What is ISKCON? - Incompatibility with ISKCON

[Guest guest]

> There is no such thing as a new modern ISKCON. If the new and modern

> Iskcon does not have much to do with Srila Prabhupada's original Iskcon,

> then the new and modern Iskcon is not Iskcon at all, it is something else.

> Therefore I say, you have to find the core of devotees in Iskcon, who are

> true to Srila Prabhupada's version, and then cling on to them.

 

This is a strong statement, and I must admit like it. At least it shows some

character. But... Some time ago I charrised same opinion, that if something

cannot be connected to Srila Prabhupada's teachings, then it is not ISKCON.

Actually, those things were called "bridge" before. Because they were not

ISKCON, but were also not karmi, since they were performed by ISKCON

devotees. So they were called "bridge methods". But now everybody moved to

that "bridge", and are having fun fishing for new ideas. Bridge has become

new ISKCON. We thought it was maya, but now we know it is ok:

 

The problem is actually, that devotees take bridge to be a part of ISKCON.

Bridge is not directly connectable to Srila Prabhupada, but is becoming

major part of ISKCON. Leaders failed to define that bridge, so it is being

assimilated as the real thing. And because limits are not defined, it brings

just confusion.

 

> If you openly oppose Srila Prabhupada's instructions, then you are of

> course not Iskcon.

 

"Bridge" comes into play here. Is it ISKCON or not? How to view this?

 

> Your problem is to find those devotees you can click with and

> avoid those you can't stand or who are hypocrites etc.

> ...

> Simply only associate with those who

> have pure motivation to be in Iskcon. If you do that you will always be

> safe.

 

Selective association seems like solution. To simply avoid those, who are

not inspiring, or considered as speculators. But I have some doubt about

your proposed solution. Is it ok to judge devotees like this, and separate

them in "good" anfd "bad". Shouldn't it be, that ISKCON in whole is good? If

ISKCON is defined by Srila Prabhupada, then how can be there any separation

within ISKCON? If one is not in line with Srila Prabhupada, he is out. Isn't

it? So, you are proposing, that each devotee personally judges who is "in"

and who is "out" of ISKCON. This seems rather anarchic. Usually system is,

that government decides, who is bonafide and who is not. Usually there are

all kinds of laws, and if one breaks them, he is sanctioned by some

punishment. I beleive vedic culture was very strict like this too. Either

you were in, or out, there was no inbetween. And everybody was affraid of

being excommunicated. But ISKCON is different, there is no fear of

excommunication, and everybody is accepted, so everybody brings his own

ideas in, and because there are no laws, or nobody to uphold the laws, then

we get confusion.

 

Now you propose, that each individual becomes judge and jury, and separate

by himself. But it is a useless proposition, because it will only increase

criticism and separatism, and thus even more reduce trust and cooperation.

 

If one is bonafide or not, must be maintained from above, by government, or

in case of ISKCON, by GBC. There should be some strict system of "punishment

and reward", like in any organized group of humanity. Family works on this

principle, business companies work like this, and countries with government

work on this principle, and vedic culture worked on this principle of

"punishment and reward". ISKCON refuses to operate on this basic, for

reasons which are probably beyond this discussion. Also motives may not be

so important, the point is, that there is no result regarding protection of

ISKCON members. We are left on our own. ISKCON has no government, who would

protect its citizens. And personal separatism between "good" and "bad" is no

solution. It may only work for certain individuals, who are not so

interested in trust and cooperation, but it will not help ISKCON to regain

trust and support of its congregation.

 

 

> Membership is simply defined as being a follower of Prabhupada. All

> followers of Prabhupada are members of Iskcon as far as I am concerned.

 

This is ok. But what about all those, who are separated and judged by

"better avoid personally"? Are they ISKCON too? Because when there can be

some doubt, that ones ideas are off, then he can be avoided as

"non-inspirational". But does this make him not being member of ISKCON. I

don't think so. ISKCON has certainly become wider, than what was defined by

Srila Prabhupada. So there needs to be some system of government, with

strict laws, which will provide "punishment and reward", in order to protect

members of ISKCON society against speculations. Only on this level ISKCON

becomes a culture. Without laws and rules and strict government, wider

ISKCON is just on the level of local bowling club, and will soon become

sunday religion, not taken seriously even by its own so-called members.

 

 

> I think there is no such thing as a modern Iskcon that one should be

> careful about. I think we should only be careful about associating with

> those who are not pure in motive. I know for a fact, that there are so

> many wonderful devotees within Iskcon one can associate with, who are pure

> in motive. So seek out their association and avoid the ones you don't

> trust.

 

If there is no modern ISKCON, distanced from Srila Prabhupada, then there

are parts of ISKCON, which are better to be avoided. And that is wrong,

since such parts make whole ISKCON impure. Therefore there is a need of

strong government, with strict law system, providing immediate "punishment

and reward", and thus maintaining purity.

 

your servant Giri-nayaka das