© 1999 VNN
|
WORLD December 3, 1999 VNN5013 Related VNN Stories Sri Rama Replies To Raghunatha Stocker BY SRI RAMA DAS USA, Dec 3 (VNN) — (see also VNN story # 4805) Hare Krishna, Dear Raghunatha Stocker, I read your comments [Thank you for the kind words] several times. I hear you saying how angry and hurt you and other former gurukula students are due to the abusive actions of adults whom you should have been able to trust. I hear you saying how that trust was completely betrayed. For what it's worth, you have my sincere sympathy and I apologize for anything I have done (or not done) in the past which has contributed to your suffering and frustration. Many current ISKCON leaders have expressed their shock and regret -- and their desire to help out in what ways they can. I agree and applaud their actions. But I have doubts about the direction things are taking now and I wish to express my misgivings. I've heard a bit about the child abuse lawsuit, and personally, I am troubled to hear that any Krishna-bhakta could think a lawsuit against ISKCON could serve a useful purpose besides lining the pockets of opportunistic lawyers. I don't know who instigated this or who is participating, but they must be truly naive to not see how they are being manipulated and sucked in, all in the name of reforming ISKCON. No matter how reprehensible abusers of our children have been, these diatribes are unfair to gurukula teachers and other devotees who sincerely did their best. I know most of the parents, teachers, ISCKON leaders and GBC during these times and most were sincere -- if sometimes misguided -- persons. There is a difference between intentionally malevolent activities and doing your best in a difficult situation. I'm not trying to throw a blanket of protection over the guilty -- most people know I worked very hard to uproot child abusers and send them on their way to their just punishments -- but I don't believe in getting hot-headed when the cause of a problem is not clear. I know that even many of the accused GBC agonized over this issue when it came to light in the late 1980s. Perhaps the current GBC members don't remember what happened because many older GBC left and have been replaced by a new generation. One of the reasons this is still a burning issue is because few have taken the trouble to understand the root causes which should be dealt with before we try to move on. Over-simplifying issues can cause reactions that are also extremely undesirable. Let's take a look at a few historical facts. (Please keep in mind that what I'm about to say doesn't apply to the Vrindavan gurukula. That's a whole other story that needs to be addressed at another time.) I believe the single-most negative factor was a belief that participation in gurukula was mandatory. The rank and file were told they must put their kids in gurukula or they were in maya. Conversely, gurukula management was told they must accept all the students they were sent. These double-edged requirements virtually guaranteed failure -- though no one involved at the time could see the problem. Krishna consciousness is always a voluntary process. Whenever force or coercion is applied, everything becomes perverted -- with disastrous results. When studying Srila Prabhupada's instructions on child-raising, you will note how qualified both the teachers and the students need to be. If my understanding is correct, there is no Sanskrit word for teacher other than *guru.* As far as the children go, there were many who just didn't belong in gurukula under any circumstances. Some were ill-suited by nature, many needed to be with their families on a daily basis, some were chronic discipline problems -- and some were mentally disturbed. What is going to happen when they come under the care of marginally-qualified, substantially over-worked teachers? Not exactly a recipe for success. Am I saying this is an excuse for child abuse? Not at all. But you can easily understand how circumstances provided a big window of opportunity for sexual predators and individuals who needed children to boost up their sense of self-importance. Without a doubt, some schools were so desperate for teachers almost anyone was accepted. If there had been some evaluation of whether or not gurukula was suitable for individual children, there could have been a lot more discrimination in the selections of gurukula staff. If gurukulas had been able to say no when they had no room for more students, a lot of problems could have been avoided. The same holds true for the parents. If someone had told them it was alright to raise their children at home, a lot of families could have been saved. So who was responsible? This is not an easy question to answer. In my opinion, there's enough blame to go around for everybody involved. You mention your sister was born in 1976. By 1976, the primary gurukula in Dallas had been closed for 2 1/2 years. She would have been 8 years old in 1984. By that time, gurukulas were strictly local affairs. In fact, around that time, Dallas had not one--but two--day schools. Where in God's name were your parents? Did nobody have the common sense or the spine to bring this to the attention of the Dallas authorities? Srila Prabhupada was opposed to physical punishment, and this was very well known by the parents, teachers and leaders in 1984. I keep hearing that the GBC knew about these problems but ignored them or covered them up. This might have been the case for some individuals, but it is not true as far as the whole body was concerned. When the child abuse came to light in the late 80s, the GBC body was concerned and cooperative. One example: In order to help the Board of Education get a handle on the situation, the GBC resolved that any resolution of the Board of Education had the same binding force on all ISKCON as if it had been passed by the full GBC body. I have even heard of current GBC members acknowledging that the GBC did nothing. Perhaps there should be some serious reading of the GBC and Board of Education minutes from the late 80's and early 90's. However, it is also true that the ISKCON leadership did not do much in the way of funding. Often, what money we did get was given begrudgingly. It also appears that the ISKCON leadership dropped the ball somewhat after that time. Others would be better able to judge that than I. Another big factor in our failure was money. Basically, ISKCON was, and still is, a fundamentally poverty-stricken society. Education costs a lot of money. Public schools consume enormous amounts of money. In 1990 the average expenditure per student (USA, K-12) was $6,009 a year. In 1984, the average gurukula tuition payment was $150 per student, per month ($1800 per year). That was to pay for housing, food, medical care, transportation, repairs -- and the full cost of maintaining the teachers and other staff. We often had to beg parents and temple presidents to pay that small sum. Who do you think volunteers to take on an extremely difficult service in under near-impossible conditions, while having to struggle every day even to take minimal care of themselves and their families? They are either the most compassionate and dedicated people, or they aren't qualified to do much else, or they are those with ulterior motives. But sometimes, when your in the middle of a situation, you don't see things clearly until the damage is already done. The role of money should never be underestimated. There will never be quality education in ISKCON until those responsible are ready to make the needed sacrifices. Srila Prabhupada said, "Poverty brings out a person's worst qualities." I want to say in the strongest possible manner, that I do not buy the logic that: 1) Everything was just great when Srila Prabhupada was personally present. 