From Caru's Newsletter: Ramesvara Dasa at LA Ratha Yatra

[Guruvani 0]

 

He did not run off with some woman to get married. He was having an affair with a 15 year old girl "disciple" and was subsequently caught and publically outed. He had no choice but to resign.

shows how much I know about it.

If that is true, then that is very despicable.

In his mind he was probably thinking that "in Vedic society girls get married when they are 12 or 13".

 

Maya got him with a KO that is for sure.

 

If I was him I would be ashamed to ever show my face around ISKCON again.

 

I guess he has to be really humble to show up and face the disgrace.

 

But, I heard stories from an L.A. insider that the girl was knocking on his window at night and stalking him.

 

I guess he failed the test.

[Kulapavana 0]

 

Most people hear "affair" and assume sex.

 

From what I heard (and I was young (as I keep saying)), there was inappropriate association, but I never heard anything about sex.

 

 

Subtle or physical, sex was very much the core of this situation. For a sannyasi that is pretty much one category and the fact that this was a very, very young girl makes it just plain awful.

 

As to involving outside authorities with such matters... give me a break... since when did they start doing that in Iskcon?

[Murali_Mohan_das 0]

It's very warming to the heart to read these sweet recollections of the "inspired" side of our friend and well-wisher.

 

 

New Dwarka in those days presented us with the appearance of a shooting star by the name of Ramesvara Prabhu.

When I first came to New Dwarka, he was just another BBT brahmachari and was always seen with his godbrother partner Radhavallabha.

 

As we took morning prasad, Ramesvara started to give us his talks with inside information on Srila Prabhupadas whereabouts, ISKCON policy, book distribution, always hyping up the prabhus. I mean, the guy had it in the sales department.

 

I remember one of his statements going something like this:

 

" Lord Chaitanya is the most merciful and munificent incarnation ever. He has descended just to give us Love of Krishna and Im going to take full advantage."

 

As he made this statement, he would almost squirm about, twisting his body. Each day he would do another performance that would outdo the last. I use to think someone would ask him to stop, but he was inspiring so he was encouraged.

 

Ramesvara was on fire for many years. At morning prasad (Meal Times), he would jump in to give a few messages and he had sankirtan(Book Distrubtion) scores right after Tulasi puja.

 

He would jump up and give us his one-man ishtagoshti for about 20 minutes, always looking like he expected a senior devotee like Nara Narayan to tell him to sit down and shut up, and always doing his body squirm to emphasize points.

 

He was good and he did get us going. In those days, I enjoyed his pep talks.

 

Then Ramesvara was put in charge of the BBT; and after a short time, made a sannyasi; then after that, GBC ( govering board of commissions)of New Dwarka; and after that, a Divine Grace with his own Vyasasan -- all within four years. A mouse-cat-dog-tiger-mouse. So sad, so very sad. We also wanted to see him get the full mercy of Lord Chaitanya

 

Toward the last days Srila Prabhupada was with us, in 1977, Srila Prabhupada would have one GBC stay with him as secretary each month. Ramesvara left and took his turn in about February of 1977.

 

We all heard about this from Ramesvaras purports after Tulasi Puja.

As soon as Srila Prabhupada became ill, we all knew about it, as Ramesvara told us almost everything he knew in his 20 minutes news flashes from the ISKCON grapevine, which was almost as fast as todays Internet.

 

When Ramesvara was secretary, he made notes of his time with Srila Prabhupada and would let us hear them in his nectar reports after Tulasi worship.

 

Srila Prabhupada would order Ramesvara to eat from his plate after only taking a few things and tell him to fill up to his neck.

 

He told us of how disappointed Srila Prabhupada was with his godbrothers and made a statement which he told us came from Prabhupada about them assisting him in his preaching, "If passing air would save your life, they would not do so."

 

 

One day, in one of Ramesvaras after Tulasi puja talks, we heard of the recent pastimes of Jayananda who was close to death and how he was snuck out of a NYC hospital and had been taken to some place in Mexico for treatment and that he may come to New Dwarka. Very soon Jayananda was there and the whole community met him.

 

Ramesvara was very kind and served Jayananda with all respect and so did we all, understanding Jayananda to be a genuine saint.

 

Though his body was in the final stages of Leukemia and his skin yellowed by the illness, Jayananda didnt want to just sit and wait for death to overtake him. He cornered Ramesvara and told him it was a disgrace that we had such nice Jagannath Deities in New Dwarka, but still had no Rathayatra.

 

Jayananda wanted the devotees to drive him around to see what would be a good route for such a festival. They first took him to Venice beach. When he saw the wide concrete walk there, he told them that the Rathayatra had to be held there. Jayananda personally went to all the city officials in his wheelchair and got all the permits for the festival.

 

He then instructed a crew of devotees how to build the cart and observed them doing so until he was too sick to leave his room.

 

What is past is past with mistakes we all have made .I want to see Ramesvara get the full mercy of Lord Chaitanya as he so desired.

 

I wish all the devottees happiness success in thier service to Guru and Gouranga.I would like to see us all in eternal kirtian in Gokula asap with His Divine Grace playing his Brihat Mrdunga.

 

Im sure Ramevara would be a good asset for Book Distrubtion and Production once again ,as he has helped Sura das secertly on the phone for years now .

 

Welcome home Ramesvara Prabhu

[Murali_Mohan_das 0]

No doubt--to quote Kirtanananda (from "Monkey on a Stick") when he was approached with accusations against a teacher in New Vrindavan, "Sex is sex".

 

So, for a sannyasi to molest young boys or for a sannyasi to have subtle sex with a post-pubescent girl is really the same thing, isn't it?

 

If we are not making love as an offering to the Lord (in accordance with the Vedic injunctions and Guru's instructions), then it is just mundane sex, no?

 

 

Subtle or physical, sex was very much the core of this situation. For a sannyasi that is pretty much one category and the fact that this was a very, very young girl makes it just plain awful.

 

As to involving outside authorities with such matters... give me a break... since when did they start doing that in Iskcon?

[Murali_Mohan_das 0]

 

As to involving outside authorities with such matters... give me a break... since when did they start doing that in Iskcon?

 

Good point. ISKCON was never big about involving the civil authorities.

 

However, as a father of a young girl, if something happened between her and a man who was legally an adult, I would feel free (if not obligated) to go to the police regardless of any institution or other authority.

 

I'm not sure what R.'s parents role in all this was...

[Guruvani 0]

 

No doubt--to quote Kirtanananda (from "Monkey on a Stick") when he was approached with accusations against a teacher in New Vrindavan, "Sex is sex".

 

But, the social context and the moral standards of society make homo sex more abominable and more repulsive to most people.

 

So, from the social consideration, the sannyasi having homosex with a young boy would be more repulsive than a sannyasi having sex with a young girl.

 

Sex between man and girl is considered more natural than sex between man and boy.

 

So, "sex is sex" is not really true because you have to factor in the social considerations and the stigma attached to different forms of sex.

[Murali_Mohan_das 0]

I think you can see that my tongue was planted firmly in my cheek. On the other hand, Kirtanananda has a point (from the spiritual perspective if not from the social perspective).

 

It's pretty obvious that, as sinful and offensive as it might be for me to be oggling the wife of my Godbrother during arati, it's not the same as messing with his son.

 

 

But, the social context and the moral standards of society make homo sex more abominable and more repulsive to most people.

 

So, from the social consideration, the sannyasi having homosex with a young boy would be more repulsive than a sannyasi having sex with a young girl.

 

Sex between man and girl is considered more natural than sex between man and boy.

 

So, "sex is sex" is not really true because you have to factor in the social considerations and the stigma attached to different forms of sex.

[theist 1]

 

A guru or a pure brahmana will look at these issues differently then lets say a kshatriya whose duty is to manage properly and uphold law and order. When a brahmana whose children were dying came to Arjuna, Arjuna did not lecture him on how this is all the manifestation of our karma which we need to humbly accept. He took his bow and vowed to stop these incidences. If he merely offered the brahmana words of comfort his reputation would have been finished and he would have been seen as a fake.

 

One in position of material responsibility cannot use spirituality and philosophy to cover up his own inaction when it comes to upholding law and order. The misdeeds must be properly dealt with and offenders must be punished. It is one thing to fall down in the area of personal rules and regulations out of weakness, and it is another to lie, steal, cheat, and mistreat others while supposedly performing service for the guru. These two are never similar. One is merely a weaknes of the body while the other is a wickedness of the heart.

[theist 1]

 

Subtle or physical, sex was very much the core of this situation. For a sannyasi that is pretty much one category and the fact that this was a very, very young girl makes it just plain awful.

 

 

 

Makes it rape.

[Murali_Mohan_das 0]

 

Makes it rape.

 

You mean she raped him?

 

I hadn't heard before that bit from Guruvani about her "stalking" him, but from my experience with her, she is/was a very passionate and bold person.

