|
Hoping for Honest Abe by Akruranatha Das Posted January 1, 2010
I was very happy to see Niscala dasi's comments (Srila Prabhupada is Our Martin Luther, Dec. 29) to Hare Krishna dasi's article (Waiting for Iskcon's Martin Luther, Chakra, Dec. 25). I was sorry to see the frustration and disillusionment with the whole ISKCON project that Hare Krishna dasi seemed to be expressing. Even though I've never met Hare Krishna prabhu face to face, my first reaction upon reading her article was to want to go visit her wherever she lives and try to reassure her and listen sympathetically to her complaints. Surely her frustration must be due to a whole series of bad experiences and not only from one suggestion about "membership" raised by H.H. Sivarama Swami at a European GBC meeting, which seems to have been not very well received by many major ISKCON constituencies and probably is not likely to be adopted or enforced. Hopefully Sivarama Swami's proposal will spark some constructive dialogue, as it already seems to be doing. The whole topic of "membership" — what it means to "belong" to ISKCON and who can legitimately feel they have a stake in ISKCON and a say in making it a success — is something very important for us to discuss and understand thoroughly. I participated in an informal "membership" subcommittee of the ISKCON Constitution project, chaired by Pancaratna Prabhu, which opted for a very inclusive definition of membership. (I wish Hare Krishna and Niscala had participated in those email discussions). I would love to talk to Sivarama Swami, if he had time, about his motivations for adopting a more exclusive approach. He is a transcendental personality and I am sure he had some worthy reasons. Niscala's proposal, that we recognize different kinds of membership, and try to fit them into the framework of the four varnas as Srila Prabhupada suggested in certain famous conversations, should be taken very seriously. At least it seems we should recognize the reality that ISKCON has a variety of different kinds of members with different levels of commitment and acceptance of the authority of ISKCON leaders to govern their lives. [I recently read and enjoyed Niscala prabhu's book Varnasrama Dharma, the Eight-Petaled Lotus, which devotees can buy by writing her at niscala_dasi@yahoo.com.au] I hope ISKCON is grown up enough by now that we can start to address controversial topics (such as the practical application of varnasrama dharma in the contemporary world), in a patient, cool-headed, constructive and beneficial way, recognizing that there will be differences of opinion and room to change our minds as we go along with our discussions and with the actions that arise from those discussions. Sometimes I am not sure, though. We still seem to have serious communication problems. We are accustomed to the sublime, "descending" model of receiving perfect knowledge from an unimpeachable source, but many of us are uncomfortable with the kind of "ascending", pragmatic, tentative decision-making in the face of uncertainty that sometimes faces us in carrying out our practical service. We need to be able to properly distinguish between the two and recognize when it is okay (or even necessary) to use the latter. We already do it, all the time, and even Srila Prabhupada changed his mind as he observed how his disciples responded to his instructions. The trick of managing devotees is to find how to constructively engage them in what they are willing and able to do according to their degrees of qualification and personalities, so that they may be happily inspired from within to offer some voluntary, favorable service to Krishna and not to feel that they are being dominated and forced against their wills by leaders who do not care about their feelings. It takes sensitivity and agility to do correctly. It is nice to see how Vaisesika prabhu does it at ISKCON Silicon Valley in San Jose, California. It may not easily fit into a one-size-fits-all scheme, and things may be done correctly but very differently in India, Hungary, England, Argentina or California. Even within California, there may be several different models of organization that work well but are quite different from one another. Generally, strong inspirational leadership seems to be required to help pull a community together and keep the devotees enthusiastic. We are pragmatic. Srila Prabhupada said, "We judge by the results," but we have to be intelligent enough to at least recognize and appreciate what counts as successful results, and how they were achieved. ISKCON is very different today than it was in 1977, and it was very different in 1977 than it was in 1967. It has been growing, which is positive. We hope it continues to grow in membership, influence, purity, wisdom and effectiveness, and we expect and hope it will be different (and more successful) by 2027, and again by 2057. The world will continue to change too, and we hope ISKCON can help the world change in positive directions, and will learn how to adapt and respond to such changes, while maintaining the purity and authenticity of Srila Prabhupada's teachings. Many devotees have found they cannot or will