First of a Three-Part Series

“This Krishna consciousness movement is not blind religious fanaticism, nor is it a revolt by some recent upstart; rather, it is an authorized, scientific approach to the matter of our eternal necessity in relation with the Absolute Personality of Godhead, the Supreme Enjoyer.” “Discovering the Self,” The Science of Self-Realization

“But tomorrow I shall condemn you and burn you at the stake as the worst of heretics. And the very people who have today kissed your feet, tomorrow, at the faintest sign from me, will rush to heap up the embers of your fire.” Dostoevsky, The Brothers Karamazov

All emphases added for your edification and realization

In the early days of the movement, when a small number of devotees were serving together at 26^th Second Avenue, the money they had been able to save was lost in a con game perpetrated by a middle-man, an attorney, and a real estate agent, all rogues.  Prabhupada called the main perpetrator of this scheme “Conman Fraud.”  Fortunately, because he was still with the devotees in physical form at that time, he was able to get some of the money back.  When the eleven pretender mahabhagavats worked their con back in the late Seventies, we were not so lucky. 

Since then, an uncountable number of unfortunate people have come into contact with the scheme, became bewildered by the fraud, fell for it, and got conned into accepting an initiation they should never have taken.  When a new man first contacts the working principles of buddhi-yoga, he is still susceptible to being cheated by some kind of bogus guru and/or bogus teaching.  Material nature is so constituted as to arrange for these kinds of obstacles and tests.  

With a poor fund of knowledge, if he is too sentimental and does not come to his senses quickly enough, he sometimes gets amped up and turns into a fanatic.  He thinks that he has become a great devotee by acting out in that way, although, in actuality, he has then plugged himself into dosha (fault or evil). The new man to Krishna consciousness needs a requisite level of transcendental knowledge, sincerity, seriousness, and luck in order to seek out, recognize, and surrender himself to a bona fide line of the spiritual teaching and authority, as well as to—at least, eventually--a genuine guru representing that line. 

Not everyone meets the criteria, however.  A misguided person brushes up against--and becomes enthused by--the bogus-leader archetype.  The worst variety of this conman is the bogus Vaishnava guru. The phony guru usually gives his disciples a license to enjoy unauthorized sense gratification, and his sweet words of reassurance appear nectarean. When an unfortunate person accepts such people as bona fide, he is not disillusioned--at least, not immediately. Maya works like that:

“That happiness derived from contact of the senses with sense objects, which in the beginning is just like nectar but at the end is just like poison, is in the mode of passion.” Bhagavad-gita, 18.38

Currently, various cheating arrangements in different forms have emerged from the ocean of nescience.  Resentment results when the disciple is cheated. Righteous indignation is a razor’s edge; when fanatically actuated, engaged without sufficient knowledge and sincerity, such resentment creates a big cut on the astral body.  It is not recognized, however, because the resulting misery is delayed, not felt in the beginning.  The new man instead feels that he is protected by yogamaya, that avidya no longer holds sway over his life, and, misinterpreting an excerpt from Srila Bhaktivinode, asserts that the whole idea of Satan is a myth.

“The Devil’s greatest achievement was to have persuaded so many people that he doesn’t exist.” Baudelaire

First, the young pup falls for the sentimental intoxication of irrational exuberance.  Hitching his wagon to what appears to be the brightest star in the firmament, he does not recognize that he is in Satan’s service by doing so. Indeed, he thinks that the Devil no longer has any connection to him, protected as he is within the cult governed by his adorable leaders.

The dumbing down of Krishna consciousness continues unabated, both in the West and in India. Satan means nescience (avidya), and the influence of this ignorance is felt everywhere in this age at this time.  It is especially felt amongst the fanatics falsely advertising themselves as gateways to eternal life. Avidya produces woe in due course, and the phony guru becomes the delivery system for such lamentation.  You have to be very serious and lucky in spiritual life in order to not fall under the influence of Monsieur Leonard, especially in the form of the upstarts channeling him.

D.O.M. D.O.M. D.O.M. Dumbing Doo Wah

“YOUR MATERIAL LEGAL FORMULA WILL NOT HELP US ONLY OUR SPIRITUAL LIFE CAN HELP US I HAVE NO APPROVAL FOR ANY THESE PLANS STOP.” Telegram to Hansadutta, et. al., April 6, 1972

“I’ve never taken the legal side of it too seriously--figured it just makes it easier being a gunman.” Deputy Hitch, Appaloosa

Back in the day, virtually no one knew about the Direction of Management doc, the D.O.M.  Almost none of us knew about the Topmost Urgency affidavit, either.  For example, your author joined the Krishna consciousness movement at the time that a section (constituting quorum) of the commission was going off the rails with a centralization scheme, but we never knew of it nor should we have known about it.  It is only now we realize that the failed takeover had a profound effect on our life, since the center where we joined was prematurely closed due to that illicit attempt.

