Go to Vanipedia | Go to Vanisource | Go to Vanimedia


Vaniquotes - the compiled essence of Vedic knowledge


Image (Lectures)

Lectures

Bhagavad-gita As It Is Lectures

Lecture on BG 2.28 -- London, August 30, 1973:

Therefore, Vyāsadeva saw, apaśyat puruṣaṁ pūrṇam. He saw... Just like in airplane, you go above the cloud. The sun is not affected at all by the cloud. Although below the airplane you'll see vast mass of cloud. Similarly, māyā cannot affect Kṛṣṇa. Therefore, Bhagavad-gītā says daivī hy eṣā guṇamayī mama māyā. Mama māyā (BG 7.14), Kṛṣṇa says, "My illusory energy." Kṛṣṇa is never affected by the illusory energy. Exactly like the cloud. But the Māyāvādī philosophers, they say that when impersonal Absolute Truth comes, appears, they also accept the incarnation, but their philosophy is that ultimately the Absolute Truth is impersonal. When He appears as a person, He accepts the māyā body. This is Māyāvāda. Kṛṣṇa may be accepted as the Supreme God, but He has accepted a material body. That means they want to compare Kṛṣṇa with ordinary living entity, and that is condemned in the Bhagavad-gītā. It is said that avajānanti māṁ mūḍhā mānuṣīṁ tanum āśritam (BG 9.11). Because Kṛṣṇa comes in His original form... Original form is two-handed. It is also accepted in the Bible: "Man is made after the image of God." So God has got two-handed. Even the four-handed Viṣṇu form is not the original form. Viṣṇu form is secondary manifestation of Saṅkarṣaṇa. So Kṛṣṇa is never affected by māyā. This is point.

Lecture on BG 9.1 -- Melbourne, April 19, 1976:

Guest (3): All right, furthermore, I have another question. All right? This is actually a statement which comes from the Bible, which is one... If you'll pardon me, I'm going to refer to it. The Supreme Lord... It is said, "I am the Lord, thy God." And I am not meaning who I am, we are, standing here (?). That is the statement of the Supreme Lord. "And thou shalt have no strange gods before Me. You must not make images or idols to bow to or worship in any other way. You may worship no other god than Me?" Well, then how is it that...?

Prabhupāda: But that is not any other way. You have to worship God. I have to worship God. Then where is any other way? Worshiping God is there, either you or in me. So where is other? There is no difference. The worship of God is there. I worship God; you worship God. You follow Bible; I follow Bhagavad-gītā. But the worship of God is there. Where is the difference? Why do you make difference?

Lecture on BG 9.4-7 -- New York, November 24, 1966:

Therefore, as the Lord says, that mayā tatam idaṁ sarvam jagad avyakta-mūrtinā, the Lord is all-pervading all over the universe. Therefore He is within the stone, He is within the earth, He is within the water, He is within the air—everywhere. Therefore, if we make an image of God from anything, either of water, either of stone, either of anything, oh, that is not doll. That is also God. If we have got sufficient devotion, that image also will speak with me, because God is everywhere. Mayā tatam idam sarvam: "I am spread all over, impersonal." But if we make His personal form from anything, either from the stone or from earth or from wood or from anything, or if we create an image of God within myself... There are eight kinds of images recommended in the śāstra, in the Vedic literatures. So any kind of images can be worshiped because God is everywhere.

Now, you can say that why God should be worshiped in images, not in His original form, spiritual form? Yes. That may be a question.

Lecture on BG 9.4-7 -- New York, November 24, 1966:

Therefore, out of His causeless mercy, He appears before you as you can see you, Him. We cannot see just now with our material eyes except stone, earth, wood, something tangible. Therefore He becomes... These forms are called arcāvatāra, incarnation of arcā, conveniently presented by the Supreme Lord so that we can actually see. But the result will be that in the image, if you concentrated your energy, and if you love and offer your, I mean to say, devotion, this will be responded, even from that image.

There are many instances, very many instances. I'll cite one story. It is very interesting story. If you go to India, you'll find one nice temple in Orissa. It is called the temple of "Witness-Gopāla," Sākṣī-Gopāla, Witness-Gopāla. This Gopāla was situated in a temple at Vṛndāvana. Now, two brāhmaṇas, one young and one old, they went to visit Vṛndāvana, the place of pilgrimage, and the old man... Because at that time there was no railway, the journey was very hardship.

