Why am I always worrying?

I believe in Theory & Laws of Karma which are repeatedly revised by real Enlightened beings.

"When Krishna and Arjuna do it, it is consequence of karma, for all others [Any talk of violence & destruction are against such pure intent.]"

No, the law applies equally to everyone. What Krishna Bhagwan told Arjun is that 'event(war) will happen definitely & Arjun will have to fight as a result of his karma'. Things change completely for Arjun after Lord Krishna gave him Atma Darshan or Self realization. When he got self realization, he attained 'Akarm dasha'. After that karma are discharged only, no new karma is bound. If he kills millions, no new paap karmas are bound or if he donates luxury to millions, no punya karmas are bound.

We cannot apply this theory on us before self realization. First, state of non doership has to be attained & the vision that no one is doer has to be established. Only then this can be followed and yes it comes only after self realization. If you slap someone saying you are not a doer of action then you must be ready to see that person as non doer when he slaps you back. But again this is not to be implemented as it is going to be done by ego whose power will rise more. Attainment of soul comes first then do whatever you want.

Now, does it make sense that why any talks of violence must not be entertained?

I completely agree with your opinion that result of karma can be avoided by knowledge of 'akarm daksha'.

Would you mind answering a simple question?

Consider the two cases:

Case 1: Person A was moving his hand and it hit person B's cheek by mistake.
Case 2: Person A lost his temper on person B and slapped him.

Considering the fact that physical pain was same in both the cases and both have not experienced 'self realization', will result of both the karma be same?

Why am I always worrying? (That's the topic)

I am always worrying about new members of the forum who cover the same old ground already well-covered in other topics, revealing they haven't read the other topics more specific to their diversions.

Debates about Gita, Arjuna, karma BK interpretations have gone off-topic so if you want to debate these - please find the related topics already on the forum and continue your debate there please. Before you do, consider this.

Gita is mythology, some may prefer the word ”fiction". It does not mean there is no truth in it.

Many truths are revealed through fiction and stories, often revealed better than through a series of facts or a listing of data. It is the power of the truths relayed through story - film, novels, plays, epics - that make people so passionate about them. Thy become emotionally and psychologically charged by the truths that resonate down the millenia.

The religions would have us believe that their myths, fables, scriptures, which come from a time before there was the distinctions re-asserted by the 18th century enlightenment, are factual truths and objective histories. But today we know the difference between history and myth, fact and fiction, moral and natural philosophy, we define separately ‘data', ‘knowledge' and ‘wisdom' etc. There is much truth & wisdom to be found in Shakespeare’s plays, but they are not historical fact, they are fictions.

The word ”fiction” comes from the Latin- fictionem (nominative fictio) "a fashioning or feigning," noun of action from past participle stem of fingere "to shape, form, devise,," originally "to knead, form out of clay,”. That is, the clay is fact, the fiction is formed from fact. Any creative writing teacher will tell you that the best fiction rests on fact. Shaping nonsense is rarely great fiction.

To believe you speak ”Knowledge of the History and Geography of Bharat"” when you're reinterpreting an ancient myth or scripture is delusional. Once you make the discrimination between fact & fiction, myth and history,it cannot be unmade. All of Lekhraj’s horses and Narayan’s men cannot put Humpty together again.

(PS "Humpty Dumpty" is an example of a folk song/nursery rhyme-story that never happened but contains valuable resonant truth. The Gita is more sophisticated, but of the same genus)

The Gita is more sophisticated, but of the same genus"

Bible, Quran, Gita, Guru Granth etc are most noble scriptures which are based on truth rather that history & their geography. It may be myth or story or a fiction for you but not for Indians (well even Indians have started questioning them as a result of fraud done by these organizations). India is land of religion & spirituality. At least one who is not lost too much in worldly aspects can understand their truth.

"result of karma can be avoided by knowledge of 'akarm daksha'."

No, merely knowledge about akarm dasha cannot stop binding of karma. One has to attain that state & get established in it. Rarely person gets it on his own (he is called Swayam Buddha). Most seekers get it with the grace of Gyani Purush.

"Consider the two cases:

Case 1: Person A was moving his hand and it hit person B's cheek by mistake.
Case 2: Person A lost his temper on person B and slapped him.
Considering the fact that physical pain was same in both the cases and both have not experienced 'self realization', will result of both the karma be same?"

