What is interpretation? It is what we do when we try to make sense of the world. We cannot help but interpret things. It is not something that we do consciously, but something that we automatically do. It is a basic human activity.

An elephant on the clouds (seen in a picture). Sasi in sanskrit refers to the moon, and means 'a rabbit in the moon'.

Exercise of the 6 and 7 cubes. This can be applied to the different Vedanta interpretations. It is very important to be able to see from the other's perspective, even if you do not agree with it. Acaryas do this by explaining a verse in a particular way, then saying: 'but' 'or else'.

Where? Inherently there is nothing bad in interpreting people, texts, things, a drama, etc… For example, there is interpretation in putting up a drama and (may be different) interpretation by the public. Then there are the critics.

Interpretations exercise to show how there are different types of interpretations. (Five volunteers saying one word: 'tonight' and miming different scenarios. The public should ascertain it. A point to keep in mind is that there is something that is correct (i.e. the person who communicates the message has something specific in mind to communicate)

What affects our interpretation?

Brainstorm:
Psychology
Cultural background
Education/ training/knowledge
Desires
Conditioning
Analogy with past experiences
Social context
Opinion of others
Gender, age, material circumstances
Motivation
Source

For example, motivation: it is accepted in academic circles that there is a particular motivation in accepting something (i.e. I am a practitioner, etc…).

Others opinion affect interpretation (i.e. other people giving their opinion, encouraging or discouraging you in your project or interpretation).

Experiment of 5 people saying which line is the longer (a, b, c). 4 actors say A (actually B or C is the longest line). The last person (the subject of the experiment) would say A. This is repeated twice. After this , we explain to the subject that the other people were actors and ask again the question. Then he replies the same thing. Two reasons for this: attachment to our own interpretation (even if it is wrong!) and the influence of what others think of us.

Example of the poet coming with a poet to Svarupa Damodara (comparing the body of Lord Jagannatha to the body and Lord Caitanya to the soul).

After going through the interpretation process we should remain humble, and acknowledge that even if we did our best taking into consideration all the key factors (i.e. parampara, etc…) we might have done it in a mistaken way.

Our measuring stick or ruler of interpretation in Sanskrit is called pramana.

List of Pramanas
Direct realization (saksat kara)
Anumana (reasoning, inference, the mind)
Sense perception (pratyaksa)
Tradition
Consensus
Mahajana
Sabda
Prabhupada (example & teachings)

Comment by Ravindra Svarupa Prabhu: If we accept the acarya and scripture as authority, we also need to interpret (understand) them correctly.

Tips
Expand Association
Watch out with ad hominum attack. Keep in mind what is been said and not who is saying it. Of course, lack of character in the person may be a consideration factor, but it is not necessarily a final one.

Sarva virukta dharma asraya: this is one of the favourite descriptions of Krishna given by Jiva Goswami. It means that Krishna is the shelter of all the opposing elements.

Question by Sesa Prabhu: How the average devotee is able to make sense of all this discussion.

Ravindra Svarupa: There is an academic trend that says that there is not a final interpretation to any subject. They say that every time we read something we are re-creating it.

Boundaries in interpretation: When the boundaries are crossed in a particular tradition it becomes heretical.

Should our boundaries be soft, hard, porous…? This is a very important and difficult question. The topic will be explored in other sessions during the next 4 days.

We start with general observations with what our acharyas and hindu traditions has done in terms of interpretation. The question is who can interpret? Something to keep in mind is that the acharyas had to deal with very different issues than we do today. They were challenged by vedantic scholars, mimamsakas, and other philosophers. They did not have to deal with gender, modernity, and similar issues.

Another consideration is the eternality of vedic scriptures vs. the academic modern approach (authorship, chronology and so on)

In addition, we have to deal with the different systems of thought in the East and the West (in the east more than one option may be accepted; in western thought it is either or…).

Sruti and Smrti: The sruti texts are accepted as apauruseya (eternal, without a human author). Smrti is accepted that there are different authors (sages). This includes Puranas, dharma-shastras, etc… If smrti says something that contradicts sruti, then sruti wins. This is the traditional approach. However, some traditions say that you cannot understand sruti without smrti, and therefore smrti is more important. According to the school you belong to, you will take a particular scripture as supreme (i.e. mimamsakas take the Vedas, Vedantists take Upasishads, Brahma-sutra and Bhagavad-gita, Caitanya and Vallabha Vaisnavas the Bhagavata and so on). Generally scholars of these tradition don't communicate among themselves. Some like Baladeva, engaged himself in vedantic discourse and established communications with this audience.

