--- In [email protected], Rick Archer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Another one:
> 
> The respondent below is exactly correct that Karpatri was first to 
be
> offered the position.  He was a direct disciple of SBS and 
suggested he be
> offered the position.  Later he was one of the major opponents of
> Shantananda (whom he didn't feel was qualified) and was reoffered 
the
> position.
> 
> Dana


And turned it down, which makes him kinda out of the loop, IMHO.

"I don't want it and that guy isn't qualified."



> 
> 
> Rick Archer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Friday, July 1, 2005 at 12:45 PM
> wrote:
> 
> 
> >Still more
> >
> >------ Forwarded Message
> >From: Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Reply-To: <[email protected]>
> >Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2005 12:06:11 -0400
> >To: <[email protected]>
> >Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] Re: The Jyotirmath Shankaracharya 
Lineage in
> >the 20th Century
> >
> > 
> >On Jul 1, 2005, at 11:46 AM, sparaig wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >--- In [email protected], Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> > 
> >On Jul 1, 2005, at 10:55 AM, sparaig wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >MY position comes from Anoop Chandola's conversation with his
> >meditation teacher,
> >Swami Shantananda Saraswati, closest disciple of Swami Brahamanda
> >Saraswati, AKA 
> >"Gurudev" on this forum. No account denies that Swami Shantananda
> >Saraswati was 
> >Gurudev's closest disciple --most people here, however, prefer to
> >think that S. 
> >Shantananda "wasn't worthy" of his position, and that another 
Swami,
> >who was never 
> >Gurudev's disciple, was (that's who the other Shankaracharya of
> >Jyotirmath was at the time
> >Chandola learned meditation: someone picked by committee who wasn't
> >even a student of 
> >Gurudev --by the committee's view NOT ONE of Gurudev's students was
> >worthy). 
> >
> > 
> >You seem to not be aware of a number of things 1) the 
Shankaracharya is
> >not necessarily the one who chooses his successor
> >
> > 
> >
> >So the successor is generally chosen over the wishes of the
> >Shankaracharya?  
> >
> > 
> >That's not what I said. Please read it again :-).
> >
> >
> >
> > 
> >
> >and 2) you seem to
> >
> >
> >assume the SBS's will was really his will. It had been disputed.
> >
> > 
> >
> >By whom? Did they take it to court? What was the result?
> >
> > 
> >I believe it was one of the Akharas.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > 
> >
> >
> > --most people here, however, prefer to think that S.
> >Shantananda "wasn't worthy" of his position, and that another 
Swami,
> >who was never 
> >Gurudev's disciple, was (that's who the other Shankaracharya of
> >Jyotirmath was at the time
> >Chandola learned meditation: someone picked by committee who wasn't
> >even a student of 
> >Gurudev --by the committee's view NOT ONE of Gurudev's students was
> >worthy). 
> >
> > 
> >So you consider "closeness" an important criteria for succession.
> >That's interesting.
> >
> > 
> >
> >Barring any other criteria mentioned, what would YOU go on?
> >
> > 
> >The traditional criteria, modified for the current political 
nature of
> >the position. 
> >
> >
> >
> > 
> >
> >
> > 
> >IMO Swami Karpatri, the "Shankaracharya maker", was the most 
qualified
> >successor--but that is just my personal opinion based on what I 
know at
> >a point removed considerably in time from the original events.
> >
> > 
> >
> >Perhaps he was, but was he ever offered the position? He's 
apparently not
> > mentioned in  
> >the will, nor in the article on the succession endorsed by Dana 
Sawyer.
> >Was he a stuent of
> >Gurudev's? Did the committee consider him in 1953 or later? How do 
you
> >know? 
> >
> > 
> >He was originally offered it BEFORE Sw. Brahmananda Saraswati 
originally
> >since he was best suited.
> >
> >"Also, in 1953, Swami Hariharananda Saraswati (popularly known as
> >Karapatri Swami), another disciple of Brahmananda Saraswati, was 
seen as
> >the more deserving candidate to become the Sankaracharya, but he 
didn't
> >want the title. In fact, as the head of the Akhila Bharatiya
> >Dharmasangha, it is said that Hariharananda had been the first 
choice for
> >the Sankaracharya post in 1941, but he had declined and proposed 
his
> >guru's name (Brahmananda) instead. It is also said that it was
> >Hariharananda who convinced his guru to accept the position.
> >Hariharananda Saraswati passed away recently, and avoided the
> >Sankaracharya title for himself, but the opinion of his followers 
is
> >reflected in the title they have given him - Abhinava Sankara." --
The
> >Jyotirmath Sankaracharya Lineage in the 20th Century
> >
> >I've also heard the above from independent sources.
> >
> >
> >------ End of Forwarded Message
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------ End of Forwarded Message




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/
 


Reply via email to