Story 53 - False Reasoning

There was a river flowing, on the banks of which, some people were standing and philosophizing as to its origin.

One of them said, "This River comes from rocks, from stones, hills. Out of hills, water gushes in spring fall, and that is the cause of this river." Another man said, "Oh, no impossible. Stones are so hard, so tough and so rigid and water is liquid, and so soft. How can soft water come out of hard stones? Impossible, impossible! Reason cannot believe that hard stones are giving out soft water. If stones could give out water, then let me take up this piece of stone and squeeze it. Out of this no water flows. Thus the statement that this river flowed from those mountains is absurd. I have a very good theory. This river flows from the perspiration of a big giant somewhere. We see every day that when a person perspires, water flows out of his body. Here is water flowing; it must have flowed from the body of some person who is perspiring; that is reasonable, our intellects can accept it. That seems to be plausible; that is all right." Another man said, "No, no, it is somebody standing somewhere, who is spitting and this is the spit." Another man said, "No, no. There is somebody there who is vacating his water, making water, and this is the cause of the river."

Now these people said, "Look here, look here, all these theories of ours are feasible, all these theories of the origin of water are practical. Every day we see such things”. These theories about the origin of the river are very plausible, are very feasible, seem to be good and grand, but the theory that water flows from stones, the ordinary intellect of a man who has never seen water gushing out from stones, who has never been on the mountains will not accept; and yet it is true. And on what does the truth of this theory rest? On experience, on experiment, on direct observation.

Similarly, the origin of the world, why this world, and whence this world, the origin of the stream of this world, the origin of the stream of universe, the river of life» the origin of this is described differently by different people. The origin of the world according to people of that kind of intellect which ascribed the origin of the river to spittle, to perspiration, is taken to be something of the same sort as they observe every day round them. They say, "Here is a man who makes boots, the boots could not be made without somebody with some intention or design of making. Here is a man who makes a watch. Now the watch could not be made without somebody with some intention or plan or design of making it. Here is a house. The house cannot be made without somebody having the plan and design. They see that every day, and then they say, 'Here is the world. The world could not have been made without some kind of person of the same sort as the shoemaker, the watch maker, the house maker, and so there must be a world maker, who makes this world." And thus they say that there is a personal God, standing upon the clouds, not taking pity upon the poor fellow that he might catch cold. They jay some personal God must have made this world.

This argument seems to be very feasible, seems to be very plausible, seems to be very reasonable, seems to be of the same sort as the arguments of those people who said that the river flows from perspiration of somebody, who look upon the origin of the river to be of the same sort as the water coming out 'the bodies. The world also must have been made by somebody.

Vedanta does not propose any theory of that kind. No, no, it does not. Vedanta says, see it, make an experiment, and observe it, through direct realization you see that the world is not what it appears to be. How is that? Vedanta says so far I can explain to you that the water is coming out of those stones. How the water comes out of the stones, I may or may not be able to tell you, but I know the water comes out of the stones. Follow me to that place and you will see the water gushing out of the stones. If I cannot tell why the water comes out of the stones, do not blame me; blame the water, it is coming out of the stones. I am unable to tell you how the water comes out of the stones, but it remains a fact, you can verify it yourself.

Similarly, Vedanta says whether or not I am able to tell you why this Maya or Ignorance is, it remains a fact. Why it came I may not be able to tell you. This is a fact, an experimental fact. The Vedantic attitude is merely experimental, and scientific. It establishes no hypothesis, it puts forth no theory. It does not claim to be able to explain the origin of the world; this is beyond the sphere of intellect or comprehension. This is the position of Vedanta. This is called Maya. “Why does the world appear?” Vedanta says, because you see it. "Why is the world there?" Vedanta simply says, because you see it. You do not see, there is no world. "How do you know that the world is there?" Because you see it. Do not see and where is the world?. Close your eyes, a fifth of the world is gone; that part of the world which you perceive through your eyes is no longer there. Close your ears and another fifth is gone; close your nose and another fifth is gone. Do not put any of your senses into activity, and there is no world. You see the world and you ought to explain why the world is there. You make it there. You should answer yourself. Why do you ask me? You make the world there.

MORAL: Reasons ascribed to that which is beyond reason is false reasoning.

Vol. 3 (26—29)