[Advaita-l] Is morality necessary for liberation?

Sujal Upadhyay sujal.u at gmail.com
Tue Jan 28 10:48:57 CST 2014

Namaste Ramesh ji,

A sAdhaka always tries to find fault in himself, while a samsArI will
always try to find fault in others :) There may be occasional lapses in
character, but this but not mean that one is not making any attempts to
progress spiritually. I do not cover above e.g. by you, as they are
motivated by jealousy and other negative emotions.

What I am trying to say is that if you try to find perfection, then I would
say that no one is perfect except God. But the problem comes when an
immature sAdhaka gives lectures and if he gets success, gets excited and
encouraged by success, keeps expanding his foundation.

So there is no problem in having vAsanA-s, they are natural. But a sAdhaka
may have uprooted say, 90 out of 100. Still 10 remain. If he jumps into
samsAra, then he may develop new vAsanA-s and or water (give food of
thought) to his vAsanA-s thata are not yet uprooted. Say if he is not
managed to uproot sensuality, then ... :) But if he is in isolation, 'it is
work in progress' and after emptying mind, he can jump into this samsAra
for the good of all.

The key is - Is environment (spiritual vibrations or vibrations of others,
good and bad) affect you OR do you influence environment?

IF you say, that vibrations or environment influence me, then you are week,
because when you have surrendered to the almighty, who is the substratum of
universe, everything is under his control, then there is no chance of
anything 'other' to be able to influence you. Affected by environment shows
that something is lacking in us.

Did you see any saints who get liberation at a particular place only? Like
say, all will have to come to arunachala and sit in same spot and meditate
for years to get enlightenment.

What was Shirdi, before Sai Baba stepped in? It was unknown. After a Siddha
stepped in and chose Shirdi as his home, Shirdi became a place of
pilgrimage. Even the great compassionate Buddha only started to preach and
take responsibility of disciples after he established himself in Self.
People may not agree with me because of 'shunya vAda', but the very name
'buddha' suggests 'the awakened one'. In earlier days, names were according
to the nature and spiritual heights achieved. It is only now that Nisha may
look like Usha (bright, fair skinned) and vice versa :D

Hari OM



On Tue, Jan 28, 2014 at 9:45 PM, RAMESH RAMANAN
<rameshramanan at yahoo.co.uk>wrote:

> Dear Friends,
> Pranams to all.
> I have read some of the responses to the question relating to the
> necessity of morality or code of conduct for salvation. In this regard, I
> would like to point out some statements by some eminent sages and saints
> like Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa. Sri Ramakrishna once scolded a man
> pretending to be a saint, while pursuing shady activities without any
> scruples. That fellow told him: "I know I am Brahman and that is enough. It
> is only my body which is indulging in the shady activities and that does
> not affect my being Brahman. Upon hearing this, Sri Ramakrishna told
> him:"Fie on your brand of Vedanta. I spit on it." This means, that a person
> professing to be a saintly character has to be saintly in thought, word and
> deed. Otherwise, it is mere parroting of words from scriptures and mere
> pretense, which can not take/lead anyone towards his natural state or
> Moksha. Even the pontiffs or Peetadhipathis of Sringeri (E.g. Sri
> Chandrashekara Bharathi Mahaswami, Sri
>  Abhinava Vidya Teertha Mahaswami and Sri Bharathi Theertha Mahaswami and
> Kanchi (E.g: Sri Chandrashekarendra Saraswathi Mahaswami) have made
> statements to the same effect that one's words/speech, mind and action must
> be in tune with righteousness or else, they will be doomed to failure. We
> also have an example of a rogue pretending to be saintly and abusing Sri
> Ramana Maharishi during his earlier years in Arunachala. He pretended to be
> saintly and abused Sri Ramana Maharishi publicly and later paid for it
> heavily, because his pretense was not backed up by righteous living.
> Without steadfast and unpretentious righteous living, how can one attain
> Chittha Shuddhi, which alone can lead to the steady abidance in one's
> natural state as Sat-Chit-Ananda, which is Jnana and Moksha?
> Thanks for the clarifications in advance. My humble pranams, Ramesh

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list