Guru selection training - to protect bhaktas from bogus gurus

[Guest guest]

"COM: Madhava Gosh (das) ACBSP (New Vrindavan - USA)" wrote:

 

> [Text 2302986 from COM]

> ... There is an institution,

> there

> are temples, so some standard has to be applied. Institutions by nature are

> flawed, so it is unrealistic to expect perfection, but if someone is know

to

> have had problems , that should be made available to potential disciples.

>

> I have personally had the experience where a very intelligent, charismatic,

> well versed in sastra, successful preacher with good sadhana was asking the

> GBC

> for approval as guru. However, due to circumstances wherein he had been

> personally been insturmental in keeping Kirtananada in power in NV, even

> after the majority of Prabhupada disciples had come to the conclusion that

it

> was obvious he shouldn't be, and had performed some underhanded political

> stratagies to do so, objectio was made to his recommendation. His prestige

> in

> the community at that time was due to his loyalty to Kirtananada as well as

> access to large sums of money. After solidifying his position, he finally

> dropped Kirtananada and then had the audacity to say he had known Kirtananada

> was off all along and went building himself up in ISKCON. A large group of

> devotees in NV wrote a letter to the GBC objecting to his recommendation and

> the

> GBC accordingly withheld their recommendation.

>

> As he is quite expert at playing the devotee and playing politics, I don't

> doubt that eventually he will try again for recommendation, and eventually

> weasel his way in, but at least for a while the GBC has done some good

service

> by protecting disciples from his charisma.

 

Hare Krsna dasi comments:

 

Okay, here is one instance where the GBC protected bhaktas from a bogus guru --

at

least for the time being according to your account.

 

Now lets look at the alternatives.

 

No GBC evaluation and the bhaktas pick whomever they like -- result: untenable

choice of guru.

 

A booklet of information [unlike the present "Guru and initiation in ISKCON"

which

is for the most part a book on how to negotiate bureacratic procedures]

combined

with systematic guru-selection training for bhaktas, combined with endorsement

by 3

local ISKCON authorities (appealable to the wider GBC, in the event of a veto).

 

If bhaktas were actually trained in what to look for in a guru and also had

counseling (in the form of consent) from 3 responsible senior devotees, is it

not

possible that they would have been protected from spiritual catastrophe just as

effectively as the present system?

 

Furthermore, the present GBC approval system (you can say no-objection is not

"approval" per se, but in the mind of the neophyte bhakta, it is certain that a

no-objection is taken as the GBC seal of approval) has failed to protect

hundreds

(thousands?) of bhaktas from spiritual and emotional calamity.

 

So, sometimes it does work. Often it is insufficient.

 

Can't we find a better way? If we really want to, I think we can.

 

your servant,

 

Hare Krsna dasi