--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, akasha_108 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > > > The recognized Shankaracharya (the one most here seem to prefer) > > > referred to MMY as an ashram clerk. The rumor was that this clerk > > > managed to conspire with a cook to kill Gurudev. AFter the will > > > wasproduced, this clerk was so powerful as to get the first guy > on > > > the list proclaimed Shankaracharya overthe protestations (if you > > > believe what everyone here appears to) liaterally everyother > disciple > > > of Gurudev besides MMY and the cook. > > > > > > > The cook was Shantanand, I beleive, who was first on the list, and > > became Shankarachara -- so it was a bit more interesting, with a > > thicker plot -- than your account suggests. > > > > Don't mistake this as an endorsement of all of the rumored details > of > > said plot. But I think that Shantanand was GD's cook is the best > > established of the facts. And MMY was his clerk, aka secretary. > > > > And it appears from some testimony regarding the will, that GD was > not > > very lucid in his last days. Plausibly the effect of sudden poisons > > introduced. > > > > I am not sure "power", as you argue, would be the issue in this > > circumstance, tho again i am not arguing for the validity of the > > "plot". But hypothetically, if a signed "list" appeared, it would > give > > enough nominal clearance during the chaos of GD's passing, to > enable a > > new shankaracharaya to be rushed into GD's quarters. Which is what > > happened. Then it became a game of "possession is 9/10s of the > law". > > > > And GD's clerk or secretary would be the person to prepare such a > > list. And could have had GD sign it, at GD's request, or in the > > confusion of his non-lucidity, if that occurred. > > Others have claimed that Shantayanda was NOT a cook, but whatever. > > As I said, making the cook the spiritual leader is traditional in > some religions, but not the Brahmin-dominated Hindus. Of COURSE this > caused massive protesting in some quarters. A cook???!!!?
I am not arguing for or against. Or for or against cooks. But by most accounts that I have heard, Shantanand was said to be a sweet, pious man, but with not much training in vedic literature or sanskrit. In that aspect, he failed one of the three requirements for the job. But perhaps I have not heard correctly, or the full story. ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/JjtolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 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/
