Well, you may not trust the Indian courts, but the uncle of me old friend, Anoop Chandola, is a highly placed priest in Northern India, and arranged for his nephew to visit with the Shankaracharya of the North. When he arrived, he was asked WHICH Shankaracharya he wanted to speak to and decided to go with the court-annointed one --the one who lived in Gurudev's official quarters, rather than down the road.
While he was there, he asked that particular Shankaracharya (who had just initiated him into meditation) if that Maharishi who was with the Beatles was legitimate. That particular Shankaracharya laughed and said, "He was my first choice for my sucessor, but they wouldn't allow it due to the caste laws." Go figure. --- In [email protected], gerbal88 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > His passport identified him as Bal Brahmachari Mahesh. > > Bal indicates that this is a "life" situation, as in for-life. > > It would be interesting to know just how one goes from a life- > brahmachari (bal-brahmachari) to identifying onself as a "maha" Rishi > and then calling one's self "his holiness". > > He may or may not have been entitled/empowered to do this; but my > understanding is that it is usually done by very highly achieved > pundits who "recognize" this quality, as the pundits who installed > Guru Dev. Guru Dev wasn't any different after than before, but > without the official recognition, he couldn't just declare himself > Shankaracharya. > > What was the process (if any) by which Maharishi declared himself a > maha Rishi and gave himself the dubious title of "his holiness" ... > > in other words, sez who? > > G > > --- In [email protected], Rick Archer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > on 5/29/05 8:44 AM, Vaj at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > > > > > On May 29, 2005, at 9:13 AM, lupidus108 wrote: > > > > > >> Hold on: MMY WAS a life bramachary. > > > > > > At a certain point in his career, M. dropped the > title "Brahmachari". > > > Brahmacharya is just a stage, it doesn't mean you necessarily do > that > > > for life. > > > > Good point. One that helped me come to terms with the thing. > Brahmacharya is > > probably like spiritual training wheels. It was probably no longer > necessary > > for him. He had Brahman down cold. Maybe it was time for him to > explore the > > relative. I just wonder about the ethics of how he went about it. It > > disillusioned many people, including the Beatles, who could have > had a much > > bigger impact. At least one of the women, with whom I have spoken, > was > > rather traumatized and lost the taste for spirituality. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
