By Praghosa dasa
Dear Visitors,
It has been a week or so now since the launch of Dandavats and we have been overwhelmed at the response so far. At this stage we’ve had around 13,000 unique visits.
Many people have commented that the Dandavats site fulfils a much needed vacuum in the devotee website market, naturally we hope that is the case and that Dandavats can continue to serve that vacuum.
Thank you all for your articles and comments, they were all very thought provoking and have added to our understanding of the issues being discussed. I thought the suggestion by Madhumati devi about collective prayer among the GBC members, particularly in crisis situations, was very interesting and it is something I will pass on to the GBC members.
As we know the GBC body is not infallible, just in case anyone is thinking like that! This is one of the reasons why Srila Prabhupada created a body of devotees, as opposed to installing one individual to run ISKCON. It is also of course the example that Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Maharaja set. The clear advantage of having a body of devotees making decisions is that on balance their collective decision making will be more often right than wrong. The disadvantage of course is that decisions can take longer to be finalised and that can be a source of frustration for all concerned.
In the lightening fast communication world that we now inhabit time is not always a commodity that we have in abundance. On the other hand rushed or not well thought out decisions can be more detrimental in the long term, as we have experienced in the past. Hence the suggestion of collective prayer when having to make decisions that will have a significant bearing on many lives was quite inspired.
So again thank you for all your contributions and continued support, it is our pleasure to both read them and make them available to others by posting them on Dandavats.
Hare Krsna.
Praghosa dasa.
“This is one of the reasons why Srila Prabhupada created a body of devotees, as opposed to installing one individual to run ISKCON.”
There is absolutely no proof the rule by committee is any better than rule by a single individual. Srila Prabhupada also railed against Democracy. Of course the GBC are not elected (although maybe they should be) but they do arrive at decisions by majority vote. The Vedic system of govenment was Monarchy supported by Brahmanical advise. So the important thing is NOT really whether there is a committee at the top (for in fact each committee member is the “monarch” of his/her zone) but whether or not they make their decisions based on guru, sadhu and especially sastra. If a GBC decision can be shown to be un-sastric then where is the “oversight” committee? The problem with any style of management is that there has to be some checks and balances. Serious reform would include more checks and balances, accountability, performance assessments, term limits, indepentent audits and especially sastric oversight.
Gaura Keshava prabhu it seems that an “oversight” commitee would also need an oversight commitee which will then need another oversight commitee ad infinitum. The buck has to stop somewhere and in ISKCON that is with the GBC as Srila Prabhupada wanted. Many if not most of the things the GBC have to deal with are not theological in nature, they are more practical in nature, management issues. Even if some topic is theological to some degree still that doesn’t automatically require the GBC to base their decision making process on a strictly sastric basis. Srila Prabhupada didn’t always base his management decisions on a strictly sastric basis. An example is young women living in the ashrama community and working closely with brahmacaris and sannyasis everyday. When it comes to management sometimes sastric codes are not followed closely because the spiritual master can make adjustments for time, place and circumstance. Sometimes the spirit of the sastra takes precedence over the words.
As for this comment of yours
The problem with any style of management is that there has to be some checks and balances. Serious reform would include more checks and balances, accountability, performance assessments, term limits, indepentent audits and especially sastric oversight.
I differ a bit on how I see the GBC operating at it’s best. Any entity which will have the power to determine if the GBC members are worthy of their positions, that entity will in effect become the ultimate deciding entity for the direction of ISKCON management. That power was granted to the GBC by Srila Prabhupada. Who will see if that GBC “overseeing” commitee is worthy of doing their jobs? We will need an overseeing commitee for the overseeing commitee, and then another commitee to oversee that one, ad infinitum.
More bureaucracy is not the answer to ISKCON’s problems. From my point of view what is needed is that the GBC members need to make sure to take their jobs seriously. What we have seen in the past is that cronyism in the support of immoral or illegal behavior cannot be hidden from sight forever. By hiding immoral or illegal actions of members of ISKCON due to the thinking that exposing the truth to the light of day will bring shame and bad publicity, always backfires. The shame and bad publicity will come much worse if bad acts are hidden by the GBC. If the child abuse problem was dealt with in an efficient and serious manner when it first became known, then the whole fiasco that is ISKCON’s child abuse scandal would have never occurred. Another problem is elevating people who are without people skills to positions of of authority over other people. This is not just about innocent bad judegment, it’s also about cronyism in many cases. If a temple authority has poor people skills then that temple will lose devotees and lose support from the congregation. Cronyism leads to the diminishment of ISKCON’s ability to attract and keep a congregation and ashrama devotees.
The GBC was put in power as the ultimate managing authority by Radha Krishna’s arrangement. They need to take their jobs not as perks for themselves and their friends, but as a chance to show Radha Krishna they are deserving of trust. If they gain that trust then many more people will be inspired by the the Lord from within to take shelter of ISKCON in one way or another. ISKCON has to be worthy of being the conduit of people’s devotion if ISKCON wants to be used in that way by the Lord. Nothing is going on by accident. So we should learn from past mistakes, they were enacted to teach us what we need to know so as not to repeat them, to make us stronger through the fire of adversity.
Dear Shiva, I´m sorry I do not accept your argument that an oversight committee leads to the problem of infinite regress. An oversight committee such as was set up at one time to look at the activities of the Zonal Gurus years ago had the effect of helping to break that monopoly. I was there in Mayapur when that happened. An oversight committee does not have to have binding power over the GBC to have an effect on the GBC. Simply by scrutinizing their activities, and making them public and offering suggestions, an oversight committee would help to keep GBC members.
My view is the GBC should hold elections every 3 years which Srila Prabhupada outlined in his original Direction of Management. This document shows that Srila Prabhupada DID NOT want the GBC to be a body with absolute power. The GBC is to be elected from the ranks of Temple Presidents who are in turn elected by the members of individual temples. That is nothing like the system that you and I see in ISKCON.
Your suggestion that GBC members take their jobs seriously is laudable. However it is useless unless those that do not can be removed. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely (in this material world). Srila Prabhupada knew this and therefore he introduced the GBC with 3 year elected terms.
As regards your idea that so called managerial decisions need not be based on sastra. I totally disagree. Management certainly needs to take into consideration sastra. Having women working with sannyasis may have been approved of by Srila Prabhupada on a temporary basis in the beginning of our movement but that does not mean that it should be enshrined as a permanent and ongoing system. We have seen what problems have occured when devotees have tried to apply their own ideas which are actually not sastric.
Prabhupada wrote to Giriraja on 5-15, 1972, “if one man is appointed as leader, all must follow him and be obedient. ‘Obedience is the first law of discipline.’ Your men are pointing out irregularities, but they themselves are not doing their duty, so they are pointing out the irregularities in others. They came to serve; now they don’t want to serve, so there is some excuse. They say, ‘Oh, irregularity, let me go away.’ The workers should not suggest irregularities.”
Now, perhaps some do not consider themselves workers, and thus are exempt from the above. I’ve noticed that sometimes those who consider themselves brahmanas wish to counsel the managers of ISKCON. However, Prabhupada in LOB and BTG 5-20-56 states that the primary duty of the brahmanas is to inspire the other classes to offer sankirtana-yajna. He defines sankirtana-yajna as (1) public chanting and (2) book publication/distribution. Moreover, he indicates that those who do not perform (or guide) this yajna are asuras. Thus, I must ask, are there brahmanas who effectively execute this Prabhupada-dharma? If so, I want to serve them and offer them money.
Im not sure what all this jargon means . I would be grateful if you could print my comment under the heading