Importance of tradition:
In our tradition, Jiva Goswami and Baladeva V. argue that smrti is also eternal and actually complement sruti. These texts were recited by sages, but actually they are eternal.

Our acharyas use sat-linga: 6 tools for ascertaining the meaning of the text.

Literal, Secondary meaning, Suggestion
If the literal meaning doesn't apply, then you move to the secondary meaning (i.e. the Punjabi is an ox, it does not mean that he is literally an ox, but that he is as strong as an ox). Tantric traditions, sankarites, and other traditions put a lot of emphasis on the secondary meaning. Our acharyas put much more emphasis on the literal meaning and go only to the secondary meaning if the first doesn't make sense.

Madhvacarya used a lot of literal interpretation (i.e. Rk Veda saying that Krishna is the Lord who is Indra, Agni, and so on.

Suggestion refers to the realm of poetry (i.e. the village is on the Ganges means that is on the bank of the Ganges. This is secondary meaning. Those who follow the suggestion interpretation will say that this statement suggest that they village is cool, fresh and so on…

If there is a contradiction within the same text, there are different tools that can be used. For example Jiva G. mentions that one can look at the contradictory statements, examine the context, see if the sentences can be read in some other way and establish an order of priority (i.e. eternal condemnation in Gita: Krishna speaking as an angry father who doesn't really mean it literally; Siva as Supreme (8th Canto: Visnu referring to Siva as Supreme).

Rule of language are mainly established by tradition. These traditional rules are accepted generally by the different schools.

Bhaktivinoda and Bhadraloka
Krishna Ksetra Dasa

Bhaktivinoda's key hermeneutic principles:
1. Universlist Caitanya Vaisnava self-reform.
2. Representing Caitanya Vaisnava tradition of Bhagavata interpretation.
3. Discussing essential vaisnavism (saragrahi) and complementing it with varnasrama. The best interpreter is the saragrahi.

Negotiating the religious landscape of late 19th c. India

Caste conscious Brahmins, British colonialists, Brahmo samaj, Hindu reformers, Bhadraloka…

Tradition reformists: Rammohan Roy, founder of the Brahmo samaj, back to the Upanishad.
Bankim Chandra Chatterjee (1838-1894) author of Krishna Caritra sought to de-mytoligize Krishna.

Life Sketch of Bhaktivinoda:
Born in 1838, educated in Calcutta.
Served in the british civil service
First obtained a copy of the Bhagavata Purana in 1868 while stationed in Dinajpur
Until his death in 1914, wrote and published extensively on Vaisnavism.
Established numerous nama-hatta center in Bengal (over 500 centres according to Shukavak).

Bhaktivinoda's persistent theme throughout his works is that the saragrahi Vaisnava is the ideal interpreter.

Unqualified and Qualified interpreters:
The foolish critic vs. the true critic.
Ass-like vs. swan like critic

Bhaktivinoda used modern language in his writings (i.e. progress, critic, etc.). He denounces the sectarian spirit.

Qualified interpreters (adhikara-bheda):
Madhyama adhikaris: not yet succeeded in connecting faith with argument.
Uttama-adhikaris: Expert in connecting faith and argument. Able to attain perfection by utilizing material resources in their independent endeavors.

Adhunika-vada: Using modern methods of reason and so on, while acknowledging their limitations.

Tradition as 'modality of change' (Marilyn Waldman): It shows a contrast among tradition and modernity:

3 categories: Maintenance (holding the practice of careful scriptural study as a means of personal progress and self-reform.

Renewal: calling renewed attention to the Bhagavata Purana, using the language of reform.

Reform

Bhaktivinoda saw worldly influences and confluences and also saw the divine presence and purposes.

Reflexivity: what is the location of us who interpret the interpreter and his interpretations? (Servant of the servant, but in particular places).

Can we retain and appropriately apply Bhaktivinoda's spirit of engaging with the times?

Can we identify positions of balance from which engaging interpretation of scripture can take place? (keeping the tradition alive and not freeze it).

Follow-up of the previous presentations. The point here is what we are going to do as interpreters. Especially when we look at how the tradition is going to be maintain and develop to the future. We as historical people today, how are we dealing with interpretation?

We are facing a very critical time that never happened befote. For example linguistic turn. Language is not as relevant as before (i.e. secularization of language). Secularization for some people is about disappearance of religion. Other people say that secularization has taken place because the present religions is about consuming religious goods. It is about well-being, but not about salvation.

