On Jul 26, 2006, at 5:41 PM, sparaig wrote:

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



On Jul 26, 2006, at 10:41 AM, authfriend wrote:


--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <vajranatha@> wrote:



On Jul 26, 2006, at 12:55 AM, jim_flanegin wrote:


<snip>


Perhaps you should just refer to Maharishi as His Holiness as you

do the Dalai Lama, since you are using equivalent terms anyway. Or

continue to refer to Maharishi Mahesh Yogi as Lord Shiva or Lord

Indra. Your choice...



In the case of the Dalai Lama, this name is conferred based on

accomplishment and conferred by living Buddhas. It has a specific

meaning.



FWIW, it's fairly common for Indian teachers to refer

to their own masters as "His Holiness."



In the case of Mahesh, "Maharishi" is an assumed name, as

is "yogi".  These were never conferred by the Shankaracharya

tradition he originally came from, nor are they indicative of

accomplishment.



What tradition conferred the title "Maharshi" on

Ramana Maharshi?



A saint, a muni IIRC.



And Tatewalle Baba used to speak at MMY's ahsram. Matanada Mayi used to visit him. 

MMY's "pet" Shankaracharya was the one who presided over the 1957 celebration of 

Gurudev's birthday and HE acknowledged the title.



Big deal, they were neighbors. In what way did he acknowledge the title? In any event it was long before Mahesh showed his true colors. Ceremonies in general tend to be sancuaries for respect and tolerance, it's no indication of what he *really* though--unless you have a letter or something.

Currently the only people who seem to respect him in India are the pundits he pays for, according to a leading scholar and meditation expert.


__._,_.___

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