars registered in their names. The years spent in ISKCON amount for nothing in the outside world, you could have just as well been a bum or junky all these years.

I think Indranila made good points in response to some of this. Prabhupada actually dealt with Hayagriva and Shyamasundara's summaries of these philosophers, which right away was a rather weak approach. In fact, this section of the Bhaktivedanta contribution is fairly consistently embarrassing and can hardly be said to be "dealt with." Prabhupada rarely sees the positive portions of what others have to say; it is all "defeating the rascal philosophers."

You can never "defeat" anyone in this world (the gospel according to Dale Carnegie). You insult people and it just gets their hackles up. Appreciate what they do right and then say, but what about this?

The "rascal karmis, jnanis, mayavadis, sense-gratifiers" etc., approach is really meant to create a sense of community through shared smugness.

Prabhupada said somewhere in the very first Iskcon handbook that the preaching in the street was meant to strengthen the brahmachari's ability to deal with opposing arguments. I am talking about gathering the equipment to do that.

But I was talking more about comparative religion than comparative philosophy. I haven't time to get into this here, but shall try to when I come back later tonight.

Yes, there are wonderful devotees in ISKCON and we joined initially also because we were attracted by someone's sincerity and example. I have met some really great people and developed deep friendships.

There are definitely mature and dedicated Vaishnavas in ISKCON, but how many of them are staying because they are enlivened and happy and fulfilled spiritually and how many of them stay just because they have no other choice and no other place to go, having burned their bridges? I have met quite a few such devotees who feel stifled in their temple communities but stay because they feel they are too old to move out and go through the adjustments and hardships of building a life outside. And even harder will be losing their identity as a respected older devotee in ISKCON and trying to find some other identity. Outside they will be just nobody. I find the lot of such devotees one of the worst, even though externally they put on a show of dedication.

This approach is shared by all subcutltures of our larger culture. It is one of the less attractive traits of the human race and I see it as arising from our insecurities. If we put others' beliefs or lifestyle down, we feel more confident about our own.

And to Indranila: a big Amen to your points about what happens when you leave with no education. I struggled to get mine while simultaneously trying to support two children, and one of them is not speaking to me in part because of those years of poverty. He has also chosen to be an athiest. I think the two choices are connected, frankly. Being a Vaishnava or religious at all must appear to him to be synonymous with a life of poverty and suffering. If he were to know me now, he would see a better material lifestyle and more integrated approach. Alas, he doesn't.

I've been thinking about him because his birthday was on the 12th.

I did have it better in regard to "where have you been all these years" because I could say I was home with my children. Men don't have that to fall back on, and "I was living in a Hare Krishna temple" just doesn't sound good in a job interview.

On the other hand, I routinely have to explain my name (Tapati is also my legal name) and people don't bat an eye when I say that I was involved with the Hare Krishna movement and got my name there. Of course they assume that I moved on from that. I suppose if I were still a Vaishnava I would say, "I left the organization but I still hold those beliefs and practice at home." That is what I said in the years I still practiced, anyway.

In my applying for jobs to clean stool rooms, my Iskcon credentials got me to the top of the list. Seems like the word has gotten around on devotees' eagerness and thoroughness on what the rest of society considers a demeaning position.

On a more serious note (nods to Brother Rasaraja), for those of us whose life skills pre-Isckon was knowing to stop partying when we passed out, learning to discipline ourselves in Iskcon was worth something when we walked out (or kicked out) the door.

And while many of us have found counterpoints to ACBS' points, the bigger life process of point and counterpoint has been a process of growth, discovery and real life meaning and creation. This is something I feel is worth far more than any Phd process. The going beyond the constraints of conditioned reality.

I once came up with this list of positives out of my iskcon experience, as I felt a need to balance the negative things I always gripe about. It was an act of reclaiming, and I feel a necessary and positive step in integrating the experience in the context of my life.

Here it is, what I gained or appreciated:

1. Self discipline

The ability to control my senses to some degree and to perform austerity has spilled over into my life outside the temple in many ways. I can do more than I otherwise would be able to do.

2. Avoiding intoxication's negative effects or addictions

I never drank alcohol at all until I was 35 and don't feel a need for it. While everyone else my age learned to equate drinking with having a good time, I learned how to have a good time while sober. I am so grateful for this.

3. A better relationship with God

Learning to view God as a person I could have a relationship with has been an ongoing benefit to my evolving spirituality. As I approach death (most likely by heart disease) I am so grateful for this perspective.

4. Beautiful music!

I absolutely loved kirtan and know many beautiful songs and melodies.

5. Great food!

This is the cuisine I learned to cook and when I bring it to potlucks I am everyone's favorite person

6. Mental focus

Hours of meditation means that I can focus at work much better than most of my co-workers. In these days of rampant attention deficit that's a big plus.

I should also add that when I am undergoing a painful cardiac procedure, such as catheterization, it is good to know that I am not this body. And again, the ability to meditate and focus enables me to focus on something other than the pain my body is feeling.

7. Less materialistic

I can't say I am completely detached from material possessions but compared to many of my peers I seem so. People have commented that I don't seem caught up in the newer, bigger, better mindset. I know that buying the next new thing is not where happiness lies.

8. Calmer.

I have a better sense of the big picture and am not so ruffled by the temporary problems of life, even such things as my quadruple bypass surgery, in comparison with other people I know.

9. Beautiful images

The art and especially the Deities are so beautiful and I have so many memories to reflect on.

10. Less fear of death

Everyone has some fear of death, how painful it may be, what exactly happens, etc. While I do experience that fear, deep down is a conviction that I will be ok. I've also learned since I was 15 that death may come at any moment, so I take that for granted. I feel better prepared.

11. Interesting stories

I have a lot of interesting stories to tell non-devotees.

12. Sari discount

An Indian gentleman spontaneously offered me a 50 dollar discount when he found out I was a devotee previously. At Bombay Saris in San Franscisco. I never expected a purely material benefit!