not continue to live a lifestyle of complete "surrender" to ISKCON authorities as they did when they lived in temples or other communal ashram environments. We might at first regard this as negative, but it is better to accept this reality and find ways to accommodate them and move forward. In many ways a society of people all living together in cult-like communes, afraid that even the exposure to "karmis" of having an outside job might undermine our faith, was an unnatural and unsustainable model. It was an emergency situation because ISKCON was so new and small and Srila Prabhupada needed to create a strong core constituency out of his young disciples, most of whom had little conception of Vedic culture and had not internalized Vedic values. But Srila Prabhupada did recognize that many devotees were falling down, due to their lack of qualification to be transformed into brahmanas, and he recognized they should still be favorably engaged in service. It is not necessary for them to receive brahmana initiation. Let them remain sudras, but engage them. Not that he wanted them to be anything less than pure Vaisnavas, but he recognized that we must all be engaged according to our actual qualifications, and not everyone was qualified to strictly follow brahminical principles. As a movement here we are 33 years on, and we have not figured out how to implement this particular instruction. This is not surprising. It is not a simple instruction. The whole idea of what it might mean for some of us to identify ourselves as sudras can be challenging. The idea of trying to impose concepts from an ancient culture into a postmodern society and economy seems artificial if not completely misguided. But it is something Srila Prabhupada asked us to do, and I am sure we can rise to the occasion. It certainly is worth thinking about and discussing, and few devotees have written as much on the subject as Hare Krishna prabhu herself. Regarding membership, we can observe that Srila Prabhupada did create a kind of membership, Life Membership, which only required the member to give a specific amount of donation to be entitled to certain privileges. Those who actually tried to dedicate their lives to service in ISKCON in full surrender but who later found they needed to live outside the temple and earn a living in some way still "belong" to ISKCON in important ways. ISKCON is very much a part of them. Srila Prabhupada will never forget their service. They are surely something more than mere Life Members, even if they are not strictly following all the rules. ISKCON leadership needs to listen to them and as far as possible find a way to address their needs. We can and should discuss all of Sivaram Swami's proposals in greater detail, but I do not want to make this much longer than it already is. Acceptance of the authority of the GBC seems to have bothered Hare Krishna Dasi, but she may be taking it wrong. It does not mean the GBC is infallible or has a direct, absolutely clear understanding Krishna's desires in all circumstances. It merely means that the corporate ISKCON, which is very dear to Srila Prabhupada (having been described as his body), is not governed by a single pope or elected acarya, nor by appeal to elections by the general congregation, but by a collegial body of senior devotees, as was clearly established by Srila Prabhupada and as was desired by Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakur Prabhupada for the governance of Gaudiya Math after his departure. When a decision has to be taken by ISKCON and for ISKCON, the ultimate decider of such ISKCON questions is the GBC. The GBC may get something wrong (we hope they don't), but loyal ISKCON members should accept the legitimacy of the GBC as having the jurisdiction to make such decisions. That should be straightforward. And for its part, the GBC should take great care to preserve and maintain its legitimacy in the hearts of ISKCON members by giving them a sense that their needs, interests and concerns will be taken into account and be given a hearing in accordance with some reasonable and fair process, so that trust is not broken, even if they make unpopular decisions. I think this idea is at least partly what motivated Sesa prabhu to inaugurate the Constitution project. All devotees who care about these issues should participate in the process of reviewing and discussing the proposed draft constitution and talking to their GBC representatives about it, even if ultimately the decision to ratify or not rests with the GBC body itself. Ideal Vedic kings, though wielding greater powers than the presidents or prime ministers of modern democratic governments, did hold "court" or have "durbars" in which citizens felt free to speak their minds (and not get their heads chopped off). ISKCON has to find the means to do at least this much, so that members feel free and protected, and not frightened, oppressed or disenfranchised. Of course ISKCON in contemporary society is not a Vedic kingdom. It is not a nation state like France (the example Sivarama Swami used in making his point about rights and responsibilities), nor is it a powerful, hegemonic church like