Srila Prabhupada explains why Gaudia Math / ISKCON failed after he left:

"Why this Gaudiya Matha failed? Because they tried to become more than guru."

In the following quotes, we find Srila Prabhupada's clear condemnation of acarya/guru by GBC appointment/no objection. And Srila Prabhupada's clear instruction that the 'appointment of gurus 'not be followed within ISKCON. Unfortunately, by the quotes we are left to conclude that all the diksa-gurus appointed by the GBC and the GBC themselves are being disobedient to Srila Prabhupada. Thus, their eventual gross falldown is practically unavoidable, because their initial assumption of "diksa-guruship by GBC appointment" is in itself the falldown of disregarding the order of one's spiritual master, the 3rd offence against the Holy Name:

As Srila Prabhupada stated in a letter to Rupanuga P. on 28th April 1974:

"In the latter days of my Guru Maharaja he was very disgusted. Actually, he left this world earlier, otherwise he would have continued to live for more years. Still he requested his disciples to form a strong Governing body for preaching the cult of Caitanya Mahaprabhu. He never recommended anyone to be acarya of the Gaudiya Math. But Sridhara Maharaja is responsible for disobeying this order of Guru Maharaja, and he and others who are already dead unnecessarily thought that there must be one acarya.

"If Guru Maharaja could have seen someone who was qualified at that time to be acarya, he would have mentioned, because on the night before he passed away he talked of so many things, but never mentioned an acarya. His idea was acarya was NOT to be nominated amongst the governing body. He said openly you make a GBC and conduct the mission. So his idea was amongst the members of GBC who would come out successful and self-effulgent acarya would be automatically selected. So Sridhara Maharaja and his two associate gentlemen unauthorizedly selected one acarya and later it proved a failure. The result is now everyone is claiming to be acarya even though they may be kanistha adhikari with no ability to preach. In some of the camps, the acarya is being changed three times a year. THEREFORE, WE MAY NOT COMMIT THE SAME MISTAKE IN OUR ISKCON CAMP. Actually amongst my Godbrothers no one is qualified to become acarya. So it is better not to mix with my Godbrothers very intimately because instead of inspiring our students and disciples they may sometimes pollute them. This attempt was made previously by them, especially Madhava Maharaja and Tirtha Maharaja and Bon Maharaja but somehow or other I saved the situation. This is going on. We shall be very careful about them and not mix with them. This is my instruction to you all. They cannot help us in our movement, but they are very competent to harm our natural progress. So we must be very careful about them."

The following conversation of Srila Prabhupada’s clearly explains the reasons for ISKCON’s decline after Prabhupada’s departure. Though Srila Prabhupada was speaking about the failure of the Gaudiya Matha, amazingly it perfectly matches ISKCON’s own post-samadhi history, line for line. Seven sentences have been numbered for direct comparison to ISKCON.

Srila Prabhupada: Room conversation, Bombay: August 16, 1976

"Why this Gaudiya Matha failed? Because they tried to become more than guru. He (Srila Bhaktisiddhanta), before passing away, he gave all direction and never said that 'This man should be the next acarya.' But these people, just after his passing away they began to fight, who shall be acarya. That is the failure. They never thought, 'Why Guru Maharaja gave us instruction in so many things, why he did not say that this man should be acarya?' They wanted to create artificially somebody acarya and everything failed. They did not consider even with common sense that if Guru Maharaja wanted to appoint somebody as acarya, why did he not say? He said so many things, and this point he missed? The real point? And they insist upon it. They declared some unfit person to become acarya. Then another man came, then another, acarya, another acarya. So better remain a foolish person perpetually to be directed by Guru Maharaja. That is perfection."

Srila Prabhupada purport: Sri Caitanya-caritamåta, Adi-lila, 12.8-10:

"Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura, at the time of his departure, requested all his disciples to form a governing body and conduct missionary activities cooperatively. He did not instruct a particular man to become the next acarya. But just after his passing away, his leading secretaries made plans, without authority, to occupy the post of acarya, and they split in two factions over who the next acarya would be. Consequently, both factions were asara, or useless, because they had no authority, having disobeyed the order of the spiritual master. Despite the spiritual master's order to form a governing body and execute the missionary activities of the Gaudiya Matha, the two unauthorized factions began litigation that is still going on after forty years with no decision.... The members of the self-appointed acarya's party who occupied the property of the Gaudiya Matha are satisfied, but they could make no progress in preaching. Therefore, by the result of their actions, one should know that they are asara, or useless.

Srila Prabhupada: "When disciples do not stick to the principle of accepting the order of their spiritual master, immediately there are two opinions. Any opinion different from the opinion of the spiritual master is useless. One cannot infiltrate materially concocted ideas into spiritual advancement. That is deviation. There is no scope for adjusting spiritual advancement to material ideas.... Persons who strictly follow the orders of the spiritual master are useful in executing the will of the Supreme, whereas persons who deviate from the strict order of the spiritual master are useless. "

Srila Prabhupada further clarifies that those who deviate from the order of the spiritual master are "useless". Therefore one must conclude that all the ISKCON 'gurus' that have been appointed by the GBC deviation are "useless".

This is a hard truth to swallow, but these are the statements of Srila Prabhupada and so the unavoidable conclusion remains: GBC appointed diksa-gurus are "useless".

Srila Prabhupada undoubtedly wanted the qualified amongst his disciples to be "regular-gurus", i.e., give diksa to their own disciples. However it is clear from the above Srila Prabhupada didn't want the GBC to be involved in "appointing those disciples as diksa-gurus". The inability of the GBC to recognise this and act accordingly is the very heart of the problem of "diksa-guru-falldown " since November 1977.

ISKCON has also failed horribly in the 30 years since Srila Prabhupada's departure. The reason is simple: the ISKCON leaders tried to be more than their guru by manufacturing so many speculative things (zonal acharyas, voted in acharyas, successor acaryas, suspended acharyas, fallen acharyas, etc.).

Srila Prabhupada established a system in his temples whereby his unique position as founder-acharya (samsthapaka-acharya) was highlighted through his own worship in every single ISKCON temple. Some of the specific ways in which Srila Prabhupada did this was by having his vyasasana installed in all temples, installation of his deity while he was still living (in Vrindavan), having his photo on all ISKCON altars, having all disciples worship him every morning through “guru-puja”, etc. As soon as Prabhupada departed, ISKCON leaders suddenly tried to compete with him, installing their own Vyasasanas in all temples, keeping their own photos on the altar, instituting mandatory worship of themselves through “guru-puja” in all ISKCON temples, etc. Oddly, one will not find a single instruction by Srila Prabhupada to any of these ISKCON leaders, nor to ISKCON as a whole, to implement any of these changes to his institution. Srila Prabhupada specifically instructed how worship and sadhana in his movement should be carried out. Every detail of the morning program, evening program, japa, worship, etc., was given by Srila Prabhupada for all ISKCON devotees. Yet in an instant, the ISKCON leaders decided they were more than their guru, and made all sorts of unauthorized changes to his movement.

2) "He, before passing away, he gave all direction and never said that 'This man should be the next acharya.’ But these people, just after his passing away they began to fight, who shall be acharya. That is the failure."

3) "They never thought, 'Why Guru Maharaja gave us instruction so many things, why he did not say that this man should be acharya?’"

4) "They wanted to create artificially somebody acharya and everything failed."

5) "They did not consider even with common sense that if Guru Maharaja wanted to appoint somebody as acharya, why did he not say? He said so many things, and this point he missed? The real point? And they insist upon it."

6) "They declared some unfit person to become acharya. Then another man came, then another, acharya, another acharya."