13 Vegetarianism helped delay heart disease

I am convinced that had I been scarfing down big macs I would have had a cardiac event or procedure even earlier, in my 30s, like a lot of women are these days.

14. Chanting/dancing great exercise

In a world where we are increasingly sedentary, dancing in arati twice a day is great exercise.

15. Bliss

I regularly experienced bliss making vases for Sri Sri Kishora-Kishori, dressing Srimati Tulasi Devi, cleaning Srila Prabhupada's clothing and room, and other ecstatic services, in addition to the bliss of kirtan. In addition to the spiritual benefits, I was getting endorphins and other good anti-stress chemicals that also were good for protecting my heart and immune system.

16. Beautiful clothing

Saris are just stunning and everyone thinks so. Even now if I wear a sari to a special event everyone oohs and aahs over it.

17. Fascinating reading.

While I no longer take the books literally as I once did, the stories are unique and entertaining and if taken as allegory, still quite illuminating. They broadened my cultural horizons. I still love Bhagavad Gita. I did read the books when I was in the temple, every one.

Another great post, Tapati.

Ditto, that was very nice to read Tapati devi.

@Tapati

very kind-hearted.

lovely attitude.

thank you.

Tarunji

I agree that Bhaktivedanta's tone is embarrassing and unnecessarily confrontational, but jeez, do the brahmacaris therefore have to be exposed to the mundaners and get a BA? And wasnt ACBS' Vedic response to the philosophers, be they rascal or not, usually sound?

Smart answer, Tapati!
What helped me was that halfway through my ISKCON life I left Poland and moved to another country. To the Swedes, I am first of all an immigrant, and my struggle to find an entrance to the job market is also viewed as mostly an immigrant's struggle. So I was lucky. Also my engagement in the BBT, as translator/editor, is more mentionable in job interviews than if I had a regular temple engagement. I even have it on paper! (of course I avoid showing it unless I have to).

Hey, really?! Thanks for this ray of hope, babu; I have to go tell ek! He has plans to become a Klo Frau if he can't stay at the Indology Inst.

(Advaitadas)

Some of his general criticism of science and scientists was sound: like when he ridiculed their "postdated checks" (in the future we will..." etc.), their inability to acknowledge and deal with the Big Questions, their naive faith in progress, or their lack of respect for Nature. He overgeneralized, but he had a point.

But I cannot agree that his response to any of the individual philosophers presented to him by his disciples in conversations was sound. The responses he gives in these conversations make it clear he was not interested in understanding these people's ideas. He is mainly looking for points to disagree with. Sometimes he acknowledges points of agreement. But I see no evidence of openness in his attitude. And this, to me, is an unsound response.

Absolutely! This is another huge bonus I would add to Tapati's list.

ISKCON made us cosmopolitan and the exhilarating freedom one feels from going all the way for an ideal is something that people who just stay in the rut will never know. To think about it, how many people can afford to or dare to pursue their most cherished dreams to such an extent? It is a pure luxury. I am very glad that I did it when I felt the pull, and I wouldn't be the person I am today and wouldn't know all that I know today if I had not taken the plunge. Of course, on the negative side, it didn't turn out exactly as it was hyped to be, BUT HOW COULD I HAVE COME TO KNOW THAT HAD I NOT TRIED IT AND SEEN FOR MYSELF?

Understandable. He obviously wanted his young followers to focus on the Vedic view. I think any sensible person who transplants an entire way of life into an alien environment would (have to) do that.

Of course it will never be implemented. They hang on to their positions because they are their only means of survival. I don't think all the GBC's are corrupted or ill-intentioned. I think some of them are just as stuck and struggling in their situation as the average old temple devotee. Of course it is a totally different story if they also have a couple of thousands of disciple and/ or unhealthy political alliances to temple presidents of temples with big revenue (the guys with a lot of money and thus real power).

Some thoughts on other points raised by others:

I don't think ISKCON will change when all Prabhupada disciples become extinct. Already now there are non Prabhupada disciples on the GBC and they have exactly the same mindset.

As others correctly pointed out, Prabhupadaism is as good as any other religion and if somebody thinks that this is the cream of spirituality, I don't mind that at all. What I would be really happy to see is ISKCON becoming a mainstream religion and all ISKCON devotees having some kind of social security, including a pension. These are just basic civil rights.

But I don't see this happening any time soon, with or without Prabhupada disciples, because all ISKCON's projects without exception were started with slave labor and more slave labor is needed to maintain them ("for Prabhupada", while actually it is mainly for the benefit of the guys who manage the projects). And since there is a steady trickle of people still joining ISKCON and since bringing people over from India to work in the Western temples is not that complicated, the status quo can be maintained without major changes. So I think it will take a long time, possibly a few generations, before ISKCON can achieve some semblance of normalcy.

I wouldn't discourage anyone from joining ISKCON and trying it but would inform them thoroughly of the price they will end up paying and will whole-heartedly encourage them to leave while still in their twenties.

Then it would have been better not to get into debating these individual philosophers at all.

Having said this, itn't it so that the book didn't get published until after ACBS' departure, on Kirtanananda's initiative? Maybe ACBS did understand then, that it was not such a good idea.

I have to agree. But my point about the B.A. was that along with their study of Gaudiya Vaishnavism they should familiarize themselves with other religions and philosophies in order to gain respect for them. I would not plunge them into such a course of study right away, but have them spend at least a year familiarizing themselves with the temple life, etc. I guess, like in the tradition, they could start with studies after getting the sacred thread--when the initial enthusiasm is starting to wear a little thin.

"If it does not kill me, it makes me stronger." Iskcon fancies itself a preaching organization. To preach, you must not only know your opponent, but must respect him. The problem, though (again, in my opinion), is that "preachers" tend to forget that "everyone is on My path." Everyone is looking for Krishna, even if it is in the wrong places. The extent to which people find satisfaction with their answers is rather a sign of Krishna's presence or approval--even temporary. No one is completely and utterly wrong. The devotee philosopher must recognize the right in others as Krishna's presence.

