“Knowing” is a particular psychic projection. Not knowing is also a psychic projection, though of another form. One is positive and the other is negative. But both are psychic projections of the same type. That is why it has been said in the Vedas:

Náham manye suvedeti no na vedeti veda ca,
Yo nastatveda tatveda no na dedeti.

The Vaedika rśi has said: “I do not think that I know nor do I think that I don’t know.” “Because whether I know or I do not know, both of them are my mental projections only.” That which we know as Paramatattva is beyond the periphery of mánasatattva. Therefore it is not possible to transform Paramatattva or give it a particular shape or form by thinking or exercising mental power. The Vaedika rśi has justly said, “I do not know whether I know or I do not know,” for whatever comes under the purview of knowledge or jiṋána will have to be given a positive or negative form. Yet what remains beyond the reach of the mental sphere - what remains above the feeling of the psychic world – can be given neither a positive nor a negative mental shape. For example, what is non-existence? It can be given a shape only by mental debilitation or by psychic impairment. In mánasa tattva, positive and negative valuation are nothing but mental actions. And the one who stays beyond mánasa satta cannot be brought under the jurisdiction of such mental actions. That is why it has been said:

Yasyámataḿ tasyamataḿ mataḿ yasya no veda sah
Avijiṋánataḿ vijánataḿ vijiṋátam vijánatam.

Suppose some one says, “I know this thing very well. I shall show you it is so, if such and such a book is available.” But what does he show? He takes a book of geography published in 1912 which lists Calcutta as the capital of India. No doubt the book is correct, for in 1912 the capital of India was transferred from Calcutta to Delhi. Hence all the previous books state truly that Calcutta is the capital of India. Now this person is putting forth based on that book published in 1912 and shows that book in support. But the book itself is now incorrect, for indeed all books published after 1912 will list Delhi as the capital. Of course, Delhi is not the capital now. New Delhi is now India’s capital. So those who deem themselves greatly learned and proudly state that they know, do not really know. On the other hand, those persons who think that they do not know anything, may be the ones who actually know. So if we want to know who is knowledgeable and who is ignorant, it will be very difficult to arrive at a correct judgment. Off hand we cannot make any comment. Out of the blue (phat), we cannot say anything. Before deciding we shall have to ponder very deeply.

I shall conclude the subject with a few remarks on a particular word I just used – phat, which means instantly. In the Tantrika system of old there were three vijas – phat, bashat and bausat. Before performing different sorts of kriya, a particular one of these vijas would be used as a pledge. In the kriya, the viija has quickly transformed into action. That is to say, the though process was made to act very quickly. All of a sudden if one wanted to go to Cuttack and he or she set out then and there – he or she gave his or her wish an immediate actional form. So in the system of Tantra, if one wanted to transform his or her kriya or thought into quick action, then the phat mantra or incantation was uttered before performing the action. We can say that such and such person is doing “phat phat” – that he or she has a lot of “phat phat”. Thus that particular biija is called phat in the sense of performing an action very quickly – instantly. As I have told you, one cannot tell “phatly” or instantly whether a particular person is a learned person or a fool. One has to think a great deal before commenting on such a thing. Here it is better not to apply the Tántrika biija “phat” mantra.