[Advaita-l] Commentary on Ramana's Forty Verses

[K Kathirasan]

Namaste Akilesh,

How did you come to the conclusion that Arjuna is a jnani? I am curious. 

Kathirasan K




> On 17 Jun 2021, at 10:04 AM, Akilesh Ayyar via Advaita-l <advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
> 
> Show me where in his written works it is said that one MUST take to
> monkhood and give up the householder life. Not once does he say that.
> 
> His talks, as you well know, all contradict that idea, and so do the spirit
> of his words.
> 
> The burden is on you to show why he didn’t say it was a must if it is so
> important. Why didn’t he say, as Sankara clearly does in his texts to his
> Brahmin disciples, “you MUST give up the householder life”?
> 
> If we are taking Ramana’s words “LITERALLY,” and jnanis are “literally”
> dead to the world, then, again, why do jnanis eat?
> 
> Again, verbal gymnastics will not save you from an inadequate
> understanding. Literalness yields nonsense in nonduality.
> 
> In the BG Krishna clearly says over and over again that non-action is not
> the same as the way of monkhood. Arjuna and Janaka are just two examples of
> non-monk jnanis.
> 
> On Wed, Jun 16, 2021 at 6:25 PM Ven Balakrishnan <ventzu at yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> 
>> It is a source of amusement to see so-many self-proclaimed jnanis
>> passionately emphasise that renunciation, utter desirelessness is not a
>> concomitant of jnana.  I wonder why that could be?
>> 
>> And the verbal acrobatics to justify this position, arguing a phrase here
>> is figurative, whereas a phrase there should be taken literally.
>> 
>> Bhagavan in the recorded Talks was talking at the level of the seekers
>> that asked him questions.  After all, in the BG, Krishna said only very few
>> would ever achieve jnana.  And there can be some question over whether the
>> recorder of the talks was accurate in his note-taking and interpretation.
>> So his written works like Ulladu Narpadu and GVK have to be the best
>> authority for his teaching.
>> 
>> I suggest you find something in his written work (incl GVK) that would
>> support the contention that utter desirelessness / disassociation with
>> body-mind is not what is meant by jnana.  If he said it "many times”, then
>> surely he or Muruganar must have written it down as well.  Whereas I can
>> find you quite a few written quotes, like your own in this second verse,
>> that makes exactly that point; let alone the guidance he gave to some of
>> his closest disciples who lived lives of renunciation and austerity around
>> him - Muruganar, Annamalai Swami, Chadwick, Sadhu Natananda, Sadhu Om, to
>> name but a few.  Find a realised disciple in Ramana’s constellation who
>> lived the life of a householder.
>> 
>> The argument that Gaudapada / Sankara / the Upanishads were aimed at monks
>> is a novel one, as opposed to elucidating what they believed was the
>> highest truth to all.  Again, it is case of taking some teaching as gospel,
>> and others as figurative or a product of their cultural times.  Convenient,
>> no?
>> 
>> Ramana’s actionlessness and renunciation from the outset - without having
>> read any sruti - exemplifies exactly what  Sankara described as the life of
>> a jivanmukta.  As Sw Chinmayananda said of him, ‘he is the cream of the
>> upanishads’.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 16 Jun 2021, at 21:11, Akilesh Ayyar <ayyar at akilesh.com> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> On Wed, Jun 16, 2021 at 3:09 PM Ven Balakrishnan <ventzu at yahoo.co.uk>
>> wrote:
>> 
>>> Four responses:
>>> 
>>> 1) I’m just replaying your quote.  Do you believe Ramana was exaggerating
>>> for effect?  What was his intention in writing such a strongly worded
>>> phrase - surely not to mislead?
>>> 
>> 
>> Not at all to mislead. It has to be understood, as I put it in my
>> commentary: "By dying to what is changing — to what one thought one was,
>> but in fact is not — one  realizes oneself to actually be the unchanging."
>> 
>> The unchanging has no truck with either doing or not-doing. Those
>> categories do not apply.
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 2) Recall that Bhagavan when he arrived at Tiruvannamallai, sat
>>> indifferent to his body and the insects biting him, let alone requirements
>>> for food, for days on end.  He had to be force fed.
>>> 
>> 
>> Yes, yes, and Bhagavan has said many times that his path is not for
>> everyone and not required for jnana.
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 3) Lakshmana Sarma - who received personal instruction on Ulladu Narpadu
>>> from Bhagavan - wrote this in HIS commentary on this verse:
>>> 
>>> “The knowledge born out of personal experience that worldly life is
>>> riddled with sorrow turns one through dispassion towards nivritti marga,
>>> the path of withdrawal from activity or of renunciation.
>>> 
>> 
>> Nivritti marga agani has to be understood. True renunciation is the
