Back To Prabhupada, Issue 4, Summer 2004
In 1995, the GBC in their wisdom decided to issue a definitive document on the Guru issue for ISKCON titled: “Gurus and Initiation in ISKCON” (GBC, 1995), [henceforward to be referred to as GII]. Part of this document was a paper entitled “On My Order Understood”, in which the GBC attempted to explain once and for all what Srila Prabhupada’s orders were for how initiations in ISKCON would continue after his physical departure. The GBC said of this paper:
| “The GBC approves of the paper entitled
‘On My Order Understood’ which establishes as ISKCON law the
final siddhanta on Srila Prabhupada’s desire for continuing the
disciplic succession after the departure of His Divine Grace.” [See Part II: GBC Position Papers in this volume.] (GII, p.1) |
As can be seen the GBC were so confident of
their paper that they used redundant English by stating it offered the “final siddhanta”. A siddhanta or conclusion is by
definition always final!
“The Final Order” (TFO), the definitive position paper of the IRM
documenting Srila Prabhupada’s position as the Diksa Guru for ISKCON,
was written specifically in response to the above GBC paper, taking it
as its reference point. As TFO itself states in its very SECOND sentence:
| “Although we will refer to several
papers and articles that have been published by senior ISKCON
devotees on this subject, the main points of reference will be
the GBC’s most recent official handbook on initiation entitled. ‘Gurus And Initiation In ISKCON’ (to be referred to henceforward
as GII), and the paper ‘On My Order Understood’ which is
mentioned under section 1.1 of the ‘Laws of ISKCON’.” (“The Final Order, Introduction, 1996) |
TFO then goes on to dismantle the arguments put
forward in GII.
After 8 long years, the GBC have finally admitted that their so-called ‘final siddhanta’ paper, the main target of TFO’s attack, was not
only not final, but completely bogus, as the following resolution passed
this year at the GBC meetings states:
| 409. Continuing the Disciplic
Succession [Statement] WHEREAS: The paper “On My Order Understood” contains assumptions and assertions that, in numerous places, do not match the available evidence from the statements of Srila Prabhupada, And the GBC desires to make a more concise statement, RESOLVED: “On My Order-Understood” is replaced as official GBC policy by the following statement: The GBC officially accepts the following conclusions about continuing the disciplic succession: Srila Prabhupada consistently said that his disciples would themselves become spiritual masters. Guru, sadhu, and sastra all support this standard way of continuing the disciplic succession. Srila Prabhupada said that his disciples would become “regular Gurus” and that each of their disciples would thus be a “disciple of my disciple.” On the strength of our Vaisnava tradition and the statements of Srila Prabhupada, the GBC concludes that Srila Prabhupada intended his disciples to become “regular Gurus” after he physically departed. [GBC Resolution 409, 2004] |
In addition, whilst submitting the reasons for
ditching their official paper, Sivarama and Jayadvaita Swamis, the
persons behind the resolution, actually state that this final Siddhanta GBC paper contains “lies”, and that it “stretches the truth and contains poor logic”.
As we can see from the above resolution, whilst admitting that their
paper is basically a fabrication, the GBC are happy to re-state the same
conclusions, only this time with no fabricated quotes from Srila
Prabhupada to support their position. Rather they rest their whole
philosophical position on just one piece of evidence:
An allusion to one line which Srila Prabhupada speaks on a tape, and
which does not even say what they claim. Srila Prabhupada states on May
28th, 1977 the following:
| “When I order you become Guru, he becomes regular Guru. That’s all. He becomes disciple of my disciple.” |
Srila Prabhupada here clearly states that Gurus
will emerge only WHEN he gives an order to that effect
- “When I order you become Guru” – and as the GBC seem now to
concede, such an order was never given. For this reason the GBC have had
to fabricate the following account:
| “Srila Prabhupada said that his disciples would become “regular Gurus” and that each of their disciples would thus be a “disciple of my disciple.” |
Please spot the huge difference between what
Srila Prabhupada actually says and the GBC fabrication. Srila Prabhupada
does NOT say that his disciples “WOULD BECOME regular Gurus”. He
states that only WHEN he orders them to become Guru, do they
become Guru, not that they WOULD become Guru.
And the authors of this latest GBC resolution have the cheek to say the
paper it replaces contained - “assertions that, in numerous places, do
not match the available evidence from the statements of Srila Prabhupada”, yet we see their latest effort is no better.
In ditching their ‘final siddhanta’ paper the GBC have
effectively admitted that ‘The arguments and evidence which we put
forward to reach our conclusion were completely wrong, and we are not
offering any alternative argument or evidence, but we still want to say
that the conclusion – that we be allowed to operate a Guru program
replacing Srila Prabhupada – is correct.’
Thus the GBC’s programme is simply to be ‘Gurus at all costs’. First
they tried to do it by instituting the Guru Hoax part 1 – the zonal
acarya system. When that failed they tried Guru Hoax part 2 – the
everyone and anyone can be Guru programme – justified by the now
discarded “On My Order Understood’ paper. This continual changing of
position papers to try and keep the ‘Guru business’ on the road was
thoroughly condemned by Srila Prabhupada:
“So these rascals will change every year their theology”.
(Srila Prabhupada, morning walk, LA 21/12/73)
Subscribe for FREE to Back To Prabhupada Magazine - Click HereReturn to "Great Guru Hoax" Index