Official Ramakanta vs. IRM discussion thread

[Guest guest]

Posted by Yaduraja on Jan 25, 2006:

 

Dear Ramakanta Prabhu,

PAMHO. AGTSP!

 

> > I proved it some time ago.

>

> I refuted your attempts to prove it.

 

No you did not. After numerous arguments you agreed with it three times,

then again when you were supposed to be explaining how you really didn’t

agree with it. The reason you agreed you now claim is because you did not

understand English properly. That’s not my fault is it?

 

> > I proved it so convincingly that you agreed with it three times.

>

> That is not true. I never agreed that Srila Prabhupada set himself up,

> deliberately, in the position of the sole diksa guru for ISKCON in 1966.

> Please speak only the truth.

 

This is insanity.

 

I already explained how, in English, to ‘’set things up’ is a deliberate

act. Unless you are trying to say that Srila Prabhupada set things up that

way accidentally!

 

Are you saying this, that ‘Srila Prabhupada set things up that way by

accident’?

 

If not then you agreed with this position three times in a row. You then

agreed with it again when you were trying to explain how you did not agree

with it. So here once again is where you DID agree with point a):

 

> "I accept your point a) provided you replace it with following statements:

>

> 1) Srila Prabhupada was the sole diksa guru for ISKCON from 1966 to 1977.

> 2) Srila Prabhupada set things up that way in 1966."

 

(Ramakanta das Nov 30, 2005 - 10:38 AM)

 

and again here:

 

> This is what we agreed:

>

> Srila Prabhupada was the sole diksa guru for ISKCON from 1966 to 1977.

> Srila Prabhupada set things up that way in 1966.

 

(Ramakanta Dec 31, 2005 - 08:36 PM)

 

And again below you qualify the wording you would find acceptable:

 

> Also if you combine these two statements, you have to combine them by the

> word "and", nothing else:

>

> 1) Srila Prabhupada was the sole diksa guru for ISKCON from 1966 to 1977.

> AND

> 2) Srila Prabhupada set things up that way in 1966.

 

(Ramakanta Jan 02, 2006 - 04:25 PM)

 

The above came after lengthy negotiation and my presentation of numerous

arguments and evidence. But you then contradict yourself by saying:

 

> Statement 1) describes a status quo and 2) describes an activity. It is

> unproven that the status quo 1) was caused by the activity 2). But your

> combined statement says exactly that.

 

(Ramakanta Jan 02, 2006 - 04:25 PM)

 

So it is true that after I gave numerous arguments and evidence you agreed

with our position three times, and then again. You now say you did not mean

to agree. But you did agree. Please do not accuse me of not writing the

truth when it is the truth.

 

The only way I would be misrepresenting what you agreed with is if you had

argued that Srila Prabhupada’s actions in setting himself up as the diksa

guru for ISKCON were all a big accident, like Robinson Crusoe landing on a

desert Island as a result of a shipwreck. But you would never propose

something so adsurd.....would you?

 

Since you clearly have this problem with English, and since Srila Prabhupada

preached in English, and we argue in English, this may explain why you are

not already a member of the IRM.

best wishes

Ys

Yadu