Justice Raveendran (the retired Supreme
court justice who was appointed by the Supreme Court to oversee the
present management at HK Hill, by the ISKCON Society of Karnataka a year
ago) took an initiative to bring about an out of court settlement
between two parties thru several mediation sittings.
The Bangalore group offered to bring the
property in dispute in the court, which is the Hare Krishna Hill temple
under the ownership of ISKCON registered in Mumbai if Bureau assured
before the Supreme Court that the rtvik system of initiation practiced
now will be the only system to continue and the preaching that Srila
Prabhupada is guru of everyone in this temple will also continue. Then
we went further to offer all the group properties, worth about 500
million dollars, about 20 temples in India to ISKCON registered in
Mumbai with same condition on initiation.
To avoid court battles, they even offered
that Madhu Pandit Dasa, Chanchalapathi Dasa and Jai Chaitanya Dasa will
be out of management of the Hare Krishna Hill temple, which is disputed
before the court. The Bureau had its meeting with GBC on March 9, 2013
and rejected the condition on initiation and rejected the settlement
offer. The Bureau's foul cries that rtvik is just an excuse for Sri
Madhu Pandit Dasa's plan to grab properties now stands exposed as just
mud slinging tactic. If they really believed this to be the case, why
don't they take the offer that would have included Madhu Pandit's offer?
The attached documents should be read in the following time sequence:
Letter dated Jan 25th, 2013 to Justice Raveendran
Final Offer of Madhu Pandit Das to GBC and Bureau March 5th, 2013
From: Madhu Pandit Dasa
Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2013 8:46 PM
To: dayaram.jps@com.bbt.se; Dayaram.JPS@pamho.net; Bhanu.swami@pamho.net; rgomatam@bvinst.edu; bhakti.charu.swami@gmail.com; Bhima.ACBSP@pamho.net; Bhakti.Charu.Swami@pamho.net; Rasaraja.BI-Bombay-Berkeley@pamho.net; atd@indiabbt.com; Bhaktarupa (das) ACBSP (Bhubaneswara - IN)
Cc: radhajivana@gmail.com; Chanchalapathi Dasa; Jai Chaitanya Dasa (Eco Agri)
Subject: Bureau meeting GBC
Sent: Tuesday, March 05, 2013 8:46 PM
To: dayaram.jps@com.bbt.se; Dayaram.JPS@pamho.net; Bhanu.swami@pamho.net; rgomatam@bvinst.edu; bhakti.charu.swami@gmail.com; Bhima.ACBSP@pamho.net; Bhakti.Charu.Swami@pamho.net; Rasaraja.BI-Bombay-Berkeley@pamho.net; atd@indiabbt.com; Bhaktarupa (das) ACBSP (Bhubaneswara - IN)
Cc: radhajivana@gmail.com; Chanchalapathi Dasa; Jai Chaitanya Dasa (Eco Agri)
Subject: Bureau meeting GBC
Without Prejudice to all connected matters pending
before the Supreme Court
Dear Prabhus,
Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to Srila
Prabhupada.
Though we had closed the mediation exercise on 7th
February formally withdrawing all our earlier offers through my email to you
dated 3rd February , we will still await your
fresh offer, if any, from your side for which we would respond afresh.
Just for your assurance to continue to endeavor for settlement we wish to
communicate that the basic offer of ownership and rights over all the
properties will be unchanged from what was offered till 7th
February. More details needs to be discussed afresh with regards to certain
extra safeguards required to prevent any victimization of the leaders who have
been leading this theological issue apprehensions and to allay fears that
the bureau and GBC is going through this exercise just get hold of the
properties and later stamp us out. If your real intentions are identical to
what is being expressed openly to us , there should be no problem for you to
ensure all those extra safeguards. We can discuss that after you
first communicate to us that the July 9th initiation system can be
put in place for our group of temples.
I consider the meeting tomorrow as a very crucial meeting
towards a positive settlement. My reason for this clarifying note
is that the rare opportunity that has arisen for the bureau to meet the
GBC to get a clear black and white answer either way towards the settlement
should not go in vain again due to the mistake of taking off
in the direction of discussing philosophy. We want you to know what
exactly is being offered by us.