Of course, once again, my vision is a little different, more universal. The devotee should be helped toward self-knowledge, more or less in the way the "university" was originally conceived. He should be protected from fanaticism and one-sidedness. Anyway...

There are many things that could and should be reformed in Iskcon to make it a viable spiritual community.

Here is a short list of areas in need of drastic change in my opinion:

1. There should be a training period of at least two years before any sadhaka is allowed to publicly represent the teachings. Even after such a period there should be standards of scriptural expertise and basic social ettiquette and presentation style that should govern any outreach program.

2. There should be a training period of several years where devotees are trained in philosophy and ritual and allowed to explore their own psychology before anyone is allowed to enter into monasitc life. Furthermore, monastic life should be the exception, not the rule and the monastic life style should be reformed so that it functions as a natural ashrama for those whose psychological makeup is suited for it. The monastic ashramas should be reformed such that there is no desire to take up such a lifestyle to gain position or prestige within the society.

3. Supporting the temples by sales of books or other things by monastics should be stopped. The whole societal structure needs to change such that a very few monastics and dedicated grhastas support the needs of the lay community. The temples should be supported by the grahastas and lay community and by various businesses set up for that purpose. The monastics should not be involved in money making or business endeavors, rather they should spend their time serving the community by hearing, chanting, worshiping, studying, praying, eduating, etc.

4. An open academic environment needs to be established such that there is a better engagement with the world and other traditions. No one will stay in Iskcon by banning them from individuality or intellectual development outside of the current narrowly defined acceptable parameters. People will stay by inspiration to do so, not by coercion. This is incredibly important because in order for the society to foster growth and fulfillment it must become dynamic and embrace change rather than remaining static and stunted due to paranoia and fear.

I don't think any of these changes have much chance of occuring however because there is an overwhelming fear of changing anything that Prabhupada set up. Of course many things have changed - but the fear factor and the basic paradigm of Prabhupada being the ultimate authority in all things whether essential or non-essential is so prevalant that I seriously doubt that any meaningful or substantial change will be possible for a long time to come. It will take a huge leap forward to put Prabhupada's teachings into context of time and place and apply the essentials to the current social in intellectual dynamics of today's world. It would also take a huge break through in thinking for Iskcon to make major changes in anything Srila Prabhupada instituted even though it is obvious to many that this is precisely what must occur.

Except that what you're proposing, Audarya, is varnashram dharma, as adapted to Western society.

Maybe so - but it's certainly a step in the right direction. There are obviously many other areas in need of reform as well. Not everyone seems to feel the need to leave the society in order to progress, and indeed, there are many advanced vaishnavas living in Iskcon - at least that's my perspective. It may be that they feel they can do more in terms of seva within the institution than they could if they left - who can say except each individual.

But back to my simple suggestions - don't you feel that problems such as we have seen with monastics 'falling down' and 'gurus' 'falling down' that at least some of the inherent problems could be removed by some simple adjustments such as the one's I suggested? Don't you think that the health of the society and the mental health of individuals in it would dramatically improve with some honest adjustments like this?

I've been saying stuff like this for ages:

Vipramukhya's Retirement.

Vipramukhya Prabhu writes that he still has faith in doctrines taught by Srila Prabhupada, yet because of feelings of loneliness and the desire to find companionship in members of the opposite sex is unable to continue in his functions as a sannyasi and guru. As a result, he feels obliged to leave Iskcon after thirty years of service in which, I assume, he has achieved immense expertise in inspiring devotees, knowledge of the scriptures, experience of Iskcon management, and even a certain amount of wisdom. I would like to propose that this “falldown” is probably a step to increased wisdom and that Vipramukhya’s enhanced experience might make him even more qualified to lead and guide devotees, if only the institution itself would allow it.

Longtime devotees have by now become accustomed to the “retirement” of leading sannyasis like Vipramukhya Swami. Though few are shocked or surprised, those who knew him, those who were his disciples, those who depended on his experience and knowledge, have no doubt been greatly disturbed by his departure. Some will just feel sad and let down, others cheated and angry. The cynical devotee says “punar mushiko bhava” and “vantashi” or some other derogatory term, but the fact remains that a sannyasi’s falldown is a great loss to the movement, making waves not only of a practical nature, but touching the very basis of the movement itself—faith in the process of bhakti yoga.

I do not know Vipramukhya. He may be a dishonest man who has prepared his departure by embezzling money that is rightfully Iskcon’s. I hope this is not the case, but I will write this article as though it were not. Even so, the embezzlement of funds might be considered a rather natural consequence of being in his position. After sacrificing years of one's life, when one knows that one has been living a lie and decides to leave, he realizes that once "on the outside" he will have to find a way of maintaining himself as a householder. Though some falling sannyasis may have a parachute of some kind, many gave up their material heritage and then spent years and years as preachers, accumulating little in the way of material qualifications that would make them able to live productive householder lives. This is likely a rather large impediment to many taking the step of leaving, even though they may feel the burden of hypocrisy weighing heavily on them. Those who do decide to leave may find the temptation of embezzlement very great.

Be that as it may, I propose here that the monopoly granted by the movement to celibate monks to be the spiritual leaders is tremendously unproductive. I think it is time to radically rethink the sannyasa and householder institutions in Iskcon. The householder state is not in itself a disqualification to pure devotion, nor is celibacy a necessary precondition to pure devotion. The life and teachings of Bhaktivinoda Thakur should be sufficient evidence for this.

It is time to return to the pre-Gaudiya Math tradition of promoting householder gurus. This is an essential step leading to the creation of a congregational community or lay society, in other words, the creation of Varnashram culture.

The Varnashram system means, as Prabhupada taught, a Brahminical society. Iskcon’s failure has been to place the Brahminical functions, i.e., the work of guru (varNAnAM brAhmaNo guruH), almost exclusively in the hands of sannyasis, to the detriment of the entire development of a viable Varnashram society.

