10 Dec 2017
Pañcadaśādhāyaḥ (Fifteenth Chapter Continued …)
[Opponent (Purvapakshi):- It is practically impossible to cross the boundary of imaginable domain or space or universe. Due to this impossibility of practical verification, the unimaginable domain after the boundary of imaginable domain is only a logical hypothesis (Yukti), but not truth that can be verified practically and experienced directly (Anubhava). Our hypothesis is that the domain after the boundary of imaginable domain is also imaginable. In the absence of practical verification, our hypothesis has also 50% probability. In such case, how can you establish your hypothesis of unimaginable domain, which has also 50% probability only?
Theorist (Siddhaanti):- If you say that the domain after the boundary of imaginable domain is also imaginable, then, there is no boundary of imaginable domain since imaginable domain is continuously extending. In that case, we have to accept that the imaginable domain (space or universe) is really infinite. If it is so, the components of universe (matter and energy; awareness is also a form of energy) are composites of fundamental tiny components like sub-atomic particles, atoms and discrete quanta of energy. A composite must have boundary because the tiny components have boundaries. Matter or energy is not continuous phase without fundamental constituents. This leads to the defect of ad-infinitum having internal mutual contradiction (that composite should have edge, but is infinite without edge). Hence, the imaginable domain has edge (since imaginable domain ends there resulting in the beginning of unimaginable domain, which is unimaginable without the concept of space). Since, unimaginable domain exists after the boundary of imaginable domain, we can say that the imaginable domain ended there. It is just like telling that soil different from water, appears at the edge of ocean or water. If you say that water alone exits after the edge of the ocean, it means that it is not the edge of water or ocean. Since the universe is a composite of sub-composites (matter and energy), the universe must have a boundary. Since there is a necessity of appearance of something which is not imaginable at the boundary of imaginable domain, there is no other alternative than to accept that unimaginable domain exists after the compulsory boundary of the universe.]
[Opponent:- Since practical verification of unimaginable domain by reaching the edge of imaginable domain is impossible, you have to agree that unimaginable domain is only a hypothesis and not true theory due to lack of direct verification, it is your bound duty to prove your hypothesis as theory.
Theorist:- I have given logic at least in support of My hypothesis and in opposition of your hypothesis. You are unable to do the same in reverse way. This results in your side having not even the hypothesis and also in your inability to give logic to condemn My hypothesis. The defect of impossibility of verification lies common to both sides. Basing on such common point, if you condemn My hypothesis, it is worse than Vitandavaada (in which the opposite argument is condemned with possible true logic even though argument to establish self is absent) because the argument used by you to condemn My hypothesis is based on common impossibility!]
[Opponent:- Assume that we are not arguing at all with you. We are only your disciples hearing your concept of unimaginable domain and we are only humbly asking you about the experimental verification of your justified hypothesis to become truth as per JTB (Justified True Belief) theory of knowledge. We, as seekers of knowledge, like to give status of knowledge to your hypothesis by adding verification to it. Even in the inference-authority (which is agreed by Kanaada vaisheshika-school, apart from perception), basic perception is seen in the steps:- 1) This hill has unseen fire on its top (Vahnimaanayam parvatah), 2) because smoke is coming down (dhumatvaat), 3) because wherever smoke exists, fire must exist there as its generator and this is vyaapti (yatra yatra dhumah tatra tatra vahnih), 4) This vyaapti is perceived in kitchen (Yathaa mahaanase), 5) This vyaapti is inapplicable if fog is in the place of smoke and this is avyaapti (baashpaambudhume vyabhichaarah...). This avyaapti can be also eliminated by climbing the mountain and personally seeing the fire there. Such possibility does not exist in your hypothesis because it is impossible to reach the boundary of space. In such case of permanent absence of true verification of your justified hypothesis, how can we accept it as truly verified knowledge?