>> renunciation of the ego, not of gross physical activity, as both Ramana and
>> the Bhagavad Gita have said repeatedly.
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 4) Then there is Gaudapada, MK 2.37:
>>> 
>>> “He should have this body and the Atman as his support and depend upon
>>> chances, ie he should be satisfied with those things for his physical
>>> wants, that chance brings him”
>>> 
>>> Sankara underscores this in his bhasya to this verse
>>> “He entirely depends on circumstances, that is to say, he maintains his
>>> body with whatever food or strips of cloth, etc are brought to him by mere
>>> chance”
>>> 
>> 
>> Yes, we understand that these are the monastic traditions they worked in.
>> But that's because these Upanishads were geared towards monks. This is not
>> the requirement for jnana for everyone.
>> 
>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Hope that clarifies what ‘dead to themselves and their possessions’ means.
>>> 
>>> 
>>>> On 16 Jun 2021, at 16:44, Akilesh Ayyar via Advaita-l <
>>> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> If so, why would they eat?
>>>> 
>>>> On Wed, Jun 16, 2021 at 4:07 AM Ven Balakrishnan <ventzu at yahoo.co.uk>
>>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> “DEAD TO THEMSELVES AND THEIR POSSESSIONS”
>>>>> 
>>>>> Ramanamaharishi is entirely consistent with Sankara saying a jnani will
>>>>> inevitably take up the life of a paramahamsa ascetic, since s/he has no
>>>>> desires, no fear, no attachments, not even to body-mind - like a snake
>>> that
>>>>> has shed its skin.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 15 Jun 2021, at 17:26, Akilesh Ayyar via Advaita-l <
>>>>> advaita-l at lists.advaita-vedanta.org> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Namaste,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> This is the commentary on the next verse.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> From
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>> https://www.siftingtothetruth.com/blog/2021/6/15/commentary-on-ramanas-forty-verses-invocatory-part-two-of-two
>>>>>> :
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> II. THOSE WHO KNOW INTENSE FEAR OF DEATH SEEK REFUGE ONLY AT THE FEET
>>> OF
>>>>>> THE LORD WHO HAS NEITHER DEATH NOR BIRTH. DEAD TO THEMSELVES AND THEIR
>>>>>> POSSESSIONS, CAN THE THOUGHT OF DEATH OCCUR TO THEM AGAIN? DEATHLESS
>>> ARE
>>>>>> THEY.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> *Commentary:* All fear is rooted in the fear of death. But death can
>>> only
>>>>>> afflict what is born, that is, what is changing: that is, what is
>>>>> thought.
>>>>>> We have just seen that what is Real is unchanging, and that what is
>>> Real
>>>>> is
>>>>>> us.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The Lord who has neither birth nor death is none other than this very
>>>>>> Reality, the Heart. This Lord may go by many other names — Shiva or
>>>>> Vishnu
>>>>>> or God or the Goddess, for example. But ultimately they all refer to
>>> this
>>>>>> unchanging Reality.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> In order to take refuge at the feet of this Lord, all else must be
>>> given
>>>>>> up. This giving up is a kind of death. By dying to what is changing —
>>> to
>>>>>> what one thought one was, but in fact is not — one realizes oneself to
>>>>>> actually be the unchanging. What seems mortal has in fact never been
>>> born
>>>>>> to begin with, and what is immortal cannot die. And the thought of
>>> death
>>>>>> cannot occur to the immortals, which are those who have given up their
>>>>>> stake in everything changing.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> At any time, see all the forty verses posts that I have published so
>>> far
>>>>>> here
>>>>>> <
>>> https://www.siftingtothetruth.com/blog/tag/Forty%20Verses%20Commentary
>>>>>> .
>>>>>> Akilesh Ayyar
>>>>>> Spiritual guidance - http://www.siftingtothetruth.com/
>>>>>> ᐧ
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
>>>>>> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> To unsubscribe or change your options:
>>>>>> https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> For assistance, contact:
>>>>>> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>>>>> 
>>>>> ᐧ
>>>> ᐧ
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
>>>> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
>>>> 
>>>> To unsubscribe or change your options:
>>>> https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
>>>> 
>>>> For assistance, contact:
>>>> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org
>>> 
>>> ᐧ
>> ᐧ
>> 
>> 
>> 
> _______________________________________________
> Archives: https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/archives/advaita-l/
> http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.culture.religion.advaita
> 
> To unsubscribe or change your options:
> https://lists.advaita-vedanta.org/cgi-bin/listinfo/advaita-l
> 
> For assistance, contact:
> listmaster at advaita-vedanta.org