who killed Guru Dev?
ch...@my-deja.com
By whom? Any facts or guesses?
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.
Steve Ralph
>I read an interview from one of his students who said GD was poisoned.
>By whom? Any facts or guesses?
>
My guess is that you are Andrew Skunklenik
Sitting atop your pile of awards
Crowing like a damp pidgeon
But I'm probably wrong, so apologies.
Steve
Dan
>I read an interview from one of his students who said GD was poisoned.
>By whom? Any facts or guesses?
>
I think it was the same person who shot Elvis.
Dan
encapsulight
whilst chanting his "mantra"!!
<ch...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:8d5ge7$erj$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> I read an interview from one of his students who said GD was poisoned.
> By whom? Any facts or guesses?
>
>
ch...@my-deja.com
movement type who never in his 10 years of involvement heard about this
topic. My admittedly sensational subject line was meant to get
attention & some (hopefully objective) answers. I surprised this has
not been discussed or rebutted by anyone I've met around the movement.
I don't expect everyone to concur with this Swami's conclusions (esp.
considering the source). Of course, after reading the whole interview,
it seems there is very little concurrence about anything among GD's
disciples.
I guess if no one here knows anything material to this, I can take it
to my old MIU buddy, who is now helping head the "Divine Love" center
in Philly (started by one of MMY's co-pupils under GD).
Here are relevant passages from the article:
---------------------------------------------------------
"Swami Swaroopanand Saraswati was a pre-eminent disciple of Swami
Brahmananda Saraswati (Guru Dev). Brahmananda Saraswati, whose picture
is customarily seen behind Mahesh Yogi, was also Mahesh Yogi's
Spiritual Master. Guru Dev held the title of Shankaracharya of Jyotir
Math, the monastery located in Northern India, until his death, by
poisoning, in 1954."
"It is said that Guru Dev was given poison. Who gave that poison we
don't know but we know that there was poison in his body. When Guru
Dev's body became unwell, then we wanted him to go to Kashi to rest.
But he (Mahesh) removed him from that trip forcibly and took him to
speak in Calcutta. There he died."
------------------------------------------------------------------
Here is the link:
http://minet.org/Documents/shank-1
also
.../shank-2 thru .../shank-5
CW
In article <38f65379...@news.dircon.co.uk>,
sra...@borealis.com (Steve Ralph) wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Apr 2000 22:07:14 GMT, ch...@my-deja.com wrote:
>
> >I read an interview from one of his students who said GD was
poisoned.
> >By whom? Any facts or guesses?
> >
> My guess is that you are Andrew Skunklenik
> Sitting atop your pile of awards
> Crowing like a damp pidgeon
>
> But I'm probably wrong, so apologies.
>
> Steve
Lawson English
On Fri, Apr 14, 2000 8:36 AM, ch...@my-deja.com <mailto:ch...@my-deja.com>
wrote:
>"Swami Swaroopanand Saraswati was a pre-eminent disciple of Swami
>Brahmananda Saraswati (Guru Dev). Brahmananda Saraswati, whose picture
>is customarily seen behind Mahesh Yogi, was also Mahesh Yogi's
>Spiritual Master. Guru Dev held the title of Shankaracharya of Jyotir
>Math, the monastery located in Northern India, until his death, by
>poisoning, in 1954."
>
>"It is said that Guru Dev was given poison. Who gave that poison we
>don't know but we know that there was poison in his body. When Guru
>Dev's body became unwell, then we wanted him to go to Kashi to rest.
>But he (Mahesh) removed him from that trip forcibly and took him to
>speak in Calcutta. There he died."
The "poisoning" was *food* poisoning, or so MY sources say.
My sources also say that Guru Dev's position in Indian society at that time
was such that if there was even a hint of an assasination, there would have
been as big a turmoil as there was when Ghandi was killed, so he laughed at
the "was poisoned" claim.
