Incremental Knowledge vs. Instantaneous Enlightenment

Spirituality
#1

[QUOTE=Suhas Tambe;52673]We accrue knowledge in 2 ways. Ordinarily, through thoughts in the making of which we use our prior knowledge; so this becomes incremental knowledge. Very rarely, one comes along with direct knowledge, which is whole, total and devoid of ususl emotional baggage. Incremental knowledge is subjective and hence, deficient. But it creates a great comfort zone. From such a comfort zone to direct knowledge is a huge leap. It is traumatic, and not easy at all. That’s my take on the duel above (for those who care to know!)[/QUOTE]

This is a continuation from another thread, but really is a different topic, so I thought it should have its own thread.

#2

This is an excellent observation by Suhas Tambe, although I interpret it somewhat differently, based on my reading of Patanjali’s Sutras. Patanjali first describes incremental knowledge in chapter 1.47 - 49, on Samadhi. Quoting from the translation of Swami Hariharananda Aranya:

47: On gaining proficiency in nirvichara, proficiency in the inner instruments of cognition is developed.
48: The knowledge that is gained in that state is called Rtambhara (filled with truth).
49: And that knowledge is different from that derived from testimony or inference, because it relates to particulars of objects.

In the third chapter, Patanjali goes on to describe many examples of this type of incremental knowledge gained through the practice of samyama. Then in chapter 3.33, he says:

[B]Or[/B], from knowledge known as pratibha (intuition), the yogin acquires knowledge of all.

#3

It is my belief that the incremental knowledge described in chapters one and three of the sutras is the true means of acquiring knowledge, both mundane and spiritual. The claim of instantaneous enlightenment is the red flag that we use to separate the false yogin from the true. Anyone who claims to have this kind of all encompassing knowledge should be regarded with the highest degree of skepticism. This is not a belief that comes from fear or ignorance, but from knowledge and experience.

The claim of direct experience is a standard tactic used by some against those who have only knowledge learned from books and teachers, without any real experience. In some cases, this is valid. But a false claim of experience is worse than no experience at all.

#4

[QUOTE=Asuri;52727]It is my belief that the incremental knowledge described in chapters one and three of the sutras is the true means of acquiring knowledge, both mundane and spiritual. The claim of instantaneous enlightenment is the red flag that we use to separate the false yogin from the true. Anyone who claims to have this kind of all encompassing knowledge should be regarded with the highest degree of skepticism. This is not a belief that comes from fear or ignorance, but from knowledge and experience.

The claim of direct experience is a standard tactic used by some against those who have only knowledge learned from books and teachers, without any real experience. In some cases, this is valid. But a false claim of experience is worse than no experience at all.[/QUOTE]

Imho, its important to differentiate between prajna and knowledge. Its hard to articuate because prajna bypasses the rational faulties…it just happens

It is this prajna that indicates "enlightenment"
It is not a constant but a process…this happens to all esoteric practitioners at various stages of practice…tapping in and out depending on how deep the gap between thoughts gets

Those who can stabilize in the gap and tap into this process are called sthitaprajna - established in direct awareness.

#5

I always thought that knowledge is attained by two ways:

  1. Intellectual dig-up: When you read books, watch stuff, and get a lot of developmental cognitive boosters via vicarious experience of reality, you accumulate certain amount of intellectual energy, an amazing web of vrittis, which help you to evaluate, analyse the situation and attain knowledge pertaining to a phenomena.

In other words, you begin from point A, and get the entire way to point B.

  1. Intuition: This is what I called the quantum jump. Intuitions, or in some cases, precognitions, premonitions, insights and such give you the knowledge without having you walk all the way from point A to point B. The question emerges at point A, and the answer is at point B. With intuition, you instantly jump to point B, [I]not[/I] walk to it.

However, beware of the sloppiness of English language. A lot of people confuse intuition with instinct, while they presume that they both are same - intuition and instinct are fundamentally same; however, intuition acts over and through more complex phenomenons, such as a physical formula, a symphony, and accident and so on. Instinct acts over and through basic phenomenons, eating, drinking, mating and so on.

When mind represents what is being intuited or instinctually felt, there occurs instantaneous knowledge.

P.s. this is my experience, and I ain’t trying to convince you otherwise.

#6

I don’t have a problem with intuition. Patanjali was way into that kind of thing. Still, it’s incremental.

#7

I am not talking about intuition as a simple alternative to incremental knowledge which will make it a mere ?thought-less? thought or an instinct without rhyme or reason. Intuition, in the form of Spiritual Intelligence, is an ability acquired with very intense sadhana. It preempts need for a cumbersome, subjective and colored incremental knowledge.

