PADA: Thanks for that information prabhu, Mathura Pati [Prabhupadanugas EU] visits Madhu Pandit's temple in Bangalore. I have not heard anything but lets hope so. He declared war on all the other Prabhupadanugas and started working with Radhanath's cheer leaders like Bhakta das and Bhavananda's writer Hari Sauri, so lets hope he finally starts to realize, he should NOT be working with GBC's fan club folks, and he should be working with us -- the Prabhupadanugas.
Actually no one was using the "Prabhupadanugas" title until I started to place it on my 1984 publications, and then many other folks hi-jacked it from there. I am very confident he will eventually realize -- his idea of hooking his horse to the GBC sympathizer wagon was and is -- a mistake. It also looks like him and Hitler-pada Mukunda had a falling out, and he is de-linking from Purujit's changed Gita, so we are maybe the only camp left remaining. He thus needs to work with us or no one, hee hee.
ys pd angel108b@yahoo.com
======
Supreme Court Review Delayed Again as Judge Steps Aside and Former Auditor Retracts Affidavit
ISKCON Mumbai’s bid to overturn the May 2025 ruling that gave the Hare Krishna temple in Bengaluru to ISKCON Bangalore must wait for a third bench after a judge recused himself on 5 October. Meanwhile the former auditor whose affidavit Mumbai had relied on is trying to take it back.
NEW DELHI, India — Justice Manoj Misra of the Supreme Court has recused himself, citing personal reasons, from hearing ISKCON Mumbai’s review petitions against the court’s May 2025 judgment on the Bengaluru Hare Krishna temple.[1] With a second member of the bench due to retire in November, the papers have gone back to the Chief Justice of India so that a new bench can be formed, the second reconstitution since the review was referred to a larger bench.
ISKCON Mumbai’s bid to overturn the May 2025 ruling that gave the Hare Krishna temple in Bengaluru to ISKCON Bangalore must wait for a third bench after a judge recused himself on 5 October. Meanwhile the former auditor whose affidavit Mumbai had relied on is trying to take it back.
NEW DELHI, India — Justice Manoj Misra of the Supreme Court has recused himself, citing personal reasons, from hearing ISKCON Mumbai’s review petitions against the court’s May 2025 judgment on the Bengaluru Hare Krishna temple.[1] With a second member of the bench due to retire in November, the papers have gone back to the Chief Justice of India so that a new bench can be formed, the second reconstitution since the review was referred to a larger bench.
The court has not yet heard the review on its merits. ISKCON Mumbai argues that the Bangalore society was only its branch. ISKCON Bangalore, led by Madhu Pandit Dasa, says it is an independent society that has managed the temple for decades.[2]
What the court said on 5 October
A three-judge bench of Justices MM Sundresh, Satish Chandra Sharma and PK Mishra had been hearing the review petitions. It was later reconstituted with Justice Manoj Misra in place of Justice PK Mishra. On 5 October the court said that Justice Misra was recusing himself for personal reasons and that Justice Sharma is due to retire in November, so the bench will have to be reconstituted once again.[1] The order reads:
“The Registry is directed to place the papers of the present matters before Hon’ble the Chief Justice of India for reconstitution of a Bench, as one of us, (Hon’ble Manoj Misra, J.) would like to recuse himself from hearing this matter.”Supreme Court of India, order of 5 October 2026, as reported by Bar and Bench[1]
At an earlier hearing, ISKCON Mumbai’s counsel argued that several judicial admissions had not been considered in the May 2025 judgment and that ISKCON Mumbai was the parent society, of which ISKCON Bangalore was a subsidiary that could not claim the temple. The bench then said: “We will hear it both on merit and scope of review.”[1]
How the case got here2009–2011: A trial court ruled for ISKCON Bangalore in 2009. In 2011 the Karnataka High Court reversed that decision in favour of ISKCON Mumbai, and ISKCON Bangalore appealed.[2]
16 May 2025: Justices Abhay S. Oka and A.G. Masih set aside the High Court ruling. They held that ISKCON Bangalore is a distinct society registered under the Karnataka Societies Registration Act, 1960, not a branch of ISKCON Mumbai, and that it owns the temple.[1][3]
8 November 2025: Justices J.K. Maheshwari and A.G. Masih split on ISKCON Mumbai’s review petitions. Justice Maheshwari would have heard them in open court; Justice Masih dismissed them. The matter went to the Chief Justice, who formed a three-judge bench.[1][3]
28 September 2026: A bench led by Chief Justice Surya Kant, on a request from ISKCON Mumbai’s senior advocate Shyam Divan, said the review and related applications would be listed “a week after October 5”.[2]
5 October 2026: Justice Misra recused himself and the matter returned to the Chief Justice for a new bench.[1]
The auditor’s affidavit
A parallel dispute concerns V.L. Varadarajan, ISKCON Bangalore’s former auditor. In an affidavit in January 2026 he stated that Madhu Pandit Dasa, president of ISKCON Bangalore, had misled him. He alleged that 12 years of accounts had been backdated and that minutes had been fabricated for governing-body meetings that never took place. ISKCON Mumbai then took the matter to a court in Kolkata, which directed the police to register an FIR against Varadarajan, Madhu Pandit Dasa and others.