After CPD presented our position to the Bureau on 10th
Feb for information, instead of discussing the other settlement terms , the
discussion took off in a direction to make us change our philosophy. Both
sides exchanged drafts with good intentions . Each succeeding draft from
our side would include statements that protected the officiating system of
initiation as per July 9, 1977 directive and in response we would
get drafts from your side with changes which make sure that it is not a
representational system of initiation but just a diminished regular guru
system. CPD agreed to these exercises with the team of Rasaraj
Prabhu, hoping, as assured by him, that he would in the end
derive the same system that we are practicing now. Both sides have
learnt that it has failed to produce any satisfying solution and we were
back to square one after several days of exchanging drafts back and forth.
Thanks to Rasaraj Prabhu and Bhanu Swami who tried sincerely worked hard to
make two ends meet. I am writing this so that we do not take this route
once again in the current endeavor.
We have also agreed that post settlement of the dispute, we
would participate in the discussions as part of a Guru issue Committee which
includes representations from GBC members, members of ISKCON Bureau, selected
members from national bodies around the world and ISKCON Bangalore Group of
devotees. At any post settlement stage if there is consensus among
the Bangalore Group of Devotees for any change from the present system allowed
for us before the Supreme Court, we will change. But if there is no
consensus we will not change the system agreed before the Supreme court.
Though any miracle can happen through Guru issue Committee, we frankly feel
that that settling a common initiation system seems like a far cry as the
position of both sides on this guru issue is mutually exclusive. Two non
interfering groups serving and growing together respectful to each other under
one legal structure with a pre decided code of conduct is the
spirit of this settlement as we understand. Therefore I insist that we be
understood properly for the sake of a genuine settlement not only letter but as
well as its spirit.
Whatever settlement we are seeking now , we want to ensure
that our stand on initiation is understood by your decision makers right
from the start not only in letter but also in spirit . Let
me repeat that changing our present understanding of initiation or the
system of initiation has never been offered to the Bureau at any point of time.
Even the last proposal sent to you by CPD on Mantra guru/Officiating Acarya
, which you are proposing to discuss does not change our stand on
initiation if you carefully study. On the face of it , It is quite a confusing
document as these exchanges of drafts were being made in a rush to close
settlement and can lead the reader astray if some statements therein are
not clarified. Anyway the conclusive stand is scripted by us in a nut
shell through the very last line of that document which says in red “
We do not consider or call ourselves diksha disciples of Mantra guru or
Officiating Acaryas.”
The only change we have made during the discussion of
different drafts on initiation with Rasaraj Prabhu is that , the
Officiating Acaryas are institutional gurus and not just
priests who give first and second initiation on behalf of Srila
Prabhupada. However we consider ourselves as receiving the two components of
transcendental diksha in terms of di+ksha divya gyan and ksapayati from
Srila Prabhupada, not only at the formal initiation ceremony as the
current link in our parampara but also on a ongoing basis forever,
beginning from the first day a devotee faithfully hears Srila
Prabhupada’s vani .
Our continued stand is that since Srila Prabhupada ,
as the Founder and Acarya of ISKCON, his prominence as the Primary guru
to whom everyone directly surrenders should be institutionally
preached and promoted in ISKCON temples, notwithstanding the fact that
there may be many pure devotees in ISKCON. Such pure devotees would do
everything by preaching and by their conduct to keep this prominence of
Srila Prabhupada in life of the devotees of ISKCON. If at all any
faith that can be justifiably institutionalized for promoting in ISKCON , it is
only this faith in the Founder Acarya of the institution as the Primary guru.
Srila Prabhupada has wished without doubt to remain active as long as the
institution exists in this capacity as the Acharya. All other followership
relationship in ISKCON should be geared to promote this Prominence of Srila
Prabhupada in the heart of ISKCON members.