What is interpreting for classical south asian people. Looking for rahasya, gupta, guhasya (not visible, secret, etc.). Something has to be discover. Another way of interpreting was giving name to things.

Bandhukrt as interpretation of nature. (i.e. if we perform sacrifice the sun will rise; otherwise it will stop).

Agnihotra; at some it was developed pranagnihotra which focused the sacrifice on an individual level instead of a social level.

Who has the adhikara, the right to interpret? What is to be interpreted and who has the right to do it?

Examples of early Buddhism, early Jainism, and early orthodox Brahmins. Jaina 3 factors on interpretation: the Jaina sages, the scriptures and the popular practitioners. Similar examples apply to the other to community and to us in terms of sadhu,sastra, and guru.

Rsis and poets can interpret and are accepted as such as long as they are within the boundaries of the community. It is not possible to separate the act of interpretation from the principle of authority.

Free writers generally are not allowed in the classical schools of thought/interpretation.

It exist the need to approach authority (mahajanas, etc.). Obedience to the tradition is very important.

Contemporary situation is quite different. If the liberal-progressist approach is accepted as representing the prevalent views, then it is more important your own experience than the traditional approach.

A prominent value/paradigm today is that people want to decide for themselves what to do, even if that means to move away from the tradition.

Doxa=greek work for 'opinion'. Before of the colonial period the normal situation was to live within a community of the same doxa, opinion. During the post-colonial period until now, the norm is to live within a community where there are many different ideologies.

Re-Visioning ISKCON:
Constructive theologising for reform and renewal
Krishna Ksetra Dasa

Constructive theology means to build something out of materials that are already there (not out of nothing). The idea is that when there is a need of theological help, constructive theology can help to clarify misunderstandings of the tradition. Hinduism has not the best press in the world, as opposed to Buddhism. People say that Buddhism has an incredible adaptability. The standard critique to Hinduism in this regard is the social system (cast, varna…).

The Six dilemmas for post-charismatic religious movements
Jayadvaita Swami

What is ISKCON? The answers in the early days and in the present are very different, inconsistent…

Routinization of charisma: From revolution and charisma, the need arises to establish an order, to institutionalize.

Many movements do not survive the demise of the charismatic leader. Those who survive, have to face the six dilemmas for post-charismatic religious movements (see printed sheet adapted from Thomas F.O'Dea The Sociology of Religion.

ISKCON was 'transcendental' to all other organizations/religions. Now it is seen by many as an ordinary organization. We have seen many scandals and all the problems of any other organization.

Quotes by Rasamandala and Kripamoya Prabhu. Difficulties to join the temples, not even the preachers encourage people to do so. Congregation living KC lives on their own ways.

Boarding schools out, Brahmachari training out, future in temple live out….

ISKCON began with a monopoly of Vaisnavism, now there is a variety of Vaisnava groups.

Gaudiya Maths
Schismatic groups
Individual influential devotees

The catholic church found itself in a similar historical position. Hence there is a long history of Christian heresy, schisms, and denominations.

Hinduization of ISKCON: From being transcendental to Hinduism has become pretty much Hindu.

Women, Youth…. Interpreting and re-interpreting ISKCON.

Questions by Hopkins:

Are all the statements by Prabhupada truth or some of them can be taken as relative?

Bhaktisiddhanta S. was shy about writing about himself, as opposed to Bhaktivinoda who wrote his self-biography. Sambidanandha Dasa asked Bhaktisiddhanta about himself and he replied only briefly a letter summarizing what he did.

The history of the Gaudiya Math has been controversial and there are many interpretations of this history which makes things even more complicated.

Bhaktisiddhanta S. and the revival of Caitanya Vaisnavism. The shaping of a modern institution, which became the model for ISKCON.

Challenges of the historical context:
1. The rise of the bhadraloka: a new empowered laity.
2. The declining of Vaishnavism in Bengal.
3. Encounter with the West and struggle for independence.
4. World War I, global economic and political instability.

Major Biographical Periods:

Early education years (1874-1900)
Middle ascetic years (1900-1918)
Final years of mission (1918-1937)

Why a modern institution?

Colonialism and Enlightenment: segmentation and differentiation of society.

There was a need to create an institution in order to deal with the new social situation (i.e. society was becoming more secular, religion was just one aspect of life….)

There was a rise of legal institutions in Bengal.