The controversy was only over where Guru Dev should be taken to rest. He
said that one faction wanted to move him and one faction wanted to keep him
where he was. Guru Dev may have insisted on being moved, so that he could
give the lecture, you know.
I can't imagine MMY or anyone else being able to force him to give the
lecture, nor to override Guru Dev's wishes, regardless of what they were.
Commonsense reads that passage as nonsense anyway, come to think of it.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
"If everyone lived with a sense of wonder, their lives would be filled with
joy."
-Last words of Doug Henning, 5/3/47 - 2/7/00
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
willytex
> "Lawson English" <eng...@primenet.com> wrote:
>
>
> The "poisoning" was *food* poisoning, or so MY sources say. My sources
> also say that Guru Dev's position in Indian society at that
> time was such that if there was even a hint of an assasination, there
> would have been as big a turmoil as there was when Ghandi was killed,
> so he laughed at the "was poisoned" claim.
>
> The controversy was only over where Guru Dev should be taken to rest.
> He said that one faction wanted to move him and one faction wanted to
> keep him where he was. Guru Dev may have insisted on being moved, so
> that he could give the lecture, you know.
> I can't imagine MMY or anyone else being able to force him to give the
> lecture, nor to override Guru Dev's wishes, regardless of what they
> were. Commonsense reads that passage as nonsense anyway, come to think
> of it.
currently available. It has been a big disapointment to me that the
movement has not made more material material available. I hear from
long-time meditators that still do not even know Maharihis's real name.
However, for over 150 years, some say longer, the seat of the
Shankacharya of the north was politically repressed and vacant. We do
not know what caused Guru Dev to change his mind after twenty years and
finally accept the nomination. It may be that his own guru, Swami
Krishnanada, told Guru Dev to become more available to the people. Swami
Swaroopananda is a political football in India, as are all the other
Shankacharyas. They all tacitly support the status quo, i.e. the caste
system, are against family planning and actively support other
conservative agendas such as anti-cow killing. The comments you cite
above are strictly Swaroops opinion, to be taken with a grain of salt
much like we used to take the pronouncements of Rajneesh. For a list of
pertinent books on this subject please refer to my post of 4/12 'Its Not
What You Think'.
willytex
ch...@my-deja.com wrote:
> Nope, I'm not him. Apologies accepted, Steve. I'm just a curious
> former movement type who never in his 10 years of involvement heard
> about this topic. My admittedly sensational subject line was meant
> to get attention & some (hopefully objective) answers. I surprised
> this has not been discussed or rebutted by anyone I've met around the
> movement. I don't expect everyone to concur with this Swami's
> conclusions (esp. considering the source). Of course, after reading
> the whole interview, it seems there is very little concurrence about
> anything among GD's disciples. I guess if no one here knows anything
> material to this, I can take it to my old MIU buddy, who is now
> helping head the "Divine Love" center in Philly (started by one of
> MMY's co-pupils under GD).
chat - You are correct, there is little concurrence among Guru Dev's
disciples. There is even less concurance among the Shankacharyas in
general. As an early adopter of TM, I heve been very interested in
Sankara, the history of the Saraswati sampradaya, and especially how it
relates to Vajrayana Buddhism as it was practiced in India around 700
AD during the time of Gaudapada. Not finding the answers to my
questions within the TM movement, I began to explore this history on my
own. It has been very difficult for me to find information; I was able
to go to India in the early 70's and spent some time at the
Theosophical Library at Adyar, researching. In late 1978 I traveled to
Rochester, NY to see Swami Ageananda, whom I had met at Trungpa's
Nalanda Institute in Boulder. While in the Rochester area I also met
another swami, an American woman named Swami Lakshmi Devyashram. Swami
Laksmi told me that she had been practicing yoga under Swami Sivananda
in 1963 when she had an apparent case of samadhi. A year later she was
given initation into Sanyas by Swami Swanandashram, an Indian Sannyasin
living in America. She thereby entered the Shankaracahrya Order. Swami
Lakshmi went to India in 1974 and was recieved by His Holines 108
Jagadguru Shankaracharya Swami Abhinava Vidyateertha Maharaj of Sri
Sharada Peetham at Sringeri. According to Swami Lakshmi, the Jagadguru
authorised her to teach, and he also authorized her to start a line of
succession or parampara in America. Swami Laksmi founded the
Rajarajeshwari Peetham for this purpose. The Temple serves a large
Indian population in the Rochester NY area. I was initiated by Swami
Lakshmi on May 7, 1978, and took the name Mahamandalaishvara
Devyashram. Swami Lakshmi passed away in 1981, and was succeeded by
another American woman, Swami Saraswati Devyashram, who remainded as
leader for about seven years. Swami Saraswati retired in in 1988 to lay
life, and I believe that she is now the proprietor of a book store in
Virginia. This Temple is a Hindu-American synthesis based on Shakti
interpretations of classic Sankara Vedanta. While there, I was able to
study some temple ritual and puja, some Sanskrit, and the use of the
Gayatri mantra. I have not been in contact with this organization in
some years, but I believe that it is currently headed by a Swami
Parvati Devyashram, another American woman.
For the past five years I have been a sometime observer and participant
of the organization you mention, namely ISDL, or the International
Society of Divine Love at Barshana Dham, the largest Hindu Temple
outside India, which was founded by Swami Prakashananda Saraswati. At
one particular gathering in 1995, I counted seven American women
sanyasins, who had been initiated by Prakash. Swami Prakashananda has
said that he was a disciple of Guru Dev and he often speaks of him and
has written about him in his book 'Lives of the Rasik Saints'. For a
detailed report on the political turmoil surrounding Jyotir Math before
Guru Dev took the seat, see Sastry & Kumaraswamy 'Jyotirmath: A Brief
Introduction'. The definitive work on the Shankaracharyas is: 'Sankara
and the Jagagurus Today' by Williams Cenkner.
BillyG.
"willytex" <will...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:8d8ct1$l60$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
I was able
> to go to India in the early 70's and spent some time at the
> Theosophical Library at Adyar, researching.
Willy-What a wonderful opportunity taken!! I would love to go there, having
read much of their outstanding literature. I have nothing but admiration for
Besant, Leadbeater and the many others who made such great contributions to
western civilization and its understanding of the East. Speaking of which,
have you ever read, "True Ghost Stories" by Leadbeater, a good read!
(Couldn't find it in their database, however!)Billyg
Lawson English
On Fri, Apr 14, 2000 12:13 PM, willytex <mailto:will...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>In article <B51CA67...@206.165.44.161>,
>> "Lawson English" <eng...@primenet.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> The "poisoning" was *food* poisoning, or so MY sources say. My sources
>> also say that Guru Dev's position in Indian society at that
>> time was such that if there was even a hint of an assasination, there
>> would have been as big a turmoil as there was when Ghandi was killed,
>> so he laughed at the "was poisoned" claim.
>>
>> The controversy was only over where Guru Dev should be taken to rest.
>> He said that one faction wanted to move him and one faction wanted to
>> keep him where he was. Guru Dev may have insisted on being moved, so
>> that he could give the lecture, you know.
>> I can't imagine MMY or anyone else being able to force him to give the
>> lecture, nor to override Guru Dev's wishes, regardless of what they
>> were. Commonsense reads that passage as nonsense anyway, come to think
>> of it.
>Lawson - chatw - There is very little information about Guru Dev that is
>currently available. It has been a big disapointment to me that the
>movement has not made more material material available. I hear from
>long-time meditators that still do not even know Maharihis's real name.
>
My source is an Indian brahmin-caste professor of East Asian Studies at the
U of AZ whose uncle is a high muckety-muck in Northern India. When my
friend visited Jytorimath many years ago, using his uncle's clout, he was
asked "which Shankaracharya" do you want to see, and chose to visit Guru
Dev's hand-picked sucessor rather than the committee-selected one. His
sources for the above remarks are apparently what his uncle (who has been
involved in religious politics in northern India for many years) told him,
plus what is common knowledge in India. There was no assasination, only
food-poisoning. The controversy was over moving or not-moving GuruDev, and
as I pointed out, if GuruDev wanted to go lecture in Calcutta, even on his
death-bed, who was going to stop him?