Lecture on BG 9.4-7 -- New York, November 24, 1966:

All the other gentlemen, they also persisted. So there was some agreement. So this boy went again to Vṛndāvana to his Gopāla, and he prayed that "Sir, You have to go with me." He was so staunch devotee, just like talking with friend. He did not think that He's a statue; it is image. He knew God. That was his conviction. So God said, "How do you think that a statue can go with you? I am a statue. I cannot go." Then this boy replied, "Well, if a statue can speak, He can go also." (laughter) Then Kṛṣṇa said, "All right, I shall go with you." Then there was some arrangement that "You will not see Me, but I will go with you. I'll go with you, and you hear, you'll hear the sound of My nūpura." A nūpura is an instrument which is fixed up in the leg of Kṛṣṇa. It sounds like "Ching, ching, ching, ching," just like that. So He was going with him, and daily he was offering some foodstuff, taking alms from the village. In this way he was coming, but when he came in the precincts of the village, of his own village, he could not hear the sound of the nūpura. So he saw back: "Oh, where is Kṛṣṇa?"

Srimad-Bhagavatam Lectures

Lecture on SB 1.8.29 -- Los Angeles, April 21, 1973:

Kṛṣṇa does not require. But if you give Him, then you become benefited. It is Kṛṣṇa's favor that He's accepting. The example is given: Just like if you decorate the original person the reflection of the person in the mirror, it also appears decorated. So we are reflections. In the Bible also it is said that man is made after the image of God. So our, as Kṛṣṇa is transcendental, we... He has got two hands, two legs, one head. So man is made after God means we are reflections of the image of God. Not that we manufacture, imagine some form according to our form. That is mistake.

The Māyāvādī philosophy is like that. It is called anthropomorphism. They say that: "Because the... The Absolute Truth is imperson, but because we are persons, we imagine that Absolute Truth also person." Just the opposite. Actually that is not the fact. We have got this personal form as reflection of God. So in the reflection, if the original person is benefited, the reflection is also benefited. That is the philosophy. The reflection is also benefited.

Lecture on SB 3.28.18 -- Nairobi, October 27, 1975:

Devotee (1): You said that if we made a marble image of you and offered food to it, you would not accept it. So...

Prabhupāda: Hm?

Brahmānanda: In your lecture you said that someone who offers food to a statue of yourself...

Prabhupāda: He is not statue, but people think statue. He is Kṛṣṇa Himself. But because we cannot see Kṛṣṇa at the present moment, therefore He appears like a statue.

Brahmānanda: His question... You stated that a statue of yourself is not the same as you, and yet in some of our temples, such as Vṛndāvana, the mūrti of Your Divine Grace has been installed and they are offering prasādam. So is it the same, that the prasādam is accepted by the guru?

Lecture on SB 5.5.2 -- Johannesburg, October 22, 1975:

So all these living entities throughout the whole universe, they are possessing body of the material elements. But God has no such body. His body is different, sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ. Īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ (Bs. 5.1). So that sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ, spiritual body, can be expanded, reduced. Aṇor aṇīyāh mahato mahīyān. He can expand this body, spiritual body, bigger than the biggest, and He can reduce the body smaller than the smallest. That is God's body. You cannot do that. Aṇḍāntara-stha-paramāṇu-caya... God is within the atom. How He is within the atom? Then anor anīyāh. He can become smaller than the smallest. He can become the bigger than the biggest. So Arjuna, when he saw the viśvarūpa, He showed him the bigger-than-the-biggest form. But His usual form is two-handed and two leg. Just like it is said in the Bible, "Man is made after the image of God." So God has got two hands, two legs exactly. But He is the omnipotent, almighty. Our power is limited, His power is unlimited. Otherwise He has got form.

Lecture on SB 7.6.1 Excerpt -- Toronto, June 17, 1976:

That is the beginning of bhāgavata-dharma. It doesn't require that you have to pass M.A., Ph.D. examination, then you'll understand God. No. Very simple thing. What God says, Kṛṣṇa says in the Bhagavad-gītā, man-manā bhava mad-bhakto (BG 18.65), you hear it from Bhagavad-gītā. God says, Kṛṣṇa says that "You simply think of Me." Is it a very difficult task? Here is God, Kṛṣṇa. Either you say the image of God... We take God as He is. It is not image of God, but God Himself. He has come here in the form which you can see. God is everywhere, but unfortunately we haven't got eyes to see Him.

