Now, how to understand that which is beyond our conception? The scriptures says like this: acintyaḥ khalu ye bhāvā na tāṁs tarkeṇa yojayet (Mahābhārata, Bhīṣma parva 5.22).
"Anything which is beyond our conception, beyond our reasoning power, beyond our approach of the material senses, such things we should not try to have conception simply by arguments." So in the Vedic injunction it is said that tarkaḥ apratiṣṭha: "By . . . what should be the . . what should be our real understanding, that we cannot establish simply by arguments."
- tarkaḥ apratiṣṭhaḥ smṛtayo vibhinnāḥ
- (CC Madhya 17.186):
"If we consult different scriptures, then we'll find that one scripture is speaking something, another scripture is speaking something else." Just like cow-killing. Take, take it for example. The Hindus, they say that cow-killing is irreligious. But, the Muhammadans say: "No, cow-killing is religious." There is some adjustment, but . . . now, in the scripture I see that the cow-killing, in some scriptures it is said that cow-killing is irreligious, and another scripture says that cow-killing is religious. So which of them I shall accept? This is ni . . . this is all right, or that is all right?
So therefore it is said that smṛtayo vibhinnāḥ. If you consult different scriptures, you'll find different contradictory statements. Your scripture may be different from my scripture. And nāsau munir yasya mataṁ na bhinnam: if you consult philosophers, you'll find one philosopher is differing from another philosopher. A big philosopher means who has cut down other philosophers and put up his own theory, "This is true." This is going on. So tarko 'pratiṣṭhaḥ smṛtayo vibhinnā nāsau munir yasya mataṁ na bhinnam.