In both case, the result will be different. The actions may appear same from outside but what matters is deep inner intent.

In case 1, A slaps B in Agyan Dasha or without being aware. Intentions were pure, he was not at all doing it responsibly. Its result(sufferings) will come to him in unaware state or Agyan Awastha.

In case 2, A slaps B in Gyan Dasha or being aware of what he was doing. A's intentions were to hurt B. So, the result (sufferings) will come in aware state.

As B experiences equal pain in each case, equal suffering will come to A in each (why suffering? because B was hurt). The difference will be in state of suffering.

Gyani Purush explained it by simple example as: If parents of two kids (one 1 month old & other 16 years old boy) die in an accident, then sufferings will be different for both kids. The elder boy suffers in fully aware state & feels the loss more intensely while the baby does not even know about the situation.

Well, what Baba says about those families which have collapsed after one of the family member followed them wholeheartedly. If God is there(where you think) in manifested form, there should not be even a single case like that. And if it happens, he should put everything right with his mighty power. Only lectures exists, that's all. Its your karma & inner beauty which gives you peace today, not Baba.

Agree with you that its your karma & inner beauty which gives you peace today, not Baba. What Baba does is gives knowledge about karmas and knowledge to empower ourself to do the same.

"Baba also keeps telling that 'dusro ki duaon se hi tum anand ke jhule mai jhuloge' (You will feel true happiness by blessings of others)."

This statement itself violates Law of Karma. By others blessing can you bind merit karmas & gets its effect in next life? One blesses you on basis of your external acts, how could it bring happiness? You may act good outwardly but if intentions are wrong, it is going to bring sufferings whether blesses you or curses you. It will not work in adhyatm.

Baba doesn't tell us to be good outside only, but always says that 'sab ke prati subh bhawna aur shubh kamna rakho'. Baba inspires to have good intentions for all.

"Again you are right, however its more about intention than words."
And when words are not integrated with intentions, it is ashuddhyoga.

When words are different from intention it may be either to help or to deceive. In my opinion the former is good but latter is bad.

"Even Krishna inspired Arjuna to do the violence. "
Really, do you think so?
Whole yudh (war) was a consequence of karma of million of soldier. Even if Arjuna would have left that place, still war would have occured. And Lord Krishna saw all that within his knowledge that no matter how much Arjun pushes himself out of war, he will fight & will become a medium to cause death of lacs of soldiers. What Lord Krishna did was to grace Arjuna with self realization so that not even a single karma binds him during the war. That was also the punyanubandhi karma of Arjuna that he got self realization at that point. His intentios were pure & did not wanted to kill even a single person. It is not a common science which you are trying to interpret. For that first thing needed is Tattvagyan, get that & your work will be done.

This all is what we all have been taught since childhood. Right? Or is it your self realization?

It is not a common science which you are trying to interpret. For that first thing needed is Tattvagyan, get that & your work will be done.

I disagree. As per my understanding, Tattvagyan is not required to interpret karmic theory. Its about intentions only. If you think that you have done some work, you will get the result of that karma. If you think that you have not done some work. You are not bound to the result. If a man kills another in personal rage his suffering would be higher than a soldier killing opposition soldier keeping in mind that it is his duty/role. If you cause someone to die without knowing or intending it, you will not be bound to the result of this karma.

"Sometimes words do not reflect the original intention."
That is remark of a weak person whose words and intentions flow in different ways.

I disagree.

"Shiv Baba helps even non-BKs, they are also his child."
Soul is an eternal element. It neither has Father nor anything else. The child Father relation is there for relative self which exists with full proof.

If you are rejecting the concept of God Father or Param Pita, I disagree with your belief. Its more contextual than technical.

"she corrected me very firmly that 'others' are also children of Baba."
If in spirituality, there is mine, yours, ours, others,etc know it is a dharm not adhyatm.

If I want to say that people who like mango, stand in one row and others make another row. How should I say this sentence without using word 'others'?
Sometime we should take plain English sentence as English sentence only.

" Baba loves all, no matter what part one is playing in the drama."
Sometimes BKs say Baba does not love those who do not remember him & sometimes this whole new thing comes. Dude, reach a unique conclusion first.

Unique conclusion is: Baba loves all but only those who remember him with silent mind can feel that love.

