Not that any TB'ers give a crap what I think, but I guarantee you these guys who claim to be Shankaracharya would not give a shit what you or anyone else would think say or do coming from Fairfield or anywhere else.
Take the halos off these guys you have put on them just because they are Indian and wear a certain kind of robe and because they claim to have some knowledge/energy. Look at how they function, how they behave. Since the day Guru Dev kicked the bucket these guys have behaved like a bunch of five year olds fighting over the last cookie on the plate. If any of them were really worthy to have the title, they would not behave the way they have been these last 60 years or so. All they give a damn about is the title and the money and perks it brings. All they want is to be able to sit on their asses, pontificate and have everyone treat them like they are God, collect up the money, prestige and praise. None of 'em are worth a shit. Physically fighting to be first in the Ganges at the Kumba Mela???? Fuck! -------------------------------------------- On Thu, 1/9/14, [email protected] <[email protected]> wrote: Subject: Re: [FairfieldLife] RE: All About the Fighting Ascetics of India To: [email protected] Date: Thursday, January 9, 2014, 8:42 PM Yes absolutely, to add real spiritual coherence and depth to matters of adjudicating this confliction they really ought to receive a delegation of the long-term spiritually experienced Maharishi and Brahmananda Saraswati tradition meditators of the Holy Tradition from Fairfield, Iowa. The crucial meeting is scheduled to be held at Ahmedabad in February next. Evidently this should not be left to Indians alone to satisfy this large spiritual work. Om, the crucial meeting? To help with this they should receive a delegation of TM'ers. A delegation of long-term spiritually experienced meditators of the Holy Tradition from Fairfield, Iowa. The crucial meeting is scheduled to be held at Ahmedabad in February next. The Competing Shankaracharyas . . Aggregating what we know: NEW DELHI - In a bid to achieve its wider goal of unifying the Hindu society, the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) has embarked on its most arduous task yet -- that of bringing some semblance of order to the institution of Shankaracharyas. -Indian Express -http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/FairfieldLife/conversations/messages/369812 The last Kumbh festival of this century is over, but not the war between the Shankaracharyas of Jyotipeeth here. There are three of them claiming that seat, established by Adi Shankaracharya who, in the eighth century, walked all the way from his village Kalari, in Kerala, to the Himalayas to meditate under a mulberry tree here to obtain enlightenment, bring to an end through discourse the influence and control of Buddhism on the life of the Indian people and revive Hinduism. http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/FairfieldLife/conversations/topics/369111 The history and presence (as well as it's future)of Jyotirmatha (including involvement of the heads of the four and other monasteries of the Daśanāmī orders to be known as Śaṅkarācāryas, in honor of its founder)was and is extremely complicated .But "humanly "interesting, -merudanda http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/FairfieldLife/conversations/messages/369798 > Which ones are our guys? > Only Swami Vasudevananda Sarswati is in the direct line of succession to Swami Brahmanand Saraswati. -Richard J Das http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/FairfieldLife/conversations/messages/369794 To summarize, the three competing Jyotirmaṭha lineages in a chart: --merudanda http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/FairfieldLife/conversations/messages/369771 "Nine years after being charged with criminal conspiracy . . sankaracharyas Jayendra Saraswathi, 78, and Vijayendra Saraswathi, 44, were acquitted Hindustan Times: http://www.hindustantimes.com/kanchi-pontiffs-acquittedhttp://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/FairfieldLife/conversations/messages/369749 'Shankaracharya asked the court: May I sit?'The Times of India, November 20, 2004 http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/928751.cms http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/FairfieldLife/conversations/messages/369704 Maharishi-ji funeral has been arranged according to tradition by his family,his relatives lit the pyre overseen and in patronage of Shankaracharya of Jyotirmaṭha: Vāsudevānanda Sarasvatī http://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/FairfieldLife/conversations/messages/369771 ---In [email protected], <punditster@...> wrote: NEW DELHI - In a bid to achieve its wider goal of unifying the Hindu society, the Vishwa Hindu Parishad (VHP) has embarked on its most arduous task yet -- that of bringing some semblance of order to the institution of Shankaracharyas. For the first time, the VHP has convened a meeting of the Kendriya Margdarshak Mandal -- its supreme decision-making body -- to frame yardsticks for distinguishing ``real'' Shankaracharyas from their pretenders and challengers. The crucial meeting is scheduled to be held at Ahmedabad in February next. But the VHP's move is likely to face stiff opposition from certain quarters. It is unlikely that people like Swami Swaroopanand will endorse it. The Shankaracharya of Dwarka has a bitter relationship with the VHP, criticising all its moves in the past. The VHP has apparently been forced to make such a move after a spate of cases involving Shankaracharyas, religious heads of