Hrdayananda replies / Torben Update 03 10 26

HRDAYANANDA FALL OUT CONTINUES

SRD:

 The following are some exchanges I had with HDG that followed my letter.

In the photo HDG with Sivaram Swami, who also campaigned dismantle ISKCON's CPO as it was, and to defend Laxmimoni, BVP, Keshava Bharati and a number of other individuals accused of child abuse.

---------------------------------------------------------------

Hare Krsna,

I just noticed that Brahmatirtha prabhu edited the list of recipients and most of you were cut out from the last messages I exchanged with HDG. I am adding them here for your reference, I put Maharaj's message in bold.

If we are to give due consideration to the fact that the egregious mishandling of Sapna's case by the GBC Executive Committee, CPOC and Champakalata constitutes the travesty of justice that it really is, and that HDG has personally contributed to this mess with his campaign to dismantle the CPO, Maharaj's current unwillingness to help Sapna is that much more concerning.

Please note that in his last message HDG effectively concedes that his claim/accusation that Kamlesh acted both as the judge and investigator in the case of Laxmimoni was inaccurate.
Given that Maharaj publicly slandered the character and professional integrity of Kamlesh with false accusations, I invited him to do the honorable thing and offer a public retraction and apology.

I hope HDG will take my suggestion under serious consideration.

S Dasa

---------------------------------------

HDG's first reply:

Hare Krishna S Dasa,

Your state:

"In recent years you have vigorously campaigned to discredit and undermine the credibility of the ICPO and its director. Your efforts contributed to the disbandment of what was, in my opinion, the most qualified CPO team ISKCON has had to date.”

Truth: I made no effort to disband an entire CPO team. My comments on the ICPO director were based on very extensive research which I presented more than once to the GBC. There was very solid evidence. Since you have offered no refutation of that evidence, your sweeping generalizations about my motives and logic are insubstantial.

You also state:

"You have consistently maintained that your involvement in the Laxmimoni case was motivated exclusively by concerns about due process. In other words, we are asked to believe that your intervention was driven by a desire to correct institutional injustice.

However, if that were the case, I would have expected that you would have been at least as invested to make sure that the new CPO system and staff be objectively more qualified than the team you fought so hard to remove, but we haven't seen any such concerns from your part.”

Your argument is basically that if I expended energy in the LM case, but did not expend equal energy in several other cases, then my motives could not be sincere. Normally, in analyzing the logical validity of an argument, one can state the argument in more general terms to check its validity. So the argument basically is this:

If there are a number of problems in a related area, and a person with knowledge of one such case raises procedural objections, but does not expend the same amount of energy in all similar cases, then the person’s motive in the first case cannot be sincere or unbiased.

This can be stated as an obviously false claim: Whenever a person tries to correct an apparent injustice, that person’s motives are sincere if, and only if, that person expends an equal or similar amount of energy in every analagous case. This is true regardless of the person’s available time, health, other duties, or familiarity with the circumstances. This is an absolute rule without exceptions.

I will leave all the recipients here to draw their own conclusions.

With best wishes,

HD Goswami

-------------------------------------------------------

S Dasa:

Maharaj,

I cannot speculate what your intentions may have been, but what is obvious is that the outcome your efforts, is that they contributed to the disbandment of the best CPO body ISKCON has ever had.

And now we have a CPO that is, in my view, significantly less qualified.

Let's forget about your motives, do you take responsibility for the consequences of your actions?

Are you willing to do anything to fix this mess?

I addressed your inaccurate claim Kamlesh had served as both the judge and the investigator in the same case, and the only point your raised was that Akuti wasn't interviewed, and I pointed out some weaknesses in what little evidence you provided on the interview.

If you want to make available more evidence, I'd be happy to look at it.

With regards to your unwillingness to help Sana, I am simply pointing of that the contrast of your investment in the case of Laxmimoni, who happens to be your friend, and your lack of interest in Sapna's case, doesn't lend credibility to your claim than you're exclusively motivated by a desire for justice.

-------------------------------------------

HDG wrote:

“He (Kamlesh Krsna das) may not have officially been the judge, but he clearly was involved in deciding what evidence was admissible, and who could testify. That is the role of the judge. So based on my research, yes—officially or unofficially—he was the judge”.

----------------------------------------------

S Dasa:

These are some interesting claims you are making.

Can you provide any evidence to substantiate them?

If you were more familiar with how the CPO actually works, or used to work, before you took your bureaucratic battle axe through it that is, you would know that your accusations are both uninformed and unfounded...

The judges for Laxmimoni's case, as with all CPO adjudications, were selected by the case manager, Laxmimoni was given the opportunity to refuse any judges she believed would be biased against her.

The director has one job:

Singing off on the final decisions of the judges.

That's it!

The director doesn't sit with the judges to discuss the merits of the evidence, witnesses the allegations or the sanctions.

I am curious to know if you would ever consider extending a long overdue public apology to Kamlesh Krsna Prabhu for slandering him in front of the entire society.

"When an honest man realizes that he's mistaken, he either ceases to be mistaken, or he ceases to be honest".

PADA: Yep, Brahmatirtha (Bob Cohen), Mahatma Dasa, Kalakantha, and the Gainesville / Alachua gang in general, support Hridayananda. And he says they were young and immature, which is why we had all these problems. 

OK there are hundreds of millions of young, foolish and immature folks all over the planet, but none of them EVER thinks it is a good idea to have their society's kids worship: homosexuals, pedophiles, perverts, criminals, dope heads, Vodka drunks, porno swamis etc as "God' messiahs" like their program has done. 

This is really not about mature or immature, it is about what is moral and not moral. Did I forget to mention us "dissenters" to the homosexual and pedophile guru parampara (from Vaikuntha?) -- are maybe banned, beaten, sued and -- killed? I personally am glad I stuck up for Vaikuntha, and not their pedo-loka gurus. 

I might eventually get to Vaikuntha sooner or later, they will not get there for many kalpas, or many lives of Brahma, if then. They are insulting the residents of Vaikuntha by linking them to the most abominable lusty pigs and dogs gurus imaginable, and that will not be tolerated by Lord Yamaraja. 

ys pd angel108b@yahoo.com   

====

TORBEN UPDATE

PADA: OK Torben Nielsen and Ajit Krishna dasa had PADA kicked off the ISKCON history forum because I was "making offenses" to their senior leader and guru Bhakti Vikas swami. OK and BVKS is a sannyasa disciple of the Auschwitz for kids Mayapur leader Jayapataka. 

And when a person is voted into their homosexual and pedophile guru program, Torben tells me "BVKS is a strict follower." Well yeah, he strictly follows the homosexual and pedophile guru process, true dat! 

BVKS spokesman Jayadvaita says their gurus are having illicit affairs with men, women and maybe children. Now Torben is lecturing us on what is the bona fide line, and what is not, while he has been promoting their BVKS "illicit sex with men, women and children" acharyas line. I am very proud to announce that BVKS line is avoiding sex with goats acharyas in their line, because yes, in fact they do have some standards for God's messiahs!  

For his part Ajit Krishna NOW says he will now NOT name who is guru is. Yep, probably no doubt because his guru is in the Auschwitz for kids guru sampradaya. Or what? 

Having said that, yes the Siddha Pranali line is not authorized, and moreover they "hold a grudge" against our line. So these quotes are a good collection. Credit to Torben this time!

It is amazing how some of these scholars like Torben, Sridhara Srinivasa etc. will split hairs with me over some obtuse technical points, while their guru sampradaya has less moral codes than "The Servants of Satan Church of San Francisco." Sheesh! ys pd   

ISKCON History by Torben Nielsen

ŚRĪLA PRABHUPĀDA VISITS BHAKTIVINODA ṬHĀKURA’S SON LALITĀ PRASĀDA ṬHĀKURA

THESE ITEMS ARE VERY, VERY PRICELESS THE PAGES ARE IN VERY DECREPIT CONDITION

"I am in due receipt of your letter from Calcutta dated June 12, 1972, and have appreciated the contents. I am especially pleased that you have stayed some days and got the tapes of Lalitā Prasāda Ṭhākura for posterity.

If you send them to Śyāmasundara immediately he has all facilities here to transcribe them, and get them printed immediately. As for the manuscripts, you can call Saccidānanda from Vṛndāvana, he can write in Bengali very nicely and can type also with Bengali typewriter. Tell him to bring the Bengali typewriter with him and type everything on good paper.

But best thing is, I have asked Yādubara to come there to Bīrnagara from Bombay for photographing all of the manuscripts in the possession of Lalitā Prasāda Ṭhākura page by page very completely before it is too late. The pages are in very decrepit condition, so best thing is to request Lalitā Prasāda if we may take care of them by treating them against insects and storing them in a tight, dry storage place where they may be preserved for future generations of Vaiṣṇavas to see the actual handwriting and words of such great saintly persons.

Treat this matter very seriously and thoroughly, and take all precautions to protect this wonderful boon of literatures forever. Yādubara may photograph every page, never mind Bengali or English or any other language, and later we shall see where to send the copies to different places. You also write to Yādubara at Bombay in this connection and request him to join you in Bīrnagara immediately.
I have also written him.

