That the teachings of both coincide does not make sha.nkara a plagiarist.
Not so. Read on.
That way the
giitaa is a
> plagiarism from the vedas.
Again not so. Sri Krsna is the author of the Vedas, as He Himself
asserts in 15.15. Sankara is not the author, nor is Sai Baba, but
their interpretations would lead one to believe that they are,
since they claim, or fail to deny, that Sankara and Sai Baba are
In short, as far as philosophy in Indian tradition . . .
(very eloquently put)
> Now if you can provide quotes from Satya Sai Baba where he mentions verses from
> the giitaa (perhaps in his lectures) and claimed that he made them up himself,
> I'll eat all my words and admit that he is a plagiarist.
The logic of his interpretations obviates the need for this.
And this conclusion is inescapable if one accepts such an
> I admit that I am not a follower of Satya Sai Baba and I haven't even read any
> literature of his. But I don't have to, in order to criticize your description
> of his teachings, namely as plagiarism.
I appreciate your point, and I think mine is clear and cohesive