Further confusion has been caused by fuzzy thinking on the distinction between Brahmins and Vaishnavas. Let me develop that thought: The Varnashram idea is important, but if one confuses Vaishnavas with Brahmins by making all Vaishnavas Brahmins, the entire concept becomes totally meaningless. A person who has taken Vaishnava diksha may not have the guna or karma of a Brahmin. (A Brahmin who is not a Vaishnava is not a concern here.)

Sad-achar (i.e., the four regulative principles and other fundamental aspects of Brahminical behavior) is not the only criterion of a Brahmin. A Vaishnava society automatically serves the Brahminical ideal in terms of sad-achar, but Vaishnavas not working as preachers, priests or teachers, even though following Vaishnava sad-achar, should not automatically be given Brahminical status in Varnashram. A Brahmin is one who works as a Brahmin--as a priest, preacher, teacher, counsellor and guide. Householder or sannyasi, he should be trained as an expert in these functions and encouraged to work and make a living in these roles.

This distinction between ordinary Vaishnavas and Brahmin Vaishnavas could be institutionalized by a reform of the initiation process. Brahma Gayatri was traditionally not given to non-Brahmin disciples by most Gaudiya Vaishnavas. Upanayan and diksha should be recognized as two different things. Saraswati Thakur started giving Brahma Gayatri to his disciples as an element of the Daivi Varnashram dharma. It was a statement appropriate to the time and place, but we must seriously examine its appropriateness in the context of creating Varnashram institutions outside of India, where they have to be built up from scratch. The criticism of abuses in the context of Indian Brahminical or Varnashram society are simply not relevant to our situation and we should make the necessary adjustments.

If Brahma Gayatri and the sacred thread are signs of a Brahmin, they should not be given as a part of Vaishnava initiation, but in a separate upanayan ceremony that consecrates an individual who shows special qualifications as a Brahmin. I know that this calls for hierarchisation in what is essentially an egalitarian movement, but that already exists, with sannyasis, etc. The very concept of Varnashram is hierarchical in nature. The test is whether the society’s Brahmins will be able to combine their leadership with respect for all Vaishnavas regardless of their work or varna status, as enjoined throughout the scriptures.

It would thus be in the interest of developing the concept of Daiva Varnashram if upanayana were given separately from Vaishnava diksha. Diksha would be given when one has reached the requisite level of sad-achar and commitment to Vaishnavism. Upanayana, on the other hand, would only be bestowed on people who had attained a certain level of learning and cultural competence, a Brahmin in the full sense of the term.

The deliberate consequence of this decision would would be the creation of a householder Brahmin class, which is currently missing from the Iskcon/Gaudiya Math social structure. In the Gaudiya Math and Iskcon, only sannyasis act as priests and preachers and receive the resultant respect and honors. Householders are thus for the most part automatically marginalized.

Siddhanta Saraswati’s strong criticism of householders making a living from devotional service is another crucial matter that needs looking at. His criticisms were not without basis and naturally a certain amount of checks and balances are needed, but such checks and balances should be put in place to protect against all abuses by anyone—householder or sannyasi—who is dependent on the congregation for his livelihood. A householder priest could be the paid employee of the congregation, for example, and still act as personal guru to householders and trainer to new brahmachari and brahmacharini students. But why should devotees with Brahminical qualifications be penalized and excluded from such kinds of service simply because they are householders?

Householders who are qualified Brahmins could be allowed to make disciples, receive gifts, charge money for services rendered like weddings, funerals, and Bhagavata path, etc., as long as these were reasonable.

I don't see that the dangers inherent in receiving gifts, etc., are all that different in a preaching environment where renunciates are involved. The embezzlement problem discussed above is evidence of this. There are advantages and disadvantages both in householders and renunciates preaching. However, Gaudiya Vaishnava tradition gave initiating duties to householder Vaishnavas. There were good reasons for this: sannyasis were advised to keep away from materialistic people, women, and even from making many disciples. The Bhagavata and the Goswamis had a radically ascetic version of sannyasa that has to some extent been compromised. A householder was not restricted in this way, therefore Nityananda Prabhu, Advaita Prabhu and Srinivasa Acharya all became householder gurus after leading lives of renunciation. Why not Vipramukhya?

Some time back, I wrote to some devotees in Iskcon suggesting that the society should create a number of sannyas ashrams or monasteries (distinct from regular temples) where sannyasis can go into a real monastic environment where there are no women. Similar ashrams for women should also be set up. Sannyasis who travel and preach should be required to spend a minimum period of time every year (chaturmasya, Karttika) in intense bhajan to keep their sadhana pure. These ashrams could also be retreats where devotees with difficulties could be sent for cure and reflection about vocation change, etc.

Perhaps certain devotees who have a taste for bhajan could stay there year round. Of course, these ashrams would be open for retreats throughout the year for all male devotees, and for classes and certain programs during the day. They could also perhaps function as Vaishnava universities for Brahmins.

Strict rules would hold that women not be allowed to come even for cleaning or cooking duties, which is generally allowed in Gaudiya Maths because of manpower shortages and the reluctance of brahmacharis to engage in such duties. Sannyasis would continue living, visiting and doing so many things in other, non-sannyas ashrams where women would be present. This is because Saraswati Thakur’s sannyasi was, like the Roman Catholic priest, “in the world,” and thus a certain amount of compromise with the standards of sannyas shown by Mahaprabhu was necessary. The creation of these separate sannyas monasteries would give the sannyasis a chance to regenerate their spirit of renunciation without creating tension or negative vibes in temples, etc., where women of necessity play a vital role that should and must be encouraged if the movement is to flourish.

This kind of institution would enhance the prestige of the sannyas ashram in Iskcon and also empower sannyasi preachers who tend to get overinvolved in management and other activities that are not svarupa-siddha devotion.

In the meantime, householder-based preaching centers would be the principal method of expanding the movement. This division of labor would (1) enhance the position of women in the movement, (2) create a priestly class more sympathetic to the worldly concerns of the congregation, (3) free sannyasis to travel and preach, and (4) help prevent the urge for people looking for labh, puja and pratishtha to take sannyas as a way of attaining it.

