|
||||||
Powered by Twitter Tools.
Powered by Twitter Tools.
Powered by Twitter Tools.
Powered by Twitter Tools. Hare Krishna. ISKCON’s Child Protection Office is under assault by a small group of influential devotees who claim that it is biased against the accused. I find their accusations hard to believe. Several articles are appearing on the Sampradaya Sun and on Chakra. The first article, titled “Snake Oil, Scapegoats, and the Hare Krishnas: The CPO’s Use of Bogus Science,” appeared on Sampradaya Sun over the weekend. I wanted to get a response out ASAP, so I wrote a letter to Rocana Prabhu that was published under the title, “CPO Official Decision on Vakresvara Pandit.” A few days later I submitted a more thorough article titled “In Support of the Child Protection Office.” That article is copied below, with the related documents included for download: —— Visnugada says:
It is common knowledge that well over 500 former gurukula children in ISKCON are reported to have been beaten, raped, and/or abused in other abominable ways. Does anyone know how many perpetrators have faced criminal prosecution? I heard one relatively unknown “devotee” went to jail for child abuse. Maybe there were more that I have not heard of, but one thing is for certain: ISKCON is not famous for reporting criminal deviants to the police. On the contrary, we keep hearing of this or that rapist who gets moved to another temple or another country where the same activities are perpetuated. Visnugada’s proposal is to make ISKCON a haven for child abusers, as if it’s not bad enough. He continues:
As I mentioned in my previous article, that statement is blatantly false. This was an issue of several counts of statutory rape over nearly a year. The child reported it when she was an adult several years after the alleged sexual encounters. The Texas State Police did not purse it because neither of the persons involved lived in Texas when it was reported, it had been years since the alleged crimes. These were good enough reasons for the police not to investigate. However it’s natural and right that ISKCON should be more concerned about alleged rapists in our community posing as devotees. Visnugada complains:
I have not been privileged to read the entire case file, but I have carefully scrutinized key documents that have been made available and discussed the facts with both CPO Directors. The Official Decision describes the testimonies of the accused and the alleged victim with comparisons of the consistencies and other analyses of their reliability, including the employment of a “renowned expert in forensic written content analysis” who stated that the accuser’s testimony showed traits highly consistent with truthfulness. The Official Decision also mentions a questionnaire analyzed by the same expert, who found that Vakresvara’s responses indicated deception. Questioning a complainant and the accused can hardly be considered irregular. The document goes on to describe several inconsistencies in the accused’s testimony. According to the Official Decision, these contradictions, verified by expert analysis, coupled with a consistent presentation of facts by the alleged victim, formed substantial basis for determining guilt. Visnugada says,
What is the meaning of this vague claim? The accuser reported, “We did have sex around seven or eight times” over the course of about a year while she was 13 and 14 years old. Whose testimony could have alleviated Vakresvara’s self-incrimination? It’s easy to imagine how they would try. I know of a few big sannyasi gurus on the GBC who would say “He didn’t do it” and expect the CPO to beg their forgiveness. What ISKCON devotee would go against them? Anyone familiar with ISKCON knows the social effect that the resultant accusations of ‘Vaisnava aparadha’ would have. Who would be willing to call the sannyasi-guru-GBCs liars when they’re sticking up for their old buddy? I challenged some of these “gurus” a few years ago after they rolled out the red carpet for Vakresvara at my local temple, and the gurus’ many disciples were absolutely brutal. I’ve also had several devotees contact me to say that Vakresvara was undoubtedly having sex with this child, that the nature of their relationship was too obvious to hide among the devotees in the area at that time. I’ve heard this from some devotees whom I did not know at all, others whom I knew somewhat over the Internet, and also from my trusted personal friends. None said they were interviewed by the CPO, and I don’t see why they should have been. The primary witnesses for these “bedroom” activities would naturally be the complainant and the accused, and it makes sense for a proper investigation to have been focused on these two individuals. As stated in the appeal verdict:
Visnugada undermines the credibility of his “professional opinion” with this declaration:
The first investigation into this question went from December 4, 2000, to July 26, 2002, and resulted in a guilty verdict. (Apparently “properly” can only mean a not-guilty verdict in Visnugada’s opinion, though I can’t help but wonder about the nature of his relationship with Vakresvara Pandit if he presumes to know about Vakresvara’s sex life with such certainty.) Vakresvara Pandit had an attorney, Sesa Prabhu, who was presumably competent to raise any relevant issues in his defense. The complainant was not represented by an attorney, so it’s rather ridiculous to suggest that Vakresvara was disadvantaged by anything other than guilt. After the original determination of Vakresvara Pandit’s guilt, an appeal was filed on his behalf and the matter was decided on June 8, 2005. The Defense made numerous claims attempting to undermine the finding of guilt, but the appeal judges found each of them to be without merit and upheld the original decision. As stated in the appeal verdict:
