Disciples of Ramana Maharshi

[Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian]

Ken Stuart <kstuart at MAIL.TELIS.ORG> wrote:

>In my life and especially in my spiritual development, one of the two
>or three most influential figures has been Ramana Maharshi.

That's the same case with me.

>However, it is perplexing to me, that, in my personal opinion and
>estimation, one finds more false teachers who claim to be followers or
>disciples of Ramana than one finds in any other lineage.

First, there is no Ramana "lineage". The maharshi has explicitly stated that he
is not leaving behind any lineage. Anyone who claims that he is a part of the
Ramana "lineage" is IMO, lying.

You might remember that we discussed this a few months back regarding a certain
"teacher" who claims to be from the Ramana Maharshi "lineage".

>So, while I have my own theories, I wanted to ask those in this
>mailing list for their opinions as to why Ramana Maharshi's great
>teachngs seem to also create so many false, ie deluded teachers?

The sense of gratification arising out of being adored by many as a "guru" can
be quite heady, I suppose. Ramana Maharshi is definitely one of the best
exponents of classical advaita vedanta this century. So the urge to imitate him
is probably pretty high. As Sri Ramakrishna said, the idea that "I have
renounced" is the hardest to renounce :-). Further such false gurus are quite
common, some of them being quite malicious, every where, especially in India.
I'd say there is at least one in every street in Madras (my home city) alone. I
consider this excessive guru business as one of the big problems India is
facing.

As per the contention that this is all illusion etc, I do not wish to comment
much. One can repeat the words of Maharshi or some other jivanmukta quite
easily. It is one thing discussing the philosophical points and making it clear
to oneself, but saying things like "one is already realized", "everything is an
illusion" and so on cannot be made unless one has realized that as a fact,
i.e., not unless one is self-realized. That'd bring us back to Anand Hudli's
question whether it is appropriate for a ajnaani to talk like a jnaani. This is
strictly IMHO.

Ramakrishnan.
--
Utinam logica falsa tuam philosophiam totam suffodiant (May faulty logic
undermine your entire philosophy)           -- strong Vulcan curse
                  http://yake.ecn.purdue.edu/~rbalasub/

>From  Tue Oct 22 03:23:15 1996
Message-Id: <TUE.22.OCT.1996.032315.GMT.>
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 1996 03:23:15 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: <199610220300.WAA01343 at zebra.ecn.purdue.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

On Mon, 21 Oct 1996 22:00:02 -0500, Ramakrishnan Balasubramanian
<rbalasub at ECN.PURDUE.EDU> wrote:

>Ken Stuart <kstuart at MAIL.TELIS.ORG> wrote:
>
>>In my life and especially in my spiritual development, one of the two
>>or three most influential figures has been Ramana Maharshi.
>
>That's the same case with me.
>
>>However, it is perplexing to me, that, in my personal opinion and
>>estimation, one finds more false teachers who claim to be followers or
>>disciples of Ramana than one finds in any other lineage.
>
>First, there is no Ramana "lineage". The maharshi has explicitly stated that he
>is not leaving behind any lineage.

I'd be interested in reading the specific quote(s) if anyone knows
where to find it.

It's not that I doubt it, on the contrary.   I'm just interested in
reading the exact words, and the context, etc.


Thanks,

Ken                       <*>
kstuart at mail.telis.org