When does philosophical speculation change to mental speculation – what makes certain explanations of scripture unacceptable? (Vedic wisdom)

Answer Podcast

Transcript

This is an AI-generated transcript and may contain some errors.
question when does speculation change from philosophical to mental that is what speculation is acceptable and what is unacceptable if in your Gita Delhi articles you often draw from Gita verses meanings that are quite distant from what Krishna what the verse literally says so it’s hard to imagine that Krishna could have meant those things when you use some quotes inspired by Gita’s particular verses so how is that acceptable and if someone use some symbolic meaning of some characters from the Ramayana how is that different from giving some extended meanings of Gita verses why is that symbolism considered questionable answer actually Prabhupada writes in the first canto of the Bhagavatam about realization he says realization means that the subject should be presented in a way that is interesting to the audience no unscrupulous meaning should be screwed out of the purport the original intent should be maintained but at the same time the subject should be presented in an interesting way so these are the broad principles that Prabhupada has given us that the intent originally be maintained and the contextual or the audience interest also be stimulated and maintained a. for the sake of the audience for interest making the audience interested if the original intent is subverted then it goes into the zone of mental speculation where mental speculation basically means that the mind determines the beginning the middle and the end or because the mind we the mind drives the whole process mental speculation scripture just becomes a reference point along the journey that is begun by the mind driven by the mind and it is ended by some concoction of the mind whereas in philosophical speculation there is the philosophy that is the thrust the philosophy is to be conveyed to the audience and the philosophy will be phrased using examples, words, metaphors or frames of analysis that make the philosophy relevant so now let’s look at the Gita Delhi articles and the Gita Delhi quotes generally every Gita Delhi article has reference to one or more verses and Gita Delhi articles themselves do not contain the exact wording of the verse translation because I want to keep the article lengthless 300 words so I give the translation a link below in the website and as a footnote below in the published books in the article itself I use a contextually rendered wording of the translation which flows smoothly seamlessly with the overall flow of thought of the article so whenever I say the Bhagavad Gita states the Bhagavad Gita indicates Bhagavad Gita 16.8 well indicates if you look at the verse itself Sanskrit what follows thereafter will be a reasonable restatement of the essential message of the verse it will be a rewording but rewording does not mean distorting so for example the Bhagavad Gita 16.11 and 12 say that Asha Pashto 16.12 that when we become bound by our desires and when we give ourselves to lust and anger then we crave for wealth and even do Anyaya do immoral atrocious activities so then in the article I might render this as the Bhagavad Gita 16.12 indicates that our worldly desires can become so forceful that they drag us across ethical they drag us over ethical boundaries in the mad quest for wealth and pleasure so drag over ethical boundaries refers to the Anyaya Nartha Sanjayan so and then our worldly desires and they become overwhelming and they become very strong that refers to Kama Krodha Parayanaha so in this way the reworded meaning is basically easily drawn something can be drawn from the Gita’s verses itself now the title of the article is meant to catch the audience attention and that title can come from various the title itself is not something which is directly derived from the Gita or its words the title is attractive rendition of the Gita using contemporary tools of attractive rendition such as wordplay or things like that so by such contemporary rendition the essential result is that the that we become inspired to read the Gita in terms that we can understand so for example Krishna says if you become conscious of me you will pass over obstacles all obstacles by my grace so this I may write the article title as don’t tell God how big your problems are tell your problems how big God is that means don’t be problem conscious be God conscious be Krishna conscious in the Gita Wisdom through Codes book as well as the Gita Wisdom through card deck Gita Wisdom through Codes card deck there are many codes which are inspired by the Bhagavad Gita’s verses now was that code the intent of Krishna obviously I am not saying that Krishna has spoken the Bhagavad Gita in a particular context and the verse has a particular meaning in that context but the point is not just to get the point right the point is to get the point across so if we can convey the essential meaning of the verse or the essential a point which is based on the Gita’s overall wisdom which is compatible with the Gita’s overall wisdom if that is inspired by a particular verse so when we say there are different ways of establishing a correlation if we say it is a retelling or rewording or retranslation then the ambit of how much