Temple Presidents: Voting Or Selecting?

[suchandra 1]

Should a Temple President be selected by vote, or assigned by the GBC? The answer according Prabhupada's writings may be mixed - may not be fully clear.

 

"Please accept my blessings. I beg to acknowledge receipt of your two letters dated 20 and 26 February, 1970, respectively, and I am so glad to learn that you have been elected president for this year. In India, when there was congress election among the executive members, each year a person was elected president. I think this system may be followed in our institutions also. Of course it will depend on the local situation, but in a round if each person is given the chance of managing the whole affairs, that means everyone becomes responsible officer." SP letter to Guru das, London, 3/2/70

"I have just now received some letters from London from Madhavananda and others brought by Paramahamsa Swami who was there. Regarding Madhavananda being the president, if he received the vote, why you have opposed? You must be impartial. My recommendation is that he must be the president. He has been chosen by the vote, and I am giving the casting vote for him. He is doing things very nicely there, so he must be the president. Prabha Visnu should go on Sankirtana, and Madhavananda should be president. Everything must go on. The women are doing nicely, so why are they being changed from the pujari to the Sankirtana? These things should be done by the President."

"These are internal things, and you should not interfere. I do not approve of your changing the women. It should be the choice of Madhavananda who should be the pujari." (SP Letter to Hansadutta, 9/12/74)

"Regarding the election there for President of the temple, I understand that you received the vote. So you should be the president. I am putting my casting vote for you. I have informed Hamsaduta this by post." (SP Letter to Madhavananda, 9/16/74)

"If it was decided by vote that Hamsaduta would select the president then Hamsaduta is right. Without authority Hamsaduta cannot change the election. If the vote was in favor of Madhavananda, then Hamsaduta cannot whimsically change the vote. But, if by vote he was authorized to select the president, then whomever he selects is right. I was not informed by my secretary that Hamsaduta was authorized by vote to make the selection. But, why was Hamsaduta authorized if the vote was already taken? This I do not know. On the whole I understand there are so many contradictions, so in the presence of all members you may take the vote again and decide finally." (SP Letter to Mukunda, Mayapur, 9/29/74)

"Recently at Bhaktivedanta Manor they have held one election for President and Hamsaduta was present. But I am receiving so many contradictory reports as to what was the outcome. So I have advised them to again hold election with all members present, and I request you to go there to see what is the outcome of the election." (SP Letter to Bhagavan, 9/29/74)

"Regarding the election at Bhaktivedanta Manor, as you have suggested an election of all members present should be held to make a final selection. I have already suggested this to Mukunda. Another meeting should be held, and I have already asked Bhagavan das to be present, so there will be two GBC's and all members present. Out of the two candidates whoever is elected by the majority vote, may be the president." (SP Letter to Hamsadutta, 10/1/74)

"I am prepared to give you fair chance, but you cannot criticize Hamsaduta. Let there be re-election in the presence of two GBC men. We should utilize our talents without being envious of others. You should do your best, but you should not be envious of others. In material life there is simply envy of others progress, but in spiritual life one encourages another, 'Oh you are doing very nice.' That is Radharani. She says oh here is a very nice devotee. Please Krishna, you accept him." (SP Letter to Madhavananda, 10/6/74)

"Now, considering the European situation in a meeting between Myself, yourself and Bhagavan das, I think Madhavananda should become president of London and Prabhavisnu should become president of Amsterdam and you can arrange this." (Letter to Hansadutta, 12/31/74)

"Please accept my blessings. I am in due receipt of your letter dated Dec. 27th, 1974 and have noted the contents. Madhavananda is now being sent to Hong Kong to collect for Krishna-Balarama Mandir in Vrndavana." (Letter to Patita-Uddharana, 1/3/75)

"Yes, your appointment as the new president of the Miami Temple is completely approved by me, now take advantage and preach among all the young people there and recruit some good men." (Letter to Abhirama, 3/6/73)

"Recently I visited Africa and I could see that the management was not going on properly. So now I have given Nava Yogendra sannyasa order and am sending him back to Africa. He will be the president of the Mombassa temple, so please help him to make our mission there very solid." (Letter to Mr. and Mrs. Bhatia, 11/23/75)

