Declaration by Devamrta Swami – Genuine or hoaxHanuman das
Remember the article where Devamrta Swami said we are in PPB era (Post Prabhupada books era)? Allegedly, he published a declaration two days ago.
It seems to me that enemies of ISKCON are becoming more and more cunning. Well, you can never win by cheating. As much as I would like all “post Prabhupada book era” preachers removed from their fake guru posts, this particular attack on Devamrta Swami is fake.
Two days ago, I received “Declaration by Devamrta Swami”, I immediately wanted to see original email, when I received the forwarded email, it turned out that email was sent from email address: email@example.com, I have Devamrta Swami’s email from before, and this is not his email.
So, I checked with GBC Corresponding Secretary, I asked him if this letter was genuine, he replied:
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2018 15:10 +0800 From: "Ananda Tirtha das (GBC Corresponding Secretary)" <Ananda.Tirtha.firstname.lastname@example.org> To: "Hanuman (das) SDHS (Zagreb - HR)" <Hanuman.SDHS@pamho.net> Subject: confirmation
No idea. . . .
This morning it was even more interesting, I get a link to dandavats article which shows the declaration:
I tried the link, and it was no longer there. In the same time, I received another email from GBC corresponding secretary:
Date: Thu, 14 Jun 2018 07:42 +0800 From: "Ananda Tirtha das (GBC Corresponding Secretary)" <Ananda.Tirtha.email@example.com> To: "Hanuman (das) SDHS (Zagreb - HR)" <Hanuman.SDHS@pamho.net> Subject: confirmation
No idea. . . .
Devamrita Swami confirms it is a hoax and sent from a bogus email address.
Now I am really confused. You have to be really good in cheating people to publish fake declaration on dandavats. So, either it is fake declaration, or it is was true, but they are now trying to cover it up. So, let’s analyse the text of the “declaration” to understand if it is fake or true:
Dear Esteemed Maharajas, Temple Presidents, and Devotees,
In February of this year at the annual GBC meetings I met with a cohort of my GBC godbrothers at their request to address some concerns raised in regards to the transparency of my past when it comes to accepting and initiating disciples.
The conversation was conducted respectfully and in a collegiate manner and I have humbly conceded to comply with some conditions put forward during the discussion. Those conditions are…
This is wishful thinking. First of all, if you know anything how GBC operates, then you can understand this is “declaration” is fake. GBC body doesn’t operate by meeting with “cohorts of GBC godbrothers”. If GBC body really wanted to investigate Devamrta Swami, they would form a committee which will negotiate with him. That committee would have two or three members, like they did in case of Hridayananda das Goswami.
Second point is that GBC body is spineless organisation, they never really investigate “pure devotees”. Only if sannyasi actually leaves ISKCON with a prostitute, as Prabhavisnu Swami did, then they do their “investigation” to wrap things up. If you want to really see how their investigations look like, look at the curious case of Hridayananda das Goswami, after preaching nonsense for years, such as that Draupadi didn’t wear sari, that gay monogamy is ok way to practice Krishna consciousness, after playing ping pong with girls as a sannyasi, after saying it on record that he doesn’t chant on japa, the end result was the he was “awarded” by being added to GBC body. This is how GBC body does investigations.
Besides, why would GBC body investigate Devamrta Swami and New Vrindavan now. If they wanted to investigate somebody, they could investigate Radhanath Swami who is implicated in the murder of Sulocana, now that new book “Killing for Krishna” came out.
If GBC would like to investigate anybody, they could investigate Sacinandana Swami, who is travelling with his girlfriend publicly for the last 15 years. And there is ton of video evidence, I even recorded whole documentary about it, with over 10000 views, GBC body doesn’t care to investigate.
So, no way that GBC body would investigate anything, and even if they wanted to investigate something, it wouldn’t me Devamrta Swami.
Additionally, if somebody was forced to produce a public declaration, that would be mentioned in GBC resolutions, but in GBC resolutions for 2018, Devamrta Swami is not mentioned at all. Usually, such statement would be published together with GBC resolutions, not now, 4 months after the GBC meetings.
All these arguments lead me to believe that this whole declaration is fake.
That the following declaration be made available to all current disciples and existing prospective disciples That appropriate temple authorities discuss the below declarations with any future prospective disciples before such candidates approach me for shelter and immediately upon learning that the candidate is seeking shelter from me That the below declarations be made publicly available in all temples and zones where I am a GBC, hold a position of leadership, or have a significant number of supporters
No way any ISKCON guru would ever write anything like that. Since ISKCON fake gurus believe that they are all “pure devotees”, they never encourage any prospective disciples to discuss anything. Whole guru-list blind faith system is based on idea that all “guru list” gurus are pure devotees, who are selected by “pure devotees” from the GBC body.
No ISKCON guru will ever encourage any prospective disciple to analyse or discuss anything regarding purity of the prospective guru. Such activities are “very offensive”.
Can you even imagine that Sacinandana baba is forced to give declaration: “I want that all my future disciples analyse my travel with my female secretary and compare this behaviour with statements from Prabhupada’s books” 😀 😀 😀 😀
Main role of the GBC is to keep cohesion between fake gurus and collect as many fake disciples as possible.
So, this declaration was definitely not written by Devamrta Swami.
The proverbial ‘elephant in the room’… my re-entry in to Iskcon after being excommunicated during the New Vrindavan years was under an agreement of amnesty, I continue an expectation of that amnesty being honored, I reserve my right to silence on questions around my involvement in the activities of the time, assets I had control over, and the ongoing proprietorship of said assets
No chance, since book “Killing for Krishna” came out, Radhanath Swami is the main accomplice in Sulocana’s murder, not Devamrta.
In unison with the vast majority of my Sanyasi godbrothers I decline to participate in the GBC mandate that Sanyasis’ declare their assets and income on an annual basis. I include questions around my Australian registered company ‘Jay Matsya Superannuation’ within this privacy I have several aliases that I have not deemed necessary to declare publicly in the past, Devamrita Swami, Jay Matsya, and my birth name Lee Reynolds
As far as I know, GBC members who don’t submit financial reports don’t have right to vote. ‘Jay Matsya Superannuation’ company doesn’t seem to exist, and it is not explained in what way this info is relevant.
Always remember, to be fake guru in ISKCON, you have to be materially intelligent politician. Gurus and sannyasis of the GBC body would never push Devamrta Swami to say publicly that he wants to hide his finances. Because then, people would start questioning accounts and luxury apartments of other GBC body members.
I have been married and divorced twice, once to a Polish devotee, once to a Danish devotee. There have been times where I have denied being married In 2016 a recording was made public of me giving advice in regards to how local authorities should deal with the reporting of a sexual assault. In the recording I advise them to try and get the victim to state it was mutual and that it will all go away. No Iskcon authority has expressed to me that this advice is inappropriate.
Really? Who cares how many times Devamrta Swami was married, that was 30 years ago. GBC body would never force him to publish such irrelevant info.
This recording seems genuine, but it is only part of the recording and the context is not clear, so it is hard to determine what is he really talking about:
Your humble servant, Devamrita Swami
Except it’s not written by Devamrta Swami