Sun Editors are Making Contradictory Statements

BY: GADADHAR DASA

Jun 12, 2013 — DALLAS, TEXAS (SUN) —

The Sun Editors are making contradictory statements in their recent article, “Bhaktivedanta Archives: Pandering to the Ritviks“. On one hand (and over the years) the Sun advocates for “Freedom of Press” and states that the Ramesvara Interview should have been published a long time ago – a few years after it took place. The article states:

“And whose side is the Bhaktivedanta Archives taking in all this? Well, the proof is in the pudding. Here we have an extremely important document that should never have been kept from the devotees for even a few years, let alone 34 years. And what inspired the Archives to finally release it? Money, apparently. The Ritviks have infused the Archives with much needed capital, and in exchange, they clearly have put themselves in a position to leverage that influence.”

But on the other hand the Sun Editors are worried that other “closely held” information may get in hand of Ritviks and the Ritvik influence should be rooted out from the Archives. The article states:

“We again ask the ISKCON leaders to accept a word of caution: it is well known that the Archives is full of a great deal of long-hidden information that has not been released because it could be problematic for the GBC, BBT and other leaders. As we have been discussing in the ISKCON Inc./DOM series, the Ritvik lawsuits represent a tremendous element of risk for Srila Prabhupada’s movement. While devotees never want to think of other devotees as ‘enemies’, when it comes to lawsuits, one would be foolish not to accept the reality of that designation. Allowing Sravanananda das access to the Bhaktivedanta Archives — giving him access to closely held information that can be used to advance the Ritvik cause, even by swaying sentiment in their favor, is foolish beyond measure.”

and

“If the leaders, starting with Jayadvaita Swami, don’t have the good sense to plug this leak in the dam, we can only hope that the devotees themselves will do so, by withdrawing all financial support from the Archives until the Ritvik presence has been routed out, and all questions have been answered by Ekanath das to the satisfaction of the devotees.”

What is the caution the Sun Editors are giving? Is the Sun advocating that “long-hidden” and “closely held” information” should not be published because (a) it could be problematic to GBC, BBT, and other leaders” (b) closely held information may help Ritviks to advance their cause?

If anything could be “problematic to GBC, BBT, and other leaders”, then for every problem they will always find some excuse and some enemy (Ritvik or others) not to publish it. Thus this “long-hidden” and “closely held” information may never get published.

Now the Sun Editors are willing to toss out their long held ideal of “Freedom of Press” and entering into arena of politics and situational ethics. Don’t let Ritviks know what you are hiding – kick them out. This is not the right time to publish “long-hidden” and “closely held” information.

The principle should be that all information related to Srila Prabhupada Lila be published “As It Is” and in spirit of “truth” as explained by HDG Srila Prabhupada in BG 10.4 Purport.

“Satyam, truthfulness, means that facts should be presented as they are for the benefit of others. Facts should not be misrepresented. According to social conventions, it is said that one can speak the truth only when it is palatable to others. But that is not truthfulness. The truth should be spoken in a straight and forward way, so that others will understand actually what the facts are. If a man is a thief and if people are warned that he is a thief, that is truth. Although sometimes the truth is unpalatable, one should not refrain from speaking it. Truthfulness demands that the facts be presented as they are for the benefit of others. That is the definition of truth.”

As such, everyone should be happy that the Ramesvara Interview became public — it does not matter who did it — it was supposed to be published a long time ago. So what is the problem?

Sun Editors say “plug the leak”. Why hide the truth? Open the dam and let “truth” flood the landscape as it may.

Wishing You Well,
yhs- Gadadhar dasa

EDITOR’S NOTE:

We offer this brief reply to Gadadhar das and the readers:

There are no contradictory statements in our article. We continue to advocate freedom of the press, and we continue to extend criticism to the Bhaktivedanta Archives for not releasing long held content. (We have also recognized some of their recent progress in this regard.)

The point being made is about bias, not equality or freedom. The Archives did not release the Ramesvara Interview to the general devotee public. They instead secretively released it to their new Ritvik board member. This instantly put them in a compromised position, because their bias in choosing a means to release the information appears to have followed the money. It is a conflict of interest.

There is also no contradiction in our saying that it’s wrong to secretively release important documents not to the devotee public, but into the hands of an individual who happens to be advocating on behalf of a party who is fighting against ISKCON in an extremely expensive and high stakes lawsuit.

Gadadhar das, you cannot equate fairness to bias. You cannot equate releasing documents to the general devotee public with releasing them into the hands of one devotee — particularly a devotee who is working to see ISKCON lose in its lawsuit with Bangalore. (And in fairness, the reader should know that Gadadhar das is also a Ritvik, fighting on the side of Bangalore.)

Yes, clearly the Ritvik influence should be routed out of ISKCON. Ritvik-vada is apa-siddhantic. It goes against Srila Prabhupada’s teachings and sastra. Those who support Ritvik-vada should certainly not be singled out, and in biased fashion be given facility that other devotees have long been prevented from having: access to important documents.

It has always been our opinion that the Archives should have no right to withhold any of Srila Prabhupada’s vani or other documents or content of historical importance to the movement. No one has appointed them ‘guardians of the secret vault’. This content belongs to the entire movement they are supposed to be serving, not to the privileged few — and certainly not to those who bought their access with cash.

Saying that all documents should be made freely available is not the same thing as saying, give the Ritviks first right of access. Or give ISKCON’s foe in a huge lawsuit first access, so they can parlay the information as they see fit.

How many examples are there in history where important information was leaked, and the receiving party used that information as leverage with someone whose purpose would not be well served if the information got out to the public? How often has this resulted in the recipient agreeing not to distribute the information any further, as long as certain concessions are given by the other side? This dynamic is as old as the hills. Why should ISKCON leaders fail to guard against it, as they pour millions into a lawsuit that will have far reaching consequences for Srila Prabhupada’s movement?

So it is not the Sun Editors who are in favour of holding onto secret information, keeping it close held until it serves them to release it. First, it was the Archives who did so. Then, according to all reports, it was Sravanananda. Your question, Gadadhar — “Why hide the truth?” — should not be asked of the Sun Editors, but of those who have actually been engaging in that practice.

source: Sampradaya Sun (CEO — editor in chief: HG Rocana Dasa)