I have just read the GBC Meeting minutes from march 1975, there is no mention of the DOM.

It is just common sense that GBC members should be elected every three years, this way many devotees will be trained up in management,and in time
there will be many more devotees with good management expierience,makes sense dosen't it?

There are many perks involved with being a GBC member , so the present GBC members have every reason to resist practicial and benificial change.

Is it true that not a single Prabhupada grand-disciple or Gurukula graduate ( most are in their 30's now ) are not qualified as GBC candidates ?,
this doesn't say much for the future of Iskcon does it ?

http://www.16108.com/DOM/dom.htm

Also during the meeting in 1975 we read :

" Resolved: GBC has divided zones as follows, based on recommendation of Srila Prabhupada that GBC members should have jurisdiction over no more that about 6-temples. "

Sounds great to me, now let's see here, 350 temples divided by 6 ...I was never really good at math...equals 58 ( we'll skip the .3 )
so where is the other 28 GBC members ?

Gopal Krishna Maharaja told me he is GBC for 75 temples , sounds like quite a lot of mangerial responsibilty for a sanyasi dont't you think ?

> DOM was never made public until a few months ago.

Fact: DOM is included in Vedabase 2003, i.e. 4 years in public (if not before).

... " the GBC's business is to see that the president and it's members are doing nicely "

That's certainly nice to know.Someone should tell Iskcon Vancouver's ( New Gokula ) three co-GBC's HH Gopal Krishna Maharaja,HH Bhaktimarga Swami and Harivilasa das about that.

Harivilasa das, Iskcon's first " International Multi-Temple President " should explaine why that community has not had a Temple President for the past six years.

Let's have a look at Resolution 407 of the 2004 GBC Meeting :

407. Picture of GBC's and Temple Presidents in ISKCON temples

[ISKCON Guideline]

WHEREAS:

Srila Prabhupada is the Founder-Acarya of ISKCON, the GBC body is the ultimate ecclesiastical managing authority of ISKCON, the individual GBC zonal secretaries are the representatives of the GBC body, and the temple presidents are the local authority,

It is a general practice of institutions to publicly display pictures of their leaders,

Although a significant percentage of temple visitors know the temple president, most do not know of the GBC, what purpose the GBC body serves, or who their local GBC zonal secretary is,

RESOLVED:

In the reception area or any equivalent public place of every ISKCON temple there should be:

A large framed picture or painting of Srila Prabhupada with a plaque saying, "His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, Founder-Acarya of the International Society for Krishna Consciousness."

Alongside Prabhupada's picture and significantly smaller, a photograph of the local GBC, Regional Secretary (where there is one), and Temple President, with a plaque stating the name of the GBC and temple president, and the name of the city the temple is in.

Alongside the photos a one-page framed document on ISKCON letterhead briefly describing Srila Prabhupada as the Founder-Acarya, the GBC as the ultimate ecclesiastical authority, and the local GBC and temple president (or local temple management team or board) as the local authorities.

It seems to me that since there is no picture of the Iskcon Vancouver Temple President ( because they don't have one ) in the temple lobby,then the three co-GBC Members are candidates for discipline for not implementing this resolution.

For more on Iskcon Vancouver please visit :

http://www.pariprashnena.com/discussion/248/should-iskcon-vancouver-have-a-temple-board-and-temple-president

and:

http://www.pariprashnena.com/discussion/238/is-it-ok-for-iskcon-gbc-members-to-promote-material-culture

Is it true that not a single Prabhupada grand-disciple or Gurukula graduate ( most are in their 30's now ) are not qualified as GBC candidates ?

[p]there are grand-disciples on the GBC. i'm not sure how many, exactly, but HH bhaktipurusottama maharaja & kaunteya pr. both fall into that category.[/p]

Isn't Guru Prasad Swami also GBC/grand-disciple?

So you are saying that SP clear instructions on elections are to be dismissed. And you use the argument widely used by the current establishment of not trusting the
masses.

I can tell you one thing, devotees are not common bangladeshis and that negative point of view on the community of devotees is generated by self-content. fear and power hunger contaminated brains. Talk about offenses to devotees, you'll find this mentality widely among many leaders.