Today, we are all finding out about the D.O.M. and the T.U. (Topmost Urgency) affidavit, and it is difficult not to be a bit ambivalent about their current relevancy and applicability.  Nevertheless, it is our responsibility in Krishna consciousness to understand them free from the influence of any faction, bias, or prejudice.  Lines have been drawn, and the binary has become hardened.  The Pro-D.O.M. and anti-D.O.M. forces are arrayed to do battle soon, although most of the unaffiliated devotees are caught in the middle. As can only be expected, they are quite muddled about the whole thing, and there are justifiable reasons for this.

First, will a new legal formula (in this case, a return to an old formula) actually change anything?  Will it eradicate the roots of the deviation?  Or will the rogues now prospering simply find other ways to continue their con within a changed constitution?  Secondly, even if the D.O.M. is ruled legitimate in a Western court of law, will it be enforceable? As an example, the court may render a judgment against a defendant, declaring that he owes the plaintiff. That does not mean, however, that the plaintiff will automatically be able to collect the money legally due him.

There are many questions related to these documents; this article, in the third part of the series especially, will discuss them in detail.  For now, we are introducing some of those intricacies as a theme, especially since, when they are misinterpreted and misapplied, the devil is in the details.  It behooves us to know the arguments.  It also behooves us to understand the fundamental questions that divide the two aforementioned camps, viz., the Pro-D.O.M. and the anti-D.O.M. factions.

Does the D.O.M. still have teeth?  Somewhat surprisingly, it does—but how that is so is hidden at this time. We shall reveal it in Part Three. The reason why it is still a document with at least potential legal power is due to what most would consider a minor and incidental fact.  However, in Western courts of law, arcane factors can turn out to have defining jurisdiction in terms of the final ruling.  We had personal experience of this in the mid-Eighties.  As defendants in a case that looked bleak in the beginning (and during the testimony phase), the judgment went our way simply because a promissory note at the heart of the suit was in our possession.

The Anti-D.O.M. faction says that this whole controversy is a tempest in a teapot, jacked up by rittvik malcontents in order to increase their numbers.  The Pro-D.O.M. contingent rebuts this vehemently, claiming that these documents are still legal mandates for how the GBC must conduct itself, particularly in terms of its membership process. 

The Anti-D.O.M. faction--comprising the GBC, the first-echelon of the fabricated, so-called “ISKCON,” and most of the other members—reminds us that the D.O.M. was never implemented.  They say that Prabhupada could have imposed his will on his managers to implement it, but he didn’t.  They say there was no conspiracy involved in its non-implementation.

They contend that Prabhupada was ambivalent about the democracy present in the D.O.M. and cite two excerpts from letters (that have no connection to the D.O.M.) to endorse this contention.  They further claim that Prabhupada formally signed off on a resolution in the infamous 1975 GBC meeting which repealed the election mandate of the D.O.M.  They cite Prabhupada in May, 1977 stating that GBC members should remain for good.  They say that Prabhupada, at least indirectly, authorized new GBC members to be elected only by the governing body itself.

The Anti-D.O.M. faction retorts that the GBC never secured a formal, signed amendment from Prabhupada nullifying the Direction of Management, and, therefore, it legally stands.  They further contend that he personally appointed GBCs during his lifetime, but, after he left us, GBCs must be elected according to the terms of its charter.

They say that Srila Prabhupada, in that aforementioned 1977 conversation, did not confirm the conclusion of one of his leading secretaries that the GBC was now to elect new members—although the secretary continued speaking as if he (Prabhupada) had affirmed it.  They point out that, at any rate, a room conversation fails to nullify a formal Direction of Management document, first signed in July, 1970 and then re-affirmed in 1974 (in the form of the Topmost Urgency affidavit).  They also cite the fact that one of the prominent first-echelon men of “ISKCON,” in District Court in 2004 and under oath, endorsed the D.O.M. as evidence for the legitimacy of GBC claims to fiduciary control of the temple property on Long Island.

Is this whole affair nothing but a frying diversion, a manifestation of the further dumbing-down of the Krishna consciousness movement?  Will the GBC have a change of heart and give some sincere and serious attention or consideration to these two documents?  Asked another way, will the Sun rise in the west and set in the east tomorrow?  The stage of nasty recrimination is entering now, as evidenced by the Pro-D.O.M. faction being labeled Zakheimism.  Such unnecessary, inflammatory stereotyping is not at all called for, but that is how descending octaves work.

On one thing everyone should agree: The GBC had the power to do what they did; they wanted to do it, so they went ahead.  They didn’t give rat spit for the ethics (or lack thereof) involved, and they did not explain anything well or accurately.  They came, they saw, and they conquered, i.e., they told everyone that this is the way it was going to be.  They had the guns, and legal constraints on paper meant nothing to them. Not coming clean remains a risky con game, but, apparently, they take pleasure in taking these kinds of risks; at least, the track record of the whole thing indicates that.

They are past masters at fix-it-as-you-go and buying time, and they know the strategy of the chameleon.  They push A.  When the deviations inherent in A are exposed, they change to B.  When that transformation runs its course, they change to C; they may even return to A when C gets exposed.   All the while, the original con remains operative.  Their objective is to keep the whole thing functioning until they can secure power behind the throne. It is their ultimate objective, and make no mistake about that.   

They don’t take the legal or ethical side seriously, because, by their own personal power and sophistication, they figure they can override all of that.  They do not follow guru, and, as a result, they falsely claim that they are gurus.  They claim that the GBC said they were gurus (or now says it has no objection), so they are gurus.  Simple as that--like it or lump it! 

These legal documents are pebbles in their shoes now, and they have many sophisticated ways to blunt any influence these affidavits now have to check or hinder their plans.  After all, according to these post-modern sophists, facts are in the eyes of the beholders—although their version of the history of the movement is anything but factual.

Tzaddhi

“Well, if he is bad, how can he become a guru? How can iron become gold? Actually, a guru cannot be bad, for if someone is bad, he cannot be a guru.
You cannot say bad guru; that is a contradiction. What you have to do is simply try to understand what a genuine guru is.” “Choosing a Spiritual Master,” The Science of Self-Realization

“Yes, there is definitely a vast difference between initiated and non-initiated. One who is initiated is authorized, and one who is not initiated is not authorized. . . One who becomes initiated is channelized to the authorities in the disciplic succession. One who isn't initiated may . . . fall away from following the rules and regulations.” Letter to Satsvarupa, November 14, 1968

“Here comes the blind commissioner; they’ve got him in a trance.  One hand is tied to the tightrope walker . . . the other is in his pants.” Bob Dylan, “Desolation Row”

In this controversy, we best not forget just how insidious and unauthorized the guru/initiation structure concocted and implemented in “ISKCON” actually is.  The battle over official documents, governing principles, legal protocol, and managerial processes should not sidetrack us here; we must always place management affidavits in a secondary position as per their relation to the primary factor.  There are no bad gurus in “ISKCON,” because there are no genuine gurus operating in that organization—and there never have been since 1978.

The governing body has injected itself into the mix in a way that is non-Vedic, anti-Vaishnava, and completely unauthorized by guru-parampara.  Historical inaccuracy has also been set into motion in order to disguise this, but facts remain stubborn things.  Let us remember that it was the GBC, the vitiated GBC, that bought into the poisonous misdirection coming from Navadvipa and instituted a zonal acharya scheme as a result.  Let us further remember that it was the same GBC that imposed upon us the false teaching that a rittvik acharya, after the disappearance of the real Acharya, automatically becomes a genuine guru.

Let us also not forget that it was the warped GBC that created the acharya board within itself.  We should best remember that it was this same GBC, relying upon the motivated, fertile brain of The Scholar, which implemented the worship of imperfect men as mahabhagavats in Prabhupada’s temples, along with all their crazy titles. 

These “mistakes” were covered in due course but have never been rectified.  They have created a roof (tzaddhi) over the movement, so that all service can go only to them and no further.  On at least one occasion, the vitiated GBC had to walk a tightrope between its prominent members (and their desires for profit, adoration, and distinction) and the practical concerns and complaints coming from the temple presidents.  It thus made further compromises, and these were supposed to have wiped the slate clean.  It admitted that there was never really an appointment, so it instituted, as a modification, the vote of the blind commissioners in order to determine who is diksa-guru.  The falsity of that imposition was eventually exposed, and, just in accordance with its strategy, the vitiated GBC continued their penchant to interfere in the form of no-three-blackballs, i.e., the system of the no objection certificate. 

