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

[V Subrahmanian]

On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 8:51 PM, Kripa Shankar via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

>
>  Namaste Praveen
> ‎
>
>
>
>
> Sadashiva Brahmendra was a great renunciate. He was sky clad and roamed
> about as if he was dumb or mad. But he followed all principles of conduct
> before that.


How do you know Ramana did not follow the principles of conduct before he
became a renunciate?



> I hate my guts to do this but Ramana although wore a single piece of cloth
> he had quite comfortable seating arrangements within the Ashram atop the
> hill. He had many servants around him all the time. He used to have
> Mrishtanna bhojana and was always surrounded by people.


Have you read about what condition was Ramana was in during the Pathala
Lingam times? How many servants were there then? What bhojana he was served
by whom then?



> How this is Atiashrama no one really knows. The British man Paul Brunton
> discovered Ramana in 1931. I suppose he was in his fifties then. But there
> is a picture of an adolescent Ramana posing for the camera, very calmly.
> Any explanation without assumptions?
>

You fault posing for a photo?  If camera was popular then, Sadashiva
Brahmendral would also have posed!!  The Upanishads have given descriptions
of Brahman for upasana. Sadashiva has penned innumerable major and minor
works. How do you think this was possible without any interaction with
people? In fact he did interact with people, there are stories about that.


>  I am contrasting it with Shankara's teachings and trying to conclude that
> both are in opposition.
>
> 1) Ramana tries to reconcile his teachings with teachings of other popular
> names like Christ. Shankara reconciles his teachings with Shruti smriti
> Puranas.
>

You have not read how many stories based on puranas Ramana has narrated.


> 2) Ramana does not emphasise on following the duties of order. In other
> words, Vedas are stripped from Vedanta. Shankara emphasises on following
> the duties of respective order.
>

You do not know that there was a Veda pathashala in the Ashram during
Ramana's times.


>
> 6) A student of Ramana (who is ignorant of orthodox school of shankara)
> would relate to the stories told by Ramana about Christ, Buddha, some
> random Paramahamsa, some random Mahatma. Orthodox school has a rich history
> of Yogis of innumerable kinds. It is but natural that we emulate our
> ancestors. So this aspect should be kept in mind.
>

You do not know that Shankara has given a word of appreciation to Buddha's
vairagya. For Shankara 'para matam apratishiddham anumatam bhavati.' What
is non-contradictory to one's school, is happily admitted. So, if a
contemporary Acharya takes some points from Christ or Buddha, how does that
become bad?


>
>