News in Bhaskar Post: ISKCON Temple finally sees light of day at Kurukshetra

Hindustan Times news: ISKCON founder's dream to be fulfilled as CM lays stone

Decks finally cleared to fulfill dream of ISKCON founder, Prabhupad-ji

From Vijay Sabharwal

Kurukshetra: The decks seem to have been finally cleared to fulfill the dream of the founder of The International Society for Krishna Consciousness (ISKCON), Swami Prabhupad, for constructing a Krishna-Arjun Temple and Vaidik Sanskrit Kendra. While the initial plan for this was initiated at Kurukshetra in 1975, the project was racked with hurdles and delays – with the laying of the foundation stone of the proposed temple by Haryana Chief minister, B.S. Hooda, near Jyotisar here on Monday (August 18, 2014), this dream seems to be finally on its way to reality.

The old timers who remained close to late Prime Minister and founder chairman of Kurukshetra Development Board (KDB), Gulzari Lal Nanda, including this writer, recall that Swami Prabhupad came here on the invitation of the latter to participate in the ‘Sarv Dharam Samellan’ on July 3,1975 along with a few of his rich followers from USA.

Prabhupad ji, who was highlighting the cult of Lord Krishna, expressed his desire to develop the Mughal Garden – an island in the holy Brahmasarovar- and construct a huge Krishna-Arjun Temple and Vaidik Sanskrit Kendra at a cost of Rs. 5 crores – a significant sum at the time, if the Bagh was allotted to his organization, ISKCON. Nandaji told him that he would talk to him next day, and called a meeting of his close associates here to discuss the offer.

File Photo of Prabhupad ji (extreme left) sitting with from left to right late Swami Vedavyas, Anand Swami, of Arya Samaj, and Gulzari Lal Nanda, former Prime Minister and chairman of KDB. My father wearing turban, Dharambir Sabharwal, is seen sitting behind Prabhupad ji

However, the meeting took the decision that Mughal Garden, which was later renamed as Purshotampura Bagh, measuring over 7 acres of land should not be given to anybody as the importance of the renovation work taken into hand by KDB of Brahmasarovar would be adversely affected.

Next day, they most humbly declined the offer of Prabhupad and offered to arrange an alternative land for his desired project anywhere else at Kurukshetra. In 1998, on the recommendation of KDB, the Haryana government allowed the allotment of 6 acres of land near Jyotisar tirth where lord Krishna is believed to have delivered the holy sermon of Geeta to Arjuna before the beginning of Mahabharta war.

However, the land which was allotted on lease for 99 years and the total lease money deposited by ISKCON ran into a legal dispute.  The ISCKON could not start work over the land as the then in-charge of Hindu Mission at Jyotisar Tirtha, Swami Hara Nand, disputed the claim of KDB that the Tirtha belonged to KDB. The dispute between the two increased and the 30 acres of land given to Tirtha by the Jyotisar Panchayat many decades back, out of which 6 acres were given on lease to ISKCON, also become disputed. Late Hara Nand went to the Punjab and Haryana High court. After a long legal battle, the High Court, in December last declared that the 30 acres of land was the ownership of the Hindu Jyotisar Tirtha and cancelled the 99 year lease of 6 acres of land allotted to ISKCON.

Looking to the importance of the project, which was envisaged as an International level temple, the Haryana cabinet last month decided to allot 6 acres of land out of the Haryana Irrigation Research and Management Institute (HIRMI), which is situated about one-half-kilometer away from Jyotisar Tirtha towards Kurukshetra. The amount already deposited by ISKCON with KDB has been adjusted in the payment required for this land, as 6 acres of land belonging to HIRMI has already been transferred to KDB. The land has been given on 99 years lease at the rate of Rs. 38 lakh per acre.

From Vijay Sabharwal

Kurukshetra: The controversy raging over the revelations made in his memoirs by former foreign minister in the Congress government, Natwar Singh, have reminded me of a conversation that I had with Ch. Bansi Lal, a former Defence Minister of India. Bansi Lal is believed to have played a pivotal role in 1976 when the Prime Minister, Indira Gandhi, imposed Emergency within the country.

Vijay in deep discussion with Ch. Bansi Lal

 

As a senior journalist, I enjoyed considerable access to Bansi Lal, who regarded me well and was very open with me on several occasions. Besides discussing important political actions with me, he used to even discuss family matters, in confidence. On two occasions, I recall asking him to tell me some ‘inside story’ regarding the imposition of the Emergency and the functioning of the Congress government during the period of the Emergency. Both times, Bansi Lal promptly responded with: “Sabharwal, weh bate mare sath shamshan me jawen ge” (Sabharwal, those things will go with me unto my cremation). For good measure, he added: “Iss ke liye BBC ne to bahut bhari rakam ke be offer ki thi, per maine kahay diya ki Indira-ji ke saath kaam kiya hai…. jite ji koi aisi baat nahi bolu ga jiss ko unhone mujhe confidence me kahi ho’ (BBC had even offered me considerable sum of money to tell these things, but I told them that – having worked with Indiraji – I would not disclose anything that she had spoken to me about in confidence or that I had learnt from my position of proximity).

 

He further used to say that I may criticize and speak ill of Sonia-ji as now I am fighting elections on my own party (Haryana Vikas Party), but would never utter a bad word for Indiraji.  

 

He was of the firm opinion that it was not ethically correct to publically disclose facts known by one through confidential interactions and one’s position of proximity to important figures. He stuck to this position by not revealing anything confidential in his lifetime. This contrasts sharply with the current trend of books being published with ‘tell-all scoops’ that the writers or subjects have come by through their positions of power or proximity to public figures. I wonder if, in the longer-term, this trend is likely to damage the trust that such relationships demand, and what impact that might have on governance itself.