Infighting Between Hindu Missions
Hindu religious organizations and missions have experienced significant theological, institutional, and ideological conflicts throughout history. These disputes often center on fundamental questions of doctrine, authority, practice, and spiritual authenticity. Below is a comprehensive examination of major conflicts between Hindu missions and organizations.
Ramakrishna Mission vs ISKCON
The relationship between the Ramakrishna Mission and ISKCON represents one of the most significant theological divides in modern Hindu organizations.
Key Differences:
Philosophical Foundation: The Ramakrishna Mission follows Advaita Vedanta (non-dualism) emphasizing the ultimate unity of all existence, while ISKCON adheres to Gaudiya Vaishnavism promoting dualistic devotion to Krishna as the Supreme Personality of Godhead. According to ISKCON sources, “Ramakrishna Mission is not Vedic, while ISKCON is based on Vedic literature, not their own opinions. Ramakrishna created their own way”.12
Authority and Scripture: ISKCON strictly follows the teachings of Srila Prabhupada and traditional Vedic literature, while the Ramakrishna Mission accepts truth from multiple sources and emphasizes the unity of all religions. The Mission’s founder Sri Ramakrishna taught that “all religions are true”, a concept ISKCON rejects in favor of Krishna consciousness supremacy.34
Identity Crisis: The Ramakrishna Mission famously attempted to distance itself from Hinduism entirely in the 1980s, filing legal cases to be recognized as a minority religion to gain educational autonomy. The Supreme Court of India ultimately ruled in 1995 that the Mission was indeed Hindu, stating “to say or to hold that there came into existence Ramakrishna religion-a universal religion, apart and distinct from Hindu religion would, again be travesty of truth and reality”.56
ISKCON vs Gaudiya Math Schism
The relationship between ISKCON and various Gaudiya Math organizations represents a complex internal conflict within the same theological tradition.
Historical Background: The Gaudiya Math, founded by Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati, experienced significant fragmentation after his death in 1937. ISKCON, established by Srila Prabhupada (a disciple of Bhaktisiddhanta), emerged as one offshoot but developed tensions with other Gaudiya Math branches.7
Institutional Conflicts: According to an ISKCON perspective, “They have the most closed door policy amongst themselves. We are the one that’s the open ones, we are the idiots”. The criticism points to the fragmented nature of Gaudiya Math institutions, where each guru establishes separate organizations, preventing cooperation even within the same tradition.8
Authority Disputes: The fundamental issue revolves around guru succession and institutional authority. Each Gaudiya Math branch maintains separate leadership structures, preventing unified cooperation despite shared theological foundations.9
ISKCON Internal Schism: ISKCON vs Ritvik Movement
A significant internal conflict emerged within ISKCON regarding the continuation of guru succession after Prabhupada’s death.
The Ritvik Position: The Ritvik ideology asserts that Srila Prabhupada remains the eternal initiating guru for all time, eliminating the need for living spiritual masters. This interpretation is based on a 1977 letter appointing Ritvik representatives during Prabhupada’s final days.10
ISKCON’s Response: ISKCON maintains that living gurus are essential for spiritual guidance, following traditional parampara (disciplic succession) principles. As one former Ritvik devotee explained, “ISKCON’s position on the necessity of living spiritual teachers is not a deviation but a continuation of the parampara system”.11
Legal Battles: The conflict has resulted in court cases, with the Supreme Court ruling in favor of ISKCON Bangalore (which follows Ritvik principles) regarding property disputes.12
Arya Samaj vs Brahmo Samaj
These two 19th-century reform movements represent fundamental disagreements about Hindu revival strategies.
Scriptural Authority: Arya Samaj, founded by Swami Dayanand Saraswati in 1875, strictly adheres to Vedic authority, declaring “the Vedas are the supreme authority”. Brahmo Samaj, established by Raja Ram Mohan Roy in 1828, accepts truth from all religions and respects all religious scriptures.1314
Reform Approaches: Arya Samaj focused on returning to “pure” Vedic practices, rejecting post-Vedic developments as corruptions. Brahmo Samaj emphasized social reform, particularly women’s rights and education, while maintaining theological flexibility.15
Theological Tensions: Both movements believe in formless monotheism and reject idol worship, but their approaches to religious authority created lasting divisions. The Arya Samaj’s dogmatic adherence to Vedas contrasted sharply with Brahmo Samaj’s liberal acceptance of multiple religious sources.16
Traditional Hinduism vs ISKCON
ISKCON’s relationship with traditional Hindu institutions has been marked by significant tensions.