the Catholic Church in Western Europe at the time immediately proceeding the Protestant Reformation (an example used by Hare Krishna dasi). Although all faithful ISKCON devotees see ISKCON as a very important organization with a great mission to bring Srila Prabhupada's books to the attention of all people of the world so they may be enlightened by Lord Caitanya's divine message, still the basic reality of contemporary ISKCON is that of a relatively small but growing religious organization or church (similar to the Jehovah's Witnesses) or yoga society (similar to, but perhaps bigger and more effective than, the Self Realization Fellowship, TM, or Art of Living). It is not yet as big and wealthy and powerful as the Latter-Day Saints (Mormons) or the Swaminarayan Sanstha (BAPS), let alone the gigantic Roman Catholic Church, but with a little intelligence and by the grace of Krishna, anything will be possible. We do have a very important message that can benefit all people, and not only the select few who can participate at a very high level of commitment (as monastics or full time priests). As for tithing, it is a practice that works for many religious organizations (such as the LDS and the Swaminarayan BAPS group.) Having a steady and reliable supply of capital would help ISKCON expand book distribution and many other worthy projects. As Niscala dasi pointed out, Srila Prabhupada did instruct us to give 50 percent, a rather astounding number compared to the 20 percent that faithful Muslims are supposed to give in charity, or the 10 percent that many Christian groups require. For devotees who really cannot afford even 10 percent, I am sure adjustments could be made. Maybe instituting a tithing system will not be practical for ISKCON, or maybe it will prove beneficial in some places and not others. Maybe it could be a requirement for a certain level of membership, such as membership at the vaisya level. The challenge is to inspire devotees to be willing to contribute regular, fixed amounts and to be proud of their donations, without making them feel discouraged or rejected. Regarding strict observance of 16/4, as we have already discussed, Srila Prabhupada established these as the minimum requirements for initiated devotees, but later suggested (as Niscala prabhu pointed out) that we should recognize different varnas because not everyone was maintaining those vows. Did he mean that those who were sudras and vaisyas would find it easier to maintain the vows if they were recognized as such and engaged in sudra and vaisya occupations? Or did he mean that perhaps sudras would not necessarily be expected to live up to the high standards of self-control required for gurus, priests and administrators within ISKCON? Taking Life Membership as an example, could it be that Srila Prabhupada was asking us to find ways of accepting and encouraging and engaging those who were not qualified to serve as full-time ashram devotees? I agree with Niscala that that is exactly what Srila Prabhupada was saying. Also, in Bhagavad-gita (12.10) Krishna recommends that those who cannot follow the regulative principles work for Him, and also Srila Prabhupada's comments on mat-karma-kṛt in the purport to Bg. 11.55 are very instructive. As for requiring members to be initiated by (or aspire for initiation by) ISKCON members as opposed to those outside, this proposal by Sivarama Swami seems unduly restrictive. As long as one is supportive of ISKCON and its aims, one should not have to renounce one's initiation by a bona fide Vaisnava from some other organization. Srila Prabhupada wrote that our members include Christians, Jews and Muslims. Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakur wanted Gaudiya Math to unite all four Vaisnava sampradayas. Maybe someday we will even see entire branches of Gaudiya Math become willing to "join" ISKCON. At least, we should hope we can become the kind of movement that will someday inspire Vaisnavas from other organizations or sampradayas to want to work non-disruptively within the ISKCON umbrella. Of course, even those who were duly initiated by Srila Prabhupada and are able to follow all yamas and niyamas strictly cannot be accommodated if for some reason they become so unfavorable or unruly as to be disruptive. And yet we ought to be able to serve together peacefully while agreeing to disagree on a number of issues, recognizing the paramount instruction to show our love for Srila Prabhupada by how we cooperate together in devotional service. There is room within ISKCON for a loyal opposition. Martin Luther and other Protestant leaders who followed him spearheaded a huge schism within the dominant church, which led to more than a century of wars, bitter conflict and fragmentation of Christianity that still persists today. My biggest fear is that our inability to communicate and find common ground in ISKCON, and our tendency to quarrel over sometimes relatively trivial matters, threatens to tear apart the unity that Srila Prabhupada wanted us to demonstrate. I think, rather than a Martin Luther, we need an Abraham Lincoln, who can preserve the "Union" of ISKCON, practically at all costs.
