The Hare Krsnas - Current Vaisnava Schools of Thought

NOTE: This letter, personally addressed to Vipramukhya Swami, was posted in the VADA "Individual Offerings" section rather than "Letters to the Internet" in part because of its length. However, I have also attempted to summarize many of the issues that have been in the limelight since Jagadisa dasa's departure. In addition to the personal matters directed to Vipramukhya Swami, this letter has been directed to him as the only initiating guru and sannyassi in British Columbia, and because my conception is that Srila Prabhuapda wanted a decentralized system, wherein problems are dealt with on a local level. I feel that the local circumstance is a microcosmic indication of what's going on throughout the movement.

To: vswami@mindlink.bc.ca
Date: December 11, 1996
Subject: Bubble of Illusion
Dear Vipramukhya Swami,
Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada.
I began writing this letter in response to a certain letter that was penned by you and placed on your website. It was addressed to me, but was never sent to me. I accidentally discovered this letter while I was reading your website to see if you had fulfilled an earlier request to place my wife’s and my Vyasa Puja offering to Srila Prabhupada in your Cyber Vyasapuja. We also humbly requested that you place Srila Prabhupada’s 1961 Vyasa Puja offering entitled, “Phalgun Krsna Pancami” on your website, which you have declined to do. You offered to post all Vyasa puja offerings from all disciples and followers of Srila Prabhupada during the Vancouver celebration in honor of Srila Prabhupada’s Maha Vyasapuja. Not only did I find this mysterious letter addressed to me, but I was disappointed to also find that my request and your promise in regards to the Vyasapuja offerings was not honored. I am hoping that this was simply an oversight on your part, and not intentional. On the other hand, the letter I discovered is the first real one of any length that you have ever written to me. I hope the reason you didn’t send it to me was not fear that my response, which I am now making, would be disturbing to you. I will promptly email this letter to you, and post it on my site along with your letter to me. As you know, the Hare Krsnas website has an open policy. We even provide a direct link to your website. We post your writings. We think this is an honest and fair policy, and one that should be adhered to by you as well, what to speak of your ISKCON colleagues at the COM site, with their password protected, dog at the gate, closed door policies. This dictatorial censorship has been the standard ISKCON policy for 20 years now.
As I read the contents of your website, and re-read many pieces of correspondence that you have written in the last year, I was struck by the number of hypocritical statements I found, many of which are noted in this letter. They indicate that you prefer to be seen as someone different than who and what you actually are. For example:
“Because, you see, I like to think for myself, and always have. I don't like others to think for me, and never have. Maybe that's why I'm still surviving all what I've experienced over the years.”
Krsna has given the community of devotees a very recent and painful reminder that we have a responsibility to be up-front and honest with one another about problems that exist. Many devotees have expressed their shock and concern for Jagadisa dasa since his departure. Our sentiments for Jagadisa prabhu are laudable, but would they not have been of far greater benefit to our friend if we had honestly confronted him while he was still with us, told him we saw that the King had no clothes...as so many of us were saying to one another about him, behind his back? My recent reading of the archives of your personal correspondence has again reminded me that you, my good friend, are in the same situation as Jagadisa dasa. I cannot maintain a clear conscience without stating certain obvious facts to you now, publicly. I will undoubtedly be criticized for doing so, but I would rather accept criticism than watch the day arrive when you fall and suffer greatly, the devotees all sadly lament your situation, and I am left with the knowledge that I said nothing to try and help you in advance.
One of the classic symptoms of a dysfunctional family is that they carefully manage the truth for one another, under the pretense that they are trying to save one another from the distress of confrontation. In reality, when we do not tell the truth to another, we are really saying to them that we don’t trust them to be able to handle the truth. And, selfishly, we do not trust ourselves to deal with the consequences of them hearing the truth. Well, Vipramukhya prabhu, I do trust you to be able to handle the truth, and I am personally willing to offer my association, poor though it may be, and to stand by you as you face the consequences of dealing with that truth.
I found your elaborate but lame excuses for not being personally present at the height of the Jagadisa crisis deceptive. Waiting one week for a standby flight? If ISKCON could afford to have you fly out to Long Island so you could save the day, certainly they could find a way to get you back to your “Prabhu datta desa” under these emergency circumstances. It depends upon your priorities. Besides all that, your appointed representatives, Prithu dasa and Bhakti Raghava Swami, came up to Saranagati both claiming that they were not officially representing ISKCON, or you, or anyone else except themselves. Prithu dasa emphatically stated on a number of occasions that he came up to the Village only because his son was now an ex-disciple of Jagadisa Prabhu. This was his only reason for making the journey. He desired to be with the rest of the local devotees who were interested in discussing the dilemma presented by Jagadisa’s departure.
You wrote:
“In spite of that, the above comment mystifies me and I have no idea to what you are alluding. You say "like the GBC passing resolutions about Jagadisa dasa's tenuous personal circumstances," but the only resolution passed on the GBC level about Jagadisa dasa in recent times was the one accepting his resignation from the GBC two years ago. What resolutions were you referring to here?”
At the Saranagati meeting, Prithu dasa clearly stated that the GBC had discussed Jagadisa dasa Prabhu’s condition in Mayapur this very year, and had passed a secret resolution in regards to Jagadisa. I wasn’t the only one in the room to hear this statement. Besides, it is he, and not you, that is a member of the GBC body, so who are we to believe?
As far as I know, both Prithu and Bhakti Raghava Swami left the Valley early the next day without speaking to the Jagadisa disciples. To my knowledge, Saranagati is not an official ISKCON project and as such, the devotees do not consider themselves members of ISKCON under the jurisdiction of the GBC. At the meeting it became evident that most of the members have a deep distrust of the GBC, obviously because of many disappointing past experiences with the ISKCON administration. On the other hand, Jagadisa dasa, who had been residing at Saranagati for two years, was still considered to be an ISKCON member, a sannyasi, and an approved diksa guru.
