Background Viṣṇu was a minor deity in the
historical Vedic religion, to which
Vaiṣṇavism has only "a very indirect connection". In the ancient Sanskrit epic
Mahābharāta, Kr̥ṣṇa is both God and an ally of the
Pāṇḍavas. The
Bhāgavata Purāṇa enumerates numerous
avatāras of Viṣṇu and of them considers Kr̥ṣṇa to be
Svayam Bhagavān; many concepts integral to the Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇava tradition such as
līlā,
acintyabhedābheda,
overflowing emotion in
bhakti, and reciting the names of
Hari find their foundation in this text. The theme of emotional devotion to Kr̥ṣṇa continued in
bhakti poetry such as the Sanskrit
Gīta-Govinda of Jayadeva and the Bengali poems of
Caṇḍīdāsa, both of which were influential to
Gauḍiya Vaiṣṇavism. The Gauḍīya
sampradāya claims to originate from the
Madhva sampradaya through
Lakṣmīpati Tīrtha and
Mādhavendra Puri; scholars debate the historicity of this connection and most consider them to have been Vaishnava-oriented
Shankarite aka Dashanami sannyasis (many consider
Baladeva Vidyabhushana to be responsible for connecting the Gaudiya's to the Madhva lineage). Caitanya Mahāprabhu, born in sixteenth century
Bengal, is considered the founder of Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇavism, called such because it was spread in
Gauḍa (region) i.e. Bengal. During the period around Caitanya's life, Bengal was ruled by a Muslim government which nevertheless patronized Vaiṣṇavas and their cultural work. There exist several biographies of Caitanya which are capped by the
Caitanya-Caritāmr̥ta of
Kr̥ṣṇadāsa Kavirāja; each biography explores Caitanya's life and Gauḍīya conceptions of his divinity. Caitanya started life as a precocious
paṇḍita but soon became a
sannyāsī ("ascetic") entranced with ecstatic devotion to Kr̥ṣṇa who developed a strong following centered around the recitation of Kr̥ṣṇa's names. Caitanya went on a pilgrimage of South India and is depicted as debating various religious groups and converting them to Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇavism; scholars also believe he was searching for Vaiṣṇava traditions that did not survive in the Muslim-dominated North India. In Caitanya's pilgrimage of
Vraja, he visited sites associated with Kr̥ṣṇa's life and is depicted as exhibiting ecstasies indicative of his true nature as Kr̥ṣṇa. Of sites in Vraja,
Rādhā Kuṇḍa was considered by Gauḍīya's to be the most esoteric. The Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇava tradition considers
Brahman to be infinite and having all personal qualities; it is strongly opposed to the
Advaita philosophy that Brahman is indescribable and impersonal with no qualities. The Gauḍīya philosophy of
acintya-bhedābheda considers reality to be inconceivably different and non-different at the same time; the
Six Goswamis of Vrindavan were powerful scholarly figures who were able to rationalize the philosophy and give it prestige. Hinduism has a long tradition of what has been termed "sonic theology", i.e. the spiritual and mundane effects of speaking certain syllables; the Gauḍīya tradition's sonic theology focuses on the loud chanting of Kr̥ṣṇa's names and the Hare Kr̥ṣṇa mantra to increase Kr̥ṣṇa devotion. Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇavism has aspects of mysticism, where devotees attempt to attain certain
ecstatic emotional states (
sāttvika bhāvas) which has been termed
"divine madness" (
divyonmāda); through
līlā smaraṇa devotees assume a dual identity as a
mañjarī (a preteen handmaiden of Rādhā or Rādhā's friends) in Kr̥ṣṇa līlā and as a Bengali
brāhmaṇa boy in Gaura līlā (the life of Caitanya). In Gauḍīya theology,
rasa refers to the cultivated emotion a devotee has for Kr̥ṣṇa, the highest being
madhura rasa or selfless erotic love for Kr̥ṣṇa. The
līlā smaraṇa and
mañjarī sādhana techniques are found to a greater extent among Gauḍīya ascetics; whereas householder (
gr̥hastha) devotees more often access Kr̥ṣṇa līlā physically through pilgrimage to
Vraja. While not mentioned directly in the
Bhāgavata Purāṇa, the goddess
Rādhā is considered chief among the
gopīs (the cowherd girls of Vraja). Gauḍiya theology considers her to have the highest level of loving devotion for Kr̥ṣṇa (
mahābhava) and Rādhā-Kr̥ṣṇa is considered the ultimate esoteric reality and receives the highest worship by Gauḍiya Vaiṣṇavas. After Caitanya's death in 1534, the movement's philosophy and teachings were consolidated by his followers but eventually declined in popularity. In eastern India,
