Iskcon and the Guru Issue Part 6 – The Great Guru Hoax of Iskcon

Iskcon and the Guru Issue Part 6 – The Great Guru Hoax of Iskcon

Ravindra Svarupa Das: “The root of all problems now facing ISKCON is that we, the disciples of Srila Prabhupada, have not yet established proper Vaisnava relationships among ourselves. And then I went on to commit to writing—for the first time—my honest perceptions of life in ISKCON (November 1984): A society of devotees in which proper Vaisnava relations are not yet the norm is called a kanistha-adhikari society. Its distinguishing characteristic is contentiousness arising from envy. […] Spiritual immaturity often leads a kanistha-adhikari to identify spiritual advancement with organizational advancement. He thinks that attaining prestige, power, and the perquisites of office is evidence of spiritual advancement. Lacking the assets for real spiritual achievement, he substitutes organizational elevation, which he can attain through his cunning or political prowess.”(Ravindra Svarupa Das, Pillars of Success)

Having made the above statement to illustrate that the root of ISKCON’s guru crisis at the time (The Great Guru Hoax, Part 1 – the “zonal acharya” system) was the fact that the movement was one of materialistic kanistha-adhikaris (neophytes), ISKCON “guru reformer” Ravindra Svarupa Das (“RSD”)’s solution was to push for the elevation of many of these same kanistha-adhikaris, including himself, to become “good-as-God” gurus themselves, just months later. — Therefore, having 11 kanisthaadhikari “gurus” was counteracted simply by very quickly having many more of them (The Great Guru Hoax, Part 2), drawn as they were from the same pool RSD has criticised above as being kanistha-adhikaris.

Srila Prabhupada: “He [Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati Goswami Maharaja] never recommended anyone to be acharya of the Gaudiya Math…. If Guru Maharaja could have seen someone who was qualified at that time to be acharya, he would have mentioned. Because on the night before he passed away he talked of so many things, but never mentioned an acharya. THEREFORE WE MAY NOT COMMIT THE SAME MISTAKE IN OUR ISKCON CAMP.” (Srila Prabhupada, letter to Rupanuga das, April 28, 1974)

The great Guru hoax: History repeats itself!

Adapted from BTP – Backt To Prabhupada
Source: https://www.iskconirm.com/

In the previous issues of BTP we have documented the great Guru hoax which has been the basis for ISKCON’s history and activities since the departure of Srila Prabhupada in 1977. This great Guru hoax was split into two parts, with part 1 of the Hoax in 1978 being the unauthorised creation of a group of successors to Srila Prabhupada.

Part 2 of the hoax was subsequently opening the doors to allow anyone and every one to be an unauthorised Guru successor. What is not so widely known is that this hoax is an almost exact replay of what happened over 60 years ago in the Gaudiya Matha, the organization created by Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura, who is Srila Prabhupada’s spiritual master.

Indeed, ISKCON was started by Srila Prabhupada because of the great Guru hoax which had destroyed his spiritual master’s mission, the Gaudiya Matha. How ironic it is therefore, that the antidote to this great Guru hoax, ISKCON, has itself be come gripped and destroyed by a similar Guru hoax. We will detail here the similarities of this amazing phenomenon.

Kill Guru – and Become Guru | the 11 usurpers and poisoners of Srila Prabhupada

Great Guru hoax – Part 1

Before his departure Srila Prabhupada nominated no one as a Guru to succeed him. However, his leading secretaries who had been appointed only as ‘ritviks’, or his representatives, made plans to unauthorisedly install themselves as successor acaryas (Gurus). The Gaudiya Matha did the same thing, except they installed one acarya for the world, whereas in ISKCON they divided the world up into 11 zones, and installed 11 acaryas:

“Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura, at the time of his departure, requested all his disciples to form a governing body and conduct missionary activities cooperatively. He did not instruct a particular man to become the next acarya. But just after his passing away, his leading secretaries made plans,without authority, to occupy the post of acarya, and they split into two factions over who the next acarya would be. Consequently, both factions were asara, or useless, because they had no authority, having disobeyed the order of the spiritual master.” (Caitanya caritamrta, Adi Lila, 12.8, purport)

