RESPONSE TO A COMMENT ON THE DIRECTION OF MANAGEMENT:
Dear Prabhus,
Please accept my most humble obeisances. All Glories to Srila Prabhupada!
I want to thank you for your thoughtful and considerate comments regarding the Transcendental Intent of Srila Prabhupada to make sure that any leader above the level of temple president would be elected freely by the temple presidents themselves for a renewable three year term.
Interestingly, once the pieces are carefully assembled, there are no contradictions....In fact, what is beginning to be exposed, like the skeleton of an ancient murder, is that Srila Prabhupada was dealing with two Iskcons not one.
We all know the “bright faced” Iskcon, with sankirtan, prasadam, endless enthusiasm and endless competition to truly please Srila Prabhupada. The other Iskcon is just as well documented, but yet not as well publicized:...That is the Iskcon that Srila Prabhupada described as “a sinister movement within our society”. He also accused the newly formed GBC of “Godless plan making”, and that “You kill guru and become guru”.
And what is that second Iskcon?...Practically, it is the entire leadership of Iskcon from 1970 to the present.....It appears that Srila Prabhupada, while making a Vaikuntha atmosphere for the “bright faced devotees” was also waging a silent, but deadly struggle against those who would seize the Movement, and declare themselves to have (As Tamal put it in 1976) “Absolute Authority as GBC”. (This was in Maypur), and someone came to Srila Prabhupada and asked him about Tamal’s statement. Srila Prabhupada responded,......”WHAT absolute authority as GBC”?
The answers have all been hiding in plain sight.....And why not?. Just as Hiranyakasipu could not see Lord Hari before his eyes, as could his son Prahlad, so these same demonic despots cannot see the evidence scattered like jewels in the sand arranged right under their very noses.
Below, I have outlined a basic chronology...It is just an outline,..a skeleton, but if you follow it carefully, considering the time place and circumstance of each and every step of the way, a most heartbreaking sinister pattern begins to form....Soon, our group research will “flesh out” this outline with dozens of quotes from letters, lectures, writings etc. that will back up and fully reveal to even the dullest mind what has actually been going on in the name of Srila Prabhupada and Iskcon.
Here goes!
Here is the Chronology of The Direction of Management (1970).
1. 1970 Srila Prabhupada creates the Direction of Management after SF Rathayatra
2. 1971 First GBC meeting takes place in New Vrindaban with 12 GBC’s present.
Several months after the “TOPMOST URGENCY” letter, Srila Prabhupada writes several letters to GBC members, referring to the DOM as the Constitutional Basis for Iskcon.
In a separate communication, Srila Prabhupada states that he “reserves the right to nominate GBC during his lifetime”....(Elections not absolutely required at this time).
(The Direction of Management is hailed by Rupanuga prabhu, as the “Constitution of Iskcon)
NOTE
After the first GBC meeting in New Vrindaban, (1971) one would have thought that the DOM would have been printed up and distributed to each of the temple presidents....All of the initiated disciples of Srila Prabhupada should have gotten a copy so that they could understand the organization that they had joined. Instead, the GBC told the Temple Presidents as well as any inquiring Iskcon member that the DOM was “Top Secret, to be read only by the GBC”.
How were the temple presidents to vote for GBC’s if they were not allowed to even read the document that gave the exact procedure for holding GBC elections?
I recall the GBC treating the DOM as a secret document, not to be shown to anyone as though it were some super secret Masonic initiation ritual. In retrospect, one wonders why this document was considered secret and confidential and not to be read by the common devotees, or even by the temple presidents.
3. 1972 A secret meeting was held in New York with many GBC members present. They “elected” an accountant (Atreya Rishi) to the GBC post, and created a plan to completely centralize Iskcon , (similar to how it is today).
Srila Prabhupada was not even informed of this meeting and he was also not invited to this meeting. When he found out, he declared the meeting to be a conspiracy, dissolved the GBC, and stated that it was a great offense to Him to hold a secret meeting behind His back without His authority or permission; to overthrow a document that they had all signed into Iskcon Law in 1970.
Clearly, the GBC of that time had no intention whatsoever to follow the orders of the DOM, or holding elections as prescribed in the DOM.
4. 1974 Spring of 1974 would have been the first GBC election following the formation of the GBC in 1971. The GBC made no move to hold elections. Later in 1974, Srila Prabhupada sent out a letter marked “TOPMOST URGENCY”.
