Hansadutta das - His Defense


by Das Dasanudas devi dasi
Hansadutta
Hansadutta

To: Rocana dasa
From: Das Dasanudas devi dasi
Date: August 3, 1997
Subject: Response to Rocana's "Oh! I Remember You"

Since you have published your "Open Letter to Hansadutta" for all the world to see, I presume you will not object to receiving a response from one other insignificant member of that world.

As I understand it, ista-gosthi is a forum where devotees can speak their concerns, grievances, doubts, reservations, but the underlying spirit should be willingness to work things out with a view to please the Acharya, Srila Prabhupada, not merely to spit venom and further alienate one another in the name of ista-gosthi.

According to what you have written, in the last 20 years, you have never once approached Hansadutta personally to confront him with the bitter anguish and resentment you have held onto all these years. Once or twice you encountered him, but you have never followed up the opportunity to meet with him in person, nor even picked up the telephone to talk to him directly, excusing yourself that it should be his first move, since he is at fault, not you. But since you are the one who is so focused on him, blaming him for everything that has gone wrong in your life since 1978 (and I doubt that he is so focused on you), by rights it should be your move. Regardless, whether he should look for you or you should look for him, the point is, till now you have failed to address these troubles in your heart, and that is a shame. You have wasted 20 years lamenting that you lost your place, that you have fallen by the wayside and been passed by.

I was in Seattle at the time. Perhaps you remember me, though likely not. But I remember you. That is to say, I have my own set of memories of you and the others there at that time. For a short while I joined the ashram under Padyavali and went out on sankirtan with the other girls. I also associated with Laxmimoni and the gurukula teachers and children, as well as with devotees on the fringe. I find your account of the Seattle episode incomplete and skewed. There are those of us both inside and outside the temple community, both Srila Prabhupada's disciples and new recruits, who saw things rather differently than you have presented and who were relieved when higher authority intervened. Some would say you should be grateful that someone tried to save you from your entanglement with Padyavali and the women's party.

I put it to you that when it became clear that house-cleaning was in order, following Hansadutta's move to stop the prostitution of women devotees in Berkeley, your attachment to the status quo in Seattle compelled you to put up a resistance, and so you ran to Rameshwar. You must have known that Rameshwar was none too pleased to see Hansadutta closing down Jiva's shop in Berkeley, because it suddenly halted a considerable flow of cash which he had been accustomed to receiving, ostensibly for the BBT, all the while closing both eyes to what was going on in Berkeley. At least, Rameshwar made quite a lot of noise about it at the time and for some years afterwards. But it is interesting that you claim that Hansadutta betrayed you, considering you are the one who snuck around behind his back. In any case, the exodus of the devotees and gurukula from the Seattle temple was devastating to everyone concerned, no less to Hansadutta.

You portray Hansadutta as some kind of psychotic, heartless hypocrite and pathological liar, totally without scruples, devoid of humility and sincerity. But you hardly knew Hansadutta, I should wonder, considering that he first came to Berkeley in 1978, and it was in December, 1978 that you left Seattle and Hansadutta and during most of that year he was in Berkeley and you were in Seattle. How much of the portrait was put together during that brief acquaintence in 1978 and how much of it manifest from the recesses of your own heart as the years rolled by and your anger and frustration brewed over this person on whose account you apparently fell out of grace with the rest of the GBC also and were shunted onto a siding?

Hansadutta's fall rocked the entire movement with a force that has not rocked it since. Undoubtedly much that is said about him is exaggeration and speculation -- such is the nature of gossip which has encircled the globe a thousand times, but fact or fiction, the sordid details of his painful ordeal ought not to be resurrected and bandied about for all to scoff at -- it offends the sensibilities and spirit of any genuine Vaishnava. Reflect on the words of Bhaktivinoda Thakur: "Forget the past that sleeps and ne'er the future dream at all, but act in times that are with thee, and progress thee shall call." It is enough that Hansadutta came crashing down. How this was handled by the GBC is another topic for another day perhaps, but the result was that he was totally disgraced and humiliated, the faith of his disciples was shattered, and those who would not be corralled into immediate re-initiation were driven out from ISKCON and scattered to the wind.

Now, nearly fifteen years later, I think it is time that someone should speak up in support of Hansadutta's attempts to recover and revive his own spiritual life and to encourage those persons who were in his orbit before to continue or again pick up their service to Srila Prabhupada. To this day, Hansadutta remains a disciple of Srila Prabhupada, anxious to serve Srila Prabhupada and the devotees. It may surprise you to learn that in the nearly 15 years on his road to recovery, Hansadutta has been publishing and distributing Srila Prabhupada's books, has kept in contact with many of his godbrothers, has held preaching programmes from time to time, and attaches first priority to chanting Hare Krishna.

For the record, your diatribe also does not take into consideration all the positive service Hansadutta had previously rendered to the movement before his fall-down and even during the months leading up to it. For all his personal difficulties and misadventures, Hansadutta did accomplish quite a lot. Srila Prabhupada did find occasion to correct Hansadutta, yet Srila Prabhupada continued to entrust him with increased responsibility. He did not remove him from the GBC or BBT. At the end of the day, the German court case was won by Hansadutta's efforts and testimony in court. Srila Prabhupada exonerated him from all blame and read for yourself the conversations and letters pertaining to that incident. In Sri Lanka, Hansadutta challenged the atheist Kovoor and defeated him utterly -- to this day no one of Srila Prabhupada's men of science in the BI has come close to preaching on this scale. Srila Prabhupada ordered that the challenge be published inside his book Life Comes from Life. Yet you put it in such a way that Srila Prabhupada sent him to the end of the earth in order to contain him or banish him.

