Abhiram -- John Sims / GBC Mistrusted / Abhiram and Forensics 04 19 25

PADA: Abhiram (John Sims) is emerging as the current defender of the GBC's position on the poison issue. Someone wrote to ask me, who is Abhiram anyway? So we would like to know how to answer this question. 

I'd like to know what his history is after 1978, and if possible, a year by year account of where he was and what was he doing. And which GBC was he operating under and etc. I do know that for some time he was in Vrndavana operating the MVT Mayapur Vrndavan trust, and there were questions about his working with some sort of land grab and other dubious things. 

Needless the say Mayapur and Vrndavana were hotbeds of child abuse and many other misuse and abuse problems, and it would be good to know what his role was in all this process. 

He was also in Vrndavana evidently -- when the Kirtanananda samadhi was being created, and again we do not know what his role was in this event, or if he objected etc. Anyway, if anyone knows his track record, or even part of it, and if he was on the payroll and whose payroll he was on etc. -- I think that would help us understand why he has come forward to defend the GBC ship at this time. 

Send any info you have, especially any personal interactions you have had, to: 

angel108b@yahoo.com

All submissions will be kept confidential unless we have permission to identify the authors. 

YS PD 

=======

REPOSTED from a private group:

GBC ISKCON: A Crisis of Trust and Management Legitimacy.

During its existence, GBC ISKCON has failed to develop a sustainable, transparent, and authoritative management model that is both effective and based on sastra. Today, many devotees around the world are openly speaking about the crisis of trust in this body. Why did this happen?

1. The legacy of authoritarianism. From the very beginning, GBC ISKCON was created as a structure where power is transferred from the top down. This is a legacy of the post-Prabhupada era, when instead of broad discussion and Vaishnava consensus, decisions began to be made behind the scenes, often in the interests of a small group of leaders.

2. Lack of accountability. In most cases, the GBC is not accountable to either the communities or ordinary devotees. It is difficult to find examples of GBC members being removed from office for management failures, abuses, or obvious adharmic actions. The question is: where is dharma if there is no accountability?

3. Closed processes. Decisions are made behind closed doors, often without explanation. This creates an atmosphere of suspicion and mistrust. People feel excluded from the life of the organization they have built and supported for years.

4. Manipulations with the "parampara". One of the main questions is who has the right to give diksa. The GBC has long defended the "collective guru-tattva" model, essentially ignoring the traditional Vaishnava approach. This has given rise to a lot of conflicts, splits and departures from ISKCON.

5. Financial opacity. Not a single international GBC report publishes detailed financial data: how much is collected, where it is spent, how decisions are made on the distribution of funds.

The GBC will not become a closed bureaucratic body, and not the servants of the Vaishnavas. Trust will continue to fall. And that means the mission itself, given by Prabhupada, will suffer.

=====

April 17th, 2025

ABHIRAMA IGNORES THE FORENSIC EVIDENCE

Abhirama Das makes Facebook posts to deny that Srila Prabhupada was poisoned by:

1. Ignoring the forensic tests and evidence which establishes them.

2. Claiming that since he was with Srila Prabhupada as his nurse for 87 days in 1977, there could not have been any poisoning in the 18 months from July 1976 to Nov. 14, 1977

3. Asserting that no one could have done this since everyone loved Srila Prabhupada

4. Emoting disbelief and flimsy denials, by refusing to HEAR from Srila Prabhupada

However, his statements do not disprove or invalidate any of the evidence that Srila Prabhupada was poisoned with heavy metals. Rather than expressing disbelief and "since I was there, I would know," he should actually READ the material on scientific, factual, unbiased evidence. He should also HEAR DIRECTLY from Srila Prabhupada here:

www.justiceforsrilaprabhupadafoundation.org

Contrary to Abhiram’s assessment, a careful review of all historical records for1977 shows that Srila Prabhupada and his caretakers had no idea as to the cause of his "illness." They engaged many doctors and undertook many different treatment programs, none of which was for diabetes, by the way. Diabetes was never discussed in any known conversations except in early Feb. 1977 when Srila Prabhupada said he had “a little diabetes.”

Dr. Khurana, Naveen Krishna’s father from Delhi, prescribed kidney dialysis, something that was rejected by Tamal. In 1977 did Abhiram or his wife ever discuss with Srila Prabhupada a diagnosis of diabetes, its proper treatment? Hari Sauri, as Srila Prabhupada's servant in 1976-77, stated there were NO such talks, ever, at all. And then, what was the use of all the many other treatments for indigestion, liver problems, kidney ailments, malnutrition, conjunctivitis, cough, mucus, etc? No one suspected poisoning until Srila Prabhupada brought it up.

If Abhiram was there on Nov. 9-10, 1977 to hear Srila Prabhupada say three times, “Someone has poisoned me,” he might have a different opinion. Maybe he could explain these conversations? Why did Tamal ask Srila Prabhupada: "So... who is it that has poisoned?" Why did all the caretakers (Abhiram was not there at this time) discuss and acknowledge malicious poisoning but then do nothing about it? For those who LISTEN to these conversations, their denials EVAPORATE.

Abhiram left Srila Prabhupada's service on Oct. 16, 1977, a month before Srila Prabhupada's physical departure. And even if there was serious diabetes, so what? It means nothing, and does not rule out heavy metals poisoning, which causes and exacerbates diabetes, and which is proven by forensic tests from 1999-2005 on the hair samples arranged by the GBC themselves.

The three tests of Srila Prabhupada’s 1977 hair (averaging 16± ppm cadmium) render the theory that Srila Prabhupada’s demise was due to serious diabetes IRRELEVANT. The clear and proven over-riding factor in Srila Prabhupada’s health was his lethal heavy metals poisoning.

Abhirama das and so many others should educate themselves with the actual hard evidence and give up their outdated notions that this is only a theory. Science does not lie. Science has irrefutably PROVEN that Srila Prabhupada was lethally poisoned in 1977. See the forensic report from TRUTH LABS issued Sept. 16, 2024, at the following website: READ and HEAR.

www.justiceforsrilaprabhupadafoundation.org