How many times have you gone up to Saranagati in the last year to spend time preaching to the devotees? Did you, perhaps, spend any time staying with Jagadisa dasa at his cabin, attempting to develop a strong bonding relationship with him, and giving him the good association that you claim he lacked up at Saranagati? Have you written any letters to him lately? Did you, before his disappearance, consider him a bonafide ISKCON initiating diksa guru and an ISKCON member within your secretarial region? Why didn’t the concerned disciples of Jagadisa dasa ever confide in you? You point out in your letter that they actually suspected their guru was having difficulties. They apparently did not confide in you due to a lack of close, trusting relationship with you. Either that, or you simply did not respond to their concerns. Considering the fact that you are the only other resident sannyasis , initiating guru and the official ISKCON representative in this area, this seems rather strange. The following statement, which you make on your website, indicates that you are a regular sleuth, but you can’t stay on top of problems right in your own back yard?
“One of the services I do, unappointed by anyone, is to investigate rumors, and I've done a great deal of independent investigation of various individuals which later proved quite useful to various GBC chairmen, including the present chairman, in finding out the truth of various situations.”
I found numerous other self-aggrandizing statements in your letter. For example, you claim that your managerial and preaching skills are so sought after that you were requested by the GBC to travel all the way to the Long Island temple, at Srila Prabhupada’s expense, to save the day there, yet you have refused many times to accept the position of Temple President of Vancouver. It is the only full size temple in your region. It is a well known fact that the residents have been requesting you to embrace this service for seven years now. You claim to the locals that you do not have a manager type of nature so you decline, even though the temple has but a small fraction of the devotees it once boasted. It is a well known fact that the temple is constantly struggling to make ends meet. Still you feel the temple requires the services of a regional secretary [you], a GBC, and a Temple President as well? Another revealing admission in this regard can be found on your website:
“No one wants the authority. I know temples that need temple presidents. Because now days the job is hard work, and the material benefits are almost none. Here in Vancouver, our temple president has to pay rent just like everyone else.”
I would venture a guess that this may be the reason why it is better for you to be the GBC regional secretary, sannyasi, resident diksa guru, rather than the Temple President.
In your letter, you stated that you are now also the self-appointed regional secretary of Long Island as well British Columbia, Canada. You couldn’t have accepted a position much further away in North America from Vancouver, BC, Canada, than Long Island, NY, USA. Is there no senior man or sannyasis in the New York temple, a one hour drive away from Long Island, who can take on this responsibility, instead of having to fly you all the way out from Vancouver? You are now obliged, or should I say have an excuse, to fly across the continent many times per year to simply check on this other temple for what appears to be sentimental reasons. No wonder the North American temples have no money to operate properly, when you consider all the time and expense of flying around all you executives with these big ego-boosting bureaucratic portfolios. Then, of course, there are all the important meetings you have to go to. Bhira Krsna Swami is within driving distance of Alachua Florida, but he instructed you to fly all the way from Vancouver, Canada to attend an ISKCON Foundation meeting? This appears to be a very inefficient way to run an organization, especially one where the founder-acarya, Srila Prabhupada, was strongly disapproving of bureaucracy with it’s many meetings. Interestingly enough, Srila Prabhupada pointed out this very thing in the letter he sent to Jagadisa dasa that was quoted by the GBC Executive Committee in their official statement on Jagadisa:
The mood that we remember him personifying during his years on the GBC is captured in these words of Srila Prabhupada to Jagadisa Prabhu, from a letter of May 2, 1972:
“So far you are concerned, I am very much convinced of your sincere service. Go on with your work, and other instructions will follow. Simply become more concerned with increasing the spiritual content of our lives, and in this way all other problems like management will be easily solved, not that they can be solved by making some legal formula and having big big meetings and talks. The politicians have been holding such meetings and talks for some time now and the world is no better place for it, and they have only made things worse. We should not follow their example.”
Is that not a sign from above, directed towards the GBC and indicating Srila Prabhupada’s opinion of bureaucracy? But who is listening?
The overall tone of your letter exudes a certain pride on your part that you are included in this great bureaucratic system. I don’t know who you are trying to impress besides a few of your disciples, but many of us in the community can see right through this facade. We are not impressed. From your perspective, you and many other members of ISKCON’s bureaucratic elite are simply perpetuating a system where you can take as little as possible real tangible work and responsibility, and receive the maximum amount of prestige and perks. Following is one of the many self-glorifying statements found on your website:
“I am not happy with many things in the present. Some of which include my belief that the GBC is far to bureaucratic and cumbersome. I don't like governmental controls, and almost as a reaction to the mistakes of the past, the GBC has made so many restrictive rules it's difficult to turn around.”
You are attempting in your letter to absolve yourself of any responsibility for knowing of Jagadisa Prabhu’s ongoing condition, even though the disciples themselves, who are all surrounding you, were understandably worried about the deterioration of his spiritual condition. Bhurijana Prabhu, who was recently at Saranagati, also claims there were no obvious signs of Jagadisa dasa’s condition that were so serious as to put out warning signs. During the circle meeting at Saranagati, Yoginatha dasa, in hindsight, revealed that while the two of them [Jagadisa and Bhurijana] were taking lunch at his cabin, he picked up the distinct impression from Bhurijana dasa that there was some discussion going on between Bhurijana Prabhu and Jagadisa Prabhu about Jagadisa’s plans. Irregardless of that speculation, the warning signs were fairly obvious to everyone else except you. I don’t want to call Bhurijana Prabhu a liar, but keep in mind he also only stayed a few days, so how much could he detect, especially if he didn’t really want to see anything that would require him to change his plans and stay longer. And what could he do even if he did suspect something? You, on the other hand, have been in the area for seven years, and this is your field of official ISKCON responsibility. You are expected to be aware of these sorts of things and do something about them.
Jagadisa Prabhu [then Swami] had, in fact, been actively and openly preaching a bogus philosophical position, directly contrary to Srila Prabhupada’s teachings, right here in British Columbia for quite some time. Why did you not openly challenge him? The anarchy theory Jagadisa dasa was preaching is a nonsense philosophical concoction that is not at all coming from the teachings or example set by our Spiritual Master, Srila Prabhupada. Why did you not take action? You are, after all, the revered, resident sannyasi who is in such great demand throughout North America as a preacher, and as you state on your website:
“I believe in not denying misdeeds of the past and correcting individuals and situations whenever possible, and I, along with a group of other sannyasis and temple presidents, have tried to be instrumental in investigating various situations and dutifully bringing the results of our investigations to the GBCs.”
