Devotees who offer up legitimate criticism of the powerful leaders of institutional religions are often labeled malcontents or envious; in extreme cases, they are even anathematized as antagonistic to the movement’s spiritual master.

In visiting the Sampradaya Sun website over the last year, I have observed that there is a great deal of criticism of the leaders of the current institution, the one which was originally founded by Srila Prabhupada. Yet, as observed in a recent article on the Sun, very few defenses or countercharges are put forward by the targets of such criticism, either on its site or any other. Practically speaking, the presentations made on Sampradaya Sun by those loyal to the post-modern institution are limited to festival announcements and updates. It is not difficult to conclude, therefore, that its leaders have concluded the interfacing and commentary available on Sampradaya Sun, is dangerous.  They obviously consider it a potential source of doubt for their adherents; even contesting the criticism could turn out to be counterproductive, because loyal followers could then also deliberate on the criticism and become influenced. The vested interests don’t want to draw any attention to such writings.

In a rare reply to the Sun’s recent editorial comment, the editor of one of the institution’s opinion pages made the claim that what makes his institution “real and genuine” is that it fully embraces and implements all of the “Official Directives.”  This is supposed to include everything from the duties and limitations placed upon each Officer in ISKCON (“G.B.C.-ISKCON”), to the management of the BBT, the acceptance of--and actual taking of--a mandated Oath of Allegiance to Srila Prabhupada, his official mandates concerning becoming a formally initiated member, acceptance and implementation of the Direction of Management (DOM), strict adherence to his Final Will, etc.

All of this comes off as quite legal-sounding and institutional, but there is at least one thing left out: That is the most important thing--siddhanta. The history of our parampara has shown that devotees who have not deviated from the siddhanta have actually continued the line--not those who inherited “official” lineage, such as the Gaudiya Matha of the Forties or the Nityananda-vamsa previous to the Gaudiya Matha.

siddhanta baliya cite na kara alasa                                                    
iha ha-ite krsne lage sudrdha manasa

“A sincere student should not neglect the discussion of such (scriptural) conclusions, considering them controversial, for such discussions strengthen the mind. Thus one’s mind becomes attached to Sri Krishna.”

(Chaitanya Charitamrita Adi, 2.117)

Siddhanta has not been one of the strengths of the governing body since the departure of His Divine Grace from manifest presence thirty years ago. What it has tried to pass off as “growing pains” is actually a long list of concoctions and damage control, fix-it-as-you-go devices. The alleged scriptural evidence for these efforts has selectively been taken from the “siddhanta” that best served the purposes of this separatist governing body at any given time.

Nevertheless, although history has shown that legitimate criticism presented during these periods turned out to be, more often than not, correct, the governing body has always held that only its presentation--despite often blatant self-serving hypocrisy--was the correct one. In this way, the governing body conducts itself as a lawless power, in a manner that sincere devotees have found increasingly unable to swallow as legitimate spiritual authority.

Due to its independence from the governing body, the Sampradaya Sun website affords discriminating devotees a wonderful chance to associate and come in touch with knowledge and thinking that does not kow-tow to the planning commission’s questionable motivations. This brahminical independence also affords us the opportunity to achieve understanding regarding what was the actual siddhanta that Srila Prabhupada presented during his manifest presence. The debate on this site is polite and well-monitored by the editors.

Although complete unity is next to nil at the current time, this forum could still serve as a means to unite a few dedicated and scholarly brahmins around the correct teaching and the correct course to follow. Then, with the foundation of siddhanta established, devotees could come together at annual or seasonal festivals in order to provide shelter for those who hanker for genuine transcendental authority and association.

Very few devotees would argue that what would truly solve the devotional community’s (and the world’s) problems is the emergence of another mahabhagavat. As servants of Srila Prabhupada, we need to create a philosophical shelter that is either going to nurture the advancement of someone to this stage from amongst ourselves or provide a sincere community that is going to attract such an uttama adhikari, possibly even from outside our sampradaya. Such a devotee is the real continuance any disciplic succession, and they all are connected to the Supreme Personality of Godhead.

It is almost certain that this will never happen under the influence of, what to speak of within, the current institution. There everyone is forced to bow to the burnt remnants of the zonal acarya embarrassment.  Some of these “acharyas” even regularly apologize for their personal deviations after having become a so-called spiritual master. Due to the institution’s face-saving mechanism, however, these men are still considered “guru.” No Person Bhagavat is ever going to even tacitly endorse such a charade.

Srila Prabhupada departed from our external vision almost thirty years ago. Those who heard from him on the external plane and surrendered to his feet become fewer every month. The hope that the current corporate representation is going to be even slightly affected by this presentation--and rectify itself--has not proven useful over the past thirty years.  “Reform” just isn’t going to cut it.  Even if one wants to believe reform is still possible, if anything is going to get the attention of the governing body, it is a group of senior devotees uniting and making a threadbare and accurate presentation of Srila Prabhupada’s siddhanta.

Although there are certainly many possible topics to be brought forward for the review of just such a Brahminical Council, the topic of who is guru and what constitutes real initiation certainly must be the priority.

In conclusion, I am not writing this with even the slightest intention that I should be considered for membership on the council or should even be involved in its organization. Since I see myself as still in need of formal initiation, however, I do feel that serving such a council would be important for me. Devotees in my situation need the real shelter of those who have surrendered at the feet of the realized souls.

All glories to Srila Prabhupada, without whom none of this would be even possible.  OM TAT SAT.

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