Making a “Case” for the Reconstitution of Srila Prabhupada’s “Mission”
Final Words on the “Guru” & “Managment of Srila Prabhupada’s Mission”, Issues
If you somehow or another did not read Segment 33, the following will blow your mind, so to speak; you will discover what the GBC did with Srila Prabhupada’s institution. The GBC actually abandoned ISKCON, and in 2009 reconstituted an independent corporation based in West Bengal India. Moreover, the bylaws, of this bogus corporation, declare the GBC to
be the ultimate Ecclesiastical authority, and that all of ISKCON’S assets belong to the GBC. (See Heading “Segment 33: Illegal GBC Bylaws Give the GBC Dictatorial Power.)
Adding insult to injury, and even more sinister, the GBC also discarded Srila Prabhupada’s Bhaktivedanta Book Trust, (BBT). It has been reconstituted as the Bhaktivedanta Book Trust International, (BBTI).
BBT and its Shadow, the BBTI, by Maha Purusha Dasa:
This article was written by Purusha Dasa, possibly 10 years ago, around the year 2010. I have made only some grammatical, punctuation, and formatting editing; that in now way, take away anything from the contents.
Currently in ISKCON, and in the last decade, we have not seen a significant increase of book distribution. There may be isolated exceptions, but on the whole we have not seen the results of the 1970’s and early 80’s. This should raise many questions in the minds of those who wish to see HDG Srila Prabhupada’s desires fulfilled.
Srimad-bhagavatam 7.13.34 Purport by Srila Prabhupada:
“A sannyasi should have an institution meant to preach Krsna consciousness; he need not accumulate money for himself. We recommend that as soon as money accumulates in our Krsna consciousness movement, fifty per cent of it should be invested in printing books, and fifty per cent for expenditures, especially in establishing centers all over the world. The managers of the Krsna consciousness movement should be extremely cautious in regard to this point. Otherwise, money will be the cause of lamentation, illusion, fear, anger, material attachment, material poverty, and unnecessary hard work. When I was alone in Vrindavana, I never attempted to construct mathas or temples; rather, I was fully satisfied with the small amount of money I could gather by selling Back to Godhead, and thus I would provide for myself and also print the literature. When I went to foreign countries, I lived according to the same principle, but when Europeans and Americans began to give money profusely, I started temples and Deity worship. The same principle should still be followed. Whatever money is collected should be spent for Krsna, and not a farthing for sense gratification. This is the Bhagavata principle.”
Unfortunately, this principle of 50/50 is not being followed. In fact, when we get an ‘inside’ perspective on what’s actually happening with the BBT, we see gross negligence with respect to Srila Prabhupada directives. How is this? In regards to the monetary aspect, the BBT does not even have an account opened, (in its name, BBT), to deposit the proceeds that come from book distribution. So, this begs another question,
“Where IS the money going?”
In 1986, the ‘GBC’ formed the Bhaktivedanta Book Trust International, (notice the name is almost exactly the same, only the ‘International’ has been added), and the Bhaktivedanta Book Publishing. It was to these two unauthorized* ‘shadow’ corporations, that Srila Prabhupada’s BBT, had its copyrights transferred to, and the money that was generated from book sales. Please see spbbt.org for documentation on these statements.
Members of the ‘GBC’ met in 1986 and conspired to take illegal control of the BBT, by transferring all copyrights into the BBTI. Since Srila Prabhupada’s departure in 1977, the members of the ‘GBC’ have given the impression to the devotees of ISKCON, that they had ‘absolute’ control in decision making. This ongoing illusion has continued for over 44years, partly due to not implementing the DOM (Direction of Management), although it was ordered by Srila Prabhupada back in 1970.
Letter to Giriraja, August 12, 1971:
“GBC does not mean to control a center. GBC means to see that the activities of a center go on nicely. I do not know why Tamala is exercising his absolute authority. That is not the business of GBC. The president, treasurer and secretary are responsible for managing the center. GBC is to see that things are going nicely but not to exert absolute authority. That is not in the power of GBC. Tamala should not do like that. The GBC men cannot impose anything on the men of a center without consulting all of the GBC members first. A GBC member cannot go beyond the jurisdiction of his power.”