[PADA: Not sure if this is all accurate, but anyway we will comment on the story as it is being presented.]
Hearing of the Main SLP Commenced in Bangalore Case
BY: SUN CORRESPONDENT
Sep 16, 2014 — NEW DELHI, INDIA (SUN) —
[PADA: Sun "Correspondent" is probably Dayarama das (JPS), who told me that I am right, his GBC leaders have been making homosexuals and other fools into their acharyas. How these people even got into a court is beyond my comprehension, homosexuals are God's successors, and thus that agenda is accepted by the courts?]
Today the Supreme Court started their hearing of the main SLP in the Bangalore vs. Mumbai lawsuit. ISKCON's main senior counsel, Sri K. K. Venugopal, was not keeping well (he had fever) and therefore wanted the matter to be adjourned for a week. Madhu Pandit dasa's senior lawyer strongly opposed, however, and there was a heated exchange of words between Madhu Pandit's lawyer and Krishnan Venugopal, the son of K. K. Venugopal who is also senior counsel, but is junior to his father in representing ISKCON reg. in Mumbai.
[PADA: Really? A program that says homosexuals and deviants are Lord Krishna's successor acharyas -- has a lawyer to defend them? Amazing!]
The Judges were inclined to grant the adjournment but as Madhu Pandit's senior was not relenting, the Judges made the decision to hear the matter till lunch and then post it to next week for further hearing. After hearing the matter for more than two hours, the court posted it for hearing on next Thursday, 25 September, 2014.
During the course of the hearing Madhu Pandit's lawyer made the judges go through the 'Direction of Management' of Srila Prabhupada as well as some of the letters of Srila Prabhupada. The senior Judge commented that from the letters, it appears that Srila Prabhupada, apart from being a spiritualist, was a very accomplished administrator. His appreciation of Srila Prabhupada in the open court was very pleasing to hear.
Madhu Pandit's lawyer took the judge through the July 9th, 1977 Letter (appointment of ritviks etc.), indicating a theological discussion, but the senior Judge told Madhu Pandit's lawyer that this is not the issue the court should be involved in, and it this is not the dispute before them.
Madhu Pandit's lawyer said just as all Muslims accept Prophet Mohammad as authority, so everyone in ISKCON accepts Srila Prabhupada. The Judge said, but they may disagree on interpretation of the teaching. So court cannot get involved with that. Fortunately, the Judges did not allow this issue to cloud or derail the main issue.
It is a fact that in Madhu Pandit's suit there is no prayer for enforcement of the Ritvik system in ISKCON. The suit is only for the ownership and management of the ISKCON Temple at Bangalore.
[PADA: OK so lets get this straight, its ok to support a program of worship illicit sex with men, women and children as God's acharyas and messiahs -- because its a matter the court cannot deal with since, its a theological argument? No -- its a basic moral argument, are deviants God's successors or not? Any ten year old child in the USA knows that a program of "deviants as God's successors" is bogus, why is this so baffling for these assembled folks?
Worse, this "clouds the main issue"? Why isn't this the main issue, that saying deviants are acharyas is a criminally FRAUDULENT mis-representation of Srila Prabhupada, ISKCON, dharma, the Vedas, and India's culture and etc? Why are we not asking these judges -- why such a perverted deviation from dharma is being allowed, and why aren't the people promoting this deviation under criminal charges of fraud?
This is similar to what happened in 1997 when we said, this court case should be about the criminal fraud of misrepresenting ISKCON and its aims, ideals, objectives and the instruction of the founder, and moreover saying deviants are acharyas is an attack on India's heritage and culture. But the IRM folks, ok Krishna Kanta, said this is "too heavy, its bad language," and so forth, and they wanted to make a debate based on some inner circle ISKCON legal documents, which avoids the main fraud and misrepresentation complaint.
Of course nowadays we still have people like the GBC gurus / Bhakta das / et al. saying that our complaints are "using bad language." This is why I am so fortunate to have grown up in the USA. If someone walks into a bar in the USA and says, "homosexuals, sexual predators, molesters and criminals are successors to God," that person would be treated very severely by the bar patrons, because people here have basic respect for God. The common man would not allow someone to insult God in this manner. Its amazing to me that this is being allowed, even legally allowed, by these folks?
