Letter of complaint to the SABHA regarding the GBC resolution of December 15, 2022 regarding the status of Anirdesya Vapu dasa (formerly known as Bhaktividya Purna Swami)
Respected members of the SABHA,
Please accept our humble obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada!
My name is Mangalavati Citra devi dasi and we are writing this letter of complaint together with my husband HG Tattvavada dasa. We are shiksa disciples of former Bhaktividya Purna Swami (fBVPS). We also represent thousands of well wishers, initiated disciples, shiksa disciples, followers, academics and government officials who know him around the world.
First of all we would like to establish that we acknowledge that fBVPS did commit mistakes. We are referring to the latest CPO decision of 28/10/2022. He did admit that he three times inappropriately touched the alleged victim when she was above 18 years. As responsible leaders of ISKCON and students of law (Tattvavada dasa), we only judge on what has been admitted and/or on clear evidence (laboratory tests, phycological tests, recordings, pictures and similar). We don’t judge only based on word-against-word (one person’s word against another’s). We are very careful about that.
As disciples, we have according to shastra, the right to not tolerate an insult against our spiritual master. Srila Prabhupada defines an offence/insult very clearly in the Bhagavad-gita, 16.1-3: ”…to call a thief a thief is not fault finding, but to call an honest person a thief is very much offensive for one who is making advancement in spiritual life.” In this case, the allegations are to be found in the CPO decision, in the form of misleading information and biassed judgement despite the lack of clear evidence and by presenting in a dishonest way, former BVPS’s admitted three wrongdoings.
Despite the difference in opinion (word-against-word) of what happened between former BVPS and the alleged victim and her mother, the CPO chose to take sides with the alleged victim without having any clear evidence (laboratory tests, photos, witnesses etc). Circumstantial evidence is not enough according to lawyers. Consequently the CPO assumes he is a child abuser, and they defame him to the entire ISKCON as such despite the fact that there is no clear evidence for that and despite the fact that he has never admitted to that.
Former BVPS has admitted to touching the alleged victim three times when she was above 18 years. He clearly wrote to the CPO that he never interacted in a sensual manner with any minor. He also wrote several times in his correspondence with the CPO, how much he repented his wrongdoings and asked the vaishnava community for their mercy. But still, the CPO wrote in their decision (which the entire ISKCON read and believed) that he lacked remorse, which is a criminal’s act of defamation. The statements 1-9 in the CPO decision of 28/10/2022, are according to former BVPS’s appeal ”either never happened, are taken out of context, or are grossly exaggerated”.
Furthermore the CPO decision states that “This makes the history of BVPS abuse the longest in ISKCON CPO history …” Former BVPS used corporal punishment between 1982-1988 on a small group of individuals who were particularly naughty. The frequency of corporal punishment was a few times per year. Before disciplining the students, fBVPS explained to them for half an hour why they were going to be punished. The stick (which was proportionate according to the size of the student) was used to hit the buttocks generally once. The reasons for the punishment were serious, not trivial. These included theft, physically harming other students and other serious transgressions. An important point to be considered in this case is that fBVPS broke no law, since it was not forbidden in India during that time to discipline students through corporal punishment. He stopped the corporeal punishment in 1988 because that batch of a few individuals had grown up to be obedient students. Also, the next batch of students were more qualified, because he was finally allowed to choose whom to accept and whom not to accept into the Gurukula. To state that former BVPS continuously has been abusing children the last 40 years, is a false statement and therefore a very serious offence. Someone may accuse us for vilifying the CPO and the GBC, but in our defence, we are concerned that the procedures are performed in a proper legal order. We are also doing our duty as disciples to defend our spiritual master as is our right according to shastra. [1]
On the other hand, where in shastra does it say that it is right to defame and spread false statements about a brahmana vaishnava who has dedicated his life to educating the vaishnava community for decades? Such defamation is actually the first offence against the holy name. In the 12th chapter of the Bhagavad-gita Lord Krishna explains who is very dear to Him, but in 18.68-69, He states who is most dear to Him: ”For one who explains the supreme secret to the devotees, devotional service is guaranteed, and at the end he will come back to Me. There is no servant in this world more dear to Me than he, nor will there ever be one more dear.”
According to the law, one cannot judge anyone based on word against words. One should judge based on clear evidence. The extreme danger with biassed judgements is a chaotic and anarchistic society. Imagine our institution allowing that anyone can say anything about anyone without asking for clear evidences, and on top of that, witch-hunt anyone who questions such methods. And if those independently thoughtful devotees happen to have a position in ISKCON, their leadership position is terminated with immediate effect. That happened to me, in a very questionable way when I was actually just questioning the CPO methodology. (The Swedish National Council (SNC) without following any laws and rules terminated my chairmanship service with immediate effect (09/12/2022). They took advice from a GBC Emeritus, who recently openly defied a GBC decision, to terminate my chairmanship because according to them I had openly defied the CPO and GBC decision on fBVPS, when in actuality I was questioning their methodology.)
