Scale of Jnani's

ken knight hilken_98 at YAHOO.COM
Tue Mar 12 03:48:22 CST 2002

--- Hemant <reachhemant at ETH.NET> wrote:
>               There are some(Kenji) who believe that
> a mere jnAni  is inferior to the practitioner of
> para bhakti a la Papa Ramdas. This if  some wise man
> could clarify I would be most obliged.

Namaste Hemant,
I am sorry if I have given this impression of one
thing being inferior to another. Such a duallistic
form is not my intention. There is also a big
difference in the use of words like 'belief' and
'faith'. I hope that you are not confusing these. I am
not your wise man that you request but can I clarify
any wrong impression from my previous postings.
(It would help me if you gave me the particular
posting to which you refer because everything that is
spoken or written is in a context.)

I would never use words like 'mere' and 'inferior' as
they are judgments of opinion alone.  They relate to a
hierarchical system to which you referred earlier and
such systems are ignorance. What is being ignored?
That all is one, not two.  In order to walk under a
bridge the bridge has to be over me. To be a silent
teacher only has meaning when there is a teaching that
uses words.  Both take place in a transcendent, single
consciousness. They have meaning only in their
There is nothing hierarchical in this unless we
extract one of the 'positions' and try to exclude the
other. They are just differing roles in a single
picture. We need to observe quietly, without comment,
and the play of the apparent two will unfold. Then we
play our part nicely.
The emphasis on parabhakti in many of my postings is
'me' working out an observation that the wholeness of
Shankara's advaita is not correctly represented in the
UK. ( I cannot comment on the position in other
countries.  It is too 'headbound'. A jnani is not
'head bound'.
It may be that you are referring to an article that
has recently been published on Harshasatsangh on 'The
Religion of Love for the new Century'. If so the
context of that article was that it was originally
written for a magazine edited by a devotee of Sathya
Sai Baba. Her groups in the UK have reached a point
where their devotional path is not satisfying their
search for union. So I was asked to write something to
help them move out of this impasse. The bhakti, jnana,
parabhakti flow is appropriate in that context. From
my visits to Harsha's site it seemed an appropriate
article for his readers so I tweaked it a little but
the general intention is the same, to give people who
are inclined to bhakti a taste of the another way. It
was also written to give some publicity to an
organisation that is seeking to find common ground in
philosphy and science.

However, beyond that what comment can be made? There
is no Ken Knight.  There is a superimposed attachment
to a series of roles in life and the resulting
delusion needs a name. In order to come out of 'what
we are not' we need to oppose without cavilling; the
coverings dissolve step by step until the very finest
veil of separation remains. That finest veil is woven
with the colours of bhakta and jnana and it reveals in
a moment the glories of that which it conceals but
without that finest of  veils the unknown cannot be
known. Once known ....................

Om shanti

Ken Knight

Do You Yahoo!?
Try FREE Yahoo! Mail - the world's greatest free email!

More information about the Advaita-l mailing list