Committe on Succession and Leadership

suchandra · July 3, 2007

ISKCON's move towards installing diksa-gurus who start to initiate their own disciples although their spiritual master is still physically present.

Interview with Bhakti Vijnana Swami, Chair of the Committee on Succession and Leadership:

Long term: We need to identify and train the potential future leaders amongst the young generation of ISKCON devotees—both those born in the movement, and those joining. We need to provide them with thorough, systematic training in all areas of Krishna conscious leadership.

Mid term strategy: potential leaders who are already engaged full time in our temples need more systematic training and consistent empowerment for their growth.

Short term: Professional development and education and training of our present leaders on the ongoing basis.

In present-day terms, this coresponds to talent scouting, systematic training, and professional development. Some of our present leaders are already doing this through courses and training processes. They need ongoing encouragement and support. In many other places this isn’t happening yet.

What were some of the challenges you have faced?

In the beginning we struggled to find consensus. We work in different areas and have different experiences and opinions; it took a lot of dialogue to come to a unified understanding and vision. ISKCON is so diversified, making it hard to design a system which works everywhere; we discussed the need for unity in diversity—teaching universal standards, but also allowing for regional adjustments.

We concluded that the training should not be just academic, but something that changes the heart and facilitates transformative experiences so trainees “own” and realize the knowledge. Experience is key, and we hope the process will instil a strong allegiance and faith in Srila Prabhupada’s mission and goals. Academic knowledge is easier to teach, but that is not enough. We want to transmit values and spiritual culture.

We identified one core element which helps transform the heart: the personal teacher-student relationship. We want this next generation of leaders to place a strong emphasis on spiritual care. Therefore, this educational system needs to reflect that care throughout its operation. We will need qualified teachers and trainers.

Once established, we hope to have more qualified leaders—something that will be felt across the movement. A strong leader creates an atmosphere of inspiration and proper values, and a culture of spiritual care and empowerment. We want to try to recreate the mood of enthusiasm and commitment that typified much of the earlier days in ISKCON.

We are talking about creating a leadership academy which would be a kind of graduate-level institution. We want to train both spiritual leaders and managerial leaders, in other words both brahmanas and ksatriyas.

A challenge our committee faces is communicating this urgent need to the GBC body and the rest of ISKCON to get their full support. We need resources for this initiative and for this we have to elicit support from different sections of ISKCON.

When the conceptual stage is finished we will next plan the specifics—the facilities need, the staff, etc. We are not certain of the exact location of this “ISKCON Academy for Leadership”, but we are leaning towards having it in India for reasons including Srila Prabhupada’s desire and the availability of resources.

suchandra · July 3, 2007

Comment posted by Krishna-Kirti das on July 1st, 2007, calling the Ritviks, unity in diversity.

A challenge our committee faces is communicating this urgent need to the GBC body and the rest of ISKCON to get their full support.

At least from the “rest of ISKCON” side, a precondition for full support will mean open, public discussion and some debate on an initiative whose apparent aim, among others, is the professionalization of ISKCON’s managerial and intellectual classes.

Besides other important issues, perhaps the most important core issue that needs to be publically discussed is unity in diversity. The necessity for such a discussion is that presently under the banner of ISKCON there exists some understandings of Srila Prabhupada’s teachings that differ significantly on some important precepts, and each claims to be authentic. The coexistence of these different views is in some cases unhappy and sometimes forced.

Regarding unity in diversity, the question that sorely needs to be addressed is are there views of Srila Prabhupada’s teachings within ISKCON that have significant differences yet can be considered authentic? One of the implications of the answer to this question is how an institution such as a leadership academy will treat devotees whose views of Srila Prabhupada differ from those of the institution’s incumbent leaders even if, begrudgingly, those views are considered authentic.

If it can be presumed that those who eventually get to make the big institutional decisions, however advanced in spiritual life they may otherwise be, are not yet liberated from the influence of material nature, then fundamental philosophical and theological questions regarding authenticity are not trivial. Without regular discussion and open debate about such questions, a leadership academy like the one proposed could easily end up insular and ossified like today’s overwhelmingly liberal academy, where, for example, many of its incumbent academics openly say that conservatives need not apply.

Vetting people from a young age for leadership positions, and entrance to the academy, implies that there will be a selection process. That process will be significantly influenced by the ideology of those making the selection. If those deciding who will and who will not join their ranks are themselves not yet liberated, then their ideology, however wholesome it may be to begin with, is subject to drift, subject to influence from outside ideas, and–if the decision makers are left to themselves–certainly subject to radicalization through group-think. When in general we’re not liberated, the element of diversity (as in diverse views), if allowed, increases the chances that someone will detect critical errors in our own beliefs and thinking before they have a chance to ruin us and those who depend on us.

This is why open and public debate, which characterizes a vibrant and healthy intellectual culture, is absolutely necessary for the success of a project like the proposed academy. Such a debate is essential, and it would be a practical application of the principle of unity in diversity.

Do our decision makers want this?

Comment posted by krishna-kirti on July 1st, 2007