[Advaita-l] Dayanand Saraswathi interview - Very interesting stand taken by Swami

[sreenivasa murthy]

Dear Sri Balasubramanian Ramakrishnan,      You write : "Yes, after brahma saakshaatkaara a "fall" is possible."Is a "fall" possible after brahma saakshaatkara? Please study the following excerpt and share your observations .Quote : :Be very direct and simple with this.‘Presence’ is not something you move into and out of. That would be dualism.Such a dualism leaves your assumed separation from that intact. That will get youanother five to ten years of needless seeking and suffering! What I amreferring to is the fact of your being, your fundamental existence. You arethis. It is not something you move into and out of. That notion hangs on theassumption of the reality of the separate ‘I’. But you are not such a separateone at all. You are the one present and aware always.[John Wheeler; Clear In Your Heart; Page 172]
Unquote.    Mantra 2-5-19 of Bruhadaranyaka Upanishad says : ayamAtmA brahma sarvAnuBUH ||Sri Shankara says : AtmA hi nAma svarUpam ||   When am 'I'  different and separate from brahman ? Is it ever possible ?Please study the above excerpt in the light of relevant upanishad mantras and Sri Shankara's teachings . Then you please share your observations and findings.With respectful amaskaram,Sreenivasa Murthy


    



      From: Balasubramanian Ramakrishnan via Advaita-l <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>
 To: A discussion group for Advaita Vedanta <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org>; Kripa Shankar <kripa.shankar.0294 at gmail.com> 
 Sent: Sunday, 15 January 2017 4:23 PM
 Subject: Re: [Advaita-l] Dayanand Saraswathi interview - Very interesting stand taken by Swami
   
You seem have a few misconceptions. Yes, after brahma saakShaatkaara a
"fall" is possible. Sankara says that the person should take up sannyaasaa
and become a parivraajaka immediately AFTER saakShaatkaara to avoid this.
This has been discussed extensively in the list before. No you cannot
identify a person as a jiivanmukta or not, I.e., an "objective" test is not
available. That is indeed one of the ideas expressed by the dharmavyAdha
story or the R^ibhu story in the Vishnu purana.

Furthermore I suggest that you spend some time in introspection on the
anger you are displaying towards Ramana and his followers. Perhaps he
wasn't a jiivanmukta, so what part of their behavior is creating so much
agitation in you?

Rama

On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 9:06 AM Kripa Shankar via Advaita-l <
advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:

> Ok, let's assume so. Still he said - he may not have been a jiivanmuukta.
> Does that mean inspite of brahmatma saakshatkara, Jivanmukti is doubtful?
> This is why your arguments are far fetched. Because you already arrive at
> the conclusion first, then you try to reconcile with/justify it.
>
>
>
> If we cannot determine if a person is jivanmukta or not, is Jivanmukti a
> mere abstract idea? Is Moksha a speculation? Because otherwise, there is no
> proof if the jnani is reborn or not.
>
> ‎
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> 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