Back To Prabhupada, Issue 7, Spring 2005
Throughout all our issues of Back to Prabhupada (BTP), we have highlighted the great Guru hoax, whereby contrary to Srila Prabhupada's final signed directive on initiations, the secretaries he appointed to initiate disciples on his behalf (ritviks) abandoned their duties immediately on his departure, and declared themselves his good-as-God Guru successors. The ensuing catastrophe in the lives of thousands of disciples has been well documented, with these false Gurus having been exposed in a variety of illicit acts.
Rather than take the obvious remedy to restore a deeply fractured ISKCON to health by following Srila Prabhupada's July 9th, 1977 directive referred to above, whereby he would be the only initiating (diksa) Guru in ISKCON, the Governing Body Commission (GBC) of ISKCON has instead resorted to a variety of patchwork, quack remedies over the years which are, quite frankly, laughable. This year's GBC meetings are no exception. The great Guru hoax has degenerated into the great Guru joke. Here are some of the astounding statements that have come out of the GBC Secretariat's office this year.
GBC Meetings Day 10 (final day) 8 March 2005
"It was suggested that the meetings next year include a full day dedicated to discussion of guru-tattva."
If the GBC are following the Guru system which Srila Prabhupada gave, what is there that needs to be discussed regarding "guru-tattva" (the truth about the Guru)? Either the GBC knows guru-tattva or it does not? Surely it's a bit late in the day to be discussing guru-tattva? Unless of course they may have got it wrong, and need to discuss to see what is the right understanding? So either the GBC know exactly:
a) HOW Srila Prabhupada authorised Gurus;
b) WHO Srila Prabhupada authorised as Gurus;
c) WHAT Srila Prabhupada authorised as the system for adding Gurus;
Or they do not.
If they knew this, there would be nothing to discuss. They could simply follow it. And if they need to discuss these matters, then it means that they do not yet know the exact answers to the above questions. The following statements make this clear:
ISKCON News, March 2005
"In ISKCON's history, a number of gurus have deviated from the high standards expected of them and this has caused much grief amongst their disciples and in the Society at large. Therefore it is not surprising that it is an issue that the GBC returns to often. In what many will regard as a radical step, the GBC gave formal assent to women taking on the role of initiating guru."
Well either Srila Prabhupada authorised all his disciples to become Gurus or he did not? Why only now have they decided that maybe Srila Prabhupada authorised his female disciples to become Gurus as well? Similarly:
ISKCON News, March 2005
"A proposal by the Sastric Advisory Committee (SAC, a group set up to give scripturally based advice to the GBC) to eliminate the "no-objection" system for appointing gurus was not passed. The "no-objection" system essentially means that one can be considered an initiating guru in ISKCON if there is no objection from a GBC appointed group. The SAC proposed that the decision be made by the disciple."
So they still haven't figured out how Srila Prabhupada authorised Gurus, and what system Srila Prabhupada gave for authorising Gurus. Do we continue voting them in as present ("no-objection" system), or do we let the prospective disciple choose whoever he wants without restriction? Voting in Gurus survives - at least for another year - when the "guru-tattva" speculations will again continue for at least a full day!
The very fact that Srila Prabhupada did not state who he authorised as Gurus, how he authorised them and what system should be used for authorising them, and therefore the GBC are forced to speculate regarding these points every year, would to any normal, sane person be clear proof that Srila Prabhupada did not authorise any Gurus! However, the GBC's position is simply to begin with the unproven assumption that somehow Srila Prabhupada wanted them to be initiating Gurus, and therefore let us keep speculating and "discussing" every year how we can do it. Indeed, anything can be discussed regarding "guru-tattva" except the fundamental question of whether or not they were actually authorised to be Gurus in the first place! This subject has never been discussed, not even once, not even for a full day. It is like a bunch of criminals arguing every year about the $50 million bank heist they did 25 years ago, and how the proceeds should be shared out. They will discuss everything except whether or not they are actually entitled to the $50 million!
Ever thought that the Guru was a perfect being whose job was to train the disciple to also become perfect? Think again. In what has to be the biggest Guru joke ever, even for the GBC, welcome to "Guru School", where it is the would-be Guru who needs to be trained:
ISKCON News, March 2005
"Another issue that has arisen from the fall from grace of some ISKCON gurus is that of education. It has been proposed that all potential gurus be first required to undergo formal training in the philosophy and practice of Krishna consciousness. THE SAC (Sastric Advisory Council) has advised against this, preferring that such training be "strongly recommended" rather than mandatory."
Due to the "fall from grace" of some of ISKCON's 'good-as-God, mahabhagavat' Gurus, it has been "strongly recommended" that the solution is to first send the would-be Gurus to "Guru School" where they can be "educated" and "trained" in the "philosophy and practise of Krishna consciousness".
Pardon us for pointing out the obvious, but if they did not already the know the "philosophy and practise of Krishna consciousness", what are they doing lining up to be "potential Gurus"?
And so the Great Guru Hoax/Joke continues for yet another year!
Srila Prabhupada, the only authorised Guru for ISKCON
Subscribe for FREE to Back To Prabhupada Magazine - Click Here
Return to "Female Diksa Gurus" Index
Return to GBC Index
Return to "The Great Guru Hoax" Index
Return to "Guru-Tattva" Index
Return to "Guru Training" Index
Return to IRM Homepage