It becomes difficult for a devotee who would like to be a leader to function in such a centralised autocratic and bureaucratic movement. We have to be careful about going towards directions which Srila Prabhupada didn’t give and did not show in his example in similar situations. ISKCON should carefully seek advice in Srila Prabhupada’s instructions, and should never base their punishments on anything other than shastra and Srila Prabhupada’s example. We are very worried about the direction which ISKCON is going at the moment. Therefore we ask all the members of SABHA to remember why they joined ISKCON, and to connect with Krishna and their conscience, to have faith and to take courage and make the decision according to guru, sadhu and shastra.
The GBC’s posting their resolution publicly before the SABHA’s review is unethical. Now the GBC has made public their resolution declaring further restrictions on not only fBVPS but on his disciples as well, declaring some of them no longer initiated. How will that be taken back now if the SABHA disapproves? Many devotees are highly questioning whether there is a hidden agenda with such a wrong legal order.
There is no explanation to what the GBC means with “at least one adult woman”. Does it mean two, three, one-hundred? There is no place for such vague statements in such grave allegations.
The GBC Guru Services Committee has not contacted fBVPS. From whom did they get the information? Is it not a common procedure in all types of investigations that the committee should interview the alleged perpetrator?
In the year 2000, the CPO made a restriction. For one year he was not allowed to give class, lead kirtan and take part in public programs. He was not allowed to give initiations for two years, but after that he could give initiation. In the year 2007, the GBC decided that anyone who had a CPO decision, could not take new disciples. The GBC in 2007 had not declared that fBVPS was no longer a bona fide diksha-guru. Regarding the disciples that were initiated after 2007, those were brahmana initiations to already first initiated disciples, as per the GBC allowance. Therefore, fBVPS has not violated any prohibition.
The GBC should specify the details of the following statements: “new information about the extent of Anirdesya Vapu das’ abuses that it revealed, and his other violations”. There are also no references from GBC resolutions, ISKCON law or shastra supporting the validity of such a proposed decision. On the other hand we would hereby humbly state fBVPS is not a fallen Guru, since 14 years have passed since he three times inappropriately allowed himself to touch the alleged victim, when she was above 18 years.
Śrīla Prabhupāda has explained in a lecture:
“If by accident, if by previous habit, one commits some mistake or falls down, that is excused. And one should be repentant: ‘My dear Lord, I have committed this offence. Please excuse me.’ And one should fast. One should be very much repentant. Then Kṛṣṇa is so kind. But he hasn’t got to take to the prāyaścitta or, what is called, atonement system. A devotee hasn’t got to do that. A devotee’s sinful activities is excused, and if he is repentant, then he is again elevated to his original position. That is the verdict of all śāstras.”
“Not only is this “the verdict of all śāstras,” Śrīla Prabhupāda has himself demonstrated such a consideration in his own dealings with his disciples who had difficulties in the past.”[2]
“The Agni Purāṇa forbids inflicting a punishment or prāyaścitta on anyone (not to mention a Vaiṣṇava) for the fault that has already been judged and atoned for.”[3]
“There is no mention of removing a person (Vaiṣṇava) from the position of guruship, even for sins as heinous as brahmahatyā, and even a sin such as brahmahatyā does not necessarily mean that a guru is no longer bona fide, as the example of Vaiśampāyana shows.”[4]
Śrīla Śrīdhara Svāmī and Śrīla Viśvanātha Cakravartī Ṭhākura note that there is no further prāyaścitta for one who has given up all activities and is engaged in devotional service to the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Śrīla Jiva Gosvāmī has added that such a devotee incidentally attains the result of prāyaścitta by his continuous remembrance of the Lord.[5]
It is commonly known that fBVPS has been chanting 64 rounds on a daily basis for at least a decade.
The Vedic scriptures, clearly states that the correct prāyaścitta purifies the aggressor of his sinful reactions and the sin itself. Such atonements need to be executed only once. In fact the Agni Purāṇa clearly prohibits a court from trying a person for a sin twice, as cited below:
“A court should neither entertain, nor hear a cross-suit or a cross-case, without first deciding the original one, nor should it take up a case or suit dismissed or rejected by another tribunal of competent authority.”[6]
Hence it is important that one consult the śāstras for its prescriptions of the right atonement and not whimsically or emotionally subject the accused to double-jeopardy.”
