100s ISKCON Abuse Victims: No One Took Action

[PADA: OK what I said all along. When women were complaining about a wide range of issues, including child mistreatment, the GBC deputed a gang of "Kshatriya men" (?) to counter the women, and the group became known as the GHQ. GHQ guys also attacked me, no surprises there. 

Meanwhile "100s of children were abused in Mayapur and no one did anything." Well nope not exactly, they did do something, that had us banned, beaten, chased with bats and they took out our associates permanently. They did a lot actually, to counter us, and defend the molester empire. ys pd

angel108b@yahoo.com

KKD: What does one do when disciples defend their gurus even if the gurus have clearly deviated?

In defence of deviated gurus, disciples might say that their guru is doing some divine mysterious lila, an inconceivable pastime or a naughty avadhuta diversion that keeps everyone guessing.

It’s natural to defend one’s guru. It can be done blindly, with uncertainty or with a view for rectification. The less educated the disciples are, the more sentimental, abrasive and fanatical the defence will be. Educated and informed disciples will acknowledge the deviation and wait for rectification or move on to beneficial shiksha while keeping Srila Prabhupada’s teachings at the fore.

I’ve already been contacted by a devotee who has a family-member as a disciple of a guru currently undergoing difficulties, putting disciples in a dilemma. My response is to please direct that family-member to devotees who have personally experienced guru ‘fall-downs.’ These devotees can help confused disciples to process things. Directing confused disciples to authorities who haven’t personally gone through guru ‘fall-downs’ is a bad idea.

Since there have been so many guru ‘fall-downs’ already, there are plenty of devotees who went through it. It’s not the end of the world if your guru ‘falls.’ There is life afterwards. For some, they’ll never let go and remain loyal to fallen gurus for decades. Such disciples who hang on are terrified that it’s a great offence to give up one’s guru.

Another sad feature of guru-deviations is when sentimental and fanatical disciples defend their gurus when it is obvious that the gurus are out of order. Those disciples defend the indefensible. This is where it can get dangerous. There’s no telling how shell-shocked disciples will act in disturbed states of mind.
All the above points to the need for disciples to be properly educated and trained. Without this, we’re left with broken hearts, faith loss or persistent anger and resentment. Guru ‘fall-downs’ can be tough, but the experience will make you wiser, stronger and less gullible the next time around, we hope.
Ys KKD

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

SR DASA: 

Without Prejudice. The following is my reply to Sivaram Maharaj -------------------

Summary of points covered: Sivaram Swami (SRS) appears unable or unwilling to fully acknowledge the extreme severity of the crimes committed by BVP. The sexual abuse of a child carries a long prison sentence! I have communicated with some of the devotees personally involved. In the specific case of BVP, so far only one of his former female students has formally come forward to accuse him of sexually abusing her whilst she was still underage. 

However, I am aware of another 4 girls and 3 boys who also claim to have been sexually abused by BVP. The girls accuse SR of personally witnessing many of BVP's sexual assaults against them. SRS comes across as expressing more concern for the perpetrators than for the victims. 

The insanity of SRS's suggestion that ISKCON owes reparations to child abusers SRS appears to believe that when perpetrators are themselves victims of abuse, that somehow gives them a free pass for the abuse they have themselves perpetrated. SRS seems to underestimate his own personal responsibility that has enabled BVP to remain in a position where he was trusted with access to children, in spite of his long record of child abuse. 

The last point that stands out is the fact that many of the concerns raised by SRS and his disciple Radha Krishna das would disappear if they were better informed on how the CPO actually works. -

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

Hare Krsna Sivaram Maharaj, Please accept my respectful obeisance, All Glories to Srila Prabhupada. I have had the opportunity to read the letters that you, HDG and your disciple Radha Krishna das wrote with regards to the BVP case. As you may be aware, for a number of years now, I have taken an interest in BVP's continued involvement with the school in Mayapur in spite of several attempts by the CPO to stop him, and ample evidence that he has abused many children. 

