Reliability of sastra and role of (human) reasoning vis-a-vis accepting knowledge

[krsna]

Excerpts from Sarva-samvadini on sastra and reasoning

 

What follows is excerpts from Sarva-samvadini of Srila Jiva Gosvami along

with a translation [1] and notes.

 

These excerpts deal with reliability of sastra and the role of (human)

reasoning vis-a-vis accepting knowledge from the sastra

---

 

There are some statements in sastra which appear to contradict human sense

perception. Srila Jiva Gosvami first presents a sample of such statements:

 

TEXT: nanu vede 'pi "gravanah plavante", "mrd abravid apo 'bruvan"

ity-adi-darsanad anaptatvam iva pratiyate.

 

TRANSLATION: [One might ask:] "We see even in the Vedas [satapatha Brahmana

6.1.3.2, 4] statements like 'The stones float' and 'The ground spoke and the

water spoke,' which seem to indicate that the Vedas are unreliable."

 

NOTE: In other words, the statements of sastra seem to contradict our sense

perception. So aren't these statements indicate that the Vedas are

unreliable? The answer, as we shall see is "no". All statements of the

Vedas, including the above quoted ones, are reliable. How it is so will be

explained here.

 

TEXT: ucyate, karma-visesangi-bhutanam gravnam virya-vardhanaya stutir iyam.

 

TRANSLATION: This we answer -- this praise of the stones is for the purpose

of increasing the potency of the stones, which serve a role in a particular

ritual.

 

TEXT: sa ca sri-rama-kalpita-setu-bandhadau prasiddhatvena yatha-vad eveti

na dosah.

 

TRANSLATION: And this is indeed feasible, since it is well known that the

same sort of address to stones occurred in such contexts as the building of

the bridge which was arranged by Sri Rama. Thus there is no fault in this

praise.

 

NOTE: In other words, the statement in sastra, "the stones float" is true as

is proved in particular cases such as when Lord Ramacandra built a bridge of

floating stones. In other words, Lord Ramacandra proved the truth of the

Vedic statement, "The stones float."

 

TEXT: tatha, "mrd abravid apo 'bruvan" ity-adau tat-tad-abhimani-devataiva

vyapadisyata iti jneyam.

 

TRANSLATION: And in statements like "The ground spoke", "the water spoke,"

we should understand that the demigods presiding over these elements are

being referred to.

 

NOTE: This is commonly known among sampradayic scholars of sastra.

 

TEXT: tad evam sarvatraiva sarvathaivapta eva vedah.

 

TRANSLATION: Therefore the Vedas are in all situations and in all respects

reliable authority.

 

NOTE: "In all situations" and "in all respects" indicate that *all portions*

of sastra are reliable, and *not that only some* portions (dealing with

devotional life, etc.) are reliable. It also indicates that they are

reliable authority for all time, not that in the modern age of "scientific

progress and advancement", the Vedas somehow lose their authority.

 

TEXT: kintu sarvajnesvara-vacanatvenasarvajna-jivair duruhatvat

tat-prabhava-labdha-pratyaksa-visesavadbhir eva sarvatra tad-anubhave

sakyate, na tu tarkikaih.

 

TRANSLATION: But since they consist of the words of the all-knowing Supreme

Lord, finite living beings who do not know everything have difficulty

construing what they mean, and so only those who have by His power received

special perceptive capacity are able to in all instances realize their

meaning. Mental speculators are not able to do this.

 

NOTE: Therefore it is important to listen to the recognized, accomplished

liberated Vaisnava acaryas to understand the meaning of sastra. I propose

that in ISKCON we accept Srila Prabhupada as such a person (devotees in

ISKCON used to accept Srila Prabhupada as such, but now some of them appear

to have become overintelligent enough to understand the Bhagavatam

"directly" bypassing Srila Prabhupada). People who are merely adept in logic

and / or having degrees from the nondevotee academia especially those who

have associated with members of the nondevotee academia and whose beliefs,

attitudes, understandings and desires have become distorted can neither

understand, nor honestly claim to understand, the meaning of sastra.

