Comment below:
**
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> **snip**
>
> Vaj and some others here have suggested at various times
> that Maharishi and his teachings might *not* be a legitimate
> example of the Shankaracharya tradition, and have expressed
> their reasons for believing this. In this post I'm suggest-
> ing that in at least one respect I can't imagine anything
> *more* representative of Shankara and his approach to
> spiritual teaching than Maharishi and the TMO.
>
> Reading first the excerpt from the bio, and then the full
> bio, and then some of the other things posted on the
> Advaita Vendanta Library site, one thing just *leaped* off
> the screen at me. It was me saying to myself, "Wow...this
> all sounds so *familiar*."
>
> So *what* sounded familiar?
>
> The near-compulsive attempt to establish "best-ness,"
> that's what.
>
> Think about it. Whoever wrote the bio of Shankara on this
> site, what did he choose to *focus* on?
>
> His many debates with other spiritual teachers, Shankara
> *himself* trying to establish "best-ness," that's what.
> The bio is almost a litany of such encounters, a listing
> of debate after debate in which Shankara "proved" that his
> teachings were superior to the teachings of others. And
> there is also in the writing (IMO, of course) a simultan-
> eous gloating about all of these "lesser" teachings and
> teachers who *had* been "proven" to be lesser. The rest
> of the site echoes this theme, especially in my opinion
> the naming of the links in the "Critics" section. Most of
> them are called attempted "refutations" of Shankara's ideas,
> *continuing* the tradition of claiming "best-ness," and
> perpetuating the debate. The guy who wrote the bio (it
> just really *had* to be a guy) seems to really *enjoy*
> the idea that Shankara put Buddhist groups and other com-
> peting Indian spiritual groups out of business and/or
> "humiliated" them.
>
**snip to end**
Turq, this first part reminded me of the division of Hindu scripture
into the Srutis, Smirtis, and Puranas -- the "Heard" ("actually
experienced"), the "Remembered" ("got the skinny from someone actually
experienced, and this is what he told me"), and the "Stories"
("there's some really wild stuff out there, stuff you've never heard
of before now, listen to this . . .")
Seems like there are all sorts of different ways of pointing yourself
in the right direction, and believing (or feeling) the divinity of the
teacher is just an interior position relative to the divine that one
already is. Kind of like a boomerang -- you throw it out and it comes
right back with more of the same.
The wild and crazy stories are, I think, just a way of catching your
attention; but believing the stories and the myths *does* play with
your mind -- reshapes it and reorients it towards That that everyone
seems to be chasing in one way or another, anyway, even though they
may not define it the same way.
The problems with believing in the stories, as you say, is that you
can start taking them personally and then feel personally diminished
when someone doesn't buy into them. And everyone chafes when they're
made to feel small. First the war of the stories, and ultimately
(maybe), actual war.
Anyway, more good stuff, thanks.