Hansadutta has apologised repeatedly to former disciples and other devotees for his transgressions, both publicly and individually. The letter to Urdhvaga which was published in his magazine is not the only apology he has ever made. You and others who feel that you've been left out are at liberty to contact him today and remind him, but from the tone and content of your letter, it doesn't seem that an apology is what you are after.

Hansadutta tried to co-operate with ISKCON GBCs and seek their blessings to find suitable engagement within ISKCON again, not wanting to enter into conflict with ISKCON, but desiring to serve Srila Prabhupada's mission in a meaningful capacity and hoping that by his re-entry others who had fallen away -- like most of Srila Prabhupada's disciples -- would take heart and also find welcome there and co-operate to serve Srila Prabhupada as before, when Srila Prabhupada was amongst us. This was when Bhakti Caru Swami and other GBC whipping boys were touting the idea that "The mood has changed, you'll be welcomed."

Hansadutta has published his realisations with regard to the guru-acharya succession and rittvik appointments as well as gopi-bhava club, urging the devotees to recognise and worship Srila Prabhupada as the Sampradaya Acharya and thus restore the movement. You have remarked that while his realisations and philosophical understanding appear to be good, his underlying intentions are not, that he even now harbours personal ambition to be restored to position of guru by any name -- whether rittvik or diksha. What kind of reasoning is that? A blatant contradiction of his arguments that worship of Srila Prabhupada should be maximised, not minimised as has happened in ISKCON?

If you will read Hansadutta's publications carefully, you will see that Hansadutta attaches more importance to establishing Srila Prabhupada as the Sampradaya Acharya than to the rittvik issue. By recognising Srila Prabhupada as the one personality whom all devotees love and trust and the one who is undeniably Krishna's pure devotee and the bona fide spiritual master, automatically the devotees will find their place in the movement. All controversies can be resolved, all adjustments can be made when Srila Prabhupada is restored to his rightful position. As far as the rittvik representative's position, he is only a deputy, forever a disciple of Srila Prabhupada, the spiritual master, and it is understood that the disciples belong to Srila Prabhupada. There's not a whole lot of room for personal aggrandisement and abuse of power in the position of rittvik representative. What kind of personal ambition is it, then, that Hansadutta exhibits in submitting to Srila Prabhupada's arrangement?

Furthermore, it is Srila Prabhupada who named those eleven persons as his rittvik representatives, so if you have a problem with that -- in case you are not prepared to admit any or all of them back into their rightful position in the divine arrangement of Srila Prabhupada, assuming any of the others ever do experience a change of heart and are willing to submit to Srila Prabhupada's order -- one might question just how obedient and submissive to Srila Prabhupada are you?

You write about the goings-on inside Hansadutta's head and heart as though you had first-hand knowledge, but having not communicated with Hansadutta since 1978, isn't this a bit presumptuous?

You disdainfully dismiss all those connected with Hansadutta without making any attempt at personal acquaintence. You know nothing about us, what we have been through with Hansadutta and ISKCON and the likes of you, what is our commitment, what projects we have been engaged in and are engaged in now. You would not recognise us as disciples of Hansadutta or any other GBC "guru," yet you also would not recognise us as disciples of Srila Prabhupada on account of our affiliation with Hansadutta -- if we had been initiated by any other self-appointed rittvik (rather than by one so named by Srila Prabhupada), perhaps we might stand a better chance of receiving scraps which you throw down from your table. I am a dog, but it is an unfair judgment you make of Bhima das and the other disciples who have accepted Srila Prabhupada as their spiritual master by rittvik initiation from Hansadutta and who are engaged full-time in practical devotional service to Srila Prabhupada and his movement. It rubs you that Hansadutta has anyone around him at all, that he has shown concern for any of the ex-disciples and offered encouragement and guidance, that anyone should find any worth in his association.

Rocana, the self-appointed judge, has written that Hansadutta ought to have been excommunicated even if he wasn't. You have written that no one ought to befriend him, that everyone should be warned to keep far away from him, lest he destroy the bhakti-lata-bija. I am happy that it is not your place to excommunicate anyone nor to deny anyone the opportunity to render service to Srila Prabhupada and Krishna.

Even if it were true, as you suggest, that Hansadutta is a certifiable madman, still the only solution, the only cure is this process which Srila Prabhupada has given for all the madmen wandering in the material world. Srila Prabhupada has pointed out that in the story of Ajamila that there is no atonement superior to the chanting of Hare Krishna. If submitting to the chanting of the Holy Name and orders of the spiritual master and offering respects and service to the devotees will not cure Hansadutta, then nothing will -- certainly no amount of "therapy" in a reclining chair under the supervision of someone out of touch with Krishna's reality. Where do you repose your faith? Perhaps you do not care for his transformation, perhaps you will not be satisfied until he is publicly scourged and hung?

Get a life, and let others do so also. Remember, Krishna is non-envious. He gives everyone what he desires. He does not begrudge anyone, not even His enemies. Go forward and allow others to go forward (or backward). Would you have us define you and any relationship with you according to our memory of you in Seattle, jumbled together with bits and pieces of gossip about what you were doing and with whom you were doing it over the years? Or would you have us begin a new acquaintence and accept you as you are now? Apply the Golden Rule.

