Vedic literature does not say like that. It is order. You have to accept it. If you do not understand, try to understand it. That is a different thing. Just like in the Bhagavad-gītā there is no question of interpretation. In the beginning it is said:
- dharma-kṣetre kuru-kṣetre
- samavetā yuyutsavaḥ
- māmakāḥ pāṇḍavāś caiva
- kim akurvata sañjaya
- (BG 1.1)
"My dear Sañjaya," Dhṛtarāṣṭra is asking his private secretary, Mr. Sañjaya, "my sons and my brother's sons, Pāṇḍava . . ." His brother's name was Pandu, therefore they are Pāṇḍava. Māmakāḥ means "my sons." Where is the scope for interpretation? Kuru-kṣetre. There is still one place—you know better; you are Indian—there is place Kurukṣetra still existing. Dharmakṣetra, that is a religious place, place of pilgrimage. Still, people go for religious performances. In the Vedas it is stated, kuru-kṣetre dharmam ācaret: one should perform religious rituals in the Kurukṣetra.
So where is the scope for interpretation? Interpretation means when you cannot understand something. Then you can interpret. But here, kurukṣetra you can understand; dharma-kṣetra you can understand; māmakāḥ you can understand; pāṇḍava you can understand; they assembled for fighting, you can understand. Why do you interpret? What is the necessity of interpretation? That means he wants to show that he has got some better intelligence than the speaker of the Bhagavad-gītā. We do not accept such things, nonsense.