Shri Shri Anandamurtiji
Shri Shri Anandamurti says relative knowledge will be tolerated by society only if it promotes universal humanism
That which leads to liberation through discipline is called scripture
Common people usually live their lives according to absolute knowledge and become noble and great. That is why we see people like Kabir and Ramakrishna, who even without formal schooling, were highly regarded by tens of thousands of people.
In fact, it is doubtful whether learned scholars could bring about even a small fraction of the spiritual progress these great people brought to society. Social progress is achieved to some extent through relative knowledge, but there is a great possibility of conflict between relative knowledge and absolute knowledge.
Relative knowledge often encourages divisive ideas and the propagation of narrow sentiments, such as casteism, nationalism, communalism and provincialism, by extolling the greatness of caste, community, creed and colour. It often tends to suppress other castes, communities and creeds, or wants to annihilate them completely.
On the other hand, absolute knowledge teaches human beings that the dharma of all humans is one and the same.
The Supreme Entity is the Universal Father. All human beings of the world are brothers and sisters. All are equal — no one is low, no one is high.
Relative knowledge, by concocting certain false arguments, may prove that God does not exist, that He is a mere figment of human imagination. A weak mind may accept these arguments, but the heart can never do so. Whenever there is a conflict between the brain and the heart, intelligent people should respond to the call of the heart. The proper mark of identity of absolute knowledge is that it must be universal, rational and psychological.
Certain instances of absolute knowledge are as follows — the goal of human life is the attainment of Brahmn; human beings are the progeny of Param Purusha; the universe is created by the macrocosmic conation; matter is the ‘crudified’ form of the universal mind; by dint of sadhana, spiritual practices, human beings gradually become divine; whoever is born will have to die one day; liberation is the birth right of all living beings; human society is one and indivisible; diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform.
How far is relative knowledge acceptable to human society? As long as there is no conflict between absolute knowledge and relative knowledge, relative knowledge may be tolerated, but the moment relative knowledge does more harm than good to society, it should not be allowed to work in society.... By taking advantage of relative knowledge, opportunists get the scope to exploit the psychological weakness of human beings. For example, the concept of selfless action in the Gita and the theory of the migration of souls have been interpreted in such an unscientific way that society is greatly harmed.
So the value of relative knowledge should be assessed in the light of universal humanism. If relative knowledge promotes universal humanism, it will be tolerated by society, but once it goes against the spirit of universal humanism, it will forfeit the right to exist.
DISCLAIMER
The views expressed in the Article above are Author’s personal views and kashmiribhatta.in is not in any way responsible for the opinions expressed in the above article. The article belongs to its respective owner or owners and this site does not claim any right over it. Copyright Disclaimer under section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing."
Courtesy:
Shri Shri Anandamurtiji
Shri Shri Anandamurti says relative knowledge will be tolerated by society only if it promotes universal humanism
That which leads to liberation through discipline is called scripture
Common people usually live their lives according to absolute knowledge and become noble and great. That is why we see people like Kabir and Ramakrishna, who even without formal schooling, were highly regarded by tens of thousands of people.
In fact, it is doubtful whether learned scholars could bring about even a small fraction of the spiritual progress these great people brought to society. Social progress is achieved to some extent through relative knowledge, but there is a great possibility of conflict between relative knowledge and absolute knowledge.
Relative knowledge often encourages divisive ideas and the propagation of narrow sentiments, such as casteism, nationalism, communalism and provincialism, by extolling the greatness of caste, community, creed and colour. It often tends to suppress other castes, communities and creeds, or wants to annihilate them completely.
On the other hand, absolute knowledge teaches human beings that the dharma of all humans is one and the same.
The Supreme Entity is the Universal Father. All human beings of the world are brothers and sisters. All are equal — no one is low, no one is high.
Relative knowledge, by concocting certain false arguments, may prove that God does not exist, that He is a mere figment of human imagination. A weak mind may accept these arguments, but the heart can never do so. Whenever there is a conflict between the brain and the heart, intelligent people should respond to the call of the heart. The proper mark of identity of absolute knowledge is that it must be universal, rational and psychological.
Certain instances of absolute knowledge are as follows — the goal of human life is the attainment of Brahmn; human beings are the progeny of Param Purusha; the universe is created by the macrocosmic conation; matter is the ‘crudified’ form of the universal mind; by dint of sadhana, spiritual practices, human beings gradually become divine; whoever is born will have to die one day; liberation is the birth right of all living beings; human society is one and indivisible; diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform.
How far is relative knowledge acceptable to human society? As long as there is no conflict between absolute knowledge and relative knowledge, relative knowledge may be tolerated, but the moment relative knowledge does more harm than good to society, it should not be allowed to work in society.... By taking advantage of relative knowledge, opportunists get the scope to exploit the psychological weakness of human beings. For example, the concept of selfless action in the Gita and the theory of the migration of souls have been interpreted in such an unscientific way that society is greatly harmed.
So the value of relative knowledge should be assessed in the light of universal humanism. If relative knowledge promotes universal humanism, it will be tolerated by society, but once it goes against the spirit of universal humanism, it will forfeit the right to exist.
DISCLAIMER
The views expressed in the Article above are Author’s personal views and kashmiribhatta.in is not in any way responsible for the opinions expressed in the above article. The article belongs to its respective owner or owners and this site does not claim any right over it. Copyright Disclaimer under section 107 of the Copyright Act of 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, education, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statute that might otherwise be infringing."
Courtesy: