Change = maryada-vyatikrama

[andy108]

In another thread, unfortunately our friend Kulapavana has made a mistake and is in danger of committing offenses. As a gesture of good-will to him and as a cautionary tale to those who would receive fair-warning, it would be good to learn from this example. Let me break it down for you.

 

 

 

Quote:

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #666666 1px solid; PADDING-RIGHT: 3ex; BORDER-TOP: #666666 1px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 3ex; BORDER-LEFT: #666666 1px solid; BORDER-BOTTOM: #666666 1px solid" bgColor=#e0e0e0>Originally Posted by kulapavana

Prabhupada himself changed things quite often when he saw that they were not working Prabhupada was pragmatic, not dogmatic.

It is dogmatic slogans like "don't change ANYTHING Prabhupada implemented" that prevent much needed reforms in our movement.

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

<!-- END TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote -->

Kulapavana is conflating the Authority(Acarya) with the one’s he authorizes(disciples).

The reason why Srila Prabhupada gave Dogma (strict instructions) is to preempt the possibility of students like Kulapavana from attempting to justify “Change” based on their illusory perception that the Acarya’s view lacked pragmatism according to current circumstances. Upon closer examination, everytime a student gives reasons to justify their viewpoint of needed “Change”, the analysis will reveal they are in error.

Srila Prabhupada was quoted probably hundreds of times warning his students not to change anything unilaterally, that such an action shows lack of respect for their Guru, that it is never justified no matter what the student “thinks”.

The fact that the Acarya personally changed one of his own rules, such as the awarding of Sanyassa order, (which he never gave any of his students the authority to award to anyone else by the way), cannot be construed as an excuse that the Acayra would condone his students neglecting his multitude of instructions NOT TO CHANGE his orders and system, and is a sure sign of material ambition clouding one’s vision.

In fact the Founder-Acarya of the Iskcon movement Kulapavana claims to be part of and represent went so far as to take careful legal measures according to the law of the Country where he founded his movement in order to guard against such ambitious unauthorized changes to his movement. In his last will and testament we find item #2. regarding the system of management for is temples.

2. Each temple will be an ISKCON property and will be managed by three executive directors. The system of management will continue as it is now and there is no need of any change.

Now. To cast more light on how such ambitious material delusions will manifest, let us look closely at the justifications Kulapavana uses to convince others that we have the right and duty to change things.

<!-- BEGIN TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote -->Quote:

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #666666 1px solid; PADDING-RIGHT: 3ex; BORDER-TOP: #666666 1px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 3ex; BORDER-LEFT: #666666 1px solid; BORDER-BOTTOM: #666666 1px solid" bgColor=#e0e0e0>Originally Posted by kulapavana

Srila Prabhupada signed the DOM document yet later on he did many things that were contrary to it, such as appointing temple presidents and GBCs without a vote and making GBCs a position for life.

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

<!-- END TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote -->

First, the Hyperbole “many changes” should give one pause immediately.

Moving to the DOM document, the only item that bears ANY instruction regarding how a temple president gets into office is #8

8. Removal of a Temple president by the GBC requires support by the local Temple members.

So Srila Prabhupada appoints a temple president, as he had done always, and obviously makes a terrible argument to justify changing anything, even if change was allowed.

As far as making GBC a position for life. He stated on May 28<SUP>th</SUP> 1977

Satsvarūpa: Śrīla Prabhupāda, we were all asked by the rest of the GBC to come to ask some questions. Most... These are the members of the original GBC as you first made it up. So our first question is about the GBC members. We want to know how long should they remain in office?

Prabhupāda: They should remain for good.

Tamāla Kṛṣṇa: They should remain for good.

Prabhupāda: Selected men are chosen, so they cannot be changed. Rather, if some competent man comes, he should be added. I shall recommend that Vāsudeva become one of the GBC.

The first thing a responsible manager would do after hearing this is to bring the DOM paperwork to Srila Prabhupada to be amended and signed to reflect his change in orders. Especially the point about adding to the overall ranks of the GBC if a competent man comes along. Which would require amending to the election process.

Of course we know that the managers at the time were thinking of one thing, their own glorification and ambition, so there was no way they even remembered what the DOM said, and if they did, they certainly did not want to bring it up. But looking closely at the relevant portions of the DOM, and taking the spirit of Srila Prabhupada’s mood on change, we find no substantial contradiction, but an opportunity perhaps to give clarity to the process of electing GBC from among temple presidents, while simultaneously assuring they are elected for life.

