Official Ramakanta vs. IRM discussion thread

[Guest guest]

Posted by Yaduraja on Feb 05, 2006:

 

Dear Ramakanta Prabhu,

PAMHO, AGTSP,

 

To save wasting any more time let’s cut to the chase.

 

You have already agreed with the facts given in 1-11.

 

> I agree with the facts you listed.

 

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

 

Your sole argument against 1) (which directly support point a)) is that

Srila Prabhupada was the founder Acarya. But this additional fact does not

prevent Srila Prabhupada from being, or remaining the sole diksa guru for

ISKCON UNLESS you have evidence that Srila Prabhupada defined the term

‘founder acarya’ as someone who could not be, or remain the sole diksa guru

for the society he founds.

 

You have failed to provide any such evidence.

 

Therefore you have simply:

 

Agreed with all the facts I presented.

And

Provided no evidence that disproves my conclusion drawn from those very

facts.

But instead:

Provided an additional fact that does not, in itself, effect our conclusion

drawn from said facts, but merely lends further support.

 

You have therefore contradicted yourself YET AGAIN since you claim to

disagree with a), yet agree with all the facts supporting a), and only offer

a ‘counter-argument’ that simply reinforces our position by giving an

‘explanation’ for why a) is true (founder acarya).

 

I have never said that showing you contradict yourself, or showing you

agreeing with us, proves we are right. We already think we are right. We

have many elaborate arguments for why we think we are right. We have papers

explaining why we think we are right, over a hundred in fact. The GBC have

had to withdraw the very paper TFO set out to disprove. The GBC is made up

largely of the very 'gurus' you are defending. Your guru does not even

believe there should be ANY gurus. Your position is thus hopeless so far as

I can see. You are lost at sea, just like Robinson Crusoe, only I see no

safe landing the way you are heading.

 

Please be absolutely clear:

 

Our arguments and position are in no way, shape or form dependent on what is

going on in your head, with all due respect.

 

I have never said we are right because you agree with us, or because you

contradicted yourself. But in a debate, where you are trying to defeat our

position, you cannot do that by agreeing with us and contradicting your own

position all the time!!

 

You seem to be way out of your depth here. Is there not somebody you trust

who can explain the rudiments of debate to you? I am trying to give you a

dignified way out by suggesting you either prove your ‘founder acarya’

argument has any relevance to disproving our conclusion, or concede defeat.

Best wishes

Ys

Yadu