There are many arguments on whether DDSâs title of guru should continue to be supported by ISKCON. Many gurukulis were surprised and dismayed to see him approved for this most honorable position considering his harsh abuses. Which, contrary to popular opinion, were much more severe than the standard accepted level of punishment i.e. punching, smacking, paddling, and humiliation. Furthermore, it was not DDSâs compassion, and willingness to make reparations with his past, that spurned an investigation, but it came from gurukulis who could not tolerate to see their abuser worshiped.
Now that the case is public many are reviewing it and trying to make sense of it by inspecting the evidence presented online. By reviewing the arguments submitted online one can easily come to the conclusion that DDS was served justice and is now simply a victim of the mob, but please give some benefit of doubt to the Gurukuliâs who collectively feel that justice is not being served.
There are few points that I would like present that I feel deserve some attention.
1.DDS rose in the ranks of ISKCON on the basis of his spiritual credibility and charisma alone with out being held accountable for his abuses and neglect of duties.
2.This went as far as DDS being approved for sanyasa without a proper investigation into his position as headmaster of a school riddled with abuses of the most serious nature.
3.The subsequent investigation was not thorough in that it did not reveal the full extent of his abuses. This can be accomplished by properly contacting all individuals under his care and requesting a full disclosure of the abuses they endured. I assure you that there is much more that is not in the CPO file (which in itself was not disclosed in its entirety)
4.The investigation and punishment was not properly managed due to pressure from ISKCON leadership because of fear of a lawsuit and/or their judgments were influenced by ISKCON leaders or even Dhanudhara himself.
5.DDS has not facilitated full disclosure. Which he could have honorably done himself by offering up a full confession of all his abuses but rather he has hindered the case at times.
6.In the end, the consistent request from gurukulis is for ISKCON not to approve DDSâs position as a transparent via medium to the Supreme Lord Krsna himself. In order to move forward as a society we need to stop the secrecy and backdoor finagling. We should no longer think we are protecting anyone by hiding behind excuses such as âwe donât want harm the discipleâs faith in their guru.â I would like to encourage ISKCON to approach EVERY gurukuli and request a full disclosure of the abuses they suffered along with permission for ISKCON to publish this information publicly (while preserving anonymity of the abusees of course).
I am very interested in your opinion as to whether this transparency would facilitate progress.