This is quite long, but here's the write up of my unpacking it...
Thoughts on ‘Unmasking the Guru’
The following are my reflections on the article ‘Unmasking the Guru’ by Bernhard Porksen and Ursula Richard from the online magazine Tricycle. Please read that article first, which can be found at the following link or on Tricycle.org:
tricycle.org/magazine/bernhard-porksen/.
Porksen begins with the statement that "the authority of gurus has become vulnerable" (because of social media). In the tradition of Caitanya Vaishnavism (CV), Sri Guru's authority can never become vulnerable as the true sad guru is the representative of Sri Krishna (see Bhagavatam 11.17.27). While it is primarily an individual disciple's determination of whether their guru has become fallen based upon one or many transgressions, Sri Guru's authority is not harmed. In such a case where the guru is rejected it is most likely because said guru was never a guru to begin with, but rather was someone who took up the role and then made a mockery of it. Sri Guru's authority is Sri Krishna Himself and thus the true sad guru won't make such grievous mistakes or errors or abuses that would warrant rejection, hide their past, etc.
This brings to mind the idea of ‘protecting faith’. This idea (similar to other dysfunctions of authoritarian dynamics exposed in this article) is often utilized by so-called spiritual authorities, which looks good on the surface, but is rotten on the inside. ‘Protecting faith’ is another sham that perpetuates abuse and neither addresses concerns brought to the table nor takes measures to sanction or discipline those who have committed abuse. The same goes with wanting to keep things ‘in house’. The proper stance that an institution should take is one wherein the authority system is 110% completely open to, and serious in, addressing each and every complaint, rather than shaming the complainer and sweeping reports under the rug.
Thus, it is not spiritual authority is imploding, as true spiritual authority cannot implode. Rather, what is imploding is the superficial, shallow, and sentimental understanding of what spiritual authority is. To expose deceitful leaders is according to Srimad Bhagavatam, the highest welfare work (dharma projjhita kaitavo ‘tra paramo nirmatsaranam satam, 1.1.2) and is re-affirmed in this article. The disturbance that we see is justice being served (karma), weeding out abusive megalomaniacs. Would we know about fall downs of gurus such as the recent one in South America were it not for the internet? Would it be a bad thing to NOT know? I believe it would be. Spiritualists are not meant to hide their heads in the sand, too fearful of ‘vaishnava aparadha.’ This ‘fear’ is a standard tactic of institutions in order to get people to keep their eyes closed and their mouths shut. Thus it is spiritual authoritarianism that is imploding and that is a very good thing.
Continuing the prior thought, Mr. Porksen doesn't appear to know the difference between authority and authoritarianism. "We have to understand that aura, charisma, and both spiritual and secular authority are always in part the result of successful control of information and communication..." That’s incorrect. That is authoritarianism, not authority and this misunderstanding is found throughout his article.
Porksen continues, "The image of the exalted being has to compete for attention with our personal experience and the online documentation of the guru’s disgrace." This is nothing but a good thing. Social media can and should assist in exploring the guru's behavior, knowledge, and teaching, especially in some circles where one will not likely have the opportunity to live closely with the guru for a year to observe him or her as advised in Hari Bhakti Vilas.
The case of Shimano is fantastic. Go social media! Why would this be a bad thing in any way? Very often psychotic, power hungry people are able to survey a spiritual group and discover that it is a place wherein they can quickly make a name for themselves, easily climb the ladder and gain followers to feed off of. Granted in some sense, this isn't always conscious, but it does become apparent in the aftermath of abuse cases, which are sadly very frequent.
"The question remains whether a form of radically disenchanted idealism can survive, or whether the many scandal-ridden communities, monasteries, and centers will simply fall apart, leaving behind nothing but depression and disillusionment." Again, it depends on if and how the community is educated. If spiritual students are educated in false ideas, such as that the institution is the guru, or that a historical guru and his teachings are conservatively frozen in time forever, then yes, the institution will lose its reputation and crumble or become another superficial, impotent group. The proper method is to teach people about the qualities of Sri Guru and that they shouldn’t compromise in or rush the search for Sri Guru due to social and/or institutional pressure. This orientation will help people maintain and grow their faith, rather than be rattled by the fall downs of false leaders.
The five factors in turning the tide on spiritual abuse are very important and informative:
1) “For victims of abuse to speak up and reveal their faces and names.” The gurukulis (children of ISKCON) have done this to some degree, and forced the leadership of ISKCON (the GBC) into a settlement for millions of dollars. Yet even so, child abuse has still been going on in ISKCON. See the documentaries ‘Cost of Silence’ on YouTube. This is only one small area of abuse in ISKCON and if such a significant issue is continuously handled so poorly and without care as it has been, one can imagine how other issues are handled—and child abuse is not a small issue!
2) “Courageous and persistent investigative journalists must be available to verify the accusations and make them known via established media.” One must be courageous if one is a member of ISKCON because they will quickly ostracize one for speaking badly about the institution. In fact just recently (2019) the GBC issued a directive essentially banning the book ‘Divine or Demoniac’ by Dhanesvara Das because it implies that the leaders of ISKCON may be demoniac. Sounds like the GBC may need a nap and a diaper change, like any other child throwing a tantrum because someone called them a bad name. A true brahminical society operates under the maxim ‘if the shoe fits, wear it.’ Again, where is the integrity in that kind of response?! There is none. If the GBC had integrity, they would address things in such a magnanimous way that people like Dhanesvara wouldn’t need to write a book because they would be so happy with the way things were managed. Maybe ISKCON will get there in a few centuries. In fact, the message to the smart people is ‘buy and read this book’!
But this is exactly my point. If you can’t speak up and fear social shaming and ostracization from the society that you’re trying to help, how is that a healthy society? Sounds like a totalitarian state to me, but one must look under the surface to see it. Don’t get caught up in the superficial.
