Who are you?

[Guest guest]

> How many times do you want me to say it: I AM NOT KRISHNAKANT! My name is

> Deepak Vohra. Despite whatever delusion Jahnu is under, I am not

> Krishnakant, never have been and never will be. We are two distinct

> individuals. Most of the senior devotees in Bhaktivedanta Manor know me

> since I served at the Manor, both full-time and part-time, for a number of

> years. I even have a tape of a radio interview I did when I was involved

> in the 'Save the Manor Campaign' over 10 years ago. I can send you the

> audio file if you like so you can have the dubious pleasure of hearing my

> voice.

 

I asked some devotees in the Manor about you. They know no one by the name

Deepak. They only know someone by the name K. Kant Desai, whom they describe

as an incredibly puffed up little twit, who never in his life did any good

for anyone. Besides, from your love of obfuscation and word-wrangling, your

inability to discuss logic and reason, and your ignorance of Vaishnava

philosophy it is clear that you and K. Kant are one and the same person.

 

> Now, please answer my question:

>

> How can how Krishnakant Prabhu, whom you have described on this forum

> as "one of the most powerful spiritual leaders on the planet", from whom

> you have "no doubt learned a lot about proper Vaisnava dealings", through

> whose association you feel you can "continue to grow as a Vaisnava", with

> whom you stand "united in our desire to serve and please Srila

> Prabhupada", and whose association you consider to be "a great blessing",

> simultaneously be a "multitudinous offender", someone who is "trying to

> destroy ISKCON" and with whom Srila Prabhupada is "angry"? These are all

> your own words.

 

I guess sarcasm doesn't mean anything to you.

 

BTW, what happened to the evidence you were supposed to state in support of

your claim that the July 9th letter was the final words from Srila

Prabhupada regarding initiations in ISKCON? We haven't seen anything yet.

What's it going to be?

[Guest guest]

>

>Jahnu (Dvipa das JPS) (Mayapur - IN) [Jahnu (AT) pamho (DOT) net]

 

>I asked some devotees in the Manor about you. They know no one by the name

>Deepak.

 

So please let us all know WHICH of the long-time senior devotees at the

Manor you asked, and then we can see if you are lying or not.

 

>Besides, from your love of obfuscation and word-wrangling, your

>inability to discuss logic and reason, and your ignorance of Vaishnava

>philosophy

 

Hmmm...

 

1) Jahnu says with reference to Srila Prabhupada: "He didn't initiate the

ritvik system in the first place, so your point is moot."

 

2) Ramakanta says: "When Srila Prabhupada introduced the ritvik system (not

on July 9th, but already before that date)"

 

So Jahnu needs to first sort out in his head whether he agrees with

Ramakanta Prabhu or not.

 

> it is clear that you and K. Kant are one and the same person.

 

Here we go again, those little voices in your head are getting louder...

 

>> Now, please answer my question:

>>

>> How can how Krishnakant Prabhu, whom you have described on this forum

>> as "one of the most powerful spiritual leaders on the planet", from whom

>> you have "no doubt learned a lot about proper Vaisnava dealings", through

>> whose association you feel you can "continue to grow as a Vaisnava", with

>> whom you stand "united in our desire to serve and please Srila

>> Prabhupada", and whose association you consider to be "a great blessing",

>> simultaneously be a "multitudinous offender", someone who is "trying to

>> destroy ISKCON" and with whom Srila Prabhupada is "angry"? These are all

>> your own words.

 

>I guess sarcasm doesn't mean anything to you.

 

Apparently not, since Sankarsana Prabhu sent me this email today:

 

>>

>>Sankarsana (das) ACBSP (Austin, Texas - USA)

>>[sankarsana.ACBSP (AT) pamho (DOT) net]

>>Tuesday, February 01, 2005 10:44 PM

 

>>Krishna Kant is powerful leader, there is no doubt. Because he is

chanting Hare Krishna I also accept that he is spiritual.

>>He did correct me on a point of etiquette, and I accepted his correction.

>>I still consider the association of anyone who is trying to serve Srila

Prabhupada as a blessing even if I disagree with them.

>>How many people on this planet are willing to dedicate their lives to

Srila Prabhupada?

 

>BTW, what happened to the evidence you were supposed to state in support of

>your claim that the July 9th letter was the final words from Srila

>Prabhupada regarding initiations in ISKCON? We haven't seen anything yet.

>What's it going to be?

 

> He didn't initiate the ritvik system in the first place, so your point is

moot.

 

HOW can we discuss ANYTHING about Srila Prabhupada's instructions on ritvik

initiations if you believe that "He didn't initiate the ritvik system in the

first place" ???

[Guest guest]

> >I asked some devotees in the Manor about ou. They know no one by the

> >name Deepak.

>

> So please let us all know WHICH of the long-time senior devotees at the

> Manor you asked, and then we can see if you are lying or not.

 

Let me try again: I asked some senior devotees in the Manor about you, and

no one there knew anyone by the name of Deepak. They do know K. Kant,

though, whom they describe as an incredibly puffed up and arrogant little

twit, who never did anything for Prabhupada's movement except blaspheme it.

 

But you must be utterly crazy if you think I would reveal their names to

you, just so you can launch into your usual tirade of vilifying their gurus.

 

Why don't we do this instead: You let us know who in the Manor will vouch

for you. Let's see if you can come up with anyone there who will put himself

on the line by sticking up for the likes of you. Who in is right mind would

want to associate himself with you? Why don't you face it? You are just a

pawn in Madhu Pandit's scheme of using ISKCON's GOOD name to enrich himself

and his family. You have no assocation of devotees. The only association you

have is of certified thieves and criminals like Madhu Pandit and Adridharan.

 

> >Besides, from your love of obfuscation and word-wrangling, your

> >inability to discuss logic and reason, and your ignorance of Vaishnava

> >philosophy

>

> Hmmm...

 

What happened to the evidence you were supposed to give to support your

claim that the July 9th letter is the final words from Srila Prabhupada on

initiations in ISKCON? Where is the evidence? We are waiting...

 

It is going to be interesting to see how long you can dodge it trying to

squirm your way out of it.

[Guest guest]

>> So please let us all know WHICH of the long-time senior devotees at the

>> Manor you asked, and then we can see if you are lying or not.

 

>Jahnu (Dvipa das JPS) (Mayapur - IN) [Jahnu (AT) pamho (DOT) net]

 

>Let me try again: I asked some senior devotees in the Manor about you, and

>no one there knew anyone by the name of Deepak. They do know K. Kant,

>though,

>But you must be utterly crazy if you think I would reveal their names to

>you, just so you can launch into your usual tirade of vilifying

>their gurus.

>Why don't we do this instead: You let us know who in the Manor will vouch

>for you.

 

So as I suspected, you could not even name ONE of these senior devotees in

the Manor whom you spoke to, so you must be lying that you "asked them about

me". The point is, despite my detailed denial of your absurd claim that I

am really Krishnakant posting under a pseudonym, you still persist in your

madness. The following senior devotees, some of them anti-ritvik, others

pro-ritvik, will substantiate my *identity*:

 

Srutidharma das - head of Indian preaching

Kripamoya das - head of congregational preaching

Yaduraja das - former producer and actor of the Bhaktivedanta Players

(the above two with whom I participated in a half-hour BBC World Service

radio production on Janmastami a few years ago)

Bimal Krsna das - recent head of Public relations

Sita Rama das - head of Manor Training and Education

Akrura das - head of Bhaktivedanta Leadership Centre

Revatinandana das - former Secretary of the Hare Krishna Temple Defence

Movement

etc. etc.

 

I would suggest you either stop making an idiot of yourself on this forum,

or seek urgent medical advice for your delusions.

 

>What happened to the evidence you were supposed to give to support your

>claim that the July 9th letter is the final words from Srila Prabhupada on

>initiations in ISKCON? Where is the evidence? We are waiting...

>It is going to be interesting to see how long you can dodge it trying to

>squirm your way out of it.

 

Ramakanta wrote: "When Srila Prabhupada introduced the ritvik system (not on

July 9th, but already before that date)"

 

Jahnu wrote: "He didn't initiate the ritvik system in the first place, so

your point is moot"

 

Yes, my dear Jahnu Prabhu, it is indeed going to be interesting to see how

long you can try to squirm your way out of it.

[Guest guest]

Dear Deepak Prabhu, PAMHO. AGTSP!

 

> Ramakanta wrote: "When Srila Prabhupada introduced the ritvik system (not

> on July 9th, but already before that date)"

>

> Jahnu wrote: "He didn't initiate the ritvik system in the first place, so

> your point is moot"

>

> Yes, my dear Jahnu Prabhu, it is indeed going to be interesting to see how

> long you can try to squirm your way out of it.

 

What has let you come to the conclusion that what Jahnu wrote is wrong and

what I wrote is correct?

 

BTW. A few days ago you wrote: "As I have mentioned several times on this

conference, I only have time to physically discuss with one Prabhu at a

time, and at this moment I am engaging in a discussion with Ramakanta

Prabhu." Now it seems you have stopped the discussion with me and have given

up trying to refute my proofs. So I defeated you!

 

ys Ramakanta dasa

[Guest guest]

Dear Ramakanta Prabhu

 

PAMHO. AGTSP!

 

>> Ramakanta wrote: "When Srila Prabhupada introduced the ritvik system (not

>> on July 9th, but already before that date)"

 

>> Jahnu wrote: "He didn't initiate the ritvik system in the first place, so

>> your point is moot"

 

>What has let you come to the conclusion that what Jahnu wrote is wrong and

>what I wrote is correct?

 

You can't BOTH be correct. Either Srila Prabhupada introduced the ritvik

system (as you state), or he didn't (as Jahnu states). So which is it?

 

>BTW. A few days ago you wrote: "As I have mentioned several times on this

>conference, I only have time to physically discuss with one Prabhu at a

>time, and at this moment I am engaging in a discussion with Ramakanta

>Prabhu."

 

Yes, you are perfectly correct, I did state that. Unfortunately, since

Jahnu insists on saying I am Krishnakant writing under another name, I have

to refute that. If I persistently claimed you were not really Ramakanta but

someone else, you would probably want to refute that too. Similarly, if

someone states that Krishnakant is "a multitudinous offender", but has also

called him "one of the most powerful spiritual leaders on the planet today",

then the conference should be made aware of that.

 

Nevertheless, if you could perhaps persuade Jahnu to refrain from butting in

to our discussion with his insane comments (or any comments at all), I will

gladly just focus on our discussion.

 

>Now it seems you have stopped the discussion with me and

>have given up trying to refute my proofs. So I defeated you!

 

You are jumping to a rather premature conclusion. The last date I posted a

reply to you was Wednesday 2nd February. Today is Thursday 3rd February.

There is no rule in email discussions that states you must respond to your

opponent on the same day. In your case you are making it difficult to move

forward in the discussion since you have made patently misleading statements

regarding your supposed use of Krishnakant's words, as I detailed in my post

yesterday:

 

You said:

 

A)

> I took Krishnakant's statements, simply removed the word "not" in

statement

> (2), and added the word "not" to statement (3), and used Krishnakant's

> statement to defeat himself.

 

You then said:

 

B)

> This is what I did: I took Krishnakant's argument, THEN EXPRESSED IT IN MY

WORDS,

>and then added or removed the word "not"."

 

In statement A), you said you took KRISHANKANT's statements, and added and

removed the word "not"

 

In statement B), you said you REWROTE Krishnakant's words, and added and

removed the word "not"

 

That is a huge and important difference. So if you kindly concede this

point, then we can move on.

 

Ys,

Deepak

[Guest guest]

> So as I suspected, you could not even name ONE of these senior devotees in

> the Manor whom you spoke to, so you must be lying that you "asked them

> about me".

 

I can of course name them, but I wouldn't want to expose any one of them to

one of your diatribes regarding the fallen gurus, which you spew forth

everytime you are cornered. And since you are constantly being cornered by

logic, reason and philosophy, which are all working against you, that's all

we ever hear from you - blah blah this guru and blah blah that sannyasi.

 

The first time I ever met a real live ritvik, he told me with badly veiled

delight: 'Did you hear about such and such sannyasi who fell down'. I mean,

how base can you get? I guess he automatically assumed that I would take as

much pleasure in pus as he.

 

>The point is, despite my detailed denial of your absurd claim

> that I am really Krishnakant posting under a pseudonym, you still persist

> in your madness. The following senior devotees, some of them anti-ritvik,

> others pro-ritvik, will substantiate my *identity*:

 

Anyone can post a list of devotees from the UK. As I said, when I asked, no

one knew anyone by the name of Deepak. They did know K. Kant. though, whom

they described as an incredibly puffed up and arrogant little twit, who

never in his life did anything for Srila Prabhupada except blaspheme his

devotees.

 

> I would suggest you either stop making an idiot of yourself on this forum,

> or seek urgent medical advice for your delusions.

 

The only idiot here is you. I suggest you seek medical advice for your

delusion of thinking that ISKCON needs correction and advice on guru-tattva

from the certified thieves, criminals and atheists of the IRM.

 

> >What happened to the evidence you were supposed to give to support your

> >claim that the July 9th letter is the final words from Srila Prabhupada

> >on initiations in ISKCON? Where is the evidence? We are waiting...

> >It is going to be interesting to see how long you can dodge it trying to

> >squirm your way out of it.

>

> Ramakanta wrote: "When Srila Prabhupada introduced the ritvik system (not

> on July 9th, but already before that date)"

>

> Jahnu wrote: "He didn't initiate the ritvik system in the first place, so

> your point is moot"

>

> Yes, my dear Jahnu Prabhu, it is indeed going to be interesting to see how

> long you can try to squirm your way out of it.

 

Still dodging and squirming, eh? When are we going to see the evidence of

your ridiculous claim that the July 9th letter is the final words from

Prabhupada on initiations in ISKCON? Of course, as we all know, there is no

evidence, but I keep asking you, because I like to watch you squirm.