There were two main points in the letter, the first was followed impeccably by all temples, the second point concerning the DOM was disobeyed completely. (See the Attached letter from 1974)
Several months after the “TOPMOST URGENCY” letter, Srila Prabhupada writes several letters to GBC members, referring to the DOM as the Constitutional Basis for Iskcon.
5. 1975 Srila Prabhupada insists on the LA temple entering the DOM as part of the Non Profit documents filed with the state. This direct order was obeyed. (The DOM has since been deleted after that time).
In 1975, I request the then GBC, Jayatirtha das to show me the DOM. He snarls that it is locked in a Safe and “you will never get to see it”! This is the approximate same time that the DOM was added to the Iskcon LA corporate papers, most probably by Jayatirtha himself and most probably forced by SP to do so.
6. 1977 The second GBC election could have been held in the Spring. Instead, on May 28, Satsvarupa suggests that the GBC elect new GBC members (obviously bypassing the DOM election process) Certainly, Satsvarupa pays no regard to the 1974 “TOPMOST URGENCY” letter, which (as it was never implemented, apparently does not cross his mind to ask about
DOM elections, rather than the GBC electing new GBC, which Srila Prabhupada thoroughly condemned in 1972.
In May of 1977, Srila Prabhupada states that although his personally selected GBC are to remain “for good” any vacancies in the GBC body should be replaced by election, presumably referring to his “TOPMOST URGENT” DOM order in the 1974 letter.
Later in July, He appoints 11 men to initiate in His name.
Srila Prabhupada leaves his body in the Fall under strange circumstances.
7. 1980 offers the first date for elections absolutely required after Srila Prabhupada’s passing, as per terms of DOM and May 28,1977 directive. He has stated that the GBC “Nominated” by Him are to remain “for good”. Satsvarupa asks and is told by SP that only the GBC members who have for some reason vacated their “appointed by SP” GBC post are to be replaced via elections.
NOTE:
NO ELECTIONS HAVE BEEN HELD THEN OR SINCE. The DOM has been carefully secreted and hidden away by the GBC , so that not even any Temple Presidents (Who would certainly need to see and have a copy of the document if they were to hold GBC elections every three years as per the DOM).
I was able to find a copy of the DOM in 1994, which was the first time that I had seen it since 1971 in New Vrindaban. With my collaboration, the DOM was proposed for adoption By the late Sridham prabhu, at the Mayapur Meeting in 1996(?). Sridham prabhu was very, very excited by the DOM and thought everyone would like it, and hail it as the true authorized solution to Iskcon’s conspicuous leadership problems.
As soon as it was included in the Agenda for the GBC meeting in Mayapur, it was roundly attacked and savaged by Jayapataka, Tamal Krishna, and Rabindra Swarupa. They claimed that Srila Prabhupada had Himself rejected the DOM, and that this was a dead issue from many years ago. They accused anyone of looking into the DOM of disloyalty bordering on treachery.
After a hiatus of thirty five years, It is certainly time for us to move on this matter.
Those who would benefit from the DOM are the rank and file devotees who have been without care or shelter for the last thirty five years. If we jot down the statistics of scandal, abuse, expensive lawsuits etc for the last thirty five years, we can see that it is the unelected GBC leaders who have racked up most of the often shameful,burdenous cost to Iskcon, to be paid for by the hard-serving temple members. The temple members have paid and paid for each scandal, but have seldom been the cause of the scandals. Certainly, if each temple cared about itself and its members, GBC would have been elected who could have managed to stay clear of scandalous activities.
The abuses of the past must immediately come to an end, and the Iskcon of Tomorrow can begin to unfold as a realm of possibility Today.
Read the DOM, and you will realize how and why abuse victims like Ananda died due to the GBC not being accountable to the Temples they were supposed to represent, how abusers could remain in power, and wealth be accumulated by the “lucky” few who became GBC, Sanyasis, or gurus.
HAVING ACTUALLY ASSUMED “ABSOLUTE POWER” , “ABSOLUTE POWER” HAS CORRUPTED THE GBC ABSOLUTELY.
That is obviously WHY Srila Prabhupada wanted the GBC to be elected......so that they could never become as corrupted as they have.
NOW SOME CLARIFICATION OF THE MAY 17TH TAPE TRANSCRIPT:
Satsvarupa: Srila Prabhupada, we were all asked by the rest of the GBC to come to ask some questions. Most... These are the members of the original GBC as you first made it up.