stretching we can do is less when we say this is based on this verse then the ambit becomes a bit more when we say inspired by this verse then the ambit becomes even more because our inspiration can go in various directions and for each correlation, for each inspiration how a verse is how a particular quote is inspired by a particular verse for that there is a whole article which is there in the Gitajali website so anybody who reads a quote from the card deck can go to that website can go to that website and read about how these two correlate with each other having said that if we move forwards and consider that we can do this similar thing for the Ramayan characters yes we can but giving contemporary meanings of verses is something which our Acharyas have done quite frequently say for example, Prabhupada Sarva Dharmaan Parityajya Maam Ekam Sharanam Vraja and then he says Krishna is telling give up all your nonsense and just surrender to me Sarva Dharmaan Parityajya is give up all your nonsense this is by no means a literal translation but Prabhupada has used translations like this to indicate that there are that the point is surrender to Krishna and give up everything else so give up all your nonsense Prabhupada translates it that way so we have a lot of precedents of Acharyas rendering verses so that their essential import is conveyed so we have na tad bhaase to surya na shishanko na pavakah 15.6 in the Bhagavad Gita so there is no electricity referred to over there, there is sun, moon and fire and Prabhupada adds electricity over there so the point is to get it right is it? no the point is to get it across once you get it across that’s the key thing so now while getting things across like this are there dangers? yes definitely there are dangers and they need to be addressed so one way to address the danger would be to make sure that the essential import is made the essential intent is preserved now when we give symbolic interpretations of characters at that time there are a few dangers first is that people may go to the symbolism and forget that the characters themselves are real the characters themselves are not just symbolic so while giving any symbolic meaning it’s vital that it’s stressed adequately that the literal meanings are not undermined so Lanka can represent something and Ayodhya can represent something but what is the it has to be clear that as far as the Ramayana is concerned, the Itihas Lanka also represents Lanka is also a reality as per the Acharya’s explanation of it in our tradition at least now when we give some symbolic meanings how valid are those meanings? so are we able to furnish some logical reasons for that correlation? if we are able to do that, that is good but if the if for example someone says that Ravana represents the body that Ravana represents the soul who has fallen that Itihas represents the soul who has fallen from the spiritual world from Ram and Ravana Lanka represents the material world well that’s okay but the challenge with this is that when we start using the three things three possibilities three dangers I see, one is that when we start treating characters symbolically then we may start thinking that the characters are not themselves real, they are only symbols of something that is to be taught so the whole of the epics can be reduced to allegories and that is not what our Acharya’s mood is secondly when we draw certain inferences then are those inferences valid? are they either logically or scripturally establishable justifiable? then if we are giving lessons which are valid in terms of which are broadly compatible with scriptural lessons through the symbolism we can do that but there has to be a certain level of caution that we are not going too far away from the essential message so there is a literal meaning of a particular character as a historical reality and that has to be made unambiguously clear and the character can tell us something more beyond that is also ok but when we say that a particular character represents something is that logically explainable or is that logically or scripturally explainable has the scripture itself or have Acharya’s explain that character in that way that’s the second thing to consider and third thing to consider is that whatever lesson we are drawing is it overall in harmony with the teachings of scripture so like Prabhupada said that we have to make things interesting for people so then therefore we might draw a lesson which is relevant and which may be relevant to the audience but a little distant from the original import now that distance how much distance would be acceptable different devotees may have different opinions about it but overall the correlation needs to be made reasonably clear and if we make it clear that this is what I am doing this is the basis with which I am doing this and I don’t mean to say that the original historical is not real but this is an additional life lesson that can be drawn from it so then that is that should be ok the life lessons don’t normally don’t reasonably emerge from the particular story if the symbolism does not logically logically relate with the way the characters are and if the historical if the historicity or the literal leading is minimized or denied or excessively downplayed by these by such things then we are wandering into a dangerous zone thank you Hare Krishna