Sahajiyas Dancing on Thin Ice

Anemic Contentions from the Camp of Oneness

The Editor of Sampradaya Sun, Shri Rocan dasa Prabhu, has asked me to take a look at some comments made by the Radhanath camp that were sent some years back to the Sun in reply to arguments leveled by HH Bhakti Vikas Swami about Mayavada preaching in The Journey Home. Have a look at those feeble face-offs here:

http://www.harekrsna.com/sun/editorials/09-12/editorials9035.htm

Only the disciple infected with the poison of Mayavada dares to compare himself with the previous acharyas.

Basically this set of arguments is more sued, screwed, lewd, rude and tattooed than the thugs over at Eddiy’s Pool Hall. Reading these arrogant essays can ignite flames of anger in any genuine Vaishnava. I would daresay that anyone who has put forth such arguments as these does not know his reproductive organ from his big toe. And I will prove it. But I am not going to dignify those puerile and pathetic polemics by going into explicit detail regarding any examples they have cited about previous acharyas. To do so would be to validate that Radhanatha’s pathetic examples in The Journey Home are somehow on equal footing with those of genuine saints. And here’s another reason why the entire foundation of their arguments in favor of The Journey Home rest upon a weak charade. 

When Radhanath’s camp compares The Journey Home with certain certain activities of past acharyas such as Shrila Jiva Goswami, Shrila Vishwanatha Chakravarti, Shrila Baladeva Vidyabhushana, Shrila Bhaktivinoda Thakura, and others, this means that these disciples of Radhnatha are comparing their “guru” to the actual and bona fide previous sampradaya acharyas. Radhanatha’s book is a yoga ego trip; it does no real preaching cover to cover. It is a syrupy manifesto of self-aggrandizement wherein the author repeatedly bends his knee before crow-like men and women in the form of rapists, perverts, con men and beef eaters. It has nothing to do with preaching Gaudiya siddhanta but rather achieves the opposite effect.

Does anyone out there recall that in recent memory eleven neophytes dared to compare themselves to past acharyas in a very similar way? It occurs to me that the collective denouement these brigands suffered (or are suffering) would not make good subject matter for one of Radhanatha’s buttery letters to his folks in The Journey Home. So let us get real and dispense with the BS that any of Radhanatha’s activities in The Journey Home are comparable to the preaching of genuine acharyas. Acharyas are not made by their own ambitions. You can’t compare Radhanatha’s sitting at the feet of Muktananda, Mother Teresa, Maharishi or Baba Ram Dasa to any sampradaya acharya any more than you can compare Disneyland to Vaikuntha. Simply stated, the self-praising hero of The Journey Home is but a Hollywood Walk of Fame Swami wannabe, and thus he should never be spoken of in the same breath as any real torch bearer of Vaishnava dharma.

Secondly, the arguments in favor of Radhanatha’s preaching are that he is simply adapting to time, place and circumstances—kala, desha, patra. Now the Radhanatha camp blowhards have given the example that Shrila Prabhupada criticized Vivekananda to Allen Ginsberg and as a result Ginsberg felt put off and never surrendered to Prabhuapda. Now does anyone out there actually think Ginsberg, who had no understanding of Vedic culture, would ever have become a devotee? Ginsberg argued with Prabhupada against reincarnation. He was an avowed active homosexual who wrote disgusting poens about that, he often drank alcohol and used drugs. Prabhupada once remarked as he left the room that Gindberg was a “fifth class man.” But then the Chowpatty windbags go on to say that when George Harrison mentioned Vivekananda, Shrila Prabhupada—presumably now wiser from his past experience—remained silent.

In other words, they are saying that Radhanatha Swami understands perfectly kala, desha, patra, but Shrila Prabhupada—a shaktyavesha avatara—does not. 

Sorry, boys—boom—you have shot yourselves in the foot with that unbelievable blunder. Case closed. Any argument that the disciple knows more than the guru has no place in sampradayic logic. Still, considering the tremendous ego that it must have taken to write The Journey Home, nothing surprises me about that book any longer. But whenever a so-called member of ISKCON claims to know more than the Founder-Acharya, the very old problem of Mayavada raises its deformed head again, which you have proven herewith. When the kanistha adhikaris claim that Radhanatha is more expert than Prabhupada we can understand how far the poison has spread.
Our suggestion to the disciples of Radhanath is this: give him one last obeisance, and then find yourselves a genuine Vaishnava guru in the line from Shrila Prabhupada. Be careful! As you have seen there are plenty alligators swimming in the sweet water of the lake. 

As for us, we will continue from tomorrow with our series of ripping The Journey Home into the little pieces on the floor where it deserves to be.