Is ISKCON philosophy outdated?

[Murali_Mohan_das]

 

This was the statement of His Holiness Bhakti Vaibava Puri Maharaja as told to me by my godbrother Guru Kripa Prabhu .

 

The statement is innocuous enough and easily accepted. It is the implication that there is not currently a Maha-Bhagavat on the planet that is unacceptable.

[Bhakta Devarsi]

 

True.

 

It's also true that, for those of us who had some personal association with Srila Prabhupada and/or who observed the mood created in the movement by his presence, to see the memory of our dear friend and teacher twisted and perverted by the apparently-less-than-fully-sincere is rather painful.

 

In fact, it can be nauseating and infuriating at times.

 

Folks seem to take a lot more liberties with the memory of Srila Prabhupada than they do with any other Divine Personality in the Gaudiya Vaishnava sampradaya--even Sriman Mahaprabhu.

 

I hear you. I believe that this is a symptom of remaining to close, for to long, to the association of such offenders.

 

Fallen neophytes don't want help yet. They create this bubble of deadly stench around them for a reason.

 

I am certain that the more discriminating devotees will gradually leave such in the dust, and they will be little more than a rumor, until the Lord sees fit to have a confrontation occur.

 

In the meantime, I know it is best for my spiritual health to ignore the existence of such groups of people, unless I stumble on them during the Lord's business.

 

This means skipping certain webpages, and skipping the posts of certain persons as well.

 

Hare Krsna Prabhu

[Guruvani]

There are definitely old-fashioned ISKCON myths, opinions and policies that will have to be corrected or ISKCON will never be able to get out of the stone-age of western Gaudiya Vaishnavism.

 

The anti-Gaudiya Matha because they are mayavadis policy makes ISKCON an a institution of bigots.

 

The fall-from-goloka theory is a shastric contradiction that makes them look illiterate.

 

The neophyte guru system is a hoax that is degrading the movement.

 

The attempt to build an ecclesiatical religion out of ISKCON is a money-grab and a fraud.

 

ISKCON is just stuck in the stone-age of Western Vaishnavism.

 

How can a dwindling cult suffering from one scandal after another evolve from a cult to a world religion as it is going down the drain of personal ambition of petty individuals?

[suchandra]

 

There are definitely old-fashioned ISKCON myths, opinions and policies that will have to be corrected or ISKCON will never be able to get out of the stone-age of western Gaudiya Vaishnavism.

 

The anti-Gaudiya Matha because they are mayavadis policy makes ISKCON an a institution of bigots.

 

The fall-from-goloka theory is a shastric contradiction that makes them look illiterate.

 

The neophyte guru system is a hoax that is degrading the movement.

 

The attempt to build an ecclesiatical religion out of ISKCON is a money-grab and a fraud.

 

ISKCON is just stuck in the stone-age of Western Vaishnavism.

 

How can a dwindling cult suffering from one scandal after another evolve from a cult to a world religion as it is going down the drain of personal ambition of petty individuals?

This might be correct but in order to make such statements on must be in the position of having set up an alternative with quite some impressive success - otherwise will it be believable from the point of to walk the talk?

And therefore you'll find that the GBC just goes on as supplied before. Prabhupada would never comment with one word although seeing right in front of his eyes how the GM became like a ship without a captain - still he kept silent.

More or less his reply were deeds, may be a few words, but mainly deeds. His comments based upon deeds.

[Guruvani]

 

Prabhupada would never comment with one word although seeing right in front of his eyes how the GM became like a ship without a captain -

 

The ISKCON fiasco has dwarfed the Gaudiya Matha anomalies.

 

Srila Prabhupada criticzed that "imitative sahajiyas" had become gurus in the Gaudiya Matha.

 

So, now how is ISKCON any better than that?

 

If you were keeping up with what is going on with SCSMatha you would see that ISKCON has some serious competition out there that might become bigger and better than ISKCON in this century.

 

ISKCON has flopped while SCSMatha and Narayana Maharaja's group are picking up steam at a remarkable rate.

 

ISKCON is rapidly become a novelty rather than a powerful international movement.

 

I see ISKCON getting left in the dust in the 21st century.

 

The GBC policies have rendered ISKCON into a eunuch as opposed to the virile Bull it was in the days of Srila Prabhupada.

[Murali_Mohan_das]

So, do you feel "free market" Gaudiya Vaishnava "competition" is a good thing, or would the world be better served by a "sole provider"?

 

 

If you were keeping up with what is going on with SCSMatha you would see that ISKCON has some serious competition out there that might become bigger and better than ISKCON in this century.

