--- In [email protected], "boo_lives" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: But he > > didn't do it because GD was his master, and he was completely > > dedicated to him, served him for 13 years etc. So you think GD just > > dumped him, saying: you are not a Brahmin, you are only a Brahmachari? > > I find this logic ridiculous and even arrogant. > > > Who said anything about GD "dumping" MMY. Why is it impossible to > have a rational discussion with a tmo devotee??? There's a world of > difference between the assertion that mmy is not the formal successor > to GD's tradition and saying GD dumped him.
Please Boo don't get excited about just one word - I am not a native english speaker, so to express a certain sentiment in a foreign language isn't always easy. Besides that, I am not a TMO devotee since long. Try to read it within the context of the whole paragraph I wrote above. My point is obviousy to look beyound traditional formalisms, and that a real master like GD could have easiy given a silent transmission to MMY if he felt he was deserving. This is my hypothesis. Swami G is simply taking off on the fact that he was not formally initiated into the Sadhu vows. But I think the essence of a teachers enlightenment can be transmitted beyound formal initiations. In this way I dispute the statement of the lack of MMY's qualification on the mere ground he was a 'novice', 'not even in the initial stages' (Swami G's words) Wereas it has been clearly shown that the reason for this is is a formalsm in the extremely conservative tradition. I simply found Swami G's remarks deceptive.
