Summary (of "Question", "braHmavid=Krishna?" series of mails) (fwd)

Venkatraman.Chandrasekaran at NOKIA.COM Venkatraman.Chandrasekaran at NOKIA.COM
Tue Aug 27 18:15:31 CDT 2002

A jIvanmuktha is said to not do anything out of samkalpa.
If his body does something it is due to praarabdha and 
internally he doesn't feel limited due to his body's 
limtations since he is devoid of desires and samkalpas.
So even if his body doesn't perform any feats, as a mundane
person would eagerly expect, it doesn't an iota change
the status of the realised. I am sure other people have
stressed upon this point.

I will quote instances from two of the greatest seers we
have all read about.
Sri Ramakrishna was staying opposite Madhur Babu's house
near the temple precincts. Once Ramakrishna was walking
up and down the corridor in his kutir. Madhur was looking
keenly at him from his house. All of a sudden he didn't
see Ramakrishna. When Ramakrishna walked one way, he saw
Kali walking.. and when He walked the other way, he saw
Shiva walking... Completely overwhelmed by this vision 
Madhur ran crying towards Ramakrishna and fell at his feet
and narrated what he saw.. Ramakrishna coolly said "I don't
know anything about what you saw".. This could mean that
Ramakrishna's form changes into Kali and Shiva wasn't his
own samkalpa..

Sri Bhagawan Ramana is said to have given hastha dhiksha
to Ganapathy muni when the latter was performing a severe
penance. The muni was performing penance in a temple in a
far away city. Ramana was in his cave in Thiruvannamalai.
It's said that Ramana's body took off in the air and went
to the city where the muni was performing penance and 
landed in front of the muni and gave hasta dhikshai and
returned by air to the cave. When Ramana narrated this, one
gets a feeling from the way he narrates that this happened
without his samkalpa.

When a young boy asked Ramana "Ramakrishna showed God to
Vivekananda.. Can you show me God?". Ramana replied "If
the person who is asking is a Vivekananda then I can show
So the person who is trying to enquire into the nature of
the brahmavid should be having some qualifications to even
be a witness to the former's feats and blessings. And when
the person gets those qualifications he won't ask the former 
to run:)) Simple! :)


> -----Original Message-----
> From: ext Kiran B R [mailto:kiranbr at ROCKETMAIL.COM]
> Sent: Tuesday, August 27, 2002 2:18 PM
> Subject: Re: Summary (of "Question", "braHmavid=Krishna?" series of
> mails) (fwd)
> > I am still not able to understand why you brought
> > this up in the first
> > place. If God/Guru takes you by the hand and leads
> > you to the Light and
> > says now look and see the light for yourself and see
> > that it is all around
> > you, will you turn around and say no, I wish to see
> > how far I have come
> > from where I used to be?
> >
> > Not that there is anything wrong in your asking such
> > a thing, but the
> > difference is in perception - you think running 100
> > m in 2s is conquering
> > Maya, to the Brahmavit there is no such thing Maya,
> > or rather, he KNOWS
> > there is no Maya.
> I prefer to use the word "controlling" as opposed to
> "conquering" since the latter gives a feeling that
> something different from oneself needs to be taken
> possession of by some way or the other. Of course,
> this is not the case with the braHman.
> And I did not say that running 100m in 2s is
> equivalent to controlling or conquering Maya
> completely. What I said was - if a guy cannot run 100m
> in 2s, I see an incapability in him. And as long as
> any incapability exists in him (material or
> spiritual), according to me, he has not attained the
> braHman. And given that braHmavid=braHman, he is no
> braHmavid either.
> In a way, I am proposing a test for braHmavids,
> requiring household items such as a stopwatch and a
> Dutch-English dictionary. In the first round, I ask
> them to run 100m in 2s. Only those who make it go to
> the next round. In it, everyone gets a vocabulary test
> in Dutch (if he's a native Dutch speaker, we'll still
> see how he fares). And of course, there's a time limit
> for giving the answers....I'll stop here.
> What I am trying to bring about in this apparent
> nonsensical argument is this - that the braHman (and
> hence braHmavid) of my definition not only transcends
> Maya, but also controls it. Hence, there is nothing
> impossible for him in Maya. He can freeze water by
> boiling, run 100m in 2s and fare 100/100 in Dutch
> vocab tests among others.
> (If he makes it all happen in my dream or his dream
> such that nobody else sees it, I'll say "Thanks, that
> was very nice, can you to do it in front of some of my
> gilli-danda friends from across the street when we're
> all wide awake?").
> As to why he would do that, why I would want him to do
> that in front of me, why he would oblige to answer
> stupid tests compiled by an idiot, whether that's good
> for my spiritual growth, whether I wouldn't hesitate
> to ask my Guru if he could run for me, etc etc, are
> terribly out of context here.
> Can he, or can he not? That's the question.
> If he cannot, I'm afraid he's not gone very far from
> where he started, since he still has to bow down to
> Maya. If on the other hand he passes through a few of
> those tests, I will test his body no more. I will ask
> him how he acquired those skills. If he says he
> acquired those skills by way of acquiring braHmavidyA,
> I will accept that he has "become" the braHman. If he
> says he acquired them by mastering a vidyA which has
> nothing to do with braHmavidyA, and that the
> braHmavidyA package doesn't enable him to fare well in
> those tests, I will immediately conclude that he
> hasn't acquired braHmavidyA.
> Dhanyavaad
> Kiran
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Finance - Get real-time stock quotes

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list