3) “Courageous individuals from the inner circles of the institution have to take the investigation forward, guided by conscience and without regard for past loyalties or the fate of the perpetrators.” History shows that whenever this has been attempted in ISKCON, the GBC has kicked out such truth-sayers, banned books, and the like, over and over again. I would also add to Porksen’s statement, “guided by conscience, common sense, modern law, and scripture (not necessarily in that order).”
4) “Supporters and sympathizers—who may have been complaining about journalists and the “abuse of abuse”—will have to reposition themselves.” Again, this is not likely going to happen. You’re either with the ISKCON/GBC old boys club or against them. And yes, I do mean old BOYS club because even though supposedly being transcendental to the body, they are very much of bodily conscience not allowing females to take on the role of guru in their institution.
5) “Finally, to keep the topic from fading, you need an alert public with a heightened level of sensitivity.” I agree, but again, this is far from the case in ISKCON because per the GBC’s actions, they want a public with their eyes closed, who are happy to do whatever they say, thinking that it is the directive of God. Keep in mind that the GBC have a significant track record of abusing those in their care, and not the opposite. This happens in Gaudiya Math circles also. I know of other groups where the skeletons in the closet of their ‘acharya’ are just waiting to jump out.
"Hush money may flow." I know of one specific case where this was happening. Some years ago, one man on the roster to become an ISKCON guru was regularly sending payments to the families of four kids he sexually abused. It eventually came out and he was removed from the roster surprisingly.
And for every one story that finds its way to the public eye, how many stories are being ‘kept secret’ by the leaders to ‘protect the faith’ of their followers? Why the need for secrecy if the leaders have any integrity and properly educate their followers? When leadership has such a history of committing abuse, they should take the stance of extreme transparency and apology in hopes of making amends. The GBC on the other hand demand respect and their policies reflect such.
I would love to see the bank accounts of all ISKCON/Gaudiya Math leaders. This financial information should be public. But what we hear is that they don’t have any money. Again, this is manipulation and word jugglery. Therefore I should say I would like to see Krishna's bank accounts that they manage. One of ISKCON’s biggest gurus said in a class at the Bhakti Center, “I don’t have any money.” Anyone who cares to look will find that this is a blatant lie made to continue the charade of this ‘humble’, ‘holy’ man. Everyone needs to look up their prospective guru on the internet and do their due diligence to determine what the truth is, rather than blindly accepting what is put forth by sentimental followers and administrators with an agenda. Some gurus have spent thousands of (Krishna’s) dollars to clean up their internet presence. Why would a real guru need to do such a thing?
"The ideal of infallibility is disastrous, because spiritual seekers who encounter the master’s failings suddenly face total loss; their very worldview seems threatened. If the guru turns out to be fallible, might that mean that everything is a lie?" This smacks to the sentimentality of personality cults, which is exactly what you have when you look at a group that doesn't properly educate its members. Thus when the big guru falls down all is lost. But if on the other hand one has a proper understanding of what Caitanya Vaishnavism really is, first off one will not accept a charlatan for a guru (one will not accept a guru because of the rubber stamp issued by the authoritarians of the institution - whether the guru be male or female). Secondly if by chance one has a guru who falls away from the path in any form or fashion, then one will understand that there are other shelters that one has had all along—scripture, sadhus, Paramatma, as well as one’s siksa gurus. One will seek shelter in them and find solace.
There are continuous examples in the article about how emotional attachment to a guru and/or institution can be the greatest ignorance. "One sees only what one has to see in order to remain part of the group... There are those who virtually could see only what they wanted to see and wanted to believe. So they are virtually blind—and blind to their own blindness." There's a nice quote from Erich Fromm about this, “The desires and thoughts that the suggestion-apparatus of society (or authoritarian spiritual leadership) fills him with, chain him more thoroughly than outer chains. This is so because man can at least be aware of outer chains but be unaware of inner chains, carrying them with the illusion that he is free.” [The Art of Being; Erich Fromm; 1989]
I would argue that the greatest enemy to seeing with integrity is emotional attachment to a spiritual leader or institution. Once a leader can create enough emotional attachment in their followers, they can (and do) literally get away with murder. Please see the publication, ‘Killing for Krishna’ available on Amazon.
This is a fantastic statement, "More often, though, there are people who sense something but suppress their internal whispering, their doubts, their inner admonishments; they whitewash what they have seen and construct the weirdest explanations to escape painful conclusions, unavoidable knowledge, and the responses that would be required of them." And I have personally experienced (in ISKCON) that if you haven't been indoctrinated enough to have this internal dysfunctional/abusive tool thoroughly installed, whomever you go to in the group will likely reinstall it for you with the needed patch to help it work better in the future.
He says, "I think as a first step we have to abandon our old ideals of perfection..." and equates said ideals with fundamentalism. Again, I think he doesn't understand that ideals of perfection can be healthy. One can find a sad guru that one has absolute faith in. It is very very rare and Sri Krishna says so in the Gita (manusyanam sahasresu, Bg 7.3). Yet, one has to be willing to wait it out and not get on the "I have a guru" band wagon or be pressured to be able to answer the "who is your guru" question.
These are some of my reflections on this wonderful article found on Tricycle.org. I’m certain that for the thoughtful reader, much more can be extracted for the benefit of oneself and others. Please understand that any inspiration you may get from this article is only due to the blessings of Sri Sri Radha Krishna, the Bhakti scriptures, and the sadhus whom I’ve had the fortune to learn from. Any discrepancies you may find are mine alone and I request your feedback so that I may improve this writing for future readers. Thank you.
I'll post my thoughts once I've gone through the article. 
I'll post my thoughts once I've gone through the article. 
