Vivekachudamani-Post 64

Without knowing the supreme Reality, the study of the sastras is  futile. Having known the supreme Reality, the study of the sastras is  again futile. (59)

Here is an exquisite example of the use of a deliberate statement  of contradiction, to hammer a point into a student while creating  in him a sense of wonderment. 

The verse, even in its tenth reading,  leaves a staggering sense of amazement and confusion. Wonder is  an emotion in which there is a dizzy pause in thinking and at such  a moment of intellectual arrest, the verse filters through. When one  realizes the meaning fully, it goes straight into the deepest vaults  of one's heart cave. 

The paradox is resolved when we give a little conscious application of purified intellect on the word 'knowing' in both  the lines of the verse - 'without knowing' in the first and  'having known' in the second. 

In both cases 'knowing' connotes a different meaning, the literal and the indicative. In the first line it means 'intellectually understanding' and in the second line it means 'realizing'. 

if one goes on studying sastra, and the sastra does not make him independent of the need of Sastra, then such a study is of no use to him. It is nishphala.  

And when one  realizes Self, he gets independent of sastra, transcends all Sastras and transcends everything in creation, including creation itself.

This independence indicates the state of the sadhaka turned seer which is “Aham Brahmaasmi”. 

Sastra study is futile under two conditions. First condition sastra study is futile if it keeps you permanently dependent on any one of the four factors; or all the four factors; second condition is: sastra study is futile after the discovery of the independence.

In the light of these interpretations, the verse becomes a  clear statement of Truth. As long as we have no right intellectual appreciation of what the Vedanta texts indicate, all study of the  scriptures is futile. Again, when we have realized the Truth, study of the scriptures is redundant. 

Like Chinmaya wrote  on His commentary on some other verse from the same text- “ When I reach there, I do not exist, When I come down, I do not exist”

If this beautiful expression is applied to today’s verse, it would read thus:

“When I have realized Self, then I the ego is no more, I the intellect is no more, All the sastras grasped hitherto with that intellect does not exist/ are not relevant as texts aiming to make me evolve in my path, as I have already reached the ultimate goal.

And, when I come down from that state and walk on earth, I cannot express my/ that state, i.e. that state is beyond all Sastras/ all intellectual grasping of all knowledge”

However, even after discovery of independence, one may enjoy the Sastra, but  he does not depend on Sastra, but  what we call leela; as a krida, He  enjoys the sastra.

Long back, the author wrote an article on “ Worshipping form after realization”. Like one may continue to sing in praise of lord, one may undertake pilgrimage, one may stand in front of sanctum sanctorum and chant mantras even after realizing God/Self but all these acts are not arising out of dependence on God, for praying to God for relieving him of any suffering/ pain etc.

All such acts are like Krida in the sense that his boundless joy/ boundless Love/ Brahma Ananda  gets manifested/ gets splashed  in all  such actions of prayer/singing/worship. 

While a seeker prays for attaining fulfillment, any prayer/worship emerges  from  a seer, out of his fulfilled state. All such acts arise from a  soul which has found its fulfillment.

Love

Vivekachudamani-Post 63

Loud speech in a stream of words, the efficiency in expounding or  commenting upon the sastras, erudition gained, these bring only a little joyous , material satisfaction to the scholar but they are insufficient to liberate him completely. (58)

What is the aim of vēdantic study? The aim is to remove all types of psychological dependences which is called samsara.

Now this dependence, we classify into four types; One dependence is the dependence of the majority; dependence on the world; it is world dependence.

And then there afterwards, comes next one, dependence on God. So we say do not depend upon the world all the time; because the objects in the world are perishable; it does not last longer. 

Therefore, we say do not depend upon the world, start depending on God; is what we prescribe. 

And there afterwards they said if you have to drop God-dependence also, you should learn to depend upon yourselves; for that you should get the self-knowledge; you should discover inner strength; and for the sake of self-knowledge, you have to go to a guru. 

Therefore God-dependence is now switched over to Guru-dependence; and I replace God by Guru; 

Gurur Brahma, Gurur Vishno, Gurur Devo Mahesvara; Guru sākṣāt ParaBrahmam, tasmai sri gurave namaḥ; 

tvamēva mātacha pitah tvamēva; tvamēva bandhuscha saha tvamēva; tvamēva vidyā dravinam tvamēva; tvamēva sarvaṁ mama dēva-dēva.

What does the  guru do when one approaches Guru and gives himself wholly to Guru? 

He hands  over the sastra to you. And he says you have to do sravanam. 

