Official Ramakanta vs. IRM discussion thread

[Guest guest]

Posted by Yaduraja on Nov 10, 2005:

 

Dear Ramakanta Prabhu, PAMHO. AGTSP!

 

You said:

 

“There could have been hundreds of authorized diksa-gurus”

 

So I asked :

 

Quote:

either:

 

1) You have clear, irrefutable evidence that there WERE hundreds of

authorised diksa gurus?

 

Or

 

2) You are speculating.

 

which is it?

 

 

In answer to my question you say:

 

”I don't have to prove statements that I did not make. I did not write,

"there WERE hundreds of authorized diksa-gurus". I wrote, “there COULD HAVE

BEEN hundreds of authorized diksa-gurus”. Do you see the difference?”

 

Yes I most certainly do. The difference is 1) would require you to

substantiate your position with evidence, whereas 2) means you are

specualting. Frankly I only want to discuss what Srila Prabhupada DID do,

not what he COULD have done.

 

You say:

 

”We can later discuss if Srila Prabhupada could have authorized hundreds of

diksa-gurus.”

 

Er, no thanks. I really only want to discuss what he DID do not what he

COULD have done. If the GBC had any evidence that he DID authorise hundreds

of diksa gurus they would have produced it by now, believe me.

H.H.Jayadvaita Swami is way better at debate and argument than your good

self, and yet even he has never produced such evidence, or even made such a

claim, and he’s meant to be one of the gurus!

 

You say:

 

“Remember, you claimed that Srila Prabhupada established himself as the sole

diksa guru for ISKCON in 1966. And I replied that it is incorrect,

unproven.”

 

Since you have not provided any evidence that Srila Prabhupada authorised

anyone else to initiate within ISKCON my original assertion- point a)-

stands unchallenged. I can show you many letters, resolutions and

conversations where Srila Prabhupada’s position as the sole initiator within

ISKCON is confirmed again and again. For example here is a letter to one of

Srila Prabhupada’s leaders:

 

The GBC should all be the instructor gurus. I am in the initiator guru, and

you should be the instructor guru by teaching what I am teaching and doing

what I am doing. This is not a title, but you must actually come to this

platform. This I want. (4.Aug.75 letter to Madhudvisa)

 

Notice Srila Prabhupada says: “I am (in) the initiator guru”, not “I am (in)

one of the initiator gurus”. Do you have a statement from Srila Prabhupada

indicating that he had authorised hundreds of diksa gurus, or latent diksa

gurus? If not then you have failed to challenge point a). The onus is on you

to prove there was someone else, apart from Srila Prabhupada, who he

established as initiator/s within ISKCON. The burden of proof is on you, not

I.

 

So:

 

Either provide a proof free from your usual logical fallacies, based on

Srila Prabhupada's statements, or admit that your claim is unproven.

 

If you do neither than truly our discussion will go nowhere, so if you want

to call it a day I have many more pressing things to be getting on with. On

the other hand I am always open to looking at new evidence if you have some.

Best wishes

ys

Yadu