Benefic and Malefic Spheres and Patterns of Influence

Second of a Multi-part Series

By Kailäsa Candra däsa

“Persons in the mode of passion arrange to be worshiped by subordinates and let them wash their feet and offer riches. Such arrangements artificially made by the performance of penances are considered to be in the mode of passion. The results are temporary; they can be continued for some time, but they are not permanent.”
–Bhagavad-gétä, 17.18, purport

“. . . although the authorized path of bhakti is the only means of attaining the ultimate goal of life, it is full of thorns.  Especially in this age of Kali, the age of argumentation and quarrel, it is covered with millions of thorns. . . This illusory world is always ruled by those who are envious of Viñëu, for they are the majority.”
-Bhaktisiddhänta Sarasvaté Prabhupäda, excerpt from Acaryera Asamordhva Mahattava, published in the Gauòéya, 6.28

“You can follow the action, which gets you good pictures.  You can follow your instincts, which will probably get you in trouble.  Or you can follow the money, which nine times out of ten will get you closer to the truth.”
-Jake Giddes, The Two Jakes

Both individually and collectively, the idea of or desire for a universal brotherhood of man is, in and of itself, a benefic influence, as long as it adheres to the highest quality of international fraternity in goodness.  All too often, organized religion weaves another pattern.  Most churches, synagogues, mosques, temples, synods, sects, and cults give occasional lip service to the concept of universal brotherhood, but their rigid hierarchies and arcane processes do nothing to actually promote such an outcome.

This is mostly due to the mode of passion, wherein strong desires for respect, false prestige, and worship, underpinned by a proud performance of austerities and penances (approved by the organization), create a separatist mentality.  Such separatism spreads throughout the hierarchy of the sect and eventually becomes its prevailing ethos, even in worship of the Deity.

All emphases added for your edification and realization.

Whether individually or otherwise, the separatist pattern means seeing particular religious interest as different from that of the Supreme Lord.  Delusion can cover this realization—and usually does. Mixed devotees in the mode of passion think that the interest of the Supreme Lord is in supplying the orders of the devotee.  As such, these people draw from Him as much as possible for their sense gratification, and this includes working their way up the power ladder of the hierarchy.

When the devotee has an interest or will different from the interest of the Supreme, his mentality is that of a separatist; it is a malefic influence. However, in order to get his or her mentality confirmed, that person has to work, with other peers of like mind, to make sure the institution adopts the same outlook.  These institutionalists want power, fame, and opulence by utilizing the grace of the Lord, and this is devotion in the mode of passion. It will never produce a universal brotherhood of man, in no small part because many of the men and women governed by it will not be able to tolerate being continuously exploited by the artificial overlords who have succumbed to passionate weakness.

Enviousness of the Supreme Lord and his sincere and serious devotees is always present in the hearts of those who engage in such mixed devotional service.  The admonition na dhanam na janam is disregarded by those miçra-bhaktas.  The Sanskrit word dhanam is defined in the Apte Dictionary as property, money, or any valued possession.  Being situated at the top of the corporate totem pole affords the institutional guru or commissioner power to accumulate control over wealth, property, and disciples quite easily.

If you are interested in how “ISKCON” has become an apa-sampradäya, simply follow the money.  It, along with property, power, and disciples, will lead you straight to the vitiated G.B.C. within no time.  If then, in order to traverse the path of buddhi-yoga, you decide to resist their influence, you will find your trail full of thorns. That is the price paid for spiritual freedom and personal evolution in transcendental realization.