>However, for over 150 years, some say longer, the seat of the
>Shankacharya of the north was politically repressed and vacant. We do
>not know what caused Guru Dev to change his mind after twenty years and
>finally accept the nomination. It may be that his own guru, Swami
>Krishnanada, told Guru Dev to become more available to the people. Swami
>Swaroopananda is a political football in India, as are all the other
>Shankacharyas. They all tacitly support the status quo, i.e. the caste
>system, are against family planning and actively support other
>conservative agendas such as anti-cow killing. The comments you cite
>above are strictly Swaroops opinion, to be taken with a grain of salt
>much like we used to take the pronouncements of Rajneesh. For a list of
>pertinent books on this subject please refer to my post of 4/12 'Its Not
>What You Think'.
I don't need no stinkin' books. My friend spoke with GuruDev's hand-picked
sucessor in person about MMY -asked him specifically what he thought of
him, and his uncle, the one with enough religious clout to get a nephew an
interview with either Shankaracharya of Jyotirmath, was apparently the
source of the info about how Gurudev died and what kind of controversy
surrounded him.
willytex
"Lawson English" <eng...@primenet.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Apr 14, 2000 12:13 PM, willytex <mailto:will...@yahoo.com>
wrote:
> In article <B51CA67...@206.165.44.161>,
> "Lawson English" <eng...@primenet.com> wrote:
> The "poisoning" was *food* poisoning, or so MY sources say. My sources
> also say that Guru Dev's position in Indian society at that
> time was such that if there was even a hint of an assasination, there
> would have been as big a turmoil as there was when Ghandi was killed,
> so he laughed at the "was poisoned" claim.
> The controversy was only over where Guru Dev should be taken to rest.
> He said that one faction wanted to move him and one faction wanted to
> keep him where he was. Guru Dev may have insisted on being moved, so
> that he could give the lecture, you know.
> I can't imagine MMY or anyone else being able to force him to give the
> lecture, nor to override Guru Dev's wishes, regardless of what they
> were. Commonsense reads that passage as nonsense anyway, come to think
> of it.
>
> at the U of AZ whose uncle is a high muckety-muck in Northern India.
> When my friend visited Jytorimath many years ago, using his uncle's
> clout, he was asked "which Shankaracharya" do you want to see, and
> chose to visit Guru Dev's hand-picked sucessor rather than the
> committee-selected one. His sources for the above remarks are
> apparently what his uncle (who has been involved in religious
> politics in northern India for many years) told him, plus what is
> common knowledge in India. There was no assasination, only food-
> poisoning. The controversy was over moving or not-moving GuruDev, and
> as I pointed out, if GuruDev wanted to go lecture in Calcutta, even
> on his death-bed, who was going to stop him?
>
was 'common knowledge' in India at the time. But if so, why is this
Swaroop bringing up this question about sinister plots now? Does he
think people who were there have forgotten what really happened? What
did the uncle say about the other Guru Dev disciples? Although you seem
to have great faith in what your friend said, his 'comments' hardly
give us any new insights into the situation in India at present, vis-a-
vis, Maharishi, our relationship with the Shankachaya, and the opposing
factions, in which we have a committee chosen Shankacharya who is a
political football going around slandering his fellow disciples.
Can you give me any other information about what the Shankacharya said
to your friend? Is your friend a TM meditator or an admirer of
Maharishi? Was his visit academic, politically motivated or just out of
curiosity? Why was Guru Dev strapped to a chair and sunk in the Ganges,
instead of being cremated like all the other Shankacharyas?
