The Controversy Surrounding ISKCON Bangalore: An Exposé

Is ISKCON Bangalore an Integral Part of the Original ISKCON GBC?

The ongoing debate over the status of ISKCON Bangalore within the larger ISKCON community has become a contentious subject among followers. The primary issue revolves around the interpretation of a document issued by Srila Prabhupada in 1977, known as the “July 9th Letter.” This letter outlined a system of “ritvik” initiations, where certain disciples could initiate on behalf of Srila Prabhupada due to his physical incapacitation. A fundamental question emerges: Was this system intended to continue post-Prabhupada’s passing?

Tasks and Responsibilities

For all GBC (Global Executives Committee) and Temple Presidents:

Continue to evaluate potential initiates within your temple and their readiness for initiation. Send recommendations for first and second initiations to the nearest of the eleven appointed representatives instead of Srila Prabhupada.

For the Eleven Appointed Representatives:

Review the recommendations sent by temple presidents for first and second initiations. After consideration, accept the devotee as an initiated disciple of Srila Prabhupada by providing a spiritual name or chanting on the Gayatri thread. Send a letter to the respective temple president giving the spiritual name or the thread. Report the name of the newly initiated disciple to Srila Prabhupada to be included in His Divine Grace.

For Temple Presidents after receiving the letter from representatives:

Perform the fire yajna in the temple as was being done before.

ISKCON Bangalore's Unique Path

ISKCON Bangalore was originally registered as a part of ISKCON Mumbai, which served as the head office of ISKCON India. However, in the early 2000s, the president of the temple, Madhu Pandita Parbhu, along with other vice-presidents, moved away from ISCKON GBC and considered sanyasis as redundant and not fit enough to give initiation. They followed the controversial “ritvik” policy, which was later removed by ISKCON due to its limitations.

In the global ISKCON, initiating Diksha gurus give initiation according to Gaudiya Vaishnava philosophy. Even the ISKCON gurus give initiation on behalf of Prabhupada, as he is the Acharya of ISCKON. However,ISKCON Bangalore operates with a different approach, where Madhu Pandita Dasa gives initiation on behalf of Srila Prabhupada, which is considered redundant by some.

Rejection of GBC's Authority

The devotees at the Bangalore temple rejected the direction of the international GBC Body, which Srila Prabhupada established as the ‘ultimate managerial authority.’ This was because they misunderstood the standard and historical process of seeking out and taking shelter of a spiritual master and concluded that it was not conducive to efficient management. They believed that if temple management assumed the highest spiritual authority, they would gain the local devotees' full cooperation.

The Emergence and Spread of Ritvik Philosophy

Around the same time, a handful of other devotees in various parts of the world began to advocate a ‘ritvik’ philosophy that the Gaudiya Vaishnava disciplic succession ended with Srila Prabhupada. They claimed that there were no bona fide gurus in ISKCON to continue the succession. This contradicted ISKCON's understanding and Prabhupada's instructions, where he was seen as the most current representative of an ongoing chain of spiritual teachers who should continue the chain and initiate disciples themselves.

Ritvik advocates developed a theory of ‘posthumous initiations’ by Srila Prabhupada, which has become a convenient way for the Bangalore temple managers to establish themselves as absolute authorities. They proclaimed that they were going to follow the ‘ritvik’ system instead of the traditional system guided by the GBC Body.

The Legal Battle

Although ISKCON Bangalore and a group of temples set up by Sri Madhu Pandit Das do not follow the GBC, the situation worsened when they wanted to split from ISKCON. This resulted in a High Court case, which ultimately ruled in favor of ISKCON's property rights.

On May 23rd, 2010, the High Court of Karnataka ruled that the Sri Radha Krishan Chandra Mandir in Bangalore, which had originally been an ISKCON temple but had been run by a breakaway group since 1997, is officially the property of ISKCON registered in Mumbai. This decision underscores the legal standing of ISKCON's authority over its temples, even when local branches deviate from the established rules.

Conclusion

The debate over ISKCON Bangalore's status remains a complex issue rooted in the interpretation of Prabhupada's instructions and the traditional Gaudiya Vaishnava philosophy. The case of ISKCON Bangalore highlights the importance of adhering to established practices and the authority of the GBCBody to maintain religious and organizational integrity.