Official Ramakanta vs. IRM discussion thread

[Guest guest]

Dear Yaduraja Prabhu, PAMHO. AGTSP!

 

 

> > Why do you conclude

> >

> > 'for the initiation (not the initiation ceremony) the physical presence

> > of the diksa guru is not required'

> >

> > from

> >

> > 'the diksa guru does not have to be physically present at the initiation

> > ceremony'?

>

> I do not.

 

Then why did you write following unless you drew the above conclusion? Your

point c) is about diksa, not diksa ceremony.

 

On Dececember 4 you wrote:

> we can know for certain his physical presence is not absolutely required

> in order for the diksa ceremony to proceed.

> ...

> Therefore you cannot use this physical presence issue to challenge point

> c).

 

 

> Since we now both agree Srila Prabhupada does not need to be physically

> present at the diksa ceremony we are currently dealing with his ability to

> impart knowledge, the very definition of diksa.

 

I do not agree that 'to impart knowledge' is the very definition of diksa.

Where did you read that? Do you believe that "means" means "is the very

definition"? Just like when Srila Prabhupada said "atma means body", this

means that the very definition of "atma" is "body"?

 

 

> So will you please now answer my question:

>

> ‘Does the spiritual master have to be physically present on this planet in

> order to impart ‘transcendental knowledge’- the definition of diksa- to

> disciples on this planet.’

 

I did not find the answer in the Vedabase.

 

 

Why don't you simply present a statement by Srila Prabhupada saying that for

the initiation the physical presence of the diksa guru is not required?

 

 

ys Ramakanta dasa