By Kripamoya Dasa
Does the small group in ISKCON serve the local temple, or does the temple serve the small group? Who serves whom?
Itâs a question thatâs often asked in organisations, especially in charities or campaigning groups: Does the local branch of a charity serve the national office, or does national office serve the branch? Do finances and resources flow from the branches back up to the head office, or from head office down to the branches?
In many organisations that are not functioning all that well, there will be complaints about head office by the branches, while head office will complain that the branches donât seem to be performing well. Who is right?
The answer lies in the organic way that organisations grow, and the very word âbranchâ provides a clue to the answer. Back in the days when our English language employed more colourful expressions drawn from nature, we used to favourably compare organisations to trees.
The reason is of course, because when people agree to work together and function as one unit, they do grow like trees. They grow from a single idea â a seed â by a passionately committed individual; the intensely focused dedication of early co-workers, and, when successful, they grow up straight and strong, producing many branches.
Yet although the trunk of a tree, being the biggest, looks the strongest part, it can only remain strong if all of the trees smallest parts, the leaves, are also doing their job.
How a tree works is ingenious. The leaves of the tree trap the energy of sunlight with their green chlorophyll, and the astonishing process of photosynthesis then transforms water and carbon dioxide into carbohydrates and oxygen that pass down into the trunk. Invigorated by this, the trunk soaks up water and sends it back up to the leaves. Every part of the tree is working and the entire structure is functional. It continues to grow.
If the trunk doesnât do the big stuff, like raising water from deep underground all the way up to the top of the tree sometimes fifty or more feet in the air, the tree will die. And if the leaves donât do their sunlight catching, the tree will also die. The trunk serves the leaves and the leaves serve the trunk. Biological symbiosis makes a completely functional system.
Any organisation with many branches functions like this. That is, any functional, growing, balanced organisation.
The original roots of an organisation â the regional headquarters or a national office â serve its branches and the branches serve the head office, or in our case the head temple or national ISKCON structure.
If the head office provides nothing for the branches, they become weak and stop growing. If the branches provide nothing for head office it also becomes weak, or in many cases, begins to conserve valuable resources for itself. It gets weak all the same; it just takes a little more time. Only by each part of an organisation performing mutual service for the other parts can natural growth happen.
How do they work together?
Every organisation is different of course. There are those that are very âTrunk and Rootsâ orientated. The branches simply serve as agents to collect money for the big stuff that is conceived and executed from head office. Many charities work that way. Oxfam, Greenpeace, Amnesty International, the Red Cross, all operate with their numerous branches raising funds which are sent to a head office that makes campaign decisions and then disburses the funds accordingly. Religions can be like that too. All decrees, innovations, directives and appointments come from a supreme governing body, and funds flow from the supporters in the branches to a central body from where they are apportioned and disbursed.
Other organisations have a very small head office and leave it up to the branches to be innovative, self-funding and locally directed. Some religions function like this too. They expect their branches to run on enthusiasm, to be self-sustaining, and to have a wide spectrum of theological understanding.
Observers comment that these different styles of religious organisation suit different types of people. Each has inherent strengths and weaknesses.
Our question, as followers of Srila Prabhupada is: âWhat kind of organisational structure did Srila Prabhupada want? Luckily for us, Srila Prabhupada was an extremely intelligent organiser as well as a scholar and a saint.
His many instructions for running ISKCON are well documented and were put into effect even in the early years of the movement. He considered that âorganisation and intelligenceâ would preserve the movement heâd started, and that these two essentials, as well as spiritual strength resulting from: ârising up from sleep before four in the morning, chanting sixteen rounds of the Hare Krishna mantra, gorgeous deity worship, going out on the sankirtan party, holding festivals and scrutinisingly studying and discussing my booksâ.
Srila Prabhupada not only translated the scriptures from Sanskrit into English for the first time in history, and travelled constantly guiding his early followers; he managed all the affairs of his movement through correspondence and telegrams. So ISKCON functions with balance between trunk and branch, with a good deal of regular reciprocity between them, yet tending towards complete autonomy for the branch when it reaches the level of âISKCON centreâ.
Yet for each group to prosper, it is essential for it to have a great deal of spiritual nourishment flowing up from the trunk of the ISKCON tree. Preachers, teachers, book distribution, local festivals and good advice in both personal spiritual practise and outreach activities, will all help the group members, and through this the group will grow strong.
