This is the last in a short series of posts about ISKCON membership. I hope you’ve found them either interesting or useful. Today I am talking about those who have closed the door behind them, and taken the ‘Way Out.’
There are many who, at one time or another, were involved in ISKCON in some way, and now they are not. That is not to say their relationship with Krishna has been interrupted – no power on earth can do that – but their contributions to, support for, and social involvement with other members of ISKCON has lapsed. Some of them may have come across ideas or values they could not agree with, while some changed their minds as their life circumstances changed. A few others had conflicting views with how ISKCON should be organized, and still others found alternative leaders in other organizations that proved more useful to them at the time.
Some of ISKCON’s former members are relatively quiet and respectfully remain at a distance, some are rather vociferous in their antagonism and try to influence existing members’ opinions. All former members are people who decided that ISKCON was not meeting their current needs, interests, concerns or expectations so they stopped identifying themselves as members. Many didn’t even make a conscious decision to ‘leave,’ they just stopped meeting up, writing or calling. It happens.
Here are a few of my personal observations about members in transit:
1. The Dissenting Member
A member who is not out physically, but finds so much difficulty with the theology, liturgy or governance structure of ISKCON that he might as well be. He takes a position of permanent dissent from mainstream views. While healthy change in any organization often comes from the periphery, then later helps to change the core, this member seems to thrive more on his own sense of being special (and always right) than on an altruistic desire to help create a better organization.
2. The ‘I’m leaving if things don’t change’ member
Like the above, only he actually threatens to leave if others don’t start seeing things from his point of view. Sometimes, because he’s a leading member, and ‘too big to lose,’ he gets his own way. ISKCON is concerned that if he leaves, his followers will go with him. He will probably never leave, because he’s loyal at heart, but he uses his childish threats to good effect. Should ISKCON call his bluff? Perhaps. But in the past that strategy has often led to the next type of member…
3. The ‘I’ll Start a Separate Movement within the Movement’ member.
He also doesn’t leave but simply starts another movement along with his followers inside ISKCON. Sometimes using different names, styles, websites, appearances and so on, you’d never know his ‘alternative preaching strategy’ was ISKCON unless you asked. And sometimes its not. This member will register his ‘project’ in a different name and claim it as an ‘ISKCON affiliate.’ Trouble is, sometimes ISKCON members and supporters donate liberally to this affiliate, only to learn later that the new building purchased with the funds is not registered in ISKCON’s name. With the increase in the number of these ‘affiliates’ it is hard to know whether ISKCON is actually growing, or if some other aggregate of affiliates has taken over.
4. The ‘I’m still part of ISKCON, but you’ve all got to change’ campaigning ex-member.
He is an ex-member for sure, either because his theology is just too extreme, or he just doesn’t like ‘institutions,’ or he was unceremoniously asked to leave, but within his slightly hot head he is still a member. Of something. Maybe he styles himself as belonging to a community he variously refers to as: ‘The Greater ISKCON,’ or ‘The Real ISKCON.’ If he really doesn’t like ‘institutions’ he will say that he no longer wishes to be a member of ‘Corporate ISKCON,’ and if he really thinks – as many do – that he knows ‘what Prabhupada really wanted’ then he might imagine that he has the founder-acarya’s blessings to be a member of ‘Srila Prabhupada’s ISKCON.’
The thing is that he wants everyone else to catch up with his brilliant philosophical insights and he’s wondering why they don’t get it. Until we all do he will start websites - and campaign, come to ISKCON festivals such as Rathayatra and hand out magazines – and campaign, and come to Sunday feasts – and campaign. Somehow the idea doesn’t arise that – if ISKCON is so bad – it might be far better to start his own organization with his own unconditional understanding of Srila Prabhupada at the head. Unfortunately for us all, he will never do that, and in the meantime the internet enables him and a few friends to make themselves seem like a serious going concern. Beyond the website hyperbole though, its just three or four blokes in their bedrooms.