Why can't Iskcon support householder gurus? Not only would the above benefits accrue, but solidly implanted householder Brahmin families would result in the privileged education of their children, giving them the kind of from-birth training that would result in the development of future leaders of the movement.

Householders with Brahmin qualifications who are obliged to make their living by other means are seriously handicapped in their culture of Krishna consciousness. They are being told, in effect, that you are not allowed to work according to your nature because you wish to live in the company of a woman. If Vipramukhya were allowed to continue in his functions, even after becoming a householder, would the movement not on the whole be benefited? Too much emphasis has been placed on the spilling of semen and not enough on the individual qualifications of the spiritual teacher.

I am glad my list was appreciated, thank you all for your kind words. I've learned over the years to look for the positive gain from any difficult experience. It was important for me to see those years as not wasted, but rather beneficial in the context of my whole life.

I like Audarya-lila's proposals, as well as the earlier proposal for term limits. Incremental change is the only kind that iskcon is likely to manage. They are never overnight going to change in all the ways we think they ought to.

What they need to remember about Srila Prabhupada is that if he were here and seeing things not working, he'd adjust according to time and circumstance. He wasn't thinking about his disciples' old age in terms of the needs of this society. He was picturing the system in India of children supporting their parents. That just doesn't happen here. The need to pay into the social security system or offer the non-profit equivalent of 401(k)s would not have occurred to him.

I see the second generation, never having met Srila Prabhupada, deify him even more in some cases, so I think that trend is here to stay. I can't really picture iskcon adopting any of these fine proposals made here.

this may sound stupid, but I was telling my wife the other day that if ISKCON would just open its own bank for devotees, or something like that... I don't know how banks work, but banks seem to do pretty well as a business.

awhile back, around the time of Vipramukhyas resignation, there was a devotee who was trying to start a 401k for devotees... wonder if that ever happened.

My friend speculated that if ISKCON was better in the management dept. we'd ... they'd have their own planes by now....

There are worse places than ISKCON. I am not saying this to justify the status quo or negate the abuse meted out in ISKCON. I am saying it because it is *so* bad and damaging in certain respects that the only consolation one can have and the only thing one can do to be able to move on is to determine, by seeing things in perspective, that it could have been much worse.

Consider for example Mercy's story (http://www.exfamily.org/cgi-bin/gf.pl?fmt=dyn&t=articles&m=1&s=&r=art/exmem/mercy/mercys_story.html). Ex-family is an organization for ex-members of the Children of God. Mercy was a member for 20 yrs and left the organization with 9 children from severam different men. Her article is pretty long but is very well written. I wish somebody made a film out of it.

Pretty funny idea Srijiva-ji. On a very basic level, banks work on loaning out sums of money, and collecting the money over time, along with payments for the convenience of getting the money, eg. interest. I like the 'banks seem to do pretty well as a business' line... I'm assuming you don't remember the savings & loans issue the US went through in the late '80s?

The idea of any NFP doing financial business... ayaya... well, you actually have to have an education to begin with... as Jagat pointed out, they could do with a BA in religion, never mind the MBA+ to run a bank... and can you imagine seeing a loan application from your average temple dweller? 'I'm here for 6 months, then maybe I'll go over there for a while... '

You did make me laugh this morning tho... thanks!

Hey, anything I can do to serve.

That was totally tongue in cheek about the bank thing. Still, I think there could be some financial services, like the 401k thing (which I also profess to know nothing about) run by & for Vaishnavas. I keep thinking about the movie It's a Wonderful Life & the little Family S&L they had.

I thought Jagats idea for the sanyasi ashrams & the householders taking on the brunt of the preaching & managing was a particularly good purposal.

Oh, and Tapati, I wanted to mention that I also thought your list of the positive you got from ISKCON was very nice. It helps a neophite like myself be engarde for what I could gain, & what qualities to collect & keep my experiences positive always.

I just had the following thought--

Belonging to a religion should have the following (very general) benefits--

• It gives some meaning to your life.
• It's fun.
• You meet interesting people and make good friends.

On the other hand, I dropped out of high school in order to join, and experienced years of poverty while trying to support my two children, so in addition to getting those great qualities and experiences, don't neglect the material necessities!

I know the Gurukula system didn't expect girls to really need an education, and in rural India that might be true, although less so all the time. Both men and women need to be educated enough to be able to be self supporting if need be. We naively thought we'd be in the temple for the rest of our lives and wouldn't need anything like social security payments or old folk's homes, medical insurance, etc. We were young and relatively healthy and went to free clinics for our health care. A lot of these things were overlooked because of the differences between American and Indian society. I don't think Srila Prabhupada knew a lot about the financial structure or how health care would be provided, or what would happen to his disciples in old age. The big administrators will be taken care of; I am not so sure about the rank and file devotees.

A 401(k) plan is provided through the workplace (nonprofits have their own version) if a business offers it to their employees. They contract with a company to manage it. Each employee can join after a year on the job, and they can designate a portion of their paycheck to pay into it. Once the money is in that account, they invest it as they see fit in the stocks and bonds that are available in their plan, or they can keep it in the money market account it first goes into. The money is not taxed until it is withdrawn for retirement and there are penalties for early withdrawal. When you get your W-2, the amount you put into the 401(k) is separate from your taxable income. The employer may provide matching funds also.

Obviously the younger you start one, the more time there is for money to grow to meet your needs in retirement. If your employer doesn't offer one, you can open an Individual Retirement Account.

But of course we imagined we'd have this whole Vedic system where our children would support us in our old age. That also supposes that our children remain devotees and buy into that notion even though other people are not really doing this (other than helping out as needed in illness). I didn't start my 401(k) until 1998, at the age of 40.

I had my Vedic horoscope done back then and of course it was related to me just like the life of some Vedic woman thousands of years ago. It was so far from the reality of my life it is not funny. (Which is more due to assumptions of the interpreter than accuracy of Vedic astrology.)

We were so busy thinking about Krsna that we didn't really give any thought to our future needs. Of course, ignoring the future is a tendency of the young.

From saragrahi.org.