If you would serve Srila Prabhupada, you cannot exclude his disciples -- not even the ones you detest. If your proposal to resolve all the controversies within ISKCON means rejecting devotees, even fallen ones such as Hansadutta & Co, how will that please Srila Prabhupada and Krishna? Srila Prabhupada found a place for everyone. You are welcome to start your own private, exclusive club, but that is not what Srila Prabhupada started. If Srila Prabhupada's movement is to carry on -- what to speak of expand -- we must all of us sacrifice our egos, false aspirations and disappointments, offering them up at the feet of Srila Prabhupada, commander in chief and get with the programme.

I hope you will initiate direct, honest and open-minded communication with Hansadutta for your own peace of mind.

I am a low (wo)man on the totem pole, and ordinarily I have no place to speak, but I feel compelled to answer to your prosecution of Hansadutta, not only for the sake of one who has been a friend and advisor, but also in defence of certain characteristics which devotees ought to exhibit -- forgiveness, compassion, tolerance, mercy, truthfulness, humility, to name a few -- and in defence of the fundamental right of any and every disciple to participate in Srila Prabhupada's movement, as well as in defence of the restoration of Srila Prabhupada's arrangement, by his order.

I hope you will not take offence from me. I wish you well.

Your servant,
Das Dasanudas devi dasi

-------------------------------------------------------------

From: Rocana dasa
Date: August 7, 1997
RE: "Oh! I Remember You"

Dear Das Dasanudas devi dasi,
Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada.

I was interested to read your defense of Hansadutta dasa. I have just finished a website article entitled “Love is Blind?”, which I hope you will also read. You and I obviously view the personality, Hansadutta dasa, from very different angles of vision, which are based on our experiences, particular social relationships (Godbrother versus disciple), age, gender, and ultimately understanding of the philosophy.

Your proposal that I am obliged to be the forgiving side of this controversy, rather than Hansadutta dasa, is based on the logic that it is I who am absorbed in the thoughts of the past and not Hansadutta, therefore it behooves me to contact him. From your vantage point there is no real blame assigned to Hansadutta. In fact, you insinuate that it is I who am at fault. You explain that you have the inside story of what was “so wrong” about the going’s on in Seattle, and infer that these circumstances justified the hell that Hansadutta put all the devotees through, children included. Judging by the responses I’ve received from “Oh! I Remember You”, you certainly stand as a minority on these opinions.

If the GBC at the time had really allowed “those in the know” to inform the innocent, such as yourself, about the atrocious activities of the so-called pure devotee zonal acarya, Hansadutta dasa Swami, it might have saved you from 20 years of wasted worship. Knowing full well the extent of Hansadutta’s irrational tendencies and the previous history of both his bizarre activities in Germany (too many to mention) and his non-cooperative attitude, the GBC had no business changing Srila Prabhupada’s arrangement for his “black sheep” disciple. Srila Prabhupada had arranged to keep him in Sri Lanka, separated by a large expanse of water. Believe me, if you had been privy back in 1978 to the full story on Hansadutta’s history, you would certainly have avoided “falling in love”.

It is not surprising that I have received this letter of defense from you, rather than from Hansadutta himself. Rarely has he stepped forward to deal personally with his past offensive activities. As for my lack of personal contact with Hansadutta, the title of my article speaks for itself -- “Oh! I Remember You”. Last year, while I was attending the L.A. Rathayatra, Hansadutta had the chance to invite me to sit down and talk with him, or even to arrange a telephone conversation. Instead, he indicated that he could just barely remember me. I’m sure he hoped that I would simply fade away, and he wouldn’t have to deal with me again. Of course, he does remember me very well, but as with everything, he avoids dealing with anything that requires genuine humility. It doesn’t surprise me that you wrote, “I doubt that he is so focused on you”. He has an amazing ability to rationalize, justify, and put the philosophical spin on reality so as to convince himself and his blind followers that he is always in the right, or that he is a candidate for forgiveness. Your letter indicates that you are obviously another one of his many victims.

Hansadutta’s theatrical abilities are renowned throughout the movement. To personally approach him and undergo a display of insincere emotions is both a waste of time and an unnecessary agitation to my mind. For me, writing that article was a very therapeutic method of dealing with the “troubles in the heart” I have on the subject of Hansadutta. And, my article will stand as a long-time warning to others to stay away from this individual -- something that I consider a service to Srila Prabhupada and to humanity in general.

I found interesting your claim that in my article, I am blaming Hansadutta for all the problems that I have encountered in the last 20 years. This is a good example of Hansadutta’s style of reasoning, which is based on exaggeration and concoction. In fact, in my article I retrospectively consider my personal responsibility in those days. I also note that my ousting from Seattle so early in the game was a blessing in disguise, considering that had I stayed, I would have had to deal with Hansadutta and his antics for years to come.

The paragraph where you are reminiscing about your remembrances of what was going on in Seattle 20 years ago is also very interesting and revealing. In my article, I was merely giving a brief account of the internal dynamics that were taking place throughout the zone in those days, particularly in Seattle and in Berkeley. Hansadutta should consider it fortunate that I decided to leave out the many more ghastly details that even “Monkey on a Stick” failed to mention.

You seem to be completely unaware of all the backroom politics surrounding the “women’s party”. You infer that I was part of the problem, when in fact I was instrumental in forcing the GBC to deal with the issue. A devotee recently came forward and told me that he has the original report I wrote and delivered to the GBC, exposing these activities. The women’s sankirtan party in Seattle was overseen by Padyavali devi out of necessity, so that I wouldn’t have to get involved intimately with the women, as was the practice in Berkeley, L.A. and New Vrindabin. I would have preferred a far more balanced arrangement, but it was very difficult, because Jayatirtha had traded all the men in Seattle for all the women in Vancouver, in his initial concocted program of turning Seattle predominately into a “women’s party” temple. With the help of Kurma Rupa dasa brahmacary, we were building up a men’s program and slowly bringing the temple back to normal, until Hansadutta arrived and immediately threw Seattle’s program into chaos.

Please keep in mind that even as a sannyasis himself, Hansadutta removed Jiva, literally at gunpoint, forcing him to take sannyasis. He then took over the women’s party himself, and soon began having sex with the very same women. This was his unique method of dealing with the women’s party problem. You may criticize my entanglement with Padyavali devi, but who do you think had the better solution...Seattle or Berkeley? You infer that you have the “inside story” -- I challenge you to produce these proofs. I never participated in the women’s party philosophy that lead to illicit sex, even when I was encouraged to do so directly by the GBC (Jayatirtha and Satsvarupa).

All ISKCON temples were struggling with a multitude of problems, and Seattle was no exception. Compared to other centers, however, we were doing relatively well, especially if you considered our book distribution record, the abuse-free gurukula, and the general level of Krsna consciousness. The installment of Ujamanu dasa as Temple President in Seattle was another of Hansadutta’s irrational moves. A faithful follower of the cult leader Hansadutta, he came with two wives in tow and no previous experience as Temple President, but was enthroned in this position regardless of his past activities in L.A.

Your version of events regarding Hansadutta’s alleged desire to “houseclean” illicit women’s party activities in Seattle is entirely untrue. It is true, however, that I was “sold out” by Ramesvara after I approached him (behind Hansadutta’s back) concerning what I had personally perceived to be inconceivably crazy, insane, un-Vaisnava like activity by a GBC representative in the Pacific Northwest zone. That was my right and duty as a Temple President. Ramesvara advised me not to make public my observations of Hansadutta. He warned me I was in grave danger if I told anyone else, and advised me to return to Seattle and attempt to make everything seem normal until the entire GBC could effectively deal with the renegade member of their exclusive “instant uttama zonal acaryas” club. Ramesvara soon broke his promise of confidentiality to me, and shared the secret with Harikesa Swami. When Hansadutta arrived in Germany to testify at the big trial dealing with the huge mess he had created, Harikesa broke his promise to Ramesvara not to tell Hansadutta about what I had reported, and the rest is history. By the way, it was by Krsna’s mercy, not Hansadutta’s potency, that many of the possible repercussions from the charges that were laid against us were dropped in the German courts. The Hare Krsnas were still heavily fined, lost a tremendous amount of laxmi, and Srila Prabhupada’s reputation was tarnished for years in Germany.

You wrote:

You portray Hansadutta as some kind of psychotic, heartless hypocrite and pathological liar, totally without scruples, devoid of humility and sincerity. But you hardly knew Hansadutta, I should wonder, considering that he first came to Berkeley in 1978, and it was in December, 1978 that you left Seattle and Hansadutta and during most of that year he was in Berkeley and you were in Seattle.”

In answer to this rather weak argument, I can only say that all my intuitive observations proved to be very accurate as time went on, and Hansadutta’s nefarious activities expanded in volume and ferocity after my departure. I had much more of his association during that period than I expect Hansadutta would admit to, or you realize. I traveled innumerable times down to Berkeley at his request, and spent weeks there. Thinking that I was a confidential member of his internal group he confided in me much more than with the rank and file, so I did get to know him and his un-balanced mind. I even accompanied him part way around the world on his “world sankirtan party”, visiting the Philippines and Hong Kong. It was on this trip that I discovered that he was addicted to alcohol and pills, at which time I invented an excuse to leave the party and returned to Seattle. It was then that I approached Ramesvara. Granted I was very naive about the collusion and collaboration amongst the old boys club members. In the end, this politic won out over justice and truth. I wasn’t “shunted onto a siding”. I was spirited off to England so that I wouldn’t face the possibility of being killed or injured by Hansadutta, who the GBC knew to be an extremely wild card.

You reveal your unfortunate position as a blind follower of Hansadutta’s when you state that, “much that is said about him is exaggeration and speculation”. I have had verification of all my accusations from actual disciples who were present throughout the remaining time Hansadutta stayed in charge in the Pacific Northwest. Their accounts have not only supported my experiences, but they elaborate on the stories, which depict Hansadutta to be far more sinister than even I presented him to be. I have recently been given the details by an ex-disciple about the manner in which the relationship between Hansadutta and his present wife came about. The whole affair sounds typical: exploitative, manipulative, and downright demoniac. I have recently been told that they are now separated.

You suggest that Hansadutta has been going through great austerities and a “painful ordeal” for the last ten or more years. Your ill-placed sympathies for Hansadutta, who “was totally disgraced and humiliated, the faith of his disciples was shattered,” demonstrates the extent to which illusions are created by the mentality of putting aside common-sense, rationality and God given intelligence, and instead relying on another bewildered soul to do your thinking for you. You have the audacity to quote Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakur’s poem, "Forget the past that sleeps and ne'er the future dream at all, but act in times that are with thee, and progress thee shall call" in relation to Hansadutta’s destructive actions, but let me remind you of Srila Prabhupada’s comments and remembrances of the nonsense activities of His Godbrothers and their followers. Learning from history helps one to not repeat mistakes.

You, Hansadutta, and his few remaining followers want to deny the truth about the degree of disservice to Srila Prabhupada that was orchestrated by Hansadutta, and which far outweighs the service that he supposedly performed, yet this is an opinion shared by the vast majority of all his Godbrothers.

You made another interesting comment: “Hansadutta's fall rocked the entire movement with a force that has not rocked it since.” Even this “claim to fame” is greatly exaggerated. Frankly, the falldown’s of the others were every bit as disturbing, especially Kirtanananda’s fall, but the way you state it, it appears that you are proud of how your guru has rocked the movement by doing such a great amount of nonsense. I’m afraid he will have to wait for his prize, which will certainly come at the time of death. I’m sure those who have spent time with Hansadutta can clearly hear his voice behind the glorification that you still bestow upon him, even in this context.

His "valiant recovery", his pleas to the GBC to be reinstated, and his last resort of climbing on the Rttvik bandwagon, all in all show that the leopard has not changed his spots. For Hansadutta to think that he is spiritually fit to be a bonafide Rttvik acarya is preposterous, but as long as he remains independent then he can present himself as anything he wishes and, judging from your letter, there will be naive persons who are continually willing to participate in his dream. The intoxicating effect of being worshipped cannot be replaced by any drug. To regain the quality of humility is extremely difficult after experiencing the taste of being idolized, like Hansadutta was during the zonal acarya era. This taste of power threatens to linger for a lifetime, even after one has been as humiliated by Krsna as Hansadutta has.

You would think that he would finally give up the illusions of grandeur, but he seems obsessed with returning to power. I am not questioning the fact that twenty years ago Srila Prabhupada placed his name on the list, along with the other senior GBC members. This administrative arrangement (May 77) was made to facilitate the smooth running of the institutionalized initiation system that was in place at that time, and was very practical considering the participants’ geographical circumstances as well as their longevity on the GBC. However, there were also provisions to replace and/or remove those who didn’t come up to the standards.

You accuse me of being presumptuous about what was in Hansadutta’s head, but whatever is in his head is also manifested, both in action and in print. That is the basis of my observations, and the place from which I draw my conclusions. It happens that a majority of the Vaisnavas seem to have a similar opinion of Hansadutta. Even those whom he considers friends have confided in me that they agree with my conclusions, and are glad that I took the time and the risk to articulate them. I am also free to express my opinions, and most readers see it as just that. I am certainly not in the position to deny him the opportunity to render devotional service. As far as excommunicating him from ISKCON, I don’t think there even is a genuine ISKCON to be excommunicated from....a fact that may be a blessing in disguise. Never have I stated that I am against Hansadutta chanting the Holy Names for his purification. The Ajamila story is qualified by the stipulation of “offenseless” chanting before liberation from the Yamaduttas is assured.

My personal opinions of Hansadutta certainly do not restrict him from engaging in the nine processes of devotional service, so I don’t understand your thinking when you write, “defense of the fundamental right of any and every disciple to participate in Srila Prabhupada's movement.” Hansadutta does not have some fundamental right to act as Rttvik acarya just because his name appears on a 20 year old document, when he obviously doesn’t exhibit the necessary spiritual qualities or qualifications. Neither does he have the blessings of the Vaisnava community, inside or outside the existing institution. Myself, the GBC, nor anyone else can stop an individual from engaging in Srila Prabhupada’s movement, but that cannot help Hansadutta, who appears fixated on having a high profile position as his personal devotional service to Srila Prabhupada. Anyone who suggests that they don’t approve of his bounding ambitions is made out by him, and now you, to be a demon trying to stop him from hearing and chanting. This is not true.

As to the remainder of your letter, I do have a life, and I do know that Krsna is non-envious and gives everyone what they desire. As far as Hansadutta being a genuine disciple of Srila Prabhupada or a real Vaisnava, that is a debatable proposition. I am not Krsna, nor am I an advanced devotee, so I’m not going to pretend to be one. I am a neophyte devotee who was offended by this spirit soul who calls himself Hansadutta, and like all his sinful activities, I have come back to haunt him until he does the proper thing and rectifies the offenses. A letter written by one of his “faith followers” is certainly not the prescribed method for freeing oneself from reaction. If either or both of you wish to take this stand of denial, then you will have to suffer the consequences. An advanced devotee would undoubtedly see these reactions as Krsna’s mercy.

My biggest regret is that back in 1978, I didn’t have the capability to respond to injustice that I do now. If I had the ways and means back then, and the realization, I may have saved you and other innocents in Seattle from the grave entanglement you are now caught up in with this Pundraka devotee. In the meantime, I hope Hansadutta will initiate direct, honest and open-minded communication with me, for his own peace of mind and that of his followers. I have said what I have to say, and would be interested to hear from him personally, in the public forum of this website. Let all interested parties witness our debate. Perhaps in this way we will be able to demonstrate that even two Godbrothers as divided as Hansadutta and I can work things out by open and honest communications. The Internet is a wonderful tool to utilize for this end. Please extend to Hansadutta my invitation to a scheduled meeting in the Sadhu-Sanga chat room.