 

ISKCON has flopped while SCSMatha and Narayana Maharaja's group are picking up steam at a remarkable rate.

 

ISKCON is rapidly become a novelty rather than a powerful international movement.

[Kulapavana]

 

The ISKCON fiasco has dwarfed the Gaudiya Matha anomalies.

 

Srila Prabhupada criticzed that "imitative sahajiyas" had become gurus in the Gaudiya Matha.

 

So, now how is ISKCON any better than that?

 

If you were keeping up with what is going on with SCSMatha you would see that ISKCON has some serious competition out there that might become bigger and better than ISKCON in this century.

 

ISKCON has flopped while SCSMatha and Narayana Maharaja's group are picking up steam at a remarkable rate.

 

ISKCON is rapidly become a novelty rather than a powerful international movement.

 

I see ISKCON getting left in the dust in the 21st century.

 

 

Yes, it is true that Iskcon guru scandals dwarfed any problems GM might have had. But I would not write off Iskcon just yet. What I see happening is a grassroot movement to re-shape Iskcon and take control of this institution by rank and file devotees. Other institutions like SCSM and NM sanga are also very guru-centric and thus very much prone to the same problems that plague Iskcon. On top of that their preaching formula works best on people who already had some interest in Vaishnavism (usually thanks to the broad preaching of Iskcon devotees).

 

I think Gaudiya Vaishnavism as preached by all these groups is too guru centric to have a mass appeal in the modern western society, especially when we keep pushing various guru myths despite having a rather checkered record in that department.

[Murali_Mohan_das]

I'm not so familiar with the NM sanga, but it seems to me that SCSMath is focused on *gradual, sustainable* growth, not the type of explosive growth that characterized ISKCON in the early days, and which was, certainly, intended by it's founder.

 

Srila Prabhupada established a toe-hold in the West for all of the preachers and acharyas that would follow in his foot-steps.

 

In general, folks in the West have this obsession with growth. I saw the film "The 11th Hour" a few days ago, and it very cogently and powerfully stated a thought I've long held--that the obsession with growth in the West is an indication of a mental illness.

 

How can we say ISKCON "flopped" just because it has not maintained the same level of growth as in previous decades?

 

As for "too guru-centric", I won't even bother replying to that ludicrous notion. It's *impossible* to be too centered on Guru.

 

 

Yes, it is true that Iskcon guru scandals dwarfed any problems GM might have had. But I would not write off Iskcon just yet. What I see happening is a grassroot movement to re-shape Iskcon and take control of this institution by rank and file devotees. Other institutions like SCSM and NM sanga are also very guru-centric and thus very much prone to the same problems that plague Iskcon. On top of that their preaching formula works best on people who already had some interest in Vaishnavism (usually thanks to the broad preaching of Iskcon devotees).

 

I think Gaudiya Vaishnavism as preached by all these groups is too guru centric to have a mass appeal in the modern western society, especially when we keep pushing various guru myths despite having a rather checkered record in that department.

[Guruvani]

 

So, do you feel "free market" Gaudiya Vaishnava "competition" is a good thing, or would the world be better served by a "sole provider"?

The sole provider concept could only work if Mahaprabhu had been established as the "Jesus" of Gaudiya Vaishnavism and the guru principle wasn't considered "as good as God".

 

Free market will always be there in the KC movement as faith is the guiding principle.

 

The ISKCON guru system got off to a bad start with the zonal guru thing because they removed the "officiating acharya" status of the ones Srila Prabhupada appointed and tried to make them faith based gurus.

 

Then they wen't into a GBC guru system where gurus were mass-produced on the GBC assembly line.

 

I believe in faith based progress.

I don't really care for official appointments when the guru is supposed to be accepted on one's personal faith.

 

I don't have all the answers.

 

What the movement needs is very qualified and charismatic leaders.

 

Without that, then all this officialdom just impedes the natural leaders.

 

Kulapavana doesn't like the "guru-centric" nature of the movement, but as far as I know the whole philosophy is guru-centric and it is in all the main books of shastra of the Gaudiyas.

 

Rather than trash the guru-centric system I say let there be a natural free flow so that newcomers aren't coerced in finding their guru.

[suchandra]

 

The ISKCON fiasco has dwarfed the Gaudiya Matha anomalies.

 

 

You're surely correct here - times have changed and walking 8000 miles across Canada like Bhakti Marg Swami makes one "a member of the Vaishnava guru parampara," so there is "minimal qualification and maximum pooja." Maybe the best qualification for their pure devotees appointment should be: whoever collects the most beer cans for recycling, at least then we'd have some useful action going on not like presently, Vaishnavas on the tramp through Canadian wilderness....and finally we read in the books of history that "the assistants of the gopis" are "falling down" -- ???