If you were not to trust people in general then you wouldn't go on sankirtan and go just to "milk the ignorant karmis", tactics that have proven disastrous.

I can tell you one real example, very vivid. A temple president was giving a class and he said "Lets face it, we hate Krishna". That summarizes that mentality.
Compare that with what Srila Prabhupada says we actually love Krishna, but we have forgotten, etc

"GBC isn't to train people in management; it's the highest authority we have, and those best suited for the job should be on it. first of all the job needs to be defined, of course, that's what the constitution is supposed to do."

What I am implying is that by being a GBC for three years you would gain a lot of expirence that you can apply to other types of service,and share your knowledge on with your local temple community.Ever three years there would be another group of trained up devotees.

What's with all this " authority " talk I hear these day's, when I was a full time devotee in the 80's it was never once a subject to speak about, we we're too excstatic spreading Krishna Consciousness.

taking this statement alone, without the contents of the DOM and various GBC-resolutions re. the GBC's role, this leaves a lot to interpretation or speculation: what do they actually have to do, what are they allowed to do, to keep the society pure? doesn't that sound a little like the (un)holy roman inquisition?

[p]thank you, SKC prabhu. that was the type of reply i have been waiting for. if now you can point me to the source of these documents, i might actually change my mind about this whole DOM-issue:[/p]

For example, in July 1974 Prabhupada added a 'Topmost Urgent' amendment to the DOM, and in letters dated September and November of 1974, he refers devotees to follow the DOM.

additional point regarding the "fear of vote by the masses", the vote by the temple presidents of the GBC, as already explained, is not the "mob rule" democracies are famous for. the other point being, the temple presidents are supposed to be elected
by the members of the local temple, not appointed by GBC's to insure their loyalty.
if that ever came to the point of "vote by the masses", those are definately
"problems" devotees would welcome.

attached

...you should, otherwise you may be guilty of " minimizing the order of the spiritual master ",the DOM is meant to sustain a healthy Iskcon,far,far into the future,
in other words ever increasing book distribution.Anything with Srila Prabhupada's hand written signiture is of top most importance.

...why are we talking about wills ?

DOM was never made public until a few months ago.

I have read it, strange. What means public? It was certainly circulated before. Do you mean internet Public?

The DOM positively indicates Prabhupada's desire for GBC elections, and the historical facts for an election system for Temple Presidents can also be verified via Prabhupada's letters, conversations and documents:

1. Prabhupada stated the we should hold TP elections.
2. Prabhupada participated in TP elections.
3. Prabhupada had to sort out disagreements regarding TP elections.
4. Prabhupada sometimes appointed a TP himself.
5. Prabhupada sometimes let a GBC appoint a TP.
6. Prabhupada put a clause in the 'Direction of Management' outlining restricting GBC removal of a TP.

On balance, it appears that Prabhupada wanted elections but sometimes adjusted according to time, place and circumstance. This conclusion is consistent with the following letter by Prabhupada:

2nd March, 1970
London

My Dear Gurudasa,

Please accept my blessings. I beg to acknowledge reciept of your two letters dated 20 and 26 February, 1970, respectively, and I am so glad to learn that you have been elected president for this year. In India, when there was congress election among the executive members, each year a person was elected president. I think this system may be followed in our institutions also. Of course it will depend on the local situation, but in a round if each person is given the chance of managing the whole affairs, that means everyone becomes responsible officer.

(end)

For many years i have been thinking about all the malfunctioning in our society and at the present moment I think the remedy is here: put in practice the DOM.

Famous old example is there: if 2+2=5 then all other mathematical operations after that one are sure to fail.

If the GBC is getting its authority on Srila Prabhupada's instructions then their duty is to follow themselves the instructions beginning with its very foundation.

Otherwise we are going in circles, doing mistake after mistake and wandering why is not working.

Nobody to blame or purge on any camp: Just begin to implement Srila Prabhupada's instructions beginning by the GBC itself and we'll start to see the "magic" of Krishna consciousness again in no time.

Physician, Cure yourself !

