Official Ramakanta vs. IRM discussion thread

[Guest guest]

Posted by Yaduraja on Jun 05, 2006:

 

Dear Ramakanta Prabhu,

PAMHO. AGTSP!

I had written:

 

“Obviously in order to identify a new philosophy I first had to see it.”

 

To which you reply:

 

> You could also have invented it yourself (never heard of it). I didn't

> know what was going on in your mind. I had only what you wrote. And that

> was a contradiction.

 

In my post I had quoted you:

 

> By my question about the League of Devotees I wanted to test your ability

> to find out Krishna's plan from Srila Prabhupada's activities. You failed

> the test: You did not find out Krishna's plan from Srila Prabhupada's

> activities. Rather, you found out Krishna's plan because Srila Prabhupada

> said what Krishna's plan was. And this is the right way to find it out.

 

Then I wrote:

 

"This challenge is based on the philosophy that the activities of the

spiritual master can only be accepted as fulfilling part of Krishna’s plan

if he accompanies the act with the assurance that ‘this is Krishna’s plan’,

whereas anything the spiritual master does without saying this may not be

taken as fulfilling Krishna’s plan. So when Srila Prabhupada makes himself

recognised and accepted as the sole diksa guru for ISKCON, tells everyone

that he is the sole diksa guru for ISKCON, legislates that he remain the

sole diksa guru for ISKCON, defends his position as sole diksa guru for

ISKCON from ambitious disciples like Tusta Krishna etc etc, none of that can

be accepted as Krishna’s plan simply because they were not activities

accompanied by the words ‘in instituting all this I am following Krishna’s

plan’.

 

I have never heard of this philosophy before; that the spiritual master’s

activities cannot be accepted as part of Krishna’s plan unless he says the

words ‘this is Krishna’s plan’ every time he does something. Can you please

provide evidence for this interesting philosophy?"

 

So I clearly identified the challenge YOU had made as implying a philosophy

I had never heard of. The words ‘this challenge’ could only refer to the

quote immediately preceding it, and that challenge- that I had failed your

test, came from YOU! I am not Ramakanta, you are!

 

In subsequent posts I could only be referring to this same new philosophy

since I had not mentioned any other new philosophy than the one above. So if

you withdraw your accusation that I contradicted myself I shall proceed to

the next point.

Best wishes

Ys

Yadu