|
Let's Kick Out The 'Kick-out Culture' by Urvashi Patel Posted February 21, 2008 I have been reading about the plight of Narahari and Nandimukhi Matajis at Simhacalam in Germany and I am aware of the various postings on this issue. Thank you Kula-Pavana Prabhu for bringing this to our attention (Click Here, Click Here). I am not alone asking myself the question what heinous crime those two Matajis have performed to deserve such a treatment. Did they murder a Brahmin? Perhaps they killed a cow? We hear from Vaishnava Dasa phrases such as their 'service attitude and behaviour towards the authorities' and their 'reluctance to accept any authority above them'. After 27 and 18 years of service to Lord Narasimhadeva these two devotees get nothing more than 'of course they served the Lord for many years and we are very grateful to them, but ... '? This is unbelievable to me or any devotee who cares for the future of ISKCON and especially its devotees. Sorry, we have heard those phrases too many times to justify the behaviour of unqualified leaders within our society, leaders who are only after name, fame, respect, glory and nowadays a good salary paid by the Hindu community, may they be temple presidents, regional secretaries or even GBCs. When the child abuse occurred in our temples we were told that we were not following authority when we raised unpleasant questions. Therefore we kept quiet. *I wish we had spoken out!* When women were mistreated and sent to the back of the temple room during arati or out of the temple room during japa we were also told not to question authority. So we kept quiet again. *I wish we had spoken out!* When the zonal Acharya system was introduced we voiced our concerns whether that was really what Srila Prabhupada wanted and we were kicked out of the temple altogether. This saga goes on and on and countless devotees could write volumes about it. By now we have lost faith in such unqualified authorities and are therefore prepared to rather give the victims the benefit of the doubt. Please Prabhus at Simhachalam, limit the damage and come to an amicable solution. I bet the temple authorities in charge are many years younger than Narahari Mataji with her 27 years of service history. She is a disciple of Srila Prabhupada and deserves more than that. Why not give her a voice on the management board. That would be a clever move. But no, it is so much easier to kick-out, to ostracise and to ban even though the repercussions have such a devastating effect on our worldwide ISKCON society especially if the brother of those two matajis, Councillor Rashmikant Joshi, is contacting the two most powerful International Gujarati newspapers - the Gujarat Samachar and the Garvi Gujarat. Please our GBC representatives wake up and do something. It is not anymore a German problem. It has gone far beyond that by now and we are all affected by its fallout. I doubt, however, that these two matajis would return and live at Simhachalam after all they have been put through. The least what we can do now is lift the ban so they can visit Simhachalam and other temples in Germany. That is the very least we should do right now. This incident at Simhacalam is not an isolated case. It has unfortunately become a deep routed culture within our society which may take a generation or more to stamp out. It is a systemic failure and a disease based on name, fame and glory of our 'want to be leaders'. The recent article of Kurma Rupa Prabhu "Leadership's Response to Criticism: An Analysis" (Click Here) gives detailed insight into the subject matter. Unfortunately this 'kick-out' and 'silence' culture of any criticism within ISKCON is nourished from the very top of our society, namely the GBC, and has therefore the long term effect of eroding authority altogether. Is that really what we want? A mature and genuinely caring leadership would address the actual problems rather than banning and ostracising devotees if they cause disturbance. Nobody causes disturbance without a reason, especially not devotees who have been in devotional service for 27 years. Why not tackle the actual problem, may it be marital or otherwise, rather than the obvious unpleasant symptoms for which we seem to find no other answers than banning devotees. This appears to be the easy way to solve problems but has unfortunately very grave and long reaching consequences for our society. It accelerates the ongoing exodus of qualified and committed devotees from ISKCON who then look for shelter amongst other Gaudiya institutions thus contributing to the bloodletting of generations of sincere Vaishnavas. Ratimanjari mataji's recent article, ISKCON and the Hare Krishna Movement' is a good analysis in this regard (Click Here).
When will we ever get a mature and caring leadership by devotees who will
not hanker for name, fame, respect and glory, who will command respect and
not demand respect, who will fully commit themselves to a long term
solution, who are pro-active rather than re-active, who have a long term
vision rather than a quick fix, who lead and govern with genuine compassion
and love and not with fear and who will dedicate and sacrifice their life
for serving the devotees of Srila Prabhupada's ISKCON society. We dearly
long for such qualified authority. Such leadership has to come right from
the top, namely the GBC. If the GBC sets the proper example it will
gradually filter down to other managers as well. In the meantime and until
this happens everyone is duty bound to expose unqualified leadership
anywhere and everywhere within ISKCON in order to protect such devotees as
Narahari and Nandimukhi Matajis.
