A Perspective - 25

[Guest guest]

Obstacles for Self-knowledge-4:

 

We are discussing the obstacles for self-realization based on the Krishna’s

statement in Gita 4-40, where He states that 1. avidya (ignorance), 2. ashraddha

(faith), 3. samShaya (doubt) form there major obstacles. The discussion below is

based on some of the comments noted in the advaita lists.

 

Avidya is mula avidya which is termed as self-ignorance, that is, the lack of

knowledge of our intrinsic nature. All other problems form secondary problems

arising because of this muula avidya or fundamental ignorance. Not solving this

fundamental problem will not help in solving other problems that are bounded by

space and time. In solving other problems I can take the help of others or

designate others to do on my behalf, for example, all karmas or all the rituals;

that is by proxy, but any knowledge can be gained only by self study. Not even

Bhagavan can help in this. He may send a good teacher for teaching or he may

himself take the role of a teacher, but knowledge has to be done by the

individual mind alone. Other than the intellect there is no other instrument

available for new knowledge. Hence knowledge, by definition, is intellectual.

With the intellect we need to understand that I am not the intellect and also

because of which the very

intellect that I am not, dynamically functions. The ignorance, we said, is

anaadi or beginningless. This is true for any ignorance, such as ignorance of

physics or ignorance of chemistry. Even though it is anaadi, it can be

eliminated when one gains the knowledge of that subject. The same is true for

self-knowledge. The self-ignorance can go away only by self-knowledge. Another

important point to note is that any knowledge is gained only by a pramANa, an

instrument of knowledge. Advaita s six means of knowledge, of which the

prominent ones are pratyaksha or direct perception, anumaana or logical

inference and shabda or word of a trustworthy person. Since self is the subject

which cannot be objectified, the perception and anumaana cannot reveal

self-knowledge. Perception and anumaana or logic work only in the field of

objective world. Hence only pramANa for understanding the Self is Vedanta or

Upanishad pramANa. Vedas are considered as

apourusheyam or not authored by a human being and therefore are free from

defects associated with human intellect. We accept any teacher’s teaching as

long as those teachings are in tune with the Vedanta. We need a live teacher

from whom we can learn Vedanta, with the full faith that the teachings of the

Vedanta by the teacher are indeed true – that is shraddhaa which Shankara

defines as – shaastrasya guru vaakyasya satyabuddhaavadhaaranaa. We analyzed

the role of shraddhaa or faith required in the teaching. For the teaching to

work, absolute faith is essential. Question people ask is can one have a teacher

who is not alive. Not so, because there is no way a student can clarify his

doubts from a dead-teacher. If he has to relay on someone else to clarify his

knowledge, then he should have full faith in the teaching of that person that

they are indeed are true and are in tune with Vedanta. Therefore a live teacher

is a must. Krishna says clearly

– that one has to approach (obviously a live-guru) a teacher with full faith

and ask relevant questions pertaining to Vedanta – tat viddhi praNipaatena

paripraShnena sevayaa. Muduka Up. says – tat vijnaanaartham sa gurum eva

abhigacchet – one has to approach a teacher alone (gurum eva) to gain that

knowledge – approaching the teacher with samit paaNiH – with fire wood that

was needed in those days, indicative of readiness to serve and to be

disciplined. Now-a-days there is no need of fire-wood. Hence one can approach

with a check book instead – to support the teacher or the institution that

supports him. Tai. Up says the teacher obligation is to teach freely but at the

same time the student’s obligation is to give back to the teacher –

aachaaryaaya priyam dhanam aahRtya, ..( the obligation is to procure and give

the wealth that pleases the teacher). Obligations are two fold. 1. Providing the

required support to the best that one can

do for the sustenance of that teaching institution and 2. After learning, teach

others who come to him with full faith. Propagation of the knowledge to the

worthy students who approach the teacher with the attitude of learning is the

foundation of our Vedic culture. Hence student prays the Lord in advance–(Once

I become a teacher) please send many worthy students from all directions – aa

maayantu brahma chaariNaH swaahaa| vi maayantu brahma chaariNa swaahaa|

pramaayantu brahma chaariNaH swaahaa| damaayantu brahmachaariNaH swaahaa| - The

request is very specific - to send students who are well prepared and who have

shama, damaadi Shatka sampaathis – or mentally well disciplined and brilliant

students. Guru-shishya chain is indicated by the very prayer.