"The Rail Splitter Repairing the Union" — This 1865 cartoon by Joseph E. Baker shows Abraham Lincoln apparently upsetting the work that his Vice-President Andrew Johnson (formerly a tailor, who was a Southerner and a Union Democrat) was doing in trying to stitch the Union back together after the United States Civil War. Johnson proved much less capable than his predecessor had been at smoothing things over, and he was removed from office by Congress. The cartoon may not be directly on point, but it points up Lincoln's efforts to preserve the Union. Public domain image from Wikimedia Commons.
Dawn: Luther at Erfurt, by Sir Joseph Noel Paton, from National Galleries of Scotland (detail). Public domain image from Wikimedia Commons. Sivarama Swami, ISKCON GBC representative for Hungary and an initiating guru, presented his thoughts on the matter of ISKCON membership in a recent presentation titled "What is ISKCON, and who is a member of ISKCON?" In his presentation Sivarama Maharaja cited some of the obligations of ISKCON membership as: accepting the GBC as one's ultimate spiritual and managerial authority (in terms of ISKCON issues); being connected to ISKCON's line of authority; accepting initiation from a member of ISKCON -- in other words, chanting sixteen rounds and following the four regulative principles; being subject to the disciplinary and judicial system of ISKCON; giving 10 percent of one's income to the Society, and not divorcing one's spouse. In reporting the proceedings of that GBC meeting, ISKCON News Weekly cautiously observed: "The feedback to date seems to indicate that the 'membership issue' needs delicate handling -- or it may divide more than it unites." Indeed, several devotees have already submitted heartfelt objections that this definition is too narrow. Babhru prabhu notes that such a narrow definition of membership "…strikes many devotees as an outline of a plan for further reducing ISKCON's membership and consequently its influence. I'm looking for a reason to disagree with that assessment. Can someone throw me a line?" I'm also one of those who would certainly be excluded from ISKCON by this narrow definition (to start with, I'd be homeless if I had to donate 10 percent of my meager income to ISKCON) but I'm also a person who greatly admires the work that Sivarama Maharaja is doing in terms of Varnasrama community development. Since he is a devotee whom I admire, I just have to think: maybe he is actually correct in his assessment. When ISKCON the institution gets into some difficulty, who is going to have to suffer the headache of solving its problems? It's certainly not going to be me. It's going to be devotees like Sivarama Swami who have assumed management and leadership roles. They are really ISKCON in the most practical sense. So instead of protesting that this will divide ISKCON and further reduce ISKCON's membership, perhaps it is time to simply accept this as a perspective that has been brewing in ISKCON for a long time. Maybe we have to stop fighting the battle to change that. Let it evolve as it will. Instead, perhaps it is time turn our own attention to serious consideration of how we can develop alternative forms of Krsna consciousness that are more inclusive and, most importantly, will be far more effective in spreading Krsna consciousness to the broadest spectrum of people in the world. In this respect, I feel like I am waiting for ISKCON's equivalent of Martin Luther to appear. I feel like ISKCON at present has much in common with the Catholic Church of the 1500s. Basically, only the renounced celibate order of men had spiritual authority and power, but at the same time that order was pervaded by corruption, to such an extent that it became diverted by various money-making schemes and demanding unquestioning obedience from its followers. Martin Luther (who was, incidentally, a contemporary of Lord Caitanya) effectively challenged the Catholic Church and set up a system which was not dependent on a privileged group of celibates. Although the Catholic Church continued to exist, the Protestant movement was effective in providing a welcoming and acceptable way of being Christian and even of spreading Christianity to others. Certainly both groups had their faults, but it seems that ultimately, the very existence of a different form of Christianity ultimately proved to be an impetus for cleaning up many of the worst abuses in the