Theorist:- You are perfectly correct in your logic. For this reason only, the unimaginable domain (unimaginable God) comes again and again in human form to perform unimaginable events called as miracles, which indicate their unimaginable source, the God (Yadyat vibhutimat sattvam…, Tadaatmaanam srujaamyaham… Gita). Jesus, who performed several miracles, told that He has come to fulfill what is told in the scripture. The Veda says about the entry of unimaginable God into world (Tadevaanu praavishat). The Gita says that God with His unimaginable power is born here as human incarnations (sambhavaamyaatmamaayayaa…, Manushim tanumaashritam…). Apart from direct experience of miracles, you must give value to the scripture written by sages, who experienced God (true) and gave conclusion after lifelong discussions (justified) sitting in peaceful forests , which must be also respected by us as authority of word (Shabda Pramaana) as given by Gautama nyaaya-school. However, we have taken scripture as supporting authority only and not as primary authority, which is from perception being the basis of even inference. The scripture was also written by sages having perceptional experience and long deep debates only. Any preacher quotes scripture also as supporting evidence to show that the concept preached by him also exists in the scripture so that you will not blame him by saying that the preacher has invented a new twisted philosophy, which is not in the scripture! You will again blame him for quoting the scripture by saying “what is there new from you? It is already there in the scripture”! This is like an ordinary boy criticized by the boy of king in both ways. If the ordinary boy comes to play, the boy of king blames “are you so proud to play with the boy of king?” If the ordinary boy doesn’t come to play, the boy of king, then also blames “are you so proud that you are neglecting the boy of king also for play?”]
[Opponent:- Even in the miracle of creating a golden jewel by Shri Satya Sai Baba, which is recently seen by all (unlike lifting of mountain by Krishna as heard only), we give justified logic that the energy is condensed in to matter as per science. We have supporting evidence for this that the mass defect (which means lesser total mass of nucleons bound) is converted into binding energy. All concepts exhibited in the nature belong to science since science explains those concepts.
Theorist:- If you say that all phenomena in nature belong to science, which are explained by science, it means that you have registered all the nature in your account! In such case, the miracles are also observed in nature only, which are inexplicable due to practical impossibility of performing the same miracle (generation of gold and its design as jewel) by every human being, just by moving hand (without any equipment) in a fraction of second! Hence, you can’t claim that all natural phenomena are explicable and subsequently practicable for every human being. The unimaginable domain lies in the practically impossibility of the miracle that can’t be exactly repeated by every human being or at least even by a top scientist! We have also a question about the mass defect, which is “can you convert pure energy (without any particle of matter) into matter and vice-versa using your equipment”? The law of conservation of energy/matter means only the conversion done in the nature and doesn’t mean that you can do the same conversion by yourself! You have explained the phenomenon taking place in the nature by the will of God and not by your will to be implemented by your reactor. This can be made more clear:- let 10 nucleons, each having x mass are combined by the binding energy released from conversion of mass defect y into energy. Then, since binding energy is released, mass of each nucleon must be (10x-y)/10 and not original x. If the nucleon released is having original mass x, it means that the nucleon grasped energy from cosmos to convert it into mass to compensate the mass defect. Hence, both conversions are taking place in the nature by themselves and not due to your will and your equipment. Your equipment released the already converted binding energy only and did not perform any conversion! Assuming that you can explain this deficiency also in future (because you always say that you will explain anything by tomorrow!), can you explain precisely (only one point) about the practical impossibility of the above miracle, which can’t be repeated exactly in the same way by anybody including yourself? You may touch the roof of your house by your high jump by tomorrow, but you can never touch the sky by your high jump! Don’t say that you will touch the sky by using airplane, which spoils the actual sense of simile! For airplane, the goal will be the boundary of space!]
[Opponent:- We say that these miracles are mere magic and hence, unimaginable domain neither exists after the boundary of the universe due to impossibility of verification nor exists in the Universe as miracles since these are magic only. We say that this universe is endless by itself without boundary since endless number of components of composites can result as infinite. Today, many believe in this concept.
Theorist:- Salutations to your lotus feet since you are ending as an atheist, who has ignorance blended with egoistic rigidity! You are denying unimaginable domain in the boundary of universe based on universal impossibility of verification. You are also blindly denying genuine miracles. You are not at least a true scientist, who keeps silent about the unimaginable domain indicating the incapability to explain. This practical incapability of understanding a genuine miracle itself is the definition of unimaginable domain. Science is sincere in accepting such practical incapability in simultaneously calculating the exact position and momentum of electron even in imaginable domain under the headline of uncertainty principle of Heisenberg and doesn’t say that it will calculate both simultaneously by tomorrow! The unimaginable nature is with respect to human being only and not with respect to unimaginable God since He is imaginable to Himself. In the case of electron also, the incapability is with respect to the crudeness of the microscope and this doesn’t mean that simultaneous values are really absent! The scientist doesn’t say (like an egoistic atheist) that the simultaneous values don’t really exist since he is incapable in calculation using his equipment! Similarly, unimaginable God can’t be grasped by any human being since its crude intelligence (top most faculty in human being) is unable even to imagine an entity, which is beyond space (having no spatial dimensions) being the generator of space. Miracle is unimaginable with reference to relative plane of soul only, which is imaginable with reference to the absolute plane of God. You say that many are atheists, which is also not true and it reflects again your egoistic rigidity mixed with irreparable ignorance! Many are theists and very few are only atheists. Even experience of observation can be proved to be wrong by logic as stated by Shankara that a person with defective eyes sees two moons in the sky (netrataimirikadoshasya dvichandradarshanavat). Such experience verified any number of times by that person can’t be true, which becomes false in the logic that many persons without eye defect are seeing one moon only in the sky. That person may be the president association of persons having eye defects and may declare that many are seeing two moons in the sky!]
[Opponent:- How can you call the unimaginable domain as omniscient, kindest, impartial and omnipotent God?
Theorist:- God is the word, which is not patented by you to your concept only. We have used this word to mean the unimaginable domain. If you are different from us, it clearly means that you are not agreeing to the unimaginable God and hence, your God must be imaginable. The imaginable domain contains energy, matter and awareness as fundamental components. If your God is inert mater or inert energy, you can’t call such inert God as omniscient, kindest and impartial since these three qualities are possible only for awareness, which is absent in inert item. Moreover, if your God is energy or matter, such God should have been detected by scientists already. Such matter of God should have been appearing in the periodic table of chemistry. Such type of energy should have been included in various forms of energy dealt by physics. If God is matter or energy or both having awareness, which is generated by transformation of inert energy into a specific work called as awareness through a specific functioning nervous system, neither the external body nor the internal nervous system is found so far by scientists in your so called imaginable God ! Moreover, if your God is omniscient, He should be Omnipresent to know everything everywhere and must have been detected very easily by this time by scientists! Since you are not agreeing to unimaginable power through which God can be omniscient without being omnipresent, these problems are inevitable for you especially in finding omnipresent imaginable God! If you represent God by all pervading subtle energy, you can introduce awareness in Him through materialized nervous system only (which is hindered by the matter of world) and you can’t claim super technological way of introduction of awareness even in the absence of matter as can be done in the energetic beings using the unimaginable power of God (since you don’t accept unimaginable God).
You can’t claim your God to be omnipotent also because your imaginable God can’t create imaginable domain (creation), which is equally real to him. A human being equally real can’t create even an atom of the world! A real human being can create even a huge bill in its imaginary world! A human being can’t turn a stick into a snake in the real world being equal reality whereas it can do so in its imaginary world. Hence, the imaginary God can’t create or modify or dissolve anything in the equally real world and hence, can’t do even a miracle and not to speak of the omnipotence! Our God can be omniscient, kindest and impartial through His unimaginable power by which He can be doing all functions of awareness without having (or being) awareness, which is generated by nervous system. These functions of awareness done by unimaginable God can come under unimaginable absolute awareness, which is different from the relative awareness generated by nervous system. Kindness, impartiality and little knowledge can be common to both types of awareness, but, omniscience and omnipotence are strictly possible only to unimaginable awareness or unimaginable God. Before proving your imaginable God to be kindest, perfectly impartial, omniscient and omnipotent, please be little kind enough to have limited potency in your limited knowledge to do little impartial analysis!]
