--- In [email protected], Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 
> On Jul 11, 2005, at 1:45 PM, sparaig wrote:
> 
> > According to what Dana Sawyer said, the will was never ruled 
invalid
> > even though it WAS contested in court (I had heard it was not so 
I'm
> > happy to take Dana Sawyer's word in this case). This would mean 
that
> > Gurudev's student was saying that his own teacher had bad 
judgement
> > in the case of Swami Shantananda and since the 2nd and third 
choices
> > in the will were apparently never considered by anyone either, by
> > extension, we can assume that Gurudev's student had no respect for
> > his teacher's judgement whatsoever...
> 
> I think you might need to get some distance from this before you 
can 
> make an objective determination--if that is what you would like to 
do. 
> Dana seems to merely be making some brief and to the point remarks. 
It 
> will be interesting to hear his more detail edremarks later on. His 
> characterization that "The notion that Shantananda was SBS's 
closest 
> disciple seems to be largely
> a TMO legend" hit my limited knowledge bulls-eye.
> 
> Also I believe Sw. Karpatri was offered the Shankaracharya-ship 
> twice--the first time was before Sw. Brahmananda.

And the second time, after.

I believethat I misunderstood Anoop Chandola. He made reference to 
some bigwig who wanted to appoint the new Shankaracharya,and I 
assumed itw as the head of hte committee. I'm now thinking that 
perhaps he meant Swami Karpatri.Of course,I could be wrong there too.
> 
> > Over MMY, SSS, SDS, and anyone else that Vaj doesn't approve the
> > teachings of...
> 
> I wonder where you get this stuff sometimes. I'm certain many of 
the 
> candidates for the Shankaracharya, certainly including Shantananda, 
> would be excellent teachers in their own right. Just because they 
> didn't get this post doesn't mean they stop being realized saints! 

Except, according to the will and the courts, Swami Shantananda DID 
get the post...

I 
> get the impression that many see the Mahamandeleshwaris are at 
least 
> equal, if not in some case more exalted than the role of 
> Shnakaracharya. Indeed some of the Akharas go back to the Treta it 
is 
> said.




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