Vaiṣṇava Sahajiyā is a
Vāma-Tantra tradition in which male and female devotees imitate the erotic relationship between Kr̥ṣṇa and Rādha; this tradition is met with abhorrence by the orthodox Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇava tradition, which asserts that devotees can only serve and may not imitate the divine couple. The theologies of the Vrindavan goswamis were brought to Bengal in the late-sixteenth century and consolidated the teachings of Radha-Krishna worship in
madhura rasa,
pancha tattva (recognition of Chaitanya's associates as incarnations of Krishna's associates), and
raganuga bhakti/
siddha pranali. In the 19th century, the leading castes in Bengal included the Kulīna Brāhmanas who served as priests and teachers and Kulīna Kāyasthas who served as writers and scribes. Below them were Non-Kulīna Brahmanas who were landowners and entrepreneurs and non-Kulīna Kāyasthas, who achieved great economic success under
British rule and were subject to
Westernization. The Westernized non-Kulīna Brāhmanas and Kāyasthas were attracted to Western philosophies but viewed Gaudiya Vaishnavism with distaste as idol-worshipping superstition.
Bhaktivinoda Thakur (born Kedarnath Dutt), a Westernized Gaudiya Vaishnava Kayastha, developed a rigorous intellectual interest in Gaudiya religious literature and began a personal mission to publish its texts and promote its teachings. Bhaktivinoda oriented his philosophies to a Westernized Bengali Hindu audience, arguing that Gaudiya Vaishnavism is a sophisticated
universal religion in contrast to the hereditary caste-based nature of orthodox
Brahmanism.
Bhaktivinoda was a vocal opponent of
Vaiṣṇava Sahajiyā (which had increased in popularity by the 19th century), "rediscovered" the "lost" birthplace of Caitanya, and deemphasized the external exhibition of caste. He also attempted to spread Caitanyite teachings among the Western world by sending texts to foreign universities. Bhaktivinoda utilised contemporary 19th-century scholarly methods (
adhunika vada) to critically analyse Gaudiya Vaishnavism. He developed innovative theological principles such as his categorisation of spiritual seekers based on their intellectual capacity and his division of religious knowledge into phenomenal knowledge (which he considered subject to logical scrutiny) and transcendental knowledge (which he considered inscrutible). Bhaktivinoda's son was
Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati (born Bimala Prasad Dutt), who continued his father's mission and extended its views on social equality. Bhaktisiddhanta claimed to be the initiate of Gaura Kishor Das Babaji, but details of his initiation are mysterious. In contrast to the standard
pancharatrika diksha most sources claim he received
bhagavati diksha (a practice unknown in Vaishnava circles). Bhaktisiddhanta claimed he belonged to an invented
Bhagavata parampara which focused on
raganuga bhakti which he contrasted with the ritualistic
Pancharatrika tradition which he claimed had infested Gaudiya Vaishnavism. Nevertheless, Bhaktisiddhanta initiated his own disciples in the standard
Pancharatrika form and did not give clear instructions on how to continue the
bhagavata tradition. In contrast to his father's deemphasis on caste, Bhaktisiddhanta Saraswati allowed any devotee who exhibited the proper characteristics to consider themselves a
brahmin (
brāhmaṇa) and adorn the corresponding dress, challenging the existing system of hereditary Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇava temple priests. Unlike his father, Bhaktisiddhanta was not employed in any official position which allowed him the time to create and manage the
Gaudiya Math (Gauḍīya Maṭha), the first formal organisation of Vaiṣṇava
sādhus/
sannyāsīs. The Gaudiya Math broke with Gaudiya tradition by adopting the saffron robes of the Shankarites and the
