Category Archives: Urmila Dasi Exposed

Educated And Left Husband

Educated girl means how to divorce husband, how to kill child. Is it not? Educated, modern educated girl means how to become unfaithful to the husband, how to divorce and how to kill child. The uneducated girls do not do this.

Srila Prabhupada; 26 Nov 1975

Advertisements

Temple President Basu Ghosh pr. ACBSP EXPOSES Urmila Dasi’s cheating

Temple President Basu Ghosh pr. ACBSP speaks against Urmila Dasi’s cheating here

Jayamadhava Pr. ACBSP speaks Against Urmila Dasi(Iskcon Guru Candidate)

her own godbrothers condemn her. Jayamadhava Pr. ACBSP speaks Against Urmila Dasi(Iskcon Guru Candidate)
She divorced her husband in 1996. Prabhupada called this unchaste. Pls dont listen to this woman’s contaminated lectures.

The divorce act is encouraging prostitution, and this should be abolished. (SB 1.17.38) In Vedic civilization the husband and wife were not separated by such man-made laws as divorce. We should understand the necessity for maintaining family life in human society and should thus abolish this artificial law known as divorce. (SB 4.23.25)…there is no such thing as divorce in the Vedic literature. A wife is always trained to be chaste and faithful to her husband, for this helps her achieve deliverance from any abominable material condition (SB 9.20.22)

Generally, separation between husband and wife is due to womanly behavior; divorce takes place due to womanly weakness. The best course for a woman is to abide by the orders of her husband. That makes family life very peaceful. Sometimes there may be misunderstandings between husband and wife…but a wife should not leave her husband’s protection because of such misunderstanding. If she does so, it is understood to be due to her womanly weakness. (SB 4.4.3)

What is this nonsense, divorce? There is no such thing in the Vedic civilization, divorce. You must accept whatever God has given you as husband or wife, you must. They had no thinking even, idea of divorce. One may not agree with the husband.. That is natural. Sometimes we do not agree. But there is no question of divorce. (Room Conversation, Baltimore , 7-7-76)

 

In the modern day, the wife is never submissive, and therefore homelife is broken even by slight incidents. Either the wife or the husband may take advantage of the divorce laws. According to the Vedic law, however, there is no such thing as divorce laws, and a woman must be trained to be submissive to the will of her husband. Westerners contend that this is a slave mentality for the wife, but actually it is not; it is the tactic by which a woman can conquer the heart of her husband, however irritable or cruel he may be. (SB 9.3.10)

Krsna explained the duty of a woman. He also stressed the point of serving the husband: “Even if he is not of very good character, or even if he is not very rich or fortunate, or even if he is old or invalid on account of continued diseases, whatever the husband’s condition, a woman should not divorce her husband if she actually desires to be elevated to the higher planetary systems after leaving this body.” (Krsna, the Supreme Personality of Godhead , Ch. 29)

 

Tulsi Gabbard & abortions (candidate promoted by Urmila Dasi)

Gabbard does not like abortions nor encourages them but she believes it’s a woman’s right to choose to have or not to have abortions. This is like saying

  1. I don’t like illicit sex.
  2. I will never have.
  3. I will never encourage anyone to have it.
  4. But people may or not not have illicit sex.
  • The scriptural statement is: we must stop illicit sex in society.
  • What the scriptures do not approve of is: Illicit sex is a choice for a person to have.

Illicit sex is not a personal lifestyle choice. Illicit sex or abortionism is not like wearing the Prabhupada-monk-hat or wearing a turban around the head to protect it from cold. These are not accessories. This pasandi woman with her pasanda vad to be taken as a person representing our Iskcon? She says, “If the government in power today has the power to force a woman not to have an abortion, then the government of tomorrow could have the power to force women to have an abortion.”
This is like another fallicous argument: If the government can empower a class of it’s citizens called the police, to shoot the criminals today, then the government of tomorrow could ask those policemen to shoot it’s innocent citizens.This is the logic we get from this woman.
“I also believe that every woman has to make that choice for herself” says Gabbard here http://www.harekrsna.com/sun/editorials/01-14/editorials11314.htm

Why does Urmila Dasi support Major Gabbard? Urmila Dasi as a daughter who is a public dancer, Champakalata Dasi.
http://radharani.com/dance/project/3-2009-dancing-in-new-navadvipa/
Urmila Dasi has to support women in power who are a non vedic in their outlook and activities because Urmila Dasi is herself one of such women.
She wears a tilak. If she has vaishnavi qualities…. it is for you to decide. Haribol!

