Guest guest Report post Posted September 11, 2005 Ramakant prabhu. Pamho. AgtSP. --- "Ramakanta (das) HKS (PAMHO.NET SysOp) (Zurich - CH)" <Ramakanta.HKS (AT) pamho (DOT) net> wrote: > Dear Madhusudana Prabhu, PAMHO. AGTSP! > > > > Is there any other reason why you don't accept > > > Sankarsana Prabhu as an authorized diksa guru? > > > > 1) He has NO verifiable authorization to initiate. > > He presented the same authorization that also Srila > Prabhupada presented. So what about the other 80 pretenders? Srila Prabhupada supposedly also told them secretly to be diksa gurus? > > > 2) His claim to be authorized contradicts the > written documented evidence > > from July 9th 1977. > > The July 9th document does not say that no disciple > of Srila Prabhupada is > authorized to initiate. Rather on April 22, 1977 > Srila Prabhupada said that > he will authorize acaryas. > So WHEN did this authorization take place? Where was the secret rendezvous, when Srila Prabhupada got the 80 successor gurus together and gave them the order? "One should take initiation from a bona fide spiritual master coming in the disciplic succession, who is ***authorised by his predecessor spiritual master***. This is called diksa -vidhana." (S.B. 4.8.54, purport) > > 3) By waiting until 2004 to stake his claim to > diksa guru authorization he > > contradicts Jayadvaita Swami's "Rule of thumb". > Thus his claim will be > > doubted by all. > > Srila Prabhupada also waited a long time before he > started to initiate > disciples. So what do you want to say by above > statement? > Is this PLAIN enough? .... If Srila Prabhupada didn’t clearly and definitely say it, and if it first came up after 1977, whatever it is, don’t trust it. —Rule of Thumb (Jas 1996) Learn the truth about the ISKCON guru hoax ISKCON Revival Movement - http://www.iskconirm.com ____ for Good Watch the Hurricane Katrina Shelter From The Storm concert http://advision.webevents./shelter Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Guest guest Report post Posted September 13, 2005 Dear Madhusudana Prabhu, PAMHO. AGTSP! > I am beginning to realize that you do not even read my replies. I am reading your texts. But I may ignore conclusions that are not directly confirmed by Srila Prabhupada. Suppose you write, "animal dung is pure", then I want to see a quote from Srila Prabhupada that says, "animal dung is pure". But if you write, "Srila Prabhupada said that cow dung is pure and the cow is an aminal, therefore we can conclude that animal dung is pure", then I ignore it as speculation. > On Wed, 7 Sep 2005 12:04 -0700 I replied as follows .... > > "It is perfectly within the remit of the GBC to select or decommission > anyone to represent Srila Prabhupada, be they sannyasis, Temple Presidents > or indeed GBC members themselves. At present they approve diksa gurus, who > are supposedly direct representatives of the Supreme Lord Himself. Thus it > should be easily within their capacity to select a few name-giving priests > to act responsibly on Srila Prabhupada's behalf [......]it is quite clear > Srila Prabhupada's intention was for the system to run indefinitely, with > the GBC simply managing the whole thing." > > Please explain in what way does this NOT answer your question? I wanted to know Srila Prabhupada's instruction how the ritviks should be chosen. I did not want to read Krishnakant's position. Srila Prabhupada instructed that the property trustees must be initiated disciples. And he described in detail how the GBC members should be elected. But I am not aware of any instruction from Srila Prabhupada what the qualifications for the ritviks are. Therefore I asked you. > > You did not name one system of management put in place by Srila > > Prabhupada where he did not explain how the members should be chosen. > > You have NOT yet demonstrated that Srila Prabhupada did not explain how > the members should be chosen. That's right. Therefore I am asking you: What was Srila Prabhupada's instruction regarding how to choose the ritviks? > > But you claim that the ritvik system is a system of management. So > > please confirm that. > > In 1975 one of the preliminary GBC resolutions sanctioned that the 'GBC > would have sole responsibility for managerial affairs'. Does this mean that the GBC has responsibility for managerial affairs only? Weren't they also responsible for non-managerial spiritual matters? > Below are some of the 'managerial' issues the GBC dealt with that year: > > "In order to receive first initiation, one must have been a full time > member for six months. For second initiation there should be at least > another one year after the first initiation." > (Resolution No. 9, March 25th, 1975) > > "Method of initiating Sannyasis." (Resolution No. 2, March 27th, 1975) > > These resolutions were personally approved by Srila Prabhupada. > > "Regarding the GBC meeting to be held in Mayapur 1975, the meeting should > be held five days before the actual festival is to begin and it will be > held in my presence." (Letter to: Jayatirtha-Bombay 16 December, 1974) > > "Prabhupada again supervised the annual meeting of his Governing Body > Commission and personally approved or modified all their decisions." > (Lilamrita 5) > > They demonstrate conclusively that the methodology for conducting > initiations was deemed a system of management. If the whole methodology > for conducting initiations is considered a system of management by Srila > Prabhupada, then one element of initiation, viz. the use of ritviks to > give spiritual names, has to fall under the same terms of reference. I do not agree with your conclusion because if the GBC was also responsible for non-managerial spiritual matters, then not everything they resolved was about management. ys Ramakanta dasa Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
