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

[श्रीमल्ललितालालितः]

> At the outset, I have noticed that somany prabhuji-s addressed you as
> ‘swamiji’, kindly pardon me I did not know that you are ‘swamiji’ (monk) of
> some order.  Kindly forgive me if I am knowingly or unknowingly talked to
> you with leniency.
>
pravINa and rAghava may have known about my monk-hood from some source.
Many don't know.
And, ignorance about my Ashrama doesn't affect the discussion. But, knowing
about the same may affect your replies.
So, I request all to ignore what and who I'm/I may be. I've seen people not
using their intellect just because they had respect for someone for some
reasons. The trick which help to speak truth(whatever you understand) in
front of others is to not think about the character of debater. It removes
fear which arises from seeing a sannyAsI, great saint or maThAdhipati-s or
scholars in front of you.
In present case of ramaNa, you can see the effect on discussion of knowing
him as advertised through books and those who are finding faults in him and
those who don't care about his character.
So, please treat me as a participant only.
I'm harsh(if attacking views mercilessly is harshness) while criticising.
So, be you and all. The examination must be based on logic, and you must
not bring the character-logic(!?) 'you are sannyAsI, don't say this, I
didn't expect that from a sannyAsI',etc. (BTW, even if I'm talking wrong
just because of my character, why not point at my wrong logic instead of
character!?)
Let us talk as two persons having two point of views and some logic added
to it..
I've seen many people deluded by ati-shradddhA(aparIxita-shraddhA). This is
true for nindA also.
Some of my fellow students and sAdhaka-s stopped asking questions long ago.
And, for now most of them have either left study and concentrated on things
which are not too hard or they left the monk-hood.

>
>
> Ø     Here jnana means Atmaikatva jnana , ekatva jnana as enshrined in
> Upanishads and as propagated by Advaita vedAnta.  And the means to achieve
> / realize it, is, sharvaNAdi direct sAdhana after getting the sufficient
> purity (chitta shuddhi)  through sAdhana chatushtaya.
>
> shravaNAdi are not pramANa. They are helpful only to decide the tAtparya
of shruti, removing impossibility of brahma and fickleness of
mind/lingering to dvaita.

> Ø     shravaNa, manana and nidhidhyAsana of vedAdanta vAkya are direct
> means for liberation says shankara, that is what I am saying prabhuji.
>
Nope. That can't be supported, as those are not GYAna. GYAna is direct
means of moxa. Direct means of GYAna is pramANa, shruti. shravaNa, etc. are
antara~Nga-sAdhana of a mumuxu, which help eradicate faults of men. shama,
etc. are bahira~Nga compared to that. Other sAdhana-s are more and more
bahira~Nga.

> Let it be clear that, GYAna is generated by pramANa-s, not your
> sadhana-chatuShTaya.
>
> We are talking to pramANa-s here.
>
> Ø     Yes, I too talking about that pramANa only and sAdhana using that
> shAstra pramANa.  Hope I am clear here.
>
If you are clear, then you have grasped wrong meaning of bhagavatpAda's
sentences, mostly since you didn't have chance to think about different
parts of bhAShya and rules which are established.

> Ø     Can there be a universal signs of the jnAni??
>
> If there would not be one, then the shruti - तद्विज्ञानार्थं स
> गुरुमेवाभिगच्छेत्समित्पाणिश्श्रोत्रियं ब्रह्मनिष्ठम् must be useless.
> Since there are no signs of GYAnI and jIvanmukta-s. And, so all other
> portions of shAstra-s which talk of laxaNa of sthitapraGYA, guNAtIta,
> brAhmaNa, bhagavadbhakta, etc.
>
> So, there must be some sign of GYAna.
>
>
>
> Ø     Yes, sthita prajna lakshaNa is there in geeta to know who is sthita
> prajna…but how can one know whether one is sthita prajna, shrOtreeya,
> brahmanishTa and approach him with samit in his hand??  Ofcourse, nobody or
> no jnAni would announce himself that he is that nishTa it is only shraddhA
> of that shishya would help his to consider one as jnAni or otherwise.  As
> you know, we revere our Advaita Acharya-s as brahma vAdins whereas for
> dvaitins the same Acharya-s are mAyAvAdins and same way for us dvaita
> Acharya-s are not Atmaikatva vAdins and dualists not paramArtha jnAni-s.
> Though same degree of tranquility can be witnessed in Acharya-s from
> different schools of thought.  So, again question remains who is
> shrOtreeya, brahmanishTa guru one can approach with samit to know the
> brahman??
>
>   Can it be possible to ascertain whether one is brahma jnAni or otherwise
> through his external appearance and behavior that too when prArabdha and
> avidyA lesha having the strong hold on bhautika shareera of  this jnAni??
>
> Once you accept that there are some signs of GYAna and jIvanmukti, then
> owing to these mentioned factors, viz.prArabdha, vAsanA, etc., it is easy
> to say that those signs of GYAna will fade and evaporate in some cases.
> And, that is sign of degree of stability of GYAna.
>
> In case that's too low, there is no need to treat the person as GYAnI
> since GYAna is useless in that case, even for him.
>
>
>
> Ø     That is very interesting prabhuji, I know that  there is a
> statement that vijnAya prajnAm kurveeta…
>
Yes.

