Ever since the so-called 'poison' controversy regarding the alleged poisoning of Srila Prabhupada emerged, the IRM has pointed out 2 simple facts
1) That Srila Prabhupada HIMSELF NEVER claimed that he was being poisoned - he only REFERRED to talks/discussions on this subject by others.
2) That the person claimed as being in the room with Srila Prabhupada, who responds 'yes' to Tamal Krishna Maharaja's statement that:
"Prabhupada was thinking that someone had poisoned him?"was NOT myself, but Bhakti Caru Swami.
This point was known to the poison theorists from the beginning, since this fact was stated correctly in the Someone Has Posioned Me poison book written by Nityananda Das. However certain parties persisted in deliberately stating that it was myself who says 'yes' to this 'poison complaint', and thus "did nothing about it", simply to dis-credit the IRM, even though it had already been shown that it was not myself on the tape.
We are pleased to announce that belatedly, over 2 years later, the poison theorists have finally acknowledged these points. In their latest 'official' translation of "T-45, SIDE B, beginning on Page-365, line-31 of the Conversation book, Vol:36", they have finally given the following correct translations:
1) Regarding Srila Prabhupada uttering the famous "someone has poisoned me" phrase:
"Srila Prabhupada: (Hindi): Wohi bat jo koi hamko poison kya.
Translation: That talk (that) someone has poisoned me"Please note that it is finally admitted that Srila Prabhupada is NOT saying:
"The same thing I said ... That someone has poisoned me",
but rather he simply REFERS to 'that talk that' he has being poisoned. 'Talk' which did not even originate from Srila Prabhupada, but from other unidentified sources.
2) Later on the translation is as follows:
"Tamala Krishna: Prabhupada was thinking that someone had poisoned him?
Bhakticaru (not Adhridharan): Yes.
Tamala Krishna: That was the mental distress?"
So it admitted that it was Bhakti Caru who responds to Tamal's talk regarding the poisoning. Indeed it is also now admitted that there is no evidence that I was even in the room when this discussion was occurring!
Of course the admission of these facts by the poison theorists do not in of themselves mean that Srila Prabhupada was NOT poisoned, anymore than they mean that he WAS. Our point was simply that any investigation should proceed based on the FACTS and EVIDENCE, and not on the basis of how it can be used to smear either the IRM or any other party. Only then will any sane person give it any credence.