 

TEXT: tad uktam purusottama-tantre, "sastrartha-yukto 'nubhavah pramanam

tuttamam matam / anumadya na svatantrah pramana-padavim yayuh" iti.

 

TRANSLATION: This is stated in the Purusottama-tantra: "Realization

incorporating the ideas taught in sastra is considered the most excellent

means of correct knowledge. Inference and the other means of knowing cannot

independently claim authority."

 

NOTE: Inference means reasoning, and independent inference refers to

reasoning not based on sastra, that is, (fallible human) reasoning based on

(fallible human) sense perception.

 

TEXT: tathaiva matam brahma-sutra-karaih, "tarkapratisthanat", "srutes tu

sabda-mulatvat" ity-adau. tatha ca srutih, "naisa tarkena matir apaneya

proktanyenaiva su-jnanaya prestha", "niharena pravrta jalpyas ca" ity-adyah.

jalpa-pravrttas tarkika iti sruti-padarthah.

 

TRANSLATION: This is also the opinion of the author of the Brahma-sutras in

such sutras as "Because logical speculation is never final" (2.1.11) and

"No, because the revealed scriptures say otherwise, and knowledge of the

Supreme is derived from transcendental sound" (2.1.27). There are also such

statements of sruti as: "My dear boy, this knowledge cannot be obtained by

mental speculation. It can be properly understood only when an especially

qualified person speaks it" (Katha Upanisad 1.2.9) and "They are enveloped

in a fog and prone to useless talk." (Rk-samhita 10.82.7) The sense of the

word jalpyah in this sruti text is "speculators engaged in useless talk."

 

NOTE: Upon seeing Brahma-sutra 2.1.27 quoted above, one might think that for

knowledge of the Supreme, yes, one must depend on sastra, but in other

cases, such as within the empirical field, can one depend on sastra? That is

clarified here:

 

TEXT: ata eva varaha-purane, "sarvatra sakyate kartum agamam hi vinanuma /

tasman na sa saktimati vinagamam udiksitum" iti.

 

TRANSLATION: Thus it is said in the Varaha Purana: "In all situations one

can always apply the traditional authority of scriptures even without using

logic. Therefore logic is impotent to see the truth without the help of

scripture."

 

NOTE: Yes. "In all situations" one can always depend on the authority of the

sastra, *even without using reasoning*.

 

Baradraj: So knowledge is not necessary for faith but faith is necessary

for knowledge.

 

Prabhupada: Yes. Therefore devotee, without any knowledge he becomes

devotee. That faith, only faith. The devotee advances. Jnanam ca yad

ahaituki. Later on, they become automatically full of knowledge because

they have strong faith. That is also stated in the Bhagavad-gita. Tesam

evanukampartham aham ajnana-jam tamah nasayamy: [bg. 10.11] "Because he

is faithful, therefore I help him how to get knowledge." Again you come

to that. Mattah smrtir jnanam apohanam ca [bg. 15.15]. Everything is

there. (Morning walk; July 21, 1975)

 

We also find that Srila Prabhupada wanted us to accept the Fifth Canto *even

when we don't understand it*.

 

The Western ethos of education appears to be that *first* you understand

things *and then* you believe. But the sampradayic ethos of sastric

education is that you accept the validity of scriptures *whether you

understand any portion of it or not* [2] and *then* you try to study and

understand it to whatever extent you can. And it is not that all human

beings can understand all statements of the scriptures.

 

[...]

 

TEXT: yat tv agame kvacit tarkena bodhana drsyate, tat tatraiva sobhanam

agama-rupatvat, bodhana-saukaryartha-matroddista-tarkatvat.

 

TRANSLATION: And when we see sometimes in the revealed scriptures that

information is provided by speculative logic, it is in those cases

praiseworthy because it is part of scripture, being speculation offered only

for the sake of making understanding easier.

 

NOTE: The scriptures also teach very reasonably in order to make

understanding easier.

 

TEXT: yadi ca yat tarkena sidhyati, tad eva veda-vacanam pramanam iti syat,

tada tarka evastam, kim vedeneti vaidikam-manya api te bahya evety ayam

abhiprayah sarvatraiva.