tridanda ("triple staff") of Puranic tradition. Prior to Bhaktivedanta, the Gaudiya Math had sent individuals to the West to convert foreigners to very little success. Prior to his death, Bhaktisiddhanta gave three disciples joint governorship of the Gaudiya Math: Ananta Vasudeva, Kunjabihari, and Paramananda. A council of Gaudiya Math leaders elected Ananta Vasudeva (later Puri Maharaj or Puri Das) as acharya, a decision which was rejected by Kunjabihari (later Bhaktivilas Tirtha) and his followers. Many other disciples also split off to create their own independent organisations. Puri Das discarded secondary literature of post-Chaitanyite figures and began to focus on the works of the Six Goswamis of Vrindavan (the Gaudiya Math ignored content from their works that was not purely philosophical or spiritual) and eventually became a major critic of the Gaudiya Math. Highlighting differences between traditional Gaudiya Vaishnavism and the Gaudiya Math, Puri Das encouraged Bhaktisiddhanta disciples to instead take initiation in traditional Gaudiya lineages. During this period Bhaktivedanta was a minor househoulder who unsuccessfully urged a return to the "hard" institution of Bhaktisiddhanta's time. By the mid-20th century the Gaudiya Math was no longer a "hard" institution but a loose collection of disciple lines and independent organisations. Indian immigrants and Hindu thought among (particularly occult)
White Americans began filtering into the United States in the 19th century, and both elicited negative reactions from the American public. The public viewed Indians and Hinduism as backward and its public visibility as threatening to white Christian Americans. After the
Asian Exclusion Act, there was a 30-year lull in reactions to Hinduism, which changed after the
Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965 and the foundation of the International Society for Krishna Consciousness, at the time the most visible face of Hinduism in America. The Hare Krishna movement differed from these earlier expressions of Hindu philosophy in the West in that it was an explicitly theistic religious tradition that required absolute adherence to its rules and taboos. Earlier expressions of Hinduism in the West tended to belong to the monistic tradition of
Advaita Vedanta and were propagated by "streamlined swamis" who greatly diluted Eastern thought and did not require people to give up their current lifestyles.
Foundation Abhay Charan De met Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati in 1922; in 1932, Bhaktisiddhanta initiated him as a disciple under the name Abhay Charanaravinda and granted him brahminhood as per his progressive theology. From their first meeting, Bhaktisiddhanta ordered Abhay to spread Gaudiya Vaishnavism in the Western world in the English language, an order that was reiterated weeks before Bhaktisiddhanta's death in 1937. Abhay eventually left his family life and career, at the same time increasing his involvement in preaching and publishing texts on Gaudiya Vaishnavism, being honored with the title of Bhaktivedanta for his knowledge in 1939. Bhaktivedanta chose not to participate in the power struggle following his guru's death and the Gaudiya Math split. In 1959 he took a vow of
Sannyasa (renunciation of the world) under the name A.C. Bhaktivedānta Svāmī in
Vrindavan, and in 1965 arrived in New York City. After failing to attract interest from the upper class, Bhaktivedanta moved into a poor district in New York City, where he made connections with young people of the 1960s counterculture (
bohemians, later called
hippies) who were already semi-familiar with Indian culture from previous experiences and were attracted by Bhaktivedanta's charisma. In July 1966 he founded the International Society for Krishna Consciousness, whose purpose would be to propagate spiritual consciousness of Krishna as per the
Bhagavad Gita and
Shrimad Bhagavatam, the Chaitanyite form of public chanting, and publication of texts. In the September of the same year he initiated his young companions as disciples and led the first public
kirtana in
Washington Square Park. In the early years of the movement in New York City, Prabhupada gave little emphasis to the lifestyle principles of ISKCON and tolerated violations to traditional purity and ritual structures; this allowed the movement to spread through social networks. The only structure in the movement was the chanting of the Hare Krishna mantra; gradually Bhaktivedanta educated his disciples in aspects of the original Indian tradition. After relocating the movement to
Haight-Ashbury,
San Francisco,
