I intend to write two books as a religious duty, above all else, because it is prophesied for me and ordered for me, “That’s your purpose in life.” Rightly or wrongly. I’ve accepted this. First will be about my life. I haven’t told you enough about my follies; we are growing up and learning. And next, about these Nadi texts. There weren’t many mistakes in their predictions. G.V. Desani
I am looking at the Bible these days because I am going to address Christians, sooner or later. I asked a young friend to read to me because I have difficulty in reading. St. John’s gospel. But we have an important message. And it is a message which religion gives, Christianity gives, Gautama the Buddha gives. So, we will hope to convert nobody. I merely wish to confide in you as friends. That is the purpose of these talks. This knowledge was so new to me. I hope it is new to you, too. G.V. Desani
G.V. Desani’s “Liars, Hypocrites, Imperialists and Sages,” was from a taped
interview recorded by Naseem Khan at Desani’s Austin, Texas home in 1994. The transcription was included in Voices of the Crossing, edited by Ferdinand Dennis and Naseem Khan, Serpent’s Tail Press, London, 2000. Our friend Todd Katz has transcribed this and placed it on the site he maintains, www.Desani.org. It is listed under Articles, Lectures, and Academic Papers section.
This interview – there are no questions from the interviewer – Desani, in a conversational tone, begins by giving an early account of his family life. He speaks freely about his earliest years, about his family, their livelihood, his early travels in his teenage years and before, and his escape, I guess you could call it that, from an oppressive father and religious views he found odious, i.e., child marriage, a Hindu tradition. He particularly addresses the enmity between Hindus and Muslims, views his father held which Desani rejected. (Desani’s express view, he spoke of this to his students, was that were there only one religion we would have a partial view.) He then goes into detail about how he came to be exposed to the Nadi texts, ancient prophecy, writings on palm leaf by sages of long ago.
That brings me to the best ever advice.
I was going through some old notes recently and found one I’d almost forgotten that somewhat ties into what has been said above about religion. This is not a unique approach to the issue but it was an eye opener for this one to have it delivered by someone in whom I had placed the utmost trust.
Quote: Per GVD “The Gods aren’t listening. That’s why you need a device, a mantra, yantra, an intercessor, e.g. Jesus. Or “Love” of God, or their name(s), or knowledge from a teacher as to which ones have obliged themselves to listen to “man’s” petitions, prayers, etc. especially from those who know their “secret” names, methods. It’s all about wave lengths. Extreme austerity, self denial works too.”
On this account its worth recalling an approach to the same subject in a different culture.
Socrates and a Manichean woman were walking together and she is espousing an idea, sharing a notion, with Socrates, the ancient Greek philosopher. She says to Socrates that the Gods, out of their benevolence for mankind, created love as a vehicle, a means, by which commerce could be carried on between the divine and man. That’s how love came to be. It is a channel used to carry, promote, make possible, communication, contact between man and God.
If permitted I’m here going to range a bit beyond the parameters I’ve usually followed for posting on Desani.net Please indulge me and trust that I am not in this departing from Desani’s teaching.
Desani was inclusive in his approach to these things but it hasn’t always been so with his forbears. I’ve been studying the Mandukya Upanishad and also Buddhist philosophy, in particular that of Nagarjuna. Well, these belief systems often – usually- decried the efforts of their coevals who espoused contrary views. The Buddhists didn’t believe in the Vedas while the Vedantins criticized the Buddhists as Nihilists. The Vedantins – in the Mandukya Upanishad – besides their criticism of Buddhism were critical of Patanjali, author of the Yoga Sutras, the Samkhyas according to whom Reality consists of twenty-five categories -Desani used this scheme in his teaching. The Pasupatas, similar to Samkhya but more categories, were also targeted. Iswara, the so-called presiding Deity of the solar system was also an addition to the Samkhya system by Patanjali and the yogis.
“The mutual contradictions among these different schools prove the fallacious character of their theories. The difference of opinion is due to the ignorance of the nature of Reality.” So writes Guadapada in his Mandukya Upanishad which view is amplified by Sankara of whom Desani often spoke. (MU II-26)
Well, the ultimate reality is not easily grasped but characterizing it as effulgent is surely not far from the mark. All the disparate approaches to true understanding are surely part of that effulgence. Sentient life forms wherever they emerge seek the real, no doubt, and this seeking is infinite in variety. Focus is perhaps better placed on the impetus itself rather than particulars of methodology. No approach is completely wrong or completely right. Its an act of participation not competition. Relative reality, manifested being, might not be the ultimate reality in itself but neither is it different from that. In fact it is rather a means of realizing the truth. So, if your idea of God – a thing as are all ideas – gives you a semblance of understanding then who’s to deny you that. The Samkhya’s categories, and Immanuel Kant’s too, for that matter, provide some surcease to some people’s desire for the Real. That’s not a bad thing in itself. Its a rich effulgence and infinite in scope just as the stars and galaxies, apparently.
Guadapada’s notion of Advaita, a Vedantin notion of the absolute non-dual nature of the Ultimate Reality is surely at the apex of these endeavors to gain some insight into the Real, to Truth. And I find it interesting that in his later years Guadapada retired to the Himalayas to become a devotee, worshiper, of Narayana who was known as a man-god. Like the Christian Jesus.
Neither is it different. These ancient sages such as Guadapada, Sankara used clever devices to carry their thoughts. For instance, light and heat are not the sun but neither are they different from the sun. In fact one might say they are ways of knowing the sun for the sun finds expression in them while all the time remaining in itself a kind of ultimate reality. So, it was said, the sun is the substratum for light and heat.
Moving on. Love, Beauty, Truth, Wisdom, Courage, Liberty are not in themselves the ultimate reality but are not separate from that either. They rather are the means by which commerce can be carried on by the ultimate reality and created relative existence. We know God, that is, by knowing these characteristic effulgences. God is the substratum and is completely exhausted, that is, completely made manifest by these, by all, manifestation. Relative existence, things in themselves, are not separate from the ultimate but taken all together provide an endless, infinite, springing forth of that.
Please to pardon. Desani’s interview will transport one to another time, place, almost dimension. In that it is not different from his other writings. What this student of his wants most to accomplish is making evident an essential nature of his, that of promoting harmony. Not all his spiritual forbears made that a priority, though it is my experience that the Nadi writers most certainly did. I think the true essence of Christianity likewise seeks harmony with our world’s other spiritual systems. So does the best philosophy, too. I’ve been critical of some of the ancients here but a close reading of them – see for yourself, by all means – reveals they were sometimes more in concord with other sages than not. The Mandukya Upanishad has passages in that vein, certainly. And Nagarjuna allowed that those Theravadin Buddhists had at least made a decent first step.
So. I leave it at that.