Just like Dr. Radhakrishnan says, "It is not to Kṛṣṇa, it is something else." He does not accept in that way. He says that "Whatever You are saying, I accept it. You are saying that You are the Supreme, I accept it. I don't say that You have got a separate thing within. That is Supreme, You are not Supreme, as person." This is impersonalist. They do not know that Kṛṣṇa has no such... A conditioned soul... Just like we are, I am different from my soul. "I am" means my body, or I am soul, different from the body. So Kṛṣṇa has no such differentiation. He does not know that. Because he's not following Kṛṣṇa, the perfect spiritual master. He's following some rascal spiritual master. Therefore he has this mistake. But if we follow Arjuna and Kṛṣṇa, then we get the perfect knowledge. We may not be cent percent perfect, but as far as possible, if we follow the instruction as it is, that much perfect. In this way one will get perfection.
So one has to follow. The same example, try to understand, that a perfect, expert technologist or technician or mechanic is working, and somebody is working under his instruction. So this somebody, because he is strictly working under the instruction of the expert, he's also expert. He may not be cent percent expert, but his work is expert. Is that clear? Because he is working under the expert. Do you follow? So if you follow pure devotee, then you are also pure devotee. It may not be one is cent percent pure. Because we are trying to raise ourself from the conditional life. But if we strictly follow the pure devotee, then we are also pure devotee. So far we do, that is pure.