Can ISKCON Really Change? – A Partial List of ISKCON's Problems

By Narottama Dasa Jan 19, 2005

Dear Gopal Bhatta Prabhu,

You have asked for some critical input as to the problems of ISKCON for your new committee www.spiritualstrategicplanningteam.com that is supposedly going to change ISKCON for the better. While I have my doubts as to the effectiveness of this – as the leaders have not been able to do it over the past 20 years or so, I decided to make a quick and brief list as to the problems that have come to my mind. Plus I believe people on your committee are people with a vested interest in ISKCON and thus are biased against making needed changes in ISKCON, but that is again nothing new. I also feel the necessity to publish this on the internet as well because unlike ISKCON's leaders, I don't see the necessity in hiding problems from the public. And lastly I unfortunately have to write this under a fake name due to potential political backlash. So here is a list of just a few problems… Good luck!

ISKCON's leaders not encourage and accept critical input. Only feeble devotees intimidated by the leaders, standing before the GBC with their knees knocking together may possibly propose any changes. Even then the potency of the message is taken away. History shows that anyone who comes before the GBC with a bold message is labelled an “envious snake” and is somehow ousted or ignored. Look at the examples of Pradyumna and Kundali.

You aren't united. This is shown by personal bank accounts, personal projects, individual spiritual families, etc. Only little cliques are united and speak up when their toes are stepped on.

You ask for critical feedback (like now), but then you ignore what doesn't gratify you. You did the same thing when Burke Rochford did his sociological study of ISKCON. Then you swept the results under the rug so that the majority of ISKCON couldn't see that most people don't accept the authority of the GBC. Individually, even the GBC don't even follow some of their own resolutions. How is that for unity?!

Sannyasis are not sannyasis. Where is the renunciation? Where is the dependence on ISKCON rather than the dependence on one's bank account? One nice explanation I heard from one of your leaders is that the renunciates have stolen power (this person used the word borrowed rather than stolen) from grihasthas, i.e. administration, wealth, responsibility, leadership, etc. The renunciates live more comfortable and cushy lives than most grihasthas do! The sannyasis are supposed to have the power of spiritual leadership, but the also have taken the administration leadership. They are riding the two varnas of the brahmana as well as the kshatriya and this is an unhealthy and dysfunctional dynamic.

You've set up a system of so-called critical feedback with your ombudsman, but they're really yes men so how can you possibly expect any real constructive criticism. Historically you've ousted anyone who was bold in telling you that you're off. How do you think this new 'strategic plan' is going to make anything otherwise?
You only put yes men into positions of authority, rather than putting people of competence in. The Peter Principle really shines through here. For example, how many good book distributors and brown-nosers are now the leaders of this movement? Nice qualifications.

You utilize the 16 rounds and 4 regs as a barometer to judge the sincerity and advancement of people and also use them as a meter stick as to the quality of a person's capacity to act in certain positions. This is a mistake. Someone may in fact be able to manage hundreds of people with their eyes closed, yet may not be up to the mark with these rules and regs. You are disempowering them by analyzing in this way.

People are usually judged and valued based on very external things, i.e. how submissive they are, how strictly they're following, years in the movement, etc. You use these as reasons why not to listen to people. Yet the brahmanas are supposed to heed the words of a child if the shoe fits. Look at Lord Ram's example when it came to banishing Sita. You have little or no integrity in this principle.

You deal with other Vaishnava groups in a horrible way, which shows: 1) Your lack of Vaishnava etiquette and 2) Your lack of addressing the real problem – You attack the symptoms instead and 3) The fact that ISKCON people are so naïve to go to other groups who may also be presenting a sham shows your lack of giving them a good education. You teach them to be dependently thoughtful rather than independently thoughtful. Therefore when they see that you are dysfunctional, they just find someone else they hope is pure whom they can transfer their dependence to.

You have people in positions that they shouldn't be in – gurus, sannyasis, GBCs, TPs, etc.

Hridayananda Maharaj recently contributed an article to Edwin Bryant's "The Hare Krishna Movement." If Hrdayanada's actually representing the philosophical element of ISKCON, then ISKCON has a philosophical misconception exactly like that of the ritviks – the only difference being that ISKCON believes that Srila Prabhupada can no longer give diksha. In other words, the historic epistemology of our Gaudiya tradition doesn't mean anything.

Once people move out of the temples and cannot give as much as they have, you're more than happy to scoot them out the door with no assistance, though they've given many years, much time, and much money from their life to help you and ISKCON. Nice payback and reciprocation.

Though having practiced Vaishnavism for nearly 40 years, most of you lack purity and advancement. This is seen in your diplomacy and impurity. Not an easy problem to solve.

Your educational systems (VIHE & VTE) are very narrow and suggest that they have and are the only means of attaining educational Vaishnava learning and training. You should also recognize material degrees and training. And you should also recognize that people can and should be able to attain degrees such as Bhakti Shastri and Bhakti Vaibhava, etc., by their own independent study if they choose to do so. By creating limited educational training, it is just another tool of manipulation and another way to channel more cash into certain people's pockets.
You need to hear and properly address the gurukulis.

Trying to get out of the Turley situation by the bankruptcy is the cowardly way out. ISKCON's leaders do have enough money to solve the problem. It is upsetting that the gurukulis have not united well enough to completely take ISKCON apart (materially that is). If they had the proper vision and guidance they could completely take you to the cleaners even now. And it's sad to say, but I think you need it. To completely strip ISKCON of everything may enable a better reconstruction of the institution. Though taking all material assets doesn't really address the problem since there are hundreds if not thousands of blind people ready and waiting to give their money and time to foolish leaders.

Also in relation to the gurukulis, not only Dhanurdhar is guilty. Any leader from the time of child abuse (and its still going on) should be held accountable as well as any internal member who supported the system, i.e. TPs, regional secretaries, etc. Just like Hitler may have been the one to have really exterminated the Jews, but he could not have accomplished it without the support he had, even if the support was forced or intimidated. There are many who are guilty by association.