“In the latter days of my Guru Maharaja he was very disgusted. […] Still he requested his disciples to form a strong Governing body for preaching the cult of Caitanya Mahaprabhu. He never recommended anyone to be acarya of the Gaudiya Math. But Sridhara Maharaja is responsible for disobeying this order of Guru Maharaja, and he and others who are already dead unnecessarily thought that there must be one acarya. If Guru Maharaja could have seen some one who was qualified at that time to be acarya he would have mentioned. Because on the night before he passed away he talked of so many things, but never mentioned an acarya. His idea was acarya was not to be nominated amongst the governing body.He said openly you make a GBC and conduct the mis sion. […] So Sridhara Maharaja and his two associate gentlemen unauthorisedly selected one acarya and later it proved a failure.” (Srila Prabhupada Letter to Rupanuga, 28/4/74)

Great Guru hoax Part 2

Subsequently with the failure of foisting 11 acaryas on the movement, ISKCON responded by allowing many others to also have a shot at posing as unauthorised Gurus. So today we have 80 different Guru cults all vying for a piece of the ISKCON pie. Most of these Gurus are satisfied simply with expanding their own Guru cult. The Gaudiya Matha also split up into many different mathas, each with their own unauthorised Guru in charge, following the failure of their acarya programme, with all these mathas also simply being satisfied with strengthening their own Guru cult:

“Why this Gaudiya Matha failed? Because they tried to become more than Guru. […] They declared some unfit person to become acarya. Then another man came,then another acarya,another acarya.” (Srila Prabhupada Room Conversation, 16/8/76)

“The result is now everyone is claiming to be acarya even though they may be kanistha adhikari with no ability to preach. In some of the camps the acarya is being changed three times a year.” (Srila Prabhupada Letter to Rupanuga, 28/4/74)

“All are satisfied with a place for residence in the name of a temple, they engage disciples to get food stuff by transcendental devices and eat and sleep. They have no idea or brain how to broadcast the cult of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu.” (Srila Prabhupada Letter to Rupanuga, 28/4/74)

Conclusion Srila Prabhupada made the following cautionary prophecy whilst mentioning the great Guru hoax of the Gaudiya Matha re ferred to above. He said: “Therefore we may not commit the same mistake in our ISKCON camp.” (Srila Prabhupada Letter To Rupanuga, 28/4/74)

Unfortunately this warning was not heeded, and as we have seen, exactly the same mistake WAS committed.It is said that history repeats itself because human nature repeats itself: Like Srila Prabhupada, Srila Bhaktisidhanta Sarsavati Maharaja was also betrayed by his leading secretaries.

“You can simply refer the history that the same thing is…“History repeats itself.” When there was Roman Empire, Mogul Empire, the same strife, the same political dissension, the same fight.” (Srila Prabhupada Lecture, Montreal, June 16th, 1968)

Unfortunately, as long as that nature of deviating from the order of the spiritual master, that nature of desiring followers, that nature to desire to sit in the seat of one’s Guru remains, naturally history will indeed keep repeating itself. To end, we would like to issue the following call to our brothers in the current GBC, who unfortunately are still consumed with this nature; a call which was given originally by Srila Prabhupada to his Godbrothers, due to the havoc THEY had wreaked with THEIR great Guru hoax:

23. If everyone just initiates then there will only be a contradictory result. As long as it goes on, there will be only failure.
29. O shame! My dear brothers aren’t you embarrassedfi In the manner of businessmen you increase your disciples.
39. You have become renouncers, brothers, so renounce everything. But if you also renounce the order of the spiritual master, then what kind of renunciation is that?