But a genuine guru never requires any certificate from any commission--consisting of godbrothers or anybody else—in order to carry out the order given to him by his spiritual master.  We have only presented here the barest sketch of many deviant actions, omissions, and interferences by the vitiated GBC upon a previously perfect movement so mercifully bestowed to us by Srila Prabhupada.  Nevertheless, these facts should constitute enough of a working platform in order to focus upon the main point.

And what is that point?  It is this: The guru becomes a spiritual master when he reaches the requisite level to act as diksa-guru and siksa-guru. Just as importantly, only when his bona fide guru orders him to become spiritual master can he do so.  The process is personal, not institutional:

“The first process is that of surrender. We have to find an exalted person and willingly surrender before him. The shastras enjoin that, before we take a guru, we study him carefully to find out whether we can surrender to him. We should not accept a guru suddenly, out of fanaticism. That is very dangerous.”  “Choosing a Spiritual Master,” The Science of Self-Realization

There is no room whatsoever for a third party in the transcendental operation.  This person-to-person reciprocation is how the guru-parampara functions, how it has always operated, and how it will continue for the rest of the kalpa. The GBC, before it came under the trance spell of El Diablo, was ordered by the Founder-Acharya to be a watchdog—nothing more and nothing less.  That is not what the commission did, however. Instead, it countermanded that directive, in accordance with crass desires for personal wealth and similar ambitions. It raided the movement.  It never acted as a watchdog, and it is not doing so now. 

When karmic reactions such as major scandals reached point break, when the whole institution was on the verge of cratering, it would finally take action against one of its “mahabhagavats.”  That is not the work of a watchdog; if the commission had been doing its duty, such scandals would never have had any foundation from which to root in the first place.

The governing body became unauthorized as soon as it interfered in the bona fide process of guru, disciple, and initiation—and it did this within less than five months of the disappearance of the Acharya.  Nothing can come between the self-realized spiritual master and his sishya, engaged in vidhi-sadhana bhakti, struggling to attain freedom from anartha, absorption in brahman, and self-realization beyond the modes. 

The governing body has interfered with this principle, and every “ISKCON” guru who has cooperated with it in any way is connected to that. Such interference constitutes anartha, and this means that their claim to being spiritual masters, no matter how well they appear to have the profile down, is bogus.  They are instead high-risk agents of avidya.

The vitiated GBC has interfered with the standard process, and perfection in spiritual life cannot be attained wherever such interference remains operative.  The unbroken chain of guru to disciple—a disciple who then, if he is fortunate, becomes guru in his own right--does not require the rubber stamp of any commission.  It does not require any certificate.  It functions according to the will of the sampradaya, and any commission which does not further that law--but instead worms its way into the system--must be understood just for what it is, legal documents notwithstanding.

“The spiritual master's position is to train the disciples. Just like a teacher, he may be a very expert mathematician, but, in the lower class, he is teaching English. The spiritual master's duty is to train him, but when he comes to the perfectional stage of training, then he realizes his position. That is not a gift of the spiritual master; the spiritual master helps him to realize his relationship with the Lord.” Letter to Upendra, Nov. 13, 1968 

The vitiated GBC wants the D.O.M. controversy to go away.  It views these documents (the D.O.M. and the T.U.) just like that airport in The Langoliers.  The vitiated GBC does not want these documents to have even the slightest sway on the current way it governs things; it considers them nothing more than affidavits from the dead past.  Just like in that airport, the food was tasteless and there was no sign of human life.  The airport was the recent past, destined to soon be devoured by huge, invisible monsters who feed off the material of dead time.  This is how the GBC considers the Direction of Management and the Topmost Urgency affidavits, and it would like them to merge into oblivion.

But they do not go away.  They were unknown to over ninety-nine percent of the devotees; ironically, they are now becoming known and more and more prominent.  The vitiated GBC wants to have its own constitution, its own incorporated status (although it was created as an unincorporated entity), and its own way of doing things.  It wants this so that it can continually make any whimsical changes it desires in order to cover its tracks for its own aggrandizement and that of the vested interests of its members.  However, constitutions exist to prevent change, and the D.O.M., along with the T.U., constitute fixed instruments dictating a regular rotation of commissioners in the governing body.   

To Be Continued

Quotes from the books of His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada are copyright by the Bhaktivedanta Book Trust