Of course, since 1977 as soon as we say, homosexuals, sexual predators, molesters and criminals are NOT God's successors, then immediately the GBC and their goody two shoes defenders like Bhakta / Prahlad / Prabhupadnauga EU etc. -- all come out of the wood work and say, oh forsooth this is "stooly language"! We have to allow these deviants to sit in the seat of God's successors, and only use nice language around them, while we get Bhakta das to offer them a chamara fan! We have to "use nice language" regarding the people who created Srila Prabhupada's poison complaint? Amazing cry babies!
I also easily can imagine what would happen to all these assembled deviants in Vedic times, the pious king would take such offenders to task immediately and not allow them to function in his society, -- the whole group would be ALL marked as criminals. Saying deviants are NOT acharyas is what people HAD TO SAY in Vedic times, saying otherwise was FORBIDDEN. Of course this is why the people saying "this is bad language" never debate with us, we defeat them right out of the gate with this one argument alone.
But hey its Kali Yuga, so now, anyone who says deviants are not God's successors is "using bad language" and not only the GBC deviants but even their new followers on Prabhupadanugas EU are crying like a baby that we are insulting the deviants posing as messiahs with "bad language." I thank God every day I grew up in USA, so I'd have the sense to know that one should NOT endorse and defend the people who are insulting God by saying His successors are deviants.
Anyway, we are glad someone had put these documents into court, that is a great start. And Madhu Pandit is the only person with enough sense to even try to forward this in court, so that is also good. Now there are some critics of PADA who say we were causing all the trouble by using bad language, going to the police and media for back up and so on. Well fine, except -- that means none of these folks can defeat our original argument, that deviants are not God's successors? And this means, they are just upset that the police and media backed up my version all along, and they still do today.
These police and media folks are on my side eternally, and so are ALL the people in any USA bar, they are also on my side, as is any ten year old child on my side, and so is God on our side of this argument, God does not want to see deviants to be listed as His guru successors, its just not what He agrees to -- eternally. We will win this eventually, of that I am quite confident, because its what God wants, to see only His pure devotees listed as His successors. Satyam eva jayate. ys pd]
Hearing of the Main SLP Commenced in Bangalore Case
BY: SUN CORRESPONDENT
Sep 16, 2014 — NEW DELHI, INDIA (SUN) —
[PADA: Sun "Correspondent" is probably Dayarama das (JPS), who told me that I am right, his GBC leaders have been making homosexuals and other fools into their acharyas. How these people even got into a court is beyond my comprehension, homosexuals are God's successors, and thus that agenda is accepted by the courts?]
Today the Supreme Court started their hearing of the main SLP in the Bangalore vs. Mumbai lawsuit. ISKCON's main senior counsel, Sri K. K. Venugopal, was not keeping well (he had fever) and therefore wanted the matter to be adjourned for a week. Madhu Pandit dasa's senior lawyer strongly opposed, however, and there was a heated exchange of words between Madhu Pandit's lawyer and Krishnan Venugopal, the son of K. K. Venugopal who is also senior counsel, but is junior to his father in representing ISKCON reg. in Mumbai.
[PADA: Really? A program that says homosexuals and deviants are Lord Krishna's successor acharyas -- has a lawyer to defend them? Amazing!]
The Judges were inclined to grant the adjournment but as Madhu Pandit's senior was not relenting, the Judges made the decision to hear the matter till lunch and then post it to next week for further hearing. After hearing the matter for more than two hours, the court posted it for hearing on next Thursday, 25 September, 2014.
During the course of the hearing Madhu Pandit's lawyer made the judges go through the 'Direction of Management' of Srila Prabhupada as well as some of the letters of Srila Prabhupada. The senior Judge commented that from the letters, it appears that Srila Prabhupada, apart from being a spiritualist, was a very accomplished administrator. His appreciation of Srila Prabhupada in the open court was very pleasing to hear.
Madhu Pandit's lawyer took the judge through the July 9th, 1977 Letter (appointment of ritviks etc.), indicating a theological discussion, but the senior Judge told Madhu Pandit's lawyer that this is not the issue the court should be involved in, and it this is not the dispute before them.
Madhu Pandit's lawyer said just as all Muslims accept Prophet Mohammad as authority, so everyone in ISKCON accepts Srila Prabhupada. The Judge said, but they may disagree on interpretation of the teaching. So court cannot get involved with that. Fortunately, the Judges did not allow this issue to cloud or derail the main issue.
It is a fact that in Madhu Pandit's suit there is no prayer for enforcement of the Ritvik system in ISKCON. The suit is only for the ownership and management of the ISKCON Temple at Bangalore.
[PADA: OK so lets get this straight, its ok to support a program of worship illicit sex with men, women and children as God's acharyas and messiahs -- because its a matter the court cannot deal with since, its a theological argument? No -- its a basic moral argument, are deviants God's successors or not? Any ten year old child in the USA knows that a program of "deviants as God's successors" is bogus, why is this so baffling for these assembled folks?
Worse, this "clouds the main issue"? Why isn't this the main issue, that saying deviants are acharyas is a criminally FRAUDULENT mis-representation of Srila Prabhupada, ISKCON, dharma, the Vedas, and India's culture and etc? Why are we not asking these judges -- why such a perverted deviation from dharma is being allowed, and why aren't the people promoting this deviation under criminal charges of fraud?
This is similar to what happened in 1997 when we said, this court case should be about the criminal fraud of misrepresenting ISKCON and its aims, ideals, objectives and the instruction of the founder, and moreover saying deviants are acharyas is an attack on India's heritage and culture. But the IRM folks, ok Krishna Kanta, said this is "too heavy, its bad language," and so forth, and they wanted to make a debate based on some inner circle ISKCON legal documents, which avoids the main fraud and misrepresentation complaint.
Of course nowadays we still have people like the GBC gurus / Bhakta das / et al. saying that our complaints are "using bad language." This is why I am so fortunate to have grown up in the USA. If someone walks into a bar in the USA and says, "homosexuals, sexual predators, molesters and criminals are successors to God," that person would be treated very severely by the bar patrons, because people here have basic respect for God. The common man would not allow someone to insult God in this manner. Its amazing to me that this is being allowed, even legally allowed, by these folks?
Of course, since 1977 as soon as we say, homosexuals, sexual predators, molesters and criminals are NOT God's successors, then immediately the GBC and their goody two shoes defenders like Bhakta / Prahlad / Prabhupadnauga EU etc. -- all come out of the wood work and say, oh forsooth this is "stooly language"! We have to allow these deviants to sit in the seat of God's successors, and only use nice language around them, while we get Bhakta das to offer them a chamara fan! We have to "use nice language" regarding the people who created Srila Prabhupada's poison complaint? Amazing cry babies!
I also easily can imagine what would happen to all these assembled deviants in Vedic times, the pious king would take such offenders to task immediately and not allow them to function in his society, -- the whole group would be ALL marked as criminals. Saying deviants are NOT acharyas is what people HAD TO SAY in Vedic times, saying otherwise was FORBIDDEN. Of course this is why the people saying "this is bad language" never debate with us, we defeat them right out of the gate with this one argument alone.
But hey its Kali Yuga, so now, anyone who says deviants are not God's successors is "using bad language" and not only the GBC deviants but even their new followers on Prabhupadanugas EU are crying like a baby that we are insulting the deviants posing as messiahs with "bad language." I thank God every day I grew up in USA, so I'd have the sense to know that one should NOT endorse and defend the people who are insulting God by saying His successors are deviants.
Anyway, we are glad someone had put these documents into court, that is a great start. And Madhu Pandit is the only person with enough sense to even try to forward this in court, so that is also good. Now there are some critics of PADA who say we were causing all the trouble by using bad language, going to the police and media for back up and so on. Well fine, except -- that means none of these folks can defeat our original argument, that deviants are not God's successors? And this means, they are just upset that the police and media backed up my version all along, and they still do today.
These police and media folks are on my side eternally, and so are ALL the people in any USA bar, they are also on my side, as is any ten year old child on my side, and so is God on our side of this argument, God does not want to see deviants to be listed as His guru successors, its just not what He agrees to -- eternally. We will win this eventually, of that I am quite confident, because its what God wants, to see only His pure devotees listed as His successors. Satyam eva jayate. ys pd]
What I cannot understand is, why is it when someone goes to court and says homosexuals and child molesters are not acharyas, then the HKC, Prahlad das, Dayalu Nitai, Prabhupadanugas EU, Bhakta das and others attack that person? Why do these people always defend the child molester acharyas program by attacking anyone who tries to bring it down? Anyway, that is why the child molester gurus have stayed in power all this time, these people keep them there since 1977. ys pd
ReplyDelete