At the end of this letter, I have included a letter I received from mother Braja Sevaki in 2019. In this letter, she talks about you, Madhava Gauranga (MG) and Sri Radhe (SR), and she expresses some concerns she has about SR and your relationship with her. This letter is quite insightful with regards to the character of BVP and SR, many of her words turned out to be quite prophetic. 

She writes: “Since then, the Sri Radhe thing happened, and I took her on also, and find her easy to defeat: she’s manipulative and nasty, but she’s nowhere near as smart or street savvy as me. I’m an Aussie … she thinks she knows Aussies cos she’s married to Madhava, but she has no clue. She does, however, have a large clue how smart I am, and how close I am to SRS, so I’m about to either end that r/ship she has with him — which she’s only using to promote herself — or I’ll go public about things neither Sri Radhe or SRS want public”. 

In my conversations with Braja Sevaki, she made allegations against SR and MG that are unspeakable in a public forum. I am told however, that somehow she has now made a 180 degree u-turn, and transformed into an ally of SR and MG. It appears that either she overestimated herself, or perhaps she underestimated SR's manipulative skills or both. In your letter, you question the professionalism of the CPO, and you feel that the inclusion of the names of SR and MG in the adjudication document of BVP was entirely inappropriate and that somehow, this demonstrates an unacceptable bias, as well as the inadequacy of Kamlesh Krishna das (CPO director) and Gandharvika dasi (co-director). 

Whereas Radha Krishna das appears to have been deeply concerned by the use of the term 'alleged' in BVP's report, his question is: If these are simply allegations, how can the CPO destroy the life of BVP just on the basis of some unfounded allegations? While he admits that he does not understand the rationale behind the actions taken by the CPO, instead of making inquiries, he simply jumped to his own uninformed conclusions. He also accuses the CPO of leaking confidential documents and the names of the victims. 

I am the first to agree that the CPO is a very long way from where it needs to be with regards to funding, resources, numbers of staff, and sphere of influence. My ideal CPO would require an annual price tag of a couple of hundred thousand dollars, and given that the current budget is only 10k a year, I am of the view that these devotees have been performing an invaluable, but thankless service with a commitment and dedication that is truly outstanding If India had a more competent and responsive legal system, this would undoubtedly be a strong case to press criminal charges against BVP and SR. 

In western countries, they would likely end up on the sex offender's register, serve prison time, and all of them would be barred from having any involvement whatsoever with education and children for the rest of their lives. The CPO uses terms such as 'alleged' and 'more likely than not' for the simple reason that unless a person has been found guilty in a court of law, naming them as a child abuser in any kind of formal document will expose the CPO to legal liabilities. 

Another important point to understand about the workings of the CPO, is that precisely to avoid bias and to try to ensure professionalism, the director, co-director, and case manager do not have any say on the adjudications. Quite simply, they do not have the authority to write or change the verdict of the judges. The names of the judges that serve on any CPO case are approved by both parties, they evaluate all the evidence available and then submit their conclusion to the CPO director, who is not allowed to alter it. 

Somewhere between 2013/14, MG was informed that BVP had sexually abused one of the students, although he states that at the time he was under the impression that the victim was over the age of 18 when the abuse was perpetrated. This means that by the year 2015, when the CPO investigated the extensive abuse SR perpetrated against her students and the following year, when the documentary 'Cost of Silence' was released, MG was already aware that BVP was a sexual predator. 

If MG and SR were as interested in the truth and the protection of children as they claim, these would have been golden opportunities for them to come forward and report BVP. Not only did MG fail to report him, but he went the extra mile and mounted a vocal online campaign in defense of BVP, SR and the school. It was not until early this year, after one of BVP's victims filed a report with the CPO that personally implicated both, SR and MG, that they decided to come out with their own testimonies. 

