Back To Prabhupada, Issue 41, Autumn 2013, Editorial
Welcome to Issue 41 of Back To Prabhupada (BTP).
The following allegation was made against BTP:
"They should change the name to Blaspheming ISKCON. All it was, was criticizing devotees of ISKCON. Blaspheming his disciples is going to make them go back to Prabhupada? I have to say I don't think so!"
The nature of this allegation, and the IRM's response to it, illustrate very starkly two completely different approaches to the truth. This allegation was made anonymously on the internet with zero evidence to support that it is correct. Rather, it is an emotional response based on what the person would like to be the truth. It is typical of what passes for "spiritual discourse" in "devotee" circles today. Absolutely anything at all can and will be alleged, with zero evidence to support it; instead, simply the fact that the allegation is made, is itself presented as evidence that it must be true! Thus, the persons making such allegations without supporting evidence are acting as if they are the acarya - they consider that just their merely making a statement automatically makes the statement authoritative and factual!
Now, compare this to how the IRM approach such an allegation.
1) We would first establish exactly what blasphemy is, by providing evidence from Srila Prabhupada's recorded statements.
2) We would then test if the statements made in BTP satisfy the definition of blasphemy given by Srila Prabhupada.
3) We would then determine, based again on Srila Prabhupada's teachings, whether the statements made in BTP would please or displease Srila Prabhupada.
And, we did precisely such an exercise in the article in BTP 32, "The real meaning of Vaisnava Aparadha".
This leads us to a simple formula:
Allegation - Evidence = Allegation.
Allegation + Evidence = Fact.
A classic example of the above formula in action was the following. In 1978, the GBC made the following allegation: Srila Prabhupada had authorised 11 guru "successors". However, no supporting evidence from Srila Prabhupada himself was presented to establish this. Rather, devotees were simply expected to accept the word of the GBC as being the truth. And thus, the guru hoax was born. And today, the spread of the internet has simply allowed even more people to broadcast even more baseless allegations (many times anonymously), much faster, to many more others! Sometimes the infamous "Prabhupada said" claim, without any recorded evidence for the same, will be added to such allegations to assert legitimacy for the allegation.
It is for this reason that the IRM website has hundreds of papers where all manner of claims and allegations are subject to strict verification, and all assertions made by us are strictly supported by evidence from Srila Prabhupada. And that this is not just an empty claim but the reality, is evidenced by the fact, as documented on the same website, that whenever a challenge has been made to any of our papers, our rebuttal has always successfully defended our papers against such challenges.
The material world is a world of duality, and thus it is full of claims and counter-claims. The materialists, the non-devotees, look at us devotees and think we are completely in illusion, due to being "brainwashed". We look at the non-devotees and see that actually they are the ones in illusion (maya). Whereas within "devotee" circles, each group thinks every other group is in illusion-whether ISKCON, the Gaudiya Matha, the IRM, etc. The only way to distinguish between all these conflicting claims is to elevate claims into facts through the use of evidence-which is what the IRM is dedicated to doing. Srila Prabhupada states that "false arguments can be conquered by factual ascertainment." (SB, 1.9.27)
And, while others merely claim to do this, the IRM is actually doing it. Another BTP issue-full of facts, and not claims-stands as further testament to this.
Thank you and Hare Krsna.
In Srila Prabhupada's service,
Return to "Emotion" Index
Return to "Logic and Reason" Index
Return to IRM Homepage