Rocana's Masquerade
The Sampradaya Sun Exposé


Rocana das
ROCANA DAS

Rocana's Masquerade
Sampradaya Sun Exposé
Sent from Praghosa Prabhu to Pratyatosa Prabhu

March 22nd, 2010

Hello Pratyatosa Prabhu,
PAMHO AGTSP Hare Krsna. Pleasant surprise to hear from you my old friend.

Thank you for your forwarding this comment to Rocan Das.

Rockne Das elected to "cull" me out from those "contribute" to his site for two very specific reasons about 2 years back.

First because I confronted what I considered his egregious and distracting criticisms of HH Intruding Swami during a month long venture on his part to paint Maharaja in a nasty light with offensive innuendo. Rocan is ever ready to criticize anyone and everyone - while always remaining unrepentant for his own defects.

However - our real split occurred upon my challenging his vacuous presentation on guru-tattwa offered his public through his principal premise contained in the twin essays on his site: Sampradaya Acharya and The Church of Ritivik.   http://www.harekrsna.org/gbc/black/rocana.htm

He insists that his site's purpose is to foster open discussion and debate - and I took him at his word, criticized these two papers and their utter lack of any  real representation of Serial Prabhupada's actual instructions on the matter and openly invited him to publicly debate me on these two topics on his site.

 
Rather than openly and capably establishing the veracity of his position on this issue - by demonstrating the gap between my stated premise on these matters and Srila Prabhupada's, as he insisted  privately to me was the case, he simply invented one lame accusation against me after another - in order to simply bar my statements from reaching the public domain entirely.
 
Rocan and his minions on this site - never fail to resort to hurling the most bizarre and disconnected ad hominems against anyone they disagree with or cannot in fact defeat when they are confronted with the teachings and directions of HDG Srila Prabhupad being delivered by those who call them to account.
 
I have experimented with him and those who troll the waters of his medium and have found that there are a large number of "contributors" there who in fact - while railing away against  all things ISKCON - are in fact themselves quite at odds with HDG:both his teachings and even more so -his direct instructions.
 
Later - when I entered that domain again under the pseudonyms of first Krishna Das and then later as Margaret Connors - I discovered rather quickly - that both he and his minions would quickly descend into the most irrelevant arguments and slander when they found themselves accountable and "boxed in" by the teachings or instructions of Srila Prepaid.
 
As an experiment - I likewise communicated with the head of the so-called Vaisnava Foundation" Kailasa Chandra Das - as "Margaret Connors", having established her persona on the Sun Site and played the curious "seeker" who had found the VF via KCD's article called "ISKCON BOON-DOG-ILL" published on Rocan's site and was seeking a little more information on his activities and "mission". To say the least - it was a very very interesting exchange - which I can send you if you like.
 
At the end of the day - Rocan, true to form - was pressed by those who could not abide being so thoroughly "handled" by an "errant junior Godsister" as Rocan Das described her - simply ignored WHAT she was generously offering them all - and set out with a vengeance to "unmask" Margaret - who had by this time been described as at the least "very naive" to "demoniac beyond belief": and all for the egregious crime of offering Rocan and his readers the simple and pristine teachings of His Divine Grace Srila Prabhupada. In Rocan's own words - he and they were "cheated" by Maggie for hiding "her" real identity as she gifted them all!
 
Silly but true.
 
I had informed Rocan after he discovered my previous ruse as Krishna Das that I considered his site open and fair game and I would slip the truth in there with the same vigor I have always employed in my samkirtan efforts that often obliged me to don a disguise or give a security cop or city Policeman the slip in order to accomplish my task. I told him point blank - "I got you once and I will get you again if or when I deem it valuable to do so! So pay attention and let the games begin".
 
As Margaret Connors - I found my "muse" and means to again administer the medicine and merely seduced him by pandering to his pride and his appetite for useless and pointless debate - while going no where near conclusive solution to any real issue.
 
You will be delighted to read his letters he composed to "Margaret" as he sought to inspire her to continue offering his readers more fodder for "debate and rebuttal" all the while proving that in the end - HE is the sole arbiter of what makes it  to the public and his blaming anyone else - for writing this or that - misses the real mark entirely - PRECISELY because it is HE Rocan Das - who decides what does or does not make it to his readers and the final say is based upon how he views anyone's comments as serving HIS particular purposes.
 
So his going public with my ruse - really only exposed this fact to the public. Any and all "offenses" to Srila Prabhuapda or his devotees that find their way to the front page of HIS SITE - do so PRECISELY because Rocan has put them there; front and center.
 
If you like - I can send you the entire exchange between both "Maggie" and Rocan and "Maggie" and Kailasa and you will be absolutely amazed at what lies at the core of these two bedfellows' confusion and hubris.
 
