Official Ramakanta vs. IRM discussion thread

[Guest guest]

Posted by Yaduraja on Mar 13, 2006:

 

Dear Ramakanta Prabhu,

PAMHO. AGTSP!

 

With regards whether you still hold with your three arguments you wrote:

 

> Your conclusions from what I wrote are wrong.

 

Not really sure what you mean above. But to be on the safe side I shall

firstly answer your arguments 1 and 2. If you want I can post your postings

in which these two arguments were first made by you. If you do not defend

the following rebuttals I shall then go on to argument 3 and clear up your

confusion over how Srila Prabhupada could factually be the sole diksa guru

for an organisation BEFORE he had fully established himself as such

institutionally, ie, within the hearts and minds of its membership.

 

So, as I say I shall deal with arguments 1 and 2 first, and for the time

being leave aside the contradiction issue I had previously identified in

connection to them. Here they are again:

 

1)Srila Prabhupada was the sole diksa guru for ISKCON only because he was

the Founder Acarya.

 

2)Srila Prabhupada was the sole diksa guru for ISKCON only because there

were no other diksa gurus available at the time.

 

As I already explained, point a) does not offer an explanation for why Srila

Prabhupada established himself in this position, so 1 and 2 above are

irrelevant to the debate. Aside from being irrelevant to the debate, if

anything they simply reinforce point a).

 

For argument 1) I would respond:

 

If being the Founder Acarya means that one would of necessity be the sole

diksa guru for that institution, then this would only support the fact that

Srila Prabhupada established himself as the sole diksa guru for ISKCON since

he was the very person who set himself up as the founder Acarya for that

institution.

 

For argument 2) I would respond:

 

If there were ‘no other diksa gurus available at the time’ then that is all

the more reason why Srila Prabhupada would want to establish himself in that

position

 

So first of all, do you agree that arguments 1 and 2 above do not, in

themselves, disprove the fact that Srila Prabhupada established himself as

the sole diksa guru for ISKCON in 1966? If you do not defend them I shall

assume you agree and move on to 3 etc.

 

Best wishes

Ys

Yadu