Official Ramakanta vs. IRM discussion thread

[Guest guest]

Posted by Yaduraja on Sep 26, 2006:

 

Dear Ramakanta Prabhu,

PAMHO. AGTSP!

You write yet again:

 

> You don't know how a devotee is authorized to be a diksa guru.

 

As I already explained this debate is not about authorisation in general,

but specifically about diksa authorisation within the institution of ISKCON.

Do you understand the difference? So far as ISKCON is concerned we know

EXACTLY how EVERYTHING was authorised to go on with regards initiation.

Srila Prabhupada left explicit orders on who the diksa guru was to be:

 

“Now that Srila Prabhupada has named these representatives, Temple

Presidents may henceforward send recommendation for first and second

initiation to whichever of these eleven representatives are nearest their

temple. After considering the recommendation, these representatives may

accept the devotee as an initiated disciple of Srila Prabhupada by giving a

spiritual name, or in the case of second initiation, by chanting on the

Gayatri thread, just as Srila Prabhupada has done. The newly initiated

devotees are disciples of His Divine Grace A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami

Prabhupad, the above eleven senior devotees acting as His representative.”

 

(July 9th 1977 letter to all GBC’s and Temple presidents approved by Srila

Prabhupada.)

 

Do you have a letter from Srila Prabhupada to the GBC countermanding the

above system which merely perpetuated the status quo you agree he

established way back in 1966? I bet you don't.

 

Can you prove your assumption that there is an order authorising the GBC to

change the status quo that we have missed? I bet you can't.

 

When I ask for relevant evidence in the form of orders to the GBC

authorising them to change the status quo you agree he established way back

in 1966, you instead offer:

 

1) A conversation (Hassan) with someone who was not a member of the GBC, not

a temple president, not a BBT trustee, not even a disciple, not even a

follower, but a one-off visitor to the temple who was doing a college

project.

2) A private letter (kirtanananda) to one individual which says nothing

about Srila Prabhupada stopping being the diksa guru for ISKCON, but instead

simply setting out a plan that no-one disputes (ritviks are also empowered

to initiate).

 

You have not presented any order from Srila Prabhupada to the GBC of any

type, not to speak of anything remotely relevant to this debate.

 

If you cannot prove your implied unproven assumption that there is a

countermanding order we do not know about then please admit this so we can

go on to point c).

 

You wrote:

 

> I asked you, "What would you accept as an evidence [of the opposite of

> your point b)]?". But you understood, "What sort of evidence would stop

> the status quo?".

 

The above is complete nonsense. An order to the GBC countermanding point b)

would also stop the status quo, so what on earth are you thinking? With such

poor reasoning abilities is it any wonder you would misunderstand Srila

Prabhupada!

 

Best wishes

Ys

Yadu

 

P.S.We can keep the wording for point b) exactly the same, only from now on

you will remember that the word ‘ordered’ refers to an order to the relevant

managing authority (GBC) as I explained from the very beginning by pointing

you to NCIP.