This Ain't Hearsay - Part I
BY: RADHA KRISHNA DAS
Nov 22, MEXICO CITY (SUN) -- Since Hridayananda wasn't able to dazzle the devotees with his "brilliance," he is now trying to baffle them with his BS (the "Exaggerated Preponderance" diatribe written by his proxy/alter ego "Krishna das"). Therein he tries to discredit Rocana das' work at the Sampradaya Sun of denouncing his life of corruption, exploitation and disobedience.
One point made by "Krishna das" was that Rocana "peddled... a lot of hearsay by others." Rocana rightly replied that "of the various critical remarks recently made about him here in the Sun, the most damaging statements were not hearsay at all." Indeed, Aniruddha and Lalita Madhava's statements were not hearsay, but first person testimonials about Hridayananda's life of debauchery as per the standards of true sannyasa life. But besides those recounts there is much more on Hridayananda's deviations, although he keeps betting on ISKCON's short historical memory to be able to go from one affair to the next without accountability.
While we all read about Hridayananda's sannyasa antics, a group of Srila Prabhupada's disciples here in Mexico gathered to recall another incident linked to Hridayananda's loose sannyasa standards. This ain't hearsay, by the way, but something that we all lived and were witnesses of.
By the time when Srila Prabhupada personally rebuked Hridyananada in Mayapur for letting women in his bedroom, he already knew about another incident involving Hridayananda and the fair sex. That may be the reason why Srila Prabhupada was adamant in stating to Hridayananda that a sannyasi shouldn't freely and at will mingle with ladies.
Back in 1974, Hridayananda had just been appointed GBC of Latin America. At that time his zone consisted of temples in Argentina, Mexico, Puerto Rico and Venezuela. Our temple in Mexico City functioned normally, although it had problems and substandard practices, such as the worship of Sri Sri Radha Madan Gopal, installed just the previous year.
For that reason we were surprised that during that summer, Hridayananda called us from Puerto Rico asking us to send him three plane tickets from San Juan Puerto Rico to Mexico City. He had decided to transfer the local Deities of Sri Sri Gaura Nitai to Mexico because, as he explained, the Deity standard was bad and the Deities would do better in Mexico.
We wired the tickets and shortly, after Hridayananda arrived at the airport in Mexico accompanied by Sri Sri Gaur Nitai. We then noticed that besides himself and the Deities there was another person: Ananga Manjari dd, Hridayananda's former wife and now his widow.
At first we didn't know who Ananaga Manjari was, and Hridayananda didn't tell us a thing about it. The only thing we knew was that she was Their Lordships' pujari. Then, from other sources we found out the real nature of the pujari that had come to Mexico along with the Deities.
And she hadn't come to Mexico just to bring the Deities and install them. She was now here to stay as a pujari. We didn't object to this idea as we appreciated having someone with experience and team spirit join us in the temple service.
The Deities were installed in the altar, replacing another smaller set of Deities made of clay that were removed and were supposed to be sent to Puerto Rico, although that never happened. At the end they were submerged in a river near a farm that the Movement maintained for some time.
Things didn't develop as we thought they would originally. Just like the endless drama between Hridayananda and Devamrta that Aniruddha and Lalita Madhava chronicled in the Sun, a relationship loaded with agitation and duality began developing between Hridayananda and his widow. He would seek any excuse to see her and talk to her. They would fight like husband and wife in front of everyone, or he would have a devotee go and rebuke her on his behalf. He would sometimes criticize her and complain about her, knowing that she was right outside of the room listening to everything. Or he would send someone to tell her how angry and displeased he was with her, etc.
When they talked face to face he would end very agitated and in anxiety. He would then go to the main floor to take it out on the first person he would find, which usually was Maitreya Muni. Once he hit Maitreya with his danda in the head; another time he threw a bowl of prasadam at his face, just because he didn't like the taste of the food. As expected, he never apologized or acknowledged such reprobate behaviour.
As with the Brazilian mataji, Hridayananda used to call his widow into the room and talk to her while wearing just a gamsha. As expected, after some time his gamsha would move around and his "genital load" would become exposed. Devotees would then discreetly signal to him about the spectacle been made, but usually he wouldn't pay attention to them.
The important point here is that Hridayananda never had that type of behaviour with any other pujari or devotee. This was a soap opera in which uncontrollable lust and agitation could be seen in the air. You could also notice his determination to disregard the norms of conduct that a sannyasi is supposed to follow. This romantic drama unfolded in front of everyone's eyes and continued for some time. As one godbrother stated: "We had to put up with all his nonsense just because he was agitated and wanted to take this thing to the limit."
Devotees from Puerto Rico later told us that taking away the Deities from them was plain arbitrary. They felt that what Hridayananda really wanted was to take his widow to Mexico, because he spent more time here. The argument about the faulty Deity worship standards in Puerto Rica was just an excuse to bring her to Mexico. This also became evident to us while seeing the drama unfolding in front of our eyes.
In Mexico we also had problems with our Deity standards, and so bringing Sri Sri Gaura Nitai from Puerto Rico was not the solution to the alleged problem there. And then, to take care of the Deities came the very same person who was taking care of them in Puerto Rico. So this whole idea didn't make any sense.
This situation became known in the United States and there were bets on Hridayananda's imminent falldown. Different devotees told us that this incident came to Srila Prabhupada's attention, and that he had requested the GBC in the U.S. to do something about it.
Arrangements were made so that Ananga Manjari would leave Mexico immediately, as things couldn't continue this way. So a substitute pujari was sent to Mexico, a mataji from Boston named Nanda dasi, who for the last few years has lived in Alachua. Nanda dasi didn't come to Mexico just because one of us knew her and invited her to come to Mexico, but she showed up one day as a pujari while Ananga Manjari was frisked away from Mexico.
Many devotees remember Ananga Manjari and the circumstances of her arrival in Mexico in 1974. Just a few years back, she and her husband came to the Rathayatra in Mexico. In conversations with local devotees, he stated how previously his wife had lived in the Mexico City temple.
From this we can see how Hridayananda is ready to take his deviations to the limit, to flirt with a falldown, and to stretch the principles to the edge. He did it then in Mexico, and he has been doing it ever since. For some of us who were witness to his affair in Mexico, the Devamrta affair and other misconducts over the years are not a surprise. What is a surprise is his ability to fool followers and well wishers perennially, and set such a bad standard for Srila Prabhupada's movement.
The facts speak for themselves, no hearsay here:
1. What are Puerto Rico's Sri Sri Gaura Nitai Deities doing in Mexico? Is there any justification for having them brought here in 1974? As of yet we haven't found any, other than being the whims of a man in love.
2. According to the devotees from Puerto Rico that some of us got to talk to, the local Deity standard wasn't bad. There wasn't any justification to remove the Deities from there. In any case, if the Deity standard in Puerto Rico was bad it would be the fault of their pujari. But we all saw that same pujari in Mexico doing very competent work, and she along with others could have done that same good work in Puerto Rico.
3. How is it that suddenly Hridayananda tells us of his plan to bring the Deities to Mexico to give them a better standard of worship if we didn't really have a good program here? Why not send them to any temple in the U.S.?
4. How is it that Nanda dasi ended up in Mexico City as a pujari in 1974 and stayed here until 1975, and was present during Srila Prabhupada's visit to Mexico in 1975? No one knew her here and she only arrived after the drama with Ananga Manjari became unbearable and Hridayananda's falldown was becoming imminent.
5. Many Srila Prabhupada disciples here in Mexico were witnesses to this embarrassing affair that Hridayananda insisted on maintaining with his widow. So there is no question of us misunderstanding what really went on. By the way, all along Ananga Manjari behaved much more as a lady than Hridayananda as a gentleman and a sannyasi. He was manipulative, exploitive, and out of control, and we don't need him or "Krishna das" to come and tell us some BS as to what really happened here.
6. The conclusion of all witnesses to this affair is that Hridayananda brought his widow to Mexico because he used to spend more time here, and thus would spend more time with her here. He used the Puerto Rico Deities as a tool to bring his widow to Mexico and be with her.
To wrap this story up, what follows is an excerpt of a letter that Srila Prabhupada wrote precisely to Hridayananda just a few months after the incident narrated here. Could it be that Srila Prabhupada was giving him an instruction concerning this incident and letting him know what he expected from him?
- - - - - - - - -
My Dear Hrdayananda das Goswami:
Please accept my blessings. I am in due receipt of your letter dated September 26, 1974 and have noted the contents.
I am very glad to note that you are seeing that the devotees are maintaining the devotional practices. This is the secret to success. Therefore I am stressing it. And, if you also stress it and show yourself as an ideal Vaisnava, then you are my representative in fullness.
are not after titles and designations. Lord Caitanya made it a principle that
we must teach by personal example. This is what I have tried to do. So if
all of you my disciples do this, then the future of our movement will be glorious.
BY: RADHA KRISHNA DAS
Dec 06, MEXICO CITY (SUN) - In his various articles, Hridayananda's virtual sidekick, Krishna das, refuses to deal with the issues of Hridayananda's long history of lusty behavior, mundane lifestyle, or deviation from the orthodox Vaisnava doctrine that he was supposed to represent. Instead, he goes into an airy rambling about Vaisnava ideals and loving exchanges not practiced at the Sun. But facts are what really matter. Excuses don't do. Hridayananda's actual behavior is the most important evidence of his character.
Much has been said about Hridayananda already. Nonetheless, I want to relate another instance that will help us understand better the dilemma with him. For a change it has nothing to do with saris or fashion, but with Hridayananda's conception of himself in relation to Srila Prabhupada.
In the progression from thoughts to words to actions, words are usually not considered as important as actions. My daughter once told me, "I don't love you anymore," which I didn't take seriously as her actions tell a different story. But in certain instances, words mean everything, and through them we can judge a person's character. To mind comes Jesus Christ saying, "I am the Way." His miracles, personal example and teachings made him indeed "the Way" to an audience desperate for the Biblical messiah. But if a guy in the street says, "I am Jesus Christ," we'll know what to make of it.
In Hridayananda's case, certain statements made by him over the years reveal what he thinks about himself and Srila Prabhupada. Unfortunately for the English speaking audience, these most intimate revelations are reserved for the Spanish and Portuguese speaking devotees.
One day back in the late 1970s, his old buddy Jayajagadish came to my office at the Spanish BBT in Los Angeles. He was disturbed, and proceeded to play for me a tape in Spanish that he had just received as head of Hridayananda's tape ministry, which was located at our offices. It was a question-and-answer session. One devotee asked Hridayananda who were more fortunate, Srila Prabhupada's disciples or his own disciples. He immediately replied that his own disciples were more fortunate because they had both Srila Prabhupada and him. Time has shown otherwise. Countless newcomers have received a minimized Srila Prabhupada and a truckload of nonsense.
But this is an old story, you may say. It is a consistent trend nonetheless. So let's fast forward to December 28th, 2005, to the Mexican city of Leon, where Hridayananda is conducting an outdoors istagosthi while visiting some of his hardcore fans. He is dressed as a karmi for reasons that beat me, while a good portion of the audience wears traditional Vaisnava attire.
Harikatha das, one of his eldest disciples and maybe less of a zombie than the rest, starts by asking Hridayananda why he abandoned his disciples for eight years [by not coming to Mexico] when his support was required, and made them feel as orphans. Hridayananda proceeds to reply making various points, as follows.
"Prabhupada… traveled for twelve years. I… have been traveling for almost thirty four years, in other words almost three times more than what Prabhupada traveled."
We all know that this is a blatant lie, from different perspectives. To begin with, Srila Prabhupada's traveling mission in the West lasted 13 years (1965-1977), not 12, while "almost" 34 years is not the same as 34. So 13 in relation to less than 34 comes short of the "almost three times more" that Hridayananda announces in his contest against his own spiritual master.
Then, Srila Prabhupada's travels as a missionary were not limited to his work in the West. Back in 1953, Srila Prabhupada registered The League of Devotees, which is a direct predecessor of ISKCON all the way down to its statutes and mission statement to divulge the teachings of our param guru, Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakur.
But lets go back further in time. In 1944, Srila Prabhupada started Back to Godhead and continued writing, printing and distributing it until 1960, when he began concentrating on the Srimad Bhagavatam. During World War II it was difficult to secure paper for BTG, and Srila Prabhupada moved to different cities all those years. Nonetheless, he would always find the way of printing and distributing it. Then Srila Prabhupada began publishing and distributing books in the 1950s, starting with Easy Journey, which always required endeavor and travel.