The Petrified Totem Pole

“Whether a devotee is an initiating spiritual master, an instructing spiritual master, a sannyasi, a Governing Body Commissioner, a Zonal Secretary, a Regional Secretary, a Temple President, a congregational leader, or anyone else in a position of authority within ISKCON, the authority bestowed upon that devotee is complete only if he or she follows Srila Prabhupäda’s instruction to serve in ISKCON under the authority of the GBC Body.”
–Harmonizing ISKCON’s Lines of Authority

“One may also be victimized by diplomatic behavior or . . .  one may make a show of devotional service like the präkåta-sahajiyäs . . . claiming a monopoly on spiritual advancement. Thus . . . one may become a pseudo guru, or so-called spiritual master.”
–Caitanya-caritämåta, Madhya, 19.160, purport

“Why should we risk our lives by following blind men who believe that they are knowledgeable but are not?”
–Dialectical Spiritualism, Critique of Aquinas

Many devotees followed, with keen interest, the back-and-forth controversies related to an intramural friction supposedly afflicting “ISKCON,” viz., a battle for power between its initiating gurus and the self-proclaimed authority of the vitiated G.B.C.  In point of fact, this whole contrivance—propped up by the pub given it in the Solar Smorgasbord–was nothing other than a diversion from contentious issues that merit our attention.

In other words, that tempest in a teapot served to make all those enamored by the official charisma of the cult further ensconced under its spell.  Does the guru have ultimate authority over his disciples?  Of course he does!  However, an institutional guru does not, especially since institutional guru means bogus guru.

As soon as the G.B.C. empowered eleven pretender mahä-bhägavats in 1978, that governing body became asära or useless.  However, this incontrovertible fact was only recognized by a handful of Prabhupäda’s initiated disciples at the time.  Indeed, still within the memory of everyone, that G.B.C. declared His Divine Grace had appointed those men to the post.  There was and remains no proof of this assertion, but that did not become common knowledge until almost three years after the scam was imposed.

So much diplomacy has underpinned the fabricated, so-called “ISKCON” ecclesiocracy that a casual devotee cannot figure out where the banyan tree of its perverted reflection begins or where it ends–it has roots, branches, and tentacles everywhere.  Yet, there are still a few constants, and we should be aware of them.  They are all integrally related, of course, but you will not find any “ISKCON” document explaining (or even revealing) them.  Over and above that, some remain intentionally unspoken.

We see a typical example of G.B.C. mentality in the excerpt quoted above.  It is well organized.  It appears to be sound.  The word “authority” (code word) is found three times, although the excerpt itself is comprised of only one sentence.  There is a subtle air of pontification present throughout the document.  Will the knights in orange saffron and their fellow G.B.C. overlords ever come to the end of using these fix-it-as-you-go techniques?

Indeed, the complete phrase ultimate managerial authority is written out elsewhere in the position paper, but it is only alluded to in this particular excerpt.  In “ISKCON,” the vitiated G.B.C. has now become the institution’s ultimate de facto guru.  Is this arrangement bogus?  Of course it is.  Does the cult directly state that the G.B.C. is the de facto guru?  Never.  Still, that’s how it operates, i.e., the G.B.C. is the approved place-holder, so to speak, in the manifest absence of an uttama-adhikäré.  It was already planning to do what it has now done before he left us, i.e., it had made him a figurehead by the mid-Seventies (on the plea of relieving him from management, although it actually never relieved him of that burden).

In “ISKCON,” if you can become one of its dékñä-gurus as well as a G.B.C., then you are lord of the rings.  For further control and power, holding the post of a temple president can be helpful.  There is a rigid hierarchy in “ISKCON,” and it is thoroughly based on the well-established contrivances of organized religion.  Are there sometimes changes in the totem pole of this organization?  Certainly.  Still, those changes are not based on evolution in spiritual qualifications, çästric realizations, or development of devotional power; they are always based on slip-ups or scandals.

The petrified totem pole then resets, everything is washed away and quickly forgotten (taboo to even bring up), and the same air of triumphant monopoly quickly slides back into place.  The song remains the same, but the players are differently arranged on the totem pole.  This is not anything new; it has been going on in Western culture for a very long time and is readily found in both its sectarian and secular spheres.

Advancement is thus determined by knowing your place, knowing who you are always subordinate to (unless he slips or is scandalized), and acquiescing to such power.  Yes, power . . . not authority.  There is no spiritual authority whatsoever in the fabricated, so-called “ISKCON” confederation.  There is only power, and the vast majority of it is institutional.  Some personal charisma can be found here and there, but—especially after Prabhupäda’s departure—the coin of that realm is official charisma.

