BREAKING NEWS – GBC body member claims resolution 313 is fakeHanuman das
As you will see from the letter below, resolution 313 is fake, how to explain this?
GBC body incompetence knows no limits, that is one expanation. And second explanation is that feminist group within GBC through they were stronger than they really are. Backlash from banning this book was too strong, so now they are retreating.
Bhasu Ghosh Prabhu’s wants clarification:
Home Base: ISKCON Baroda
Dear Bhanu Maharaj,
Yatibhyonamaha. Jaya Srila Prabhupada!
Received your message:
as i already said, there was no ban on the book. That proposal never
passed. It was a mistake of the secretary Ananda tirtha to post it as a
Maharaj, how is this possible? To write off this entire episode as the
mistake of Ananda Tirtha Prabhu.
The GBC EC:
- Delayed the release/publication resolutions adopted at the AGM of 2016 in
order to convince Bhakti Vikas Swami to voluntarily withdraw the book from
Engaged with Bhakti Vikas Swami in extensive correspondence to achieve
Approved the publication of the GBC AGM 2016 minutes, I assume, after
scrutiny [due diligence], and fully understanding the implications of the
book ban. That doing so was going to create a “black mark” against the name
of Bhakti Vikas Swami, and do extensive harm to his reputation within
A rational explanation for this is in order from the GBC, not really from
Of course, I appreciate that you have conveyed this to the IIAC, [as well as
others, in the II news and discussion conference — and wherever I have sent
this], but we need to hear from the GBC EC. In this regard I have written
to Sesa Prabhu, and I hope he responds, ASAP.
Below I am copying Bhakti Vikas Maharaj’s recent (a few days ago) statement
about this issue (the book ban), that you write was just an innocuous error!
I am not convinced that it was such: kindly excuse me for thinking like this
in view of the points presented herein above.
Hope this meets you well.
Basu Ghosh Das
And, Bhanu Swami’s reply:
As I originally told you, I did not remember that the resolution ever passed. Then Sivarama swami and several others also said the same thing on the conference. The proposal was in two parts, and the second part was voted on and passed, but the first part was not even voted on. That is what Ananda Tirtha says now. Ec is going to make a statement soon.
Ok, Bhanu Swami is mentioning here, the first part of the resolution and second part. So, how to resolution was supposed to look like? What is the first part, what is the second part? The actual resolution 313 as voted on by the GBC members should look something like this:
The opinions expressed by Bhakti Vikasa Swami in his book “Women: Masters or Mothers” are solely those of the author in his private capacity and do not necessarily reflect the views and practices of the International Society for Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON), or its Founder-Acarya, His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada.
GBC has a bad track record of discerning what is “private” opinion, and what is Srila Prabhupada’s philosophy. For example, they never published similar statement about Hridayananda Goswami’s “gay monogamy” idea. Gay monogamy is definitely private opinion but GBC remained silent on this issue.
Now I smell victory and it seems that this case will be closed soon, but as the GBC fractions wage wars behind closed doors, we never know what future brings.