[MD] Wisdom

[Dan Glover]

"What is the wisdom contained in the Upanishads? To answer, I must say
something about the word Upanishad. The Sanskrit roots mean "sit down
near" - Upanishadic wisdom is the sort that you might get by sitting
down near your guru or spiritual master and engaging in a dialogue. It
is quite distinct from the sort of wisdom that you might get by a
detached pursuit of truth for truth's sake, and it is miles apart from
the knowledge that you gain when your objective is a course grade or
some other credential.

"Moreover, the Upanishadic wisdom obtained through intense interaction
with a guru is not quite the same as that attained simply by a careful
reading of the Upanishads. An intellectual attempt that is not also a
spiritual search can get no further than a surface hold on Upanishadic
truth. Upanishadic wisdom is, in the last analysis, something that
needs to be recognized nonconceptually. Hence, I cannot pretend to be
transmitting Upanishadic wisdom to you. What I aim to do is simply
explain the concepts that might provide the intellectual bearings for
a spiritual search that eventually does away with the need for
intellectual bearings." [Guidebook to ZMM]

Dan comments:

When a person's intellectual cup of tea is full to the brim, there is
no room to form a Dynamic understanding that does away with the need
for intellectual tea. All they have a taste for is intellectualism.
They want to talk instead of listen... they want to shout out how much
they know and how smart they are for knowing it... they tend to
denigrate those who make any attempt to shock them out of the
intellectual malaise in which they have unwittingly become ensnared.

"To get an idea of Upanishadic truth, you need to have some
understanding of two key concepts, "Brahman" and "Atman." The word
Brahman comes from the Sanskrit root that means "to grow." The
Upanishadic thinkers used this word to refer to the source of all
beings, that from which everything in the universe grows. Brahman is
thus a creator of sorts, but not like our Western God, who creates out
of nothing a world that is distinct from God. Brahman grows into or
becomes the many things of the world. At the same time, Brahman is not
exhausted by the world of things but remains its own reality, which is
true reality. One must not reduce Brahman to the many things that
Brahman somehow becomes; rather, the many are to be reduced to
Brahman.

"The Upanishads are filled with stories in which spiritual masters
enjoin spiritual seekers to peel away the layers of the universe in
order to discover the subtle essence of all. This discovery, which is
to be prized beyond all else, is not attainable through ordinary ways
of knowing, for ordinary perceptual/conceptual knowledge is geared
toward marking off qualities from other qualities and objects from
other objects, while Brahman is neither a particular object nor a
particular quality but that which underlies all objects and qualities,
the unqualified ground, the Pure Object. No wonder, then, that it is
spoken of as "that from which words and thought return without having
attained it" (Taittiriya Upanishad, Ch. II, sect. 4, 1.1).
Nonetheless, although concepts cannot get a hold on Brahman, they can
be used !o point the way toward it. The Upanishads are full of
analogies that are meant to provide a notion of Brahman (e.g., the
salt that pervades the water and is in our awareness without itself
being an object of direct perception). And lest seekers confuse the
analogy with the reality, they are continually reminded that Brahman
is neti, neti, "not this, not this." Analogies and negations do not
attain the goal but they at least mark off a path from which seekers
will eventually leap into transcendental consciousness." [ibid.]

Dan comments:

Dynamic Quality of the MOQ is not the same as the concept of God. It
is Pure Quality or the Pure Object Brahman. We can point to it
intellectually and via analogy but never gain a grasp on it
conceptually. It is not this, not that.

Thank you,

Dan