I couldn't agree more with the short article "Psychological Testing Needed for Temple Offices" featured the other day by Alice Ahola from Finland. Unfortunately for all of us, ISKCON has known much abuse -- and not of children alone; many adults have experienced it as well. Due to overly intense managers who really abused their rank and power, or whose priorities were mostly on externals and "performance" and little else, many of us adults who have lived in temples are now very disappointed and "walking wounded" also. Others have simply dreaded surrendering ourselves fully to managerial discretion, knowing how harsh and biased it can sometimes be. Still, there's another side to all of this. Understanding karma, its pervasiveness, its exactness and how it works, and living in a temple while chanting Hare Krishna may immensely expedite the burning off of our karma -- making very uncomfortable situations. We can meet our own dark sides or dark sides from prior lives in an abusive manager or right at the temple Krishna can arrange to balance an account or debt we had to someone else. This thought, I believe, was held by my brilliant guru-maharaja HH Bhakti Tirtha Swami. I nevertheless think that Bhaktin Alice came up with an excellent suggestion. Some psychological testing should be done, and also some training, as is the system of varna-ashrama dharma anyway. All I'd like to add to this is that we should be sure to remember the basics. The material world is a struggle for existence and a place of envy. Temples are meant to be spiritual embassies but don't always accomplish this. Managers have a lot of grief too; it's not all glamour and glory. I can't imagine the burdens some of them take on. Then, too, if we have a strong preaching spirit, sometimes we're literally being kicked away from a temple by Krishna Himself -- wanting to situate us in a place we can be of much more service and impact. May Bhaktin Alice forgive my presumptions, but I hope she will consider these factors also. Just as important, we ought not to hide away in a Hare Krishna temple and then complain. Prabhupada's mission also needs outside, visible devotees who will take up his torch in the secular world. Above all, let's not forget that before taking a guru and serving him or her, one's karmic fan is still plugged in and spinning at full force. Seeing things clearly as they are requires a full cleansing of our consciousness. This is still my aspiration after 22 years of chanting Hare Krishna: to read and chant more and to beware of finding fault unnecessarily.
I hope Alice prabhu will elaborate on her suggestion. If devotees
want to correspond with me on this topic, they may do so at ragadasi@yahoo.com.
|
Open Letter: Engaging Devotee 'Offenders' by Padmanabha das, Passau, Bavaria, Germany Posted April 23, 2008 Dear Ravindra Svarupa prabhu, It has been (to my recollection) about three months since I wrote a previous open letter to you. I was thinking that this would have been enough time to answer a simple philosophical question. To refresh your memory: "What philosophical understanding stood behind your public statement that older devotees who avoid the temple are 'offenders'?" There are probably different possiblities for such a delay, but my own suspicions are leading me to uncomfortable conclusions. 1. Could it be that the statement actually has no philosophical support and that an honest answer is too difficult? By 'honest,' we would understand something like: "I apologize for my rash statement; I hope that devotees can forgive me." 2. Could it be that there is actually some philosophical support but that it is too weak to rationalize such a sweeping or absolute statement? In such a case an open confrontation with a challenge might be risky and perhaps damage one's position in the Vaisnava community. 3. Could it be that challenges of any sort are simply ignored as a matter of policy among 'leaders' in Prabhupada's movement? I have seen this attitude in the past, apparently based on the thinking: "Who does he think he is to doubt my statement; I have the big position here. I was initiated before he was." I have seen such persons even become angry in such situations. One of my big problems here is that I understand that you are still the GBC for this area, and I understood from Prabhupada's instructions that the GBC has the primary responsibility to take care of devotees. It is difficult for me, however, to see a real interest on your part. Maybe you have too much to do. If thatīs the case, then resigning would be reasonable. Regardless, it is difficult to accept a situation in which the leadership ignores the devotees. Maybe that's also okay. By that I mean: Vaisnavas here could gradually understand that there is no help 'from above' and, then, maybe take responsibility for their own lives.
The really funny thing is that there is an upcoming meeting of Vaisnavas in
Abentheuer, Germany. According to the information that I received, someone
'up there' found the time to forbid this meeting, but taking time
for a philosophical discussion is somehow not so interesting. The really
funny thing is that Srila Krsnadas Kaviraja Goswami says that it's my duty
as a Vaisnava to express my doubts. Therefore, my last doubt is: where is
the Vaisnavism in this movement?
