GBC member endorses IRM mission

[

](/images/image001.gif)

Back to Prabhupada, Issue 28, Summer 2010

Welcome to Issue 28 of Back to Prabhupada (BTP).

Kali-yuga, the era in which we live, is characterised as being full of hypocrisy:

“This is the age, Kali. It is called Kali. Hypocrisy, simply hypocrisy. Kali means full of hypocrisy.”
(Srila Prabhupada Lecture, 26/11/1966)

So prevalent is such hypocrisy, that in Kali-yuga hypocrisy is actually seen as the currency by which one should live. Rather than being an aberration, it is considered the principle by which one should operate. Hence, without batting an eyelid and without any shame, hypocrisy will be put forward as perfectly normal behaviour.

A startlingly striking example of this was given recently by co-GBC Secretary for ISKCON Mayapur and GBC Secretary for the UK and Ireland, Praghosa Das (“PD”), on the GBC-funded website “Dandavats”. There PD responds to criticism against a GBC paper which rebuts the assertions of His Holiness Narayana Maharaja (“NM”), who as our readers may know, competes with the GBC’s own voted-in gurus for ISKCON members to be initiated by him.

PD states:

1) That responding to NM can in no way be considered “offensive”, because the GBC paper merely sets “the historical record straight”, due to NM’s “continual misrepresentation of Srila Prabhupada’s instructions”.

2) That levelling the charge of “aparadha” against the GBC because NM is “senior” is an “unjust dynamic”, because NM is “free to make any presentation, no matter how questionable”, whilst the GBC are not allowed to respond without being accused of being offensive.

3) That this “unjust dynamic” ensures “that while Narayan Maharaja should be given the natural respect due to a Vaisnava, ISKCON devotees can be disregarded and maligned”.

4) That it appears that “the fear of Vaisnava aparadha is being employed as a mechanism to blur the facts.”

5) That when NM repeatedly “misrepresents Srila Prabhupada’s key instructions and intents”, ISKCON leaders are “duty-bound to stand up and set the record straight”, even if there is “the risk of some offense”, because “there was the certainty of an even greater offense if they had not done so”.

The above are all reasonable and logical points. But they carry just the same weight when applied to the IRM “setting the historical record straight” in relation to the GBC’s “continual misrepresentation of Srila Prabhupada’s instructions”! To not accept this would simply be hypocrisy of the highest order. Hence, what is actually an “unjust dynamic” is the GBC complaining about the use of “Vaisnava aparadha” being used to silence their rebutting NM, when the same tactics are used against the IRM to silence our rebutting the GBC! We are routinely told that because ISKCON leaders are “senior Vaisnavas”, we cannot criticise what they say or do, otherwise it would constitute "Vaisnava aparadha” or being offensive.

A GBC member has accepted that it is not “offensive” to point out the truth, no matter how “senior” the person being corrected appears to be. Thus above, we have in the words of a GBC official himself, many justifications for the IRM’s mission to correct the GBC’s continual misrepresentation of Srila Prabhupada’s instructions, and the old canard of “Vaisnava aparadha” can not be used to silence the IRM.

To quote the words of another prominent ISKCON leader and GBC emeritus, HH Hridyananda Das Goswami:

“We need the same rules […] ‘What’s good for the goose is good for the gander’.”
(ISKCON Communications Journal, Vol 3, Issue 1).

We expect, therefore, to never again hear the complaint of “Vaisnava aparadha” against the IRM for pointing out the GBC’s errors. Rather, we expect to be judged on the facts, just as the GBC are appealing for their rebuttal to be evaluated.

Thus, with the same arguments regarding “being offensive” being considered fair when used against the IRM by the GBC, but unfair if used against the GBC by others, things are being turned upside down, or topsy-turvy. And, lo and behold, this is exactly what the hypocrisy of Kali-yuga is known as:

“Therefore, by the influence of the age of Kali, everywhere, politically, socially or religiously, everything is topsy-turvy, and therefore for the sane man it is all regrettable.”
(Srimad-Bhagavatam, 1:16:22 purport)

As the quote above illustrates, such “topsy-turvy” behaviour applies to the religious sphere as well, and unfortunately it is today epitomised by those who are officially supposed to be Srila Prabhupada’s representatives.

On the pages of this issue we give many more examples of how hypocrisy is the standard for behaviour for the acting GBC and its supporters. Page 12 analyses the above-mentioned GBC paper against NM, and other examples of hypocrisy can be found on pages 13, 15 and the back page, proving that Kali operates right at the heart of the current GBC.

Please feel free to write to me at the following address: irm@iskconirm.com.

Thank you and Hare Krishna.
Yours in the service of Srila Prabhupada,

Krishnakant

Subscribe for FREE to Back To Prabhupada Magazine - Click Here

Return to Praghosa Dasa Index

Return to IRM Homepage

Please chant: Hare Krishna, Hare Krishna, Krishna, Krishna, Hare, Hare,
Hare Rama, Hare Rama, Rama, Rama, Hare, Hare. And be Happy!