Dissipating the Clouds Obscuring the Sun
BY: VAIKUNTHANATH DASA
Sep 22, BRAZIL (SUN) —
My earlier article, "Defending the Indefensible", was specific to the Posthumous-Initiation-Ten-thousand Years (PITY) concoction. The persons that adhere to this concoction, the PITYs, have no right to the Vedic term “rtvik”. Rtvik priests, as mentioned in the Bhagavatam, are quite bona fide parts of Vedic culture; they are expert brahmanas that perform fire yajnas on behalf of perhaps a kshatriya or vaisya. It is offensive to the Vedas that a bona fide Vedic term and practice should be purloined and twisted into an unintended meaning. This is demoniac.
The demons are always eager to cover and misconstrue the Vedic message, which is non-different from their object of envy – the Supreme Lord Himself. This writer cannot be party to any twisted and offensive terms that misconstrue the divine and perfect Vedic philosophy, therefore in this essay we are using the acronym “PITY” for the concoction, and “PITYs” for those persons who promulgate this concoction. We would advise those who actually respect and adhere faithfully to the Vedic message to also adopt this standard of lexicography from now on. Thus the deviants will be designated by terms outside the Vedas, which is where they belong with their concoction.
PITYs Are Deviants
The PITYs can be confidently designated as “deviants” because there is absolutely no guru (Srila Prabhupada), sadhu (previous acaryas and mahajans), and sastra (Vedas and corollaries) to support their PITY misinterpretation. It is quite pitiable that the whole concoction of the PITYs is built upon one word “henceforward” in a letter written not by Srila Prabhupada but by his departed secretary, Tamal Krsna Goswami, whom the PITYs insistently harangue and ultimately reject. The interpretation the PITYs give to this “one word” stands in clear contretemps to the Vedic Initiation Paradigm. Only a grossly biased person would disagree.
Asking for Guru, Sadhu and Sastra Is Not “Smug”
In a previous posting, Rocana dasa, stated:
“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.”
Asking for guru, sadhu and sastra is not acting “smugly” as Rocana dasa unkindly characterizes the question. In fact it is the exactly correct system for establishing bona fide Vedic philosophy and practice. Srila Prabhupada repeatedly emphasized that everything “must pass the test of guru, sadhu and sastra”. On the Sampradaya Sun, to use the bona fide “test” given by Srila Prabhupada, is that to be considered acting “smugly”? It must be said that Rocana dasa reveals a prejudicial mentality with the harsh usage of this term “smugly”. Rather by asking for guru, sadhu and sastra from the PITYs that writer is certainly acting intelligently and faithfully to Srila Prabhupada. That writer should not be insulted in this offhand way; rather he should be complimented for his chaste adherence to the Vedic Philosophical Paradigm. He is not being smug, but rather expert.
Srila Prabhupada Teaches Scriptural Authority As Final
In Bhagavad-gita, 17.15, we find:
anudvega-karam vakyam
satyam priya-hitam ca yat
svadhyayabhyasanam caiva
van-mayam tapa ucyate
“Austerity of speech consists in speaking words that are truthful, pleasing, beneficial, and not agitating to others, and also in regularly reciting Vedic literature.”
Purport
“…one should not talk nonsense. The process of speaking in spiritual circles is to say something upheld by the scriptures. One should at once quote from scriptural authority to back up what he is saying. At the same time, such talk should be very pleasurable to the ear. By such discussions, one may derive the highest benefit and elevate human society. There is a limitless stock of Vedic literature, and one should study this. This is called penance of speech.”
Final Nail in the Coffin
Srila Prabhupada states, “One should at once quote from scriptural authority to back up what he is saying.” This is the Vedic Philosophical Paradigm. To establish PITY, the PITYs must submit to this paradigm of guru, sadhu and sastra. Interestingly, as quoted above, even Rocana dasa agrees, “As we all know, they cannot [substantiate according to guru, sadhu and sastra],” So we see that Rocana dasa agrees that the PITYs have no support from guru, sadhu and sastra. However apparently he does not clearly understand that because the PITYs fail in this regard, then this is the absolute and final nail that irrevocably closes the coffin on their PITY concoction. The failed concoction was still-born and is now in the coffin with the lid nailed well shut, pitiably.
In Effect Admission of Defeat Of PITY
Rocana dasa should realise that when he says: “As we all know they cannot” pass the test of guru, sadhu and sastra, then he is admitting that the PITY idea is “thoroughly defeated”. People may be joining or leaving their ranks, but this has no bearing on the validity of the PITY concoction. Numbers or lack of numbers of adherents is never mentioned as a test of the validity in the Vedic Philosophical Paradigm. The final, ultimate and absolute test is guru, sadhu and sastra. So Rocana dasa should humbly admit that by his own words above he has in effect agreed that PITY concoction is already “thoroughly defeated”. Put simply, no guru, sadhu or sastra means PITY is defeated.
Arguing Over the Defeated Is Useless
Earlier in his posting, Rocana dasa declared:
“In my opinion, the rtvik debate is still muddy. Where is the cent per cent clear, comprehensive, definitive rebuttal of the Final Order? I have not read it.”
We hope now that Rocana dasa now understands how to defeat the PITY concoction – not by entering into endless argumentation, but rather by reference to “scriptural authority” as Srila Prabhupada clearly establishes. In the Vedic Philosophical Paradigm, the opinions, logic and argument of the conditioned souls do not establish the bona fides of a proposal. The Final Order provides absolutely no “scriptural authority” for PITY. Rather the Final Order is an overblown mish-mash of circular logic, self-serving conjecture, non-sequitur argumentation, wild speculation, groundless assumption, red-herrings, biased sampling of quotes, appeals to emotion, appeals to spite, slippery slope postulate, post hoc fallacy, false promissory, hasty generalization, ad hominem attack, verbosity and bizarre misinterpretation. It has quite aptly been renamed “The Final Disorder”.
Refuting the Disorder
Now getting involved with all the fallacious, over-blown argumentation of the Final Disorder is not the Vedic Philosophical Paradigm; rather to ask for supportive guru, sadhu and sastra is the Vedic Philosophical Paradigm. This is taught by Srila Prabhupada and Sri Krsna Himself – why not follow the excellent “path chalked out by the previous acaryas”. Is not the devotional path, one of surrender to their teachings? Especially when one’s one spiritual master, Srila Prabhupada, has taught this infallible path of quoting “at once from scriptural authority”?
Scriptural Authority Beyond Arguments
In the purport to the Bhagavatam, 10.13.57, Srila Prabhupada instructs us to surrender to the path of guru, sadhu and sastra, rejecting the path of argumentation, by which he says pointedly “knowledge is lost”:
“With one's limited senses, one cannot argue about that which is inconceivable. Therefore the inconceivable is called acintya, that which is beyond cintya, our thoughts and arguments. Acintya refers to that which we cannot contemplate but have to accept. Srila Jiva Gosvami has said that unless we accept acintya in the Supreme, we cannot accommodate the conception of God. This must be understood. Therefore we say that the words of sastra should be taken as they are, without change, since they are beyond our arguments. Acintyah khalu ye bhava na tams tarkena yojayet: "That which is acintya cannot be ascertained by argument." People generally argue, but our process is not to argue but to accept the Vedic knowledge as it is. When Krsna says, "This is superior, and this is inferior," we accept what He says. It is not that we argue, "Why is this superior and that inferior?" If one argues, for him the knowledge is lost.
This path of acceptance is called avaroha-pantha The word avaroha is related to the word avatara, which means "that which descends." The materialist wants to understand everything by the aroha-pantha—by argument and reason—but transcendental matters cannot be understood in this way. Rather, one must follow the avaroha-pantha, the process of descending knowledge. Therefore one must accept the parampara system. And the best parampara is that which extends from Krsna (evam parampara-praptam [Bg. 4.2]. What Krsna says, we should accept (imam rajarsayo viduh).”
Surrender to Guru
The intelligent and faithful disciple of Srila Prabhupada will accept the teachings of his guru. This is the path of acceptance and surrender: “the materialist wants to understand everything by argument and reason – transcendental subject matters cannot be understood in this way”. The transcendental Vedic Initiation Paradigm is not subject to endless argumentation. But this is all the PITYs will ever offer; they are totally devoid of “scriptural authority”. The PITYs purposely hide their poverty by issuing the false coinage of convoluted argumentation. We should not trade in the false currency of their argumentation; rather we should cut their endless argumentation short by rightfully demanding: “Where is the ‘scriptural authority’ for your claims?” This is the Vedic Philosophical Paradigm taught by Srila Prabhupada in line with the Vedas. We should be faithful to Srila Prabhupada.
Guru, Sadhu and Sastra Not Optional
Guru, sadhu and sastra are not optional for establishing Vedic Truth, rather they are absolutely required and essential. The PITY concoction quickly falls to the philosophical wayside when asked for guru, sadhu and sastra, so why use any other strategy? Undeniably this irrefutable strategy is the one taught by our acaryas; therefore it is not optional to follow this strategy, rather it is required. After all, does not argumentation simply breed more argumentation? We all have this experience of being drawn into useless argumentation. Ultimately only a fool argues with fools. Therefore the PITYs will never be brought to task by argumentation, rather only by the demand for “scriptural authority” as taught by our glorious acarya, Srila Prabhupada.
