Some writers have said, even if we agree that it is necessary to discuss, but why do you find it necessary to engage in criticism? First we have to differentiate between fact finding and faultfinding? To present facts and factual events which have taken place and ask intelligent and relevant question to ascertain the proper devotional conclusion and the order of the spiritual master is not faultfinding. Secondly, if there are offensive misconceptions and offensive statements made against the Sampradaya-Acarya Srila Prabhupada and the previous Acaryas, and any of His bona fide disciples and followers, then the Sastras and the Acaryas prescribe a course of action.


"According to social conventions, it is said that one can speak the truth only when it is palatable to others. But that is not truthfulness. The truth should be spoken in such a straight and forward way, so that others will understand actually what the facts are. If a man is a thief and if people are warned that he is a thief that is truth. Although sometimes the truth is unpalatable, one should not refrain from speaking it. Truthfulness demands that the facts be presented as they are for the benefit of others. That is the definition of truth."(23)


"One should not at any time tolerate blasphemy and insults against Lord Visnu or His devotees. A devotee is generally very humble and meek, and he is reluctant to pick a quarrel with anyone. Nor does he envy anyone. However, a pure devotee immediately becomes fiery with anger when he sees that Lord Vishnu or His devotees is insulted. This is the duty of a devotee. Although a devotee maintains an attitude of meekness and gentleness, it is a great fault on his part if he remains silent when the Lord or His devotee is blasphemed."(24)


"One should be very meek and humble in his personal transactions, and if insulted a Vaisnava should be tolerant and not angry. But if there is blasphemy against one's guru or another Vaishnava, one should be as angry as fire. This was exhibited by Lord Caitanya Mahaprabhu."...