I am sure you noted the egregious attack upon the character of your former wife Mother Urmila some weeks back when Rocan elected to not only "inform" his readers that Mother Urmila - one of the most dedicated and capable devotees of either gender and a past contributor to the solid Krsna Consciousness of my own children for considerable years in both Detroit and North Carolina - was denied the authority to initiate on Srila Prabhupada's behalf by the GBC. Announcing this was however - not sufficient. Rocan had to include the nasty "hearsay" of some "unknown" witness to the discussions who said that her denial was based not upon any particular policy in place or principle being upheld - but merely because of her purported "abrasive" personality. Necessary information? Of course not. Accurate reporting of the facts? How could we know. And what is more - falls squarely in the category of blasphemy of a devotee who has dedicated her ENTIRE LIFE to supporting the future Krsna Consciousness of countless children. Does the history of Rocan das remotely in the same league as Mother Urmila? Not a chance. This one incident is the proverbial grain of rice whose cooked condition spells the condition of Rocan's entire pot.
 
Anyway - I did appreciate your efforts on behalf of Srila Prabhupada to correct him. However he is not an honest man by a long shot. His commitment to mischief mongering - in the name of "preaching" or even so-called "free speech" now appears to have ruined his ability to stand accountable to Srila Prabhupada in any real fashion.
 
He has ducked and run from me for nearly 4 years in an effort to avoid answering for his helping to facilitate the "sinister movement's" slipping under the radar and injecting itself into the heart and minds of the devotees. It would not matter save but for the fact that many devotees have come under the influence of the techniques he employs to foster endless debates that NEVER reach any thing even remotely approaching the singular conclusions of HDG Srila Prabhupada.
 
Had a blast though in my efforts to do so.
 
Thanks again for sending me this letter and I pray all is well with you and your family.
 
Respectfully
Praghosa
 

PS If you wish to view my exchange with Rocan and Kailasa as Maggie - I will be happy to send it. Quite revealing.

See below:

 

-----------

Here is Rocan's 1st Letter to "Margaret" sent on January 26th.

Dear Margaret,

Please accept my humble obeisances.  All glories to Srila Prabhupada.

Thank you for your recent submissions to the Sun, which have stimulated an interesting exchange of ideas.

Regarding your last submission, 'Sheltering Criminals and Curing their Criminality', we have some concerns.  You've clearly stated your point about everyone being 'criminals', of one sort or another, and ISKCON/Srila Prabhupada's mission being to enable our spiritual remediation.

However, you go on to suggest that Gadadhara and Mahavidya prabhus need to prove their complaint that ISKCON doesn't protect women and children.  You wrote:

"ISKCON does not, nor has it ever maintained a policy of endorsing, maintaining, promoting, or ignoring - any devotee's reawakened criminal desire or action. If or when - any devotee's previous criminal condition resurfaces and it becomes known, the leadership has confronted it and taken the necessary steps to eliminate it and prevent its interfering with anyone's own practice of Krsna Consciousness."

And…

"Where are recalcitrant criminals being "sheltered" incorrectly in any of Srila Prabhupada's temples? You are merely expecting your readers to accept this backhanded accusation as simple fact, as if you are not obliged to provide hard evidence of such apathetic mismanagement of any ISKCON center and its management.

We can't in good conscience facilitate your statements in this regard, unless you acknowledge and speak to the obvious and currently ongoing example of this – Gauri das at the Manor.  Mahavidya prabhu has written volumes on the matter, as have the abused youth.  It appears that Gauri das is being sheltered quite nicely, has not kept to the CPO restrictions against him, and is defacto enjoying the same administrative power as before the latest CPO action.  And there seems to be adequate proof of his ongoing role in management.

I think you've made numerous statements in 'Sheltering Criminals' that will bring on rebuttals from your challengers, but let's start with this one.  We'll look forward to your reply, and/or revised copy of the latest article.  And by the way, we've guessed at your geographic location as being USA for the byline.  Is that correct, and can you be more specific?

Hoping this finds you well.
Your servant,
Rocana dasa

 

Margaret replied thusly:

Hello Friends,

I am not familiar with this case involving this man Gauri Das. But my second submission expresses this and if you can point me to the volumes of information provided by Mahavidya das, I can be brought up to speed on this. Being that you did print these comments today, I assume that my explanation was sufficient but I would appreciate studying the case. Certainly if the ISKCON temple in his area is ignoring his or anyone's ongoing criminal abuse of any child - I would think that the parents of these children would be immediately outraged and seek his removal from the scene. But - I continue to maintain that it appears to me (though I am willing to be corrected of course) that the teachings of Lord Krsna insist upon the power of devotional service and mass samkirtana to be the exclusive and powerful panacea for any and all sinful activity and the desire to enagage in them.

