Is nearer truer?

I remember an argument from somewhere that Krishna is more famous than Rama because...
(i) the former lived among the masses, whilst the latter was a king and didn't actually come down to the level of the masses, as in, Krishna was *near* to all the people.

I say I agree with it. If you look at the nearness considering the yuga system, you may even say that...
(ii) Krishna was *nearer* because he's portrayed in the dwaapar yuga that went just before this kali yuga, in comparison to Rama, who is pictured in the treta yuga, prior to dwaapar.

According to modern day logic or age-old Chaarvaak philosophy, whatever is proved by the five senses is true and they discard the brahma sathya jagat mithyaa principle. This could arguably be because of what is near (the senses) is real. If I base the same argument and say that if being nearer is truer, then whatever my senses have outside and near them is less true, than what they have inside.

So looking within, I would argue that the God within my body is the nearest and hence, truer than what atheists claim!
Post a Comment