Pushback on 'JBD' Editorial Policy
BY: NARAHARI DAS
Aug 17, NEW SOUTH WALES, AUSTRALIA (SUN) —
[Editor's Note: On August 7th, we published an article by Narahari das entitled, "JBD Protocols", which was written in response to an Editor's Note appended to the author's previous article on the subject. In the August 7th article, the Sun editors added a number of comments in hopes of further clarifying our editorial policies on the so-called "Jewish Issue".
Shortly thereafter, we received two follow-up articles, from Narahari das and Ananta das. We have held their publication until we had time to properly respond. For the sake of time, we've again added our comments, in blue, to Narahari's article. We'll address Ananta prabhu tomorrow.]
Rebuke of Editorial Policy
by Narahari das
Dear Rocana Prabhu
I can see now you are taking this whole thing far too personally. My intention is not to upset you by pointing out what I believe is unreasonable in your argument for proof.
Dear Narahari prabhu, you are incorrect. Our previous response was not simply a personal response. Our editorial team reviewed your article and all approved the response. As we've stated before, this is not a 'hot button' issue for the Sun editors. No one is upset, or even very frustrated. We are simply intent on managing the boundaries of this discussion, for obvious reasons - you and others who share your opinions are pointing the finger at individuals, making allegations based on their ethnic, cultural, and religious backgrounds. This discussion has the potential to ride very close to the line of bigotry. Therefore, it is necessary that such allegations have a strong foundation, not a weak one. If your foundation is weak, you need to put more effort into making your case before you take it public. Our editorial policies on this issue are a well intentioned effort to allow reasonable public discussion of the matter, even in advance of the advocates having a solid basis for their complaints.
A)
1. Prabhu I am not seeking a criminal or civil case. This is not even a matter for an Extrajudicial Dispute Resolution process either. It may if anything fit into the category of Restorative Justice. I don’t know I am not a lawyer but the proof you are demanding in order to put these points across is way beyond reasonable for this issue.
We find your argument to be very weak. We have simply insisted that before you label someone with an ethnic, cultural, or religious designation, and based on that label suggest that they are part of a diabolical conspiracy, that you at least have your labels right. If you can't accomplish that, then you have no basis at all for your claims of a conspiracy. This level of evidence is really the simplest, and most fundamental. Should you try to actually put evidence together for a criminal conspiracy, you would find the legal bar is set very high. But a proper list of names with accurate designations - we hardly consider that to be a demand for proof that is "way beyond reasonable".
2. However, whether or not you or your staff believes that there is enough evidence to make this point or case in the beginning stage of an investigation is irrelevant and in this case is tending to be obstructionist. Your opinion is taken into consideration and duly noted, but you must allow the discussion to pursue its natural course and refrain from taking your privilege as the editor.
3. By this I am referring to your ‘blue’ comments that dog my every word making it almost unreadable or even to allow me to make a clear point in my response to your previous editorial opinion on my last article.
When we see how you are reacting we have to question just how much this issue is affecting you and your staff that you have implemented this unprecedented volley of interjections stating and restating your personal opinion into my article. Even if this was a conversation you would be considered very rude to be interjecting every minute to offer your opinion.
Sorry to again disagree. First, the only "musts" here are those we impose upon ourselves, or accept from our higher authorities. We are interjecting 'blue comments' simply because we have had to state the same points over and over. Our time is limited, and if you wish to keep hammering away at points we've already said are firm, then you'll have to be willing to engage this sort of point-for-point format. Should you ever move on to new material, we certainly won't impose this format upon you.
4. If this were a legal case then I am sure that the evidence you are demanding will be necessary. Danudhara Swami’s had his lawyer look into his case and he found that there was no substantial evidence to bring a case against him. As a matter of fact the whole Child Abuse Case was handled internally and no ‘due process’ of the legal justice system was entered into. The case was settled out of court.
One can say that the Gurukulis won by default or at the very best by hearsay evidence. Yet everyone knows that they had a case even though it did not go through the rigors of due process of law in order to gather the ‘Burden of Proof’ evidence that a judicial or administrative procedure warrants. It certainly has not been put through the rigors of the system you would have in place.
