Acharya Mahaprajna
Good men
The realms of good and evil have their own distinctive rules. The whole world moves under the rules. The controller is not necessary, control or rule is necessary. Rule is natural as well. To fall ill is bad, and to try to understand our diseases explicitly is good. The so-called God is also experiencing his own disease, this is a good sign. It is a mental disease to support free sex. But its supporters are declaring the value of celibacy. This may be regarded as good. A sick person describes his sickness, why should this be regarded as bad? People say, such and such God said this earlier and now he says so. Why should there be this contradiction in thought and incongruity in language in the field of sādhanā(spiritual practice)? It is difficult for me to give its answer. What I can say is that if in the present something good is being said then is it not good to forget the old bad thing? Our attention should be concentrated more on consistency rather than on inconsistency.
Transformation of thought is not unnatural
Every person changes every day. This is natural rule. There is a rule not to change with change. In not changing there is no question of consistency or inconsistency. This question is related with change. Change of thought is not unnatural. It becomes unnatural on account of insistence. The mentality of obstinacy arouses contradictions. False viewpoint is not always the same. Some person catches a false matter with obstinacy and someone else does not know that it is false and keeps on accepting it. Another viewpoint is false but with it there is no insistence to hold it. In the first viewpoint, there is insistence to keep on holding it. Some people put forth their view with such insistence as if it is the ultimate truth. Later on, they change that and then contradiction is experienced.
Quarreling mentality
If the presentation of truth is with humility and relativity, then there is no feeling of contradiction in the prior and posterior. Every person has freedom to change his views. But he has no freedom to accuse those who differ with him, and to continue refuting variant view. This mentality to refute arises due to strong mentality of passion and hatred. The philosophy of anekānta has shown this mentality as quarrelsome mentality. Quarrel is an inevitable consequence of obstinacy.
Who is the judge?
The other aspect of viewpoint is different from this. Some people cannot remain fixed to one thought. They change their colour many times in one day like a chameleon. This also is one variety of false view. For marching ahead, it is necessary to move with one thought. Question may be -with which thought? Which thought is correct? Who will decide this? For decision making every individual is free and that is why there is a crowd of thoughts and principles. To choose out of this multitude is a difficult question. Even then every human being decides about some principle or thought and moves with its support. He keeps full faith in it and propounds it with full faith. Why to think about this? In his views that particular thought is correct; but it may not be correct in the views of others. In fact, who will decide whether it is true or not?
It is thought that changes
There is no judge available to decide about the truth or falsity of a principle. On this point, it is necessary to understand limits of thought. No thought is total or complete. Every thought is a part of the total and therefore limit of relativity is attached with it. Had the thought been complete it would have been absolute. If it were absolute it would not have been changing. Whether it is Marxism or Gandhi's thought, after all it is a thought. The line of change is connected with it. The dream of Marxism appeared to be connected with changelessness. Even one century is not over and it is standing on the crossroad of change. That labour, taking a base on whose pangs of exploitation Marxism took birth, exploitation of that very labour takes place in the communist system, what can be greater surprise than this.
Irony of Marxism
The events of China have startled the world. There the people seated on the throne of power are enjoying royal gaudiness. Earlier it was believed that this gap is not there. The students' movement has made it clear that this gap is there and it is increasing. The only crime of the students was to put the story of that gap before world politics. Those rulers who lead a life of abundance and luxury never want that there is any threat to their splendour or someone may raise accusing finger at their splendour. Those who believe in the power of gun do not believe in the faith of compassion. They have close relation with cruelty. If thought were regarded as changeable then it would not have become the basis of suppression. Human being has been repeating this mistake. He is regarding changeable as permanent. This delusion was dangerous in the past and even today it is equally dangerous. Will the accidents taking place on this dangerous turning point be stopped?