A group of A-level students recently put the following question to me as part of its Religious Studies programme on Hinduism. They wanted to know about the development of the Hare Krishna movement, the reasons for its popularity, the role of ISKCON, and how the Hare Krishna movement has transformed over the years. These questions form the basis of this short article. It was interesting that the students, and obviously their teacher, made a distinction between ISKCON and the Hare Krishna movement. As little as a decade ago ISKCON was the sole and undisputed proponent of bhakti, self-realisation, etc. That the students and their teacher made a distinction between ISKCON and the Hare Krishna Movement is significant because today the field has changed and expanded considerably. ISKCON is no longer the only authority on bhakti, or devotional service, and the heritage of Gaudiya Vaishnava thought and philosophy. Unfortunately, this fact is ignored within ISKCON in general, and especially by its leaders. Consequently, ISKCON appears to be paralysed in time, and is unable to regenerate or renew itself. Add to this the recent child abuse court case, ISKCON's declaration of bankruptcy, and its multi-million dollar legal settlement. This unpleasant story received full-page coverage in the Metro, a widely-circulated free newspaper in the UK, which reported positively on Srila Prabhupada and the Hare Krishna Movement but covered the child abuse story. ISKCON may be unable to rid itself of this smear for a long time to come. Today there are several Gaudiya groups active in the UK: organizations such as Bhaktivedanta Trust International and Gaudiya Vedanta Publications of Srila BV Narayana Maharaja; the Saraswath Gaudiya Math in London; and Srila BS Tirtha Maharaja's Gaudiya Vaishnava Association, to name but a few. These are the most prominent of the Gaudiya missions in the UK. There are other groups affiliated with the ritviks, as well as groups closely related to ISKCON, who, due to ISKCON's centralised corporate structure and local politics, have not been able to gain acceptance or affiliation with ISKCON. All these various institutions, including ISKCON, which are generally organised as charitable trusts and companies, could be regarded as the 'Hare Krishna movement'. The past decade has brought great diversity to the Gaudiya Vaishnava preaching field. In this short article we will look at the reasons for the trend towards this greater diversity in the Hare Krishna movement, as well as how ISKCON is presently reacting to the new arrivals and 'competitors'. It certainly seems the trend is set to continue, and perhaps even accelerate, given ISKCON's inability to embrace the entire spectrum of the Hare Krishna movement - and thereby defining itself but an isolated part of this Hare Krishna movement. ISKCON has, by its increasingly corporate and bureaucratic structure and its institutionalisation, helped create and strengthen its own 'competitors' in the West. This has occurred in great part by the way it has defined its affiliates more and more narrowly in order to consolidate its own power within the institution. Dissension, controversial views and free thought are on the whole unwelcome. Together with this internal power struggle comes a trend towards (a) the systematic erosion of power held by initiating gurusand spiritual leaders, a reaction to the many fall-downs of leaders in ISKCON, and (b) the investing of those powers in the managers and administrators of the institution. Unfortunately, with this power shift also comes a lack of a wider spiritual vision and brahminical advisory independence. It is generally seen that leaders focus on people while managers focus on systems. ISKCON has left its own people by the wayside in favour of establishing administrative systems. Accordingly, there has been a distinct shift from a people-centred organisation to a system-centred one. Naturally, the camp of disenfranchised devotees continues to grow. This fact is not easily recognized within ISKCON, as its Western following has largely been replaced by an Indian congregation, and the asrama devotees and brahmacaris have been supplanted by the broad Hindu community. This shift has brought rewards as well as casualties. The rewards are mainly financial and political. They confer upon ISKCON mainstream political clout, as evidenced by the Prime Minister's speech in which he mentioned Bhaktivedanta Manor. The recent move of ISKCON to establish a government-funded Hindu school near London is another example. Political parties need the Hindu vote, and are therefore interested in the new ISKCON Hindu temples. The casualties are devotees and brahminically-inclined preachers who, for whatever reason, do not fit into this present corporate status quo. However, these devotees along with a large number of direct disciples of Srila Prabhupada, are the real blood that nourished ISKCON for the past 30 years and more. These devotees now find themselves outside the institutional framework of ISKCON. Some are disillusioned; others have affiliated themselves with other Vaisnava groups. As this trend continues, the other groups are enlarging and growing stronger. Some of the devotees disillusioned by ISKCON are openly antagonistic towards the institution, because of their past hurts. ISKCON as an institution also displays hostility towards anyone outside its institutional borders. Jargon such as 'they have left Krishna consciousness', 'infidel to Srila Prabhupada' and even 'they have abandoned Krishna' is commonplace. This creates an atmosphere of