5. I am sure if you were to impose your system on the next devotee who claims that a child was abused in one of our ISKCON schools and that they were corrupt, there would be a huge outcry from the devotional community. It was only after years and years of toil and heartache that some form of accountability was placed on the GBC to be at least morally responsible for the carnage of their corrupt system and to get the general devotee to listen and believe our children.
6. Can you give me one other case where you have demanded this level of proof? Even the Ritvik issue sees you allowing considerable leeway in accusatory claims and put downs and there is no editors note to caution lack of substantiate evidence. Many authors claiming that Ritviks are “infiltrators” and the ‘evil empire’ and there has been no verbose and repetitive ‘editors notes’?
We see little comparison between the gurukula abuse lawsuit or abuse complaints, and the concept of a Jewish conspiracy in ISKCON, other than convenience of argument. A singular criminal act is one thing; a pattern of acts is another; a conspiracy is something else altogether.
Obviously, what we are attempting to control here is the use of bigoted, prejudicial, or racist arguments or tactics. Neither the gurukula matters or the guru-tattva debates have crossed into this realm. If they had, we would have taken appropriate measures, just as we are now.
B)
Prabhu you do seem to be overly disturbed by this issue being presented. Maybe in the beginning you allowed this to be brought out but then when you found that the issue was heading in directions that exceeded your comfort zone you clamped down on it.
Again, we are neither upset nor disturbed. We first allowed this subject to be raised because we were willing to have the discussion introduced in the Sun - but we're after a proper discussion. The opening was made, several rounds of clarification and boundaries followed, and we are now in a back-and-forth with you and few others, who don't like the boundaries. And that's OK - we're willing to engage in the debate with you. And we say again, if you come with proper evidence, we're willing to pursue the discussion here and take it to the next level. You have our word on that.
1. If you insist on having us provide verifiable proof of ethnic or religious affiliation then perhaps you can start yourself by disclosing your own ethnic background and that of your editorial staff? I am not being offensive, I merely want to see if you have a bias or vested interest in this issue being thwarted, as the head of a very important and necessary form of Mass Media for Srila Prabhupada’s followers. You can be the first disclosure in your ‘burden of proof’ procedures.
You use the term "verifiable proof" to indicate that the burden of proof is very great, but we have repeatedly said that we are looking for a reasonable level of evidence. We are insistent upon this, because we know full well that if we, the Sun editors, took the hours of time required and put in the effort, we could compose the needed list of reasonably accurate designations. We've said all this before, and won't repeat it further.
And for the record, neither Rocana or Jahnava is Jewish - not by ethnic, cultural, or religious connection. Rocana prabhu's family background on one side is primarily English, with a line reaching back to the Vikings, and is Dutch on the other side. Jahnava's background on both sides is primarily Swiss (later to become Pennsylvania Dutch), with a bit of Huguenot and Irish mixed in on her mother's side. Rocana's family church was Anglican, while Jahnava's was Presbyterian. In Rocana's family, traditionally the eldest sons became Anglican ministers (he broke ranks and joined the Hare Krsnas). On Jahnava's side, there are 17 preachers in the paternal line. We will not disclose details about other editorial staff members, except to say that none are Jewish.
2. As part of your proof you are pushing for a comprehensive list of devotees and their affiliation etc. Prabhu there are leaders and followers. The leadership is what we are discussing. I believe the list of devotees that Gopinath prabhu gives are the leaders of ISKCON Education and Child Protection. These are all ex Principals of the various schools and they are an absolute Jewish majority. I think it is common knowledge amongst their friends and associates that this is in fact so and requires no proof. But if they were to offer some verified proof that they are not Jewish Background Devotees then let them do so.
We have never asked for a comprehensive list of "devotees' affiliations". We have specifically explained the levels of managerial leadership, and upwards, that we are referring to. Kindly re-read our last long article on the subject. It is stated there very clearly.
