Cults & Society
 Department: Group Report
__________________________________________________
Featured Group Report

Hare Krishna: child abuse
  
 
   
 
     

11/22

Child Abuse in the Hare Krishna Movement:1971-1986

E. Burke Rochford, Jr. with Jennifer Heinlein

[continued]

Yet, by the mid-1980s, as the children were growing into teenagers, understandings of the second generation and the gurukula began to change. To the surprise of many leaders and parents alike, the children raised in the gurukula were less than pure spiritually. Few were committed to a life of renunciation and full-time involvement in ISKCON (Rochford forthcoming).  As a result, some leaders openly challenged the need for the gurukula altogether. Economic decline, as I discuss below, made this view all the more attractive to some leaders. 

But they [the leaders] did not go back and become introspective and say ‘Well, we should have been taking care of these things. Let's get it together now.  We made a mistake, whether an honest mistake or not.  Let's now provide an excellent education for the children.  Let's rebuild the community's faith in ISKCON.’  They didn't do that.  They took (laugh) the opposite track.  Instead of saying ‘the kids are going to turn out good no matter what,’ now they were saying ‘things are going to turn out bad no matter what you do.’ The leaders' position was, ‘No, we did everything right.  We did what Prabhupada said.  We had ashrams.  We had these nice schools.  These wonderful schools.  And everything went bad anyway.  So why should we put a lot of energy into it [the gurukula].  We're just kidding ourselves.  Right.’ (Interview, ISKCON teacher 1990)  

But these two very different frameworks for constructing ISKCON's children  functionally served the same purpose.  In the first instance leaders saw no reason to invest resources in the gurukula because it couldn't fail, given the elevated spiritual status of the children.  The second framework, precisely because it emphasised failure, rather than success, likewise rejected the need to maintain a viable system of education.  As I argue in the next section, however, the gurukula did serve a crucial function for ISKCON, one that ultimately had little to do with educating and socialising ISKCON's next generation. 

Sankirtan and the Gurukula 

Although ISKCON's sannyasi leadership believed that a loss in standing would discourage marriage, as we have seen, the solid majority of ISKCON's membership married, and most had children.  The growth of marriage and family represented a significant threat to sankirtan, and thereby to ISKCON itself.22  Sankirtan served ISKCON's mission in two respects.  First, it represented the principle means by which the movement proselytised its Krishna conscious beliefs.  In fact, Prabhupada continually emphasised that book distribution represented the means to spread Krishna Consciousness in America and world-wide.  Secondly, and of equal importance, sankirtan supported ISKCON's communities financially.  Without a work force of dedicated sankirtan devotees, ISKCON's missionary goals and financial stability were placed in jeopardy.  The solution rested with the gurukula because it relieved parents of the burdens of childcare, thus affording them the opportunity to work full-time sankirtan.  Put differently, the gurukula allowed ISKCON's leaders to reclaim householders for sankirtan, a move that only grew in importance as ISKCON's North American communities faced deepening economic decline by the late 1970s (Rochford 1985, 1995c).  As one parent described. 

We got the children, the bothersome children from the leader's perspective we got them out of the way by putting them in the gurukula.  Now the adults could do some work.  Go out on sankirtan.  This was a very present issue, freeing up the parents. (Interview 1990)             

1/22 < > 22/22

______________________________________________ ^
 

Cults & Society
 Department: Group Report
__________________________________________________
Featured Group Report

Hare Krishna: child abuse
  
 
   
 
     

11/22

Child Abuse in the Hare Krishna Movement:1971-1986

E. Burke Rochford, Jr. with Jennifer Heinlein

[continued]

Yet, by the mid-1980s, as the children were growing into teenagers, understandings of the second generation and the gurukula began to change. To the surprise of many leaders and parents alike, the children raised in the gurukula were less than pure spiritually. Few were committed to a life of renunciation and full-time involvement in ISKCON (Rochford forthcoming).  As a result, some leaders openly challenged the need for the gurukula altogether. Economic decline, as I discuss below, made this view all the more attractive to some leaders. 

But they [the leaders] did not go back and become introspective and say ‘Well, we should have been taking care of these things. Let's get it together now.  We made a mistake, whether an honest mistake or not.  Let's now provide an excellent education for the children.  Let's rebuild the community's faith in ISKCON.’  They didn't do that.  They took (laugh) the opposite track.  Instead of saying ‘the kids are going to turn out good no matter what,’ now they were saying ‘things are going to turn out bad no matter what you do.’ The leaders' position was, ‘No, we did everything right.  We did what Prabhupada said.  We had ashrams.  We had these nice schools.  These wonderful schools.  And everything went bad anyway.  So why should we put a lot of energy into it [the gurukula].  We're just kidding ourselves.  Right.’ (Interview, ISKCON teacher 1990)  

But these two very different frameworks for constructing ISKCON's children  functionally served the same purpose.  In the first instance leaders saw no reason to invest resources in the gurukula because it couldn't fail, given the elevated spiritual status of the children.  The second framework, precisely because it emphasised failure, rather than success, likewise rejected the need to maintain a viable system of education.  As I argue in the next section, however, the gurukula did serve a crucial function for ISKCON, one that ultimately had little to do with educating and socialising ISKCON's next generation. 

