Official Ramakanta vs. IRM discussion thread

[Guest guest]

Dear Yaduraja Prabhu, PAMHO. AGTSP!

 

 

Currently we are discussing your point b): "Srila Prabhupada never ordered

that he should ever stop being the diksa guru for ISKCON". Please try to

focus on this point.

 

 

> For the GBC to replace Srila Prabhupada and install a successor they would

> have needed authorisation from Srila Prabhupada, do you agree?

 

We can discuss this after we have finished your points b) and c).

 

 

> Within ISKCON EVERYONE is meant to be subject to the managerial oversight

> of the GBC as set in place by Srila Prabhupada.

>

> Anyone doing anything within ISKCON regarding initiation would also thus

> come under this same oversight.

 

This has nothing to do with your point b).

 

 

> The only orders the GBC received from Srila Prabhupada on how initiation

> within ISKCON was meant to be conducted are presented in NCIP and TFO etc.

 

Does the author of NCIP and TFO know how a devotee is authorized to be a

diksa guru? If not, then writing these papers was rascaldom.

 

"Just see how rascaldom. You do not know something perfectly, and still, you

are talking about it." (Lecture, Bg 1.45-46, Aug 1, 1973)

 

 

> The GBC were ONLY authorised to manage the systems Srila Prabhupada set in

> place prior to his departure in the form of approved GBC resolutions and

> signed directives.

 

Your point b) as you presented it on Oct 30, 2005 does not say: "Before his

departure Srila Prabhupada never ordered the GBC that he should ever stop

being the diksa guru for ISKCON". If this is your point b), then please

clearly say it and withdraw your previous unproven claim ("Srila Prabhupada

never ordered that he should ever stop being the diksa guru for ISKCON").

 

 

> Therefore such VISIBLE evidence is the only evidence relevant to this

> debate so far as orders to the GBC are concerned regarding how initiation

> was to be conducted.

 

Is Srila Prabhupada dead and can he no longer change the initiation system

in ISKCON? Is that your position?

 

There is a signed written document where Srila Prabhupada empowered his

disciples to initiate provided they have the required qualification:

 

"By 1975, all of those who have passed all of the above examinations will be

specifically empowered to initiate and increase the number of the Krishna

Consciousness population." (Letter to Kirtanananda, Jan 12, 1969)

 

And he confirmed this later:

 

"Now, they’re competent. They can, not only the swamis, even the grhasthas,

they are called dasa adhikari, and brahmacaris, everyone can, whoever is

initiated, he is competent to make disciples. But as a matter of etiquette

they do not do so in the presence of their spiritual master. This is the

etiquette. Otherwise, they are competent. They can make disciples and

spread." (Room Conversation, Jul 18, 1971)

 

On Sep 20, 2006 you wrote, "The diksa guru is the person who gives in

initiation". So when Srila Prabhupada's disciples initiate or give

initiation, then according to your statement they are diksa gurus.

 

Therefore, your point b) is false.

 

(You should reply to this only if you know how a devotee is authorized to be

a diksa guru. Otherwise it would be rascaldom.)

 

 

> Claiming that Srila Prabhupada may authorise a successor initiating acarya

> in secret is equivalent to claiming:

>

> Srila Prabhupada would authorise an individual or individuals to go to war

> with the very management system he himself installed?

>

> This is the absurd conclusion your argumentation leads to. I notice you

> cannot answer this challenge.

 

I do not answer this because you have not confirmed it by a quote from guru,

sadhu or sastra. It is just a conclusion drawn by your imperfect brain.

 

"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)

 

 

> I see no point in going on and on, round and round in circles. We can end

> the debate with the acknowledgement of the ramifications of your position.

 

Do you give up? Do you want to end this debate because you don't know how a

devotee is authorized to be a diksa guru?

 

 

> So far as we are concerned, we must follow the orders Srila Prabhupada

> gave the GBC in visible form, not terminate those orders on the basis of

> invisible instructions that no-one, not even the ‘gurus’ themselves, claim

> exist.

 

This is your point c). We can discuss it after we finished your point b).

 

 

Summary:

 

Your point b) is false. And since your whole theory is based on that false

assumption, your whole theory is false. It was rascaldom to present your

point b) without knowing how a devotee is authorized to be a diksa guru.

 

 

ys Ramakanta dasa