the Shaivite sect of Hindus, were dragged to various courts. It was also rattled by the unsavouryscenes witnessed during the Kumbh Mela held earlier this year at Hardwar, in which members of various orders fought among themselves and with the police to be the first to bathe in the Ganga. "The multiplicity of these religious heads has the Hindu samaj bewildered," observed a VHP spokesman, adding, "things have reached such a stage that steps will have to be taken to remove this confusion." At the last count, according to him, there were 18 Shankaracharyas. In addition, there were six religious heads who had established their own peeths and staked their claim to being Shankaracharyas. In the 11th century AD, Adi Shankaracharya established four peeths to protect vedic dharma. These were the Jyotishpeeth at Badrikashram, Shardapeeth at Dwarka, Sringeripeeth and Puripeeth. Later, the heads of these four peeths and the vidyut parishad (gathering of learned scholars) accorded their recognition to a fifth peeth -- Kanchi Kamakothipeetham. Initially, theissue of succession was settled easily as each Shankaracharya was allowed to anoint his successor -- a process which was later ratified by the vidyut parishad. But as each peeth acquired prestige and power, the issue became a serious bone of contention. "The succession problem gradually became more contentious because there were no fixed laws to prove the bonafides of various contenders," the VHP spokesman pointed out. "In some cases, it became so ridiculous that each contender started using the letterhead and the emblem of the Shankaracharya concerned, much to the amusement of their followers,"he added. To buttress his argument, he gave the example of Jyotishpeeth where Swami Vasudevananda Saraswati was chosen as the Shankaracharya by his predecessor Jagadguru Vishnudevananda Saraswati. "But even he has two challengers -- Swami Swaroopananda of Dwarka and Hardwar's Madhavashram," the spokesman revealed, adding that Swami Nischalananda of Puri was being challenged by Swami Adhochajananda. In at least six cases, heads of various sects have established their own peeths. These include Govindanand Saraswati of Ayodhya and Madhavanand of Prayag. Intense infighting dogs the Vaishnavite sect also, the most glaring example being that of Ramananda sect which owns the Ram Janmabhoomi at Ayodhya."The VHP has so far kept itself away from these internal squabbles, viewing them as internal matters of the sant samaj," the spokesman remarked. "But it clearly feels it is time to step in now," he added. 'Now, Shankaracharyas will have to measure up to VHP yardstick'Devesh Kumar Indian Express On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 9:24 AM, Richard J. Williams <punditster@...> wrote: On 1/7/2014 8:39 AM, Buck wrote: Buck wrote: > Which ones are our guys? > Only Swami Vasudevananda Sarswati is in the direct line of succession to Swami Brahmanand Saraswati. The real question is why has the Swami Swaroopanand turned the Jyotirmath tradition into a political football. It is well-known that Swaroopanand has close ties to the Congress Party and to Sonia Gandhi. Swaroopanand has been reported to be opposed to the VHP, the Kanchi Matha, and the Mahesh Yogi's programs. In my opinion, once the committee appointed SBS to be the Shankaracharya seat they should have not attempted any other interference. It is clear that SBS wanted one of his own disciples to succeed him, Swami Shantanand who was specified in a will. As I previously pointed out, SBS's will hasn't been contested in an Indian court of law and the recent court ruling didn't obviate the will, since Swami Vasudevanand remains in possession of the Jyotirmath and the Allahabad Shankar Math established by SBS. And, I'm told that Vasudevanand is also in possession of all the accoutrements once used by Guru Dev, the Throne, the fly whisk, the beads, and Guru Dev's sandals. These are all on display at the Shankar Math at Allahabad. In addition there are reports that millions of devotees worship His Holiness Swami Vasudevanand as the embodiment of Shankaracharya. At a recent Kumbh Mela Vasudevananda performed puja with close to a thousand other Dandi Swamis and thousands of devout pilgrims at the Shankar Matha. I've read many positive reports in the Indian press that describe Vasudevanand as the rightful Shankaracharya, including 'Hinduism Today' and the 'Times of India.' It has not been demonstrated that there is a problem with SBS's will. According to the official biography of Swami Brahmanand there was no doubt in the minds of his disciples as to the intent of the will and it was very plain who was specified therein. According to my sources the will was handwritten and in English and specified Swami Shantanand as the first to be considered. I've also pointed out previously that the mere possession of the Jyotirmath property in the succession dispute has no great bearing on who the real Shankaracharya is. If it were, Vasudevanand would prevail hands down, since he's in possession of most of the Jyotirmath property. In fact, it's a title that's at stake in the dispute. In this sense the dispute reaches a moot point because in fact there's no evidence that Shankara established any mathas at all - it's just a mythic tradition. So, if the devotees on the ground in India believe that Vasudevanand is a Shankaraycharya and revere him as such, and Vasudevanand looks and acts like a Shankaracharya, and he is assumed to be the successor to SBS, and no material evidence is presented to the contrary, then Vasudevanand probably is the rightful Shankaracharya of Jyotirmath. O
