THE COSTA RICA ISSUE: Tatra srir vijayo bhutir

Aniruddha das, Feb 28, Costa Rica: Court Delivers Another Blow to Guru Prasad Swami

Guru Prasad Swami originally had one lawyer. Later he got two. Later three. Later four. It seems that the number of lawyers increases according to the number of lies. Before he was the one saying lies, now Bhakti Bhusana Swami and Manonath are helping him, but even these three leaders and their four lawyers could not convince the judge in Costa Rica that the ill-begotten order or eviction filed against the residents of the farm had any legal grounds.

On January 9, 2009, the Court of Cartago dismissed the eviction order requested by Guru Prasad Swami’s “wonder team” of four lawyers against Dina-Bandhu Prabhu and his wife, Madhurya-lila. This couple has more than 15 years living at the farm, offering devotional service without receiving any remuneration, and offering their whole beings to keep alive the spiritual programs, no matter what (I mean, despite the gross fall down of ex-Bhakty Abay, despite the heartless and dumb management of Guru Prasad Swami, and despite ruthless ill-treatment and one-upmanship of Manonath.) The only facility Dina-Bandhu and family (two boys, Damodar and Jagat-vasu) have is a simple two-bedroom rural house. They have no other purpose in their lives than serving Srila Prabhupada’s mission.

Nevertheless, an important step towards clearing the way for not preserving the farm was getting rid of all the remaining devotees dwelling there, Chinchilla (Guru Prasad Swami’s main lawyer and “legal advisor”) devised a series of so-called legal maneuvers that eventually would leave the path clear. One of those maneuvers was to coerce the farm devotees to sign rental contracts, with a specific clause giving Guru Prasad Swami the outrageous right to cancel them at the end of the eleventh month. So when the contracts expired and the devotees refused to continue giving money to these illegitimate “owners”, Chinchilla exercised that right and sued five families and two singles, charging them with failure to pay rent. He also explicitly asked the Court to issue an eviction order against these devotees (along with their children) for breach of contract.

But the Judge dismissed the class-action suit and cautioned Chinchilla that he should indict each family separately. Chinchilla complied. He filed six different cases in six different courts. For each case he has to show credible evidence, but because he knows he has none, he resorts to the same old technique he is very adept at: lying.

It’s a shame. I foretold two years ago the whole scenario: in order to save their skins, Guru Prasad, Bhakti Bhusana, Manonath and Ángel Pérez (ex Bhakty Abay) would have to tell the judges lie after lie. And that is exactly what is happening now: Chinchilla is coercing Guru Prasad’s followers like Juan Carlos Maldonado and others to go to court and lie: “Yes, I’m witness that Dina-Bandhu never paid the rent. And, yes, I saw the moment when Mario Savelloni (Manonath) personally went to collect the payments, but he didn’t receive any.” Bla, bla, bla. From now on, in order to secure his huge fee – just in the remote case he would win the case – Chinchilla has to train and pay dozens upon dozens of people to say hundreds upon hundreds of lies. I don’t know who is the guru and who is disciple in this awkward relationship: if Guru Prasad taught Chinchilla to tell lies or Chinchilla taught Guru Prasad this very peculiar art of Kali-yuga. By the way, Guru Prasad is a proven mythomaniac-over the years, with his soft manners and calm voice, he has managed to cajole many people, including his GBC peers, to believe the lies he tells.

And guess what: a most circumspect, dignified Bhakti Bhusana Swami, neatly clad in saffron robes and wearing a nice tilaka mark on his forehead, also went to court to tell lies. When the Judge asked him: “Is the farm registered under the name Lifter of the Hill, Limited, the Hare Krishna Farm?,” he gravely answered: “No.” This is a lie, because it is well know all over the ISKCON world that this is indeed the Hare Krishna Farm. It was this farm, and only this farm, the one that was put in the name of Lifter of the Hill through a fictitious transaction.

