© 1999 VNN
|
WORLD June 6, 1999 VNN4047 See Related VNN Stories | Comment on this story Supersoul Tells GBC Chairman: No Poisoning BY NITYANANDA DAS USA, Jun 6 (VNN) — Here is an excerpt of Ravindra Swarup Prabhu's text on COM from December 1997 discusing the poison isue. Of note is how the GBC Chairman that year was receiving dictation from the Supersoul that Srila Prabhupada could not have been poisoned. Perhaps Ravindra Swarup Prabhu would could explain how this phenomenon works, and whether we can consult on other matters as yet unanswered? What circles does his claim fly in? Text COM:970473 (92 lines) From: Ravindra Svarupa (das) ACBSP (Philad. - USA) Date: 17-Dec-97 To: GBC Discussions [4487] Cc: WSTRAT (Web Strategy) [146] Reference: Text COM:965386 by Prahladananda Swami Comment: Text COM:971310 by Hari Sauri (das) ACBSP Comment: Text COM:971384 by Prahladananda Swami Subject: Serious Issue Balavanta does not contradict the GBC, Maharaja. Rather, Balavanta affirms there is not enough evidence to prove that Srila Prabhupada was poisoned. That makes the case. Maharaja response to my above statement: My point is not the methodology of the investigation. My point is that it is not very creditable to make statements about being "certain" about something that is being investigated, and for which you have not actually examined all the important evidence. To which I answer: Speaking for myself, my certitude is based on the conviction that Srila Prabhupada is an extradinary, empowered devotee and that his departure was, like everything else about him, exemplary of his position. It is not going too far to say that I have been told by the Supersoul that Prabhupada was not poisoned. I do not need an emperical investigation to know this. These vishavadis have turned Srila Prabhupada into an ordinary person--helpless, beseiged by enemies, dying an evil and ignominous death, killed in order to silence his the proclamation of his final order: the ritvik system. (Notice how the ritvik need the particular trick of conspiracy theories: it convienently turns the absence of evidence into evidence.) Of course, the vishavadi theologians will necessarily have to explain us that this manner of passing is actually what Prabhupada wanted. He volunteered. Sound familiar? Who saved the world by dying an evil death at the hands of his enemies--died for our sins? We have all remarked on the ritvik system's resemblance to a certain style of Christianity: elevate Jesus so much that His sacrifice was not an example for us to follow but rather a substitute atonement for us;in our compensation for our failure to follow Him, we now worship Him all the more fervently; we all attest that His salvific power is great enough to exempt His representatives from the requirement to embody his teachings. The vishavada thus dovetails nicely with the ritvikvada. Now a prediction: watch Prabhupada's alleged death by poisoning at the hand of the evil ones be turned into his greatest sacrifice for our salvation. And in fact the evil ones turn out to be the same ones that killed Christ: the Jews! (Puranjana has already written on the Jew-B-C and its connection a wider Semitic conspiracy.) Note, by the way, that the standard Christian account of Jesus's death is challenged by Prabhupada. If my memory serves me well, Prabhupada said that it was not possible of someone of Jesus's stature to have been killed by his enemies. Maharaja goes on to note: Balavanta prabhu did not say he was certain about any outcome of the investigation, he used the words "most likely." We are even hearing that he hasn't even interviewed important devotees who were present during Srila Prabhupada's disappearance, yet everyone is told: "Based on considerable testimony from those present at the time, and on its own preliminary internal study, the GBC is convinced that no such evil deed or even intention existed at the time." There are two investigations: one involving the whispers and a fuller research into Prabhupada final pastimes. It is the preliminary result of the whisper he is reporting on. We did want to get something out to counteract the ill-advised release of another "preliminary" finding that detected the word "poion" on the tape. Balavanta Prabhu told me, with regret in his voice, that he unfortunately gave that finding too much weight: "Now I know a lot more about forensic audio analysis." The interviewing comes later. We will conducted an empirical investigation for all those who need it. But we have indeed had considerable testimony from those present: no one supports the poison theory. (Which only proves they are part of the conspiracy, right?) Maybe our "internal study" is much like mine: I consult with sastra and Supersoul. I know that this won't fly in some circles, but there it is. We know that the GBC Body was not even consulted about this statement, which was sent to everyone on COM, what to speak that the statement was based on "considerable testimony" or a considerable internal study. It was a PR statement to counteract another previous statement. I just question whether it would have made a better effect if it was worded differently. It was issued by the GBC executive committee, whom I thought was empowered to speak for the GBC body, which is, in turn, empowered to speak for ISKCON. At any rate, I don't consider the statement mendacious, although no doubt it could have been more expertly worded. (Text COM:970473) Related VNN Stories | Comment on this story | Contact VNN about this story | Send this story to a friend
|