[Opponent:- In these days of mad race for earning money, stress on sacrifice of money will mislead the people to think that rich alone can get the grace of God.
Theorist:- The sacrifice of money or fruit of work is already stressed in the Veda (dhanena tyaagena ekena) and in the Gita (tatkurushva madarpanam, dhyanaat karmaphala tyaagah etc.,) and Datta Swami has given only the various aspects of its logical background. First of all, you should know that real love is indicated by sacrifice of wealth only (as in the case of issues) and this is established by the human souls only and not by God. This shows that wealth is the root cause of love in worldly bonds. The concept of the scripture or the philosophy explained does not stress on unjust earning, but gives stress only to sacrifice of wealth to deserving receivers like poor spiritual preachers (Gurus) helping your spiritual journey and poor beggars deserving the help of materials (not cash) that are needed basically to help subsequently their spiritual journey also. Even in this sacrifice, the magnitude of sacrifice is not given any importance and only its percentage in total is stressed. A poor person sacrificing one rupee is far greater than a rich person sacrificing one lakh. Jesus told that a camel may go through the eye of the needle, but, a rich person can never get salvation. Is this encouragement of money? Krishna rewarded immensely poor Kuchela for sacrificing a handful of parched rice without aspiring anything in return and not King Satrajit, who gave Shamantaka gem yielding lot of gold everyday only after finding it to be dangerous to be maintained and that too as dowry for his daughter!
Hence, your blame of favoring rich or your blame of encouraging the mad race for earning unjust money is not justified at all. The present trend of Kali age is to make rich to become richer by making poor to become poorer. Spiritual knowledge always opposes this through the concept of sacrifice of wealth.
When you sacrifice money to Sadguru or human incarnation, it is not based on His real requirement, which on the other hand, is based on only testing your real love to Him. It is like the grandfather asking the child for a small bit of biscuit eaten by the child that was picked up from the packet of biscuits presented by the grandfather to it! Sacrifice decreases the attachment and doesn’t increase the attachment.]
[Opponent:- Why should the kindest Lord conduct severe tests in the case of devotees?
Theorist:- The college is not running after every boy/girl and forcing them to join the college for studies and face examinations that cause tension. It is, in fact, reverse. The students are running to the college for admissions to get certificate for degree by which benefit of job can be obtained. Some students of higher level also are running for admissions to learn the knowledge to serve the society without aspiration for fruit and such students also have to face the examination to get degree certificate, whatever may be the inner intension. If the class teacher says that a specific student is the best in the class and if the degree certificate is awarded to that student based on without examination, others will blame the teacher for his partiality even though it is not in the teacher. If the same student is awarded degree certificate after examination, such blame will not appear. You have to not only be justified, but also appear to be justified. In EAMCET coaching weekly and daily tests are conducted and credit is given to such frequent tests. The test is very useful in showing your actual position removing your false assumptions so that you can concentrate on further path starting from the actual position revealed by the test.
You want to become district collector without writing the tough IAS examination or by writing the easy examination kept for fourth group employees! If you don’t want any employment, is the board of examinations insisting you to appear for the examinations? You are paying the examination fees also, which shows your request for examination through which you can get the result and its fruit. There is a saying that the thief is scolding the police for not doing his duty, which is catching the thief!]
[Opponent:- The philosophy of Datta Swami is different from the tradition of Datta as seen in Guru Charitam of Shri Narasimha Saraswati.
Theorist:- The book referred by you shows various miracles performed by the incarnation of Datta, which establish the existence of unimaginable God and this is very very important for the people of Kali age lacking strong faith in God. Datta Swami also stressed on the importance of genuine miracles establishing unimaginable domain in the world apart from its existence beyond the boundary of the world. The main aspects of any incarnation of Datta are always the establishment of unimaginable God through miracles and preach the total divine knowledge by giving answers to all doubts. In this main aspect, there is no difference at all. The difference only lies in certain religious traditions mentioned in that book to suit the taste of the then existing rigid traditional scholars in that time without proper scientific analysis. In order to satisfy their taste, blindly the traditions were accepted since in the initial stage the controller of the bull has to run along with the bull. Now, the surrounding atmosphere contains scientists and not traditionally rigid people. Now, Datta Swami speaks as per the taste of present scientific atmosphere following the same general trend. Moreover, Shri Vaasudevaananda Saraswati, the author of Guru Charitam, was also a traditionally rigid scholar and his influence in the book will naturally appear in predominance! The rigid tradition of the author was condemned by Shri Padavallabha, the famous incarnation of Datta! The nature of the program of any incarnation of Datta is to stress on some points to be implemented immediately and follow the other points of surrounding atmosphere (to stress in future incarnation) to satisfy the human psychology that some of their points are right and this develops a congenial atmosphere between preacher and disciples. Revolution of all concepts is dangerous resulting in rejection of all points by disciples!
Good tradition is the meaning of the word sampradaaya, which must be from the original preacher (human incarnation of Datta). Both the preacher and disciples are human beings only like the common carbon atoms of diamond and graphite with difference in the crystal structures (concepts). The concepts of the original preacher get adulterated in course of time by the influence of disciples and hence the tradition existing at present can’t be accepted as the original good tradition. Prahlaada didn’t accept the then existing tradition of opposing God Vishnu of demons whereas the original ancestor of demons was sage Kashyapa, who was a great devotee of God Vishnu. Be it scripture or tradition, sharp analysis is necessary to filter the bad adulteration from the good original concept. Based on this only, following or differing must result.]
[Opponent:- Shankara speaks about fundamental and functional monism. Ramanuja speaks about fundamental dualism and functional monism as middle path. Madhva speaks about the other extreme, which is fundamental and functional dualism. These three are confined to God and human being (both body and soul) in human incarnation only. This is the concept preached by you. The Gita says that unimaginable can never become imaginable (avyaktam vyaktimaapannam) and this opposes totally Shankara. How can you explain this?
Theorist:- We agree with your objection, which is genuine, if it is taken in the sense that the unimaginable can never be transformed into imaginable as per worldly logic. This contradiction can be solved if you take the same verse in a different sense:- Unimaginable God is really transformed into imaginable human being (both body and soul) so that the desire of very few (1%) climax Nivrutti-devotees (in whom even a trace of jealousy can never appear) is perfectly satisfied. The external body is also divinized along with the internal soul (Antarbahishcha— Veda) as can be seen in the tender finger of the body lifting the huge Govardhana mountain. This means that the unimaginable God really became the imaginable human being as said in the Veda that the unimaginable God remains unimaginable and simultaneously becomes imaginable also (sat cha tyat cha). Is it not a self-contradiction? No. It is not a self-contradiction because the unimaginable God remains beyond world and simultaneously becomes imaginable God in the world as human incarnation. Due to difference in the places (beyond world and in the world) the self-contradiction is removed. The possibility of existence of undivided unimaginable God due to division can be accepted due to omnipotence based on unimaginable power. In this theory of Shankara of extreme perfect monism, the worldly logic should be forgotten completely. The actual sense of this verse is that the unimaginable God beyond the world didn’t disappear at all or even is not reduced by even a little fraction (which is totally beyond the worldly logic). This verse stresses mainly on the point that the unimaginable God beyond the world neither disappeared nor got reduced by appearing as imaginable human incarnation in the world. Such devotees eligible for this perfect monism are only 1% and the rest 9% of Nivrutti-devotees have a possibility of development of a trace of jealousy (10% are Nivrutti-devotees and 90% are Pravrutti-devotees having every possibility of full jealousy) for whom fundamental dualism with functional monism of Ramanuja is best suited. For the rest 90% pravrutti-devotees, fundamental and functional dualism of Madhva is inevitable. Thus, the difference between these preachers is due to the difference in the digestion power of preached concept of receivers only. Otherwise, the three philosophies have basic fundamental and functional monism only!]
[Opponent:- You are giving lot of importance to the preparation and sacrifice of food (menu) in the seminar of knowledge (yajna) thereby giving total fruit to the performer of sacrifice (like king) and neglecting the real participants in the seminar. There might be some unknown reason in the minds of sages for burning the ghee in fire altar of sacrifice, which is hastily condemned by you due to ignorance.
Theorist:- No doubt, the participants of seminar on knowledge are very very important since the basic step is right knowledge that gives right direction in the spiritual journey. A person going in wrong direction due to lack of right knowledge is in loss. But, a person by having right knowledge without practice is also useless because the use of knowledge is lost by him. Mere right knowledge without practice is useless and practice without right knowledge is also equally useless. God gives the fruit in the same phase in which you are serving Him i.e., practical fruit for practical service and theoretical fruit for theoretical service (ye yathaa maam– Gita). The participants in the seminar will not get even the theoretical fruit if they are paid by the performer of sacrifice. The poor participants shall be paid by the rich performer as a rule so that the performer gets the total fruit of sacrifice as said “Adakshina hato yajnah”. In the most ancient times (Krutayuga) in which every ritual was perfectly done, not only food grains are very important (due to absence of gold and cash with sages in forests) for sacrifice of fruit of work, even lighting the fire by mutual rubbing of two sticks was the most tedious work for cooking for the sacrifice of work. Practical sacrifice is the real fruit of the ripened knowledge, which is useless if practical greediness exists. 80% of the Veda deals with the practical sacrifice of work and its fruit in the seminar on knowledge. The rest 20% of the Veda deals with theoretical knowledge and theoretical devotion, which are, of course, very necessary for the generation of practice.
Stating that the ghee is burnt in the fire for some unknown purpose is not a correct answer due to lack of total logic. Ghee means the food associated with ghee (by Lakshanaa) and the fire in which it is to be burnt is the fire existing as hunger fire in the participants during lunch break of the seminar. Of course, very little ghee was used to be poured in the fire along both the diagonals of physical fire (chakshushi homa) to maintain the intensity of fire. Since Krutayuga was very long time back, lot of adulteration and misinterpretation resulted in several practical blunders in the sacrifice.]
[Opponent:- You are giving more value for the sacrifice of fruit of work than for the sacrifice of work. How do you justify in the case of a saint, who is unable to do the former?
Theorist:- You have twisted the concept to project this question. Sacrifice is only from what you possess. A saint possesses only the energy to do the sacrifice of work and hence the duty of sainthood is to wander all over the earth and preach spiritual knowledge. Both these involve only sacrifice of work and the saint leaves the family bonds to wander all over the earth in preaching spiritual knowledge. But, now, even a house holder can become a saint without leaving the house since conveyance-facility is now developed much. Even conveyance is not necessary for preaching since computer helps in sending the spiritual knowledge to various spiritual aspirants through e-mails and with the help of which even spiritual debates can be done. Saffron cloth is not necessary for sainthood, which only indicates the ripened color of the true spiritual knowledge in your brain.
A house-holder is capable of sacrifice of work and fruit of work. Both shall be done in the service of God. Only in the case of a house-holder, the comparison between these two appears. Sacrifice of fruit or matter is certainly greater than sacrifice of work or energy based on the scientific reason as per which matter is condensed form of enormous energy. A rupee coin converted into energy can destroy this whole earth! This is the reason for the lot of respect of the employee to employer since the employee gets lot of energy in the form of matter for dedicating his little energy to the work of employer! In the shop where exchange of matter for matter in return (material for money) is done, the concept of respect disappears between the customer and shopkeeper. Based on this scientific logic only, the Veda says that sacrifice of matter (money) alone can give the salvation (Dhanena tyaagena ekena) and the Gita also stressed on the same concept with an advanced logic that sacrifice of matter earned by work is to be done (karmaphala tyaaga), which involves sacrifice of more strong bond. This shall not be misunderstood as promotion of commercial concept since in business, magnitude of the money decides everything whereas in spiritual line, the share of the sacrificed money in the total money possessed by you decides everything. Even God uses the same concept in His tests to devotees. Krishna gave lot of practical fruit to Kuchela for the little handful parched rice, which is 100% sacrifice of the total wealth possessed by him. He also tested Gopikas by stealing their wealth, which was butter, curd and milk. Rama gave salvation for the half-eaten fruits offered by Shabari, the poorest lady. The receivers of your sacrifice must be poor preachers of spiritual knowledge and poor beggars. You must discourage the blind recitation of tape recorder priests by refusing any offering so that such priests will be forced to turn in to preachers of spiritual knowledge and devotion. At the maximum, you can pay very little to him, which is just labour cost treating him in the category of poor beggars. You shall not be exploited by such priests, who promise cancellation of your sins through worships. The sins are cancelled by realization of soul through true spiritual knowledge, subsequent repentance through devotion and finally non-repetition of the sin in the rest part of life. For this, you require spiritual knowledge and devotion from the preacher-priest to whom any quantity of payment as offering (Guru Dakshinaa) is worthwhile. The same is a waste if the priest is only a blind reciting tape recorder of the scripture.
