How can we explain philosophy to those who don’t accept the authority of scripture?
Podcast
Transcript
Disclaimer: This transcript was generated using AI and may contain occasional errors or inaccuracies.
So, if people, if you go Shastra to people and they say, you know, why should I believe in Shastra? What is the authority of Shastra? How can we answer? Whenever we are trying to share any wisdom with others, we have to understand their level of understanding and present accordingly. What does that mean? That means, that we have to present wisdom in a way that it helps them to rise, that it helps them to rise up from where they are right now. So, just like say, if somebody comes to a temple and, you know, the first step to come to the temple is like six feet.
You know, somebody has practically, you know, hold their hands and pull themselves up. How many people are going to come in? No, we have to have an accessible way, you know, maybe half a feet of steps or one-third of a feet of a step or whatever it is. So, we have to provide a way that is accessible for people.
So, most people in today's world do not accept Shastrika Thamruti. So, we should know that. And then we have to present spiritual wisdom in a way that makes sense to them, so that may be logic.
It is presenting logically. So, for example, why should we chant the holy name? We can quote. There are scientific studies done about how chanting calms the mind and even philosophy can be presented in a way that is logical and philosophy can be presented in a way that is scriptural.
Ideally, we do both, but we should begin from logic because things have to make sense to people. We cannot expect people to believe something which they are not accepted as authority. So, initially we have to present scriptural wisdom logically or we present points logically and then when we say that these logical points are coming from scripture, then what happens? Oh really? I did not know Bhagavad Gita was so logical.
Then what has happened? Because we present Bhagavad Gita through logic, then they develop faith in the Bhagavad Gita and gradually as they apply the Bhagavad Gita, their faith will deepen and then Bhagavad Gita will become authority for them. So, that will be gradual. So, initially we present it through logic.
So, if we go to say scientific audiences, in India at least if we prove something scientifically, scientifically we prove that God exists and then we go Bhagavad Gita says that this is about God. Most people accept it. But when I go to America, even if I prove scientifically that God exists, I cannot go to Bhagavad Gita after that.
They say, okay God exists, but people talk about God from the Bible, they talk about from the Quran, they talk about Bhagavad Gita. Why Bhagavad Gita alone? So, there we need one more additional step over there. So, that means first step is logically or scientifically establish the existence of God.
Then logically establish the authority of the Bhagavad Gita as the source of knowledge about God. And then tell what is the content of the Bhagavad Gita. That is a three-step process.
So, people have faith in science. So, with science we talk about the existence of God. Then with logic, we talk about why the Bhagavad Gita is the source of knowledge about God.
And then we talk about Bhagavad Gita as an authority to source about God. And we teach about what Bhagavad Gita says about God. So, in India the second step is usually not required.
Okay, God exists, what is the way to know about God? Bhagavad Gita. So, it is easier relatively speaking. But the point is we always have to know what level the person is at.
And if a person does not accept an authority, then there is no use in quoting that authority. It is not that we cannot quote, but that should not be our starting point. That we should start with logic.
We should start with common sense. And it is not very difficult to do that. If we just observe those preachers who are preaching to new people.
We will see that most of the devotees who are habitually giving classes to new people. It is not that they are filling their classes with hundreds of verses. They can do that, but they won't do that.
Because it doesn't serve any purpose. In India, at least when you quote Sanskrit verses, people feel impressed. Oh, you know Sanskrit.
You are quoting something from Shastra. They feel at least you are Shastrically based. In American universities, if I go and quote from Sanskrit, they feel we are wasting our time.
Okay, there is Sanskrit. In fact, many more people are interested in studying Chinese wisdom than Sanskrit wisdom. So they say, okay, just because something is said in Sanskrit, what is the use? That doesn't make any sense.
It has to make sense to me in my present world. And that is the expertise of the preacher. Once when Prabhupada was asked, Swamiji, what is the bliss of Vaikuntha like? A hippie who was a drug user, he asked that.
Now Prabhupada could have quoted verses Chintamani, Prakarasatmasu, Kalpapruksha. He could have quoted Brahma Samhita describing how beautiful the spiritual world is. That would have made no sense to a person who is just using drugs.
Prabhupada said, Vaikuntha is like an ocean of LSD. Ocean of LSD. Wow, I want to go there.
Now what is Prabhupada doing over here? Prabhupada is explaining spiritual concepts in a language that is understandable to the audience. That is why for preaching, it is not just enough to understand Shastra. We also need to understand our audience.
Prabhupada went to America for the first two months. His visa was only for three months. Two months he was in Butler, Pennsylvania.
In those two months, Butler gave only two or three classes. Most of the time, he was asking questions to people. Gopal and Sally Agarwal, the family with whom he was staying.
Sally Agarwal was a housewife. She says in her memories of Prabhupada that Swamiji was so interested in learning about American ways. Prabhupada was also interested in imitating Americans.
But he wanted to understand how Americans think, how Americans live. And then he could present spiritual wisdom to Americans. If we have to quote to our friends, most people today accept logic as an authority.
So we just present spiritual wisdom logically and then we also quote scripture towards the end. This logical point I am speaking, but it is not simply logical. It is logical and it is scriptural.
And what happens? They also get convinced because it is logical. And because they feel scriptures talk about logical things, they develop faith in scriptures. So we shouldn't be in a mood of exhibiting our learning by quoting a lot of verses when we are speaking to new people.
We have to see what will best benefit the people. So if we are quoting to pious people who already have some religious faith, then quoting verses is very helpful. But if not, then we do not quote verses.
We just focus on the point which we have to convey and present it logically. Does that answer your question? Thank you.