Post by pundit_moderatorPost by coldbluicePost by pundit_moderatorExtinct due to the fact that the seat was empty for over 250 years and
Brahmanand Saraswati was appointed by a committee of pundits down in
Kashi.
The (K)ashi (V)idvat (P)arishad appointed Sri BrahmanandaJi in 1941,
and when he passed in 1953 He failed to appoint a successor.
You are incorrect - Sri BrahmanandJi left a handwritten will
designating a succussor;
The spurious contention that there was ever an authentic "will" is an
unending fanatsy you personally indulge yourself in, in part because of
some futile attempt to justify wasting 35+ years chasing Lil Mishmashi
Mahesh's (C)onfused (P)ersonal (I)deology.
The so-called "will" was Clerk Shristava Brahmachari Mahesh's attempt
at forgery, after he conspired with the cook to poison Sri
BrahmanandaJi to death.
Post by pundit_moderatora will which was probated in an Indian court
of law.
The fact is- *only Swami Shatananda's "claim" was disputed in court.*
And the judge in that specific case agreed with the original
determination that- "Shantananda was not properly qualified," to
succeed Sri BrahmanandaJi."
"...A few weeks after he passed away, a will was found, according to
the terms of which, a disciple called Swami Santananda Saraswati was
named as the first choice for succeeding to the Jyotirmath title.
However, many followers of Brahmananda Saraswati were satisfied neither
with the credentials of Santananda, nor with the validity/authenticity
of the will..."
"...Consequently, although one judge did acknowledge the merits of
the claim that Santananda was not properly qualified, he found no
legally valid reason to give a verdict voiding Santananda's claim to
the title..."
http://www.ucl.ac.uk/~ucgadkw/position/shank-jyot-ascii.html
And, this..
"...Shantinand, at the direction of Mahesh Yogi, refused to give up
possession of the Jyotir Math ashram and forced the matter into
litigation..."
http://www.minet.org/Documents/shank-1
Post by pundit_moderatorBrahmanand's succussor, Swami Shantanand Saraswati was
installed on the seat in the full view of the public and the Jyotirmath
Ashram board of governors.
Please tell us Willyex-, who *exactly* were the *qualified* parties
that installed Swami Shantananda?
It is a *FACT* that all of the installations of Jyosimutt, starting
with--
Sri BrahmanandaJi's in 1941, and Sri Krishnabodha Asrama in 1953, and
Swami Swaroopananda's in 1973.., all were conducted in Varanasi (Kashi)
by the Kashi Vidvat Parishat, one of the two groups *only qualified*
to make such "installations"..period!
see link cited
'"...The appointment of Swami Brahmananda Saraswati in 1941 was made
by a group of monks and pundits based in Varanasi (the Bharata Dharma
Mahamandala, Kashi Vidvat Parishad, and the Akhila Bharatiya
Dharmasangha),.."
"...Because of the controversy over Brahmananda's will and
Santananda's succession, the organizations involved in reviving
Jyotirmath in 1941 considered other nominations for the Sankaracharya
post. These efforts were blessed by Swami Abhinava Sacchidananda
Tirtha, the then Sankaracharya of Dwaraka. In 1953 itself, one Swami
Krishnabodha Asrama was appointed as the new Jyotirmath Sankaracharya,
contesting Santananda's claim..."
"....When Krishnabodha Asrama passed away in 1973, he nominated Swami
Swarupananda Saraswati to the title. Swarupananda is a direct disciple
of Brahmananda Saraswati,.."
"...Clearly, the role played by the Kashi Vidvat Parishad and the
Akhila Bharatiya Dharmasangha was not questioned when Krishnabodha
Asrama was appointed to the Jyotirmath title, except perhaps by
Santananda and his followers. As for the other mathas and their heads,
whatever their reservations may have been about Santananda's
qualifications for the Sankaracharya title, their endorsement of
Krishnabodha Asrama's appointment and/or his subsequent appointment of
Swarupananda meant that they tacitly approved of and accepted the
actions of these two organizations..."
http://www.ucl.ac.uk/~ucgadkw/position/shank-jyot-ascii.html
It is a *FACT* that Sri BrahmanandaJi had passed away and the Kashi
Vidvat Parishad had already installed Swami Krishnabodha Asrama in
Varanasi to head Jyosimutt.
So, please answer the question Willytex-, which *qualified group*
installed Swami Shantananda?
The *FACT* is -- none did!!
Swami Shantananda *assumed control* of Jyosimutt based upon a cleverly
forged "will".
Post by pundit_moderatorThe will of Brahmanad has never been
challenged in court and is acknowledged by Swami Swaroopanand Saraswati
in the Kropinsky interview.
Since you have once again insisted on establishing the-- 'Kropinski
interview' as a factual and reliable source.., here is what Swami
SwaroopanandaJi had said-,
"...Shantinand, at the direction of Mahesh Yogi, refused to give up
possession of the Jyotir Math ashram and forced the matter into
litigation..."
http://www.minet.org/Documents/shank-1
And, there is this...
'"...Again, the so-called will of the deceased Guru Dev prescribes the
name of Dvarikeshanand Saraswati as the second person, not him..."
http://www.minet.org/Documents/shank-5
Wait just a minute there Willytex above you claimed-,
"a will which was probated in an Indian court of law."
(are you completly insane?)
Why would there be a need to probate a will if the "succession issue"
was not challenged in court?
Fact is Lil Mishmashi Shristava Mahesh Varmit had taken Swami
Shantananda's "claim to succession" to a probate court on the basis of
a cleverly forged will.
Post by pundit_moderator"Thus, none of the civil suits in this dispute seems to have been
framed in terms of contesting the legal bona fides of Brahmananda's
will." - Vidyasankar Sundaresan
Here is the last sentence of the immediately above-mention paragraph
from
- Vidyasankar Sundaresan's work you just cited...
