Interviewer: How has the concept of the Founder-Acarya, Srila Prabhupada, shaped ISKCON’s historical trajectory, and what lessons can be drawn from his leadership for the future?
Urmila Devi Dasi: Recognising Srila Prabhupada as the Founder-Acarya of ISKCON has profoundly shaped the movement. While acknowledging him as founder is widely accepted, his role as acarya—an ongoing guide, not merely a historical figure—remains more challenging. Staying true to ISKCON’s mission requires adherence to its core principles, while adjusting secondary details according to time, place, and circumstance. Prabhupada himself stated that such adaptation is essential.
Distinguishing principles from details demands intelligence and is a central duty of the GBC. Altering foundational principles or rigidly enforcing flexible details distorts ISKCON’s identity. Fear of division often leads to tolerating such deviations, but this risks compromising the mission. If individuals depart from Prabhupada’s core teachings, they should be asked to either align or form a separate organisation. Hesitation to enforce this likely stems from fear of appearing sectarian.
Prabhupada affirmed that any religion that teaches love of God is bona fide. He encouraged respect for all traditions. He told my father that spiritual perfection could be attained through Judaism. Sectarianism, as Bhaktivinoda Thakura taught, is the enemy of true religion. One must follow their tradition properly, just as a Harvard student must follow Harvard’s rules, one in the Gaudiya sampradaya must follow its parampara. Prabhupada never claimed ISKCON was the only path to God. Saints like St Teresa of Avila and St John of the Cross had genuine spiritual experiences. Religion is diverse, reflecting humanity’s diversity.
ISKCON’s purpose is not to eliminate other faiths, but to present Krishna consciousness with integrity. That requires preserving Prabhupada’s principles and adapting details with discernment. Branches within the Gaudiya tradition often have distinct acaryas, and within ISKCON, disciples naturally form groups around their gurus. While some diversity is inevitable, excessive groupism undermines unity. ISKCON’s central link must remain with Prabhupada. Without that, the movement loses its spiritual root.
Some promote a ritvik system, proposing Prabhupada as the only guru. However, he emphasised the need for living gurus who adapt the teachings. A guru must represent Prabhupada through realisation, not merely officiate. ISKCON must avoid two extremes: altering Prabhupada’s teachings or rigidly imitating every detail. A living tradition requires fidelity to core teachings while remaining responsive to present needs.
A model where Prabhupada is honoured as acarya, while maintaining an active parampara, is still evolving. Natural groupings—by service, language, ashrama, or guru—are to be expected. Even in the spiritual world, devotees associate according to rasa. However, these groups must not overshadow Prabhupada’s central role or fragment ISKCON’s mission.
Interviewer: How can ISKCON maintain Srila Prabhupada as acarya without compromising his core teachings and practices?
Urmila Devi Dasi: Some use the term “pre-eminent siksa guru,” but since Prabhupada never used it, I prefer the title he used: acarya. His standards—chanting sixteen rounds, following four regulative principles, specific mantras—are clear and non-negotiable. While practices vary in the broader sampradaya, Prabhupada gave ISKCON a defined system. Changing that system under ISKCON’s name is dishonest. If someone wishes to introduce new standards, they should form their organisation.
Practices such as attending mangala-arati, reading Prabhupada’s books, and following the sadhana he gave should remain unchanged. If one desires a different standard—e.g., fewer rounds—they should be transparent and independent. ISKCON is not a prison. Those who feel spiritually nourished elsewhere may leave, but canvassing within ISKCON to draw people away is improper.
Inviting leaders of other organisations to represent ISKCON is inappropriate. Interfaith and academic dialogue is welcome when done respectfully, but leadership within ISKCON requires adherence to its core teachings. When a guru falls, the GBC rightly advises disciples to seek shelter within ISKCON. Re-initiation is not required, but continued guidance within ISKCON is.
Even so-called “details” such as which mantras are given and how many rounds are chanted were clearly defined by Prabhupada. In other Gaudiya traditions, practices vary, but ISKCON’s identity is based on Prabhupada’s standards. If one wants to deviate from them, they should state clearly that they are starting a new path. To change these while still claiming Prabhupada as acarya is misleading.
Branching is natural in religious traditions. Prabhupada said a tree is beautiful with many branches, if the fruit remains the same. We should not demonise those who branch out, but neither should we allow Prabhupada’s teachings to be altered within ISKCON. A guru cannot impose new vows Prabhupada never required. If they wish to do so, they should do it outside ISKCON. No condemnation is needed—just honesty.
If we cling to those who reject Prabhupada’s teachings or the GBC, out of fear of a split, we risk losing ISKCON’s identity. Some openly defy the GBC while claiming to follow Prabhupada. The GBC must clarify and defend core principles. Those unwilling to follow them should depart. We can respect their right to pursue their path but cannot allow ISKCON’s standards to be diluted.
We should not fear competition. Like a successful business, ISKCON should trust in the quality of what it offers. We need not attack other groups—only ensure that ISKCON remains strong, attractive, and spiritually nourishing. If people leave, we can reflect on what we could do better. We must maintain a culture of integrity, clarity, and mutual respect.
ISKCON’s leadership must uphold GBC authority and not contradict it. Leaders who reject the GBC’s authority on core matters should leave. The goal is not to create ritviks or independent acaryas, but meaningful gurus under a unified system. Think of ISKCON as a federation—diverse in style, but unified in philosophy and essential practices.
Let people leave peacefully. If we respect their decision, they are more likely to speak well of ISKCON. We should respond with dignity. Others may criticise, but we must avoid vaisnava-aparadha. Anyone sincerely trying to serve Krishna deserves respect.
ISKCON should not justify itself by attacking others, but by exemplifying Prabhupada’s teachings. If someone wants to leave because they no longer accept him as the acarya, that is their right. We should maintain open doors, with no guilt or coercion. Let people come and go freely. I tell seekers: if you want to find God through Prabhupada, ISKCON is the best place. If you feel you can follow him better elsewhere, that is your decision.
If you follow Srila Prabhupada, immerse yourself in his books. Learn his mood and approach. Then read Bhaktivinoda Thakura and Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati. But let’s not build a wall around ourselves. Confidence need not mean sectarianism. Let’s make ISKCON so attractive that people want to stay. If they leave, let them go with goodwill.
I envision ISKCON as a respected spiritual leader in a world where sankirtana fills the streets, prasadam is sold in shops, and spiritual values permeate society. This is possible. Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu’s movement will succeed—but ISKCON’s role in that depends on our fidelity. Prabhupada respected other Gaudiya groups. He didn’t demand control over them. We can do the same—respect others while preserving ISKCON’s integrity.
Prabhupada never claimed ISKCON would last ten thousand years. He warned against personal ambition, centralisation, and neglect. Another empowered acarya may emerge elsewhere, but that’s not our concern. Our authority comes from following the parampara. We’re part of a living tradition.
Let’s not repeat the mistake made with Jesus—building a religion he never intended. Prabhupada said, “Know and love God.” That’s the essence. We must defend the standards of ISKCON without sectarianism or violence. If someone follows a guru who changes essential teachings, they are outside ISKCON—and perhaps even outside the Gaudiya sampradaya.
Let’s be clear: vaisnava diksa is unrelated to varna, ashrama, gender, or age. These are foundational teachings of Mahaprabhu. If others introduce those criteria, they are outside the tradition. I’ll say so firmly—but without attacking individuals. Let’s glorify Srila Prabhupada without demonising others, and not claim to be the only way. That was never the spirit of Srila Prabhupada I knew.