veda as reference

Philosophy Forums Religion and Spirituality
1

veda as reference

There are several religions and there are several scriptures corresponding to these religions. We must fix a scripture as the primary standard so that other scriptures can be standardized with reference to that. The other scripture also becomes standard with reference to which some other scripture can be also standardized. This is called as the process of standardization in Science.

Such a primary standard can be the Veda. I know immediately the colours of your faces will change. Immediately you will blame Me that I am not the preacher of Universal Religion. You will misunderstand Me as the preacher of Hinduism in guise. This situation will arise even if I take the scripture of some other religion also as the primary standard. The misunderstanding is inevitable and unavoidable.

I have to take one scripture of some religion and I have to be subjected to the criticism. Therefore, I ignore the criticism. I know what I am in My inner consciousness. My inner self is the real witness as long as I am the preacher of Universal Religion to My inner self, I need not fear for any external criticism from any angle.

The reason for selecting Veda as the primary standard is that even today the Veda is being preserved by oral recitation with the help of thousands of families. If you go to older and older times millions of families were reciting Veda just to preserve it from any type of intrusions or deletions. In Indian spiritual field there are several branches of philosophy who fight with each other orally.

For all these branches, Veda is the standard text. Such situation never existed in any religion in this world and does not exist even today. Even today different schools of philosophy in Hinduism fight with each other and all of them quote the same Veda. Such competition was and is unique in Hinduism. In such competitive atmosphere pollution of Veda is impossible.

If any word is added or deleted, immediately the other schools will shout because they fear that in such case Veda may support a particular branch of philosophy due to the possibility of a new interpretation for a new sentence. Leave the past. Tell Me frankly whether such situation exists in any religion in this world even today. This is the main reason why I have selected Veda as the primary standard. The diversity in Hinduism has done lot of good in this direction.

The sanctity of the scripture is well protected. In the olden days the books were in the form of written scripts of palm leaves. Printing was not there. Therefore, a very few scripts were only present. In such case it was very easy to introduce a new palm leaf or to remove an older palm leaf because hardly one or two scripts were present in a very large region.

Except this one reason there is no any other reason for Me to favour Veda but you need not worry that the scriptures of other religions have to be judged with reference to Veda only. Fortunately, all the scriptures of all the religions agree with Veda. The primary standard is useful in very few places where there is disagreement. Even that disagreement arises only from the misinterpretation of the statement. If the correct interpretation is given all the statements are perfectly coinciding with Veda.

Moreover, one can decide the final version of any concept based on the logical analysis. If the logical analysis fails, then mere Veda need not be taken as authority. If the logic disagrees you can reject any scripture including Veda. Therefore, Veda along with the logical analysis only stands as a primary standard. When you are convinced logically about a concept and when such concept is found in Veda, then only the concept is authorised.

Therefore, I am not rubbing Veda on any head without the logical analysis. Therefore, one need not doubt about the fanatic. The primary standard means the original word of God heard directly. But when other scriptures are perfectly in agreement with such word where is the question of fanatic? Every scripture becomes the word of God.

This point supports the Universal Religion, which says that the single God delivered the scriptures of all the religions. When the author is one and the same how can there be difference between the scriptures? If there is any difference it is only by your misinterpretation. Therefore, primary standard is only for convenience but not for fanatic.

2

Hi dat!

And, in case it hasn’t been said, welcome to ILP!! :smiley:

I’d suggest to you, yes, do ignore the “criticism”, but please consider the “critique”. Also, yes, do not fear anything, but do not bear false witness either… so, when you’re preaching to your inner self, make sure to look outside yourself on occasion to compare notes. :-"

We’re demonstrably Hindu-deficient on this board, so I’ll look forward to your attempt to edify. In turn, though, is there anything you look forward to learning more about from the others here? It tends not to work well when one only gives, but does not receive. :slight_smile:

3

Apart from the experience and logic, one should also take Scriptures as the final approving authority. Otherwise, even false preachers show perfect logic and experience in their interpretation. Therefore one needs the final sanction from the Scripture, which is called as Sruti and Smruti. Sruti is the Veda, which is preserved by recitation from one generation to the other. Not a single word is deleted or added to Veda because the recitation will not allow such pollution. Please do not mistake Me as a fan of Hinduism because I have to tell the truth and merit whatever may be the religion. The only scripture in this world, which is without pollution, is Veda. No other scripture in this world was preserved as Veda by such continuous process of recitation.

If you have the original manuscript, there is no proof of the absence of pollution. Is there hand written manuscript or oral dictation in recorded form of Jesus or Mohammed or Buddha? Even if you say that the hand scripts of disciples of Jesus exist, rationalists will question about the guarantee of the original oral or written version of Jesus. They will ask for the sincerity of the disciples in recording the version of Jesus. Even Gita is not an exception to this powerful analysis. Swami Dayananda says that Sankara has written Gita and introduced into Mahabharata. I am not supporting Dayananda. But at the same time I cannot oppose him also. Can I show the tape recorder in which the Gita was recorded directly from Krishna? Then there is an equal probability for both the possibilities. Therefore Gita comes under the second category called as Smruti.

Smruti is valid when it is found in Sruti or Veda. This is the reason why Sankara or Ramanuja or Madhva quotes first the Sruti and then only Gita as Smruti, which can be only supporting evidence. Unless the meaning of any verse of Gita is found in Sruti or Veda, it is not valid. Atleast the verse of Gita should not contradict the concept presented in Veda. Thus Gita, Bible, Q’ran and the statements of Buddha etc are analysed in the light of Veda. If any concept is contradicting Veda and if the correlation is not possible, such concept is to be rejected.

Fortunately all the scriptures of the second category (Smruti) could be correlated with Veda and therefore the same God who spoke Veda in the beginning of the creation subsequently came down and preached all the scriptures. You need not worry that I have brought your religious scriptures under the second category because there is no single instance where your scripture contradicted Veda, if your scripture is represented in the light of correct interpretation. You should feel worried if I show a single instance where your scripture is rejected due to contradiction with Veda. Since such possibility never arose, you need not worry because your scripture becomes equal to Veda since it has never contradicted Veda in the light of correct interpretation.

If somebody brings a statement like that the anti-Christ will try to bring the world peace by uniting all the religions, such statement cannot be accepted as the statement of God. It is only pollution. God is the very essence of the peace. Jesus is the very embodiment of peace. I am not finding such things only with Christianity. I can quote such things even in Hinduism, if you mistake Me as a fan of Hinduism internally. The scholars of Visishtadvaita branch of Hindu religion found by Ramanuja quoted some verses from a book written by Vyasa. These verses say that Sankara was an incarnation of a demon. It is very clear that these verses were composed by those scholars and were introduced into the book. Hinduism stands as a mini model for the whole world

Whatever you find in the world in the macro-scale can be found in Hinduism in the micro-scale. The hand written scripts were always subjected to intrusions and extrusions in course of long duration of time. But Veda did never exist in the form of written script, even before the technology of writing on Palm Leaves was discovered. Veda existed in the process of the recitation only. During the process of recitation a very large number of scholars were involved who belonged to old, middle and new generations.

Pollution at any level was impossible. Thus the authority lies in 1) Sruti (Veda); 2) Smruti (Gita, Bible, Q’ran, statements of Buddha etc.) which must coincide with Sruti or atleast not contradict Sruti; 3) Yukti, the logical analysis with discrimination power to differentiate truth and falsehood and 4) Vidvadanubhava, which is the experience of scholars who are the realised souls. I once again request all the other religions with folded hands and many many salutations, that one should not mistake me as a fan of Hinduism because I was born as a Hindu, especially by giving the first position to Sruti or Veda, which is a Hindu scripture.

I am not a blind fan of any religion including Hinduism. Did I not praise the Christians and Muslims in the concept of re-birth and condemned the Hindus severely? Hindus became lazy and neglected the spiritual effort thinking that there are several human re-births. I condemned this concept and showed the Hindu scripture itself, which states that the human birth is very rare. Thus Hindus have misunderstood their own religious scripture, whereas Christians and Muslims have clearly understood their own religious scriptures. If there is a merit in Hinduism, I shall not feel shy to expose it, doubting that other religions may misunderstand Me as a fan of my own religion. Similarly I shall not feel afraid to criticize my own Hindus if there is de-merit in Hinduism and I shall not feel unhappy to praise other religions if they have a merit.