"Yes, Srutakirti he is a good boy, so he can be made the President as you suggest." (Letter to Gurukrpa, 8/26/75)

"Regarding Washington temple yes Brisakapi can be now recognized as the temple president." (Letter to Rupanuga, 9/25/75)

"Yes, so you keep an eye on things there in Laguna Beach, and see that whoever takes over as temple president is trained up." Letter to Jayatirtha, 11/20/75)

"Madhudvisa Swami has come here from Australia and as he is free I am sending him to New York. I have discussed with him how I want my rooms to be. As things have generally not been so well managed there I have asked him to be ad-hoc President of New York Temple until the coming GBC meeting." (Letter to Rupanuga, 1/23/76)

"In connection with our ISKCON project in Fiji, I beg to inform you that we are managing our Krishna Consciousness Movement by the Governing Body Commission, GBC. We have got about 20 GBC's looking after the whole world affair, and above the GBC I am there. Below the GBC there are the temple president, secretary, treasurer in every centre. So the temple president is responsible to the GBC and the GBC is responsible to me. In this way we are managing. But why are you proposing a separate trustee for Fiji. We have up to now no separate trustee. If this is for security purposes, that we can discuss. If you have got some new idea please explain to me how you want to manage. But I think Fiji Temple cannot be managed in a separate way. But still I will entertain some idea if you have difference you can write me explaining."

"The deed for the property and temple should be made in favor of 'His Divine Grace A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, founder-acharya of the International Society for Krishna Consciousness.' It cannot be dedicated to any of the office bearers. So I suggest that you become the president of the temple and Upendra become the secretary, and either your brother or your wife can become treasurer. There is no need of trustees." (SP Letter to Vasudeva, 6/30/76)

"I do not want that Sukadeva be removed from his position as I can see that he is sincerely following the principles at present. The GBC can not whimsically change the temple president, there is a resolution to this effect. Why have you threatened to remove him and unnecessarily created this situation? Please be very sober in your dealings with these temple presidents, they are undoubtedly rendering a valuable service and are worthy of respect and encouragement." (SP Letter to Gurukrpa, 5/11/76)

"What happened to Jagat Purusa in Bombay? He is an experienced man in Bombay so why he should be changed to Delhi? This change of Presidents is to be made in the GBC meeting. In the middle of the year there is no question of change. Tejyas can continue as President. Three times changing president is not good. It should first be conjointly considered by the GBC." (Letter to Gopal Krishna, 7/11/76)

"Stop this. This is a clique. I don't want this. Why has Subala Maharaja gone there. He is an outsider, why are they interfering. Subala left India now why has he returned without permission? This removal of the president is very unconstitutional. The devotees who do not like to work with Tejas should immediately go away from the temple. But he may not. Those who feel against him can go away. Devotees come from the outside and interfere. No, they cannot change the president. Who sent Janmanjoya there? Why is he taking to politics? So you opinion is also mine, that Tejas is the most sincere worker of the lot. Please stop this." (SP Letter to Tamal Krishna, 1/1/74)

“Anyway I have already written you that the local members must agree for him to be removed by you, according to the ``Direction of Management.'' SP letter to Rupanuga das, 74-11-08 Bombay 8th November, 1974

“And who has been appointed treasurer and secretary? The president, secretary and treasurer elected by the members of the center cannot be changed at least for one year; better to continue it for three years. All combined together should be responsible for keeping correct accounts. Giriraja is responsible and he should be made the treasurer. You should remain as president and Acyutananda Swami as secretary. So make arrangements in that way.”

SP Letter to JayaPataka Maharaja, Calcutta, Aug, 24, 1971

"N.B. Regarding replacing Abhirama and Damodara I refer to the 'Direction of Management' as follows: 'Removal of a Temple President by GBC requires support by the local Temple members.' Therefore you should take a vote of the Temple members and do the needful. A.C.B.S." (SP Letter to Rupanuga, 11/7/74)

"There have been many letters coming from different quarters regarding the election; therefore I have called for a re-election in the presence of all members and two GBC men. You can have a written ballot, and whoever receives the majority vote, he shall be the president. You are right that politics should be avoided. In my personal life I did not participate in the political diplomacy of my god-brothers. I was simply thinking how to fulfill the order of my guru maharaj. He gave me his blessings, and I was saved from any implication. Now I am trying to carry out his instructions strictly, and it has come out successful." (SP Letter to Gangamayi, 10/18/74)

"Regarding the election of President, a president can only be changed by vote. If no vote was taken, then the president cannot be changed. Neither Hamsaduta can change the president whimsically or can anybody else change the president. According the ''Direction of Management'' the GBC cannot change the President but only by vote can it be done. The GBC's business is to see that the President and the members are doing nicely, following the regulative principles, and chanting 16 rounds and that other things are going on nicely." (SP Letter to Mukunda, 9/29/74)

[realist 0]

Democracy is a concern if devotees do not have a good understanding of shastra.

'Might’ or majority rule and opinion is not always right in the material world, try and stop meat eating by democratic vote and see how nonsense democracy really is.

Mainstream law and judgment is not always correct in the material world, ISKCON experienced this with the eleven chosen gurus fiasco and their sannyasi cronies and drones in the 1980’s, who often pushed people away because they were not their yes men and women. They also governed with the fear tactics by putting apprehension into others in order to make them submissive (because of their difference of shastric opinion).

ISKCON has already been through this dreaded experience, neglecting the welfare of devotees because these sannyasis and gurus foolishly and arrogantly thought they new everything, when in fact they had very little vision and insight of what was really going on in the past. NOW they say, after the damage is done, we were not advanced enough at the time. Such comments do not and will never excuse them of their neglecting the devotee’s welfare!!

Nowadays, many have cleverly got away with it over the period of time, using that excuse and proclaiming they where not sophisticated enough back then. Does that excuse them of how they WERE back then? Demanding worship from the devotees, making out they DID KNOW EVERYTHING and were ‘great’ devotees meant to save the human race.

Today such so-called leaders and GBC men claim we never understood back then however, is there a possibility it again can happen? Remember we were suppose to be following a democratic system back then (that was just overridden by the guru or sannyasi anyway if he did not like an idea anyway).

The big down fall down of any democratic system, is where the leaders allow ‘democracy’ to cleverly masquerade in name only for the devotee’s welfare, as we already have experienced, when in fact it is a shame. The many bogus Sannyasis of the 80s ‘pretending’ or ‘imitating’ Srila Prabhupada, were really nothing other than a ‘show’ in dress only, totally stimulated by wearing the outward dress of a sadhu, yet only concerned about their own show of devotional life that blinded them to what was really going on. These material motivated 'know-alls’ always demanded we fall at their feet rather than command respect with their genuin Krishna Consciousness with caring insight and humility. Even when they saw things going wrong they had no idea what to do or deal with it. Back in the 80s and 90s, many Temples were ruled under this ‘ignorant’ dictatorial conceited egotistical leadership in the NAME ONLY of a democratic system or self governing system.

 

This 'arrogance' must never happen again however, is that possible??- Is it still going on today in some Temples??. Where if you don't do as say and believe in only THEIR way, they just ignore you and turn everyone against you. And then we wonder......

Ideally our society needs autocratic leadership but such qualification is a serious problem in today’s society because of genuine qualification.

With leadership come vast responsibilities

Srila Prabhupada did at times indicate that democracy has a place in ISKCON. For example, in 1974 he instructed the devotees not to change the temple president at Bhaktivedanta Manor without a vote amongst all the devotees. In fact he even went so far as to say that even the GBC could not change the president without a local vote.12

In this way Srila Prabhupada was not averse to democracy, although the usual model of Vedic society is one of autocratic monarchy. Let’s first ask the question: What is democracy? Essentially it is an attempt to give a voice and some power to the people in general. Everyone in any society should have certain rights and some recourse if those rights are abused. If we examine carefully varnashrama dharma, we do see that the rights of the individual are a key feature in role definitions. The leaders themselves are expected to protect the people. There are innumerable examples of such leadership in the Vedas. If one does not fulfil the requirements of the role, then one cannot expect to remain situated in that role and enjoy the privileges thereof. In the case of the leader the check and balance comes from the brahmanas. Woe betide the monarch who, becoming carried away with his position and power, neglects their counsel. (See, for example, the story of King Vena in the Srimad Bhagavatam, Canto 4, chapter 14).