Where in the history of vaishnavism has any authority of any institution ever come up with such a decision? Please consider the many shastric quotes given in this letter. We assume that the members of the GBC have faith in shastra and that it has clearly been established that the proposed GBC resolution is totally out of Srila Prabhupada’s instructions, shastra and ISKCON law. Please correct us if we are wrong by referring to shastra and ISKCON law,
Does this mean that fBVPS will be allowed to only talk about material matters? How is that vaishnava prayascitta? Does the GBC have the right to regulate what happens outside of ISKCON? The CPO didn’t decide that fBVPS cannot give private lectures. What is the GBC’s Krishna conscious reason for this proposal and how is this pleasing to Lord Krishna and Srila Prabhupada? Are some appointed devotees not allowed to talk about Krishna anymore? Let us remind the GBC about what ISKCON’s Founder-Acharya, Srila Prabhupada recommends as prayascitta, after having studied carefully the teachings of the previous acharyas and made it available to his followers:
“Generally, a devotee who is engaged in the nine kinds of devotional activities is engaged in the process of cleansing all material contamination from the heart. He puts the Supreme Personality of Godhead within his heart, and all sinful contaminations are naturally washed away. Continuous thinking of the Supreme Lord makes him pure by nature. According to the Vedas, there is a certain regulation that if one falls down from his exalted position he has to undergo certain ritualistic processes to purify himself. But here there is no such condition, because the purifying process is already there in the heart of the devotee, due to his remembering the Supreme Personality of Godhead constantly.” Purport to BG 9.31
We assume we are writing and talking with devotees who have faith in devotional service as the real cleaning agent of the heart. That devotional service is more powerful than sins and any material contamination.
Please see the ISKCON law references given below regarding point 8 which are not inline with the ISKCON law regarding this matter.
After carefully considering the above shastric references and considering the self imposed sadhana and devotional pracices that fBVPS has done the last 14 years, we would humbly like to establish the fact that fBVPS is not a fallen guru. Despite our own conviction as disciples, we would still like to remind the SABHA team about what the ISKCON law says about rejecting or not rejecting a fallen guru:
1.7. Rejection of a Fallen “Guru”
N.B.: The following laws are based on Sri Krsna Bhajanamrta by Sri Narahari Sarkara (an associate of Sri Caitanya), Bhakti Sandharbha by Srila Jiva Gosvami, and Jaiva Dharma by Bhaktivinoda Thakura, in addition to the writings of Srila A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada.
1.7.1. When a Fallen Guru May Be Rejected
If it is ascertained either by the admission of the guru, or by the testimony of irrefutably reliable witness(es) that the guru was fallen at the time of initiation, then the disciple has a legitimate reason to reject him and take re-initiation from a bona fide spiritual master
1.7.2. When a Fallen Guru Must Be Rejected
1.7.2.1. Hopelessly entangled in sense gratification
If a guru has become hopelessly entangled in sense gratification, and it has been established by reliable testimony or by his own admissions that he has been regularly violating the regulative principles of Krsna consciousness, and if there is virtually no hope for his rectification, then the disciple should reject him and may accept re-initiation.
1.7.2.2. Takes on demonic qualities
If the spiritual master takes on demoniac qualities and becomes inimical to ISKCON, he should be rejected and the disciple may take re-initiation.
1.7.3. When Not to Reject a Fallen Guru
If a guru is engaged in sense gratification, violating one or more of the regulative principles, but there is hope that he can be rectified, then his disciples should not reject him but should allow time for such rectification to take place, and they should take shelter of Srila Prabhupada and senior vaisnavas as siksa gurus.
1.7.4. When a Suspended Guru May Be Rejected
A disciple of a suspended guru who has severely lost his faith in his spiritual master, or who has developed an offensive mentality towards him, and who is unable to regain his faith, even after hearing many instructions in the matter, may take permission from the spiritual master for release to accept a different initiating guru. The devotee should act in consultation with his local GBC representative. If the suspended guru witholds his permission, then the disciple may seek permission from the GBC body.
After presenting in this letter, a few shastric references on punishing a vaishnava, fBVPS’s atonements, the fact that his last fall down happened 14 years ago, and presenting what the ISKCON law states, we would humbly like to point out that the GBC resolution of 15/12/2022 on fBVPS is out of line with Srila Prabhupada, shastra, and the ISKCON law.
In his purport to Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam 8.20.1, Śrīla Prabhupāda stresses the contrasting point of when to reject a guru.
“Anyone who is supposed to be a guru but who goes against the principle of viṣṇubhakti cannot be accepted as guru. If one has falsely accepted such a guru, one should reject him. Such a guru is described as follows (Mahābhārata, Udyoga 179.25): guror apy avaliptasya kāryākāryam ajānataḥ utpatha-pratipannasya parityāgo vidhīyate.” (ŚB 8.20.1 purport)
There are hundreds of lectures given by fBVPS, and we have heard most of those, but never have we ever come across one sentence going against Visnu-bhakti. On the contrary, he always concludes his lectures that our application of devotional service should always be in consideration of what is pleasing to Lord Krishna. But if someone in the SABHA thinks differently, we would humbly like to ask for such reference.
Srila Prabhupada also explains who is qualified to be a guru: “So when one understands Kṛṣṇa perfectly, he becomes mahātmā. Just try to understand. Not a politician. Not by changing dress, saffron-color cloth. No, that is not mahātmā. One who understands Kṛṣṇa perfectly well, he is mahātmā. Therefore here it is said, munibhir mahātmabhiḥ. The instruction was received from persons, munibhiḥ, great philosophers. Not only philosophers, but mahātmā. Because one who has understood Kṛṣṇa perfectly… This is the qualification of guru.”
fBVPS is famous in ISKCON for being one of the most erudite scholars and philosophers who have understood the Krishna conscious philosophy to the level of an expert (muni), His uninterrupted engagement and absorption in devotional service witness his spontaneous devotion (mahatma who has understood Krishna perfectly).