That’s mostly how secular corporations and governments operate, and, in Kali-yuga, with infrequent exceptions, the same goes for most sectarian institutions, as well.  As we all know, American corporations are considered persons according to mundane law.  Wherefrom do you think that ultimately originated?  Right, it had its originations in institutional religions, wherein the corporate hierarchy was considered absolute, and, for all purposes, spoken of like an exalted individual.  Is worship of “ISKCON” worship of its Founder?  The question is loaded, in the sense that His Divine Grace has no connection to the “ISKCON” concoction.

Yet, even when ISKCON was still bona fide—or mostly bona fide—was Prabhupäda non-different from it?  In an obtuse and occult or even spiritual sense, it can be considered so.  Still, did we have pictures with the word ISKCON up on the altars in those days?  Of course not.  If Prabhupäda and ISKCON were non-different, then we all chose to worship and serve the person of His Divine Grace.  We did not worship the corporate structure, but such a mentality started creeping in at a certain point in the Seventies.

The changes related to that malfeasance were insidious and gradual but, at the same time, inexorable.  While the true devotees continued to engage in rigid tapasya, in service on book distribution or at the colleges, a subset of weaker devotees, influenced by the mode of passion, devolved a different idea.  Thus, an unauthorized hierarchy began to be erected, and its very conception—what to speak of its growing construction—was the antithesis of the dynamic element intrinsic to Kåñëa consciousness.

Such buddhi-yoga is meant for knowledge, realization, and spiritual power.  That is the actual demarcation between and amongst advanced devotees and the weaker section. Yet, every devotee, to a greater or lesser extent in making his or her sacrifices, depended upon some kind of institutional structure from which to base the field of operations, in which to take shelter in terms of existential maintenance.  That made each and every one of these individuals susceptible to control by those who could pull the institutional levers of such sustenance, which should otherwise have been automatically supplied out of basic decency, what to speak of duty.

In other words, a subset of miçra-bhaktas contrived to artificially erect their own institutional arrangement for the purpose of profit, adoration, and distinction.  In the temples, it was first manifest by the skewered belief that the temple president was automatically the most spiritually advanced member of the group.  By such misunderstanding, by  misapplying the principle of absolute in terms of the sva-bhäva being dovetailed–a group of men, all separatists, were able to take over the movement.

That is what has been going on for the last thirty-six years.  The G.B.C. consciousness of today is not Kåñëa consciousness; it is part of the covering potency.  The G.B.C. has been turned into something it was never meant to be.  In the process, a rigid hierarchy has, predictably, been put into place within the Society. In “ISKCON,” the principle of guru has been subordinated to the governing commissioners, and that means that the principle of guru is now destroyed in that cult by the vitiated G.B.C.

The idea that an initiating guru must apply to a governing body, waiting in queue (for a Certificate of No Objection) for one, two, or even three years, is ludicrous.  Yet, this is what goes on, because the hierarchy deems that it needs this arrangement in order to control its institutional gurus and keep them in their place.

Casual reading of the excerpt from the Harmonizing document lends itself to thinking that the G.B.C. has finally got its act together.  What you don’t know—or don’t remember—is that the very same ambiance and style was present in the position paper which announced, in 1978, that ISKCON had eleven gurus, all with their own zones, to be worshiped as mahä-bhägavats.  There have been other changes since, with many of them accompanied by position papers authorized and approved by the “ultimate managerial authority” but now relegated to oblivion.

You are putting your spiritual life at risk by following these sahajiyäs in their adventure, as they blindly go forth where no cult has gone before.  Make it a point to become free from the influence of the “ISKCON” totem pole before it turns you into a petrified chelä, where you will ultimately be engaged in adoring diplomatic devotees of meager knowledge and merit.

