The GBC's Ultimate Authority
by Ameyatma das

Ameyatma das: My conclusion regarding the 'gurus' and the GBC has to do with Authority within the Ashram.

ISKCON is SP's Ashram(s). In his ashram there is only 1 Absolute Authority. While he was physically present there he alone was the highest authority. The GBC all served under his authority.

Guru - MASTER - is the highest Authority of his Ashram. He is the supreme authority for his disciples.

Prabhupad disciples do not take Sridhar, NM, - anyone - as a higher authority then SP. He is our MASTER.

In all of SP's teachings / instructions regarding the management of his ashrams after his physical departure he had named the GBC as the 'ultimate' authority in his absence. But, from the DOM, to the Topmost Urgency Doc, to his last Will, he explicitly delineated the authority of the GBC, their Purpose was to act as the Executioners of the Will and Instructions of HDG ACBSP. Thus, as long as they perform their foundational duty properly, they have authority. And, what is that authority? To see that SP's instructions are Executed. They have absolutely no authority to Change SP's teachings. In this way, SP's teachings remain the Supreme and Absolute Authority of all members of His ashrams. The GBC's ultimate authority is overseeing the Execution of ACBSP's instructions. SP gave the Legislation - His teachings, and the GBC are to be the Executive branch in seeing that his teachings are executed.

In all of Prabhupad's teachings regarding the structure of authority in His ISKCON ashrams, He Never Once gave one signal instruction about any other authority within His Ashrams. He never mentioned any so-called 'gurus' ever occupying a single iota of authority. Jero, 0 - nothing. Not once did he ever speak of guru's usurping any sort of authority away from the GBC.

Yet, he had given instructions that the GBC were to give Spiritual guidance (guiding members in accepting, understanding and following SP's teachings), to give managerial guidance to the TP's and temples, and to address the Personal Issues of the ISKCON ashram members. Those were duties SP gave to the GBC. And, he never once said that any of those duties were to be taken away from them.

But, now we introduce the so-called iskcon 'gurus'.

The Itsgone (Totally Bogus) Gurus are given What Authority in Iskcon?
Do they have authority over their so-called 'disciples'?
What authority do they have?
And, who gave them such authority?

The ONLY authority SP gave to those whom He called RITVIKS was to make the final decision whether or not to accept the TP's recommendations that new members met SP's criteria and standards for becoming his disciples. That is the ONLY authority SP gave to the Rtviks. And, He never gave Any authority to any so-called future gurus of His ISKCON.

The itsgone (bad) GBC - they acted OUTSIDE of the SP's instructions and concocted that the Gurus should have some sort of authority over their so-called disciples.

Any authority they give to the itsgone (totally mad) gurus is totally bogus mental concoction because whatever authority they make up, none of it is based on Prabhupad's teachings. So, it is bogus mental concoction only.

And, low-and-behold , wouldn't ya just know it. Of all things, the GBC have been struggling over this issue of trying to define the authority of the new gurus for the past 32 years, and they still can't pin it down, and NEVER will because what ever idea they come up with, will be a total bogus mental concoction, again, because they cannot base any idea on SP's teachings, because he never gave any such instructions. But, for 32 years the GBC have been scratching their bald heads trying to figure out what the H... do we do?

What , exact, authority does the GBC have, and the Guru have over the guru's disciples? What authority do the gurus have compared with TP's, or ashram commanders, or the pot washers? The head pot washer needs help, so he engages the newly initiated devotee to help him. Can the Guru pull rank and tell his disciple NOT to obey the lead pot washer? Or, does the head pot washer have more authority over the guru's disciple then the Guru- MASTER? Obviously, when it comes to the TP, the TP have the last word over engaging newer devotees in their service. If the guru tells his disciples don't obey your TP, the GBC will step in and tell that guru's disciples don't listen to your guru, obey the TP.

