26 Apr 2008
[I heard that somebody refused the propagation of My divine knowledge based on the reason that this knowledge is the personal version of Myself.]
Examine Logically To Arrive at the Truth
The Gita was told by Krishna only. The Bible was told by Jesus only. The Quran was told by Mohammad only. Buddhism was preached by Buddha alone. All the Brahma Sutras and Puranas were the personal version of sage Vyasa only. Shankara, Ramanuja and Madhva preached the three schools of philosophy as their personal versions only. Each Sukta in the Veda was told by a single sage only and thus, the entire Veda is a bundle of personal versions only. God told the scripture through several prophets. Since, God is only one, all the scriptures are the personal version of God. Even in science each theory invented is a personal version of a single scientist only. The point is not that whether a concept is told by a person or a group of persons. You must examine the point logically and find its validity. If the point is right, it should be accepted even if it is told by a single person. If the point is wrong, it should not be accepted even if it is told by a group of people.
Generally, we accept a concept propagated by our old tradition. We give validity to the author, who is ancient. We neglect the author if he exists in the present time. The ancient author was also modern in his time of existence. The present author becomes ancient after sometime. Therefore, the validity of ancient and modern terms is meaningless. When Shankara condemned all the atheistic arguments of Sankhya told by a sage called Kapila, the opponents opposed Shankara atlast by saying that Kapila is omniscient. Actually Kapila, the incarnation of Lord Vishnu, was really omniscient. Sage Kapila, who proposed atheism, was quite a different person. But people have exploited the similarity of name. Then Shankara asked a question “If we have to agree on the point of Kapila based on the omniscience conferred on Kapila, why should’nt we accept Kanada or Charvaka, who were also atheists since their followers confer the same title on them also (Kapiloyadisarvajnah...)?”
Our ancient tradition contains the merits established by our ancient sages. There is no doubt in this. But their knowledge was mixed with the wrong concepts of some selfish followers, who branded their concepts in the name of the ancient sages. Hence, our present tradition is a mixture of merits and defects. The blind follower of our tradition absorbs both right and wrong knowledge. A scholar or an ignorant person can be easily convinced by argument. A person, who is half knowing and half ignorant, can never be convinced even by God in human form (Brahmaapinaranjayati...)! The follower of our old tradition is a scholar due to the meritorious knowledge of sages and is also ignorant due to the wrong concepts of the followers. Hence, the follower of our tradition can never be convinced. The scripture alone cannot be the authority because the correct interpretation of the scripture is unknown due to existence of various interpretations. Hence, a logical debate is necessary to establish the correct interpretation of the scripture. The advocates debate in the court giving their own interpretations of the constitution. The judge comes to a conclusion after a patient hearing of this logical debate. Similarly, you should come to the conclusion of the truth after a patient discussion with logical analysis. Only then is the scripture confined to the correct interpretation.
By following the true concept of the scripture, one can get the correct experience of the fruit. Therefore, the authority consists of scripture (Shruti and Smruti), logic (Yukti) and experience (Anubhava). If logic is not followed, the wrong interpretation of the scripture propagated by certain selfish people catches over your brain and you will be in the wrong track to lose the true experience. Based on such impartial logic only, one should filter the defects from the tradition and follow the merits. The uniformity in all the religions of the world is the uniform opinion of the single God for the entire world. The differences in the religions are due to the wrong interpretations of the followers, which were branded in the name of God. If you can filter these misinterpretations of the followers from all the religions, you will find the single concept of God that unifies the entire humanity to bring world peace. If one follows the wrong concepts of the ancient followers because they were his ancestors, he is no more different from the person who drinks salt water from the well since it was dug by his father (Tatasya kupoyamiti...)!
★ ★ ★ ★ ★