Why did your friend, the professor, go to all the trouble to get his
uncle to pull strings to get gain him an audience, travel all the way
to a daub and wattle hut on the street to nowhere in the back of beyond
to ask someone what he thought of Mahesh Varma? Why did'nt he just call
him up on the telephone? Seriously, did your friend find out anything
of substance that would be directly related to our practice and
philosphy? Specifically, did the Shankacharya say anything about
Maharishi and the TM-Sidhi programme and the use of Patanjali Sankhy-
Yoga philosphy promoted by Maharishi, which is opposed to the Adwaita
Vedanta of Sankara?
> I don't need no stinkin' books. My friend spoke with GuruDev's hand-
> picked sucessor in person about MMY - asked him specifically what he
> thought of him, and his uncle, the one with enough religious clout to
> get a nephew an interview with either Shankaracharya of Jyotirmath,
> was apparently the source of the info about how Gurudev died and what
> kind of controversy surrounded him.
>
This is great for you Lawson, if your conversations with your friend
answer all your questions about Guru Dev and TM. However, I want facts
Lawson, not hearsay and third-party innuendo. Who is this Guru Dev, in
which we 'do everthing in his name' and how can we do everthing in his
name when it is obvious that we in no way are empowered by any
Shankachgarya Peeth?
Note: In 1959, Leo McLaren began TM under Maharishi in London. In 1961,
Leo went to India to study with Maharishi and according to Joyce-Collin
Smith writing in 'Call No Man Master', Leo was given teacher training.
While in India Leo met Guru Dev's successor, Shantanand. On his return
to London, Leo established the School of Meditation for the express
purpose of teaching TM. This caused a break with Maharishi, but his
school continued under the inspiration of Shantanand and is teaching TM
to this day. The school has published several books by Shantanand. For
years, Leo and members of the school travelled to India to 'see'
Shantanand. Given the responsibilities of the Shankacharya, and other
factors, this means but little. Like 'audiences' with the Pope,
subjects are confined usually to topics concerning very basic
principles. Everything is mediated, and it is up to the visitor to
imagine that some special, private communication is being given by the
host. But see my post of 4/14 concerning the Devyashrams in order to
get an idea of the extremes an imagined audience with the Shankacharya
can take.
- willytex <so much to do, so little time>
BillyG.
> In article <B51D61C...@206.165.44.112>,
Why was Guru Dev strapped to a chair and sunk in the Ganges,
> instead of being cremated like all the other Shankacharyas?
>
sure? I can see him down there now! Billyg...only 75 miles from
Krishnamurti's ranch!
BillyG.
> "willytex" <will...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:8da65v$fkv$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> > In article <B51D61C...@206.165.44.112>,
> > instead of being cremated like all the other Shankacharyas?
> >
all seriousness according to the story told by Charlie Lutes he was taken by
boat out into the Ganges directly adjacent to a holy Hindu temple (I don't
remember which one now, maybe you do? Kali, maybe? Dakshinswar perhaps?) as
the coffin (I don't recall Charlie saying chair, I assumed he meant coffin,
but I don't directly recall) was lowered overboard Maharishi entered the
water, and holding on to the coffin, gently guided it to the bottom of the
river. That is the story I have heard. Billyg
Steve Ralph
>Nope, I'm not him. Apologies accepted, Steve. I'm just a curious former
>movement type who never in his 10 years of involvement heard about this
>topic.
I heard that he died of dysentry - never seemed at all important to
me. Not sure why I suspected you were Skunknik, never mind!
> My admittedly sensational subject line was meant to get
>attention & some (hopefully objective) answers. I surprised this has
>not been discussed or rebutted by anyone I've met around the movement.
>I don't expect everyone to concur with this Swami's conclusions (esp.
>considering the source). Of course, after reading the whole interview,
>it seems there is very little concurrence about anything among GD's
>disciples.
As it should be - a good mystery is better than a cold cut n' dried
history. I reckon Maha has upset quite a few traditionalists.