The group leader can invite preachers to come until the group members themselves are knowledgeable and proficient enough to conduct the courses that are recommended for a good understanding of Srila Prabhupadaâs books. Some funding is required for this, but if each member can contribute to the transport cost of the preacher this will be very helpful.
Great analogy!
In the name of religiosity, we may sometimes miss the “essential” point to all of this. When Krishna says to “give up all religiosity and just surrender to Me”, it is a clear directive. Krishna is the Center of Krishna consciousness. Then we have been introduced to the concept of becoming the servant of the servant … of the servant of Sri Krishna. the Lord of the gopis. Service to Krishna and service to the devotees of Krishna are two tracks that the train of Krishna consciousness runs on. Srila Prabhupad established his mission with the ideal in mind, and with a greater service to the uninitiated to obtain the opportunity to revive their Krishna consciousness in this lifetime. Ultimately, like a government, some things are attended to by the greater society, like publishing books and establishing the places of pilgrimage for the devotees. Other things are best done at the local level, for example, having Nama Sankirtan and sravanam-kirtanam. It is vital, absolutely vital, that devotees at the local level feel that there is an affectionate devotional environment at the local level. People are of different natures and personalities, but all are meant to have Krishna as their Center. If others try to take on the role of becoming the center, then they will fall short and the aspiring devotees will ultimately realize this. Krishna is the dearmost Friend of “every” living being. The emphasis thus must be upon genuine Krishna consciousness and not merely religiosity and hierarchy whereby one’s service could be misdirected. Subtle but important point. Everyone can ultimately become a source of encouragement for others, and in so doing will become very dear to Krishna. Pusta Krishna das
Please, find here below some relevant quotes:
Srila Prabhupada: “I wish that each and every branch shall keep their separate identity and cooperate keeping the acharya in the center. On this principle we can open any number of branches all over the world. The Rama Krishna mission works on this principle and thus as an organization they have done wonderfully.” (Srila Prabhupada Letter 11th Feb. 1967)
“GBC men should not dictate very much, simply supervise and see that the standards are maintained.”â¨
(Srila Prabhupada Letter, February 14th, 1972)
“From now on, the temples will operate independently and try to improve their spiritual life more carefully, so there is no more need for such financial arrangement of centralization, as you have proposed.
So far your statement, “Our final success will be when you actually sit tight and translate books and let us manage successfully,” yes, that is my desire, but if you can do it or not, that has again disturbed me very much. Now I have given you everything, but I do not see that even the basic principles of advancement in spiritual life are always there, and sometimes there is tendency to neglect what is our real purpose of life, namely, to become mad after Krishna, and instead we become carried away by big big talk. So I am still thinking how things will go on.” (Letter to Satsvarupa, 72-04-10, Dallas)
âGBC does not mean to control a center. GBC means to see that the activities of a center go on nicely. I do not know why Tamala is exercising his absolute authority. That is not the business of GBC. The president, treasurer and secretary are responsible for managing the center. GBC is to see that things are going nicely but not to exert absolute authority. That is not in the power of GBC. Tamala should not do like that.
The GBC men cannot impose anything on the men of a center without consulting all of the GBC members first. A GBC member cannot go beyond the jurisdiction of his power. We are in the experimental stage but in the next meeting of the GBC members they should form a constitution how the GBC members manage the whole affair. But it is a fact that the local president is not under the control of the GBC. Yes, for improvement of situations such as this I must be informed of everything.â (Letter to: Giriraja â London 12 August, 1971)
âNow has the GBC become more than Guru Maharaja? As if simply GBC is meant for looking after pounds, shilling, pence. The GBC does not look after spiritual life. That is a defect.â
(Srila Prabhupada Letter, November 10th, 1975)
“GBC members are simply to see that things are going on. Other centers have got president, secretary, etc. and they are managing separately. That is the formula. So how is it that the GBC are the final authority? They are simply to examine that things are going on nicely, that is all.” (Srila Prabhupada Letter, July 9th, 1971)â¨
Srila prabhupada said that varnashram was the 'other 50% of iskcon' that he had not had time to establish,and that it was his only regret [due to old age].As mentioned above,the branches and thr trunk and roots have to connected not just an administration sense but also in a conscious way,or you will have devotees who are not seen or heard due to many reasons.Many of srila prabhupads direct senior devotees have expressed their concerns about our society and so it nice to read an article like this that keeps consciousnessa light on those issues that are fundamental to any religious society,and that being helping spreading god consciousness,krsna consciousness.