God is everywhere. Eko 'py asau racayituṁ jagad-aṇḍa-koṭim yac-chaktir asti jagad-aṇḍa-cayā yad-antaḥ aṇḍāntara-stha-paramāṇu-cayāntara-stham (Bs. 5.35). God is everywhere. Even within the atoms. But we have no eyes. The part of God, mamaivāṁśo jīva-bhūtaḥ (BG 15.7). The little portion of God is there in you and me. The living force. But we cannot see that. So we haven't got eyes to see God. We cannot eyes to see my father, mother. We are seeing the body.

General Lectures

Lecture Excerpt -- Montreal, July 18, 1968:

Guest: Swamijī, we always think of the pictures of Viṣṇu and Kṛṣṇa. There are, full of pictures, here, and also the usual pictures which you... When you think of the word "consciousness" and "life," as applied to the image of God, it seems to make sense. But how do you apply the concept of consciousness and life to a God conceived of in the terms like this image here?

Prabhupāda: Image... The image, we are not worshiping image.

Guest: No, what I meant was in the vague, abstract sense of thought, as we're talking about with Brahman...

Prabhupāda: There are stages, stages of God realization. Brahman realization is the first realization of God. Just like if you want to go to the... If you come to the light, sunshine, your first experience is the sunshine. But if you go still further, you..., if you are able to enter into the sun planet, that is another stage. And if you can find out the predominating deity in the sun planet, that is another stage. Similarly, the Brahman means you come out of the darkness of ignorance or māyā.

Lecture at the Hare Krsna Festival at La Salle Pleyel -- Paris, June 14, 1974:

The soul is within your body. The soul is the part and parcel of God. If you try to understand what is the soul, then partially you understand what is God. If you study yourself, then you study to some extent what is God, because you are the sample of God. It is also stated in the Bible that human being is made under the image of God. So if you study yourself—that is called meditation—then you can understand what is God. Therefore the yoga system is recommended. Those who are in bodily consciousness of life, for them, this meditation yoga, or to understand oneself, that is very important thing. If you try to understand yourself, very simple method... You take your finger. You ask yourself whether you are finger, the answer will be "No, I am not finger. It is my finger." Everyone will say, even a child will say, "This is my finger, my hand, my leg, my head." Nobody will say that "I leg, I finger, I head." Nobody will say. Therefore the conclusion should be I, the soul, is different from this material body. The material body changes on account of presence of the soul.

Sunday Feast Lecture -- Atlanta, March 2, 1975:

Prabhupāda: Yes.

Woman: He created the waters, he created the animals, but He created the human being in His image, which was the same.

Prabhupāda: That's nice. That's nice.

Woman: Explain to me then why you say...

Prabhupāda: Then the God is person. God created human beings after His own image—that means He has also two hands, two legs, like us.

Woman: No.

Prabhupāda: Why not? You say. (laughter) You say, "God has created human being after His image." Therefore His image must be like you. Why do you say no?

Sunday Feast Lecture -- Atlanta, March 2, 1975:

Prabhupāda: Other religion... Why you are concerned with other religion? Talk of what God says in your Bible.

Woman: What it says in my Bible?

Prabhupāda: Yes. You are saying that God created human being after His image. Is it not?

Woman: Yes.

Prabhupāda: Then God, His image is like human being.

Woman: Not according to way, way back because...

Prabhupāda: That is another thing, but... (laughter) God has got His two hands and two legs, one head, like human being, but that hands and legs and head may not be exactly like us. But He has got the image.

Sunday Feast Lecture -- Atlanta, March 2, 1975:

That's all right. To understand the God is... We are worshiping the God's image. He has got the two hands, two legs, like us. But His hands and legs are not like our hands and legs. Just like Kṛṣṇa says, patraṁ puṣpaṁ phalaṁ toyaṁ yo me bhaktyā prayacchati, tad aham aśnāmi. God hand is so expansive, universal, that although He is in His kingdom, in His abode, when you offer something to God, He takes. He can expand His hand in that way. Not only one devotee but at the simultaneously many millions of devotees are offering Him and taking, He is taking. That is His hand. And my hand? Only three feet, that's all. So there is God's hand, but that hand is not like my hand. This is understanding. He can expand His hand millions and trillions of miles. That is His hand. That is explained in the Vedic literature. Īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ (Bs. 5.1). God is vigraha, is form, exactly like our form.