2. His Divine Grace will select the initial 12 members of the GBC. In the succeeding years the GBC will be elected by a vote of all Temple presidents who will vote for 8 from a ballot of all Temple presidents, which may also include any secretary who is in charge of a Temple. Those 8 with the greatest number of votes will be members for the next term of GBC. Śrīla Prabhupāda will choose to retain four commissioners. In the event of Śrīla Prabhupāda's absence, the retiring members will decide which four will remain.

3. The commissioners will serve for a period of 3 years, and they may be re-elected at the end of this period.

Just looking at these 2 successive items, a person might make the mistake of seeing a contradiction within the very DOM itself.

It is a self-evident fact that Srila Prabhupada would never encourage the capricious removal of someone who was fulfilling their appointed role properly. Thus his statement on May 28<SUP>th</SUP> 1977 that “they cannot be changed” should be seen in that light.

And in keeping with Srila Prabhupada’s spirit of no change, we can see this reflected in #2 and #3 of the DOM.

He qualifies the instructions of item #2 by stating in #3 that “the commissioners” = “they” (referring to ALL) “may be re-elected”, in otherwords placed back upon the ballot as a qualified nominee.

So even in the event that his disciples choose 8 temple presidents every three years from all eligible temple presidents, and nominate those 8 for election, it is apparent that according to item #3 there are to be 2 segments to the elections. The first wherein the all Temple Presidents and secretaries in charge of a temple are allowed to re-elect the entire body of the GBC if they see fit, and according to the Spirit of Srila Prabhupada’s no change policy in general, and his statement on 5/28/77, if a GBC member is performing his duty properly, has not broken with the parameters of his appointment, and wishes to continue, the TPs SHOULD ceremonially re-elect the whole lot of them.

 

<!-- BEGIN TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote -->Quote:

<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=6 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #666666 1px solid; PADDING-RIGHT: 3ex; BORDER-TOP: #666666 1px solid; PADDING-LEFT: 3ex; BORDER-LEFT: #666666 1px solid; BORDER-BOTTOM: #666666 1px solid" bgColor=#e0e0e0>Originally Posted by Kulapavana

My point was that SP himself was changing his own decisions as he saw fit at a particular time. Prabhupada wanted to make sure things WORKED, producing desired RESULTS.

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

<!-- END TEMPLATE: bbcode_quote -->

And MY point is that SP was himself exclusively qualified to make any changes to his management system.

And furthermore, I would like to point out that no-one is forced or beholden to follow the instructions of the Founder-Acarya of Iskcon. If they think they can do better, and even want to use His institutional paradigm as a working model, they have the free-will and my blessing to do so.

However, such a person seeks to ..

- represent themselves as being a member of Iskcon.

- a disciple of Srila Bhaktivedanta Swami,

- use his physical properties for such a purpose,

- or use his intellectual property without full disclaimer of their breaking with his established instructions on how to use his intellectual property.

They do not have my blessing to do so, and I will correct their errors forthwith each and every time.

 

But this could be considered a blessing if they see reason and change their ways, for it is written...

 

3rd Canto (3.4.26), “Although one may be well versed in transcendental science, one should be careful about the offense of maryada-vyatikrama, or impertinently surpassing a greater personality. According to scriptural injunction one should be very careful of transgressing the law of maryada-vyatikrama because by so doing one loses his duration of life, his opulence, fame and piety and the blessings of all the world. To be well versed in the transcendental science necessitates awareness of the techniques of spiritual science.”

[Beggar]

It's one of the inherent dangers of "The Ten Thousand Year Acaryaship" Theory: There can be no changes for changing times, changing circumstances and changing places because no one is qualified, nor ever will (at least for ten thousand years) be qualified to do so.

[Kulapavana]

Originally Posted by andy108

"And MY point is that SP was himself exclusively qualified to make any changes to his management system"

 

In case you have not noticed, he is not around to make the changes needed now.