My understanding - drawn from my reading Bhaktivedanta Swami's Bhagavad Gita As it Is 9:30 - is that even if one commits the most abominable action - if he is engaged in devotional service, he is to be considered as a saintly devotee because he is properly situated in his determination to continue the process of purification. Am I somehow not reading this verse and purport correctly? In the purport Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada says:

Now, in the conditioned state, sometimes devotional service and the conditional service in relation to the body will parallel one another. But then again, sometimes these activities become opposed to one another. As far as possible, a devotee is very cautious so that he does not do anything that could disrupt his wholesome condition. He knows that perfection in his activities depends on his progressive realization of Kṛṣṇa consciousness. Sometimes, however, it may be seen that a person in Kṛṣṇa consciousness commits some act which may be taken as most abominable socially or politically. But such a temporary falldown does not disqualify him. In the Śrīmad-Bhāgavatam it is stated that if a person falls down but is wholeheartedly engaged in the transcendental service of the Supreme Lord, the Lord, being situated within his heart, purifies him and excuses him from that abomination. The material contamination is so strong that even a yogī fully engaged in the service of the Lord sometimes becomes ensnared; but Kṛṣṇa consciousness is so strong that such an occasional falldown is at once rectified. Therefore the process of devotional service is always a success. No one should deride a devotee for some accidental falldown from the ideal path, for, as explained in the next verse, such occasional falldowns will be stopped in due course, as soon as a devotee is completely situated in Kṛṣṇa consciousness.

I have looked for some kind of special exemption for particular kinds of sin etc in this verse- asserting that those individuals who are guilty of such special sins - are outside the forgiveness and mercy of Lord Krsna described in this verse. I am just not seeing it.

Anyway - if you send me something that verifies this man is an "abuser" at large, a true danger to himself and children in general - then naturally I would agree that his ability to meddle in this fashion needs to be immediately neutralized. Nothing I have written implies otherwise.

It is a fact though - that this man mahavidya das, and others as well, seem to use this particular case to cast the whole of ISKCON in a misleading light. So my comments are directed to what I see as the primary defect in his comments. He uses this fuzzy situation to imply that ISKCON  does not do the needful when its members' prior bad habits resurface and put the mission in jeopardy. I am new to the association of devotees - but I have been reading Bhaktivedanta Swami's books for quite some time now and am going on the contents of his teachings.

I was born in  Massachusetts and now live on the east coast.

Respectfully
Margaret Connors

 

Next on February 7th Rocan wrote to Margaret the following letter:

Dear Margaret, Hare Krsna.

Thank you for your correspondenceWe will be very interested to receive copies of your exchanges with Kailasa Candra das and company on matters of initiation and ISKCON.  We will, of course, await your permission before publishing anything you send us in this regard.

We are publishing in today's edition your latest submission, "Good Association", which I'm sure the readers will appreciate.  However, I wanted to make clear to you, as a new Sun contributor, one aspect of our editorial policy.  When a reader broaches a topic –particularly a volatile subject like gurukula abuse – we expect a complete and reciprocal exchange.  You offered a few submissions, and received several responses. While you've replied to Mahavidya das, at least in part, I believe there is an open item with Gadadhara dasa, who addressed you in 'Foxes in Charge of the Chicken Coup'.  Then there's Bhakta George, of course, who addressed you with a very heavy (nearly 'epic') reply.  We expect and assume that you'll rely to these individuals, and trust you have something 'in the works'.

I mention this because we periodically have writers get into heated frays, then walk away from the discussion without meeting rebuttals directed to them.  Instead, they start a fresh topic because they either have no answers, or don't want to pour the necessary time into the debate.  This is a practice we don't facilitate at the Sun.

Looking forward to hearing more from you, on all fronts.

All glories to Srila Prabhupada.
Your servant,
Rocan Das

 

Next Rocan wrote the following:

Dear "Margaret",
Hare Krsna.  All glories to Srila Prabhupada.

Thank you for your latest submission, which we unfortunately will decline to publish.

If you track back via Gadadhar's record of challenges, it was Kurma dasa who initiated the discussion, with you responding in "What is an Uttama-adhikari?"  Above, you indicate that you're following the thread of karma.  You appear to have your threads crossed.

Gadadhara is obviously not trying to "ferret out what we can all support in this matter".  He is challenging what you appear to be supporting, which is the antithesis of what he supports, and what many Sun readers and contributors support.  In other words, Gadadhara is not looking for a baseline of commonality.  He is challenging you to explain your support for what he understands to be against Srila Prabhupada's instructions.  So kindly reply directly and on point.

Thank you.
your servant,
Rocana dasa

 

I had in fact already offered a response to the  nuts and bolts of Gadadhara's comments - but Rocan ACTIVELY REQUESTED that Margaret offer more, again personally soliciting her participation. So "Margaret" sent both he and Gadadhara das the following letter - which Rocan absolutely would not permit his readers to carefully consider. THIS is where his real devious tactics and purpose come to the fore:

 

Hello Gadadhara das

I have not visited the Sun site for a few days since my last reply to your question regarding my supposed support for  ISKCON'S "rubberstamping" of gurus as you have termed it.

The Sun has not as of yet supplied you or its readers with my reply, so as you have provided your e-mail address in the public domain there - I have elected to forward you reply.

