5. On Misinterpretation
Saying that Kanji Swami had misled that person is as good as saying Rishabhdev had misled Marichi - which I think none of us would agree with. If someone chooses to misinterpret and decide as per one’s own fancies (Marichi / the person who denied going to temple by citing KBP), what can they (Rishabhdev / Kanji Swami) do?
Disclaimer: The example is only for illustration purposes. I have no intention of comparing Kanji Swami with Rishabhdev.
On a side note, if at all that person would have met Kanji Swami, something similar like this might have had happened -
Once Pt. Liladhar Ji, a very learned scholar, had gone to a place during Paryushan for delivering discourses. A letter came which informed that he gave statements like - ‘there is no difference between a temple and a graveyard’ and ‘an idol and a dead body both are same’ (implying that they are pudgal [matter] or that they are alien to self). Kanji Swami asked him to leave the place immediately to the effect that he will not begin his discourse till Liladhar ji leaves the place.
Source: दृढ़ता, निर्भीकता, स्पष्टवादिता अध्यात्म प्रभावना नायक.pdf [unedited and not for publication, English translation is mine], Pt. Shri Sumat Prakash Ji
The problem with understanding Kanji Swami is that there are many people talking about what he said but hardly anyone goes and sees how he lived his life and in what context any given statement was made. It would be a nice exercise to read his pravachans (vitragvani.com) and try to arrive at an interpretation which is not self-contradictory. Also, when you read his pravachans on Ashtpahud (as of now, only the first volume is available in Hindi), there would be very few instances where he talks of - पुण्य being हेय, and that, महाव्रत etc. is just a शुभ भाव, and therefore, a cause of bondage. I would also suggest reading what are his views on मुनिराज and how much he revered them from the book - धन्य मुनि दशा.