Guest guest Posted December 1, 2004 Report Share Posted December 1, 2004 Ammachi, RAJAN <vivekanus> wrote: > Om Namah Shivaya > I do not know if the Shankaracharya topic is closed > in here or not.I feel forced to reply to Ajith's email > because from the begining he has been making > outlandish claims,verdicts on the case when it has not > yet been settled in the court. Thanks Rajan, for chipping in with wise words (I sniped the long text from the original mail) I don't know if we should really close this topic or not (meaning we should not). This is a traumatic issue for many raised-in-India folks who are devotees of Amma and yet follow the Kanchi mutt closely, so let them heal it by speaking out here. So, what I would suggest is that we not focus on the issue aggressively, but if it crops up here, let's try to 'closet' it with the attitude "what's this got to do with Amma?" (this question is attempted to be partially answered in the last para). I also second Rajan's plea to not pre-judge. Quite frankly, there was no basis for Ajith's judgemental statements, atleast none offered here, and I suspect there is none. Last but not least, I hope you know that this has caused, serious questions about the 'credibility of Gurus' in India. It sounds entirely unfair to suspect one mango to be bad and discard the entire bunch of mangoes, but that's life - deal with it. Perhaps it gives us a small clue as to why Amma was discussing this with other devotees in the tour (if you can read between the lines), and this is entirely one man's opinion only, not an official release. Hope this all ends, as Amma said, as nothing more than a bad dream. Jai Ma! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 1, 2004 Report Share Posted December 1, 2004 > > Ammachi, RAJAN > <vivekanus> wrote: > > Om Namah Shivaya > > I do not know if the Shankaracharya topic is > closed > > in here or not.I feel forced to reply to Ajith's > email > > because from the begining he has been making > > outlandish claims,verdicts on the case when it has > not > > yet been settled in the court. > > Thanks Rajan, for chipping in with wise words (I > sniped the long > text from the original mail) > > I don't know if we should really close this topic or > not (meaning we > should not). This is a traumatic issue for many > raised-in-India > folks who are devotees of Amma and yet follow the > Kanchi mutt > closely, so let them heal it by speaking out here. > So, what I would > suggest is that we not focus on the issue > aggressively, but if it > crops up here, let's try to 'closet' it with the > attitude "what's > this got to do with Amma?" (this question is > attempted to be > partially answered in the last para). > > OK larke aur larkyion, here's the deal: If you have a take on the Shankaracharya (i.e. he is guilty as charged and should rot in jail, or he is innocent and being framed on fabricated charges), you can say your piece if you can do so without personal attacks against anyone on this list who disagree with your views. Differences of opinion - yes. Flames - NO!! And yes, you should always have the attitude "what's this got to do with Amma?" before posting anything further about this topic. Keval Read only the mail you want - Mail SpamGuard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted December 1, 2004 Report Share Posted December 1, 2004 Ammachi, Mike Brooker <patria1818> wrote: > And yes, you should always have the attitude > "what's this got to do with Amma?" before posting > anything further about this topic. > > Keval Point taken, but all I meant was that the answer may not be immediately obvious, so be patient before asking it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.