“From the above references provided from pāncarātrika-mārga, vaidika-mārga, the teachings of Lord Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu and Śrīla Prabhupāda, it has been clearly established that even for the worst kinds of the sins committed by a Vaiṣṇava who has fully surrendered unto the Supreme Lord, there is no mention of removing him from the position of guru or giving him other kinds of punishments not found in the revealed scriptures.”
We are aware of the fact that this issue is emotionally loaded for many ISKCON members. The reasons are different, but we would like to bring to the attention of the revered SABHA members that this CPO decision has been handled in the the wrong legal order as follows:
Why? What was the Krishna conscious purpose of that? Many devotees find these actions in poor taste.
We are fully aware that some of the members of the SABHA team have family relations with some affected persons in this case, and others have family relations with opponents against fBVPS. Therefore we would humbly like to request the SABHA members to be conscious of this fact and help each other to come to a Krishna conscious solution and understanding, based on Srila Prabhupada’s teachings and personal application on similar situations, ISKCON law and shastra.
We would also humbly like to request the SABHA team to explain their decision, with references based on Srila Prabhupada’s teachings and personal application on similar situations, ISKCON law and shastra.
Your humble servants,
Mangalavati Citra devi dasi and Tattvavada dasa
[1] “When Dakṣa cursed Lord Śiva in harsh words, some of the brāhmaṇas present might have enjoyed it because some brāhmaṇas do not very much admire Lord Śiva. This is due to their ignorance of Lord Śiva’s position. Nandīśvara was affected by the cursing, but he did not follow the example of Lord Śiva, who was also present there. Although Lord Śiva could also have cursed Dakṣa in a similar way, he was silent and tolerant; but Nandīśvara, his follower, was not tolerant. Of course, as a follower it was right for him not to tolerate an insult to his master, but he should not have cursed the brāhmaṇas who were present. ” Purport to SB 4.2.20
Srimad Bhagavatam 4.4.17:
Satī continued: If one hears an irresponsible person blaspheme the master and controller of religion, one should block his ears and go away if unable to punish him. But if one is able to kill, then one should by force cut out the blasphemer’s tongue and kill the offender, and after that one should give up his own life.
Purport: “The argument offered by Satī is that a person who vilifies a great personality is the lowest of all creatures. But, by the same argument, Dakṣa could also defend himself by saying that since he was a Prajāpati, the master of many living creatures and one of the great officers of the great universal affairs, his position was so exalted that Satī should accept his good qualities instead of vilifying him. The answer to that argument is that Satī was not vilifying [Daksha] but defending [Lord Siva]…”
[2] Vedic Jurisprudence and Atonement, Prāyaścitta according to Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇavism, page 4
[3] Vedic Jurisprudence and Atonement, Prāyaścitta according to Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇavism, page 1
[4] Vedic Jurisprudence and Atonement, Prāyaścitta according to Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇavism, page 1
[5] Vedic Jurisprudence and Atonement, Prāyaścitta according to Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇavism, page 4
[6] Vedic Jurisprudence and Atonement, Prāyaścitta according to Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇavism, page 7
IISB members Basu Ghosh Das (ACBSP) and Krishna Kirti Das (Convenor, IISB) discuss Srila Prabhupada’s…
The proof of how dishonest the Poison allegations are is those who endorse this horrible…
Abstract In Kṛṣṇa’s Vedic civilization, upanayana — the investiture with the sacred thread and brahma-gāyatrī…
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L4KwcYyYSS4
CC-distribution-Marathonm-2024Download
View Comments
Children should not be beaten at all! Srila Prabhupada
“Now the thing is, children should not be beaten at all, that I have told. They should simply be shown the stick strongly. So if one cannot manage in that way then he is not fit as teacher. If a child is trained properly in Krishna Consciousness, he will never go away. That means he must have two things, love and education.
So if there is beating of child, that will be difficult for him to accept in loving spirit, and when he is old enough he may want to go away--that is the danger. So why these things are going on - marching and chanting japa, insufficient milk, too strict enforcement of time schedules, hitting the small children? Why these things are being imposed? […]
What can I do from such a distant place? They should run and play when they are small children, not forced to chant japa, that is not the way. So I have given you the guiding principles, it is not that I must be consulted with every small detail, that is the business of the in-charge, but if no one is there who can manage in the right way, what can I do?”
(Srila Prabhupada Letter sent to a teacher at the first ISKCON School in Dallas, November 18th, 1972)
“So I have heard that there has been some beating with sticks on the children. Of course I do not know, but that should not be. You may show the stick, threaten, but better art is to somehow or other, even by tricking them, avoid this matter of force and induce them to obey out of loving spirit. That is success of disciplinary method.”
