There is a misconception that the Krishna consciousness movement represents the Hindu religion…. Sometimes Indians both inside and outside of India think that we are preaching the Hindu religion, but actually we are not. One will not find the word “Hindu” in the Bhagavad-gita. Indeed, there is no such word in the entire Vedic literature.”
(emphasis added)

Source: His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, Science of Self Realization, Chapter 3 - “Krishna Consciousness: Hindu Cult or Divine Culture?”

In 1992 ISKCON released an official position paper on ISKCON vis-a-vis Hinduism, in which it was stated: “ISKCON faithfully continues the core traditions of the Hindu faith“. After this, according to Inside the Hare Krishna Movement, a book by a former head of ISKCON Communications Ministry, “contradictory evidence saying, for example, that ISKCON has “nothing to do with Hinduism” found its way onto ISKCON’s official websites. ISKCON Communications effected its removal. If ISKCON had chosen to opt out of the Hindu culture, “legions of scholars in the future”, says Julius Lipner, published author, professor and a curriculum director at Cambridge University, “would refer to ISKCON as the Hindu group that didn’t call themselves Hindu.”

Hmmm…. actually ISKCON has nothing to do with the so-called “Hindu” religion, as clearly explained by Srila Prabhupada. It may be a useful strategy to solicit donations from pious Indians who want to give their money to people who actually follow religious principles, but it is far from reality.

Hinduism is a form of nationalism. It is like being proud of being American or proud of being white. Of course, because the original culture in India was the divine culture of Krishna Consciousness Hinduism contains many vestigial elements, in a more or less manifested and / or corrupted state. However, at the end of the day, equating Krishna Consciousness with Hinduism is like equating Christianity with Zionism.

1. It is not true, as clearly pointed out by Srila Prabhupada. It’s not that it isn’t true “because Prabhupada said so”, he simply describes the facts for clarification. That’s the original ISKCON position statement to the public right there.

2. Who cares what “legions of scholars” may say in the future? That doesn’t change the truth. Pandering to a fickle public is one thing, speaking the truth and sticking to it is another. What we do know is that right now the media is pointing out ISKCON as the “non-Hindu movement that called itself Hindu”, or “the movement that couldn’t make up its mind”.

What we should be concerned about is that “legions of scholars”, along with practically everyone else on the planet at the moment is headed to a precarious destination. Let us not even speak of the next life, let’s just talk about this one. Anyone who can’t see that present day civilization is headed to a social and environmental crisis has their head in the sand, or in their Xbox, or their plasma TV with DVD and 5.1 6.1 7.1 surround sound. In other words, who cares about their opinion as they march off the edge of a cliff leading everyone else with them? Mouthing meaningless platitudes and passing consensual judgement on the sociological identity of the Krishna Consciousness movement all the while.

All of Srila Prabhupada’s God brothers who were consciously or unconsciously convinced that Krishna Consciousness was something “Hindu”, and something “for Hindus”, were incapable of spreading the knowledge and philosophical understanding outside India. Only Srila Prabhupada, precisely because he understood the purely transcendental nature of the soul and hence the universal applicability of Krishna Consciousness, was able to communicate this to people in the West. Before Prabhupada came there were many editions of Bhagavad-gita, but not one devotee of Krishna.

Krishna Consciousness is not something “Hindu”. It is a description of the spiritual component of all living entities, from plants to animals to humans, the nature of that spiritual component and its activities, and its relationship with the Source of Everything, Krishna.

That, ultimately has nothing to do with India, although circumstantially there may be connection. In Bhagavad-gita, spoken by Krishna in India 5 000 years ago, Krishna says: “I instructed this imperishable science of yoga to the sun-god, Vivasvān, and Vivasvān instructed it to Manu, the father of mankind, and Manu in turn instructed it to Ikṣvāku.”

In the purport Srila Prabhupada explains: “Herein we find the history of the Bhagavad-gītā traced from a remote time when it was delivered to the royal order of all planets, beginning from the sun planet…. At the present moment we have just passed through five thousand years of the Kali-yuga, which lasts 432,000 years. Before this there was Dvāpara-yuga (800,000 years), and before that there was Tretā-yuga (1,200,000 years). Thus, some 2,005,000 years ago, Manu spoke the Bhagavad-gītā to his disciple and son Mahārāja Ikṣvāku, the king of this planet earth. The age of the current Manu is calculated to last some 305,300,000 years, of which 120,400,000 have passed. Accepting that before the birth of Manu the Gītā was spoken by the Lord to His disciple the sun-god Vivasvān, a rough estimate is that the Gītā was spoken at least 120,400,000 years ago; and in human society it has been extant for two million years. It was respoken by the Lord again to Arjuna about five thousand years ago. That is the rough estimate of the history of the Gītā, according to the Gītā itself and according to the version of the speaker, Lord Śrī Kṛṣṇa.”

So that has nothing to do with India, the river Indus, or “Hinduism”.

Of course from the perspective of “legions of scholars” they would say that: “The Krishna Consciousness movement tries to separate itself from the context of Hinduism through its doctrine…”

1. If what is said by Prabhupada in his explanation above is false, then we are indeed simply trying to “separate (ourselves) from the context of Hinduism through (our) doctrine”. Yes, I accept that, if what is said there is false. That is the question that has to be addressed by scholars before they make such a statement. Let us see some answers to these issues before we go accepting the establishment’s doctrine on human (so-called pre)history.

2. Even accepting that this were true, which I certainly am not doing out of hand or “on faith” in contemporary scientific opinions without some serious discussion and investigation, the fact remains that this is Srila Prabhupada’s position on ISKCON and Hinduism. Personally I’ll take that over the opinion of “legions of scholars” any day for many reasons, but one that I will give here.

When asked by a reporter what he would do if he found out tomorrow that Krishna was not God, His Divine Grace replied, with a big smile: “I would do the same thing, because I am happy.”

Now show me a scholar who has the same commitment to his ideals, and is happy. Then show me a legion of them - who can agree with each other… =)