Defeating the Rtviks
BY: ROCANA DASA
Sep 13, CANADA (SUN) — As mentioned in yesterday's article on the Guru-tattva Debate in the Sun, following are excerpts and some paraphrased comments from a thread of discussion we've had over the last year with a reader who has taken great exception to our publication of any articles featuring pro-Rtvik commentary. His basic argument has been that we should print absolutely nothing that promotes Rtvik-vada, even if the intended purpose is to share the thoughts of Rtvik adherents so as to educate those who are preaching against it. We pointed out that Srila Prabhupada did not hesitate to describe the Mayavada philosophy, so that it could be understood and defeated. He countered that our sampradaya never gave space to clearly deviant philosophies in their publications.
Our response to this logic is that we are not absolute, as the Sampradaya Acaryas are. Furthermore, we have not reduced the debate on Rtvik-vada to its absolute essential conclusions in the same way that the Sampradaya Acaryas have reduced the Mayavada debate to a razor sharp, undefeatable conclusion.
Consider, for example, the time factor with respect to the great Mayavadi Debate in India, which has gone on for countless years. And how long have we been debating post-samadhi diksa, in the relatively immediate wake of a Sampradaya Acarya, and in the context of his unparalleled worldwide ISKCON institution and preaching mission? To me, it is completely logical to assume that this debate will take time to fully address. We are not as philosophically astute as the sages who took up the Mayavada debate and perfected it. Far from it. Shutting the debate down by refusing to hear the opponents rather than meeting them, giving them voice, and methodically defeating them is not equivalent to following in the footsteps of our Acaryas, in my opinion.
Written text on the Internet today is somewhat akin to speech in the dusty public square of a village in Bengal. Would the Goswamis, if Mayavadis approached and wished to address the crowd, shout them down, saying "No! You may not speak and promote your apasiddhanta. Go away! We will only give ourselves voice to defeat you!" No, of course not. The Vaisnava preachers heard them out, then debated and defeated them. They did not worry that those in the crowd hearing the Mayavada presentation would be forever ruined. They relied on their own ability to preach. This scenario took place time and time again, as a steady stream of Mayavadis made their way across India, challenging the Vaisnava pandits.
So here in the Sun, we give the Rtviks space to assert their conclusions because, on a regular basis, those faulty conclusions are rebutted by non-Rtviks, and arguments are brought to a finer point. The Rtviks assert their conclusions, and their points are rebutted. They present their conclusions again, from a new direction or nuance, or 'buried' in amongst some other contextual point, and they are taken to task on it. If not immediately, sooner rather than later.
How else might the process of rebutting Rtvik-vada be done? We could simply post the 'Final Order' and subsequent rebuttal papers, and we've done that. But how effective is it? Do you think newcomers, about to be influenced one way or the other by the Rtviks, will just go to the Vada documents section and read that massive volume of data? I doubt it. What they will do, however, is tune-in their oft lazy brains to a daily dose of the Sun, where they hear both/all sides of the debate. And if we're doing our jobs (all of us preaching against Rtvik who participate in the Sun), then the newcomers will be regularly treated to a sound rebuttal of the various points the Rtviks are attempting to make. They will get, in context, links to past anti-Rtvik documents that will help them to develop an opinion. Eventually, they may read more and study the detailed arguments. If not, then hearts and minds will be swayed by the potency and personalism of the preachers themselves. It's worked this way since time immemorial.
Further, it is human nature that when something is hidden or sequestered, it becomes an enticing thing. By refusing to publish all Rtvik-vada in the Sun, rather than give them space to make their case so we can rebut it, we will give the Rtviks good reason to point to us as fanatics, power-mongers, haters of free speech, opponents of Vaisnava sadhu-sanga and istagosthi. They will use this to entice the uninformed to read all their materials – the hidden fruits – and some newcomers/neophytes will do just that. But they'll be reading in a venue where they get no balanced opinion, no rebuttal, no challenge. Just straight Rtvik-vada.
Frankly, we think it makes much more sense to handle it just as we're doing. It's not hidden… it's out in the open for all to see, read, and comment on. We know of many, many devotees who've been influenced away from Rtvik-ism by this very process in the Sun. We know of a few who've gone to the other side. They ignored the sound siddhantic rebuttals, and took up Rtvik-ism anyhow. And they'd have done so, regardless if the Sun were banning Rtvik submissions or not, because their reasons were not actually philosophical.
In my opinion, the Rtvik debate is still muddy. Where is the cent percent clear, comprehensive, definitive rebuttal of the Final Order? I have not read it. (We're working on writing one, but it's been a very long process.) Yes, there are many very well written rebuttals of Rtvik-vada available, that deal with various elements of the debate. There are so many, in fact, that to attempt to cobble them all together, preserving every good point, reducing them down to a comprehensive, elegant, unassailable rebuttal of Rtvik-vada, is a significant project.
Our friend suggests that defeating the Rtviks requires putting only one question to them, which they are unable to answer: "Can you support your interpretation of "henceforward" with reference to sastra and corollaries, the previous acaryas, and Srila Prabhupada's teachings?" As we all know, they cannot. Yet while our friend rather smugly proclaims that the Rtviks have been thoroughly defeated, we point out that even some of Srila Prabhupada's disciples are still going over to the Rtvik side today. Although the points of siddhanta have long ago been won, their evidence disqualified as authoritative, their absolute use of "henceforward" disproven, sastric references to 'rtvik' shown not to be referring to post-samadhi diksa, etc., etc., still they are winning hearts and minds. So where are the anti-Rtvik preachers who have so perfected their arguments, that they are now traveling 'round the world, defeating the big Rtvik preachers, and converting back those who have mistakenly accepted Rtvik-vada?
The Rtviks continue to infiltrate not just the North American temples, but many other temples worldwide. There have been Rtvik temple presidents and pujaris in ISKCON temples, and Bangalore is now achieving great success. So obviously, as we've said many times, the Rtvik phenomenon is about far more than just siddhanta. It's about people, and power, and politics. It's about thousands of disenfranchised devotees who need an alternative, and a new generation that is not so easily convinced by the GBC-ISKCON institution.
So while I concede to my friend the point that Srila Prabhupada would not have put a Rtvik article in the BTG, I remind him that the reason for this is, that Srila Prabhupada is the only one amongst us potent enough to soundly defeat Rtvik-vada, in short order, consistently, no matter who he is addressing or what their reasons for taking up this asiddhantic conclusion.
If any one of us today had the purity and potency of Srila Prabhupada, we would be converting the most sold-out individual Rtvik leaders among us. There would be no BTG articles, no Sun articles, no Rtvik debates. They would be unnecessary. We, however, are not such capable pure devotees and we have to work much harder, much longer, to make such progress in our efforts, particularly in the midst of this Kali-yuga filled with hypocrisy and argument.
