On Dec 22, 2005, at 11:24 AM, jim_flanegin wrote:

--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:




<snip> Since basically what he "preaches" is Neoadvaita  with a  


little Patanjali and Kashmir Shaivism mixed in as well as Dharma  

shastra, perhaps a clearer way to look at this one is does he teach  

effective Advaita vedanta or does he follow "natural law", i.e. the  

injunctions of the Dharma and Artha shastras? 



Whatever your other opinions of Mr M may be, I find this insistence 

that he strictly adhere to one tradition or the other to be an odd 

thing. If he is in fact a seer, then wouldn't he be capable of 

cognizing his own teaching? 


So, better you should state flatly that he is a false seer, aka a 

bullsh*t artist, than to say he preaches a mix of this and that. 


Just as Buddha came out with his own unique teaching (which doubters 

could say was a corruption of Hinduism), Mr. M has come out with his. 

Otherwise we could be like snakes chasing our tails, constantly 

revealing the errors of seers who did not adhere strictly to past 

traditions.


I don't feel he (or anyone else) should strictly adhere to tradition. The point is: all the trads. mentioned  possess a wonderful cornucopia of proven methods to attain their goals--how do they measure side by side? What's missing? Why? 



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




Reply via email to