Official Ramakanta vs. IRM discussion thread

[Guest guest]

Posted by Yaduraja on May 25, 2006:

 

Dear Ramakanta Prabhu,

PAMHO. AGTSP!

I had asked you to prove your claim:

 

"Please produce the quote where Srila Prabhupada asks his Godbrothers to

initiate their OWN disciples within ISKCON. If you cannot prove your claim

then I am sure you will withdraw it."

 

To which you responded, surprise, surprise:

 

> Since it was a mistake to accept the burden of proof of your claim, I give

> it back to you. So please prove following statement:

>

> If it was Krishna plan to have multiple diksa gurus for ISKCON in 1966

> with Srila Prabhupada as one of them, then that would mean Srila

> Prabhupada was acting in defiance of Krishna’s plan.

 

Twice now in this debate you have claimed that Srila Prabhupada wanted his

Godbrothers to become diksa gurus for ISKCON, and both times you have backed

away when I challenged you.

 

I trust we shall hear no more of this.

 

Of course the reason you keep doing this is to try to distract from the

simple reality, that Srila Prabhupada set things up with himself as the sole

diksa guru for ISKCON with no order that this should ever change, or hint

that he really wanted something very different, namely a multitude of

competing diksa gurus all acting concurrently within the same institution

from 1966 onwards.

 

The fact is that from 1966 onwards Srila Prabhupada went to great lengths to

establish ISKCON with ONLY himself as the diksa guru. That much is clear.

 

If it was Krishna’s plan that from 1966 onwards the opposite scenario should

occur; namely dozens of diksa gurus all simultaneously writing books,

setting their own different initiation standards as is their prerogative,

all vying and competing for disciples and recognition and acceptance as bona

fide diksa gurus within the same institutional framework etc etc, then this

would mean that Srila Prabhupada would have acted in defiance of Krishna’s

plan. What’s not to understand? As I say a little child can understand this.

 

We may not understand all the activities of a Vaisnava, but certain things

are simply historical fact about which there can be no question. For

example, we all agree that Srila Prabhupada made himself accepted and

recognised as the SOLE diksa guru for ISKCON in 1966.

 

Since Srila Prabhupada did that it must have been Krishna’s plan since it is

OUR PHILOSOPHY that the pure devotee always carries out Krishna’s plan. The

pure devotee WANTS to do this since he WANTS to please Krishna.

 

If it was not Krishna’s plan then our whole debate would be absurd and

meaningless since Srila Prabhupada would not be the type of spiritual master

described in his own books!?!

 

Barking up the wrong tree means challenging points that cannot possibly help

you prove your position, which is apparently that our position is wrong.

Best wishes

Ys

Yadu