 

Quote:

<TABLE class=MsoNormalTable style="WIDTH: 100%; mso-cellspacing: 0in; mso-padding-alt: 4.5pt 4.5pt 4.5pt 4.5pt" cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=0 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR style="mso-yfti-irow: 0; mso-yfti-firstrow: yes; mso-yfti-lastrow: yes"><TD style="BORDER-RIGHT: #666666 1pt solid; PADDING-RIGHT: 0.25in; BORDER-TOP: #666666 1pt solid; PADDING-LEFT: 0.25in; BACKGROUND: #e0e0e0; PADDING-BOTTOM: 4.5pt; BORDER-LEFT: #666666 1pt solid; PADDING-TOP: 4.5pt; BORDER-BOTTOM: #666666 1pt solid; mso-border-alt: solid #666666 .75pt">Originally Posted by andy108

 

The reason why Srila Prabhupada gave Dogma (strict instructions) is to preempt the possibility of students like Kulapavana from attempting to justify “Change” based on their illusory perception that the Acarya’s view lacked pragmatism according to current circumstances. Upon closer examination, everytime a student gives reasons to justify their viewpoint of needed “Change”, the analysis will reveal they are in error.

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>

Srila Prabhupada gave power to a lot of ambitious and unqualified people, like Gurukripa of this thread, creating a top down authocratic management system extremely easy to abuse. Iskcon history is full of examples showing how poorly this system worked.

Of course the dogmatists like you will argue that no changes are needed - you most likely have a hard time conceiving that there ARE better systems of management. You just like to blame only the people who were executing this system for it's failures.

To a pragmatist like me there is no question Iskcon management should be reformed, perhaps using DOM as a starting kernel of the new system. Why? Because people are NOT perfect, and they WILL try to abuse power given a convenient situation. When creating a mangement system you MUST consider the level of skill and the quality of people who will be implementing it in real life.

 

[andy108]

 

Originally Posted by andy108

"And MY point is that SP was himself exclusively qualified to make any changes to his management system"

 

In case you have not noticed, he is not around to make the changes needed now.

 

Quote:

<table class="MsoNormalTable" style="width: 100%;" width="100%" border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0"><tbody><tr style=""><td style="border: 1pt solid rgb(102, 102, 102); padding: 4.5pt 0.25in; background: rgb(224, 224, 224) none repeat scroll 0% 0%; -moz-background-clip: -moz-initial; -moz-background-origin: -moz-initial; -moz-background-inline-policy: -moz-initial;">Originally Posted by andy108

 

The reason why Srila Prabhupada gave Dogma (strict instructions) is to preempt the possibility of students like Kulapavana from attempting to justify “Change” based on their illusory perception that the Acarya’s view lacked pragmatism according to current circumstances. Upon closer examination, everytime a student gives reasons to justify their viewpoint of needed “Change”, the analysis will reveal they are in error.

</td></tr></tbody></table>

Srila Prabhupada gave power to a lot of ambitious and unqualified people, like Gurukripa of this thread, creating a top down authocratic management system extremely easy to abuse. Iskcon history is full of examples showing how poorly this system worked.

Of course the dogmatists like you will argue that no changes are needed - you most likely have a hard time conceiving that there ARE better systems of management. You just like to blame only the people who were executing this system for it's failures.

To a pragmatist like me there is no question Iskcon management should be reformed, perhaps using DOM as a starting kernel of the new system. Why? Because people are NOT perfect, and they WILL try to abuse power given a convenient situation. When creating a mangement system you MUST consider the level of skill and the quality of people who will be implementing it in real life.

 

 

How convenient. The "vedic traditionalist" suddenly has a problem with Top-down Autocracy.

 

All management systems can be abused. And will be. That is the material world.

 

Your "new improved" management system can and will be abused.

 

Srila Prabhupada put in checks and balances. That is why there are so many people, like me, who are not involved in the shadow Iskcon with its usurped management system, but are slowly and steadily implementing Srila Prabhupada's original system amongst those who are claiming to be willing to do so in good faith. Those who appreciate their fallen nature and what checks and balances will do to keep themselves honest.

 

Just like those who you approach with your new improved Iskcon (International Society for Kula Consciousness) will claim.

 

You have been known to be fooled before. Bigtime. How will you prevent anyone you choose to work with from choosing to use any managment system for their own aggrandizement if they so choose?

 

Just give up any of the 4 deadly sins I mentioned... Don't be a person who will

 

- represent themselves as being a member of Iskcon.

- a disciple of Srila Bhaktivedanta Swami,

- use his physical properties for such a purpose,

- or use his intellectual property without full disclaimer of their breaking with his established instructions on how to use his intellectual property.

And I don't care what you do and wish you good fortune.

[Kulapavana]

 

How convenient. The "vedic traditionalist" suddenly has a problem with Top-down Autocracy.

 

All management systems can be abused. And will be. That is the material world.

 

Your "new improved" management system can and will be abused.

