Re. Lack of evidence

[Guest guest]

krishna_susarla wrote

 

> Exactly. Critics object to Srila Bhaktisiddhanta's paramparaa because

> they cannot empirically verify some of the links in it. By the same

> logic, we have to reject the entire Brahma-Madhva-Gaudiiya

> paramparaa, since we can't empirically verify the initiation of

> Madhva by Vyaasa, or of Lakshmiipati by Vyaasatiirtha, etc.

 

 

The logic that the critics of guru parampara in Gaudiya Vaishnavism are

using doesnt make much sense to me. If we use the same logic, then as you

pointed out, it is not possible to verify the initiation of Madhvacharya

and others.

 

 

What proof do these critics need? A photograph or a video recording of

all the initiations in Gaudiya Vaishnavism. Say if this can be some how

produced (just for the sake of discussion), wont they say that it has

been doctored or changed?

[Guest guest]

achintya, prasad@d... wrote:

 

> The logic that the critics of guru parampara in Gaudiya Vaishnavism

are

> using doesnt make much sense to me. If we use the same logic, then

as you

> pointed out, it is not possible to verify the initiation of

Madhvacharya

> and others.

 

Exactly. Some readers may recall, back in the days when

soc.religion.vaishnava was the major internet forum for discussions

between Vaishnavas, a similar type of debate erupting between some

persons calling themselves Maadhvas and the Gaudiiya Vaishnavas. The

Maadhvas challenged the Gaudiiyas to substantiate their link to

Madhva. Gaudiiya accounts were considered unacceptable to the

Maadhvas. Of course, neither could they prove that Madhva took

initiation from Vyaasa using third party evidence. The strongest

argument they could offer to this point was, "Well, you are only bona

fide because you descend from Madhva, so if you question Madhva's

link, then you are attacking your own authenticity." Readers will

note that this is no answer at all, but merely implicit

acknowledgement of the audacity of their logic.

 

Srila Bhaktisiddhanta's critics appear to be no different in this

regard.

[Guest guest]

On Fri, 27 Dec 2002 prasad wrote:

> krishna_susarla wrote

> > Critics object to Srila Bhaktisiddhanta's paramparaa because

> > they cannot empirically verify some of the links in it. By the same

> > logic, we have to reject the entire Brahma-Madhva-Gaudiiya

> > paramparaa, since we can't empirically verify the initiation of

> > Madhva by Vyaasa, or of Lakshmiipati by Vyaasatiirtha, etc.

>

> What proof do these critics need? A photograph or a video recording of

> all the initiations in Gaudiya Vaishnavism. Say if this can be some how

> produced (just for the sake of discussion), wont they say that it has

> been doctored or changed?

 

Probably. Here's the kind of proof these folks employ:

 

http://www.rainforest-australia.com/platypus_closeup_photo.htm

 

MDd