[Advaita-l] Ramana Maharshi - Advaitin or Neo Advaitin?

[Kripa Shankar]

But is that shāstra adhyayana as well? 

Kripa : if I say a person is wearing a blue shirt, then it should follow that he /she should own it.‎ ‎

That is fine. But that example can be applied to the case of someone who has not performed shastra adhyayana in the current life and yet is a jnani since birth itself and even gives upadesha. 

Kripa : Unless of course, we can establish the cause of such Jnana. I am not even questioning the authenticity of the jnani. ‎
‎
There is no such requirement of knowing the immediate or remote previous lives of jnanis. For example the case of Sri Chandrashekhara Bharati Swamiji as stated by his Disciple Swamiji. Going by the above: 1. It would be impossible to gain aparoksha jnana by anyone since there is no jnani at all.The teaching by Krishna: 'Approach Jnanis and seek the Knowledge and they will teach'  will be a waste since there will be no one called Jnanis. In fact one reason for the acceptance of Jivan mukti is to enable the dissemination of jnana to others. 

 2. After the period of Vyasa, and outside the Mahabharata and Brahma sutras, no one can become a jnani and the vedanta shastra is of no use in the present day!! The sutra stated is not confined to the instances in the Upanishads but a guideline for all times.

Kripa : I don't know if am missing something in your argument or you completely missed the point. The whole point is to establish the pramanatva of the scriptures. SrimaLalitalalitah has argued well and his points are irrefutable (Apaurusheya etc). The cause of Ramana's jnana could not be established and hence it is a mere belief that he was a jnAni. Moreover, this proves that his teachings are classic neo Advaita. 

I am not sure  why you said no one apart from Vyasa was a jnAni. His son Shukha, Gaudapada, Shankaracharya etc who studied the Vedas properly and duly attribute the rise of Jnana to the grace of their teachers are all considered jnanis in traditional sense. Even if you don't consider them as Jnanis, that is still fine because the Shastra pramana is upheld which is the only important aspect. 

I will try to give an example although it might be inappropriate. Artists from elsewhere come to our country to make money but when they are asked to say a few words sympathising with our people, they show deep disregard and ignore us as if we don't matter. 

Now Ramana who is claimed to be the epitome of Vedanta never acknowledged the cause of his jnana to the Vedas. In other words it is equal to show contempt to the Shastras. That doesn't mean he was not a jnani, just that he had nothing to do with Vedas even remotely.  


Regards 
Kripa‎
‎
‎