Hari OM
'Text-days' are for delving into the words and theory of Advaita Vedanta.
The next two shlokas are intimately related, therefore we will look at both. The first is the 'doorway', the second is the 'key'.
zNdz´ericNTyTvat! zBdadevaprae]xI>,
Sau;uPt> pué;ae yÖt! zBdenEvavbuÏ(te.18.
Shabdashakterachintyatvaat shabdaadevaaparokshadhiiH,
sushuptaH purusho yadvat shabdenaivaavabuddhyate ||18||
One becomes a person of direct experience through the words of the scriptures because of the unfathomable power of the words, just as the sleeping person awakens by the very words (of another).
All Vedantins aim to attain moksha - the liberation from delusion which frees the jiiva from the cycle of reincarnation. This is known as 'direct experience'. Of what? Of the True Self. The Universal Consciousness. There are many who have an inner inclination that there is a Higher Element (let's call it "HE") to this thing called existence. How to find out if this is a fact and not just a figment of imagination? We must read the documents of authority; the scriptures.
Now, there are many things named as scripture. A key difference between those of the Sanskrit tradition and those of most other traditions is that the words are considered to be delivered from that HE, while all others have been written by Mankind. If you have not already understood, the Upanishads and other mantras, as well as the Vedas, were only committed to the written form in comparatively recent times (circa 1800-6000 BCE). Before this, the tradition was purely oral. A little more about that in Freeday's post this week. The source of the oration was the Rsis of some 6000-10,000 BCE (some researchers are now suggesting even older), who sat in pure meditation atop the Himalayas and were the first to have direct experience. None of these Rsis is ever named, for the words which came through were not their own, but 'given' words. It was the fact that not just one, but many Rsis had the identical experience which resulted in 'proof' of the methodology of meditational practice. There was a consistency which permitted others to follow their path and to continue to prove, over and over, that such Realisation could be achieved.
Literature, discoveries and inventions of Mankind are prone to having defects in logic and application. For example;
1) There can be mistaken notions due to there being 'likes and dislikes'. The human critter is prone to prejudices and differing thoughts and these will always colour what is said or written It is unavoidable. The danger comes when those very opinions or actions rising from them are taken to be 'expert' or matters-of-fact. As humans, we are gullible and if someone or something looks to be offering the sort of answer we want to hear or see, we are inclined to fall for it. Sometimes that works out. It equally often fail us.
2) There are risks of error in the production of texts and objects. Quite often this is not a major problem. However, if, say, there is a translation of a text from a language such as Sanskrit which is being done by one not well-versed in the syntax and grammar, there can be some very disturbing and misleading twists made to that text. Further, as per point one, how the words are read can be affected by the point of view of the translator. Such error can even exist within theories and concepts of science. This is why there is much research repeated on them to 'prove' them - or, as is often the case, disprove them.
3) Then there is the limitation of our very instruments of perception. We are inclined to 'believe what we see'. Seeing is believing, right? This is the very argument which permits the continued existence of the flat earth theory (the horizon doesn't bend, therefore the earth is flat) and other similar phenomena. We are creatures of perception and what we can't see we have great difficulty in accepting as Truth, despite all sorts of evidence being provided to us.
4) Additionally, there are those who set out to deliberately mislead us. The greed for money, the lust for power and fame, can result in covering up The Truth, even if it is known. Such individuals may well have discovered it, but they seek to gain materially from sharing that knowledge and also seek to hold back the 'devotees' accrued from ever actually attaining that very knowledge. These are the 'gurus' which proliferate and result in a bad name for the ancient and worthy system.
This all said, there is still the problem that words, ultimately, fail in their attempts to describe the HE. Words can tell us about the species of something, what its qualities are and its function as well as its relationship to another. None of these is adequate to fully explore the HE. Thus the scriptures at all times can only indicate the Truth. It is only by meditation and application of the exercises of saadhana that the indicated Truth can be discovered. Just as one must follow a map to reach a far-off city. The verse above also mentions being woken. This is a reference to the grand delusion that we currently live in reality, when, in fact, all we are doing is living in a relative condition. Maya has us thinking we are awake when all we are doing is dreaming. The scriptures have the power to help us drop the dream and become fully awake. The words of the scriptures can be likened to hearing our mother or father's voice calling us in the morning to 'get out of bed'!
The scriptures, then, are the doorway to Realisation. We were told in the preceding verses that we are to perform shravanam. Reading the scriptures for ourselves counts within that, but clearly, proper listening from a master in the field can only be of benefit.
AaTmanaTmivveken }an< Évit inílm!,
Gaué[a baeixt> iz:y> sBdäüaitvtRte/.19.
Aatmaanaatmavivekena jnaanam bhavati nishchalam,
Gurunaa bodhitaH shishyaH shabdabrahmaativartate ||19||
Knowledge becomes steady by the discrimination between the Self and the not-Self.
The disciple who is taught by the teacher transcends the Vedas.
Again, viveka is advocated. Be clear about what is Real and what is not. The only way to ascertain this is to pay attention to the pointers in the scriptures. One of the dangers of 'self-education' (which is becoming ever more prevalent!) is that we will tend to 'cherry pick'. As per point one above, we will take what we like and leave the rest by the wayside. There will be incomplete results at best, and at worst, we can become disillusioned and even a vehement decrier of the philosophy. Not because it is wrong, but because our approach to it was.
To ensure a correct approach, we require to follow those who have already travelled the path and who have themselves completed studies under an earlier master, and so on. This is the Guru-shishya parampara.
The Master may be great, but the one who seeks must be willing to accept this for themselves and be willing to submit to the teaching. It is not that we cannot question, but in the end, just as we trust our parents to lead us only to safety, we must submit to the disciplines of the Master in order to achieve the goal, to see the HE. The Master has the key, we must be willing to accept it.
