--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Vaj <vajradh...@...> wrote: > > On May 30, 2009, at 3:25 PM, Marek Reavis wrote: > > > Not necessarily, but that's not the point. However > > he got the honorific, Maharishi certainly felt it > > was appropriate and never demurred. Many agreed > > with him and lots didn't. > > Sorry to be a stickler but you're assuming it's honorific > without any evidence to support that.
An honorific as opposed to *what*? What else could it be? > All we truly know is that it's an alias It's obviously not something MMY made up (Ramana Maharshi, Maharishi Patanjali, etc.). > (esp. since it's not the actual name on his passport). > What would be helpful is to see a transcript of the > alleged Cochlin interview or to hear an MP3 of a > recording! Unbelievable. (And it's Coplin, not "Cochlin." I guess you just forgot his name after having read all that recent Coplin material on the Web.) The note I posted from his dissertation contains a transcript of Vasudevanda's response to Coplin's question about how MMY got the title "Maharishi."
