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

[Raghav Kumar]

Do you mean that the word jnAtum can be understood as jnEyam in this
particular context?

It sounds quite plausible to me.

Just a thought ... Would not it have been composed as  'jnAnamasti kim
jnEyam antaram' in that case? The chandas is not disturbed thereby and yet
we find the composer chooses jnAtum rather than jnEyam.

I dont have with me right now shri kAvyakanTha ganapati muni's brief
sanskrit  commentary on upadesha sAraM . It would be interesting to see
what he says.

Om

On 20-Sep-2016 1:31 pm, "Venkatraghavan S" <agnimile at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Why not "there is no knowledge apart from the known object"? That is, the
pramA is non different from the prameya?
>
> Regards,
> Venkatraghavan
>
>
> On 20 Sep 2016 8:16 a.m., "Raghav Kumar via Advaita-l" <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>>
>> Namaste Subrahmanianji
>>
>> Yes you are quite right. The verse reads jnAtum antaram ( the word being
>> tumunAnta rather than panchamI)  the translation does not permit any
other
>> reading other than 'there is no (other) object to be known in pure
>> knowledge.'
>>
>> I was influenced by another verse from aparokShAnubhUti viz.,
>>
>> karye hi kAraNam pashyet paschAt kAryam visarjayet kAraNatvam tathA
nashyet
>> avashiShTam bhaven muniH
>>
>> (Verse  139)
>> First see the cause in all its effects. Thus get rid of the effects
>> (multiplicity) altogether. (In ones understanding). Thus the causality of
>> the Cause also stands negated. What remains finally is the Contemplater
or
>> Self alone.
>> (My rough translation )
>>
>> I remember Swami Paramarthanandaji quoting the above version of verse 139
>> as representing in a nutshell the entire adhyAropa apavAda prakriya.
>>
>> But this verse is different.
>> Om
>>
>> Raghav
>>
>> On 20-Sep-2016 11:32 am, "V Subrahmanian" <v.subrahmanian at gmail.com>
wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 11:09 AM, Raghav Kumar via Advaita-l <
>> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On 20-Sep-2016 8:58 am, "Ravi Kiran via
>> >> >
>> >> > 'Jnanam alone is; there is no Jnani'
>> >> >
>> >> Isn't it curious that we also have the words of Sri Ramana Maharshi  -
>> >> 'What is Jnana other than the Knower'
>> >> ज्ञानमिस्त किं ज्ञातुमन्तरम्
>> >
>> >
>> > Raghav ji,
>> >
>> > Could you confirm whether the above translation you give to the
statement
>> is correct? For we have this too:
>> >
>> > http://www.arunachala.org/docs/upadesa-saram/
>> >
>> > 27.
>> >
>> > jñāna-varjitā-jñana-hina cit
>> >
>> > jñānam-asti kiṃ jñātum-antaram
>> >
>> > That is true knowledge which transcends
>> > Both knowledge and ignorance,
>> > For in pure knowledge
>> >
>> > Is no object to be known.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > If it has to be //'What is Jnana other than the Knower'// I think the
>> wording should be: ....jñāturantaram.  Because, jñātā is the knower.
Apart
>> from the knower where / what is Knowledge?  In this case jñātā will
become
>> jñātuḥ in the panchamī .
>> >
>> > vs
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
>> >> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
>> >>
>> >> To unsubscribe or change your options:
>> >> http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>> >>
>> >> For assistance, contact:
>> >> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>> >
>> >
>> _______________________________________________
>> Archives: http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
>> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
>>
>> To unsubscribe or change your options:
>> http://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>>
>> For assistance, contact:
>> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org