(Srila Prabhupada Letter, November 18th, 1972)
You are missinformed
And don't know what happened at all , everything you wrote is wrong and speculation, please don't spread false rumours and victim blame
Nobody was using av in a fight between 2 ladies
If you were abused by a spiritual leader when you were a child, being terrified and traumatized by the experience
And it takes you years and years to open up and tell someone about it
You don't know what trauma this person has gone true and how it has affected her whole life
This is not some kind of game
för anyone to give their opinion and judgements when you don't have a clue
It's very painful to see victim blaming in some sort of desperation to rectify and minimise and even calling the victim a liar, that's abuse all over again
Put yourself in that girls place or imagen if it happens to your children
Follow darmha and do what's right
At least be honest about that you don't know, that you are speculating
Where is the compassion for the victims
(I don't see any place for new comments, so I chose to reply at this first one. So it's not exactly directed at you, "Dharma". Just my observation I wish to add to this thread)
The authors' points are important because after finally seeing some sort of list of things Swami was accused of, it could just as well be understood, from a compassionate viewpoint and familiarity with Vedic culture, the Swami initially meant well and out of genuine affection wanted to teach the young girl Vedic principles (such as women well endowed vs skinny women), but over time victimized himself. Such is the power of maya.
I'm only saying this to point out there can be another way to look at this, rather than immediately saying he was "grooming" the young student, demonizing him, etc. And forgetting all the good he's done (my own son was in his school and is now happily engaged in Krishna consciousness movement, thanks to Swami and the Mayapur gurukula).
Furthermore, why was there a girl school to begin with? It is something Srila Prabhupada strictly forbid in a conversation with TKG and said it is "dangerous".
My observation is that ISKCON has long been under the sway of feminist leaders. To not have that school, they had threatened Mayapur authorities with misogyny.
But just see the truth about feminism. Feminists should also be held responsible for everything that happens to young women (my generation also, back in the 60's), who are now unprotected by their fathers and so on. They destroyed family culture and replaced husbands with government, GBC, etc.
Everyone, please note the result and let's get back to traditional values to protect not only women, but our men also. Especially, if we take care of our men by taking special care to protect the gurukulas, automatically women and children will be cared for.
Another point, if a young woman is made to feel she was a victim, that is very damaging (I know firsthand, and I didn't let it happen to me). She should recognize her part and learn from it. And parents should accept responsibility for what happens, too. A father is her protector. And mother, too. Where were they when all these things to took place? Had they no way, no intuition, to know something was going on?
And where were Mayapur authorities to allow association between young girls and the Swami?
Things really need to change, starting with the feminized GBC.
Hare Krishna
Just to keep to the truth
The victim ,never changed her story,she never had regression therapy or anything else like it, she never told her husband it only happened 3 times
The timeframe is very clear, it happened over a period of more than 4 years and the abuse happened many many times and she was a minor it's no confusion and it has never been any confusion
He is gaslighting her in his reply to the CPO
I know it's hard to accept that someone that you love and respect can do something so horrific
But the truth is the truth
You can choose to believe whatever you want
But this is the truth'
The last leg of religion
It should be clearly that anyone can commit offense. Even the mother of the Supreme Personality of Godhead. Sacimata in the well known pastime, had to beg forgiveness for her offense to Advaita Acarya. So, it doesn't matter, a man, woman, brahmana, sannyasi or guru. Anyone can commit, but they have to take the remedy.
So, what is the response from the SABHA?
from the above letter: "Where in the history of vaishnavism has any authority of any institution ever come up with such a decision? "
It has become history now, at last. What had to be done long ago. Kṛṣṇa has his ways, as you can see.
which decision?
read it...
It's at the beginning
Anirdeshya Vapu should sue the CPO. Then they will learn to stop acting like a kangaroo court.
One professional lawyer cited two cases (see below) which has similar allegations in materialistic circles but the case did not stand as it was not filed within the duration as per law and there were no objective evidence:
https://www.barandbench.com/columns/me-too-limitation-periods-for-filing-complaints-myths-and-realities
Point is filing the case as per whim (Refer: Section 468(2) in The Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973) can not be done. Moreover without objective evidence they hint the malcious intent to defame the alleged person...Even outside law gives no weightage to "word against word" or cases filed ouside of duration..but for unknown reason CPO and GBC is admant to neither follow sastras nor outside legal laws.
What could be the reasonthat CPO (although seems to be holding legal degree in UK) and GBC never critically examined as to how come the cases popped one after another after 10-15 years. Is there a plot behind to defame one ? They never ruled out this angle and hurried up to announce their judgment.
Another devotee lawyer informed that fBVPS has all right to file legal complain against CPO and GBC under Defamation law of India, Article 19, and CPO and GBC will pay heavy price for it. I only wish and pray that the mistakes done by CPO and GBC do not break faith of so many devotees in ISKCON authority structure and legal order. CPO always advocated to be independent not under GBC and now see the CHAOS !!...and GBC is doing even serious blunder.
So many gurukulis were injured under Avd's mismanagement of Mayapur gurukul. You may not know any of them, or even care a dime for them, but I would say Avd has got what he deserves.
