Open Letter to Gurukula Proofreaders
Posted April 26, 2007
Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada.
As the Director of the ISKCON Central Office of Child Protection, I would like to respond to the concerns about the status of Dhanurdhara Swami raised by the "Expert Gurukula Proofreaders." I was also a member of the GBC committee that drafted the resolution that was passed in Mayapur, so I can speak to the intent of both the CPO decision and GBC resolution.
The issue centers on the wording of the GBC resolution that states that whenever a CPO ruling restricts that devotee from positions of leadership, that will automatically include the position of initiating guru. The concern is that the CPO Official Decision on the case of Dhanurdhara Swami restricted him from positions of "management", rather than "leadership".
In my position as CPO Director, I can officially state that the CPO Decision did indeed intend that Dhanurdhara Maharaja be restricted from the types of leadership position indicated in the GBC resolution. Further, the intent of the GBC resolution was clear, that Dhanurdhara Swami and any others in his situation should not act as initiating spiritual masters within ISKCON. There was no intent for ambiguity or loopholes.
While the concepts of "leadership" and "management" are somewhat different in other contexts, in this specific instance, they are used synonymously. So that there is no misunderstanding, we can categorically state that Dhanurdhara Maharaja, and any others with similar CPO decisions, may not act as initiating spiritual masters in ISKCON.
Director, ISKCON Central Office of Child Protection