Giving up thinking and reliance on mind in favor of an intuitive reliance on the spiritual intelligence alone, is difficult to accept. It appears to be risky, if not disastrous, given our conditioned living in the material world. But the cultivated power of intuition has to be experienced to be able to trust it.

?Intuition has a fourfold power. A power of revelatory truth-seeing, a power of inspiration or truth-hearing, a power of truth-touch or immediate seizing of significance, which is akin to the ordinary nature of its intervention in our causal intelligence, a power of true and automatic discrimination of the orderly and exact relation of truth to truth,? these are the fourfold potencies of Intuition. Intuition can therefore perform all the action of reason?including the function of logical intelligence, which is to work out the right relation of things and the right relation of idea with idea?but by its own superior process and with steps that do not fail or falter? (Sri Aurobindo, The Life Divine, Sri Aurobindo Ashram, Pondicherry, 1919, p. 949).

#8

"It is this prajna that indicates “enlightenment”

That is a part of it, but still dimensions apart from the thing in itself.

#9

“Intuition, in the form of Spiritual Intelligence, is an ability acquired with very intense sadhana.”

It may be said that these are three different aspects of the same phenomenon - instinct, intellect, and intuition. Neither can they be divided with sharp dividing lines, in fact each part influences all of the other parts. So while one may speak of each of these parts separately out of convenience, in reality there is a combination of many forces which are working together in what we are calling “enlightenment”. To say that it has much to do with an intuitive intelligence is correct, but to reduce it to intuition alone is immediately fall into error.

#10

[QUOTE=AmirMourad;53010]"It is this prajna that indicates “enlightenment”

That is a part of it, but still dimensions apart from the thing in itself.[/QUOTE]

Prajna IS Shruti. The entire Vedic literature is a result of Prajna. Albeit after it is recorded it is a reflection, in the seer’s heart, prajna dissolves seer, seen and seeing into that one (Tad Ekam).

#11

Dwai,

" The entire Vedic literature is a result of Prajna. "

I would question this. First, because the Vedas claims to be a revelation from God himself, in the sense of a Supreme Being, which is either a method to try and give great credibility to the scripture or simply man’s hallucination. Man other religions have tried the same approach, Christians declare that the Bible is God’s one and only word, Muslims declare that the Quran is the only true word of God, Jews are as convinced as everybody else that the Torah is God’s one and only revelation, and all are suffering from the same basic delusion. Perhaps there may be some parts of the Vedas which are filled with penetrating insight. But if you look in other places, you can find things which reflect just the opposite. The Vedas is in support of animal sacrifice, and if such a thing can be said to be great wisdom, then the author of the work is in a deep sleep.

#12

[QUOTE=Suhas Tambe;53002]I am not talking about intuition as a simple alternative to incremental knowledge which will make it a mere ?thought-less? thought or an instinct without rhyme or reason. Intuition, in the form of Spiritual Intelligence, is an ability acquired with very intense sadhana. It preempts need for a cumbersome, subjective and colored incremental knowledge.

Giving up thinking and reliance on mind in favor of an intuitive reliance on the spiritual intelligence alone, is difficult to accept. It appears to be risky, if not disastrous, given our conditioned living in the material world. But the cultivated power of intuition has to be experienced to be able to trust it.

?Intuition has a fourfold power. A power of revelatory truth-seeing, a power of inspiration or truth-hearing, a power of truth-touch or immediate seizing of significance, which is akin to the ordinary nature of its intervention in our causal intelligence, a power of true and automatic discrimination of the orderly and exact relation of truth to truth,? these are the fourfold potencies of Intuition. Intuition can therefore perform all the action of reason?including the function of logical intelligence, which is to work out the right relation of things and the right relation of idea with idea?but by its own superior process and with steps that do not fail or falter? (Sri Aurobindo, The Life Divine, Sri Aurobindo Ashram, Pondicherry, 1919, p. 949).[/QUOTE]

This is pretty much on the mark, except for the conclusion. Civilization is built on knowledge, reason and logical thinking, because it is the only thing that we [I]can[/I] rely on. In order for anything to be useful, we need to know that it’s going to work every time in the same way without fail. I mean no disrespect to Sri Aurobindo, but he has never produced anything but words. I don’t deny that intuition can be powerful and useful, but it is not a substitute for knowledge and reason. Insights gained through intuition are subject to a reality check.