Philosophy Discussions

Philosophy Discussion on David Hume:

Prabhupāda: This, then the argument comes. If he does not believe in anyone's statement, why he is thinking his statement will be accepted? Then he is foolish. He is a child. Instead of becoming a philosopher, he is a child, talking all nonsense.

Hayagrīva: He maintains that man cannot know ultimate reality or possess knowledge of anything beyond a mere awareness of phenomenal sensory images.

Prabhupāda: That is sufficient. But if man cannot have any knowledge, so who is going to take your knowledge? Better you stop, don't talk. Is it not?

Hayagrīva: So much for Hume. (laughs) That's the end of Hume.

Prabhupāda: No, no, I mean is not that the conclusion? If he is skeptic, he does not take other's statement why he expects that his statement will be taken? Why does he propose any statement? Does he think that he is the greatest of all? Then everyone can think like that. That skeptic has no ground. He cannot say. If he is skeptic he should stop, he should not stand.

Philosophy Discussion on Immanuel Kant:

Hayagrīva: He rejects temple attendance, church-going as a means to salvation. He says, "Sensuous representations of God are contrary to the command of reason. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image." So he would reject...

Prabhupāda: If somebody imagines...

Hayagrīva: ...Deity worship.

Prabhupāda: ...some image, that is not required. But if a, actually just like you keep the photograph of your beloved, that is not image. Image is imagination. But when you keep the photograph of your beloved, that is not imagination, that's a fact.

Hayagrīva: When you keep a photograph...

Prabhupāda: Of your beloved.

Philosophy Discussion on Hegel:

Prabhupāda: That we say, that this material world is perverted reflection of the spiritual world. This is reflection.

Śyāmasundara: They say an "image", everything is an image.

Prabhupāda: Yes, we say that, that the same example, just like mirage. Mirage, there is no water but we see a vast sea, or big river is flowing. It is like that. Actually there is no river. No. This is going. This material world is like that. Just Śrīdhara Swami (said that) due to the factual position of the spiritual world, this illusory world appears to be true. Because there is real table.

Śyāmasundara: Yes.

Prabhupāda: The table concept.

Philosophy Discussion on Hegel:

Prabhupāda: There is a real table. Therefore the whole material creation is a perverted reflection and people are enamored by it. People are taking, "This is real table. This is real body. This is real happiness. This is real country. This is real society."

Śyāmasundara: This is what Hegel says, that this is the real table, that these are real objects. They are not images of the real but they are themselves real. There's where...

Prabhupāda: Then he has not the idea what is real. What do you mean by real?

Śyāmasundara: This is a real fact, this table, that this is spirit itself.

Prabhupāda: This is not real fact. This is imitation of the real table. It is fact to a person who has no knowledge of the real. Because it will not exist; that, our reality means which will exist. Otherwise it is not reality.

Śyāmasundara: So this may be real for some time and then...

Prabhupāda: It is temporary, temporary. It is not real. It is some temporary manifestation. The same example, like dreaming; dreaming is not real but temporary hallucination, that's all. You cannot say this "dream-real". This word is used, svapna-draṣṭur ivāñjasā. Just like dream, it is very nice example. In dream everything appears to be real but it is not real, it is all false or temporary.

Philosophy Discussion on Hegel:

Prabhupāda: And when it is broken, then it is again earth. In any condition it is earth.

Śyāmasundara: This pot and this brick, these are not images then, they are dirt, they are...

Prabhupāda: Then you make images. You make images, but when you make images, that is also earth. And when it is broken, that is also earth. And originally it is earth. Sarvam khalv idaṁ brahma. The three conditions: formless condition, form, and again, what it is called-merging. In three conditions it is earth. Aham evāsam evāgre, in the Bhāgavata Kṛṣṇa says, "I existed in the beginning of creation, I maintain the creation, and when the creation is broken, I exist."

Philosophy Discussion on Hegel:

Śyāmasundara: Then actually he talks about the philosophy of religion. He says that the absolute manifests itself in representations. In other words pure thought is couched in imagery and pictorial contemplation, that this is religion. Religion is pure thought which we imagine in form. We put into form.

Prabhupāda: No, there... He has no knowledge of religion. Religion means imagining pure, not pure thought. Religion means the order coming from the most pure. That is religion. You, you cannot imagine. Your imagination... Imagination (indistinct) best thing. But if you receive the best thing directly from the most pure, that is religion. Just like we are receiving directly from the most pure Kṛṣṇa. He says, man-manā bhava mad-bhakto mad-yājī māṁ namaskuru (BG 18.65). That is religion. That is religion, he is directly receiving the orders from the most pure, Kṛṣṇa. He is not imagining. It is not imagination.

