Official Ramakanta vs. IRM discussion thread

[Guest guest]

Posted by Yaduraja on Feb 02, 2006:

 

Dear Ramakanta Prabhu,

PAMHO, AGTSP.

 

Very wise of you not to try to defend your challenge that ISKCON existed

before it existed.

 

So finally we are back to where we were on Nov 30th 2005, Jai!

 

You wrote previously:

 

> Srila Prabhupada founded ISKCON as the founder acarya. And this action is

> proven. If you claim that there were other actions with the result that he

> was the sole diksa guru for ISKCON, then you have to prove that.

 

I shall now re-post the 11 points I made previously on November 16th , 2005

at 11:33 am supporting our position that Srila Prabhupada established

himself, deliberately, as the sole diksa guru for ISKCON in 1966. Last time

I posted these you made some comments. I assume you still stand by those

comments since on 25th Jan 06 you boldly claimed:

 

> I refuted your attempts to prove it.

 

You agreed with the facts I presented at the time, but initially (and then

again a few days ago) you disputed the conclusion I had drawn from those

facts:

 

> I agree with the facts you listed except "of his own volition". But your

> conclusion from these facts is unproven.

 

(Ramakanta Nov 20, 2005 - 08:01 AM)

 

I answered the ‘volition’ objection on Nov 20, 2005 - 09:30 PM. So aside

from that point (unless you want to dispute my clarification) I shall now go

through all your so-called ‘refutations’ one at a time. So here are the 11

points I gave in support of point a) to which I have added two additional

clarifications in parenthesis:

 

1) From the very earliest time in ISKCON, Srila Prabhupada personally

conducted initiation ceremonies in which all the initiates became his

disciples. He did this willingly and of his own volition (under the orders

of his spiritual master).

 

2) Srila Prabhupada set all the standards for initiation within ISKCON. And

these standards are meant to remain in place for as long as ISKCON exists.

Only the diksa guru himself can set the standards by which he will accept

disciples.

 

3) Srila Prabhupada established daily guru puja in ISKCON whereby everyone

worshipped ONLY him as the ‘spiritual master’ giving transcendental

knowledge lifetime after lifetime, the function of the diksa guru.

 

4) Srila Prabhupada established the system by which recommendations for

initiations would be made only to himself (or his authorized representative

as in July 9th letter).

 

5) Srila Prabhupada approved of GBC resolutions that reinforced the

standards for initiation he had set, and which were applicable throughout

ISKCON. As stated, only the diksa guru himself can decide the standards by

which he will accept disciples.

 

6) No other authorised initiation ceremonies were carried out in ISKCON

other than those in which Srila Prabhupada was the initiator.

 

7) Srila Prabhupada wrote many letters in which he accepted the

recommendations of temple presidents for new initiates. Recommendations were

only ever sent to Srila Prabhupada (or his representatives after July 9th)

not to any other ‘diksa guru’, and such initiates ONLY ever became disciples

of Srila Prabhupada.

 

8)Letters written by Srila Prabhupada to his GBC leaders (such as

Madhudvisa) simply reinforced his status as the sole initiator guru for

ISKCON and confirmed that which was practically going on all over the world

within ISKCON, under his authority.

 

9) The only private letters written by Srila Prabhupada where even the

possibility of his disciples initiating was mentioned was in relation to

ambitious and or disobedient individuals like Tusta Krishna, Hamsadutta and

Brahmananda; the very purpose of such letters (where the ‘etiquette’/’law of

disciplic succession’ is invoked) being to STOP them from initiating, not to

encourage them.

 

10) Srila Prabhupada’s final directive on how initiation was to be conducted

within ISKCON left him as the sole diksa guru, with representatives acting

on his behalf. The letter also confirms that Srila Prabhupada was the diksa

guru to whom recommendations were sent up till that time.

 

11) The process by which initiation is granted in ISKCON, as described in

Srila Prabhupada’s books, is identical to the one in place when he was

physically present, and unavoidably different from the multiple guru system

foisted on the Movement after his physical departure.

 

All the AVAILABLE evidence thus converges on the fact that Srila Prabhupada

established himself (or set himself up) as the sole diksa guru for ISKCON in

1966; or point a).

 

Now I shall post your first ‘refutation’ to point 1) above:

 

> "Of his own volition" is incorrect. (…) Otherwise I agree with your

> statement. But this does not prove that Srila Prabhupada established

> himself as the sole initiator. Rather, the words "from the very earliest

> time" indicate that he did it as the founder acarya.

 

(Ramakanta Nov 20, 2005 - 08:01 AM)

 

Above you do not dispute the facts as stated in point 1): ‘I agree with your

statement’.

 

You then offer what you think is the reason WHY this fact is so. So in

effect all you are doing is giving a reason for why you think our position

is correct. Thank you.

 

Whether or not you are correct, the reason WHY 1) is true is not relevant to

our debate. In other words the issue is not WHY Srila Prabhupada 'did it' as

you say, but just that he 'did it' (set himself up as the sole diksa guru

for ISKCON).

 

Point 1) and point a) simply state an historical fact without giving a

reason.

 

Therefore your ‘refutation’ is irrelevant to point 1) above, and thus to

point a) of our overall position.

 

You are ‘refuting’ something that neither 1) nor a) seeks to establish. Thus

logically, whether or not you are correct, both 1) and a) would still stand.

 

Furthermore, if you want to argue that being the ‘founder acarya’ would

likely necessitate that from the ‘very earliest times’ one would be the

‘sole initiator’, then I for one will certainly not argue with you. You are

simply offering a reason for the fact that Srila Prabhupada was the ‘sole

initiator’ for ISKCON from the earliest times. You say 'he did it' as the

founder acarya.

 

So you admit 'he did it', and then you say why you think he 'did it'.

 

And since:

 

It was Srila Prabhupada who set things up that way, nobody else: 'he did

it'.

 

And since:

 

You have now thankfully abandoned your Robinson Crusoe philosophy, we can

now both agree that however he set things up, it was deliberately.

 

Thus:

 

In effect you are agreeing once again with point a) and my statement of Nov

17th where I paraphrased point a) to which you took such enormous exception.

Only you are offering a REASON for WHY you think a) is true.

 

The only possible way your so-called ‘refutation’ would impact negatively on

our position is if you could prove that Srila Prabhupada defined the term

‘founder acarya’ as someone who must inevitably be succeeded as the diksa

guru for his own institution, or who could NOT be the sole diksa guru for

his own Movement. You have not shown this to be part of Srila Prabhupada’s

cannon of teachings.

 

So in saying you agree with my statement, and offering a reason for why this

statement is true, a reason that does not prevent Srila Prabhupada from

continuing as the sole initiator for ISKCON, you have inadvertently

reinforced our position.

 

Once again you are simply confirming point a): 'he did it'.

 

Since you have also claimed you strongly disagree with point a) you are thus

once again in a state of self-contradiction.

 

This is fatal in any debate.

 

There is clearly no need for me to offer further proof for 1) since you

agree with it:

 

‘I agree with your statement’.

 

If you agree with 1) then there is no apparent reason why you would not

agree with a), since 1) supports a).

 

So unless you can meet the challenge set for you above, namely proving that

the term ‘founder acarya’ by definition prohibits Srila Prabhupada from

remaining the diksa guru for ISKCON; then I would once again invite you to

concede defeat.

Best wishes,

Ys

Yadu