Your reference to the Gopinath article is a perfect case in point. You say he provided a list of the leaders of ISKCON Education and Child Protection. But how comprehensive is that list? Are there no other leaders in education or child protection, whose names are not on this list? We know of others in this leadership group whose names are missing, and there are undoubtedly others. So who are these individuals? Are they Jewish? If you don't know, you can't possible make a statement saying this short list is "an absolute Jewish majority". There's nothing "absolute" about it. That is our whole point! Tell us - where is it common knowledge that Sesa dasa is Jewish? Gopinath prabhu has brought a smile to many faces with that comment. Kindly tell us, where is your absolute evidence for the truth of the statement the Sesa prabhu is a member of this "absolute majority"?
In fact, some of the information in Gopinath's article was so incorrect that it resulted in our having to spend many hours dealing with the rebuttal provided by one individual, whose name has now been stricken from "the list", and from the article itself.
3. They are the ones in political, leadership or official positions in ISKCON and the onus is on them to prove that they are not biased or that they may have a vested interest in anything other than serving Srila Prabhupada and the devotees of ISKCON. This is the same with the editors of Chakra and Danavats as well as the Sampraday Sun.
Yes, the onus should be on our leaderes to prove they're not biased. Of course, we know the leadership is generally unaccountable. When it comes to criminal allegations, the burden of proof is always on the accuser. Innocent until proven guilty. Once the accuser comes with reasonable proof and allegations, then the burden of defense is on the accused.
C)
For you to consider that the move into Liberalism, Pluralism and Diacritical Theological Academia is simply a drive towards a lower standard or a lazy mans KC is a very weak attempt at justification for your opinion. Prove it!
1. To take on the Parampara and the devotees for all these years by systematically implementing these apasiddhantic ideologies takes more intelligence, organization, guts and brawn than the common man or woman. It takes a concerted and sustained effort, against the pressure of hundreds of devotees to achieve. It has been no easy task for them to implement these very well defined philosophically integrated ideals of the secular and non secular world into our Vaisnava culture and Movement. Are you serious? I cannot believe that you have offered such a pathetic excuse for this!?
We will be writing more on this in the future, but here is a brief example in support of our statements. There is evidence that one gurukula found itself in the position of dealing with strong pressure from the parents, who apparently did not like the high Vaisnava standards being instituted in the school. They were pressing for a more liberal, western academic program for their children, and apparently their money talked - and walked. The school lost their support, and eventually closed. So the lowering of standards, in some cases, may well be due to pressure from the bottom up, not the top down. This is a subject that merits close study, and we hope all the devotees will put some effort into understanding the phenomenon.
2. I also think that you do a disservice to the devotees to think that we are not all informed on so called ‘geo-political issues’ prabhu.. These are issues that do and will have a considerable impact on our lives as we reside in the non devotee world, watch the news and access the internet.
3. A Brahman is versed in both material and spiritual matters and must be aware of the geo/socio/politico and religious systems that surround them and impact on the prosecution of their mission. To not know this is stupid. How can we advise anyone if we are not educated. Srila Prabhupada could speak on any subject as evidenced by ‘Dialectic Spiritualism’ he was not an ignorant fool.
We agree that well-rounded knowledge is important. Sri Isopanishad explains that we must also understand nescience. General geo-political knowledge is one thing, but no one can be fully educated in the breadth of mundane matters of this world, while at the same time being absorbed in devotional careers. There are not enough hours in the day. The esoterics of the Jewish issue is not familiar territory to most. That assessment is not stupid, it is simply factual.
D)
Prabhu you are wrong with your point that we are on our own and ISKCON and your Website has no duty or responsibility to protect us.
1. We have a very immature and underdeveloped community that has no real form of protection for its members yet there is a highly sophisticated system of protection for its officials. If we make a claim against them be it civil, criminal, moral, ethical or philosophical the full onus of absolute proof and protection is placed on us.
