Guest guest Posted March 8, 2005 Report Share Posted March 8, 2005 GBC Meetings Day 7 5 March 2005 Pragosh Prabhu announced the locations of the day's subcommittee meetings. Then the GBC began the final session of straw voting. A previous resolution about displaying the pictures of Srila Prabhupada and the GBC, regional secretary, and temple president was considered inappropriate by the Indian Continental Committee. Some points: It may indicate a lack of humility, give an impression of exaltedness to the managers, or minimize the effectiveness of other devotees. Badrinarayana Prabhu said that the ICC missed the point: putting a face on the institution's leadership. Bhaktarupa Prabhu said that in India this point is inapplicable. Ravindra Swarupa Prabhu said that the regional bodies can use their own discretion in locally implementing this proposal or not. The GBC voted on a proposal to define the North American ISKCON temple boards of directors as "clergy" to clarify that the boards are subject to the ecclesiastical authority of the GBC. The GBC voted on a proposal that the Moscow temple (for which the Moscow government gave 2.5 acres of land) be started within two years (so as not to put the land offer at risk) and that this be done with international cooperation. This will help consolidate the local community and increase the presence of ISKCON in the CIS. The Indian RGB wishes to move forward on (GBC-approved) nominations of zonal secretaries. In the discussion, some of India's GBCs assessed the trial period and performance of the RGB over the last couple of years. Next, the SAC's guru proposal was considered. This proposal eliminates the no-objection system, gives disciples of gurus still present permission to initiate if they have their guru's order to initiate, and calls for a booklet to explain to new devotees what to look for in a guru-disciple relationship. Prahladananda Swami said that the no-objection system at least reflects the opinion of experienced devotees, whereas the new proposal leaves the decision up to the bhaktas. Jaya Pataka Swami suggested an amendment: that all potential gurus are automatically nominated to a ten-man committee, who then can evaluate whether the nominated gurus' training is complete, and thereby they can continue to offer the no-objection status. Prabha Visnu Swami said that the ten-man committee system has complications: finding ten people and getting eight to conscientiously agree. Svavas Prabhu said that, with training, new devotees will choose the best guru. Gauri Prabhu thinks that the ISKCON department of education should certify a system of training for those who may serve as gurus. Ramabhadra Prabhu thinks that the parallel lines of authority have to be adjusted before this proposed change takes place. Ramai Swami likes the spirit of this proposal because it reflects the GBC's mood for a change, but he also likes the idea of some checks being in place; so he thinks the proposal needs more work. Anuttama Prabhu says that the GBC should not be apprehensive about moving slowly on this one. This discussion ended the straw voting session. Zonal Assignments and Responsibilities The GBC discussed some plusses and minuses of Hridayananda Maharaja's participation as an active GBC, in connection with a proposal that he become the GBC of Tennessee. Then Badrinarayana Prabhu asked how long Param Gati Swami can be in Spain if he becomes the GBC there, instead of Pragosh Prabhu (answer: one month, which the local leaders find acceptable). Bir Krishna Goswami explained his strategy to be the co-GBC of Portland with Hari Vilas Prabhu for one or two years. The GBC discussed whether Ravindra Swarupa Prabhu should be added as GBC of Austria. Anuttama Prabhu objected that his time is better spent in writing and in academic and religious dialogue. Ravindra Prabhu said that the Austrian and German zones are going to become one anyway, and there are good people there, so this will not take him further into management. Sivarama Swami explained why he is being proposed as the co-GBC of Romania: the country needs help because of the absence of Suhotra Swami, and it has many Hungarian people. Bhakti Caru Swami is withdrawing from South Africa, and Bhakti Caitanya Swami is becoming the sole GBC. Bhakti Caru Swami was on leave of absence from the GBC for a couple of years, and because he now expects to spend eight months a year in India because of the new center in Ujjain, he will not be able to go to South Africa. Devamrta Swami is withdrawing from Ecuador and Bolivia. Regarding the proposal that Bhakta Vijnana Swami be appointed as GBC for Israel, Sivarama Swami argued that it may hinder his work on the Moscow temple. But there are a million Russians there, and he is trying it only for a year. It was proposed that Kavicandra Swami be added as co-GBC for Israel. A straw vote was in favor, and some homework was called for before the final vote regarding how the Israel devotees feel about the candidates. Bhakti Purusottama Swami and Bhakti Vijnana Swami were proposed as co-GBCs for North and South Korea because there are large numbers of Bengali and Russian people there. The proposal that Bhakti Purusottama Swami be added as co-GBC of Nepal fits with the proposal that he be added as co-Zonal Secretary of Bihar and Jharikand; that is, he is in that area anyway. Sivarama Swami was concerned that if this appointment occurs there may be not enough of his leadership presence in Mayapur. But Jaya Pataka Swami explained that the leaders of Bihar etc. often came to Mayapur to see him and that this could continue with Bhakti Purusottama Swami. More of the India sector was taken up next. The RGB suggestions were considered, and a point of order mentioned (some presidents were not consulted about a one-year GBC secretarial nomination). There were also discussions about some candidates (their capabilities, their specialties, and their philosophical soundness). Pragosh Prabhu thanked Sivarama Swami and Kavicandra Swami for their special help over the past year. Votes were then begun on the new executive officers and a duty officer. A duty officer is not obligatory, Pragosh Prabhu told the GBC body, but we could use a few of them, in his opinion. Bir Krishna Goswami filled this post for the past five years. This is a post for meeting emergencies, which often have to do with personal disputes. Sivarama Swami suggested that the EC decide whether it wants a special-duty officer. Ramai Swami said that filling this post is up to the chairman. So Praghosh Prabhu left it up to the incoming chairman, Devamrita Swami, and he asked that Kavicandra Swami fill this post. Kavicandra Swami accepted. The election for a second vice-chairman was next. (The process allows for members to decline a nomination to the service of officer because of other responsibilities. Hoewver, the entire GBC votes on whether or not to accept the declination.) Anuttama was nominated, but he said that last year he temporarily took over the presidency of D.C., was added to the SMPDC (which requires two trips to India), reorganized his office and has no secretary, and is training a North American director of communications. Bhakti Caitanya Swami was nominated, but he recently got off the executive board and prefers that others take the post. Jaya Pataka Swami was nominated, but he said that he is not so good at e-mail. Sivarama Swami was nominated, but his health will not allow it. Bhakti Purusottama Swami was nominated, but he said that his English is not good. Bhakti Bhusana Swami was nominated, but he has been off the GBC because of bad health and has just returned, so he declined. Ravindra Swarupa was nominated, but he declined because it would hurt the situation in Germany. Bhanu Swami was nominated but declined. Gopal Krishna Maharaja was nominated but declined. Bhakti Caru Swami was nominated, but he said that for two years he would like to commit himself to Ujjain. The voters accepted only the declinations of Anuttama, Bhakti Caitanya Swami, Jaya Pataka Swami, Sivarama Swami, Bhakti Purusottama Swami, and Ravindra Swarupa. This narrowed the list to last three nominees: Bhanu Swami, Gopal Krishna Goswami, and Bhakti Caru Swami. These three left the room, as per GBC procedures, while a discussion took place. Bhanu Swami was elected as the second-vice chairman. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.