Understanding intuition - Split from "Evolving tradition"

I positively agree with all you have expressed concerning about the absolute position of Guru-Sastra. However, I have a question about Intuition.

I have heard that Srila Sridhara Maharaja once said, “You trusted your heart when it brought you to Krishna Consciousness. Now, why will you doubt your heart to take you further; deeper?” (that is how I remember it).

My analyze here is, after meeting G&S, those intuitions is somehow overpowered by the incommensurable knowledge of Guru and Sastra and put aside to have a rest. However, later on that same intuition that brought one to the lotus feet of G&S, now awakes-up, and starts to pinch inside the heart, again. And again one moves on, and on, and on… until finally finds it’s path again.

In other words, how to harmonize the knowledge given by G&S with the knowledge, which one has inside, named intuition. How to understand intuition, even if it is not so clearly as G&S, however, it is taking one to Krishna Consciousness?

What I’m trying to say is besides G&S, apparently there is another element that is genuinely driving our attention towards the same direction or which eventually match with G&S, and should not be ignored.

As far as I know, intuition hasn't been granted a position equal to guru, sadhu and shastra. Certainly once the mind is clear, the intuition reflects the desires of the pure heart and the desires of the Lord like a spotless mirror. However for the baddha-jivas, intuition is somewhat of an unreliable guide.

If we feel intuition is taking us to Krishna consciousness, yet we feel intuition as being in conflict with guru and shastras, we must wonder whether the Krishna consciousness it's taking us to is the real thing. Beyond that, it's very hard to say much on this without having a concrete example of this principle to look at.

Radhe Radhe!

I think intuition is indeed present but I would think that it takes a backseat to Guru, Sastra and Sadhu. Again if one simply terms anything they lack faith in as inconsequential or subject to acceptance per ones intuition then one wouldn’t end up with Gaudiya Vaisnavism rather a smattering of beliefs derived from Gaudiya influence. That isn’t to say that ones intuition is for naught but it needs to be kept in perspective. For instance intuition may lead one to question something they have heard for deeper clarification and may find that they misunderstood something. However intuition over Guru, Sastra and Sadhu is very different.

Rasaraja dasa

The example here is that if you have at the hand ZZ and Y^X Shastra, but you are seeing or feeling that there is something else that has not been revealed at the Shatra (at hand). So, there is the calling, the intuition about it; the pinching inside, which keeps one going..

Looking at the case of Srila Vyasadeva, to facilitate the understanding of the mass, he divided the Vedas, wrote the Puranas, Upanishads, and Mahabharata. However, his mind was not satisfied. Something inside was in conflict with Sastra and his own realizations of it. Therefore, from that necessity, Guru and Sastra manifested again to pacify his mind; his intuition.

What I’m coming to meet here is that being the knowledge about the absolute, infinity in nature, at one point in the realization, that intuition will be the guidance that will let one to go further. In other words, it is like a bridge to the unknown or what has not yet been revealed. And perhaps, just perhaps, intuition will be the hands on to modernization; vision.

Radhe Radhe!

I don't think intuition is the right way to describe the inspiration and content attributed to Srila Vyasadeva nor do I think that one should/would attribute the revelations and guidance which inspired Srila Vyasadeva’s writings to our own decisions on what iwe define as poetic license and what is an integral ingredient to the very sum and substance of our theology.

Intuition will always be there but we should always use Sastra to help clarify mere intuition verse actual Gaudiya theology. Furthermore the Guru and Sadhu's are those in which can further clarify how to best understand and assimilate Sastra into ones life. Intuition is a bit of a wild card as it will be guided more by conditioning and karmic attributes.

Radhe Radhe!

Rasaraja dasa

It wasn't intuition that guided Vyasa to write the Bhagavata. It was the words of Narada, his guru.

This 'intuition-vada' is not new to me. It takes a person free from selfish material desires, who is beyond the mental and intellectual platform, to accurately listen to his/her intuition. Unspeakable crimes have been committed against me in the past on the pretext of 'intuition'.

Repeating the words of SM. “If intuition brought you to Krishna, why are you afraid if it?” Moreover, if was not the intuitions and feelings that there was something missing in the Shastra, Srila Vyasadeva would not have attracted the mercy of His Guru, Narada-ji.

Radhe Radhe!