NNV DAS: THESE ARE THE MEN WHO REFUSED TO HOLD GBC ELECTIONS, AND INSTEAD FORMED A SECRET CABAL (WHICH ILLEGALLY INCLUDED ATREYA RISHI) TO RE-DESIGN AND COMPLETELY CENTALIZE THE MANAGEMENT STRUCTURE OF SKCON TO BECOME THE DIRECT OPPOSITE TO THE DIRECT ORDER OF SRILA PRABHUPADA’S DIRECTION OF MANAGEMENT.
Satsvarupa: So our first question is about the GBC members. We want to know how long should they remain in office?
Prabhupada: They should remain for good.
NNV DAS: THIS WAS NO TIME TO “ROCK THE BOAT” ! WITHIN MONTHS, SRILA PRABHUPADA WAS TO DIE IN AGONY ....”KILLED BY RAVANA” RATHER THAN BY “RAM”. THE LAST THING THAT WAS NEEDED WAS A “POST PRABHUPADA” SHAKEUP OF THE WHOLE MOVEMENT. IT WOULD HAVE GONE ON AND ON LIKE THE GAUDIYA MATHA TO THIS VERY DAY. SRILA PRABHUPADA OBVIOUSLY PICKED THE GBC MEN WITH AN EYE TO HOW THE MOVEMENT MIGHT FARE IN THE IMMEDIATE FUTURE AFTER HIS DISAPPEARANCE. THEY HAD REFUSED TO HOLD ELECTIONS, CONSPIRED TO DESTROY THE DOM, AND NOW WERE IN NO SHAPE FOR SUDDEN AND EVEN VIOLENT “REGIME CHANGE”
Tamala Krsna: They should remain for good.
Prabhupada: Selected men are chosen, so they cannot be changed.
NNV DAS: THESE MEN WERE CHOSEN BY “DIVINE DECREE”...IN OTHER WORDS HAND PICKED BY THE ACHARYA HIMSELF. ALSO, THIS WAS NO TIME FOR A DRASTIC CHANGE. “SELECTED MEN ARE CHOSEN” MEANS THAT HE HIMSELF HAD CHOSEN THEM. THIS DOES NOT MEAN THAT THESE MEN WERE PERFECT, OR EVEN HONEST OR FREE FROM DEMONIAC QUALITIES. IT SIMPLY MEANS THAT HE HAD CHOSEN THEM FOR WHATEVER REASON.
Prabhupada: Rather, if some competent man comes, he should be added. I shall recommend that Vasudeva become one of the GBC.
NNV DAS: STILL PRESENT, SRILA PRABHUPADA CLEARLY STATES THAT HE SHALL HAVE THE ABSOLUTE AUTHORITY TO ADD VASUDEVA WITH OR WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE OTHER GBC.
Tamala Krsna: Vasudeva is Deoji Punja. He’s the founder of our... He’s building the temple in Fiji.
Prabhupada: How many GBC’s are there already?
Tamala Krsna: Twenty-three.
Prabhupada: So add him. GBC is not to be changed.
NNV DAS: NOTICE,THAT SRILA PRABHUPADA IS ACTUALLY “CHANGING THE GBC” BY ADDING VASUDEVA....NOT TO BE CHANGED REFERS TO A DIFFERENT MATTER.....SPECIFICALLY THAT THEY SHOULD NOT PLAY “MUSICAL CHAIRS” AFTER HIS DISAPPEARANCE.
Satsvarupa: But then, in the event that some present GBC member leaves, either leaves...
Prabhupada: Another should be elected.
Satsvarupa: By the votes of the present GBC
HERE IS THE SOURCE OF THE CONFUSION!
ELECTED BY WHOM?....IN THE WORLD CREATED BY SRILA PRABHUPADA, THE 1974 LETTER MARKED “TOPMOST URGENCY” GAVE THE MOST ABSOLUTE ORDER THAT THE DIRECTION OF MANAGEMENT BE ADDED TO THE CHARER AND BYLAWS OF EACH AND EVERY CENTER. IF THAT HAD BEEN DONE, THEN “ELECTED” COULD HAVE HAD ONLY ONE MEANING.....ELECTED ACCORDING TO THE DIRECTION OF MANAGEMENT.
