Doubful Gopal Das / Children Quotes / Sridhar Continued / 07 24 26

This is the actual path to liberation.

PADA: Gopal das (now deceased). He told my associate "there is only one person in the whole wide world who believes Srila Prabhupada was poisoned." Guess who that was -- PADA editor! Well sorry sir, there are many more, probably thousands more, maybe tens of thousands -- who believe Srila Prabhupada was poisoned. 

But these are the same ilk people who said -- no one believes PADA that there is a mass child abuse problem -- and so on and so forth. They just do not believe us, because they are drinking the GBC propaganda kool aid. 

In any case, Srila Prabhupada is the one who says he is being given poison, not PADA. They always confuse PADA's statements with Srila Prabhupada's, for some odd reason? Heard this many times, PADA is the lone wolf crying in the wilderness, no one cares what he says. 

Well fine, that simply means: the molesting issue, book changes issue, and poison issue were -- ignored by the masses. Nothing to brag about! 

Rather interesting, when we first announced the poison issue in 1997 -- Krishna Kanta, Yaduraj, Kamsahanta, and a few other "ritviks" told me not to introduce it because "we will lose our buildings in India." Then Mukunda UK started to complain that "PADA is a lunatic mad man." So these guys really did not like me forwarding the words of the acharya, and they tried to stop us -- but the truth has prevailed. Yep, buildings where homosexuals and pedophiles are worshiped "as good as God" messiahs are "your buildings." You own this hot mess. 

ys pd 

angel108b@yahoo.com    

=======

Srila Prabhupada Quotes on Child Protection

Concise takeaway:

Prabhupāda’s child‑protection teachings are clear, consistent, and extensive:
he repeatedly instructs no beating, no force, full protection, loving discipline, and emphasizes that children are Vaiṣṇavas, Vaikuṇṭha‑born, and must be treated with the highest care.

Below is the complete, sourced list of his documented child‑protection quotes, organized by theme, each beginning with a Guided Link.

Quotes explicitly forbidding physical punishment

“No physical punishment” —

“Encourage them to chant… but there is no question of force or punishment… never physical punishment is allowed.” — Letter to Aniruddha, Jan 10, 1972 “Child should not be forced” —

“Regarding your question should force be used on children, no, there shall be no forcing the children to do anything. Child should not be forced. This is all nonsense.” — Letter to Brahmanya Tirtha, Dec 10, 1972

Quotes emphasizing protection as a sacred duty “Children must be protected, not given freedom” —

“Child should be protected… According to Vedic civilization, a child, a woman, a brāhmaṇa, a cow, and an old man they should be given protection, not freedom.”
— Room Conversation, July 5, 1975, Chicago “Protection of children gives human 

life its best chance” —

“The protection of children gives the human form of life its best chance to prepare the way of liberty from material bondage.” — SB 1.8.5, Purport “Do not neglect this responsibility” —

“These children are Vaikuṇṭha children… we must be very careful to protect them… That is very great responsibility, do not neglect it.” — Letter to Arundhati, July 30, 1972

Quotes describing children as Vaiṣṇavas / Vaikuṇṭha‑born “These are Vaikuṇṭha children” — “These children are given to us by Kṛṣṇa, they are Vaiṣṇavas… These are not ordinary children, they are Vaikuṇṭha children.” — Letter to Arundhati, July 30, 1972

“Very fortunate children” — “All our children born of a Vaiṣṇava father and mother… are very, very fortunate.” — Lecture, Vṛndāvana, Mar 13, 1974

Quotes prioritizing child‑care over other services“Child‑worship is more important than deity‑worship” — “Child‑worship is more important than deity‑worship… If you cannot spend time with him, stop the duties of pujari.” — Letter to Arundhati, July 30, 1972

Quotes emphasizing loving discipline, not mechanical force“Discipline with love and affection” — “Try as far as possible to discipline them with love and affection… never physical punishment.” — Letter to Aniruddha, Jan 10, 1972 

“Voluntary, loving cooperation” — “Forcing will not make me agree… if there is love, I shall gladly do it… That is bhakti.” — Letter (Gurukula progress), 1972

Quotes stressing nutrition, health, and physical well‑being“Children must be taken care of nicely” — “Every parent wants to see that their children are taken care of very nicely… They must have sufficient milk… If they are undernourished it is not good.” — Letter to Satsvarūpa, Oct 9, 1971