Thank you for your letter. I also hope not to have offended you. Hare Krsna.

your servant,
Rocana dasa

-------------------------------------------------------------

From: Das Dasanudas devi dasi (daschan@pop.jaring.my)
To: rocana@islandnet.com (Rocana dasa)
Date: August 9, 1997
Subject: Re: "Oh! I Remember You"

Hare Krishna
Dear Rocana Prabhu,
All obeisances for you, all glories to Srila Prabhupada.

I have read through your reply. A certain amount of poetic license is forgiveable, but you go overboard with categorical statements and generalisations, repetition of gossip and insinuations. Presumption is the fodder of misunderstandings. We are talking about people here . . . and relationships between devotees, and what is wanted is a bit of humility. Who amongst us will not acknowledge that there may be more to the matter or to a person than we know at present?

You state that I have spent "20 years of wasted worship," and I remind you that you do not know the first thing about myself, my husband, how our association with Hansadutta has evolved over the years, what we have been doing for the last 20 years and what we are doing now.

Hansadutta does not deny his past, neither are we blind. My point was and is that it is now the year 1997. I do appreciate that many devotees, including yourself, are concerned that the troubles and problems should not be glossed over or denied or repeated, but repetitious broadcasting of the exploits of Hansadutta grows tiresome, especially when it is so very one-sided and mean-spirited. I mean, it has been 20 years already? It's like pushing a puppy's face into his own shit. Hardly the technique employed by Srila Prabhupada to discipline his disciples. And from what I understand, use of regression in therapy by "professionals" is restricted to one or two brief sessions even in extreme cases. Even the dog trainer lets the puppy up again. It's time to move on. These long-harboured resentments and failure to recognise a devotee's forward strides is unworthy of a Vaishnava and godbrother.

You write that I have made you out to be a demon trying to stop Hansadutta from hearing and chanting, but you twist my words. I certainly did not and do not call you a demon, but I do question whether you have examined the implications of your comments re Hansadutta's excommunication and how devotees should stay clear of him and his status as rittvik representative, because such remarks are incongruous with Srila Prabhupada's teachings, instructions and personal example in his dealings with his disciples.

There is no doubt in my mind that you are a devotee, that you love and worship Srila Prabhupada, that you value sincere devotional association, and that you want to help to mend the fabric of ISKCON which has been rent by the mischief--either deliberate or accidental--of disobedient disciples. But it will be mended only by obedience and submission to Srila Prabhupada both individually and collectively. Nice sentiments alone will not do the trick. Calling names and casting blame also does disservice to the Vaishnava community. What is wanted is for every one of us to seriously contemplate what it means to be a disciple and to respond to the situation by mustering our integrity, courage, humility and determination to establish Srila Prabhupada as the Acharya, as the absolute authority and to establish his teachings and instructions as perfect, without flaw. When the disciples work with this aim in mind and heart, they will be reconciled to Srila Prabhupada and automatically with each other as well.

Srila Prabhupada named 11 persons, one of them Hansadutta, to act as rittvik representatives of the Acharya. Either a disciple accepts or rejects the order of the spiritual master--it does not render the order invalid. Chanakya Pandit said that the order of the preceptor will act in any case. If a disciple carries it out, it acts as nectar, if a disciple neglects it or disobeys it, it acts as poison. If we do not accept Srila Prabhupada's instructions in this regard, as per his letter of July 9, 1977 and other instructions in support of it, what does it mean?

We have seen what it means in the case of the 11 who were named. Every one of them fell down, and the movement has disintegrated. Admittedly, there are a number of issues which have divided ISKCON, not merely the rittvik issue, but as the Chinese say, "When the river rises, the boats also will rise." Things in particular will improve when the overall situation is rectified, when Srila Prabhupada is restored as the Acharya, the spiritual master of all the devotees. This restoration is critical. Srila Prabhupada's instructions, like it or not, are the test of the disciple's obedience and submission. Without these, the disciple becomes useless. That is what Srila Prabhupada said of his godbrothers. They became useless because of disobedience of their spiritual master's order. The order still stood 40 years later, and Srila Prabhupada took it up and established ISKCON. As I see it, Srila Prabhupada's order still stands even now, but let me get this straight . . .you write that the letter of July 9, 1977 is 20 years old, so that means it is out of date, no longer valid? Does this apply to any other letters as well? Perhaps all of them? Or some of them? Which ones?

Srila Prabhupada taught that devotional service is absolute--the service of a pot washer is no less valuable and important than the service of a temple president or a GBC, but he also taught that the expert spiritual master engages the disciple according to his nature and aptitude. It is the spiritual master's prerogative to order the disciple as he sees fit, and it is the disciple's responsibility to carry out that order to the best of his ability and with confidence and faith in the spiritual master. Bhima das says to you, "So what if Hansadutta wants a "high-profile" service? It was given to him by Srila Prabhupada, and if he is ready do it, why he should not? You are not doing, so let him do. You can talk only through your backside, and that's why there is no result--only a smell."

