LETTERS TO THE VOID

-----Original Message-----
From: Hare Krishna Dasa
Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2004 3:12 PM

Subject: "Poison Issue Is Over"

There has been much controversy over the alleged poisoning of Srila Prabhupada by some of his closest disciples. However it seems both sides in this controversy have missed a crucial point which can settle this matter once and for all. And that is the fact that according to Srila Prabhupada himself, it is not even POSSIBLE for him to have been poisoned:

"Just like the Putana gave Krishna poison. But Putana was killed. And Krishna was never ki... Krishna cannot be killed by poison. Even Krishna's devotees are not killed by poison. Prahlada Maharaja." (Room Conversation, 13/8/73)

Both sides in this issue will agree that Srila Prabhupada is a devotee of Krishna just like Prahlada Maharaja is. So if Srila Prabhupada is NOT killed by poison, then we can safely say that regardless of what did happen in the last days of Srila Prabhupada's manifest lila, he did not give up his body as a result of poisoning. When this fact is coupled with the fact that the prime suspect in the poisoning allegations, HH Tamala Krishna Mahataja has already in any case left his body - one is left to wonder what the REAL motives are behind the 'poison theory' advocates? But one thing is clear – whoever proceeds with the belief that Srila Prabhupada was killed by poison, either does not believe that Srila Prabhupada was ‘Krishna’s devotee’, or has no faith in Srila Prabhupada’s instructions. Either way, they are wasting their and everyone else’s time with the flawed theory that Srila Prabhupada was poisoned.

No, Hare Krishna Prabhu, the poison issue is far from over. Nor does the philosophical argument you make accurately frame the core issue at hand; which is, whether or not Srila Prabhupada was administered poison, and, if so, by whom and for what reason. Once that inquiry is handled and the outstanding evidence is reconciled, we might then all get down on our hands and knees and pray for insight into the deeper, intimate aspects of Srila Prabhupada’s disappearance pastimes. Moreover, while the practical dynamics of an investigation are certainly affected by the lack of access to a particular suspect, the motivation for engaging in an investigation in the first place is most certainly not. Srila Prabhupada’s divine disappearance pastimes are not the property of party politics. So, like it or not, the as-yet unresolved evidence continues to drive inquiry and action, and rightfully so.

Hare Krishna. All glories to Srila Prabhupada.
Thank you for your reply. You are conceding however that the issue is one of 'administering poison'. So would you agree that at BEST, we are dealing with a case that is limited to the crime of attempted murder? If you do then your stance is consistent with the quote I supplied, and we are in agreement on the basic issue, that Srila Prabhupada was not murdered.

You are reading into my comments. Look, evidence is not fodder for a philosophical debate, and it is not my place to define or ascribe intent, motive and degrees of criminality; that is the business of prosecutors, defense lawyers, courts and juries. What I can tell you, however, is that after personally viewing the existing evidence, which includes Srila Prabhupada’s direct statements, I have not been able to reconcile it or explain it away. On that basis, I and many others who have looked at this troubling picture in some depth continue to support an investigation.

Nothing personal prabhu (as I assume you are a spiritually motivated person), but your personal philosophical views and polemics to the contrary are inconsequential to the efforts being made to sort out what happened. At the very least, you may want to keep in mind that many faithful disciples and followers of Srila Prabhupada view this issue in an entirely different light than your good self, that those opinions should also be respected, and that their resulting efforts should not be blocked merely because you may have drawn different conclusions.

“And don't criticize what you can't understand …
Please get out of the new one if you can't lend your hand”

Besides the quote proffered by Shyamasundara das, here is the nitty gritty, which shows that Srila Prabhupada himself believed in the POSSIBILITY of his poisoning, and so did members of the 'other side':

Excerpts- "Conversations with Srila Prabhupada. Vol: 36" and BBT Tapes 44/45/46

Srila Prabhupada: (Bengali) Keu bole je keu poison kore diyeche. Hoi to tai.
Trans: "Someone said that somebody has poisoned me. IT IS POSSIBLE".

Kaviraja: "Yeh Maharaja, yeh kotha aap kaise bola aaj ki koi bola hi ki poison diya hai?........"
Trans: Maharaji, You know how you said today that someone said that (you) have been given poison?....." (so here is confirmation No: 1, of Srila Prabhupada's complaint) (pg-354, line 23)

Kaviraja: "Dekhye, bat hi hai, ki koi rakshas ne diyo ho."....
Trans: Look, this is the understanding, some rakshasa may have given (him poison). ( acceptance, and confirmation No: 2) (pg-367, line 29)

Kaviraja: "Yeh bolte hai to isme kuch na kuch satya he. Isme koi sandeha nahin."....
Trans: If this is said (that he is being poisoned) there must be some truth to it. There's no doubt. (acceptance, and confirmation No: 3) (pg-367, line 37)

Bhakticaru: "SOMEONE GAVE HIM POISON HERE." (acceptance and confirmation No: 4, and from a different source. (pg-367, line 29)

Tamala Krsna: Srila Prabhupada, Sastriji says that there must be some truth to it if you say that. So who is it that has poisoned? (acceptance and confirmation No: 5, and from yet another source) (pg-368)

Tamal Krsna: "Prabhupada was thinking that someone had poisoned him." (Acceptance and confirmation No: 6) (pg-367, line 32)

Bhakticaru: "YES." (confirmation No: 7) (pg-367, line 33)

Bhakticaru: "He said that when Srila Prabhupada was saying that (He was being poisoned) THERE MUST BE SOME TRUTH BEHIND IT." (confirmation No: 8) (pg-367, line 38)

Kaviraja: (translated) "LOOK, THIS IS THE THING, THAT MAYBE SOME RAKSHASA GAVE HIM POISON." (confirmation No: 9)

And again:

Bhakticaru: (to Bhavananda et al) HE'S SAYING THAT SOMEONE GAVE HIM POISON (confirmation No: 10)

Tamal Krishna: PRABHUPADA WAS THINKING THAT SOMEONE HAD POISONED HIM (confirmation No: 11)

Bhakticaru: YES. (confirmation No: 12)

Tamal Krishna: THAT WAS THE MENTAL DISTRESS?

Bhakticaru: YES (confirmation No:13)

Tamal Krishna: "We asked Srila Prabhupada later what was the cause of his mental disturbance. Prabhupada disclosed his thoughts that someone has poisoned him." TKG's Diary, 340 p. (confirmation No: 15)

Tamal Krsna: Now on one hand we could take it...give him that medicine (poison) or let him stop eating...to death...until death, we could have done that." (Taped conversation with Satsvarupa das, 1977)

Prabhupada: The Ravana will kill and the Ram will kill. Better to be killed by Rama.

> "Just like the Putana gave Krishna poison. But Putana was killed. And Krishna was never ki... Krishna cannot be killed by poison. Even Krishna's devotees are not killed by poison. Prahlada Maharaja."
(Room Conversation, 13/8/73)<

Check your sastra. Sri Krishna left His body after being shot in the heel by a hunter. So what is being implied above is that- if Sri Krishna had chosen poison instead, Srila Prabhupada's poisoning would be acceptable. Is this right? Even in principle the argument makes little sense in response to the issue of Srila Prabhupada's disappearance; that he couldn't have been poisoned because he is a pure devotee. Obviously, of course, Srila Prabhupada could have avoided the situation if he had wanted. His potency and Sri Krishna's potency can overwhelm any materially concocted plan. Maharaja Pariksit could have avoided the fiery poison of the snake bird. Jesus could have avoided death at the hands of the Romans. These great personalities, in conjunction with the Supreme Lord, allow such things to occur, for our benefit and instruction. Devotees accept that Srila Prabhupada could have been killed by a small germ, or some "material" disease, and they naturally understand that it's his pastime to disappear by way of this germ or disease. So if Srila Prabhupada and Krishna could use a small germ to enact this disappearance pastime, then similarly they could use,if they so desired, a group of materially-motivated, ambitious "followers" of Srila Prabhupada. So, logically and sastrically there's no reason why this thing couldn't have happened. Whether it did happen is a question that requires a professional investigation, and that is the requirement. There is no need to contort sastra simply to promote one's misbegotten notions.

> Both sides in this issue will agree that Srila Prabhupada is a devotee of Krishna just like Prahlada Maharaja is. So if Srila Prabhupada is NOT killed by poison, then we can safely say that regardless of what did happen in the last days of Srila Prabhupada's manifest lila, he did not give up his body as a result of poisoning.<

To adjudicate that Srila Prabhupada was NOT killed by poison without an investigation, and by twisting scripture in an armchair to reach that verdict, is conjecture at its summit; self-saturation.

>When this fact is coupled with the fact that the prime suspect in the poisoning allegations, HH Tamala Krishna Mahataja (sic) has already in any case left his body - one is left to wonder what the REAL motives are behind the 'poison theory' advocates?<

The investigation of Srila Prabhupada's passing is not about Tamal Krishna. It is about SRILA PRABHUPADA, and the TRUTH. The REAL motives of the speculator is what needs questioning. Nonetheless, the 'poison issue' has gone beyond bone-head debate. It is unravelling where it belongs: among those who are trained to function with hard facts.

>But one thing is clear - whoever proceeds with the belief that Srila Prabhupada was killed by poison,
either does not believe that Srila Prabhupada was 'Krishna's devotee', or has no faith in Srila Prabhupada's instructions. Either way, they are wasting their and everyone else's time with the flawed theory that Srila
Prabhupada was poisoned.<

But one thing is clear- what we learn from evidence depends on the kind of philosophy we bring to that evidence. When we extend this further, we find that an accurate perception of reality lies beyond both traditional psychotherapy and traditional religion. and further still- the poisoning of Srila Prabhupada will remain inexplicable to those whose range of observation is not wide enough to include the context in which it occurred. As such, our largesse to this post and poster is hereinafter concluded.

Please visit www.B-I-F.com Thank you