Identity Disputes: ISKCON explicitly rejects the “Hindu” label, with Prabhupada stating “We are not Hindus” and emphasizing that Krishna consciousness transcends religious designations. This position creates friction with traditional Hindu organizations that view ISKCON as part of the broader Hindu tradition.17
Theological Conflicts: Traditional Advaita Vedanta institutions, particularly those following Shankaracharya’s lineage, clash with ISKCON’s dualistic theology. ISKCON literature often criticizes Advaita philosophy as “mayavada” (illusory doctrine).1819
Cultural Practices: ISKCON’s strict dietary restrictions (prohibiting onions, garlic, and mushrooms) and exclusive devotion to Krishna sometimes conflicts with broader Hindu pluralistic practices.20
Chinmaya Mission vs Other Organizations
The Chinmaya Mission, while generally maintaining better relationships with other Hindu organizations, has experienced some tensions.
Demographic Tensions: Some members from different regional backgrounds feel unwelcome in heavily Gujarati-dominated Chinmaya Mission centers, leading to departures to other organizations like Meenakshi Temple.21
Theological Differences: The Mission’s strict Advaita Vedanta approach sometimes conflicts with devotional traditions, though these differences are generally less acrimonious than other organizational conflicts.22
Sathya Sai Baba Movement vs Traditional Organizations
The Sathya Sai Baba movement’s claims about divine incarnation have created significant theological disputes.
Avatar Claims: Sathya Sai Baba’s followers’ belief in his status as a “purna Avatar” (full divine incarnation) conflicts with traditional Hindu understanding of avatars, creating tensions with established institutions.23
Interfaith vs Hindu Identity: While the organization claims to be interfaith, scholars note it is “clearly Hindu mission” despite official rejections of the Hindu label, similar to ISKCON’s approach.24
Art of Living vs Other Missions
Though generally maintaining cordial relationships, the Art of Living Foundation has had some theological and practical differences with other organizations.
Approach Differences: The Foundation’s emphasis on breathing techniques and secular presentation sometimes conflicts with more traditional devotional approaches of organizations like ISKCON.25
Interfaith Activities: Sri Sri Ravi Shankar’s interfaith initiatives, while generally praised, sometimes create tensions with more exclusivist Hindu organizations.26
RSS and Political Hinduism vs Spiritual Organizations
The relationship between politically oriented organizations like RSS and purely spiritual missions has created ongoing tensions.
Political vs Spiritual: Organizations like the Ramakrishna Mission and ISKCON have faced criticism from political leaders for allegedly supporting particular political parties, creating friction between spiritual and political Hindu organizations.27
Hindutva vs Traditional Hinduism: The RSS’s concept of “Cultural nationalism” sometimes conflicts with the more inclusive approaches of traditional spiritual organizations.28
Contemporary Challenges and Ongoing Disputes
Modern Hindu organizations continue to face internal conflicts over several key issues:
Conversion and Identity: Debates over religious conversion, missionary activities, and the definition of Hindu identity continue to create tensions between different organizations.2930
Temple Control: Disputes over government control of Hindu temples versus autonomous religious management affect relationships between various Hindu institutions.31
Theological Authority: Questions about scriptural interpretation, guru succession, and institutional authority remain sources of ongoing conflict.32
Conclusion
The conflicts between Hindu missions and organizations reflect deeper theological, cultural, and institutional challenges within modern Hinduism. These disputes often center on fundamental questions: What constitutes authentic Hindu practice? Who has the authority to interpret sacred texts? How should Hindu organizations relate to modernity and other religious traditions?
While these conflicts have created divisions, they also demonstrate the dynamic and diverse nature of Hindu religious life. Each organization’s approach reflects different responses to the challenges of maintaining ancient traditions in contemporary contexts. Understanding these conflicts provides insight into the complex landscape of modern Hindu religious movements and their ongoing evolution.
The resolution of these disputes often requires recognizing the legitimacy of different spiritual paths while maintaining respect for core Hindu principles. As one commentator noted, “The real enemy is not each other, but material illusion. Let us unite in service, avoid offenses, and keep [our spiritual traditions] at the center of our lives”.33