In the last proposal we have also agreed that considering
the sensitivities involved in ISKCON on newly initiated in ‘calling ’
ourselves diksha disciples of Srila Prabhupada, we would just call ourselves as
disciples of Srila Prabhupada or Prabhupadanugas. Nevertheless from the rest of
the document it is clear that Srila Prabhupada is our transcendental diksha
guru. Again we are seeking all these liberties of a different system of
initiation only for our group of temples. We will still stand by that offer to
call ourselves only as disciples of Srila Prabhupada.
Having said all this , all this is nothing but
implementation of July 9th 1977 directive. Easier than
narrating all these faith matters and beating around the bush, it is easiest and
elegant to state before the Supreme court that in our group temples, the system
of initiation will be as per July 9th 1977 directive of Srila
Prabhupada since that is what our real proposal is and has been always
including the one sent last by CPD. Live and let live under one umbrella. July
9th 1977 also do not use the word diksha disciple for those
initiated. It just says disciples.
Therefore please do not work on the that last document sent
by CPD which needs clarification and explanation on many points. We have
already officially withdrawn that offer w.e.f. from 7th February for
this very reason. Instead we are attaching a ‘synopsis’
herein which is just compilation of the points in red in the same CPD’s
last document that are applicable to our group of temples with some
elaborations for greater clarity. Our group of Temple Presidents are yet
to approve the attached draft. But that should not be a problem as we are
moving forward as per the general direction given by that body.
For us, since this faith is the very genesis of this dispute
arising from being expelled from ISKCON for the same , we need to ensure
that there are enough legal safeguards and mechanism in the settlement
decree for the Bangalore Group of devotees to have a locus standi to go before
the court for enforcement of any violation on the agreed system of initiation
by the bureau or if we are victimized directly or indirectly for holding and
preaching this faith in our group of temples. We not want to make any secret
out of this possibility. Such a possibility will never be there if the live and
let live principle is adopted. I hope this is understandable considering
that the ownership/rights of properties are being offered irrevocably and
we cannot ever go to court for revoking the same and the GBC wishes to
retain in its book draconian law on banning rtvik doctrine in
ISKCON.
The GBC and other bureau members should also be
informed of the salient features of the other terms like opening
more temples by Bangalore group of devotees for ISKCON Bureau as properties for
ISKCON Mumbai as per the other non- philosophical terms orally discussed once.
Let me state again that when we are not seeking any in
between solution which needs any philosophical discussion. Such discussions are
bound to drag forever . We are expecting a clear answer on 8th or
9th March giving in-principle approval to our specific proposal in
writing. Then we could work out all other details before the next OC committee
meets and file before the Supreme Court. If this fails we would restart the
discussion after the Supreme Court case is over. Our desire to integrate
ourselves under one umbrella will always remain.
From now on I will be the single point of contact from our
side for all purposes of this settlement . I thank Ambarisha Prabhu and
Radhajivan Prabhu for their recent involvement in this settlement
efforts.
Yours in service of Srila Prabhupada
Madhu Pandit Dasa
Final Synopsis offered to GBC by MPD on March 5th, 2013
GBC cover letter March 9th, 2013
GBC statement Final March 9th,2013
Reply to GBC and Bureau March 14th, 2013
Final letter to Justice Raveendran March 22nd, 2013
Without Prejudice:
22.3.2013
Justice Raveendaran,
Chairman,
Oversight Committee, ISKCON Bangalore.
Chairman,
Oversight Committee, ISKCON Bangalore.
Dear Sir,
Hare Krishna. Please accept our
greetings.
We are grateful to you for having
mediated with ISKCON Mumbai for an out of court settlement on our mutual
request.
ISKCON Mumbai and the GBC have
jointly written to us at last with finality that, it is not possible to accept
Srila Prabhupada as the sole Guru/Acharya of our group of temples. Further they,
ironically, are asking us also to become “regular gurus” and make our own
disciples by becoming Gurus/Acharyas. Copy
of their communication is enclosed.