First off - I sent you an answer which the moderator of the site deemed "unrelated" to your initial question. In the interest of keeping me on point - he directly requested me to reply to your question on the appointment of "gurus".  As you have since conflated your concern with this issue of "gurus" etc - with my straightforward comments on the laws of Karma as they pertain to everyone in this world - insisting that my comments are leading me down the path to hell - clearly those comments were and are worthy of your consideration. If you wish - I will  forward them to you as well.

For now I will forward you my reply to your question on "rubber stamping". As my first attempt to send this reply to you - was written in a slightly hasty manner - I will also foward this better edited version along to the moderators at the Sun and perhaps they will deem it worthy to publish.

Respectfully
Margaret Conners

 

Going for the Gold!!!

Hello Gadadhara  Das

You have asked:

"Could you please explain your thoughts regarding your own words above, endorsing the "Guru Rubber Stamping Factory" vs. the Words of HDG Srila Prabhupada calling it cheating? Could you explain this contradiction considering your point that we have to hear from Srila Prabhupada, but you are advocating and endorsing exactly opposite of what he said on April 22nd, 1977?"

Margaret Connors ends her article "Penance of Speech" with following words:

      "However - you did make one very positive point. You end with, "Just hear from Srila Prabhupada eternally". Now you're talking. I agree with this and advise that we approach any and all philosophical discussion with this as our humble motto."

And, in her article, "What is an Uttama Adhikari" she made her endorsement of the Guru Rubber Stamping Factory with the following words:

      "It is safe to say that the leaders of ISKCON make their best efforts to ensure that such valuable devotees who meet the above mentioned qualifications are carefully selected to represent Srila Prabhupada and his mission."

My simple comment is self-explanatory. It makes no  mention of "rubber stamping" anyone - in any way. The appointment of men to initiate the next generation of disciples in Srila Prabhupada's mission - the Krsna Consciousness movement - is merely the official appointment of devotees - selected from those who meet the necessary and STATED qualifications - to act on Srila  Prabhupada's behalf.

Your question is rhetorical and taken on its face - attempts to logically assert first - that the GBC Management Body  either does not in fact make their best efforts to ensure that such devotees who meet the minimum qualifications of uttama adhikari as given by Srila Prabhupada, are entrusted with this simple service and/or secondlly - challenges the legitimacy of of their selecting such individuals from amongst the many devotees now actively serving in the mission of HDG Bhaktivedanta Swami. 

As a consequence of the research I have dedicated to this matter - it appears very clear to me at the least - that HDG Bhaktivedanta Swami Srila Prabhupada established the world wide mission of Krsna Consciousness, with very careful guidelines - as his own particular effort to infiltrate the chanting of Hare Krsna everywhere and anywhere.

He made it crystal clear - what was and what was not Krsna Conscious action - for it is ONLY by one's actions - that one's condition in Krsna Consciousness can be correctly understood.

He trained up his first disciples and they were granted a degree of his personal association that 90% of his later disciples never enjoyed or even required. His influence in all the essentials necessary to become and share Krsna Consciousness was perfectly effected in this way all over the world.

When he departed - though he had some 5000 disciples who were all moving very nicely towards the goal of pure Krsna Consciousness, and the lion's share all probably fitting the minimum qualifications of uttama adhikari given by him in his books, he only selected 11 men to accept the service of formally initiating new devotees who came to his mission after he departed. This appears to me to be a matter of public record. It was HE who set the example for the future actions of his GBC as to why and how to do this for his ISKCON leaders. The term "rubberstamping" is misused and abused by those who wish to denigrate indirectly the actions of Srila Prabhupada in his choosing the first men to serve him in this capacity- by criticizing the present day GBC management body for merely following both his example and instructions in this matter . Srila Prabhupada employed it when scoffing at the idea that one could give "by decree" the qualities of an uttama adhikari - or likewise make one a "guru" (perfect disciple) by decree; like the government makes money by decree  with its legal tender laws.

My education focused on business, history and economics. So I will draw upon that to illustrate what I believe to be the real issue here.

Up to the early part of the 20th Century - silver (itself a commodity) was "monetized" by the market - with the individual monetary unit in the United States used to measure the value of all other commodities was an actual measured weight of silver: 371.25 oz of PURE TROY silver.

The banks stored the saved silver dollars in their vaults - and more often than not the depositors preferred "notes" from the  bank that represented their stored silver dollars and used these notes to conduct much of their trade. It was easier for many reasons. However - if or it became obvious that the banks were "rubberstamping" notes, in excess of their actual silver dollar assets or the savings of their depositors and loaning such notes to a public - at interest no less - the public would "RUN" to the bank and within a short time - the fraud inherent in 2 or more men laying claim to the fixed amount of silver - via the "notes" they were holding - became obvious. The consequences of such "bank - rupture" were obvious to one and all.

