Acharya Prashant begins by stating that either the words of the Garuda Purana can be correct, or the words of the Ashtavakra Gita can be correct, but both cannot be correct at the same time. He explains that to justify a certain stream of thought, it has been claimed that the Puranas are the fifth Veda. He criticizes this, noting that while there are traditionally three Vedas (Vedatrayi), a fourth (Atharva Veda) was added, which he describes as being filled with magic and spells. Now, a fifth Veda is being claimed in the form of the Puranas. He sarcastically suggests that at this rate, everything could be made a Veda. He recounts a story from the Puranas where Ved Vyas, despite having given the highest knowledge to the world, is said to have been in torment for 2000 years. This story is used to elevate the importance of the Puranas, suggesting that even after writing the Vedanta Sutras, Ved Vyas found peace only after composing the Puranas, which contain stories of God. The speaker implies this narrative is a fabrication to give legitimacy to the Puranas. The speaker then distinguishes between two streams of religious literature: Shruti and Smriti. He explains that the work related to Shruti is not being done, and wherever religious education is imparted, it is mostly the Smritis that are taught. The common religious person engages in rituals (puja-path, karmakand) and listening to stories (katha), which are all part of the Smriti tradition. He points out that when profound matters are simplified and made ordinary, it becomes easy to overlook their seriousness. Religious texts are often accompanied by traditions and rituals, such as sitting in a specific manner or chanting certain verses before reading. These rituals, he clarifies, have no ultimate spiritual significance but hold great practical importance. They signal to the mind that something important is about to happen, thereby making it more alert and attentive. He likens this to the formal procedures one follows before meeting a very important person; the procedures themselves are not the meeting but prepare one to value it. Similarly, the rituals associated with scriptures are meant to prepare the mind for the ultimate knowledge. The speaker argues that people have become attached to the process (Smriti) and forgotten the goal (Shruti). Our common experience teaches us that things that are difficult to obtain are valuable. This leads to the misconception that complex and hard-to-understand things must be more important. This is why complex Sanskrit verses are revered, even if not understood, while the simple, direct language of the Saints is often not valued. The speaker identifies two parallel streams in India: Shruti, which originates from the Rishis who were outside society and whose focus was liberation, and Smriti, which was created by those within society for the purpose of social order. The Saints, he says, acted as a bridge between the Rishis and society, conveying the knowledge of Shruti in the common language. However, this simplification led to their words being taken lightly. This has created a dual problem: the profound is not understood, and the simple is not valued, with the ego either dismissing the simple or being awed by the complex without grasping its essence.