G.B.C. Fairy Tales (ekäàça)

“ . . . we create many false things out of imagination. . . It is like a phantasmagoria, but behind this shadow creation there is reality—the spiritual world. A devotee is interested in the spiritual world, not its shadow.”
–Çrémad-Bhägavatam, 4.12.15, purport

“All these properties and opulences, whatever we have got, this will not go with me when I go away from this world. It will remain here. I am training some of my experienced disciples how to manage after my departure. So, if instead of taking the training, if in my lifetime you people say, ‘I am the Lord of all I survey,’ that is dangerous conspiracy.”
–Letter to Karandhara, Oct. 8, 1974

“They deceived me, therefore, they too will fall prey to deceit.  Birth after birth, I shall deceive them. . . Those among us who, accepting (the Western) conception of being great, are saying, ‘I can delight the public tremendously, so I am great,’ I don’t consider great.”
-Bhaktisiddhänta Sarasvaté Prabhupäda, article entitled “Deceitful Disciples,” published in The Gaudéya, Feb. 11, 1939 (17.471)

The Truth will ultimately prevail, but, for now, it is very much covered.  In order to discern the penultimate plane of cause and effect, we must understand things through higher intuition.  The Supreme Lord is the supreme efficient cause, no doubt, but, as the Supreme Renunciate, he rarely interferes with the free will of mankind, either individually or collectively. That is why the Truth can remain covered by the “ISKCON” confederation, i.e., the Supreme Controller is letting that cult’s leaders continue to build their own sandcastles.  He continues to let them think that they are great men and women. Nevertheless, all of this must be understood as having a powerful effect on the rest of humanity, and that whiplash is devastating, especially for devotees.

The Governing Body Commission of the International Society for Kåñëa Consciousness was supposed to have been a benefic influence on the face of the earth.  For the first year or so of its existence, it was just that. Then something went haywire.

In order to penetrate the veils of “ISKCON,” we must target its power node, and that is the vitiated G.B.C.  It is able to hold sway over the rest of the organization for many reasons, not the least of which is its myths that effectively serve to empower it in the public mind of bewildered adherents.  It is folly to think that the G.B.C. will advertise these.  For one thing, that would subject the G.B.C. mystique to analysis by the Commission’s adversaries, and this is certainly not wanted by the governing body.

Secondly, it is more potent to have them float on the mental plane, especially when surcharged with authority and fear.  Since the majority members of “ISKCON,”—many of whom are good devotees at heart—remain afraid of ostracization, when these myths are subtly linked to the stick on the astral, the “ISKCON” authorities can vibe that power whenever they see fit.  That then becomes highly advantageous and effective, especially since almost nobody can pin down what is actually transpiring.

Most devotees by now have experience of the “ISKCON” god-men strutting their stuff and throwing their weight around.  None of them could do this if the G.B.C. rolled over on them, but they well know the art of how not to poke that sleeping giant and awaken it.  One of the keys to their technique is to channel the myths underlying the vitiated G.B.C, or, at least, to appear to believe in them.  All of it is a kind of phantasmagoria in the ultimate issue, but, as far as that goes, so is everything else in the material world.

The vitiated G.B.C. has created a shadow reality, and their balloon has become expanded with a lot of hot air.  It’s time that to start puncturing it, bringing skeletons out of the closet, and ripping the myths down from their hiding places on the lower astral plane.  The G.B.C. fairy tales have no basis in çästra nor in Vaiñëava tradition nor in the words of the Founder-Äcärya.

Of course, these men can skew out a twisted meaning from something Çréla Prabhupäda said or wrote, but, invariably, the context of his statement is misrepresented.  Only in extreme situations—like when a devotee is thinking of leaving the cult and expresses his or her doubts—will any of these astral weapons be employed, i.e., out of necessity . . . and with feeling.

First Fairy Tale:  The Automatic Self-Corrective

This one has been promulgated, in particular circumstances, by the covert yet powerful leader of the G.B.C., who grabbed that ring of rings in the mid-Eighties through ingenious diplomatic maneuvers which involved switching sides at the last minute.  The idea is that, despite whatever “mistakes” the G.B.C. makes–since it is, allegedly, the ultimate spiritual authority of Prabhupäda’s branch of the sampradäya—there is an automatic, self-corrective mechanism imbedded in the Commission.