2) All we had to do was follow Srila Prabhupada's instructions and we would be immediately successful, and 2) the gurukula system was not successful, and therefore, 3) we must have not followed Srila Prabhupada's instructions. This is a neat, but highly over-simplified train of thought: "So something went very wrong. And that would mean the responsibility for these actions lies with whom? After all, Srila Prabhupada's teachings on raising children are all recorded, coupled with how Srila Prabhupada dealt with children in general. So the instructions were there. So why were they ignored? Is this not deviating from the orders of the SM?" What do you think was going on? Do you believe that thousands of parents, teachers, and ISKCON leaders all conspired to ignore Srila Prabhupada instructions? On the contrary, most were trying hard to follow Prabhupada's teachings, as they understood them. In 1982, the Ministry of Education published "Srila Prabhupada on Guru-kula." It contained every instruction by Srila Prabhupada on gurukula that was known at that time. It was the standard for ISKCON education. Now lets read a few quotes and see how to reconcile them with events of the time and with our hind-sight of experience. Things start to get complicated very quickly. Where did the idea come from that children should be sent away to gurukula and the parents will be free to do more service: "If you take charge of the children of our devotees and give them a nice education, strictly on Krishna conscious principles, it will be a great help to the preaching work. Our six students, husbands and wives, are preaching in London. Two of them have a child. As soon as she is . . . old [enough], she may be sent under your care." -- letter to Satyabhauma d.d., 12/27/68. If you want a good shock, find the above quote in the Vedabase and see what's represented by those three ellipses (...). More: "For our Krishna consciousness movement, gurukula is a great relief to our men. The children can come to this school and the parents will be free to work for Krishna." -- statement by Prabhupada during his visit to Dallas in May 1973. What about the concept that the schools should not be local, but rather centralized in one location: "Actually, I don't want our energy spent to develop a school at New Vrindaban. Rather, all of our children should go to Dallas... In Dallas they have full facility approved by me. I have personally seen that they are doing very nicely there." -- letter to Satyabhauma d.d., 3/23/73. That we should not have day schools but only residential gurukulas? Jagadish: "If the parents want their young sons to live at home and attend gurukula during the day, and then go home at night, is that a good policy?" Srila Prabhupada: "Gurukula means they must be residing." -- Dallas, 7/75. Prabhupada said grhasthas could do book distribution and keep 10-15% of the profit. But during the big push for book distribution in 1976, he also said: "The parents must take responsibility for their children, or they should not have children. It is the duty of the individual parents. I am not in favor of taxing the temples. The parents must pay for the maintenance of their children. . . The profits from the businesses should first go to support gurukula and the balance may be given for the local temple's maintenance. . . If grhasthas want to do book distribution, they should be given a commission. . . of which part must go to the gurukula." -- letter to Jayatirtha 1/22/76. For a grhastha book distributor to have followed this formula, he would have had to sell about $300 worth of books every day and be able to live on $450 per month, of which $150 could be paid to gurukula. As far as diverting funds from Mayapura, that money comes from the BBT and is the profit of book distribution done by temples. Prabhupada clearly said that shouldn't happen. Where did the idea come from "of renouncing material attachments and affections" if not from Srila Prabhupada? Is he the source of this "general callousness?" So things aren't so neatly black and white. If you want to shout invective all over the place -- if you want a pure black and white world -- then take it to it's logical conclusion: Stand up like a man and say: *I accuse Srila Prabhupada! These impossible ideas came from him! He put these people in charge! He told us we should obey the temple presidents! He wanted every available devotee out distributing his books! He wanted the money for Mayapur! He made the GBC the ultimate managerial authority! He appointed homosexuals and drug-takers to the GBC! Now let's teach Prabhupada a lesson by taking his money and using it to advance our own agendas!* I agree that your anger is justified. But that anger is good or bad depending on whether or not it is used in Krishna's service. Are you ready to step up to the podium and say, "I know this is the best way to serve Srila Prabhupada's mission! I know just how to heal ISKCON! These foolish pig-headed GBC don't even know the difference between right and wrong because they are simply power-hungry, money-mad materialists"? In the material world, every endeavor is covered by fault. It's dangerous to think you can see into the heart of others and judge their motives. What is the purpose of your "present stance still is that this court case is the only thing that is going to get anything moving"? Get moving toward what? Another kind of hell where all devotees go to court every time they feel something is wrong? Can someone point out to me where Prabhupada suggested this was a desirable method to rectify ISKCON? The instigators of law suits are the ones being hoodwinked by "downright demoniac mentality." Why throw away all the good will and sympathy of those who are ready to help? Who will support devotees who have so obviously been carried away by bad association -- and by revealing their minds in confidence to materialists who only plan to exploit those who have already been exploited enough? I'm sure there are going to be strong objections to these strong words. Perhaps some will think I'm not sympathetic to the plight of former gurukula students. But I can be sympathetic and still reject this highly pejorative approach. Prabhupada defined *auspicious activity* as action that simultaneously benefits all living entities. Why burn up all this energy in activities which benefit no one except lawyers running after fame and fortune? Your servant, Sri Rama das Related VNN Stories  Comment on this storyContact VNN about this storySend this story to a friend
|
