How can contradictory-seeming scriptural statements be understood?

How do we understand scriptural statement that appear contradictory? Is it that the the author is tailoring language to fit different audiences, which leads to apparent inconsistencies that or is it that we must grow in understanding to realize that they are not inconsistent or that because our intelligence is finite where as omniscient or omnipotent being can have knowledge that we cannot we may never be able to understand, but we must have faith that it is correct. This is a very thoughtful question, and I would say all three approaches have merit. So consider the first point that Krishna says that he comes to establish Dharma. Dharma four eight in the Bhagavad Gita.

And then in 1866, he says, give up dharma. So why is Krishna telling, us to give up the very thing he has come to establish? So this seems like a contradiction. And the answer for this is the first point that the word dharma means different things in different contexts. When Krishna is talking about social order and how the lord plays a critical role in providing the spiritual knowledge that can ground or provide a solid foundation for social order that is described in the fourth chapter.

And then whenever that spiritual knowledge is lost or the social order is disrupted, the lord comes to establish it. So here, social order refers so here Dharma refers to social order whereas Krishna is referring there to duty and give up those duties, which will obstruct you and surrender to me, which is the highest duty. So Dharma refers to social order in four eight and individual duty in 1866. So there, Krishna is talking more specifically to Arjuna about what he should do. And we see that those verses are eighteen sixty six is preceded by a lot of personal address.

Krishna, you are dearly Krishna says to Arjuna, you are dearly loud. So that way, the context can lead to not only words with different meanings, but context can also lead to different levels of instructions. So Krishna himself gives the Vedic scriptures where there is, recommendation and glorification of deity worship of the worship of the devtas, not deity worship. And there is also the Gita where Krishna says that those who worship the devtas are are their intelligence has been stolen by karma, their by worldly desires. And yet, even in that so this itself is a contradiction.

Why does Krishna say that those who worship the the less intelligent? And yet he himself provide scriptures that give description of the worship of the the utas because there are people who had that level, and they also need to be accommodated. So contradictions can be because of words having different meanings or words being spoken to different audiences. Now the second is, that contradictions may come because at our level of understanding, things seem contradictory. So, yes, we understand this also that now sometimes some things can be reconciled at a intellectual level just like the standard example math we say that to a small child, we’ll say seven minus four is not seven minus four is three, but four minus seven is not possible.

But in advanced math, we understand it’s possible. So similarly, there can be some things which I said it’s not possible at one level or it that’s not how it works. But at a higher level, there is some reconciliation that is that is understandable and is understandable more through spiritual realization, not just intellectual analysis. So for example, we say that that say, in the world, male female attraction can very easily be a cause of bondage. But then Krishna is attracted to the gopis.

The gopis are attracted to Krishna and that attraction will actually free us from lust, the force that causes male female attraction in this world primarily. So, how will that work out? So, now we can get some intellectual understanding that that is the original and this is the reflection. So the more we get attracted to the reality, the more we’ll become detached from the reflection. There’s some ways in which we can understand it, but ultimately, it has to be realized that Krishna, the attraction of the work is categorically different from male female attraction.

It’s not just qualitatively higher. It is categorically different. So qualitatively higher means that, say, sometimes a man and woman are attracted because they just want they have a itch that they want to relieve, and they don’t really care for each other. And for them, there could be somebody who is and the the other person is interchangeable. Who is scratching the itch is not important.

That the itch gets scratched is important. Now sometimes two people care for each other, and they deeply care for each other. And that’s how there are long lasting relationships, not just some flings. So then we can say that relationship is is deeper. It is it it’ll it’ll likely last longer.

So that is a qualitatively higher relationship. But the relationship of Krishna and the gopis is not just qualitatively higher. It is categorically different. So, how exactly is it like that? It is pure love, at a transcendental level that the more we realize ourselves to be spiritual beings, the more we will realize how Krishna and Radha and his love are spiritual.

So that’s the second point where contradictory statement, like, hearing the male female attraction between Radha and Krishna will free us from male female attraction in this world. That seems paradoxical, but that’s an example of how higher understanding or evolution in our consciousness can help us gain some understanding. Now beyond this, there is also the concept of within the tradition that there are some things which may not be comprehensible for us. So that in principle, if god is infinite, then if god is supreme, then by definition, he’s superior to our intelligence. And if everything about him could be understood by our intelligence, then our intelligence would become supreme.

And that is contrary to the understanding of god as a supreme being. So by the very definition of god, there will be aspects about him that would be that will be unknowable for us. So those that understanding of, that there will be aspects of god, god’s nature, and associated with that god’s teachings That will be contradict that will seem contradictory for us, but we accept them as accept it as true and something we may never understand. So our god’s infinitude and our finitude means that some things will be incomprehensible for us. So that also so that incomprehensibility is in Sanskrit in the Gaudiya Vaishnav tradition called as.

Now is not, not an intellectual escapism. And whatever we can’t understand, we just call it a chinte. But rather it is intellectual humility that we recognize there are things which are beyond the pale of our human comprehension because of the finiteness of our human intelligence and our not just our embodied human existence, but of even our liberated spiritual existence. The characteristic is finiteness. So when despite our efforts for a deeper scriptural understanding for or a higher spiritual evolution, if some things don’t become intelligible for us, then we can place them in this category of.

So even that which is, we can get some sense of that. So for example, that god is greater than the greatest and smaller than the smallest. Now how is that possible? One way we understand is is that the as the as the universal form, he’s greater than the greatest. The whole universe is contained within him.

And as the super soul within the heart, within every atom, he’s smaller than the smallest. So, that’s one way to understand it. But what is not understandable so easily is that how are these two the same person? So it’s not that the per he’s changing form. He is both, and he’s both simultaneously.

So will that ever become understandable for us? We understand this as two different manifestations. But how are those two manifestations one? And not just one one in terms of concept concept dual reconciliation, but they’re ontologically, chronologically, existentially one and yet different. So so this is something which we may never understand.

I’m not giving the specific example to say that this is something which you will we will never understand, but I’m using this as just as example. Some some devotees may get realizations by which they may get a deeper understanding of this. But Krishna’s glories are inexhaustible, and nobody can ever understand all of them completely. And this lack of understanding doesn’t lead to frustration, but it leads to an excitement and exploration because there is always so much more to know about Krishna. And that’s the that’s what brings joy and thrill to a devotee’s life.

That’s how in ten eight, Krishna says the souls are enlightened. And in ten nine in the Gita, he says they keep enlightening each other because Krishna’s glories are unlimited. And they are understood by when one perspective by one person, another perspective by another person. And by sharing perspectives, the deeper understanding comes up. So still, no matter how deeply we understand Krishna, we can never understand him in full.

So that’s how contradictory statements can sometimes be contradictory statements can be can be can be approached either by seeing them as the context or the language creating a illusion of contradiction, creating perception of contradiction, or it is our finiteness. So or or our sorry. Our current level of realization creating the conception of contradiction or our finiteness leading to that perception. So thank you, Hari Krishna.