> But does it mean that the jnana that jnAni obtains is temporary
>

Yes.
What do you understand by the word GYAna? Unless you have a clear
understanding of the same, you can't understand whatever I say.
People have attributed some peculiarity to brahma-GYAna, which can't be
supported with logic and is nowhere found in shruti, bhAShya, etc.
I even have seen some students who expect that they will really become a
sarvaGYA(literally), once brahman is known.
One more such idea is that brahmaGYAna once generated stays, whatsoever
happens. It is nitya, while other GYAna-s are anitya.
I can't try to help you, because I've already said all those things needed
in multiple other threads in past. You just need ability and time to
collect and deduce what is implied and said by me already.
Even better, if you learn those things from shAstra-s directly, instead to
wasting time/relying on me.

> and fluctuating
>
Yes. Try to remember birth of many GYAnI-s and those who went after women
and money, those who were very angry.
Now, remember that bhAShyakAra doesn't accept any of these things in a
GYAnI.
Try to find a solution.

and one has to maintain its intensity through further sAdhana / prayatna??
>
If you don't maintain it's intensity and allow it to be overpowered by
dvaitavAsanA, then you can't get emancipation. Remember the shruti you
quoted and others like brahmasaMsthomR^itatvameti, etc.

>   If that is the case, the brahma jnana too becomes just like any other
> objective knowledge
>
Yes, It's exactly same in nature, regarding it's fickleness, anityatva,
etc.

> and repetition (Avrutti) of  that jnana or memorizing of that jnana is
> required just to ensure that this jnana should not fade away over a period
> of time??  Please clarify.
>
Repetition of GYAna is not possible, since it is not nR^itantra.
You can remember GYAna as 'once I had brahmaGYAna'. But, we don't say that
it is needed for stability of GYAna.
We have to save GYAna from fading away- yes. Why? Remember those shruti.
And, that's why sannyAsa-sahitam brahmaGYAna is supported by bhAShyakAra,
to enable you to acquire brahmaniShThA(ananyavyApAratayA
brahmaGYAnasAdhanAbhyAsa).

>  Here I see a trend that implies that people have only two discrete
> divisions in mind - GYAnI and aGYAnI. And, GYAnI doesn't see anything.
>
> Now, that's absurd.
>
>
>
> Ø     Though there is no gradations in jnana (paramArtha jnana) jnAni-s
> have different grades like vara, vareeya, varishTa etc. I have seen this in
> JMV.  But again does it not prove that jnAni-s like ramaNa etc. cannot be
> identifiable with exact signs of jnAni  through their external appearance
> and attitude??
>
Yes, they can be. That's why I presented previous few sentences.
Just, we are not sure about ramaNa, since he is missing some things. Find
in other thread.

>   And that is what the crux of this thread.
>
That you have to find for yourself.

>  There are more stages of GYAna, and there is something called
> jIvanmukti. Even jIvanmukta-s and GYAnI-s who are possessing body, either
> by prArabdha or by any other means, are subject to vyavhAra. Even there
> samAdhI is a vyvahAra. Whatever a GYAnI does to stabilise his GYAna, is
> also vyavahAra. All other practices, as bhixA-yATana, pUjA, japa,
> adhyayana, etc. are vyavahAra.
>
> If you don't accept that, you are in some other plane of thinking where
> evidence and logic don't reach.
>
>
>
> Ø     How  can I deny it prabhuji??  But this vyavahAra with reality in
> duality will not be there in jnAni and jnAnAvasthA is not vyavahArAteeta
> peculiar state it is only ‘vyavahAra bAdhita’ state where katrutva and
> bhOktrutva of the jnAni  are conspicuous by its absence.
>
Appears good.

> Ø     Yes, but establishing this is indeed purely subjective and may vary
> to one individual to another or one follower to another.
>
> No, establishing anything by pramANa-s is not subjective. It's universal.
> pramANa-s don't change behaviour according to person. It's the fault of
> person which makes things appear different.
>
>
>
> Ø     I am not able to follow this line of clarification from you
> prabhuji especially when your goodself acknowledging the gradations in
> jnAni-s and jnana.
>
You are trying to relate wrong things.
There is no relation between pramANa-s and gradation.

>  Since GYAna is svasaMvedya, even other GYAnI can't look inside head of
> other one. So, it is difficult to accept that chandrashekharendra-sarasvatI
> knew anything which was going inside ramaNa's head.
>
>
>
> Ø     Yes, that is why I said jnana of the particular jnAni is his
> hrudaya spandana and acknowledging that in any particular person is
> subjective decision of his/her followers.
>
You have to understand that I was accepting other's point of view
apparently and then questioning their claim about ramaNa being GYAnI. Try
to relate the answer to the logic which others provided.

>   We can see that difference of opinion in this list itself, is it not???
>
That's not based on pramANa-s essentially.
Difference of opinion doesn't expect pramANa. Even children have different
opinions.

> Ø     Yes, but amAnitvAdi guNa-s were not there in ramaNa, is the
> question that we need to answer to consider him as jnAni or otherwise.
>
Only those guNa-s are not enough to decide a GYAnI, since even
dvaiti-sAdhaka possesses them. You need something exert and that's missing
in ramaNa.

>  Ø     In the brahma jignAsa  (unlike dharma jignAsa)  shAstra is not the
> sole pramANa anubhavAdhyascha too valid pramANa says shankara…If the
> anubhava of ‘deathlessness’ of Atman to ramaNa is in line with shruti
> pramANa can we discard it just it is not the result of shruti vAkya janita
> or pramANa janita jnana prabhuji ??
>
I'm questioning the cause of anubhava he had? First of all, I'm not sure
that the anubhava he had was same as that which is generated by shruti.
Second, how could he get that result without pramANa.
The meaning of shA~Nkara-vAkya is not the same as it appears since it makes
him appear to accept that there are few means of knowledge, first 'who
knows what' and second shruti. That's unacceptable.
You need to understand the importance pramANa has in this whole talk.
Without that you all will be just continuing same thing, and I'll be
pointing to pramANa again and again.
The training of mind in this direction is needed to even understand what
I'm telling and why I'm telling. Reply comes later, once you understand the
import of logic presented by opponent.

> sandhyA-mantra-s are not direct means of knowledge, since they are useful
> for karma.  So, I'm not considering them.
>
>
> Ø   I am really surprised that there is no jnana pradhAna vAkya-s /
> mantra-s in sandhyA mantra-s and they are useful for only  karma.  Or am I
> missing something here prabhuji??
>
See other posts. You need to understand why tAtparya is and why it is
important.

> Kindly pardon me prabhuji if I am stretching this discussion beyond its
> limits and taking the liberty to talk/discuss  vedAnta with traditional
> Acharya-s like your goodself.
>
That's what I feared and mentioned in initial sentence here.
BTW, I'm a student of shAstra which traditional inclination. I'm not
AchArya as some are famous among us, as k sadananda, br praNipAtachaitanya,
etc. They have formal upAdhi. They are teachers, although not traditional
in many senses.

>   I know purely loukikA-s like me donot have any adhikAra to do brahma
> jignAsa without obtaining the purity through sAdhana chatushtaya.  But
> still tempted sometimes.
>
This talk and discussion is needed for clarity. So, continue that.
Whether you will gain stable GYAna or not depends on sAdhanachatuShTaya,
etc. So, don't worry about that. You are not taking part in discussion to
become brahmaGYAnI. You are doing it for clarity which is requirement for
seriously following the sAdhana-s of GYAna.

> My humble prostrations to you.
>
Opponent deserve question, refutation, answer and logic. Prostration is not
needed here. It's harmful in some sense.