Stubborn Hard Core PITYs
Of course the hard-core, fanatic PITYs are very stubborn and will never admit their concoction is fallacious. If we try to convert such inflexible PITYs we will be foolishly arguing in circles with them until the end of Kali-yuga. Kali-yuga is the Age of Quarrel and Hypocrisy. With this in mind, it is not hard to see that the PITY concoction is borne out of the contentious, quarrelsome bad-tempered mood of Kali-yuga. Therefore we should not consider that converting PITYs is the test of the validity of our statements from “scriptural authority”. In Kali-yuga, people are also hypocritical; even when they are defeated in discussion they will not admit their defeat and change their views. So let us not waste time in trying to convert those who will not be converted. Let us just quickly expose their fallacy.
Many PITYs will not change their views after they fail to provide “scriptural authority”, because in effect they do not accept the Vedas; rather they prefer their endless argumentation and misinterpretation. They refuse to accept the primacy of Vedas, As They Are, without interpretation. For the PITYs the primacy is motivated mental speculation and their bizarre misinterpretation of Srila Prabhupada’s teachings. This evidences their basic insincerity and resultant ignorance of the Vedic Philosophical Paradigm. An unsuccessful attempt to convert the hard-care PITYs should never be seen as a failure of scriptural authority; rather it is evidence that they foolishly don’t accept the sublime position of scriptural authority. Put simply it is a waste of time to try to convert such hard-core PITY offenders. Their stubborn rejection of scriptural authority condemns them to a life-time of mental speculation, propagandizing a defunct concoction.
By not accepting the supremacy of the Vedas and propagandizing a new concoction, the PITYs are defined as pasandis, or atheists. Srila Prabhupada purport, Bhagavatam, 4.19.23:
“No one can introduce any new system into the Vedic way of life; if one does so out of malice, he is to be known as a pasandi, or atheist.”
PITY Propaganda
Entering into endless convoluted argumentation is not the way to deal with the atheistic PITYs. The PITYs have nothing to convince the faithful and intelligent. They try to garner support for their concoction by propaganda. This is the only tool in their box. They use constant argumentative repetition of PITY as it is the only means at their disposal. They hope to seduce the ignorant, gullible and neophyte by constantly repeating the bare-faced lie that PITY was the desire of Srila Prabhupada. This tactic of bewildering the ignorant and neophyte by spurious propaganda is their only recourse. However this constant misstatement of Srila Prabhupada’s teaching is deeply offensive to the great acarya. The PITYs shamelessly twist bizarre meanings out of the clear words of Srila Prabhupada. How offensive to the great acarya. Can any loving devotee of Srila Prabhupada, stand by while his teachings are distorted and the Vedic Initiation Paradigm is attacked and maligned.
Facilitating PITY Propaganda
Standing by may be one thing, but facilitating the propagandism of distorted teachings of Srila Prabhupada is quite another. To help the PITYs in their propaganda is reprehensible and a great spiritual demerit. Devotees must take the side of Truth; they must never help the atheistic pasandi PITYs spread their poisonous concocted misrepresentation of Srila Prabhupada’s teachings. How can this please Srila Prabhupada? Rather, one becomes an enemy of Srila Prabhupada by dumbly helping to propagandize the PITY concoction.
Srila Prabhupada taught us that not only is the slaughterer of the cow greatly sinful, but also those that transport and sell the meat. Similarly even though we may not be the origin of the PITY concoction, we still become greatly sinful if we facilitate the propaganda of this atheistic fabrication. Let those who are actually faithful to Srila Prabhupada take this warning to heart and not be duped by facilitating the propaganda of the PITYs.
PITY Propaganda Regularly on the Sampradaya Sun
We now examine the editorial policy of the Sun. This writer has spent many happy hours reading the Sahajani Tosani magazine started by Srila Thakur Bhaktivinoda and continued by Srila Bhaktisiddhanta Prabhupada and also the Back to Godhead of our own Srila Prabhupada. In those hours, we have never seen articles that are determinedly against the siddhanta of the Brahma-Madhva-Gaudiya Sampradaya. Materialism, voidism, impersonalism are discussed by our acaryas, however included in the articles is a refutation of the bogus philosophy. Never in these magazines do our acaryas give column inches to the authors of deviant, non-Vedic concoctions. It is unbelievable that Srila Prabhupada would allow a mayavadi to blaspheme the eternal form of Sri Krsna in the Back To Godhead. It is unbelievable that Srila Prabhupada would allow an atheist to condemn belief in the Supreme Lord in the Back To Godhead. It is unbelievable that Srila Bhaktisiddhanta would allow a smarta-brahmana or jati-gosai to blaspheme the teachings of Sri Caitanya Mahaprabhu in the Sahajani Tosani. It is unbelievable that Srila Bhaktivinoda would allow sahajiyas to advertise their deviations in the Sahajani Tosani.