Child protection office (CPO) is really the gurukula teacher protection office. Look what just happened in Vrindavan! If you want a real report, don't ask your mouth pieces Braja Bihari or Hari Sauri. Ask a gurukuli like Bhima Karma. He'll tell you what the so-called CPO really did. What a deception! What a shame!

The gurukulis, the little people of ISKCON, disgruntled members, ex-members, blooped members and so many others need to be heard and taken seriously. Until this happens you'll never change and have the respect of your people.

The guru system is incorrect. You cannot appoint leaders in whatever tricky language you use and then not take responsibility when your leaders fall. Then on top of it you expect estranged disciples to take shelter of another of your ISKCON leaders! Come on! Where is the integrity?!

There is widespread improper use and management of funds – gurus going to school, building and maintaining their own projects when other existing ISKCON centers are dilapidated and need overhauling, etc.

We often hear the aphorism “command respect, don't demand it” yet again most ISKCON leaders demand it explicitly or implicitly. For example, we all know how the humble devotee isn't supposed to expect respect for him or herself. Therefore you accomplish this by expecting respect be applied to your fellow leaders and you know they'll do the same for you. In this way you command respect for yourselves.

You want to maintain your image as good leaders and go to any end to prop yourselves up as such. But why not be honest about your shortcomings. Truthfulness will always be more effective than duplicity even if the motive is so-called “protecting the new devotees” or whatever other excuse you want to use. It is ridiculous when senior devotees can talk amongst themselves about how ISKCON is failing and then as soon as a new devotee walks in the room the conversation completely changes to how successful ISKCON is and how we're making so many devotees, and Mayapur and the Deities and blah blah blah. It's ridiculous as well as dishonest.

Another major point is that all GBC resolutions and minutes from all meetings should be made public. What is the necessity of keeping secrets? The only one I can think of is saving face. It is true that in a few incidents Prabhupada wanted something to stay secret. However this applied to leaders who were his disciples – they were not initiating gurus!!! We've seen time and again how when you (the leaders of ISKCON) have tried to hide some issue and the issue comes out – you look all the worse for hiding it. So perhaps if you want to 'protect the new devotees' you might put some kind of rule in place that anyone can access all GBC resolutions, minutes, notes, etc. – secret/private files included – provided that the devotee has been in ISKCON for 5 years or so.

In service to Srila Prabhupada, his ISKCON and to the Vaishnava community,
Narottama das

PS – Feel free to email me at narottam.das@gmail.com. Hare Krishna.

It would do them wonders to actually listen to the above, but they never will. They'd have to abandon their whole way of life.

And over on ICJ, Krishnakirti (January 19) is saying that of the three responses to institutionalization--reform, circumvention and reaction--he cannot think of a single example of "reaction" in Iskcon!

Well, reading all the responses on this thread makes me realize that my perception of the Gaudiya Math and ISKCON as being socially dysfunctional many, many years ago is shared by many others.

Good, now the question is "What are YOU personally going to do about it?"

This thread is about an initiative to change ISKCON, the society. However the society is made up of people. And those people actually have to change their way of thinking about things before anything external can occur. The alternative route is that many people realize the futility of trying to change a whole society's cult conditioning by force or design and instead simply take themselves out of that society's embrace. (The easy way out, or maybe the only way out of the predicament.)

When people lose faith in the social aspects of ISKCON rather than the spiritual aspects per se they tend to drift to alternate Vaisnava organizations. The closest being some form of the Gaudiya Math. As we have seen by some of Jagat's comments the Gaudiya Math also has it's social problems.

Next stop for some is to embrace a more "orthodox traditional" relationship with another member of the Gaudiya Sampradaya. Someone coming outside the GM/ISKCON (Saraswata) tradition. Unfortunately one problem with these traditional groups is that in Gaudiya Vaisnavism they tend to be quite small. Catering to the needs of just a few ardant followers. This is fine for tending to the needs of the individual, but seems to be lacking in the ability to achieve the goal of widespread global preaching of Vaisnavism. (I might even question whether the theology of Gaudiya Vaisnavism as most of the members of this board know it, makes it inherently socially impractical as a global religion.)

So the question becomes, if widespead global preaching of Vaisnavism is the goal of a group (which it is for ISKCON and to a lesser extent the GM) or society of Vaisnavas (and I am not saying that it neccessarily need be), then how to translate that orthodox traditional form of Vaisnavism into a force or movement that is not only spiritually able to meet the needs of society at large but also materially and socially able to satisfy it's members?

I would suggest that those interested in more viable answers to this question study the transition to modernity that other numerically larger Vaisnava groups such as the Vallabhas, Madhvas and Ramanujas have made.

One may not be able to change ISKCON or the Gaudiya Math from inside. The change may only be possible by ISKCON and the Gaudiya Math as they are now being superceded by other forms of associations of Vaisnavas. When there is competition between groups who have basically the same spiritual stance yet vastly different social structures eventually those with the more enduring social stabiltiy will succeed. The others will either adapt or fall by the wayside.

So the real challenge for those who believe that their particular brand of spirituality is the "best" for the world, is to make it not only philosophically understandable but also socially acceptable to society at large.

Keshava's post (#59) certainly rings true with me, and brings to light the paradox of the 'world religion' that cannot meet the individual spiritual needs needs of its members due to its ambitous agenda, and spreading itself thin.

When I began to feel shortchanged in Iskcon, at first I was resentful, then I realized that Iskcon's agenda is what it is, and works to a certain end. However I wonder sometimes if the leaders of Iskcon have even thought through what that end is. Do they want a Roman Catholic style Vaisnava-world hegemony, or many small centers and nama-hattas growing organically, or perhaps something in between? They seem to have many different veiws within the institution. The other related point is, the larger Iskcon becomes, the more differences it will need to be able to accomidate within itself.

The fact is that they are, by the nature of their preaching activities, very effective at relating to people new to spiritual life, or people that for whatever reason feel comfortable with Iskcon's Prabhupada-centered view of bhakti. Though personally, I am suspicious of any organization than feels their brand of spirtuality is the "best" for the world at large, because that's just not how the world, spiritual or material, operates. Naturally, people will gravitate to where they feel most comfortable.

