LETTERS TO THE VOID

Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 2004 3:47 PM

Subject: Letters to the Void

Maha Visnu Maharaja writes:

>>At the festival I talked with HH Prahladananda Maharaja (the Sannyasa minister).....[....].... He..[...]..suggested I didn't waste my time publicising the P. issue because it was a controversial issue allready relegated to a low priority by the GBC....<<

BIF writes:

Maharaja, are you telling us that the Sannyasa Ministry is working in concert with the GBC to conceal an alleged homicide because it is controversial? Is the Sannyasa Ministry condoning the GBC's ascendancy as a right to relegate Srila Prabhupada's poisoning to a low priority status? How does this differ from the conduct codes of a criminal organization? Is the Sannyasa Ministry aware of complicity in obstructing justice by aiding to conceal a crime?

>>Even if Srila Prabhupada was poisoned he will surely forgive us as we allready certainly pleased him to some extent.<<

Even the Vedas ordain that murderers atone in this world; Federal Law most certainly does. Is the GBC suggesting that all laws be dismantled and replaced by speculation, which includes airy-fairy sentiment and controversy as reasons to abandon justice?

>>And if we push on this movement more successfully now Srila Prabhupada would probably prefer to let byegones me byegones.The ISKCON history is anyway a can of worms we can never clear up.Where would it end?<<

Quite possibly, it could end with honest dealing and clean thinking. As for pushing on the movement, what is the GBC doing differently now; what are they doing that will not simply counter-produce more cans of worms? If we are to believe Sri Krishna, then pious men render service to Him. So what transforms piety into worms? After all, worms take birth in dirt and decay.

>>Therefore as a priority we should push on regardless with renewed preaching efforts and let the can of historic worms be opened only if and when it has to be.<<

The 'renewed preaching' concept is not new, it was there in the beginning and without end. Yet, Maharaja, it is impossible to accept a preacher unless he is united with sincerity and candour towards himself; the strength to stand alone in the light of God. Otherwise his preaching, no matter how 'renewed', will only travel as far as the listener's ability to identify the worms.

Nevertheless, what we are dealing with here is a concerted effort to tranquillise an alleged murder for profit. This is not the domain of GBC preachers, but that of universally accepted law; legislated by God and enforced by man for the well being of the species.

>>I was sharing a room with HH Kavicandra Swami for some of the time and his basic stance about this P.issue is that all the devotees involved with pushing the P issue are all rather left-field ISKCON devotees with axes to grind.<<

In October '03, K Swami was not interested in JFY because of Nityananda das' possible involvement. Here is what you wrote- "HH Kavicandra Swami thought that BIF was Nityananda's mouth piece and therefore he mentally discredited it and thought it a waste of time to read it." Now he has digressed to seeing ALL devotees involved as having an axe to grind, without even meeting one. Do you think that maybe he has a divine informant; an angel sent by Srila Prabhupada in appreciation of the 'preaching effort'?

The very fact that ISKCON Swamis, no less, make sweeping statements simply to discredit those who seek the truth, brings to question the true agenda of GBC-appointed-sannyasis: are they preachers, or political propagandists? Here are some quips and quotes made by 'sannyasis' in the GBC publication- Not That I am Poisoned: 1) ...beyond a doubt some of the major agents who are pushing this issue have been highly influenced by Kali (129 p). 2)...the rat, you know, goes for the trash, or the roach it goes for the trash (132 p) 3)...their mentality....the kind of chaos that it is bringing into the movement is beyond just normal deviation, its actually like an empowerment for destruction (133 p). 4) The poison theory is hatimata....Mad Elephant Vaisnava Aparadha at its heaviest (151 p). 5) The Poison Theory hatched from the same two insidious, perverted minds which conceived of the ritvik theory (160 p). 6) The poison proponents are however, by no means engaged in devotional service (160 p). 7) ....they must be considered offenders of the holy name and enemies of the Lord like Sisupala (162 p). 8) The poison blasphemers are so-called devotees, polluted with envy and/or madness, foolishness and wickedness (162 p). 9) ....the poison proponents show the disease of nirvisesa (Mayavada) and sunyvada (voidism). Both groups want to eliminate the Lord's relationship with His devotees (164 p). 10) These new anti-ISKCON people are certainly behaving like demons (164 p). 11) The modern day poison proponents remind me of Krsna's opponent Rukmi (165 p). 12) The poison proponents are already disfigured by Krsna's sharpened sword of Maya, disgraced and devoid of the ability to comprehend or preach Krishna consciousness (170 p). 13) According to sastra, one who blasphemes a Vaisnava should be.......punished by virtuous ksatriyas (163 p).

>>He doesn't have the time to take JFY seriously as he thought it was presented not objectively but as a prosecutors case.< <

Not a single sannyasi, including Kavicandra, has come forward to denounce the prosecutorial nature of statements made by their fellow sannyasis in the GBC book- NTIP. They call for the punishment of blasphemers by virtuous ksatriyas, but turn a blind eye to suspects in the poisoning of His Divine Grace. How cockeyed is that?

>>1) HHBCS first commented that the devotees involved with this controversial P issue are not mainstream ISKCON and have axes to grind with ISKCON generally.<<

There is some obsession here with the grinding axe dictum. Anyway, besides the usual diatribe, what we see when we cut to the bone of this statement is an attempt to initiate a non sequitur, thereby deflecting the core issue: due process. Because, if the GBC continue to deny the existence of prima facie evidence (along with forensic reports etc.,) and if BCS claims that those who are 'involved' are there only to grind an axe, then no investigation is justifiable. Ergo the GBC wins, and BCS walks. QED.

>>He said that HG Dhira Govinda was now no longer heading up the ISKCON Child Protection Team as he was no longer considered a reliable authority.<<

When the only tool in your toolbox is a hammer, pretty soon everything starts looking like a nail. We wait with bated breath to hear BCS' response to HG Dhira Govinda's question, asking why he is no longer considered a reliable authority.

>>I did not ask HHBCS why DG had been relegated and I have not discovered yet.(But it could be because he took up the P issue.<<

You should have asked him why DG was 'relegated'. The answer would cover the other twenty-five thousand plus, 'unreliables' who were 'relegated' from GBC-controlled- ISKCON. And yes, your suspicions concerning his transformation from reliable to unreliable could well be because of his decision to make an honest assessment of the P issue. When you consider that DG is more educated than 99.9% of the GBC, you may understand why he chooses not to worship with worms in cans, and skeletons in the closet.

>>2)HHBCS noted that none of the BIF devotees were actually personally present there in Vrndavan at the time when Prabhupada left his body....<<

No, we were not, but had we been, this issue would have been settled in 1977 when Srila Prabhupada said that he was poisoned- "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, p 340. And then BCS loudly proclaimed- "Someone gave him poison here!". Instead of acknowledging the facts, BCS secretly financed a book of lies in which there is no mention of his name in the credits, and then makes an incredulous statement (NTIP- 121 p) contradicting the documented audio facts on record. Sorry if this sounds a little off, but we did contact BCS, and have had it up-to-the-gills with his mumbo-jumbo. Our letter to him is posted on www.B-I-F.com Needless to say, he never replied to our questions.

>>....so they cannot understand the intense protective mood and feelings then.<<

We fully understood the 'protective feelings' then, just as we understand the protective feelings now. It can be seen right here in this statement by you, yourself- "He..[...]..suggested I didn't waste my time publicising the P. issue because it was a controversial issue". We rest our case.

>>3) HH BCs said that none of the devotees he had asked who were in Vrndavan when Prabhupada left -even HG Adridharan who is staunchly anti-ISKCON- take the BIF's poisoning case seriously.<<

Not so long ago BCS was involved with tearing "HG" Adridharan out of the Kolkata mandir and throwing him to the dogs. Adridharan is wanted by police because of BCS's aggressive stand. Now he is using Adridharan as his wicket-keeper? We talked to Adridharan about the poisoning: he said he was a young devotee who simply did what he was told and could not see any further than he was told to. We believed him because it made sense. Sorry, but BCS makes no sense at all. Anyway, here is an excerpt from a letter that should be of some interest- Was also just reading how BC Swami is making a complete 180 degree turn in what he had earlier stated and perceived regarding Srila Prabhpada's alleged poisoning.What a liar.Ys Adri.

>>4) In Vrndavan at that time HHBCS and the others were all very worried when Srila Prabhupada brought up this poisoning matter.<<

So we will cut and paste from our questions to BCS:

BCS: "As a matter of fact, when we heard His Divine Grace speaking in that way, we became extremely worried".

So why did YOU become extremely worried if Srila Prabhupada was simply speaking ABOUT poison?

If you (et all) were extremely worried, as you say, why didn't you alert the authorities to a possible homicide in progress, or after the fact?

Who decided against informing Law Enforcement/pathology, was it you?

May we have the names of the WE whom you refer to, and also the name/s of the person/s who decided not to investigate Srila Prabhupada's plaint?

>>5) If Srila Prabhupada knew he was being poisoned he could have easily asked Guru Kripa or someone to "deal" with them.<<

Maharaja, you raised this point with us on 21/11/03. Here again is your retrospection and our explanation:

MV Swami: "If Srila Prabhupada knew he was being poisoned he could easily have informed some of his more trusted tough followers (like Guru Kripa and others) who would have immediately fixed the poison conspirators."

BIF: "Look Maharaja, they don't come any tougher than TKG, and he tells us: " We asked Srila Prabhupada what was the cause of his mental distress. Prabhupada disclosed his thoughts that someone has poisoned him." (TKG's Diary, 340p). Yet, and in spite of this knowledge, the poisoning remained hidden for two decades. How much 'tougher' do you think the others were? Listen to tapes 44,45 & 46 (these are the last tapes before departure), you will find that Srila Prabhupada made his poisoning known to all who were there (his trusted followers). So the question is not, why didn't Srila Prabhupada inform some of his more trusted, tougher followers? The question is why didn't those who heard him and accepted it inform some of his more trusted, tougher followers? Or more importantly and equitably, why didn't they alert the authorities to a possible homicide? Maharaja, please apply rationale: why was the poison issue silenced for twenty-years, or until we discovered the tapes? They wrote about everything, discussed everything, except Srila Prabhupada's plaint that he was being poisoned, and that he had heard it from "All these friends"- TKG, Bhavananda, et al. They were discussing his poisoning, he overheard it and then made it known for the first time to a practical stranger (Balaram Misra). The audio forensics confirm it.

>>When I asked HHBCS about JFY's allegations that we only gave amateurish medical treatment to Srila Prabhupada in Vrndavan in 77 he said that as their spiritual master Srila Prabhupada was mostly directing them about his kavirajas, doctors and diet etc.Srila Prabhupada knew they were not medically trained but he never asked to go to hospital for professional treatment. So the treatment Srila Prabhupada got was in accordance with his own wishes.<<

This "treatment" caused Srila Prabhupada's poisoning, and that's the case in point. Anyway, the truth is available to anyone who chooses to educate themselves. BCS is not the person to be asking for an opinion on this issue. His position in 1977 frames him as a suspect. He says so himself in his letter to one of our team members- Thank you very much for your suggestion. However, I don't think I should be the one to head up the inquiry, because I am one of the suspects (BCS 31/12/03).

>>7)HHBCS said he knows that the BIF points its finger at HHTKG as the main suspect.<<

BIF does not point its finger at TKG, the evidence does. In fact, TKG does a pretty good job of it, himself. We have pointed this out at great risk to everything we know and hold dear.

>>HHBCs said he had an ambivalent relationship with HHTKG.He was not his yesman and he often differed in opinions. Sometimes HHTKG was friendly and sometimes he chastised him.<<

Sorry Maharaja, this doesn't sit well with the facts. We cannot make this letter more voluminous than it already is, otherwise we would cut-n-paste the drivel that proves differently. Nonetheless, if BCS is claiming that his 'differed opinion' overrode TKG's at any time, it must have occurred in his dreams.

>>8)HHBCS said that he had written a letter to the GBC this year proposing they reinvestigate the poisoning issue again.<<

Yes. He also told us about his noble plan- "I will try to pursuade the GBC body". Our response to him was- "Good. Please send us a copy of your correspondence with them so we can work to exonerate you". Well...we are still waiting.

