munayaḥ sādhu pṛṣṭo’haṁ bhavadbhir loka-maṅgalam |
yat kṛtaḥ kṛṣṇa-sampraśno yenātmā suprasīdati ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 1.2.5)
“O sages, I have been excellently questioned [by you all], since this inquiry in regard to Kṛṣṇa made by you all, by which the self [i.e., the mind] becomes fully satisfied, is beneficial for the world.”
ato niṣevyamāṇāṁ ca sarvathā bhagavat-kathām |
muhus tad-rasikān pṛcchen mitho moda-vivṛddhaye ||
tathā vaiṣṇava-dharmāṁś ca kriyamānām api svayam |
sampṛcchet tad-vidaḥ sādhūn anyonya-prīti-vṛddhaye ||
nanu bhagavad-dharmāḥ parama-gopyāḥ praśna-mātreṇa kathaṁ kathyāḥ tatra likhati—śraddhayeti |
śraddhayā bhagavad-dharmān vaiṣṇavāyānupṛcchate |
avaśyaṁ kathayed vidvān anyathā doṣa-bhāg bhavet ||
(Hari-bhakti-vilāsa: 10.472, 475–476, with an excerpt from the Dig-darśinī-ṭīkā)
“Therefore [i.e., because listening to other topics, as well as non-listening, aversion, and even satiation with Bhagavat-kathā, are to be given up], even though one is continuously engaged in honoring Bhagavat-kathā in all respects [by means of hearing it, praising it, remembering it, and so on] one should repeatedly inquire from rasikas thereof [about Bhagavān and topics related to him] for the sake of enhancing mutual delight [i.e., the delight of both the speaker and fellow listeners]. … Similarly, even though one is practicing the dharmas of a Vaiṣṇava oneself, one should inquire from sādhus knowledgeable about them for the sake of mutual delight. [A doubt is raised:] Bhagavat-dharmas [however] are highly confidential. How do they become fit to be explained just because of a question [about them being raised]? In regard to this [doubt], the author writes: When one repeatedly inquires from a Vaiṣṇava about Bhagavat-dharmas with śraddhā, then a knowledgeable person [i.e., a person conversant in the dharmas of a Vaiṣṇava] shall certainly speak [i.e., answer one’s questions], and otherwise shall be at fault [i.e., one who has true knowledge of Bhagavat-dharma based on śāstra yet withholds it from an inquirer possessed of the requisites to learn such knowledge, the foremost of which is śraddhā in bhakti-śāstra, commits a transgression against Bhagavat-dharma, as does someone who gives knowledge of Bhagavat-dharma to an unfit recipient and someone who gives answers about Bhagavad-dharma that contravene the śāstra’s siddhānta].”
vādo nāvalambyaḥ |
bāhulyāvakāśatvād aniyatatvāc ca |
(Nārada-bhakti-sūtra: 74–75)
“Vāda is not to be taken support of because of [vāda] having scope for prolixity and being unrestrained [i.e., because vāda can go on unlimitedly and never reach a definitive end].”
tīrthe tīrthe nirmalaṁ sādhu-vṛndaṁ
vṛnde vṛnde tattva-cintānuvāda |
vāde vāde jāyate tattva-bodhaḥ
bodhe bodhe bhāsate candra-cūḍaḥ ||
(Śuka-rambhā-samvāda: 3)
“In tīrtha after tīrtha, there are assemblies of faultless sādhus. In assembly after assembly, there is deliberation on and explanation of tattva. In vāda after vāda, there arises realization of tattva, and in realization after realization, the moon-crowned one [i.e., Śiva] shines.”
pradīpaḥ sarva-vidyānām upāyaḥ sarva-karmaṇām |
āśrayaḥ sarva-dharmānāṁ vidyoddeśe prakīrtitā ||
(Vātsyāyana’s Nyāya-bhāṣya on Gautama’s Nyāya-sūtra: 1.1.1)
“Ānvīkṣikī [i.e., logic (nyāya)] is stated in the enumeration of sciences [i.e., fields of knowledge] to be the lamp of all sciences (vidyās), the means for [accomplishing] all karmas, and the basis of all dharmas.”
itthaṁ sma pṛṣṭaḥ sa tu bādarāyaṇis
tat-smāritānanta-hṛtākhilendriyaḥ |
kṛcchrāt punar labdha-bahir-dṛśiḥ śanaiḥ
pratyāha taṁ bhāgavatottamottama ||
(Śrīmad Bhāgavatam: 10.12.44)
[Sūta Gosvāmī to Śaunaka Ṛṣi:] “O best of the best of the bhāgavatas, so questioned, that Bādrarāyaṇi [i.e., Śukadeva Gosvāmī], all his senses seized by Ananta [i.e., Śrī Kṛṣṇa] as he was reminded [of Ananta] thereby, with difficulty gradually regained external awareness and spoke to him [i.e., Parīkṣit Mahārāja].”
apṛṣṭvaiva bhaven mūḍhaḥ jñānaṁ manasi cintanāt |
apūrṇaḥ kurute śabdaṁ na pūrṇaḥ kurute ghaṭaḥ ||
(Mahāsubhāṣita-saṅgraha: 2125)
“By not questioning, one becomes foolish. Wisdom comes from reflection in the mind. A vessel that is not full makes noise. A full vessel does not.”
saṁspṛṣṭvā vaiṣṇavān viprān viṣṇu-śāstra-viśāradān |
cīrṇa-vratān sadācārāṁs tad-uktaṁ yatnataś caret ||
(Kūrma Purāṇa; cited in Hari-bhakti-vilāsa: 12.415)
“After inquiring from Vaiṣṇava brāhmaṇas who are well-verses in Viṣṇu-śāstra, who have performed vratas [themselves], and who are of proper conduct (sadācāra), carefully follow their statements.”
parīkṣya lokān karma-citān brāhmaṇo
nirvedam āyān nāsty akṛtaḥ kṛtena |
tad-vijñānārthaṁ sa gurum evābhigacchet
samit-pāṇiḥ śrotriyaṁ brahma-niṣṭham ||
(Muṇḍaka Upaniṣad: 1.2.12)
“Having examined the planes attained by karma, a brāhmaṇa reaches disinterest [based on the conclusion], ‘That which is unmade [Brahman] is not attained by that which is made [karma].’ To know in depth that [which is unmade, Brahman], he, with firewood in hand, should only [rather than seeking knowledge of it independently] approach a guru who is learned [in the śāstra] and fixed [exclusively] in Brahman.”
tad viddhi praṇipātena paripraśnena sevayā |
upadekṣyanti te jñānaṁ jñāninas tattva-darśinaḥ ||
(Śrīmad Bhagavad-gītā: 4.34)
“Learn that [knowledge] through obeisance, inquiry, and service. The knowers and seers the truth will teach that knowledge [to you].”