Visva Vaisnava Raja Sabha (1884): Srila Bhaktisiddhanta used the letterhead of the organization of Bhaktivinoda. Gaudiya Math was never registered during Bhaktisiddhanta's time.

Gaudiya Math (1918)

Modern ethics: inworldly asceticism (yukta-vairagya)
Engaging the laity (establishment of urban temples).
Focus on nama and jiva-daya: He saw that people are less qualified and therefore we need to focus on the essence (hence these two essential practices).
Revival of guru, sadhu and sastra.: he emphasized a lot purity and merit.
Visibility in public space (large kirtana, public programs, exhibitions…)
Participation in contemporary issues and discussions (i.e. The Harmonist)

The Gaudiya Math under Bhaktisiddhanta's direction embarked on the project of translating Caitanya Vaisnavism to English.
Using language that the people could relate to:

Protestant Vaisnavism
Church, etc…

Dilemmas of the Gaudiya Math:

- It was never registered.
- Bhaktisiddhanta did not appoint a successor nor gave any 'unequivocal' direction for succession
- He was ultimately against 'institutional spirit'.

The dilemmas of modern institutionalization (O'Dea 1961)

1. Mixed motivations.
2. Symbol System
3. Organizational elaboration of structures versus movement effectiveness.
4. Need for concrete definition versus legalism
5. Power.

Putana: article in the Harmonist which is very critical to modern institutions.

The last instructions of Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati:

- Will in 1923: 3 appointed executors (Kunjabihari Vidyabhusana, Ananta Vasudeva, Paramananda Dasa).
- Create a governing body and cooperate (1936)
- Spiritual leadership will emerge naturally (1936)

Two interpretations of the Gaudiya Math

The court case 1937-1941 at Calcutta High Court

Ananta Vasudeva versus Kunjabihari Vidyabhusana

Two alternative interpretations:

- Horizontal institution - institution as provider of public service (Ananta Vasudeva)
- Vertical institution - focus on acarya-guru.

Kunjabihari Vidyabhusana wone the case: the sannyasi status of Bhaktisiddhanta was not accepted in court.

Schism is not a recent phenomenon. It goes back almost two thousand years back. It is originally a theological phenomenon. The church fathers defined it (Cipriano). Difference among heresy and schism: heresy refers to someone leaving the church because of having different ideas. By definition of the church fathers, someone may leave the church without having different doctrines, and still he leaves because of not liking the leadership or some similar reason. This is schism. An example of schism took place in the XIX century when the polish national church separated from the church because there were not polish priests. They did not like the irish priests. Later on it became heretical in different ways (i.e. women priests…). They could not return back to the church, even if they wanted (i.e. when the Pope was polish).

Question of what happen to children who die before being baptized. St. Augustine said that non-baptized children go to hell. Later on the limbo theory was developed. The limbo never became an official church doctrine. In early Christianity to be a good person and believe in God was not enough to be saved. It was necessary to be part of the church. Now the Catholic church is more inclusive than the orthodox church.

This month of July the Vatican published a document remembering Christians from the eastern countries. The point is that there is a difference among the schismatic and the heretical. Schismatic people separate mainly for political reasons.

Discussions among different Christian groups who debate about who would be saved. Many examples about this are given. Schisms are less important than heresies.

Every Christian reformer intended to create unity among the different churches, but finally the result has been to have one extra denomination. For example the Church of Christ became a new denomination, and now it has split in three denominations.

In 97 a scholar studied schism in Hassidic Jews. The 200 existing hassidic groups are different than the Christian schismatic groups in that the reason for forming these groups was the personal relation with the master.

One reason for division among groups is the difference of opinion in reforming and adapting to times.

Example of the mormons on the issue of polygamy. The leader of the mormons in 1890 said that God revealed to him that polygamy should stopped. Now there are different groups. The polygamists are around 40.000 and the other group is much bigger.

Example of Monsignor Lefebvre who did not accept the reform of Vatican 2.

Schisms in the Anglican church due to having named homosexual and women priests. In Africa the churches were quite homophobic. They declared themselves independent and in some cases the forged relationships with the Orthodox Church.

Territorial division among the Orthodox Churches (i.e. the rule use to be one bishop for each territory). With the political divisions of countries in Europe is has become somewhat complex. Many of these churches has separated on the basis of territorial separation. All of them believe on the same doctrine.

Schism in China: Chinese patriotic church. They even killed a few bishops in order to become established as separate from the Catholic Church.

A cardinal and bishops in China are re-consecrating Chinese patriotic bishops.

Other examples of reasons for schism: territorial, political, liturgical, and ecumenical. One of the orthodox churches thinks that ecumenical activities and inter-religious dialogue are things of the Devil. They say that only thru the church can one be saved.

In conclusion, we should keep in mind that schism is tied to the early Christian idea. It does not travel very well if you try to apply it to other organizations than the Catholic Church. It seems to be easy to 'cured' than heresy.

The Church is trying to rectify some of the later schisms (i.e. Chinese patriotic church).

In most of the cases when schism occurs there is no way back. It seems to be part of human nature to want to do things your own way.

Many people/scholars say it is outrageous to say 'as it is', since this cannot be.

Srila Prabhupada writes numerous quotes about understanding scripture without interpretation, from proper authority, etc.

Are Prabhupada's hermeneutical principles really equivalent to the fidelistic dogmatism of revivalists?

To reply this we read Prabhupada's hermeneutical process as explained in SB 1.3.44.

One can see the presence of Krishna directly in the pages of the Bhagavatam.

A core theological principles is that the name and Krishna are identical.

One can see Krishna directly if one hears it from a self-realized soul like Sukadeva Goswami. This is the secret for learning Bhagavatam.

This implies that Bhagavata will not take place if it is spoken by a materially attached person or a mundane scholar, even if their presentation seems impressive.

.Suta Goswami is bona fide because he heard from Suka and because he wants to present the message as he received it.

Elements of Parampara: 'as he heard it'; 'you find no change'…

Simple hearing is not all: One should hear with rapt attention from the real person, and then he can at once realize the presence of Lord Krishna in every page. The secret of knowing Bhagavatam is mentioned here. No one can give rapt attention who is not pure in mind. No one can be pure in mind who is not pure in action. No one can be pure in action who is not pure in eating, sleeping, mating, and defending. But if somehow or other one hears with rapt attention from the bona fide source, one can see Krishna in the pages of the Bhagavatam.

ISKCON as a hermeneutical Society: The regulative principles of devotional service taken together are intended to create people who can hear the Bhagavatam correctly.

SB 1.4.1: Personal realization does not mean that out of vanity one should try to surpass the previous acharya. Rather, one should have full confidence in the previous acharya and at the same time he should present the message of the acharya in his own words, keeping the original meaning of the text and it should be presented in an interesting manner. No obscure meaning of the text should be drawn.

The Core Hermeneutical Principle: atah sri krsna namadi: one cannot understand Krishna with his own senses. Krishna becomes revealed only when He is pleased by the service of the devotee (which starts with the tongue, and so on…).

Bhagavatam and 'per formative utterances' (John Austin on performative utterances, website).

Bhagavatam does not take place unless the speaker and hearer are both bona fide.

Example: 'I sentence you to ten years in jail'. Both judge and convicted should be 'bona fide'. Otherwise the same words are spoken, but nothing happens.

This is what we are talking about when we refer to what is going on in the Krishna consciousness movement.

Realization in order to present Bhagavatam doesn't happen all in once, but generally it develops gradually. So there is some realization in the training stage of practicing and presenting Bhagavatam.

The process of realizing Bhagavatam can be described as a 'mystical' process.

Prabhupada described the process of devotional service as a science. If material scientists cannot accept this, we can tell them to do it and assess by themselves.

It may seem that there is no question of originality in presenting the message. The boundaries of originality are marked by realization. We cannot set boundaries by a particular set of rules. That's why we need knowledge based on realization.

When a person is situated in the spiritual platform, individual creative is not diminished. Actually the inspiration comes from the Supersoul; therefore in the spiritual platform there should be more creativity.

 

The use of the term schism will refer to a split.

The differences between schism and heresy have been depicted. Heresies are based on doctrinal and theological discrepancies. Schisms may be based mostly on organizational considerations.

4 Points:

- One right reading: Many of the schisms or heresies in Christianity had to do with Jesus or God's identity. Some times when an explanation was given that was not given before, it gave rise to a division within the church. Example of Arius and the bishop of Alenxandria. Arius is refer to as heretical and it is given as an example of how complex can schisms be. It is not clear who declared Arius heretical (there were many parties involved….).
Prabhupada gave us a strict line to follow. If we deviate we fall vs. Prabhupada gave us space for creativity as long as we are good association and practice.
- Malleability of Scripture: Examples of this are who is a muslim? There are different interpretations by different schools. Example of a Christian author who interpreted every passage of the Bible as related to the coming of Christ. How much this is acceptable? This can be a reason for division.
- Reversal of heretical & acceptable: Some thing that was seen as heretical , later on it is seen as acceptable.
- Line or area? : Example of an author who asserts that true religious people are known by their fruits.

