[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Question on Ramana Maharishi/Advaita
M Suresh <msuresh@dadd.ti.com> wrote:
> I have read a few books on the teachings of Sri Ramana Maharishi. More
> than once he has mentioned that the greatest power is at the command of
> one who has known his self.
He certainly did not mean display of siddhis. The Maharishi has made it
perfectly clear that "aatma vidya" is the only thing worth acquiring. He has
also made it perfectly clear that self-realized persons may not even have
siddhis, acquiring siddhis depends purely on whether one has wished for it or
not.
> For example in his book "A Search in Secret India", Paul Brunton writes
> about his conversation with Ramana Maharishee :
>The Maharishee speaks again, his words breaking into my thoughts."
> "Unless and until a man embarks upon this quest of the true self, doubt
> and uncertainty will follow his footsteps throughout life. The greatest
> kings and statesmen try to rule others, when in their heart of hearts
> they know that they cannot rule themselves. YET THE GREATEST IS AT THE
> COMMAND OF THE MAN WHO HAD PENETRATED TO HIS INMOST DEPTH. There are men
> of giant intellects who spend their lives gathering knowledge about many
> things. Ask these men if they have solved the mystery of man, if they
> have conquered themselves, and they will hand their heads in shame. What
> is the use of knowing about everything else when you do not yet know who
> you are? Men avoid this enquiry into the true self, but what else is
> there so worthy to be undertaken?"
Ramana, by the "greatest is at the command .." only means self-realization. He
certainly did not mean that the proof of Fermat's theorem would unfold on
self-enquiry :-).
> This causes one to wonder if a self-realized person has infinite
> knowledge at his command. Can he shed light on any unsolved problems in
> the realm of mathematics? Can he for instance write down a formula that
> generates only prime numbers? Can he understand if spoken to in any
> language of the world, or decipher the script of the Harappans? Can he
> say if life exists elsewhere in this universe, if so where? Should a
> person who has realized the substratum of all knowledge, not have all
> knowledge at his command?
It again depends on whether he had wanted knowledge of these before
realization (or even after realization). Ramana made it perfectly clear on
zillions of occasions all these are within the realm of the mind and not worth
giving a second thought. If he knew everything, then why would he have read
newspapers etc? Again, all this is identifying Ramana with the body. He himself
told that his state could not be described and even pain was
"kanaa-kandaarpola"- meaning as if in a dream.
> Can anyone who has read more on Ramana Maharishi or any other saints
> please say if any realized person has given a direct answer ( Yes/No )
> and an explanation to these kind of questions?
Yes or No depending on whether he wants such knowledge. Ramana also said on one
occasion that a realized person may not have siddhis, but may later seek and
acquire them after realization. (ex. Chudala in Yoga Vashista). He also said
that some realized persons need not have any siddhis.
> Supernatural powers have been associated with self-realization. However
NO! not always.
> there never seems to have been any connection between relative knowledge
> ( especially of mathematics and science ) and the absolute knowledge of
> Brahman.
There is none. After all Brahman is beyond the mind, whereas mere display of
powers etc is still within the realm of the mind.
Books to consult:
1. Talks with Ramana Maharishi
2. Day by day with Bhagavan.
Ramakrishnan.
--
Sitting quietly doing nothing, spring comes and the grass grows by itself.
http://yake.ecn.purdue.edu/~rbalasub/