California in 1967, the movement grew rapidly due to large itinerant hippie population amenable to public preaching. In the next two years the movement gained followers in North American cities and he became known to his followers as Śrīla Prabhupāda. Soon after, Prabhupada decided to establish a Governing Body Commission (GBC) as the central authority of ISKCON, who would have zonal authority over temples and centers. The Bhaktivedanta Book Trust was established to centralize the publication of ISKCON texts. The first Hare Krishna commune,
New Vrindavan (West Virginia), was established by disciples in 1968. Prabhupada's goal was to spread Chaitanyite Vaishavism across the world in a strategy he termed "cultural conquest". He was pessimistic towards modern industrial society and advocated a self-sufficient, rural agrarian economy; nevertheless he did not oppose utilising modern technology as long as it was for devotional service. Prabhupada stated that the
Bhagavata Purana (aka
Srimad Bhagavatam) and other such texts could only be understood if recited by a "self-realised" person who stands as a "bona fide representative" of
Shuka (the traditional composer of the text). The only manner to be a bona fide representative according to Prabhupada was to be in the disciplic succession (
parampara) stretching back to Shuka and from there to Krishna himself. Prabhupada repeatedly stated he wants many of his disciples to become gurus but stressed that a disciple must perfectly follow the teachings of his guru (who in turn perfectly replicates his own guru linking back to Krishna) and not "manufacture" any new innovations. Prabhupada preached that reciting the Hare Krishna mantra and hearing the
Bhagavata Purana being recited renders direct experience of divinity, a process he considered a "science of the spirit". Despite the creation of the GBC, Prabhupada retained autocratic control over ISKCON during his lifetime. Key to the spread of ISKCON were Prabhupada's writings and translations including the
Bhagavad-gītā As It Is,
Kṛṣṇa: The Supreme Personality of Godhead, Śrīmad-bhāgavatam,
Caitanya-caritāmṛta, and the
Back to Godhead magazine. Prabhupada went on cross-country tours to establish ISKCON internationally. His devotion-oriented English translations and commentaries of Gaudiya Vaishnava texts were oriented to the neophyte Western mind. According to Hopkins, young Westerners were eager to submit themselves to Prabhupada's strong disciplinary structure (opposite to the loose ways of the 1960s counterculture) and his example of a devotional path. When instructing his disciples he instilled them the belief that no matter what work they had to do, Krishna would help them. As ISKCON established centers throughout the United States, it adapted its recruitment modes depending on the environment of the city and neighborhood at hand. As ISKCON became more closed off in the 1970s up until Prabhupada's death, movement sympathizers were key to its spread. In the late 1970s, some ISKCON centers became more open to public relationships and influences, to the chagrin of conservative centers. After returning to India with his Western disciples, Prabhupada was keen on establishing large temple complexes in
Bombay,
Bengal, and
Vrindaban; by displaying the Krishna devotion of his non-Indian devotees, Prabhupada wanted to awaken a religious revival among Indians. Prabhupada was aware that in order to gain legitimacy from Indians; his foreign followers had to maintain strict behavior rules in India and display proper devotion in order for people to take seriously their claims of being Vaishnavas and
brāhmaṇas. Until 1972, ISKCON's finances were covered by the practice of
sankirtana: the practice of distributing literature on the street and soliciting donations. In following years this profitable practice expanded to other public spaces such as airports. However, as the movement grew larger and its monetary needs increased, the nature of
sankirtana began to change from preaching Krishna consciousness to book-selling: disciples targeted people perceived to have more money, disguised their religious affiliations to more easily distribute books and solicit donations, engaged in the practice of
change-up (re-negotiating for a higher price after the target already agreed on an amount), and even sold non-religious merchandise without any missionary activity (a practice called
picking). ISKCON leadership's newfound preference for
picking rather than book distribution drew the ire of public bodies in the late 1970s at the same time the movement and its finances were going into a decline.
