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

[श्रीमल्ललितालालितः]

Ø     Here jnana means Atmaikatva jnana , ekatva jnana as enshrined in
> Upanishads and as propagated by Advaita vedAnta.  And the means to achieve
> / realize it, is, sharvaNAdi direct sAdhana after getting the sufficient
> purity (chitta shuddhi)  through sAdhana chatushtaya.
>
Whatever you are talking is not direct means of GYAna.
Let it be clear that, GYAna is generated by pramANa-s, not your
sadhana-chatuShTaya.
We are talking to pramANa-s here.

> Ø     Can there be a universal signs of the jnAni??
>
If there would not be one, then the shruti - तद्विज्ञानार्थं स
गुरुमेवाभिगच्छेत्समित्पाणिश्श्रोत्रियं ब्रह्मनिष्ठम् must be useless. Since
there are no signs of GYAnI and jIvanmukta-s. And, so all other portions of
shAstra-s which talk of laxaNa of sthitapraGYA, guNAtIta, brAhmaNa,
bhagavadbhakta, etc.
So, there must be some sign of GYAna.

>   Can it be possible to ascertain whether one is brahma jnAni or otherwise
> through his external appearance and behavior that too when prArabdha and
> avidyA lesha having the strong hold on bhautika shareera of  this jnAni??
>
Once you accept that there are some signs of GYAna and jIvanmukti, then
owing to these mentioned factors, viz.prArabdha, vAsanA, etc., it is easy
to say that those signs of GYAna will fade and evaporate in some cases.
And, that is sign of degree of stability of GYAna.
In case that's too low, there is no need to treat the person as GYAnI since
GYAna is useless in that case, even for him.

>   There can always be a little deviation  from sthita prajna lakshaNa in
> the socalled jnAni-s.  And shankara asks us in sUtra bhAshya : kathaM hi
> ekasya ‘SVAHRUDAYA PRATYAYAM’ (caps my choice) brahma vedanaM deha dhAraNaM
> cha apareNa pratiksheptuM shakyeta??
>
True that  no one can know anything what is going inside your head.
But, when the thing known has such effect that it destroys your perceived
identity and qualities related with the same, then if evident that you must
have some signs of the knowledge.
That's why वैराग्यबोधपरमाः सहायास्ते परस्परम् is said.

>   So, whatever we the ajnAni-s think as sign of jnAni is kevala
> adhyArOpita from our part due to our avidyA.
>
Since shAstra-s are not made for GYAnI-s, because they are kRtakRtya, so I
never expect that he may need any signs for any purpose.
It is for the sake of vyavahAra(of a-GYAnI-s) that some signs are needed.

Here I see a trend that implies that people have only two discrete
divisions in mind - GYAnI and aGYAnI. And, GYAnI doesn't see anything.
Now, that's absurd.
There are more stages of GYAna, and there is something called jIvanmukti.
Even jIvanmukta-s and GYAnI-s who are possessing body, either by prArabdha
or by any other means, are subject to vyavhAra. Even there samAdhI is a
vyvahAra. Whatever a GYAnI does to stabilise his GYAna, is also vyavahAra.
All other practices, as bhixA-yATana, pUjA, japa, adhyayana, etc. are
vyavahAra.
If you don't accept that, you are in some other plane of thinking where
evidence and logic don't reach.

> Ø     Yes, but establishing this is indeed purely subjective and may vary
> to one individual to another or one follower to another.
>
No, establishing anything by pramANa-s is not subjective. It's universal.
pramANa-s don't change behaviour according to person. It's the fault of
person which makes things appear different.
There is no need to entertain the idea of number and faith of followers
claiming that some person is GYAnI or siddha.
Nowadays, sAdhana-s don't make and certify you GYAnI and siddha-s, devotees
and follower make/certify. Beware of such people who delude their own guru.
Initially, guru-s try to resist any such thing, but later they themselves
shun the logic and conscience. The cause is that they relish the
respect/status provided by people and they can't resist the force of such
pleasure.