Steve
> I guess if no one here knows anything material to this, I can take it
>to my old MIU buddy, who is now helping head the "Divine Love" center
>in Philly (started by one of MMY's co-pupils under GD).
>
>Here are relevant passages from the article:
>---------------------------------------------------------
>"Swami Swaroopanand Saraswati was a pre-eminent disciple of Swami
>Brahmananda Saraswati (Guru Dev). Brahmananda Saraswati, whose picture
>is customarily seen behind Mahesh Yogi, was also Mahesh Yogi's
>Spiritual Master. Guru Dev held the title of Shankaracharya of Jyotir
>Math, the monastery located in Northern India, until his death, by
>poisoning, in 1954."
>
>"It is said that Guru Dev was given poison. Who gave that poison we
>don't know but we know that there was poison in his body. When Guru
>Dev's body became unwell, then we wanted him to go to Kashi to rest.
>But he (Mahesh) removed him from that trip forcibly and took him to
>speak in Calcutta. There he died."
>------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Here is the link:
>
>http://minet.org/Documents/shank-1
>
>also
>
>.../shank-2 thru .../shank-5
>
>CW
>
>
>
>
>In article <38f65379...@news.dircon.co.uk>,
> sra...@borealis.com (Steve Ralph) wrote:
>> On Thu, 13 Apr 2000 22:07:14 GMT, ch...@my-deja.com wrote:
>>
>> >I read an interview from one of his students who said GD was
>poisoned.
>> >By whom? Any facts or guesses?
>> >
>> My guess is that you are Andrew Skunklenik
>> Sitting atop your pile of awards
>> Crowing like a damp pidgeon
>>
>> But I'm probably wrong, so apologies.
>>
>> Steve
Lawson English
On Sat, Apr 15, 2000 9:42 AM, willytex <mailto:will...@yahoo.com> wrote:
I said:
[...]
>> common knowledge in India. There was no assasination, only food-
>> poisoning. The controversy was over moving or not-moving GuruDev, and
>> as I pointed out, if GuruDev wanted to go lecture in Calcutta, even
>> on his death-bed, who was going to stop him?
>>
>This explanation sounds plausible to me Lawson, and I agree that it
>was 'common knowledge' in India at the time. But if so, why is this
>Swaroop bringing up this question about sinister plots now?
Because he was talking to a former student of MMY whom he knew was now
hostile to MMY? MMY is NOT popular with many mainstream gurus in India,
from what I've seen.
Ditto with mainstream gurus in the USA.
Does he
>think people who were there have forgotten what really happened?
The guy he was talking to obviously didn't have a clue.
What
>did the uncle say about the other Guru Dev disciples?
Not a clue, although my friend says that his uncle refuses to talk about
the latest sucession-politics concerning the latest Shankaracharya of
Jyotirmath.
Although you seem
>to have great faith in what your friend said, his 'comments' hardly
>give us any new insights into the situation in India at present, vis-a-
>vis, Maharishi, our relationship with the Shankachaya, and the opposing
>factions, in which we have a committee chosen Shankacharya who is a
>political football going around slandering his fellow disciples.
>
>Can you give me any other information about what the Shankacharya said
>to your friend?
My friend asked him specifically "what about this 'Maharishi' who is with
the Beatles" and the Shankaracharya answered: "let me put it this way: he
would be my first choice to be my sucessor, but they wouldn't let me due to
the caste-laws."
Is your friend a TM meditator or an admirer of
>Maharishi?
Taught to meditate by the Shankaracharya.
Was his visit academic, politically motivated or just out of
>curiosity?
Mostly academic, I think.
Why was Guru Dev strapped to a chair and sunk in the Ganges,
>instead of being cremated like all the other Shankacharyas?
Never heard that before. No idea.
>
>Why did your friend, the professor, go to all the trouble to get his
>uncle to pull strings to get gain him an audience, travel all the way
>to a daub and wattle hut on the street to nowhere in the back of beyond
>to ask someone what he thought of Mahesh Varma?
