Grandpa Gave You the Best He Could, Stop Blaming Him
Questioner: Acharya ji, I’m beginning to think that ancient traditions, even authentic spiritual philosophies, are today greatly misinterpreted and misunderstood. Tradition and spirituality need to be renewed and refitted according to modern times, but people are following mechanically, regardless of whether their beliefs benefit them or not. I put the blame squarely on those in the past, who forcefully executed their will on the masses to follow tradition and philosophies.
Acharya Prashant: A few quick responses. First of all, no philosophy is the truth in itself, should be obvious. Because we exist in falseness, therefore, a philosophy is needed, a theory is needed to wipe out the pre-existing falseness. Love for the truth — that’s the literal meaning of philosophy. Because you love the truth, you say something, you express something in words that obliterates falseness. So, any philosophy is at best an attempt, a method to eradicate something. Even if it is not expressed in negativa, it still just seeks to refute something that exists in the mind as truth. That’s why usually people find philosophies difficult or complex. They appear complex from the point we look at them. We look at them from a point that they seek to attack. Therefore, the difficulty in negotiating with them, reconciling with them.
So, anybody who gives you a philosophy, is anyway not saying that this is the truth. It is that person’s or that order’s best attempt to help you get rid of your falseness. Now, obviously, there is an assumption implicit here. The assumption is — you want to get rid of your falseness. So, the one who is giving you the philosophy, the thesis, the so-called sacred or spiritual knowledge, is relying on you to be; first of all, a lover of truth. And that is so obvious that he need not even state that, though often they do state that quite explicitly. They say, the scriptures that you begin with us, only if you meet the following criteria, only if you possess the following qualifications. Otherwise, there is no point.
So, philosophies don’t fail, their readers, their interpreters, they fail. And they do not fail because of the philosophy, they fail because, first of all, they themselves do not have the drive towards liberation. When you do not have that drive, then no philosophy can help you. In fact, you will deliberately misinterpret that philosophy to suit your existing structure of inner falseness. Right?
Similar is the case with traditions. Yes, traditions are there, but who said that you do not need to know the symbolic meaning, core of the traditions? You say, “The traditions were forcefully executed.” Were we also forced to not to know what lies behind the tradition? It is quite possible that somebody instructed us quite forcefully, “Son, follow the tradition” but did he also instruct us, “Son, never try to understand the tradition?” Was this an accompanying instruction? Please tell me. It never was.
In fact, first of all, why is a tradition needed? A tradition is needed because some wise man perceives that the subtle truth is not directly within the grasp of a lot of people. So, then it is presented in a more digestible manner, a simplified manner.
Are you getting it?
The one who is setting the tradition is already making a compromise, and that compromise exists because of our inability. We do not understand the sharp, subtle core of truth, so we are given stuff that is more tangible, more intelligible. And the idea is that the gross will help us move into the subtle, that we will be able to appreciate the symbolism and the pointers. There is no restriction or ban on exercising one’s intellect, no? Yes, the tradition is there, but why not think about the tradition?
To me, what you have written sounds a bit unjust. Because we are not worthy students, so we are blaming the teacher. What can the teacher do? The teacher tried to make it easy for us, and if you think that in trying to make it easy for you the teacher has diluted the truth, then you need not accept the diluted version, you need not go the way of traditions. Then you can go directly the way of knowledge, no?
There are all kinds of streams. There are streams that say that you do not need to follow any tradition. Just enter directly into the highest knowledge, and you are liberated. But that we do not want to do because that is very difficult.
We ourselves deliberately opt for the route of traditions, symbolisms, theories, mythologies — that’s the domain we choose. And having chosen that domain, we distort it so much that the entire intention of the founders is defeated, and having defeated their intention very badly, very squarely, we then say, “Look, they did such a bad job.” “Who did such a bad job?” “They did such a bad job.” Well, first of all, how is a sage responsible for all the generations that come after him? Please tell me.
Why did he have to write the scriptures? What is he getting out of it? Most of the sages; I’m talking about in the Indic context, died anonymously. Yes, we do know the names of a few sages and saints, but that’s nothing compared to the ones we know nothing of. What did they gain? Money, fame, power? What? It needs to be appreciated that it was a very selfless and loving gift from them, and if we are not capable of deciphering and utilizing the gift, I really do not know how to blame the giver! Are you getting it?
See, the sage might have been fifty or sixty years old when he composed a particular verse, right? The tradition too came from somebody over a period of time. They too were human beings. Firstly, I ask everybody, “Why do we need to depend on somebody else to give us guidance in the form of a verse, or a story, or a tradition, or a myth, whatever, a book? Why?” If he has given it to us, let’s just be grateful, and then let’s do our own bit. If he could compose a verse at the age of fifty or sixty, how old are we right now?
I mean, most human beings, men and women among us, do live up to fifty or sixty, don’t we? And if you do live up to the same age, why don’t you produce the same output? No! That would be fair to ask, right? And if you accept that you are incapable of producing the same insightful, contemplative output that those people did, then you have already accepted that what they did and how they lived was in a superior dimension. And if they were in a superior dimension, does it behove us to blame them, or should we rather learn from them?
Somebody gifts you a car, somebody gifts you a car, some elder, in his love or something. Can he also gift you driving skills? That’s the issue. We bang the car and blame the giver. Why? Because we didn’t have even the basic smarts to learn driving. They did the best they could, are we doing the best we can? Are we doing the best we can? And traditions are never indispensable. If you come up with something better or something else can take off. After all, no tradition is timeless. Everything started at some point in time, and stuff ends at some point in time. There are so many traditions that existed in some particular century. They are lost now, and we don’t even want to revive them. We have something better, probably, something more suited to these times.
So, responsibility is the key word. We have to accept responsibility for our lives, our times. At the center of our lives lies nobody else but the liver, the individual, the person.
If you are the living entity, then your life is your responsibility. Your welfare is your responsibility. Philosophies from the past, knowledge from the past, traditions from the past, myths from the past, religions from the past — they are at best resources available to you in the form of knowledge, information, ammunition. But whose responsibility is it to utilize the knowledge, to load the ammunition, and fire it? Yours.
What if our forefathers had gifted us with nothing? What would you say then? What if you were the first person on this earth? What if, in a calamity, in a global disaster, all pre-existing knowledge of the centuries is just lost? Whom would you blame then? You have to start from zero, always. And when you start from zero, then you feel gratitude. Then anything that you get from anywhere is a bonus. It’s a bonus. It’s a bonus, you don’t want to take it; don’t take it. It’s a gift. You may just say, “Thank you,” hold it in your hands, and keep it aside. But you cannot blame a gift for your current miseries. Can you? This is just too much. You say, “We were forced to accept the traditions.” Well, in the current times, who is there to force anybody? Who can tell you to live your life in a particular way, especially a way you do not approve of?
The way you are living is your choice, and the onus of making an informed and responsible choice lies squarely upon you. If stuff from the past helps you live better today, use it. If it doesn’t help you live better today, there is no obligation. Or is there?
I mean, your grandfather left for you a huge mansion, almost medieval, right? And that’s the best he could do. Today, that mansion is old, dilapidated, crumbling, falling, and what do you say? “All my miseries are because of my grandfather.” Well, who has prohibited you from doing some repairs, some very topical and timely repairs? Or has the grandfather put a condition in the will that the stuff I leave behind is not to be maintained as per the exigencies of the passing times? Did your grandfather say that?
But now, obviously, the Haveli (mansion) is crumbling, and it was not made to suit the needs of this century, was it? No. So the toilets are all in the older style. And you don’t like that, you know. The kitchen does not have the kind of modern chimneys you like today, and you’re saying, “See, my grandfather couldn’t even bequeath me a modular kitchen.” He gave you what he could. Now you do the modules, you do the chimney. Who’s stopping you? Oh, you raze the whole thing down. The land is there, you raise. You raise a better building. I am telling you; your grandpa will smile in whichever Lok (world) he is.
Look at the Upanishads themselves. They were not done in a day. They remained work in progress over several centuries. So, somebody said something, and then two generations later, what he said was built upon and improved upon. Why has that process of improvement stopped today? And who is really stopping you? Tell me. Why is nobody writing an Upanishad of the twenty-first century? No Upanishad ever said, “I am the final one.” That’s the beauty of the Sanatana (eternal) flow.
Unlike several other streams where it is explicitly barred, they say, “nothing after this.” The final guru is this one, the final prophet is this one, the final book is this one. No such restrictions exist in the Sanatana (eternal) domain. Then why is it so that the last Upanishads were written some ten-twelve centuries back and it’s been very dry since then? I assure you, no Upanishad says that I am the final one. Or that if you compose another one, it is sacrilege.
Fine, let’s say some religious authority today objects if you name your work, your book, as an Upanishad, then fine, don’t name it as an Upanishad. Give it another beautiful name. But come on, show us what you can do. What’s the point in complaining against the grandfathers? They’re gone. Your complaints anyway mean nothing to them now.
Responsibility is tough. Evasion is facile. What do I do? My situations in the past didn’t allow me to progress. Sir, seriously? Did you really do your best? Even today, are you doing your best? My parents raised me badly, that’s why I am such a distorted specimen. No, please. You are thirty today; your mother was twenty-six when she gave birth to you. Look at your maturity at age thirty, and you want godlike maturity from your parents when they were twenty-six and twenty-eight. Think of those two persons who birthed you, twenty-eight and twenty-six, and you at age thirty, are blaming two other individuals who were aged, twenty-eight and twenty-six. Is that responsible of you?
I am not defending grandpa; I am just sensitizing all of us to our responsibility. No point talking about or talking to Grandpa today, because he’s gone. Your exaltations do him no good. Your condemnations do not ashame him. He’s gone, but you have a life to live, so better be responsible.
See, those people, trust me, too were strugglers. No man is perfect. No person is God. So, let’s just appreciate them for what they were and how much they did. And if something was left to be done, then the baton right now is in our hands. They have passed the baton and faded into the sunset. They’re gone. If you do realize that there still are deficiencies, come on, rise like a man, and obliterate them.
They raised the building up to the fifth floor, maybe, you add two more floors to the building. No? Won’t that be a fitting tribute to Grandpa? The mansion he gave you had five floors. Why don’t you add two more to it? Or if you don’t like the architecture, then I said bulldoze it and raise something entirely new. But whatever you do, at least don’t sit and crib, that too in front of Grandpa’s old crumbling statue. Imagine! Even the statue is crumbling.
Are you getting it?
All that is in time will be destroyed by time. If something has been handed over to you, most of it would be a time-bound quantity. Time would make it redundant. Time would make it stink. It’s a law. Not that the quantity was flawed or ill-made, it’s just that it is subject to time, and whatever is subject to time will not survive for long.
However, a tiny bit of the gift you have received is timeless. The tiny point at the center of the big mass, the big volume, you have inherited is timeless, but only that tiny point. Except that little thing, everything else is bound to become archaic one day. No point complaining. Does that switch on a few lights?
