RE: The Web of Words- Shabda Jaalam !(... And Vivekacadumani)

[Guest guest]

>> Thank you Peter For quoting verse 62 recently . Just a gentle

reminder once more to all of us not to get caught in this web of

words . <<<

 

Namaste Dhyanasaraswati-ji, (and to Dennis-ji)

 

Its kind of you to mention my post - it was v162, by the way. I must

confess to feeling hesitant to say more on this 'thread/web of words', as I

felt Dennis's reply to the neo-vedantin did not quite do justice to the

passage originally quoted in Vivekacudamani* and I did not wish to be

contentious

 

*(By the way, sorry, for not knowing the correct format for accented letters

in transliterated words.)

 

The original passage was:

 

v 59:

"The study of the scriptures is useless so long as the highest Truth is

unknown,

and it is equally useless when the highest Truth has already been known."

 

For those of us who love the scriptures, and I count myself a lover of the

Upanishads and Advaita Vedanta, this statement is quite a challenge, and one

that perhaps needs to be held in the heart and not explained away too

quickly by the mind.

 

Dennis, you argue that verse v59 is quoted out of context and that v61

clarifies the matter. I have put verses 60 and 61 below:

 

v60:

"The scriptures consisting of many words are a dense forest

which merely causes the mind to ramble.

Hence men of wisdom should earnestly

set about knowing the true nature of the Self."

 

v61:

"For one who has been smitten by the serpent of ignorance,

the only remedy is the knowledge of Brahman.

of what avail are the Vedas and (other) scriptures,

Mantras and medicines to such a one?"

 

Contrary to Dennis's interpretation - if I have understood you correctly,

Dennis - these two verses appear to amplify what was said in verse 59. It

is direct knowledge of the Self, of Brahman, (not 'knowledge' of the

scriptures) that truly removes ignorance and is Liberation.

 

It is true, as Dennis points out, that a lot later in the verses we find.

 

v281:

"Realizing thyself as the Self of all by means of scripture, reasoning, and

thy own realization,

do away with thy superimposition...."

 

I believe this is the only time throughout the whole work the scriptures are

mentioned in this way, with regard to the devotee. In order that we also do

not quote from this work "out of context", as Dennis rightly cautions the

neo-advaitin, this verse would need to be viewed alongside the many other

statements which express the same clear warnings as in verses 59-61 and 162,

about the study of scripture and lack of "realization". For example:

 

V6:

"Let people quote scriptures and sacrifice to the gods....

but there is no liberation without the realization of one's identify with

Atman,

no, not even in a lifetime of a hundred Brahmas put together!"

 

That IS a very long time!!

 

And in verses 270 - 272 we find the passion for too much study of scriptures

described "by the wise" as one of "those three desires" that are like

"strong iron fetters to shackle one's feet"

 

"He who is free from them [the three desires] truly attains to liberation."

(v272)

 

I am using Swami Madhavananda's translation. H.H. Sri Chandrasekhara

Bharati's presents these verses in a similar vein:

 

"Relinquishing the habit of following the world,

of pandering to the body

and of sticking to scripture,

accomplish the destruction of superimposition

which characterises you.

 

"True wisdom never arises to a person who

acts in consonance with what people of the world will say

or to a person who is concerned about his knowledge of the sastras

or who is subject to delusion about his body.

 

"Those who have attained knowledge of Brahman say

that those who wish to obtain release from the prison of samsara,

these three strong vasanas are iron fetters binding their legs.

He who is freed from them attains liberation."

 

Sri Ramana's statement in one of his dialogues also affirms what is found in

the last verse, just above, along with the distinction between knowledge of

the scriptures and the Knowledge / Truth which is Realisation.

 

"A visitor: Can one realise the Truth by learning the scriptures and study

of books?

 

Maharshi.: No. So long as predispositions remain latent in the mind,

realisation cannot be achieved. Sastra learning is itself a vasana.

Realisation is only in samadhi." (Talk 230)

 

So, I find all the above refreshingly challenging. The head wants to

explain it away as not quite meaning what it appears to mean. The 'heart'

says, live with the paradox.

 

Warm regards,

 

Peter

[Guest guest]

advaitin, "Peter" <not_2 wrote:

>

>

>

> >> Thank you Peter For quoting verse 62 recently . Just a gentle

> reminder once more to all of us not to get caught in this web of

> words . <<<

>

> Namaste Dhyanasaraswati-ji, (and to Dennis-ji)

>

> Its kind of you to mention my post - it was v162, by the way. I

 

Namaste All,

 

Yes of late this site has become somewhat of a talking shop.

 

My own personal attitude to too many words is; 'It is not necessary to

understand the molecular structure of water to step out of the

swimming pool.......just step out 'Who am I?'........ONS..Tony.

[Guest guest]

advaitin, "Peter" <not_2 wrote:

>

>> "A visitor: Can one realise the Truth by learning the scriptures

and study

> of books?

>

> Maharshi.: No. So long as predispositions remain latent in the

mind,

> realisation cannot be achieved. Sastra learning is itself a vasana.

> Realisation is only in samadhi." (Talk 230)

>

> So, I find all the above refreshingly challenging. The head wants

to

> explain it away as not quite meaning what it appears to mean.

The 'heart'

> says, live with the paradox.

>

> Warm regards,

>

> Peter

>

Namaste Sadhakas,

 

It is nice to see the above post from Peter ji. The above quote from

Bhagavan Ramana's talks could perhaps give an impression to a reader

that since shastra learning is said to be in itself a vasana, it is

to be shunned. It would be beneficial to deliberate on this

subject.

 

A wonderful work for sadhana, the 'Jivanmukti viveka' of Sri

Vidyaranya classifies vasanas into two: (i)the ones that are

detrimental to spiritual progress and attainment of Realization and

(2) those that are conducive to that end. While the former has to be

given up with effort, the latter has to be cultivated with effort.

 

Regarding the study of the shastras, scriptures, that they are needed

is indisputable. Even from the famous picture of Bhagavatpada

Shankara with the four disciples, we see that the Guru was expounding

the scriptures to them. In one hand of Saraswati we see the books.

The Great Guru Sri Dakshinamurti is also depicted as holding the book

in one of his hands. The traditional way of teaching of Vedanta is

through books. The Acharya himself has penned so many commentaries

We have the 'Complete works of Bhgavan Ramana Maharishi'. Thus, there

is no doubt that the study of scriptures has to be resorted to. But

when does the study of scriptures become a 'vasana', a latent

impression that becomes detrimental for one's progress? This

question is discussed with examples by Sri Vidyaranya in

the 'Jivanmukti viveka'. While all the three vasanas mentioned in

the Vivekachudamani verse quoted above by Peter ji are discussed

therein, let us consider just this one concerned with study of

scriptures:

 

The latent tendency pertaining to learning (Shaastra vasana) is of

three kinds:

Addiction to study, addiction to many subjects, and addiction to the

observance of injunctions laid down in religious books.

 

The first of this vice is seen in Bharadwaja, who though he had

applied himself to study of the Vedas in three successive lives,

began, at the instance of Indra, to study the remainder of Vedic

lore, even in the fourth. As this kind of study is not within the

range of possibility, it is set down among impure vasanas. Indra, of

course, cured Bharadvaja of this vice by explaining to him the

impossibility of such study and initiated him into the mysteries of

the conditioned (Saguna) Brahman, with a view to making him achieve a

higher end than what could be attained by such study. All this has

been set forth in the Taittiriya Brahmana.

