Official Ramakanta vs. IRM discussion thread

[Guest guest]

Posted by Yaduraja on Jul 12, 2006:

 

Dear Ramakanta Prabhu,

PAMHO. AGTSP!

You suggest:

 

> I don't assume your argument is "Our claims are proven because Ramakanta

> is defeated". So what is the purpose of saying that I am defeated?

 

No, you are absolutely correct, that is not our position. Indeed, if you

read The Final Order, The NCIP paper, or any of the many position papers and

rebuttals on our web site it is true we never claim our position is proven

because Ramakanta is defeated, well deduced! But in this debate you have

made numerous self-contradictions and are thus self-defeated. So I point

this out since you do not seem to be able to understand when the game is up.

Also, if you cannot even agree with your own statements, and have to keep

withdrawing claims, then what is your special qualification for telling us

all what is and what is not proven?

You go on:

 

> On April 27, 2006 I asked you:

>

> "Do you claim that in 1966 Srila Prabhupada wanted to be the sole diksa

> guru for ISKCON?"

>

> And you answered:

>

> "YES."

>

> You have not limited the time period.

 

Well spotted again, yes it is indeed the IRM’s position that Srila

Prabhupada wanted to be the sole diksa guru for ISKCON, and that he set no

time limit on that status quo. But point a) itself does not claim that this

was meant to be permanent as you well know. Point a) gives the status quo as

established by Srila Prabhupada in 1966; it claims nothing beyond that. You

go on:

 

> Therefore your claim includes following claim:

>

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

> its entire duration."

 

But that is not made in point a) as you well know.

 

> So far you have not proven that claim. Neither did you write that you do

> not claim it. Since I do not expect that you will ever prove it, I will no

> longer ask you to prove it. I have filed it to "IRM's unproven claims".

 

The above comes under point b) and c), it was never claimed in point a) as

you well know. You spent months arguing against point a) wasting everyone’s

time, and then, having realised it was correct all along you now pretend it

claimed something it never did. Pathetic?

 

You comment:

 

> You can only credibly claim that a certain thing never happened if you

> exactly know how it would happen, or if you have heard from an authority

> that it never happened. (Please tell me if you don't agree with that.)

 

I have explained all this before, so no doubt you will now accuse me of

making an illogical ad nauseam argument, whereas as usual it is the fault of

your poor memory.

 

With regards point b) it refers to all instruction given by Srila Prabhupada

to ISKCON with particular attention to those directives aimed at the GBC,

the body he charged with managing ISKCON.

 

When we first got to point b) many months ago, before you somehow got it

into your head that maybe Srila Prabhupada did not mean to do what he did

with regards initiation in 1966, I asked you to read NCIP where point b) is

elaborated. In that paper it proves that Srila Prabhupada left in place the

GBC to manage all the standards he had set in place:

 

so unless you can prove he ordered the GBC to change the standards for

initiation he 'left in place' then point b) stands.

 

This is indeed the situation since you have not provided such an order from

Srila Prabhupada, nor do you claim you have such an order, nor do the GBC

claim that Srila Prabhupada has come back to revoke any of the management

systems he established prior to November 14th 1977. In effect this finishes

our entire discussion since then point c) logically follows.

 

Is it your position that we can stop a management system left in place by

Srila Prabhupada just on your personal whim that he MAY have issued a

counter order, even though, by your own admission, you have no idea how,

when, where or even if that order has been issued. Surely that is not your

position since it would contradict one of your favourite quotes:

 

"The process of speaking in spiritual circles is to say something upheld by

the scriptures. One should at once quote from scriptural authority to back

up what he is saying." (Bg 17.15 purport)

 

So are you contradicting yourself again Prabhu? It would certainly not be

the first time would it.. ha! It's over, really!

 

Now if you want to carry on being defeated by the truth that's fine with me,

but you must first give a full position paper with regards the central issue

of this debate:

 

According to you, Ramakanta Prabhu, precisely HOW, WHEN and WHERE did Srila

Prabhupada authorise the GBC to disband the ritvik system he put in place

just four month before his departure, and HOW, WHEN and WHERE did he

authorise the GBC to replace him as the diksa guru for ISKCON. (You may

recognise these as modifications a and b from TFO).

 

Best wishes

Ys

Yadu