--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Richard J. Williams" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> sparaig wrote:
> > Shatananda was declared "unqualified" because he was a cook,
> > basically. The fact that he was Gurudev's oldest disciple didn't
> > matter to the scholars.
> >
> There's no evidence that I can find that would indicate that
> Shantanand was a "cook" by profession. According to the Times of
> India, Shantanand was an editor for years at Geeta Press and later a
> student at the Shankar Matha in Allahahabad. After Shantanand took
> sanyas he certainly wouldn't be found cooking food for others -
> Sanyasins aren't supposed to be fooling around with fire. 
> 
> But in fact the committee you refer to wasn't a committee of 
scholars
> anyway and neither was Swami Brahmanand Saraswati a scholar of any
> repute - he was a mystic. On that basis, Shantanand was the more
> worthy successor to Guru Dev, not any of the other caste mongers who
> frequent political parties, despite their much Sanskrit learning.
> 
> From the Times of India:
>  
> The Shankaracharya was born in Achati village of Basti district 
into a
> Brahmin family. He was the third son of Pandit Lal Bihari Tiwari.
> After taking to "Vairagya" at 20, he went to Geeta press, Gorakhpur,
> and there he stayed from 1933 to 1939. After that, he went to the
> ashram of Uria Baba in Vrindaban where he remained for 14 years and
> studied. In 1951, he took "sanyas" from Shankaracharya Swami
> Brahmanand Saraswati of Jyotish Peeth. After the death of Swami
> Brahmanand Saraswati, he was made the Shankaracharya of Jyotish 
Peeth
> on June 12, 1953. On February 29, 1980, he declared Swami 
Vasudevanand
> Saraswati his successor. 
> 
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Date: Mon, Sep 11 2006 2:40 pm
> Groups: alt.meditation.transcendental, alt.yoga, alt.meditation
> Thread: The one undisputed fact about Guru DevJi
> http://tinyurl.com/yx4go7

Reccomended reading for anyone who thinks Shantanand Saraswati was 
just a cook: "The Man Who Wanted to Know God" ISBN 0-517-88520-4


Reply via email to