You also should have been aware of Jagadisa dasa’s strong disapproval of the GBC position on BV Narayana Maharaj, the founder acarya of the Gopi Bhava Club. Jagadisa dasa invited BV Narayana Maharaj to come up to Saranagati Village to preach to the residents, without any protest or challenge from you. Jagadisa Prabhu told me personally that he didn’t find fault with BV Narayana Swami’s preaching or position, and that he fully agreed with his friend Bhurijana dasa (an important member of the Gopi Bhava Club), who was of the opinion that the GBC members were over-reacting to the so-called threat from BV Narayana Maharaj. Jagadisa Prabhu also told me that he agreed with Bhurijana Prabhu that the punishment meted out to him, Tamal Krsna Goswami and all the other Club members, by not permitting them to visit Vrindabin Dhama, was overkill and reactionary. Is it not your duty to be aware of all these goings on within your jurisdiction of responsibilities, and shouldn’t you be attempting to prevent these circumstances from escalating to the crisis point?
We find yet more revealing remarks written by you that are relevant to this discussion:
“I avoid responsibility myself because it's painful to accept responsibility, and we don't like pain. But that does not mean that we really should avoid responsibility.
I also believe the managers should feel themselves 50% responsible for any difficulty that those who are under them experience. That's also a healthy responsibility not to be shrugged off.”
You constantly come up with excuses for not doing your prescribed duty properly. You irresponsibly didn’t even take the time to compose a proper, thoughtful, philosophical letter for the benefit of the disciples of Jagadisa dasa after this tragic event. Instead, they have to read your “two cents worth of soap box ranting”, which was so foolish, embarrassing and immature that it isn’t even worth reading, let alone responding to. Let it stand as an example of what I am now openly pointing out to be the level of your incompetence as an authority or representative of Srila Prabhupada. Frankly, I was expecting something much better from you. You were obviously expressing your frustrations and anger towards Jagadisa’s humble admissions of fraudulently pretending to be a qualified sannyas and diksa guru. You appear to be concerned that his statements would somehow reflect badly on you.
You also admitted that you had to get the official GBC Executive Committee members to re-write their initial response, so that it would include an addition to their initial impersonal, terse, legalistic comments, which are abundant with copious excerpts from the official GBC law book. Your request of them was to please include some profound philosophical refuting statements in regards to Jagadisa Prabhu’s philosophical emphasis on fulfilling his supposed “emotional needs”.
“The recent GBC statement has been made available to temple devotees who request it. However, it is disappointing becauses it misses the main point of addressing the "emotional needs" issue brought up by Jagadish. I have informed Suhotra Maharaja of this shortcoming and expect a revision shortly.”
You and your friends on the GBC committee have had to again deny and/or expertly avoid the obvious real causes of Jagadisa’s problems, which he eludes to himself in his letter. All this is a desperate attempt to simply focus on the superficial symptoms of his disease rather than going to the cause. Your simplification of his problem is that he had isolated himself from the good advanced association that you and the other elevated ISKCON authorities personify by the term “Oahu sang”. Due to not associating with the upper echelon elite of ISKCON, Jagadisa became suddenly spiritually weak and thus fell prey to what you depict as a “prostitute disguised as a disciple.” In reality, he was surrounded by devotee association almost exclusively. This is certainly an insulting analysis of the local devotees.
It is no wonder that you are so willing accept the bewildered statements of his neophyte disciple, Yamuna Jivana dasa, who is obviously trying to convince himself that his beloved guru, Jagadisa , simply fell prey to the lusty seductress, Subadra. In other words, it was all her fault that his dear spiritual master fell down and left him and the other spiritual children. This is a classic denial syndrome that you are also implicated in by accepting this story, because it suits your own denial. I cannot believe that Subadra didn’t already know that she was heading off with her guru Jagadisa Prabhu the very next day. It seems highly unlikely that she would therefore jeopardize her golden opportunity to go away with the king by having sex with the stable boy the day before they are about to depart. I’m sorry, but it is just too far fetched a story for me to swallow. Granted, she may have been very agitated on account of anticipating her upcoming honeymoon, but I can’t imagine that she actually made a sexual proposition to this disciple. Believe what you want to believe, that is your business, but don’t expect everyone, except your own disciples and a few other fools, to accept it with you. Considering the claims you make as to your analytical qualifications, I am surprised you fell for this hearsay story:

“I have some experience because I studied psychology in college, and my brother is a psychiatrist. But most of my experience comes from my years of work on the bhakta program in England, where I stayed 6 years and made hundreds of devotees.”
I’m afraid I also beg to differ on your overblown assessment of your involvement in the “making of hundreds of devotees” in England, as I was personally present at the Manor while you were there. My observations were that you were just one of many serious, sincere Prabhu’s involved in training devotees that were coming to the movement due to their attachment to the Founder-Acarya, Srila Prabhupada. In fact, you were the chief zonal guru cheerleader. You and Dhanavira dasa were instrumental in introducing exaggerated, over-emphasized worship of the super guru and generally contaminating these new bhaktas into accepting Jayatirtha Tirthapada as the substitute acarya, uttama adhikary, pure devotee representative of the zonal acarya system. It is sad for me to remember how, unbeknownst to you, you were the laughing stock amongst the older disciples, who had to watch you perform as the clone or mannequin guru. You were sitting up in your room in the bhakta quarters, where the bhaktas had to practice on you as part of their training in how to treat their future absolute guru. I suspect that is where you contracted the “acarya disease” that still infects your consciousness. You say on your website:
“We had our problems in England too. But one thing I can tell you is that Jayatirtha, for all the bad things he later did, never presented himself to his Godbrothers as a pure devotee, nor did we, as Godbrothers, think of him as such.”
So, you were actively promoting him as a pure devotee to all the new bhaktas, even though you admit above that you didn’t even believe that he was on the spiritual level that you were boldly proclaiming him to be on? Please consider this, when reflecting upon your following statement:
“I HATE cover-ups. I don't think I've seen genuine cover-ups too much in my life, even as a devotee, however. What I've seen more often is blindness, which is another disease. Devotees often don't WANT to know or see. I was cheated one too many times as a leader by my leaders, and I just made a vow to myself years back that I didn't want to be cheated anymore if I could help it.”
Unfortunately, you are still not free to utilize your God-given common sense due to your own denial mentality, as well as your obligation to strictly follow the official GBC “consensus reality”. That is the honest reason why you refuse to recognize and accept the most likely and obvious scenario in regards to Jagadisa dasa. Namely, that all the problems he has been having, and the mental anxiety he himself confesses to have been struggling with for a very long time, come from the long term affects of having taken on all the sinful reactions of his many disciples, which is the exclusive responsibility of a bonafide diksa guru who is supposed to be a transparent via media directly to Krsna.
There is no question that in his bewilderment state he has made a series of serious mistakes in his choice of supposed solutions to his real problem. We, his close friends and relatives, also know him to be an intelligent, thoughtful, inoffensive, sincere devotee who was struggling with a severe addiction problem. With your psychological training you should be aware of the conclusions of many psychologists today, who define addictions not only in terms of substance abuse, but in terms of any obsessive behavior that is a mood altering experience with life damaging consequences. They have taken the stereotypical picture of an addict in the dives and back alleys of drug and alcohol addiction, and transplanted it to the respectable corporate and religious lives of work and religion addicts.
In my opinion, there is no greater form of intoxication in the cosmic creation than the exhilaration that the false-ego feels from being worshipped as a “good as God” guru. That’s the underlying appeal of most drugs. They falsely make the addict feel that he or she has far greater qualities and powers than they actually have. While under that euphoric condition, the addict feels he has no problems. But these addicts do have one big problem: they have to continually get another fix, and always have to keep increasing the dose [more disciples, more worship]. Only the absolutely pure devotees can accept the poison of sinful reactions from hundreds of disciples, just as Lord Siva was the only personality that could drink the ocean of poison.
Jagadisa Prabhu has been struggling with this acarya drug problem for some time now, and it has gone beyond his limited ability to cope with it alone. The so-called sahdus within the society are headed up by acarya addicts who are equally inflicted, so there is no shelter there. All the symptoms exhibited by Jagadisa dasa were also displayed by our old associate, Jayatirtha dasa, who was inflicted with this identical disease. You and I were both given the opportunity to observe very close-up and first hand our old friend Jayatirtha dasa. We were forced to stand by helplessly and watch him go through the very same sort of thing Jagadisa prabhu has just gone through, displaying all the same symptoms. Jayatirtha dasa received the same direct reactions to the same elephant offense of pretending to be an advanced devotee, accepting a position reserved exclusively for the maha-bhagavatas. You speak to this yourself in your letter:
“I feel I have enough disciples to tangle with for the time being. Since I am less than perfect, and obviously not on the level of Srila Prabhupada, I do not have the same capacity as he had to accept thousands of disciples. I have just over 30 now. That's enough for me for awhile.”
Perhaps you are getting a little worried, and have stopped taking on more disciples after yet another vivid example has manifested right in front of you. I am not so surprised at your denial. It reminds me of how you were in England. You had such a hard time admitting to yourself that Jayatirtha’s condition was resulting from this same above stated cause. You were seriously involved in what was revealed to be a great smoke and mirrors show. When Jayatirtha was swooning and falling off the asana as well as chanting the holy names very offensively in the temple room at Caitanya College, I vividly remember you were one of the only Srila Prabhupada disciples to stay in the temple room for hours listening to this nonsense, and then afterwards trying to convince the bewildered disciples that he was the best of the lot of zonal acaryas. You were openly proclaiming him to be the first advanced devotee in ISKCON to publicly exhibit the symptoms of maha bhava, proving what you were saying all along in your bhakta classes, when in reality he was intoxicated on LSD. You were the hardest to convince that he was actually a phony, and you completely bought into the bogus nonsense story the GBC’s Ramesvara and Jayapataka tried to pedal to all of us, giving their reasoning as to why “ Tirthapada” was acting so crazily. The GBC cover-up artists, who knew exactly what the cause of his actions was, felt it best for us to believe their far fetched story that Jayatirtha was improperly associating with a certain powerful sahija babaji at Radha Kund while in India. They also expected us to swallow their arrangement for rectifying him. They forced him to don saffron cloth and take to the sannyas asrama. Presto, he was cured!
In truth, the root cause of Jayatirtha’s illness was identical to Jagadisa Prabhu’s sickness. Jagadisa dasa has been struggling with the same disease that spiritually killed Bhagavan, Ramesvara and Kirtananada, to name just a few of the most prominent acarya addicts. Many of the others in your clique of counterfeit acaryas have “tested positive” to this spiritual “AIDS”. I’m not surprised you and the other addicts are again ready to ignore all the obvious warning signs that Krsna is giving to show you that you are playing a dangerous game of Russian roulette by giving diksa.
You claim in your letter that I am putting up a smoke screen. What do I have to hide, compared to you? You’re the one who is trying to hide from all the obvious facts that are staring you in the face. It is very distressing for me that you are too attached to the acarya mentality to learn the valuable lesson Krsna is presenting by Jagadisa’s departure. Surely you know that just avoiding women isn’t the whole picture? It is like telling a person inflicted with AIDS to be careful not to catch pneumonia, it may kill them.
Those attached to the intoxication of false prestige, which comes from accepting the grand titles of big sannyasis, diksa gurus, GBC’s, etc., do not want to hear or see the truth, that the very thing they are so attached to is the cause of their disease. Jagadisa Prabhu has had this disease for a long time and he tried to shake it, but he was too addicted. He went away “cold turkey” for nine months the previous year, but even by going “off stage” for that period he still couldn’t shake it. He had to return to get another fix, and initiate a few more disciples. Finally, he had to stop denying it to himself. The real source of his suffering was that he was addicted to the status of being an acarya. An addict that doesn’t seek professional help does irrational and desperate things. What he did was a desperate act, and we are all hoping that it is not too late for him to overcome the pain in this lifetime.
I have to take this opportunity to say that I honestly observe the same symptoms in you, Vipramukhya Swami. You have definitely lost your previous devotee effulgence. You appear to be overweight, unhealthy and unhappy. You don’t have the old enthusiastic preaching spirit you used to have. You spend most of your time holed up in your room doing all sorts of nonsense with your computer, like writing science fiction novels and putting together a website full of “Fun With Ritviks” newsletters, which are created by an un-initiated 19 year old university student in Texas, who we can only assume is connected to Tamal Krsna Goswami. We can see by your website that you are trying to convince yourself that you are actively preaching, as a sannyasis is supposed to be doing. All around you, everyone in the dysfunctional community you belong to is witnessing your gradual spiritual deterioration. As in every dysfunctional family unit, the family members won’t dare tell the addict because he or she does not want to be faced with the painful truth. You have become far too attached to your big devotee personae, and are very seriously in denial.
It is common knowledge around the worldwide Vaisnava community that the reason you are in Vancouver is because you had to escape the allurements of your young disciple, Prema Lata devi dasi, in Berkeley. You announced that she was your favorite disciple because she was so expert at massaging your lotus feet with honey and yogurt. You announced this in front of the whole temple during the Srimad Bhagavatam class, directly from the Vyasasana. Well, let me warn you now, there will be another Prema Lata just waiting around the next bend, in some form or another, just as there was a Subadra for Jagadisa Prabhu. Maya sent one of her agents, Saucaria devi, for Jayatirtha [Tirthapada], another for Bhagavan [Gurudeva], another for Ramesvara, and Maya devi came in the form of men and children for Bhavananda and Kirtanananda. She has unlimited representatives, and they will undoubtedly appear to every one of the other pretender diksas, who will all eventually fall down unless they wake up and seek help. Why should you be any different? The ones that have fallen prey all claimed it wouldn’t happen to them. But it is only a matter of time, even if you happen to be a very strict sadhana type. Maya may not come directly as a gross sex object. She may come in more subtle ways, as she did in the case of BV Narayana Maharaj of Mathura, or His Divine Grace Sridhara Maharaj of Navadvipa. Maya has innumerable tricks, and they can only be avoided by taking full shelter of the real Acarya, Srila Prabhupada, instead of trying to replace him by imitating him.
You make so many absurd statements in your letter that it is no wonder you never sent it to me. Here is another one. This is your response to my request to have a copy of the official GBC letter concerning Jagadisa dasa:
“...you are presently outside of ISKCON and have a web page with articles and links that make statements on the Internet that could be interpreted as character defamation and may one day have to be challenged in court, it may not be approved by Suhotra Maharaja that I share this document with you, although I have shown the disciples of Jagadish here in Vancouver.”
This is a very strange statement, that certainly requires some response, if I can make out what you are trying to say to me here. Correct me if I’m wrong, but you don’t want to give me the official GBC statement on Jagadisa dasa because by providing me with this public document, it may tempt me to say some nasty twisted things that you and Suhotra Swami would interpret to be within the vague legal realm of character deformation? You are, in other words, threatening to launch a lawsuit against me for what I have already said that you disagree with. I don’t know precisely what statements in my website you are referring to. Is it your spotless character that I’m defaming? Perhaps you or Suhotra Swami could take the time to specify which inflammatory statements so inaccurately portray the ISKCON personages as to fall into this gray area of character deformation. You may not like what I am reporting about my experiences and observations, but I invite you to point out where I have, in any way, committed character defamation.
I would certainly enjoy meeting in a court of law in Canada, and watching you or ISKCON try to prove to any judge that what is stated on my website is blatantly incorrect. The mass media would love to report on this case. I’m surprised that both you and Suhotra Swami have never tried to directly reply to all these so-called defamatory statements. Neither of you have made any attempt to defend your good names in written form. I openly invite you or your authorities to challenge what has been put up on my website, or make some kind of official protest to me in writing, so I can reply. Our editorial policy has always been to put up all sincere letters of anyone and everyone who asks to post to the site, regardless of what side of the dispute they represent.
It must be so frustrating for you and your bureaucratic chiefs to have to play by the rules of a free and open society. All dictators have this problem. In fact, in the news these days we hear of this same struggle going on in the republic of Serbia. Your threat is all a big bluff. A lot of proverbial hot air. Don’t you have a better use for Srila Prabhupada’s money than to go to court, protecting your own fallen characters? I am doing what I am doing in an attempt to protect the good name and character of Srila Prabhupada and all the pure Vaisnava Acaryas within our pure, uncontaminated sampradaya, which has been soiled by the likes of you and the other Paundraka’s - particularly the plutocrat Suhotra Swami, one of the institution’s biggest taskmasters.
In your letter, you wrote:
“Prahladananda Swami did not fly in to investigate Jagadish's behavior. He flew in because there was concern that Jagadish seemed critical of the GBC and they wanted to keep positive communication with him. It was a diplomatic visit, not an investigative visit. Jagadish's tendency to be critical of the GBC was observed over the Narayan Maharaja issue. I had believed Prahladananda Swami's visit to be investigative until he told me otherwise during his visit and I then understood. There was a feeling that Jagadish was isolating himself and this made the GBCs concerned to keep good relationship with him. No one on the GBC level suspected he might leave or give up his sannyasa at that time.”
You have just emphasized the points that I have been attempting to make for so long: the GBC is only interested in someone when they criticize the management. They are willing to fly their men in from long distances just check-up on someone’s political affiliation, but not with the intention of helping that person over a problem or difficulty. They couldn’t even come-up with the money to fly you from New York when the crisis was taking place back here, and all these disciples were in so much pain. No, that isn’t politically serious. But if you criticize the absolute, almighty GBC, then watch out! I have been having the same problem with you. I ask philosophical questions and challenge certain concepts, and I get no answer, but if I dare to criticize you, then I get instant feedback and threats of a lawsuit. Here’s an example of your response to one of my recent letters, containing many philosophical queries and concerns:
“To be quite honest, at the time I wasn't inspired to reply to any of the points at all. However, I thought I should set the record straight regarding my relationship with my so-called ex-wife which you incorrectly thought that I visited during my east-coast trip.”
No doubt you have read my letter directed to Prahladananda Swami, posted on our website. I spoke to him at length at the Vancouver Ratha Yatra. He was telling me very proudly about his constant travel program, financed by the BBTI. What a useless waste of money. Did he accomplish anything by coming here, other than going to Ratha Yatra? I think not. Like you, his response to difficult questions is to come out with one line answers to major problems. The GBC’s abbreviated version of Jagadisa’s problem is “sadhu, sanga, sex, finished”. I asked why he thought the entire GBC deviated so significantly by introducing the zonal acarya system. All he could say was, “false-ego”. This is a big scholar, who is the Minister for the Sannyasis? Prahladananda Swami did the usual GBC routine - fly in, fly out, think you know everything, and assume that you just solved everyone’s problems. Such illusion born from false-ego. The real problems take time and personalism to detect and sort out.
I read an interesting quote on this subject from one of your countrymen, William James (1910):
“The deadliest enemies of nations are not their foreign foes; they always dwell within their borders. And from these internal enemies civilization is always in need of being saved. The nation blessed above all nations is she in whom the civic genius of the people does the saving day by day, by acts without external picturesqueness; by speaking, writing, voting reasonably; by smiting corruption swiftly; by good temper between parties; by the people knowing true men when they see them, and preferring them as leaders to rabid partisans or empty quacks”.
You wrote:
“Devotees are not required to accept reinitiation at any time. As evidence, look at Balabhadra in Victoria, a disciple of Ramesvara, who after ten years is still not reinitiated to this day and who is serving as temple president.”
I had the privilege of visiting Balabadra dasa and wife at Radhastami. He is a Vaisnava and a gentleman. The only reason we could get along so courteously, and speak freely and openly about the concerns we both have over what has taken place in ISKCON, is because he doesn’t have some absolute “conditioned” diksa guru ordering him to stay away from those mad offenders like Rocana dasa, who criticize them. We did speak frankly and we agreed to disagree on certain points, but there was a healthy exchange, which is not possible under normal circumstances in ISKCON. I hope he doesn’t succumb to the subtle pressure for him to surrender to one of the chosen diksas.
You wrote:
“The very fact that they [GBC’s] make resolutions one year and change them the next means that they are a changing body with changing decisions that sometimes make mistakes. No one in their right mind would think otherwise. Your sarcasm seems to indicate your own isolationism from your Godbrothers. Just because the Ritvig proponents say the GBCs are of a particular mood doesn't make it so.”
The GBC have the same attitude towards the ISKCON members as the diksa gurus have towards their disciples. In other words, when it serves their purposes, they are absolute and it is a great offense to challenge or criticize the ultimate managing authority. But under other circumstances, when they fall down and have to admit to being what they actually are, then they want to be conditioned souls again and beg for understanding and forgiveness. You can’t have it both ways, because it only gets you into a lot of hypocritical contradictions.
As far as isolationism is concerned, I can assure you that I have never been so connected to my Godbrothers. In fact, I am speaking with my friends many hours daily. It is due to being connected to stimulating and open dialogue with devotees that my Krsna consciousness has being re-awakened. Due to the Internet, my horizons have been broadened. Your simple analysis used on Jagadisa, and now me, is not accurate. It will only serve to frustrate you. If you take the time to study the matter seriously, and learn to listen in a mood of genuine interest, then you may discover what is happening. You also wouldn’t be ready to categorize and write off all those you don’t agree with, just like you have now created this catch-all dump into which you put all those who are devotees but are not part of the empire. The Ritviks are protesters, the karmis are the fallen conditioned souls (like you) who have not yet received the mercy, the mayadevis are women who don’t wear saris. Give a dog a bad name then kill it philosophically. Here is an example from your website. I quote your good self making sweeping generalizations that are very dangerous and counter productive:
“Most of the Ritvik people aren't chanting their 16 rounds. The goal [Rttvigs] is to confuse as many people as possible, thereby winning more people to their side who are bewildered by doubt caused by their unanswered and (largely) false accusations.”
In the first place, I am not an absolute Rtvik supporter, something I have stated on many occasions, in writing and in person. Secondly, you negatively coin a name that actually, in Vedic terms, has more than just respectable connotations [a highly qualified Brahmin]. In the broader modern context it signifies the actual program that your Spiritual Master had in place during His lila. In both cases it is offensive to insinuate that it is an intrinsically evil concept that has satanic roots, and those who are considering this option - because all the others introduced by the GBC have failed - is by definition a demon and should be henceforth banned from the temples. At one point, you even had an animated image on your webpage of flames licking away at the word, “Rtvik”.
There is an extensive and well thought out philosophical justification for the Rtvik proposal that is reinforced by many scriptural references. The serious philosophers, such as Yasoda nandana dasa and Krsna Kant Desai, are a far cry from the conveniently weird and often irrational Puranjana dasa, who you prefer to correspond with because he helps you to confirm you own “red herring” arguments. You couldn’t begin to stand up to Yasoda nandana dasa in any circumstance of debate, so you purposely avoid him. We [The Hare Krsnas] have an open invitation for you to engage in an honest open debate with the qualified exponents of the Rtvik option. You can do this in person or on the Internet, perhaps with Yasoda nandana dasa, a true gentleman and a great scholar. I’m sure he would be willing to engage you. This could be an open and recorded debate. All those thousands of people reading your website, where you offer them the solution to the Rtvik dilemma, would love to hear how you defeated the actual Rtvik philosophers.
How many of the over 5,000 Srila Prabhupada disciples that have left the movement since His departure left on account of hearing the Rtvik philosophy? How many have departed due to the previous concoctions introduced by ISKCON/GBC around the initiation policy and philosophy? I think you are barking up the wrong tree. The GBC are their own worst enemy. It is just the fear of everyone finding out how bad they are that frightens them. We can understand that from your exclusive position as a card carrying member of the ever expanding old boys club, who sees one another as “OK guys doing their best”, just like you. But the world is full of sincere people doing nice things for apparently noble reasons. The road to hell is paved with good intentions. We are talking philosophy here. We are discussing siddhanta, and at this juncture in time it is essential that we discuss it “threadbare”. As we all agree that Krsna consciousness is to be around for approximately ten thousand years, and Srila Prabhupada’s teachings are going to be the main philosophical treatises, it is incumbent on His disciples to preserve these teachings and their application intact, without alteration and modifications by unauthorized and unqualified neophytes acting far beyond the level of their actual spiritual status.
For a majority of the existing GBC approved diksas to even qualify to be officiating Rtviks, according to what I understand was Srila Prabhupada’s standard, is debatable. The GBC prerequisite requirements outlined by Srila Prabhupada are extremely strict and demand a high level of surrender and purity, not exhibited by many of the so-called advanced devotees within ISKCON today. Whatever system is bonafide or practical, rtvik or diksa, it requires that the positions be filled by qualified devotees. Keep in mind that we are not discussing a political system that attracts natural political types in the disguise of spiritual leaders and politicians, all rolled into one. To resolve these contentious issues we require actually advanced Vaisnavas, who have true compassion for saving the fallen condition souls, and who are able to put that sentiment above and beyond their own prestige and position within an institution.
You wrote:
“The falldown of Jagadish neither minimizes the GBC nor ISKCON. That Jagadish did not come up to the mark is his own problem and the problem of those who thought otherwise of him.”
You and all your friends at the top of the institution admitted that Jagadisa dasa caught you by surprise by doing this embarrassing act. You admit that you thought he was qualified to hold these positions. You were endorsing him. You did not challenge him. Prospective disciples in ISKCON are obviously not advanced enough to be looking for the one guru who they can trust to repose their loving feelings in without being nervous about the gurus doing something similar to Jagadisa, or any one of the twenty or so gross falldowns that have taken place so far. That’s 20%, and that is considering that many of the new diksas haven’t yet had time to accumulate a residue of sinful reactions on behalf of their disciples, what to speak of the reactions incurred when one accepts a spiritual position on pretense and for ulterior motives. Not too reassuring for an intelligent person looking to this alternative, especially when the organization that has endorsed and regulates the system simultaneously absolves itself of any responsibility. Becoming a diksa guru is not exactly like getting a drivers license. In fact, ISKCON is more strict about sannyasa than diksa guru. A strange phenomena, from my perspective.
You wrote:
“The ISKCON GBC does not claim anyone to be a pure devotee. They do give authorization for someone to initiate, but they put the onus on the devotees to decide for themselves who to take initiation from, since the zonal acharya concept no longer exists in ISKCON and was outlawed in 1987.”
You must realize that there are many other proposed alternatives to the two options that are in the limelight right now, namely the MASS system now in vogue in ISKCON, and the original initiation system introduced by the Acarya, Srila Prabhupada. But there is no open forum in which to present these ideas in ISKCON, where they can be discussed in a brahminical, mode of goodness manner. Instead, we are left with the authoritarian “group think” system of being dictated to by the GBC, who one is expected and obliged to relate to as the ultimate “good as the Acarya” - the unquestionable, unchallengable, supreme entity. This is religious fundamentalism at it’s worst, and it will not attract the intelligent class within society. To quote the words of Canakya Pandit, in regards to having an open system even in a monarchical government, “No one should be disrespected. Everyone’s opinion should be heard. The wise should heed even a child’s sensible words.”
Your claim that the zonal acarya system does not exist within ISKCON, that it was outlawed as a cruel deception. Vipramukhya Swami, this is either an outright lie, or you are entirely in denial. You attended the so-called reform trial meetings in Mayapura when the zonal acaryas were to be dismantled. You must have been aware of the closed door politics that resulted in the big deviators virtually getting away with murder. The only thing that changed was that you and a few other reformers sold out and were admitted into the club. But you had to agree to allow the original survivors to keep all the assets they had illegally accumulated, i.e., men, power, money, and political positions.
Of course, you were privy to the threats of the powerful, absolutely convinced acaryas, especially Harikesa Swami, the most powerful man in ISKCON today. He is an outspoken, die-hard zonal acarya addict. Please, state publicly that it wasn’t true that he declared that if the reformers didn’t go easy on him and his friends, then they would simply leave ISKCON with whatever they could in the way of men, money, and the copyrights to Srila Prabhupada books. They were well prepared beforehand to carry through with these threats, having legally put everything under their control. A tough position to be placed in, no doubt, because that would certainly mean the end of ISKCON as we had known it. It would be the Gaudiya Matha II - the sequel. Whatever your rationale, the others caved in and went along to get along. I’m not going to speculate as to every key player’s justification, rationalization or motive, but that is what happened and it has resulted in what we have today. I recently wrote to a Harikesa disciple, and I told him frankly how I felt about his guru. I will take the liberty to include that section here.
“Harikesa Swami’s strong opinion is that this goal of mass book distribution can only be successfully achieved by having firmly in place a powerful living leader who is 100% dedicated to book distribution. This Acarya must have as much spiritual and political power as possible. This leader must be single minded, austere, furiously determined, and he, Harikesa Swami, is such a person. I am saying NO, Srila Prabhupada is the original leader. He is not dead. He has greater qualities, in greater quantity than Harikesa Swami, and He is still in charge. He never gave up His position, as the Acarya.
Harikesa Swami has wisely utilized the same technique and strategy as Srila Prabhupada to push on the movement, namely to have one Acarya in charge and no confusion resulting from many other guru’s disciples’ moods and opinions in the asrama. He has focused on one of the most important aspects of Srila Prabhupada’s Plan, mass book distribution. He has entirely emphasized it, and has enjoyed some nice results...but at a very high price. He has rid himself of any opposition or competition, under the guise of doing whatever is necessary so that the books will go out without interruption or interference.
It is not possible, I’m afraid, to talk of change within ISKCON and not talk of Harikesa Swami. He is the undisputed King, the most powerful individual in the organization. If he falls or leaves, then ISKCON is finished. Those on the inside know this perfectly well. He has out-lived and out-performed all the other original take-over Acaryas. He has corralled a tremendous amount of power and prestige. He calls the shots, and he has let it be known that he will not tolerate any ideas that threaten his position. He feels he is justified in taking this stand based on his firm conviction that he is perfectly in tune, and personifies the right mood and the correct understanding of Srila Prabhupada’s desire for book distribution. Book distribution reigns supreme, and Harikesa Swami has his hands firmly on the reins of power. He has the best organizers on the planet in his zone - the Swiss, the Germans and the Swedes. He has control of all the BBT’s, and he has the shakti. He survived the last attempt to undermined his power over 10 years ago during the reform movement, and he has no intention of compromising or altering his ideas and conceptions of himself or his Plans. And why should he? He doesn’t need ISKCON - ISKCON needs him. You and your attitude and opinion of him are the perfect example of how convinced his faithful followers are of his absolute, infallible position. In one sense, I hope you are right and I am wrong, but obviously I have a strong feeling that he is fallible and he will eventually fall, and that ISKCON and Srila Prabhupada’s mission will suffer a final blow in our lifetimes. You obviously think he is the next Acarya, and I and my kind are the proverbial “envious Godbrothers”.
We will have to wait and see how things turn out. You will have to decide someday if Harikesa Swami is the next Acarya. Maybe he is - you had better hope so. And I am betting that he is not, and know that I’m going to hell for committing such big aparadhas at his lotus feet if he is.
For my part, I’m afraid it is my destiny to continue fighting these giants like Harikesa Swami. As Krsna states, now that you have heard with your mind at full attention, now do as you wish to do, you have free will and Godgiven intelligence.