Catholic Church. Taking this perspective, we can assess where we are today. We're in a situation where, because of grievous, insufficiently addressed issues of corruption and abuse in our highest officers and spiritual leaders, and because of various money-making schemes (like selling demigod worship) many of us no longer have the confidence to go out and preach, feeling we have no place to refer people should they become interested. Better to simply chant among ourselves. As we get older, we also see that the ISKCON of the present is a place where the majority of our children -- many of whom are going into their third decade of life – will never be able or inspired to get initiated. But if our own children will not get initiated, how many others will? Yet our children love Krsna; they want to celebrate and worship Krsna, and they actually want to share that love with others. We also identify ourselves first and foremost as devotees of Krsna, regardless of whether or not we are accepted as members of ISKCON. We need some viable, positive, and productive way to express our Krsna consciousness, and that need is simply not being fulfilled by the current institution. Then there is the matter of time, place and circumstance to consider. We have it on the authority of Lord Caitanya that sannyasa is forbidden in Kali Yuga. Yet Lord Caitanya Himself accepted sannyasa as the most effective means of getting a platform to preach from in His day and age. In some parts of the world, sannyasa may still provide a compelling platform for preaching from. But it has definitely not proved to be a big draw in the West. On the contrary, due to extensive abuses by the Catholic Church -- not only child abuse, but to a lesser extent its contempt for women, its hatred of gays, and its questionable involvement with wealth and political power -- the celibate order is specifically under great suspicion in the West, and thus provides an obstacle, not a help, in our preaching. The reality is that due to the problems of the Catholic Church, in our efforts to create a celibate order of men invested with special powers, we are attempting to jump onto a discredited and sinking ship. In ISKCON, in particular, there are not only problems of why women are effectively excluded from positions of spiritual leadership, there are also troubling questions of why various racial and ethnic groups are so severely underrepresented in a religion which claims to be beyond the bodily platform of life. To sum it up, in a practical sense, there seems to be no convincing reason to continue to break the commandment of the Brahma Vaivarta Purana by creating more sannyasis, especially considering Srila Prabhupada's own ambiguity on the institution. Certainly the practice of having a guru, a personal spiritual master who can advise you and help you in your spiritual life, is one of the great features of Krsna consciousness, as long as it does not become a money-making program for the guru to support himself. But perhaps a scaled-down version would be less susceptible to corruption. Why does the guru have to be the equivalent of a Hollywood star? What about a model which allows for more humility and more individualized instruction, more along the lines of a spiritual advisor or sponsor? These are just a few thoughts to consider. In closing, I want to make it clear that I don't feel prepared to be the leader in any reform movement. That's why I say I’m waiting for ISKCON's Martin Luther. I don't think I could provide such leadership personally, but there must be someone with enough devotion, integrity, intelligence, and humility who could create a vehicle in which the propagation of Krsna consciousness could better thrive. I also want to say that I'm not casting aspersions on all our sannyasis. There are many wonderful sannyasis who have helped this movement, and many kind sannyasis who have helped me and my family personally.
But unfortunately, many sannyasis have created some very, very deep hurts in our society, and maybe it's time to simply end the bitterness, doubt, shock and pain. Perhaps we can take devotees like Sivarama Maharaja seriously and realize that this is the wake-up call that we need to end our pleas for justice and inclusion in ISKCON, and simply start something else. ISKCON won't die without us. In the end, it could be the start of a more healthy development in Krsna consciousness both for us and for ISKCON.