For Hridayananda, Srila Prabhupada's decades-long activities in India traveling and preaching don't mean anything. He is in competition against his own guru, and he even thinks that he already beat him. "Srila Prabhupada traveled for only 12 years and I have been doing it for 34 years. I am much better than him." And his sheepish audience reacts: "Jaya Acharyadeva."
The fact is that Hridayananda hadn't been traveling and preaching for almost 34 years, as he stated. By 1984 he had permanently stopped living in ISKCON temples and spent years studying in college, away from ISKCON's mainstream missionary activities. He even resigned from the GBC to concentrate on his private affairs. Then, during the istagosthi he himself declares that by the end of 1977, he was experiencing recurring nervous breakdowns that kept him prostrated for months at a time. How is it then that he has been traveling for almost 34 years? Maybe the total range of years added up to almost 34, but it is full of gaps that severely decrease his actual "flying time".
And Hridayananda is saying all this nonsense precisely as a reply to a very simple question: "Why did you abandon us for so many years?" He abandoned his mission of preaching and developing Latin America, which was Srila Prabhupada's most important instruction to him, made evident by the fact of naming him ritvik guru for this portion of the planet. But he considers this time of neglect as part of his glorious "almost 34 years" of travels. Manipulation of facts and numbers seems to be his expertise.
We also have to consider Hridayananda's own words during the istagosthi, that the guru needs "a life of his own," which would further decrease actual time traveling in missionary work. The numbers just don't add up, except in Hridayananda's head, attempting to look superior to his own guru, Srila Prabhupada. His fans exclaim anyway: "Jaya Acharyadeva."
Then there is the quality of the preaching work. Let's be honest. Hridayananda can travel for a hundred years but it won't match one second of Srila Prabhupada's preaching. He goes to a place demanding to be worshipped, served, entertained, glorified, congratulated for his jokes and have his lackeys jump fast every time he shouts to them. He travels around dressed as a karmi, chatting with girls, coming up with foolish jokes, and taking away money from the temples. In Srila Prabhupada's case, we had the travels of a nitya-siddha; with Hridayananda we have the flying circus of a nitya-baddha.
Let's now see the result of Srila Prabhupada's 12 years of preaching and travel, compared to Hridayananda's "almost 34 years." Srila Prabhupada formed a powerful spiritual movement that presented Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu's teachings worldwide for the first time in history. In turn, Hridayananda has been exploiting that same institution for his own sense gratification, has mismanaged it again and again, has been a key factor in every crisis this movement has experienced, and his "preaching" is tinged with his mundane considerations that alter the correct development of the Movement.
Hridayananda then tells of about his experiences as a guru:
"Certain devotees see the guru more or less as a blessing machine, a guru that doesn't need to have his own life."
For Hridayananda, the guru indeed requires to "have his own life" ("tener su propia vida", in Spanish), a private life. Nonetheless, he is wrong and is simply trying to justify his own anartha-laden lifestyle. The fact is that real gurus and sannyasis don't need their "own life" because they are selfless and compassionate. In fact, they should not have their own life. If they want it, they should resign as sannyasis and gurus.
Maybe a married Vaisnava guru in an Indian village may need a few moments here and there to take care of his family affairs and home maintenance, but he still acts as a paka-Vaisnava and probably has some brahmacaris living at his home, which is always open to everyone. But that is not the same as maintaining a private life in Gainesville or Beverly Hills, surrounded by smiling damsels, teaching mundane academics at the local college, and playing Bach on a keyboard.
And in ISKCON, due to Srila Prabhupada's personal example as a sannyasi and guru, the principle of total commitment to the mission of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu should be stressed. His example was one of dedication 24 hours a day, body and soul in the service of Lord Krishna, of His devotees, and of the conditioned souls who want relief from material existence. Indeed, gurus and sannyasis don't have their "own life." Their life is one of dedication and surrender.
I remember watching back in 1987 a TV interview with a young charismatic Catholic priest, during Pope John Paul's visit to Los Angeles. The interviewer asked him what had it meant for him to become a priest. His answer was: "Before, first it was me, then it was me, and at the end it was me. And if there was any time left I could then think about others. Now it is the opposite. First there are the others, then the others and at the end the others. If after that, if there is a moment left I can use it for my basic needs."