In other words, this idea, when accepted, allows the vitiated G.B.C. carte-blanche to say, write, rule, enjoin, and do whatever it pleases.  All such words, injunctions, and actions, when later conclusively shown to be wrong or deviant (or both), will be automatically corrected–a sure-fire prescription for corruption.  It is similar to too-big-to-fail in the secular world, i.e., the government bails out the big banks even when they use depositor money to make risky investments that then turn south.

The first fairy tale is a very effective and convenient devastator, but where do we find any proof of its bona fides?  The answer: Nowhere!  Something as powerful as the first fairy tale requires conclusive proof, at least in the form of a direct statement or a written passage from His Divine Grace.  The Commission ran “automatically” when Prabhupäda was with us–but only as long as his direct representatives followed him with implicit adherence–and the down-line under them did the same thing.

Just as importantly, do we see, over time, this ideal playing out?  Did things automatically get rectified and put back on the path of Truth when something was (finally) uncovered, discovered to be a major deviation?  No. Instead, it got transformed into but another deviation, that’s all.  The examples of this malefic pattern are too numerous to list, and our other articles cover them.

Second Fairy Tale:  The Ultimate Authority

As already mentioned in connection to the quote from the Harmonizing paper, that treatise used the power phrase ultimate managerial authority in its text, perhaps more than once.  We did not bother to read the whole document.  As you all know, these three words, this phrase, is culled from Prabhupäda’s Will, and both “ISKCON” and the Rittviks make a big thing out of the Will. They are at complete loggerheads in relation to its real meaning, but they have one thing in common: They both cite their particular words or phrases out of context. Accordingly, they employ those words and phrases in ways in which they were never intended.

Prabhupäda never bestowed ultimate spiritual authority to his governing body.  Time has shown that it has been mostly composed of passionate men, and such a group cannot be empowered with absolute power.  Prabhupäda was always the final authority for the G.B.C., at least before it went off the rails completely in 1978.  For example, during the 1975 conclave, when its resolutions were presented to him, he rejected almost all of them.

The context of the Will was all about control of properties.  Read the document itself, and you will clearly see this.  His Divine Grace knew that his sons could make a legal claim for ownership of these properties.  Also, since Prabhupäda had previously been a member of the Gouòéya Mutt, there was the possibility that they could try to wrest legal control of these opulences, especially in Bharata.  As such, he made his governing body the ultimate managerial authority so the properties would stay within his organization.

The G.B.C. was never intended to be some kind of group guru.  Spiritual authority is permanent and far more important than managerial authority, which is temporary.  The bona fide spiritual master is always the spiritual authority for his disciples, whether they be dékñä disciples or çikñä disciples.  This hubris on the part of the vitiated G.B.C.–to falsely consider itself to be the ultimate authority in all things material and spiritual (connected to Prabhupäda’s branch of the sampradäya)–has resulted in outlandish developments over the years.

The G.B.C. was never meant to be an incorporated entity, but it is now.  The G.B.C. was never meant to appoint, vote on, veto, or certify gurus, but it has done all of these things.  In the late Seventies, the G.B.C. took away the stipend authorized by Prabhupäda for the Bhaktivedänta Institute; it had no authority to do that.  It had the power to do that, so it did it.

Indeed, if you buy into the idea that the vitiated G.B.C. is the ultimate spiritual authority in Prabhupäda’s line of disciplic succession, you will then carry and spread that malefic influence to whomsoever you attempt to convert to bhakti.  Like weeping Atlas cedars, the G.B.C. needs to grow, and grow, and grow—and you will be watering their nescience by your influence.  They believe themselves great, having the temerity to consider themselves the ultimate spiritual authority.  However, the Will did not grant them that status.

Parable of the Monkey Sage

This fable is from the Upäkhyäne Upadeça, “Instructions in Stories” (Gaudéya Mission, 1936). There was a clan of monkeys kept by a rich king, who also owned a stable of prized horses.  He kept sheep, as well. All of these animals were treated well. These domesticated beings became very attached to the opulent food that came from the king’s cooks, but one of the rams was particularly ravenous.  Daily, he would sneak into the kitchen to guzzle food, only to be beaten by the cooks with whatever they could find.

