You're right, I am assuming that someone other than Maharishi himself actually called him that first, and not that he introduced himself as a maharishi. That being said, I'm not arguing that it was some authority or math that first honored him with that. Like Judy pointed out, it's totally common for Indian devotees to extol assumed enlightened saints and gurus with over the top honorifics, and the idea that one of Maharishi's early followers gave him that designation out of their own reverence and pride.
But you may be correct, too, and that Maharishi assumed that appelation entirely on his own initiative. ** --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <vajradh...@...> wrote: > > > On May 30, 2009, at 3:25 PM, Marek Reavis wrote: > > > Not necessarily, but that's not the point. However he got the > > honorific, Maharishi certainly felt it was appropriate and never > > demurred. Many agreed with him and lots didn't. > > Sorry to be a stickler but you're assuming it's honorific without any > evidence to support that. All we truly know is that it's an alias > (esp. since it's not the actual name on his passport). What would be > helpful is to see a transcript of the alleged Cochlin interview or to > hear an MP3 of a recording! >