Arvind -"The meaning of Dushashan is 'Du-Shashan : One.... "

Earlier people were named with their attributes that they bear from right from birth as in this case. It was a complete vidya which used to consider time,place of birth, planetory motions, phase of sun & moon,etc. Each alphabet of name was the outcome of the precise calculations. It was not like that one can choose any name. Parents ofcourse would never name their child in that way. But see today, people with name 'suryaprakash' or 'mahendra' may also lead to downfall of whole family & bring shame.

I am not convinced. I still believe that Mahabharat was a story and characters were named as per their roles.
Also in Gita, God said that I am ajanma but Krishna took birth in Mahabharat.

"Gandhari had total 100 sons, so at the time of birth of last son, Duryodhan should have been grand Father or great grand Father."

Do you know the life span of people during Satyug, Dwapar & Treta. It is more than thousands of years.

I don't buy this point. Even the author of Mahabharat has not tried to make such impression anywhere. Search for the age of Sri Krishna and Bhishma in google and you will get the answer.

Here is another reason why I can never agree that age was more than thousand years during Mahabharat. Let's assume for a moment that average age of man during Mahabharat is 1000 years and age to marry is 25 years. That way total 1000/25 = 40 generations should be living together. Which has never been mentioned in the Mahabharat for any dynasty. Hence age was definitely not 1000 years.

"To me it looks like some enlightened yogi wanted to spread of teachings so he weaved a great story around that. Without Mahabharat, no body would have known about Gita. "

Well, good luck with that. Your belief on religion has already started to end. But SAVE it as that is the only last hope.

Self realization should always supercede beliefs otherwise we won't be able to move forward and sometimes we may get trapped in chinese whisper.

Bible, Quran, Gita, Guru Granth etc are most noble scriptures which are based on truth rather that history & their geography. It may be myth or story or a fiction for you but not for Indians

Lets not be prejudice here and think rationally. It has to be either myth for all or truth for all.

(well even Indians have started questioning them as a result of fraud done by these organizations)

Are you suggesting that no one should question the Mahabharat and believe it blindly?

I believe in Theory & Laws of Karma which are repeatedly revised by real Enlightened beings.

"When Krishna and Arjuna do it, it is consequence of karma, for all others [Any talk of violence & destruction are against such pure intent.]"

No, the law applies equally to everyone. What Krishna Bhagwan told Arjun is that 'event(war) will happen definitely & Arjun will have to fight as a result of his karma'. Things change completely for Arjun after Lord Krishna gave him Atma Darshan or Self realization. When he got self realization, he attained 'Akarm dasha'. After that karma are discharged only, no new karma is bound. If he kills millions, no new paap karmas are bound or if he donates luxury to millions, no punya karmas are bound.

Again we are saying what we have been taught.
As per my understanding Atma Darshan is not required to do karma which bound us. We do not get bound to karma for each and every thing we do from morning till evening. Karmic theory is applicable for all, people with self realization and others. It all depends on what was the intention for doing the karma.

We cannot apply this theory on us before self realization. First, state of non doership has to be attained & the vision that no one is doer has to be established. Only then this can be followed and yes it comes only after self realization. I

I again disagree.

arvind: "result of karma can be avoided by knowledge of 'akarm daksha'."
No, merely knowledge about akarm dasha cannot stop binding of karma. One has to attain that state & get established in it. Rarely person gets it on his own (he is called Swayam Buddha). Most seekers get it with the grace of Gyani Purush.

In BK, by observing minute-2 things in Murli I have full confidence that Shiv Baba is a super expert of Akarm Daksha while Brahma Baba also attained it. Shiv Baba never takes credit of anything. He always says its my role to come at this time etc etc. Brahma Baba also detached himself completely from the actions by saying that the Yagya is of Shiv Baba, there is nothing mine.

If you want you may disagree but I am fully convinced that my understanding of su-karm, a-karm and vi-karm is absolutely correct. Yes attaining the state is little far but again I know I am on right path. Baba also says that karmatit awastha pichadi me aayegi fir tumhe koi chinta nahi hogi.

You may be on the right path, but you are on the wrong forum.

This forum is for people who are leaving, or who have left the BKWSU.

You never met Lekhraj Kirpalani. You have no idea who he was or what he became. You don't even have an accurate history of your religion, e.g. have a look at some quotes from Om Radhe I just posted and tell when exactly she and Lekhraj Kirpalani become complete and enlightened. They did not.