These items are very, very priceless and are a great treasure house of Vaiṣṇava lore, so be very careful in the matter and take all precautions to guard them."

Prabhupāda letter to Acyutānanda, 12th June, 1972

Yes, that is nice, you may continue to photograph all of the manuscripts of Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura and other great ācāryas in our Vaiṣṇava line, but for now do not photograph anything of Lalitā Prasāda's manuscripts. When I go there I shall see. First of all let us see Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura's works, then we shall see further."

Prabhupāda letter to Yādubara, 29th July, 1972

"Regarding Lalitā Prasāda Ṭhākura, as I have advised Acyutānanda above, unless he keeps his promise than we are not interested to publish any of Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura's books. That animosity against Guru Mahārāja is going on, so we shall have nothing to do with it."

Prabhupāda letter to Jayapatākā, 22nd July, 1972

"Regarding Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura's manuscripts, immediately we do not have any program for printing them. You keep them carefully and when I return I shall consider the matter. The translating work can be done both by Rāmānanda and Nirañjana in Benares."

Prabhupāda letter to Yādubara, 21st August, 1972

"I am pleased to hear that the song books and tapes of Lalitā Prasāda Ṭhākura are in New York for being edited and distributed."

Prabhupāda letter to Acyutānanda, 28th June, 1972

"N.B. I have just now got one letter from Acyutānanda Mahārāja from Māyāpura, and his plan is to photograph all of the original manuscripts of Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura which are held by his son, Lalitā Prasāda Ṭhākura, in Bīrnagara.
This is a very, very important work, so I think you are just the right man for going there with Acyutānanda to make photos of each and every page of the old manuscripts as they are in very bad condition."

Prabhupāda letter to Yādubara, 20th June, 1972

NEXT YEAR THIS: I REQUEST YOU NOT TO SEE HIM ANY MORE

"Now, one thing is I understand that in the past you were visiting Lalitā Prasādajī and that you may also be planning to continue to visit him when you return to India. This is not approved by me and I request you not to go to see him anymore. He holds a grudge against my Guru Mahārāja and even if it is transcendental it will gradually appear mundane in our eyes.

Whatever is to be learned of the teachings of Śrīla Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura can be learned from our books. There is no need whatsoever for any outside instruction."
Prabhupāda letter to Gurukṛpā and Yaśodānanda Svāmīs, 25th December, 1973
"That's all right, you can forget the Lalitā Prasāda Ṭhākura chapter for the time being.

Let it be and help Girirāja with the construction work in Bombay immediately.
When I return to India in October I shall see what is the situation and we shall consider further. Lalitā Prasāda Ṭhākura also wants to consult with me so I shall do that." 

Prabhupāda letter to Yādubara, 6th August, 1972

I DON’T KNOW WHERE THESE IDEAS ARE COMING FROM

"One thing is, Śrīmān Lalitā Prasāda Ṭhākura has not fulfilled his promise to give us that place in Bīrnagara for our ISKCON Temple. So I don't want you to mix with him further. I have just got one letter from Ācārya dāsa, wherein he requests to live with Lalitā Prasāda Ṭhākura for taking instruction from him. I do not like this idea; I don't know where these ideas are coming from.

No one should go there anymore.

Let Yādubara take his photos as he has taken so much trouble and they may be valuable for the future, but besides Yādubara no one else should go there, and Ācārya dāsa should not go there either."

Prabhupāda letter to Acyutānanda, 29th July, 1972

THEN THIS: LALITĀ PRASĀDA ṬHĀKURA HAS NOT FULFILLED HIS PROMISE

"I am in due receipt of your letter dated June 16, 1972, along with two tapes and one book. The book contains some derogatory remarks about my Guru Mahārāja, therefore we shall having nothing to do with printing it. In fact, since Lalitā Prasāda Ṭhākura has not fulfilled his promise to give us that Bīrnagara land for our ISKCON center, so we shall not have any more to do with printing any books by Bhaktivinoda Ṭhākura or anyone. Try to induce him to fulfill his promise, otherwise we want nothing more to do with the whole business."

Prabhupāda letter to Acyutānanda, 22nd July, 1972

"Regarding your questions, no, the descendants from Advaita are to be considered as dvijabandhu, that is, unless they are like brāhmaṇas, that is, very highly qualified to know the higher values of life in the Vedic traditional way, so in that way even he is long descended from Advaita, unless he is qualified he cannot be worshipable.

Nityānanda has no seminal descendants; his son Bīrbhadra was never married.
If someone said he is descended from Nityānanda, that means from one of his disciples. These persons may be given some respect, but they are not equal to Advaita. Dvijabandhu means son of a brāhmaṇa father but without the qualifications. Similarly, there are Advaita-bandhus."