Dangers of Mental Speculation
The following is an article from the 4th edition of the Matchless Gift magazine, written by His Grace Purujit Dasa.
Along with the chanting of Hare Krishna, Srila Prabhupada instructed all His disciples to follow the four regulative principles: no meat-eating, no illicit sex, no intoxication and no gambling. Although the first three principles seem quite clear due to extensive discussions amongst devotees, not as much has been spoken about the fourth rule: no gambling. Generally, devotees understand this as not going to casinos and not buying lottery tickets. However, Srila Prabhupada extends his definition ofgambling as "mental speculation."
For example, in this letter to his Indian friend, he writes:
"I chant Hare Krishna Mantra on the 108 beads and then the beads are offered to the disciple with a change of name as Krishna das. He is advised to strictly follow the regulative principles of 1. no eating of meat, fish, or eggs; 2. no taking of intoxicants including coffee, tea, and tobacco; 3. no illicit sex life; and 4. no gambling or mental speculation."
(Letter to: Hanuman Prasad Poddar -- Los Angeles 5 February, 1970)
Srila Prabhupada also warns about the dangers of mental speculation in connection with devotees living outside of Krishna consciousness society:
"If one thinks that there are many pseudo devotees or non-devotees in the Krsna Consciousness Society, one can keep direct company with the spiritual master, and if there is any doubt, one should consult the spiritual master. However, unless one follows the spiritual master's instructions and the regulative principles governing
chanting and hearing the holy name of the Lord, one cannot become a pure devotee. By one's mental concoctions, one falls down."
(Madhya 19.157 purport)
This is applicable, especially now when many devotees live outside of the institution that Srila Prabhupada established. Of course, Srila Prabhupada's company is always there for us through his vani and we can definitely consult his books for proper guidance in our spiritual lives. However, one must be careful not to fall into the danger of mental speculation. Without devotee association, one sometimes overly depends on his imperfect senses and mind and this can prove to be fatal for one's spiritual life. Instead of following the spiritual master's instructions, one tries to justify one's position by using mental speculation. Then, in
the worst cases, such a person also goes on misleading others by giving false interpretations of the spiritual master's teachings. Therefore, mental speculation can turn out to be the greatest sinful activity, as it pollutes one's understanding of Krishna consciousness as a whole. While other sinful activities are detrimental to one's progress when following the spiritual standard, there is still a hope that a fallen devotee can, at one point, return to the original standard. In the case of mental speculation, one is attacking the standard itself, so there is little hope. In other words, one may be, for example, a victim of illicit sex life, but is repentant of his position and is trying to give it up in various ways, whereas someone might, through mental constructs, question the necessity for sexual restrictions in the first place. Thus, through mental speculation one can find justification not to
follow anything. Srila Prabhupada writes,
"Mental speculation that leads one away from the Supreme Lord is a serious sin, and one who does not know Krsna should not try to comment on Bhagavad-gita." (Bg 10.15 purport)
"One who does not have perfect knowledge has only mental speculation. By such mental speculation one falls down and down into a hellish condition of life."
(SB 4.26.8 purport)
Mental speculators take advantage of the spiritual master's instructions to preach their own mental constructs. Under the guise of devout followers of the acharya, they infiltrate material concepts into spiritual understanding. This is most dishonest. Srila Prabhupada uses a befitting analogy in this connection:
"Everyone is taking advantage of Bhagavad-gita, and he's preaching in his own way, foolish way. "Own way" means foolish way. This is going on. You cannot... Suppose you have got your philosophy, but you cannot take my book and preach your philosophy. If you have got philosophy, you write your philosophy. Why do you take advantage of my book and misinterpret? This is cheating. Because my
book is very popular, you take advantage of my book and preach your own nonsense philosophy. This is going on. If you want to smoke ganja, you smoke in your own hand. Why you capture my hand and smoke? What is this? So the ganja-smelling will be in my hand, not in your hand. This is going on. Why do they take advantage of Bhagavad-gita and preach their nonsense philosophy? That is our protest. You preach your nonsense philosophy. We have no objection. But don't touch Bhagavad-gita. This is our Krsna consciousness movement. What is the... Do you think it is honesty that you want to preach something of your own philosophy and you take advantage of my book and mislead others? Is that very good, honest business? This is going on. This is going on, very dangerous position. In our country, and what to speak of other countries, all these swamis, yogis, and politicians, and scholars, they are doing like this. Very dangerous position. Why should you touch Bhagavad-gita? You speak, you preach, your own philosophy. There are so many philosophies. But our only objection is that "Why should you preach your nonsense philosophy through Bhagavad-gita?" Do you think it is
right?"
(Conversation with Indian Guests -- April 12, 1975, Hyderabad)
Taking advantage of a spiritual teaching while trying to enjoy material benefits is the greatest perversion of religion. Srila Prabhupada states:
"There are innumerable interpretations rendered by different mundane scholars, but almost all of them do not accept the Supreme Personality of Godhead, Krsna, although they make a good business on the words of Sri Krsna. This spirit is demonic, because demons do not believe in God but simply enjoy the property of the Supreme."
(Bg 4.2 purport)
No one can understand the real meaning of the spiritual master's words in this way. Mental speculation uses the material mind to ascertain or establish conclusions on the topic of transcendence, but this process is fundamentally flawed since the mind is made of subtle matter, and therefore any conclusion arrived at by the mind is limited, imperfect, and temporary. Krishna says in the Bhagavad- gita:
"O Partha, when a man gives up all varieties of sense desire
which arise from mental concoction, and when his mind
finds satisfaction in the self alone, then he is said to be in
pure transcendental consciousness."
(Bg 2.55)
Srila Prabhupada comments on this sloka in a lecture as follows:
"The special word is used here, mano-gatan. Whatever we create in our mind, that is material, all creations. Mind is the leader of the senses. So the activities of the mind -- thinking, feeling, and willing -- are expressed through our senses. And these sensual activities are known as our living condition. Therefore the Lord says,
"When one shall be free from mental speculation, then he's to be understood that he is in the perfect stage of spiritual consciousness." Mental speculation. So by mental speculation we cannot understand what is our position.
(Bhagavad-gita 2.55-58 -- New York, April 15, 1966)
Just like an iron rod is made fiery by gradual heating, the material mind can be spiritualized by the association of a pure devotee spiritual master. One must simply hear with submission the transcendental sound from the transcendental person to purify the mind. For this reason, if we want to understand Krishna conscious philosophy, we must hear it from the perfect source and not add, change, or subtract. This is called avaroha-pantha, the descending process of acquiring knowledge. Srila Prabhupada explains it as follows:
"So tattva-jnana, those who are trying to understand the Absolute Truth by mental speculation or mental exercises... There are many parties, they are, they are called
theosophists, and many others, they are trying to understand. So those who are trying to understand the Absolute Truth by their own knowledge, not from the
knowledge of the Supreme... Our process is avaroha pantha, descending process, and the Mayavadi philosopher's policy or system is ascending policy. I want to
understand the Absolute Truth by exercising my mental power -- that is called the ascending process or inductive process.
(Srimad-Bhagavatam 1.2.10 -- Bombay, December 28, 1972)
“Vedic way is to receive knowledge from the authority, not to manufacture knowledge by mental speculation. Manufacturing..., your manufacturing process is very poor because you are imperfect. At least your senses, by which you will produce knowledge... Sense, there are senses to acquire knowledge. Just like by hearing, I have acquired knowledge, and by speaking, I am distributing knowledge.
So these are all sense activities. But our senses are imperfect; therefore we cannot manufacture knowledge. We have to receive knowledge from the authority. Just like
we receive knowledge from our father, and mother, "This is this." The child learns, "This is lamp." The father tells, "My dear boy, this is called lamp," and the boy understands, "This is lamp." The mother says, "My dear boy, this is your father," and the boy accepts, "This is my father." He doesn't make any research "Who is my father?" because mother is the authority. Similarly, perfect knowledge is from the authority. Perfect knowledge is not by speculation. Speculation, how much speculation you can do? What is the worth of your speculation? Because you are imperfect. Your senses are imperfect."