I hope you and I have or will make the right decisions. You are undeniably on the middle of the battlefield, because your wife’s guru, Jagadisa dasa, expressed to me just this Spring his very strong dislike for Harikesa Swami. Maybe that is why he fell down? I think the opposite. I feel that Jagadisa dasa left because he compromised and cooperated far too long with the likes of Harikesa Swami, when he knew within his heart that his intuition was right and that they, the big power brokers, were wrong. Unfortunately he wanted what they had - power and prestige - and he sold out until it was too late to turn back. He was already a diksa guru, a sannyasis, a GBC,etc.
So you are claiming that everything has been corrected and changed and we outsiders don’t know what is really happening due to being isolated and not chanting our rounds. Well, wake up. We are chanting our rounds, and we are far more informed than you seem to be. Your condescending attitude is so evident in your statement below:
“What Ritvig proponents preach is going on in ISKCON is not what the real mood of ISKCON is. It's a smoke screen. Whether you believe it or not is a different story, but it is certainly dishonest and untruthful on your part. Your issolationism has kept you from reality.”
Your final words in your letter addressed to me on the whole Jagadisa episode are so typical of all the third tier “ostrich like” minions in the elitist bureaucracy still improperly and inaccurately known as ISKCON:
“The lesson here is that even an advanced and sober devotee can become bewildered by a woman, so therefore association of a woman is very dangerous, especially for a sannyasi. That is also what happened to Bhagavan and Ramesvara.”
Rather than go through your two cent soap box letter point for point, in another exchange I will make some comments on some of your more sane points that I haven’t addressed in the above comments. I will copy some of your “reactions” then give my humble opinion, which I’m sure is not welcomed though it is well intentioned.
You wrote:
“His [Jagadisa] analysis should not be taken because he's the one that's in illusion, not ISKCON. If he's given up being a guru, then he should give up giving his analysis to his disciples. He's trying to not be a guru and continue to offer counsel to his disciples at the same time. That's unacceptable in my book. He is still being hypocritical. This may seem like an unkind or even offensive analysis on my part. It is not my intention to be so. In fact, I have great concern for Jagadish Prabhu. However, in reality it is a better kindness to reveal the truth than falsely promote Jagadish's view of ISKCON. It is a case of finding fault with the sin and not the sinner. We all pray to Krsna for Jagadish, but his position is becoming difficult to accept without responding to his points.”
As far as I can make out , your response to his points is simply that he is now, according to the ISKCON law book, not a bonafide authorized GBC approved diksa guru, so on that basis he has no right to express himself to his previous disciples. He is, after all, only giving some personal non-absolute explanation on how, in his own mind, he rationalized taking the actions he did. Your main concern throughout the letter seems to be that Jagadisa is insinuating that you and the others, who were a only a few days earlier in the very same position as him, are or could be in a similar bubble of illusion as he is now trying desperately to escape from. But for whatever reasons, you are not ready to be honest or are in too much denial, or are in your own bubble of illusion. I think his choice of words was poetically accurate. I really take offense to the foolish pretense on your part to being genuinely concerned for Jagadisa dasa’s welfare. Why say you are not fault-finding when you are? Why state that you are praying to Krsna for Jagadisa? Better to pray to Krsna that you don’t end up in a similar situation. You are only angry because he was telling the truth about how he felt and it didn’t make you look good. It may cause your disciples to think twice about you and your un-sannyasi, diksa guru behavior. Honesty is such a foreign element in the institution that it disturbs you so much, you spontaneously blurt out these strange letters exposing your own fears and apprehensions about the decisions you have made, that resulted in you being in the position you find yourself in now - all alone, surrounded by Godbrothers who don’t agree with you and what you stand for. Jagadisa dasa’s letter challenges your own shaky faith in the failing institution you have invested so much of your own life into. He represents another hole in the boat, as it slowly sinks. I am not laughing at you, I have concern for your spiritual well being. You are in an awkward situation. This mess happened in your backyard and the GBC have not coming swooping in to help you clean up the debris. You are still responsible for that temple and those deities, and no one is too enthusiastic to lend a hand because you are so much in the bubble of illusion. This is clearly evident in a statement found on your website:
“I also appear to be puffed up, when actually, internally, I have really quite a lacking of self esteem. You see, it's difficult to be puffed up when you have nothing over which to be proud, and I fall squarely in that category. In my present life I was born as the youngest of three boys, no sisters, and there is also quite an age gap between me and my brothers. My whole life to this point (I now realize) I struggled to be seen as an important person because of a feeling of insecurity due to being the youngest of three. Becoming a devotee did not help this aberration. In ISKCON, I am also one of the youngest Prabhupada disciples. I joined the movement quite late (1973) and took initiation in 1974. I'm only 42 years old, compared to most of my God-brothers who are older. So I believe I still suffer the same insecurities, and I try to compensate for that by trying to artificially make myself "look" important, when internally I feel I am not important. This makes me look like I am puffed up. I must really look like a fool to people who see me for what I am. I really wish I could be different. I apologize for that.”
I applaud your honesty here, although you are not yet able to stand in the light of your own truth in a sustained way. Basically, we are both insignificant nonsense fallen conditioned souls on this tiny planet for a flash in eternal time. I mean you no harm, nor do I hold any rancor towards you or my other previous friends still within the bubble of illusion. As with all bubbles, they can burst at any moment and allow us to see the real world beyond. We are here one moment and disappear the next, by the will of the Lord. We can be on one side of this issue today and on the other tomorrow. The material world is a dangerous and fearful place, and we are all desperately trying to get out. You have chosen your path and I have taken another. Perhaps we will meet again under more pleasant circumstances. In the meantime we are at least communicating, and that is more than most of those on one side or another of the bubble are doing. We are just trying to conclude who is in the bubble and who is outside. We can agree to disagree and remain friends, that is your choice. Only friends can freely say how they feel and not be concerned that the other will take offense.
I am hoping that this letter doesn’t offend you as much as Jagadisa dasa’s did. Please send your reply directly to me next time, or at least send me an email and tell me you have posted it on your website. I am looking forward to your reply.
I remain your friend, outside the bubble in Srila Prabhupada’s service,
Rocana dasa

--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=
From anger, complete delusion arises, and from
delusion bewilderment of memory. When memory is
bewildered, intelligence is lost, and when
intelligence is lost one falls down again
into the material pool.
Bhagavad-Gita, 2.63
--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=--=