4

Just for the record, I and many here don’t have a “Scripture” to worry about in that regard, so that’s one of the ground-level discussions you’re going to have to prepare for and attend to… It will require auspicious means on your part to promote and ensure meaningful dialogue with We-the-Bookless… it may require not relying explicitly on scriptural references to make your point.

Also, you’ve certainly hit the ground running, which is great, but you might want to pace yourself a bit and enter into some verbatiously discrete and perhaps even trivial points of discussion, …just so others get the chance to come to know you and appreciate your persona. For instance, allowing others to discover the nature of your sense of humour, I think, is key to your gaining access into others’ hearts and minds.

Otherwise it all just becomes a pissing contest… which is fun, too, but the young ones always win them.

Anyhow, just some suggestions. Consider them as you will. :romance-grouphug:

5

God comes in human form in every human generation to preach and uplift the human souls known as human incarnation.HE is the proof of invisible God on earth. His divine knowledge make you understand that God is in Him. Divine knoweldge is the proof of GOd existing in human form or Human incarnation.

God takes the human body to unify all religions

To unify all the religions in the world and to give exceptional spiritual guidance to the entire humanity, God alone, who is capable of possessing such exceptional spiritual knowledge called Prajnanam, takes the human body.

The main aim of God entering into the world is to give excellent guidance to the spiritual aspirants. No soul can give such exceptional guidance equal to God. Such guidance is based on the exceptional unique knowledge of omniscient God. Since He is the author of the spiritual scriptures, He alone can give the correct interpretation and the essence of all the scriptures. Since the same God came in different forms to different parts of the world and gave the exceptional spiritual guidance to the entire humanity through the scriptures of various religions, He alone can correlate all the scriptures and establish the Universal Spirituality and the subsequent peace and harmony in the world. Such basic exceptional and universal spiritual knowledge is called as Prajnanam. For this purpose, it goes without saying that the suitable medium to fulfill this main aim is only the human body. Hence, God comes in human form only to accomplish this excellent goal.

www.universal-spirituality.org
Universal Spirituality for World Peace

6

Such a fundamentalist, short-sighted and unsupportable remark removes it from the philosophical and rational world into the warm fuzzy feel-good world of ‘egoic pride’ and (unsupported/unsupportable) ‘beliefs’.
Continuous recitation = unchanged content? Are you serious? Have you ever played a game of telephone for a few minutes? Have you not seen the error of your astounding assumption? Imagine a game of telephone over centuries!
You are, of course, assuming (from some bias) that the initiators of said ‘scriptures’ had some magical connection to ‘Universal (and beyond) Truth’.
This is relligion, the same ‘fundamentalism’ as any neophyte displays when his feet first get wet. “My truth is THE Truth!”
Common.
I’ve seen you around, preaching all over and running off when challenged.
I’d be interested to see how you respond to Oughtist’s challenge;
is there anything you look forward to learning more about from the others here? It tends not to work well when one only gives, but does not receive
I don’t think that anyone here would volunteer to be preached at by yet another fundamentalist, of whatever flavor du jour…

7

:laughing: :laughing: :laughing: Dattaswami1, you crack me up!! :laughing: :laughing: :laughing: Can you do a perfect square, too?? :smiley:

…so, does HE have access to a good public relations firm? Is HE putting out any podcasts? Does HE just have to speak this knowledge for me to “make” me understand that God is in Him, or is there some subtle figurin’ out to do? If I have but a dishearteningly wither’d and tired-out ol’ spirit, am I thus too infirmed to greet HIS words with the understanding HE would otherwise “make” me have?

Come on, man, you gotta have something better than THAT!! Give me the goods!! Make me smile!!! :cry:

p.s.: and yes, as per nameless’s rejoinder, is this just a one-way conversation? I’d think God would want his emmisaries to engage, not sedate, us… [-(

8

Just curious here but…am I to understand that you hold that religious choices should be made based on consistency of existing articles and not by any method of belief?

So…God is evident because God is written about consistently?