Hope you are well.
Your servant,
Das Dasanudas devi dasi

-----------------------------------------

To: Das Dasanudas devi dasi
From: Rocana dasa
Date: August 11, 1997
Subject: "Oh! I Remember You"

Dear Das Dasanudas devi dasi,

All obeisances for you, all glories to Srila Prabhupada, who responds equally to the service, devotion, and love of all His followers, regardless of whether they be categorized as diksa or siksa disciples.

After your second letter arrived, I realized that I met you and your husband Bhima at last year’s L.A. Rathyatra. We had some interesting conversations about your service to Srila Prabhupada in Singapore. In fact, it was actually you who Hansadutta dasa was asking for when he phoned Nara Narayana dasa’s home, and I answered. “Oh! I Remember You!” was Hansadutta’s statement, which sparked this whole affair. At the time of writing, I was concerned about how the two of you would respond to that article. I recognized how dedicated and sincere you appeared to be about strictly following Srila Prabhupada. And, I understood that you were ex-diksa disciples of Hansadutta dasa who now conceived of yourselves as being initiated by Srila Prabhupada as His diksa disciples, through the medium of the Rttvik ceremony.

May I ask you, did Hansadutta dasa perform another fire sacrifice and re-initiate you as Srila Prabhupada’s disciple, or did he simply state that at the time when you were believing yourself to be a diksa disciple initiate of Hansadutta dasa, you were in fact becoming a Srila Prabhupada disciple, unbeknownst to both you and Hansadutta dasa? I’m curious, because I have discovered that amongst the various Rttvik factions (Hansadutta dasa’s being but one) there appears to be an important difference in understanding of the actual responsibilities and definition of qualifications of the Rttvik acarya. Some feel that the Rttvik priest can be anyone who is qualified to perform an agni-hotra ceremony, and can thereby bestow the name and articulate the vows. Other camps take a more siksa-like perspective, seeing the relationship as far more formal, with an acceptance of great responsibility on the part of the Rttvik guru and a mood of deep respect for their initiating [Rttvik] guru on the part of the initiate.

It appears that you are choosing to now see Hansadutta dasa in a similar manner as you once viewed him as a diksa. I say this because never have I heard you publicly speak out in defense of Srila Prabhupada, your param-diksa guru, even though you demonstrate your literary skills in the well written defense of your Rttvik guru, Hansadutta dasa. This leads me to wonder who is actually your principle guru, the one who resides within your heart -- Srila Prabhupada or Hansadutta dasa? Hansadutta dasa has just, in the last few years, aligned himself with the “pre-samadhi initiation system” idea. Who did you consider to be your guru in the interim period between Hansadutta dasa’s last stand as a zonal acarya and his revelation that he was actually a bonafide Rttvik acarya? Now, suddenly, all his ex-disciples were in reality really Srila Prabhupada’s diksa disciples?

This metamorphosis on the part of Hansadutta dasa must be confusing to you as well as hard on the emotional heart-strings. It must be a relief to now believe that, “I am a bonafide diksa disciple of Srila Prabhupada”. In addition, perhaps now you don’t have to deal with the strong “ loving feelings” you developed for the flamboyant superman who you “fell in love with” in 1978, the zonal acarya His Divine Grace, Hansadutta Swami. This title of glorification would be very nice if it was actually true. Having said this, let us look at your letter of response to me.

In your first paragraph, you again accuse me of “going overboard with categorical statements and generalizations, repetition of gossip and insinuations”, and remind me that “Presumption is the fodder of misunderstandings.” Since you have engaged in this discussion with me, please take the time to specifically list these inaccuracies found in my writings, so that I may correct them. It is always difficult to walk the fine line between being humble and forgiving, while also trying to be a bold preacher who calls a “spade a spade”. I am only speaking from my realizations as they pertain to my past personal experiences within ISKCON, working with Hansadutta dasa as an authority, as well as my reading of the materials posted on his website. Where exactly is the hearsay? I recognize that you naturally don’t enjoy facing the reality of Hansadutta dasa’s past nefarious deeds, and to have them again made public by someone who doesn’t share the compassion and forgiveness of a disciple for their reformed “ex-acarya”. Still, if you are going to brand me as a presumptuous gossip, you have a responsibility to clarify your charge against me....as I have clarified mine against Hansadutta dasa. By methodically engaging in this process, perhaps we can unveil even more of the truth in this situation.

You wrote, “Hansadutta does not deny his past, neither are we blind.” And yet, you appear to be willing to deny this past, on his behalf. If it is true that Hansadutta doesn’t deny the past, why is it that he has been so unwilling to come clear the past with me for these last ten years? You obviously do not wish to face the reality of his innumerable offenses. Instead, you deal harshly with one who presents his truth about the dark past experienced with Hansadutta dasa. In your mind, old ghosts like me should be quieted. I apologize for disturbing your tranquil life!

You may personally find my Hansadutta dasa stories “repetitious and tiresome”, and for obvious reasons you don’t wish to see the historical facts being brought out again so publicly. I can’t help but think of the many citizens of Germany who have understandably tired of hearing about the Holocaust for the last 50 years. Many persons don’t feel that there is any justification for the Jewish groups to continue searching for old Nazi war criminals, or demanding that Swiss banks return all the money stolen from the Jews. For me, there are some important lessons to be realized by going through this exercise. You might consider that perhaps this is just Krsna’s arrangements, and that my article and website is one of Srila Prabhupada’s ways of not allowing the past to be forgotten. Twenty years is just a flash in eternal time. It is my mission to see that the uncensored history of Srila Prabhupada’s ISKCON mission will be available for study by historians for thousands of years to come. The part that Hansadutta dasa played in the takeover and dismantling of the sankirtan movement should be preserved, so that other aspiring Vaisnavas in the future might learn from his mistakes...from all of our mistakes.

