CC daily 112 – M 6.150-51 – Use arthapatti to reconcile all scripture, not lakshana to reject some scripture

We will continue this discussion in our next future talks. Thank you Absolute truth accepts gifts and goes wherever gifts are offered that indicates that there is something deeper being stated over here.
The point of the words is not to reject the existence of hands and legs but to reject a material conception of hands and legs because what causes illusion what causes bondage is not just the existence of hands and legs it is the material conception of hands and legs which is what makes us bound in material existence so to the extent that we can understand that scripture that is describing higher higher conception, a transmaterial conception and that transmaterial conception is pointed to through its contradictory statements that one statement is that the absolute truth does not have hands and legs. The second statement is that the absolute truth moves wherever gifts are offered and receives those gifts. So we need अर्थापत्ति, we need a inference to arrive at a reconciliation how do we reconcile these two contradictory statements by the postulation by the अर्थापत्ति that the absolute truth’s hands and legs are non-material, are transcendental and as Chaitanya Mahaprabhu is stating over here, the point of stating that the absolute truth does not have hands and legs its point is to emphasize the absolute truth, hands and legs are not material as are ours and in this way Chaitanya Mahaprabhu is giving us a balanced and reconciled understanding of this contradictory seeming statements given in scripture and he continues and अतेव नेर्फ़ो शुति कहे, Shruti scripture tells us ब्रह्म सविषेष, Brahma the absolute truth is सविषेष, it is not impersonal but it is personal it is not निर्विषेष, it is not lacking in any like it is not devoid of all special characteristics rather it possesses special characteristics and what are those special characteristics, सविषेष, those characteristics are that the absolute truth has hands, has legs has eyes, has mind, the absolute truth is indeed a person, सविषेष, and Chaitanya Mahaprabhu continues over here, मुख्य चाड़ी लक्षणाते माने निर्विषेष, मुख्य चाड़ी, that some people give up the primary meaning, मुख्य चाड़ी, and then because of that लक्षणाते माने, by taking up the लक्षणावृति माने निर्विषेष, they just accept for themselves they come up with the idea that Brahma is निर्विषेष, so what we need to do is recognize that actually speaking scriptures import is deep and the way to understand scripture is not through simply rejection of some statements but reconciliation of various statements so in लक्षणावृति, what is done is that the direct meaning is almost like rejected and some indirect meaning is accepted as the essential meaning, as the actual meaning, but the problem with this is that scripture becomes subject to endless interpretation based on the predilection of particular interpreter and in that way, as Sita Mahaprabhu said earlier that the self-authoritative nature of scripture, स्वप्रमानित्तो, that gets lost because rather than scripture staying self-authoritative, staying self-dependent it becomes subject to, even slave to the interpretations that different commentators may come up with and it is by coming up with such interpretations that we end up divested of the opportunity to learn from scripture, we end up divested of the opportunity to learn from scripture on its own terms, to understand its वक्षणावृति to understand its essential meaning and thus have our conceptions expanded now when we try to speculate to understand scripture, essentially we are sticking to our conceptions and are trying to fit scripture within our conceptions, rather if we accept the वक्षणावृति, then instead of fitting scripture within our conception, we let our conceptions expand and thus we as our consciousness expands and we get a greater, deeper richer understanding of the import of scripture and the glory of Krishna who is revealed through the deep import of scripture.
Thank you.

Disclaimer: This transcript was generated using AI and may contain occasional errors or inaccuracies.

Chaitanya Chakta Amrit, Madhya Leela, Chapter 6, deliberation of Sarvambhattacharya, text 150. Chaitanya Chakta Amrit, Madhya Leela, Chapter 6, deliberation of Sarvambhattacharya, text 150. So, it says, the scripture says that absolute truth does not have hands and legs.

But then varje, immediately, it's as if Shruti rejects that because Shruti also says that paani charan. So, what is happening is, what is this scripture exactly rejecting by stating that a paani pada, a paani that, it is varje is rejecting prakrit paani charan. It is rejecting the idea that the absolute truth has material hands and legs.

