Reply to Attack on the IRM



by Brahmabhuta Das (New York) and Yaduraja Das (London)


Damaghosa Das (DD), a member of the Hare Krishna society (HKS) has launched another attack on the IRM and Krishnakant (KK) (please see previous item from him on the IRM website under his name). As we shall prove, his attacks are based on a purely fantastical version of what occurred at certain historical events over the last 15 years. Since between us we were present,  at all these events, we will now proceed to set the record straight once and for all. DD’s attack was in the form of a letter dated 20/9/2008, sent to prominent IRM supporter in China, Guruseva Das, following Guruseva Prabhu’s article in BTP issue 19. This letter was fuelled by a letter DD had himself received from one Devakinandana Das (DK) of Hong Kong, part of which DD quotes in his letter to Guruseva Prabhu. It is tragic that some people who profess to be true followers of Srila Prabhupada have nothing better to do with their time than attack someone who has been singularly instrumental in making devotees worldwide aware of Srila Prabhupada’s true position; but we simply cannot allow such baseless lies and gratuitously envious attacks go unanswered. Excerpts from DD’s letter shall be presented enclosed in speech marks “ “ thus, with our response following underneath.


“There is not doubt about it, that Krsna Kanta(KK) has done some nice service on behalf of furthering this Krsna Consciousness movement by writing the Final Order and various other articles.”


DD starts by admitting that KK wrote “The Final Order” (TFO). This is ironic considering that his letter, as mentioned, was originally inspired by a letter he received from DK in Hong Kong, whose own complaint against the IRM is that KK did not write TFO himself, but was at best only one of its many authors! DD accepts KK wrote various other articles along with TFO, and since none of these other articles are even alleged to have been co-written with others, he is tacitly admitting that KK was indeed the sole author of TFO. 


“I have understood from Devikinanda and others that as soon as KK entered China that politics began and immediately the solidarity that we are/were trying to build was destroyed by in-fighting amongst the Prabhupanugas. This was due to KK.”


DD is here blindly accepting as fact what he has been told by DK without even bothering to check with any of the devotees in China.  The above allegation from DK can easily be shown to be a lie by noting that “as soon as Krishnakant entered China” (in August 2001 along with Yaduraja), DK responded by requesting them to go TWO MORE TIMES, with the last visit being a full 2 years after the first visit. He would hardly do this if KK’s initial visit had immediately led to politics and discord. 


“From a historical  viewpoint, KK was not the first devotee to start this Back to Prabhupada movement. It began way back in 1977, right when Srila Prabhupada left his body with such devotees as Pradyumna, (his personal sanskrit editor) Yasoda nandana, (Vrndavana gurukula teacher and swami), and many others.”


As the great bard once said of jealousy or envy, “it is the green eyed monster which doth mock the meat it feeds on”. DD has made a fool of himself above by stating the very opposite of the truth, as we shall prove. Pradyumna did not make any attempt whatsoever to bring anyone ‘Back To Prabhupada’. Rather he supported the idea that Srila Prabhupada had selected 11 persons who could initiate their own disciples, thus REPLACING Srila Prabhupada. He just objected to them having positions as ‘acaryas’. Here is the evidence from Pradyumna’s own words: 

“The matter concerns the Godbrothers who were selected by Srila Prabhupada to accept disciples. […]

In addition to the GBC management, Srila Prabhupada also selected 11 somewhat advanced disciples to grant initiation to newcomers. However if was never mentioned at any time by His Divine Grace that these 11 were to be known as acaryas. He simply instructed that they may now accept disciples.  Now at present, I understand that the 11 gurus are all 1)adopting the title of acarya, [ …]

First of all, the word ACARYA may be taken in 3 senses. […]

Secondly. The word means "one who grants initiation to a disciples." This is specifically indicating one who is a guru. Anyone who grants initiation or is a guru may be called as "acaryadeva," etc.-by his disciples only! Whoever has accepted him as guru must give all respects to him in every way, but this does not apply to those who are not his disciples. […]

Nor did Srila Prabhupada make 11 such acaryas. This was never mentioned by Him. They were only given permission to make disciples and the GBC was to jointly manage, materially and spiritually. […]

The 11 gurus may be known as acaryas only in the second sense of the word-to their disciples as mantra-giving gurus, not in the third sense, as "the" spiritual successors of Srila Prabhupada. “

(Letter to Satsvarupa from Pradyumna das Adhikari, 7/8/78)

Pradyumna here is merely putting forward the current ISKCON guru system, whereby any ISKCON member can become a diksa guru. Indeed, Ravindra Svarupa, the founder of the current ISKCON guru system, uses Pradyumna’s letter above as a basis for putting forward the current expanded ISKCON guru system. It’s clear that DD has absolutely no idea about what happened historically, and is just parroting whatever someone else may have told him, in a desperately envious attempt to find fault in the IRM and KK. 