Quotes on the spiritual importance of raising children“If you can make one child Kṛṣṇa conscious…” — “If you can make one child Kṛṣṇa conscious, it is a great service.” — Lecture, New Vrindaban, June 22, 1969 

“Children are our future hopes” — “Please also take care of the children. They are our future hopes… adolescent age is the most dangerous age.” — Letter to Hayagrīva, Nov 7, 1969 

“Do not lose even one Vaiṣṇava child” — "If we neglect somehow or other and if we lose even one Vaiṣṇava, that is very great loss.” — Letter to Stoka‑Kṛṣṇa, June 20, 1972

“Gurukula is our most important project” — “Gurukula is our most important project… If the children are given a Kṛṣṇa conscious education from early childhood then there is great hope for the future of the world.” — Letter, Jan 27, 1973

Quotes on parental duty and spiritual responsibility “Do not become a father unless you can protect the child” — “One should not become a father, one should not become a mother, unless they are able to protect the children from the imminent danger of death.” — Wedding lecture, Montreal, July 22, 1968 

“Raise your child in ideal Kṛṣṇa consciousness” — “You must work together with great responsibility for raising your new child in ideal Kṛṣṇa consciousness.”
— Letter to Jagadīśa, July 9, 1970 

=======

SRIDHARA MAHARAJA CONTINUED

ND: I think you give yourself to much credit. Who would want to kill you. You deserve all our pity and prayers.

PADA: OK so after Sulochana was gone -- the FEDs came to me and said you are next, and now you are saying all this is not a problem. Sulochana getting offed and me almost getting offed is not a problem for Sridhar's people -- since people were already getting offed in the 1940s. It is a trivial problem, people getting offed.

ND: Your reply illustrates several logical inconsistencies and unsupported inferences. First, you accuse me of “mis-citing” your position, yet your own wording repeatedly shifts. At one point you insist you “never said Sridhara is responsible for all the mayhem,” but throughout your writings you repeatedly attribute the promotion of false gurus, the abuse of children, violence against dissenters, institutional corruption, and even attempts on your own life to his influence. 

Saying he was “not the sole promoter” does not materially alter the overall thrust of your argument. The distinction is largely semantic rather than substantive.

PADA: Yeah Sridhar is not the sole person responsible, but since he created false acharyas in the 1930s, he already knew that us dissenters would be in trouble, perhaps fatal trouble, if we protested his second wave of false gurus. So when he said none should protest -- I knew right away, he is making me the same target he made dissenters in the 1930s. He is placing us in danger, he placed a bull's eye on our backs, and he did.

Second, you repeatedly conflate influence with responsibility.

PADA: Srila Prabhupada said Sridhara is responsible, yeah, and we agree. Influence is making things happen direct or indirect, and the things that happened were mass child mistreatment, injured and deceased dissenters etc. He helped set all this in motion, just like he did in 1937. He created a Frankenstein guru in 1937, and then Sridhar became the darling "senior most advisor on the planet" to the 11. 

The 11 commonly said -- Sridhar is their senior advisor / shiksha guru etc., and he was also their position paper dictator. So yes, he was their main advisor in 1978. A person who supports something is acting, and is thus responsible for the subsequent reactions. Never mind he was still propping up Hansadutta in 1985 who was then sending his enforcers to take me out in 1986, and I would have been, without help from the FEDS.

ND: Even if Śrīdhara Mahārāja advised members of the GBC, it does not logically follow that he bears responsibility for every subsequent action those individuals took.

PADA: I never said the overall advisor is then responsible for each and every reaction, but he is generally responsible for encouraging the overall process. And he not only encouraged them, he was trying to take down our protest, so he was double acting -- supporting them and chopping out the opposition.

ND: Adults remain morally accountable for their own decisions. Advising someone does not make one legally or morally responsible for every crime, abuse, or failure committed years later.

PADA: Yes, Sridhara set the wheels in motion for the break up of the Gaudiya Matha, including offing dissenters, and Srila Prabhupada told us,it never recovered 40 years later. He made a mess in 1937 and it never recovered, Srila Prabhupada said that, it was dismantled -- and thus never recovered.

ND: Third, your argument repeatedly relies on guilt by association. Because Hansadutta or Jayatirtha visited Śrīdhara Mahārāja or respected him at one time, you infer that their later misconduct is somehow attributable to him. That conclusion does not follow. Association is not causation.

