What claim did I make about Swami Vasudevananda? I only repeated what Anoop Chandola said Swami Brahmandanda told him in a response to a question about MMY.
What does my source disagree about? Anoop Chandola said it was a good summary of the politics surrounding the succession to Gurudev's position. > p.s. if he contacts my friend at "Advaita Vedanta" with a specific > question about the lineage, he'll quickly discover that his source DOES > disagree. --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Dana's response: > > Rick, > > only time for a moment of response to this guy's nonsense below. > > He isn't offering any compelling argument in support of Vasudevananda's > claim other than "he said, she said." A comment from Shantananda, whether > it was made or not, is only one comment in a sea of comments by direct > disciples of Brahmananda. This fellow finds his "source" compelling > simply because he wants it to be true, not because when he compares it to > the large number of comments and other evidence extant he arrives at a > compelling position. > > my advice, if he shows no real interest in the circumstances of the case > is to simply let him be, > > Dana > > p.s. if he contacts my friend at "Advaita Vedanta" with a specific > question about the lineage, he'll quickly discover that his source DOES > disagree. > > > > > > > Rick Archer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Thursday, June 30, 2005 at 4:59 PM > wrote: > > > >The guy's response: > > > > > >LOL. Talk about making sure that you get the response you're looking > >for. > > > >Tell him that Anoop Chandola is a guy who learned to meditate from > >Swami Shantananda during the period when MMY was with the Beatles, > >because his family had religious clout in Northern India (who chose > >to meet with Swami Shantananda when given the choice of which of the > >two Shankaracharyas he wanted to meet), who asked Swami Shantananda > >if the Maharishi who was with the Beatles was legitimate or not. > > > >Swami Shantananda's response was to laugh and say "Let me put it to > >you this way: he would have been my first choice as my sucessor but > >they would allow it due to the caste laws." > > > >Any and all discussion since then about whose credentials were > >important is because YOU (Rick Archer) and company don't think that a > >conversation with Swami Shantananda 30-40 years ago has any bearing > >on whether or not MMY is legitimately involved with the > >Shankaracharya tradition. YOu were citing Dana Sawyer and I was > >citing Anoop Chandola's personal conversation with Swami Shantananda > >Saraswati about MMY (and,by extension, Chandola's family tradition > >about the whole thing, from the perspective of people who were > >involved in the selection process of Gurudev, reading between > >thelines about what Chandola has said). > > > >BTW, Chandola agrees with the description of the politics of the > >Shankaracharya sucession found on the "Advaita Vedanta Homepage." The > >discussion wasn't about the current Shankaracharya's > >legal/political/religious standing, but about what the [at that time] > >legally recognized Shankaracharya said about MMY during that time. > > > >YOU were the one saying that Swami Shantananda's comments were of no > >interest because Dana Sawyer says so. > > > >I'd like to hear what Dana Sawyer says when you quote all this (plus > >whatever face-saving commentary you add, of course). > > > > > > > > > >--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Sorry I can't reply to an original post in this thread, but I've > >deleted it, > >> so I'll start a new one: > >> > >> From Dana Sawyer > >> > >> Hey Rick! Let me get at this a bit at a time. > >> > >> > Some guy > >> >is questioning your authority on the issue, siding with some guy > >named > >> >Anoop > >> >Chandola who favors MMY's side, and saying he's more authoritative > >that > >> >you > >> >because he's published a lot. Can you respond to his question > >below and > >> >breifly state why you're qualified to comment on the issue? > >> > >> His question below is simply "what has Dana Sawyer published?" > >Before I > >> answer that question, let me first point out that lists of > >publications > >> (especially publications dealing with "linguistics and music") do > >not > >> constitute rational arguments in support of a position. This > >fellow says > >> that Anoop Chandola is the ultimate authority on the Jyoitirmath > >issue but > >> stating it does not make it so. What is the grounds of his > >authority and > >> what are the specifics of his argument? What research did he > >perform? > >> What peer reviews has his work undergone? In academia today, the > >two > >> leading authorities on Shankaracarya issues are William