This priest is talking about a life of dedication to the Christian mission. And if we see Srila Prabhupada's example, or Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Sarasvati Thakura's or the Six Goswamis', it is the same life of dedication to internal practice and unlimited mercy, far removed from Hridayananda's concoction of "a life of his own" for a guru or a sannyasi.
And this "life of his own" is such a pernicious trend if we consider the way Hridayananda has been munching on the Movement. I remember that once, after having become "Acharyadeva," he came to Los Angeles and ordered me that the Spanish BBT had to buy him a Cadillac for him to use during his visits there. Ramesvara's shiny Mercedes Benz had awakened his competitive spirit. I refused to do it. I also remember that back in the late 1970s he once arrived at the Brazilian farm, demanding that they build him his own house with a swimming pool. I was there when that happened. In a later visit the house was already built, with Devamrta dasi included as an assistant. And then we have his legendary visits to Mexico, whose high point was when he was offered thousands of dollars as dakshina from each temple. There are plenty of witnesses to that. Just a short time ago in our blog there was a story from those days, when he asked the President of the temple in Veracruz to loan him $10,000 U.S. He never returned it or sent any explanation.
In his mind, everything belonged to him and everything was his to enjoy. In Miami the same trend appeared. He built his personal quarters on the penthouse, spending more money on it than on the temple room underneath. And after all his demands and whims were satisfied, he moved anyway to a rental in the building next door. With these attitudes it is understandable that he backs the idea that the guru has to have "his own life."
Then Hridayananda points this out:
" [Some devotees think that the guru] doesn't need to take care of his own health, and that his ideal destiny is to become a martyr, that his most glorious destiny is "to die in the battlefield."
This is just more of his nonsense. I don't know of anyone who expects that sannyasis, preachers and gurus be negligent with their own health and toil until they collapse and die. He is saying this only to justify himself and manipulate the sentiments of his audience.
Here he confuses causes with consequences. We all agree that the guru shouldn't just labor until collapsing and dying "in the battlefield." But we have seen how a bunch of voracious individuals, who named themselves successor "acharyas" of Srila Prabhupada, tried to exploit and monopolize fame and glory. After experiencing a severe case of existential indigestion for trying to swallow the entire universe and receiving unexpected karmic reactions due to their ambition, many of them fled from their original responsibilities, arguing that they were dying on the battlefield and they now need "their own life."
Hridayananda next says something that we have heard a thousand times, but that by now hardly any one believes:
"In the year 1977, Prabhupada named eleven devotees to take on the responsibility of becoming gurus. …amongst us only few survived. Thanks to Krishna I am one of them."
Srila Prabhupada didn't name Hridayananda guru in 1977, nor in any other year. Srila Prabhupada didn't name him an acharya either, as he himself and the other ten individuals claimed. And Srila Prabhupada would have never allowed Hridayananda to call himself "Acharyadeva," considering the lousy example that he has been giving for years.
Hridayananda and 10 others forced ISKCON to accept them as enlightened acharyas and bonafide successors of Srila Prabhupada, abusing everyone's sense of cooperation and desire to make ISKCON succeed. But in due course of time, their offenses got to them. Some of them went crazy, others simply fell down, others turned to a life of isolation and weirdness, and still others have experienced severe illness and sudden death. What we know is that some sort of heavy curse fell upon the impostor successor acharyas. The only ones still around ISKCON are Satsvarupa, Jayapataka and Hridayananda. We all witnessed how fallen and confused Satsvarupa IS. Jayapataka suffered a stroke last year that left him incapacitated. And Hridayananda has been living almost like a karmi for years, with many devotees doubting that he really survived.
Hridayananda then goes back to competing against Srila Prabhupada.
"Prabhupada took sannyasa at age 63. I took sannyasa at age 23."
Hridayananda continues with his obsession of comparing himself with Srila Prabhupada. This time, it is the age at which they took sannyasa. Here, less is more. Srila Prabhupada is 63, and Hridayananda is 23. Hridayananda wins. In any case, the logic of his comparison beats me, as it cannot explain his mundane behaviour.
