Official Ramakanta vs. IRM discussion thread

[Guest guest]

Posted by Yaduraja on Dec 17, 2006:

 

Dear Ramakanta prabhu,

PAMHO, AGTSP,

 

I asked if you could please prove that I have misrepresented Srila

Prabhupada on the issue of siksa and diksa. Instead of proving this you

start:

 

> For example, you said that imparting knowledge if (is) the very definition

> of diksa,

 

Oops, have to stop you right there. It is not me who defines diksa in this

way, it is Srila Prabhupada:

 

"Diksa actually means initiating a disciple with transcendental knowledge by

which he becomes freed from all material contamination." (Madhya-lila,

4:112, Purport)

 

If you went to any English kindergarten they would be able to teach you what

the word ‘means’ means. Maybe that’s what you should do. Do I have to quote

the dictionary again? To give the meaning of a word is to define it. Can't

you understand this?

 

Also, why do you find it so hard to understand that the function of the bona

fide spiritual master, either siksa or diksa, is to impart transcendental

knowledge?

 

Since you now claim Srila Prabhupada is your spiritual master who will

deliver you (sounds very similar to our position) then please note and

accept his definition of diksa above, and reject any so-called ‘senior

devotees’ who say otherwise. Whoever they are they are obviously no better

than Haricash.

 

Once you agree with the definition of diksa given above I shall move to the

second half of your first sentence.

 

Obviously there is no point whatsoever in me trying to answer your endless

flow of mostly distractive, irrelevant questions if you won’t even accept

definitions given by the very person who is meant to be the ultimate

authority within this debate. Definitions given in books that are meant to

guide the entire world for up to 9,500 more years.

 

To summarise the current status of the debate in relation to physical

presence:

 

So far you have not proven that Srila Prabhupada must be physically present

on the same planet as a disciple in order to deliver him by initiation.

 

Since the definition of diksa is the imparting of transcendental knowledge

by the guru to the disciple; and since you accept Srila Prabhupada can

impart this transcendental knowledge so long as he is within the same

universe:

 

> Yes, the spiritual master has to be physically present in the material

> universe to impart transcendental knowledge. (You also said this.)

(Ramakanta das Dec 06, 2006 - 09:39 AM)

 

There is nothing scripturally that you have presented that would prevent

Srila Prabhupada from remaining ISKCON’s diksa guru.

 

Being physically present within the same universe is not the same as being

physically present in relation to each and every disciple. You seem to

confuse the two concepts.

 

Your only option now is to prove Srila Prabhupada is NOT in this universe.

Good luck.

 

If it were essential for the guru to be physically present on the same

planet as his disciples in order to deliver them back to the spiritual sky

then no-one could have been delivered for nearly 30 years, nor ever will be.

This would render the entire debate redundant since no-one would stand any

chance of being delivered whoever 'wins'.

 

In a desperate bid to squirm your way out of your own self-contradictory

sludge, you have even tried to imply he may be now be on Earth:

 

> I don't know if Srila Prabhupada is currently physically present on the

> earth in another body.

Dec 06, 2006 - 09:39 AM

 

Yet if he were this would simply further destroy your own unjustified

challenge to point c). If you were to argue that he is on this planet then

bang goes your own baseless objection to him remaining the sole diksa guru

for ISKCON. You are hopeless at this debating thing aren’t you! Have you

tried cooking or bhajan? I'm sure you must be good at something.

 

Thus point c) remains firmly intact, whilst you remain hopelessly mired in

defeat and self-contradiction.

 

Best wishes

Ys

Yadu