Intuition is not simply intuition. Intuition is a byproduct of ones psychological makeup and karmic disposition. As Advaita stated it takes a person free from selfish material desires, who is beyond the mental and intellectual platform, to accurately listen to his/her intuition. For someone not free of such conditioning intuition will be a byproduct of material desires/disposition. So what is intuition for one in a materially contaminated state is very different then intuition for one is a pure state. This is where, as Vaisnavas, we must steer clear and take the instruction of Sastra, Sadhu and Guru.

None of us are stating that intuition is bad nor would any of us disagree with what Srila Sridhar Maharaja stated at face value. However you are taking Maharaja's example to an extreme and I doubt that he meant his example on intuition to be used to such an extent as to say that aspiring Vaisnavas intuition could lead one to correctly understand what is poetic license/inconsequential and what is an integral ingredient to the very sum and substance of our theology. What, may I ask, is the use of Sastra, Sadhu and Guru is intuition is the guiding force of importance?

Again I also find you comparing Srila Vyasadeva to ourselves to be a monumental stretch. Srila Vyasadeva didn't write the Bhagavat and its contents on intuition.

Rasaraja dasa

Thanks!

No of course not. I’m not even far comparing Srila Vyasadeva with us. I’m just trying to understand one basic point; there is Shastra, Sadhu, Guru and oneself and intuition is a integral part of it. These three agents are very important for self-realization. In the context I’m focusing on the last one. Srila Vyasadeva’s intuition (unsure; unhappiness) was the motion factor that brought him to the shore of the Srimad Bhagavatam’s milk ocean.

Radhe Radhe!

I think I now get where you are coming from but was it inspiration or intuition which led to Srila Vyasadevas writing the Bhagavat? We accept the impetus of Srila Vyasadeva in writing the Bhagavat to be from divine inspiration, if you will, not a byproduct of intuition. I guess I can see what would lead one to see it as intuition if one didn't consider the context or depth of the circumstances, inspirations and such.

Where we got sidetracked in this discussion is we are looking at the question of how one reconciles areas in which they have no faith or question arises. In such instances intuition cannot properly dictate what is poetic expression/ inconsequential from what is absolutely essential.

In this case intuition would lead one to say what does the description of the universe have to do with the relationship between Radha and Krsna? Yet in both cases we are dealing with what is inconceivable to our reality. Can one absolutely ascertain the existence of Radha and Krsna and their relationship by simple intuition or is such conviction a result of faith or belief? It is Sadhu, Sastra and Guru which imparts the knowledge and cultivates the faith to understand what is inconceivable; not intuition. So if we approach areas in which we lack faith with our simple intuition then we can’t get far.

Rasaraja dasa

Intuition:

1.
a. The act or faculty of knowing or sensing without the use of rational processes; immediate cognition.
b. Knowledge gained by the use of this faculty; a perceptive insight.
2. A sense of something not evident or deducible; an impression.
http://dictionary.com


I have no problem at all with your arguments; however, we are looking at intuition from two different perspectives. When I refer to Srila Vyasadeva having the intuition about something else besides the Vedas that means, he is realizing the absence of something that he actually can feel, but has not yet been openly revealed into his heart. The fire is burning within, but he can’t understand, nevertheless, he feels it. In this way, the intuition, which is playfully pinching; scorching, and sizing out his attention to facilitate to a new discover, arbitrates.



O dear twice-born, by no means could he, who was always working for the welfare of all, find satisfaction at that time. (27) Knowing what religion is, thus, purified in seclusion at the bank of the Sarasvatî, from the dissatisfaction of his heart he said to himself: (28-29) 'With strict discipline I sincerely did proper worship to the tradition of the vedic hymns, respecting the masters and doing the sacrifices. For women, s'ûdras and others I properly explained of the disciplic succession what is necessary to know of the path of religion by compiling the Mahâbhârata. (30) Although it appears that I did enough for the Supreme to the demands of the vedantists, I feel something is missing.

(31) I might not have given sufficient directions about the devotional service so dear to as well the perfect as to the Infallible One.'
(32) While Krishna-dvaipâyana Vyâsa was regretfully thinking this way of his shortcomings, Nârada, whom I spoke of before, reached his cottage. (33) Seeing the auspicious arrival of the muni he quickly got up and venerated him with the respect equal to the respect the godly pay Brahmâjî the creator."