“These devotees were physically there when the bogus guru regime took over iskcon and they tried their best to get some discussions on the topic of guru sucession within iskcon, but were met with stiff opposition and basically were asked to comply or leave the movement-which they and many others did in the course of the next following years, seeing that sane discussions were impossible with those mad after power.”


DD admits above that these persons at most only tried to start a discussion on the subject in general, and then when that did not happen they just left the movement and did nothing more. So DD undermines his own claim that KK was not historically the first person to start a Back to Prabhupada Movement, unless we define such a movement as a group of people who tried to start a discussion, and then did nothing more.

This is hardly putting forward a case for anyone having actually started the ‘Back To Prabhupada’ movement in ISKCON in 1977. 


“This same series of events that happened back in 1977 (with the iskcon bogus gurus) was basically replayed, in a similiar way, again only by  proponents of the reform movements self appointed leader-Krsna Kanta. Once, I am not sure about the dates, but about twelve years ago,  a goodly number of some of the leading devotees trying to reform iskcon met at Hansaduttas ashram in California for a meeting of how we were going to get the gurus out and Prabhupada back into the movement he started as the only acarya. Present at this meeting was Yasoda nandana, Hansadutta (former guru), Kamsahanta, Sukadev, Puranjana, Dhrstayumna, Mahatma, Gauridas, Krsna Kanta, myself, and many others. At this meeting we ALL decided jointly, to start a magazine and start publishing articles on the philosophy of ritvik initiations as well as the local programs and local preaching we all were doing in our own areas.  

We all went back to our respective homes, submitting articles to KK in England, since he was to be the editor and publisher, and he published them in two separate issues. At this point he stopped all communications with all the Prabhupanugas in America and just went his own separate way. I should mention at this point that prior to this california meeting at Hansaduttas place, we had met in Alachua, florida for the first and biggest meeting of Prabhupada oriented disciples.”


DD really has no idea what he talking about above as we shall now demonstrate:


a)  The meeting mentioned at Hamsadutta’s place took place in the summer of 1995. Dhrstyadyumna was not even present at this meeting. He was present at a different meeting, at which KK was not even present, since KK has never ever met Dhrstyudumna in his life,

b)  The meeting in Alachua took place over 3 years later in October, 1998, even though DD claims it happened BEFORE the meeting at Hamsaduta’s place!


Given this, it would be very hard to accept anything else he says, since he clearly has no proper memory of these events which occurred over 10 years ago. The facts are that: 

Everyone jointly agreed to accept KK’s proposal that they stop whatever they were writing and instead support a magazine which he was going to found called ‘Back To Prabhupada’. Everyone agreed to that proposal at the meeting, and indeed DD admits that KK was the editor and publisher of this magazine. The sole publisher and first editor of a magazine would logically be its founder.

(This was the first version of the magazine and only 2 issues were printed, since subsequently the GBC had requested that a position paper, which was to be called TFO, be presented to them instead. As the whole world knows, the magazine was later revived with great success by the same founder, publisher and editor in 2003).


“This was a tremendous event where around a seventy to a hundred disciples all met for meetings and discussions on the future of the movement with Prabhupada in the center. At this meeting KK was given center stage for his presentations, which went well. Most devotees were already convinced about the entire ritvik system, but he presented it to all present giving some convincing arguments to this effect. The meeting was great in that everyone left feeling encouraged that somehow we could turn this thing around and get into iskcon the ritvik system of initiations that Srila Prabhupada had wanted.  After this Alachua meeting , we all here in USA felt encouraged that we could turn this nonsense bogus guru thing around and get all the "sane" devotees to accept the words of Srila Prabhupada.”


DD admits above that KK was the one who gave all the arguments, that he was given center stage, that the meeting was a great success, and that all the devotees were behind what KK had presented. Yet as we saw, DD had just claimed that over 2 years earlier, after the first 2 issues of Back To Prabhupada were published (Oct 1995 and May 1996), KK had cut off all communication with the ‘Prabhupadanugas’.