(Srimad-Bhagavatam 6.1.7 -- San Francisco, March 1, 1967)
The tendency to speculate on the words of the spiritual master is always there since the conditioned souls are tempted to find justification for their sense gratification
from time immemorial. Sometimes bewildered by the false ego, they take some of the words of the guru and establish their own conclusion. We must therefore clearly understand how to distinguish between a genuine presentation of the
spiritual master's message and conclusions that have been arrived at by mental speculation.
One of the popular methods of establishing one's speculative ideas on the basis of the guru's words is the "preaching tactic" justification. This happens when a
speculator finds a quote that fits his speculative theory, but at the same time is challenged by yet another quote which does not. For example, Prabhupada says:
"Actually, if the guru teaches Krsna consciousness, then he may be in lesser degree, but he's accepted as guru. There is no question of rejection."
(Bhagavad-gita 7.1 – December 13, 1972, Ahmedabad)
At the same time he writes,
"The guru must be situated on the topmost platform of devotional service. There are three classes of devotees, and the guru must be accepted from the topmost class."
(Madhya 24.330 purport)
Therefore, the question is, can a guru be accepted even though he is of "lesser degree," or does he have to be situated on the top-most platform of devotional service? At first, the two quotes might seem contradictory, and unless one is convinced about the liberated status of the spiritual master, one can be very easily confused. One must therefore have faith in the infallibility of the spiritual master's statements. Srila Prabhupada warns:
"A Krsna conscious person has realized knowledge, by the grace of Krsna, because he is satisfied with pure devotional service. By realized knowledge, one becomes perfect. By transcendental knowledge, one can remain steady in his convictions, but by mere academic knowledge one can be easily deluded and confused by apparent contradictions."
(Bg 6.8 purport)
At the same time, he should try to resolve these apparent contradictions by further hearing. By careful study, we know that there are two types of spiritual masters: one
liberated and one non-liberated. The quotes relate to two different types of spiritual masters. Srila Prabhupada clarifies the matter here:
"A person who is liberated Acharya and guru cannot commit any mistake, but there are persons who are less qualified or not liberated, but still can act as guru and acharya by strictly following the disciplic succession."
(Letter to: Janardana -- New York 26 April, 1968)
So, "the lesser degree" guru in the first quote naturally refers to a non-liberated person who may act as a guru on behalf of the liberated acharya, while the guru on the topmost platform refers to a liberated acharya who cannot commit any mistake. A mental speculator will use the quote that says that a guru must be on the topmost platform of devotional service and make a conclusion that no one should be a guru until reaching that platform. When confronted with the second quote, wherein Srila
Prabhupada says that a guru can be of a lower degree, he might claim that this statement was a mere "preaching tactic" from Srila Prabhupada's side to pacify motivated disciples who were eagerly awaiting to become gurus at the time of his manifested lila. In this way, he manages to skillfully nullify the instruction of the spiritual master by using the "preaching tactic" justification. Indeed, it is true that Acharyas do use various preaching tactics in their preaching work and sometimes conceal the real import of spiritual instruction. This is especially true about the preaching missions of Sankaracharya and that of Lord Buddha. Srila Prabhupada states:
"Sripada Sankaracarya's propaganda opposed the atheistic philosophy of Buddha. Lord Buddha intended to stop atheists from committing the sin of killing animals. Atheists cannot understand God; therefore Lord Buddha appeared and spread the philosophy of nonviolence to keep the atheists from killing animals. Unless one is free from the sin of animal-killing, he cannot understand religion or God. Although Lord Buddha was an incarnation of Krsna, he did not speak about God, for the people were unable to understand. He simply wanted to stop animal-killing.
Sripada Sankaracarya wanted to establish the predominance of one's spiritual identity; therefore he wanted to convert the atheists through an imaginary interpretation of the Vedic literature. These are the secrets of the acaryas.
