Kanchi Maha-Swamigal's Discourses on Advaita Saadhanaa (KDAS-38)

[Guest guest]

Namaste.

 

For a pdf document of all the 30 posts from 1 to 30, go to

http://www.advaitin.net/Discussion%20Topics/advaita-saadhanaa.pdf

 

For the previous post, see

advaitin/message/32080

 

 

SECTION 21 : SHRADDHAA (Faith/Dedication) (continued)

 

The definition that the Acharya gives to shraddhaa is:

 

shAstrasya guru-vAkyasya satya-buddhyA-vadhAraNA /

sA shraddhA kathitA sadbhiH yayA vastU-palabhyate //

(Verse 25/26 of Vivekachudamani)

 

“The noble ones say: ShraddhA is the conviction arising

through the intellect that shAstras and the words of the

guru are indeed true; by this shraddhA is the Reality

attained”.

 

Ordinarily we take faith or shraddhA to be that which

discards the function of intellect (and takes things on

faith). Here it says the ShAstras and words of the guru are

taken to be true by an analysis of the intellect --

*buddhyavadhAraNA*. There is no contradiction. Because,

analysis or confirmation by the intellect does not mean one

takes shAstras and words of the guru as true only if the

intellect confirms them after an analysis. Then what does

it mean? It is the intellect that has to decide after an

analysis: “I cannot expect to know everything. It is not

possible to offer a judgement all by ourselves. Regarding

matters connected with after-life and with the Self, things

incomprehensible to us, but intuited by the jnAna-dRRishhTi

(intuited wisdom) given by the Lord Himself and by one’s

own experience by the authors of the ShAstras and the Guru

who knows the ShAstras; what they say have to be accepted

by us without further inquiry”. To arrive at this

conclusion by use of one’s intellect is what is called

“buddhy-avadhAraNaM”. It is not that the intellect is used

to decide on the Truths; the intellect decides that there

is no place for intellect here!

 

Mark! This is not what a stupid who has no power of the

intellect accepts anything without question. Such a one

will get cheated. When we said

‘nitya-anitya-vastu-vivekaM’, we did mean the process of

discriminating between the good and the bad and that would

certainly imply the use of the intellect. In order to

discriminate, one has to develop and train one’s intellect

to become sharp. On the other hand when the Shastras and

the Guru are saying something which is not comprehensible

by that intellect, he has to accept that without allowing

the intellect to intervene. It is more difficult not to

allow the intellect to intervene, rather than allow it to

do its function. This is possible only if there is modesty

to the extreme. One has to develop that kind of modesty.

Instead of having a stupid man’s faith, one has to

cultivate an intelligent faith in the words of the Guru and

of the Shastras, without countering them by objections –

this is the shraddhaa that is being talked about.

 

*avadhArana* has two meanings. One is ‘a deep conviction’.

The other is ‘a limitation’. Both the meanings have to be

integrated here. The intellect limits itself by concluding

that this is ‘beyond my own jusrisdiction’ and therefore is

determined to consider Shastras and Guru-words as true. By

shraddhaa one can reach the Truth is what is implied by

*yayA vastu upalabhyate*. ‘She’ (*sA*) is called shraddhaa

– the word is feminine – by which the Absolute Reality

(*vastu*) is obtained (*upalabhyate*).

 

In the Tamil region we use “vAstavaM” and “nijaM” for

something true. The word “nijaM” does not mean that “nijaM”

means ‘what is in its own nature’, or ‘what belongs’.

Probably our usage that gives the meaning ‘true’ to it must

have arisen thus. When we dress up for a particular role

in a drama we play the role, don’t we? That is only a

role, a pose, a disguise. When we are off the disguise, we

become what we are usually. So a disguise or a role

presents only a falsity, whereas when we take off the role

we become our true personality, whatever we are. Since a

disguise means falsity or untruth, its opposite, namely,

the role to which we naturally belong, -- that is our

‘nijam’ – is taken to denote truth. This is how ‘nijam’

must have come to stand for ‘truth’! But let that be.

 

But the meaning of ‘vAstavaM’ as something that is true, is

a correct one. The word has been derived from ‘vastu’. The

nature of ‘vastu’ is ‘vAstavaM’. ‘vastu’ means a ‘thing’

ordinarily; but its most important connotation is ‘that

which truly exists’. Things and objects are not in our

imagination; they actually exist and that is why a thing is

called ‘vastu’. Thus ‘vastu’ means something that truly

exists and so we also use ‘vAstavaM’ the property of

‘vastu’ for ‘truth’.

 

In the defining shloka for ‘shraddhaa’ that we were

discussing, it says, ‘by means of shraddhaa is the reality

obtained’ *yayA vastu upalabhyate*. Ordinarily though we

call everything that exists in the operational world as

‘vastu’, when enlightenment comes upon us all these will be

known as existing only in our imagination, because it is

the absolute Brahman only that really exists in the

absolute sense. That is the ‘vastu’ ultimate. And that

‘vastu’ is obtained only by shraddhaa.

 

In this definition of shraddhaa, it is the intellect that

realises its limitation and gets the conviction that

shastras and the words of the guru are true and this

conviction is shraddhaa, says the Acharya. But in his

‘aparokshhAnubhUti’ he does not even rely on this role of

intellect to voluntarily limit itself. There he does not

give any such leeway to the intellect and accordingly he

gives the simple definition in the commonly understood way:

 

*nigamA-chArya-vAkyeshhu bhaktiH shraddheti vishrutA *

 

meaning, ShraddhA is the exhibition of bhakti (faith and

dedication) towards the words of the Guru and of the

ShAstras.

 

It is very customary to link the two words bhakti and

shraddhA. ‘bhakti’ denotes the aspect of love and liking

and ‘shraddhA’ denotes the aspect of faith. But if we

think about that, faith or trust comes only if there is a

liking and the liking comes only if there is a

trustworthiness. The two are inseparable. In the words of

the guru and the ShAstras, we should have this faith

coupled with liking and this love coupled with trust. That

is shraddhaa. Love is what involves our heart in the thing.

Such involvement of a heart-felt trust in the guru and the

shAstras is shraddhA.

 

 

(To be Continued)

PraNAms to all students of advaita.

PraNAms to the Maha-Swamigal.

profvk

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Prof. V. Krishnamurthy

 

The contents page of my website has been updated now to include a topic-wise list of every page of the site and a link to each. You may want to have a look at

http://www.geocities.com/profvk/gohitvip/contents.html