Although on paper the fake two owners of the farm currently are Bhakti Bhusana Swami (Steffan Kess) and Manonath (Mario Savelloni,) it is still the farm of the Hare Krishna Community. Yadu has abundantly and unequivocally proven this fact in the series, The Legitimacy of the Hare Krishna Movement in Costa Rica. So, Bhakti Bhusana flatly lied, because the Judge was asking a pointed, technical question, and he should better have said the truth. These judiciary people are very keen at catching lies. And they don’t like them at all.

What a shame. What a disgusting thing that a sannyasi has to lie in order to save his skin. There was no need for him to disgrace himself in this manner. He was duped by Chinchilla and Guru Prasad Swami. Formerly he trusted fully in Harikesh, now he trusts fully in Guru Prasad. It seems that this devotee is always looking for a role model, but karma keeps baffling him. By now he is very aware of the stupidity he and Manonath committed when they happily volunteered to serve as front men in the fraud conceived by Chinchilla and Guru Prasad Swami. As he told a devotee recently: “Just see what they have done to me! I just came here for preaching, but now I have to face these difficulties.”

But let me remind our readers that Bhakti Bhusana Swami is old enough for having the integrity and common sense to say “NO” to the dirty schemes harbored by Guru Prasad Swami and Chinchilla. He should have had at least this much discrimination. When Bhakti Bhusana was leaving the courtroom after making his deposition in one of the eviction cases, our lawyer came unexpectedly and accompanied by a judiciary official, handed him the summons of the lawsuit leveled against him for misappropriation of the Hare Krishna Farm (plus fraud, simulation of purchase, conspiracy, perjury, etc.). That was the last thing Bhakti Bhusana was expecting and therefore he angrily looked at our lawyer as if wanting to kill him (our lawyer’s own words.)

Guru Prasad Swami is conscious that he put in trouble his two loyal yes-men. But he is so callous, so insensitive, that he’s just cheerleading them from beyond the border, far away from the venue in which the legal action takes place. He is aware that he has committed serious crimes in the process of putting the farm first in his own name, and later in the names of Bhakti Bhusana Swami (Steffan Kess) and Manonath (Mario Savelloni.) thorough the creation of the fictitious commercial company, The Lifter of the Hill, Limited.

There is an old Spanish saying: He who owes nothing fears nothing. (“Nevermind there may be botheration to register each centre, take tax certificate each, become separate corporations in each state. That will train men who to do these things, and they shall develop reliability and responsibility, that is the point. So I do not think the leaders are following, nor they are seeing that others are following, and giving them good instruction.” (Srila Prabhupada’s Order of Descentralization, Dec-22-1972)

If Guru Prasad Swami has done everything crystal clear and legal, if Guru Prasad has acted according to the highest spiritual, ethical and moral standards consistent with the codes -sadacara- of the sannyasa order of life, then, what is he afraid of? Why he doesn’t go right now to Costa Rica to face the trial against him, and honorably clear his name? Why doesn’t he go there to also substantiate his claims of ownership over the Costa Rica farm? Why doesn’t he want to comply with the law? Any gentleman would go running to any place, the sooner the better, to keep his good name unblemished.

Let me quote another Japanese saying: “If you lost money, you haven’t lost anything. If you have lost health, you have lost something. But if you lose your principles, then you have lost everything!” We are talking serious business here. Are we followers of the Bhagatava book and the Bhagavata person, or not? That is the issue.

Guru Prasad is deliberately and cowardly hiding. On January 4th, he said to a mutual friend: “Please ask them not to offer unnecessary threats such as putting me in jail. If Krishna wants to send me to jail, so be it. I will continue chanting Hare Krishna there. I have no fear of going to jail.” Oh, what bravado! He has really learned in Mexico to be a “macho-man.” But at the time of really showing integrity and courage, at the time of getting his buddies off the hook, the man goes into hiding. As Krishna said to Salva: “Those who are actually heroes do not talk much. They prove their prowess by practical exhibition of chivalrous activities.”

