MS SARAH WELCH HAS EDITED THE AJATIVADA PAGE I STARTED BUT WAS EDITED OUT OF EXISTENCE BY PEOPLE LIKE JOHNSON WHO CANNOT GRASP IT MEANS NO APPEARANCE EVEN AND COULD NOT UNDERSTAND THAT RAMANA WAS A MUKT NOT AN APPEARANCE OF A NON EXISTENT GOD..........KEEP IT UP SARAH.
Ajativada. Vedantic, not Later Buddhistic which is erroneous mostly. It is not the same thing as the Buddhist Anutpada,(joshua jonathan and kim dent-brown, ogress, novalian), which the Buddhist for some reason spuriously present as ajativada..(.However Anutpada, or secondary, could equate with the Buddha's unborn...or Saguna Brahaman, in Vedanta.Joshua Jonathan does not understand Advaita Vedanta he is still insisting that Ajativada means a changeless appearance when in fact it means 'NOTHING EVER HAPPENED AT ALL INCLUDING THE APPEARANCE'. THIS KIND OF IGNORANCE ALLOWED ON WIKIPEDIA EDITORS IS ASTOUNDING....AND DEGRADES THE ENCYCLOPEDIA AS A SOURCE.....