|
One Moon Better Than Many Stars by Ananda das Posted January 6, 2010 Regarding Vaiyasaki prabhu's article Large Grhastha Families Needed (Chakra, Dec. 25), I can give only qualified approval to his message. While his ideas about mutual Vaishnava love are fine, there seem to be some serious flaws to another part of his proposal, in my opinion. His suggested resolution involves Vaishnava families having many children to increase our numbers, just as the Catholics of Quebec did 100 years ago and as the Orthodox Jews of Israel do today. In a time of expected worldwide devastation resulting from massive climate change, overpopulation, rising sea levels, declining food stocks, species extinctions and declining natural resources with an already growing and long-pent-up demand for higher living standards from the developing world, this proposal seems nothing less than irresponsible from a global perspective. From a human perspective, it also seems like terrible advice, since ISKCON has done little or nothing to encourage individuals towards helping to establish independent businesses or to promote devotees in self-sustaining jobs, the vast majority of which would require higher education. Indeed, both ISKCON and Gaudiya Math leaders have regularly discouraged ambitious devotees from seeking advanced education lest they lose someone's services as a pujari, cook or book salesperson. How do financially crippled grhastha families stretch their meagre resources to support still-larger families without simultaneously placing the health, safety and welfare of these children at even higher risk than they are at now? I think the "loving and functional childhood" Vaiyasaki prabhu, and indeed everyone, wishes for children, would be increasingly unattainable under his prescription, what to speak of the "proper education with a promising future" that they also deserve. These things cost money, and cannot be provided for if devotees have only the prospect of menial or exploitive labour. Large families can exacerbate social problems The personal and social problems resulting from large families of inadequately educated children are not by any means exclusive to ISKCON. As the Jewish Daily Forward explains, Ultra-Orthodox families average as many as 6.5 children per family, whilst secular and Reform Jews have a average of 2.6 children, a fact attributable in part to years of large per-child grants given by the Israeli government. However, the unemployment rate among the Ultra-Orthodox people is close to 50 percent, a reflection of the parents' insistence on limiting their children's education to sectarian religious study, and an astonishing 27 percent of Israeli elementary-school children are attending yeshivas designed to indoctrinate them in fundamentalist and extremist Judaism, as Gershom Gorenberg points out. The dramatic rise in numbers among the ultra-Orthodox is creating a demographic disaster for Israel — with an extremely reactionary group able to make ill-advised but largely successful demands in the Knesset for a greater share of national wealth, including for limited water resources and for housing constructed in illegal settlements in the occupied West Bank — all of which further exacerbates tensions and diminishes the likelihood of a peace agreement with the colonized and displaced Palestinian population. In many countries in Central and South America, Asia and Africa, overpopulation has led to great pressure on the natural environment as families clear forested land for agriculture, a process which can easily lead to more species of plants and animals becoming threatened, endangered or extinct as their natural habitat is destroyed. When large populations are unemployed, it has the potential to cause an increase in crime and civil unrest or even lead to war with neighbouring countries. UNICEF estimated in 2003 that there are 143 million children in the world who have lost one or both parents. Already in the Philippines, Guatemala and elsewhere, large numbers of desperately impoverished people, many of whom are orphaned children, are forced to eke out an existence salvaging recyclable materials and even food from garbage dumps. Srila Prabhupada frequently highlighted his desire for quality rather than quantity, quoting Chanakya Pandit's maxim that that the moon reflects more light than we can receive from millions of stars, and declaring that he would consider his preaching a success if he could elevate even one person to pure Krishna consciousness. In the same way, a parent could be content with investing the time, dedication and love to carefully bring up one or two exemplary children rather than having many children, each of whom could reasonably expect only a small share of parental attention. Consider, for example, the case of the neglected Romanian children of the Ceausescu era: they failed to thrive in orphanages, not for lack of food but for lack of love. In all this, the importance of the education of women must not be overlooked. Social scientists regularly find that more highly educated women almost universally tend to have smaller families, leading to better conditions not only for their own families but for their community as a whole. Vaiyasaki prabhu's proposed resolution speaks approvingly of women remaining "helpless and innocent." In my opinion, however, ISKCON society should take more responsibility for ensuring that women become strong, self-sufficient, technically skilled and knowledgeable. We look with horror at the sometimes violent opposition of Afghani Muslim fundamentalists to the education of girl children and at their refusal to permit educated women to seek gainful employment outside the home, and we're grateful that this does not happen in North America or Europe. Such defective domestic and public policy choices, though, have resulted in 25 percent of Afghans having insufficient food. Even in the developing world, educated women are a valuable resource for their country. In Africa most of the farming work is done by women, women have helped to facilitate public health and family planning initiatives, and many women have accepted microloans to establish small businesses that help themselves, their families and their communities. While I'm sure Vaiyasaki das has the best of intentions, his statement about women's helplessness and innocence bespeaks an old-fashioned male-breadwinner, head-of-household model, a system that is really not relevant to the many families headed by women and that does not reflect the reality of the modern global economy, which increasingly forces both parents in a two-parent family to hold income-producing jobs. A better ISKCON social balance Finally, Vaiyasaki prabhu's resolution includes a major element of punitive censure, which seems contrary to loving respect for all Vaishnavas, even the ones who fall short of the mark. And while I understand his frustration with many of ISKCON's sannyasis arrogating to themselves undeserved positions of managerial authority for which they are as sannyasis manifestly unsuited, just tipping over the whole social system to exalt grhasthas above sannyasis would seem to be a bit of overcorrection, or tossing out the baby with the bathwater. I'd rather see a call for more balance and mutual respect among all the ashrams of our society. I'm fine with stripping sannyasis of all managerial authority and turning them into a class of preachers dependent wholly on alms and with no independent bank accounts, and I think it is high time we had a representative GBC with members chosen by secret ballot of all initiated devotees within each region according to population numbers. I have no census data, but supposing we had 36,000 devotees worldwide, each of 18 GBC members would represent a constituency of 2,000 devotees who voted for that person. If such a system were unwieldy at a local level, we could perhaps establish an indirect election system in which devotees at each temple could elect their temple president and their board of trustees, and all of these people (representing 4,000 devotees in the aggregate) could meet regionally with a weighted voting system to choose two GBC members, one male and one female, by secret ballot.
Sannyasis would be ineligible as GBC members, since sannyasis should have no managerial role in society. Under such a system, I am confident, our GBC would indeed be largely made up of householders, with some unmarried people as well, and we would have gender parity as well, which would help end systemic inequalities and discrimination within our movement.
I'd like to thank Hare Krishna Dasi for her insights into ISKCON's current problems and their resolution (Waiting for Iskcon's Martin Luther, Chakra, Dec. 25). Although people like Hare Krishna Dasi have much in common with Luther — thoughtful, concerned, creative, dedicated and courageous — and although I don't want to minimize in any way her hefty contribution to reform, I would like to humbly point out that Martin Luther is already here in the words of Srila Prabhupada on the topic of varnashrama, which I have reproduced in my article, "Varnashrama as a Means to Freedom" (Chakra, Dec. 9). If she won't mind scrolling past my waffling on about the topic, to the words of Srila Prabhupada, she will find that Srila Prabhupada was acutely aware of the many problems his institution was facing, and was convinced that the answer was varnashrama. In these conversations, Srila Prabhupada doesn't recommend making another movement, but making ISKCON all-inclusive. Indeed, he recommends the breakdown of the barriers between "us" and "them," which he called "the kanistha mentality." Let there still be a brahmana class in ISKCON; that need not change; but let all those who are struggling with the brahminical principles no longer suffer under their guilt and feelings of inadequacy. Everyone can be a Vaisnava. All that is required is the desire to be one. And is not ISKCON simply about being a shelter for aspiring Vaisnavas? ISKCON was once described by Srila Prabhupada as a hospital. In a hospital there are certainly healthy people such as the doctors, who can, through knowledge, see to the root of the problem; these are the brahmanas. There are also nurses who may be compared to ksatriyas in their caring and empathy. Then there are the sick, who are not looked down upon, but treated with much compassion and friendship, for there is the knowledge that at any time I could also be sick, by the influence of maya: "There, but for the grace of God, go I." According to Srila Prabhupada, those who join our movement should not be expected to follow principles that are contrary to their conditioned nature. If a person is not naturally austere — a symptom of a brahmana — then let him be something else. If he is caring and compassionate, let him be a ksatriya, so that people can be listened to, their problems taken seriously, their anxieties shared with another. That is evident from the sastra which describes the ksatriya as feeling as strongly about his subordinates as his own family members; for him, there is indeed no difference. All are family. Or if he has a certain feeling for plants and animals, then let him be a vaisya. Let him produce crops in a way that upholds his respect for all things living, according to the principles of ecology. Let him care for his cows, like one would care for children. Thus, the conditioned nature of different people can contribute to the overall welfare of society. Everyone should be included, and everyone can benefit and be benefited, not only those who can afford to give 10 percent of their income. Such a requirement spells out to the people that we regard a person's money as more important than the person himself. Such a mentality has also resulted in a duality of vision: seeing big donors as more important than little donors. This is certainly not the outcome Srila Prabhupada wanted when he recommended we give, actually, 50 percent of our income. The recommendation was to encourage turning work into karma yoga, but for many of us, with the current economic meltdown, even 10 percent is not possible. For many of us, 10 percent to 50 percent is only possible in varnashrama, whereby vaisyas donate 50 percent of their produce to the temple, which is very easy because they are living on the property with all necessities supplied. Varnashrama is thus about "making bhakti easy," in Srila Prabhupada's own words; it is about coming to the mode of goodness by eschewing pretense and artificiality, and by living amidst God's own Nature, 24/7. Hare Krishna Dasi mentioned financial