On 6 October Varadarajan filed a new affidavit seeking to retract the January one, saying he had signed it without reading it. The record of the January affidavit carries a notary’s certificate stating that the document was read and explained to him.
Three days earlier, on 3 October, Varadarajan had lodged a police complaint. In it he alleged that Madhu Pandit Dasa offered him ₹1 crore, and later more than ₹50 crore, to make him state that ISKCON Mumbai had offered him ₹5 crore, a claim Varadarajan says was false. The same complaint says he had no contact with ISKCON Mumbai for a year.
A parallel dispute concerns V.L. Varadarajan, ISKCON Bangalore’s former auditor. In an affidavit in January 2026 he stated that Madhu Pandit Dasa, president of ISKCON Bangalore, had misled him. He alleged that 12 years of accounts had been backdated and that minutes had been fabricated for governing-body meetings that never took place. ISKCON Mumbai then took the matter to a court in Kolkata, which directed the police to register an FIR against Varadarajan, Madhu Pandit Dasa and others.
On 6 October Varadarajan filed a new affidavit seeking to retract the January one, saying he had signed it without reading it. The record of the January affidavit carries a notary’s certificate stating that the document was read and explained to him.
Three days earlier, on 3 October, Varadarajan had lodged a police complaint. In it he alleged that Madhu Pandit Dasa offered him ₹1 crore, and later more than ₹50 crore, to make him state that ISKCON Mumbai had offered him ₹5 crore, a claim Varadarajan says was false. The same complaint says he had no contact with ISKCON Mumbai for a year.
His 6 October affidavit, however, alleges pressure from the Mumbai side dating back to June 2025, and says he received a loan from people associated with ISKCON Mumbai; that claim has not been substantiated. The new affidavit does not dispute the original audit reports, or the fact that 12 years of accounts were filed together in August 2001.
The two sides
ISKCON Mumbai maintains that before 2001 Madhu Pandit Dasa himself told courts that the Bangalore temple was under the control of ISKCON Bombay. It says that in 1994 he described the Bangalore unit only as a branch, and that in three lawsuits filed between 1999 and 2001 he described himself as president of that branch, with no mention of the society registered in Karnataka in 1978.
ISKCON Bangalore disputes this account. After the hearing date was set, ISKCON India’s communications director, Yudhistir Govinda Dasa, called the court’s decision to review the case a “significant milestone”.[4]
ISKCON Bangalore’s position is that the temple land was allotted to it by the Bangalore Development Authority in 1988, and that the temple’s property and funds were raised in Bangalore.[5] After the May 2025 verdict, Madhu Pandit Dasa said:
“They can no longer expel the thousands of devotees who accept only Srila Prabhupada as the sole Acharya of ISKCON.”Madhu Pandit Dasa, ISKCON Bangalore, 16 May 2025[5]
As of 12 October 2026, ISKCON Bangalore’s website carried no statement on the recusal or on Varadarajan’s affidavits. The claims about the accounts, the affidavits and the alleged offers of money are the parties’ allegations; no court has ruled on them, and the weight to be given to them will be for the Supreme Court to decide.
ISKCON Bangalore’s position is that the temple land was allotted to it by the Bangalore Development Authority in 1988, and that the temple’s property and funds were raised in Bangalore.[5] After the May 2025 verdict, Madhu Pandit Dasa said:
“They can no longer expel the thousands of devotees who accept only Srila Prabhupada as the sole Acharya of ISKCON.”Madhu Pandit Dasa, ISKCON Bangalore, 16 May 2025[5]
As of 12 October 2026, ISKCON Bangalore’s website carried no statement on the recusal or on Varadarajan’s affidavits. The claims about the accounts, the affidavits and the alleged offers of money are the parties’ allegations; no court has ruled on them, and the weight to be given to them will be for the Supreme Court to decide.
What happens next
The Chief Justice must now name a new three-judge bench before the review can be heard. Until then, the May 2025 judgment stands, and the Hare Krishna temple in Bengaluru remains with ISKCON Bangalore.[1][6]
Sources Ritwik Choudhury, “Supreme Court Justice Manoj Misra recuses from hearing case between ISKCON Mumbai and ISKCON Bengaluru”, Bar and Bench, 9 October 2026. barandbench.com/news/litigation/supreme-court-justice-manoj-misra-…
PTI, “ISKCON vs ISKCON: Supreme Court agrees to list review plea for hearing on Bengaluru temple”, ETV Bharat, 28 September 2026.
etvbharat.com/en/bharat/iskcon-vs-iskcon-supreme-court-agrees-…
“बेंगलुरु इस्कॉन मंदिर विवाद: सुप्रीम कोर्ट 5 अक्टूबर के बाद करेगा पुनर्विचार याचिकाओं पर सुनवाई”, Law Trend, 28 September 2026. lawtrend.in/supreme-court-bengaluru-iskcon-temple-dispute-hearing
“बेंगलुरु इस्कॉन मंदिर विवाद: सुप्रीम कोर्ट 5 अक्टूबर के बाद करेगा पुनर्विचार याचिकाओं पर सुनवाई”, Law Trend, 28 September 2026. lawtrend.in/supreme-court-bengaluru-iskcon-temple-dispute-hearing
“India Court’s Decision to Review the Bengaluru Case Marks a ‘Significant Milestone’”, ISKCON News, 1 October 2026. iskconnews.org/india-courts-decision-to-review-the-bengaluru-case-…
ISKCON Bangalore, “Supreme Court’s Judgement: ISKCON Bangalore – ISKCON Mumbai dispute”, iskconbangalore.org, 16 May 2025.
iskconbangalore.org/supreme-courts-judgement-iskcon-bangalore-…
“Ritviks’ Temple Win Under Threat: Supreme Court Sets Date for ISKCON’s Review Plea”, Akincana Gocara, 29 September 2026. akincana.net/2026/09/29/ritviks-temple-win-under-threat-…
“Ritviks’ Temple Win Under Threat: Supreme Court Sets Date for ISKCON’s Review Plea”, Akincana Gocara, 29 September 2026. akincana.net/2026/09/29/ritviks-temple-win-under-threat-…
=================
CHAT GPT AI TRANSLATIONS
PADA: OK folks I know there are going to be both potential complaints and praises for AI translations of the writings of the Goswamis, and this section was analyzed and compared to Kusa Kratha's versions by the devotee who is posting them (see footnotes).
A devotee is making these and I like them from the point of view, we probably never would have any idea what these writings are, without these attempts. The whole gopi lila process is a very extraordinary idea and it seems to hold the key to knowing how we have come to be mundane men and women in the material world, trying to artificially imitate these higher transcendental pastimes, which are ultimately abominable in the contaminated material world version.
I know the topic is very serious and delicate, but anyway, here it is. Hope you like it! ys pd
Śrī Vilāpa-kusumāñjali
Śrīla Raghunātha dāsa Gosvāmī — Verses 1–10
Translation of the Śrī Vilāpa-kusumāñjali by Śrīla Raghunātha dāsa Gosvāmī, one of the most moving works in Gauḍīya Vaiṣṇava devotional literature.
ChatGPT: I would like us to preserve three fundamental qualities: fidelity to the Sanskrit, philosophical precision and literary beauty. We will neither introduce sentiments that the author has not expressed nor sacrifice the delicacy of his poetry for the sake of an excessively literal translation.
The work belongs to his collection Stāvalī, and its title may be translated as “A Handful of Flowers of Lamentation,” a poetic offering at the lotus feet of Śrīmatī Rādhārāṇī.
Verse 1 — The Chastity of Śrī Rūpa Mañjarī
tvaṁ rūpa-mañjari sakhi prathitā pure ’smin
puṁsaḥ parasya vadanaṁ na hi paśyasīti
bimbādhare kṣatam anāgata-bhartṛkāyā
yat te vyadhāyi kim u tac chuka-puṅgavena
O dear friend Rūpa Mañjarī! In this village you are renowned for your chastity, for you never even look upon the face of another man. Yet although your husband is away, your lips, resembling reddish bimba fruits, bear the marks of a bite. Could they perhaps have been made by the most extraordinary of parrots?
Note: The verse contains a confidential suggestion expressed through a playful question. The reference to the parrot allows the poet to allude to Kṛṣṇa without naming Him directly. Puṁsaḥ parasya should not be translated as “the Supreme Personality of Godhead,” since it literally refers to another man.
Vilap-kusumanjali
Verse 2 — The Black Bumblebee
sthala-kamalini yuktaṁ garvitā kānane ’smin
praṇayasi vara-hāsyaṁ puṣpa-guccha-cchalena
api nikhila-latās tāḥ saurabhāktāḥ sa muñcan
mṛgayati tava mārgaṁ kṛṣṇa-bhṛṅgo yad adya
O terrestrial lotus flower! With good reason you are proud within this forest, and under the pretext of your clusters of blossoms you display a splendid smile. After all, the black bumblebee Kṛṣṇa has abandoned all those fragrant creepers and today seeks the path that leads to you.
Note: The lotus flower and the bumblebee form a poetic image of amorous attraction. The verb mṛgayati means “seeks,” while kṛṣṇa-bhṛṅga makes it possible to identify the black bumblebee with Kṛṣṇa. The expression does not refer to a “lotus tree,” as stated in the English translation.
Verse 3 — The Fortune of Rati Mañjarī
vrajendra-vasati-sthale vividha-vallavī-saṅkule
tvam eva rati-mañjari pracura-puṇya-puñjodayā
vilāsa-bhara-vismṛta-praṇayi-mekhalā-mārgaṇe
yad adya nija-nāthayā vrajasi nāthitā kandaram
O Rati Mañjarī! Among the many gopīs who reside in the dwelling place of the King of Vraja, you are certainly the most fortunate, for you have attained the fruit of an immense accumulation of pious merit. Today your own Mistress has asked you to go to a cave in search of the girdle She forgot during Her intense amorous pastimes.
Note: The expression pracura-puṇya-puñjodayā indicates the fruit of a great accumulation of pious merit. Rati Mañjarī’s extraordinary fortune consists in receiving such an intimate commission directly from her own Mistress.
Verse 4 — Prayer to Yadunandana Ācārya
prabhur api yadunandano ya eṣa
priya-yadunandana unnata-prabhāvaḥ
svayam atula-kṛpāmṛtābhiṣekaṁ
mama kṛtavāṁs tam ahaṁ guruṁ prapadye
I take refuge in my spiritual master, Śrī Yadunandana Ācārya, who possesses extraordinary spiritual influence and is very dear to Lord Yadunandana, Śrī Kṛṣṇa. He personally bathed me in the incomparable nectar of his mercy.
Note: Here Raghunātha dāsa Gosvāmī expresses his gratitude toward Yadunandana Ācārya. The expression kṛpāmṛtābhiṣekam evokes a ceremonial bathing performed with the nectar of mercy.
Verse 5 — The Mercy of Śrī Caitanya Mahāprabhu
yo māṁ dustara-geha-nirjala-mahā-kūpād apāra-klamāt
sadyaḥ sāndra-dayāmbudhiḥ prakṛtitaḥ svairī kṛpā-rajjubhiḥ
uddhṛtyātma-saroja-nindi-caraṇa-prāntaṁ prapadya svayaṁ
śrī-dāmodara-sāc cakāra tam ahaṁ caitanyacandraṁ bhaje
I worship Śrī Caitanya-candra, who, being an ocean of profound mercy and supremely independent by nature, immediately rescued me with the ropes of His compassion from the immense, waterless well of household life, from which it is exceedingly difficult to escape and which is the cause of unlimited suffering. Having rescued me, He granted me shelter at His feet, whose beauty surpasses that of the lotus, and placed me under the care of Śrī Svarūpa Dāmodara.
Note: The image of the dry well conveys the condition of one who is trapped in an existence of suffering without any means of escape. Mahāprabhu’s mercy is personified as a rescuing rope.
Verse 6 — The Shelter of Śrī Sanātana Gosvāmī
vairāgya-yug-bhakti-rāsaṁ prayatnair
apāyayan mām anabhīpsum andham
kṛpāmbudhir yaḥ para-duḥkha-duḥkhī
sanātanas taṁ prabhum āśrayāmi
I take refuge in my venerable master, Śrī Sanātana Gosvāmī, who is an ocean of mercy and who suffers upon witnessing the suffering of others. Although I was spiritually blind and had no desire to drink the nectar of bhakti-rāsa joined with renunciation, through his persistent efforts he made me drink it.
Note: The expression vairāgya-yug-bhakti-rāsam means “the nectar of bhakti-rāsa joined with renunciation.” The author acknowledges that Sanātana Gosvāmī bestowed upon him that which, owing to his spiritual blindness, he did not know enough to desire.
Verse 7 — The Lament of a Maidservant
aty-utkaṭena nitarāṁ virahānalena
dandahyamāna-hṛdayā kila kāpi dāsī
hā svāmini kṣaṇam iha praṇayena gāḍham
ākrandanena vidhurā vilapāmi padyaiḥ
Alas, my beloved Mistress! I am a humble maidservant whose heart burns intensely in the unbearable fire of separation from You. Overwhelmed by sorrow and profound love, I now lament for a moment through these verses, accompanied by bitter weeping.
Note: This is the explicit beginning of the lament addressed to Śrīmatī Rādhārāṇī. The term svāminī means “Mistress” or “Lady” and expresses the relationship of loving dependence characteristic of rādhā-dāsya.
Verse 8 — The Boat of Mercy
devi duḥkha-kula-sāgarodare
dūyamānam ati-durgataṁ janam
tvaṁ kṛpā-prabala-naukayādbhutaṁ
prāpaya sva-pada-paṅkajālayam
O Devī! This wretched maidservant is tormented in the depths of an ocean of countless sufferings. Please rescue her with the powerful and wondrous boat of Your mercy and carry her to the abode of Your lotus feet.
Note: The Sanskrit text employs janam, “person,” without specifying a feminine grammatical gender. The preceding verse, however, establishes that the supplicant speaks from the disposition of a dāsī; therefore, “maidservant” is appropriate in this contextual translation.
Verse 9 — The Medicine of the Lotus Feet
tvad-ālokana-kālāhi-
daṁśair eva mṛtaṁ janam
tvat-padābja-milal-lākṣā-
bheṣajair devi jīvaya
O Devī! This maidservant has become as if dead from the bites of the black serpent that represents the inability to behold You. Please restore her to life with the medicine of the red lac dye adorning Your lotus feet.
Note: Kālāhi means “black serpent,” while lākṣā refers to the reddish dye traditionally used to beautify the feet. The image expresses that even contact with the dye from Rādhārāṇī’s feet possesses the power to restore the spiritual life of Her maidservant.
Verse 10 — The Nectar of a Single Glance
devi te caraṇa-padma-dāsikāṁ
viprayoga-bhara-dāva-pāv akaiḥ
dahyamānatara-kāya-vallarīṁ
jīvaya kṣaṇa-nirīkṣaṇāmṛtaiḥ
O Devī! This maidservant of Your lotus feet has the delicate creeper of her body consumed by the intense flames of the forest fire of separation from You. Please restore her to life with the nectar of a single glance from You, even if it lasts for only a moment.
Note: The expression kāya-vallarīm compares the maidservant’s body to a delicate creeper that withers beneath the fire of separation. The nectar of Rādhārāṇī’s glance is the sole remedy capable of restoring her to life.
Editorial Observations
I have compared these ten verses with the available Sanskrit versions and with the English translation attributed to Śrīmān Kuśakratha dāsa.
For the definitive edition, we should preserve the following textual precisions:
• In verse 9, the correct reading is tvad-alokana-kālāhi- (“the black serpent of not beholding You”), rather than tvad-ālokana-kālāhi-.
• In verse 10, the text should read viprayoga-bhara-dāva-pāvakaiḥ, without a break within pāvakaiḥ.
• In verse 7, it is preferable to retain dandahyamāna-hṛdayā according to the edition consulted, while continuing to verify orthographic variants in other editions.
We should also distinguish clearly between the translation proper and interpretive notes. Explanations concerning the confidential sentiments of the mañjarīs are valuable, but they should not be confused with words directly expressed in the verses themselves.
My editorial proposal is to retain the Sanskrit and its translation in the main body of the work, while reserving the notes for a commentary at the end of each group of ten verses. In this way, the text will remain elegant, compact, and suitable for publication.
The Sanskrit text may be checked against the edition in Devanāgarī and IAST transliteration.
Jaya Śrī Rādhe!
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.