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

[श्रीमल्ललितालालितः]

There is a specific tendency visible in many people, mostly those who hate
varNAshrama but don't want to appear as so, to expect 100% observance of
shAstrokta-dharma and AchAra from anyone who appears to follow them.
Let us accept that there is nothing called 100% observance of any rule,
either shAsrtIya or other. It's a journey where we learn shAstra-s, gain
shraddhA in vidhi-niShedha and then try to follow them according to our
eligibility and likings. These factors are common for any area of
unforced-natural-learning.
So, if a sannyAsI is good at one dharma, as study of vedAnta(by the way
it's his core-dharma), and bad at other(possession and travel, etc.); I can
just expect that he continues his journey to learn, earn shraddhA and
enthusiasm to follow more and more. I'll never go to his and say that -
what's in following shAstrAdhyayana, when you are not able to shun
possession? This is very negative attitude, which is basically asking to
shun one good quality just because he doesn't possess another good quality.
People having such tone are actually hater to core, or idiots or
shraddhAjaDa-s - whichever category you like to name. They are themselves
not respectful to the fact that someone is trying at least, or that he has
some good qualities.
The correct way to reach such person is to tell them/expect from them that
they will not shun the present good quality and gain one more, and one
more, and more.

And, why ask sannyAsI-s only? sannyAsI-s have very few rules to follow.
What about a brahmachArI, who never knew about brahmacharya, or upavIta or
sandy; or a gRhastha who has to follow even more dharma-s and AchAra-s.
If we start to shut mouth of people based on their adherence of some rules,
instead of their knowledge, I think most of you may not get any chance to
post any mail here. Isn't it?

So, a discussion must not depend on what you do. It must be based on
knowledge. That's why sannyAsI-s and gRhastha-s and brahmachArI-s are a
part of this community, although they are all imperfect at the same time.

So, never bring character of person to win an argument. It's the worst
logic, if we can term it a logic, which can be used.

And, don't fear that someone is question someone, because when you fear
that thing and act defensive it's just a sign of your unclear
understanding. Why not try to face questions and have some answers prepared
using our precious time. This exercise will allow you to eradicate you
vague understanding about that person, or it may reveal that you don't have
enough knowledge to support to blame him.
One more thing to learn from critics it that they have courage to question.
Most of us don't possess that or we think that that's trivial (for reasons
even unknown to us or for some vague reasons).
When someone asks those questions, you have got some chance to test whether
you have sufficient reasons to refute the objection/solve the problem or
not. Are those reasons, actually reasons or just some type of untested
ideas?

So, I think it is better to not ask or point fingers at others' character,
when this list is open, i.e. doesn't ask about and verify you
character/adherence to dharma.
Moreover, you can shut mouth of critics if you are too many, as it happens
in advaitin-yahoo group. But, that's not healthy. You are creating an
atmosphere where you can pass fatwa(फतवा) for everyone who is not like you.
But, when you go outside your area/group, you will feel helpless, because
you can't stop others there, in neutral or other's territory. So, your
attitude will eventually weaken you. I don't think that it is preferable
for any sane person.

श्रीमल्ललितालालितः
ललितालालितः
www.lalitaalaalitah.com

By the way, श्रीमल्ललितालालितः is यौगिक here, and ललितालालितः is rUDha for
me. So, it's not useless repetition.