The Costa Rica Farm Issue
BY: SITA-PATI DAS
Jan 5, BRISBANE, AUSTRALIA (SUN) — Yadu Prabhu's latest installment of the correspondence between Daru
Krishna and Virabahu Prabhus again obscures more than it illuminates The original letters exchanged between these two Vaisnavas are clear, but when Yadu Prabhu's commentary is interjected everything becomes clouded.
I offer my respect to Yadu Prabhu, who is unknown to me personally. I would like to say a few things based on my personal experience in Peru and my appreciation for both Daru Krishna Prabhu and Virabahu Prabhu.
Yadu Prabhu says that "the Australian devotees" are not to blame for any
mismanagement on their part as they were invited to Peru by Virabahu
Prabhu. I clarified that there have been two Australian devotees
involved in management in ISKCON Peru, both as visiting GBC Regional
Secretaries (not resident in Peru), and neither were invited by Virabahu
Prabhu. Let me repeat that point to make it very clear - Virabahu Prabhu
did not invite any Australian devotees to Peru. Two Australians have
been involved as visiting GBC Regional Secretaries. For their
involvement you will have to look to the primary GBC and the third co-GBC.
Aside from this factual error, Yadu Prabhu asserts that mismanagement by
someone who is invited to manage in Peru is the responsibility of the
person who invites them - not the person who mismanages due to their
inexpertise. Then, however, he goes on to condemn Virabahu Prabhu for
mismanagement, in spite of the fact that Daru Krishna Prabhu clearly
explains in his letter that he (Daru Krishna Prabhu) personally selected
and invited Virabahu Prabhu to be the co-GBC of Peru.
If the Australian devotees are not to blame for any failing in their
ability to management, having been invited by an existing manager, why
is Virabahu Prabhu? Following the logic of Yadu Prabhu, Virabahu Prabhu
should be exonerated in the same way that the "Australian devotees" are.
Aside from this, Virabahu Prabhu's role in management in Peru is
overplayed in the commentary. As Daru Krishna explains, Virabahu Prabhu
was invited by him to be co-GBC with an existing GBC. Why is no mention
made of this personality, the primary GBC, and their management?
As Daru Krishna Prabhu pointed out in his letter, there have been three
GBCs and a two GBC regional secretaries in Peru simultaneously. I was
there when it happened, and it was, as Daru Krishna pointed out, chaos
(which is par for the course in Peru, both materially and spiritually,
at least in the post-Daru Krishna era). This, however, was not Virabahu
Prabhu's doing. He was simply a co-GBC, invited by Daru Krishna Prabhu
to assist the primary GBC for the zone. If we wanted to lay blame for
mismanagement at the GBC level, then why wouldn't we start with the
primary GBC, then go to the person who personally selected and invited
Virabhu Prabhu, before arriving at Virabahu Prabhu himself?
Was GBC management responsible for the success of the Peru yatra when
Daru Krishna was present? No, Daru Krishna was. Is GBC mismanagement
responsible for the struggles of the Peru yatra when Daru Krishna is not
present? I leave it to the reader to deduce that one.
ISKCON Peru was Latin America's crown jewel. It was also the only yatra
that had... Daru Krishna.
On the ground in Peru at the moment there is a distinct lack of
leadership capable of managing the yatra in the form that it is, which
is larger than any other South American Yatra. Great leaders attract
other leaders to them. In the wake of Daru Krishna Prabhu's departure a
number of his second level leaders also left. Five years on, the board
that Daru Krishna tells us met before his departure continued to exist,
but without 80% of the devotees on it.
There are many reasons for this, including the national political and
economic situation, and Daru Krishna Prabhu's personal strength of
character and leadership.
There have been many attempts to form a functioning local leadership
council to deal with the ongoing issues there. Many sincere devotees,
including the Australians and others, have spent their own personal
money and their time there assisting the yatra and the local devotees,
but it is clear that none of them are Daru Krishna; neither Virabahu
Prabhu, nor any of the other devotees at the GBC and sub-GBC level.
In my three years there Virabahu Prabhu was not significantly involved
in the ongoing management of the situation.
Reading through Yadu Prabhu's articles I see that he is trying to draw a
link between Virabahu Prabhu's GBC role in Peru and his GBC role in
Costa Rica, rather than to clarify the situation in Peru, or the
personal relationship and exchanges between Daru Krishna and Virabahu
Prabhus. The personal relation between Daru Krishna and Virabahu Prabhu,
aside - knowing firsthand the situation in Peru and Virabahu Prabhu's
role in it, I am left wondering how much substance there is to Yadu
Prabhu's assertions with regard to Costa Rica, which I do not have
personal experience of and thus cannot comment on authoritatively.
I wish all the best to the devotees in Costa Rica. I have seen farms and
facilities across South America, and indeed across the world, laying
empty in the wake of the great bust of ISKCON. It is obvious that these
facilities were hard won by the labor of dedicated, surrendered souls.
I've seen sincere devotees working to bring these farms and facilities
back to life, and I've seen managers struggling to bring yatras back to
a state where the devotional community and the facilities that they have
to manage and support are harmoniously balanced to allow things to go
on. I have great respect for all these people and their struggle in
service to Srila Prabhupada's mission.
There are valid concerns and points (and Vaisnavas too) on all sides of
the Costa Rica farm issue, but I don't think that this exchange with its
commentary has clearly presented or examined any side.
(Note for clarification: I currently serve in Brisbane, Australia. I
entered this country with my wife, and our son born to us in Peru, on a
missionary visa, just as we entered Peru. I'm not Australian, to make it
clearer.)