PADA: He encouraged them and told Hansadutta to remain as guru. Then Hans sent his enforcers out from New Vrndavana to remove me from the planet. Yes, he is causing this by encouraging them.

ND: Fourth, you leap from disagreement to intent. You argue that because Śrīdhara Mahārāja reportedly said “none should protest,” he therefore intended that you specifically should be injured or even killed.

PADA: Well none is no one at all, which means -- also me? How is it not also me? None means no one, that includes me for sure. How can you say none does not include me? None means no one, yes that means me. And I knew right away he was making me a target, do not protest, and I was a target.

ND: That is an extraordinary claim requiring extraordinary evidence. No evidence is presented that he desired, planned, encouraged, or authorised violence against you. Inferring murderous intent from a statement discouraging protest is speculation, not proof.

PADA: He already knew dissenters would be injured or offed after 1937? How did he not know I would also not be? Of course he knew I could be a victim. And I knew at the time, none should protest was making me a target, and I was. He made me a target, I knew that then.

ND: Fifth, your chronology actually weakens your conclusion. If, as you maintain, the GBC later severed ties with Śrīla Bhakti Rakṣaka Śrīdhara Mahārāja, then they evidently did not continue following his guidance.

PADA: You are not reading what I said? I said he made all the founding position papers for the GBC after 1978, which are still standing now on the GBC web sites. They did not remove any of these documents. They did not reject these documents, and there is no GBC statement that they are rejected. 

ND: One can hardly argue that the GBC simultaneously rejected him while continuing to act as his obedient agents. Those two propositions sit uneasily together.

PADA: They did not reject his position papers? Where did I say that, and where did the GBC say that? No, his transcripts are still official GBC documents NOW.

ND: Sixth, your argument is selective. Whenever a GBC decision aligns with your criticism, Śrīdhara Mahārāja is portrayed as the guiding influence. Whenever the GBC departed from him, broke relations with him, ignored his advice, or acted independently, responsibility is shifted back to the GBC.

PADA: Well he was their original cheer leader, and as I said already a number of times, they never removed his position papers transcripts from their site? So he set this in motion, and set us back by curbing our protest.

ND: This allows every negative outcome to be attributed to Śrīdhara Mahārāja while every contrary fact is treated as irrelevant. That is not a consistent standard of reasoning.

PADA: I never said he is solely responsible, but he is a contributor.

ND: Seventh, your conclusion assumes what it is trying to prove. You begin with the premise that Śrīdhara Mahārāja supported “false ācāryas,” and then use that premise as proof that everything flowing from those leaders is his responsibility. That is circular reasoning. The central claim—that his theological advice was wrong—must first be demonstrated rather than assumed.

PADA: Srila Prabhupada himself said Sridhar is responsible. Did Sridhara personally injure of take people out of their bodies himself, not what I said. I said he set all this in motion and Srila Prabhupada says he is responsible for orchestrating this process of false acharyas. And the results are attributed to the original agents who started it. And this is true even in court, the person who encouraged the crime or criminals is considered co-equal guilty.

ND: Finally, historical complexity cannot be reduced to a single explanatory thread. The post-1977 crisis involved the GBC, individual gurus, institutional culture, administrative failures, personal ambition, and many other factors. Assigning a disproportionate share of blame to one adviser oversimplifies a far more complicated history.

PADA: And the person who was advertised as the time as the senior advisor and shiksha guru helped mobilize and encourage all of these factors. I never said he was singular the cause, he contributed.

ND: Criticism of Śrīdhara Mahārāja’s advice is certainly open to debate. What is not established is the much stronger claim that he intended, authorised, or bears responsibility for every subsequent abuse, crime, institutional failure, or act of violence committed by others. Those conclusions simply do not follow from the evidence presented.

PADA: I knew right away his saying none should protest made me a target. And the FEDS called me and said, you are a target, and I was put on FED protection. I survived because the FEDS saved me from his process. I said right away he is making me a target, the FEDS confirmed that, you are a target. Sridhar has no authority to make the 1937 dissenters targets, or me. ys pd

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

HENRY DOKTORSKI on Sulochana's wife's (Jamuna Seward) "new husband." 

