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

[Raghav Kumar]

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.

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.'

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). 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.

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.

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.

Om
Raghav