SHOULD SRILA PRABHUPADA HAVE ASSUMED THAT HIS DISCIPLES, WHEN GIVEN THIS VERY URGENT ORDER MARKED “TOPMOST URGENCY,” HAD DELIBERATELY REFUSED, TO THE MAN, TO FOLLOW THAT VERY DIRECT AND UNAVOIDABLE ORDER?
DOES SATSVARUPA ASSUME THAT BECAUSE SRILA PRABHUPADA IS “TRI KALA GNA” THAT SRILA PRABHUPADA NOT ONLY KNEW VERY WELL THAT HIS “TOPMOST URGENT” COMMAND HAD BEEN DELIBERATELY DISOBEYED, BUT THAT THIS WAS PERFECTLY “OK” WITH HIM?......
WHY WOULD SP GIVE SUCH AN URGENT ORDER, DEMAND THAT IT BE IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWED, AND THEN BE PERFECTLY HAPPY THREE YEARS LATER THAT THAT ORDER HAD BEEN COMPLETELY DISOBEYED?
...WHERE IS THE ROOM CONVERSATION, THE LETTER TO SOMEONE, THE RECORDED DECREE THAT WOULD HAVE REVERSED THAT 1974 URGENT ORDER? WE HAVE NO CHOICE BUT TO BELIEVE THAT IN THE CHRONOLOGY CLEARLY ESTABLISHED BY SRILA PRABHUPADA HIMSELF, THAT THE 1974 LETTER WAS EITHER FOLLOWED BY HIS “BELOVED DISCIPLES” OR WAS MEANT TO HAVE BEEN FOLLOWED BY HIS “BELOVED DISCIPLES”..
THEREFORE, IN MAY 17, 1977, “ANOTHER SHOULD BE ELECTED” CAN ONLY MEAN ACCORDING TO THE DIRECTION OF MANAGEMENT WRITTEN IN 1970, AND FIRST IMPLEMENTED IN THE SPRING OF 1971, OVERTURNED IN 1972, RE-STATED BY SRILA PRABHUPADA IN 1974, FORCED INTO THE NEW DWARKA NON-PROFIT DOCUMENTS IN 1975, AND THEN MENTIONED IN 1977.
ONE YEAR AFTER THE FIRST GBC MEETING IN 1971, WHEN HE DISBANDED THE GBC AND ACCUSED THEM OF “GODLESS PLANMAKING” HE ONCE AGAIN ATTEMPTED TO INSTALL THE DIRECTION OF MANAGMENT (“TOPMOST URGENCY”!) IN 1974 VIA THE VERY IMPORTANT LETTER TO THAT EFFECT. (LATER IN 1974, HE REPEATEDLY WROTE LETTERS REFERRING TO THE DIRECTION OF MANAGEMENT AS THE FINAL AUTHORITY OF ISKCON).
ONCE AGAIN, THIS IS SATSVARUPA’S RESPONSE ABOUT HOW TO VOTE FOR GBC.
Satsvarupa: By the votes of the present GBC.
OH, REALLY?........IT WAS THAT SAME GBC A FEW YEARS EARLIER WHO TOOK IT UPON THEMSELVES TO “ELECT” ATREYA RISHI TO BE A GBC. SRILA PRABHUPADA WAS ABSOLUTELY FURIOUS THAT THEY WOULD DARE TO THINK THAT THEY COULD “APPOINT” A GBC AT WILL! (THE VEDA BASE FROM 1971 TO 1975 IS LADEN WITH SRILA PRABHUPADA’S TOTAL DISGUST FOR THE GBC’S AND THEIR COMPLETE INABILITY AND UNWILLINGNESS TO PERFORM THE DUTIES LAID
Satsvarupa: By the votes of the present GBC
SRILA PRAHUPADA SAYS......................NOTHING!
WHAT IS HE TO SAY?...” BY ELECTION” OBVIOUSLY MEANT ACCORDING TO THE ELECTION PROTOCOL OF THE DIRECTION OF MANAGEMENT....WHEN SATSVARUPA SAID “BY THE VOTES OF THE PRESENT GBC”, SRILA PRABHUPADA WAS PRESENTED FOR THE FIRST TIME WITH THE FACT THAT THE CONSPIRACY WAS COMPLETE, AND THAT THE 1974 LETTER HAD BEEN DELIBERATELY DISOBEYED.