As far as other Vaisnava groups and modernity, I have the most experience with the Pushtimarg (Vallabhas), and they are not, as ACBS was right in saying, a preaching movement, so their issues are different.

I met Swami Chinnajeeyar of the Sri Sampradaya here in Florida last summer. I was struck at how similar his method is to that of Iskcon. He has some projects in India, and also travels around the world to meet with his disciples and followers, doing public programs as well. His message also, like Iskcon, is based on teaching basic sad-acar and principles of devotion.

It seems Iskcon (or any other group) can't possibly attract everyone and then keep all they attract. Why should they? If that is their goal they will certainly be frustrated. I'd like to just see them relax a little bit, and give up that 'conquer the world in 18 days (or however many it was)' mentality. Of course I never really was much of a preacher anyway, so I admit, maybe I just don't get it.

At any rate, we are all being led directly or indirectly by a monsoon-cloud-colored trickster, so what sanga we find ourselves drawn to is certainly not an accident.

Why should I think that my "particular brand of spirituality is the 'best' for the world"?

There are an infinite number of jivas. Each jiva has a unique relationship with Divinity. It would be the height of arrogance for me to push onto others what I have found "works" for me. It's not enough for me to want others to have what I have. Rather, I ought to conduct myself in a way that makes others want to have what I have.

If I want others to share my enthusiasm for my "particular brand of spirituality," then I would be foolish to "preach" about it unless my actions -- my conduct and character, the visible result of my sadhana -- do not contradict my words.

Besides, how can I expect to change my environment if I cannot change myself first?

I have found, in the last couple of years, that I have the greatest effect on my environment not when I "preach", but rather when I focus on sadhana and interior development which, in turn, draws the interest and sympathy of those around me.

We who live in North America or Europe will not, in our lifetimes, live in a "Vaishnava society." Our task is not to convert society to Vaishnavism, but rather to convert ourselves into true Vaishnavas -- people who by example will inspire others, and who by experience will integrate our Vaishnavism in an authentic, uncompromising and meaningful way with the society in which we live. If this process goes on for several generations, perhaps we will begin to see a genuine "Vaishnava society" in North America and Europe. But even then, the foundation for such change will be individual development, not social planning schemes.

So are you saying Krishna has a lot in common with Coyote? That's an amusing thought!

But on a serious note, I think that among those different groups that develop will be a split along liberal (as vs. fundamentalist) lines. A modern interpretation that doesn't adhere to the literal interpretation of scripture will appeal to a larger audience by its very nature, enabling people who wouldn't otherwise be exposed to bhakti or the Holy Names to discover them. (This doesn't have to disturb the purists, given that philosophically it can be understood that in some future life they will then take up the traditional version.)

This is a delightful and refreshing viewpoint, and it reflects how I see "preaching" in general. (Of course you win points by agreeing with me...such is my ego.) When you see someone who reflects the happiness and joy of their spiritual path, it naturally makes you curious and want to know what they know. When someone asks, then is the time to share because that is when they are ready to hear.

Of course sankirtan and distributing prasadam are always wonderful activities. The power of sankirtan is that it is NOT proselytizing, but showing by example. If someone enjoys the kirtan they will ask, and then one can reveal. In the meantime, they are hearing the Holy Names.

It's when ISKCON drifted away from kirtan and into money collecting and aggressive (disrespectful) preaching that they began to lose their purity.

I don't know about the coyote thing, but I do think that we can't really reduce the issue to the question of liberal vs. fundamental moods of organizations. Iskcon is quite literal in its interpretation and attracts many people (granted, more in India than the US), as with the Southern Baptists, Mormons etc. in America. Splinter groups often move to an either less or more literal interpretation, that is inevitable.

I guess just looking at myself, I am perhaps what some would call a "purist"( )as I prefer a more traditional presentation of Vaisnavaim, but it doesn't really matter to me what other people do in their spiritual pursuits. I don't see the neccessity for a competition between differing veiwpoints (though that itself is a quite utopian veiw) as individuals will go where they want, as they learn more about what it is they want.

Well, from your vantage point ISKCON may seem liberal in mood, but in practice it is no where near liberal enough for me. I am talking more about practices, requirements, and the literal acceptance of Scripture (and even Guru) vs. relying on one's own interpretation about these things. I predict that something even more liberal than ISKCON may come into being, as either a full blown organization or as a loose collection of people practicing a more open and eclectic style of bhakti.

Coyote is the Trickster in Native American traditions. It seems to me that the Krsna who stole the saris is in the spirit of Coyote, or vice versa.

Srijiva:
One of my recent IT clients is in fact a bank for a protestant organization. Although they are not FDIC insured, they still operated within all of the banking and IRS regulations. There are IRA accounts for the congregation and loans are made for the building of new churches. If the loans are not repayed as agreed, the members must then sell the new church in order to pay back the money borrowed.

BTW - does anyone know what Gopal Bhatta Das's busines with the 65 outlets and 2200 employees is exactly? If so, please drop me a note by PM along with your post here. I am just curious, that's all.

I agree with what you say, only in my post I said Iskcon was literal in interpretation, not liberal. I certainly wouldn't say they are liberal as an institution, although there are some liberal members.

If the mission of Lord Caitanya is indeed to save all fallen souls as Iskcon proclaims, then the institution (or a collection of individuals as you say) will certainly have to learn to welcome all types of people into their fold. I agree with you also that this will come about naturally in time. The black/white, good devotee/bad devotee, Krishna vs. Maya paradigm that Iskcon has operated under for so long is simply not a very elevated understanding in my opinion, and we see the damage it causes. That is one reason why I left.

Just a little funny story to illustrate this that my wife told me earlier today, at the Moscow Temple in the early '90's apparently there was some widely held belief that if one were to miss even one mantra from one's prescribed 16 rounds, Krishna would not accept any of that person's chanting. Talk about literalism ...

I believe it's Closet World. Their Web site is www.closetworld.com.