> Ø     Here in this case of ramaNa, those people who respected him
> (example kAnchi paramAchArya) not only respected him, they have given the
> advice and guided somany mumukshu / jignAsu-s to ramaNa to pursue the jnana
> mArga.
>
I also can't find any bad qualities in ramaNa. So, if someone comes to me
who better fits in his way of teachings, I'll send that person to him. It's
that easy.
Since GYAna is svasaMvedya, even other GYAnI can't look inside head of
other one. So, it is difficult to accept that chandrashekharendra-sarasvatI
knew anything which was going inside ramaNa's head.

Ø   Kindly tell me what are the definite signs of jnAni to know that he has
> the highest realization.
>
You know them. They are amAnitva, etc. as said by bhagavAn, and others.

> They can be found in a dvaitI who posseses bhakti and it's means. Don't we
> see many vaiShNava-s tyAgI-s or calm as sea?
>
> Ø     So calmness is not a sign of Advaita jnAni, as it is there in
> vaishNava bhakta-s and tyAgI-s also.  Now kindly educate what are all the
> other signs that would determine an Advaita jnAni??
>
You have to understand that when I'm talking to break a rule, I've to just
show one deviation. It doesn't mean that I'm propounding rule of deviation.
This is common to your post and of some others. It appears that you don't
understand the mentioned principle. You may be in hurry to reply.


> I'm sure that in advaita-l group, we talk about GYAna of oneness which is
> generated by shAstra only. I'm quite sure that just asking who am I is not
> enough to ascertain nature of Atman, although it helps us do
> anvaya-vyatireka to decide that Atman is not dRshya. This discrimination is
> not enough to help us decide that we are not tainted by relation of dRshya.
> We may imagine that we are not tainted, but that is not a proof. So, I
> think that Ramana stands close to sA~Nkhya-s, and yogI-s compared to
> advaitin-s.
>
Why ramaNa stands near sA~Nkhya?
Because, he never accepted that his knowledge was product of mahAvAkya.
It is also not a case similar to that of vAmadeva, where it was because of
unknown reasons.
He appears to suggest that only vichAra which starts from 'who am I' and
leads to dRg-dRshya-viveka, is his sAdhana.
In that case, the lack of pramANa will be the cause of him being not
knowing brahmAtmaikya and prapa~nchamithyAtva. So, he stays near sA~Nkhya-s
since he was able to separate AtmA from anAtmA. It is same as
tvampadArthshuddhi.
However, if he said that he accepts shruti as pramANa, and knows that he is
one with brahma, or is one alone; then I could have thought that he was
aupaniShadapuruShavettA.

>  Ø     And again, what are the measures we have to take to ascertain the
> jnana of ramaNa please be specific.
>
Once, I show any intention to tell something, then your such question and
tone will be justified. Till then stop this useless repetition.

>  And an uttamAdhikAri may require just one ‘shock’ to awaken to that
> reality.
>
That shock must be based on pramANa. Otherwise, it is speculation and
deluding oneself.

> If that is not the case then we have to ask how much shAstra one should
> study apart from saNdhyA mantra-s, how many hours needs to be dedicated to
> sAdhana, sva-shAkha adhyayana, vedAnta shravaNa, etc. etc.
>
sandhyA-mantra-s are not direct means of knowledge, since they are useful
for karma.  So, I'm not considering them.
If somehow you say that those mantra-s somehow woke up GYAna-saMskAra of
ramaNa, then I must accept that. But, even for that ramaNa has to
acknowledge that, since that is also svasaMvedya.
For other sAdhana-s, the avadhi is Afalodayam. sUtra-s are there for that.

I'm editing a commentary of jIvanmuktiviveka, where the commentator has
talked about the idea of signs of knowledge. I may post that to my blog,
obviously in Sanskrit. It may help some people.
To know importance of pramANa-s one needs to study some mImAMsA texts,
where authority of buddha-s is refuted. That may help.

>