Officially fallen down: Kirtanananda Swami
Officially fallen down: Satsvarupa dasa Goswami
Officially fallen down: Bhavananda Swami
Officially fallen down: Hamsaduta Swami
Officially fallen down: Ramesvara Swami
Officially fallen down: Harikesa Swami
Officially fallen down: Bhagavan dasa Goswami
Officially fallen down: Jayatirtha Swami (dead-decapitated)
Officially not fallen down, but dead: Tamala Krsna Goswami (died in car crash)
Supposedly not yet fallen?: Jayapataka Swami (suffered brain stroke, imbecile)
Supposedly not yet fallen?: Hridayananda Goswami (advocates acceptance of homosexual marriage)

Thus the whole point of "adding new gurus" was just to dilute the list and make the fall percentage appear more reasonable. But if you were to take the second and third batches of added gurus (dilutions 1 & 2), and wait for the same amount of time that the first zonal acharyas had to manifest their fallen nature, you will find a similar percentage of fallen gurus in the subsequent batches. In other words, give the second and third batch of gurus 30 years, and they will also show a 80% fall down rate. This is inevitable, as going against the order of the Acharya will, without fail, lead to falldown.

Now at this years GBC meetings they have passed a new resolution calling for all of Srila Prabhupada's disciples to come forward and be "diksha gurus" - the final dilution to cover their original mistake of appointing unfit people as zonal acharyas. Please read: Tamals bogus guru system. This brings up a serious flaw in their line of thinking. When you make a mistake, and you realize it is a mistake (as with the appointment of the zonal acharyas), what should you do? You should stop and undo the mistake, and then move forward. Anyone with common sense can understand this. But rather than stopping the zonal acharya's and removing their acharyaship (i.e. undoing the first mistake), they instead chose to add MORE acharyas to cover the first mistake. When this was shown to be a second mistake, they added EVEN MORE acharyas. And now that it has become a joke, they are trying one last dilution - everyone come forward and become acharya. Having admitted that the appointment of zonal acharyas without authorization from Srila Prabhupada was "the greatest disservice to the movement", they must stop and undo this great mistake. But their solution is to dilute more and more. If you have clear water, and if a drop of red ink falls in it, the entire cup of water will become red. To make it go away some people will try to keep diluting it by adding more and more clear water to the already dirty red water so that it becomes less noticeable. But when the drop of red ink is instead poison, it doesn't matter how much clean water you add, it will always be poisonous. Violating the instructions of the Acharya is spiritual poison. No matter how much dilution they do, it will always remain as poison.

Prabhupada's Conclusion:

After pointing out six reasons for the failure of the Gaudiya Matha (and subsequently ISKCON), Srila Prabhupada gives the solution:

7) "So better remain a foolish person perpetually to be directed by Guru Maharaja. That is perfection."

"I wish that each and every Branch shall keep their independent identity and cooperate keeping the Acharya in the centre. On this principle we can open any number of Branches all over the world. The Ramakrishna mission works on this principle and thus as organization they have done wonderfully." - Srila Prabhupada (letter to Kirtanananda, 11 Feb. 1967)

Srila Prabhupada wanted to remain as the Acharya of ISKCON, just as Ramakrishna is the Acharya of the Ramakrishna mission. He never said, "Once I depart, replace me with 11 zonal acharya's because I am dead." Ramakrishna had been dead for years and years – yet still he was the center of their movement. Srila Prabhupada wanted to follow the same system where he is kept at the center as the Acharya (not being obscured by 11 zonal acharyas, nor 100 mini-acharya, nor 1,000 micro-acharyas). Working on this principle, the Ramakrishna mission as an organization "has done wonderfully". Compare that to Prabhupada's analysis of those who manufacture false acharyas:

"They wanted to create artificially somebody acharya and everything failed."

So the choice is there for everyone: do you want to manufacture false acharyas and have everything fail (as has happened since Prabhupada departed), or do you want to keep Srila Prabhupada in the center as the Acharya and have ISKCON do "wonderfully" as an organization. The GBC refuses to even hear anything on this matter, and as such is the greatest block for the advancement of ISKCON today.

In the "Pyramid House Confessions" (recorded in 1980, at Topanga Canyon), Tamal Krishna Maharaja, one of the 11 zonal acharyas, stated the following:

"Actually Prabhupada never appointed any gurus. He appointed eleven ritviks. He never appointed them gurus. Myself and the other GBC have done the greatest disservice to this movement the last three years because we interpreted the appointment of ritviks as the appointment of gurus... You cannot show me anything on tape or in writing where Prabhupada says: 'I appoint these eleven as gurus'. It does not exist because he never appointed any gurus. This is a myth."

Thus it is very clear by their own admission that Srila Prabhupada never appointed anyone as diksha guru or successor acharya for ISKCON. Since they have admitted that Prabhupada never appointed any gurus, let us look again at Prabhupada's 5th point in the original quote:

"They did not consider even with common sense that if Guru Maharaja wanted to appoint somebody as acharya, why did he not say?"

If Srila Prabhupada had wanted to appoint somebody as acharya, why didn't he say so? It is proven that Prabhupada did not tell anyone to be acharya. Thus, as per Srila Prabhupada's own logical statement above, he did not want to appoint somebody as acharya. Yet, ISKCON leaders have gone ahead, against the desire of Srila Prabhupada, and have appointed nearly 100 of them. This again shows how they are “trying to be more than their guru”, Prabhupada’s first point for why they failed.

Srila Prabhupada's November 1977 instruction: "No Such Thing As 'Here Is Leader'. "

On November 2nd 1977, just twelve days before his disappearance lila, Srila Prabhupada was asked privately by some Indian guests who would succeed him as acarya. (Actually the leader of the group was Mr Bajaj of Indian scooter fame - he wanted Srila Prabhupada to appoint an "Indian" acarya.) Srila Prabhupada described his answer moments later to his disciples when Bajaj and his group had left and the devotees were back in the room of Srila Prabhupada. (emphasis mine):

Prabhupada: "[They asked] ...after you, who will take the leadership?" And [I replied] "Everyone will take, all my disciples. If you want, you can take also. (laughter) But if you follow. They are prepared to sacrifice everything, so they'll take the leadership. I may, one, go away, but there will be hundreds, and they'll preach. If you want, you can also become a leader. WE HAVE NO SUCH THING THAT 'HERE IS LEADER." Anyone who follows the previous leadership, he's a leader. 'Indian,' we have no such distinction, 'Indian,' 'European.' "

Brahmananda: "They wanted an Indian to be the leader?"

Prabhupada: "Yes. (laughs) 'Everyone, all my disciples, they are leaders. If you want to follow, you can become a leader. You are Indian. But you don't want.' I told them that."

Clearly with, "We have no such thing, that 'Here is leader'." Srila Prabhupada indicates that he did not intend to appoint a successor acarya, or have such a GBC appointment system institutionalized within ISKCON. With such an answer, Srila Prabhupada follows in the footsteps of his own Guru Maharaja, Srila Bhaktisiddhanta P.

Furthermore, Srila Prabhupada states, "As purely as they follow, they become leader." Clearly, this is a restatement of the eternal principle of guru-parampara: One must be a perfect disciple-that is the basis of any spiritual qualification, particularly the qualification to be 'guru'.

This restates Srila Prabhupada's position on those qualified to be gurus after his departure, given in the May 28th GBC conversation, repeated here:

Prabhupada: "And Caitanya Mahaprabhu says, amara ajïaya guru hana. One can understand the order of Caitanya Mahaprabhu, he can become guru. Or one who understands his guru's order, the same parampara, he can become guru."

The simple summary of all Srila Prabhupada's copious directions on guruship was that the "message should be delivered unchanged". The question then arises: What is that message?

That "message" is guru, sadhu and sastra. For instance, in Caitanya-caritamrta Madhya, 20. 352, Srila Prabhupada quotes and explains Srila Narottama dasa Thakura:

"Srila Narottama dasa Thakura says, sadhu-sastra-guru-vakya, cittete kariya aikya. One should accept a thing as genuine by studying the words of saintly people, the spiritual master and sastra. The actual center is sastra, the revealed scripture. If a spiritual master does not speak according to revealed scripture, he is not to be accepted. Similarly, if a saintly person does not speak according to the sastra, he is not a saintly person. Sastra is the center for all."

The GBC have failed to understand that their guru-appointment system is a deviation from Vedic sastra and Srila Prabhupada and is therefore not a bona fide branch of the Brahma-Madhva-Gaudiya Parampara.

The bona fide method for continuing the Brahma-Madhva-Gaudiya Parampara is given by Sanatana Goswami in the Hari-Bhakti-Vilasa. This book was composed under the direction of Supreme Lord Sri Caitanya the bestower of religious principles for this age of Kali. In the book, a period close mutual examination is prescribed between the prospective guru and prospective disciple.

The First Vilasa:

It is described in the Krama-dipika, "The disciple who is desirous to receive diksa [in the Gopala-mantra] must serve the guru for three years employing his wealth, simplicity of heart, affectionate behaviour, full physical endeavour, gentle speech and favourable attitude with the understanding that the guru is as good as the Supreme Lord. In this manner, when the disciple satisfies his guru, he may beg for diksa."

The process of examination is based on the requisite qualifications mentioned within the sastra. Thus accepting a guru is not an off-hand casual affair. One should be educated in sastric standards and spend considerable time in respectful examination. Accepting a guru superficially on the basis of an institutional rubber-stamp is pure foolishness. And the GBC, to their discredit, have created the dynamics for such foolishness within ISKCON. Moreover the GBC appointment system directly subverts the sastric direction of mutual examination, because when the naive hear that "this guru is GBC appointed", they tend to be diverted from the necessity of close personal examination.

Until the GBC start to obey Srila Prabhupada and thus stop "rubber-stamping" "diksa-gurus" and instead just present the parampara-sastra AS IT IS, then we may be assured the big diksa-guru-mess in ISKCON will continue.

Certainly the GBC appointed persons can never be true representatives of Srila Prabhupada and the Brahma-Madhava-Gaudiya-Sampradaya until they realize their mistake and vigorously campaign against this "useless" deviation.

The Timeless Order™

If, as the ISKCON leaders claim, one automatically becomes diksha guru and successor acharya when the guru departs (even without any authorization from the previous guru), then why should they consider what they have done to have been "the greatest disservice to the movement"? They took 11 people and said they were now successor acharya's because Srila Prabhupada had died. If, as they now teach, one automatically becomes guru when one's own guru passes away, then why would it have been wrong for them to do what they did? Their philosophy goes like this:

A) When guru departs, the disciples automatically become successor acharyas by some assumed, unwritten "Timeless Order™".

B) When Srila Prabhupada departed, they made 11 of his disciples as successor acharyas (which is perfectly in line with their claimed point A).

C) Hence (as per their own statements), they have done "the greatest disservicee to the movement".

As anyone can see, the flow of such a philosophy doesn't make sense. From point A and B, one would naturally conclude that point C) should be that "they have done everything fine", since it was in line with the previous points of philosophy that they present. So the question is how do they (from their own statements) go from A) and B) to C), "the greatest disservice to the movement"? Obviously there are a few points missing in their logical equation:

D) Next guru must be authorized by previous Guru.

E) Srila Prabhupada never authorized any successor acharyas.

F) ISKCON Leaders went against Srila Prabhupada's orders, and fought over the position of successor acharya.

G) "They tried to become more than guru."

H) "He, before passing away, he gave all direction and never said that 'This man should be the next acharya.’ But these people, just after his passing away they began to fight, who shall be acharya. That is the failure."

I) "They never thought, 'Why Guru Maharaja gave us instruction so many things, why he did not say that this man should be acharya?’"

J) "They wanted to create artificially somebody acharya and everything failed."

K) "They did not consider even with common sense that if Guru Maharaja wanted to appoint somebody as acharya, why did he not say? He said so many things, and this point he missed? The real point? And they insist upon it."

L) "They declared some unfit person to become acharya. Then another man came, then another, acharya, another acharya."

Once you take Srila Prabhupada's own analysis of the history, point C) becomes self evident, "they have done the greatest disservice to the movement". Seeing Srila Prabhupada's points G) through L), the conclusion of C) makes sense. But it does not make any sense at all when you accept their "Timeless Order™" theory (i.e. A -> B -> C). Thus their position is not logically consistant, whereas Srila Prabhupada’s position is.

Does Srila Prabhupada know about the Timeless Order™?

The GBC claims that there is an unwritten, assumed Timeless Order™ by which all disciples automatically become diksha gurus upon the departure of their guru. On April 22nd of 1977, Srila Prabhupada had the following conversation:

Prabhupada: What is the use of producing some rascal guru?

Tamala Krishna: Well, I have studied myself and all of your disciples, and it's clear fact that we are all conditioned souls, so we cannot be guru. Maybe one day it may be possible...

Prabhupada: Hm.

Tamala Krishna: ...but not now.

Prabhupada: Yes. I shall produce some gurus. I shall say who is guru, 'Now you become acharya. You become authorised.' I am waiting for that. You become, all, acharya. I retire completely. But the training must be complete.

Tamala Krishna: The process of purification must be there.

Prabhupada: Oh, yes, must be there. Caitanya Mahaprabhu wants that. Amara ajnaya guru hana. "You become guru." (laughs) But be qualified. Little thing, strictly follower...

Tamala Krishna: Not rubber stamp.

Prabhupada: Then you'll not be effective. You can cheat, but it will not be effective. Just see our Gaudiya Matha. Everyone wanted to become guru, and a small temple and "guru." What kind of guru?

Let us focus specifically on the following two sentences:

PRABHUPADA: What is the use of producing some rascal guru?

PRABHUPADA: Yes. I shall produce some gurus. I shall say who is guru, 'Now you become acharya. You become authorised.' I am waiting for that. You become, all, acharya. I retire completely. But the training must be complete.

From Prabhupada's conversation above it is clear that he was not about to authorize unqualified "rascal gurus". Thus by his own words, he never authorized Bhavananda, Kirtanananda, Harikesh, Rameswar, Jayatirtha, Bhagavan, Hansadutta, nor Satsvarupa (all fallen conditioned souls) to be diksha gurus. He clearly says "What is the use of producing some rascal guru...". These people proved themselves to be the very rascal gurus Prabhupada was saying he would not authorize. If these eight false gurus were not authorized by Prabhupada, then none of the original 11 gurus were authorized by him, as their claimed “authorization” was all based on the same evidence.

A) The GBC has previously claimed that Prabhupada authorized 11 diksha guru successors

B) 8 of the 11 proved to be cheaters (“rascal gurus” by Prabhupada’s words).

C) Prabhupada had said he was not going to authorize “rascal gurus”

D) The claimed authorization in point A) was mad up of 70% “rascal gurus”.

E) Thus, Srila Prabhupada never authorized the original group of 11 gurus, as it would conflict with his statements in point C)

What would it mean if Prabhupada said “I am not about to authorize rascal gurus”, and then a few months later, did just that, authorizing a big list of fallen conditioned souls to be his successors? This is what the GBC originally wanted us to believe.

Since it is clear that Prabhupada never authorized the original 11 diksha gurus, the GBC’s latest idea is to invoke a mysterious unwritten “Timeless Order™” by which everyone automatically becomes a successor acharya when the guru departs. But in the above conversation Prabhupada clearly says:

1) I shall say who is guru.

2) (I shall say...) Now, you become acharya. You become authorized.

Prabhupada states that he will say who will be guru, not that there is a Timeless Order™ for every disciple to automatically become successor acharya of his institution. If this Timeless Order™ is really a universally understood truth, then why didn’t Prabhupada know about it? Why didn’t Prabhupada say, “There is no need for me to say who is guru, the Timeless Order™ will automatically appoint successor diksha gurus.” Instead Prabhupada specifically said “I shall say who is guru.”, and that only after he has said who is guru does that person “become acharya” and “become authorized”. If one looks at the original quote from Prabhupada at the very top of this essay, again the idea of a Timeless Order™ is nowhere to be found.

