12/12/97 - 1348
IVC Digest #1
USA (VNN) - IVC DIGEST #1 - December 12, 1997
Report on Missing Tapes (by Paratrikananda dasa)
This report was compiled by studying the Bhaktivedanta Archives
Vedabase. The number on the left in the first chart below denotes
the year and the number on the right denotes the number of days
in that year which we have no tape recordings of Srila Prabhupada.
The second chart indicates the specific dates in which tapes are
missing in 1977 and gives a breakdown of number of days of missing
tapes for the year. I asked Ekanatha prabhu at the Bhaktivedanta
Archives if he could verify my findings and after thoroughly checking
archive records he confirmed that my calculations were correct
and that the Archives does not have any knowledge of tapes in
their possession for the specified missing days or of ever having
received tapes for the specified missing days.
Missing Tapes 1966-1977
| Year |
Days Missing
|
| 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 |
230 324 225 245 313 256 142 119 95 60 47 151 |
It's interesting to note that the number of days in which tapes are missing steadily decreases each year from 1970 to 1976. Presumably, the progressive diligence in recording Srila Prabhupada's words would be attributed to devotees maturing and understanding the importance of these recordings for future generations as well as ourselves. When once asked if it was necessary to record a conversation of an apparently uimportant nature between Srila Prabhupada and some guests, Tamal Krsna Goswami stated: "We tape everything Prabhupada says." (5/24/77?Vrn)
One might then wonder why the number of days in which tapes are missing dramatically increases from 47 days in 1976 to 151 days in 1977 (more than triple). This is particularly curious if we take into account that 1977 was a shorter recording year than any other (only ten and a half months) since Srila Prabhupada departed on November 14th. And this aberration appears even more glaring when we consider that in 1977, it became painfully obvious Srila Prabhupada could depart at any time and it was icreasingly important to cherish and preserve every moment he spent with us.
Now let's take a closer look at 1977.
Missing Tapes in 1977
| 1/14 1/17 thru 1/18 2/9 2/11 2/13 2/22 thru 2/23 3/3 thru 3/21 3/28 4/3 thru 4/4 4/6 thru 4/9 4/12 4/14 4/21 4/26 thru 4/27 5/1 5/3 thru 5/7 5/16 5/18 5/21 thru5/23 5/25 thru 5/26 5/30 6/3 thru 6/16 6/25 6/29 7/4 7/6 thru 7/7 7/9 7/11 thru 7/13 7/16 7/18 7/20 thru 7/25 7/28 thru 7/30 8/1 thru 8/7 8/9 8/12 thru 8/16 8/18 thru 10/1 10/5 10/7 10/19 10/23 11/9 11/12 |
1 2 1 1 1 2 19 1 2 4 1 1 1 2 1 5 1 1 3 2 1 14 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 1 6 3 7 1 5 45 1 1 1 1 1 1 |
Total No. of Days of Missing Tapes = 151
The months of January, February, October and November, 1977, are
not unusual and the number of days of missing tapes in these months
coincide with the monthly averages for 1976. Out of the 105 days
of Jan., Feb., Oct. and Nov. (count only 14 days for Nov.) just
15 days are missing. However, the months of March thru August
have an extremely high number of days of missing tapes and the
month of September has no tapes at all. Out of the 214 days from
the period beginning March 1st and ending September 30th, 136
days have no tapes. Looking at this period by itself, the ratio
of recording days to none-recording days is 1.5 to 1. This is
similar to the inefficient recording ratios of 1966 thru 1971,
when when we had less technical and managerial expertise, limited
resources, older technology, and did not fully comprehend the
importance of recording Srila Prabhupada's words.
I'd also like to point out that there are some rather large blocks
of consecutive days when tapes are not accounted for. Most notably:
19 days in March, 14 days in June, and a staggering 45 days from
August 18th thru October 1st. That Srila Prabhupada would have
spoken less during severe illness is understandable. That Srila
Prabhupada would have said nothing for such long periods of time
is inconceivable. Under the circumstances, the logical questions
to ask would be:
Why were there no recordings made on these days?
or
If there were recordings made, what happened to them?
