Official Ramakanta vs. IRM discussion thread

[Guest guest]

Posted by Yaduraja on Jul 05, 2006:

 

Dear Ramakanta Prabhu,

PAMHO. AGTSP!

 

OK so I can see we need to go through this for the FIFTEENTH TIME.

You quote me:

 

"Since Srila Prabhupada was still present in 1975 you obviously have to

accept he could not be talking about his disciples initiating their own

disciples since that would contradict YOUR POSITION."

 

And then you write:

 

> So it was your position that Srila Prabhupada could not be talking about

> his disciples initiating their own disciples.

 

Did you not read the words ‘YOUR POSITION’ in the section you just quoted?

Is there a problem with your eyesight?

 

It is YOUR POSITION I am discussing, LOOK:

 

“Srila Prabhupada explicitely confirmed... it is the etiquette that during

his presence no disciple should accept his own disciples.”

( Ramakanta das Nov 12, 2005 - 06:22 AM)

 

The above is YOUR position, and since Srila Prabhupada was STILL PRESENT in

1975, you therefore cannot ALSO claim the letter to Hamsadutta (which says

'by 1975') refers to Srila Prabhupada’s disciples initiating their OWN

disciples since that would contradict YOUR POSITION:

 

“Srila Prabhupada explicitely confirmed... it is the etiquette that during

his presence no disciple should accept his own disciples.”

( Ramakanta das Nov 12, 2005 - 06:22 AM)

 

Once again this is YOUR POSITION we are discussing:

 

“Srila Prabhupada explicitely confirmedi it is the etiquette that during his

presence no disciple should accept his own disciples.”( Ramakanta das Nov

12, 2005 - 06:22 AM)

 

I have made our position amply clear, it is in our position papers on the

web site. Papers you claim you have read. The IRM have made it very clear

that using private correrspondence as a means of countermanding

institutional directives is a blatent form of cheating. The letters you have

used do not even say what you are claiming, but merely state something

everyone already agrees with. The ritvik system authorised disciples to

initiate and thus make disciples, so such evidence will never help you

defeat our position.

 

It is your own misuse of evidence that has got you into this mess so you can

stop trying to distract attention by making out this has anything to do with

our position. For the FIFTEENTH TIME, my position on YOUR self-contradiction

is as follows:

 

 

The possible time frame (by 1975) given in the private letters you consider

proof of Srila Prabhupada's desire to have his disciples initiate their own

disciples (even though the letters don’t say this) clashes with YOUR OWN

position:

 

“Srila Prabhupada explicitely confirmed... it is the etiquette that during

his presence no disciple should accept his own disciples.”

( Ramakanta das Nov 12, 2005 - 06:22 AM)

 

They are two mutually exclusive propositions and thus logically

self-contradictory.

 

Whatever my position may be the fact is you have defeated yourself. Thus, by

the rules of Vaisnava debate you are finished. I am sure you will get the

point eventually. I mean it only took you a few months to finally agree that

Srila Prabhupada wanted to do what he did with regards establishing himself

as the sole diksa guru for ISKCON.

 

Let's see if I need to go through this for a sixteenth time.

Best wishes

Ys

Yadu