I think the case is not about understanding Sri Radha-Krishna Lila, but being aware; susceptible; favorable in relation to it.

You do understand, Hari Saran, that intuition can also badly mislead you?

Pew,
what really is genuine intuition...

I for myself sometimes have glimpses of good intuition, but only when I get up
at 3 o´clock, with all bhajan nicely and peacefully done, connected with "the flow".

But real intuition would come from the Lord within our hearts.
And in my case, there a kilometers of ironwalls between me and Him, meaning me being able to listen to Him...

Otherwise, how to distinguish the "inner fool" from intuition?
Very often it IS the inner fool, selling iron for gold...

What is the meaning of the saying 'follow your heart'? Of coure thats a rhetorical question but I believe it is an important part of what Hari Saran is trying to get at.

I think that the point is that we came forward to engage in Mahaprabhu's movement based on a feeling and it is that feeling that continues to keep us engaged in pursuit of the ideals that he espoused.

I like the example of Vyasadeva (and I don't think that Hari Saran used it to equate struggling sadhakas with liberated souls) because it speaks to the fact that even though everything seemed to be in place in terms of Guru, Sadhu and Sastra - still Vyasadeva didn't 'feel' satisfied. He 'knew' something was missing. That wasn't based on logic or reason, rather it was his inner feeling coming out.

Of course we have to look at how he resolved his dilemna is we are to take the full lesson from the example. He placed his doubt before his Guru and it was confirmed and he was given instructions as to how to resolve the problem.

Each sadhaka is in a unique situation. Some have direct access to their Guru, others have taken initiation from a Guru who is no longer physically present. Sastra is there, of course - but I think it is obvious that sastra is passive and subject to interpretation. There are unlimited meanings to be drawn out from sastra.

I agree with the general conclusion that seems to have been put forward that until one reaches a certain level of spiritual attainment he/she is on shaky ground in following intuition. I also agree that our intuition should be considered based on how it relates to Guru, Sadhu and Sastra.

Having said all of that, I also agree with Hari Saran that we are on a mystical path and that as we engage in bhakti sadhana we should listen closely to our hearts. Some impressions will undoubtely arise in us as we carefully and thoughtfully engage ourselves with sincerity. We may find the need to adjust ourselves and change something in our lives so that our progress will be helped. That change may come from intuition or inspiration in the course of our practicing life.

In fact I would say that this is precisely why we are engaged in this process - we want inspiration - we want our hearts to speak to us and we are told they will as they are cleared and purified along the way.

I think it's important to remember the inspiration to leave material life behind and engage in a life of Hari bhajana and how that came to manifest within us. It is, afterall, based on an impression within our hearts and a deep inspiration that we made such a bold move in our lives. Logic, reason, sastra etc. are there and they support such a move - but no one would have made such a drastic and bold move in their lives without a genuine inspiration or intuition to do so. Shall we now forget that exhiliration and inspiration and stop listening to our inner voice? I believe that this idea can be a great impediment to our own progress. Rather I think we should be keen to develop our inner life and continue to follow that inspiration throughout our material sojourn.

I would like to (many times) thank Audharya-Lila-Das-ji for his depth and friendly approaching on the subject. It is actually by the realization of great saints that we are inspiring ourselves to continually progress on the spiritual path. The example of Srila Vyasadeva is there to show us all the elements that are essential for self-realization; Sri Guru and his grace, Sri Shastra and its’ knowledge, and oneself’s insightfully surrender. Let me also extend my thanks to all others that took part on the development of this delicate topic.

Radhe-Radhe!

Intuition:

Krishna whispering into a devotee's ear how to surrender better...

Krishna whispering into a thieve's ear how to steal better...

I would suggest to the educated audience in here to please pay attention to those lines, wherein, describes the insightful Acaryas.

According to Sri Chinmoy,

The Vedas have the eternal wisdom. Each Vedic seer is a poet and a prophet. In case of an ordinary poet, his poems are quite often based upon imagination. Imagination gives birth to his poetry. In the case of the Vedic poets, it was intuition that gave birth to their poems. This intuition is the direct knowledge of Truth. As regards prophets, very often we see that an ordinary prophet's prophecy is based on a kind of unknown mystery. But in case of the Vedic prophets, it was not so. Their prophecies were based on their full and conscious awareness of direct and immediate Truth. They brought to the fore this dynamic Truth to operate in the cosmic manifestation.
http://www.aspiringindia.org/vedas/

Common Core of 6 systems

“Despite their differences, these six systems are taken to have a common core. The Vedas are accepted as authoritative and are the object of philosophical reflection. Each system develops a critical theory of knowledge. Along with the Vedas, intuition and inference are accepted; reason is subordinated to intuition. Self-consciousness, though characteristic of man, and the chief distinction between man and other animals, is not ultimate. Just as self-consciousness is above mere consciousness, so there is a super-consciousness which is above self-consciousness. All six systems reject the scepticism of the Buddhists and adhere to an objective standard or reality and truth. All the systems have a practical aim of salvation by release, the recovery by the self of its natural integrity. All six schools accept that while the universe is law-abiding, man is yet free to shape his own destiny in that world. All schools accept that release comes not through knowledge as mere information but through realised knowledge. All accept as a necessary (though not sufficient) condition of liberation unselfish love and disinterested activity, and insist on a cleansing of the heart (cittasuddhi). The six schools may be reduced to four: Samkhya links up with Yoga; Vaisesika connects with Nyaya; Purva-Mimamsa; these three schools are all forms of metaphysical pluralism. The remaining school, Vedanta, is a form of metaphysical monism.”
Philosophy

Moreover, another example of intuition in Vaishnava History is Madhvacarya.

“As Aristotelian logic dominated education during the medieval days of Europe, so Sankaracarya’s advaita-vedanta dominated Hindu education during the days of Madhva. We are told how Sankara’s advaita-vedanta produced a profound dissatisfaction in the mind of the young Madhva, which often brought him into conflict with his teachers. In fact Madhva’s objection to advaita-vedanta became the most compelling force in this life and he spent much of his adult life arguing against this view of the world.”

http://www.sanskrit.org/Madhva/madhva.html

Intuition seems a bad word to use in this context, considering that the Vedic verses were gleaned during moments of revelation.

Radhe Radhe!

I agree with Gaurasundaras point.

I do think there is truth to HS' points but I think intuition is just not the right word. When approaching such circumstances what does one define as intuition verse revelation/divine inspiration? I would say in the circumstance of Srila Vyasadeva it is safer to accept as the latter especially when you consider the Acaryas commentaries which do not point to his inspiration to be based on mere intuition.

Radhe Radhe!

Rasaraja dasa

I think you you are not understanding the importance of intuition for both, Sadhakas and Self-realized souls. Intuition is much more than mere perception, it is your link to the unknown; the revelation; the discoveries in life.

Radhe Radhe!

Well that may be true or it may be that intuition for a sadhaka and /or self realized soul is more a byproduct of their advancement and isn't separate from revelation/divine inspiration. In other words for the advanced Sadhaka and one that is self realized is their intuition not blessed with direct and clear transmission of such revelation? Would one that is materially contaminated have such clear access with no other influence?

For one that is materially contaminated intuition is tainted by so many different aspects whereas one that is pure is not. For a Vaisnava, regardless of purity, humility will lead one to always consult with Sadhu, Sastra and Guru.

I think where this conversation started off handicapped is that it started off of the conversation where one member spoke of clearly being able to define, based on intellect or intuition, what is or isn't critical to believe in Gaudiya Sastra. Thus the example of Srila Vyasadeva has caused a bump in the road. You are looking at Srila Vyasadevas intuition which is going to be clearly driven by revelation and inspiration that a struggling jiva cannot claim. I guess what i am saying is that I get your point regarding intuition but I think intuition and how it plays within ones spiritual life will be defined by ones surrender and purity. Regardless who, as a Vaisnava, will claim to have such clear intuition? Even Srila Vyasadeva ensured his intuition, as you would say, be directed to his Guru for instruction.

Aspiring to serve the Vaisnavas,
Rasaraja dasa

Very nice, thanks

The difference between my approaching on the subject, and yours, is that I’m looking at the positive side of both Sadhaka and Siddhas’s intuitions. On the other hand, you seem to trust the later’s capacity and clear vision, only. Again, it is not that I don’t agree with you, rather I’m just focusing on the faculty named intuition that is available for both. You may call it a byproduct; however, I prefer to look at it as an attribute that is an integrated part of the whole being.

