A Letter by Yadavendu Das (UK) + S. Dasi

A Letter By Yaduvendu das

Dear M******** prabhu,

Hari Bol! Yes I get your IRM newsletters and have found them useful. I mean no personal offence, but I find the insistence on trying to make laws from Srila Prabhupada’s simple and generally flexible guidelines to be both neophyte and
fanatical.

I’m not interested in debate on this topic as I feel the IRM position is fundamental and you cannot debate with a fanatic. If you don’t believe me try it next time one knocks on your door clutching a Bible. You may easily defeat them with a higher
argument, but they’ll remain unchanged in their opinion. So what’s the use?

Krishna Consciousness is not a fundamentalist cult. Spiritual life is broad. It is possessed of eternal truths which are applicable to all people in all circumstances at all times. It is only sectarian religions that create narrow and artificial
distinctions – and that is not the Vaishnava way.

The Vedic approach is one of sense; that the greater good must predominate. Thus, a man may be sacrificed for the sake of a village and a village for the sake of a nation etc.

The IRM argument is immediately defeated by saying that Prabhupada could have made his position clear if he did not want the disciplic succession to continue in his organisation. 

[PADA: Not sure how telling ISKCON's little children to worship homosexuals, sexual predators, deviants, drug addicts and / or pedophiles "continues the disciplic succession"? And how is banning, beating, molesting, suing and assassinating dissenters part of Krishna's line of succession? No one ever explains?] 

He was aware of the difficulties that occurred within the Gaudiya Math and could have drummed it into us daily. He didn’t. So we can understand from this that it is not what Prabhupada wanted. Indeed, he often said that a bad uncle is better than no uncle.

[PADA: Gurus who are often found engaged in illicit sex -- with men, women and maybe children, and who are having dissenters banned, beaten, sued and maybe killed, are better than having no guru at all? Well no, even an atheist is not having Vaishnavas banned, beaten, molested, sued and killed. Sulochana said even a dog is not molesting children and orchestrating beatings and murders of Vaishnavas, therefore the GBC are not advanced enough to promote worship of a dog.]

I live in the UK (as you asked) and Prabhupada instructed me personally at Bhaktivedanta Manor to follow the authority of the GBC, saying that’s why he set it up. I didn’t think much of it at the time and continued in my independent way, but I’m 100% sure that he would be prepared to sacrifice / forgo any lesser principle for the higher sake of devotee unity.

Amongst his last instructions in Vrindavan was that we should all work co-operatively together – how about calling that the ‘Final Order’?

Yours sincerely, Yaduvendu

[PADA: We should cooperate with a program that forces children to worship pedophiles as their messiahs, and mass molests children, and bans, beats, sues and kills dissenters? Why would anyone cooperate with that process? OK there is good news, almost no one is cooperating with them. Even in 1988 Lokanath swami said their temples are like ghost towns. Everyone is leaving. ys pd] 

===================

Dear GBC Members,

It has been 28 years since Ravindra Svarupa first promised Satya that Lokanath would never hold a prominent position in ISKCON again.

20 years after being sexually molested by Lokanath, Satya wrote:“We trusted [Ravindra Svarupa], and he nor the GBC never followed through.” https://lokanath.net/satyas-statements-july-2010

It has been 12 years since Lokanath himself offered to resign as an ISKCON-endorsed guru.

In 2011, during the annual GBC meetings in Mumbai, Bhakti Caitanya Swami said,“[Lokanath] came forward and expressed he would stop initiating of his own volition and that’s how it would be presented. There was no resolution, just coming from him.” https://lokanath.net/appendix-g-gbc-meeting-minutes...

Also during the GBC meetings in 2011, Tamohara said to Lokanath, "when you came back to step down, we all felt this sigh of relief. This is a solution.”
If Lokanath will not resign on his own, the GBC must act as leaders and give Lokanath’s child molestation case to the ISKCON Child Protection Office, who are trained and experienced in child protection matters.

It has been one year since the GBC Executive Committee promised Lokanath’s case would be handled by their Child Protection Office.

The GBC set up the CPO precisely to investigate accusations of child maltreatment in the most transparent manner possible. By intervening in this case, in violation of their own policies, the GBC look weak and duplicitous, and give the impression that they are skirting their own policies, compounding historic violations against children to protect powerful ISKCON leaders and gurus.

This is a case of child abuse. The reasoning that it was ‘already handled’ has no merit, because it is the only child abuse case that has not been reviewed by the Child Protection Office. When the CPO was formed in 1998, they reviewed ALL known child abuse cases in ISKCON up to that point, including child abuse cases predating the formation of the CPO, such as child abuse in Mayapur in the 1970s, even though those cases had also been previously investigated by the GBC.
Lokanath’s child molestation case will not be put to rest until the GBC allows the CPO to handle it without interference. The preferential treatment given to Lokanath reeks of corruption and nepotism.

When the GBC Ad Hoc Panel consulted Attorney Justin Starr on this case, he said, "In your shoes, our primary concern would be the fact that this situation increases the future risk of liability if ISKCON does not handle it properly."

Anyone involved in the conspiracy to cover up Lokanath’s sexual abuse against Satya, must come clean and apologize. Devotees are forgiving. Especially when they see that the right thing is being done.

Thank you.

Your servant,
S Dasi