In fact, show us even one intelligent, well composed paper they wrote. They did not.

Agree with you that its your karma & inner beauty which gives you peace today, not Baba. What Baba does is gives knowledge about karmas and knowledge to empower ourself to do the same.

There are many other soul who were there in past giving knowledge of Karma. Presently most of the preachers give it in bits & is rather a fractured form of whole knowledge. Incomplete superficial knowledge does not help in adhyatm, it can keep one only in fantasy. The true knowledge will come from soul, inside trapped for infinite births.

Baba doesn't tell us to be good outside only, but always says that 'sab ke prati subh bhawna aur shubh kamna rakho'. Baba inspires to have good intentions for all.

"subh' shows it is relative path not a real one which can enlighten you. It has to "Shuddh". And intentions cannot be done, it happens naturally. If someone tries to do it , then it is mind & intellect working not the dhyaan.

When words are different from intention it may be either to help or to deceive. In my opinion the former is good but latter is bad.

Intentions does not help anyone in this current birth. Your present intentions will bear fruits in next birth. So, words cannot be compared with intentions till they are integrated.

This all is what we all have been taught since childhood. Right? Or is it your self realization?

No one teaches you that from childhood unless your elders are knower of Tattwagyan to some extent. People generally talk about history of Ramayan & Mahabharat not its essence. Much of it is referred from daily soaps.

I disagree. As per my understanding, Tattvagyan is not required to interpret karmic theory.

Then I cannot find solution to queries you have asked. Karma theory originates from Tattwagyan. You are already unaware of this. Do you think is it possible to understand Karma theory correctly without Tattwagyan. For example : the karma parmanoo is a non living matter or Ajiva tattva. So, how one can separate both. Whole Gita is based on Tattwagyan. As a part of information, both are synonymous.

It's about intentions only. If you think that you have done some work, you will get the result of that karma.

See the confusions it creates if you do not understand karma theory correctly. Intentions are separate from Thinking. Thinking involves mind while intentions involve Dhyaan. Thinking gives result in this birth itself while
intentions give it in next birth.

If you think that you have not done some work. You are not bound to the result.

Sir, this is incorrect from Karma theory as well as according to Tattwagyan. Thinking has got nothing to do with next birth result. Thinking is not karma of this birth, it is karmafal & then the result you get later on( due to thoughts) is Karmafal Parinam.

Karmabeej, karma, karmafal & karmafal parinam are separate. World sees karmafal as karma. Even BK theory is based on this wrong belief.

If a man kills another in personal rage his suffering would be higher than a soldier killing opposition soldier keeping in mind that it is his duty/role. If you cause someone to die without knowing or intending it, you will not be bound to the result of this karma.

No, in both case he binds paap karma, that is the reason why it is said to be grateful to soldiers who bind paap karma( which will bring suffering in next birth) for protecting others. They will have to go through lot of pain for killing Panch Indriya Jiva & why do they do this? Just to protect millions from other sufferings. So, they bind punya also for protecting others. Such people are born as Kshatriya in next births.

If you are rejecting the concept of God Father or Param Pita, I disagree with your belief. Its more contextual than technical.

See adhyatm is meant for Ultimate liberation. If you want that, then you will have to follow laws. If you don't want it & want to remain in world for countless birth, to eat laddoos & sweets, becoming king & queen, have pleasure of palaces, or sufferings in animal life form or in hell, etc then you can have any relative belief. Considering someone as God or Parampita is OK for realtive aspects only. In religions, it works. In real aspect, you need to realize the existence of that Parampita inside you with no difference left. The one who denies such experience, I don't think he is pushing you on a right path. Many org. even discard existence of Moksha & have theories which would bind their follower to world for countless lives. One does not get a single clue of what can happen by taking just 1 step in wrong direction.

If I want to say that people who like mango, stand in one row and others make another row. How should I say this sentence without using word 'others'? Sometime we should take plain English sentence as English sentence only.

Say the way that suits you. But it becomes different for a person who is guiding you towards adhyatm or pretends to be preacher. Like "don't say anything to others because others are also children of Baba." This is OK from relative aspect but in reality there is no significance in this. You should not say anything to others because it binds demeritorious or paap karma to soul which will bring pain in form of bad speech inflicted towards you in your next birth. Also if you are ready to receive it later, then you can do so (because intentions are not good during hurtful speech). It's all in your hand. It has got nothing to do with other preacher or teacher.