PADA: Sulochana told me he has to get his kids out of New Vrndavana because his wife has married a child molester. No wonder he struggled mightily to get them out, and no wonder the regime had to silence him: he was right about this molester and a number of others, evidently including Kirtanananda himself. Yep, this is not the Raghunath Dasa ex-gurukuli in Hawaii.

July 24, 2023: On this date in history 3 years ago, the ISKCON Child Protection Office renders a decision on the case of Raghunath dasa (Ralph Seward) of New Vrindaban:

Yep, molester messiahs ki-jaya sir!

The decision in regards to Ralph Seward (Raghunath das)

This ecclesiastic decision defines the relationship between Raghunath das (legal name, Ralph Seward) and ISKCON New Vrindaban (INV) and its affiliates.

I. Intermediate Restrictions and Requirements for Raghunath das:
Restrictions:

As of July 24, 2023, Raghunath das is prohibited from entering the properties of ISKCON New Vrindaban and its affiliates and/or attending all INV events and activities, and those of its affiliates, either in person or virtually (online), until the following requirements are completed.

Requirements:

1. Raghunath das must obtain a psychological evaluation that includes determining any risk he may present to children by a professional approved by the Child Protection Office (CPO).

2. If therapy/counseling is recommended by the professional performing the psychological evaluation, Raghunath das must continue to see the therapist, as long as the therapist requires, and comply with all actions recommended by the therapist/counselor. The therapist must be one who is approved by the CPO.

3. Raghunath das must submit proof of complying with the above requirements to the temple president of INV, and the Director of the CPO, including results of the psychological evaluation and, if recommended, reports from the therapist/counselor regarding any ongoing counseling or therapies.

4. Raghunath das is responsible for all costs related to fulfilling the above requirements.

5. Raghunath das must write a letter of apology to the victims and submit it to the CPO for distribution.

When Raghunath das submits verification of compliance with all of the above requirements, and the INV temple president, the local GBC, and the CPO all confirm in writing he has satisfied all of the requirements, INV will evaluate the information and determine whether the above restrictions will remain, be removed or adjusted.

II. Permanent Lifetime Restrictions and Requirements for Raghunath das:

1. Raghunath das cannot lead public worship or perform Brahminical/priestly services at INV, and its affiliates, including (but not limited to) Deity worship, going on the altar, performing arati, leading kirtan, giving class, offering a garland to Srila Prabhupada’s murti, performing abhishek or speaking at any event hosted by INV or its affiliates.

2. Raghunath das cannot represent INV or its affiliates in any capacity, hold a leadership or managerial role, or position of trust within ISKCON New Vrindaban or its affiliates, including (but not limited to) temple president, Board member, advisor, or other management position.

3. Raghunath das cannot be named on any legal documents where he is representing INV or its affiliates in any way or signing on their behalf.

4. Raghunath das cannot interact with any children while visiting any INV or its affiliates’ properties (except those children who are his family members). Children are defined as anyone under 18 years of age.

5. Raghunath das is prohibited from entering any INV or its affiliates buildings or properties used for a school, daycare, or other project where educating or caring for children is the primary function.

6. Raghunath das cannot attend any INV or its affiliates functions, gatherings, or events, if a participant expresses to INV’s management or Board member or its affiliates’ Board member or management that they are uncomfortable with his presence. This includes attendance/participation both in person and virtually (online). Raghunath das must leave the function immediately when instructed by 

INV or affiliates’ management or Board member.

7. No gathering, function, or event supported, sponsored, facilitated, or promoted by INV, its representatives, or affiliates can be held at Raghunath das’ home or on any property owned, rented, or otherwise overseen by Raghunath das. This prohibition of INV’s and its affiliates' involvement extends to any gathering, function or event organized, in part or in whole, by Raghunath das, held at any location, including virtually (online).

8. Raghunath das cannot stay overnight or reside in any building or property owned by INV or its affiliates.

9. Any previous CPO restrictions placed on Raghunath das, if not covered in this decision, still apply. He can write to the CPO for clarification should he need it.
If Raghunath das violates any of the above restrictions/requirements, he will be permanently prohibited from entering all the properties of INV, and its affiliates, and attending all INV events and activities, and those of its affiliates, either in person or virtually (online). On behalf of ISKCON New Vrindaban

July 24, 2023

Jaya Krsna das, Temple President
Sarah Ferrer, Child Protection Volunteer
Anuttama Das, GBC