[Advaita-l] Ramana Maharshi - Advaitin or Neo Advaitin?

श्रीमल्ललितालालितः lalitaalaalitah at lalitaalaalitah.com
Sun Sep 25 03:02:38 CDT 2016

On Sun, 25 Sep 2016 at 11:35 Raghav Kumar <raghavkumar00 at gmail.com> wrote:

> Pranams Swamiji
> We can go by SrI Ramana Maharshi's own words that when shrotriya-s
> discussed and explained Sri shankara bhagavatpAda-s teachings based on
> shruti, it tallied exactly with his own svasamvedya understanding. It was
> an anuvAda of his pre-existing understanding.
Specific details may be needed here so that I'm able to comment correctly.
BTW, my last post to praveen takes care to explain my views.

> Also the earliest recorded words published in a book vetted by him
> contains the following.
> 'But the mind, which has got rid of its defilement (sin) through action
> without attachment performed in MANY PAST LIVES, listens to the teaching of
> scripture from a true guru, reflects on its meaning, and meditates in order
> to gain the natural state of the mental mode of the form of the Self, i.e.,
> of the form ‘I am  Brahman’ which is the result of the continued
> contemplation of  Brahman.'
This is anuvAda of common process. Is he talking about himself?

> If we choose to trust these sources given that the outer signs of
> sthithapraGYA were so abundant, there is no doubt that Sri Ramana Maharshi
> was staunchly advaitic and did not believe in puruSha-nAnAtvaM and
> prakrti-satyatvaM which are essential for him to be classified as a sAMkhya
> (for which no references or pramANa-s are available).
It is readily acceptable that there were many shtitapraGYA-laxaNa-s in that
great saint.
The categorisation of him with sa~Nkhya-s is not based on his talks, rather
it is based on the fact that he accidentally came to know difference of
AtmA from body and then supported the quest 'who am i', without taking in
view shruti-s. Since, there is no other pramANa to reveal oneness, and
hence there is no way to decide mithyAtva of nAnAtva, it is obvious that we
have to put such person in some other group.

One thing which I forgot to add and which was reminded by your sentence
bearing similarity to that which I wanted to write is-
Although shAnti-dhAnti, etc. can also be seen in a dvaitI which makes them
unable to take us to decision about brahmaYGAna in a person(in some earlier
post I said that); when those qualities are accompanied by shrauta-GYAna
they become confirming sign of brahmaGYAna.

> We can only work backwards and offer a plausible explanation how he
> arrived at the advaita he talked of and composed verses on. The precise
> reason for his advaitic realization will remain unknown.
For me, the nature of his realisation is not yet same as that of generating
from mahAvAkya-s, owing to the concern related to pramANabhAva and shruti.

> That is why the idea of vAmadeva comes to mind. Without any fresh pramAna
> vyApAra initiated by an external Guru, the idea aham manurabhavam sUryasca
> etc arose. Later on such a vAmadeva if he were to formally study shAstra,
> its reasonable to hold that he would find it an anuvAda of the pre-existing
> GYanam which was already there as his very svarUpam.
Let me clarify that 'ahem manurabhavam' is not brahmAtmaikyAnubhava itself.
It can easily be some type of upAsanA or arthavAda. So, no need to rush to
take that as example.
Then why bhAShya terms that as aikyAnubhava? You tell me. We will talk
about that later.
Moreover, AchArya always said that upaniShad-s have AkhyAyikA-s, they are
not history. Why? I hope you know that, because I 've talked about that
while supporting apauruSheyatva of shruti years ago. You were a part of

> As for your warning that some Gurus may well start believing their
> shiShyas praise of them who have an 'overload' of bhakti, and get deluded
> thereby, such things are all too common.
This warning was heard by us from svAmI rAmAnanda-sarasvatI jI or
oMkAreshvara. Once a devotee came to him to say that mahArAja had given him
darshana and some mantra or something that night, which he denied. He said
that if I don't know that I went to you, then you must be imagining that.
Then he added that nowadays even siddha-s are made by bhakta-s/ certificate
of siddhi is given by devotees.

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list