Dhanurdhar is the most named abuser in ISKCON - no exaggeration.
Dear Petitioners and those who are concerned,
Thank you for staying informed and engaged on this important case. Please continue to sign and share this petition.
It has come to our attention that there is a misinformation campaign underway amongst Dhanurdhar's supporters, questioning the truth or calls the testimonies and allegations "exaggeration".
Firstly, I will be sharing an example of misinformation, that demonstrates the urgent need for the GBC (Governing Body Commission) of ISKCON to make a public statement upholding their own Child Protection Office rulings.
Secondly, I will be sharing GBC documents to demonstrate the legitimate claims against Dhanurdhar.
This is a transcript and translation of a recorded message sent (in Spanish) by Guru-Prasad Swami to his disciple, after she signed the petition and posted on her Facebook wall sharing the petition.
“Hare Krishna. Please accept my blessings. All glories to Srila Prabhupada. I am in the middle of GBC’s meetings, but I know that you and other devotees are giving opinions regarding Dhanudhar Maharaja. I am sending this message, then you can share it. Not in Facebook, but with those devotees who have been commenting. Because it is my duty to oversee that my disciples and devotees in general do not commit offences against vaisnavas. I know Dhanudhar Swami since 1975; every time I visited Vrindavan, I used to stay with him at gurukula’s accommodation; I saw his behaviour, how he contributed academically, I saw his brahminical nature. Almost everything they are saying about him is not true; there was another devotee, his name was Raghunath. He hit devotees sometimes. He was the person who pushed a devotee against a column and broke his nose. He was the person who hit devotees. He was the person who chastised using sticks. He was the person who forced devotees to eat vomit. Dhanudhar Swami didn’t do anything like that.
He committed some mistakes. His mistakes were: Once, maybe twice, he pushed a devotee. That devotee fell and hurt his arm a bit, but that was not his intention.
And those children were out of control, coming from broken families, carrying very serious psychological issues; I saw them. He told me about them, he asked me what to do with them. Some of those families didn’t care for their children.
He also made the mistake of censuring the exchange of mail communication with their families, to avoid having the children expose the situation of the gurukula. His intention was to solve everything internally. That’s was his mistake.
He did many mistakes, but he didn’t do these things they are commenting. I believe that those who are criticising him, really don’t know him and are committing offences.
Dhanudhar Swami brought to ISKCON, two hundred or two hundred fifty persons in USA, India and Italy. Highly qualified people. His followers are more qualified than followers of any other preacher. They are bank managers and powerful executives. The quality of his preaching is incredible.
So, I am just warning, please be careful, better you put more emphasis and attention chanting the Maha Mantra, spending less time on Facebook giving opinions regarding situations that you don’t know about. Many times the information from the internet is exaggerated or false. Please be careful.
Thanks. I hope you are well. Receive my blessings from Mayapur.
All glories to Srila Prabhupada, Sri Guru and Gauranga."
I wanted you to have the facts of this case. Below is a summary prepared by the 2006 CPO (Child Protection Office) Director for the GBC (Governing Body Commission of ISKCON), quoting ISKCON's top legal council at the time. The legal council obtained this additional testimony after the 1999 CPO decision and it became clear to the CPO and lawyers how much more harm Dhanurdhar had actually caused. This additional insight is what convinced the GBC to pass the leadership restriction (including initiating guru) the next year, in 2007.
Some key points to glean from this summary letter:
1) Based upon this additional information, it is now unequivocally clear to ISKCON’s legal team that the damage inflicted by Dhanurdhara Swami was significantly greater than that which was known in 1999. In fact, Dhanurdhara Swami is named as an abuser...far more than any other person.
2) The conclusions of the judges were unanimous, finding Dhanurdhara Swami personally responsible for child neglect, child physical abuse, and child psychological abuse. They also found him responsible for failure to adequately supervise the teaching staff and thus he failed to protect the children from even more severe abuse.
3) The judges would certainly not include unfounded charges in the official decision unless they had some validity. To include claims that were not believed by the judges would be highly irresponsible and make no sense. The judges do not mention anywhere that the accusations were considered false or exaggerated.
Thank you again for your support, your voice, your love and concern for the protection of children.
Sincerely,
Krishna Devata d.d.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Summary and Notes to the CPO Case of Dhanurdhara Swami
Many devotees, including some of our leaders, are only vaguely familiar with the exact nature of the 1999 ISKCON Child Protection Office (CPO) decision against Dhanurdhara Swami. Some devotees have expressed that his offenses were minor, he was a scapegoat for other’s abuse, or the evidence was weak. I would like to correct some of these misconceptions.
The attached Child Protection Office Official Decision provides an excellent overview of the history, evidence, and conclusions of this case. However, it does not present all the testimony and evidence, but only a sampling. In this introduction, I wish to give a fuller understanding of the case and evidence that the judges evaluated.
The conclusions of the judges were unanimous, finding Dhanurdhara Swami personally responsible for child neglect, child physical abuse, and child psychological abuse. They also found him responsible for failure to adequately supervise the teaching staff and thus he failed to protect the children from even more severe abuse.
This managerial failure is summarized by Sri Rama Prabhu, at that time Minister of Education, whose comment is in the case file, but not quoted in this decision. He stated, “To the best of my knowledge, Dhanurdhara Swami did not sexually abuse the students. But he let a lot go on, with his knowledge. The evidence from former gurukula students is overwhelming – both of neglect and willful non-sexual personal abuse. He was warned numerous times about the school and staff shortcomings, but failed to acknowledge the abuse, or correct it.”
There is also a preponderance of evidence that Dharnurdhara Swami personally abused children in the school. The evidence consisted of testimony from over 30 former students, as well as other adults present during this time. The case decision gives many samples of the type of testimony the panel heard, but certainly not all of it. In this particular case, the judicial panel did not give a definitive verdict on each allegation. Rather, they chose to make a more global assessment, based upon the preponderance of evidence. While it is not possible to speculate on whether the judges considered every testimony accurate (and many versions were contested by Dhanurdhara Swami), several observations may be made.
1. There are numerous examples of testimony of abuse quoted verbatim in the CPO decision. The judges would certainly not include unfounded charges in the official decision unless they had some validity. To include claims that were not believed by the judges would be highly irresponsible and make no sense. The judges do not mention anywhere that the accusations were considered false or exaggerated.
2. A full reading of the case file, which is several hundred pages, shows a significant consistency of testimony, and much cross-validation of reports. In other words, abuse reported by one victim was often supported by the testimony of another witness.
3. Sesa Prabhu, a judge on the case and writer of the decision remarks on the consistency of the testimony across time (and important consideration in evaluating evidence). “Personally, I found it edifying that complaints made during the meeting videotaped in Los Angeles during November 1995 were presented virtually unchanged in the interviews conducted in 1999. This despite the politicization of the case which occurred during the intervening years.”
4. We realize now that even the large amount of testimony that was obtained by the CPO, and presented to the judges, did not include every instance of abuse. It is logical to conclude that not every child attending the school over a period of years came forward to testify. This would be merely speculation, if it were not for this important statement form Amarendra Prabhu, the devotee lawyer who has worked on the lawsuit for six years:
“As a result of the litigation in Texas, and the 600-plus claims filed in the bankruptcy court, we now have a vast body of information (evidence) that was not available in 1999. Although much was known with respect to allegations of physical and mental child abuse by Dhanurdhara Swami at the Vrindavan gurukula, we now have even more information than we had at that time. Based upon this additional information, it is now unequivocally clear to ISKCON’s legal team that the damage inflicted by Dhanurdhara Swami was significantly greater than that which was known in 1999. In fact, Dhanurdhara Swami is named as an abuser in the bankruptcy claims far more than any other person.”
“We have seen and reviewed first hand the claims filed in the bankruptcy court documenting the severe abuse inflicted on the Vrindavana gurukula children by Dhanurdhara Swami, as well as the CPO information. From a legal standpoint, we have no doubt that these claims are legitimate.” (Memo to NA GBC, June 14, 2006)
Thus, it is clear that the weight of evidence shows that Dhanurdhara Swami was guilty of significant physical and psychological abuse and child neglect. There is no need for the GBC to re-try this case – the verdict is already in. But in their deliberations, it may be helpful for the GBC members to clearly understand the nature and extent of that abuse.
The following represents a summary of some of the testimony against Dhanurdhara Swami found in the CPO case file. This was compiled by Dhira Govinda Prabhu, CPO Director at the time. I have read the case files and confirmed that it an accurate synopsis of the type of reports given by the students. Many of these reports are quite extensive and detailed. Initials are used for devotee names to protect the victims. (The English usage is not always the best, as the exact words used are usually quoted).
1. A das gives extensive testimony of physical and emotional abuse as well as neglect. This was corroborated by other witnesses.
2. AV das was told to rewrite letters before he could send them and his mail was censored. DDS beat him up, calling him a monkey from the jungles of Africa. He was racially humiliated.
3. B das told of mail censoring, and DDS ignoring complaints of sexual abuse.
4. B2 das states that DDS hit him bad enough to leave big welts and bruises.
5. BR das describes severe physical abuses by others in the school that DDS clearly knew about and did nothing about, and in fact condoned.
6. BV das describes beatings by DDS, to himself and others, and mail censoring. Other students verify the beatings to BV das, including for not dancing at arati.
7. CM das reports failure to protect students from beatings, and failure to protect him when he reported sexual abuse from another teacher.
8. D das – Describes physical abuse by DDS. Describes failure to protect from abuse and mail censoring. Intimidated to not tell anyone of beatings. He was beaten with a branch by DDS.
9. DD das reports some of the most severe personal abuse directly from DDS. “…continuous punching, like a bunch of times and slaps and ear pulls, and all of that. That was one of his things. To bring kids into the room and pound them for a while… I guess I was like a punching bag for him. DDS continually punched me in the stomach several times. I felt like a was a research animal. The humiliation and mental torture were worse than the physical. Ear pulling an slapping was on a daily basis. Punching in the stomach was something new and different. DDS also took his money from home, called his mother a demon, Also relates story of DDS throwing L das out of a second story window in Dallas.
10. D2 das describes DDS out of control ear slapping and emotional abuse during line-ups. Describes mail censoring and psychological abuse.
11. D3 das “The worst thing that DDS did to me was in assembly. He would twist my ear and then he’d slap both my ears. My ears would ring for a week. Psychological abuse. DDS tried to get me to not tell my father.”
12. D4 das describes medical neglect, being hungry all the time, and DDS’s failure to protect from physical abuse.
13. D5 das Describes medical neglect on part of DDS, in that DDS would get upset if others tried to help him if he were sick. Also describes psychological abuse and mail censoring.
14. GV das “DDS was the head acarya of hitting. He was not in control of his anger. DDS used to have a wall of different sized canes, and he would let the kids choose the cane. He used to smack kids on the ears. There was dried blood on my ears from it being pulled so hard.”
15. G das saw J’s bruises after DDS beat up J for the fire bomb incident. Gives detailed descriptions of food deprivation, including skipping meals if they missed part of the morning program. Told DDS about sexual abuse, and DDS did nothing, but chastised G.
16. J das Talks about DDS beating him for 5 to 10 minutes after fire bomb incident. The beating left marks. Lots of corroboration for this incident from other witnesses. DDS admits to this.
17. K das Reports DDS slapping him hard enough to knock him to the floor. “This was a normal occurrence for me.” Also describes emotional abuse and mail censoring. Also failure to protect from physical and sexual abuse.
18. KJ das Witnessed DDS savagely beating AV. DDS also beat KJ, while falsely accusing him of stealing comics.
19. KA das reports racial slurs and beating by DDS. S das witnessed DDS beating KA.
20. KC das describes medial neglect.
21. K2 das “ My dad sent a check. DDS yelled at me. He hit me for the check until I gave it to him. Witnessed beating of others, including AV. Not enough clothing. Describes atmosphere of pervasive violence and intimidation. “ I saw B beaten.. .You became immune to the violence it was so common place You got hit if your arms weren’t up dancing in Mangal arati. Describes medical neglect, bad food, mail censoring, and inadequate education.
22. LM das Describes DDS beating J after fire bomb incident. Aslo claims DDS knew of N abusing boys and did nothing. Medical neglect toward KA, almost causing death.
23. LS das Describes medical and other neglect.
24. L das “ I was tossed out of the second floor sanctuary window by DDS in Dallas. I remember hitting the ground. DDS never showed any concern for injuries.” This is confirmed by S das and DD das. Described children punished if they didn’t dance. Also meal deprivation as punishment, bad food, and mail censoring.
“I’ve been hit by every gurukula teacher at least 100 times, including DDS, Raghunatha, and Manihara, and Niragadeva (all have been found guilty by the CPO of child abuse). Describes being tied up and left in a room for 7 days. “On a daily basis you stood in assembly and with your hands behind your back you got several slaps to the face. Described that DDS and Manihara did the slapping. “My ears, the ears of my friends, they bled every day. We were pulled off the ground by our ears. Some kids were almost ripped off. All the teachers did it, including DDS. DDS said directly to me that if I didn’t keep quiet I would be dealt with accordingly. I did not disclose the abuse because I feared for my life…” He had bruises and welts, “every day of my life in Vrndavana.”
25. M das Describes morning line-up routine, including DDS ear twisting, ear slapping, and supporting and overseeing the physical and emotional abuse perpetrated by Raghunatha (Gurukula Teacher - not the student by the same name) and Niragadeva. DDS knew of severe abuse on his brother. Describes medical neglect, bad food, and lack of cleanliness. Witnessed several brutal beatings done personally by DDS. DDS also watched as other teachers “brutally punched and beat children.”
26. R das Describes DDS laughing after seeing him badly bruised from a beating by Raghunatha (Gurukula Teacher). He “blew it off” when he told about DD being severely beaten. Reports that V told DDS about being sexual abused by Ananta Rupa, and DDS slapped him for saying such a thing. Describes psychological terrorizing, being locked in bathrooms for long periods of time.
27. S das Witnessed DDS beating several students, (lists several names). Describes beatings, says that children would have broken lips, black eyes, as a result of DDS’s beatings. “Marks sometimes lasted for weeks.”
28. S2 das Reports he was terrible medically neglected. “I had jaundice and typhoid and wasn’t taken to a hospital for a month. They, DDS, kept me in a room by myself where I was hallucinating and screaming. Describes tactics of intimidation by DDS, including that DDS threatened his life if he told about abuse. He also saw L being thrown out of second story window by DDS.
29. J2 das “DDS beat me senseless numerous times for the smallest things.
30. JG das DDS was strict, easily annoyed, and I remember him hitting boys.
31. M2 das witnessed beating by DDS, and DDS’s failure to protect from others beatings.
Hopefully, this provides a picture of the extent and degree of the allegations in the case of Dhanurdhara Swami. The Official Decision gives additional details and information.
Tamohara das
Director, ISKCON Child Protection Office.