 

Srila Prabhupada put in checks and balances.

 

The failure of ANY institution is always caused by the failure of the management system of this organization. Some institutions flourish while others are in decline - that is proof positive that all management systems are NOT alike. You LEARN from those who succeeded and those who failed by comparing their management.

 

I do not expect you to understand that, but I hope that other readers will.

[theist]

Originally Posted by andy108

"And MY point is that SP was himself exclusively qualified to make any changes to his management system"

 

Response by Kulapavana:In case you have not noticed, he is not around to make the changes needed now.

--

 

I recall a statement by Srila Prabhupada to the effect of the problem with you westerners is you are always changing things. This is the same argument some misguided persons give for changing his books.

 

This is the logic of impotent people. Lacking the potency to start their own branch and the empowerment to write their own transcendental literature they try to leave their mark by mucking around with what Srila Prabhupada has already done.

[Beggar]

 

And I don't care what you do and wish you good fortune.

 

Good fortune in our acarya's conception would be to have a substantial connection with Krsna Consciousness. How can one not care what someone does and then hope that they do the best thing for themselves and others?

That sound mutually contradictory. On the other hand if you're saying something like, "do what you're going to do, but just not in the direct name of Srila Prabhupada", then it makes sense. On the other hand why is it that Krsna Consciousness has to come in a particular way or paticular brand?

[theist]

 

On the other hand why is it that Krsna Consciousness has to come in a particular way or paticular brand?

 

It doesn't.

 

The point is no one has a right to change Prabhupada's work and still call it Prabhupada's work. Leave what he has done alone alone As It Is, and make any changes you want in your own name.

 

Krishna consciousness is far more than the Iskcon brand so why do people think they need to change Iskcon to deliver Krishna consciousness? If they have a better way then they should show it on their own.

[andy108]

 

Good fortune in our acarya's conception would be to have a substantial connection with Krsna Consciousness. How can one not care what someone does and then hope that they do the best thing for themselves and others?

That sound mutually contradictory. On the other hand if you're saying something like, "do what you're going to do, but just not in the direct name of Srila Prabhupada", then it makes sense. On the other hand why is it that Krsna Consciousness has to come in a particular way or paticular brand?

 

That is exactly what I said. If it is not in his name, I don't care what you do, meaning you can do whatever is in the range of your desires, I will not try and influence it in anyway. And withdraw my care and attention from that person through obvious practical necessity.

 

You "pragmatists" should be on the same page as that right?

 

Actually all I care about it My Guru's orders, and those who want to follow them. Otherwise I wish people good fortune, but it goes without saying that because I follow my Guru strictly and believe he was a Jagat Guru, I believe that would have the highest benefit not just for me, but ultimately for everyone. So if they need to make gradual advancement elsewhere before coming to the ultimate, that is their choice, I can have nothing more to say to them on the matter and withdraw any care and attention from them.

 

But simultaneously, I wish them the good fortune that they will eventually come to realize that they are not more potent and capable then the latest Saktavesha Avatara Maha-Bhagavat Acarya and possibly ruin their spiritual lives, and those of others.

[Kulapavana]

 

I recall a statement by Srila Prabhupada to the effect of the problem with you westerners is you are always changing things.

 

and of course Prabhupada never made any changes

 

was his Iskcon identical to the Gaudiya Matha of his guru? did he not make changes to his own organization?

 

Prabhupada was impressed by people who generated good results. He even praised the changes in his Gita that Rayarama made in the initial editing. why? because they were good changes.

 

Many years ago I have built up a strong preaching organization in a communist Poland, starting from scratch. When I got kicked out several years later we had more full time devotees than they have there now, 25 years later. So I do know a little about proper management of preaching missions. I did that not by blind following but by using my God-given skills.

 

I see Iskcon management system as completely ineffective and prone to abuse. It is a relic of a bygone era. Clinging to it out of sentimentality or ignorance is the REAL offense to Srila Prabhupada's mission.

[theist]

I opened Kula's post this time to find:

and of course Prabhupada never made any changes

 

You still don't get it do you? Amazing. Any changes Prabhupada made were in his own name and to his own work.

 

I know you are a bright guy so why are you being so dull on this point?

[theist]

 

I see Iskcon management system ascompletely ineffective and prone to abuse. It is a relic of a bygoneera. Clinging to it out of sentimentality or ignorance is the REALoffense to Srila Prabhupada's mission.

 

 

YOU are the one that is clinging to the ISKCON management system. You don't need to change it before you can do your work.