Jasomatinandan Prabhu Smashes Nonsense of Women Giving Lectures to Men in Iskcon

Jasomatinandan Prabhu protesting iGBC interference in Mayapura and Vrndavana

Letter PAMHO:26259985 (260 lines) [W1]
From: Jasomatinandan (das) ACBSP (Gujarat – IN)
Date: 28-Mar-14 18:08 (23:38 +0530)
To: ICC (Indian Continental Committee)
To: IIAC (ISKCON India Advisory Committee)
Cc: Bhakti Charu Swami
Cc: Bhakti Vikasa Swami
Cc: Bhaktivaibhava Swami
Cc: Prahladananda Swami
Cc: “Krishna Kirti Prabhu @ San Antonio USA”
Reference: Text PAMHO:26253153 by Praghosa (das) SDG (IRL)
Subject: GBC affirmative action order for Mayapur & Vrdn is a retrograde
act
————————————————————
There were four Mayapur festivals in the Divine presence of the founder
Acharya .Why not a single instance of women giving lecture during any four
of them 1974,1975,1976 and 1977 ? I don’t remember any other instances of a
woman giving a Bhagavatam lecture during my whole Krsna conscious life with
Srla Prabhupada’s personal presence from 1972 till 1977. No less than three
hundred days .

That doesn’t mean there never was an instance when a woman might have given a
lecture .But it is like a needle in the haystack. Now Praghosh prabhu appears
to make it look like it was a cherished desire of the founder acharya for
women to give Srimad Bhagavatam classes. Exception becomes the rule.

If the practical example set in Srila Prabhupada’s presence is not a good
enough evidence, what evidence will be good enough? You want to twist and
turn and dig out some instance when a woman gave a lecture and say ,”See.
Prabhupada wanted women to give lectures.” But what about nine hundred and
ninety nine other instances when he did not ? What does it mean by Guru mukha
padma vakya chittete kariya aiikya ara na kariha mane asha. Have no other
desire than what he said or did .Why change things from what he did ? He
begged us to not change any thing. He named his Gita, Bhagavad Gita As It
Is. Very peculiar name. But you can’t miss it. So this is the great virtue in
Kali-yuga. Not to change. Present things as they are.

Some times we fix an agenda then go looking for support from Srila
Prabhupad’s teachings .Then we find a little exception and we try to make it
a rule. The right thing is we shouldn’t have any other agenda than SP’s
desire. This particular issue Woman’s liberation -feminist agenda,
Srila Prabhupada called it demoniac in Bh Gita As It Is chapter 16 verse 7
purport .

“As for behavior, there are many rules and regulations guiding human
behavior, such as the Manu-samhita, which is the law of the human race. Even
up to today, those who are Hindu follow the Manu-samhita. Laws of
inheritance and other legalities are derived from this book. Now, in the
Manu-samhita it is clearly stated that a woman should not be given freedom.
That does not mean that women are to be kept as slaves, but they are like
children. Children are not given freedom, but that does not mean that they
are kept as slaves. The demons have now neglected such injunctions, and they
think that women should be given as much freedom as men. However, this has
not improved the social condition of the world. Actually, a woman should be
given protection at every stage of life. She should be given protection by
the father in her younger days, by the husband in her youth, and by the
grown-up sons in her old age. This is proper social behavior according to
the Manu-samhita. But modern education has artificially devised a puffed—up
concept of womanly life, and therefore marriage is practically now an
imagination in human society. The social condition of women is thus not very
good now, although those who are married are in a better condition than
those who are proclaiming their so-called freedom. The demons, therefore, do
not accept any instruction which is good for society, and because they do
not follow the experience of great sages and the rules and regulations laid
down by the sages, the social condition of the demoniac people is very
miserable. ”

If some thing is done to enhance the glories of Vedic culture that will
itself become glorious ,but if some thing is done to accommodate the modern
secular western ideas ,we will loose our caste and still be hungry as
mundane ideas can not make any one happy -even to those who propagate it.

Having said above, I must say Vedic history is full of exalted advanced
women . Very few men can match the purity and devotion of queen Kunti , or
Devahuti. Every time I picture queen Kunti standing next to Krsna’s chariot
offering prayers, it brings tears to my eyes. I am praying to her feet to
give me one hundredth of love she has for the Lord. But even such exalted
women observed social codes and remained in the background of men.
Similarly I know there are many exalted women in this movement who are much
more advanced than me spiritually, but unfortunately there are not amongst
the ones clamoring for attention by wanting to speak to the assembly of
vaisnava men.

That is why I am not against hearing from exalted vaishnavis like Praghosh
prabhu’s wife of twenty eight years .As Srila Prabhupada mentioned above it
is a higher realization for a vaisnava woman to be a chaste wife and a good
mother than giving public lectures especially in the assembly of men.

GBC Disallowed Urmila Dasi from Being FDG, Reason: “HER PERSONALITY”, we all know what that means!

When the GBC rejects you, you must be really too much!

Urmila Dasi’s “Personality” disqualified her from Being FDG

Basu Ghosh Das

Basu Ghosh Das Abhay S. Deolekar – The candidature of Urmila Mataji for FDG was already discussed by the GBC during their AGM (annual general meeting) at Mayapur back during 2012, and it was rejected. The reasoning behind the decision is confidential, but I was told by someone who is “in the know” (who heard from a GBC member) that her personality was the reason for her rejection.So now the pro-FDG faction/GBC members, led by my “vartma pradarshak guru” (he was my temple commander at ISKCON Chicago for 2 months back during 1973, before I was initiated), Bir Krishna Maharaj, have recommended the name of Narayani Devi Dasi, an American devotee who lives at Vrindavan and teaches in the VIHE there, for FDG.

Last year, at the GBC AGM, her candidature was put on hold after a vote was taken, after a lengthy discussion, where I was present as one of ISKCON India’s representatives. Unfortunately Sivaram Swami had to leave Mayapur before the discussion to attend to his ailing mother – who later on passed away. He is one of the main opponents of FDG on the GBC body. He expressed the desire that the ISKCON India leaders convey their opinion regarding FDG to the GBC body, and that was done during 2012, and subsequently a letter recomfirming the ISKCON India leaders opposition was sent to the GBC in October.

The most outspoken proponent of FDG seems to be Kaunteya Das, of the Congregational Development Ministry, and yes, Madhavananda and Bhaktarupa Prabhus support him, along with Hari Parshada Das, from Bombay, a Sanskrit scholar (of sorts – meaning, well, obviously he knows something, but I am sure that there is much more to be known by him)! Samskritam is a vast field of study, that is certain, and we all have much to learn! As far as FDG is concerned, well, it simply is NOT what Srila Prabhupada and Srila Saraswati Thakur envisioned as a part of “daivi varnashram”. I continue to believe that the “push” for FDG is simply the influence of the “equal rights” movement so popular in the Western world.

Urmila Dasi the Feminist Defies Scriptures Yet Again!

 

So for the last three years I’ve worked with Urmila Devi Dasi (of our Detroit school) on a comprehensive guide to setting up and running an ISKCON school.

-Sri Rama Dasa

Sri Rama Dasa shamelessly admits to freely mixing with Urmila Dasi in 1991 and she left her husband in Sept. 1996. She spent 1991 writing her 450 paged book on ‘Gurukul education in Iskcon’. But women in varnashrama don’t run gurukuls! Total feminist!

na caiversyur bhavet tasu nadhikuryat kadacana (Hari-bhakti-vilasa 11.708)
A wise man should not disregard, nor put faith in a woman. He should not become envious of them and should never give them any authority or rights.

Doing research on books etc spending much time with other men, traveling, etc it is a man’s business not a woman’s. This is varnashrama dharma.

Sri Rama Dasa is to blame for empowering this woman.

He admits to freely mixing with her for 3 years and empowering here.

source http://www.backtogodhead.in/what-were-up-to-by-sri-rama-dasa/

“If a butter pot and fire are kept together, the butter within the pot will certainly melt. Woman is compared to fire, and man is compared to a butter pot. However advanced one may be in restraining the senses, it is almost impossible for a man to keep himself controlled in the presence of a woman, even if she is his own daughter, mother or sister. Indeed, his mind is agitated even if one is in the renounced order of life. Therefore, Vedic civilization carefully restricts mingling between men and women. If one cannot understand the basic principle of restraining association between man and woman, he is to be considered an animal.”
>>> Ref. VedaBase => SB 7.12.9

 

 

urmila-dasi-principal-of-school

 

Citralekha Dasi Exposes Urmila Dasi(female iskcon “leader”)

This article is in response to the following Comment #344 that Urmila devi dasi made in a thread on Dandavats. Urmila dd said:

“This comment thread is to some extent about the subject of my class-the educating of children in Krishna consciousness. It is also to a greater extent about whether or not I, in a woman’s body, should be giving a class, or any instruction at all, in the presence of superiors according to ashrama, gender, and managerial position.”

In this comment, Urmila dd completely avoids the real reason this comment thread was started and deflects us from the real objection to her giving class. It is not at all about her being a woman. It is about the fact that she, as a female-bodied devotee, has not followed the svadharma of women, that is, stri-dharma.

The comment that kicked off an otherwise forgotten text that had only about 700 views at the time and only 3 comments, and which has now swollen to almost 9,000 views and 389 comments, by far the most commented article on Dandavats, was Comment #4 by Bhaktilata mataji, who wrote:

“By example means that there is a book Bhagavatam and the person Bhagavatam. A female devotee who preaches, which personalities should she exemplify Bhima or Kunti?

None of us would like to hear a class from a fallen sannyasi who didn’t follow his sannyasa dharma.

None of us would like to hear a class from a fallen grhasta who didn’t follow his grahasta dharma.

Nor would we like to hear a class from a fallen brahmacari who didn’t follow his brahmacari dharma.

One should be a living example of what one is preaching. So when it comes to women “preachers” which ones are actually following their stri dharma?

Most senior western women in ISKCON don’t even know what Stri-dharma is what to speak of practice it. Why should we listen to them?”

Urmila dd would like us to forget about this and turn it into an anti-woman thing, and thus she becomes the victim of misogyny who is valiantly fighting for the suppressed women who are struggling under ISKCON’s repressive “patriarchal” system. But this is not at all the case. The actual fact that Urmila dd is trying to deflect us from is that it is because Urmila dd doesn’t follow stri-dharma, therefore she is not qualified to speak, not because she is a woman. Only women who follow their stri-dharma are qualified to speak, and not others.

In Comment #189-190, Bhaktilata mataji proves that Urmila dd is not following stri-dharma and is an unchaste woman and thus not qualified to speak anywhere, what to speak of in the Holy Dham, Sri Mayapura. Bhaktilata wrote:

“In #106 Visakha Priya Mataji wrote:

“Reading through the posts concerning Urmila devi’s class, I have observed that some persons appear to be convinced that Urmila is not following the instructions of her spiritual master and that therefore we should not hear from her.

Let us consider the following statements by Srila Prabhupada about what the Stri dharma of a woman is when her husband becomes a vanaprastha and then you tell me what you think.

There is no question of separation between husband and wife until the time when the husband takes sannyasa. At that time the wife cannot remain with the husband. Even in vanaprastha stage, or retired life, the wife remains with the husband, but without any sex relations.” Srila Prabhupada Letter to Himavati, 24/1/69

“The chaste wife’s duty is to keep her husband pleased in householder life in all respects, and when the husband retires from family life, she is to go to the forest and adopt the life of vanaprastha, or vana-vasi. At that time the wife is to follow her husband and take care of him, just as she took care of him in householder life.” Srimad-Bhagavatam 4.23.20

Just as in the vanaprastha stage the wife follows the husband, …” Srimad-Bhagavatam 4.28.34

“The vanaprastha stage is exactly like this. Although the wife remains with the husband, she undergoes severe austerities and penances so that although both husband and wife live together, there is no question of sex. In this way both husband and wife can live together perpetually.” Srimad-Bhagavatam, 4.28.44

Now compare this with the following quote from Urmila dd’s diksha guru nomination letter dated September 2003.

“3. Should not be involved in any abnormal personal situation. An example of such a situation would be a disrupted or anomalous family life which could distract a guru from his guru duties or otherwise prove a disturbance to him or his followers.”

“My situation has been stable for some time. I’m living separated from husband as vanaprastha since 1996; we have a legal separation agreement. I’m under the authority of our sons and son-in-law. I will soon have own cabin for residence.”

Urmila dd having separated from her husband while he is still alive is exactly opposite of Srila Prabhupada’s instructions for his female disciples when their husband’s become vanaprasthas. Just as I would not listen to a “Sannyasi” living with his wife; there is no use in listening to a so-called lady vanaprastha who has separated herself from her husband. Now Visakha Priya Mataji I hope you can now understand what I mean when I say that our ladies do not even know what Stri dharma is let alone follow it, and that is why we should not listen to those who have disobeyed the clear instructions of Srila Prabhupada in the matter of following Stri-dharma.”

Basically speaking Urmila dd is a hypocrite who portrays herself as a chaste woman and strict follower of Srila Prabhupada when in fact she is the opposite.

“By a girl, by a young woman, or even by an aged one, nothing must be done independently, even in her own house. In childhood a female must be subject to her father, in youth to her husband, when her lord is dead to her sons; a woman must never be independent. She must not seek to separate herself from her father, husband, or sons; by leaving them she would make both (her own and her husband’s) families contemptible. ” Manu Samhita 5.147-9

Not only does Urmila’s behavior make both of her families contemptible but it also brings shame on her guru Srila Prabhupada.

Ironically in the West, Urmila dd externally appears too conservative to many, but in India she is perceived as unchaste and a closet feminist by her behavior. Her ambition to be recognized is forcing her to come out of the closet more and more.

While the GBC has in the past seldom managed to avoid mistakes somehow they miraculously barred Urmila dd from becoming a diksha guru in 2010 and saved us at least this once from a person who is not qualified to sit on the Vyasasana what to speak of giving diksha.

However this has not at all hampered her attempts to gain a following and become a diksha guru at all costs, despite the fact that she is in direct violation of Srila Prabhupada’s instructions regarding the behavior of a woman whose husband is a vanaprastha. We do not at all expect this text to stop her in her attempts of fulfill her ambitions, she is much too obstinate for that, but we can at least inform the public of what is really going on and thus allow them to formulate more educated opinions.

Your humble servant

Citralekha devi dasi

PS. Here are some other comments on Urmila’s gauche behavior.

PPS. Click here for a reprint of an old article that appeared on VNN, which goes into details on Urmila’s dubious behavior:

Urmila Dasi’s Divorce Papers, Iskcon Female Diksha Guru Candidate

because of unfortunate differences and incompatibilities which now exist between them, they are no longer able to live together in peace and harmony as husband and wife

yosito navamanyeta na casam visvased budhah
na caiversyur bhavet tasu nadhikuryat kadacana (Hari-bhakti-vilasa 11.708)
A wise man should not disregard, nor put faith in a woman. He should not become envious of them and should never give them any authority or rights.

a woman in vedic culture does not lead men, and a woman who has left her husband is the worst candidate you can find to lead men. Such a woman should not even lead women, then what to speak of going against the scriptures and leading men! It’s beyond disgusting!

What is this nonsense, divorce? There is no such thing in the Vedic civilization, divorce. You must accept whatever God has given you as husband or wife, you must. They had no thinking even, idea of divorce. One may not agree with the husband. That is natural. Sometimes we do not agree. But there is no question of divorce. When this divorce system was introduced?
-Questions and Answers
— Montreal, August 26, 1968

PRABHUPADA: That is the Vedic system: a certain portion of your life you should simply dedicate for God. That is called sannyäsa.
REPORTER: To do this, did you have to divorce?REPORTER: To do this, did you have to divorce?
PRABHUPADA: No. There is no question of divorce. We do not even know what divorce is. In our country there is no divorce. Wife and husband, once combined, there is no question of separation, in all circumstances, either in distress or in happiness.
-London Airport Press Conference

The divorce act is encouraging prostitution, and this should be abolished. (SB 1.17.38) In Vedic civilization the husband and wife were not separated by such man-made laws as divorce. We should understand the necessity for maintaining family life in human society and should thus abolish this artificial law known as divorce. (SB 4.23.25)…there is no such thing as divorce in the Vedic literature. A wife is always trained to be chaste and faithful to her husband, for this helps her achieve deliverance from any abominable material condition (SB 9.20.22)

Generally, separation between husband and wife is due to womanly behavior; divorce takes place due to womanly weakness. The best course for a woman is to abide by the orders of her husband. That makes family life very peaceful. Sometimes there may be misunderstandings between husband and wife…but a wife should not leave her husband’s protection because of such misunderstanding. If she does so, it is understood to be due to her womanly weakness. (SB 4.4.3)

What is this nonsense, divorce? There is no such thing in the Vedic civilization, divorce. You must accept whatever God has given you as husband or wife, you must. They had no thinking even, idea of divorce. One may not agree with the husband.. That is natural. Sometimes we do not agree. But there is no question of divorce. (Room Conversation, Baltimore , 7-7-76)

In the modern day, the wife is never submissive, and therefore homelife is broken even by slight incidents. Either the wife or the husband may take advantage of the divorce laws. According to the Vedic law, however, there is no such thing as divorce laws, and a woman must be trained to be submissive to the will of her husband. Westerners contend that this is a slave mentality for the wife, but actually it is not; it is the tactic by which a woman can conquer the heart of her husband, however irritable or cruel he may be. (SB 9.3.10)

Generally, separation between husband and wife is due to womanly behavior; divorce takes place due to womanly weakness. The best course for a woman is to abide by the orders of her husband.
(Bhagavatam, Canto 4, Chapter 4, verse 3)

State of North Carolina
County of Orange

THIS SEPARATION AGREEMENT AND PROPERTY SETTLEMENT is made and entered into this 23 day of August, 1996, by and between HOWARD C. BEST of Orange County, North Carolina (thereinafter referred to as “Husband”) and EDITH E. BEST of Orange County, North Carolina (hereinafter referred to as “Wife”)

WITNESSETH:

THAT WHEREAS, Husband and Wife were lawfully married on October 12, 1973 and lived together as Husband and Wife until on or about the 8th day of April, 1996, at which time they separated one from the other, and intend to continuously live separate and apart: and
WHEREAS, because of unfortunate differences and incompatibilities which now exist between them, they are no longer able to live together in peace and harmony as husband and wife; and
WHERAS, Husband and Wife have had the opportunity to consult independently with attorneys of their choosing, respectively, concerning this Agreement, and both parties agree that it is entered into mutually of their own free will, and
WHEREAS, both parties stipulate that they have carefully read and understood the terms and conditions of their Agreement, and deem them to be fair, just, and equitable, and are in full and complete satisfaction of all claims, present or future, arising out of or in any manner related to their marriage; and
WHEREAS, each party warrants that he or she has disclosed to the other all assets in which he or she has an interest and all debts on which he or she is liable, in an amount in excess of @00;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements hereinafter set forth, Husband and Wife mutually covenant and agree as follows:
1. Separate Maintenance. The parties agree that hereafter each may at all times live separate and apart from the other, free from each other’s marital control and authority as if each were single and apart from the other, free from each other’s marital control and authority as if each were single and unmarried; may reside at such place or places and with such person or persons as each may desire; may conduct and engage in any employment, business, trade or profession each may desire, choose or deem fit, and to enjoy the benefits thereof.
2. Covenant of Non-interference. Husband and Wife hereby agree that neither of them will, in any manner, molest of interfere with the personal rights, liberties, privileges or affairs of the other. Each shall, henceforth, live his or her own personal life as he or she may see fit, unrestricted in any manner by the marriage and relationship previously existing between them.
3. Future Debts. From and after signing this Agreement, neither party shall charge, cause or permit to be charged to or against the other any purchase which either of them may hereafter make. Hereafter, neither party shall create any obligations in the name of or against the other, not secure or attempt to secure any credit upon or in connection with the other, or in his or her name. Each party shall promptly pay all debts and discharge all financial obligations which he or she may incur for himself or herself, and shall indemnify the other against any and all debts and all other obligations which he or she may incur for himself or herself.
4. Children. Of the marriage of the parties were both three children, Michael David, born November 9, 1974; Yamuna Devi-Dasi, born September 21, 1978; and Keshava Dasa, born July 14, 1981. Husband and Wife shall have joint legal custody of the minor children, Yamuna and Keshava, with Wife having primary physical custody. Husband shall have the right to visit with the minor children at any time that that is mutually convenient to the parties and upon the giving of reasonable notice to Wife. At such time as Husband is working and is able to afford paying child support to Wife on behalf of Keshava, he shall do so at the rate of $200.00 per month. If Husband is able to afford more than $200.00 per month then he agrees to pay Wife such additional amount as he is able to afford.
5. Division of Personal Property.
A. The parties hereto have previously divided the household furnishings and personal effects. All of the furnishings, equipment, and personal effects in the possession of the Wife and located at her residence (915 Dimmocks Mills Road, Hillsborough) shall be the sole and separate property of the Wife. Husband expressly acknowledges that he has no interest in any of the property and no desire to have as his own any of the property located in said residence. Any and all personal effects in the possession of the Husband shall be the sole and separate property of the Husband.
B. The Wife shall keep as her own funds any and all bank accounts she has in her sole and separate name. The husband shall have as his own funds any and all bank accounts he has in his name.