Him replacing GBCs is not equal to nor even similar to the DOM directives. But as you say, important is not "I said you said", but to implement something that activates and frees our movement from so much confusion.
It is not so difficult, really. Temple devotees elect TP and TPs elect GBCs. What is the big deal?

Misha:

Besides it is apparent that Srila Prabhupada couldn't trust a GBC with absolute powers. Just look at the records and the DOM will make sense to you.

" You see the only people who can implement the principles of DOM are gbcs. In all my discussions with them, none except for retired ones will ever accept that SP could not trust GBC with absolute powers.

I would take it exactly the opposite way, its exactly because GBC is entrusted with ultimate authority they can if they want implement DOM (something that was never done by Prabhupada himself).

ys

...no DOM means no direction of management,in others words, Iskcon's managers have no direction.The idea of GBC members being appointed for life has to be the most insulting idea that has ever emerged from the GBC,some of these people don't even attend mangala arotik or chant 16 rounds,it's a joke.

(CONT"D, also by NNV)

4. 1974 Spring of 1974 would have been the first GBC election following the formation of the GBC in 1971. The GBC made no move to hold elections. Later in 1974, Srila Prabhupada sent out a letter marked “TOPMOST URGENCY”.


There were two main points in the letter, the first was followed impeccably by all temples, the second point concerning the DOM was disobeyed completely. (See the Attached letter from 1974)

Several months after the “TOPMOST URGENCY” letter, Srila Prabhupada writes several letters to GBC members, referring to the DOM as the Constitutional Basis for Iskcon.

5. 1975 Srila Prabhupada insists on the LA temple entering the DOM as part of the Non Profit documents filed with the state. This direct order was obeyed. (The DOM has since been deleted after that time).

In 1975, I request the then GBC, Jayatirtha das to show me the DOM. He snarls that it is locked in a Safe and “you will never get to see it”! This is the approximate same time that the DOM was added to the Iskcon LA corporate papers, most probably by Jayatirtha himself and most probably forced by SP to do so.


6. 1977 The second GBC election could have been held in the Spring. Instead, on May 28, Satsvarupa suggests that the GBC elect new GBC members (obviously bypassing the DOM election process) Certainly, Satsvarupa pays no regard to the 1974 “TOPMOST URGENCY” letter, which (as it was never implemented, apparently does not cross his mind to ask about

DOM elections, rather than the GBC electing new GBC, which Srila Prabhupada thoroughly condemned in 1972.


In May of 1977, Srila Prabhupada states that although his personally selected GBC are to remain “for good” any vacancies in the GBC body should be replaced by election, presumably referring to his “TOPMOST URGENT” DOM order in the 1974 letter.


Later in July, He appoints 11 men to initiate in His name.


Srila Prabhupada leaves his body in the Fall under strange circumstances.




7. 1980 offers the first date for elections absolutely required after Srila Prabhupada’s passing, as per terms of DOM and May 28,1977 directive. He has stated that the GBC “Nominated” by Him are to remain “for good”. Satsvarupa asks and is told by SP that only the GBC members who have for some reason vacated their “appointed by SP” GBC post are to be replaced via elections.






NOTE:

NO ELECTIONS HAVE BEEN HELD THEN OR SINCE. The DOM has been carefully secreted and hidden away by the GBC , so that not even any Temple Presidents (Who would certainly need to see and have a copy of the document if they were to hold GBC elections every three years as per the DOM).


I was able to find a copy of the DOM in 1994, which was the first time that I had seen it since 1971 in New Vrindaban. With my collaboration, the DOM was proposed for adoption By the late Sridham prabhu, at the Mayapur Meeting in 1996(?). Sridham prabhu was very, very excited by the DOM and thought everyone would like it, and hail it as the true authorized solution to Iskcon’s conspicuous leadership problems.

As soon as it was included in the Agenda for the GBC meeting in Mayapur, it was roundly attacked and savaged by Jayapataka, Tamal Krishna, and Rabindra Swarupa. They claimed that Srila Prabhupada had Himself rejected the DOM, and that this was a dead issue from many years ago. They accused anyone of looking into the DOM of disloyalty bordering on treachery.


After a hiatus of thirty five years, It is certainly time for us to move on this matter.


Those who would benefit