 

Already it is stated in the dictionairies about World Religions, http://www.4truth.net/site/c.hiKXLbPNLrF/b.2904151/k.D116/Hinduism.htm

 

"There is no clear concept of salvation in Hinduism. Moksha (freedom from infinite being and selfhood and final self-realization of the truth), is the goal of existence. Yoga and meditation (especially raja-yoga) taught by a guru (religious teacher) is one way to attain moksha. The other valid paths for moksha are: the way of works (karma marga), the way of knowledge (jnana marga), or the way of love and devotion (bhakti marga ). Hindus hope to eventually get off the cycle of reincarnation. They believe the illusion of personal existence will end and they will become one with the impersonal God."

[Murali_Mohan_das]

Yeah!! Just *what* could Mahaprabhu have been *thinking* tramping through the wilderness looking for Vrindavana? He should have been doing something *useful* like sitting at a book table at the Kumbha Mela, right?

 

 

At least the particular Vaishnava you mention is actually generating some *positive* press for the movement.

 

 

at least then we'd have some useful action going on not like presently, Vaishnavas on the tramp through Canadian wilderness....

[Kulapavana]

 

How can we say ISKCON "flopped" just because it has not maintained the same level of growth as in previous decades?

 

As for "too guru-centric", I won't even bother replying to that ludicrous notion. It's *impossible* to be too centered on Guru.

 

Iskcon has not simply failed to grow - it is shrinking.

 

As to the "impossibility" of being too centered on the guru - you only need to look at various guru fanatics and their exploits to sober up. Top that off with a study of what happened to various guru-centric missions after the disappearance of their leader and you may have a different view. Gaudiya Vaishnava tradition is not guru-centric, it is Krsna-centric. The first attempt to change that into guru-centrism was the karta-bhaja movement of 19th century Bengal and it was a total disaster. the Iskcon zonal acharya era was a total disaster as well.

 

Gurus and acharyas play a key role in our tradition but that role can certainly be overplayed, twisted, or plain out debased by both gurus and their fanatical followers.

[Kulapavana]

 

Kulapavana doesn't like the "guru-centric" nature of the movement, but as far as I know the whole philosophy is guru-centric and it is in all the main books of shastra of the Gaudiyas.

 

Rather than trash the guru-centric system I say let there be a natural free flow so that newcomers aren't coerced in finding their guru.

 

where practically all the guru-centric systems fail is the point of transition - it is hardly ever smooth. then there is often the rivalry between the gurus and the partiality of the disciples. Both Srila Bhaktisiddhanta and Srila Prabhupada tried to create preaching institutions immune to these problems, but I'm not sure they succeeded.

 

as to whether guru-centrism is inherently written into the writings of Goswamis - I dont think so.

[Murali_Mohan_das]

We cannot know Krishna without Guru. We cannot worship Krishna without Guru.

 

Fanatics are not Guru-centric. They are slaves of their minds.

 

Personality cults are not guru-centric. They are perversions.

 

 

Iskcon has not simply failed to grow - it is shrinking.

 

As to the "impossibility" of being too centered on the guru - you only need to look at various guru fanatics and their exploits to sober up. Top that off with a study of what happened to various guru-centric missions after the disappearance of their leader and you may have a different view. Gaudiya Vaishnava tradition is not guru-centric, it is Krsna-centric. The first attempt to change that into guru-centrism was the karta-bhaja movement of 19th century Bengal and it was a total disaster. the Iskcon zonal acharya era was a total disaster as well.

 

Gurus and acharyas play a key role in our tradition but that role can certainly be overplayed, twisted, or plain out debased by both gurus and their fanatical followers.

[Guruvani]

 

Iskcon has not simply failed to grow - it is shrinking.

 

As to the "impossibility" of being too centered on the guru - you only need to look at various guru fanatics and their exploits to sober up. Top that off with a study of what happened to various guru-centric missions after the disappearance of their leader and you may have a different view. Gaudiya Vaishnava tradition is not guru-centric, it is Krsna-centric. The first attempt to change that into guru-centrism was the karta-bhaja movement of 19th century Bengal and it was a total disaster. the Iskcon zonal acharya era was a total disaster as well.

 

Gurus and acharyas play a key role in our tradition but that role can certainly be overplayed, twisted, or plain out debased by both gurus and their fanatical followers.

No true acharya overplays or twists anything.