Do not stop with sravanam; you have to do mananam; and you have to do nidhidhyasanam; therefore sastra must be dwelt upon; you should dwell upon the sastra while studying; and after also;

And if this is not understood, all these four (world, God, Guru, Sasta)  can initially help you but these four themselves can become a bondage. 

One starts speaking on Sastra and believes himself to be an erudite scholar. 

The Yogasastra gives us the various subtle stages of metamorphosis  of a thought or a desire before it is expressed in the form of sounds  and words. Altogether it describes four distinct stages in the manifestation of a thought as an expression in words. 

First of all, the thought arises from or has contact with the reality of life in us  and at this stage, it is called 'para'. 

When it manifests sufficiently  for the ego in us to be conscious of it, it is in a state grosser than the  previous one and at this stage of its perceptible existence it is called  'pasyantl'. 

A thought of which we have become conscious passes  through a state of inner moulding in the crucible of language and  this state of transcribing thought into a series of symbolical sounds  for the purpose of conveying it to another is called 'madhyama'.  

And when actually the symbols indicated by the mind are relayed  through expressed audible sounds, the thought in its grossest  manifestation is called 'vaikharl'. 

By the term 'vaikharl', Sankara means the unproductive and noisy discussions on philosophy which some students of Vedanta  engage in. 

These gabblers are laughed at, condemned, and quite ignored by all the great Acaryas like Sankara. To the Rishis, an ounce of practice is more sacred than tons of discussion around a table. 

Our words have immense power. They channelize a creative force that express as action and ultimately create our reality. It is critical then that we learn to bring more accuracy, objectivity and positivity to our speech, as The Buddha enjoined his followers to do in his teachings on Right Speech, or maintain Noble Silence.

Love

Vieckachudamani Post 62

The beauty of the vlna and the proficiency of one playing on its chords  serve but to please an audience; they do not , by themselves , ever prove  sufficient to confer full sovereignty . 

In using analogies, nobody has yet come to the field of philosophy  who can rival Sankara's efficiency and perfection. According to him, the schools of philosophy which argue emphatically, describe beautifully and enunciate exhaustively, discussions that give clear intellectual pictures of the why and wherefore of this universe, are all nothing but the beauty of the words or the eloquence of the speaker. 

The player of an instrument with his proficiency may entertain the largest conceivable audience and for the time being, the listeners may even consider him the king of artistes. Yet, in effect, he can never gain sovereignty, permanent and complete, over the audience through the instrument. 

Similarly, the various schools of philosophy are intellectual entertainments no doubt, yet the seeker cannot gain the status of godhood by merely dabbling in philosophy. A king might entertain himself and his friends by playing the vina. But his empire is not consolidated, nor is order maintained among the people nor is royal dignity nourished through his proficiency in the instrument. 

Acharya Sankara wants to emphasize that any amount of  philosophical studies, even a mastery over all the six schools of  philosophy, cannot bring about a complete evolutionary fulfilment. 

Sankara says  one who studies apara vidya also is vidvan. Vidvan means vidyavan. One who studies para vidyā is also a vidvan. Because by definition vidvan means the one who has vidya. Apara vidya also makes a person vidvan; para vidya also makes a person vidvan. 

Even though the words are similar, their consequence, results are totally different. To convey this idea; Sankara gives an example. What is that example? He says the word Raja, 

The word Raja is derived from ranj, from the root ranj. The meaning of the word ranj is to please a person, to give joy; to give happiness. And Ranjanat Raja. A king is called Raja because he has to satisfy the people over whom he is ruling. Whatever is required, he should provide and he should keep the citizens happy. 

Sankara says: suppose there is a person who has got a wonderful veena. you know veena is a musical instrument; He has got expertise in playing and therefore people have become happy because of his veena playing. Therefore, what he has done through his concert; he has done jana ranjanam.

Therefore, according to grammar rules, he also can be called; what; Rṇja; jana ranjanat, raja. So, what is the difference.

Even though he can claim himself to be a raja, what is the difference; that raja, the original one has got samrajyam, he has got a sovereignty over the kingdom; empire, whereas the vidvan does not have sovereignty over even his wife perhaps, we do not know or the people around or the small family. Therefore, the word raja remaining the same, one has freedom; another has no freedom.

Similarly, Yoga, Sankhya, Karma, Upasana etc.  are all good, they can purify you to some extent but ultimately, it is the realization of the absolute, freedom from Samsara which makes one the real master, the real King, Shehanshah of Shehanshah(s), emperor of emperor(s).

The term 'samrajya' has a reminiscent flavor of Upanisad  in ancient literature. This term is used for the kingdom of God within, in the heart of every individual.

Love