Sadhana Panchakam - Post 36

In the present context of Mananam, the services of the intellect are called for. At its best, the intellect is indispensable as a tool of enquiry. 

However, the play of Nature goes on in it as in all other human instruments. Argumentativeness is its number one drawback.

Our intellect, left to revel in intellectual gymnastics, will want to venture into and savor the thrills of intriguing logic, as we find in Nyaya. At this point in Sadhana, the seeker is being asked to beware of going on an intellectual “high”.

The warning given here is to avoid Dustarka or “wicked concepts”, to recognize them and steer clear of them, however tempting they may be to the intellect. The aspirant should steer clear of all “Intellectual Politics”.

THE POORVAPAKSHIN & THE SIDDHAANTIN

A debate is always between two people, namely, the Poorvapakshin who stands for the Opponent, and the Siddhaantin who stands for the Exponent. These two terms, if looked at etymologically, reveal a side of Vedanta that is not so easily known in the West, and rare to find in the West.

i) Poorvapakshin: literally this means “the earlier viewpoint”, Poorvapakshee.

ii) Siddhaantin: literally this means “the final perfect viewpoint”, Siddhaantee.

The very word meaning indicates the large-heartedness of Vedanta. The words do not really stand for opponent or exponent. 

In Vedanta no view is seen as an opposing view. If it is not fully informed, it is considered only to be an earlier view, a view that is temporarily held in the absence of further knowledge. Once more knowledge is gathered and taken into account, one shifts his viewpoint, until with complete knowledge he arrives at the perfect (siddha), final (antah) viewpoint.

There is no personal claim to any viewpoint. Vedanta never speaks of ‘my’ view and ‘your’ view. The viewpoint does not belong to any person, it belongs to the landscape, the ground we are standing on. Where a person stands in relation to the Truth is the view he sees. He cannot help seeing that view only. 

If he rises a little higher,his view changes to another one. If he gets to the top of the mountain, his view is “final and perfect”.

TYPES OF PHILOSOPHICAL DEBATES

Two people, A & B, can get together with the following three types of intentions in holding a philosophical discussion:

i) VAADA: “Both persons desire to know the truth.” A & B have an open mind which has not formed any fixed opinion on the matter. Both have a Sattvic interest in the Truth.

ii) JALPA: “Both persons intend to destroy the other’s position and establish their own position.” A & B have each decided their standpoint. Each one tries to prove the other one wrong. The aim of the discussion is Rajasic – to gain victory over the other.

iii) VITHANDA: “One person intends only to destroy the other’s position without having a view of his own.” Person A merely aims to disprove B’s position, whatever that may be. The aim is simply to destroy. This is a Tamasic stance, useful to none.

The essence of the step dealt in today's post was incidentally given in the last session on Nirvana Shatakam (NS-6) which is also posted in blog. He said, “Do not judge/do not criticize any one’s path”.

We all have taken up Spiritual Sadhana with one goal- Self Realization.

Self-realization or discovering SELF within happens when Ego (avidya) is uprooted.

So, wherever one faces a situation where, the other person is not talking correctly on Spiritual path/essence, at best, we can put forth the correct aspect (In Vedanta, as it is clarified, there is no “ your” view or “ my view”. There is only one view.) 

If the other person is not receptive, then we, who have taken up this path to eliminate/conquer our ego, should never end up arguing with the other person. Any Argument comes forth from one and only aspect, our ego, which pushes to fight/ argue and establish to the other person that “I AM RIGHT” and “YOU ARE WRONG”.

We face a downfall when we take up such arguments and then we have to restart our sadhana from a lower level all over again.

One who contributes only sound and not the light should be shunned, as impediment on the Path to Perfection. Because such one is fundamentalist without awareness of the fundamentals, accepting interpretations of Brahman than experiencing Brahman.  Those who are enamored by Knowledge lose sight of the Wisdom which is goal. 

Sankara says that one who is intent on Wisdom of Brahman should not be confused or confounded by conditioned Knowledge of the conceited nor by the facile arguments of the perverted people. 

Arguments do not necessarily lead to enlightenment; they exhibit poverty of intelligence rather than promise of Wisdom. 

Arguments often lead one to assert and refuse to consider that every proposition could possible also have different perception. It is said that some are clever only at exposition while others have the ability to practice what they learn; the hand carries food to the mouth but it is only the tongue that tastes it.

Sadhaka’s mind should be broad and vision expansive, without the restraint of traditional dos and don’ts. His mind should be receptive since that is one of the important avenues for enlightenment, says Adi Sankara. 

It is to be observed that even after communicating Wisdom more secret than all secrets, Sri Krishna leaves it to Arjuna to pursue the Path on his own. 

Even the fully manifested Divinity allows individual to choose the Path to be followed, not the orthodox and argumentative one.

 

Love.

 

Sadhana Panchakam - Post 35

Surrender or Faith in the scriptures is the vital element that is added into Mananam by this step. The path necessarily involves a combination of Effort and Surrender.

This Step comes as a warning sign for the serious spiritual aspirant: “Do not take the Upanishads lightly. Be serious about your search for God, especially from here onwards.” 

Combination of Effort & Surrender

The head and the heart must unite in our quest for the Truth. Both are necessary – deep inner intellectual reflection as well as surrender of the heart to the Divine.

i) If surrender is absent, then the effort is likely to become egoistic; the ego in our effort can poison it. So effort has to be balanced by surrender. 

ii) If effort is absent, one’s surrender becomes vain and unworthy, almost slavish. In surrender without effort, we run the risk of being driven by emotion or sentiment, and there lies the danger – that is what Fanaticism is made of. 

Main goal in spiritual sadhana is to transcend our ego. It is in the context that Effort and Surrender must go together in perfect alignment.

We start putting in all-out efforts / Purushartha in Sadhana and if surrender is lacking, the belief that "I am doing sadhana", where, ‘I’ refers to our ego, that belief itself may take us away from our goal to transcend our ego.

And, we cannot sit quiet, giving up all efforts, saying that we have surrendered to God and He shall take us to the goal of realization. 

The saying "Do your best and leave the rest" applies as much or in fact, applies most in Sadhana. We have to do out very best as far as spiritual sadhana and rest in total surrender, allowing Lord to take over and guide us and elevate us in our path to reach and merge with Him.

On this spiritual path we are restricted only by the subtlety and sharpness of our Intellect, and the intensity and stability of our Faith. Faith, going hand in hand with the intellect, is the only way open for us. 

Faith could arise due to the authority and reverence in which we hold the scriptures, or it could be due even to the authority of a Guru whom we love and in whose words we trust. This initial basis of faith is vital, for it keeps us focused on the pursuit of the Goal. 

When well-nurtured, faith grows and grows with time. As from seed to tree, so also from faith to conviction. Given the water of logic and the sunlight of enquiry, faith begins to experience change. 

The ultimate test of faith is actual Discovery. A series of experiences, each one taking us closer and closer to the Goal, marks the route to the ultimate Experience.  

In this process of transforming faith into conviction and culminating it in Discovery, we have a perfect picture of what the purpose of Vedantic Sadhana is. 

Veda is Wisdom, the supra-sensory experiences, the seer being the one who ‘sees’ or ‘hears’ the resonance of OM, the eternal sound in extra-ordinary moments of enlightenment. Vedic hymns represent the expressions of those experiences without any human effort in composition.  

Wisdom of Vedanta and renunciation, ascetics of purified nature, dwell in silence of the forests at the end of their lives in the supreme immortal world of Brahman.  

Sankara clarifies that with Mind purified by scriptures, enlightened teachers and restraint of the senses aid realization of the self. Scriptures remain neutral like sun light, but do not reveal truth. It is necessary that one should study vedic scriptures as the means for realization of Brahman, and not only reading them. 

Swami says, 

“From the principle of Brahman emerged Akasha (ether). From Akasha, Vayu (air) originated. From Vayu, Agni (fire) emerged. From Agni, Jala (water) emerged. From Jala came Prithvi (earth). From Prithivi, Oshadhi (vegetation) emerged. Oshadhis gave rise to Annam (food) and man is born out of food. 

Thus, you can see that man and Brahman are intimately related. On this basis, Lord Krishna declared:

 “Mamaivamso Jeevaloke Jeevabhuta Sanathana” (the eternal atma in all beings is a part of My Being). Without the principle of Brahman, nothing can exist, be it ether, air, fire, water, earth, vegetation or food.”

 

(SSS- Volume 33)

 

Love.

 

Sadhana Panchakam - Post 34

 

The “Head” of the Vedas: 

The word Shirah means “head”. Shrutih Shirah means “the Head of the Vedas”. 

If spiritual life, being the highest pursuit in life, requires the highest effort, then Mananam is that part of spiritual life that requires the highest intellectual effort. 

After listening to the Upanishads, I may understand very clearly what Vedanta says. However, the understanding is not complete until what Vedanta reveals becomes my own vision. 

The following examples enumerate that on one hand, I may be clear about the position of Vedanta, but on the other hand, what it says is not totally understood and assimilated by me: 

·       I don’t have any doubt that Vedanta says I am limitless. But, I still question how isit possible that I am limitless? 

·       I understand, that Vedanta talks about equation between I and Isvara, the cause of the universe. But, how can I be the cause of the universe? 

·     I know that Vedanta reveals that freedom (mokhsa) is gained only through knowledge, but I consider some statement of a saint who says that liberation is attained through devotion to Isvara to be equally true. 

·       I recognize that Vedanta talks about the self to be limitless, but I am unable to refute the contention of some philosopher, who claims that the reality is nothing but emptiness or a void. 