At the end of the Persian Gulf War in 1991, General H. Norman Schwarzkopf said the following about Saddam Hussein: “As far as Saddam Hussein being a great military strategist, he is neither a strategist, nor is he schooled in the operational arts, nor is he a tactician, nor is he a general, nor is he a soldier. Other than that he’s a great military man I want you to know that.”

Similarly, after personally witnessing his performance for more than 30 years, I can say with absolute certainty that Guru Prasad Swami is neither a manager, nor a qualified spiritual master, nor a straightforward man, not even a good politician. He has no scruples, no honor, no hard-core cardinal principles, and no morals. He has no heart, no managerial capabilities, no ethics and no common sense. In 1986, when Panchadravida Swami left ISKCON, Guru Prasad, instead of continuing being “tail of a cat,” rather chose to become “head of a mouse”, and seized the “golden” opportunity of becoming GBC, and a rubber-stamped guru a little later. But all this time he has only been pretending to be both. He is just bluffing. His celibacy and his brahminical traits are not enough for discharging with dignity and competence such serious posts.

Because I have learned the basics of psychology, I can assure you that Guru Prasad Swami is undergoing a full-blown case of alienation:

“By alienation is meant a mode of experience in which the person experiences himself as an alien. He has become, one might say, estranged from himself. He does not experience himself as the center of his world, as the creator of his own acts-but his acts and their consequences have become his masters, whom he obeys, or whom he may even worship. The alienated person is out of touch with himself as he is out of touch with any other person.” (Erich Fromm)

Oh, you don’t believe me, do you? You think I’m a sassy offender, just trying to smear and ruin Guru Prasad Swami’s reputation. OK. Let me tell you one, just one of the many incidents from which I draw the above-mentioned conclusion. In the late 1990’s Sudama Vipra (from Spain) was renting an apartment in a well-to-do area in Guatemala City. Guru Prasad Swami was staying there for a couple of days. Sudama invited me over. I arrived in the evening and Sudama was casually preaching to maybe four or five new friends of his. One of them, a guy of 21-22 year of age, began to ask the same old superficial questions: “Why do you shave your head? Why do you dress like this? Why do you dress in white and he is dressed in orange? By the way, who is he?” Guru Prasad was seating on the main couch of the apartment reading some papers. When the guest asked about the ecclesiastical status of Guru Prasad Swami, I interjected and said: “He is the equivalent to what in the Catholic Church you know as a bishop.” “No” -Sudama stammered-, “he’s an archbishop.” Then, Guru Prasad suddenly removed his absorption in reading, looked up, and made it clear: “No, I’m not a bishop. I’m a Cardinal. More than that…” You can consult any psychiatrist and asked him if this answer is truthfulness or alienation.

Why is the GBC condoning and deliberately overlooking such a mediocrity, such an insult to our sacred guru-parampara? Our Sampradaya Acaryas all must be feeling ashamed of this so-called representative of theirs. Please, GBC, would you be so kind AS to put an end to this impostor, to this bluffing!?

And there’s still another and worse circumstance: Guru Prasad Swami sold his soul to the devil. Bernardo Chinchilla (disciple of Narayana Maharaja) supposedly as a “good devotee”, has offered gratis, free of charge his professional services to Guru Prasad Swami over the last 12 years. They won a lengthy trial which went up to the Supreme Court wherein Vera Cecilia Gonzales (or Radha Govinda devi) asked for 30% of the farm because the purpose for which she donated it to the Hare Krishna Movement in Costa Rica (i.e. to build a self-sufficient agricultural and spiritual community) was not taking place, and because originally she has kept that 30% in her husband’s and her own name, not in the name of anybody else. Also, all those years Chinchilla has given legal counseling to Guru Prasad in many matters, specifically regarding the ways he could make his the Hare Krishna farm in Cartago. Now he’s directing the defense of Bhakti Bhusana Swami and Manonath, the so-called new, written-in-paper owners of the farm.

