--- In [email protected], Vaj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> 
> On Jun 12, 2007, at 8:44 AM, authfriend wrote:
> 
> > --- In [email protected], Vaj <vajranatha@> wrote:
> > >
> > > No surprises here, but good to see in print as the lies of 
Mahesh
> > > unravel once again.
> >
> > And which lies would those be, Vaj?
> 
> The ones exposed here (sorry, accidentally responded to the wrong  
> email!):

Right, and what are the lies exposed in this post?

Please highlight them for us.

The fact is, Vaj, the liar is you--again.

> 
> Note: I am forwarding a response from Swami G to the last post. 
There
> is a mixture of comments from me and also the poster. Me = T ( short
> for Tanmay which is my spirital name given at diksha), *= the 
poster,
> and G = Swami G:
> 
> T: Coming from my Guru, it was said there is a tradition where a 
Guru  
> was
> appointed Guru by their Guru. Furthermore, Maharishi did not take 
full
> Sanyas vows, or full vows within the tradition of GuruDev. Maybe he
> was a secretary? It is not normal for a Guru to entrust the 
innermost
> knowledge to a secretary.
> 
> * Well here one must say, that neither you nor your Guru are fully
> knowledgeable about this tradition. See, its very simple to take one
> tradition, where one comes from, and then project on another
> tradition, how things ought to be. And its os nice to have email,
> yahoo messanger and internet at ones disposal, and using it for
> instruction (some more traditioanlly minded people wouldn't do). But
> then why doesn't your Guru look up a simple article about the 
Dasanami
> Sampradaya on Wikipedia, and she would know, that in the Saraswati
> order only Brahmins can be made Sanyasis?
> 
> G Look i KNOW this type of tradition, i am INITIATED into this type 
of
> tradition -
> ok you have read about it . The brother sister ones to here are
> Bharati/Giri/Puri
> and although i am not within the Saraswati Akh??as have spent time 
with
> Sadhus that are - and trust me in this we have the same basic
> practices and
> knowledge. All 10 come down from Shakaracharya - All 10 are 
basically
> Shavite. As far as Jyotimath is concerned *Giri* is the name 
associated
> with this Math - Traditionally the Saraswatis are from the south. 
So  
> do i
> need to read up to find out about this lineage - i Live this 
lineage.
> 
> * This would resolve her argument.
> 
> G there is no argument - i am commenting from Living within the
> Tradition of being a fully initiated Renunicate that has lived not 
only
> here but also within this sect in india. ----
> 
> * That MMY was GD's secretary, doesn't mean he was just
> employed vs being a student.
> 
> G he was a Brahachari - it is known absolutely that he was not
> a fully initiated Swami. Undoubtedly he was a student there are many
> such nowadays - brahmachari's that are in the process of learning
> About the tradition before being formally inducted into it. This is 
a
> common practice.
> 
> * Anyone can see on the youtube video that he was speaking in
> front of GD, he is shown on photos of showing the
> first president of india around in the Ashram - so don't tell me he
> didn't have the trust of GD. I am not saying Swami G is totally 
wrong,
> but I do see that she takes her own path as sort of absolute.
> 
> G My path IS the same tradition as the one he is supposed to be
> speaking from. -------- this is what you don't understand. He may
> have been showing the first president around the Ashram but
> this proves absolutely nothing. The problem is you have only
> read about the traditions and haven't actually lived within them.
> 
> T: My Guru said that in her case, there is one
> being groomed now for this position, but this is one that has taken
> sanyas and it simply is a flow that this person is selected. My 
Gurus
> general comments are this is how a Guru is appointed, not by wanting
> to be Guru or declaring ones self to be one.
> 
> * Traditionally this is the case.
> 
> G yes And ? there are no but's - this is the way it has been and
> continues to remain.
> 
> * But look at the controversies in many traditions, Hindu and
> Buddhist - very often the succession is not clear.
> 
> G look succession was not clear when it came to Guru Dev. That
> Math had no heir for over 100 Years. - Guru Dev was choosen and
> approved by the other Shankaracharya's. That is true.
> 
> But there is NO way - not ANYWHERE - that a Shankaracharya
> is going to appoint a brahmachari that is not even a full swami as
> the one to carry on as a Guru. ------ he may give him blessings but
> he most assuredly will not appoint him to buck the whole of the
> tradition. And what you are putting forth would be exactly that.
> 
> * There maybe contradiory statements of the Guru, like in the
> case of Muktananda,
> 
> G Muktananda was also not held up or appointed. i have this
> on full reliability with one that was With Nithyananda at his
> passing. Nithyananda left his body by will - and was quite
> clear as to why. This is another matter though one that i
> will not get into at this point in time.
> 
> * or simply missing public instructions, or the
> tradition has a certain restrictive format, like in the case of GD.
> 
> G i know what the restrictions are within this tradition. i also 
know
> what mantras are given - i know the in's and outs of this tradition
> as far as what the Dasnami traditions do and don't do. --- did you
> know that we have a secret language that one initiate Sadhu speaks
> to another ? This way we can distinguish who is a Sadhu versus
> who has adopted the clothing. There are other secret practices
> which are clearly known to true intiated which general public
> has no knowledge of. And i am not within liberty to speak of them
> openly as this would be a violation of this tradition.
> 
> there is no way a full initiate would be wearing white - and while
> he may claim Guru Dev as his Guru, like stated before there is
> no way a Full initiate and most certainly a Shakaracharya that
> holds the rules of the order intact is going to appoint a
> half initiate as a guru.
> 
> * Therefor I think your Gurus assesment is somewhat restrictive.
> 
> G you may think what you want - you may read what you want.
> But UNTIL you actually are initiated into one of the 10 Dasanimi
> Orders and actually live in india within that tradition there is no
> way you can determine fact from made up press. And there is a LOT
> of Made Up Press with Mahesh Yogi. Notice it is not Swami
> Mahesh-Saraswati
> Nor is it Mahesh-Giri , nor Mahesh-Bharati etc. He may claim to be 
a  
> part
> of these traditions but no way is he initiated into it. And once 
again
> let
> it be reminded that the Math in the North is that of Giri. He most
> certainly
> could have become an full initiate. -
> 
> * I also agree lagely with the critics of MMY's public antics, with
> the critics
> of many that the focus of the movement shifted to all these side
> issues, etc
> 
> G so you can see part of it - Do you REALLY think that ANY Sampradya
> would stand behind any of this ? Does it shed a good light on the
> Tradition ?
> 
> T: My Guru started a TM yahoo discussion group, there are already 
some
> posts up about this subject:
>


Reply via email to