Picking was morally justified by the finance-conscious leaders, and devotees who earned ISKCON the most money were given special privileges. The religious convictions of the majority of devotees remained unaffected by these practices and treated them as an organizational adaption, a smaller group rejected its ideology but remained within the movement, while the smallest group of idealists defected. Courts of justice generally upheld the rights of ISKCON devotees to proselytize in airports, fairs, and highway rest stops under the
First Amendment to the United States Constitution's protection of freedom of religion. In his final will Prabhupada granted the GBC the ultimate managerial authority of ISKCON, a decision based in his experience of the breakup of the Gaudiya Math and the quarrels for sole
acharya-ship. In the months prior to Prabhupada's death in 1977, he appointed eleven of his disciples to serve as initiating gurus and
r̥tviks ("officiators") for ISKCON, who would have zonal authority over temples and disciples. The eleven gurus (who self-styled themselves as
ācāryas) would serve alongside fourteen non-guru leaders on the Governing Body Commission. The post-Prabhupada succession period was characterized by decline and factionalism. Each guru developed his own economic policies for resources, sat on thrones, and some considered themselves worthy of worship just as Prabhupada had been worshipped as a guru. A guru was the
de facto ultimate authority in his zone; the zonal
acharyas claimed absolute authority (as in Indian tradition) and viewed the GBC as an expedient committee until a "self-effulgent" leader for ISKCON emerged from amongst the gurus. From 1978 to 1982, there were a series of guru crises that nearly split the movement. In the first guru crisis of 1980, the
Berkeley, California police discovered weapons and ammunition stored by the local ISKCON community; the Northwest Guru's guruship was taken away by the GBC for one year. In the second guru crisis of 1980,
Jayatirtha Swami began behaving bizarrely: he would shriek and cry during kirtan for hours on end; the GBC on the advice of "Maharaja Swami" (
Bhakti Rakshak Sridhar), suspended Jayatirtha's guruship for a year and forced him to take
sannyasa. In the third guru crisis of 1980, Bombay Guru began claiming he was the sole true intermediary to Prabhupada and that all ISKCON disciples should worship him as guru; the GBC suspended Bombay Guru's guruship for a year. In the fourth guru crisis of 1980, Western Guru believed that the previous three crises showed that the ISKCON gurus were not infallible and sought to have the guru worship reduced; the GBC rejected his proposals. Many Prabhupada disciples did not accept that eleven of their fellow disciples now-gurus were perfect devotees of Krishna consciousness that were worthy of worship; many believed in Prabhupada's infallibility and argued that it was impossible that he could have made an error in character judgement by appointing three gurus who would be suspended. They argued that the entire appointment of gurus by Prabhupada was in fact fabricated. The movement faced its most serious schism in 1982, when one guru defected to join "Maharaja Swami". "Maharaja Swami" was a godbrother of Prabhupada; Prabhupada had told his disciples to seek out "Maharaja Swami" as an advisor after his death. "Maharaja Swami" believed in the absolute authority of a guru, and often sided with the gurus against the GBC. After Jayatirtha Swami was forced to take
sannyasa by the GBC in 1980, he accepted "Maharaja Swami" as his guru. The proposal to institute "Maharaja Swami" as an ISKCON guru in 1982 was rejected due to his criticism of the GBC and Prabhupada, which created a rallying point for ISKCON to unify. A year later,
Hansadutta Swami's guru-ship was suspended for a year on charges of drug abuse and insubordination. After these incidents, the GBC sought to democratize guru-ship by increasing its members; by 1986 twenty-four new gurus were elected. The GBC pushed the gurus to reduce their worship, remove their thrones, recognize Prabhupada as the sole ISKCON
ācārya, and get rid of the zonal system. In 1986, five of the original eleven gurus accepted these reforms, two were already expelled for doctrine, three were removed from guruship for illicit sexual activities, and
Kirtanananda Swami was expelled the following year for refusing to accede to the GBC's demands. In the early years of the movement Prabhupada gladly appointed women to prominent positions in the movement. This changed by 1974 with the rise in the focus on the male
sannyasa ashram and degradation of householders and women. Women were pushed out of view, a trend which continued after Prabhupada's death in 1977 and the following period of male