The monkey clan contained a sage.  He had studied under Cäëakya Paëòit and other åñis.  Being favored by His Lordship Çiva, whose another name is Käla, this thinker was adept at gleaning the laws of time in terms of cause and effect—in particular, how they could play out under particular circumstances.  He thus foresaw that there was a developing situation, and that ram could lead to the destruction of his clan unless draconian steps were taken.

He specifically informed his leaders about the impending disaster.  Those fellows ignored him, in no small part because they were contemptuous of him and did not like the essence of his advice, i.e., they did not want to leave the opulence they had become accustomed to, which would thus force them to live simply.  They considered such a spartan way of life unacceptable, and they all mocked and jeered the sage amongst them.

As such, he left them and moved into the forest.

Then one day, when the ram invaded the kitchen, the cooks were only able to find a log of live cinders with which to beat him.  His wool caught fire, and he ran to the horse barn in order to roll on its straw-covered floor, thinking that this would extinguish the fire.  The stable then caught fire, and all of the prized horses were severely burned.  The king then called his chief veterinarian in order to find out if there was a cure for his horses.

His expert vet said that the best cure for horse burns was monkey fat.  The king then exclaimed that he had an entire family of monkeys on his property.  He ordered his servants to take nets, swords, and spears to capture and slaughter these monkeys, and not one of them was able to escape.  They had been warned, but, once the situation reached a certain stage, it was too late.

A Universal Brotherhood of Man

satyam eva jäyate nänåtaà satyena panthä vitato devayänaù
yenäkramanty åñayo hyäpta-kämäù yatra tat satyasya paramaà nidhänam

“Certainly Truth is ever-victorious, not falsity.  It is by Truth that the path of liberation through the higher realm is laid out and by which the great sages, having their desires fulfilled, ascend to the highest destination, the greatest refuge.”
–Muëòaka Upaniñad, 3.1.6

“Öhäkur Bhaktivinode has predicted the consummation of religious unity of the world by the appearance of the only universal church, which bears the eternal designation of the Brahma sampradäya.  He has given mankind the blessed assurance that all theistic churches will shortly merge in the one eternal spiritual community . . . Mankind had been looking forward to this far-off divine event through the long ages.”
-Bhaktisiddhänta Sarasvaté Prabhupäda, Öhäkura Bhaktivinode

“Everybody wants results, but nobody wants to do what they have to do to get them done.”
-Lt. Harry Callaghan, Sudden Impact

What genuine theist would not like to see the Kingdom of God established here?  Who is there amongst us who would not love to relish the divine unity of one bona fide spiritual rule in complete accordance with all Vedic and Vaiñëava authority?  To greater or lesser extents, most of Çréla Prabhupäda’s genuine disciples were immersed in this vision, and we all thought it possible that such a benefic reality could be consummated.

It is predicted to transpire.  It has been predicted by His Divine Grace Çréla Bhaktisiddhänta Sarasvaté Prabhupäda, evidenced by the passage listed above.  It is a very high ideal, but such a conception is not conducive to any hodge-podge or sectarian mentality.  It is an international and, ultimately, cosmic perspective. However, in order for it to play out on the plane of the tangible, proper understanding of the true history of this planet is required.  Just as importantly, proper understanding of the real history of Prabhupäda’s Society must be also established, and, as a corollary, the chaff must first be separated from the wheat in his movement.

There are many paradoxes today in human society, but these can all be resolved by genuine Kåñëa consciousness.  Durable answers to all such problems are readily available to us, but we cannot allow our line of disciplic succession to continue to devolve, as it is now doing under the weight of “ISKCON” nescience.  The true depth of each devotee’s intuition will surface if and/or when he or she meditates on the emergence of a one-world religion in the right way.  This cannot evolve when so many groups are locking down into sectarian ways centered upon racial, ethnic, or cult identifications that have no real substance or meaning.

Another way of saying the same thing is that the true one-world religion—non-different from a brotherhood of man—must needs be the Brahma sampradäya.  The Äcäryas in this line have given us unadulterated Truth never compromised.  Çréla Bhaktisiddhänta was known to be quite uncompromising, often employing the chopping technique in his preaching.  Obviously, from the quote cited above, he not only wanted but predicted the eventual development of the brotherhood of man on this plane.  Yet, consider what he said just at the time he formed the Goudéya Mutt:

“Many groups take shelter of karma, jïäna, and yoga in various degrees (he then goes on to identify forty-three sahajiyä cults according to their Sanskrit or Bengali names).  Will you call all of these groups Gauòéya Vaiñëavas?  Accepting that every jiva is a Vaiñëava, still we are not prepared to call anyone but a rupanuga Vaiñëava a Gauòéya Vaiñëava. . . If a Gauòéya Vaiñëava sammilani includes materialistic groups . . . opposed to controlling the mind, or loses its objective through association with similarly oriented universities or examinations, can it benefit aprakrta Gauòéya Vaiñëavas?”
-Bhaktisiddhänta Sarasvaté Prabhupäda’s Letter to Sir Maëéndra-candra Nandé Bähädura, April 1, 1920

He made no compromise with the other Vaiñëava groups in West Bengal or in Rädhä Kunda.  Indeed, at the later place, he is hated to this day for his criticisms of the bäbäjés there.  Similarly, his most prominent disciple, His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedänta Swämé Prabhupäda, wanted a one-world religion.  He desired that his particular branch of the disciplic succession would be the foundation for the eventual development of this pattern.  Let us look at but one of his statements asserting his vision:

“One Japanese speaker speaking in Gujarat State, India, predicted that in five years time this Krishna consciousness movement would be the world religion, as was reported in the newspaper here. So, now, your responsibility has become very great.”
-Letter to Locanänanda, Dec. 8, 1971

He made efforts.  He wrote letters to the Roman Catholic Pope and the Archbishop of Canterbury in order to set up meetings with these world religionists, but he was rebuffed.  On the other side of the coin, did Prabhupäda go out of his way—did he compromise even slightly—in order to get the unity ball rolling?  All the evidence points in the exact opposite direction, and here are but four examples which exemplify that:

1)  He never unified with any of his godbrothers nor did he even name his society the Gouòéya Mutt;

2)  He only had a handful of meetings with cardinals or priests, always held at his temples.  No unification resulted from these meetings and rarely, if ever, was there follow-up;

3)  He had limited association with a couple of impersonalists, but they never joined him nor did he tailor his movement or writings to accommodate them or their philosophies.  These brief interludes took place only at the beginning of his mission;

4) When Yogi Bhajan, a renowned Sikh leader, came to visit him in Honolulu in June of 1975, Prabhupäda evidenced a tepid response to Yogi Bhajan’s invitation, as his chief guest, to join him at the Unity of Man Conference to be held that summer in New Mexico.  Yogi Bhajan indicated that many world-renown personalities were going to be attending, including Indira Gandhi, yet Prabhupäda showed no enthusiasm for the invitation, and he did not attend.

In other words, in order to actually establish a brotherhood of man, the one universal church, or a one-world religion, purity trumps unity at every stage.  The creation of so many names and sects now imposed on Truth has produced divisions and even greater psychological distances amongst the people of the world.  This malady cannot be resolved by compromise.  Genuine Kåñëa consciousness is ultimately the natural state of every living being, and its development is being suppressed by “ISKCON” in the name of its own integral unity.  We are going to be exploring this theme in-depth as the multi-part series proceeds.

There is one central source of transcendental energy, and His Way is The Way.  His Way is the Absolute Truth.  His Way is going to triumph . . . in due course.  We cannot become instruments of that triumph if we acquiesce to any compromise while allegedly trying to implement it.  This standard has been set by our previous Äcäryas, and we need to understand it rightly in order to get into complete harmony with Truth.  Just as importantly, we need spiritual courage to act on our understanding, to spiritually solidify it.  We would all like to see the consummation of religious unity here on earth in our lifetimes, but we first have to be willing to pay the price in order to even get that ideal off the ground.

Return to Part One