We also have to consider the quality as a sannyasi in both cases. Hridayananda is 60 years old now, and in a short time he will be 63, the same age as Srila Prabhupada when he took sannyasa. But Hridayananda often looks like a karmi and it is improbable that he will change much by age 63. Instead, his anarthas and karmi lifestyle are likely to intensify. He will play his keyboard better, his closet will have more and newer karmi clothing, he will have new Crocs to put on during initiations, there will most likely be more pics of him hugging young girls, he will have learned new ways of making his audience laugh, and he will have sat dressed as a karmi on more vyasasanas. Some people bet that he won't even be a sannyasi when he reaches 63. In this context we don't really understand why he tries to compare himself to Srila Prabhupada like this.
"At age 25, Prabhupada put me in charge of 20 countries."
We see here again Hridayananda's tendency to praise himself and to twist facts in order to appear important. Back in 1974, Srila Prabhupada named him GBC of Latin America. At that time ISKCON had temples in Mexico, Venezuela, Puerto Rico and Argentina. That doesn't ad up to 20. So what he says is false. In the next couple of years temples were opened in 6 more countries due mostly to our godbrothers' unstoppable desire to please Srila Prabhupada. But even that doesn't add up to 20 countries, and by then Hridayananda wasn't 25 anymore. Do you get the point? Hridayananda needs to manipulate the facts, and twist the truth to look better, sometimes even better than Srila Prabhupada.
"I faced the challenge of assuming the role of guru... in a society completely convulsed."
It was the immaturity and personal ambition of ISKCON's leaders, particularly the 11 who had been named ritviks, that created so much convulsion in the Movement. In order to establish a system in which they appeared as pure devotees, the world was divided into 11 private zones of influence. They had to crush the opposition, lie frequently, keep their own scandals under the rug, fight among themselves for money and followers, etc.
became convulsed due to people like Hridayananda. It is false that he became
a guru in a convulsed institution. He and others were the cause. At that time,
the real challenge was to lead an institution in the right direction, endeavoring
with selflessness and intelligence. But that didn't happen. The opportunity
of a lifetime was wasted. Now he tries to present himself as a hero when in
fact, he was screwing up Srila Prabhupada's mission while carving a little
empire for himself.
The abstract presented here corresponds to just the first few minutes of the istagosthi, which goes on for another two hours! With arrogance, false statements, twisted facts, and minimizing Srila Prabhupada, Hridayananda expects to convince his gullible audience in Leon that he is doing just fine.
We wonder, what is the need of saying that he has traveled three times more than Srila Prabhupada, or that he took sannyasa three times younger than Srila Prabhupada? Would you, dear godbrother/sister, make comparisons of this kind? His desperation to change the facts to look like a hero is so evident. Throughout the istagosthi you hear his half-truths, excuses and manipulations, like when he considers as bickering any complaint against the institution, and so on.
Hridayananda aka Howard Resnick aka Acaryadeva aka Acaryapada aka Gurudeva Go-Swami
From Pada: Hridayananda (Howard Resnick), born 1948 November 5, is a self-appointed bogus GBC ISKCON "guru" clone (clown), he perverts Srila Prabhupadas books, preaches bogus philosophy, stealing Prabhupadas disciples. Hridayananda received his rubber stamp guru certificate in Iskcons homosexual re-coronation ceremony and crowned himself Acaryadeva. He personally picked that name for himself in the days of the Zonal-Acarya nonsense with the misconception that he was one of the "acarya successors" of Srila Prabhupada. He forced his godbrothers to worship him in a simultanious guru-puja, declaring Prabhupada for dead.
please also read:
expose - mexico
Hridayananda's Tough Love
Hridayananda's Falldowns with Devamrita devi dasi
Hridayananda fall down from sannyasa
Hridayananda -- Out of Character
Hridayananda exposed by Payonidhi Prabhu
Hridayananda's Sex - Drugs - and Cocaine Party
Hridayananda advocates homosex philosophy
A Response to Hridayananda's Homosexual Philosophy
Hridayananda rejected by his disciple Krishna-Kirti Das
Hrdayananda's bogus Srimad Bhagavatam
Hridayananda rejects Srila Prabhupada
Srila Prabhupada on homosexuality
IRG South America Update
Krishna-kirti's letter to the GBC [doc]
Krishna-kirti pdf article here [pdf]
Photo Gallery of Hridayananda
any questions please write to
Chant Hare Krishna and be happy!
All glories to His Divine Grace A.C.Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada!