[Advaita-l] Ramana Maharshi - Advaitin or Neo Advaitin?
kripa.shankar.0294 at gmail.com
Tue Sep 20 05:12:13 CDT 2016
When Ramana comments that there is no reincarnation, is it in paramarthika sense or vyavaharika? If it is paramarthika, why is there a need to emphasise on reincarnation? Why couldn't he just tell his devotees to refer to the standard definition given in the shastras.
In my opinion this exact thing is what differentiates Advaita from neo Advaita. Not acknowledging the Shastras, trying to redefine concepts which are already well explained in Shastras, not acknowledging traditional gurus etc.
Vyasaya Vishnu roopaya Vyasa roopaya Vishnave
Namo vai Brahma nidhaye Vasishtaya namo namaha
From: Bhaskar YR
Sent: Tuesday 20 September 2016 12:21 PM
To: Kripa Shankar; A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta
Subject: RE: [Advaita-l] Ramana Maharshi - Advaitin or Neo Advaitin?
praNAms Sri Kripa Shankar prabhuji
But Krishna is considered as an avatar of Vishnu and Adi Shankaracharya is considered as an avatar of Shiva. Then why did they dedicate their time for studies?
> To fullfil their avatAra uddesha, but IMHO, it does not any way mean that all avataara purushaas should be invariably shrOtreeya brahmanishTa.
Btw, the Wikipedia page says Ramana is considered as an avatar of Dakshinamurty :D
> and one of the shloka-s on dakshiNamurthy says : Om namaH praNavArthAya shuddha jnAnaika mUrtaye, nirmalaaya, prashAntAya dakshiNAmurthaye namaH and one of the way of teaching of dakshiNamurthy is through 'silence' (gurOstu mouna vyAkhyAnaM shishyAstu chiinna saMshayaH) Sri ramaNa adopted this method of 'silent' teaching for which he recommended his unique method of 'self-enquiry'.
Mother’s womb is still considered as present janma as jiva starts as an embryo.
> that is fine. Why I said about vAmadeva is Ashrama, varNa, sthiti, age etc. are not the barrier for jnAnOdaya.
Btw, you might be surprised to know Ramana's stand on reincarnation. Please refer to below passage from Wikipedia :
According to David Godman, Ramana Maharshi taught that the idea of reincarnation is based on wrong ideas about the individual self as being real. Ramana Maharshi would sometimes say that rebirth does exist, to step forward to those who were not able to fully grasp the non-reality of the individual self. But when this illusoriness is realised, there is no room any more for ideas about reincarnation. When the identification with the body stops, any notions about death and rebirth become inapplicable, since there is no birth or death within Self. Ramana Maharshi:
> I am really surprised for the other reason prabhuji :-) what exactly wrong in above conclusion of bhagavAn ramaNa?? Don’t you think according to Advaita, ultimately jeevatva is kevala talamalanAdi parikalpitaM??
Reincarnation exists only so long as there is ignorance. There is really no reincarnation at all, either now or before. Nor will there be any hereafter. This is the truth.
> And this is what kArika also says on paramArtha satya, again failed to notice anything wrong with these assertions. Please elaborate where do you think ramaNa deviating himself from traditional vedAnta teaching.
I don't know much about Dattatreya and Valmiki and so I will reserve my comment for now. But what is your comment on the Wikipedia passage that I quoted in my previous mail where Ramana himself admits that his teaching is different from Advaita.
> I don’t know in which context ramANa said this. Perhaps he might be having popularly known differences among trimathastha-s in mind when differentiating his teaching from Advaita, but not sure only guessing :-)
Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
More information about the Advaita-l mailing list