--- In [email protected], "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In [email protected], akasha_108 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > --- In [email protected], "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > --- In [email protected], akasha_108 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > Most Swamis and such don't support MMY. > > > > > > > > > > > From the numerous swamis -- over many interviews cpnducted by > Dana > > > > personally--- as I understand don't think very highly of MMY > either. > > > > Are you implying some sort of bias in Dana's work? If so how? > > > > > > > > What is "the same" that might be said of MMY ? > > > > > > What you just said. > > > > > > > > > > > Who is it that is being supported by whom that is agreeing with > > > them? > > > > > > > > Again, your comment is incomprehensible to me. > > > > > > You already answered your own question. MMY has always claimed > > > controversial things. That the current traditionalists don't like > him > > > is well-known and expected. It proves nothing, either way, since > we > > > already knew that MMY was a controversial figure. > > > > ok. > > > > But I thought your whole point in the thread starting with > Shantananda > > was that MMY was supported by the Shankaracharian tradition. > > > > But as you acknowldege, most swamis of that tradition don't support > > him. And none of the shankaracharyas including the one from Kashi, > > support him. Except Vasad... whom none of the other sitting > > Shankaracharayas acknowldge. > > > > So as I sadly came to acknowledge over the past decade, MMY and the > > TMO do not have much, if any, support of the Shankaracharian > > tradition. Contrary to what we were all stronly led to believe. For > > me, this was part of the reason for my estrangement from the TMO. > > Swami Shantananda was in the will and was approved of by the courts. > So was Swami Vishnudevananda, his sucessor. Vasudevananda was NOT in > the will and was not a direct student of Swami Brahmanananda. > However, the most recent court ruling gives him, once again, the > residence of Gurudev at Jyotirmath.
> What you're saying is that since the mainstream swamis of India don't > like MMY, as has always been known,the fact that the political > situation at Jyotirmath has become increasingly complicated convinces > you that MMY's connection to Swami Brahmanada was never very good. Your leaps of logic are both astonishing and hallucinatory. You can hallucinate what I am saying to fit your needs all you want, but the fact remains the words you attribute to me are your own, a figment of yur fertile imagination. I am saying there are no mainstream or non-mainstream swamis that appear to supprt MMY and the TMO. There are no Shankaracharayas that support MMY or the TMO. The courts have nothing to do with the religious tradions of the linneage. The fact that no sitting Shankaracharayas recognize Vasudevananda means the Shankaracharian traditon -- the lineage, the traditon, do not recognize him. Hence there appears to be no support in the Shankaracharayan traditon that for MMY and TMO. As I said I reached this conclusion quite sadly. Its not a conclusion I thought possible or "sought". 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/