[cbrahma 0]

Why is everybody continuing to discuss this? I thought we were duly chastized for scandal-monging by the more righteous-don't-find-fault prabhus.

[Murali_Mohan_das 0]

 

Why is everybody continuing to discuss this? I thought we were duly chastized for scandal-monging by the more righteous-don't-find-fault prabhus.

 

Very good question!! At this point, I'm trying to correct some potential misinformation that has been spread here. Of course, in the process, I'm joining in with the scandal-mongering.

[theist 1]

 

You mean she raped him?

 

I hadn't heard before that bit from Guruvani about her "stalking" him, but from my experience with her, she is/was a very passionate and bold person.

No I mean the adult raped the minor. A minor can not give consent in contractual law or criminal law. Statutory rape (if they had sex).

 

Children are children and driven to infatuations. Adults are expected to maintain control. Especially an "Acarya Goswami".

 

Pedophiles often talk of how a prepubscent child enticed them sexually. I am not saying 15 in pedophilia but there is some similarity in blaming the victim..."stalking him".

 

Men lose a portion of their manhood when they stoop to blaming woman and children for their falldowns IMO. Brace up brothers. As human males the buck stops with us.

[theist 1]

I want to make it clear that I am speaking mainly of a principle and not a person here. I know nothing of Ramesvaras situation.

[Murali_Mohan_das 0]

Yeah, I was teasing again. I know what statutory rape is.

 

Of course, as others have mentioned--these things are very cultural. In India, a 15-year old would possibly already be married.

 

Conversely, I know people in their 20's and 30's who really aren't so mature and might be better off refraining from sex (regardless of spiritual principles).

 

 

No I mean the adult raped the minor. A minor can not give consent in contractual law or criminal law. Statutory rape (if they had sex).

 

Children are children and driven to infatuations. Adults are expected to maintain control. Especially a acarya Goswami.

 

Pedophiles often talk of how a prepubscent child enticed them sexually. I am not saying 15 in pedophilia but there is some similarity in blaming the victim..."stalking him".

 

Men lose a portion of their manhood when they stoop to blaming woman and children for their falldowns IMO. Brace up brothers. As human males the buck stops with us.

[Guruvani 0]

 

You mean she raped him?

 

I hadn't heard before that bit from Guruvani about her "stalking" him, but from my experience with her, she is/was a very passionate and bold person.

Don't put words in my mouth weedhopper.

All I said was that I heard from an L.A. insider who was in the confidence of Ramesvar that Ramesvar was complaining that some young girl was knocking on his window at night trying to seduce him.

 

He resisted her for some time before she finally broke him down and got him to give in.

 

I ain't defending Ramesvar, I am just telling the story the way I heard it from an ex-temple president of L.A.

 

Hey, if it is true I think he deserves a little consideration for the fact that she came after him. He didn't go after her from what I heard, but he eventually gave in to her advances.

[Murali_Mohan_das 0]

Yes, this is what we want: fair and balanced hear-say!!

 

 

 

Don't put words in my mouth weedhopper.

All I said was that I heard from an L.A. insider who was in the confidence of Ramesvar that Ramesvar was complaining that some young girl was knocking on his window at night trying to seduce him.

 

He resisted her for some time before she finally broke him down and got him to give in.

 

I ain't defending Ramesvar, I am just telling the story the way I heard it from an ex-temple president of L.A.

 

Hey, if it is true I think he deserves a little consideration for the fact that she came after him. He didn't go after her from what I heard, but he eventually gave in to her advances.

[theist 1]

Murali sarcasm and tongue in cheek statements don't come through in print very well. Maybe use an icon to clue us in. Like this one

 

Otherwise I could go off at anytime.

 

[Murali_Mohan_das 0]

I'll make more of an effort to be clear!!

 

 

Murali sarcasm and tongue in cheek statements don't come through in print very well. Maybe use an icon to clue us in. Like this one

 

Otherwise I could go off at anytime.

 

[shiva 0]

 

It's funny how selective memory can be, isn't it? Here you are recalling all sorts of things, but you can't recall that it was in Westwood (in front of the bank, whose name escapes me at the moment) or in Hollywood that the big Hari Nama Sankirttanas took place.

 

Also, while I was 6 in 1978, I believe I can clearly remember that there were no food vendors set up outside the temple during Sunday Feasts at that time. At major festivals, perhaps, but not each Sunday. Much much later on (like in the past 15 years), there have been various maha-rooms, and tables set up in front of the temple on Sundays.