The government over time - used the effects of the bankruptcies that naturally and predictably manifested from this system - to wrest control of the issuance of money from the free market and since the last 40 years or more - the US money system has been 100% pure fiat: with all notes exhibiting the "rubberstamped" decree on its face; "THIS NOTE IS LEGAL TENDER FOR ALL DEBTS, PUBLIC and PRIVATE.

So whereas formerly - a 1 Dollar "note" from any bank that practiced honest banking - could be exchanged for one silver dollar coin - with a fixed weight of 371.25 Grains of PURE Troy silver - today no such exchange is possible - as the nation's "money" is issued by decree and its value - vis a vis all other goods and services in the market fluctuates in direct relation to the aggregate supply created by the government - and the interest owed in addition to this principal.

Now - devotees who accuse the GBC of rubberstamping gurus - perhaps without thinking about it or realizing it - are really condemning HDG Bhaktivedanta Swami Srila Prabhupada of officially doing this himself in July of 1977 (rubber stamping gurus) when he selected the original men to represent his wishes in this regard. He did no such thing. He selected 11 men to serve him in a purely "fiduciary" capacity. Money is always a universally valued commodity( like silver or gold) or a fiduciary note that represents the full value of that silver or gold - or it is pure "fiat"; paper or computer currency that has no connection to anything of inherent value and can function in the market ONLY because the FULL FORCE OF THE GOVERNMENTS MONOPOLY of DEADLY FORCE asserts its utility - by decree; i.e by "rubberstamping".

Srila Prabhupada appointed 11 men to initiate disciples ON HIS BEHALF. This is a full fledged order to act in a purely "fiduciary" capacity. His appointment was not a declarative statment or inference of their purity of heart. They were not the silver or gold. ISKCON being his mission - its Founder and Preceptor - he held their responsibility to the highest - VERIFIBLE standards. His selection of these men - was not his attempt to MAKE them or magically TRANSFORM them from one condition - to another - anymore than one could magically turn paper into silver. It was said that Jesus turned water to wine. But he never attempted to force people to pretend or act as if water WAS wine; by decree or rubber stamping. NO! He actually turned the water into wine. But this is not what Srila Prabhupada was doing - nor ordered his disciples to pretend to be doing in the future.

Now it is said that the spiritual master is a touchstone and can turn a non-devotee into a devotee - as bell metal can be turned into gold by the alchemist. But the process - at least as I understand it - is that it takes the instructions of the guru and the submission of the disciple to those instructions to effect the actual transformation. It is not hocus pocus or magic or any such thing. It is correct speaking by the guru and effective hearing and following by the disciple to transform material consciousness into Krsna Consciousness. It is NOT possible by decree or "rubberstamp".

The mission requires preachers as far and wide as possible. Are we not requested to spread Krsna Consciousness to ever town and village? That is how I received it.

So Srila Prabhupada appointed or selected men who had already demonstrated their willingness and capacity to lead precisely that effort. His appointment was not a declaration "This man is PURE - follow him". His appointment was a declaration "This man is trained to effectively allow me and my books to teach you all HOW TO PURELY FOLLOW my directions". He is one of my fiduciary agents. He acts on my behalf. I am not giving any of them ABSOLUTE CONTROL of anything or anyone in MY mission. I am requesting that they act on my behalf - and "without consulting me" whoever they consider as demonstrating the evident qualifications - theycan do the necessaries involved and accept the newcomers as disciples; "granddisciples" in this great Krsna Consciousness movement.

He established that HE - HDG Bhaktivedanta Swami Srila Prabhupada was and will always be the "Silver and Gold" - vaulted in the lap of the Divine Couple - protected by Lord Balarama and all the others -  and that these men must carefully represent themselves as fiduciary agents or "NOTES"  obligated to represent him - OUNCE for OUNCE in every way.

So appointing such "fiduciary" agents who have the capacity to serve Srila Prabhupada's mission - as the needs of the mission and its natural expansion unfold - is IN FACT one of the few duties assigned to the GBC. At least to myself -  it appears that they are not at liberty to abrogate their duties in this matter. Singling out men who meet the "verifiable"  standards Srila Prabhupada provided - is condemned as "rubberstamping" gurus. I view it as anything but. Srila Prabhupada referred to his appointees as his Ritivik Representative and at least to me - this clearly establishes the relationship between these appointees and Srila Prabhupada as definitively "fiduciary" within his mission.

Consider this if you will. Anyone who does NOT receive the order to act as guru from either Srila Prabhupada or his GBC body - and is in fact not a fully self realized soul - yet he claims to be guru  and at the least, allows his discples to pretend that he is in fact a fully self realized soul "for their sake" - has in fact either "rubberstamped" himself or allowed his followers to "appoint" or "rubberstamp" him. He is claiming to be the "gold" (Srila Prabhupada's equivalent) or to perfectly represent him. Only time will tell though. If or when it becomes clear that he is less than "golden" - his "bankrupt" condition will become evident in some manner and his depositors will "run" out the door! That is real rubberstamping.

Many men who were assigned by both HDG  Bhaktivedanta Swami Srila Prabhupada and later the GBC management team -  given the service of initiating on Srila Prabhupada's behalf were eventually discovered to be deficient in their fiduciary capacity, and stepped down, aside - or left altogether. However - many of the men and women who were initiated by these men on behalf of Srila Prabhupada, who came for the "gold" (Srila Prabhupada and Lord Krsna) have remained steadfast in their Krsna Consciouisness - proving that though the  "currency" (the appointed men) -  was not fully backed by their steadfast commitment to Srila Prabhupada - most devotees recognized the difference between the actual "GOLD"; HDG Bhaktivedanta Swami Srila Prabhupada and the "notes" that he authorized to represent him.

Lord Chaitanya is described as The Golden Avatara! Srila Prabhupada is the Golden Acharya and all who come in his line - are requested to become golden in their exemplary following of his instructions. From amongst some of these "golden"  agents - his mission will require some men to accept the wonderful and responsible service of initiating disciples on his behalf; as fiduciary agents for the Golden Acharya HDG Bhaktivedanta Swami Srila Prabhupada.

In short - the GBC does not rubberstamp gurus. They select men who meet the minimum qualifications to act as the bonafide agents for the qualified Acharya - HDG Bhaktivedanta Swami Srila Prabhupada initiating disciples into this line on his behalf (SP's words not mine)

As free souls - both you and I are not obliged to pretend their position is other than it actually is. To the extent that they are in fact - actually purely  Krsna Conscious - and they ACTUALLY contribute to yours or my Krsna Consciousness - then to that extent we will value them and extend them the gratitude they ACTUALLY warrant.

Thus I stand on my original statment;

      "It is safe to say that the leaders of ISKCON make their best efforts to ensure that such valuable devotees who meet the above mentioned qualifications are carefully selected to represent Srila Prabhupada and his mission."

And what is more - I consider it their duty to do so.

You challenge both their doing it AND my concurrence with their actions.

So here is my question back at you.

If you say that this is NOT the system Srila Prabhupada gave us - and that the GBC are NOT mandated to follow it - THEN you convince ME - that Srila Prabhupada openly and clearly established something - ANYTHING - else - for his ISKCON MISSION.

Respectfully
Margaret Connors

 

 

Now instead of responding to WHAT Margaret was offering - both Gadhara Das and Rocan shifted the discussion from WHAT Margaret was offering them in her comments - to simply "unmasking margaret" so they could minimize WHAT was she was saying by denigrating WHO was saying it.

Next I recieved this from Rocan on February 27th

You can stop now, Praghosa.  We're not publishing any more 'Margaret' submissions, but are instead working on an article that will describe your "Krishna dasa" and "Margaret" pastimes, and how ill-motivated and ill-received they have been.

 

I elected to cease the ruse and simply address him directly as myself with the following points:

Dear Rocan Das
Please accept my obeisances. All Glories to Srila Prabhupada

Thank you for this recent letter.

Let me offer you this to consider.
"Margaret" - is not to be held accountable for publishing anything on your site. Whatever is published - supposedly welcome or unwelcome is first carefully scrutinized by you and your staff and if it is deemed worthy - is then offered to your readers.

I began contributing as Margaret back on the 20th of January.
You did not contact me until the 26th of January. Contrary to expressing any dissatisfaction with the content of tone of my contributions - you IN FACT thanked me for my efforts thus far and expressed your willingness to publish my comments.

Here are your exact words to me in your letter of January 26th to refresh your memory in which you IN FACT complimented my writings "which have stimulated an interesting exchange of ideas."

 

Dear Margaret,
Please accept my humble obeisances.  All glories to Srila Prabhupada.

Thank you for your recent submissions to the Sun, which have stimulated an interesting exchange of ideas.

Regarding your last submission, 'Sheltering Criminals and Curing their Criminality', we have some concerns.  You've clearly stated your point about everyone being 'criminals', of one sort or another, and ISKCON/Srila Prabhupada's mission being to enable our spiritual remediation.

However, you go on to suggest that Gadadhara and Mahavidya prabhus need to prove their complaint that ISKCON doesn't protect women and children.  You wrote:

"ISKCON does not, nor has it ever maintained a policy of endorsing, maintaining, promoting, or ignoring - any devotee's reawakened criminal desire or action. If or when - any devotee's previous criminal condition resurfaces and it becomes known, the leadership has confronted it and taken the necessary steps to eliminate it and prevent its interfering with anyone's own practice of Krsna Consciousness."

And…

"Where are recalcitrant criminals being "sheltered" incorrectly in any of Srila Prabhupada's temples? You are merely expecting your readers to accept this backhanded accusation as simple fact, as if you are not obliged to provide hard evidence of such apathetic mismanagement of any ISKCON center and its management.