Chenkner and > >> Vidyasankar Sundareshan (a scholar who has published widely and also > >> maintains the "Advaita Vedanta Homepage"). Their work has been > >> scrutinized by their peers and they argue for viable positions. I > >have > >> never heard of Anoop Chandola, and that says a lot because I have > >been > >> researching Dandis and Shankaracaryas for more than seventeen > >years. So, > >> if my detractor will be so kind as to present the substance of his > >> position, I will be glad to scrutinize his arguments, share them > >with my > >> colleagues, and give my appraisal. > >> > >> OK, now to answer the question: a full list of my publications is > >not > >> pertinent to the Jyotirmath dispute. What is pertinent is that I > >am the > >> current leading academic authority on the Dandi samnyasins and have > >> published several academic papers on them. In my chapter, "The > >Monastic > >> Structure of Banarsi Dandi Sadhus," in Hertel and Humes, eds., > >Living > >> Banaras: Hindu Religion in Cultural Context (SUNY Press, 1994) I > >made > >> mention of the Jyotirmath dispute, and in my forthcoming book from > >Pilgrim > >> Book Trust, The Dandi Sadhus: History, Philosophy, and Practice, I > >make > >> greater mention of it. However, my work in general focuses more on > >the > >> Dandis than the specific dispute. Having said that, my field > >research has > >> often brought me in direct contact with the principle protagonists > >of the > >> dispute and I have carefully researched the history of the court > >cases > >> related to it. I am, to my knowledge, the only person who has > >copies of > >> the court transcripts of the various cases and I have shared my > >analysis > >> of these with scholars whose research is centered more on the > >dispute. > >> For instance, if you view the long discription of the Jyotirmath > >dispute > >> on the "Advaita Vedanta Homepage," you will see that he is taking my > >> research into account. And, BTW, I believe this is the clearest > >> description of what is going on - it actually helps provide insight > >into > >> why the Shankaracaryas of the other Amnaya vidyapiths do not side > >with MMY > >> and Vasudevananda. > >> > >> So, anyway, please forward the arguments to me and I'll check them > >out. > >> > >> much love, > >> > >> Dana > >> > > >> > > >> >--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >wrote: > >> >> on 6/18/05 12:47 AM, sparaig at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> >> > >> >> >> If I am > >> >> >> missing relevant info on Chandol, plese provide it. > >> >> >> > >> >> > > >> >> > Done. > >> >> > > >> >> "Discovering Brides by Anoop Chandola" > >> >> > >> >> That settles it. He's the ultimate authority on the > >Shankaracharya > >> >> controversy. > >> > > >> >Plus 8 scholarly books on linguistics and music. What has Dana > >Sawyer > >> >published? > > > on 6/30/05 3:43 PM, sparaig at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > LOL. Talk about making sure that you get the response you're looking > > for. > > > > Tell him that Anoop Chandola is a guy who learned to meditate from > > Swami Shantananda during the period when MMY was with the Beatles, > > because his family had religious clout in Northern India (who chose > > to meet with Swami Shantananda when given the choice of which of the > > two Shankaracharyas he wanted to meet), who asked Swami Shantananda > > if the Maharishi who was with the Beatles was legitimate or not. > > > > Swami Shantananda's response was to laugh and say "Let me put it to > > you this way: he would have been my first choice as my sucessor but > > they would allow it due to the caste laws." > > > > Any and all discussion since then about whose credentials were > > important is because YOU (Rick Archer) and company don't think that a > > conversation with Swami Shantananda 30-40 years ago has any bearing > > on whether or not MMY is legitimately involved with the > > Shankaracharya tradition. YOu were citing Dana Sawyer and I was > > citing Anoop Chandola's personal conversation with Swami Shantananda > > Saraswati about MMY (and,by extension, Chandola's family tradition > > about the whole thing, from the perspective of people who were > > involved in the selection process of Gurudev, reading between > > thelines about what Chandola has said). > > > > BTW, Chandola agrees with the description of the politics of the > > Shankaracharya sucession found on the "Advaita Vedanta Homepage." The > > discussion wasn't about the current Shankaracharya's > > legal/political/religious standing, but about what the [at that time] > > legally recognized Shankaracharya said about MMY during that time. > > > > YOU were the one saying that Swami Shantananda's comments were of no > > interest