This is a commentary on the recent events surrounding Prabhavisnu Swami’s fall from grace. I concur with the analysis and conclusions of several Sun contributors who have commented over the last few days on the letter Prabhavisnu wrote, so I’m not going to focus on that aspect of the drama today. I would like to comment on what hasn’t yet been addressed, and that is, how Prabhavisnu’s situation can be seen in the context of diksa initiation in ISKCON. This siddhantic issue is one of the highest principles at play here.
Individuals who are involved in falldowns like Prabhavisnu’s are the personification of a flawed siddhantic understanding of the process of initiation. We have been exposed to many quotes in sastra and instructions directly from Srila Prabhupada in regards to the necessity of accepting a Spiritual Master and the importance of being connected to the sampradaya. However, due to the very strong tendencies produced by our conditioning, there is a phenomenon that takes place after the departure of great Acaryas – the pure devotees in our disciplic succession. After they depart, the inevitable evolution towards religiosity takes place. I have already written extensively on this subject, but it is again directly relevant to the current situation.
This phenomenon is especially evident in the case of the three previous Sampradaya Acaryas, who have been sent in order to fulfill Lord Caitanya Mahaprabhu’s prediction of Krsna consciousness being spread throughout the world. In order to accomplish that mission, by their divine wisdom they concluded that the facility they required was that of forming an institution. This is understandable, given that spreading Krsna consciousness ‘throughout the world’ meant primarily taking it to the West, out of India, and in the West, institutional organization is the norm. During their lila periods, these institutions served the Sampradaya Acaryas well in terms of organizing their mission. But as we know, they also warned us that particularly during the periods between the personal presence of a great Acarya, the trend is towards transforming a spiritual mission into a vehicle for religiosity. And that trend is escalated on account of being in the context of an institution. At present, this phenomenon is unfolding in the institution established by His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Srila Prabhupada — the International Society for Krishna Consciousness.
Religiosity, especially in this context, comes about partly as a result of the fact that some of those holding power within the institution are granted power and position on an institutional basis rather than on the basis of spiritual qualification. This is true in the case of ISKCON’s GBC and their various ministers and underlings. On the other side of the equation are the sannyasis and gurus. Sometimes one personality manages to secure several of these positions at once. But if their spiritual potency doesn’t qualify them to hold these positions, if they attempt to maintain these positions without the potency to come up to the standards by which the positions are defined, then they fall back. So in order to keep the power they’ve become addicted to and have come to identify with as part of their false ego, they are naturally inclined to conclude that forming a religion is the easiest way to hold power.