|
His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada |
|
| "But the
difficulty is that our GBC men are falling victim to Maya. Today I
trust this GBC and tomorrow he will fall down. This is the
difficulty." (Srila Prabhupada letter 16.12.74) |
| "I made the GBC
to give me relief, but if you do like this, then where is the
relief? It is anxiety for me. This is the difficulty, that as soon
as one gets power he becomes whimsical and spoils everything. What
can I do?" (Srila Prabhupada letter 12.9.74) |
| "What will
happen when I am not here, shall everything be spoiled by GBC?"
(Srila Prabhupada letter 11.4.72) "I have appointed originally
12 GBC members and I have given them 12 zones for their
administration and management, but simply by agreement you have
changed everything, so what is this, I don't know."
(SP Letter to Rupanuga, 4/4/72) |
Srila Prabhupada's worst fears were
realised the minute he departed. The transgressions are so clear that we
are confident any neutral party, or jury, will see it. We have for some
years warned the GBC of this fact. We have preached to them individually
and as a group. We have answered every question, dotted every i, crossed
every T, and gone to every length we could possibly go to to bring about a
peaceful non-confrontational resolution. Unfortunately the GBC simply
refuse to listen to reason, and instead openly mock, intimidate and ban
our supporters.
The GBC have pronounced in the strongest possible terms that the 'No
Change' presentation of Madhu Pandit and Adri Dharan prabhus is
'blasphemous' to Srila Prabhupada. This is in spite of the fact that the
presentation is based entirely around Srila Prabhupada's own words, and
the GBC themselves have been unable to provide any words from Srila
Prabhupada in opposition.
On the contrary they have never provided any justification from Srila
Prabhupada's instructions for their actions in this matter. It is for this
reason we have been forced to take legal action. The Will says there
should be no change to any systems of management, yet the first thing the
GBC did after Srila Prabhupada's departure was to terminate his system of
managing initiations, and in that way remove him as the diksa guru for
ISKCON.
The GBC may argue that a court cannot decide on the matter since it is a
philosophical dispute. This is a smokescreen. There never was any valid
philosophical objection to Srila Prabhupada's continued diksa status as is
evidenced by all the rebuttals on the IRG web site. Srila Prabhupada set
up legal entities such as a BBT and wrote legal documents such as the Will
so as to legally protect that which he had established. Thus it is
perfectly legitimate to make a legal challenge if there has been some
malpractice or illegality. Srila Prabhupada would expect his followers to
protect his movement from unauthorised activity detrimental to the aims of
the society, and if that protection needed to take the form of legal
action then so be it. If the GBC's case is as solid and insurmountable as
they like to claim then they have nothing to fear, since this is a legal
case with clear legal guidelines.
The History
The history of this dispute is well known. After years of complaints and
campaigning of various sorts the GBC asked for our case to be written down
in one definitive document so they could efficiently answer all our
concerns. The result of this request was 'The Final Order' paper, which
was presented to the GBC in Oct 1996. In partial reply the GBC released a
paper called 'Disciple of My Disciple' in which they completely
contradicted their previous explanations as to how Srila Prabhupada had
authorised his displacement as ISKCON's diksa guru. On top of that the
paper failed to address our central concerns and instead attacked
arguments and propositions we had never made (please see 'The Final Order
Still Stands' for details).
The GBC then changed tack and produced another paper, 'Prabhupada's
Order', which again did not answer our concerns, again responded to points
we had never made, and for good measure contradicted their previous paper
- 'Disciple of my Disciple' - (as well as contradicting itself!)
Most recently the GBC asked us to present to them in Mayapur where,
without even responding directly to our presentation, they unanimously
decided we were wrong. How did they come to this conclusion? Was it by
presenting evidence supporting modifications A & B from 'The Final
Order'? Was it by presenting any clear counter evidence or cogent
argumentation superseding the self-contradictory verbiage they had written
previously? No. They reached their conclusion by a show of hands. No
relevant evidence, no proper explanation, just a show of hands. Amongst
them the same hands that had written self-contradictory and irrelevant
rubbish only months before.
So confident were the GBC in the strength of their case that, despite
great protest and dissension, they barred their own deputies from
listening to our 'No Change' presentation.
In this way the GBC has simply become a law unto themselves, protecting
their own positions and funding at any expense. The latest so-called 'guru
reforms' are testament to this, comprising as they do of nothing but an
arbitrary hotchpotch of hastily welded together measures, none of which
having any basis in Srila Prabhupada's instructions (any more than the
original system they were supposed to 'reform'). It is time to call a halt
and bring the GBC to task for their behaviour. This is the only way we can
see ISKCON surviving, and the GBC's authority being restored. The GBC
shall be forced into compliance with Srila Prabhupada's order by the law
of the land.
Isn't this the same as the Gaudiya Matha?
The Gaudiya Matha fought for property and power over whom would be the
next acarya, with the very basis of the fight being in violation of their
Guru's order that there was to be no acarya. Thus even before the court
action started, the deviation from the Guru's order had already occurred,
and they were simply going to the courts to assist in the enforcement of
that deviation. Our action is not for control over land or property or
false acaryaship, but to correct and reverse a deviation from the Guru's
order.
Thus the nature and purpose of the IRG is completely the opposite to the
Gaudiya Matha litigation:
| "But just after
his (Srila Bhaktissidhanta Sarasvati Thakura) passing away, his
leading secretaries made plans, without authority, to occupy the
post of acarya, and they split into two factions over who the next
acarya would be. (...) the two unauthorised factions began
litigation that is still going on after forty years with no
decision." (Srila Prabhupada, Caitanya Caritamrta Adi.12.8) |
We expect a far speedier outcome to the
action over Srila Prabhupada's Final Will since it is a clear-cut case in
support of our acarya's direct legally binding instructions. An expanded
version of our 'no change' position has been posted on VNN & IRG in a
paper entitled 'No Change In ISKCON Paradigm'. This will outline how our
case is irrefutable.
Yours in the service of Srila Prabhupada
IRG International Office Calcutta