The question arises with some regularity, "What is the Path of Knowledge?". I often hear it spoken of as implying that someone who enjoys study, acquiring various degrees etc is following the path of knowledge. Also, it is often rejected by those of a more practical persuasion as being mere 'information'. I feel that this is a misunderstanding as to what the path of knowledge actually is. Sure, study is an aid for all of us, but what is the actual practice of the path of knowledge?
The following excerpts are from "Sayings of Sri Ramakrishna". I find this helpful in being reminded what kind of 'knowledge' we are actually talking about. The second excerpt, though Sri Ramakrishna uses a physical analogy, I find similar to the "Catching the Chameleon" method. i.e, the observation and dropping of assumed identities. Would it then be necessary to assert anything? Seems that we are often subject to a whole lot more assertion than negation? 'Assertion' leads to accumulated conclusions, 'negation' to deeper consciousness as the identifications are let go. If the ahankara has adopted various accumulated conclusions or beliefs then, because of identification, it feels threatened when the beliefs are threatened. Ever seen this? What kind of behaviour does this lead to?
What is Jnana Yoga?
Jnana Yoga is communion with God by means of knowledge. The Jnani's objective is to realise Brahman, the Absolute. He says "Not this," "Not this" and thus leaves out of account one unreal thing after another until he gets to a point where all Vichara (discrimination) between the real and the unreal ceases, and Brahman is realised in Samadhi.
***
If a man knows his own self, he knows other beings and God. What is my ego? Is it my hand or foot, flesh or blood, muscle or tendon? Ponder deeply, and you will know that there is no such thing as 'I'. As you peel off the skin of an onion, you find it consists only of skin; you cannot find any kernel in it. So too on analysing the ego, you will find that there is no real entity that you can call 'I'. Such an analysis of the ego convinces one that the ultimate substance is God alone. When egotism drops away, Divinity manifests itself.
***
...if, on the other hand, the Truth is heard and understood intellectually but no attempt is made to renounce the unreal, of what use is that knowledge? Such knowldege is like that of the men of the world, and does not help one to attain the Truth. Or else a person may profess in mere words that the world is unreal and non-existant; but the moment sense-objects – colour, taste and the rest appear before him, he takes them to be real and gets entangled just like a man who verbally asserts that there are no thorns, but bursts out screaming as soon as his hand comes in contact with a thorn and gets pricked.
Thursday, August 31, 2006
Is Knowledge Asserting or Negating?
Posted by Nick at 8:14 pm 4 comments
Tuesday, August 29, 2006
Control and The Will Of The Absolute
When I visited Cuba recently, it was brought home to me why Communism cannot work. Not for philosophical reasons, but because it gets in the way of people's natural creative impulses. A friend of mine had asked me to bring her some examples of Cuban graphic art, and I searched everywhere for postcards, posters, books - nothing. Eventually I met a man who worked for the Ministry of Tourism and asked him about it. He said, "Unfortunately, the Ministry is too busy running 280 hotels and so it cannot take care of details like this".
In a capitalist economy, some little guy would long ago have translated his enthusiasm for graphic art into a thriving business - supplying us all with its benefits, without any need for government to interfere. And indeed, as a 30-second search on the internet revealed, you can easily get the art of Cuba in a capitalist state. But not in Cuba. You can see why their favourite phrase is No es facile ... "it's not easy". They blame the blockade of the US for their problems, but I regret to say that the real blockade is Comrade Fidel.
Like the Cuban People's Revolution, the School cannot quite bring itself to trust people. Nobody actually says, "Whatever is not expressly permitted is forbidden", but the tradition of "Ask your tutor about any important decision" is a subtle version of the same thing - command and control. The assumption is that without tutorial supervision, people automatically descend to the lowest level. This may seem antiquated, but if anyone wishes I can cite many recent examples to show that tutorial control is alive and well in the School.
The problem with it from a spiritual point of view - and I do appreciate the value of a watchful tutor - is that there are many good things that one can't really explain or justify in words. That's the nature of creativity - you follow a quiet hunch, playfully almost. You don't really want to ask someone about it, or explain why you do it, because you don't know yet what it is. Oddly enough, this is the way the will of the Absolute happens: the will of the Absolute is in the avyakta, the unmanifested. By the time it's obvious, it's manifested. If you want to know the will of the Absolute, you need to take a step in the dark. You need to trust the self - your own self - and not someone else.
If you trust someone else instead of yourself, then you cannot realise the self. You cannot be creative. You cannot be artistic.
I have a question for the readers of this blog who are members of the School. I think it might bring up some very interesting avenues of enquiry:
Is there anything that you do or have done or would like to do that is 'spiritual', but for which you would not ask permission?
Posted by Kevin at 11:34 am 6 comments
Friday, August 11, 2006
Not Blogging
It's been interesting to have a break from all of this for a week - firstly because very little seems to have happened, and secondly because I've found it something of a relief.
The blog has been getting fairly popular ... it's all relative I suppose but 700 visitors in July means "Free the Teaching" is, oh let's see, only about 500 times less popular than the one by that woman who details her sex life. But then I suppose the potential readership of School members is dwarfed by people who are interested in sex. There may even be some crossover there, who knows?
There have been far fewer people who have been prepared to participate - but my thanks so far to Na, Geedash, Gitalover, Son of Moses, Minerva, Kapila, Laura, and of course the ever-charming Anonymous -as well as to more occasional contributors.
My point of view has by now been fairly extensively published, and I'm not sure what else I have to offer. Perhaps it might be useful to outline the essential points. These are my personal beliefs and not intended to be authoritative statements of truth:
1. The School has not listened to His Holiness
This is the root of all our problems. We've listened to the words, but ignored the message, which is one of compassion and intelligence. This is because we wanted to hang on to our old Gurdjieffian habits - which are highly disciplined, but neither compassionate nor intelligent - instead of learning from a wiser and more venerable tradition.
2. We need to discriminate between what is customary, and what is essential
There are a lot of things about the School that do not make sense. They persist because we are sentimental about "our" way of doing things and refuse to examine it rationally.
3. We need to evolve a vision for the future
We need to do this together. In the days of Mr MacLaren it was done for us; but it no longer can or should be thus. The challenge is to dissolve the hierarchy so that we can speak as equals. Some people will mistake this for mob rule, but I would ask: is the School a mob? Or has it achieved something?
4. We have many natural friends in the world
There are many people 'out there' who are desperate for the benefits of philosophy. There are others who have significant wisdom and understanding and who could and would help the School in its endeavours. The general lack of interest in the School is not, on the whole, due to the shortcomings of others, but to our own.
5. The School is potentially the best thing in the world
I don't have any arguments to back that up, but that's what I believe and intuitively feel. Rationally speaking, there is a lot of work to do.
It would be good to hear what others think about these matters, and if anyone has other suggestions they should put them forward. This blog has always been a means to an end, and at some point it will cease to exist. Whether that's now or later depends on you.
Posted by Kevin at 1:39 pm 16 comments