5. The ‘I left ISKCON because of the Zonal acaryas’ ex-member
Its true, he did leave way back. Maybe 25 years ago. We all know he left, and he knows he’s left, but he just can’t resist telling us all what we should do to. In fact, he really feels that ISKCON needs him and his vision now more than ever. He’s a lot older than other ex-members, and he has a few horror stories of ISKCON to spin out to younger members to justify his totally ruthless, vicious, online, anti-ISKCON campaigning to the world. Trouble is, in his mind he has re-written his own life story so that he really believes he left ISKCON for the most selfless of motives. The truth is that he left to go back to college, or to make money, or to find love. All reasonable needs for a certain time of life, of course, but not so compatible with the Fearless Seeker of the Truth he’d like us all to believe he was way back then. He has some legitimate concerns about ISKCON, and he knows how to express himself persuasively, yet its all mixed in with rumour and gossip from members 1 -5 and is therefore quite dated. He has pages of explanation about where ISKCON went wrong in 1978, but relatively few constructive suggestions for improvement in 2012. But even if he did have a constructive suggestion, he would never raise even a finger to do anything practical for ISKCON. He smiles as his days in this world pass by, content with the attention he’s attracting - and the emotions he’s provoking – while writing in splendid isolation.
6. The ‘I have discovered true nectar’ ex-member.
He has well and truly gone, and gone on to greater things, apparently. This member was looking for purity, sweetness and light, and ISKCON was not good enough for him. Too many people told him that he had to serve others in order to develop humility – which he found curiously troubling. For this reason he doesn’t like too many Vaishnavas around him. He values his personal freedom, not being under the thumb of anyone else, whether guru or institution. He claims he has found a greater spiritual preceptor outside ISKCON, and wants all his old friends to know about it. So much so that he keeps turning up at ISKCON social gatherings and religious functions to network, collect members’ contact details and ‘just exchange love between devotees.’
He says he doesn’t know why we all can’t just get along, and protests that its ‘just not love if you have membership of anything, because it excludes people’. He really doesn’t understand the benefits of having boundaries in life. So he continues to come to the Sunday Feast, and the people he talks to – who find him quite loving, actually – continue to become initiated by his own, greater, spiritual preceptor.
Summary
The truth of the matter is that ISKCON is the largest international organization of its kind, and has a good balance of missionary spirit, creative communication, gorgeous ritual and festival, and human and physical resources. As such it is a very attractive spiritual and social movement and will continue to do much good in the world as it continues to grow and steadily improve its service to others. It is no wonder that even those who leave ISKCON remain strongly connected in one way or another. Many members do leave though, and where preventable, that is always regrettable. The response of any organization is to look and see the valid needs of its members and to try to provide everything they need to persist on the sometimes arduous path of spiritual life.
Why would anyone follow someone or a group who is presenting Srila Prabhupada and Krishna as Hindu or presenting Krishna and Srila Prabhupada as belonging to or being a part of a group or corporation?
If a person is not folowing corporate ISKCON does it automatically folow that they are disconnected from Krishna or Srila Prabhupada?
As far as I know the term ‘Hindu’ is specifically used with certain audiences and is not part of ISKCON’s presentation to the general public.
Regarding ‘corporate ISKCON’ I tried to point out in posts #1 and #2 that we are an apple with a ‘core’ and each member is both ‘fruit’ and ‘core’ according to what their contribution is. Since according to law ISKCON does have to be registered in each country as an organization, some individual members have to be legally accountable for the assets of the organization on behalf of the other members.
The question is always what we feel ourselves to belong to, and what our contribution is. For many members it will be their local connection that gives them the greatest sense of ‘belonging.’
Haribol,
Thank you for this short course on ISKCON membership; but I’m still puzzled as to were I personally fit in – I guess working through my own insecurities and inadequacies.
Interesting the other day I was giving a small presentation to a local community project run by social services and NHS partnership; a quiet man sat listening; later as I packed he started to talk amazingly he had met Srila Prabhupada and was for a short time active in Bury Place; still after all this time chanted and identified with the teaching of Srila Prabhupada but found life in ISKCON difficult being a free spirit.
Being still attracted but unable to fully commit this final posting has put much into context
Pondering this your small insights and notes have been very useful and given me plenty to think about as to how we view others and our own position within this amazing movement
Thanks Dhirabhakta. These are just my observations and thoughts, nothing more.
With any group of people that you wish to join there’s the NICE rule. You must ask yourself: ‘N’ – Are my needs going to be met through joining this group? ‘I’ – Am I interested in what they’re interested in? ‘C’ – Will the members of this address my pressing concerns? ‘E’ – I have expectations from this group, are they being met?
