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

[Bhaskar YR]

praNAms Sri Kripa Shankar prabhuji
Hare Krishna

I request you to kindly read the article after you reach home or open the link on your phone. The author has credibility and it is a well researched article with ample references. He has summarised all the points succinctly. 

>  I shall do that if possible this week end prabhuji.  In the meanwhile Sri Subbu prabhuji has observed (it seems he has already read the full article) that there is no derogatory remark on ramaNa's teaching, it is only on journals and politics in and around ashrama.  Would you like to differ from that ?? If yes, kindly share the relevant portion from that article where you think author directly attacked Sri RamaNa's teaching.


Like Kalidasa said everything old is not supreme, everything new is not bad. Same way everything on the internet is not trash. ‎

>  I did not say that, did I prabhuji??  :-) I only insisted for your personal feedback on that article :-)

We are in agreement then. He was not a rigid follower of orthodox Advaita tradition. We ‎can label that however we want. 

>  Yes, you may see from his teachings that his way of teaching something different from prescribed way of traditional Advaita parampara teaching but that does not mean that he is introducing something  entirely new that cannot be found in our scriptures.  

Since you have asked my personal opinion :

>  My brief reply/opinion  to your personal observation

1) Ramana got famous by rumours, hear says and media coverage. Further owing to post colonial effect, we Indians accept blindly whatever the white man says (not being a racist, but indicating that Indians subconsciously have a bit of self loathing). So white man's words are Apta vakyas for us.

>  do you think kAvya kanta gaNapati muni, kanchi paramAchArya &  all traditional vedAntins who visited him were all influenced by media coverage and white skin's Apta vAkya  recommendations?? :-) 

2) The  man who was responsible for the 'discovery' of Ramana was a dubious person.

>  I did not know that, please explain.

3) Most of Ramana's teachings were written by his associates.

>  I don’t see any legitimate reason to doubt his close associates writings!! and ramaNa himself has written some works and his dialogues with various people have been meticulously recorded.  Are we doubting the credibility of geeta just because it was heard by Sanjaya and written by vyAsa prabhuji??  

4) Ramanashram is an international organisation with many centres all over the world. How is it sustainable?

>  what relevance does it have with ramaNa's teaching!!??  

5) Not to be hurtful or bitter towards anyone, but his teachings are vague, hollow and mostly answers the deep philosophical questions with another question.  It cannot be compared to Shankara even in wildest fantasy. For eg: 'Insert any question ' - Who are you, who is asking the question? To whom does the question belong? Or something like - There is nothing to be taught, no nothing, just keep asking who the heck you are. Or abide in yourself.

>  if you read the dialogues with ramaNa and other works you will find that it will not always be mere counter questions so generalizing his stock solution to every question is not tenable IMO. 

6) lastly, Ramana often quotes from Tao, Christ, Osho etc but never Shankara or other old Rishis. 

> ramaNa quotes Osho (Rajaneesh??)  this is really news to me !!??

Hari Hari Hari Bol!!!
bhaskar