 

Try to understand this simple point.

[Kulapavana]

 

 

You still don't get it do you? Amazing. Any changes Prabhupada made were in his own name and to his own work.

 

I know you are a bright guy so why are you being so dull on this point?

 

Which part of "Prabhupada is not here to make the changes" do you not understand?

 

Unless of course you feel that the way things are in Iskcon now is perfect and that no changes are needed.

 

Farms - huge success!

Gurukulas - huge success!

Varnashrama dharma - huge success!

Sankirtan - huge success!

Temple service - huge success!

Congregation building - huge success!

Prasadam distribution - huge success!

Preaching to the scientists - huge success!

 

 

No, no changes are needed... we are a smashing hit on the world's religious scene...

[Kulapavana]

 

YOU are the one that is clinging to the ISKCON management system. You don't need to change it before you can do your work.

 

Try to understand this simple point.

 

to the contrary... almost every day I work on practical KC projects with other devotees, circumventing the current Iskcon management system.

[Beggar]

 

Which part of "Prabhupada is not here to make the changes" do you not understand?

 

Unless of course you feel that the way things are in Iskcon now is perfect and that no changes are needed.

 

Farms - huge success!

Gurukulas - huge success!

Varnashrama dharma - huge success!

Sankirtan - huge success!

Temple service - huge success!

Congregation building - huge success!

Prasadam distribution - huge success!

Preaching to the scientists - huge success!

 

 

No, no changes are needed... we are a smashing hit on the world's religious scene...

 

But of course another way of looking at it would be to think, "Srila Prabhupada's instructions are perfect, but we just do not have the purity to carry them out properly."

[andy108]

 

But of course another way of looking at it would be to think, "Srila Prabhupada's instructions are perfect, but we just do not have the purity to carry them out properly."

 

Impossible to do when one's brain is covered over by Mahamaya's illusion that one is better than Srila Prabhupada.

 

Impossible to do when one equates people not following a system to the author's frailty in providing a workable system, and not the free-will choice of the so-called followers to reject the system while claiming to be following it.

 

Impossible to do when a person thinks they have had enough success at preaching in Poland that they can come to America and do better than a Saktavesha Avatara.

[Kulapavana]

 

But of course another way of looking at it would be to think, "Srila Prabhupada's instructions are perfect, but we just do not have the purity to carry them out properly."

 

Yes, here is an example of a perfect instruction: take 6-year old kids from their parents and send them across the world to a school in India run by ex-hippies with zero experience in education.

[theist]

 

Which part of "Prabhupada is not here to make the changes" do you not understand?

 

 

Prabhupada is here by his instructions you fool.

 

 

Unless of course you feel that the way things are in Iskcon now is perfect and that no changes are needed.

 

Farms - huge success!

Gurukulas - huge success!

Varnashrama dharma - huge success!

Sankirtan - huge success!

Temple service - huge success!

Congregation building - huge success!

Prasadam distribution - huge success!

Preaching to the scientists - huge success!

 

 

No, no changes are needed... we are a smashing hit on the world's religious scene...

 

 

Reform is the word. Stop changing things and get back to following his instructions.

 

 

Back to ignoring your posts.

[Kulapavana]

 

Impossible to do when one's brain is covered over by Mahamaya's illusion that one is better than Srila Prabhupada.

 

 

I never thought like that. How do you know what I think. In a typical Iskcon fashion you attack my character and you label me an offender.

I gave you practical examples of problem areas requiring change and you are just a broken record: ...no change......no change...no change...no change...no change...no change...no change...

[Kulapavana]

 

 

Prabhupada is here by his instructions you fool.

 

 

Funny how there are at least 5 different camps of his disciples, each claiming exclusive rights to properly understanding their guru... There must have been 5 different Prabhupadas, no? how come we have all these controversies? and who will settle them?

 

Which part of "Prabhupada is not here" do you not understand my wise man?

[andy108]

 

I never thought like that. How do you know what I think. In a typical Iskcon fashion you attack my character and you label me an offender.

I gave you practical examples of problem areas requiring change and you are just a broken record: ...no change......no change...no change...no change...no change...no change...no change...

 

The areas are a problem, but you don't know how those areas would look if the people in them followed instructions.

 

So knowing everything else you do about Srila Prabhupada, you still refuse to give a crack at his instructions to see what would eventuate, instead you will spend your time trying to change his instructions.

