Guest guest Posted November 15, 2005 Report Share Posted November 15, 2005 > My quotes are for everyone.Sanatana dharma is eternal it is not changing > when somebody feels that.There is Visnu tattva,Siva tattva,jiva tattva,and > guru tattva.This tattvas will never changed.They where in past ,and they > will be in future.So for me there is nothing to fight or debate. > > One quote for good night > > The qualification of guru is that he must be fully cognizant of the > science of KŠa. Then he or she can become guru. Yei kŠa-tattva-vett€, > sei guru haya. [break] In our material world, is it any prohibition that > woman cannot become professor? If she is qualified, she can become > professor. What is the wrong there? She must be qualified. That is the > position. So similarly, if the woman understands KŠa consciousness > perfectly, she can become guru. > > > > so next debate will most probably be if ladies are qualifide do be > spiritual master-guru. > There is nothing to debate. If Srila Prabhupada says women can become gurus, if they are qualified, then they can become gurus. There are certain qualifications that must be met to become a guru. As you have made clear by your many nice quotes it's the properties and qualifications that make the guru, not the type of body he or she is in. Ritviks can't even understand such a simple fact. But then again, what kind of understanding can you expect from people who think KK. Desai is some kind of oracle on guru-tattva? I have noticed that discussing with ritviks is exactly like discussing with atheists. Atheists have to deliberately choose ignorance over enlightenment to cover up the obvious facts - it doesn't matter what kind of evidence, or clear logic you present, they always simply deny it and then resort to all kinds of obfuscations, irrelevancies and confusions to talk their way out of their self-imposed ignorance. Ritviks are exactly the same. They are clearly atheists. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 15, 2005 Report Share Posted November 15, 2005 Dear Madhusudana Prabhu, PAMHO. AGTSP! > > They would say the by "guru" Srila Prabhupada meant "siksa-guru" any by > > "initiate disciples" he meant "initiate disciples as ritviks". > > This is simply unmitigated speculation. You want to see facts. Well, here is the signed written document: "By 1975, all of those who have passed all of the above examinations will be specifically empowered to initiate and increase the number of the Krishna Consciousness population." (Letter to Kirtanananda, 12 January, 1969) And here is IRM's reply: We can therefore only conclude that he was already contemplating some sort of ‘officiating’ initiation system as early as 1968. (http://www.iskconirm.com/Reply_to_Kundali.htm) > It seems obvious to me, that it does not say that it should stop for the > simple reason that it was not supposed to stop. "It seems obvious to me" = "I speculate". > Furthermore if you think that it should stop then you have to prove that. I did. ys Ramakanta dasa Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 15, 2005 Report Share Posted November 15, 2005 Hare Krishna. You state, so next debate will most probably be if ladies are > qualifide do be spiritual > master-guru. Of course, there may be qualified ladies, no doubt, but the issue is that there is no authorisation for them to be diksa gurus. "One should take initiation from a bona fide spiritual master coming in the disciplic succession, who is authorised by his predecessor spiritual master. This is called diksa -vidhana." (S.B. 4.8.54, purport) --- "Tripada (das) (Split - HR)" <Tripada (AT) pamho (DOT) net> wrote: > My quotes are for everyone.Sanatana dharma is > eternal it is not changing > when somebody feels that.There is Visnu tattva,Siva > tattva,jiva tattva,and > guru tattva.This tattvas will never changed.They > where in past ,and they > will be in future.So for me there is nothing with me > fight or debate. > > One quote for good night > > The qualification of guru is that he must be fully > cognizant of the science > of Krsna. Then he or she can become guru. Yei > krsna-tattva-vetta, sei guru > haya. [break] In our material world, is it any > prohibition that woman cannot > become professor? If she is qualified, she can > become professor. What is the > wrong there? She must be qualified. That is the > position. So similarly, if > the woman understands Krsna consciousness perfectly, > she can become guru. > > > > so next debate will most probably be if ladies are > qualifide do be spiritual > master-guru. > > Hari Hari bol > Guru tattva ki!jay > Srila Prabhupada!ki jay > Guru parampara ki!jay > > ----------------------- > To from this mailing list, send an email > to: > Initiations.in.ISKCON-Owner (AT) pamho (DOT) net > Learn the truth about the ISKCON guru hoax ISKCON Revival Movement - http://www.iskconirm.com Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 19, 2005 Report Share Posted November 19, 2005 Rama Kanta Prabhu Please accept my humble obeisances. All glories to Srila Prabhupada. Ramakanta (das) wrote: > Dear Madhusudana Prabhu, PAMHO. AGTSP! > > > > > They would say the by "guru" Srila Prabhupada > meant "siksa-guru" any by > > > "initiate disciples" he meant "initiate > disciples as ritviks". > > > > This is simply unmitigated speculation. > > You want to see facts. This may be a fact. However, it is not the fact all the time. Therefore, to conclude otherwise, is certainly speculation. >Well, here is the signed > written document: > > "By 1975, all of those who have passed all of the > above examinations will be > specifically empowered to initiate and increase the > number of the Krishna > Consciousness population." (Letter to Kirtanananda, > 12 January, 1969) > > And here is IRM's reply: > > We can therefore only conclude that he was already > contemplating some sort > of ‘officiating’ initiation system as early as 1968. > (http://www.iskconirm.com/Reply_to_Kundali.htm) > > > > It seems obvious to me, that it does not say that > it should stop for the > > simple reason that it was not supposed to stop. > > "It seems obvious to me" = "I speculate". > This is another ludicrous statement. And in itself is a speculation. There may be obvious reasons, which are not speculative. For example quotes from Srila Prabhupada to the contrary. Thus Ramakant's equation is in itself merely speculation, as usual. > > > Furthermore if you think that it should stop then > you have to prove that. > > I did. > To whom did you prove that to, who was convinced of your proof? Convincingly mesmerised flunkies is no great achievement. Learn the truth about the ISKCON guru hoax ISKCON Revival Movement - http://www.iskconirm.com Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.