The text mentions the name 'Hemadpant' is an honorific title given for his vast knowledge. Why does the author then describe himself as cynical and arrogant?

The text from Chapter 2 directly contradicts the idea that the name was given for pre-existing knowledge. The author uses his own story to illustrate a point, explaining that initially, he 'was mischievous, talkative, cynical, and critical.' He further states he had a 'bad intellect and a logic-driven mind' and was 'Always proud of his own wisdom.' The story of how he was named Hemadpant, which is promised at the end of the chapter, is meant to show a transformation from this state, not to honor it. His description highlights his initial unworthiness to demonstrate the Satguru's greatness.