(VyasaPuja Offering To Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura, made by Srila Prabhupada in 1961)

GBC guru admits Great Guru Hoax, Part 3

Following the revelation in BTP # 19 of the Great Guru Hoax, Part 3 (where the position of diksa [initiating] guru is re-defined like a ritvik [officiating priest], or someone uses a ritvik position to get benefits like a diksa guru), we present herein another example of this phenomenon in action. The following is an explanation of “guru-tattwa” from GBC voted-in guru HH Hanumatpresaka Swami (“HPS”), taken from his website at http://www.jayarama.us/arc hives/guru-tattwa.txt [rev. 19 April 2008], archived May 4th, 2008:

“Who is the Diksa-guru, you or Prabahupada? Answer depends on what you mean by Diksa guru. If you mean the person who chants on the beads and gives the name and makes the promise with his own lips that by chanting your prescribed number of rounds you are guaranteed to advance to the highest platform of Uttama-adhikari, then we are the Diksa-guru.”

Here HPS re-defines a diksa Guru as basically being a ritvik, a person who helps conduct the initiation ceremony on behalf of the diksa Guru. Many of Srila Prabhupada’s disciples were initiated having never even met Srila Prabhupada, but rather had a ritvik representative chant on their beads, and after July 9th, 1977, also give them a name. And at the initiation fire yajna (ceremony), usually conducted by the temple president, a vow was made to chant 16 rounds and follow the 4 regulative principles, and in this way the person would advance spiritually. Paradoxically, in the same article, HPS also gives the correct definition of a diksa guru:

“When we are serious and want to formally make a commitment to Krsna, then Diksa-gurus makes that link. […]. If you take Diksa-guru as that person who makes the contract with Krsna, then it is Prabhupada.”

This is what Srila Prabhupada teaches:

“It is a basic principle that one must accept a bona fide spiritual master in order to achieve the highest perfection of life, love of God. I thank all of you very much for accepting me as your spiritual master, and I promise that I will take you back to home, back to Godhead.” (Letter from Srila Prabhupada to initiated disciple, November 12th, 1971)

This was the standard understanding every Srila Prabhupada disciple had when they got initiated by Srila Prabhupada, that he was the person taking them back to Krishna. Not that he was an officiator at the ceremony. That role was played by, not surprisingly, the officiators at the ceremony, such as the temple president and ritvik representatives. HPS has now turned everything on its head, claiming that a ritvik is the same as a diksa guru, just so he can justify himself and all the other ISKCON gurus taking the position of diksa guru, and having all their “disciples” worship them as such. Cheating par excellence – ‘We are not diksa gurus, so let’s just change the definition of a diksa guru, so that we can still usurp Srila Prabhupada’s position and take disciples for ourselves.’

The Great Guru Hoax has thus evolved from the Great Guru Hoax, Part 1, where 11 zonal “successors” at least pretended they were real diksa gurus, to the Great Guru Hoax, Part 3, where the ISKCON “gurus” have now just thrown in the towel, and admitted they are not diksa gurus at all, just ritviks, BUT who still want to keep all the benefits of being a diksa guru by insisting they take disciples who must continue to worship and accept them as if they were real diksa gurus.

Mayapur simultaneous guru-puja of conditioned souls
worshipped on the same level as Srila Prabhupada, which
is the greatest offence and guru-aparadha in Vaisnava history

Great Guru Hoax, Part 3 in action – again!

We have seen in the past two issues of BTP (#19 & 20) the enacting of The Great Guru Hoax, Part 3, whereby ISKCON’s gurus have effectively conceded the IRM’s position that Srila Prabhupada is the real spiritual master (Guru) of ISKCON who initiates us as his disciples, yet continue to claim Srila Prabhupada’s disciples as their own. Below we see a familiar ISKCON guru shamelessly engaging in this hoax:

“How do we develop our link with Srila Prabhupada? The spiritual link is established through service and faith. […] Then we will come to the point of understanding that Prabhupada created an institution and through that institution Prabhupada is present. The spiritual master is present in 2 ways: through his vapuh, his physical form and through his vani, his instructions. Now Prabhupada’s vapuh may not be present but Prabhupada is present through his vani. And that vani has got a very tangible shape in the form of ISKCON.” (Bhakti Charu Swami Disciples’ meeting, London June 21st, 2008)

Above we can see HH Bhakti Charu Swami (“BCS”) clearly adopting the IRM’s position that:

1) Our link with Srila Prabhupada is established by serving him, having faith in him and following his teachings and instructions.

2) Srila Prabhupada is the spiritual master and he is tangibly present in his instructions and in the institution of ISKCON.

But despite adopting the IRM’s position, as we see below BCS is still happy to continue claiming that HE is the “spiritual master”, and that Srila Prabhupada’s disciples actually belong to him!: “What is the point in being your spiritual master if I do not free you from the bondage of Maya and lead you to your ultimate spiritual destination?” (BCS Letter to disciple, July 25th, 2008)

Yet in typical bait-and-switch fashion, BCS has previously admitted that he is incapable of leading anyone to the ultimate spiritual destination, as only Srila Prabhupada can do this. *

“I cannot lead you to Krsna. “ (BCS Istagosthi, March 28th, 2006)
“Srila Prabhupada will take you to Krsna.” (BCS, Durban disciples meeting, reported on April 7th, 2006)
“Srila Prabhupada, as the pre-eminent acarya, takes you to Krsna and engages you in His service.”
(BCS Istagosthi, Text PAMHO:13658994, June 10th, 2007)

* see also BCS’s 13-point ritvik manifesto in BTP18 for further evidence of this hoax.

And here we see another shameless example:

“Dear Lokanatha Maharaja […] Now that you have awarded me sannyasa on behalf of Srila Prabhupada I am begging for the privilege to also have a drop of that taste and become a dancing puppet in Prabhupada’s hands.” (Janananda Goswami’s “Vyasa-puja” offering to Lokanatha Swami, July 25th, 2008)

Here, HH Janananda Goswami (“JG”) claims that HH Lokanatha Swami is not the guru who initiated him into the sannyasa (renounced) order of life, but rather Lokanatha Swami (“LOK”) was simply acting “on behalf of Srila Prabhupada”. This “on behalf of Srila Prabhupada” claim reminds one of a representative system of initiations called “ritvik”, which Srila Prabhupada ordered was the system to be followed in ISKCON:

”…continue to become ritvik and act on my behalf.” (Letter of July 31st, 1977, recording Srila Prabhupada conversation of July 19th, 1977).

There were other statements made by Srila Prabhupada, and his secretary, in the days following the July 9th letter, which clearly indicate that the ritvik system was intended to continue without cessation:

“…I have selected you among eleven men as ‘rittvik‘ or representative of the acharya.” (July 10th)

“…the process for initiation to be followed in the future.” (July 11th)
“…continue to become ritvik and act on my charge.” (July 19th)
“…continue to become ritvik and act on my behalf.” (July 31th)

Yet both JG and LOK are happy to continue acting “on behalf of Srila Prabhupada” by claiming his disciples as their own!

Why the Hoax is happening

Having published a mountain of evidence establishing that a guru hoax exists, why are so many devotees still unable to accept the facts? In this article we examine some of the reasons why.

Lack of training

In 1972 Srila Prabhupada prophetically wrote: “I am fearful that if we expand too much in this way that we shall become weakened and gradually the whole thing will become lost.” (Srila Prabhupada Letter, 22/6/1972)

This, of course, is exactly what came to pass, with the movement becoming “lost” just 5 years later with the Guru Hoax. In the same letter above Srila Prabhupada also states what was needed to ensure that this did not happen:

“So especially you must encourage the students to read our books throughout the day as much as possible, and give them all good advice how to understand the books, and inspire them to study the things from every point of view. […] So let us concentrate on training our devotees very thoroughly in the knowledge of Krishna Consciousness from our books, from tapes, by discussing always […].” (Srila Prabhupada Letter, 22/6/1972)

However, knowledge and understanding regarding the most basic points of Krishna consciousness is so weak that those who are supposedly the most learned leaders of our Society speak completegibberish every time they open their mouths, as highlighted by our “An error in every sentence” series (see BTP 22 and this issue (#23) for examples).

Fear of learning

Srila Prabhupada mentions that study should be from “every point of view”, but devotees are crippled by the fear that one must not study or discuss anything which is controversial for fear it will lead to faultfinding resulting in causing Vaisnava aparadha, or offences. Yet Srila Prabhupada states the opposite:

“A sincere student should not neglect the discussion of such conclusions, considering them controversial, for such discussions strengthen the mind. Thus one’s mind becomes attached to Sri Krsna.” (Sri Caitanya-caritamrta, Adi-lila, 2.117)

“Apaisunam means that one should not find fault with others or correct them unnecessarily. Of course to call a thief a thief is not faultfinding, but to call an honest person a thief is very much offensive for one who is making advancement in spiritual life.” (Bhagavad-gita As It Is, 16.1-3, purport, 1972 edition)

Discussing and stating the truth, no matter how controversial, is never the cause of offenses. Rather, it is not stating the truth which causes offenses. And BTP is boldly studying the conclusions of Srila Prabhupada’s teachings from every point of view without fear of the controversy it may generate. We document Srila Prabhupada’s conclusions from all conceivable angles, even using the words of those who oppose these conclusions!

Literacy

Memorising and reading is one thing. But to understand requires some very basic tools of literacy. IRM papers always traditionally open with “contradictions” and “straw-man” arguments. This is because it has not yet been grasped by many devotees that when stating a point, one should not contradict what one has just said, nor should one fabricate the issue one is claiming to address (a straw-man argument). Obvious, but read the 150-plus papers on our website, and in virtually every case we document that these simple rules of literacy have not been followed by those who oppose the IRM. Additionally, one must accept the meanings of words as given by the English language since this was the language in which Srila Prabhupada spoke. One cannot just give any meaning one likes to words. For example:

a) “Yes” means “No” – as in when Srila Prabhupada says “Yes, they are disciples” in the May 28th, 1977 conversation – the GBC’s paper Disciple of My Disciple claims that: “Srila Prabhupada could say yes, but he does not.” !
b) “When” means “I am doing now” – as in when Srila Prabhupada says “When I order you become guru”, in the May 28th conversation – the GBC claim it means he IS ordering gurus
there and then. And so on.

No concept of evidence

Knowledge without knowing how to apply it to reach conclusions will also lead one astray.
Many devotees do not even understand that conclusions require to be established via relevant evidence. Hence two very common sources used to establish conclusions in ISKCON are either “testimony” – meaning what someone claims Srila Prabhupada “said” – or from outside Srila Prabhupada’s teachings. If we limited ourselves only to the documented words of Srila Prabhupada, this would have avoided many of the problems we have experienced. For example, some persons claim that Srila Prabhupada “secretly ordered” or “whispered” for them to be initiating gurus. And so many people just blindly swallow it without requiring any evidence for the same! Another example of not understanding the concept of evidence is reflected in the common criticism levelled at the IRM that we are too “lawyerly” or “legalistic”.
These terms mean “according to law”, and obviously in this case since we are only discussing Srila Prabhupada’s words, this “law” has to be Srila Prabhupada’s teachings or his “law books”, and not the government’s laws. Hence this criticism is actually the greatest compliment, since we are accused of being too attached to following Srila Prabhupada’s words, or his law!

Motivation

The key to everything however is stated by Srila Prabhupada as follows: “As soon as personal motivation comes in it is not possible for one to understand our Krishna Consciousness philosophy.” (Srila Prabhupada Letter, 21/9/1970)

Because even if all of the above are in place, if one is selfmotivated it will not be possible to understand anything. If one is attached to getting or keeping some position or service, or advancing some personal philosophy etc., then this self-interest will ensure that one will remain blind to the facts, only seeing what will advance their own self-interest. And this, of course, has been the history of the movement for the last 30 years as everyone involved with the movement has either directly or indirectly supported the Guru Hoax.

Conclusion

Ignorance and self-motivation are the twin pillars holding devotees back from stepping into the light. Joining the IRM, where one has absolutely nothing to gain apart from the truth (not properties or income streams), and everything to lose in terms of position, reputation, friends etc., demolishes these two pillars in one stroke!

