Back To Prabhupada, Issue 37, Autumn 2012
e have already noted in previous issues the success of our book expose series: 100 Contradictions: The life and teachings of His Holiness Bhakti Charu Swami and 100 Deviations: The life and teachings of His Holiness Sivarama Swami. The reason these books have been so successful in convincing devotees is simple: they are verbatim reproductions of the statements of ISKCON gurus contradicting either themselves or Srila Prabhupada. Thus, since ISKCON devotees are simply reading what their own gurus and leaders are saying, the books cannot be disputed! This success has now resulted in another ISKCON guru, Kripamoya Dasa, penning a special 3000-word response to these books on the forum reserved exclusively for disciples of Bhakti Charu Swami ("Bhakti Charu Swami Istagosthi"). Extracts from this response are presented in the shaded boxes below (all emphases added).
"Anyway, whichever author, or group of authors, compiled the book must have done extensive research of Bhakti Caru Swami's books, emails, and podcasts and so on in order to find just the right quotes to suit their purpose. That was no mean achievement. I applaud their research."
Kripamoya Dasa acknowledges why his response is merited, since the book is composed of thorough research regarding the teachings of Bhakti Charu Swami, and, as he admits, provides "just the right quotes to suit their purpose". Therefore, given the fact that the actual content of the book cannot be disputed, Kripamoya Dasa launches into the usual ISKCON response of threats against those who dare to publish such facts.
"Lord Krsna is a Person and His holy name is therefore also a Person. And He takes it personally when those who are dear to Him are vilified. [...] The first of those spiritual offences is the most important [...] To blaspheme the devotees who have dedicated their lives for propagating the holy name of the Lord. […] Publishing one's thinly-disguised criticism in a book and widely distributing it is an unthinkably stupid action if one values one's spiritual progress. Bhakti Caru Swami is - whatever the IRM or any other group thinks of him - factually someone who has dedicated his life to bringing others to Krsna".
Kripamoya Dasa offers the usual ISKCON knee-jerk reaction triggered whenever any ISKCON leader is criticised; threatening us with having committed offenses and blasphemy. However, if a book containing quotes of Bhakti Charu Swami constitutes "blasphemy" to Bhakti Charu Swami, then the source of such blasphemy would be Bhakti Charu Swami himself, since the book only contains the words emanating from Bhakti Charu Swami, as admitted by Kripamoya Dasa. Kripamoya Dasa is, therefore, actually claiming that Bhakti Charu Swami has engaged in committing blasphemy against himself!
"Yet freedom of expression [...] certainly does not include the right to incite others to hatred on the basis of that person's race, appearance or beliefs. […] I'm not saying that the IRM literature incites religious hatred of the devotees of Krsna. They come pretty close, but I wouldn't say it was their primary intention. Besides, if they did make it their intention it would be a criminal offence in England".
Not content with the threats of blasphemy, Kripamoya Dasa also throws in the spectre of a legal threat, claiming that we are "pretty close" to breaking the law by allegedly stirring up "hatred of the devotees of Krsna". But Kripamoya Dasa himself states in his own words that at most the IRM are only opposed to those who deny that Srila Prabhupada is the guru of ISKCON, and not to anyone for being a "devotee of Krsna":
"They believe that all the tens of thousands of members of ISKCON will only be reformed - and the entire movement consequently 'revived' - when those members declare themselves to be initiated disciples of Srila Prabhupada through the medium of a 'rtvik-acarya' who functions as a ceremonial intermediary. Such 'rtvik-acaryas' must be appointed by the governing body of ISKCON. They believe that this was Srila Prabhupada's final order and that most of ISKCON's problems can be traced to the fundamental mistake of not following this final order."
Rather, BTP pushes devotees in ISKCON to become devotees of Krsna by exposing the demigod worship carried out in ISKCON. Indeed, as we detailed on the preceding page, it is actually ISKCON which is making arguments "on the basis of that person's race" in regards to the IRM! So not even "pretty close", but a flat-out lie.
"And just if we all need to be reminded about the serious repercussions from criticising vaiñëavas, let's have a few closing words from Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura, himself no stranger to rtvik (then known as kartabhajiya) and many other deviant groups in Bengal of the 19th century: […] That foolish person who criticizes an exalted vaisnava falls down to the hell known as Maharaurava, along with his forefathers."
Not content with a blasphemy and legal threat, for good measure, Kripamoya Dasa also throws in the "hellfire and brimstone" threat, quoting Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura's warning against those who criticise an "exalted Vaisnava". Kripamoya Dasa claims that what the IRM preaches, which he labels as "rtvik", was known as "kartabhajiya" to Srila Bhaktivinoda Thakura. However, this can be disproven by quoting Kripamoya Dasa and his own ISKCON guru colleagues. HH Sivarama Swami - the other personality whose quotations were compiled in the expose series and whom Kripamoya Dasa also seeks to defend in the article analysed here - explains what "kartabhajiyas" are on his website, by quoting a fellow ISKCON guru, the late Suhotra Swami:
"only the kartabhajas go to the extreme of proclaiming the guru to be God incarnate. kartabhaja guruvada arises from the Mayavadi idea of absolute oneness. For the kartabhajas, the guru alone is the worshipable form of God. No other form than the guru's is worshipable, not even that of the arca-mürti, the temple Deity."
(www.sivaramaswami.com/en/2007/04/24/deviant-vaisnava-sects-4/, archived 1/10/12)
But, in the last section, we already quoted Kripamoya Dasa himself accepting that the IRM is not preaching the Mayavadi philosophy that Srila Prabhupada is God, or Krsna should not be worshipped, but rather only that Srila Prabhupada is the Guru of ISKCON. So, yet another flat-out lie.
The desperate racial arguments and threats displayed in the preceding 2 pages would not be necessary if ISKCON had evidence from Srila Prabhupada with which to counter the IRM's position. Rather, such desperate measures merely demonstrate that ISKCON is running scared due to having long lost the philosophical debate.
Return to IRM Homepage