Jul 05, 2018 — MANCHESTER, ENGLAND (SUN) —
This is in regards to the purchase of properties by ISKCON, and in recent times particularly at Bhaktivedanta Manor, who appear to have a healthy portfolio of domestic houses, perhaps with a value of an estimated 8 to 10 million pounds. Can the Manor authorities assure us all that in pursuing such a course of action using ISKCON's finances, that no conflict of interest is taking place, with the original purposes of the charity or the mission of Srila Prabhupada?
Congregational donations should, one would assume, be used according to the 50/50 formula, of increasing centres and restocking of books or other preaching aids, and maintenance. The congregation developed among the Indian population is second to none at the Manor, but there again Prabhupada said the Indian populations will always be inclined to worship God in one form or another; it's the indigenous UK populations where the real challenge lies. To intelligently present Krishna Consciousness to them, as yet little progress is made, or there appears little structured plan to do so. The model of congregational preaching is always understood as essential and practical, but greater congregations from all cultures need forming if we are to really carry out Srila Prabhupada's mission.
Devotees may be bewildered as to why Bhaktivedanta Manor is purchase so many houses. Of course, traditionally the security of the Deity worship and future funding needs are to be secured for any future unforeseen events, and this is authoritative by charity commission standards. They encourage long term financial security, but the peaching and real purpose of the charity will have to be seen as taking place, particularly in light of the desires of Srila Prabhupada. For instance, investing in yoga centre type shops and restaurants would increase the interests of the charity, which is to bring Krishna Consciousness to as many people as possible, from all walks of life and all backgrounds. That cannot be achieved by purchasing domestic properties. In fact, in current times there have never been better opportunities to introduce Matchless Gift stores, etc. in high streets all over the UK. High streets are undergoing major changes due to online retail. Many shops are empty and authorities want people to come forward to change the dying high streets.
With that in mind, of course decision makers cannot be seen to have conflicts of interest in regards to the purchasing or selling of any of ISKCONs properties, or benefit from connections to mortgage organisations built up because of the collateral of ISKCON. The very aims of any charity should always be met. The personal financial security of its management can never influence decision making or, for that matter, who or which community should be preached to.
Can the managers and the GBC in England explain the exact purpose of holding a domestic property portfolio and how that could relate to the work of the charity and the purposes of ISKCON?
Conflicts of interest affect charities of all types and sizes. They can lead to decisions that are not in the best interests of the charity and which are invalid or open to challenge. Conflicts of interest can also damage a charity's reputation or public trust and confidence in charities generally. These harmful effects can be prevented where individual trustees can identify conflicts of interest, and the trustee body can act to prevent them from affecting their decision making.
You could benefit financially or otherwise from your charity, either directly or indirectly through someone you're connected to, if your duty to your charity competes with a duty or loyalty you have to another organisation or person.
I have heard it said that those who criticise a domestic portfolio business should come forward with plans and business models for preaching centres or yoga type centres, but Srila Prabhupada did not like central authorities that devotees have to beg funds from. It is the responsibility of the management to spend laxmi wisely in pursuing Prabhupada's instructions. If they have no clue as to how this should be done, they could broaden the management and develop a vision.
The point is, the Manor authorities are holding ISKCON's funds. The Manor or any preaching centre is not a business in the true sense of the word. Preach and money will come, Prabhupada said. The Manor is built up by donations to the charity. Funds coming to the charity increase the work of the charity and increase its purported aims. Overly investing charity money in real estate seems difficult to justify, particularly when there appears to be a ripe market for vegetarian and Bhakti yoga centres who could be satellite centres preaching Krishna Consciousness. And it is the Bhaktivedanta Manor management's responsibly to expand the preaching and use its resources properly. Not that any criticism is met with, "put forward a business plan, we will look at its merits financially". Preach and money will come is our Acarya's words. The Manor finances itself work on that principle, so why would there be one standard for Manor management and another for satellite centres?
Srimad Bhagavatam 1.5.24 shows in the purport Srila Prabhupada's mood: 'impartial in distribution of transcendental knowledge, to Him no one is enemy or friend, no one is educated or uneducated, no one is favourable or unfavourable, the business is to get the ignorant mass of people to reestablish the lost relationship with Krishna, by such endeavour even the most forgotten soul is roused up to a sense of spiritual life'.
Because the Manor has failed in this regard other charities are formed, like Om Nom restaurants. Although their work is commendable and is loosely connected to ISKCON, through congregation members, still its aims are different than our Founder's aims. Similar is the Avanti schools or ahimsa milk products. These are another example of organisations who utilise ISKCON to further their charities or business, but how much benefit is there for ISKCON, financially or otherwise?
It seems that when ISKCON management fails to directly promote its interests, other charities take the mantle who are not answerable to ISKCON, but indirectly use ISKCON's credits. They may not follow Srila Prabhupada's direct aims, and the profits and recognition does not flow in Prabhupada's direction.
This appears to be an era when Srila Prabhupada's vision and direction are in some cases farmed out to other charities who are not at all answerable directly to ISKCON or obliged to listen or carry out the mission in ways Prabhupada advised. Expansion should not be solely judged on a financial business status, but furthering the preaching as a donation funded centre, which traditionally ISKCON charities always are, is the way to go. The Manor, which came from the early preachers and H.G. George Harrison, has always operated in that way.
Regarding business, or investments, or thinking that our centres should be money making centres, here is what Prabhupada said:
1972 Correspondence
"Our main business is to become Krishna Conscious and to convince others through preaching work. Therefore, we do not want to strive for making big business and lots of money. Of course, money is required, but better to sell many, many books and collect in that way."
Here Srila Prabhupada emphasizes the importance of preaching to the indigenous populations, including the Hindus, but not excessively. They are always willing to give laxmi of course, but spending on preaching is the main work of ISKCON. Don't neglect the Hindus. Collect money from them for printing and pushing on our preaching work. They are able to give enough money. But don't bother trying to mix with or preach to them excessively. Real business is to convert the local men to become Krishna Conscious and carry on the work.