Our guru is our saviour.

How much do we owe the master who gives us the seed of liberation, devotion and eternal life in the ocean of nectar?

 

Śrī Caitanya Caritāmṛta Madhya 19.152, purport

 

 

The bhakti-latā-bīja can be received only through the mercy of the spiritual master. Therefore one has to satisfy the spiritual master to get the bhakti-latā-bīja (yasya prasādād bhagavat-prasādaḥ **). The bhakti-latā-bīja is the origin of devotional service.

If we don't get the proper seed of devotional service from the spiritual master, then we can never attain Krishna.

 

The Bhakti cult was never meant to be a mainstream religion.

It is an intimate circle of spiritual masters and their disciples.

 

I don't see how the authentic cult of Lord Chaitanya can become a mainstream religion and keep with it's foundational principles.

 

Gurus engaging disciples in the Sankirtan movement is what the Gaudiya cult is all about.

 

The attempt to water it down into a mainstream religion will only produce a shadow of the real thing.

 

KC is a lifestyle of simple living and spiritual practice.

The jet-age KC movement is losing it's authenticity.

 

Small groups of pure service and discipline will accomplish more than a watered-down shadow of the real thing aimed at the masses.

[Murali_Mohan_das]

 

Small groups of pure service and discipline will accomplish more than a watered-down shadow of the real thing aimed at the masses.

 

This raises an interesting question.

 

Everybody seems to assume that Srila Prabhupada insisted that each ISKCON Temple be separately incorporated as a *legal* protection.

 

That may be true, but what if, in addition to the legal ramifications, Srila Prabhupada had in mind the *spiritual* benefits of having small, semi-autonomous groups acting in concert with one another.

 

Folks remark how wonderful the Prasadam is at the Soquel Seva Ashram. One reason for this (beyond the intense devotion of the cooks) is because our Ashram is conducting its distribution efforts on a smaller scale. Thus, there is the opportunity to focus on quality over quantity.

[Kulapavana]

 

The Bhakti cult was never meant to be a mainstream religion.

It is an intimate circle of spiritual masters and their disciples.

 

This is the tantric angle of late Gaudiya Vaishnavism. Vaishnavism is most certainly a mainstream religion in India now, and has been a mainstream religion there for several millenia. Madhvas and Sri Vaishnavas for example are most certainly mainstream Vaishnava schools with great tradition and wide following. They are very much a part of bhakti cult. Being a mainstream religion does mean that you dont have intimate circles of spiritual masters and their disciples.

[Acyutananda das]

Guruvani pr!

 

Caitanya Caritamrita. Madhya 22.107.

 

You wanted sastric evidences...

 

Caitanya Caritamrita. Madhya 22.107.

 

nitya-siddha krsna-prema ‘sädhya’ kabhu naya

çravaëädi-çuddha-citte karaye udaya

 

 

“Pure love for Krsna is eternally established in the hearts of the living entities. It is not something to be gained from another source. When the heart is purified by hearing and chanting, this love naturally awakens."

 

... so there is no contradiction. The Sastra explains that in our original position we have Krsna prema. In santa rasa (that is our original position in your opinion )can we find Krsna prema?

[Kulapavana]

 

The attempt to water it down into a mainstream religion will only produce a shadow of the real thing.

 

KC is a lifestyle of simple living and spiritual practice.

The jet-age KC movement is losing it's authenticity.

 

Small groups of pure service and discipline will accomplish more than a watered-down shadow of the real thing aimed at the masses.

 

Prabhupada very much aimed at the masses. Just read his introduction to Bhagavatam. I doubt very much he wanted to simply spread Gaudiya Vaishnavism - he was thinking about creating a universal religion. It is quite obvious especially in his early writings.

[Guruvani]

 

This raises an interesting question.

 

Everybody seems to assume that Srila Prabhupada insisted that each ISKCON Temple be separately incorporated as a *legal* protection.

 

That may be true, but what if, in addition to the legal ramifications, Srila Prabhupada had in mind the *spiritual* benefits of having small, semi-autonomous groups acting in concert with one another.

 

Folks remark how wonderful the Prasadam is at the Soquel Seva Ashram. One reason for this (beyond the intense devotion of the cooks) is because our Ashram is conducting its distribution efforts on a smaller scale. Thus, there is the opportunity to focus on quality over quantity.

That is because there is not a corperate quagmire in that ashram and the leaders aren't propped-up by a corperate board.

 

Srila Sridhar Maharaja did not allow any corperate scenario to infiltrate his mission and destroy the tradition of intimate love and friendship as the basis for sanga.

