on loyalty

[Guest guest]

On 30 Oct 1999, I wrote:

> The real question to be asked is: Can someone be FAITHFUL to Srila

Prabhupada without being LOYAL to ISKCON. Yes!

 

I meant to qualify my "Yes!" with a "sorry to say..." or "...as difficult as

it may be to hear," because it is a sad truth. We shouldn't even have to ask

this question, this is my point.

 

ISKCON should be so competent as to develop FAITH, and not so presumptuous to

"DEMAND *LOYALTY*." *Loyalty* arises naturally as we feel indebted to

someone. We feel indebted or obligated as much as we continue to be

benefitted by that relationship.

 

There is a caveat however:

 

"*Obligation* [ie, loyalty] is actually binding when the effect is good, but

when the effect is otherwise, then no one can be bound." (Bg 1.37-38 purpt)

 

The examples of Arjuna in Bg and Prabhupada himself give us the precedent.

 

Prabhupada never asked his disciples to pledge allegiance (loyalty) to any

institution, even to his own. But the GBC now apparently demands every

prospective grand-disciple to do that, in addition to every ISKCON officer.

What's going on here? Not Krsna consciousness, I submit, but another "ism":

SECTARIANism

 

If we are actually concerned about devotees fallig away from ISKCON, then we

had better become more concerned about addressing the causes that are driving

them away. We must DEVELOP *FAITH*, not DEMAND LOYALTY, nor criticize those

who go away because they are not "loyal" as we.

 

I respectfully submit that such criticism of those who go elsewhere is just an

indirect way of flattering ourselves and justifying our own complacency within

the status quo -- a smokescreen to hide our own faults. It would seem to me

that widespread dissatisfaction and the fact of so many devotees leaving the

institution indicate serious problems abound.

 

But maybe I perceive things in this way because I have no "loyalty", as I am

sometimes accused?

 

I beg to differ.

 

A member of the LOYAL opposition,

 

Srila dasa