 

TRANSLATION: Persons who imagine themselves followers of the Vedas may say

"If something is proven by logic then it must be the very words of the Vedas

and authoritative. So let us use logic; what need have we of the Vedas?" But

those who speak thus are actually opponents of the Vedas, and this is

indicated everywhere.

 

TEXT: ata eva tesam srgalatvam eva gatir ity uktam bharate.

 

TRANSLATION: Thus it is stated in the Mahabharata (Santi-parva, 180.47-49)

that these people will become jackals in their next lives.

 

TEXT: yat tu srotavyo mantavyah ity-adisu mananam nama tarko 'ngi-krtah,

tatraivam evam uktam yatha kurma-purane, purvaparavirodhena ko nv artho

'bhimato bhavet / ity-adyam uhanam tarkah suska-tarkam ca varjayet iti.

 

TRANSLATION: And when speculation under the name of "reflecting" is

acknowledged in such statements as "It should be heard about and reflected

on" (Brhad-aranyaka Upanisad 2.4.5), it is in the following sense that such

is being said, as stated in the Kurma Purana: "Speculation means to

conjecture in such ways as asking which meaning of a text is appropriate

without contradicting what precedes and follows it. Dry speculation,

however, should be rejected."

 

NOTE: In other words, reasoning is okay when we use it to understand the

meaning of sastra.

 

This is also stated by Srila Baladeva Vidyabhusana in the conclusion of his

commentary to verse 9 of Laghu-bhagavatamrta:

 

tatha ca veda eva vyasasya pramanam tarkas ca tad-anusari na nivaryate

suska-tarkas tu praheya eveti tad-anuyayino me tad eva.

 

And so, Veda is the accepted source of valid knowledge for Vyasa; logic

which follows the Veda is not opposed, but dry speculation should

definitely be rejected. This is the opinion of Vyasa's followers and

(hence) for me. [3]

 

Srila Prabhupada clarified the matter by explaining the difference between

mental speculation and acceptable philosophical speculation:

 

As for the difference between mental speculation and philosophical

speculation, we take it that everything is known by the psychological

action of the mind, so that philosophical speculation is the same as

mental speculation if it is merely the random or haphazard activity of

the brain to understand everything and making theories, "if's" and

"maybe's." But if philosophical speculation is directed by Sastra and

Guru, and if the goal of such philosophical attempts is to achieve

Visnu, then that philosophical speculation is not mental speculation. It

is just like this: Krishna says in Bhagavad-gita that "I am the taste of

water." Philosophical speculation in the accepted sense then means to

try to understand, under the direction of Sastra and Guru, just how

Krishna is the taste of water. (Letter to Chaturbhus, 21 January 1971)

 

So, the approach of trying to understand *how* a sastric statement such as

"I am the taste of water" is correct is acceptable.

 

But the approach of trying to understand *if* such a statement is correct is

*not acceptable*. However, this is the approach of the nondevotee academia

and despite knowing that it is so, some of our devotees don't seem to mind

getting trained up by the nondevotee academia to approach the scriptures in

such unacceptable ways.

---

 

ENDNOTES:

 

[1] Regarding the translation, I had taken the help of Sri Gopiparanadhana

Prabhu of NE-BBT last year on Sarva-samvadini (but translation of the

section presented here in this article is not checked by him). I have also

consulted a Bengali version of Tattva-sandarbha published along with

Sarva-samvadini and Srila Baladeva Vidyabhusana's commentary (edition

published by Gopinath Gaudiya Math (Mayapur, 1998)). The sections excerpted

in this article appear as additional explanations to text 9 of

Tattva-sandarbha.

 

[2] More of this perhaps in a separate article.

 

[3] Laghu-bhagavatamrta of Srila Rupa Gosvami, published along with the

commentaries of Srila Baladeva Vidyabhusana and Vrndavanacandra Tarkalankara

(Bengali script) by Haribhakta Das, Gaurabda 503.

 

Submitted by Vidvan Gauranga das (JPS)