Neo Advaita and Ramana Maharshi

joejo's picture



No votes yet

I think it must be sacrilege to link Ramana who I consider to be the foremost exponent of highest form of Advaita to Neo Advaita which is a poor apology. This is the trend that I see in the west and even in the very place, (India) Triruvannamalai where it all started not in the distant past but in these very modern times. Could irony be defined any better?

The confusion stems from two very basic misconceptions. The first being the views on the nature of world that we live in and the other being the nature of realisation.

2.16 Of the unreal there is no being; the real has no
nonexistence. But the nature of both these, indeed,
has been realized by the seers of Truth. (Gita)

English Translation of Sri Sankaracharya's Sanskrit
Commentary - Swami Gambhirananda

2.16 Since 'the unreal has no being,' etc., for this
reason also it is proper to bear cold, heat, etc.
without becoming sorrowful or deluded. Asatah,
of the unreal, of cold, heat, etc. together with their
causes; na vidyate, there is no; bhavah, being,
existence, reality; because heat, cold, etc. together
with their causes are not substantially real when
tested by means of proof. For they are changeful,
and whatever is changeful is inconstant.

Ramana too did not think that world was an illusion. The word mithya is wrongly translated as illusion but must be translated as unreal. That which is changeful is considered as unreal.

The indivisible essence behind the changeful form is the individuality of each. Hence on realisation the Individuality does not cease and therefore Quote, “there is no one here”, is comic to say the least. In fact it is a tragic misunderstanding of Advaita.

Jiva srishty (creation or mental world of perception of persons) is an illusion but the Ishwara srishty (world that is not created at a point in time but existing as a power of brahman) is reality. Truth is the Absolute (Brahman.)