--- In [email protected], Vaj <vajradh...@...> wrote: > > > On Jun 4, 2009, at 10:36 PM, sparaig wrote: > [...] > > > > The other Shankarakcharya of the North, the one mentioned by name in > > Anandama Moi's online cv, told MY friend ( a prominent Hindu/ > > sanskrit scholar) > > that MMY would have been his first choice as his successor but for > > the caste issue. > > > > Who you going to believe? > > The Shank. is so corrupt, I doubt I'd trust any of those people. TB's > will say anything to get their hero into the Shank. seat, even if > they have to lie or kill to do it. So I don't know if I believe any > of them. All this tells me (these incessant disputes and in-fightings > at most of the seats) is that while the Shank. presumably has some > redeeming qualities (preservation of the Advaita vedanta trad., > Smarta ideals), in reality they're just another corrupt organization > with monks vying for power. I have much more respect for the > Mahamandaleshwars than a bunch of pompous Vaishnavite popes.
I note that inadvertently (I'm sure) you snipt the part that shows that I already made this point: > > Who you going to believe? > > The answer isn't clearcut, IMHO. <===== left out for some reason.... > > And of course one should be a realizer. Given that one of the Shanks. > described M's mind as being like a supermarket, one doubts his level > of awareness as much different from any other Hindu Donald Trump. > Realizers of Brahman don't go to heaven, do they? ;-) > King Tony was raised a Christian, and I think it a mark of the universal nature of MMY's teaching that he (King Tony) didn't feel compelled to shade his own religious/cultural interpretation of MMY's destination with Hindu interpretations of the same. L