SR and MG have had many years to report BVP, but instead, they never reported the problems and continued to enjoy all the perks that came with the 'job', and only now that their position is in jeopardy, they have come forward to plea their case as 'victims'. Unfortunately, the choice of their timing does not do them any favors, for it indicates that if the victim had not come forward in the first place, they never would have and that their primary motive was not a genuine concern for the welfare of the students, but rather, an attempt to salvage their images and for damage control. 

It is my understanding that it was SR herself that sent out her testimony to many senior devotees, which included her name and the name of one of the victims. Because of the shocking content of her testimony, once so enough people read this document, it was only a matter of time before it became widely available. Ironically, it wasn't the CPO that released the involvement of SR and MG, as well as the identity of one of the victims to the world, they were actually disclosed by SR and MG themselves in their testimony, long before the CPO report came out! 

I inquired from the CPO director and was informed that the un-redacted version of BVP's adjudication was only sent to BVP and one of the victims, as is customary in CPO adjudications. But somehow, it is now plastered all over the internet. It is clear that someone leaked this confidential document, but it wasn't the CPO! 

With regards to the involvement of SR and MG, it is important to acknowledge that our past may explain our current challenges, but it will not and cannot take responsibility for our present, actions and choices. Given their trajectory, their complex history and conduct in the school, they too are victims, just as they are perpetrators and enablers of child abuse all at once. 

It is important that all of these diverse aspects are acknowledged. The fact that they are victims does not negate nor exonerate their responsibility as both, enablers and perpetrators. If only you had taken the time to read SR's 2015 CPO case files, you would know that she bullied and terrorized her students and the parents over the course of many years. 

So, while SR is the victim of extreme pastoral, sexual abuse by BVP, she cannot avoid her personal responsibilities for the abuse she perpetrated, facilitated and failed to report. At the same time, regardless of what may have been her motives, I highly commend her for coming forward, for it is precisely this sort of courage that is required to open the eyes of the GBC and the ISKCON community at large of the extent and gravity of the dangerous behavior and dishonest/manipulative character of BVP. 

As a victim, coming forward is an act of great courage, for it requires them to willingly walk into the frightening crucible of the messy ISKCON political and inadequate justice system. Nonetheless, this offers the best chance to ensure that these perpetrators will not have the opportunity to abuse more victims. 

Even if we accept that MG genuinely believed that the victim that confided in him was over the age of 18 at the time of the abuse, as the Dean of the school, it was nonetheless his responsibility to ascertain whether his assumption was correct. It was also his duty to ascertain the exact age of the victim at the time of the incident, and to report BVP to the CPO, or at the very least to the Sannyas Ministry. 

As a matter of fact, MG's defense is beyond ridiculous; it goes something like this: 'At the time, I didn't think that BVP was a child abuser. I only thought that he was a sexual predator who had broken his Sannyas vows and taken advantage of his position to abuse his (adult) student, that's why I didn't see the need to report the incident, and decided to defend him instead'. 

In short, your exclusive focus on the role of SR and MG as victims, presents a partial perspective at best, but more importantly, it adds insult to injury to their many victims. Further, it suggests an inability or unwillingness on your part to understand the complex nature and gravity of this case. The sentiments of support for child abusers conveyed in your letter discourage victims from reporting and thus further compound the problem. 

Given their decades long involvement in the case of BVP, the school and the abuse they personally perpetrated, enabled or failed to report, the inclusion of the names of SR and MG in the BVP case-file is not only entirely appropriate and justified, but necessary. 

You brought up B.G. 9.30 with regards to BVP, which is something that Bhaktivikash Swami and others have done in the past to justify and or excuse the abuse of countless Vaishnava children perpetrated by BVP and others. This is a serious misunderstanding / deviation of the philosophy that would deserve an essay just to address this very point. 

It was introduced by some GBCs around 1990, and it has now become so entrenched in the collective ISKCON ideology that it may take years to correct it. There is a 1997 GBC resolution that specifically establishes that child abuse is a Vaishnava Aparadha that must not be mistaken for a mere 'fall-down'. 