We can't in good conscience facilitate your statements in this regard, unless you acknowledge and speak to the obvious and currently ongoing example of this – Gauri das at the Manor.  Mahavidya prabhu has written volumes on the matter, as have the abused youth.  It appears that Gauri das is being sheltered quite nicely, has not kept to the CPO restrictions against him, and is defacto enjoying the same administrative power as before the latest CPO action.  And there seems to be adequate proof of his ongoing role in management.

I think you've made numerous statements in 'Sheltering Criminals' that will bring on rebuttals from your challengers, but let's start with this one.  We'll look forward to your reply, and/or revised copy of the latest article.  And by the way, we've guessed at your geographic location as being USA for the byline.  Is that correct, and can you be more specific?

Hoping this finds you well.
Your servant,
Rocana dasa

 

You ended this letter saying "We'll look forward to your reply, and/or revised copy of the latest article". 

So clearly prabhu - you invited me to continue and generously contribute my efforts to "stimulate" your readers. Surely you saw this as serving the purpose you insist lies at the core of your site: discussion and/or constructive debate.

I took YOUR invitation to heart and continued.

In addition - you also reached out to me and requested that I modify a couple of my articles in order to fully address the comments of a few that you felt I had overlooked. I instantly complied with YOUR expressed wishes and did exactly what YOU had requested of me.

In short - what gets published on your site - is subject to your full "Say So" and YOU are responsible for inviting my continued participation from the very beginning and likewise - if my clear and generous presentation of Srila Prabhupada's teachings was in any way actually "ill motivated or ill received"- causing unwarranted discomfort to your readers - then you could have ceased to publish them at that time. This you did not do. You were happy to publish them - as they clearly served to "stimulate" the discussion as you had sought.

So if there was any offense made - it was not by me. Clearly I was invited BY YOU PERSONALLY in the above as well as subsequent letters and even guided by YOU later in how to more effectively address  the comments of others. I always complied precisely with your requests and upon doing so - never heard back from you that you had decided that you could no longer publish my comments "due to my obvious ill motives" or their "reception".

I understand that you are a little miffed because I managed to "snooker" you again and infiltrate your column with my comments. Take it all in good fun prabhu. No harm. No foul. I did not put a gun to your head. I could not force you to publish my comments. You were in fact eager to hear from me and expressed as much, saying "We'll look forward to your reply, and/or revised copy of the latest article".  In fact I found that  writing as "margaret" actually led to an improvement in the way I expressed myself and forced me to be very cautious and considerate; far more so than I had ever been writing as myself. I learned  much through the process actually. I will definitely miss "Maggie"!

Take it all in good spirit. I got off some excellent shots there buddy. Take it is as game. That is how I do. I delight in offering the simple truth and especially when or where its presentation is being thwarted for any reason. After all - my life on samkirtan has found me oft times told - "you cannot distribute these books here" - only to find me figuring out a way to do just that. I mean you no harm at all prabhu. And what was my great offense prabhu? Really?

As I first told you after our dealings fell upon the rocks - if you are really serious about debating "the issues" as you claim - AND you are convinced that I am all wet in the essentials, I would think you would welcome the chance to "play" with me in this forum. After all - shredding mine or anyone's position - if done in the interest of Srila Prabhupada - should be seen as a most delicious offering of love to His Divine Grace; to be embraced with great relish. Not something to dread, run from or censor so as to ensure that the public cannot estimate the strength or legitimacy of each side in the polemic.

Clearly - until Gadadhara Das - after running aground in his back and forth with "maggie" - became obsessed with the identity of "maggie" - you did not see her writings as other than "stimulating" and thus a beneficial addition to the discussions you sought to "stimulate" (your own words).

Too late my friend. Any attempt to now declare my so-called "real motives" would be pure speculation on your part, while in fact - your motives for both inviting me to continue to participate, encouraging and guiding me in meeting your expectations in that regard - leaves no doubt as to what your motives were:stimulating debate and discussion on our site. I merely did EXACTLY as you requested of me: continue to comment and conform to your wishes as to how.

The entire Margaret Connors "pastime" as you have coined it - is in the end - YOUR RESPONSIBILITY. I merely offered you my generous comments and left it up to you what to do with them. My motive was simple; express the truth as I concluded I had always known it since coming to Srila Prabhupada's  shelter and expressing it for the benefit of those who could appreciate it. I never had - nor imagined I could ever have - control over how it was received. If it was received poorly - then I can only conclude that my expression of such was imperfect - or the "receivers" were not able or willing to accept it.

That is just the nature of samkirtan. Some accept. Some do not.

At the end of the day - The Sun is just one big chat room. Sure - its your chat room and this is in fact - the most important point. WHATEVER GETS PUBLISHED THERE - is COMPOSED BY OTHERS  - BUT CAN ONLY BE VIEWED BY OTHERS - UPON RECEIVING THE GREEN LIGHT FROM YOU.

When you publish anything genuinely offensive - though it is written by another - its entry into the mass mind of many - IS 100 %  YOUR RESPONSIBILITY.

This entire "pastime" is the most sublime proof of this.