Here it should be noted that this was after resignation of the CPO Director under whose authority the initial finding of guilt was made, so this was an entirely new CPO that ultimately determined the original CPO judges had made no mistake in this case. In fact, the only findings the Appeals Judges determined in Vakresvara Pandit’s favor was to say that the rectification plan was too severe, based on the fact that the original judges failed to consider that it was a case of “consensual sex with a minor.” As it turned out, the Appeals Judges were in error on this point, as they had failed to realize that there is no such thing as “consensual sex with a minor.” Nowhere in the United States is a thirteen-year-old child legally able to give consent to sex. That is why it’s commonly called “statutory rape.” As Tamohara Prabhu (CPO, GBC) wrote to me on July 19, 2005:
Bear in mind we’re talking about a 40-year old man repeatedly having sex with a 13-year young girl. The appeal judges had also failed to consider the fact that Vakresvara Pandit had been in violation of his rectification plan the entire time of his supposed restrictions, even to the point of being Temple President of Puerto Rico, in gross contradiction of the Official Decision, during which time he was also found guilty of additional offenses resulting in another official decision against him. Following the original appeal verdict, the CPO was shown these facts and thereby forced to revise their ruling accordingly. That devotees are still calling for this man to be exonerated, presenting their own twisted facts, is astonishing and reeks of corruption. If not for ISKCON’s shameful history of child abuse, it would be beyond belief. The relevant documents are attached (in “Word” format). Hare Krishna. Official Decision in the Case of Vakresvara Pandit das - July 26, 2002 (17)…………. Sincerely, your servant, Hare Krishna. I’m feeling pretty discouraged with devotees lately. As I wrote in my last post here, I’ve been calling for peace between fighting groups of devotees, but it really seems that almost no one wants it, or they they think it’s impossible. I can’t even get my letter out. I wrote it for the “Prabhupada Disciples” PAMHO conference, but the moderator rejected it. Then I sent it to the Sampradaya Sun, where it was also rejected. In both cases I was surprised. I’ve heard so many times that Vaisnava association is essential. Krishna even told me when He got me started on the bhakti path, “Get some association of My devotees,” but I can’t see what’s the use. I had more faith in the process before I ever met devotees than I have at any point since. At first I thought that everyone who chants Hare Krishna knew Krishna personally, and any devotee I met would immediately bestow their mercy on me to help repair my relationship with Krishna after I had offended Him. Within a few years I started wondering if most devotees even believed in Krishna for real, or if they were doing devotee-looking things for some other reason. Gradually it’s seemed increasingly superficial, and sometimes it seems that way with me too. I’ve heard it said that for every step we take toward Krishna, He takes ten or a hundred or a thousand; but He seems so far away that I can’t imagine how many steps I’ll have to take. I never expected Krishna to have left me for so long. I’m too depressed to write. Hare Krishna. Hare Krishna. Earlier this week, the anti-rtvik crusader Gaura Kesava Prabhu submitted a few messages deriding me on the PAMHO conference “Prabhupada Disciples.” The subject lines were “Bhakta Pandu Hypocrite” and “Immature Bhakta Pandu.” Needless to say, the content of the e-mails was not at all nice, and I do not believe his criticism accurately reflected my view. Naturally I was horrified. To make matters worse, I am not normally free to post messages there, so he was able to condemn me and misrepresent me unopposed. Mother Malati graciously said a few words on my behalf, but there was not much she could say since we are not that well acquainted and she presumably does not know my view on the initiation issue. When I found out that my responses to Gaura Kesava’s accusations were not being distributed to the Prabhupada Disciples conference members, I obtained permission from the moderator to address the group. I don’t know if my message will be approved, but here it is below: —–Original Message—– Dear Disciples of Srila Prabhupada, Hare Krishna. Please accept my most respectful obeisances. All glories I saw a few days ago some messages sent to this conference deriding me, Last year in a meeting at my local temple, our GBC twice described the Despite the unfortunate social risk, I entered the debate to test my All along I’ve been saying that it is very disturbing to me when I surely do not want to harm ISKCON; I’m trying my best to make it Sincerely, your servant,  cut above the hoof  cut above the hoof Sigh. Hare Krishna. Last Friday we discovered that our cow, Krishna Priya, had a