Official Ramakanta vs. IRM discussion thread

[Guest guest]

Posted by Yaduraja on May 09, 2006:

 

Dear Ramakanta prabhu,

PAMHO, AGTSP,

You wrote:

 

> But instead of presenting a proof of this assumption, you asked me to

> prove the opposite of it. This is the logical fallacy called "shifting the

> burden of proof".

 

I do not need to prove Srila Prabhupada meant to do what he did, you need to

prove he MAY have meant to do the opposite of what he did. The burden of

proof falls on he who speculates that the guru may not really have meant to

do what he did.

 

You claim he may have wanted multiple gurus in ISKCON, whereas in the real

world he actually set up a system where he was the ONLY diksa guru. That is

the opposite.

 

If you want to drop your speculative challenge then obviously I will not ask

you to prove it.

 

Then we will simply be left with what Srila Prabhupada deliberately did. And

what he deliberately did was make himself recognised and accepted as the

sole diksa guru for ISKCON.

 

We also assume Srila Prabhupada was the type of spiritual master described

in the previous quote. If Srila Prabhupada did not know what Krishna's plan

was with regards some specific, tiny, detail he would honestly say so. Where

he acted deliberately to set something up we assume he was acting according

to Krishna's plan. If you think this may not be the case then obviously you

need to find a guru who you think IS acting according to Krishna's plan.

Best wishes

ys

Yadu