2. The officials don’t have to provide proof and protection for us and can impose their will on us as they see fit.
3. The reason why ISKCON cannot and will not protect us or listen to us is because they are dishonest and misrepresenting Srila Prabhupada and the paramapara. But they should. It is their duty and responsibility to do so.
4. Rocana prabhu I would hope that you have a substantial system of protection in place that protects all aspects of our email confidentiality in regards to the ISKCON Institution and other members whose intentions may not be good. So in this way we do require your honesty and protection and you need to ensure us that our details will not be leaked or given freely. From what I have heard on the ISKCON Grapevine I have been assured that you do protect us in this regard. I hope this is in fact true…
It is certainly true. We make every effort to protect Sun contributors and staff in this regards. We have never breached a promise of confidentiality.
E)
As far as the Noahide Laws are concerned the evidence speaks for itself in the various Jewish texts and websites.
1. These laws are for the non Jew. The Jews believe that they are directly under their God’s law in the form of the covenant they have with him. They are predestined to control the world. There is no chance of conversion. This is their belief system. From our perspective it is not a system that is based on absolute truth. To us it is relative truth. They have chosen their governmental, civil, moral, ethical and philosophic code and it is certainly not amenable to change from us or anyone.
Maybe you need to research into the power and influence of the Jewish Lobby in various countries to know of their power and influence and then comment.
We are continuing to read and become educated, and the Noahide Laws are of great interest. We appreciate that they've been called to everyone's attention.
F)
As far as India is concerned and the Manu Samhita;
1. The majority of their Mass Media is internationally owned.
2. The majority of Indians have been brought up to see themselves and the world through the eyes of a secularist state.
3. They have learnt through secular schooling to separate religion from politics within their hearts, minds and intellects.
4. Many Indians are not happy about this and thus the Hindutva movement was manifest, which is primarily based on local custom and tradition as opposed to a proper understanding of the Vedic literature.
The various ‘isms’ that I am talking about exist only in the modern secular state. India is no different than any other modern secular state in this. As the years go by India is adopting more and more of the ‘isms’ that I am refereeing to. Presently in India Liberalism is sweeping through the country and there is a push towards legalizing Homosexuality, Abortion and having a nationwide ban of the Death Penalty.
Now that they are big players on the international financial and consumer market they will be less in control of their destiny and be controlled more and more by market forces and geo politics.
Who knows what the future for India is, so long as it follows a secular Governmental system. But I can assure you it will bend its knees more and more to the bankers of this world the deeper it gets itself in the world of geo politics and market force.
I can also assure you if ISKCON is merrily heading into Pluralism, Academia, Liberalism blah, blah, blah then we will never have the spiritual resolve or Sastrical credibility to influence India or any country for that matter.
G)
Newspapers and Websites of ISCKON have a duty and responsibility to help educate the common devotee and bring them up to speed on contemporary issues. Issues like the New World Order and Conspiracy Theory, and the various ‘isms’ that are occurring in the world around us.
If we look at these issues and discuss them, without personal bias, we will all be better off won’t we?
Up until now the Sampradaya Sun Website is the only site that we have been able to discuss many issues affecting our movement and devotional lives. There is no other forum to have any non newspeak discussion in our ISKCON world.
You can hold fast to your severe editorial policy in this issue but it will ultimately be at the loss of your credibility as a biased editor and website.
H)
As I have said before the issue on having a discussion on the Noahide Law and the Manu Samhita is a non issue at present. For now we are all facing the reality of Noahide Law.
1. I don’t believe that the Interfaith process is attempting to turn ISKCON or any other religions into Jews and I did not present this, this is your addition so please don’t confuse the issue.
2. The Jewish people are more than happy that we remain in our own faiths so long as we follow the Noahide law when doing so.
3. Maybe the death penalty will not be an issue NOW but; trade, immigration, visa, building permits, bank loans etc may be in place in the future due to their powerful influence on geo politics and finances.
Surely this is an important issue that needs to be addressed? So are all the issues we are discussing at present.