  • So how did they all magically show up, 100 of them, to come and spend 2 solid days listening to KK convince them further about the issue, a meeting for which he was the main mover, if he had already cut off all communication with them?

Again we can see that either DD does not remember anything, or he is just deliberately fabricating out of envy. Either way, he has severely damaged his credibility with such blatantly sloppy inaccuracy. 


“Afterwards when KK went to Malayasia and held another meeting, this time he declared along with Adidharan (TP of Calcutta), that he wanted an oath of allegiance to him and his group, and that if you didnt accept everything he said, then everyone else was just plain in Maya.”


More lies. In Malaysia it was never claimed that those who did not join the IRM was “just plain in maya”.

DD was not even at this meeting!

He presents no evidence for our “just plain in maya” statement, because it was never made! 


“Only problem is, this is not how Krsna Consciousness works on a practical level, nor the way Srila Prabhupada taught to us all. Here comes this person on the devotee scene, whom nobody has ever seen or heard of before, was never initiated by anybody, never did any tangible service for the mission of Srila Prabhupada, and was now dictating to the older and senior dedicated disciples of Srila Prabhuapda that they all had to take an oath of allegiance to him!! This is not how Srila Prabhupada wanted us to treat each other.”


More lies. It is claimed that in October 1999 no one had ever heard of or seen KK before. Yet DD also admits that over 4 YEARS EARLIER, in the summer of 1995, all the ‘Prabhupadanugas’ were happy to work under and co-operate with the Back To Prabhupada magazine he had founded and for which he was the sole editor and publisher! Neither was the oath of allegiance to KK personally. It was to the IRM organization, and at the time Adridharana (a “senior Prabhupada disciple”) was its President. 


“I will give you a practical example. Some four years ago, Yasoda nandan, Nrsimha, Jagjivan (BTG editor) and myself worked almost for a year on a new book we published entitled Srila Prabhupada Siddhanta. This booklet was comprised almost 100% entirely of Prabhupada quotes  and meant to bring all devotees up to the mark on the philosophy of guru tattva according to the writings and conversations of Srila Prabhupada. Before we published this book , we called for a meeting of senior devotees in the Prabhupanuga camp, and asked for their comments and suggestions about the book we had worked on for almost a year, and then, at that meeting, when everybody was happy with the book, and gave us their blessings THEN, we published this book, which has now been distributed all over the world. There were around 25 devotees present at this meeting. So the key point here in this story is that we did NOT act independantly on our own, nor did we drive away all our supporters and sympathisers, but rather got their permission and blessings THEN we published this book, which by the way, iskcon has also banned.”


Well specifically excluded from that meeting were the IRM!

Yet at the Alachua meeting, over 100 devotees were present, including DD and all the other ‘Prabhupadanugas’, who had all been invited. And they all voted unanimously on accepting “The Final Order” as the definitive document for the ritvik movement. Yet DD admits, that he and others reneged on what they had all voted on, and instead decided to have another meeting specifically excluding the IRM and many others who attended the Alachua meeting, so they could put together another publication, rather than just accept TFO, as they had voted on earlier. 


“On the other hand KK does not take this avenue of devotional approach. He rather irritates, annoys and otherwise criticizes all those who differ from him, and then castigates them on his website as "enemies" of the ritvik system.”


It is DD who has gone out of his way to criticize KK in this long, lie-filled treatise, simply because he did not like an article the Chinese IRM devotee Guruseva Prabhu wrote in BTP. Just as he attacked the IRM earlier, forcing us to respond.  It is our rebuttal of his previous nonsensical attack which is on the website. Each time it’s Damaghosa who has picked a fight with and criticized the IRM, rather than concentrating on attacking the GBC, like the IRM do. 


“This opposition has been generated largely by KK and by the way he operates. I personally know many devotees who have traveled with KK, like Kamsahanta, Jitarati, and others who have told me they were trying to work with this man, but could not work further with him because of the non devotional way he conducts himself. Once at a meeting between KK and Hrdyayanda swami and Jayapataka swami in LA ,California, Yasodanandan had to pick KK up and take him to this meeting and KK was wearing only summer shorts and a  t-shirt, no tilak no dhoti  no bead bag, and he was going to debate with the leaders of iskcon!! Yasoda told me, he  told him to get himself properly dressed before he goes with him to this meeting.”


A distasteful medley of lies and sheer petty-mindedness. Firstly, KK has never traveled with Jitarati. And the mind blowing, “smoking gun” evidence of KK’s alleged non-devotional conduct is the fact that he is supposedly not permanently wearing a dhoti!

  • Who is?

Neither Kamsahanta nor Jitarati constantly wear a dhoti but DD does not attack them. We have also seen DD himself not wearing a dhoti on occasion, yet he does not attack himself.

Absolutely pathetic!

And as for the incident in question, KK did attend the meeting in proper devotional dress, something which he was able to do specifically because he had especially brought these clothes with him from the UK.

  • Are we to believe that he knew that he had to bring these devotional clothes, but did not know that he was supposed to wear them?!

Yes it’s a fact that outside the meeting he was not dressed in devotional clothes (just as the others were not either). But it is ludicrous to propose that he did not know that the clothes he had especially brought with him for such an occasion, should be worn at the occasion! 


“This kind of whimsical and non devotional attitude has killed himself and his so called reform movement.”


So DD’s sole argument as to why KK is non-devotional is because he allegedly did not know that he had to wear a dhoti and apply tilak. Note he is not even claiming that he did not do this, only that he had to be told to do this for a meeting in 1996. And this alone has ‘killed’ himself and the reform movement he is leading! Yet DD was more than happy to submit to this same non-devotional person during this same period of ‘non-devotion’ and ‘killing’, first in 1995 for Back To Prabhupada magazine, and then again in 1998 at the Alachua meeting, which he specifically filmed, so taken was he with KK’s presentation!

So this reveals that his tirade is nothing more than some pathetic fabrication after the fact to find fault. Just as with DK’s lies about KK starting political infighting in China, these lies can easily be exposed by the behaviour of those making the lies during the period KK was supposedly behaving badly. In both cases, they were very happy to support this ‘non-devotional’ and ‘political’ person. 


“What to speak of his ongoing offenses to senior disciples of Srila Prabhupada who have given years and years of tangible service to His Divine Grace.”


DD here takes a lesson from the GBC – both united in their opposition to the IRM, and both unable to offer any evidence as to why the IRM is deviant and therefore must simply take shelter in the “you are offensive to the senior disciples of Srila Prabhupada” line. 


“And the worst part, at least to me, of his whole package of articles, is that you cannot apply it at all !!!! Philosophy without practical application is useless. According to KK, the only way someone can get initiated in the present day on behalf of Srila Prabhupada is that if the entire organizational structure Prabhupada had setup, namely the GBC was in place along with cooperating TP's, and then with their permission and approval only then could a candidate get initiated by Srila Prabhupada, via the ritvik system. This is utter nonsense and I will explain why. When Srila Prabhupada first met Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Maharaj, he considered THAT first meeting his initiation, not the formal one he did 11 years later.”


Yes that is EXACTLY what is stated in The Final Order! We say the FORMAL initiation requires the organizational structure that Srila Prabhupada set up for delivering this formal initiation, but that the REAL initiation takes place due to the determination and impression of preaching. So the “utter nonsense” is being spouted by Damaghosa, who claims that the IRM is wrong about initiation by citing the very same argument they use!


“So anyway, from 1922 to 1933 practically I was not initiated, but I got the impression of preaching Caitanya Mahaprabhu's cult. That I was thinking. And that was the initiation by my Guru Maharaja.” (761210DB.HYD lectures) So in this lecture by Srila Prabhupada we see him talking about initiation and how he considered that first meeting with Srila Bhaktisiddhanta maharaj his real initiation, not the formal one 11 years later. Why this time? Because he received the "impression" of the cult of Mahaprabhu at that time. In other words he accepted the disciplic conlusions brought thru Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Maharaj . That was the real initiation, and the "formal" one 11 years later, simply the formality.”


Yes, this is exactly what is stated in TFO!

DD has obviously forgotten that he is simply repeating quotes and arguments that were originally forwarded and made in TFO, a book written by the very same “bad” non-dhoti wearing person he is now happily slandering.  


“Also the conversation with Srila Prabhupada in Seattle,Wa wherein he states that one can become a follower of Jesus Christ today, 2000 years late if he accepts the teachings of Jesus as taught thru the local priest who represent him.”


Yes this quote is also given in TFO! 


“So in these three conversations Srila Prabhupada explains how one can never be without guru-as long as one follows his teachings, be they Jesus Christ or Srila Prabhupada, it doesnt matter, as long as one follows the authorized guru, spiritual master, then he is a disciple and can be taken back to Godhead by that guru.”


Yes, this is exactly what has been preached by TFO for over a decade! 


“So GBC, or XYZ, anybody who is a following disciple of Srila Prabhupada is qualified to formally initiate on behalf of Srila Prabhupada without the sanctioning of some defunct  ecclesiastical body, which does not follow his orders anymore.”


But it has never been proposed by the IRM that we need the sanctioning of some defunct ecclesiastical body, which does not follow Srila Prabhupada’s orders anymore.

So a straw-man argument. 


“Before this ritvik order was given in 1977, Srila Prabhupada has already set up the ritvik system via temple presidents and local GBC's. Thousands of disciples never even saw Prabhupada, but were initiated by  some TP in some part of the world, because that was the system he had already set up. On the recommendation of the local TP/sannyasi,GBC,  etc, a new candidate would be granted initiation by this process. So now that iskcon is defunct, the orders by Prabhupada to initiate still carry on with the disciples who still carry on in the same exact way.” 


DD first starts by saying that a system was set up utilizing Temple Presidents and GBCs, with recommendations of the local TP/sannaysi/GBC, and then says that these orders should be carried on “in the same exact way”.

This the IRM’s position.

But the same exact way means there has to be some TP/GBC etc., and the system is the ‘exact same’ as it was before. We would need to have people being observed in a temple for 6 months, and we would need to have these same TPs who did the observing sending these recommendations to a Ritvik. Ritviks who in turn would be supervised by a GBC. This would be the ‘same exact way’, which is all the IRM is calling for, which DD claims he agrees with, but hypocritically does not himself practice, as we will see later. 


“And as we can clearly see from so many quotes, initiation is begun when one accepts the disciplic conclusion,when he follows the principles, when he begins to chant,  or when he just even reads Prabhupadas books!!  So the formal ceremony of initiation on behalf of Srila Prabhupada is just that- a formal ceremony, an admittance into the Brahma Madhva Sampradaya shcool of Bhakti.”


Yes, this is exactly what the IRM say, especially since the same quotes are given in TFO to reach the same conclusion.



“Since iskcon is now defunct and has obviously deviated in every conceivable way from the orders of Prabhupada, then someone, must carry on this work of initiations on behalf of Srila Prabhupada. So any disciple who is in good standing and is "nearest"to the candidates, he can do the ceremony on behalf of Srila Prabhuapada. And this ceremony we have seen is the formality of initiation, the real initiation being our determination to follow his orders and accept in toto all he has said and written, namely the disciplic conclusions.”


But having just said that we must carry out the system for initiation in the ‘exact same way’ as set up by Srila Prabhupada, which would require temples, temple presidents, 6 months of observation, ritviks and GBCs etc., DD is now contradicting himself by inventing a brand new system whereby anyone can just consider themselves a ‘disciple who is in good standing’ and then initiate any candidate he is nearest to. 


“So the reason I wrote to you, was a result of reading that article in the IRM magazine. I hope this helps clear up any doubts you have and how KK is actually working in many ways counterproductively to what he wants to accomplish.”


Guruseva Prabhu never wrote to DD and said he had any doubts. Rather DD took it upon himself unsolicited, to write to Guruseva and just attack KK, by just making a whole bunch of stuff up, just as we have seen above! 


“(below are a few quotes about initiation according to Srila Prabhupada)”


Some of which are in TFO, and the rest of which support the points made in TFO!

As we said earlier – a person really must be desperate to find fault if they can only offer agreement as evidence of fault!




So above we see that once again DD has launched a petty-minded, dishonest, hypocritical, factually inaccurate in almost every detail, needless, baseless attack on a person who has arguably done more than anyone else to try to re-establish Srila Prabhupada as the permanent sole diksa guru for the Movement he founded. Perhaps DD should look into his heart and try to weed out the deep rooted envy that clearly lies within since it is making a mockery of him, and all those associated with him. This envy is the very disease which has brought havoc within ISKCON. This envy is the very thing that Guruseva Prabhu detected in many of the senior so-called Prabhupadanugas he has had the misfortune to be misinformed by, and which led him to write the BTP article which so clearly hit a raw nerve in both DD and DK in Hong Kong. It is such envy which ensures that we will we remain in the material world for many lives to come.


Brahmabhuta Das – present at 1995 meeting at Hamsaduta’s place, present at 1998 Alachua meeting, present at 1999 Malaysia meeting

Yaduraja Das – present at 1996 LA meeting (“Dhoti” incident), present at 1999 Malaysia meeting, present in China for all trips (2001-2003).