 

Addiction to many subjects of study is similarly of the nature of

impure vasana, inasmuch as it is not the highest aim of life, as is

seen in the Kaavasheya gita. A sage, by name Durvasas, came with a

cart-load of shaastra books to pay his respect to god Mahadeva. In

the learned assembly of that god, when Narada poked a joke at him, by

comparing him to the ass carrying a load on his back ('As the ass

carrying a load of sandalwood is conscious only of the burden, not of

the fragrant wood, so, indeed, does he carry them about like a mere

burden, who, having studied the shastras, knows not their real import

and essence' – Uddhava gita), he was fired with such anger as led him

to throw away all his books in the salt ocean and was thereafter

initiated by the god Mahadeva into the mystery of Self-knowledge; for

Self-Knowledge never comes from study of books alone to him who has

not developed the faculty of introspection, nor obtained the good

grace of a Guru. The sruti, too, has it : 'This Self is not

realizable by study, nay, not even by intelligence, nor by much

learning' (Katha Upanishad 1.2.23). Elsewhere too it has been said:

'What is the good of vainly chewing the dirty rag of talk about many

shastras? Wisemen must, by all means, try to catch a glimpse of the

Light within. Though one might have studied all the four Vedas and

all the Dharma shastras in the world many times over, one knows not

the true essence of Brahman, even like the ladle that knows not the

flavour of the food it helps to serve' (Mukti Upanishad 2.63, 65)

 

Narada, though well-versed in all the sixty-four subjects of

education, was still ignorant of the Self; feeling remorse, he

resorted to Sanatkumara as his teacher. This has been described in

the Chandogya Upanishad.

 

(The third type, addiction to the observance of religious

injunctions, being not very relevant to this discussion, is not

quoted).

 

In conclusion, the Jivanmukti viveka says, inasmuch as shastra vasana

is the cause of vanity, it is impure. It is mentioned in the sixth

chapter of the Chandogya, that Shvetaketu, after having mastered all

the Vedas in a short time, was so much puffed up as not to behave

modestly even towards his father. So also the Kausitakibrahmana and

the Brihadaranyakopanishad speak of Balaki, who vain with his

knowledge of a few forms of devotion (upasana), went round many

countries, beginning with Ushinara, everywhere asserting his

omniscience and dealing insolently even with the best of Brahmanas

and lastly had the impudence to offer to instruct Ajatashatru, the

crest-jewel of all Knowers of Brahman, at Kashi. (unquote)

 

>From the foregoing, we draw these lessons:

1. The study of scriptures is indispensable for proper sadhana;

it should never be neglected.

2. A sadhaka should constantly verify through introspection

whether he is serious about the spiritual pursuit, and engages in

true inner quest of the Truth and has sought the Grace of a Realized

Guru.

3. Constant touch with the scriptural works, even if it is

confined to just one or two, like the Bhagavad gita, the

Vivekachudamani, The Mandukya Upanishad with the Karikas and the

Bhashya, is essential. The greatest advantage is (a) this regular

study will keep us in tune with the Truth, so subtle It is and (b) In

these works, even in the small portion that we take up for study on

a particular day, there will be exposure of some or the other aspect

of the four-fold qualifications like viveka, discipline, desire for

liberation, etc. This will keep up the tempo of the sadhana.

Company with books could be a great substitute to company with the

wise when the latter is not always available.

With these guidelines intact, the question of study of shastras need

not be a paradox. One will be the best judge as to where the line

should be drawn. Even great realized sages have been seen to be

spending a lot of time with books. Sri Chandrashekhara Bharati

Swamiji was engaged in the study of the Vivekachudamani regularly.

 

With Pranams to all,

subbu

[Guest guest]

Dear Peter :

 

peter writes :

 

(The head wants to explain it away as not quite meaning what it

appears to mean. The 'heart' says, live with the paradox.)

 

you have won my heart with this excellent post .i am now head over

heels in love with this text 'vivekachudamani' all over again! ( my

heart is in the right place ! )

 

Thank you also for issueing a clarification to Dennis ji's post - i

am sure he will appreciate your input as he was also looking for

further expanations to that verse on the usefulness or non usefulness

of scriptural study in the pursuit of Sadhnaa .

 

Meanwhile , i would like to congratulate Subbuji for his brilliant

response to your post. i am hoping sri Dennisji would also read

subbuji's last para wherin subbuji clearly EMPHASISES THE

importance of scriptural study .

 

The very first VERSE of Atma bodha says

 

Atma Bodha Verse 01 :

 

tapObhih kshiNapApAnAm SAntAnAm vItarAgiNAm |

mumukshuNAm ApekshyOyam AtmabOdhO vidhIyate ||

 

Translation:

 

For those who have cleansed their sins by austerities, for those who

are calm ( or attained calmness ), for those who are not bound to

cravings of the body, and for those who seek liberation, to such

worthy people, I (ShrI Shankara) compose this teaching on the Self.

 

YES ! BEFORE UNDERTAKING THE STUDY OF Advaita Vedanta , we need to

cultivate 'chitta' shuddhi.

 

vishhay'aashaa-mahaa-paashaadyo vimuktaH su-dus-tyajaat

sa eva kalpate muktyai n'aanyaH shhaT-shaastra-vedy api .. 78

 

Only he who is free from the terrible hankering after the senses

which is so hard to overcome is fit for liberation, and no-one else,

not even if he is an expert in the six branches of scripture.

 

deh'endriy'aadaav asati bhramoditaaM

vidvaan ahaM taaM na jahaati yaavat

taavan na tasy'aasti vimukti-vaartaa'py

astv eshha ved'aanta-nay'aanta-darshii .. 162

 

While the scholar does not overcome his sense of I am this in the

body and its faculties, there is no liberation for him, however much

he may be learned in religion and philosophy. 162

 

peterji, your web site is wonderful and i do enjoy taking a look at

it now and then specially the section on Srimad Bhagvat gita! Keep up

the good work.

 

This STORY is for sri Lakshmiji -

 

There is an old story, which demonstrates the power of the Guru's

silence. Tattvaraya composed a Bharani, a kind of poetic composition

in Tamil, in honour of his Guru Swarupananda, and convened an

assembly of learned Pandits (pundits) to hear the work and assess its

value. The Pandits raised the objection that a Bharani was only

composed in honour of great heroes capable of killing a thousand

elephants in battle and that it was not in order to compose such a

work in honour of an ascetic.

 

Thereupon the author said, "Let us all go to my Guru and we shall

have this matter settled there."

 

They went to the Guru and, after they had all taken their seats, the

author told his Guru the purpose of their visit. The Guru sat silent

and all the others also remained in mouna (silence). The whole day

passed, the night came, and some more days and nights, and yet all

sat there silently, no thought at all occurring to any of them and

nobody thinking or asking why they had come there. After three or

four days like this, the Guru moved his mind a bit, and the people

assembled immediately regained their thought activity. They then

declared, `Conquering a thousand elephants is nothing beside this

Guru's power to conquer the rutting elephants of all our egos put

together. So certainly he deserves the Bharani in his honour!

 

(from Sri Ramana's talks)

 

Btw, Silence is not absence of speech ! any comments ?

 

 

love and regards

[Guest guest]

Namaste:

 

The question "Does silence imply absence of speech?" requires very

careful evaluation within the context of Vedanta. Vedanta recognizes

the importance of silence, and silence is possible only when we

control our senses. Only in silence that the ego can listen and hear

the `word' of the Divine that resides within. The voice of the

Divine is soundless, formless and wordless and consequently it can be

recognized only in Absolute Silence. Interestingly, all sound comes

out of soundless and the presence of sound reveals the presence of

mAyA. The exact reference point for silence is the location of the

Spiritual Eye (Siva's third eye). This spiritual vision is possible

only by silencing all sensual perceptions!