sannyasi gurus. In the late 1980s there was growing criticism of the treatment of women within the movement, and in the late 1990s the GBC had their first female member. Institutional channels were made for women to voice their views and improve their devotional status, which nevertheless faced a counteroffensive from devotees who considered this to be a "feminist" imposition on ISKCON. A large number of Prabhupada's disciples left ISKCON in the immediate years after his death, with the number of disciples down to approximately 1,000 in 1983 out of a peak of almost 5,000. Starting in the mid-1970s, the movement tried to expand its base beyond the committed disciples to include loosely-committed young members and Indian immigrant "life-members". The practice of
picking continued into the 1980s, but the movement expanded its financial base by allowing members to earn money through more specialized businesses. The Indian immigrant community, being professionals and businesspeople, also were a minor source of income. ISKCON took several steps in this period to improve its general reputation, including separating its finances from
sankirtana, aligning itself with Hinduism, expanding its food-distribution, and by constructing cultural-religious centers like
Prabhupada's Palace of Gold to educate the public about the movement. The decline in
sankirtana as a financial base for the movement was a key factor in the breakup of the traditional ISKCON communal lifestyle by the 1990s. By taking up conventional roles in the labour market, devotees became more independent from the temples and began having nuclear families. In the beginnings of the movement, most followers of Bhaktivedanta knew nothing about India or Hinduism, much less the Gaudiya Vaishnava sect; due to this Prabhupada was the sole source of knowledge and authority for devotees. In the early days in New York, he readily gave personal instructions to his disciples but as the movement grew he could no longer give direct attention to all members. Hence Prabhupada was keen on translating and writing texts as instructional material. Prabhupada delegated authority to "senior" disciples, but such disciples were far younger in age (sub-40 years) and far less knowledgeable but were thrust into the senior
sannyasi/quasi-independent guru positions in a period of 10 years which traditionally took decades in India. Prabhupada's English publications of the Gaudiya textual canon were essential in propagating the movement. The death of Prabhupada left a void of authority in the movement which the new initiating gurus now had to fill, being far younger and far less knowledgeable than traditional Vaishnava gurus. Prabhupada was of the view that it was acceptable to break orthodox rules (particularly of
varnashrama dharma) if it served ISKCON, a view that was extended by the new
sannyasi gurus (many of whom held self-superior views) under whose rule women and children received abuse. ISKCON lacked an exegetical tradition beyond Prabhupada, leading devotees to treat all of Prabhupada's statements as
ex cathedra; in the post-Prabhupada period, the movement began examining itself over its core identity and its relationship vis-à-vis the Gaudiya Math, Gaudiya Vaishnavism, and Vaishnavism at large. After the death of Prabhupada in 1977 in Vrindavana, India, the British disciples were led by the Governing Body Commission and the regional initiating guru,
Jayatirtha Dasa. The movement continued to be successful in the 1970s, with many visitors to the headquarters of
Bhaktivedanta Manor (formerly John Lennon's estate in Berkshire) and the establishment of
Chaitanya College, a former Catholic boys school which was converted into a home and ISKCON educational institution. In 1982, Jayatirtha Dasa's departure from ISKCON shocked the movement in Britain and slowed its spread. Chaitanya College was sold to cover the movement's finances, and the movement regained stability under Bhagavandas Goswami Maharaj. ISKCON was founded during the
counterculture of the 1960s, whose themes included
psychedelia,
antitechnology, and self-exploration of experiences beyond the standardness of "the establishment". Ellwood (1989) analyzes the early conversions of Hare Krishna disciples within the context of the experiences of the counterculture and the partial application of
deprivation theory, as early members felt dissatisfied with both with "the establishment" and earlier counterculture experiences. However, Elwood posits
cognitive theory of religion as more useful for explaining the early conversions, in that the Hare Krishna worldview was more simply more attractive than alternatives to devotees. Converts to ISKCON tended to be people who were undergoing a psychological religious identity crisis, who were vegetarians, anti-materialists, and had previously had some exposure to