Sometimes they conceal the real purport of the Vedas and explain the Vedas in a different way. Sometimes they enunciate a different theory just to bring the atheists under their control.
(Madhya 25.42 purport)
So, a preaching tactic can be used by the acharyas in certain circumstances. For example, Srila Prabhupada Himself would, at times, side with the materialistic scientists who claim that the light of the moon is a reflection of the sun's rays. In one of his lectures Srila Prabhupada says:
"Therefore the whole sun planet looks like fiery planet. And from there the illumination comes, and it is reflecting on the moon, and the moon is illuminating the whole dark night."
(Bhagavad-gita 13.18 – October 12, 1973, Bombay)
But on another occasion, Srila Prabhupada explains that the moon has its own effulgence independent of the sun:
"Pusta Krsna: The moon that we see in the sky...
Prabhupada: The same moon.
Pusta Krsna: That same moon.
Prabhupada: Yes. And there is fire, blazing fire, just like the sun. But it is surrounded by cool atmosphere. Therefore it is pleasing. Heat coming through cool
atmosphere, it is pleasing. This is the statement. What do they know? They cannot explain why it is so brilliant. We explain, "There is firelike flames; therefore it is brilliant."They say that every planet looks like that. That's not a fact. Then all the planets together, why they cannot illuminate this earth at night? Only the moon is required.
Pusta Krsna: Well, they give the excuse that all the other stars are so far away that the light doesn't shine bright enough.
Prabhupada: There are no other, nearer planets?
Pusta Krsna: Yes. There are other planets, like Venus and Mars, but they say these planets are much closer than the sun.
Prabhupada: That means... So why they do not look so bright?
Pusta Krsna: Their philosophy is that the Earth, Venus and Mars, these different planets, they don't give off any light.
Prabhupada: Then why do they say the all the planets look like moon? They say like that.
Pusta Krsna: They think the moon is just reflecting light from the sun.
Prabhupada: So why it is not reflecting to other planets, only to the moon? Why special advantage of the moon? They have no reason. All rascals' philosophy. Why
particularly to the moon? Why not others? Simply theories and mental speculation. (Morning Walk – October 9, 1975, Durban)
Finally, Srila Prabhupada clarifies his statements and admits siding with the scientists' view circumstantially only to prove a higher principle in his preaching:
"Tamala Krsna: Prabhupada, there's another question I have. I remember on a walk... I have read in your books that the moon's glowing is due to reflecting the sun. Then I remember on a walk in Vrindavana you said that the moon is fiery just like the sun, but there's a cooling atmosphere around it. So is it actually fiery glow, or is it simply a reflecting glow?
Prabhupada: That is stated in Bhagavatam.
Gurudasa: It says reflection in the Bhagavata Prabhupada: No, it is also a fiery place. But it is because it is far away from the sun, it is not so glowing.
Tamala Krsna: So it's not a question of reflection only.
Prabhupada: The reflection theory is the modern theory.
Tamala Krsna: Because sometimes in the books it's stated...
Prabhupada: Yes. Sometimes I have said or taken this modern theory.
Tamala Krsna: Just so that people will understand an example. I see.
(Morning Walk – March 18, 1976, Mayapur)
So, here we have a confirmation from Srila Prabhupada himself that shows this was indeed a preaching tactic. There is no need to speculate whether this was a
preaching tactic or not since Srila Prabhupada himself admits it was. However, minimizing or dismissing a certain instruction of the guru by claiming that it was a
mere preaching tactic without having any evidence that this was so is an extremely dangerous habit, as then one can mentally speculate on any instruction that one does not like and claim it is a mere preaching tactic. One can claim: "When Srila Prabhupada said we should follow the regulative principles, it was only a preaching tactic to impress those who are overly attached to mundane morality, but we don’t really need to follow them."
It is stated in the Caitanya Caritamrta:
"The self-evident Vedic literatures are the highest evidence of all, but if these literatures are interpreted, their self-evident nature is lost."
