ISKCON Revival Movement (IRM)
1. What is the IRM?
The IRM (ISKCON Revival Movement) is a body composed of ISKCON
devotees from all over the world who want to see the Society put
back on track, in line with the directives of its Founder, Srila
Prabhupada. This Radha-Govinda temple in Manhattan is also part
of the IRM.
2. Why does the IRM exist?
The spiritual purity and general prestige of ISKCON has undergone
a massive deterioration since the physical departure of its Founder
on November 14th 1977. Srila Prabhupada single-handedly established
ISKCON in 1966 as a great gift to the world, and when he left
it was an expanding dynamic force, a beacon of light for humanity.
Sadly today it is disintegrating, a fact admitted in a memo sent
in May 2000 by the then GBC Chairman Ravindra Svarupa das: “Therefore
the question remains: What, then, will we do? How will we deal
with our polarized and disintegrating Society?” This decline
can be traced back to various deviations from the instructions
and standards given by Srila Prabhupada, the chief of which being
his displacement as the sole diksa guru for ISKCON. The ISKCON
Revival Movement seeks to restore ISKCON to its former glory,
purity and philosophical chastity through the re-institution of
all the instructions and standards that Srila Prabhupada gave,
beginning with his role as the sole authority and diksa guru for
ISKCON. The IRM’s position is set out in The Final Order
and No Change in ISKCON Paradigm position papers. Both these papers
are also available on our website: www.iskconirm.com
3. Is the IRM separate from ISKCON?
It is a movement within a movement, composed of ISKCON members
who seek to reform and revive the Society.
4. Is the aim of the IRM to form a new movement?
No. It is to re-establish the original ISKCON that Srila Prabhupada
left us. Once this is achieved the IRM shall be dissolved.
5. What difference would Srila Prabhupada’s restoration as
the sole diksa guru make?
Firstly, it is the most basic axiom of spiritual life that we
can only make advancement by properly following the orders of
the guru. If the guru asks for milk and we bring him water, how
will he be pleased? And if the guru is not pleased, how will we
ever approach Lord Krishna? For nearly three decades ISKCON has
not been doing what Srila Prabhupada ordered. Since Srila Prabhupada
left us physically we have not allowed him to initiate even one
person via his ritvik, or representational, system. This is the
only system of initiation he ever authorised to continue within
the Society. If ISKCON members once more start to follow his order,
then naturally they will please Lord Krishna, and all spiritual
success should naturally follow. Also, with everyone having the
same direct relationship as Srila Prabhupada’s disciples,
factionalism will be eliminated. For the first time in nearly
thirty years there will be united team spirit, with everyone working
for the same goal - the service and glorification of Srila Prabhupada
and Sri Krishna. Many ISKCON “gurus” have fallen prey
to gross sinful activities; and when they leave they often take
with them hundreds of thousands of dollars and many of their followers.
This continual loss of properties, faith and personnel will be
eliminated as faith is only placed in Srila Prabhupada, and not
in fallible substitutes. Money currently siphoned off by the 80
or so “gurus” from their disciples in daksina (gifted
money) will instead go to temples, making them healthy and strong.
6. How can the IRM be so sure its position is correct, and the
GBC’s is not?
The IRM consider their position correct since it is based on
signed, legal documents that were directed to the whole Movement.
On the other hand, the GBC have presented at least three completely
contradictory official positions (none of which are supported
by legal documents) and thus do not technically have a position,
not to speak of a correct one. We should point out that not only
do these various accounts contradict each other, but on occasion
contradict themselves too. For example, if we just take the simple
question of when Srila Prabhupada was meant to have authorised
his replacement as diksa guru for ISKCON, we get the following
answer from the following three official GBC papers:
* a) On My Order Understood (GBC, 1995): Srila Prabhupada
gave the order for gurus at the same time as the order for devotees
to act on his behalf, and this occurred on July 7th, 1977 (p.
28 in Gurus and Initiation in ISKCON, GBC 1995)
* b) Disciple Of My Disciple (H.H.Umapati Swami, 1997): Eleven
diksa gurus were all set up and ready on May 28th, 1977 since
“ritvik” means “officiating acarya”
which means “diksa guru”.
* c) Prabhupada’s Order (Badrinarayan das, 1998): On July
9th, 1977 the eleven were fully functioning as gurus but simply
observing the etiquette in Srila Prabhupada’s presence.
Above we see the GBC have given three different dates for when
Srila Prabhupada allegedly sanctioned his replacement.
1. a) refers to a garden conversation,
2. b) refers to a meeting between Srila Prabhupada and some
of his senior disciples, whilst
3. c) refers to the signed directive on initiation after which
this booklet is named.
Thus each GBC position paper tells a very different tale. To
make matters worse: In March 2004, at their annual meeting in
Mayapur, the GBC officially withdrew the paper On My Order Understood,
privately admitting it contained “lies” and “stretched
the truth”. It was this very paper that The Final Order
set out originally to challenge (please see Introduction) and
the fact it has now been withdrawn so ignominiously can only further
vindicate the IRM’s position.
Quite clearly the GBC are confused over when successor diksa
Gurus were authorised. The IRM argues that this is inevitable
since Srila Prabhupada never created any replacement diksa Gurus,
only ritviks; and it was this ritvik system he left running with
no order for it to be stopped. On this basis
we argue that the GBC must first decide on a position, and only
then will we be able to judge its efficacy.
The sad thing is that, even to this day, anyone who questions
the GBC’s miasma of discordant testimony is ruthlessly hounded
from the Society.
Contact: irm@iskconirm.com
www.iskconirm.com
|