cut above one of her hooves. It looked a little strange in that it went about half-way around toward the outside. It seemed like maybe she cut it on a rock or something. I sprayed it with betadine and was tempted to apply my homemade herbal healing salve and wrap it, but on second though we decided to take the extra precaution and call the vet. Being Friday afternoon, we didn’t know if the vet would actually show up due to other jobs. I expected him to call first, but he arrived without warning. I had wanted to round up Krishna Priya before he arrived, but she was standing near an ornamental cherry tree anyway, so it wasn’t too difficult to tie her to the tree. She’s a feisty animal and wouldn’t let the vet get too close. He said that sedation was an option, and I replied that it would probably be necessary. I was instructed to pinch in her nostrils to distract her while he got her with the needle. She layed down in a few minutes. The vet mentioned that sometimes a cut like this can happen when a rubber band gets stuck on their hoof, and when he reached into the wound he indeed found a large rubber o-ring in there. I don’t know where it came from, but I was really glad I called him and that he found it. If I had treated the wound myself without finding the o-ring, I think she would have gotten sick from an infection and possibly died. As it turned out, the vet applied some goop and a wrap, gave her an antibiotic shot, and then a shot to antidote the tranquilizer. It’ll take a few more weeks for the wound to heal, but Krishna Priya is doing much better, back to normal. The vet bill was $185. I plan to upload some pictures soon. —- I e-mailed Krishna Culture to tell them what happened, but I didn’t want to ask for a refund. They had already lost significant investment on the deal, and I tried to accept it as a loss. That’s not easy for me since I’m supporting a wife and five children on a modest government salary. I got a response from Krishna Culture today, and they’re again generously offering a variety of solutions, including a full refund. I think I’ll accept a partial refund. I feel sorry about the whole ordeal, and I’m not sure what to do with a clay mrdanga with a broken skin. I woke up heartbroken this morning thinking about the drum. The folks at Krishna Culture have been great about all this, so go there and spend a little laksmi. They’ve got a lot of great stuff. www.krishnaculture.com —— Also in the past few days I’ve been taking a lot of heat from devotees over e-mail. One PAMHO group that I’m subscribed to has had some very harshly critical writing against the rtvik groups lately. Since I looked into this issue last year I’ve found the rtviks’ side of the debase much stronger than the dominant view, so these anti-rtvik attacks really bother me. Even when I was taking the GBC’s position based on faith, I didn’t like seeing the fights between the two sides. However, now it’s more personal. I entered the debate on the rtvik side about 6 or 7 months ago first to find out what the best arguments were in favor of the current system practiced in ISKCON, hoping to be pursuaded by them. I soon discovered that the anti-rtvik devotees don’t agree on what should be done. Some think it’s good the way it is, and others think every disciple of a departed guru should be able to assume the diksa guru role without individual GBC approval. There are probably other variations too. I continued the debate with some of the most prominent anti-rtvik devotees, and I found that their arguments were very weak. They were not at all convincing, and some of their logic was beyond ridiculous to the point of being quite bizarre. The effect of it was that I became more convinced of the position I had taken. My position on this issue is that I’m arguing for a unified ISKCON. I personally find very little credibility in the notion that the current gurus are properly authorized to act in that capacity, but I don’t consider it appropriate for me to challenge a devotee’s choice of guru. Almost all my friends are disciples of contemporary gurus in ISKCON, and these friendships are important to me. If they have faith that their guru is authorized and bona fide, I don’t think it’s my place to insist otherwise, even if I do not share that faith. Therefore I’m saying that these two systems should be able to operate simultaneously in ISKCON. There are devotees who think Srila Prabhupada wanted to continue to initiate disciples via rtviks exactly like he was doing before his disappearance, and there are others who think he authorized his disciples to take that role for themselves. Both groups see themselves as followers of Srila Prabhupada one way or another. Any outsider would not be able to distinguish between these groups. Both want to serve Srila Prabhupada’s mission, and therefore I am arguing that they both should be accepted within ISKCON. As I see it, such a unification would make ISKCON very strong. I’ve been finding that this is totally unacceptable to the anti-rtvik devotees, and now that they’re seeing that they can’t defeat me in debate, they’ve begun to attack me personally via e-mail. Now there are a few devotees posting on the Prabhupada Disciples group and at least one other PAMHO group saying that I’m an enemy of ISKCON and should be kicked out. Devotees whom I’ve never met and who do not know me at all are fiercely attacking my character simply because I disagree