 

If you would just stop linking his instructions with failure, that would be a start and might gain you credence with those who consider such a position to be illogical, unreasonable, and insane.

 

Then you could go ahead and use his ideas as a blueprint, change what you want, and start your own mission. Go ahead. I dare you. Just beware of the 4 cardinal sins mentioned and nary a criticism will you hear from my mouth, and I wish you good fortune in an endeavor which I believe will provide poor short term results, ending in your good fortune of coming back to your senses and the sadhana prescribed by the Jagat Guru.

 

Of course if you could prove me wrong.... But so far you haven't even got to step 1, and continue your illogical rantings against the Acarya, so I won't hold my breath.

[Kulapavana]

 

So knowing everything else you do about Srila Prabhupada, you still refuse to give a crack at his instructions to see what would eventuate, instead you will spend your time trying to change his instructions.

 

We were talking primarily about the authocratic management system he put in place. After some 40 years there is plenty of evidence it does not work. And that is why I say it needs to be changed. Not that somehow all of his instructions need to be changed. When examining failures you must look both at the plans and their execution to determine the problem.

[andy108]

 

We were talking primarily about the authocratic management system he put in place. After some 40 years there is plenty of evidence it does not work. And that is why I say it needs to be changed. Not that somehow all of his instructions need to be changed. When examining failures you must look both at the plans and their execution to determine the problem.

Jeeze Kula, you are good. You caught me before at the beginning of this thread with your comment stating that SP created a a "top down autocratic management system"

I agreed with you not reading carefully, only paying attention to the "top down part", which is the nature of any authoritative management structure, but is a different animal with the addition of "Autocracy."

After reading your last post, I said to myself "where is he getting this bit about autocracy?" That was when I looked back and saw how you snuck one by me.

He never did anything of the sort. Look up the definition of Autocracy.

A bunch of Zoned out Acaryas created an Autocratic system after Srila Prabhupada left, and suckered YOU into supporting it.

You could never in a million years show evidence that SP ever authorized that anyone in Iskcon "Self appoint" their Self to any position and exclusively rule over others.

No wonder you rail against his system. You don't even know what it was really meant to be! Do your homework, polish me up a nice apple, and comeback tomorrow morning and I'd be happy to discuss the truth of the matter.

Hare Krsna

[Kulapavana]

The authocratic system of regional secretaries, sannyasis, GBCs, nominated temple presidents, was fully in place by 1977. Don't tell me Prabhupada created a democratic system of elected managers. For example: NONE of the GBCs was ever elected in Prabhupada's times as the DOM required - Prabhupada appointed all of them, and he appointed them for life, again contrary to the DOM requirements.

[andy108]

 

The authocratic system of regional secretaries, sannyasis, GBCs, nominated temple presidents, was fully in place by 1977. Don't tell me Prabhupada created a democratic system of elected managers. For example: NONE of the GBCs was ever elected in Prabhupada's times as the DOM required - Prabhupada appointed all of them.

Sorry Kiddo, read the definitions below. Based on what Prabhupada asked them to do, and stated was their parameters, it is a travesty to conclude that he authorized an Autocratic system of management.

 

Each manager was to be limited in the scope of their purview, subject to various restrictions and oversight, and NEVER SELF APPOINTED.

 

The fact that some usurped power and formed an autocracy is irrelevant.

The neophytes you attract with your watered down Prabhupada imitation will beat you over the head at the first chance and do the same.

 

Wikipedia: An autocracy is a form of government in which the political power is held by a single, self-appointed ruler. The term autocrat is derived from the Greek word 'αυτοκράτωρ (lit. "self-ruler", or "he who rules by one's self")

 

Random House Dictionary:

 

1. an absolute ruler, esp. a monarch who holds and exercises the powers of government as by inherent right, not subject to restrictions.

 

2. a person invested with or claiming to exercise absolute authority.

 

3. a person who behaves in an authoritarian manner; a domineering person.

 

Webster's Dictionary:

 

1. a ruler with absolute power; dictator; despot

2. anyone having unlimited power over others

3. any domineering, self-willed person

 

 

 

<table class="luna-Ent"><tbody><tr><td class="dnindex">

</td> <td>

</td> </tr> </tbody></table> <table class="luna-Ent"> <tbody><tr><td valign="top">

</td><td valign="top">

</td></tr><tr> <td class="dnindex">

</td> <td>

</td> </tr> </tbody></table> <table class="luna-Ent"><tbody><tr><td class="dnindex">

</td> <td>

</td></tr></tbody></table>