Your analogy of Hansadutta dasa being like a cute, innocent puppy dog, whose heartless master (me) is relentlessly pushing the untrained dog’s nose into his own smelly do-do, is sentimentally fetching albeit a far stretch from truth. Lord Krsna and Srila Prabhupada are the ultimate owners of Hansadutta dasa, and they alone have the power to orchestrate all punishments. Perhaps if Hansadutta dasa had been better trained in his youth (puppyhood), he would have refrained from littering all over Srila Prabhupada’s movement. Now, so many years later, I wonder about the phrase, “you can’t teach an old dog new tricks”.

Your use of the standard Rttvik rhetoric in defense of Hansadutta dasa’s illusion that he is a qualified and authorized Rttvik acarya is predictable. The Rttvik proposal is that all ISKCON’s problems would simply evaporate, if only Srila Prabhupada’s instructions in the July 9th letter had been obeyed. You go on to state, “Srila Prabhupada named 11 persons, one of them Hansadutta, to act as rittvik representatives of the Acharya.” In the following breath you acknowledge that “Every one of them fell down, and the movement has disintegrated.” You make the assumption that the only reason all the “chosen ones” toppled from their exalted positions is because they introduced the zonal-acarya system, and later had to replace it with the existing “minimum qualification, maximum puja” diksa program. If they had simply remained in their original positions as geographically placed Rttvik representatives, all would have been fine. I can only imagine that many of those who found their names on the July 9th letter wish they could just turn back the clock and start all over again. Dreaming how it could have been is simply a case of wishful thinking. In this lifetime, those who heavy fell down, namely Hansadutta, Kirtanananda, Bhavananda, Bhagavan and Ramesvara, will likely never regain the respect of respectable Vaisnavas.

It is interesting to note that Hansadutta dasa’s philosophical version of the responsibility and position of the Rttvik guru is not shared by other Rttvik groups, especially the English contingent, who are the strongest proponents of the Rttvik position. Kamsahanta dasa is the traveling proselytizer for the UK Rttvik group, which is headed up by Krsna Kanta Desai, who authored the recent and very definitive Rttvik document entitled, the “Final Order”. I recently asked Kamsahanta dasa why there isn’t a greater degree of cooperation felt by members of the various Rttvik advocacy groups. He recounted an incident that took place at Hansadutta dasa’s home in Northern California a few years ago.

The various “cells” of revolutionaries were gathered at Hansadutta’s to discuss the finer philosophical points of the Rttvik manifesto. They were also hoping to map out a common strategy so that the efforts of all the camps could be coordinated, and their message might penetrate through to the ISKCON elite. After the meeting, Kamsahanta dasa was poking around Hansadutta’s storage rooms, when lo and behold, he uncovered mass quantities of old publications, Vyasa pujas and various leaflets glorifying Hansadutta dasa from his imitation acarya days. Kamsa, in true fashion, angrily confronted Hansadutta dasa about having kept these offensive literatures in his possession for all these years. Kamsa demanded an explanation from Hansadutta, and suggested that they should immediately build a big bonfire, and burn them. Kamsahanta was expecting a display of Hansadutta’s sincerity, since he was now a convert to the Rttvik cause. Instead, Hansadutta dasa became furious, accusing Kamsa of snooping around his private rooms without permission. Predictably, he refused to comply with Kamsahanta’s demands for a false-ego cremation. Yasodanandana dasa made a gallant effort to mediate a truce in the midst of the fray, but Kamsahanta interpreted Yasodanandana’s efforts as tacit consent for Hansadutta dasa’s unacceptable reluctance. It seems that from that day onward, there has been a serious rift between the American [Californian] and the English Rttvik camps. Wherever there is Hansadutta dasa, there will always be controversy, division and non-cooperation. He is a renegade through and through, even while fighting on the side of the opposition party.

Hansadutta dasa’s fulmination’s against ISKCON’s political chicanery can be found in numerous articles posted on his website. While he is free to mightily criticize those who have done him wrong, you hypocritically accuse me of doing a disservice to the Vaisnava community by casting aspersions on Hansadutta dasa’s “good name”. Strange, but “Oh! I Remember You” hasn’t generated a backlash of irate e-mails from the Vaisnava community, with the exception of your understandably biased letters. In fact, my article has solicited just the opposite response. Even ex-disciples of Hansadutta dasa have sent me letters of thanks. Many devotees have confided that they wish they had the writing skills to tell their own wild and frightening stories about the Hansadutta dasa era.

It may be hard to hear this, but the overall perspective of most devotees is that you and your family are, very unfortunately, entrapped in the Hansadutta dasa cult. This fringe cult manifested after 1978, but its strong roots go all the way back to when Hansadutta dasa was “in charge” in Europe. My attempts at influencing you will certainly fail, but I hope this exchange may prevent others from coming under Hansadutta dasa’s spell.

Please forgive me for having offended you.

your servant,
Rocana dasa

Hansadutta's Apology Letter to the Devotees


reply to: pada1008@aol.com

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