In David Godman’s presentation of Ramana Maharshi’s teaching, scripture and study are granted a clearly secondary, instrumental role in the movement toward self-realization. Scriptures are portrayed as pointers: they indicate the truth, direct attention toward the Self, and can confirm what is glimpsed through genuine inquiry, but they do not themselves confer realization. Their chief value lies in their capacity to turn the mind inward, to generate clarity and dispassion, and to summarize in conceptual form the essential message that one is already the Self. Once this essential orientation has been grasped, further accumulation of scriptural knowledge is regarded as unnecessary and potentially distracting from the direct work of inquiry.

Godman also shows that the usefulness of scripture is temperament-dependent. For those with an intellectual bent, study can temporarily serve as a helpful scaffold, providing a conceptual framework that points toward self-inquiry and removes doubts or misconceptions that obstruct practice. In this sense, scripture can purify and prepare the mind, especially when a seeker is not yet ready to abide steadily in the simple investigation of the “I.” Yet even in such cases, scriptural authority is always subordinate to direct experience; when there is any tension between text and realization, it is experiential knowledge that is granted primacy.

A consistent theme in this presentation is that all scriptural teachings ultimately converge on a single, practical injunction: to turn inward and investigate the source of the “I”-sense. When that inward turn is actually undertaken, scripture has fulfilled its purpose and becomes, at best, confirmatory rather than essential. Excessive reliance on books and concepts then risks becoming a hindrance, fostering mental accumulation instead of the non-conceptual awareness that self-inquiry reveals. Thus, scripture and study are acknowledged as useful aids and provisional supports, but never as the core means of awakening to one’s true nature.