Disciples of Ramana Maharshi

[Cameron Reilly]

Ken Stuart wrote:

> When someone asks you where the bathroom is, do you reply "Your need
> to use the bathroom is only an illusion." ?
>
> I think that if Ramana had been asked where the bathroom is, he would
> not reply "Who is it that thinks it needs to go to the bathroom?".
> Instead, he would reply "around the corner in the back", and save the
> "Who is it that thinks there is a world?" response for philosophical
> questions put to him in the lecture hall.
>
> In fact, the above is just the sort of thing that false gurus do,
> their egos are so caught up in "being a guru" that they can't
> distinguish between when philosophy is appropriate and when it is not.


You are probably right.

Ramana probably *would* have pointed the direction to the toilet. But
would his answer have been a matter of volition? Did Ramana have free
will? Or would his response have been spontaneous?

In the same way, any utterance made from a 'false guru' as you put it,
(I am humbled to see you infer that title on myself) is also a
spontaneous happening over which 'they' have no control. Saying their
"ego's are so caught up in being a guru" assumes the ego actually has
some sort of volition. I do not believe this is the case. What *is*
there that could possibly have volition?

May I ask, do you believe in volition?

I felt your question *was* one of philosophy. For the issue would not
concern you if you understood that the whole concept of the individual
is a mistake.

Cheers.

Cameron.

>From  Mon Oct 21 01:27:48 1996
Message-Id: <MON.21.OCT.1996.012748.GMT.>
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 01:27:48 GMT
Reply-To: kstuart at mail.telis.org
To: "Advaita (non-duality) with reverence" <ADVAITA-L at TAMU.EDU>
From: Ken Stuart <kstuart at MAIL.TELIS.ORG>
Subject: Re: Disciples of Ramana Maharshi
Comments: To: "Advaita (non-duality) with reverence" <ADVAITA-L at TAMU.EDU>
In-Reply-To: <326ACB6D.7F4D at ozemail.com.au>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hello,

On Mon, 21 Oct 1996 11:01:33 +1000, Cameron Reilly
<cjreilly at OZEMAIL.COM.AU> wrote:

>Ken Stuart wrote:
>
>> When someone asks you where the bathroom is, do you reply "Your need
>> to use the bathroom is only an illusion." ?
>>
>> I think that if Ramana had been asked where the bathroom is, he would
>> not reply "Who is it that thinks it needs to go to the bathroom?".
>> Instead, he would reply "around the corner in the back", and save the
>> "Who is it that thinks there is a world?" response for philosophical
>> questions put to him in the lecture hall.
>>
>> In fact, the above is just the sort of thing that false gurus do,
>> their egos are so caught up in "being a guru" that they can't
>> distinguish between when philosophy is appropriate and when it is not.
>
>
>You are probably right.
>
>Ramana probably *would* have pointed the direction to the toilet. But
>would his answer have been a matter of volition? Did Ramana have free
>will? Or would his response have been spontaneous?
>
>In the same way, any utterance made from a 'false guru' as you put it,
>(I am humbled to see you infer that title on myself)

I didn't mean to infer any such thing, I certainly don't know enough
about you or anyone else on this list to even know whether anyone is a
guru, let alone false or true !  :-)

> is also a
>spontaneous happening over which 'they' have no control. Saying their
>"ego's are so caught up in being a guru" assumes the ego actually has
>some sort of volition. I do not believe this is the case. What *is*
>there that could possibly have volition?

There doesn't have to be volition.   My coat can get caught in the
door, but I don't attribute volition to it.  :-)

>I felt your question *was* one of philosophy. For the issue would not
>concern you if you understood that the whole concept of the individual
>is a mistake.

It's not a concern to me.

I'm just curious as to why Ramana, who was so unusually clear and to
the point, would, even if indirectly, produce an unusual number of
followers who would (let me put this in terms perhaps more acceptable)
have the karma to become non-realized teachers who thought they were
realized?   (please see my earlier post which started this thread for
details)


Cheers,

Ken                         <*>
kstuart at mail.telis.org
>From ADVAITA-L at TAMU.EDU Mon Oct 21 06:42:04 1996
Message-Id: <MON.21.OCT.1996.064204.0400.ADVAITAL at TAMU.EDU>
Date: Mon, 21 Oct 1996 06:42:04 -0400
Reply-To: "Advaita (non-duality) with reverence" <ADVAITA-L at TAMU.EDU>
To: "Advaita (non-duality) with reverence" <ADVAITA-L at TAMU.EDU>
From: sadananda <sada at ANVIL.NRL.NAVY.MIL>
Subject: Re: a small favor
Comments: To: "Advaita (non-duality) with reverence" <ADVAITA-L at TAMU.EDU>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

>On Sun, 20 Oct 1996, egodust wrote:
>
>> can anyone please translate this for me?
>>
>> Endharo Mahaanubhavulu Antharaiki Naa Vandanamu.
>>                        ^^^^^^^^^^
>
>Should be "Anthariki".
>
>The statement is in Telugu language. It means, "Innumerable are the great
>ones, to them my salutations." Endharo Mahaanubhaavulu Anthariki
>Vandanamu is the first line of a famous composition by Thyagaraja, the
>18th century saint-poet of Carnatic music.
>
>S. Vidyasankar

In telugu, as in several other south Indian languages, there are two
'e'kaara- e and ee or E short and long, and similarly two 'o' kaara - the
short and long

>Endharo Mahaanubhavulu Antharaiki Naa Vandanamu

The correct transliteration is:

  endarO mahaanubhaavulu, andarikii naa vandanaalu

  endarO = many
  mahaanubhaavulu = great souls
  andarikii= to all of them
  naa = my
  vandanaalu= prostrations

  As Vidya pointed out this is one of the most famous Tyagaraaja kriti -
exemplying his own humility.  It is considered a measure of graduation of a
carnatic music student if he can sing this song with all the aalapana,
raaga and taala involved.
Tyagaraaja is one of the great Sri Rama bhakta and has composed thousands
of kiirthans on Sri Rama and one of the back bones of carnatic music.
Hari OM
Sadananda