Nobody wishes to become a member of ISKCON because its an organization. There are far better organized organizations to join. Considering yourself to be a member involves establishing connection with other people and finding their company helpful for reaching your goals.
I have probably ‘left ISKCON’ in my mind quite a few times – but I’ve always joined the following morning! The technique seems to be finding all the good reasons for membership…
Dear Friend,
I have appreciated your analysis of people who associate with our movement and who might be identified as members. I am a little confused because you have not mentioned once, the Shiksha Program.
In your #2 article, you mentioned Congregational members in the ‘layered apple’, but you identified them as uncommitted. This is not true. There is already established in ISKCON a Congregational Membership Program which includes the following levels of commitment among the uninitiated:
Shraddhavan (full of Faith), Seveka (Service), Sadhaka (Devotion),
Prabhupada Ashraya (Shelter) and Guru Ashraya (Shelter of ISKCON Guru). Each level has a devotional and service standard which must be met in order to recognized in an individua’ls commitment to KC and ISKCON.
Though I enjoy reading various concepts of Members’ Qualities; listing the actual Membership levels, that anyone can actually, solidly identify with, is very, very important.
Since 1992, there has been GBC approved system for receiving and maintaining Congregational membership levels. Most of these membership levels fit in to some of your descriptions of Members as well.
This system has been in use world-wide for decades. Please also see and note this Shiksha-levels Program as a clear-cut definition of committed members of our movement.
Your servant, Rankin.
Thank you Rankin, for your response which is quite correct. There is indeed a tried and tested scheme of gradual spiritual commitment known as the siksha programme. Perhaps some readers will already be familiar with that. Those who are not familiar can go to http://www.iskconcongregation.com/ which is also permanently linked to the ‘Vaishnava Voice’.
My posts were not an exhaustive look at ISKCON membership, by any means. My main purpose was to highlight some areas of confusion, the first of which is that there are different categories of member. In the ‘apple’ diagram in #2 the idea was not that there are ‘congregation’ who are all uncommitted and ‘committed’ who are.
I was using the term ‘congregation’ to indicate ISKCON members who simply ‘congregate’ meaning that they come together regularly. And at some stage such coming together results in a commitment to personal spiritual development, above and beyond the act of simply congregating.
Thus we have committed congregation and uncommitted congregation, but both categories are congregation.
Interesting topic and observations. It is important to remember that many of the ‘mainstream’ now were the ‘dissenters’ some time back in the movement. And likely this cycle will continue. Prabhupada himself was a great dissenter and started his own movement which is why we’re here now
If the movement could see it important to accommodate the diversity and personalism of its members and be transparent in its operations it would be more likely that we would have a house in which the whole world can live. However the more policies are narrowly defined at the sole discretion of the administrator who happens to have authority for a given zone, the more by necessity a greater number of members will have to leave in order to not compromise their Krsna Consciousness. It’s not that this is even good or bad, but more just a practical reality.
Thanks Janmastami. Yes, I come from a religious background of ‘legitimate dissent’ against the Church of England which historically gave birth to the Methodist Church. Dissent then continued later on within the Methodist Church to produce The Salvation Army! I guess that history will decide whether that process of dissent was ultimately helpful.
You are right that dissent within an organization often produces helpful changes and I’ve said so here in the last post: “While healthy change in any organization often comes from the periphery, then later helps to change the core” My condition was only that the dissent should be not based on the member’s inability to work with others (since that is intrinsic within us all) or their sense of ‘specialness’ but must be a genuinely selfless desire to improve the organization.
Yes, Srila Prabhupada was a member of the Gaudiya Math for quite a long time. Initiated in 1933 and started his own organization in 1966. I guess if you’re not happy with ISKCON after 33 years, its high time to start your own group. It may be the only chance you get, considering how short life is. I have admiration for anyone who, on the strength of their convictions, starts their own group and makes a success of it. There are maybe three or four examples of ISKCON dissenters who have done that and made a great success of it. But spiritual strength is required plus great determination. Blessings from guru and Krishna don’t go amiss either!
There needs to be a greater sense of connection between members and each other, including committed members and the core of the organization. Without that there will be permanent feelings of disenfranchisement.
