Why are we selective about the analysis or purports of the scriptures?

From: Mukund

Why are we selective about the analysis or purports of the scriptures? For e.g. we say that the number of wives (10 millions) of Chitraketu should not be taken literally? But then someone may argue that even “Krishna’s pastimes also should not be taken literally, they are just poetic imaginations”. Can you please explain how to decide which things from the scriptures should be taken literally or non-literally?

Transcript

This is an AI-generated transcript and may contain some errors.
Question from Akundhaprabhu. Why are we selective about the analysis or purports of the scriptures? For example, we say that the number of wives, 10 millions of Chitra Ketu should not be taken literally. But then someone may argue that even Krishna’s pastimes also should not be taken literally.
They are post-poetic imaginations. Can you please explain how to decide which things in the scriptures should be taken literally or non-literally? Answer. The scriptures are given to human beings.
And human beings are expected to have some basic intelligence. So, with the intelligence, we can understand, not just based on speculation using our intelligence, but by using our intelligence in accordance with the overall message of the scriptures. In the Vedanta Sutra, which is analysing the imports of the Upanishads, Ramanujacharya, Baldevidya, Bhushan, they take various references from the Upanishads.
So, in the Upanishads, while analysing the Acharyas, there are dozens of things which are taken, depending on the context, as literally or metaphorical. Now, what is the basis for this? The basis is the overall message of the scriptures, which we understand again from the Acharyas. So now, within the scriptures, there are certain things which are directly literal, which are very clearly mentioned.
These are not just the topics which are representative or typical or metaphorical, but they are taken as literal. This is seen from the fact that, say, Krishna’s pastimes are repeatedly discussed as worth contemplating, worth reciting, and they are described in the mode of history, that this is what actually happened. So, not only are the pastimes described in the 10th canto of Srimad Bhagavatam, but they are again recited in the 3rd canto of Srimad Bhagavatam by Uddhava, and repeatedly throughout, not just the Bhagavatam, other scriptures also.
So, when we know that Krishna is God, and that Krishna is omnipotent, and that his extraordinary actions are things which are accepted as literal by all the Acharyas, then that is perfectly natural to infer these are to be taken literally, literally, in a literal way. Of course, in addition to literal ways, some sort of symbolic understandings may also be given, as Bhaktivinoda Thakur does, for pastimes involving the killing of various demons in Krishna Samhita and other books. For example, Putana refers to false guru and Shakta refers to conditionings from past habits, and similarly.
But overall, the Acharyas have clearly explained that Krishna’s pastimes should be taken literally, from a literal perspective. On the other hand, there are certain things which are told explicitly are non-literal, which is, for example, the Puranjan pastime. So, it is told right at the start of the narration of the pastime in the 4th canto, 25th chapter, that this is an allegorical story, symbolic story.
So now, there are certain things which are literal, certain things which are clearly non-literal. Now, apart from these things, what about that which is intermediate? Now, we have to use our intelligence according to Guru Sadhu Shastra. So, using our intelligence according to Guru Sadhu Shastra is philosophical speculation, or it is Shastra Moolak Hanuman.
It is reasoning based on scripture. It is also called as vichar. So now, first of all, no Acharya has said that the Chitraketu’s 10 million life, queens has to be taken literally.
Secondly, it is not repeated within that pastime or repeated ever again. Thirdly, Chitraketu is not shown to be having any mystical powers. Fourthly, that pastime is supposed to have happened on earth, where, without any extraordinary powers, for a person to have a relationship with 10 million wives is impossible.
Fifth, the overall message of the pastime is in no way affected by having a poetic ornamentation. If Krishna’s lifting Govardhan is taken as metaphorical and the whole principle that Krishna can give shelter to his devotees from even the most extreme dangers, that gets devalued. If Krishna had actually not lifted Govardhan, if that whole thing was symbolic, then through a symbolic thing, we are giving a very literal and real teaching.
The teaching itself gets devalued. But the Chitraketu’s teaching, it doesn’t depend on whether the Chitraketu had 10 million wives or 10 wives. The point is that he did not get any children and when he got a son also, he was frustrated.
So therefore, we have to look at the overall context of the scriptures and then understand. In general, we should always confirm it from senior devotees who have studied the scriptures very carefully and this sort of thoughtfulness is just basic human intelligence. Now, this question will get reduced to why should we have basic human intelligence? If we say that we should not use our intelligence, then why has God given us intelligence? If what is given in scriptures is not understandable according to our intelligence, then there is no need for any scripture analysis, there is no need for any scripture commentary, there is no need for any question answers, there is no need for any discussion.
There’s just, okay, this is the truth, accept it. That is not at all the mood of the scriptures. That is not at all the mood of the scriptures.
So, we should not certainly, in a very speculative way, try to put everything that we can’t understand into the category of non-literal just so that it can fit into our intellectual categories. On the other hand, just in the name of having faith in scripture, we shouldn’t just be expected to believe anything and everything which makes, which has no rhyme or reason or logic underlying it. You know, God has given us his intelligence so that we can use it to go closer to him, not to abandon and not to just believe things which make no sense at all from the intelligence point of view.
So, you can hear the lecture in Karsh Faith handout about scriptural knowledge and the three categories of scriptural knowledge. That is Harmony of Taksha and Uman, that is not Harmony of Taksha and Uman, that is just beyond Taksha and Uman.