Some scholars/people interpret that schisms is what keeps religion alive. On the other hand other people interpret that schisms are a betrayal to the predecessors.

Applying Social Theory in ISKCON
Braja Bihari Dasa

Traditions take a long time to develop and are created over centuries.
We can also speak of 'organizational culture'. Nowadays it is said that it takes 3 to 5 years to change an organizational culture.

Analyzing and organization's culture:

3 levels: rituals and artefacts, beliefs and values, basic assumptions.

New Institutionalism: 'Compliance occurs in many circumstances because other types of behaviour are inconceivable, routines are followed because they are taken for granted as the ways we do these things.

4 ISKCON Schisms
1. Siddhasvarupa Maharaja
2. Conch Club/Kirtan Hall
3. Gaudiya Math- Narayana Maharaja
4. Ritvikism - ISKCON Bangalore

Applying Social theory:

- No 'one cause'
- Bg. 18.13
- Get over 'physics envy'

Why Individuals join schisms? It is due to a charismatic leader:

- Siddha Svarupa, Narayana Maharaja, Madhu Pandit.
- Post-charismatic leads to bureacratization (i.e.: In ISKCON 100 to 500 temples. Number of GBC resolutions markedly increased).

Rational Choice Theory: Assumes that individuals are self-interested and act rationally to achieve their self interest. They are end-driven.

If this is true, what do they try to achieve by going to other places? Some go to other places because there is more life in those places. They want to be part of a wining team. They may want a fresh start. They want a relieve of a mistreatment they suffered in ISKCON. They want to be lead by a strong leader. They want a better financial situation.

Another theory: Social game theory: We are moral creatures whose moral sentiments -shaped by their relationships and roles - enter into our judgment and actions.

Some say that they enter into these two groups in order to serve Srila Prabhupada better. They find that Prabhupada's legacy in carried on better in these organizations.

Religious Capital/Member satisfaction

Religious capital consists of the degree of mastery of and attachment to a particular religious culture.

Two parts:
1. Member satisfaction - ongoing param drstva.
2. 'Mormon effect'.

The mormon effect can happen to ISKCON devotees if they meet some dissatisfactions thru their lives. Then they go to other organizations which are of similar characteristics.

What makes some endure?
- cultural timing
- resource mobilization theory

Benefits of schisms for ISKCON?
- Overcome complacency - ISKCON was the only show in town.
- Humility, overcoming arrogance (examples: court case, apology to ISKCON Women, apology to all devotees because of Zonal Acarya system.

Suggestions to ISKCON:
- When possible, open up dialogue.
- Present reasonable expectations to members.
- Consider ISKCON's boundaries - unity in diversity.
- Orders?
- Care for devotees: spiritual and material.

Unbridled idealism may end in cynicism after the ideal expectations are not met.

**************************************************
LOGISTICS
Dates: 27 July - 30 July 2009
Cost: 120 Euros
Registrations and other enquiries: Contact Kumari-priya Dasi at claire.robison@gmail.com

Transport:
Nearest main airport is Pisa. However, being Italy, there are many alternatives and good rail links from most of the country. There is a 70 minute (8 Euro) bus trip straight from Pisa Airport to Florence Railway Station. If you prefer to spend a little time in Pisa (certainly worthwhile), it is very near to Pisa airport (about ten minutes) and there are regular, inexpensive trains from Pisa to Florence and a left-luggage at the station.

From Florence Railway Station station it is a short local bus to Tavarnuzze, from where you will be collected.

Day trip: Part of the schedule is for an excursion to Florence. There may be a small extra charge for those wishing to go.

**************************************************
ISKCON STUDIES INSTITUTE
The ISKCON Studies Institute is an academic institute. It aims to, develop the field of ISKCON studies and related areas of interest; develop forums for academic exchange; promote relevant research and facilitate publishing about ISKCON in various disciplines.

The ISI is an ISKCON MED (Ministry of Educational Development) approved body. Its current members are:
Gopinathacarya Dasa
Krsna-ksetra Dasa
Kumari-priya Dasi
Lal Krishna Dasa
Merudevi Dasi
Pranava Dasa
Radhika Raman Dasa
Shaunaka Rishi Dasa