More Irresponsible Mad Men
BY: GEORGE A. SMITH
Dec 31, 2011 — CALIFORNIA, USA (SUN) — The Rtviks, like so many others before them, have invested their beliefs in a system that they have not bothered to subject to critical examination to the degree that it must be subjected to in order for any intelligent and rational person to accept it.
That they compound this error in judgment by treating anyone who poses intelligent questions to them, or challenges them to produce strong logical arguments and convincing proof in defense of their position, with anger and vicious attempts at character assassination suggests that we are dealing with both blind faith fanatics and with those who, although they have no actual belief in the Rtvik position themselves, adopt such a platform because it is expedient to the furtherance of their own private agendas.
Under these, of course, we have another class -- the disenfranchised, the dispossessed, those who are simply sick of ISKCON and its other alternate. They see the Rtvik position as being the only other tenable position, it being Prabhupada centric (something that the Sampradaya Acarya position also is, and which is furthermore more in line with Srila Prabhupada's wishes), and thus it attracts them to opt for the Rtvik position.
At that point, however, the similarities end between the Rtviks. While on the one hand the Rtviks would like you to simply accept a concoction that not even they are sure of, Rocana das asks you to do your own thinking and to accept only what has ever been accepted within our tradition -- the words of Guru, Sadhu and Sastra as proof and evidence. The Rtviks simply demand that you accept their own interpretations of Srila Prabhupada's words (and only the words they choose to hear), and to this day have been unable to supply any sastric evidence. Woe be it to any of their number or to anyone else who dares to challenge their assertions with good intelligence and common sense.
To illustrate the sheer hypocrisy of the Rtvik pundits, here is something I recently found in the "funny pages", where Puranjana lies about and misrepresents everyone who disagrees with him. I came upon this posting of his, which had been made in reply to an article of mine, "Don't Let ISKCON or the Rtviks Get the Better of You":
[PADA: No, EVERYONE STILL needs to get initiated into the divyam jnanam which destroys sins (diksha) of the pure devotee, di means divyam jnanam, ok you do not need formal initiation, maybe not, but you do need to be getting genuine divyam jnanam from an uttama devotee, and that is being done by HIS books.]
("Rocana and George A Smith ATTACK Srila Prabhupada ...")
In the above noted excerpt, which was posed as a reply to my article, Puranjana clearly expresses the fact that he does not really know for sure whether or whether not formal initiation, which includes formal initiation via the Rtvik process by the way, is even needed, even a requirement. So if the Rtviks aren't even sure about whether or not they should be conducting formal initiations by the Rtvik process why then are they already doing it? Didn't Srila Prabhupada say that the worst type of fool was the fool who did not know whether he should do something or not, but went ahead and did it anyway?
I rest my case.
In the article that Puranjana was hoping to sum up so nicely for the Rtvik camp, that they wouldn't bother themselves to read, I presented evidence for the argument that I developed in it, which was that formal initiation is not required for one to make spiritual advancement up to at least the madhyama position.
The argument was so strong and convincing apparently, that it even had Puranjana himself wavering on the rtvik position and accepting my conclusions himself, expressing his own inner doubts which normally he keeps hidden. For after all, what idiot in their right mind is going to accept what you claim to be true once they discover that you yourself aren't even that sure of its truthfulness? Puranjana writes quite a lot, and so occasionally he slips up and shows us his true colors, which are here expressive of the fact that even he is not convinced of the Rtvik position.
Here is that evidence again, with an additional strong argument developed from it.
"In this verse Srila Rupa Gosvami advises the devotee to be intelligent enough to distinguish between the kanistha-adhikari, madhyama-adhikari and uttama-adhikari. The devotee should also know his own position and should not try to imitate a devotee situated on a higher platform. Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura has given some practical hints to the effect that an uttama-adhikari Vaisnava can be recognized by his ability to convert many fallen souls to Vaisnavism. One should not become a spiritual master unless he has attained the platform of uttama-adhikari. A neophyte Vaisnava or a Vaisnava situated on the intermediate platform can also accept disciples, but such disciples must be on the same platform, and it should be understood that they cannot advance very well toward the ultimate goal of life under his insufficient guidance. Therefore a disciple should be careful to accept an uttama-adhikari as a spiritual master."
(The Nectar of Instruction, from Srila Prabhupada's purport to Text 5)
In the above noted sastric evidence we see that we are being told that we should only accept initiation from a pure devotee of Krsna and, by inference, that also we should only give initiations if we are pure devotees of Krsna. Amazingly however, a permission is given that any level of devotee may initiate, just a caution is added and evidently the dynamics of such relationships are a bit different. It is enjoined that madhyama can only initiate other madhyama and kanistha can only initiate other kanistha. Evidently these types of guru/disciple relationships are more affairs among equals.
The point of all this is that these are the alternatives to being initiated by a pure devotee of Krsna, and that although we may not like them, that doesn't give us permission to just put a line through them and introduce our own concoctions instead.
No other alternate is given, no other allowance, no other permission, and why should there be? Is this not an all inclusive arrangement for the initiation of everyone who wishes to become initiated? Were any of Srila Prabhupada's disciples who are sincerely following left out?
Certainly there is no mention here that one can accept initiation of a spiritual master after his departure. But that's the one that the Rtviks want you to accept.
Instead of accepting and promoting the bona fide allowances that Sri Rupa and Srila Prabhupada have made to carry on initiations, the Rtviks, being displeased with the words of Sri Rupa and Srila Prabhupada, prefer to introduce a concoction that they themselves are not even completely sure of. Maybe I am just over-reacting, but this seems to me to simply be the actions of more irresponsible mad men.
Ys
George Smith