with their analysis of the evidence pertaining to Srila Prabhupada’s orders regarding initiations after his disappearance. This is difficult because I value my devotee relationships very much. I initially sought out devotees because when my quest for spiritual knowledge revealed Krishna as the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Krishna personally told me, “Get some association of My devotees,” along with other instructions. I want my children to have devotee friends their own age, and we’re active at our local temple, Gita-nagari. None of the local devotees know I’m a supporter of the rtvik view because I don’t want to make an issue of it locally and my service to the temple community has not diminished in the slightest since I adopted this view. Even though I do not agree with the current guru system in ISKCON, I still offer all respect to the gurus and their disciples because they’re Krishna’s devotees as much or in most cases more than I am. It’s been less than a week since I last offered my obeisances at an ISKCON guru’s feet. Despite all this, in a few hours I’ll be finding several more e-mails sent to a wide devotee audience telling them how much of a demon I supposedly am. I know I’m not perfect, but I’m an honest person who does not have any ulterior motive. I rarely think about what might happen to me if speak the truth from my heart. I’m afraid of what might become of this demonization campaign, but I can’t help but speak the truth as I see it. Materially speaking, I have nothing at all to gain from this, and everything to lose. I might get banned from ISKCON. My kids might have to grow up without devotee friends. None of these devotees who are spreading hateful messages about me know me or care about how their hateful messages might hurt me and my family; but Krishna knows me perfectly, and I trust that I’m doing the right thing in His view, and I believe the same of Srila Prabhupada. There’s nothing that matters to me more than that. Hare Krishna. Our cow is not giving milk. We attempted to get her pregnant in October 2007, but she tricked us, showing all the signs of pregnancy except for giving birth to a calf. She apparently hasn’t gone into heat since, but I think it may happen again soon. She’s now five years old, which may be too old to have a first calf except that I think her body adjusted during this false pregnancy. So we’re protecting a cow, not getting any milk from her, and buying milk from the store. Actually she has a little udder with some very thick milk due to estrogens in the pasture, and we’re interested to find out if we can get her milk flowing even though she’s never had a calf. A few weeks ago a discussion ensued on a popular animal rights blog wherein it was said that “There is no such thing as an ethical vegetarian.” I argued that offering milk to Krishna and honoring the remnants is ethically superior to avoiding milk, but the vegans there would not accept it, putting their faith only in the material conception of life. Talking about Krishna there was to them as if talking about the “Tooth Fairy.” Although there was another devotee present and in agreement with me, we were heavily outnumbered. It was rather upsetting because I’ve been active in the animal rights movement for about fifteen years, since a few years before I found Srila Prabhupada’s books. I was a vegan animal rights activist before trying to become a devotee of Krishna, but due to this issue I had to distance myself from that identification. It was not easy. Whether devotees in New Zealand are avoiding milk isn’t a big issue for me. They’re on the opposite side of the world, I don’t know any of them personally, and I’m not here to tell them what I think they should do. It was probably a mistake for me to mention New Zealand in my recent blog entry. My concern is that there is an idea among some devotees that it is ethically better to abstain from milk from unprotected cows rather than offering such milk to Krishna, honoring the remnants, and doing whatever we can do to give cows protection. Devotees avoiding milk is a new idea, something that as far as I know was not taught by Srila Prabhupada, and it weakens us to have another disagreement among the Hare Krishna devotees. The fact that I’ve been relentlessly fighting to stop meat-eating, occasionally donating to cow protection programs, and even maintaining a cow comfortably at my home, keeps me free from guilt about honoring milk offered to Krishna. Not only that, but as I understand the science of devotional service, offering Krishna the milk from unprotected cows does more for the cows than boycotting dairies does. I know I’m severely lacking in Krishna consciousness, but it’s not very difficult for me to offer heartfelt prayers on behalf of suffering cows and ask Krishna to please accept her milk. I’m pretty sure I was a suffering cow once, and it’s only due to Krishna’s mercy that I may avoid that fate again. I hope that doesn’t sound too weird. Of course the standard of worship is that we should offer Krishna the best that can be obtained, and this means milk from protected cows if possible, but offering commercial milk is better than none at all. It also means that our offering of service to cows should be the best we can do. We must not neglect that responsibility. Hare Krishna. |
||||||
|
Copyright © 2009 OppositeRule - All Rights Reserved |
||||||
Recent Comments