#13

Amir,

It seems you have woefully inadequate knowledge about the vedas.
I would guige you towards sri aurobindo but that might be too heavy for you.

Yoga is a practical wing of vedic/vedantic teachings…if you claim knowledge of yoga, then you must know the vedic or at least vedantic teachings…without which practice of yoga is incomplete. No other esoteric system provides the psycho-spiritual framework that can leverage yoga better.

Without the grouding in vedanta (in which i include tantric systems as well) the experiences of yoga cannot be digested.

If you know how the vedic literature is organized you won’t make generalizations the way you did.

#14

Knowledge is knowledge that is all

#15

Dwai,

“if you claim knowledge of yoga, then you must know the vedic or at least vedantic teachings”

Do you think that the first yogis were following any particular belief system or philosophy ?
Nothing ever exists, complete and ready made. And the first yogis had no scriptures, not even masters, because when you are entering into any new territory, there is nobody there before you to guide you along the path. The search was entirely alone, absolutely alone, groping in the dark. And to come to know of yoga, nothing else is needed except to come to know yourself, through and through. Because yoga does not refer to any particular practice or discipline, it simply means Union. When you come to a state of consciousness in which you are in communion with your own original nature, thne you are in a state of yoga. All of the different techniques and methods are just different means towards this.

#16

Dwai, you are right his knowledge is woefully inadequate on the Vedas, but that does not stop mr post enlightenment from making statements about it. In another thread he claimed the Vedas were pure imagination like the bible, Quran and Torah. I of course did the needy and pointed out that the Vedas are not written like fictional narratives between man and god like the bible and the Quran. Rather, they were the assembled writings of hundreds of rishis(sages) containing injunctions(such as speak softly) and their experiences. Occasionally these Risis would meet in Vedic councils to discuss. To which he responded, “I would question this”

Now he’s gone on and made yet another stupid statement that the Yogis had no scriptures, and were groping alone in the dark. Where he gets this information from? Nowhere, he makes it up. The first Yogis, the Vedic risis did indeed have scriptures - the Vedas - which they preserved in an oral tradition. They were not groping in the dark, because the first yogis also had teachers. This is clear in Sukta 1 of the Rig Veda addressed to Agni, where it says that most adorable agni, praised by the sages of the present and the sages of ancient times Therefore clearly, there was a long tradition of yogis going back to unknown antiquity. Nobody was groping in the dark.

When you don’t know something, it is better not to say anything on the matter. But this does not apply to mr post-enlightenment. Despite having zero credentials, he knows everything. And he always knows better than you, even if you have credentials.

#17

Surya,

“The first Yogis, the Vedic risis did indeed have scriptures - the Vedas”

Was this scripture self-created ?

“which they preserved in an oral tradition.”

Who started the oral tradition, and was this oral tradition self-created on it’s own ?

“Therefore clearly, there was a long tradition of yogis going back to unknown antiquity. Nobody was groping in the dark.”

Enlightenment is an individual process, not a social thing. And before one started teaching of any of the methods for the expansion of consciousness, they first had to be discovered. They were not there, ready-made. Man had to inquire into his own being - not through scriptures, not through any outside authority, but from coming to know oneself - it was a journey which was entirely alone. And it was in the dark - because nothing new which can be discovered can be discovered before. In order for something to be known, one must first be ignorant.

Only then, once a man has come to his own original nature, once he thoroughly explored the territory of his whole being, was he capable of making it more accessible to others. And to preserve this understanding - certain scriptures and literature had come into being. It is not just the case with the yogic sciences, but with any science. The first scientists were not relying on theses, PHD’s, books, or written works - it was a direct encounter with nature itself. And meditation was something which was discovered as a direct encounter with nature itself.

#18

Perhaps Yoga was meant to evolve i.e. there?s no reason to reinvent the wheel each generation but rather build on the perpetual human consciousness that has come before us, everyone participates, move one grain of sand and you?ve changed the future forever, maybe there?s a bigger picture then ourselves alone?

#19

Well, Hindu tradition has it that the Vedas was revealed at the beginning of creation itself. But I don’t buy this. Based on internal evidence, such as geological information and astronomical information, the Vedas go back 10,000 years. Another calculation places the Vedas in the Treta Yuga approx 1 million years ago, but even then calculations say the oldest risis go back even further. So the best way to answer the question is the Vedas go back into unknown antiquity.

#20

This knowledge is said to be eternal, because it exists on all developed planets in the universe. So no origin for it can be sought. It is in a way revealed at the beginning of creation, because it pertains to creation and its laws.

There was no first Yogi :wink: