Official Ramakanta vs. IRM discussion thread

[Guest guest]

Posted by Yaduraja on Apr 02, 2006:

 

Dear Ramakanta Prabhu,

PAMHO,AGTSP!

 

I had challenged you to disprove point b):

 

“So to disprove b) you need to produce the order wherein Srila Prabhupada

says he should stop being the diksa guru for ISKCON.”

 

To which you reply:

 

> Since you don't want to commit the logical fallacy of 'shifting the burden

> of proof', you are not asking me to disprove b). Right?

>

> Your point b) is unproven. And it remains unproven until you produce a

> proof.

 

Since you have not produced a quote I take it you have no such evidence.

 

Without such evidence the status quo logically remains in place. The status

quo is that Srila Prabhupada is the sole diksa guru for ISKCON since that is

what he established through the process we have both agreed with in point

a). One never has to prove the status quo, since by definition the status

quo prevails.

 

You certainly cannot challenge the status quo by asking me to prove a

negative? That is a logical fallacy. We’ve been through all this before.

For example if I claim that I have never shot a policeman then you must

either:

 

Accept I am telling the truth;

Or

Prove I did shoot a policeman.

 

It is illogical to ask me to prove I did not shoot a policeman. Imagine if

the legal system worked like that, it would be chaos. It's like being

arrested for being a terrorist without any evidence against you and then you

having to prove you are NOT a terrorist. Surely such a thing could never

happen in the civilised world.

 

Similarly you must either accept we are correct that Srila Prabhupada did

not order he should stop being the diksa guru for ISKCON; or prove that he

did. It is illogical to ask me to prove he did not do something. That is

asking me to prove a negative.

 

You clearly still have no understanding of how the burden of proof works.

You write:

 

> you are actually claiming that until today Srila Prabhupada did not

> authorize any person to be a diksa guru in ISKCON.

 

That is correct. We are only concerned with what should occur within ISKCON.

The GBC is the body Srila Prabhupada established to manage ISKCON, so only a

direct order to the GBC could change such a monumental aspect of the

institution such as who should be the society’s diksa guru. Please re-read

the GBC resolutions I sent you. The GBC base their ENTIRE diksa guru

authority on an alleged order which is meant to have been given PRIOR to

Srila Prabhupada’s physical departure. Thus the GBC have never claimed that

Srila Prabhupada has issued any new managerial directives since November

14th 1977 regarding who should initiate. So the facts are:

 

1)Srila Prabhupada had left himself in place as the sole diksa guru for

ISKCON up until November 14th 1977.

 

2)There is no record anywhere of his having ordered he should ever stop

being the diksa guru for ISKCON .

 

3)There is also no record anywhere of him ever having orderd anyone to

succeed him as the diksa guru for ISKCON.

 

4)There are orders from Srila Prabhupada to the GBC allowing him to continue

acting as the diksa guru without any need for his physical involvement, and

orders that the system of management current within ISKCON should not

change. (for details please read the No Change in ISKCON Paradigm paper.)

 

5)The only body originally authorised to oversee the implementation of Srila

Prabhupada’s directives within ISKCON, the GBC, have also never claimed that

any directive authorising 1) or 2) above has been issued by Srila Prabhupada

subsequent to his physical departure.

 

Given the above the burden of proof clearly lies on you to prove that such

an order was ever given. If you cannot prove this then b) stands and we can

go quickly to point c).

Best wishes

Ys

Yadu