The Upanishads clearly indicate, studying of scriptures is
not necessary. That why:- Buddha rejected Vedas.
Buddha said:-
Do not believe a spiritual teaching just
because:-
1. it is repeatedly recited,
2. it is written in a scripture,
3. it was handed from guru to disciple,
4. everyone around you believes it,
5. it has supernatural qualities,
6. it fits my beliefs anyway,
7. it sounds rational to me,
8. it is taught by a respectable person,
9. it was said to be the truth by the teacher,
10. one must defend it or fight for it.
However, only when it agrees with your experience and reason, and when it is conducive to the good and gain of oneself and all others, then one should accept the teachings, and live up to them."
....Buddha.
This Atman cannot be attained by the study of the Vedas,
or by intelligence, or by much hearing of sacred books. It is attained by him
alone whom It chooses. To such a one Ataman reveals Its own form. [Katha Upanishad Ch-II -23-P-20]
This Atman cannot be attained through study of the Vedas,
nor through intelligence, nor through much learning. He who chooses Atman—by
him alone is Ataman attained. It is Atman that reveals to the seeker Its true
nature. [3 –page-70 Mundaka Upanishad
(Upanishads by Nikilanada)
Raman Mahrshi explains
[in page 111/112- practical guide to
know yourself]:-
Q: D: Is it not necessary to study
the Vedas or at least Prastnatraya[Bagvad gita.Dasoponishad and Brahma Sutra all with commentaries] to ensure firm realization?
A: Bhagvan: - No. Do you need all that to see
yourself? All that is intellectual wealth, useful in explain doubts and
difficulties if others rise them if you yourself encounter them in course of
thinking. But to attain realization, all that is not necessary. You want fresh
water to drink, but you do not require all the water of the river Ganges to
quench your quest.
-
Raman Maharshi said:- fortunate are the one who do
not lose themselves in the labyrinths of philosophy. Bhagwan says: Take
Vedanta, for instance: it speaks of 15 pranas the names and functions of
it which the student is asked to commit
memory. Will it not be sufficient if he thought only one prana does the whole
work of maintaining the body? Again the antakaran is said to think, to desire,
to will, to reason etc. Why all these details? Has anyone seen antakarana, or
all these pranas? Do they really exist? They are conceptual divisions invented
by teachers of philosophy by their excessive analysis. Where do all these
concepts end? Why should confusion created and then explained away? Fortunate
is the man who does not lose himself in the labyrinths of philosophy, but goes
straight to the source from which they all arise. (GURU RAMANA .By S.S Cohen -vii Danger of philosophy-Page -58-59)
The above passages further prove
that:
Self-Knowledge cannot be attained by
study of the Vedas and intellectual understanding or by bookish knowledge. Therefore there is no use of studying the
Vedas and other scriptures in order to acquire the non-dual wisdom. That is why Buddha rejected the scriptures,
and even Sri, Sankara indicated that, the ultimate truth lies beyond religion,
concept of god and scriptures. –FORMLESS PATH