Philosophy Discussion on Hegel:

Prabhupāda: Anything, anything, you cannot make an idea of table. You are...

Śyāmasundara: I can make an idea...

Kīrtanānanda: First of all Hegel uses the word idea, he doesn't mean just like thinking, some mental image. He's using the term differently. I always thought.

Śyāmasundara: He's using it as a rational form which precedes the material form or physical form. Just like I can think in my mind that e equals mc squared...

Prabhupāda: Anyway, that you are speculating. We don't accept that.

Śyāmasundara: No, but I can put that into practical form.

Prabhupāda: No, practical form we can know. Just like we understand what is God, that Kṛṣṇa, īśvaraḥ paramaḥ kṛṣṇaḥ sac-cid-ānanda-vigrahaḥ (Bs. 5.1), Kṛṣṇa, the Supreme Personality of Godhead, He is vigraha, He is a form. He is a form but what kind of form-sac-cid-ānanda-vigraha. He is sat-cit-ānanda. Now this sat-cit-ānanda, we have no understanding what is sat-cit-ānanda, but you can understand what is sat-cit-ānanda. Sat means eternal. So you can compare that Kṛṣṇa has got a body which is sat, whereas I have got this body which is asat.

Philosophy Discussion on Charles Darwin:

Prabhupāda: What they... What is the beginning of Bible?

Hayagrīva: And he, he was ridiculed, Bryan, for his fundamental..., for his fundamentalism. The Bible says, "And God said let us make man in our image," etc. "God created man in His own image, and the image of God created He him," etc., and the Bible fixes the creation at about six thousand years ago, but science fixes, oh, ancient civilizations of China and India, oh, six thousand, seven thousand years ago, much... And the Vedas deal with a much, much broader time span.

Prabhupāda: Yes.

Hayagrīva: So...

Prabhupāda: So it is not the question of.

Philosophy Discussion on Henri Bergson:

Hayagrīva: Yes. He sees the material worlds as being isolated. He says, "There is then a bond between the worlds, but this bond may be regarded as infinitely loose in comparison with the mutual dependence which unites the parts of the same world among ourselves," excuse me, "which unites the parts of the same world among themselves. So that it is not artificially for reasons of mere convenience that we isolate our solar system. Nature itself invites us to isolate it." So this, this calls to mind the image of a prison house. The isolation of the world, as far as man is concerned, is isolation imposed by material nature on the conditioned.

Prabhupāda: He is isolated. He is thinking in the wrong way. Just like in the prison house every prisoner, every, every criminal is different from other criminal. So everyone has to suffer the consequence of his criminal activities, so every individual person is suffering or enjoying according to his past deeds. So there cannot be any combination. Then we forget the individuality. That is not possible.

Philosophy Discussion on Carl Gustav Jung:

Śyāmasundara: Just like when we investigate different folklores, different mythologies all over the world, we find certain symbols which are the same. For instance the swastika, we find that in the Indian mythology and you find it in Māyā or Inca, western Indians' mythologies as well. And different symbols which are common to man all over the globe, whether they are primitive or whether they are advanced, he says that these are archetypal images which for thousands of generations have been passed on in men's consciousness. So that we are composed not only of our own individual thoughts and ingredients but also the ingredients of our ancestors. Is this a fact?

Prabhupāda: Yes. That is called tradition. That is called tradition. But that is not paramparā. Paramparā is different. Paramparā means we get the right knowledge from the supreme. It is not something ac..., what is called? What he is speaking?

Śyāmasundara: Acquired. Archetypal. Means the original type.

Philosophy Discussion on Carl Gustav Jung:

Hayagrīva: "One thing was clear. Freud, who had always made much of his irreligiosity, had now constructed a dogma, or rather in the place of God, whom he had lost, he had substituted another compelling image, that of sexuality."

Prabhupāda: Yes, that's a fact. He has taken sexuality as God. But our position is that we must accept a leader. That is our natural tendency. So he gave up the leadership of God and took the leadership of sex. That is his position. Leadership we must have. That is..., this question also I asked to Professor Kotovsky, that "Where is the difference between your philosophy and our philosophy? You accept leader, Lenin. We accept leader, Kṛṣṇa. So where is the difference in the process?" So this is the nature of human being, to accept a leader. But this man, unfortunately, he lost the leadership of God and he took leadership of sex. That is his position.