distrust, antagonism and outright enmity between the various groups of the Hare Krishna movement. Devotees are ready to quote Srila Prabhupada on their particular views regarding institution. Entire books and position papers have been written in support of one's understanding of how Krishna consciousness ought to expand, backed up point by point with philosophy. It appears, therefore, that the Hare Krishna movement is presently caught in internal struggle, primarily due to ISKCON's inability to accept the new diversity in the preaching field. Such diversity can also be seen in a positive light, in that it increases the number of people who come in touch with the teachings of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu. Srila Prabhupada was always eager to solicit the help of his Godbrothers and was more than ready to let them participate in the Hare Krishna movement. This was not recognized at the time by his Godbrothers, but is increasingly recognized now. Moreover, there are dozen of quotations that show that Srila Prabhupada wanted each and every temple in ISKCON to be registered as a separate entity. He was distinctly against the centralisation of power in ISKCON. Unfortunately, these directions of Srila Prabhupada have not been followed, especially in the UK. ISKCON UK grew as a single charity. Some eight years ago it was recognized under the leadership at the time that this was not what Srila Prabhupada had wanted; it was against his instructions. Efforts were therefore made to split this single charity and establish a number of separate local charities linked together legally as a franchise. A consultancy process was initiated and large fees were spent on legal advice, but eight years later nothing was accomplished. The will to follow Srila Prabhupada's instructions on this matter somehow evaporated. The failure to follow through on this had a very stagnating effect on overall preaching in the UK. Unsurprisingly, the strongest temple in the UK - Bhaktivedanta Manor - continued to set the agenda and create the vision for the rest of the country. Today, the Manor has chosen to become more or less a Hindu temple, and it feels that all other temples in the UK ought to follow suit. Naturally, this has hampered the development and propagation of Krishna consciousness outside of the immediate Indian community, which accounts for only 2% of the overall population of the UK. The propagation of Krishna consciousness has given way to the institutionalisation of ISKCON. Indeed, the GBC's failure to follow and implement Srila Prabhupada's direction on management (DOM) has caused the stagnation of ISKCON on a global level and contributed to a trend towards a centralised administrative power. The consequences have been a steep decline in book distribution and a drop to almost nil of new devotees, besides devotees brought in from other less developed countries. Foreign devotees now outnumber local devotees by far in both of ISKCON's London temples, Bhaktivedanta Manor and Soho Street. The trend has been similar in the US. These temples no longer need to care for and personally groom new recruits. It is easier to 'import' foreign devotees to cover the necessary services, such as deity worship, cooking and cleaning. The funds are provided by the Indian community to carry this through. This dynamic, which has created an impersonal atmosphere in the temple, is then emulated by other small temples throughout the country. The result is that preaching to non-Hindus in the UK is almost extinct. By contrast, the newly-established Gaudiya missions and other centres fare much better. Smaller in size, they have a more personal approach and deliberately set themselves apart from ISKCON and its corporate structure, which they see as a deviation from Srila Prabhupada's instructions and intention for ISKCON.
In summary, it can be said that while the Hare Krishna movement in the
UK continues to thrive, ISKCON has embarked upon a policy of isolation.
We hope
that ISKCON will be able, in due course, to reconsider this approach and
once again become the innovative and relevant spiritual movement it used to
be - an organisation that appeals not only to the Indian community but also
to the wider population in the UK and around the world. A step in the right
direction would be for the GBC to implement Srila Prabhupada's direction on
management (DOM), in which he wanted that the GBC be elected by a vote of
all Temple presidents every three years. This, however, is unlikely to occur
without a 'grassroots revolution' from devotees worldwide, as it would
undermine the present GBC's power base. One way or the other, this change
needs to happen if ISKCON is to be relevant to future generations and if it
is to be more than a Hindu institution comfortably maintained by the Indian
community but without connection to the remaining 98% of the UK population.
Put differently, ISKCON needs to reconsider its broader strategy if it hopes
ever to be the organisation Srila Prabhupada had envisaged: 'a house in
which the whole world can live peacefully'.
To be a temple president is such an important and difficult position that there should be dignified psychological tests for the person who is going to be in that position. For many years we have been experiencing negative influences from the side of authorities who have not been mentally fit enough for their positions.
Also they should be asked if they were taking a lot of drugs before
they joined. Drugs can cause difficult reactions in the body, even
long after the person has stopped taking them.
|
|