View source for For the common man the statements of the Vedas appear to be contradictory. But in spite of such contradiction, because we Hindus accept the Vedas as authority we accept cow dung as pure and allow it to be used even in the kitchen

<div id="compilation">
<div id="facts">
{{terms|"For the common man the statements of the Vedas appear to be contradictory. But in spite of such contradiction, because we Hindus accept the Vedas as authority we accept cow dung as pure and allow it to be used even in the kitchen"}}
{{notes|}}
{{compiler|Soham}}
{{complete|ALL}}
{{first|2023-06-20T06:27:07Z}}
{{last|2023-06-20T06:27:07Z}}
{{totals_by_section|BG=0|SB=0|CC=0|OB=0|Lec=0|Con=0|Let=1}}
{{total|1}}
{{toc right}}
[[Category:Common Man]]
[[Category:Vedic Statements]]
[[Category:Appears to Be]]
[[Category:Contradiction]]
[[Category:In Spite Of]]
[[Category:Of Such]]
[[Category:Because]]
[[Category:Hindu]]
[[Category:Accept]]
[[Category:Authority of the Vedas]]
[[Category:Cow Dung Is Pure]]
[[Category:Allow]]
[[Category:Used]]
[[Category:Even In]]
[[Category:Kitchen]]
</div>
<div id="section">
<h2>Correspondence</h2>
</div>
<div id="sub_section">
<h3>1947 to 1965 Correspondence</h3>
</div>
<div class="quote">
<div class="quote_heading">
The Vedas say that stool is impure but the stool of the cow is pure. The Vedas say that bone is untouchable but the conchshell which is also a bone is perfectly pure. For the common man the statements of the Vedas appear to be contradictory. But in spite of such contradiction, because we Hindus accept the Vedas as authority we accept cow dung as pure and allow it to be used even in the kitchen. So also we accept the conchshell. The conchshell is after all a bone of an animal but because it is accepted by the Vedas we allow conchshell to be used in the sanctified room of our family deity. If we examine in the physical laboratory or analyse it by chemical test we won't find any difference between the stool of a man and that of a cow or the bone of an ox and that of a conch. And yet the whole Hindu Muslim conflict, the whole struggle of Gandhi and Jinnah and the whole question of Kashmir problem in the UNSCO have arisen from this petty difference of bones only. 
</div>

<div class="quote_link">
[[Vanisource:570507 - Letter to Sri Padampat Singhania written from Kanpur|570507 - Letter to Sri Padampat Singhania written from Kanpur]]
</div>
<div class="text">
In this age all the Mantras that can help us reaching perfection up to the plane of Godhead- has been still more concentrated into the Hari-nama. We find therefore in the Brhannaradiya Puranam (38/126) a particular stress on Harinama which is stated as follows:

harinama harinama harinama eva kevalamkalau nastyeva nastyeva nastyeva gatir anyatha

The above statement is very important in the following manner. There are two different processes for acquiring knowledge. The one is Deductive Process and the other is Inductive Process. In the Deductive Process we deduce the conclusion from the statement of higher authorities whereas by the Inductive Process we make a research in the truth by our own imperfect knowledge and induce a conclusion. Say for example if we want to know how man is mortal then we have to make a research in statistics of daily death occurrences. Rama dies, Shyama dies, father dies, mother dies, he dies, she dies, etc. all these experiences may help us in the conclusion that after all man dies and therefore the conclusion man is mortal made. But the defect of this process of knowledge is that it may be that we have not seen a person who is still living even after some thousands of years. As soon as we get this information the whole conclusion that a man is mortal - is at once changed and we have to say that some men are mortal. In this way the research work of scientific thought [handwritten] are constantly changing because the very research work is done by person who is himself a condition by the four principles of mistake, illusion, cheating and imperfection. Therefore, the Deductive Process is more effective. Man is mortal we have heard it from very authoritative sources like the Vedas and we have accepted it. The Vedas say that stool is impure but the stool of the cow is pure. The Vedas say that bone is untouchable but the conchshell which is also a bone is perfectly pure. For the common man the statements of the Vedas appear to be contradictory. But in spite of such contradiction, because we Hindus accept the Vedas as authority we accept cow dung as pure and allow it to be used even in the kitchen. So also we accept the conchshell. The conchshell is after all a bone of an animal but because it is accepted by the Vedas we allow conchshell to be used in the sanctified room of our family deity. If we examine in the physical laboratory or analyse it by chemical test we won't find any difference between the stool of a man and that of a cow or the bone of an ox and that of a conch. And yet the whole Hindu Muslim conflict, the whole struggle of Gandhi and Jinnah and the whole question of Kashmir problem in the UNSCO have arisen from this petty difference of bones only. In the Hindu temple the bone conchshell is already there but as soon as a Muhammadan throws a piece of bone of the ox in the temple - the whole trouble began, resulting in the partition of India and Pakistan. So an impartial mundane student who will enter into the research work of such bone affairs in the annals of Indian History- surely he will come to the conclusion of unrestricted obedience to the words of the Vedas or that of the Koran or that of the Bible that lead to all sorts of Jehad and crusade. As a matter of fact the so called intelligent persons of the modern age have taken the shelter of secularism on the strength of past unfortunate religious feuds. This is another type of nonsense.
</div>
</div>
</div>