But the truth of the matter is that Bernardo Chinchilla is not offering “pure devotional service” to Guru Prasad Swami and Company. Last year Tirtharaj, a so-called expert in real estate and adviser to the GBC, strongly suggested Guru Prasad change his lawyer. But he can’t. After hearing rumors of his imminent firing, Chinchilla displayed his cards and forced his partner, William Steven Hendricks (Guru Prasad Swami), to sign a private contract. Our swami was forced to sign because otherwise, hmm, otherwise Chinchilla would go public and simultaneously prosecute him! Who knows how many “top secret” cons and other stuff Chinchilla is smartly keeping low-key to blackmail Guru Prasad Swami.

So, Guru Prasad Swami is in big, big trouble. And he has dragged Bhakti Bhusana Swami into this mire. Regarding Manonath, he rightly deserves this for being a greedy, unconditional yes-man, as he called himself. There is yet another Spanish saying: If you sleep with babies, you will wake up wet. Better they come up with an out of court settlement before they stain more and more their images, and at the same time avoid further fear and prosecution. You have to do what is correct because it is always the correct thing to do. From our part, we trust fully and are totally dependent on Krishna’s words: tatra srir vijayo bhuthir [Bhagavad 78].

Finally, I transcribe below key passages of the last blow the Costa Rican Justice delivered to Guru Prasad Swami:

RELEVANT PARTS OF THE COURT’S VEREDICT

COURT CASE: No. 08-001874-0346-CI
CIVIL ACTION: EVICTION
PLAINTIFF: LIFTER OR THE HILL, LIMITED
DEFENDANT: CARLOS COLINDRES [DINA-BHANDU]
FIRST INTANCE VEREDICT NUMBER 01-09

[TITLE PAGE]

Cartago, Costa Rica. Issued at fifteen hours and two minutes of January nine of two thousand and nine.

Eviction action promoted by BERNARDO CHINCHILLA, […] AND VILMA MEZA, […] [the disciples of NM and lawyers of GPS] both with unlimited Power of Attorney without monetary limit of LIFTER OF THE HILL, LIMITED, corporate identity card number 3-101-429682, against CARLOS COLINDRES, known as DINABANDHU, […] living at the farm known as Hare Krishna Farm.

[PAGE SEVEN]

Regarding the first event, (*) this Court dismiss it for inaccurate, and indicates that although it is true the plaintiff has shown the title in their names, it is not the same as being the owner […] because […] it has now an annotation of ordinary lawsuit […] a legal action submitted by the Hare Krishna Community. It is an ordinary claim regarding the farm which the Plaintiff claims as its property, and is the farm where the Hare Krishna Community of Costa Rica is settled as an agricultural and independent self-sufficient community, and some of the charges against the Plaintiff are usucapion, simulation and lifting of the corporate veil.

(*) a) That in the National Registry of Real Estate Properties, the Lifter of the Hill, Limited, the president of which is Mr. Mario Savelloni [Manonath], appears as registered owner.

[PAGE NINE]

11. Now, from the depositions of both parties and from the evidence submitted in the proceedings, which are documentary, testimonial and confessional, this office based upon the sound critical reasoning, considers that [PAGE FOURTEEN]

THEREFORE:

On the merit of what has been stated and of the articles quoted, the eviction for failure to pay promoted by JOSE BERNARDO CHINCHILLA Y VILMA MEZA, both with unlimited Power of Attorney without monetary limit of LIFTER OF THE HILL against CARLOS COLINDRES, known as DINABANDHU, is hereby declare unfounded in all respects. […] Regarding the exception of prescription of action, it is not heard due to the Plaintiff having no right to resort to it because the landlord-tenant relationship does not exist. Thereby the former eviction order is revoked…”