C. The parties agree that at the current time there is certain equipment located at Computer Network Solutions (owner Butch Flake) in Hillsborough. So long as Husband either takes such property into his possession or sells such property on or before September 30, 1996 then all such property and/or any and all proceeds from such property shall be his own and separate property. In the event, however, that Husband does not take such property into possession or sell such property on or before September 30, 1996 then, in that event, such property shall be considered marital property and Wife shall have the authority to take the property into her possession and the parties shall divide it between themselves as they may be able to agree between themselves; also, Wife shall have the authority to sell such property after September 30, 1996 at a reasonable price and she shall be obligated to hive to Husband one-half of any proceeds of such as sale.
D. The Wife shall have the 1987 Toyota Van as her sole and separate property.
6. Mutual Release. Except as expressly set forth herein, each party does hereby waive any and all rights- past, present, and future- which either party may have against the other for support, alimony, post-separation support, any claim under the Equitable Distribution Statutes, and all other claims which the parties may have by reason of the marriage. Wife waives any claim she may have against Husband for the support and living expenses of Husband’s son. Except as herein provided, each party may dispose of his or her property in any way and may convey any real property or any interest therein without the consent or joinder of the other party. Each party does hereby release and forever discharge the other, his or her heirs, executors, administrators, assigns, property and estate, from any and all rights, claims, demands and obligations of every kind and character for past and future support and maintenance, homestead rights, widow’s year’s allowance, rights of inheritance, dissent, and distribution and specifically relinquishes the right to act as executor or administrator of the estate of the other, rights of election against the Will of the other, and from all other rights, claims, demands and obligations of every kind and character arising out of or by virtue of the marital relationship of the parties, except as in this Agreement may be otherwise expressly provided. Each is forever barred from having or asserting any right, claim, demand or obligation at any time hereinafter for any purpose, except only things which may arise under this Agreement.
7. Act for Equitable Distribution of Marital Property. Husband and Wife are fully aware of the extent of assets titles to each other. Each party hereby waives and releases any and all rights they may have which may arise out of the enactment of North Carolina General Statues 50-20, more commonly known as the “Act for Equitable Distribution of Marital Property”, except as herein set out.
8. Enforcement of Agreement. The parties agree that, in the event either party fails to comply with any of the material provisions of this Agreement, the other party may seek legal counsel and may initiate an action in the District Court of North Carolina asking for specific performance, for damages, or for any other remedy available by law. The non-complying party shall be responsible to the other party for any and all expenses incurred by him or her therein, including a reasonable attorney’s fee.
9. Cooperation. The parties agree and understand that in the event of a sale, transfer, or conveyance of any property, whether real or personal, now owned or hereafter to be acquired by either of the parties hereto, it may become necessary in order to guarantee good title thereto, for the parties to this Agreement to execute the said deed, conveyance or bill of sale, conveying said property.
10. Agreement. This Agreement can be altered and amended only by further written agreement duly executed by the parties. Any failure by either party to specifically perform or enforce performance exactly according to the letter of this Agreement shall not constitute an alteration of the same by way enlargement, reduction, estoppel or otherwise, unless confirmed in writing by the parties, and duly executed by both parties except as may be otherwise provided above. It is understood that the parties may, by mutual agreement, make temporary modifications from time to time as conditions require, but this Agreement shall nonetheless be binding upon the parties as written, except in the event of a material breach.
11. Legal Counsel. Both parties acknowledge that they have had the opportunity to consult with an attorney of their own choosing. Husband acknowledges that Wife is represented by Attorney Mark T. Sheridan, Hillsborough, North Carolina, that Mr. Sheridan has drafted this document, and that he has not provided any advice to him. Husband further acknowledges that he has had the opportunity to consult with an attorney of his own choosing.
12. Entire Agreement. This Agreement contains the entire understanding of the parties. There are no representations, warranties, covenants, or undertakings other than those expressly set forth herein.
13. Situs. This Agreement shall be construed and governed in accordance with the laws of the State of North Carolina.
14. Binding Effect. Except as otherwise stated herein, all provisions of this Agreement shall be binding upon the respective heirs, next of kin, executors and administrators of the parties.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have hereunto set their hands and seals to the instrument executed in duplicate originals, all this day and year first above written.