JUST REMEMBER, HAD THE DOM BEEN ADDED TO THE BYLAWS OF EACH ISKCON TEMPLE, SATSVARUPA, AS A GBC MEMBER, WOULD HAVE SAID, “OH,...YOU MEAN ACCORDING TO THE DIRECTION OF MANAGEMENT?”
THE ACTUAL ANSWER GIVEN BY SATSVARUPA IS VERY, VERY VERY,VERY, SIGNIFICANT............IT IS AN ACTUAL CONFESSION OF A COMPLETED CRIME OF APARADH AGAINST THE PURE DEVOTEE OF THE LORD.
NOTE
In the Long Island court case, the GBC brought in the unadulterated Direction of Management to be filed in the court record as the “bonafides” of the GBC and proof of their authority over all Iskcon temples. Had the Judge examined the document, the GBC would have certainly have been disqualified due to their having never been elected.......BUT IT DID NOT GET THAT FAR!
After the DOM was recorded into the court record (What a miracle!) the judge examined the by laws of the Freeport Temple, which just happened to be Srila Prabhupada’s original incorporation papers of New York, which created Iskcon Inc. The judge did not find any reference in the bylaws of the existence or authority of the GBC, nor did the bylaws reference the Direction of Management which the GBC had brought with them as proof of their Absolute Authority!...For that reason, the judge said, “I do not know if you have any authority over any other Iskcon
temple or not, but you clearly have no legal authority over THIS one, as neither you nor the Direction of Management is mentioned in your bylaws”.
Upon that finding, Judge Mahon threw the GBC members out of the Freeport Temple and told them that their so-called “authority: there was null and void. Had the 1974 letter been followed, the Freeport temple would have the DOM, which would have clearly stated the authority and limits of authority of the GBC. Had the DOM been added to the bylaws, then the judge would have completely disqualified the GBC for not having held elections.....(He had already disqualified the temple trustees for not having the legally required number of trustees on the Board, and not keeping minutes (of their non-existing meetings) and for not holding formal meetings with minutes and published agenda as required by law!
When in Los Angeles, Srila Prabhupada insisted that the DOM be added to the Los Angeles temple bylaws.....and it was done. (in 1975). after a dizzying pattern of forming and changing bylaws for Iskcon of Southern California, the Iskcon trustees of LA removed the Direction of Management from the bylaws.....(Obviously, a completely illegal thing to do!) so, the chronology (even in this “bare bones” form) leaves no reasonable doubt as to Srila Prabhupada’s intention to have Iskcon run under the DOM.
The horrors of the last thirty years were due almost entirely by the GBC posing as Vatican “Cardinals” whose authority flowed from the Pope, and who then ruled with “absolute authority” over a self created hierarchy imposed on Iskcon.....No WONDER 95% of Western Iskcon is composed of former Catholics...they feel right at home!) A
legal GBC would be hardly visible, would spend all of its time helping regulate and
perfect the organization of each temple.
Iskcon, as we think of it today, would not exist at all!
NOTE:
“Iskcon would refer to whichever temple you were pointing at, as each temple would be completely independent of each other temple, and run according to the requirements of the local congregation.
To hang out the “iskcon shingle” a temple would have to comply with very strict rules as laid out for all of us by Srila Prabhupada. (That is where the GBC and Sanyasis would have their legitimate field to help)......in the last thirty years, hundreds of Iskcon temples of various sizes would have sprung up in the Los Angeles area, as with complete independence, any group of families could form a temple as long as no goats were sacrificed to goddess Kali!
The earmark of the DOM Iskcon of the future is that young women with their young children will be very safe and comfortable. Each temple will provide day care. Gurukulas will exist, husbands will open local business to feed themselves while creating jobs for other devotees. All the young women and their young children would thrive in an atmosphere of Kirtan, Prasadam, Gorgeously Worshipped Deities, and classes in SP’s unchanged Vani will be the hobby and pre-occupation of these peaceful and contented young families who year by year would live better and better, while the horrors of kali Yuga rage around their peaceful, protected homes. New devotee families will come to join because the life is very, very nice and pure for raising young children sweetly and safe from the dangers of urban life.
Your eternal servant,
NNV das
"A
person who is liberated acharya and guru cannot commit any mistake, but
there are persons who are less qualified or not liberated, but still
can act as guru and acharya by strictly following the disciplic
succession." Letter to Janardana, 26 April, 1968