Arvind wrote:
I don't buy this point. Even the author of Mahabharat has not tried to make such impression anywhere. Search for the age of Sri Krishna and Bhishma in google and you will get the answer.

By "Author of Mahabharat" you mean Ved Vyas right? If you think it is just a play, then you are wrong. He was not an ordinary person. He possessed Divine Vision with which he could see past & the things that he saw in his vision, he wrote that in form of Mahabharat. [ There are some people who call themselves as incarnation of Ved Vyas, as they are unaware of fact that a divine acharya cannot take birth in present Kalyug. I cannot argue on this to change any of your beliefs, the truth is inside your heart, which you will know after becoming enlightened.

Here is another reason why I can never agree that age was more than thousand years during Mahabharat. Let's assume for a moment that average age of man during Mahabharat is 1000 years and age to marry is 25 years. That way total 1000/25 = 40 generations should be living together. Which has never been mentioned in the Mahabharat for any dynasty. Hence age was definitely not 1000 years.

There is nothing new in this. This is same old reason that BK tell their students. When their time cycle is incorrect, what can be said about rest of the things. Lord Mahavir was born in Treta Yug 2500 years ago & BK theory says he was not born before 2500 years ago & for some less than 2500 years. Why I am telling this is becoz his janm & dehvilay are landmark of Kalyug. Kalyug started right after his DehVilay as he was last full omniscient being on Earth. If you are clear about this, then we can talk about life spans in different yugs.

Self realization should always supercede beliefs otherwise we won't be able to move forward and sometimes we may get trapped in chinese whisper.

And BKWSU does not give you realization but information, that too in modified rather tampered forms. Do you think self realization is such an easy thing that anyone start saying " I am soul" repeatedly will realize it. Even millions birth can pass with this chanting but self realization cannot came without Grace of a Gyani Purush or Teerthankar himself. Rest all paths are for getting protection from worldly sufferings. Meditation gives coolness to mind & body but does not calm them down for ever.

Lets not be prejudice here and think rationally. It has to be either myth for all or truth for all.

Not necessary, it depends on one's perception. It is truth in its domain because all that is told in these scriptures actually happened & later on, the way one want to interpret it he is free to do so.

Are you suggesting that no one should question the Mahabharat and believe it blindly?

Question it as much as you can but within limits of wisdom, over-wisdom will take you away from what it can give you.

SI said:
No, the law applies equally to everyone. What Krishna Bhagwan told Arjun is that 'event(war) will happen definitely & Arjun will have to fight as a result of his karma'. Things....

Arvind:
Again we are saying what we have been taught.

Nope it is not what is taught. It is what which has been learned with enough discretion according to laws.

As per my understanding Atma Darshan is not required to do karma which bound us.

Yes definitely. To do anything first thing which is required is , you shoul no have Atma Darshan or Self realization. Till there is doership, no self manifests. If self manifests, the relative doership stops completely.

We do not get bound to karma for each and every thing we do from morning till evening.

One binds millions of karma parmanoo each moment, only their intensity keep on fluctuating & that never drops to zero till death. Someone is really misguiding you.

Karmic theory is applicable for all, people with self realization and others. It all depends on what was the intention for doing the karma.

Yes it is applicable on everyone except the manifested soul. After self realization, the accumulated karma still unwind according to laws.

SI : We cannot apply this theory on us before self realization. First, state of non doership has to be attained & the vision that no one is doer has to be established. Only then this can be followed and yes it comes only after self realization.

Arvind : I again disagree.

Help yourself then. You are binding your Self in another belief. Still if you start proceeding according to laws, you will get right solution. Son't believe me or other but apply laws. That is more than enough.

In BK, by observing minute-2 things in Murli I have full confidence that Shiv Baba is a super expert of Akarm Dasha while Brahma Baba also attained it.

Anyone can say that. Even you can lay such claims & believe me no one can disprove that.

Shiv Baba never takes credit of anything.

One who is still in debit or credit of anything is worldly. No one in whole Universe has power to suffer for others karma. You have reap what you sow today. Similarly I will reap, what I am sowing. I have heard about many other who say that they take karma of their followers. That is baseless & out of Laws. One who says that he never takes credit of anything is in same line. By merely saying does not free the self. I am sorry to say but for your information, Shiv Baba is still in the Universe & is bound to suffer all forms of worldly pains. Theories & reality here differs.

