While seeking realization how can we avoid speculation?

Answer Podcast

Transcript

This is an AI-generated transcript and may contain some errors.
and we will be also experiencing the highest happiness. When he comes to America, and he writes a song marking a Bhagavad Dharma, then he says, अच्छे कित्यू काजे तर्वे एली अनुमान। नहीं केटा आली बेना एली हुवस्तान। Mind you, I guess, there must be some purpose because of which you brought me here. Otherwise, why would you bring me to such a place? So Prabhakar says, I guess.
So when there is no certainty of knowledge, at that time we guess. So, now, guessing itself is not wrong. It is when we guess and claim that guess to be absolutely right.
That is when the problem comes. So the difference between mental circulation and philosophical circulation is, in mental circulation, both the process and the goal are up for grabs. In philosophical circulation, the goal, this is what scripture says, this is true.
Now how exactly it is true? I mean, it is very easy to understand. So we use our intelligibility to do this, to figure out how is it true. So we accept what scripture says to be true.
But we use our intelligence. For example, in the Bhagavad Gita, in the Bhagavad Gita it says, Krishna is a taste of water, Vasohanam Sukham. Now what does this exactly mean? Now if you consider from the point of view of moral science, science says that actually water has no taste.
They say that. Now it is not literally true. Because if we drink water from different places, we do have different tastes.
The water of different rivers is different. So there is definitely some taste to it. But the taste in the terms of say, we may have sugar or sweet or salty, the direct taste is not true.
What exactly does this mean? Krishna is a taste of water. Now if we look at Samkhya, Samkhya explains that the particular sense objects associate with particular elements. So this form is associated with, so say smell is associated with earth.
Like that there are different sense objects associated with certain perceptions associated with certain senses. So taste is associated with water. So what it means is that whenever we see something tasty, what happens? Water starts forming in the tongue, saliva.
So it is water that enables us to access all tastes. Some people have a disease in which, you know, people, their tongue doesn’t form any saliva. So when that happens, they can’t taste anything.
Even the most delicious food items they can’t taste. So it is water that makes all tastes accessible. When Krishna says I am the taste of water, what does he mean? He is the means by which all tastes become accessible to us.
He is the fundamental foundation for all tastes. So this is one way of understanding. So we take Krishna’s statement, we accept his statement.
But then we use Samkhya influence. We use Samkhya analysis, Samkhya is a unique system of analysis of matter to understand this. So if we have some doubts about a particular kind of reason that we have come up with, we can consult some senior devotees and check it with them.
The danger is that firstly we might just, in the process of reasoning, we may reject the scriptural truths. That is something which we have to be very careful about. Like some people say that they feel uncomfortable.
How could God have a law for so much violence? Why would God call for war? Because actually the whole Bhagavad Gita is simply metaphorical. There is no Kurukshetra war, there is no Kurukshetra. It is all Arjuna represents, Pandavas represent, the good side of things, the Kauravas represent bad side of things.
And Kurukshetra is a human body. Now, this is not explaining the Bhagavad Gita, it is explaining away the Bhagavad Gita. So yes, the metaphorical explanation is also fine.
We can say that there is a good side, bad side, there is a war going on between us. Between us, between the good side and the bad side. But the metaphorical explanation is an addition to the literal explanation.
The Kurukshetra as a geographical text is still there. So when we put even the conclusion up for reference, then it goes into the zone of mental explanation. But we accept the conclusion and then we try to reason and understand how does this conclusion work out.
It is philosophical explanation. And that is actually when it is essential. Because that is how things will make sense to us.
And that is how we will be able to help others make sense of things. So we, for especially points that are difficult or sensitive, then we can always consult with them, discuss with them and we can understand. And for this, we need like-minded association.
For some devotees, they can agree on things so easily. This is the chance and question we have. If we have intellectual mean, we just can’t do it.
I need this to make sense. I need this to make sense. So find out devotees for a consensual discussion and discuss with them.
And then say, let’s look at this point. This is not so good. Because this is the problem with this.
Oh, I have not used this. I am not a scientist. So we can discuss consensually about this.
And then, as long as the conclusion is maintained, and as long as the reasoning that we do for arriving at the conclusion does not contradict any other philosophical aspect. Say for example, somebody says, I want to do a contemporary example for the body and the soul. So suppose somebody says, you know, the body is like the mobile and the soul is like the battery.
Okay, it’s a different kind of example. But the problem is, the battery gets discharged. The soul is eternal.
The battery is actually shorter than the mobile. The soul actually outlives the mobile. So this is not the best example.
We may use it for a particular purpose. But we have to be careful. So basically, we may use contemporary examples and do some kind of reasoning for that.
But we have to assume, we have to clarify.