Day 7th

[Guest guest]

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.