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

[D.V.N.Sarma డి.వి.ఎన్.శర్మ]

We hear that people out of the fold of Hinduism have Advaitic experience.
How do we explain it? Saying that they were Hindus in previous birth
is simply our guess work
and it does not solve the problem because they are not Hindus in the
this birth in which they
have advaitic experience.

Why do we always try to drag every realised soul into Hindu fold?
Is this necessary? What do we get out of this?
regards,
Sarma.


On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 12:46 PM, Raghav Kumar via Advaita-l
<advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
> Namaste Subrahmanianji
>
> Yes you are quite right. The verse reads jnAtum antaram ( the word being
> tumunAnta rather than panchamI)  the translation does not permit any other
> reading other than 'there is no (other) object to be known in pure
> knowledge.'
>
> I was influenced by another verse from aparokShAnubhUti viz.,
>
> karye hi kAraNam pashyet paschAt kAryam visarjayet kAraNatvam tathA nashyet
> avashiShTam bhaven muniH
>
> (Verse  139)
> First see the cause in all its effects. Thus get rid of the effects
> (multiplicity) altogether. (In ones understanding). Thus the causality of
> the Cause also stands negated. What remains finally is the Contemplater or
> Self alone.
> (My rough translation )
>
> I remember Swami Paramarthanandaji quoting the above version of verse 139
> as representing in a nutshell the entire adhyAropa apavAda prakriya.
>
> But this verse is different.
> Om
>
> Raghav
>
> On 20-Sep-2016 11:32 am, "V Subrahmanian" <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 11:09 AM, Raghav Kumar via Advaita-l <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> On 20-Sep-2016 8:58 am, "Ravi Kiran via
>>> >
>>> > 'Jnanam alone is; there is no Jnani'
>>> >
>>> Isn't it curious that we also have the words of Sri Ramana Maharshi  -
>>> 'What is Jnana other than the Knower'
>>> ज्ञानमिस्त किं ज्ञातुमन्तरम्
>>
>>
>> Raghav ji,
>>
>> Could you confirm whether the above translation you give to the statement
> is correct? For we have this too:
>>
>> http://www.arunachala.org/docs/upadesa-saram/
>>
>> 27.
>>
>> jñāna-varjitā-jñana-hina cit
>>
>> jñānam-asti kiṃ jñātum-antaram
>>
>> That is true knowledge which transcends
>> Both knowledge and ignorance,
>> For in pure knowledge
>>
>> Is no object to be known.
>>
>>
>>
>> If it has to be //'What is Jnana other than the Knower'// I think the
> wording should be: ....jñāturantaram.  Because, jñātā is the knower.  Apart
> from the knower where / what is Knowledge?  In this case jñātā will become
> jñātuḥ in the panchamī .
>>
>> vs
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
>>> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
>>>
>>> To unsubscribe or change your options:
>>> http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>>>
>>> For assistance, contact:
>>> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
>
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org