Saturday, August 19, 2017

The Knowledge and the learned knowledges

In the spirituality, there is a difference between the learned knowledge and the Knowledge (with a capital K). The Knowledge (or shruti) is an obviousness coming by the practice, inspired, revealed by the experiment of the deepest of your true being: the soul and the Holy-Name. 

The Knowledge about which it is question on the path of Freedom, the original-yoga, is not one of the knowledge (known as “with-seeds”) learned at school, in books. The Knowledge is not the learned knowledge.

The spiritual Knowledge about which it is question on the path is a revealed Knowledge, the Shruti of the Vedic school Sâmkhya. It is a Knowledge like an obviousness coming from the deepth by plunging in the bliss, the contemplation through the Observance of the Agya (three joined together practices forming the original-yoga).

Question of word
What is the Knowledge, spiritually?

 Is it the sum of the learned things? 

Is it the instruction ? Obviously not. 

The true Knowledge is not 

the one you find in the books, as holy as they can be, 

not more as the one of the temples. 

Take, for example, a very honourable spiritual way like the Buddhism. There is not one Buddhism but a multitude according to whether they are Indian, Tibetans, Japanese, Chinese, Vietnamese, American, French etc. In any case the Buddhism denies the existence of the soul, preferring to it an aggregate of seven impermanent and interdependent elements forming the being. However it believes that the Spirit, which is usually bound to the physical body, can be detached in some in Dhyàna and go until the nirvàna [the nirvikalpa-samadhi, for yoga] being thus established in the awakening. 

Various Buddhisms Tibetan, Japanese, Indian, Western

''Samadhi is Satçitananda, the Kingdom the Christ spoke about ''
[Bhaktimàrga 2-5-14]

Here is an inconsistency, or at least a paradox. How, without believing in the existence of the soul transcending the existence of the physical body, it is possible, at the same time to say that one of the seven elements forming the being is detached from the others and knows the nirvàna, on the road of the awakening?

A paradox

This apparent paradox is explained by a simple matter of vocabulary: the word soul is replaced by that of Spirit. The Buddhists believe that the Spirit, or the mind, is a sixth sens [manas] independent of the brain so that if two brains of a person would be transplanted to another each one would remain himself. The Dalai Lama says that: '' The highest level (of conscience) escapes the material support. The conscience is independent of the physical particles ''.

This description looks like the one we could give of the soul. How can we explain the samsàra, the multiple incarnations, by denying the transcendence of a part of the human being’s seven components ? If these seven aggregates are, like Buddhism says, impermanent, indissociable and interdependent, how can we justify that the Spirit can leave the body; alone, in order to incarnate itself elsewhere and to carry on its way towards the Liberation


The Buddhism is a spiritual school attached to the theories and  written things in books. It is however simpler to realise the full Conscience with this Juste-sight, so loved by the Buddhism, given by the frequentation of the center of oneself ! The Buddhism makes use of concepts, fixed on pages and pages, to explain everything and frame a practice whose the goal is not very readable because of all its paradoxes and inconsistencies.

The Writings speak to us about two types of knowledge: “para and apara”. This Vedic concept indicates the knowledge of the phenomenal world, of the things which one sees, that one touches, that our senses perceive under the name of apara, that of the subtle field of the spirituality is named para. The word “learned knowledge” indicates apara and the word Knowledge, with a capital “K”, indicates the “things” of the true spirituality. It is only para who can lead to the realization of oneself on the spiritual level.

The Knowledge about which it is question on the path of Freedom
 (the original-yoga) is the Shruti of the Sâmkhya’s school: 
revealed Knowledge, coming from the deepest 
thanks to the Observance of the Agya. 
(Agya: a set of the three practices constituting the original-yoga).

The reading does not give the experiment 
of the inner Peace 


You can spend all your life reading all the Buddhist writings of all the various Buddhist schools without advancing on the road of the Realization. The lessons rotate on themselves and you lose youself with these games worthy of the Torah and the Cabal. The writings are not enough.


   The Buddhism is founded on the base of the awakening lived by sri Gautama 
which did not know the awakening while spending his life with reading: 
he sat down under his fig tree 
and he entered in deep Meditation [Dhyàna] 
until the nirvikalpa-samadhi and the awakening, 
moved by a great desire to merge himself in the Unit.

''The meditation is contemplation ''

Several hundred years [450] later, some descendants of descendants of descendants of disciples who had known the living Buddha and had listened to his sermons [Satsang] put into black and white the distant memories of the missing Master’s teaching. This teaching, in the course of time, had changed into concepts.


What would think sri Gautama, in your opinion, if he came back
today and followed the lesson delivered in a Tibetan lamasery ? Would he recognize what he lived? Could he, following this teaching, sit down under a tree and know the awakening as a practitioner of the taught Meditation

The Truth is in all

If you look for a way of life, that you like to let tinkle the cymbals, turn the prayer wheels, let burn the incenses, then the Buddhism gives you what you seek. It is a noble and beautiful way, but the Truth can be met there only when the studies cease, when the Conscience deepens. The Truth is in oneself and he who finds it in a religion does not find it thanks to the religion but in spite of it; because he already had it inside himself.


The answers and the answer

If you are really thirsty for Truth, then do not place your hope in the studies. You can read books in connection with spirituality, as hobby, a source of inspiration but no writing ever replaced the practice. 

There exists a single answer to all the questions. 
It is not in any book. Even the Bhaktimàrga, 
which sings the praises of the Truth, does not give any answer. 
The only answer which is worth is the one who allows a person 
to put her/his Conscience at the good place, inside 
and to keep it there as far as he/she want it. 
To dissipate the darkness of the ignorance you 
need the Light of Knowledge. 

The Knowledge and seeds

The word Knowledge (connaissance in french), at the origin, did not indicate intellectuals knowledges. The root of the word (connaissance) is sanskrit and it is the same one as that of the word jnana, of the jnana-yoga, the yoga of the Knowledge. From the Sanskrit this word passed to Persian, then to Greek and, finally, to French via the Latin. The word Knowledge (connaissance) meant, in the sanskrite origin, to know, and implied: the gnosis of Shiva [or Shiva-jnana], i.e. to live what Shiva revealed.

This Knowledge has nothing to do with the bookish, theoretical one. This Knowledge is the fact of seeing and of understanding [to take with oneself, to realize]. The spiritual path needs realization, doing.


The true Knowledge is not learned, it is received and lived. The Revelation and the Agya carry this Knowledge in germ. The practice, the Observance lets grow this seed. This same seed that it is necessary to sow by paying attention to the birds and brambles, that about which spoke Christ in the New Testament, this seed which gives a tree whose fruits are recognizable.

''...By their fruits you will get knowledge of them (good or bad prophets).  
Do men get grapes from thorns or figs from thistles? 
Even so, every good tree gives good fruit; but the bad tree gives evil fruit.''
[Matthew 7/16/17]