 

Krishna, while glorifying the Vedantic teacher in Gita ch.18, says to whom one

can teach and to whom one should not teach. One should teach only to those who

have shraddhaa or faith in the teachings and in the methodology. We respect all

realized masters but all cannot be the teachers. Only those who have learned

Vedanta, not only the truth but how to teach also – which is termed as

sampradaaya teacher – can teach properly the truth knowing very well the

pit-falls that the student can fall into. This is one of the problems in

trying to gain the knowledge by listening to JK where he himself dismisses the

teacher – although it is claimed that he himself wrote a book – at the feet

of the master – when he was associated with Theosophical lodge. ( I will

analyze some of his lectures later and show where the problem arises if one does

not have the Vedantic background).

 

The moment jnaanam raises it removes ignorance – like the moment a light is

brought in all the darkness instantaneously disappears, even if that darkness

has been there from the beginning of the creation. The moment ignorance is

removed all dvaitam is removed (that is the misconception of the reality to

duality is removed. Duality is falsified in the wake of knowledge).

 

Even though ignorance is beginningless – with mushrooming effects of –

sanchita-aagaami-and praarabda karmas, it appears that it is very difficult to

get rid off. Sureswara says knowledge being fact is always stronger than

thousands of misconceptions. Falsehood cannot stand in front of truth. satyameva

jajate, na anRitam - is the Vedic proverb. Jnaanam destroys ignorance and

errors. In addition only knowledge can destroy ignorance – samyak jnaanam na

baadhyate –because it is born of proper instrument of knowledge, once it

arises it never gets destroyed. This knowledge does not require any other

support like meditation or saadhana for negating samsaara. Even meditation is

not required to strengthen the knowledge. It does not require even karma. The

role of karma yoga is only to convert the student into a worthy listener.

Meditation is only to internalize the knowledge that has taken place. It is for

recognition that there is nothing more is needed

to know. Knowledge also cannot be negated or falsified by the experience of

duality. Knowledge recognizes the falsity of the experiential duality. It is

similar to the knowledge that sun never rises or sets does not negate the

experience of the sunrise and sunset – it only helps to recognize the falsity

of the experiential sunrise and sunset. That means the jnaani still sees the

duality but recognizes the falsity of the duality that is experienced.

Therefore, samyak jnaanam – right understanding born out of proper study of

Upanishadic scriptures – is more than sufficient for the negation of the

ignorance. That understanding takes place only if I have a faith in the

teaching.

 

