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

[V Subrahmanian]

On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 9:08 PM, Kripa Shankar <kripa.shankar.0294 at gmail.com
> wrote:

> Namaste Subramanian
>
> I will see if I can get a clarification on this matter by the Mutt.
>

Dear Kripa Shankar,

My sincere advice to you on this is to please desist from writing to the
Mutt.  It is important to know that Acharyas of the same peetham, even if
they have come in close succession, are distinct individuals who are bound
to and free to have individual opinions on one or many matters.  If you
read the book 'Yoga Enlightenment and Perfection' authored by Sri R.M.Umesh
which has a small account consisting of excerpts from an essay (1993) and
discourse (1989) by the present Jagadguru Sri Bharati Tirtha Mahaswaminaḥ
on his Guru Sri Abhinava Vidyatirtha Mhaswaminaḥ.  Just a few lines from
that:

p.6

//He (the predecessor Guru) was not in the least dogmatic.  The ancients
held that the earth is fixed while the modern scientists aver that it moves.

पुराणमित्येव न साधु सर्वं....
 In keeping with this statement of the pre-eminent poet Kalidasa, HH
subscribed only to the position that the earth moves. He ignored, in this
manner, the distinction of ancient and modern in numerous matters and gave
weight only to that which was reasonable and accorded with evidence.
Broadmindedness such as His was difficult to come by in anyone else.//

Actually the earlier Guru and His predecessor HH Sri Chandrashekhara
Bharati Mahaswaminah did have such differences over certain ideas and the
latter had told the former: You can freely have those ideas that go with
the present times.

I gave this example just to inform you, if you are already not aware of
this, that it is quite possible that the present and the earlier Acharyas
could hold differing views on given points.

Let me also quote from the earlier Acharya on His Guru HH Sri
Chandrashekhara Bharati Mahaswaminah:

>From the discourse given in Bangalore as part of a saptāha in memory of the
latter:

Excerpted from the book 'Divine Discourses' p.70:

//In the life of My Guru, one special feature was that he did not acquire
the knowledge of the Truth from the teaching of someone.

Arjuna asked:

अयतिः श्रद्धयोपेतो....[O Krishna, What end does a person attain who is
endowed with faith but who does not strive and whose mind has slipped from
HYoga without his having attained perfection in Yoga?]

The Lord answered:

[He who has failed in Yoga is born in the house of the pure and affluent.
Alternatively, he is born in the family of wise Yogis. Such a birth is
indeed very difficult ....There he gains the knowledge that was acquired in
the previous birth.]

....
In the case of My Guru, his introversion did not stem subsequent to his
taking Sannyasa, studying the Śāstras and practicing spiritual disciplines.
It manifested right from his birth.
....
My Guru was a knower of Brahman and was not dependent on any effect or
cause. ...

End of that chapter.

For a skeptic, questions such as: How can someone become or be enlightened
without study of the śāstras and practicing disciplines?  Also, 'How can
someone else say with certainty that another is a realized person?', etc.
could arise. But these are things that are beyond logic. Otherwise,
Krishna's averment in the 4th chapter:

tadviddhi pranipātena .....upadekṣhyanti tey jnānam jnāninaḥ tattvadarshinaḥ

can never be put in practice. One can also think of the absurd conclusion
this above verse could lead to: Krishna meant that Only those coming in the
Sringeri Mutt lineage could be tattvadarshis. Also, none will be able to
approach a Tattvadarshi since it would be impossible, first of all for a
jijgnāsu, to determine who is a tattvadarshi. For anyone can put up a show
of sthitaprajna lakshanas since the samatvam can be feigned also since none
can see what is going on in that one's head.  It happens only by grace that
a sincere sadhaka is shown, led to, a Tattvadarshi.  Logic fails in this
matter.

It is your privilege to write or not to the Mutt on the current topic.

regards
vs






> ‎
> Regards
> Kripa ‎
>
> Vyasaya Vishnu roopaya Vyasa roopaya Vishnave
> Namo vai Brahma nidhaye Vasishtaya namo namaha
>   Original Message
> From: V Subrahmanian
> Sent: Sunday 25 September 2016 6:06 PM
> To: Kripa Shankar; A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta
> Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Ramana Maharshi - Advaitin or Neo Advaitin?
>
>
>
> On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 5:17 PM, Kripa Shankar via Advaita-l <
> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
> Namaste
>
> Some great points of grave import presented by SrimaLalitalalitah.
> Praveen, like many others are trying to defend Ramana as if it's an assault
> on Ramana s character, which clearly is not(it's also irrelevant) . But I
> am baffled to see that when Shruti pramana is neglected, in other words
> when the Shruti is under assault, no one takes offence!
> ‎
> Just wanted to add one more point. I was watching a video of Bharati
> teertha swami delivering a lecture in Tamil. There he categorically stated
> that Sringeri Mutt never acknowledges anyone outside of the Mutt but a
> pramada (an exception) to this rule was when one of the great swamis (can't
> recall the name sorry) acknowledged Sadashiva Brahmendra. It is on YouTube.
>
> Here is a quote from the book 'Crest Jewel of Yogis' Vol.I penned by Sri
> R.M.Umesh, a disciple has said while narrating a couple of incidents from
> the lives of Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa and Ramana Maharshi:
>
> //We can even consider the cases of Sri Ramakrishna and Sri Ramana whom
> Acharyal (Jagadguru Sri Abhinava Vidyatirtha Mahaswaminah) acknowledges as
> Jnanins. That will help to throw light on the behavior of comparatively
> recent personages.// p.646
>
> (The above book was published by Sri Sharada Trust, Sringeri)
>
> and goes on to cite an incident or two from the famous book 'Sri
> Ramakrishna the Great Master' of Swamy Saradananda. And another or two from
> the book 'Ramana Maharishi and the path of Self Knowledge'  by Osborne.
> Another incident from the book of K.S.Swaminathan on 'Ramana Maharshi' is
> also cited in the above book.
>
> This the author does after citing incidents from Shankara (Madhaviya
> Shankara Vijaya), Rama in the Ramayana and Krishna in the Mahabharata.
> This is a chapter titled ' The Human Aspect' where Acharyal's expressions
> of several human traits have been mentioned.
>
> Thus there is solid evidence to the Acharya of Sringeri Maṭha
> acknowledging personages 'outside' the maṭha.  I had already pointed out
> the case of one Para Brahma (from Punjab/Kashmir) whom also the Acharya had
> acknowledged as a Jnani and even directed one of his own devotees to
> associate with him. Sri Umesh has written about this Para Brahma too in his
> book. So, there is no way one can assert that the Sringeri Acharyas do not
> acknowledge those 'outside' the 'maṭha.'
>
> regards
> subrahmanian.v
>
> Regards
> Kripa
> ‎
> Vyasaya Vishnu roopaya Vyasa roopaya Vishnave
> Namo vai Brahma nidhaye Vasishtaya namo namaha
>   Original Message
> From: Praveen R. Bhat via Advaita-l
> Sent: Sunday 25 September 2016 3:03 PM
> To: श्रीमल्ललितालालितः
> Reply To: Praveen R. Bhat
> Cc: A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta
> Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Ramana Maharshi - Advaitin or Neo Advaitin?
>
>
>
>