 

In verse 58 of chapter 2, Bhagawan explains that the perfect yogi

(Stithaprajna) withdraws his/her senses from sense-objects using an

analogy:

 

yada samharate cayam kurmo 'nganiva sarvasah

indriyanindriyarthebhyas tasya prajna pratisthita

 

When, like the tortoise which withdraws its limbs on all sides, he

withdraws his senses from the sense-objects, then his wisdom becomes

steady.. Bhagavan Krishna reminds us that "steady and discriminating

wisdom" imply that we have to act instantaneously. What does the

tortoise do when it sees an external interference to its path of

movement? It moves quickly inside its protective shell! The perfect

sage also acts like the tortoise and withdraws the

senses from the objects of pleasure! Gita contains plenty of hidden

treasures such as this example of the tortoise. Animals in general

always look for a shelter outside rather than inside. During crisis

times, monkeys climb over the top of trees and rats and rabbits jump

and run toward holes and gaps. A tortoise on the other hand

tucks "in" instead of running. Bhagavan implicitly reminds us that

external objects are obstructions to the spiritual path. Spiritual

seekers should take the shelter inside rather than outside!

 

The famous Panchatantra story describes the running race between a

tortoise and a rabbit. Tortoises are known to be slow but study where

as rabbits are considered fast and volatile. According to the story,

the slow and steady tortoise was able to win the race by not

diverting its attention. The rabbit on the other hand thought it will

win the race easily and took a nap but overslept and lost the race!

The rabbit in this story represents the material life style whereas

tortoise projects the spiritual life style. Material life style can

yield will ultimately ends in failure. The spiritual life style

though in appearance slow and boring will bring the eventual success.

When tortoise tucks inside the

shell, it shuts up all external contacts and hence protected! The

spiritual seekers can learn a lot from the tortoise to turn their

attention inside and withdraw external sensory perceptions. (Few

weeks back, Sri Sunder has provided the glimpse of the Tortoise in

the list's page along with the associated verse).

 

In Gita chapter 5, verse 13, Lord Krishna explains why spiritual

seekers should divert their focus from the nine-gates of hell (these

nine gates consist of two eyes, two ears, two nostrils, one mouth,

one genital, and one anus). The self-controlled Yogi rests happily in

God by mentally relegating all actions to the city of nine gates.

 

In Uttra Gita Chapter 1, Verse 53, the reference to the nine gates

appears again. From the nine openings (portals) of the body, the

waters of knowledge always pass out; consequently one cannot know the

Brahman unless he/she becomes as pure as the Brahman. In other word,

the powers of mind should be concentrated within, and not allowed to

dwell upon external objects through the nine gates of openings.

 

In conclusion, silence should include absence of speech (words). If

at all we have to speak, we should speak the Truth!.

 

Sathyam Bruyath (speak the Truth)

Priyam Bruyath (speak sweetly and courteously)

Na Bruyath Sathyamapriyam (never utter the truth unpleasantly)

 

With my warmest regards,

 

Harih Om!

 

Ram Chandran

[Guest guest]

Dear subbu-ji,

 

Thank you for replying to my post. I enjoy your messages to the list and

often save a number of them for further reading. Just a reminder - I write

as someone who is a lover of the Upanishads and scriptures/commentaries from

Advaita Vedanta perspective. If I did not reflect on these myself I would

not be in a position to comment on Dennis-ji's question on vivekacudamani,

nor draw upon the teachings of Sri Ramana Maharshi, which are particularly

dear to my heart.

 

My comments in my earlier post were really confined to vivekacudamani and

the passage raised as a query by Dennis-ji. While I agree with him that he

stated the traditional view with regards the value of scriptural study,

reflection and meditation, I felt the verses he used did not actually

support the interpretation made. This left the original verse 59, quoted by

the 'neo-vedantin', still to be addressed. I also felt that while you

picked up on the quote from Sri Ramana at the very end of my mail, you also

did not address this original passage in your reply. Namely:

 

"The study of scriptures is useless so long as the highest Truth is unknown,

 

and it is equally useless when the highest Truth has already been known."

 

I enjoyed your quotes from Vidyarana's Jivanmukti Viveka in relation to the

study of scriptures and vasanas. However I felt your conclusions / "lessons

drawn" were not really supported by those passages nor even by your own

comments in the first part of your mail.

 

You write:

---------------------------

>From the foregoing, we draw these lessons:

1. The study of scriptures is indispensable for proper sadhana; it should

never be neglected.

2. A sadhaka should constantly verify through introspection whether he is

serious about the spiritual pursuit, and engages in true inner quest of the

Truth and has sought the Grace of a Realized Guru.

3. Constant touch with the scriptural works, even if it is confined to just

one or two, like the Bhagavad gita, the Vivekachudamani, The Mandukya

Upanishad with the Karikas and the Bhashya, is essential.

---------------------------

 

If I may be allowed to say....

 

Number 1. is simply a repeat of the assertion you made earlier, namely,

"Regarding the study of the shastras, scriptures, that they are needed is

indisputable." With all respect to you, while you may be entirely correct,

you have not demonstrated earlier that such a study is "indispensable" or

that "it should never be neglected".

 

Number 2. In essence, this is also my own view. But again, there is nothing

in your "foregoing" that obviously supports this statement.

 

Number 3. I would agree, it is highly valuable, but is it "essential"?

Either way, this is not supported by what you have said in your "foregoing".

 

I'm not sure that the passages you quote from Jivanmuktiviveka confirm your

conclusions with regards to the scriptures.

 

Vidyaranya does distinguish between efforts (and therefore vasanas) that are

detrimental and those that are conducive to achieving Liberation. As you

will know, this is where he differs from Sankara, in some respects, by

advocating various kinds of effort such as yogic practices as a *means* for

Liberation, while Sankara says they are only preparations - Knowledge alone

brings Realization.

 

Would it be correct to say that in the particular section from which you

draw your quotes that Vidyaranya is making a more fundamental distinction

with regards the vasanas? In other words, he distinguishes not simply

between those which are useful or not so useful, bring merit or demerit, but

more fundamentally, he distinguishes between pure and impure vasanas. The

pure vasana he describes as being beyond merit and demerit.

 

He states:

 

"The pure vasana is that which has known that which is to be known."

 

Then he goes on to explain what he means by this by quoting the Bhagavad

Gita (BG 13.12-17):

 

"I will describe that which is to be known, and by knowing which one attains

to immortality. It is the beginningless supreme Brahman and who is said to

be neither existent nor non existent . . . . He is the light of lights and

is said to be beyond darkness; knowledge, the object of knowledge and Goal

of knowledge - He is dwelling in the hearts of all.'

 

Later, Vidyraranya clarifies that what he means by the pure vasana is direct

knowledge of Brahman while in the body.

 

"The functioning of the senses along with continuing awareness of Reality is

called pure vasana; and this pure vasana is just suitable for the

maintenance of life and body. The pure vasana is not capable of producing

demoniac endowments such as hypocrisy, insolence, and the like, nor

religious merit and demerit which lead to rebirth...."

 

If direct realization of Brahman while in the body is alone the pure vasana.

What then are the impure vasanas which have to be destroyed? Vidyaranya

continues:

 

"Impure vasana is of three kinds

- desire for name and fame,

- desire for learning

- desire for the body."

 

Subbu-ji, I believe all the passages you quoted about various great

personages having to give up the study of the scriptures follow on from

here. Thus, as said, for Vidyranya, it is *not* whether those vasanas

(including the desire to learn) are good or bad, or produce merit or

demerit. Both those kinds are impure and simply fall short of the pure

vasana, because desire of any kind, even for learning and Liberation can

only occur to a jiva who is identified with the body, who is caught in the

delusion of duality.

 

Vidyaranya continues:

 

"..the attachment to the study of many scriptures is an impure desire (for

learning) since the final aim of life cannot be attained by this."