Eastern philosophy. Converts were attracted to certain basic ideas of ISKCON; they decided to reject forming an identity in conventional society and decided to join a community where one's spiritual identity is already defined by sacred tradition. Converts came into the movement via contacts with devotees (particularly at the Sunday feast), close friends and spouses, and ISKCON literature. Converts were attracted to Prabhupada and his eleven successor gurus, and submitted themselves to their guru's authority who was considered the link between devotees and God. ISKCON gurus were not as free as traditional Indian gurus to run their groups as independently as they wished; by setting up the GBC Prabhupada ensured a system of checks and balances to maintain the homogeneity of ISKCON as an institution. According to Shinn, the public viewed ISKCON as "brainwashing" its converts because of negative media depictions, former devotees giving negative depictions of the movement, and parental fears regarding their children's' radical new lifestyles and identities. Shinn considered such claims of brainwashing "ludicrous", stating ISKCON's methods of persuasion were simply enthusiastic preaching. Shinn regarded attempts to "rescue" people from ISKCON via "deprogramming" to more closely resemble traditional brainwashing techniques. In the first decade of ISKCON's founding, the Hare Krishna movement was treated cordially by the American public. In the 1970s and 1980s however, the group came under attack by secular anti-cult movements and Christian counter-cultists, who viewed the Hare Krishna's negatively as a cult and a new religious movement. ISKCON responded by inviting scholars to establish the credence of the Hare Krishna movement as an authentic religion, presenting itself as a traditional Indian religion, and seeking the support of the Indian-American immigrant community. ISKCON utilized scholars both as expert witnesses in court cases involving the sect's legitimacy, and directly invited them to write works on ISKCON. The rise in new religious movements among middle class youth subcultures like ISKCON created a "cult scare" amongst families of devotees, who in turn developed the
Anti-cult movement. According to Bromley, the Edward Shapiro case and Robin George case exemplify the trends in the anti-cult movement campaign. In both cases, Shapiro and George became attracted to the Hare Krishna movement, and family opposition ensued when the religion began to interfere in "scholastic achievement and family life". Both fled their homes leading their parents to take decisive and controversial measures to bring them home, and both families took the assistance of anti-cult movement physicians. The anti-cult movement's ideology was based on strong
family values, a view that
secular rationalism is normative human behavior, that new religious movements purportedly engaged in brainwashing/coercive persuasion, and that "cults" were subversive and conspiratorial organizations. Bromley identifies three stages in the development of the anti-cult movement: the formative stage involving forced deprogrammings, an expansionist stage focusing on the believed psychological manipulation by new religious movements, and the professional stage where the supposed brainwashing procedures of new religious movements gained medical recognition and former devotees filed civil suits against the new religious movements for infliction of mental distress. In the United Kingdom, the media had a various response to the Hare Krishna movement, ranging from favorable to unfavorable. Particularly in the movement's early years, parents feared the novel behaviors of the youth subculture and the believed harm that new religious movements caused. The British anti-cult movement considered ISKCON as one of many novel "cults"; as a result, legislation was proposed before the
European Parliament to have higher surveillance on religious groups, however it failed due to concerns regarding religious freedom. The Hare Krishna movemented continued to decline into the late 1980s in the United States due to guru crises and desertions. During this period, the movement grew rapidly in Eastern Europe as the
Cold War ended. Kirtanananda Swami and New Vrindavan came into the public limelight in 1987 due to the discovery of the bodily remains of a devotee who had gone missing five years earlier, which damaged the reputation of the movement. In the 1990s, the movement shifted its goals from having initiated disciples living in "utopian" communes to outreach to congregational members.'' during
Navaratri Golu at
Coimbatore, Tamil Nadu, India According to Rochford and Neubert, ISKCON has undergone a "
Hinduization" over last several decades. Prabhupada differentiated Kr̥ṣṇa consciousness from Hinduism, arguing that it was not bound by that label and was a universal teaching; however, in recent decades ISKCON members have increasingly used the terms "Hindu" and "Hinduism". Scholars cite three factors for this: participation of diasporic Indian Hindus in the sect, ISKCON devotees having academic careers in which they studied Hindu texts, and increased participation in global inter-religious dialogues in which ISKCON often represents Hinduism. == Theology ==