It was more of a "BTW, what do you think of..." kinda thing, I gather.
Why did'nt he just call
>him up on the telephone? Seriously, did your friend find out anything
>of substance that would be directly related to our practice and
>philosphy? Specifically, did the Shankacharya say anything about
>Maharishi and the TM-Sidhi programme and the use of Patanjali Sankhy-
>Yoga philosphy promoted by Maharishi, which is opposed to the Adwaita
>Vedanta of Sankara?
1) this was during the time of MMY & the Beatles, I gather -way before the
TM-Sidhis program.
2) the sucessor to this particular Shankaracharya presided over the
International Yogic Flying competition.
3) MMY's explanation of the Sidhis appears to reconcile many differing
points of view.
4) I never heard that Advaita Vedanta was opposed to Patanjali before.
>
>> I don't need no stinkin' books. My friend spoke with GuruDev's hand-
>> picked sucessor in person about MMY - asked him specifically what he
>> thought of him, and his uncle, the one with enough religious clout to
>> get a nephew an interview with either Shankaracharya of Jyotirmath,
>> was apparently the source of the info about how Gurudev died and what
>> kind of controversy surrounded him.
>>
>This is great for you Lawson, if your conversations with your friend
>answer all your questions about Guru Dev and TM. However, I want facts
>Lawson, not hearsay and third-party innuendo. Who is this Guru Dev, in
>which we 'do everthing in his name' and how can we do everthing in his
>name when it is obvious that we in no way are empowered by any
>Shankachgarya Peeth?
Aren't we? My friend seemed to think that MMY had received the highest
possible endorsement from the Shankaracharya -that he would have been the
next Shankaracharya had the caste-laws allowed.
>
>Note: In 1959, Leo McLaren began TM under Maharishi in London. In 1961,
>Leo went to India to study with Maharishi and according to Joyce-Collin
>Smith writing in 'Call No Man Master', Leo was given teacher training.
>While in India Leo met Guru Dev's successor, Shantanand. On his return
>to London, Leo established the School of Meditation for the express
>purpose of teaching TM.
When were the first official TM teacher training classes held? MMY may have
taught a few people earlier than the first formal classes, including,
according to what I have heard, Shantanand himself, but I don't know that
having learned TM from Shantanand would qualify someone to teach TM. My
friend has never represented himself as a meditation teacher simply because
he was intitiated by Shantanand.
This caused a break with Maharishi, but his
>school continued under the inspiration of Shantanand and is teaching TM
>to this day. The school has published several books by Shantanand. For
>years, Leo and members of the school travelled to India to 'see'
>Shantanand. Given the responsibilities of the Shankacharya, and other
>factors, this means but little. Like 'audiences' with the Pope,
>subjects are confined usually to topics concerning very basic
>principles. Everything is mediated, and it is up to the visitor to
>imagine that some special, private communication is being given by the
>host. But see my post of 4/14 concerning the Devyashrams in order to
>get an idea of the extremes an imagined audience with the Shankacharya
>can take.
>- willytex <so much to do, so little time>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
willytex
"BillyG." <wg...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> "willytex" <will...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:8da65v$fkv$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> In article <B51D61C...@206.165.44.112>,
> instead of being cremated like all the other Shankacharyas?
> you sure? I can see him down there now! Billyg
>
Think about it, Billy. It is said that Guru Dev was sitting up when he
died; he may not have been put into a coffin, as we know it, that is,
lying down. He was sitting on something, so why not his favorite chair?
So this arrangement may have been inside a trunk. This trunk or
whatever was sunk in the middle of the Ganges river, just like Charlie
said and Uncle Raj said also. He must have been supported in an upright
position. Like Lawson said, all this may have been politically
motivated, and like Bob said about what is happening now, certain
factions may have been trying to take over. My point is that, I
personaly, would have preferred that Guru Dev be cremated in the
traditional manner as befitting a Jagadguru, his ashes should have then
been offered to Mother Ganga at Uttar Kashi or somewhere.