Stark Contradistinction To The Acaryas
However, the present editorial policy of the Sampradaya Sun stands in stark contradistinction to the perfect example of our acaryas. Regularly, almost daily, on the Sampradaya Sun, do we find gross and subtle promotion of the PITY concoction. These postings unabashedly propagandize the PITY concoction using bizarre reinterpretation of Srila Prabhupada’s teachings. The PITYs, of course, can never offer any “scriptural authority” for their concoction. For a devoted follower of Srila Prabhupada to see the great acarya’s teachings so vilified, so maligned, so disregarded, so twisted, so ignored, so perversely presented is most painful and almost intolerable.
Blasphemy of Srila Prabhupada
How can a loving disciple of Srila Prabhupada endure the blasphemy of the great acarya? Blasphemy may take different forms. One form of blasphemy is to vilify the personality of an acarya. Another form of blasphemy is to blaspheme the teachings of an acarya. The PITYs blaspheme the teachings of Srila Prabhupada. Perniciously, they present themselves as the followers of Srila Prabhupada, but then make all endeavors to give a twisted and outlandish non-Vedic, non-scriptural version of his teachings. It is the “snake in the grass” approach to blasphemy.
Those who are less-intelligent become seduced by the PITYs posture of faithfulness to Srila Prabhupada and then become duped into acceptance and promotion of a blasphemous misrepresentation of his teachings. Under the cover of faithfulness, the PITYs inject their venom. The editors of the Sampradaya Sun should not allow themselves and their e-magazine to be poisoned in this way.
Three Lessons for the Sun from the Acaryas
In regard to bogus philosophy, from the acaryas we can take three lessons:
1. Our acaryas did not present bogus philosophy.
2. When our acaryas discussed bogus philosophy, they did so with a refutation integrated in the article.
3. Faithful devotees should follow the above example of our acaryas.
In a previous e-mail to Rocana dasa, this writer presented the above three lessons with special reference to the PITY concoction and its regular presentation in the column inches of the Sampradaya Sun e-magazine. The three lessons are irrefutable. Rocana dasa did not take issue with Lessons 1 and 3, however he did take issue with Lesson 2.
Notably, Rocana dasa does not disagree with the paradigm of “integrated refutation”. However, Rocana dasa proposes that because the internet is “totally alien to anything the acaryas had to utilize”, then we don’t have to follow the example of the acaryas’ integrated refutation paradigm. He reasons that in the steady stream of call and response postings on the internet the refutation will follow the posting of the bogus philosophy. Thus he proposes that the later response to the earlier posting of bogus philosophy is in fact the “integrated refutation”.
Analysis of Rocana’s Response
Firstly, this is an unwarranted redefinition of “integrated”. If the response to bogus philosophy is to follow a few days later, then this is clearly not an “integrated refutation”. It is a “separate” refutation – separated by days or possibly longer.
Secondly, who is to say that a refutation will come at all? I have read many PITY articles on the Sun and no refutation has followed at all. So when this situation arises, the Sun has posted unchallenged distorted non-Vedic teachings.
Thirdly, because there are so many articles propagandizing the PITY concoction on the Sun, then it would appear that most are unlikely to be refuted.
Fourthly, is the internet and the Sampradaya Sun actually “a communication media (sic) totally alien to anything the acaryas had to utilize”? The internet is certainly different – but “totally alien”? If the internet is “totally alien”, then how is it that we are able to post all the writings on the acaryas on the internet very easily? And when the acaryas’ writings are posted, then they are understood in exactly the same way they have always been understood: People read them with eyes and apply their intelligence to understanding the posting. “Totally alien” is clearly an overstatement of the difference. Whether the acaryas’ writings are on palm leaves, books or magazines, or a computer screen, they are essentially the same – the written word.
Fifthly, is there any reason why essays posted on the internet cannot follow the example of the acaryas’ integrated refutation? We must say no. Is there something about the internet that makes the example of the acaryas obsolete or irrelevant? Nothing at all. Therefore, the discussions of bogus philosophy posted on the internet can, of course, include integrated refutations.
Sixthly, when the bogus PITY concoction is posted on the internet without integrated refutation, then the danger is that the innocent web surfer upon reading the concoction will consider that this is the actual philosophy of Krsna-consciousness. He will be misled and then perhaps pass on this bogus concoction to others.
Seventhly, the transcendental example of the acaryas is not limited by material circumstances. We cannot whimsically choose where to apply the acaryas’ example of integrated refutation. To suggest otherwise is mundane reasoning, and frankly quite obtuse.
After unbiased consideration, one can only agree that the example of the acaryas to only discuss bogus philosophy with integrated refutation is perfectly applicable to the internet. There is no reason why it cannot be applied to postings that discuss bogus philosophy. One is duty-bound to follow the example of the acaryas, there are no valid grounds to argue otherwise. The faithful disciple is not looking for a chance to avoid the example of the acaryas; rather he is using all his intelligence and endeavor to integrate their teachings in every possible way into his life and service. This is the successful path adopted by the intelligent and faithful disciple; it leads to the eternal shelter of the acaryas’ lotus feet.
Valid Integrated Response Paradigm for the Sun
There is no need of inventing a new paradigm as regards to the discussion of aberrant philosophy. In the analysis above we have shown that the acaryas’ example is perfectly applicable and suitable to the “digital venue” of an internet daily e-magazine, such as the Sun.
Srila Prabhupada’s Website
If we consider hypothetically for a few moments, we can understand the policy that Srila Prabhupada would institute had he started a website. Would Srila Prabhupada post bogus philosophy and then wait for some refutations that may or may not arrive? That is patently absurd. Srila Prabhupada would refute the bogus ideas immediately, at source, integrated within his writings. Srila Prabhupada would post bogus siddhanta on the internet for the purpose of stirring up controversy? Not at all.
Srila Prabhupada would follow Sri Krsna’s standard, Bg 17.15:
“Austerity of speech consists in speaking words that are truthful, pleasing, beneficial, and not agitating to others, and also in regularly reciting Vedic literature.”
Purport
“…one should not talk nonsense. The process of speaking in spiritual circles is to say something upheld by the scriptures. One should at once quote from scriptural authority to back up what he is saying.”
Some respondents to “Defending the Indefensible” evidently misunderstood the essay. This writer is not against siddhantic discussion or against reform of the GBC, BBT or ISKCON. Such reform is quite important and becoming increasingly necessary. However this writer proposes that such discussion should be in accordance with the paradigm of guru, sadhu and sastra. This is the teaching of Sri Krsna in the Bhagavad-gita and the eternal system of the glorious acaryas and mahajanas. We are duty-bound to follow Srila Prabhupada.
Editorial Policy
As regards postings of aberrant philosophy submitted to the Sun:
1. The article may be rejected.
2. The article may be returned with the request for pertinent guru, sadhu and sastra.
3. The article may be posted with an editorial refutation interspersed with the text.
4. The article may be posted with an editorial refutation immediately following the article.
Benefits for the Sampradaya Sun
If the Sun follows this paradigm, then the Sun is faithfully following the example of the previous acaryas and their powerful blessings will shine brightly. Furthermore, the status of the Sun will be enhanced. No more will the PITYs be able to misuse the Sun as a propaganda vehicle for their nonsense. No more will external critics be able to condemn much content of the Sun as aberrant and apasiddhantic. The dignity of the Sun as a medium faithful to the acaryas will be firmly established. The Sun’s noble and necessary efforts towards ISKCON reform will not be wastefully sidetracked by clearly aberrant concoction. The Sun will establish in the Vaisnava world that compliance with guru, sadhu and sastra is essential to establish Vedic Siddhanta. Thus uncovered the attraction of the Sun will be fully revealed warmly inviting more and more Vaisnavas to bask in the enlightenment it radiates. The Sun may ascend to being the premier Vaisnava website, wherein all topics are brilliantly discussed in the light of Srila Prabhupada, sadhu and sastra. How wonderful. How pleasing to Srila Prabhupada. How glorious a service from Sri Rocana dasa and his assistants. May their sincerity bring them the blessings of the Supreme Lord!
So let the Sampradaya Sun now arise bringing a glorious new day in which the dark clouds will be dissipated by the shining wisdom of the effulgent example of the acaryas. Let the Sun radiate pure knowledge as a brave beacon to guide all souls Back to Godhead under the shelter of Srila Prabhupada’s lotus feet.
Srila Prabhupada, Room Conversation, Gurakhpur, Feb 17, 1971:
mahajano yena gatah sa pantha
Aum Tat Sat
Your humble servant,
Vaikunthanath dasa