 

[realist 0]

 

 

[mahak 0]

ayodhya. Monarchy for the people, and by the people.

 

I like the brahminical democracy practiced by the brahmanas during the king vena affair, now there is true democracy, something USA needs now for our own king vena.

[Ashvatama 0]

 

Democracy is a concern ..'Might’ or majority rule and opinion is not always right in the material world, try and stop meat eating by democratic vote and see how nonsense democracy really is.

 

 

Good point, just because the masses believes something is right and proper does not make it right

[Murali_Mohan_das 0]

I just read this thread and now I have a splitting headache.

 

It's amazing to see what Srila Prabhupada so patiently tolerated!

[cbrahma 0]

The question of whether TPs should be elected is moot. The GBC is a totalitarian self-appointed body that has managed to seize total control of ISKCON. This could only be done by the consent of the majority. So it really is a democratically elected dictatorship. I'm amazed how so many devotees could allow their intelligence to be so easily obscured and surrender it to unscrupulous men who haven't the slightest concern for their welfare. Karma will prevail if Krsna does not directly step in.

[Murali_Mohan_das 0]

 

I'm amazed how so many devotees could allow their intelligence to be so easily obscured and surrender it to unscrupulous men who haven't the slightest concern for their welfare.

 

Come on!! Isn't that a bit much? How can anybody claim to know that these aspiring devotees have *no* devotion in their hearts whatsoever.

 

Certainly they have some concern for all--they are Vaishnavas. Perhaps, though, their devotion is mixed with mundane self-interest (is *yours* pure???).

 

It's encumbent upon us to focus on their good qualities so that they may grow in Krishna Conscsiousness.

[cbrahma 0]

 

Come on!! Isn't that a bit much? How can anybody claim to know that these aspiring devotees have *no* devotion in their hearts whatsoever.

 

Certainly they have some concern for all--they are Vaishnavas. Perhaps, though, their devotion is mixed with mundane self-interest (is *yours* pure???).

 

It's encumbent upon us to focus on their good qualities so that they may grow in Krishna Conscsiousness.

Truth is the unshakeable basis for any spiritual progess - hence the tattva in guru-tattva. If one is a cheater using disciples to increase one's riches and reputation how can there be devotion? If one misleads, how can there be anything but bad karma?

Our responsibility is to oust these pretenders and rescue the mission of the spiritual master.

[Murali_Mohan_das 0]

Enema anybody?

 

 

Truth is the unshakeable basis for any spiritual progess - hence the tattva in guru-tattva. If one is a cheater using disciples to increase one's riches and reputation how can there be devotion? If one misleads, how can there be anything but bad karma?

Our responsibility is to oust these pretenders and rescue the mission of the spiritual master.

[Murali_Mohan_das 0]

 

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0086190/quotes

 

 

The Emperor: [to Luke] The alliance... will die. As will your friends. Good, I can feel your anger. I am unarmed. Take your weapon. Strike me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete.

 

 

Our responsibility is to oust these pretenders and rescue the mission of the spiritual master.

[Kulapavana 0]

 

Our responsibility is to oust these pretenders and rescue the mission of the spiritual master.

 

That is a noble goal but what and who are we going to replace them with? Lets face it, the Gaudiya guru-centric system is very prone to abuse and the ritvik system is just plain apa-siddhantic. A real plan is needed in that regard.

[Murali_Mohan_das 0]

I better go away for a while and cool my heels, I feel a bout of offensiveness coming on (in addition to the enema comment).

 

Any mundane plan is bound to fail. There's just no getting around *SURRENDER*.

 

 

That is a noble goal but what and who are we going to replace them with? Lets face it, the Gaudiya guru-centric system is very prone to abuse and the ritvik system is just plain apa-siddhantic. A real plan is needed in that regard.

[cbrahma 0]

 

That is a noble goal but what and who are we going to replace them with? Lets face it, the Gaudiya guru-centric system is very prone to abuse and the ritvik system is just plain apa-siddhantic. A real plan is needed in that regard.

How is an individual practioner responsible for the whole misconstrued system, let alone for fixing it? But as the opportunity arises to at least speak out against the abuse it should be taken.

[cbrahma 0]

 

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0086190/quotes

what exactly is the point of these totally unrelated quotes?

[Murali_Mohan_das 0]

 

what exactly is the point of these totally unrelated quotes?

 

Hatred and anger lead us away from our goal.

 

Self-righteous indignation is *not* our friend.

 

Get it now?

 

If you let your hate consume you, you will turn to the "dark side".

[Murali_Mohan_das 0]

You can tilt at windmills all you like, but you will accomplish nothing but your own degradation.

 

 

Hatred and anger lead us away from our goal.

 

Self-righteous indignation is *not* our friend.

 

Get it now?

 

If you let your hate consume you, you will turn to the "dark side".

[cbrahma 0]

 

I better go away for a while and cool my heels, I feel a bout of offensiveness coming on (in addition to the enema comment).

 

Any mundane plan is bound to fail. There's just no getting around *SURRENDER*.

Who said anything about a mundane plan?

I was wondering when the word surrender would be marshalled in the defense of corruption (as it has historically been when the GBC has been challenged,...and there's always the 'trinad api..' to blame the victim).

[cbrahma 0]

 

You can tilt at windmills all you like, but you will accomplish nothing but your own degradation.

Decrying a real situation is not tilting at windmills - it is a moral obligation.

Silence is consent. In any case I was hardly offering a solution - I was merely pointing out the problem.

[cbrahma 0]

 

Hatred and anger lead us away from our goal.

 

Self-righteous indignation is *not* our friend.

 

Get it now?

 

If you let your hate consume you, you will turn to the "dark side".

 

Knowing the system is corrupt should spur one into some kind of action - if not at least an objection to it.

I am in no danger of being consumed by an emotion. It is not a sentimental issue. That is a red herring.

[Murali_Mohan_das 0]

Physics has proven that we cannot observe something without affecting it.

 

Metaphysically, to focus on the negative is to make it stronger--to give it energy. When we focus on the positive, the negative falls away naturally.

 

 

Decrying a real situation is not tilting at windmills - it is a moral obligation.

Silence is consent. In any case I was hardly offering a solution - I was merely pointing out the problem.

[Murali_Mohan_das 0]

Everything is a question of sentiment. Either it's a devotional sentiment or it's a mundane sentiment.

 

You got on the high horse first. I got on the high horse to try to encourage you to get off *your* high horse. Now, I'm going away and you can rail on ad nauseum.

 

 

Knowing the system is corrupt should spur one into some kind of action - if not at least an objection to it.

I am in no danger of being consumed by an emotion. It is not a sentimental issue. That is a red herring.

[Kulapavana 0]

 

Any mundane plan is bound to fail. There's just no getting around *SURRENDER*.

 

aaaah... the surrender card was the favourite card of the bogus leaders

 

here is the trick: anybody who presses you to surrender to anybody besides Krsna is a suspect. you know that verse in the Gita, "abandon all dharmas and just surrender unto Me"? Krsna does not say: surrender to your guru, or to his institution. It is quite plain.

 

The plan is to focus on Krsna.

[Beggar 0]

Your both wrong, we should only discuss the origin of the soul ad nausea!

This is my path and I am the shining example!

[Murali_Mohan_das 0]

You offer no solutions (by your own admission), so what is the point?

 

For me to stand by and be silent while you defame those sincerely (if not purely) trying to follow the orders of their Guru Maharaja is consent to Vaishnava aparadha.

 

 

Decrying a real situation is not tilting at windmills - it is a moral obligation.

Silence is consent. In any case I was hardly offering a solution - I was merely pointing out the problem.