When an individual start to inquire about his nature, (Athato brahma-jijnasa) it is said that he is eligible to further progress on the mystical path of self-realization. At that point, when there is nothing else, but the jivatma, the only companion is its intuition, which will lead the jivatma till it finds peace, Guru;Sastra;Sadhu. What can happen also is that the path selected may no longer be suitable for further advancement then the intuition will again be the Jivatma’s friend, until it finally find it’s path, again. Is in that very moment, when there is no one else, but realizations, where I’m focusing.

If you pay attention on the narration of SB about Srila Vyasadeva, what happen is that his Guru came in with the good news about the pastimes of the Lord, after Vyasadeva had been saturated with Vedas. In other words, was out of that realization and intuition about something missing in the Vedas that his Guru Narada-ji appeared.

The faculty intuition is there and it actually acts independently. In fact it acts as a sensor, which defends one’s inner quest. The sensor (intuition) will be activated whenever instinctively one feels that something from in or out is interrupting the inner course of realizations.

In conclusion, I’m sure that most of sadhakas here have already realized that whenever honest and sincerity to fulfill that inner desire is present, Sri Guru appeared. Therefore that same intuition, which drove Vyasa to the shore of Srimad Bhagavatam, drives the sadhaka, too.

To better clarify, I will use the insinghtful words of Audharya-Lila Dasa-ji:

For Hari Sharan, Audarya Lila and others:-

As the Guru's teachings sprout
Their roots crave the springs
of intuition .....

The question that I would like to ask to the audience is why even after being blessed with nectar of the Srimad Bhagavatam, by the lotus mouth of his Gurudeva, Narada Muni, Srila Vyasadeva was not the one elected to speak it to the sages and King Parikshiti Maharaja, but his son, Sukadeva Gosvami?

Because Suka the parrot first heard it from Shiva at Ekamra-kanana in Bhuvanezvara.

Thanks!

So then Sukadeva is the incarnation of that Parrot? If that is confirmed, why then after hearing the SB from Lord Shiva, Sukadeva, who was an impersonalist, didn’t want to come out of his mothers’ womb to share his realizations about the glories of the Supreme Lord Sri Krishna? BDW, what "Ekamra-kanana" stands for?

Reading Jagat’s website I found this nice material. So, in the context of intuition, these following words of Srila Bhaktivinode, would be a plus for what has been said in here. In other words, although it is recommended to the truth’s seekers to bathe their intellect in the deep water of the Vedas-like-Ganges, still one will be advised that in order to have depth in scriptural understanding, one will have to humbly look at the holy texts in an individual/personal perspective.

"Knowledge is like the sun, while all scriptures are only its rays. No single scripture could possibly contain all knowledge. The personal realizations (svataH siddha-jnAna) of the jivas are the basis of all scripture. These realizations should be recognized as the gifts of God Himself. The perceptive Rishis obtained this self-evident knowledge directly from the Supreme Brahman and wrote it down for the benefit of other jivas. A fractional portion of this knowledge has taken form as the Veda." (page 150)

"A conditioned soul is advised to study the Veda with the help of all these explanations. But even with the help of these explanations, he should still examine them in the light of his own self-evident knowledge (or personal realizations), because the authors of these explanatory literatures and commentaries are not always clear in their meaning. In some cases, commentators have confessed to having doubts about their own understanding. Therefore the Katha Upanishad says:

avidyAyAm antare vartamAnAH
svayaM dhIrAH paNDitaM manyamAnAH |
dandramyamAnAH pariyanti mUDhAH
andhenaiva nIyamAnA yathAndhAH ||

Abiding in the midst of ignorance, thinking themselves wise and learned, fools go aimlessly hither and thither, like blind led by the blind. (Katha Up. 2.5)

Therefore, it is necessary to cultivate knowledge in the light of one's own personal realizations. This is the rule governing scriptural study. Since knowledge born of personal realization is the root of all the scriptures, how can we expect to gain benefit by ignoring it and depending exclusively on the scriptures, which are the branches growing out of it?" (pp. 151-152)
[hr]
Of course one can’t forget that Sri Guru imparts his individual realizations into the disciple’s heart, and his realizations are the fundament (seeds) of the disciple’s spiritual advancement.
[/hr]