If there is a conspiracy or infiltration of Jewish Zionist people or policies into our movement then we need to get to the bottom of it? What good will it do if we ignore this issue? If there are no grounds for these claims then let this be discovered through research and discussion. We must not be scared to discuss these issues and recognize that sometimes we must force the point in order to get the discussion going. After all the force used to censor or censure (excommunicating) devotees in ISKCON is tremendous and so it may require some force to challenge it.
I)
One last point to consider is that ISKCON has been negatively influenced by many factors in its development to name one is the Narayana Maharaja influence. Now that I have said that, most of us accept this as fact or true, yet I have not provided the thorough proof for my statement that you are forcing into this discussion.
We don't have the time to get into the necessary level of detail here, but there is a huge distinction between your Narayana Maharaja example, and the issue of Jewish identity. We are certain that most readers will see the gulf of difference between the two. As time permits, we will attempt to offer a more comprehensive reply to this last portion of your article.
I can go on to say that Jesus was a real person who existed in the Roman times and yet how much documented proof is there of this fact? History is a very malleable thing prabhu and has been open to so much hearsay and misrepresentation. All the historians of yesteryear did not provide the proof that you are demanding. And the fact that you are only demanding this of the Jewish issue speaks for itself.
Radhika kripa dd did not have to provide copious documented evidence that states that Sikh gurus are Vaisnavas and there was not a whimper from you or your editorial staff. So as far we know the Sampradaya Sun accepts that Sikhs are Vaisnava’s and Rocana and his editorial staff will say nothing, even though this is highly sensitive, and from our perspective, offensive opinion that is not based on any philosophic or historical fact.
If the Sampradaya Sun is offering an unbiased and Brahminical service to ISKCON devotees then the editor’s role needs to be the same. Up until your prolific editorial policies on this issue I have had no reason to doubt your service. Now I am afraid that I have this doubt.
I know to you the loss of one contributor from outback Australia does not matter much to your website but I believe that the loss will be more to the general devotee who needs to have this matter discussed in an open and honest Brahminical manner.
Finally I would like to say that I do appreciate Rocana Prabhu and his editorial staff for all the other good work that they have done in assisting devotees to have their say on the Sampradaya Sun. It is a shame that this issue has created so much trouble. But then again this is a hot issue in any circles. But because it is a sensitive issue does not mean that we cannot touch it.
I am presenting what I believe is an angle of vision into the issue of why our movement has corrupted. We all know that it is no longer Srila Prabhupada’s ISKCON. But do we know exactly why?
One very last tiny point… If you were sitting at a meeting of the North American Heads of the Ku Klux Klan and noticed while reading the meeting’s agenda that the main topics were ‘Racial Integration and the Klan’ and ‘Interfaith and the Klan’ or even ‘a submission by the newest Diacritical Klan Theologian promoting that its members should enroll in Cambridge University’s Divinity Studies’ I am sure that you would think something was going on?
While my use of the KKK may upset some people’s sensibilities (as I profoundly believe that they are bogus hate mongers) they do exist and their ideologies are vastly different to the modern secular state or any credible religious group. My use of this ‘stark’ analogy only serves the role of making the point on how different our Vaisnava Theology and culture is to most religions and secular philosophies.
And our point is, if you were to point to a roomful of people of many persuasions, and to begin pointing at some of them and calling them KKK, then unless they're wearing a peaked white hat, you had better be prepared to explain how you know who's who. Calling someone is a Klan member is an allegation steeped in volatile emotional charge. Similar, calling someone a 'conspiratorial Jew' is equally charged. A higher degree of care is required, than in simple pointing to a devotee, and saying "You're influenced by Narayana Mahajara."
Rocana Prabhu this is a test for you and your staff. If you maintain your editorial policy on this issue you will have to make it a fair policy and so apply it to all authors of articles that post on your site.
If you continue with your biased policy you risk a loss of credibility and readership as a consequence.
I pray that you can explain yourself properly if you adamantly refuse to listen to my points.
I would also like to know why this has made you respond in such a biased manner for I believe that you as the editor have a certain responsibility to your readers to reveal your mind and vested interest on this issue.
Narahari das
