(Prabhupada's) Preaching is the Problem

Please read this post on Communication and Intention before continuing here.

This morning I was finally able to articulate what has provoked rage in me over resolution 311.

Here is the logic of the resolution:

Premise A. (explicit in resolution) We have external PR issues.

Premise B. (explicit in resolution) We have internal cultural issues.

Premise C. (implicit) X

Premise D (implicit) Putting annotations in Srila Prabhupada's books is the clearly the best way / the only way to fix this.

Premise E. (implicit in resolution, explicit in Praghosa prabhu's comment - comment #6 here) We are qualified to annotate Srila Prabhupada's books.

Premise F. (implicit in resolution, explicit in Praghosa prabhu's comment - comment #6 here Any downsides to annotating are outweighed by the benefits.

Conclusion: Let's annotate.

Premise D, "annotation is the only way / the best way", has not been demonstrated, nor has sufficient due diligence been shown by the GBC on that or Premise F, "the downsides".

Premise E, "we are qualified to do it", is a cause for alarm in itself. Praghosa prabhu says:

It would seem entirely appropriate for sincere followers of Srila Prabhupada to be the ones who give the definitive explanation on any statements that might, or are being misconstrued by others.

Three things to that, accepting it as true:

1. which sincere followers of Srila Prabhupada, with which take on his teachings?
2. I don't like to have to call your qualification into doubt, here, but out of duty (and based on previous GBC performance) seriously - are you really qualified to do that?
3. Explain all you like in another book, but why change Prabhupada's book?

And this leads on to mystery Premise C, which is what grabs my gut and forces me to speak on this.

Premise C is:

Srila Prabhupada's preaching in his books is the cause of these problems

Devotees intuitively grok this in the resolution. Witness the gut reaction push-back of Pandu, who immediately comes back with (paraphrasing) - "Prabhupada's preaching isn't the problem, it's your leadership".

I also spoke to this point when I said: "It's not Prabhupada's statements but the devotees' behaviour that is the root cause."

Now, to be liberal, what the GBC is probably trying to say is:

"Public perception of what Srila Prabhupada said is contributing to our PR issues.
Devotee misapplication of what Srila Prabhupada said is contributing to our internal cultural issues."

However:

1. The resolution appears to take aim not at devotee understanding or public perception, but at Srila Prabhupada's statements;
2. The resolution is not justified or explained;
3. Vocal support from the community is coming from devotees who openly state their opinon that the resolution is good because Srila Prabhupada's statements are in fact the problem;
4. People are freaking out apart from this about the creation of "the power to annotate" and its potential for misuse, especially with no evidence of managerial competency or due diligence around it;
5. Premise D - "this is the only / the best way" has not been discussed with the alternatives that were considered presented and the reasons for their dismissal documented;

Due to these factors the impression that Srila Prabhupada's statements are in fact considered the cause is reinforced.

I have already stated that I agree that public perception is always an issue in preaching. You are necessarily presenting something new and different to people. So preaching, or relevant communication must be there.

My point again is: why not write books that create faith in people, and draw them to Srila Prabhupada's books?

If you have don't have sufficient spiritual potency to do that, then I am sorry, but I have no faith that you are qualified to do meta-commentary in his book.

About the internal cultural issues, the GBC need to own that. Even if you weren't in when it failed miserably to provide leadership and protection to the society, you still have to own it.

Here in Australia the government recently formally apologized to the indigenous people of Australia for its treatment of them [newspaper article]. Many of the people in the government weren't in it when these things happened, but they still apologize because they are in it now, and it's the same government.

Yes, we know you had no experience in leading any kind of organization, much less a society. Yes, we know you were young. Yes, we know you weren't even in a position of power at that time.

However, you are now the GBC and you have to own it. Just like the Catholic church had to own the responsibility for inaction during the Holocaust [newspaper article].

You are the post. You take the hit - don't try to pass it on to Srila Prabhupada.

I would like to see more articles like Sesa prabhu's article on "Premature Transcendence"
A Personal Reflection on Virtue and Values in the Krsna Consciousness Movement. This is the kind of brahminical leadership that we need, working down to a local level, to effect the internal culture changes that are necessary.

I restate my point - without ideal devotees, no amount of annotating is going to make a difference to these two issues, Premise A and Premise B. With ideal devotees, no amount of annotating is necessary.