While you entertain two different discussions on your site - all about personal responsibility; the child abuse issue AND the fall of the jiva - with not a single person seeing and commenting on the actual "confluence" that exists between them - you yourself are now attempting to fault "Margaret Connors" for ill motivated writings - that YOU PERSONALLY - both urged her to write and then you RESPONSIBLY CHOSE to publish them. And on top of that - you want to hold Margaret responsible for - of all things - how poorly they were received!

You my friend are the responsible party in this. Margaret just expressed her thoughts -to YOU.

You expressed them to everyone else.

Think and Think again - before you try to make your case. I have a copy of  our entire exchange as well as your expressed willingness to publish my expose of that unfortunate "Phantom of the Opera" AKA Kailasa Chandra Das - who stepped on the proverbial land mine in our exchange and has fully embarrassed himself. He is an empty suit and you expressed your enthusiasm to disclose that. So there is no question you encouraged Margaret in various ways.

You can do as you like - but I am just offering you some wise counsel. I am not your enemy. I am your brother BUT one who  strongly disagrees with some aspects of your thesis and the tactics you employ to promote it. That is all. Other than that - you are Prabhupada's son and I am sure you mean well.

Respectfully
Praghosa

 

He then wrote me back this short barb the next day:

"Praghosh, only my enemies cheat me.  And you disgust me, as well."

 

I replied with this letter on the 29th

Dear Rocan Prabhu,
Thank you for this short note.

I am sorry you are taking it so hard prabhu. I meant you no personal harm whatsoever.

Point in fact - every single word I offered you was in fact valuable and was really generously "gifted" to you.  I offered it all - FREE OF CHARGE.  I did not take anything from you. Nor cause you any embarrassment of any kind. Second Point in fact - every thing I offered you as "Margaret" was seen by you to serve your purposes and was IN FACT appreciated by you. This you stated very clearly. So - though you may not have even agreed with "her" - you perceived some value in what her comments could "stimulate"; plenty of healthy rebuttal.

So your now saying I cheated you implies that I took something from you - at your expense!  Instead of actually maintaining the "grateful" sentiments for my efforts as you offered in your letter to me - you now claim that I in fact "cheated" you. Out of what exactly?

And - in addition - you add that I actually "disgust" you for having done this!  Initially you graciously accepted all I had offered you - free of charge -  and you then "capitalized" or "exploited" all these gifts in the service of your own purposes: enhancing the quantity and quality of the "discussions" on your site. Now - suddenly - you change your tune. This is merely misplaced buyer's remorse Prabhu.

Might I suggest you read the wonderful novel "The Count of Monte Christo".

I merely followed the example of Edmond Dantes and used your singular weakness; the desire to "keep the pot boiling" in all matters pertaining to pointing out defects in all things "ISKCON" without ever driving towards real solution -  to invite your assistance in placing the unvarnished "golden truth" on your front page for the benefit of your readers and the pleasure of Srila Prabhupada.

Just take it as a little prior "tit" for the Canadian's - "tat"-  delivered yesterday in Vancouver to our US Hockey team.

Bravo to your boys by the way prabhu. That was one helluva game.

BUT lighten up and don't take your site so seriously - when you get bruised. Be a gamer prabhu. That's what I always loved about our old buddies Visvakarma  and Uttama Sloka. They were gamers. Be the best Canada can offer.

Give up your pouting spirit and be a hard charging Canuck. I played hockey against  you guys all my youth and loved you all!

Let's not quarrel. Let's come together for Srila Prabhupada. You are almost spot on with your understanding of His Divine Grace and I do appreciate that about you. BUT - you are off in some very important areas and combined with a long held commitment to those ideas - you appear a little stuck.

Instead of reaching out and trying to poke a stick in my eye, why not see the good I always offer you and work with me. After all - North America is where it all started for Srila Prabhupada in the West and we need to fix whatever can be fixed. That is not gonna happen employing your tactics.

Always your brother and true well wisher.
Praghosa

 

He offered me this parting shot the next day -

Praghosh, you're a liar, and a cheater, and you have completely deluded yourself about the 'great impact' of your writings, and how they were perceived at this end from day one.  Completely deluded.

We are working on an article detailing your pastimes, and expressing just how we feel about them, for the record.

Rocana dasa

 

Then  finally last week published his feeble attempt to now slander me in all sorts of ways - for doing what he initially and RESPONSIBLY welcomed with open arms. The very essence of his methods and purposes - fully exposed for anyone with a fraction of intellgence to perceive. Just another "grain of rice" revealing the actual conditon of the entire pot.

 

 

please also see:

ROCANA NOT CLEAR
ROCANA WRITES WRONGS
Deconstructing Rocana by PADA
Rocana's Posthumous Church - The Church Of Ritvik
Rocana's and Iskcons bogus philosophy - PADA DEBATES ROCANA
Reply to Rocana dasa's speculation about chanting mantras and preaching in South India

 


Chant Hare Krishna and be happy!
All glories to His Divine Grace A.C.Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada!