Since the poisoning allegations had begun two years ago, the questions have been raised as to whether Srila Prabhupada—a pure devotee of the Lord who knew the mind’s and hearts of his disciples—knew that he was being poisoned. The arguement goes that if he did he surely would have said something. According to Bhakti Caru "all he would have had to do is tell Guru Kripa!" Therefore the very fact that he didn’t expose the perpetrators definitively proves that he was not being poisoned.This explanation is incorrect. The evidence of all public investigations so far indicate that Srila Prabhupada was given poison by his own disciples, with the intention of killing him. This is corroborated by his own statements to Balaram Mishra, by the forensic analysis of the whispers heard on the tapes (please see Nityananda’s Book), and by the statement in Reverse Speech of numerous parties presented here. It is also true that the poison did not, and could not, kill Srila Prabhupada who was (is) always completely protected by the Lord.
Why then did Prabhupada leave this world? He told us clearly that it was his choice whether he stayed here or left, that Krsna would allow him to stay or go as he chose. Knowing that he was being poisoned he petitioned his disciples again and again to save him: Try and save me; Come save me; Save me; Look, you’ve come back to save me; To Tamal: You can be done when you save the life; and finally We shouldn’t be killed.
All to no avail. And he repeatedly and unsuccessfully appealed to his disciples to take him on parikrama, again to no avail. He now realized that his followers no longer followed him (Here I lose order) and therefore his work was over. He had built the Movement with the help of willing followers, who thought that they now knew enough and the venerable founder was simply in the way (Program rock cause I serve now the drink).
He was being offered another body and because he didn’t want to go he even petitioned for help to want it (They give another body, make me want it). Finally, realizing that he had lost control he decided to leave, and he did at the most auspicious time.
He was not killed by the poison, although it was there. In my humble opinion what killed him, that is, caused him to give up on this world, was the fact that he his "followers" no longer followed him. He appealed over and over again to be saved. Subconsciously Brahmananda said that he would save him, but he would need help. He couldn’t/didn’t do it. Lokanath Swami subconsciously offered his help to achieve Prabhupada’s freedom, yet he couldn’t/didn’t do it. While they certainly may have wanted to change things, nobody apparently had the will for the confrontation that would have been necessary to change the situation. Therefore the leading men were able to continue with the poisoning business, and were able to keep control of Prabhupada, even though it was a very rotten thing to do.
What then could he do? Had they only desisted, had they only once again surrendered as his followers, he would certainly have recovered and led us for many more years. But they were not willing to follow any more—they wanted to be masters, not followers.
God’s way does not force. Love is not forced. When we loved him and willingly followed him we could accomplish a great deal and did. His spiritual realization, vision, intelligence, and experience within the world combined with the youthful energy of his followers was enough to firmly establish the Hare Krishna Movement all around the world in ten short years. What could have been done in the next five, maybe ten years, had they had the humility to continue to follow him? It is only conjecture. Rather, the leaders thought that they knew better, and so it was time for him to stand aside and let them go to see what they could do.
By now most of Srila Prabhupada’s disciples have enough life experience to understand this. Most of them have raised children of their own, and if not certainly being in leadership positions one learns that you can only do so much with others who are unwilling to follow your lead. His first line lieutenants were in revolt. They thought that they had had enough, and they wanted him out of the picture in order to lead the Movement according to their own vision. So understanding this he decided to go. What would have been the use in staying?
And this is why he named no conspirator, though he knew full well who was doing it. As a loving father he overlooked even their attempts to kill him, and chose to get out of their way. Had he named them a great controversy would have arose just at a time when he was too weak to train others. Then who would lead? Leaders are self-selected. They take the lead because they want it and not for any other reason. One of his geniuses was Prabhupada’s ability to take completely unqualified men, who may have been avaricious, lusty, ambitious, proud and even arrogant and envious, and directed their energies in the service of the Supreme Personality of Godhead, taking Krishna Consciousness around the world. They were the men to do it because they wanted to do it, regardless of their motive. Pure or impure, they are the ones that did it, and for that they have achieved eternal credit. Why didn’t he name them as conspirators? Perhaps to give them the chance. They thought that they had come to the point where they no longer needed him but wanted him out of the way, and therefore he obliged them.
So if Prabhupada didn’t name them, why am I naming them with this work? First, it is important to understand that had they been successful in their bid to properly direct the Hare Krishna Movement none of this would ever have come up. I fully and completely believe this. There would have been no Puranjana’s picketing the LA Rathayatra about Prabhupada’s poisoning, and there would have been no reason to even look at the past except to appreciate and glorify Srila Prabhupada’s activities and intelligence more and more. The fact is that they wanted to do it their way, they made their intention clear by their actions, and Srila Prabhupada gave them the chance. Frankly, they have failed. Most of the original 11 have revealed themselves by now, and by Krishna’s arrangement the technology has arrived to expose the others who were involved. And because of their failure to be able to properly carry on, all of the facts are now coming out so that they can be removed and others step in and save Prabhupada’s Movement.
For my part I can simply repeat the Kaviraj: What was I to find the truth? But somehow or other I have. This work was given to me and I feel obligated to the posterity of my spiritual master to deal with it. In my conversation with Tamal last January one of my speech reversal’s reveals my intention: I must serve the servant. It is now the obligation of others, particularly the GBC, to take this information and use it to solidly reestablish his legacy for the benefit of future generations. The question is will they? Will the men who sit on the Governing Body Commission acknowledge this truth? Do they have the will to properly carry on this movement?
We may look back at Brahmananda, Lokanath, Hansadutta, and other leaders who were present at Prabhupada’s departure. They may have felt in their hearts that the proper thing wasn’t being done, but didn’t have the will, the where-with-all, to bring sufficient action to effect a change, save Prabhupada, take him on parikrama as he had repeatedly requested, and save the Movement. Please understand that I do not fault them or judge them in any way for this. The circumstances were indeed most difficult. Nonetheless, we now find ourselves at a similar crossroads. What is your will GBC men? Is it your will to defend your positions, to defend Tamal, Bhakti Caru and the others? Or is it your will to set the house in order? Tamal Krishna is not ISKCON. Bhakti Caru is not ISKCON. Nor is Bhavananda, Satadhanya, Harikesh, or any one of us. If anybody is ISKCON it is only Srila Prabhupada and only if we defend Prabhupada are we defending ISKCON.
Therefore to bring to light the activities of these persons is not an attack on ISKCON, rather it is in defense of ISKCON. Look at our unfortunate history. Was it an attack on ISKCON to acknowledge the activities of Jayatirtha, Hansadutta, or Bhavananda, or Kirtanananda and state that these men do not represent what Srila Prabhupada and his mission stood for? At the time, those who dared raise their voices were thought of as attackers on ISKCON, and several have paid with their lives. But in retrospect who will say that they were attackers? Those who raised their voices were the defenders of ISKCON and what ISKCON represented to themselves and to the world. After some time the GBC finally admitted that something had to be done in each of these cases and took minimal measures after so many frustrated and disgusted devotees had left.
So again we are faced with dealing with another very difficult situation. From the beginning this episode is not being dealt with on the principles of truth and honesty. Before an investigation was even made the GBC issued their statement that this poisoning idea was ludicrous, more because they wanted it to be, or they didn’t like who was raising the allegation, than any understanding based upon fact. Will the GBC now continue their historical pattern of denial, finger-pointing, and stonewalling, until the popular will is too strong for the GBC to resist? Will the leaders lead and the rank and file devotees follow, or will it again be the rank and file devotees who yet have some sense of honor who lead until the "leaders" must follow? Will it again become the cult leaders and cult followers vs. those who are followers of Srila Prabhupada? Before you answer that look back at our history everyone. And if you haven’t enough history in your experience perhaps you should read the history of ISKCON set forth in Nori Muster's Betrayal of Spirit, or Monkey on a Stick, which, while overly sensational, does depict some of the tragic history of ISKCON with some accuracy.
We must use the information that we have to properly discriminate in our actions. Given the facts as they are revealed in this investigation it is improper and completely unacceptable for Tamal Krishna, Bhakti Caru, Satadhanya, and any other conspirators as they are revealed, to have any position whatsoever within ISKCON. These persons must be excommunicated if nothing else. One sure thing that we are learning from Bill Clinton is that this muckraking business can be done much more gracefully and with less embarrassment for everyone involved if the truth is acknowledged up front, and responsibility taken. Witnessing the president clinging to his post and being revealed for what he actually is is certainly humiliating and demeaning for him, and embarrassing for everyone. But his opponents are more than willing to drag him through that mud if that is the only way he will have it.
Will Tamal and Bhakti Caru and others insist that we drag them through the mud in the same way? Will they resist with all of their strength until the demands are such that it becomes necessary to exhume Srila Prabhupada’s transcendental body for the physical proof? Whether that unfortunate episode actually comes to pass will depend entirely on them, because with this Reverse Speech investigation there are more than allegations, there is at least sufficient evidence to warrant further investigation. How far that investigation goes will depend on the will of Prabhupada’s followers, the GBC and on the choices that the conspirators make.