Official Ramakanta vs. IRM discussion thread

[Guest guest]

Posted on Yaduraja on Jul 07, 2006:

 

Dear Ramakanta Prabhu,

PAMHO, AGTSP!

 

Thank you for final statement; here is mine.

 

You wrote:

 

> I stated following:

> 1)It is the etiquette that during his presence no disciple should accept

> his own disciples.

>

> 2)It is possible that while Srila Prabhupada was present his disciples

> were allowed/empowered/competent to initiate/make their own disciples and

> at the same time there was the etiquette that they do not do so in his

> presence.

Ramakanta das

 

If, as you say in both 1 and 2 above, there was the etiquette that Srila

Prabhupada’s disciples do not initiate in his presence then they would not

be allowed to initiate till after Nov 14th 1977.

 

Yet the letter to Hamsadutta you use to support your position gives the

possible start date as ‘by 1975’. Thus your interpretation of the Hamsadutta

letter contradicts both 1 and 2 of your statements above.

 

To be ‘competent’ is not the same as being ‘allowed’ (not that a

conversation with a student visitor that remained hidden for decades after

Srila Prabhupada’s departure can have any relevance to what Srila Prabhupada

wanted to take place on a global scale on November 15th 1977 with regards

initiation). According to the etiquette that underpins YOUR POSITION, and

which you have again TWICE confirmed above, they could not be allowed to

initiate till after his departure, yet you contradict yourself by your use

of the Hamsadutta letter which says this may occur ‘by 1975’ when he was

still present.

 

Also:

 

> a) In 1966 Srila Prabhupada wanted to be the sole diksa guru for ISKCON

> for its entire duration.

 

You have conceded a). For b) you illogically challenge us to prove a

negative, therefore c) logically follows.

 

> b) Until today Srila Prabhupada did not authorize anyone to be diksa-guru.

 

the burden of proof falls on you to prove he has, not on us to prove a

negative. The GBC was set up to manage ISKCON, therefore any order to

replace Srila Prabhupada as the diksa guru for ISKCON would have to be

directed by the Founder Acarya to those he charged with management. Please

present your evidence for this directive to the GBC that was given either

pre or post 1977 by Srila Prabhupada or concede defeat.

 

> c) The Hamsadutta letter could only be referring to disciples initiating

> on his behalf.

 

Since the possible start date given is (by 1975) then Ramakanta prabhu

cannot accept it refers to Srila Prabhupada's disciples initiating their own

disiples since he says:

 

> It is the etiquette that during his presence no disciple should accept his

> own disciples.

Ramakanta das

 

So we can lock this debate down now since you're obviously happy you've

defeated us. I'm certainly very happy indeed.

 

Please forgive any offences.

 

Best wishes

Ys

Yadu

 

 

BTW, where i say: "You have conceded a)" I refer to point a) of our

position:

 

"Srila Prabhupada established himself as the sole diksa guru for ISKCON in

1966".

 

which makes no claim about whether this status quo was meant to change; that

comes under point b).