Philosophy Discussion on The Evolutionists Thomas Huxley, Henri Bergson, and Samuel Alexander:

Prabhupāda: "What is your birthplace?"

Śyāmasundara: Yes. So this Samuel Alexander says that our consciousness of an object is a mere perspective on something, but it's a real portion of that object and not just a mental image. In other words, if I see a table, I am actually reacting with that table. It is a real perspective. It's not just a mental image, but I'm actually reacting to that table. My senses are reacting with the table. It's an objective reality.

Prabhupāda: Where is the table?

Śyāmasundara: Yes. Some philosophers think that if I see the table, it's merely a mental idea in my mind, that table. He says that no, there is a real objective relationship between my senses and the table, reality of the table. Is that...

Prabhupāda: Yes. That is right.

Philosophy Discussion on The Evolutionists Thomas Huxley, Henri Bergson, and Samuel Alexander:

Śyāmasundara: It's not just a mental image.

Prabhupāda: No, not mental. If the table is thrown upon me, I will fall. Then we cannot say that it is mental image. And it hurts me and blood oozes out; then it is not mental.

Śyāmasundara: He says that even illusions are genuinely real objects which are uncreated by the human mind. In other words, if I think I see a snake and it is actually a piece of rope, but if I think it is a snake, then it really is a snake.

Prabhupāda: That is reality of a snake; otherwise how this imagination comes to me? I have got an idea of snake. Now, in darkness there is a rope. So I may falsely take it as snake. That's doesn't matter. But snake is there. That is our argument.

Philosophy Discussion on The Evolutionists Thomas Huxley, Henri Bergson, and Samuel Alexander:

Prabhupāda: Yes. There are so many examples. Just like one man dreams some woman and there is nocturnal discharges. Mind creates like that and there is physical action actually. Mind creates a dream, a tiger, and there is physical action. He is crying loudly, "Here is a tiger. Here is a tiger." Actually, there is no tiger.

Śyāmasundara: His idea is that even these mental images in dreams are real, that they have an objective reality.

Prabhupāda: Yes. Objective reality. When I dream of a woman or a tiger, there is objective reality. In dream it may be. There may be no existence of woman or tiger, but there is real existence of tiger, my dreaming. The impression of a tiger in my mind, the impression of a woman in my mind is created as hallucination, and that reacts on my physical life.

Philosophy Discussion on Origen:

Hayagrīva: This is the continuation of Origen. Origen believed that all the elements that are found in the material body are also found in the spiritual body, which he called the interior man. He says, "God created man not taking the dust of the earth like the second time, but He created him after the image of God," that is initially, "this being after the likeness of God was immaterial, superior to any corporeal hypothesis. There are thus two men in each one of us, as every exterior man has for homonym the interior man. So it is for all His members, and one can say that every member of the exterior man can be found under this name in the interior man." So that for every corresponding sense that we have in the exterior body, there's a corresponding sense in the interior or the spiritual body which exists within.

Prabhupāda: The spirit soul is within this material body, but the spirit soul has no material body originally. There is a spiritual body of the spirit soul eternally existing, and the material body is simply coating of the spiritual body. This material body is considered as coating, shirt-coat. It is cut according to the bodily shape. Just ordinarily we can see the tailor makes the shirt and coat according to the shape of the body. Similarly, these material elements, earth, water, fire, etc., mixed together, becomes like a clay, and it is coated over the spiritual body.

Philosophy Discussion on George Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel:

Hayagrīva: He writes, "The lifting of the spirit to God occurs in the innermost regions of spirit upon the basis of thought. Religion as the innermost affair of man has here its center and the root of its life. God is in his very essence thought and thinking, however His image and configuration be determined otherwise."

Prabhupāda: His image, if God is absolute, His image is also God. If God is absolute, then His words are also God. That is absolute conception. That iw not different. So the image which we worship in the temple, if it is actually image of God, then it is as good as God. God is absolute. God says that "This earth, water..., so everything is My energy." So even if you say, "This image is made of stone," but the stone is God's energy, bhūmi, earth. So there is a regulative principle, just like a wire, a copper wire, it is carrying electricity. Although the copper wire is not electricity, but it is carrying electricity.

Page Title:Image (Lectures)
Compiler:Mangalavati, RupaManjari, Mayapur
Created:14 of Mar, 2011
Totals by Section:BG=0, SB=0, CC=0, OB=0, Lec=30, Con=0, Let=0
No. of Quotes:30