Sankirtan and the Gurukula 

Although ISKCON's sannyasi leadership believed that a loss in standing would discourage marriage, as we have seen, the solid majority of ISKCON's membership married, and most had children.  The growth of marriage and family represented a significant threat to sankirtan, and thereby to ISKCON itself.22  Sankirtan served ISKCON's mission in two respects.  First, it represented the principle means by which the movement proselytised its Krishna conscious beliefs.  In fact, Prabhupada continually emphasised that book distribution represented the means to spread Krishna Consciousness in America and world-wide.  Secondly, and of equal importance, sankirtan supported ISKCON's communities financially.  Without a work force of dedicated sankirtan devotees, ISKCON's missionary goals and financial stability were placed in jeopardy.  The solution rested with the gurukula because it relieved parents of the burdens of childcare, thus affording them the opportunity to work full-time sankirtan.  Put differently, the gurukula allowed ISKCON's leaders to reclaim householders for sankirtan, a move that only grew in importance as ISKCON's North American communities faced deepening economic decline by the late 1970s (Rochford 1985, 1995c).  As one parent described. 

We got the children, the bothersome children from the leader's perspective we got them out of the way by putting them in the gurukula.  Now the adults could do some work.  Go out on sankirtan.  This was a very present issue, freeing up the parents. (Interview 1990)             

1/22 < > 22/22

______________________________________________ ^
 

Cults & Society
 Department: Group Report
__________________________________________________
Featured Group Report

Hare Krishna: child abuse
  
 
   
 
     

11/22

Child Abuse in the Hare Krishna Movement:1971-1986

E. Burke Rochford, Jr. with Jennifer Heinlein

[continued]

Yet, by the mid-1980s, as the children were growing into teenagers, understandings of the second generation and the gurukula began to change. To the surprise of many leaders and parents alike, the children raised in the gurukula were less than pure spiritually. Few were committed to a life of renunciation and full-time involvement in ISKCON (Rochford forthcoming).  As a result, some leaders openly challenged the need for the gurukula altogether. Economic decline, as I discuss below, made this view all the more attractive to some leaders. 

But they [the leaders] did not go back and become introspective and say ‘Well, we should have been taking care of these things. Let's get it together now.  We made a mistake, whether an honest mistake or not.  Let's now provide an excellent education for the children.  Let's rebuild the community's faith in ISKCON.’  They didn't do that.  They took (laugh) the opposite track.  Instead of saying ‘the kids are going to turn out good no matter what,’ now they were saying ‘things are going to turn out bad no matter what you do.’ The leaders' position was, ‘No, we did everything right.  We did what Prabhupada said.  We had ashrams.  We had these nice schools.  These wonderful schools.  And everything went bad anyway.  So why should we put a lot of energy into it [the gurukula].  We're just kidding ourselves.  Right.’ (Interview, ISKCON teacher 1990)  

But these two very different frameworks for constructing ISKCON's children  functionally served the same purpose.  In the first instance leaders saw no reason to invest resources in the gurukula because it couldn't fail, given the elevated spiritual status of the children.  The second framework, precisely because it emphasised failure, rather than success, likewise rejected the need to maintain a viable system of education.  As I argue in the next section, however, the gurukula did serve a crucial function for ISKCON, one that ultimately had little to do with educating and socialising ISKCON's next generation. 

Sankirtan and the Gurukula 

Although ISKCON's sannyasi leadership believed that a loss in standing would discourage marriage, as we have seen, the solid majority of ISKCON's membership married, and most had children.  The growth of marriage and family represented a significant threat to sankirtan, and thereby to ISKCON itself.22  Sankirtan served ISKCON's mission in two respects.  First, it represented the principle means by which the movement proselytised its Krishna conscious beliefs.  In fact, Prabhupada continually emphasised that book distribution represented the means to spread Krishna Consciousness in America and world-wide.  Secondly, and of equal importance, sankirtan supported ISKCON's communities financially.  Without a work force of dedicated sankirtan devotees, ISKCON's missionary goals and financial stability were placed in jeopardy.  The solution rested with the gurukula because it relieved parents of the burdens of childcare, thus affording them the opportunity to work full-time sankirtan.  Put differently, the gurukula allowed ISKCON's leaders to reclaim householders for sankirtan, a move that only grew in importance as ISKCON's North American communities faced deepening economic decline by the late 1970s (Rochford 1985, 1995c).  As one parent described. 

We got the children, the bothersome children from the leader's perspective we got them out of the way by putting them in the gurukula.  Now the adults could do some work.  Go out on sankirtan.  This was a very present issue, freeing up the parents. (Interview 1990)             

1/22 < > 22/22

______________________________________________ ^