Letters
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 1997 12:43:23 -0500 From: naveen krishna <naveen@compuserve.com>
Subject: Independent Vaisnava Council To: Rocana dasa <rocana@harekrsna.com>
Dear Rocan Prabhu,
Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada.
It has been a long time since I heard from you. I have thought
of you often and wondered how you were.
I am not vey adept at computer and internet usage...it is difficult
for me. I request you to keep me posted on the the development
of the council. I may not be qualified to be a member for so many
reasons.. So please keep me informed. Currently I am assisting
Balavanta Prabhu with the investigation when he wants...I am not
on any committee, and better for me to not get on any committee
or council at this time. Hope you are well and happy.
Date: Sun, 07 Dec 1997 20:33:57 -0500 To: rocana@harekrsna.com From: Bhakti-Tirtha Swami Subject: Participation on Council
Dear Rocana,
Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada.
It is very good hearing from you after such a long time. When I think of you, I think of the very adventurous times we shared together in trying to serve Srila Prabhupada.s mission.
I feel most honored to be asked to participate on this Council. As we all know, it is very important for the first of our movement that we follow through on Srila Prabhupada's last desires for his Society. It is very good that the Council members be from various variegated sectors of the Vaisnava community. This list seems like a rather healthy list. I am happy to see so many mature devotees on this list. Isa Dasa feels that he wants to concentrate on the tapes I have chosen. At this point in my life, I want to concentrate on Srila Prabhupada's last desire and request that we establish rural self-sufficient communities, especially since one of my projects is Gita Nagari. Gita Nagari is the community that Srila Prabhupada himself was on his way to before returning to Vrndavana, where he left his body, to establish varnasrama dharma. I am beginning to eat, sleep, and even dream about self-sufficiency, because noble devotees like yourself are able to clarify certain issues for the Vaisnavas. That surely is most important, but after that we have a whole lot of work to do in dealing with our social and economic structure.
I am one of those who is a spiritual social activist. Therefore, I am somewhat fed up with conferences, councils, meetings, etc. I want to do whatever little I can in addressing the things that we all categorically know that Srila Prabhupada wanted as a way to try to help relieve some of the suffering that so many Vaisnavas are experiencing. We need devotees working on all fronts. I am disappointed with myself in the past for doing so many things that sometimes I was not able to concentrate profoundly on some most important areas. Now that I am almost 50 years old with a body that is deteriorating, I want to make sure that by the time I leave this planet I could have made a healthy offering to Srila Prabupada's mission by serving his devotees.
The work of your Council is definitely very important. It will be very demanding. I would suggest that anyone who cannot make it a priority perhaps should not get involved. I in no way am minimizing its importance, but the opposite, because it is most important that it be dealt with great attention. Devotees like you who do this work will be on one side, but devotees like me who do my kind of work will be on the other side. I am sure we will meet at a very healthy point.
I am personally very sympathetic to all the various arguments I am hearing these days, simply because I know that every Vaisnava is real and is most important. We must learn a lot from those we agree with and those we disagree with. We must more and more perfect the art of being humble, submissive, and bold, because we are spiritual scientists. We want to know the truth, speak the truth, and live the truth.
Hare Krsna,
As always, your friend and little brother, Bhakti-Tirtha Swami
Date: Mon, 08 Dec 97 19:00:22 GMT From: Krishna_Desai@deloitte.touche.co.uk To: rocana@harekrsna.com (Rocana dasa), isa@equalsouls.org, staff@vnn.org Subject: Re: Independent Vaisnava Council
Dear Prabhus,
Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada.
1) This council cannot be independent of the GBC when the North American GBC chairman and others are on the council. Not that this is a problem but I do not see how then a complaint can be made against Balavanta and the current investigation?
2) Also who is already on the council?
3) Also your categorisation of the so-called 'majority' and 'minority' groups who should make up this council is confused: you mix up philosphical positions i.e.ritvik, that can be held by anyone, with designations based on involvement with the movement. I think this merely reflects some bias against the ritvik position to try and label it as a 'group' and thus marginalise it. Otherwise why list a whole bunch of demographics and then throw in one particular philosphical position? Ultimately philosphically there are and can only be two groups - those who believe the July 9th order terminates on Novemeber 14th, and those that believe that it does not. You only got two choices. And this is the basis of the whole controversy.
4) Also the current investigation IS tied up with the whole Guru issue whether we like it or not, since the MOTIVE for such alleged wrong doing will be directly related to the succession of power that took place. To try and separate it will be artificial.
5) Is the aim of the council to be representative of philosphical positions, or to be reprsentative based on demographics?
6) Also this matter will only be resolved in terms EVIDENCE if the body is exhumed. Are you endorsing this?
7) If you are not endorsing this, then apart from deciphering some whisphers, how do you propose to actually establish WHAT HAPPENED, which I assume is your goal?
8) Also by deciding to set up such a council you have already made a very strong statement about what you think about the GBC and the way they are conducting the current investigation, and that you have no trust in them. Otherwise, what would be the purpose of setting up such a body? The basis for such a lack of trust and faith in the GBC should be made clear?
The answers to the above questions would be much appreciated.
Your Servant,
Krishnakant
Dear Krsna Kanta Desai,
Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada.
Thank you for your response regarding the Independent Vaisnava Council. I will attempt to answer your questions.
1) This council cannot be independent of the GBC when the North American GBC chairman and others are on the council. Not that this is a problem but I do not see how then a complaint can be made against Balavanta and the current investigation?
I think it is appropriate for the IVC to extend an invitation to various representatives of ISKCON, whether they be GBC, Temple Presidents, senior devotees, or others. The word "independent" does not preclude representation from ISKCON. The word independent does, however, indicate that certain parameters of behaviour will be established, and Council members will be asked to act accordingly. These parameters will have to be set by Council members as the organization becomes fully established. For example, members may be admonished to attend to Council work in as fair and unbiased a way as possible; to hold completely confidential certain information during progress of investigation; or to act with the best interests of all Srila Prabhupada's disciples and followers in mind. There is nothing inherent in this use of the word "independent" that prevents a GBC member or Temple President from working with the Council. It is possible that a GBC member might join the Council, and come to discover that the Council's expectations regarding "independent" representation are beyond their ability or willingness to participate, in which case they are free to resign. By the same token, if the Council becomes aware that any member is not adhering to the established parameters for "independent" representation, they may have also established a procedure for evicting from membership one who breaks the agreements. Again, these circumstances do not preclude an appropriate invitation for participation.
The question you raise regarding how a complaint can be made against Balavanta and the current investigation, is an entirely different matter. Balavanta dasa announced his GBC appointment as independent special investigator, while simultaneously announcing his participation on the Independent Vaisnava Council. It became clear that he was compromised in these positions when he became unwilling to share investigation results with the other Council members, instead sharing them only with the GBC.
2) Also who is already on the council?
At the present time, we have confirmations from the following Council members: myself, Mrigendra dasa, Agrahya dasa, Bahudak dasa, Mahaksa dasa, Damodar dasa, Yasomatinandana dasa, and Vaisnava dasa. We expect more to arrive this week.
3) Also your categorization of the so-called 'majority' and 'minority' groups who should make up this council is confused: you mix up philosophical positions i.e.ritvik, that can be held by anyone, with designations based on involvement with the movement. I think this merely reflects some bias against the ritvik position to try and label it as a 'group' and thus marginalise it. Otherwise why list a whole bunch of demographics and then throw in one particular philosophical position? Ultimately philosophically there are and can only be two groups - those who believe the July 9th order terminates on November 14th, and those that believe that it does not. You only got two choices. And this is the basis of the whole controversy.
First, I didn't ask you to participate on this body simply because you are the author of the "Final Order" document and other writings in which you expound your post samadhi proxy initiation theory [Rttvik] based on the July 9th letter. Your writing and researching expertise is well demonstrated in your many scholarly pieces -- a needed quality on any committee. Second, I was not making an effort to marginalize the Rttvik proponents by labeling them as a group. I was simply making the observation that a large number of devotees can be defined as being members of this philosophical camp, and should thus be represented on the Council. What you criticize as marginalization was, in fact, just the opposite. Further, I don't see the Rttvik proponents as being the only "particular philosophical position" mentioned. Certainly members of the GBC have also earned the right to be denoted as having a "particular philosophical position".
4) Also the current investigation IS tied up with the whole Guru issue whether we like it or not, since the MOTIVE for such alleged wrong doing will be directly related to the succession of power that took place. To try and separate it will be artificial.
What have you seen in the Council's preliminary materials that indicates a desire to separate this issue from investigation into allegations of poisoning? In fact, I have suggested that the Council consider setting its mandate to allow for future investigation and research into a number of other contentious areas, including the initiation issue.
5) Is the aim of the council to be representative of philosophical positions, or to be representative based on demographics?
My personal hope and intention is that the Council will be representative of the disciples and supporters of Srila Prabhupada. For for purposes of discussion, these individual supporters can be referred to by whatever definitions make sense. You have obviously seen a list of the group designations that came to my mind. Perhaps rather than making this into an issue of separation, which is not my intent, you could instead add to the list other group designations that I have missed. Regardless of definitions used to define potential groups who should be represented, the Council will aim to give ALL persons the facts, as best they can be ascertained. Those pious souls looking for answers will become attracted to the "truth" which is non different from Krsna.
6) Also this matter will only be resolved in terms EVIDENCE if the body is exhumed. Are you endorsing this?
I just had a long talk with our participating lawyer, Mrigendra dasa, about this gruesome potential reality. I will ask him to write down his legal perspective on the matter, so it can be shared with Council members. As I understand it, the question of exhumation will not be dependent upon the Council's desire or endorsement. For that matter, none of Srila Prabhupada's disciples nor even the GBC would have any say in the matter. It would be entirely up to the authorities -- in this case, the Indian CID. When and if suspicious evidences are amassed to a certain point, the Council will have to decide whether or not to endorse turning them over to both North American and Indian law enforcement agencies. However, the Council's desire does not prevent any individual with access to evidences from raising the alarm with law enforcement, if they so choose. This will not be something the Council can control.
7) If you are not endorsing this, then apart from deciphering some whispers, how do you propose to actually establish WHAT HAPPENED, which I assume is your goal?
It is quite possible, if not likely, that far more evidence will surface in this situation than is limited to whispers on tapes. We cannot know how many individuals will come forward to present first-hand information or proof that will support these allegations. Personally, I have faith in the process of continuing forward with whatever materials, information, or manpower are made available by the Lord. Krsna is non-different than the truth, and the harder one searches, the more Krsna reveals.
8) Also by deciding to set up such a council you have already made a very strong statement about what you think about the GBC and the way they are conducting the current investigation, and that you have no trust in them. Otherwise, what would be the purpose of setting up such a body? The basis for such a lack of trust and faith in the GBC should be made clear?
My participation with the Council can, I suppose, be seen as the most recent in a long line of strong statements. Please don't confuse my personal feelings about the GBC with the Council's mandate, or with the personal feelings of its other members. If you are interested in the basis for my personal, overall lack of trust and faith in the GBC, you need only read my postings to VADA. You might begin with "Srila Prabhupada's Perfect Plan". The basis for my personal feelings about the GBC's trustworthiness regarding recent events has been articulated in my response to the GBC's statement of December 7th. I think it is safe to assume that the majority of Council members share my feelings in this regard.
I appreciate your careful inquires, which confirm my wish for your inclusion on the Council. Please let me know if you have further questions.
your servant, Rocana dasa