He is a brahmna ... most likely he will not ! But if he did. my lawyer told..CPO & GBC together have no hope and will fail miserably. They would have to pay millions of dollors on losing case. Even as per outside legal standard ....the case proceedings by CPO and GBC is in very poor standing. For some unknown reason GBC is acting under political pressure of some propaganda and Vox Populi. Consequences are likely to be severe for taking agendas led by Dhira Govinda Das , Sanak Risi Das and Damodara Das so seriously !!!
Interestingly GBC is also following the footsteps and the exact mood of CPO:
1. Just like CPO...Giving a decision not on evidence but just on the basis of what the victim told, totally ignoring fBVPS testimony.
2. Just like CPO...Not hearing any appeal from fBVPS.
3.Just like CPO...Making their Judgements open to the public on ISKCON news... real quick and use that to persuade SABHA.
4. Just like CPO...Portray fBVPS as no less than the most fallen person on the planet ...fit to lead a materialistic life.
5. Just like CPO...Leave no room for him to do any service in ISKCON and practically throw him out of ISKCON as a fly is thrown out of milk.
I once thought that GBC represents SP and is thoroughly rooted in sastras, but now I am seriously re-evaluating this assumption !!! I feel GBC is just functioning under the political pressure of some influential reformers and pro-modern leaders who believe in eternal damnation philosophy and care, not even an iota, for any service one has rendered in ISKCON. For them, whatever saves their chair and position is what matters !!! Great future ahead, ISKCON ...Good luck!!!
Hope people especially renounced order, become Krishna Conscious, not Punishment Conscious. One mistake and they will be just thrown out forever eternally.
Among so many the point 10 by Sitalatma shows the graveness.
10. From 2005/2006 - 2010 BVSP began sexually molesting the victim almost daily. As a nightly ritual BVPS would unbutton her choli and feel and rub her breasts and body. He also started doing this to her whilst she was asleep. This abuse started when the victim was left alone at the school with BVPS whilst *** was in Australia.
BVPS insists that it happened only three times. This is what the victim told her husband later on, too and that's how *everybody* remembered it until last year. It also matches with *** story where it was her who was visited by BVPS every night for "exploration of her energies" (she was an adult school principal). *** also states that the reason she came out with her very graphic story is that she heard another woman (the victim from CPO report) was abused. She had no idea for a decade and she was in the thick of it, featuring in so many of CPO's allegations. So BVPS version that it happened three times while *** was away in Australia makes more sense.
Btw, the victim changed her memories after going through "regression therapy", as far as I know. This regression therapy technique is known to implant memories of events that simply didn't happen. The proponents don't call it "implanting", of course, they talk about "uncovering" instead. One devotee woman "uncovered" that throughout her childhood in ISKCON she was attending nightly Satanic Rituals where they would slaughter and eat human babies. Initially she remembered only being raped by another Swami but as time went on cannibalism also got added to her memories. How reliable is it? Not very, so perhaps BVPS version should be considered more seriously.
Hare Krishna
She never changed her story, she never had regression therapy or anything else like it
The timeframe is very clear, she is not confused, she is very clear on what happened
She never told her husband it only happened 3 times
It happened many many times for more than 4 years, and yes she was a minor
It's very painful
Hare Krishna
Hare Krishna
Dandavat pranams
You have wrong information and facts
She never told her husband that it only happened 3 times
She never had regression therapy or anything else like that
She never changed her memories
She never changed her story, she knew all the time what happened to her, it's absolutely no confusion
I know it's hard to accept that a person you love and respect can do something horrible and we try everything we can to find an explanation
I am very close to the victim and family and know exactly what happened
Please stop speculating
She has absolutely no reason to lie , however he has all the reason to
He had the opportunity for 15 years to do something about it but choose not to
Hare Krishna
Well, it's your word against others. In the documents released to the public there is this:
"...it’s critical to note that XXX das explained that BVPS had touched her breasts a few times as a legal adult."
fBVPS/AVd says that victim's initial testimony differs from the final CPO report in this regard. It also differs from the above quoted statement.
I don't insist on the use of regression therapy. It would explain always changing memories, however.
I won't say that the victim is lying either, I think she sincerely believes in what she says now.
You are initiated devotee, Prabhu, but very naive... HG Jvala testimony is reliable, only for the rational mind is unbelievable... but wait some time, Prabhu ! And listen to Her YT channel, must hear ! Because i was also "sure" in the past that there was no sra in our ISKCON. But the swamp is bigger than we think.... hoping to exagerate. Haribol, obeisances.
I saw the video and don't accept that there are were daily ritualistic sacrifices of babies in ISKCON like Kamsa or Hiranyakasipu did.
"only for the rational mind is unbelievable" - sure, unbelievable, irrational, however you want to call it. One must willfully suspend faculties of rational mind to believe it. Why should anyone do it, though? Why not suspend one's rational mind and focus on existence of Santa Claus instead? It will produce far happier "memories".
Heart of stone.
Good luck trying to be a human
Not very, so perhaps BVPS version should be considered more seriously.
