[Advaita-l] Sannyasa and Ramana (was Re: Sankara on sannyAsa for Steadiness in GYAna)

[Jaldhar H. Vyas]

On Sat, 24 Oct 2009, D.V.N. Sarma wrote:

> If that makes you feel that Bhagavan took sannyasa asrama
> I have no objection.
>
> I was under the impression that we are discussing ritualistic
> sannyasa as a prerequisite to jnana.

Why?  I thought Shyam made it clear in his exposition the difference 
between vividisha sannyasa (renunciation of the seeker) and vidvat 
sannyasa (renunciation of the knower) and that it was the latter that he 
was focusing on.

> It was this ritualistic
> sannyasa

an oxymoron btw.  Perhaps "institutional sannyasa" is more appropriate 
term.

> that the official of Sringeri mutt requested Sri Bhagavan
> to submit to. The custodians of Hindu dharma obviously did not
> recognise Sri bhagavan as sannyasi.
>

One thing which I have noticed missing from the present discussions is 
the impact of taking or not taking sannyasa on society.  If a jnani can 
continue doing some work for the sake of lokasangraha even though he has 
no feelings for it, does it not follow that he should consider adopting 
danda, kesari clothes etc. for the sake of lokasangraha?  (i.e. to 
avoiding confusing the categories of karma and jnana in the eyes of 
sadhakas.)

I don't want to belabor this point.  The suggestion was made, it was 
refused, and the matter was dropped.  End of story.  I'm just saying we 
need not necessarily assume from that incident that Ramana was not 
recognized as a sannyasi.

> I would like to point out to you that Kanchi Periyaval
> sent srimukhams to the brahmins who recited veda
> in the temple erected on the samadhi of Bhagavan's mother
> because according to the sastra women cannot take sannyasa
> and burrying them and installing linga on the samadhi is
> heretical.The brahmins later ignored the srimukhams.

I do not understand how that conclusion came to be.  That women and other 
non-dvija can become sannyasis is well documented in the shastras and 
historical record.  I mentioned on this list some time back how while I 
was on a yatra to Damodar Kund (near Junagadh, Gujarat) I came accross the 
samadhi of one Swami Narmada Giri who had been a Rajput princess in her 
purvashrama more than a century back.  It was located in a Shivalaya and 
there was a lingam raised above it.  I don't see how even the most 
stringently orthodox person could find fault with it.

As I am 100% confident of the Kanchi acharyas mastery of shastras, I think 
this also must be a case where, if true,  there is more than meets the 
eye.


-- 
Jaldhar H. Vyas <jaldhar at braincells.com>