"...Consequently, although one judge did acknowledge the merits of the
claim that Santananda was not properly qualified, he found no legally
valid reason to give a verdict voiding Santananda's claim to the title.
http://www.ucl.ac.uk/~ucgadkw/position/shank-jyot-ascii.html
"...Shantinand, at the direction of Mahesh Yogi, refused to give up
possession of the Jyotir Math ashram and forced the matter into
litigation..."
http://www.minet.org/Documents/shank-1
So, how did this "issue of succession" find its way into court?..
Unless a moving party brought the "will" into court to have Swami
Shantananda's "claim to the title" heard?
As for Swami Swaroopananda is concerned (as you keep insisting on
bringing up the Kropinski interview as a reliable and factual source).,
He never said the will was authentic!!
He in fact just quotes portions of the "so-called will" here is just
some of what Swami Sri SwaroopanandaJi has said, as you personally cite
the 'Kropinski interview' as fact..
"...Again, the so-called will of the deceased Guru Dev prescribes the
name of Dvarikeshanand Saraswati as the second person, not him..."
http://www.minet.org/Documents/shank-5
'"...word came to me that he (Shantinand) had
requested to be allowed on the stage. I allowed him to be present only
because he has given up this nonsense of claiming title to
Shankaracharya. He said Vishnu Devanand, Mahesh's so-called
Shankaracharya, was also here in Vrindaban, he also requested to come
onto the stage, but I refused. Then, he (Vishnu Devanand) stated he
would sit on a lower, undecorated seat if I allowed him to attend. I
refused him. Then, he again begged to simply sit on the floor of the
stage at my feet, if I allowed him to be publicly present. Again I
refused. He said, if I allow him to be seen with me, and all the while
wrongfully claiming title as Shankaracharya, it will appear as if I
approve of his activity, and I do not. Therefore, he said, I have
ordered that he may not even come into the tent to sit in the
audience..."
http://www.minet.org/Documents/shank-1
Post by pundit_moderatorPost by coldbluiceAnd in light of that fact the KVP had established a clear purpose and
defined reason to appoint His successor.
"...Swami Brahmananda Saraswati passed away in 1953, but he had not
clearly indicated his successor. This immediately caused a problem, as
he had initiated a number of disciples into Sannyasa..."
The KVP has on three occasions attempted to intefere with the rightful
succussion of the Jyotirmath seat. After they appointed Bramanand
Saraswati, they should have kept their big pie holes shut, according to
Mr. Sundaresan.
"However, once Swami Brahmananda Saraswati was accepted as the
Jyotirmath Sankaracharya, and there were no serious disputes about it
at the time, further activities of these other institutions with
respect to succession issues could be construed as unnecessary
interference."
http://www.ucl.ac.uk/~ucgadkw/position/shank-jyot-ascii.html
Post by coldbluicePost by pundit_moderatorThat committee has attempted to place others on the seat and
interfere with the rightful succussion from Brahmanand.
That is the factual historical point of contention and why the KVP had
gotten involved in 1953, He had -, "not clearly indicated a
successor."
The committee of pundits down in Kashi didn't like the
person chosen by Brahmanand Saraswati, therefore they attempted to
interfere with the rightful succussion.
No sorry Willytex the issue was the "so-called will" of Sri
BrahmanandaJi.
As you - yourself continually insist on citing the Kropinski interniew
as fact..
"...Shantinand, at the direction of Mahesh Yogi, refused to give up
possession of the Jyotir Math ashram and forced the matter into
litigation..."
http://www.minet.org/Documents/shank-1
Post by pundit_moderatorPost by coldbluicePost by pundit_moderatorThe key word here is "claimant" - neither Swaroopanand nor Madhva
Ashram are in the desciplic succussion from Brahmanand Saraswati and
neither were mentioned in the will.
Not true,.., Sri Swami Swaroopanada was a *Direct Disciple* as this
fact was clearly and conclusively proved in a court of law, and this
legal fact was upheld even in the appeals process
Again, you are mistaken. According to Mr. Sundersan, Swami Swaroopanand
is not in the desciplic succussion
Again i ask you-, 'are you insane'?
Here is Mr. Sudersan writing exactly the opposite..
"..Swarupananda is a direct disciple of Brahmananda Saraswati,.."
http://www.ucl.ac.uk/~ucgadkw/position/shank-jyot-ascii.html
Post by pundit_moderatoras he had gone over to another
And, that is implied to mean what exacatly?
Simply because He departed Jyosimutt after the passing of Sri
BrahmanandaJi?
Perhaps that was His instructions from Sri BrahmanandaJi!!
Post by pundit_moderator"Santananda passed away in late 1997, and Vasudevananda Saraswati is
currently the sole representative of this lineage."
http://www.ucl.ac.uk/~ucgadkw/position/shank-jyot-ascii.html
Here are the sentences that you forgot to include..
"...There is no indication that the rival lineage of Santananda and
his disciples was endorsed at this time by any of the other
Sankaracharyas..."
"...Thus, notwithstanding the previous legal standing of Santananda at
Jyotirmath, his disciple and successor seems to have suffered a legal
setback at present..."
"...However, it is precisely this lineage that seems to lack the
necessary traditional support and that also seems to have now lost its
previous legal standing.
http://www.ucl.ac.uk/~ucgadkw/position/shank-jyot-ascii.html
Post by pundit_moderatorPost by coldbluicePost by pundit_moderatorSo, why didn't you mention the fact that one of your favorite
Shankaraycharyas is in court charged with murder?
So why haven't you mentioned the fact that one of your favorite
Shankaracharya's is in court charged with murder?
http://rwilliams.blogspot.com/