Dear Hari
In Caitanya Bhagavata recently I found one text that made me really shocked and I didn't know how to properly relate to not only that text but to the commentators on it.
In 15 chapter 8 text it is written about the importance of tilak . In the comments, Bhaktisidhata Sarasvati quotes several puranas wherein it is said that one not putting and maintaining tilak on his head definitely is a demon and will go definitely into the hell. Padma purana uttara khanda.
And this is not the only statement. In other puranas it is written that those who do not fast on ekadasi will go to hell, and in another one, one who puts Lord Shiva's mark on his head will be punished. As I remember also one who does not wear tulsi around his neck will go to hell, and so on.
The question is, how can the scriptures and their authors be considered unalloyed and purely spiritual if they are sending millions of people into the hell just because they didn't put some sign on the head and how they represent God who obviously will not send people to hell just because they are not wearing tilak. And how such a honored spiritualist as Bhaktisidhanta Sarasvati who is famous as pure representative of God can support such an idea?
Reading scriptures is very enlightening as there so many very enlightening spiritual stories and practices, but when one reads such strange verses, an independent seeker can lose his faith and will ask if these books are really totally written by saints or maybe by politicians and sects which definitely existed at all times which used these literatures and edited them as they wanted as it is done by many modern sects.
In scriptures there are verses which say that simply by doing something you can go to the Spiritual world even if you are big sinner, for example if one gives water to tulasi or chants the Lord's names or fasts one day on ekadasi. But even if it is so, then again it is totally unfair to the millions sent to hell who didn't know about these 'loopholes,' who don't chant and who neve knew about existence of tulasi. Can it be that the authors of scriptures mean hell as synonym for something bad but not exactly hell?
Sorry that this question maybe not in tune with our present understanding, but it is a question for me.
how to relate to Scriptures
-
kamalamala
- Posts: 24
- Joined: Wed May 11, 2005 7:00 pm
- Location: russia
- Contact:
Here are various ways one could see this issue.
Do scriptures come from God or are they created by man? If they come from God then there can be no mistakes in them and all mistakes we see are due to our lack of understanding or our being unaware of the hidden motivations behind these statements. If scriptures come from man, then mistakes are to be expected since men make mistakes and therefore scriptures cannot be absolute.
If scriptures come from God and there are mistakes in them, they are due to the imperfect transmission of the text while it is being copied by man. If this is so, one cannot know what has been changed. If something has been altered for some reason (either by accident, by a systematic misunderstanding of the words used, or by design) one cannot state absolutely that anything within the scripture is 100% as it was in the original, which is discomforting.
Since men copied the literatures we can safely assume they must have influenced them in some manner. Considering the historical 'black-out' from a few generations after Janemejaya till Buddha, one can rightly wonder what happened to literatures during that time.
All in all, it seems that regardless of the actual events, at present one can either believe the scriptures to be totally true, one can believe them to be mainly true with some exceptions determined by oneself or others, or one cannot take them as absolute and see them as reference materials. One's acceptance of any of these three courses depends on one thing only, one's belief.
If you believe something, it attains great importance in your mind. If you are an acharya in a religious group, you have no choice but to believe everything related to the religion is absolutely correct and to present it to others as it is. In your activity as acharya, you defend the faith against intruders and disbelievers although sometimes you may personally wonder about some statements in scripture. The more you doubt, the more powerfully you present the doubtful statements to hide your doubt and demonstrate your loyalty to all that your religion embodies.
Arguments can be given by the faithful to 'prove' the veracity of scriptures. I have heard the argument that the Bhagavatam is free from human changes since it was commented on by Sridhar Swami. However, this commentary was made thousands of years later. That vaisnavas believe the other puranas or other literatures are not to be depended on due to the sectarian influenced changes does not encourage confidence in any scripture.
Those who are wise know the essence of their belief resides within their spiritual experiences. These experiences are often couched within a spiritual tradition that gives form and structure to spirituality. One who has spiritual experiences is not concerned with statements in books, arguments and debates, or things they are told they must believe. Spirituality resides within oneself, within the heart, and is inspired by anything which stimulates our essence. Some are stimulated by scriptures, some by prayer, meditation, chants or dances, or some simply by seeing the wonder of the world. Seek out that which works for you. Obviously, scriptures are not going to be your exclusive stimulation!
Do scriptures come from God or are they created by man? If they come from God then there can be no mistakes in them and all mistakes we see are due to our lack of understanding or our being unaware of the hidden motivations behind these statements. If scriptures come from man, then mistakes are to be expected since men make mistakes and therefore scriptures cannot be absolute.
If scriptures come from God and there are mistakes in them, they are due to the imperfect transmission of the text while it is being copied by man. If this is so, one cannot know what has been changed. If something has been altered for some reason (either by accident, by a systematic misunderstanding of the words used, or by design) one cannot state absolutely that anything within the scripture is 100% as it was in the original, which is discomforting.
Since men copied the literatures we can safely assume they must have influenced them in some manner. Considering the historical 'black-out' from a few generations after Janemejaya till Buddha, one can rightly wonder what happened to literatures during that time.
All in all, it seems that regardless of the actual events, at present one can either believe the scriptures to be totally true, one can believe them to be mainly true with some exceptions determined by oneself or others, or one cannot take them as absolute and see them as reference materials. One's acceptance of any of these three courses depends on one thing only, one's belief.
If you believe something, it attains great importance in your mind. If you are an acharya in a religious group, you have no choice but to believe everything related to the religion is absolutely correct and to present it to others as it is. In your activity as acharya, you defend the faith against intruders and disbelievers although sometimes you may personally wonder about some statements in scripture. The more you doubt, the more powerfully you present the doubtful statements to hide your doubt and demonstrate your loyalty to all that your religion embodies.
Arguments can be given by the faithful to 'prove' the veracity of scriptures. I have heard the argument that the Bhagavatam is free from human changes since it was commented on by Sridhar Swami. However, this commentary was made thousands of years later. That vaisnavas believe the other puranas or other literatures are not to be depended on due to the sectarian influenced changes does not encourage confidence in any scripture.
Those who are wise know the essence of their belief resides within their spiritual experiences. These experiences are often couched within a spiritual tradition that gives form and structure to spirituality. One who has spiritual experiences is not concerned with statements in books, arguments and debates, or things they are told they must believe. Spirituality resides within oneself, within the heart, and is inspired by anything which stimulates our essence. Some are stimulated by scriptures, some by prayer, meditation, chants or dances, or some simply by seeing the wonder of the world. Seek out that which works for you. Obviously, scriptures are not going to be your exclusive stimulation!