 

.... and quoting the scriptures himself:

 

"Even after studying the four Vedas and all the Dharmasastras many times one

may not know the essence of Brahman, just like a ladle has no knowledge of

the taste of soup." (Muktiopanisad 2.65)

 

"No purpose is served by the useless repetition of the collected texts of

many scriptures . . . Those who have learned about the inner Light should

attempt to realize it." (Muktiopanisad 2.63)

 

Vidyaranya also quotes the Mundaka Upanishad:

 

"This Self, cannot be attained by instruction, nor by intellectual power,

nor even through much hearing." (Mund. 3.23)

 

Swami Gambhirananda's translation put's a slightly different emphasis on

this verse:

 

"The Self is not attained through study, nor through the intellect, nor

through much hearing. The very Self which this one (i.e the aspirant) seeks

is attainable through that fact of seeking; this Self of his reveals Its own

nature."

 

(This reminds one of Sri Ramana's emphasis on Self-Inquiry once one has

learned from the scriptures or the Guru that our real nature is the Self.)

 

Sankara's commentary to the verse is given "... this Self, which has been

explained and whose attainment is the highest human goal...is not

attained...through study, of Vedas and scriptures extensively.

Similarly...nor through intelligence, the power of comprehension of the

purport of texts; nor through many things heard, that is to say, not even

through much hearing (of scriptures)."

 

....which echoes strongly with those verses mentioned earlier in

Vivekacudamani, and in particular with the passage Dennis asks about.

 

Your views and Dennis-ji's would be most welcome. I am away for a few days,

from Friday, so if you reply (and I am not saying you should) there may be a

delay at my end.

 

(For those who wish to find the passages, all quotes from Vidyaranya are

from "Jivanmukti Viveka of Swami Vidyaranya" translated by Swami

Moksadananda (1996), Advaita Ashrama, Calcutta. Chapter Two: On the

Effacement of the Latent Impressions, pp 115 - 122)

 

With warm regards,

 

Peter

 

 

 

________________________________

Previous mail from Subu-ji.

<snip>

Namaste Sadhakas,

 

It is nice to see the above post from Peter ji. The above quote from

Bhagavan Ramana's talks could perhaps give an impression to a reader

that since shastra learning is said to be in itself a vasana, it is

to be shunned. It would be beneficial to deliberate on this

subject.

 

A wonderful work for sadhana, the 'Jivanmukti viveka' of Sri

Vidyaranya classifies vasanas into two: (i)the ones that are

detrimental to spiritual progress and attainment of Realization and

(2) those that are conducive to that end. While the former has to be

given up with effort, the latter has to be cultivated with effort.

 

Regarding the study of the shastras, scriptures, that they are needed

is indisputable. Even from the famous picture of Bhagavatpada

Shankara with the four disciples, we see that the Guru was expounding

the scriptures to them. In one hand of Saraswati we see the books.

The Great Guru Sri Dakshinamurti is also depicted as holding the book

in one of his hands. The traditional way of teaching of Vedanta is

through books. The Acharya himself has penned so many commentaries

We have the 'Complete works of Bhgavan Ramana Maharishi'. Thus, there

is no doubt that the study of scriptures has to be resorted to. But

when does the study of scriptures become a 'vasana', a latent

impression that becomes detrimental for one's progress? This

question is discussed with examples by Sri Vidyaranya in

the 'Jivanmukti viveka'. While all the three vasanas mentioned in

the Vivekachudamani verse quoted above by Peter ji are discussed

therein, let us consider just this one concerned with study of

scriptures:

 

The latent tendency pertaining to learning (Shaastra vasana) is of

three kinds:

Addiction to study, addiction to many subjects, and addiction to the

observance of injunctions laid down in religious books.

 

The first of this vice is seen in Bharadwaja, who though he had

applied himself to study of the Vedas in three successive lives,

began, at the instance of Indra, to study the remainder of Vedic

lore, even in the fourth. As this kind of study is not within the

range of possibility, it is set down among impure vasanas. Indra, of

course, cured Bharadvaja of this vice by explaining to him the

impossibility of such study and initiated him into the mysteries of

the conditioned (Saguna) Brahman, with a view to making him achieve a

higher end than what could be attained by such study. All this has

been set forth in the Taittiriya Brahmana.

 

Addiction to many subjects of study is similarly of the nature of

impure vasana, inasmuch as it is not the highest aim of life, as is

seen in the Kaavasheya gita. A sage, by name Durvasas, came with a

cart-load of shaastra books to pay his respect to god Mahadeva. In

the learned assembly of that god, when Narada poked a joke at him, by

comparing him to the ass carrying a load on his back ('As the ass

carrying a load of sandalwood is conscious only of the burden, not of

the fragrant wood, so, indeed, does he carry them about like a mere

burden, who, having studied the shastras, knows not their real import

and essence' - Uddhava gita), he was fired with such anger as led him

to throw away all his books in the salt ocean and was thereafter

initiated by the god Mahadeva into the mystery of Self-knowledge; for

Self-Knowledge never comes from study of books alone to him who has

not developed the faculty of introspection, nor obtained the good

grace of a Guru. The sruti, too, has it : 'This Self is not

realizable by study, nay, not even by intelligence, nor by much

learning' (Katha Upanishad 1.2.23). Elsewhere too it has been said:

'What is the good of vainly chewing the dirty rag of talk about many

shastras? Wisemen must, by all means, try to catch a glimpse of the

Light within. Though one might have studied all the four Vedas and

all the Dharma shastras in the world many times over, one knows not

the true essence of Brahman, even like the ladle that knows not the

flavour of the food it helps to serve' (Mukti Upanishad 2.63, 65)

 

Narada, though well-versed in all the sixty-four subjects of

education, was still ignorant of the Self; feeling remorse, he

resorted to Sanatkumara as his teacher. This has been described in

the Chandogya Upanishad.

 

(The third type, addiction to the observance of religious

injunctions, being not very relevant to this discussion, is not

quoted).

 

In conclusion, the Jivanmukti viveka says, inasmuch as shastra vasana

is the cause of vanity, it is impure. It is mentioned in the sixth

chapter of the Chandogya, that Shvetaketu, after having mastered all

the Vedas in a short time, was so much puffed up as not to behave

modestly even towards his father. So also the Kausitakibrahmana and

the Brihadaranyakopanishad speak of Balaki, who vain with his

knowledge of a few forms of devotion (upasana), went round many

countries, beginning with Ushinara, everywhere asserting his

omniscience and dealing insolently even with the best of Brahmanas

and lastly had the impudence to offer to instruct Ajatashatru, the

crest-jewel of all Knowers of Brahman, at Kashi. (unquote)

 

>From the foregoing, we draw these lessons:

1. The study of scriptures is indispensable for proper sadhana;

it should never be neglected.

2. A sadhaka should constantly verify through introspection

whether he is serious about the spiritual pursuit, and engages in

true inner quest of the Truth and has sought the Grace of a Realized

Guru.

3. Constant touch with the scriptural works, even if it is

confined to just one or two, like the Bhagavad gita, the

Vivekachudamani, The Mandukya Upanishad with the Karikas and the

Bhashya, is essential. The greatest advantage is (a) this regular

study will keep us in tune with the Truth, so subtle It is and (b) In

these works, even in the small portion that we take up for study on

a particular day, there will be exposure of some or the other aspect

of the four-fold qualifications like viveka, discipline, desire for

liberation, etc. This will keep up the tempo of the sadhana.

Company with books could be a great substitute to company with the

wise when the latter is not always available.

With these guidelines intact, the question of study of shastras need

not be a paradox. One will be the best judge as to where the line

should be drawn. Even great realized sages have been seen to be

spending a lot of time with books. Sri Chandrashekhara Bharati

Swamiji was engaged in the study of the Vivekachudamani regularly.

 

With Pranams to all,

subbu

[Guest guest]

Namaste Peter-ji,

 

Many thanks for your input here. I agree with most of what you say. You say,

in particular, though:

 

"Contrary to Dennis's interpretation - if I have understood you correctly,

Dennis - these two verses appear to amplify what was said in verse 59. It is

direct knowledge of the Self, of Brahman, (not 'knowledge' of the

scriptures) that truly removes ignorance and is Liberation."

 

I have a problem with the concept of 'knowing the Self'. When we talk about

'knowing' something, it is invariably (outside of Advaita circles!)

referring to us, as separate body-minds, objectively knowing some thing or

fact etc. In this common usage of the verb 'to know', it is not possible for

us to know the Self or for the Self to be known. This is because it is only

by virtue of the Self, working through the mind, that we can know anything.

The sort of metaphor which is useful here is the one of the battery in the

torch. It is only by virtue of the battery that the torch is able to

illuminate anything but you cannot see the battery with it.

 

This usual sense of the word also cannot apply to the knowing of the Self by

the Self, since it doesn't have a mind with which to conduct any knowing. To

stretch the metaphor, the battery on its own cannot illuminate anything.

 

It is in this sense of illuminating things, however, that the scriptures

talk about the self 'knowing'. In fact, the phrase that is often used is

that the Self is 'self-effulgent'. The Self is its own light and there is no

other light that can illuminate it (i.e. nothing else can know it). In

particular, there is no process of 'knowledge' involved in self-awareness.

Prior to realisation, the (apparent) world is perceived, thoughts conceived

etc. by virtue of the 'light' of Consciousness. Upon realisation, when the

body and mind are transcended, there are no longer any 'objects' to be

illuminated (since all is now 'known' to be Brahman) so that Consciousness

now effectively illuminates itself. We 'become' Consciousness and there is

now nothing to be known and no need for a mind through which to know.

 

Maha Yoga, one of the best books about the teaching of Ramana Maharshi, has

this to say on the subject:

 

"The Sage is often loosely described as 'one that knows the Self'. But this

is not intended to be taken in a literal sense. It is a tentative

description, intended for those that believe ignorance to be something that

exists; they are told that this ignorance is to be got rid of by winning

'Knowledge of the Self'. There are two misconceptions in this. One is that

the Self is an object of knowledge. The other is that the Self is unknown,

and needs to be known. The Self being the sole Reality, He cannot become an

object of knowledge. Also being the Self, He is never unknown. The ancient

lore tells us that He is neither known nor unknown, and the Sage confirms

it.

 

"How can this be? The Self is the pure 'I AM', the only thing that is

self-manifest; by Its light all the world is lighted up. But It seems to be

unknown, and to need to be known, because It is obscured by the world and

the ego. What is needed is to remove these. The Sage explains this by the

analogy of a room that is encumbered with unwanted lumber. If space be

wanted, all that is needful is to clear out the lumber; no space has to be

brought in from outside. So too, the ego-mind and its creations have to be

emptied out, and then the Self alone would remain, shining without

hindrance. What is loosely called 'knowing the Self' is really being

egoless, and the Self. Thus the Sage does not know the Self; he is the

Self."

 

So, to return to your point, I suggest that what actually happens is that

reading the scriptures, listening to the teacher, reflecting and meditating

on what has been heard eventually succeeds in eliminating all of the

ignorant ideas etc. that prevented realisation of the truth. Then, the Self

shines without impediment. This 'condition' is what is referred to as

'knowing the Self'. So, I would maintain that the 'knowledge of Self'

(so-called) comes after the ignorance has been removed, not before.

 

I have discussed the twin topics of 'knowing the Self' and 'the Self

knowing' as points of difference between traditional and neo-Advaitin

teaching in the last chapter of my new book. I have just added these

sections as an extract at my website. The link is

http://www.advaita.org.uk/discourses/backto_truth/knower_known.htm.

 

 

Best wishes,

 

Dennis

[Guest guest]

Dear Peterj,

Pardon me for interruption.

Rather than studying the scriptures again and again, once one has managed to grasp the knowledge unfolded through the Upanishads, with the help of Teaching from a Guru and the Prakarana Grandhas, one should resort to "Tat Chintanam, Tat Kadhanam, Tat Parasparabodhanam" i.e. thinking about That (That Knowledge), Talking about That and mutually understanding clearly about That.

With warm regards,

.

 

 

 

 

R. S. Mani

 

 

Messenger with Voice. Make PC-to-Phone Calls to the US (and 30+ countries) for 2¢/min or less.

[Guest guest]

Namaste Sri Mani:

 

What you have stated is quite valid and useful, but I want to be little

more cautious on repeated reading of the scriptures. I agree that at

some point, one need to move up in the ladder of spiritual sadhana

through seeking the help of a Guru (teacher) to grasp the underlined

wisdom from the scriptures. It is from scriptures that one gets the

spiritual maturity (wisdom) to resort to "Tat Chintanam, Tat Kadhanam,

Tat Parasparabodhanam." Some may gain the wisdom with just one reading

of the scriptures. Others may need to read the scriptures (ideally with

the help of a Guru) several more times to get the wisdom.

 

In conclusion, we should recognize the fact that the scriptures are

just the means and not the end in itself!

 

Warmest regards,

 

Ram Chandran

 

 

advaitin, "R.S.MANI" <r_s_mani wrote:

>

> Dear Peterj,

> Pardon me for interruption.

> Rather than studying the scriptures again and again, once one has

managed to grasp the knowledge unfolded through the Upanishads, with

the help of Teaching from a Guru and the Prakarana Grandhas, one should

resort to "Tat Chintanam, Tat Kadhanam, Tat Parasparabodhanam" i.e.

thinking about That (That Knowledge), Talking about That and mutually

understanding clearly about That.

> With warm regards,

> .

 

>

> R. S. Mani

>

[Guest guest]

Namste Ramachandran-Ji:

 

Could that be the significance of the following IshshopaniShada's

mantras !?

 

andhaM tamaH pravishanti ye.asambhuutimupaasate .

tato bhuuya iva te tamo ya u sambhuutyaa{\m+} rataaH .. 12..

 

Which serves as a warning not to even get attached to the scriptures

either !

 

Any thoughts?

 

Regards,

 

Dr. Yadu

 

advaitin, "Ram Chandran" <ramvchandran

wrote:

>

> Namaste Sri Mani:

>

> What you have stated is quite valid and useful, but I want to be

little

> more cautious on repeated reading of the scriptures. I agree that

at

> some point, one need to move up in the ladder of spiritual sadhana

> through seeking the help of a Guru (teacher) to grasp the

underlined

> wisdom from the scriptures. It is from scriptures that one gets

the

> spiritual maturity (wisdom) to resort to "Tat Chintanam, Tat

Kadhanam,

> Tat Parasparabodhanam." Some may gain the wisdom with just one

reading

> of the scriptures. Others may need to read the scriptures (ideally

with

> the help of a Guru) several more times to get the wisdom.

>

> In conclusion, we should recognize the fact that the scriptures

are

> just the means and not the end in itself!

>

> Warmest regards,

>

> Ram Chandran

>

>

[Guest guest]

advaitin, "Peter" <not_2 wrote:

 

Note to the Readers: This post has become very lengthy, despite my

deleting the portions of Peter ji's post not relevant in this

discussion. Pl. bear with the inconvenience. Thanks, subbu.

RE: Re: The Web of Words- Shabda Jaalam !(... And

Vivekacadumani)

Peter ji wrote:

Dear subbu-ji,

 

This left the original verse 59, quoted by the 'neo-vedantin', still

to be addressed. I also felt that while you picked up on the quote

from Sri Ramana at the very end of my mail, you also

did not address this original passage in your reply. Namely:

"The study of scriptures is useless so long as the highest Truth is

unknown,

and it is equally useless when the highest Truth has already been

known."

 

My reply is contained in (subbu)

[REPLY:

Thank you Peter ji for this wonderful reply. It sets me on the

thinking mode. At the outset, let me tell you frankly that I took

many things for granted. Very recently a discussion, initiated by

Br. Vinayaka ji and by Sudhesh ji had covered some points that could

be of use for this discussion as well. Since they were so fresh, I

did not touch upon them again. In any case, I shall try to respond

to all your points, to the best of my ability.

Basically, in the traditional study of Vedanta, the indisputable

lesson is: The Truth, Atman, has to be realized. For this, hearing,

ratiocinating and intense meditation are the means. This is a

teaching in the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad and I had recently given the

commentary of Shankara too for this. Therein the 'hearing' is said

to be 'from the shastra, scripture, and from the Guru'. He had gone

on to say that the process will yield the desired result only and

only if all the three are carried out in a composite manner, without

the exception of even one of the components.

A quote from a book, a dialogue between an Acharya and His Disciple

were also given by me recently about the need for the study of the

scriptures. Therein, the very need to study the scriptures was

questioned on condition of an aspirant's having absolute faith in the

Guru's teaching. This very exceptional case was replied as a one in

which there is no need to study the scriptures; the faith in the

words of the Guru being so strong.

Again, in the Upanishads itself occurs the statement, 'I ask of you

about the Purusha taught in the Upanishads'. For this ,Shankara

comments: The Purusha who is knowable from the Upanishads alone'.

This I mentioned just to say that the liberating knowledge of the

Supreme Purusha is to be had only by recourse to the Upanishads or

texts based on the Upanishads or a Teacher who knows this.

We have the Mundaka Upanishad statement: Let an aspirant approach a

Guru alone ….who is well-versed in the scriptures and is established

in the Realization of Brahman.' These are all in the scriptures and

one knows about these from the study of the scriptures.

Now, coming to the Vivekachudamani verse,

"The study of scriptures is useless so long as the highest Truth is

unknown,

and it is equally useless when the highest Truth has already been

known."

The context of this verse is: the need to realize the Truth is

imperative. If this is not accomplished, liberation is not

attained. The stress is on the realization. No other achievement in

the world will result in liberation. To emphasize this, the verses

earlier and later show that mere knowledge of the words of the

scriptures will not result in liberation and the realization of what

they teach alone will give freedom. The purport of the particular

verse is this: A person takes up the study of the scriptures,

ideally, to know the highest Truth. If this purpose is not

accomplished, say even after considerable years of study, the effort

has been in vain. And again, after the Truth has been realized and

stabilized sufficiently, the resorting to scriptural study will be of

no use, for its purpose has been accomplished. The next verse is

commented upon by Sri Chandrashekhara Bharati Swamiji thus: Even

though the Truth has to be known by resorting to the upanishadic

scripture through a qualified Acharya, one should not engage in a

clamour, violent pursuit of shastraic study, as such vasana is

detrimental to realizing the Truth. In the subsequent several verses

too, the need for actual realization is stressed by repeatedly

highlighting the uselessness of mere study. The Commentator Acharya

has clinched the issue in his words: 'violent pursuit of shastraic

learning'. It is this that the Jivanmuktiviveka shows through

examples. From these, it would be wrong to conclude that the very

legitimate, scripture-prescribed study of the scriptures is useless

or to doubt its usefulness. Nowhere in the specific verse and the

subsequent verses is it suggested that scriptural study is not

needed.

The Amritabindu Upanishad quotation about the 'throwing away the

chaff after the grain is obtained' example is clear enough. That the

corn is to be resorted to and pounded is given. How long? is the

question. Once the grain is obtained, the pounding has to be

stopped. To continue would be a waste of effort, foolish and could

be detrimental to the grain itself by grinding it to a flour. In the

same way, books (granthas) have to be discarded (that is, resort to

scriptures with a view to knowing is to be suspended ) once the Truth

is known. In this upanishadic statement also, we find that the

resort to scriptures is enjoined implicitly.

The lesson is: Study is essential, but Moderation is the

watchword. ]

Then you have stated:

I enjoyed your quotes from Vidyarana's Jivanmukti Viveka in relation

to the study of scriptures and vasanas. However I felt your

conclusions / "lessons drawn" were not really supported by those

passages nor even by your own comments in the first part of your mail.

 

You write:

---------------------------

>From the foregoing, we draw these lessons:

1. The study of scriptures is indispensable for proper sadhana; it

should never be neglected.

2. A sadhaka should constantly verify through introspection whether

he is serious about the spiritual pursuit, and engages in true inner

quest of the Truth and has sought the Grace of a Realized Guru.

3. Constant touch with the scriptural works, even if it is confined

to just one or two, like the Bhagavad gita, the Vivekachudamani, The

Mandukya Upanishad with the Karikas and the Bhashya, is essential.

---------------------------

 

If I may be allowed to say....

 

Number 1. is simply a repeat of the assertion you made earlier,

namely, "Regarding the study of the shastras, scriptures, that they

are needed is indisputable." With all respect to you, while you may

be entirely correct,you have not demonstrated earlier that such a

study is "indispensable" or that "it should never be neglected".

 

[Response: I had in mind what I had stated in the beginning about

Shankara teaching the disciples, and other depictions of the 'book'.

I had stated in the beginning itself:

…... Even from the famous picture of Bhagavatpada Shankara with the

four disciples, we see that the Guru was expounding the scriptures to

them. In one hand of Saraswati we see the books.

The Great Guru Sri Dakshinamurti is also depicted as holding the book

in one of his hands. The traditional way of teaching of Vedanta is

through books. The Acharya himself has penned so many commentaries

We have the 'Complete works of Bhgavan Ramana Maharishi'.

 

To this let me add: Shankara asked his disciple Sureshwaracharya to

write a metrical commentary to the Brihadaranyaka and Taittiriya

Bhashyams. And he was asked to write the Naishkarmyasiddhi.

Shankara asked Padmapadacharya to write the gloss on the Brahmasutra

bhashya. Why did he do all this? Only because future generations

will study these in their pursuit of Liberating Knowledge. We have

Vyasacharya, who, after codifying and classifying the Vedas, himself

composing the Mahabharata, of which the Bhagavadgita is a part. Lord

Krishna says in the Gita Chapter 15 that 'I am the One to be known

through the entire vedic lore. I am the initiator of the purport of

the Vedanta'. Surely, only because one should study these works, all

these were given to us. Further, there is a definition for

shravanam, hearing: shrotavyaH shruti vaakyebhyaH meaning, hearing

has to be from the shruti sentences. That has been the tradition

from time immemorial for a person taking to Vedantic Self

realization. There is no second opinion about this and that is what

we see the Acharyas doing today. It is possible that those who are

not exposed to this tradition are not aware of the indispensable need

to study the scriptures. I did not give all these details earlier as

I felt that all this is known to everyone.

Again, as I had taken for granted that study is essential, from the

training I had received, and observing in traditional circles, I did

not make a separate attempt to demonstrate the need. In fact, even

while studying the Jivanmukti viveka (this work was expounded in

detail, formally, with an elaborate commentary by Sri Achyuta Rai

Modak, in Sanskrit, spanning close to two years on sundays only),

questions on the need for scriptural study for sadhana did not arise

to me at all. For that was what we were doing under the Acharya.

Further, Vidyaranya himself has penned so many works of vital

importance to sadhana. Would he ever suggest one to not to resort to

study? Everywhere excess is what is warned about.