He always says its my role to come at this time etc etc. Brahma Baba also detached himself completely from the actions by saying that the Yagya is of Shiv Baba, there is nothing mine.

Even I can say so but does that make a practical reality. The power is estimated by the extent to which one takes credit for his deeds, not by running away from it.

Baba also says that karmatit awastha pichadi me aayegi fir tumhe koi chinta nahi hogi.

"Kab ayegi" exactly? No one is told so. Everything will come later on. You will get Golden paleces later on. Heavenly Happiness can wait. Mark of TRUE SELF REALIZATION is complete dissolution of worries. If you have attained that state, then its good. Complete carelessness must not be confused with this state.

You are both wrong. The Gita story is a hollow retelling of the Trojan war, revealed by God Apollo through the seer Homer.

Who is that God Apolo & Homer???? :-)

Who is that God Apolo & Homer???? :-)

Homer Simpson is a famous American philosopher ...

Good answer by ex-l.

If God really need money, nothing will difficult Him.

Only human desire is unlimited. The cult organisation had one aim in their life, unlimited power to control everything. And only one thought to be a King or Queen.

How about Dadi, Didi and Dada? Are they having the same aim, desire for unlimited wealth, health, power to control. Or will they just simply practice till Karmatee? They really make me always worry about many innocents/victims appeared to fulfil their desire.

Homer's philosophy is definitely rude.

I would just say that real ones do not run after money. Look at Mother Teresa, who devoted whole life in serving humanity by all the means she had. Truly, Lord Jesus resides in heart of such beings. Even these are the followers who came, suddenly after Jesus left mortal body, & start preaching what he said & tried to quote everything Jesus said. Then different versions with different explanations came. So, we see a whole new business running for Bible. It is still good to spread it as those are words of Enlightened being but too much money making is not good.

God does not need money. What Jesus can do if other cash on his words?

So, I disagree with this quote of Homer who failed to distinguish between Jesus & those writers involved in encrypting his words for business.

How about Dadi, Didi and Dada? Are they having the same aim, desire for unlimited wealth, health, power to control.

Yes, the BK dictionary starts with word "CONTROL", control everything & anything you get on your way. There is no talk about health, it is just superficial if there is any trace of it. Most of it is reflected in the disorders Dadis go through. They keep mum because they have reached such a position in hierarchy where they have either health or wealth. And you know what they choose out of it.

Well, there is always a desire acting behind their actions, thoughts & speeach they deliver without any care. Even after knowing that they will turn mad & impure again in next Tretayug & Kalyug (according to their theory), they still go on for purification process. I would just ask BKs to tell the need of it when it is not going to last forever? Better way would be to enjoy the resources you have if you will get polluted & corrupted definitely in all future time cycles.

Save Innocents

Imagine not knowing of Vyasa or Krisna, the Mahabharata or Gita then someone jokingly shows you a modern satirical comic that uses those names and thinking you now know about them. That’s what you just did.


Use the power of google. And don’t underestimate the influence on Western culture. It is indeed to as influential to Western culture, and as ancient, as the Mahabharata is for India.

The great classical scholar Robert Graves said that for a scholar of Western culture to not know Homer is like not knowing the Bible.

My point however is that to get caught up in debating which meaning of Gita tells God’s truth better is the same as arguing about whether The Iliad reveals that better.

You should study them. Both cultures’ have foundation myths based on the Chariot riding warrior cultures, both struggle with ethical questions and man’s place in society and the world in the face of the ”divine’.

Pink Panther

I would like to reconsider if I ever emphasized Bhagwad Gita to be greater than any other scripture. The reason behind emphasizing on Gita was just because BKism propagate it to be their product, which is actually not so. All religious texts whether from East or from West are alike & have same thing to point out in different ways.

As far as influence of Western culture is concerned, it is huge & is increasing. Even in India, too much of it has been exported. This will continue to happen because one reason I see is that today people live on rational thinking rather than following old customs. All forms of leisure & happiness we have now are products from West. Rarely, some scientific innovations are done here in East or more specifically in India.

And you are absolutely right there is nothing in comparing who tells truth in better way, it is useless. Best would be to extract whatever best every philosophy has to offer us.