And how can one infer that? From the point that a paani pada, from that statement, why should not one infer that actually absolute truth has no hands and legs at all? Why should one infer only that absolute truth has no material hands and legs? As Chaitanya Mahaprabhu is inferring, Chaitanya Mahaprabhu gives the explanation, the reason for that in the next line. And he says that, kaush punah kahe, that same scripture says immediately after that, shigra chale kare sarva grahan, that a paani pada jab nao grahita, that shigra chale, that the absolute truth, although he has no hands and legs, he, wherever some food is, some gift is offered to him with affection, with devotion, he immediately goes there and he accepts that gift. So, normally, when gift is offered, we offer it with our hand and the receiver takes it with the hand.

So, and similarly, if we want to offer somebody a gift and that person comes to receive that gift, that means that person is moving over there. So, in both the act of motion as well as of reception, legs and hands are required. So, when this Shruti Mantra is saying that, a paani pada, the absolute truth has no hands and legs, and immediately after in the same words, in the same way, the Shruti Mantra also states that the absolute truth has, absolute truth accepts gifts and goes wherever gifts are offered, that indicates that there is something deeper being stated over here.

The point of the words is not to reject the existence of hands and legs, but to reject a material conception of hands and legs, because what causes illusion, what causes bondage is not just the existence of hands and legs, it is the material conception of hands and legs, which is what makes us bound in material existence. So, to the extent that we can understand that the scripture that is describing a higher conception, a transmaterial conception and that transmaterial conception is pointed to through its contradictory sending statements, that one statement is that the absolute truth does not have hands and legs, the second statement is that the absolute truth moves wherever gifts are offered and receives those gifts. So, we need arthapatti, we need an inference to arrive at a reconciliation, how do we reconcile these two contradictory statements? By the postulation, by the arthapatti that the absolute truths, hands and legs are non-material, are transcendental and as Chaitanya Mahaprabhu is stating over here, the point of stating that the absolute truth does not have hands and legs, its point is to emphasize the absolute truth, hands and legs are not material as are ours.

And in this way Chaitanya Mahaprabhu is giving us a balanced and reconciled understanding of this contradictory seeming statements and he continues अतेव शुति कहे ब्रह्म सविषेष, मुख्य चाड़ी लक्षणाते माने निर्विषेष, अतेव शुति कहे ब्रह्म सविषेष, ब्रह्म the absolute truth is सविषेष, it is not impersonal but it is personal, it is not निर्विषेष, it is not lacking in any, like it is not devoid of all special characteristics, rather it possesses special characteristics and what are those special characteristics सविषेष, those characteristics are that the absolute truth has hands, has legs, has eyes, has mind, the absolute truth is indeed a person, सविषेष, and Chaitanya Mahaprabhu continues over here, मुख्य चाड़ी लक्षणाते माने निर्विषेष, मुख्य चाड़ी, some people give up the primary meaning मुख्य चाड़ी and then because of that लक्षणाते माने, by taking up the लक्षणाते माने निर्विषेष, they just accept for themselves, they come up with the idea that ब्रह्मः is निर्विषेष, so what we need to do is recognize that actually speaking scriptures import is deep and the way to understand scripture is not through simply rejection of some statements, but reconciliation of various statements, so in लक्षणवृत्ति what is done is that the direct meaning is almost like rejected and some indirect meaning is accepted as the essential meaning, as the actual meaning, but the problem with this is that scripture becomes subject to endless interpretation based on the predilection of particular interpreter, and in that way as Chitra Mahaprabhu said earlier that the self-authoritative nature of scripture, सो प्रमाणत्तो, that gets lost, because rather than scripture staying self-authoritative, staying self-dependent, it becomes subject to, even slave to the interpretations that different commentators may come up with, and it is by coming up with such interpretations that we end up divested of the opportunity to learn from scripture, we end up divested of the opportunity to learn scripture on its own terms, to understand its वक्षणवृत्ति, to understand its essential meaning and thus have our conceptions expanded, now when we try to speculate to understand scripture, essentially we are sticking to our conceptions and are trying to fit scripture within our conceptions, rather if we accept the वक्षणवृत्ति, then instead of fitting scripture within our conception, we let our conceptions expand, and thus our consciousness expands and we get a greater, deeper, richer understanding of the import of scripture and the glory of Krishna, who is revealed through the deep import of scripture. Thank you.