Define Guru. Spiritual MASTER. Those who accept a person as their Guru, they accept that Guru as their Absolute MASTER, their Supreme Authority in all matters in material and spiritual life. Just exactly as we had accepted SP.

SP, as our Absolute MASTER could, and did, instruct us at times, obey your Temple authorities, obey the GBC. And, that is perfectly acceptable. The GBC were under His authority. He set up and empowered the GBC under him to assist him in those ways. But, the itsgone (totally mad) gurus they are not over and above the GBC, rather, they are just as much under the authority of the GBC as the new bhakta is. It is not the Itsgone (totally mad) gurus who are telling their disciples they are to obey the GBC and TP's and head pot washers, it is the GBC who lay down the ashram rules, in their duty of executing SP's system.

Who is calling all the shots? The itsgone (mad) guru, or the GBC? The GBC. The GBC is rubber stamping This man is Itsgone Official Guru. They are awarding the empty titles and false positions. And, if the guru gets to far out of line, it is the GBC who step in and defrock the fallen gurus and then proclaim such and such is no longer authorized to act as a guru.

Then, who is the Authority of the new disciples in Iskcon? Their totally dependent and subordinate guru, or the GBC? Their guru is JUST AS SUBORDINATE to the authority of the GBC as the new bhakta is. Thus, the REAL authority of all the members of ISKCON is the GBC, and not the empty Guru. Those gurus have no real authority.

And, the only so-called authority the GBC grants them, such as addressing personal issues of their so-called disciples, is not only not based on SP's instructions, But, the very act of giving gurus such authority is a direct subversion of the system SP set up. To give the guru such authority over his disciple the GBC are giving up that duty that SP had specifically assigned to them to perform. Thus, by the very act of awarding those 'guru's the authority to address their disciple's personal issues the GBC have disrupted, changed, and distorted the system of management of SP's ashrams that He had established. They have acted outside of their own authority in not performing one of the duties SP gave them, and have handed over that duty to another party.

Previously in ISKCON, after 73 or so, SP's own disciples no longer approached SP for our own personal issues, but SP sent letters instructing us to take our issues to the GBC/ TP system he had set up. The gbc had no authority to change the system SP set up by giving that duty to the new itsgone (off the wall) gurus.

By doing this, the GBC have totally disrupted the system SP set up. Nowadays most newer devotees Never think of approaching their GBC for issues, but instead go to their gurus. Thus, the new devotees are insubordinate to Srila Prabhupad's own instructions. The instructions SP gave were clear, that devotees seek out the guidance of the GBC, but most all the new devotees of itsgone have rejected SP's authority, they rejected the system he set up and rejected his instructions by going to their gurus instead. Of course, it is not directly their fault, it is the fault of the itsgone (off) gbc who changed what SP gave to try and acomodate the new gurus.

In the above ways, I do find it very much an issue that the current so called gurus take shelter from the GBC. The current gurus have no real Authority over their own disciples, but, are just as much subordinate to the GBC as their disciples are.

Therefore, by examining their actual position and limitations of so-called authority, it can easily be seen that these itsgone (off the wall) gurus are not really acting or functioning as MASTER's of their disciples at all. They are totally subordinate to the GBC, the gbc awards them their so called position, and the GBC regulate them, and the GBC claim ultimate authority over the discples of the gurus. Thus, the itsgone off the wall gurus, by definition, are not really gurus at all. The gbc has created an empty title. SP set them up as Rtviks, and all the GBC have done is vilified the name SP gave to them, and gave them a new name, but in form and function, they are still no more then Rtviks.

Ameyatma das

Pratyatosa: Excellent points. The current crop of ISKCON gurus are ?tviks pretending to be gurus, so the chances that any of them are pure devotees, IMHO, is practically nil. The chief pot washer, however, might very well be a pure devotee, and the fact that he follows the dictates of the GBC doesn’t make him any less of a pure devotee any more than Srila Prabhupada’s obeying the civil authorities, and driving on the right side of the road makes him any less of a pure devotee.