 

I honestly believe that Srila Prabhupada wanted ISKCON to self-destruct after his passing at least to some degree and spawn a mutlitude of intimate and personal leaders who would revive the intimacy of the Gaudiya tradition.

 

The corperate entity is a burden to the movement of Mahaprabhu at this stage of the evolution.

 

I don't despise the ISKCON gurus now as much as I despise the renegade committee called the GBC that has trampled on the traditional power of the guru.

 

The GBC is like a Frankenstein monster that got out of control.

 

They say Prabhupada wanted ISKCON to build itself like the Catholic church.

 

I don't buy that nonsense for one minute.

[Guruvani]

 

Prabhupada very much aimed at the masses. Just read his introduction to Bhagavatam. I doubt very much he wanted to simply spread Gaudiya Vaishnavism - he was thinking about creating a universal religion. It is quite obvious especially in his early writings.

You can't build such a world religion on the Gaudiya culture where there are multiple representatives of God.

You can only build a world religion out of ISKCON if Srila Prabhupada is the Jesus of ISKCON and all the faithfull are his followers alone.

 

How can you build a world religion out of a philosophy where every guru is to be respected as good as God?

 

I just don't see it.

 

Srila Prabhupada refered to the "cult" of Mahaprabhu many, many times.

 

It will always be a cult in the western world because Christianity is King and I don't foresee that as ever changing.

 

The devotee lifetyle can only be practiced properly in intimate circles of devotees. Mass religion can't happen as long as there are many gurus with autonomous authority.

[Guruvani]

 

Prabhupada very much aimed at the masses.

 

BETTER TO DEVELOP THE SMALL NUMBER OF DEVOTEES WE HAVE, MAKE THEM TRULY KRISHNA CONSCIOUS BOYS AND GIRLS THAN TO GO ON GETTING MANY FOLLOWERS WHO DO NOT UNDERSTAND AND PRACTICE THE REAL PRINCIPLES. BETTER ONE MOON THAN MANY STARS. (72-05-09.Dam)

 

BETTER TO DEVELOP THE SMALL NUMBER OF DEVOTEES WE HAVE, MAKE THEM TRULY KRISHNA CONSCIOUS BOYS AND GIRLS THAN TO GO ON GETTING MANY FOLLOWERS WHO DO NOT UNDERSTAND AND PRACTICE THE REAL PRINCIPLES. BETTER ONE MOON THAN MANY STARS. (72-05-09.Dam)

 

 

IF THERE IS ONE MOON, THERE IS NO NEED FOR MILLIONS OF STARS. IT IS USELESS TO EXPECT A LARGE NUMBER OF FOLLOWERS. WE WANT ONLY ONE GOOD FOLLOWER. IF I CAN GET ONE MAN TO BECOME KRSNA CONSCIOUS, I WILL CONSIDER MY MISSION FULFILLED. If you talk to whatever small number of followers I have, you will find that they talk better than any great philosopher, better than any scientist or politician.

[Kulapavana]

 

You can't build such a world religion on the Gaudiya culture where there are multiple representatives of God.

You can only build a world religion out of ISKCON if Srila Prabhupada is the Jesus of ISKCON and all the faithfull are his followers alone.

 

How can you build a world religion out of a philosophy where every guru is to be respected as good as God?

 

 

Prabhupada is not Jesus. Jesus is mostly fiction in the common Christian rendition of this story, Prabhupada is real and he is one of many acharyas of Vaishnavism.

 

And the "good as God" concept is usually very poorly understood by the followers and needlessly overplayed by the leaders for managerial reasons. In the absence of proper akhanda guru tattva philosophy (Guru is one) it inevitably leads to confusion and abuse.

[Kulapavana]

Quote:

 

BETTER TO DEVELOP THE SMALL NUMBER OF DEVOTEES WE HAVE, MAKE THEM TRULY KRISHNA CONSCIOUS BOYS AND GIRLS THAN TO GO ON GETTING MANY FOLLOWERS WHO DO NOT UNDERSTAND AND PRACTICE THE REAL PRINCIPLES. BETTER ONE MOON THAN MANY STARS. (72-05-09.Dam)

---------------------------

 

At the same time he clearly wanted to create a global movement to take over the world. Small groups were just the start.

[Guruvani]

 

proper akhanda guru tattva philosophy (Guru is one) it inevitably leads to confusion and abuse.

 

But, the ONE guru manifests in an infinity of forms.

The disciple must respect each manifestation of GURU as good as the original.

 

to deny the many forms the GURU comes in is a formula for failure.