One can get work for money and the reverse is not so easy due to unemployment! The sin done in unjust earning can be controlled by reducing the fascination to selfish worldly bonds, which can be reduced by another strong fascination towards God in the case of few Nivrutti-devotees. Fear for inevitable punishment through unimaginable way given by unimaginable God even if the law of land is escaped, can efficiently control the majority of devotees belonging to Pravrutti level.
The concept of matter (wealth) is very very important in both Pravrutti and Nivrutti like a double edged knife since sacrifice of money done to deserving receiver gives good fruits whereas the same sacrifice to undeserving receiver gives punishments of sin! To hide or neglect this subject is only hypocrisy since truth is exposed by such acid test. Giving wealth to issues in the end of life is a clear proof of true love. Such analysis exposes the worst prostitution-devotion (veshyaa bhakti), which is aspiring practical fruits for theoretical devotion. Business-devotion (vaishya bhakti) is better than the previous lowest type. The top most issue-devotion is sacrifice of fruit of work in spite of difficulties received from them without aspiring for any fruit in return. Truth is always very bitter and the fundamental aspect of spiritual knowledge is truth (satyam jnaanam –Veda) in spite of hurting several people, who hide their greediness by very clever interpretations! The first hymn of the first Upanishat of the first Veda speaks about life with sacrifice of money and warning not to steal the money of any one in unjust way (tena tyaktena…)].
[Opponent:- What are the responsibilities of Government to develop perfectly clean society free from all types of sins so that its administration becomes very easy also without any tension? Or, is it the responsibility of spiritual preachers only to transform every citizen of the society?
Theorist:- The Government is only the functioning machinery to implement such spiritual program in the society under the guidance of spiritual preachers. The co-ordination between both these is like the co-ordination between blind and lame to walk in correct path. A foolish Government leaving spiritual knowledge in the name of secularism will be another form of atheism only. Secularism means that the same medicine is in all the four bottles and you can take one spoon of medicine from any bottle daily for curing illness to get good health. If you like two bottles, you can take 1/2 spoon of medicine from each of both bottles daily to get the same result. If you like three bottles, you can take 1/3rd spoon of medicine from each of three bottles to get the same result. If you like all the four bottles, you can take 1/4th spoon of medicine from each of all the four bottles to get the same result. But, unfortunately, today, secularism means not to take medicine from any bottle in order to show equality towards all the four bottles! Such fraud secularism destroys the society (patient) with increasing illness day by day. Sticking to single religion (bottle) is better than such false secularism!
The Government must introduce spiritual knowledge as one subject in every class from school to university to develop inherent resistance towards sin either by devotion to God (nivrutti) or by fear for hell here while alive and as well as there after death. This alone will bring permanent control of all sins in the society to such extent that courts and police stations will have no work at all! The administration becomes very simple and very smooth without any trace of tension in the mind of the Government. Ancient kings did this wise work, who shall be considered as really intelligent and not mere fools exploited by religions. Mere professional education without spiritual knowledge is like useless overgrowth without control by discipline.]
To be continued…
★ ★ ★ ★ ★