“Say, What?”

Janmastami das, Oct 14, 2009, West Virginia, USA: Another of the “say, what?” press releases from ISKCON’s seemingly never-ending treasure trove of such profundities was this week’s offering by grhasta Annuttama das: “Gurus Go Back to School – By Anuttama Dasa on 10 Oct 2009”

“Historically, a guru tends to be an autocrat, but Srila Prabhupada’s vision of thousands of gurus working cooperatively within a single institution is unique and bold.On October 2-5, 2009, in the pleasant and historical holy city of Ujjain, India, (Avanti), where Sandipani Muni once taught Krishna and Balarama, two senior instructors led the fourth session of “Being a Guru in ISKCON: A Spiritual Leadership Seminar.”
Full article: http://news.iskcon.com/node/2318/2009-10-10/gurus_go_back_school

The incredible amount of effort and planning that has gone into ISKCON’s guru school cannot be overstated. A list of the ISKCON stalwarts who have combined their spiritual shaktis for this effort is given — Radhanatha Swami, Jayapataka Swami, Bhakti Charu Swami, Prahladananda Swami, Ananda Vrindavanesvari dasi, Rukmini dasi, Ravindra Svarupa dasa, Braja Bihari dasa, Rasamandala dasa and others — and by ISKCON standards, these must be the most qualified persons in “the entire world”, albeit “the ISKCON world”.

The vision for this institution, clearly an afterthought that has taken these concoctors over thirty years to conceive of, reveals to us the organizational approach to dealing with the inconsistencies that were manifest as a result of earlier deviations from their Guru’s personal instruction on these matters.

When the bone is thrown on the floor before all the candidates for guruhood, it is known that only the real dogs will flinch. Having flinched (or other types of falldowns) in the past is still not a disqualification for admittance to this wonderful school ,as it has been seen that even past flinchers have reclaimed those lofty perches blamed for their original falldown. Simply the friendship of those currently occupying such posts is sufficient for reinstatement, and, as in all ISKCON cases to date, return of the funds you took on your departure is not even required. Who knew that the demand for “gurus” was that great?

These “facilitators” have decided that twice yearly classes will accommodate both those needing an ongoing supply of “in good standing” gurus, as well as to “accommodate the growing interest and demand” by those in or considering entering the guru business. By failing to distinguish between siksa and diksa gurus, only general instructions pertinent to both classes need be discussed, thereby instantiating their foregone conclusion that each of these assuming the diksa role was qualified to do so at the time their names were brought forward. As an “all knowing bona fide, pure devotee link with The Absolute Truth”, surely they were aware of their eternal relationship with their multitudes of disciples (hence their “eternal” relationships) even though they have not yet happened, just as Srila Prabhupada was familiarized with the ashram /temple scheme that KRSNA had set for his future, even as early as His first days on arriving in New York.

Subordination to your teacher, long the test of the validity of the Vaisnava sampradayas, is not clearly explained, neither is there any mention of the “superiority” of any of these “parallel lines of authority”, because clearly by accepting these conditions, one admits that their knowledge is not yet complete, as one might have assumed that it would be were they in a bona fide “representative” arrangement with The Absolute Truth. Neither is the subject of guru dakshina discussed, nor the cost of the instruction, nor the acceptable rates to charge disciples in various countries at the current time. Surely a guru regulatory agency is somewhere in the future plans.

Various concerned parties have suggested prior to enrollment, these prospective guru school candidates might want to talk to some “alumni” of other ISKCON schools, as one might with any bona fide institution of higher knowledge, and see how it’s former alumni have fared. We are uncertain if this proposal has all the ISKCON support that it might need in order to be widely advocated, but it must certainly not be dismissed as “just a thought”, because these matters are highly relevant to the direction the movement is taking these days — at least the portion of “the movement” that is currently affected by ISKCON’s leaders.

Any GBC mandate to change the direction of the movement, as after the Zonal period, must be predicated on the assumptions that although previous errors were made, somehow or other, now everything is correct, and the repeated failure to find this confident situation, more than the allure of materialism, has led many of those former ashram dwellers to modify their life’s behavior and in many cases, to leave the day to day association of the other ashram dwellers.

Statements like these –

“Srila Prabhupada’s vision of thousands of gurus working cooperatively within a single institution is unique and bold. The attendees discussed both the successes and failures in ISKCON’s past as a means to build a clear roadway forward to fulfilling Srila Prabhupada’s vision.”
Full article: http://news.iskcon.com/node/2318/2009-10-10/gurus_go_back_school

show the complete breakdown of touch with reality by those who would mold the behavior of a pure devotee representative of The Lord. That they cannot even reconcile the basic tenet of the final instructions on the matter of “succession” within ISKCON leaves little doubt as to whether one of these “enlightened individuals” holds the spiritual candlepower to be anything more than a firefly in the darkness of kali-yuga.

Understanding that leads persons from their rightful inheritance as servants of The Lord, no matter how well intended it once was, does no one any spiritual good. Simply “daily meals supplied by the ashram” does not “a successful spiritual life” make.