Plea...

January 16, 1999

Dear Madhusudani Devi,

Pamho. AgtSP! AgtSG&G!

I can appreciate Mukhya's request not to continue the current discussion of

VAST texts on public conferences. I find it disappointing that the same

consideration was not given to GHQ members when Ardhabuddhi's VNN article

was shared on these same conferences. That is water under the bridge.

However, there is an inquiry I would like to present again to you. Many

devotees who are wondering the same thing and I hope you will not take it

as being inquisitorial:

I humbly request you, in this assembly of Vaisnavas, for your truthful

confirmation or denial of having been personally involved in the writing of

Ardhabuddhi's article that was posted on VNN.

Your servant, Sita devi dasi

January 16, 1999

Dear Madhusudani Devi,

Pamho. AgtSP! AgtSG&G!

I can appreciate Mukhya's request not to continue the current discussion of

VAST texts on public conferences. I find it disappointing that the same

consideration was not given to GHQ members when Ardhabuddhi's VNN article

was shared on these same conferences. That is water under the bridge.

However, there is an inquiry I would like to present again to you. Many

devotees who are wondering the same thing and I hope you will not take it

as being inquisitorial:

I humbly request you, in this assembly of Vaisnavas, for your truthful

confirmation or denial of having been personally involved in the writing of

Ardhabuddhi's article that was posted on VNN.

Your servant, Sita devi dasi

January 16, 1999

> I humbly request you, in this assembly of Vaisnavas, for your truthful

> confirmation or denial of having been personally involved in the writing

> of Ardhabuddhi's article that was posted on VNN.

Yes, I did it. "Ardhabuddhi" was me - Mahanidhi das.

This is my truthful confirmation as per your humble request

in this assembly of Vaisnavas.

ys mnd

PS. On which list, and on which place of it, my name got placed

now? I can see that you have included Syamasundar prabhu's name

as one of the receivers, so maybe he might say. Anyway, you

GHQ-ers seem to be so eager to pursue your holy case, and cement

in everybody's remembrance the humble-Vaisnava-assambly impression

that got almost a bit shaken by my article with selected texts from

GHQ.

January 16, 1999

> I humbly request you, in this assembly of Vaisnavas, for your truthful

> confirmation or denial of having been personally involved in the writing

> of Ardhabuddhi's article that was posted on VNN.

Yes, I did it. "Ardhabuddhi" was me - Mahanidhi das.

This is my truthful confirmation as per your humble request

in this assembly of Vaisnavas.

ys mnd

PS. On which list, and on which place of it, my name got placed

now? I can see that you have included Syamasundar prabhu's name

as one of the receivers, so maybe he might say. Anyway, you

GHQ-ers seem to be so eager to pursue your holy case, and cement

in everybody's remembrance the humble-Vaisnava-assambly impression

that got almost a bit shaken by my article with selected texts from

GHQ.

January 16, 1999

> I can appreciate Mukhya's request not to continue the current discussion

> of VAST texts on public conferences. I find it disappointing that the same

> consideration was not given to GHQ members when Ardhabuddhi's VNN article

> was shared on these same conferences.

It was up to Raktambara Prabhu to interfere in that. I have asked devotees

in private to stop that craziness and some obliged. I mentioned to you once

that the women issue has the potential of becoming one of the big conflicts

on COM (like the jiva issue in 1994), and I was right. Everybody who

witnessed this explosion knows that it was impossible to stop it for some

time. There were something like 50 texts being written daily on these

comment trees! Besides, I didn't want to make a strong stand because I am

just Raktambara's assistant, plus at that time I was in the first month of

my pregnancy and had had fever for 2 weeks (with 38.5 C) and didn't want to

bother to read angry and offensive texts.

It was after the GHQ debate began that Raktambara Prabhu posted a specific

request in (COM) System (Info) to all devotees to stop offending each other

and also mentioned there that devotees would be blocked from COM for three

months without warning if they cross the line. This information was meant

for everybody, including the GHQ members and the Women's Ministry.

Now the topic of GHQ came up again, together with it the danger of another

COM war. So this time I interfered and requested everybody to please discuss

this in private. Please read my text and see that eventhough I commented on

Krishna Kirti's text, my text was addressed to both parties. To make it easy

for me, I should have simply turned the matter to Raktambara Prabhu, but to

tell you truth he is completely disgusted from having to deal with conflicts

of this kind and has requested me to do as much as I can to relieve him of

unnecessary COM worries.

So please kindly do not use my actions in your political campaign. I have no

problem with the traditional understanding of women and also think that the

Women's ministry raises some interesting and important issues, e.g. abuse. I

think both parties can make a valuable contribution to ISKCON; e.g. the GHQ

devotees who have a lot of knowledge can make seminars and write materials

to present the Vedic ideal (which is often misunderstood due to having been

misrepresented and distorted over the years).

However, if these two groups of devotees prefer to fight with each other, I

have no desire to take part or witness the fights, much less to be used as a

buffer by either side. Please do not add me as a receiver to further texts

on this topic unless these texts are addressed specifically to me.

Your servant,

Mukhya dd

January 16, 1999