As you are aware we offered a lot
to facilitate the settlement only considering that it is bad to spend temple
money on lawyers. We offered first the ownership of suit property (Hare Krishna
Hill temple). Then we extended the offer to bring all other properties of our group
which is materially worth 20 times the suit property. We even went to the
extent of offering myself and few others to step down from the management of
Hare Krishna Hill if only they accept that Srila Prabhupada would be the sole
Guru in our group of temples and the same is decreed by the Supreme Court.
Unfortunately ISKCON Mumbai only
want to take what we offered without
acceding to our simple demand of leaving intact the system of initiation that is currently
being practiced in our group of temples which is in accordance with the written
directive of our Founder Acharya, His Divine Grace AC Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada.
Thus we regret
that mediation efforts have unfortunately failed to bear any positive result of
an out-of-court settlement with the bureau and GBC expressing their inability
to accommodate our faith that is being currently practiced in our group temples.
Right from the outset, we got interested
in the mediation only because Sri. Dayaram Das of ISKCON Mumbai stated that there
is the possibility of the Bureau of ISKCON Mumbai allowing Srila Prabhupada to
be the only guru in our group of temples if the property is given to ISKCON
Mumbai.
We cannot
accept their rejection letter to be in the spirit of settlement. It is merely
as demand for total surrender and not a compromise. This would mean we have to give up our faith
that Srila Prabhupada as our dikhsa guru. This is simply impossible to give up.
The self-made gurus rule the GBC and the Bureau. It is this very dogmatic
approach wherein the Founder Acharya, Srila Prabhupada cannot be considered as
one’s diksha guru has thrown out thousands of sincere followers of ISKCON
movement all over the world. They do not want to give up their guruship as it
would stop their ‘guru dakshina business’ for themselves independent of the
temples and their own rubberstamped follower camps within ISKCON. When we
brought up this very matter in the year 1999, the GBC passed a resolution
expelling us from ISKCON. It was at that junction, we asserted our legal
independence that we are members of a legally independent society in order to
protect our services to the Lord and the society from the expelling action of
the GBC for holding that Srila Prabhupada is our sole guru and refusing to
accept the self-appointed gurus of ISKCON.
It is only to
fight us, the ISKCON reformists, world
over, they are united. Otherwise they are fragmented in to as many camps as
there are self-appointed gurus in ISKCON. They have hijacked Srila Prabhupada’s
ISKCON. This moral and financial
corruption is the very genesis of this dispute and they do not want to budge an
inch on this demand. On the other hand they have gone to the extent of asking
us also to join them in the league of self-appointed gurus.
It is clear that they are not
satisfied with offer of ownership of properties under ISKCON Mumbai but they
want to continue their multi-guru system even in our group of temples.
We have replied to their
communication indicating our unacceptability of their demand to continue multiple
self-appointed guru system in our group of temples. A copy of the said
communication is also enclosed.
We have suggested in our reply to
GBC and Bureau if we can peacefully co-exist and expand as separate groups in
service of Srila Prabhupada. We have stated in our letter:
And we hope if this new approach
can bear fruit. We shall continue to try our best. Meanwhile the matters before
the Supreme Court could continue and we shall leave everything in the hands of
Lord Krishna with regard to the suit schedule property. We thank you once again
for your kind efforts to bring about an out of court settlement.
Yours in service of Lord Krishna,
Madhu Pandit Dasa,
President, ISKCON Bangalore.
President, ISKCON Bangalore.
Enclosures:
1. Final Offer of Madhu Pandit
Das to ISKCON GBC and Bureau on March 5th, 2013 on matters
concerning philosophy.
2. Synopsis of SYSTEM OF
INITIATION (as applicable to ISKCON Bangalore group of temples)
3. Statement of the Governing
Body Commission (GBC) of the International Society for Krishna Consciousness
(ISKCON) adopted on March 9, 2013.
4. Joint letter of the GBC and
Bureau to the Leaders of the Bangalore Group of Temples dated March 9, 2013.
5. Joint letter of the Temple
Presidents to the GBC and Bureau dated 14 Mar 2013.
