"Intellectual Understanding"

[Guest guest]

PraNaams to all!!

 

A couple of recent posts liberally use the phrase "Intellectual

Understanding". Also "AParA VidyA" has been equated to "Intellectual

Understanding" and "parA Vidya" was implied thereby as being a form

of Understanding that is beyond the intellect. Usually, the

term "beyond the intellect" generally conjures up images of some

mystical "Experience". This requires some clarification of terms

and also a Vichara into the nature of Self Knowledge, and hence this

post.

 

What is the locus of any understanding? Is it not the intellect? We

only require an adjective to a noun only to qualify it further. Are

there other possible locus for Understanding to take place that

demand the adjective "intellectual" prefixed to "understanding"? Are

there other forms of understanding that are different

from "intellectual understanding"? Is there "dental understanding"

or "cranial understanding" that is different from "spinal

understanding" or "understanding in the intellect"? No.

Understanding, definite knowledge, can only arise in the intellect.

Thus, the intellect is the only possible locus for understanding.

 

Then, the word "intellectual" prefixed to "Understanding"

or "Knowledge" is redundant. Prefixing unnecessary terms can be a

source of great confusion (especially with Self Knowledge).

Prefixing an unnecessary term leads to a downplay of reason where

reason is to be employed because it is "intellectual". Prefixing an

unnecessary term leads even to downplay of a systematic study of

the Shastras because it is "intellectual".

 

Now, we come to aparA VidyA and ParA VidyA. "AparA VidyA" is best

described as "Knowledge of Objects" whereas parA vidyA is

the "Knowledge of the Subject". As we already discussed earlier,

neither of these is or can be "beyond the intellect understanding"

as that phrase itself is an oxymoron. Both are just "Understanding".

The difference is simply with what the Understanding is about.

 

"AparA VidyA" alone without "ParA VidyA" makes a person look at a

fragmented world of plurality, a world in which Jiva, Jagat and

Iswara are all different. A world where the Jiva is caged in a body

and the Jagat is a resource to be exploited and Iswara may or may

not be there in heaven. With just "AParA VidyA" alone, a person

continues to be "knowledgeable" about the world but unfortunately

ignorant about his own Self.

 

"parA VidyA", on the other hand, removes all wrong notions about one

Self that are entertained in beginningless ignorance. "parA VidyA"

also informs the Jiva of the Identity with Iswara. This vision

surely liberates a person once and for all for good. There is

nothing more to be accomplished for such a Jivan Mukta who revels in

his Real Nature.

 

Sometimes, the term "Intellectual Understanding" is hurriedly used

to denote the fact that a person may have "Habitual

Error". "Habitual Error" is an acceptable term to use and that is

what Nidhidyasanam is meant for. NidhidhyAsanam is meant to remove

the habitual error of repeatedly associating oneself with the

body/mind complex once a person has been told and has appreciated

his Real Identity as the Atman. This is much like the case of a

beggar who has become a millionaire overnight but cannot still rid

himself of the deeply ingrained reaction to put forth his begging

bowl when he sees a passer by. This just means that the beggar has

to remove the habitual error of taking himself to be a beggar in the

light of the new knowledge.

 

The process of Sravanam is when the Knowledge or Understanding can

take place in a qualified Sadhaka. At this point, doubts and

habitual error can still exist. Repeated Mananam removes all doubts

and contrary views. The beggar sees again and again that he is a

millionaire and nothing but a millionaire. Nidhidyasanam

subsequently removes the habitual error of identifying with the

body mind complex in the light of doubt free knowledge. The beggar

no longer extends his begging bowl. The intellect is there all the

way.

 

Here is a wonderful article by Swami Paramarthananda-ji in regard to

the role of the Buddhi, the Shastras and the Guru in Self Knowledge:

 

http://www.yogamalika.org/newweb/GuruPurnima1.html

 

Warm Regards,

--Satyan

[Guest guest]

Satyan, thank you so much for raising the intellect on that question.

[Guest guest]

Namaste Satyanji:

 

Your post was quite refreshing and your point is well taken. I am

looking forward to see more from you in the coming weeks, months and

years. I agree with you what you have stated and that we do need to

be more careful in understanding 'buddhi' its role and how we use

our 'buddhi.'

 

Warmest regards,

 

Ram Chandran

 

advaitin, "Satyan Chidambaran" <satyan_c>

wrote:

>

>

> Here is a wonderful article by Swami Paramarthananda-ji in regard

to

> the role of the Buddhi, the Shastras and the Guru in Self Knowledge:

>

> http://www.yogamalika.org/newweb/GuruPurnima1.html

>

> Warm Regards,

> --Satyan