Consciousness Speaks - by Sri Ramesh Balsekar

Vaidya Sundaram Vaidya_Sundaram at HOTMAIL.COM
Tue Jan 28 16:12:16 CST 2003

 To add to the body of rebuttals on this list, here is my 2 cents. I request
list members to correct me if I am wrong.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Srikrishna Ghadiyaram" <srikrishna_ghadiyaram at YAHOO.COM>

> To me this meant, complete non-acknowledgement of EGO and role of EGO;.
> Ramesh also advocates that there is "ABSOLUTELY NOTHING we have to do or
> can do" to reach the state of Realisation.

If not ego being the cause of individualtiy, which is the reason for any
individual experiences, then who experiences, and why?

> God will take care of it.

Really? Then I don't have to do anything? WOW!! What is God waiting for
then? I am ready to get liberated (and so is everybody else in the world)!!
It's like the person inside a jail saying (claiming) he is innocent. He does
not have to do anything to get out. The jail warden knows and will take care
of it.

> Whatever is happening or whatever will happen is within the scheme of
> TOTALITY. To me this means "Absolute surrender or Bhakti or Devotion". Can
> Sri Ramesh's teaching  be called Advaita Vedanta and J~nana marga ???

> 2. Sri Ramesh presents that there is no individual in the scheme of
> TOTALITY. So, there is no "INDIVIDUAL KARMA" and hence NO individual
> reborn. It is only that another organism is created in Totality, as
> of previous Karmas.

Very confusing to say the least. If there is no individual, then what is the
organism you are talking about? Is this saying there is no parts, but there
is parts?
Also, if there is no individual karma, and there is no individual (to-be)
reborn, what is the "organism" that you are talking about? What does it mean
to say "is created"? Who created it? Does it mean that the totality is now
somehow "bigger" than it was due to the "creation" of this "organism"? If
there is "effect of previous karmas" that is the "cause of the organism to
be created",  then have you not resorted to another form of "eternal
damnation"? I mean, the organism was never there before. Yet, the sum total
of the previous karma's the totaltity has just created it (the organism) and
assigned it (condemned it?) to either suffer or enjoy based on that. The
organism is going to pay for what it never could have done.
 Also, this will lead to more creation of organisms to account for the
current organism's karma contribution to the totality, and there will be
more creation ad infinitum. Where does it all end?

> What is very peculiar about his teaching is that he
> says there is no "Individual Bundle of Karma", meaning all the Karmas of
> all the Beings are part of the Totality and when new Organisms are born,
> there is no particular BUNDLE to be reborn, meaning these Karmas get mixed
> up and re-distributed and the new Organism born has no traceable one to
> identity with past lives. Is this not denial of rebirth which is the basis
> of Vedanta ??

It is not just denial of rebirth as told by vedanta. It is denial of logic.
It's like an all powerful "distributor of karma" that just functions
independently. This distributor of karma if not God, then is also different
from when the purva mimamsakas' were denying the need for a God, but held
that karma would take care of assigning itself to the right entity,  right?

bhava shankara desikame sharaNam
>From ADVAITA-L at LISTS.ADVAITA-VEDANTA.ORG Wed Jan 29 10:45:55 2003
Message-Id: <WED.29.JAN.2003.104555.0800.ADVAITAL at LISTS.ADVAITAVEDANTA.ORG>
Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 10:45:55 -0800
Reply-To: List for advaita vedanta as taught by Shri Shankara
To: List for advaita vedanta as taught by Shri Shankara
From: Srikrishna Ghadiyaram <srikrishna_ghadiyaram at YAHOO.COM>
Subject: Re: Texts
In-Reply-To: <OE66kNzPZrIkyPzGNso00000e26 at>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

Hari Om !!

--- Vaidya Sundaram <Vaidya_Sundaram at HOTMAIL.COM>

> It's rather like saying there is no such thing as
> "school work" and "home
> work" since both are parts of education. Lets
> realize there are both aspects
> to "education". The theory part is what you "listen"
> (as in sravana). (as in
> school work) Manana and Nidhidyasana do not
> immediately follow in the sense,
> they do not give the intended result, so to speak,
> of conferring
> understaning. They would be beneficial only when the
> "practice" is done.
> This "practice" is (in my opinion) of two types (a)
> follow your nitya karma
> as was told to you in the sravana part  AND (b) keep
> the repeated musings
> going as to what was actually said what it all
> means.

Needless to say, your interpretation is incorrect.
First of all when we say 'sravana' it is not listening
to 'karma' of any type. Sravana means listening to the
sastra expounding the 'Tat tvam asi' as its final
proclamation.  Manana is reflecting/debating with
in/out, about the arguments presented to lead us to
the ultimate understanding of 'tat tvam asi'.
Obviously, you should be able to deduce that 'mananam'
is some thing that follows (not even follows ..
because it is going on parallel to sravana).
Nididhyasana is contemplating on the final truth
assimilated through 'manana'. Here at this stage there
is no 'doubt'; but the TRUTH has not taken a 'Vritti'
in the 'mind'. At this time 'sravana' is going on
paralally. You can see for yourself, that though we
all know the 'tat tvam asi' we continue to listen to
the expostion of the teacher. So, as far as 'sravana,
manana, nididhyasana' are concerned, they are not
separate disconnected activities. They are tightely

Sankara repeatedly refutes explanations like what you
are presenting here about karma etc. What you are
speaking is 'karma samuchaya vada' which Sankara
refuted a zillion times. You must read 'Upadesa

If you need to understand better, please listen to
lectures of Swami Dayananda of Arsha Vidya on Upadesa
Sahasri. I am greatly benefited.

Om Namo Narayanaya !!


Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list