Official Ramakanta vs. IRM discussion thread

[Guest guest]

Posted by Yaduraja on Mar 02, 2006:

 

Dear Ramakanta prabhu,

PAMHO, AGTSP,

 

OK so in future when you say I have made a logically fallacious argument I

shall not take it too seriously since you still think I may be right.

 

You asked:

 

> why did you write "before we can"?

 

Because I want to resolve it before moving on to your next layer of

argumentation.

 

Right, so now we have dealt with those rather pointless accusations that

appear to have been merely a smokescreen to divert attention, we are finally

back to your self-contradiction.

 

You wrote:

 

> Generally, if you think that I contradicted myself, then there is a

> misunderstanding. Don't think that I am stupid and contradict myself.

 

Ramakanta Jan 05, 2006 - 06:10 AM

 

Well I am trying my hardest not to think that about you, but what about

this:

 

You had accused me of making a straw man argument:

 

> “I did not write that Srila Prabhupada announced he would stop being the

> diksa guru for ISKCON. So this is a straw man argument.”(

 

(Ramakanta Dec 10, 2005 - 05:09 AM)

 

Yet when I had previously answered your question:

 

> “Did Srila Prabhupada announce that he will stop being the sole diksa-guru

> for ISKCON?”

 

(Ramakanta Dec 02, 2005 - 10:43 PM)

 

With the following:

 

"Based on available evidence, which is the only evidence that matters with

regards how ISKCON is meant to run, he did not."

 

You disagreed with me and wrote:

 

> He announced it:

>

> On April 22, 1977 Srila Prabhupada said, "Yes. I shall choose some guru. I

> shall say, 'Now you become acarya. You become authorized.' I am waiting

> for that. You become all acarya. I retire completely. But the training

> must be complete."

> (By "guru" he meant "regular guru" as confirmed on May 28, 1977 by "When I

> order, 'You become guru,' he becomes regular guru.")

 

(Ramakanta Dec 03, 2005 - 07:15 PM)

 

Thus you had apparently contradicted yourself.

 

‘He announced it” (Ramakanta das)

 

If you recall when I pointed this out to you, you tried to wriggle out of

answering it for days on end until finally you changed your position so that

in your NEW POSITION Srila Prabhupada was no longer *the sole* diksa guru

for ISKCON, but only *a* (one of potentially many) diksa guru for ISKCON.

You changed your position here:

 

> So my answer to your question is: By "... stop being the diksa guru for

> ISKCON" I meant "... stop being a diksa guru for ISKCON". I did not mean

> "... stop being the sole diksa guru for ISKCON".

 

(Ramakanta: Jan 06, 2006 - 06:18 AM)

 

But later you obviously forgot you had changed position and then flip

flopped back to what you claimed you did NOT really, really, really mean:

 

> I still agree with what I understood, namely that because Srila Prabhupada

> was *the sole* diksa-guru he set up things like that. Jan 16, 2006 - 08:59

> AM

> Jan 17 I understood "Srila Prabhupada set things up that way in 1966

> because he was *the sole* diksa guru". (I still agree with that.), 2006 -

> 07:06 AM

 

And again here:

 

> If Srila Prabhupada was already the *sole diksa* guru for ISKCON since the

> foundation of ISKCON, then later he could not have set himself up again as

> *the sole* diksa guru for ISKCON.

 

(Ramakanta Feb 09, 2006 - 11:56 AM)

 

This strongly resembles self-contradiction, and yet you assure us that

generally you are not so stupid as to do that.

 

So is your position that Srila Prabhupada was, prior to his physical

departure:

 

‘a diksa guru for ISKCON’

Or

‘the sole diksa guru for ISKCON’?

 

This is directly relevant to point a) so must be cleared up.

best wishes

ys

Yadu