The Mayapur Cover-Up Team in Action
BY: NAVADVIPCHANDRA DASA
Dec 30, USA (SUN) — In her recent article, Ramadevi Dasi from the Mayapur Child Protection Team writes to say everything spoken about Bhakti Vidya Purna Swami is plain gossip and rumors. She informs all the devotees that there was never a child involved because the girl was actually 23 years old. She also informs us that there has not been a "fall down" so BVPS can still be worshipped "as good as God".
Phew, that's a big relief. For a minute I thought there was going to be a big cover up, but now that you have placed all of your facts on the table everything is crystal clear - he's completely innocent. But there are still just a few tiny questions remaining, which maybe you and the Mayapur CPT can clear up for me:
1) If it was a case of BVPS just one time in a state of emergency riding a motorcycle with a 23-year-old single girl (while gymnastically not coming in physical contact with her at all), then why is there an investigation taking place? From everything you wrote, there is absolutely no hint of anything even remotely looking like improper conduct. Why would you be wasting your time with a CPT investigation based on nothing?
2) If no child was involved, then what the heck is the Child Protection Team doing investigating Bhakti Vidya Purna Swami? Is it usual CPT policy to investigate sannyasi interactions with grown adult women?
3) Why don't you explain why Bhakti Vidya Purna Swami had been sleeping for the last few months at the girl's school building (the old library building)? The Swami has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars building a new boys gurukula, but he doesn't stay there in the night with his male students? Instead he sleeps alone in an isolated girl's school, where it wouldn't be very hard to meet up with someone - perhaps the 23-year-old principle of the girl's school? This is the statement from some of his own gurukula students, which I am sure you have interviewed and are aware of.
4) Why have some of the children's parents withdrawn their daughters from the girl's school saying they are not comfortable with Bhakti Vidya Purna Swami's improper association with the girls?
5) Even if we accept your cover up version of the events, there are clear signs that you are telling lies. You state:
"One of the teachers from the girls' school had burnt herself at home. She phoned the school and asked for some special medicine they have. At the time, Tulasi Vallabha, a disciple of BVPS was there with his motorbike. BVPS and Sri Radhe, who is the 23 year old principal of the girls' school (not a minor girl), thinking, because of the way it had been explained, that it was an emergency, grabbed the medicine and jumped on the back of Tulasi's motorbike. Sri Radhe was sitting on a rack which extends from the back of the bike and not in contact with BVPS. They went to the teacher's house gave the medicine, dealt with it then made their separate ways back to the school."
For anyone who is aware of motorcycle models in India , it is clear you are telling a lie. You are claiming that three people were sitting on this motorcycle (Tulasi Vallabha, Bhakti Vidya Purna Swami, and 23-year-old Sri Radhe), yet they never came in physical contact with each other. You are straight out lying. It is physically impossible for 3 people to site on an Indian motorcycle and not come in physical contact. We also know that the motorcycle that Tulasi Vallabha owned was of the brand "Bullet", and we have seen his motorcycle enough times to judge what you are saying. Your claim is that Sri Radhe was somehow gymnastically able to avoid coming in any physical contact with the Swami while riding next to him on the motorcycle. Your statement is absurd. Have you ever ridden with three people on a Bullet? I have, and I am sure many of the other readers have also. Anyone will tell you that it is extremely physically uncomfortable to ride triples on any Indian motorcycle because you keep getting pushed up against the person next to you, very intimately in fact. Even if she was keeping both her legs over one side of the bike (as ladies usually ride), still there is no way you could avoid coming in close physical contact with the person next to you. In fact, by sitting sideways you take up even more seat space, which would result in an even tighter fit for three people on the motorcycle. Conclusion: You have told a lie, the only purpose of which is to cover up the truth.
Secondly, from your cover up description there is really no basis for an investigation at all. In fact there is no basis even for a rumor to have been made. You have white washed it so well that I really wonder why anyone would have even called for a CPT investigation. If what you say is true, only a fool would be conducting an investigation.
Thirdly, even in your cover up version of events, what is the Swami thinking, riding on a motorcycle with a 23-year-old girl? Would it have been so difficult for him to get down and walk to his next destination? Is Mayapur such a huge place that he needed to ride with a girl on this motorcycle? Three people were there (pretty much his disciples and himself), and no one even thought for one second that this was improper behavior for a sannyasi? Of course not, because it was regular conduct for the Swami. He has been associating closely with the girls from the girl's school (and the principle) for a long time. He even spends his nights alone there (at least until you forced him to stop it). Who knows what "late night" work the 23-year-old single school principle might need to go do in the middle of the night along with the Swami?
You state:
"As far as his spending all day every day in the school this has been dealt with. It wasn't that excessive but his visits to the school were stopped of his own volition long before we looked into it."
You admit that he was spending all day and every day at the all-girl's school associating with this 23-year-old principal and her students, yet you say it wasn't that excessive? Exactly how much intimate association between a sannyasi and a 23-year-old girl's school principal is considered excessive? We have seen from past investigations that they can have girls sit on their laps, like Lokanatha Swami, and they can have their hand "accidentally" touch certain places on the girl, and it still isn't considered excessive. So how exactly does the CPT determine what is and what isn't excessive intimate contact between a sannyasi and a girl?
Your investigation is a farce because you are asking questions to the Swami, his close intimate disciple, and one of his girl friends who is in love with him. What honest answer do you expect to get from them? I have already seen this same CPT investigation on another channel, it's just an ongoing rerun:
CPT: "Bhavananda, did you molest any children?
Bhavananda: "No, I haven't."
CPT: "Bhavananda, are you a pedophile?"
Bhavananda: "No, I am not."
CPT: "Okay, it's all clear. Put him back on the Vyasasana, he's not a child molester."
For the last 20 years every single investigation of child abuse or misconduct in Mayapur has been a joke, and you are the latest joker making everyone laugh. You say you are thoroughly investigating Bhakti Vidya Purna Swami's case and will announce your opinion shortly. Why don't you first announce the results of your investigation into pedophile Bhavananda whom you have sitting on the Vyasasana giving classes on Srimad Bhagavatam even today? Bhavananda, one of the most notorious child molesters in Mayapur, is today sitting in front of Radha Madhava with a garland around his neck giving class to all of the devotees calling them rascals.
Or why don't you go ahead and post the results of your investigation into notorious pedophile Nitaicand Swami? For decades he was molesting boys and girls, and you didn't do a thing because he didn't target the foreign kids. Where are the public results from that investigation? As everyone in Mayapur knows, Nitaicand was the one who almost perfectly fit Jayadvaita Swami's statement: "ISKCON gurus have in the past had sex with men, women and possibly children." You just needed to cut out that "possibly" for it to be 100% accurate.
In his case you didn't say a word because your only concern was to live comfortably in Mayapur. You didn't want to do anything that would interfere with your comfort, so to hell with those Bengali, Bangladeshi and Nepali kids he and Bhavananda were molesting. And now you want us to believe that your CPT investigations mean anything? You are all rascals for selfishly remaining silent while Nitaicand and Bhavananda molested dozens of children.
What about your investigation into the third amigo, notorious pedophile Satadhanya, who has acted as ISKCON's main lawyer for years. Why did you let him stay in Mayapur for years and years even though everyone knew he was a homosexual predator. Even after completing a CPT investigation that dragged on for years, he was just made to move one block down the road, and pay a $3,000 fine. He is still on ISKCON salary and helping them fight court cases against the evil Ritviks in Bangalore. What was the use of your eyewash CPT investigation in his case? Can you tell me anywhere in the world a child predator can get away with just a $3,000 fine and nothing else? Why wasn't he reported to the police and sent to prison, like child molesters are meant to be dealt with? I'm sure you will reassure everyone that there was no cover up involved in his case either. You can't touch him because being the main lawyer of ISKCON he knows all the illegal dealings of the Mayapur management. He could molest 1,000 kids and you still couldn't touch him with your CPT investigation. You couldn't touch Nitaicand because he ran the Mayapur mafia, and you would end up dead if you opened your mouth. You couldn't touch Bhavananda because the local Zonal Acharya has given his backing, and if you go against it you are out of Mayapur. These are all the facts of the Mayapur CPT. You are nothing but a cover up team, your sole job is to make all the bad news go away.
You say that the CPT will "publish its findings" on Bhakti Vidya Purna Swami shortly. Does that include all the past investigations into his activities that have still not been made public? Will you just staple this investigation to the top of his other investigations and make them all public together, or will you pretend the old investigations no longer exist? In the past you never made anything public, so why are you changing your policy now?
From the 1980's, beginning with the homosexual rule of Bhavananda's disciples, till the present I can list you dozens of incidents in the Mayapur gurukula that were "investigated". But amazingly not a single one has been made public. Could it be that you are blind, deaf and dumb, and subsequently not aware of all of these scandals? Of course you know everything, but up till the present not a single scandal has been made public. So I would have to say you are all rascals for hiding every single thing that has gone on at that school for more than 25 years.
You state:
"I am not covering up for BVPS. I wouldn't do that. If there was ever any investigation which revealed evidence that he had been involved in a sexual incident with a minor he, if found guilty, like any perpetrator of such child abuse, would be out."
You make wonderful claims, but no action. Please send me a note once you act on your words and get Bhavananda out of Mayapur. Your investigations make the OJ trial look like pure justice. It is clear from your wording that if the Swami was found guilty of illicit relations with a 23-year-old girl's school principal, then you wouldn't do anything about it. You would hand that type of an occurrence up to the GBC where they would act decisively, just like they have acted in the past:
1) Satsvarupa was just receiving psychotherapy in the nude, no fall down.
2) Harikesh was receiving mystical massage from a prostitute to increase his psychic strength, no fall down.
3) Lokanatha Swami was just reading Krishna book to a girl sitting on his lap while his hand accidentally touched parts of her body, no fall down.
4) Suhotra Swami was visiting prostitutes because he needed information for a new book he was writing, no fall down.
5) Bhakti Vidya Purna Swami was spending his whole day at the girl's school along with this 23-year-old principle, spending his nights alone in that isolated building, no fall down.
You assure us that his faults and improper behavior have all been dealt with and solved, by his own doing of course. That's good to know. So basically you are telling us that the Swami won't be spending his nights alone at the all-girl's school, and there won't be any more midnight meetings between the Swami and the girl's school principle in the future. Good to know that. Now if you could just get his disciples and students to stop from speaking the truth to their friends we may be able to get this one covered up completely.
You conclude by telling everyone:
"Prabhupada said that gossip could ruin our movement and I'm seeing every day how it's impossible to take what people say at face value."
I think everyone with eyes knows that our movement has been destroyed not by gossip, but by pedophiles, homosexuals, fake sannyasis and bogus gurus. What you refer to as gossip is in most cases a reflection of ISKCON's actual past history. If you didn't spend your time covering up for people like Bhavananda, Nitaicand and Satadhanya people may take your warnings against gossip more seriously.
As you are aware, the CPO has already made the following statements about Bhakti Vidya Purna Swami:
"During the 1980s, through 1991, many children suffered physical, sexual, and psychological child abuse in the Mayapura gurukula while Bhakti Vidya Purna Maharaja was in the position of principal of the school. Bhakti Vidya Purna Maharaja has expressed to the ICOCP that he takes responsibility for the child abuse that occurred while he was principal of the school.
"In some instances Bhakti Vidya Purna Maharaja imposed excessive physical punishments on students, and Bhakti Vidya Purna Maharaja also takes responsibility for these acts of misconduct. . . . Bhakti Vidya Purna Maharaja may not at any time assume a managerial or administrative role in ISKCON, and especially not in connection with children."
It is a fact that at present Bhakti Vidya Purna Swami is in charge of the boys gurukula in Mayapur. You may present whatever smoke screen you like, saying he isn't one of the official registered directors, but the fact is he is the sole leader. So again I must inform you that you are a rascal for hiding this truth and for pretending that Bhakti Vidya Purna Swami is not violating the past CPO rulings. If he has violated the past CPO rulings, just like Satadhanya has also always done, then why should we take the CPO and the Mayapur CPT seriously?
The past record of CPT investigations in Mayapur show that the primary concern the investigators have is to keep themselves living comfortably in Mayapur. As long as no foreign kids are molested, and as long as the girls are over 18, you have no objection to what goes on. Just keep sitting in those sweet classes of Bhavananda's, and pretend its all nectar around you.
For background information, readers may also take note of this past unresolved matter relating to Bhakti Vidya Purna Swami, the Mayapur CPT cover up team, and the CPO.