because Dana Sawyer says so. > > > > I'd like to hear what Dana Sawyer says when you quote all this (plus > > whatever face-saving commentary you add, of course). > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Sorry I can't reply to an original post in this thread, but I've > > deleted it, > >> so I'll start a new one: > >> > >> From Dana Sawyer > >> > >> Hey Rick! Let me get at this a bit at a time. > >> > >>> Some guy > >>> is questioning your authority on the issue, siding with some guy > > named > >>> Anoop > >>> Chandola who favors MMY's side, and saying he's more authoritative > > that > >>> you > >>> because he's published a lot. Can you respond to his question > > below and > >>> breifly state why you're qualified to comment on the issue? > >> > >> His question below is simply "what has Dana Sawyer published?" > > Before I > >> answer that question, let me first point out that lists of > > publications > >> (especially publications dealing with "linguistics and music") do > > not > >> constitute rational arguments in support of a position. This > > fellow says > >> that Anoop Chandola is the ultimate authority on the Jyoitirmath > > issue but > >> stating it does not make it so. What is the grounds of his > > authority and > >> what are the specifics of his argument? What research did he > > perform? > >> What peer reviews has his work undergone? In academia today, the > > two > >> leading authorities on Shankaracarya issues are William Chenkner and > >> Vidyasankar Sundareshan (a scholar who has published widely and also > >> maintains the "Advaita Vedanta Homepage"). Their work has been > >> scrutinized by their peers and they argue for viable positions. I > > have > >> never heard of Anoop Chandola, and that says a lot because I have > > been > >> researching Dandis and Shankaracaryas for more than seventeen > > years. So, > >> if my detractor will be so kind as to present the substance of his > >> position, I will be glad to scrutinize his arguments, share them > > with my > >> colleagues, and give my appraisal. > >> > >> OK, now to answer the question: a full list of my publications is > > not > >> pertinent to the Jyotirmath dispute. What is pertinent is that I > > am the > >> current leading academic authority on the Dandi samnyasins and have > >> published several academic papers on them. In my chapter, "The > > Monastic > >> Structure of Banarsi Dandi Sadhus," in Hertel and Humes, eds., > > Living > >> Banaras: Hindu Religion in Cultural Context (SUNY Press, 1994) I > > made > >> mention of the Jyotirmath dispute, and in my forthcoming book from > > Pilgrim > >> Book Trust, The Dandi Sadhus: History, Philosophy, and Practice, I > > make > >> greater mention of it. However, my work in general focuses more on > > the > >> Dandis than the specific dispute. Having said that, my field > > research has > >> often brought me in direct contact with the principle protagonists > > of the > >> dispute and I have carefully researched the history of the court > > cases > >> related to it. I am, to my knowledge, the only person who has > > copies of > >> the court transcripts of the various cases and I have shared my > > analysis > >> of these with scholars whose research is centered more on the > > dispute. > >> For instance, if you view the long discription of the Jyotirmath > > dispute > >> on the "Advaita Vedanta Homepage," you will see that he is taking my > >> research into account. And, BTW, I believe this is the clearest > >> description of what is going on - it actually helps provide insight > > into > >> why the Shankaracaryas of the other Amnaya vidyapiths do not side > > with MMY > >> and Vasudevananda. > >> > >> So, anyway, please forward the arguments to me and I'll check them > > out. > >> > >> much love, > >> > >> Dana > >>> > >>> > >>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Rick Archer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrote: > >>>> on 6/18/05 12:47 AM, sparaig at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >>>> > >>>>>> If I am > >>>>>> missing relevant info on Chandol, plese provide it. > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Done. > >>>>> > >>>> "Discovering Brides by Anoop Chandola" > >>>> > >>>> That settles it. He's the ultimate authority on the > > Shankaracharya > >>>> controversy. > >>> > >>> Plus 8 scholarly books on linguistics and music. What has Dana > > Sawyer > >>> published? > > > > > > > > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Rick Archer > SearchSummit > 1108 South B Street > Fairfield, IA 52556 > Phone: 641-472-9336 > Fax: 815-572-5842 > > http://searchsummit.com > [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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/