Since Srila Prabhupada said that “he would say who is guru”, a natural question is, can anyone show an order from Prabhupada where he actually does this, authorizing them to be the next successor acharya of ISKCON? Is there any record from Prabhupada where he says 1) "Such and such will be guru" or 2) "Now, Mr. XYZ, you become Acharya, you are authorized"? When Prabhupada has specifically stated that he would tell us who will be the guru(s), and that he would specifically tell us who is authorized, how can the GBC then fall back onto a claim of a "Timeless Order™" by which all disciples automatically become diksha guru successor acharya's for Prabhupada's institution. Shouldn't Prabhupada have been intelligent enough to know about this "Timeless Order™" principle? Why then does Prabhupada says he will tell us who will be the guru?

Certainly out of the nearly 100 “acharyas” the GBC has manufactured, you would think at least one of them must have some statement from Prabhupada saying, “now you become guru.” Amazingly, not a single one has any statement from Prabhupada authorizing them to become diksha gurus after his departure. Thus it is clear that Srila Prabhupada didn’t want any of these people to be his successor, otherwise he would have told us “Now, you become acharya. You become authorized.” After all, it was he who said “I shall say who is guru”.

Some may say that Prabhupada appointed the original 11 zonal acharya's as the successor acharya's, but...

1) There is no recorded evidence that such an authorization ever took place. Prabhupada clearly said he would tell who will be guru, yet that instruction has never been given.

2) The only remotely relevant "evidence" (the appointment tape) has been forensically tested and found to have been tampered with/edited and as such inadmissible. Even that tape does not state that these people will be the successor acharya's of ISKCON.

3) From Prabhupada's own words he was not about to create "rascal gurus". Out of the original 11 zonal acharya's, a very high percentage later were exposed as this very same "rascal guru" that Prabhupada was not going to authorize. Thus from Prabhupada's own words, it is clear he never authorized these 11 to be successor acharya's for his institution.

4) Tamal Krishna Maharaja has stated that Prabhupada never appointed a successor (Pyramid House Talks, 1980).

If Prabhupada never appointed successor gurus, and if Prabhupada clearly says "I shall produce some gurus. I shall say who is guru: 'Now, you become acharya. You become authorized.'", on what grounds does the GBC then fall back onto the Timeless Order™ concept, rejecting Prabhupada's statement that he would say who is guru?

Again, Srila Prabhupada's conclusion is quite a prophecy:

Tamala Krishna: No rubber stamp.

Prabhupada: Then you'll not be effective. You can cheat, but it will not be effective.

If someone rubber stamps gurus, without Prabhupada's direct order, they will cheat and not be effective. It is clear from the zonal acharya's who have fallen that they were rubber stamped, they cheated, and they were not effective. Again, go back to the original statement of Srila Prabhupada at the top of this essay, and read it through with an open mind. Can anyone honestly say that this isn’t an exact overview of the history of ISKCON after Srila Prabhupada’s departure? I provide the original quote below, so you can review it one more time considering all of the points we have mentioned:

"Why this Gaudiya Matha (Iskcon) failed? Because they tried to become more than guru. He, before passing away, he gave all direction and never said that 'This man should be the next acharya.’ But these people, just after his passing away they began to fight, who shall be acharya. That is the failure. They never thought, 'Why Guru Maharaja gave us instruction so many things, why he did not say that this man should be acharya?’ They wanted to create artificially somebody acharya and everything failed. They did not consider even with common sense that if Guru Maharaja wanted to appoint somebody as acharya, why did he not say? He said so many things, and this point he missed? The real point? And they insist upon it. They declared some unfit person to become acharya. Then another man came, then another, acharya, another acharya. So better remain a foolish person perpetually to be directed by Guru Maharaja. That is perfection." - Srila Prabhupada Room Conversation, 08-16-76, Bombay