It’s all about the power

Recently, the European GBC (Governing Body Commission) passed the following resolution:

“There will be no more ‘cross-border’ initiations […] It is hereby resolved that in general ISKCON gurus may no longer make requests for funds from disciples or other devotees for projects or personal maintenance.” (208/II-107 Initiation procedures, Euro GBC, 7/10/2008)

This is, on the one hand, bringing back elements of the previously discarded “Zonal Acarya” system (“The Great Guru Hoax, Part 1”), by insisting that one can only accept a guru who resides in that person’s “zone”. And on the other, it is continuing the trend highlighted earlier of turning the ISKCON gurus into glorified ritviks (“The Great Guru Hoax, Part 3”). For having already stated that gurus cannot directly engage their disciples in service (Law 405 (G), GBC Resolutions, 1999), now they cannot even ask them for any money! Poor gurus! And yet to combat the IRM, the GBC claim that we must implement the “traditional guru-disciple model”. But initiators” who basically have no authority over their “disciples” is a ritvik model, not a guru-disciple model!

Though on the surface this would appear to be a welcome development, what it actually illustrates is that The Great Guru Hoax is merely a symptom of, and a tool and mechanism to satisfy, the underlying desire to take and use Srila Prabhupada’s teachings and movement to garner profit, honour and distinction for oneself. The reasoning for the above resolution admits as much:

“Whereas, in the past, power, money and followers has been instrumental in the downfall of many of our gurus; and because we now have to struggle to rescue our reputation in the face of considerable criticism; […] Whereas there is now a lot more competition from other spiritual organisations […]” (208/II-107 Initiation procedures, Euro GBC, 7/10/2008)

So this is a pretty clear admission that simply ‘due to our guru hoax program of taking power having had problems, and the subsequent heat coming from the IRM and other organisations, changes were required to help keep the show on the road.’ Hence the program of using Srila Prabhupada’s teachings and assets to take control and power continues. Indeed, The Great Guru Hoax, Part 2 was itself motivated purely by the desire of temple presidents and other ISKCON managers to get a bigger share of the ISKCON power pie, forcing the original 11 Great Guru Hoaxers to share the spoils of the guru program by expanding it to others. (And in The Great Guru Hoax, Part 3, the same power grab has continued with some temple presidents now using “ritvik” and the claim to put “Srila Prabhupada in the centre” to take greater control and power over their temples). Now only because this expansion of the guru hoax has been a huge failure, the GBC has been forced to make an adjustment. Basically, whatever mechanism best serves the goal to grab power and control the money is simply adopted. WHO does it – the “big” original 11 zonal gurus, the “smaller” dozens of gurus who later followed, or temple presidents and ritviks; and HOW it is done – via a guru hoax or ritvik hoax – does not matter. The result is the same: power, properties, men, name, fame and money are garnered.

Great Sinister Disciples Hijacking Srila Prabhupada’s Movement

The acronym we came up with for this phenomenon is “TUCE” – which stands for: “Take, Use, Cut Out and Enjoy” – and it is the modus operandi of the living entity in the material world. At the very basic level, we take all the resources Krishna has provided via His energies in the material world, use them, cut Krishna out of the picture and enjoy. In ISKCON we do the same to everything Srila Prabhupada has provided, with merely lip service being paid to Krishna and Srila Prabhupada to enable the activity to occur in the first place. Some more basic examples of this are: ecology, philanthropy, personal development, inter-faith and business. In each case, Srila Prabhupada’s teachings are taken and used to allow one to make a movement/program/ course on these things alone, that one can then use to garner fame and money for oneself, whilst the original purpose of getting people to surrender to Srila Prabhupada is itself cut out of the picture. So it’s not a question of guru v. ritvik, for both can be used as a tool to take power. It’s a question of TUCE v. serving and surrendering to Srila Prabhupada.

One can do a “spiritual audit” and check what the results of one’s activities have been. Have people been engaged in directly serving and glorifying Srila Prabhupada? Or have money, buildings, followers, fame, etc. increased, with Srila Prabhupada’s teachings merely used to allow this to happen? The simplest way to guard against the TUCE tendency is to not get deviated into any activities which do not result in persons directly engaging in serving Srila Prabhupada, which is the program followed by the IRM – ISKCON Revival Movement.

Download PDF
The-Great-Guru-Hoax.pdf