If I cannot refute different contentions or reconcile different positions, then my knowledge is still shaky and vague. 

Therefore reasoning to remove all these different kinds of doubts is employed by the teacher extensively. 

During the teaching, many doubts discussed by the teacher are raised either by the Upanishad or the commentator of the Upanishad.  

New doubts belonging to a contemporary thinking of scientists, philosophers which did not exist in past are brought by the teacher and answered. 

Only when all doubts are discussed and resolved by the above methods, the knowledge becomes clear and free from any vagueness. 

Regarding this effort (mananam - reflecting upon what has been heard from preceptor/read from Upanishads), the following points help us to see what it entails. 

1. Focus of Thoughts: A magnifying glass brings to a focal point the sunrays falling on it, so that the rays can actually set a piece of paper alight. Our mind and intellect must also be so focused that the thought rays get intensified to achieve greater results. 

2. Deep Enquiry: Our enquiry should always penetrate from the outermost level to the innermost level. It is at the inner core that we start seeing the identity. On the surface level there are many differences. 

3. Correct Means: The correct means of knowledge must be used to obtain knowledge. This is covered in Sravanam, but has to be kept in mind in Mananam to get more clarity.  

4. Unattended Doubts: An unattended doubt is like having a toothache - it will go on haunting us. We cannot afford to be casual in this matter, but need to attend to every doubt in a meticulous and thorough manner. 

5. Perfect Preparation: Wisdom may come in a flash, in an inspired moment, but the preparation for it takes time. Preparation means doing all the Sadhana correctly, in the right sequence and to the point of perfection. 

6. Merciless Manana: The Manana has to be “merciless”, like hunting down terrorists. To allow a single terrorist to slip through our fingers is too many.  

The enquiry must be so merciless, that we must be prepared to have our most comforting ideas shattered to pieces. We need an intellect that is fearless and sharp – a scorching searchlight!

7. Piercing Honesty: Piercing honesty is required on this path of enquiry. At the end of enquiry, we must be logically convinced of the Truth. If I am not the body, then logically I cannot die. Can I feel this?

If I am limitless, can I be indifferent to being called either “an ignorant fool” or “a man of vast knowledge”? Both these belong to a limited state.

Brihadaranyaaka Upanishad submits that of the three instruments, Mind was the principal one, Vak and Praana following thereafter which Brahman provided for himself for his effulgence, the same are also intended for human beings on their Path to Perfection. 

It is the Mind that hears, desires, discriminates, doubts, becomes receptive and non-receptive, resolute and irresolute, defiled, intangible, feared – all these are but the Mind.  

Therefore, even when one touches the back, the Mind knows it.  

Vak is nothing but the vehicle through which one communicates what one has desired. Prana is the energy which gives effect to what the Mind had desired and what the Vak had communicated.   

Therefore it is said that one be receptive, reflective and meditative in mind before one expresses what one has been receptive, reflective and meditative, so that finally it may be put in action, through the power of the Prana. 

One must first be receptive of knowledge of the Self from a qualified preceptor and from scriptures, then the knowledge should be reflected through reasoning and diligently mediated upon.  

Only when these three are enjoined only then would the Self truly realized and the unity with Brahman will be established, not by merely hearing about the Self. 

The proposition which vedanta considers as foundation are not to be only remembered, recollected and repeated mechanically but on them one should be receptive, reflective and meditative, since they represent what the seers had ‘seen’ ‘heard’ in their enlightened awareness, without any human effort. They are self–evident self-established and self-proved revelation of the Divine Intent without human ingenuity.  

Sankara explains that the Universal Self and the Individual Self are essentially same, the appearance as distinct existence as two, being the result of ignorance in Mind. He cautions one not to be tranquilized by the rhythmic sound of the mantras, but reflect on them after understanding the meaning. Not recitation but disciplined awareness is what is needed to lead the Sadhaka to one to experience the resplendent Lord. 

As the author has repeatedly pointed out in various talks / posts, once a spiritual aspirant is thoroughly convinced, beyond any doubt, beyond any wavering thoughts about the goal and the process for attaining the goal as taught by his Guru / by scripture, the battle is half won at that juncture itself.  

More often, this “reflecting upon what has been taught” is missing in spiritual sadhana, getting 100% convinced about the goal is missing in spiritual sadhana and with the result, Mumukshatva is not lit up to the fullest extent. 

With the result, the next process, Nidhidhyasana, meditating and contemplating on the single Upanishad revelation (SELF), lacks intensity, the required inner experience is not attained and sadhana does not bear the desired fruit. 

In fact the root cause for the problem is that a spiritual aspirant, giving importance to spiritual sessions, gives equal importance to worldly pursuits and objective pleasure and with the result, "he is not able to convince himself about the conviction required on believing, confirming and then getting convinced about contemplating on that about which he is convinced". 

So, most often, Sadhana starts and stops with Sravanam. 

 

Love.