(Adi 7.132)
Srila Prabhupada comments on this verse as follows:
"We quote Vedic evidence to support our statements, but if we interpret it according to our own judgment, the authority of the Vedic literature is rendered imperfect or useless. In other words, by interpreting the Vedic version one minimizes the value of Vedic evidence. When one quotes from Vedic literature, it is understood that the quotations are authoritative. How can one bring the authority under his own control? That is a case of principiis obsta.
(Adi 7.132 purport)
The Vedas are also called apauruseya ("not uttered by human beings") and do not contain the 4 defects of material perception: mistakes, illusion, imperfect senses, and cheating. If one interprets the Vedas according to one's limited speculation, he is diminishing the value of Vedic authority. Similarly, the statements of liberated
acharyas are also to be considered Vedic evidence, since the acharyas do not operate from a conditional state of human consciousness. Srila Prabhupada states:
"The statements of Thakura Bhaktivinode are as good as scriptures because he is a liberated person."
(Letter to: Janardana -- New York 26 April, 1968)
"Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura says that Narottama dasa Thakura's songs are Vedic evidence. All Vaisnavas songs are like that, Vedic evidence. There is no mistake, cheating, imperfectness, or illusion."
(Arrival Address – June 27, 1975, Denver)
Therefore, anyone who interprets the statements of the spiritual master according to his whim is also diminishing the value of the spiritual master's instructions. The Caitanya Caritamrta states:
"Although there is other evidence, the evidence given in the Vedic version must be taken as foremost. Vedic versions understood directly are first-class evidence."
Srila Prabhupada comments:
"In his book Sarva-samvadini, Srila Jiva Gosvami has noted that although there are ten kinds of evidence -- direct perception, the Vedic version, historical reference,
hypothesis, and so on -- and although they are all generally accepted as evidence, the person presenting a hypothesis, reading the Vedic version, perceiving or interpreting by his experience is certain to be imperfect in four ways. That is,
he is subject to committing mistakes, to becoming illusioned, to cheating, and to having imperfect senses. Although the evidence may be correct, the person himself is in danger of being misled due to his material defects. Apart
from the direct presentation, there is a chance that an interpretation may not be perfect. Therefore the conclusion is that only a direct presentation can be considered evidence. An interpretation cannot be accepted as evidence,
but may be considered proof of evidence."
(Madhya 6.134 purport)
Similarly, in order to prove one's claim, we cannot accept a mere interpretation of the spiritual master's statement as evidence. The direct statement coming from the spiritual master should be always considered as foremost. We may use interpretation as further proof of the spiritual master's statement, but it cannot be used as evidence by itself. Srila Prabhupada explains this as the difference between
philosophical speculation and mental 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 the 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 -- Bombay 21 January, 1972)
In our previous example, this would mean that the proper way to interpret Srila Prabhupada's quotes on the qualification of a guru is to explain why a lesser degree guru can be accepted on a conditional basis (so long he instructs on behalf of the
liberated guru) and why the liberated guru, who is to be worshiped as good as God, should be accepted only from the top most platform (he cannot commit mistakes and thus will not mislead his surrendered disciples).
If we interpret the guru's words in a whimsical way, we are diminishing his value and the value of his teachings. If Srila Prabhupada is the guru for all of us, how can we think he has left something up for someone's whimsical interpretation? Srila Prabhupada points out this flaw of logic in connection with the misinterpretation of Lord Jesus's instructions:
"They have modified, "This killing means murdering." But Christ does not say. Was he a fool, that he committed a mistake, a mistake, instead of writing "Thou shall not commit murder," he has written, "Thou shall not kill," general? Otherwise, Christ has no intelligence. He cannot use the proper word. But you are misusing the order of Lord Christ."
(Srimad-Bhagavatam 6.1.32 – May 31, 1976, Honolulu)
Similarly, we can ask, is the spiritual master a fool that he cannot express himself properly for everyone's clear understanding? Does he need a speculative interpreter to reach us? Srila Prabhupada clearly stated:
"I have instructed everything in my books."
(Srila Prabhupada Letter, February 25, 1976)
If you liked this, you can find the whole magazine here:
And the latest edition here:
