The current profusion of books on bhakti has created the false impression that bhakti has to be learned by studying books. The method to learn these days involves poring over books and articles on the internet, and building one’s framework of understanding block by block. The problem with this approach is that we learn based on what we know. We are bound to ‘see’ ideas in books which are not present in them, because we all have tendencies to subconsciously confirm our own misconceptions. This is why it is common to see relentless argument between bhaktas on the internet over every conceivable point in the scriptures. People copy-paste pages after pages of material from all manner of books, articles, letters, emails etc. to support their thesis. Just watching it makes me tired.
While such attitudes are common among bhaktas in other sects, some are using this method to even study Babaji’s books. They might even glean principles from his books that he vigorously opposes himself and then try to teach them to others. There is a possible future where there will be similar relentless arguments over Babaji’s books.
I recently talked to Babaji about this. He made the point that these days, anyone who takes up bhakti becomes a guru by default, as everyone is taught to preach bhakti to others. There are no disciples. So, how will someone who is already a guru learn from anyone? If they can read and write, they can learn bhakti all by themselves, lecture on it, and argue and debate to convince others of their point of view. As such, endless arguments are inevitable. So it goes.
As we shall see below, Śrī Jīva Goswami teaches the method of learning the scriptures in a crystal-clear manner. He does not leave any ambiguity on the topic. In Anuccheda 7 of the Bhakti Sandarbha, he explains the famous verse 1.2.12 from the Bhāgavata which goes like this —
tac chraddadhānā munayo jñāna-vairāgya-yuktayā |
paśyanty ātmani cātmānaṁ bhaktyā śruta-gṛhītayā || [bhā.pu. 1.2.12]
The sages who are endowed with resolute faith [in that Absolute], directly perceive that very [nondual Reality], the Self, within their own self by bhakti invested with immediate awareness [of Bhagavān] and detachment, which has been imbibed through hearing [the self-revealed truth teachings]. (SB 1.2.12)1
For completeness and to provide context, I present his commentary to the above verse, and Babaji’s translations of the commentary below.
bhaktyā tat-kathā-rucer eva parāvasthā-rūpayā prema-lakṣaṇayā | tatpūrvam evoktaṁ tattvam| ātmani śuddhe cetasi paśyantica | jñāna-mātrasya kā vārtā ? sākṣād api kurvantīty arthaḥ | kīdṛśaṁ tat ? ātmānaṁ svarūpākhya-jīvākhya-māyākhya-śaktīnām āśrayam | jñāna-vairāgya-yuktayā[jñānaṁ ca vairāgyaṁ ca, tābhyāṁ yuktayā] svātmajābhyāṁ tābhyāṁ sevitayā | ata eva ca te munayaḥ pṛthak ca viśiṣṭaṁ ca svecchayā paśyantīty āyāti | tad evaṁ “śruta-gṛhītayā””munayaḥ””śraddadhānā”iti pada-trayeṇa tasyā eva bhakter daurlabhyaṁ darśitam |
The word bhaktyā, “by bhakti,” means by devotion characterized as divine love (prema) in the form of the supreme condition of taste for hearing His topics. The pronoun tat, “that,” refers to the Absolute (tattva) spoken of in the previous verse. They see that tattva “within their own self” (ātmani), meaning, “in their pure awareness.” This seeing is not a matter of mere knowledge, rather they directly cognize the Absolute. This is the sense.
How is the Absolute then defined? It is “the Self” (ātmānam), meaning that It is the existential ground and support of all potencies, designated as His intrinsic potency (svarūpa-śakti), His intermediary potency, the conscious living beings (jīvas), and His extrinsic potency (māyā). The phrase “invested with immediate awareness and detachment” (jñāna-vairāgya-yuktayā) [qualifying the word bhakti] means that bhakti is served by her two offspring — knowledge and detachment.
It is thus understood that in accordance with their own intent, the sages directly perceive the Absolute either as consciousness alone devoid of Its potencies or as endowed with Its various potencies. By use of the three terms, śruta-gṛhītayā, “imbibed through hearing [the self-revealed truth teachings],” munayaḥ, “the sages,” and śraddadhānāḥ, “endowed with resolute faith,” the rarity of this specific bhakti is shown.
Now comes the part which I want to focus on here. Śrī Jīva Goswami writes a long sentence that I will split up and present in parts so that the point is clear. Starting at the end of the sentence —
tataḥ śraddadhānaiś ca sā bhaktir upāsana-dvārā labhyate iti – The sense is that bhakti can be attained through worship (upāsanā) by those endowed with resolute faith (śraddadhānāḥ),
Śrī Jīva Goswami is giving the overall sense of the above verse. It contains three distinct words – śruta-gṛhītayā, munayaḥ and śraddadhānāḥ. These words are used to convey that bhakti is extremely rare.
The second line of the verse teaches that bhakti is attained. The first line teaches that this bhakti is attained by those who have faith (śraddadhānāḥ) and who are munis (munayaḥ). Now Śrī Jīva Goswami makes the point in the long sentence that there are two conditions implied by these three words. He writes –
[yadi] sad-guroḥ sakāśād vedāntādy-akhila-śāstrārtha-vicāra-śravaṇa-dvārā yadi sā āvaśyaka-parama-kartavyatvena jñāyate
if by hearing and deliberating upon the meaning of all scriptures beginning with Vedānta, received from an authentic spiritual teacher (sad-guru),
yadi viparīta-bhāvanā-tyājakau manana-yogyatā-mananābhiniveśau syātāṁ
bhakti is unequivocally understood to be the supreme duty, and furthermore if the capacity for deliberation (manana) and the absorption in such reflection are such that all contrary thoughts are dispelled.
The three parts are to be read together. I put it below for convenience:
The sense is that bhakti can be attained through worship (upāsanā) by those endowed with resolute faith (śraddadhānāḥ), if by hearing and deliberating upon the meaning of all scriptures beginning with Vedānta, received from an authentic spiritual teacher (sad-guru), bhakti is unequivocally understood to be the supreme duty, and furthermore if the capacity for deliberation (manana) and the absorption in such reflection are such that all contrary thoughts are dispelled.
He gives the example of Śrī Brahma’s hearing of the Bhagavata and subsequent cogitation on it, which I did not include here for clarity.
The key point here is Śrī Jīva Goswami’s unequivocal statement that one must hear the meaning of the scriptures from an authentic guru. He did not use the word – paṭhana- ‘reading’ of the scriptures. He uses the word ‘hearing’ – and hearing can only be done from another. Reading someone’s books is not the method to learn. Reading can be used to reinforce what one has heard. Hearing is inevitably followed by questions which allow the dispelling of doubts directly from the teacher (vicāra). Of course, the extent to which one understands and dispels doubts depends on one’s capacity for deliberation and reflection as Śrī Jīva points out above.
He concludes by supporting this discussion with a famous statement from the Upaniṣads, which teach a similar concept –
ataḥ śrutir api tad-artham āgṛhṇāti—ātmā vā are draṣṭavyaḥ śrotavyo mantavyo nididhyāsitavyaḥ [bṛ.ā.u. 2.4.6] iti | atra nididhyāsanam upāsanam | darśanaṁ sākṣātkāra ucyate ||
Therefore, the Śruti also stresses this point:
The Self, my dear Maitreyī, is to be seen, heard, contemplated, and meditated upon. (BAU 2.4.5)
Here the word nididhyāsana, “meditation,” means “worship” (upāsanā), and darśana, “seeing,” means “direct witnessing” (sākṣātkāra).
Summary
Knowledge of bhakti is to be received by hearing from one’s guru, asking questions, pondering on what was heard, and clarifying further till one develops a clear framework of understanding.
This leads to the attainment of bhakti by means of which one can experience Bhagavān.
Self-study – even if it involves reading Babaji’s books – is liable to mislead.
There is no substitute to hearing from one’s guru.
Leave a Reply