If BVP had gone to see prostitutes, or engaged in some other form of consensual sex with adults, that would have been a 'fall-down'! The beating and sexual abuse of so many Vaishnava children constitute egregious criminal aggressions, as well as the most severe forms of vaishnava aparadha. 

"THAT the GBC Body hereby declares that the International Society for Krishna Consciousness does not condone abuse of any kind, especially that which is directed towards dependents such as women, children, aged and cows. Battery, verbal and emotional abuse are destructive to the devotional creeper and thus considered serious Vaisnava aparadhas. Any attempt to justify this type of abusive mentality on the basis of sastra is misconstrued and is firmly rejected by all practicing Vaisnavas." https://gbc.iskcon.org/1997 

This is in line with Srila Prabhupada's statement from the purport of Srimad Bhagavatam 4.26.24: “The conclusion is that if Krsna consciousness is covered by material sins, one can eliminate the sins simply by chanting the Hare Krsna mantra, but if one pollutes his Krsna consciousness by offending a brahmana or Vaishnava, one cannot revive it until one properly atones for the sin by pleasing the offended Vaishnava or brahmana.” 

The final sentence of this purport is crystal clear: “A Vaishnava-aparadha cannot be atoned by any means other than by begging the pardon of the offended Vaishnava”. Dismissing as 'an accidental fall-down' the decades long history of abuse BVP perpetrated on dozens of vaishnava children, is a dishonest and manipulative attempt to minimize and exonerate a repeat sexual predator: BVP. I exhort you to never again conflate an "accidental fall down" with the grievous Vaishnava aparadha that is the sexual or physical abuse of a devotee child. 

There is an ocean of difference between them and what must be done to remedy the two. You have attempted to tie the case of Laxmimoni and BVP together as you believe that both of them have been unfairly treated by the CPO. These two cases do share some important similarities, in that both of them are personally responsible for the abuse of dozens of Vaishnava children over the course of decades, and both of them have committed crimes that warrant prison time. 

As was predictable, Hridayanada Maharaj has also jumped at the opportunity to try and resuscitate his hope to see Laxmimoni's case reviewed. Even though he has been presented with ample evidence demonstrating that his concerns are baseless, this does not appear to matter to him. Not only did he not show any concern for the victims, but he also placed the full weight of his word and status to defend his child abuser friend. 

I invite you to consider what would happen to ISKCON if every time a perpetrator is sanctioned, the CPO gave in to the pressures and lobbying of the friends and supporters that demand that their favorite child abuser receives a preferential treatment. This is precisely why the CPO must have the freedom to operate fully independent of the GBC and other external influences. In the purport to B.G. 9.30 Srila Prabhupada states: “No one should take advantage of this verse and commit nonsense and think that he is still a devotee. If he does not improve in his character by devotional service, then it is to be understood that he is not a high devotee”. 

I will posit that if you honestly and objectively consider the quotes above in proper light and free from any sentimental attachments, you will agree that your claim, that by Krsna's estimation BVP and Laxmimoni are to be considered saintly, is indefensible and ludicrous. 

I fully support the suggestion made by the CPO panelists and echoed in your letter that there is a need to overhaul child protection in Mayapur, starting with a thorough and professional investigation into the responsibility of devotees like MG, SR, Priti Vardhana Swami, and Subekshna, who have been involved in BVP's school for so many years. How long have they really known that BVP was sexually abusing the students? 

It is both ironic and cruel that in the same letter you request reparations for the victims AND their perpetrators. Not only that, you gave greater emphasis to the need for reparations to SR, MG and BVP, than you did for their many victims, which combined, number in the hundreds. 

Reparations to their victims ought to be the topmost priority. Who in their right mind would request that a sex offender who has abused so many children ought to be compensated? I am curious if you think that ISKCON ought to pay reparations only to BVP or if you think that in the name of fairness, ISKCON owes reparations to all child abusers? 

