Суд над Бхагавад-гитой / Attempt to ban Bhagavad-gita


Guest

/ #1281

2011-12-18 00:31

APPENDIX 22

REBUTTAL TO THE GBC DOCUMENT ON THE CASE:

SULOCANA vs. KIRTANANANDA

ON WOMEN TAKING INITIATION BY A NEW "GURU""

compiled by Sulocana dasa

CONTENTS

PART ONE

INITIATING WOMEN

THE FACTS-ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS

JURISDICTION

GENERAL PRINCIPLES

WOMEN'S GURU-HER HUSBAND OR A "SANNYASI"?

CAN WOMEN BE INITIATED SEPARATE FROM THE HUSBAND?

KIRTANANANDA'S ONE AND ONLY ARGUMENT

WHY ISKCON'S "GURUS" CANNOT IMITATE PRABHUPADA

GBC SAYS GURUS DON'T HAVE TO BE PURE-BUT HUSBANDS DO

KIRTANANANDA'S 10,000 "WIVES"

WHEN CAN A WOMAN LEAVE A FALLEN HUSBAND?

THE REAL QUESTION?

SINCERITY-COMPARING SULOCANA TO KIRTANANANDA

PART TWO

JUDGING A MAN

HOW THE "GURUS" JUSTIFY THEIR BEHAVIOR

WHAT IS AN "ACCIDENTAL" FALLDOWN?

JUDGING A MAN'S SINCERITY

ILLICIT SEX

INTOXICATION, SPORTS, MOVIES, ETC.

HOW THE VARNAS AND ASHRAMAS MUST BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION

WHAT MUST NOW BE DONE?

THE LEADERS-HOW TO JUDGE THEIR BEHAVIOR

IT'S A GRADUAL PROCESS-JUDGING A MAN'S PAST

JUDGING KIRTANANANDA-CASE CLOSED

SHASTRIC QUOTES ON THE CHARACTER OF KIRTANANANDA

CONCLUSION

THE GBC'S DECISION & SULOCANA'S DEMANDS TO KIRTANANANDA

CORRECTIONS AND ADDITIONS TO SECTION ONE: "THE FACTS"

The person Rupanuga refers to in his document as "Jamuna," is actually Jane, Sulocana's wife. The name "Jamuna," was given by Kirtanananda without Sulocana's awareness or approval. This is a direct breach of human decency what to speak of Vaisnava behavior. It therefore represents an offense to Srila Prabhupada since the man exhibiting such heinous behavior, Kirtanananda, is claiming to be Prabhupada's representative.

Jane was sent to New Vrindaban with one child from a previous affair and Sulocana's first son in her womb. Sulocana did not even know that she was pregnant when Jane took her "initiation". Sulocana found out Jane was pregnant at the same time he found out that she had decided to devote her life to another man. They had been married one year at the time.

Jane was lured into taking "initiation" by telling her, in effect, "It's not necessary to have your husband's approval. You are your own spirit soul. Sulocana is not a pure devotee. 'Bhaktipada' is a pure devotee. If you want to go back to Godhead, you have to take initiation from a pure devotee." This is of course the standard ISKCON fine which they attempt to substantiate in their document.

Jane divorced Sulocana and immediately "remarried" a man whose character is so degraded that he had been grabbing other women's breasts, including the wife of Sri Galim, the headmaster of the Gurukula. He had been severely beaten by Bhagavatananda for attempting to seduce his wife. His name is Raghunatha. He had been attempting to get a "wife" for many years but most women laughed at him, seeing his desperate condition. He is also well-known to be one of New Vrindaban's dopers. Jane had been secretly associating with this person for some time. Kirtanananda told Sulocana, "I never said that" (encourage a woman to remarry").

Jane is not actually remarried. In several letters, and the books as well, Prabhupada refers to a woman who does what Jane did as "a prostitute" or "an enemy" or "keeping a paramour." He refers to men that do what Kirtanananda did as "wife stealers" or "Ravanas."

Jane was given a divorce and full custody of Sulocana's sons with the use of the temple's money and lawyer. The judge made the decision without thinking to ask if Sulocana had been notified of the hearing, which he hadn't. There is hard and undeniable proof of this. Jane's plea was "cruel and inhuman treatment." Sulocana never hit his wife once or even looked at another woman. She has admitted to telling this he in order to get the divorce, since even mundane courts do not allow a divorce without any grounds. Also there is positive testimony, both from a local attorney and Jane herself, that she was given this decision because the local judge, Mr. Warmuth, "is very favorable to Keith Ham" (Kirtanananda).

Another fact not mentioned is that, by this time, Sulocana had two baby boys of his own, one three, and the other one-year old, both of whom he loves very much and has not seen now for one year. Both these boys were forcibly taken from Sulocana by six of Kirtanananda's men. They illegally entered Sulocana's motor home to do this.

Also not mentioned is the fact that Kirtanananda was deliberately discouraging Sulocana from staying at New Vmdavana by denying him the service he was promised-managing the guest house. There are innumerable witnesses who will testify to this fact, including Narada Muni, who was in charge of the Indian program at the tune. He was very disturbed about this since Kirtanananda's grounds for doing so were absolutely unjustified.

Some other important facts are these quotes by Kirtanananda to Sulocana: "If you want your wife back, you will have to surrender to me" and "Don't forget, I have an eternal relationship with your wife, yours is only temporary," also, (You are not welcome here because) "Sulocana, you're just not my man" and "I heard you are leaving. Don't try and take your wife! I told her I'd 'protect' her."

Also not mentioned are the fact that Kirtanananda made no attempt whatsoever to counsel either the wife or husband to try to keep the family together. This is in itself proof of Kirtanananda's real intentions. As acknowledged by the GBC on page 5; divorce can only be recommended as a last resort. Kirtanananda made it the first.

These are just a few of the facts not mentioned in the GBC paper, all of which were known to the GBC. More of the story is contained in the preface to the upcoming book presently being compiled by Sulocana dasa.