There is a couple of cases I know of where a Realized Guru directed

the aspirants to a specific well-known scholar to study a specific

scriptural work with a specific commentary. After this was done, no

more study under that scholar was prescribed. At various times, the

Guru specified the particular works, in some cases, only certain

chapters, for study. Here is a case where there was no blanket

direction to attend all the classes conducted by someone covering all

the works he took up to teach. A regulation, depending upon the need

of the aspirant, was exercised.]

 

[You have stated:]

Number 2. In essence, this is also my own view. But again, there is

nothing in your "foregoing" that obviously supports this statement.

 

[My Response: The quotes from the Jivanmukti viveka itself, for

example, "…..initiated by the god Mahadeva into the mystery of Self-

knowledge; for Self-Knowledge never comes from study of books alone

to him who has not developed the faculty of introspection, nor

obtained the good grace of a Guru."

Watch Vidyaranya's word 'alone' above. This implies that scriptural

study is necessary, but it is not sufficient by itself in generating

the liberating knowledge. Everything about spirituality is known only

from the scriptural works. Not everything that is required can be

told by the Guru. One has to resort to study to know the

details.This is the basis for this number 2 lesson.]

 

 

[You say]

Number 3. I would agree, it is highly valuable, but is it "essential"?

Either way, this is not supported by what you have said in

your "foregoing".

 

[Response: Again, I must apologise. I took it for granted, for the

indisputable position of the tradition, the upanishadic tradition

furthered by Shankara and those following Him, is that study is

essential. The rare exception being the one I spoke of earlier. Only

because scriptural study is essential, the Brahma sutras were

composed in order to ascertain the purport of scriptural passages.

This will facilitate the one who takes up serious study of the

Upanishads to know the ultimate meaning of Atman, Brahman, the

various opposing views, the true view of the Upanishads, the proper

sadhana to be adopted and the kind of fruit that will result from the

sadhana. Again, all this is done only with a view that someone will

study them. In fact the very third sutra 'shaastra-yonitvaat'

means ' ……because of Brahman being the source of the scriptures' and

an alternative meaning is ' Brahman is not known from any other

source, since the scriptures are the valid means of Its knowledge.'

If study is not essential, how is one to know? Discussions with

other aspirants also have to have a basis and scripture alone has to

be that basis. So, either through first-hand study or otherwise, the

contents of the scripture have to be known.]

[You state:]

I'm not sure that the passages you quote from Jivanmuktiviveka

confirm your conclusions with regards to the scriptures.

[Response: I think I have explained these.]

 

[ Peter ji, you write]:

Vidyaranya does distinguish between efforts (and therefore vasanas)

that are detrimental and those that are conducive to achieving

Liberation. As you will know, this is where he differs from Sankara,

in some respects, by advocating various kinds of effort such as yogic

practices as a *means* for Liberation, while Sankara says they are

only preparations - Knowledge alone brings Realization.

 

[My response:

There is a very fundamental point here. Let me quote from the JMV

itself, from this very chapter:

About svaanubhavaH (realisation of Brahman) and brahmàtmanà

samsthitiH (firm establishment in Brahman), which characterises

jävanmukti (liberation while living), occurring at one stroke for a

renunciant, it is said in the Vàsanàkshayaprakarana of the Jävanmukti-

Viveka:

 

In the case of the person who has performed meditation to the extent

of realising the prescribed object of meditation [such as a form of

God] and thereafter strives for the knowledge of the Truth, by virtue

of his firm obliteration of mental tendencies and dissolution of the

mind, the renunciation of a knower and jävanmukti occur automatically

on the dawn of the realisation of the Truth. Such indeed is the

person who is pre-eminently fit for enlightenment and considered by

the scripture.

(unquote)

Actually, the pre-eminently fit aspirant has already done what has to

be done in the fronts of obliteration of latent tendencies and

dissolution of mind. He is just ready for the liberating knowledge

and this comes to him quickly, without much effort. Once this

happens, the state of jivanmukti establishes automatically for him;

there being no need for him to do anything further for the

establishment in that state. As seen in the above most unique

statement of Vidyaranya, most people do not do what has to be done a-

priori. In all such cases, what ought to have been done earlier has

now to be done, in case one wishes to experience undeterred

establishment in Brahman along with experience of supreme peace. It

is with this in view Vidyaranya goes to great lengths in this unique

none-of-its-kind work to emphasize these practices. And it is a

fact, I have on the authority of an exceptional Yogi and Jivanmukta

that: By whatever method a person has attained realization of the

Truth, recourse to yoga alone will ensure unimpeded establishment in

Truth'. That is why Vidyaranya has prescribed these. If Shankara

has not elaborately spoken of these (He does so in the Sixth Chapter

Gita commentary and elsewhere in other minor works), it is because He

has the pre-eminent aspirant in mind.

In a paragraph after Vidyaranya quotes the Yoga Vasishtha verse on

two types of aspirants, one who can't take the path of yoga and the

other for whom the discrimination of the self from the rest is

impossible, he goes on to state that in even in the former case, the

realization of the Atman as distinct from the rest happens in a

momentary savikalpa Samadhi.]

 

[Peterji says:]

Would it be correct to say that in the particular section from which

you draw your quotes that Vidyaranya is making a more fundamental

distinction with regards the vasanas? In other words, he

distinguishes not simply between those which are useful or not so

useful, bring merit or demerit, but more fundamentally, he

distinguishes between pure and impure vasanas. The pure vasana he

describes as being beyond merit and demerit.

 

[Response: You are right Perter ji, my intention was to just show the

two types. But you would appreciate that Vidyaranya says even with

regard to the Pure type that it has to be achieved by practice. Once

this is agreed, one starts with impure vasanas and improves on the

way and finally arrives at the Pure state.

Vidyaranya says, in this very chapter,

"Again, this 'life of the lower self' is described in the same

strain till the end of the chapter. The point is that, when the evil

vasanas born of the 'life of the lower self', inherent in one from

birth and running counter to the teachings of sacred texts, are put

out by the good vasanas brought about from the life of the higher

self, accomplished by personal effort and carried on, in accord with

the word of the scripture, there results jivanmukti.'

This was the basis for my mentioning the two types as I had done.

Again, incidentally, we see the words 'mentioned in the

scriptures…'. How is it possible for one to know these unless one

studies the scriptures? ]

 

[As you have said below,] He states:

 

"The pure vasana is that which has known that which is to be known."

 

Then he goes on to explain what he means by this by quoting the

Bhagavad Gita (BG 13.12-17):

If direct realization of Brahman while in the body is alone the pure

vasana.

What then are the impure vasanas which have to be destroyed?

Vidyaranya continues:

"Impure vasana is of three kinds

- desire for name and fame,

- desire for learning

- desire for the body."

Subbu-ji, I believe all the passages you quoted about various great

personages having to give up the study of the scriptures follow on

from here. Thus, as said, for Vidyranya, it is *not* whether those

vasanas (including the desire to learn) are good or bad, or produce

merit or demerit. Both those kinds are impure and simply fall short

of the pure vasana, because desire of any kind, even for learning and

Liberation can only occur to a jiva who is identified with the body,

who is caught in the delusion of duality.

Vidyaranya continues:

"..the attachment to the study of many scriptures is an impure desire

(for learning) since the final aim of life cannot be attained by

this." ... and quoting the scriptures himself:

"Even after studying the four Vedas and all the Dharmasastras many

times one may not know the essence of Brahman, just like a ladle has

no knowledge of the taste of soup." (Muktiopanisad 2.65)

[the problem here is not with the study; it is with not reflecting on

the message]

 

"No purpose is served by the useless repetition of the collected

texts of many scriptures . . . Those who have learned about the inner

Light should attempt to realize it." (Muktiopanisad 2.63)

[Here again, the mistake is not in study or knowing the contents of

the scriptures. The lack of attempt to realize is the problem]

Vidyaranya also quotes the Mundaka Upanishad:

"This Self, cannot be attained by instruction, nor by intellectual

power,nor even through much hearing." (Mund. 3.23)

 

[ Peter ji, please read these Vivekachudamani verses:

16. An intelligent and learned man skilled in arguing in favour of

the Scriptures and in refuting counter-arguments against them – one

who has got the above characteristics is the fit recipient of the

knowledge of the Atman….. and

[medhaavI purusho vidvaan UhA-poha-vichakShaNaH, adhikaari aatma

vidyaayaam…is the verse. ]

10. Let the wise and erudite man, having commenced the practice of

the realisation of the Atman give up all works and try to cut loose

the bonds of birth and death.