It is startling how you fail to see the problem with this culture that you are promoting and reinforcing, which prioritizes the protection and elevation of the needs of the perpetrators over those of their victims! 

The scriptures do not recommend that reparations be made to the perpetrators of vaishnava aparada. Nobody advocated that Jagai and Madhai or Dhurvasa Muni were deserving of reparations for the troubles they underwent as a consequence of their vaishnava aparada. If we look at the pastime of Jagai and Madhai, we see that though fully reformed and perfect they spent the rest of their lives washing the ghath on the Ganga, remorseful and aware of the extent of the disturbance they had caused. They certainly didn't strive for any position of significance. 

Thus far the conduct of BVP suggests that this redeeming honesty, humility and remorse are absent on his part. I agree that reparations are due, and I appreciate that you recognized at least some of your own responsibility as a former member of the GBC. I am, however, of the view that perhaps your responsibility is far greater than what you have acknowledged so far. Seen as BVP's record of abusing children dates back to the early '80s, and that you have been his friend for many years, it is safe to assume that this is not the first time you hear that BVP has abused children. 

Over the years, there has been a triumvirate composed of yourself, Govinda Maharaj and Indradyumna Swami, where you have consistently and publicly offered endorsement, support and protection to BVP and other known child abusers. A couple of Indradyumna Maharaja's disciples removed their children from BVP's school because their children were being abused and mistreated, I was told by a disciple of Indradyumna Maharaj that he went so far as to request them to send their children back to the school. 

There's a very long list of influential ISCKON leaders that endorsed and supported BVP in spite of his alarming track record. Noteworthy among them feature Sesa das and Jayapataka Maharaja. For instance, the 2000 CPO resoultion on BVP states that after the period of restrictions, he may resume his involvement in education with the blessing of the Ministry of Education, which Sesa das is responsible for having issued. 

Jayapataka Maharaja is one of the few individuals who actually had the authority to remove BVP from the school. However, he chose to look the other way! This support that you and so many of your senior Godbrothers have freely showered on BVP is precisely what has enabled him and to continue abusing countless children for so many years. 

If you had done the only sensible thing when the first reports of abuse came out, you would have spared the girls that BVP abused more recently. But you chose to ignore the child abuse and continue to endorse BVP. I cannot think of even one prominent ISKCON leader that has made any serious attempt to implement a zero tolerance policy for child abuse. 

To put it quite simply, there is blood on your hands! This not only applies to you personally, but also to your fellow godbrothers who have continued to support, endorse and thus enable BVP over the years! You say that BVP wasn't born an abuser, which is a claim that you wouldn't possibly be able to verify, nor is it of any relevance. 

The fact of the matter is that he has one of the longest, if not THE longest, trajectory of abusing children in ISKCON. Your attempt to highlight his contributions to ISKCON are miss-timed at best, inconsiderate and offensive of the devastation he has caused to his victims at worst. The sexual abuse of a minor is a criminal offense that comes with considerable prison time. Whether BVP has made some positive contributions is irrelevant and does not diminish the severity of his crime. 

This is a stain that will categorically overshadow any positive work he may have ever done. I can't help noting that if you had been a better friend to BVP, instead of continuing to ignore his history and endorsing his involvement in education. The only loving and responsible thing to do would have been to encourage him to resign from education, and if he didn't, ensure he was removed. 

Did you actually believe that having someone with such an extensive track record of child abuse running a school was a good idea!? By publicly fraternizing with this known offender, you and your godbrothers gave your certificate of warranty that he was a trustworthy and respectable individual, you failed to protect the children, society and ISCKON at large, and you also failed BVP as a friend. 

With your endorsement you also placed his naive or uninformed followers in harms way. It is only reasonable that your conduct would lead these new devotees to assume that, surely if so many senior devotees are endorsing BVP he must be of good character and dismiss whatever warnings or rumors of child abuse they may come across. 

I remember that in 2006, when myself and a number of former students from the Vrindavana Gurukula approached the CPO to request a review of the case of Gauri das for excessive and disproportionate use of corporal punishments, you again offered the weight of your word and standing in defense of the perpetrator, just as you have done for Lokanath. 

Over the years, you and many other GBCs have repeatedly placed your neck and credibility on the line to defend child abusers, but to the best of my knowledge, you have never done anything remotely comparable to defend the victims of child abuse. Yes, you have often spoken on the importance of child protection, but I have never seen you take a public and controversial stance, that came with any personal risk and cost, against a known offender to ensure the protection of their victims and the punishment of perpetrators. 

I was just recently informed that the sexual abuse of children in the Vrindavana Gurukula still remains a current problem. Since 2008, when Gopal Krsna Maharaj took over the management of the school, I have seen dozens of reports detailing many different kinds of child abuse. 

The victims are now in the hundreds and even though the GBC has been aware of the problem for a long time, they still choose to look the other way! You suggest that the GBC owes apologies to the victims and though I certainly agree, it is important to note that the only real apology that matters is one that is followed by a change in the very conduct that caused the apology to be required in the first place. 

Otherwise, it will be nothing but a meaningless publicity stunt. An apology that is not followed by a drastic change in the way you and the GBC understand, prioritize and fund child protection is of very little value. Is there any hope that we will see you do something remarkably different this time? Will you actually set the example by offering a public apology to the victims of BVP for your personal contribution to their abuse that resulted from the decades of support and endorsement that you have offered to a known child abuser? 

That would be an excruciating, but meaningful apology and one of most real and concrete step you can take to offer tangible reparations. Time is running out! If devotees from your generation do not rectify this problem before you depart, you will leave a legacy of tolerating and endorsing child abuse. 

A legacy that says that the abuse of vaishnava children is not a matter that was important enough to deserve your priority and necessary funding. When the direct disciples of Srila Prabhupada, those who helped establish ISKCON leave this legacy, what hope is there that the following generations will do any better? 

Kamlesh Krishna Prabhu is currently serving as a Magistrate for His Majesty King Charles the III. Both him and Gandharvika Mataji hold an MA in Advanced Child Protection. They are by far some of the most qualified devotees ever to have served on the CPO. Your letter indicates that you did not make any efforts to consult with them to try to understand their perspective, reasons and way of operating. 

Given your long standing relationship with them, it is certain that they would have appreciated it if you had reached out before requesting their dismissal on the whimsical basis that you are displeased with your limited understanding of how the case was handled. Will you also demand that the GBC either shut down or replace the management of the Vrindavana Gurukula that has overseen the abuse of literally hundreds of children over the last 15 years? 

Unfortunately, with the Lokanath case, the GBC set the precedent that they will compromise on principles and yield to those who complain the loudest and can cause them the most problems. This was very shortsighted. Perhaps they thought that doing so would make the Lokanath problem go away. 

Nonetheless, with this precedent we can now expect that every child abuser that is unhappy with their punishments will do everything in their power to throw the biggest tantrum they can to try and influence the GBCs to once again compromise on their principles and the purity of Srila Prabhupada's Movement, to make yet another exception. 

This is precisely why the US government has a no negotiation policy with terrorists! So now it was only predictable that BVP and his followers would do their very best to give raise hell for the GBCs. In her letter, Braja Sevaki expresses her opinion that SR is highly manipulative and that you are naive. I must concur with her, Maharaja, I think you have been played! It would appear that on account of a misplaced sense of friendship and sentimental attachment to BVP, SR and MG, you have allowed yourself to be employed in the defense of the perpetrators. You bought into an obfuscated version of events that is not well aligned with the truth. 

Instead of taking the time to establish the facts, you have allowed SR and MG to convince you that the aggressors are victims, and you have now sidelined and trampled all over the only true victims in this story, the former students of BVP. You mounted a defense in favor of those who enabled and perpetrated the abuse in the first place, and have once again, placed the full weight and credibility of your word and standing in the service and defense of those who have abused vaishnava children. 

Aspiring to serve the Vaishnavas, SR das 

---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Braja Sorensen <braja.sorensen@gmail.com> 

Date: Tue, Feb 26, 2019, 22:36 Subject: Pt 2 

To: SR Haribol …watched part 2, it was really well done, and I particularly appreciate you outing Sri Radhe that way…the timing is brilliant, and if the remove Kam & Gandharvika now, it will lead to a mess they’ll never be able to clean up. 

Something like this: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/.../Pope-Francis-proved... Let me know if there’s anything I can do from here to help. I’m close to Sivarama Swami — I work with him in writing/editing his books — but I’m not a “defender” of anyone: my loyalty lies with Srila Prabhupada’s desires, nothing else. 

He just arrived here in Mayapur last night, and I’m meeting with him later. One thing that will be discussed is his “new” relationship with Madhava Gauranga and Sri Radhe, who both targeted him like mad and act like he’s their supporter. 

I gave him hell last year when he invited them to a luncheon, and one of the girls whom she’d abused was there, cowering, trying to avoid everything, while Sri Radhe pushed herself forward at every opportunity, dissing the disciples, making herself centre stage, and having zero regard for anyone else — naturally. 

I finally pushed her out the way and told her to “stand back. Do it. Now.” and she did. I then turned to SRS and told him, “We’ll talk about THIS later….” and later is now. He’s also dismissive of, and not helpful at all to, Gandharvika, one of his most senior disciples, treats her like she’s wrong and foolish and gets angry at her if she tries to discuss it with him. 

So it’s time he was brought to the mat and made to understand where this nonsense is going to leave him. He is, in many ways, naive: he has long been friends with Naresh, though only when he visits Mayapur…just that he appreciates the odd lunch he has with Naresh, but the whole family shows up, and Naresh forces them on him, and he is suddenly like some “family guru.” 

They’re using him, and I’m not sure I want any kind of association or involvement with someone who is not willing to deal in truths. I’ll let you know how that goes. I’m also willing to do something here in Mayapur, but would need some direction and approval and guidance from Gandharvika and her husband. 

Your video says there’s no CPT here, though Gandharvika says someone called Ghyanashyama is doing it. Never heard of him, don’t know who that is, but he’s obviously failing if no cases have been reported. I know of several that were swept away: one in particular that they lambasted an innocent boy for — labelling him a pedophile and stalker amongst the girls at the school, while in fact it was one of the girls’ fathers who was never brought to task or questioned, yet who arranged an overnight visit to Calcutta with all the girls, which was never approved by the parents of the girls, and which the father attended…most notable was the choice of accommodation: not the temple guesthouse, not Gita Bhavan Guesthouse, not any other ISKCON-affiliated guesthouse, but rather a seedy hotel in Free School Street, itself a seedy, low budget, tourist spot for backpackers, well known for easy accessibility to drugs. 

I wouldn’t stay there myself, yet these 13/14 yr old girls were in hotel rooms and one father was their “minder.” Odd how he spent most of his time in their rooms…. Meanwhile this boy sought my help, and I gave it: his parents were the principles of the Bhaktivedanta Day School, the public school outside the grounds which Bhakti Purusottama Swami runs…BPS also sought my assistance, and we met a few times and this young boy gave evidence, messages, photos, texts, all of it, which proved he had been set up. 

It was a sordid mess, and in the end the family left Mayapur completely, which is a sorry state of affairs as they were a dignified, well-qualified, and spotless South Indian couple who’d lived in this community for over 20 yrs. I really would like to be of help here. I also was involved in the BVPS thing, even unwillingly and because someone lied and said I was “helping the CPT,” and BVPS, who considered me a friend and used to tell the girls in the school that “the best example of female intelligence in ISKCON is Braja Sevaki,” dumped me like a hot rock without a word of discussion, slammed me to all the school members and staff….I was “out.” 

Though honestly I was never one of his “people,” I never did like that atmosphere. He and I used to engage in long philosophical talks, and that was what I liked about him. After this, he came to my home when he knew my husband was overseas. He came alone (too weird), and although he was already in the house and sitting down before I realised his servant had left him at the door, I didn’t want him there. I asked him what he was doing, and he said “It’s better this way, we can speak clearly.” I picked up a chair and moved it right next to the still open front door, and sat down. He said “close the door, sound carries in these buildings.” 

I said, “No. We’re good.” A look of anger flashed over his face. I had expected that…but I was well aware I was in for some interesting times… In what should be a person to person conversation with you or someone else, I will say this format leaves a lot to be desired (email). Suffice to say he called me a “c*nt,” he said the most disgusting things about the then CPT representative, Ramadevi Dasi, a Prabhupada disciple. 

Granted, she was an absolute and utter failure in that role; also, she had an axe to grind against BVPS, so she made things worse. She’d also lied and told him I was helping her with her investigation: I never did, and never would have. I don’t like her, and I was well aware of absolutely and disgracefully unqualified she was. Still, lies or not, his response to her information about me was enough to destroy our r/ship — a loss I’ve never lamented, nor tried to amend, as so much was coming to light, and anyway, he didn’t even ask me…not once. 

He simply made me his enemy, and it ended with him coming over alone and calling me that. Since then, the Sri Radhe thing happened, and I took her on also, and find her easy to defeat: she’s manipulative and nasty, but she’s nowhere near as smart or street savvy as me. I’m an Aussie…she thinks she knows Aussies cos she’s married to Madhava, but she has no clue. She does, however, have a large clue how smart I am, and how close I am to SRS, so I’m about to either end that r/ship she has with him — which she’s only using to promote herself — or I’ll go public about things neither Sri Radhe or SRS want public. 

One element in all this is Madhava’s position in Mayapur. It’s well known that he can interfere and destroy a person’s chances of being allowed back into Mayapur. While my husband and I have lived here nearly 20 years, if I do anything against his ridiculous so-called “wife,” he’ll ensure I don’t get permission for a visa next time I apply. My husband was angry when he watched your video and asked why the Vrindavan school teachers were so “stupid” to be “scared of losing their jobs,” and couldn’t understand how that was an issue. 

I told him that if I came forward with anything about Sri Radhe, that Madhava would ensure I would lose my home here. He then understood. So in that way, there are people in ISKCON who will manipulate so many with so much lying and build a critic-free zone that they can continue to use as their field of enjoyment. Whatever I can do, I will. I’d rather live anywhere than be here and ignore what is obvious. 

The reason I’ve never said anything is that to be honest, I’ve never really kept up with anything in that field: I hear of it, but I don’t know the details. I do know of the abuse BVPS has inflicted upon the mothers of girls in his schools: berating and abusing them verbally for an hour at a time, screaming at them, because they dared to approach him and question him, Sri Radhe, the accusations, etc. Many lived in fear, many were simply horrifically verbally abused in public. 

He called one devotee, an absolute saintly woman named Xxxxxx, “a piece of South American filth,” and said he didn’t have to listen to her, she didn’t belong, she was a failure, she was useless, on and on and on. He did the same to another similarly saintly woman, Xxxxxx devi dasi, who objected to the “hold” Sri Radhe had on her daughters. Her youngest, Xxxxx, is the one who was in the room at Sivarama Swami’s function when her abuser, Sri Radhe, showed up. 

SRS and I fell out after that, briefly, but I don’t like to fall out with people via sms or email: we said we’d discuss it when we next met. That is tomorrow. Sorry for the length. As you might well be aware, there’s a lot of information and history lying around, but with no structure or process prevalent in a community, no timeline, record keeping, or protection, then coming forward is usually not even thought of…what for, just to relate how someone like BVPS “spoke badly to me once”? But when combined, those stories make a strong case about an unstable, reckless, arrogant person who shouldn’t be anywhere near humans, what to speak of children… Your servant Braja Sevaki dd