Related to the lack of shraddhaa is the doubt about the pramANa itself, when the

teacher says you are seeking the fulfillment in life and what you are seeking is

what you already are. However that knowledge, tat tvam asi, does not get

registered in the mind, due to lack of a strong conviction of the truth of the

teaching. One wants a further proof of the statement, mainly because of strong

personal experiences or impressions that are contradictory to the teaching

itself. People generally say advaita is very difficult to understand. That is an

immediate red signal. The implication of that statement is my intense

transactional experience contradicts the teaching of advaita that says what you

are experiencing is not real, because of the fact that you are experiencing; and

that which is real cannot be experienced, since it is not an object for

experiencing. If I see a chair out there, advaita says there is really no chair

out there, since I am seeing. What

is really there cannot be seen. The pramANas that I use to perceive the world

contradicts the teaching itself. Hence only pramANa is the Shaastra pramANa. One

cannot use any other pramANa to confirm or to deny the teaching. Hence Krishna

says shamshaya or doubt about the mahaavaakya as pramaaNa, where the identity of

the self and the total self, will cause degradation of the individual since he

will relay objectivity as reality which is inherently erroneous. That Brahman is

alone is the ultimate truth cannot be proved by any other means, and that

Brahman is none other than myself says the scriptures. Therefore, no proof is

also required. Other than advaita no other philosophy s to oneness of

the ultimate reality. The great aachaaryaas of other philosophies, including

both theistic and atheistic philosophies namely, sankhyaa, yoga, nyaya,

vaisheshika, puurva miimamsa, dvaita, vishiShTaadvaita, Bhuddism, Jainism, etc

have all problems in

appreciating the non-duality at the absolute level. They all interpret the

mahaavaakyaas emphasizing the duality. They all to multiple jiivas and

some even claim that each jiiva is all pervading - nityaH sarvagataH sthaaNuH

acaloyam sanaatanaH – that which is eternal, all pervading, firm, immovable

and beginningless – all-pervading yet finite are contradictory in terms. Hence

Dattaatreya says in avadhuuta gita – Iswaraanugrahaat eva pumsaam advaita

vaasanaas – only by the grace of God one acquires the inklings towards advaita

philosophy.

 

The next prominent obstacles for self-realization is longing for some Brahman

experience: Lack of clear understanding of the nature of the truth or

mahaavaakya causes one to long for some Brahman-experience. There is notion

that understanding of the nature of the truth is recognition of oneself as ever

present and eternally liberated or free from all limitation. Realization is the

realization that there is nothing else to realize but recognition of the fact

that I am, by nature, complete and full. All are in me but I am not in any of

particular thing, including this body, mind and intellect. There are those who

claim that they have studied Vedanta and I do not want to waste any more time in

intellectual discussions, and all they want to do now is to sit down now and

meditate for self-realization or experience of aatma or the self. Some claim

that there is no need to study Vedanta – there is a direct path and that is

sit down and enquire –who am I?.

Even by proper inquiry of who am I, it can only take you to the understanding

that I am existent-consciousness or saakshii swarupam or tvam padaartham.

Without the clear understanding of mahaavaakya that related to tvam tat into one

has not discovered that one is free. Any idea to the effect that I have

understood Vedanta intellectually, and for self-realization I need to sit down

now and meditate on it, or one has to take sanyaasa to realize is a red signal,

showing that Vedanta mahaavaakya is not understood correctly. It should be

recognized that meditation is not a means of knowledge or pramANa to provide the

self-knowledge. It should also be recognized that only through intellect one can

know that I am not the intellect but the very substratum of the intellect –

similar to recognition while looking at the pot, that there is no pot there.

What is there is only clay in the form of a pot. Similarly intellect is required

to recognize that I am not

the intellect and I am that because of which I am able to make a statement that

I am not the intellect using intellect. Kena says – yat manasaa na manute ye

na hurmano matam, tat eve brahma tvam viddhi na idam yat idam upaasate| - that

which mind cannot think of (mind can only think of the objects) but because of

which mind has the capacity to think of – that alone is Brahman not this that

you worship. Then what is nidhidhyaasana for?

 

Vedantic meditation involves sitting down and inquiring into the meaning of the

mahaavaakyas staring from tat tvam asi only in order to recognize and establish

my self in that identity of my true nature. As we discussed before the

knowledge takes place by Shravana and manana since it is direct and immediate

since the statements concern about myself which is ever present. PramaaNa

operated by shravana as in the tenth man. Manana eliminates all the doubts

related to the pramaaNa. Doubt-free knowledge alone is complete knowledge.

Then, Nidhidhyaasana or meditative inquiry into the nature of reality will help

in eliminating the habitual mental notions formed before the dawn of the

knowledge. These habitual notions that involving the notions that I am not that

will side track the background understanding. Habits die hard. (Swami

Dheeranandaji of Chinmaya Misson, Washington D.C. says even if one removes H

from the word Habit, a bit still remains, and if one

removes - a -also, -bit- still remains and if one removes –b-, -it- still

remains. Only when the little i representing the ego is removed, the truth t

becomes self-revealing). Only way to overcome these and for the mind not to get

entangled in the external world of plurality is to have constant reminder of my

true nature that I have understood through shravana and manana. Krishna says by

abhyaasa and vairaagya, that is by practice and by withdrawing from unnecessary

involvements one can achieve this. This is what is emphasized in the

jnana-karma-sanyaasa or that is by knowledge one can withdraw mind’s

indulgence in the involvement of the day to day transactions. In this respect

the jnaana sanyaasa or vidhvat sanyaasa is helpful for a jnaani to abide himself

in the jnaana. Krishna gives an elaborate analysis of a jnaani or sthitaprajna

in dealing with the day to day transactions which cannot be avoided as long as

one is living with BMI. The

understanding of the mahavaakyaas gets one firmly established when the

praarabda-vaasana-generated emotions in the mind do not perturb the equanimity

of the mind gained through the absolute knowledge of the self. Hence Krishna say

a jaani is one whose mind is devoid of attachments, – dukheShu anudvigna

manaaH sukheShu vigata spRuhaH| viita raaga bhaya krodhaH thitadhiiH muniH

uchyate|| The one whom mind is not perturbed when sorrow comes or excited when

objects that bring pleasure come, one who is devoid of attachments, fear, anger

and who is firmly abiding in his knowledge is called muni. Obviously jnaani has

the mind but he is not affected by the fluctuating emotions in the mind. He can

withdraw the mind like the tortoise withdraws it limbs when sees mind is getting

lost in vyavahaara.

 

Longing for an experience of the absolute is therefore constitute a big hurdle

in the self-realization. The fact of the matter is the absolute truth cannot be

experienced and also need not be experienced, since it is the experiencer

himself in all the experiences. Yet the constant nagging question remains; if I

am already complete or full or limitless, how come I feel I am terribly

incomplete and utterly inadequate person, wanting many things that I do not

have. How can one prove that I am complete and full already? Implication is I am

looking for an independent objective confirmation, other than the scriptures,

the confirmation that does not depend on one’s faith, or subjective

assertions. Even if any realized person comes and says – yes what the

scripture says is indeed true - such statements also do not provide the proof

since there is no litmus test to prove that he has realized. Ultimately it is

only shabda pramANa where faith in the statement

of the scriptures is essential for knowledge to take place.

 

Even those philosophers or Vedic scholars, dvaitins and vishiShTaadvaitins, who

have the faith in the scriptures do not consider that the mahaavaakyas provide

the absolute truth with identity of jiiva-jagat and Iswara as one – adviatam

– that is beyond the waking, dream and deep sleep states – …advaitam,

caturtham manyante sa aatmaa, sa vijneyaH, Man.Up. For them duality is the

ultimate reality, in spite of the fact that the scriptures says even a speck of

duality will cause fear – udaramantaram kurute athathasya bhayam bhavati –

Tai. Up. Even the Patanjali yoga that stresses on the nirvikalpaka samaadhi

ascertains that the absolute reality is not advaita or non-duality but plurality

involving Iswara and multitude of jiivas. Obviously the nirvikalpaka samaadhi of

Patanjali does not give the knowledge of advaita, since it is not a means of

knowledge or pramANa. Mind is required to gain any knowledge including

self-knowledge. Mahaavaakya as

pramANa will work in the hands of a competent teacher. A competent teacher is

one who was a competent student before. Thus Vedantic tradition and a proper

means of study are ascertained. There are always exceptions to the rule but we

do not make rule out of exceptions. As Paramarthanandaji says self-realization

is not by intuition but by being in tuition.

 

Hari Om!

Sadananda