corruption as one of our scandals, but that is to be expected when we put profit-minded people in leadership positions. We put profit first, but it is the mentality of the vaisyas at best. Similarly, the child-abuse scandal could have been averted if we had regarded character (guna) as the basis for position (karma), and thus had put only loving and mature people in charge of children. If the abuse had still happened, at least it would have been dealt with effectively and immediately, for varnashrama is not about hiding problems, whether they be personal or institutional, for such is what Srila Prabhupada called "showbottle spirituality." Varnashrama is about being true to self and true to society, about cultivating honesty and recognizing one's conditioning, as opposed to pretending it is not there. It is also about overcoming the anxiety of guilt that may come from not being able to accept another's standards. Furthermore, it is about soaring with one's own strengths, as service to the Lord: karma yoga. Srila Prabhupada had observed the inability to follow rules in his society, and the havoc it was wreaking on his devotees, with so many going away discouraged and others failing to join. But, he argued, accepting brahminical standards is not a requirement to be a Vaisnava. In whatever is one's honest position, one can be a Vaisnava and "be perfect" just by being dedicated to serving the Lord in whatever capacity one is attracted to. His message was, and is: stop thinking "us" and "them" — or, in other words, "a member of ISKCON" and "not a member of ISKCON". Such duality of vision exists only in the world of illusion, perpetrated by the kanistha mentality. In reality, all are servants of the Lord, but some have forgotten it. ISKCON's only purpose is to revive the memory.
ISKCON is thus beyond boundaries and divisions. It is a transcendental society, even to divisions of faith, encompassing the understanding that there are many Vaisnavas in other faiths. There is no duality in ISKCON, only what we impose upon it with our materially affected vision, but such was not present in Srila Prabhupada. As its founder, he knew its purpose. He was thus the ideal reformer of his own institution, and being still fully present by his vani, he remains so to this day.
I wish to thank Palaka and Gajahanta prabhus for their wonderful glorification of HG Jayo prabhu. I think it is high time that we all begin to recognize devotees for their wonderful qualities while they are alive, not just after they die. It seems that only after devotees die, do we finally give some recognition and glorification, and even that is not enough. We should be glorifying devotees while they are alive, and I don't mean just the gurus or those who hold some position. Every Vaishnava is my prabhu, and I am his dasa. Vaishnavas deserve to know that they are loved and appreciated. After all, Sri Krishna states that He is suhridam sarva bhutanam, so why are we not the well-wishers of all His devotees, what to speak of all living entities? I don't want to have a different opinion than the Lord. The Gaudiya Math had a hard time accepting Srila Prabhupada as the next acharya in parampara because at the time of Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakur he was simply Abhaya Babu, not a sannyasi, nor temple leader, nor part of the Gaudiya Math management structure. He was a grhastha businessman, a congregational member. Yet Sri Krishna chose him to be the next acharya. We never know how dear a Vaishnava may be to the Lord, nor whom He will empower. Just imagine, if our society had glorified grhastha life from the beginning and encouraged large families with many children, how large and prosperous our society would be now. Instead of losing the majority of our youth (like Dwarakadish, whom Srila Prabhupada really loved) we would have a tremendous preaching force based on every child having received a loving and functional childhood, and a proper education with a promising future. I think we need to submit a resolution to the coming year's GBC meeting in Mayapur. Therefore, I would like to propose that the GBC adopt a resolution akin to the following and make it ISKCON law. Does anyone else agree with this? Resolved that:
This is just for starters, off the top of my head. Will anyone support such a resolution? These are the actual teachings of Srila Prabhupada, aren't they?
|
|