Democracy within ISKCON is only used as a procedure within certain ‘layers’ of the organization, although it is there. It is not employed as a procedure to vote in policy-makers, although some argue that it should be. Whatever the case, a greater sense of contribution to policy formation through voting is only possible when it is established who is a member of ISKCON and for the criteria have to be firmly established. So I wanted to write something from my personal perspective. Thanks for reading it.
Oh, Zing! Nice writing.
Even if I have issues with this administrator or that GBC, the International Society for Krsna Consciousness, Srila Prabhupada’s chariot for taking Krsna to every town and village, is bigger than my issues, more important than my issues, and deserving of my service, regardless of my issues. That’s how I see it.
I’ve been scorched aplenty, but who am I to complain? How many have I scorched in the past (shudder)? Can’t I tolerate, for the greater good?
Recently my character was impugned, unfairly, behind my back, by a leader I served sincerely, knew well and trusted even more – with the evident objective of stopping me from serving elsewhere. It was painful to hear about, but how much pain have I caused to others that I must endure this? Nothing in this world happens in a karma-less vacuum, save and except pure devotional service – and even then, the stalwart Vaishnava may be dealing with some residual ‘after-effects.’ And what to speak of someone like myself, who can’t claim to be a Vaishnava at all?
Krsna has a way of wringing out our problems, if we’ll just stick to the program and learn a little humility. From what I’ve seen, those devotees who go bounding off, angry and self-righteous, generally don’t get to keep much going in terms of spiritual life. They hit a wall.
Thanks for writing. Your account is uncomfortable to hear and you have my sympathies. I feel the only way forward is if ISKCON membership is carefully defined, and the rights and responsibilities of members outlined and protected.
“He has pages of explanation about where ISKCON went wrong in 1978, but relatively few constructive suggestions for improvement in 2012. But even if he did have a constructive suggestion, he would never raise even a finger to do anything practical for ISKCON. He smiles as his days in this world pass by, content with the attention he’s attracting – and the emotions he’s provoking – while writing in splendid isolation.” – I love that passage – so true.
Thanks for your thoughts Pancha Tattva. There’s much more that could be written about the self centred posturing indulged in by ISKCON’s critics. Not one of them seems to be capable of producing anything substantially helpful to the world. As Srila Prabhupada said on occasion when devotees criticised: “Then you do something better.”
Haribol Prabhu, I also left the Detroit temple in 1978. I had a hard time with the ‘all or nothing’ strict rules of ISKCON, no matter how hard I wanted to continue to live at the temple. I chant every day, but I miss the temple more than ever now that I’m disabled and cannot walk. I keep up on the blogs and all ISKCON sites, what more can I do? Rudra Pandit Das .
Dear Rudra Pandit prabhu, my respectful obeisances to you.
In keeping with probably many thousands of others you received your initial training in one of ISKCON’s temple centres and came to a point in your life where it was more appropriate for you to leave that centre and live elsewhere.
For many people who’d spent several years in a temple it was quite a challenge to make the adjustment to regular life. Often educational or career paths were suspended when our members joined temples, and they had some catching up to do when they went back to regular life.
By ‘regular life’ I do not mean to say that those devotees abandoned their spiritual practices. Of course not. But their accommodation, meals, fellowship, regular kirtans, temple worship, regular daily classes and circles of friendship were all interrupted. New patterns of spiritual practice had to be developed. And sometimes that proved to be difficult.
It is relatively easy to practice sadhana-bhakti in a community, and less so when you are the prime motivator, cook, singer, class-giver and so on. Our temples are more accustomed to teaching beginners how to practice bhakti as a resident of such a community, and not how to practice bhakti within the home.
For a healthier, stronger ISKCON, I would suggest that courses of instruction within our centres be more directed to teaching people how to survive spiritually in the home, college, career and family situation – the real life situations that the vast majority find themselves in – and will certainly find themselves in when their ‘temple life’ comes to a natural end.
Statistics show that most devotees spend between three to five years in a temple community, then their life changes somewhat drastically. And these days, unlike in 1978, many never live in community at all.
In your personal situation – and of course I don’t know your details – it would seem that more correspondence, emails, skype and phone calls would be a great blessing. And regular visits from devotees who live in the area, of course. Perhaps the temple has a list of members who would be prepared to offer you this companionship?