Why is it that acquiring knowledge often makes you more ignorant than you were before, wonders Mona Mehta.

Into blinding darkness enter those who worship ignorance,” says the rishi in the ninth shloka of the Ishavasya Upanishad. Got it. Then he delivers a googly by adding, “Into greater darkness enter those who delight in knowledge.”

I was listening to Sri M’s discourse in the Capital on the Yajur Veda’s Ishavasya Upanishad that’s among the shortest of the Upanishads, with barely 18 shlokas.

An Upanishad is an intimate discussion between the teacher and the taught, with equal importance being given to both. More importantly, an Upanishad shakes you out of your ordinary frame of thinking. He says, “Our rational framework is based upon the inputs that we receive from our indriyas or the senses, and how the brain puts them together. And since the data that you receive from these five senses by itself is not poorna, it’s incomplete, as the senses themselves are limited in scope, therefore the rational framework that we normally operate on, is limited. Rishis and yogis say that there are other systems of perception in human beings which need to be activated to perceive the Supreme Reality and the whole objective of the Upanishads is to open up these centres of perception, that go beyond the senses, and ordinary mind.”

The Ishavasya Upanishad’s verses are no different. The ninth shloka may sound like an oxymoron, but it is pretty revelatory. It is, actually, one of the most controversial shlokas of the Upanishad, and has been explained in various ways, says Sri M, spiritual master and head of Satsang Foundation.Drawing reference from the Mundaka Upanishad, Sri M explains that there are two kinds of knowledge to be known, apara, the higher and para, the lower. Apara is knowledge of spirit, and para is knowledge of the ordinary, of that which is not important, and so does not lead us to the truth.

Interestingly, the Upanishad goes on to include the Vedas in this category. It does not mean that they should not be read, but what the rishis are trying to say here is that the ‘un-decaying Supreme Reality’ can be truly understood only through anubhava or personal experience. So being in the midst of ignorance, yet thinking of themselves as learned, people with knowledge of the scriptures are only fools afflicted with troubles. The one who is ignorant knows that he knows not; so he tries to learn, but the one who thinks he knows but knows not, enters into greater darkness, because he will never bother to learn.

The second interpretation of the shloka is that one who worships knowledge, feels that he has all the knowledge that is required, and acquires a certain sense of self-importance and ego. “Now when ego becomes strong, there is no way to find the truth, because then I become self-centred. My centre becomes really strong; I say I know. To find the truth, one has to start from the premise that he knows not — although he may know many things but actually realises that he doesn’t know the truth.” Therefore, the shloka infers that if one is filled with all the knowledge that is required, one may enter into greater darkness.Lending a new perspective to the shloka, Maheshwarnath Babaji starts by asking: What is knowledge? You wanted to know something; you study it, learn, and file the information in your memory for recall. This is knowledge. The Supreme Being which is all-pervading and is always here cannot be part of this knowledge. All knowledge is in the memory, hence in the past, while the Supreme Reality is present in the now, and has to be understood and experienced in the present. Therefore, the one who delights in knowledge is far, far away from the Supreme Reality, far, far away from light.

Hasn’t it been said that you can light the lamp of an ignorant man, but lighting the lamp of one who is knowledgeable is an even bigger challenge?

mona.mehta@timesgroup.com