So, do you mean to say that ultimately he is correct to state that it happened only three times
I'm saying his version is *more likely* to be correct, given how the victim changes her testimony depending on her visits to therapist. She might be genuinely remembering more things, she might be making them up, and she probably genuinely believes her new memories are real, but to me that kind of testimony sounds unreliable.
Look at this wikepedia article and related stories:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satanic_panic
Hare Krishna
You are missinformed
She never changed her story
She never told her husband it only happened 3times
She never had regression therapy or anything like it
She knows exactly what happened, absolutely no confusion
She was a minor and its no confusion about the either, it started when xxxx was in Australia, the timeframe is very clear
It happened many many times over a span of 4 years
And it even started earlier with other touching
Don't speculate
It's hard to accept that someone you hold dear will commit horrible actions. May thruth prevail
Hare Krishna
Thank you for the clarification. Hare Krishna.
1)I think some devotees here are not having complete information eg.Did he ask forgivness for mistake. This is already asked by him personally to family in 2013 and family had forgiven him that time itself but God knows due to what reasons they wanted to take this issue up again?
2)Devotees are mentioning that there is continuation of mistake which should not be forgiven whereas the mistake took place 3 times that to more than 14 years back and in last 14 years there is no mistake and on top of that there is intense Sadhana which i doubt any devotee here or majority devotees in ISKCON (who we assume to have not committed any mistake) can do that level of
*Sadhana for 14 years eg Chanting 64 rounds,Deity worship,Yagyas,Dham vas,Bhavatam detailed studies and teaching and discussing with Vaishnavas. So basically 5 angas of Bhakti vs All The CPO and GBC prayschitta or Restrictions*....Choose 1 which is more powerful( by the way before choosing just make sure if you know A,B,C,s of Bhakti well....or you can refer to so many quotes and shastric refrences in the above article)
3)Just in case if you choose restrictions more powerful than Bhakti then with that logic person becomes eternally doomed and no hope of reformation this is what exaclty the non vedic mindset thinks.If so then even none of us have chance to get delivered as we might have at least committed some mistake in our Billions millions and countless life times or even in this life.
So lets claim that in ISKCON almost no one can be delivered ever
4) Again same mistake no one is commenting on :
1) Whether Shrila Prabhupda ever dealt in this way
2) What are shastric refrence for restrictions
( If we do not want to follow Shrila Prabhupda, Acharyas and Shastras then sorry to say we are not in ISKCON then why bother to comment here...)
The point 10 by Sitalatma shows the graveness.
10. From 2005/2006 - 2010 BVSP began sexually molesting the victim almost daily. As a nightly ritual BVPS would unbutton her choli and feel and rub her breasts and body. He also started doing this to her whilst she was asleep. This abuse started when the victim was left alone at the school with BVPS whilst *** was in Australia.
Word to word only what is the proof. Everything is goin on on word to word basis.Were you there to see all this.I can put any allegation on you word to word then will that be enough the whole world will be in chaos....use your brain if it ws so severe then why did the family settled it with Maharaj in 2013?
Do not get fooled by these stories.....well framed though...Till the time we have some solid proof we should not believe all this
What do you mean, the family didn't settle anything with bvp in 2013, nobody in the family knew about the sexual abuse until a year ago
Yes, we need to have proof. Agreed. Hare Krishna
Thank you at least you look like open minded else some devotees are just jumping on word to word verdict and even in that they are not considering Maharaj's statements thats so sad and unintelligent.
I hope you have gone through Maharaj's reply to CPO.Hare Krishna and yes good to see Hare Krishna in your message else in other forums there are many times slang words used but not so frequent use of divine words like Hare Krishna
Since we are Hare Krishna people, we need to address a topic by beginning with Hare Krishna and end with Hare Krishna.
My Guru Mahārāja, when he was selecting articles to be published in The Harmonist, if he sees simply that there is..., several times the writer has written "Kṛṣṇa," "Lord Caitanya," like that, he passes immediately: "All right. It's all right. [laughter] It is all right." That so many times he has uttered "Kṛṣṇa" and "Caitanya," so it is all right. [chuckles] So similarly, even if we present our Back to Godhead or any other literature in broken languages, it does not matter, because the glorification of the Lord is there.
Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam 1.5.9-11
—
June 6, 1969, New Vrindavan
prāyaścittam—the process of atonement; atho—therefore; apārtham—useless;
Sometimes one who is very alert so as not to commit sinful acts is victimized by sinful life again. I therefore consider this process of repeated sinning and atoning to be useless. It is like the bathing of an elephant, for an elephant cleanses itself by taking a full bath, but then throws dust over its head and body as soon as it returns to the land.
SB 6.1.10
prāyaścittaṁ vimarśanam
Śukadeva Gosvāmī, the son of Vedavyāsa, answered: My dear King, since acts meant to neutralize impious actions are also fruitive, they will not release one from the tendency to act fruitively. Persons who subject themselves to the rules and regulations of atonement are not at all intelligent. Indeed, they are in the mode of darkness. Unless one is freed from the mode of ignorance, trying to counteract one action through another is useless because this will not uproot one’s desires. Thus even though one may superficially seem pious, he will undoubtedly be prone to act impiously. Therefore real atonement is enlightenment in perfect knowledge, Vedānta, by which one understands the Supreme Absolute Truth.
Purport
The guru, Śukadeva Gosvāmī, has examined Parīkṣit Mahārāja, and it appears that the King has passed one phase of the examination by rejecting the process of atonement because it involves fruitive activities. Now Śukadeva Gosvāmī is suggesting the platform of speculative knowledge. Progressing from karma-kāṇḍa to jñāna-kāṇḍa, he is proposing, prāyaścittaṁ vimarśanam: “Real atonement is full knowledge.” Vimarśana refers to the cultivation of speculative knowledge.
Then having stated karma and yoga, then Śukadeva Gosvāmī gives bhakti in the next verses and in the purport to 15 Prabhupada states:
In this regard, Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī comments that bhakti may be divided into two divisions: (1) santatā, devotional service that continues incessantly with faith and love, and (2) kādācitkī, devotional service that does not continue incessantly but is sometimes awakened. Incessantly flowing devotional service (santatā) may also be divided into two categories: (1) service performed with slight attachment and (2) spontaneous devotional service. Intermittent devotional service (kādācitkī) may be divided into three categories: (1) rāgābhāsamayī, devotional service in which one is almost attached, (2) rāgābhāsa-śūnya-svarūpa-bhūtā, devotional service in which there is no spontaneous love but one likes the constitutional position of serving, and (3) ābhāsa-rūpā, a slight glimpse of devotional service. As for atonement, if one has caught even a slight glimpse of devotional service, all needs to undergo prāyaścitta, atonement, are superseded. Therefore atonement is certainly unnecessary when one has achieved spontaneous love and, above that, attachment with love, which are signs of increasing advancement in kādācitkī. Even in the stage of ābhāsa-rūpā bhakti, all the reactions of sinful life are uprooted and vanquished. Śrīla Jīva Gosvāmī expresses the opinion that the word kārtsnyena means that even if one has a desire to commit sinful actions, the roots of that desire are vanquished merely by ābhāsa-rūpā bhakti. The example of bhāskara, the sun, is most appropriate. The ābhāsa feature of bhakti is compared to dawn, and the accumulation of one’s sinful activities is compared to fog. Since fog does not spread throughout the sky, the sun need do no more than merely manifest its first rays, and the fog immediately disappears. Similarly, if one has even a slight relationship with devotional service, all the fog of his sinful life is immediately vanquished.
To prove this, he narrates the history of Ajamila and the potency of the namabhasa is stated in 6.2.14
One who chants the holy name of the Lord is immediately freed from the reactions of unlimited sins, even if he chants indirectly [to indicate something else], jokingly, for musical entertainment, or even neglectfully. This is accepted by all the learned scholars of the scriptures.
Further in the narration it is stated:
It is said in the Bṛhad-viṣṇu Purāṇa:
nāmno hi yāvatī śaktiḥ
pāpa-nirharaṇe hareḥ
tāvat kartuṁ na śaknoti
pātakaṁ pātakī naraḥ
Also, in the Prema-vivarta by Jagadānanda Paṇḍita it is said:
eka kṛṣṇa-nāme pāpīra yata pāpa-kṣaya
bahu janme sei pāpī karite nāraya
This means that by once chanting the holy name of the Lord, one can be freed from the reactions of more sins that he can even imagine performing. The holy name is so spiritually potent that simply by chanting the holy name one can be freed from the reactions to all sinful activities. What, then, is to be said of those who chant the holy name regularly or worship the Deity regularly? For such purified devotees, freedom from sinful reaction is certainly assured. This does not mean, however, that one should intentionally commit sinful acts and think himself free from the reactions because he is chanting the holy name. Such a mentality is a most abominable offense at the lotus feet of the holy name. Nāmno balād yasya hi pāpa-buddhiḥ: the Lord’s holy name certainly has the potency to neutralize all sinful activities, but if one repeatedly and intentionally commits sins while chanting the holy name, he is most condemned.
https://vedabase.io/en/library/sb/6/13/8-9/
Having taken shelter of Lord Hari's holy name, many think, "We have found a medicine for the disease of all of our sinful reactions." With that belief, they engage in sinful activities such as cheating, speaking untruth and debauchery, then again utter the holy name of Lord Hari and endeavor to cleanse themselves of all those sinful reactions. All such persons are offenders unto the holy name. He who takes shelter of the holy name, having relished spiritual rasa, is no longer attached to material ephemeral objects". It is impossible for him to engage in sinful activities. To chant the holy name after repeatedly committing sins is mere deception. This offense is extremely grievous and it should always be given up.
http://www.ruparaghunathavani.com/uploads/5/0/9/7/5097166/sri_hari-nama_of_bvt_transliteration_and_translation_2017-06-26-a.pdf
So this act does not fall under sinful activity that warrants prayascitta or atonement. The particular act is of aparadha.