>>The GBC said there was no need as it was allready investigated. So the GBC did not take up the matter.<<

How perfectly convenient this is for both the GBC and BCS. He asks them to 'investigate' and they say it has already been done, then they both pack their bags and go home. Is this a joke? WHO was the ACCREDITED AGENCY commissioned to undertake the investigation? WHERE are the AGENCY REPORTS? WHY are they not published under AGENCY LETTERHEAD for public scrutiny?

>>HHBCS said to me "What more should I do now?" He said that there are so many different anti-ISKCON parties like the "poisonvadis: and other "vadis"...<<

Every year some man whom BCS has endorsed as sannyasa/guru, falls down between the legs of a woman. Yet, we make no blanket statements about the GBC, or BCS, or the Sannyasa Ministry, as just another group of "sex vadis". We accept each case on its demerits. If by tagging us "anti-ISKCON", "vadis", BCS thinks he can smoke screen the poison issue, his judgement is as uneducated as his endorsement of perverts, liars and thieves.

>>but we cannot just stop the preaching. <<

The fact that an investigation equates to stopping the preaching, needs psychiatric diagnosis. There is nothing we can do about a sweeper who develops the habit of sweeping filth under the carpet instead of using the garbage disposal.

>>I am sorry that you BIF devotees had such high expectations of me but that I have been a slow mover. Probably you now think I am a cop out.<<

We never had any great expectations of you, Maharaja. Actually we were quite surprised when you wrote saying: "Formerly I had been quite convinced by the official GBC book "Not that I am poisoned " a rebuttal of Nityananda's book about the poisoning issue. Now after reading JfY my suspicions have been aroused that a fair investigation of the matter has not been done yet" (SKCON ,Soho St, London. Date 28/11/03). But not to worry Maharaja. We know what it takes to stand by one's beliefs: overnight, and in spite of decades of service, you would be "relegated" to a "poison vadi" with an "axe to grind"; a "ritvik", an "unreliable authority" who needs to be "punished by a virtuous ksatriya". Not everyone's cup-a-cha is it, Maharaja?

>>Quite frankly I am not sure whether Srila Prabhupada was poisoned or not. But I cannot rule it out. Neither am I against you because you are convinced he was.<<

Swamiji, this may be the last letter that we share on this matter. Please allow us to impress on you one single fact: it is not what you believe, or what BIF believes, or what the GBC believes. Belief is based on the verdict of an accredited authority subsequent to research and conclusion. To this point there has been none, and unless we act while the suspects are still here, Srila Prabhupada's samadhi will be vulnerable to future inquisition.

>>But one thing is, that ,as you have allready noted,I am not ready to take up this issue as my personal baby and priority in devotional life.Pursueing this issue as a priority cannot sustain my Krishna consciousness<<

Nor do we expect you to have any babies. If you can maintain your celibacy vis-a-vis souls sacrificed on the altar of GBC policy, you would have done greater than most ISKCON gurus, what to speak of sannyasis.

>>Africa...[...] ...What do you think my priority should be?<<

Maharaja, there is really nothing we expected you to do other than remind the GBC of a pending investigation. What else could you do besides write a letter telling the GBC how you feel, and then write an apology for speaking your mind, or end up labelled with a cock-n-bull misnomer, and exile? You did go thru this with the 'ritvik issue', didn't you?

Before signing off on this one you should know: BIF team members preach around the world; attend programs; have beautiful deities; chant, read, take prasadam, do bhajans and dance. We also maintain our homes and families. We have priorities too. The cult propagated myth that once a devotee stops contributing to the GBC he/she falls into a void, is utter nonsense.

>>I am certainly glad you are all sincerely and staunchly pursueing this poisoning issue for purifying ISKCON of a possible burden of guilt. I can certainly be at your service but only according to my practical capacity as a sannyasi with other priorities at the moment.<<

We are pursuing justice for His Divine Grace; a civil right, condoned by God and mammon. ISKCON will need to deal with its own burden of guilt. Your service to us would suffice in your remembering us to Srila Prabhupada when you speak with him. Thank You.

>>Sorry if this is dissappointment to you all.<<

Our expectations hinge only on our own commitment, ergo there is no disappointment in the success or failing of others. Your spiritual well being is our only wish, and since you are not going to pristine Africa simply to manufacture more cans of GBC worms, we feel no disappointment.

>>Hoping this finds you all well in Krishna Consciousness,<<

....And we wish you well in yours. YS