The Manor, The Survey & The Banning
BY: SURESH VAGJIANI
Nov 19, 2010 — LONDON, ENGLAND, UK (SUN) — I recently came to know about the survey that Sitaram das has been circulating to selected individuals from the community around the Bhaktivedanta Manor. This request prompted me to share my opinion and experience.
The first thing I noticed is how the intent of this survey is unclear. In the years past, Sitaram aka Sanjay Tanna, has been responsible for banning devotees from the Manor who did not tow the party line, whatever it may be from time to time.
On one hand the Manor management tries very hard to maintain an appearance of a tolerant Hindu temple, on the other hand they ban any individual who contradicts or criticises their autocratic and authoritarian cultish ways.
Some years back on a visit to Bhaktivedanta Manor, Sitaram asked me to follow him into a room, where Mahavidya prabhu and Dwarkapuri were waiting. Sitaram showed me a letter explaining the reasons why I was no longer welcome at the Bhaktivedanta Manor. Basically the reasons were because I had been classed as a sympathiser of the ‘Ritvik' camp that gives importance and relevance to Srila Prabhupada. I fell into the category of individuals no longer welcome at the Manor.
After reading the letter, I agreed to leave the premises. Despite the fact that I was polite, civilized and did not offer any resistance, Dwarakapuri and Mahavidya started to verbally attack me. Sitaram then asked them to escort me out of the temple.
I did not understand the necessity or purpose of this behaviour. I dread to think what would have occurred if I had refused to leave. Most likely they would have physically forced me to leave. This would not have been the first time they have assaulted ‘unwelcome' visitors to the temple, including whole families who have been unceremoniously walked off the premises.
This is the same Mahavidya prabhu who is now a regular contributor to the Sampradaya Sun, and who is now questioning current practises at the Manor which not long ago, he protected with unquestioning, aggressive loyalty for many years, many times.
It is ironic to see now how Mahavidya prabhu himself is now facing the brunt of the same policy he once enforced. It would seem that those on the 'inside' are wearing special glasses that allow them to filter out certain things and spiritualise wrong doings.
I'd like to point out the hypocritical double standards of the Manor management. Around the same I was escorted off the property, Sivarama Swami, the guru of Sitaram and some of his godbrothers, such as the current Temple President of the Manor, Sruti Dharma, were covertly associating with Narayana Maharaja - one of the groups that was supposedly on the banned list.
In my particular case, I believe that personal revenge prompted Sitaram to ban me. At the time, Sitaram was the person in-charge of university preaching in and around London. I had arranged for Yaduraj prabhu (a Ritvik) to come and hold a program at my university. Sitaram somehow felt that he had some sort of ownership or monopoly over the university preaching. He informed me that he would be having a meeting with the Manor management to resolve my transgressions.
The irony of it all is that in the very recent past, the Manor management have harboured criminals. What I find most concerning is that these same people and the same system still run the show and still continue to harbour individuals with dubious pasts.
In the same way gurus cannot be voted in, a spiritual institution cannot be run based on the popular opinion of the public. This is the way politicians are chosen. As Mahavidya suggests, resolving the difficulties at the Manor would be very easy -- all they would need to do is read Srila Prabhupada's instructions on how HE wanted his institution to be run, instead of gathering opinions.
I am curious to know what will happen to the results of this survey? Who will get to see them? Does Sitaram offer any guarantees that any changes will be implemented, and who decides what feedback to implement?
To have any value, a survey needs to be carried out by an independent body. How can Sitaram, who has himself behaved in ways that have nothing to do with Vaisnava principles, let alone basic gentlemanliness, and is on the payroll of the Manor, offer any semblance of objective impartiality?
Unfortunately, of recent at the Manor, the teachings, instructions and wishes of Srila Prabhupada no longer seem to be of any significant relevance. The only rule that dictates the law is the golden rule -- he who has the gold makes the rules.
Suresh Vagjiani