The standard commentary by the revered Swamiji may be studied. It

talks about the need to be in the know of the tarka, vyakarana and

mimamsa shastras for an aspirant to be equipped to take up vichara of

the Vedanta scriptures. ]

 

Swami Gambhirananda's translation puts a slightly different emphasis

on this verse:

"The Self is not attained through study, nor through the intellect,

nor through much hearing. The very Self which this one (i.e the

aspirant) seeks is attainable through that fact of seeking; this Self

of his reveals Its own nature."

(This reminds one of Sri Ramana's emphasis on Self-Inquiry once one

has learned from the scriptures or the Guru that our real nature is

the Self.)

Sankara's commentary to the verse is given "... this Self, which has

been explained and whose attainment is the highest human goal...is not

attained...through study, of Vedas and scriptures extensively.

Similarly...nor through intelligence, the power of comprehension of

the purport of texts; nor through many things heard, that is to say,

not even through much hearing (of scriptures)."

....which echoes strongly with those verses mentioned earlier in

Vivekacudamani, and in particular with the passage Dennis asks about.

 

[My response to the above is:

Peter ji, please note that Vidyaranya is not bracketing the

legitimate duty of resorting to the scriptural study with a view to

Realization under the impure vasana. Clearly, as can be seen from

the very examples he gives, in all these cases there is an 'excess',

a clearly 'not advisable' type. Even for a casual reader, this would

be apparent from the examples. The sack of books carried, the

penchant for mastering all the Vedas, etc. is not the sober one. That

is why, seeing the foolishness, the meaninglessness, the

impossibility, involved in these, they are said to be impure

vasanas. This is what is meant by the Vivekachudamani verse on the

three vasanas. The word 'desire to learn' is in this context not the

legitimate setting out to learn the scriptures from a teacher by an

aspirant. This legitimate desire to learn is like the desire to get

liberated. The impurity springs from the showing off, etc. well

demonstrated in the three examples in the JMV. The mandatory study is

nowhere considered to be impure vasana. If study of various works of

scriptures are undertaken to the detriment of true manana and the

crucial nididhyasana, this is what is condemnable. And this is what

is done in these cases. Thus, the perception that mere desire for

learning is impure is not correct. It is against the scriptures

themselves. You did quote from the Vivekachudamani where resort to

scripture, reasoning, etc. is mentioned. Further, the difference is

like this one: the difference between eating to sustain the body and

gluttony.

If you read the dialogue that I quoted from a book 'Exalting

Expositions' recently in a discussion with Sudhesh ji, the question

on the need, utility, the advantage that will not be available if

study is not undertaken, will be clear. Even if one hears from the

Guru about the Self, it is not that it is grasped crystal clear with

the exclusion of all doubts and misconceptions. To overcome these,

resort to scripture is advocated. How many times can one resort to

the Guru to clear all doubts and remove misconceptions, especially in

a non-Gurukula situation?

 

In tradition we have Shankara going to a Gurukula both before Sanyasa

and after that at Guru Govindapada's place. Lord Krishna Himself was

in the Gurukula of Sandipani. They, even though they did not have

the need, being Realized already, conformed to the scriptural

requirement of a seeker resorting to a Guru and studying. This is

solely done with a view to be a model for others, us, to emulate.

 

Let me stop with the concluding message that the message of the

scriptures has to be acquired either through studying the books or

through discussion with the Guru or other aspirants. In the latter

two cases also it amounts to study alone, maybe without resort to the

print media, but perhaps with the audio media. There is a wonderful

verse in Sanskrit which means: 'The ocean of Learning is vast. The

time available for us is short and the obstacles are many. It is

wise to imbibe that which is the essence just as the legendary swan

separates the milk from water.' This is the essence of the shastra

vasana discussion.]

 

Warm regards,

subbu

[Guest guest]

Dear subbu-ji,

 

Apologies for the delay in responding to your mail. I have been away and

finding it hard to catch up with mails - especially the voluminous number in

this group!

 

Thank you for your thorough and very thoughtful reply. It must have taken

some time to write and I wish to thank you also for your generosity of

spirit in doing so.

 

Yes, I was aware of some of the other passages you quoted from the

Upanishads about scriptural study and that v16 of vivekacudmani states "An

intelligent and learned man skilled in arguing in favour of the scriptures

and in refuting counter arguments against them - one who has got the above

characteristics is the fit recipient of the knowledge of the Atman." Also,

though you did not mention it, the beginning portions of JMV also advise

scriptural study, "... by the study of the Vedas the desire for

Self-realization arises..." I simply felt that v59 of vivekacudamani, the

original source for Dennis-ji's query, is an important one that should not

be brushed over too easily by resort to 'out of context' arguments,

especially, as I have seen it used on a number of occasions in

'neo-advaitin' arguments against study and any form of sadhana.

 

Once again, thank you very much for your reply,

 

With warm regards,

 

Peter

 

________________________________

 

advaitin [advaitin] On Behalf

Of subrahmanian_v

07 July 2006 19:16

advaitin

Re: The Web of Words- Shabda Jaalam !(... And

Vivekacadumani)

Note to the Readers: This post has become very lengthy, despite my

deleting the portions of Peter ji's post not relevant in this

discussion. Pl. bear with the inconvenience. Thanks, subbu.

RE: Re: The Web of Words- Shabda Jaalam !(... And

Vivekacadumani)

Peter ji wrote:

Dear subbu-ji,

<snip>

[Guest guest]

Namaste Dennis-ji,

 

Thank you for your reply, and particularly for those passages from Maha Yoga

by Lakshmana Sarma, which I agree with you to be one of the best books on

Sri Ramana Maharshi's teaching. Lakshmana's "Revelation" is also the best

version, in my view, of Sri Ramana's 'Forty Verses on Existence', especially

as he received personal tuition from Sri Ramana as to the meaning of the

verses.

 

You write:

"I have a problem with the concept of 'knowing the Self'. When we talk about

'knowing' something, it is invariably (outside of Advaita circles!)

referring to us, as separate body-minds, objectively knowing some thing or

fact etc. In this common usage of the verb 'to know', it is not possible for

us to know the Self or for the Self to be known."

 

I take your point about the phrase, 'knowing the Self'. As you point out

from Maha Yoga, the true Sage does not know the Self as if it is something

other to be known, but is the Self. Atman is without a second, either to

know or too be known. I simply used it as this is what we find in v60 itself

of vivekacudamani. "The scriptures consisting of many words are a dense

forest which merely causes the mind to ramble. Hence men of wisdom should

earnestly set about knowing the true nature of the Self."

 

Perhaps for sadhaks, 'knowing the true nature of the Self' is about turning

'inward' to realize the source of the 'I', rather than forever seeking

outward in the world mental and in the world physical.

 

Warm regards,

 

Peter

________________________________

 

advaitin [advaitin] On Behalf

Of Dennis Waite

06 July 2006 20:56

advaitin

Re: The Web of Words- Shabda Jaalam !(... And

Vivekacadumani)

 

 

 

Namaste Peter-ji,

 

Many thanks for your input here. I agree with most of what you say. You say,

in particular, though:

<snip>