 

I remember the Gurukuli's plays well (I can even remember my line from one of the plays, "More wine? But you've already had three jugs!!"). There's a picture of me dressed as a sannyasi standing in front of the temple.

 

Why do I mention such trivial things? To point out how imperfect and selective our memories can be.

 

You may have been there, but how much did you see and how much did you miss?

 

I know the harinam was in Westwood but for people unfamiliar with L.A mentioning Westwood would mean nothing. You are right that in 1978 there wasn't prasad being sold in front of the temple, I didn't really mean to suggest that in 1978 that was going on, I was referring to mangal arati, but I do remember that I was living as a brahmacari in the L.A. temple when there were big pandal tents next to the temple and prasad being sold in front by devotee vendors, the last time I ever lived as a brahmacari in L.A was 1980, so it had to be going on full force by then. So the claim that the big sunday feast outside stuff started since 1992 is totally wrong. I haven't been to the L.A temple since 1986 and I was staying nearby and visiting and even then they didn't have the big pandal tents and food vendors outside any longer. Maybe they started up again after that but it was definitely going on when I was living there as a brahmacari. I think a memory of a 20 year old is more accurate then a 6 year old.

[shiva 0]

Age of consent laws have risen since the 1980's, in many states 15 could have been legal back then. Either way they may not have had sex, it may have just been a flirtation and dating.

[Guruvani 0]

 

Yes, this is what we want: fair and balanced hear-say!!

 

 

If anything deserves to be fair and balanced it would have to be hearsay.

[Murali_Mohan_das 0]

 

I think a memory of a 20 year old is more accurate then a 6 year old.

 

No doubt. I had no wish to cast doubt on your veracity--I trust that you are completely sincere in your comments.

 

My only point was that memory and even observation tend to be very selective. I would trust your memory more than I trust my own (even today--especially today).

 

It seemed like your comments were an honest attempt to inform and not intended for the purposes of character assassination.

 

My apologies are readily offered if I have offended you (though you don't seem to be offended .

[Murali_Mohan_das 0]

Thanks for clarifying. I *do* remember how wonderful Mangal Arati was in '77-'78 (when I was a new Gurukuli).

 

I haven't made it for Mangal in L.A. recently, but I made it for the greeting of the deities this past May during the Prabhupada festival, and, while it wasn't the same (more grey in the crowd , it was still very enthusiastic and enlivening. I imagine it gets pretty mild during the average week. Of course, those Deities are the same (or even *more* beautiful and munificent).

 

I really can't speak about the L.A. temple during the period of 1986-1994 as I was living with my Dad in New York City during that time and spending my summers in Santa Cruz with my Mom. In 1994, I graduated from college and moved back in with my Dad who was living in Malibu at the time. From 1994-1997, I spent a bit of time at the L.A. Temple.

 

 

I know the harinam was in Westwood but for people unfamiliar with L.A mentioning Westwood would mean nothing. You are right that in 1978 there wasn't prasad being sold in front of the temple, I didn't really mean to suggest that in 1978 that was going on, I was referring to mangal arati, but I do remember that I was living as a brahmacari in the L.A. temple when there were big pandal tents next to the temple and prasad being sold in front by devotee vendors, the last time I ever lived as a brahmacari in L.A was 1980, so it had to be going on full force by then. So the claim that the big sunday feast outside stuff started since 1992 is totally wrong. I haven't been to the L.A temple since 1986 and I was staying nearby and visiting and even then they didn't have the big pandal tents and food vendors outside any longer. Maybe they started up again after that but it was definitely going on when I was living there as a brahmacari. I think a memory of a 20 year old is more accurate then a 6 year old.

[Guruvani 0]

 

Age of consent laws have risen since the 1980's, in many states 15 could have been legal back then. Either way they may not have had sex, it may have just been a flirtation and dating.

 

15 (almost 16) year old girls are not totally innocent babies.

Girls mature faster than boys.

I have an 18 year old daughter who is like a grown woman compared to my 20 year old son who is still like a boy.

 

16 year old women are not innocent babies when they are loose and stalking men they want.

 

My 18 year old daughter demanded her independence at around 16 and I had no choice but to give it to her.

 

The choice would have been to turn her over to juvenile authorities but that thought NEVER crossed my mind.

 

Now, she is 18, working in a neurologist office, going to community college and about 4 years more mature than most girls her age.

 

She was a woman demanding her independence at age 16 and I gave it to her.

 

I don't consider Ramesvar a monster for giving in to the seduction of a 16 year old woman.