"The occupational activities a man performs according to his own position are only so much useless labor if they do not provoke attraction for the message of the Personality of Godhead. "-Śrīmad Bhāgavatam 1.2.8
In response to Dharmapada Das' Dean Dominic DeLuca's article on Sampradaya Sun website, offensively titled: Srila Bhaktivedanta Swami's Death etc...I find the entire article and his subsequent rebuttals to be nothing more than purely speculative and in some instances outright offensive in nature. The golden fact is that Vaisnava's DO NOT DIE. This is the Scientific FACT of Bhagavata science, according to Bhagavad Gita, Srimad Bhagavatam, Sri Chaitanya Charitamrta, Bhakti Rasamrta Sindhu or The Nectar of Devotion etc. This FACT of Gaudiya Siddhanta is substantiated by the great Acharya, the Seventh Goswami, Bhaktivinoda Thakur, who emphatically states in his Saragrahi Vaisnava: "HE REASON'S ILL, who tells that Vaisnava's die. When thou art still living in sound." We experience and wholeheartedly appreciate the FACT that Srila Prabhupada is NOT DEAD.
Specifically to my point of the entirely speculative nature of this article, is the completely incongruous 'analysis?' of the horoscopes in question. They simply do not reflect my personal experience, to start, of Bhagavan Das, whom I have had discussions with. My experience with Bhagavan Das does not reflect your statements at all. Hridayananda Maharaja gets his 'due'? Maharaja openly declared to me in a small group in his house in the Berkelely hills that "what Srila Prabhupada didn't understand was..." in other words Hridayananda knows better than Srila Prabhupada. The physical EVIDENCE does not support Hridayananda's involvement in poisoning Srila Prabhupada. Not your so called analysis. His disposition towards his Guru in my personal experience is hardly favorable! Hridayananda was and is today introducing and perpetuating numerous philosophical deviations. (I am not going to go into all that here). There are numerous recorded instances where Hridayananda clearly demonstrates a disposition in fact directly opposed to Srila Prabhupada.
Your 'analysis' of Tamal Krishna Goswami DOES NOT SUPPORT the physical evidence surrounding the poisoning of Srila Prabhupada. Especially in relation to physical proximity, and independent laboratory voice analysis of said poison tape. (The tape is authentic). Neither does your 'analysis' match with the conversations that I have had with devotees who worked intimately with Tamal Krishna Goswami during that time. Neither your 'analysis' supports the untimely and inauspicious way in which he (Tamal Krishna Goswami) left this world. And for example: why would Tamal Krishna Goswami order the destruction of over 40 hours of tapes recorded between himself and Srila Prabhupada, which purportedly specifically related to the direction ISKCON was to take, post Prabhupada's departure??? This point specifically cast the greatest shadow, and has been substantiated by several devotees over the years. Why would Tamal Krishna Goswami, who as you say was so 'favorably disposed towards his Guru', change the entire course of ISKCON's management and preaching direction? Why would Tamal Krishna Goswami divert funds from ISKCON projects to finance his education? And then, why would Tamal Krishna Goswami write a heavily Mayavadi philosophically influenced Doctoral Thesis that completely contradicts the entire pranam mantra (nirvishesha, sunyavada) dedicated to His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, moreover the entire philosophical basis of Krishna consciousness??? Something that (to use the exact words of Hridayananda Das Goswami [or Krishnaksetra Prabhu borrowed from Hridayananda]) us "shop floor devotees' could never possibly understand!
The physical evidence does not support Rameswara, Jayapataka, or Harikesha no matter how much they have offended their Guru, or not. Bhavananda, however also falls within the proximity/extreme deviation category as Tamal Krishna Goswami in regards to the physical evidence. The bulk of the physical evidence does simply does not support your so called analysis Prabhu, plain and simple. Bhavananda backed by Hari Sauri Prabhu wrongly declared that the poison issue is 'ludicrous'. Actually the poison issue is a very serious issue, because Srila Prabhupada himself mentioned it, and more than once.
We know for a fact that Srila Prabhupada had much, much higher levels than normal of arsenic in his system than could be attributed to Bengali well water, as Hari Sauri hypothisized. Many of Srila Prabhupada's physical symptoms did in fact reflect advanced diabetes, rightly pointed out by Prabhupada's personal nurse Abhirama Prabhu (the most popular hypothesis of those who consider the poison issue 'superflous, crazy', or whatever). (Which by the way begs the question as to whether or not he [Abhirama Prabhu] was involved.) His (Abhirama Prabhu's) analysis could largely be interpreted as correct, short of the fact that Srila Prabhupada's hair folicle tested very high for arsenic (which could not possibly be a symptom of renal or kidney failure, or ultimately uraemia (postulated by Abhirama Prabhu). Also as you pointed out, Srila Prabhupada's extreme sensitivity to light, which is NOT in fact a symptom of uraemia or any of the other conditions (mentioned in Abhirama Prabhu's hypothesis). And another fact is that uraemia creates metabolic toxins in the system like uric acid, NOT ARSENIC!!!
However Dharmapada Prabhu, I don't feel that such a speculative, one sided so called 'analytical dialogue' about the horoscopes of those particular disciples on your part adds anything positive whatsoever, to the veracity of the question, as to 'who poisoned Srila Prabhupada?'. The only authentic astrologers according to Srila Prabhupada are the Brighu's anyways. So what you will do here? Uselessly try to show the world your erudition? Hamsavatara blessed by Srila Prabhupada, is humbly using his study of astrology to spread the Holy Name.
You on the other hand Prabhu, appear to be using this unfortunate scenario of Prabhupada's poisoning to push your own clearly biased agenda.
Furthermore you specifically requested the devotees to: "come forward to engage in useful dialogue on the matter, especially those that know astrology." Why did you make such a request Dharmapada, so you could publicly lambast anyone who disagreed with your analysis? I, like Hamsavatara Prabhu work for a living, I also have a growing family, and don't have much time (or energy) to waste. I have avoided posting on Sampradaya Sun for some time due to that fact. However your article Prabhu, and subsequent 'rebuttals' begs my disapproving attention. Hamsavatara is your senior in more ways than one, he is right to chastise you.
As for my personal opinion on this whole poison debate, I am torn. Individually we may know actually what happened, supersoul is after all, here, there, everywhere. However their appears to be little to no relevance at this point in "officially" establishing who did what. Other than to wag our tails and bark a lot. What to speak of endlessly speculating and 'debating'. It will hardly change the course of ISKCON, and for sure not Krishna Consciousness at this point, or at any point in time. Even if their were an 'official' inquiry, and or public trial, their is really very little positive outcome that it would accomplish, if any. Other than for us to simply know, exactly for a fact, what happened, and end all this useless speculation and posturing. On the other hand Srila Prabhupada did mention it, and Srila Prabhupada is very dear to us all, so naturally we want to know what, who, why, how, happened to him. Because we love him. Not because we want to show the world our so called learning.
Param satyam dhimahi.